Chowchilla City Council
May 24, 2022

AGENDA
Special City Council / Redevelopment Successor
Agency Joint Meeting
Council Chambers, Chowchilla City Hall
130 S. Second Street, Chowchilla, CA 93610
Tuesday, May 24, 2022
Closed Session: 6:00 p.m.

Open Session: 7:00 p.m.

City Hall is open to the public for business. The City Council Chamber is OPEN to the public for City Council meetings. City Council meetings will also be available to view and participate via Zoom. Please read Page 4 of this agenda packet for Zoom login and participation information.

Agendas for all City Council meetings are posted at least 72 hours prior to the meeting in the kiosk just outside of City Hall, 130 S. Second St., Chowchilla, CA 93610.

Agendas for Special Meetings are posted 24 hours prior to the meeting.

Any writing or 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.CityofChowchilla.org.

The City of Chowchilla complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA of 1990). The Council Chambers is accessible to the physically disabled. If you need special assistance, please call (559) 665-8615, ext. 102 at least 4 days prior to a regular meeting, 1 day for a special meeting.

CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
Mayor/Chair: John Chavez
Mayor Pro Tem/Vice Chair: Ray Barragan
Council/Board Members: Waseem Ahmed, Diana Palmer, Kelly Smith City staff and contract employees present at the meeting will be reflected in the minutes.

CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Additions and/or Deletions:

PUBLIC ADDRESS – CLOSED SESSION
This time is reserved for members of the audience to address the City Council on items listed on the Closed Session agenda only. It is recommended that speakers limit their comments to no more than 3 minutes each.

CLOSED SESSION – 6:00 PM

1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION – Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Paragraph (2) or (3) of Subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9
Potential cases: 1
City Council / RSA Meeting Agenda May 24, 2022

2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION – Initiation of Litigation – Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 Paragraph (4) Subdivision (d) (deciding whether to initiate litigation)
Number of Cases: 1

3. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6
Agency Designated Representatives: City Administrator, Finance Director, City Attorney Employee Organizations: Chowchilla Police Officer Association, Chowchilla City Employee Association, Chowchilla City Office Employees Association, Chowchilla MidManagement/Confidential Association and Non-Represented Staff OPEN SESSION – 7:00 PM

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
INVOCATION:

CLOSED SESSION REPORT:

PRESENTATIONS/WORKSHOP - Section 1

PUBLIC ADDRESS
This time is reserved for members of the audience to address the City Council on items of interest that are not on the agenda and that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Council.

It is recommended that speakers limit their comments to no more than 3 minutes each and it is requested that no comments be made during this period on items on the Agenda.

Members of the public who are joining the meeting via Zoom and would like to address the Council on items on the agenda should follow the policy on page 4 of this agenda packet.

The Council is prohibited by law from taking any action on matters discussed that are not on the agenda. No adverse conclusions should be drawn if the Council does not respond to public comment at this time.

COUNCIL AND STAFF VERBAL REPORTS – Section 2

2.1 COUNCIL VERBAL REPORTS
Legislative, Collaborative Agency, Ad Hoc

2.2 STAFF VERBAL REPORTS
CONSENT CALENDAR – Section 3

3.1 Approval of the May 10, 2022 City Council/Redevelopment Successor Agency Joint Meeting Minutes (McClendon)
City Council / RSA Meeting Agenda May 24, 2022

3.2 Approval of the May 16, 2022 City Council Budget Workshop Meeting Minutes (McClendon)

3.3 Approval of the May 18, 2022 City Council Special Meeting Minutes (McClendon)

3.4 Consideration and Approval of the April 2022 Financial Statements Report (Williams)

3.5 Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution Authorizing Continued use of Remote Teleconferencing Provisions (AB 361 and Government Code Section 54953) (McClendon)

3.6 Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution Adding Recreational Swim Admission Fees to the Master Fee Schedule to Offer a Community Recreational Program (Wisener)

3.7 Consideration and Approval of an Aerial Fireworks Display for July 9, 2022 at the Chowchilla Fairgrounds and Authorize the Fire Chief to Approve Necessary Documents Thereto (State and Local Permits) (Gaumnitz)
PUBLIC HEARINGS – Section 4
DEFERRED BUSINES – Section 5

5.1 Discussion and Direction Regarding the Former County Library and Future Use of the Facility (Rogers)
NEW BUSINESS – Section 6

6.1 Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution Declaring Surplus Property (Dodge Building Bricks) (Rogers)

6.2 Consideration and Adoption of a Resolution Amending the 2021/2022 Salary Scale to Include the Seasonal Lifeguard I & II and Pool Supervisor Classifications (McClendon) ANNOUNCEMENTS – Section 7

ADJOURNMENT
I, Joann McClendon, CMC, City Clerk, do hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing agenda was posted at Chowchilla City Hall, 130 S Second Street, Chowchilla, CA and made available for public review on this 20th day of May, 2022 at or before 4:00pm.

Joann McClendon, CMC, City Clerk
JUNE 14 CITY COUNCIL MEETING, CITY HALL, 7PM
JUNE 15 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, CITY HALL, 7:00 PM *SPECIAL NOTICE REGARDING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION DUE TO
COVID-19*
Public meetings are still open to the public to attend in-person.

However, if you wish to attend remotely, please read the message below.

Consistent with AB 361 and Government Code section 54953, this meeting will be held remotely. Members of the public may access the meeting using the following information:

Zoom login instructions
Use the following url to start Zoom:
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/85928146832?pwd=U2NCL1Q2SE9uR29MYnU5OFU2 UHlZQT09
Passcode: 61 63 32
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To participate by phone, dial: 1-877-853-5247
Webinar ID: 859 2814 6832
Passcode: 61 63 32
Staff highly recommends that participants log into Zoom 15 minutes before the meeting begins to perform an audio check and to make sure you have optimal internet connection.

Options to participate / view / and listen to the meeting:
• If you wish to speak on an item using the Zoom platform on your computer/laptop or smart phone, please use the “raise hand” icon and you will be unmuted when it is your turn to speak. Please provide your name when unmuted. You will be able to speak to the Committee for up to 3 minutes.
• If you are calling in to the meeting only (no camera/video) and you wish to make a comment, press *9 to “raise your hand” and *6 to unmute yourself.

MINUTES
Special City Council /
Redevelopment Successor Agency
Joint Meeting
Council Chambers, Chowchilla City Hall
130 S. Second Street, Chowchilla, CA 93610
Tuesday, May 10, 2022
Open Session: 6:00 p.m.

CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL: 6:01 p.m.

Mayo/Chair: John Chavez (Remote)
Mayor Pro Tem/Vice Chair: Ray Barragan
Council/Board Members: Waseem Ahmed, Diana Palmer, Kelly Smith City staff and contract employees present: City Administrator Rod Pruett (Remote), City Attorney Mary Lerner, Police Chief David A. Riviere, Jr., Fire Chief Fred Gaumnitz, Public Works Director Jason Rogers, Community & Economic Development Director Mark Hamilton (Remote), Finance Director Kerri Williams, Recreation & Community Outreach Manager Stacy Wisener, IT System Administrator Carlos Berrocal, Deputy City Clerk/Sec II Stacy Weaver

CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Additions and/or Deletions:

Motion by Council Member Ahmed, Seconded by Council Member Smith to Approve the Agenda as Presented. Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote.

OPEN SESSION – 6:00 PM
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Council Member Ahmed
INVOCATION: Pastor Melvin Hurndon
PRESENTATIONS/WORKSHOP - Section 1

1.1 Proclamations: National Law Enforcement Week, May 11-17, 2022 National Public Works Week, May 15-21, 2022

PUBLIC ADDRESS
No one spoke
COUNCIL AND STAFF VERBAL REPORTS – Section 2

2.1 COUNCIL VERBAL REPORTS
Legislative, Collaborative Agency, Ad Hoc
Council Member Ahmed attended the National Day of Prayer at Veteran’s Memorial Park and attended the Helping One Women in Chowchilla dinner yesterday with the Mayor.

Item 3.1

CLICK HERE

TO RETURN TO

THE AGENDA
City Council / RSA Meeting Minutes May 10, 2022
Mayor Pro Tem Barragan also attended the National Day of Prayer at the park. Barragan thanked the Pastors who provided prayer for the event. He wished there was more community involvement since this was a great event.

Council Member Palmer also went to the National Day of Prayer event; attended the Centennial Ad Hoc Committee meeting with the Mayor and Ms. Wisner, requesting community involvement and support for the City’s Centennial. Also, she attended the Measure T Steering Committee meeting, working on allocations for future projects; attended the funeral for Mr. Vern Moss which was well attended; met with Superintendent Miller to discuss getting the pool open and figuring out insurance and staffing needs.

Council Member Smith also attended the National Day of Prayer event and remarked that the local Pastors did an excellent job; attended the Chowchilla Athletic Foundation Golf Tournament, which was well attended by the community, and many local businesses were represented.

Mayor Chavez attended the National Day of Prayer at Veteran’s Memorial Park, the Centennial Ad Hoc Committee meeting, and the Helping One Women (HOW) dinner in honor of Julie Kennedy.

2.2 STAFF VERBAL REPORTS
Recreation & Community Outreach Manager Stacy Wisener provided updates on the Centennial Celebration planning for the City. Two of the significant events that are planned is a community dinner on February 11, 2023 at Eastman Hall. The dinner is scheduled for the closest date to the City's Centennial date. The other significant event is being planned for July 2023. The July event will also be at the Fairgrounds, where it is planned to open the City's time capsules. The City is working with Chowchilla Lion's Club to combine their fireworks event and the City's Music in the Park. Further updates will be coming soon.

Public Works Director Jason Rogers wanted to take a moment to thank his staff for their hard work. They are an amazing group of people and help to keep our city going and he is honored to work with them and thankful to them every day. He attended budget and capital improvement project (CIP) meetings for the new fiscal year; attended several Measure T Steering Committee meetings with Council Member Palmer. He noted that there is a Measure T survey on social media and encouraged participation. Public Works is also working with the Transit Department on a bus shelter project at RC Wisener Park. As a result, new ADA ramps were installed at the park and across the street at the Police Department and the sidewalk was fixed to provide better access to the future bus stop.

Finance Director Williams participated in the second session of the City's Employee negotiations. Continued work with Tyler's software implementation to get Community Development active to handle permits and business licenses and finalizing the payroll module; Measure N Oversight Board preparations and participation. Continued meeting for FY 2022/23 Budget preparations, and had a meeting with Muni Services to go over the 4th quarter sales tax.

Police Chief Riviere extended an invitation to the 15th Annual Police Officer Memorial Ceremony that is on May 17 at noon at Court House Park in Madera.

Fire Chief Gaumnitz reported that next Thursday is the annual lighting of the barbeque pits at the Fairgrounds. Madera County was able to acquire a salvaged 14-foot steel beam from the 9/11 Twin Towers. The beam will travel through Madera starting in Oakhurst down to Madera on May 28th, and the Chowchilla Fire Department will be participating along the route and presentation.

City Council / RSA Meeting Minutes May 10, 2022
City Administrator Pruett participated in the Measure T Steering Committee meeting, labor negotiations, the discussion with Superintendent Miller regarding pool season, the Centennial Committee meeting, discussion of sales tax with Muni Services, and the Measure N Oversight meeting. The Development Impact Fee Study Report has been completed. A 30-day public notice requirement was sent to publish in the newspaper for the Council meeting for the June 14, 2022. He also attended the Community Task Force Zoom meeting and with Mid-Valley for the agenda item tonight.

CONSENT CALENDAR – Section 3

3.1 Approval of the April 26, 2022 City Council Meeting Minutes (McClendon)

3.2 Approval of the April 26, 2022 City Council Town Hall Meeting Minutes (McClendon)

3.3 Consideration and Approval of the April 2022 Check Register Report (Williams)

3.4 Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution (#32-22) Initiating Proceedings for the Annual Levy of Assessments for Landscape Maintenance and Lighting District No. 90-1 of the City of Chowchilla (Rogers)

3.5 Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution (#33-22) Authorizing Continued use of Remote Teleconferencing Provisions (AB 361 and Government Code Section 54953) (McClendon)

3.6 Consideration and Approval of a Letter to Support the Madera High-Speed Rail Station Project (Pruett)

3.7 Consideration of the March 2022 Financial Statements (Williams) Motion by Council Member Palmer, Seconded by Council Member Smith to Approve the Consent Calendar as Presented. Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote.

PUBLIC HEARINGS – Section 4

4.1 Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution Related to Hearing Protests of Any Affected Property Owners and Authorize the City Administrator to Execute Any Necessary Documents thereto (2022 Weed Abatement Program) (Gaumnitz) Public Hearing Opened at 6:26 p.m.

No one spoke for or against the item.

Public Hearing Closed at 6:26 p.m.

Motion by Council Member Smith, Seconded by Council Member Palmer to Approve City Council Resolution #34-22, Related to Hearing Protests of Any Affected Property Owners and Authorize the City Administrator to Execute Any Necessary Documents thereto (2022 Weed Abatement Program). Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote.

DEFERRED BUSINES – Section 5
City Council / RSA Meeting Minutes May 10, 2022
NEW BUSINESS – Section 6

6.1 Consideration and Adoption of a Successor Agreement with Mid Valley Disposal to Provide Additional Services Related to Organic Waste Hauling and Bin Service Rates and Authorizing the City Administrator to Sign the Agreement (Rogers) Joe Kalpakoff, President of Mid-Valley spoke and answered questions on Mid-Valley’s behalf.

Motion by Council Member Palmer, Seconded by Mayor Chavez, Approving a Successor Agreement with Mid Valley Disposal to Provide Additional Services Related to Organic Waste Hauling and Bin Service Rates as Amended with the appropriate changes to the date to reflect the correct year [2022], and Authorizing the City Administrator to Sign the Agreement. Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote.

6.2 Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution Rejecting a Proposal for On-Call City Engineering Services (Rogers)
Motion by Council Member Smith, Seconded by Council Member Ahmed to Approve City Council Resolution #35-22, Rejecting a Proposal for On-Call City Engineering Services. Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote.

6.3 Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution Approving Two Agreements with QK Engineering, Inc. for On-Call City Engineering Services and Authorizing the City Administrator to Execute the Agreements on Behalf of the City (Rogers) Spencer Supinger, Engineer with QK, spoke and answered questions on QK’s Behalf Motion by Council Member Smith, Seconded by Council Member Palmer to Approve City Council Resolution #36-22, Approving Two Agreements with QK for On Call City Engineering Services and Authorizing the City Administrator to Execute the Agreements on Behalf of the City. Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote.

6.4 a) Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution Cancelling Task Orders with Yamabe and Horn and QK for Completing the Environmental Documentation Required for the State Route (SR) 99/233 Interchange Project and Transferring Back to Madera County Transportation Commission (MCTC) and Caltrans District 6 for Completion; and
Mike Day, Project Manager for Caltrans District 6, spoke and answered questions on Caltrans behalf.

There was a question posted on Zoom from the Public – Jake S. “Why does MCTC get a better rate than the City of Chowchilla from Caltrans?” Answer: “MCTC is a self-help county and they have a county wide tax measure in place. They basically get a slightly improved rate based on SB 848.”
Motion by Council Member Palmer, Seconded by Council Member Smith to Approve City Council Resolution #37-22, Approving the Canceling Task Orders with Yamabe and Horn and QK for Completing the Environmental Documentation Required for the State Route (SR) 99/SR 233 Interchange Project and Transferring Back to Madera County Transportation Commission (MCTC) and Caltrans District 6 for Completion. Motion passed with Mayor John Chavez voting No.

City Council / RSA Meeting Minutes May 10, 2022
b) Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution Reaffirming Support of the Development and Construction of the State Route 99/233 Interchange Project (Rogers)
Motion by Council Member Palmer, Seconded by Council Member Smith to Approve City Council Resolution #38-22, Reaffirming Support of the Development and Construction of the SR 99/SR 233 Interchange Project. Motion passed with Mayor John Chavez voting No.

6.5 Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution Approving Budget Amendments for Measure N (Williams)
Motion by Council Member Ahmed, Seconded by Council Member Palmer to Approve City Council Resolution #39-22, Approving Budget Amendments for FY 2021-2022 Measure N.

Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote.

6.6 Consideration and Approval to Authorize the Executive Director of the Chowchilla Redevelopment Successor Agency to Sign the Listing Agreement for APN 002-250- 053 with Charitar Realty and Listing the Property Purchase (Hamilton) Motion by Vice Chair Barragan, Seconded by Board Member Smith to Authorize the Executive Director of the Chowchilla Redevelopment Successor Agency to Sign the List Agreement for APN 002-250-053 with Charitar Realty and Listing the Property for Purchase. Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote.

ANNOUNCEMENTS – Section 7
MAY 18 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, CITY HALL, 7:00 PM
MAY 18-22 CHOWCHILLA MADERA COUNTY FAIR, FAIRGROUNDS
MAY 21 SPRING FESTIVAL ARMED FORCES DAY PARADE, ROBERTSON BOULEVARD, 10AM MAY 24 CITY COUNCIL MEETING, CITY HALL, 7:00 PM

ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Chavez adjorned the Tuesday, May 10, 2022 City Council / Redevelopment Successor Agency Joint Meeting at 7:35 p.m.

ATTESTS: APPROVED:
__________________________________
Joann McClendon, CMC, City Clerk Mayor John Chavez

MINUTES
Special City Council Goal Setting
Workshop
City Council Chamber
Chowchilla City Hall - 130 S. Second Street, Chowchilla, CA 93610 Monday, May 16, 2022 – 3:00 p.m.

CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL: 3:05 PM
Mayor: John Chavez
Mayor Pro Tem: Ray Barragan
Council Members: Waseem Ahmed, Diana Palmer, Kelly Smith City staff and contract employees present: City Administrator Rod Pruett, City Attorney Mary Lerner, Police Chief David A. Riviere, Jr., Commander Jeff Palmer, Fire Chief Fred Gaumnitz, Public Works Director Jason Rogers, Community & Economic Development Director Mark Hamilton, Recreation & Community Outreach Manager Stacy Wisener, IT System Administrator Kurt Wlodarzyk, City Clerk Joann McClendon
OPEN SESSION – 3:05 PM

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
INVOCATION: Council Member Palmer
GOAL SETTING WORKSHOP - Section 1

1.1 Discussion Regarding Fiscal Year 2022/2023 Goals and Priorities to Incorporate into the Budget

ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Chavez Adjourned the May 16, 2022 Special City Council Goal Setting Workshop at 4:44 p.m.

ATTEST: APPROVED:

Joann McClendon, CMC, City Clerk Mayor John Chavez
Item 3.2

CLICK HERE

TO RETURN TO

THE AGENDA

MINUTES
Special City Council Meeting
City Council Chamber
Chowchilla City Hall - 130 S. Second Street,
Chowchilla, CA 93610
Wednesday, May 18, 2022 – 5:30 p.m.

CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL: 5:33 PM
Mayor: John Chavez (Absent)
Mayor Pro Tem: Ray Barragan
Council Members: Waseem Ahmed (Remote), Diana Palmer (Remote), Kelly Smith (Remote) City staff and contract employees present: City Administrator Rod Pruett (Remote), City Attorney Mary Lerner (Remote), Fire Chief Fred Gaumnitz, Public Works Director Jason Rogers (Remote), IT System Administrator Carlos Berrocal, Deputy City Clerk/Sec II Stacy Weaver OPEN SESSION – 5:33 PM

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
INVOCATION: Council Member Diana Palmer
NEW BUSINESS - Section 1

1.1 Consideration and Approval of an Aerial Fireworks Display at the Chowchilla Municipal Airport on May 21, 2022 for the Chowchilla-Madera County Fair Spring Festival and Authorizing the Fire Chief to Approve and Sign all Related Documents Thereto (Gaumnitz)
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Barragan, Seconded by Council Member Smith to Approving an Aerial Fireworks Display at the Chowchilla Municipal Airport on May 21, 2022 for the Chowchilla-Madera County Fair Spring Festival and Authorizing the Fire Chief to Approve and Sign all Related Documents Thereto. Motion passed by roll call vote with Mayor Chavez Absent.

ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Pro Tem Barragan Adjourned the Wednesday, May 18, 2022 Special City Council Meeting at 5:39 p.m.

ATTEST: APPROVED:

Joann McClendon, CMC, City Clerk Mayor John Chavez
Item 3.3

CLICK HERE

TO RETURN TO

THE AGENDA

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Item 3.4

CLICK HERE

TO RETURN TO

THE AGENDA
Meeting of: May 24, 2022
AGENDA SECTION: Consent
SUBJECT: Consideration of a Resolution Authorizing Continued Use of Remote Teleconferencing Provisions Pursuant to AB 361 and Government Code Section 54953
PREPARED BY: Joann McClendon, City Clerk
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution

REVIEWED BY
ADMINISTRATOR ☒ REVIEWED BYATTORNEY ☒ REVIEWED BY FINANCE ☒ RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the continued use of remote teleconferencing provisions pursuant to AB 361 and Government Code section 54953.

BACKGROUND:

On September 16, 2021, the California legislature passed Assembly Bill (“AB”) 361, which amends Government Code, section 54953 and permits a local agency to use teleconferencing to conduct its meetings in any of the following circumstances:
(A) the legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency, and state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing; or (B) the legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency for the purpose of determining, by majority vote, whether as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees; or (C) the legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency and has determined, by majority vote, pursuant to subparagraph (B), that, as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

In order for the City Council to continue use of teleconferencing as allowed by AB 361, it must first adopt the resolution allowing the City Council to conduct teleconferenced meetings for a period of thirty (30) days. In addition, AB 361 requires the City to continue to make specified findings every thirty (30) days thereafter. The last time this was presented on the agenda was May 10, 2022.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None foreseen at time of report.

ALTERNATIVES:

Not adopt the resolution and revert to the original Brown Act rules for posting agendas when a member of the council remotely joins a City Council meeting.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

Continue to place the item on the City Council meeting agenda every 30-days to continue with the AB361 guidelines without disruption.

COUNCIL RESOLUTION # -22

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHOWCHILLA, CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING CONTINUED USE OF REMOTE TELECONFERENCING PROVISIONS (AB 361 AND GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54953)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chowchilla (“City Council”) is committed to open and transparent government, and full compliance with the Ralph M. Brown Act (“Brown Act”); and WHEREAS, the Brown Act generally requires that a public agency take certain actions in order to use teleconferencing to attend a public meeting virtually; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that a local emergency persists due to the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic; and
WHEREAS, the California Legislature has recognized the ongoing state of emergency due to the COVID-19 pandemic and has responded by creating an additional means for public meetings to be held via teleconference (inclusive of internet-based virtual meetings); and WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021, the California legislature passed Assembly Bill (“AB”) 361, which amends Government Code, section 54953 and permits a local agency to use teleconferencing to conduct its meetings in any of the following circumstances: (A) the legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency, and state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing; (B) the legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency for the purpose of determining, by majority vote, whether as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees; or (C) the legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency and has determined, by majority vote, pursuant to subparagraph (B), that, as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees; and
WHEREAS, in order for the City Council to use teleconferencing as allowed by AB 361 after October 1, 2021, it must first adopt findings in a resolution, allowing the City Council to conduct teleconferenced meetings for a period of thirty (30) days; and WHEREAS, Governor Gavin Newsom declared a state of emergency for the State of California due to the COVID-19 pandemic in his order entitled “Proclamation of a State of Emergency,” signed March 4, 2020; and/or
WHEREAS, the California Occupational and Safety Health Administration (OSHA) continues to recommend certain social distancing requirements, as described in detail in California Code of Regulations Title 8, section 3205 Covid Prevention; and/or WHEREAS, Madera County Health Officer, Dr. Simon Paul issued a letter on October 8, 2021 recommending physical distancing measures by way of utilizing teleconferencing options for public meetings to facilitate participation in public affairs and encourage participants to protect themselves and others from the COVID-19 virus; and
WHEREAS, on May 10, 2022, April 12, 2022, March 22, 2022, March 8, 2022, February 8, 2022, January 11, 2022, December 14, 2021, November 23, 2021, and October 26, 2021, the City Council continued use of the remote teleconferencing provisions originally adopted on September 28, 2021; and
WHEREAS, the City Council hereby finds that the state and local emergencies have caused and will continue to cause imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees; and WHEREAS, the City Council is conducting its meetings through the use of telephonic and internet-based services so that members of the public may observe and participate in meetings and offer public comment.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the recitals set forth above are true and correct and fully incorporated into this Resolution by reference.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council is conducting meetings during a state of emergency and the County of Madera and OSHA recommend measures to promote social distancing.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council has determined that given the state of emergency, holding in-person only meetings would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the actions taken by the City Council through this resolution shall be applied to all City committees governed by the Brown Act unless otherwise desired by that committee.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City Council authorizes the City Manager or their designee(s) to continue to take all actions necessary to conduct City Council meetings in accordance with AB 361 and Government Code section 54953(e) and all other applicable provisions of the Brown Act, using teleconferencing for a period of thirty (30) days from the adoption of this Resolution after which the City Council will again reconsider the circumstances of the state of emergency.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chowchilla this 24th day of May, 2022 by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

Mayor John Chavez
ATTEST:

Joann McClendon, CMC
City Clerk

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Item 3.5

CLICK HERE

TO RETURN TO

THE AGENDA
Meeting of: May 24, 2022
AGENDA SECTION: Consent
SUBJECT: Consideration of Monthly Financial Statements
PREPARED BY: Kerri Williams, Finance Director
ATTACHMENTS: April 2022 Budget vs Actual and Balance Sheet

REVIEWED BY
ADMINISTRATOR ☒ REVIEWED BYATTORNEY ☒ REVIEWED BY FINANCE ☒ RECOMMENDATION:

Approve the April 2022 Financial Statements shown in the attachment.

BACKGROUND:

Staff provides Council with monthly financial information as an ongoing financial status update.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

The monthly financial statements consist of a Budget vs Actual and a Balance Sheet for the General Fund. The Budget vs Actual shows the current Month (Period Activity) and current Year (Fiscal Activity) Revenues and Expenses by Department in summary form compared to the current year Original and Current budgets. The Balance Sheet shows the Assets, Liabilities and Fund Balance at the time the report is generated. This provides an overview of cash, amounts owed to the City, amounts the City owes and the fund balance at a specific point in time.

The financial statements are being presented as an overview of the City’s finances and are not meant to be a comprehensive in-depth review. As a reference to compare to the percent remaining column in the report, the percentage of the year remaining 17%.

If the percent remaining column for Revenues is higher than the above-mentioned percentage, that is an unfavorable variance and should be explained if significant. If the percent remaining column for Expenses is lower than the above-mentioned percentage, that is an unfavorable variance and should be explained if significant.

If there are questions regarding the actual amounts or budget vs actual variances, please forward your questions to me in enough time before the meeting for staff to research them.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Revenues
General Administration- Property tax and VLF, which are 2 of our biggest revenues, are only received 2 times a year in February and May so we have only received the 1st distribution. Property tax is coming in less than anticipated but VLF is coming in a little more. We will see how property tax does on the 2nd distribution. We are teetered which means we do not have to worry about delinquencies because the County pays us and goes after the delinquencies themselves. Sales tax payments run a couple months behind and this report amount represents payments received through January 2022. Sales tax is our 2nd largest revenue and it is projected to come in fairly higher than budgeted.

City Attorney- This is the settlement from the HSR and that is not something we budgeted for.

General Services- The original budgeted revenue here is from an internal accounting for the POB debt service. After the auditors completed our 20-21 audit we were asked to reclassify the way we were transferring out the POB. We are now doing direct transfers out to the POB, eliminating the revenue source in the General Services Fund.

Police Sworn/Net- Budgeted revenue is from school reimbursements for SRO services, SIU from the Count and from grants that are billed periodically. We have not billed the schools or the County yet as we usually bill quarterly. Also, it has $950k of Transfer In from Measure N for the fencing project ($775k) and $175k for recruitment and retention of employees. Also, the Madnet program has not had people in it and the program is reimbursed through the County so we have much less Expense and Revenue.

Fire Services- this revenue is from transfers in from Measure N and the General Fund for the fire station expansion project. That project has not happened yet but the RFP process has been completed and we have awarded the project to a vendor. We are close to beginning construction.

Community & Economic Development- This will fluctuate as building permits are pulled. We budgeted for growth which includes projects like Oleander, Rancho Calera, Montgomery Farms and misc. lots within Greenhills. So far, we have Century Communities building their part of the Montgomery Farms lots but other projects have not pulled their permits. We still have other misc. permits for other items that are happening as well. There is also $185k of grant revenues that we have not received all of yet.

Parks and Recreation- $200k of this is from a grant that we have not spent yet so we have not requested reimbursements. The rest is overhead allocations from the LLMD that happen at the end of the year.

Community Relations- Revenues are from sports program reimbursements, park pavilion rentals and donations. A lot of the Revenue growth you see this month is from Donations for Music in the Park.

Expenses
All departments expenses are within the normal range or better right now.

ALTERNATIVES:

Pull the item for further discussion.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

None.
5/18/2022 8:56:23 AM Page 1 of 3
Budget Report
Chowchilla, CA Group Summary
For Fiscal: 2021-2022 Period Ending: 04/30/2022
Fiscal
Activity
Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Period
Account Typ… Activity
Current
Total Budget
Original
Total Budget
Percent
Remaining
Dept: 1600 - General Administration
Revenue 7,438,460.00 8,372,430.00 524,345.27 5,502,285.79 -2,870,144.21 34.28% Expense 27,654.00 289,182.00 28,594.96 185,316.90 103,865.10 35.92% Dept: 1600 - General Administration Surplus (Deficit): 7,410,806.00 8,083,248.00 495,750.31 5,316,968.89 -2,766,279.11 34.22% Dept: 1605 - City Council
Revenue 0.00 50.00 0.00 48.83 -1.17 2.34%
Expense 91,815.00 81,551.00 2,768.62 47,817.37 33,733.63 41.37% Dept: 1605 - City Council Surplus (Deficit): -91,815.00 -81,501.00 -2,768.62 -47,768.54 33,732.46 41.39% Dept: 1610 - City Clerk
Revenue 0.00 0.00 0.00 181.23 181.23 0.00%
Expense 301,002.00 279,908.00 18,012.25 224,073.51 55,834.49 19.95% Dept: 1610 - City Clerk Surplus (Deficit): -301,002.00 -279,908.00 -18,012.25 -223,892.28 56,015.72 20.01% Dept: 1615 - City Attorney
Revenue 0.00 400,000.00 0.00 400,000.00 0.00 0.00%
Expense 210,000.00 190,000.00 16,682.82 133,070.74 56,929.26 29.96% Dept: 1615 - City Attorney Surplus (Deficit): -210,000.00 210,000.00 -16,682.82 266,929.26 56,929.26 -27.11% Dept: 1705 - General Services
Revenue 409,052.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00%
Expense 1,523,530.00 1,131,990.00 8,131.62 718,954.47 413,035.53 36.49% Dept: 1705 - General Services Surplus (Deficit): -1,114,478.00 -1,131,990.00 -8,131.62 -718,954.47 413,035.53 36.49% Dept: 1710 - City Administration
Revenue 0.00 0.00 0.00 181.23 181.23 0.00%
Expense 391,980.00 393,200.00 20,208.91 293,412.85 99,787.15 25.38% Dept: 1710 - City Administration Surplus (Deficit): -391,980.00 -393,200.00 -20,208.91 -293,231.62 99,968.38 25.42% Dept: 1712 - City Property - Rents
Revenue 113,086.00 113,086.00 7,842.70 97,571.56 -15,514.44 13.72% Expense 31,385.00 36,235.00 234.26 22,205.00 14,030.00 38.72% Dept: 1712 - City Property - Rents Surplus (Deficit): 81,701.00 76,851.00 7,608.44 75,366.56 -1,484.44 1.93% Dept: 1720 - Finance Department
Revenue 3,000.00 3,250.00 3.64 5,832.47 2,582.47 79.46% Expense 801,847.00 732,279.00 46,119.39 544,623.94 187,655.06 25.63% Dept: 1720 - Finance Department Surplus (Deficit): -798,847.00 -729,029.00 -46,115.75 -538,791.47 190,237.53 26.09% Dept: 2610 - Police Department
Revenue 1,141,305.00 1,404,455.00 473,204.19 693,570.75 -710,884.25 50.62% Expense 5,255,255.00 5,834,748.00 221,543.20 4,212,945.19 1,621,802.81 27.80% Dept: 2610 - Police Department Surplus (Deficit): -4,113,950.00 -4,430,293.00 251,660.99 -3,519,374.44 910,918.56 20.56% Dept: 2615 - Police - Mad Net
Revenue 192,000.00 192,000.00 6,032.15 21,656.04 -170,343.96 88.72% Expense 275,915.00 155,424.00 0.00 43,297.06 112,126.94 72.14% Dept: 2615 - Police - Mad Net Surplus (Deficit): -83,915.00 36,576.00 6,032.15 -21,641.02 -58,217.02 159.17% Dept: 2705 - Fire Department
Revenue 1,042,500.00 1,171,234.00 0.70 2,628.08 -1,168,605.92 99.78% Expense 1,412,445.00 1,558,644.00 113,215.90 359,971.17 1,198,672.83 76.90% Dept: 2705 - Fire Department Surplus (Deficit): -369,945.00 -387,410.00 -113,215.20 -357,343.09 30,066.91 7.76% Dept: 4705 - Community & Economic Development
Revenue 800,550.00 1,035,150.00 93,902.28 669,401.99 -365,748.01 35.33% Expense 846,381.00 970,647.00 41,629.82 540,916.20 429,730.80 44.27% Dept: 4705 - Community & Economic Development Surplus (Deficit): -45,831.00 64,503.00 52,272.46 128,485.79 63,982.79 -99.19% Budget Report For Fiscal: 2021-2022 Period Ending: 04/30/2022 5/18/2022 8:56:23 AM Page 2 of 3
Fiscal
Activity
Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Period
Account Typ… Activity
Current
Total Budget
Original
Total Budget
Percent
Remaining
Dept: 6615 - Senior Services
Expense 38,500.00 36,100.00 768.97 19,579.97 16,520.03 45.76% Dept: 6615 - Senior Services Total: 38,500.00 36,100.00 768.97 19,579.97 16,520.03 45.76% Dept: 6620 - Parks & Facilities
Revenue 256,597.00 259,097.00 500.00 45,848.29 -213,248.71 82.30% Expense 823,604.00 814,856.00 34,217.65 408,650.41 406,205.59 49.85% Dept: 6620 - Parks & Facilities Surplus (Deficit): -567,007.00 -555,759.00 -33,717.65 -362,802.12 192,956.88 34.72% Dept: 6625 - Community Relations
Revenue 19,850.00 25,550.00 932.00 21,630.96 -3,919.04 15.34% Expense 167,342.00 174,548.00 20,654.77 130,775.32 43,772.68 25.08% Dept: 6625 - Community Relations Surplus (Deficit): -147,492.00 -148,998.00 -19,722.77 -109,144.36 39,853.64 26.75% Report Surplus (Deficit): -782,255.00 296,990.00 533,979.79 -424,772.88 -721,762.88 243.03% Budget Report For Fiscal: 2021-2022 Period Ending: 04/30/2022 5/18/2022 8:56:23 AM Page 3 of 3
Fund Summary
Fiscal
Activity
Variance
Favorable
Fund (Unfavorable)
Period
Activity
Current
Total Budget
Original
Total Budget
100 - General Fund -782,255.00 296,990.00 533,979.79 -424,772.88 -721,762.88 Report Surplus (Deficit): -782,255.00 296,990.00 533,979.79 -424,772.88 -721,762.88 5/18/2022 8:57:10 AM Page 1 of 1
Balance Sheet
Chowchilla, CA Account Summary
As Of 04/30/2022
Account Name Balance
Fund: 100 - General Fund
Assets
100-0100-0201 Petty Cash 500.00
100-0100-0202 Pre-Paid Postage Account 38.58
100-0100-0206 Cash Drawer 1,500.00
100-0100-0220 Accounts Receivable-Clients 33,865.16
100-0100-0221 A/R - Non Governmental 20.46
100-0100-0222 A/R - Intergovernmental 11,024.52
100-0100-0224 A/R MODULE ONLY RECEIVALBLES 220,351.02
100-0100-0226 Advance to Other Funds 524,551.86
100-0100-0227 Liens Receivables General Fund 162,990.13 100-0100-0228 Pending Charges or Refunds 55.17
100-0100-0229 A/R Business License 94,581.50
100-0100-0230 Accounts Receivable-Utilities -30.00
100-0100-0231 Allowance for Doubtful A/C 67,200.00
100-0100-0291 Prepaid Expenses 3,037.50
100-0100-1900 Claim On Cash 6,016,773.40
Total Assets: 7,136,459.30 7,136,459.30
Liability
100-0200-0420 Trade Payables 6,591.40
100-0200-0422 Bonds for Work-Refundable 18,500.00
100-0200-0428 Prepaid Deposits 138,000.00
100-0200-0480 Deferred Revenue 162,766.23
100-0200-2901 Accounts Payable Pending 106,216.22
Total Liability: 432,073.85
Equity
100-0300-0601 Fund Balance 5,679,446.39
100-0300-0602 Designated Restricted Donation 5,934.55
100-0300-0604 Reserve for Contingencies 910,223.00
100-0300-0605 Designated for Prepaid Items 239.50
100-0300-0611 Reserve for L/T A/R 533,314.89
Total Beginning Equity: 7,129,158.33
Total Revenue 7,460,837.22
Total Expense 7,885,610.10
Revenues Over/Under Expenses -424,772.88
Total Liabilities, Equity and Current Surplus (Deficit): 7,136,459.30 Total Equity and Current Surplus (Deficit): 6,704,385.45

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Item 3.6

CLICK HERE

TO RETURN TO

THE AGENDA
Meeting of: May 24, 2022
AGENDA SECTION: Consent
SUBJECT: Consideration and Adoption of a Resolution Adding Admission Fees to Master Fee Schedule for the Recreational Swim Program
PREPARED BY: Stacy Wisener, Deputy Director of Recreation & Community Engagement ATTACHMENTS: Resolution, Recommended Admission Fees, Comparable Admission Fees from the City of Madera and City of Merced

REVIEWED BY
ADMINISTRATOR ☒ REVIEWED BYATTORNEY ☒ REVIEWED BY FINANCE ☒ RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council approves the Resolution to add the recommended admission fees on the Master Fee Schedule to allow for the pending community seasonal Recreational Swim Season.

BACKGROUND:

The City Staff is working on hosting a community recreational open swim season, utilizing the pool at the Chowchilla Union High School, for 8 weeks in the summer. The hours of operation are Monday – Thursday from 10:00 am to 2:00 pm, 16 hours a week. The City would charge an entry fee comparable to surrounding cities at a low cost to keep it affordable for community members. A punch card option is also recommended to help the Pool Supervisor with fewer transactions.

Daily Admission Community Swim: Youth (<18 Years) $1.00 (Adults >18 Years) $2.00 Daily Admission 16-day Punch Card: Youth (<18 Years) $15.00, Adults (>18 Years) $30.00 REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

Due to the dissolution of the Summer Aquatics Program, admission fees for the swimmimg pool were removed from the Master Fee Schedul by Council Resolution #92-09.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Adding the entry fees to the Master Fee Schedule will allow us to move forward in obtaining approval for the program and generate income of approximately $800.00 based on previous years when the program was viable.

ALTERNATIVES:

Alternatively, the council could not approve adding the entry fees to the Master Fee Schedule, and the program will not move forward, or they can modify the fees and approve changes as they see fit.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

The fees will be added to the Master Fee Schedule.

COUNCIL RESOLUTION # -22

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHOWCHILLA, CALIFORNIA, ADDING

RECREATIONAL SWIM ADMISSION FEES TO THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE TO OFFER A

COMMUNITY RECREATIONAL SWIM PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the City of Chowchilla is seeking to provide the community a seasonal recreational swim activity; and
WHEREAS, the community has continually requested use of the pool located at the Chowchilla Union High School, which was originally donated for the school and community’s use; and WHEREAS, staff has met with Chowchilla Union High School and has had multiple discussions to come to a preliminary agreement to offer Recreational Swim to the community; and WHEREAS, in order to move forward with Recreational Swim as a City activity, the entry fees must be added to the Master Fee Schedule; and
WHEREAS, staff believes the city will benefit from the recreational activity by providing the community with program services that provide enjoyment and healthy exercise.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chowchilla hereby finds, determines, and declares the following:

1. The above recitals are true and correct.

2. The fees that will be charged are comparable to surrounding cities and affordable to the community.

3. Agrees to add the entry fees staff recommended to the City’s Master Fee Schedule.

4. Authorizes the City Administrator or designee to execute all documents necessary to complete the addition of the fees to the Master Fee Schedule.

5. This resolution is effective immediately upon adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chowchilla this 24th day of May 2022 by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

John Chavez, Mayor
ATTEST:

Joann McClendon, CMC
City Clerk

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Item 3.7

CLICK HERE

TO RETURN TO

THE AGENDA
Meeting of: May 24, 2022
AGENDA SECTION: Consent
SUBJECT: Aerial Fireworks Display at Chowchilla Fairgrounds PREPARED BY: Fred Gaumnitz, Fire Chief
ATTACHMENTS: Application, Certificate of Insurance, Map

REVIEWED BY
ADMINISTRATOR ☒ REVIEWED BYATTORNEY ☒ REVIEWED BY FINANCE ☒ RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council approve an aerial fireworks display for July 9, 2022 at the Chowchilla Fairgrounds and authorize the Fire Chief to approve necessary documents thereto (State and Local Permits).

BACKGROUND:

Historically the Chowchilla Lions Club has provided an annual aerial firework display for the community.

Originally this event was held at the fairgrounds and later at Berenda Reservoir for Independence Day.

Due to dry conditions and lack of water in the reservoir this event was moved back to the fairgrounds and has now been held there for the past several years.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

The Chowchilla Lions Club representatives have met with City Staff and staff from Chowchilla Fair and desire to again conduct this event at the fairgrounds as has been done for the last several years. This event is open to the public at no charge as a community celebration event.

With the fairgrounds, Lions Club, and City working together, the Lions club has been able to bring the annual fireworks display back to the fairgrounds.

Additional items that were discussed in the above-mentioned meeting were A- The need for the City Public Works Department to post a NOTAM with FAA advising of the aerial fireworks display and its proximity to the airport.

B- Lions Club representatives to check and remove any larger debris from the airport that would hinder the normal operation of the airport and/or planes using the airport C- Lions Club to arrange for City application for aerial fireworks display.

D- Lions Club contractor (pyrotechnician) to obtain permit from State Fire Marshal’s Office for aerial fireworks display.

E- Pyrotechnician to provide insurance at required amounts and name City, Chowchilla Fairgrounds, and Chowchilla Fire Department as additional insured’s.

F- Fire department representative to inspect and approve mortars for safety and compliance prior to discharge.

G- Fire department to provide stand-by service aerial fireworks event.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Staff and equipment costs to provide fire inspections and stand-by for event.

ALTERNATIVES:

Deny the permit and do not have aerial fireworks.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

Verify receipt of City application, State application, and insurance certificates.

Public Works (as airport manager) to post NOTAM for airport, notifying of aerial fireworks.

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Item 5.1

CLICK HERE

TO RETURN TO

THE AGENDA
Meeting of: May 24, 2022
AGENDA SECTION: Deferred Business
SUBJECT: Request for Direction of the Former County Library and Future Use of the Facility
APPROVED BY: Jason Rogers, Director of Public Works
ATTACHMENTS: Structural Assessment Report, Construction Cost Estimate

REVIEWED BY
ADMINISTRATOR ☒ REVIEWED BYATTORNEY ☒ REVIEWED BY FINANCE ☒ RECOMMENDATION:

Staff requests City Council provide direction regarding the future use of the City’s former library located at 621 Robertson Blvd.

BACKGROUND:

In 1940, the City of Chowchilla gave three lots (4,5, and 6 of Block 88 and now currently APN 002-041- 007), located at 621 West Robertson Boulevard within the City of Chowchilla, to Madera County for the purpose of building a library. Madera County contributed $5,400 toward a total building cost of $15,800.

The library, built by the Work Progress Administration (WPA), was made of adobe brick, and included a basement. It is reputed to be the last structure built by the agency in Madera County. The library opened to the public on August 1, 1941. It closed on February 1, 2003, and was replaced by a new library on Kings Avenue.

In March, 2009, the City of Chowchilla purchased the old library from the County of Madera for a purchase price of $225,000. The purchase was made through the City’s Redevelopment Agency.

In March, 2012, the City applied for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds in the amount of $635,500 in order to remodel and restore the dilapidated old library building to create public space for social organizations providing services to low- and moderate-income persons so that it can be used again as a meeting room for a disadvantaged segment of the population. Unfortunately, the City was not awarded any CDBG funds for rehabilitation of the facility.

In 2018, the Chowchilla District Historical Society expressed an interest in leasing the Library building from the City. In January 2019, the City of Chowchilla agreed to allow the Historical Society to enter the building and initiate a survey, collecting measurements and taking photographs of the property in order to submit the building for historical preservation to the State of California, in addition to using the information collected to submit the Old Library for possible grant funds. Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic, the Historical Society was only recently able to enter beginning January, 2021.

On April 13, 2021, staff presented an agenda item to City Council to discuss the current status of the facility. City Council provided direction to staff to come back to Council at a later date and conduct a workshop in order to gather additional comment from the public.

On May 11, 2021, the City hosted a workshop as part of the regular City Council meeting to discuss the status of the former library and receive additional comment from the public. Chris Thomas and Dale Thomas of the Chowchilla Historical Society addressed the City Council in support of salvaging the building by using the CA Historical Building Code, which they stated could be used so that a majority of the repairs could be completed for $30,000 to $50,000. Additionally, they requested that the City allow the Historical Society to submit an application to the State, on behalf of the City, to have the facility be considered as a state historical landmark. It was the consensus of the City Council to bring back the item at the June 22, 2021 meeting with additional information.

On June 29, 2021, the City Council reviewed a draft application from the Chowchilla Historical Society for consideration of State historical recognition. Due to concerns regarding the structural safety of the building and potentially significant repairs needed, Council declined to submit the application to the State for review at this time.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

On September 14, 2021, after receiving a quote from the Historical Society that a multitude of repairs could be completed for approximately $30,000 to $50,000. The City was not able to assess the Historical Society’s claims that repairs for the facility could be completed for approximately $50,000 as the City was not provided any detailed quotes. As a result, staff was directed to contract with an outside firm to complete a structural assessment and ascertain potential costs to repair the building. Advanced Structural Design, Inc. (ASDI) completed the structural assessment of the former library for the City.

In regards to the structural assessment of the facility, ASDI noted the following concerns:
• The structure, in its current configuration, does not appear to meet current building standard, and thus should not be considered safe for occupancy by the public. • Adobe walls are prohibited materials for lateral systems by any current building code, however the California Historical Building Code does provide guidance for qualified historic structures. In order to be able to use this guidance, the building would need to qualify as an historical structure. • The exterior plaster finish is exhibiting significant deterioration. Adobe is particularly susceptible to moisture exposure, and tends to soften when wet.
• There is cracking and/or spalling of concrete at the bottom of the basement walls. It does not appear due to a structural overload; however, the concrete was crumbling and did not appear sound.

Further investigation and material testing is recommended but at a minimum, should be chipped back to solid material and patched.
• The anchorage of the exterior adobe walls to the roof framing was determined be inadequate. the roof framing appears to be attached to the nailer with toe nails. • A concrete wall was found to have been altered to accommodate ductwork, which, if used as a shear wall, can reduce its shear transfer capacity dramatically. • Chimney not adequately anchored to the structure and should be braced. • Non-structural concerns related to improperly anchored equipment, improper support for outdoor mechanical units, damaged/missing gutters and downspouts Several options are available which may allow the structure to remain. Below is a discussion of three possible scenarios. It should be noted that all scenarios will require a balance and tradeoffs between available funds, structural risks, and value provided by the building. Minimizing costs may be desirable, but the City must balance the risks associated with a structure which is not considered safe by modern standards against the historical and sentimental value it offers. ASDi emphasizes in the strongest terms that structural safety should not be compromised under any circumstances.

Option 1: In-depth structural study. An in-depth analysis was beyond the scope of our investigation at this time, but may be able to show that the structure can be preserved. Due to the unusual nature of adobe walls, and vast amount of necessary material testing and data collection required, such an analysis could result in tens of thousands of dollars in structural design fees, selective demolition, and material testing fees. It should also be noted that such analysis offers no guarantees that a different conclusion will be reached. The building could still be determined to be inadequate and would require rehabilitation.

Estimated cost: $50,000 - $100,000
Option 2: Historical Building Code. The California Historical Building Code typically allows historic structures to be evaluated for less-stringent structural demands. Frequently, this allows a building which would otherwise be irreparable to be salvaged. The building must be registered as ‘Historic’ to qualify for analysis per the CHBC, and would need to apply to the State in order to determine if the State’s registration requirements are met. The Chowchilla District Historical District has drafted an application for State consideration. Furthermore, the building would have to comply with all applicable requirements of the CHBC, including fire protection, egress, and other non-structural requirements. This option would likely limit the costs of retrofit to a minimum, but ASDi recommends that all critical structural deficiencies should still be addressed and recommends that all work is performed by a licensed contractor experienced with this type of construction and familiar with the CHBC. If the building does not qualify, a full structural evaluation and retrofit of the existing building should be undertaken if the building is to be opened for public use.

Based on initial findings, a construction cost estimate, based upon schematic rehabilitation plans produced by ASDi, was created by a licensed contractor. This is a preliminary estimate based on plans that represent the construction work necessary to address only the most critical structural deficiencies according to the report. The total cost for the recommended structural repairs by a licensed contractor is $494,565.

Staff also used the construction cost estimate to determine a minimum base cost under the CHBC. This would exclude the roof modifications, though this is not recommended by ASDI. Materials and supply costs are estimated at $68,325. However, staff currently does not have the ability to make the recommended repairs and due to this cost estimate, the project would be subject to CA Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) prevailing wage requirements and California Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Commission (CAUCCAC) requirements. The City would need to request bids from licensed contractors familiar with similar work. As a result, the estimated cost increases to $246,602.

Option 3: Full seismic rehabilitation. This option would involve constructing an alternate structural system within the constraints of the original building. These retrofits typically preserve the historic look and feel, of the building, but remove the structural burden from the original materials. The possibilities for such a retrofit are wide-ranging. Examples include shotcrete walls cast against the inside face of the original walls, fiber-reinforced polymer reinforcement, CMU supplemental shear and bearing walls, or structural steel braces. This option would preserve the structure for the longest time period and maximize the safety of the building, but involves the highest cost of construction.

Estimated cost: In excess of $2,000,000
At stated above, the structure, in its current configuration, does not appear to meet a current building standard, and thus should not be considered safe for occupancy by the public. As a result, staff is requesting direction from Council on how to proceed with the former library and has

1. Rehabilitation of the Facility per the Historical Building Code Would allow the Chowchilla Historical Society to apply for historical recognition from the State. If the facility receives historical recognition, the City can move forward with construction of the needed improvements as identified in the ASDi report and construction cost estimate.

2. Sale of the Property
The City could consider sale of the property for commercial development. While currently zoned as a public facility within the City’s General Plan, the location is located close to the City’s downtown commercial core. Changing the zoning designation and selling to commercial development could potentially result in a potential sale of $200,000 to $300,000 based upon current commercial square footage sale costs.

3. Lease/Sale to the Historical Society
The Chowchilla District Historical Society continues to express interest in the Old Library. The City could consider leasing/selling the facility to the Historical Society for a nominal amount. As a result of a potential lease or sale, the Historical Society would be required to bring the Old Library into compliance and maintain the facility in compliance with local, state and federal codes. As part of the agreement, the City could require certain deadlines be met, similar to Conditional Use Permits (CUPs) issued to businesses within the City. Examples of conditions that the City could require are dates for repairs/rehabilitation to completed or a timeframe for getting the facility recognized as an historical landmark, such as three to six months or a year from the lease agreement.

4. Demolition of the Property
Due to the current condition of the facility and the rehabilitation costs associated with it, the City could consider demolition of the facility. Due to the facility’s proximity to Veterans’ Park and the City’s downtown core and limited parking space in the vicinity, the area could be converted to parking in order to encourage downtown interaction and park visitation. Due to the current condition of the facility, mitigation of hazardous materials and parking lot construction, estimated costs for this option are $100,000 - $150,000 and an architectural/structural engineering firm would need to be hired to assist the City.

FISCAL IMPACT:

As this is a request for direction, there is no fiscal impact noted.

ALTERNATIVES:

None identified at this time.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

If direction is provided, staff will implement.

Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com i
March 25, 2022
Mr. Jason Rogers
Director of Public Works
City of Chowchilla
Hello Jason,
Thank you very much for contacting ASDi regarding the investigation of the existing Public Library building. Attached please find our written report showing our findings and recommendations.

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions regarding this report, or if you have any other structural engineering needs.

Sincerely,
Mark T. Bozzo, SE
Principal Structural Engineer
Advanced Structural Design, Inc.
*This report was updated May 6, 2022 to incorporate and provide discussion of the City’s provided construction cost estimate.

Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page No.

1. Introduction............................................................................................1

2. Scope and Limitations...........................................................................1

3. Observations ..........................................................................................2

4. ASCE 41-17 Tier 1 Screening.................................................................3

5. Areas of Concern and Recommendations.........................................14

6. Non-Structural Concerns .....................................................................21

7. Additional Concerns .............................................................................24

8. Conclusions ...........................................................................................25

9. Construction Cost Estimate and Discussion......................................26

10. Appendix A: Structural Calculations ..................................................A-1

11. Appendix B: Construction Cost Estimate ..........................................B-1 Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

1. INTRODUCTION
Advanced Structural Design, Inc. (ASDi) was hired to investigate an existing Public Library facility in Chowchilla, CA. The client informed ASDi that the building has not been in use since approximately 2002, but expressed that the building holds sentimental value to the local community, and requested that its structural safety was evaluated. ASDi visited the site on Tuesday, December 7, 2021. This report is intended to document our observations and opinions regarding the structural the structural safety of the subject building.

2. SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS
Use of the information contained in this report is at the sole discretion of the client. Our observations are limited only to the structural aspects of the building, and do not include any examination or analysis of other code regulations such as fire safety or ADA compliance.

No investigation of the mechanical, electrical, or plumbing systems was performed.

Our review was based on a limited visual examination of the structural elements which were observable from the ground and basement floors. In some cases, isolated ceiling tiles were removed to allow for observation of connections or member conditions. No other destructive investigation or material testing of any kind was performed at this time.

Approximate structural calculations were performed as part of our analysis in order to estimate the material and connection capacities of the structure under consideration.

Because no existing construction documents were available for review, many of these calculations are based upon estimated material capacities and assumptions of commonlyused and available structural materials at the time of original construction. Further guidance on approximate material capacities was obtained from ASCE 41-17 and the 2019 California Historical Building Code. If more in-depth analysis is warranted, material testing would be required to establish appropriate structural design parameters.

State law requires inspectors of wood-destroying organisms such as termites to be licensed by the Structural Pest Control Board. ASDi is not a licensed pest inspector and as such this type of inspection was not performed.

It should be further recognized that inherent material defects, construction quality, workmanship, unusual loading conditions, material quality, and numerous other factors influence the performance of any structure. Many of these conditions may exist but not be visible from the exterior. While we feel our review is complete and thorough, ASDi does not assert that the observations and analysis in this report represent every structural condition which may exist. As such, this report shall not be considered a guarantee of structural safety, structural failure, or compliance with applicable building codes. Such analysis is outside the scope of this report.

Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

3. OBSERVATIONS

3.1. Building Use
The Library Building consists of a single-story first floor over a basement. The first floor contains open areas for library use, with wood shelving around the perimeter walls, and free-standing bookshelves. Also found on the first floor are various storage/office spaces.

In the southwest corner of the building, a restroom addition was built subsequent to completion of the original structure. The basement houses two large open rooms, a small kitchen, and various mechanical equipment rooms, storage rooms and closets.

3.2. Structural Systems
The primary structure above ground consists of what are apparently adobe brick exterior bearing walls with a wood-framed roof. It is unknown whether any reinforcement is present within the structural walls. For the purposes of this evaluation, we will presume the walls are unreinforced. A continuous concrete bond beam appears to be cast over the top of the adobe brick walls. This bond beam provides continuity around the perimeter walls and supports a wood nailer which has been inset into the concrete. Reinforcement of the bond beam and its attachment to the adobe walls below are unknown. The nailer is fastened with anchor bolts to the concrete beam, and the roof framing appears to be attached to the nailer with toe nails. The floor framing consists of cast-in-place concrete beams and slab. The reinforcement of the beams and slab are both unknown. Basement walls are also cast-in-place concrete, with a concrete slab on grade floor. It is presumed that shallow foundations are present below the basement walls and/or floor slab, however no documentation was available and observation of the foundations was not performed at this time.

3.3. Material Conditions
The finishes on the adobe brick show signs of deterioration. Wood roof framing appears to be in generally good shape. No obvious signs of significant mold, dry rot, or other deterioration were observed. Concrete floor framing appeared to be sound. In several places at the basement, concrete walls exhibit spalling and crumbling. ASDi was informed by City personnel that the building flooded in the recent past, which could cause and/or accelerate the concrete wall damage. Flood damage of the basement flooring was widespread.

Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

4. ASCE 41-17 TIER 1 SCREENING

4.1. Introduction and Notes on Tier 1 Screening
The ASCE41 Tier 1 Screening is a series of checklists and “quick check” calculations designed to quickly evaluate existing structures for crucial structural deficiencies. As mentioned previously, our evaluation was not intended to be exhaustive at this time, thus there are several items noted as “Unknown” which would ordinarily be required to be fully investigated prior to completing the screening. In this case, investigation of the remaining unknown items would require selective demolition or material testing which was beyond the scope of this report.

It should be noted that ASCE 41-17 specifically prohibits the use of adobe brick walls as part of the lateral load resisting system. Furthermore, this system is not a defined building type per Table 3-1. Therefore, Tier 1 and Tier 2 for evaluation or for deficiency-based retrofit are also not permitted. However, it is not the intent of this report to perform a complete retrofit or in-depth evaluation. Instead, this report is intended to identify potential structural concerns, so the ASCE 41-17 Tier 1 screening checklist was used as a starting point to assist in identification of the critical structural deficiencies.

ASCE 41-17 commentary refers to other documents for guidance regarding adobe structures, namely Planning and Engineering Guidelines for the Seismic Retrofit of Historic Adobe Structures by The Getty Conservation Institute, and Earthquake-Resistant Construction of Adobe Buildings: A Tutorial (2011) by EERI/WHE, and California Historical Building Code (2019). ASDi has performed a cursory review of these documents, and incorporated pertinent information and recommendations in this report where appropriate.

4.2. On-Site Investigation
ASDi performed an on-site investigation on December 7, 2021. Our observations are summarized in Section 3 of this report. Where deficiencies or other concerns were noted, they are further discussed in Section 5.

Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

4.3. Screening Parameters
Building Type: URM (Assumed)
Performance Objective: Collapse Prevention (S-5, N-C)
Risk Category: II
Location: Chowchilla, CA
Seismic Hazard Values
Hazard Level BSE-2N BSE-1N BSE-2E BSE-1E
SS 0.572 -- 0.415 0.222
Fa 1.342 -- 1.468 1.600
SXS 0.768 0.512 0.610 0.355
S1 0.232 -- 0.175 0.097
FV 2.135 -- 2.249 2.400
SX1 0.496 0.331 0.394 0.233
TL 12s
Level of Seismicity: High
Checklists Required:
 Basic Configuration Checklist (Sec. 17.1.2)
 Collapse Prevention Checklist (Sec. 17.18)
 Life Safety Nonstructural Checklist (Sec. 17.19)
Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

4.4. Basic Configuration Checklist (ASCE 41-17, Section 17.1.2) ASDi COMMENTARY
Load path unclear from
concrete bond beam to adobe
walls.

No adjacent buildings present
No Mezzanines present
N/A for single-story building
N/A for single-story building
All shear walls are continuous
N/A for single-story building
N/A for single-story building
Shear walls located at perimeter
of building
Exact soil conditions are
unknown. Liquefiable soils are
very rare in this region.

No slopes nearby
No active faults nearby
Lw/h = 7/11 = 0.64 > 0.6*Sa =

0.366
Foundation investigation not
performed at this time.

Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

4.5. Collapse Prevention Checklist (ASCE 41-17, Section 17.18) ASDi COMMENTARY
4 shear walls ea. direction
See calculations in Appendix A
See calculations in Appendix A
Ledgers not present
Blocking appears to be nailed to
edge of nailer.

No girder-column connections
H/t = 11ft*12/14” = 9.4 < 13
Not multi-wythe
No significant diaphragm opngs
No significant diaphragm opngs
Cross ties not observed;
assumed to not be present at
roof.

Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

ASDi COMMENTARY
Max Diap. Ratio = 38’/23’ = 1.65
Max Diap. Span = 38’ & consists
of straight shtg.

Diag Shtg not used.

Diaps consist of wood straight
shtg.

Wall anchors act in shear. No
movement needed to engage
anchors.

No beams/girders supported by
URM.

Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

4.6. Nonstructural Checklist (ASCE 41-17, Section 17.18) ASDi COMMENTARY
No Life Safety Systems
No Hazardous Materials
No URM partitions
Not req’d for HR/LS
No structural separations
Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

ASDi COMMENTARY
Not required for HR/LS
Ceilings attached directly to
frmg
No heavy light fixtures
No cladding
Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

ASDi COMMENTARY
No cladding
No masonry veneer
Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

e
ASDi COMMENTARY
No masonry veneer
No parapets
No canopies
No parapets
No appendages
URM chimney extends > 2X least
dimension
Chimney appears to be attached
at roof level
Stairs appear to be surrounded
by concrete walls
Stair details not visible.

Connections unknown.

No industrial storage
Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

ASDi COMMENTARY
Free-standing bookcase
anchorage is unknown
Free-standing bookcase
anchorage is unknown
Not req’d for HR/LS
Not req’d for HR/LS
Not req’d for HR/LS
No fall-prone equipment
observed
No in-line equipment observed
No tall/narrow equipment
observed
Not req’d for HR/LS
Not req’d for HR/LS
Not req’d for HR/LS
Not req’d for HR/LS
Not req’d for HR/LS
Not req’d for HR/LS
Not req’d for HR/LS
Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

ASDi COMMENTARY
Not req’d for HR/LS
Not req’d for HR/LS
No elevator
Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

5. AREAS OF CONCERN AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1. Adobe walls are prohibited materials for lateral systems by any current building code (2019 California Building Code and/or ASCE 41-17) for buildings in Seismic Design Category D. The California Historical Building Code, however, does provide guidance for adobe brick walls for qualified historic structures.

A “Qualified Historical Building Or Property”, as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 18955, is “any building, site, object, place, location, district or collection of structures, and their associated sites, deemed of importance to the history, architecture or culture of an area by an appropriate local, state or federal governmental jurisdiction. This shall include historical buildings or properties on, or determined eligible for, national, state or local historical registers or inventories, such as the National Register of Historic Places, California Register of Historical Resources, State Historical Landmarks, State Points of Historical Interest, and city or county registers, inventories or surveys of historical or architecturally significant sites, places or landmarks.”
It is outside of ASDi’s expertise to speculate as to whether this particular structure qualifies to be designated as historic. If ASDi therefore recommends further evaluation of the building’s eligibility for historical building status. If the building does not qualify, a full structural evaluation and retrofit of the existing building should be undertaken if the building is to be opened for public use.

5.2. The exterior plaster finish is exhibiting significant deterioration, in some areas exposing the underlying adobe bricks. Adobe is particularly susceptible to moisture exposure, and tends to soften when wet. The plaster helps protect the adobe from the environment, and is effective in increasing the wall stiffness and strength. ASDi recommends that the finishes are repaired to provide complete coverage of the adobe.

Figure 1: Exterior photo showing finish deterioration.

Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

5.3. There is cracking and/or spalling of concrete at the bottom of the basement walls in various locations. At some areas, reinforcing has been partially exposed and shows evidence of corrosion. Some of the pockets of concrete damage exceeded 1” in depth from the wall surface. No significant cracking was visible in the concrete walls, so it does not appear that this is due to a structural overload, however the concrete was crumbling and did not appear sound. ASDi recommends further investigation of concrete walls at these locations, including material testing to determine the adequacy of the concrete for gravity, retaining and lateral loads. At a minimum, concrete should be chipped back to solid material and patched.

Figure 2: Concrete wall near stairs is spalling, exposing reinforcement.

Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

Figure 3: Concrete wall damage.

Figure 4: Concrete wall damage.

Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

5.4. The anchorage of the exterior adobe walls to the roof framing was determined by the ASCE 41 quick check to be inadequate. If not anchored properly, heavy walls have been shown to pull away from the supporting structure during seismic events, resulting in total collapse of the wall or roof structure. ASDi recommends that adequate positive wall anchorage is installed. Wall anchorage can be accomplished in a multitude of ways. One such solution is sketched below in Figure 5.

Figure 5: Suggested wall anchorage detail

5.5. No uplift ties were observed to be installed. Current code design wind loads exceed the weight of the roof structure, and must be tied down to prevent uplift in an extreme wind event. Similar to wall anchorage, one solution is to add a framing clip to each rafter. This uplift tie was also shown in the sketch in Figure 5.

5.6. A concrete wall was found to have been altered to accommodate ductwork. Two penetrations were made: one perpendicular to the wall, and one parallel to the length of the wall. The floor framing spans parallel to the wall, but it is unknown whether this wall was used as a shear wall. If it was used as a shear wall, its shear transfer capacity has been reduced dramatically. Furthermore, the out-of-plane anchorage capacity of the wall may have been compromised. ASDi recommends further analysis of this wall to determine appropriate remediation steps.

Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

Figure 6: Wall penetration at duct.

Figure 7: Duct penetration parallel to wall.

Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

Figure 8: Duct penetration parallel to wall and through intersecting wall.

Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

5.7. Bookcases appear to have been recessed into the adobe walls. It is unclear whether this was part of the original design or performed subsequent to the original construction. It possible that removal of part of the adobe wall has compromised its strength and/or stability. It is recommended that further investigation of this condition is performed.

Figure 9: Photo showing recessed book case at exterior wall

5.8. Some rafter tails are missing paint at exterior. The paint provides critical protection from the environment, and should be replaced to prevent dry rot.

Figure 10: Rafter tails exposed to weather.

Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

6. NON-STRUCTURAL CONCERNS

6.1. A large piece of mechanical equipment was observed to be situated partially on its support pad. This equipment was also not anchored to the pad where legs did rest on concrete.

ASDi recommends pouring a wider pad to accommodate the equipment, and providing a positive attachment to resist shear and overturning.

Figure 11: Mechanical Unit without proper support or anchorage.

Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

6.2. Also on the west side of the building, a mechanical duct was found not attached to any equipment. Suggest removing the ductwork and patching associated penetrations.

Figure 12: Unattached duct

6.3. At the southeast corner of the building, a mechanical unit sits on sleepers and a frame which is supported by the lightwell guardrail. It is unclear whether this guardrail was intended to support the equipment load. Sleepers appera to be exposed to weather and could be susceptible to rot. Recommend reconfiguring support for this equipment.

Figure 13: Duct with improper support.

Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

6.4. Rain gutters are missing in some locations and not attached to downspouts in others. This can lead to water damage to the structure if water runoff is not properly directed away from the building.

Figure 14: Disconnected rain gutter.

Figure 15: Rain gutter missing at roof line. Downspout not attached.

6.5. Chimneys: Two adobe brick chimneys are present. It is unknown whether these chimneys are reinforced or adequately anchored to the structure. Unreinforced masonry chimneys have been shown to be particularly vulnerable during strong seismic shaking. The ASCE 41 Tier 1 checklist recommends chimneys are limited to no taller than 2x their least dimension in height. ASDi recommends accurate dimensions are ascertained and appropriate analysis of the chimneys is performed to determine appropriate remediation steps.

6.6. Book Stacks: The library floor contained several free-standing book stacks. These book stacks should be anchored to the concrete floor below to prevent overturning. The anchorage of these stack was not visible at the time of our visit, but should be examined.

Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

7. ADDITIONAL CONCERNS:

The following are items which were unobservable at the time of our site visit, but could pose structural concerns depending on the installation and detailing. It is recommended that further investigation of these items is performed and corrective action taken as necessary.

7.1. Foundations: Observation of the foundations was practically impossible due to the presence of the basement. It is therefore unknown whether the building’s foundation system is adequate for the required structural demands.

7.2. Floor slab, and framing: The thickness of the concrete floor could not be measured accurately at the time of our site visit. The reinforcement of the floor slab, beams, and girders are also unknown at this time. Due to the heavy live loads typically experienced by libraries which house heavy book stacks, the floor gravity and lateral systems should be carefully examined. Reinforcement should be located and/or selectively exposed to determine size and spacing.

7.3. Shear wall load path: It is unclear whether a complete load path exists from the roof structure to the foundations. Questionable areas include attachment of blocking to top of wall, attachment of concrete bond beam to adobe brick, and attachment of adobe wall to concrete floor/walls.

7.4. Addition at southwest: There is an addition present in the southwest corner of the building.

The addition appears to be constructed of concrete masonry unit walls and a wood-framed roof. There are several concerns with this structure, many of which are similar in nature to the main building:

7.4.1.It is unknown whether the walls of this structure are grouted and/or reinforced. The reinforcement is critical to the strength of the wall in- and out-of-plane.

7.4.2.No positive wall anchorage could be seen on either the high or low side of the roof.

Similar to the main building, if the walls are inadequately anchored to the roof structure, there exists a potential for collapse in a seismic event.

7.4.3.It is unknown whether the addition is positively attached to the main building. If the walls are not positively anchored to the original structure, there could be some differential movement between the structures. This is more likely a cosmetic concern as it could result in cracking or separation of finishes.

Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

8. CONCLUSIONS
Based on our observations and subsequent review, the structure, in its current configuration, does not appear to meet a current building standard, and thus should not be considered safe for occupancy by the public.

Several options are available which may allow the structure to remain. Below is a discussion of three possible scenarios. It should be noted that all scenarios will require a balance and tradeoffs between available funds, structural risks, and value provided by the building. Minimizing costs may be desirable, but the City must balance the risks associated with a structure which is not considered safe by modern standards against the historical and sentimental value it offers.

ASDi emphasizes in the strongest terms that structural safety should not be compromised under any circumstances.

Option 1: In-depth structural study. An in-depth analysis was beyond the scope of our investigation at this time, but may be able to show that the structure can be preserved. Due to the unusual nature of adobe walls, and vast amount of necessary material testing and data collection required, such an analysis could result in tens of thousands of dollars in structural design fees, selective demolition, and material testing fees. It should also be noted that such analysis offers no guarantees that a different conclusion will be reached. The building could still be determined to be inadequate and would require rehabilitation.

Option 2: Historical Building Code. The California Historical Building Code typically allows historic structures to be evaluated for less-stringent structural demands. Frequently, this allows a building which would otherwise be irreparable to be salvaged. As discussed previously, it is our understanding that the building must be registered as ‘Historic’ to qualify for analysis per the CHBC, and it is beyond our expertise to speculate on what those registration requirements are.

Furthermore, the building would have to comply with all applicable requirements of the CHBC, including fire protection, egress, and other non-structural requirements which ASDi is not familiar with. This option would likely limit the costs of retrofit to a minimum, but ASDi recommends that all critical structural deficiencies should still be addressed.

Option 3: Full seismic rehabilitation. This option would involve constructing an alternate structural system within the constraints of the original building. These retrofits typically preserve the historic look and feel, of the building, but remove the structural burden from the original materials. The possibilities for such a retrofit are wide-ranging. Examples include shotcrete walls cast against the inside face of the original walls, fiber-reinforced polymer reinforcement, CMU supplemental shear and bearing walls, or structural steel braces. This option would preserve the structure for the longest time period and maximize the safety of the building, but involves the highest cost of construction.

Finally, we recommend strongly that all critical structural deficiencies are addressed. The specific repair details necessary to address these concerns are outside the scope of this report, and should be developed by a licensed professional engineer. We also recommend that all work is performed by a licensed contractor experienced with this type of construction.

Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com

9. CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
Based on our initial findings, the City of Chowchilla has obtained a construction cost estimate, dated 4-22-22, by Diede Construction, Inc. This estimate was based upon schematic rehabilitation plans produced by ASDi, and dated 4-15-2022. These plans represent the construction work necessary to address only the most critical structural deficiencies. A copy of the estimate is attached to this report in Appendix B.

It should be noted that these schematic drawings do not include any work related to the “Additional Concerns” from Section 7 of this report. These are items which are unknown or not observable during our investigation. It is strongly recommended that the additional necessary investigation, analysis, and construction work is accounted for when budgeting for any potential rehabilitation work.

The work shown on these plans also presume that the existing adobe walls can be salvaged and used for both gravity and lateral loads. As discussed in Section 5.1, adobe walls are not permitted by current code standards. Therefore, for the existing construction to remain in service, the building would most likely be required to be registered as ‘Historic’. While other options may be available, such options may be prohibitively expensive relative to the value of the existing building.

Other potential items which are not reflected in this estimate, but which may be necessary to reopening the building to the public include but are not limited to the following. These items do not affect the structural performance of the structure, but we have listed them for informational purposes.
 HVAC equipment repair or replacement
 Electrical and/or Data repairs or upgrades
 Windows and Doors
 Furniture and Cabinetry
 Kitchen equipment
 Computers, TVs, etc.

Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com APPENDIX A:

STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS
BY:

SHT:

PROJ #:

DATE:

PROJECT:

SUBJECT:

ADVANCED STRUCTURAL DESIGN, INC ADVANCED STRUCTURAL DESIGN, INC CHOWCHILLA LIBRARY 1412104
MTB
TIER 1 SCREENING
SEISMIC PARAMETERS :
• PER ASCE 41-17 , § 4.1.1 : PERF. LEVEL = COLLAPSE PREV . (5-5 ; Nc)
0 PER TBL 2- 1 Bpoe = BSE -

IE BSE -
ZE
STRUCT . LIFE SAFETY COLLAPSE PREV .

NONSTRUCT LIFE SAFETY HAZARDS RED.
o PER TBL 2-2 ,
STRUCT .

PERFORMANCE EVALUATED AT BSE -

ZE ONLY
FOR TIER 1 SCREENING .
o PER HTC HAZARD Tool :

BSE -
ZE :

Ss -0.415 51=0.175
Fa = 1.468 Fu =

2.249
5×5=0.610 5×1=0.394
0 LEVEL OF SEISMICITY :
5ps =
Esta Ss =
2-3 (1,342×0.572)--0.511 70,5 㱺 HIGH
Sp,
=
ZZFVS, =
2=(2.135×0.232)--0.330 > 0.2 㱺 HIGH
FEE
A-1


 








!"
#
$%&!'()*+!
"', * +$'*-.$
/!01
2
!!1
)* 134



56789:;<=>?8@7AB?= CDD86EEF *-.$
/!0
2
!!
)* 34
G??8DB=7A6EF ()*, *  HI6J7AB?=F *K LB@6EA7@MF  , ,  (*NO P7Q78D;LRM6F 4$% S6>686=96;T?9U@6=AF
4V,( 5BA6;GI7EEF W,$K ! GUEA?@;X8?Y7YBIBARF P?8BQ?=A7I;S6EM?=E6;5M69A8U@;Z;P7Q78D;[6J6I;\5HZ]^ P7Q78D;[6J6I;\5HZ]^ ^7@6 _7IU6 T6E98BMAB?= 43 *  `$ K%,

$!$!$
a1
!K $b$$
$
N $c .4 ) $KK$
Kda c 4.

N(
!d,"$$"
%
a c 4W N `$$$%
$!$
0! $a c 44 N(
V."
%
a
$' c `  4$%
!K
K  4e4 (* 4$%K$
$!$

$a c 43 N `$
K%,

$!$!$
a1
!K $b$$
$
N $c . )N $KK$
Kda c 4.

!d,"$$"
%
a c 4W * `$$$%
$!$
0! $a c 4 
V."
%
a
$' c `0 N 4$%
!K
K  4e )* 4$%K$
$!$

$a c P7Q78D;[6J6I;\5HZf^ ^7@6 _7IU6 T6E98BMAB?= 4e4 N 4$%K$ $!$

$a c 4e  4$%K$
$!$

$a c P7Q78D;[6J6I;\5HZ]H
ghijkl
vtoswtrtsxyzyys{pp|}n~s€{ mnopqrstsutosnqqpq
  *    X68B?D;‚Eƒ    * 57‚„ƒ
A-2


 








!"
#
$%&!'()*+!
"', * +$'*-.$
/!01
2
!!1
)* 134


5678 96:;8 <8=>?@AB@CD 44 E
F."
%
G
$' H I * 4$%
!J
J  4K4 * 4$%J$
$!$

$G H 4 (E
F."
%
G
$' H I0 ) 4$%
!J
J  4K ) 4$%J$
$!$

$G H L6M6?NOP8Q8:ORSTUVT 5678 96:;8 <8=>?@AB@CD 44  F."
%
G
$' H I * 4$%
!J
J  4K4 EE 4$%J$
$!$

$G H 4  )(
F."
%
G
$' H I0  4$%
!J
J  4K  4$%J$
$!$

$G H WPO<6B6 5678 96:;8 <8=>?@AB@CD
  
",
$


$GH XYZ[\Z]^_`][abcade`Zc[YZ\Z[fg[hgX[\Zi_Zd`[ebj[]`e`Z[k\[_kde_[elZbclZb`][`k[`YZ[me_^Z][k\[ebj[cZ_abZe`akb[_abZ][lecZ[c^\abn[`YZ[o^a_cabn[dkcZ[eckp`akb[p\kdZ]]q[r]Z\][]Yk^_c[dkbia\l[ebj k^`p^`[ko`eabZc[i\kl[`Ya][`kk_[sa`Y[`YZ[_kde_[t^`Yk\a`j[uemabn[v^\a]cad`akb[oZik\Z[p\kdZZcabn[sa`Y[cZ]anbq <@=>:6@78? !$ 0$
$34w$!"!4 0$4$%x$"
-$4$0$ -
!$
$
J%

$$
$

2$$$!$0$$$






  %$
$

!!!J 

$%$!
$$
$

$$

 !
$ $$!$

J

$J

!
2
 %
$$
$y%


0$J
J  !


!! $
"
$$
$!$
$
J$
!

$

$


$ $J

J%
$
!$
$
z "%$
J 
%
$$

J$
!
0
"$y
$$
$
 {
2!$"$

$J$!J
$
  $J
$
J$$| $J 

J$
!

$
$
"


!
"
$$ !J
$$

0$
2$$ 3$J
$
J%
J%
2$$ %$!!!!
"J% 
 $3$J
$ 
J
2$$$
%
!

0!
$"0$

" !
"$$ $

!$J !
"$

0!

$
$
J
$ !
"$$$! $
!
" $!


$$

A-3
BY:

SHT:

PROJ #:

DATE:

PROJECT:

SUBJECT:

ADVANCED STRUCTURAL DESIGN, INC ADVANCED STRUCTURAL DESIGN, INC CHOWCHILLA LIBRARY 1412104
MTB
SEISMIC FORCES :

PER § 4.4.2.1 :

V - C -
sa -
W
C = to for URM
⇐
BSE -
ze
=
¥-1 Sxs [BSE -
ZE ]
5×1--0.394
1- =

0.0244'
)
" "
= 0,145
Sxg = 0.610
Sa _-°j?¥- =

2.72¥ 0.610 㱺 Sa -_ 0.610
11=0.61 -W
A-4
BY:

SHT:

PROJ #:

DATE:

PROJECT:

SUBJECT:

ADVANCED STRUCTURAL DESIGN, INC ADVANCED STRUCTURAL DESIGN, INC CHOWCHILLA LIBRARY 1412104
MTB
LATERALANALYsis-a-i.lk
13 '
WA ↳8
"
CMO
② 14.1k
>
¥6.5"
£-06.5k
43 14.8k -
y
16 "

ADOBE TYP
16 '
vow
→
¢;
f- →
㱺
④

12.0k

16.5 '
Wc Wc
¥"
→ →
"
⑥
⑧ ④ ⑦
④18.4k 18¥ 19.61-

18.6k /
30-0 "

30.0 "
23 '
17 ' 23
'
l l t
i
÷ u
,
^
W ,
W,
=

0.61/15.5 psf (40'
) t
182pct (11/2) [ 2 walls]) =
1599pA
wz =

0.61 { 15,5pA (38
'
) t
182psf- ( 11
'
/2)[3 walls]] =
2192pA
W ,
= 0.61 [ 15,5 psf ( 53
'
) t 182 psf (H2)(3) + Gop,f(%)] =
2601pA
We = 0.61 I 15 psf (44'
) t 182 psf (11/2) (2) t 8o( "
(2)(2)] =
2174µF
Wp>
= 0.61 [ 15.5 psf (66'
) t 182 psf (142×2) ) . = 1845pA
We .
o.si [ 15.5 psf (25'
) t 1821142)(2) ] =
ktboplf
A-5
BY:

SHT:

PROJ #:

DATE:

PROJECT:

SUBJECT:

ADVANCED STRUCTURAL DESIGN, INC ADVANCED STRUCTURAL DESIGN, INC CHOWCHILLA LIBRARY 1412104
MTB
SHEAR STRESS CHECK :

LINE ④
Fsw =

0.61482psf)( 11
'
)(38'
) = ¢6.4k

18.1¥
① ①

46.4£ →
② ②
Varg ¥ -
¥
✓ = 18.4k
A,. ,
= [6)[16
"
✗ 16"
] = 1536in'
Ms = 1.75 for 012M ecp
Vary 6.8ps: < 12 psi ← CHBC guidance ✓o±
¥y② =

18.4k + ¢6,4k
( 16%(38×12) ( 1.75) =
It psi <
12ps; ✓±
A-6
BY:

SHT:

PROJ #:

DATE:

PROJECT:

SUBJECT:

ADVANCED STRUCTURAL DESIGN, INC ADVANCED STRUCTURAL DESIGN, INC Chowchilla Library MINDY
BDW Shear Wall Stress Check 312212022
Line B
37k S
'
-11 " y:S"

44.5K
11 :O"
1 1
16'
-6"
19 '
-11 "
Esw = . 61×182 psf ✗ 11 '
✗ ( 16'
-6"
-119 '
-11 "
) =

44.5k
Varg , = V I Ms = 1.75 for URM
A
"
Ms
Varg , = (37K -144.5k ) ✗ I = 6.66 psi < 12 psi ( CHBC Guidance ) ✓ (36.421×12"
/ft) ✗ 16"

1.75 Line C

48.6 H 2
'
-9 '
5'
-11 "

44.5K
11'
-0" 1 1
19 '
-11 "
16'
-6"
Esw = .61×182 psf ✗ 11 '
✗ ( 19 '
-11 "
-116 '
-6 " ) 44.5K
Varg , = V × I Ms = 1.75 for URM
A Ms
Varg , = ( 48.6K -144.5K ) ✗ 1
(36.41×1241-+1×1611 1.gg
= % " Psi < 12 Psi ( CHBC Guidance ) ✓
A-7
BY:

SHT:

PROJ #:

DATE:

PROJECT:

SUBJECT:

ADVANCED STRUCTURAL DESIGN, INC ADVANCED STRUCTURAL DESIGN, INC Chowchilla Library M 12104
BDW Shear Wall Stress Check 312212022
Line D
3pm 5
'
-11"
5 '
-11"
5 '
-11 "
3 '
-
y
"
3 '
-
y "

62.3K 1 1
11 '
-0
"
51 '
-0 "
Es = .
61×182 psf ✗ 11 '
✗ 51 '
= 62.3k
Varg , = V × I Ms = 1.75 for URM
A Ms
Varg , = ( 30kt 62.3k) ✗ I = 5.39 psi < 12 psi ( CHBC Guidance) ✓ (511×12"
/
ft) 16 " 1.75
Line 1
3 '
-9 "
4 '
-3"
3 '
-0"

14.1k

51.3k
11:O"
1-1
421-0 "
Fsu = .61×182 psf ✗ 111×42' = 51.3k
Varg , = V × I Ms = 1.75 for URM
A Ms
Varg , = (14.1kt 51.3k) ✗ I = 4.63 psi < 12 psi ( CHBC Guidance ) ✓ 142×12" /
ft) ✗ 16 " 1.75
A-8
BY:

SHT:

PROJ #:

DATE:

PROJECT:

SUBJECT:

ADVANCED STRUCTURAL DESIGN, INC ADVANCED STRUCTURAL DESIGN, INC Chowchilla Library M 12104
BDW Shear Wall Stress Check 312312022
Line 2

20.6K 5
'
-11 "
3 '
-0"

51.9K
11 :O" 1 1

21.5 ' 21 '
Esw= .61×182 psf 11 " ✗ (21.51-1211) =

51.9 K
Varg , = V × I Ms = 1.75 for URM
A Ms
Varg , = ( 20.6k -151.9k) × I = 5.08 psi < 12 psi ((HBC Guidance ) ✓ (42.51×12" /ft) ✗ 16 " 1.75
Line 3

21.3M 2
'
-6" 2
'
-9"

51.3K
11'
-0"
1 1
42'
-0 "
Esw = -61×182 psf ✗ 111×42'
= 51.3K
Varg , = V × I Ms = 1.75 for URM
A Ms
Varg , = ( 21.3kt 51.3k) ✗ I = 5.14 psi < 12 psi ( CHBC Guidance ) ✓ (421×12"
/ft) ✗ 16 " 1.75
A-9
BY:

SHT:

PROJ #:

DATE:

PROJECT:

SUBJECT:

ADVANCED STRUCTURAL DESIGN, INC ADVANCED STRUCTURAL DESIGN, INC Chowchilla Library M 12104
BDW Shear Wall Stress Check 312312022
Line 4
s
'
-2"

26.8K

20.8 K
pi -
o
"
1 1
17'
-0 "
Esw =
, 61 ✗ 182 psf × 11 '
✗ 17 ' = 20.8K
Varg , = V × I Ms = 1.75 for URM
A Ms
Varg , = ( 26.8k -120.8K) ✗ I = 8.33 psi < 12 psi ( (HB Guidance ) ✓ ( 17×12"
/
ft) ✗ 16 " 1,75
Line 5
12K 519 " 5
'
-9 "

56.2K 11 :O'
1 1
23'
-0 23'
-0 "
Esu = . 61×182 psf ✗ 11 '
✗ 46' = 56.2k
Varg , = V × I Ms = 1.75 for URM
A Ms
Varg , = ( 12kt 56.2k) ✗ I = 4.41 psi < 12 psi ( (HBC Guidance) ✓ (461×12"
/ft) ✗ 16 " 1.75
A-10
BY:

SHT:

PROJ #:

DATE:

PROJECT:

SUBJECT:

ADVANCED STRUCTURAL DESIGN, INC ADVANCED STRUCTURAL DESIGN, INC CHOWCHILLA LIBRARY 1412104
MTB

WALL ANCHORAGE
(4) tod TOE NAILS
→ -4 ←
To
Ii
÷:÷÷÷: → -4 ←
PER ASCE 41-17 , SEC. 4.4.3.7 :

I. =
µ Sxswp Ap
= to for C.P.

Sxs = 0.61
Wp -
-
182psf
Ap = "
Yz
To =
611 plf
FOR RAFTERS e 32"
Oc :

Ru = 611 (32/12) = 1630*4after
Qcf = (4)(11811%+1×0.83×3.32) = 1301
# < 1630¥ ④
Ctn Kof
i. (E) WALL ANCHORAGE IS INADEQUATE
A-11
Craig A. Hiett, SE Jack D. Brewer, SE Mark T. Bozzo, SE 2490 W. Shaw, Suite 210 · Fresno, CA 93711 · Phone: 559.432.4151 · Fax: 559.432.9315 · www.asdiengr.com APPENDIX B:

CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
B-1
B-2
Qty Qty Description Total Hours
Materials
Cost Sub Contr
Equip &
Rental Other Cost labor
1 152 Prep Rafter Tails 120 1,520 1,000 500 3,020 15,000 1 152 Repair Rafter Tails 216 15,200 1,800 900 17,900 27,000 2 228x10 2280 sq ft Prep Plaster 120 2,280 600 300 3,180 15,000 2 253 sy 2280 sq ft New Plaster 120 12,650 600 300 13,550 15,000 3 4 areas Chip & Prep for Repo 24 500 100 50 650 3,000
3 4 areas Repair Areas 24 2,000 100 50 2,150 3,000
4 1 area Prep 24 250 100 50 400 3,000
4 1 area Repair 24 500 100 50 650 3,000
4 1 area Move Duct 24 2,500 100 50 2,650 3,000
5 228 lf Remove gutters & DS 48 - 500 400 200 1,100 6,000 5 12 228 lf New Gutters & DS 96 17,700 800 400 18,900 12,000 6 1 Brace Chimney 48 2,500 500 400 200 3,600 6,000
Layout/Mob/Demob 16 25 400 100 50 575 2,000
228x12 2,736 7056 sf Prep for Paint 80 500 400 200 1,100 10,000 70 gal 4320 7056 sf New Paint Int & Ext 200 7,056 1,000 500 8,556 25,000 s2-1 228x4 912 sf Demo Roofing and PW 80 - 500 250 750 10,000 s2-1 304 ea Install Fastener 216 3,040 2,250 1,250 6,540 27,000 s2-1 34 ea 912 sq ft New PW 64 3,400 500 250 4,150 8,000 s2-1 912 sq ft New Roofing 48 9,120 500 250 9,870 6,000 s2-2 50 l 400 sq ft Demo Roofing and PW 48 - 500 500 250 1,250 6,000 s2-2 99 ea Install Fastener 96 9,900 800 400 11,100 12,000 s2-2 14 400 sq ft New PW 24 1,400 200 100 1,700 3,000
s2-2 400 sq ft New Roofing 24 4,000 200 100 4,300 3,000 s2-3 160 sq ft 20' Demo Roof and PW 24 - 250 250 125 625 3,000 s2-3 26 ea Install Fasteners 24 260 250 125 635 3,000
s2-3 6 ea New PW 12 600 200 100 900 1,500
s2-3 160 sq ft New Roofing 12 1,600 200 100 1,900 1,500 s-4 12' Demo 12 - 100 100 50 250 1,500
s-4 24 ea Install Blocking and Fastener 24 240 200 100 540 3,000 s-4 4 ea New PW 12 400 100 50 550 1,500
s-4 96 sq ft New Roofing 12 960 100 50 1,110 1,500
Totals 1,916 $ 100,101 $ 2,250 $ 14,450 $ 7,350 $ 124,151 $ 239,500 Recommended Minimum Repairs following CHBC
Materials/Supplies 124,151
Labor 239,500
Sub Total 363,651
Misc Costs
Insurance 0.015 $ 5,455
Bond 0.015 $ 5,455
General Conditions 0.12 $ 43,638
OH 0.1 $ 36,365
Contingency 0.05 $ 18,183
Fee 0.06 $ 21,819
Sub Total $ 130,914
TOTAL 494,565
Excluding Roof Work and following CHBC
Materials/Supplies $ 68,325
Labor $ 113,000
Sub Total $ 181,325
Misc Costs
Insurance 0.015 $ 2,720
Bond 0.015 $ 2,720
General Conditions 0.12 $ 21,759
OH 0.1 $ 18,133
Contingency 0.05 $ 9,066
Fee 0.06 $ 10,880
Sub Total $ 65,277
TOTAL $ 246,602

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Item 6.1

CLICK HERE

TO RETURN TO

THE AGENDA
Meeting of: May 24, 2022
AGENDA SECTION: New Business
SUBJECT: Consideration of a Resolution for Declaration of Surplus Property PREPARED BY: Jason Rogers, Director of Public Works
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution

REVIEWED BY
ADMINISTRATOR ☒ REVIEWED BYATTORNEY ☒ REVIEWED BY FINANCE ☒ RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the disposal of, surplus City property in the form of bricks and transferring ownership to the Chowchilla District Historical Society.

BACKGROUND:

Under City of Chowchilla Municipal Code Section 4.04.050, the City has the authority to sell or otherwise dispose of all commodities and equipment which cannot be used by any department or which have become unsuitable for City use. Disposition may include abandonment, destruction or donation to public bodies, charitable, civic or nonprofit organizations and may include City property which has no commercial value or for which the estimated cost of continued care, handling, maintenance, or storage would exceed the estimated proceeds of sale. Further, these assets have fully depreciated and have no residual value. Sales procedures may include negotiated sales, acceptance of sealed bids, or public auction.

The Subject City property to be disposed includes:

Dodge Brothers Garage Building Bricks: Twenty (20) pallets of concrete brick from the demolition of the Dodge Brothers Garage previously located in Chowchilla, CA. The concrete brick has been stored in the City’s corporation yard since the demolition of the Dodge Brothers Garage.

The Chowchilla District Historical Society has expressed interest in the brick and will remove it from the City’s corporation yard at no cost to the City.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

Disposal of City surplus property with maximum return on surplus items rather than disposing of items at landfill or recyclers.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no impact to the City’s General Fund with this action.

ALTERNATIVES:

Continue to store items at corporation yard and value of items continues to decrease or dispose of items at landfill or recycler.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

Notify the historical society to begin removal of the Dodge Brothers Garage concrete brick from the corporation yard.

COUNCIL RESOLUTION # - 22

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHOWCHILLA, CALIFORNIA

AUTHORIZING THE DISPOSAL OF SURPLUS CITY PROPERTY IN THE FORM OF CONCRETE

BRICKS TO THE CHOWCHILLA DISTRICT HISTORICAL SOCIETY
WHEREAS, the City of Chowchilla (City) owns and stores concrete bricks from the demolition of the Dodge Brothers Garage; and
WHEREAS, staff has designated the concrete brick as surplus; and WHEREAS, Chowchilla Municipal Code Chapter 4.04.050 specifies the terms and conditions for the disposition of surplus City property; and
WHEREAS, the City of Chowchilla desires to surplus the concrete brick and dispose of the assets by transferring the pipe to the Chowchilla District Historical Society.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chowchilla hereby finds, determines and declares the following:

1. The above recitals are true and correct.

2. Declares the identified concrete brick surplus.

3. The ownership of the surplus material will be transferred over to the Chowchilla District Historical Society.

4. The surplus material is transferred as is.

5. The Chowchilla District Historical Society will, at their sole cost, remove the surplus material from the City’s corporation yard.

6. This resolution is effective immediately upon adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chowchilla this 24th day of May, 2022 by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

Mayor John Chavez
ATTEST:

Joann McClendon, CMC
City Clerk

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Item 6.2

CLICK HERE

TO RETURN TO

THE AGENDA
Meeting of: May 24, 2022
AGENDA SECTION: New Business
SUBJECT: Consideration and Adoption of a Resolution Amending the 2021/2022 Salary Scale to Include the Seasonal Lifeguard I & II and Pool Supervisor Classifications
PREPARED BY: Stacy Weaver, Deputy City Clerk / Secretary II Joann McClendon, City Clerk
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution

REVIEWED BY
ADMINISTRATOR ☒ REVIEWED BYATTORNEY ☒ REVIEWED BY FINANCE ☒ RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopts a resolution amending the 2021/2022 salary scale to include the seasonal Lifeguard I & II and Pool Supervisor Classifications.

BACKGROUND:

The City and the Chowchilla Union High School Districts are currently negotiating to develop and bring to the community an agreement to offer a summer swimming season. Staff is working with its risk management provider to create the needed personnel positions. The City's minimum qualifications to provide adequate coverage based on their recommendations is to have no less than two (2) trained lifeguards. They will monitor swimmers in the water at all times. Those lifeguards have to have an American Red Cross Lifeguard Training certificate and First-Aid and CPR Certification. The City's risk management provider also recommends that if there are less than two lifeguards who are solely dedicated as lifeguards, then the pool should be closed to all swimmers until appropriate staffing becomes available.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

Staff researched Merced and Madera City job descriptions and from cities and organizations from various locations throughout California. Staff also reviewed the requirements needed from the American Red Cross and the American Training Aquatics Safety organization.

To be considered a lifeguard based on the knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSA) that are needed to obtain and have a certification as a lifeguard and a pool Supervisor, the staff recommends that these positions have at least lifeguard training and certification along with first-aid and CPR certifications.

Staff’s recommendation is the following:

Pool Supervisor
Under the general direction of the Deputy Director of Recreation and Community Engagement, the Pool Supervisor oversees the day-to-day operations, maintenance, and administration of the aquatic facility. Responsibilities include but are not limited to enforcing policies and procedures which ensure the efficient and effective operation of pool facilities, including personnel management and training. Duties involve all swimming pool operations, including first aid, rotations, scheduling for Staff, public relations, and light janitorial duties, including verifying daily chemical analysis/testing, pool cleaning, and cleaning bathrooms, following the California Code and Regulations regarding Public Swimming pools [§CCR Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 20. 65500 Series] and paperwork necessary for certification required for operations. Develop and maintain records of operational facility usage; monitor and maintain inventories of pool equipment and supplies. Collect entrance fees, authorization forms, and logs as required. Provide Lifeguard services when needed.

Pre-Requisites (Any combination of training and experience that would likely provide the required knowledge and abilities is qualifying. A typical way to obtain the required knowledge and abilities would be:)

1. Education and Experiences:
a. Graduation from high school and/or GED and a minimum of three (3) years experience in aquatics and (1) year of experience supervising other employees.

Valid Driver's License. American Red Cross Lifeguard Training Certificate.

American Red Cross First Aid (either multi-media, standard, or advanced).

American Red Cross or American Heart of Association Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR/AED) Certificate
b. Pool/Spa Operator Certificate Preferred
c. Water Safety Instructor (WSI) Preferred
Grade A A ½ B B ½ C C ½ D D ½ E E ½ F
30 20.56 21.08 21.61 22.15 22.70 23.27 23.85 24.44 25.06 25.68 26.32 Lifeguard I & II
Under direct supervision of the Pool Supervisor. Lifeguard I & II has the responsibility to enforce the safety standards, rules, and regulations of the City's Pool program; to rescue swimmers in distress and administer First Aid and CPR when it is needed; This position includes ensuring the safety of all pool patrons be alert of all activities in and around the pool while on duty and assisting with general maintenance and cleanup activities and performs related work as required. Work is performed in a swimming facility environment; frequent contact with City staff and the public.

Multiple Lifeguard positions are available.

Pre-Requisites (Any combination of training and experience that would likely provide the required knowledge and abilities is qualifying. A typical way to obtain the required knowledge and abilities would be:)

1. Education and Experiences:

Lifeguard I – Completion of the 10th grade (Must be at least 16 Years Old) and possess advanced lifesaving or water safety Instructor's Certificate. • Valid Driver's License.
• American Red Cross Lifeguard Training Certificate.
• American Red Cross First Aid (either multi-media, standard, or advanced). • American Red Cross or American Heart Association Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) Certificate.

Grade A A ½ B B ½ C C ½ D D ½ E E ½ F
19 15.69 16.08 16.48 16.89 17.31 17.75 18.19 18.65 19.11 19.59 20.08 Lifeguard II – Graduation from high school and/or GED and experience as a lifeguard and possess advanced lifesaving or water safety Instructor's Certificate. • Valid Driver's License.
• American Red Cross Lifeguard Training Certificate.
• American Red Cross First Aid (either multi-media, standard, or advanced). • American Red Cross or American Heart of Association Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) Certificate.

Grade A A ½ B B ½ C C ½ D D ½ E E ½ F
21 16.49 16.90 17.32 17.75 18.20 18.65 19.12 19.60 20.09 20.59 21.10 FISCAL IMPACT:

Finance Department provided a rough estimate depending on COLA (Cost of Living Adjustment) and retirement, which could change the projected cost. Based on hiring one (1) Lifeguard I and two (2) Lifeguard II, and one (1) Pool Supervisor working a total of eight (8) weeks from June to July. The pool will be open from Monday to Thursday from 10:00 am to 2:00 pm, a total of 16 hours per week. Since the pool will be available between two fiscal years, the below chart depicts two columns.

Descriptions Fiscal
YR
21/22
Fiscal
YR
22/23
Total
One: Lifeguard I Grade 19A @ 15.69 1,356 1,391 2,747
Two: Lifeguard II Grade 21A @ 16.49 2,832 2,906 5,738
One: Pool Supervisor Grade 30A @

20.56 1,721 1,767 3,488
TOTALS $5,909 $6,064 $11,973
ALTERNATIVES:

Do not approve the additional classifications.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

Update the salary scale and begin recruitment immediately.

COUNCIL RESOLUTION # -22

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHOWCHILLA, CALIFORNIA AMENDING THE 2021/22 SALARY SCALE TO INCLUDE LIFEGUARD I & II AND POOL

SUPERVISOR CLASSIFICATIONS
WHEREAS, Section 37206 of the Government Code requires City Council to prescribe the time and method of paying salaries and wages of employees of the City; and WHEREAS, The City and the Chowchilla Union High School Districts are currently negotiating to develop and bring to the community an agreement to offer a summer swimming season; and WHEREAS, in order to facilitate this, the City needs to provide staff to operate the community pool season; and,
WHEREAS, the Administrative Services Department has analyzed the needs and requirements needed; and
WHEREAS, the recommended Lifeguard I & II and Pool Supervisor job descriptions best fits the immediate and long-term needs to operate the program.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chowchilla hereby finds, determines and declares the following:

1. The salary scales for the Lifeguard I & II and Pool Supervisor job classifications are attached and marked as Exhibit A are hereby added to the City’s current Salary Scale.

2. This resolution is effective immediately upon adoption. * * * * *
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chowchilla this 24th day of May, 2022 by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

Mayor John Chavez
ATTEST:

Joann McClendon, CMC
City Clerk

EXHIBIT A
Pool Supervisor:

Grade A A ½ B B ½ C C ½ D D ½ E E ½ F
30 20.56 21.08 21.61 22.15 22.70 23.27 23.85 24.44 25.06 25.68 26.32 Lifeguard I:

Grade A A ½ B B ½ C C ½ D D ½ E E ½ F
19 15.69 16.08 16.48 16.89 17.31 17.75 18.19 18.65 19.11 19.59 20.08 Lifeguard II:

Grade A A ½ B B ½ C C ½ D D ½ E E ½ F
21 16.49 16.90 17.32 17.75 18.20 18.65 19.12 19.60 20.09 20.59 21.10