Calistoga City Council
July 19, 2022

- 10 -
OAK #4890-2776-373v1 (Rev. 9/2021)
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date set forth above.

CITY OF CALISTOGA
By: Date:

Laura Snideman, City Manager

CONSULTANT
By: Date:

By: Date:

Attest
By:

Marni Rittburg, City Clerk
Approved As To Form
By:

Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney
Item #7.5.

Exhibit A
OAK #4823-2508-6159 v2

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF WORK
Item #7.5.

Exhibit A
OAK #4823-2508-6159 v2

EXHIBIT B
Compensation
CITY shall pay CONSULTANT for the Services on a cost reimbursement basis, up to the Cost Ceiling (as defined in Section 2.1 of the Agreement). CONSULTANT agrees to use appropriate methods to contain its fees and costs under this Agreement. Compensation shall include only the following costs, which shall all count toward the Cost Ceiling:

1. Direct Labor
Direct labor costs shall be the total number of hours worked on the job by each employee times the agreed hourly rate for such employee's labor as set forth on the attached Exhibit B-1. CITY will pay all personnel at their regular straight-time rate, including any work performed on overtime or on holidays or weekends.

2. Subconsultant Costs
Subconsultant services shall be billed at cost plus a 10 percent markup. CONSULTANT shall provide a copy of each subconsultant's invoice for which it seeks payment from CITY with any invoice in which such payment is requested.

3. Other Direct Costs
The following categories of costs are eligible for reimbursement, which shall be made at the actual cost to CONSULTANT without any additional mark-up:
a. Reasonable living and traveling expenses of employees when away from home office on business in its prosecution of the Services. CONSULTANT must have prior approval of CITY to be reimbursed for these expenses.
b. Automobile expenses for personal vehicle use, if necessary, at the IRS approved mileage rate.
c. Reproduction of drawings and specifications by CONSULTANT as required under this Agreement, at rates prevailing in this community for bulk reproduction or at other reasonable rates approved by CITY.
d. Special overnight delivery or messenger services.

Payments to CONSULTANT for reimbursable costs/expenses will be made only after the specific costs/expenses have been incurred and CONSULTANT has submitted substantiating documentation, such as copies of paid invoices or other documentation confirming that such costs/expenses have been incurred.

Item #7.5.

City of Calistoga

STAFF REPORT
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Mitch Celaya, Chief
Meeting: City Council - Jul 19 2022
Subject: Police Radio Base Station
DESCRIPTION:

Replacement of Radio Base Station to meet DOJ mandate to protect sensitive personally identifiable information.

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to expend Police COPS grant funds to replace the police radio base station for an amount not to exceed $18,419.00.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

In October of 2020, the California Department of Justice (DOJ) notified every police department in the State of a policy update that mandated the transmission of sensitive personally identifiable information (PII) be encrypted by January 1, 2021. The purpose of the mandate is to protect the privacy and identity of any person whose information is broadcast over a police radio frequency. The encryption requirement is to not only prevent potential identity theft, but also to give privacy to victims of crime. The DOJ allowed police agencies who did not have radio encryption capabilities to submit a written letter describing how they would comply with the mandate until radio encryption could be achieved. DOJ gave a hard deadline for radio encryption compliance by December 2023.

Napa County law enforcement agencies including Calistoga Police Department (CPD) do not have radio encryption capabilities. CPD submitted a letter to DOJ describing how CPD would comply with the mandate of not transmitting sensitive personally identifiable information (PII) over the radio. CPD joined Napa County law enforcement agencies in a project to purchase and/or update existing radios to digital radio encryption capabilities to comply with DOJ’s mandate by December 2023.

Napa County Communication’s initial radio assessment determined it would cost up to 3 million dollars to upgrade or replace all radio equipment and infrastructure of all Napa County law enforcement agencies to be radio encryption compliant. Through the assistance of US Congressman Mike Thompson, Napa County law enforcement was awarded 1.2 million dollars. Approximately $360,000 is set aside for CPD and St. Helena PD to replace and/or update our radio equipment to achieve radio encryption capabilities. Initially, the acquired funds were to be a grant in which CPD would be responsible for matching up to 20% of the funds used. The funds are now an allocation earmarks that requires no matching funds.

Item #7.6.

CPD’s radios are not capable of reprogramming and will require replacement of all handheld radios, all car radios, and all dispatch radio heads. All radio accessories such as extra batteries, shoulder mics, radio holsters will need to be replaced. Napa County Communication informed CPD that in addition to replacing all radios, the current radio base station is not capable of supporting the new replacement radios. The allocated funds do not cover the replacement of the radio base station. This requires CPD to replace the base station, which resides on the roof of the fire station, for the new radios and equipment to operate.

Napa County Communication can facilitate the order of the base station, install the base station, and maintain the base station once installed. Napa County Communication provided the base station specifications and quote of $18,419.00 (see attached quote).

Purchasing the base station is critical to moving forward with upgrading CPD’s radio equipment and being in conformance with DOJ’s mandate. Transitioning to the digital encryption radios will improve radio interoperability with other county law enforcement agencies and is anticipated to improve the quality of radio reception and transmission capabilities. The improved communications will result in improved officer safety and better service to the community.

CONSISTENCY WITH CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES:

This project supports and furthers the City Council’s Goal of “Offer excellent professional services to all customers.” This purchase is critical to ensuring CPD’s radios operate at the highest level of efficiency to ensure CPD can provides excellent services to the community.

CEQA STATUS:

Not Applicable
FINANCIAL IMPACT:

The cost of radio base station is $18,419.00. A transfer of $18,419.00 from the police COPS grant fund account #41-4700-4799 to the Equipment Replacement fund account 15-3299 and expense account #15-4970-4821.

ATTACHMENT(S):

Radio Base Station Replacement Resolution 071922
Copy of Napa County Calistoga Tait TB9400 100 Watts 05182022 APPROVAL(S):

Gloria Leon, Administrative Services Director Approved - Jul 12 2022 Laura Snideman, City Manager Approved - Jul 12 2022
Marni Rittburg, City Clerk Approved - Jul 12 2022
Item #7.6.

ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XXXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

CALISTOGA, COUNTY OF NAPA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXPEND POLICE

COPS GRANT FUNDS TO REPLACE THE POLICE RADIO

BASE STATION FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$18,419.00
WHEREAS, the Police Department’s radio base station needs to be replaced to comply with the California Department of Justice mandate to implement radio encryption; and
WHEREAS, implementing radio encryption will protect
sensitive personally identifiable information sensitive from being transmitted over the radio; and
WHEREAS, replacing the radio base station will improve radio interoperability with other Napa County law enforcement agencies; and
WHEREAS, improved radio reception and transmission results in reliable and better communication that improves officer safety and service to the community; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council
of the City of
Calistoga hereby authorizes the City Manager to expend
COPS grant funds to replace the police radio base station for an amount not to exceed $18,419.00 by transferring funds from COPS grant funds account #41-4700-4799 to the
Equipment Replacement fund account 15-3299 and expense
account #15-4970-4821.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of July
2022.

I, MARNI RITTBURG, CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF
CALISTOGA, HEREBY CERTIFY the foregoing resolution
was introduced and passed at a regular meeting of the
Calistoga City Council by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

Item #7.6.

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
____________________________
__________________________
Marni Rittburg, CMC, City Clerk Chris
Canning, Mayor
Item #7.6.

SALES QUOTE 22051801
COMPANY: County of Napa - Calistoga COMPANY:

ATTENTION: Patrick Spanheimer ATTENTION: DEPT:

ADDRESS: 2721 Napa Valley Corporate Drive Bldg. 4 ADDRESS:

CITY: Napa, CA 94558 CITY:

PHONE: (707)299-1301 PHONE: FAX:

[email protected]

NASPO UNIT NASPO EXTENDED

QTY COST COST
1 TB9400 Single 100 Watts Chassis Assembly - TB9435S-100T $1,067.25 $1,067.25 1 TB9400 Reciter 148-174MHz - T01-01103-DAAA $2,154.75 $2,154.75 1 TB94 Linear PA 148-174MHz 100Watts - T01-01121-BBBA $1,702.50 $1,702.50 1 TB8000/9000 Power Management Unit 48 VACDC Aux12V - TBA30A4-4100 $2,088.00 $2,088.00 1 Cable, PMU IEC, 6.5ft - 219-01561-00 $10.50 $10.50
1 P25 Common Air Interface (CAI) - TBAS050 $5,384.25 $5,384.25 1 SFE Key - Simulcast Enable - TBAS062 $3,948.75 $3,948.75 1 IP Networking Satellite - TBAS071 $636.00 $636.00
Tait NASPO Contract #06913
Public Safety Communications Equipment
Service
Napa County to install and program radio
SUBTOTAL $16,992.00
TAX RATE 7.75% $1,316.88
ALL ORDERS ARE SUBJECTED TO 25% RESTOCKING FEE IF CANCELLED OR RETURNED. SHIPPING $ 110.00 SERVICE $0.00
TOTAL DUE $ 18,418.88
CONTACT INFORMATION DATE PO #
11 COMPLETED BY
NOTE: This quote is intended only for the use of the person/s to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination , distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.

QUOTE IS VALID FOR 30 DAYS
1770 Neptune Dr. San Leandro, CA 94577

VISION COMMUNICATIONS CO
5/18/2022

SIGNATURE
PHONE (510) 346-0300 FAX (510) 346-8474
THANK YOU FOR CHOOSING VISION COMMUNICATIONS, CO.

Cathy Conley OFFICE: (510) 864-7900 MOBILE: (510)703-3411 [email protected]
SHIP TO:

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:

EQUIPMENT

DESCRIPTION
THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESS! THANK YOU FOR YOUR BUSINESS! Item #7.6.

City of Calistoga

STAFF REPORT
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Derek Rayner, Public Works Director/City Engineer Meeting: City Council - Jul 19 2022
Subject: Consideration of a resolution authorizing the levying and collection of assessments for the Palisades Landscape Maintenance District for Fiscal Year 2022-23
DESCRIPTION:

Consideration of a resolution authorizing the levying and collection of assessments for the Palisades Landscape Maintenance District for Fiscal Year 2022-23.

RECOMMENDATION:

Conduct a public hearing and consider adoption of a resolution approving the assessment amount and authorizing the levying and collection of assessments for Fiscal Year 2022-23.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

As a condition of the development of the Palisades Subdivision, a landscaping assessment district was established to fund the maintenance of the area adjacent to State Route 29 on the north side of the development, and along Money Lane between the property fence and sidewalk.

The Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (Streets and Highways Code 22500-22647) requires that the city undertake certain proceedings for any fiscal year during which assessments are to be levied and collected. These proceedings are usually accomplished at three separate Council meetings.

On May 3, 2022, the Council adopted a resolution directing the City Engineer to prepare and file a report for the Palisades Landscape Maintenance Assessment District for Fiscal Year 2022-23. On June 7, 2022, the Council adopted a resolution approving the Engineer’s Report, declaring the City Council’s intent to levy and collect assessments and setting July 19, 2022, as the date for the public hearing.

Tonight’s action is the third and final Council action on these annual proceedings. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Council can authorize the levying and collection of the annual assessments for the Palisades Landscape Maintenance District in the amount of $35/parcel. This is the same amount as was assessed in Fiscal Year 2021-22.

CONSISTENCY WITH CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES:

The recommended action supports the FY 2021-22 City Council Goal No. 3, Objective 2, by providing a funding mechanism to “…maintain the high level of service and reliability of the City’s infrastructure systems and facilities.” The LMD provides a funding mechanism for maintenance of the landscaping that benefits the properties in the LMD. Without this funding mechanism, the city would have to Item #8.1.

consider termination of landscape maintenance or use other discretionary funding to cover the maintenance costs.

CEQA STATUS:

That the recommend action is not a project under the definitions contained in the Guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and is therefore exempt from CEQA.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

The Assessment District was originally established with intent of having no fiscal impact on the City of Calistoga for the purposes of maintaining the landscaping and administration. However, estimated costs for FY 2022-23 are expected to exceed the total assessment in the amount of $5,226. This amount has been included in the overall Park Maintenance budget under Account #01-4123-4402.

Any proposed increase in the amount of the assessment would require balloting of the property owners under the provisions of Proposition 218.

ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Draft Resolution

2. Engineer's Report
APPROVAL(S):

Derek Rayner, Public Works Director/City Engineer Approved - Jul 07 2022 Gloria Leon, Administrative Services Director Approved - Jul 07 2022 Laura Snideman, City Manager Approved - Jul 08 2022
Marni Rittburg, City Clerk Approved - Jul 12 2022
Item #8.1.

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALISTOGA, COUNTY OF

NAPA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE LEVYING AND COLLECTION

OF ASSESSMENTS FOR THE PALISADES LANDSCAPE AND MAINTENANCE DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023
WHEREAS, the City of Calistoga established a Landscape and Maintenance District for the Palisades Subdivision; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (Streets and Highways Code 22500-22647), the City is required to undertake certain proceedings for any fiscal year during which an assessment is to be levied; and WHEREAS, on May 3, 2022, the City Council directed the City Engineer to prepare a report in accordance with the requirements of the California Streets and Highways Code in Article 4 of Chapter 1 commencing with Section 22565; and WHEREAS, on June 7, 2022, the City Engineer’s report was accepted by the City Council and on July 19, 2022, a public hearing was held to receive testimony from the citizens of the City of Calistoga; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code, Article 4 of Chapter 1, commencing with Section 22620, the City Council may set the amount of assessment to be the same as the preceding year; and
WHEREAS, there will be no new improvements or substantial changes in the existing improvements other than maintaining the existing landscape and irrigation system.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALISTOGA DOES HEREBY find the following:

1. Confirms the diagram and the assessment contained in the Engineer’s Report.

2. Levies an assessment of $35.00 per parcel.

3. Authorizes collection of such assessment for the Palisades Landscape Maintenance Assessment District for the Fiscal Year 2022-23.

ATTACHMENT 1 Item #8.1.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of July, 2022. I, MARNI RITTBURG, CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF CALISTOGA, HEREBY CERTIFY the foregoing resolution was introduced and passed at a regular meeting of the Calistoga City Council by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
__________________________ __________________________
Marni Rittburg, CMC, City Clerk Chris Canning, Mayor
Resolution No. 2022-XXX

Item #8.1.

ATTACHMENT 2
ENG|NEER'S REPORT

PALISADES LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT

CITY OF CALISTOGA
FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023
PREPARED BY:
rek R yner, .E.

City Engineer
RCE 60941
Exp. 12/31/22
Dated: June 7, 2022
Item #8.1.

ENG|NEER'S REPORT

PALISADES LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT

CITY OF CALISTOGA
I HEREBY CERTIFY the City Council on May 3, 2022, authorized the City Engineer to prepare and file a report as required by the Streets and Highways Code, together with Assessment and Assessment Diagram thereto attached.

Marni Rittburg, CMC, City Clerk
City of Caiistoga
Napa County, California
K?lwg
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Engineer's Report, together with Assessment and Assessment Diagram thereto attached, was filed with me on the May 25, 2022.

Marni Rittburg, CMC, City Clerk
City of Caiistoga
Napa County, California
\
The undersigned respectfully submits the enclosed report as directed by the City Council.

DATED: June 7, 2022 Derek Rayner, P.E.

City Engineer/Engineer of Work
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Engineer's Report, together with Assessment and Assessment Diagram thereto attached, was filed with the County Auditor of the County of Napa on July , 2022.

Marni Rittburg, CMC, City Clerk
City of Caiistoga
Napa County, California
BY
Item #8.1.

ENG|NEER'S REPORT

PALISADES LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT

CITY OF CALISTOGA, COUNTY OF NAPA, CALIFORNIA
(Pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972)
Derek Rayner, City Engineer and Engineer of Work for Palisades Landscaping Maintenance District, City of Caiistoga, County of Napa, California, makes this report, as directed by the City Council, pursuant to Section 22585 of the Streets and Highways Code (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972).

The improvements which are the subject of this report are briefly described as follows:

The maintenance of all the public landscaping improvements as part of "Palisades Subdivision" consisting of plant materials, trees, ground cover, irrigation systems, and planting strips, located in the public areas shown as Parcel State Highway 29 (Lincoln Ave.), and only the area between the back of sidewalk and the right—of— way line for Money Lane, as shown on the Assessment Diagram for Palisades Landscape Maintenance District.

This report consists of six parts, as follows:

EXHIBIT A — Plans and specifications for the improvements are filed with the City Clerk. Although separately bound, the plans and specifications are a part of this report and are included in it by reference.

EXHIBIT B — An estimate of the cost of maintenance for the improvement.

EXHIBIT C — An assessment of the estimated cost of maintenance for the improvement on each benefited parcel of land within the assessment district.

EXHIBIT D — A statement of the method by which the undersigned has determined the amount proposed to be assessed against each parcel.

EXHIBITE — A list of the names and addresses of the owners of real property within this assessment district, as shown on the last equalized assessment rollfor taxes, or as known to the Clerk. The list is keyed to "EXHIBIT C" by assessment number.

EXHIBIT F — A diagram showing all of the parcels of real property within this assessment district. The diagram is keyed to "EXHIBITC" by assessment number.

Item #8.1.

PALISADES LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT

CITY OF CALISTOGA
EXHIBIT"A"
Plans and Specifications, though bound separately, are filed by reference as a part of this report.

Item #8.1.

PALISADES LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT

CITY OF CALISTOGA
EXHIBIT"B"
Estimate of Costs (Palisades Subdivision)
Estimated contract cost of $484.75 per month for 12 months $5,817 Incidental and Report Costs
County collection fee $ 50
City Administration (12.5%) 727
Engineer—of—work(Preparation of Report) 172
Total Estimated Incidental and Report Costs $ 949
TOTAL ESTIMATED COSTS FOR MAINTENANCE AND REPORT $6,766 Adjustments
Amount to be Supplemented by City $ (5,226)

AMOUNT NEEDED TO BE ASSESSED FOR MAINTENANCE
OF "PALISADES IMPROVEMENTS $1,540
Number of Parcels to be assessed = 44
Estimated total costs per parcel to be assessed = $35/per lot TOTAL ASSESSMENT $1,540
Item #8.1.

Assessment
Number
01 02
O3
O4
O5
06 07
08 09
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 29
30 31
32 33
34 35
36 CITY OF CALISTOGA
EXHIBIT"C"

ASSESSMENT ROLL
Amount of
assessment
$35.00/each
(for 44 lots)

PALISADES LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT
Assessor's Parcel
Number
01 1-525-003
011-525-002
011-534-004
011-534-003
011-534-002
011-534-001
011-531-009
011-531-010
011-531-011
011-531-013
011-531-017
011-531-016
011-531-015
011-531-014
011-531-012
011-531-008
011-531-007
011-531-006
011-531-005
011-531-004
011-531-003
011-531-002
011-531-001
011-532-001
011-532-002
011-532-005
011-532-006
011-532-007
011-532-004
011-532-003
011-533-001
011-533-002
011-533-003
011-533-004
011-533-005
011-533-006
Item #8.1.

37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
TOTAL $1,540
01 1-533-O07
O11-533-O08
01 1-533-O09
O11-533-O10
O11-533-O11
O11~526-O03
O11-526-002
011-526-001
Item #8.1.

PALISADES LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT

CITY OF CALISTOGA
EXHIBIT "D"
Basis of Allocation of Assessments
The total maintenance costs per year were estimated and incidental administrative expenses added to yield a total annual cost. Adjustments were then made to give credit, if any, for the surplus from the previous year and to provide a cash reserve for payments to be made between July 1 and December 31, 2022. The resulting net "Costs to be assessed" were then prorated equally to the 44 lots, so that each lot willshare equally in the annual landscape maintenance expenses.

Item #8.1.

PALISADES LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT

CITY OF CALISTOGA
EXHIBIT“E”

PROPERTY OWNERS LIST
Assessment Property Owners AP Number
Number Name & Address
01 Edwardo &Carmen Gonzales 011-525-003
2001 High Rocks Drive
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2001 High Rocks Drive
02 John & Margaret Barkley 011-525-002
2003 High Rocks Drive
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2003 High Rocks Drive
03 Asmus—Hampton Family Trust 011-534-004
2005 High Rocks Drive
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2005 High Rocks Drive
04 Leonard & Sonia Murphy 011-534-003
2007 High Rocks Drive
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2007 High Rocks Drive
05 Manuel & Josephina Vera 011-534-002
2009 High Rocks Drive
A Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2009 High Rocks Drive
06 Maria Marron Trust 011-534-001
2011 High Rocks Drive
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2011 High Rocks Drive
07 Alain & Laurence Poisson 011-531-009
936 Allison Avenue
St. Helena, CA 94574
Site Address: 2010 High Rocks Drive
Item #8.1.

Assessment
Number
08 09
10 11
12 13
14 15
Property Owners AP Number
Name & Address
Chole & Reagan Ballo 011-531-010
2008 High Rocks Drive
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2008 High Rocks Drive
Nicolas & Maria Cervantes 011-531-011
2006 High Rocks Drive
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2006 High Rocks Drive
Daniel & Jennifer Herndon 011-531-013
2004 High Rocks Drive
Calisotga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2004 High Rocks Drive
Rodolfo Gonzales 011-531-017
2015 Table Rock Court
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2015 Table Rocks Court
Albert & Jennifer Filipelli 011-531-016
2017 Table Rock Court
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2017 Table Rock Court
Dempsey Family Trust 011-531-015
2705 Spring Street
St. Helena, CA 94574
Site Address: 2019 Table Rock Court
Scott & Vicki Atkinson 011-531-014
2103 Oat HillCourt
Calistoga, Ca 94515
Site Address: 2103 Oat Hill Court
Stephen Ruminer 011-531-012
2107 Oat HillCourt
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2107 Oat Hill Court
Item #8.1.

Assessment
Number
16 17
18 19
20 22
23 Property Owners
Name & Address
Christopher White
2109 Oat HillCourt
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2109 Oat Hill Court
Kevin Conlon & Bin Yang Trust
2111 Oat HillCourt
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2111 Oat Hill Court
Manual Avila & Lourdes Gonzalez
2113 Oat HillCourt
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2113 Oat Hill Court
Jim Kensinger, Jr.
4061 Princeton Drive
Santa Rosa, CA 95405
Site Address: 2115 Oat Hill Court
Elizabeth Tangney & Jeremiah Moore
2117 Oat HillCourt
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2117 Oat Hill Court
Maria Cortez
2119 Oat HillCourt
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2119 Oat Hill Court
Autumn & Jeremy Grove Trust
2121 Oat HillCourt
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2121 Oat Hill Court
Isidro & Irma Guzman
2123 Oat HillCourt
Calisotga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2123 Oat Hill Court
AP Number
O11-531-O08
011-531-007
01 1-531 -006
011-531-O05
O11-531-O04
O11-531-O03
011-531-002
011-531-001
Item #8.1.

Assessment
Number
24 25
26 27
28 29
30 Property Owners
Name & Address
Matthew &Adrian Moye Trust
1026 Hardman Avenue
Napa, CA 94558
Site Address: 2110 Oat Hill Court
McAu|iffe Family Trust
78 Otsego Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94112
Site Address: 2108 Oat Hill Court
John & Biserka Potrebic
2106 Oat HillCourt
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2106 Oat Hill Court
Jason & Diana Toji Trust
2104 Oat HillCourt
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2104 Oat Hill Court
Kevin Eisenberg & Mary Hastings
2101 Table Rock Court
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2101 Table Rock Court
Matthew & Michelle Freese
2103 Table Rock Court
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2103 Table Rock Court
Barbara Ronche||i—Olguin
2105 Table Rock Court
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2105 Table Rock Court
Laurel & Ryan Gourd
2108 Table Rock Court
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2108 Table Rock Court
AP Number
01 1-532-001
O11-532-002
O11-532-O05
01 1-532-O06
O11-532-O07
O11-532-O04
011-532-003
011-533-001
Item #8.1.

Assessment
Number
32 33
34 35
36 37
38 39
Property Owners AP Number
Name & Address
Tracey Schmidt 011-533-002
2106 Table Rock Court
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2106 Table Rock Court
Ismael & Guadalupe Apolinar 011-533-003
2104 Table Rock Court
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2104 Table Rock Court
Homero Vasquez 011-533-004
2102 Table Rock Court
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2102 Table Rock Court
Salvador & Mercedes Nunez 011-533-005
2020 Table Rock Court
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2020 Table Rock Court
Jose & Maria Cervantes 011-533-006
2018 Table Rock Court
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2018 Table Rock Court
Summer Wilms 011-533-007
1660 Aetna Springs Lane
Pope Valley, CA 94567
Site Address: 2016 Table Rock Court
William & Kathleen Brady 011-533-008
4975 S. Juniper Loop Road
Prescott, AZ 86303
Site Address: 2014 Table Rock Court
David Alt 2015 Trust 011-533-009
19566 Pleasantview Drive
Groveland, CA 95321
Site Address: 1901 Cinnabar Court
Item #8.1.

Assessment
Number
40 41
42 43
44 Property Owners
Name & Address
Alfred & Catherine Belluomini Trust
1381 Camino Peral
Moraga, CA 94556
Site Address: 1903 Cinnabar Court
Kelly Giannini
1905 Cinnabar Court
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 1905 Cinnabar Court
Diana Reiss
1904 Cinnabar Court
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 1904 Cinnabar Court
Ulrike Hermann Trust
PO Box 2971
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
Site Address: 1902 Cinnabar Court
Mark Fitzgerald & Jamie McMui|en
1900 Cinnabar Court
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 1900 Cinnabar Court
AP Number
O11-533-010
O11-533-O11
011-526-003
01 1-526-O02
O11-526-O01
Item #8.1.

EXHIBIT"F"
017-230-010-000
/
/
//
No i .531 000‘ / \m /
01 314302- / //
o -531goo3- /
/ 017-230-009-000
Laura Michael
0 -5:moo4- - / WW
I 5314005- \
_ [email protected]
0 \o1.-532aoo3- ~n
t
\o0o/g 1-532.301‘H
gin
0 -53‘-W1 01.45323005 in as
I-H_53-Lfms.‘if a
011 1 Q:,,,;_' Q9
1', Q 11-5§1eo1 .»531so14- ‘-‘r.~,.___ ‘£561?zmz W
0115339003- - .
011 -1 IH 940 _5:m01
11- 34-o__9é4 ‘*4-or 0,5 o
i-“‘"'__J's"-’o 1~.533__;o\o6-
r S
\ A
* o 1..533-ooh)oo , 4:9
is‘
534!bo4-
_3ssp
(?1-.33so1u-I no
011.5301 .o in
0311-5359003
q_1(535eoo1- ""5352"m
a ..|.I um
Legend
Addresses
All Roads
—— Major Road "I
——— Local Road
C] Parcels 5,
r- ~, County
'- — —’ Boundary
I ?rm‘ W 5223910Iii
V Palisades Subdivision 0
mi 0 0.0125 0.025 0.05
‘«'< "',+ 7'9. "*s:57v»a;).'15 .)'J.‘,‘d A J’) '15'>"H—i.‘m1+ H-1! ") "79 Prints:-ri On’ 5/95/7n79 ) —'*<*>‘ J "V ‘J 5‘ Item #8.1.

City of Calistoga

STAFF REPORT
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Derek Rayner, Public Works Director/City Engineer Meeting: City Council - Jul 19 2022
Subject: Consideration of a Resolution authorizing the levying and collection of assessments for the Silverado Place Landscape Maintenance District for Fiscal Year 2022-23
DESCRIPTION:

Consideration of a Resolution authorizing the levying and collection of assessments for the Silverado Place Landscape Maintenance District for Fiscal Year 2022-23.

RECOMMENDATION:

Conduct a public hearing and consider adoption of a resolution approving the assessment amount and authorizing the levying and collection of assessments for Fiscal Year 2022-23.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

As a condition of the development of the Silverado Place Subdivision, a landscaping assessment district was established to fund the maintenance of the area adjacent to State Route 29 on the north side of the development.

The Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (Streets and Highways Code 22500-22647) requires that the city undertake certain proceedings for any fiscal year during which assessments are to be levied and collected. These proceedings are usually accomplished at three separate Council meetings.

On May 3, 2022, the Council adopted a resolution directing the City Engineer to prepare and file a report for the Silverado Place Landscape Maintenance Assessment District for Fiscal Year 2022-23.

On June 7, 2022, the Council adopted a resolution approving the Engineer’s Report, declaring the City Council’s intent to levy and collect assessments and setting July 19, 2022, as the date for the public hearing.

Tonight’s action is the third and final Council action on these annual proceedings. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Council can authorize the levying and collection of the annual assessments for the Silverado Place Landscape Maintenance District in the amount of $66.67/parcel. This is the same amount as was assessed in Fiscal Year 2021-22.

CONSISTENCY WITH CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES:

The recommended action supports the FY 2021-22 City Council Goal No. 3, Objective 2, by providing a funding mechanism to “…maintain the high level of service and reliability of the City’s infrastructure systems and facilities.” The LMD provides a funding mechanism for maintenance of the landscaping that benefits the properties in the LMD. Without this funding mechanism, the city would have to Item #8.2.

consider termination of landscape maintenance or use other discretionary funding to cover the maintenance costs.

CEQA STATUS:

That the recommend action is not a project under the definitions contained in the Guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and is therefore exempt from CEQA.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

The Assessment District was originally established with intent of having no fiscal impact on the City of Calistoga for the purposes of maintaining the landscaping and administration. However, estimated costs for FY 2022-23 are expected to exceed the total assessment in the amount of $68. This amount has been included in the overall Park Maintenance budget under Account #01-4123-4402. Any proposed increase in the amount of the assessment would require balloting of the property owners under the provisions of Proposition 218.

ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Draft Resolution

2. Engineer's Report
APPROVAL(S):

Derek Rayner, Public Works Director/City Engineer Approved - Jul 07 2022 Gloria Leon, Administrative Services Director Approved - Jul 07 2022 Laura Snideman, City Manager Approved - Jul 08 2022
Marni Rittburg, City Clerk Approved - Jul 12 2022
Item #8.2.

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALISTOGA, COUNTY OF

NAPA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE LEVYING AND COLLECTION

OF ASSESSMENTS FOR THE SILVERADO PLACE LANDSCAPE AND
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023
WHEREAS, the City of Calistoga established a Landscape and Maintenance District for the Silverado Place Subdivision; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (Streets and Highways Code 22500-22647), the City is required to undertake certain proceedings for any fiscal year during which an assessment is to be levied; and WHEREAS, on May 3, 2022, the City Council directed the City Engineer to prepare a report in accordance with the requirements of the California Streets and Highways Code in Article 4 of Chapter 1 commencing with Section 22565; and WHEREAS, on June 7, 2022, the City Engineer’s report was accepted by the City Council and on July 19, 2022, a public hearing was held to receive testimony from the citizens of the City of Calistoga; and
WHEREAS, Pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code, Article 4 of Chapter 1, commencing with Section 22620, the City Council may set the amount of assessment to be the same as the preceding year; and
WHEREAS, there will be no new improvements or substantial changes in the existing improvements other than that required to maintain the existing landscape and irrigation system.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALISTOGA DOES HEREBY find the following:

1. Confirms the diagram and the assessment contained in the Engineer’s Report.

2. Levies an assessment of $66.67 per parcel.

3. Authorizes collection of such assessment for the Silverado Place Subdivision Landscape Maintenance Assessment District for the Fiscal Year 2022-23.

ATTACHMENT 1Item #8.2.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of July, 2022. I, MARNI RITTBURG, CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF CALISTOGA, HEREBY CERTIFY the foregoing resolution was introduced and passed at a regular meeting of the Calistoga City Council by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
__________________________ __________________________
Marni Rittburg, CMC, City Clerk Chris Canning, Mayor
Resolution No. 2022-XXX

Item #8.2.

ATTACHMENT 2
ENG|NEER'S REPORT

SILVERADO PLACE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT

CITY OF CALISTOGA
FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023
PREPARED BY:

Derek Rayner, P.E.

City Engineer
RCE 60941
Exp. 12/31/22
Dated: June 7, 2022
Item #8.2.

ENGINEER'S REPORT

SILVERADO PLACE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT

CITY OF CALISTOGA
I HEREBY CERTIFY the City Council on May 3, 2022, authorized the City Engineer to prepare and file a report as required by the Streets and Highways Code, together with Assessment and Assessment Diagram thereto attached.

Marni Rittburg, CMC, City Clerk
City of Calistoga
Napa County, California
BY:\/Wkkltix? I I
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Engineer's Report, together with Assessment and Assessment Diagram thereto attached, was filed with me on the May 25, 2022.

Marni Rittburg, CMC, City Clerk
City of Calistoga
Napa County, California
BY
The undersigned respectfully submits the enclosed report as directed by the City Council.

DATED: June 7, 2022 Derek Rayner, P.E.

City Engineer/Engineer of Work
BY
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Engineer's Report, together with Assessment and Assessment Diagram thereto attached, was filed with the County Auditor of the County of Napa on July , 2022.

Marni Rittburg, CMC, City Clerk
City of Calistoga
Napa County, California
BY
Item #8.2.

ENG|NEER'S REPORT

SILVERADO PLACE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT

CITY OF CALISTOGA, COUNTY OF NAPA, CALIFORNIA
(Pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972)
Derek Rayner, City Engineer and Engineer of Work for SILVERADO PLACE Landscaping Maintenance District, City of Calistoga, County of Napa, California, makes this report, as directed by the City Council, pursuant to Section 22585 of the Streets and Highways Code (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972).

The improvements, which are the subject of this report are briefly described as follows:

The maintenance of all the public landscaping improvements as part of "S|LVERADO PLACE Subdivision" consisting of plant materials, trees, ground cover, irrigation systems, and planting strips, located in the public areas shown as Parcel as shown on the Assessment Diagram for SILVERADO PLACE Landscape Maintenance District.

This report consists of six parts, as follows:

EXHIBIT A - Plans and specifications for the improvements are filed with the City Clerk. Although separately bound, the plans and specifications are a part of this report and are included in it by reference.

EXHIBIT B — An estimate of the cost of maintenance for the improvement.

EXHIBIT C — An assessment of the estimated cost of maintenance for the improvement on each benefited parcel of land within the assessment district.

EXHIBIT D — A statement of the method by which the undersigned has determined the amount proposed to be assessed against each parcel.

EXHIBIT E — A list ofthe names and addresses of the owners of real property within this assessment district, as shown on the last equalized assessment rollfortaxes, or as known to the Clerk. The list is keyed to "EXHIBIT C" by assessment number.

EXHIBIT F — A diagram showing all of the parcels of real property within this assessment district. The diagram is keyed to "EXHIBITC" by assessment number.

Item #8.2.

SILVERADO PLACE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT

CITY OF CALISTOGA
EXHIBIT"A"
Plans and Specifications, though bound separately, are referenced as a part ofthis report.

Item #8.2.

SILVERADO PLACE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT

CITY OF CALISTOGA
EXHIBIT "B"
Estimate of Costs (SILVERADO PLACE Subdivision)
Estimated maintenance cost of $62.70 per month for 12 months $752 Incidental and Report Costs
County collection fee $ 50
City Administration (12.5%) 94
Engineer—of—work(Preparation of Report) 172
Total Estimated Incidental and Report Costs $ 316
TOTAL ESTIMATED COSTS FOR MAINTENANCE AND REPORT $1,068 Adjustments
Amount to be Supplemented by City $ (68)

AMOUNT NEEDED TO BE ASSESSED FOR MAINTENANCE
OF "S|LVERADO PLACE IMPROVEMENTS $1,000
Number of Parcels to be assessed = 15
Estimated total costs per parcel
to be assessed $66.67 /per lot
TOTAL ASSESSMENT $ 1,000
Item #8.2.

SILVERADO PLACE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT

CITY OF CALISTOGA
EXHIBIT "C"

ASSESSMENT ROLL
Assessment Amount of Assessor's Parcel
Number Assessment Number
01 $66.67/each 011-533-014
02 (for 15 lots) 011-533-015
03 011-533-016
04 011-533-017
05 011-533-018
06 011-533-019
07 011-533-020
08 011-533-021
09 011-535-001
10 011-535-002
11 011-535-003
12 011-535-004
13 011-535-005
14 011-535-008
15 011-535-009
TOTAL $1,000
Item #8.2.

SILVERADO PLACE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT

CITY OF CALISTOGA
EXHIBIT"D"
Basis of Allocation of Assessments
The total maintenance costs per year were estimated and incidental administrative expenses added to yield a total annual cost. Adjustments were then made to give credit, if any, for the surplus from the previous year and to provide a cash reserve for payments to be made between July 1 and December 31, 2022. The resulting net "Costs to be assessed" were then prorated equally to the 15 lots, so that each lot willshare equally in the annual landscape maintenance expenses.

Item #8.2.

SILVERADO PLACE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT
Assessment
Number
1 CITY OF CALISTOGA
EXHIBIT“E”

PROPERTY OWNERS LIST
Property Owners
Name & Address
Donald Wilson
715 Linda Falls Terrace
Angwin, CA 94508
Site Address: 2011 Urbani Place
Brian Harlan
2013 Urbani Place
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2013 Urbani Place
Wi|ms—Shardin Laura Suc Tr Etal
c/0 Eric Wilms
2309 James Creek Rd.

Pope Valley, CA 94567
Site Address: 2015 Urbani Place
Johnsen Family Trust
2007 Andalucia Lane
Brentwood, CA 94513
Site Address: 2017 Urbani Place
Bruce Kendall
1713 Lake Street
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2019 Urbani Place
Cara Landry Trust
P. O. Box 31
Rutherford, CA 94573
Site Address: 2021 Urbani Place
Arturo Maldonado
2023 Urbani Place
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2023 Urbani Place
AP Number
O11-533-O14
O11-533-O15
011-533-O16
011-533-017
O11-533-O18
011-533-019
O11-533-O20
Item #8.2.

Assessment
Number
8 10
11 12
13 14
15 Property Owners
Name & Address
Martha Calvin—Perez, Et Al.
675 Montclair Dr.

Santa Rosa, CA 95409
Site Address: 2025 Urbani Place
Smith Family Trust
1241 Spring Brook Ct.

St. Helena, CA 94574
Site Address: 2012 Urbani Place
Bradley Stover
4323 Thetford Rd.

Durham, NC 27707
Site Address: 2014 Urbani Place
Gordon Brownell
2016 Urbani Place
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2016 Urbani Place
Ciji Rich
2018 Urbani Place
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2018 Urbani Place
Randall Mendes
2022 Urbani Place
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 2022 Urbani Place
Daniel G. Avina
1722 Falleri Drive
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 1722 Falleri Drive
Francisco Carrillo—Caloca
1720 Falleri Drive
Calistoga, CA 94515
Site Address: 1720 Falleri Drive
AP Number
O11-533-O21
011-535-001
01 1-535-O02
011-535-003
011-535-004
011-535-O05
O11-535-O08
O11-535-O09
Item #8.2.

011-533-001 -000
2108701119' o kCt
Q
EXHIBIT"F"
2174Lake County
Q sanza Rc-~33
~ 0 011-535-006-000
.0115333114-000
Legend
Addresses
All Roads
i
—— Major Road
~— Local Road
1 C] Pa'°e'S 011-535-010-000
r--, County
;
'~-—’ Boundary
Silverado Place Subdivision 0
'7 0:995,,°:°1 . .3-0?0. ,
'1; printpd On. )1 JJ'‘‘.‘,\‘ 1”,‘ “4"',‘ ‘d ‘ix’. 5 :Vi)‘S:lV!"4<.\l '3 i \
Item #8.2.

City of Calistoga

STAFF REPORT
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Derek Rayner, Public Works Director/City Engineer Meeting: City Council - Jul 19 2022
Subject: Award a Consultant Services Agreement with Raftelis to conduct a Water & Wastewater Rate Study
DESCRIPTION:

Consider adopting a Resolution that authorizes the City Manager to execute a Consultant Services Agreement with Raftelis to provide professional services associated with a Water and Wastewater Rate Study in an amount not to exceed $155,000.

RECOMMENDATION:

Consider adopting resolution.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

The City of Calistoga provides water and sewer service to approximately 1,600 residents and businesses within and outside City limits. The city’s water system consists of over 40 miles of water mains, Kimball dam/reservoir and Water Treatment Plant, 2 water storage tanks (2.5 million gallons), and three water booster pump stations. The city’s sewer system consists of over 18 miles of sewer collection mains, 3,000 feet of force main, four lift stations and a wastewater treatment plant. In addition, the city operates and maintains a recycle water system that consists of six miles of distribution piping throughout the city, two booster pump stations, and storage of over 46 million gallons.

Purpose and Importance of the Study
The purpose of a water and wastewater rate study is to determine the level of funding required over the next five years to ensure that each utility is meeting financial obligations for ongoing operations and maintenance, debt service, and capital improvements while maintaining prudent reserves. The rate study will follow California’s Proposition 218 requirements that rates be proportionate to the cost of service provided.

Regular rate studies are critical to a utility’s healthy operation. Utility systems must keep up with rising costs and be able to implement critical capital projects that are mandated or necessary for the health and safety of their customers. Cost escalations related to operation and maintenance costs increases, increased water costs from the state/City of Napa, capital costs, inflation, and material cost increases affect the performance of the utility.

Calistoga has a significant amount of critical capital projects over the next few fiscal years that are cease-and-desist order or state mandated projects, which must be completed to maintain compliance with permits. Even though many are covered by grants they still require city contributions that need to be incorporated into the rate study.

Item #9.1.

Previous Study’s
The City of Calistoga’s most recent rate study was completed in 2018 (Ordinances 734 and 735) which became effective April 5, 2018 and continued through the end of this year, December 31, 2022.

Prior to this, rates were updated January 1, 2014 and effective through December 31, 2017.

It’s important to note that Calistoga customers generally pay higher rates than other agencies due to the economies of scale. Calistoga owns and operates a significant amount of infrastructure for their utility and these costs are spread over a very small customer base. The city is required to meet all the same high level of state standards as all the other larger agencies and deliver/treat water to a relatively small population in a remote location.

DISCUSSION:

On February 24, 2022, the city released a Request for Proposals (RFP) for professional services to complete an updated Water and Wastewater Rate study. The RFP closed on April 4, 2022. The city received proposals from four firms: Bartle Wells Associates, RDN, Raftelis and Lechowicz+ Tseng.

Based on direction from the June 7, 2022 City Council meeting BWA was eliminated as a contender, and staff was directed to further evaluate the remaining three firms. Staff and legal counsel interviewed the remaining three firms and followed up on references. As part of the interview process we focused on the consultants public outreach approach and technical aspects of the rate study. Staff also checked the proposers’ references to confirm the nature and quality of their work for other agencies.

Based on the interviews and references, City staff and legal counsel have now concluded that Raftelis is the most qualified firm to successfully complete the work. They are a large firm with substantial experience developing rate studies for agencies across the state including our neighbors in Saint Helena who comes highly recommended. They also had the best answers to questions regarding the technical and public outreach approach for the rate studies.

Scope of Work
Raftelis scope of work for the rate study will include the following:
• Data collection
• Develop Water, Wastewater and recycled water financial plans • Capacity Fee Study
• Meetings (staff, public and council)
• Proposition 218 process and public hearing
Raftelis’ scope will include a comprehensive review of the City’s water, wastewater and reclaimed water operations and the development of recommendations for the water, wastewater, and recycled rates to fund each utility’s cost of service. Raftelis will use a collaborative project approach and work closely with City staff, the City Council and/or subcommittees, legal counsel, and other stakeholders; identify objectives; set milestones; have frequent communication; and remain flexible to resolve unanticipated issues. Additionally, the rate study will include analysis for potential recycle water rates, new development impact fees, and a drought surcharge that are consistent with many other utility agencies. Upon completion of work, Raftelis will present its findings in the form of a proposed FiveYear Utility Rate Plan to be included as part of the adopted budget and work plan for adoption.

Schedule
The proposal schedule shows about six months to complete/adopt the new rates but we anticipate with a contingency that the rate study will conclude by April 2023, and have included additional time in the contract.

Item #9.1.

CONSISTENCY WITH CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES:

The recommended action conforms to Council Goal 3: Establish, Improve and Maintain City Infrastructure; Objective 2: Maintain the high level of service and reliability of the City’s infrastructure systems and facilities.

CEQA STATUS:

That the recommend action is not a project under the definitions contained in the Guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and is therefore exempt from CEQA.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

The total not to exceed amount for the project is $155,000and includes a 5% contingency above the cost proposal by Raftelis to conduct the rate study at $147,200. A total of $80,000 has been budgeted in FY22/23 and budget adjustment of $75,000 is being requested be approved and split equally ($38,750/ea) between Water and Wastewater funds Accounts 02-4132-4402, 02-4131-4402, 03- 4142-4402, and 03-4141-4402, covering treatment, distribution and collection.

ATTACHMENT(S):

Rate Study Reso Attach 1
Attachment 2 Proposal - Raftelis
Rate Study Attach 3
APPROVAL(S):

Derek Rayner, Public Works Director/City Engineer Approved - Jul 07 2022 Gloria Leon, Administrative Services Director Approved - Jul 07 2022 Laura Snideman, City Manager Approved - Jul 12 2022
Marni Rittburg, City Clerk Approved - Jul 12 2022
Item #9.1.

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALISTOGA,

COUNTY OF NAPA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY

MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT

WITH RAFTELIS TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ASSOCIATED

WITH A WATER AND WASTEWATER RATE STUDY IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $155,000
WHEREAS, the City of Calistoga provides water and sewer service to approximately 1,600 residents and businesses within and outside City limits. The City water and sewer rates are established by City Council; and WHEREAS, the Public Works Department has sought proposals for said study; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of a water and wastewater rate study is to determine the level of funding required over the next five years to ensure that each utility is meeting financial obligations for ongoing operations and maintenance, debt service and capital improvements while maintaining prudent reserves; and
WHEREAS, updating the water and wastewater rates to keep up with the rising costs of providing safe and high-quality drinking water and wastewater services is a key component of maintaining the financial viability of the utilities, including maintaining healthy fund balances/reserves for emergencies and applicable bond covenants, debt coverage ratios for bond covenants and strong credit ratings; and WHEREAS, updates to the rate study are also necessary to fund investments in infrastructure maintenance and improvements which are mandated or otherwise necessary for safe and efficient operation of the utilities; and WHEREAS, the City of Calistoga last updated utility rates for water and wastewater in 2018 (Ordinances 734 and 735) which became effective April 5, 2018 and continues through December 31, 2022. Prior to this, rates were updated January 1, 2014 and effective through December 31, 2017; and
WHEREAS, the City staff requested proposals for professional services to complete an updated Water and Wastewater Rate study and received four proposals from Bartle Wells Associates, RDN, Raftelis and Lechowicz+ Tseng; and WHEREAS, staff reviewed proposals and conducted interviews with the proposers and concluded that Raftelis was the most qualified firm to successfully complete the work.

ATTACHMENT 1 Item #9.1.

Resolution 2022-XXX

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALISTOGA DOES HEREBY find the following:

1. Authorizes the City Manager to execute a Consultant Services Agreement with Raftelis in an amount not to exceed $155,000 for a utility rate study related to the water and wastewater enterprise systems.

2. Authorize a budget adjustment in the amount of $75,000 be added to the existing $80,000 FY 22/23 budget to the Water and Wastewater fund balances and equally distributed between the four accounts 02-4132- 4402, 02-4131-4402, 03-4142-4402 and 03-4141-4402.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of July, 2022. I, MARNI RITTBURG, CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF CALISTOGA, HEREBY CERTIFY the foregoing resolution was introduced and passed at a regular meeting of the Calistoga City Council by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
____________________________ __________________________ Marni Rittburg, CMC, City Clerk Chris Canning, Mayor
Item #9.1.

Q RAFTELIS
City of Calistoga
Water and Sewer Utility Rate Study
PROPOSAL I APRIL 4, 2022
Item #9.1.

Di\ sity and inclusion
are an integral part of
Raftelis’ core values.
we are committed to doing our part to ?ght
prejudice, racism, and discrimination by
becoming more informed‘disengaging with
business partners that do not share this
commitment, and encouraging our employees
to use their skillsto work toward a more just
society that has no barriers to opportunity.
—; REGISTERED
"

MUNICIPAL

ADVISOR
Rufteli s registered with
the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission
(SEC) and the Municipal
Securities Rulemaking
Board (MSRB) as :1
Municipal Advisor.

Registration as a MunicipalAdvisor is a
requirement under the Dodd-Frank wall
street Relcrm and consumerProtection Act
All?rms that provide ?nancial rorecasts that
Include assumptions about the size, timing
and terms lor possible luture debt issues‘ as
well as debt issuance support services tor
specrhc proposed bond issues, including
bond ieasibility studies and coverage
iorecastscmust be registered with the sec
and MSRB to legally provide ?nancial
opinions and advice. Rartelrs registration as
a Municipal Advisurmeans our clients can be
conrrdent that Rattetis is tutly quali?ed and
capable of providing ?nancial advice related
to all aspects orhnanciat planning in
compliance with the applicable regulations oi
the sec and the MSRB.

Table of
Contents
01 Introd uctory Letter
04 Of?ce Locations at Which Work WillBe Performed
05 Quali?cations and Experience
09 Work Plan
17 Project Schedule
18 Supportive Information
54 References
61 Con?ict of Interest Statement
62 Insurance Coverage
Item #9.1.

mnmnucfonv LETTER r-znrrzus 1
AP""4v2°22 Q RAFTELIS
Mr. Hamid Heidary, P.E., Senior Civil Engineer
City of Calistoga Department of Public Works
414 Washington Street, Calistoga, CA 94515
Subject: Proposal for Water and Sewer Utility Rate Study Dear Mr. I-leidary:

Raftelis is pleased to submit this proposal to assist the City of Calistoga (City) with a water and sewer utility rate study.

We appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal, which details our project approach to meet the City's objectives as well as our quali?cations and experience within the water and wastewater utility industry.

Raftelis was established in l993 to provide ?nancial, rate, and management consulting services of the highest quality to water and wastewater utilities. Since that time, Raftelis has grown to have the largest water and wastewater utility rate and ?nancial consulting practice in the country, with more than 140 consultants. Our staff has provided rate and/or ?nancial planning assistance United States and have conducted thousands ofstudies. Our mission has always been focused on assisting our clients in meeting their goals of ?nancial viability. Raftelis is uniquely quali?ed to serve as your expert consultant based on our extensive experience successfully completing many similar studies for utilities in California and across the country.

We believe our team would successfully complete the study and provide signi?cant value to the City for several reasons, including:
- Breadth of experience — We have conducted thousands of ?nancial, cost of service, and rate design projects for utilities across the country, many of them similar [0 this study. - Depth of resources — No other ?rm that specializes in ?nancial and rate consulting for the water and wastewater industry has the staff resources that we can provide.
- Drive to succeed — Our project team will he focused on not only meeting, but exceeding, the City's expectations.

To assist the City with this project, we have assembled a team with extensive experience and a reputation for quality service. I will serve as Project Director of the study, ensuring the City's objectives are fully met. l will work closely with the Project Manager, Kevin Kostiuk, who will manage the day-to-day aspects ofthe project ensuring it is within budget and on schedule and who will serve as the City's main point of contact for the study. Charles Diamond will assist Kevin as Assistant Project Manager and Lead Consultant. Charles will direct Raftelis consulting staff in conducting analyses and preparing deliverables for the project. Please do not hesitate to contact me by phone at 213.262.9308 or by email at [email protected] if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
JWV-<7M~
Steve Gagnon
SeniorMrmagev
445 5. Frgueroz Street, Suite 192.5%
www vaflzlis cam
Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 1

EXCEPTIONS
We request that th
Services Agreemen
nsider making the following modi?cations,shown in red below, to the Professional contact us if you have any questions or concen-is about these modi?cations.

6. Ownership of Documents.

A ...whether the Services are completed or not. Consultant shall deliver all Documents to City, upon request at (1) the completion of the Services, (2) the date of termination of this Agreement for any reason, or (3) any time requested by City, upon ?ve (5) days prior written notice and payment of allsums due to Consultant.

B. The Documents may be used by City and its agents, employees, representatives, and assigns, in whole or in part, or in modified form, for all purposes City may deem advisable without further employment of or payment of any compensation to Consultant but any use other than as contemplated in this Ageement or modi?cation of the Documents shall be at the sole risk of the City .

C. Consultant retains the copyright in and to the intellectual property depicted in the Documents subject to Consultant's limitations and City's rights and licensesset forth in this Agreement. City's ownership interest in the Documents includes the following single, exclusive license from Consultant: Consultant, for itself, its employees, heirs, successors and assigns, hereby grants (and if any subsequent grant is necessary, agrees to grant) to City an irrevocable, perpetual, royalty-free, fullypaid, seleand-exelusi-ve nonexclusive; non-assignable license and right to use and exercise any and all of the copyrights or other intellectual property rights that Consultant may author or create, alone or jointly. .. ll. Indemnig.

To the fullest extent permitted by law (including, without limitation,California Civil Code Sections 2782 and 2782.8), Consultant shall defend (with legal counsel reasonably acceptable to the City) indemnify and hold harmless City and its officers, agents, departments, officials, representatives and employees (collectively "lndemnitees") from and against any and-ail claims, loss, cost, damage, injury (including, without limitation, injury to or death of an employee of Consultant or itssub~Consultants), expense and liability (including, , fines, penalties, incidental and , court costs, attorneys fees, litigation expenses and fees of expert consultans or expert witnesses incurred in connection therewith, and costs of investigation), ererelate-te caused by the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Consultant, any sub-Consultant, anyone H. City Not Responsible. The City is not responsible or liable for Consultant's failure to comply with any and all of said requirements.

Consultant's opinions, estimates,projections, and forecasts of current and future costs, revenues, other levels of any sort, and events and estimates of oost-justified system development fees shall be made on the basis of available information and Consultants expertise and quali?cations as a professional. Consultant will perfonn the Scope of servicesin conformance with the professional standards in its ?eld of expertise prevailing at the time and place the Scope of services are performed. Consultant does not warrant or guarantee that its opinions, estimates, projections or forecasts of current and 445 s Figueroa stree:,suita1925,Los Angeles, CA 90071
www m?elrs com
Item #9.1.

A’¥ RAFTELIS J
, .~ «*7 /? LP:
future levelsand events will not vary from the City's estimates or forecasts or from actual outcomes. Consultant identi?es costs, allocates costs to customer classes and provides rate models. It does not establish rates, which is the legislative responsibility of the City.

26. Consultant's Books and Records.

A. Consultant shall maintain any-and-all ledgers, books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, and other records or documents evidencing or relating to charges for services, or expenditures and disbursements charged... as s. Figulrua StreeI.5ulle1525,Lo5 Angules. CA anon
www rahelismom
Item #9.1.

arncs LOCATIONS A1 wmcn WORK WILL as PERFORMED
Office Locations at \/Vhich
Work Will Be Performed
Work will be performed from the office locations below. Raftelis' consulting staff is strategically positioned in offices throughout the country to efficiently provide servicesfor our clients. Our staff collaborates with team members in other offices on a daily basis, and our people are adept at virtually collaborating with these team members using tools like Teams and Zoom. We have found that this crosspollination across geographies and practice areas allows for the sharing of ideas and perspectives from across the firm, which helps us to provide insightful analysis to our clients.

RAFTELIS
Los Angeles Office
445 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 1925
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Santa Barbara Office
1 N. Calle Cesar Chavez, Suite I02
Santa Barbara, CA 93103
Denver Metro Office
5619 DTC Parkway, Suite 850
Greenwood Village, CO 80111
4 Item #9.1.

QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE RAr1E|_|s 5
WHO IS
Raftelis
l‘rillEH..PiE\l(3‘DAQCAL @fCD‘l.f’ERn‘Ji‘JlEN‘ll"S AND U‘il'llL"rTllESTE'flRll‘UE Local government and utility leaders partner with Raftelis to transform their organizations by enhancing performance, planning for the future, identifying top talent, improving their ?nancial condition, and telling their story. We've helped more than 600 organizations in the last year alone. We provide trusted advice, and our experts include former municipal and utility leaders with decades of hands-on experience running successful organizations. People who lead local governments and utilities are innovators—constantly seeking ways to provide better service to the communities that rely on them. Raftelis provides management consulting expertise and insights that help bring about the change that our clients seek.
* V|S|T RAFTELIS.COM TO LEARN MORE
Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 6
We believe that Raftelis is the right ?t for this project. We provide several key factors that will bene?t the City and help to make this project a success.

RESOURCES 8 EXPERTISE - Specialized and highly experienced utility rate consultants that all stakeholders can have con?dence in. With I20 consultants, Raftelis has the largest water-industry ?nancial and rate consulting practice in the nation. Our depth of resources will allow us to provide the City with the technical expertise necessary to meet your objectives. In addition to having many of the industry's leading rate consultants, we also have experts in key related areas, like stakeholder engagement and data analytics, to provide additional insights as needed.

DEFENSIBLE RECOMMENDATIONS - Industry knowledge to ensure methodologies reflect best practices. Our senior staff is involved in shaping industry standards by chairing various committees within the American Water Works Association (AWWA) and the Water Environment Federation (WEF). Raftelis‘ staff members have also co-authored many industry—standardbooks regarding utility ?nance and rate setting.

Being so actively involved in the industry will allow us to keep the City informed of emerging trends and issues and to be confident that our recommendations are insightful and founded on sound industry principles. In addition, with Raftelis‘ registration as a Municipal Advisor, you can be con?dent that we are fully quali?ed and capable of providing ?nancial advice related to all aspects of utility ?nancial planning in compliance with federal regulations.

HISTORY OF SIMILAR SUCCESSES - A long history of project experience to ensure successful ‘Q’execution. Raftelis staffhas assisted l,00O+ utilitiesthroughout the US, with financial and rate consulting W services with widcaranging needs and objectives. Our extensive experience will allow us to provide innovative and insightful recommendations to the City and will provide validation for our proposed methodology ensuring that industry best practices are incorporated.

USER-FRIENDLY MODELING - Powerful and easy-to-use tools for ongoing ?nancial management success. Raftelis has developed some of the most sophisticated yet user-friendly ?nancial/ rate models available in the industry. Our models are tools that allow us to examine different policy options and cost allocations and their ?nancial/customer impacts in real time. Our models are non—proprietaryand are developed with the expectation that they will be used by the client as a ?nancial planning tool long after the project is complete.

EXPERTS ON CALIFORNIA REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS - This expertise will allow the City to be con?dent that our reconunendations take into account all of these regulatory requirements.

The regulatory environment in California has become more stringent due to Proposition 218. Besides developing wellathought-out financial plans, Raftelis staff members are very knowledgeable about these regulations and have made presentations on this subject at various industry conferences.In addition, we are frequently called on to be expert witncsses regarding these regulatory matters.

Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 7
29 1'33's5§me How we stack up
public sector

OUR TEAM INCLUDES
consultants focused on
financelmanagementlcommunicationl
technology for the public sector
chairs members of
& AWWA and WEF utlllty ?nance and
management committees and subcommittees
the &Immediate Past-President of AWWA

RAFTELIS HAS PROVIDED ASSISTANCE FOR
1 public agencies
’
and utilities
that serve more than including the agencies sewing
o U.S. population 50 largest cities
of the of the nation's
in the past year alone, we worked on
’ 1 000+ for in
"'°‘°°“ 600+ '°°"°'°’ “"‘°’
Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 8
Project Team

WE HAVE DEVELOPED A TEAM OF CONSULTANTS WHO SPECIALIZE

IN THE SPECIFIC ELEMENTS THAT WILL BE CRITICAL TO THE
SUCCESS OF THE CITY'S PROJECT.

Our team includes senior-level professionals to provide experienced project leadership with support from talented consultant staff. This close-knit group has frequently collaborated on similar successful projects, providing the City with confidence in our capabilities.

Here, we have included an organizational chart showing the structure of our project team. In the Supporting Information section, we have included resumes for each of our team members as well as a description of their role on the project.

CITY OF

CALISTOGA
rncuzc-r nmzcron
Steve Gagnon, PE
moucr MANAGER
Kevin Kostiuk
ASSISTANT rnouacr MANAGER
Charles Diamond

LOS ANGELES STAFF CONSULTANTS COMMUNICATION SUPPORT
Jonathan Jordan Matt Wittern, APR, PMP
Lindsay Roth Gina DePinto, APR
Nicholas Kennedy
Item #9.1.

WORK PI-AN RAFTELIS 9
Work Plan

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
'30
The City of Calistoga provides water and wastewater servicesto over 1,500accounts across a popul ion of over 5,000.

The City, located in Napa Valley, California, supplies water from the Kimball Reservoir and from to recent water quality issues, the City’s water supply has been sourced primarily from the City ' '
ew w?yh?wmmer. The City’s Wastewater Treatment Plant also tre » at, after tertiary treatment, is either distributed for recycled water use or— from October 1st to May l5th- discharged into the Napa River as per the City's NPDES permit.

The selected consultant for this study will conduct a ?nancial analysis, cost of service, and rate study (Study) for water and wastewater services.The selected consultant will also conduct an i water, rmd s. The ?nancial plans, cost of service analyses, and proposed rates will also consider tools l
incorporate the approved capital improvement plan (CIP), and will achieve other policy objectives for the City.

SCOPE OF SERVICES
Raftelis‘ approach to projects heavily encourages collaborative work efforts. Raftelis will work with City staff on an 0n~ going basis via scheduled in-person meetings and web conferences to achieve project milestones in a timely manner and complete the project on schedule. Raftelis will complete the tasks outlined below to develop utility rates that align with Proposition 218, industry standards, and the City's goals and objectives.

Task 1: Project Initiation, Management, and Data collection Raftelis believes in a process that encourages and stresses communication, teamwork, objectivity. and accountability to meet project objectives. We also believe in a noasurprises approach and communicate regularly with clients through in— person meetings and webinars so that the City is aware of the project status at all stages. For every project we also implement a systemic program of quality assurance and control (QA/ QC) to ensure accuracy, consistency, and validity of the results. We believe that a productive kick-off meeting is the most effective way to begin an engagement of this nature.

Raftelis uses the kick-off meeting as an opportunity to do our due diligence and ensure that all project participants agree on the goals, approach, work plan, schedule, and study priorities. Prior to the kick-off meeting, a detailed data request list will be submitted so the City may begin assembling appropriate data. During the meeting itself, we will discuss pertinent background information to gain more familiarity with the City’s utilities. In addition, Raftelis uses this opportunity to determine drivers for the Study, discuss current utility challenges, work with City staff to identify and prioritize objectives, develop an understanding of the ?nancial plan and current rate structure, review the data request list, and pinpoint data gaps or questions. We will provide Staffwith an agenda in advance of the meeting and detailed notes on the decisions and outcomes of the meeting afterwards.

PLANNED MEETINGS:
0 One (l) virtual kick—otfmeeting with City staff (virtual based on responses in RFP Addendum #1) DELWERAELES:
- Data request list
Item #9.1.

nnrvsus 1n
- Agenda for kick-off meeting
- Presentation materials
0 Kickoff meeting minutes
Task 2: Financial Plan Development - Water and Wastewater services In order to establish comprehensive short- and long-term ?nancial plans for the City's utilities, Raftelis will create a model examining the water and wastewater utilities’ ten~year ?nancial plan to determine the revenue requirements needed to ensure the ?nancial suf?ciency of the City's utility enterprises. The ?nancial model will project existing rate revenues based on water use and new connection growth estimates to assess the current rate structure's performance as a baseline.

The model will also project other operating and non-operating revenues alongside operating and capital expenses to develop a ten-year cash ?ow analysis for the water and wastewater enterprises. The cash?ow analyses will determine the revenue adjustments (i.e., gross revenue increases) required while attempting to minimize rate ?uctuations. In identifying the revenue adjustments, we establish the funding requirements that the recommended rates will need to achieve to frilly fund system costs and other costs resulting from future standards and regulations. The cash?ow analysis will also identify and incorporate any recommended revisions to reserve policies.

While preparing these plans, we will analyze the City's current policies and practices for funding utility operations, capital facilities plans, and debt service requirements. ln discussionswith City staff, we will consider various ?nancing options, or a combination of options, such as operating revenue, debt, and us of reserves. We will assist the City in achieving a suitable balance among the ?nancing options when developing the proposed ?nancial plans. This will ensure ?nancial sufficiency to meet operating and capital costs, achieve sensible ?nancial reserveslevcls, meet the City's service policies and objectives, and fairly distribute ?nancing responsibilities, Having detailed ?nancial plans will ensure that City's utilities operate in a sel?suf?cient manner and achieve debt coverage requirements. We will develop separate standalone financialplans for both the water and wastewater utilities.

The ?nancial plans for each utility will include a capital improvement ?nancing component that ensures each utility can fully fund the City's proposed CIP while minimizing impacts to existing ratepayers and complying with any existing bond COVEHBHIS.

The ?nancial plan willserve as the basis for the revenue requirements, which includes the projection ofbudget items, such as annual costs related to water supply, power, personnel, materials, plant investment, other O&M expenses, transfers, reserve contributions, and debt service, using assumptions based on different economic factors and growth trends. Raftelis will examine the effect of changes in factors that impact the utility's future revenue requirements and identify one or more ?nancial plan options. Projecting revenue adjustments over a multiayear planning horizon can illustrate future rate impacts and potential challenges to the City utilities‘ ?nancial situation. This will allow the City to adjust its expenses, transfers, and reserve balances; or schedule capital projects to smooth rate impacts and maintain ?nancial stability.

PLANNED MEETINGS:
~ Three (3) web-meetings with City staff
DELIVERABLES:
- Water and Wastewater Financial Plan models in Microsoft Excel Item #9.1.

RAFYELIS 11
....W. W XIV Kl) .....0. 7H )9)‘ M Raftelis will develop a "‘ "‘ ""‘ "" "" ““ "" "‘ "" “" customized ?nancial model .1: ._ ._'1'. r
'23. ,'3“:.'-.r.. .".7...."am., "3. that Incorporates a .r... ...., r... .......... nu ............. dashboard to allowyou to M ‘ ‘ _ H M
easily run scenarios and see
.
" " ' " "
,,,...".i’.L‘§:',i.“,'i. the impacts in real time.
for another project.
...E
v r L... Shown here is a sample
r r _/_{ . , dashboard that we developed
, _,., “-31.2 »'
.t.i
W
W
inglj xl ‘lip ‘
Task 3: cost of service Analyses
Raftelis will complete a Cost of Service (COS) analysis to determine updated cost allocations and recommended rate structures for the City’s utility systems. We will incorporate the City’s policy considerations and the requirements of Proposition 218 throughout the cost allocation process.

Water
For water, the COS is based on industry standards and methodologies approved by the American Water Works Association ( , Fees, and Charges. Cost allocations
will be based on AWWA-approved Base—ExtraCapacity method, which focuses on usage patterns and peaking characteristics. Revenue requirements from the ?nancial plan are functionalized and are then allocated to cost components including supply (purchase of water and pumping of groundwater), average daily demand, extra capacity, meter maintenance, conservation costs, and other direct and indirect costs consistent with industry standards. The goal of this task is to distribute the cost components based on the cost responsibility of each user class. The result is the total cost to serve which is used as the basis for rate development.

Waslewater
For the wastewater cost of service analysis, Raftelis will use methods set forth by the Water Environment Federation 7,Financing‘and Charges for the Wastewater Systems. We will rely on our experience to prepare a wastewater cost of service analysis using a methodology based on industry standards and tailored to the unique characteristics of the City's wastewater system.

Raftelis will ensure that the wastcwater cost allocations focus on appropriate service functions and allocate the cost of service to the appropriate service functions. We will th , .- ~ ,- ‘ .r - ~.._ -or ‘V “ -‘ — nv"
Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 12
requirement identi?ed in the ?nancial plan, costs will be allocated to various cost components, including collection, treatment, and customer costs consistent with industry standards.

Raftelis will incorporate the City's policy considerations and current federal, state, and local rules and regulations, such as Proposition 218 throughout the water and wastewater cost of service analysis.

PLANNED MEETINGS: '*
0 Two (2) web-meetings with City staff

DELIVERABLESI
- Water and Wastewater Cost of Service analyses in Microsoft Excel Task 4: Rate Design
Ra?elis will develop a rate model in Microso? Excel to calculate a proposed five-year schedule of water and wastewater rates. During our analysis, we will examine how the current uniform water rate structure serves the City's goals. Raftelis may recommend rate structure revisions to meet policy objectives, aid in the defensibility of rates, and assist in communicating rates to customers
In today's rate-setting environment, it is imperative to show the nexus between the cost to serve and the rates charged to customers. Raftelis will show this nexus by clearly showing distinct unit cost components that constitute each rate. For example, variable water rates typically including unit cost components for water supply costs, system delivery costs, peaking costs (extra-capacity costs), and conservation costs, among others. These calculations will communicate to customers the cost drivers behind the rates.

Current and Proposed Rate Structures
The City's current water rates include a ?xed monthly charge and a variable uniform rate per water unit. The current wastewater rates include several classi?cations for both residential and non-residential usct classes. Residential wastewater rates include a ?at fixed charge per sub-class.Non-residential and transient classes are a variable rate based on water consumption. Industry and bottling works are charged per unit of measured flow and bamdmed d -5365:‘
While the City may not change their rate structure during this Study, Raftelis will still examine and propose any ah€1'“3‘lV5 Y3 Water rate structures alternatives may include i ng a declared drought. Additionally, Raftelis will evaluate the impacts and/ or required changes to water rates resulting from legislation enacted by s& Customer Impacts and Sensitivity Analysis
Rate adjustments resulting from changes in the total revenue required to serve customers and/or changes to rate structures can sometimes cause "rate shock" to customers. In our impact analysis, we calculate estimated monthly bills at typical usage levels, assuming thc new proposed rate structure was already in place to determine the total impact ofthe new rate structure for each customer class. The impact analysis will include a series of tables and ?gures that show projected rate impacts by customer class at various levels of usage. Understanding customer impacts and taking corrective action, if necessary, allows us to design public outreach strategies for generating customer buy-in and successful rate implementation.

Item #9.1.

RAFYELIS 13
Drought Rates
In times of er-nergenc , water shortag ated conservation the City rmp em re . he first step in developing Drought Rates is to examine the City's Drouyrt / Water Shortage Contingency Plan. Generally, each stage in the plan targes a system—widereduction of a certain aluate the existing rate structure including the existing stages; discuss the likely reduction in use for each class; and establish the reduction goals for each shortage stage to achieve system»wide targets.

Shortage-related costs can be recovered through fixed charges, commodity rates, or a combination of both. During a water supply crisis, the City's Drought Rates recover revenues with an increase to the variable rate. Raftelis will develop the Drought Rates model with the City's existing structure as the base structure. We will discussthe validity of the current structure, any desired changes, and any recommendationsby Raftelis. Mandatory water use reductions result in revenue loss from water sales reductions.Raftelis will quantify the n s ur' analysis.

Based on the demand reduction scenarios and selected water shortage rate structure, the Drought Rate Model will calculate the rates for each demand reduction scenario and present the resulting customer impacts in both numerical and graphical format using a Dashboard platform. We will present our ?ndings and recommendations to the City Council, concurrent with the base rates.

PLANNED MEETINGS:
0 Three (3) web-meetings with City staff
DELIVERABLES:
- Draft and Final Rate Models in Microsoft Excel
Task 5: Rate Survey
Raftelis will work with City staff to conduct a water and wastewater Raftelis has extensive experience in conducting rate surveys. We partner with the AWWA to conduct the nationwide biennial survey of water and wastewater rates and with the California—NevadaSection of AWWA to survey water and wastewater utilities in California and Nevada. Some of the data collected from the national survey may be of great use to the public outreach portion of rate implementation. This provides Raftelis with extensive survey experience, a national database, and numerous contacts throughout the industry that will be useful in collecting ?nancial and rate information for the rate and cost of service comparison. Comparing rates with other representative agencies can provide insights into a utility's pricing policies. However, care should be taken in drawing conclusions from these comparisons as some factors, including geographic location, demands, customer constituency, level of treatment, level ofgrant funding, age of systems, sources of supply, and rate-setting methodology can affect the cost of providing services.

PLANNED MEETINGS:

I None

DELIVERABLESI
0 Rate Survey in Microsoft Excel
Item #9.1.

RAFYELIS 14
Task 6: Impact Fee Analysis - Potable Water, Recycled Water, and Wastewater Facil' ies
In addition to existing connection fees, th ’ ‘ '
development's and revdevelopmenfs appropriate share of future capital costs related to treatment plant expansions, replacement of the North Bay Aqueduct, and other capital projects, Raftelis will work with City staff to establish an appropriate methodology to calculate impact fees for new connections to the potable water, recycled water, and wastewater systems, Raftelis will then develop an impact fee model in Microsoft Excel to calculate proposed impact fees.

PLANNED MEETINGS:
o Two (2) web-meetings with City staff
DELIVERABLES:
- Potable water, recycled water, and wastewater impact fee model in MicrosoftExcel Task 7: Rate Study Report
Rafrelis will prepare a report documenting the Rate Study to serve as the City's administrative record. The purpose of this report is to document the methodology used to calculate the City's water and wastewater rates and to demonstrate alignment with cost—of-serviceprinciples and Proposition 218 requirements. The Study Report will include an executive summary highlighting decisions reached during the development ofrates. The main body of the report will summarize the underlying model assumptions, the long-term ?nancial plans, the cost of service analyses, proposed revisions to rate stnrctures, proposed rate derivation, and customer impacts. The report will detail rate structure selection, rate design assumptions, and methodologies used to develop the proposed rates. The cost of service and rate calculations will be described in detail so that the nexus between costs and rates is clearly demonstrated. The report will also include a section describing the development of proposed impact fees from Task 6.

Raftelis will provide a draft report to City staff and the City's attorney for review and comment. We will then incorporate any revisions into the final report. The ?nal report will be completed before the noticing period to ensure City customers have public access during the protest period and before the Public Hearing for rate adoption.

PLANNED MEETINGS:
0 One (l) conference call to discuss edits to the draft report DELIVERABLES:
0 Draft and Final Reports in Microsoft Word and PDF format Task 8: Workshops and Stakeholder Engagement
An integral part of developing rates and fees is ensuring that key stakeholders are included in the process from the beginning, with the opportunity to provide meaningful input that is reflected in the final rate recommendation(s). While we expect to break these stakeholders down to a more granular level during the planning phase, outreach at a minimum should include City Staff, City Council, and utility customers. While we anticipate the need to discuss and refine the following process, successful Raftelis studies have followeda path like this one:

Stakeholder Information Session 1 | Open House Format | Public Invitation (ln-Person) At a series of stations, information will be shared about the City's plans to invest in its water and wastewater infrastructure and describe the public process that is embedded in the rate study. This forum would provide information Item #9.1.

RAFYELIS 15
about common approaches to funding water and wastewater utility services; gather input on participants’ sense of existing challenges and concerns; how they envision ensuring a secure water future; which funding approaches they feel make the most sense or that they would support; and importantly which pricing objectives they believe are most important.

Rate Workshop 1 1City council 8- Staff (Virtual)
The goals of the rate workshop is to gather feedback on rate study purpose, need, and vision for success, deliver a highlevel overview of ongoing challenges, CIP, and key planned investments, provide a summary of information gathered at Stakeholder Information Session #1, perform a pricing objectives exercise that seeks consensus, and discuss ?nancial reserves policies modi?cations, if any are recommended.

Stakeholder Information Session 2 | Open House Format 1Public Invitation (In-Person) At a series of stations, this second Stakeholder Information Session is designed to compare results of pricing objectives ?‘om prior Stakeholder Information Session and Rate Workshop #1, describe rate structure altematives including the pros and cons of each as well as preliminary bill impacts, and gather stakeholder input. The City may want to schedule a couple instances of this Open House to reduce barriers to participation.

Rate Workshop 2 | City Council 8. Staff (In-Person)
Following Stakeholder Information Session #2, this rate workshop is designed to deliver the results of water and wastewater rates and fees of nearby providers as comparison tool, provide preliminary rate structure alternatives which includes high-level water bill impacts to typical customers, provide a summary of public comment gathered at Stakeholder Information Session #2, and facilitate structure alternatives discussion and seek consensus on preferred alternatives to move forward in the process.

Stakeholder Information Session 3 | Webinar Format | Public Invitation (Virtual) The goals of the third Stakeholder Information Session is to communicate the value of water and wastewater servicesthe City provides, summarize the challenges being faced and planned investments to deliver a secure water future, summarize rate study public process to date as well as provide speci?c examples ofhow public input has informed and helped guide the study, share preliminary recommendation(s) including anticipated bill impacts, show the results of rates and fees the rate survey of surrounding communities, and answer questions and gather feedback. The City may want to record and post a video of this webinar to its website to increase transparency and reduce barriers to participation.

Rate Workshop 3 | City Council 8. Staff (Virtual)
This third rate workshop with City Council & Staff is designed to provide an opportunity to present results of remaining alternatives with anticipated bill impacts to typical customers, summarize public feedback gathered at the prior Stakeholder Information Session, secure approval on recommendation(s), and approve the development and mailing of the Proposition 218 notice.

PLANNED MEETINGS:
~ Three (3) Stakeholder Sessions
- Three (3) City staff and City Council Work Sessions
DELIVERAELES:
- Presentation materials
- Graphics/displays
- Facilitation services
- Meeting minutes
Item #9.1.

RAFYELIS 16
Task 9: Noticing and Public Hearing
Raftelis will develop graphics and narrative content needed for the City's Proposition 218 public notices, which must be postmarked to all property owners in the City's service area no fewer than 45 days prior to the public hearing. Content will include all statutorily required elements, along with strategic communications messages about the value of water servicesthe City provides, the need for investment to deliver a secure water future, etc. Beyond satisfying legal requirements, the goal of the notice will be to describe the public process that went into the recommendations and make the case for why adoption is critical.

Once the content passes City Attorney review, Raftelis' Creative Services group will flow the content into an attractive design that will encourage City ratepayers to read the information and have a broader understanding of the issues.

Our pricing includes development ofa press-ready PDF. It is anticipated that City staff will liaise with the printer and mail house, and contract directly with them for payment. We are able to provide liaison services at our standard hourly rates.

Community Meetings 1 & 2 | Open House Format | Public Invitation (One Virtual I One InPerson) The goals of these community meetings are to communicate the value of water and wastewater services the City provides as well as summarize the challenges being faced and planned investments to deliver a secure water future. Also during these meetings will be a summary of the rate study public process to date and provide speci?c examples of how public input has informed and helped guide the study. This will also be an opportunity to share recommendation(s), including anticipated bill impacts, answer questions, and gather feedback.

Public Hearing (In-Person)
Raftelis will develop and deliver a slide deck to set the stage at the public hearing. The presentation — developed with input and direction from City Staff— will include a summary of the study's purpose and need, including how CIP investments will help deliver a secure water future; a review of Council's earlier direction in terms ofits vision for a successful rates study conclusion; a review of the public process that informed the recommendations with speci?c examples ofhow stakeholder feedback was valuable, and a comparison of anticipated bill impacts for typical customer types, including how the rates stack up against neighboring communities using data gathered in Task 5.

PLANNED MEETINGS:
- Two (2) Community Meetings
I One (1) Public Hearing
DELWERABLES:
- Draft and ?nal Proposition 218 notice content, graphic design, facilitation services, and presentation materials Item #9.1.

PRDJECY SCHEDULE nAr1EI.Is 11
Project Schedule
Raftelis will complete the scope of services within the timeframe shown in the schedule below. The proposed schedule assumes a notice-to-proceed by the middle of May 2022, that Raftelis will receive the required data in a timely manner, and that the City will be available to schedule meetings as necessary. Project completion is estimated as November 2022 for rate implementation in January of 2023.

1. Fmjacl Ini ation,
Management, and Data
Collection

2. Financial Plan Development

3. Cost of Service Analyses

4. Rate uesign

5. Rate Survey

6. Impact Fee Analysis

1. Rate Study Report

3. workshops and
Stakeelmlder Engagement

9. Noticing and Public Hearing
® /Ii-Person Meelingsl Workshops
9 Wel7Mes1i‘Iigs
De/rverab/es
June July August September October November
-
TE
me
Item #9.1.

suwonrlms INFOHMAYION
Steve Gagnon 'F*lZs(.Aa?)"

PROJECT DIRECTOR
Senior Manager
ROLE
Steve will be responsible for overall project accountability and will be available to provide quality assurance and control, industry perspective, and insights into the project.

PROFILE
Steve has 20 years of experience in ?nancial analysis and environmental engineering. His broad range of experience includes water and wastewater rate studies, capacity fees, and utility valuations. Steve has also performed strategic ?nancial analysis of water sourcing alternatives and costing of ground water remediation alternatives, asset inventory and condition assessments, utility performance metrics, and earned value analysis. He has also managed the construction and installation of water treatment equipment and overseen Superfund remediation for the U8. Army.

KEY PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Utility Rate Studies and Long-Range Planning Experience city of Manhattan Beach (CA)
Steve is helping the City ofManhattan Beach to create a water ?nancial plan and set rates, The City had two major concerns; 1)wells were impaired in the near term and the city would have to purchase more imported water and 2) the City was unsure about tiered rates given recent litigation. Steve worked with city staff to discussthe pros and cons of tiered rates. After reviewing these pros and cons with the city attorney and manager, staff is recommending cost based tiered rates as ofthis writing. Steve will present the ?nancial need and rate study results to city council and the public.

City of Tracy (CA)
In 2019, the City of Tracy (City) engaged Raftelis to perform a wastewater rate study. Raftelis is currently working with City staff to best plan for expenses to minimize customer impacts, and Steve is serving as Project Manager. city of San Diego (CA)
The City of San Diego (City) is considering a renewable energy project to take landfill gas and create electricity. Steve prepared a ?nancial model evaluating three alternatives: 1) do nothing and purchase electricity from a regional provider, 2) enter into a contract with a private entity to run and the renewable energy facility and sell electricity to the City at an agreed upon rate, 3) to purchase the facility and run it with City staff. The analysis gives the City a range of acceptable electi'icity rates for negotiating with a private party for option 2.

RAFTELIS 13
Spoclaltlos
a utility cost—of—service8. rate
structure studies
- consemation rate studies
- Economic Ieasibillly studies
- capital budgeting studies
- Wastewaler rate studies
- capital recovery/capacity tee
studies
- surveyresearch orwater 8.
waslewater utilitycharacteristics 8.
rates
Profs:-slanal Hlstory
- Rattelis Senior Manager (2o2o—
present), Manager (2017-2019).

Senior consuitant (2014-2016)
- APTwa|er, inc. (Now Ullura) project
manager (2U11—2D14)
- PES&J (now ATKINS)’ protect
manager — UtilityFinance (2005
2011) .Eanii Tech (now AECOM): senior
project manager (2004-2005)
- Malcolm Pirnie, lnc (now
ARCADIS):consultant (2002-2003)
- National Parks Conservalion
Association - Business Plan
initiative: Business Plan Consultant
(2000)
- u 3 Army Corps orEngineers —
New England DlVlSl0l’Iprotect
manager (19954 999) . Geophex, Llrtliled: Graduate
Research Assistant (1994)
Educallon
I Master of Business Administration -
University OISouthern California
(2001)
I Master OIScience In Environrnenlal
Engineering . university or
Massachusetts (1995)
- Bachelor of Science in Civil
Engineering — university or
Massachusetts (1994)
Corti?eatllons . Registered Protessional
Environmental Engineer in Arizona . Series 50 Municipal Advisor Representative
Professional Mumborshipt . AWWA
Item #9.1.

RAFYELIS 19
Delta Diahlo Sanitary District (CA)
Steve, as a sub-consultant to HDR, is preparing the ?nancial analysis for a potential food waste to energy project in which the Delta Diablo Sanitary District (District) would take food waste slurry, convert it to biogas and sell electricity. There are many unknowns in the project including exact operations and maintenance costs and the tipping fee from the nearby land?ll. Steve is performing a Monte Carlo simulation to help the District visualize the probability of a ?nancially viable project given all the unknowns.

Running Springs Water District (CA)
Steve is assisting the Running Springs Water District (District) establish water and wastewater rates and evaluate the ?nancial health of the Fire and Ambulance Department. The District is unique in that many residents are absentee owners of vacation homes. As such, the District is maintaining a higher than average level of ?xed charges for both water" and sewer to equitably distribute costs among full-time and part time residents. Steve also prepared a l0—year?nancial plan for the Fire and Ambulance Department showing its ?nancial health under different property tax, other revenue and expenses assumptions, including ?re engine replacement.

Encina Wastewater Authority (CA)
Steve is helping the Encina Wastewater Authority (Authority) analyze the Net Present Value of three large capital investments: 1) their co-generation facility, 2) the heat dryer and 3) the fats, oils and greases (FOG) receiving facility that supports Encina‘s co-digestion facility operation. For the co-gen facility, the analysis involves calculating the Net Present Value of electricity purchase costs with and without the co-gen facility. The heat dryer analysis involves calculating the equivalent annual cost of operating solely the centrifuge (with the associated disposal cost of sludge) versus operating the heat dryer and its reduced sludge disposal costs. Lastly, he is helping the Authority analyze its options for alternative digester fuels for co~digestion to enhance digester gas production - FOG versus beer waste - based on the tipping fees and associated maintenance costs of each.

Hi-Desert Water District (CA)
Steve is helping the Hi-Desert Water District (District) establish defensible and affordable water rates for a District with a high number of low-income residents. The study includes an update of their miscellaneous fees. The District has one main source of water, which limits the rate differentiation between tiers. The study includes an extensive outr'each program to educate customers as to the need for rate adjustments. city of Port Hueneme (CA)
The City of Port Hueneme (City) has some of the highest water rates in the area due to the amount ofcapital reinvestment needed to maintain the system. Steve is helping City Council and Staff assess the impacts oftheir decisions, including capital reinvestment, loan re?nancing and ?xed charge pricing on customer bills. The study included a rate workshop with City Council to show the Council the effects of their decisions.

Mesa Water District (CA)
Mesa Water District (District) prides itself on the fact that it is no longer dependent on imported water. Steve helped the District revise their water and recycled water rates in a few months during a fastvpaced rate study. The study included over 10 ?nancial plan options for the Board to select from.

City at Pomona (CA)
Steve is currently helping the City of Pomona (City) establish water, recycled water and wastewater rates. He is establishing defensible tiered rates based on the City's multiple sources of water and use characteristics. He is also establishing pumping charges based on the costs associated with serving water to high elevation customers. The engagement includes working with rate committee members, Staff and council members to ascertain their rate setting goals. It also includes a l0—year?nancial plan and modeling rates under industry standard reserve targets.

Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 20
City of Lakewood (CA)
Steve helped the City of Lakewood (City) develop cost-of-service based tiered water rates. Of note, Steve recommended revising the current practice of provi ing free water for the ?rst four units of water in single family ?rst tier. To ease the impacts of this change, the City decided to transition the rates over a 5-year period. The study included a full ?ve-year ?nancial plan and a review and recommendations on reserve levels. city of Orange (CA)
Steve is helping the City of Orange (City) update its water rates and rate structure to ensure that rates are based on cost‘ of-service principles. The study includes a ?nancial plan to fully fund operational and capital expenses and reserves. Steve also helped the City establish wastewater rates for its sanitation enterprise. The rates were revised to re?ect sewer whereas they were previously based on water use.

Channel Islands Beach Community Services District (CA)
Steve helped the Channel Islands Beach Community ServicesDistrict (District) establish equitable water and wastcwater rates. Particularly noteworthy in this study was a class ofcustomers that required the District to reserve capacity in the water treatment plant for possible future growth. Steve explained the cost causation-basedrate for this customer class at Board meetings and the Public Hearing. Steve also held special web-based workshops with this customer class to explain cost-of-service principles and the basis for the rates.

City of Shasta Lake (CA)
The City of Shasta Lake's (City) water revenue dropped signi?cantly during the recent drought - while their water costs increased due to emergency water purchases from expensive sources. In addition, the City’s infrastructure was over 80 years old which necessitated signi?cant capital expenditures. Steve worked with City staff to develop a water ?nancial plan that fully funded their capital program, reserves and operational expenses. The ?nancial plan called for a 30% revenue increase in one year. Steve presented the basis for revenue adjustments and rate development at a well—attended public hearing at City Hall.

Santa Fe Irrigation District (CA)
Santa Fe Irrigation District (District) has one of the largest per capita water use rates in the State due to itslarge lots, many of which have orchards and other agriculture requiring irrigation. Steve worked with City Staff and Board members to establish water cost-of—servicebased rates which included a complete restructuring of their ?xed charges so that the District could pass through their ?xed wholesaler charges. The consumption rates were based on the peaking characteristics of each class. Steve presented at a contentious Public Hearing, in which that rates were adopted, to answer Board and the Publrc’s questions.
city of Encinitas (San Dieguito Water District, CA)
Steve helped the City of Encinitas (City) establish water rates that are based on cost-of-service principles. Cost-of-service based rates creates large bill impacts for the agricultural class. Steve worked with City staff and the Board rate setting committee to evaluate rates and explain rate setting basics to the committee and public in a Proposition 218 public hearing.

Trabuco canyon Water District (CA)
Steve helped the Trabuco Canyon Water District (District) establish water, wastewater and recycled water rates. The Trabuco Canyon Water District's revenue plummeted signi?cantly during the recent drought. Steve helped the District established rates, including drought rates, that fully funded operations, capital expenses and reserves. The District previously had a 7-tier rate structure. Steve helped the district establish a 4-tier rate structure in which the rates were based on the supply costs and peaking costs to serve water in each tier - as required by Proposition 218. The study started with a Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 21
pricing objectives exercise so that the Board could communicate its most important rate setting goals. Steve presented ?nancial plan options and rate study results and a public hearing. sweetwaler Authority (CA)
Steve is evaluated water rates, including drought rates, for the Sweetwater Authority in light of recent legal concerns over their current rate structure. The evaluation includes a cost-of-servicestudy to clearly demonstrate the nexus between the rate for each singevfamily tier and the associated costs to serve that tier. The study started by soliciting input from Board members regarding their water pricing objectives so that rates could be designed accordingly. Steve concluded the study with presentations to the District Board of Directors and the Public.

Moulton Niguel Water District (CA)
Steve prepared water and wastewater capacity fees and miscellaneous fees in June of 20l6. The water and wastewater capacity fees were calculated using the buy-in methodology and varied by meter size. The Moulton Niguel Water District (District) also decided to implement a water demand offset fee for new water connections based on the premise that the recycled water system offsets potable water use and bene?ts potable water users. Steve attended Board meetings to help staff explain the rationale and basis for the capacity fees.

Steve also helped calculate miscellaneous fees by interviewing staff to assess the time and effort involved with the fees, bene?t burden rates and material charges to properly calculate over three dozen fees for the water and wastewater systems. The deliverable included an excel model with which the District could update the miscellaneous fees in the future.

City of Henderson (NV)
Steve is creating water and wastewater rate and ?nancial planning models for the City of Henderson as well as updating their water and sewer system development charges. The models will be used over the next 5 to 10 years not only to calculate water and wastewater rates but also to create yearly ?nancial statements.

City of Redlands (CA)
Steve updated the City of Redland‘s (City) water and wastewater rates and development impact fees. The rate study process included workshops with the City’s Utility Advisory Committee in which he presented the basics of rate setting and the ?nancial environment of the utilities. The interactive workshops solicited input from committee members and staff regarding revenue adjustments and rates.

Rainbow Municipal Water District (CA)
Steve created water conservation-based sewer rates to complement the Rainbow Municipal Water District’s (District) conservation-based water rate structure. These rates will be based on the actual water usage of each customer within the District. In addition, appropriate sewage strengths will be incorporated into the District's sewer user rates.

County of San Diego (CA)
Steve prepared integrated ?nancial models for a landmark study for the County of San Diego. The study will not only be updating the sewer user, capacity, and annexation fees for the nine dependent sewer districts but will also include the economic analysis of creating one “super sanitation district." Long—range ?nancial plans will be prepared for all ofthe districts as well as the super district including 10 years of operational and capital costs.

Town of Quartzsite (AZ)
Steve performed a lhirdeparty rate review of a recently completed water and wastewater rate study for the Town of Quartzsitc(Town). The Town is concerned with insuring that their winter RV population is paying their fair share of the water and sewer expenses.

Item #9.1.

Rnrreus 22
Town of Parker (AZ)
Steve updated the Town of Parker's (Town) water rates. One of the Town's main concems was the fairness and equity of water system cost distribution given the Town's large population of Native Americans who do not pay sales or utility taxes yet bene?t from Town parks and other Town amenities. He also helped the Town establish operating and capital reserves.

Walnut Valley Water District (CA)
Steve performed the Walnut Valley Water District's (District) first professional rate study which included updating the rate structure. Steve created a three-tier residential rate structure to help decrease discretionary consumption and ensure the District avoids or reduces water purchase surcharges from the Metropolitan Water District. He presented his ?ndings to District staff and the District’s Board of Directors.

Fallhrook Public Utility District (CA)
With water shortages looming in Southern California, this progressive water and sewer district asked for help creating water conservation-based sewer rates to complement their conservation-based water structure. Steve created rates based on the actual water usage of each customer within the Fallbrook Public Utility District (District). ln addition, appropriate sewage strengths were incorporated into the District’s sewer user rates.

Otay Water District (CA)
The Otay Water District (District) performs an update to their capacity and annexation fees every ?ve years. In this update they changed their capacity fee from an incremental fee based on future costs to a combined fee structure using replacement costs less depreciation. They are also revised their annexation fee to recover taxes and availability charges paid by existing users who are currently inside the District’s boundaries. In addition, they added a new water supply fee to recover the expansion costs of their water system. This is a new fee that addresses the issue of new development bringing their own water supply or pay for offsets.

Steve was also the lead economist on a fast track study to assist the District in adding further conservation incentives into their potable and reclaimed water user rates. Specifically, he added rate blocks into their non-residential and landscaping user rate structures based on specific base extra capacity cost allocations per user class. in addition, he assisted the District in the preparation of a drought/ shortage rate structure that overlays their new conservation rate structure. This drought rate structure is based on the guidelines provided by the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California and the San Diego County Water Authority.

Rowland Water District (CA)
Steve updated the Rowland Water District’s (District) water rates for the second time. The District had several concerns for the most recent study which included a large debt issue for a recycled water system as well as staff increases and wholesale water rate increases. The model helped the district size its debt issue by performing a rate sensitivity analysis to the size of the debt issue.

Olivenhain Municipal Water District (CA)
Steve created a drought rate model to help the Olivenhain Municipal Water District (District) develop a drought rate ordinance. The model calculated commodity rate adjustments for four drought stages. It allowed for customer voluntary cutbacks in consumption as well as cutbacks due to higher water prices using the price elasticity of water. The model will help ensure the District maintains adequate revenue in times of drought.

Steve helped the District update their wastewater rates and developed a customized model for its unique rate structure.

The District’s residential rates are a flat charge per Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) and the commercial rate structure includes a service charge per EDU and a variable rate based on measured water consumption.

Item #9.1.

nAF'rEI.Is 23
Steve also prepared valuation calculationsfor the system capacity required for update of water and wastewater connection and annexation fees for the District. The analysis showed that the District would bene?t by changing capacity fee calculation methodologies from a growth method to a combined method, thereby imposing lessrestrictions on the use of capacity fee revenue.

Steve modeled the long-term cost of several different water sources for the District. Options included purchasing treated water, expanding their water treatment plant and purchasing untreated water from the Metropolitan Water District or partnering with other local agencies to desaliriate ocean water. The model contained many variable inputs to allow “what-if" scenario analysis. Although purchasing treated water was the least costly option, the authority favored plant expansion due to other bene?ts such as reliability of water supply. city of Poway (CA)
Steve completely rebuilt the City of Poway’s water and wastewater rate models to reflect the latest rate setting practices.

Helix Water District (CA)
Steve created an economic model to add life-line and a water waster tier to the Helix Water District’s (District) three-tier rate structure. In addition, budget—basedwater rates were created for all irrigation accounts. The District is transitioning slowly to budget-based rates due to staf?ng limitations. In 2010 they will implement budget-based rates for all commercial accounts.

Steve also performed all of the economic modeling in the preparation of the District's ?rst Capacity Fee study. The capacity fee was designed to collect a buy-in portion based on replacement costs of the District's current water system and the incremental cost of adding a new water supply, the El Monte Valley Ground Water Recharge project.

City of Anaheim (CA)
Steve prepared a commercial and residential wastewater rate study for the City of Anaheim (City). The proposed rate structure was based on water consumption to replace the antiquated structure based on the number of toilets. Proper water use and wastewater retum to sewer analysis is required to ensure proper revenue generation for the City. city of Coronado (CA)
Steve is helping restructure the City of Coronadds wastewater rates from a flat parcelrbased fee for residential users to one with a consumption-based charge and a ?xed charge.

City of Lemon Grove (CA)
Steve helped update the commercial and residential wastewater rates for the City of Lemon Grove. The rate structure included 20 different user classes for residential, commercial, and institutional customers.

Western Municipal Water District (CA)
Steve prepared a long»range ?nancial plan to help ensure the Western Municipal Water District's (District) financial health. Based on the District's ?ve-year CIP, in?ationary water rate adjustments, and reserve policies, the plan showed that a debt issue was needed to execute the CIP and maintain adequate reserves.

Julian and Pine Valley Sanitation Districts (CA)
Steve updated the wastewater rates and connection fees for both sanitation districts. The wastewater fees had not been updated for several years in one district and over 15 years in the other necessitating large rate increases. He developed a few different scenarios which included postponing ClP projects or lowering reserve balances, to ease ratepayers into higher rates.

Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 24
San Antonio Water System (TX)
Steve prepared a sewer impact fee economic model and study for the City of San Antonio. This included a valuation of the system‘: facilities using several asset-based approaches. Ultimately the total net book value without depreciation was selected as the basis for the valuation of the System's assets. In addition, an equity residual model was prepared that included the allocation of the present value of past and future debt service payments. The study also analyzed a number ofimpact fee structures to determine the most fair and equitable fee.

La Habra Heights county Water District (CA)
Steve assisted with the update in water user rates, capacity charges, and long-range ?nancial plan for the La Habra Heights County Water‘ District (District). The 2001 study set the District's user rates for ?ve years and expired in 2005.

The District had recently completed an updated Water Master Plan and wished to incorporate the new cost of replacement capital facilities for the next 10 years into their longarange ?nancial plan and user rates.

City of La Habra (CA)
Steve helped prepare the City of La Habra‘s (City) first professional sewer user rate study. This study followed industry standards and an EPA approved rate structure. The City plans to create a formal enterprise fund for their sewer utility to properly ?nance their sewer operations and maintenance. He developed the long—range?nancial plan modeled year—end cash reserves to ensure execution ofthe City's $21 million capital improvement program and to fund operations and maintenance.

City of Webster (TX)
Steve is constructing a stormwater model for the City of Webster (City). The rates are based on the impervious surface of each parcel. The City plans using water meters to bill customers.

City of Norman (OK)
Steve is Constructing a stormwater rate model for the City of Norman. The model is constructed in several different ways to allow the city council to cltoose from alternative rate structures, including the contentious issue of whether or not Oklahoma University, which owns large parcels of impervious surface area, will support the stormwater utility.

Boxelder county (UT)
Steve assisted Boxelder County in the determination of how they will ?nance their required stormwater improvements.

They plan to create a stormwater utility through diverse funding sources including impact and user fees, a community ?nancing district, and grants and loans. The goal of this study was to identify and size a system of improvements which will achieve the greatest de?ned economic bene?t (both local and regional) per dollar of cost, based on the 100-year floodplain extents.

City of Fullerton (CA)
Steve conducted a ?eld audit to determine appropriate return to sewer flows as well as fats, oils and greases surcharge rates for the top 50 industrial water customers in the City of Fullerton.

Utility and Water Right Valuations Experience
Blue Plains Wastewaler Treatment (DC)
Steve is valuing the largest advanced wastewater treatment plant in the world (370 MGD) using several different valuation methods for Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. The study values capacity rights in a treatment plant shared by several users. Valuation methodologies include original cost, reproduction cost, and market comparables.

Item #9.1.

RAFYELIS 25
Metro Wastewater Joint Powers Authority (CA)
Steve updated a prior valuation study which values treatment capacity in the San Diego Metropolitan Wastewater System. The valuation study considered several different valuation methodologies including the asset approach, prior sale (market comparables); buyer’s avoided cost, seller's potential future cost and alternative investment value. city of Pico Rivera (CA)
Steve is slated to help the City of Pico Rivera value groundwater pumping rights. Groundwater pumping rights will likely be valued using both a market comparables approach and a buyer’s avoided cost approach, Other Financial and Management Experience
Town of Parker (AZ)
Steve is performing a benchmarking analysis of the Town of Parker's (Town) water, parks and recreation and streets departments due to efficiency concerns. The study will compare the Town's cost efficiency with other small towns.

Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton (CA)
Steve led an asset inventory and condition assessment of the water and wastewater systems on Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton. The inventory included ?eld visits and literature reviews to document and describe the extent and condition of all utility assets. Asset data was compiled in a database and linked to GIS mapping.

Olivenhain Municipal Water District (CA)
Steve developed an economic model that evaluates the cost benefit analysis of four different water supply options including desalinization, increased use of recycled water, and expansion of their existing water treatment plant using membrane technology. Proposed funding levels were prepared for the long-range ?nancial plan to match projects against the revenue levels necessary to support them.
confidential Fortune 500 Aerospace Corporation (CA)
Steve created an excel based ?nancial model to cost and budget one of the largest corporate environmental liabilities » a nineamiie long plume of rocket fucl—relatedcontamination — underlying several cities in southern California. Remediation strategies were constantly changing and, thus, the model simulated costs for numerous remediation alternatives. The model also allowed for monthly and yearly budgeting and total clean-up expenditures.

Earth Tech (CA)
Steve developed an Operation Excellence Plan to ensure client satisfaction on the execution ofa multimillion-dollar Master Services Agreement with a Fortune 500 Aerospace Corporation. The plan provided guidance in many ar'eas including QA/QC, client feedback, staff allocation, etc. The plan also included performance measures to evaluate client satisfaction, program success, and failures.

Otay Water District (CA)
Steve assisted in facilitating performance metric workshops with the Otay Water District management staff. The workshops discussed performance metric basics, analyzed dozens of performance metrics, how to calculate them, and eventually helped staff narrow down the metrics they believed were best for their utility.

Keweenaw National Historical Park, National Park Service (MI) Steve coauthored a business plan submitted to the US. Congress to seek additional funding to expand a national park in Michigan. The business plan included a historical cost accounting analysis of prior fund use and projected future fund needs.

Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 26
US. Army Sudbury Annex Superfund Site (MA)
Steve was the project manager for the remediation and real estate transfer of a 2,000—acrearmy ammunition depot and research installation in central Massachusetts. Steve oversaw project funds; environmental studies, and construction contracts with consulting ?rms and partnered with the U.S. EPA to determine clean—upgoals and strategies.

PROJECT LIST
- City of Anaheim (CA) - Wastewater rate study
0 Boxelder County (CO) - Stormwater ?mding research
o Blue Plains Wastewater Treatment Plant (DC) 4 Valuation study o Con?dential Fortune 500 Aerospace Corporation (CA) — Strategic remediation ?nancial planning and analysis - City of Coronado (CA) - Wastewater rate study . Earth Tech (CA) - Operation excellence plan o Fallbrook Public Utility District (CA) - Water conservation—basedsewer rates - City of Fullerton (CA) - Sewer fee assessment
a Helix Water District (CA) - Conservation based water rates; capacity fee study - Julian and Pine Valley Sanitation Districts (CA) A Wastewater rate study - Kewcenaw National Historical Park, National Park Service (Ml) — Business plan » City of La Habra (CA) - Sewer rate study and long—range?nancial plan a La Habra Heights County Water District (CA) 7 Water user rate study and longvrange ?nancial plan - City of Lemon Grove (CA) - Wastewater rate study . Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton (CA) - Utility privatization - Metro Wastewater Joint Powers Authority (CA) - Valuation of treatment capacity - City of Norman (OK) — Stormwater rate study
- Olivenhain Municipal Water District (CA) - Drought water rates; wastewater rate update; capacity and annexation fee update; long—termwater planning financial model; water supply cost bene?t analysis - Otay Water District (CA) — Capacity fees update; water rate structure update and drought phasing plan; performance metrics
o Town of Parker (AZ) - Water rate study; benchmarking and ef?ciency analysis - City of Pico Rivera (CA) - Valuation of groundwater
o pumping rights
- City of Poway (CA) - Water and wastewater rate models - Town of Quartzsite(AZ) - Third party rate review
- Rainbow Municipal Water District (CA) - Water conservatiombased sewer rates 0 Rowland Water District (CA) - Water rate study
- San Antonio Water System (TX) - Sewer impact fee study . County of San Diego (CA) - Sewer utility rate study - Sweetwater Authority (CA) - Water rate study
- U.S. Army Sudbury Annex Superfund Site (MA) - Base realignment and closure 0 Walnut Valley Water District (CA) 4 Water rate study
Item #9.1.

Kevin Kostiuk

PROJECT MANAGER
Manager
ROLE
Kevin will manage the day-to—dayaspects of the project ensuring it is within budget, on schedule, and effectively meets the City’s objectives. He will also lead the consulting staff in conducting analyses and preparing deliverables for the project. Kevin will serve as the City's main point of contact for the project.

PROFILE
Kevin has a background in economics and accounting and possesses extensive analytical skills. His expertise lies in water resources management, environmental economics, environmental policy, and federal water supply and ?ood control policy. Kevin is a member of the American Water Works Association (AWWA) Young Professionals and the Young Professionals Summit Committees in conjunction with the AWWA Utility Management Conference (UMC). He has authored an article on potable reuse in Journal AWWA discussing the treatment, ?nancing structures, and pricing oftreated water at advanced puri?cation treatment plants; an article on municipal water demand pattern changes during the recent State-wide drought; and an article on proactive ?nancial planning in times of drought for California Society of Municipal Finance Officers (CSMFO) Magazine. Most recently Kevin presented at the AWWA UMC discussing a recent evaluation of the conceptual Customerselect rate model for Soquel Creek Water District.

KEY PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Crescenla Valley Water District (CA)
Kevin developed a combined water and sewer financial plan and rate model for the Crescenta Valley Water District (District) in 20l6. The cost-of-service and RAFTELIS 27
spoclaltlu
- Water& Drought rate design
- water budget rate structures
- Utrtitycost-of~seNice
- Sustainable Groundwater
Management Act
- Data analysts
- Envtronmental policy analysts
Profosslonll History
- Rattetts. Manager (2020-present).
senrorconsultant (2o14v2o19);
consultant (2o14—2o15)
- Turner New Zealand, |l'|E . Director
orOperaitons (2009-2012);
Accountrng Manager (2007-2009)
~ Lesley, Trtomas.Schwat1 &
Poslma, lne Staff Accountant
(2007)
Education
I Master of Environmental
Management — Duke unrverstty
(2014)
I Bachelor ofAns in Business‘
Economics & History - University of
California‘Santa Barbara (2005)
rate study included several workshops with the District Board which culminated in structural changes to the District's existing water and sewer rate structures. In addition to the tiered water rate structure, which was ultimately adopted, Kevin developed a water budget rate model for evaluation by District staff and the District Board.

Prior to the cost»of-service and rate study, Kevin performed an economic analysis for the District to determine the feasibility of offsetting imported water supply with the production oflocal groundwater. Kevin created a customized model for the District to use under different scenarios of capital requirements, lease options, and contract lengths. As part of the study, he reviewed the Districts prior consultant's work, determined internal rate of returns, calculated the net present value of district savings, and determined the cost at which the District should lease water rights for groundwater prod uction.

East Valley Water District (CA)
Raftelis contracted with East Valley Water District (District) in 2014 to develop budget-based rates to replace the District's existing uniform rate structure. Kevin assisted the District with design and implementation ofbudget—based water rates for their 23,000 accounts including residential, commercial and irrigation customers. The stttdy included Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 25
creation of a long-term ?nancial plan and full cost~of-service study for the water enterprise. Kevin developed the 10 year ?nancial plan model, rate model, and water budget model for the District.

Kevin worked closely with the District‘s ?nance, IT, and, billing departments in the early stages to analyze customer account level data including monthly use. He also worked with the District's GIS and other outside consultanm to develop the water budget model using irrigable landscape area, customer class, assessor parcel number (AFN), etc. for construction ofindoor and outdoor allocations, or budgets.

The project incorporated signi?cant public outreach whereby Raftelis led meetings with ratepayers to receive input, provide study updates, and answer questions of the public. The ratepayer meetings assisted adoption of the new rate structure and implementation. The rate structure that the Board adopted allows for the most precise, scientific and equitable design of rate structures, tailored speci?cally to an individual account.

Goleta Water District (CA)
Kevin completed a full water cost-of»service study for the Goleta Water District (District) which included design of inclining tiered rates for their singe-family residential class, as well as agricultural rates for two classes. Complexities in customer classes’ access to District water supplies, interruptibility during times of drought, and bene?t (or lack thereof) from treatment made the analysis unique and challenging. The study included development of a long term ?nancial plan model, rate model, and corresponding bill impacts.

To achieve the District's demand reduction targets as outlined in their Drought Management Plan, the District wished to explore drought rates/ drought surcharges to curb demand. Ultimately, Kevin developed three options of revenue neutral drought Surcharges for the Boards consideration. These various options ranged from targeted surcharges on an inter and intra—classbasis, to a surcharge applied to non-drought commodity rates, to a uniform commodity surcharge irrespective of customer class or use. The proposed rates and drought surcharges were adopted and implemented July I, 2015.

City of Redlands (CA)
Kevin updated prior financial plans developed by Raftelis for the City of Redlands (City) for their water and sewer enterprises. The update included building in more ?exibility to the model for ease of use and for future updates, as well as, making the model dashboards more user friendly.

The statewide drought in California called for a mandatory 25% reduction for all water service agencies in the state. The City’s target was to reduce residential consumption by 35%. Kevin assisted the City in design and implementation of drought surcharges to achieve a 35% reduction and to recover lost revenue from reduced water sales.

Additional work for the City included updating the City's Storm Drain Impact Fee and miscellaneous fee for National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) inspections as part of the MS4 permit requirement. The storm drain fee had not been reevaluated in 20 years. Additionally, the City had recently completed a Storm Drain Master Plan which called for $83 million in improvements to system de?ciencies. Kevin developed a methodology to retain the existing impact fee structure while updating the fee paid by different land use classes.

In 2015 and 2016 Kevin developed a water budget rate model for the City to evaluate a new rate structure. The model integrated with the existing water ?nancial plan model and designed parallel water budget rates for consideration by City staff and the Council.
city of Camarillo (CA)
Raftelis has provided rate consulting services to the City of Camarillo (City) for the past seven years with Kevin serving as lead analyst the past three years. In the current rate cycle Kevin serves as project manager. The City adopts rates on a Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 25
two-year cycle and the most recent study included rebuilding long term ?nancial plan models, revising the wastewater utility's rate structure, and performing a cost-of-service analysis for the sewer utility. Kevin has made presentations to the City Manager, City’s Utility Committee, and City Council in consecutive years. Kevin successfully presented rates to City Council in December 2016, November 2017, and November 2018.

During the height of the most recent state-wide drought, the City contracted with Raftelis to evaluate emergency drought rates as a conservation and revenue recovery tool. Kevin adapted the existing ?nancial plan model and developed multiple scenarios based upon the City’s water supply condition stages. Kevin developed drought rates utilizing the City's financial plan at each stage and estimating water reductions. The rates were not adopted prior to the end of the state-wide drought however the drought tool is available for quick implementation should drought conditionsreturn. Raftelis is currently contracted with the City for another two-year rate and capacity fee study for 2019 with Kevin as project ma nager.

City of Tustin (CA)
Raftelis contracted with the City of Tustin (City) to develop a 10—year?nancial plan and evaluate a budget-based rate structure for its customers. Kevin worked extensively with City staff, Raftelis’ data services team, and outside consultants of the City to develop the water budget allocation and rate model for the City's approximately 14,000 customer accounts.

As part ofthe model build, data from GIS consultants had to be organized and validated for each of the City customers’ parcels. Raftelis’ data services team worked internally to ensure matches between assessor‘s data and GIS data for integration to the water budget model. Rates and customer impacts have been presented to City staff and a public outreach campaign is being devised in anticipation of the council workshop. The project is ongoing.

Placer County Water Agency (CA)
In 2015 Placer County Water Agency (PCWA) contracted with Raftelis to evaluate its water system. PCWA provides retail and wholesale water service to treated water and raw water users throughout western Placer County. In Phase I of the project Kevin evaluated the current systems four service zones and numerous service classes and customer classes.

Raftelis then provided recommendations to consolidate and simplify the water system organization and structure. In Phase 11Raftelis performed a cost allocation study between the four proposed classes of service to identify the cost of providing service to these distinct users. Phase III consisted of performing cost-of-service analyses for PCWA‘s four service classes and developing corresponding rates. The study was completed in October 2017 with new organization, rate structures, and associated rates implemented January 1, 2018.

Additional to the water system evaluation and costaofaservice study, Kevin developed a water budget model for PCWA‘s internal use The water budget model allows PCWA to examine their Single Family Residential (SFR) customer's usage patterns relative to efficiency standards, climate, and account level characteristics. The model will aid in water management and give insight into water demand pattern changes with the Agency’s new rate structure and rates.

Mammoth community Water District (CA)
Raftelis provided the Mammoth Community Water District (District) with a 10-year ?nancial plan model for both the water and wastewater enterprises, as well as performing a cost-of—serviceanalysis for the water enterprise. The district carries out operating and capital activities that are indirectly assigned to the two enterprises. Kevin worked with District staff to carry out a cost allocation study to distribute administrative costs appropriately. Raftelis recommended changes to the water rate structure as part of the study to simplify the rates and make them more legally defensible.

The study took place at the heigctt of the statewide drought and as part of meproject Kevin developed drougit rates for the District to implement in times of mandatory conservation or water supply shortage. Being an agency with a large seasonal population Raftelis worked with staff to determine the most appropriate and effective means of charging the drought rates. Kevin designed drought rates for each stage of the Districts water conservation plan, effective on the Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS an
meter—based?xed charge of a customer's bill. This ensured that every connection in the water system shared in the burden caused by the drought, irrespective of water use. Raftelis also evaluated existing capacity fees for both enterprises. This task is ongoing. The water rates, wastewater rates, and drought rates were adopted and implemented January 2016.

In 2018 the District again contracted with Raftelis to conduct a wastewater cost-of-service and rate study as well as a capacity fee study for both utilities. Raftelis developed updated water and wastewater capacity fees which meet the District's ?nancial and policy objectives. Capacity are scheduled for adoption in Summer 2019. The cost-o?service study is ongoing.

Borrego Water District (CA)
Raftelis contracted with the Borrego Water District (District) to evaluate the impact of county growth projections as well as the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) of 2014. Kevin utilized the existing ?nancial plan model, water supply analyses provided by other District consultants, and assumptions on land acquisitions to determine the effect of SGMA on long term water rates. The Borrego Groundwater Basin is critically over drafted, and users will need to decrease water production signi?cantly to achieve sustainable yield by 2040. This will require the District to reduce per capita water use and acquire production credits within the basin by fallowing agricultural land. Kevin estimated water rates in each year through 2040 incorporating assumptions on groundwater production, market values of land in the basin, debt ?nancing, and water source alternatives,
In 2017 Kevin examined the affordability of water rates charged to the District's customers. The assessment analyzed both existing and future rates and affordability under the SGMA scenario identi?ed in 2016. The affordability assessment relied upon the SGMA Impact Assessment and corresponding demand projections, basin yield assumptions, ?nancing assumptions, and projected rates to the year 2040. The project allowed the District to understand affordability of existing rates and water allocation and to estimate the affordability impacts of SGMA compliance in the Borrego Groundwater Basin over the long term.

Borrego Valley Groundwater Sustainability Agency (CA)
Raftelis was contracted by the Borrego Valley Groundwater Sustainability Agency (Agency) to develop a ?nancial planning model and fee options for the new entity as mandated by the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). Tasks includedworking with the core project team to develop policy options for fee structuring and various fee recovery mechanisms. Project deliverables included a ?nancing plan memorandum, an Excel-based ?nancial plan Model, operating and administrative budget creation, and a user manual for the Excel Model. The deliverables were used in the submission ofthe Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) to the State Department of Water Resources (DWR) in 2019.

Soquel Creek Water District (CA)
The Soquel Creek Water‘ District (District) contracted with Raftelis in 2017 to evaluate a novel rate structure for its ratepayers. Kevin participated in several workshops with the District's citizen Water Rates Advisory Committee and Board of Directors to develop of policy framework for the rate structure and conduct pricing objectives exercises with both groups. Kevin developed a report for the District which informed the rate design in 2018.

In 2018 Raftelis contracted with the District for a long-term ?nancing plan and rate study. Kevin served as the assistant project manager and oversaw the model creation for the ?nancial plan, tiered rate model, and Customerselect rate model.

The District adopted our recommended three years of rates in February 2019, Summerland Sanitary District (CA)
Raftelis contracted with the Summerland Sanitary District (District) in 2016 to perform a cost-of-service and rate study for wastcwater services.The study included a 10year ?nancial plan model, cost-of-service analysis, and review of the existing equivalency de?nitions for the District's user classes. Additional work included adoption ofa formal ?nancial Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS :1
reserves policy to ensure long term fiscal health as well as updates and additions to the District’s miscellaneous fee schedule. Kevin served as project manager and lead analyst for the project and held several meetings with District staff, the Finance Committee, and the Board of Directors. Five years of rates were adopted in December 2017.

Monterey County Water Resources Agency - New source Water Evaluation (CA) In 2017, Kevin performed a cost analysis and evaluation of new source waters from recycled water for its coastal agricultural users. Recycled water production from the several sources will require new infrastructure, treatment, and maintenance. Kevin built an electronic model which incorporated different climate scenarios, costs of capital, operating, maintenance, and treatment, and the water available from all sources under different weather conditions and water rights.

The project is ongoing with a series of meetings with the Agency’s agricultural customers, County Board of Supervisors, and stakeholder agencies.

City of Buenaventura (Venlura)
Raftelis developed long-range financial plans so that the water and wastewater utilities could be ?nancially stable and save costs in the long run. Rattelis also assisted the City of Buenaventura (City) with developing different water and wastewater rate alternatives with various scenarios based upon estimated water sales and capital improvement plan (CIP) funding. The study is being conducted with several meetings and input from stakeholders comprised of customers within the City. Raftelis educates the Water Commission on the basics of rates, cost allocations, and rate design to obtain their buy—inusing the dashboards in the rate models that were developed. This allows us to demonstrate the impacts of various revenue adjustments on the long-term ?nancial stability of the enterprises. As of May 20l9 the studies are ongoing.

City of Riverside (CA)
Kevin completed a study for the City of Riverside (City) to determine the value of an elevation fee credit for present and future customers in a special district, The project required calculation of asset replacement values for infrastructure serving the special district, specific to booster capacity, and within the context of a historical assessment. The ?ndings from the study were used to defend the City’s move to assess its elevation fee schedule.

City of Sim‘ Valley (CA)
The City of Simi Valley (City) had last raised sewer rates in fiscal year 2008-2009 and was facing a backlog of sewer system improvements and repair and replacement. Kevin updated the existing sewer financial plan with recent data, as well as updated the cost-of-service analysis, As part of the study, tier definitions were changed for nonresidential customers to reduce the base charge on small users without impacting revenue recovery. Working with City staff, and with presentations to City management, Raftelis assisted in getting Council authorization for proposition 2l8 notices of a rate increase to the City's customers. The revenue increases will allow the City to commence the public works department's capital improvement schedule while maintaining reserve funds at target levels. city of Henderson (NV)
Kevin created water and wastewater rate and financial planning models for the City of Henderson (City) as well as updated their water and sewer system development charges. The project created a combined model for the water and sewer enterprises which incorporated finance department reporting tools. The combined model allows the utility (water and sewer) to be viewed as a one, with impacts and reporting available to the user. The models will be used over the next 10 years to calculate water and wastewater rates as well as to create annual financial statements, city of Corona (CA)
Kevin assisted the City of Corona (City) in updating its financial plans for the water and reclaimed water enterprises. The study included performing cost-of-service analyses for both utilities and updating the water budget rate structure. In addition, Kevin developed a framework and corresponding rates for contract reclaimed water customers.

Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 32
City of Raleigh Public Utilities Departmenb American Rivers (NC) Kevin served as project leader for a study of alternatives to meet Raleigh's long term water supply shortfall. The project examined four options in extending the life of the existing federal reservoir, thereby postponing capital expenditures on a new raw water supply. Results were delivered to city staff, their consultants and the United States Army Corps of Engineers.

Lower Cape Fear Water Quality Trading Program - The Nature conservancy (NC) To reduce nutrient loading and decrease utility costs, The Nature Conservancy proposed a Water Fund to improve water quality through improved agricultural practices on private landholdings in the watershed. Kevin was in charge of researching comparable programs and providing options for a ?nancial mechanism and governance approach between various stakeholders in the region including utilities, agriculture, environmental organizations and community groups.

City of San Jose (CA)
Raftelis contracted with the City in 2016 to perform a cost-of-service and rate study for the City's water enterprise. The study included creation of a 10 year ?nancial plan model, cost-of-service analysis, and redesign of the City’s water rate structures. Kevin as lead analyst developed the financial plan model and worked closely with City staff to incorporate the City's budgetary information as part of the planning exercise. Additionally, Kevin worked with the City’: water resources manager and water system engineer to identify future supply and demand in each of the City‘s different service areas, with differentiated water rates for each area. At the conclusion ofthe study Kevin held a session to train staff on use of the electmnit: financial plan model. The project was completed in 2017.

Santa Cruz Mid-county Groundwater Agency (CA)
Raftelis was contr'acted by the Agency to evaluate funding criteria for Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) fees and calculate preliminary fees. Kevin served as the project manager. Raftelis conducted multiple meetings and webinars with County staff and the Advisory Committee to produce a ?nancial budget for management activities, discuss fee structure options, and develop a pricing objectives exercise for the GSA Board. The project culminated with fee analysis and production ofa White Paper to assist the Agency in navigating their ?nancing plan as part ofthe GSP submittal process, as well as recovering costs of management over the long term. The project is complete as of May 2019.

PROJECT LIST
. Antelope Valley (CA) - East Kern Water Agency
- Citrus Heights Water District (CA) - Groundwater supply analysis - Coastside County Water District (CA) — Water rate study - Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (CA) — Drought surcharge study - La Canada Irrigation District (CA) — Water cost-of-service and rate study 0 City of Lancaster (CA) - Wastewater c0st~of—servicestudy - Madera County Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (CA) . Montecito Basin Groundwater Sustainability Agency (CA) a City of Torrance (CA) — Wastewater cost-ofeservice and rate study a Triunfo Sanitation District (CA) — Water rate study . Ventura County Waterworks District No. S Simi Valley (CA) Item #9.1.

RAFTELI5 33
Charles Diamond

ASSISTANT PROJECT MANAGER
Senior Consultant
R0 LE spoclaltlu
- Ultltlyiinanciai analysis
Charles will assist the Project Manager with managing the day-to-day aspects of - Data collection 8. analysis the project and leading the consulting staff in conducting analyses and preparing ' Slalisllcal analYSiS deliverables for the project. Proksslonal History
- Raftelis‘ Senior Consultant (2021.

PR0F"-E present). Consultant (2o19—2o2o).
. , Associate Consultant t2o17—2o1t3)
Charles has a background in natural resource economics and water resources management. His expertise lies in ?nancial modeling and data analysis. He _ I . _
lducallon
joined Raftelis initially in 2017 as an associate consultant upon receiving a . Mastery Envimnmentai science 3, master's degree from the University of California, Santa Barbara’s Bren School of M3"59e'"5"‘Male’ RESWCBS Management) — Urllvetslly at
Environmental Science & Management. Charles has developed ?nancial models cammia? Sam Barbara (2017) and conducted analyses for water and wastewater rate studies as well as capacity . Bacheio, 0153.9.-we in fee studies‘ Environmenlal Economics & Policy —
university of camomra,Berkeley
(2013)

KEY PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Alameda County Water District (CA)
Alameda County Water District (ACWD) engaged Raftelis in 2017 to provide multi-year rate design and ?nancial advisory services, Charles provided ACWD staff with technical support in updating the existing ?nancial plan model that Raftelis had developed for ACWD’s previous ?nancial plan update. Additionally, Charles designed alternative inclining tiered rates for consideration by the ACWD Board and developed drought rates to be activated during ACWD‘s varying drought stages as de?ned in the agency‘: Urban Water Management Plan. Charles developed a study report for ACWD staffthat outlined the ?nancial plan update and the newly proposed drought rates. Charles also assisted other Raftelis staff in conducting a facility capacity fee study for ACWD during this time.

Antelope Valley-East Kern Water Agency (CA)
The Antelope Va1lcy—EastKern Water Agency (Agency) engaged Raftelis in 2019 to provide an annual update of the Agency's ?ve—year?nancial plan and to propose rates for 2020, Charles served as lead analyst on the sttidy update. He updated the existing ?nancial plan model, and also worked with Agency staff to evaluate potential rate structure alternatives to be considered in future years. Charles developed a study report to document the key results of the study.

Antelope Valley State Water contractors Association (CA) The Antelope Valley State Water Contractors Association (AVSWCA) engaged Raftelis in 2018 to conduct a ?nancial analysis study to develop a proposed replacement water assessment for groundwater users in the area. Charles conducted ?nancial analyses necessary to develop an equitable and defensible replacement water assessment that accounts for State Water Project costs incurred by AVSWCA’s member agencies. As the lead analyst on the project, Charles developed an Excel-based replacement water assessment model and drafted a study report for AVSWCA staff. city of Brentwood (CA)
The City of Brentwood (City) engaged Raftelis to conduct a water and wastewater rate study. In 2017, Raftelis helped the City evaluate the current water and wastewater utilities’ cost-of-service and adjusted rates accordingly. Recently Charles Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS :4
updated a ?nancial plan model and performed a cost-of-serviceanalysis for the City's wastewater utility. Charles assisted with the update of existing rates as well as the development of a proposed alternative rate structure and rates.

Cucamonga Valley Water District (CA)
The Cucamonga Valley Water District (District) engaged Raftelis in 2019 to conduct a water ?nancial plan and cost-ofservice study. The Study included the development of a ?ve~year ?nancial plan, a cost~of-service analysis, and the development of a proposed ?ve-year schedule of rates. Raftelis also developed drought rates to be implemented during periods of declared water supply shortages per the District's Water Supply Shonage Contingency Plan. Charles served as lead analyst, conducting technical analysis and preparing key deliverables for the study. The study was temporarily postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and proposed rates were successfully adopted by the District's Board of Directors in September 2021.

City of Dixon (CA)
The City of Dixon (City) engaged Raftelis in 2018 to conduct a water rate study to develop updated water rates for the City’s water utility. Charles developed a 10-year ?nancial plan model, performed a costofvservice analysis, and developed a ?ve—yearschedule of proposed water rates. Charles also assisted in the preparation of presentation materials for water rate workshops with the City Council.

City of El Monte (CA)
The City of El Monte (City) engaged Raftelis in 20l9 to conduct a water rate study. Charles attended meetings with City staff, collected and reviewed necessary data for the study, developed a user-friendly ?ve-year ?nancial plan model, and developed a proposed rate schedule over a ?ve-year period. Additionally, Charles developed water shortage rates to be implemented by the City during times of declared water supply shortages. He also developed a Cost Allocation Plan model in concurrence with the water rate study to assist the City in allocating personnel costs associated with providing water service to the City's water utility‘
Goleta Water Di ict (CA)
The Goleta Water District (District) engaged Raftelis in 20l9 to conduct a water rate study. Charles developed a multiyear ?nancial plan model, performed a cost-of-service analysis, and developed a ?ve—yearschedule of proposed water rates as Raftelis‘ lead analyst on the study. Additionally, Charles prepared presentation materials for meetings with the District's Board of Directors tings and the rate study report and drafted the study report to serve as an administrative record.

La ca?ada Irrigation District (CA)
La Canada Irrigation District (District) engaged Raftelis to conduct a water rate study. Since the last rate study was performed in 2008, Raftelis helped the District evaluate the eost—of—serviceand adjusted rates accordingly. In 2017, Charles developed a ?nancial plan model for the District to support the ?nancial plan development for ?scal years 2018 to 2027. Charles also recently performed a cost-of-service analysis to assist with the update of the District's rates, City of Long Beach (CA)
The City of Long Beach (City) engaged Raftelis in 2018 to develop an updated ?nancial plan model for the C1ty’swater and wastewater utilities. Raftelis had previously conducted a comprehensive water and wastewater cost~of—sen/icerate study in 2016 for the City. Charles developed an updated ?nancial plan model to be used by City staff in future ?nancial planning efforts. The ?nancial plan model was designed speci?cally to facilitate ease of use and understanding while providing for convenient and ?exible scenario analysis. Charles worked with City staff to provide customized model features with speci?c functionalities based on requests and input from City staff.

Item #9.1.

nnrrsus 35
Olivenhain Municipal Water District (CA)
Olivenhain Municipal Water District (District) engaged Raftelis in 2019 to conduct a comprehensive water rate study. As a member agency of the San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA), the District provides water service to over 80,000 people in northern San Diego County. Raftelis had conducted the previous cosbofaservice analysis and rate study for the District in 2014. As part of the rate study effort, Charles developed a new ?nancial plan model for the District's water enterprise, performed a cost-of-service analysis, and developed updated tiered rates based on current customer usage characteristics. Additionally, Charles assisted in redesigning the Districts water supply shortage rates, which are activated during periods of reduced water demand in order to recover‘ reduced revenues from volumetric rates.

Municipal Water District of Orange County (CA)
The Municipal Water District of Orange County (District) engaged Raftelis in 2020 to conduct a study to establish service charges for the District (which is a wholesale water importer) to recover its costs from its member agencies. Raftelis evaluated the District’s existing rate structure and recommended changes as necessary. Charles conducted all technical analysis and prepared deliverables to be presented to District staffand its member agencies. Charles documented the results of the study in a ?nal report to District staff.

National Water and Sewerage Authority of Grenada (Eastern Caribbean) The National Water and Sewerage Authority of Grenada (NAWASA) engaged Raftelis in 2019 to conduct a water and sewer rate study for the eastern Caribbean country of Grenada’s national water and sewer utility. Charles developed a water and wastewater ?nancial plan and rate model in Microsoft Excel and travelled out to Grenada for a week of onsite meetings with NAWASA staff, Charles worked directly with NAWASA staff to develop and re?ne model results, and assisted with the development of a study report to document the key results of the study.

Rancho califomia Water District (CA)
Rancho California Water District (District) engaged Raftelis in 2017 to conduct a water capacity fees study. Raftelis reviewed and updated the existing methodology for calculating the District's water capacity fees, developed a water capacity fee model for use in calculating updated capacity fees. As pan‘. of the study, Charles developed the water capacity fee model, calculated updated water capacity fees, and drafted the study report.

The District engaged Raftelis in 20l8 to conduct a two—year water, recycled water, and wastewater rate study. Raftelis developed a cost-of-servicc rate model to allocate costs and calculate rates for ?scal years 2019 and 2020. Charles assisted with rate model revisions, prepared presentation materials for meetings with the Districts Board of Directors, and drafted the rate study report.

Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority (CA)
The Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority (Authority) engaged Raftelis in 2017 to develop a rate model for the Inland Empire Brine Line, which is a pipeline used to divert non-reclaimable wastewater of high brine content from the upper Santa Ana River Basin. Raftelis reviewed and recommended changes to the Authority’s reserve policies, developed a 10- year ?nancial plan for the Brine Line Enterprise Fund, performed a multi-year cost-of-service analysis, and developed a rate model for use in calculating rates assessed to the Brine Line’s dischargers. Additionally, Raftelis assessed and recommended potential methodologies to be used in the development of long—tcrmcapacity leasing rates and rental charges. Charles developed the ?nancial plan, assisted with the cost-of-service analysis and r'ate calculation, drafted the study report, and attended multiple meeting with the Authority's staff.

Scotts Valley Water District (CA)
The Scotts Valley Water District (District) engaged Raftelis in 2020 to conduct a water‘ cost»of—service study for the District’s potable water and recycled water funds. The Study included thc development ofa ?ve—year?nancial plan, a cost-of»ser'vice analysis, and the development of proposed ?ve—yearrate schedules for the potable water fund and recycled Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS as
water fund. Charles served as lead analyst, conducting all technical analysis and preparing all key deliverables for the study. The proposed rates were successfully adopted by the District‘s Board of Directors in October 2021.

City of Simi Valley (CA)
The City of Simi Valley (City) engaged Raftelis in 2019 to conduct a water rate study for the City’s water utility. The Study included the development ofa ?ve-year ?nancial plan, a cost-of-service analysis, and the development of proposed water rates over a ?ve-year period. Charles sewed as lead analyst and conducted the vast majority of the technical analyses required for the study.

City of Sonoma (CA)
The City of Sonoma (City) engaged Raftelis in 2018 to conduct a water rate study for the City’s water utility. The study included the development of a five-year ?nancial plan, a cost»of-sewice analysis, and the development of proposed water rates for ?scal years 2019-2023. Charles processed and analyzed account level billed water consumption data, assisted in development of the water rate model, and drafted the water rate study report.

City of Thousand Oaks (CA)
The City of Thousand Oaks (City) engaged Raftelis in 2021 to conduct a water cost-of-service and wastewater ?nancial plan update study for the City’: water and wastewater utilities. The Study included the development ofa ?ve-year ?nancial plan for water and wastewater, a costvofvserviceanalysis for water, and the development of proposed water and wastewater rates. Charles served as project manager for the study. The proposed rates were successfully adopted by City Council in December 2021.

City of Watsonville (CA)
Raftelis was engaged to develop 10-year ?nancial plans for the City of Watsonvi.lle‘s (City) water, wastewater, and solid waste enterprise funds. The goal was to develop a ?nancial plan model that could be used as a ?nancial planning tool to determine the necessary rate adjustments and bond issuances for maintaining operations as well as handling several large capital projects. Charles assisted with developing a water, wastewater, and solid waste ?nancial plan and cost of service rate model as part ofthe study.

PROJECT LIST
- Alameda County Water District (CA) — Water rate update study - Antelope Valley-East Kern Water Agency (CA) — Water rate update study - Antelope Valley State Water Contractors Association (CA) — Replacement water assessment study - Borrego Water District (CA) — Water affordability assessment - City of Brentwood (CA) — Water and wastewater rate study 0 Castaic Lake Water Agency (CA) — Facility capacity fee update study - Cucamonga Valley Water District (CA) —Multi—yearwater and drought rate study . City of Dixon (CA) — Water rate study - City of El Monte — Water rate study and cost allocation plan - Goleta Water District (CA) — Water rate study
0 City ofHuntington Beach (CA) ~ Water rate study update - County of lnyo (CA) — Water rate study
0 La Canada Irrigation District (CA) — Water rate study - Las Virgenes Municipal Water District (CA) ~ Water and wastewater rate study a City of Lincoln (CA) — Water rate study
- City of Long Beach (CA) — Water and wastewater ?nancial plan development 0 Marin Municipal Water District (CA) — Miscellaneous fee study - Mojave Water Agency (CA) — Strategic ?nancial plan
Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 37
Municipal Water District of Orange County (CA) — Core service charge allocation study National Water and Sewerage Authority of Grenada (Eastern Caribbean) — Water and sewer rate study Olivenhain Municipal Water District (CA) — Water rate study Rancho California Water District (CA) — Water capacity fee study Rancho California Water District (CA) — Water cost of service study Sacramento Suburban Water District (CA) — Water rate study Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority (CA) — Inland Empire Brine Line rate model Santa Rosa Plain, Sonoma Valley, & Petaluma Valley Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (CA) — Groundwater sustainability agency fee analysis and rate setting services Scotts Valley Water District (CA) — Water and recycled water rate study South Mesa Water Company (CA) — Water rate study and connection fee update City of Simi Valley (CA) — Water rate study
City of Sonoma (CA) — Water rate study
South Mesa Water Company (CA) — Water rate study
City of Thousand Oaks (CA) — Water ?nancial plan update and wastewater cost of service rate study City ofThousand Oaks (CA) — Water cost of service and wastewater ?nancial plan update study City of Ventura (CA) — Water and wastewater rate study
Victor Valley Wastewater Reclamation Authority (CA) — Wastewater rate study and capacity fee study City of Watsonville (CA) — Water, wastewater, and solid waste rate study Item #9.1.

Lindsay Roth

STAFF CONSULTANT
Associate Consultant
ROLE
Lindsay will work at the direction of Kevin and Charles in conducting analyses and preparing deliverables for the project.

PROFILE
Lindsay has over two years of experience working in the environmental ?eld and has a graduate degree in water resources management. At Raftelis, she has contributed to ?nancial models and analyses for water and wastewater rate studies as well as bill impact analyses. Prior to joining Raftelis, Lindsay was a student consultant for the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, assessing the state's algal bloom monitoring program and nutrient criteria. She also interned for the Conservation Trust for North Carolina, developing best practices for the organization to participate in community-based environmental justice. She is based in Raftelis‘ Los Angeles Office.

KEY PROJECT EXPERIENCE
carpinteria Valley Groundwater Sustainability Agency (CA) The Carpintcria Groundwater Sustainability Agency (Agency) engaged Raftelis in 2021 to conduct a GSA Fee Study to proposed groundwater user fees to fund Phase Two of GSA Operations. Lindsay served as the lead analyst on the fee study. She developed a ?nancial plan and worked with the project team as well as Agency staffto evaluate the best methodology for calculating the GSA user fee.

City of Coronado (CA)
RAFTELIS as
Spoclalilu
- Data analysis & visualization
- Water 8.sewernnancial analysis
- statistical analysis
Prokxlonnl Hlslnry
- Raftells: Associate Consultant
(2020-present)
- North Carolina Department at
Environmental Quality Student
consultant (2019-2020)
- Conservation Trust lor North
Carolina Disaster Mitigationand
climate Resiliency Intern (2019)
Educaclon
- MaslerolEnvlronmental
Management in Water Resources
Management - Nicholas School or
the Environment. Duke University
(2020) . Bachelor eiscience in Earth and
Environmental Sciences — Tulane
Urllversliy (2015)
The City of Coronado (City) engaged Raftelis in 2021 to review and evaluate the City's current rate-setting methodology, update the financial plan for a frveyear period, and propose rates for 2022. The City's sewer rates included contracted transportation and treatment fees for three US Navy Campuses. Lindsay served as the lead analyst on the study update.

She developed a ?nancial plan and worked with the project team to evaluate potential rate structure alternatives.

City of Hayward (CA)
The City of l-layward (City) engaged Raftelis in 2021 to conduct a comprehensive water cost of service and rate study proposing rates for the next two years and to provide a financial plan and rate model to serve as a planning resource for future use. The project required a balance of multiple ?nancial objectives, including managing increasing water costs from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission while also producing rates that were affordable for all customer classes.

Lindsay served as an associate consultant on the project and assisted in the development ofan updated 10-year financial plan for the City and a detailed rate study report explaining each step of the rate study process.

City of Hollister (CA)
City of Hnllister (City) engaged Raftelis in 2021 to conduct a water and wastewater cost of service and rate study as well as a water and wastewatcr capacity fee study. Lindsay served as an associate consultant on the project and was the lead analyst for the water cost of service and rate study. The study required Raftelis to develop rates that built up reserves over Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 35
time without creating rate shock to water users as well as work with the project team and City staff to evaluate various rate structure options. Lindsay also wrote a detailed rate study report explaining every step of the water rate study and water capacity fee study process.
city of Pleasanton (CA)
City of Pleasanton (City) engaged Raftelis in 2019 to update its water, recycled water, and wastewater rates as well as conduct capacity fee and drought rate studies. Lindsay is serving as lead analyst on the City’s rate study. The study involves developing long-term ?nancial plans, conducting cost of service analyses, and designing rate structures for each of the three enterprises. The main considerations for the study include funding capital projects to remediate PFAS groundwater contamination, maintaining ?nancial suf?ciency for all enterprises, encouraging conservation during periods ofdrought, and reducing rate shock to customers.

City of Thousand Oaks (CA)
City of Thousand Oaks (City) engaged Raftelis in 2021 to conduct water and wastewater ?nancial plan update as well as a water rate study. Lindsay served as an associate consultant on the project and helped to develop an updated water rate model and an updated wastewater ?nancial plan model forecasting projected revenues and expenditures for the next 5 years. The study required Raftelis to develop rates that accounted large CIP project expenditures planned for the study period for both the water and wastewater utilities while avoiding rate shock for customers, The updated models also included various capital expenditure and rate adjustment scenarios in order to aid in the City’s decision-making process.

City of Torrance (CA)
City ofTorrance (City) engaged Raftelis in 2021 to conduct wastewater rate study update. Lindsay served as the lead analyst on the project and helped to build a wastewater rate model projecting revenues and expenditures for the next 5 years. The City had recently taken on more CIP projects under the wastewater fund due to a new policy that required stormwater projects to fall under wastewater’sjurisdiction. The study required Raftelis to develop cost of service rates that generated enough revenue to fund these projects without having to issue any debt while maintaining fairness and affordability goals for all customer classes,
City of Venlura (CA)
The City of Ventura (City) engaged Raftelis in 2020 to conduct a comprehensive water and wastewater cost of service and rate study. Lindsay served as an associate consultant on the project and helped analyze the impacts of the proposed rates on monthly water and wastewater billsfor each customer class.

San Benito County Water District (CA)
San Benito County Water District (SBCWD) engaged Raftelis in 2021 to develop a longer-term ?nancial plan to capture planned major capital improvements that will come from the pending water master plan, as well as updating the cost allocating methodology. The SBCWD has a unique water system driven by allocations of purchased water, groundwater sources, and maintaining adequate water reserves in storage. Lindsay is building the ?nancial planning and cost of service model.

RELEVANT PROFESSI DNAL EXPERIENCE
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality: Student Consultant (2019-2020) The Division of Water Resources at the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality works to understand and manage the proliferation of algal blooms in lakes and reservoirs across the state. Lindsay worked with a team ofNicholas School students to analyze ambient water quality monitoring data and provide recommendations on how the agency could improve their harmful algal bloom nutrient criteria and management strategies. Her work included the Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 40
development of multiple linear regression statistical models to understand the morphological drivers of lakes and reservoirs for algal blooms across the Piedmont region of North Carolina.

PROJECT LIST
o Borrego Water District (CA) — Water & Wastewater Capacity Fees o Carpinteria Valley Groundwater Sustainability Agency (CA) — GSA Fee Study - Carpinteria Valley Water District (CA)—Water rate study . Coastside County Water District (CA) — Drought rate study a Contra Costa Water District (CA) — Drought rate study - City of Coronado (CA) — Wastewater rate study . City of Hayward (CA) — Water rate study o City of Hollister (CA) ~ Water rate studyMontecito Water District (CA) — Financial plan update o City of Pleasanton (CA) — Water, Wastewater, Capacity Fee, and Drought Rate Study - Rincon Del Diablo (CA) — Reserve policy survey study . San Benito County Water District (CA) — Water rate study o City of Torrance (CA) — Wastewater rate study
- Thousand Oaks (CA) — Water and wastewater rate study
- City of Ventura (CA) — Water and wastewater bill impact study 0 Yorba Linda Water District (CA) — Capacity fee study
Item #9.1.

Jonathan Jordan PGp (CA)

STAFF CONSULTANT
Consultant
R0 LE
Jonathan will work at the direction of Kevin and Charles in conducting analyses and preparing deliverables for the project.

PROFILE
Jonathan has focused on ?nancial plan model development and rate design studies for California water, wastewater, recycled water, and wholesale agencies.

Jonathan is a California licensed Professional Geophysicist (PGp) with a background in GIS analysis and remote sensing. He has been involved in the survey design, data analysis, and reporting for large capital projects in the engineering, environmental, and geotechnical ?elds.

KEY PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Camarillo / camarillo sanitary District (CA)
Raftelis is performing water, wastewater, and recycled water rate study for the City of Camarillo/Camarillo Sanitary District. Jonathan is lead analyst developing the rates and ?nancial plan. Jonathan assisted the City during the 2020 studies y to update the ?nancial plans for the water and sanitation enterprises.
city of Encinitas (San Dieguito Water District, CA)
Jonathan was the lead analyst for the City of Encinitas (City) to establish water rates based on costeof-serviceprinciples. Jonathan worked with City staff and the Board rate—settingcommittee to evaluate rates and explain rate-setting basics to the committee.

City of St. Helena (CA)
RAFTELIS 41
Spoclaltlos
I Utility rate analysis
- Geospatial Data Analysis
I Data Visuallzallon
Probsslonail History
- Raflelis Consultant(2D22—preseni);
Asscciaie consuiiani (2D20~2021)
- Geovision Geophysical Services:

ProieciGeophyslcisl (2015-2020;
- Signal HillPetroleum. Inc: Intern
Dala Analyst (2013)
Education
- Master of science in Geological
Sciences/Geophysics -caiiiarnia
siaie University ai Long Beach
(2019)
- Bachelor orscience in Geophysics
— University orcaiiicrriia at
Riverside (2012)
Proloulonal Momhorslulps
- AGU
AEG
EEGS (Former)
AAPG (Former)
Jonathan assisted the City of St. Helena in developing a drought penalty allocation model. The project's goal was to evaluate the customer class and customer water allocation during a water shortage emergency declaration. Jonathan worked in tandem with City staff and the data servicesteam to ensure the generated customer bills corrected billed the drougit penalties for any water use over—allocationand ensure each customer received a correct allocation during the water use restrictions.

Alameda County Water District (CA)
Jonathan provided financial review and a cost of service rate update consulting experience to Alameda County Water District (District) since 2020. Jonathan sewed as the lead analyst for the 2020 Water Cost of Service and Rate Update study, including an update of fire rates, development ofdrought rates, and public outreach to stakeholders, During these projects, Jonathan has participated in the preparation of deliverables and Board presentation of workshops with the Executive Management and the Board ofDirectors in evaluating and identifying which financial/rate solutions meet their objectives.

Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 42
California Domestic Water company (CA)
Jonathan assisted California Domestic Water Company in conducting a Wholesale Water Financial Study and Rate Update. The project included developing a new ?nancial planning and rate model for the District. Using the model, Raftelis developed the required rate increase scenarios based on the City's capital obligations, projected expenditures, and projected debt issuance.

City of Malibu (CA)
Jonathan assisted the City of Malibu (City) as the Lead Analyst in conducting a rate update for the City's wastewater operation. Jonathan assisted in updating its ?nancial plans, rates, and debt repayment for the wastewater and recycled water enterprises. Furthermore, Jonathan is helping the City wastewater fee charges onto the LA County Assessor property roll.
city of Santa Cruz (CA)
The City of Santa is currently updating its ?nancial model to evaluate different water demand factors and associated drought rates, reserve policies, a comprehensive rate study, drought rates, capacity fees, and other ?nancial/rate matters.

The City experienced a signi?cant drought and had to allocate water. Water use was already at a historically low level, and residential water use was one of the lowest in California. With the desire to refund a debt and low commodity revenues sales, the City needed to adopt drought rates within a short period. Jonathan is currently working with the City and Raftelis team staff on completing the 2021 update.

California Rate Survey (CA)
Jonathan is the Lead analyst that conducted the CA—NAAWWA Water rate survey for water enterprises in California.

The project involved surveying rates from select water districts, which will be available for qualitative and quantitative analyses. Raftelis and CA-NVAWWA deployed a functionaldata visualizationdashboard, which has been shared with all CA-NV agencies as a database and regional rate metric.

PROJECT LIST
. San Dieguito Water District (CA) . City of Malibu (CA) - Alameda County Water District (CA)
- City of Santa Cruz (CA)
- City of Camarillo (CA)
- California Domestic Water Company (CA) . San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency (CA) - El Toro Water District (CA)
- Madera County Groundwater Sustainability Agency (CA) . Zone 7 Water Agency (CA) - City of St, Helena (CA)
Item #9.1.

Nick Kennedy

STAFF CONSULTANT
Associate Consultant
ROLE
Nick will work at the direction of Kevin and Charles in conducting analyses and preparing deliverables for the project.

PROFILE
Nick is an Associate Consultant based in the Los Angeles office with a professional background in sustainable community development and data analysis. He holds a BS in Environmental Economics with a focus in Business Sustainability from Ohio State University. Nick joined Raftelis after graduating in December 2020,

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
City of Columbus Department of Development lntem (OH)
Nick served as a Department of Development intern with the City of Columbus (City). He collaborated within the City's government as well as other cities across the country. Nick led process reviewing recent updates to zoning codes in similar cities in the United States and making recommendationsfor the City moving forward, speci?cally pertaining to sustainable and equitable development. Research was also done to compare the City’s waste reduction goals compared to other RAFTELIS 4::
spoclaltlos
- Envlronmemal Economics
- Community Development
- Business Sustainability
Prolosslonal History
- Raftells: Assoclate consultant
(202l—Fresenl)
- city of Columbus Department of
Development Intem (2o2o—202o)
- Bngntview Enterprise Solullons
Data Analytics lnlern (2020-2020)
Educatlun
- Bachelor of Science in Envivonment.

Economy, Development, and
Sustainability — Ohio Stale
Unlverslly (2020)
cities. Recommendations were made and implemented into the Office of Sustainabrlity's 2030 Waste Reduction Plan.

Brightview Enterprise Solutions: Data Analytics Intern (OH) Nick served as a data analytics intern with Brightview Enterprise Solutions in New Albany, OH. He worked across all business fronts in the company, including the Finance, Client Analytics, and Data Analytics teams. Nick created an annual breakdown within the Client Analytics team for one of the company’: largest clients and made recommendations on where money is best spent in future years based Dffthe historical data. He assisted the Finance department in billing clients and paying Vendors, as well as ensuring data quality. Nick used GIS applications to map out properties. He also created a dashboard for executive leadership to universally track KPI’s across different clients within the Data Analytics department.

Item #9.1.

Matt Wittern APR, PMP

COMMUNICATION SUPPORT
Senior Consultant
ROLE
Matt will provide input and guidance for the communication components of this project.

PROFILE
Matt has a 20+ year public relations career serving clients and customers in the public utility, engineering and constmction sectors. He excels at designing and implementing strategic Communications campaigns that incorporate stakeholder input to inform, advocate and achieve behavior change. His specialty is successfully translating complex subjects and concepts into messages that are easily understood by target audiences. At Raftelis he manages strategic communications planning and implementation, as well as stakeholder engagement initiatives. Prior to joining Raftelis,Matt managed a variety of public affairs efforts at Denver Water, which included designing the public engagement and public information strategies for nearly a billion dollars’ worth of infrastructure projects, spearheading the public process for the utility's policy decision regarding Community Water Fluoridation, and led development of processes to gain stakeholder support for preventative maintenance on critical infrastmcture. He earned a BA. in journalism, is Accredited in Public Relations (APR) from the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) and achieved status as a Project Management Professional (PMP) from the Project Management Institute. Matt has presented at national conferences including the American Water Works Associations ACE and the CityaCounty Communications and Marketing Association's (3CMA) Annual Conference. Matt’s work has earned prestigious Gold Pick Awards from the Colorado Chapter of PRSA and SAVVY Awards from 3CMA.

KEY PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Denver Water (Co)
In the wake of updated guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention regarding management of ?uoride levels in drinking water, advocates on either side of the policy issue lobbied Denver Water's Board of Water Commissioners (Commissioners). The utility charged Matt with designing and implementing a public process to provide Commissioners with sufficient information to make a policy decision. Matt brought together local and national experts on the issue to debate the pros and cons of managing ?uoride levels. This included launch of a strategic communications strategy that built community awareness about the issues that garnered support for the board's ultimate decision, The result was a decision supported by customers who were well informed compared to the start of the campaign and a board that could stand RAFTELIS 44
Spa: I»
~ strategic communication planning
- Stakeholder engagement
- Public involvement .Communtlyoulreach
- Primary & secondary research
- Expen positioning
a Media reiailons
I Socialmedia
I An direction
- Reputation management
I Coalition building . Advocacycampaigns
Profosslonal Hlstory
I Ra?elts‘ Senior Consultant (2019—
present)
I Denver Water Senior Community
Relations
Specialist/Communications Manager
(2015201 9)
I Communication Infrastructure
Group Counselor(2006v2015J
- collegelnvesl. Marketing
Communications Manager (2005
2006)
- Transportation Expansion (T-REX)
Project community Relations
Manager (ZOUZ2005)
I LawsComm' Client Service
Coordinator (1998—2002)
Educatlon
0 Bachelor of Ans in Technical
Journalism (Public Relations) .

Colorado State Universlly (1999)
Profosslonal Mulnhorslllps
I Public Relations Society of America:

Accredited in Public Relations (APR)
- Project Management lnsiiiute -
Project Management Professional
(PM P)
O International Association of Public
Farllclpatlorl (IAP2) — Cent?ed in
Public Participation . WEF
I AWWA
behind the legitimacy of a policy reaffirmed by a process that included robust stakeholder involvement.

Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 45
Denver Water’s collection system is unbalanced, lacksresiliency and is at-risk to myriad natural disasters including wild?res, ?oods and drought. In the federal permitting process for the past 16 years, plans to expand the capacity of Gross Reservoirto help mitigate these risks had grown stagnant while voices of project opponents grew louder. How could Denver Water raise the pro?le of the nearly $500 million project and gain support from critical stakeholders and customers? How could claims of opponents be effectively rebutted and diffused? How could political support be marshaled and directed to ease the work ofpermitting entities and oversight authorities? Matt stepped in and became the architect of a multi—layered,multi-faceted advocacy and public information campaign designed to achieve these goals, It included:
- Primary research to gauge support of/ opposition to the project, along with identi?cation of top objections from fence sitters and opponents that helped drive key messaging. - Successful lobbying of state and federal elected of?cials - including then Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper - to go on record supporting the project.
- Recruiting dozens of local governments and major environmental groups to pledge their support and help negate claims by more radical/ fringe environmental groups opposing the project. - Launch of stakeholder outreach plan including presentations delivered to civic organizations and creation of a community outreach office built to serve as a truth repository and venue to gather ongoing public input. - Design of a comprehensive proactive media relations campaign that targeted key stakeholders in major media outlets througi third-party supporters’ letters to the editor, media tours, exclusive interview and meetings with editorial boards.
- Design of robust education campaign delivered via social media campaign that that rebutted common false claims made by project opponents in ways that did not lend them legitimacy by drawing attention to opponents directly.
- Development of a multi—layeredonline and multimedia presence that delivered compelling messages about the project's purpose and need through rich storytelling, powerful imagery and the use of influential third-party advocates.

Elbert County (CO)
During a recent update of Elbert County's impact fees for Parks/Recreation, Public Facilities, Sheriff, and Transportation, Matt was the strategist behind development ofthe strategic communicationsand community outi'each plan. It prescribed an extensive stakeholder engagement process featuring interactive online meetings and surveys, which informed the study prior to online work sessions with County Commissioners. County leaders credited this work with raising awareness in the community, making the study and recommendations less controversial and thus more politically acceptable,
Town of Jackson (WY)
The Town of Jackson, located in Teton County, boasts among the highest incomes of any county in the United States. juxtaposed against that is the thousands of hourly and service industry jobs that support the vibrant tourism industry, and Raftelis accepted the challenge to develop a water and wastewater rate structure that was fair and equitable, while pricing in complications such as the prevalence of seasonal homes that only had seasonal demand and impact on the system.

Matt led the creation of a Technical Advisory Committee made up of representatives from myriad stakeholder groups.

Through a series of meetings facilitated by Matt, the TAC ensured that the recommendation ultimately delivered to the Town Council was representative ofthe community and included measures for affordability.

Colorado Department of Transportation (CO)
The Colorado Department of Transportation was in a pinch. After many years of costly traffic congestion through the critical I-70 mountain corridor, funding was secured to conduct the first step in the federal process to conform to requirements set by the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA). After performing much of the work associated with the Draft Preliminary Environmental Impact Statement (DPEIS), concerns were raised by of?cials that the process had not sufficiently engaged members of the local low—incomeand minority communities. NEPA promotes Item #9.1.

RAFYELIS 46
environmental justice by requiring federal agencies to include a proposed projects potential environmental, economic, and public health impacts on loweincome, minority, and rural communities. Mr. Witten was charged with designing and implementing a strategic engagement process to ensure voices from these underrepresented communities were included in the DPEIS. Teaming with partners specializing in multicultural outreach, the program successfully engaged members of this community by approaching with cultural sensitivity and appropriateness. The result was a successful integration of feedback from once underrepresented groups and satis?ed environmental justice requirements.

The Colorado Department of Transportation hired Matt and a partner engineering firm to develop a report to inform the Departments approach to public involvement. Through primary and secondary research, and by applying public involvement expertise gained over years of practice, the team delivered the comprehensive report, which became the goto source on the topic. Feedback from end-users across the state was an incredible validation of the work that was performed. Many had been directed to perform public involvement as part of their individual projects, but there was no prior guidelines for implementation. This report gave important insights, dove deep into practice and provided a solid roadmap to ensure that those most impacted by the Department’s work were properly consulted.

Drivers on Interstate 25 between Denver and Fort Collins were fed up. Northbound, the lane count abruptly went from four lanes to two just north of the metro area, creating congestion even during non-peak travel hours. In both directions, road rage was common as aggressive drivers wove in and out of traffic; creating unsafe conditions and frequent accidents that only added time and expense to travelers on this vital thoroughfare. Matt, as part of a consultant team, led community engagement efforts to gather stakeholder input on preferred alternatives to relieve the situation. The team launched a projectaspeci?c website (a near first for the time) to increase stakeholder awareness and provided multiple two— way communication channels. Open houses were hosted at strategic points in the community that were designed to lower barriers to participation, and these strategies were successful. As a result ofthe outreach, stakeholders were in a much better position to understand the engineering and likely funding limitations, Members of the project team benefitted from the fresh eyes of stakeholders who were being impacted by the conditions and were able to screen alternatives to those that addressed the challenges while being responsive to the public‘s needs Northern Colorado Water conservancy District (co)
Like many parts of the state, Northern Colorado is experiencing exceptional growth, with a population that is expected to double to a halfAmillionpeople by 2050. As a key raw water provider to municipalities and agricultural interests, the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District began plans in the 1980sto provide valuable source water to 15 partners working together to make the Northern Integrated Supply Project a reality. Today, on the cusp of state and federal regulatory approvals, NISP faces opposition from a very small but vocal minority who threaten to derail the public process and stop the project by any means necessary. Millions of dollars, years ofplanning and thorough environmental study and protections hangs in the balance. Raftelis was hired to assist Northern with development of a comprehensive public outreach and information campaign to ensure continued public support for this critical $1.1 billion project. Matt Wittem conducted thorough primary and secondary research to inform a plan that when implemented will ensure those who will benefit most from the project will understand the value it brings and its role to help ensure a continued thriving community for years to come.
city of Port Hueneme (CA)
A rate study had not been performed for some time for this small coastal city, and the City Council str'essedthat affordability was a key factor for their approval. They also stressed the importance of transparency, especially as it related to ensuring the community’s significant population of individuals for whom English was not their primary language. As the strategic communications project coordinator, Matt conducted public outreach efforts for the City of Port Hueneme (City) that included the development of an infographic that explains the City's rate structure changes, a Proposition Z18 notice, and facilitated three public workshops to explain the changes. All materials were translated into Spanish-language versions to enable communication across a potential language barrier.

Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 47
Montecito Water District (CA)
This coastal community faced the opportunity to reduce its reliance on surface water sources that are becoming less and less certain due to the effects of climate change and drought. Their solution was to switch over to a guaranteed source using a state—of-the-artdesalination plant. This change modi?ed the cost structure paid by customers, but also came with bene?ts that were not obvious at ?rst glance. Matt managed the implementation of a strategic communicationsplan that included development of a variety of communication tools and pieces that effectively made the case for why the changes planned will provide long—termcommunity bene?ts.

Cucamonga Valley Water District (CA)
The Cucamonga Valley Water District, in Califomia‘s Inland Empire, was updating its rates and fees to account for a modi?ed passthrough fee for State Water Project water, along with aligning its tiered rate structure to more closely follow the varied costs of different sources of water. In addition, CVWD’s ?nancial plan and Capital Investment Plan called for infrastructure upgrades to its aging water infrastructure before costly breaks and outages became more common. Matt coordinated the implementation of a strategic communications and outreach plan that included communication tools such as billstuffers, FAQS, a fact sheet/infographic, Proposition 218 notice, and participation in an annual community outreach event.

Crestview-Lake Arrowhead Water Agency (CA)
CrestviewALake Arrowhead Water Agency (CLAWA) had not had a rate increase in 26 years and needed to ensure compliance with California's Proposition 218 requirements. CLAWA sought specialized assistance communicating the purpose and need for rate increases to customers on a strict implementation timeline. Matt provided strategic communications assistance, including guidance on messaging strategy and tactics. city of Newport Beach (CA)
The City of Newport Beach (City) Utilities Division provides water service to more than 86,000 people over 50 square miles. A high—inC0m€community composed of primarily singlefamily residential properties, there was signi?cant resistance to past water rate increases, For the past four years, City Council declined to increase rates, but with costs such as purchasing supplemental water rising by 75% in recent years, the time had come for action. Matt was on the Raftelis team charged with developing a comprehensive strategic communicationsplan, messages and communicationstools, including a Proposition 218 notice. The effort communicated the great need for infrastructure improvements to ensure continued deliver of high-quality drinking water and water for ?re protection. City Council voted to increase rates at the end of 2019.

Denver International Airport South Terminal Redevelopment Program (C0) Commuter rail was ?nally coming to Denver International Airport (DIA). The question was — how and where would it connect? The good news isthe $500 million program was merely a continuation of the original vision for DIA that included a world-class hotel and open-air plaza. The bad news was the multi-year construction — if managed and communicated improperly — would create chaos at one of the nation’: busiest travcl hubs.

Matt was on the team hired to develop a strategic communications program designed to properly inform a variety of internal and external stakeholder groups; to convey the vision for the program while also communicating valuable coping messages to avoid or mitigate disruption from construction.

Strategic communications included a variety of stakeholder outreach strategies, including convening a Program Advisory Committee to bring together myriad groups and interests, a leading-edge diversity program to promote inclusion and opportunity, and a host of innovative communication tools (touchscreen kiosk, large vinyl floor messages, special events. etc.).

Item #9.1.

nAI=1'eLrs A8
The result of the multi-year campaign was reduced frustration levels among busy travelers and a program that serves as a model for other regional construction projects that must be undertaken while the underlying infrastructure remains in operation.

City of Wheat Ridge (00)
Matt was the project manager on the team hired to design and implement a community-based brand identity development for the City of Wheat Ridge (City). The City’s existing brand was designed by a high school student in the mid-19703and despite the brands age and dated nature, there were voices in the community opposed to the City’s rebranding. Matt designed a process that brought together key community stakeholders using a variety of public engagement techniques to draw out from them their view of what was quintessentially Wheat Ridge. These elements were then distilled down to core themes that were woven into the City's new identity. While there was no consensus on what made Wheat Ridge Wheat Ridge, each group could literally point to an element of the brand and buy-in to the brand as a whole. The result was a process that members of City Council praised as the model for how City staff should encourage public involvement. A post-project survey found that 70 percent of respondents agreed that the new identity represents the City as a positive, progressive community. - Cherokee Denver’s Redevelopment of the Old Gates Rubber Factory (00) An icon (and to some an eyesore) on the Denver skyline since the late-18005,the Gates Rubber Factory was decommissioned and for decades sat empty and had fallen into disrepair. One reason it remained in such a condition for so long was the signi?cant environmental contamination that was present at the site that had been found to be leaching chemicals into the water table and into surrounding neighborhoods. Cherokee Denver, a developer specializing in brown?eld redevelopments, secured the property and began work to revitalize it into a modern mixed-use destination including residential,retail, commercial and public spaces.

Wary of powerful nearby neighborhood groups, Cherokee Denver hired Matt to lead community relations and public engagement activities designed to inform the community of future plans and incorporate public feedback to avoid political hurdles. Through a comprehensive campaign of education and outreach, Matt built valuable mutually beneficial relationships with community leaders, business interests, homeowners associations and elected officials. On his recommendation, Cherokee Denver convened the Cherokee Denver Redevelopment Advisory Committee, which consisted of community leaders and some of the project’s most outspoken opponents. Through dialogue and relationship building, objections from opponents dwindled and community support increased.The project resulted in a development that was properly remediated environmentally and today the community is one of the most desirable and visited in the area.

PRESENTATIONS
- “Biosolids Communication Toolkit Workshop” Water Environment Federation - “Rc—lmaginingEngagement: I-larvesting what we've learned about virtual public engagement for the future" ACE '21 Annual Conference
- “Reimagining Engagement: Harvesting what we've learned about virtual public engagement for the future" Arizona Water Association 2021 Annual Conference
- “It's Human Nature: Using Social Science to Enhance Your Communications,” RMSAWWA/RMWEA, 2020 - “Ensuring Public Process Legitimacy Through the Lens of The Community Water Fluoridation Issue," AWWA ACE Conference, 2015

PUBLICATIONS
- “Leverage Social Media in Times ofCrisis", Article, Joumal AWWA, 2020 Item #9.1.

Gina DePinto APR

COMMUNICATION SUPPORT
Manager
ROLE
Gina will provide input and guidance for the communication components of this project.

PROFILE
Gina is an award-winning and accredited public relations professional with more than 34 years of experience and leadership in crisis communications, community outreach, advocacy, stakeholder engagement, marketing, and media relations in the public and private sectors. Gina's leadership experience includes communications program management for $2 billion in public transportation and water infrastructure projects, including the Port of Long Beach Gerald Desmond Bridge Replacement Project and the Orange County Groundwater Replenishment System. The GWRS has been covered by international media including National Geographic, Wall Street Journal, New York Times, BBC, CNN, and NPR to name a few. Prior to joining Raftelis, Gina served the residents of Santa Barbara County as the first executive Communications Manager in the County of Santa Barbara‘s l7l-year history. She advised the County Executive Team on strategic communicationsprograms, crisis communication, media relations, issues management, internal communications, branding and culture change. During her tenure, the County Emergency Operations Center was activated 15 times and included two federally declared disasters, a global pandemic, and two mass casualty incidents. Born and raised in Phoenix, Arizona, DePinto sewed as public information officer for the city of Phoenix, public relations director for Farnam Companies, Inc. (animal health and pet products), and coordinated publicity for Olympic and World Champion ?gure skater Dorothy Hammill prior to relocating to California. Gina has a bachelor's degree in organizational communication from Arizona State University and is accredited in public relations from the Public Relations Society of America. Gina is currently a member ofthe California Association of Public Information Officials (CAPIO), Public Relations Society of America (PRSA), and the California Gold Coast Chapter of PRSA.

KEY PROJECT EXPERIENCE
crisis communications and Disaster Response
(Santa Barbara county, CA)
One month after being recruited by the County of Santa Barbara (County) to serve as itsfirst executive Communications Manager, a wild?re began on the Gaviota Coast. Without a central communications structure in place, Gina pulled together and led a team of employees through a nine-day activation of the County Emergency Operations Center/Joint Information Center to issue 24/7 critical timely and accurate information. The fire forced evacuations for people, pets and livestock, and intermittent closures ofHwy I01, CA State Route 1, and regional RAFTELIS 45
Spoclnlllu
- Strategic communications planning
- crisis at risk communications
- Reputation management
- Stakeholder engagement
- Media relations & media training
- Development 8. oversight orearned
social and paid meoia
- wntrng, copyediling. script writing
- collateral development and art
direction
- Branding and marketing
- Public speaking
Prolosslonal History
- Ralteiis. Manager. strategic
Communications (2022-present)
- county oisanta Barbara
communications Manager auto
2022)
- westbound Communications,
Account Director (2o13»2o15)
- Orange county water District
communications specialist (2006—
2013)
- Byllnes Public Relations &
Marketing, owneriPrinciple (199e»
2006)
- Farnam companies. Public
Relations Director (2ooo—2o03)
- City orPhoenix Public lnlorinatinn
officer (19951000)
- Manz Goldwater Public Relations:
senior Accouni Executive (1996»
1997)
- oorotny Hami|i's ice Capades:

Marketing Manager & Publicist
(19934 995)
Education
' Accredlled in Public Relations -
PRSA (2013)
I Bachelor ofArIs In Organizational
communication — Arizona state
university (1927)
Profosslanal Momlurships
- Public Relations society orAmerica
- California Associallon of Public
Information Of?clals
Item #9.1.

RAFYELIS so
and interstate passenger trains and freight service. Two months later, another fire bumed near the Santa Ynez Valley and Cachuma Lake impacting a busy commuter route. Gina initiated custom bilingual emergency messaging across all communication channels, which is now the standard in California. Over nearly six years, Gina developed bilingual communication strategies for 15 extended emergencies including two federally declared disasters, a global pandemic, and two mass casualty incidents: the Montecito l/ 9 debris ?ow and “Conception" dive boat tragedy, Califomia’s worst maritime accident, The back-to-back ?re and debrisflow disasters in December 2017 and January 2018 necessitated staf?ng the JIC for seven continuous months to issue public information on preparedness, recovery and rebuilding; a 16- month Local Assistance Center; and longaterm Recovery Strategic Plan for Montecito.

Crisis Communication Messaging and Media Training (Santa Barbara County, CA) Gina developed a crisis communication plan, key messaging, Q&A, and media spokesperson training for two separate high-pro?le issues at the County of Santa Barbara (County): a $40 million pension rebalance and $2 million embezzlement in the Public Works Department. For the media training, Gina and a media training consultant provided off and on—camera guidance where participants learned how to bridge, flag and deflect. Participants were ?lmed so they could apply what they learned in mock, on—camera interviews.For the pension rebalance, employees were engaged through a series of face—to-facemeetings with the executive and budget teams to address questions and concerns, The pension rebalance program ultimately led the County to embark on a 5-year transformation initiative and strategic plan called Renew 2022. Following the embezzlement, process improvements were implemented, and Gina developed messaging and collateral for a whistleblowerprogram overseen by the County Auditor’s Office.

Infrastructure Outreach and communications (Port of Long Beach, CA) As Account Director at Orange County-based Westbound Communications, Gina led a team of six practitioners to design and manage the communication strategy for the $1.8 billion Port of Long Beach Gerald Desmond Bridge Replacement Project, one of the largest and most signi?cant highway infrastructureprojects in California, Roughly 15 percent of the nation’s waterborne cargo is trucked over it, and the bridge is a critical access route for commuters between the Port of Long Beach (Port), downtown Long Beach and surrounding communities. The new bridge supplants an old one in dire need ofreplaccment and is the centerpiece ofthe Port's $4 billion capital improvement plan. At 205 feet above the shipping channel, the new cable-stayed bridge is 50 feet higher than the old bridge, thus enhancing the Port’s capacity to handle today's larger cargo ships. The Port established a unique designrbuild project team headquarters where the contractor, traf?c engineers, Caltrans inspectors, construction managers and communications worked side-by-side to enhance collaboration and decision making.

Infrastructure Outreach and communications Mobile App (Port of Long Beach, CA) The challenges of a seven—year transportation construction project replete with long-term road closures, detours and congestion required clear communication and solid relationships with a broad spectrum of audiences and media. The comprehensive outreach plan to update stakeholders at every phase of the project included development ofa content-rich website and mobile application to deliver real—timeinformation directly to app customers. The app provided tr'af?c conditions, construction updates, linksto social media and live cameras, and bilingual audio reports to deliver handsfree updates to professional truck drivers and commuters. The app quickly became an important tool to reach stakeholders and build loyalty by keeping them informed through this highly visual and easily accessible new media platform. Within months oflaunching the app it was featured as a successful communications case study in PR Week magazine.

Infrastructure Outreach and Communications For Reuse Project (Orange county, CA) Gina led communications and outreach for the world's largest advanced water puri?cation system for potable reuse.

While Orange County’s Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS) is one of the most celebrated civil engineering and water reuse projects in the world, itssuccess is equally recognized for the robust strategic public engagement and outreach program. In the early 20005, public opposition had prevented or shuttered similar water reuse projects in Los Angeles and San Diego, but Orange County's (County) system earned the public’s trust and overwhelming support. The strategic Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 51
communications plan included a support letter campaign, citizens advisory group, multicultural outreach, media outreach, speakers bureau, and facility tour program with technology demonstrations and water tasting. To date, the GWRS has never been publicly opposed. Initially producing 70 million gallons of puri?ed water per day in 2012, the GWRS final expansion will increase capacity from 100MGD to I30 MGD, enough to secure water reliability for more than 1million people.

Water Education and Outreach Program Development (Orange county, CA) Community engagement is important to educate and inform stakeholders about critical and emerging issues. While leading strategic communications at the Orange County Water District (OCWD)t, Gina was engaged with planning and directing content, and engaging partners and sponsors for several signature events to engage generational audiences about regional and state water resources and supplies, water efficiency and environmental sustainability. Key partners and sponsors include The Walt Disney Company, National Geographic, Wyland Foundation, UC Irvine, UCLA, NASA JPL, USGS, National Water Research Institute, California Department of Water Resources, and others to support events like the annual O.C. Water Summit, Children's Water Education Festival, and the Groundwater Adventure Tour. The Water Summit brings together academics, business professionals, elected officials, and water industry representatives to talk about water issues, projects, and emerging technologies in a dynamic forum atmosphere. The Children’s Water Education Festival is the largest of its kind in the U.S. reaching 7,000 elementary students annually with interactive presentations that complement or expand upon subject matter taught in California elementary schools and adhere to Next Generation Science Standards. OCWD’s alladay Groundwater Adventure Tour takes participants to its H20 Learning Center, Groundwater Replenishment System, Advanced Water Quality Assurance Laboratory, downstream Anaheim Recharge Basins, and upstream Prado Wetlands in Riverside County.

Stakeholder Engagement Program (County of Santa Barbara, CA) In 2016, recreational cannabis was overwhelmingly approved by voters in Santa Barbara County (County), but it remains a controversial and divisive land use, water, agriculture, and environmental issue. Gina led proactive and transparent outreach to ensure all stakeholders were engaged throughout the ongoing development ofthe permitting and licensing ordinance that included more than 100 public meetings. In 2018, the County Board of Supervisors voted to limit retail storefront licensesto no more than six total countywide. For the industry, six was not enough and securing a license would be competitive. For many community members, six were six—too-many. Gina developed an outreach program to address the challenge of creating a fair and legal process for retail storefront operators to apply for a license while also ensuring the community had every opportunity to provide input and address questions and concerns about security, traffic, parking, odor‘, and proximity to schools, daycare, and youth sports. Six in—personcommunity engagement meetings were replaced with virtual meeting due to the COVID-19 public health emergency at a time when using Zoom was new, uncomfortable, and seen as a barrier to participation by those who preferred in—personmeetings. The objective was to create as many ways as possible to engage and inform the community leading up to and long after the series of virtual meetings. Tactics included interactive maps, bilingual videotaped presentations available on the website ahead of the meetings, FAQs and a Zoom lrow—toguide, custom email and business hours phone access, videos of the meetings including public comment, and a neighborhood compatibility survey. The cannabis retail storefront outreach program was recognized by the California State Association of Counties with a 2021 Infrastructure Challenge Award. Out of433 entries, only 21 Challenge Awards were distributed.

Stakeholder Engagement for Groundwater (Orange County Water District, CA) As the agency responsible for managing the groundwater basin, the Orange County Water District (OCWD) initiated the South Basin Groundwater Protection Program (SBGPP) to detect the location, size and source of goundwater contamination after levels of volatile organic chemicals and perchlorate that exceeded the maximum contaminant level allowed by the California Department of Public Health were detected in drinking water wells. Orange County's groundwater basin is the source of 75 percent ofthe drinking water for 2.4 million people. To measure the direction and speed of the migrating contamination, OCWD planned to construct six new monitoring wells. Gina developed and Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 52
managed the construction outreach plan to build support from municipal leaders and assure residents that while their drinking water was safe, construction of the monitoring wells was needed to protect the deep aquifer and assure future water supplies. Construction impacts to businesses and residents required an outreach plan to determine potential impacts, mitigation efforts, and methods to communicate with stakeholders. Outreach tactics included written materials, face»to-face communication, and Community meetings with maps, pictures, visuals and experts to address questions. The successful outreach program achieved l0O% support ofthe program from all municipal partners, no public opposition, 80% acceptance from businesses and residents, and laid the foundation for the construction phase of extraction wells, pipeline and treatment facility.

Habitat Restoration communications and Engagement (Phoenix, AZ) Gina developed the initial strategic communications and engagement plan for the Rio Salado Habitat Restoration Project to restore the native wetland and riparian habitats of the Salt River, replacing what had become a waste disposal area with an ecosystem supporting both ?ora and fauna, Gina guided a multidisciplinary team of city employees through a discovery and planning process to assure key stakeholders were informed of the project and opportunities to provide input into the design. Gina also guided the production and dissemination of bilingual information about the project.

Strategic Media Relations for Groundwater (Orange county, CA) Gina drove media relations for Orange County’s Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS) interfacing with national and international broadcast, print and online journalists. As the world’s largest water reuse project of its kind, the GWRS was covered extensively by broadcast and print media including The Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Time, National Geographic, USA Today, The Economist, Der Spiegel (Germany), Christian Science Monitor, Discovery Channel, CNN, NBC News and NPR. GWRS water was featured in the 2011 water documentary. “Last Call at the Oasis" written by Alex Prutl’homme and directed by Oscar-winning documentarian Jessica Yu. In a National Geographic story about California's water supply crisis (April 2010), the GWRS opened and closed the article with the quote about the ultraapure recycled water tasting like “Califot‘nia’sfuture." Following the publication, a National Geographic Vice President of Communications said of Gina's efforts that, “Nobody pitches ‘National Geographic,’ but somehow you found a way." Gina also initiated relationships with National Geographic “Emerging Explorer” Alexandra Cousteau, and EarthEcl1o International founded by Philippe Cousteau. The GWRS is featured in EarthEcho's educational book series called “Going Blue,"
Results Driven Marketing and Media Relations (Phoenix, AZ) As the Public Relations Director for Farman Companies, lnc., Gina led public and media relations efforts for one of the largest privately held animal health product manufacturers that launched an average of 40 new products annually on top of an aggressive acquisition and strategic alliance program (Farnam was acquired in 2006 by Central Garden & Pet).

Gina developed strategies and communication programs to generate brand awareness and consumer trust, ultimately in?uencing image, reputation, user knowledge and sales. Tactics included press releases, newsletters, video news releases, satellite media tours, advertorials, mat releases, and collateral development. In her first 18 months, earned media results included more than 75 million impressions valued at about $6 million. On average, she generated a minimum of$4 million worth ofeclitorial coverage annually on a budget of only $250,000.

PRESENTATIONS
- “Business Communications,” County of Santa Barbara Employee University training and development curriculum (2019)
- “Elevate Your Leadership Communication Strategies,” County of Santa Barbara Leadership Certificate Program curriculum (2018)
- “Front Line Crisis Communications: Are You Prepared?” 2019 Public Relations Society ofAmerica Western District Conference, Phoenix, Ariz.

Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 5:
- “Emergency Communications: Technical Solutions, Political Risks, Community Information and Lessons Learned" (panelist), 2019 League of California Cities City Manager Conference, San Diego, Calif. - “Emergency Situations and Crisis Plans for PEG Channels” (panelist), National Association of Telecommunications Oflicers and Advisors (NATOA), Webinar
- “Communication Tools and Methods During Times of Crisis," 2018 California Association of Public Information Officials (CAPIO) Annual Conference, Santa Rosa, Calif. - “California’s Year of Wild?res” (panelist), 2018 California Association of Public Information Officials (CAPIO) Annual Conference, Santa Rosa, Calif.
- “Emergency Communications and the Joint Information Center" (panelist), 2018 Summer Session, Municipal Managers Association of Southern Califomia (MMASC), Pasadena, Calif. - “Natural Disasters" panelist “Santa Barbara County Thomas Fire and 1/9 Montecito Debris Flow Communications." 2018 National Information Officers Association (NIOA) Annual Conference, Clearwater Beach, Fla.

PUBLICATIONS
- “Alisal Fire — Flood After Fire Threat Preparations," consumer preparedness article, October 17,2021 - “Environmental Law Practice Grows,” guest editorial, Arizona Capitol Times, March 28, 2997 - “Build Brand Equity: A Race to the Finish,” guest editorial, Equestrian Retailer (BZB),September 2003 - “A New Way to Behave," contributed feature article, Pet Business (B2B), February 2003 Item #9.1.

REFERENCES RAr1E|.Is 54
RAFTELIS HAS PROVIDED FINANCIAL]

ORGANIZATIONALITECHNOLOGYASSISTANCE

TO UTILITIESSERVING MORE THAN
25% OF THE U.8. POPULATION.

References

RAFTELIS HAS THE MOST EXPERIENCED UTILITY FINANCIAL AND MANAGEMENT CONSULTING PRACTICE IN THE NATION.

Our staff has assisted more than l,20O local government agencies and utilities across the U.S., including some ofthc largest and most complex agencies in the nation. In the past year alone, Raftelis worked on more than 1,200 ?nancial, organizational, and/or technology consulting projects for over 600 agencies in 46 states, the District of Columbia, and Canada. Below, we have provided descriptions of projects that we have worked on that are similar in scope to the Ciry’s project. We have included references for each of these clients and urge you to contact them to better understand our capabilities and the quality of service that we provide.

City of Camarillo I camar Io Sanitary District CA
Reference: Mark S. Uribe, Assistant Directorof Finance
601 Carmen Drive, Camarillo, CA 93010
P: 805.388.5358 I E: [email protected]
Dollar value: $63,792
Dates of service: March 2021 - March 2022
Key team members: Kevin Kostiuk
Since 2011, the City of Camarillo (City) has engaged Raftelis to conduct a comprehensive water and wastewater rate study to independently assess and evaluate existing water and wasrewater rates for compliance with industry standards Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 55
and California regulations, and to develop a ?nancial plan to ensure ?nancial suf?ciency while minimizing rate impacts to the greatest degree possible. The study included a comprehensive review of the water and wastewater enterprises’ revenue requirements, a review ofthe City’s user classi?cation and usage patterns, a costvofservice analysis, the development of water and wastewater connection fees, the design of water and wastewater rates, and the analysis of customer impacts along with a rate survey of neighboring agencies. The City had signi?cant capital improvement projects scheduled in the immediate future (FY 2012 to FY 2014); to smooth out customer impacts while suf?ciently maintaining the utility’s systems, Raftelis developed water and wastewater ?nancial plan models to evaluate different CIP scenarios, ?nancing options, and associated ?nancial impacts. Raftelis recommended water and wastewater rate schedules for a two-year period effective January 2012 and 2013, which were approved by the City Council in November 2011. Since 2011 Raftelis has updated the City’s rates annually and is currently re-evaluating the ?nancial plans and rates for calendar year 2021-2022, For the 2021-2022 study, Theresa is serving as assistant project manager and performing the capacity fee updates for water and sewer.
city of Ventura CA
Reference: Susan Rungren, General Manager
501 Poll Street, Ventura, CA 93001
P: 805.652.4523 / E: [email protected]
Dollar value: $187,000
Dates of service: January 2020 — March 2021
Key team members: Kevin Kostiuk and Charles Diamond
Raftelis conducted a water, wastewater, and recycled water cost of service and rate study for the City of Ventura (City).

The City had not updated its rate structure in 20 years, Additionally, the City was under a cease and desist order that required the City to carry out improvements estimated at more than $55 million, and which the City wanted to start funding to mitigate impacts.

The goal of the study was to develop conservation-oriented rates consistent with cost of service to recover adequate revenues to pay for necessary capital improvements, meet debt service coverage requirements, and maintain sufficient reserve requirements. The study included a comprehensive review of the City’s revenue requirements and allocation methodology, review ofthe City's user classi?cation, usage patterns, a cost of service analysis, and rate design for City users. Raftelis developed long—range?nancial plans so that the water and wastewater utilities could be ?nancially stable and save costs in the long run. We also assisted the City with developing different water and wastewater rate alternatives with various scenarios as well as calculating outside-city rates. The study was conducted with several meetings and input from stakeholders comprised of customers within the City. Raftelis educated the Citizen Advisory Committee on the basics of rates, cost allocations, and rate design to obtain their buy-in through the use of the dashboards in the rate models we developed for them to demonstratc the impacts of various revenue adjustments on the longvterm ?nancial stability of the enterprises. Raftelis also developed a schedule for funding a major wastewater program required by environmental groups. The recommended rates were implemented.

Raftelis has also completed a drought study for various stages of conservation and targeted cutbacks of water required by the state and the City.

Item #9.1.

RAFYELIS 55
Placer County Water Agency CA
Reference: Joe Parker, Director of Financial Services
144 Ferguson Road, Auburn, CA 95603
P: 530.823.4850 I E: [email protected]
Dollar value: $99,868
Dates of service: June 2021 - Present
Key team members: Kevin Kostiuk and Charles Diamond
In 2015, Placer County Water Agency (PCWA) engaged Raftelis to conduct a cost-of-service study for its water service, The agency was consolidating its water service area zones and reorganizing budgetary items to align with the new, single Western Water System. Additionally, PCWA provides water to a wide range of customers across an expansive service area. The system itselfincludes unlined canals as part of a gravity fed system, several water treatment facilities, pump stations, several sources of supply, and numerous customer classes. Over time, the water rate structures for the agency‘:
various user groups and zones had become difficult to administer, explain, andjustify. Raftelisheld initial meetings with PCWA to understand the Agency's water system, cost centers, and cost drivers. A series of meetings followed to discern the unique cost components to the system and develop an appropriate cost-of-service analysis.

In 2016, Raftelis developed a cost-of-service model with the ability to allocate various costs based on different variables including user class, water sales, accounts, among others. Considerations for water availability and reliability, retail versus wholesale water, and raw versus treated water were incorporated to appropriately allocate costs first to user groups and then to customer classes. The Agency provides four types of water service: raw, treated, wholesale, and retail, The first step in the cost of service was a cost allocation between the four services, before continuing to a cost-of-service analysis for each. The study was completed in October 20l7 with a new water system organization, amended rate structures, and updated rates implemented January 1, 2018.

Additional to the water system evaluation and cost-of-service study, Raftelis developed a water budget model for PCWA's internal use. The water budget model allows PCWA to examine their Single Family Residential (SFR) customers‘ usage patterns relative to efficiency standards, climate, and account level characteristics. The model will aid in water management and give insight into water demand pattern changes with the Agency’s new rate structure and rates.

Mammoth Community Water District CA
Reference: Jeffrey Beatty, Finance Manager
P.O. Box 597. MammothLakes, CA 93546
P: 760.934.2596 ext 239 / E: [email protected]
Dollar value: $72,400
Dates of service: November 2020 - October 2021
Key team members: Kevin Kosiiuk
Mammoth is a winter tourist destination for Californians. This small resort community, with a permanent population of more than 8,000 and peak transient visitor population of 35,000, is located on the eastern slope of the Sierra Nevada at an elevation of approximately 8,000 feet above sea level. The Town is surrounded by lands administered by the Inyo National Forest, and the economy is primarily based on recreation and tourism, with a majority ofthe visitation coming during the winter ski season, There are a large number of cabins and condominiums in town that are occupied Item #9.1.

RAFTELIS 57
intermittently during the year. This results in high peaks and also poses a challenge in terms of adequately ?nancing the operations of the utilities.

Raftelis was selected in a competitive process to assist the Mammoth Community Water District (District) with its water and sewer rates. Raftelis met with the staff to identify their pricing objectives and priorities. Raftelis conducted several workshops with Board members and displayed rate model dashboard presentations to review alternatives and impacts on customers. We developed water rates to incentivize conservation and wastewater rates to ensure adequate cost recovery.

To increase revenue stability and ensure adequate collection of service charges from vacation properties, we designed rates to recover the ?xed costs through ?xed charges. Properties outside the District were charged based on the cost of providing service to those customers and were set at a rate higher the inside»City rate. The rates were successfully implemented.

Raftelis is currently conducting a water and sewer rate study.

Item #9.1.

California Experience
This table lists the Callfonila utilities
that Raftelis has assisted over the
past flve years on financial, rate, and/
or management consulting projects.

Cllent
Alameda county water District
Anaheim, city or
Arroyo Gnndo, city or
Aiwater.city or
aakarsrlelo, city at
aenicla, city or
Eeverly Hills city or
aorrego water District
area,city or
arantwood (cm, city at
CAL FIRE/SariLiils olalspo
caiieguas Municipal water District
canrarlllo. city or
Carlsbad Municipal water District
casltas Municipal water District
castaic Lake water Agency
central Easln Municipal water District
central contra costa sanitary District
channel lsiancs laeacii community Suvlcas District
cnlno Hills, city or
cttlno. city at
Chawchllla.city at
Corona. city at
county of sari Diego
Ctoscerlla Vallny water District
cucarrrnnga valley water District
Del Mar Union School District
Delta Diabio sanitation District
East Eav Municipal utility District
East orange county water District
East valley water District
Eastern Municipal water District
El Toro water District
Elk Grove water District 0
Eislrnm valley Municipal water District
Escondido, city or
salt. city at
clenaora, city at
Galet: water District
coleta west sanitary District
Hirllx water District
Hendermn. city oi
Holllster.city at
Holtvllie.city or
Hutitliigmn Beach. city or
imperial cauniy
Inland Empire utilities Agnncy

RAFTELIS
53 Item #9.1.

Client
irvine unilioci scnooi District
Jurupa community services District
Kern county water Aglncy
La canaoa trrigation Dlslrlcl
La Habrz tieignts county water District
Laguna anacn,city or
Lake valley Fire Protection District
Las virgenes Municipal water District
Lmlcadla Waslewalar District
Livernrore, city at
Long Beach city or I
l_os Aiamos community services District
Los Angeies Department or water and Pnwer
Los Angeies, city orBureau nf Sanllaliotl
Madera, city or
Mammoth community water District
Marin Municipal water District
Mevced.city or
Mesa water District
Metropolitan water District or soutnern caliiornia
Modeslo irrigation District
Moiavewater Agency
Montercy county water Resources Agency
Monterey, city or
Mouiton Nlgllel water District
Municipal water District or orange county
Nap: sanitation District
oiai Valley sanitary District
Diivenirain Municipal water District
ontario Municipal utilities company
onlario, city at
orange. city of
Pain Alto. city at
i=neian Pinon Millscommunity services District I
Placer county water Agency
Pleasant Hill Recreation A Park District
Pomona. city on
Rainbow Municipal water District
Ramona Min-ilclpal water District
Rcnctra caiirornia water District
Redlatlds. city ot
nincun dcl Diablo Municioaiwater District
rtivorsitie Public utilities
Rosevlllu, city oi
sacr-amcnto Regional county sanitation District
sacramsnto. city oi
salton community Sulvlclts District

RAFYELIS
5 E 2‘
E E g 5
§ %
2 E
.—‘2i
:3 B
E,, E- a E
55 Item #9.1.

Client
san Dernardino valley Municipal water District
sansernaroina. County or
san Clemente, city or
san Diego. city orPublic utilities Deparlrvtanl
san Dieguito Water District
sanEiiloJoint Powers Aulhoilly
san Gabvinl county Walor District
sari Gabrll city or
san Jose, city or
san Juan Capistrano, city or
Santa Ana. city or
Santa iaarpara, city at
Santa Clara Valley water District
santa Clarita water District
santa Cruz, city of
Santa Fe irrigation District
Santa Fe springs, city at
Santa Margarita water District
Santa Rosa, city Attorney’: oliice
Scans valley Wall! District
snarter, city or
snasta Lake.city at
Sierra Madto.city or I
Signal Hill, city or
Sliltl valley. City or
sonoma,city oi‘
Scum Mesa water Company
South Pasadena, city or
South san Francisco, city or
sunnysiope county water District
swutwater Authority
Temescai valley water District
Thousand Oaks. city at
Torrance. city of
iraouco canyon water District
Trluttlo sanitation District
mstin, city of
Union sanitary District
ventura Regional sanitation District
ventura, city at D
vista, city or
walnut valley Water District
watsonvllie. city at I
wast aasin Municipal water District
western Municipal water District
vortra Llnda water District
Zone 7 Walor Agency
E
E
au

1.1 aN

RAFTELIS
so
Item #9.1.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST SYAYEMENY um='rEL|s 51
Con?ict of Interest Statement
Raftelis has no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Item #9.1.

INSURANCE COVERAGE RAFTELIS
Clienmz 1722483 RAFIEFIN
ACORD. CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITYINSURANCE ”“,Z,,“‘,"2;;;V'” THIS CERTIFICATE Is ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLV AND CONFERS No RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AI=rIRMATIvEI.vOR NECATIVELV AMEND,B(TEND OH ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED Ev THE ROLICIES EELow. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT RETWEENTHE l§UING INSuRER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER,AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.

IMPORTANT; Inn: Czn?lcnle IIOIGEVIS -n ADDITIONAL INSURED, me poIIcyIII must hnve ADDITIONAL INSURED provlslnns or b ndorsmm It SUBROGATION IS WAIVED) sulsjecl In in: Ierms um conainons oI mupallcy, Clrlaln pollcloe may requlio nu Indcrslmenl A Stnlemunt on ms caTIIIIcaIunus not Cenler any ngms In thecerlllleale holder In Ileu oI Such ondcrsemurms). raanucm WW Andrew Lltlle Cameron M Harris & Co, LLC K1as E“ 9534950332 Div U5' ‘"5 W andrew le@us Cam 6100 Fain/iew Road Sxe ‘A00 INSURER1$)AFFORDING COVERAGE NAICI °*"""°"°I NC 232” msunsnp Nallonnl Flu lnsurmce co,oI Hullovd 20475 INSURED _ _ .,,5.,m5 cum: Iul Insurance Cumuuny 35239 Ra?elis FInanCIaI Consultants, Inc. msungfC “K”... c.s...I.y Company mia..aIT.gFA éoazii 227 wesI Trade SII-eeI.Ste. 1400 "mm D
cmmm, Own,“ cmpmy 20443 Charlotte, No 23202 mm E:
mswsn F COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER:

IHIS Is To CERTIFV THAT THE POLICIES or INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEENISSUED YOTHE INSURED NAMEDAWDVE row THE poucv PERIOD INDICAYED NOIWIYHSIANDING NW REDUIREMENLTERM on CONDIIION or ANY CONIRACT ox OTHER I>ocumENT WIYH RESPECT To WHICH THIS CERIIFICAIE MAT EE IssuEI:I DR MAY PERTAIN IHE INSURANCEAFFORDED av IHE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN Is SUBJECT To ALL THE TERMS. a<cLusIDNs AND ooTInITIoNs as sucH POLICIES LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED av FAID CLAIMS 33%” "PE OF INSURANCE I?4%°AL T9/BI: I>oucvmmIaEA §I?'dS~«W»-I TTII’T?.LI:‘3V5355I UMWS A x CDMWWLGE'IEWILWIEIU'V I
so7eooouII D121/2022 uI/2I/202: L H oneone ‘ILIITI, |_><|H ,2 E 7 xsouag I
I I I5 000
F II ooimooo
I2 oooooo
s2,ooo,uoo
I
BUAS075UUOD25 01/21/2022 OI/2|/202 ,1,ooo,oou
I‘
I K
I
I WBFEW‘ ‘MB CuEeo7auuooa9 01/21/2022 01/21/2023 . E c§,oo_og1og_ Excess ma ,5 mg mg
I wcs7sau5s37 m/21/2022 01/21/2023
wcs7soooo42-CA I/21/2022 m/21/202 I1 000 000
E EA EV'LLII’:E :1 000 000
Em, .-‘.I‘I‘I II 000 mm
652071235 I/21/2022 oI/2I/202: $5,000,000 Aggregale
s5,uua,ooo Occurrence
ozscmmon Or ovsmnonss LOCATIONSIvEIIIcI.ss (ACORD IaI_ Addllnnai A.......Ts §ChIIduII.mny I:-nIn£hudIIm¢Ta§pdCn Is rtqulndj

CERTIFICATE I-IOLDER CANCELLATION
suouux ANV or THE AaovE DESCRIBEDnoumss as CANCELLED BEFORE THE ExvInAT1oN DATE THEREOF. NOTICE WILL BE nEIIvEAEn IN ACCORDANCE wmI THE I=oLIcv PROVISIONS.

FIaIIeIIs Financial ConsuIIants. Inc
227w. Trade Slreel suiIe 1400
Charlotte, NC 28202-0000
Au-n<oAIzEu AEI>AEsEmATIvE . PML (5 1b..1l,...E..

O Iaaa-2uI5 ACORD CORPORATION AIIngns roscrvad. AcoRD 25 (2015103) I on Thu ACORD name and logo arn ngIsIm=I marks oI ACoRD JIs347946u5/M3477ou9a BXCE4
62 Item #9.1.

REQUESTFOR PROPOSALS

WATER AND SEWER UTILITYRATESTUDY

CITYOF CALISTOGA
ADDENDUMNO. 1
March 16, 2022
Dear Consultants:

Enclosedherein is Addendum Number 1 for the above referenced RFP. Addendum Number 1 forms a part of this Request for Proposal and shall be acknowledged in your proposal.

The RFP is amended as follows:
1,

4. Amend Appendix C — General Provisions to delete the ’’Insurance‘'section. Refer to ExhibitA - Sample Professional Services for allinsurance requirements.

Provide a list of any proposed Consultants, Specialist or Experts Employed by Consultant and Key Personnel (to be used as Exhibit D ofthe Agreement).

Provide a description of alltasks that are necessary to complete this study that are excluded from your scope of work.

The attached Ranking Sheet will be used by the City to evaluate the proposals received.

In response to your questions, the following clarifications are offered:

1. Does the City have a desired project completion date/implementation date for new rates? a. Answer: The City's goal is to implement the adopted new rates in January 2023.

How many copies ofthe proposal are required?
a. Answer: 5 bound copies ofthe proposal, one unbound copy, and one electronic copy (DVD or thumb/flashdrive)
Can the City confirm that the scope of work includes a review of and recommended adjustments to the City's water, wastewater, and recycled water capacity charges? a. Answer: The scope of work includes recommendations to establish the City's water, wastewater, and recycled water impact fees that represent new development's share of capital costs required to accommodate their addition to the respective systems. See also answerto question No.4.

Can you elaborate on what is intended for Scope of Service task #6? Review impacts ofprojected new development and redevelopment on rates and develop projected impactfees for water and wustewater. As part ofthisreview, the proposer should differentiatecapital costs associated with

Item #9.1.

the rehabilitation/replacement ofexisting utilities fromthe capitai costs for improvements required for expansion ofservice as 11 result ofnew development. a. Answer: The City currently does not have an impact fee that developers would pay into.

Developers only pay for a connection fee for water/sewerrights/allocations. The City would liketo have a water/wastewaterimpact fee in addition to the existing connection fees that would cover future WTP/WWTPexpansions and provide funding for future replacements of the 11 mile long North Bay Aqueduct, water supply main that feeds town with 70% of its water supply.

5. Does the scope of work include recycle water rates?
a. Answer: Ves. The scope of work includes establishing recycled water rates for existing and new customers that are or will be connected to the system and metered. The City will continue providing recycled water at the waste water treatment plant free of charge.

6. Isthe City interested in changing its rate structure? is the City interested in rate structure alternatives such as multietiered water rates?
a. Answer: The City would liketo keep a single-tiered water/wastewater rate structure. The consultant shall evaluate and recommend drought impacts on the water/wastewater rates as a possibility for high users to encourage and incentivize water conservation. Water conservation/drought trigger 15% to 20% surcharge for high users.

7. Would the City like assistance with printing and mailing the Proposition 218 notices? a. Answer: Yes, Consultants are expected to prepare and mail all notices including Proposition 218 notices.

8. Meetings: We understand Scope of Services tasks 7 and 8 to require a minimum of 10 meetings: 1 in-person kickaoff;at least 3 rate workshops; at least 3 community outreach meetings; at least 2 community meetings ahead of the Proposition 218 hearing; and 1 Proposition 218 Hearing. Can the City confirm the number of desired meetings?
The City identified the kick»of‘f meeting as being in-person. Does the City expect the other meetings with staff, council, and the publicto be held virtually or in-person? How many in-person meetings does the City prefer?
a. Answer: The meetings may be virtual or in person depending on COV|DA19 restrictions. For purposes ofthis Request for Proposals (RFP), consultant shall assume five (5) in-person meetings and five (5) virtual meetings. Consultant shall provide a fee schedule for optional additional meetings, both virtual and in-person.

Thank you for your interest in this project and we look forward to receiving your proposals.

Sincerely yours,
Derek Rayner, P.E.

Public Works Director
//M//i
HamidHeidary, P.EL
Senior Civil Engineer
Enc: Proposal Ranking Sheet

Item #9.1.

EVALUATIONCRITERIA& RATING
WRITTEN PROPOSAL — PART 1 MAXIMUM REVIEWERS

POINTS SCORE
Quality and completeness of Proposals; 5
Responsiveness of the proposal in clearly stating the understanding of the 10 work to be performed;
Quality, performance, and effectiveness of service to be provided by the 20 Proposer;
Proposer’s ability to perform the work within the time specified; 10 Cost to the City; 15
TOTAL 60
INTERVIEW — PART 2 (if necessary)
Presentation by PM - project understanding. critical issues, innovation, and 10 solutions.

Presentation by team - experience, roles and responsibiiities, communication 10 and coordination between team members. agencies. and City.

Q&A — response to panel's questions. 20
TOTAL WITH INTERVIEWS 40
TOTAL 100
RANKING OF CONSULTANT FIRM (assigned after completion of scoring)

Item #9.1.

ATTACHMENT 3

- 1 -

MASTER AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES
This Master Agreement for Consultant Services (the "Agreement") is made and entered into this _____________ day of _______________, 2022, by and between THE CITY OF CALISTOGA, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CITY") and Raftelis [a sole proprietorship, partnership, limited liability partnership, corporation, limited liability corporation] (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT"). CITY and CONSULTANT may be referred to individually as “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.”

RECITALS
WHEREAS, CITY requires professional services in connection with the project described as Water and Wastewater Rate study;
WHEREAS, CONSULTANT is qualified to perform such services; and WHEREAS, CONSULTANT has agreed to provide CITY with such services on the terms and conditions set forth herein.

NOW, THEREFORE, for the considerations hereinafter set forth, CONSULTANT and CITY agree as follows:

ARTICLE 1 - SCOPE OF SERVICES

1.1. Scope of Services. CONSULTANT agrees to furnish services pursuant to a Task Order in the form set forth in Exhibit A, Task Order, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein (the "Services").

1.2. Compliance with Law. The Services shall be performed in accordance with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations and orders.

1.3. Time is of the Essence. CONSULTANT agrees to diligently prosecute the Services. In the performance of this Agreement, time is of the essence.

1.4. Professional Competence. CONSULTANT represents that it has the professional skills necessary to perform the Services and that it will perform the Services in a skillful and professional manner. CONSULTANT represents that it has all the necessary licenses to perform the Services and shall maintain them throughout the term of this Agreement.

CONSULTANT agrees that the Services shall be performed in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner of the profession in which CONSULTANT is engaged, in the same or similar geographical area in which CONSULTANT practices its profession, and will prepare all work products required by this Agreement in accordance with such standards. CITY and CONSULTANT agree that CONSULTANT is in responsible charge of the Services and CITY shall have no control over the method or means of performance of the Services. Acceptance by CITY of the Item #9.1.

- 2 -
Services does not operate as a release of CONSULTANT from professional responsibility for the Services performed.

1.5. Independent Contractor. CONSULTANT is an independent contractor and not an employee of CITY. CONSULTANT expressly warrants that it will not represent that it is an employee of CITY. Persons employed or utilized by CONSULTANT in the performance of the Services will not be employees or agents of CITY. CONSULTANT is solely responsible for the payment of employment taxes incurred under this Agreement and any similar federal or state taxes.

1.6. Confidentiality. CONSULTANT agrees to maintain in confidence and not disclose to any person, firm, governmental entity, or corporation, without CITY's prior written consent, any trade secret or confidential information, knowledge or data relating to the products, process, or operation of CITY. CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain in confidence and not to disclose to any person, firm, governmental entity, or corporation any data, information, technology, or material developed or obtained by CONSULTANT during the performance of the Services. The covenants contained in this Section 1.6 shall survive the termination of this Agreement for whatever cause.

1.7. Ownership of Material. Any reports and other material prepared by or on behalf of CONSULTANT under this Agreement (collectively, the "Documents") shall be and remain the property of CITY. All Documents not already provided to CITY shall be delivered to CITY on the date of termination of this Agreement for any reason. The Documents may be used by CITY and its agents, employees, representatives, and assigns, in whole or in part, or in modified form, for all purposes CITY may deem appropriate without further employment of or payment of any compensation to CONSULTANT.

1.8. Documentation. CONSULTANT shall keep and maintain full and complete documentation and accounting records, employee time sheets, and correspondence pertaining to the performance of the Services, and CONSULTANT shall make such documents available for review and/or audit by CITY and CITY's representatives at all reasonable times for at least four years after the termination of this Agreement or completion of the Services.

1.9. Testimony. CONSULTANT agrees to testify at CITY's request if litigation is brought against CITY in connection with the Services. Unless the action is brought by CONSULTANT or is based upon CONSULTANT's negligence, CITY will compensate CONSULTANT for the preparation and the testimony at CONSULTANT's standard hourly rates.

ARTICLE 2 - COMPENSATION

2.1. Compensation. Compensation for the Services shall be in accordance with the rate and schedules specified in a Task Order. However, in no event shall the amount the CITY pays to CONSULTANT for work done under a Task Order exceed the total compensation specified in the Task Order (“Cost Ceiling”).

Item #9.1.

- 3 -

2.2. Invoices. CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices in a form satisfactory to CITY on or before the tenth day of each month for Services provided during the preceding month. CONSULTANT shall submit time and cost records as necessary to substantiate performance of the Services. Within 35 days after receipt of each such invoice, CITY shall verify the accuracy of the invoice, correct the charges where appropriate and as discussed and mutually agreed with CONSULTANT, and make payment to CONSULTANT in an amount equal to the amount of such invoice, as verified or corrected by CITY. No payment hereunder shall be construed as evidence of acceptance of any of CONSULTANT's work. CITY reserves the right to withhold payment from CONSULTANT on account of Services not performed satisfactorily, delays in CONSULTANT's performance of Services, or other defaults hereunder. CONSULTANT shall not stop or delay performance of the Services under this Agreement on account of payment disputes with CITY.

2.3. Status Reports. Together with each monthly invoice, CONSULTANT shall submit a status report detailing the amount expended on the Services to that date and the remaining amount to be expended before the Cost Ceiling is reached. CONSULTANT shall notify CITY in writing when payments have reached 90 percent of the Cost Ceiling.

2.4. Withholding. In lieu of holding retention, CITY shall withhold CONSULTANT's final payment under a Task Order until the Services provided under that Task Order are complete and CITY has received all Documents. CONSULTANT shall diligently continue and complete performance of the Services if the Services are not complete at the time CONSULTANT has performed services up to the Cost Ceiling.

ARTICLE 3 - TIME OF PERFORMANCE

3.1. Effective Date. This Agreement shall become effective upon execution of the second signature and shall remain in full force and effect until April 30, 2023 (the "Term").

Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Agreement may be extended for successive one-year term(s) upon mutual, written approval by the City Manager or his/her designee and CONSULTANT. Work authorized by a Task Order shall be performed in accordance with the schedule set forth in the Task Order.

3.2. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated at any time by CITY upon written notice to CONSULTANT.

3.3. Final Payment. CONSULTANT shall be entitled to compensation for Services performed up to the time of such termination, it being understood that any payments are full compensation for the Services rendered under this Agreement.

3.4. Other Remedies. Nothing in this Article 3 shall be deemed to limit the respective rights of the parties to terminate this Agreement for cause or otherwise to exercise any rights or pursue any remedies which may accrue to them.

Item #9.1.

- 4 -
ARTICLE 4 - DESIGNATED CONTACTS

4.1. CITY Contact. CITY designates Derek Rayner, Public Works Director as its contact who shall be responsible for administering and interpreting the terms and conditions of this Agreement, for matters relating to CONSULTANT's performance under this Agreement, and for liaison and coordination between CITY and CONSULTANT. In the event CITY wishes to make a change in CITY 's representative, CITY will notify CONSULTANT of the change in writing.

4.2. CONSULTANT Contact. CONSULTANT designates Alex Handlers as its contact, who shall have immediate responsibility for the performance of the Services and for all matters relating to performance under this Agreement. Any change in CONSULTANT's designated contact shall be subject to written approval by CITY.

ARTICLE 5 - INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE

5.1. Indemnification. CONSULTANT shall, to the fullest extent allowed by law, with respect to claims, liability, loss, damage, costs, or expenses, including reasonable attorney's and expert witness fees, awards, fines, penalties, or judgments, arising out of or relating to the Services (collectively "Claims") that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of CONSULTANT, defend, indemnify, and hold harmless CITY, its Officials, officers, employees and agents (the "CITY Parties"), except to the extent the Claims are attributable to CITY Parties' gross negligence or willful misconduct. CONSULTANT shall defend the CITY Parties as required by California Civil Code Section 2778, and with counsel reasonably acceptable to those parties. CONSULTANT shall have no right to seek reimbursement from the CITY Parties for the costs of defense.

If CONSULTANT is a “design professional,” as defined in California Civil Code Section 2782.8(c), CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend, and hold the Indemnitees harmless against Liability only to the extent such Liability arises out of, pertains to, or relates to CONSULTANT’s negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct. In such an event, the cost to defend charged to CONSULTANT shall not exceed CONSULTANT’s proportionate percentage of fault.

The obligations contained in this Section 5.1 shall survive the termination of this Agreement for whatever cause for the full period of time allowed by law and shall not in any way be limited by the insurance requirements of this Agreement.

5.2. Health and Safety. CONSULTANT may perform part of the Services at sites which contain unknown working conditions and contaminated materials. CONSULTANT shall be solely responsible for the health and safety of CONSULTANT's employees during the performance of the Services.

5.3. Insurance. CONSULTANT and all of CONSULTANTS employees, subcontractors, consultants and other agency shall procure, provide and maintain at all times during the performance of this Agreement, and for such additional periods as described herein, the Item #9.1.

- 5 -
insurance listed below with insurers licensed to do business in the State of California and with a Best's rating of no less than A:VII.

A. Commercial Automobile Liability Insurance. Commercial Automobile Liability Insurance providing bodily injury liability and property damage, to protect against all liability arising out of the use of any owned, leased, passenger or commercial automobile at a minimum amount of $1,000,000 combined single limit and $2,000,000 aggregate. Coverage shall apply to hired and non-owned autos.

B. Commercial General Liability Insurance. Commercial General Liability Insurance, with limits providing a minimum amount of $1,000,000 combined single limit coverage for each occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate and $2,000,000 products/completed operations aggregate. The insurance shall cover all operations including but not limited to the following: (1) premises, operations and mobile equipment liability; (2) completed operations and products liability; (3) contractual liability insuring the obligations assumed by CONSULTANT in this Agreement; (4) broad form property damage liability; (5) personal injury liability endorsement, including death; and (6) automobile bodily injury and property damage insurance, including all owned, hired and non-owned equipment.

C. Professional Liability Insurance. Professional Liability Insurance protecting against liabilities arising out of or in connection with negligent acts, errors, or omissions of CONSULTANT and all of CONSULTANTS employees, subcontractors, consultants and other agency in connection with this Agreement, at a minimum amount of $1,000,000 combined single limit coverage and $1,000,000 aggregate, on a "claims made basis" with a continuation of coverage extension for liabilities for two years from the date the Services are substantially complete. Such professional liability policies shall include coverage for liability assumed by the CONSULTANT under this Agreement.

D. Workers Compensation Insurance. Workers Compensation insurance, occupational disease insurance and employer’s liability insurance shall be required with minimum limits as required by law, covering all workplaces involved in this Agreement.

E. Policy Terms. Concurrently with execution of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall provide CITY with Certificates of Insurance evidencing that CONSULTANT has obtained or maintains the insurance required by this Section

5.3. The Certificates shall be on forms acceptable to CITY. CONSULTANT shall also furnish CITY with original endorsements with the following documentation:
 Precluding cancellation or reduction in coverage before the expiration of thirty (30) days after CITY shall have received written notification thereof from CONSULTANT by United States mail;
 Providing that CONSULTANT's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, and include a “separation of insureds” or “severability” clause which treats each insured separately, Item #9.1.

- 6 -
except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability (cross-liability endorsement);
 Excepting CONSULTANT’S professional liability insurance, naming CITY, its City Council, boards, commissions, committees, officers, employees and agents as additional insureds (“Additional Insureds”); and  Providing that for any claims relating to CONSULTANT's services hereunder, CONSULTANT's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance with respect to CITY, its City Council, boards, commissions, committees, officers, employees and agents, and that any insurance or self-insurance maintained by CITY for itself, its City Council, boards, commissions, committees, officers, employees and agents shall be in excess of CONSULTANT's insurance and shall not be contributory with it.
 It shall be a requirement under this Agreement that any available insurance proceeds broader than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverages requirements and/or limits shall be available to the Additional Insured, including but not limited to any umbrella or excess insurance.

Furthermore, the requirements for coverage and limits shall be the greater of:
(a) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this Agreement; or (b) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named insured.

F. Waiver of Subrogation: CONSULTANT hereby grants to CITY a waiver of any right to subrogation which any insurer of said CONSULTANT may acquire against the CITY by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance.

CONSULTANT hereby agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to affect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not CITY has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer. However, the Worker’s Compensation policy required by Section 5.3(D) of this Agreement shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor of CITY for all work performed by CONSULTANT, its employees and/or agents.

G. Material Breach. If CONSULTANT fails to maintain insurance coverage or provided insurance documentation which is required pursuant to this Agreement, it shall be deemed a material breach of this Agreement. CITY, at its sole option, may terminate this Agreement and obtain damages from CONSULTANT resulting from said breach. Alternatively, CITY may purchase the required insurance coverage, and without further notice to CONSULTANT, may deduct from sums due to CONSULTANT any premium costs advanced by CITY for such insurance. These remedies shall be in addition to any other remedies available to CITY.

ARTICLE 6 - NOTICES
All notices or other communications required or permitted hereunder shall be in writing, and shall be personally delivered or sent by facsimile or reputable overnight courier and shall be deemed received upon the earlier of: (1) if personally delivered, the date of delivery to the address of the person to receive such notice; (2) if delivered by Federal Express or other Item #9.1.

- 7 -
overnight courier for next business day delivery, the next business day; (3) if sent by facsimile, with the original sent on the same day by overnight courier, the date on which the facsimile is received, provided it is before 5:00 P.M. Pacific Time; or (4) if sent electronically, the date of delivery on the confirmed read receipt. Notice of change of address shall be given by written notice in the manner described in this Article 6. Rejection or other refusal to accept or the inability to deliver because of a change in address of which no notice was given shall be deemed to constitute receipt of the notice or communication sent. Unless changed in accordance herewith, the addresses for notices given pursuant to this Agreement shall be as follows:

If to CITY: Laura Snideman, City Manager
1232 Washington Street
Calistoga, CA 94515
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 707-942-2806
If to CONSULTANT: Steve Gagnon
Raftelis
445 S. Figueroa St, Suite 1926
Los Angeles, Ca 90071
Phone: (213) 262-9309
Email: [email protected]
ARTICLE 7 - MISCELLANEOUS

7.1. Conflict of Interest Prohibition. CITY and CONSULTANT will comply with the requirements of the CITY’s Conflict of Interest Code adopted pursuant to California Government Code §87300 et seq., the Political Reform Act (California Government Code §81000 et seq.), the regulations promulgated by the Fair Political Practices Commission (Title 2, §18110 et seq. of the California Code of Regulations), California Government Code §1090 et seq., and any other ethics laws applicable to the performance of the Services and/or this Agreement. CONSULTANT may be required to file with the CITY Clerk a completed Form 700 before commencing performance of the Services unless the CITY Clerk determines that completion of a Form 700 is not required, pursuant to CITY’s Conflict of Interest Code. Form 700 forms are available from the CITY Clerk.

CONSULTANT may not perform Services for any other person or entity that, pursuant to any applicable law or regulation, would result in a conflict of interest or would otherwise be prohibited with respect to CONSULTANT’s obligations pursuant to this Agreement.

CONSULTANT agrees to cooperate fully with CITY and to provide any necessary and appropriate information requested by CITY or any authorized representative concerning potential conflicts of interest or prohibitions concerning CONSULTANT’s obligations pursuant to this Agreement.

CONSULTANT may not employ any CITY official, officer or employee in the performance of the Services, nor may any official, officer or employee of CITY have any Item #9.1.

- 8 -
financial interest in this Agreement that would violate California Government Code §1090 et seq. CONSULTANT hereby warrants that it is not now, nor has it been in the previous twelve (12) months, an employee, agent, appointee, or official of CITY. If CONSULTANT was an employee, agent, appointee, or official of CITY in the previous twelve months, CONSULTANT warrants that it did not participate in any manner in the forming of this Agreement. CONSULTANT understands that, if this Agreement is made in violation of Government Code §1090 et seq., the entire Agreement is void and CONSULTANT will not be entitled to any compensation for CONSULTANT’s performance of the Services, including reimbursement of expenses, and CONSULTANT will be required to reimburse CITY for any sums paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement. CONSULTANT understands that, in addition to the foregoing, penalties for violating Government Code §1090 may include criminal prosecution and disqualification from holding public office in the State of California.

Any violation by CONSULTANT of the requirements of this provision will constitute a material breach of this Agreement, and the CITY reserves all its rights and remedies at law and equity concerning any such violations.

7.2. Subcontracting. CONSULTANT may subcontract portions of the Services upon the prior written approval of CITY. CONSULTANT will be solely responsible for payment of such subcontract Services. No contractual relationship will exist between any such subcontractors of CONSULTANT and CITY. CONSULTANT’s subcontractors agree to be bound to CONSULTANT and CITY in the same manner and to the same extent as CONSULTANT is bound to CITY under the Agreement. CONSULTANT’s subcontractors further agree to include the same requirements and provisions of this Agreement, including the indemnity and insurance requirements, with any subsubcontractor to the extent they apply to the scope of the sub-subcontractor’s work. A copy of the CITY indemnity and insurance provisions will be furnished to CONSULTANT’s subcontractors upon request.

7.3. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire understanding of CITY and CONSULTANT as to those matters contained herein. No prior oral or written understanding shall be of any force or effect with respect to those matters covered hereunder. This Agreement may only be modified by an amendment in writing signed by each party.

7.4. No Assignment. The Services are deemed unique and neither party shall assign, transfer, subcontract or otherwise substitute its interest in this Agreement or any of its obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the other party. As limited by this Section

7.2, this Agreement is to be binding on the successors and assigns of the parties hereto.

7.5. Severability. If any part of this Agreement is determined to be unconstitutional, invalid or beyond the authority of either party, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Agreement, which shall continue in full force and effect, provided that the remainder of this Agreement can be interpreted to give effect to the intentions of the parties.

Item #9.1.

- 9 -

7.6. Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts and, when fully signed, such counterparts shall have the same effect as if signed in one document.

7.7. Choice of Law. This Agreement and all matters relating to it shall be governed by the laws of the State of California without reference to its choice of laws principles and venue shall be in the appropriate court in Napa County, California.

7.8. Waiver. No failure on the part of either Party to exercise any right or remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any other right or remedy that party may have hereunder. A waiver by either CITY or CONSULTANT of any breach of this Agreement shall not be binding upon the waiving party unless such waiver is in writing. In the event of a written waiver, such a waiver shall not affect the waiving party's rights with respect to any other further breach.

7.9. Mediation. In the event the parties are unable to resolve a dispute arising under this Agreement through good faith negotiations, the parties agree to submit the matter to mediation with a mutually agreeable mediator. Prior to the mediation, the parties shall exchange any documents reasonably necessary to resolve the matter to be mediated.

7.10. Interpretation. In the event this Agreement is ever construed in any dispute between the parties, it and each of its provisions shall be construed without regard to the party or parties responsible for its preparation and shall be deemed to have been prepared jointly by the parties. The rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in interpreting this Agreement.

7.11. Authority. Each individual executing this Agreement on behalf of one of the parties represents that he or she is duly authorized to sign and deliver the Agreement on behalf of such party and that this Agreement is binding on such party in accordance with its terms.

7.12. Third Parties. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall create a contractual relationship with, or cause of action in favor of, a third party against either the CITY or CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT’s Services hereunder are being performed solely for the benefit of CITY. CITY shall be an express third-party beneficiary of all contracts between CONSULTANT and any subcontractors or subconsultants in connection with any services performed in connection with, or in furtherance of, this Agreement. ***
[Signatures on Next Page]

Item #9.1.

- 10 -
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date set forth above.

CITY OF CALISTOGA
By: Date
Laura Snideman, City Manager

CONSULTANT
By: Date
By: Date
Attest:

By: ___________________________
Marni Rittburg, City Clerk
Approved As To Form
By:

Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney
Item #9.1.

ATTACHMENT 3

OAK #4818-2196-0582 v1

EXHIBIT A

TASK ORDER

Item #9.1.

- 2 -
TASK ORDER NO. 1

CITY OF CALISTOGA
AND

RAFTELIS ASSOCIATES
SECTION 1 – PURPOSE
The purpose of this Task Order is to authorize and direct Raftelis Associates to proceed with the work specified in SECTION 2 below, in accordance with the provisions of the Master Agreement for Consultant Services between the City of Calistoga (“CITY”) and Raftelis Associates (“CONSULTANT”) hereto dated ________________ (“MASTER AGREEMENT”) SECTION 2 – SCOPE OF WORK
The items authorized by this Task Order are presented in Attachment “A” – Scope of Services, which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference.

SECTION 3 – COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT
Compensation shall be as provided in the MASTER AGREEMENT. Compensation for services as set forth in SECTION 2 shall be as set forth in Attachment “B” – Compensation, which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. Total compensation for all services provided under this Task Order shall not exceed one-hundred and forty-seven thousand, two-hundred dollars ($147,200) (“Cost Ceiling”).

SECTION 4 – TIME OF PERFORMANCE
The services described in SECTION 2 of this Task Order shall be completed by April 30, 2023 or as extended in writing by the City Manager.

SECTION 5 – ITEMS AND CONDITIONS
All terms and conditions contained in the MASTER AGREEMENT are incorporated by reference and remain in full force and effect.

Approved this _______ day of _____, 2022.
[Signatures on Next Page]
Item #9.1.

- 3 -

CITY OF CALISTOGA
By: Date
Laura Snideman, City Manager
Approved As To Form
By:

Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney

CONSULTANT
_______________________________
By: Date
By: Date

Item #9.1.

- 4 -
ATTACHMENT “A”

SCOPE OF SERVICES

Item #9.1.

- 5 -
ATTACHMENT “B”

COMPENSATION
Item #9.1.

City of Calistoga

STAFF REPORT
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Laura Snideman, City Manager
Meeting: City Council - Jul 19 2022
Subject: City Council Civic Operating Agreements
DESCRIPTION:

Consider adopting a Resolution Rescinding Resolution 2021-075 and adopting City Council Civic Operating Agreements.

RECOMMENDATION:

Consider adopting Resolution
BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

The City Council adopted Resolution 2021-075 on October 5, 2021, adopting agenda policies. City Councils in most communities have a broader set of agreements that often cover such practices in addition to many other topics ranging from how they wish to interact with each other to communications with staff and more.

Staff provided Council with a draft City Council Civic Operating Agreements during the May 18, 2022, Special Council Meeting. A facilitator was present during the meeting and gathered input from Council. Those changes have been incorporated into the attached document.

Once approved, the City Council Civic Operating Agreements will take effect immediately and guide all meetings of the City Council.

CEQA STATUS:

This item is exempt.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact associated with the recommended action.

ATTACHMENT(S):

Reso Adopting Council Civic Operating Agreements
Calistoga Final Civic Operating Agreements 7.10.2022
APPROVAL(S):

Gloria Leon, Administrative Services Director Approved - Jun 14 2022 Item #9.2.

Laura Snideman, City Manager Approved - Jul 12 2022
Marni Rittburg, City Clerk Approved - Jul 12 2022
Item #9.2.

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALISTOGA, COUNTY OF NAPA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RESCINDING RESOLUTION 2021-075 AND

ADOPTING CITY COUNCIL CIVIC OPERATING AGREEMENTS
WHEREAS, it is necessary to provide for the orderly and efficient Conduct of meetings of the City Council; and
WHEREAS, it is desirable to ensure advance notice to all interested persons of matters to be considered by the City Council.

WHEREAS, periodic review will assist new members of the City Council to better understand their responsibility and role as a Council Member; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Calistoga hereby rescinds Resolution 2021-075;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Calistoga hereby adopts the City of Calistoga City Council Civic Operating Agreements attached hereto as Exhibit A.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of July 2022. I, MARNI RITTBURG, CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF CALISTOGA, HEREBY CERTIFY the foregoing resolution was introduced and passed at a regular meeting of the Calistoga City Council by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
____________________________ __________________________ Marni Rittburg, CMC, City Clerk Chris Canning, Mayor
Item #9.2.

DRAFT

FINAL DRAFT
1 City of Calistoga

CITY COUNCIL CIVIC OPERATING AGREEMENTS
Section TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

1. AUTHORITY .............................................................................................................. 3

2. ROLE OF CITY COUNCIL ........................................................................................ 3

2.1 Responsibilities ................................................................................................... 3

2.2 Considerations .................................................................................................... 4

2.3 Fiscal Authority …................................................................................................ 4

2.4 Civility ................................................................................................................. 4

3. COUNCIL OFFICERS .............................................................................................. 4

3.1 Election of Council Officers ................................................................................ 4

3.2 Role of Mayor and Vice Mayor ........................................................................... 4

4. COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS ................................................................................... 5

4.1 City Manager and City Attorney ......................................................................... 5

4.2 Councilmember Appointments ........................................................................... 5

4.3 Ad Hoc Committees ........................................................................................... 5

5. MEETINGS .............................................................................................................. 6

5.1 Meeting Dates and Times .................................................................................. 6

5.2 Closed Sessions ................................................................................................ 6

5.3 Special Meetings ............................................................................................... 6

5.4 Quorum ............................................................................................................. 7

5.5 Teleconferencing .............................................................................................. 7

5.6 Adjournment ..................................................................................................... 7

5.7 Minutes of Proceedings .................................................................................... 7

5.8 Attendance ....................................................................................................... 7

5.9 Recording of Meetings ..................................................................................... 8

5.10 Avoiding Brown Act Violations ....................................................................... 8

6. AGENDA ............................................................................................................... 8

6.1 Order of Business ............................................................................................ 8

6.2 Preparation of the Agenda .............................................................................. 10

6.3 Agenda Materials ............................................................................................ 10

6.4 Agenda Posting ............................................................................................... 11

7. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION .................................................................................... 12

7.1 Safety and Order ............................................................................................. 12

7.2 Addressing the Council ................................................................................... 12

7.3 Conduct of Speakers ....................................................................................... 13

7.4 Written Communications ................................................................................. 13 Item #9.2.

DRAFT

FINAL DRAFT
2 Section TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

8. PUBLIC HEARINGS ............................................................................................... 13

8.1 Ex-Parte Communications ................................................................................. 13

8.2 Procedures ........................................................................................................ 14

8.3 Absence During Public Hearing ........................................................................ 14

9. MEETING RULES OF CONDUCT ........................................................................... 15

9.1 Presiding Officer ................................................................................................ 15

9.2 Actions Limited to Posted Agenda .................................................................... 15

9.3 Continuance of an Item ..................................................................................... 15

9.4 Standards of Decorum ....................................................................................... 15

9.5 Debate ............................................................................................................... 16

10.ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS ................................................................................ 18

10.1 Correspondence .............................................................................................. 18

10.2 Communications with the Public ..................................................................... 19

10.3 Relations with Staff ......................................................................................... 19

11.FAILURE TO OBSERVE CIVIC OPERATING AGREEMENTS ............................ 19

12.AMENDMENT OR SUSPENSION OF THESE CIVIC OPERATING
AGREEMENTS....................................................................................................... 20

12.1 Amendment of Operating Procedures............................................................. 20

12.2 Suspension of Operating Procedures ............................................................ 20 Item #9.2.

DRAFT

FINAL DRAFT
3 1. AUTHORITY
The City Council has established these Civic Operating Agreements to provide for continuity of responsibility in the City Council’s decision-making process and to allow sufficient time and opportunity for full consideration and public discussion of important issues which the City Council must review and decide. Adopting Civic Operating Agreements that establish rules for matters such as the election of Council Officers (Mayor and Vice Mayor) and the manner of conducting City Council meetings facilitates these goals.

The following provisions will be in effect upon their adoption by the City Council and until such time as they are amended, or new provisions are adopted in the manner provided by these Civic Operating Agreements.

2. ROLE OF CITY COUNCIL
The City Council is the highest-level decision-making body for the City of Calistoga. In performing its duties, the Council represents all Calistoga citizens.

In executing its duties, the City Council examines a variety of considerations, such as the needs and desires of the community, financial, legal, health, environment, and safety impacts. The City Council welcomes new ideas and innovative approaches, as appropriate, and aims to provide frequent and clear communications and transparency on its activities and decision making. Furthermore, the members of the City Council treat each other, staff, and other parties with dignity and respect.

2.1 Responsibilities
The City Council’s responsibilities include following types of considerations:
a. Prior to making decisions, performs appropriate diligence in consideration of the topic; b. Communicates with residents as appropriate to receive comment from and provide information to residents.
c. Develops policies that guide the City Manager in her/his management of the City, taking into consideration the value of promoting efficiency and effectiveness in operations while maintaining a reasonable level of service;
d. Develops Calistoga’s annual goals for each calendar year, and monitors those annual and multi-year goals, reporting progress and achievement of those goals to the City at mid-year and year-end;
e. Reviews and revises as necessary, and approves the annual Operating and Capital Improvement Program budgets as prepared by the City Manager by July 1 of each calendar year;
f. Faithful application of Calistoga’s Approved General Plan and Municipal Code and enacts revisions to the General Plan and Municipal Code as needed; g. Reviews and approves/denies/revises Ordinances, Resolutions, community planning decisions and Minutes;
h. Recruits, hires, and/or terminates the City Manager as necessary, and conducts an annual City Manager performance review as set forth in Section 4.1; i. Recruits, hires, and/or terminates the City Attorney as necessary, and conducts an annual City Attorney performance review as set forth in Section 4.1; Item #9.2.