Agenda packet — Baldwin Park City Council, August 7, 2024 (part 2 of 3)

Attachment #6
Exhibit F, City Council Minutes – Feb. 16, 2022 Meeting

motINALDW,d
HU40Ft•
SAN,GABReLqYALLEYt
4jL`D JA$'

AMENDED MINUTES

BALDWIN PARK CITY COUNCIL VIRTUAL REGULAR MEETING
February 16, 2022, 7:00 P.M.

COUNCIL CHAMBER - 14403 E. Pacific Avenue, Baldwin Park, 91706

CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:06 p.m. by Mayor Estrada.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Chief of Police Robert A. Lopez.

ROLL CALL
City Clerk Garcia performed roll call:

MEMBERS PRESENT:

Council Member Alejandra Avila
Council Member Paul C. Hernandez
Mayor Pro Tem Daniel Damian
Mayor Emmanuel J. Estrada
Council Member Monica Garcia - Excused

REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION DURING OPEN SESSION
City Attorney Tafoya announced the City Council will reconvene into closed session following the regular session and will report out at the conclusion of the closed session.

ANNOUNCEMENTS
The City Council are also members of the Board of Directors of the Housing Authority, and Finance Authority, which are concurrently convening with the City Council this evening and each Council Member is paid an additional stipend of $ 30 for attending the Housing Authority meetingand $ 50 for attendingthe Finance Authoritymeeting. 9

PROCLAMATIONS, COMMENDATIONS & PRESENTATIONS
Cannabis Program Presentation presented by Benjamin Martinez, Director of Community Development and HDL Companies

PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Mayor Estrada opened Public Communications at approximately 7:43 p.m. 1) Greg Tuttle
2) John Rios
3) Katherine Loeser
Mayor Estrada closed public communications at approximately 7:53 p.m.

Regular Meeting Minutes— 02- 16- 2022

Page 1 of 7 ends

CONSENT CALENDAR

1. City of Baldwin Park' s Warrants and Demands
Motion to ratify the attached Warrants and Demands Register.

MOTION: It was moved by Emmanuel Estrada, seconded by Paul Hernandez to adopt Motioned. AYES: Estrada, Hernandez, Avila, Damian, [ 4— 0]. Passes

2. Meeting Minutes
Motion to approve meeting minutes for the following City Council Meetings:

Special City Council Meeting of February 2, 2022.

Regular City Council Meeting of February 2, 2022.

MOTION: It was moved by Emmanuel Estrada, seconded by Paul Hernandez to adopt Motioned. AYES: Estrada, Hernandez, Avila, Damian, [ 4— 0]. Passes

3. Treasurer' s Report— December 2021
Motion to receive and file the Treasurer' s Report for December 2021.

MOTION: It was moved by Emmanuel Estrada, seconded by Paul Hernandez to adopt Motioned. AYES: Estrada, Hernandez, Avila, Damian, [ 4— 0]. Passes

4. Claim Rejection
Motion to reject the following claims and direct staff to send the appropriate notice of rejection to claimant( s):

Edwin Parra The claimant alleges POBAR rights were violated, discrimination, hostile work environment, harassment, and whistle blower retaliation.

Frank Real The claimant alleges POBAR rights were violated, discrimination, hostile work environment, harassment, and whistle blower retaliation.

Cetina Gonzalo The claimant alleges POBAR rights were violated, discrimination, hostile work environment, harassment, and whistle blower retaliation.

Jose Jimenez The claimant alleges POBAR rights were violated, discrimination, hostile work environment, harassment, and whistle blower retaliation.

Luis Valdivia The claimant alleges POBAR rights were violated, discrimination, hostile work environment, harassment, and whistle blower retaliation.

These government claims, and all government claims, should be considered as potential lawsuits in the future. Thus, it is requested that all City Staff, the Mayor and all Council Members refrain from making any statements, whether public or private in nature. It is important that no statements be made so as to not prejudice this claim in any way which can happen if public or private comments are made about this claim by City staff or Council Members.

MOTION: It was moved by Emmanuel Estrada, seconded by Paul Hernandez to adopt Motioned. AYES: Estrada, Hernandez, Avila, Damian, [ 4— 0]. Passes Regular Meeting Minutes— 02- 16- 2022

Page 2 ends

5. Approve an Industrial Disability Retirement ( IDR) Claim for Joseph D. Bartolotti Motion to approve the IDR and Resolution No. 2022- 003 effectuating the approval.

MOTION: It was moved by Emmanuel Estrada, seconded by Paul Hernandez to adopt Motioned. AYES: Estrada, Hernandez, Avila, Damian, [ 4— 0]. Passes

6. Approve an Industrial Disability Retirement ( IDR) Claim for Darryl R. Kosaka Motion to approve the IDR and Resolution No. 2022- 004 effectuating the approval.

MOTION: It was moved by Emmanuel Estrada, seconded by Paul Hernandez to adopt Motioned. AYES: Estrada, Hernandez, Avila, Damian, [ 4— 0]. Passes

7. Ratify and Adopt Resolution to Approve Updates to the City of Baldwin Park Job Clarification Plan to include Revisions to the Class Specifications of Police Captain, Police Lieutenant and Police Sergeant
Motion to approve Resolution No. 2022- 005 to update the class specifications for Police Captain, Police Lieutenant and Police Sergeant, respectively and add accredited college institution.

MOTION: It was moved by Paul Hernandez, seconded by Daniel Damian to adopt Motioned. AYES: Hernandez, Damian, Estrada, Avila, [ 4— 0]. Passes

8. Award of Contract with Shaw Integrated Solutions for CIP22- 029 Replacement of Carpet for Teen Center
Motion to:

1. Waive formal bid procedures per the City' s Purchasing Ordinance No. 1101 and Baldwin Park Municipal Code Chapter 34 section 37 ( A); and

2. Authorize Director of Recreation & Community Services to Execute the Contract with Shaw Integrated Solutions.

MOTION: It was moved by Emmanuel Estrada, seconded by Paul Hernandez to adopt Motioned. AYES: Estrada, Hernandez, Avila, Damian, [ 4— 0]. Passes

9. Approving the form of the Agreements to be used with the San Gabriel Valley Habitat for Humanity, Inc. to Implement an Acquisition and Rehabilitation Housing Program using HOME Investment Partnership Act Program Funds to Create Homeownership Opportunities
Motion to:

1. Approve the form of the attached Agreements for use in the Program; and

2. Authorize the Chief Executive Officer (" CEO") and City Attorney to carry out all subsequent and needed actions to proceed with the Program, including approving real estate purchase transactions, and executing agreements.

MOTION: It was moved by Emmanuel Estrada, seconded by Alejandra Avila to adopt Motioned. AYES: Estrada, Avila, Hernandez, Damian, [ 4— 0]. Passes Regular Meeting Minutes— 02- 16- 2022

Page 3 of 7 ends

10.Consideration of an Agreement between the City of Baldwin Park and the San Gabriel Valley Regional Housing Trust to Provide Homeless Housing and Related Services for Homeless Families at 13167 Garvey Avenue
Motion to:

1. Approve the Resolution No. 2022- 006 directing the Chief Executive Officer ( CEO) to execute the Agreement between the City of Baldwin Park and the SGVRHT; and

2. Direct the Director of Community Development to prepare and invoice the SGVRHT for 25% of the HHPP grant award or $ 312, 500 within 30 days; and

3. Direct the Director of Community Development to prepare a site plan and schematic design for the housing developmentand, when ready, return to the City Council for review, discussion, and direction thereof; and

4. Authorize the Directorof Financeto make the necessaryappropriationsand budget adjustments for the HHPP grant funds.

MOTION: It was moved by Emmanuel Estrada, seconded by Alejandra Avila to adopt Motioned. AYES: Estrada, Avila, Hernandez, Damian, [ 4— 0]. Passes

11. Second reading of Ordinance No. 1467 Entitled: " An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Baldwin Park, California, Amending Chapter 50 of the Baldwin Park Municipal Code and Enacting a New Section in Chapter 50 Establishing Mandatory Organic Waste Disposal Reduction Requirements Under Senate Bill ( SB) 1383 Related to Short- lived Climate Pollutants ( SLCP)" Motion to waive second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1467, entitled: " An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Baldwin Park, California, Amending Chapter 50 of the Baldwin Park Municipalc pal Code and Enacting a New Section in Chapter 50 Establishing Mandatory Organic Waste Disposal Reduction Requirements Under Senate Bill ( SB) 1383 Related to Short- Lived Climate Pollutants ( SLCP)".

MOTION: It was moved by Emmanuel Estrada, seconded by Paul Hernandez to adopt Motioned. AYES: Estrada, Hernandez, Avila, Damian, [ 4— 0]. Passes

12. Adopt Resolution No. 2022- 007 Entitled " A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Baldwin Park Authorizing Submittal of Applications for all CalRecycle Grant and Payment Programs"
Motion to adopt Resolution No. 2022- 007 entitled, " A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Baldwin Park Authorizing Submittal of Applications for all CalRecycle Grant and Payment Programs".

MOTION: It was moved by Emmanuel Estrada, seconded by Paul Hernandez to adopt Motioned. AYES: Estrada, Hernandez, Avila, Damian, [ 4 — 0]. Passes

13. Award Professional Service Agreement to La Canada Design Group ( LCDG) for Landscape, Architectural and Engineering Design Services for the Completion of the Zocalo/Civic Center Park Plaza Project and Conceptual Designs for a New City Hall Annex Building and Facade Upgrades to the Exterior of the City Hall Building Motion to:

1. Authorize the Director of Public Works to execute a professional services agreement with La Canada Design Group Inc. ( LCDG) in the amount of $ 346, 770 for architectural and engineering design services of the Zocalo/ Civic Plaza Project; and Regular Meeting Minutes— 02- 16- 2022

Page 4 of 7 ends

2. Authorize the Director of Finance to appropriate $ 236, 480 from Fund No. 270 - SB- 129 California Natural Resources Agency/ California Department of Parks and Recreation, appropriate $ 34, 240 from Fund No. 275 — ARPA American Rescue Plan Act ( Loss Revenue Category), appropriate $ 76, 050 from Fund No. 245 — Prop C to fully fund the project; and

3. Authorize the Director of Finance to record the State Parks grant in the amount of 6, 000, 000 under Grant Fund No. 270 and make the necessary appropriations and budget adjustments; and

4. Authorize the Director of Public Works to process the necessary invoice and payment documentation.

MOTION: It was moved by Emmanuel Estrada, seconded by Paul Hernandez to adopt Motioned. AYES: Estrada, Hernandez, Avila, Damian, [ 4— 0]. Passes

14. Approval of Employment Agreement with Veronica Alvarez for the Position of Accounting Manager
Motion to approve the agreement with Veronica Alvarez for the position of Accounting Manager and direct the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute it.

MOTION: It was moved by Emmanuel Estrada, seconded by Paul Hernandez to adopt Motioned. AYES: Estrada, Hernandez, Avila, Damian, [ 4— 0]. Passes

CITY COUNCIL ACTING AS SUCCESSOR AGENCY OF THE DISSOLVED COMMUNITY

DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

CONSENT CALENDAR
All items listed are considered to be routine business by the City Council and will be approved with one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a City Councilmember so requests, in which case, the item will be removed from the general order of business and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda.

SA- 1 Successor Agency to the Dissolved Community Development Commission of the City of Baldwin Park Treasurer' s Report— December 2021 Motion to receive and file the Treasurer' s Report for December 2021.

MOTION: It was moved by Emmanuel Estrada, seconded by Alejandra Avila to adopt Motioned. AYES: Estrada, Avila, Hernandez, Damian, [ 4— 0]. Passes SA- 2 Successor Agency to the Dissolved Community Development Commission of the City of Baldwin Park Warrants and Demands
Motion to ratify the attached Warrants and Demands Register.

MOTION: It was moved by Emmanuel Estrada, seconded by Alejandra Avila to adopt Motioned. AYES: Estrada, Avila, Hernandez, Damian, [ 4— 0]. Passes SA- 3 Successor Agency to the Dissolved Community Development Commission of the City of Baldwin Park Approving the Form of the Agreements to be used with the San Gabriel Valley Habitat for Humanity, Inc. to implement an Acquisition and Rehabilitation Housing Program using Low- and Moderate- Income Housing Funds to Create Homeownership Opportunities
Motion to:

1. Approve the form of the attached Agreements for use in the Program; and Regular Meeting Minutes— 02- 16- 2022

Page 5 of 7 ends

MOTION: It was moved by Emmanuel Estrada, seconded by Paul Hernandez to adopt Motioned. AYES: Estrada, Hernandez, Avila, Damian, [ 4— 0]. Passes

PUBLIC HEARING

15. FY 2022-23 Annual Action Plan Housing and Community Development Needs and Priorities Public Hearing
Motion to:

1. Conduct a public hearing to consider the city's housing and non- housing community development needs for the preparation of the FY 2022-23 Annual Action Plan; and

2. Following the public hearing, receive and file this report, any comments made by the Mayor, City Council, and/or residents during the public hearing, for inclusion in the Fiscal Year 2022- 23 Annual Action Plan.

Mayor Estrada opened the public hearing at approximately 8: 07 p. m., seeing no one wishing to speak in favor or opposition of the item, Mayor Estrada closed the public hearing at 8:07 p.m.

MOTION: It was moved by Emmanuel Estrada, seconded by Alejandra Avila to adopt Motioned. AYES: Estrada, Avila, Hernandez, Damian, [ 4— 0]. Passes

REPORTS OF OFFICERS

16. Consideration of Ordinance of the City of Baldwin Park to Establish Campaign Contribution Limits and Penalties in Baldwin Park
Motion to consider the new ordinance with added amendments introduce for first reading, by title only, Ordinance entitled: " An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Baldwin Park Establishing Campaign Contribution Limits and Penalties" and direct staff to bring back for second reading and adoption at the next regularly scheduled City Council Meeting. Delete Section 40. 03 delete. Section 40. 15 amended. Add section

40. 16 Amendments: Any amendments to this Ordinance shall not act to weaken the Ordinance or act in a manner that is counter to the spirit, purpose, or intent of the Ordinance. Amendment or repeal of any portion of this Ordinance, except mandated by a court of law, shall require a four-fifths vote of the City Council, except for amendments that are clerical or act to further clarify clauses in the Ordinance.

MOTION: It was moved by Emmanuel Estrada, seconded by Daniel Damian to adopt Motioned. AYES: Estrada, Damian, Avila, Hernandez, [ 4— 0]. Passes Direction to add ordinance to the ballot in November Election and bring staff report with the cost of adding to the ballot.

Regular Meeting Minutes— 02- 16- 2022

Page 6 of 7 ends

CITY COUNCIL / CITY CLERK / CITY TREASURER / STAFF REQUESTS &

COMMUNICATION
Mayor Pro Tern Daniel Damian requestsCity Councildiscussionand directionto move the City of Baldwin Park's annual parade from the month of November to the month of December. Also, bring back a proposed budget for the Downtown Street Market and Concerts in the Park events to the next meeting.

The City Council recessed back into Closed Session at approximately 8: 53 p. m. and reconvened into open session at approximately 10:34 p.m.

REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Tafoya announced no reportable action was taken.

ADJOURNMENT
Therebeingnootherbusinessto discuss, a motionwas madeby MayorEstrada, secondedby Mayor Pro Tern Damian, to adjournthe meetingat approximately10:32 p.m.

ATTEST: r j!
Emmanue da, Mayor
Marlen Garcia, City Clerk
APPROVED: June 7, 2022

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES SS:

CITY OF BALDWIN PARK
I, ShirleyQuinones, ChiefDeputyCityClerkof theCityof BaldwinParkdo herebycertifythat the foregoingactionswere taken by the City Councilof the City of Baldwin Park at a regular meeting thereof held on February 16, 2022
V
moPkAI
vyyllinones
Chief D.'• uty City Clerk
Regular Meeting Minutes— 02- 16- 2022

Page 7 of 7 ends

Attachment 7
Exhibit G, 2016 Downtown TOD Specific Plan (https://
www.baldwinpark.com/DocumentCenter/View/1947/BP-
DowntownTODSpecificPlan-Final2016-PDF)

Attachment #8
Exhibit H, Site and Vicinity Photos

Vicinity Map

LOCATION: Northwest Intersection of Maine Avenue
and Pacific Avenue and extends South of
Maine Avenue

CASE NUMBER: TPM 84199

DATE: February 14, 2024

AREA MAP
Not to Scale
N

Subject
Property

View from City Hall Civic Plaza

View of Southeast corner of Project

View of West side of Project

View of Southwest corner of Project

Attachment 9
Exhibit I, Letter of Opposition dated June 27, 2023

Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP
Attorneys at Law
2010 Main Street, 8th Floor | Irvine, CA 92614-7214
Telephone: 949.553.1313 | Facsimile: 949.553.8354
www.allenmatkins.com
K. Erik Friess
E-mail: [email protected]
Direct Dial: 9498515478 File Number: 393765.00001/4857-7660-3243.4

Los Angeles | Orange County | San Diego | Century City | San Francisco Allen Matkins

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
June 27, 2023
City of Baldwin Park Planning Commission
c/o Christopher Saenz, City Clerk
14403 East Pacific Avenue
Baldwin Park, CA 91706

Email: [email protected]

Re: Agenda Item No. 2 for the June 28, 2023, Planning Commission meeting: Objections to City of Baldwin Park's adoption of a tentative parcel map (TPM 084199)
Dear Planning Commissioners:

This firm represents the Asher family, who are owners of the property located at 14402 Pacific Avenue (held under the legal entity 14418 Pacific Avenue LLC). And this letter is a formal objection to the City of Baldwin Park's proposed adoption of a Tentative Parcel Map (TPM 084199) at the June 28, 2023, Planning Commission public hearing, Agenda Item No. 2.

We have been in contact with the City and its outside counsel since April 13, 2023, regarding the City's unconstitutional taking of the Asher's property and the City’s improper attempts to vacate Maine Avenue in connection with the construction of the Zocalo Civic Plaza. As you are aware, the City demolished Maine Avenue in furtherance of the Zocalo Civic Plaza project without first making any of the required findings to support such a drastic action, without complying with the street-vacation procedures and requirements set forth in the California Streets and Highways Code, and without complying with other laws. We have raised these concerns in multiple letters that were previously sent to the City in connection with its approval of the Zocalo Civic Plaza. The City has, to date, failed to reverse course and to remedy these violations of law.

It now appears that the City is attempting to use approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 084199 as a post-hoc mechanism to “cure” the City’s prior violations, including its failure to properly vacate Maine Avenue prior to its demolition. This will not work.

As outlined more fully below, TPM 084199 should not – and cannot – be approved by your body nor the City Council for the following reasons: (1) the approval of TPM 084199 would illegally incorporate previously condemned land originally taken for intersection expansion into this Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP
Attorneys at Law
City of Baldwin Park Planning Commission
June 27, 2023

Page 2 ends

park project; (2) TPM 084199 is inconsistent with the City’s Specific Plan governing development on the property; (3) the approval of TPM 084199 is not categorically exempt from review under CEQA; and (4) the City’s actions in demolishing Maine Avenue without properly vacating that roadway has effectively landlocked the Asher's property by unconstitutionally destroying their abutter's rights to Maine Avenue and Pacific Avenue.

We note that the Staff Report recommends that the Planning Commission continue consideration of Agenda Item No. 2 to a future date uncertain. We agree with this recommendation and believe that further discussions and City actions are necessary to for the City to cure the many legal deficiencies of the Zocalo Civic Plaza project, many as outlined below.

The City does not have the legal right to use condemned property for public-plaza and City- park purposes
Many years ago, the City condemned a portion of what is now the Asher family's property for the purpose of widening the intersection of Maine Avenue and Pacific Avenue. The City never moved forward with expanding the intersection, and the condemned area remains in the same condition as it did prior to condemnation.

The City is prohibited from using this condemned property for a public use other than the use designated in the condemnation unless and until the City adopts a resolution, after proper notice and other due process, authorizing a different use of the property. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1245.245, subd. (a).) Consolidation of the condemned parcel for the construction of a public plaza and park runs contrary to the public use on which the condemnation was based and would constitute a statutory violation by the City.

Further, condemned property that is not utilized for the public use stated in the resolution of necessity within ten years of the adoption of the resolution of necessity is required to be offered back to the property owner absent a new resolution or a reauthorization resolution. (See Code Civ.

Proc. § 1245.245, subd. (b); see also Rutgard v. City of Los Angeles (2020) 52 Cal.App.5th 815.) The City has failed to satisfy these requirements. The condemned property was never utilized for expansion of the intersection of Maine Avenue and Pacific Avenue within ten years of the adoption of the resolution of necessity that authorized the condemnation, and the City subsequently failed to offer the property back to the owner as required.

By failing to comply with these mandatory statutory provisions, the City is in illegal possession of the condemned portion of the Asher family's property. The City has no legal right to consolidate this portion of land into the proposed Zocalo Civic Plaza project and must immediately make a statutory offer to sell the land.

Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP
Attorneys at Law
City of Baldwin Park Planning Commission
June 27, 2023

Page 3 ends

The City's current Specific Plan does not contemplate the closure of Maine Avenue, thus the City's demolition of Maine Avenue is inconsistent with the Specific Plan The Planning Commission must deny approval of a Tentative Parcel Map if it finds that the proposed map is not consistent with the City's General and Specific Plans (Gov. Code, § 66474, subd. (a).) The City's current Downtown Specific Plan (adopted on March 16, 2022) does not describe nor depict the Zocalo Civic Plaza at all and certainly does not mention the closure of Maine Avenue between Sterling Way and Pacific Avenue.

The only part of the current Downtown Specific Plan that could even be reasonably construed to apply to the Zocalo Civic Plaza is a reference to a "renewed civic park." (2022 Downtown Specific Plan, p. 26.) However, the civic park is described as "the space in front of City Hall along Pacific Avenue," and there is no extension of the park depicted or described along the section of Maine Avenue (which has already been demolished by the City). In fact, the current Downtown Specific Plan identifies Maine Avenue as one of the “core streets” that supports transit in the Downtown Specific Plan area and is designated as a collector street. (Downtown Specific Plan, pp. 14, 15.)
While, the Zocalo Civic Plaza is mentioned in an outdated version of the Downtown Specific Plan (February 2016), that old Specific Plan states that an environmental review is required: "In order to maximize usable space and allow a larger site, the portion of Maine Avenue between Sterling Way and Pacific Avenue could be closed, either fully or partially (one lane only).

This may, however, cause impacts to vehicular circulation and will need to be studied further before the design is finalized." (2016 Downtown Specific Plan, p. 28.) This is further supported in the City's October 2015 Downtown Specific Plan Final Environment Impact Report, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program that called on the City Planning and Engineering Departments to evaluate the loss of service to Maine Avenue and other traffic issues prior to approval of projects that would affect this intersection and roadway areas. (2015 EIR, MMRP, p. 52.) There is no record of the City’s conducting the required analysis dictated in its own Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report.

The proposed Tentative Parcel Map is in no way consistent with the City's current Downtown Specific Plan and does not comport with the required studies required by earlier iterations of the Downtown Specific Plan. Thus, the Planning Commission must deny the Tentative Parcel Map.

The Zocalo Civic Plaza project is not categorically exempt from CEQA review The Zocalo Civic Plaza project does not satisfy the elements for a Class 32 CEQA exemption, as the City's staff asserts in the staff report, and the City has admitted as much in the Downtown Specific Plan and previous public hearings.

Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP
Attorneys at Law
City of Baldwin Park Planning Commission
June 27, 2023

Page 4 ends

A project must meet five requirements to be characterized as an in-fill development under CEQA’s Class 32 (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15332). If any of the five requirements are not met, a project cannot be considered categorically exempt from CEQA review. One requirement is that "approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality." (Ibid.) Here, the destruction of a core street (Mane Avenue) will undoubtedly result in a significant impact to traffic.

Specifically, to facilitate construction of the Zocalo Civic Plaza project, the City has already demolished a section of Maine Avenue, which in turn destroyed access to the intersection with Pacific Avenue and access to the Asher family's property. As previously mentioned, Maine Avenue is identified as one of the “core streets” that supports transit in the Downtown Specific Plan area and is designated as a “collector street.” (2022 Downtown Specific Plan, pp. 14, 15.) Additionally, Mayor Pro-Tem Monica Garcia publicly stated that closing Maine Avenue will “significant[ly] impact the circulation of traffic.” (October 19, 2022, City Council Hearing, at 1:55.) Any argument that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA review and would not "result in any significant effects relating to traffic" is disingenuous and runs contrary to the City's previous public assertions. Therefore, it would be improper for the City to consolidate the parcels and otherwise develop the project without proper CEQA review.

The City has unconstitutionally destroyed the Asher's abutter's rights.

Once a city has formally accepted a street as part of the public road system, the owners of property abutting the street gain specific property rights; namely, the abutting owners have the right of access over the street to and from their property. (Clay v. City of Los Angeles (1971) 21 Cal.App.3d 577, 581.) Once these abutter’s rights are established, a city is obligated to maintain the access. And if a city damages, obstructs, or eliminates that access, the city must compensate the owner of the property. (Id. at p. 587.) Abutting property owners also have the right to:
(1) maintain a view from the street so that travelers can see the property and thereby be induced to enter it to do business; (2) receive light and air from the public street; and (3) have the street space kept open so that signs on the lot are visible to those passing by. (Short Line Associates v. City and County of San Francisco (1978) 78 Cal.App.3d 50, 55.)
The history of the property and the City’s own planning documents clearly demonstrate that the Asher family had abutter’s rights to both Maine Avenue and Pacific Avenue. There is no question that Maine Avenue and Pacific Avenue are part of the City’s public road system. As noted above, the City identified Maine Avenue as a “core street” within the downtown area. (Downtown Specific Plan, p. 14.) Pacific Avenue is identified as a “core street” too. (Ibid.) There is also no question that the Asher family’s property was abutting Maine Avenue and Pacific Avenue. There are two very clear and obvious driveways that connect the Asher family’s Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP
Attorneys at Law
City of Baldwin Park Planning Commission
June 27, 2023

Page 5 ends

property to the public road system: one that connects to Maine and one that connects to Pacific.

Furthermore, while the City owned the land where the two driveways were located, the City’s ownership of that land stemmed from an old condemnation action by which the City condemned the land in order to widen and extend Pacific Avenue, so the land is part of those streets.

Because the condemnation was for roadway purposes, it did not eliminate any access rights related to the Asher’s family property; instead, when the City altered the streets in the future, the Asher family’s access would have been to the streets once altered and, until then, they have the right to access across the condemned right-of-way. Thus, the Asher family has abutter’s rights in both Maine and Pacific Avenues that the City has illegally destroyed by commencing construction of the project.

Conclusion
There is no legal basis for the Planning Commission to approve the proposed Tentative Parcel Map. The City is attempting to illegally incorporate previously condemned land originally taken for intersection expansion into this park project, the City has completely disregarded its own Specific Plan, which is not consistent with the proposed Tentative Parcel Map, the City is falsely claiming that this project is categorically exempt from CEQA review, and the City has landlocked the Asher's property by unconstitutionally destroying their abutter's rights to Maine Avenue and Pacific Avenue. The City has already closed and demolished Maine Avenue, and any attempt to "vacate" the street through the adoption of a Tentative Parcel Map is a sham, a post-hoc justification that will not withstand judicial scrutiny. We agree with Staff's recommendation that the Planning Commission continue Agenda Item No. 2 to a future date. In the alternative, the Planning Commission must deny the Tentative Parcel Map (TPM 084199).

Very truly yours,
K. Erik Friess
KEF:slp
cc: via email:

Alexander N. Brand, Esq. ([email protected])
Ron Garcia ([email protected])

Attachment #10
Exhibit J, Letter of Opposition dated February 14,
2024

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
February 14, 2024
City of Baldwin Park Planning Commission
c/o Christopher Saenz, City Clerk
14403 East Pacific Avenue
Baldwin Park, CA 91706

Email: [email protected]
[email protected]

Re: Agenda Item No. 2 for the February 14, 2024, Planning Commission meeting: Objections to City of Baldwin Park’s adoption of a tentative parcel map (TPM 084199)
Dear Planning Commissioners:

The City of Baldwin Park should be ashamed.

It has blatantly violated the law. And the City’s violations of the law include taking the Asher family’s property without required process, in violation of the United States and California Constitutions. As a result of these violations of the law, the City is embroiled in litigation, the City will soon have its park project shut down by court order, the City will have to pay the Asher family just compensation, and the City will have to reimburse the Asher Family for their substantial – and growing – attorneys’ fees.

Look outside City Hall, and you can see for yourselves that the City already has tractors rolling on the park project that you are just now being asked to approve – really to rubberstamp.

The City’s actions in illegally demolishing Maine Avenue have inversely condemned the Asher family’s property, resulted in a public nuisance and a private nuisance, and qualify as a misdemeanor under Penal Code section 372.

Do not sign on as accomplices to the City’s existing violations of the law. And do not become direct perpetrators of still more City violations of the law by rubberstamping Agenda Item no. 2.

Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP
Attorneys at Law
City of Baldwin Park Planning Commission
February 14, 2024

Page 2 ends

More specifically, please accept this letter as a formal objection to the City of Baldwin Park’s proposed adoption of a Tentative Parcel Map (TPM 084199) at the February 14, 2024, Planning Commission public hearing. The proposed adoption of TPM 084199 is a complete farce designed only to head-off a motion for preliminary injunction that this firm is preparing on behalf of the Asher family.

The Asher family owns the properties located at 14402 Pacific Avenue and 14410 Pacific Avenue. We have been in contact with the City and its outside counsel since April 13, 2023, regarding the City’s unconstitutional taking of the Asher’s property rights and the City’s improper attempts to vacate Maine Avenue in connection with the construction of the Zocalo Civic Plaza.

As you may be aware, TPM 084199 was set to be considered at the June 28, 2023, Planning Commission hearing. Realizing that the Planning Commission could not lawfully approve TPM 084199, staff recommended that the agenda item be continued to a later date. Then when our firm recently informed the City’s attorneys of our intent to file a motion for a preliminary injunction against the City related to this project, City staff rushed to place this agenda item before you in an attempt to use approval of TPM 084199 as a post hoc mechanism to “cure” the City’s many prior violations of the law, including the City’s failure to properly vacate Maine Avenue prior to demolition of the street. This will not work.

As outlined more fully below, you cannot legally approve TPM 084199 including because:
(1) TPM 084199 is inconsistent with the City’s Specific Plan; (2) the permanent closure of Maine Avenue violates the Mitigation Measures the City is required to enforce pursuant to the 2016 TOD Downtown Specific Plan EIR; and (3) any attempt to push through a post hoc ratification of the City’s illegal actions will never survive judicial scrutiny.

The State already audited the City regarding Zocalo Civic Plaza. The City must stop violating the law.

In about 2014, the City first contemplated construction of a public park and plaza near City Hall. And between 2014 and 2016, the City authorized over $500,000 in design services related to the project, but the City never approved a completed design let alone approved an actual park project, wasting the public’s $500,000.

This waste prompted Assembly member Blanca Rubio in 2017 to request that the State Controller’s Office audit the City’s handling of the project. Specifically, the Assembly member asked for an audit to determine:
whether Baldwin Park city council members followed the proper channels of approval and protocol, or not, when spending City funds on a proposed development project … During this process, there was a dispute among council members that the proper channels of approval were not followed and Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP
Attorneys at Law
City of Baldwin Park Planning Commission
February 14, 2024

Page 3 ends

thus, the project was halted. The halting of this project has negatively affected the Baldwin Park community and taken away valuable land that could have been used for a public benefit.

One week after Assemblywoman Rubio lodged her formal request for a state audit, the City – knowing it had violated the law – abandoned the park project in favor of a mixed-use development.

In removing the park project from the public agenda, Councilmember Ricardo Pacheco explained that his motion to remove the item was “based on the County’s Park Assessment which did not identify this site as a recommended location for a park.” The State Controller’s Office subsequently completed the requested audit of the City and issued its written findings in 2020. Notably, Finding #1 entitled “[e]xpenditures of over $500,000 on an engineering project that was discontinued” determined:

The city did not explain why it developed plans for a park that the city could not afford to build or maintain. According to the city’s budget books, its Park Fees (Quimby Act) Fund had a fund balance of only $73,529 at June 30, 2016, after incurring costs for the Civic Center Plaza project construction documents. Public resources should be committed only after careful planning, analysis, and consideration.

Although the City had been caught red-handed violating the rules and planning laws, the City has continued to move forward with a park project in violation of the law.

The City’s current Specific Plan does not contemplate the closure of Maine Avenue, thus the City’s demolition of Maine Avenue is inconsistent with the Specific Plan.

After formally abandoning the project in 2017 to explore mixed-use development, the City began to again consider a public park and plaza adjacent to the Asher Family’s properties in 2021.

The City’s Staff Report alleges that the City Council directed staff to move forward with the Zocalo Civic Plaza project at its February 2022 City Council meeting when the 2016 Downtown Transit Oriented Specific Plan was the controlling planning document. This is flatly false; consistent with this falsity, it is not reflected in the meeting minutes attached to the Staff Report.

At the February 2022 meeting, the City Council approved only a professional services agreement with La Cañada Design Group for “landscape, architectural, and engineering design services” for the Zocalo Civic Plaza. The City flatly did not approve an actual park project.

Instead, in approving this professional services agreement, the City did not purport to approve the project itself, nor did it make any findings on the record that the project was consistent with the Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP
Attorneys at Law
City of Baldwin Park Planning Commission
February 14, 2024

Page 4 ends

City’s General Plan or Downtown Specific Plan. To date, no legislative body has made such determinations.

Further, several members of the City Council warned against the closure of Maine Avenue at a subsequent City Council meeting in October 2022 (at which time the project was still not formally approved and the 2022 Downtown Specific Plan was the controlling planning document).

For example, Mayor Pro-Tem Monica Garcia warned on the public record that the City had not fully considered the vacation of Maine Avenue and the resulting consequences, and that closing Maine Avenue would “significant[ly] impact the circulation of traffic.” Likewise, former City Councilmember Paul Hernandez warned on the public record that they City had not done “any type of outreach” regarding the closure of Maine Avenue.

As we pointed out in our June 2023 letter to the Planning Commission (a copy of which is enclosed), a tentative parcel map must be denied if the proposed map is not consistent with the City’s General and Specific Plans (Gov. Code, § 66474, subd. (a).) The City’s current Downtown Specific Plan (adopted on March 16, 2022) does not describe nor depict the Zocalo Civic Plaza and certainly does not mention the closure of Maine Avenue between Sterling Way and Pacific Avenue.

The only part of the 2022 Downtown Specific Plan that could even be reasonably construed to apply to the Zocalo Civic Plaza is a reference to a “renewed civic park.” (2022 Downtown Specific Plan, p. 26.) However, the civic park is described as “the space in front of City Hall along Pacific Avenue,” and there is no extension of the park depicted or described along the section of Maine Avenue which has already been demolished by the City. In fact, the current Downtown Specific Plan identifies Maine Avenue as one of the “core streets” that supports transit in the Downtown Specific Plan area and is designated as a collector street. (Downtown Specific Plan, pp. 14, 15.)
Regardless of when the City alleges the project was “approved,” the substantial inconsistencies between this project and the current Downtown Specific Plan require a full Environmental Impact Report to assess their impact. In the language of the California Environmental Quality Act, these are “substantial changes [that] occur[red] in the circumstances under which the project is being undertaken that will require major revisions in the EIR.” The permanent closure of Maine Avenue violates the Mitigation Measures the City is required to enforce pursuant to the 2016 TOD Downtown Specific Plan EIR.

Even if the Planning Commission were to be convinced that the project was somehow approved before the adoption of the current Downtown Specific Plan (which it was not), the old 2016 Downtown Specific Plan states that an environmental review is required: “[i]n order to maximize usable space and allow a larger site, the portion of Maine Avenue between Sterling Way and Pacific Avenue could be closed, either fully or partially (one lane only). This may, however, Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP
Attorneys at Law
City of Baldwin Park Planning Commission
February 14, 2024

Page 5 ends

cause impacts to vehicular circulation and will need to be studied further before the design is finalized.” (2016 Downtown Specific Plan, p. 28.)
To that end, the City’s 2016 Downtown Specific Plan Final Environment Impact Report contemplates a partial vacation of Maine Avenue in connection with the Zocalo Civic Plaza, but imposes a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program that the City is required to enforce pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081.6 and CEQA Guidelines section 15097. Namely, Mitigation Measure TRAF-2 calls for the “conver[sion] of Maine Avenue between Pacific Avenue and Sterling Way to a one-way (westbound) only roadway. This shall be achieved by the relocating of Maine Avenue to be located along the rear of the commercial uses fronting Ramona Boulevard between Pacific Avenue and Sterling Way.” Clearly, the Tentative Parcel Map at issue does not conform with this requirement. Rather, it proposes to fully vacate Maine Avenue and construct a narrow alley along the rear of Ramona Boulevard instead.

Notwithstanding this required mitigation measure, the Staff Report attempts to offer an August 2022 Transportation Assessment as evidence that it has studied the closure of Maine Avenue as required by the 2016 Downtown Specific Plan. But, by the City’s own purported timeline, this assessment would have been delivered to the City six months after it claims to have approved the Zocalo Civic Plaza at the February 2022 City Council meeting. In making this claim, the City is not even pretending to have followed the law.

Now, the Staff Report asks the Planning Commission to bestow “approval” of its actions by making a finding that “pursuant to Public resources Code section 2116 and CEQA Guidelines section 15162, the Project was analyzed by the 2016 TOD Downtown Specific Plan EIR (Exhibit C) and Addendum to the 2016 TOD Downtown Specific Plan EIR (Exhibit D), as well as the Transportation Assessment (Exhibit E) that was prepared for the Project and that no further environmental review is necessary.”
If you rubberstamp this, you will be lying.

As detailed above, the City has not complied with the 2016 Downtown Specific Plan Final EIR’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program required by CEQA, and the City did not consider the Transportation Assessment before plowing ahead with this project.

The Zocalo Civic Plaza was never formally approved by the City and any attempt to push through a post hoc ratification of the City’s illegal actions will not sustain judicial scrutiny.

At this stage, any attempts to cure the litany of deficiencies relating to this park project will not hold up in court. Construction of the Zocalo Civic Plaza has been underway for over a year, during which time Maine Avenue was completely demolished, as depicted on the following page.

Instead of seeking approval for TPM 084199 before beginning construction and before demolishing Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP
Attorneys at Law
City of Baldwin Park Planning Commission
February 14, 2024

Page 6 ends

a public street, the City waited until it was faced with a preliminary injunction to seek a rubberstamp from you.

Again, the City never formally approved the Zocalo Civic Plaza, did not vacate Maine Avenue pursuant to Streets and Highways Code section 8300 et seq. before demolishing the street, has not enforced Mitigation Measure TRAF-2 as required by 2016 Downtown Specific Plan Final EIR, and did not consider its own Transportation Assessment before moving ahead with the project.

Instead, the City is asking the Planning Commission to help lie to the public. It is too late for the Planning Commission to make the determinations that the Staff Report requests. As the California Supreme Court stated in Save Tara v. City of West Hollywood (2008) 45 Cal.4th 116, 129 “if postapproval environmental review were allowed, EIR’s would likely become nothing more than post hoc rationalizations to support action already taken.” Conclusion.

The Planning Commission cannot legally approve the proposed Tentative Parcel Map. The City has already closed and demolished Maine Avenue, and any attempt to “vacate” the street through the adoption of a Tentative Parcel Map is a sham, post hoc justification that will not

Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP
Attorneys at Law
City of Baldwin Park Planning Commission
February 14, 2024

Page 7 ends

withstand judicial scrutiny. Commissioners do not make yourselves law breakers; and do not rubberstamp the City’s past lawbreaking; deny Tentative Parcel Map (TPM 084199).

Very truly yours,
K. Erik Friess
KEF:slp
Enclosure
cc: via email:

Mark Easter, Esq. ([email protected])
Alexander Brand, Esq. ([email protected])
Henry Andriano ([email protected])
Ron Garcia ([email protected])

Los Angeles | Orange County | San Diego | Century City | San Francisco Allen Matkins

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
June 27, 2023
City of Baldwin Park Planning Commission
c/o Christopher Saenz, City Clerk
14403 East Pacific Avenue
Baldwin Park, CA 91706

Email: [email protected]

Re: Agenda Item No. 2 for the June 28, 2023, Planning Commission meeting: Objections to City of Baldwin Park's adoption of a tentative parcel map (TPM 084199)
Dear Planning Commissioners:

Page 2 ends

Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP
Attorneys at Law
City of Baldwin Park Planning Commission
June 27, 2023

Page 3 ends

Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP
Attorneys at Law
City of Baldwin Park Planning Commission
June 27, 2023

Page 4 ends

The City has unconstitutionally destroyed the Asher's abutter's rights.

Page 5 ends

property to the public road system: one that connects to Maine and one that connects to Pacific.

Very truly yours,
K. Erik Friess
KEF:slp
cc: via email:

Alexander N. Brand, Esq. ([email protected])
Ron Garcia ([email protected])

Attachment #11
Exhibit K, Review of Prior Public Comments

EVIEW OF PRIOR PUBLIC COMMENTS

Consideration of the Proposed Tentative Parcel Map was continued from prior Planning Commission meeting dates. The Commission was provided with letters from interested parties providing comments about the Map and Project. The following summarizes and responds to some of the major issues identified in those comment letters.

ABUTTING RIGHTS

The proposed plaza incorporates land owned by the City, the City Redevelopment Successor Agency, and the School district. No land from private entities are necessary for the creation of this plaza or the approval of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map. A concern has been raised by a private property owner to the south of the proposed plaza that the project will infringe upon his rights as an abutting property owner (see Exhibit I ). The proposed southerly property boundary will incorporate a City- owned parking area to the north of the office building located at 14402 Pacific Avenue, but the project will not sever this private property from the public right of way as illustrated below. The existing southerly driveway on that property will retain street access for the property.

PAST STREET VACATION

In the 1950s, a segment of Pacific Avenue ran through the project site and connected the current Pacific Avenue with Sterling Way and then on to Ramona Boulevard. Sometime in the 1950s or 1960s this section of road was vacated and the City developed this area with public parking. The property owner of 14402 Pacific Avenue states in his letter (Exhibit I) that the City was required by law to offer to sell back the land that was taken for street purposes but allegedly was not used for that reason. Even if the property owner’s position was correct, and the City disagrees with that position, the City examined the claim made in this letter and discovered that the law cited in Exhibit E does not apply since it was passed in the 1970s, which was after the condem nation occurred.

Therefore, the City is under no obligation to offer to sell the land back to the property owner of 14402 Pacific Avenue.

CURRENT STREET VACATION

The proposed project includes a segment of Maine Street that extends from Sterling Way to Pacific Avenue. This

2 portion of the street has been closed in preparation of the development of the site since January 2023 and is currently fenced off. The owner of 14402 Pacific Avenue states in his letter (Exhibit I) that the City cannot close the street without first vacating it through a public hearing process. This is not the case. As noted in the staff report, the City intends to vacate/abandon the street as part of the Final Map, which is a lawful practice.

Impact of 2020 State Controller’s Audit

A member of the public submitted a letter to the City in February 2024 arguing that a prior audit of City finances should prevent the City from adopting the tentative map now (“February Letter”, Exhibit J)._The February Letter claims that the City must cease the construction of the Project in response to a California State Controller’s Office audit from 2020. T he State Controller’s Office investigated the authorization of approximately $500,000 in design services from La Cañada Design Group related to the Project. However, the City fully cooperated with the audit which is now complete. Notably, the services obtained from La Cañada Design Group in 2014 resulted in the creation of a “shovel-ready” project using fundamentally the same design as the instant Project. The City has also identified proper contemporary funding to proceed with this long- pending “shovel -ready” Project.

Furthermore, the decision to halt the Project in 2016 was based on the lawful decisions by the then-sitting governmental body comprising City of Baldwin Park City Council. The City Council as it is now constituted chooses to proceed with the “shovel ready” Project. The audit does not prevent the Planning Commission from adopting the tentative parcel map nor did the audit make a finding that the City previously violated the law or that it could not proceed with the project.

Compliance with City’s General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan

The February Letter claims that the Project violates Government Code §66474(a) because it does not depict and is therefore allegedly inconsistent with City’s General Plan and 2022 Downtown Specific Plan. The Project is consistent with the General Plan, which seeks to utilize open spaces for the development of new parks and recreational facilities. (City of Baldwin Park 2020 General Plan - Open Space and Conservation Element, Goal

1.0; Policy 1.2) Additionally, Policies and Actions for achieving the 2022 Specific Plan goals are consistent and compatible with the development of the Project. Notably, project consistency is supported by the 2022 Downtown Specific Plan’s objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs in the following ways:

Policy –
P1.1: “ Expand and maintain an enhanced, interconnected system of public parks, trails and open space in Downtown area.”
Actions –
• A1.1a: “ Introduce additional public spaces, such as promenade, neighborhood and pocket parks, plazas, and parklets on public land.”
• A 1.1b: “ Enhance and connect public parks, open spaces and trails serving residents and visitors, connecting existing parks and the other Downtown assets through paseos, promenades, trails, and enhanced sidewalks.”
• A 1.1e: “Allow parklets on streets to provide visual interest and expand the useable area of the sidewalk.”

Policy –
P1.6: “Expand the inventory of publicly accessible community gathering spaces so that businesses and residents are within a short walking distance of a park or recreational area.” Actions –

3 • A1.6b: “Allow parklets on streets to provide visual interest and expand the useable area of the sidewalk.”

Policy –
P2.13: “Expand places and spaces where community events and festivals can occur.” • Actions – A2.13a: “Develop the Promenade and Paseos and various parks and open spaces in the Downtown area.”

Policy –
P3.8: “Create well-designed spaces for a high-quality user experience for all modes.” Actions –
• A3.8a: “Provide streetscapes and public realms that provide safe and convenient routes for walking and biking.”
• A 3.8d: “ Reduce block lengths for shorter walking and biking distances.” • A3.8e: “Provide a diverse mix of uses that includes housing, employment, retail, and public spaces to create a vibrant urban environment
• A 3.8f: “ Incorporate pedestrian and bicycle safety into plans, programs, and designs.” • A3.8g: “ Incorporate designs that remove barriers to pedestrians, bicyclists, and persons with mobility limitation, connecting sidewalks to bus stops and pathways that do not require passing through parking areas or driveways.”

The Policies and Actions identified within the 2022 Downtown Specific Plan are consistent with the Project in several specific ways. For example, the 2022 Downtown Specific Plan calls for the expansion of public parks and open space in the Downtown area. (2022 Downtown Specific Plan, Policy 1.1) The Policy is furthered by introducing additional public spaces and plazas on public land. (Action 1.1a.) The Policy is further complimented by Actions calling for the enhancement of open spaces connecting downtown assets through open spaces and enhanced sidewalks Project (Action 1.1b), and by allowing parklets on streets to provide visual interest and expand the useable area of sidewalks. (Action 1.1e). As noted above, the Project is consistent with the 2022 Downtown Specific Plan in other key aspects, including based on the policy of expanding publicly accessible community gathering spaces (Policy 1.6), expanding places where community events and festivals can occur (Policy 2.13), and well -designed spaces for all modes of accessibility (Policy 3.8.) As noted in the February Letter, t he 2022 Downtown Specific Plan also specifies the development of a “Renewed Civic Park” and contemplates th e development of Public Open Spaces as part of a goal in creating a dynamic downtown.

Moreover, the 2016 Downtown Specific Plan specifically called for the construction of the community park.

The General Plan and the 2022 Downtown Specific Plan are also mutually consistent. (2022 Downtown Specific Plan at p. 23.) Although the Letter claims that Maine Avenue is part of the Downtown “Core”, the 2022 Downtown Specific Plan more precisely identifies the “Core” at a section of Maine Avenue different from where the Claimants’ businesses are located. ( Id. at p. 34. [“The Downtown Core is the intersection of Ramona Boulevard and Maine Avenue…”]) The Project is, therefore, not inconsistent with 2022 Downtown Specific Plan. G reat deference is accorded to a local governmental agency’s determination of consistency. ( Save Our Peninsula v. Monterey County Board of Supervisors (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 99, 142.) A project must be consistent with the specific plan and is consistent if, in all its aspects, the project furthers the objectives of the plan and does not obstruct its attainment. ( Sierra Club v. County of Napa (2004) 121 Cal.App.4th 1490, 1509.) (Save Our Peninsula v. Monterey County Board of Supervisors (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 99, 142. As demonstrated above, substantial evidence supports a finding that that the Project harmonizes, is in agreement, and is consistent with the 2022 Downtown Specific Plan’s goals and policies.

4 Compliance with 2016 Downtown Transit-Oriented Development Specific Plan

The February Letter claims that the Project is in consistent with the February 2016 Downtown Transit -Oriented Development Specific Plan. The February 2016 Specific Plan clearly identifies the development of a civic park “[a]cross Maine Avenue with direct links and views to City Hall will allow City Hall to be better connected, both physically and visually, to the surrounding Downtown area.” (2016 Downtown Specific Plan, pp. 27- 28.) The civic park described also contemplated that the “[p]ortion of Maine Avenue between Sterling Way and Pacific Avenue could be closed, either fully or partially (one lane only). This may, however, cause impacts to vehicular circulation and will need to be studied further before the design is finalized.” ( Ibid.) The Letter claims that the City did not follow through with studying vehicle circulation prior to breaking ground on the Park project.

However, records from the October 27, 2015 City Council meeting related to the 2016 Specific Plan’s FEIR refute this claim and show that mitigation measure TRAF-2 was assessed as part of the traffic study therein.

Attachment #12
Exhibit L, Review of Appellant’s Arguments

REVIEW OF CERTAIN ARGUMENTS RAISED BY APPELLANT

In addition to challenging the required findings for adoption of the tentative parcel map, Appellant raises other arguments that do not directly address the necessary findings. The City provides it response to those arguments in this Exhibit.

RESPONSE TO ABUTTER’S RIGHTS
The proposed plaza incorporates land owned by the City and the City Redevelopment Successor Agency. No land from private entities are necessary for the creation of this plaza or the approval of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map. A concern has been raised by the Appellant who is a private property owner to the south of the proposed plaza that the project will infringe upon his rights as an abutting property owner (see Exhibit I). The proposed southerly property boundary will incorporate a City-owned parking area to the north of the office building located at 14402 Pacific Avenue, but the project will not sever this private property from the public right of way as illustrated below. The existing southerly driveway on that property will retain street access for the property.

The Appellant claims it has abutter’s rights to Maine and Pacific Avenues. The City disagrees.

Appellant’s property did not front any public street. It was other public property that fronted the public street. In order to have abutter’s rights, Appellant’s property must directly abut a public street and here it did not. Additionally, the highly edited images of documents submitted by Appellant do not conclusively show that it has abutter’s rights. For example, the phrase highlighted form the 1928 judgment does not say anything one way or the other on if abutter’s rights were extinguished.

Moreover, even if Appellant had abutter’s rights, the City is not taking those rights. To the extent Appellant feels it’s abutter’s rights have been unreasonably and substantially impaired, Appellant’s recourse is to file a claim for inverse condemnation which it h as done. Whether Appellant has abutter’s rights and if they have been harmed is a legal issue for the court to determine.

RESPONSE TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65402 COMPLIANCE

Appellant claims that the City has violated Government Code section 65402 because it allegedly vacated the street without complying with the statutory requirements. This is incorrect. This process that the City is going through now is the vary required process to proceed with a stree t vacation. Whether a street has been vacated or abandoned is a legal act that requires Council action. Staff cannot vacate or abandon a street on their own. Furthermore, there is not statutory requirement specifying a time for the street vacation to occur. The process the City has started to vacate the street through the adoption of this parcel map is the process required to vacate the street.

RESPONSE TO CEQA ARGUMENT

Appellant raises three CEQA claims in its appeal regarding the Tentative Parcel Map:

1. Appellant claims the City failed to prepare an environmental impact report for the Tentative Parcel Map.

Once an EIR has been certified, “CEQA prohibits the agency from preparing further EIRs” unless substantial project changes require major revisions to the EIR, or new information reveals a new significant impact, substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact, or a mitigation measure or alternative that the project proponent declines to adopt. (Committee for Re-Evaluation of the T -Line Loop v. San Francisco Mun. Transp. Agency (2016) 6 Cal.App.5th 1237, 1246, citing to PRC, § 21166, emphasis added; see also CEQA Guidelines, § 15162, subd. (a).)

As stated in the attached Staff Report , the Tentative Parcel Map falls within the scope of the certified 2016 TOD Downtown Specific Plan EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 2014121098) and the adopted Addendum because the Zocalo Civic Plaza Park (also referred to as the Arts Park or Civic Park) was analyzed in these environmental documents. (See, e.g., 2016 TOD Downtown Specific Plan Draft EIR, p. 2 -11, 2-15; Addendum, p. 4.) Therefore, no further environmental review is required because none of the conditions in Public Resources Code Section 21166 and/or State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 is triggered by the approval of the Tentative Parcel Map. Based on this finding, the City was not required to prepare an environmental impact report for the Tentative Parcel Map.

2. Appellant claims that the Zocalo Park & Civic Center Plaza Project was approved Before CEQA review was completed.

This was not the case and the appeal letter conflates the timeline of events. Since the Zocalo Park & Civic Center Plaza Project was specifically contemplated in the 2016 Downtown Specific Plan and was analyzed in the 2016 Downtown Specific Plan EIR and 2022 Addendum, the certification of this EIR and Addendum and the approval of the Downtown Specific Plan also constituted approval of this project. As often is the case with projects such as this Specific Plan, which is a planning document that contemplates future development, lead agencies need to take several further discretionary approvals after the initial approval in order to implement the project (here, the Specific Plan). The approval of the design contract in February 2022 did not change any aspect of the Specific Plan or the Zocalo Park & Civic Center Plaza Project. Instead, taking action on this design contract was simply the next, incremental, discretionary step the City took in order to implement the approved Specific Plan. Therefore, approval of the design contract in February 2022 merely constituted furtherance of the already approved Zocalo Park & Civic Center Plaza Project pursuant to the 2016 Downtown Specific Plan EIR and 2022 Addendum.

3. Appellant claims that the permanent closure of Maine Avenue violates the mitigation measure, TRAF-2, found in both the 2016 Downtown Specific Plan EIR and 2022 Addendum.

According to the 2016 Downtown Specific Plan EIR and 2022 Addendum’s Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program, TRAF -2 states: “Intersection No. 1: Convert Maine Avenue between Pacific Avenue and Sterling Way to a one way (westbound) only roadway. This shall be achieved by the relocating of Maine Avenue to be located along the rear of the commercial uses fronting on Ramona Boulevard between P acific Avenue and Sterling Way.” Per TRAF -2, the City’s Planning and Engineering Departments were to “evaluate i ntersections LOS and other traffic issues prior to approval of projects that would affect this intersection and roadway areas . . . when needed due to traffic volumes.”

Appellant’s claim is unfounded. No portion of Maine Avenue will be closed. Rather, as stated in mitigation measure TRAF-2, Maine Avenue will be relocated to an alley way along the rear of the commercial uses fronting on Ramona Boulevard. A driver will be able to enter the alley from Maine Avenue and drive all the way across to exit onto Pacific Avenue. Further, a traffic study was completed in August 2023 to analyze the impacts of this relocation. The traffic study found that the tentative parcel Map would not have new significant traffic and parking impacts outside the purview of the 2016 Downtown Specific Plan and 2022 Addendum.

Therefore, the City is in compliance with mitigation measure TRAF-2.

Attachment #13
Exhibit M, City Council Resolution 24-13
RESOLUTION 2024-13

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

BALDWIN PARK DENYING THE APPEAL AND AFFIRMING
THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S A PPROVAL OF A
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP TO CONS OLIDATE FIVE (5)

LOTS, VACATED STREE T RIGHT -OF-WAY, AND A CITY
PARKING LOT INTO ONE (1) 92,680 SQUARE FOOT LOT

FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ZOCALO CIVIC PLAZA

PROJECT LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST

INTERSECTION OF MAINE

AV ENUE AND PACIFIC
AVENUE AND EXTENDS SOUTH OF MAINE STREET;
(APPLICANT: CITY OF BALDWIN PARK; CASE
NUMBER TPM 84199)
T

HE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

S ECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Baldwin Park does hereby find, determine, and declare as follows:

W
HEREAS, On February 16, 2022, City Staff received direction from the City Council to proceed with the development of a public plaza (Project) located at the northwest intersection of Maine Avenue and Pacific Avenue and extends south of Maine Street; and
W
HEREAS, The City, acting as the applicant, prepared a Tentative Parcel Map to consolidate five (5) lots, vacated street right -of-way, and a City parking lot into one (1) 92,680 square foot lot for the development of the Zocalo Civic Plaza; and W
HEREAS, That a duly noticed public hearing was held on February 14, 2024 on said Project by the Planning Commission, and the project was continued to a date certain on March 27, 2024; and
W
HEREAS, That a duly noticed public hearing was held on March 27, 2024 on said Project by the Planning Commission, and based upon evidence presented including applicable staff report and each member of the Commission being familiar with the property, it was determined that the facts as required by the Baldwin Park Municipal Code for the granting of the Project is present and the approved the Project; and W
HEREAS, The Planning Commission’s decision to approve the project was also based on the fact that the proposed Project was analyzed by the 2016 TOD Downtown Specific Plan EIR and Addendum as well as the traffic analysis prepared for this project and pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 151692 and Resolution 2024-13
May 15, 2024

Page 2 ends

Public Resources Code Section 21166, no further environmental review is necessary since none of the conditions that would trigger further environmental review are present; and

WHEREAS, On April 4, 2024 , a member of the public submitted a complete and timely appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision to the City Clerk of the City of Baldwin Park; and

WHEREAS, A duly noticed public hearing was held on said Application by the City Council on May 15, 2024. The City Council, after reviewing the Staff Report, Administrative Record, Appeal, and considering oral evidence during said public hearing, found that there are requisite findings to approve the tentative parcel map; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 2. Based upon the evidence presented, the City Council hereby finds and determines that each fact set forth in the recitals above is true and correct.

SECTION 3. That the City Council does hereby adopt the following requirements and findings applicable to the approval of the Tentative Parcel Map.

1. Adequate systems designed and constructed to provide all necessary utilities to each lot proposed to be created, including, but not limited to, facilities for water, natural gas, electricity, cable television and telecommunications telephone services.

The project has been designed to provide all the necessary utilities to each lot proposed to be created, including, but not limited to, facilities for water, natural gas, electricity, cable television and telecommunications service. All conditions from outside agencies and utility companies shall be met or provided for prior to finalizing the tentative parcel map.

2. An adequate domestic water distribution system designed and constructed to service each lot proposed to be created.

Valley County Water District is the purveyor in the area and water would be provided to the subject property by Valley County Water District.

3. An adequate sewage system designed and constructed to serve each lot proposed to be created.

The proposed project shall comply with any conditions of approval as imposed by the Sanitation District of Los Angeles County prior to approval of the final map by the City of Baldwin Park.

Resolution 2024-13
May 15, 2024

Page 3 ends

4. An adequate storm water drainage system designed and constructed to serve each lot proposed to be created.

The Public Works Department have designed the site to include the construction of storm drains to address stormwater in the area.

5. An adequate public and/or private street and/or alley system designed and constructed to serve each lot proposed to be created.

The site will be served by Sterling Way and Maine Avenue to the west and Pacific Avenue to the east. A drive aisle with parking will be created on the north side of the parking area between Sterling Way and Pacific Avenue to allow for one- way vehicular access from the west.

A traffic study was prepared on August 18, 2022 date by the City to examine the potential impact to vehicular traffic associated with the closing of the segment on Maine Avenue between Sterling Way and Pacific Avenue (see Exhibit E). The report concluded that no significant impacts to the surrounding areas would occur with the closing of this segment of road.

6. An adequate traffic regulatory system, including necessary traffic signals, signs, and pavement markings and striping.

The Project scope entails the closure of a portion of Maine Avenue and minor adjustments to the roads connecting to the Project site will be necessary to create a seamless transition. A new one- way alley will be created along the northern edge of the Project and this alley will be complete with new traffic signs, striping and pavement markings.

7. The undergrounding of utilities pursuant to Chapter 97, part 2 (Underground Utility District) of the Municipal Code.

Pursuant to Chapter 97 of the City’s Municipal Code all new utilities to the subject property shall be undergrounded. This requirement is also addressed as part of the overall plan check requirements and review of the final map.

8. Any and all other improvements found necessary by the City to provide all services to each lot proposed to be created.

The proposed Tentative Parcel Map is consistent with the City’s codes and will receive adequate utility service when built as designed.

9. In addition to the improvements as required by the City’s Municipal Code and Departments, there are also design requirements for the proposed tentative parcel map that need to be met. Pursuant to Section Resolution 2024-13
May 15, 2024

Page 4 ends

152.12 of the City’s Municipal Code, the design of the subdivision shall conform to the requirements of this Chapter 152, any and all design requirements set forth in the General Plan, the design and development standards established for the associated zoning district per the Zoning Code, the applicable design guidelines set forth in the Design Guidelines Manual, generally accepted engineering standards, and to such standards required by the City, including, but not limited to, plans for grading and erosion control.

The Planning Division has reviewed the proposed subdivision of the proposed lot meets the minimum development standards contained within the Municipal (Zoning) Code, including, setbacks, density, and height.

Additionally the tentative parcel map is consistent with Goal 2.0 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan which states “accommodate new development that is compatible with and compliments existing conforming land uses” as the proposed parcels meet the existing development standards contained in the Code.

10. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and specific plans.

The project is also consistent with the City’s General Plan. The designated land use for the site is Mixed-Use and the proposed open space use of the site is allowed by-right for lots with this land use designation. Furthermore, the project is consistent the policies in the General Plan to create pedestrian spaces in the downtown that connect to the City Hall courtyard and have the potential to support businesses that support pedestrianism such as outdoor cafes and flower shops.

The design of the civic plaza is in accordance with the 2016 Specific Plan, which is the Specific Plan that was in place at the time of the project’s approval. The land use, circulation surrounding the site, improvements to the site are all in compliance with that plan. The proposed use is civic plaza, which is an open space use that was contemplated by the 2016 Specific Plan. The Specific Plan called for new open space areas within the downtown area to improve pedestrian activity and improve destination appeal. The proposed circulation is consistent with the 2016 Specific Plan.

There will be an alley and site parking at the northern edge of the site to support vehicle access. Parking and traffic were analyzed in 2022 by a parking and traffic consultant and the project was determined to have no adverse impacts on traffic and parking (Exhibit E).

The improvement of the proposed subdivision is also in compliance with the 2022 Downtown Specific Plan. The improvements consist of a civic plaza with accessory retail food businesses and these improvements are permitted land uses within the Downtown Core area of the specific plan.

Resolution 2024-13
May 15, 2024

Page 5 ends

Furthermore, the improvements are consistent with the Plan’s policies to expand pedestrian-oriented parks and gathering spaces in the downtown area. Specifically, the subdivision is consistent with the Specific Plan’s Policy 1.1 to “ Expand and maintain an enhanced, interconnected system of public parks, trails and open space in Downtown area”, Policy 1.6 to “Expand the inventory of publicly accessible community gathering spaces so that businesses and residents are within a short walking distance of a park or recreational area”, Policy 2.13 to “Expand places and spaces where community events and festivals can occur”, and Policy 3.8 to “Create well - designed spaces for a high-quality user experience for all modes”.

11. The site is physically suitable for the type of development.

The site has a flat topography that lends itself to development in general and could support a civic plaza use. Also, it is not located in a flood hazard or high fire zone. Lastly, there is ample access to the site given that it is accessible from Pacific Avenue to the east, Sterling Way to the west, and Maine Avenue to the south.

12. The design of the proposed subdivision or the proposed improvements are unlikely to cause substantial damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife of their habitat.

The site is a fully urbanized area that is almost entirely paved. It is not a location that provides habitat for fish or wildlife and therefore development of the site for a civic plaza could not harm fish or wildlife habitat.

13. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements are unlikely to cause serious public health problems.

The site is currently developed with parking lots and street right of way, both of which facilitate automotive vehicle traffic. The subdivision supports the development of the site as a civic plaza, which facilitates public gathering for pedestrians. The proposed use is aligned with the 2016 Specific Plan and General Plan goals of providing more opportunities within the City for residents for exercise and recreation. Therefore, the proposed use is more likely to promote public health and is not likely to cause public health problems.

14. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the governing body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided, and that these will be substantially equivalent to the ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall only apply to easements of record or to easements Resolution 2024-13
May 15, 2024

Page 6 ends

established by judgement of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to a legislative body to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision.

There are no existing easements in the project area that were acquired by the public at large that would be adversely affected by this project. A portion of City right-of-way will be closed for the creation of the plaza, but vehicular access between Sterling Way and Pacific Avenue will continue via the alley connection at the northern edge of the project site. Furthermore, the traffic study undertaken in 2022 (Exhibit E) determined that the closure of the right-of-way necessary for the development of the site for a civic plaza would not have an adverse effect on traffic and circulation for the area. It should also be mentioned that there are no existing private lots adjacent to the Project that will lose access to the street as result of this subdivision.

15. Discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into an existing community sewer system would result in a violation of existing requirements prescribed by a California regional water quality control board pursuant to Division 7 (commencing with Section 13000) of the Water Code.

Sewer waste discharge from the project site will be in accordance with City, State, and Sanitation District regulations. The small commercial building will have indoor plumbing fixtures that will contribute a minimal amount to the City’s overall sewage waste stream, but this contribution will not be in violation of the existing requirements.

SECTION 4. The Application, as herein above described below, and the same is hereby approved subject to the following conditions:

(a) That the property shall be developed and maintained in substantial accordance with Exhibit “A” to the staff report for TPM 84199, dated March 27, 2024; and

(b) If within two (2) years after the date of approval of TPM 84199, all conditions of approval have not been satisfied, then TPM 84199 shall become null and void; and

(c) Recordation of Final Parcel Map with the Los Angeles County Reorder shall be required prior to issuance of building permits.

(d) The Final Map shall be submitted to Los Angeles County Fire Department for review and approval prior to recordation.

SECTION 5. Pursuant to the foregoing recitations and findings, the City Council denies the appeal and upholds the Planning Commission decision to approve a Tentative Resolution 2024-13
May 15, 2024

Page 7 ends

Parcel Map to consolidate five (5) lots, vacated street right -of-way, and a city parking lot into one (1) 92,680 square foot lot (TPM 84199).

SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall Certify to the passage of the adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.

SECTION 7. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption.

SECTION 8 . The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and hereafter the same shall be in full force and effect.

PASSED AND APPROVED this ____day of _______2024.

_____________________________________
Emmanual Estrada, Mayor

BALDWIN PARK CITY COUNCIL

ATTEST:

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ss.

CITY OF BALDWIN PARK

I, Christopher Saenz, City Clerk of the Baldwin Park City Council, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2024 -____ was duly and regularly approved and adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof, held on _________ and that the same was adopted by the following to wit:

AYES: ___________________________________
Ricardo Pacheco
NOES: ___________________________________

ABSENT: ___________________________________

ABSTAIN: ___________________________________

_____________________________________
Resolution 2024-13
May 15, 2024

Page 8 ends

Christopher Saenz
BALDWIN PARK City Clerk

STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. ____4____

Page 1 ends

TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Robert Lopez, Chief of Police
DATE: August 7, 2024
SUBJECT: Approve a Request for Proposal for Jail Facility Staffing and Support Services

SUMMARY
The Baldwin Park Police Department operates a municipal jail facility for booking and housing arrestees. The current contract for jail staffing services is set to expire on November 30, 2024. Staff seeks City Council approval to circulate a Request for Proposal (RFP) to qualified firms for Jail Facility Staffing and Support Services. The project scope includes but is not limited to providing trained custody officers to support the City -operated jail facility, assisting with inmate management, and contributing to the safety and sec urity of inmates and staff, all under the direction and policies set by the City. The purpose of the Request for Proposal is to solicit bids from qualified contractors to provide these essential services.

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council

1. Approve the release of the Request for Proposal; and

2. Direct staff to review and rank the responses to the RFP based on the evaluation criteria; and

3. Present a recommendation to the City Council, including a cost estimate, for the award of the contract.

FISCAL IMPACT
The fiscal impact will be determined based on the proposals received. The current budget allocation for jail staffing services is $443,505.00, line item 100.30.370.51100.00000.

BACKGROUND
The City of Baldwin Park Police Department operates a municipal jail at 14403 Pacific Ave, Baldwin Park, California, 91706, which fingerprints and books arrestees and transports them to local courthouses. The City maintains complete operational control and management of its jail facility.

This RFP process allows us to explore potential improvements in service, incorporate lessons learned from this current contract period, and adapt to evolving best practices in jail management and custody services. It also enables us to ensure compliance with the latest regulatory requirements, including recent changes in California law regarding private detention facilities.

The City values the safety and security of our community, staff, and inmates and is committed to maintaining the highest standards of professionalism and care in our jail facility. Through this RFP, we aim to partner with a qualified firm that can support our mission while recognizing the City's full operational control and management

Page 2 ends

of the jail facility.

The selected firm will be awarded a three -year contract for these services, beginning December 1, 2024, and ending November 30, 2027. We are seeking experienced firms that can demonstrate innovative approaches to jail staffing, a strong track record in similar facilities, and a clear understanding of our community's unique needs and our commitment to public safety.

ALTERNATIVES
The City Council may choose not to approve the release of this Request for Proposal. However, this would necessitate an extension of the current contract without the benefit of a competitive bidding process, potentially resulting in less favorable terms or reduced service quality for the Police Department’s Jail.

LEGAL REVIEW
The City Attorney's office has reviewed and approved the Request for Proposal document to ensure compliance with all applicable laws and regulations.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Request for Proposal - Jail Facility Staffing Support Services (with attachments).

1 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
FOR

JAIL FACILITY STAFFING & SUPPORT

SERVICES

PROPOSALS DUE
Monday, September 2, 2024, by 5:00 pm
City of Baldwin Park
Police Department
14403 E. Pacific Avenue
Baldwin Park, CA 91706

2 1. BACKGROUND
The City of Baldwin Park (“City”) is centrally located in the San Gabriel Valley approximately 20 miles east of downtown Los Angeles with a total population of approximately 75,000 residents.

Baldwin Park is approximately 6.79 square miles and is surrounded by the cities of Irwindale, El Monte, Industry, West Covina and unincorporated portions of Los Angeles County. The City of Baldwin Park Police Department (the “Police Department”) operates a municipal jail to fingerprint and book arrestees and transport them to local courthouses. The facility is located at 14403 Pacific Ave, Baldwin Park, CA 91706.

2. GENERAL
The City has prepared this Request for Proposal s (“RFP”) and is requesting proposals from qualified and interested security or staffing companies (“Proposers”) to provide custody officer staffing support services for the City’s jail facility. All proposers shall be properly licensed for the performance of the services in accordance with California law.

The selected firm or company will be awarded a three (3) year contract for these services, beginning December 1, 2024, and ending November 30, 2027. The City encourages proposals from experienced firms that can demonstrate innovative approaches to jail staffing, a strong track record in similar facilities, and a clear understanding of the community's unique needs and the City’s commitment to public safety.

3. SCOPE OF SERVICES; PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
The scope of services (“Services”) sought under this RFP are set forth in more detail in Section 5 below.

Notwithstanding the inclusion of such Services in the RFP, the final scope of Services negotiated between the City and the successful Proposer shall be set forth in the Professional Services Agreement (“Agreement”) executed by and between City and the successful Proposer. A copy of the Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by this reference.

4. MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS FOR PROPOSERS
To be considered, Proposers must meet the following minimum qualifications:
a) Legal Authorization: Proposers must be legally authorized to do business in the State of California.
b) Experience: Proposers must have a minimum of three (3) years of experience providing custody officer staffing services to municipal jail facilities in California. c) Current Contracts: Proposers must currently hold at least one (1) contract of similar size and scope with other law enforcement agencies or municipalities in California. d) Financial Stability: Proposers must demonstrate financial stability and have the ability to obtain required insurance coverage.
e) Licensing: Proposers must possess all necessary licenses and certifications required by the State of California to provide custody officer staffing services. 3 f) Training Capabilities: Proposers must have established training programs that meet or exceed the standards set by the California Board of State and Community Corrections. g) Compliance History: Proposers must have a clean record of compliance with state and federal labor laws and regulations.
h) Background Checks: Proposers must have the capability to conduct thorough background checks on all potential employees in accordance with California law and City requirements.
i) Technology: Proposers must demonstrate the ability to use and maintain modern jail management software systems.
j) Staffing Capacity: Proposers must have the capacity to fully staff the City's jail facility as required, including the ability to cover all shifts and provide backup personnel as needed.

Proposers that do not meet these minimum qualifications will not be considered.

5. SCOPE OF WORK
The City requires the services of a qualified security and staffing company to provide custody officer staffing support for the City’s jail facility. It is expressly understood that the City , through the Police Department, will retain complete operational control and management of the jail facility.

The successful Proposer will be strictly limited to providing staffing services under the City's direction and control. At a minimum, these tasks shall include:

5.1 Staffing Support:
a) Provide qualified custody officers to support the jail facility 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year, as determined by the City.
b) Ensure all custody officers meet or exceed the minimum qualifications set by the California Board of State and Community Corrections and any additional requirements set by the City.
c) Maintain appropriate staffing levels as directed by the City to ensure the safety and security of inmates, staff, and visitors.

5.2 Operational Support:
a) Assist with inmate booking procedures, including fingerprinting and photographing, as directed by jail facility staff.
b) Support inmate releases and transfers under jail facility staff supervision. c) Perform regular security checks and maintain order within the facility per City-established protocols.
d) Assist in emergency responses within the jail facility under jail facility staff direction. e) Maintain accurate records and logs of all jail activities as required by the City.

5.3 Training and Compliance:
a) Provide initial and ongoing training to all custody officers in accordance with state and federal requirements and City-specific policies.
b) Ensure compliance with all relevant laws, regulations, and standards governing jail operations as directed by the City.
c) Adhere to all City-implemented policies and procedures.

5.4 Transportation Services:
a) Provide trained personnel to transport inmates to and from court appearances at various Superior Courts in the region.
4 b) Ensure all transportation staff are properly trained in inmate transport procedures and safety protocols.
c) Maintain and operate appropriate City vehicles for inmate transportation, if required. d) Coordinate with the City and court schedules to ensure timely transportation of inmates for court appearances.

5.5 Administrative Support:
a) Provide scheduling of custody officers in accordance with City-determined needs. b) Handle payroll and human resources functions for custody officers. c) Maintain all necessary certifications and licenses for custody officers.

5.6 Reporting and Communication:
a) Provide regular reports to the Police Department on staffing levels and any incidents as required by the City.
b) Maintain open lines of communication with Police Department leadership. c) Participate in periodic meetings with City and jail facility staff to discuss operations and address concerns.

5.7 Quality Assurance:
a) Implement and maintain a quality assurance program to ensure high service standards in line with City expectations.
b) Assess, conduct and document regular performance evaluations of custody officers. c) Address any issues or complaints promptly and effectively with City leadership.

5.8 Transition Plan:
a) If applicable, provide a detailed plan for transitioning staffing services from the current provider to ensure continuity of operations.
b) Coordinate with City and jail facility staff to ensure a smooth transition process with minimal disruption to jail operations.

5.9 Insurance:
a) Submit a "Statement Certifying Insurance Coverage" certifying that the successful Proposer will obtain the required insurance coverage and understands that said coverage is a prerequisite for entering into an agreement with the City. The successful Proposer is required to confirm with its insurance carrier that it can meet all the insurance requirements. Failure to meet the insurance regulations as set forth shall result in the Proposer’s disqualification.

5.10 Contract Duration:
a) Provide the services outlined in this Scope of Work for a period of three (3) years, from December 1, 2024, through November 30, 2027

5.11 Agreement
a) Complete and sign a copy of the City's Professional Services Agreement, attached hereto as Exhibit “A,” as part of the proposal package.
b) Understand that completion of this agreement indicates acceptance of all terms and conditions.
c) Recognize that the completed agreement included in the proposal does not constitute acceptance by the City or a notice to proceed.

5 All actions are to be taken in accordance with California requirements, industry standards for jail operations and custody staffing, and specific policies and procedures established by the City. The successful Proposer shall at all times recognize and support the City's complete operational control and management of the jail facility.

This Scope of Work emphasizes the successful Proposer’s supportive role while maintaining the City's control over jail operations, in alignment with Penal Code sections 9500 -9505. Please review and adjust as needed to ensure it fully captures your requirements and aligns with your specific operational needs.

6. PROPOSAL FORMAT AND CONTENT

6.1 Solicitation Publication
This Request for Proposal (RFP) is being published on August 8, 2024, and is available on the City's website at www.baldwinpark.com/rfp. Proposers interested in participating in this solicitation are encouraged to email the Chief Deputy City Clerk, Shirley Quiñones, at [email protected] to be added to the interested Proposer’s list.

6.2 Mandatory On-Site Meeting
A mandatory site visit for all interested Proposers will be held on August 21, 2024 , starting at 10:00 a.m. at the Baldwin Park Police Department, 14403 E. Pacific Avenue, Baldwin Park, CA 91706. This visit will allow potential Proposers to view the facility and ask questions about the operational requirements. Attendance at this meeting is required for any firm submitting a proposal.

6.3 Question Submittal
Interested Proposers may submit questions for clarification to Captain Joshua Hendricks at [email protected] by 5:00 p.m. on August 26, 2024. The City will prepare responses to all questions and publish them as an amendment to this RFP by August 29, 2024. It is the responsibility of all interested Proposers to check the City's website for any addenda or clarifications.

6.4 Proposal Submission Requirements
Interested Proposers shall submit concise, well -organized proposals that demonstrate their qualifications and experience relating to the proposed project. The Cost Proposal shall reflect all costs associated with the proposed project. At a minimum, proposals shall include the following information:

6.4.1 Contents
The following contents shall be included in the Proposal submittal:
a) Cover Letter
b) Table of Contents
c) Qualifications: Past Experience in jail staffing and management

d) Operational Pla n: This section should provide a comprehensive overview of how the Proposer intends to carry out the day-to-day operations of staffing and supporting the jail facility. It should include:
• References from similar contracts (minimum of three)
• Project Planning Methodology
• Key Personnel details
6 • Partnerships (if applicable)
• Financial Capacity

e) Staffing plan and schedules: Detail how the Proposer will ensure adequate staffing levels at all times, including shift rotations, coverage for absences, and handling of peak periods. f) Training program: Outline the initial and ongoing training programs for custody officers, including topics covered, frequency of training, and how the firm ensures compliance with state and local requirements.
g) Safety and security protocols : Describe the procedures and protocols the Proposer will implement to maintain the safety and security of inmates, staff, and visitors. This should include emergency response procedures.
h) Inmate management procedures: Detail how custody officers will handle and document daily inmate activities, including booking, housing assignments, meal distribution, medical care coordination, and transportation to court.
i) Communication Management Plan: This should detail how the Proposer will maintain clear and effective communication with the City, including reporting structures and frequency j) Quality Assurance Plan: This should outline the Proposer’s approach to maintaining high standards of service, including performance metrics and evaluation methods. k) Transition Plan (if applicable) : If the Proposer is not the current service provider, this should detail how they plan to transition into the role with minimal disruption to operations. l) Project Organization Chart: This should show the structure of the team that will be working on this contract, including key personnel and their roles. m) Comprehensive Services Overview: This should provide a broad overview of all services the Proposer will provide, highlighting any unique or value-added offerings. n) Cost Proposal: This should provide a detailed breakdown of all costs associated with providing the required services.
o) Statement Certifying Insurance Coverage : Submit proof of insurance requirements addressed in the Professional Services Agreement of this Request for Proposal upon execution of the original contract for submission to the City Council. p) Signed copy of the City's Professional Services Agreement.: Exhibit “A” is a copy of the City's Professional Services Agreement. A copy shall be completed and signed as part of the proposal package. Completion of this agreement will be your statement that all terms and conditions are acceptable. This completed agreement made part of the proposal is by no means to be interpreted as acceptance by the City or notice to proceed

6.4.2 Format
Proposals should be prepared on standard 8 1/2" x 11" paper. Standard advertising brochures should not be included in the proposal. The proposal shall include one (1) original, three (3) copies, and one (1) electronic copy in PDF format.

6.4.3 Due Date
All proposals must be submitted to:

Shirley Quiñones, Chief Deputy City Clerk
14403 E. Pacific Avenue
Baldwin Park, CA 91706
626-960-4011 ext. 466
[email protected]
7 All submissions are due by September 2, 2024 , at 5:00 p.m.; late submissions will not be accepted.

6.5 Proposal Evaluation
A selection committee appointed by the Chief of Police will evaluate proposals based on the criteria outlined in Section 5 of this RFP.

6.6 Interviews / Presentations
The City may invite the top -ranked firms (typically the top three) to present their proposals in person. These presentations, if held, are tentatively scheduled for September 18, 2024. The City reserves the right to award the contract based solely on written proposals.

6.7 Potential Contract Award
The City anticipates making a recommendation to the City Council by October 2 , 2024. The selected firm shall be prepared to begin work immediately following any award of contract, with a tentative start date of December 1, 2024.

6.8 Anticipated Schedule
Event Date
RFP Issued Thursday, August 08, 2024
Mandatory Site Visit Wednesday, August 21, 2024
Deadline for Inquiries Monday, August 26, 2024
Responses to Questions Thursday, August 29, 2024
Proposals Due Monday, September 2, 2024
Potential Interviews Wednesday, September 18, 2024
Anticipated Contract Award Wednesday, October 2, 2024
Notice to Proceed (Tentative Start Date) Sunday, December 1, 2024

7. EVALUATION CRITERIA
Proposals will be evaluated based on the following criteria:

Criteria Weight
Overall Assessment of Response 10%
Experience in Jail Staffing 20%
Operational Plan 30%
Staff Qualifications 15%
Cost Proposal 25%

8 8. PROTESTS

8.1 Protest Contents
Protests based on the content of the RFP shall be submitted to the City no later than ten (10) calendar days prior to the scheduled proposal submittal deadline. If necessary, the proposal submittal deadline may be extended pending a resolution of the protest. Proposer may protest a contract award if the Proposer believes that the award was inconsistent with City policy or this RFP is not in compliance with law. A protest must be filed in writing with the City (email is not acceptable) within five (5) busin ess days after receipt of notification of the intended contract award. Any protest submitted after 5 p.m. of the fifth business day after notification of the intended contract award will be rejected by the City as invalid and the Proposer’s failure to time ly file a protest will waive the Proposer’s right to protest the contract award. The Proposer’s protest must include supporting documentation, legal authorities in support of the grounds for the protest and the name, address and telephone number of the person representing the Proposer for purposes of the protest. Any matters not set forth in the protest shall be deemed waived.

8.2 City Review
The City will review and evaluate the basis of the protest provided the protest is filed in strict conformity with the foregoing. The City shall provide the Proposer submitting the protest with a written statement concurring with or denying the protest. Action by the City relative to the protest will be final and not subject to appeal or reconsideration. The procedure and time limits set forth in this section are mandatory and are the Proposer’s sole and exclusive remedy in the event of protest. Failure to comply with these procedures will constitute a waiver of any right to further pursue the protest, including filing a Government Code claim or legal proceedings.

9. ADDENDA
The City reserves the right to revise the RFP prior to the time set to receive proposals. Revisions, if any, shall be made by written addenda. All addenda issued by the City shall be included in the proposal and made part of the RFP. Each Proposer shall leave with City its name, address, phone and fax numbers, and e-mail address for the purpose of receiving Addenda. City will cause copies of addenda to be mailed, faxed, delivered or e-mailed to such names at such addresses.

Proposers are responsible fo r ensuring that they have received any and all addenda. Each Proposer should contact the City to verify that it has received all addenda issued, if any, prior to the bid opening. Failure to acknowledge receipt of all addenda may result in bid rejection.

10. GENERAL CONDITIONS
a.) Amendments to Proposals . Unless specifically requested by the City, no amendment, addendum or modification will be accepted after a proposal has been submitted to City. If a change to a proposal that has been submitted is desired, the submitted proposal must be withdrawn and the replacement proposal submitted prior to the deadline stated herein for receiving proposals.
b.) Non-Responsive Proposals . A proposal may be considered non -responsive if conditional, incomplete, or if it contains alterations of form, additions not called for, or other irregularities that may constitute a material change to the proposal. 9 c.) Costs for Preparing . The City will not compensate any Proposer for the cost of preparing any proposal, and all materials submitted with a proposal shall become the property of the City. The City will retain all proposals submitted and may use any idea in a proposal regardless of whether that proposal is selected. d.) Cancellation. City reserves the right to cancel this request for proposals at any time prior to contract award without obligation in any manner for proposal preparation, interview, fee negotiation or other associated marketing costs. e.) Price Validity. Prices provided by Proposers are valid for 90 days from the proposal due date. The City intends to award the contract within this time but may request an extension from the Proposers to hold pricing, until negotiations are complete and the contract is awarded.
f.) No Commitment to Award. Issuance of request for proposals and receipt of proposals does not commit the City to award a contract. City expressly reserves the right to postpone the proposal for its own convenience, to accept or reject any or all proposals received, to negotiate with more than one Proposer concurrently, or to cancel all or part of this request for proposals.
g.) Right to Negotiate and/or Reject Proposals . City reserves the right to negotiate any price or provision, task order or service, accept any part or all of any proposals, waive any irregularities, and to reject any and all, or parts of any and all proposals, whenever, in the sole opinion of City, such action shall serve its best interests and those of the tax- paying public. The Agreement, if any is awarded, will go to the Proposer whose proposal best meets City’s requirements.

11. CONTACT INFORMATION/QUESTIONS

All communications or questions regarding this RFP should be directed to:

Captain Joshua Hendricks
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 626-813-5226

12. ENCLOSURES

• Exhibit “A” - Professional Services Agreement: Please sign and return this form along with your completed proposal.

• Exhibit “B” - Jail Facility Layout: A 2D overhead diagram of the Jail Facility, including room dimensions, is provided as a separate attachment to this RFP.

END INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS

10 EXHIBIT “A”

CITY OF BALDWIN PARK

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

65431.00007\42447298.1

BB&K (2020) -1- PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

CITY OF BALDWIN PARK

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

1. PARTIES AND DATE.

This Agreement is made and entered into this _____ day of ________, 20___, by and between the City of Baldwin Park, a California municipal corporation ("City") and ***NAME OF COMPANY], a [INSERT TYPE OF BUSINESS; I.E., CORPORATION (INCLUDE STATE OF INCORPORATION), LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, SOLE PROPRIETORSHIP, ETC.***], with its principal place of business at [***ADDRESS***] ("Consultant"). City and Consultant are sometimes individually referred to herein as "Party" and collectively as "Parties."

2. RECITALS.

2.1 Consultant.

Consultant desires to perform and assume responsibility for the provision of certain professional services required by the City on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. Consultant represents that it is experienced in providing [***INSERT TYPE***] services to public clients, is licensed in the State of California, and is familiar with the plans of City.

2.2 Project.

City desires to engage Consultant to render such professional services for the [***INSERT NAME OF PROJECT, AND CONTRACT NUMBER, IF APPLICABLE***] project ("Project") as set forth in this Agreement.

3. TERMS.

3.1 Scope of Services and Term.

3.1.1 General Scope of Services. Consultant promises and agrees to furnish to the City all labor, materials, tools, equipment, services, and incidental and customary work necessary to fully and adequately supply the professional [***INSERT TYPE ***] consulting services necessary for the Project ("Services"). The Services are more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. All Services shall be subject to, and performed in accordance with, this Agree ment, the exh ibits attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations.

3.1.2 Term. The term of this Agreement shall be from [ ***INSERT DATE***] to [***INSERT DATE ***], unless earlier terminated as provided herein. [***INSERT THE

FOLLOWING SENTENCE FOR MULTI -YEAR, AUTOMATIC RENEWAL NOT TO EXCEED THREE CONSECUTIVE YEARS; OTHERWISE, ALWAYS DELETE: The City shall have the unilateral option, at its sole discretion, to re new this Agreement automatically for no more than [INSERT NUMBER] additional one-year terms.***] Consultant shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement, and shall meet any other established schedules and deadlines. The Parties may, by mutual, written consent, extend the term of this Agreement if necessary to complete the Services.
65431.00007\42447298.1

BB&K (2020) -2- PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

3.2 Compensation.

3.2.1 Compensation. Consultant shall receive compensation, including authorized reimbursements, for all Services rendered under this Agreement at the rates set forth in Exhibit "C" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The total compensation shall not exce ed [***INSERT AMOUNT WRITTEN OUT] ($[***INSERT NUMBER]) without written approval of the City Council or City Manager, as applicable. Extra Work may be authorized, as described below, and if authorized, will be compensated at the rates and manner set forth in this Agreement.

3.2.2 Payment of Compensation . Consultant shall submit to City a monthly invoice which indicates work completed and hours of Services rendered by Consultant. The invoice shall describe the amount of Services provided since the initial commencement date, or since the start of the subsequent billing periods, as appropriate, through the date of the invoice.

City shall, within 30 days of receiving such invoice, review the invoice and pay all non -disputed and approved charges. If the City disputes any of Consultan t's fees, the City shall give written notice to Consultant within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice of any disputed fees set forth therein. Payment shall not constitute acceptance of any Services completed by Consultant. The making of final payme nt shall not constitute a waiver of any claims by the City for any reason whatsoever.

3.2.3 Reimbursement for Expenses. Consultant shall not be reimbursed for any expenses unless authorized in writing by City, or included in Exhibit "C" of this Agreement.

3.2.4 Extra Work . At any time during the term of this Agreement, City may request that Consultant perform Extra Work. As used herein, "Extra Work" means any work which is determined by City to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which the Parties did not reasonably anticipate would be necessary at the execution of this Agreement.

Consultant shall not perform, nor be compensated for, Extra Work without written authorization from the City.

3.3 Responsibilities of Consultant.

3.3.1 Independent Contractor; Control and Payment of Subordinates . The Services shall be performed by Consultant or under its supervision. Consultant will determine the means, methods and details of performing the Services subject to the requirements of this Agreement. City retains Consultant on an independent contractor basis and not as an employee.

Any personnel performing the Services on behalf of Consultant shall not be employees of City and shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City, or any of its officials, officers, directors, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultants officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall pay all wages, salaries, and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their performance of Services under this Agreement and as required by law.

Consultant shall be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such additional personnel, in cluding, but not limited to: social security taxes, income tax withholding, unemployment insurance, disability insurance, and workers' compensation insurance.

3.3.2 Schedule of Services. Consultant shall perform the Services in a prompt and timely manner and in accordance with the Schedule of Services set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Consultant represents that it has the 65431.00007\42447298.1

BB&K (2020) -3- PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

professional and technical personnel required to perform the Services expeditiously. Upon request of City, Consultant shall provide a more detailed schedule of anticipated performance to meet the Schedule of Services.

3.3.3 Conformance to Applicable Requirements . All work prepared by Consultant shall be subject to the approval of City.

3.3.4 Substitution of Key Personnel . Consultant has represented to City that certain key personnel will perform and coordinate the Services under this Agreement. Should one or more of such personnel become unavailable, Consultant may substitute other personnel of at least equal competence upon written approval of City. In the event that City and Consultant cannot agree as to the substitution of key personnel, City shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement for cause. The key personnel for performance of th is Agreement are as follows:
[***INSERT NAME AND TITLE***].

3.3.5 City's Representative . The City hereby designates [***INSERT NAME AND TITLE***], or his/her designee, to act as its representative in all matters pertaining to the administration and performance of this Agreement ("City's Representative"). City's Representative shall have the power to act on behalf of the City for review and approva l of all products submitted by Consultant but not the authority to enlarge the Scope of Services or change the total compensation due to Consultant under this Agreement. The City Manager shall be authorized to act on City's behalf and to execute all neces sary documents which enlarge the Scope of Services or change the Consultant's total compensation subject to the provisions contained in this Agreement. Consultant shall not accept direction or orders from any person other than the City Manager, City's Representative or his/her designee.

3.3.6 Consultant's Representative. Consultant hereby designates [***INSERT NAME AND TITLE***], or his/her designee, to act as its representative for the performance of this Agreement ("Consultant's Representative"). Consultant's Representative shall have full authority to represent and act on behalf of the Consultant for all purposes under this A greement. The Consultant's Representative shall supervise and direct the Services, using his/her best skill and attention, and shall be responsible for all means, meth ods, techniques, sequences, and procedures and for the satisfactory coordination of all portions of the Services under this Agreement.

3.3.7 Coordination of Services. Consultant agrees to work closely with City staff in the performance of Services and shall be available to City's staff, consultants and other staff at all reasonable times.

3.3.8 Standard of Care; Performance of Employees. Consultant shall perform all Services under this Agreement in a skillful and competent manner, consistent with the standards generally recognized as being employed by professionals in the same discipline in the State of California. Consultant represent s and maintains that it is skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform the Services. Consultant warrants that all employees and subconsultants shall have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. Consultant represents that it, its employees and subconsultants have all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services, and that such licenses and approvals shall be maintained throughout the term of this Agreement. Consultant shall perform, at its own cost and expense and without reimbursement from the City, any services necessary to correct errors or omissions which are caused by the Consultant's failure t o comply 65431.00007\42447298.1

BB&K (2020) -4- PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

with the standard of care provided for herein. Any employee of the Consultant or its subconsultants who is determined by the City to be uncooperative, incompetent, a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Project, a threat to the safety of persons or property, or any employee who fails or refuses to perform the Services in a manner acceptable to the City, shall be promptly removed from the Project by the Consultant and shall not be re-employed to perform any of the Services or to work on the Project.

3.3.9 Period of Performance.

3.3.9.1 Consultant shall perform and complete all Services under this Agreement within the term set forth in Section 3.1.2 above (“Performance Time”). Consultant shall also perform the Services in strict accordance with any completion schedule or Project milestones described in Exhibits “A” or “B” attached hereto, or which may be separately agreed upon in writing by the City and Consultant (“Performance Milestones”). Consultant agrees that if the Services are not completed within the aforementioned Performance Tim e and/or pursuant to any such Performance Milestones developed pursuant to provisions of this Agreement, it is understood, acknowledged and agreed that the City will suffer damage.

3.3.9.2 Neither City nor Consultant shall be considered in default of this Agreement for delays in performance caused by circumstances beyond the reasonable control of the non-performing Party. For purposes of this Agreement, such circumstances include a Force Majeure Event. A Force Majeure Event shall mean an event that materially affects a Party’s performance and is one or more of the following: (1) Acts of God or other natural disasters; (2) terrorism or other acts of a public enemy; (3) orders of governmental authorities (including, without limitation, unreasonable and unforeseeable delay in the issuance of permits or approvals by governmental authorities that are required for the services); (4) strikes and other organized labor action occurring at the site and the effects thereof on the services, only to the extent such strikes and other organized labor action are beyond the control of Consultant and its subcontractors, and to the extent the effects thereof cannot be avoided by use of replacement workers; and (5) pandemics, epidemics or quarantine restrictions. For purposes of this section, “orders of governmental authorities,” includes ordinances, emergency proclamations and orders, rules to protect the public health, welfare and safety, and other actions of a public agency applicable to the services and Agreement.

3.3.9.3 Should a Force Majeure Event occur, the non -performing Party shall, within a reasonable time of being prevented from performing, give written notice to the other Party describing the circumstances preventing continued performance and the efforts being made to resume performance of this Agreement. Force Majeure Events and/or delays, regardless of the Party responsible for the delay, shall not entitle Consultant to any additional compensation.

Notwithstanding the foregoing in this section, the City may stil l terminate this Agreement in accordance with the termination provisions of this Agreement.

3.3.10 Laws and Regulations; Employee/Labor Certification.

3.3.10.1 Compliance with Laws . Consultant shall keep itself fully informed of and in compliance with all local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations in any manner affecting the performance of the Project or the Services, including all Cal/OSHA requirements, and shall give all notices required by law. Consultant shall be liable for all violations of such laws and regulations in connection with the Services and this Agreement. All violations of such laws and regulations shall be grounds for the City to terminate the Agreement for cause. 65431.00007\42447298.1

BB&K (2020) -5- PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

3.3.10.2 Employment Eligibility; Consultant . Consultant certifies that it fully complies with all requirements and restrictions of state and federal law respecting the employment of undocumented aliens, including, but not limited to, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, as may be amende d from time to time and shall require all subconsultants and sub-subconsultants to comply with the same. Consultant certifies that it has not committed a violation of any such law within the five (5) years immediately pre ceding the date of execution of this Agreement, and shall not violate any such law at any time during the term of the Agreement.

3.3.10.3 Equal Opportunity Employment. Consultant represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and it shall not discriminate against any subconsultant, employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, handicap, ancestry, sex or age. Such non -discrimination shall include, but not be limited to, all activities related to initial employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination. Consultant shall also comply with all relevant provisions of City's Minority Business Enterprise program, Affirmative Action Plan or other related programs or guidelines currently in effect or hereinafter enacted.

3.3.10.4 Air Quality . To the extent applicable, Consultant must fully comply with all applicable laws, rules and regulations in furnishing or using equipment and/or providing services, including, but not limited to, emissions limits and permitting requirements imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management City (SCAQMD) and/or California Air Resources Board (CARB). Consultant shall indemnify City against any fines or penalties imposed by SCAQMD, CARB, or any other governmental or regulatory agency for violations of applicable laws, rules and/or regulations by Consultant, its subconsultants, or others for whom Consultant is responsible under its indemnity obligations provided for in this Agreement.

3.3.10.5 Water Quality Management and Compliance . Consultant shall keep itself and all subcontractors, staff, and employees fully informed of and in compliance with all local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations that may impact, or be implicated by the performance of the Services including, w ithout limitation, all applicable provisions of the City’s ordinances regulating water quality and storm water; the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. § 1251, et seq.); the California Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Water Code § 13000 et seq.); and any and all regulations, policies, or permits issued pursuant to any such authority. Consultant must additionally comply with the lawful requirements of the City, and any other municipality, drainage district, or other local agency with jurisdiction over the location where the Services are to be conducted, regulating water quality and storm water discharges. City may seek damages from Consultant for delay in completing the Services caused by Consultant ’s failure to comply with the laws, regulations and policies described in this Section, or any other relevant water quality law, regulation, or policy.

3.3.10.6 Safety. Consultant shall execute and maintain its work so as to avoid injury or damage to any person or property. In carrying out its Services, the Consultant shall at all times be in compliance with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations, and shall exercise all necessary precautions for the safety of employees appropriate to the nature of the work and the conditions under which the work is to be performed.

3.3.11 Insurance.

3.3.11.1 Time for Compliance . Consultant shall not commence work under this Agreement until it has provided evidence satisfactory to the City that it has secured all 65431.00007\42447298.1

BB&K (2020) -6- PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

insurance required under this section. In addition, Consultant shall not allow any subconsultant to commence work on any subcontract until it has provided evidence satisfactory to the City that the subconsultant has secured all insurance required under thi s section. Failure to provide and maintain all required insurance shall be grounds for the City to terminate this Agreement for cause.

3.3.11.2 Types of Insurance Required . As a condition precedent to the effectiveness of this Agreement for work to be performed hereunder, and without limiting the indemnity provisions of the Agreement, the Consultant, in partial performance of its obligations under such Agreement, shall procure and maintain in full force and effect during the term of the Agreement the following policies of insurance. If the existing policies do not meet the insurance requirements set forth herein, Consultant agrees to amend, supplement or endorse the policies to do so.
(A) Commercial General Liability: Commercial General Liability Insurance which affords coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office "occurrence" form CG 00 01, or the exact equivalent, with limits of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and no less than $2,000,000 in the general aggregate. Defense costs shall be paid in addition to the limits. The policy shall contain no endorsements or provisions (1) limiting coverage for contractual liability; (2) excluding coverage for claims or suits by one insured against another (cross-liability); (3) products/completed operations liability; or (4) containing any other exclusion(s) contrary to the terms or purposes of this Agreement. (B) Automobile Liability Insurance: Automobile Liability Insurance with coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office Form CA 00 01 covering "Any Auto" (Symbol 1), or the exact equivalent, covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities with limits of not less than $1,000,000 combined limit for each occurrence. (C) Workers' Compensation: Workers' Compensation
Insurance, as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance with a limit of not less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and disease. (D) Professional Liability (Errors & Omissions): Professional Liability insurance or Errors & Omissions insurance appropriate to Consultant’s profession with limits of not less than $1,000,000. Covered professional services shall specifically include all work to be performed under the Agreement and delete any exclusions that may potentially affect the work to be performed (for example, any exclusions relating to lead, asbestos, pollution, testing, underground storage tanks, laboratory analysis, soil work, etc.). If coverage is written on a claims-made basis, the retroactive date shall precede the effective date of the initial Agreement and continuous coverage will be maintained or an extended reporting period will be exercised for a period of at least five (5) years from termination or expiration of this Agreement.

3.3.11.3 Insurance Endorsements . Required insurance policies shall contain the following provisions, or Consultant shall provide endorsements on forms approved by the City to add the following provisions to the insurance policies:
(A) Commercial General Liability: (1) Additional Insured: The City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be additional insureds with regard to liability and defense of suits or claims arising out of the performance of the Agreement.

Additional Insured Endorsements shall not (1) be restricted to "ongoing operations"; (2) exclude "contractual liability"; (3) restrict coverage to "sole" liability of Consultant; or (4) contain any other 65431.00007\42447298.1

BB&K (2020) -7- PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

exclusions contrary to the terms or purposes of this Agreement. For all policies of Commercial General Liability insurance, Consultant shall provide endorsements in the form of ISO CG 20 10 10 01 and 20 37 10 01 (or endorsements providing the exact same c overage) to effectuate this requirement. (2) Cancellation: Required insurance policies shall not be canceled or the coverage reduced until a thirty (30) day written notice of cancellation has been served upon the City except ten (10) days shall be allowed for non-payment of premium. (B) Automobile Liability. (1) Cancellation: Required insurance policies shall not be canceled or the coverage reduced until a thirty (30) day written notice of cancellation has been served upon the City except ten (10) days shall be allowed for non-payment of premium.
(C) Professional Liability (Errors & Omissions): (1) Cancellation:

Required insurance policies shall not be canceled or the coverage reduced until a thirty (30) day written notice of cancellation has been served upon the City except ten (10) days shall be allowed for non-payment of premium. (2) Contract ual Liability Exclusion Deleted: This insurance shall include contractual liability applicable to this Agreement. The policy must “pay on behalf of” the insured and include a provision establishing the insurer’s duty to defend. (D) Workers' Compensation: (1) Cancellation: Required
insurance policies shall not be canceled or the coverage reduced until a thirty (30) day written notice of cancellation has been served upon the City except ten (10) days shall be allowed for non-payment of premium. (2) Waiver of Subrogation: A waiver of subrogation stating that the insurer waives all rights of subrogation against the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers.

3.3.11.4 Primary and Non -Contributing Insurance . All policies of Commercial General Liability and Automobile Liability insurance shall be primary and any other insurance, deductible, or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall not contribute with this primary insurance. Policies shall contain or be endorsed to contain such provisions.

3.3.11.5 Waiver of Subrogation . All required insurance coverages, except for the professional liability coverage, shall contain or be endorsed to waiver of subrogation in favor of the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers or shall specifically allow Consultant or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these specifications to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss. Consultant hereby waives its own right of recovery against City, and shall require similar written expr ess waivers and insurance clauses from each of its subconsultants.

3.3.11.6 Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductible or self- insured retention must be approved in writing by the City and shall protect the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers in the same manner and to the same extent as they would have been protected had the p olicy or policies not contained a deductible or self -insured retention.

3.3.11.7 Evidence of Insurance . The Consultant, concurrently with the execution of the Agreement, and as a condition precedent to the effectiveness thereof, shall deliver either certified copies of the required policies, or original certificates on forms approved by the City, together with all endorsements affecting each policy. Required insurance policies shall 65431.00007\42447298.1

BB&K (2020) -8- PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

not be in compliance if they include any limiting provision or endorsement that has not been submitted to the City for approval. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy shall be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind cov erage on its behalf. At least fifteen (15 days) prior to the expiration of any such policy, evidence of insurance showing that such insurance coverage has been renewed or extended shall be filed with the City. If such coverage is cancelled or reduced and not replaced immediately so as to avoid a lapse in the required coverage, Consultant shall, within ten (10) days after receipt of written notice of such cancellation or reduction of coverage, file with the City evidence of insurance showing that the required insurance has been reinstated or has been provided through another insurance company or companies.

3.3.11.8 Acceptability of Insurers . Each such policy shall be from a company or companies with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII and authorized to transact business of insurance in the State of California, or otherwise allowed to place insurance through surplus line brokers under applicable provisions of the California Insurance Code or any federal law.

3.3.11.9 Enforcement of Agreement Provisions (non estoppel) .

Consultant acknowledges and agrees that actual or alleged failure on the part of the City to inform Consultant of non-compliance with any requirement imposes no additional obligation on the City nor does it waive any rights hereunder.

3.3.11.10 Requirements Not Limiting . Requirement of specific coverage or minimum limits contained in this Section are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits, or other requirement, or a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance.

3.3.11.11 Additional Insurance Provisions
(A) The foregoing requirements as to the types and limits of insurance coverage to be maintained by Consultant, and any approval of said insurance by the City, is not intended to and shall not in any manner limit or qualify the liabilities and obligations otherwise assumed by the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement, including but not limited to, the provisions concerning indemnification.
(B) If at any time during the life of the Agreement, any policy of insurance required under this Agreement does not comply with these specifications or is canceled and not replaced, City has the right but not the duty to obtain the insurance it deems necessary and any premium paid by City will be promptly reimbursed by Consultant or City will withhold amounts sufficient to pay premium from Consultant payments. In the alternative, City may cancel this Agreement.
(C) The City may require the Consultant to provide complete copies of all insurance policies in effect for the duration of the Project. (D) Neither the City nor any of its officials, officers, employees, agents or volunteers shall be personally responsible for any liability arising under or by virtue of this Agreement.
(E) The limits set forth herein shall apply separately to each insured against whom claims are made or suits are brought, except with respect to the limits of 65431.00007\42447298.1

BB&K (2020) -9- PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

liability. Further the limits set forth herein shall not be construed to relieve the Consultant from liability in excess of such coverage, nor shall it limit the Consultant’s indemnification obligations to the City and shall not preclude the City from tak ing such other actions available to the City under other provisions of the Agreement or law.
(F) Consultant shall report to the City, in addition to Consultant’s insurer, any and all insurance claims submitted by Consultant in connection with the Services under this Agreement.

3.3.11.12 Insurance for Subconsultants . Consultant shall include all subconsultants engaged in any work for Consultant relating to this Agreement as additional insureds under the Consultant's policies, or the Consultant shall be responsible for causing subconsultants to purchase the appropria te insurance in compliance with the terms of these Insurance Requirements, including adding the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers as additional insureds to the subconsultant's policies. All polici es of Commercial General Liability insurance provided by Consultant’s subconsultants performing work relating to this Agreement shall be endorsed to name the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers as additional insureds using endor sement form ISO CG 20 38 04 13 or an endorsement providing equivalent coverage. Consultant shall not allow any subconsultant to commence work on any subcontract relating to this Agreement until it has received satisfactory evidence of subconsultant’s compliance with all insurance requirements under this Agreement, to the extent applicable. The Consultant shall provide satisfactory evidence of compliance with this section upon request of the City.

3.4 Labor Code Requirements.

3.4.1 Prevailing Wages. Consultant is aware of the requirements of California Labor Code Section 1720, et seq., and 1770, et seq., as well as California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 16000, et seq., ("Prevailing Wage Laws"), which require the payment of prevailing wage rates and the performance of other requirements on "public works" and "maintenance" projects. If the Services are being performed as part of an applicable "public works" or "maintenance" project, as defined by the Prevailing Wage Laws, and if the total compensation is $1,000 or more, Consultant agrees to fully comply with such Prevailing Wage Laws. City shall provide Consultant with a copy of the prevailing rates of per diem wages in effect at the commencement of this Agreement. Consultant s hall make copies of the prevailing rates of per diem wages for each craft, classification or type of worker needed to execute the Services available to interested parties upon request, and shall post copies at the Consultant's principal place of busine ss and at the project site. It is the intent of the parties to effectuate the requirements of sections 1771, 1774, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1813, and 1815 of the Labor Code within this Agreement, and Consultant shall therefore comply with such Labor Code secti ons to the fullest extent required by law. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers free and harmless from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with the Prevailing Wage Laws.

3.4.2 Registration/DIR Compliance. If the Services are being performed on a public works project of over $25,000 when the project is for construction, alteration, demolition, installation, or repair work, or a public works project of over $15,000 when the project is for maintenance work, in addition to the foregoing, then pursuant to Labor Code sections 1725.5 and 1771.1, the Consultant and all subconsultants must be registered with the Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”). Consultant shall maintain registration for the duration of the Project 65431.00007\42447298.1

BB&K (2020) -10- PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

and require the same of any subconsultants.

3.4.3 Compliance Monitoring. This Project may also be subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the DIR. It shall be Consultant’s sole responsibility to comply with all applicable registration and labor compliance requirements, including the submission of payroll records directly to the DIR. Any stop orders issued by the DIR against Consultant or any subconsultant that affect Consultant’s performance of services, including any delay, shall be Consultant’s sole responsibility. Any delay arising out of or resulting from such stop orders shall be considered Consultant caused delay and shall not be compensable by the City. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officials, officers, employees and agents free and harmless from any claim or liability arising out of stop orders issued by the DIR against Consultant or any subconsultant.

3.4.4 Labor Certification. By its signature hereunder, Consultant certifies that it is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and agrees to comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Services.

3.5 Termination of Agreement.

3.5.1.1 Grounds for Termination . City may, by written notice to Consultant, terminate the whole or any part of this Agreement at any time and without cause by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination, and specifying the effective date thereof, at least seven (7) days before the effective date of such termination. Upon termination, Consultant shall be compensated only for those Services which have been adequately rendered to City, and Consultant shall be entitled to no further compensation. Consult ant may not terminate this Agreement except for cause. The rights and remedies of the City provided in this section shall not be exclusive and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law, equity or under this Agreement.

3.5.1.2 Effect of Termination . If this Agreement is terminated as provided herein, City may require Consultant to provide all finished or unfinished Documents and Data and other information of any kind prepared by Consultant in connection with the performance of Services under this A greement. Consultant shall be required to provide such document and other information within fifteen (15) days of the request.

3.5.1.3 Additional Services. In the event this Agreement is terminated in whole or in part as provided herein, City may procure, upon such terms and in such manner as it may determine appropriate, services similar to those terminated.

3.6 Indemnification.

3.6.1 To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall defend (with counsel of City’s choosing), indemnify and hold the City, its officials, officers, employees, volunteers, and agents free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury of any kind, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of, pertaining to, or incident to any acts, errors or omissions, or willful misconduct of Consul tant, its officials, officers, employees, subcontractors, consultants or agents in connection with the performance of the Consultant’s Services, the Project 65431.00007\42447298.1

BB&K (2020) -11- PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

or this Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all damages, expert witness fees and attorney’s fees and other related costs and expenses except such loss or damage caused by the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City. Consultant 's obligation to indemnify shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement and shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by Consultant, the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, or volunteers.

3.6.2 If Consultant’s obligation to defend, indemnify, and/or hold harmless arises out of Consultant’s performance as a “design professional” (as that term is defined under Civil Code section 2782.8), then, and only to the extent required by Civil Code section 2 782.8, which is fully incorporated herein, Consultant’s indemnification obligation shall be limited to claims that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Consultant, and, upon Consultant obtaining a final adjudication by a court of competent jurisdiction, Consultant’s liability for such claim, including the cost to defend, shall not exceed the Consultant’s proportionate percentage of fault.

3.7 General Provisions.

3.7.1 Accounting Records . Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to all costs and expenses incurred under this Agreement. All such records shall be clearly identifiable. Consultant shall allow a representative of City during normal business hours to examine, audit, and make transcripts or copies of such records and any other documents created pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to the Agree ment for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment under this Agreement.

3.7.2 Independent Contractors and Subcontracting.

3.7.2.1 Use of Consultants. Consultant is aware of statutory and case law regarding classification of workers as independent contractors, including California Labor Code Section 2750.3 and Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court , 4 Cal. 5th 903 (2018). To ensure that Consultant is in compliance with the California Labor Code, Consultant shall only utilize its employees to provide the Services. Consultant may not provide the services through any independent contractor, subcontractor or subconsultant (“Subcontractor(s)”) unless approved by the City as set forth in Section 3.7.2.2 below. Consultant represents and warrants that all personnel who perform the Services on Consultant’s behalf are Consultant’s employees, and that Consultant complies with all applicable laws, rules and regulations governing i ts employees, including, but not limited to, the California Labor Code, Unemployment Insurance Code and all applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders.

3.7.2.2 Prior Approval Required . Consultant shall not use any Subcontractor to provide the Services, or any portion of the work required by this Agreement, without prior written approval of City. In the event that City authorizes Consultant to use a Subcontractor, Consultant shall enter into a written agreement with the Subcontractor, which must include all provisions of the Agreement, including a restriction on the Subcontractor’s use of further independent contractors, subcontractors or subconsultants without the City’s prior written consent.

3.7.3 Delivery of Notices. All notices permitted or required under this Agreement shall be given to the respective parties at the following address, or at such other address as the 65431.00007\42447298.1

BB&K (2020) -12- PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

respective parties may provide in writing for this purpose:

Consultant: [***INSERT BUSINESS NAME***]
[***INSERT STREET ADDRESS***]
[***INSERT CITY STATE ZIP***]
ATTN: [***INSERT NAME AND TITLE***]
City: City of Baldwin Park
14403 E. Pacific Avenue
Baldwin Park, CA 91706
ATTN: [***INSERT NAME AND TITLE***]
Such notice shall be deemed made when personally delivered or when mailed, forty -eight (48) hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class postage prepaid and addressed to the party at its applicable address. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate not ice on the date actual notice occurred, regardless of the method of service.

3.7.4 Ownership of Materials and Confidentiality.

3.7.4.1 Documents & Data; Licensing of Intellectual Property . This Agreement creates a non-exclusive and perpetual license for City to copy, use, modify, reuse, or sublicense any and all copyrights, designs, and other intellectual property embodied in plans, specifications, studies, drawings, estimates, and other documents or works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, including but not limited to, physical drawings or data magnetically or otherwise recorded on computer diskettes, which are pre pared or caused to be prepared by Consultant under this Agreement ("Documents & Data"). All Documents & Data shall be and remain the property of City, and shall not be used in whole or in substantial part by Consultant on other projects without the City’s express written permission. Within thirty (30) days following the completion, suspension, abandonment or termination of this Agreement, Consultant shall provide to City reproducible copies of all Documents & Data, in a form and amount required by City. City reserves the right to select the method of document reproduction and to establish where the reproduction will be accomplished. The reproduction expense shall be borne by City at the actual cost of duplication. In the event of a dispute regarding the amount of compensation to which the Consultant is entitled under the termination provisions of this Agreement, Consultant shall provide all Documents & Data to City upon payment of the undisputed amount. Consultant shall have no right to retain or fail t o provide to City any such documents pending resolution of the dispute. In addition, Consultant shall retain copies of all Documents & Data on file for a minimum of fifteen (15) years following completion of the Project, and shall make copies available to City upon the payment of actual reasonable duplication costs. Before destroying the Documents & Data following this retention period, Consultant shall make a reasonable effort to notify City and provide City with the opportunity to obtain the documents.

3.7.4.2 Subconsultants. Consultant shall require all subconsultants to agree in writing that City is granted a non -exclusive and perpetual license for any Documents & Data the subconsultant prepares under this Agreement. Consultant represents and warrants that Consultant has the legal right to license any and all Documents & Data. Consultant makes no such representation and warranty in regard to Documents & Data which were prepared by design professionals other than Consultant or its subconsultants, or those provided to Consultant by the City.
65431.00007\42447298.1

BB&K (2020) -13- PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

3.7.4.3 Right to Use . City shall not be limited in any way in its use or reuse of the Documents and Data or any part of them at any time for purposes of this Project or another project, provided that any such use not within the purposes intended by this Agreement or on a pro ject other than this Project without employing the services of Consultant shall be at City’s sole risk. If City uses or reuses the Documents & Data on any project other than this Project, it shall remove the Consultant’s seal from the Documents & Data and indemnify and hold harmless Consultant and its officers, directors, agents and employees from claims arising out of the negligent use or re -use of the Documents & Data on such other project. Consultant shall be responsible and liable for its D ocuments & Data, pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, only with respect to the condition of the Documents & Data at the time they are provided to the City upon completion, suspension, abandonment or termination. Consultant shall not be responsible or liable for any revisions to the Documents & Data made by any party other than Consultant, a party for whom the Consultant is legally responsible or liable, or anyone approved by the Consultant.

3.7.4.4 Indemnification. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, volunteers and agents free and harmless, pursuant to the indemnification provisions of this Agreement, for any alleged infringement of any patent, copyright, trade secret, trade name, trademark, or any other proprietary right of any person or entity in consequence of the use on the Project by City of the Documents & Data, including any method, process, product, or concept specified or depicted.

3.7.4.5 Confidentiality. All ideas, memoranda, specifications, plans, procedures, drawings, descriptions, computer program data, input record data, written information, and other Documents & Data either created by or provided to Consultant in connection with the performance of this Agreement shall be held confidential by Consultant. Such materials shall not, without the prior written consent of City, be used by Consultant for any purposes other than the performance of the Services. Nor shall such materials be di sclosed to any person or entity not connected with the performance of the Services or the Project. Nothing furnished to Consultant which is otherwise known to Consultant or is generally known, or has become known, to the related industry shall be deemed c onfidential. Consultant shall not use City's name or insignia, photographs of the Project, or any publicity pertaining to the Services or the Project in any magazine, trade paper, newspaper, television or radio production or other similar medium without the prior written consent of City.

3.7.4.6 Confidential Information. The City shall refrain from releasing Consultant’s proprietary information ("Proprietary Information") unless the City's legal counsel determines that the release of the Proprietary Information is required by the California Public Records Act or other applicable state or federal law, or order of a court of competent jurisdiction, in which case the City shall notify Consultant of its intention to release Proprietary Informa tion.

Consultant shall have five (5) working days after receipt of the release notice to give City written notice of Consultant's objection to the City's release of Proprietary Information. Consultant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, and its officers, directors, employees, and agents from and against all liability, loss, cost or expense (including attorney’s fees) arising out of a legal action brought to compel the release of Proprietary Information. City shall not release the Proprietary Information after receipt of an objection notice unless either: (1) Consultant fails to fully indemnify, defend (with City's choice of legal counsel), and hold City harmless from any legal action brought to compel such release; and/or (2) a final and non-appealable order by a court of competent jurisdiction requires that City release such information. 65431.00007\42447298.1

BB&K (2020) -14- PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

3.7.5 Cooperation; Further Acts . The Parties shall fully cooperate with one another, and shall take any additional acts or sign any additional documents as may be necessary, appropriate or convenient to attain the purposes of this Agreement.

3.7.6 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior negotiations, understandings or agreements.

3.7.7 Attorneys’ Fees. If either party commences an action against the other party, either legal, administrative or otherwise, arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to have and recover from the losing pa rty reasonable attorneys’ fees and all costs of such action.

3.7.8 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in Riverside County. In addition to any and all contract requirements pertaining to notices of and requests for compensation or payment for extra work, disputed work, claims and/or changed conditions, Consultant must comply with the claim procedures set forth in Government Code sections 900 et seq . prior to filing any lawsuit against the City. Such Government Code claims and any subsequent lawsuit based upon the Government Code claims shall be limited to those matters that remain unresolved after all procedures pertaining to extra work, disputed work, claims, and/or changed conditions have been followed by Consultant. If no such Government Code claim is submitted, or if any prerequisite contractual requirements are not otherwise satisfied as specified herein, Consultant shall be barred from bringing and maintaining a valid lawsuit against the City.

3.7.9 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement.

3.7.10 City's Right to Employ Other Consultants . City reserves right to employ other consultants in connection with this Project.

3.7.11 Successors and Assigns . This Agreement shall be binding on the successors and assigns of the parties.

3.7.12 Assignment or Transfer. Consultant shall not assign, sublet, or transfer this Agreement or any rights under or interest in this Agreement without the written consent of the City, which may be withheld for any reason. Any attempt to so assign or so transfer without such consent shall be void and without legal effect and shall constitute grounds for termination.

Consultant shall not subcontract any portion of the Services required by this Agreement, except as expressly stated herein, without prior written approval of City. Subcontracts, if any, shall contain a provision making them subject to all provisions stipulated in this Agreement.

3.7.13 Construction; References; Captions. Since the Parties or their agents have participated fully in the preparation of this Agreement, the language of this Agreement shall be construed simply, according to its fair meaning, and not strictly for or against any Party. Any term referencing time, days or period for performance shall be deemed calendar days and not work days. All references to Consultant include all personnel, employees, agents, and subconsultants of Consultant, except as otherwise specified in this Agreement. All references to City include its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers except as otherwise specified in this Agreement. The captions of the various articles and paragraphs are for convenience and ease 65431.00007\42447298.1

BB&K (2020) -15- PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

of reference only, and do not define, limit, augment, or describe the scope, content, or intent of this Agreement.

3.7.14 Amendment; Modification. No supplement, modification, or amendment of this Agreement shall be binding unless executed in writing and signed by both Parties.

3.7.15 Waiver. No waiver of any default shall constitute a waiver of any other default or breach, whether of the same or other covenant or condition. No waiver, benefit, privilege, or service voluntarily given or performed by a Party shall give the other Party any contractual rights by custom, estoppel, or otherwise.

3.7.16 No Third -Party Beneficiaries . There are no intended third party beneficiaries of any right or obligation assumed by the Parties.

3.7.17 Invalidity; Severability. If any portion of this Agreement is declared invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions shall continue in full force and effect.

3.7.18 Prohibited Interests. Consultant maintains and warrants that it has not employed nor retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, to solicit or secure this Agreement. Consultant warrants that it has not paid nor has it agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Agr eement. Consultant further agrees to file, or shall cause its employees or subconsultants to file, a Statement of Economic Interest with the City’s Filing Officer as required under state law in the performance of the Services. For breach or violation of this warranty, City shall have the right to rescind this Agreement without liability. For the term of this Agreement, no member, officer or employee of City, during the term of his or her service with City, shall have any direct interest in this Agreement, or obtain any present or anticipated material benefit arising therefrom.

3.7.19 Authority to Enter Agreement. Consultant has all requisite power and authority to conduct its business and to execute, deliver, and perform the Agreement. Each Party warrants that the individuals who have signed this Agreement have the legal power, right, and authority to make this Agreement and bind each respective Party.

3.7.20 Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original.

3.7.21 Survival. All rights and obligations hereunder that by their nature are to continue after any expiration or termination of this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the indemnification obligations, shall survive any such expiration or termination.

SIGNATURE PAGE TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

BETWEEN THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK AND
[***INSERT NAME***]
65431.00007\42447298.1

BB&K (2020) -16- PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the Parties has caused this Agreement to be executed on the day and year first above written.

CITY OF BALDWIN PARK [INSERT NAME OF CONSULTANT]

[If Corporation, TWO SIGNATURES,
President OR Vice President AND Secretary
OR Treasurer REQUIRED]
By:

Its:

Printed Name:

By:

Its:

Printed Name:

Approved By:

[INSERT NAME]
[INSERT TITLE]

Attested By:

City Clerk

Approved as to Form:

_____________________________________
Best Best & Krieger LLP
City Attorney

65431.00007\42447298.1

BB&K (2020) Exhibit “A”-1 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

EXHIBIT "A"

SCOPE OF SERVICES
[***INSERT SCOPE***]

65431.00007\42447298.1

BB&K (2020) Exhibit “B”-1 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

EXHIBIT "B"

SCHEDULE OF SERVICES
[***INSERT SCHEDULE***]

EXHIBIT "C"

COMPENSATION
[***INSERT RATES & AUTHORIZED REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES***]

11 EXHIBIT “B”

JAIL FACILITY LAYOUT

InmateCellInmateCellInmateCellInmateCell
InterviewRoomInmateCell
BathroomStaffOffice
BookingCellBookingCell
Live scan area
Hallway
Elevator
BPPDJail
Attachment A

STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. ____5____

Page 1 ends

TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Robert Lopez, Chief of Police
DATE: August 7, 2024
SUBJECT: Approval of Payment for Automated License Plate Readers ("ALPR") Camera Subscription from Flock Safety (Flock
Group, Inc.) for Fiscal Years 2022-23 and 2023-24

SUMMARY
This report seeks authorization from the City Council to approve payment for two invoices from Flock Safety ("Flock") for the continued lease of 30 Automated License Plate Readers "ALPR" cameras from December 27, 2022, to December 26, 2023, and December 27, 2023, to December 26, 2024

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council

1. Approve the payment of two invoices (INV-37827 and INV-37828) for the continued lease of thirty (30) Automated License Plate Reader Cameras from Flock Group INC., for the periods specified above, each in the amount of $78,500.00, for a total of $157,000.00; and

2. Authorize the Director of Finance to transfer the funds previously approved and allocated in the Police Department budget line item 100-30-310-51100-00000 (Consultant Services) to 100-30-310-58140- 00000 (Lease Expense) and process the payments; and

3. Authorize the Chief of Police or his designee to complete all appropriate documentation to process the payments.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no impact on the budget. The total amount of $157,000.00, comprising two invoices of $78,500.00 each, has already been allocated and approved by the City Council during the respective fiscal years for the Police Department under line item 100-30-310-51100-00000. A line-item transfer is required to capture these expenses under the appropriate expense category of Lease Expense. These funds were previously budgeted and set aside for this purpose, and the payment of these invoices will not require any additional appropriation.

BACKGROUND
On December 15, 2021, the City Council approved a one-year lease of thirty (30) Automated License Plate Reader Cameras from Flock Group INC. in an amount not to exceed $86,000.

It's important to note that Flock Safety delayed billing until all cameras were fully installed and validated. This process was completed on April 1, 2024, at which point Flock Safety issued invoices for both the 2022 -23 and 2023-24 fiscal years. Now that all cameras are operational and validated, payment for both fiscal years is due.

Due to the City's purchasing policy, City Council approval is required for expenses that exceed $50,000.00.

Page 2 ends

DISCUSSION
The ALPR technology has proven to be a valuable tool for the Police Department in locating stolen vehicles and solving crimes where automobiles have been used.

The Flock system provides coverage throughout the community with system maintenance provided by the vendor.

Flock Safety is a technology company that provides Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) systems to law enforcement agencies, offering a network of cameras and software designed to help solve and reduce crime It also includes a two-year warranty, Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) compliant cloud-based hosting, unlimited user licenses, ongoing software enhancements, camera setup, mounting, shipping, handling, and a cellular connection.

ALTERNATIVES
None

LEGAL REVIEW
This report has been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney as to legal form and content.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Invoice INV-37827 for $78,500.00 (Period: 12/27/2022 - 12/26/2023) from Flock Group Inc.

2. Invoice INV-37828 for $78,500.00 (Period: 12/27/2023 - 12/26/2024) from Flock Group Inc.

INVOICE

Flock Group Inc dba Flock Safety Invoice Number INV-37827 www.flocksafety.com Invoice Date: 4/1/2024
Due Date: 5/1/2024
Payment Terms: Net 30
PO#:

If you have questions about your invoice or need to update your billing contact information, please email [email protected] or call 866-901-1781, option 3.

Bill
To:

CA - Baldwin Park PD
14403 Pacific Ave
Baldwin Park, California, 91706
Ship To: CA - Baldwin Park PD
14403 Pacific Avenue
Baldwin Park, California 91706

Billing Company Name: CA - Baldwin Park PD Payment Terms: Net 30 Billing Contact Name: Contracted Billing Structure: Annual Billing Email Address:

Notes: CA - Baldwin Park PD 12/22 - 12/23

ITEMS QTY UNIT PRICE SALES TAX TOTAL
Flock Safety Falcon ® 30 $2,500.00 $0.00 $75,000.00
Flock Safety Advanced Search 30 $116.67 $0.00 $3,500.00

Unless otherwise noted on the Order Form, the Term shall commence upon first installation and validation of Flock Hardware.

Link to Location of Services:

Subtotal: $78,500.00
Sales Tax: $0.00
Credit: $0.00
Payments: $0.00
Balance Due: $78,500.00

INVOICE

Flock Group Inc dba Flock Safety Invoice Number INV-37827 www.flocksafety.com Invoice Date: 4/1/2024
Due Date: 5/1/2024
Payment Terms: Net 30
PO#:

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Detach and Return with Payment

Make Checks Payable to: Flock Group Inc

If sending via
USPS:

Flock Group Inc
PO Box 121923
Dallas, TX 75312-1923
Account: CA - Baldwin Park PD
Or
Invoice # INV-37827
If sending via
UPS, FedEx or
USPS:

Flock Group Inc
891923
1501 North Plano Rd. ste 100
Richardson, TX 75081
Amount Due: $78,500.00
Amount Enclosed: $_________

Payment Remittance Information
Pay by Check:

Payable to: Flock Group Inc
Memo: INV-37827
Mail to: PO Box 121923
Dallas, TX 75312-1923

If paying by check, please include the remittance slip below.

Pay by ACH:

Account Legal Name: Flock Group Inc.

Account Number: 3302113966
Account Type: Checking
Routing / SWIFT Code: 121140399 / SVBKUS6S

If paying by ACH, please include your invoice number in the memo section of the ACH transfer request.

By paying this invoice, I, the customer, agree to the terms and conditions listed at https://www.flocksafety.com/terms-and-conditions

Please be aware that failure to pay the invoice by the due date may result in an interest penalty or disconnection of service, as specified in your contract.

INVOICE

Flock Group Inc dba Flock Safety Invoice Number INV-37828 www.flocksafety.com Invoice Date: 4/1/2024
Due Date: 5/1/2024
Payment Terms: Net 30
PO#:

If you have questions about your invoice or need to update your billing contact information, please email [email protected] or call 866-901-1781, option 3.

Bill
To:

CA - Baldwin Park PD
14403 Pacific Ave
Baldwin Park, California, 91706
Ship To: CA - Baldwin Park PD
14403 Pacific Avenue
Baldwin Park, California 91706

Billing Company Name: CA - Baldwin Park PD Payment Terms: Net 30 Billing Contact Name: Contracted Billing Structure: Annual Billing Email Address:

Notes:

CA - Baldwin Park PD 12/23 - 12/24
Period 12/27/23 through 12/26/24.

ITEMS QTY UNIT PRICE SALES TAX TOTAL
Flock Safety Falcon ® 30 $2,500.00 $0.00 $75,000.00
Flock Safety Advanced Search 30 $116.67 $0.00 $3,500.00

Unless otherwise noted on the Order Form, the Term shall commence upon first installation and validation of Flock Hardware.

Link to Location of Services:

Subtotal: $78,500.00
Sales Tax: $0.00
Credit: $0.00
Payments: $0.00
Balance Due: $78,500.00

INVOICE

Flock Group Inc dba Flock Safety Invoice Number INV-37828 www.flocksafety.com Invoice Date: 4/1/2024
Due Date: 5/1/2024
Payment Terms: Net 30
PO#:

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Detach and Return with Payment

Make Checks Payable to: Flock Group Inc

If sending via
USPS:

Flock Group Inc
PO Box 121923
Dallas, TX 75312-1923
Account: CA - Baldwin Park PD
Or
Invoice # INV-37828
If sending via
UPS, FedEx or
USPS:

Flock Group Inc
891923
1501 North Plano Rd. ste 100
Richardson, TX 75081
Amount Due: $78,500.00
Amount Enclosed: $_________

Payment Remittance Information
Pay by Check:

Payable to: Flock Group Inc
Memo: INV-37828
Mail to: PO Box 121923
Dallas, TX 75312-1923

If paying by check, please include the remittance slip below.

Pay by ACH:

Account Legal Name: Flock Group Inc.

Account Number: 3302113966
Account Type: Checking
Routing / SWIFT Code: 121140399 / SVBKUS6S

If paying by ACH, please include your invoice number in the memo section of the ACH transfer request.

By paying this invoice, I, the customer, agree to the terms and conditions listed at https://www.flocksafety.com/terms-and-conditions

Please be aware that failure to pay the invoice by the due date may result in an interest penalty or disconnection of service, as specified in your contract.

STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. ____6____

Page 1 ends

TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Shirley Quinones, Chief Deputy City Clerk
PREPARED BY: Norma Tabares, City Attorney
DATE: August 7, 2024
SUBJECT: Consideration of Adoption of Resolution No. 2024 -040 Authorizing the Chief Executive Officer to Enter into the Settlement Agreement with Kroger Co., Revert Funds to the County of Los Angeles, and to Execute any Documents
Necessary to Implement the Action

SUMMARY
In the last few years, states and cities across the United States brought litigation against the three largest pharmaceutical distributors of opioid painkillers, Amerisource Bergen, Cardinal Health, and McKesson (the “Distributors”), and the opioid painkiller manufacturer, Janssen (owned b y Johnson & Johnson) (“J&J”), which resulted in two proposed settlements totaling approximately $26 billion dollars. Between November and December 2022, five additional parties entered into National Opioid Settlements with terms identical to the Distributors/J&J Settlements. The City has opted into every previous round of opioid settlements.

On June 7, 2024, Kroger Co. reached a tentative settlement regarding its outstanding opioid distribution claims. The City can opt into this new settlement, thereby releasing its claims against Kroger. Co, in order to receive a maximum of $23,058, paid out over a period of 11 years. The funds are restricted to certain opioid abatement/remediation uses. The City can either allow the funds to be used by Los Angeles Coun ty or elect to use the funds itself subject to reporting requirements to the state. Alternatively, the City can take no action, thereby opting out of the settlement, while maintaining its right to pursue litigation against the Kroger Co.

RECOMMENDATION
Unless the City intends to pursue its own litigation against Kroger Co., it is recommended that the City Council opt into the Settlement Agreement, revert settlement funds to the County of Los Angeles, and authorize the Chief Executive Officer to execute any documents necessary to implement the action.

FISCAL IMPACT
Approval of the settlement will result in gross payments of up to $23,058 for opioid abatement over a 11 -year period. If the City elects direct payments, the City would have associated staff costs to administer and report on its use of the funds. If the City elects for payment to the County of Los Angeles, the settlement funds will remain with the County, and the City would have no associated staff costs to administer and report on its use of the funds.

BACKGROUND
A. Allocation of Funds

Litigation against the Kroger has resulted in a proposed settlement totaling approximately $1.2 billion, which will be paid out over 11 years. Of this amount, California is to receive approximately $122 million and is to distribute these funds pursuant to intrastate allocation agreements for the new settlement.

Page 2 ends

As outlined in the Intrastate Allocation Agreements, Settlement Fund payments due to the State of California are allocated as follows: 15% to the State Fund; 70% to the California Abatement Accounts Fund; and 15% to the California Subdivision Fund. This results in the State receiving 15% of the payments allocated to California and local subdivisions receiving the remaining 85%. The percentages paid out to the California Subdivision Fund are reserved for entities that participated in the litigation of the c laims giving rise to the settlement agreements. The percentages paid out to local subdivisions that did not litigate (such as Baldwin Park), but choose to opt into the settlement, comes from the share of the settlement proceeds that are placed in the California Abatement Accounts Fund. Essentially, this means that the City of Baldwin Park, if it chooses to opt into the settlement, is entitled to receive a percentage share from the California Abatement Accounts Fund.

The City of Baldwin Park has been allo cated 0.027% of the 70% of the approximately $122 million (i.e., best case scenario), which is equal to $23,058. This total amount will be disbursed over a period of 11 years, with payments decreasing as each settlement finishes paying out. The first payments are scheduled to occur in the latter half of 2024. After the receipt of these initial payments, further payments will be received annually thereafter.

As stated above, the ultimate settlement amount is not yet known because of the bonus structure buil t into the agreements.

The default distribution of funds in the settlement agreements provides that the funds will go directly to the county in which a city is located. A city can elect to have its funds delivered directly to the city by providing notice in the settlement agreements. Additionally, a city within a county may opt in or out of direct payment at any time, and it may also elect direct payment of only a portion of its share, with the remainder going to the county, by providing notice to the settlement fund administrators at least 60 days prior to a payment date.

In deciding whether to allow a city’s funds to go directly to the county in which a city is located, a city should consider the following: (1) whether the amount of money is substantial enough for the city to handle on its own; (2) whether the city offers the services and has the employees to spend the money in accordance with its prescribed uses; and (3) whether the city wants to engage in the reporting requirements over the course of the next 12 years (11 years of distribution and an additional year following final distribution).

B. Use of Received Funds

Similar to the other opioid settlements, funds received from this additional settlement must be used for future opioid remediation or abatement. For instance, participating subdivisions may use funds for areas such as services to treat opioid use disorder; support people in treatment and recovery; connect people to care; address needs of criminal justice-involved persons; address the needs of pregnant or parenting women and their families, including babies with neonatal abstinence syndrome; prevent over -prescribing and ensure appropriate prescribing and dispensing of opioids; prevent misuse of opioids; prevent overdose deaths and othe r harms; provide leadership, planning, and coordination of programs; provide training; and conduct research.

The Intrastate Allocation Agreements also provide spending limitations in addition to those provided in the settlement agreements. Under the Intr astate Allocation Agreements, no less than 50% of the funds received in each calendar year will be used for one or more of the following High Impact Abatement Activities:
(1) the provision of matching funds or operating costs for substance use disorder fac ilities within the Behavioral Health Continuum Infrastructure Program;
(2) creating new or expanded Substance Use Disorder (“SUD”) treatment infrastructure; (3) addressing the needs of communities of color and vulnerable populations (including sheltered and unsheltered homeless populations) that are disproportionately impacted by SUD; (4) diversion of people with SUD from the justice system into treatment, including by providing training and resources to first and early responders (sworn and non -sworn) and implementing best practices for outreach, diversion and deflection, employability, restorative justice, and harm reduction; and/or

Page 3 ends

(5) interventions to prevent drug addiction in vulnerable youth.

In addition to these requirements, there is also a time limit on the spending of received funds. If funds are not expended or encumbered within five years of receipt and in accordance with t he settlement agreements and the Intrastate Allocation Agreements, the funds are required to be transferred back to the State.

C. Management of Funds

Each county and city that receives payment of funds from the settlement must prepare a written report at least annually regarding the use of those funds until the funds are fully expended and for one year thereafter. Each county and city will need to track all deposits and expenditures. This report will also include a certification that all funds received have been used in compliance with the allocation agreements. The California Department of Healthcare and Services (“DHCS”) may review the report to determine compliance with the settlement agreements and the Intrastate Allocation Agreement.

If the DHCS determines that a participating subdivision’s use of abatement funds is inconsistent with the settlement agreements or Intrastate Allocation Agreements, the parties are required to meet and confer. If the meet and confer process does not provide a resolut ion, the DHCS may conduct an audit, which can lead to a court action if the matter is still not resolved after an audit.

D. Opting In

The City must opt into the settlement by August 12, 2024, which requires the City to release its claims against Kroger Co.. The attached Resolution No. 2024 -040 authorizes the Chief Executive Officer to enter into the Settlement Agreement, revert funds to the County of Los Angeles, and to execute any documents necessary to implement the action. A sample of the Settleme nt Agreement is attached to Resolution No. 2024 -040 (final documents will be separately provided to the City for execution).

If the City Council takes no action, it will effectively opt out of the settlement and Baldwin Park’s designated funds will flow to the State. By opting out of the settlement, the City would still have the opportunity to bring its own action against Kroger Co.

ALTERNATIVES
The City may elect, at its own cost and expense, to pursue its own litigation against the Kroger Co.

LEGAL REVIEW
This report has been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney as to legal form and content.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution No. 2020-040

2. Exhibit A - Settlement Agreement

ATTACHMENT 1

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-040

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

BALDWIN PARK CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF

EXECUTIVE OFFICER TO ENTER INTO THE
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH KROGER CO. AS

PART OF A NATIONAL OPIOID SETTLEMENT , REVERT

FUNDS TO THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, AND TO

EXECUTE ANY DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO

IMPLEMENT THE ACTION

WHEREAS, the United States is facing an ongoing public health crisis of opioid abuse, addiction, overdose, and death, forcing the State of California and California counties and cities to spend billions of dollars each year to address the direct consequences of this crisis; and,

WHEREAS, pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio is a multidistrict litigation (“MDL”) being pursued by numerous public entity plaintiffs against the manufacturers and distributors of various opioids based on the allegation that the defendants’ unlawful conduct caused the opioid epidemic; and

WHEREAS in 2024, a proposed nationwide tentative settlement (the “Settlement Agreement”) was reached between the plaintiffs in t he MDL and Kroger Co. (“Settling Defendant”); and

WHEREAS, as part of the settleme nt with the Settling Defendant , local subdivisions, including certain cities, that are not plaintiffs in the MDL may participate in the settlements in exchange for a release of the Settling Defendant; and

WHEREAS, a copy of the Settlement Agreement has been provided to the City Council with this Resolution; and

WHEREAS, the Settlement Agreement provide s, among other things, for the payment of a $23,058 to the City of Baldwin Park over an 11 -year period (“Settlement Funds”), or about $2,000 per year . The City may accept the direct payment of the Settlement Funds or revert the funds to the County of Los Angeles; and

WHEREAS, if the City elects the direct payment of Settlement Funds, it must use the Settlement Funds for future opioid remediation or abatement programs or services.

The City must also prepare a detailed written report annually regarding the use of Settlement Funds and track all expeditures and deposits; and

WHEREAS, the intent of this Resolution is to authorize the City to enter into the Settlement Agreement with the Settling Defendant and to revert the Settlement Funds to the County of Los Angeles.

Resolution No. 2024-040

Page 2 of 3 ends

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK AS FOLLOWS:

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

SECTION 2. The Chief Executive Officer is authorized to settle and release the City’s claims against the Settling Defendant in exchange for the consideration set forth in the Settlement Agreement and to execute any documents necessary to implement the action.

SECTION 3. The City Council finds this Resolution is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in that the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty, as in this case, that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA.

SECTION 4. Certification. The Mayor shall sign this Resolution and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption thereof.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of August, 2024.

EMMANUEL J. ESTRADA
MAYOR

Resolution No. 2024-040

Page 3 of 3 ends

ATTEST:

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES SS.

CITY OF BALDWIN PARK

I, CHRISTOPHER SAENZ, City Clerk, of the City of Baldwin Park, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2024-040 was duly and regularly approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Baldwin Park at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 7th day of August, 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

_________________________________

CHRISTOPHER SAENZ

CITY CLERK

Subdivision Participation and Release Form
Governmental Entity: Baldwin Park city State: CA
Authorized Signatory: /officialname_kroger/
Address 1: /address1_kroger/
Address 2: /address2_kroger/
City, State, Zip: /cit_kr/ /state_kr/ /zi_kr/ Phone: /phone_kroger/
Email: /email_kroger/
The governmental entity identified above (“Governmental Entity”), in order to obtain and in consideration for the benefits provided to the Governmental Entity pursuant to the Settlement Agreement dated March 22, 2024 (“ Kroger Settlement ”), and acting through the undersigned authorized official, hereby elects to participate in the Kroger Settlement, release all Released Claims against all Released Entities, and agrees as follows.

1. The Governmental Entity is aware of and has reviewed the Kroger Settlement, understands that all terms in this Participation and Release Form have the meanings defined therein, and agrees that by executing this Participation and Release Form, the Governmental Entity elects to participate in the Kroger Settlement and become a Participating Subdivision as provided therein.

2. The Governmental Entity shall promptly, and in any event no later than 14 days after the Reference Date and prior to the filing of the Consent Judgment, dismiss with prejudice any Released Claims that it has filed. With respect to any Released Claims pending in In re National Prescription Opiate Litigation , MDL No. 2804, the Governmental Entity authorizes the Plaintiffs’ Executive Committee to execute and file on behalf of the Governmental Entity a Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice substantially in the form found at https://nationalopioidsettlement.com/.

3. The Governmental Entity agrees to the terms of the Kroger Settlement pertaining to Participating Subdivisions as defined therein.

4. By agreeing to the terms of the Kroger Settlement and becoming a Releasor, the Governmental Entity is entitled to the benefits provided therein, including, if applicable, monetary payments beginning after the Effective Date.

5. The Governmental Entity agrees to use any monies it receives through the Kroger Settlement solely for the purposes provided therein.

6. The Governmental Entity submits to the jurisdiction of the court in the Governmental Entity’s state where the Consent Judgment is filed for purposes limited to that court’s role as provided in, and for resolving disputes to the extent provided in, the Kroger Settlement. The Governmental Entity likewise agrees to arbitrate before the National 1 Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 Arbitration Panel as provided in, and for resolving disputes to the extent otherwise provided in, the Kroger Settlement.

7. The Governmental Entity has the right to enforce the Kroger Settlement as provided therein.

8. The Governmental Entity, as a Participating Subdivision, hereby becomes a Releasor for all purposes in the Kroger Settlement, including without limitation all provisions of Section XI (Release), and along with all departments, agencies, divisions, boards, commissions, districts, instrumentalities of any kind and attorneys, and any person in their official capacity elected or appointed to serve any of the foregoing and any agency, person, or other entity claiming by or through any of the foregoing, and any other entity identified in the definition of Releasor, provides for a release to the fullest extent of its authority. As a Releasor, the Governmental Entity hereby absolutely, unconditionally, and irrevocably covenants not to bring, file, or claim, or to cause, assist or permit to be brought, filed, or claimed, or to otherwise seek to establish liability for any Released Claims against any Released Entity in any forum whatsoever. The releases provided for in the Kroger Settlement are intended by the Parties to be broad and shall be interpreted so as to give the Released Entities the broadest possible bar against any liability relating in any way to Released Claims and extend to the full extent of the power of the Governmental Entity to release claims. The Kroger Settlement shall be a complete bar to any Released Claim.

9. The Governmental Entity hereby takes on all rights and obligations of a Participating Subdivision as set forth in the Kroger Settlement.

10. In connection with the releases provided for in the Kroger Settlement, each Governmental Entity expressly waives, releases, and forever discharges any and all provisions, rights, and benefits conferred by any law of any state or territory of the United States or other jurisdiction, or principle of common law, which is similar, comparable, or equivalent to § 1542 of the California Civil Code, which reads:

General Release; extent. A general release does not extend to claims that the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release that, if known by him or her would have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor or released party.

A Releasor may hereafter discover facts other than or different from those which it knows, believes, or assumes to be true with respect to the Released Claims, but each Governmental Entity hereby expressly waives and fully, finally, and forever settles, releases and discharges, upon the Effective Date, any and all Released Claims that may exist as of such date but which Releasors do not know or suspect to exist, whether through ignorance, oversight, error, negligence or through no fault whatsoever, and which, if known, would materially affect the Governmental Entities’ decision to participate in the Kroger Settlement.
2 Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20

11. Nothing herein is intended to modify in any way the terms of the Kroger Settlement, to which Governmental Entity hereby agrees. To the extent this Participation and Release Form is interpreted differently from the Kroger Settlement in any respect, the Kroger Settlement controls.

I have all necessary power and authorization to execute this Participation and Release Form on behalf of the Governmental Entity.

Signature: /signer_1_kroger/
Name: /name_1_kroger/
Title: /title_1_kroger/
Date: /date_1_kroger/
3 Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 Proposed California State-Subdivision Agreement
Regarding Distribution and Use of
Settlement Funds – Kroger Settlement

1. Introduction
Pursuant to the Kroger Settlement Agreement, dated as of March 22, 2024, and any revision thereto as well as any modification thereto entered into by the State of California and Kroger (the “Kroger Settlement Agreement”), including Section V and Exhibit O, the State of California proposes this agreement (the “CA Kroger Allocation Agreement”) to govern the allocation, distribution, and use of Settlement Fund payments made to California pursuant to Sections IV and V of the Kroger Settlement Agreement. For the avoidance of doubt, this agreement does not apply to payments made pursuant to Section IX of the Kroger Settlement Agreement.

Pursuant to Exhibit O, Paragraph 4, of the Kroger Settlement Agreement, acceptance of this CA Kroger Allocation Agreement is a requirement to be an Initial Participating Subdivision.

2. Definitions
a) CA Participating Subdivision means a Participating Subdivision that is also (a) a Plaintiff Subdivision and/or (b) a Primary Subdivision with a population equal to or greater than 10,000. For the avoidance of doubt, eligible CA Participating Subdivisions are those California subdivisions listed in Exhibit C (excluding Litigating Special Districts) and/or Exhibit I to the Kroger Settlement Agreement. b) Allergan Settlement Agreement means the Allergan Settlement Agreement dated November 22, 2022, and any revision thereto.
c) CVS Settlement Agreement means the CVS Settlement Agreement dated December 9, 2022, and any revision thereto as well as any modification thereto entered into by the State of California and CVS.
d) Distributor Settlement Agreement means the Distributor Settlement Agreement dated July 21, 2021, and any revision thereto.
e) Janssen Settlement Agreement means the Janssen Settlement Agreement dated July 21, 2021, and any revision thereto.
f) Teva Settlement Agreement means the Teva Settlement Agreement dated November 22, 2022, and any revision thereto.
g) Walgreens Settlement Agreement means the Walgreens Settlement Agreement dated December 9, 2022, and any revision thereto.
h) Walmart Settlement Agreement means the Walmart Settlement Agreement dated November 14, 2022, and any revision thereto.
i) CA Litigating Special District means a Litigating Special District located in California. CA Litigating Special Districts include Downey Unified School District, 1 Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 Elk Grove Unified School District, Kern High School District, Montezuma Fire Protection District (located in Stockton, California), Santa Barbara San Luis Obispo Regional Health Authority, Inland Empire Health Plan, Health Plan of San Joaquin, San Leandro Unified School District, Pleasant Valley School District Board, and LA Care Health Plan.
j) Plaintiff Subdivision means a Subdivision located in California, other than a CA Litigating Special District, that filed a lawsuit, on behalf of the Subdivision and/or through an official of the Subdivision on behalf of the People of the State of California, against one or more Opioid Defendants prior to October 1, 2020. k) Opioid Defendant means any defendant (including but not limited to Kroger Co., Walgreen Co., Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Allergan Finance, LLC, Allergan Limited, CVS Health Corporation, CVS Pharmacy, Inc., Walmart Inc., Johnson & Johnson, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Purdue Pharma L.P., Cardinal Health, Inc., AmerisourceBergen Corporation, and McKesson Corporation) named in a lawsuit seeking damages, abatement, or other remedies related to or caused by the opioid public health crisis in any lawsuit brought by any state or local government on or before October 1, 2020.

3. General Terms
This agreement is subject to the requirements of the Kroger Settlement Agreement, as well as applicable law, and the Kroger Settlement Agreement governs over any inconsistent provision of this CA Kroger Allocation Agreement. Terms used in this CA Kroger Allocation Agreement have the same meaning as in the Kroger Settlement Agreement unless otherwise defined herein.

Pursuant to Section V(D)(1) of the Kroger Settlement Agreement, (a) all Settlement Fund payments will be used for Opioid Remediation, except as allowed by Section V(B)(2) of the Kroger Settlement Agreement; and (b) at least seventy percent (70%) of Settlement Fund payment amounts will be used solely for future Opioid Remediation.

4. State Allocation
The Settlement Fund payments to California,1 pursuant to the Kroger Settlement Agreement, shall be allocated as follows: 15% to the State Fund; 70% to the Abatement Accounts Fund; and 15% to the Subdivision Fund. For the avoidance of doubt, all funds allocated to California from the Settlement Fund shall be combined pursuant to this CA Kroger Allocation Agreement, and 15% of that total shall be allocated to the State of California (the “State of California Allocation”), 70% to the California Abatement Accounts Fund (“CA Abatement Accounts Fund”), and 15% to the California Subdivision Fund (“CA Subdivision Fund”). 1 For purposes of clarity, use of the term “California” refers to the geographic territory of California and the state and its local governments therein. The term “State” or “State of California” refers to the State of California as a governmental unit. 2 Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 A. State of California Allocation
Fifteen percent of the total Settlement Fund payments will be allocated to the State and used by the State for future Opioid Remediation.

B. CA Abatement Accounts Fund
i. Allocation of CA Abatement Accounts Funds
a) Seventy percent of the total Settlement Fund payments will be allocated to the CA Abatement Accounts Fund. The funds in the CA Abatement Accounts Fund will be allocated based on the allocation model developed in connection with the proposed negotiating class in the National Prescription Opiate Litigation (MDL No. 2804), as adjusted to reflect only those cities and counties that are eligible, based on population or litigation status, to become a CA Participating Subdivision. The percentage from the CA Abatement Accounts Fund allocated to each CA Participating Subdivision is set forth in Appendix 1 in the column entitled abatement percentage (the “Local Allocation”). For the avoidance of doubt, CA Litigating Special Districts and California towns, cities, and counties with a population less than 10,000 are not eligible to receive an allocation of CA Abatement Accounts Funds.
b) A CA Participating Subdivision that is a county, or a city and county, will be allocated its Local Allocation share as of the date on which it becomes a Participating Subdivision, and will receive payments as provided in the Kroger Settlement Agreement. c) A CA Participating Subdivision that is a city will be allocated its Local Allocation share as of the date on which it becomes a Participating Subdivision. The Local Allocation share for a city that is a CA Participating Subdivision will be paid to the county in which the city is located, rather than to the city, so long as: (a) the county is a CA Participating Subdivision, and (b) the city did not elect to receive its share of funds in the National Opioids Settlement with Distributors AmerisourceBergenCorporation, Cardinal Health, Inc., and McKesson Corporation (the “Distributors Settlement”). If a city later changes or has already changed its distribution election in the Distributors Settlement, that change in election will apply here, provided that the change in election is received by the settlement administrator at least 60 days prior to a Payment Date. A Local Allocation share allocated to a city but paid to a county is not required to be spent exclusively for abatement activities in that city, but will become part of the county’s share of the CA Abatement Accounts Funds, which will be used in accordance with Section 4.B.ii (Use of CA Abatement Accounts Funds) and reported on in accordance with Section 4.B.iii (CA Abatement Accounts Fund Oversight).
d) A city within a county that is a CA Participating Subdivision may opt in or out of direct payment at any time, and it may also elect direct payment of only a portion of its share, with the remainder going to the county, by providing notice to the Settlement Fund Administrator at least 60 days prior to a Payment Date. For purposes of this CA Kroger Allocation Agreement, the Cities of Los Angeles, Oakland, San Diego, San Jose and 3 Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 Eureka will be deemed to have elected direct payment if they become Participating Subdivisions.
e) The State will receive the Local Allocation share of any payment to the Settlement Fund that is attributable to a county or city that is eligible to become a CA Participating Subdivision, but that has not, as of the date of that payment to the Settlement Fund, become a Participating Subdivision.
f) Funds received by a CA Participating Subdivision, and not expended or encumbered within five years of receipt and in accordance with the Kroger Settlement Agreement and this CA Kroger Allocation Agreement shall be transferred to the State; provided however, that CA Participating Subdivisions have seven years to expend or encumber CA Abatement Accounts Funds designated to support capital outlay projects before they must be transferred to the State. This provision shall not apply to the Cost Reimbursement Funds, which shall be controlled by Appendix 2.
ii. Use of CA Abatement Accounts Funds
a) The CA Abatement Accounts Funds will be used for future Opioid Remediation in one or more of the areas described in the List of Opioid Remediation Uses, which is Exhibit E to the Kroger Settlement Agreement.
b) In addition to this requirement, no less than 50% of the funds received by a CA Participating Subdivision from the Abatement Accounts Fund in each calendar year will be used for one or more of the following High Impact Abatement Activities:
(1) the provision of matching funds or operating costs for substance use disorder facilities within the Behavioral Health Continuum Infrastructure Program; (2) creating new or expanded Substance Use Disorder (“SUD”) treatment infrastructure; (3) addressing the needs of communities of color and vulnerable populations (including sheltered and unsheltered homeless populations) that are disproportionately impacted by SUD;
(4) diversion of people with SUD from the justice system into treatment, including by providing training and resources to first and early responders (sworn and non-sworn) and implementing best practices for outreach, diversion and deflection, employability, restorative justice, and harm reduction; (5) interventions to prevent drug addiction in vulnerable youth, including but not limited to, youth in foster care, juvenile justice-impacted youth, youth experiencing adversities related to socioeconomic status, and unhoused youth; and/or (6) the purchase of naloxone for distribution and efforts to expand access to naloxone for opioid overdose reversals.
4 Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 c) The California Department of Health Care Services (“DHCS”) may add to this list (but not delete from it) by designating additional High Impact Abatement Activities. DHCS will make reasonable efforts to consult with stakeholders, including the CA Participating Subdivisions, before adding additional High Impact Abatement Activities to this list. d) For the avoidance of doubt, and subject to the requirements of the Kroger Settlement Agreement and applicable law, CA Participating Subdivisions may form agreements or ventures, or otherwise work in collaboration with, federal, state, local, tribal or private sector entities in pursuing Opioid Remediation activities funded from the CA Abatement Accounts Fund. Further, provided that all CA Abatement Accounts Funds are used for Opioid Remediation consistent with the Kroger Settlement Agreement and this CA Kroger Allocation Agreement, a county and any cities or towns within the county may agree to reallocate their respective shares of the CA Abatement Accounts Funds among themselves, provided that any direct distribution may only be to a CA Participating Subdivision and any CA Participating Subdivision must agree to their share being reallocated.
iii. CA Abatement Accounts Fund Oversight
a) Pursuant to Section 5 below, CA Participating Subdivisions receiving settlement funds must prepare and file reports annually regarding the use of those funds. DHCS may regularly review the reports prepared by CA Participating Subdivisions about the use of CA Abatement Accounts Funds for compliance with the Kroger Settlement Agreement and this CA Kroger Allocation Agreement.
b) If DHCS determines that a CA Participating Subdivision’s use of CA Abatement Accounts Funds is inconsistent with the Kroger Settlement Agreement or this CA Kroger Allocation Agreement, whether through review of reports or information from any other sources, DHCS shall send a request to meet and confer with the CA Participating Subdivision. The parties shall meet and confer in an effort to resolve the concern. c) If the parties are unable to reach a resolution, DHCS may conduct an audit of the Subdivision’s use of the CA Abatement Accounts Funds within one year of the request to meet and confer, unless the parties mutually agree in writing to extend the meet and confer time frame.
d) If the concern still cannot be resolved, the State may bring a motion or action in the court where the State has filed its Consent Judgment to resolve the concern or otherwise enforce the requirements of the Kroger Settlement Agreement or this CA Kroger Allocation Agreement. However, in no case shall any audit be conducted, or motion be brought, as to a specific expenditure of funds, more than five years after the date on which the expenditure of the funds was reported to DHCS, in accordance with this agreement.
5 Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 e) Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Agreement does not limit the statutory or constitutional authority of any state or local agency or official to conduct audits, investigations, or other oversight activities, or to pursue administrative, civil, or criminal enforcement actions.

C. CA Subdivision Fund
i. Fifteen percent of the total Settlement Fund payments will be allocated to the CA Subdivision Fund. All funds in the CA Subdivision Fund will be allocated among the Plaintiff Subdivisions that are Initial Participating Subdivisions. The funds will be used, subject to any limits imposed by the Kroger Settlement Agreement and this CA Kroger Allocation Agreement, to fund future Opioid Remediation and reimburse past opioid- related expenses, which may include fees and expenses related to litigation, and to pay the reasonable fees and expenses of the Special Master as set forth in Appendix 2.

The CA Subdivision Funds will be allocated as follows:
a) First, funds in the CA Subdivision Fund shall be used to pay the Special Master’s reasonable fees and expenses in accordance with the procedures and limitations set forth in Appendix 2 to this document;
b) Second, funds will be allocated to Plaintiff Subdivisions that are Initial Participating Subdivisions that have been awarded Costs, as defined by and in accordance with the procedures and limitations set forth in Appendix 2 to this document. c) Funds remaining in the CA Subdivision Fund, which shall consist of no less than 50% of the total CA Subdivision Fund received in any year pursuant to Appendix 2, Section 2.c.v, will be distributed to Plaintiff Subdivisions that are Initial Participating Subdivisions, in relative proportion to the Local Allocation. These funds shall be used to fund future opioid-related projects and to reimburse past opioid-related expenses, which may include fees and expenses related to litigation against any Opioid Defendant.

D. Provision for State Back-Stop Agreement
On August 6, 2021, Judge Dan Polster of the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, issued an order (ECF Docket Number 3814) (“MDL Fees Order”) in the National Prescription Opiate Litigation (MDL No. 2804) “cap[ping] all applicable contingent fee agreements at 15%.” Private counsel representing Plaintiff Subdivisions should seek its contingency fees and costs from the Attorney Fee Fund or Cost Funds under the Kroger Settlement Agreement, and, if applicable, the Teva Settlement Agreement, Allergan Settlement Agreement, CVS Settlement Agreement, Distributor Settlement Agreement, Janssen Settlement Agreement, and Walmart Settlement Agreement.

A Plaintiff Subdivision may separately agree to use its share of the CA Subdivision Fund to pay for fees or costs incurred by its contingency-fee counsel (“State Back-Stop Agreement”), 6 Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 pursuant to Exhibit R, section I(CC), of the Kroger Settlement Agreement and the MDL Fees Order, so long as such contingency fees do not exceed a total contingency fee of 15% of the total gross recovery of the Plaintiff Subdivision pursuant to the Kroger Settlement, inclusive of contingency fees from the national Attorney Fee Fund and this State Back-Stop Agreement.

Before seeking fees or litigation costs and expenses from a State Back-Stop Agreement, private counsel representing Plaintiff Subdivisions must first seek contingency fees and costs from the Attorney Fee Fund or Cost Funds created under the Kroger Settlement Agreement. Further, private counsel may only seek reimbursement for litigation fees and costs that have not previously been reimbursed through prior settlements or judgments.

To effectuate a State Back-Stop Agreement pursuant to this section, an agreement in the form of Appendix 3 may be entered into by a Plaintiff Subdivision, private counsel, and the California Office of the Attorney General. The California Office of the Attorney General shall, upon the request of a Plaintiff Subdivision, execute any agreement executed by a Plaintiff Subdivision and its private counsel if it is in the form of Appendix 3. The California Office of the Attorney General will also consider requests from Plaintiff Subdivisions to execute and enter into agreements presented in other forms.

For the avoidance of doubt, this agreement does not require a Plaintiff Subdivision to request or enter into a State Back-Stop Agreement, and no State Back-Stop Agreement shall impose any duty or obligation on the State of California or any of its agencies or officers, including without limitation the Attorney General.

5. State and Subdivision Reporting
a) DHCS will prepare an annual written report regarding the State’s use of funds from the settlement until those funds are fully expended and for one year thereafter. These reports will be made publicly available on the DHCS web site.
b) Each CA Participating Subdivision that receives payments of funds from the settlement will prepare written reports at least annually regarding the use of those funds, until those funds are fully expended and for one year thereafter. These reports will also include a certification that all funds that the CA Participating Subdivision has received through the settlement have been used in compliance with the Kroger Settlement Agreement and this CA Kroger Allocation Agreement. The report will be in a form reasonably determined by DHCS. Prior to specifying the form of the report DHCS will confer with representatives of the Plaintiff Subdivisions.
c) The State and all CA Participating Subdivisions receiving CA Abatement Accounts Funds will track all deposits and expenditures. Each such subdivision is responsible solely for the CA Abatement Accounts Funds it receives. A county is not responsible for oversight, reporting, or monitoring of CA Abatement Accounts Funds received by a city within that county that receives direct payment. Unless otherwise exempt, Subdivisions’ expenditures and uses of CA Abatement Accounts Funds and other Settlement Funds will be subject to the normal budgetary and expenditure process of the Subdivision. 7 Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 d) Each Plaintiff Subdivision receiving CA Subdivision Funds will track all deposits and expenditures, as required by the Kroger Settlement Agreement and this CA Kroger Allocation Agreement. Among other things, Plaintiff Subdivisions using monies from the CA Subdivision Fund for purposes that do not qualify as Opioid Remediation must identify and include in their annual report, the amount and how such funds were used, including if used to pay attorneys’ fees, investigation costs, or litigation costs. Pursuant to Section V(B)(2) of the Kroger Settlement Agreement, such information must also be reported to the Settlement Fund Administrator and Kroger. e) In each year in which DHCS prepares an annual report DHCS will also host a meeting to discuss the annual report and the Opioid Remediation activities being carried out by the State and Participating Subdivisions.

6. Miscellaneous
a) The State or any CA Participating Subdivision may bring a motion or action in the court where the State has filed its Consent Judgment to enforce the requirements of this CA Kroger Allocation Agreement. Before filing such a motion or action the State will meet and confer with any CA Participating Subdivision that is the subject of the anticipated motion or action, and vice versa.
b) Except as provided in the Kroger Settlement Agreement, this CA Kroger Allocation Agreement is not enforceable by any party other than the State and the CA Participating Subdivisions. It does not confer any rights or remedies upon, and shall not be enforceable by, any third party.
c) Except as provided in the CA Kroger Allocation Agreement, if any provision of this agreement or the application thereof to any person, entity, or circumstance shall, to any extent, be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this agreement, or the application of such provision to persons, entities, or circumstances other than those as to which it is invalid or unenforceable, will not be affected thereby, and each other provision of this agreement will be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. d) Except as provided in the Kroger Settlement Agreement, this agreement shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of California. 8 Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 The undersigned, Baldwin Park city, ACKNOWLEDGES acceptance of this Proposed California State-Subdivision Agreement Regarding Distribution and Use of Settlement Funds – Kroger Settlement is a requirement to be an Initial Participating Subdivision in the Kroger Settlement and ACCEPTS this Proposed California State-Subdivision Agreement Regarding Distribution and Use of Settlement Funds – Kroger Settlement. EXECUTED on /date_1_kroger/.

Signature: /signer_1_kroger/

Name: /name_1_kroger/

Title: /title_1_kroger/

Date: /date_1_kroger/

9 Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 APPENDIX 1
DISCLAIMER: The allocation percentages herein are estimates only and should not be relied on for decisions regarding legal rights, releases, waivers, or other decisions affecting current or potential legal claims. Percentages shown in the Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage column may change pursuant to Section 4.C. of the California State-Subdivision Agreement Regarding Distribution and Use of Settlement Funds—Kroger Settlement, whereas the percentages shown in the Abatement Percentage column should not change. Participating Subdivisions, underlying calculations, and the calculated allocation percentages are subject to change.

Regarding the column herein entitled “Abatement Percentage,” pursuant to Section 4.B.e., the State of California will receive the Local Allocation share of any payment to the Settlement Fund that is attributable to a county or city that is eligible to become a CA Participating Subdivision, but that has not, as of the date of that payment to the Settlement Fund, become a Participating Subdivision.

Regarding the column herein entitled “Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage,” payments allocated to a Plaintiff Subdivision, which is not an Initial Participating Subdivision, will be re-allocated among the Plaintiff Subdivisions that are Initial Participating Subdivisions.

Regarding the column herein entitled “Abatement Percentage,” the annotation of “100%” refers to one-hundred percent (100%) of the California Abatement Account Funds received, pursuant to Section 4.B. Regarding the column herein entitled “Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage,” the annotation of “100%” refers to one-hundred percent (100%) of the California Subdivision Funds received, pursuant to Section 4.C. Regarding the column herein entitled “Weighted Allocation Percentage,” the annotation of “100%” refers to one- hundred percent (100%) of the combined and weighted allocation of the Abatement Percentage and the Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage.

Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 APPENDIX 1
1 of 15
100.000% 100.000% 100.000%
Participating
Subdivision
Classification
Participating Subdivision County Abatement
Percentage
Plaintiff
Subdivision
Percentage
Weighted
Allocation
Percentage
County Alameda County Alameda 2.332% 2.853% 2.4237952%
City Alameda Alameda 0.069% 0.0570162%
City Albany Alameda 0.013% 0.0107768%
City Berkeley Alameda 0.152% 0.1249656%
City Dublin Alameda 0.033% 0.040% 0.0338810%
City Emeryville Alameda 0.023% 0.0185765%
City Fremont Alameda 0.108% 0.0888576%
City Hayward Alameda 0.117% 0.0966218%
City Livermore Alameda 0.054% 0.0446740%
City Newark Alameda 0.026% 0.0217626%
City Oakland Alameda 0.486% 0.595% 0.5055601%
City Piedmont Alameda 0.014% 0.0114064%
City Pleasanton Alameda 0.067% 0.0554547%
City San Leandro Alameda 0.039% 0.0321267%
City Union City Alameda 0.043% 0.0352484%
County Amador County Amador 0.226% 0.277% 0.2349885%
County Butte County Butte 1.615% 1.975% 1.6783178%
City Chico Butte 0.216% 0.264% 0.2246499%
City Oroville Butte 0.079% 0.0646595%
County Calaveras County Calaveras 0.226% 0.277% 0.2351644% County Colusa County Colusa 0.059% 0.0489221%
County Contra Costa County Contra Costa 2.102% 2.571% 2.1844585% City Antioch Contra Costa 0.037% 0.0301879%
City Brentwood Contra Costa 0.026% 0.0215339%
City Clayton Contra Costa 0.002% 0.0018060%
City Concord Contra Costa 0.055% 0.0456676%
City Danville Contra Costa 0.010% 0.0082255%
City El Cerrito Contra Costa 0.023% 0.0189024%
City Hercules Contra Costa 0.010% 0.0078273%
Participating
Subdivision
Classification
Participating Subdivision County Abatement
Percentage
Plaintiff
Subdivision
Percentage
Weighted
Allocation
Percentage
City Lafayette Contra Costa 0.006% 0.0046030%
Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 APPENDIX 1
2 of 15
City Martinez Contra Costa 0.012% 0.0098593%
City Moraga Contra Costa 0.004% 0.0031007%
City Oakley Contra Costa 0.010% 0.0079416%
City Orinda Contra Costa 0.005% 0.0038157%
City Pinole Contra Costa 0.013% 0.0110909%
City Pittsburg Contra Costa 0.053% 0.0436369%
City Pleasant Hill Contra Costa 0.013% 0.0106309%
City Richmond Contra Costa 0.146% 0.1201444%
City San Pablo Contra Costa 0.018% 0.0148843%
City San Ramon Contra Costa 0.021% 0.0176459%
City Walnut Creek Contra Costa 0.026% 0.0212132%
County Del Norte County Del Norte 0.114% 0.140% 0.1189608% County El Dorado County El Dorado 0.768% 0.939% 0.7980034% City Placerville El Dorado 0.015% 0.0127642%
City South Lake Tahoe El Dorado 0.081% 0.0665456%
County Fresno County Fresno 1.895% 2.318% 1.9693410%
City Clovis Fresno 0.065% 0.0536211%
City Coalinga Fresno 0.012% 0.0098554%
City Fresno Fresno 0.397% 0.3270605%
City Kerman Fresno 0.005% 0.0042534%
City Kingsburg Fresno 0.008% 0.0066167%
City Mendota Fresno 0.002% 0.0019387%
City Orange Cove Fresno 0.004% 0.0035607%
City Parlier Fresno 0.008% 0.0069755%
City Reedley Fresno 0.012% 0.0098804%
City Sanger Fresno 0.018% 0.0146135%
City Selma Fresno 0.015% 0.0127537%
County Glenn County Glenn 0.107% 0.131% 0.1116978%
County Humboldt County Humboldt 1.030% 1.260% 1.0703185% Participating
Subdivision
Classification
Participating Subdivision County Abatement
Percentage
Plaintiff
Subdivision
Percentage
Weighted
Allocation
Percentage
City Arcata Humboldt 0.054% 0.0447660%
City Eureka Humboldt 0.117% 0.143% 0.1216284%
City Fortuna Humboldt 0.032% 0.0266837%
County Imperial County Imperial 0.258% 0.315% 0.2679006% Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 APPENDIX 1
3 of 15
City Brawley Imperial 0.011% 0.0087986%
City Calexico Imperial 0.019% 0.0152799%
City El Centro Imperial 0.158% 0.1302522%
City Imperial Imperial 0.006% 0.0048791%
County Inyo County Inyo 0.073% 0.089% 0.0754413%
County Kern County Kern 2.517% 3.079% 2.6159145%
City Arvin Kern 0.006% 0.0046425%
City Bakersfield Kern 0.212% 0.1747198%
City California City Kern 0.009% 0.0070820%
City Delano Kern 0.030% 0.0249316%
City McFarland Kern 0.003% 0.0025644%
City Ridgecrest Kern 0.015% 0.0120938%
City Shafter Kern 0.013% 0.0103417%
City Tehachapi Kern 0.009% 0.0073580%
City Wasco Kern 0.008% 0.0069861%
County Kings County Kings 0.293% 0.2413469%
City Avenal Kings 0.007% 0.0056335%
City Corcoran Kings 0.013% 0.0107032%
City Hanford Kings 0.027% 0.0226038%
City Lemoore Kings 0.016% 0.0131900%
County Lake County Lake 0.795% 0.6545389%
City Clearlake Lake 0.041% 0.050% 0.0426253%
City Lakeport Lake 0.021% 0.026% 0.0222964%
County Lassen County Lassen 0.319% 0.391% 0.3320610%
City Susanville Lassen 0.027% 0.0219295%
County Los Angeles County Los Angeles 13.896% 16.999% 14.4437559% Participating
Subdivision
Classification
Participating Subdivision County Abatement
Percentage
Plaintiff
Subdivision
Percentage
Weighted
Allocation
Percentage
City Agoura Hills Los Angeles 0.005% 0.0040024%
City Alhambra Los Angeles 0.042% 0.0343309%
City Arcadia Los Angeles 0.033% 0.0267718%
City Artesia Los Angeles 0.001% 0.0005100%
City Azusa Los Angeles 0.026% 0.0210857%
City Baldwin Park Los Angeles 0.027% 0.0218520%
City Bell Los Angeles 0.008% 0.0068783%
Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 APPENDIX 1
4 of 15
City Bellflower Los Angeles 0.002% 0.0014485%
City Bell Gardens Los Angeles 0.014% 0.0114301%
City Beverly Hills Los Angeles 0.065% 0.0534897%
City Burbank Los Angeles 0.100% 0.0823132%
City Calabasas Los Angeles 0.006% 0.0048948%
City Carson Los Angeles 0.019% 0.0159805%
City Cerritos Los Angeles 0.005% 0.0039682%
City Claremont Los Angeles 0.010% 0.0082584%
City Commerce Los Angeles 0.000% 0.0002971%
City Compton Los Angeles 0.044% 0.0361882%
City Covina Los Angeles 0.028% 0.0229127%
City Cudahy Los Angeles 0.001% 0.0006020%
City Culver City Los Angeles 0.055% 0.0449894%
City Diamond Bar Los Angeles 0.001% 0.0006993%
City Downey Los Angeles 0.052% 0.0429994%
City Duarte Los Angeles 0.003% 0.0027261%
City El Monte Los Angeles 0.031% 0.038% 0.0318985%
City El Segundo Los Angeles 0.033% 0.0268020%
City Gardena Los Angeles 0.034% 0.0278088%
City Glendale Los Angeles 0.166% 0.1366586%
City Glendora Los Angeles 0.016% 0.0134411%
City Hawaiian Gardens Los Angeles 0.005% 0.0040549%
City Hawthorne Los Angeles 0.050% 0.0407833%
Participating
Subdivision
Classification
Participating Subdivision County Abatement
Percentage
Plaintiff
Subdivision
Percentage
Weighted
Allocation
Percentage
City Hermosa Beach Los Angeles 0.018% 0.0145307%
City Huntington Park Los Angeles 0.023% 0.0190667%
City Inglewood Los Angeles 0.059% 0.0489195%
City La Cañada Flintridge Los Angeles 0.003% 0.0025565% City Lakewood Los Angeles 0.005% 0.0039971%
City La Mirada Los Angeles 0.010% 0.0081572%
City Lancaster Los Angeles 0.045% 0.0369689%
City La Puente Los Angeles 0.002% 0.0012999%
City La Verne Los Angeles 0.024% 0.0194190%
City Lawndale Los Angeles 0.002% 0.0017731%
Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 APPENDIX 1
5 of 15
City Lomita Los Angeles 0.004% 0.0031940%
City Long Beach Los Angeles 0.439% 0.3614151%
City Los Angeles Los Angeles 2.715% 3.321% 2.8218811%
City Lynwood Los Angeles 0.016% 0.0134345%
City Malibu Los Angeles 0.002% 0.0019269%
City Manhattan Beach Los Angeles 0.032% 0.0260686%
City Maywood Los Angeles 0.004% 0.0035528%
City Monrovia Los Angeles 0.031% 0.0254455%
City Montebello Los Angeles 0.030% 0.0250670%
City Monterey Park Los Angeles 0.031% 0.0256677%
City Norwalk Los Angeles 0.031% 0.0258228%
City Palmdale Los Angeles 0.046% 0.0375827%
City Palos Verdes Estates Los Angeles 0.006% 0.0053102% City Paramount Los Angeles 0.011% 0.0091483%
City Pasadena Los Angeles 0.146% 0.1200524%
City Pico Rivera Los Angeles 0.022% 0.0183333%
City Pomona Los Angeles 0.111% 0.0911933%
City Rancho Palos Verdes Los Angeles 0.002% 0.0012645%
City Redondo Beach Los Angeles 0.062% 0.0506992%
City Rosemead Los Angeles 0.003% 0.0028260%
Participating
Subdivision
Classification
Participating Subdivision County Abatement
Percentage
Plaintiff
Subdivision
Percentage
Weighted
Allocation
Percentage
City San Dimas Los Angeles 0.003% 0.0022016%
City San Fernando Los Angeles 0.013% 0.0104837%
City San Gabriel Los Angeles 0.018% 0.0147726%
City San Marino Los Angeles 0.009% 0.0073791%
City Santa Clarita Los Angeles 0.022% 0.0178167%
City Santa Fe Springs Los Angeles 0.031% 0.0257531%
City Santa Monica Los Angeles 0.158% 0.1298513%
City Sierra Madre Los Angeles 0.006% 0.0048646%
City Signal Hill Los Angeles 0.010% 0.0084884%
City South El Monte Los Angeles 0.005% 0.0039603%
City South Gate Los Angeles 0.020% 0.0166272%
City South Pasadena Los Angeles 0.012% 0.0095334%
City Temple City Los Angeles 0.005% 0.0039498%
Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 APPENDIX 1
6 of 15
City Torrance Los Angeles 0.112% 0.0919820%
City Walnut Los Angeles 0.006% 0.0047305%
City West Covina Los Angeles 0.049% 0.0404521%
City West Hollywood Los Angeles 0.013% 0.0108517%
City Whittier Los Angeles 0.032% 0.0260581%
County Madera County Madera 0.349% 0.427% 0.3630669%
City Chowchilla Madera 0.012% 0.0097332%
City Madera Madera 0.039% 0.0318441%
County Marin County Marin 0.564% 0.690% 0.5861325%
City Larkspur Marin 0.015% 0.0124697%
City Mill Valley Marin 0.020% 0.0168401%
City Novato Marin 0.028% 0.0229824%
City San Anselmo Marin 0.009% 0.0078062%
City San Rafael Marin 0.089% 0.0729823%
County Mariposa County Mariposa 0.084% 0.103% 0.0876131% County Mendocino County Mendocino 0.439% 0.536% 0.4558394% City Ukiah Mendocino 0.039% 0.0317153%
Participating
Subdivision
Classification
Participating Subdivision County Abatement
Percentage
Plaintiff
Subdivision
Percentage
Weighted
Allocation
Percentage
County Merced County Merced 0.551% 0.674% 0.5724262%
City Atwater Merced 0.024% 0.0195846%
City Livingston Merced 0.006% 0.0045873%
City Los Banos Merced 0.020% 0.0165142%
City Merced Merced 0.061% 0.0500762%
County Modoc County Modoc 0.065% 0.080% 0.0678250%
County Mono County Mono 0.023% 0.029% 0.0242606%
County Monterey County Monterey 0.908% 1.111% 0.9437083% City Greenfield Monterey 0.006% 0.0050552%
City King City Monterey 0.005% 0.0037355%
City Marina Monterey 0.017% 0.0144098%
City Monterey Monterey 0.041% 0.0336540%
City Pacific Grove Monterey 0.009% 0.0074842%
City Salinas Monterey 0.094% 0.0776576%
City Seaside Monterey 0.023% 0.0191772%
City Soledad Monterey 0.007% 0.0060870%
Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 APPENDIX 1
7 of 15
County Napa County Napa 0.288% 0.352% 0.2994325%
City American Canyon Napa 0.017% 0.0136869%
City Napa Napa 0.078% 0.0642783%
County Nevada County Nevada 0.441% 0.539% 0.4579827%
City Grass Valley Nevada 0.024% 0.0197805%
City Truckee Nevada 0.003% 0.0023843%
County Orange County Orange 4.364% 5.339% 4.5363576%
City Aliso Viejo Orange 0.014% 0.0113841%
City Anaheim Orange 0.554% 0.678% 0.5759282%
City Brea Orange 0.086% 0.0708897%
City Buena Park Orange 0.087% 0.0714352%
City Costa Mesa Orange 0.124% 0.152% 0.1288366%
City Cypress Orange 0.033% 0.0271937%
City Dana Point Orange 0.001% 0.0005560%
Participating
Subdivision
Classification
Participating Subdivision County Abatement
Percentage
Plaintiff
Subdivision
Percentage
Weighted
Allocation
Percentage
City Fountain Valley Orange 0.055% 0.0455980%
City Fullerton Orange 0.137% 0.168% 0.1425744%
City Garden Grove Orange 0.213% 0.1752482%
City Huntington Beach Orange 0.247% 0.302% 0.2568420%
City Irvine Orange 0.139% 0.170% 0.1442350%
City Laguna Beach Orange 0.047% 0.058% 0.0493043%
City Laguna Hills Orange 0.014% 0.0115457%
City Laguna Niguel Orange 0.001% 0.0007071%
City Laguna Woods Orange 0.001% 0.0006546%
City La Habra Orange 0.060% 0.073% 0.0621049%
City Lake Forest Orange 0.012% 0.0101249%
City La Palma Orange 0.012% 0.0095439%
City Los Alamitos Orange 0.008% 0.0069190%
City Mission Viejo Orange 0.014% 0.0117560%
City Newport Beach Orange 0.179% 0.1470134%
City Orange Orange 0.150% 0.1231320%
City Placentia Orange 0.029% 0.035% 0.0298912%
City Rancho Santa Margarita Orange 0.001% 0.0006296%
City San Clemente Orange 0.008% 0.010% 0.0086083%
Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 APPENDIX 1
8 of 15
City San Juan Capistrano Orange 0.008% 0.0065510%
City Santa Ana Orange 0.502% 0.614% 0.5213866%
City Seal Beach Orange 0.020% 0.0165891%
City Stanton Orange 0.035% 0.0291955%
City Tustin Orange 0.073% 0.0600341%
City Westminster Orange 0.104% 0.127% 0.1082721%
City Yorba Linda Orange 0.044% 0.0362223%
County Placer County Placer 1.045% 1.278% 1.0861002%
City Auburn Placer 0.017% 0.0141114%
City Lincoln Placer 0.031% 0.0255599%
City Rocklin Placer 0.076% 0.0625485%
Participating
Subdivision
Classification
Participating Subdivision County Abatement
Percentage
Plaintiff
Subdivision
Percentage
Weighted
Allocation
Percentage
City Roseville Placer 0.196% 0.1616559%
County Plumas County Plumas 0.205% 0.251% 0.2128729%
County Riverside County Riverside 4.534% 5.547% 4.7128296% City Banning Riverside 0.017% 0.0143848%
City Beaumont Riverside 0.021% 0.0171135%
City Blythe Riverside 0.012% 0.0096714%
City Canyon Lake Riverside 0.000% 0.0001761%
City Cathedral City Riverside 0.067% 0.0553614%
City Coachella Riverside 0.021% 0.0173054%
City Corona Riverside 0.147% 0.1207083%
City Desert Hot Springs Riverside 0.024% 0.0200433%
City Eastvale Riverside 0.000% 0.0002747%
City Hemet Riverside 0.051% 0.0421792%
City Indio Riverside 0.056% 0.0457794%
City Jurupa Valley Riverside 0.001% 0.0008991%
City Lake Elsinore Riverside 0.021% 0.0172949%
City La Quinta Riverside 0.063% 0.0516732%
City Menifee Riverside 0.032% 0.0260909%
City Moreno Valley Riverside 0.137% 0.1130348%
City Murrieta Riverside 0.048% 0.059% 0.0497423%
City Norco Riverside 0.016% 0.0134542%
City Palm Desert Riverside 0.083% 0.0682465%
Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 APPENDIX 1
9 of 15
City Palm Springs Riverside 0.076% 0.0629862%
City Perris Riverside 0.009% 0.0076774%
City Rancho Mirage Riverside 0.052% 0.0431098%
City Riverside Riverside 0.268% 0.2206279%
City San Jacinto Riverside 0.010% 0.0085936%
City Temecula Riverside 0.022% 0.0180086%
City Wildomar Riverside 0.008% 0.0062500%
County Sacramento County Sacramento 3.797% 4.645% 3.9465887% Participating
Subdivision
Classification
Participating Subdivision County Abatement
Percentage
Plaintiff
Subdivision
Percentage
Weighted
Allocation
Percentage
City Citrus Heights Sacramento 0.057% 0.0465312%
City Elk Grove Sacramento 0.130% 0.1066994%
City Folsom Sacramento 0.108% 0.0890850%
City Galt Sacramento 0.017% 0.0143704%
City Rancho Cordova Sacramento 0.008% 0.0067679%
City Sacramento Sacramento 0.721% 0.882% 0.7496530%
County San Benito County San Benito 0.106% 0.130% 0.1101417% City Hollister San Benito 0.027% 0.0225355%
County San Bernardino County San Bernardino 3.259% 3.987% 3.3878124% City Adelanto San Bernardino 0.008% 0.0066640%
City Apple Valley San Bernardino 0.025% 0.0207360%
City Barstow San Bernardino 0.015% 0.0122056%
City Chino San Bernardino 0.064% 0.0525893%
City Chino Hills San Bernardino 0.001% 0.0006388%
City Colton San Bernardino 0.031% 0.0253443%
City Fontana San Bernardino 0.112% 0.0920543%
City Grand Terrace San Bernardino 0.006% 0.0051051%
City Hesperia San Bernardino 0.035% 0.0291522%
City Highland San Bernardino 0.004% 0.0029061%
City Loma Linda San Bernardino 0.009% 0.0071188%
City Montclair San Bernardino 0.039% 0.0322108%
City Ontario San Bernardino 0.179% 0.1472934%
City Rancho Cucamonga San Bernardino 0.084% 0.0689431%
City Redlands San Bernardino 0.057% 0.0469150%
City Rialto San Bernardino 0.073% 0.0603206%
Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 APPENDIX 1
10 of 15
City San Bernardino San Bernardino 0.178% 0.1461880%
City Twentynine Palms San Bernardino 0.002% 0.0012605%
City Upland San Bernardino 0.052% 0.0424460%
City Victorville San Bernardino 0.033% 0.0269400%
City Yucaipa San Bernardino 0.016% 0.0128772%
Participating
Subdivision
Classification
Participating Subdivision County Abatement
Percentage
Plaintiff
Subdivision
Percentage
Weighted
Allocation
Percentage
City Yucca Valley San Bernardino 0.003% 0.0021228%
County San Diego County San Diego 5.706% 6.980% 5.9309748% City Carlsbad San Diego 0.128% 0.1050485%
City Chula Vista San Diego 0.189% 0.231% 0.1961456%
City Coronado San Diego 0.044% 0.0359095%
City El Cajon San Diego 0.113% 0.0933582%
City Encinitas San Diego 0.061% 0.074% 0.0630289%
City Escondido San Diego 0.145% 0.1192204%
City Imperial Beach San Diego 0.014% 0.0118283%
City La Mesa San Diego 0.055% 0.068% 0.0575593%
City Lemon Grove San Diego 0.022% 0.0183911%
City National City San Diego 0.080% 0.0656808%
City Oceanside San Diego 0.213% 0.1753428%
City Poway San Diego 0.062% 0.0511040%
City San Diego San Diego 1.975% 2.416% 2.0531169%
City San Marcos San Diego 0.089% 0.0733897%
City Santee San Diego 0.033% 0.0268401%
City Solana Beach San Diego 0.017% 0.0138564%
City Vista San Diego 0.052% 0.0425144%
Consolidated San Francisco San Francisco 3.026% 3.702% 3.1457169% County San Joaquin County San Joaquin 1.680% 2.055% 1.7460399% City Lathrop San Joaquin 0.009% 0.0075394%
City Lodi San Joaquin 0.053% 0.0439484%
City Manteca San Joaquin 0.054% 0.0443454%
City Ripon San Joaquin 0.013% 0.0104219%
City Stockton San Joaquin 0.313% 0.383% 0.3256176%
City Tracy San Joaquin 0.084% 0.0692047%
County San Luis Obispo County San Luis Obispo 0.816% 0.999% 0.8484126% Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 APPENDIX 1
11 of 15
City Arroyo Grande San Luis Obispo 0.024% 0.0199053%
City Atascadero San Luis Obispo 0.029% 0.0240680%
Participating
Subdivision
Classification
Participating Subdivision County Abatement
Percentage
Plaintiff
Subdivision
Percentage
Weighted
Allocation
Percentage
City El Paso de Robles (Paso Robles) San Luis Obispo 0.043% 0.0353456% City Grover Beach San Luis Obispo 0.017% 0.0137881%
City Morro Bay San Luis Obispo 0.020% 0.0160922%
City San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo 0.077% 0.0637841%
County San Mateo County San Mateo 1.074% 1.313% 1.1159599% City Belmont San Mateo 0.021% 0.0169860%
City Burlingame San Mateo 0.019% 0.0152537%
City Daly City San Mateo 0.044% 0.0363880%
City East Palo Alto San Mateo 0.013% 0.0103982%
City Foster City San Mateo 0.020% 0.0166101%
City Half Moon Bay San Mateo 0.004% 0.0031638%
City Hillsborough San Mateo 0.013% 0.0110029%
City Menlo Park San Mateo 0.015% 0.0126209%
City Millbrae San Mateo 0.013% 0.0105836%
City Pacifica San Mateo 0.016% 0.0130625%
City Redwood City San Mateo 0.056% 0.0463511%
City San Bruno San Mateo 0.021% 0.0172161%
City San Carlos San Mateo 0.013% 0.0108885%
City San Mateo San Mateo 0.052% 0.0425841%
City South San Francisco San Mateo 0.043% 0.0353943%
County Santa Barbara County Santa Barbara 1.132% 1.385% 1.1768968% City Carpinteria Santa Barbara 0.001% 0.0008938%
City Goleta Santa Barbara 0.004% 0.0028969%
City Lompoc Santa Barbara 0.047% 0.0389379%
City Santa Barbara Santa Barbara 0.122% 0.1004559%
City Santa Maria Santa Barbara 0.058% 0.0479179%
County Santa Clara County Santa Clara 2.404% 2.941% 2.4987553% City Campbell Santa Clara 0.014% 0.0112566%
City Cupertino Santa Clara 0.008% 0.0066824%
City Gilroy Santa Clara 0.025% 0.0202891%
Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 APPENDIX 1
12 of 15
Participating
Subdivision
Classification
Participating Subdivision County Abatement
Percentage
Plaintiff
Subdivision
Percentage
Weighted
Allocation
Percentage
City Los Altos Santa Clara 0.013% 0.0103338%
City Los Gatos Santa Clara 0.013% 0.0103220%
City Milpitas Santa Clara 0.036% 0.0298120%
City Morgan Hill Santa Clara 0.015% 0.0124619%
City Mountain View Santa Clara 0.041% 0.0334608%
City Palo Alto Santa Clara 0.039% 0.0323080%
City San Jose Santa Clara 0.294% 0.360% 0.3054960%
City Santa Clara Santa Clara 0.067% 0.0549723%
City Saratoga Santa Clara 0.004% 0.0034161%
City Sunnyvale Santa Clara 0.053% 0.0434069%
County Santa Cruz County Santa Cruz 0.783% 0.957% 0.8135396% City Capitola Santa Cruz 0.020% 0.0168191%
City Santa Cruz Santa Cruz 0.143% 0.1180348%
City Scotts Valley Santa Cruz 0.015% 0.0126525%
City Watsonville Santa Cruz 0.063% 0.0520136%
County Shasta County Shasta 1.095% 1.339% 1.1380191%
City Anderson Shasta 0.024% 0.0198896%
City Redding Shasta 0.284% 0.2334841%
City Shasta Lake Shasta 0.004% 0.0031993%
County Siskiyou County Siskiyou 0.228% 0.279% 0.2373393% County Solano County Solano 0.760% 0.6260795%
City Benicia Solano 0.031% 0.0253903%
City Dixon Solano 0.016% 0.0130849%
City Fairfield Solano 0.109% 0.0897317%
City Suisun City Solano 0.021% 0.0176183%
City Vacaville Solano 0.119% 0.0976497%
City Vallejo Solano 0.167% 0.1373644%
County Sonoma County Sonoma 1.218% 1.490% 1.2661290%
City Healdsburg Sonoma 0.032% 0.0266929%
City Petaluma Sonoma 0.081% 0.0667507%
Participating
Subdivision
Classification
Participating Subdivision County Abatement
Percentage
Plaintiff
Subdivision
Percentage
Weighted
Allocation
Percentage
Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 APPENDIX 1
13 of 15
City Rohnert Park Sonoma 0.041% 0.0340759%
City Santa Rosa Sonoma 0.184% 0.1519070%
City Sonoma Sonoma 0.022% 0.0183438%
City Windsor Sonoma 0.016% 0.0129298%
County Stanislaus County Stanislaus 1.722% 1.4182273%
City Ceres Stanislaus 0.041% 0.0340260%
City Modesto Stanislaus 0.217% 0.1788759%
City Newman Stanislaus 0.006% 0.0046964%
City Oakdale Stanislaus 0.018% 0.0145531%
City Patterson Stanislaus 0.015% 0.0126590%
City Riverbank Stanislaus 0.010% 0.0085699%
City Turlock Stanislaus 0.065% 0.0531966%
County Sutter County Sutter 0.306% 0.374% 0.3179548%
City Yuba City Sutter 0.074% 0.0606242%
County Tehama County Tehama 0.213% 0.261% 0.2216654%
City Red Bluff Tehama 0.014% 0.0117771%
County Trinity County Trinity 0.082% 0.101% 0.0855476%
County Tulare County Tulare 0.809% 0.990% 0.8410949%
City Dinuba Tulare 0.014% 0.0116929%
City Exeter Tulare 0.004% 0.0032479%
City Farmersville Tulare 0.003% 0.0027879%
City Lindsay Tulare 0.007% 0.0057111%
City Porterville Tulare 0.021% 0.0171845%
City Tulare Tulare 0.037% 0.0302273%
City Visalia Tulare 0.066% 0.0545872%
County Tuolumne County Tuolumne 0.486% 0.594% 0.5047621% County Ventura County Ventura 2.192% 2.681% 2.2781201%
City Camarillo Ventura 0.002% 0.0012815%
City Fillmore Ventura 0.002% 0.0020294%
City Moorpark Ventura 0.008% 0.0067337%
Participating
Subdivision
Classification
Participating Subdivision County Abatement
Percentage
Plaintiff
Subdivision
Percentage
Weighted
Allocation
Percentage
City Oxnard Ventura 0.156% 0.190% 0.1617338%
City Port Hueneme Ventura 0.021% 0.0174145%
City San Buenaventura (Ventura) Ventura 0.085% 0.0702181% Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 APPENDIX 1
14 of 15
City Santa Paula Ventura 0.014% 0.0119072%
City Simi Valley Ventura 0.065% 0.0533043%
City Thousand Oaks Ventura 0.022% 0.0179902%
County Yolo County Yolo 0.357% 0.437% 0.3713319%
City Davis Yolo 0.055% 0.0451747%
City West Sacramento Yolo 0.066% 0.0544321%
City Woodland Yolo 0.058% 0.0477904%
County Yuba County Yuba 0.214% 0.262% 0.2225679%
City Marysville Yuba 0.014% 0.0112079%
Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 1 APPENDIX 2
Cost Reimbursement Procedure

1. Additional defined terms:
a) Costs means the reasonable amounts paid for the attorney and other City Attorney and County Counsel staff time for individuals employed by a Plaintiff Subdivision at the contractual rate, inclusive of benefits and overhead, together with amounts paid for court reporters, experts, copying, electronic research, travel, vendors, and the like, which were not previously reimbursed and which were paid or incurred (i) prior to December 31, 2022 in litigation against any Opioid Defendant and/or (ii) in negotiating and drafting any CA Allocation Agreement(s) concerning a settlement with any Opioid Defendant(s).

Costs does not include attorneys’ fees, costs, or expenses incurred by private contingency fee counsel. No part of the CA Abatement Accounts Fund will be used to reimburse Costs.
b) First Claims Date means October 1, 2023 or when all applications for reimbursement of Costs, in whole or in part, from funds available under Section IX and Exhibit R of the Walgreens Settlement Agreement, Section XIV and Exhibit R of the Teva Settlement Agreement, Section XIII and Exhibit R of the Allergan Settlement Agreement, Section X and Exhibit R of the Distributor Settlement Agreement, Section XI and Exhibit R of the Janssen Settlement Agreement, Section X and Exhibit R of the CVS Settlement Agreement, or Section IX and Exhibit R of the Walmart Settlement Agreement, have been finally determined under the provisions of those agreements, whichever comes first. c) Special Master means a retired judicial officer or former public lawyer, not presently employed or retained by a Plaintiff Subdivision, who will aggregate, review, and determine the reasonable Costs to be awarded to each Plaintiff Subdivision that submits a claim for reimbursement of Costs. The Special Master will be selected by a majority vote of the votes cast by Plaintiff Subdivisions, with each such subdivision having one vote. d) Plaintiff Subdivision Committee means the committee of Plaintiff Subdivisions that will review and approve the invoices submitted by the Special Master reflecting his or her reasonable time and expenses.

2. Cost Reimbursement to Plaintiff Subdivision
a) Purpose. Substantial resources have been expended to hold Opioid Defendants accountable for creating and profiting from the opioid crisis, and this effort has been a significant catalyst in creating National Opioid Settlements with various manufacturers, distributors, and chain pharmacies.
///
Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 2 b) Claims Procedure.
i. If a Plaintiff Subdivision is eligible to seek reimbursement of Costs, in whole or in part, from funds available under Section IX and Exhibit R of the Kroger Settlement Agreement, Section IX and Exhibit R of the Walgreens Settlement Agreement, Section XIV and Exhibit R of the Teva Settlement Agreement, Section XIII and Exhibit R of the Allergan Settlement Agreement, Section X and Exhibit R of the CVS Settlement Agreement, Section IX and Exhibit R of the Walmart Settlement Agreement, Section X or Exhibit R of the Distributor Settlement Agreement, or Section XI or Exhibit R of the Janssen Settlement Agreement, it must first make a timely application for reimbursement from such funds. To allow sufficient time for determination of those applications, no claim for Costs to the CA Subdivision Fund under this Agreement may be made before the First Claims Date. ii. A Plaintiff Subdivision that wishes to be reimbursed from the CA Subdivision Fund must submit a claim to the Special Master no later than forty-five (45) days after the First Claims Date. The Special Master will then compile and redistribute the aggregated claim totals for each Plaintiff Subdivision via email to representatives of all the Plaintiff Subdivisions. A claim for attorney and staff time must list, for each attorney or staff member included in the claim, the following information: name, title, total hours claimed, hourly rate (including, if sought, benefits and share of overhead), and narrative summarizing the general nature of the work performed by the attorney or staff member. For reimbursement of “hard” costs, the subdivision may aggregate across a category (e.g., total for travel costs). It is the intention of the Plaintiff Subdivisions that submission of documents related to reimbursement of Costs does not waive any attorney-client privilege or exemptions to the California Public Records Act.
iii. The Special Master may request, at his or her sole option, additional documents or details to assist in the final award of Costs.
iv. The Special Master will review claims for reasonableness and will notify each Plaintiff Subdivision of the final determination of its claim, and will provide a list of all final awards to all Plaintiff Subdivisions by email or, upon request, via First Class U.S. Mail. Any Plaintiff Subdivision may ask the Special Master to reconsider any final award within twenty-one (21) days. The Special Master will make a final determination on any such reconsideration request within thirty (30) days of receipt. v. Any decision of the Special Master is final and binding, and will be considered under the California Arbitration Act, Code of Civil Procedure section 1280 et seq. as a final arbitration award. Nothing in this agreement is intended to expand the scope of judicial review of the final award for errors of fact or law, and the Parties agree that they may only seek to vacate the award if clear and convincing evidence demonstrates one of the factors set forth in Code of Civil Procedure, section 1286.2, subdivision (a). Plaintiff Subdivisions will have fourteen (14) days after all final awards are made, together with any final determination of a request for Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 3 reconsideration, to seek review in the Superior Court of California, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure, section 1285, where the State has filed its Consent Judgment. vi. The Special Master will prepare a report of Costs that includes his or her fees and expenses at least ninety (90) days before the Payment Date for each Annual Payment. The Special Master’s preparation of a report of Costs does not discharge a Plaintiff Subdivision’s reporting requirement under Section V(B)(2) of the Kroger Settlement Agreement.
vii. A member of the Plaintiff Subdivision Committee, which is a CA Participating Subdivision, will submit to the Settlement Fund Administrator and Kroger a report of the fees and expenses incurred by the Special Master pursuant to Section V(B)(2) of the Kroger Settlement Agreement.
c) Claims Priority and Limitation.
i. The Special Master will submit invoices for compensation of reasonable fees and expenses to the Plaintiff Subdivision Committee no later than ninety (90) days prior to the Payment Date for each Annual Payment. The Plaintiff Subdivision Committee will promptly review and, if reasonable, approve the Special Master’s invoice for compensation. The Plaintiff Subdivision Committee will submit approved invoices to the Settlement Fund Administrator for payment. The Special Master’s approved invoices have priority and will be paid first from the CA Subdivision Fund before any award of Costs, subject to the limitation in Section 2.c.v below. ii. Final Awards of Costs that do not exceed seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000.00) will be paid next in priority after the Special Master’s approved invoices.
iii. Final Awards of Costs in excess of seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000.00) will be paid proportionally from the funds remaining in that year’s Annual Payment. iv. Any claim for Costs that is not paid in full will be allocated against the next year’s distribution from the CA Subdivision Fund, until all approved claims for Costs are paid in full.
v. In no event will more than 50% of the total CA Subdivision Fund received in any year be used to pay Costs or the Special Master’s approved invoices. vi. In no event shall more than $28 million of the total CA Subdivision Funds paid pursuant to the Kroger Settlement Agreement, Walgreens Settlement Agreement, Teva Settlement Agreement, Allergan Settlement Agreement, Distributor Settlement Agreement, CVS Settlement Agreement, Janssen Settlement Agreement, and the Walmart Settlement Agreement be used to pay Costs.

Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 4 d) Collateral Source Payments and Third-Party Settlement. i. In the event a Plaintiff Subdivision is awarded compensation, in whole or in part, by any source of funds created as a result of litigation against an Opioid Defendant for its reasonable Costs, it will reduce its claim for Costs from the CA Subdivision Fund by that amount. If a Plaintiff Subdivision has already received a final award of Costs from the CA Subdivision Fund, it will repay the fund up to the prior award of Costs via a payment to the Settlement Fund Administrator or notify the Settlement Fund Administrator that its allocation from the next and subsequent Annual Payments should be reduced accordingly. If the Plaintiff Subdivision is repaying any prior award of Costs, that repayment will occur as soon as is feasible after the Plaintiff Subdivision’s receipt of Cost funds from the collateral source, but no more than 90 days after its receipt from the collateral source. The Settlement Fund Administrator will add any repaid Costs to the CA Subdivision Fund. Any Plaintiff Subdivision that has submitted for reimbursement to any national fund and has not received a final determination by the First Claims Date may request that the settlement administrator withhold some or all of its payment from the CA Subdivision Fund in order to avoid repayment.
ii. In the event a Plaintiff Subdivision reaches a monetary settlement or compromise against any Opioid Defendant outside of the National Opioid Settlement, the monetary portion of such settlement, net of fees paid to outside contingency fee counsel and of funds earmarked strictly for abatement, will be credited against its Costs and the subdivision will be ineligible to recover those credited Costs from the CA Subdivision Fund. Plaintiff Subdivisions negotiating monetary settlements or compromises against any Opioid Defendant outside of the National Opioid Settlement will negotiate for funds to repay any Costs it previously received from the CA Subdivision Fund or for Costs it otherwise might be eligible to claim from the CA Subdivision Fund. If such a settlement is paid after all final approved claims for Costs by all Plaintiff Subdivisions are satisfied in full, the settling subdivision will reimburse the CA Subdivision Fund in that amount by making payment to the Settlement Fund Administrator to add to the CA Subdivision Fund in a manner consistent with the repayments described in section 2.d.i above.

Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20 1 APPENDIX 3

CALIFORNIA-SUBDIVISION BACKSTOP AGREEMENT
On August 6, 2021, Judge Polster of the US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio issued an Order (the Order), docket number 3814, in In Re National Prescription Opiate Litigation, MDL 2804, addressing contingent attorney fee contracts between political subdivisions eligible to participate in the Kroger Settlement and their counsel.

In light of the Order, and at the request of [SUBDIVISION], the [SUBDIVISION], its counsel [COUNSEL], and the California Attorney General, on behalf of the State of California, are entering into this California-Subdivision Backstop Agreement (Backstop Agreement). [SUBDIVISION] and [COUNSEL] intend this Backstop Agreement to constitute a State Back- Stop Agreement as that term is used in the Order and in Exhibit R (Agreement on Attorneys’ Fees, Costs, and Expenses) of the Kroger Settlement Agreement.

Pursuant to this Backstop Agreement, [SUBDIVISION] may, subject to the limitations of the Kroger Settlement Agreement and CA Kroger Allocation Agreement, as well as any other limitations imposed by law, use funds that it receives from the Kroger Settlement CA Subdivision Fund to pay a contingent fee to [COUNSEL]. Any such payment from [SUBDIVISION] to [COUNSEL], together with any contingency fees that [COUNSEL] may receive from the national Attorney Fee Fund, will not exceed a total contingency fee of [PERCENTAGE NOT TO EXCEED 15%] of the total gross recovery of [SUBDIVISION] from the Kroger Settlement.
[COUNSEL] certify that they first sought fees and costs from the Attorney Fee Fund created under the Kroger Settlement Agreement before seeking or accepting payment under this backstop agreement. [COUNSEL] further certify that they are not seeking and will not accept payment under this backstop agreement of any litigation fees or costs that have been reimbursed through prior settlements or judgments.

The Attorney General is executing this agreement solely because the definition of “State Back- Stop Agreement” in Exhibit R of the Kroger Settlement Agreement requires such agreements to be between “a Settling State” and private counsel for a participating subdivision. Neither the California Attorney General nor the State of California have any obligations under this Backstop Agreement, and this Backstop Agreement does not require the payment of any state funds to [SUBDIVISION], [COUNSEL], or any other party.
[DATE] [SUBDIVISION SIGNATURE BLOCK]
[DATE] [COUNSEL SIGNATURE BLOCK]
[DATE] [ATTORNEY GENERAL SIGNATURE BLOCK]
Docusign Envelope ID: 31342C6E-34FE-4E3B-8381-7B3178B03E20

STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. ____7____

Page 1 ends

TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Robert Lopez, Chief of Police
DATE: August 7, 2024
SUBJECT: Adoption of Resolution No. 2024 -039 Certifying the Application For Grant Funds, Accepting Grant Funds in the Amount of $282,560.00, And Authorizing the Chief of Police to execute The California Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Agreement

SUMMARY
This report seeks the City Council’s adoption of Resolution No. 2024-039, certifying the application for the California Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program (CTFGP), accepting grant funds in the amount of $282,560.00 and authorizing the Chief of Police to execute the FY 2024-2025 grant agreement.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends City Council adopt Resolution No. 2024 -039 certifying the CTFGP application, accepting grant funds in the amount of $282,560.00 and authorizing the Chief of Police to execute the CTFGP grant agreement.

FISCAL IMPACT
The City of Baldwin Park will receive $282,560.00 in grant funding. This action has no negative fiscal impact on the City's general fund.

BACKGROUND
The Baldwin Park Police Department has been awarded funding under the FY 2024 -2025 California Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program (CTFGP) administered by the California Highway Patrol. The grant will provide financial assistance for education, prevention, and enforcement of laws related to driving under the influence of alcohol and other drugs, including cannabis.

The grant totals $282,560.00 and will fund several key components:

1. Training for officers: $63,434.12 This includes overtime backfill for 20 officers to attend Standardized Field Sobriety Testing (SFST) and Advanced Roadside Impaired Driving Enforcement (ARIDE) training.

2. Conducting 32 DUI saturation patrols throughout the year: $125,440.00 This covers overtime pay for 4 officers and 1 sergeant to conduct 8-hour DUI saturation patrols.

3. Purchasing and outfitting a dedicated DUI enforcement vehicle: $93,685.88 o $68,085.88 for the purchase of the vehicle
o $25,000.00 for vehicle outfitting (emergency equipment, lights, etc.) o $600.00 for vehicle decals/graphic

Page 2 ends

The goal of this program is to reduce DUI/DUID -related incidents by 25% and DUI/DUID fatal collisions by 50%.

As required by the City's procedures and to comply with the grant's requirements, this agreement is being presented to the City Council for review and authorization before the Chief of Police can execute it. The grant agreement specifies that the City must provide a copy of a resolution, order, motion, or ordinance of the local governing body authorizing the execution of the grant agreement.

ALTERNATIVES

1. The City Council may elect to not approve the grant agreement and provide alternate directions to staff.

LEGAL REVIEW
This Staff Report and Resolution have been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney as to legal form and content.

ATTACHMENTS

1. FY 2024-2025 CTFGP Grant Agreement (including Project Description and Budget Summary)

2. Resolution No. 2024-039

State of California

DEPARTMENT OF CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL
GRANT AGREEMENT - Page 1
Award Number
17870
________________________________________________________________

1. GRANT TITLE
FY24/25 CTFGP Law Enforcement - Baldwin Park Police Department

2. NAME OF ORGANIZATION/AGENCY
Baldwin Park Police Department

3. ORGANIZATION/AGENCY SECTION TO ADMINISTER GRANT
Traffic Bureau

4. PROJECT PERFORMANCE PERIOD
From: 07/01/2024 To: 06/30/2025

5. PURCHASE ORDER NUMBER

6. G RANT OPPORTUNITY INFORMATION DESCRIPTION
Law Enforcement grants provide financial assistance to allied agencies for the education, prevention, and the enforcement of laws related to driving under the influence of alcohol and other drugs, including cannabis and cannabis products.

The intent of the program is to educate the public regarding the dangers of impaired driving, enforce impaired driving laws on the roadway, and improve the Organization/Agency’s effectiveness through training and development of new strategies.

7. FUNDS ALLOCATED UNDER THIS GRANT AGREEMENT SHALL NOT EXCEED $282,560.00

8. TERMS AND CONDITIONS
The Grantee agrees to complete the Project, as described in the Project Description. The Grantee’s Grant Application, and the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Division 2, Chapter 13, Sections 1890.00- 1890.27, are hereby incorporated into this Grant Agreement by reference.

The parties hereto agree to comply with the Terms and Conditions of the following attachments:
• Schedule A – Project Description, Problem Statement, Goals and Objectives, and Method of Procedure • Schedule B – Detailed Budget Estimate
• Schedule B-1 – Budget Narrative

We, the officials named below, hereby swear, under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that we are duly authorized to legally bind the Grant recipient to the above-described Grant Terms and Conditions.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Grant Agreement is executed by the parties hereto.

9. APPROVAL SIGNATURES
A. AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL OF ORGANIZATION/AGENCY
Name: Robert Lopez
Title: Chief of Police
Phone: (626) 960-1955

Address: 14403 East Pacific Avenue
Baldwin Park, CA 91706

E-Mail: [email protected]

___________________________ _______________
(Signature) (Date)
B. AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL OF CHP
Name: Andrew Beasley Phone: (916) 843-4360
Title: Captain Fax: (916) 322-3169

Address: 601 North 7th Street
Sacramento, CA 95811

E-Mail: [email protected]

___________________________ _______________
(Signature) (Date)
C. ACCOUNTING OFFICER OF CHP
Name: C. M. Jones Phone: (916) 843-3531
Title: Commander Fax: (916) 322-3159

Address: 601 North 7th Street
Sacramento, CA 95811

E-Mail: [email protected]

___________________________ _______________
(Signature) (Date)

10. AUTHORIZED FINANCIAL CONTACT TO RECEIVE

REIMBURSEMENT PAYMENTS

Name: Rose Tam
Title: Finance Director
Phone: (626) 960-1955

Address: 14403 East Pacific Avenue
Baldwin Park, CA 91706

TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Grantee shall comply with the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Division 2, Chapter 13 Section 1890, et seq. and all other Terms and Conditions noted in this Grant Agreement. Failure by the Grantee to comply may result in the termination of this Grant Agreement by the California Highway Patrol (hereafter referred to as State). The State will have no obligation to reimburse the Grantee for any additional costs once the Grant Agreement has been terminated.

A. EXECUTION

1. The State (the California Highway Patrol) hereby awards, to the Grantee, the sum of money stated on page one of this Grant Agreement. This funding is awarded to the Grantee to carry out the Project set forth in the Project Description and the terms and conditions set forth in this Grant Agreement.

2. The funding for this Grant Agreement is allocated pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 34019(f)(3)(B). The Grantee agrees that the State’s obligation to pay any sum under this Grant Agreement is contingent upon availability of funds disbursed from the California Cannabis Tax Fund to the State. If there is insufficient funding, the State shall have the option to either: 1) terminate this Grant Agreement; whereby, no party shall have any further obligations or liabilities under this Grant Agreement, or 2) negotiate a Grant Agreement Amendment to reduce the grant award and scope of work to be provided under this Grant Agreement.

3. The Grantee is not to commence or proceed with any work in advance of receiving notice that the Grant Agreement is approved. Any work performed by the Grantee in advance of the date of approval by the State shall be deemed volunteer work and will not be reimbursed by the State.

4. The Grantee agrees to provide any additional funding, beyond what the State has agreed to provide, pursuant to this Grant Agreement, and necessary to complete or carry out the Project, as described in this Grant Agreement. Any modification or alteration of this Grant Agreement, as set forth in the Grant Application submitted by the Grantee and on file with the State, must be submitted in writing thirty (30) calendar days in advance to the State for approval.

5. The Grantee agrees to complete the Project within the timeframe indicated in the Project Performance Period, which is on page one of this Grant Agreement.

B. PROJECT ADMINISTRATION

1. The Grantee shall submit all reimbursements, progress, performance, and/or other required reports concerning the status of work performed in furtherance of this Grant Agreement on a quarterly basis, or as requested by the State.

2. The Grantee shall provide the State with a final report showing all Project expenditures, which includes all State and any other Project funding expended, within sixty (60) calendar days after completion of this Grant Agreement.

3. The Grantee shall ensure all equipment which is purchased, maintained, operated, and/or developed is available for inspection by the State.

4. Equipment purchased through this Grant Agreement shall be used for the education, prevention, and enforcement of impaired driving laws, unless the Grantee is funding a portion of the purchased price not dedicated to impaired driving and that portion is not part of the Project costs.

Equipment purchased under this Grant Agreement must only be used for approved Project- related purposes, unless otherwise approved by the State in writing.

5. Prior to disposition of equipment acquired under this Grant Agreement, the Grantee shall notify the State via e-mail, and by telephone, by calling the California Highway Patrol, Impaired Driving Section, Cannabis Grants Unit at (916) 843-4360.

TERMS AND CONDITIONS

C. PROJECT TERMINATION

1. Grantee or the State may terminate this Grant Agreement at any time prior to the commencement of the Project. Once the Project has commenced, this Grant Agreement may only be terminated if the party withdrawing provides thirty (30) calendar days written notice of their intent to withdraw.

a. If by reason of force majeure the performance hereunder is delayed or prevented, then the term end date may be extended by mutual consent for the same amount of time of such delay or prevention. The term “force majeure” shall mean any fire, flood, earthquake, or public disaster, strike, labor dispute or unrest, embargo, riot, war, insurrection or civil unrest, any act of God, any act of legally constituted authority, or any other cause beyond the Grantee’s control which would excuse the Grantee’s performance as a matter of law.

b. Grantee agrees to provide written notice of an event of force majeure under this Grant Agreement within ten (10) calendar days of the commencement of such event, and within ten (10) calendar days after the termination of such event, unless the force majeure prohibits Grantee from reasonably giving notice within this period. Grantee will give such notice at the earliest possible time following the event of force majeure.

2. Any violations of law committed by the Grantee, misrepresentations of Project information by the Grantee to the State, submission of falsified documents by the Grantee to the State, or failure to provide records by the Grantee to the State when requested for audit or site visit purposes may be cause for termination. If the Project is terminated for the reasons described in this paragraph, the State will have no obligation to reimburse the Grantee for any additional costs once the Grant Agreement has been terminated.

3. The State may terminate this Grant Agreement and be relieved of any payments should the Grantee fail to perform the requirements of this Grant Agreement at the time and in the manner herein provided. Furthermore, the Grantee, upon termination, shall return grant funds not expended by the Grantee as of the date of termination.

4. If this Grant Agreement is terminated, the State may choose to exclude the Grantee from future Grant Opportunities.

D. FINANCIAL RECORDS

1. The Grantee agrees the State, or their designated representative, shall have the right to review and to copy all records and supporting documentation pertaining to the performance of this Grant Agreement. Grantee agrees to maintain such records for possible audit for a minimum of five (5) years after final payment, unless a longer period of records retention is stipulated or required by law. Grantee agrees to allow the auditor(s) access to such records during normal business hours and to allow interviews of any employees who might reasonably have information related to such records. Furthermore, the Grantee agrees to include a similar right for the State to audit all records and interview staff in any subcontract related to performance of this Grant Agreement.

E. HOLD HARMLESS

1. The Grantee agrees to indemnify, defend, and save harmless the State, its officials, agents and employees from any and all claims and losses accruing or resulting to any and all Grantee’s staff, contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, and other person, firm or corporation furnishing or supplying work services, materials, or supplies in connection with the performance of this Grant Agreement, and from any and all claims and losses accruing or resulting to any person, agency, firm, corporation who may be injured or damaged by the Grantee in performance of this Grant Agreement.

TERMS AND CONDITIONS

F. NONDISCRIMINATION

1. The Grantee agrees to comply with State and federal laws outlawing discrimination, including, but not limited to, those prohibiting discrimination because of sex, race, color, ancestry, religion, creed, national origin, physical disability (including HIV and AIDS), mental disability, medical condition (including cancer or genetic characteristics), sexual orientation, political affiliation, position in a labor dispute, age, marital status, and denial of statutorily-required employment- related leave. (GC 12990 [a-f] and CCR, Title 2, Section 8103.)

G. AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT

1. The Grantee assures the State it complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability, as well as all applicable regulations and guidelines issued pursuant to the ADA. (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.)

H. DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE

1. The Grantee shall comply with the requirements of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1990 and will provide a drug-free workplace by taking the following actions:

a. Publish a statement notifying employees that unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited and specifying actions to be taken against employees for violations.

b. Establish a Drug-Free Awareness Program to inform employees about:

i. The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace.

ii. The person's or Organization/Agency's policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace.

iii. Any available counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs.

iv. Penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations.

c. Every employee who works on the Project will:

i. Receive a copy of the company's drug-free workplace policy statement.

ii. Agree to abide by the terms of the company's statement as a condition of employment on the Grant Agreement.

2. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in suspension of payments under this Grant Agreement, or termination of this Grant Agreement, or both, and Grantee may be ineligible for award of any future Grant Agreements if the department determines that any of the following has occurred:

a. The Grantee has made false certification or violated the certification by failing to carry out the requirements, as noted above. (GC 8350 et seq.)

I. LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES

1. All law enforcement Organization/Agency/Agency Grantees shall comply with California law regarding racial profiling. Specifically, law enforcement Organization/Agency/Agency Grantees shall not engage in the act of racial profiling, as defined in California Penal Code Section 13519.4.

TERMS AND CONDITIONS

J. LABOR CODE/WORKERS' COMPENSATION

1. The Grantee is advised and made aware of the provisions which require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions, and Grantee affirms to comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Grant Agreement, (refer to Labor Code Section 3700).

K. GRANT APPLICATION INCORPORATION

1. The Grantee agrees the Grant Application and any subsequent changes or additions approved or required by the State is hereby incorporated into this Grant Agreement.

L. STATE LOBBYING

1. The Grantee is advised that none of the funds provided under this Grant Agreement may be used for any activity specifically designed to urge or influence a state or local legislator to favor or oppose the adoption of any specific legislative proposal pending before any state or local legislative body. Such activities include both direct and indirect (e.g., “grassroots”) lobbying activities, with one exception. This does not preclude a state official, whose salary is supported by this Grant Agreement, from engaging in direct communications with the state or local legislative officials, in accordance with customary state and/or local practice.

M. REPRESENTATION AND WARRANTIES

1. The Grantee represents and warrants that:

a. It is validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the State of California, has, or will have the requisite power, authority, licenses, permits, and the like necessary to carry on its business as it is now being conducted and as contemplated in this Grant Agreement, and will, at all times, lawfully conduct its business in compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and rules.

b. It is not a party to any Grant Agreement, written or oral, creating obligations that would prevent it from entering into this Grant Agreement or satisfying the terms herein.

c. If the Grantee is a Nonprofit Organization/Agency, it will maintain its “Active” status with the California Secretary of State, maintain its “Current” status with the California Attorney General’s Registry of Charitable Trusts, and maintain its federal and State of California tax - exempt status. If the Grantee subcontracts with a Nonprofit as part of this Grant Agreement, the Grantee shall ensure the Nonprofit will maintain its “Active” status with the California Secretary of State, maintain its “Current” status with the California Attorney General’s Registry of Charitable Trusts, and maintain its federal and State of California tax-exempt status.

d. All of the information in its Grant Application and all materials submitted are true and accurate.

N. AIR OR WATER POLLUTION VIOLATION

1. Under the state laws, the Grantee shall not be: (1) in violation of any order or resolution not subject to review promulgated by the State Air Resources Board or an air pollution control district; (2) subject to cease and desist order not subject to review issued pursuant to Section 13301 of the Water Code for violation of waste discharge requirements or discharge prohibitions; or (3) finally determined to be in violation of provisions of federal law relating to air or water pollution.

TERMS AND CONDITIONS

O. GRANTEE NAME CHANGE

1. Grantee agrees to immediately inform the State, in writing, of any changes to the name of the person within the Organization/Agency/Agency with delegated signing authority.

2. An Amendment is required to change the Grantee's name, as listed on this Grant Agreement. Upon receipt of legal documentation of the name change, the State will process the Amendment. Payment of invoices presented with a new name cannot be paid prior to approval of said Amendment.

P. RESOLUTION

1. A county, city, district, or other local public body shall provide the State with a copy of a resolution, order, motion, or ordinance of the local governing body, which by law, has authority to enter into a Grant Agreement, authorizing execution of the Grant Agreement.

Q. PAYEE DATA RECORD FORM STD. 204

1. This form shall be completed by all non-governmental Grantees.

R. FINANCIAL INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT AGENCY TAXPAYER ID FORM

1. This form shall be completed by all Grantees.

S. CONFLICT OF INTEREST

1. This section serves to make the Grantee aware of specific provisions related to current or former state employees. If Grantee has any questions regarding the status of any person rendering services or involved with the Grant Agreement, the Grantee shall contact the State (California Highway Patrol, Impaired Driving Section, Cannabis Grants Unit) immediately for clarification.

2. Current State Employees:

a. No officer or employee shall engage in any employment, activity, or enterprise, from which the officer or employee receives compensation or has a financial interest, and which is sponsored or funded by any state agency, unless the employment, activity, or enterprise is required, as a condition of regular state employment.

b. No officer or employee shall contract on their own behalf, as an independent Grantee, with any state agency to provide goods or services.

3. Former State Employees:

a. For the two-year period from the date they left state employment, no former state officer or employee may enter into a contract in which they engaged in any of the negotiations, transactions, planning, arrangements, or any part of the decision-making process relevant to this Grant Agreement while employed in any capacity by any state agency.

b. For the 12-month period from the date they left state employment, no former state officer or employee may enter into a contract with any state agency if they were employed by that state agency in a policy-making position in the same general subject area as the proposed Grant Agreement within the 12-month period prior to their leaving state service.

4. The authorized representative of the Grantee Organization/Agency, named within this Grant Agreement, warrants their Organization/Agency and its employees have no personal or financial interest and no present or past employment or activity, which would be incompatible with

TERMS AND CONDITIONS

participating in any activity related to this Grant Agreement. For the duration of this Grant Agreement, the Organization/Agency and its employees will not accept any gift, benefit, gratuity or consideration, or begin a personal or financial interest in a party who is associated with this Grant Agreement.

5. The Grantee Organization/Agency and its employees shall not disclose any financial, statistical, personal, technical, media-related, and/or other information or data derived from this Grant Agreement, made available for use by the State, for the purposes of providing services to the State, in conjunction with this Grant Agreement, except as otherwise required by law or explicitly permitted by the State in writing. The Grantee shall immediately advise the State of any person(s) who has access to confidential Project information and intends to disclose that information in violation of this Grant Agreement.

6. The Grantee will not enter into any Grant Agreement or discussions with third parties concerning materials described in paragraph five (5) prior to receiving written confirmation from the State that such third party has a Grant Agreement with the State, similar in nature to this one.

7. The Grantee warrants that only those employees who are authorized and required to use the materials described in paragraph 5 will have access to them.

8. If the Grantee violates any provisions in the above paragraphs, such action by the Grantee shall render this Grant Agreement void.

T. EQUIPMENT-USE TERMS

1. The Grantee agrees any equipment purchased under this Grant Agreement shall be used for impaired driving efforts.

2. Law Enforcement Projects:

a. Oral Fluid Drug Screening Devices and Cannabis/Marijuana Breath Testing Equipment - The Grantee agrees to ensure all personnel using road-side drug testing equipment, including oral fluid drug testing devices and/or cannabis/marijuana breath testing devices, purchased with grant funds from this Grant Agreement, are trained to recognize alcohol and drug impairment.

At a minimum, personnel using these devices should receive Standardized Field Sobriety Testing training. These personnel are also encouraged to attend Advanced Roadside Impaired Driving Enforcement and Drug Recognition Evaluator training. Prior to using these devices, the Grantee agrees to obtain permission from their local prosecutor’s office, establish a policy ensuring appropriate use, and require the staff using these devices to receive appropriate training, which may include training from the manufacturer. This will help ensure the equipment is used appropriately. The Grantee shall advise the State (California Highway Patrol, Impaired Driving Section, Cannabis Grants Unit) of any legal challenges or other items of significance that may affect the use or legal acceptance of these devices.

Additionally, the State may request additional information about the performance of these devices, including information about their use, accuracy, and feedback from personnel using the devices.

b. Law Enforcement Vehicles – The Grantee agrees any law enforcement vehicles purchased with Grant funds, from this Grant Agreement, will be primarily used for the enforcement of driving under the influence laws and/or providing public education, related to the dangers of driving under the influence. Additionally, any vehicle purchased using funds from this Grant Agreement shall comply with all California Vehicle Code and California Code of Regulation requirements. The State may require the Grantee to mark these vehicles with a decal and/or emblem, indicating the vehicle is used for driving under the influence enforcement.

Schedule A

Baldwin Park Police Department

All grant awards, including any adjustments to requested funding, were made by the Cannabis Grants Unit based on the merits of the Grant Application, scale of operation, and in accordance with the Request for Application (RFA) requirements and associated regulations. As a result, not all Project activities and items detailed in Schedule A are applicable. Refer to Schedule B - Detailed Budget Estimate for approved Budget line items and Project activities. Project activities and items that are not clearly identified/specified in the Grant Agreement must be submitted to and approved by CGU prior to purchase.

Project Description
The Baldwin Park Police Department has seen as increase in impaired driving incidents involving alcohol and drugs since the legalization of marijuana. The Baldwin Park Police Department impaired driving enforcement project strategy consists of three prongs: Training, Education, and Enforcement. The Baldwin Park Police Department Project will promote increased public awareness of the dangers of driving under the influence of alcohol, drugs, and marijuana. Enforcement of D.U.I. laws pertaining to driving under the influence of alcohol, drugs, marijuana, and other associated collision factors will reduce the number of citizens killed or injured in collisions.

Through the Baldwin Park Police Department impaired driving enforcement project, we will enhance public safety and reduce the number of persons killed or injured in collisions involving alcohol, drugs, and marijuana.

Project funds will be used for D.U.I. saturation patrol overtime salaries and a dedicated D.U.I. enforcement vehicle to carry out C.T.F.G.P. enforcement efforts.

The BPPD project will also provide police officers the needed training to recognize the signs and symptoms of impairment (SFST, ARIDE, DRE). Funds will be used to train additional police officers to recognize the signs and symptoms of impairment for DUI investigations to highlight awareness and purchase equipment to support our DUI enforcement and prosecutions efforts. Through the BPPD impaired driving educations and enforcement project, officers will gain proper training and experience in identifying drivers under the influence of alcohol, drugs, and marijuana to better serve the community and improve public safety.

Problem Statement & Proposed Solution
Problem:

The City of Baldwin Park continues to experience a rise in DUI injury collisions. Patrol officers are discovering more DUI drivers at the scene of severe traffic collisions. BPPD has recognized the need for specially trained SFST and ARIDE officers. BPPD has trained several officers over the last year to help reduce the number of DUI injury collisions. Due to the volume of patrol-related service calls, officers cannot focus primarily on suppressing DUI. As a result, patrol officers continue to find crashes involving DUI drivers. The Baldwin Park Police Department has motivated police officers who want to become experts in locating and apprehending impaired drivers. Through attrition, newer officers have lost the skill for spotting driver impairment due to alcohol and or drugs, especially when it comes to recognizing the signs and symptoms of being under the influence of marijuana.

In 2020, BPPD arrested 55 suspected DUI drivers and experienced 31 DUI and DUID -related traffic collisions. The total number of fatal traffic collisions for the year was four (4). The total number of traffic collisions for the year was 327.

In 2021, BPPD arrested 65 suspected DUI drivers and experienced 26 DUI and DUID -related traffic collisions. The total number of fatal traffic collisions for the year was one (1). The total number of traffic collisions for the year was 325.

In 2022, BPPD arrested 83 suspected DUI drivers and experienced 32 DUI and DUID -related traffic collisions. The total number of fatal traffic collisions for the year was five (5). The total number of traffic collisions for the year was 328.

In 2023, BPPD arrested 99 suspected DUI drivers and experienced 45 DUI and DUID -related traffic collisions. The total number of fatal traffic collisions for the year was five (5). The total number of traffic collisions for the year was 346.

Schedule A

BPPD currently has 32 sworn officers assigned to patrol. Out of the 32 sworn officers, only 13 have been to an SFST/ARIDE class. Patrol officers that have not been properly trained are inhibited from identifying, evaluating, and apprehending impaired drivers. Over half of the patrol officers are not knowledgeable in conducting a DUI investigation or arrest. Half of the sergeants who are assigned to patrol have not attended an SFST/ARIDE training class. Trained supervision is important for DUI investigations and reports. Every completed report is submitted to the field supervisor for approval. Having trained supervisors who can detect errors and provide direction on how to improve reports will help patrol officers succeed. We currently have one DRE certified officer. ARIDE and DRE courses provide officers with training on how to properly investigate drug-related DUI. The low number of arrests for DUI. Drivers who choose to operate a vehicle under the influence of alcohol, drugs, and marijuana will continue to do so unless officers receive proper training, the community is educated on the dangers, and enforcement is conducted with solid investigative practice.

Solution:

Provide specialized law enforcement training in DUI investigation to patrol officers, educate the public on the danger of DUI/DUID, and support continued DUI enforcement with equipment. Providing BPPD officers specialized training in DUI investigations will provide the officers that work on the streets daily the needed skills to identify, locate and apprehend DUI/DUID drivers thus reducing DUI/DUID related incidents. Having patrol officers specially trained in DUI investigation will facilitate better investigations, better report writing, and greater experience to build up an officer's confidence in handling DUI/DUID cases. Out of the 32 sworn officers assigned to patrol, only 13 have been to an SFST/ARIDE class. Patrol officers that have not been properly trained are inhibited from identifying, evaluating and apprehending impaired drivers. Over half of the patrol officers are not knowledgeable in conducting a DUI investigation or arrest. The proposed solution also is to conduct 32 (8-hours) directed DUI saturation details over the fiscal grant year. Four (4) SFST/ARIDE trained officers will work together in pairs of two to locate and carry out DUI enforcement within the city limits of Baldwin Park and will be supervised by one sergeant. BPPD is a small law enforcement agency with limited patrol vehicles. Officers will utilize a dedicated DUI enforcement vehicle obtained through rant project funding to facilitate the DUI saturation details. The dedicated DUI traffic enforcement vehicle will be fully equipped with emergency lighting, a siren, a police radio, in-car radar, and prisoner transport equipment. The funding for the DUI saturation details will reduce the number of DUI/DUID and marijuana-related injury collisions and enhance community safety through education and enforcement.

To accomplish this project objective, the following budget items are needed:

Training:
a. (20) Police officers will be trained in SFST/ARIDE.
b. (2) Police Sergeant will be trained in SFST/ARIDE.
c. (2) Police officers will be trained in and certified as DRE.

Enforcement Overtime Salary:
a. (32) DUI Saturation Patrol - 8-hour details (Comprised of four officers paired into two-person enforcement teams and one supervisor).

Equipment:
a. DUI Enforcement Vehicle

Performance Measures/Scope of Work
The Goal of the Baldwin Park Police Department Impaired Driving Enforcement Grant is to Save Lives and maintain the positive effects of this grant for several years after. Through public awareness and enforcement, the Baldwin Park Police Department will work to reduce D.U.I./D.U.I.D. -related incidents by 25% and D.U.I./D.U.I.D. fatal collisions by 50%

The following objective must be accomplished to complete the grant.

Objective: Directed Enforcement

1. The BPPD will conduct (32) D.U.I. enforcement details throughout the grant year. These D.U.I. enforcement details specifically target D.U.I. drivers to reduce the number of injuries and fatal collisions.

Officers working on the D.U.I. enforcement details will utilize specialized SFST/ARIDE training to conduct their D.U.I./D.U.I.D. investigations.

Schedule A

a. Overtime salaries: (32) DUI/DUID enforcement details will consist of four (4) officers paired into two- person teams with (1) supervisor. Two-person teams are needed to conduct DUI/DUID investigations safely. DUI enforcement details will be conducted primarily during nighttime hours for 8 hours. A minimum of (8) DUI enforcement details will be conducted in each quarterly period of the grant.

b. Equipment: (Dedicated D.U.I. Enforcement Vehicle) To facilitate BPPD's enforcement efforts, officers assigned to the detail will utilize a dedicated marked "D.U.I. Enforcement" vehicle to locate and apprehend impaired DUI/DUID drivers and enforce primary collision factors (Speeding, unsafe turning movements, failure to yield, and so on) associated with D.U.I. incidents. A dedicated D.U.I. Enforcement Vehicle is needed to achieve the goal of the grant. The D.U.I. Enforcement Vehicle will provide officers with the means to carry out directed enforcement duties targeting D.U.I./D.U.I. drugs and associated collision factors and facilitate the successful reduction of D.U.I./D.U.I.D. related incidents and fatal collisions. D.U.I. enforcement detail will be conducted primarily during nighttime hours for 8 hours. The D.U.I. Enforcement Vehicle will be utilized for a minimum of (8) D.U.I. enforcement details in each quarterly period of the grants.

Project Performance Evaluation
The Baldwin Park Police Department will utilize data compiled during the grant term to complete a final evaluation in the fourth/final quarter of the project. The final evaluation will provide a summary of the grant's accomplishments, challenges, and significant activities. The Baldwin Park Police Department will also include whether the goals and objectives were met, or exceeded, or an explanation of why objectives were not complete.

The Baldwin Park Police Department utilizes Spillman Analytics Software to track traffic collision data. This program has the capability of keeping detailed information on DUI-related incidents. Data from Spillman program will be utilized to compare data obtained during the grant year and years prior. This data will provide information on the success of the grant. The Baldwin Park Police Department will compile statistics on DUI, DUI traffic collisions, DUI injury traffic collisions, and DUI traffic fatalities for quarterly evaluations.

Program Sustainability
Officers experienced in DUI/DUID investigations will pass on their knowledge to newer officers in the department, continuing the enforcement effort. This experience will provide these officers with greater confidence in their ability to proactively seek out DUI/DUID drivers and handle these types of investigations.

The expertise gained will continue to develop long after the end of the grant, further improving public safety in the community.

Obtaining specialized equipment through this grant project, such as a dedicated DUI Enforcement Vehicle, is essential to the success of the project. The dedicated DUI Enforcement Vehicle will facilitate DUI enforcement and enhance out department's efforts to deter, identify, and prosecute DUI/DUID cases for many years after the grant has ended. The Baldwin Park Police Department is dedicated to the safety of the community and is committed to reducing DUI/DUID-related incidents, injuries, and fatalities.

Administrative Support
The Baldwin Park Police Department has successfully managed OTS STEP grants. Records are maintained and statistics are regularly updated by a Police Sergeant who is the grant coordinator. Statistical records are entered into Spillman Program by the department's records Bureau. The City of Baldwin Park Finance Department handles the processing of all financial records for OTS grant billing. The Baldwin Park Police Department is adequately staffed, motivated, and ready to carry out the necessary takes to reduce DUI/DUID incidents and increase public safety in the community.

Schedule B

Detailed Budget Estimate

Award Number
Organization/Agency
Total Amount

17870
Baldwin Park Police Department
$282,560.00

Cost Category
Line Item Name
Total Cost to Grant

Other Direct Costs

DUI Patrol Vehicle - Outfitting
$25,000.00

DUI Patrol Vehicle - Decals/Graphics
$600.00

Category Sub-Total
$25,600.00

Personnel

DUI Saturation Patrol
$125,440.00

Backfill
$63,434.12

Category Sub-Total
$188,874.12

Equipment

DUI Patrol Vehicle
$68,085.88

Category Sub-Total
$68,085.88

Grant Total
$282,560.00

Schedule B-1
Budget Narrative

Baldwin Park Police Department

Prior to engaging in grant-funded Saturation Patrols, DUI Checkpoints, or other enforcement activities in areas where the grantee does not have primary traffic jurisdiction, the grantee should consult with the agency having primary traffic jurisdiction.

Other Direct Costs

DUI Patrol Vehicle – Outfitting (Any outfitting costs that are not vehicle wrap, lights/siren, Police radio, and partition are not eligible costs and will not be reimbursed).

$25,000.00

Equipment for DUI Enforcement Vehicle (Pre-law enforcement conversion). Please see attached file for details.

ALGT53J-1670286073 Allegiant 53" Dual Color / Black Domes 1 1,842.95 1,842.95 THKB-DUR11-HP Light Bar Hook Kit Dodge Durango 2015-2022 1 0.00 0.00T PF200S17B Pathfinder 17 Button (TB-INTG22) 1 1,278.90 1,278.90T ES100C Speaker, ES00C/DynaMax, 100W, High Output 1 304.49 304.49T ESB-U Universal Siren Speaker Bracket for ES100 1 38.96 38.96T ES100C Speaker, ES00C/DynaMax, 100W, High Output 1 0.00 0.00T ESB-U Universal Siren Speaker Bracket for ES100 1 0.00 0.00T OBDCABLE25-DGCAN 25-ft OBD Cable, 2018-2023 Dodge Charger/Dodge Durango 1 150.00 150.00T EXPMOD24 24-Channel Expansion Module 1 306.87 306.87T 36-4075 Westin Push Bumper Elite Dodge Durango 2021-2023 1 461.25 461.25T 36-6005F2MP Two Light Channel Federal Signal MicroPulse Light Ford PIU 1 42.89 42.89T 36-4075WC Westin Push Bumper Elite Wire Cover Dodge Durango 1 46.19 46.19T MPS62U-BW Micropulse Dual Color Blue / White Mirror Forward Facing 1 159.80 159.80T MPS62U-RW Micropulse Dual Color Red / White Mirror Forward Facing 1 159.80 159.80T MPS62U-RB Micropulse Dual Color Red / Blue 4 159.80 639.20T FHL-CHG Headlight Flasher Dodge Charger/ Durango 2018-2023 Fog Lamp Only for Durango /Halo Rear only for Charger 1 102.55 102.55T FHL-TAIL Flasher, Taillight, Universal 1 96.99 96.99T CC-21DUR-0810 2021+ Durango 18" Console, 8" Slope, 10" Level Area, Relocates OEM USB Ports 1 534.79 534.79T AC-INBHG Troy 4" Internal Dual Cup Holder 1 51.84 51.84T AC-TB-ARMMNT-58 Console Mounted Height Adjustable Swivel Arm Rest 1 172.53 172.53T DS-PAN-1111-2 Docking Station For Panasonic TOUGHBOOK 33 2-In-1 Laptop with Dual Pass-Thru Antenna Connections 1 1,293.30 1,293.30T WB450 Laird 1/4 Wave Antenna, 450-470Mhz, Black 1 15.04 15.04T WB152 Laird 1/4 Wave Antenna, 152-162Mhz, Black 1 13.61 13.61T 22174 MiniUHF Male Crimp-RG58 2 3.75 7.50T Ch27.1.20/L3 27 Circuits W/ Modular Smart Start Timer and L3 bracket for Ford Utility with 20ft long Output Wires. 1 783.00 783.00T FULL, BUILD Installation of all Emergency Equipment and customer provided Two Way radio into a 2024 Dodge Durango Police Vehicle. 1 3,850.00 3,850.00 WIRE TERMINALS Wire, Terminals, Tie-Wraps, Hardware 1 260.00 260.00T $24,210.80

DUI Patrol Vehicle - Decals/Graphics
$600.00

Exterior graphics marking vehicle as police and DUI Enforcement. Digital Print 10.25" x 66.5" POLICE x 2 both side doors: $196.96 1.75" x 27.25" Baldwin Park x 2 both sides: $37.00 2" x 12.5" Police REAR: $18.75 ROOF Number 13" $55.00 BPK 11" $45.00 Unit Numbers: $30.00 Labor: $142.50 SUBTOTAL: $549.21 SALES TAX (9.5%) $38.64 TOTAL: $587.85

Personnel

Backfill
$63,434.12

Overtime Backfill OFFICERS (20) – SFST/ARIDE Overtime Backfill Amount calculated to backfill patrol staffing for twenty (20) police officers at the overtime rate of $95.00 (per hours) to facilitate patrol coverage while the department sends them to CHP 16-hour SFST course and CHP 16-hour ARIDE course for an accumulative total of 32-hours per officer. $95 X 32 = $3040 3040 X 20 students = $60,800.

Schedule B-1
Budget Narrative

Baldwin Park Police Department

DUI Saturation Patrol
$125,440.00

(4) Officers and (1) Sergeant - 8 hours per DUI Saturation Patrol. (32) DUI Saturation Patrols in grant year - (8 per Quarter). Overtime Pay Rate: Officer - OT $95/hour; Sergeant - OT $110/hour) TOTAL: (OFFICER - 8 hours X $95 X 32 X 4 = $97,280; SERGEANT -8 X 110 X 32 X 1 = $28,160; TOTAL = $125,440)

Equipment

DUI Patrol Vehicle
$68,085.88
Base Vehicle: $58,320.00 Preinstalled Options $2690 Document Prep Fee $85 License/Title: $719 Tire/Battery/VTR Fee $8.75 Sales Tax $6263.13 Total Price: $68085.88 West Covina Dodge (Stock# PC694588)

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-039

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BALDWIN

PARK CERTIFYING THE APPLICATION FOR THE STATE OF

CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL CANNABIS TAX FUND GRANT
PROGRAM, ACCEPTING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $282,560.00,

AND AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF OF POLICE TO EXECUTE THE

GRANT PROGRAM AGREEMENT AND RELATED DOCUMENTS

WHEREAS, the California Highway Patrol has been delegated the responsibility by the Legislature of the State of California for the administration of the Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program (the Grant Program), setting up necessary procedures governing the application; and

WHEREAS, the procedures established by the California Highway Patrol require the City to certify by Resolution the approval of the application to the State; and

WHEREAS, successful Grant Program applicants will enter into a n agreement with the California Highway Patrol to complete the Grant Program;

WHEREAS, following the City’s submittal of Grant Program application to the California Highway Patrol, the City was awarded $282,560.00 in Grant funds; and WHEREAS, in order to be considered eligible to receive Grant Program funding, the City must adopt a Resolution accepting the award and execute the required documents in relation thereto.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK,

CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE, FIND AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct.

Section 2. The City of Baldwin Park certifies that it has reviewed, understands, and agrees to the general provisions contained in the Grant Program regulations and hereby ratifies and approves the application for Grant Program funding.

Section 3 . The City of Baldwin Park hereby accepts an award in the amount of $282,560.00 from the California Highway Patrol for the Grant Program and agrees to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations, and guidelines.

Section 4. The City of Baldwin Park hereby certifies that it has, or will have available, prior to commencement of any work on the project included in the Grant Program application, the sufficient funds to complete the project. The City further certifies that it has, or will have, sufficient funds to operate and maintain the project.

Section 5. The Chief of Police is hereby authorized to conduct all negotiations, sign and submit all documents, including, but not limited to applications, agreements, amendments, and payment requests, which may be necessary for the completion of the Grant Program.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of August, 2024.

EMMANUEL J. ESTRADA
MAYOR

ATTEST:

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES SS.

CITY OF BALDWIN PARK

I, CHRISTOPHER SAENZ, City Clerk, of the City of Baldwin Park, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2024-039 was duly and regularly approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Baldwin Park at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 7 th day of August, 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

_________________________________

CHRISTOPHER SAENZ

CITY CLERK

STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. ____8____

Page 1 ends

Baldwin Park City CouncilAugust 7, 2024

Baldwin Park City Council
August 7, 2024