Costa Mesa City Council
June 16, 2026

310

City of Costa Mesa
Agenda Report

77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Item #: 26-295 Meeting Date: 6/16/2026
TITLE: PROPOSED FIRST TIME HOMEBUYER PILOT PROGRAM FUNDED BY MEASURE Q (RETAIL CANNABIS)

DEPARTMENT: ECONOMIC AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT/ADVANCED

PLANNING AND HOUSING DIVISION

PRESENTED BY: NANCY SA, GRANT ADMINISTRATOR AND ANNA MCGILL, PLANNING

MANAGER

CONTACT INFORMATION: NANCY SA, GRANT ADMINISTRATOR, (714) 754-5678

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council provide direction on a pilot First -Time Homebuyer (FTHB) Program utilizing the dedicated Measure Q revenue; provide direction on the core elements of the proposed program; and direct staff to return to the Council with an evaluation of the program following completion of the pilot period.

BACKGROUND:

On November 3, 2020, Costa Mesa voters approved the City of Costa Mesa Retail Cannabis Tax and Regulation Measure (Measure Q), authorizing cannabis retail storefront and delivery uses within the City. Following its passage, on May 4, 2021, the City Council adopted a seven- percent tax on cannabis retail businesses and directed that one- half of one percent of Measure Q revenues be allocated to a First-Time Homebuyer (FTHB) Program for current residents, former residents raised in the City, and graduates of the Newport -Mesa Unified School District. Funding for the program began in Fiscal Year 2022-23.

• May 4, 2021, Agenda Report and Attachments:
https://www.costamesaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/47786/637557361622170000

The FTHB Program funded through Measure Q is not subject to federal or state i ncome-eligibility requirements and may be designed to address local priorities. On June 4, 2024, Council appropriated $2.5 million in American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds to the Housing Trust Fund, which could be used to provide or assure continued provision of affordable housing in the City through activities including development of affordable housing, rental assistance, or a first-time homebuyers program.

These funds have since been committed on March 17, 2026, to Jamboree Housing Corporation for the development of the Costa Mesa Senior affordable housing project and on April 21, 2026, for the rehabilitation of rental units at the James/18
th Street Apartments.

311

Item #: 26-295 Meeting Date: 6/16/2026

• June 4, 2024 Agenda Report and Attachments:
https://costamesa.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=6712591&GUID=E687585E-334A- 47E5-9CA2-847DF5760A3C

• March 17, 2026 Agenda Report and Attachments:
https://costamesa.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=7949570&GUID=65518C76-80C6- 40A3-9903-7FD39E7C3A4B

• April 21, 2026 Agenda Report and Attachments:
https://costamesa.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=7984263&GUID=CB2081E0-60E6- 492D-B6CC-D26E50AC38F2

A preliminary analysis conducted in 2024 found that Measure Q revenues at the time were insufficient to implement the program. The dedicated fund now totals approximately $550,000. The budget for FY 2026-27 is $227,472 and the anticipated revenue is $242,200. Staff is returning to the City Council to seek direction regarding potential implementation of a pilot program.

The current housing market in Costa Mesa remains highly challenging for first‑time homebuyers. The median home purchase price in Costa Mesa is approximately $1.4 million according to industry data.

By way of example, the table below summarizes typical costs associated with purchasing a $1 million home and the minimum annual income to meet this recommendation.* Mortgage professionals recommend that home payments be no more than 30 percent of a household’s gross income. When using this recommendation, Table 1 includes the estimated minimum household income needed to purchase a $1 million home at the low, mid, and high-end estimates.

Table 1: Estimated Costs Associated with Purchase of $1 Million Home in Orange County Cost Category Low-End Estimate Mid Estimate High-End
Estimate
Down Payment 3.5% - $35,000 10% - $100,000 20% - $200,000 Closing Costs $45,072** $28,907 $26,142
Monthly Mortgage (P&I) $5,555 $5,689 $5,057
Additional Monthly Costs (taxes,
insurance, mortgage insurance)
$1,894 $1,534 $1,294
Total Monthly Costs $7,449 $7,223 $6,351
Estimated Minimum Annual
Household Income Needed***
$297,960 $288,930 $254,040
*Data source: Bank of America Closing Costs calculator
**Closing costs associated with a 3.5% down payment are higher due to the upfront mortgage insurance premium required for an FHA loan, compared with a 20% down conventional loan. ***The Median Family Income in Orange County for 2026 is $138,600.

312

Item #: 26-295 Meeting Date: 6/16/2026

ANALYSIS:

City staff developed a high‑level framework for a FTHB Program, identifying key program components for City Council review and direction. In preparing this framework, staff reviewed comparable programs in neighboring jurisdictions, examined current home prices in Costa Mesa, and evaluated strategies to ensure the program aligns with local needs. The proposed program is intended to support and advance the City Council’s strategic goal to “diversify, stabilize, and increase housing to reflect community needs.”

As previously indicated, staff recommends structuring the framework as a pilot program that includes City Council direction on core program elements. It is anticipated that the pilot program would run for 2 years to provide enough time for staff to develop the program, officially launch the pilot and provide suitable time to receive applications, review and assess eligibility and allow home buyers sufficient time to purchase a home (i.e., search for a home, enter into escrow and close on the home). Following the pilot program, staff would return to the City Council to report of the program’s effectiveness and provide any recommendations for restructuring or altering the program moving forward.

Staff is requesting direction from the Council on the following core program elements:

1. Grant Amount

2. Eligible Uses of Grant Funds

3. Household Eligibility

4. Income Limit

5. Cash Assets

6. Eligible Housing Types

7. Residency Requirements

8. Application Review Process

1. Grant Amount
Given the current fund balance and anticipated ongoing revenues, staff recommends structuring assistance as a one-time grant to maximize the number of households served. The following options illustrate potential grant amounts and corresponding households served, based on the total $537,656 dedicated funds available. Note that the number of households may increase based on dedicated funds available if revenues increase between now and the launch of the program.

Table 2: FTHB Program Grant Options
Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
Grant Amount $25,000 $30,000 $35,000
Households Served (Year 1) 22 18 15

City Council Direction Requested: Provide direction on a grant amount.

Potential Alternate Loan Structure
Alternatively, City Council may consider structuring the assistance as a 0% interest loan , repayable at sale/transfer or refinance , with the City subordinating to other loan s. Staff presents the following considerations:
313

Item #: 26-295 Meeting Date: 6/16/2026

• There is a cost to the City of administering loan s. The City currently uses a third -party contractor for loan administration, including loan setup and annual monitoring activities, amounting to approximately $6,000 per loan. Assuming two years of the two- year pilot program, staff estimates a total of 17 anticipated loans equat ing to about $1 02,000 in administrative costs, or about 13 percent of the total Measure Q fund balance for the program.

With a $30,000 assistance amount, staff estimates the ability to award over the course of two years 23 grants, but only 17 loans.
• There is currently no additional staff capacity to administer 20- 30 additional loans. The City currently services about 50 different homeowner loans. If administration is done by staff, an estimated additional 400 hours of staff time would be needed, resulting in the need for a part- time staff member at a minimum. This estimate is in addition to the initial loan set up (performed by the loan contractor) and does not include City legal and finance staff time and resources. • The average tenure of homeownership in southern California is 20 years. With 0% interest, the repaid loan amount would not keep pace with inflation. Over the course of 20 years, t he loan amount would trail current closing costs by about 35%, meaning each repaid loan could only partially subsidize future homebuyers.
• Historically, the City is not below a second mortgagee for homebuyer loans, meaning that there is some guarantee that the City will recapture its loan in the event of a sale or refinance.

However, subordination (refers to a procedure that ensures loan lien priorities) could put the City in a position where recapture of funds may be more challenging (i.e. loan listed as 3 rd of
4th secured against the property).
• For reference, the City’s Single Family Rehabilitation Program issues grants and loans to low- income households. The minimum threshold for a loan is $50,000. This amount was pre- determined by staff based on the administrative burden associated with administering a loan. • The City Council could consider an interes t rate to accommodate the loan, or a higher loan amount (for example, $75,000) to fewer recipients, which would lessen the administrative burden on each loan.

2. Eligible Uses of Grant Funds
Staff recommends that grant funds may be used for home-purchase-related expenses, including but not limited to down payments, closing costs, and interest rate buy-downs. Related expenses must be exhausted at the close of sale. Expenses such as home renovations, improvements and purchase of furniture or other household related items, will not be eligible under this grant. The application process will include a list of eligible home -purchase related expenses. Applicants will be required to identify their intended use of funds and provide documentation prior to fund disbursement.

City Council Direction Requested: Provide directions on the eligible uses of grant funds. • Staff recommendation: Approve the list of eligible expenses as described below. o Eligible expenses: down payment assistance, closing costs, interest rate buy downs and any similar expenses related to the financing aspect of the home purchase, o Ineligible expenses: costs related to home renovations, improvements, and purchase of furniture or other household related items.
314

Item #: 26-295 Meeting Date: 6/16/2026

3. Household Eligibility
Measure Q requires the program participants to be current Costa Mesa residents (for a minimum of one year ), former residents who were raised in the City, and/or graduates of the Newport -Mesa Unified School District. Staff has identified the following additional criteria for Council consideration:

• First-time homebuyer: An applicant is eligible if they meet one of the following criteria:
o Never owned a home in California;
o Has not owned a home in California within the past three years. • Mortgage pre-approval: Applicants must obtain pre- approval for a fixed rate mortgage loan.

Cash purchases are not eligible.

City Council Direction Requested: Eligibility criteria. • Staff rec ommendation: applicants are eligible if they meet Measure Q requirements, the definition of first-time homebuyer and obtain pre-approval for a fixed rate mortgage loan.

4. Income Limit
Although Measure Q does not impose income restrictions, the City Council may wish to adopt optional income limits to target assistance. Staff has provided the following options using 2026 Area Median Income (AMI) information from the California Housing and Community Development (HCD) Department.

Table 3: FTHB Program Income Limit Options
Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
Area Median Income 150% AMI 200% AMI 250% AMI
Annual Income $207,900 $277,200 $346,500

If an income limit is adopted, staff recommends setting a single income threshold regardless of household size. The annual incomes included above are the AMI for a 4- person household. This approach will avoid excluding households preparing for future household needs and will simplify program administration. The income limit will be updated annually to reflect updated AMI information provided by HCD.

City Council Direction Requested: Whether to adopt an income limit, and if so, at what level.

5. Cash Assets
A prior analysis recommended limiting eligibility to households with no more than $100,000 in liquid assets remaining after the close of escrow. Staff have considered this task and observe that there are limited ways to ensure that the City has the complet e inventory of an applicants’ liquid assets, with verification being an administrative challenge.

City Council Direction Requested: Limit on liquid assets. • Staff recommendation: Removing this requirement for administrative simplicity.

315

Item #: 26-295 Meeting Date: 6/16/2026

6. Eligible Housing Types
Homes purchased with the FTHB assistance must be located within the City of Costa Mesa. Staff recommended eligible and non-eligible housing types are as follows:

Table 4: FTHB Program Eligible Housing Types
Eligible Housing Types Non-Eligible Housing Types
• Single-family detached homes
• Townhomes
• Condominiums
• Manufactured homes
• Multi-unit properties (e.g. , duplexes,
triplexes)
• Recreational vehicles (RVs)

City Council Direction Requested: Eligible housing types. • Staff recommendation: Approve the eligible and non-eligible housing types in Table 4.

7. Residency Requirement
Although not required by Measure Q, staff recommends that program participants be required to occupy the home as their primary residence for a minimum of five years. This safeguard helps ensure that program funds support long-term homeownership rather than short-term investments.

City Council Direction Requested: Residency requirements • Staff recommendation: Require a residency requirement for a minimum of five years.

8. Application Process
Applications for the program, once launched, will be open for a 60 -day period . Staff estimates that
there is workload capacity to review up to 60 applications per funding cycle. Staff will conduct robust outreach to maximize public awareness which will include notifying local mortgage lenders, community organizations, and businesses, and using the City’s outreach channels such as social media and email lists. Outreach will also be provided in multiple languages to ensure an inclusive process.

Applications will be accepted during a 60- day period. After the application period closes, all submissions will be entered into a randomized lottery to determine which households move forward for review. Households will be notified whether they were selected to proceed, placed on a waitlist, or not selected.

Once an application is pre- approved, the household will have 12 months to secure and close on a home. Staff will also maintain a waiting list in case pre-approved households are not able to close on a home within the approved time frame.

Staff also evaluated reviewing applications in the order received but do not recommend this approach due to the additional administrative burden it would create. If Council chooses to move forward with a first received , first reviewed process, staff will need additional time to develop procedures for administering the program, including how to verify that applications are complete upon submission.

The randomized lottery ensures that all households who apply within the 6 0-day window have an equal opportunity to advance, regardless of when their application is submitted. 316

Item #: 26-295 Meeting Date: 6/16/2026

City Council Direction Requested: Review of applications using a randomized lottery.

Program Implementation Timeline
Following City Council direction on the program components outlined in this report, staff will finalize program policies and develop application procedures. Staff anticipates opening the application period in Fall 2026.

ALTERNATIVES:

City Council may decide to postpone the FTHB program or change any element(s) of the proposed program including adding additional program requirements.

FISCAL REVIEW:

The FTHB program is funded by Measure Q revenue and will not have an impact on the General Fund.

There is currently a n available fund balance of approximately $550,000 for the program in the First Time Homebuyers’ Fund (Fund 140). The fund receives approximately $242,200 in annual revenue from Measure Q, however, accurate annual projections remain challenging due to fluctuations in revenue collection. The program will be administered in accordance with the availability of funds.

LEGAL REVIEW:

The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed this agenda report as to form.

CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:

This item supports the following City Council Goal:
• Diversify, Stabilize and Increase Housing to Reflect Community Needs

CONCLUSION:

The development of a pilot First‑Time Homebuyer Program presents an opportunity to support the City Council’s strategic goal to diversify, stabilize, and increase housing to reflect community needs. With sufficient dedicated Measure Q funding now available, staff recommends that the City Council provide direction on the proposed core program elements and authorize staff to launch the pilot program. Staff further recommends that, following implementation, a comprehensive evaluation be brought back to a future Council meeting to assess the program’s effectiveness, equity, and long‑term viability.

317

CITY OF COSTA MESA
Agenda Report
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
File #: 26-305 Meeting Date: 6/16/2026
TITLE:

FAIRVIEW ROAD AND BELFAST AVENUE TRAFFIC SIGNAL PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 26- 03 DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT/TRANSPORTATION SERVICES

DIVISION
PRESENTED BY: RAJA SETHURAMAN, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
CONTACT INFORMATION: PAUL MARTIN, TRANSPORTATION SERVICES MANAGER (714) 754-5343
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council:

1. Adopt plans, specifications, and working details for the Fairview Road and Belfast Avenue Traffic Signal Project, City Project No. 26-03, and find the project categorically exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

2. Reject the apparent low bid submitted by Elecnor Belco Electric, Inc., 14320 Albers Way, Chino, CA 91710 as non-responsive.

3. Award a Public Works Agreement (PWA) for construction to the apparent second lowest bidder, Select Electric Inc., 1700 E. Via Burton, Anaheim, CA 92806, in the amount of $683,584, and authorize a ten percent (10%) contingency in the amount of $68,359.

4. Authorize the City Manager and the City Clerk to execute the PWA and any future amendments to the agreements within Council authorized limits.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The proposed project is exempt from CEQA. The project involves an organizational or administrative activity of government that will not result in direct or indirect physical change in the environment. The proposed project is categorically exempt under section 15301 relating to the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, and/or minor alteration of existing public facilities.

BACKGROUND:

The Fairview Road and Belfast Avenue Traffic Signal Project, City Project No. 26-03 (Project), will construct a new traffic signal at the intersection of Fairview Road and Belfast Avenue. The Project includes civil work in addition to the traffic signal including a new raised concrete curb extension (bulb -out) at the southwest corner of the intersection, center median modifications to lengthen the

318
File #: 26-305 Meeting Date: 6/16/2026
-out) at the southwest corner of the intersection, center median modifications to lengthen the northbound left turn lane, signing and striping, and new ADA curb ramps.

The new traffic signal will help to facilitate controlled ingress and egress of Belfast Avenue and will provide a new high-visibility pedestrian crosswalk on the south side of the intersection. Due to its close proximity, the new signal will be synchronized with the adjacent signal at the intersection of Fairview Road and McCormack Lane to minimize disruptions to the traffic flow along Fairview Road.

A community outreach meeting was held in March 2025 as part of the design phase, during which the public provided input on the Project.

ANALYSIS:

Project Construction:

The Engineer’sestimate for the project is $746,503, with $454,784 for the traffic signal and $291,719 for the civil portion of the project.

The City received and opened seven (7) bids for the Project on May 4, 2026. Elecnor Belco Electric, Inc. (Belco) is the apparent lowest bidder with a base bid proposal of $672,046. Select Electric, Inc. (Select Electric) was the apparent second lowest bidder with a base bid proposal of $683,584.

Rejection of the Non-Responsive Bidder
Although Belco was the apparent low bidder for the project, Belco did not submit a physical bid bond to the City Clerk’soffice prior to the bid opening. As a result, its bid was rendered non-responsive.

The bid did not conform to the requirements of the bid package which clearly stated that a physical bid bond must be submitted for the Contractor’sbid to be considered. As a result, staff recommends that the City Council reject Belco’s bid as non-responsive.

Selection of Lowest Responsible Bidder
Select Electric submitted the apparent second lowest bid with a base bid proposal of $683,584. The bid abstract for the Project is included as Attachment 1. The total for the traffic signal portion of the project is $347,529 and the remaining $336,056 is for the civil portion of the project.

Staff analyzed the bid proposal submitted by Select Electric and found that it included all the required documents necessary with the bid package and found no significant errors or irregularities. Staff recommends that the City Council award a construction contract to the apparent second lowest bidder, Select Electric. The license and references of Select Electric have been checked and staff has found them to be in good standing. Select Electric has successfully worked on projects for the City of Santa Ana with good feedback from references.

Upon City Council authorization to execute the Public Works Agreement (PWA), (Attachment 2) Select Electric will furnish the necessary bonds and insurance, which will be approved as to form by Risk Management. After the award and subsequent execution of the agreement, a “Notice to Proceed” will be issued.

The contractor is required to complete all tasks necessary to perform the scope of work as outlined in

319
File #: 26-305 Meeting Date: 6/16/2026
The contractor is required to complete all tasks necessary to perform the scope of work as outlined in the contract documents, plans, and specifications. A copy of the specifications and working details are available for review in the Office of the City Clerk.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council could choose to reject all bids, re-advertise, and re-bid the construction project.

Due to receiving a competitive number of bids, City staff has determined that re-advertising and re- bidding the project will not result in lower bids and will only delay the Project.

FISCAL REVIEW:

The funding for this agreement, inclusive of contingency in an amount of $751,943, is available in the FY2025-26 Capital Improvement Program budget, consisting of Regional Measure M2 Fairshare (Fund 416) with an available budget of approximately $138,000 and in the Gas Tax Fund (Fund 201) with an available budget of $400,000. There are available funds in the City’s Citywide Street Improvements CIP with an available budget of approximately $8 million that can be utilized to fund the work related to the concrete and asphalt work of the project.

LEGAL REVIEW:

The City Attorney’sOffice has reviewed this agenda report, prepared the agreement, and approves them all as to form.

CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:

This project works toward achieving the following City Council goals:
· Strengthen the Public’s Safety and Improve the Quality of Life · Maintain and enhance the City’s facilities, equipment, and technology.

CONCLUSION:

Staff recommends the City Council:

1. Adopt plans, specifications, and working details for the Fairview Road and Belfast Avenue Traffic Signal Project, City Project No. 26-03, and find the project categorically exempt from CEQA.

2. Reject the apparent low bid submitted by Elecnor Belco Electric, Inc., 14320 Albers Way, Chino, CA 91710 as non-responsive.

3. Award a Public Works Agreement (PWA) for construction to the apparent second lowest bidder, Select Electric Inc., 1700 E. Via Burton, Anaheim, CA 92806, in the amount of $683,584, and authorize a ten percent (10%) contingency in the amount of $68,359.

4. Authorize the City Manager and the City Clerk to execute the PWA and any future amendments to the agreements within Council authorized limits.

320
City Total Base Bid
CHINO $672,046.00
ANAHEIM $683,584.00
LA PUENTE $701,694.35
TEMECULA $704,606.00
COMPTON $709,435.60
CORONA $781,184.00
RIVERSIDE $844,637.00
**Contractor bid was non-responsive
$728,169.56

BID RESULTS

3. CALIFORNIA PROFESSIONAL
ENGINEERING, INC.

BID OPENING RESULTS: MAY 4, 2026
ATTACHMENT 1

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

FAIRVIEW ROAD AND BELFAST AVENUE TRAFFIC SIGNAL PROJECT CITY PROJECT NO. 26-03

CITY OF COSTA MESA

AVERAGE

5. ALFARO COMMUNICATIONS
CONSTRUCTION, INC.

Bidder

4. DBX, INC.

1. ELECNOR BELCO ELECTRIC, INC.**

2. SELECT ELECTRIC, INC.

6. INTERNATIONAL LINE BUILDERS, INC.

7. PTM GENERAL ENGINEERING
SERVICES, INC.
321
1 CITY OF COSTA MESA

PUBLIC WORKS A

GREEMENT FOR
CITY PROJECT NO. 26-03

THIS PU
BLIC WORKS AGREEMENT (“Agreement”), dated June 16, 2026 (“Effective Date”), is made by the CITY OF COSTA MESA, a political subdivision of the State of California (“CITY”), and SELECT ELECTRIC, INC. , a California Corporation (“CONTRACTOR”).

WHERE
AS, CITY desires to construct the public improvements described below under Paragraph 1, Scope of Work (the “Project”); and
WHERE
AS, CITY has determined that CONTRACTOR is the lowest responsible bidder; and

WHEREAS, CI
TY now desires to contract with CONTRACTOR to furnish
construction and related services for the Project; and
WHERE
AS, CITY and CONTRACTOR desire to set forth their rights, duties and liabilities in connection with the services to be performed.

NOW, TH
EREFORE, for and in consideration of the covenants and conditions contained herein, the parties hereby agree as follows:

1. SCOPE OF WO
RK.

The scope of w
ork generally consists of mobilization; installation of a new traffic signal at the intersection of Fairview Road and Belfast Avenue; concrete sidewalk and curb and gutter modifications; curb access ramp modifications; center median modifications; construction of a curb extension (bulb-out); notifications to businesses and residents; traffic signing; striping and markings; installation of pavement markers; and implementing traffic control (the “Work”).

The Work is
further described in the “Contract Documents” referred to below.

The Project
is known as the Fairview Road and Belfast Avenue Traffic Signal Project, City Project No. 26-03 (the “Project”).

2. CONTRACT
DOCUMENTS.

The complete A
greement consists of the following documents relating to the Project:
(a) This Agreement;
(b) CONTR
ACTOR’s bid, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein; ATTACHMENT 2
322
Project and Specification No. 26-03
2 (c) Bid package , including, but not limited to, notice inviting bids, complete plans, profiles, detailed drawings and specifications, general provisions and special provisions. The bid package is attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein;

(d) Faithful Performance Bond and Labor and Material Bond, including agent’s Power of Attorney for each bond, attached hereto as Exhibit C;

(e) Drug-Free Workplace Policy, attached hereto as Exhibit D and incorporated herein; and

(f) Provisions of the most current edition of The Greenbook: Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (“The Greenbook”). Provisions of The Greenbook are incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein.

The documents comprising the complete Agreement will be referred to as the “Contract Documents.”

All of the Contract Documents are intended to complement one another, so that any Work called for in one and not mentioned in another is to be performed as if mentioned in all documents.

In the event of an inconsistency in the Contract Documents, the terms of this Agreement shall prevail over all other Contract Documents. The order of precedence between the remaining Contract Documents shall be as set forth in The Greenbook.

The Contract Documents constitute the entire agreement between the parties and supersede any and all other writings and oral negotiations.

3. CITY’S REPRESENTATIVE.

The CITY’s Representative is Ramin Nikoui, referred to herein as the Project Manager (“Project Manager”).

4. CONTRACTOR’S PROJECT MANAGER; PERSONNEL.

(a) Project Manager. CONTRACTOR’s Project Manager must be approved by City. Such approval shall be at CITY’s sole discretion.

(b) Personnel. CITY has the right to review and approve any personnel who are assigned to perform work under this Agreement. CONTRACTOR shall remove personnel from performing work under this Agreement if requested to do so by CITY.

This Paragraph 4 is a material provision of the Agreement. 323
Project and Specification No. 26-03
3 5. SCHEDULE.

All Work shall be performed in accordance with the schedule approved on behalf of CITY by the Project Manager, and in accordance with the time of performance set forth in Paragraph 11 (Time of Performance).

6. EQUIPMENT - PERFORMANCE OF WORK.

CONTRACTOR shall furnish all tools, equipment, apparatus, facilities, labor and materials necessary to perform and complete the Work in a good and workmanlike manner in strict conformity with the Contract Documents.

The equipment, apparatus, facilities, labor and material shall be furnished and such Work performed and completed as required in the plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the Project Manager or his or her designee, and subject to his or her approval.

7. COMPENSATION.

CITY shall pay CONTRACTOR in accordance with the fee schedule set forth in CONTRACTOR’s bid. CONTRACTOR’s total compensation shall not exceed Six Hundred Eighty -Three Thousand, Five Hundred Eighty -Four Dollars and Zero Cents ($683,584.00).

8. ADDITIONAL SERVICES.

CONTRACTOR shall not receive compensation for any services provided outside the scope of the Contract Documents unless such additional services, including change orders, are approved in writing by CITY prior to CONTRACTOR performing the additional services.

It is specifically understood that oral requests or approvals of such additional services, change orders or additional compensation and any approvals from CITY shall be barred and are unenforceable.

9. PAYMENTS TO CONTRACTOR.

On or before the last Monday of each and every month during the performance of the Work, CONTRACTOR shall meet with the Project Manager or his or her designee to determine the quantity of pay items incorporated into the improvement during that month.

A “Progress Payment Order” will then be jointly prepared, approved, and signed by the Project Manager and the CONTRACTOR setting forth the amount to be paid and providing for a five percent (5%) retention. Upon approval of the progress payment order by the Project Manager, or his or her designee, it shall be submitted to CITY’s Finance Department and processed for payment by obtaining approval from the City Council to 324
Project and Specification No. 26-03
4 issue a warrant.

Within three (3) days following City Council’s approval to issue a warrant, CITY shall mail to CONTRACTOR a warrant for the amount specified in the progress payment order as the amount to be paid. The retained five percent (5%) shall be paid to CONTRACTOR thirty-five (35) days after the recording of the Notice of Completion of the Work by the CITY with the Orange County Clerk-Recorder and after CONTRACTOR has furnished releases of all claims against CITY by persons who furnished labor or materials for the Work, if required by CITY.

Upon the request of CONTRACTOR and at its expense, securities equivalent to the amount withheld pursuant to the foregoing provisions may be presented to CITY for substitution for the retained funds. If CITY approves the form and amount of the offered securities it will release the retained funds and will hold the securities in lieu thereof.

CONTRACTOR shall be entitled to any interest earned on the securities.

In the event that claims for property damage or bodily injury are presented to CITY arising out of CONTRACTOR’s or any subcontractor’s work under this Agreement, CITY shall give notice thereof to CONTRACTOR, and CONTRACTOR shall have thirty-five (35) days from the mailing of any such notice to evaluate the claim and to settle it by whole or partial payment, or to reject it, and to give notice of settlement or rejection to CITY. If CITY does not receive notice within the above-mentioned 35-day period that the claim has been settled, and if the Project Manager, after consultation with the City Attorney, determines that the claim is meritorious, CITY may pay the claim or a portion of it in exchange for an appropriate release from the claimant, and may deduct the amount of the payment from the retained funds that would otherwise be paid to CONTRACTOR upon completion of the Work; provided, however, that the maximum amount paid for any one claim pursuant to this provision shall be One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00), and the maximum amount for all such claims in the aggregate paid pursuant to this provision shall be Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00).

10. PROMPT PAYMENT OF SUBCONTRACTORS.

CONTRACTOR agrees to pay each subcontractor under this Agreement for satisfactory performance of its contract no later than seven (7) days from the receipt of each payment the CONTRACTOR receives from CITY.

CONTRACTOR agrees further to release retainage payments to each subcontractor within thirty (30) days after the subcontractor’s work is satisfactorily completed.

Any delay or postponement of payment from the above referenced time frame may occur only for good cause following written approval of the CITY.

11. TIME OF PERFORMANCE.

325
Project and Specification No. 26-03
5 CONTRACTOR shall commence Work by the date specified in CITY’s Notice to Proceed, unless a later date is agreed upon in writing by the parties. The Work shall be completed within sixty (60) working days from the first day of commencement of the Work.

12. TERMINATION.

(a) Termination for Convenience. CITY may terminate this Agreement at any time, with or without cause, by providing thirty (30) days’ written notice to CONTRACTOR.

(b) Termination for Breach of Contract.

(i) If CONTRACTOR refuses or fails to prosecute the Work or any severable part of it with such diligence as will ensure its timely completion, or if CONTRACTOR fails to complete the Work on time, or if CONTRACTOR, or any subcontractor, violates any of the provisions of the Contract Documents, the Project Manager may give written notice to CONTRACTOR and CONTRACTOR’s sureties of the CITY’s intention to terminate this Agreement; and, unless within five (5) days after the serving of that notice, such conduct shall cease and arrangements for the correction thereof be made to the satisfaction of the CITY, this Agreement may be terminated at the option of CITY effective upon CONTRACTOR’s receipt of a second notice sent by the CITY indicating that the CITY has exercised its option to terminate.

(ii) If CONTRACTOR is adjudged bankrupt or files for any relief under the Federal Bankruptcy Code or State insolvency laws, this Agreement shall automatically terminate without any further action or notice by CITY.

(iii) If CONTRACTOR is in breach of any material provision of this Agreement, CITY may immediately terminate this Agreement by providing written notice to CONTRACTOR of same.

13. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES.

In the event the Work is not completed, for any reason, within the time required including any approved extensions of time, and to the satisfaction of the Project Manager, CITY may, in addition to any other remedies, equitable and legal, including remedies authorized by Paragraph 12 (Termination) of this Agreement, charge to CONTRACTOR or its sureties, or deduct from payments or credits due CONTRACTOR, a sum equal to Three Thousand Six Hundred Dollars ($3,600.00) as liquidated damages for each calendar day beyond the date provided for the completion of such work.

The parties hereto agree that the amount set forth above, as liquidated damages constitutes a fair and reasonable estimate of the costs the CITY would suffer for each day that the CONTRACTOR fails to meet the performance schedule. The parties hereby 326
Project and Specification No. 26-03
6 agree and acknowledge that the delays in the performance schedule will cause CITY to incur costs and expenses not contemplated by this Agreement.

14. PERFORMANCE BY SURETIES.

In the event CONTRACTOR fails or refuses to perform the Work, CITY may provide CONTRACTOR with a notice of intent to terminate as provided in Paragraph 12 (Termination), of this Agreement. CITY shall immediately give written notice of such intent to terminate to CONTRACTOR and CONTRACTOR’s surety or sureties, and the sureties shall have the right to take over and perform this Agreement; provided, however, that the sureties must, within five (5) days after CITY’s giving notice of termination, (a) give the CITY written notice of their intention to take over the performance of this Agreement; (b) provide adequate assurances, to the satisfaction of the CITY, that the Work shall be performed diligently and in a timely manner; and (c) must commence performance thereof within five (5) days after providing notice to the CITY of their intention to take over the Work. Upon the failure of the sureties to comply with the provisions set forth above, CITY may take over the Work and complete it, at the expense of CONTRACTOR , and the CONTRACTOR and the sureties shall be liable to CITY for any excess costs or damages including those referred to in Paragraph 13 (Liquidated Damages), incurred by CITY. In such event, CITY may, without liability for so doing, take possession of such materials, equipment, tools, appliances, Contract Documents and other property belonging to CONTRACTOR as may be on the site of the Work and reasonably necessary therefor and may use them to complete the Work.

15. DISPUTES PERTAINING TO PAYMENT FOR WORK.

Should any dispute arise respecting whether any delay is excusable, or its duration, or the value of the Work done, or of any Work omitted, or of any extra Work which CONTRACTOR may be required to do, or respecting any payment to CONTRACTOR during the performance of this Agreement, such dispute shall be decided by the Project Manager, and his or her decisions shall be final and binding upon CONTRACTOR and its sureties.

16. SUPERINTENDENCE BY CONTRACTOR.

At all times during performance of the Work, CONTRACTOR shall give personal superintendence or have a competent foreman or superintendent on the worksite, with authority to act for CONTRACTOR.

17. INSPECTION BY CITY.

CONTRACTOR shall at all times maintain proper facilities and provide safe access for inspection by CITY to all parts of the Work and to all shops on or off -site where the Work or portions of the Work, are in preparation. CITY shall have the right of access to the premises for inspection at all times. However, CITY shall, at all times, comply with CONTRACTOR’s safety requirements on the job site.
327
Project and Specification No. 26-03
7 18. CARE OF THE WORK AND OFF-SITE AUTHORIZATION.

CONTRACTOR warrants that it has examined the site of the Work and is familiar with its topography and condition, location of property lines, easements, building lines and other physical factors and limitations affecting the performance of this Agreement.

CONTRACTOR, at CONTRACTOR’s sole cost and expense, shall obtain any permission, and all approvals, licenses, or easements necessary for any operations conducted off the premises owned or controlled by CITY. CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for the proper care and protection of all materials delivered to the site or stored off -site and for the Work performed until completion and final inspection and acceptance by CITY. The risk, damage or destruction of materials delivered to the site or to Work performed shal l be borne by CONTRACTOR.

19. CONTRACT SECURITY AND GUARANTEE.

CONTRACTOR shall furnish, concurrently with the execution of this Agreement, the following: (1) a surety bond in an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price as security for the faithful performance of this Agreement, and (2) a separate surety bond in an amount equal to at least one hundred percent (100%) of the contract price as security for the payment of all persons furnishing labor or materials in connection with the Work under this Agreement. Sureties for each of the bonds and the forms thereof shall be satisfactory to CITY. In addition, such sureties must be authorized to issue bonds in California; sureties must be listed on the latest revision to the U.S.

Department of the Treasury Circular 570; and must be shown to have sufficient bonding capacity to provide the bonds required by the Contract Documents.

CONTRACTOR shall provide a certified copy of the certificate of authority of the surety issued by the Insurance Commissioner; a certificate from the clerk of the county in which the court or officer is located that the certificate of authority of the surety has not been surrendered, revoked, canceled, annulled, or suspended or, in the event that it has, that renewed authority has been granted; and copies of the surety’s most recent annual statement and quarterly statement filed with the Department of Insurance pursuant to Article 10 (commencing with Section 900) of Chapter 1 of Part 2 of Division 1 of the Insurance Code.

CONTRACTOR guarantees that all materials used in the Work and all labor performed shall be in conformity with the Contract Documents including, but not limited to, the standards and specifications set forth in the most current edition of The Greenbook.

CONTRACTOR shall, at its own expense, make any and all repairs and replacements that shall become necessary as the result of any failure of the Work to conform to the aforementioned Contract Documents, and/or standard specifications; provided, however, that CONTRACTOR shall be obligated under this provision only to the extent of those failures or defects of which CONTRACTOR is given notice within a period of twelve (12) months from the date that the Notice of Completion is recorded.

328
Project and Specification No. 26-03
8 The rights and remedies available to CITY pursuant to this provision shall be cumulative with all rights and remedies available to CITY pursuant to statutory and common law, which rights and remedies are hereby expressly reserved, and neither the foregoing guarantee by CONTRACTOR nor its furnishing of the bonds, nor acceptance thereof by CITY, shall constitute a waiver of any rights or remedies available to CITY against CONTRACTOR.

20. INDEMNIFICATION.

CONTRACTOR agrees to protect, defend, indemnify and hold harmless CITY and its elected and appointed boards, officers, agents, and employees from any and all claims, liabilities, expenses, or damages of any nature, including attorneys’ fees, for injury to or death of any person, and for injury or damage to any property, including consequential damages of any nature resulting therefrom, arising out of or in any way connected with the performance of this Agreement. The defense obligation provided for hereunder shall apply without any advance showing of negligence or wrongdoing by the CONTRACTOR, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, but shall be required whenever any claim, action, complaint, or suit asserts as its basis the negligence, errors, omissions or misconduct of the CONTRACTOR, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, and/or whenever any claim, action, complaint or suit asserts liability against the CITY, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees based upon the work performed by the CONTRACTOR, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors under this Agreement, whether or not the CONTRACTOR, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors are specifically named or otherwise asserted to be liable.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the CONTRACTOR shall not be liable for the defense or indemnification of the CITY for claims, actions, complaints or suits arising out of the sole active negligence or willful misconduct of the CITY. This provision shall supersede and replace all other indemnity provisions contained either in the CITY’s specifications or CONTRACTOR’s proposal, which shall be of no force and effect.

CONTRACTOR shall comply with all of the provisions of the Workers’ Compensation insurance laws and Safety in Employment laws of the State of California, including the applicable provisions of Divisions 4 and 5 of the California Labor Code and all amendments thereto and regulations promulgated pursuant thereto, and all similar State, Federal or local laws applicable; and CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and hold harmless CITY from and against all claims, liabilities, expenses, damages, suits, actions, proceedings and judgments, of every nature and description, including attorney fees, that may be presented, brought or recovered against CITY for or on account of any liability under or failure to comply with any of said laws which may be incurred by reason of any Work performed under this Agreement by CONTRACTOR or any subcontractor or others performing on behalf of CONTRACTOR.

CITY does not, and shall not, waive any rights against CONTRACTOR which it may have by reason of the above hold harmless agreements, because of the acceptance by CITY or the deposit with CITY by CONTRACTOR of any or all of the insurance policies described in Paragraph 21 (Insurance) of this Agreement. 329
Project and Specification No. 26-03
9 The hold harmless agreements by CONTRACTOR shall apply to all liabilities, expenses, claims, and damages of every kind (including but not limited to attorneys’ fees) incurred or alleged to have been incurred, by reason of the operations of CONTRACTOR or any subcontractor or others performing on behalf of CONTRACTOR, whether or not such insurance policies are applicable. CONTRACTOR shall require any and all tiers of subcontractors to afford the same degree of indemnification to the CITY OF COSTA MESA and it s elected and appointed boards, officers, agents, and employees that is required of CONTRACTOR and shall incorporate identical indemnity provisions in all contracts between CONTRACTOR and all tiers of its subcontractors.

In the event that CONTRACTOR and CITY are sued by a third party for damages caused or allegedly caused by negligent or other wrongful conduct of CONTRACTOR, or by a dangerous condition of CITY’s property created by CONTRACTOR or existing while the property was under the control of CONTRACTOR, CONTRACTOR shall not be relieved of its indemnity obligation to CITY by any settlement with any such third party unless that settlement includes a full release and dismissal of all claims by the third party against the CITY.

21. INSURANCE.

(a) Minimum Scope and Limits of Insurance. CONTRACTOR shall not commence work under this Agreement until it has obtained all insurance required under this Paragraph 21 and CITY has approved the insurance as to form, amount, and carrier, nor shall CONTRACTOR allow any subcontractor to commence any Work until all similar insurance required of the subcontractor has been obtained and approved.

CONTRACTOR shall obtain, maintain, and keep in full force and effect during the life of this Agreement all of the following minimum scope of insurance coverages with an insurance company admitted to do business in California, rated “A,” Class X, or better in the most recent Best’s Key Insurance Rating Guide, and approved by CITY:

(i) Commercial general liability, including premises -operations, products/completed operations, broad form property damage, blanket contractual liability, independent contractors, personal injury or bodily injury with a policy limit of not less than One Millio n Dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence. If such insurance contains a general aggregate limit, it shall apply separately to this Agreement or shall be twice the required occurrence limit.

(ii) Business automobile liability for owned vehicles, hired, and non- owned vehicles, with a policy limit of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage.

330
Project and Specification No. 26-03
10 (iii) Workers’ compensation insurance as required by the State of California, with Statutory Limits, and Employer’s Liability insurance with a limit of no less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) per accident for bodily injury or disease. CONTRACTOR agrees to waive, and to obtain endorsements from its workers’ compensation insurer waiving subrogation rights under its workers’ compensation insurance policy against the CITY, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers arising from work performed by CONTRACTOR for the CITY and to require each of its subcontractors, if any, to do likewise under their workers’ compensation insurance policies.

(iv) Umbrella or excess liability insurance that will provide bodily injury, personal injury and property damage liability coverage at least as broad as the primary coverages set forth above, including commercial general liability, automobile liability, and employer’s liability. Such policy or policies shall include the following terms and conditions:

(1) A drop down feature requiring the policy to respond in the event that any primary insurance that would otherwise have applied proves to be uncollectable in whole or in part for any reason;
(2) Pay on behalf of wording as opposed to reimbursement; (3) Concurrency of effective dates with primary policies; (4) Policies shall “follow form” to underlying primary policies; and (5) Insureds under primary policies shall also be insureds under the umbrella or excess policies.

(b) Endorsements. The commercial general liability insurance policy and business automobile liability policy shall contain or be endorsed to contain the following provisions:

(i) Additional insureds: The City of Costa Mesa and its elected and appointed boards, officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers are additional insureds with respect to: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the CONTRACTOR pursuant to its contract with the City; products and completed operations of the CONTRACTOR; premises owned, occupied or used by the CONTRACTOR; automobiles owned, leased, hired, or borrowed by the CONTRACTOR.”

(ii) Notice: “Said policy shall not terminate, nor shall it be canceled nor the coverage reduced, until thirty (30) days after written notice is given to CITY.”

(iii) Other Insurance: “CONTRACTOR’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City of Costa Mesa, its officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers. Any other insurance maintained by the City of Costa Mesa shall be excess and not contributing with the insurance provided by this policy.”

331
Project and Specification No. 26-03
11 (c) Reporting Provisions . Any failure of CONTRACTOR to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City of Costa Mesa, its officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers.

(d) Insurance Applies Separately. CONTRACTOR’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer’s liability.

(e) Deductible or Self-Insured Retention. If any of such policies provide for a deductible or self -insured retention to provide such coverage, the amount of such deductible or self -insured retention shall be approved in advance by CITY. No policy of insurance issued as to which the CITY is an additional insured shall contain a provision which requires that no insured except the named insured can satisfy any such deductible or self-insured retention.

(f) Proof of Insurance. Prior to commencement of the Work, CONTRACTOR shall furnish CITY, through the Project Manager, proof of compliance with the above insurance requirements in a form satisfactory to City’s Risk Management.

(g) Non-Limiting. Nothing in this Paragraph 21 shall be construed as limiting in any way, the indemnification provision contained in this Agreement, or the extent to which Consultant may be held responsible for payments of damages to persons or property.

22. PREVAILING WAGE REQUIREMENTS.

(a) Prevailing Wage Laws. CONTRACTOR is aware of the requirements of Chapter 1 (beginning at Section 1720 et seq.) of Part 7 of Division 2 of the California Labor Code, as well as Title 8, Section 16000 et seq. of the California Code of Regulations (“Prevailing Wage Laws”), which require the payment of prevailing wage rates and the performance of other requirements on “public works” and “maintenance” projects. This Project is a “public works” project and requires compliance with the Prevailing Wage Laws. CONTRACTOR shall defend, indemnify and hold the CITY, its elected officials, officers, employees and agents free and harmless from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with the Prevailing Wage Laws.

(b) Payment of Prevailing Wages. CONTRACTOR shall pay the prevailing wage rates for all work performed under this Agreement. When any craft or classification is omitted from the general prevailing wage determinations, CONTRACTOR shall pay the wage rate of the craft or classification most closely related to the omitted classification. A copy of the general prevailing wage rate determination is on file in the Office of the City Clerk and is incorporated into this Agreement as if fully set forth herein. CONTRACTOR shall post a copy of such wage rates at all times at the project site(s).

(c) Legal Working Day . In accordance with the provisions of Labor Code Section 1810 et seq., eight (8) hours is the legal working day. CONTRACTOR and any subcontractor(s) of CONTRACTOR shall comply with the provisions of the Labor Code 332
Project and Specification No. 26-03
12 regarding eight (8) -hour work day and 40- hour work week requirements, and overtime, Saturday, Sunday, and holiday work. Work performed by CONTRACTOR’s or any subcontractor’s employees in excess of eight (8) hours per day, and 40 hours during any one week, must include compensation for all hours worked in excess of eight (8) hours per day, or 40 hours during any one week, at not less than one and one- half times the basic rate of pay. CONTRACTOR shall forfeit as a penalty to CITY Twenty -Five Dollars ($25.00), or any greater penalty set forth in the Labor Code, for each worker employed in the execution of the Work by CONTRACTOR or by any subcontractor(s) of CONTRACTOR, for each calendar day during which such worker is required or permitted to the work more than eight (8) hours in one calendar day or more than 40 hours in any one calendar week in violation of the Labor Code.

(d) Apprentices. CONTRACTOR shall comply with the provisions of Labor Code Section 1777.5 concerning the employment of apprentices on public works projects.

CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for ensuring compliance by its subcontractors with Labor Code Section 1777.5.

(e) Payroll Records. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1776, CONTRACTOR and any subcontractor(s) shall keep accurate payroll records, showing the name, address, social security number, work classification, straight time and overtime hours worked each day and week, and the actual per diem wages paid to each journeyman, apprentice, worker, or other employee employed by CONTRACTOR or any subcontractor in connection with this Agreement. Each payroll record shall contain or be verified by a written declaration that it is made under penalty of perjury, stating both of the following:
(1) The information contained in the payroll record is true and correct; and (2) The employer has complied with the requirements of Sections 1771, 1881, and 1815 of the Labor Code for any work performed by his or her employees on this Project. The payroll records shall be certified and shall be available for inspection at all reasonable hours in accordance with the requirements of Labor Code Section 1776. CONTRACTOR shall also furnish each week to CITY’s Project Administration Division a statement with respect to the wages of each of its employees during the preceding weekly payroll period.

(f) Registration with DIR. CONTRACTOR and any subcontractor(s) of CONTRACTOR shall comply with the provisions of Labor Code Section 1771 and Labor Code Section 1725.5 requiring registration with the DIR.

23. COMPLIANCE WITH ALL LAWS.

CONTRACTOR shall, at its own cost and expense, comply with all applicable local, state, and federal laws, regulations, and requirements in the performance of this Agreement, including but not limited to laws regarding health and safety, labor and employment, and wage and hours.

24. DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE POLICY.

CONTRACTOR, upon notification of the award of this Agreement, shall establish 333
Project and Specification No. 26-03
13 a Drug-Free Awareness Program to inform employees of the dangers of drug abuse in the workplace, the penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations occurring in the workplace, and the employee assistance programs available to employees. Each employee engaged in the performance of a CITY contract must be notified of this Drug- Free Awareness Program, and must abide by its terms.

CONTRACTOR shall conform to all the requirements of CITY’s Policy No. 100- 5, attached hereto. Failure to establish a program, notify employees, or inform the CITY of a drug-related workplace conviction will constitute a material breach of contract and cause for immediate termination of the contract by the CITY.

25. NON–DISCRIMINATION.

In performing this Agreement, CONTRACTOR will not engage in, nor permit its agents to engage in, discrimination in employment of persons because of their race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, physical handicap, medical condition, marital status or sex, or sexual orientation, except as permitted pursuant to Section 12940 of the Government Code. Violation of this provision may result in the imposition of penalties referred to in Section 1735 of the California Labor Code.

26. PROVISIONS CUMULATIVE.

The provisions of this Agreement are cumulative and in addition to, and not in limitation of, any other rights or remedies available to CITY.

27. NOTICES.

It shall be the duty and responsibility of CONTRACTOR to notify all tiers of subcontractors and material men of the following special notice provision; namely, all preliminary 20-day notices or stop notices shall be directed only to the City Clerk and to no other department, and shall be either personally delivered or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid.

All other notices shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid. Notices required to be given to CITY pursuant to this Agreement shall be addressed as follows:

City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Attn: Ramin Nikoui, PE, TE, PTOE, Senior Engineer

Notices required to be given to CONTRACTOR shall be addressed as follows:

Select Electric, Inc.
1700 E. Via Burton
Anaheim, CA 92806
334
Project and Specification No. 26-03
14 Tel: (619) 460-6060
Attn: James Staab, President

Notices required to be given to CONTRACTOR’s sureties shall be addressed as follows:

To be provided upon execution of bonds

28. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR.

The parties hereto acknowledge and agree that the relationship between CITY and CONTRACTOR is one of principal and independent contractor and no other. All personnel to be utilized by CONTRACTOR in the performance of this Agreement shall be employees of CONTRACTOR and not employees of the CITY. CONTRACTOR shall pay all salaries and wages, employer’s social security taxes, unemployment insurance and similar taxes relating to employees and shall be responsible for all applicable withholding taxes.

Nothing contained in this Agreement shall create or be construed as creating a partnership, joint venture, employment relations, or any other relationship except as set forth between the parties. The parties specifically acknowledge and agree that CONTRACTOR is not a partner with CITY, whether general or limited, and no activities of CITY or CONTRACTOR or statements made by CITY or CONTRACTOR shall be interpreted by any of the parties hereto as establishing any type of business relationship other than an independent contractor relationship.

29. P ERS ELIGIBILITY INDEMNIFICATION.

In the event that CONTRACTOR or any employee, agent, or subcontractor of CONTRACTOR providing services under this Agreement claims or is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (PERS) to be elig ible for enrollment in PERS as an employee of the CITY, CONTRACTOR shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless CITY for the payment of any employee and/or employer contributions for PERS benefits on behalf of CONTRACTOR or its employees, agents, or subcontractors, as well as for the payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions, which would otherwise be the responsibility of CITY.

Notwithstanding any other agency, state or federal policy, rule, regulation, law or ordinance to the contrary, CONTRACTOR and any of its employees, agents, and subcontractors providing service under this Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled to, and hereby agree to waive any claims to, any compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by CITY, including but not limited to eligibility to enroll in PERS as an employee of CITY and entitlement to any contribution to be paid by CITY for employer contribution and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits.

30. VALIDITY.

The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void 335
Project and Specification No. 26-03
15 or affect the validity of any of the other provisions of this Agreement.

31. GOVERNING LAW.

This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Any legal action relating to or arising out of this Agreement shall be subject to the jurisdiction of the County of Orange, California.

32. NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARY RIGHTS.

This Agreement is entered into for the sole benefit of the CITY and CONTRACTOR and no other parties are intended to be direct or incidental beneficiaries of this Agreement and no third party shall have any right in, under or to this Agreement.

33. ASSIGNABILITY.

This Agreement may not be transferred or assigned by either party, or by operation of law, to any other person or persons or business entity, without the other party’s written permission. Any such transfer or assignment, or attempted transfer or assignment , without written permission, may be deemed by the other party to constitute a voluntary termination of this Agreement and this Agreement shall thereafter be deemed terminated and void.

34. WAIVER.

No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the party against whom enforcement of a waiver is sought referring expressly to this Paragraph. The waiver of any right or remedy in respect to any occurrence or event shall not be deemed a waiver of any right or remedy in respect to any other occurrence or event, nor shall any waiver constitute a continuing waiver.

35. HEADINGS.

Section and subsection headings are not to be considered part of this Agreement, are included solely for convenience, and are not intended to modify or explain or to be a full or accurate description of the content thereof.

36. CONSTRUCTION.

The parties have participated jointly in the negotiation and drafting of this Agreement and have had an adequate opportunity to review each and every provision of the Agreement and submit the same to counsel or other consultants for review and comment. In the event an ambiguity or question of intent or interpretation arises with respect to this Agreement, this Agreement shall be construed as if drafted jointly by the parties and in accordance with its fair meaning. There shall be no presumption or burden 336
Project and Specification No. 26-03
16 of proof favoring or disfavoring any party by virtue of the authorship of any of the provisions of this Agreement.

37. COUNTERPARTS.

This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts by the parties hereto. All counterparts shall be construed together and shall constitute one Agreement.

38. CORPORATE AUTHORITY.

The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the parties hereto warrant that they are duly authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of said parties and that by doing so, the parties hereto are formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement.

[Signature page follows.]
337
Project and Specification No. 26-03
17 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by and through their respective authorized officers, as of the date first above written.

CITY OF COSTA MESA
A municipal corporation

__________________________________ Date: _____________________ Cecilia Gallardo-Daly
City Manager

CONTRACTOR

__________________________________ Date: _____________________ James Staab, President

ATTEST:

__________________________________ Date: _____________________ Brenda Green
City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

__________________________________ Date: _____________________ Kimberly Hall Barlow
City Attorney

APPROVED AS TO INSURANCE:

__________________________________ Date: _____________________ Ruth Wang
Risk Management

338
Project and Specification No. 26-03
18 APPROVED AS TO PURCHASING:

__________________________________ Date: _____________________ Finance Director

DEPARTMENTAL APPROVAL:

__________________________________ Date: _____________________ Raja Sethuraman
Public Works Director

__________________________________ Date: _____________________ Ramin Nikoui
Project Manager

339

EXHIBIT A

CONTRACTOR’S BID

340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362

CITY OF COSTA MESA
Agenda Report
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
File #: 26-310 Meeting Date: 6/16/2026
TITLE:

AWARD OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR THE SENIOR TRANSPORTATION

PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT: PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES
PRESENTED BY: BRIAN GRUNER, PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

DIRECTOR
CONTACT INFORMATION: KEVIN STODDART, SENIOR RECREATION SUPERVISOR, (714) 327-7561
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council:

1. Award a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) for the Senior Transportation Program with Orange County Yellow Management LLC (OCY) (Attachment 1) at 520 West Dyer Road, Santa Ana, California, 92707 with an annual amount not to exceed $200,000, for a period of three years effective July 1, 2026 - June 30, 2029; and

2. Authorize a ten (10%) percent contingency in the amount of $20,000 for unforeseen costs; and

3. Authorize the City Manager to execute the PSA and future amendments for this agreement within City Council authorized limits.

BACKGROUND:

The Senior Transportation Program began in 2011 due to the availability of Tax Measure M2 funding administered by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA).

From 2011 to April 2020 the City used a shuttle service model to transport seniors to medical and non -medical appointments. During COVID, the shuttle service provider became insolvent and all services were suspended.

The City Council approved an emergency services agreement with Orange County Yellow (OCY) from May 2020 to June 2021. The program provides curb to curb transportation Monday through Friday from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM within the city’sboundaries for groceries, household supplies, and shopping, and curb to curb transportation for non-emergency medical appointments such as doctor appointments, physical therapy in eleven cities and the Long Beach Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital.

Due to an accumulation of unused M2 funds during COVID, the City transitioned from the shuttle

363
File #: 26-310 Meeting Date: 6/16/2026
Due to an accumulation of unused M2 funds during COVID, the City transitioned from the shuttle service to the taxi model, for which the City entered into an agreement with OCY for a five (5) year term beginning July 2021 to June 2026. The City funded this program through Measure M, Hoag, and Enhanced Mobility for Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities (EMSD) grant funds.

The current operational model is one of the most accessible programs in Orange County. Prior to the COVID pandemic, the annual shuttle ridership was 7,000 rides, while post-pandemic the program provides more than 24,000 rides. The top users of the program use the service more than 500 times per year with the top user exceeding 700 rides in one year. Approximately 80% of all rides are comprised of and utilized by 20% of all riders.

The rapid growth of the program, the large service area, unlimited use of the on-call service, and limited funding have is not financially unsustainable. The only guaranteed source of funding for the program are Measure M2 Project U funds and the City match, which amounts to approximately $162,000 annually, however the M2 amount fluctuates as sales tax revenue in the county changes.

On June 17, 2025, staff requested Council authorize an increase in the annual not-to-exceed amount of the Professional Services Agreement with OCY and to accept the Enhanced for Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities (EMSD) grant funding in the amount of $237,600. Additionally, the Council was informed of future funding challenges and the unsustainability of the program. Council advised staff to have the Parks and Community Services Commission evaluate the project and to provide a recommendation to Council.

ANALYSIS:

The Parks and Community Services Commission (PACS) reviewed the Senior Transportation Program during two (2) meetings, one on February 12, 2026, and the second on March 12, 2026.

The first meeting provided program background information and announced three (3) community feedback opportunities to help evaluate potential program funding options.

Community Feedback Meetings
Senior Center staff conducted outreach in the form of in-person meetings at the Senior Center as well as a mailer with a survey about implementing cost control measures that included:
· restrictions on boundaries
· collection of copays
· limits on rides per person per month
In-person meetings were held at the Senior Center on: March 4, 2026, March 5, 2026, and March 10, 2026.

A total of 170 surveys (Attachment 2) were completed. The overwhelming number of respondents prioritized non-emergency medical rides over any other type of ride. The average response by those surveyed for copays for non-medical rides was $3.56 and $6.12 for medical rides.

On March 12, 2026, the Commission discussed and reviewed two options (Attachment 3) and recommended the following program model option based on an anticipated rate of $21.50 per ride, with an additional $5.50 per mile for all medical rides outside the City:

364
File #: 26-310 Meeting Date: 6/16/2026
Ride Type Destination Frequency Co-Pay
Rides within City Limits Senior Center, Seven
(7) Major Shopping
Centers, Hoag Urgent
Care
Three (3) Round
Trips per Month
$4.00 each way
Medical Rides Newport Beach,
Fountain Valley, Santa
Ana, Long Beach VA,
Irvine, and Huntington
Beach
Three (3) Round
Trips per Month
$8.00 each way
RFP Process
Simultaneously with the PACS evaluation, a Request For Proposal (RFP) for the Senior Transportation Program was released on February 23, 2026, and submissions were due on March 11, 2026. The City received two proposals, one from Orange County Yellow Management LLC (OCY) and another from Onward Health, Inc.

Following the pre-established Finance Department guidelines, a full assessment and scoring exercise was carried out by three Parks and Community Services contract raters that manage the senior transportation program.

The evaluation of OCY proposal was positively rated by all three evaluators. OCY presented a strong proposal for delivering the STP’srequired day-to-day services for the City of Costa Mesa and fulfilled the requirements presented in the Scope of Work. Onward Health’s proposal also met all requirements, but its fee structure is significantly more expensive than what the STP available funding. OCY’sfee structure, however, is significantly lower than the rates anticipated by staff. OCY’s proposed rates allow for a significantly more expansive service model than the one approved by the Parks and Community Services Commission.

The scope of work and evaluation criteria (Attachment 4) were for the vendor to have flexibly in implementing cost control measures that include the following:
· Destination limits or geographic boundaries
· Ridership quotas
· Collect copays
OCY Cost Proposal
OCY’scost proposal is below the estimated fee structure that was presented to PACS on May 12, 2026, at a projected rate of $21.50 plus $5.50 per mile for medical rides.

July 1, 2026 - June 30, 2029
Non-medical rides in Costa Mesa $17.50 per ride
Medical rides $15.00 per ride and an additional $3.00 per mile

365
File #: 26-310 Meeting Date: 6/16/2026
Non-medical rides in Costa Mesa $17.50 per ride
Medical rides $15.00 per ride and an additional $3.00 per mile
July 1, 2029 - June 30, 2031
Non-medical rides in Costa Mesa$19.50
per ride
Medical rides $16.00 per ride and an additional $3.50 per mile
Onward Health Proposal
Onward Health proposed a slightly different fee structure that is significantly more expensive:

Non-medical rides in Costa Mesa$36.00
per ride
Medical rides $36.00 per ride and an additional $2.25 per mile
ADA Non-medical rides in Costa Mesa $65.00 per ride
ADA Medical rides $65.00 per ride and an additional $2.25 per mile
Cancellations within 2 hours $15.00
The chart below lists the final scoring of both OCY and Onward Health.

Proposer Points Rank
OCY Management 1330 1st
Onward Health 1075 2nd
OCY outranked Onward overall, but the cost difference was the most significant factor. OCY’s proposed fee structure will allow for a significantly more expansive service model than anticipated.

OCY Service Model
This model has a service area that is nearly as large as the current service model, which provides STP members maximum flexibility with locations and is an improved model from what PACS approved on March 12, 2026.

The implementation of ride limits and copays are necessary to ensure the STP remains financially sustainable. Staff will monitor the program’sridership levels and financials on an ongoing basis and make program adjustments as necessary. The proposed plan is as follows:

1. Boundaries

366
File #: 26-310 Meeting Date: 6/16/2026
· Non-medical rides: anywhere within Costa Mesa
· Medical rides: anywhere within Costa Mesa, Newport Beach, Huntington Beach, Santa Ana, Fountain Valley, Irvine, Anaheim, Orange, Tustin, and the Long Beach VA Hospital. · Exceptions: No “big box” (e.g., Costco, Sams Club, etc.) locations or stand-alone pharmacies outside of Costa Mesa such as CVS, Walgreens, Costco, etc.

2. Ride Limits
Medical or Non-Medical Eight one-way rides per month

3. Copays
Non-medical rides $3.00 Medical rides $5.00
ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may elect to recommend:

1. A continuation of existing service model which is currently fiscally unsustainable or;

2. Any other combination of model options which may not be in line with participant feedback.

FISCAL REVIEW:

Funding for the Senior Transportation Program is in the adopted Senior Center budget in the amount of $200,000 for FY 26/27. The program is reliant on M2 funding, a 20% Measure M2 City match, and a grant from Hoag Hospital. As M2 funding is based on sales tax, the actual funding for the program is subject to change from year to year. The implementation of a copay, ride limits and boundaries will ensure that the contract cost does not exceed $200,000. Staff will closely monitor the contract and make program adjustments when necessary, without impacting services.

Funding Source FY 2026-27 Estimates
M2 Funding $130,525
M2 City Match (20%) $32,631
Hoag Community Health Benefit Grant $50,000
Total Funding Estimate $213,156
LEGAL REVIEW:

The City Attorney’s office has reviewed this report and approved it as to form.

CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:

This item supports the following City Council Goals:
· Strengthen the Public’s Safety and Improve the Quality of Life

367
File #: 26-310 Meeting Date: 6/16/2026
CONCLUSION:

Staff recommends the City Council:

1. Award a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) for the Senior Transportation Program with Orange County Yellow Management LLC (OCY) at 520 West Dyer Road, Santa Ana, California, 92707 with an annual amount not to exceed $200,000, for a period of three years effective July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2029; and,

2. Authorize a ten (10%) percent contingency in the amount of $20,000 for unforeseen cost; and

3. Authorize the City Manager to execute the PSA and future amendments for this agreement within City Council authorized limits.

368
1 OCY Management, LLC
Rev. 4-2026

CITY OF COSTA MESA

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

WITH OCY MANAGEMENT, LLC

THIS PROF
ESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into this 1st day of July 2026 (“Effective Date”), by and between the CITY OF COSTA MESA, a municipal corporation (“City”), and OCY MANAGEMENT, LLC, a California limited liability company (“Consultant”).

RECITALS
A. City pr
oposes to utilize the services of Consultant as an independent contractor to perform senior transportation services on an as needed basis , as more fully described herein; and
B. Consultant repr
esents that it has that degree of specialized expertise contemplated within California Government Code s ection 37103, and holds all necessary licenses to practice and perform the services herein contemplated; and
C. City and
Consultant desire to contract for the specific services described in Exhibit “A” and desire to set forth their rights, duties and liabilities in connection with the services to be performed; and
D. No official o
r employee of City has a financial interest, within the provisions of sections 1090-1092 of the California Government Code, in the subject matter of this Agreement.

NOW, THER
EFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions contained herein, the parties hereby agree as follows:

1.0. SERVICE

S PROVIDED BY CONSULTANT

1.1. Scope of
Services. Consultant shall provide the professional services described in City’s Request for Proposals, attached hereto as Exhibit “A,” and Consultant’s Proposal, attached hereto as Exhibit “B,” both incorporated herein.

1.2. Profess
ional Practices. All professional services to be provided by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement shall be provided by personnel experienced in their respective fields and in a manner consistent with the standards of care, diligence and skill ordinarily exercised by professional consultants in similar fields and circumstances in accordance with sound professional practices. Consultant also warrants that it is familiar with all laws that may affect its performance of this Agreement and shall advise City of any changes in any laws that may affect Consultant’s performance of this Agreement.

1.3. Perform
ance to Satisfaction of City . Consultant agrees to perform all the work to the complete satisfaction of the City. Evaluations of the work will be done by the City Manager or his or her designee. If the quality of work is not satisfactory, City in its discretion has the right to:
(a) Meet with
Consultant to review the quality of the work and resolve the matters of concern;
Attachment 1
369
2 OCY Management, LLC
Rev. 4-2026

(b) Require Consultant to repeat the work at no additional fee until it is satisfactory; and/or

(c) Terminate the Agreement as hereinafter set forth.

1.4. Warranty. Consultant warrants that it shall perform the services required by this Agreement in compliance with all applicable Federal and California employment laws , including, but not limited to, those laws related to minimum hours and wages; occupational health and safety; fair employment and employment practices; workers’ compensation insurance and safety in employment; and all other Federal, State and local laws and ordinances applicable to the services required under this Agreement. Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless City from and against all claims, demands, payments, suits, actions, proceedings, and judgments of every nature and description including attorneys’ fees and costs, presented, brought, or recovered against City for, or on account of any liability under any of the above-mentioned laws, which may be incurred by reason of Consultant’s performance under this Agreement.

1.5. Non-Discrimination. In performing this Agreement, Consultant shall not engage in, nor permit its agents to engage in, discrimination in employment of persons because of their race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or military or veteran status, e xcept as permitted pursuant to s ection 12940 of the Government Code.

1.6. Non-Exclusive Agreement. Consultant acknowledges that City may enter into agreements with other consultants for services similar to the services that are subject to this Agreement or may have its own employees perform services similar to those services contemplated by this Agreement.

1.7. Delegation and Assignment. This is a personal service contract, and the duties set forth herein shall not be delegated or assigned to any person or entity without the prior written consent of City. Consultant may engage a subcontractor(s) as permitted by law and may employ other personnel to perform services contemplated by this Agreement at Consultant’s sole cost and expense.

1.8. Confidentiality. Employees of Consultant in the course of their duties may have access to financial, accounting, statistical, and personal data of private individuals and employees of City. Consultant covenants that all data, documents, discussion, or other information developed or received by Consultant or provided for performance of this Agreement are deemed confidential and shall not be disclosed by Consultant without written authorization by City. City shall grant such authorization if disclosure is required by law. All City data shall be returned to City upon the termination of this Agreement. Consultant’s covenant under this Section shall survive the termination of this Agreement.

2.0. COMPENSATION AND BILLING

2.1. Compensation. Consultant shall be paid in accordance with the cost proposal set forth in Exhibit “C,” attached hereto and made a part of this Agreement. Consultant’s total compensation shall not exceed Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000.00).

370
3 OCY Management, LLC
Rev. 4-2026

2.2. Additional Services. Consultant shall not receive compensation for any services provided outside the scope of services specified in the Consultant’s Proposal unless the City Manager or designee, prior to Consultant performing the additional services, approves such additional services in writing. It is specifically understood that oral requests and/or approvals of such additional services or additional compensation shall be barred and are unenforceable.

2.3. Method of Billing. Consultant may submit invoices to the City for approval on a progress basis, but no more often than two times a month. Said invoice shall be based on the total of all Consultant’s services which have been completed to City’s sole satisfaction. City shall pay Consultant’s invoice within forty-five (45) days from the date City receives said invoice. Each invoice shall describe in detail, the services performed, the date of performance, and the associated time for completion. Any additional services approved and performed pursuant to this Agreement shall be designated as “Additional Services” and shall identify the number of the authorized change order, where applicable, on all invoices.

2.4. Records and Audits. Records of Consultant’s services relating to this Agreement shall be maintained in accordance with generally recognized accounting principles and shall be made available to City or its Project Manager for inspection and/or audit at mutually convenient times from the Effective Date until three (3) years after termination of this Agreement.

3.0. TIME OF PERFORMANCE

3.1. Commencement and Completion of Work. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the parties, the professional services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall commence within five (5) days from the Effective Date of this Agreement. Failure to commence work in a timely manner and/or diligently pursue work to completion may be grounds for termination of this Agreement.

3.2. Excusable Delays . Neither party shall be responsible for delays or lack of performance resulting from acts beyond the reasonable control of the party or parties. Such acts shall include, but not be limited to, acts of God, fire, strikes, pandemics (excluding COVID-19), material shortages, compliance with laws or regulations, riots, acts of war, or any other conditions beyond the reasonable control of a party (each, a “Force Majeure Event”). If a party experiences a Force Majeure Event, the party shall, within five (5) days of the occurrence of the Force Majeure Event, give written notice to the other party stating the nature of the Force Majeure Event, its anticipated duration and any action being taken to avoid or minimize its effect. Any suspension of performance shall be of no greater scope and of no longer duration than is reasonably required and the party experiencing the Force Majeure Event shall use best efforts without being obligated to incur any material expenditure to remedy its inability to perform; provided, however, if the suspension of performance continues for sixty (60) days after the date of the occurrence and such failure to perform would constitute a material breach of this Agreement in the absence of such Force Majeure Event, the p arties shall meet and discuss in good faith any amendments to this Agreement to permit the other party to exercise its rights under this Agreement. If the parties are not able to agree on such amendments within thirty (30) days and if suspension of performance continues, such other p arty may terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the party experiencing the Force Majeure Event, in which case neither party shall have any liability to the other except for those rights and liabilities that accrued prior to the date of termination.

371
4 OCY Management, LLC
Rev. 4-2026

4.0. TERM AND TERMINATION

4.1. Term. This Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and continue for a period of five (5) years, ending on June 30, 2031, unless previously terminated as provided herein or as otherwise agreed to in writing by the parties.

4.2. Notice of Termination. The City reserves and has the right and privilege of canceling, suspending or abandoning the execution of all or any part of the work contemplated by this Agreement, with or without cause, at any time, by providing written notice to Consultant.

The termination of this Agreement shall be deemed effective upon receipt of the notice of termination. In the event of such termination, Consultant shall immediately stop rendering services under this Agreement unless directed otherwise by the City.

4.3. Compensation. In the event of termination, City shall pay Consultant for reasonable costs incurred and professional services satisfactorily performed up to and including the date of City’s written notice of termination. Compensation for work in progress shall be prorated based on the percentage of work completed as of the effective date of termination in accordance with the fees set forth herein. In ascertaining the professional services actually rendered hereunder up to the effective date of termination of this Agreement, consideration shall be given to both completed work and work in progress, to complete and incomplete drawings, and to other documents pertaining to the services contemplated herein whether delivered to the City or in the possession of the Consultant.

4.4. Documents. In the event of termination of this Agreement, all documents prepared by Consultant in its performance of this Agreement including, but not limited to, finished or unfinished design, development and construction documents, data studies, drawings, maps and reports, shall be delivered to the City within ten (10) days of delivery of termination notice to Consultant, at no cost to City. Any use of uncompleted documents without specific written authorization from Consultant shall be at City’s sole risk and without liability or legal expense to Consultant.

5.0. INSURANCE

5.1. Minimum Scope and Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall obtain, maintain, and keep in full force and effect during the life of this Agreement all of the following minimum scope of insurance coverages with an insurance company admitted to do business in California, rated “A,” Class X, or better in the most recent A.M. Best’s Rating Guide, and approved by City:

(a) Commercial general liability, including premises -operations, products/completed operations, broad form property damage, blanket contractual liability, independent contractors, personal injury or bodily injury with a policy limit of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence, Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00) general aggregate.

(b) Business automobile liability for owned vehicles, hired, and non-owned vehicles, with a policy limit of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage.

(c) Workers’ compensation insurance as required by the State of California. 372
5 OCY Management, LLC
Rev. 4-2026

Consultant agrees to waive, and to obtain endorsements from its workers’ compensation insurer waiving subrogation rights under its workers’ compensation insurance policy against the City, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers arising from work performed by Consultant for the City and to require each of its subcontractors, if any, to do likewise under their workers’ compensation insurance policies.

(d) Professional errors and omissions (“E&O”) liability insurance with policy limits of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00), combined single limits, per occurrence and aggregate. Architects’ and engineers’ coverage shall be endorsed to include contractual liability. If the policy is written as a “claims made” policy, the retro date shall be prior to the start of the contract work. Consultant shall obtain and maintain, said E&O liability insurance during the life of this Agreement and for three years after completion of the work hereunder.

5.2. Endorsements. The commercial general liability insurance policy and business automobile liability policy shall contain or be endorsed to contain the following provisions:

(a) Additional insureds: “The City of Costa Mesa and its elected and appointed boards, officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers are additional insureds with respect to: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant pursuant to its contract with the City; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant; automobiles owned, leased, hired, or borrowed by the Consultant.”

(b) Notice: “Said policy shall not terminate, be suspended, or voided, nor shall it be cancelled, nor the coverage or limits reduced, until thirty (30) days after written notice is given to City.”

(c) Other insurance: “The Consultant’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City of Costa Mesa, its officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers. Any other insurance maintained by the City of Costa Mesa shall be excess and not contributing with the ins urance provided by this policy.”

(d) Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City of Costa Mesa, its officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers.

(e) The Consultant’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer’s liability.

5.3. Deductible or Self-Insured Retention. If any of such policies provide for a deductible or self-insured retention to provide such coverage, the amount of such deductible or self-insured retention shall be approved in advance by City. No policy of insurance issued as to which the City is an additional insured shall contain a provision which requires that no insured except the named insured can satisfy any such deductible or self-insured retention. 373
6 OCY Management, LLC
Rev. 4-2026

5.4. Certificates of Insurance. Consultant shall provide to City certificates of insurance showing the insurance coverages and required endorsements described above, in a form and content approved by City, prior to performing any services under this Agreement.

5.5. Non-Limiting. Nothing in this Section shall be construed as limiting in any way, the indemnification provision contained in this Agreement, or the extent to which Consultant may be held responsible for payments of damages to persons or property.

6.0. GENERAL PROVISIONS

6.1. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to any matter referenced herein and supersedes any and all other prior writings and oral negotiations. This Agreement may be modified only in writing, and signed by the parties in interest at the time of such modification. The terms of this Agreement shall prevail over any inconsistent provision in any other contract document appurtenant hereto, including exhibits to this Agreement.

6.2. Representatives. The C ity Manager or his or her designee shall be the representative of City for purposes of this Agreement and may issue all consents, approvals, directives and agreements on behalf of the City, called for by this Agreement, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement.

Consultant shall designate a representative for purposes of this Agreement who shall be authorized to issue all consents, approvals, directives and agreements on behalf of Consultant called for by this Agreement, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement.

6.3. Project Managers. City shall designate a Project Manager to work directly with Consultant in the performance of this Agreement.

Consultant shall designate a Project Manager who shall represent it and be its agent in all consultations with City during the term of this Agreement. Consultant or its Project Manager shall attend and assist in all coordination meetings called by City.

6.4. Notices. Any notices, documents, correspondence or other communications concerning this Agreement or the work hereunder may be provided by personal delivery or mail and shall be addressed as set forth below. Such communication shall be deemed served or delivered: (a) at the time of delivery if such communication is sent by personal delivery, and (b) 48 hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail as reflected by the official U.S. postmark if such communication is sent through regular United States mail.

IF TO CONSULTANT: IF TO CITY:

OCY Management, LLC
520 Dyer Road
Santa Ana, CA 92707
City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Tel: (714) 754-5636 Tel: (714) 754-5636
Attn: Melissa Gomez Attn: Kevin Stoddart

374
7 OCY Management, LLC
Rev. 4-2026

Courtesy copy to:

City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Attn: Finance Dept. | Purchasing

6.5. Drug-Free Workplace Policy . Consultant shall provide a drug-free workplace by complying with all provisions set forth in City’s Council Policy 100-5, attached hereto as Exhibit “D” and incorporated herein. Consultant’s failure to conform to the requirements set forth in Council Policy 100-5 shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement and shall be cause for immediate termination of this Agreement by City.

6.6. Attorneys’ Fees . If litigation is brought by any party in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the opposing party all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred by the prevailing party in the exercise of any of its rights or remedies hereunder or the enforcement of any of the terms, conditions, or provisions hereof.

6.7. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of California without giving effect to that body of laws pertaining to conflict of laws. In the event of any legal action to enforce or interpret this Agreement, the parties hereto agree that the sole and exclusive venue shall be a court of competent jurisdiction located in Orange County, California.

6.8. Assignment. Consultant shall not voluntarily or by operation of law assign, transfer, sublet or encumber all or any part of Consultant’ s interest in this Agreement without City’s prior written consent. Any attempted assignment, transfer, subletting or encumbrance shall be void and shall constitute a breach of this Agreement and cause for termination of this Agreement. Regardless of City ’s consent, no subletting or assignment shall release Consultant of Consultant’s obligation to perform all other obligations to be performed by Consultant hereunder for the term of this Agreement.

6.9. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, hold free and harmless the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees, at Consultant’s sole expense, from and against any and all claims, actions, suits or other legal proceedings brought against the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees arising out of the performance of the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, of the work undertaken pursuant to this Agreement. The defense obligation provided for hereunder shall apply without any advance showing of negligence or wrongdoing by the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, but shall be required whenever any claim, action, complaint, or suit asserts as its basis the negligence, errors, omissions or misconduct of the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, and/or whenever any claim, action, complaint or suit asserts liability against the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees based upon the work performed by the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors under this Agreement, whether or not the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors are specifically named or otherwise asserted to be liable.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Consultant shall not be liable for the defense or indemnification of the City for claims, actions, complaints or suits arising out of the sole active negligence or willful 375
8 OCY Management, LLC
Rev. 4-2026

misconduct of the City. This provision shall supersede and replace all other indemnity provisions contained either in the City’s specifications or Consultant’s Proposal, which shall be of no force and effect.

6.10. Independent Contractor . Consultant is and shall be acting at all times as an independent contractor and not as an employee of City. Consultant shall have no power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability on behalf of City or otherwise act on behalf of City as an agent.

Neither City nor any of its agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant’s employees, except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not, at any time, or in any manner, represent that it or any of its agents or employees are in any manner agents or employees of City. Consultant shall secure, at its sole expense, and be responsible for any and all payment of Income Tax, Social Security, State Disability Insurance Compensation, Unemployment Compensation, and other payroll deductions for Consultant and its officers, agents, and employees, and all business licenses, if any are required, in connection with the services to be performed hereunder. Consultant shall indemnify and hold City harmless from any and all taxes, assessments, penalties, and interest asserted against City by reason of the independent contractor relationship created by this Agreement. Consultant further agrees to indemnify and hold City harmless from any failure of Consultant to comply with the applicable worker’s compensation laws. City shall have the right to offset against the amount of any fees due to Consultant under this Agreement any amount due to City from Consultant as a result of Consultant’s failure to promptly pay to City any reimbursement or indemnification arising under this paragraph.

6.11 Conflicts with Independent Contractor. Contractor/consultant’s duties and services under this Agreement shall not include preparing or assisting the public entity with any portion of the public entity’s preparation of a request for proposals, request for qualifications, or any other solicitation regarding a subsequent or additional contract with the public entity. The public entity entering into this Agreement shall at all times retain responsibility for public contracting, including with respect to any subsequent phase of this project. Contractor/consultant’s participation in the planning, discussions, or drawing of project plans or specifications shall be limited to conceptual, preliminary, or initial plans or specifications. Contractor/consultant shall cooperate with the public entity to ensure that all bidders for a subsequent contract on any subsequent phase of this project have access to the same information, including all conceptual, preliminary, or initial plans or specifications prepared by contractor pursuant to this Agreement.

6.12. PERS Eligibility Indemnification. In the event that Consultant or any employee, agent, or subcontractor of Consultant providing services under this Agreement claims or is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) to be eligible for enrollment in PERS as an employee of the City, Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City for the payment of any employee and/or employer contributions for PERS benefits on behalf of Consultant or its employees, agents, or subcontractors, as well as for the payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions, which would otherwise be the responsibility of City.

Notwithstanding any other agency, state or federal policy, rule, regulation, law or ordinance to the contrary, Consultant and any of its employees, agents, and subcontractors providing service under this Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled to, and hereby agree to waive any claims to, any compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by City, including but not limited to eligibility to enroll in PERS as an employee of City and entitlement to 376
9 OCY Management, LLC
Rev. 4-2026

any contribution to be paid by City for employer contribution and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits.

6.13. Cooperation. In the event any claim or action is brought against City relating to Consultant’s performance or services rendered under this Agreement, Consultant shall render any reasonable assistance and cooperation which City might require.

6.14. Ownership of Documents. All findings, reports, documents, information and data including, but not limited to, computer tapes or discs, files and tapes furnished or prepared by Consultant or any of its subcontractors in the course of performance of this Agreement, shall be and remain the sole property of City. Consultant agrees that any such documents or information shall not be made available to any individual or organization without the prior consent of City. Any use of such documents for other projects not contemplated by this Agreement, and any use of incomplete documents, shall be at the sole risk of City and without liability or legal exposure to Consultant. City shall indemnify and hold harmless Consultant from all claims, damages, losses, and expenses, including attorneys’ fees, arising out of or resulting from City’s use of such documents for other projects not contemplated by this Agreement or use of incomplete documents furnished by Consultant. Consultant shall deliver to City any findings, reports, documents, information, data, in any form, including but not limited to, computer tapes, discs, files audio tapes or any other Project related items as requested by City or its authorized representative, at no additional cost to the City.

6.15. Public Records Act Disclosure. Consultant has been advised and is aware that this Agreement and all reports, documents, information and data, including, but not limited to, computer tapes, discs or files furnished or prepared by Consultant, or any of its subcontractors, pursuant to this Agreement and provided to City may be subject to public disclosure as required by the California Public Records Act (California Government Code s ection 7920.000 et seq.).

Exceptions to public disclosure may be those documents or information that qualify as trade secrets, as that term is defined in the California Government Code section 7924.510, and of which Consultant informs City of such trade secret. The City will endeavor to maintain as confidential all information obtained by it that is designated as a trade secret. The City shall not, in any way, be liable or responsible for the disclosure of any trade secret including, without limitation, those records so marked if disclosure is deemed to be required by law or by order of the Court.

6.16. Conflict of Interest. Consultant and its officers, employees, associates and subconsultants, if any, will comply with all conflict of interest statutes of the State of California applicable to Consultant's services under this agreement, including, but not limited to, the Political Reform Act (Government Code sections 81000, et seq.) and Government Code s ection 1090.

During the term of this Agreement, Consultant and its officers, employees, associates and subconsultants shall not, without the prior written approval of the City Representative, perform work for another person or entity for whom Consultant is not currently performing work that would require Consultant or one of its officers, employees, associates or subconsultants to abstain from a decision under this Agreement pursuant to a conflict of interest statute.

6.17. Responsibility for Errors. Consultant shall be responsible for its work and results under this Agreement. Consultant, when requested, shall furnish clarification and/or explanation as may be required by the City’s representative, regarding any services rendered under this Agreement at no additional cost to City. In the event that an error or omission attributable to Consultant occurs, then Consultant shall, at no cost to City, provide all necessary design drawings, estimates and other Consultant professional services necessary to rectify and correct 377
10 OCY Management, LLC
Rev. 4-2026

the matter to the sole satisfaction of City and to participate in any meeting required with regard to the correction.

6.18. Prohibited Employment. Consultant will not employ any regular employee of City while this Agreement is in effect.

6.19. Order of Precedence. In the event of an inconsistency in this Agreement and any of the attached Exhibits, the terms set forth in this Agreement shall prevail . If, and to the extent this Agreement incorporates by reference any provision of any document, such provision shall be deemed a part of this Agreement. Nevertheless, if there is any conflict among the terms and conditions of this Agreement and those of any such provision or provisions so incorporated by reference, this Agreement shall govern over the document referenced.

6.20. Costs. Each party shall bear its own costs and fees incurred in the preparation and negotiation of this Agreement and in the performance of its obligations hereunder except as expressly provided herein.

6.21. Binding Effect. This Agreement binds and benefits the parties and their respective permitted successors and assigns.

6.22. No Third Party Beneficiary Rights . This Agreement is entered into for the sole benefit of City and Consultant and no other parties are intended to be direct or incidental beneficiaries of this Agreement and no third party shall have any right in, under or to this Agreement.

6.23. Headings. Paragraphs and subparagraph headings contained in this Agreement are included solely for convenience and are not intended to modify, explain or to be a full or accurate description of the content thereof and shall not in any way affect the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement.

6.24. Construction. The parties have participated jointly in the negotiation and drafting of this Agreement and have had an adequate opportunity to review each and every provision of the Agreement and submit the same to counsel or other consultants for review and comment. In the event an ambiguity or question of intent or interpretation arises with respect to this Agreement, this Agreement shall be construed as if drafted jointly by the parties and in accordance with its fair meaning. There shall be no presumption or burden of proof favoring or disfavoring any party by virtue of the authorship of any of the provisions of this Agreement.

6.25. Amendments . Only a writing executed by the parties hereto or their respective successors and assigns may amend this Agreement.

6.26. Waiver. The delay or failure of either party at any time to require performance or compliance by the other of any of its obligations or agreements shall in no way be deemed a waiver of those rights to require such performance or compliance. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the party against whom enforcement of a waiver is sought. The waiver of any right or remedy in respect to any occurrence or event shall not be deemed a waiver of any right or remedy in respect to any other occurrence or event, nor shall any waiver constitute a continuing waiver.

6.27. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court of 378
11 OCY Management, LLC
Rev. 4-2026

competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable in any circumstance, such determination shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining terms and provisions hereof or of the offending provision in any other circumstance. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the value of this Agreement, based upon the substantial benefit of the bargain for any party , is materially impaired, which determination made by the presiding court or arbitrator of competent jurisdiction shall be binding, then both parties agree to substitute such provision(s) through good faith negotiations.

6.28. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original. All counterparts shall be construed together and shall constitute one agreement.

6.29. Corporate Authority . The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the parties hereto warrant that they are duly authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of said parties and that by doing so the parties hereto are formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement.

[Signatures appear on following page.]
379
12 OCY Management, LLC
Rev. 4-2026

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by and through their respective authorized officers, as of the date first above written.

CONSULTANT

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Signature

__________________________________
[Name and Title]

CITY OF COSTA MESA

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Cecilia Gallardo-Daly
City Manager

ATTEST:

__________________________________
Brenda Green
City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Kimberly Hall Barlow
City Attorney

APPROVED AS TO INSURANCE:

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Ruth Wang
Risk Management

380
13 OCY Management, LLC
Rev. 4-2026

APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Kevin Stoddart
Project Manager

DEPARTMENTAL APPROVAL:

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Brian Gruner
Parks and Community Services Director

APPROVED AS TO PURCHASING:

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Finance Director

381

EXHIBIT A

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

382
383
384

If clarification or interpretation of this solicitation is considered necessary by City, a written addendum shall be issued and the information will be posted on PlanetBids. Any interpretation of, or correction to, this solicitation will be made only by addendum issued by the City’s Purchasing Department. It is the responsibility of each Proposer to periodically check PlanetBids website to ensure that it has received and reviewed any and all addenda to this solicitation. The City will not be responsible for any other explanations, corrections to, or interpretations of the documents, including any oral information.

2. Schedule of Events: This Request For Proposal shall be governed by the following schedule:

3. Release of RFP February 23, 2026 at 5:00pm

4. Deadline for Written Questions March 2, 2026 at 10:00am.

5. Responses to Questions Posted March 6, 2026 at 5:00pm

6. Proposals are Due March 11, 2026 at 10:00am

7. Interviews (if held) March 25-26, 2026

8. Approval of Contract April 2026
**All dates are subject to change at the discretion of the City.

3. Proposer’s Minimum Requirements: Interested and qualified Proposers that can demonstrate their ability to successfully provide the required services outlined in Appendix A– Scope of Work, of this RFP are invited to submit a proposal, provided they meet the following requirements. All requirements must be met at the time of the proposal due date. If these requirements are not met, the proposal may not receive further consideration, as determined in the sole discretion of the City.

1. Must have familiarity with the Measure M2 funded Senior Mobility Program administered by Orange County Transportation Authority.

2. Must demonstrate fleet capacity to meet the needs of the Senior Transportation Program.

3. Must have the ability to flexibly adjust operational parameters of the service at the request of the city, which include collection of copays, limiting destinations based on either boundaries or singular addresses, and limiting rides per client per month. The operational model of the Senior Transportation Program is currently under review by the Parks and Community Services Commission and the City Council will make a final determination on the aforementioned parameters on April 26, 2026 when this contract is awarded.

4. Must have the ability to submit, ridership data, driver training documents, vehicle maintenance records, and any other document requests that may be required by the Orange County Transportation Authority through the county-wide Senior Transportation Program.

5. Must provide three Municipal/County client references; please include contact information.

385

6. Must state whether the company is a party to a lawsuit with any public entity. If so, please provide the case number and a brief summary of the cause of action.

7. Must state whether the contractor has ever been a party to any contract that was terminated by any public entity; please include the name of the public entity, nature of the contract, and reasons for termination.

II. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS AND PROVISIONS

1. Proposal Format Guidelines: Interested entities or contractors are to provide the City of Costa Mesa with a thorough Proposal using the following guidelines: Proposal should be typed and should contain no more than 20 typed pages using a 12- point font size, including transmittal letter and resumes of key people, but excluding Index/Table of Contents, tables, charts, graphic exhibits and prici ng forms. Each Proposal will adhere to the following order and content of sections. Proposal should be straightforward, concise and provide “layman” explanations of technical terms that are used. Emphasis should be concentrated on conforming to the RFP instructions, responding to the RFP requirements, and on providing a complete and clear description of the offer. Proposals which appear unrealistic in terms of technical commitments, lack of technical competence or are indicative of failure to comprehend the complexity and risk of this contract may be rejected. The following Proposal sections are to be included in the Proposer’s response:
• Cover Letter: A cover letter, not to exceed three pages in length, should summarize key elements of the Proposal. An individual authorized to bind the Contractor must sign the letter. Indicate the address and telephone number of the contractor’s office located nearest to Costa Mesa, California, and the office from which the project will be managed. Include proposed working relationship among the offering agency and subcontractors, if applicable.

• Background and Project Summary Section: The Background and Project Summary Section should describe your understanding of the City, the work to be done, and the objectives to be accomplished. Refer to Scope of Work, Appendix A of this RFP.

• Method of Approach: Provide a detailed description of the approach and methodology that will be used to fulfill each requirement listed in the Scope of Work of this RFP. The section should include:

1. An implementation plan that describes in detail (i) the methods, including controls by which your firm manages projects of the type sought by this RFP; (ii) methodology for soliciting and documenting views of internal and external stakeholders; (iii) and any other project management or implementation strategies or techniques that the respondent intends to employ in carrying out the work.

2. Detailed description of efforts your firm will undertake to achieve client satisfaction and to satisfy the requirements of the "Scope of Work" section. 386

3. Detailed project schedule, identifying all tasks and deliverables to be performed, durations for each task, and overall time of completion.

4. Detailed description of specific tasks you will require from City staff. Explain what the respective roles of City staff and your staff would be to complete the tasks specified in the Scope of Work.

5. Proposers are encouraged to provide additional innovative and/or creative approaches for providing the service that will maximize efficient, safe, and cost - effective operations or increased performance capabilities.

• Qualifications & Experience of the Firm: Describe the qualifications and experience of the organization or entity performing services/projects within the past eight years that are similar in size and scope to demonstrate competence to perform these services. Information shall include:

1. If the owner is a corporation please provide: Name of corporation, corporate office street address, city, state, and zip code, state where incorporated, date of incorporation, first and last name of officers, local office address, city, state & zip, and the date local office opened its doors for business.

2. If the owner is a partnership or joint venture, please provide: Name of partnership or joint venture, principal office street address, city, state, and zip code, state of organization, date of organization, first and last name of general partner(s), local office address, city, state, and zip code, and date local office opened its doors for.

3. List all businesses owned or controlled by yourself (applicant) or business manager doing similar business in California under another business name. List business name and address and specify who owns or controls the business (e.g., self, business manager, etc.).

4. List all businesses for which you or your business manager is or was an officer, director, or partner doing similar business in California under another business name.

List business name and address, title, date(s) in position; specify who was in position (e.g., self, business manager, etc.).

5. How many years have you been in business under your present business name?

6. Provide a list of current and previous contracts similar to the requirements for Costa Mesa, including all public agencies served (if any). For each, provide a brief description of the scope of work performed, the length of time you have been providing services, and the name, title, and telephone number of the person who may be contacted regarding your organization’s service record. Provide a sample of each background investigation for each contract.

7. Submit a description of the organization’s qualifications, experience and abilities that make it uniquely capable to provide the services specified in the Scope of Work. 387

8. The City of Costa Mesa is interested in knowing how Proposers support the communities that they serve. Please provide information on your organization’s participation in local community, charitable and civic organizations and events, including membership in the Costa Mesa Chamber of Commerce, charitable contributions made by your organization, etc.

Any public entity which submits a Proposal should describe in detail how it currently performs services like those identified in the Scope of Work within its or other jurisdictions, including photographs, written policies and/or video of services provided. If you have performed these services under contract for another public entity, please provide references for those entities as set forth above for private Proposers.
• Financial Capacity: The City is concerned about bidders’ financial capability to perform, therefore, please provide sufficient data to allow an evaluation of firm’s financial capabilities.

• Key Personnel: It is essential that the Proposer provide adequate experienced personnel, capable of and devoted to the successful accomplishment of work to be performed under this contract. The Proposer must agree to assign specific individuals to the key positions. o Identify the members of the staff who would be assigned to act for Proposer’s firm in key management and field positions providing the services described in the Proposal, and the functions to be performed by each.

o Include resumes or curriculum vitae of each such staff member, including name, position, telephone number, email address, education, and years and type of experience. Describe for each such person, the relevant transactions on which they have worked.

• Cost Proposal:

Provide a fee schedule/pricing information for the project as referenced in the attached in Appendix C. Proposals shall be valid for a minimum of 180 days following submission.

• Disclosure: Please disclose any and all past or current business and personal relationships with any current Costa Mesa elected official, appointed official, City employee, or family member of any current Costa Mesa elected official, appointed official, or City employee. Any past or current bus iness relationship may or may not disqualify the firm from consideration.

• Sample Professional Service Agreement: The firm selected by the City will be required to execute a Professional Services Agreement with the City. A sample of the Agreement is enclosed as Appendix B, but may be modified to suit the specific services and needs of the City. If a Proposer has any exceptions or conditions to the Agreement, these must be submitted for consideration with the Proposal. Otherwise, the Proposer will be deemed to have accepted the form of Agreement. See No. 12 of this RFP below.

• Checklist of Forms to Accompany Proposal: The following is a list of the forms, Appendix C included in this RFP, which must be completed in full and included with Proposals:

1. Vendor Application Form
388

2. Company Profile & References

3. Ex Parte Communications Certificate

4. Disclosure of Government Positions

5. Disqualifications Questionnaire

6. Bidder/Applicant/Contractor Campaign Contribution

7. Cost Proposal

2. Process for Submitting Proposals:
• Content of Proposal: The Proposal must be submitted using the format as indicated in the Proposal format guidelines.

• Preparation of Proposal: Each Proposal shall be prepared simply and economically, avoiding the use of elaborate promotional material beyond those sufficient to provide a complete, accurate and reliable presentation.

• Cost for Preparing Proposal : The cost for developing the Proposal is the sole responsibility of the Proposer. All Proposals submitted become the property of the City. Fee proposal shall be submitted in a separate file containing the following:
 Cover letter stating the total lump sum fee.
 A spreadsheet with a detailed fee schedule of the proposed costs. Each fee schedule shall depict individual project tasks, number of hours assigned for specific personnel and their basic hourly rates, mark up on supplies, if any, etc..

• Forms to Accompany Proposal: Appendix C forms shall be attached at the end of the Proposal with the exception of the Cost Proposal which shall be submitted in a separate file.

• Number of Proposals: Submit one (1) PDF file format copy of your proposal in sufficient detail for thorough evaluation and comparative analysis

• Submission of Proposals: Complete written Proposals must be submitted electronically in PDF file format via the planetbids.com website not later than 10:00 a.m. (P.S.T) on March 11, 2026. Proposals will not be accepted after this deadline.

Bids received after the scheduled closing time will not be accepted. It shall be the sole responsibility of the Bidder to see that the bid is received by the deadline. Faxed or e-mailed Proposals will not be accepted. NO EXCEPTIONS.

• Inquiries: Questions about this RFP must be posted in the Q & A tab on Planetbids no later than March 2, 2026 at 10:00 A.M. The City reserves the right not to answer all questions.

The City reserves the right to amend or supplement this RFP prior to the Proposal due date.

All addenda, responses to questions received, and additional information will be posted to the Costa Mesa Procurement Registry, Costa Mesa-Official City Web Site, Business-Bids & RFP's. Proposers should check this web page daily for new information.

From the date that this RFP is issued until a firm or entity is selected and the selection is announced, firms or public entities are not allowed to communicate outside the process set forth in this RFP with any City employee other than the contracting officer listed herein regarding this RFP. The City reserves the right to reject any Proposal for violation of this 389

provision. No questions other than posted on Planetbids will be accepted, and no response other than written will be binding upon the City.

• Conditions for Proposal Acceptance: This RFP does not commit the City to award a contract or to pay any costs incurred for any services. The City, at its sole discretion, reserves the right to accept or reject any or all Proposals received as a result of this RFP, to negotiate with any qualified source(s), or to cancel this RFP in part or in its entirety. The City may waive any irregularity in any Proposal. All Proposals will become the property of the City of Costa Mesa, California. If any proprietary information is contained in the Proposal, it should be clearly identified.

• Insurance & W-9 Requirements:

Upon recommendation of contract award, Contractor will
be required to submit the following documents with ten (10) days of City notification, unless otherwise specified in the solicitation:

 Insurance - City requires that licensees, lessees, and Contractor s have an approved Certificate of Insurance (not a declaration or policy) or proof of legal self-insurance on file with the City for the issuance of a permit or contract. Within ten (10) consecutive calendar days of award of contract, successful Bidder must furnish the City with the Certificates of Insurance proving coverage as specified in the sample contract.

 W-9 – Current signed form W -9 (Taxpayer Identification Nu mber & Certification) which includes Contractor’s legal business name(s).

3. Evaluation Criteria: The City’s evaluation and selection process will be conducted in accordance with Title II, Chapter V, Article 2 of the City's Municipal Code (Code). In accordance with the Code, the most qualified responsive and responsible proposer shall be determ ined based on evaluation of qualitative factors in addition to cost. At all times during the evaluation process, the following criteria will be used. Sub- criteria are not necessarily listed in order of importance. Additional sub-criteria that logically fit within a particular evaluation criteria may also be considered even if not specified below.

1. Qualifications of Experience of Key Personnel ------- 15%

2. Qualifications of the Firm ----30%

3. Method of Approach ----35%

4. Cost Proposal ---- 20%

4. Evaluation of Proposals and Selection Process: In accordance with its Municipal Code, the City will adhere to the following procedures in evaluating Proposals. An Evaluation Committee, which may include members of the City's staff and possibly one or more outside experts, will screen and review all Proposals according to the weighted criteria set forth above.

While price is one basic factor for award, it is not the sole consideration.

A. Responsiveness Screening : Proposals will first be screened to ensure responsiveness to the RFP. The City may reject as non-responsive any Proposal that 390

does not include the documents required to be submitted by this RFP. At any time during the evaluation process, the City reserves the right to request clarifications or additional information from any or all Proposers regarding their Proposals.

B. Initial Proposal Review: The Committee will initially review and score all responsive written Proposals based upon the Evaluation Criteria set forth above. The Committee may also contact Proposer's references. Proposals that receive the highest evaluation scores may be invited to the next stage of the evaluation process. The City may reject any Proposal in which a Proposer’s approach, qualifications, or price is not considered acceptable by the City. An unacceptable Proposal is one that would have to be substantially rewritten to make it acceptable. The City may conclude the evaluation process at this point and recommend award to the most qualified or lowest responsible bidder. Alternatively, the City may elect to negotiate directly with one or more Proposers to obtain the best result for the City prior to making a recommendation or selection.

C. Interviews, Reference Checks, Revised Proposals, Discussions: Following the initial screening and review of Proposals, the Proposers included in this stage of the evaluation process will be invited to participate in an oral interview. Interviews are tentatively scheduled for the week of March 25-26, 2026 and will be conducted at City of Costa Mesa City Hall, 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 . This date is subject to change. The individual(s) from Proposer's organization that will be directly responsible for carrying out the contract, if awarded, should be present at the oral interview. The oral interview may, but is not required to, use a written question/answer format for the purpose of clarifying the intent of any portions of t he Proposal.

In addition to conducting an oral interview, the City may during this stage of the evaluation process also contact and evaluate the Proposer’s references, contact any Proposer to clarify any response or request revised or additional information, contact any current users of a Proposer’s services, solicit information from any available source concerning any aspect of a Proposal, and seek and review any other information deemed pertinent to the evaluation process.

Following conclusion of this stage of the evaluation process, the Committee will again rank all Proposers according to the evaluation criteria set forth above. The Committee may conclude the evaluation process at this point, and make a recommendation for award, or it may request Best and Final Offers from Proposers. The City may accept the Proposal or negotiate the terms and conditions of the agreement with the highest ranked organization. The City may recommend award without Best and Final Offers, so Proposers should include their best Proposal with their initial submission.

Recommendation for award is contingent upon the successful negotiation of final contract terms. Negotiations shall be confidential and not subject to disclosure to competing Proposers unless an agreement is reached. If contract negotiations cannot be concluded successfully within a time period determined by the City, the City may terminate negotiations and commence negotiations with the next highest scoring Proposer or withdraw the RFP.
391

5. Protests: Failure to comply with the rules set forth herein may result in rejection of the protest.

Protests based upon restrictive specifications or alleged improprieties in the Proposal procedure, which are apparent or reasonably should have been discovered prior to receipt of Proposals shall be filed in writing with the City’s Purchasing Department at least 10 calendar days prior to the deadline for receipt of Proposals. The protest must clearly specify in writing the grounds and evidence on which the protest is based.

Protests based upon alleged improprieties that are not apparent or that could not reasonably have been discovered prior to submission date of the Proposals, such as disputes over the staff recommendation for contract award, shall be submitted in w riting to the City’s Purchasing Department, within 48 hours from receipt of the notice from the City advising of City’s recommendation for award of contract. The protest must clearly specify in writing the grounds and evidence on which the protest is based. The City’s Purchasing Department will respond to the protest in writing at least 3 days prior to the meeting at which City’s recommendation to the City Council will be considered. Should Proposer decide to appeal the response of the City’s Purchasing Department, and pursue its protest at the Council meeting, it will notify the City’s Purchasing Department of its intention at least 2 days prior to the scheduled meeting.

A. Procedure – All protests shall be typed under the protester’s letterhead and submitted in accordance with the provisions stated herein. All protests shall include at a minimum the following information:
• The name, address and telephone number of the protester; • The signature of the protester or the protester’s representative; • The solicitation or contract number;
• A detailed statement of the legal and/or factual grounds for the protest; and • The form of relief requested.

6. Accuracy of Proposals: Proposers shall take all responsibility for any errors or omissions in their Proposals. Should there be any discrepancies in numbers or calculations, the lowest price or total shall prevail.

If prior to contract award, a Proposer discovers a mistake in their Proposal which renders the Proposer unwilling to perform under any resulting contract, the Proposer must immediately notify the facilitator and request to withdraw the Proposal. It shall be solely within the City's discretion as to whether withdrawal will be permitted. If the solicitation contemplated evaluation and award of "all or none" of the items, then any withdrawal must be for the entire Proposal. If the solicitation provided for evaluation and award on a line item or combination of items basi s, the City may consider permitting withdrawal of specific line item(s) or combination of items. Any Proposer who withdraws a Proposal will be ineligible to bid further on the work included in the RFP scope.

7. Responsibility of Proposers: The City shall not be liable for any expenses incurred by potential Contractors in the preparation or submission of their Proposals. Pre- contractual expenses are not to be included in the Contractor’s Pricing Sheet. Pre- contractual expenses are defined as, including but not limited to, expenses incurred by Proposer in:

• Preparing Proposal in response to this RFP;
• Submitting that Proposal to the City;
• Negotiating with the City any matter related to the Proposal; and, 392

• Any other expenses incurred by the Proposer prior to the date of the award and execution, if any, of the contract.

8. Confidentiality: The California Public Records Act (Cal. Govt. Code Sections 7920.000, et seq.) mandates public access to government records. Therefore, unless information is exempt from disclosure by law, the content of any request for explanation, exception, or substitution, response to this RFP, protest, or any other written communication between the City and Proposer, shall be available to the public. The City intends to release all public portions of the Proposals following the evaluation process at such time as a recommendation is made to the City Council.

If Proposer believes any communication contains trade secrets or other proprietary information that the Proposer believes would cause substantial injury to the Proposer’s competitive position if disclosed, the Proposer shall request that the City withhold from disclosure the proprietary information by marking each page containing such proprietary information as confidential.

Proposer may not designate its entire Proposal as confidential nor designate its Price Proposal as confidential.

Submission of a Proposal shall indicate that, if Proposer requests that the City withhold from disclosure information identified as confidential, and the City complies with the Proposer’s request, Proposer shall assume all responsibility for any challenges resulting from the non- disclosure, indemnify and hold harmless the City from and against all damages (including but not limited to attorney’s fees and costs that may be awarded to the party requesting the Proposer information), and pay any and all costs and expenses related to the withholding of Proposer information. Proposer shall not make a claim, sue, or maintain any legal action against the City or its directors, officers, employees, or agents concerning the disclosure, or withholding from disclosure, of any Proposer information. If Proposer does not request that the City withhold from disclosure information identified as confidential, the City shall have no obligation to withhold the information from disclosure and may release the information sought without any liability to the City.

9. Ex Parte Communications: Proposers and Proposers’ representatives should not communicate with the City Co uncil members about this RFP. In addition, Proposers and Proposers’ representatives should not communicate outside the procedures set forth in this RFP with an officer, employee or agent of the City, including any member of the evaluation panel, with the e xception of the RFP Facilitator, regarding this RFP until after Contract Award.

Proposers and their representatives are not prohibited, however, from making oral statements or presentations in public to one or more representatives of the City during a public meeting.

A "Proposer" or "Proposer's representative" includes all of the Proposer's employees, officers, directors, consultants and agents, any subcontractors or suppliers listed in the Proposer's Proposal, and any individual or entity who has been requested by the Proposer to contact the City on the Proposer's behalf. Proposers shall include the Ex Parte Communications Form in Appendix C with their Proposals certifying that they have not had or directed prohibited communications as described in this section.

10. Conflict of Interest: The Proposer warrants and represents that it presently has no interest and agrees that it will not acquire any interest which would present a conflict of interest under California Government Code Sections 1090, et seq., or Sections 87100, et seq., during the performance of services under any Agreement awarded. The Proposer further covenants that it 393

will not knowingly employ any person having such an interest in the performance of any Agreement awarded. Violation of this provision may result in any Agreement awarded being deemed void and unenforceable.

11. Disclosure of Governmental Position : In order to analyze possible conflicts that might prevent a Proposer from acting on behalf of the City, the City requires that all Proposers disclose in their Proposals any positions that they hold as directors, officers, or employees of any governmental entity. Additional disclosure may be required prior to contract award or during the term of the contract. Each Proposer shall disclose whether any owner or employee of the firm currently hold positions as elected or appointed officials, directors, officers, or employees of a governmental entity or held such positions in the past twelve months using the attached Disclosure of Government Positions Form in Appendix C.

12. Conditions to Agreement: The selected Proposer will execute a Professional Services Agreement for Services with the City describing the Scope of Services to be performed, the schedule for completion of the services, compensation, and other pertinent provisions. The contract shall follow the sample form of Agreement provided as Appendix B to this RFP, which may be modified by the City.

All Proposers are directed to particularly review the indemnification and insurance requirements set forth in the sample A greement. The terms of the agreement, including insurance requirements have been mandated by the City and can be modified only if extraordinary circumstances exist.

Submittal of a Proposal shall be deemed acceptance of all the terms set forth in this RFP and the sample agreement for services unless the Proposer includes with its Proposal, in writing, any conditions or exceptions requested by the Proposer to the proposed Agreement.

13. Disqualification Questionnaire: Proposers shall complete and submit, under penalty of perjury, a standard form of questionnaire inquiring whether a Proposer, any officer of a Proposer, or any employee of a Proposer who has a proprietary interest in the Proposer, has ever been disqualified, removed, or otherwise prevented from proposing on, or completing a federal, state, or local government project because of a violation of law or safety regulation and if so, to explain the circumstances. A Proposal may be rejected on the basis of a Proposer, any officer or employee of such Proposer, having been disqualified, removed, or otherwise prevented from proposing on, or completing a federal, state, or local project because of a violation of law or a safety regulation, included in Appendix C.

14. Standard Terms and Conditions: The City reserves the right to amend or supplement this RFP prior to the Proposal due date. All addenda and additional information will be posted to www.Planetbids.com
394

APPENDIX A

395

City of Costa Mesa
Scope of Services - Senior Transportation Programs
Background
The City of Costa Mesa Parks and Community Services Department participates in Orange County Transportation Authority’s (OCTA) Senior Mobility Program funded by tax measure M2. The program is designed to fill the gap between local fixed-route buses and ADA paratransit, or OC ACCESS service, by providing local transportation services to Costa Mesa residents ages 60 years and older within Orange County. The operation of the program is tied to the City’s M2 allocation for senior mobility, but the city continually seeks grant funding to augment the program to the benefit if the City’s residents.

General Scope of Work for Senior Transportation
Contractor shall provide professional transportation services to eligible Costa Mesa residents ages 60 and older within Costa Mesa’s borders, throughout Orange County, and to the Veteran’s Affairs Hospital in Long Beach as specified by the City of Costa Mesa beginning July 1, 2026. Vendor must have the ability to flexibly implement cost control measures that include destination limits or geographic boundaries, ridership quotas, and collect copays. Initial cost control measures will be established based on Contractor’s cost proposals and will be communicated at the award of contract. The City of Costa Mesa will consider both shuttle and taxi-based transportation models and may award multiple contracts if a hybrid service model suits the City’s needs.

Professional services are required by the City’s Senior Transportation Program include the following tasks:

1. Contractor will meet with City staff regarding the schedule, status, and program services on a monthly basis, at a minimum.

2. Door-To-Door Service. The Contractor shall provide door -to-door transportation of eligible Costa Mesa residents ages 60 and older to and/or from the Costa Mesa Senior Center (CMSC) and transportation for the following purposes: medical appointments, nutrition, shopping, personal care, and social/recreational.

3. The maximum service area Contractor is expected to provide services to include the entirety of Orange County and the Long Beach Veterans Affair Hospital.

4. Contractor must have the ability to limit rides within defined geographic boundaries, such as within one mile of Costa Mesa’s borders, as well as service satellite locations that may fall outside of the defined geographic boundary as needed by the City of Costa Mesa.

5. Contractor must have the ability to collect copays from riders via cash or credit card.

6. Contractor must have the ability to implement monthly ridership quotas on a per rider basis.

7. Contractor must have the ability to scale operations within a reasonable amount of time if the City wishes to temporarily expand the service area, reduce copays, adjust ridership quotas, or other program modifications that may increase or decrease ridership.

8. Taxi based models must provide a Fee Schedule that includes a flat rate per one way ride that originates and ends within Costa Mesa’s boundaries and may include an additional per mile fee for any rides that extend beyond the City’s boundaries. Shuttle based models will provide a Fee Schedule that consists of an hourly rate per vehicle.

9. Contractor will invoice the City at the rate agreed to by the City and identified in Fee Schedule and must have the ability to invoice the city separately for different types of rides, e.g., non-emergency medical rides and non-medical rides.

10. Contractor must comply with all state and federal regulations, as well as any additional OCTA requirements of Senior Mobility Program service providers, relating to driver training, licensing, 396

vehicle inspections, maintenance documentation, and allowable hours on duty requirements, drug and alcohol testing, etc.

11. The Contractor shall provide a toll -free telephone number for use by Senior Transportation Program clients. The Contractor shall accept telephone reservations from Costa Mesa for Senior Transportation Program patrons and dispatch a vehicle to the requested pick -up location within the City. Booking via smart phone application is desirable, but not required.

12. The earliest notice Contractor requires to guarantee an ADA compliant vehicle shall be the earliest in advance any rides shall be booked. For example, if Contractor can guarantee ADA complaint vehicle bookings with 48 hour notice, all rides must be booked 48 hours or more in advance.

13. Contractor shall participate in on-going customer relations efforts as coordinated by the City.

14. Contractor shall provide the necessary staff, equipment, and vehicle(s) to ensure efficient and timely administration of reservations, scheduling, customer service, and dispatch of City senior transportation trips in accordance with the service schedules and policies set forth by the City, and will provide substitute drivers in the event of absence from assigned/designated driver.

15. Contractor shall supply audio transcripts and/or video footage of the vehicle cabin space to the City in order to settle disputes and complaints from customers.

16. Drivers must be legally licensed to operate a motor vehicle in the Stage of California, be in good standing with the DMV, able to speak, understand, and read English adequately, and treat all passengers with respect and courtesy. Bilingual drivers are highly desirable.

17. Contractor must demonstrate it has an acceptable recruitment and hiring program, which is intended to minimize driver turnover and retain a high quality driver workforce

18. The City may require at any time that any driver be removed from transporting City customers for complaints, rudeness, or other inappropriate behavior or appearance, and may also request specific drivers from the said Contractor who provide exceptional customer service and have established rapport with customers.

19. Driver feedback about schedules, customers’ needs, vehicle maintenance, and working conditions is expected.

20. Contractor will be responsible for all training of the vehicle driver and ensuring all training and certifications are current, service policies, passenger fares, etc.

21. Contractor shall comply fully with state and federal regulations pertaining to licensing and operations of vehicles, which are contained in the California Vehicle Code, California Administrative Code, and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations.

22. Contractor shall comply with the California OSHA requirements including the requirement of SB 198 to develop and implement an employee injury prevention program.

23. Contractor is required to provide a computerized system for trip reservations, scheduling, and dispatch of senior transportation services as well as for the collection, recording, and reporting of operational and performance data regarding these services.

24. City staff shall have access to a ride scheduling portal should the need arise for City staff to book rides for clients at the senior center or to view the status of any rides currently s cheduled or in progress on any given day.

25. Contractor shall notify the City within 24 hours of any accidents/incidents, and ensure proper follow up on any accidents/incidents, where appropriate, to ensure that any unresolved safety hazards or liability issues are addressed.

26. Vehicle Collisions: The Contractor shall have sole responsibility, at its own cost and expense, for repair of any vehicle damaged in a vehicular accident or by any passenger. The City retains the right to investigate any vehicular collision involving the Contractor, and may request drug/alcohol screening of a driver found to be at fault under specific circumstances.

27. Contractor shall provide monthly ridership data that complies with OCTA’s Senior Mobility Program’s reporting requirements, which includes: client name, vehicle number, trip date, scheduled pick up time, actual pick up time, pick up address, pick up city, pick up odometer, drop 397

off address, drop off city, drop off time, drop off odometer, number of passengers, vehicle type, and trip category

28. Retention/Review of Records. The Contractor shall maintain all records pertaining to the services as required by OCTA Project U Funding and Policy Guidelines. The Contractor shall make its records available to the City upon request during regular business hours either for inspection or audit.

29. Vehicles shall remain clean and free from body damage. Driver shall inspect vehicle daily, before pulling out of the yard in accordance with state requirements. Contractor shall ensure that a Preventative Maintenance Inspection (PMI) is performed on vehicles in at least 3,000- mile intervals.

30. The City reserves the right to remove from service any vehicle that does not meet its appearance and cleanliness standards.

31. Payments for all specified services will be made based on the following: customer satisfaction, receipt of a detailed invoice sent in no later than the 15th day of the services for the preceding month (i.e., an invoice for services performed January 1st through 31st should be received by the City no later than February 15th)

32. The Senior Transportation Program will operate and provide services, excluding City observed holidays, Monday through Friday, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. until 4 p.m. Additional transportation may be required to and from special events at the Senior Center during non-operating hours.

398

EXHIBIT B

CONSULTANT’S PROPOSAL

399
1 OCY Management, LLC
Formally known as:

Cabco Yellow Inc.

DBA California Yellow Cab
City o
f Costa Mesa
Senior Transportation Services
February 27, 2026
400
2 3
4 5
13 14
16 23
Table of Contents
Cover Letter
Background & Project Summary
Method of Approach
Qualifications
Experience of the Firm
Key Personnel
Appendix C Forms
401
3 OCY Management, LLC
Febru
ary 27, 2026
Mike Fuentes
Finance Dept. Buyer
77 Fair Drive
1st Floor
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Hello Mr.

Fuentes,
OCY Management, LLC (OCY), formerly known as Cabco Yellow Inc., respectfully submits its interest in providing transportation services to the City of Costa Mesa. This proposal shall remain valid for a minimum of 180 days from the date of submission.

OCY has a long-standing history of delivering transportation services that extend well beyond traditional taxicab operations. Early in our development, we recognized underserved populations within Orange County and designed flexible, on-demand transportation solutions to address the limitations of public transit. Today, OCY operates the largest and most adaptable taxicab fleet in the county, offering seniors and paratransit passengers reliable transportation without the constraints of fixed bus schedules.

We are confident in our ability to successfully support this program through our experienced drivers and dedicated staff. Our drivers are professional, patient, and safety-focused, consistently treating senior passengers with the respect and care they deserve.

OCY currently serves as a transportation contractor for more than fifteen senior transportation programs throughout Orange County, including the Cities of Costa Mesa, Rancho Santa Margarita, Laguna Woods, Aliso Viejo, Laguna Niguel, Orange, Garden Grove, Seal Beach, and others.

We appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal and look forward to the possibility of continuing to serve and support the transportation needs of seniors in the City of Costa Mesa.

Sincerely,
Akbar M
ajid
President
402
4 Background & Project Summary
We have over 25 years of experience in the transportation industry, delivering Senior Mobility Program services across 20 cities, including the City of Costa Mesa for the last 5 years. As the incumbent provider, we possess a thorough understanding of the City’s requirements and the objectives to be achieved.

Leveraging more than 100 years of combined team experience, we are well- equipped to manage the full scope of work and consistently deliver services that meet the highest standards of reliability and effectiveness.

403
5 Method of Approach
OCY proposes establishing a dedicated toll-free telephone number for Senior Mobility Program (SMP) participants in the City of Costa Mesa. Through this number, program patrons may request on-demand transportation during program service hours, with the expectation that a vehicle will arrive at the designated pick-up location within sixty (60) minutes.

The toll-free line will automatically recognize callers as program participants, requiring them only to provide basic trip details and their SMP identification number, also known as a Passenger ID number. As the City of Costa Mesa’s current transportation provider, OCY can either continue using the existing toll- free number or establish a new one, based on the City’s preference.

In addition to standard on-demand service, participants may use the same toll- free number and identification process to schedule trips up to two weeks in advance. This advanced scheduling allows OCY dispatchers and routing staff to plan and assign trips to designated drivers ahead of time, ensuring efficient and reliable service.

Reporting and Billing
All OCY documentation and reporting are managed through our proprietary digital dispatch system. In addition to providing monthly trip data and invoicing, the system maintains highly detailed electronic records that are securely archived and can be accessed and compiled into customized reports within as little as twenty-four hours.

The information collected, stored, and readily available for reporting includes essential dispatch details such as passenger names, pick-up locations, destinations, travel dates and times, passenger identification numbers, and additional contact information. Beyond standard trip data, the system also captures GPS “ping” data from each vehicle, providing accurate records of 404
6 routes taken, vehicle speeds, and performance metrics. Comprehensive records of customer interactions are maintained as well, including audio recordings of all inbound and outbound calls, along with detailed trip event logs documenting pick-up and drop-off times.
**Under c
urrent SMP reporting requirements, both pick-up and drop-off odometer readings are recorded. OCTA has approved OCY’s method of reporting the pick-up odometer reading as zero (0) and using the drop-off reading to reflect the total mileage for each trip.

Complaints and Incidents
The Pro
ject Manager will review all complaints and concerns within twenty-four (24) hours of receipt. A proposed resolution will be identified promptly, and the City will be notified of the issue and its status within forty-eight (48) hours.

Appropriate remedies will be implemented as necessary to prevent similar issues from occurring in any area of operations.

As a serv
ice-oriented organization, OCY maintains that any incident is unacceptable. Upon receipt of an incident report, the Project Manager will assume responsibility for gathering all relevant details and conducting appropriate follow-up. A comprehensive written report documenting any accident, injury, or dispute will be prepared and submitted to the City.

In accordance with standard operating procedures, all accidents receive immediate attention from OCY’s accident investigation team. These investigators are responsible for responding promptly when applicable and for completing a formal investigation using established reporting protocols. Each investigation includes interviews with involved parties, on-site measurements, and photographic documentation of the incident and surrounding conditions.

Additio
nally, detailed trip-level data is included with each monthly invoice.

Ridership is itemized on a line-by-line basis to support program auditing, transparency, and effective oversight.
405
7 Experience
OCY has provided senior and paratransit transportation services since its founding more than thirty years ago in 1995. Currently, OCY serves as the transportation contractor for senior mobility programs in the Cities of Costa Mesa, La Habra, Fullerton, Laguna Hills, Laguna Woods, Mission Viejo, Orange, Garden Grove, Rancho Santa Margarita, and others. In addition, OCY is the exclusive ground transportation contractor for John Wayne Airport, holds a franchise in the City of Anaheim, and partners with several independent private care organizations—all of which require strict ADA compliance and comprehensive driver Sensitivity Orientation.

OCY also serves as the transportation provider for OCTA’s Same-Day Taxi Program and as a subcontractor under the ACCESS paratransit contract.

Notably, OCY has more than fifteen years of experience serving the approximately 25,000 senior residents of Laguna Woods, maintaining a complaint rate consistently below one percent.

As the exclusive contractor for John Wayne Airport (JWA), OCY continuously adapts and innovates to meet the evolving needs of a diverse traveling public.

Operational best practices developed at JWA—including modern fleet protocols, advanced customer service standards, enhanced situational awareness, and specialized assistance techniques for seniors and culturally diverse populations—are incorporated into OCY’s street-fleet driver orientation programs, ensuring a consistent and high level of service across the entire fleet.

Fleet and Maintenance OCY has a diverse fleet consisting of conventional sedans, 6-passenger minivans, and ADA-compliant wheelchair-access vans.

406
8 All taxicabs are subject to a comprehensive maintenance program to ensure safe, reliable transportation for all passengers. Detailed inspection reports and maintenance logs are maintained as permanent records and are available for review by City staff upon request.

Central to OCY’s vehicle maintenance program is the Preventive Safety and Maintenance Inspection (PSMI). This proactive program is designed to identify and address potential mechanical or safety issues before they escalate, ensuring optimal vehicle performance and passenger safety.

Safety Inspections
Every cab in our fleet is inspected by the driver daily prior to conducting any trip.

This helps prevent any vehicle malfunction or unsafe conditions, including, but not limited to:
• Headlights, taillights, brake lights, interior lights, and turn signals • Steering
• Windshield wipers
• Tires
• Oil, transmission fluid, etc.
• Warning lights on display
• Body, windshield, or interior damage
• Leakage of any fluids
• Horn
• Mirrors
• Double-check the hood to ensure both latches are fastened securely • Wheelchair Vehicles: handrails, wheelchair tie-downs (manual or power), internal and exterior lighting, operation of ramp/lift, etc.

If any malfunction or damage is observed, the vehicle is not driven.

Interval Preventive Maintenance Inspections (PMI)
PMI‘s are conducted at intervals established per standard manufacturer recommendations for applicable vehicles. The vehicle’s engine oil and filter are 407
9 changed at each inspection, and the tires, lights, steering, and brakes are inspected and adjusted, if necessary.

Automa
ted Maintenance Tracking System
OCY utilizes an automated driver and vehicle maintenance tracking system that proactively monitors all drivers and vehicles within the fleet, including the weekly recording of vehicle mileage. The system tracks critical driver compliance data, including:
• Driver’s license status and expiration
• Norton Medical certification expiration (drug screening) • Driver permit status
In addition, the system monitors essential vehicle information, including:
• Vehicle registration status and expiration
• Vehicle mileage and required preventive maintenance
The program also maintains a comprehensive history of prior vehicle inspections.

Using this data, the system evaluates the entire fleet and identifies vehicles scheduled for inspection within the upcoming week, as well as the specific inspection required. This information is communicated to the Fleet Manager to ensure vehicles are made available to the Maintenance Department as scheduled.

All OCY vehic
les are washed weekly, and drivers are required to always maintain clean and orderly interiors. Any vehicle found to be dirty or emitting unpleasant odors is immediately removed from service and reinspected after corrective action before being returned to operation.

While most O
CY taxicabs maintain a uniform and easily recognizable
appearance, some vehicles transitioned to a single solid color beginning in 2020.

However, all vehicles retain consistent decal placement to ensure uniform identification across the fleet.

Insurance Requirements
408
10 Our automobile liability insurance coverage is $1,000,000.

Business License
AB1069 states “A city or county shall not require a taxicab company or driver to obtain a business license, service permit, car inspection certification, or driver permit, or to comply with any requirement under this section or Section 53075.52, unless the company or driver is substantially located within the jurisdiction of that city or county”. Under AB 1069, regulatory fees will be paid to the jurisdiction where taxicabs are “substantially located,” which is defined as both where the taxicab driver or taxicab business is located and where the taxicab provided the largest number of trips in the year prior.

Orange County Taxi Administration Program (OCTAP)
OCTAP went out of business in 2019. Therefore, drivers are no longer eligible for a Taxi permit through OCTAP. Drivers now obtain a taxi permit through the City of Anaheim.

Dress and Appearance Standard
All drivers participating in the program will wear business casual attire.

Operations Base in Santa Ana
Our facility includes approximately 2,600 square feet of office space and over 5,000 square feet dedicated to logistics and vehicle maintenance. The administrative office is staffed by fifteen full-time employees, and we contract with an additional dozen on-site fleet maintenance technicians and specialists.

All routine and most specialized maintenance is performed on-site, except for certain bodywork and machine shop services. Our fully equipped maintenance facility can handle everything from routine oil changes to complete driveline and chassis rebuilds. The shop meets all local zoning requirements and is staffed by highly trained, certified technicians, ensuring vehicles are maintained to the highest standards of safety and reliability.
409
11 Driver Orientation Program
All driver
s with (OCY) are independent contractors.

All applicants must be able to produce the following:
• An Excellent Driving Record
o Current, valid California Driver’s License
o ZERO serious violations such as reckless driving, or driving while under the influence of drugs or alcohol
• Pass a drug screening initially, and enroll in a random and annual drug and alcohol program
• Live Scan fingerprints
• Successfully pass a background check
• Provide proof of legal residency
• Be placed on the DMV Pull-Notice program
Only aft
er successfully producing the above will a prospective driver be considered for a Lease under the OCY livery.

OCY utilizes a comprehensive driver orientation program structured around four modules: Operations, Safety, Service, and Review (OSSR). OSSR places particular emphasis on customer service, fare collection policies, and sensitivity orientation for transporting seniors and individuals with disabilities. The program includes approximately 30 hours of combined classroom and on-the-road orientation, typically delivered over a three- to five-day period.

Orientation is conducted before assigning a vehicle to a driver, on an annual basis, and as needed. Whenever program guidelines are updated, drivers are promptly notified via their tablets, and the revised guidelines are immediately made available.

For all senior programs we serve, drivers are requested to wear a white shirt with dark trousers and dark shoes. Participation is optional; however, drivers who choose to participate are required to comply with the program’s uniform standards.

Drug and Alcohol Policy
410
12 OCY provides safe, dependable, and efficient transportation services to our customers. Our safety-sensitive employees’ and affiliates’ use of illegal drugs and misuse of alcohol pose a significant risk to public safety, as well as the employees’ and affiliates’ health and well-being, and can cause loss of efficiency, productivity, or a disruptive work environment. OCY’s drug and alcohol policy is intended to comply with all applicable State and Federal regulations governing workplace anti-drug use and alcohol misuse programs in the transportation industry. They include DOT 49 CFR Part 40 as amended (“Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs”); FTA 49 CFR Part 655 (“Prevention of Alcohol Misuse and Prohibited Drug Use in Transit Operations”); DOT 49 CFR Part 29 (“Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988”); and CA Govt. Code Section 8350 et. Seq. (“Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1990”).

The policy incorporates the requirements of the above regulations for safety- sensitive employees and others when so noted (this policy is available at any time). Drivers undergo an FTA Drug test initially (pre-employment) and must enroll in a random pool.
411
13 Qualifications
Legal Name of Company:

OCY Management, LLC
Formally known as:

Cabco Yellow Inc.

DBA California Yellow Cab
Office Location:
520 W Dyer Road, Santa Ana, CA 92707
Phone: (714) 427-2555
Dispatch Phone Numbers:
(714)444-4444
(949)444-4444
(657)444-4444
(877)951-8294
Name and Title of Person Authorized to Submit Proposal:

Akbar Majid, President
Ph. (714)427-2555 Ext. 112 Email: [email protected] Federal Employer Identification Number:

Statement of Ownership:

OCY Management, LLC is an LLC
Wholly owned by William Rouse
Years in Business:
>1 year as OCY Management
30+ Years as Cabco Yellow Inc., dba California Yellow Cab Failures or Refusals to Complete Any Contracts:

None

Arbitrations, lawsuits, settlements, etc., in the last 5 years There is no pending litigation or arbitration for OCY other than that related to normal operational vehicle accident activity, which has resulted in routine litigation, which is 412
14 addressed by our company’s insurance carrier. Additionally, there are no other conditions – including those identified above – that Cabco Yellow believes would impede the company’s ability to service the program.

Comparable contracts in the last 5 years
Please refer to Summary of Experiences (page 13)
*OCY is aware of and understands the scope of work and all the tasks outlined for the City of Costa Mesa.

Experience of the Firm
OCY has numerous contracts with public and private organizations throughout Orange County, including the OC Health Care Agency, OCTA-Same-Day Taxi, OCTA-Access, and Children’s Hospital of Orange County. However, OCY is the primary provider to 19 City Senior Mobility Programs in Orange County. 2004 – Present
City of Laguna Woods- Senior Mobility Program
Transp
ortation for Laguna Woods residents 60 years of age and older. Trips must begin or end in Laguna Woods, but can travel within OC and Long Beach VA.

Participants must provide the taxicab drivers with a co-pay (if applicable) and may use the services for non-emergency medical appointments, social, personal care, and other recreational purposes.
2012 – Present
City of Mission Viejo- Senior Mobility Program
Transp
ortation for Mission Viejo residents 60 years of age and older. Services are limited to the City of Mission Viejo, surrounding cities, and selected satellite destinations. Participants must provide the taxicab driver with a co-pay (if applicable) and may use the services for non-emergency medical appointments, grocery store, church, visit family and friends, the senior center, and more.
413
15 2012 – Present
City of Orange- Senior Mobility Program
Transportation for Orange residents 60 years of age and older. Trips must begin and end in Orange. Services must be to/from the seniors’ resident and the senior center, grocery store, and/or a medical facility.
2017 – Present
City of Lake Forest- Senior Mobility Program
Transportation for Lake Forest residents 60 years of age and older. Services are limited to the City of Lake Forest, surrounding cities, and selected satellite destinations. Participants must provide the taxicab driver with a co-pay (if applicable) and may use the services for non-emergency medical appointments, grocery store, church, visit family and friends, the senior center, and more.
2012 – Present
City of Mission Viejo- Senior Mobility Program
Transportation for Mission Viejo residents 60 years of age and older. Trips must begin and end in Mission Viejo, but can go to surrounding cities and selected satellite destinations. Participants must provide the taxicab driver with a co-pay (if applicable) and may use the services for non-emergency medical appointments, grocery store, church, visit family and friends, the senior center, and more.
2012 – Present
City of Laguna Hills- Senior Mobility Program
Transportation for Laguna Hills residents 60 years of age and older. Trips must begin and end in Laguna Hills. Riders can travel within Laguna Hills and surrounding cities as well as satellite destinations.
414
16 Key Personnel
Akbar Majid- Mr. Majid serves as General Manager overseeing the daily operations of SDY Management, LLC, and as President of OCY Management, LLC. He is actively involved in all aspects of the organization’s operations and plays a key role in strategic planning and decision-making.

Throughout the term of this contract, Mr. Majid will work closely with Melissa Gomez, Project Manager, to ensure full compliance with all requirements. With more than 30 years of experience in the taxicab industry, Mr.

Majid has an extensive background providing transportation services to seniors, individuals with disabilities, and the public.

Melissa Gomez- Since January 2017, Ms. Gomez has served as Project Manager, overseeing compliance with program guidelines and ensuring all outcome objectives are met while maintaining the highest standards of service. She manages established client relationships and takes the lead in addressing service issues and resolving complaints related to Orange County programs. With an extensive background in the transportation industry, Ms.

Gomez currently manages more than 19 Senior Mobility Programs in Orange County and is dedicated to ensuring seniors receive exceptional service and are transported safely, reliably, and on time.

Jackson Fraser- As Director of Operations at OCY Management LLC, Mr. Fraser oversees all aspects
of day-to-day service delivery for our fleet. His
responsibilities include driver oversight, regulatory and contract compliance, customer service quality, and operational strategy to ensure reliable, timely transportation across Orange County. Mr. Fraser has led initiatives to streamline dispatching, improve ADA accessibility, and maintain fleet standards in accordance with county, city, and private contracts. He collaborates closely with both municipal partners and private stakeholders to ensure OCY Management’s services meet evolving community needs.
415
416

APPENDIX C
FORMS
Vendor Appli
cation Form
Ex Parte Communications Certification
Disclosure of Government Positions
Disqualification Questionnaire
Company Profile & References
Bidder/Applicant/Contractor Campaign Contribution
Cost Proposal
23 417

VENDOR APPLICATI

ON FORM
FOR
RFP No. 26-16 Senior Transportation Program

TYPE OF APPLICAN
T:  NEW  CURRENT VENDOR
Legal
Contractual Name of Corporation: ______________________________________ Contact Person for Agreement: _____________________________________________ Title: ______________________________ E-Mail Address: ______________________ Business Telephone: _________________________ Business Fax: ________________ Corporate Mailing Address: ________________________________________________ City, State and Zip Code: __________________________________________________ Contact Person for Proposals: ______________________________________________ Title: ______________________________ E-Mail Address: ______________________ Business Telephone: _________________________ Business Fax: ________________ Is your business: (check one)
 NON PROFIT CORPORATION  FOR PROFIT CORPORATION Is your business: (check one)
 CORPORATION  LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
 INDIVIDUAL  SOLE PROPRIETORSHIP
 PARTNERSHIP  UNINCORPORATED ASSOCIATION
OCY Management, LLC
Akbar Majid
President
[email protected]
714-427-2555 x112
NA
520 W Dyer Road
Santa Ana, CA 92707
Melissa Gomez
Program Manager
[email protected]
714-427-2555 x307
NA
24 418
Names & Titles of Corporate Board Members
(Also list Names & Titles of persons with written authorization/resolution to sign contracts) Names Title Phone
___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Federal Tax Identification Number: _________________________________ City of Costa Mesa Business License Number: ________________________________________ (If none, you must obtain a Costa Mesa Business License upon award of contract.) City of Costa Mesa Business License Expiration Date: ________________________________ Akbar Majid
Jackson Fraser
Director of Operations 714-427-2555 x200
President 714-427-2555 x112 NA
NA
25 419

EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS CERTIFICATION
Please indicate by signing below one of the following two statements. Only sign one statement.

I certify that Proposer and Proposer’s representatives have not had any communication with a City Councilmember concerning informal RFP No. 26-16 Senior Transportation Programat any time after February 23, 2026.
_____________________
___________ Date: _______________________
Signature
_____________________
___________
Print
OR
I certify t
hat Proposer or Proposer’s representatives have communicated after February 23, 2026 with a City Councilmember concerning informal RFP No. 26-16 Senior Transportation Program. A copy of all such communications is attached to this form for public distribution. _____________________
___________ Date: _______________________
Signature
_____________________
___________
Print
February 27, 2026
Akbar Majid
26 420

DISQUALIFICATION QUESTIONNAIRE
The Contractor shall complete the following questionnaire:

Has the Contractor, any officer of the Contractor, or any employee of the Contractor who has proprietary interest in the Contractor, ever been disqualified, removed, or otherwise prevented from bidding on, or completing a federal, state, or local government project because of a violation of law or safety regulation?
Yes _____ No _____
If the answer is yes, explain the circumstances in the following space.

X
27 421

DISCLOSURE OF GOVERNMENT POSITIONS
Each Proposer shall disclose below whether any owner or employee of Contractor currently hold positions as elected or appointed officials, directors, officers, or employees of a governmental entity or held such positions in the past twelve months. List below or state "None." NONE.
28 422
423
COMPANY PROFILE & REFERENCES (Continued)
Submit the company names, addresses, telephone numbers, email, contact names, and brief contract descriptions of at least three clients, preferably other municipalities for whom comparable projects have been completed or submit letters from your references which include the requested information.

Company Name: City of Laguna Woods SMP
Telephone Number:949-639-0512
Contact Name: Yolie Trippy, Deputy City Clerk
Contract Amount: determined by the City
Email: [email protected]
Address: 24264 El Toro Rd, Laguna Woods, Ca 98263
Brief Contract Description: Transportation for Laguna Woods residents 60 years of age and older.

Trips
must begin or end in Laguna Woods, but can travel within OC and Long Beach VA. Participants must provide the taxicab drivers with a co-pay (if applicable) and may use the services for non-emergency medical appointments, social, personal care, and other recreational purposes.

Company Name:City of Yorba Linda SMP
Telephone Number:714-961-7183
Contact Name: Rob Cavanaugh
Contract Amount: $150,000 per year
Email: [email protected]
Address: 4501 Casa Loma Ave, Yorba Linda,
CA 92886
Brief Contract Description: Transportation for Yorba Linda residents 60 years of age and older.

Trips must be within Yorba
Linda or a 1-mile radius of Yorba Linda. May use the services for non- emergency medical appointments, social, personal care,
and other recreational purposes.
30 424
Company Name: City of Mission Viejo SMP
Company Name: City of La Habra SMP
Telephone Number: 562-383-4211
Contact Name: Martha Montoya
Contract Amount: $60,000 per
year
Email: [email protected]
Address: 101 W La Habra Blvd, La Habra, CA 90631
Brief Contract Description:

Transportation for La Habra residents 60 years of age and older. Trips must be within La Habra and a 10-mile radius outside of La Habra. The City allows services to two out of County locations. May use the services for non-emergency medical appointments, shopping, and financial institutions.

Company Name: City of Garden Grove SMP
Telephone Number 714-741-5168
Contact Name: Amanda Cross
Contract Amount: $240,000.00 per year
Email: [email protected]
Address: 11300 Stanford Av
e, Garden Grove, CA 92840
Brief Contract Description: Transportation for Garden Grove residents 60 years of age and older.

Trips within Garden Grove are
for medical, shopping, and/or senior center trips. Trips outside of Garden Grove but within a 10-mile radius are for medical purposes only.

Telephone Number: 949-470-8441
Contact Name: Melanie McGrane
Contract Amount: $
180,000 per year
Email: [email protected]
Address:
24932 Veterans Way, Mission Viejo, CA 92692
Brief Contract Description: Transportation for Mission Viejo residents 60 years of age and older.

Trips must be within Mis
sion Viejo, surrounding cities and selected satellite destinations. May use the services for non-emergency medical appointments, social, personal care, and other recreational purposes.
31 425
426

EXHIBIT C

COST PROPOSAL

427
Cost Proposal Form/Sample
As the provider for the City of Costa Mesa during the last five-years we have not increased our rates despite nationwide inflation and rising operational costs, including maintenance, fuel, insurance, vehicle parts, and labor. During this time, our team has continued to provide services in full compliance with our contractual obligations. However, the company has absorbed these increasing costs along with driver incentives, and it is no longer sustainable for us to continue operating at the current rates.

Proposed rates July 1, 2026 - June 30, 2029
Trips within Costa Mesa $17.50 one-way, per participant Trips outside of Costa Mesa $15.00 + $3.00 per mile one-way, per participant Proposed rates July 1, 2029- June 30, 2031
Trips within Costa Mesa $19.50 one-way, per participant Trips outside of Costa Mesa $16.00 + $3.50 per mile one-way, per participant Cost Proposal
33 428

EXHIBIT D

CITY COUNCIL POLICY 100-5

429
1 Yes 57
No 96
N/A 17
2 Medical Destinations 153
Nutrition/Grocery Shopping 71
Personal Care 22
Senior Center 37
Shopping 24
Social & Recreational 13
3 A balance of where I can go, how much I must pay, and how many times I can use the program.
60 A service that only goes to a few locations, but I can use it frequently and for free.
85 A service that travels many places, but I can only use it a small number of times each month and I have to pay for
each ride. 11
N/A 13
Do you own or have the ability to operate a motor vehicle? If the senior transportation program prioritized one or two types of locations,which would you prefer? Please
only check two.

Which of the following do you prefer?
Senior Transportation Survey Results
ATTACHMENT 2
430
4 $10 each way 1
$10-$15 2
$10-$20 2
$2-$2.50 1
$2-$5 1
$3-$5 3
$5-$10 3
? 2
0 20
1 14

1.5 3
10 10
12 1
15 1
2 7

2.5 1
20 3
25¢ 1
3 8
5 33
cant afford much 1
Free 2
I always tip $5 anywhere 1
I don't know yet at this time. I will wait after the meeting this coming March 1
I wish they provided bus pass 1
N/A 18
no idea 1
no se (does not know) 1
Not sure 1
not sure. this was a free service to help the aged, whats fair? 1
prefer 1
unsure 1
whatver uber/lyft would charge 1
How much are you willing to pay per ride for a senior taxi service for rides within Costa Mesa?
431
5 $10-$15 1
$10-$20 1
$2-$5 1
$20 each way 1
$20-$25 1
$20-$30 2
$3-$5 1
$5 each ride 1
$5-$10 1
$5-$20 1
$5($3 is best) 1
? 2
0 9
1 4

1.5 3
10 20
15 6
2 7
20 8
25 1
3 12

3.6 1
30 1
4 1
5 23
6 1
7 3
best rate 1
Free 2
N/A 21
no idea 1
no se (does not know) 1
not sure 1
Not sure maybe $2 1
not sure. this was a free service to help the aged, whats fair? 1
prefiero usar el servicio de Access(prefer to use Access) 1 the cost should depend on distance: $5-$10 1
use Access 1
whatver uber/lyft would charge 1
How much are you willing to pay per ride for a senior taxi service for rides to Medical Destinations facilities outside of Costa Mesa?
432
6 If you could not use the Senior Taxi Program,
what alternate transportation would you
use?
? 1

1. Bus but with 30 minute trips 2. uber/lyft 1
a family member will help us for a ride 1
A friend 1
Access 2
Access, OCTA, family 1
ask for ride 1
Bike 1
bike or neighbor 1
bus 16
bus or bike 1
bus or insurance transportation 1
bus or thumb 1
bus or uber 1
Bus, but I am handicapped and need a walker. 48 hours in advance is inconvenient for people with dementia. 1
Bus, caminar con dificultad (difficulty walking) 1
Bus/Lyft/Uber 1
cab 1
Cal Optima 1
car 1
car/bus/taxi 1
caretaker/lyft 1
Daughter 1
Dial a Ride 1
dial-a-ride 1
dont know 2
Drive Car 1
drive sons car 1
family 3
family or taxi 1
friend 1
friends 3
friends and family 1
friends or family 1
friends/relatives 1
High Hight 1
hire someone somewhere somehow 1
I used this service for rehab when I broke my hand and
couldn't drive- very helpful 1
I will take the bus 1
433
I'm stuck 1
insurance 2
lyft 1
my car 1
my husband/taxi/uber 1
My own car 1
N/A 14
no idea 1
none 7
none- it would be too difficult to take public
transportation because of walking aid 1
not sure 1
not sure... 1
OC 1
OC Access 6
OC Access or OCTA 1
OC bus system 1
OCTA 5
OCTA for inside CM. Id have to pay taxi about $100
roundtrip for Medical Destinations in irvine, orange and tustin 1
OCTD 1
regular taxi 1
ride circuit, OCTA bus, motivcare transportation Medical Destinations 1
ride from friends 1
ride share/friends 1
SCAN 1
Senior Bus Pass 1
son 1
Stay at home/call family or friends 1
still doing research 1
stuck 1
taxi 2
taxi, uber 1
taxis 1
the bus 1
The Goat 1
try to find someone 1
Uber 12
uber or lyft 1
uber or neighbor 1
uber, drive self 1
uber, lyft 1
uber/lyft 2
uber/lyft/taxi 1
walk 2
434
walking/bus 1
wife would drive 1
435
UNOF
FICIAL MINUTES – PACS MEETING – MARCH 12, 2026 – PAGE 1

THE COSTA MESA PARKS & C OMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION
MARCH 12, 2026
6:00 P.M. – UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER by Chair Brown at 6:00 PM.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE by Commissioner Dorn Parker.

ROLL CALL
☒ = Present ☐ = Absent
Commissioners City Staff
☒ Cristian Garcia Arcos* ☒ Brian Gruner, Parks and Community Services Director ☒ Jake Husen ☒ Monique Villasenor, Recreation Manager
☒ Jason Komala ☒ Kevin Stoddart, Sr. Recreation Supervisor ☒ Brandine Leger ☒ Raja Sethuraman, Public Works Director ☒ Elizabeth Dorn Parker ☒ Robert Ryan, Maintenance Services Manager ☒ Shayanne Wright, Vice Chair ☒ Bryan Wadkins, Police Captain ☒ Kelly Brown, Chair ☒ Laura Fautua, Executive Assistant ☒ Kathia Vitier, Recreation Specialist
*Commissioner Garcia Arcos arrived as Chair Brown opened up for public comment.

PUBLI
C COMMENTS – Correspondence Received.

COM

MISSIONER COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS
Commissioner Komala: T hanked attendees of the senior transportation sessions for sharing feedback, noting it was well received and helpful in identifying next steps.

Co
mmissioner Leger: Thanked community members for attending and providing feedback regarding Moon Park and transportation issues.

Com
missioner Garcia Arcos: Shared excitement regarding an upcoming conference in and encouraged anyone interested in becoming an arborist or learning about trees to reach out.

Vi
ce Chair Wright: Shared that visiting and evaluating parks outside of her usual neighborhood was a meaningful and enjoyable experience and stated she looked forward to sharing her analysis and professional perspective.

Chai
r Brown: T hanked commissioners for their comments, expressed interest in updates regarding the Lions Park café opening, shared observations from Costa Mesa United meetings regarding business impacts on park events, suggested revisiting a community Picnic Day, and noted supplemental meeting materials were available on the City website.

CONS

ENT CALENDAR

1. Minutes – February 12, 2026 and February 26, 2026 PACS Draft Minutes

2. Department Report – February 2026
Public Comment: None.

ATTACHMENT 3
436

UNOFFICIAL MINUTES – PACS MEETING – MARCH 12, 2026 – PAGE 2 MOTION: To approve consent calendar items
MOVED/SECOND: Commissioner Dorn Parker / Commissioner Leger The motion carried by the following roll call vote:

Ayes: Commissioner Dorn Parker, Commissioner Garcia Arcos, Commissioner Husen, Commissioner Komala, Commissioner Leger, Vice Chair Wright, Chair Brown Nays: None

Absent: None
Motion Carried: 7 – 0

MONTHLY REPORTS

1. PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR’S UPDATE
Mr. Brian Gruner, Parks and Community Services Director presented.

Public Comment: None.

Commissioner Garcia Arcos thanked City staff for their outreach efforts with Bright Youth and the Shalimar Park community and expressed interest in continued collaboration.

Commissioner Dorn Parker thanked the City for hosting the Ability League baseball program at the park and acknowledged the effort involved in relocating the program and supporting its growth.

Vice Chair Wright inquired about the City’s perspective regarding the Newport -Mesa Unified School District’s recent e-bike and bicycle restrictions and asked whether there were approaches the City could learn from or improve upon regarding e- bike issues in parks.

Commissioner Dorn Parker stated that e-bike and electric motorcycle concerns were occurring statewide and noted that legislators, school districts, and law enforcement agencies were working to address safety concerns while still encouraging biking and walking among students.

Vice Chair Wright noted the Newport-Mesa Unified School District recently discussed e-bike issues at a school board meeting and suggested the City could evaluate the district’s approach regarding illegal bike activity in parks, particularly at Fairview Park.

Chair Brown asked about trends discussed at the California Park & Recreation Society conference, including parks funding, budget challenges, and whether other cities were utilizing values-based assessment frameworks similar to Costa Mesa’s approach.

OLD BUSINESS:

1. SENIOR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM
Mr. Brian Gruner, Parks and Community Services Director, and Mr. Kevin Stoddart, Sr. Recreation Supervisor presented.

437

UNOFFICIAL MINUTES – PACS MEETING – MARCH 12, 2026 – PAGE 3 Staff proposed the following variations:

Variation One (1) Variation Two (2)
Rides within City Limited to:
• Senior Center
• Seven Major Shopping Centers
• Hoag Urgent Care
• Four rides per person per month
(two round trip)
• $4.00 Copay

Medical Rides to:
• Newport Beach
• Fountain Valley
• Santa Ana
• Long Beach VA
• Hoag and Kaiser Medical
Centers in Irvine
• Hoag Urgent Care and Optum
Clinic in Huntington Beach
• Four rides per month (two round
trip)
• $8.00 Copay

Total Rides Allowed: 7,201
Rides within City Limited to:
• Senior Center
• Seven Major Shopping Centers
• Hoag Urgent Care
• Six rides per person per month
(three round trip)
• $4.00 Copay

Medical Rides to:
• Newport Beach
• Fountain Valley
• VA Clinic, Kaiser, and Wave
Imaging in Santa Ana
• Long Beach VA
• Hoag and Kaiser Medical
Centers in Irvine
• Hoag Urgent Care and Optum
Clinic in Huntington Beach
• Six rides per month (three round
trip)
• $8.00 Copay

Total Rides Allowed: 8,056

Public Comment:

Jean: Expressed appreciation for the senior transportation program, noted the importance of including Kaiser medical offices in transportation options, inquired about how transportation models would be selected, and shared that the service had been helpful due to not being able to drive.

Chair Brown asked questions regarding the anticipated costs of the program options, how frequent riders would be accommodated, whether service hours could be expanded later into the day, and whether alternative transportation resources such as the City’s shuttle service could be utilized to support rides to the Senior Center.

Commissioner Leger thanked staff for conducting extensive outreach efforts and asked whether the public was being informed that the 48-hour reservation requirement was necessary to maintain ADA compliance.

Commissioner Komala inquired whether extending service hours would increase program costs, asked about coordinating alternative transportation options such as Uber for seniors, and questioned how the program would address riders requiring frequent medical treatments beyond the proposed ride limits.

Chair Brown highlighted the Commission’s role was to provide recommendations to City Council and noted that commissioners could recommend alternatives beyond the two (2) presented options.
438

UNOFFICIAL MINUTES – PACS MEETING – MARCH 12, 2026 – PAGE 4 Commissioner Dorn Parker shared personal experience assisting her mother with senior transportation needs and discussed concerns regarding seniors requiring frequent medical transportation, potential partnerships with outside providers, staffing needs to assist seniors with transportation coordination, affordability of co- pays, and the importance of evaluating and adjusting the program over time to balance financial constraints with community needs

Chair Brown inquired if the VA is covered in all three options.

Commissioner Garcia Arcos suggested exploring bus passes for seniors comfortable using public transit to help reduce program costs and increase access to destinations such as the Senior Center and medical facilities. He also inquired about the outreach conducted to approximately 1,300 residents and requested that informational materials, including Spanish-language resources are available.

Vice Chair Wright requested a side-by-side comparison of the transportation program options, discussed a potential hybrid model with free local rides and co- pay medical rides, questioned whether survey responses aligned with rider behavior, sought clarification regarding the proposed paid options, and expressed support for variation two (2) due to the increased number of rides and preservation of medical destinations while questioning the value of including Santa Ana as a service area.

Chair Brown emphasized the importance of maintaining seniors’ sense of independence and flexibility when accessing transportation services and encouraged consideration of expanded service hours and creative partnerships with other transportation resources, including public transit and existing City shuttle services.

Commissioner Leger stated support for variation two (2), noting appreciation for the expanded medical trip options while maintaining free rides, and asked when the program could be revisited for expansion if sales tax revenue increased.

Commissioner Wright did not support additional program funding but supported funding a dedicated full -time staff member to assist seniors with navigating transportation and related services, and expressed interest in making the recommendation formal.

Commissioner Husen acknowledged the benefit of limited free rides but leaning toward a program structure without limited free rides in order to serve a broader range of users.

Commissioner Garcia Arcos emphasized the importance of supporting and giving back to elders, and encouraged further review and discussion due to the significance of the decision.

Commissioner Komala asked staff which option was considered the most sustainable long-term and confirmed that the City would not be locked into a long-term contract if adjustments were needed. He also raised concerns regarding seniors being stranded after delayed medical appointments and suggested including a provision to ensure seniors would still receive transportation home if appointments ran late.

439

UNOFFICIAL MINUTES – PACS MEETING – MARCH 12, 2026 – PAGE 5 Commissioner Leger asked whether the program could be revisited the following year to evaluate the selected option and determine whether adjustments or expansion would be needed.

Commissioner Dorn Parker made a motion to support the free option.

Commissioner Husen seconded the motion and stated appreciation for the public and staff feedback, noting the discussion helped provide perspective while weighing the benefits of both options.

Vice Chair Wright made a substitute motion to support variation two (2) and stated openness to including financial recommendations for staffing support during the program transition. She stated support for maintaining the greatest number of locations possible and noted that a small co -pay aligned with survey feedback while remaining fiscally responsible and accessible.

Commissioner Leger seconded Vice Chair Wright’s motion and suggested the proposed staff support position be temporary in order to reduce City benefit costs.

Chair Brown proposed a friendly amendment requesting the City evaluate and project potential costs associated with expanded service hours without committing to implementation.

Vice Chair accepted the amendment to the motion.

Commissioner Garcia Arcos proposed staff position operat e in a hybrid capacity to help ensure no seniors were left stranded after appointments, including the possibility of adjusted work hours to assist with transportation support.

Mr. Stoddart stated the staffing suggestion would be difficult to implement due to potential liability concerns.

MOTION: To approve recommend variation (2) and exploring staffing to redirect seniors to other services that are available and complete a cost analysis for financial expansion of hours for future iterations.

MOVED/SECOND: Vice Chair Wright / Commissioner Leger
The motion carried by the following roll call vote:

Ayes: Commissioner Garcia Arcos, Commissioner Husen, Commissioner Leger, Vice Chair Wright, Chair Brown
Nays: Commissioner Dorn Parker, Commissioner Komala

Absent: None
Motion Carried: 5 – 2

NEW BUSINESS:

1. PARK RANGER REPORT
Captain Bryan Wadkins presented.

440

UNOFFICIAL MINUTES – PACS MEETING – MARCH 12, 2026 – PAGE 6 Public Comment:

Jen Tanaka: R equested that monthly Park Ranger reports and statistics be made publicly available, stating the data would help highlight park -related issues and improve transparency. She provided background regarding the Harper Park ranger assignment, noting it was originally intended as a six-month pilot program, and asked for an update regarding potential use of drones or cameras in parks enforcement efforts.

Commenter 2: R equested clarification regarding the lack of reported patr ol checks, calls for service, citations, arrests, and reports at Shalimar Park and asked how parks were prioritized for ranger patrols and when the park was last visited by a ranger.

Evan Carey (zoom): R equested additional transparency regarding the total cost and operational investment associated with assigning a park ranger to Harper Park, including salary, benefits, and future park improvements. He expressed concern regarding dedicating one of the City’s limited park rangers to a single park while other parks also face ongoing safety issues.

Commissioner Husen thanked staff for the presentation, shared observations from a ranger ride-along, and requested clarification regarding ranger assignments at Harper Park and the adequacy of ranger vehicles and coverage.

Commissioner Garcia Arcos raised concerns regarding patrol coverage, surveillance cameras, lighting at Shalimar Park and Paris Park, encouraged greater collaboration on park safety and maintenance issues, and expressed concerns regarding ranger vehicles driving on wet grass areas near trees at Canyon Park.

Commissioner Leger discussed observing drone use during enforcement activity at Fairview Park, asked questions regarding enforcement coordination and drone operations near Talbert Regional Park, and requested additional detail in future ranger reports regarding enforcement activity and safety trends.

Commissioner Komala asked whether patrol checks were proactive or initiated by calls for service and requested clarification regarding how patrol frequency was determined. He also asked about the process for expanding surveillance camera installations at parks.

Commissioner Dorn Parker requested clarification regarding patrol activity at Harper Park and nearby schools, discussed concerns regarding off -leash dogs, s upported exploring additional fenced dog areas, and encouraged residents to utilize the City’s 311 App system to document recurring park concerns.

Vice Chair Wright thanked the Park Rangers for their work and relationships with the unhoused community, particularly at Lions Park, and supported reinstating monthly ranger reports to provide objective public safety data and trend tracking.

Chair Brown thanked staff for the presentation, supported more frequent ranger reporting, and stated additional citation and enforcement detail would help the Commission better evaluate park safety, equity concerns, and future Capital Improvement Project priorities.

441

UNOFFICIAL MINUTES – PACS MEETING – MARCH 12, 2026 – PAGE 7 Commissioner Garcia Arcos asked about Park Ranger coordination with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife regarding drone usage near Fairview Park and shared information regarding an upcoming bilingual wildlife protection workshop at Griffith Park.

Chair Brown called for a 15-minute recess to begin at 8:33 PM. Commissioner Leger made the motion and seconded by Commissioner Dorn Parker. Meeting was c alled back to order at 8:48 PM.

2. PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 AND THE FIVE-YEAR CIP BUDGET THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 2030-31
Mr. Raja Sethuraman, Public Works Director, and Mr. Robert Ryan, Maintenance Services Manager presented.

Public Comment:

Jenn Tanaka: T hanked staff for including funding for Harper Park in the Capital Improvement Program and stated the park serves a high-density residential area with limited nearby park access. She highlighted ongoing maintenance and accessibility deficiencies at the park, including aging infrastructure, lack of signage, and ADA concerns, and encouraged simultaneous investment in Moon Park.

Commenter 2: T hanked staff for proposed funding related to Moon Park and emphasized the importance of investing in parks to support children, families, and community connection. The commenter encouraged the Commission to prioritize the park based on strong community support and outreach efforts.

Commenter 3: Requested improved transparency and communication regarding park updates and project progress on the City’s website, specifically referencing Shalimar Park expansion efforts. The commenter also thanked City staff for supporting a youth entrepreneurship program and community outreach efforts related to neighborhood improvements.

Commenter 4: Advocated for continued investment in Moon Park, thanked staff for proposed outreach funding, and emphasized that the community would continue advocating for full project funding and implementation in future fiscal years.

Ralph Taboada: E ncouraged the Commission to align the proposed Capital Improvement Program budget with the Commission’s previously developed park assessment priorities, including open space and community garden considerations.

He also thanked Director Sethuraman for providing additional budget comparison details and noted the added transparency helped clarify changes between previously forecasted and currently proposed project funding.

Evan Carey (Zoom): Stated the proposed funding for Moon Park was appreciated but insufficient to address longstanding community concerns. He urged the City to accelerate meaningful park investment, citing ongoing issues related to safety, lighting, graffiti, and park conditions, and emphasized that delaying improvements would continue negatively impacting the surrounding neighborhood.

442

UNOFFICIAL MINUTES – PACS MEETING – MARCH 12, 2026 – PAGE 8 Chair Brown inquired how and if the Commission values by staff by staff for CIP project evaluation.

Mr. Sethuraman addressed inquiry and informed commission that value assessment is not applied for staff evaluation of CIP projects.

Chair Brown proposed future projects incorporate Commission’s values.

Mr. Gruner stated that values were created for commission resourc e and not utilized within staff practices. Suggested values maybe incorporated in the future.

Vice Chair Wright shared findings from her review of park conditions and demographics, supported prioritizing projects based on safety, equity, and access, identified Harper Park as the most deficient playground reviewed, and raised concerns regarding park maintenance and cleanliness standards.

Commissioner Dorn Parker requested greater transparency regarding project prioritization, supported earlier Capital Improvement Program discussions, emphasized alignment with the Commission’s values framework, prioritized improvements at Harper Park, and encouraged continued community engagement regarding Moon Park and Shalimar Park projects.

Commissioner Leger supported earlier Capital Improvement Program review timelines, emphasized the importance of community engagement and equity in park prioritization, stated parks serving apartment communities such as Gisler Park should not be overlooked, and noted that improvements in higher -crime areas could encourage greater park use and safety.

Commissioner Komala thanked Vice Chair Wright for incorporating demographic and values-based analysis into her review, acknowledged staff’s community engagement efforts regarding Moon Park, and stated that park safety considerations should include both infrastructure conditions and broader public safety concerns impacting park use.

Commissioner Husen recommended exploring funding for an additional Park Ranger vehicle, stating i t would support safety efforts and improve ranger effectiveness throughout the park system.

Commissioner Garcia Arcos requested earlier Capital Improvement Program discussions, asked questions regarding Fairview Park vernal pool restoration funding, supported community garden opportunities and dedicated funding for underserved neighborhoods, and encouraged evaluating local alternatives to the City’s park maintenance contractor.

Chair Brown expressed concerns regarding delayed bike trail lighting improvements, emphasized prioritizing park -deficient Westside neighborhoods consistent with the General Plan and Commission values framework, and stated the Commission should consider the needs of underserved and less represented communities when making recommendations.

443

UNOFFICIAL MINUTES – PACS MEETING – MARCH 12, 2026 – PAGE 9 Commissioner Leger asked whether Moon Park funding had been considered prior to community outreach efforts and raised concerns regarding ground squirrel activity and related safety hazards at TeWinkle Park.

Chair Brown proposed reviewing recommendations individually to determine Commission consensus, similar to the prior Fairview Park recommendation process.

Vice Chair Wright supported prioritizing only C-rated parks within the five-year Capital Improvement Program, expressed concerns regarding funding projects outside identified safety priorities, questioned the timing of Moon Park community engagement funding, and supported pursuing alternative funding opportunities for the Fairview Park and TeWinkle Park Skatepark projects.

Attendees Present: Chair Brown, Vice Chair Wright, Commissioner Garcia Arcos, Commissioner Husen, Commissioner Komala, Commissioner Leger

Absent: Commission Dorn Parker*Left during item discussion, did not vote.

Commission moved staff recommendations and included the following additional recommendations in the following motions:

Motion to: First Second Motion
Carries Nays
Add Marina View Park
- sand and sidewalk in
priorities to FY 26/27)
Chair Brown Commissioner
Husen
6-0
Add Wilson - restrooms
to FY 26/27
Vice Chair
Wright
Chair Brown 5-1 Commissioner
Komala
Add community
gardens to five-year FY
27/28 ($50,000) and
potentially navigate
Neth Park in a multi-
faceted way
Chair Brown Commissioner
Garcia Arcos
6-0
Add Westside
Development to FY
27/28 ($400,000)
Chair Commissioner
Leger
5-1 Commissioner
Komala
Explore alternative
funding sources to
reduce City funding for
Fairview Park and
Skate Park projects
Vice Chair
Wright
Chair Brown 4-2 Commissioner
Husen,
Commissioner
Komala
Prioritize C-rated parks
in the 5yr. plan
Commissioner
Leger
Vice Chair
Wright
5-1 Commissioner
Husen

ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER MEMBER & STAFF COMMENTS

ADJOURNMENT by Chair Brown at 10:51 PM.
444
Pag
e 14 of 38
City of Costa Mesa
Scope of Services - Senior Transportation Programs
Background
The City of Costa Mesa Parks and Community Services Department participates in Orange County Transportation Authority’s (OCTA) Senior Mobility Program funded by tax measure M2. The program is designed to fill the gap between local fixed-route buses and ADA paratransit, or OC ACCESS service, by providing local transportation services to Costa Mesa residents ages 60 years and older within Orange County. The operation of the program is tied to the City’s M2 allocation for senior mobility, but the city continually seeks grant funding to augment the program to the benefit if the City’s residents.

General Scope of Work for Senior Transportation
Contractor shall provide professional transportation services to eligible Costa Mesa residents ages 60 and older within Costa Mesa’s borders, throughout Orange County, and to the Veteran’s Affairs Hospital in Long Beach as specified by the City of Costa Mesa beginning July 1, 2026. Vendor must have the ability to flexibly implement cost control measures that include destination limits or geographic boundaries, ridership quotas, and collect copays. Initial cost control measures will be established based on Contractor’s cost proposals and will be communicated at the award of contract. The City of Costa Mesa will consider both shuttle and taxi-based transportation models and may award multiple contracts if a hybrid service model suits the City’s needs.

Professional services are required by the City’s Senior Transportation Program include the following tasks:

1. Contractor will meet with City staff regarding the schedule, status, and program services on a monthly basis, at a minimum.

2. Door-To-Door Service. The Contractor shall provide door-to-door transportation of eligible Costa Mesa residents ages 60 and older to and/or from the Costa Mesa Senior Center (CMSC) and transportation for the following purposes: medical appointments, nutrition, shopping, personal care, and social/recreational.

3. The maximum service area Contractor is expected to provide services to include the entirety of Orange County and the Long Beach Veterans Affair Hospital.

4. Contractor must have the ability to limit rides within defined geographic boundaries, such as within one mile of Costa Mesa’s borders, as well as service satellite locations that may fall outside of the defined geographic boundary as needed by the City of Costa Mesa.

5. Contractor must have the ability to collect copays from riders via cash or credit card.

6. Contractor must have the ability to implement monthly ridership quotas on a per rider basis.

7. Contractor must have the ability to scale operations within a reasonable amount of time if the City wishes to temporarily expand the service area, reduce copays, adjust ridership quotas, or other program modifications that may increase or decrease ridership.

8. Taxi based models must provide a Fee Schedule that includes a flat rate per one way ride that originates and ends within Costa Mesa’s boundaries and may include an additional per mile fee for any rides that extend beyond the City’s bounda ries. Shuttle based models will provide a Fee Schedule that consists of an hourly rate per vehicle.

9. Contractor will invoice the City at the rate agreed to by the City and identified in Fee Schedule and must have the ability to invoice the city separately for different types of rides, e.g., non-emergency medical rides and non-medical rides.

10. Contractor must comply with all state and federal regulations, as well as any additional OCTA requirements of Senior Mobility Pr ogram service providers, relating to driver training, licensing, ATTACHMENT 4
445

vehicle inspections, maintenance documentation, and allowable hours on duty requirements, drug and alcohol testing, etc.

11. The Contractor shall provide a toll-free telephone number for use by Senior Transportation Program clients. The Contractor shall accept telephone reservations from Costa Mesa for Senior Transportation Program patrons and dispatch a vehicle to the requested pick-up location within the City. Booking via smart phone application is desirable, but not required.

12. The earliest notice Contractor requires to guarantee an ADA compliant vehicle shall be the earliest in advance any rides shall be booked. For example, if Contractor can guarantee ADA complaint vehicle bookings with 48 hour notice, all rides must be booked 48 hours or more in advance.

13. Contractor shall participate in on-going customer relations efforts as coordinated by the City.

14. Contractor shall provide the necessary staff, equipment, and vehicle(s) to ensure efficient and timely administration of reservations, scheduling, customer service, and dispatch of City senior transportation trips in accordance with the service schedules and policies set forth by the City, and will provide substitute drivers in the event of absence from assigned/designated driver.

15. Contractor shall supply audio transcripts and/or video footage of the vehicle cabin space to the City in order to settle disputes and complaints from customers.

16. Drivers must be legally licensed to operate a motor vehicle in the Stage of California, be in good standing with the DMV, able to speak, understand, and read English adequately, and treat all passengers with respect and courtesy. Bilingual drivers are highly desirable.

17. Contractor must demonstrate it has an acceptable recruitment and hiring program, which is intended to minimize driver turnover and retain a high quality driver workforce

18. The City may require at any time that any driver be removed from transporting City customers for complaints, rudeness, or other inappropriate behavior or appearance, and may also request specific drivers from the said Contractor who provide exceptional customer service and have established rapport with customers.

19. Driver feedback about schedules, customers’ needs, vehicle maintenance, and working conditions is expected.

20. Contractor will be responsible for all training of the vehicle driver and ensu ring all training and certifications are current, service policies, passenger fares, etc.

21. Contractor shall comply fully with state and federal regulations pertaining to licensing and operations of vehicles, which are contained in the California Vehicle Code, California Administrative Code, and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations.

22. Contractor shall comply with the California OSHA requirements including the requirement of SB 198 to develop and implement an employee injury prevention program.

23. Contractor is required to provide a computeriz ed system for trip reservations, scheduling, and dispatch of senior transportation services as well as for the collection, recording, and reporting of operational and performance data regarding these services.

24. City staff shall have access to a ride scheduling portal should the need arise for City staff to book rides for clients at the senior center or to view the status of any rides currently scheduled or in progress on any given day.

25. Contractor shall notify the City within 24 hours of any accidents/incidents, and ensure proper follow up on any accidents/incidents, where appropriate, to ensure that any unresolved safety hazards or liability issues are addressed.

26. Vehicle Collisions: The Contractor shall have sole responsibility, at its own cost and expense, for repair of any vehicle damaged in a vehicular accident or by any passenger. The City retains the right to investigate any vehicular collision involving the Contractor, and may request drug/alcohol screening of a driver found to be at fault under specific circumstances.

27. Contractor shall provide monthly ridership data that complies with OCTA’s Senior Mobility Program’s reporting requirements, which includes: client name, vehicle number, trip date, scheduled pick up time, actual pick up time, pick up address, pick up city, pick up odometer, drop 446

off address, drop off city, drop off time, drop off odometer, number of passengers, vehicle type, and trip category

28. Retention/Review of Records. The Contractor shall maintain all records pertaining to the services as required by OCTA Project U Funding and Policy Guidelines. The Contractor shall make its records available to the City upon request during regular business hours either for inspection or audit.

29. Vehicles shall remain clean and free from body damage. Driver shall inspect vehicle daily, before pulling out of the yard in accordance with state requirements. Contractor shall ensure that a Preventative Maintenance Inspection (PMI) is performed on vehicles in at least 3,000-mile intervals.

30. The City reserves the right to remove from service any vehicle that does not meet its appearance and cleanliness standards.

31. Payments for all specified services will be made based on the following: customer satisfaction, receipt of a detailed invoice sent in no later than the 15th day of the services for the preceding month (i.e., an invoice for services performed January 1st through 31st should be received by the City no later than February 15th)

32. The Senior Transpor tation Program will operate an d provide services, e xcluding City observed holidays, Monday through Friday, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. until 4 p.m. Additional transportation may be required to and from special events at the Senior Center during non-operating hours.

447

CITY OF COSTA MESA
Agenda Report
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
File #: 26-311 Meeting Date: 6/16/2026
TITLE:

AWARD OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR THE ARTS AND CULTURE

MASTER PLAN UPDATE
DEPARTMENT: PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES
PRESENTED BY: BRIAN GRUNER, PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

DIRECTOR
CONTACT INFORMATION: BRIAN GRUNER, PARKS AND COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR, (714) 754-5009
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff Recommends the City Council:

1. Award a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) to Moore, Iacofano, Goltsman, Inc. (MIG) in an amount not to exceed $132,655 to conduct an Arts and Culture Master Plan Update (Attachment 1).

2. Authorize a ten percent (10%) contingency in the amount of $13,265 for unforeseen costs related to the project.

3. Authorize the City Manager and City Clerk to execute the PSA and future amendments to this agreement within Council authorized limits.

BACKGROUND:

On March 16, 2021, the City Council approved the City of Costa Mesa’sfirst Arts & Culture Master Plan. The Master Plan established a vision to reaffirm Costa Mesa’sidentity as a “City of the Arts” and outlined four (4) core priorities: (1) increasing opportunities for the community to experience arts and culture, (2) expanding public art throughout the City, (3) professionalizing and elevating arts and culture within City government, and (4) supporting Costa Mesa’s creative economy.

The Master Plan has since resulted in important initiatives and organizational enhancements, including the addition of the City’sfirst professional arts staff position in 2022, establishment of the Arts Commission in 2022, expansion of arts programming and grant opportunities, development of public art initiatives, and increased partnerships with regional arts organizations and community stakeholders.

Implementation of the original Plan provided the City with valuable insights into staffing capacity, funding considerations, program demand, public engagement strategies, and operational challenges associated with advancing arts and culture initiatives citywide. This experience has positioned the City to develop a more informed, focused, and actionable updated Master Plan that builds upon the

448
File #: 26-311 Meeting Date: 6/16/2026
City to develop a more informed, focused, and actionable updated Master Plan that builds upon the successes of the original document while addressing gaps, emerging opportunities, and lessons learned during implementation.

On August 7, 2025, the Arts Commission reviewed and provided feedback on a draft Scope of Work for an update to the current Arts and Culture Master Plan. Staff incorporated commissioner and public feedback and returned the revised Scope of Work to the Arts Commission on September 4, 2025, at which time the Commission voted to approve the Scope of Work (Attachment 2). The Scope of Work sought the services of an arts consultant to assist City staff with updating the current Arts and Culture Master Plan, including assessing accomplishments and outcomes from the first five years of the plan and recommending strategies and priorities for a new five- to ten-year vision for arts and culture in Costa Mesa. Residents, local artists, and local arts agencies, such OC Arts, were informed of the update through multiple Arts Commission meeting discussions, e-mail correspondence and the Planet Bids solicitation process.

ANALYSIS:

As the City approaches the conclusion of the original five-year implementation period, the Commission and staff have identified the need to evaluate the effectiveness of the initial Master Plan and develop an updated strategic framework that reflects the City’s current priorities, operational realities, and evolving community needs. The first Arts & Culture Master Plan functioned as an important learning and discovery tool for the City, providing valuable insight into which recommendations were achievable, impactful, sustainable, and aligned with community interests, as well as identifying areas that may require refinement, reprioritization, or alternative approaches.

An updated Arts & Culture Master Plan would allow the City to reassess community priorities, evaluate changing cultural trends and demographics, establish measurable and achievable goals for the next planning period, and ensure that City resources continue to be strategically invested in programs and initiatives that provide meaningful community benefit. Additionally, updating the Plan will help ensure alignment with current City Council priorities and reinforce Costa Mesa’scontinued identity and reputation as the City of the Arts.

On October 27, 2025, the Finance Department, Purchasing Division, released the Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 26-09 for the Arts and Culture Master Plan Update (Attachment 3). Prospective bidders needed to meet the following key six (6) criteria in the scope of work: (1) Project Initiation, (2) Assessment of Progress, (3) Community and Stakeholder Engagement, (4) Plan Refinement and Strategic Visioning, (5) Staffing Needs and Workload Analysis, and (6) Plan Preparation and Approval.

In response to the RFP, five (5) proposals were received and evaluated based on the company’s ability to respond and satisfactorily define its ability to meet the following criteria: method of approach, qualifications of experience, staffing, and cost.

After a thorough review and analysis of each proposal, a panel comprised of City staff from both the Parks & Community Services Department and the Economic and Development Services Department interviewed the following top four (4) companies:

Proposers Proposal Scores Interview Scores Total Rank
MIG 1277.55 1425 2702.55 1st
Designing Local 1315.00 940 2255.00 2nd
Dyson & Womack 1147.70 995 2142.70 3rd
Arts OC 1192.60 705 1897.60 4th

449
File #: 26-311 Meeting Date: 6/16/2026
Proposers Proposal Scores Interview Scores Total Rank
MIG 1277.55 1425 2702.55 1st
Designing Local 1315.00 940 2255.00 2nd
Dyson & Womack 1147.70 995 2142.70 3rd
Arts OC 1192.60 705 1897.60 4th
MIG demonstrated they are well qualified to provide the Arts and Culture Master Plan update based on the firm’s extensive experience in cultural planning, public engagement, creative economy analysis, and implementation strategy development. The proposal demonstrated a comprehensive and data-driven approach that includes technical analysis, multilingual community outreach, benchmarking, funding and governance strategies, and implementation planning. MIG and its subconsultants, Cultural Planning Group and CVL Economics, have successfully completed similar arts and cultural planning projects for municipalities throughout California and nationally, including Redmond, San Diego, Santa Ana, and Ventura County. The proposed consultant team also brings specialized expertise in public art planning, cultural policy, economic impact analysis, and organizational capacity development that aligns with the City’s project goals and scope of work.

The remaining bidders presented various constraints that resulted in lower overall scores compared to MIG. For example, Designing Local is headquartered in Columbus, Ohio and would require a local third-party consultant to complete the work. Arts OC proposal lacked sufficient detail and a cohesive approach to fully demonstrate how project objectives and expectations would be met. Dyson & Womack lacked adequate resources and experience in providing a complete master plan.

ALTERNATIVES:

City Council could choose not to award a contract for an Arts and Culture Master Plan update.

However, without consultant support, the City would have limited capacity to perform the technical analysis, robust community engagement and stakeholder outreach necessary to comprehensively evaluate existing programs and develop an updated plan with clearly defined priorities, goals, and implementation strategies.

FISCAL REVIEW:

Funding for this agreement, inclusive of the contingency in the amount of $145,920, is available in the FY 2025-26 Adopted Budget in the Non-Departmental in the General Fund (Fund 101) and in the Cultural Arts Master Plan (Fund 130).

LEGAL REVIEW:

The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed this agenda report, prepared the PSA, and approves them both as to form.

CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:

This item supports the following City Council Goals:
· Strengthen the public’s safety and improve the quality of life

450
File #: 26-311 Meeting Date: 6/16/2026
CONCLUSION:

Staff Recommends the City Council: Staff Recommends the City Council:

1. Award a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) to Moore, Iacofano, Goltsman, Inc. (MIG) in an amount not to exceed $132,655 to conduct an Arts and Culture Master Plan Update (Attachment 1).

2. Authorize a ten percent (10%) contingency in the amount of $13,265 for unforeseen costs related to the project.

3. Authorize the City Manager and City Clerk to execute the PSA and future amendments to this agreement within Council authorized limits.

451
1 Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc.

Rev. 4-2026

CITY OF COSTA MESA

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH MOORE IACOFANO GOLTSMAN, INC.

THIS PR
OFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into this 16th day of June, 2026 (“Effective Date”), by and between the CITY OF COSTA MESA, a municipal corporation (“City”), and MOORE IACOFANO GOLTSMAN, INC., a California Corporation (“Consultant”).

RECITALS
A. City pr
oposes to utilize the services of Consultant as an independent contractor to perform arts and culture master plan consulting services, as more fully described herein; and B. Consultant repr
esents that it has that degree of specialized expertise contemplated within California Government Code s ection 37103, and holds all necessary licenses to practice and perform the services herein contemplated; and
C. City and
Consultant desire to contract for the specific services described in Exhibit “A” and desire to set forth their rights, duties and liabilities in connection with the services to be performed; and
D. No official o
r employee of City has a financial interest, within the provisions of sections 1090-1092 of the California Government Code, in the subject matter of this Agreement.

NOW, THER
EFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions contained herein, the parties hereby agree as follows:

1.0. SERVICE

S PROVIDED BY CONSULTANT

1.1. Scope of
Services. Consultant shall provide the professional services described in Consultant’s Proposal, attached hereto as Exhibit “A,” and incorporated herein.

1.2. Profess
ional Practices. All professional services to be provided by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement shall be provided by personnel experienced in their respective fields and in a manner consistent with the standards of care, diligence and skill ordinarily exercised by professional consultants in similar fields and circumstances in accordance with sound professional practices. Consultant also warrants that it is familiar with all laws that may affect its performance of this Agreement and shall advise City of any changes in any laws that may affect Consultant’s performance of this Agreement.

1.3. Perform
ance to Satisfaction of City . Consultant agrees to perform all the work to the complete satisfaction of the City. Evaluations of the work will be done by the City Manager or his or her designee. If the quality of work is not satisfactory, City in its discretion has the right to:
(a) Meet with
Consultant to review the quality of the work and resolve the matters of concern;
(b) Require C
onsultant to repeat the work at no additional fee until it is ATTACHMENT 1
452
2 Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc.

Rev. 4-2026

satisfactory; and/or

(c) Terminate the Agreement as hereinafter set forth.

1.4. Warranty. Consultant warrants that it shall perform the services required by this Agreement in compliance with all applicable Federal and California employment laws , including, but not limited to, those laws related to minimum hours and wages; occupational health and safety; fair employment and employment practices; workers’ compensation insurance and safety in employment; and all other Federal, State and local laws and ordinances applicable to the services required under this Agreement. Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless City from and against all claims, demands, payments, suits, actions, proceedings, and judgments of every nature and description including attorneys’ fees and costs, presented, brought, or recovered against City for, or on account of any liability under any of the above-mentioned laws, which may be incurred by reason of Consultant’s performance under this Agreement.

1.5. Non-Discrimination. In performing this Agreement, Consultant shall not engage in, nor permit its agents to engage in, discrimination in employment of persons because of their race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or military or veteran status, e xcept as permitted pursuant to s ection 12940 of the Government Code.

1.6. Non-Exclusive Agreement. Consultant acknowledges that City may enter into agreements with other consultants for services similar to the services that are subject to this Agreement or may have its own employees perform services similar to those services contemplated by this Agreement.

1.7. Delegation and Assignment. This is a personal service contract, and the duties set forth herein shall not be delegated or assigned to any person or entity without the prior written consent of City. Consultant may engage a subcontractor(s) as permitted by law and may employ other personnel to perform services contemplated by this Agreement at Consultant’s sole cost and expense.

1.8. Confidentiality. Employees of Consultant in the course of their duties may have access to financial, accounting, statistical, and personnel data of private individuals and employees of City. Consultant covenants that all data, documents, discussion, or other information developed or received by Consultant or provided for performance of this Agreement are deemed confidential and shall not be disclosed by Consultant without written authorization by City. City shall grant such authorization if disclosure is required by law. All City data shall be returned to City upon the termination of this Agreement. Consultant’s covenant under this Section shall survive the termination of this Agreement.

2.0. COMPENSATION AND BILLING

2.1. Compensation. Consultant shall be paid in accordance with the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit “B,” attached hereto and made a part of this Agreement. Consultant’s total compensation shall not exceed One Hundred Thirty-Two Thousand Six Hundred Fifty-Five Dollars ($132,655).

2.2. Additional Services. Consultant shall not receive compensation for any services 453
3 Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc.

Rev. 4-2026

provided outside the scope of services specified in the Consultant’s Proposal unless the City Manager or designee, prior to Consultant performing the additional services, approves such additional services in writing. It is specifically understood that oral requests and/or approvals of such additional services or additional compensation shall be barred and are unenforceable.

2.3. Method of Billing. Consultant may submit invoices to the City for approval on a progress basis, but no more often than two times a month. Said invoice shall be based on the total of all Consultant’s services which have been completed to City’s sole satisfaction. City shall pay Consultant’s invoice within forty-five (45) days from the date City receives said invoice. Each invoice shall describe in detail, the services performed, the date of performance, and the associated time for completion. Any additional services approved and performed pursuant to this Agreement shall be designated as “Additional Services” and shall identify the number of the authorized change order, where applicable, on all invoices.

2.4. Records and Audits. Records of Consultant’s services relating to this Agreement shall be maintained in accordance with generally recognized accounting principles and shall be made available to City or its Project Manager for inspection and/or audit at mutually convenient times from the Effective Date until three (3) years after termination of this Agreement.

3.0. TIME OF PERFORMANCE

3.1. Commencement and Completion of Work. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the parties, the professional services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall commence within five (5) days from the Effective Date of this Agreement. Failure to comm ence work in a timely manner and/or diligently pursue work to completion may be grounds for termination of this Agreement.

3.2. Excusable Delays . Neither party shall be responsible for delays or lack of performance resulting from acts beyond the reasonable control of the party or parties. Such acts shall include, but not be limited to, acts of God, fire, strikes, pandemics (excluding COVID-19), material shortages, compliance with laws or regulations, riots, acts of war, or any other conditions beyond the reasonable control of a party (each, a “Force Majeure Event”). If a party experiences a Force Majeure Event, the party shall, within five (5) days of the occurrence of the Force Majeure Event, give written notice to the other party stating the nature of the Force Majeure Event, its anticipated duration and any action being taken to avoid or minimize its effect. Any suspension of performance shall be of no greater scope and of no longer duration than is reasonably required and the party experiencing the Force Majeure Event shall use best efforts without being obligated to incur any material expenditure to remedy its inability to perform; provided, however, if the suspension of performance continues for sixty (60) days after the date of the occurrence and such failure to perform would constitute a material breach of this Agreement in the absence of such Force Majeure Event, the p arties shall meet and discuss in good faith any amendments to this Agreement to permit the other party to exercise its rights under this Agreement. If the parties are not able to agree on such amendments within thirty (30) days and if suspension of performance continues, such other p arty may terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the party experiencing the Force Majeure Event, in which case neither party shall have any liability to the other except for those rights and liabilities that accrued prior to the date of termination.

454
4 Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc.

Rev. 4-2026

4.0. TERM AND TERMINATION

4.1. Term. This Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and continue for a period of twelve (12) months, ending on June 15, 2027, unless previously terminated as provided herein or as otherwise agreed to in writing by the parties. This Agreement may be extended by two (2) additional one (1) year periods upon mutual written agreement of both parties.

4.2. Notice of Termination. The City reserves and has the right and privilege of canceling, suspending or abandoning the execution of all or any part of the work contemplated by this Agreement, with or without cause, at any time, by providing written notice to Consultant.

The termination of this Agreement shall be deemed effective upon receipt of the notice of termination. In the event of such termination, Consultant shall immediately stop rendering services under this Agreement unless directed otherwise by the City.

4.3. Compensation. In the event of termination, City shall pay Consultant for reasonable costs incurred and professional services satisfactorily performed up to and including the date of City’s written notice of termination. Compensation for work in progress shall be prorated based on the percentage of work completed as of the effective date of termination in accordance with the fees set forth herein. In ascertaining the professional services actually rendered hereunder up to the effective date of termination of this Agreement, consideration shall be given to both completed work and work in progress, to complete and incomplete drawings, and to other documents pertaining to the services contemplated herein whether delivered to the City or in the possession of the Consultant.

4.4. Documents. In the event of termination of this Agreement, all documents prepared by Consultant in its performance of this Agreement including, but not limited to, finished or unfinished design, development and construction documents, data studies, drawings, maps and reports, shall be delivered to the City within ten (10) days of delivery of termination notice to Consultant, at no cost to City. Any use of uncompleted documents without specific written authorization from Consultant shall be at City’s sole risk and without liability or legal expense to Consultant.

5.0. INSURANCE

5.1. Minimum Scope and Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall obtain, maintain, and keep in full force and effect during the life of this Agreement all of the following minimum scope of insurance coverages with an insurance company admitted to do business in California, rated “A,” Class X, or better in the most recent A.M. Best’s Rating Guide, and approved by City:

(a) Commercial general liability, including premises -operations, products/completed operations, broad form property damage, blanket contractual liability, independent contractors, personal injury or bodily injury with a policy limit of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence, Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00) general aggregate.

(b) Business automobile liability for owned vehicles, hired, and non-owned vehicles, with a policy limit of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage.

455
5 Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc.

Rev. 4-2026

(c) Workers’ compensation insurance as required by the State of California.

Consultant agrees to waive, and to obtain endorsements from its workers’ compensation insurer waiving subrogation rights under its workers’ compensation insurance policy against the City, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers arising from work performed by Consultant for the City and to require each of its subcontractors, if any, to do likewise under their workers’ compensation insurance policies.

(d) Professional errors and omissions (“E&O”) liability insurance with policy limits of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00), combined single limits, per occurrence and aggregate. Architects’ and engineers’ coverage shall be endorsed to include contractual liability. If the policy is written as a “claims made” policy, the retro date shall be prior to the start of the contract work. Consultant shall obtain and maintain, said E&O liability insurance during the life of this Agreement and for three years after completion of the work hereunder.

5.2. Endorsements. The commercial general liability insurance policy and business automobile liability policy shall contain or be endorsed to contain the following provisions:

(a) Additional insureds: “The City of Costa Mesa and its elected and appointed boards, officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers are additional insureds with respect to: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant pursuant to its contract with the City; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant; automobiles owned, leased, hired, or borrowed by the Consultant.”

(b) Notice: “Said policy shall not terminate, be suspended, or voided, nor shall it be cancelled, nor the coverage or limits reduced, until thirty (30) days after written notice is given to City.”

(c) Other insurance: “The Consultant’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City of Costa Mesa, its officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers. Any other insurance maintained by the City of Costa Mesa shall be excess and not contributing with the ins urance provided by this policy.”

(d) Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City of Costa Mesa, its officers, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers.

(e) The Consultant’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer’s liability.

5.3. Deductible or Self-Insured Retention. If any of such policies provide for a deductible or self-insured retention to provide such coverage, the amount of such deductible or self-insured retention shall be approved in advance by City. No policy of insurance issued as to 456
6 Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc.

Rev. 4-2026

which the City is an additional insured shall contain a provision which requires that no insured except the named insured can satisfy any such deductible or self-insured retention.

5.4. Certificates of Insurance. Consultant shall provide to City certificates of insurance showing the insurance coverages and required endorsements described above, in a form and content approved by City, prior to performing any services under this Agreement.

5.5. Non-Limiting. Nothing in this Section shall be construed as limiting in any way, the indemnification provision contained in this Agreement, or the extent to which Consultant may be held responsible for payments of damages to persons or property.

6.0. GENERAL PROVISIONS

6.1. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to any matter referenced herein and supersedes any and all other prior writings and oral negotiations. This Agreement may be modified only in writing, and signed by the parties in interest at the time of such modification. The terms of this Agreement shall prevail over any inconsistent provision in any other contract document appurtenant hereto, including exhibits to this Agreement.

6.2. Representatives. The C ity Manager or his or her designee shall be the representative of City for purposes of this Agreement and may issue all consents, approvals, directives and agreements on behalf of the City, called for by this Agreement, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement.

Consultant shall designate a representative for purposes of this Agreement who shall be authorized to issue all consents, approvals, directives and agreements on behalf of Consultant called for by this Agreement, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement.

6.3. Project Managers. City shall designate a Project Manager to work directly with Consultant in the performance of this Agreement.

Consultant shall designate a Project Manager who shall represent it and be its agent in all consultations with City during the term of this Agreement. Consultant or its Project Manager shall attend and assist in all coordination meetings called by City.

6.4. Notices. Any notices, documents, correspondence or other communications concerning this Agreement or the work hereunder may be provided by personal delivery or mail and shall be addressed as set forth below. Such communication shall be deemed served or delivered: (a) at the time of delivery if such communication is sent by personal delivery, and (b) 48 hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail as reflected by the official U.S. postmark if such communication is sent through regular United States mail.

IF TO CONSULTANT: IF TO CITY:

Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc.
800 Hearst Avenue
Berkeley, CA 94710
City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Tel: (510) 845-7549 Tel: (714) 754-5679
457
7 Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc.

Rev. 4-2026

Attn: Daniel Iacofano, PhD, President Attn: Monique Villasenor

Courtesy copy to:

City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Attn: Finance Dept. | Purchasing

6.5. Drug-Free Workplace Policy. Consultant shall provide a drug-free workplace by complying with all provisions set forth in City’s Council Policy 100-5, attached hereto as Exhibit “C” and incorporated herein. Consultant’s failure to conform to the requirements set forth in Council Policy 100-5 shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement and shall be cause for immediate termination of this Agreement by City.

6.6. Attorneys’ Fees . If litigation is brought by any party in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the opposing party all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred by the prevailing party in the exercise of any of its rights or remedies hereunder or the enforcement of any of the terms, conditions, or provisions hereof.

6.7. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of California without giving effect to that body of laws pertaining to conflict of laws. In the event of any legal action to enforce or interpret this Agreement, the parties hereto agree that the sole and exclusive venue shall be a court of competent jurisdiction located in Orange County, California.

6.8. Assignment. Consultant shall not voluntarily or by operation of law assign, transfer, sublet or encumber all or any part of Consultant’ s interest in this Agreement without City’s prior written consent. Any attempted assignment, transfer, subletting or encumbrance shall be void and shall constitute a breach of this Agreement and cause for termination of this Agreement. Regardless of City ’s consent, no subletting or assignment shall release Consultant of Consultant’s obligation to perform all other obligations to be performed by Consultant hereunder for the term of this Agreement.

6.9. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify, hold free and harmless the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees, at Consultant’s sole expense, from and against any and all claims, actions, suits or other legal proceedings brought against the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees arising out of the performance of the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, of the work undertaken pursuant to this Agreement. The defense obligation provided for hereunder shall apply without any advance showing of negligence or wrongdoing by the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, but shall be required whenever any claim, action, complaint, or suit asserts as its basis the negligence, errors, omissions or misconduct of the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors, and/or whenever any claim, action, complaint or suit asserts liability against the City, its elected officials, officers, agents and employees based upon the work performed by the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors under this Agreement, whether or not the Consultant, its employees, and/or authorized subcontractors are specifically named or otherwise asserted to be liable. 458
8 Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc.

Rev. 4-2026

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Consultant shall not be liable for the defense or indemnification of the City for claims, actions, complaints or suits arising out of the sole active negligence or willful misconduct of the City. This provision shall supersede and replace all other indemnity provisions contained either in the City’s specifications or Consultant’s Proposal, which shall be of no force and effect.

6.10. Independent Contractor . Consultant is and shall be acting at all times as an independent contractor and not as an employee of City. Consultant shall have no power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability on behalf of City or otherwise act on behalf of City as an agent.

Neither City nor any of its agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant’s employees, except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not, at any time, or in any manner, represent that it or any of its agents or employees are in any manner agents or employees of City. Consultant shall secure, at its sole expense, and be responsible for any and all payment of Income Tax, Social Security, State Disability Insurance Compensation, Unemployment Compensation, and other payroll deductions for Consultant and its officers, agents, and employees, and all business licenses, if any are required, in connection with the services to be performed hereunder. Consultant shall indemnify and hold City harmless from any and all taxes, assessments, penalties, and interest asserted against City by reason of the independent contractor relationship created by this Agreement. Consultant further agrees to indemnify and hold City harmless from any failure of Consultant to comply with the applicable worker’s compensation laws. City shall have the right to offset against the amount of any fees due to Consultant under this Agreement any amount due to City from Consultant as a result of Consultant’s failure to promptly pay to City any reimbursement or indemnification arising under this paragraph.

6.11 Conflicts with Independent Contractor. Contractor/consultant’s duties and services under this Agreement shall not include preparing or assisting the public entity with any portion of the public entity’s preparation of a request for proposals, request for qualifications, or any other solicitation regarding a subsequent or additional contract with the public entity. The public entity entering into this Agreement shall at all times retain responsibility for public contracting, including with respect to any subsequent phase of this project. Contractor/consultant’s participation in the planning, discussions, or drawing of project plans or specifications shall be limited to conceptual, preliminary, or initial plans or specifications. Contractor/consultant shall cooperate with the public entity to ensure that all bidders for a subsequent contract on any subsequent phase of this project have access to the same information, including all conceptual, preliminary, or initial plans or specifications prepared by contractor pursuant to this Agreement.

6.12. PERS Eligibility Indemnification. In the event that Consultant or any employee, agent, or subcontractor of Consultant providing services under this Agreement claims or is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) to be eligible for enrollment in PERS as an employee of the City, Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City for the payment of any employee and/or employer contributions for PERS benefits on behalf of Consultant or its employees, agents, or subcontractors, as well as for the payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions, which would otherwise be the responsibility of City.

Notwithstanding any other agency, state or federal policy, rule, regulation, law or ordinance to the contrary, Consultant and any of its employees, agents, and subcontractors providing service under this Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled to, and hereby agree to waive any claims to, any compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by City, 459
9 Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc.

Rev. 4-2026

including but not limited to eligibility to enroll in PERS as an employee of City and entitlement to any contribution to be paid by City for employer contribution and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits.

6.13. Cooperation. In the event any claim or action is brought against City relating to Consultant’s performance or services rendered under this Agreement, Consultant shall render any reasonable assistance and cooperation which City might require.

6.14. Ownership of Documents. All findings, reports, documents, information and data including, but not limited to, computer tapes or discs, files and tapes furnished or prepared by Consultant or any of its subcontractors in the course of performance of this Agreement, shall be and remain the sole property of City. Consultant agrees that any such documents or information shall not be made available to any individual or organization without the prior consent of City. Any use of such documents for other projects not contemplated by this Agreement, and any use of incomplete documents, shall be at the sole risk of City and without liability or legal exposure to Consultant. City shall indemnify and hold harmless Consultant from all claims, damages, losses, and expenses, including attorneys’ fees, arising out of or resulting from City’s use of such documents for other projects not contemplated by this Agreement or use of incomplete documents furnished by Consultant. Consultant shall deliver to City any findings, reports, documents, information, data, in any form, including but not limited to, computer tapes, discs, files audio tapes or any other Project related items as requested by City or its authorized representative, at no additional cost to the City.

6.15. Public Records Act Disclosure. Consultant has been advised and is aware that this Agreement and all reports, documents, information and data, including, but not limited to, computer tapes, discs or files furnished or prepared by Consultant, or any of its subcontractors, pursuant to this Agreement and provided to City may be subject to public disclosure as required by the California Public Records Act (California Government Code s ection 7920.000 et seq.).

Exceptions to public disclosure may be those documents or information that qualify as trade secrets, as that term is defined in the California Government Code section 7924.510, and of which Consultant informs City of such trade secret. The City will endeavor to maintain as confidential all information obtained by it that is designated as a trade secret. The City shall not, in any way, be liable or responsible for the disclosure of any trade secret including, without limitation, those records so marked if disclosure is deemed to be required by law or by order of the Court.

6.16. Conflict of Interest. Consultant and its officers, employees, associates and subconsultants, if any, will comply with all conflict of interest statutes of the State of California applicable to Consultant's services under this agreement, including, but not limited to, the Political Reform Act (Government Code sections 81000, et seq.) and Government Code s ection 1090.

During the term of this Agreement, Consultant and its officers, employees, associates and subconsultants shall not, without the prior written approval of the City Representative, perform work for another person or entity for whom Consultant is not currently performing work that would require Consultant or one of its officers, employees, associates or subconsultants to abstain from a decision under this Agreement pursuant to a conflict of interest statute.

6.17. Responsibility for Errors. Consultant shall be responsible for its work and results under this Agreement. Consultant, when requested, shall furnish clarification and/or explanation as may be required by the City’s representative, regarding any services rendered under this Agreement at no additional cost to City. In the event that an error or omission attributable to Consultant occurs, then Consultant shall, at no cost to City, provide all necessary design 460
10 Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc.

Rev. 4-2026

drawings, estimates and other Consultant professional services necessary to rectify and correct the matter to the sole satisfaction of City and to participate in any meeting required with regard to the correction.

6.18. Prohibited Employment. Consultant will not employ any regular employee of City while this Agreement is in effect.

6.19. Order of Precedence. In the event of an inconsistency in this Agreement and any of the attached Exhibits, the terms set forth in this Agreement shall prevail . If, and to the extent this Agreement incorporates by reference any provision of any document, such provision shall be deemed a part of this Agreement. Nevertheless, if there is any conflict among the terms and conditions of this Agreement and those of any such provision or provisions so incorporated by reference, this Agreement shall govern over the document referenced.

6.20. Costs. Each party shall bear its own costs and fees incurred in the preparation and negotiation of this Agreement and in the performance of its obligations hereunder except as expressly provided herein.

6.21. Binding Effect. This Agreement binds and benefits the parties and their respective permitted successors and assigns.

6.22. No Third Party Beneficiary Rights . This Agreement is entered into for the sole benefit of City and Consultant and no other parties are intended to be direct or incidental beneficiaries of this Agreement and no third party shall have any right in, under or to this Agreement.

6.23. Headings. Paragraphs and subparagraph headings contained in this Agreement are included solely for convenience and are not intended to modify, explain or to be a full or accurate description of the content thereof and shall not in any way affect the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement.

6.24. Construction. The parties have participated jointly in the negotiation and drafting of this Agreement and have had an adequate opportunity to review each and every provision of the Agreement and submit the same to counsel or other consultants for review and comment. In the event an ambiguity or question of intent or interpretation arises with respect to this Agreement, this Agreement shall be construed as if drafted jointly by the parties and in accordance with its fair meaning. There shall be no presumption or burden of proof favoring or disfavoring any party by virtue of the authorship of any of the provisions of this Agreement.

6.25. Amendments . Only a writing executed by the parties hereto or their respective successors and assigns may amend this Agreement.

6.26. Waiver. The delay or failure of either party at any time to require performance or compliance by the other of any of its obligations or agreements shall in no way be deemed a waiver of those rights to require such performance or compliance. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the party against whom enforcement of a waiver is sought. The waiver of any right or remedy in respect to any occurrence or event shall not be deemed a waiver of any right or remedy in respect to any other occurrence or event, nor shall any waiver constitute a continuing waiver.

461
11 Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc.

Rev. 4-2026

6.27. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable in any circumstance, such determination shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining terms and provisions hereof or of the offending provision in any other circumstance. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the value of this Agreement, based upon the substantial benefit of the bargain for any party , is materially impaired, which determination made by the presiding court or arbitrator of competent jurisdiction shall be binding, then both parties agree to substitute such provision(s) through good faith negotiations.

6.28. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original. All counterparts shall be construed together and shall constitute one agreement.

6.29. Corporate Authority . The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the parties hereto warrant that they are duly authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of said parties and that by doing so the parties hereto are formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement.

[Signatures appear on following page.]
462
12 Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc.

Rev. 4-2026

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by and through their respective authorized officers, as of the date first above written.

CONSULTANT

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Daniel Iacofano, PhD, President

CITY OF COSTA MESA

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Cecilia Gallardo-Daly
City Manager

ATTEST:

__________________________________
Brenda Green
City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Kimberly Hall Barlow
City Attorney

APPROVED AS TO INSURANCE:

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Ruth Wang
Risk Management

APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Monique Villasenor
Project Manager

463
13 Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc.

Rev. 4-2026

DEPARTMENTAL APPROVAL:

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Brian Gruner
Parks and Community Services Director

APPROVED AS TO PURCHASING:

__________________________________ Date: __________________________ Finance Director

464

EXHIBIT A

CONSULTANT’S PROPOSAL

465
466
467
468
2 City of Costa Mesa | Arts and Culture Master Plan Our process will be inclusive, accessible, and actionable—combining deep listening with analytic rigor to deliver a plan that is visionary, implementable, and distinctly Costa Mesa.

A STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP
This partnership unites MIG’s leadership in cultural and public art planning, CPG’s deep experience in arts policy and administration, and CVL’s strength in economic and funding strategy. Together, we bring the full spectrum of expertise to help Costa Mesa realize a future where art and culture are treated as essential civic infrastructure—vital to the City’s economic health, identity, and quality of life.

We are committed to creating a plan that does more than inspire—it will establish a lasting framework for coordination, investment, and community pride in Costa Mesa’s cultural future.

We look forward to the opportunity to discuss our approach and answer any questions you may have. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at [email protected] or by phone at (858) 254-3031.

Sincerely,
Ann Berchtold
Principal-in-Charge / Director of Public Art and Placemaking 469
City of Costa Mesa | Arts and Culture Master Plan 3

BACKGROUND AND PROJECT SUMMARY
Our approach to community engagement goes beyond
outreach to create value-added participation—building
civic capacity, strengthening partnerships, and fostering resilience across Costa Mesa’s creative community.

Through collaboration with artists, small businesses,
and cultural organizations, we will identify shared
opportunities and design win–win solutions that expand
access and amplify impact.

The updated plan will move beyond visioning to deliver
a clear, actionable roadmap that connects artistic
innovation to economic strategy, reinforces Costa
Mesa’s identity, and provides equitable access to
cultural opportunities. By positioning art as integral civic infrastructure, Costa Mesa will continue to lead as a city where creativity is celebrated, structurally supported, visible in every neighborhood, and vital to its collective future.

Costa Mesa has built a remarkable creative reputation,
and the community has embraced its identity as the City of the Arts. The foundation is strong. The next step is turning that identity into a more intentional, sustainable system—one that ties cultural investment to the
City’s broader goals for economic vitality, community
connection, and civic pride.

The City of Costa Mesa's 2021 Arts and Culture Master
Plan created a strong foundation for collaboration
among artists, institutions, and local government.

Four years later, with significant demographic shifts,
mounting economic pressures on creative spaces, and
new expectations for public participation, it is time
to measure progress and renew the framework that
supports Costa Mesa’s creative ecosystem.

The MIG Team brings the local insight and national
expertise needed to guide this evolution. We
understand that successful arts and culture master plans now operate as strategic civic systems—connecting
creativity to infrastructure, planning, and policy. This update will align with and complement the work of other City departments, embedding arts and culture into
initiatives spanning economic development, land use,
mobility, and parks planning.
470
4 City of Costa Mesa | Arts and Culture Master Plan

METHOD OF APPROACH
Task 1.4: Baseline Data and Resource Assessment
Compile and analyze available data to establish
baseline conditions for the Plan update. This includes
cultural asset mapping, funding landscape analysis, and review of existing data on community demographics,
participation rates, and cultural engagement. CVL
Economics will assess current funding levels and
per-capita investment in the arts compared with peer
cities.

Task 1.5: Interdepartmental Coordination
and Alignment
Conduct virtual coordination meetings with relevant
City departments (Planning, Economic Development,
Parks & Community Services, and Communications) to
assure the arts lan supports and aligns with ongoing
City initiatives.

Phase 1 Deliverables Summary: Kickoff Meeting
Summary and Schedule, Existing Plans Review Matrix,
Integration Opportunities/Shared Performance
Indicators List, Project Management Plan (Gantt
Schedule), Baseline Data and Funding Assessment,
Cultural Asset Inventory Map, Interdepartmental
Coordination Summary.

PHASE 2: ASSESSMENT OF PROGRESS AND

CURRENT CONDITIONS
Building on Phase 1, this phase evaluates progress since the City of Costa Mesa's 2021 Arts and Culture Master
Planand defines the current state of Costa Mesa’s
cultural ecosystem. Using qualitative and quantitative
analysis, the MIG Team will assess achievements,
identify opportunities, and examine trends shaping the
City’s creative future—establishing the foundation for
subsequent recommendations.

Task 2.1: Plan Progress Evaluation
Review the goals, strategies, and implementation
actions of the City of Costa Mesa's 2021 Arts and
Culture Master Plan to document completed, ongoing,
and unmet initiatives. Evaluate policy effectiveness,
organizational capacity, and the impact of past
investments on community engagement and cultural
growth.

The MIG Team will lead a clear, phased process
designed to be analytical, inclusive, and action-
oriented. Our methodology builds from understanding
to implementation—moving from research and
coordination to engagement, strategy development, and
plan delivery. Each phase builds upon the last, providing continuity between discovery, analysis, and community
dialogue. The result will be a cohesive, data-driven, and community-validated plan that reflects Costa Mesa’s
identity as the City of the Arts while providing the
practical tools, policies, and partnerships needed to
sustain its cultural growth for the next decade.

PHASE 1: PROJECT INITIATION AND DISCOVERY
This phase lays the groundwork for a successful plan by aligning expectations, confirming goals, and integrating with related City initiatives. Through coordination with staff and review of existing materials, the MIG Team will assess progress since 2021, identify gaps, and establish baseline metrics to guide future work within the City’s broader policy framework.

Task 1.1: Project Kickoff Meeting
Conduct a 1-hour kickoff meeting (virtual) with City staff to confirm goals, communications protocols, decision-
making pathways, and key project milestones. Review
roles, responsibilities, and reporting expectations for all participants.

Task 1.2: Review of Existing Plans and Policies
Review the City of Costa Mesa's 2021 Arts and Culture
Master Plan and related City initiatives—including the
City’s Economic Development Strategy, Parks and
Recreation Master Plan, and any current planning or
mobility studies—to identify alignment opportunities and data gaps.

Task 1.3: Project Management Framework
Develop a comprehensive project management
plan using MIG’s Monday.com tracking system. The
framework will outline project phases, deliverables,
responsibilities, and inter-departmental coordination
steps.
471
472
6 City of Costa Mesa | Arts and Culture Master Plan Task 3.1: Stakeholder Engagement Framework
Organize outreach around key stakeholder
constituencies, recognizing the unique roles each plays in Costa Mesa’s cultural life. This framework will guide targeted engagement efforts and encourage balanced
representation across all sectors.

Stakeholder Groups Include:
» City leadership and department representatives
(Economic Development, Planning, Parks &
Community Services)
» Arts organizations and individual artists
» Independent venues, cultural businesses, and
creative entrepreneurs
» Philanthropic and nonprofit partners
» Small businesses and economic development leaders
Task 3.2: Multimodal Engagement Strategy
Implement a variety of engagement formats to maximize
participation and broad demographic, cultural, and
geographic representation. This includes:
» A citywide survey (online and in-person) to capture
broad resident input.
» Two pop-up engagements at arts events, libraries,
and parks to reach people in informal, high-traffic
settings.
» Two bilingual focus groups with artists, youth,
cultural organizations, small business owners, and
underrepresented communities.
» Two bilingual public workshops co-facilitated by local cultural partners.
» A joint Arts Commission and Parks & Community
Services Commission session to review findings and
build cross-departmental alignment.

Task 3.3: Trusted Partner and Compensation
Model
Establish partnerships with trusted local organizations to extend reach and build authenticity in community
participation. Community-based organizations will be
compensated for their time and expertise, recognizing
their role as conveners and cultural translators.

Task 3.4: Digital and Interactive Engagement Tools
Use interactive platforms such as ArcGIS StoryMap,
online dashboards, and visual polling tools to gather,
visualize, and share community input. Digital tools will complement in-person efforts, expanding participation
beyond traditional public meetings.

Task 3.5: Synthesis of Engagement Findings
Compile and analyze engagement results, identifying
key themes, emerging opportunities, and shared
priorities. These findings will directly inform the
development of the Plan’s vision, goals, and
implementation framework in the next phase.

Phase 3 Deliverables Summary: Stakeholder
Engagement Framework, Engagement Strategy and
Outreach Calendar, Citywide Survey and Pop-Up
Toolkit, Partner Stipend and Participation Model,
ArcGIS StoryMap and Online Dashboard, Engagement
Summary Report and Infographic.

PHASE 4: PLAN REFINEMENT AND STRATEGIC

VISIONING
This phase transforms insights from earlier work into a strategic framework positioning the arts as a core part of Costa Mesa’s civic infrastructure. Working with City staff and stakeholders, the MIG Team will refine the cultural vision, set priorities, and establish clear, achievable actions supported by realistic funding and measurable
outcomes.

Task 4.1: Vision and Mission Refinement
Revisit and refine Costa Mesa’s vision and mission for
the arts, drawing from stakeholder input, engagement
findings, and City leadership priorities. The refined
vision will serve as a unifying statement for City
departments, artists, and community partners.

Task 4.2: Identification of Strategic Focus Areas
Define key focus areas for the Plan, building on
community priorities and national best practices.

Anticipated focus areas include:
» Public Art and Creative Placemaking
» Y outh Engagement and Arts Education
» Cultural Equity and Inclusion
» Creative Economy and Workforce Development
» Integration of Art in Public Works and Urban Design
473
474
475
City of Costa Mesa | Arts and Culture Master Plan 9 Task 5.2: Peer City Benchmarking
Benchmark Costa Mesa against a refined cluster of peer
cities with comparable populations and thriving arts
programs, including Pasadena, Santa Monica, Boulder,
Burbank, and Tempe. These cities offer a spectrum
of approaches—from city-led to hybrid governance
models—providing valuable insights into scalable
staffing and funding frameworks.

MIG will evaluate the following best-practice indicators within each benchmark city:
» Number and type of full-time equivalent positions
dedicated to arts and culture.
» Departmental placement and reporting structure (e.g., Planning, Economic Development, or standalone
Cultural Affairs Division).
» Integration of public art, events, and creative
economy functions.
» Staffing-to-population ratio and per-capita funding
levels.
» Use of hybrid partnerships or nonprofit management
models.

Task 5.3: Phased Staffing Model and Capacity Plan
Develop a phased staffing plan aligned with
Costa Mesa’s cultural goals and budget realities.

Recommendations will define roles, position
qualifications, and estimated costs for short-,
mid-, and long-term implementation. The plan will
emphasize adaptability, professional development, and
partnership-based capacity building (e.g., collaboration with nonprofits, regional institutions, or private
sponsors).

Task 5.4: Interdepartmental Integration
Recommendations
Provide recommendations for improved coordination
between City departments—such as Planning, Economic
Development, Parks and Community Services, and
Communications—to enhance efficiency and embed
arts considerations are embedded across policy and
project development.

Phase 5 Deliverables Summary: Organizational
Assessment Summary, Peer City Benchmarking Report
and Matrix, Phased Staffing and Capacity Plan with
Budget Implications, Departmental Integration Memo
and Coordination Map.

PHASE 6: PLAN PREPARATION, DESIGN,

AND ADOPTION
The final phase unites all research, analysis, and
engagement into a clear, visually engaging, and
actionable plan that communicates Costa Mesa’s
cultural vision. MIG will synthesize findings into an
accessible, well-designed document that serves as both
a policy roadmap and a communication tool—making
complex ideas understandable, inspiring civic pride, and encouraging investment in the City’s creative future..

Task 6.1: Draft Plan Development
Prepare a full draft of the Arts and Culture Master Plan that integrates all prior analyses, community input,
and recommendations. The document will include
key elements such as the refined vision, strategic
focus areas, implementation roadmap, funding and
governance strategies, and staffing recommendations.

Task 6.2: Plan Design and Visualization
Develop a visually engaging and user-friendly plan
layout that reflects Costa Mesa’s creative identity. MIG’s design team will incorporate infographics, maps, and
photography to communicate data and ideas effectively.

The Plan will be designed for both print and digital
distribution, for broad accessibility.

Task 6.3: Review and Approval Presentations
Present the draft Plan to the Arts Commission, Parks
& Community Services Commission, and City Council
for review and adoption. MIG will facilitate discussion, respond to feedback, and make necessary revisions
based on comments from staff and commissioners.

Task 6.4: Final Plan and Deliverables
Incorporate all feedback into the final Plan and prepare both print-ready and accessible digital versions. The
final Plan will include an executive summary, detailed
appendices, and implementation tracking tools.
476
477
City of Costa Mesa | Arts and Culture Master Plan 11

QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE OF THE FIRM
Cultural Planning Group (CPG)
The Cultural Planning Group brings more than two
decades of leadership in cultural policy, governance,
and creative economy planning. With a portfolio of
over 100 cultural and creative economy master plans,
CPG excels in developing actionable, community-driven
strategies that balance artistic vision with organizational and financial sustainability.

Having worked alongside MIG on numerous cultural and
public art initiatives—including Redmond, Sugar Land,
and Grand Rapids—CPG provides deep expertise in
policy analysis, funding strategies, benchmarking, and
arts administration models. For Costa Mesa, CPG will
lead policy evaluation, funding framework development,
and organizational recommendations to strengthen the
City’s capacity to implement its vision for the arts.

CVL Economics
CVL Economics specializes in creative economy
analysis and funding strategy development for arts
and cultural sectors. Their expertise includes economic modeling, fiscal impact assessments, and governance
framework design. CVL’s deep experience in quantifying
the value of arts investment provides the data
foundation for informed decision-making.

For Costa Mesa, CVL will lead a comprehensive analysis
of the City’s creative economy—evaluating industry
performance, employment, and fiscal impact—to inform
funding strategies and support long-term cultural and
workforce growth.

A Proven Partnership
Together, MIG, CVL Economics, and CPG bring a rare
combination of strategic, analytical, and creative
expertise—grounded in years of collaboration and
shared success. Our collective experience assures that
the updated Costa Mesa Arts and Culture Master Plan
will be visionary, data-informed, community-driven,
and implementation-ready, positioning the City of the
Arts for its next decade of creative leadership.

The MIG Team: MIG, CVL Economics,
and Cultural Planning Group
MIG has assembled an experienced and well-integrated
team that combines national leadership in cultural
planning, economic strategy, and implementation
design. Together, MIG, CVL Economics, and the
Cultural Planning Group (CPG) bring a shared history
of collaboration and a collective vision for building
sustainable creative ecosystems.

Our firms have partnered successfully on multiple
cultural and public art initiatives, including the City of Redmond, WA Public Art Master Plan Update; the
Grand River Public Art Plan in Grand Rapids, MI; the
City of Sugar Land, TX Cultural Plan; the Howard
County, MD Arts for All Program; and the City of
Santa Clarita Water District Art Integration Project.

This proven partnership fosters alignment in approach,
seamless communication, and efficient project delivery
from planning through implementation.

MIG, Inc.

MIG is a cross-disciplinary planning and design firm that helps cities connect creativity, policy, and infrastructure to build thriving communities. Our team includes
cultural and urban planners, creative economy and
workforce development specialists, park and recreation
professionals, mobility and transportation planners,
designers, and engagement experts—supported by
dedicated studios in Native Nations, Health Equity,
and Public Art and Placemaking. This diversity mirrors
how cities operate—across systems rather than silos—
allowing us to integrate arts, culture, and the creative economy into the broader civic framework.

For Costa Mesa, MIG will lead project management,
community engagement, and plan development,
allowing cultural vitality to be embedded across
transportation, parks, development, and economic
strategies. Our work is grounded in the belief that art is civic infrastructure —essential to identity, resilience, and long-term community wellbeing.
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
18 City of Costa Mesa | Arts and Culture Master Plan

FINANCIAL CAPACITY
MIG has no debt and has current assets that are 3.6 times over current liabilities.

COST PROPOSAL
As requested, we have provided the MIG Team's Cost Proposal separately.

DISCLOSURE
MIG has no past or current business and personal relationships with any current Costa Mesa elected official, appointed official, City employee, or family member of any current Costa Mesa elected official, appointed official, or City employee.

SAMPLE PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENT
MIG has reviewed the City’s Professional Services Agreement for the Arts and Culture Master Plan and has no exceptions or amendments at this time.
485
486
20 City of Costa Mesa | Arts and Culture Master Plan

 CORPORATION  LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP
 INDIVIDUAL  SOLE PROPRIETORSHIP
 PARTNERSHIP  UNINCORPORATED ASSOCIATION

Names & Titles of Corporate Board Members
(Also list Names & Titles of persons with written authorization/resolution to sign contracts)

Names Title Phone
___________________________________ ___________________________________

___________________________________ ___________________________________

___________________________________ ___________________________________

___________________________________ ___________________________________

___________________________________ ___________________________________

___________________________________ ___________________________________

Federal Tax Identification Number: __________________________________________

X
Daniel Iacofano, PhD Preside
nt, CEO, CFO (510) 84
5-7549
Christopher Beynon, AICP Vice Pres
ident, CDO (510) 84
5-7549
Roxanne Torrez Evanoff COO, Tal
ent Officer (303) 44
0-9200
Mukul Malhotra Chief Innovation Officer (510) 845-7549 Deanna Chow Trotter Chief Cuture Officer (510) 845-7549 Jay Renkens, AICP Chief Practice Officer (347) 896-8028 487
City of Costa Mesa | Arts and Culture Master Plan 21

City of Costa Mesa Business License Number: ________________________________________ (If none, you must obtain a Costa Mesa Business License upon award of contract.)

City of Costa Mesa Business License Expiration Date: ________________________________

EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS CERTIFICATION
Please indicate by signing below one of the following two statements. Only sign one statement.

I certify that Proposer and Proposer’s representatives have not had any communication with a City Councilmember concerning informal RFP No. 26-09 Affordable Housing Development Projects at any time after October 27, 2025

________________________________ Date: _______________________ Signature

________________________________
Print

OR

I certify that Proposer or Proposer’s representatives have communicated after October 27, 2025 with a City Councilmember concerning informal RFP No. 26-09 Affordable Housing Development Projects.

A copy of all such communications is attached to this form for public distribution.

________________________________ Date: _______________________ Signature

________________________________
Print

Daniel Iacofano, PhD, President, CEO, CFO
2/28/2026
RGEN-25-0908
November 3, 2025
488
22 City of Costa Mesa | Arts and Culture Master Plan

DISQUALIFICATION QUESTIONNAIRE
The Contractor shall complete the following questionnaire:

Has the Contractor, any officer of the Contractor, or any employee of the Contractor who has proprietary interest in the Contractor, ever been disqualified, removed, or otherwise prevented from bidding on, or completing a federal, state, or local government project because of a violation of law or safety regulation?
Yes _____ No _____
If the answer is yes, explain the circumstances in the following space.

X
489
City of Costa Mesa | Arts and Culture Master Plan 23

DISCLOSURE OF GOVERNMENT POSITIONS
Each Proposer shall disclose below whether any owner or employee of Contractor currently hold positions as elected or appointed officials, directors, officers, or employees of a governmental entity or held such positions in the past twelve months. List below or state "None."

None
490
24 City of Costa Mesa | Arts and Culture Master Plan

COMPANY PROFILE & REFERENCES

Company Legal Name:

Company Legal Status (corporation, partnership, sole proprietor etc.):

Active licenses issued by the California State Contractor’s License Board:

Business Address:

Website Address:

Telephone Number: Facsimile Number:

Email Address:

Length of time the firm has been in business:

Length of time at current location:

Is your firm a sole proprietorship doing business under a different name: ___Yes ___No

If yes, please indicate sole proprietor’s name and the name you are doing business under:

Federal Taxpayer ID Number:

Regular Business Hours:

Regular holidays and hours when business is closed:

Contact person in reference to this solicitation:

Contact person for accounts payable:

Name of Project Manager:

Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc. (MIG)
(510) 845-7549
800 Hearst Avenue, Berkeley, CA 94710
Ann Berchtold, Principal-in-Charge
(858) 254-3031
[email protected]
43 years
www.migcom.com
(510) 845-8750
36 years
#C1513382
X
9am - 5pm (Mon-Fri)
TBD
Saul Vazquez-Mejia, Project Manager
(210) 600-9990
[email protected]
Ann Berchtold, Principal-in-Charge
(858) 254-3031
[email protected]
491
City of Costa Mesa | Arts and Culture Master Plan 25

COMPANY PROFILE & REFERENCES (Continued)

Submit the company names, addresses, telephone numbers, email, contact names, and brief contract descriptions of at least three clients, preferably other municipalities for whom comparable projects have been completed or submit letters from your references which include the requested information.

City of Redmond
Chris Weber, Cultural Arts Supervisor
15670 NE 85th Street, Redmond, WA 98052
(425) 556-2316 | [email protected]
Descrption: MIG is leading an update to Redmond’s Public Art Plan to align the City’s investments in public art with its rapid growth, emerging cultural districts, and creative economy goals. The plan identifies priority sites, funding strategies, and governance models to support a more inclusive, innovative, and sustainable public art program.

City of Grand Rapids
Kimberly Van Driel, Director of Space Management,
Downtown Grand Rapids, Inc.
29 Pearl Street, NQ, Suite 1, Grand Rapids, MI 49503
(616) 915-9500 | [email protected]
Descrption: MIG, in collaboration with CPG, developed a comprehensive Public Art Plan for the Grand River corridor, integrating art into ongoing river restoration and public space improvements. The plan establishes a curatorial framework, funding strategies, and governance structure to guide implementation across the 80-acre riverfront.

City of San Diego
Jonathon Glus, Arts & Culture Director
202 C Street, San Diego, CA 92101
(323) 620-6519 | [email protected]
Descrption: Delivered by Cultural Planning Group, the City of San Diego Cultural Plan established a roadmap to strengthen the creative sector, expand equitable access to arts and culture, and integrate cultural vitality into civic life. The plan provides strategies for investment, inclusion, and long-term cultural sustainability.
492
493
City of Costa Mesa | Arts and Culture Master Plan 27

1 ADDENDUM NO. 1

REQUEST FOR PROPSAL
FOR
Arts and Culture Master Plan Update
RFP NO. 26-09

Parks and Community Services Department

CITY OF COSTA MESA

Addendum Released on November 12, 2025
The referenced document has been modified as per the attached Addendum No. 1

Please sign this Addendum where designated and return the executed copy with submission of your proposal. This addendum is hereby made part of the referenced RFP.

494
28 City of Costa Mesa | Arts and Culture Master Plan

2 1. Delete Schedule of Events : Schedule of Events: This Request For Proposal shall be governed by the following schedule:

2. Responses to Questions Posted November 10, 2025 at 5:00pm

3. Proposals are Due November 14, 2025 at 10:00am

4. Interviews (if held) December 2- 4, 2025

5. Approval of Contract January 2026
•

6. Replace Schedule of Evets : Schedule of Events: This Request For Proposal shall be governed by the following schedule:

1. Responses to Questions Posted November 18, 2025 at 5:00pm

2. Proposals are Due November 25, 2025 at 10:00am

3. Interviews (if held) December 15-16, 2025

4. Approval of Contract January 2026
•

All other provisions of the request for proposal shall remain in their entirety.

Vendors hereby acknowledge receipt and understanding of the above Addendum.

Complete and submit this Addendum with your proposal.

____________________________ ____________________________ Signature Date Company Name

____________________________
Typed Name and Title Address

____________________________
City State Zip
Ann Berchtold, Principal-in-Charge
Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc. (MIG)
800 Hearst Avenue
Berkeley, CA 94710
11/13/2025
495

EXHIBIT B

FEE SCHEDULE

496
497
498

EXHIBIT C

CITY COUNCIL POLICY 100-5

499
ATTACHMENT 2
City of Costa Mesa – Scope of Work
Arts & Culture Master Plan Update
Purpose:

The City of Costa Mesa seeks to update its Arts & Culture Master Plan, originally adopted in 2021. The updated Plan will assess progress to date, reevaluate community needs, and establish revised goals and strategies that align with the City’s motto, “City of the Arts.”
Project Objectives:
• Evaluate implementation progress of the 2021 Master Plan. • Re-engage the community to gather updated input and feedback. • Review and analyze new trends, demographic shifts, and emerging needs. • Identify updated goals, measurable objectives, and actionable strategies for the next 5–10 years.
• Explore innovative arts policy, public art practices, and sustainable funding models.
• Assess current staffing levels, roles, and capacity.
• Propose a staffing model that supports sustainable plan implementation and growth of the City’s arts initiatives.
• Emphasize diversity, equity, inclusion, and geographic balance across Costa Mesa.

Scope of Work:

A. Project Initiation

1. Conduct kickoff meeting with City staff and Arts Commission.

2. Review the 2021 Arts & Culture Master Plan and any relevant City initiatives and policies.

3. Establish a project timeline, communications plan, and deliverable schedule.

B. Assessment of Progress and Current Conditions

1. Review progress made on goals and action items in the 2021 Plan.

2. Conduct updated inventory of:
• Cultural assets and programs
• Public and private arts initiatives
500