Agenda — Calistoga City Council, May 2, 2023 (part 1 of 2)

Mayor
Donald Williams
Vice Mayor
Irais Lopez-Ortega
Councilmembers
Lisa M. Gift
Scott Cooper
Kevin Eisenberg
AGENDA
City Council
Tuesday, May 2, 2023 - 6:00 PM
Calistoga Community Center
1307 Washington Street
Calistoga, CA 94515
Virtual

Below is information on how the public may observe and participate in the meeting. The City recognizes that not all residents have the same ways to stay engaged, so several alternatives are offered.

Please participate in the meeting by observing or listening to the meeting in one of the following ways:

1. Watch on your TV – Napa Valley TV Channel 28 (call your cable provider to ensure you have a City of Calistoga coded cable box)

2. Listen or participate via your phone – dial 1-669-900-6833, enter webinar ID: 829-0729- 5419, password: 123201

3. Watch or participate online via Zoom - click this link and enter password: 123201

4. Watch online via YouTube Live at youtube.com/cityofcalistoga

5. Attend In-Person
COMMENT ON THIS MATTER DURING THE MEETING: Please participate in the meeting by providing public comment on any item on the agenda or any item of municipal concern. To comment during a virtual meeting (Zoom), click the "Raise Your Hand" button to request to speak when Public Comment is being taken on the Agenda item. You will be unmuted when it is your turn to make your comment for up to 3 minutes. After allotted time, you will be re-muted. Instructions for how to "Raise Your Hand" are available at: https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/205566129-Raise-Hand-InWebinar.

WRITTEN COMMENTS: Alternatively, you may provide public comment on any item on the agenda or any item of municipal concern via email. Please submit your comment, limited to 350 words or less, via email to [email protected]. Written public comments submitted by email should clearly indicate the Agenda Item No. or specify “Oral Communications” in the Subject Line for items not on the agenda and are requested to include the submitter’s full name.

Comments received by 2:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting will be posted online with the agenda packet and included in the record but will not be read aloud. Comments received after the 2:00 p.m. deadline will be provided to the City Council and included with supplemental materials after the meeting. No written comments will be read verbally at the meeting. Note: The methods of observing or listening to the meeting or providing public comments may be altered or the meeting may be canceled, if needed, due to certain technical disruptions.

Page

1. CALL TO ORDER – ROLL CALL – PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND

OPTIONAL PATRIOTIC ACTIVITY

2. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSIONS

3. ORAL COMMUNICATION ON CONSENT ITEMS OR NON-AGENDA ITEMS This time is set aside to receive comments from the public regarding matters on the Consent Calendar or matters of municipal concern not on the agenda.

Pursuant to Government Code section 54954.3 (the Brown Act), however, the Council cannot consider any issues or take action on any requests during this comment period. Speakers are encouraged to limit their comments to 3 minutes maximum so that all speakers have an opportunity to address the City Council.

3.1. Public Comments - Non Agenda Items - Redacted 6 - 10

3.2. Public Comment - Non-Agenda Items - Redacted 5.2.2023 11

4. ADOPTION OF MEETING AGENDA

5. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT

6. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS/ AWARDS
None

7. CONSENT CALENDAR

7.1. Approve the Minutes of the October 18, 2022, and the December 6, 2022, City Council Regular Meetings as submitted.

Recommended Action: Approve Minutes
Staff Report - Minutes

10.18.2022 DRAFT MINUTES CC

12.6.2022 DRAFT MINUTES CC
12 - 22

7.2. Consider adoption of a Resolution that makes a temporary increase in the City’s authorized Personnel and Staffing Listing by temporarily increasing the allocated staffing of Fire Chief and of Utilities Systems Superintendent.

Recommended Action:

Adopt a resolution which that makes a temporary increase in the Personnel and Salary Listing.

Staff Report - Approving Amendment to the Personnel and Staffing Listing by temporarily increasing authorized positions during the current fiscal year - Pdf
23 - 25

7.3. Consider adopting a Resolution directing the City Engineer to prepare and file a report for the Palisades Subdivision Landscape Maintenance District 2023/2024 Assessment in accordance with Article 4 of Chapter 1 of the Streets and Highways Code.

Recommended Action:

Consider Adopting Resolution.

Staff Report - Prepare and File a Report for the Palisades Subdivision Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) 2023/2024 Assessment - Pdf 26 - 28

Page 2 of 178 ends

7.4. Consider adopting a Resolution directing the City Engineer to prepare and file a report for the Silverado Place Subdivision Landscape Maintenance District 2023/2024 Assessment in accordance with Article 4 of Chapter 1 of the Streets and Highways Code.

Recommended Action:

Consider Adopting Resolution.

Staff Report - Prepare and File a Report for the Silverado Place Subdivision Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) 2023/2024 Assessment - Pdf
29 - 31

7.5. Consider adopting a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consultant Services Agreement with Fehr & Peers to prepare a Fire Evacuation Analysis for the Yellow Rose Ranch project as part of CEQA.

Recommended Action: Adopt the attached Resolution.

Staff Report - Consultant Services Agreement CEQA Fire Evacuation Analysis – Yellow Rose Ranch - Pdf
32 - 53

7.6. Consider adopting a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consultant Services Agreement with Fehr & Peers to prepare a Fire Evacuation Analysis for the 2565 Grant Street project as part of CEQA.

Recommended Action: Adopt the attached Resolution.

Staff Report - Consultant Services Agreement CEQA Fire Evacuation Analysis – 2565 Grant St - Pdf
54 - 75

7.7. Consider adopting a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consultant Services Agreement with Fehr & Peers to prepare a Fire Evacuation Analysis for the Kortum Ranch project as part of CEQA.

Recommended Action: Adopt the attached Resolution.

Staff Report - Consultant Services Agreement CEQA Fire Evacuation Analysis – Kortum Ranch - Pdf
76 - 97

7.8. Consider adopting a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an Amendment to Consultant Services Agreement No. 917 with M-Group for the preparation of a Wetland Delineation and Rare Plant Survey in support of the EIR for the Kortum Ranch project as part of the CEQA analysis.

Recommended Action: Adopt the attached Resolution.

Staff Report - Amend Consultant Services Agreement No. 917 Kortum Ranch – CEQA Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Wetland Delineation and Rare Plant Su - Pdf
98 - 112

8. GENERAL GOVERNMENT

8.1. Consider adopting a Resolution rescinding Resolution No. 2021-019 approving the Stage II Water Emergency and adopting a resolution requesting voluntary restrictions of water use under Stage I best management practices.

Recommended Action:

Consider adopting Resolution.
113 - 118

Page 3 of 178 ends

Staff Report - Resolution Rescinding the Stage II Water Emergency - Pdf
Item 8.1 - Public Comment

8.2. Receive the presentation regarding progress on the Utility Rate Study and provide feedback and consensus on some of the model and key underlying assumptions to develop the base Financial Model.

Recommended Action:

Receive the presentation and provide feedback and consensus on some of the model and key underlying assumptions to develop the base Financial Model.

Staff Report - Utility Rate Study Update & Review Foundation of the Finance Model - Pdf
Final CC PowerPoint Presentation Financial Plan and Rate Alternatives 119 - 176

8.3. Appointment to Blue Zones Steering Committee
Recommended Action: Make an appointment to the local Blue Zones Steering Committee
Staff Report - Appointment to Blue Zones Steering Committee - Pdf 177 - 178

9. COUNCIL REPORTS

10. ADJOURNMENT
NOTICE: If you challenge a city’s zoning, planning, or other decision in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. Judicial review of any City administrative decision may be had only if a petition is filed with the court not later than the 90th day following the date upon which the decision becomes final. Judicial review of environmental determinations may be subject to a shorter time period for Litigation, in certain cases 30 days following the date of final decision.

Pursuant to GC §54957.5 any writings/documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection on the City website at www.ci.calistoga.ca.us.

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL RECEIVED AFTER THE POSTING OF THE AGENDA:

Any supplemental writings or documents distributed to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this Agenda, after the posting of the Agenda, such writings or documents will be made available on the City’s website and will be available for public review in the City Clerk’s Office located at 1232 Washington Street, Calistoga, California, during normal business hours and by appointment.

AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT: The City can provide special assistance for persons with disabilities to participate in public meetings. To make a request for disability-related modification or accommodation please contact the City Clerk at [email protected] or (707) 942-2807. If you need assistance or accommodation, please provide notice at least 48 hours prior to the meeting.

For TTY/ Speech-to-Speech users, dial 7-1-1 for the California Relay Service, offering free text-tospeech, speech-to-speech, and Spanish language services 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

Se les pide por favor que avise con 48 horas de anticipación cuando haga un pedido para asistencia.

Esto les da suficiente tiempo antes de la junta para permitir que la ciudad tome medidas razonables.

POSTING: I declare a copy of this agenda was posted at City Hall, 1232 Washington Street, Calistoga, among other locations in the city limits of Calistoga, on April 26, 2023, by 4:30 p.m.

Page 4 of 178 ends

Page 5 of 178 ends

Marni Rittburg
From:

Sent
To:

Subject:

Sheila Allen
Monday, April 24, 2023 4:09 PM
Public Comment
Traffic - continued speedy on Foothill at Lillie & High St.

Addilion4 in, Mectingof~ ,o} ,2-3
Item No. 1
Distributed Ott-0~ Tu e~c./4,_;fCAUTION:'This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not dick links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Mayor Don!
As you know & have experienced the out of control speeders outside my home (1906 Foothill), it seems it's getting worse & I personally never see Calistoga police patrolling this area! I would be calling the police dept. to complain every 5 mins and to let them know the count of cars & trucks that speed right outside my house.

When can we put this issue back on the calendar? I was told by Erica Pusey & her team that it wouldn't be until 2024 but a new law would take effect where we didn't need a traffic survey performed by calTrans to lower the speed limit because the City could do it on their own.

I would like to see traffic signs (digital, battery operated) to flash you're speeding & will be ticketed! Let's get this issue back in front of the council & I still have signatures of residents that feel the same! The problem is though they agree something should be done, they're not personally affected so this issue goes on the back burner again!
Let me know your thoughts!
Respectively yours,
Sheila Allen
Fellow Calistogan
1 Addriionalw‘tin ‘ Mccnngof‘ ;‘—'%g22 3
_llemNo,
Mam‘ R‘ burg Dmnhutcdan?iéé
From: Sheila Allen a
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2023 4:09 PM
To: PublicComment
Subject: Traffic - continued speedy on Foothillat Lillie81High St. munch:Th Ema ”n'afed'lFo'rn,6utsideo‘l7t’h"e”drgaion.Do'no't" ‘clicklir'il<s‘oiopenattacliriiérits uriléss yduTeco§?ii'ethe" senmcler.an,d‘know,th :ontent‘is;sate.

Dear Mayor Donl
As you know & have experienced the out of control speeders outside my home (1906 Foothill), it seems it's getting worse & I personally never see Calistoga police patrolling this area! Iwould be calling the police dept. to complain every 5 mins and to let them know the count of cars &trucks that speed right outside my house. when can we put this issue back on the calendar? Iwas told by Erica Pusey & her team that it wouldn't be until 2024 but a new law would take effect where we didn't need a traffic survey performed by CalTrans to lower the speed limit because the City could do it on their own.

Sheila Allen
FellowCalistogan
Item #3.1.

Page 6 of 178 ends

Marni Rittburg
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Mother Tabitha
Monday, April 24, 2023 4:22 PM
Public Comment
Concern for our Town's Citizens
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

I appreciate your thoughtfulness in regard to those in town that are sick . As well as those who have departed. May we all take the time to say a prayer for our town, and our local and national government. Miracles happen and lives are changed when people pray.

Mother Tabitha
1 Meelingof 9-
ItemNo. 3
Distributedwo+ Marni R‘ tbura
From: Mother Tabitha
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2023 4:22 PM
To: PublicComment
Subject: Concern for our Town‘: Citizens
jznujnouzThisemal?irlginatedlfrom outsideof the o'rg‘a‘nization.Danot’clickllnksor open attachmentsunlessyou r_ecagni_zethe sem:ler_.andknnwthecontent-‘Issafe.

I appreciate your thoughtfulness in regard to those in town that are sick .As well as those who have departed. May we all take the time to say a prayer for our town, and our local and national government. Miracles happen and livesare changed when people pray.

Mother Tabitha
Item #3.1.

Page 7 of 178 ends

Marni Rittburg
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Len Tolstunov
Monday, April 24, 2023 9:48 PM
Public Comment
Public Comments/Calistoga
Additional W .•
Meetingof /5/~ 'o--'p
Ilem N~ ~ , _J... Distributed . ~ :tv, J' ci<b1
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click Jinks or open attacbroents unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

1. Safety: improve public roads for walking and biking. Major safety issue for our walkable and bicycle-able town. Streets, like Washington and Fair are bad and full of potholes and large cracks. Both my wife and I fell and got injured there while biking. Our City Council should ask town's manager to allocate funds to repair many roads to avoid injuries and lawsuits related to them. City Council should make a decision, pass a resolution, and delegate money to fix our roads.

2. Beautification. We drive to Healdsburg, Saint Helena, and Yountville many times and always admire how thoughtful people of these towns and their City Councils think about beautification. It is not a side issue, it is a persistent afford to beautify your town, the place where you live. I traveled to Carmel last weekend- the same thoughtful beautification afford. In fact, the town has a beautifu:ation committee with professionals who understand this issue and care about it. Everyone enjoys clean and beautiful places: residents and tourists alike.

Look at our Lincoln street parklets, trees, signs. Example: we had a fantastic sign in red letters on Lincoln Street next to the Bella's bakery, on the fence- We love Calistoga. People used to take pictures there all the time.

Great idea, not sure who was responsible. Last year the lot behind that fence went on sale and the owner placed a huge sigh "for sale" on the same fence without any feel or consideration, making it so unattractive. The great photo opportunity was ruined. Part of the character of our town was ruined too.

We need a beautification committee that would have a simple but distinct goal to make our town especially attractive and distinct not only by the presence of steam baths and pools but also by exterior and interior attractive features that create a character of our small town. Holidays: please travel to St. Helena during Christmas holidays and see how beautiful is there. We should be able to have it even better!

3. Fairgrounds. Our town wanted to buy an expensive but very old and broken toy, called Fairgrounds. Then, spend a lot more money to repair that toy. Then, ask everyone to pay for it. And then after all this to have the same old Fairgrounds that we did not know what to do to begin with. Will we spend our personal money in our own family this way? No. We love it but we did not know what to do with it. That is the real reason why this resolution failed.

Do we need a Speed track? No.

Do we need a golf course? No.

Do we need a beautiful park with fountains, flowers, and lake with ducks and swans, and biking and walking trails around for families and children? Yes!
Do we need a I-mile running track around the lake and an Exercise patch? Yes! Do we need a public tennis and pickleball courts? Yes!
Do we need a Calistoga Community Center center with an Art Center for art and craft classes, cooking classes, and Calistoga Wine School for teaching and tasting. Yes! These new ideas can justify changes. Old ideas do not. People should also not pay for town improvements, it's not fair!
1 Distributed :(<gf' Marni Rittburg
From: Len Tolstunov — Sent: Monday, April 24, 2023 9:48 PM To: PublicComment
Subject: PublicComments/Calistoga
t‘:6n.132:}notélleliilinlsbiiipehlattiéhmeiits tiziI'e's,"s7vo'u re“édg}Ti'é'th'é

1. Safety: improvepublic roads for walking and biking. Major safety issue for our walkable and bicycle-able town. Streets, like Washington and Fair are bad and full of potholes and large cracks. Both my wife and I fell and got injured there while hiking. Our City Council should ask town's manager to allocate funds to repair many roads to avoid injuries and lawsuits related to them. City Council should make a decision,pass a resolution, and delegate money to fix our roads.

2. Beauti?cation. We drive to Healdsburg, SaintHelena, and Yountville many times and always admire how thoughtful people of these towns and their City Councils think about beauti?cation. It is not a side issue, it is a persistentafford to beautify your town, the place where you live. I traveled to Carmel last weekend‘ the same thoughtful beauti?cation afford. In fact, the town has a beuuttfcationcommittee with professionals who understand this issue and care about it. Everyone enjoys clean and beautiful places:residents and tourists alike.

Great idea, not sure who was responsible.Last year the lot behind that fence went on sale and the owner placed a huge sigh "for sale" on the same fence without any feel or consideration, making it so unattractive. The great photo opportunity was mined. Part of the character of our town was mined too.

We need a beauti?cation committeethat would have a simple but distinct goal to make our town especially attractive and distinct not only by the presence of steam baths and pools but also by exterior and interior attractive features that create a character of our small town. Holidays: please travel to St. Helena during Christmas holidays and see how beautiful is there. We should be able to have it even better!

3. Fairgrounds. Our town wanted to buy an expensive but very old and broken toy, called Fairgrounds. Then, spend a lot more money to repairthat toy. Then, ask everyone to pay for it. And then alter all this to have the same old Fairgrounds that we did not know what to do to begin with. Will we spend our permnal money in our own family this way? No. We love it but we did not know what to do with it. That is the real reason why this resolution failed.

Do we need a Speed track? No.

Do we need a golf course’?No.

Do we need a beautiful park with fountains, ?owers, and lake with ducks and swans, and biking and walking trails around for families and children? Yes!
Do we need a 1-mile running track around the lake and an Exercise patch? Yes! Do we need a public tennis and picklehallcourts? Yes!
Do we need a Calistoga Community Center center with an Art Center for art and cra? classes, cooking classes, and Calistoga Wine School for teaching and tasting. Yes! These new ideas can justify changes. Old ideas do not. People should also not pay for town improvements, it's not fair!
Item #3.1.

Page 8 of 178 ends

If we have this vision, then, we will not argue and come together to ask Napa County to give (not sell) Fairgrounds on the territory of town of Calistoga back to our town where it used to belong.

Thanks,
Len (Lenny)
2 If we have this vision, then, we will not argue and come together to ask Napa County to give (not sell) Fairgrounds on the territory of town of Calistoga back to our town where it used to belong.

Thanks,
Len (Lenny)
Item #3.1.

Page 9 of 178 ends

Marni Rittburg
From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Norine Moses
Tuesday, April 25, 2023 3:07 PM
Public Comment
dangerous crosswalk remediation
Meeting '""'"°"" of 5 w~ ~ Item No. Distributed etrea1sj:& f c'.i:~ CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Members of the City Council:

As part of the building project at the Green Church/Brannan Center, a new crosswalk was installed going from the 11 southeast" corner of 4th and Washington Streets to the front entry of the Orthodox Monastery. Crossing from the 4th St side is dangerous. I am asking you to have 2 additional Stop Signs installed at that intersection, one for each direction on Washington Street, so that it will become a 3-way stop. As it is now, vehicles approaching from the downtown direction cannot see a pedestrian on the 4th St side wanting to cross to the Monastery side. I have stepped off and then back onto the curb while as many as 5 vehicles drove on through the crosswalk with just enough time between them to allow for the fact that they each stopped at the 3rd and Washington intersection and then started moving again. I could not see them coming and they could not see me waiting to cross. Finally, a driver with quick reflexes stopped. In another instance a driver coming from the direction of Lake Street was able to see that I was waiting to cross. When that driver stopped it alerted the oncoming vehicle from the blind direction that there was a reason to be cautious and they were able to stop.

The intersection is a busy crossing point morning and afternoon for children heading to or from the Elementary School.

I visited the Police Station to request the installation of the 2 additional Stop Signs. The Dispatcher said the Police Department does not have that authority and referred me to you, the City Council. This· is something that needs a quick fix so please act on it as soon as possible.

Thanks for your efforts on our behalf.

Best wishes,
Norine Moses
Marni
From: Norine Moses :

Sent: Tuesday, April25, 2023 3:07 PM
To: PublicComment
Subject: dangerous crosswalk remediation
CAHMON:Thisemail originated from outsideat the organization. Do not clickIlnksor apenyattachmentsunlessyou reooy1ize.t_he sender and know the content is safe.

Members of the City Council:

As part of the building project at the Green Church/BrannanCenter, a new crosswalk was installed going from the "southeast" corner of 4th and Washington Streets to the front entry of the Orthodox Monastery. Crossing from the 4th St side is dangerous. I am asking you to have 2 additional Stop Signs installed at that intersection, one for each direction on Washington Street, so that it willbecome a 3-way stop. Asit is now, vehicles approaching from the downtown direction cannot see a pedestrian on the 4th St side wanting to cross to the Monastery side. I have stepped off and then back onto the curb while as many as 5 vehicles drove on through the crosswalk with just enough time between them to allow for the fact that they each stopped at the 3rd and Washington intersection and then started moving again. I could not see them coming and they could not see me waiting to cross. Finally, a driver with quick reflexes stopped. In another instance a driver coming from the direction of Lake Street was able to see that I was waiting to cross. When that driver stopped it alerted the oncoming vehicle from the blind direction that there was a reason to be cautious and they were able to stop.

The intersection is a busy crossing point morning and afternoon for children heading to or from the Elementary School.

I visited the Police Station to request the installation of the 2 additional Stop Signs. The Dispatcher said the PoliceDepartment does not have that authority and referred me to you, the City Council. This is something that needs a quick ?x so please act on it as soon as possible.

Thanks for your efforts on our behalf.

Best wishes,
Norine Moses
Item #3.1.

Page 10 of 178 ends

Meetingof Addi ltem . "tiNo.
·?it; • • ~ ~ I .J
Distributed ~ 4t
eMc..t/G-d
Dear Councilmembers,
We, the members of Calistoga Public Employees Association, are writing this letter to express our strong support for our fellow member, Mitchell Egert, who is currently facing the possibility of termination.

Mitchell has been serving the City as the full-time Water Conservation Technician for the past year and nine months and during his employment has been instrumental in education and outreach that has helped the community save millions in gallons of water.

On April 24, Mitchell preemptively received a notice of layoff, his last day effective May 31. It is noted in the letter that Mitchell has not "held a different classification within the City," which means there is no position he can 'bump back' into, according to the letter.

On April 5, 2022, City Council approved Staffing Modifications, which included "Administrative Services Technician to provide both water conservation support and broader high level administrative support to Public Works, particularly related to capital projects, with a corresponding reduction of Water Conservation Technician." Following this action, Mitchell immediately began completing administrative assignments while continuing his water conservation efforts. After several months, and contrary to Council's direction, Mitchell for unknown reasons was informed that he would return to only water conservation duties despite the need for administrative help at Public Works. Had this not occurred, Mitchell may still have a position to fall back into.

We are deeply concerned about the impact that the termination of Mitchell would have on the entire Association. He is a valued City staff member, as well as community member, and his experience and expertise would be extremely valuable in other areas of the City.

As such, we respectfully request that you direct the City Manager to reconsider the decision to layoff Mitchell. We believe that it is in the best interests of our City, and all of its employees, to retain his services and expertise and not take such immediate and drastic personnel action.

We appreciate your attention to this matter and thank you for considering our request.

Sincerely,
Calistoga Public Employees Association Members
CC: Claudia Aceves, President
Brandon Gray, Vice President
Melissa Velasquez, Secretary
Jovani Carrillo, Treasurer
Richard Reed, Labor Representative
Item #3.2.

Page 11 of 178 ends

CITY OF CALISTOGA
STAFF
REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Marni Rittburg, City Clerk
DATE: May 2, 2023
SUBJECT: Approve Minutes
Approved by:

Laura Snideman, City Manager
DESCRIPTION:

Consider approving the Minutes of the October 18, 2022, and the December 6, 2022, Regular City Council Meetings.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve the minutes as submitted.

ATTACHMENTS:

October 18, 2022, Regular City Council Meeting Minutes
December 6, 2022, Regular City Council Meeting Minutes
Item #7.1.

Page 12 of 178 ends

DRAFT MINUTES

CALISTOGA CITY COUNCIL

REGULAR MEETING
Tuesday, October 18, 2022 - 6:00 P.M.

Calistoga Community Center
1307 Washington Street, Calistoga, CA 94515
And Via Zoom - Hybrid Meeting

1. CALL TO ORDER – ROLL CALL – SALUTE TO THE FLAG
Mayor Canning, called the regular session to order at 6:03 p.m.

Present: Councilmembers Lisa Gift, Gary Kraus, and Donald Williams; Vice Mayor Irais Lopez-Ortega, and Mayor Chris Canning

Absent: None

2. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Canning reported that today, October 18, 2022, a Closed Session was held at 4:00 P.M. regarding labor negotiations and there was no reportable action taken.

3. ORAL COMMUNICATION ON CONSENT ITEMS OR NON-AGENDA ITEMS Oral communication was received. For oral communication and public comment content, for any item on the agenda, view the video of the meeting available on the City’s YouTube channel at https://www.youtube.com/user/CityofCalistoga or visit the City’s Website at:
https://calistoga.civicweb.net/Portal/MeetingInformation.aspx?Org=Cal&Id=219

4. ADOPTION OF MEETING AGENDA
Motion by Councilmember Kraus and seconded by Councilmember Gift and passed by the following roll call vote to adopt the meeting agenda as presented. Mayor Canning announced the meeting will adjourn in memory of retired City of Calistoga employee Rick Kane.

AYES: Councilmembers Kraus, Gift and Williams, Vice Mayor Lopez- Ortega and Mayor Canning
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None

5. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
City Manager Laura Snideman provided updates on COVID-19 and public projects including the completion of the Vine Trail Pavement Project, which took a year for total completion. Speed cushions have been put in on Grant Street. The generators for Rancho de Calistoga will be tested later this week.

Item #7.1.

Page 13 of 178 ends

Calistoga City Council Minutes
October 18, 2022

Page 2 of 5 ends

6. CONSENT CALENDAR
Item 6.6 was pulled for separate discussion/action by Councilmember Williams. Public comment was not received. Motion by Councilmember Kraus, second by Vice Mayor Lopez-Ortega and passed by the following roll call vote, Council approved all remaining Consent Calendar items:

AYES: Councilmembers Kraus, Williams and Gift, Vice Mayor LopezOrtega, and Mayor Canning NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None

6.1 Approve the Minutes of the May 24, 2022, City Council Special Meeting as submitted.

Recommended Action: Approve Minutes

6.2 Consider affirming Resolution No. 2021-071 findings related to the state of emergency due to COVID-19 authorizing the City manager to continue implementing teleconference accessibility to conduct public meetings pursuant to Assembly Bill 361:

Recommended Action: Affirm Resolution No. 2021-071 findings in accordance with the provisions and findings of AB361 to continue virtual/teleconference meetings of the City Council and City Boards, Commissions, and Committees after September 30, 2021.

6.3 Consider adopting Resolution No. 2022-082 approving the purchase of handheld radios.

Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 2022-082.

6.4 Consideration adopting Resolution No. 2022-083 authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consultant Service Agreement with Sloan Sakai Yeung & Wong LLP for professional project management consulting services.

Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 2022-083.

6.5 Consider adopting Resolution No. 2022-084 authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consultant Services Agreement with Bureau Veritas North America, Inc. (BVNA) for building official, building inspection, plan check and program administration services, as needed.

Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 2022-084.

6.6 Item Pulled from Consent by Councilmember Williams – Consider adopting Resolution No. 202-085 (Attachment 1)approving (i) a Final Map (Attachment 2) to create 13 single-family residential estate lots, 20 residential villa lots, 3 resort lots and 7 forest reserve parcels on approximately 100.8 +/- acres at 515 Foothill Boulevard (011-310-031 through 011-310-041 and 011-310-044; 011-320-007; 011-320-039 through 011-320-069; and 011-3010-024); and (ii) a First Amendment to On-Site Item #7.1.

Page 14 of 178 ends

Calistoga City Council Minutes
October 18, 2022

Page 3 of 5 ends

Remediation and Reimbursement Agreement(Attachment 3) to provide security for Developer’s obligation to pay On-Site Remediation Costs incurred by City.

Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 2022-085.

MAYOR CANNING DIRECTED PULLED CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS 6.6 TO BE CONSIDERED AT THIS POINT IN THE MEETING:

6.6Item Pulled from Consent by Councilmember Williams – Consider adopting Resolution No. 2022-085 (Attachment 1)approving (i) a Final Map (Attachment 2) to create 13 single-family residential estate lots, 20 residential villa lots, 3 resort lots and 7 forest reserve parcels on approximately 100.8 +/- acres at 515 Foothill Boulevard (Calistoga Hills) (011-310-031 through 011-310-041 and 011-310-044; 011-320-007; 011-320-039 through 011-320-069; and 011-3010-024); and (ii) a First Amendment to On-Site Remediation and Reimbursement Agreement(Attachment 3) to provide security for Developer’s obligation to pay On-Site Remediation Costs incurred by City.

Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution.

Councilmember Williams discussed the remediation cost and recording of the final map. City Manager clarified the issue.

Public comment was not received. Motion by Councilmember Williams, second by Councilmember Kraus and passed by the following roll call vote, Council adopted Resolution No. 2022-085 approving a Final Map for the Calistoga Hills Resort (TM 2019-1) and a First Amendment to On-Site Remediation and Reimbursement Agreement.

AYES: Councilmembers Williams, Kraus and Gift, Vice Mayor LopezOrtega, and Mayor Canning NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None

7. GENERAL GOVERNMENT

7.1 Provide direction regarding Napa County Fairground Community Facilities District (CFD) Special Tax Allocation.

Recommended Action: Direct City Staff and Consultants on special tax methodology in order to draft the necessary CFD formation documents prior to establishing the CFD and calling for the election for the funding of the Napa County Fairgrounds acquisition.

Mayor Canning updated those present of the status of the PSA document stating it was presented to the County of Napa, which was presented to the Board of Supervisors.

City Manager Snideman opened the item and introduced NHA Advisors Managing Principal Craig Hill and Associate Roy Kim. Councilmember Gift recused herself due to a proximity issue and left the meeting at 6:20 PM.

Item #7.1.

Page 15 of 178 ends

Calistoga City Council Minutes
October 18, 2022

Page 4 of 5 ends

Craig Hill presented a PowerPoint presentation that updated the four primary land use options.

Council and staff discussion ensued. City Manager Snideman reminded everyone the amount of funding being discussed is the maximum amount of funding that will be needed. The amount can be lessened in the future.

Public comment was received both in favor and against the purchase of the property.

City Council and staff discussion ensued.

The Council asked Mr. Hill and his staff to return to the next City Council meeting with a Resolution of Intention to form the Napa County Fairground Community Facilities District.

Mayor Canning recessed the meeting for a 5-minute comfort break.

Councilmember Gift rejoined the meeting at 8:25 PM.

7.2.Allow the City Council and the community an opportunity to review the Housing and Community Development (HCD) comments and City Staff recommended responses on the draft Housing Element and provide any comments for consideration by Staff.

Recommended Action: No final decisions will be made at this meeting. The final decisions are currently anticipated during the November 15, 2023, City Council regular meeting.

Director of Planning & Building Jeff Mitchem introduced the item and provided a PowerPoint presentation to summarize HCD’s comments. Council and staff discussion ensued.

Public comment was not received. There will be adoption hearings in March and April, 2023, for adoption in April, 2023.

7.3 Logistics of Special Meetings
Recommended Action: Hear staff input on special meeting logistics and provide direction.

This item was postponed to a future meeting.

8. COUNCIL REQUESTS AND IDEAS FOR DISCUSSION
There were no Council requests and ideas for discussion.

9. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Canning adjourned the meeting at 9:26 p.m. in memory of Rick Kane.

Item #7.1.

Page 16 of 178 ends

Calistoga City Council Minutes
October 18, 2022

Page 5 of 5 ends

Respectfully Submitted
Prepared by: Approved by:

Marni Rittburg, City Clerk Donald Williams, Mayor
Approved:

Item #7.1.

Page 17 of 178 ends

DRAFT MINUTES

CALISTOGA CITY COUNCIL

REGULAR MEETING
Tuesday, December 6, 2022 - 6:00 P.M.

Calistoga Community Center
1307 Washington Street, Calistoga, CA 94515
And Via Zoom - Hybrid Meeting

1. CALL TO ORDER – ROLL CALL – SALUTE TO THE FLAG
Mayor Canning, called the regular session to order at 6:04 p.m.

Present: Councilmembers Lisa Gift, Gary Kraus, and Donald Williams; Vice Mayor Irais Lopez-Ortega, and Mayor Chris Canning

Absent: None

2. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Canning reported that today, December 6, 2022, a Closed Session was held regarding labor negotiations and there was no reportable action taken in Closed Session.

3. ORAL COMMUNICATION ON CONSENT ITEMS OR NON-AGENDA ITEMS Oral communication was not received. For oral communication and public comment content, for any item on the agenda, view the video of the meeting available on the City’s YouTube channel at https://www.youtube.com/user/CityofCalistoga or visit the City’s Website at:
https://calistoga.civicweb.net/Portal/MeetingInformation.aspx?Org=Cal&Id=219

4. ADOPTION OF MEETING AGENDA
Motion by Councilmember Kraus and seconded by Councilmember Williams and passed by the following roll call vote to adopt the meeting agenda as presented.

AYES: Councilmembers Kraus, Williams and Gift, Vice Mayor Lopez-Ortega and Mayor Canning
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None

5. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
City Manager Laura Snideman reminded everyone that the December 20, 2022, Regular City Council Meeting will include the Council reorganization and certifying the election results. There will be a reception afterward to thank the outgoing Mayor and Councilmembers and welcome the incoming Councilmembers.

6. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS/AWARDS
Item #7.1.

Page 18 of 178 ends

Calistoga City Council Minutes
December 6, 2022

Page 2 of 5 ends

None

7. CONSENT CALENDAR
Item 7.7 was pulled for separate discussion/action. Public comment was not received.

Motion by Councilmember Kraus, second by Councilmember Williams and passed by the following roll call vote, Council approved all remaining Consent Calendar items:

AYES: Councilmembers Kraus, Williams and Gift, Vice Mayor LopezOrtega, and Mayor Canning NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None

7.1 Consider adopting and Ordinance repealing certain chapters of Calistoga Municipal Code Title 15, Building Standards Codes, and adopting updates to CMC Title 15 and Title 24.

Recommended Action: Adopt Ordinance 757 as submitted adopting the 2022 California Building Standards Code, Title 24, with local amendments, and the 2021 International Property Maintenance Code and 2021 International Pool and Spa Code.

7.2 Consider adopting a Resolution accepting the FY 2021-2022 Development Impact Fees Annual Report in Compliance with Assembly Bill 1600.

Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 2022-100

7.3 Consider adopting a Resolution amending salary and benefits schedules by incorporating January 1, 2023, California minimum wage changes and approving salary and benefit changes to unrepresented employees.

Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 2022-101 approving an amendment to the Temporary Employee Salary Schedule, unrepresented Management Employees Salary and Benefits Schedule, and Executive Management Employees Salary and Benefits Schedule.

7.4 Consider adopting a Resolution confirming the Mayor’s Appointments to the Active Transportation Advisory Committee, Green Committee, Housing Advisory Committee and the Planning Commission.

Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 2022-102.

7.5 Consideration of proposed uncodified ordinance canceling the City of Calistoga’s enforcement responsibility for mobile home parks (MHP) and installations and special occupancy parks under the California Health and Safety Code.

Recommended Action: Introduce the draft Ordinance and waive its first reading.

7.6 Consider adopting a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consultant Services Agreement with M-Group to prepare an EIR for Kortum Ranch project as part of the CEQA analysis.

Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 2022-103.

Item #7.1.

Page 19 of 178 ends

Calistoga City Council Minutes
December 6, 2022

Page 3 of 5 ends

7.7 Item Pulled from Consent by Councilmember Williams Consider adopting a Resolution authorizing the City of Calistoga to execute a Professional Services Agreement with Godbe Research for a parks and recreation needs assessment survey.

Recommended Action: Consider adopting the Resolution

7.8 Consider authorizing payment to Napa County for the purpose of conducting a special election for the formation of a Community Facility District for the Fairgrounds..

Recommended Action: By minute order, authorize payment to Napa County for the purpose of conducting a special election for the formation of a Community Facility District for the Fairgrounds and adjust the City FY 2022-23 budget, as necessary.

MAYOR CANNING DIRECTED PULLED CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 7.7 TO BE CONSIDERED AT THIS POINT IN THE MEETING:

Recommended Action: Consider adopting the Resolution
Councilmember Williams opened the item. Parks and Recreation Director Rachel Melick presented the item.

Council and staff discussion ensued.

Public comment was received. Motion by Mayor Canning second by Councilmember Kraus. The Resolution was not adopted by the following roll call vote.

AYES: Mayor Canning and Councilmember Kraus
NOES: Councilmembers Williams and Gift and Vice Mayor Lopez-Ortega ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None

8. PUBLIC HEARING

8.1 Consideration of 1) adopting Resolution No. 2022-096 for the formation of City of Calistoga Community Facility District (CFD) to finance public services and the acquisition and construction of certain public facilities; 2) Resolution No. 2022-097 determining necessity to incur bonded indebtedness for No. CFD 2022-1; and 3) Resolution No. 2022-098 calling a special election for No. CFD 2002-1. In addition, adopt Resolution No. 2022-099 approving an argument in favor of the CFD special tax measure that would be submitted to voters on behalf of the entire City Council.

Recommended Action: Hold a Public Hearing and consider adopting four resolutions.

Item #7.1.

Page 20 of 178 ends

Calistoga City Council Minutes
December 6, 2022

Page 4 of 5 ends

Councilmember Gift recused herself due to a proximity issue and left the meeting at 6:24 PM.

Mayor Canning asked NBS Director Sara Mares to summarize the 42 written protests received from property owners who are non-exempt from the special tax. This represents 7.51 percent of property owners. No additional written protests were received. Ms. Mares also presented a PowerPoint presentation on this item.

NHA Advisors Managing Principal Craig Hill answered questions from the Council.

Mayor Canning opened the Public Hearing at 6:25 PM. Public comment was received. No oral protests were received. The Public Hearing was closed at 7:41 PM.

Council and staff discussion ensued. It was noted the Resolutions can be voted on by a single motion and second, instead of individually.

A motion by Councilmember Williams and a second by Vice Mayor Lopez-Ortega to 1) adopt Resolution No. 2022-096 for the formation of City of Calistoga Community Facility District (CFD) to finance public services and the acquisition and construction of certain public facilities; 2) Resolution No. 2022-097 determining necessity to incur bonded indebtedness for No. CFD 2022-1; and 3) Resolution No. 2022-098 calling a special election for No. CFD 2002-1. In addition, adopt Resolution No. 2022-099 approving an argument in favor of the CFD special tax measure that would be submitted to voters on behalf of the entire city Council by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmember Williams, Kraus; Vice Mayor Lopez-Ortega and Mayor Canning
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Councilmember Gift
ABSENT: None
Mayor Canning recessed the meeting for a 5-minute comfort break Councilmember Gift returned to the meeting after the recess.

9. GENERAL GOVERNMENT

9.1 Consider proposed amendments.to the Calistoga Municipal Code to include new regulations governing the use of reusable and disposable food ware to encourage waste reduction within the City of Calistoga (City).

Recommended Action: Provide direction to staff regarding the applicability of the draft Municipal Code amendments as presented and any other regulations.

This item was moved to the January 17, 2023 Regular City Council meeting due to a connectivity issue.

9.2 Report on Police response to party noise complaints to the City Council Recommended Action: Solicit input and direction from the City Council regarding police response to party noise complaints.

Item #7.1.

Page 21 of 178 ends

Calistoga City Council Minutes
December 6, 2022

Page 5 of 5 ends

This item was moved to the January 17, 2023 regular City Council meeting due to a connectivity issue.

10.COUNCIL REQUESTS AND IDEAS FOR DISCUSSION
Councilmember Gift discussed the City of Calistoga website and noted there is a lack of inclusivity. She also thanked Celebrate Calistoga and the Christmas Fair participants for a very successful event.

Vice Mayor Lopez-Ortega suggested Community Forums start again hosted by the Mayor and one City Councilmember on a monthly basis. She also wished everyone a Happy Holiday.

Mayor Canning also discussed the Community Forum, noting December 12, 2022, at 6:00 PM. The Mayor will be joined by Councilmember Williams at the Community Forum, with the topic being the Napa County Fairgrounds Acquisition and the CFD.

He also echoed the thought about the weekend festivities being a huge success.

11. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Canning adjourned the meeting at 8:24 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted,
Prepared by: Approved by:

Marni Rittburg, City Clerk Donald Williams, Mayor
Approved:

Item #7.1.

Page 22 of 178 ends

City of Calistoga

STAFF REPORT
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Marc Fox, Acting Administrative Services Director Meeting: City Council - May 02 2023
Subject: Approving Amendment to the Personnel and Staffing Listing by temporarily increasing authorized positions during the current fiscal year.

DESCRIPTION:

Consider adoption of a Resolution that makes a temporary increase in the City’s authorized Personnel and Staffing Listing by temporarily increasing the allocated staffing of Fire Chief and of Utilities Systems Superintendent.

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt a resolution which that makes a temporary increase in the Personnel and Salary Listing.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

Both the City’s Fire Chief and the Utilities Systems Superintendent have each announced their retirement from City service, with retirements occurring in late June 2023.

The City Manager and Public Works Director/City Engineer are actively recruiting to fill both the Fire Chief and the Utilities Systems Superintendent positions, with appointments of new employees anticipated in June 2023 and prior to the retirement date of the incumbent employees.

The proposed action temporarily increases the authorized positions of Fire Chief and Utilities Systems Superintendent so that cross-training from the incumbent employee to the new employee can occur.

CEQA STATUS:

Not applicable.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

Assuming that both new employees start June 1, 2023 the fiscal impact would be $34,518 to $44,427 for salaries and benefits, depending on the starting wage and whether the employee selects benefits for self only or for eligible dependents.

ATTACHMENT(S):

Resolution Amending the Personnel Staffing Listing by Temporarily Increasing Staff APPROVAL(S):

Nitish Sharma Approved - Apr 23 2023
Item #7.2.

Page 23 of 178 ends

Laura Snideman, City Manager Approved - Apr 25 2023
Marni Rittburg, City Clerk Approved - Apr 25 2023
Item #7.2.

Page 24 of 178 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-____

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

NAPA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA APPROVING A TEMPORARY AMENDMENT TO

THE PERSONNEL AND STAFFING LISTING
WHEREAS, the City’s Fire Chief and the Utilities Systems Superintendent have each announced their retirement from City service, with retirement occurring in the current fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager and Public Works Director/City Engineer are actively recruiting to fill the Fire Chief and the Utilities Systems Superintendent positions prior to the incumbent employees’ last day of City employment; and
WHEREAS, it is advantageous for the incoming new employee to have some concurrent employment overlap with the retiring employee prior to the effective date of retirement.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Calistoga hereby amends the Personnel and Staffing Listing by authorizing a temporary increase in the staffing allocation of Fire Chief and of Utilities Systems Superintendent and authorizes the City Manager with City Attorney concurrence to make any technical corrections.

Amendment to the Personnel and Staffing Listing:

Allocation
Department Classification
Effective
Date Current Proposed Change
Fire Fire Chief 06/01/23 1.0 2.0 1.0
Fire Fire Chief 07/01/23 2.0 1.0 -1.0
Public Works Utilities Systems Superintendent 06/01/23 1.0 2.0 1.0 Public Works Utilities Systems Superintendent 07/01/23 2.0 1.0 -1.0 Net Change 0.0
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of May 2023. 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 Donald Williams, Mayor
Item #7.2.

Page 25 of 178 ends

City of Calistoga

STAFF REPORT
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Derek Rayner, Public Works Director/City Engineer Meeting: City Council - May 02 2023
Subject: Prepare and File a Report for the Palisades Subdivision Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) 2023/2024 Assessment
DESCRIPTION:

Consideration of a Resolution directing the City Engineer to prepare and file a report for the Palisades Subdivision Landscape Maintenance District 2023/2024 Assessment in accordance with Article 4 of Chapter 1 of the Streets and Highways Code.

RECOMMENDATION:

Consider Adopting Resolution.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

Through the conditions of approval for the Palisades Subdivision, the City required the establishment of a Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) to fund the maintenance of adjacent public landscaping through the levying of assessments on the parcels within those subdivision.

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 an assessment is proposed to be levied and collected. These proceedings are usually accomplished through three Council actions as follows:

1. Adopt a resolution directing the City Engineer to prepare and file a report.

2. Approve the Engineer’s Report, declare the City Council’s intent to levy and collect assessments and set the date for a public hearing.

3. Conduct a public hearing and authorize the actual levying and collection of assessments.

The recommended Resolution begins the process for the 2023/2024 assessment. At the June 6, 2023, meeting you will receive the Engineer’s Report and set the date for a public hearing. During the Public Hearing, the Council will receive any public testimony on the proposed assessment and will consider the levy of the proposed assessments.

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.

Item #7.3.

Page 26 of 178 ends

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

There will be no fiscal impact through the adoption of the recommended resolution. Actual fiscal impact will be determined after the preparation of the Engineer’s Report.

ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Draft Resolution
Item #7.3.

Page 27 of 178 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XXX

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

NAPA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DIRECTING THE CITY ENGINEER TO PREPARE

AND FILE A REPORT FOR THE PALISADES SUBDIVISION LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT (LMD) 2023/2024 ASSESSMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 4 OF CHAPTER 1 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE WHEREAS, the City of Calistoga established a Landscape Maintenance District for the Palisades Subdivision to fund the maintenance of adjacent public landscaping through the levying of assessments on the parcels within that subdivision; and WHEREAS, 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 an assessment is proposed to be levied and collected; and WHEREAS, the recommended action is general policy and procedure and is not a Project under CEQA pursuant to Section 15378(b) (4) of CEQA; and WHEREAS, the first step in these annual proceedings is to direct the City Engineer to prepare and file a report for the LMD 2023/2024 assessment.

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

1. Directs the City Engineer to prepare and file a report for the Palisades Subdivision Landscape Maintenance District as required by the Streets and Highways Code and return to the Council with the completed report for further action.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 2
nd day of May 2023. 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 Donald Williams, Mayor
ATTACHMENT 1
Item #7.3.

Page 28 of 178 ends

City of Calistoga

STAFF REPORT
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Derek Rayner, Public Works Director/City Engineer Meeting: City Council - May 02 2023
Subject: Prepare and File a Report for the Silverado Place Subdivision Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) 2023/2024 Assessment
DESCRIPTION:

Consideration of a Resolution directing the City Engineer to prepare and file a report for the Silverado Place Subdivision Landscape Maintenance District 2023/2024 Assessment in accordance with Article 4 of Chapter 1 of the Streets and Highways Code.

RECOMMENDATION:

Consider Adopting Resolution.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

Through the conditions of approval for the Silverado Place Subdivision, the City required the establishment of a Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) to fund the maintenance of adjacent public landscaping through the levying of assessments on the parcels within that subdivision.

1. Adopt a resolution directing the City Engineer to prepare and file a report.

2. Approve the Engineer’s Report, declare the City Council’s intent to levy and collect assessments and set the date for a public hearing.

3. Conduct a public hearing and authorize the actual levying and collection of assessments.

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.

Item #7.4.

Page 29 of 178 ends

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

There will be no fiscal impact through the adoption of the recommended resolution. Actual fiscal impact will be determined after the preparation of the Engineer’s Report.

ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Draft Resolution
Item #7.4.

Page 30 of 178 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XXX

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

NAPA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DIRECTING THE CITY ENGINEER TO PREPARE

AND FILE A REPORT FOR THE SILVERADO PLACE SUBDIVISION LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT (LMD) 2023/2024 ASSESSMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 4 OF CHAPTER 1 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE WHEREAS, the City of Calistoga established a Landscape Maintenance District for the Silverado Place Subdivision to fund the maintenance of adjacent public landscaping through the levying of assessments on the parcels within that subdivision; and
WHEREAS, 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 an assessment is proposed to be levied and collected; and WHEREAS, the recommended action is general policy and procedure and is not a Project under CEQA pursuant to Section 15378(b) (4) of CEQA; and WHEREAS, the first step in these annual proceedings is to direct the City Engineer to prepare and file a report for the LMD 2023/2024 assessment.

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

1. Directs the City Engineer to prepare and file a report for the Silverado Place Subdivision Landscape Maintenance District as required by the Streets and Highways Code and return to the Council with the completed report for further action.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
____________________________ __________________________ Marni Rittburg, CMC, City Clerk Donald Williams, Mayor
ATTACHMENT 1 Item #7.4.

Page 31 of 178 ends

City of Calistoga

STAFF REPORT
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Jeff Mitchem, Planning & Building Director
Meeting: City Council - May 02 2023
Subject: Consultant Services Agreement CEQA Fire Evacuation Analysis – Yellow Rose Ranch
DESCRIPTION:

Consider adopting a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consultant Services Agreement with Fehr & Peers to prepare a Fire Evacuation Analysis for the Yellow Rose Ranch project as part of CEQA.

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt the attached Resolution.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

On November 15, 2022, City Council approved Resolution No. 2022-094 authorizing City Manager to enter into an Agreement for Consultant Services (No. 873) with First Carbon Solutions (FCS) to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (CEQA compliance) in connection with the Yellow Rose Ranch project. The approved scope of work was not required to be scoped for Fire Evacuation Analysis. Note that Applicants representing three concurrent developments – 2565 Grant Street, Yellow Rose Ranch and Kortum Ranch – have agreed to share the scope of work and cost associated with the analysis.

The need for the additional analysis is based (in part) on the recent court decisions in Lake, Placer and San Diego Counties that have established a clear need to quantitatively evaluate a project’s effect on evacuation travel times for the surrounding area. This need has been affirmed by the Attorney General’s (AG) office in its recently published guidance on the topic; the AG’s office was a party to several lawsuits in the State regarding deficiencies in CEQA documents related to evacuation travel time estimate analysis. Many projects in the North Bay are taking steps to comply with the implication of the court decisions by completing analyses that are in alignment with the guidance released by the AG’s office.

ANALYSIS:

Evacuation travel time analysis requires the study of supersaturated traffic operating conditions not typically modellable by traditional tools such as travel demand models and isolated, peak-hour intersection analysis (e.g. Synchro/SimTraffic). While these methods could be used to inform the analysis, they have clear limitations that would open the door for CEQA challenges as they would not represent a good faith effort at full disclosure of CEQA impacts as other tools and methods are available that would alleviate the limitations.

Item #7.5.

Page 32 of 178 ends

Phase 2 will focus on the following efforts:
• Evacuation Route Identification - The work will expand on and supplement previous evacuation planning or analysis that was included in the City's Circulation and Safety Elements in the latest General Plan. The project team to explore possible emergency evacuation route opportunities to supplement the existing vehicular routes on State Route 128/Foothill Boulevard, State Route 29 and Silverado Trail. The supplemental route evaluation will consider pedestrian, bicycle, vehicular and waterway evacuation routes.
• Transportation Network Capacity Estimation - Review of assumptions in previous plans or analyses regarding a reasonable transportation network capacity available during an evacuation event and analyze in conjunction with applicable pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular egress assumptions for the chosen emergency scenario. Assessment of options to temporarily provide additional capacity during an emergency event including the potential use of the existing unpaved facilities for emergency vehicle access and/or vehicular egress. • Zone/Scenario Testing and Evacuation Time Estimates (ETEs) - For the chosen emergency, the project team will identify key elements of an evacuation event and estimate the evacuation travel time (including intermediate times and capacities). • Recommendations/Mitigation Measures - Specific recommendations or mitigation measures related to evacuation events.

CEQA STATUS:

Study being conducted in compliance with CEQA EIR.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

Compensation shall be $33,317 (Exhibit B of Attachment 2) and will be paid for by the developer through an existing Developer Deposit Account (42-2220-0318).

ATTACHMENT(S):

Attach 1 - RESO Calistoga Evacuation Analysis Yellow Rose Ranch Project Attach 2 - PSA - Calistoga Fire Evacuation Analysis
APPROVAL(S):

Item #7.5.

Page 33 of 178 ends

Nitish Sharma Approved - Apr 24 2023
Laura Snideman, City Manager Approved - Apr 25 2023
Marni Rittburg, City Clerk Approved - Apr 26 2023
Item #7.5.

Page 34 of 178 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XXX
Authorizing Consultant Services Agreement No. XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALISTOGA AUTHORIZING

THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT

WITH FEHR & PEERS TO PREPARE AN FIRE EVACUATION ANALYSIS FOR THE

YELLOW ROSE RANCH PROJECT AS PART OF THE

CEQA ANALYSIS
WHEREAS, the City of Calistoga (City), Planning and Building Department received a Vesting Tentative Map application on January 19, 2021, to develop 46 singlefamily homes on an approximately 46.3-acre site located at 2650 Foothill Blvd (Project); and
WHEREAS, On November 15, 2022, the City Council approved Resolution 2022- 094 authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consultant Contract (agreement No. 873) with First Carbon Solutions to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Project which, at the time, was not required to be scoped for wildfire evacuation analysis; and
WHEREAS, recent court decisions in Lake, Placer and San Diego Counties that have established a clear need to quantitatively evaluate a project’s effect on evacuation travel times during wildfire; and
WHEREAS, City desires third-party review of wildfire evacuation services to support the EIR in connection with the Project; and
WHEREAS, Consultant hereby warrants to the City that Consultant is skilled and able to provide such services described in Exhibit A of Consultant Services Agreement; and
WHEREAS, City desires to retain Consultant pursuant to this Agreement to provide the services described in Exhibit A of Consultant Services Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Applicant, TTLC Calistoga, LLC shall be responsible for fee reimbursement not to exceed $33,317 as conveyed in Exhibit B of Consultant Services Agreement; and
WHEREAS, Applicants representing three concurrent developments – 2565 Grant Street, Yellow Rose Ranch and Kortum Ranch – have agreed to share the scope of work and cost associated with the analysis.

Page 35 of 178 ends

Resolution No. 2023-XXX

Page 2 of 2 ends

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all terms, conditions, and covenants of said Agreement be, and the same are, hereby approved, ratified, and confirmed.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST:
_________________________ ___________________________
Marni Rittburg, City Clerk Don Williams, Mayor
Item #7.5.

Page 36 of 178 ends

- 1 -
OAK #4890-2776-3737v1 (Rev. 9/2021)

AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES
This Agreement for Consultant Services (the "Agreement") is made and entered into this 02 day of May 2023, by and between THE CITY OF CALISTOGA, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CITY") and Fehr & Peers (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT"). CITY and CONSULTANT may be referred to individually as “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.”

RECITALS
WHEREAS, CITY requires transportation engineering services for fire evacuation analysis in connection with the Yellow Rose Ranch Project to support CEQA; 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 Work. CONSULTANT agrees to furnish the services set forth in Exhibit A, Scope of Work, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein (the "Services").

1.2. Compliance with Law. CONSULTANT will use reasonable care to comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations and orders in effect at the time the Services are performed hereunder, which, to the best of CONSULTANT’s information, knowledge and belief, apply to its obligations under this Agreement.

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. However, notwithstanding the foregoing, CONSULTANT shall perform its Scope of Work as expeditiously as is consistent with the professional standard of care as defined in Section 1.4 below and the orderly progress of the project.

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 accordance with the professional standard of care as defined below. 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 accordance with the care, skill, and diligence ordinarily observed by a practitioner of the profession in which CONSULTANT is engaged, in the same or similar geographical area in which CONSULTANT practices its profession and in the same or similar circumstances to that of CONSULTANT under this Agreement, and will prepare all work products required by this Agreement in accordance with such standards. CITY and ATTACHMENT 1 Item #7.5.

Page 37 of 178 ends

- 2 -
OAK #4890-2776-373v1 (Rev. 9/2021)
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 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 CONSULTANT, and made available to CITY upon request without restriction or limitations on their use. 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. However, notwithstanding the foregoing, CONSULTANT shall not be responsible or liable for any alterations, modifications, or additions made to the Documents by CITY or any reuse of the Documents by CITY or any other party for this project or any other project without the consent of CONSULTANT. CITY shall defend, indemnify, and hold CONSULTANT harmless against any claims, damages, or losses arising out of the reuse or distribution of the Documents without the consent of CONSULTANT and arising out of alterations, modifications, or additions to the Documents made by anyone other than 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.

Item #7.5.

Page 38 of 178 ends

- 3 -
OAK #4890-2776-373v1 (Rev. 9/2021)

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 Exhibit B, Compensation, attached hereto and incorporated herein. It is agreed that the compensation for the Services shall not exceed $33,317 ("Cost Ceiling").

Compensation for the Services shall not exceed the Cost Ceiling without prior written approval of the City.

2.2. Invoices. CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices in a form reasonably 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 reasonably 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 in accordance with this Agreement, delays in CONSULTANT's performance of Services other than delays that are due to circumstances beyond CONSULTANT’s reasonable control, or other defaults hereunder.

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 until the Services 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 the Services are completed (the "Term"). CONSULTANT agrees to complete all services by December 2024.

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

Item #7.5.

Page 39 of 178 ends

- 4 -
OAK #4890-2776-373v1 (Rev. 9/2021)

3.3. Final Payment. CONSULTANT shall be entitled to compensation for Services performed and costs incurred by CONSULTANT 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.

ARTICLE 4 - DESIGNATED CONTACTS

4.1. CITY Contact. CITY designates Jeff Mitchem, its Planning and Building 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 Ashlee Takushi 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 indemnify CITY from damages, losses, and judgments, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses recoverable under applicable law, but only to the extent they are caused by the negligent acts, errors, or omissions of CONSULTANT in the performance of its professional services under this agreement. CONSULANT’s obligation to indemnify CITY does not include a duty to defend.

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 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. Coverage shall apply to hired and non-owned autos.

Item #7.5.

Page 40 of 178 ends

- 5 -
OAK #4890-2776-373v1 (Rev. 9/2021)
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 to the extent of the policy; (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 agents in connection with this Agreement, at a minimum amount of $1,000,000 per claim 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.

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. Sexual Abuse or Molestation (“SAM”) Liability. If the work will include contact with minors, and the Commercial General Liability policy under Section 5.3(B) is not endorsed to include affirmative coverage for sexual abuse or molestation, CONSULTANT shall obtain and maintain a policy covering Sexual Abuse and Molestation with a limit no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence or claim.

F. 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, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability (cross-liability endorsement);
• Excepting CONSULTANT’S professional liability insurance and workers’ compensation insurance, naming CITY, its City Council, boards, commissions, Item #7.5.

Page 41 of 178 ends

- 6 -
OAK #4890-2776-373v1 (Rev. 9/2021)
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.

G. 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.

H. 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 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 Item #7.5.

Page 42 of 178 ends

- 7 -
OAK #4890-2776-373v1 (Rev. 9/2021)
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: Fehr & Peers
100 Pringle Avenue, Suite 600
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Phone: (925) 977-3200
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. If applicable to CONSULTANT’s Services for CITY, 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 reasonably 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 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 Item #7.5.

Page 43 of 178 ends

- 8 -
OAK #4890-2776-373v1 (Rev. 9/2021)
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.

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.

Item #7.5.

Page 44 of 178 ends

- 9 -
OAK #4890-2776-373v1 (Rev. 9/2021)

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]
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 – Fehr & Peers
By: Date:

Bob Grandy, Principal in Charge
Item #7.5.

Page 45 of 178 ends

- 10 -
OAK #4890-2776-373v1 (Rev. 9/2021)
Attest
By:

Marni Rittburg, City Clerk
Approved As To Form
By:

Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney
Item #7.5.

Page 46 of 178 ends

The following scope of work reflects Fehr & Peers’ current understanding of the needs for evacuation analysis stemming from the Lake, Placer, and San Diego Counties CEQA case decisions and feedback provided by the project team in late 2022. As evacuation analysis is still an emerging topic in CEQA, the following scope has been developed to provide some degree of flexibility as evacuation analysis best practices. If additional analysis is requested in the future, a scope of work will be developed as part of a separate amendment effort.

As much of the background for the evacuation analysis is still unknown, the scope is divided into two phases of work:

Phase 1 reviews planning documents and includes coordination with the project team in the following areas:
• Review of relevant City and County planning documents related to evacuation analysis (i.e., Calistoga Fire Safe Council’s Community Wildfire Protection Plan, City Safety Element and other City evacuation planning documents).
• Coordination with City staff and fire/emergency responder experts on selection of Study Area for the analysis based on historical evacuation patterns and appropriate response for the chosen emergency event (e.g. shelter in place, evacuate to a specified distance, or evacuate study area immediately).
• Identification and selection of the emergency event that has the most realistic chance of requiring an evacuation of the Study Area.
• Identification of appropriate evacuation time CEQA standards of significance. • Obtain land use growth assumptions from City and County staff for 2040 No Build scenario. • Obtain Zonehaven zone-level data from the County’s Zonehaven lead Phase 2 will focus on the following efforts:
• Evacuation Route Identification - Our work will expand on and supplement previous evacuation planning or analysis that was included in the City's Circulation and Safety Elements in the latest General Plan. We will work with the project team to explore possible emergency evacuation route opportunities to supplement the existing vehicular routes on State Route 128/Foothill Boulevard, State Route 29 and Silverado Trail. The supplemental route evaluation will consider pedestrian, bicycle, vehicular and waterway evacuation routes.

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF WORK
Item #7.5.

Page 47 of 178 ends

• Transportation Network Capacity Estimation - We will review the assumptions in previous plans or analyses regarding a reasonable transportation network capacity available during an evacuation event and analyze in conjunction with applicable pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular egress assumptions for the chosen emergency scenario. We will also explore options to temporarily provide additional capacity during an emergency event including the potential use of the existing unpaved facilities for emergency vehicle access and/or vehicular egress. • Zone/Scenario Testing and Evacuation Time Estimates (ETEs) - For the chosen emergency, we will work with the project team to identify key elements of an evacuation event and estimate the evacuation travel time (including intermediate times and capacities). • Recommendations/Mitigation Measures - Our work will result in specific recommendations or mitigation measures to reduce total evacuation times that the project team should consider.

Please note that we are not proposing to prepare a comprehensive evacuation plan, but instead, we will estimate total evacuation times for baseline and project scenarios, provide technical support to the project team related to the transportation network capacity and potential opportunities to increase the capacity and improve ETEs during an evacuation event. As such, our scope below is tailored to focus on a specific emergency event identified in coordination with the project team and address the emergency transportation needs within the Study Area, if any.

In addition, our scope of work does not provide guarantees as to the adequacy of the multimodal circulation system nor can it guarantee that the findings are applicable to any or all situations. Moreover, as emergency evacuation assessment is an emerging field (both as a standalone field and in CEQA), there is no established standard methodology. We have adopted existing methodologies used in transportation planning that, in our knowledge and experience, we believe are the most appropriate. Nevertheless, such methodologies are necessarily also limited by the budgetary and time constraints in our scope of work, and by the current state of our knowledge. We would be happy to conduct further analyses, analyze different scenarios, and/or employ other methodologies. However, Fehr & Peers cannot guarantee the efficacy of our analyses or recommendations beyond our professional duty and the current capability of transportation planning.

Scope of Work
The scope of work is divided into the following phases and tasks.

Task 1 – Emergency Event Identification and Evacuation Response Due Diligence Our understanding is that the City has not undertaken the establishment of evacuation time standards and thus the project team (in coordination with City staff) will need to develop CEQA thresholds of significance related to a project's effect on emergency evacuation time.

Item #7.5.

Page 48 of 178 ends

Fehr & Peers will review the City's General Plan Circulation and Safety Elements, and other relevant evacuation planning documents to confirm emergency events that have the most realistic chance of requiring an evacuation of the Study Area. Based on previous conversations with the project team, this project will analyze a wildfire related emergency event.

It is understood that due to the complexities and unique challenges of the Study Area, and the lack of codified standards and/or formal design guidance for evacuation studies (i.e., required evacuation times), the project team will provide recommendations on the parameters of the wildfire emergency event(s) that have the most realistic chance of requiring an evacuation of the Study Area as well as the appropriate response for a wildfire related emergency event (e.g., shelter in place, evacuate to upper floors, evacuate only the building/facility, evacuate to a specified distance, or evacuate study area immediately).

After completion of the previously described work, Fehr & Peers will collaborate with the project team on CEQA standards of significance related to a project's effect on evacuation times; this scope assumes that others on the project team will be primarily responsible for developing CEQA standards of significance. It is anticipated that these proposed standards of significance will be discussed amongst the project team prior to undertaking Phase 2 of this scope of work.

Task 2 – Establishing Project Effect on Evacuation Times The following scope item has been based on the following assumptions:
• Study Area defined as the area generally bound by SR 128/Tubbs Lane, SR 29/Tubbs Lane, SR 29/Dunaweal Lane, and Silverado Trail/Dunaweal Lane.
• The evacuation analysis will consider one baseline evacuation scenario (time of day, evacuation pattern, road closures, type of emergency event, etc.). The scenario will be analyzed for the following development scenarios any change in total evacuation time resulting from the projects:
o No Projects (i.e. none of the 3 projects are built yet) o No Yellow Rose Ranch Project (i.e. Kortum Ranch and 2565 Grant Street are built) o No Kortum Ranch Project (i.e. Yellow Rose Ranch and 2565 Grant Street are built) o No 2565 Grant Street Project (i.e. Kortum Ranch and Yellow Rose Ranch are built) o Plus Projects (i.e. all 3 projects are built)
• The assessment of the project's impact on evacuation times will be based on data from the 2019 base year and Year 2040 versions of the Solano-Napa Activity-Based Model (SNABM). The analysis will consider evacuations under a Year 2019 data-based “near term” scenario and a Year 2040 data-based “far term” scenario.

Item #7.5.

Page 49 of 178 ends

• The analysis provided in this task is a weekday analysis; if a Saturday analysis is required, the contingency budget (discussed in Task 3) may be used to expand the data set for the analysis to reflect a Saturday period. We have included budget for collection of intersection turning movement count data at up to 5 intersections as part of this task.

Fehr & Peers will complete a quantitative analysis (using the Fehr & Peers EVAC+ tool) of evacuation times for one evacuation scenario. It is anticipated that the wildfire evacuation analysis will require the City of Calistoga and surrounding environs to evacuate. The scenario would consider a road closure pattern associated with the wildfire event as determined by the project team.

Based on the defined wildfire evacuation scenario, the first step in the operations analysis will focus on estimating the number of evacuating vehicle trips for each evacuation scenario. We will utilize the SolanoNapa Activity-Based Model (SNABM) socio-economic data and trip generation information for the evacuation zone to estimate baseline evacuation demand. This data includes a variety of information based on census data, including persons per household, number of employees, auto-ownership information, population, and other factors that could affect the number of vehicles per household used during evacuation. The travel demand will also consider time of day. For example, an evacuation event during the middle of the night would create an evacuation trip for most that would begin at their home and end at either the evacuation center or somewhere external to the Study Area. Conversely, an event that occurred during the middle of the day (when people are shopping) could delay evacuation movements as people come home first to access their belongings prior to leaving. The number of evacuation trips for each of the three projects will be estimated based on project description information provided by City staff.

The during-evacuation traffic operations analysis will utilize Fehr & Peers' EVAC+ Tool. This tool will be customized to reflect the evacuation roadway network and traffic demand data extracted from SNABM.

The tool then references trip tables for areas outside of the Study Area to form the "background" traffic estimates on the roadways not affected during an evacuation event. Areas affected by the evacuation event are then processed through the EVAC+ Tool trip estimator to estimate the number and sequencing of trips that occur due to the event.

The sub-area extracted network and new trip tables are then input into a Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTA) model. A DTA model estimates traffic and levels of congestion on 15-minute intervals and, as link congestion builds (roads fill with cars), the model dynamically reassigns traffic to less-congested routes, if available. This is a more accurate way of estimating trip assignment and identifying congested locations on the network that should be considered during an evacuation event. The results of this modeling effort will be used to identify bottlenecks in the County's roadway network during the evacuation scenario.

Item #7.5.

Page 50 of 178 ends

The results of the traffic operations analysis will be illustrated in figures and metrics will be summarized in tables to highlight the key findings, including evacuation travel times and congestion bottlenecks. We anticipate two meetings with the project team as part of this task.

The change in evacuation patterns and times would be compared against a threshold of significance to be as part of Phase 1. If significant impacts are identified, mitigation measures will be developed to alleviate the impact. Recommendations will also be developed to aid egress from the project site onto the local roadway network.

It is noted that the quantitative evaluation described in this task is conceptual in nature as the historical wildfire pattern in and around Calistoga shows that wildfires are unpredictable in nature and can be sparked by any number of causes. The purpose of the analysis is to assess for one given set of assumptions (which may not reflect an actual fire event in the future) how evacuation times could potentially change after completion of the proposed project. A more formal wildfire and flooding evacuation planning effort should be undertaken by the City to more carefully consider various evacuation scenarios and evacuation parameters (e.g., as part of a Safety Element Update analysis in-line with the legislative requirements of SB 99 and AB 747).

Task 3 – Documentation
Fehr & Peers will document the analysis and findings from Tasks 1 and 2 in a technical memorandum. A draft of the memorandum will be developed and submitted to the project team for review and comment.

We will respond to one round of consolidated comments on the draft memorandum (up to 8 hours of staff time) and prepare a final memorandum.

Optional Task 4 – Contingency
Because project-level analysis of evacuation times for CEQA purposes is a new and evolving topic area in CEQA, and new OPR guidance on evacuation assessments is expected to be released in 2023, the analysis described in Tasks 1 and 2 may undergo additional rounds of revision beyond those typically required for more-established transportation analyses. Therefore, this scope of work includes an additional $10,000 in contingency budget to accommodate changes in the analysis, such as changes to methodology, scope, and the number of scenarios. The contingency budget will only be used upon authorization by the project team. If scope changes require more effort than the $10,000 in budget reserved under this task, a scope amendment will be prepared.

Item #7.5.

Page 51 of 178 ends

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.

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.

Page 52 of 178 ends

1 EXHIBIT B-1
Fee Proposal for Calistoga Three Project Evacuation Analysis Fehr & Peers
Project
Manager
Principal-inCharge Associate-in- Charge
Tasks $190 $350 $285 $255 $170 $170 $150
Task 1 - Emergency Event Identification and Evacuation Response Due Diligence 12 4 12 0 0 0 4 32 $690 $8,390 Task 2 - Establishing Project Effect on Evacuation Times for 3 Projects 48 4 24 20 200 8 38 342 $5,950 $69,470Task 3 - Documentation 24 2 2 0 24 2 7 61 $790 $12,090 Optional Task 4 - Contingency $10,000
Total for Tasks 1-3 84 10 38 20 224 10 49 435 $7,430 $89,950 Total for All Tasks for 3 Projects $99,950
Notes:

This fee proposal is valid for a period of 90 days from the proposal submittal date.Actual billing rate at the time of service may vary depending on the final staffing plan at the time the project starts; the overall fee will not be exceeded.Rates and staff are subject to change at any time, without notice, and within the total budget shown Hours TBD Based on Need
Labor
Hours
Direct
Costs Total
Forecasting
Expert
Engineer/
Planner Graphics Admin
Total Cost Share for Each Project $33,317
Item #7.5.

Page 53 of 178 ends

City of Calistoga

Consider adopting a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consultant Services Agreement with Fehr & Peers to prepare a Fire Evacuation Analysis for the 2565 Grant Street project as part of CEQA.

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt the attached Resolution.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

On February 7, 2023, City Council approved Resolution No. 2023-012 authorizing City Manager to enter into an Agreement for Consultant Services (No. 920) with M-Group to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (CEQA compliance) for the 2565 Grant Street project. The approved scope of work was not required to be scoped for Fire Evacuation Analysis. Note that Applicants representing three concurrent developments – 2565 Grant Street, Yellow Rose Ranch and Kortum Ranch – have agreed to share the scope of work and cost associated with the analysis.

ANALYSIS:

Item #7.6.

Page 54 of 178 ends

CEQA STATUS:

Study being conducted in compliance with CEQA EIR.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

Compensation shall not exceed $33,317 (Exhibit B of Attachment 2) and will be paid for by the developer through an existing Developer Deposit Account (42-2220-0366).

ATTACHMENT(S):

ATTACH 1 RESO - Calistoga Evacuation Analysis 2565 Grant St ATTACH 2 - PSA - Calistoga Evacuation Analysis
APPROVAL(S):

Item #7.6.

Page 55 of 178 ends

Nitish Sharma Approved - Apr 24 2023
Laura Snideman, City Manager Approved - Apr 25 2023
Marni Rittburg, City Clerk Approved - Apr 26 2023
Item #7.6.

Page 56 of 178 ends

ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XXX
Authorizing Consultant Services Agreement No. XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALISTOGA AUTHORIZING

THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT

WITH FEHR & PEERS TO PREPARE AN FIRE EVACUATION ANALYSIS FOR THE 2565 GRANT ST PROJECT AS PART OF THE CEQA ANALYSIS
WHEREAS, the City of Calistoga (City), Planning and Building Department received a Vesting Tentative Map application on July 3, 2022, to develop 35 singlefamily homes on an approximately 35.6-acre site located at 2565 Grant Street (Project); and
WHEREAS, On February 7, 2023, the City Council approved Resolution 2023-012 authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consultant Contract with M-Group to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Project which, at the time, was not required to be scoped for wildfire evacuation analysis; and
WHEREAS, recent court decisions in Lake, Placer and San Diego Counties that have established a clear need to quantitatively evaluate a project’s effect on evacuation travel times during wildfire; and
WHEREAS, City desires third-party review of wildfire evacuation services to support the EIR in connection with the Project; and
WHEREAS, Consultant hereby warrants to the City that Consultant is skilled and able to provide such services described in Exhibit A of Consultant Services Agreement; and
WHEREAS, City desires to retain Consultant pursuant to this Agreement to provide the services described in Exhibit A of Consultant Services Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Applicant, VA Vineyard Properties shall be responsible for fee reimbursement not to exceed $33,317 as conveyed in Exhibit B of Consultant Services Agreement; and
WHEREAS, Applicants representing three concurrent developments – 2565 Grant Street, Yellow Rose Ranch and Kortum Ranch – have agreed to share the scope of work and cost associated with the analysis.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Calistoga that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute a Consulting Services Agreement between Fehr & Peers and the City of Calistoga for the services; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all terms, conditions, and covenants of said Agreement be, and the same are, hereby approved, ratified, and confirmed.

Item #7.6.

Page 57 of 178 ends

Resolution No. 2023-XXX

Page 2 of 2 ends

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST:
_________________________ ___________________________
Marni Rittburg, City Clerk Donald Williams, Mayor
Item #7.6.

Page 58 of 178 ends

- 1 -
OAK #4890-2776-3737v1 (Rev. 9/2021)

RECITALS
WHEREAS, CITY requires transportation engineering services for fire evacuation analysis in connection with the 2565 Grant Street Project to support CEQA; 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 Work. CONSULTANT agrees to furnish the services set forth in Exhibit A, Scope of Work, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein (the "Services").

Page 59 of 178 ends

Acceptance by CITY of the Services does not operate as a release of CONSULTANT from professional responsibility for the Services performed.

Item #7.6.

Page 60 of 178 ends

- 3 -
OAK #4890-2776-373v1 (Rev. 9/2021)

ARTICLE 2 - COMPENSATION

Compensation for the Services shall not exceed the Cost Ceiling without prior written approval of the City.

2.4. Withholding. In lieu of holding retention, CITY shall withhold CONSULTANT's final payment until the Services 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

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

Item #7.6.

Page 61 of 178 ends

- 4 -
OAK #4890-2776-373v1 (Rev. 9/2021)

ARTICLE 4 - DESIGNATED CONTACTS

ARTICLE 5 - INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE

Item #7.6.

Page 62 of 178 ends

Page 63 of 178 ends

Page 64 of 178 ends

Form 700 forms are available from the CITY Clerk.

Page 65 of 178 ends

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

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.

Item #7.6.

Page 66 of 178 ends

- 9 -
OAK #4890-2776-373v1 (Rev. 9/2021)

CITY OF CALISTOGA
By: Date:

Laura Snideman, City Manager
CONSULTANT – Fehr & Peers
By: Date:

Bob Grandy, Principal in Charge
Item #7.6.

Page 67 of 178 ends

- 10 -
OAK #4890-2776-373v1 (Rev. 9/2021)
Attest
By:

Marni Rittburg, City Clerk
Approved As To Form
By:

Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney
Item #7.6.

Page 68 of 178 ends

As much of the background for the evacuation analysis is still unknown, the scope is divided into two phases of work:

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF WORK
Item #7.6.

Page 69 of 178 ends

Scope of Work
The scope of work is divided into the following phases and tasks.

Item #7.6.

Page 70 of 178 ends

Item #7.6.

Page 71 of 178 ends

Item #7.6.

Page 72 of 178 ends

We will respond to one round of consolidated comments on the draft memorandum (up to 8 hours of staff time) and prepare a final memorandum.

Item #7.6.

Page 73 of 178 ends

OAK #4823-2508-6159 v2

Item #7.6.

Page 74 of 178 ends

Page 75 of 178 ends

City of Calistoga

Consider adopting a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consultant Services Agreement with Fehr & Peers to prepare a Fire Evacuation Analysis for the Kortum Ranch project as part of CEQA.

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt the attached Resolution.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

On December 6, 2022, City Council approved Resolution No. 2022-103 authorizing City Manager to enter into an Agreement for Consultant Services (No. 917) with M-Group to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (CEQA compliance) in connection with the Kortum Ranch project. The approved scope of work was not required to be scoped for Fire Evacuation Analysis. Note that Applicants representing three concurrent developments – 2565 Grant Street, Yellow Rose Ranch and Kortum Ranch – have agreed to share the scope of work and cost associated with the analysis.

ANALYSIS:

Item #7.7.

Page 76 of 178 ends

CEQA STATUS:

Study being conducted in compliance with CEQA EIR.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

Compensation shall not exceed $33,317 (Exhibit B of Attachment 2) and will be paid for by the developer through an existing Developer Deposit Account (42-2220-0364).

ATTACHMENT(S):

ATTCH 1 RESO - Calistoga Evacuation Analysis Kortum Ranch ATTCH 2 - PSA - Calistoga Fire Evacuation Analysis
APPROVAL(S):

Item #7.7.

Page 77 of 178 ends

Nitish Sharma Approved - Apr 24 2023
Laura Snideman, City Manager Approved - Apr 25 2023
Marni Rittburg, City Clerk Approved - Apr 26 2023
Item #7.7.

Page 78 of 178 ends

ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XXX
Authorizing Consultant Services Agreement No. XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALISTOGA

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A CONSULTANT SERVICES

AGREEMENT WITH FEHR & PEERS TO PREPARE AN FIRE EVACUATION

ANALYSIS FOR THE KORTUM RANCH PROJECT AS PART OF THE

CEQA ANALYSIS
WHEREAS, the City of Calistoga (City), Planning and Building Department received a Vesting Tentative Map application on May 28, 2022, to develop 23 singlefamily homes on an approximately 50-acre site located at 500 Kortum Canyon Rd (Project); and
WHEREAS, On December 6, 2022, the City Council approved Resolution 2022- 103 authorizing the City Manager to execute a Consultant Contract (Agreement No. 917) with M-Group to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Project which, at the time, was not required to be scoped for wildfire evacuation analysis; and WHEREAS, recent court decisions in Lake, Placer and San Diego Counties that have established a clear need to quantitatively evaluate a project’s effect on evacuation travel times during wildfire; and
WHEREAS, City desires third-party review of wildfire evacuation services to support the EIR in connection with the Project; and
WHEREAS, Consultant hereby warrants to the City that Consultant is skilled and able to provide such services described in Exhibit A of Consultant Services Agreement; and
WHEREAS, City desires to retain Consultant pursuant to this Agreement to provide the services described in Exhibit A of Consultant Services Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Applicant, Kortum Ranch, LLC shall be responsible for fee reimbursement not to exceed $33,317 as conveyed in Exhibit B of Consultant Services Agreement; and
WHEREAS, Applicants representing three concurrent developments – 2565 Grant Street, Yellow Rose Ranch and Kortum Canyon – have agreed to share the scope of work and cost associated with the analysis.

Item #7.7.

Page 79 of 178 ends

Resolution No. 2023-XXX

Page 2 of 2 ends

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST:
_________________________ ___________________________
Marni Rittburg, City Clerk Don Williams, Mayor
Item #7.7.

Page 80 of 178 ends

- 1 -
OAK #4890-2776-3737v1 (Rev. 9/2021)

RECITALS
WHEREAS, CITY requires transportation engineering services for fire evacuation analysis in connection with the Kortum Ranch Project to support CEQA; 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 Work. CONSULTANT agrees to furnish the services set forth in Exhibit A, Scope of Work, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein (the "Services").

Page 81 of 178 ends

Acceptance by CITY of the Services does not operate as a release of CONSULTANT from professional responsibility for the Services performed.

Item #7.7.

Page 82 of 178 ends

- 3 -
OAK #4890-2776-373v1 (Rev. 9/2021)

ARTICLE 2 - COMPENSATION

Compensation for the Services shall not exceed the Cost Ceiling without prior written approval of the City.

2.4. Withholding. In lieu of holding retention, CITY shall withhold CONSULTANT's final payment until the Services 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

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

Item #7.7.

Page 83 of 178 ends

- 4 -
OAK #4890-2776-373v1 (Rev. 9/2021)

ARTICLE 4 - DESIGNATED CONTACTS

ARTICLE 5 - INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE

Item #7.7.

Page 84 of 178 ends

Page 85 of 178 ends

Page 86 of 178 ends

Form 700 forms are available from the CITY Clerk.

Page 87 of 178 ends

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

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.

Item #7.7.

Page 88 of 178 ends

- 9 -
OAK #4890-2776-373v1 (Rev. 9/2021)

CITY OF CALISTOGA
By: Date:

Laura Snideman, City Manager
CONSULTANT – Fehr & Peers
By: Date:

Bob Grandy, Principal in Charge
Item #7.7.

Page 89 of 178 ends

- 10 -
OAK #4890-2776-373v1 (Rev. 9/2021)
Attest
By:

Marni Rittburg, City Clerk
Approved As To Form
By:

Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney
Item #7.7.

Page 90 of 178 ends

As much of the background for the evacuation analysis is still unknown, the scope is divided into two phases of work:

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF WORK
Item #7.7.

Page 91 of 178 ends

Scope of Work
The scope of work is divided into the following phases and tasks.

Item #7.7.

Page 92 of 178 ends

Item #7.7.

Page 93 of 178 ends

Item #7.7.

Page 94 of 178 ends

We will respond to one round of consolidated comments on the draft memorandum (up to 8 hours of staff time) and prepare a final memorandum.

Item #7.7.

Page 95 of 178 ends

OAK #4823-2508-6159 v2

Item #7.7.

Page 96 of 178 ends

Page 97 of 178 ends

City of Calistoga

STAFF REPORT
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Jeff Mitchem, Planning & Building Director
Meeting: City Council - May 02 2023
Subject: Amend Consultant Services Agreement No. 917 Kortum Ranch – CEQA Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Wetland Delineation and Rare Plant Survey
DESCRIPTION:

Consider adopting a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an Amendment to Consultant Services Agreement No. 917 with M-Group for the preparation of a Wetland Delineation and Rare Plant Survey in support of the EIR for the Kortum Ranch project as part of the CEQA analysis.

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt the attached Resolution.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

On December 6, 2022, City Council approved Resolution 2022-103 authorizing the City Manager to enter into a Consultant Services Agreement with M-Group to prepare an Environmental Impact Report for the Kortum Ranch project as part of the CEQA analysis. Due to site investigation discoveries (Monday, February 13, 2023) made by M-Group’s biological sub-consultant (Monk & Associates), potential jurisdictional wetland features and rare plants may occur onsite. As a result, Monk & Associates has determined that a Wetland Delineation and Rare Plant Surveys are needed to fully analyze potential biological resource impacts of the proposed project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

CEQA STATUS:

Study being conducted in compliance with CEQA EIR.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

The total value of the agreement is raised to $235,508. Compensation for the additional work will be $29,968 (Exhibit B of Attachment 2) and will be paid for by the developer through an existing Developer Deposit Account 42-2220-364.

ATTACHMENT(S):

ATTCH 1 Resolution - Kortum Ranch Wetland Delineation CSA Amendment ATTCH 2 Kortum EIR Amendment No. 1
APPROVAL(S):

Item #7.8.

Page 98 of 178 ends

Nitish Sharma Approved - Apr 24 2023
Laura Snideman, City Manager Approved - Apr 25 2023
Marni Rittburg, City Clerk Approved - Apr 26 2023
Item #7.8.

Page 99 of 178 ends

ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XXX
Authorizing Amendment No. 1 to Professional Services Agreement No. 917

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALISTOGA

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT NO. 917 WITH M-GROUP TO PREPARE

A WETLAND DELINEATION AND RARE PLANT SURVEY IN CONNECTION WITH

AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE KORTUM RANCH PROJECT AS

PART OF THE CEQA ANALYSIS
WHEREAS, the City of Calistoga, Planning and Building Department received a Vesting Tentative Map application (Project) on May 28, 2022, to develop 23 singlefamily homes on an approximately 50-acre site consisting of four (4) legal parcels comprising Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 011-290-007, 011-290-038, 011-290- 039, and 011-310-023, located at 500 Kortum Canyon Road, south of Foothill Boulevard (SR 128);
WHEREAS, City required third-party environmental review analysis services in connection CEQA analysis for Project (VTM 2022-1); and
WHEREAS, City released a duly noticed Request For Proposals for consulting services to prepare an Environmental Impact Report for the project; and WHEREAS, on October 26, 2021, the City selected M-Group to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Project; and
WHEREAS, on December 6, 2022, City Council approved Resolution 2022-103 authorizing the City Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement (No. 917) with M-Group to prepare an Environmental Impact Report for the Kortum Ranch project as part of the CEQA analysis; and
WHEREAS, due to site investigation discoveries (Monday, February 13, 2023) made by the project’s biological sub-consultant (Monk & Associates), potential jurisdictional wetland features and rare plants may occur onsite, and as a result, Monk & Associates has determined that a Wetland Delineation and Rare Plant Surveys are needed to fully analyze potential biological resource impacts of the proposed project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and WHEREAS, Consultant hereby warrants to the City that Monk & Associates is skilled and able to provide such services described in Exhibit A of Amendment to Professional Services Agreement; and
WHEREAS, City desires to amend Professional Services Agreement No. 917 pursuant to this Agreement to provide the services described in Exhibit A of Consultant Services Agreement; and
Item #7.8.

Page 100 of 178 ends

Resolution No. 2023-XXX

Page 2 of 2 ends

WHEREAS, the Applicant, Kortum Ranch, LLC shall be responsible for fee reimbursement not to exceed $29,968 as conveyed in Exhibit B of Professional Services Agreement as Developer Deposit Account 42-2220-364; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Calistoga that the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute a Professional Services Agreement between M-Group and the City of Calistoga for the services; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all terms, conditions, and covenants of said Agreement be, and the same are, hereby approved, ratified, and confirmed.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST:
_________________________ ___________________________
Marni Rittburg, City Clerk Donald Williams, Mayor
Item #7.8.

Page 101 of 178 ends

AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
Environmental Review Services for Kortum Ranch Project
Amendment No. 1 to Authorizing Agreement No. 917
This Amendment No. 1 (“Amendment”) to Authorizing Agreement No. 917 (“Agreement”) is dated this day of ____ 2023, by and between the City of Calistoga, herein called the "City", and Metropolitan Planning Group (M-Group), herein called the "Consultant".

RECITALS
A. City and Consultant entered into the Agreement effective December 6, 2023, in the amount of $205,540, by which the Consultant agreed to perform environmental review services more particularly described in the Agreement.

B. Due to site investigation discoveries (Monday, February 13, 2023) made by the project’s biological sub-consultant (Monk & Associates), potential jurisdictional wetland features and rare plants may occur on site. As a result, Monk & Associates has determined that a Wetland Delineation and Rare Plant Surveys are needed to fully analyze potential biological resource impacts of the proposed project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Agreement
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HERETO AGREE AS FOLLOWS:

1. Scope of Services. M-Group's sub-consultant shall perform the additional biological services set out in the "Amendment #1 Scope of Work" attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference.

2. Incorporation by Reference. This Amendment hereby incorporates by reference all terms and conditions set forth in the Agreement, unless specifically modified by this Amendment. All terms and conditions set forth in the Agreement which are not specifically modified by this Amendment shall remain in full force and effect.

3. Compensation. The compensation to be paid to Consultant, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall be increased by $29,968 described as attached hereto as Exhibit "B", to a total for the Agreement of no more than $235,508.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Consultant have executed this Agreement as of the date first above written.

ATTACHMENT 2 Item #7.8.

Page 102 of 178 ends

Amendment No. 1 to PSA 917 with M-Group

Page 2 of 3 ends

CITY OF CALISTOGA METROPOLITAN PLANNING GROUP
By: By: _________
Laura Snideman, City Manager Heather Hines, Principal
ATTEST
____________________________
Marni Rittburg, City Clerk
Item #7.8.

Page 103 of 178 ends

m-group
m-group.us 499 Humboldt Street, Santa Rosa, CA 95404 707.540.0723 March 7, 2023
Jeff Mitchem
Planning & Building Director
City of Calistoga
Subject: Amendment #1: Kortum Ranch Development Environmental Impact Report (EIR) M-Group is in contract with the City of Calistoga to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Kortum Ranch Development located at 500 Kortum Canyon Road in accordance with the Agreement for Consultant Services entered into December 6, 2022, as well as M-Group’s scope of work for the project dated October 26, 2022.

Amendment #1 is being requested to augment the original project budget as additional studies to analyze biological resources are required. Specifically, the project’s biological consultant, Monk & Associates, identified potential jurisdictional wetland features and rare plants that may occur onsite during their visit to the site on Monday, February 13, 2023. As a result, Monk & Associates has determined that a Wetland Delineation and Rare Plant Surveys are needed to fully analyze potential biological resource impacts of the proposed project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

The following includes the original project budget, requested amount under Amendment #1, and new project budget.

Original Contract $205,540.00
Amendment #1 $29,968.00
Updated Total Budget $ 235,508.00
Amendment #1 would augment the original budget ($205,540) by $29,968 resulting in an updated total not to exceed budget of $235,508. We trust that this additional information is sufficient to authorize Amendment #1. Please let me know if you have any questions or would like to discuss.

Thank you,

OLIVIA ERVIN
Principal Environmental Planner
[email protected]
707.570.0723 x 202
Attachments:

1. Monk & Associates Cost Proposal for Preparation of a Draft U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Aquatic Resources Delineation Report/Map and Special-Status Plant Surveys

EXHIBIT A
Item #7.8.

Page 104 of 178 ends

MONK & ASSOCIATES
Environmental Consultants
1136 Saranap Ave., Suite Q  Walnut Creek  California  94595 (925) 947-4867  FAX (925) 947-1165
March 2, 2023
Metropolitan Planning Group
1303 Jefferson Street, Suite 100-B
Napa, California 94559
Attention: Ms. Krystle Rizzi:

RE: Cost Proposal for Preparation of a Draft U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Aquatic Resources Delineation Report/Map and Special-Status Plant Surveys Kortum Ranch Development, 500 Kortum Canyon Road, Calistoga, California APNs: 011-290-007, -038, -039, and 011-310-023 (~50 Acres) Dear Ms. Rizzi:

Monk & Associates, Inc. (M&A) has prepared the following cost proposal to prepare a Draft U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) Aquatic Resources Delineation Report/Map for Kortum Ranch Development project, 500 Kortum Canyon Road, located in Calistoga, California (hereinafter referred to as the project site). The Aquatic Resources Delineation Report and map will detail the amount and extent of regulated waters of the U.S. (i.e., wetlands and other waters) on the project site. This map could be submitted to the Corps so that this federal agency can give you a stamped map which confirms the extent of their jurisdiction over waters of the U.S. on the project site.

M&A is also proposing to conduct special-status plant surveys. M&A will conduct special-status plant surveys in accordance with California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW) 2018 Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special-Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities to determine if special-status plants are present on the project site. M&A will also conduct the surveys following California Native Plant Society (2001) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (2000, 2005) published survey guidelines.

All work performed under this agreement will be on a time and materials basis in accordance with costs proposed herein. Tasks that are not completed or only partially completed will only be billed in accordance with actual work completed and/or material expenditures as required for the portion of work completed. Proposed tasks and associated costs are presented below.

Task 1. Conduct Draft Aquatic Resources Delineation Survey M&A will map those areas on the project site that meet criteria as “wetlands” and “other waters” that could be within the Corps’ jurisdiction pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The wetland delineation would be conducted according to the Corps’ 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual1in conjunction with the Regional Supplement for the Arid West Region2. This 1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station.

Technical Report, Y-87-1. Vicksburg, Mississippi. 100 pp 2 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2008. Regional supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2). U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (December 2008).

Item #7.8.

Page 105 of 178 ends

Cost Proposal for Preparation of a Draft U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Aquatic Resources Delineation Report/Map and Special-Status Plant Surveys Kortum Ranch Development, 500 Kortum Canyon Road, Calistoga, California APNs: 011-290-007, -038, -039, and 011-310-023 (~50 Acres)

Page 2 ends

Monk & associates
jurisdictional determination request and the Draft Preliminary Wetland Delineation Map will also be prepared in compliance with the Corps’ 2016 Minimum Standards for Acceptance of Aquatic Resources Delineation Reports3and the 2016 Updated Map and Drawing Standards for the South Pacific Division Regulatory Program4.

This means that M&A will be examining hydrology, plants, and soils over the project site.

M&A’s draft jurisdictional map could be submitted to the Corps with a request that this agency confirm the extent of its jurisdiction pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.

The Corps always reminds the public that “only the Corps can determine the extent of their jurisdiction.” A confirmed Corps’ jurisdictional determination would provide an official map depicting the extent of Corps jurisdiction over “waters of the United States” on the project site and is essential for assessing constraints/permitting requirements for proposed developments.

The confirmed Corps’ map would also likely provide a map that the Regional Water Quality Control Board would use to determine the extent of its jurisdiction over the project site pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act.

Please note that while M&A can estimate Corps regulated areas, only the Corps can confirm the extent of area falling within their jurisdiction. Thus, the Corps would have to confirm M&A’s draft map to provide you with an official map depicting the Corps’ Clean Water Act jurisdiction.

Task 1A. Field Delineation
To complete the draft Aquatic Resources Delineation survey, M&A would map those areas that would likely constitute “waters of the United States” (i.e., those areas that would likely be regulated by the Corps) using satellite (GPS) technology. All wetlands mapped in the field with the GPS will be digitally transposed over a registered aerial photograph of the project site. The mapped areas would be roughly accurate within 36-inches of true location. Using the GPS mapped wetlands, M&A would also accurately calculate the amount of area that would likely constitute “waters of the United States.” The actual amount of wetland acreage (and the types of wetlands) would likely have bearing on the type(s) of permits that would have to be acquired from the Corps for the proposed project. Please note that while M&A can estimate Corps regulated areas, only the Corps can confirm the extent of area falling under their jurisdiction.

To satisfy the Corps’ requirements for conducting draft jurisdictional determinations, M&A needs to examine the soils (will dig shallow soil pits) and plant species composition on the project site to develop a map of likely jurisdictional areas that can be examined by the Corps. 3 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2016. Minimum Standards for Acceptance of Aquatic Resources Delineation Reports, January 2016
4 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2016. Updated Map and Drawing Standards for the South Pacific Division Regulatory Program.

February 10, 2016.

Item #7.8.

Page 106 of 178 ends

Page 3 ends

Monk & associates
*Please note that the hours budgeted below are to complete a delineation of the entire project site and not just of the development envelope. If you think it would only be necessary for us to delineate the development footprint, please let us know and we can reduce the cost of this task.

Principal Biologist 2 days x 10 hours @ $200/hr. $ 4,000.00 Project Biologist II 2 days x 10 hours @ $140/hr. $ 2,800.00 Mileage 2 trips x 130 miles @ $0.655/mile $ 170.30
Toll $ 14.00
GPS Rental $ 100.00
Subtotal Cost of Task 1A $ 7,084.30
Task 1B. Prepare Wetlands Assessment Report
An Aquatic Resources Delineation Report, including sample point data sheets, will be prepared and could be submitted to the Corps with a request to this agency to conduct a formal Aquatic Resources Delineation Determination. M&A’s field map would also be included in this report.

M&A will provide you with a draft of this report and map for your review prior to agency submittal.

Principal Biologist 8 hours @ $200/hr. $ 1,600.00
Project Biologist II 16 hours @ $140/hr. $ 2,240.00
Project Biologist I 8 hours @ $135/hr. $ 1,080.00
Report Materials Costs, Reproductions, Photocopying $ 50.00 Subtotal Cost of Task 1B: $ 4,970.00
Task 1C. Graphics (as necessary for Corps jurisdictional determination) M&A will prepare a scaled draft wetlands map of the project site for the Aquatic Resources Delineation report. This map will include wetland polygons, data points, project boundaries and all other features that are required to be included as detailed in the Corps’ 2016 Updated Map and Drawing Standards for the South Pacific Division Regulatory Program.

Graphics Production 4 hours @ $135/hr. $ 540.00
Subtotal Cost of Task 1C: $ 540.00
Item #7.8.

Page 107 of 178 ends

Page 4 ends

Monk & associates
Task 1D. M&A will meet with the Corps on the Project Site to Verify Mapped Wetlands; Resubmit Final (Modified, if necessary) Wetlands Map to Corps; Request Final Map Concurrence.

The Corps jurisdictional determination would provide an official map depicting the extent of the Corps’ jurisdiction over waters of the United States on the project site. It would also likely provide a map that the Regional Water Quality Control Board would use to determine the extent of its jurisdiction over the project site pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. The actual amount of jurisdictional acreage would likely have bearing on the type(s) of permits that would have to be acquired from the Corps for any proposed impacts to Corps regulated areas.

We are proposing one field day to meet with the Corps to have M&A’s draft wetlands map confirmed. We are also budgeting time to modify the wetlands map in the field and in the office (if deemed necessary by the Corps), and to resubmit the wetland map to this agency.

Principal Biologist 8 hours @ $200/hr. $ 1,600.00
Project Biologist II 8 hours @ $140/hr. $ 1,120.00
Graphics Production 1 hour @ $135/hr. $ 135.00
Mileage 130 miles @ $0.655/mile $ 85.15
Toll $ 7.00
GPS Rental $ 50.00
Subtotal Cost of Task 1D: $ 2,997.15
Subtotal Cost of Task 1: $15,591.45
Task 2. Special-Status Plant Species Surveys
Task 2A. Special-Status Plant Species Surveys
M&A will conduct three special-status plant surveys, one in April, one in May, and one in July to address all the special-status plant species known from similar habitats in the area. During the site visits, a botanist would record all plant species observed as necessary to determine rarity status. Survey areas will cover all areas of potential habitat. We are estimating it will take one (1) botanist x 1 day (8 hours) to complete each monthly survey (8 hours x 3 months =24). The hours allotted account for drive time to/from the project site for each survey.

Item #7.8.

Page 108 of 178 ends

Page 5 ends

Monk & associates
Associate Biologist 24 hours @ $170/hr. $ 4,080.00
Project Biologist II 24 hours @ $140/hr. $ 3,360.00
Mileage 3 Trips x 130 Miles @ $0.655/mile $ 255.45
Toll $ 21.00
GPS Rental 3 days @ $50/day $ 150.00
Subtotal Cost of Task 2A: $ 7,866.45
Task 2B. Plant Keying
After each survey it may be necessary to “key” unknown plants found on the project site “to the level necessary to determine their rarity status” (quote from California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s rare plant survey guidelines). This means that some plants will need to be identified to the species level, while other plants will need to be identified to the “subspecies” or “variety” level. Typically, the hours necessary to key plants are dependent upon the number of unknown plants found; however, below we have provided an estimate of the number of hours that will be necessary to key plants found during the surveys. We have budgeted 1.5 keying hours per survey month, for a total of 4.5 hours over the course of the entire survey year.

Principal Biologist 4.5 hours @ $200/hr. $ 900.00
Subtotal Cost of Task 2B: $ 900.000
Task 2C. Report Preparation
M&A will provide you with a letter-report presenting our survey methods and findings at the completion of the surveys that can be inserted into the CEQA document.

Principal Biologist 2 hours @ $200/hr. $ 400.00
Associate Biologist 16 hours @ $170/hr. $ 2,720.00
Graphics 2 hours @ $135/hr. $ 270.00
Subtotal Cost of Task 2C: $ 3,390.00
Subtotal Cost Task 2: $12,156.45
Task 3. Project Management/Administration
Project management tasks include report and graphics preparation oversight, and telephone calls with you and/or your designees. Administrative tasks include contracting, billing, and budget tracking.

Item #7.8.

Page 109 of 178 ends

Page 6 ends

Monk & associates
Principal Biologist 6 hours @ $200/hr. $ 1,200.00
Associate Biologist 6 hours @ $170/hr. $ 1,020.00
Subtotal Costs Task 3: $ 2,220.00
Total Estimated Costs: $29,967.90
Item #7.8.

Page 110 of 178 ends

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 3 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:

Item #7.8.

Page 111 of 178 ends

MONK & ASSOCIATES
Environmental Consultants
1136 Saranap Ave., Suite Q  Walnut Creek  California  94595 (925) 947-4867  FAX (925) 947-1165

SCHEDULE OF CHARGES
March 2023
Hourly Rates
Principal Biologist Field Work/Permitting/Agency Negotiations $200/hour Principal Biologist Testimony/Public Hearings/Affidavits $350/hour in 4-hour increments.

Senior Associate Biologist Field/Office Work $195/hour
Associate Biologist Field/Office Work $170/hour
Senior Botanist Field/Office Work $155/hour
Senior Biologist Field/Office Work $155/hour
Project Botanist Field/Office Work $140/hour
Project Biologist II Field/Office Work $140/hour
Project Biologist I Field/Office Work $135/hour
Staff Biologist Field/Office Work $110/hour
Office Manager $105/hour
Graphics $135/hour
Sub-contracting Biologists Field Work $110 to $200/hour • Any Biological Construction Monitoring performed on weekends will be billed at 1.5 times the hourly rate.

Other Expenses (Flat Rates)
Any invoices submitted through 3rd Party Online Portal: $100 plus portal service fee + 15% would require a budget amendment or change order.

Any weekly Zoom calls, Microsoft Teams calls, or conference calls would require a budget amendment or change order.

Per Diem: $250/day/per person (major metropolitan/Rural areas may be adjusted to hotel rate plus $60/day)
Vehicles: Passenger vehicle: $0.655/mile
Oversize Maps $2.00/square foot.

Color Photographs (laser printed, $2.00 per page).

Air fares: Cost plus 10 percent
Materials/Supplies/Permit & Fees Payments : Cost plus 15 percent Equipment Rentals: GPS (sub-meter accuracy) $50/day. Surveillance Cameras $15/day each; rodent traps 0.20/day each; Burrowing owl eviction doors at $2.00/day each; medium- size mammal traps $5.00/day each. Spotlight charged at $3.00/day. Other equipment priced on a job basis by approved proposal.

EXHIBIT B-1
Item #7.8.

Page 112 of 178 ends

City of Calistoga

STAFF REPORT
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Derek Rayner, Public Works Director/City Engineer Meeting: City Council - May 02 2023
Subject: Resolution Rescinding the Stage II Water Emergency DESCRIPTION:

Consider adopting a Resolution rescinding Resolution No. 2021-019 approving the Stage II Water Emergency and adopting a resolution requesting voluntary restrictions of water use under Stage I best management practices.

RECOMMENDATION:

Consider adopting Resolution.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

On April 6, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2021-019 declaring the 2021 Stage II water emergency. Shortly thereafter, the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) revised the State Water Project (SWP) Table A allocations from 15% down to 5% for Napa County. At that time, the reduction in the SWP allocation represented a twenty-five percent (25%, 193af) of the City’s annual water demand and created a condition requiring significant conservation measures.

Rescinding Stage II Water Emergency
Calistoga along with the State of California has been extremely fortunate in receiving substantial amounts of rainfall and snowpack this winter. According to the Department of Water Resources (DWR), California’s snowpack is now one of the largest ever at 221% of average with the last snow survey. DWR recently set Napa County’s Table A allocation to 85% for north of delta customers, equating to 1,636 acre-feet (af) of water for Calistoga. Additionally, DWR provided Article 21 water, equating to another 45af for Calistoga. Calistoga also has return water that the City of Napa owes us totaling another 442af. Locally, we had above average rainfall this season (over 45”, the average is 38”) and has filled Kimball Reservoir, including installation of all four flashboards totaling 328af of local water supply.

At this point Calistoga has a total water supply of more than 3.6 years of water supply. Our annual use this last year with about a 14% water conservation level, was 665af. Conservation amounted to a reduction of approximately 90af. Staff is projecting water consumption to be about 755af this year if the City Council declares an end to the Stage II drought emergency and implements Stage I voluntary restrictions.

With over 3.6 years of water supply, staff is recommending the City Council consider rescinding the Stage II drought emergency.

Item #8.1.

Page 113 of 178 ends

Stage I Voluntary Restrictions
According to the Calistoga Municipal Code Section 13.04.340, a Stage I water shortage condition requests voluntary restrictions. The City Council previously adopted Resolution No. 2016-062 updating best management practices for Stage I voluntary restrictions that staff will publish on the city website and send out in utility bills educating the public on the Stage l voluntary restrictions (see Attachment 2). Additionally, and in compliance with Municipal Code Section 13.04.034, the City Clerk will publish the Stage I declaration in a newspaper of general circulation within the city and the declaration will be published at least once a week for four weeks.

Similar to the end of the 2015/16 drought, additional staff hired for public education and outreach to meet the Stage II 20% reduction goals are no longer necessary as there is insufficient work. The City will continue to process the minor amount (i.e., before this last drought we were completing between 2 to 6 rebates a year) of rebates and issue the remaining conservation kits.

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 effectiveness of the water conservation efforts has had a significant impact on the water enterprise revenues over the past two years. A 14% reduction in use is about 90af/yr of lost revenue at $10.76/unit which equates to a revenue loss of about $425,000 over the past year and a total loss of approximately $1.1M during this drought period. Additionally, the water conservation program cost approximately $130,000 annually to staff and operate in the Stage II declaration and we anticipate the program will require $5,000 to operate in Stage I category.

ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Resolution Rescinding State 2 Water Emergency Declaration

2. Stage l Best Management Practices
APPROVAL(S):

Laura Snideman, City Manager Approved - Apr 25 2023
Marni Rittburg, City Clerk Approved - Apr 25 2023
Item #8.1.

Page 114 of 178 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALISTOGA, COUNTY OF NAPA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 2021-019

DECLARING A STAGE II WATER EMERGENCY AND ADOPTING A RESOLUTION

REVERTING TO VOLUNTARY STAGE I RESTRICTIONS
WHEREAS, on April 6, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2021-019 declaring the 2021 Stage II water emergency; and
WHEREAS, the City of Calistoga, along with the State of California, has been extremely fortunate in receiving substantial amounts of rainfall and snowpack this winter. According to the Department of Water Resources (DWR), California’s snowpack is now one of the largest ever at 221% of average with the last snow survey; and WHEREAS, the City of Calistoga has a total water supply of 2,740af consisting of Napa County’s Table A allocation of 1,925 acre-feet (af), 45af of Article 21 water, 442af of return water from the City of Napa and Kimball Reservoir at 328af; and WHEREAS, given the improved water supply conditions with over 3.6-years of supply, it is appropriate to rescind Resolution No. 2021-019 and revert to a voluntary Stage I water condition; and
WHEREAS, Stage I water shortage conditions per Calistoga Municipal Code Section 13.04.340, requires voluntary restrictions. The City Council previously adopted Resolution No. 2016-062 updating best management practices (BMP) for Stage I voluntary restrictions shown on EXHIBIT A. Staff will publish BMP on the city website and send out a notification in utility bills educating the public on what the new voluntary restrictions consist of; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 (a) the recommended resolution to impose mandatory water conservation is not a “project” subject to CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the effectiveness of the water conservation efforts has had a significant impact on the water enterprise revenues over the past two years. During this period revenue was reduced by approximately $1,100,000; and WHEREAS, this reduction in revenue has made it difficult for the City to adequately fund capital projects, meet debt coverage ratios, and build up prudent reserves.

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

1. The City Council of the City of Calistoga rescinds Resolution No. 2021- 019 and reverts to voluntary Stage I water restrictions.

2. The Stage I Best Management Practices are affirmed.

ATTACHMENT 1
Item #8.1.

Page 115 of 178 ends

Resolution No. 2023-XXX

Page 2 of 2 ends

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
____________________________ __________________________ Marni Rittburg, CMC, City Clerk Donald Williams, Mayor
Item #8.1.

Page 116 of 178 ends

EXHIBIT A
City of Calistoga, 2016 Best Management Practices (“BMP”) For Water Conservation
Adopted by Resolution No. 2016-062, July 19, 2016
All Water Customers:

1. Outdoor irrigation with potable water only during the early morning hours to reduce evaporation loss with an odd/even address watering schedule (odd addresses water Tuesday, and Friday and Sunday; and even water Monday, and Thursday and Saturday).

No outdoor irrigation on Wednesday with potable water.

2. Irrigation is not permitted during or 48 hours after measurable rainfall. Measurable rainfall is ¼” in a calendar day (mid-night to mid-night).

3. Irrigation may not spray onto paved areas and sidewalks.

4. All newly permitted pools and spas are required to have a pool cover installed prior to final inspection.

5. No washing sidewalks, driveways, patios, or other paved areas with potable water.

Buildings may be pressure washed twice a year.

6. No noncommercial washing of privately owned motor vehicles, trailers and boats except from a bucket and hose equipped with an automatic shut-off nozzle.

7. Any use of water from a fire hydrant is prohibited, except for fighting fires and line flushing required by regulatory agencies.

8. No use of potable water for dust control or compaction at construction sites.

9. Newly constructed homes and buildings using potable water for outside irrigation shall install drip or micro-spray systems.

10. The use of portable water in a fountain or other decorative water feature ispermitted where the water is part of a recirculating system.

11. Inspect all irrigation systems, repair leaks, and adjust spray heads to provide optimum coverage and eliminate avoidable over-spray.

12. Run full loads through dishwasher.

13. Wash full loads of laundry.

Restaurant Specific:

1. Tap water provided to customers only upon request.

2. Scrape all dishes prior to rinsing.

3. Run full loads through dishwasher.

4. Wash full loads of linens.

Hotel and Spa Specific:

1. Hotels and motels must clearly and prominently display notice of option to reuse towels.

2. Wash full loads of linens/laundry.

3. Inspect all irrigation systems, repair leaks, and adjust spray heads to provide optimum coverage and eliminate avoidable over-spray.

4. No washing sidewalks, driveways, patios, or other paved areas with potable water.

5. Prohibit any use of water from a fire hydrant, except for fighting fires and line flushing required by regulatory agencies.

6. No noncommercial washing of privately owned motor vehicles, trailers and boats except from a bucket and hose equipped with an automatic shut-off nozzle.

Violation of a BMP is subject toissuance of a notice of violationor other citation and subject to monetary penalties.

Violations are cumulative unless there are no violations during the subsequent billing cycle.

ATTACHMENT 2Item #8.1.

Page 117 of 178 ends

Dear Councilmembers,
Addiriona\ Wri1in~
Meeting of ·b _.Q , ot..3
Item o. 'O \
Di tributed ~ f's:fr>L
We, the members of Calistoga Public Employees Association, are writing this letter to express our strong support for our fellow member, Mitchell Egert, who is currently facing the possibility of termination.

We appreciate your attention to this matter and thank you for considering our request.

Sincerely,
Calistoga Public Employees Association Members
CC: Claudia Aceves, President
Brandon Gray, Vice President
Melissa Velasquez , Secretary
Jovani Carrillo, Treasurer
Richard Reed, Labor Representative
Item #8.1.

Page 118 of 178 ends

City of Calistoga

STAFF REPORT
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Derek Rayner, Public Works Director/City Engineer Meeting: City Council - May 02 2023
Subject: Utility Rate Study Update & Review Foundation of the Finance Model DESCRIPTION:

Receive the presentation regarding progress on the Utility Rate Study and provide feedback and consensus on some of the model and key underlying assumptions to develop the base Financial Model.

RECOMMENDATION:

Receive the presentation and provide feedback and consensus on some of the model and key underlying assumptions to develop the base Financial Model.

BACKGROUND/SUMMARY:

On July 19, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2022-060 to award a Professional Services Agreement to Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc., (Raftelis) to complete the water and wastewater rate studies. The consultant, city staff and city attorney worked on preparing public outreach materials, and advertised and hosted an open house on October 5, 2022. The purpose of the initial open house was to inform the community of the water/wastewater assets, provide an overview of the study objectives and gather initial public feedback regarding concerns, and questions they had. Shortly after the open house the consultant and staff team prepared a Frequently Asked Questions document addressing many of the questions raised at the open house and other questions that came into staff that the community generated.

The team has had numerous coordination meetings and staff has provided Raftelis with the majority of the financial data necessary to set the initial framework and assumptions that have created the beginnings of the Financial Plan. Developing the Financial Plan includes an analysis of annual operating revenues under the current rates, O&M expenses, planned capital improvements, transfers between funds and reserve requirements.

Additionally, the city attorney has had significant input in the direction of the three rate alternatives that Raftelis will model as alternatives. These alternatives were a result of input received from the open house and subsequent discussions between the city attorney, Raftelis, and City staff to ensure a final rate proposal is defensible and aligned with proposition 218.

At this point in time it is important for council to provide initial direction on some key macro level items (water rate alternatives, financial reserves policies, debt versus cash financing of capital projects, and the capital improvement program) to confirm or adjust direction prior to the consultant completing long-range financial plan scenarios and cost of service analyses as well as hosting the next community open house.

Item #8.2.

Page 119 of 178 ends

The next steps towards adopting new rate schedules are:

1. Hold a second community open house to share rate plan alternatives and review initial financial model projections.

2. Return to Council to share the financial plan scenario(s) for each enterprise, the preliminary rates that result from each rate alternative, and the input from the second community open house.

3. Hold a third open house to present the final rate proposal.

4. Return to Council to approve a final rate proposal and authorize City staff to set a public hearing and mail notices to property owners and customers in order to begin the Proposition 218 rate adoption process.

5. Hold a public hearing, consider all written protests, and if protests are not received by a majority of parcels receiving water or sewer services, adopt the new rates.

The objective is to complete this process in late summer/early fall 2023.

DISCUSSION:

There are several items that the consultant is seeking consensus on and/or feedback on from Council regarding some of the key underlying assumptions to develop the base Financial Model and are discussed below and will be presented with some additional detail.

Conceptual Rate Study Alternatives
City Staff, the City Attorney and Consultant have spent a lot of time discussing and evaluating conceptual rate alternatives that are legally defensible and within the confines of Prop 218, and that include community input from our initial open house last October.

The three initial alternatives are as follows:

1. Uniform Commodity Rate
The uniform commodity rate continues our current rate structure, which includes a uniform commodity or volume rate, currently set at $10.76/unit, with residential/commercial/industrial paying the same rate. The water bill would also have updated fixed meter charges, based on meter size. The sewer bill would have some consolidation of customer class with updated rates, like the fixed or commodity/volume-based charges, dependent on customer class.

Alternatives 2 and 3 provide tiers that would help encourage conservation with higher rates for higher volumes:

2. Two-Tier’s for commodity rate for residential uniform commercial Have two-tiers for residences and commercial will be a uniform/non-tiered rate.

3. Two-Tier’s for commodity rate across all user classes (tiered but not differentiated by customer class) Would include tiered rates for both residential and commercial.

Capital Improvement Program - Water and Wastewater
The City’s ten-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is a multi-year planning instrument that guides the construction of new facilities/infrastructure and the expansion, rehabilitation, or replacement of existing City-owned assets. The CIP projects become the guiding document for the prioritization of projects, provides projected programming, and provides estimated costs over the next five and tenyear period.

Item #8.2.

Page 120 of 178 ends

The CIP projects are updated annually to reflect changing priorities, updated costs, funding availability, and project completion. The CIP budgets are presented to the City Council and adopted annually with recommended projects, adjustments to project budgets, funding sources, descriptions, and/or schedules.

Raftelis will highlight debt versus no debt to seek initial council feedback on. A comparison will also be run in the future models of grant versus no grant.

Reserve Policies
The primary objective of a city’s reserve policy is to maintain a prudent level of financial resources to mitigate risk due to temporary revenue shortfalls or unpredicted one-time expenditures. Adequate reserves also allow the City to maintain the highest possible credit ratings, which are dependent, in part, on the City’s maintenance of a healthy fund balance and are essential to the City’s capital improvement goals.

The City of Calistoga currently uses 20% reserve goals in both water/wastewater enterprise funds to ensure financial security. Raftelis will discuss how this compares with other agency reserve policies and will request the council’s initial feedback on the options. The alternatives will be to keep reserves at 20%, increase reserves to 33% of the operating budget plus a minimum $1-million and target of $2 million for emergency, and the same as previous but including some average cash funding CIP, or other hybrid approach that is legally defensible.

Proposition 218
California's Proposition 218 requires that rates cannot exceed total costs of service and must be equitably apportioned based on the costs of serving each customer class. The water and wastewater rate study will include a Cost of-Service analysis, which evaluates the total costs of providing water and wastewater services, including the costs of maintaining adequate reserves, and then proportionately allocates those costs to each customer class. This approach ensures that the proposed rates are aligned with the costs/expenses to operate the enterprise are subject to equitable cost recovery amongst customers.

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:

There will be no fiscal impacts for this report/presentation as they are a part of the adopted Resolution No. 2022-060, and part of Raftelis’ scope of work related to the utility rate study.

ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Presentation

2. Frequently Asked Questions
Item #8.2.

Page 121 of 178 ends

1 City of Calistoga
Water & Wastewater Rate StudyCity Council Presentation May 2, 2023 ATTACHMENT 1
Item #8.2.

Page 122 of 178 ends

Agenda
• Rate Study Process• Financial Planning
› Reserves Policies › Capital Improvement Program› Capital Financing • Rate Alternatives• Study Schedule
2 Item #8.2.

Page 123 of 178 ends

3 Start
Step 1: Rate Setting Framework• Financial goals and policies• Pricing objectives• Alternative rate structures for evaluation
Step 1: Rate Setting Framework• Financial goals and policies• Pricing objectives• Alternative rate structures for evaluation
Step 2: Financial Plan• Evaluation of operating
and capital costs
• Cash flow analysis for
financial sufficiency
• Scenario AnalysisStep 2: Financial Plan• Evaluation of operating and capital costs
• Cash flow analysis for
financial sufficiency
• Scenario Analysis
Step 3: Rate Design• Cost of Service Analyses
(Cost allocations)
• Alternative rates design• Rate calculations &
customer impact analyses
Step 3: Rate Design• Cost of Service Analyses
(Cost allocations)
• Alternative rates design• Rate calculations &
customer impact analyses
Step 4: Rate Plan Approval• Documentation• Study Report • Review by legal counsel Completion
Step 5: Rate Adoption –218 Procedures• Notice to City
customers
• Public HearingStep 5: Rate Adoption –218 Procedures• Notice to City customers
• Public Hearing
Rate Study Process
Stakeholder Engagement
We Are
Here
Item #8.2.

Page 124 of 178 ends

4 Utility Financial
Planning
Item #8.2.

Page 125 of 178 ends

WHY FINANCIAL PLANNING?
• Financial Sufficiency for the Short- and Long-Term
› Operating expenses› Anticipated capital expenditures
• Prepare for the Future
› Identify knowns and unknown variables› Evaluate risks› Evaluate opportunities • Helps to minimize and smooth rate fluctuations from year to year 5 Item #8.2.

Page 126 of 178 ends

6 Inflationary Pressures Supply Sources and
Costs
Cash Reserves
Future Borrowing Terms
and Assumptions
Baseline Water
Sales Estimates
Long-Range Financial Plan Drivers
Capital Reinvestment
Item #8.2.

Page 127 of 178 ends

7 CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDING
Funding Mix
(Cash, Debt,
Grants)
Borrowing
Terms

ANNUAL CASH FLOW

FISCAL POLICIES AND TARGETS
Cash
Reserves
Debt Service
Coverage

FINANCIAL PLAN
INPUTS
• Customer connections• Billed water use• Other Revenues• Operating expenses• Long-term CIP• Beginning cash position

ANNUAL GROSS

RATE REVENUE

REQUIREMENTS
Financial Plan Elements
Item #8.2.

Page 128 of 178 ends

Financial Health Indicators
8 Healthy Reserves• Operating Reserve – results from positive cash flow
• Capital Reserve – can award contracts
quickly and speed up projects if necessary
• Rate Stabilization – funds used during
periods of revenue shortages
• Emergency – funds available in case of asset
failure
Healthy Reserves• Operating Reserve – results from positive cash flow
• Capital Reserve – can award contracts
quickly and speed up projects if necessary
• Rate Stabilization – funds used during
periods of revenue shortages
• Emergency – funds available in case of asset
failure
Debt Coverage• Exceed Official Statement requirements• Achieve/maintain good credit ratings• Borrowing capacity › How much debt is the enterprise able to
issue?
Debt Coverage• Exceed Official Statement requirements• Achieve/maintain good credit ratings• Borrowing capacity › How much debt is the enterprise able to
issue?
Item #8.2.

Page 129 of 178 ends

9 Reserves Policies
Item #8.2.

Page 130 of 178 ends

Goals of Financial Reserves Policies
• Mitigate financial risk
› Rate / revenue instability› Emergency with asset failure› Volatility in working capital • Maintain solvency • Achieve and/or maintain a specific credit rating• Determine the most opportune time to issue debt
• Enhance financial management transparency through a policy statement 10 Item #8.2.

Page 131 of 178 ends

EXAMPLE RESERVES POLICY –WATER
(Neighboring Agencies)
Agency O&M Capital Emergency Rate Stabilization
City of Calistoga 20% of O&MTown of Yountville 30% of O&M 5% Asset Value 5-10% of Water Sales
Revenue
5-10% Annual O&M
excluding debt
10-20% Annual CIP (CIP
Reserve)
10-20% Annual CIP (R&R
Reserve)
Target: 90 days of O&M
Minimum: 45 days of O&M City of Napa
Engineering earthquake
assessment (>$6M) City of Santa Rosa 15% of O&M
?
Target: 14 months of Operating
City of St. Helena Min: 10 months of Operating
11 Item #8.2.

Page 132 of 178 ends

EXAMPLE RESERVES POLICY –WASTEWATER
(Neighboring Agencies)
Agency O&M Capital Emergency Rate Stabilization
City of Calistoga 20% of O&MTown of Yountville 30% of O&M 5% of Asset ValueNapa Sanitation 15% of O&M (excluding debt) $1 M Engineering earthquake assessment (>$7M) City of Santa Rosa 15% of O&M ?
Target: 8 months O&M
Minimum: 6 months O&M City of St. Helena
12 Item #8.2.

Page 133 of 178 ends

Reserve Policy Alternatives – Water
Operating Capital Emergency
Existing Policy 20% of Operating None None
$1M Minimum
$2M Target Alternative 1 33% (four months) of Operating None $1M Minimum
$2M Target Alternative 2 33% (four months) of Operating Average Cash-Funded CIP 13 Operating Capital Emergency Total Reserve Target
Existing Policy $900,000 - - $900,000
$2,500,000 to
$3,500,000
$1,000,000$2,000,000 Alternative 1 $1,500,000 -
$4,400,000 to
$5,400,000
$1,000,000$2,000,000 Alternative 2 $1,500,000 $1,900,000 Item #8.2.

Page 134 of 178 ends

Reserves Policy Recommendation
• Increase Operating reserve target for improved working capital• Include some reserve for emergencies • Consider a dedicated capital reserve given the magnitude of the Water CIP
• Any alternative would:
› Improve days cash on hand (a key metric for credit rating agencies) › Help ensure self-sustaining utility enterprises › Mitigate a greater degree of risk 14 Item #8.2.

Page 135 of 178 ends

15 Capital Financing
Item #8.2.

Page 136 of 178 ends

External Debt Financing
(Lower Short-Term Rates versus Long-Term Obligations)
• More costly (in absolute dollars)
in the long term, relative to ratefunded financing
• Obliges the agency to maintain
minimum revenue/ liquidity levels for debt coverage requirements • Excessive debt limits financial
flexibility & may lower credit rating
• Cheaper short-term option
relative to rate-funded financing
• Provides intergenerational
equity
• Far less impactful on current
ratepayers
• Low-interest rate programs
available (SRF, USDA, etc.)

ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES
16 Item #8.2.

Page 137 of 178 ends

17 Water Rate
Alternatives
Item #8.2.

Page 138 of 178 ends

Water Use Rate Alternatives
18 Alternative #1 Alternative #2 Alternative #3
Two-Tiers based on Water Supply
Two-Tiers based on Water Supply Uniform
Commodity
ResidentialNon-Residential Structure Uniform
Item #8.2.

Page 139 of 178 ends

Wastewater Rate Structure
19 • Maintain existing structure
› Residential service charges per dwelling unit› Non-Residential based on flow and strength of wastewater – Subject to minimum capacity charge
• Modest modifications may be proposed to simplify the schedule › Low, Medium, and High strength categories for non-residential dischargers • Evaluating geothermal discharger surcharges in addition to standard discharge rates
BMA0
Item #8.2.

Page 140 of 178 ends

Next Steps
• Near-term:
› Community Meeting #2 › Rate Alternatives Modeling
• Mid-term:
› City Council Workshop #2
– Long-Range Financial Plan Results – Preliminary Rate
• Longer-term:
› Revised/Final Rate Presentation (Rate Authorization)› Study documentation, noticing, continued outreach, and Public Hearing 20 Item #8.2.

Page 141 of 178 ends

Contact:

Kevin Kostiuk213-262-9309 / [email protected] Wingfield213-262-9311 / [email protected] 21 Thank you
Item #8.2.

Page 142 of 178 ends

Page | 1
City of Calistoga Frequently Asked Questions
Water and Wastewater Rate Study (updated 10/20/22)

1. What is a water/wastewater utility rate study? How often are they done? A utility rate study is a financial review that projects future revenues and expenses, usually for the next 5-10 years. The ultimate purpose of a utility rate study is to determine whether operating revenues are sufficient to meet expenses, the cost of operations and maintenance, upcoming or needed replacements and debt service, and to help you make capital improvements during the implementation plan period. Ideally, rate studies should be performed every 3-5 years and coincide with that year’s public works budgeting process.

2. Why is the City conducting a water and wastewater rate study? Performed regularly, utility rate studies provide transparency into what the City can expect in the years ahead and ensure we have the financial resources to meet our budget, maintain our infrastructure, manage system capacity for growth, implement new technologies, address existing and new state and federal regulations, and implement our capital improvement plan (CIP). Other elements of the rate studies include the development of a reserve policy that considers the different types of risks we face, including future drought conditions, and ensures revenue stability while maintaining affordability and communicating the intention of conservation.

3. Didn’t we just get done with 5 years of water/wastewater rate increases? Why do we need to revisit this?
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, general 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 orders or state-mandated projects that must be completed to maintain compliance with permits. Even though many are covered by grants, they still require utility contributions that must be incorporated into the rate study.

4. Does the City inflate forecasted expenses when setting rates to stockpile cash reserves? Are excess reserves used to fund other City expenditures?
The City’s objective is to have 20% cash reserves in both the water and wastewater Enterprise Funds because adequate reserves are necessary for Calistoga to meet debt covenants for grants/loans and reserves are necessary to address emergency failures of the water or wastewater system due to unforeseen conditions. Rate revenues must cover these reserves. Reserves are not used to fund other City expenditures and must be utilized for the appropriate water or wastewater Enterprise Fund.

Calistoga’s rate study will include projected expenses and forecasted cost increases over the next ATTACHMENT Item #8.2. 2

Page 143 of 178 ends

City of Calistoga Frequently Asked Questions
Water and Wastewater Rate Study

Page 2 of 9 ends

five-to-ten-year period. The City of Napa treatment and wheeling costs will increase, along with increases to the State Water Project (SWP) supply costs. Cost escalations related to operation and maintenance, capital projects costs, general inflation, and material cost increases (e.g., chlorine alone has tripled in cost from just a couple of years ago) go into the rate study to project expenses.

5. Is revenue from water rates used on any non-water projects? No, water Enterprise Funds can only be used on water projects, and similarly, wastewater Enterprise Funds are only used on wastewater projects.

6. In 2021, Calistoga sold unused water to Napa. How was the money used, and did it help offset costs? Should ratepayers have received a rebate?
The unused water referenced in the question was Advanced-Table-A (ATA) water that the City could not consume in 2021 because it still had unused Carryover and Table A water from the State Water Project (SWP) source. ATA water is last resort water for Calistoga to consume as all your other available Table A and Carryover water allocations have to be used, and any ATA water consumed has to be paid back with equivalent volume to the State of California within five years. The City of Napa needed Calistoga’s ATA water in 2021, so Calistoga sold Napa 332 acre feet at a total price of $148,404, for which they are required to pay the water volume back they consumed to the state.

Calistoga may need to utilize ATA water in the future, and if needed, it will be an additional cost to the enterprise fund that the revenues from Napa can offset.

The $148,404 revenue went into the water Enterprise Funds and is used to offset expenses. As a frame of reference, the water enterprise expenses are more than $4.6 million annually, and the wastewater enterprise expenses are more than $4.5 million, not including capital expenditures that generally add another $1 - $5 million annually for each fund. The order of magnitude of the Napa revenue without capital is about 3% of expenses, so not very significant. Additionally, the City applies for grants and if successful, utilizes grants revenues that are typically much larger amounts that help reduce capital cost impacts that ultimately slow down the rate of increase that is factored into the cost of running the utility.

The Enterprise Funds have projected annual fiscal budgets with anticipated revenue and expenses.

There are situations like the Napa revenue that are not anticipated just as there are expenses that are not anticipated (e.g., chlorine costs tripled in price last year, fuel, supply and material increases, main breaks/repairs, emergencies, etc.). The budget for Enterprise Funds will have unanticipated revenue and expenses that occur over the year. Enterprise Funds are not operated to pass along unanticipated revenue as a rebate to customers, just as the Enterprise Funds do not send out additional bills for unanticipated expenses. Both unanticipated revenues and expenses are accounted for in the Enterprise Funds each year and offset each other. If there is additional revenue or expenses the fund will either be slightly in the positive or slightly in the negative, with the objective of a healthy Enterprise Fund to balance revenues with expenses over multiple years.

Enterprise Funds must pay for themselves and meet minimum debt and reserves to maintain a healthy utility. The purpose of five-year rate studies is to reconcile these differences in projected expenses and revenues and factor actual expenses and surpluses or deficits into the projected revenue needs for the next five years.

Item #8.2.

Page 144 of 178 ends

City of Calistoga Frequently Asked Questions
Water and Wastewater Rate Study

Page 3 of 9 ends

7. Can you explain the capital costs required to catch up with needed maintenance to existing assets and new projects?
The water and wastewater Enterprise Funds have historically been underfunded to keep up with the significant amount of deferred maintenance to the utility systems. The City has a significant amount of aging infrastructure, and over 10% of the water pipes and 14% of the wastewater pipes will be over 75 years old by 2027. Additionally, Calistoga has a significant amount of critical capital projects over the next several fiscal years that are cease-and-desist orders or state-mandated projects that must be complied with to maintain our permits.

The 10-year outlook on CIP for the water system is more than $40 million, and more than $30 million for the wastewater system.

8. What is the rates study process, and will the community be kept informed? The city hired Raftelis Inc., a consulting firm with expertise in water and wastewater rate studies across the country. Their scope of work consists of the following:
• Data collection
• Develop long-range financial plans for Water, Wastewater, and recycled water service • Design rates for the City’s water, wastewater, and recycled water users • Conduct a Capacity Fee Study (fees paid by new development wishing to connect) • Attend, present at, and help facilitate several meetings with City staff, the ratepaying public, and City Council
• Assist in the Proposition 218 process and public hearing for rate adoption The rate study consists of a series of steps involving data evaluation, performing technical analyses, deriving customer rates, and understanding customer impacts of any modifications. Once a rates proposal is determined, the complete study is documented in a Study Report to serve as part of the City’s administrative record to justify the proposed rates.

In California, all parcels connected to a utility system must be given notice of any rate changes with the ability to protest the proposed rates. The notice details the proposed rates, the basis for calculating the proposed rates, the reason for the proposed rate increase, the details of the public hearing, and the ratepayers’ or property owners’ right to protest. Protests may be submitted by either the property owner or the customer of record, but only one protest per parcel will be counted. After a protest period of no less than 45 days, the City Council can conduct a Public Hearing. Absent a majority protest to the rate proposal, the City Council may choose to adopt the rates as noticed.

The anticipated schedule to complete the rate study and adopt the new rates is about nine months, and to adopt rates in spring 2023 and implement the new rates on July 1, 2023, the beginning of the City’s fiscal year.

A community meeting was held on Wednesday, October 5, 2022, before kicking off the study to receive community input at the beginning of the rate study process. The meeting had about 60 community members in attendance. There will be two additional stakeholder meetings and three City staff and City Council work sessions for the rate study, with some scheduled as virtual and others in person. We encourage the community to stay informed about the rates studies through Item #8.2.

Page 145 of 178 ends

City of Calistoga Frequently Asked Questions
Water and Wastewater Rate Study

Page 4 of 9 ends

the City’s website here. The website will be updated for future stakeholder and City Council meeting dates. Additionally, residents are encouraged to submit questions or comments, to [email protected] or call the Public Works Department at (707) 942-2780.

9. Is there an appeal process? Who is allowed to appeal recommended rates? Proposition 218 provides a process for property owners to protest a proposed rate increase before the rates can be adopted. Written notice will be provided to all customers of record at least 45 days before the public hearing (the City will also broadly notify the public). The public is invited to provide public comment at the hearing. A written protest must contain a statement of opposition to the rate increase, the property assessor’s parcel number or property address, and the name and original signature of the property owner or utility customer of record registering the protest. Per California Government Code section 53755(b), only one protest will be counted for each parcel or address.

This means that a parcel that has multiple dwelling units but only one customer of record will be limited to one protest. Since protests must include an original signature, electronic protests via email, social media, etc., will not qualify as a written protest. At the public hearing, written protests will be considered and tallied. If a majority of the service accounts protest the charge, the City shall not adopt the increase(s).

10. Can you give us a forecast as to how much rates will go up? A lengthy rate studies process begins in October 2022 with several community engagement and listening sessions for residents to learn about the water and wastewater rates study process. The City hopes to gather valuable resident feedback on water issues and input on what priorities any future rate structure should help accomplish (i.e., fairness, water conservation, water system reliability, resiliency, etc.). Although the City will use those community values to guide the rate study structure, Proposition 218 requires the City to adopt a rate structure that reflects the City’s actual costs of serving each customer class. As of October 2022, financial calculations have not begun, so there is no way to forecast rates until spring 2023. Throughout the rates study process, the community is encouraged to provide input. Questions and comments can be submitted via email to [email protected] or call the Public Works Department at (707) 942-2780. Updates and information about the rates studies are posted on the City’s website here.

11. Why don’t we charge the resorts and more extensive users more and small-scale users less? It seems more equitable.

The rate study has to follow California law, and Proposition 218 requires that rates are proportionate to the cost of services being provided. To be fair and equitable, higher rates must be justified by higher costs of service. Accordingly, the City can only charge resorts and bigger users more if it can demonstrate, through the rate study analysis, that those users cost more to serve.

12. Where do the vineyards get their water? How much do they use? How much do they pay? Vineyards typically irrigate with private well systems or under-drain systems that capture stormwater and store irrigation water in large earthen reservoirs for irrigation use. Unfortunately, City recycled water is not usable for vineyards as it is high in boron content (above what vineyards can tolerate) and the recycled water piping and delivery system is limited to within city limits. There are very few large vineyards within Calistoga city limits, with most of them located in the county or unincorporated areas that are outside municipal city limits but have a Calistoga mailing address.

13. Can you explain the different rates groups, or classes, and how they’re determined? Item #8.2.

Page 146 of 178 ends

Calistoga City CouncilMay 2, 2023

Calistoga City Council
May 2, 2023