El Cajon City Council
February 24, 2026

fully funded their portion of the operating reserves. PAs that do not have adequate refunds will be billed for their portion of the reserve in the next quarterly 2010 billing . The operating reserves for each fiscal year will be established based on 45 days of operating revenues as determined by the following formula:

Fiscal Year Estimated Operating Expenses (not including CIP and debt service) 365 days X45 days
The number of days included in the calculation cannot be changed without prior consent of the PAs.

The operating reserves will be maintained by the City of San Diego and interest will accrue on a monthly basis based on actual interest rates on the City's investments. This interest revenue will be added to the PAs undesignated fund balance for that fiscal year. As part of each year's Exhibit E audit the actual required operating reserves and interest earned on it will be determined and audited by the City of San Diego's external auditors and PA representatives. A summary of the operating reserves balance and interest earned for each PA will be included as a footnote or attachment to the City Metro Wastewater Exhibit E Audit .

PROTOCOL REGARDING ALLOCA TIQN OF DEBT SERVICE COVERAGE TO PAs Background:

A 1.2 debt service coverage ratio is a requirement for all of the outstanding Metro parity debt. A cash flow prepared by the City of San Diego shows (Attachment C) that if the PAs are billed at the current level ($65 million annually to cover the PAs portion of operations, pay-go capital, and debt service expense) for the next three to five years that this requirement can be achieved without additional contributions by the PAs. This provides the PAs a stable projected annual Metro contribution for the next three to five years.

Protocol:

The PAs will maintain through annual contributions and use of PA undesignated fund balance a positive cash flow not to exceed 1.2 times the PA share of the required annual debt service on Metro Debt. The debt service coverage ratio of 1.2 cannot be changed without prior consent of the PAs.

The undesignated fund balance will be maintained by the City of San Diego and interest will accrue on a monthly basis based on actual interest rates on the City's investments. This interest revenue will be added to the PAs undesignated fund balance for that fiscal year.

As part of each year's Exhibit E audit the actual required reserve coverage and interest earned on the undesignated fund balance will be determined and audited by the City of San Diego's external auditors and PA representatives. A summary of the debt service coverage requirement and portion of interest earned on the undesignated fund balance for each PA will be included as a footnote or attachment to the City Metro Wastewater Exhibit E Audit.

If the cash flow in any year does not provide the required 1.2 debt service coverage the PAs will be billed the additional required revenue including interest.

Draft #2 - March 10, 2010
SDPUB\PDESOUSA\393171.1

Draft
Scheclulo of -pallna As•nc, Co-'>ul!ON to Ope...ttons Reserve and o.bt Servi<• Cov•raae Cash fl- fY 2007-2011 Prepand on: F«bruary ll, 2010
HOW TO READ CASH ROW SPREADSHEET:

Blue font a data Inputted directly Into spreadsheet
Green font= data ln,pQrted from iiOOthe.t $pre.iidsheet tn workbook 811cll font • ~n; sae lqond to dotarmlne cakulatlon
-
Unel tnh-'-"' Lesond
1 current Projected -ua Slnam Input
1 Annual ~ Afte< Exhibit E Audit Input
3 T.......,, (to}/fN>mOpe.-1 Reserve line 21~riorYHr
4 Undalcn-<i F- Balanoo lntorest Line 17 X lnt_,.st Rll<I 5 Operattnc 11,,_ lnlffat Clloulated Off-line
6 Gloss PA System Re-.nue Sum(Unel:LlneS)
7 IAU:
• PAEstlmatedTobll)pernlnc t.pense Prlorye tXl.01
9 10 Not PA Syotem llewenue Un16 · lin1 B
11 12 PA Annllll Debt Senl<a Paymont Calculatod Off-Une 13 OP Pay Go - • ot Projected OP lni,ut
14 Total CIP - Debt - Lin• 12+ 13
15 16 Not lnoame after CP nd Debt - Line 10 · 14
17 PA Uncltlllft•ted Fund-nc.t! Line 16 + Prior Yeu
u
19 Calculated Dbt Service Ratio line 10/Une 12
10 Foot·
-·
(1)
(11
(3)
(4)
(5)
11 a.--a-145 dlyol fU"" 8/365 days) X 45 djs
Footnotu,-

AUINTED
f'I07
- --
- $54,007,596
$54,007,596
$32,304,298
$21 703,198
$20,373, 393
(4,417,5021
15,955,1191
$5,747,407
$5,747,407
(1) averaip of cutrent yea,, tndlrc bllanc:• + prior yHrendq b•l•ncal times 3.2'4 (Zl ..,..._ monthly balance times lAJF "'t• (flrst yeor oakulated al half yoar lnlerost) 131 FY09 b•sed on....,,_ of FYrn & F'/08 than 1% Inflation (41 10% of pn,joctad Metro CIP
(51 Mln,mum cove~ requirement 1,2 thn• annua• Metro debt siervf,;e F'IOI FY09 mo
-- --
$63,231,038 $57,249,960 $64,487,-408
i lUJ%431i . (4,281,432}
79,990
164,514
$63,231,038 $57,249,960 $52,241,049
$37,150,042 $34,727, 170 $34,727,170
$26,080,996 $22,522,790 $17,513,879
$19,850,05 I $20,441,069 $24,049 ,989
(512,512) 1,318,048
19,337,539 20,441,069 25,368,037
$6,743,457 s2,oa1 ,n1 ($7,854,157)
$12,490, 864 $14,572,S&S $6,718,428

0.73 $4,281,431
mp 9PalUnc kacolJ! cak.;
PA Operatln1 Expenses: $34,72 7,170
dMdod by: 365
Equals: $95,143
Tlmes:
45 day Operatlnl RI....,. :
45 $4,281,432

PIIOJECTEO
FYU FY12 FYU fY14 FY15
~- -- -- --
$65,000,000 $65,000,000 $65,000,000 $65,000,000 $65,000,000 (1,500,000) (3,000,000) (2,500,000) (2,100,000) (1,800,000) (42,814) (43, 242) (43,675] (44,112) (44,553 )
258,156 2:Z.S,608 113,282 62,579 58,899
166,159 167,821 169,499 171,194 172,906
$63,881.500 $62,350,187 $62,739,106 $63,089,661 $63,387,252 $35,074442 $354:Z.S 186 $35 779 438 $36,137 232 $36,498 ,605 $28,807,059 $16,925, 001 $26,959 ,668 $26,952,429 $26,888 ,647 $.14,043,880 $22,479,039 $22,478,266 $22,478,075 $22,478,730 5,610,210 7,369,218 5,800,940 4,570,129 4,655,009
29,654,090 29,848,257 28,279,206 27,048,204 27,133,739
($847,0321 ($2,923,257) ($1,319,537) ($95,775) ($245,0921 $5,871.396 $2,948,139 $1,628,602 $1,532 ,827 $1,287,735

1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1,10
$4,324,246 $4,367,489 $4,4U,164 $4,455,175 $4,49!1,121
mo APc1111o1 6Acm lgtgra& c.Jc;
PA ooe,.tlrc Expen.e s: $4,281.432
Tlmos av. monthly LAIF Interest llote : 0.038425 (,..,.. ftom 3.18" to 4.53" per month l FYlO htlmoted interest Earned : S164,514
r
Agency

CHULA VISTA

CORONADO
DELMAR

EL CAJON

IMPERIAL BEACH

LA MESA

LAKESIDE/ ALPINE

LEMON GROVE

NATIONAL CITY
OTAY

PADRE DAM
POWAY

SPRING VALLEY

WINTERGARDENS
TOTAL
March 23, 2010
FY07-FY08 Operating Reserve Rate Stabilizat ion
Based on 2008 Flows
FINAL

EXHIBIT E AUDIT ADJUSTMENTS I
FY 2007 FY 2008 TOTAL 2008 FLOWS
&LOADS
($1,837,010) ($2,100,751) ($3,937,761) 28.083%
($189,910) {$366,858) ($556,768) 3.356%
($87,785) ($103,913) ($191,698) 1.029%
($290,369) $66,888 ($223,481) 15.270%
($132,300) ($130,153) ($262,453) 3.652%
($99,793) ($40,190) ($139,983) 8.842%
($293,313) ($243,206) ($536,519) 5.357%
($147,034) ($195,043) ($342,077) 3.611%
($637,379) ($947,043) ($1,584,422) 7.572%
$123,792 ($138,545) ($14,753) 0.459%
($789,976) ($1,752,218) ($2,542,194) 5.198%
($683,251) $130,168 ($553,083) 5.770%
($611,093) ($667,539) ($1,278 ,632) 10.316%
($71,984) ($56,162) ($128,146) 1.482%
($5,747,405) ($6,544,565) ($12,291,970) 100%
-
2008 FLOWS & LOADS

OPERATING NET

RESERVE -
$1,202 ,374 ($2,735,387)
$143,693 {$413,075)
$44,061 ($147,637)
$653,789 $430,308
$156,373 ($106,080)
$378,561 $238,578
$229,368 ($307,151)
$154,615 ($187 ,462)
$324,211 ($1,260,211)
$19,668 $4,915
$222,537 ($2,319,657)
$247,021 ($306,062)
$441,691 ($836,941)
$63,470 ($64,676J
$4,281,432 $ (8,010,538.00)
Exhibit D
Notice Listing
4914-3650-2326

EXHIBIT D

NOTICE LISTING
Maria Kachadoorian
City Manager
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91919
Phone: (619) 691 5031
mkachadoorian@chulavista
ca.gov
Tin
a Friend
City Manager
City of Coronado
1825 Strand Way
Coronado, CA 92113
Phone: (619) 522-7335
[email protected]
As
hley Jones
City Manager
City of Del Mar
1050 Camino Del Mar
Del Mar, CA 92014
Phone: 755-9313 ext. 25
[email protected]
Gr
aham Mitchell
City Manager
City of El Cajon
200 Civic Center Way
El Cajon CA 92020
Phone: (619) 441-1716
[email protected]
Ty
ler Foltz
Greg Humora
City Manager
City of La Mesa
8130 Allison Avenue
La Mesa, CA 91942
Phone: (619) 667-1101
[email protected]
Lydi
a Romero
City Manager
City of Lemon Grove
3232 Main Street
Lemon Grove, CA 91945
Phone: (619) 464-6934
[email protected]
Sc
ott Huth
Acting City Manager
City of National City
1243 National City Blvd.

National City, CA 91950
Phone: (619) 336-4240
[email protected]
Ch
ris Hazeltine
City Manager
City of Poway
13325 Civic Center Drive
Poway, CA 92064
Phone: (858) 679-4200
[email protected]
Ma
yor Todd Gloria
Chief Operating Officer
City of San Diego
202 "C" Street
San Diego, CA 92101
Phone: (619) 236-5949
[email protected]
Ebon
y Shelton
Chief Administrative Officer County
of San Diego
1600 Pacific Highway, Rm. 209
San Diego, CA 92101
Phone: (619) 531-5250
[email protected]
Jose
Martinez
General Manager
Otay Water District
2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd.

Spring Valley, CA 91977
Phone: (619) 670-2210
[email protected]
Kyl
e Swanson
CEO/General Manager
Padre Dam Municipal Water
District
9300 Fanita Pkwy
Santee, CA 92071
Phone: (619) 258-4673
[email protected]
City Manager
City of Imperial Beach
825 Imperial Beach Blvd.

Imperial Beach, CA 91932
Phone: (619) 423-8300 ext. 7
[email protected]
Exhibit E
Methodology for Contract Capacity Transfers.

Last Updated: 5/29/2025

EXHIBIT E

METHODOLOGY FOR CONTRACT CAPACITY TRANSFERS

The following exhibit describes the methodology for transferring contract capacities from the Metro Pooled Capacity (summarized in the table below) to a Party’s contract capacity defined in Exhibit B.

POOLED CAPACITY
Average Flow,
mgd
Incremental Peak1,
mgd
TSS,
1,000 lbs.

COD,
1,000 lbs.

After Phase 1 Pure Water 0 102 96,820 27,521
After Phase 2 Pure Water 10 20 96,820 27,521

1. At Point Loma WWTP

2. Assume system storage

If a transfer of contract capacity is initiated as set forth in Section 4.4.3.1, capacity will be taken from the Pool ed Capacity and added to the Party in need of additional capacity. Thereafter, the above table of Pool ed Capacity will be updated with the subject column reduced, and Exhibit B will be updated with the subject Party’s contract capacity correspondingly increased.

In lieu of transferring average flow capacity from the Pool ed Capacity to a Party, the Party can choose to transfer Incremental Peak Flow Capacity to Average Flow Capacity keeping Total Allowable Flow the same, assuming the Party would still have sufficient Total Allowable Flow Capacity for their peak flows.

If a transfer of contract capacity as set forth in Section 4.4.3.2, the reverse shall occur and the subject Party’s contract capacity will be reduced in Exhibit B and the Pooled increased.

In lieu of transferring average flow capacity to the Pool ed Capacity from a Party, the Party can choose to transfer Average Flow Capacity to Incremental Peak Flow Capacity keeping Total Last Updated: 5/29/2025
Allowable Flow the same, if they anticipate needing their current Total Allowable Flow for their peak flows.

The remainder of this Exhibit has examples of how these transfers would be performed and the estimated effect on a Party’s share of Metro System Costs under the FAB Billing System. Please note Metro System costs will change from time to time as well as Contract Capacities per Exhibit B, so the following are only examples and not meant to be exact. These examples are based on Exhibit B as of the signing of this agreement, not necessarily the last revision of this exhibit. These examples are currently based on FY24 unaudited costs and estimated FY27 billing units.

AVERAGE FLOW EXAMPLE - 5% INCREASE IN CONTRACT CAPACITY FROM POOLED CAPACITY If the City of Chula Vista needed a 5% Increase in Average Flow Contract Capacity from the Pooled Capacity, then Exhibit B Contract Capac ity would be updated as follows

DISTRIBUTION OF WASTEWA TER SYSTEM CAPACITY RIGHTS

AN UAL FIXED CAPACITY RIGHTS
AGENCY I 2 3 4 s 6
Average I ncrcmcntal Total Allowable TSS, COD, Flow, Peak Flow, RSPD, MGD Flow, 1,000 lbs. 1,000 lbs. MGD MGD MGD Chula Vista (Old) 18.33 19.52 0 37.85 22,082 38,419
Chula Vista (New) 19.25 19.52 0 38.77 22,082 38,419
If the City of Chula Vista needed a 5% Increase in Contract Capacity, then Chula Vista's costs increa se -4%. All other agencies' costs would decrease proportionally.

OWNERSHIP USE TOTAL AGENCY OLD NEW
Average I ncremcntal RSDP, TSS, COD, Metered RSDP, TSS, COD, %of AGENCY Flow, Peak Flow, MGD 1,000 lbs. 1,000 Flow, MGD 1,000 lbs. 1,000 lbs. TOTAL Total MGD MGD lbs. MGD Chula Vista $ 28.346,743 s 29.46 7,877
Corona do $ 2,351,663 $ 2,340,482
Chu la Vista $2,910 ,602 $1 ,330,563 $0 $2,040,479 $527,94 1 SI 1,035.399 $0 $7,560 ,599 $2,94 1,160 $28,346,743 11.1% (Old) Del Mar $ 20,447 $ 20,405
East Otav Mesa $ 1,072,840 $ 1,069,00 1
Chula Vista $3.04 1,025 $1,327,783 $0 $2,040,479 $527,94 1 S 12.028.890 $0 $7,560,599 $2,94 1,160 $29,467,877 11.6% (New) El Caion $ 3,311,325 $ 3,300,158
Impe rial Beach $ 3,397,789 $ 3,379,514
La Mesa $ 8,545,592 $ 8,504,174
Lakeside / Alpine $ 305,946 $ 304,943
Lemon Grove $ 3,041,920 $ 3,026,888
National Cirv $ 6,275,5 12 $ 6,243,265
Otay $ 946,6 16 $ 943,355
Padre Dam $ 750, 193 $ 748,140
Poway $ 4,347,435 $ 4,326,388
Spring Valley $ 7,182,725 $ 7,147,1 14
Wintergardens $ 135,844 $ 135,453
SUBTOTAL $ 70,032,590 $ 70,957,155
San Diel!o
SD Wastewater $ 182,904,588 $ 181,993,097
SD Water $ 1,457,146 $ 1,444,072
SU BTOTAL $ 184,361,734 $ 183,437, 169
Regio nal Sludge $ - $ -
TOTAL $ 254,394,325 $ 254,394,325
Last Updated: 5/29/2025
AVERAGE FLOW EXAMPLE - 5% INCREASE IN CONTRACT CAPACITY FROM INCREMETNAL PEAK lftbe City of Chula Vista needed a 5% Increa se in Average Flow Contract Capacity from their Incremental Peak, then Exh ibit B Contract Capacity would be updated as follows

DISTRIBUTION OF WASTEWATER SYSTEM CAPACITY RIGHTS

ANNUAL FIXED CAPACITY RIGHTS
AGENCY I 2 3 4 s 6
Average Incremental Total Allowable TSS, COD, Flow, Peak Flow, RSPD, MGD Flow, 1,000 lbs. 1,000 lbs. MGD MGD MGD Chula Vista (Old) 18.33 19.52 0 37.85 22,082 38,419
Chula Vista (New) 19.25 18.61 0 37.85 22,082 38,419
lftbe City of Chula Vista needed a 5% Increase in Contract Capacity, then Chula Vista's costs increase - 3.8%. All other agencies' costs would decrease proportionall y.

OWNERSHIP lJSE TOTAL AGENCY OLD NEW
Average Increment al RSDP, TSS, COD, Metered RSDP, TSS, COD, %of AGENCY Flow, Peak Flow, MGD 1,000 lbs. 1,000 Flow, MGD 1,000 lbs. 1,000 lbs. TOTAL Total MGD MGD lbs. MGD Chula Vista $ 28,346 ,743 s 29.4 11.586
Coronado $ 2,35 1,663 $ 2,341,152
Chula Vista $2,910,602 $ 1,330,563 $0 $2,040,479 $527,941 S 11 ,035,399 $0 $7,560,599 $2,941,160 $28,346,743 11.1% (Old) Del Mar $ 20,447 $ 20,449
East Otay Mesa $ 1,072,840 $ 1,069,587
Chula Vista $3,041 .423 $1,268,493 $0 $2,040,479 $527,941 S 12,03 1.492 $0 $7,560,599 (New) $2,941 ,160 $29,411,586 11.6% El Cajon $ 3,311,325 $ 3,303,299 Impe rial Beach $ 3,397,78 9 $ 3,380,539
La Mesa $ 8,545,592 $ 8,508,472
Lakeside/ Alpine $ 305,946 $ 305,22 6
Lemon Grove $ 3,041,920 $ 3,027,850
National City $ 6,275,512 $ 6,244,378
Otay $ 946,6 16 $ 943,505
Padre Dam $ 750,193 $ 749,149
Poway $ 4 ,347,435 $ 4,328,094
Soring Valley $ 7,182,725 $ 7,148,584
Wintergarde ns $ 135,844 $ 135,622
SUBTOTAL $ 70,032,590 $ 70,917,492
San Diee:o
SD Wastewater $ I 82,904,588 $ 182,03 1,622
SD Water $ 1,457, 146 $ 1,445,211
SUBTOTAL $ 184,361,734 $ 183,476,833
Regio nal Sludge $ - $ -
TOTAL $ 254,394,325 $ 254,394,325
Last Updated: 5/29/2025
INCREMENTAL PEAK FLOW EXAMPLE - 5% INCREASE IN CONTRA CT CAPACITY FROM POOL ED CAPACITY If the City of Chula Vista needed a 5% Increase in Increme ntal Peak Contract Capacity from the Pooled Capac ity, then Exhibit B Contrac t Capacity would be updated as follows

DISTRIBUTION OF WASTEWA TER SYSTEM CAPACITY RIGHTS

AN UAL FIXED CAPA CITY RIGHTS
AGENCY I 2 3 4 s 6
Averag e Incremental Total Allowable TSS, COD, Flow, Peak Flow, RSPD, MGD Flow, 1,000 lbs. 1,000 lbs. MGD MGD MGD Cbula Vista (Old) 18.33 19.52 0 37.85 22,082 38,419
Chula Vista (New) 18.33 20.50 0 38.83 22,082 38,4 19
ff the City of Chula Vista needed a 5% Increase in Contract Capacity, then Chula Vista's costs increase -0.2%. All other agencies' costs would decrease proportionally.

OWNERSHIP USE TOTAL AGENCY OLD NEW
Average Incremental RSDP, TSS, COD, Metered RSDP, TSS, COD, % of AGENCY Flow, Peak Flow, MGD 1,000 lbs. 1,000 Flow, MGD 1,000 lbs. 1,000 lbs. TOTAL Total MGD MGD lbs. MGD Chula Vista $ 28,346,743 s 28,407,227
Coro nado $ 2,35 1,663 $ 2,350,944
Chula Vista $2,91 0,602 $1,330,563 $0 $2,040,479 $527,941 $11,035,399 $0 $7,560,59 9 $2,941,160 $28,346,743 11.1% (Old) Del Mar $ 20,447 $ 20,400
East Otay Mesa $ 1,072,840 $ 1,072,211
Chula Vista $2,9 10,196 $1.394.000 $0 $2,040,479 $527,941 $11,032,852 $0 $7,560,5 99 (New) $2,941 ,160 $28,407,227 11.2% El Cajon $ 3,311,325 $ 3,307,956 Imperial Beach $ 3,397,789 $ 3,396,688
La Mesa $ 8,545,592 $ 8,540,979
Lakeside/ Alp ine $ 305,946 $ 305,642
Lemon Grove $ 3,041,92 0 $ 3,040,886
National City $ 6,275,5 12 $ 6,274,315
Otay $ 946,6 16 $ 946,455
Padre Dam $ 750, 193 $ 749,111
Poway $ 4,347,435 $ 4,345,604
Soring Valley $ 7,182,725 $ 7,181,144
Wintergardens $ 135,844 $ 135,662
SU BTOTAL $ 70,032,590 $ 70,075,225
San Die1m
SD Wastewater $ 182,904,588 $ 182,863,179
SD Water $ 1,457,146 $ 1,455,920
SU BTOTAL $ 184,36 1,734 $ 184,319,099
Regio nal Sludge $ - $ -
TOTAL $ 254,394,325 $ 254,394,325
Last Updated: 5/29/2025
RSDP EXAMPLE ~ 5% INCREASE IN CONTRACT CAPACITY
If the City of El Cajon needed a 5% Increase in RSDP Contract Capacity, then Exhibit B Contract Capacity would be updated as follows

DISTRIBUTION OF WASTEWATER SYSTEM CAPACITY RIGHTS

AN UAL FIXED CAPACITY RIGHTS
AGENCY I 2 3 4 s 6
Average I ncrcmcntal Total Allowable TSS, COD, Flow, Peak Flow, RSPD, MGD Flow, 1,000 lbs. 1,000 lbs. MGD MGD MGD El Cajon (Old) 1.29 19.93 0.602 2 1.82 2,196 3,052
El Cajon (New) 1.29 19.93 0.632 2 1.85 2,196 3,052
If the City of Chula El Cajon needed a 5% Increase in Contrac t Capacity , then Chula Vista' s costs increase - 2.1 %. All othe r agencies' costs would decreas e proportio nally.

OWNERSHIP USE TOTAL AGENCY OLD NEW
Average Incremental RSDP, TSS, COD, Metered RSDP, TSS, COD, %of AGENCY Flow, Peak Flow, MGD 1,000 lbs. 1,000 Flow, MGD 1,000 lbs. 1,000 lbs. TOTAL Total MGD MGD lbs. MGD Chula Vista $ 28,346,743 $ 28,339,437
Coronado $ 2,351,663 $ 2,35 1,013
El Cajon $204,838 $1,358,378 $6.5 17 $202.924 $4 1,940 $625,109 $65,117 $6 16,086 $190,415 $3,311,325 1.3% (Old) Del Mar $ 20,447 $ 20,432
East Otav Mesa $ 1,072,840 $ 1,072,562
E Cajon $204,837 $1,357,377 $6,841 $202,924 $41,940 $624 ,752 $34,67 1 $6 16,086 $190,415 $3,382,124 1.3% (New) El Cajon $ 3,311,325 s 3,382,124
Imperial Beach $ 3,397,789 $ 3,396,719
La Mesa $ 8,545,592 $ 8,542,569
Lakeside/ Alpine $ 305,946 $ 305,784
Lemon Grove $ 3,041,920 $ 3,041,021
Natio nal Citv $ 6,275,512 $ 6,273,843
Otay $ 946,616 $ 946,432
Padre Dam $ 750,193 $ 749,779
Poway $ 4,347,435 $ 4,346,059
Spring Valley $ 7,182,725 $ 7,180,836
Wintergardens $ 135,844 $ 135,768
SU BTOTA L $ 70,032,590 $ 70,084,378
San Diel!o
SD Wastewa ter $ 182,904,588 $ 182,854,978
SD Water $ 1,457,146 $ 1,454,969
SU BTOTAL $ 184,36 1,734 $ 184,309,947
Regional Sludge $ - $ -
TOTAL $ 254,394,3 25 $ 254,394,325
Last Updated: 5/29/2025
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS EXAMPLE - 5% INCREASE IN CONTRACT CAPACITY FROM POOLED CAPACITY If the City of Chula Vista needed a 5% Increase in TSS Contract Capacity from the Pooled Capacity, then Exhibit B Contract Capacity would be updated as follows

DISTRIBUTION OF WASTEWATER SYSTEM CAPACITY RIGHTS

AN UAL FIXED CAPACITY RIGHTS
AGENCY I 2 3 4 s 6
Average I ncrcmcntal Total Allowable TSS, COD, Flow, Peak Flow, RSPD, MGD Flow, 1,000 lbs. 1,000 lbs. MGD MGD MGD Chula Vista (Old) 18.33 19.52 0 37.85 22.082 38,419
Chula Vista (New) 19.25 19.52 0 38.77 23.186 38,419
If the City of Chula Vista needed a 5% Increase in Contrac t Capacity, then Chula Vista's costs increase -2.6%. All other agencies' costs would decrease proportionally.

OWNERSHIP USE TOTAL AGENCY OLD NEW
Average I ncremcntal RSDP, TSS, COD, Metered RSDP, TSS, COD, %of AGENCY Flow, Peak Flow, MGD 1,000 lbs. 1,000 Flow, MGD 1,000 lbs. 1,000 lbs. TOTAL Total MGD MGD lbs. MGD Chula Vista $ 28.346,743 s 29,099,869
Corona do $ 2,351,663 $ 2,343,749
Chula Vista $2,910 ,602 $1 ,330,563 $0 $2.040,479 $527,941 $11,035,399 $0 $7,560,5 99 $2,94 1,160 $28,346,743 11.1% (Old) Del Mar $ 20,447 $ 20,447
East Otav Mesa $ 1,072,840 $ 1,070,428
Chula Vista $2,910 ,602 $1,330,563 $0 $2.129,678 $527,941 $11,035,399 $0 $8,224,526 $2,94 1,160 $29,099,869 11.4% (New) El Caion $ 3,311,325 $ 3,302,439
Imperial Beach $ 3,397,789 $ 3,388,031
La Mesa $ 8,545,592 $ 8,523,126
Lakeside / Alpine $ 305,946 $ 305,003
Lemon Grove $ 3,041,920 $ 3,032,733
Natio nal Citv $ 6,275,512 $ 6,254,625
Otay $ 946,6 16 $ 941,107
Padre Dam $ 750, 193 $ 749,005
Poway $ 4,347,435 $ 4,334,133
Spring Valley $ 7,182,725 $ 7,158,161
Wintergardens $ 135,844 $ 135,517
SUBTOTAL $ 70,032,590 $ 70,658,374
San Diel!o
SD Wastewater $ 182,904,588 $ 182,278,804
SD Water $ 1,457,146 $ 1,457,146
SU BTOTAL $ 184,361,734 $ 183,735,95 1
Regional Sludge $ -
TOTA L $ 254,394,325 $ 254,394,325
Last Updated: 5/29/2025
TOTAL CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND EXAMPLE - 5% INCREASE IN CONTRACT CAPACITY FROM POOLED CAPACITY If the City of Chula Vista needed a 5% Increase in COD Contract Capac ity from the Pooled Capacity, then Exhibit B Contract Capacity would be updated as follows

DISTRIBUTION OF WASTEWATER SYSTEM CAPACITY RIGHTS

AN UAL FIXED CAPACITY RIGHTS
AGENCY I 2 3 4 s 6
Average I ncrcmcntal Total Allowable TSS, COD, Flow, Peak Flow, RSPD, MGD Flow, 1,000 lbs. 1,000 lbs. MGD MGD MGD Chula Vista (Old) 18.33 19.52 0 37.85 22,082 38.419
Chula Vista (New) 19.25 19.52 0 38.77 22,082 40,339
If the City of Chula Vista needed a 5% Increase in Contract Capacity, then Chula Vista's costs increa se - I%. All other agencies' costs would decrease proportionally.

OWNERSHIP USE TOTAL AGENCY OLD NEW
Average I ncremcntal RSDP, TSS, COD, Metered RSDP, TSS, COD, %of AGENCY Flow, Peak Flow, MGD 1,000 lbs. 1,000 Flow, MGD 1,000 lbs. 1,000 lbs. TOTAL Total MGD MGD lbs. MGD Chula Vista $ 28.346,743 $ 28,631,524
Coronado $ 2,351,663 $ 2,349,193
Chula Vista $2,910 ,602 $1 ,330,563 $0 $2,040,479 $527,941 $11,035,399 $0 $7,560 ,599 $2.941, 160 $28,346,743 11.1% (Old) Del Mar $ 20,447 $ 20,447
East Otav Mesa $ 1,072,840 $ 1,072,103
Chula Vista $2,910 ,602 $1,330,563 $0 $2,040,479 $551,269 $11,035,399 $0 $7,560,599 $3,202,612 $28,631,524 11.3% (New) El Caion $ 3,311,325 $ 3,308,915
Imperial Beach $ 3,397,789 $ 3,394,165
La Mesa $ 8,545,592 $ 8,536,429
Lakeside / Alpine $ 305,946 $ 305,720
Lemon Grove $ 3,041,920 $ 3,038,467
National Citv $ 6,275,512 $ 6,267,241
Otay $ 946,616 $ 945,687
Padre Dam $ 750,1 93 $ 749,916
Poway $ 4,347,435 $ 4,343,173
Spring Valley $ 7,182,725 $ 7,174,270
Wintergardens $ 135,844 $ 135,764
SUBTOTAL $ 70,032,590 $ 70,273,015
San Diel!o
SD Wastewater $ 182,904,588 $ 182,664,163
SD Water $ 1,457,146 $ 1,457,146
SUBTOTAL $ 184,361,734 $ 184,121,309
Regio nal Sludge $ - $ -
TOTAL $ 254,394,325 $ 254,394,325
Last Updated: 5/29/2025
Last Updated: 5/29/2025
EXHIBIT F –

METRO SYSTEM FLOW FORMULAS AND

SAMPLING LOCATIONS
JULY 2025
LEGEND
Billing and Sampling Meters
Billing Meters
Municipal Meter
0 0
0 CHULA VISTA

Hollister
& Main
Meter
CV1
“J” ST
Meter
CV2
“G” ST
Meter
CV3
Autopark
&
Crossings
(0.025
mgd)
Waterpark &
Amphitheater
(0.031 mgd)
Lagoon
Drive
(0.011
mgd)
Bay Blvd
North
(106
EDUs)
Bay Blvd
South
(16
EDUs)
Gunpowder
Point
(51 EDUs)
Acacia
Ave
SV to CV
(4 EDUs)
Combined
Housecounts
(1,040
EDUs)
E. Flower
Street
Meter
CV5
Plaza
Bonita-1
Meter
CV6M
Plaza
Bonita-2
Meter
CV7M
Las Flores
Dr
Meter
CV8
N. Fifth
Ave
Meter
CV9
Acacia
Ave
Meter
CV10
Otay
Lakes
Road
Meter
CV11
Proctor
Valley
Meter
CV12
Main
Street
Meter
CV14
CHULA
VISTA
TOTAL
+ __ + - + +
+ = + + _ + _ + _
+ + + +

CORONADO

Trans-Bay
Meter C1M
Amphibious
Base
Meter C2
North Island
Meter C3

CORONADO
TOTAL
- - --

DEL MAR

Meter DM2
Riviera Del
Mar
(110 EDUs)
Connection
#1
(96 EDUs)
Connection
#2
(21 EDUs)
Del Mar
Estates
(27 EDUs)

DEL MAR
TOTAL
- +
+ - --

EAST OTAY MESA

EOM1 Meter East Otay Mesa
(55.4 EDUs)

EAST OTAY

MESA TOTAL
+ --

EL CAJON

El Cajon Meter
EC1B
To LM Meter
LM4
To LM
(321.5 EDUs)
Winter Gardens
Meter WG1M
Winter Gardens
(1,383 EDUs)

EL CAJON
TOTAL
+
- - --

IMPERIAL BEACH

9th & Imp.

Meter IB1
Elder St.

Meter IB2M
Palm Ave.

Meter IB3M2
Georgia Street
(170.5 EDUs)
Palm Avenue
(29.5 EDUs)

IMPERIAL
BEACH
TOTAL
+ +
+ - --

LA MESA

La Mesa
North
LM3
Meter
Colorado
(16
EDUs)
73rd &
Sar.
(22
EDUs)
Alvarado
Trtmnt
Plant
(61 EDUs)
Alvarado
Lab
(27
EDUs)
Alvarado
Training
Ctr.
(2 EDUs)
Blue
Lake
(69
EDUs)
East
Lake
(349
EDUs)
Jackson
(279
EDUs)
Keeny
(28
EDUs)
Lake
Arago
(292.7
EDUs)
Lake
Murray
(119.8
EDUs)
La Mesa
South
LM1AM
Meter
LM7
Meter
68th &
Univ
(91
EDUs)
67th &
Valencia
(158.5
EDUs)
Rosefield
(20
EDUs)
Alamo
(4 EDUs)
Vigo
(204
EDUs)
69th &
University
(34 EDUs)
70th &
Colony
(551.5
EDUs)
73rd & El
Cajon
(15.6
EDUs)
To SV
(52
EDUs)
To SV
LM2
Meter
To SV
LM5A
Meter
To SV
LM8
Meter
To LG
(921.7
EDUs)
From EC
LM4
Meter
From EC
(311
EDUs)
LA
MESA
TOTAL
+
- -
- -
+ +
- -
+ +
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
-
+
--

LAKESIDE/ALPINE

Meter
LS2

LAKESIDE
ALPINE

TOTAL--

LEMON GROVE

Winnett &
Oriole St
LG1M
Meter
Akins &
69th
LG2M
Meter
Imperial &
Viewcrest
LG4
Meter
Total
Lemon
Grove to
SV
(1547.63
EDUs)
Net from
La Mesa
(921.7
EDUs)
69th &
Madera
LG3
Meter
Madera
(4 EDUs)
Calvacado
(121
EDUs)
69th &
Klauber
(3 EDUs)
Gold Lake
(48 EDUs)
Angelus
Avenue
(12 EDUs)
69th &
Evelyn
(4 EDUs)
College
Avenue
(498.6
EDUs)
Navy
Housing
(278 EDUs)
College
Grove
(25.6 EDUs)
69th &
Gibson
(3 EDUs)
College
Grove Way
(161 EDUs)
LEMON
GROVE
TOTAL
+ + +
I I
+ + + +
- - -
- - --

NATIONAL CITY

33rd St
NC2
Meter
21st &
Hoover
NC3A
Meter
2262
Hoover
NC3B
Meter
West of
I5
NC3C
Meter
22nd &
Hoover
NC Yard
& HC
(2 EDUs)
7th &
Wilson
NC5
Meter
Nordica
NC7M
Meter
Stockman
NC15
Meter
Southland
Ind. Park
(76.5
EDUs)
Rachael
Ave.

North
(46
EDUs)
Olive
Avenue
(6
EDUs)
Bonita
Paradise
(47
EDUs)
Rachel
Ave.

South
(43
EDUs)
NC to SV
Inter-Agency
Compromise
(36 EDUs)
Plaza
Bonita
NC8M
Meter
Sweetwater
Road
(52.72%)
NC13
Meter
Prospect
St
(39.16%)
NC16
Meter)
SV to NC I-A
Compromise
(144 EDUs)
Harbor
Drive
NC6
Meter
Delta St.

NC9M
Meter
Paradise
Val
NC10
Meter
Olive
Ave.

NC11
Meter
18th &
Rachael
NC12
Meter
Dalbergia
(26.3
EDUs)
Nordica
(36
EDUs)
Bryanview
(16 EDUs)
Lorenz
(42
EDUs)
Mariposa
(18
EDUs)
Ebbs
(291
EDUs)
Delta St
(100.5
EDUs)
Navy
Sports
Center
(7 EDUs)

NATIONAL
CITY
TOTAL
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
--
+
+
-
-
NA VY

Amphibious Base
Meter (C2)
North Island
Meter (C3) NAVY TOTAL
+ --
OTAY

Otay Net OTAY

TOTAL--

PADRE DAM

Padre Dam
Meter PD1B
Lakeside
Meter LS2
Simeon Dr.
(413 EDUs)
Padre Dam
Meter PD2
Cowles Mtn.
(270 EDUs)
Treviso
(186 EDUs)

PADRE DAM
TOTAL
+
--
POWAY

Springhurst
PO2
Meter
La
Manda
(53
EDUs)
Camino
Del Norte
PO1
Meter
Holland
Canyon
PO3M
Meter
Eastview
Ct.

PO4
Meter
Highland
Ranch
PO5
Meter
Creek
Road
PO6
Meter
Springhurst
Street
(72 EDUs)
Stone
Canyon
(727.14
EDUs)
POWAY
TOTAL
+

SPRING V ALLEY

SubTotal Chula Vista to SV = Combined Housecounts – Acacia Ave + CV5 + CV6 + CV7M + CV8 + CV9 + CV10 + CV11 + CV12 + CV14
Brisbane
& 5th
SV8M
Meter
Lincoln
Acres/Alta
Drive
(84.4
EDUs)
Sweetwater
(52.72%)
NC13
Meter
Prospect
St
(39.16%)
NC16
Meter
SV to NC
Inter-Agency
Compromise
(144 EDUs)
NC to SV
Inter-Agency
Compromise
(36 EDUs)
From
NC
NC8M
Meter
SubTotal
Chula
Vista to
SV
To SV
LM2
Meter
To SV
LM5A
Meter
To SV
LM8
Meter
SubTotal
La Mesa
to SV
(52
EDUs)
SubTotal
Lemon
Grove to
SV
(1,547.63
EDUs)
Bonita
BO1
Meter
Manzana
Way
(439
EDUs)
Parkbrook
Street
(197
EDUs)
Noeline
Avenue
(109
EDUs)
Worthington
Street
(64 EDUs)
Innsdale
Avenue
(51
EDUs)
Greenridge
Avenue
(10 EDUs)
Ellenwood
Circle
North
(9 EDUs)
Delrose
Avenue
(109
EDUs)
Crestmore
Avenue
(8 EDUs)
Potrero
Street
(61
EDUs)
Carlsbad
Street
(41
EDUs)
Otay Net
SPRING

V ALLEY
TOTAL
+ + + + -
- - - - - -
- - - - - -
- -
- -

WINTER GARDENS

Winter Gardens
Meter (WG1M)
WG House Count
1,383 EDUs
WINTER

GARDENS
TOTAL
+ --

CITY OF SAN DIEGO

SD33
Meter
N. Harbor
Drive
(2,550.4
EDUs)
SD1E
Meter
SD2A
Meter
SD2B
Meter
Sports
Area
Blvd.
(498
EDUs)
SD3
Meter
Barnett
Avenue
(2551.6
EDUs)
SD5M
Meter
SD20
Meter
SD40M2
Meter
SD42M
Meter
SD7B
Meter
SD8
Meter
Commercial
Street
(1,458.6
EDUs)
SD12
Meter
SD6M
Meter
Del Mar
Net
Poway
Net
SD1B
Meter
EC1B
Meter
Padre
Dam Net
Lakeside
Net
LM
North to
San
Diego
Net
SD19
Meter
Anna
Street
(564
EDUs)
SD7A
Meter
SD7C
Meter
Coronado
Net
Beach
Street
(1,944.2
EDUs)
SD9
Meter
LG to
San
Diego
Net
LM
South to
San
Diego
Net)
SD9D
Meter
NC7M
Meter
NC9M
Meter
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
+
+
+
-
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
+
+
CITY OF SAN DIEGO (Continued)

NC10
Meter
NC11
Meter
Olive
Ave.
(6
EDUs)
NC12
Meter
Rachael
Ave.

North
(46
EDUs)
NC6
Meter
San
Diego
HC
Through
NC Total
BO1
Meter
NC15
Meter
Bonita
Paradise
(47
EDUs)
Rachael
Ave.

South
(43 EDUs)
Alta
Drive
(84.4
EDUs)
San Diego
HC
Through
SPV Total
SD10
Meter
Waterpark &
Amphitheater
Autopark &
Crossings
PC1
Meter
IB2M
Meter
Georgia
Street
(170.5
EDUs)
Palm
Avenue
(29.5
EDUs)
IB3M2
Meter
SB1
Meter
SD11
Meter
SD11A
Meter
SD18
Meter
Small SD
House
Count
(694.3
EDUs)
Elm
Street
(1,455
EDUs)
USN4
Meter
USN5
Meter
USN8
Meter
USN11
Meter
SAN
DIEGO
TOTAL
-
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Exhibit G
Sample of the Interest Calculation
Exhibit G - Sample of the Interest Calculation (Section 6.6) Purpose: To document assumptions used to account for the time value of money for shared Pure Water costs (Allocated Shared Costs) that were agreed to be reconciled at a later date based on final Phase 1 project costs.

This is discussed in Section 6.6: Reallocation of PWP Costs incurred since FY2014 and cited in Section 6.6.1.3. See the example" Calculator Spreadsheet" below and accompanying footnotes. .

C D E F G H I J K L M
50/ 50 Expenses from
That Year
Original
Metro Split
%
Original Water
Split %
Original
Metro Share
Original
Water Share
Metro Post
Allocation
Share
Amounts Subject
to Interest
(50% Cost - Metro
Share%)
Running Metro
Balance Subject to
Interest
(New Activity + Prior
Year Balance + Prior
Interest Earning)
Yearly Interest
Earnings
(Compounded
Monthly)
Estimated PA
share
( Average share of
Interest Earnings)
Annual Interest
Rate
(San Diego City
Treasurers)
FY 2014 $630,109 50% 50% $315,055 $315,055 $283,549 $31,505 $31,505.46 $138.27 $41.48 0.438% FY 2015 $2,476,617 50% 50% $1,238,309 $1,238,309 $1,114,478 $123,831 $155,474.59 $871.33 $261.40 0.559% FY 2016 $4,503,182 50% 50% $2,251,591 $2,251,591 $2,026,432 $225,159 $381,505.03 $2,971.03 $891.31 0.776% FY 2017 $7,398,893 50% 50% $3,699,447 $3,699,447 $3,329,502 $369,945 $754,420.72 $8,150.10 $2,445.03 1.075% FY 2018 $6,194,711 50% 50% $3,097,355 $3,097,355 $2,787,620 $309,736 $1,072,306.36 $14,783.19 $4,434.96 1.370% FY 2019 $7,844,738 50% 50% $3,922,369 $3,922,369 $3,530,132 $392,237 $1,479,326.46 $31,230.90 $9,369.27 2.091% FY 2020 $8,018,735 50% 50% $4,009,367 $4,009,367 $3,608,431 $400,937 $1,911,494.09 $43,708.61 $13,112.58 2.263% FY 2021 50% 50% $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,955,202.70 $29,649.45 $8,894.84 1.506% FY 2022 50% 50% $1,984,852.16 $16,257.11 $4,877.13 0.816% FY 2023 32% 68% $2,001,109.26 $35,993.15 $10,797.94 1.784% FY 2024 32% 68% $2,037,102.41 $59,323.71 $17,797.11 2.874% FY 2025 32% 68% TBD
FY 2026 32% 68% TBD
FY 2027 32% 68% TB D
Totals $37,066,985 $18,
533,493 $18,533,493 $16,680,143 $1,853,349 $13,764,299 $243,077 $72,923 N/A Pending Final Audits:

Estimated Final Metro % of Pure Water Costs (Draft) 45% Estimated JPA % Share of Metro Expenses (Draft) 30%
Exhibit G - Sample of the Interest Calculation (Section 6.6) (Continued) Procedures and Assumptions:

The City proposes the following procedures be used to allocate these costs. These costs will be allocated 1 year after substantial completion of Pure Water Phase 1, as part of the annual Audit of Metro costs (Projected to be annual audit of metro activity for Fiscal Year 2026). The City will prepare a yearly update to the calculator as part of the preparation for the yearly metro audit.

Co
lumn Description:

Cost Included (Column C) This column represents cost subject to this calculator. This includes Purchase Orders (and their associated expenditures) that have been split 50%/50% (50/50 POs) from 2014 to 2022 and have been included as part of each yearly audit of Metro JPA Pure Water costs. This sheet is prepared by the City and reviewed by the JPA's consultants on a yearly basis to determine samples for the Pure Water O&M costs. After awarding of all Pure Water construction contracts, new costs will use an updated percentage based on actual awarded construction contracts. This date will be called out on the purchase order sheet and a new line on the calculator will be added to track the change in percent allocation.

Open purchase orders using the 50/50 split will be separated on the calculator sheet until they are fully spent, closed or amended to the new split.

Original Splits % (Column D & E) These columns split the total costs of the 50/50 POs based on their original share between the water and Metro funds. This establishes each funds initial share of the costs Original Share (Column F & G) These columns split the total costs in Column C by the percentages in Columns D and E.

Metro Post Allocation Share(Column H) This column uses Metro funds final share of Phase 1 costs, as a percentage of total project costs, and applies it to costs included in Column C. This represents the actual share of costs based on the final allocation costs.

Amounts Subject to Interest (Column I) This column takes the difference between the initial splits for Metro (Column F) and the Metro post allocation share (Column H). These are the new expenditures from that fiscal year subject to the interest calculation.

Running Metro Balance Subject to This column takes any prior year balance in Column J, the prior year accrued interest in Column K and adds the new expenditures from Column I. This is the total balanced Interest (Column J) used to calculate each year's interest owed.

Yearly Interest Earnings (Column K) This column takes the annual interest earnings shown in Column M and assumed monthly compounding of Metro balance in Column J. Compounding period is consistent with the City's monthly interest earnings paid on City funds.

Estimated PA share (Column L) This column estimates the portion of interest earnings that is expected to be credited to the Participating Agencies. Individual Agencies will be credited during the audit following one year after the substantial completion of Pure Water Phase 1. Agencies will be credited at weighted average of costs from 2014 to one year after substantial completion of Phase 1, based on the PA's individual annual percent share of Metro costs.

Annual Interest Rate (Column M) This column shows the annual percent returns on funds invested by the City Treasurer. This is based on the Treasurers annual return on investments as invested under the City's investment policy. This is the rate used to calculate yearly interest owed.

Notes This calculator was designed to account for the time value of money related to (50/50 POs). If additional Phase 1item (CIP expenses, Revenue, etc.) need to account for the time value of money, the assumptions used in Columns I-K will remaining consistent in those calculations. Columns C through H and the associated percentages used will be adapted to fit the types of costs being allocated.

Exhibit H
Summary of Billings from County Water Authority
Showing Costs for Untreated Water
Fixed Charges Total ($)
CWA Customer Service Charge $ 933,611.00
CWA Emergency Storage Charge $ 2,197,725.00
CWA Infrastructure Access Charge $ 1,760,089.00
CWA Supply Reliability Charge $ 1,504,825.00
Supply Charges Volume (AF) Rate ($/AF) Total ($)
CWA Forced Delivery - Untreated 231.3 $ 1,200.00 $ 277,560.00 CWA Regular Meter Delivery - Treated 2,069.2 $ 1,600.00 $ 3,310,720.00 CWA Regular Meter Delivery - Untreated 12,973.7 $ 1,200.00 $ 15,568,440.00 Subtotal 15,274.2 $ 19,156,720.00
CYTD Volume (AF)
46,134.1
17,627.4
129,500.4
193,261.9
Net Deliveries Current Month Volume (AF) Adjustment Volume (AF) CYTD Volume (AF)
Tier 1 Total Treated Water Delivered 2,081.1 17,964.3
Tier 1 Total Untreated Water Delivered 7,970.5 96,706.3 Tier 1 Usage 10,051.6 114,670.6
Water Exchanges Volume (AF) Rate($/AF) Total ($)
CWA Total To Other Agencies Untreated Water (5,285.0) $ 1,200.00 ($ 6,342,000.00) CWA Total From Other Agencies Treated Water 11.9 $ 1,600.00 $ 19,040.00 CWA Total From Other Agencies Untreated Water 50.5 $ 1,200.00 $ 60,600.00 Subtotal (5,222.6) ($ 6,262,360.00)
CYTD Volume (AF)
(79,483.9)
336.9
473.1
(78,673.9)
Subtotal 10,051.6 $ 1,899,752.40
Generated Date: 01/10/2025 11:21 AM
19-6364
A Public Agency
4677 Overland Avenue, San Diego, California, 92123-1233 (858) 522-6673 FAX (858) 522-6561
December 2024
Invoice Summary
Billed to:

San Diego, City of
Mailed: 1/10/2025 Due Date: 2/14/2025
Invoice Number: 1224-15 Page 1 of 8
Service Address:
2797 Caminito Chollas
San Diego, CA 92105-
Sample Bill from the County Water
Authority for all city of San Diego
Water purchases for the month of
December 2024 to provide clarity for
any sewer only providers. Additional
documentation will be provided at a
later date walking from this bill to the
purified water calculation
Fixed Charges Total ($)
MWD Capacity Reservation Charge $ 287,980.00
MWD Readiness-to-Serve Charge $ 406,779.00
Subtotal $ 7,091,009.00
Current Balance $ 21,885,121.40
Previous Balance $ 17,919,593.50
Total Due And Payable $ 39,804,714.90
REMIT TO:

SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY
4677 Overland Avenue
San Diego, CA 92123-1233
Payment is due on the last business day of the month and shall be delinquent if not received in investable funds by 2 p.m. of the tenth business day of the following month.

Delinquency charges are 1% of the total amount if paid within five business days of the delinquency, 2% thereafter. Reference San Diego County Water Authority Ordinance No. 2007-03 Revenue Collection Policy for a complete explanation of billing and payment for water deliveries.

Generated Date: 01/10/2025 11:21 AM
19-6364
A Public Agency
4677 Overland Avenue, San Diego, California, 92123-1233 (858) 522-6673 FAX (858) 522-6561
December 2024
Invoice Summary
Billed to:

San Diego, City of
Mailed: 1/10/2025 Due Date: 2/14/2025
Invoice Number: 1224-15 Page 2 of 8
Service Address:
2797 Caminito Chollas
San Diego, CA 92105-
Variable Charges Volume (AF) Rate($/AF) Total ($)
Transportation Charge - Meter Delivery 15,274.2 $ 189.00 $ 2,886,823.80 Transportation Charge - Water Exchange (5,222.6) $ 189.00 ($ 987,071.40) Variable Charges Volume (AF) Rate($/AF) Total ($)
Transportation Charge - Meter Delivery 15,274.2 $ 189.00 $ 2,886,823.80 Transportation Charge - Water Exchange (5,222.6) $ 189.00 ($ 987,071.40) Supply Charges
CWA
Forced Delivery - Untreated
Meter No Begin Read End Read 1000 CU. FT. AC. FT. Rate($/AF) Dollars($) Over Weir,WEIR 248,532 248,761 228 5.2 $ 1,200.00 $ 6,240.00 San Diego,02 2,012,753 2,022,602 9,849 226.1 $ 1,200.00 $ 271,320.00 Untreated Water Subtotal 231.3 $ 277,560.00
Regular Meter Delivery - Treated
Meter No Begin Read End Read 1000 CU. FT. AC. FT. Rate($/AF) Dollars($) San Diego, 27 197,491 210,099 12,609 289.5 $ 1,600.00 $ 463,200.00 San Diego, 30 3,079 3,080 2 0.0 $ 1,600.00 $ 0.00
San Diego,10 3,300,807 3,316,240 15,433 354.3 $ 1,600.00 $ 566,880.00 San Diego,11 11,413,060 11,461,025 47,966 1,101.1 $ 1,600.00 $ 1,761,760.00 San Diego,14 5,034,606 5,046,789 12,183 279.7 $ 1,600.00 $ 447,520.00 San Diego,15 3,837,922 3,839,738 1,816 41.7 $ 1,600.00 $ 66,720.00 SD 18/21 Bypass,
18/21 B/P 7,490 7,616 127 2.9 $ 1,600.00 $ 4,640.00
Treated Water Subtotal 2,069.2 $ 3,310,720.00
Regular Meter Delivery - Untreated
Meter No Begin Read End Read 1000 CU. FT. AC. FT. Rate($/AF) Dollars($) Generated Date: 01/10/2025 11:21 AM
19-6364
A Public Agency
4677 Overland Avenue, San Diego, California, 92123-1233 (858) 522-6673 FAX (858) 522-6561
December 2024
Invoice Detail
Billed to:

San Diego, City of
Mailed: 1/10/2025 Due Date: 2/14/2025
Invoice Number: 1224-15 Page 3 of 8
Service Address:
2797 Caminito Chollas
San Diego, CA 92105-

Water Exchanges
CWA
To Other Agencies Untreated Water
Exchange Location To Agency AC. FT. Rate($/AF) Dollars($) Comments DCFSV66 San Diego County Water Authority (4,974.8) $ 1,200.00 ($ 5,969,760.00) credit for no purchase Del Mar (NA) Del Mar, City of (78.9) $ 1,200.00 ($ 94,680.00) San Vicente Acct San Diego County Water Authority (231.3) $ 1,200.00 ($ 277,560.00) To Other Agencies Untreated Water Subtotal (5,285.0) ($ 6,342,000.00) Supply Charges
CWA
Leakage (SD-1),01 0 31 540 12.4 $ 1,200.00 $ 14,880.00
San Diego, 28 7,377,561 7,443,701 66,141 1,518.4 $ 1,200.00 $ 1,822,080.00 San Diego, DCFSV66 1,434,378 1,651,079 216,701 4,974.8 $ 1,200.00 $ 5,969,760.00 San Diego,05A 9,627,449 9,733,405 105,956 2,432.4 $ 1,200.00 $ 2,918,880.00 San Diego,05B 8,808,476 8,932,713 124,237 2,852.1 $ 1,200.00 $ 3,422,520.00 San Diego,05C 1,405,570 1,428,831 23,261 534.0 $ 1,200.00 $ 640,800.00 San Diego,06A 2,967,595 2,969,351 1,756 40.3 $ 1,200.00 $ 48,360.00 San Diego,06B WEIR 1,591,412 1,591,432 20 0.5 $ 1,200.00 $ 600.00 San Diego,20 11,002,113 11,028,633 26,520 608.8 $ 1,200.00 $ 730,560.00 Untreated Water Subtotal 12,973.7 $ 15,568,440.00
Supply Charges Subtotal 15,274.2 $ 19,156,720.00
Supply Charges Total 15,274.2 $ 19,156,720.00
Generated Date: 01/10/2025 11:21 AM
19-6364
A Public Agency
4677 Overland Avenue, San Diego, California, 92123-1233 (858) 522-6673 FAX (858) 522-6561
December 2024
Invoice Detail
Billed to:

San Diego, City of
Mailed: 1/10/2025 Due Date: 2/14/2025
Invoice Number: 1224-15 Page 4 of 8
Service Address:
2797 Caminito Chollas
San Diego, CA 92105-

Variable Charges
Transportation Charge - Meter Delivery
Meter No./Location AC. FT. Rate($/AF) Dollars($) Comments Leakage (SD-1),01 12.4 $ 189.00 $ 2,343.60
Over Weir,WEIR 5.2 $ 189.00 $ 982.80
San Diego, 27 289.5 $ 189.00 $ 54,715.50
San Diego, 28 1,518.4 $ 189.00 $ 286,977.60
San Diego, 30 0.0 $ 189.00 $ 0.00
San Diego, DCFSV66 4,974.8 $ 189.00 $ 940,237.20
Water Exchanges
CWA
From Other Agencies Treated Water
Exchange Location From Agency AC. FT. Rate($/AF) Dollars($) Comments El Camino Real Santa Fe I.D. 1.0 $ 1,600.00 $ 1,600.00
Highland Ct. Santa Fe I.D. 0.2 $ 1,600.00 $ 320.00
Otay TP Otay W.D. 10.7 $ 1,600.00 $ 17,120.00
From Other Agencies Treated Water Subtotal 11.9 $ 19,040.00 From Other Agencies Untreated Water
Exchange Location From Agency AC. FT. Rate($/AF) Dollars($) Comments Fletcher Well Helix W.D. 50.5 $ 1,200.00 $ 60,600.00
From Other Agencies Untreated Water Subtotal 50.5 $ 60,600.00 Water Exchanges Subtotal (5,222.6) ($ 6,262,360.00)
Water Exchanges Total (5,222.6) ($ 6,262,360.00)
Generated Date: 01/10/2025 11:21 AM
19-6364
A Public Agency
4677 Overland Avenue, San Diego, California, 92123-1233 (858) 522-6673 FAX (858) 522-6561
December 2024
Invoice Detail
Billed to:

San Diego, City of
Mailed: 1/10/2025 Due Date: 2/14/2025
Invoice Number: 1224-15 Page 5 of 8
Service Address:
2797 Caminito Chollas
San Diego, CA 92105-

Variable Charges
San Diego,02 226.1 $ 189.00 $ 42,732.90
San Diego,05A 2,432.4 $ 189.00 $ 459,723.60
San Diego,05B 2,852.1 $ 189.00 $ 539,046.90
San Diego,05C 534.0 $ 189.00 $ 100,926.00
San Diego,06A 40.3 $ 189.00 $ 7,616.70
San Diego,06B WEIR 0.5 $ 189.00 $ 94.50
San Diego,10 354.3 $ 189.00 $ 66,962.70
San Diego,11 1,101.1 $ 189.00 $ 208,107.90
San Diego,14 279.7 $ 189.00 $ 52,863.30
San Diego,15 41.7 $ 189.00 $ 7,881.30
San Diego,20 608.8 $ 189.00 $ 115,063.20
SD 18/21 Bypass, 18/21 B/P 2.9 $ 189.00 $ 548.10
Transportation Charge - Meter Delivery Subtotal 15,274.2 $ 2,886,823.80 Transportation Charge - Water Exchange
Meter No./Location AC. FT. Rate($/AF) Dollars($) Comments DCFSV66 (4,974.8) $ 189.00 ($ 940,237.20) credit for no purchase Del Mar (NA) (78.9) $ 189.00 ($ 14,912.10)
El Camino Real 1.0 $ 189.00 $ 189.00
Fletcher Well 50.5 $ 189.00 $ 9,544.50
Highland Ct. 0.2 $ 189.00 $ 37.80
Otay TP 10.7 $ 189.00 $ 2,022.30
San Vicente Acct (231.3) $ 189.00 ($ 43,715.70)
Transportation Charge - Water Exchange Subtotal (5,222.6) ($ 987,071.40) Generated Date: 01/10/2025 11:21 AM
19-6364
A Public Agency
4677 Overland Avenue, San Diego, California, 92123-1233 (858) 522-6673 FAX (858) 522-6561
December 2024
Invoice Detail
Billed to:

San Diego, City of
Mailed: 1/10/2025 Due Date: 2/14/2025
Invoice Number: 1224-15 Page 6 of 8
Service Address:
2797 Caminito Chollas
San Diego, CA 92105-

Fixed Charges
CWA
Customer Service Charge Annual ($) Monthly ($)
Annual Customer Service Charge for Calendar Year 2024 $ 11,203,332.00 Customer Service Charge December $ 933,611.00
Emergency Storage Charge Annual ($) Monthly ($)
Annual Emergency Storage Charge for Calendar Year 2024 $ 26,372,700.00 Emergency Storage Charge December $ 2,197,725.00
Infrastructure Access Charge Annual ($) Monthly ($)
Annual Infrastructure Access Charge for Calendar Year 2024 $ 21,121,068.00 Infrastructure Access Charge December $ 1,760,089.00
Supply Reliability Charge Annual ($) Monthly ($)
Annual Supply Reliability Charge for Calendar Year 2024 $ 18,057,900.00 Supply Reliability Charge December $ 1,504,825.00
MWD
Capacity Reservation Charge Annual ($) Monthly ($)
Annual Capacity Reservation Charge for Calendar Year 2024 $ 3,455,760.00 Capacity Reservation Charge December $ 287,980.00
Readiness-to-Serve Charge Annual ($) Monthly ($)
Annual Readiness-to-Serve Charge for Fiscal Year 2025 $ 4,881,348.00 Readiness-to-Serve Charge December $ 406,779.00
Fixed Charges Subtotal $ 7,091,009.00
Current Balance $ 21,885,121.40
Previous Balance $ 17,919,593.50
Total Due And Payable $ 39,804,714.90
Variable Charges Subtotal 10,051.6 $ 1,899,752.40
Variable Charges Total 10,051.6 $ 1,899,752.40
Generated Date: 01/10/2025 11:21 AM
19-6364
A Public Agency
4677 Overland Avenue, San Diego, California, 92123-1233 (858) 522-6673 FAX (858) 522-6561
December 2024
Invoice Detail
Billed to:

San Diego, City of
Mailed: 1/10/2025 Due Date: 2/14/2025
Invoice Number: 1224-15 Page 7 of 8
Service Address:
2797 Caminito Chollas
San Diego, CA 92105-

REMIT TO:

SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY
4677 Overland Avenue
San Diego, CA 92123-1233
Payment is due on the last business day of the month and shall be delinquent if not received in investable funds by 2 p.m. of the tenth business day of the following month.

Delinquency charges are 1% of the total amount if paid within five business days of the delinquency, 2% thereafter. Reference San Diego County Water Authority Ordinance No. 2007-03 Revenue Collection Policy for a complete explanation of billing and payment for water deliveries.

Generated Date: 01/10/2025 11:21 AM
19-6364
A Public Agency
4677 Overland Avenue, San Diego, California, 92123-1233 (858) 522-6673 FAX (858) 522-6561
December 2024
Invoice Detail
Billed to:

San Diego, City of
Mailed: 1/10/2025 Due Date: 2/14/2025
Invoice Number: 1224-15 Page 8 of 8
Service Address:
2797 Caminito Chollas
San Diego, CA 92105-

- 1 -
10-23-25
4932-9907-9020
ADMINISTRATIVE AGREEMENT #1

AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF SAN DIEGO AND PARTICIPATING AGENCIES

IN THE METROPOLITAN SEWERAGE SYSTEM FOR UNIFIED MANAGEMENT OF

INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGE PRETREATMENT AND ENHANCED SOURCE

CONTROL PROGRAMS
This Administrative Agreement #1 (“Administrative Agreement”), Agreement Between City of San Diego and Participating Agencies in the Metropolitan Sewerage System for Unified Management of Industrial Waste Discharge Pretreatment and Enhanced Source Control Programs is entered by and among the CITY OF SAN DIEGO, a municipal corporation (“City”), on the one hand; and the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation; the CITY OF CORONADO, a municipal corporation; the CITY OF DEL MAR, a municipal corporation; the CITY OF EL CAJON, a municipal corporation; the CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH, a municipal corporation; the CITY OF LA MESA, a municipal corporation; the LEMON GROVE SANITATION DISTRICT, a political subdivision of the State of California; the CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, a municipal corporation; the CITY OF POWAY, a municipal corporation; the OTAY WATER DISTRICT, a political subdivision of the State of California; the PADRE DAM MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT, a political subdivision of the State of California; and the SAN DIEGO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT, a political subdivision of the State of California (individually a “Participating Agency” or collectively, the “Participating Agencies”), on the other hand, and shall be effective 30 days after execution by all Parties (the “Effective Date”).

City and each Participating Agency may be referred to herein individually as a “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.”
WHEREAS, City operates the Metro System, a regional wastewater system that collects, treats and disposes of wastewater generated from within City’s boundaries and from within the service areas of the Participating Agencies, in accordance with NPDES Permit No. CA107409 and California Waste Discharge Requirements; and
WHEREAS, City desires to carry out a uniform industrial waste disposal, pretreatment and enhanced source control program (“Industrial Pretreatment and Source Control Program,” as defined below) on behalf of itself and the Participating Agencies in the Metropolitan Sewerage System (“Metro System”) throughout the Metro System service area; and to help ensure that City can meet the requirements of its NPDES permits, including implementation of both indirect potable reuse under Phase 1 of Pure Water San Diego and a potential future direct potable reuse (“DPR”) program; and
WHEREAS City and Participating Agencies determined that the centralized operation of an Industrial Pretreatment and Source Control Program provides certain General Benefits (as defined below) to all users of the Metro System. Absent an Industrial Pretreatment and Source Control Program providing these General Benefits, the increased costs would be incurred as general treatment and disposal costs of the Metro System. Additionally, any Participating Agency with Industrial Users in their jurisdiction would also incur the costs of operating their own program; and
- 2 -
10-23-25
4932-9907-9020
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Sections 6502 and 6513, the Participating Agencies may delegate to City full authority to carry out a common Industrial Pretreatment and Source Control Program, on behalf of City and the Participating Agencies, which meets the requirements of federal and state law, including City’s required permits, and is consistent with the Industrial Pretreatment and Source Control Program ordinances enacted by City and each Participating Agency, as amended from time to time; and WHEREAS, pursuant to such delegation, City may issue industrial user permits or discharge authorizations to Industrial Users, levy and collect industrial waste Discharge, Pretreatment, and permitting fees, fines and penalties, and recover other costs of monitoring and enforcement from industrial and other users discharging to the Metro System on behalf of the Participating Agencies; and
WHEREAS, City and the Participating Agencies must ensure that all Industrial Users within the Metro System are regulated under an effective Industrial Pretreatment and Source Control Program that conforms to all applicable laws, rules and regulations; and WHEREAS, previously, City and the Participating Agencies individually entered into individual “Interjurisdictional Pretreatment Agreements” under which the Participating Agencies agreed to adopt and diligently enforce an ordinance which conforms to the minimum legal requirements contained in the Federal Pretreatment Regulations and other provisions of Federal and California law, including carrying out an industrial Pretreatment program and complying with all NPDES and waste discharge requirements issued to each Participating Agency; and WHEREAS, currently, the costs related to the industrial Discharges inspection, monitoring, and enforcement program within City’s boundaries, including related administrative and laboratory costs, are excluded from the amounts charged by City as Metro System Costs to City and the Participating Agencies pursuant to section 5.2.1.2.3 of the Amended and Restated Regional Wastewater Disposal Agreement (“ARA” as defined further herein), and WHEREAS, City and the Participating Agencies agreed, pursuant to section 2.9.1.3 of the ARA, to negotiate in good faith to allow certain costs relating to the Industrial Pretreatment and Source Control Program to be charged as Metro System Costs to City and Participating Agencies in recognition of the General Benefits that the program provides to the Metro System; and WHEREAS, based on the above, the Participating Agencies agree to delegate City, as the agent of each PA, and City agrees to accept, the authority and responsibility for diligently inspecting, monitoring and enforcing City’s Industrial Pretreatment and Source Control Program ordinances on behalf of the Participating Agencies within their respective boundaries through administrative or legal proceedings, with Participating Agencies working in coordination with City as necessary in enforcement efforts. The City shall not be responsible for, and does not accept authority or responsibility to inspect, monitor or enforce any source control program requirements for any Participating Agency’s NPDES permits, and
WHEREAS, City and Participating Agencies intend for all costs relating to the Industrial Pretreatment and Source Control Program be recovered, to the maximum extent permissible by law, through fees, costs, charges, and fines billed directly to Industrial Users subject to the - 3 -
10-23-25
4932-9907-9020
Industrial Pretreatment and Source Control Program, and for such fees, costs, charges, and fines to be reviewed and updated periodically to ensure maximum cost recovery. These costs include, but are not limited to, costs of permitting, inspection, compliance monitoring, setting of Local Limits, source control, and enforcement.

NOW, THEREFORE IT IS AGREED:

1.RECITALS INCORPORATED. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated into this Administrative Agreement by reference.

2.DEFINITIONS. Terms in this Administrative Agreement shall have the same meaning as set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations [C.F.R.] at 40 C.F.R. 401.11 and 403.3.

The meaning of various other terms as used in this Administrative Agreement shall be as follows:
(a) “Act” means the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, also known as the Clean Water Act, as amended, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.
(b) “ARA” means Amended and Restated Regional Wastewater Disposal Agreement executed by and between the City and the Participating Agencies. (c) “Categorical Pretreatment Standard,” “Categorical Standard,” “National Pretreatment Standard,” “Pretreatment Standard,” or “Standard” means any regulation containing pollutant discharge limits promulgated by the EPA in accordance with section 307(b) and (c) of the Act, which applies to Industrial Users. This term includes prohibitive discharge limits established pursuant to 40 C.F.R. 403.5.
(d) “C.F.R.” means the Code of Federal Regulations.
(e) “Discharge” or “Indirect Discharge” means the introduction of pollutants into the POTW from any nondomestic source regulated under section 307(b), (c), or (d) of the Act. (f) “EPA” means the United States Environmental Protection Agency. (g) “FOG” means Fats, Oils and Greases. Any substance such as a vegetable or animal product that is used in, or is a byproduct of, the cooking or food preparation process, and that turns or may turn viscous or solidifies with a change in temperature or other conditions. (h) "Food Establishment" means food facilities defined in California Retail Food Code (commencing with Health and Safety Code section 113700), and any commercial entity within the boundaries of City and the Participating Agencies, operating in a permanently constructed structure such as a room, building, or place, or portion thereof, maintained, used, or operated for the purpose of storing, preparing, serving, or manufacturing, packaging, or otherwise handling food for sale to other entities, or for consumption by the public, its members or employees, and which has any process or device that uses or produces FOG, or grease vapors, steam, fumes, smoke or odors that are required to be removed by a Type I or Type II hood, as defined in the California Retail Food Code. A limited food preparation establishment is not considered a Food Service Establishment when engaged only in reheating, hot holding or assembly of ready to eat food products and as a result, there is no wastewater Discharge containing a significant amount of FOG. A limited food preparation establishment does not include any operation that changes the form, flavor, or consistency of food. - 4 -
10-23-25
4932-9907-9020
(i) “General Benefits” mean and refer to the benefits provided to all users of the Metro System as the result of the Industrial Pretreatment and Source Control Program, including, but not limited to: a decrease in damage to and extended life of collection systems, pump stations and treatment systems by limiting Discharge of corrosive chemicals; consistency and efficiencies in enforcement, such as the provision of a database for potential violations of permit requirements and a reduction in time to identify sources of actual or potential violations; a decreased risk of permit violations that could result in fines and increased permitting costs to customers; the centralized conduction and management of strength and other sampling for agency billings, or as required for investigation of sewer system issues; increased regional awareness of impacts of Discharges of hazardous materials to the Metro Sewer System; a safer sewer system for wastewater employees; a reduction in illegal Discharges to the Metro System (because City will monitor and accept trucked waste and septage from septic tanks from customers throughout the county); and avoidance or reduction of Discharges to system that could result in plant upsets, bypass, spills, or other disruption of the system, including avoiding penalties or fines resulting from the same. (j) “General Benefits Costs” mean and refer to the costs associated with providing General Benefits to the Metro System, which are calculated as set forth herein. General Benefits Costs shall be charged to the City and the Participating Agencies based on their proportionate share of Flow and Strength, as defined in the SARA.
(k) “Industrial Pretreatment and Source Control Program” means an industrial waste Discharge, Pretreatment, and source control program that is sufficient to meet the requirements of federal and state law and the City’s NPDES Permit requirements relating to the Discharge to public sewers upstream of the Metro System. Such program may include, but not be limited to, permitting, inspection, compliance monitoring, Local Limits , source control mechanisms, laboratory work, enforcement, program administration and overhead, and claims relating to the program. The City’s program is known as the Industrial Wastewater Control Program or IWCP.
(l) “Industrial Wastewater” means wastewater from any producing, manufacturing, processing, institutional, commercial, service, agricultural, or other similar operation even if such wastewater is combined with domestic wastewater, and includes groundwater and surface run-on at project sites with active construction dewatering or groundwater remediation as defined in Chapter 6, Article 4, Division 2 of the San Diego Municipal Code. If the definition of Industrial Wastewater provided in Chapter 6, Article 4, Division 2 of the San Diego Municipal Code is modified during the term of this Agreement in a way that conflicts with this definition, the meaning in the San Diego Municipal Code shall supersede this definition, without the necessity of an amendment to this Agreement.
(m) “Industrial User” means a source of Indirect Discharge. (n)“Industrial Users’ Costs” means that portion of the Total Program Costs remaining to be allocated among Industrial Users in accordance with applicable law, after deducting the Trucked Waste Costs and the amount of the General Benefits Costs from the Total Program Costs.
(o) “Interference” means a Discharge which, alone or in conjunction with a discharge or discharges from other sources, both: (1) inhibits or disrupts the POTW, its treatment processes or operations, or its sludge processes, use or disposal; and (2) therefore is a cause of a violation of any requirement of the POTW’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System [NPDES] - 5 -
10-23-25
4932-9907-9020
permit (including an increase in the magnitude or duration of a violation) or of the prevention of sewage sludge use or disposal in compliance with the following statutory provisions and regulations or permits issued thereunder (or more stringent State or local regulations): Section 405 of the Clean Water Act, the Solid Waste Disposal Act [SWDA] (including title II, more commonly referred to as the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act [RCRA], and including State regulations contained in any State sludge management plan prepared pursuant to subtitle D of the SWDA), the Clean Air Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, and the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act.
(p)“Laboratory Services Costs” mean that portion of the laboratory services costs incurred by the City related to IWCP, determined by the number of IWCP samples processed compared to the number of total samples processed by the laboratory. For example, if the laboratory services processed 100 total samples in a year, and 40 of those samples were IWCP samples, then 40% of the City’s total Laboratory Services Costs would be part of the Total Program Costs as defined below.
(q) “Local Limit” means a numerical limit on a pollutant established by the City to implement the general and specific prohibitions currently set forth in San Diego Municipal Code section 64.0512, as may be amended, renumbered, or retitled from time to time. Such limits shall be technically based and shall require EPA and/or Regional Water Quality Control Board approval prior to implementation.
(r) “Metro System” means and consist of those facilities of the Metropolitan Sewerage System which are listed, shown and/or described in Exhibit A attached to the SARA, as may be amended from time to time.
(s) “Publicly Owned Treatment Works” or “POTW” means treatment works as defined by section 212 of the Act, which is owned by a State or municipality (as defined by section 502(4) of the Act). This definition includes any devices and systems used in the storage, treatment, recycling and reclamation of municipal sewage or industrial wastes of a liquid nature. It also includes sewers, pipes and other conveyances only if they convey wastewater to a POTW Treatment Plant. The term also means the municipality as defined in section 502(4) of the Act, which has jurisdiction over the Indirect Discharges to and the discharges from such a treatment works.
(t) “POTW Treatment Plant” means that portion of the POTW which is designed to provide treatment (including recycling and reclamation) of municipal sewage and industrial waste. (u) “Pretreatment” means the reduction of the amount of pollutants, the elimination of pollutants, or the alteration of the nature of pollutant properties in wastewater prior to or in lieu of discharging or otherwise introducing such pollutants into a POTW. The reduction or alteration may be obtained by physical, chemical or biological processes, process changes or by other means, except as prohibited by 40 C.F.R. 403.6 (d). Appropriate pretreatment technology includes control equipment, such as equalization tanks or facilities, for protection against surges or slug loadings that might interfere with or otherwise be incompatible with the POTW. However, where wastewater from a regulated process is mixed in an equalization facility with unregulated wastewater or with wastewater from another regulated process, the effluent from the equalization facility must meet an adjusted pretreatment limit calculated in accordance with 40 C.F.R. 403.6(e). - 6 -
10-23-25
4932-9907-9020
(v) “Pretreatment Requirement” means any substantive or procedural requirement related to Pretreatment, other than a National Pretreatment Standard, imposed on an Industrial User.
(w) “SARA” means the Second Amended and Restated Regional Wastewater Disposal Agreement made and entered into by and between the CITY OF SAN DIEGO, a municipal corporation, on the one hand; and the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation; the CITY OF CORONADO, a municipal corporation; the CITY OF DEL MAR, a municipal corporation; the CITY OF EL CAJON, a municipal corporation; the CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH, a municipal corporation; the CITY OF LA MESA, a municipal corporation; the LEMON GROVE SANITATION DISTRICT, a political subdivision of the State of California; the CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, a municipal corporation; the CITY OF POWAY, a municipal corporation; the OTAY WATER DISTRICT, a political subdivision of the State of California; the PADRE DAM MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT, a political subdivision of the State of California; and the SAN DIEGO COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT, a political subdivision of the State of California (collectively, the “Participating Agencies”), on the other hand. (x) “Total Program Costs” means all of the costs incurred by the City’s Public Utilities Department to staff, operate, and maintain the City’s Industrial Wastewater Control Program (or successor program if renamed in the future). Permissible program costs include but are not limited to personnel, permit issuance, monitoring and related programmatic and administrative costs including costs associated with reasonable overhead, regulatory compliance, and laboratory services.
(y) “Trucked Waste Costs” mean the costs associated with administering the City’s Industrial Wastewater Control Program and treating the wastewater disposed of into the wastewater system through delivery by a transport truck, which costs are charged directly to the trucking discharger.

3.ORDINANCE ADOPTION. No later than 60 days after the Effective Date of this Administrative Agreement, each Party to this Administrative Agreement shall begin the process of amending its Pretreatment ordinances or resolutions, as applicable, including providing public notices as may be required by law, as necessary to implement this Administrative Agreement.

Each Participating Agency shall adopt an ordinance delegating authority to City to implement, operate and enforce an Industrial Pretreatment and Source Control Program against Industrial Users in the Metro System, in a form substantially similar to the model ordinance attached to this Administrative Agreement as Attachment A. Each Participating Agency must provide a copy of its adopted ordinance to City. Each Party’s revised ordinances or resolutions (as applicable) governing Pretreatment shall be adopted and effective by no later than the effective date of the SARA as set forth in Section 14.1 of the SARA.

4.NOTICE AND AMENDMENTS. On or shortly after the Effective Date of this Administrative Agreement, City shall notify the Participating Agencies of any amendments to City’s ordinances or Municipal Code relating to Pretreatment, in order to develop and maintain, insofar as possible, a uniform set of wastewater disposal regulations at least as stringent as those adopted by City throughout the Metro System, including the established Local Limits and source control measures for protection of the Pure Water program. Throughout the life of this - 7 -
10-23-25
4932-9907-9020
Administrative Agreement, City shall continue to notify the Participating Agencies of any amendments to City’s ordinances or Municipal Code relating to the Industrial Pretreatment and Source Control Program which may require the Participating Agencies to take action to ensure their ordinances, rules or regulations relating to Pretreatment conform or adhere to City’s rules and requirements. When necessary, each Participating Agency shall adopt and routinely maintain Industrial Pretreatment and Source Control Program ordinances or resolutions which conform or adhere to the rules adopted by City. City shall not require that the Participating Agencies adopt any ordinances or amendments that are more stringent than ordinances or amendments that have been adopted by City.

5.IDENTIFICATION OF INDUSTRIAL USERS. Participating Agencies shall be responsible for notifying all known Industrial Users in their jurisdiction which are subject to regulation under the Act about the change from Participating Agency to City Pretreatment oversight, and the change from Participating Agency to City direct billing and enforcement, by no later than the first July 1 after the Effective Date of this Administrative Agreement. The cost of this notice will be borne by the individual Participating Agency providing the notice. Each Participating Agency shall create and maintain a reporting procedure mutually acceptable to the City and Participating Agency that includes a monthly report identifying potential new Industrial Users, including the name of the business, business address, type of business, and contact information. The reporting procedure shall also include a requirement that the Participating Agency promptly inform the City of a potential new Industrial User after the Participating Agency becomes aware of the new potential Industrial User. Each Participating Agency shall provide notice and a blank copy of the City’s Industrial Wastewater Control Program Industrial User Permit application to each identified potential new Industrial User. The notice may indicate that the Pretreatment program fees or charges billed and collected by City are in addition to any business license fees, permits or general wastewater service charges adopted and imposed by the Participating Agency. The notice shall be in a form approved from time to time by City. Thereafter, it shall be the responsibility of the City and the potential new Industrial User to coordinate regarding potential permitting and compliance, subject to the provisions in Section 2.8.6 of the SARA which govern permitting and permit compliance. New residential users, and dischargers of FOG, including Food Establishments, to the Participating Agencies’ collection system need not be reported to City, absent unusual circumstances. City and each Participating Agency shall meet and confer prior to making changes to administrative procedures unique to a Participating Agency relating to the identification of a potential new Industrial User.

6.INVENTORY. City shall create and maintain an inventory, that will be available to the Participating Agencies upon request, of all Industrial Users within the Metro System as soon as reasonably practicable after the Effective Date of this Administrative Agreement. If the City includes this inventory in an annual report, no additional inventory is required to be created. Upon request from a Participating Agency, the City will provide the location or locations, and the point of contact for each Industrial User. City shall update this inventory as often as reasonably practicable, but by no later than March 1 of each year. If a Participating Agency is aware of an Industrial User within its jurisdiction which is not noted on the City’s inventory, the Participating - 8 -
10-23-25
4932-9907-9020
Agency shall promptly notify the City of the name of the business, business address, type of business and contact information so that the City may investigate as appropriate.

7.EVALUATION, PERMITTING AND MONITORING. It shall be City’s right and obligation to perform all evaluation, permitting, and monitoring required under the Act or any National Pretreatment Standards as required by City’s NPDES permit, for all Industrial Users discharging to the Metro System. City shall review and amend its Pretreatment Requirements as necessary, but no less than every five (5) years, to ensure full compliance with Federal and State Laws. The City shall follow the requirements set forth in Section 2.8.6 of the SARA with respect to permitting and permit compliance. The City shall not be responsible for evaluation, permitting, or monitoring requirements contained in a Participating Agency’s NPDES Permit.

8.DILIGENT ENFORCEMENT. City shall be responsible for identifying any Interference or other unlawful Discharges by Industrial Users in the Metro System, other than Discharges by Food Establishments and other FOG dischargers, and shall be responsible for initiating and administering enforcement actions related to the violation of any applicable laws, rules, or regulations associated with Discharge. The Participating Agencies hereby delegate authority to City to diligently enforce the provisions of Article 4, of Chapter 6, commencing with § 64.0100, et seq. of City’s Municipal Code, as may be updated or amended, against Industrial Users throughout the Metro System and in each Participating Agency’s service areas, and City hereby accepts these enforcement rights, liabilities and obligations; provided, however, that each Participating Agency shall undertake within their boundaries, primary enforcement of Food Establishment and FOG Discharges to protect the collection system within its jurisdiction and City shall have no responsibility therefor.
(a) City may, in its authority as provided herein, commence informal or formal enforcement procedures against a delinquent Industrial User according to the procedures set forth in the City’s then current Enforcement Response Plan. If City issues formal enforcement to an Industrial User in a Participating Agency’s jurisdiction, City shall carbon-copy that Participating Agency on the letter or transmission delivering the Compliance Order to the Industrial User in order to ensure the Participating Agency receives notice that formal enforcement procedures have commenced in its jurisdiction.
(b) City may revoke an Industrial User permit as provided in City’s Enforcement Response Plan. Before a Permit Revocation Notice is delivered to an Industrial User in a Participating Agency’s jurisdiction, City shall contact that Participating Agency to discuss and, if necessary, coordinate termination of the Industrial User’s services. City and the Participating Agency shall work together in identifying a termination of services date before City delivers a Permit Revocation Notice to the Industrial User.

9.ENFORCEMENT AND COOPERATION BY PARTICIPATING
AGENCIES. Nothing herein shall be construed as prohibiting any Participating Agency from enforcing its own Pretreatment ordinance within its jurisdiction, nor shall this agreement require the City to accept a delegation of authority to enforce a Pretreatment ordinance adopted by a - 9 -
10-23-25
4932-9907-9020
Participating Agency that is more stringent or contains different requirements than the City’s.

Notwithstanding the delegation of authority to City, each Participating Agency retains authority to implement and enforce its own ordinance and to contract with other agencies for such purposes, including without limitation through a joint powers agreement. However, such enforcement shall be in cooperation and coordination with the City and shall not interfere with City’s enforcement.

Participating Agencies shall be solely responsible for enforcement of Discharges of FOG and Food Establishments within their service areas. In the event a Participating Agency adopts an ordinance more stringent than City’s, the Participating Agency may enforce the ordinance itself, or negotiate and enter into a separate agreement with City under which City will enforce the Participating Agency’s ordinance; provided, however, that any added costs of such enforcement will be borne by the Participating Agencies adopting the ordinance and shall not be borne by City or the other Participating Agencies. If the authority of City to act as agent of a Participating Agency is challenged by any person in a manner which may restrict or prevent City from performing the permitting, inspection, monitoring or enforcing of applicable provisions of law, the Participating Agency will cooperate in good faith with City and take such actions as are reasonably necessary to ensure effective implementation and enforcement of the Participating Agency’s ordinance and this Administrative Agreement.

10.COSTS FOR INDUSTRIAL WASTE CONTROL PROGRAM. City shall, not less often than every 5 years, adopt resolutions establishing fees, costs, charges and fines sufficient to recover the full cost of carrying out the Industrial Pretreatment and Source Control Program.

City shall directly bill Industrial Users to recover the costs and charges of the Industrial Pretreatment and Source Control Program, with additional billings sent directly to Industrial Users as needed for any enforcement costs (including related monitoring) incurred by City.

(a) Method for Allocating Industrial Pretreatment and Source Control Program Costs.

To establish the costs that are recovered from Industrial Users, the City will take the following steps during each annual budget process:

1. Determine the budgeted Total Program Costs for the upcoming Fiscal Year. The budgeted Trucked Waste Costs and budgeted General Benefits Costs shall be determined periodically, but no less often than every five (5) years, consistent with the cost-of-service study required by Section 10(d) below.

2. Deduct the budgeted Trucked Waste Costs and the amount of the budgeted General Benefits Costs from the budgeted Total Program Costs for the upcoming Fiscal Year.

In other words: (Total Program Costs) – (Trucked Waste Costs) – (General Benefits Costs) = (Industrial Users’ Costs)

3. Allocate the remaining costs to Industrial Users as Industrial Users’ Costs through permit fees and annual charges (“Permit Fees”).
- 10 -
10-23-25
4932-9907-9020
(b) If, at the end of a Fiscal Year, the actual Total Program Costs are determined to have exceeded the total amounts collected from Industrial Users’ Costs, Trucked Waste Costs, and General Benefit Costs, the remaining costs for that fiscal year shall be allocated to the City and the Participating Agencies with Industrial Users within their jurisdiction, in proportion to the total Permit Fees charged to Industrial Users in each Party’s jurisdiction compared to the total amount of Permit Fees charged for all Industrial Users for the applicable fiscal year. For example, if the Permit Fees charged for Industrial Users in the City of San Diego is $2,000,000, and the Permit Fees charged to all Industrial Users in that same fiscal year was $4,000,000 then fifty-percent (50%) of the remaining costs for that fiscal year ($2,000,000/$4,000,0000) will be allocated to the City of San Diego. The remaining Participating Agencies shall pay their respective proportionate shares according to the same methodology (Permit Fees charged for Industrial Users in the Participating Agencies Jurisdiction divided by the total Permit Fees charged for the fiscal year). See the table attached hereto as Attachment B for a more complete example. (c) City shall seek, to the maximum extent permitted by law, to ensure that Industrial Users’ Costs shall be paid for entirely by the Industrial Users regulated under the ordinances of City and Participating Agencies, through permit fees, fines, administrative penalties, inspection fees and other cost recovery mechanisms provided for under the ordinances of City and Participating Agencies, as applicable. However, this section is not intended to prevent the City from approving Industrial User fees based on a cost of service study that phases in fee increases to mitigate significant fee spikes, which may not be fully cost recoverable for a specific fiscal year as further discussed in subsection 10(h) below.
(d) Periodically, but no less often than every five (5) years, City shall cause to be performed a cost-of-service study or other appropriate study to ensure that permit fees, fines, administrative penalties, inspection fees and other cost recovery mechanisms, including General Benefit costs, are sufficient to fully fund the Industrial Pretreatment and Source Control Program.

The City will work with Metro JPA staff as part of this process in advance of any presentation to the Metro Commission or the San Diego City Council. The costs of this study shall be allocated based on the results of the study as either programmatic or administrative costs. (e) The City will bring a yearly update to the Metro Commission, after the release of the City’s Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR), that provides an update on the program and will include recorded revenues and expenses for the completed year. (f) City will provide notice of fee structure changes in accordance with the requirements of City’s Municipal Code as well as applicable state rules. (g) City will make a good faith effort to conduct outreach to Industrial Users regarding potential changes to the program fees.
(h) If the City proposes a fee structure for Industrial User fees based on a cost of service study that is not fully cost recoverable for a fiscal year (or years) that are part of the study in order to phase-in or mitigate significant fee increases for Industrial Users, the City will provide a presentation to the Metro Commission on the proposed fees and how it would impact the - 11 -
10-23-25
4932-9907-9020
calculation in Sections 10(a) and 10(b) above. If the Metro Commission takes a vote regarding the proposed fee structure, City staff will provide that information to the City Council for the City Council’s consideration at the time the proposed fees are before the City Council for adoption, however, the City Council may choose to adopt the fee or not, in accordance with its legislative authority. If the fees adopted based on a cost of service study are set at an amount intended to recover the full cost of carrying out the Industrial Pretreatment and Source Control Program over the study period (but not to exceed five (5) years), no Participating Agency shall have a claim against the City for a failure to adopt fully cost recoverable fees. (i) City will in its sole discretion select and procure billing system software to use for this program.

11.TERMINATION OF INDIVIDUAL PRETREATMENT AGREEMENTS.

Any and all previously approved “Interjurisdictional Pretreatment Agreements” between City and any Participating Agency shall be terminated on the Effective Date of the SARA.

12.PERMIT OBLIGATIONS CONTINUE. Nothing herein shall be construed to relieve any Industrial User to the Metro System of the responsibility to obtain a permit for, and to comply with rules and regulations applicable to Industrial Users to the Metro System.

13.LIABILITIES. If a third-party liability, penalty or fine arises relating to City’s operation of this Industrial Pretreatment and Source Control Program, then all costs arising from the liability, penalty or fine shall be directly passed through to the Industrial User(s) found to be responsible for the liability, penalty or fine. If the Industrial User(s) responsible for the liability, penalty or fine cannot be ascertained or identified, or if the Industrial User(s) initiates bankruptcy proceedings or is declared bankrupt, then the liability, penalty or fine shall be absorbed as part of the Total Program Costs, and shall be allocated among the City and the Participating Agencies in accordance with the methodology described in Section 10(b). The Participating Agencies shall not be responsible for any liability, penalty or fine, or portion thereof, that arises from City’s gross negligence or willful misconduct.

14.DELEGATION OF AMENDMENT OR TERMINATION AUTHORITY TO
METRO COMMISSION. The Participating Agencies hereby delegate to the Metro Commission the authority to approve, by a vote of no less than two-thirds of the members of the Metro Commission at a duly noticed public meeting (in other words, upon the affirmative vote of no less than eight of the twelve members of the Metro Commission, irrespective of how many Metro Commissioners are present at the meeting), any amendments or supplements to this Administrative Agreement, including, if necessary, termination of this Administrative Agreement.

15.MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
(a) A Participating Agency’s local limits may be more stringent than the City’s Local Limits, but may not be less stringent.
- 12 -
10-23-25
4932-9907-9020
(b) City is performing services under this Administrative Agreement as an independent contractor and is not an employee of any of the Participating Agencies. No employee or agent of City shall be considered an employee of any of the Participating Agencies. City shall be and remain responsible for all payroll, compensation, employee benefits, and employment administration of any of its employees who perform services under this Administrative Agreement. (c) Books, documents, papers, accounting records, and other evidence pertaining to costs and revenues related to this Administrative Agreement shall be maintained by City and made available Participating Agencies to the same extent as under the SARA. (d) If any term of this Administrative Agreement shall be held invalid in any judicial action, the remaining terms shall be unaffected.
(e) Other agreements by and between the Parties to this Administrative Agreement or any other entity are neither prohibited nor modified in any manner by execution of this Administrative Agreement, except as expressly provided herein. (f) Except as otherwise provided in this Administrative Agreement, the rights and obligations of any Party to this Administrative Agreement shall not be assignable or transferable without the consent of the governing body of each Party hereto; provided, however, that this provision shall not affect City’s ability to contract with a third party to provide services related to this Administrative Agreement.
(g) This Administrative Agreement is made in the State of California, under the Constitution and laws of such State, and shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of such State.
(h) This Administrative Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the successors of the Parties hereto.
(i) The Parties are hereby authorized to take any and all legal or equitable actions, including but not limited to an injunction and specific performance, necessary or permitted by law to enforce this Administrative Agreement.
(j) Except as otherwise may be provided in this Administrative Agreement, neither this Administrative Agreement nor any provision hereof may be modified or amended except by a written instrument approved pursuant to Section 15 of the SARA. In the event of any conflict between the SARA and this Administrative Agreement, the terms of the SARA shall control. (k) This Administrative Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original and all of which together shall constitute one and the same agreement. (l) All the covenants contained in this Administrative Agreement are for the express benefit of each and all such Parties. This Administrative Agreement is not intended to benefit any third parties, and any third-party beneficiaries are expressly disclaimed. - 13 -
10-23-25
4932-9907-9020
(m) Notices required or permitted hereunder shall be provided in the manner set forth in the SARA.
(n) The individuals executing this Administrative Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. (o) The term of this Administrative Agreement shall run concurrently with and remain in effect in accordance with the provisions of Section 15 of the SARA.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Administrative Agreement effective as of the date first set forth above.

CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Name:

Title:

Approved as to Form:

Name:

Title:

CITY OF CORONADO
Name:

Title:

Approved as to Form:

Name:

Title:

CITY OF DEL MAR
Name:

Title:

Approved as to Form:

Name:

Title:

CITY OF EL CAJON
Name:

Title:

Approved as to Form:

Name:

Title:

CITY OF IMPERIAL BEACH
Name:

Title:

Approved as to Form:

Name:

Title:

CITY OF LA MESA
Name:

Title:

Approved as to Form:

Name:

Title:
- 14 -
10-23-25
4932-9907-9020

LEMON GROVE SANITATION

DISTRICT
Name:

Title:

Approved as to Form:

Name:

Title:

CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
Name:

Title:

Approved as to Form:

Name:

Title:

OTAY WATER DISTRICT
Name:

Title:

Approved as to Form:

Name:

Title:

PADRE DAM MUNICIPAL WATER

DISTRICT
Name:

Title:

Approved as to Form:

Name:

Title:

CITY OF POWAY
Name:

Title:

Approved as to Form:

Name:

Title:

CITY OF SAN DIEGO
Name:

Title:

Approved as to Form:

Name:

Title:

SAN DIEGO COUNTY SANITATION

DISTRICT
Name:

Title:

Approved as to Form:

Name:

Title:
- 15 -
10-23-25
4932-9907-9020

ATTACHMENT A
Ordinance of the [Member Agency] Amending Ordinance [xxx] Delegating Authority to City of San Diego to Enforce Regulations for the Discharge of Wastewater to Sewerage Facilities, Pretreatment and Source Control Program
WHEREAS, [Participating Agency] has adopted Ordinance/Resolution [number], establishing a local sewer use ordinance, including a pretreatment and source control program to control discharges from all industrial and other users of its wastewater collection and treatment system pursuant to the requirements of 40 CFR Part 403 and California law; and WHEREAS, [Participating Agency] has contracted with City of San Diego to manage, treat and dispose of wastewater discharged within [Participating Agency]’s boundaries and conveyed to the Metropolitan Sewerage System, a regional wastewater system owned by City of San Diego and in which [Participating Agency] owns contract capacity; and WHEREAS, Government Code sections 6502 and 6513, and [Water Code section, etc.] provide authority for [Participating Agency] to contract with City of San Diego for such purposes and to delegate to City of San Diego primary responsibility for implementation and enforcement of Ordinance [number], as may be amended from time to time; and WHEREAS, [Participating Agency] desires City of San Diego to assume primary responsibility for implementation and enforcement of [Participating Agency] ’s regulations for the control of discharges to the Metropolitan Sewerage System from all industrial and other users of its wastewater collection and treatment system pursuant to the requirements of 40 CFR Part 403 and California law, other than food establishments and dischargers of fats, oils and grease for which [Participating Agency] retains primary responsibility, and the City of San Diego shall not be responsible for, and does not accept authority or responsibility to inspect, monitor or enforce any source control program requirements for any Participating Agency’s NPDES permits.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED:

1.Notwithstanding any provision of Ordinance [number] to the contrary, the [City council/Board of Directors], hereby delegates to City of San Diego authority to implement and enforce the terms and conditions of the Industrial Waste Discharge Pretreatment and Enhanced Source Control Program in [Participating Agency’]s jurisdiction as the agent of [Participating Agency], to be effective upon the date of execution of the ADMINISTRATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF SAN

DIEGO AND PARTICIPATING AGENCIES IN THE METROPOLITAN

SEWERAGE SYSTEM FOR UNIFIED MANAGEMENT OF INDUSTRIAL

WASTE DISCHARGE PRETREATMENT AND ENHANCED SOURCE
CONTROL PROGRAM dated [insert], as may be amended from time to time, to the

SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED REGIONAL WASTEWATER DISPOSAL

AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF SAN DIEGO AND THE PARTICIPATING AGENCIES IN THE METROPOLITAN SEWERAGE SYSTEM.
- 16 -
10-23-25
4932-9907-9020

2.A copy of this amendment shall be forwarded to City of San Diego by the clerk/secretary forthwith upon its adoption.

Approved and adopted by the following vote this ___ day of ____, 2025:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent
Abstain:
[add signature lines for chair of governing body and secretary/clerk] City Council
Agenda Report
Agenda Item 8.

DATE: February 24, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Graham Mitchell, City Manager
SUBJECT: Parkway Plaza Update
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council receives the report.

BACKGROUND:

For the past several City Council Action Plan cycles, the City Council has identified the reimagination and revitalization of Parkway Plaza as a priority. At the City Council’s direction, staff is advancing multiple efforts related to the potential acquisition and long-term revitalization of the mall property. The purpose of this report is to provide an update on those ongoing initiatives.

First, the City secured a Smart Growth Incentive Program (SGIP) grant through SANDAG to support land use planning for the property. Initial planning work has begun, with the majority of the technical analysis commencing next month. This process also includes a complete environmental analysis as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Second, the City has retained a financial advisory firm to assist in identifying potential funding strategies for a possible acquisition. This advisor will also analyze short- and long-term benefits or liabilities of acquiring the property.

Third, staff is working with the property ownership group to complete key due diligence steps.

Finally, the City has engaged acquisition experts and legal counsel to guide staff through the complexities of a potential transaction.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT:

Discussion and City Council feedback is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it is a procedural, administrative step in the process.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

Prepared By: Graham Mitchell, City Manager
Reviewed By:

Approved By: N/A
City Council
Agenda Report
Agenda Item 9.

DATE: February 24, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Yazmin Arellano, Director of Development Services SUBJECT: Discussion of Speed Cushions Pilot Program Survey Results RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council receives and considers the results of the Speed Cushion Pilot Program and community outreach efforts, which did not achieve the required 67% affected household support threshold at any of the pilot locations, and provides direction regarding the continuation, modification, or discontinuation of the Speed Cushion Program.

BACKGROUND:

At the September 23, 2025, City Council meeting, the City Council approved a pilot program to install speed cushions at three (3) locations in the City of El Cajon. The three (3) candidates selected for this pilot program were: Taft Avenue, Sandalwood Drive, and Graves Avenue.

Letters were sent via regular mail to the affected residents at the three (3) locations, requesting that they complete an online survey to indicate their interest in participating. The letters also informed residents that, to move forward with the speed cushion installation, two-thirds (67%) of the affected property owners must approve it. The following list outlines the letters sent to the affected households:

November 3, 2025 - 1st letter was sent with a QR code and a City of El Cajon contact for any questions.

December 4, 2025 – 2nd letter was sent advising that responses were due by December 19, 2025.

December 17, 2025 – 3rd and final letter was sent advising that a no response received by January 5, 2026, would be voted as a “No.”
The table below summarizes the responses received after the January 5, 2026, deadline.

Taft Avenue Sandalwood Drive Graves Avenue
Total Households 71 53 52
Did Not Vote 54% 43% 56%
YES 34% 47% 35%
NO 13% 9% 10%
Given the results, staff recommends that the City Council consider 1) maintaining the 67% threshold, abandoning the identified streets, and identifying other streets to consider, or 2) reducing the threshold at the three selected streets. Staff seek City Council direction regarding whether to continue, modify, discontinue, or implement the program at alternative locations.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT:

Implementation of the pilot program to reduce vehicle speeds on public streets is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to sections 15378(b)(5) and 15301 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Section 15378(b)(5) exempts administrative activities of government that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment and section 15301 exempts minor alterations to existing public facilities, including public streets.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Funding for the pilot program, approximately $70,000, is available in the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Traffic Safety Calming Project (233790PWCP).

Prepared By: Olga Reyes, Principal Civil Engineer
Reviewed By: Yazmin Arellano, Director of Development Services Approved By: Graham Mitchell, City Manager
City Council
Agenda Report
Agenda Item 10.

DATE: February 24, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Sara Diaz, Director of Information Technology
SUBJECT: City of El Cajon Homeless Point-in-Time Count Survey RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council receives the report.

BACKGROUND:

Per City Council direction through its City Council Action Plan, the City of El Cajon established its own Homeless Point-In-Time (PIT) Count survey to ensure quality actionable data specific to El Cajon’s needs. The first count was carried out on Thursday January 22, 2026. The purpose of this agenda item is to report on that event and share insights gained from performing the count. A full analysis of the data will be presented at a future meeting when data can be compared with the regional count's data.

The survey relied on forty city employees, including seven police officers. Employees were divided up into ten groups with different routes. Each route took approximately two hours to complete. Survey questions asked were based on San Diego's Homeless PIT survey and additional questions selected for El Cajon’s specific needs. For willing participants, a total of forty-five questions were asked; for unwilling participants, staff completed three observational questions.

Gift cards ($5 to local fast-food chains) were provided to individuals who participated in the survey. Also, once the Homeless PIT Count was completed, City employees were asked to complete a survey providing feedback on the successes and deficiencies of the project.

When we compare the data collected during the El Cajon count with the data provided from regional PIT in 2025, there is a noticeable difference in detail. The El Cajon count provided detailed demographics and those receiving outreach services. Data received from the region is limited to the location and number of homeless individuals that were recorded. Data from both counts follow the same locational patterns; however, the number of individuals present at each site appears to be higher in the 2025 regional count.

The following summarizes the benefits, the shortcomings, the insights, and the next steps of the survey.

Benefits
There was adequate staff to conduct the surveys on the specified routes. All teams, but one, completed their routes within the 2-hour time-period.

Employees appreciated having an assigned police officer on their team. Officers were comfortable speaking with the interviewees and made the other volunteers feel safer.

The newly developed application worked as designed with very few technical challenges encountered during the count.

Each team had multiple devices to conduct surveys, which sped up the question/answer sessions.

Questions provided opportunities for homeless individuals to speak about their situation.

Gift cards offered an incentive to participate.

The majority of the homeless population appreciates the attention that El Cajon is giving to their circumstances.

Shortcomings
There were three groups that did not have a police officer present. The individuals in those groups did not feel as secure in approaching the homeless population compared to groups that did include an officer.

Frequent responders of the feedback survey mentioned that the questions had some redundancy and would benefit from being streamlined. Some of the questions would be better as multiple-choice questions.

There was also a consensus that the date of birth question format was not user friendly.

Surveyors mentioned that most individuals were not truthful about the drug and alcohol questions, and therefore, it was not useful.

City workers found it difficult to follow the route with the map within the survey and the hard copy of the routes provided.

Based on the concentration of surveys collected, routes need to be refined.

Multiple individuals surveyed had questions regarding services. It was recommended to provide informational handouts.

Insights
There was a total of 146 survey counts taken, with 108 active participants agreeing to answer our questions.

El Cajon has an aging homeless population--about half of those interviewed were 55 or older, with 34 percent over 65.

Collected data showed that individuals who did not originally become homeless in El Cajon are clustered between Home Start Inc., East County Transitional Living Center, and Parkway Plaza.

There were individuals that said they wanted to connect with outreach services, but had not yet. This is an area worth further exploration (i.e. what are the barriers, what efforts to connect had been made, etc.).

It would be beneficial to investigate the connections between those seeking shelter and being a part of multi-person households.

Next Steps
Review survey questions for refinement, with particular attention to statistics that would be useful.

Improve the format of existing questions for data entry efficiency, in particular date of birth.

Ensure each group consists of at least one officer.

Create a separate application with routes that allows individuals to view their current location and area to be covered.

Establish the schedule for a quarterly count.

Compare El Cajon 2026 PIT results to County 2026 PIT results.

Meet with City staff from Public Works, Police, Parks, and Housing to determine if changes are needed for City homelessness policies and procedures.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT:

The proposed action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5), as it is an administrative activity of government that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the environment.

FISCAL IMPACT:

No additional funds are allocated for the El Cajon Point In Time Count. The project uses existing staff and existing software licenses. Some volunteers were paid overtime to conduct the count.

Prepared By: Sara Diaz, Director of Information Technology Reviewed By:

Approved By: Graham Mitchell, City Manager
City Council
Agenda Report
Agenda Item 11.

DATE: February 24, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Clay Schoen, Director of Finance
SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2025-26 Mid-Year Report
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council:

Receives and accepts the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Mid-Year Report; and1.

Increases or modifies Fiscal Year 2025-26 appropriations, and related transfers, by $1,089,000 for additional needs as detailed in the report.

2. BACKGROUND:

The City of El Cajon prepares the Mid-Year Report as part of an overall financial planning and monitoring program. This document is an opportunity to measure financial performance at the midpoint of the fiscal year. Mid-year results are compared to both budgeted amounts and previous year’s results. This is also the basis for projecting year-end results, as well as longer-term projections.

Other major components of the program include the Five-Year Business Plan, Annual Budget, and the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report. When viewed as a cycle, they represent long-term planning, the implementation of that plan, and the execution and measurement of that plan.

As part of this process, it is common to identify City Council actions, including budget adjustments, which are needed for financial and/or operational circumstances that have arisen since the Fiscal Year 2025-26 budget was developed last year.

Appropriation Adjustments

Human Resources Legal Expenditures (101180) Staff recommends an increase of $105,000 in Human Resources Department appropriations, from General Fund fund balance, for increased legal costs.

Public Works Operating Expenditures (101810/101830) The Public Works Department is requesting an increase of $100,000 in appropriations, from General Fund fund balance, for increased operating costs. The primary driver of this request is rising utility costs.

Unforeseen Additional Expenditures (211800) The Public Works Department is requesting an increase to Gas Tax Fund appropriations of $34,000 from fund balance for unforeseen challenges, including collision-related and rising utility costs.

Unforeseen Additional Expenditures (601895) The Public Works Department is requesting an increase to Vehicle-Equipment Maintenance appropriations of $40,000 from fund balance for unforeseen collision-related costs.

Magnolia Performing Arts Center Transfer (101191) Staff recommends increasing Other Financing Uses appropriations by $500,000, from General Fund fund balance, for the purpose of transferring to the Magnolia Performing Arts Center Fund (241) to meet working capital needs.

Asset Management Software (615157) Staff recommends the transfer from existing Wastewater Enterprise Fund (Maintenance Operations / 650720) appropriations of $310,000 to the IT Services Fund for the purpose of acquiring asset management software. The system will provide a centralized work-order platform and standardized maintenance recordkeeping, supporting Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP) compliance by documenting inspections, maintenance, and corrective activities. This will improve operational efficiency, data accuracy, regulatory reporting, and long-term infrastructure planning. This action would also include the appropriation of the transfer to increase IT Services Fund (615157) appropriations for this capital expenditure.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT:

The Fiscal Year 2025-26 Mid-Year Report, and proposed appropriation adjustments, are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines sections 15378(b)(2)(4) and (5), these administrative and fiscal activities are not projects and therefore not subject to CEQA.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The Fiscal Year 2025-26 Mid-Year Report is critical for informed financial decision-making and the ongoing implementation of City goals. Approval of this action will increase appropriations by a total of $1,089,000. (General Fund $705,000; Gas Tax $34,000; Fleet Maintenance $40,000; IT Services Fund $310,000)
Prepared By: Clay Schoen, Director of Finance
Reviewed By: Clay Schoen, Director of Finance
Approved By: Graham Mitchell, City Manager
Attachments
FY2025-26 Mid-Year Report

CITY OF EL CAJON MID-YEAR REPORT

CITY OF EL CAJON

MID-YEAR REPORT
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26

This report is intended to evaluate the status of revenues and expenditures at the halfway point of the fiscal year, as well as communicate anticipated year-end results. In evaluating mid-year performance, current y ear activity is compared to that of previous years and budgeted expectations. This analysis has been conducted for the City of El Cajon’s major funds: the General Fund, the American Rescue Plan Act special revenue fund, the Low- Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund special revenue fund, and th e Wastewater enterprise fund. This report is useful for both managing operat ions for the remainder of this fiscal year, as well as contributing information necessary for the development of the Fiscal Year 2026-27 Annual Budget.

Note: The following analysis was prepared solely for the purpose of determining how revenues and expenditures are performing a s related to the budget. Consequently, the information contained herein may not be presented in accordance with generally accepte d accounting principles.

CITY OF EL CAJON MID-YEAR REPORT

GENERAL FUND

Overview
As of December 31, 2025, General Fund Revenues and Sources of Funds totaled $30.9 million, an increase of 2.8% ($838,000) from the same point last year. Expenditures and Uses of Funds totaled $46.9 million, which is down approximately 0.9% ($410,000) from last year’s midway point.

For this period, July through December 2025, Expenditures and Uses of Funds exceeded Revenues and Sources of Funds by approximately $16.0 million. Several of the General Fund’s larger revenue streams, such as Property Taxes, are received in the latter half of the fiscal year. During the first six months of the fiscal year , the General Fund cash flow needs are reliant upon the City’s 20% Operating Reserve which p revents the City from having to borrow funds (i.e. issue tax and revenue anticipation notes), thereby avoiding additional interest and issuance expenses.

The table below summarizes this activity for the current year, as well as the two previous years.

By fiscal year end, Revenues and Sources of Funds are projected to total $102.2 million, which is $738,000 (0.7%) above budget. Expenditures and Uses of Funds are estimated to be $100.4 million at fiscal year-end, and is approximately $ 3.0 million (2.9%) below budget. Further analysis of selected revenues and expenditures follows.

Revenue and Sources of Funds
While the General Fund has many sources of revenue, three major categories account for 73.8% of total budgeted revenue. These categories are: Sales Taxes, Property Taxes, and Franchise Fees. Each of these will be discussed separate of all remaining sources.

Sales Taxes- Sales tax revenue is comprised of two components: the City’s share of the State sales tax rate and a vot er approved 0.5% general sales ta x (Proposition J). At the mid-year point of the fiscal year, sales tax receipts are up approximately $525,000 (3.5%) from the same point last year. The table below summarizes these balances, as well as those of the two previous years.

FY25-26
Budget
FY25-26
Mid-Year
% of
Budget
FY24-25
Mid-Year
FY23-24
Mid-Year
Sales Taxes $33,361,201 $11,176,766 33.5 $10,612,352 $11,154,729 Sales Taxes (Proposition J) 13,471,000 4,398,319 32.7 4,437,430 4,527,624

FY25-26
Budget
FY25-26
Mid-Year
% of
Budget
FY24-25
Mid-Year
FY23-24
Mid-Year
Revenues and Sources of Funds $101,429,650 $30,874,881 30.4 $30,037,085 $28,536,486 Expenditures and Uses of Funds 103,421,160 46,935,538 45.4 47,345,130 45,446,724

CITY OF EL CAJON MID-YEAR REPORT

As of mid-year, Sales Taxes are still expected to be at budgete d amounts at fiscal year end.

Property Taxes- Property tax revenue is comprised of three major components: regular property taxes, property tax received in lieu of Vehicle Licens e Fees, and the residual distribution from the Redevelopm ent Property Tax Trust Fund. Pr operty taxes, in total, are up approximately 4.3% ($220,000) from last year.

FY25-26
Budget
FY25-26
Mid-Year
% of
Budget
FY24-25
Mid-Year
FY23-24
Mid-Year
Property Taxes (PT) $12,636,755 $5,277,884 41.8 $5,058,299 $4,782.074 PT – In Lieu VLF 13,574,549 - - - -
PT – RPTTF Residual Distribution 1,862,572 - - - -

The majority of this revenue is received in the second half of the fiscal year, but current projections indicate that year-end results will slightly exceed budgetary expectations by approximately $236,000 (0.8%).

Franchise Fees- Franchise fees are collected from San Diego Gas & Electric, ED CO, Cox Communications, and Direct TV. At the midpoint of the fisca l year, current year Franchise Fees are down approximately 4.4% ($59,000) from last year. The table below illustrates Franchise Fees for the current year, as well as the two previous years.

FY25-26
Budget
FY25-26
Mid-Year
% of
Budget
FY24-25
Mid-Year
FY23-24
Mid-Year
Franchise Fees $6,692,960 $1,294,367 19.3 $1,353,615 $1,892,152

Other Revenue Categories- The remaining revenue categories represent 19.6% of total budgeted General Fund Revenues and Sources of Funds. The following table details the mid-year performance of each ca tegory for the current year, as well as the two most recent years.

FY25-26
Budget
FY25-26
Mid-Year
% of
Budget
FY24-25
Mid-Year
FY23-24
Mid-Year
Transient Occupancy Tax $3,291,602 $740,072 22.5 $970,594 $868,676 Business Licenses 861,753 504,639 58.6 642,284 529,605
Real Property Transfer Tax 400,000 130,576 32.6 163,856 130,297 Ambulance/Paramedic Tax 368,000 75,172 20.4 90,226 80,463 Licenses and Permits 2,011,000 1,350,792 67.2 1,226,786 1,170,311 Intergovernmental Revenues 1,439,200 478,954 33.3 760,637 438,358 Charges for Services 6,335,058 3,007,977 47.5 2,448,673 1,554,973 Use of Money and Property 4,440,500 1,979,395 44.6 1,837,089 986,820 Fines and Forfeitures 467,500 246,430 52.7 269,168 251,800 Other Revenue& Reimbursement 216,000 213,538 98.9 166,003 167,773 Other Financing Sources - - 0.0 74 832

CITY OF EL CAJON MID-YEAR REPORT

Projected results for each major revenue category is shown in the following table.

FY25-26
Budget
FY25-26
Projected
% of
Budget
Sales Taxes $ 46,832,201 $ 46,832,201 100.00
Property Taxes 28,073,876 28,310,198 100.8
Franchise Fees 6,692,960 6,742,202 100.7
All Other Categories 19,830,613
20,283,336 102.3
Total General Fund Revenue $101,429,650 $102,167,937 100.7

Expenditures and Uses of Funds
Expenditures and Uses of Funds a re $46.9 million or 45.4% of bu dget at mid-year. This represents a 0.9% ($410,000) decrease from the same point last year. The following table shows mid-year expenditures organized by function for the curre nt year, as well as the two preceding years.

FY25-26
Budget
FY25-26
Mid-Year
% of
Budget
FY24-25
Mid-Year
FY23-24
Mid-Year
General Government $9,918,211 $4,075,184 41.1 $4,384,632 $3,751,534 Public Safety- Police 52,366,150 24,077,451 46.0 23,819,508 24,172,309 Public Safety- Fire 23,190,902 10,954,891 47.2 11,173,297 10,341,606 Engineering Services 2,860,052 1,384,835 48.4 4,702,947 3,366,173 Public Works 4,698,056 2,004,305 42.7 - -
Parks & Recreation 6,921,400 2,888,132 41.7 1,936,693 2,121,411 Community Development 3,466,389 1,550,740 44.7 1,328,052 1,443,688 Other Financing Uses -
- 0.0 - 250,002
Total General Fund Expenditures $103,421,160 $46,935,538 45.4 $47,345,130 $45,446,724

General Fund expenditures are also shown by category in the following table.

FY25-26
Budget
FY25-26
Mid-Year
% of
Budget
FY24-25
Mid-Year
FY23-24
Mid-Year
Salaries and Benefits $73,210,956 $33,587,083 45.9 $34,258,401 $32,839,323 Materials, Services, and Supplies 21,752,134 9,092,427 41.8 8,405,731 8,170,450 Capital Outlay - 51,000 - 523,448 262,216
Other Financing Uses 8,458,070
4,205,028 50.0 4,157,550 4,174,734
Total General Fund Expenditures $103,421,160 $46,935,538 45.4 $47,345,130 $45,446,724

By year end, these categories in total are projected to total l ess than budgeted amounts as shown in the following table.

FY25-26
Budget
FY25-26
Projected
% of
Budget
Salaries and Benefits $ 73,210,956 $ 73,207,440 100.00 Materials, Services, and Supplies 21,752,134 18,722,196 86.1 Capital Outlay - - 100.0
Other Financing Uses 8,458,070
8,458,070 100.0
Total General Fund Expenditures $103,421,160 $100,387,705 97.1

CITY OF EL CAJON MID-YEAR REPORT

Fund Balance
Fund balance is comprised of reserves and designations for spec ific operating needs or purposes. The 20% Operating Reserve is used to provide sufficient cash flow during the first half of the fiscal year, primarily resulting from the tim ing differences between expenditures and revenues. The Economic Uncertainty Reserve is established for the purpose of stabilizing delivery of City services during periods of budget deficits and to mitigate the effects of major eco nomic uncertainties resulting from unforeseen changes in revenues and/or expenditures. The Reserve for Unfunded Retir ement Obligation was established to address increas ing unfunded liabi lities and high er employer contribution rates. Any remaining fund balance creates a Carryover Reserve.

The fund balance at the start of the fiscal year was $67.6 million. Taking into consideration projected revenues and expenditures at fiscal year-end; fund balance is expected to total approximately $69.4 million. The following table illustrates projected reserve balances at year-end.

Projected General Fund Balance

07/01/25
Fund Balance
06/30/26
Estimated
Fund Balance
20% Operating Reserve $20,183,723 $20,183,723
Economic Uncertainty Reserve 20,183,723 20,183,723
Reserve for Unfunded Retirement Obligation 13,000,000 13,000,000 Carryover Reserve ** 14,243,050 16,023,282
Total Fund Balance $67,610,496 $69,390,728

** Carryover Reserve is available to bridge any imbalance of expenditures exceeding revenues.

AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT FUND

The American Rescue Plan Act Fund is a special revenue fund use d to manage various programs related to the mitigation of the impacts of the public health crisis related to the Covid-19 virus. The fund is administered by the City Manager’s Office, and is funded primarily by revenues generated from the American Rescue Plan Act.

FY25-26
Budget
FY25-26
Mid-Year
% of
Budget
FY24-25
Mid-Year
FY23-24
Mid-Year
Expenditures $5,554,871 $1,617,423 29.1 $5,835,051 $285,003 Revenues - - 0.0 - -

CITY OF EL CAJON MID-YEAR REPORT

LOW-MODERATE INCOME HOUSING ASSET FUND

The Low-Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund (LMIHAF) is a special revenue fund used to manage the housing programs and projects to increase afforda ble housing opportunities for the City’s lowe r income households. The fund is administered by the City’s Community Development D epartment, and is funded primaril y by revenues generated from the housing assets transferred from the former redevelopment agency.

FY25-26
Budget
FY25-26
Mid-Year
% of
Budget
FY24-25
Mid-Year
FY23-24
Mid-Year
Expenditures $3,153,646 $ 112,005 3.6 $ 116,952 $ 108,897 Revenues 205,402 112,065 54.6 249,984 38,225

The activity in this fund is largely project based, and therefore highly impacted by timing differences. However, it is anticipated that year-end results will be within budget.

WASTEWATER ENTERPRISE FUND

Revenues at the midpoint of the fiscal year total $34.7 million , which is up 4.6% ($1.5 million) from the same point las t year. The chart below illustr ates mid-year performance for the current year, as well as the two preceding years.

Wastewater Revenues FY25-26
Budget
FY25-26
Mid-Year
% of
Budget
FY24-25
Mid-Year
FY23-24
Mid-Year
Sewer Service Fee $33,040,000 $32,838,130 99.4 $31,805,762 $30,035,572 Septic Tank Disposal Fee 1,500,000 670,853 44.7 489,551 415,071 All Other Revenue 694,600
1,180,828 170.0 879,511 606,009
Total Revenue $35,234,600 $34,689,810 98.5 $33,179,504 $31,056,652

Expenditures of $16.2 million ar e 11.9% ($1.7 million) higher t han the same period last year. It is anticipated that the Wastewater Fund expenditures will be within budget at year end.

Wastewater Expenditures FY25-26
Budget
FY25-26
Mid-Year
% of
Budget
FY24-25
Mid-Year
FY23-24
Mid-Year
Salaries & Benefits $4,018,883 $1,632,078 40.6 $1,551,617 $2,070,828 Materials, Services, and Supplies 26,807,971 11,871,694 44.3 12,088,112 8,001,523 Debt Service 592,205 475,482 80.3 461,384 461,008
Capital Outlay and Projects 24,432,897 2,096,207 8.6 195,759 469,945 Other Financing Uses 344,230
172,122 50.0 224,958 204,360
Total Expenditures $56,196,186 $16,247,582 31.9 $14,521,830 $11,207,664

BUDGET REVENUE BALANCE % BUDGET REVENUE BALANCE %
101 GENERAL FUND
11 CITY MANAGER 267,000$                   118,674 $                   148,326 $                   44.45% 243,000 $                   104,639 $                   138,361 $                   43.06% 12 CITY CLERK AND ELECTIONS 55,000                       21,750                        33,250                        39.55% 60,000                        34,389                        25,611                        57.32% 14 FINANCE 93,746,350               27,326,288                66,420,062                29.15% 90,930,666                25,938,750                64,991,916                28.53% 16 CITY ATTORNEY ‐                             35                               (35)                              0.00% ‐                              960                             (960)                            0.00% 18 HUMAN RESOURCES ‐                             11,214                       (11,214)                      0.00% ‐                              ‐                              ‐                              0.00% 20 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 2,267,100                 1,528,562                  738,538                      67.42% 2,202,700                  1,310,386                  892,314                      59.49% 30 POLICE 1,595,700                 462,522                      1,133,178                 28.99% 1,677,500                  535,125                      1,142,375                 31.90% 40 FIRE 1,438,000                 482,283                      955,717                      33.54% 1,248,000                  981,823                      266,177                      78.67% 50 ENGINEERING SERVICES 1,784,000                 708,208                      1,075,792                 39.70% 1,436,800                  1,005,960                  430,840                      70.01% 60 PARKS & RECREATION 250,500                     176,396                      74,104                        70.42% 285,000                      125,053                      159,947                      43.88% 80 PUBLIC WORKS 26,000                       38,950                        (12,950)                      149.81% ‐                              ‐                              ‐                              0.00% TOTAL GENERAL FUND 101,429,650$          30,874,881 $             70,554,769 $           30.44% 98,083,666 $           30,037,085 $             68,046,581 $           30.62% 201 AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT F ‐                             ‐                              ‐                              0.00% 18,472,577                ‐                              18,472,577               0.00% 209 CA BEVERAGE GRANT ‐                             777                             (777)                            0.00% ‐                              497                             (497)                            0.00% 211 GAS TAX 3,017,905                 1,350,740                  1,667,165                  44.76% 2,950,582                  1,405,802                  1,544,780                  47.64% 213 TRANSIT 133,775                     147,842                      (14,067)                       110.52% 105,000                      102,133                      2,867                          97.27% 215 STATE COPS GRANT‐BRUELTE 305,000                     209,508                      95,492                        68.69% 275,000                      225,101                      49,899                        81.86% 222 FEDERAL ASSET FORFEITURE 20,500                       599                             19,901                       2.92% 16,200                        6,785                          9,415                          41.88% 223 STATE ASSET FORFEITURE 11,000                       1,645                          9,355                          14.96% 11,000                        3,063                          7,937                          27.85% 224 LOCAL PUBLIC SAFETY PROP 1 618,368                     264,237                      354,131                      42.73% 615,594                      256,784                      358,810                      41.71% 226 POLICE GRANTS 1,621,425                 137,867                      1,483,558                 8.50% 1,978,630                  114,007                      1,864,623                 5.76% 240 RECREATION PROGRAMS 650,825                     368,280                      282,545                      56.59% 668,825                      351,770                      317,055                      52.60% 241 MAGNOLIA PERFORMING ARTS 513,000                     32,777                        480,223                     6.39% 512,551                      19,636                        492,915                     3.83% 245 PARKS & RECREATION GRANTS 34,514                       17,904                        16,610                        51.87% ‐                              ‐                              ‐                              0.00% 251 PUBLIC WORKS OPERATING GRA 3,651,744                 ‐                              3,651,744                 0.00% 3,293,477                  22,343                        3,271,134                 0.68% 254 FIRE DEPARTMENT GRANTS 97,569                       17,975                        79,593                        18.42% 140,687                      19,481                        121,206                     13.85% 260 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GRAN (56,037)                      ‐                              (56,037)                      0.00% (56,037)                       ‐                              (56,037)                      0.00% 266 STATE CASP‐AB1379 FUND ‐                             1,688                         (1,688)                        0.00% ‐                              1,640                         (1,640)                        0.00% 271 COMMUNITY DEV BLOCK GRANT (472,248)                   299,163                      (771,411)                   ‐63.35% (160,665)                    514,689                      (675,354)                   ‐320.35% 276 HOME 4,575,793                 78,287                        4,497,506                 1.71% 4,028,261                  67,291                        3,960,970                 1.67% 277 PERMANENT LOCAL HOUSING AL 2,475,886                 16,728                        2,459,158                 0.68% 2,010,118                  15,885                        1,994,233                 0.79% 280 CAL HOME GRANT 166,584                     ‐                              166,584                     0.00% 164,588                      ‐                              164,588                     0.00% 290 LOW‐MOD HOUSING ASSET FUND 205,402                     112,065                      93,337                        54.56% 503,101                      249,984                      253,117                      49.69% 299 HOUSING IN LIEU FEES ‐                             12,310                       (12,310)                      0.00% ‐                              4,903                         (4,903)                        0.00% 401 PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS 9,118,641                 4,559,323                  4,559,318                  50.00% 9,122,932                  4,561,478                  4,561,454                  50.00% 501 CITY CAPITAL IMPROVMNT PRO 1,308,596                 43,384                        1,265,213                 3.32% 1,344,754                  42,079                        1,302,675                 3.13% 502 PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY (169,629)                   50,704                        (220,333)                   ‐29.89% (61,654)                       36,385                        (98,040)                      ‐59.01% 511 ROAD MAINTENANCE & REHAB (5,724,505)                1,086,481                  (6,810,986)                ‐18.98% (2,823,101)                 1,022,289                  (3,845,390)                ‐36.21% 512 TRANSNET 9,838,042                 2,243,833                  7,594,209                  22.81% 14,029,990                4,258,699                  9,771,291                  30.35% 513 REGIONAL TRANSP CONGESTION ‐                             259,887                     (259,887)                   0.00% 70,800                        36,531                        34,269                        51.60% 516 TRAFFIC CONGESTION RELIEF ‐                             300                             (300)                            0.00% ‐                              1,398                         (1,398)                        0.00% 517 PARK IMPACT FEES ‐                             15,896                       (15,896)                      0.00% ‐                              8,456                         (8,456)                        0.00% 551 CAPITAL GRANTS 14,769,038               320,512                      14,448,527               2.17% 18,156,487                680,262                      17,476,225               3.75% 601 VEHICLE‐EQUIPMENT MAINTENA 2,500,000                 1,250,749                  1,249,251                  50.03% 2,000,000                  901,984                      1,098,016                 45.10% 606 VEHICLE‐EQUIPMENT REPLACEM ‐                             ‐                              ‐                              0.00% ‐                              250,002                     (250,002)                   0.00% 610 SELF‐INSURANCE FUND 3,600,000                 1,835,660                  1,764,340                  50.99% (318,000)                    1,478,503                  (1,796,503)                ‐464.94% 615 IT SERVICES FUND 4,704,670                 2,354,894                  2,349,776                  50.05% 3,972,201                  1,989,346                  1,982,855                  50.08% 620 OTHER POST‐EMPLOYMENT BENE 11,463,344               3,982,800                  7,480,544                  34.74% 1,200,000                  4,872,034                  (3,672,034)                406.00% 650 WASTEWATER 35,234,600               34,689,810                544,790                      98.45% 35,384,600                33,179,504                2,205,096                  93.77%

CITY OF EL CAJON

MID-YEAR REVENUE AND SOURCES OF FUNDS COMPARISON REPORT CURRENT YEAR / FY2025-26 PRIOR YEAR / FY2024-25
FUND
BUDGET EXPENDITURE BALANCE % BUDGET EXPENDITURE BALANCE % 101 GENERAL FUND
10 MAYOR‐CITY COUNCIL 582,827$                   362,274 $                   220,553 $                   62.16% 618,590 $                   342,515 $                   276,075 $                   55.37% 11 CITY MANAGER 3,595,875                 1,205,179                  2,390,696                  33.52% 3,462,781                  1,049,769                  2,413,012                  30.32% 12 CITY CLERK AND ELECTIONS 688,273                     317,535                      370,738                      46.14% 1,018,176                  558,162                      460,014                      54.82% 14 FINANCE 3,041,225                 1,337,586                  1,703,639                  43.98% 2,861,210                  1,451,504                  1,409,706                  50.73% 16 CITY ATTORNEY 853,810                     353,281                      500,529                      41.38% 822,538                      358,636                      463,902                      43.60% 18 HUMAN RESOURCES 1,156,201                 499,329                      656,872                      43.19% 1,381,876                  624,046                      757,830                      45.16% 20 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 3,466,389                 1,550,740                  1,915,649                  44.74% 3,232,581                  1,328,052                  1,904,529                  41.08% 30 POLICE 52,366,150               24,077,451                28,288,699                45.98% 51,608,950                23,819,508                27,789,442                46.15% 40 FIRE 23,190,902               10,954,891                12,236,011                47.24% 21,853,628                11,173,297                10,680,331                51.13% 50 ENGINEERING SERVICES 2,860,052                 1,384,835                  1,475,217                  48.42% 9,618,291                  4,702,947                  4,915,344                  48.90% 60 PARKS & RECREATION 6,921,400                 2,888,132                  4,033,268                  41.73% 4,564,814                  1,936,693                  2,628,121                  42.43% 80 PUBLIC WORKS 4,698,056                 2,004,305                  2,693,751                  42.66% ‐                              ‐                              ‐                              0.00% TOTAL GENERAL FUND 103,421,160$          46,935,538 $             56,485,622$           45.38% 101,043,435 $         47,345,130 $             53,698,305 $           46.86% 201 AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT F 5,554,871                 1,617,423                  3,937,448                  29.12% 18,472,577                5,835,051                  12,637,526                31.59% 209 CA BEVERAGE GRANT ‐                             ‐                              ‐                              0.00% ‐                              ‐                              ‐                              0.00% 211 GAS TAX 5,818,235                 1,491,458                  4,326,777                  25.63% 4,305,373                  1,494,685                  2,810,688                  34.72% 213 TRANSIT 150,788                     48,961                        101,827                     32.47% 177,398                      39,240                        138,158                     22.12% 215 STATE COPS GRANT‐BRUELTE 463,984                     159,722                      304,262                      34.42% 310,083                      43,205                        266,878                     13.93% 222 FEDERAL ASSET FORFEITURE 21,000                       19,143                        1,857                          91.16% 59,672                        15,689                        43,983                        26.29% 223 STATE ASSET FORFEITURE 20,000                       10,000                        10,000                        50.00% ‐                              ‐                              ‐                              0.00% 224 LOCAL PUBLIC SAFETY PROP 1 648,746                     516,647                      132,099                      79.64% 611,407                      299,419                      311,988                      48.97% 226 POLICE GRANTS 1,692,939                 108,045                      1,584,894                 6.38% 1,851,652                  76,337                        1,775,315                 4.12% 240 RECREATION PROGRAMS 636,276                     271,970                      364,306                      42.74% 648,123                      275,781                      372,343                      42.55% 241 MAGNOLIA PERFORMING ARTS 949,700                     230,521                      719,179                      24.27% 1,018,000                  360,584                      657,416                      35.42% 245 RECREATION GRANTS 43,582                       2,018                          41,564                        4.63% (3,819)                         1,442                          (5,260)                        ‐37.75% 251 PUBLIC WORKS OPERATING GRA 3,616,967                 416,554                      3,200,414                 11.52% 3,242,424                  1,081,920                  2,160,503                  33.37% 254 FIRE DEPARTMENT GRANTS 103,446                     38,638                        64,808                        37.35% 123,801                      51,253                        72,548                        41.40% 260 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GRAN (205,046)                   ‐                              (205,046)                   0.00% (205,046)                    ‐                              (205,046)                   0.00% 266 STATE CASP‐AB1379 FUND 8,466                         959                             7,507                         11.33% 8,466                          416                             8,050                         4.92% 271 COMMUNITY DEV BLOCK GRANT 3,119,490                 504,736                      2,614,754                 16.18% 3,447,260                  544,374                      2,902,886                 15.79% 276 HOME 7,956,917                 134,782                      7,822,135                 1.69% 7,486,253                  180,723                      7,305,530                 2.41% 277 PERMANENT LOCAL HOUSING AL 2,501,668                 206,501                      2,295,167                 8.25% 2,147,738                  284,671                      1,863,068                 13.25% 280 CAL HOME GRANT 64,588                       20,075                        44,513                        31.08% 64,588                        ‐                              64,588                       0.00% 290 LOW‐MOD HOUSING ASSET FUND 3,153,646                 112,005                      3,041,641                 3.55% 3,456,128                  116,952                      3,339,176                 3.38% 299 HOUSING IN LIEU FEES ‐                             ‐                              ‐                              0.00% 303,000                      ‐                              303,000                     0.00% 401 PENSION OBLIGATION BONDS 9,122,932                 1,709,322                  7,413,610                  18.74% 9,122,932                  1,742,541                  7,380,391                  19.10% 501 CITY CAPITAL IMPROVMNT PRO 6,355,743                 140,547                      6,215,197                 2.21% 4,001,975                  52,159                        3,949,816                 1.30% 502 PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY 3,069,704                 3,145                          3,066,559                 0.10% 3,317,125                  110,281                      3,206,844                 3.32% 511 ROAD MAINTENANCE & REHAB 3,591,073                 1,477,710                  2,113,363                  41.15% 2,035,805                  33,156                        2,002,649                 1.63% 512 TRANSNET 21,443,345               5,160,327                  16,283,018                24.06% 18,509,106                917,195                      17,591,912               4.96% 513 REGIONAL TRANSP CONGESTION 35,043                       24,114                        10,929                        68.81% 502,886                      449,727                      53,159                        89.43% 514 SPECIFIC STREET OBLIGATION 587,343                     1,399                          585,945                     0.24% 614,477                      26,083                        588,394                     4.24% 516 TRAFFIC CONGESTION RELIEF 18,161                       12,492                        5,669                          68.79% 260,525                      232,979                      27,546                        89.43% 517 PARK IMPACT FEES 138,527                     ‐                              138,527                     0.00% ‐                              ‐                              ‐                              0.00% 551 CAPITAL GRANTS 11,413,298               1,137,266                  10,276,032                9.96% 16,629,631                2,608,848                  14,020,783                15.69% 601 VEHICLE‐EQUIPMENT MAINTENA 2,622,423                 994,652                      1,627,771                 37.93% 2,586,169                  1,030,328                  1,555,841                  39.84% 606  VEHICLE‐EQUIPMENT REPLACEM 1,939,719                 654,921                      1,284,798                 33.76% 1,505,283                  13,852                        1,491,431                 0.92% 610 SELF‐INSURANCE FUND 6,497,738                 4,999,254                  1,498,484                  76.94% 6,056,235                  4,024,373                  2,031,862                  66.45% 615 IT SERVICES FUND 5,492,125                 2,483,722                  3,008,403                  45.22% 4,754,924                  2,589,427                  2,165,497                  54.46% 620 OTHER POST‐EMPLOYMENT BENE 11,463,344               9,865,241                  1,598,103                  86.06% 1,200,000                  3,693,545                  (2,493,545)                307.80% 650 WASTEWATER 33,090,019               14,865,847                18,224,172                44.93% 30,955,963                14,355,323                16,600,640                46.37% 651 WASTEWATER PROJECTS AND GR 23,106,167               1,381,736                  21,724,432                5.98% 15,009,310                166,507                      14,842,802               1.11%

CITY OF EL CAJON

MID-YEAR EXPENDITURE AND USES OF FUNDS COMPARISON REPORT CURRENT YEAR / FY2025-26 PRIOR YEAR / FY2024-25
FUND
City Council
Agenda Report
Agenda Item 12.

DATE: February 24, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Mayor Wells
SUBJECT: Council Activity Report
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council accepts and files the following report of Council/Mayor activities attended during the current agenda period.

BACKGROUND:

Government Code Section 53232.3(d) requires members of a legislative body to provide brief reports on meetings attended at the expense of the local agency at the next regular meeting of the legislative body. This City Administrative Activity is not a project and therefore not subject to CEQA.

REPORT:

Since the last City Council meeting, I have attended the following events on behalf of the City of El Cajon:

February 11, 2026 - Podcast with Kate Monroe
February 11, 2026 - Meeting with San Diego Rescue Mission and Albert Garzon February 13, 2026 - SANDAG Board of Directors Meeting
February 14, 2026 - Played music at Hacienda's
February 17, 2026 - Meeting with AFPI
February 18, 2026 - Deposition on City business
February 18, 2026 - Meeting with Kevin Brown
February 19, 2026 - Meeting with Firefighter Union
February 20, 2026 - Meeting with Collin McGlashen, GUHSD February 20, 2026 - Meeting with Neighborhood Health Care February 21, 2026 - Building Industry Association of San Diego Installation Dinner February 24, 2026 - City Council Meeting(s)
I am available to answer questions.

Submitted By: Bill Wells, Mayor
City Council
Agenda Report
Agenda Item 13.

DATE: February 24, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Bill Wells, Mayor
SUBJECT: Update to City Council Assignments
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council approves City Council assignments (as identified in the report) to various boards and commissions representing El Cajon.

BACKGROUND:

The City Council represents the community and region on various boards and commissions.

Recommendations for the 2026 Board and Commission assignments, are as follows:

Board/Commission Primary Alternate
SANDAG Board of Directors Bill Wells Steve Goble, Phil Ortiz MTS Steve Goble Phil Ortiz
METRO Commission/Wastewater JPA Gary Kendrick Michelle Metschel East County Advanced Water Purification JPA Steve Goble Phil Ortiz League of California Cities, San Diego Division Phil Ortiz Graham Mitchell Heartland Communications Gary Kendrick Michelle Metschel Heartland Fire Training JPA Gary Kendrick Michelle Metschel Chamber of Commerce - Gov't Affairs Committee Steve Goble Phil Ortiz East County Economic Development Council Phil Ortiz N/A Harry Griffen Park Joint Steering Committee Michelle Metschel N/A In addition to the assignments listed, Councilmember Goble was appointed to serve as a non-voting Chair of the Military Working Group by the Chair of the Board of Directors.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT:

The proposed City Council assignments to various boards and commissions is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") in accordance with section 15378(b)(5) of the State CEQA Guidelines because it is a governmental administrative activity.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

Prepared By: Bill Wells, Mayor
Reviewed By: N/A
Approved By: N/A
City Council
Agenda Report
Agenda Item 14.

DATE: February 24, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Councilmember Goble
SUBJECT: COUNCILMEMBER STEVE GOBLE
MTS (Metropolitan Transit System Board); East County Advanced Water Purification JPA Board; Chamber of Commerce – Government Affairs Committee; SANDAG – Board of Directors – Alternate; SANDAG – Public Safety Committee – Alternate; SANDAG – San Diego Military Working Group.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council accepts and files the following report of Council/Mayor activities attended during the current agenda period.

BACKGROUND:

Government Code Section 53232.3(d) requires members of a legislative body to provide brief reports on meetings attended at the expense of the local agency at the next regular meeting of the legislative body. This City Administrative Activity is not a project and therefore not subject to CEQA.

REPORT:

Since the last City Council meeting, I have attended the following events on behalf of the City of El Cajon:

February 3, 2026 - Emails with Kelly B re: Lily Ave House Condition February 4, 2026 - Emails with Josh P re: E. Main St Business February 4, 2026 - Emails with Tobias H re: Speeding
February 6, 2026 - Emails with Greg D. re: Parkway Bowl Event February 6, 2026 - Emails with Danielle K re: SANDAG Military Working Group February 6, 2026 - Emails with Willy @ Meals on Wheels re: Ridealong February 10, 2026 - Emails with Don M re: RV Parking
February 10, 2026 - Emails with Mark A re: Melody Ln
February 11, 2026 - AWP Staff Meeting
February 12, 2026 - MTS Board Meeting
February 17, 2026 - Chamber Government Affairs Board Meeting February 18, 2026 - SANDAG/MTS/NCTD Meeting
February 19, 2026 - MTS Ad Hoc Committee Meeting
February 19, 2026 - AWP Board Meeting
February 20, 2026 - Hilltop Deli Ribbon Cutting
February 23, 2026 - Meeting with City Manager
February 24, 2026 - City Council Meeting(s)
I am available to answer questions.

Submitted By: Steve Goble, Councilmember
City Council
Agenda Report
Agenda Item 15.

DATE: February 24, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Councilmember Kendrick
SUBJECT: COUNCILMEMBER GARY KENDRICK
METRO Commission/Wastewater JPA; Heartland Communications; Heartland Fire Training JPA.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council accepts and files the following report of Council/Mayor activities attended during the current agenda period.

BACKGROUND:

Government Code Section 53232.3(d) requires members of a legislative body to provide brief reports on meetings attended at the expense of the local agency at the next regular meeting of the legislative body. This City Administrative Activity is not a project and therefore not subject to CEQA.

REPORT:

Since the last City Council meeting, I have attended the following events on behalf of the City of El Cajon:

February 24, 2026 - City Council Meeting(s)
I am available to answer questions.

Submitted By: Gary Kendrick, Councilmember
City Council
Agenda Report
Agenda Item 16.

DATE: February 24, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Deputy Mayor Metschel
SUBJECT: DEPUTY MAYOR MICHELLE METSCHEL
Harry Griffen Park Joint Steering Committee; METRO
Commission/Wastewater JPA – Alternate; Heartland Communications – Alternate; Heartland Fire Training JPA – Alternate.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council accepts and files the following report of Council/Mayor activities attended during the current agenda period.

BACKGROUND:

Government Code Section 53232.3(d) requires members of a legislative body to provide brief reports on meetings attended at the expense of the local agency at the next regular meeting of the legislative body. This City Administrative Activity is not a project and therefore not subject to CEQA.

REPORT:

Since the last City Council meeting, I have attended the following events on behalf of the City of El Cajon:

February 11, 2026 - Meeting with Firefighter Union
February 12, 2026 - East County Homeless Task Force Meeting February 16, 2026 - Neighborhood Health Facility Tour
February 18, 2026 - Meeting with Crisis House
February 24, 2026 - City Council Meeting(s)
I am available to answer questions.

Submitted By: Michelle Metschel, Deputy Mayor
City Council
Agenda Report
Agenda Item 17.

DATE: February 24, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Councilmember Ortiz
SUBJECT: COUNCILMEMBER PHIL ORTIZ
League of California Cities, San Diego Division; East County Economic Development Council; MTS (Metropolitan Transit System Board) – Alternate; East County Advanced Water Purification JPA Board – Alternate; Chamber of Commerce – Government Affairs Committee – Alternate.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council accepts and files the following report of Council/Mayor activities attended during the current agenda period.

BACKGROUND:

Government Code Section 53232.3(d) requires members of a legislative body to provide brief reports on meetings attended at the expense of the local agency at the next regular meeting of the legislative body. This City Administrative Activity is not a project and therefore not subject to CEQA.

REPORT:

Since the last City Council meeting, I have attended the following events on behalf of the City of El Cajon:

February 11, 2026 - Meeting with Firefighter Union
February 13, 2026 - Tour of Neighborhood Health
February 17, 2026 - East County Chamber of Government Affairs Meeting February 17, 2026 - Investment Policy/Fund Control Meeting with Staff February 17, 2026 - VPM and Projects Meeting with Staff February 24, 2026 - City Council Meeting(s)
I am available to answer questions.

Submitted By: Phil Ortiz, Councilmember
City Council
Agenda Report
Agenda Item 18.

DATE: February 24, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Michelle Metschel, Deputy Mayor & Gary Kendrick, Councilmember SUBJECT: Request Staff Analysis and Draft Ordinance to Authorize up to Four Regulated Cannabis Dispensaries
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council directs staff to:

Prepare an analysis of the regulatory, zoning, fiscal, and public safety implications of authorizing up to four (4) cannabis retail dispensaries modeled after Santee’s approach;

1. Evaluate land use criteria including buffers from sensitive uses, security requirements, and compatibility with established land use designations;

2. Assess projected revenue scenarios from licensing fees and potential local cannabis taxes; and

3. Develop and return with a draft ordinance for City Council consideration.4.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Santee recently adopted a Cannabis Business Ordinance to establish a permitting system for commercial cannabis businesses, including a cap of up to four retail permits. Santee conducts a merit-based application and selection process for retail applicants and specifies allowed land use zones. A similar framework in El Cajon would permit local control (including zoning, public safety, security standards, and operational requirements) while constraining the number of dispensaries to a manageable level.

Statewide surveys indicate that cannabis use among adults is common, with roughly one in three California adults reporting recent use and most obtaining products from licensed retailers.

A local ordinance would allow the City to regulate oversight of outlets. Also, legal cannabis dispensaries can generate significant taxable transactions. Local licensing, business taxes, and sales tax revenue can provide revenue that supports important community services, including public safety.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT:

The action being considered by the City Council is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") because it is not a “project” under Section 15378(b)(5) of the State CEQA Guidelines. The action involves an organizational or administrative activity of government that will not result in a direct or indirect physical change in the environment. All future actions directed by the City Council will be assessed in accordance with CEQA.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Staff estimates legal costs of approximately $10,000 to review staff's analysis and to draft an ordinance and approximately $10,000 for a tax/revenue consultant to analyze revenue projections. Funds are not currently budgeted and would need to be appropriated.

Prepared By: Michelle Metschel, Deputy Mayor & Gary Kendrick, Councilmember Reviewed By:

Approved By: N/A
City Council
Agenda Report
Agenda Item 19.

DATE: February 24, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Noah Alvey, Deputy Director of Development Services SUBJECT: Introduction of Ordinance to Amend El Cajon Municipal Code Chapter

15.14 Regarding Flood Damage Prevention Regulations
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council:

Moves to introduce the next Ordinance, in order;1.

Directs the City Clerk to read the Ordinance by title only; and2.

Directs the second reading and adoption of the Ordinance to be placed on the March 10, 2026, City Council agenda.

3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

El Cajon Municipal Code (ECMC) Chapter 15.14 includes flood damage prevention regulations in order to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare, and to minimize public and private losses due to flooding. In 2025, the State of California Department of Water Resources conducted a review of the City's regulations and recommended the following updates:

Add definitions for clarity and consistency
Revise the dates for the applicable Flood Insurance Study Update manufactured home siting requirements
Remove outdated language related to superseded maps and reporting requirements Update requirements for improvements to existing residential structures in flood zones The proposed updates will ensure that the City is eligible for the National Flood Insurance Program, which provides federally backed, affordable flood insurance to homeowners, renters, and businesses in participating communities.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT:

The Ordinance update is not subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because the update is not a "project" within the meaning of sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines and because it will not result direct or indirect physical change in the environment. The Ordinance update is also exempt under section 15061(b)(3), the general rule exemption, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that this Ordinance update will have a significant effect on the environment.

Prepared By: Noah Alvey, Deputy Director of Development Services Reviewed By: Yazmin Arellano, Director of Development Services Approved By: Graham Mitchell, City Manager
Attachments
Ordinance - Title 15
Department of Water Resources Review

ORDINANCE NO. _____

AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO TITLE 15 OF THE

EL CAJON MUNICIPAL CODE (BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION),
CHAPTER 15.14 (FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION) FOR

CONSISTENCY WITH CURRENT FEDERAL EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA) NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE

PROGRAM (NFIP) REGULATIONS

WHEREAS, Title 15 of the El Cajon Municipal Code requires regular maintenance to ensure that it complies with changes in Federal and State laws; is internally consistent; and is effective in regulating buildings and construction in the City of El Cajon (the “City”); and

WHEREAS, the State of California Department of Water Resources review ed Chapter 15.14 of Title 15 of the El Cajon Municipal Code and identified updates needed for compliance with current FEMA NFIP regulations; and

WHEREAS, the updates to Chapter 15.14 of Title 15 of the El Cajon Municipal Code include the addition of definitions for consistency and clarity, updated Flood Insurance Study (FIS) adoption dates, the removal of references to Flood Boundary and Floodway Maps (FBFMs) that are no longer utilized by FEMA, and updating references to flood zones and flood proofing standards.

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL CAJON DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Recitals

The City Council finds the foregoing recitals to be true and correct and hereby incorporates such recitals as findings into this ordinance.

SECTION 2. Environmental Review

The City Council finds and determines that the adoption of this ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(c)(2), in that the adoption of this ordinance will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and is further and independently exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), in that it can be seen with certainty there is no possibility the adoption of this ordinance will have a significant effect on the environment.

SECTION 3. Amendment

Section 15.14.030 of Chapter 15.14 of Title 15 of the El Cajon Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

15.14.030 Definitions

Unless specifically defined below, words or phrases used in this chapter shall be interpreted so as to give them the meaning they have in common usage and to give this chapter its most reasonable application.

“Accessory structure” means a structure on the same parcel of property as a principal structure and the use of which is incidental to the use of the principal structure. For floodplain management purposes, the term includes only accessory structures used
a. solely for the parking of no more than 2 cars; or
b. A small, low cost shed for limited storage, less than 150 square feet and $1,500 in value.

"Accessory use" means a use which is incidental and subordinate to the principal use of the parcel of land on which it is located.

“Agricultural structure” means a walled and roofed structure used exclusively for agricultural purposes or uses in connection with the production, harvesting, storage, raising, or drying of agricultural commodities and livestock, including aquatic organisms. Structures that house tools or equipment used in connection with these purposes or uses are also considered to have agricultural purposes or uses.

"Appeal" means a request for a review of the floodplain administrator's interpretation of any provision of this chapter.

"Area of shallow flooding" means a designated AO Zone on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). The base flood depths range from one to three feet; a clearly defined channel does not exist; the path of flooding is unpredictable and indeterminate; and velocity flow may be evident. Such flooding is characterized by ponding or sheet flow.

"Area of special flood hazard" — see "Special flood hazard area."

“Alteration of Watercourse” means a dam, impoundment, channel relocation, change in channel alignment, channelization, or change in cross-sectional area of the channel or the channel capacity, or any other form of modification which may alter, impede, retard or change the direction and/or velocity of the riverine flow of water during conditions of the base flood.

“ASCE 24” means the standard Flood Resistant Design and Construction, referenced by the building code, developed and published by the American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA. Where cited, ASCE 24 refers to the edition of the standard that is referenced by the building code.

"Base flood" means a flood which has a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year (also called the "100- year flood"). Base flood is the term used throughout this chapter.

"Basement" means any area of the building having its floor subgrade—i.e., below ground level—on all sides.

"Building" —see "Structure."

“Building Code” means California Code of Regulations Title 24, the California Building Standards Code, the family of building codes specifically adopted by the State of California and composed of:
a. Part 2, applicable to buildings and structures other than dwellings within the scope of this part.
b. Part 2.5, applicable to one- and two- family dwellings and townhouses not more than three stories, and accessory structures. c. Part 10, applicable to existing buildings (as defined in that code). d. Other specified codes.

“Design flood” means the flood associated with the greater of the following two areas:
a. Area with a flood plain subject to a 1- percent or greater chance of flooding in any year.
b. Area designated as a flood hazard area on a community’s flood hazard map, or otherwise legally designated.

“Design Flood Elevation” means the elevation of the “design flood,” including wave height, relative to the datum specified on the community’s legally designated flood hazard map. In areas designated as Zone AO, the design flood elevation shall be the elevation of the highest existing grade of the building’s perimeter plus the depth number (in feet) specified on the flood hazard map. In areas designated as Zone AO where a depth number is not specified on the map, the depth number shall be taken as being equal to 2 feet (610 mm).

"Development" means any manmade change to improved or unimproved real estate, including, but not limited to, buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation or drilling operations or storage of equipment or materials.

"Encroachment" means the advance or infringement of uses, plant growth, fill, excavation, buildings, permanent structures or development into a flood plain which may impede or alter the flow capacity of a floodplain.

“Exceptional hardship” means, for the purpose of variances from these regulations or the building code, the exceptional difficulty that would result from a failure to grant a requested variance. Mere economic or financial hardship is not exceptional. Inconvenience, aesthetic considerations, physical handicaps, personal preferences, or the disapproval of one's neighbors do not, as a rule, qualify as exceptional hardships. All of these circumstances can be resolved through other means without granting variances, even when the alternatives are more expensive or require the property owner to build elsewhere or put the parcel to a different use than originally intended.

"Existing manufactured home park or subdivision" means a manufactured home park or subdivision for which the construction of facilities for servicing the lots on which the manufactured homes are to be affixed (including, at a minimum, the installation of utilities, the construction of streets, and either final site grading or the pouring of concrete pads) is completed before the effective date of the floodplain management regulations adopted by a community.

"Expansion to an existing manufactured home park or subdivision" means the preparation of additional sites by the construction of facilities for servicing the lots on which the manufactured homes are to be affixed (including the installation of utilities, the construction of streets, and either final site grading or the pouring of concrete pads).

"Flood, flooding or floodwater" means:
a. A general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of normally dry land areas from the overflow of inland or tidal waters; the unusual and rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any source;
b. The condition resulting from flood- related erosion—see "Flood- related erosion.”

“Flood Control Project” means a dam or barrier design and constructed to keep water away from or out of a specified area, including but not limited to levees, floodwalls, and channelization.

“Flood damage resistant materials” means any construction material capable of withstanding direct and prolonged contact with floodwaters without sustaining any damage that requires more than cosmetic repair.

“Flood hazard area” means the greater of the following two areas:

a. The area within a floodplain subject to a 1-percent or greater chance of flooding in any year.
b. The area designated as a flood hazard area on the community’s flood hazard map, or otherwise legally designated.

"Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)" means the official map on which the Federal Insurance Administrator has delineated both the areas of special flood hazards and the risk premium zones applicable to the community.

"Flood Insurance Study" means the official report provided by the Federal Insurance Administration that includes flood profiles, the Flood Insurance Rate Map, the Flood Boundary and Floodway Map, and the water surface elevation of the base flood.

"Floodplain" or "flood- prone area" means any land area susceptible to being inundated by water from any source—see "Flooding.”

"Floodplain Administrator" is the individual appointed to administer and enforce the floodplain management regulations.

"Floodplain management" means the operation of an overall program of corrective and preventive measures for reducing flood damage and preserving and enhancing, where possible, natural resources in the floodplain, including, but not limited to, emergency pr eparedness plans, flood control works and floodplain management regulations, and open space plans.

"Floodplain management regulations" means this chapter and other zoning chapters, subdivision regulations, building codes, health regulations, special purpose chapters (such as grading and erosion control) and other applications of police power which control development in flood-prone areas. This term describes federal, state or local regulations in any combination thereof, which provide standards for preventing and reducing flood loss and damage.

"Floodproofing" means any combination of structural and nonstructural additions, changes, or adjustments to structures which reduce or eliminate flood damage to real estate or improved real property, water and sanitary facilities, structures and their contents.

"Floodway" means the channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than one foot. Also referred to as "regulatory floodway.”

"Floodway encroachment lines" means the lines marking the limits of floodways on federal state and local floodplain maps.

"Floodway fringe" is that area of the floodplain on either side of the "regulatory floodway" where encroachment may be permitted.

“Fraud or victimization” means, for the purpose of variances from these regulations or the building code, the intentional use of deceit to deprive another of rights or property, making a victim of the deprived person or the public. As it pertains to buildings granted variances to be constructed below the elevation required by the building code, future owners or tenants of such buildings and the community as a whole may bear the burden of increased risk of damage from floods, increased cost of flood insurance, and increased recovery costs, inconvenience, danger, and suffering.

“Freeboard” means additional height above a minimum level of protection, typically expressed in feet above the base flood elevation (BFE).

“Functionally dependent use” means a use that cannot perform its intended purpose unless it is located or carried out in close proximity to water, including only docking facilities, port facilities necessary for the loading or unloading of cargo or passengers, and shipbuilding or ship repair facilities. The term does not include long-term storage, manufacture, sales or service facilities.

"Governing body" is the local governing unit, i.e. county or municipality that is empowered to adopt and implement regulations to provide for the public health, safety and general welfare of its citizenry.
"Highest adjacent grade" means the highest natural elevation of the ground surface prior to construction next to the proposed walls of a structure.

"Historic structure" means any structure that is:
a. Listed individually in the National Register of Historic Places (a listing maintained by the U.S. Department of the Interior) or preliminarily determined by the Secretary of the Interior as meeting the requirements for individual listing on the National Register; b. Certified or preliminarily determined by the Secretary of the Interior as contributing to the historical significance of a registered historic district or a district preliminarily determined by the Secretary to qualify as a registered historic district;
c. Individually listed on a state inventory of historic places in states with historic preservation programs which have been approved by the Secretary of the Interior; or
d. Individually listed on a local inventory of historic places in communities with historic preservation programs that have been certified either by an approved state program as determined by the Secretary of the Interior or directly by the Secretary of the I nterior in states with approved programs.

“Letter of Map Change” means an official determination issued by FEMA that amends or revises an effective Flood Insurance Rate Map or Flood Insurance Study. Letters of Map Change include:
a. Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA): An amendment based on technical data showing that a property was incorrectly included in a designated special flood hazard area. A LOMA amends the current effective Flood Insurance Rate Map and establishes that a specific property, portion of a property, or structure is not located in a special flood hazard area.
b. Letter of Map Revision (LOMR): A revision based on technical data that may show changes to flood zones, flood elevations, special flood hazard area boundaries and floodway delineations, and other planimetric features.
c. Letter of Map Revision Based on Fill (LOMR-F): A determination that a structure or parcel of land has been elevated by fill above the base flood elevation and is, therefore, no longer located within the special flood hazard area. In order to qualify for this determination, the fill must have been permitted and placed in accordance with the community’s floodplain management regulations and the standards set forth by Title 44 Code of Federal Regulation Sections 59,60,65, and 70.
d. Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR): A formal review and comment as to whether a proposed flood protection project or other project complies with the minimum NFIP requirements for such projects with respect to delineation of special flood hazard areas. A CLOMR does not revise the effective Flood Insurance Rate Map or Flood Insurance Study; upon submission and approval of certified as-built documentation, a Letter of Map Revision may be issued by FEMA to revise the effective FIRM.

"Levee" means a man-made structure, usually an earthen embankment, designed and constructed in accordance with sound engineering practices to contain, control or divert the flow of water so as to provide protection from temporary flooding.

"Levee system" means a flood protection system which consists of a levee, or levees, and associated structures, such as closure and drainage devices, which are constructed and operated in accord with sound engineering practices.

“Light-duty truck," as defined in 40 C.F.R. 86.082-2, means any motor vehicle rated at 8,500 pounds Gross Vehicular Weight Rating or less which has a vehicular curb weight of 6,000 pounds or less and which has a basic vehicle frontal area of forty- five (45) square feet or less, which is:
a. Designed primarily for purposes of transportation of property or is a derivation of such a vehicle, or
b. Designed primarily for transportation of persons and has a capacity of more than twelve (12) persons; or

c. Available with special features enabling off -street or off -highway operation and use.

"Lowest floor" means the lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area including basement. An unfinished or flood resistant enclosure usable solely for parking of vehicles, building access or storage in an area other than a basement area (see "Basement") is not considered a building's lowest floor, provided it conforms to applicable nonelevation design requirements, including but not limited to:
a. the wet floodproofing standard in Section 15.14.060.A.3.c. b. the anchoring standards in Section 15.14.060.A.1.
c. the construction materials and methods standards in Section

15.14.060.A.2.
d. the standards for utilities in Section 15.14.060.B.

For residential structures, all subgrade enclosed areas are prohibited as they are considered to be basements (see "Basement" definition). This prohibition includes below-grade garages and storage areas.

"Manufactured home" means a structure, transportable in one or more sections, which is built on a permanent chassis and is designed for use with or without a permanent foundation when attached to the required utilities. The term "manufactured home" does not include a "recreational vehicle.”

"Manufactured home park or subdivision" means a parcel (or contiguous parcels) of land divided into two or more manufactured home lots for rent or sale.

“Market Value” means the price at which a property will change hands between a willing buyer and a willing seller, neither party being under compulsion to buy or sell and both having reasonable knowledge of relevant facts. As used in these regulations, the term refers to the market value of buildings and structures, excluding the land and other improvements on the parcel. Market value may be established by one of the following methods:
a. Actual Cash Value (replacement cost depreciated for age and quality of construction),
b. tax assessment value adjusted to approximate market value by a factor provided by the Property Appraiser, or
c. a qualified independent appraiser.

"Mean sea level" means, for purposes of the National Flood Insurance Program, the National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) of 1929 or other datum, to which base flood elevations shown on a community's Flood Insurance Rate Map are referenced.

"New construction", for floodplain management purposes, means structures for which the "start of construction" commenced on or after the effective date of floodplain management regulations adopted by this community, and includes any subsequent improvements to such structures.

"New manufactured home park or subdivision" means a manufactured home park or subdivision for which the construction of facilities for servicing the lots on which the manufactured homes are to be affixed (including at a minimum, the installation of utilities, the construction of streets, and either final site grading or the pouring of concrete pads) is completed on or after the effective date of floodplain management regulations adopted by this community.

“Nuisance” means that which is injurious to safety or health of an entire community or neighborhood, or any considerable number of persons, or unlawfully obstructs the free passage or use, in the customary manner, of any navigable lake, or river, bay, stream, canal, or basin.

"Obstruction" includes, but is not limited to, any dam, wall, wharf, embankment, levee, dike, pile, abutment, protection, excavation, channelization bridge, conduit culvert, building, wire, fence, rock, gravel, refuse, fill, structure, vegetation or other material in, along, across or projecting into any watercourse which may alter, impede, retard or change the direction and/or velocity of the flow of water, snare or collect debris carried by the flow of water, or is likely to be carried downstream.

“One hundred year flood" or "100-year flood” — see "Base flood.”

“Permit for floodplain development ” means an official document or certificate issued by the community, or other evidence of approval or concurrence, which authorizes performance of specified development activities that are located in flood hazard areas and that are determined to be compliant with these regulations.

"Principal structure" means a structure used for the principal use of the property as distinguished from an accessory use.

"Recreational vehicle" means a vehicle which is:
a. Built on a single chassis;
b. Four hundred square feet or less when measured at the largest horizontal projection;
c. Designed to be self-propelled or permanently towable by a light-duty truck; and
d. Designed primarily not for use as a permanent dwelling but as temporary living quarters for recreational, camping, travel, or seasonal use.

"Regulatory floodway" means the channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than one foot.

"Remedy a violation" means to bring a structure or other development into compliance with state or local floodplain management regulations, or, if this is not possible, to reduce the impacts of its noncompliance. Ways that impacts may be

reduced include: protecting the structure or other affected development from flood damages, implementing the enforcement provisions of the ordinance or otherwise deferring future similar violations, or reducing state or federal financial exposure with regard to the structure or other development.

“Riverine” means relating to, formed by, or resembling a river (including tributaries), stream, brook, etc.

"Sheet flow area" — see "Area of shallow flooding.”

"Special flood hazard area (SFHA)" means an area having special flood, mudslide (i.e., mudflow), and shown on a FIRM as Zone A, AO, A1-A30, AE, A99 or AH.

"Start of construction" includes substantial improvement and other proposed new development and means the date the building permit was issued, provided the actual start of construction, repair, reconstruction, rehabilitation, addition, placement, or other improvement was within one hundred eighty days from the date of the permit. The actual start means either the first placement of permanent construction of a structure on a site, such as the pouring of slab or footings, the installation of piles, the construction of columns, or any work beyond the stage of excavation; or the placement of a manufactured home on a foundation. Permanent construction does not include land preparation, such as clearing, grading and filling; nor does it include the installation of streets and/or walkways; nor does it include excavation for a basement, footings, piers, or foundations or the erection of temporary forms; nor does it include the installation on the property of accessory buildings, such as garages or sheds not occupied as dwelling units or not part of the main structure. For a substantial improvement, the actual start of construction means the first alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor or other structural part of a building, whether or not that alteration affects the external dimensions of the building.

"Structure" means a walled and roofed building that is principally above ground; this includes a gas or liquid storage tank or a manufactured home.

"Substantial damage" means damage of any origin sustained by a structure whereby the cost of restoring the structure to its before-damaged condition would equal or exceed fifty percent of the market value of the structure before the damage occurred.

"Substantial improvement" means any reconstruction, rehabilitation, addition, or other proposed new development of a structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds fifty percent of the market value of the structure before the "start of construction" of the improvement. This term includes structures which have incurred "substantial damage", regardless of the actual repair work performed. The term does not, however, include either:

a. Any project for improvement of a structure to correct existing violations or state or local health, sanitary, or safety code specifications which have been identified by the local code enforcement official and which are the minimum necessary to assure safe living conditions; or
b. Any alteration of a "historic structure", provided that the alteration will not preclude the structure's continued designation as a historic structure.

“Utility and Miscellaneous Group U” means buildings and structures of an accessory character and miscellaneous structure not classified in any special occupancy, as described in the building code.

"Variance" means a grant of relief from the requirements of this chapter which permits construction in a manner that would otherwise be prohibited by this chapter.

"Violation" means the failure of a structure or other development to be fully compliant with this ordinance. A structure or other development with the elevation certificate, other certifications, or other evidence of compliance required in this ordinance is presumed to be in violation until such time as that documentation is provided.

"Watercourse" means a lake, river, creek, stream, wash, arroyo, channel or other topographic feature on or over which waters flow at least periodically. Watercourse includes specifically designated areas in which substantial flood damage may occur.

SECTION 4. Amendment

Subsection B of Section 15.14.040 of Chapter 15.14 of Title 15 of the El Cajon Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

15.14.040 General Provisions

B. Basis for Establishing the Areas of Special Flood Hazard. The areas of special flood hazard identified by the Federal Insurance Administrator (FIA) of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in the preliminary Flood Insurance Study (FIS) dated January 19, 2001and accompanying preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and all subsequent amendments and/or revisions, are hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this chapter. This FIS and attendant mapping is the minimum area of applicability of this chapter and may be supplemented by studies for other areas which allow implementation of this chapter and which are recommended to the city council by the Floodplain Administrator.

The, FIS and FIRMs are on file at the City of El Cajon Departments of Community Development, 200 Civic Center Way , El Cajon, CA 92020.

SECTION 5. Amendment

Subsection C.4.a of Section 15.14.050 of Chapter 15.14 of Title 15 of the El Cajon Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

15.14.050 Administration

C.4.a Within six months of information becoming available or project completion, whichever comes first, the floodplain administrator shall submit or assure that the permit applicant submits technical or scientific data.

SECTION 6. Amendment

Subsections A.3.a(2), A.3.c(2), D, and F.1 of Section 15.14.060 of Chapter 15.14 of Title 15 of the El Cajon Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

15.14.060 Provisions for flood hazard reduction.

A.3.a(2). In an A zone, elevated to or above the base flood elevation with a minimum one foot freeboard, as determined by this community.

A.3.c(2). Have a minimum number of openings required by Floodplain management regulations with a total net area of not less than one square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding. The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one foot above grade. Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, valves or other coverings or devices provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of floodwater.

D. Standards for Manufactured Homes.

1. All manufactured homes that are placed or substantially improved within Zones A1-30, AH, and AE on the community's Flood Insurance Rate Map, on sites located:
a. Outside of a manufactured home park or
subdivision,
b. In a new manufactured home park or
subdivision,
c. In an expansion to an existing manufactured
home park or subdivision, or
d. In an existing manufactured home park or
subdivision on a site upon which a
manufactured home has incurred "substantial

damage" as the result of a flood, shall be
elevated on a permanent foundation such that
the lowest floor of the manufactured home is
elevated at least one foot above the base flood
elevation and be securely anchored to an
adequately anchored foundation sys tem to
resist flotation collapse and lateral movement.

2. All manufactured homes to be placed or substantially improved on sites in an existing manufactured home park or subdivision within Zones A1- 30, AH, and AE on the
community's Flood Insurance Rate Map that are not subject to the provisions of Section 15.14.060(D)(1) will be securely fastened to an adequately anchored foundation system to resist flotation collapse, and elevated so that either the:
a. Lowest floor of the manufactured home is at
least one foot above the base flood elevation
with a minimum one foot freeboard, or
b. Manufactured home chassis is supported by
reinforced piers or other foundation elements of
at least equivalent strength that are no less than
thirty-six inches in height above grade

F.1 Prohibit encroachments, including fill, new construction, substantial improvement, and other new development unless hydrologic and hydraulic analysis certified by a registered professional engineer or architect is provided demonstrating that encroachments shall not result in any increase in [the base] flood elevation during the occurrence of the base flood discharge.

SECTION 7. Amendment

Subsection B.3 of Section 15.14.070 of Chapter 15.14 of Title 15 of the El Cajon Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows.

15.14.070 Variance Procedure

B.3 The floodplain administrator will maintain a record of all variance actions, including justification for their issuance, and report such variances issued to Federal Emergency Management Agency.

SECTION 8. Effective Date.

This ordinance shall be effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. Within fifteen (15) days after its adoption, the City Clerk of the City of El Cajon shall cause this ordinance to be published pursuant to the provisions of Government Code section 36933.

SECTION 9. Severability

The City Council of the City of El Cajon intends this ordinance to supplement , not duplicate or contradict, applicable state and federal law and this ordinance shall be construed in light of that intent. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase, or portion of this ordinance is, for any reason, held to be unconstitutional or invalid or ineffective by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity or effectiveness of the remaining portions of this ordinance or any part thereof. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance irrespective of the fact that one or mor e sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or invalid or ineffective. To this end, the provisions of this ordinance are declared to be severable.

SECTION 10. Publication

The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be published at least once within fifteen (15) days after its adoption.

02/24/26 CC Agenda – 1st Reading
03/10/26 CC Agenda – 2nd Reading/Adoption

STATE OF CALIFORNIA – CALIFORNIA NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES
P.O. BOX 942836
SACRAMENTO, CA 94236-0001
(916) 653-5791

FPO Review – City of El Cajon

Definitions:

Recommend the City of El Cajon add definitions listed below into their Floodplain Management Ordinance for clarity and consistency.

o Accessory structure, Agricultural structure, Alteration of Watercourse, ASCE 24,Building Code, Design flood & DFE, Dry floodproofing, Exceptional hardship, Flood Control Project, Flood damage resist material, Flood hazard area, Fraud or victimization, Functionally dependent use, Letter of Map Change, Light-duty truck, Market Value, Nuisance, Permit for floodplain development, Riverine, and Utility Misc Group U.

Community Floodplain Ordinance:

The City of El Cajon current Floodplain Management Ordinance in the sections outlined below, does not currently meet the NFIP minimum requirements as outlined in Title 44 CFR and the community adopted California Building Code (CBC).

Community Floodplain Management Ordinance (FPO) deficiencies are listed below.

• The community FPO does NOT address 44 CFR Section [60.2(h)]. o Adopt or reference correct Flood Insurance Study and date, including FIRMs. o Community using incorrect FIS date. Should use first FIS dated 1982 or the first county-wide FIS dated January 19,2001.

• The community FPO does NOT address 44 CFR Section [60.3(c)(6)]. o Require that manufactured homes placed or substantially improved within A1-30, AH, and AE Zones, which meet one of the following location criteria, to be elevated such that the lowest floor is at or above the BFE and be securely anchored:
 i. outside a manufactured home park or subdivision;  ii. in a new manufactured home park or subdivision;  iii. in an expansion to an existing manufactured home park or subdivision;  iv. on a site in an existing park which a manufactured home has incurred substantial damage as a result of flood.
o Community FPO section 15.14.060(D) addresses Zone A-30 but zone AE is missing.

• The community FPO includes outdated language.
o Consider removing Flood Boundary and Floodway Map (FBFM) definition and any mention in the FPO. It is no longer an effective product, has been superseded with a FIRM. o Consider removing Flood Hazard Boundary Map definition and any mention in the FPO. o Update the FIRM definition to include Federal Insurance Administrator not the Federal Insurance Administration.
o Update 15.14.040 (B) to reflect the FIS and FIRM are issued by the Federal Insurance Administrator.
o Remove biennial report language in 15.14.070

• The community FPO does not meet minimum state standards.

Require all new and substantially improved residential structures within A1-30, AE, and AH Zones have their lowest floor (including basement) elevated to or above the BFE

o Community FPO section 15.14.060(A)(3)a addresses minimum NFIP requirements however it does not meet minimum 1 foot freeboard requirement for A zone.

City Council
Agenda Report
Agenda Item 20.

DATE: February 24, 2026
TO: City Clerk
FROM: City Attorney/General Legal Counsel
SUBJECT: Closed Session - Conference with Real Property Negotiators - Government Code section 54956.8:

Property:

Parkway Plaza
APN 482-270-56-00
APN 482-270-35-00
APN 482-270-42-00
Negotiating Parties:

Star-West Parkway Mall LP
Penney Property Sub Holdings LLC
Star-West Parkway Mall LP

City Negotiators:

City Manager
Assistant City Manager
City Attorney

Under Negotiation:

Price and terms of payment
RECOMMENDATION:

That the following Closed Session be scheduled for the Joint City Council / Housing Authority / Successor Agency to the El Cajon Redevelopment Agency meeting on Tuesday, February 24, 2026, at 3:00 p.m.

CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS – pursuant to Government Code section 54956.8.

Conference with real property negotiators is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is a procedural, administrative step in the process.

Jennifer M. Lyon
Jennifer M. Lyon
City Attorney
JML:rnb
City Council
Agenda Report
Agenda Item 21.

DATE: February 24, 2026
TO: City Clerk
FROM: City Attorney/General Legal Counsel
SUBJECT: Closed Session - Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation - pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Government Code section 54956.9: Gregg vs City of El Cajon;
Superior Court of California, County of San Diego;
Case No. 25CU004443C
RECOMMENDATION:

That the following Closed Session be scheduled for the Special Joint City Council / Housing Authority / Successor Agency to the El Cajon Redevelopment Agency meeting on Tuesday, February 24, 2026, at 3:00 p.m.

CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION – pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Government Code section 54956.9:

NAME OF CASE:

Gregg vs City of El Cajon;
Superior Court of California, County of San Diego;
Case No. 25CU004443C
Jennifer M. Lyon
City Attorney
JML:rnb
City Council
Agenda Report
Agenda Item 22.

DATE: February 24, 2026
TO: City Clerk
FROM: City Attorney/General Legal Counsel
SUBJECT: Closed Session - Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation - Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of section 54956.9: One (1) potential case
RECOMMENDATION:

That the following Closed Session be scheduled for the Joint City Council / Housing Authority / Successor Agency to the El Cajon Redevelopment Agency meeting on Tuesday, February 24, 2026, at 3:00 p.m.

CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION – Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Government Code section 54956.9:

Number of Potential Cases: 1
Jennifer M. Lyon
City Attorney
JML:rnb