Agenda, first session — Fairfield City Council, July 5, 2022 (part 3 of 6)

E. Multi Class Pay: Employees may be assigned to work in more than one classification. When such assignment is made, employees shall be compensated for the hours worked in each classification at the hourly rate designated for each classification.

F. Standby/Callback: Employees assigned to work in groups which operate in a 24/7/365 working environment or in situations deemed appropriate by a department head shall be included for participation in callout/standby.

Packet Page 538 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 7 of 29

5 In the event the department/division has the need for employees to be available for standby work, the employer shall establish a standby list. The employer shall first ask volunteers who wish to be placed on the standby list. In the event there are not an adequate number of volunteers, the employer shall assign all employees in the affected work group to be placed on the standby list. A standby rotation list shall be established to ensure equitable distribution of shifts. All employees scheduled to work standby shall be compensated as identified in the following paragraphs.

1. Those employees scheduled for normal standby outside of City days of operation will be compensated(from the end of the work day on Friday until the beginning of the work day on the following Monday) will be compensated for twelve six (126) hours of either straight time pay or straight time compensatory time off for all non‐scheduled workdays employees are scheduled for standby. When the standby is extended by a holiday either on the Friday before or the Monday following the weekend the straight time compensation will be increased by six (6) hours.

2. Those employees scheduled for midweek holiday standby (those holidays falling Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday) will be compensated for six (6) hours per holiday at straight time pay or straight time compensatory time off.

3. When an employee who is on regularly scheduled standby (weekend or holiday) is called out for duty, the employee will be compensated at the overtime rate to the closest quarter of an hour. Round trip travel time from and to the employee’s home will be considered compensable time. If the time between the start of the callout and the release from the callout is less than one hour, the employee will receive one hour of overtime compensation.

Multiple callouts in the same time period shall be paid straight through from the start of the initial callout through the last callout when the employee is released. In such instances, there shall not be multiple one hour minimums.

4. When an employee who is not on regularly scheduled standby is called out for duty, the employee will be compensated at the overtime rate to the closest quarter of an hour. Round trip travel time from and to the employee’s home will be considered compensable time. If the time between the start of the callout and the release from the callout is less than two four hours, the employee will receive two four hours of the overtime compensation. After the initial four hour call out period, for subsequent call outs, employees shall receive two hours of overtime compensation. Multiple callouts in a callout period shall be paid straight through from the start of the initial callout through the last callout within the same callout period. Multiple callouts in the same time period shall be paid straight through from the start of the initial callout through the last callout when the employee is released. In such instances, there shall not be multiple two hour minimums.

5. Employees in the Water Distribution/Sewer Division of Public Works who are on voluntary standby from Monday through Thursday will be compensated at the overtime rate to the closest quarter of an hour when they are called out for duty. Round trip travel time from and to the employee’s home will be considered compensable time for employees who live within the required radius, the radius is 35 minutes driving time to the worksite. If the time between the start of the callout and the release from the callout is less than two four hours, Packet Page 539 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 8 of 29

6 the employee will receive two four hours of overtime compensation. Such employees on voluntary standby have the ability to trade coverage with another employee on the voluntary standby list. Employees who do not wish to work on the night they signed up for voluntary standby have the ability to talk with their supervisor in advance of a proposed change and request relief for that night or nights. Employees may also request from their supervisor to be removed from the voluntary standby list. After the initial four hour call out period, for subsequent call outs, employees shall receive two hours of overtime compensation. Multiple callouts in the same time period shall be paid straight through from the start of the initial callout through the last callout, when the employee is released. In such instances, there shall not be multiple two‐hour minimums. Such employees on voluntary standby have the ability to trade coverage with another employee on the voluntary standby list. Employees who do not wish to work on the night they signed up for voluntary standby have the ability to talk with their supervisor in advance of a proposed change and request relief for that night or nights. Employees may also request from their supervisor to be removed from the voluntary standby list.

6. Employees, including shift operators called back to work who have to work in excess of four (4) hours after midnight may arrive at work past their normal starting time that same day by one‐half (1/2) the amount of time they worked past midnight. One‐half (1/2) the amount of time is calculated at straight time, e.g., if an employee worked from midnight to 4 am, the employee may arrive at work two (2) hours past his or her normal starting time that day. If the employee wishes to take additional time off on the same day, the employee shall use accrued leave, (i.e., compensatory or vacation leave.)

ARTICLE 7. PROBATION, ACCRUED HOURS, MERIT & PERFORMANCE APPRAISALS A. Probationary Period: All employees represented in this bargaining unit shall serve a probationary period of 1800 hours or 2 years, whichever comes first. There are no appeal rights for an employee released from probation during his/her probationary period.

B. Accrued Hours: The City shall maintain an accurate accounting of each part time employees accrual of hours, both on a fiscal year basis and ongoing. Such hours shall be maintained for the purposes of merit increases, conversion from Temporary Part‐Time to Career Part‐Time, and to track the total number of hours an employee may have worked at any time during the fiscal year. The annual hours worked and the total hours worked shall be provided to employees upon request of the employee’s supervisor and/or the designated “Timekeeper”.

The City will provide such accounting to the Union and/or the individual employee upon request.

It is not the intent of the City to schedule any part time worker more than 1000 hours per fiscal year. It is acknowledged that the “reset” date for the annual accrual of hours changes each year. Generally, the “reset” date is the first day of the 14th pay period, which takes place in June of each year. Employees may inquire with the Finance Department for the exact date. The City shall identify the date on the City Payroll Calendar each year and make the calendar available to employees upon request of the supervisor and/or designated “Timekeeper”.

C. Merit Date & Promotion/Demotion/Flexible Staffing:

1. Merit Date: For classifications with step increases, the annual review date will correspond with the effective date of the appointment, promotion, or demotion. The Packet Page 540 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 9 of 29

7 calculation of an employee’s merit date is based on a full‐time equivalent position (2080 hours annually). Classifications assigned a flat rate will not receive an increase in pay based on hours. Their hourly rate will increase based on the salary schedule in Appendix A.

2. Promotion: Upon promotion the employee will receive the salary step of the new classification closest to 5% without going under 5%.

A promotion is defined as moving from one classification to another classification where the top step salary of the new classification exceeds the top step salary of the previous classification.

3. Demotion: Upon demotion, the employee will go to the same step as they had in their previous classification prior to the promotion. Employees who are being demoted and have not held a previous classification with the City will be placed at the same step in the new classification as that held in the previous classification.

A demotion is defined as moving from one classification to another where the top step salary of the new classification is less than the top step salary of the previous classification.

4. Flexible Staffing: An employee who moves from a I to a II position, will receive the salary step of the new classification closest to 5% without going under 5%.

A flexibly staffed position is defined by a classification series that contains a I and II. For example Recreation Specialist I and Recreation Specialist II. Employees move from a I to a II designation upon completing the minimum qualifications of the II classification and upon recommendation of management.

D. Performance Appraisal: Performance evaluations may be conducted at the time a merit increase is due. Employees shall have the right to review their performance evaluation with the evaluating supervisor, and the employee may submit a written response to accompany the evaluation in the employee’s personnel file. Employees not eligible for merit step increases may receive performance appraisals annually.

If the performance evaluation has not taken place within thirty (30) days of the anniversary date, the employee will receive their step increase, if eligible, retroactive to their merit anniversary date. The granting of the merit increase under this paragraph does not assume the employee is rated as satisfactory for the rating period.

E. Inactive Employees: Any employee on the payroll who has not worked in 12 consecutive months will be removed from the City payroll system and will no longer be considered a City employee.

ARTICLE 8. LEAVE
A. Vacation:

Career part‐time employees shall accrue vacation leave at the rate of 0.0577 hours per hour worked. This rate is equivalent to three (3) weeks per year for full‐time employees working 35 Packet Page 541 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 10 of 29

8 hours per week. For an employee averaging fifteen (15) hours per week the rate would result in 45 hours annual vacation.

Career Part‐time employees may cash out up to 32 hours of their accrued vacation balance in the months of May and/or November each year; provided, the total cash out may not exceed 32 hours in any calendar year. Additionally, employees exercising their option to cash out must maintain a minimum balance of 32 hours of vacation after the cash out.

1. Requests for vacation shall not be unreasonably denied.

2. Upon separation from the City, employees shall be paid for any unused vacation credit.

B. Compensatory Time Off/Overtime:

Depending on the work schedule, employees will be eligible for overtime for all hours worked over eight in a day, or forty in a workweek; provided, however, that employees on approved flex time schedules (including 9/80, 4/10 or other scheduled shifts) will not be eligible for overtime unless they work in excess of forty (40) hours in a designated workweek. Entitlement to overtime shall be based on hours actually worked.

For part time employees who work a flexible schedule, overtime will also be earned if required to work seven (7) consecutive days, and work at least 25 hours within the first 6 consecutive days. Any time worked on the 7th day will be paid at 1.5 of their hourly rate. Pre‐approval by a supervisor is required for all employee to self‐schedule work through the automated time keeping system that would exceed either 40 hours in a week or that results in work on the consecutive 7th day.

At the discretion of the City, FPTEA agrees that all other overtime compensation may be paid as compensatory time off (CTO) or in pay, at the rate of 1 ½ .5x hours per each hour of overtime actually worked. Employees desiring to use accrued CTO must request use of CTO as far as reasonably possible before the date time off is requested.

All employees covered by this MOU will be able to accrue up to 100 hours of comp time.

Employees with one (1) or more year of service in the City of Fairfield may cash out up to 25% of their existing CTO balances in the months of May and November.

Shift Extension: Hours worked as an extension of a scheduled work shift or on a City‐observed holiday will be paid out at the 1.5x factor, calculated to the closest quarter of an hour.

C. Work Schedules:

Part Time classifications in Appendix A are flexibly scheduled to support the business needs of the department. Part Time employees shall work hours as assigned by the department based on availability.

Part time classifications in Appendix B may be on a fixed schedule, alternative schedule or may be flexibly scheduled to support the business needs of the department.

Packet Page 542 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 11 of 29

9 Fixed Schedule: Employees assigned to a fixed work schedule shall have specified starting times and ending times to their work shifts. These employees shall have a fixed number of hours per shift, though they may not have the same starting and ending times every day. Hours worked in excess of the scheduled shift, where the regular shift is not less than eight hours shall be paid in salary or compensatory time off at a time‐and‐one‐half rate.

Flexible Schedule: Employees that agree to work a flexible schedule will not have a fixed daily schedule. Instead, they shall have start and end times that are mutually agreed to prior to the start of each pay period. If an employee assigned to a flexible schedule works more than forty hours in a week, they shall receive overtime pay either in salary or compensatory time off at a rate of time‐and‐one‐half.

Alternative Schedule: The City agrees to consider a request made by an employee or a majority of FPTEA represented employees in a department or major division of a department to change to an alternative work schedule, such as 9/80 or 4/10. Where such accommodations can be made, requests may be granted by the department head. At such time that the department head decides that the schedule does not meet service needs, the employees shall be reassigned to their original schedule. Except in emergencies or by mutual agreement, employees will be given at least two (2) week notice.

Work periods: In the Parks and Recreation Department the work period is defined as Friday midnight to Thursday at 11:59 p.m. In all other departments where a part time employee may be utilized, the work period is Friday noon to Friday 11:59 a.m. For employees on a 9/80 alternate schedule, the 40 hour work week concludes 4 hours after the beginning of their shift on the 5th day of week one.

Lunch Periods: Unless otherwise determined by the department, each workday of five hours or more shall include a lunch period of not less than thirty (30) minutes to be taken approximately mid‐point during the workday. The lunch period may be scheduled by the department. The lunch period shall not be considered hours of work except at work sites where the employee continues to work during the lunch period; or where the employee is not allowed to leave the job site.

Rest Periods: Each employee shall be entitled to take one fifteen (15) minute rest period for each (4) hours of work performed by such employee in a workday. Rest periods may not be combined with lunch periods; nor may they be moved to the beginning or ending of the workday. Rest periods may be scheduled by the department and time taken shall be counted as time worked.

D. Sick Leave Accrual and Use:

1. Career part‐time employees: shall accrue sick leave at an hourly accrual rate equivalent to the hourly accrual rate for general employees. This rate is 0.0462 hours per hour worked.

Employees are eligible to use sick leave as it is accrued. There shall be no limit on the amount of accumulated sick leave. Sick leave shall be allowed and used solely for cases of actual person sickness or disability medical or dental treatment, or as authorized for other necessary health reasons and may be used by the employee for attendance upon a member of his/her immediate family who is seriously ill and requires care and attention by the employee, or for medical/dental appointments.

Packet Page 543 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 12 of 29

10 2. Temporary Part‐time employees: are entitled to 24 hours of paid sick leave annually. Upon hire, the employee shall be granted 24 hours of sick leave, however, an employee must be employed for 3 calendar months before being eligible to use this leave. An additional 24 hours of leave shall be granted on every July 1 thereafter. Any balance not used by June 30 of each year shall not be carried over.

For purposes of this section immediate family is defined as mother, father, step‐mother, step‐father, mother‐in‐law, father‐in‐law, spouse, domestic partner, son, daughter, brother, sister, foster parent, foster child, step child and child for whom the employee is the legal guardian, grandchild, or grandparents. Employees are not required to divulge their illness to their supervisor; however, the employee may be required to provide supporting information or documentation pursuant to the City’s sick leave policy. The supervisor does have the authority to ask if the employee is contagious, and if so, direct the employee to remain at home until the employees’ physician has cleared them to return to work.

Departments have the ability to develop and implement sick leave call in procedures which coincide with business necessity.

3. Sick leave Cash Out: Career part‐time employees are eligible to cash out twenty‐five (25%) of unused sick leave accrued during the twelve (12) months from the end of each November at the employee option. Employees are eligible for compensation of accumulated sick leave upon retirement, or termination after fifteen (15) years at a base rate of thirty percent (30%). For each year thereafter, the base figure increases 2 percent (2%) each year until a maximum of forty percent (40%) is reached.

4. If the employee dies due to a duty‐related injury, his/her beneficiary shall been entitled to reimbursement of one‐hundred (100) percent of accumulated unused sick leave.

E. Bereavement Leave: Department Heads may grant Career Part‐Time employees up to a maximum of 24 hours within four weeks of bereavement leave in the event of a death or serious traumatic injury or illness in the employee's immediate family. The City Manager may grant up to a total of 48 hours within the same four weeks of bereavement leave. Immediate family is defined as mother, father, step‐mother, step‐father, mother‐in‐law, father‐in‐law, spouse, domestic partner, son, daughter, brother, sister, foster parent, foster child, step child and child for whom the employee is the legal guardian, grandchild, or grandparents. Exceptions will be considered by the City Manager. Additionally, bereavement leave will not be deducted from sick leave and does not accrue to any employee as vested leave.

A “serious traumatic injury or illness” is defined as a sudden and unexpected event which requires prompt and immediate attention from the employee without delay. It may also include attending to the need of an immediate family member who is expected to die in the immediate future. Bereavement leave shall be taken immediately in conjunction with the event of death or serious traumatic injury or illness.

F. Union Business Time: The City and the Union agree that the number of FPTEA members who can participate in negotiations is greater than two (2). The number of FPTEA members will be agreed upon in advance of commencing bargaining between the Municipal Employee Relations Officer and FPTEA. In no event, will the number of FPTEA members be greater than five (5) employee Packet Page 544 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 13 of 29

11 members, or as mutually agreed upon between the Municipal Employee Relations Officer and FPTEA. Employees shall be responsible for reporting back to work promptly after the conclusion of any formal meet and confer sessions.

The City may grant requests for paid time for members to attend training and union business during members’ normally assigned work hours, e.g., FPTEA board meetings and annual FPTEA board training sessions. Requests will be made by the President of FPTEA (or designate) to the City Manager (or designate). The City Manager shall base the decision on the operational needs of the City. On a case‐by‐case basis, the City may provide release time to attend union functions other than board meetings and board training sessions. The employee and an FPTEA officer shall certify the employees’ attendance at the meeting(s) in question for the approved time. FPTEA shall be permitted to hold a maximum of one (1) general membership meeting annually on City time and City property. Such meetings shall be no longer than one (1) hour in duration. Any additional meetings are subject to approval by the City Manager.

The City shall waive rental and set up fees for FPTEA membership meetings.

The City will allow SEIU access to work locations and use of City facilities in accordance with Resolution No. 2001‐185.

ARTICLE 9. HEALTH/LIFE INSURANCE/OTHER BENEFITS
A. Deferred Compensation: Career part‐time employees are entitled to participate in the City’s employee deferred compensation program with no City contribution.

ARTICLE 10. UNIFORM ALLOWANCE/BOOT REIMBURSEMENT
Reimbursement amounts shall be adjusted accordingly upon the adjustment of the reimbursement amounts of the FEA chapter.

A Uniforms: The City will provide required clothing (i.e. uniform shirts, smocks, coveralls, etc.) to all employees required to wear such clothing. Exceptions to this shall be for the specific classifications listed below. Employees in such classifications shall be reimbursed for the purchase of required clothing. . Cleaning or laundering of the uniforms or coveralls will be the responsibility of the employee. Departmental procedures regarding standards for upkeep and presentability, damage at work, replacement, and so forth, will govern uniform use.

Classifications and amounts paid annually are as follows:

Code Enforcement Off.        $875
Community Services Off.       $875
Dispatcher:         $875
Lead Dispatcher:        $875
Park Ranger        $875
Crime Prevention Spec.        $875
Fire Inspector I/II/III:        $425
Fire Prevention Spec.        $425
Fire Department clerical (includes Office Specialist   $325 Office Assistant Classifications working full‐time
in the Fire Department)
Packet Page 545 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 14 of 29

12 Subject to the discretion of the Department Head or designee, employees receiving a uniform allowance shall be required to wear their uniform while at work.

Payment for the uniform allowance will be made in two equal payments, which shall be issued the first pay date in June and the first pay date in December to each affected employee who has completed six (6) months of continuous service in an eligible assignment prior to the payment date. For those who have less than six (6) months of continuous service prior to the date of issuance, the allowance shall be pro‐rated.

B Boot Reimbursement: For employees required to wear boots, the City shall reimburse employees up to $175 250 annually, provided the boots meet the following requirements: oil resistant soles, leather uppers, and ankle height or above. Receipts are required. Meter Readers will also receive a boot/shoe reimbursement of $175 250 annually. Reimbursements will be paid by a separate check and are not subject to payroll taxes.

C Tools and Tool Allowance: The City will pay for reasonable replacement or repair of personal tools damaged at the work place in the normal course of business where such damage is not covered by tool warranties.

Eligible employees will receive an annual tool allowance of $400, on the first pay date in June.

Only those employees in the following classifications shall be entitled to such an allowance:

Equipment Mechanic I   Equipment Service Worker I
Equipment Mechanic II   Equipment Service Worker II
Senior Equipment Mechanic   Fire Equipment Mechanic II

D Prescription Safety Glasses: For employees required to wear safety glasses, the City shall reimburse employees up to $300 every two years for prescription safety glasses. Receipts are required. Reimbursements will be paid by separate check and are not subject to payroll taxes.

ARTICLE 11. TUITION REIMBURSEMENT
For Career Part‐Time employees, the Annual tuition reimbursement per calendar year shall be $46,000.The City will provide a tuition and books reimbursement program for educational activities which are approved in advance by the Department Head, subject to reimbursement guidelines established by the City's Director of Human Resources.

ARTICLE 12. CERTIFICATION/LICENSE FEE
Employees who are required by the City as a condition of employment or continued employment to obtain state certification or licensing in the field in which they are employed by the City shall be reimbursed by the City for the actual cost of such certificate or license.

ARTICLE 13. RETIREMENT/PERS
A. Part‐time employees who work or have worked 1000 hours in a fiscal year will be required to participate in PERS. Employees will be enrolled in PERS upon the 1000th hour worked. The following benefits shall apply:

For employees hired prior to July 1, 2012, the City's contract with the Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) shall provide for the following benefits:

Packet Page 546 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 15 of 29

13 • 2.7% @ 55 retirement plan (21354.5)
• Death benefits – Basic Level (21532)
• 1959 survivor’s benefit (Level IV) (21574)
• Continuation of Pre‐Retirement Death Benefits After Remarriage of Survivor (21551) • Industrial Disability Retirement for Miscellaneous Members (21151) • PERS unused sick leave credit option (20965)
• Single highest year coverage (20042)
• Military service credit as public service (21024)
 Employee Sharing Cost of Additional Benefits (20516)

Employees hired on or after July 1, 2012 shall be enrolled in the City’s second tier plan with the following benefits:
• 2.5% @ 55 retirement plan (21354.5)
• Death benefits – Basic Level (21532)
• 1959 survivor’s benefit (Level IV) (21574)
• Continuation of Pre‐Retirement Death Benefits After Remarriage of Survivor (21551) • Industrial Disability Retirement for Miscellaneous Members (21151) • PERS unused sick leave credit option (20965)
• Three year average (20042)
• Military service credit as public service (21024)
 Employee Sharing Cost of Additional Benefits (20516)

Effective January 1, 2013 employees who are enrolled in PERS and are for purposes of PERS considered new employees as defined by PERL are eligible for 2%@62 with a three year average for final compensation. Employees in this group will pay 50% of the normal cost as determined by PERS.

The employee contribution rate of 10.5% is paid by the employee.

Employee contributions will be paid pre‐tax under IRS section 414 (h) (2).

B. Social Security: The section shall not apply to employees who are enrolled into PERS.

Employees will be enrolled into the PARS plan with an employee mandatory deduction of

6.2% and employer contribution of 1.3%.

Each employee who has reached Career Part Time status as of January 1, 2016 shall be enrolled in Social Security. Any employee who becomes Career Part Time after January 1, 2016 will remain in the PARS program and will not be subject to Social Security.

Contributions to Social Security shall be made by the City and the employee, per federal law.

Effective January 1, 2016, the PARS plan for those enrolled in Social Security shall be discontinued and employee monies shall remain on deposit with PARS until the employee leaves City employment.

C. Medicare: All employees hired on or after April 1, 1986 shall contribute a portion of their gross salary (1.45%) for Medicare coverage as determined by federal regulations.

ARTICLE 14. LIGHT DUTY
Packet Page 547 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 16 of 29

14 Light duty may be provided for employees who are unable to work due to injury or illness from either industrial or non‐industrial causation. Further, workers’ compensation law and disability plans provide that an employee is not entitled to temporary disability benefits if suitable light duty work is available.

The basic principles are as follows:

•  The employee is temporarily not able to resume full duty, but is capable of performing some work duties.
•  The employer may develop a light duty work assignment commensurate with the employee’s temporary work restriction.
•  If the employer is unable to offer light duty work, the employee is entitled to continued temporary disability benefits until the employee is able to resume normal duties, or is permanent and stationary, whichever is earlier.
•  If the employee declines suitable light duty work, the employee is no longer entitled to temporary disability benefits.

It is the City’s policy to temporarily provide light or modified duty work assignments, when possible, and in accordance with the MOU’s, to all injured employees until they can return to full work status.

However, the City is under no obligation to provide light or modified duty if there is none available.

A physician may return an injured employee to duty with work restrictions prior to releasing the employee to his/her regular full work duties. It is important that the treating physician understand the physical job demands of the injured worker in order to prescribe the proper work restrictions. The City must communicate to the treating physician the essential functions of the job classification so that necessary work restrictions may be determined. Risk Management consults with the physicians to provide this information on an as needed basis.

A “light duty” assignment is made when an employee’s work restriction (s) can be temporarily accommodated within his/her normal duties. A “modified duty” assignment is made when an employee’s work restrictions(s) is considered to be permanent and their position duties are accommodated to allow for the work restriction.

Under this policy, Supervisors have the added responsibility to ensure that any and all work restrictions specified by the treating physician are rigidly adhered to and enforced during the period of light or modified duty assignment, and employees are required to adhere to the work restrictions. While on light or modified duty, employees will receive their regular rate of pay in most circumstances.

Light and/or modified duty assignments shall be considered flexible and adaptable to meeting the particular needs of both the disabled employee and the department. This may include assignments of less than eight (8) hours a day, frequent breaks, the use of modified work stations, and so forth. Each situation will be evaluated on an as‐needed basis. The assignment of a light or modified duty position shall not be considered a permanent job placement.

If an employee is released by his or her treating physician to light or modified duty, Risk Management follows up with the department to determine whether the employee can be returned to work in a light duty mode. If the department does not have a light or modified duty assignment for the employee, the employee receives temporary disability payments for industrial injury or illness, and may be eligible for short term disability benefits for non‐industrial injury. The City may assign employees to light duty work Packet Page 548 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 17 of 29

15 in other departments or divisions provided that the work duties are appropriate for the skills of the employee and the work restrictions.

ARTICLE 15. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE
A. Definition of Grievance: A grievance is defined as an allegation by the Union or an individual covered by the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that the City has violated: (a) an express term of the MOU; (b) a written personnel rule or regulation in the City; or (c) an established City policy governing personnel practices or working conditions.

B. Purpose: The purpose of this grievance procedure is to ensure an orderly method whereby employee complaints are considered and resolved rapidly and fairly.

C. Exclusions from Grievance Procedure: Disciplinary actions (including without limitation dismissals, reprimands, suspensions, demotions or disputes concerning pay increases), performance appraisals and layoffs are not subject to the grievance procedure.

D. Steps in the Grievance Procedure: It is the intent of the parties to deal with and settle grievances informally, promptly and fairly, and at the nearest practical organizational level. In any instance of grievance, the employee or employees concerned shall first make efforts to resolve such grievance informally with their immediate supervisor within twenty (20) calendar days following the occurrence of the events on which the grievance is based.

First Step: If a mutually satisfactory solution of a grievance is not reached after informal discussion with the immediate supervisor, then the aggrieved party shall submit a formal written grievance with their manager within five (5) working days. The manager must submit a written response within five (5) working days.

Second Step: If the grievant is not satisfied with the manager’s response, the grievant may advance the grievance to the Department Head within five (5) working days after receiving the manager’s response. The Department Head shall consider the matter and submit a written response within five (5) working days after receiving the grievance. The decision of the Department Head may not be appealed and shall be the final step for Temporary Part‐ Time employees.

Third Step: Career Part‐Time Employees If the grievant is not satisfied with Department Head’s response, the grievant may advance the grievance to a Tripartite Adjustment Board with written notice to the Employee Relations Manager within five (5) working days after receiving the Department Head’s response. The grievant may choose to skip this step and advance the grievance directly to the City Manager at Step 4.

The Adjustment Board will consist of one (1) mediator from and selected by the California State Mediation and Conciliation Service (CSMCS), one (1) Union appointed representative and one (1) representative appointed by the City. The mediator from CSMCS shall serve as the chair of the Board. In lieu of selection by CSMCS, the parties may mutually agree to a specific mediator. The mutually incurred costs of the mediation, if any, shall be shared equally by the parties.

Packet Page 549 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 18 of 29

16 The parties shall present their position to the panel including documentation and witnesses which may be relevant to the grievance. The parties may cross examine the witnesses. The panel may ask questions of the witnesses, the grievant and the representatives of each party. The Board may undertake mediation if agreed to by both parties.

Upon conclusion of the presentations, the Adjustment Board will recess to discuss the grievance. Upon reconvening, the mediator will advise the parties of the panel’s recommendation and whether the decision was unanimous.

The mediator shall provide a written recommendation to both parties which shall be advisory only. The Adjustment Board shall not issue any public statement of fact or opinion on the matter in question nor shall their recommendation be made public.

Fourth Step: If the grievant is not satisfied with Step 3, the grievant may advance the grievance to the City Manager within five (5) working days after receiving the Step 3 response. The City Manager (or designate) shall consider the matter, may hold a hearing in his/her discretion and submit a written response within ten (10) working days after receiving the grievance. The decision of the City Manager shall be final.

E. General Provisions: As used in this section, working day shall refer to the working day of the party involved (employee, Manager, Department Head, City Manager and/or their designees), depending upon whose response or action is pending.

1. Requirements for Written Grievances: Grievances must contain the following information in order to be considered: (a) the grievant’s name and classification; (b) a list of those specific policies or MOU provisions alleged to have been violated; (c) a statement of the facts and circumstances supporting the grievance; (d) a description of all relief requested; and, (e) the address where the grievant wishes grievances to be postmarked.

2. Receipt of Grievance: A grievance shall be considered “received” within five (5) days of being postmarked to the address specified by the grievant, or upon hand delivery to the designated party, or upon date and time sent by electronic mail.

3. Time Limitations: If a grievant fails to advance the grievance to the next step, as specified in this procedure, the grievance shall be considered withdrawn. If the City fails to respond within the time specified in this procedure, the grievance shall be considered advanced to the next step. Notwithstanding any provision in this section, any time limit or stage of procedure specified in this section may be waived or modified upon the written consent of all parties involved.

4. No Work Disruption: During the determination of a grievance herein, there shall be no interruption of scheduled work relating to the grievance. Whenever reasonably feasible, grievances shall be handled during the regularly scheduled working day hours of the parties involved, and at a mutually convenient time for all affected persons.

5. Advancement: With the written consent of the Department Head or City Manager, grievances may be submitted directly at Step 3 or above.

Packet Page 550 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 19 of 29

17 6. Other Rights: This grievance procedure is without prejudice to any existing independent legal rights of FPTEA regarding contract enforcement.

7. No Retaliation: No party shall retaliate against any grievant, party or witness for exercising rights under this grievance procedure.

ARTICLE 16. WEINGARTEN RIGHTS
When a City employee is subjected to an investigative interview, and the employee reasonably believes that the interview could lead to disciplinary action, the employee is entitled to a union representative.

ARTICLE 17. DISCIPLINE PROCEDURE
As used in this section, working day shall refer to the working day of the party involved (employee, supervisor, Division Head, Department Head, City Manager and/or their designees), depending upon whose response or action is pending. Wherever possible, supervisors will handle disciplinary matters in a confidential, professional and respectful manner.

A. Written reprimands: Written reprimands are not appealable. When issuing a written reprimand to an employee, copies will also be provided to the Department Head and the Director of Human Resources. The employee will receive two (2) copies of the reprimand, one for the employee and one for SEIU. It is the employee’s responsibility to provide a copy to SEIU, if the employee wishes to do so. An employee who receives a written reprimand will have the option to submit a response to the Human Resources Department (and the Department Head) within 30 calendar days of receiving the written reprimand. The employee’s response will be placed in his or her official Personnel File.

B. Suspensions Three Days or Less: For suspensions of three (3) days or less, steps 1‐6 shall be followed:

1. The manager may meet with an employee to discuss proposed discipline actions after notifying the employee in writing that such a meeting is being held for the purposes of ascertaining whether disciplinary action is appropriate.

2. Throughout the disciplinary process, the employee shall be provided copies of all documents that are provided to all appellate bodies and used in justification of the disciplinary action being recommended. When a Notice of Intent to Discipline is issued to an employee, names of all witnesses to alleged events shall be provided to the employee to whom the discipline is being imposed. After any meeting, or meeting held under paragraph B.1, the manager shall notify the employee of the proposed discipline action by written notice containing the following:
a. A description of the proposed action and its effective dates; b. A clear and concise statement of the reasons for such action, including the acts or omissions on which the disciplinary action is based;
c. A statement advising the employee of the right to respond, either verbally or in writing, to the authority proposing the action prior to its effective date; d. A statement that a copy of the materials upon which the action is based is attached or available for inspection upon request; and
e. A statement advising the employee of the method and right to appeal and the time within which the appeal must be made.

Packet Page 551 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 20 of 29

18 3. If the employee disagrees with the proposed disciplinary action, he or she shall within ten (10) working days of the written notice request a meeting with the manager recommending discipline to attempt to resolve the issue.

4. The manager shall confirm the results of the meeting in a memorandum to the employee. If the employee disagrees with the results, the employee may submit the matter to the employee’s Department Head for discussion within ten (10) working days from the date of the memorandum.

5. Temporary part‐Time Employees; The Department Head or designee shall meet with the employee within ten (10) working days from the date of the appeal. The Department Head shall issue his/her decision in writing within ten (10) working days of the meeting. Such decision shall be final.

6. Career Part‐Time Employees; The Department Head or designee shall meet with the employee within ten (10) working days from the date of the appeal. The Department Head shall issue his/her decision in writing within ten (10) working days of the meeting. If the employee disagrees with the decision, the employee may appeal the decision to the City Manager within ten (10) working days of the date of the written response from the Department Head. The City Manager or designee shall meet with the employee within ten (10) working days from the date of the appeal. The review at the City Manager’s level is not a full evidentiary hearing. The City Manager or designee shall consider the matter, will hold a hearing in his/her discretion, and will submit a written response within ten (10) working days after the hearing is held. If a hearing is not held, the response shall be issued within ten (10) working days of receiving the appeal.

C. Suspensions More than Three Days/Demotions/Terminations: For suspensions for more than three (3) days, demotions or terminations, Steps 1‐6 under paragraph B. shall be followed with the additional steps below:

1. Temporary Part‐Time Employees; An employee who has been suspended for more than three (3) days, demoted or terminated may appeal the decision to the Department Head within ten (10) working days of receiving the decision. The Department Head shall meet with the employee and the labor representative within ten (10) working days of receiving the appeal and shall issue a written decision concerning the appeal within ten (10) days of the meeting. Such decision shall be final.

Career Part‐Time Employees; An employee who has been suspended for more than three (3) days, demoted or terminated may appeal the decision of the Department Head concerning the action to the City Manager, within ten (10) working days of receiving the Department Head’s decision. The City Manager shall appoint a hearing officer who shall conduct an administrative hearing. The City Manager or designee shall consult with the employee’s representative prior to making the appointment. The hearing officer shall be a neutral party from outside the organization. Upon receipt of the appeal request received by the City Manager, the City Manager or designee shall have ten (10) working days to send a letter to State Mediation Service, or other mediation service, to request a list of arbitrators. Upon selection of an arbitrator, the City Manager or designee shall have ten (10) working days to send a letter to the mediation service notifying them of the arbitrator selected.

Packet Page 552 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 21 of 29

19 2. The fees and expenses of the hearing officer and court reporter shall be borne by the City.

Other expenses shall be borne by the party incurring them and neither party shall be responsible for the expenses of witnesses called by the other;

3. A party requesting a transcript to the hearing shall bear the cost thereof;

4. The hearing officer shall hold a hearing and make a recommendation to the City Manager to sustain, modify, or reverse the disciplinary decision. A copy of the recommendation will be forwarded to the employee. The City Manager or designee will then issue a final decision within ten (10) working days of receiving the recommendation and may, but is not required, to accept the hearing officer’s recommendation; and

5. This procedure does not constitute a waiver by the employee’s representative of its right to request a review of the City’s decision in a court of law pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 1094.5.

D. Time Limitations: If an employee fails to advance the appeal to the next level, as specified in this procedure, the appeal shall be considered withdrawn. If the City fails to respond within the time specified in this procedure, the appeal shall be considered advanced to the next step.

Notwithstanding any provision in this section, any time limit or stage of procedure may be waived or modified upon the written consent of the parties

ARTICLE 18. LAYOFFS
When the City deems it necessary to reduce costs by reducing hours and eliminating positions of part time employees, the City shall notify the Union at least 2 weeks prior to the implementation of such reductions. The Union shall have the opportunity to meet and discuss alternative and impact with the employer.

Layoff shall occur by reverse seniority within each job classification within the program/division within the department.

The City shall keep a list of employees effected by layoff and such employees shall have recall rights for a period of not less than 2 years. Recall must be to the same job classification, program/division and department.

ARTICLE 19. SENIORITY
Seniority shall be determined by the first date of hire into a part time position represented by the Union.

Periods of program hiatus shall not be considered a break in service. When an employee works in multiple classifications, seniority shall be calculated from the first date of hire.

Separate seniority lists shall be maintained for the Career Part‐Time and the Temporary Part‐Time employees.

ARTICLE 20. TRANSFER & PROMOTION
Packet Page 553 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 22 of 29

20 In general and in most cases, when a department head intends to hire additional part time staff, and if an eligibility list does not exist, the position will be posted to the City’s recruitment web page. Employees who are interested in the posted positions may submit an application for consideration. For internal only recruitments, employees may get the link for the City intranet from their supervisor or department manager. In rare instances, a department head may have an immediate need to fill a position through appointment and without posting a vacancy. In such cases, Human Resources shall ensure the process is in compliance with the administrative manual.

ARTICLE 21. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
Union Access to New Employee Orientation/Member Information

1. The City shall schedule a regularly occurring New Employee Orientation (NEO) meeting for new employees each month, offering 1 morning and 1 evening session; and send an electronic list of expected participant(s) at least forty‐eight (48) hours, to the extent possible, in advance of the orientation meeting. This notification shall be sent via email to the recognized Union Representative and Chapter President which will include the name, job title, and department of all newly hired employees scheduled to attend the City’s NEO meetings. The city shall provide the Union with at least ten (10) calendar days’ notice of any change in the regularly scheduled NEO meetings.

2. Up to two (2) Union representatives shall be provided paid release time, not to exceed thirty (30) minutes if on shift; or if not on shift, Union representatives shall be paid no more than (30) minutes to meet in person with all newly hired employees. The Union representatives shall be provided up to thirty (30) minutes of release time to travel to attend the NEO, if applicable. Union representatives may include SEIU Local 1021 Representatives and designated chapter officers, stewards, and members. The Union shall provide the City with a list of chapter officers, stewards, and members designated to attend NEO meetings on behalf of the Union.

3. The City will schedule all new employees to attend the first meeting that takes place following their date of hire. This date will be provided to them in their hiring packet.

4. The time and day for the NEO meetings with be the 2nd Wednesday of the month at 11:00 a.m. in Human Resources and 7:00 p.m. in the Community Center.

5. Audio‐visual equipment, if available, shall be provided for the Union representative if requested by the Union forty‐eight (48) hours in advance of the NEO meeting.

6. City representatives shall be absent from the room during any sessions or training conducted by the Union during the NEO meeting.

7. If for any reason, the Union representative(s) are unable to attend the scheduled NEO, the Union shall notify the City as soon as possible, but no later than 4 p.m. the day before the scheduled meeting. If Union representatives are not able to attend the NEO meeting, the Union will provide the City with a contact sheet to be provided to the new employee. If the newly hired employees have any questions about Union representation, they will be directed to contact the Union.

Packet Page 554 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 23 of 29

21 8. If the Union is unable to attend the scheduled orientation, each newly hired employee will be required to attend a make‐up session onsite, without loss of compensation during the next regularly scheduled NEO. This time will be cleared by the employee’s immediate supervisor if release time is required.

9. If a newly hired employee is unable to attend the scheduled orientation, the employee will be required to attend a make‐up session onsite, without loss of compensation. The Union will be provided with the employee’s work schedule and contact information and their supervisor’s name and contact information. The Union shall arrange with the newly hired employee an alternate time to meet in person within the two weeks of the original NEO.

This time will be cleared by the employee’s immediate supervisor if release time is required.

10. On a monthly basis, the City shall provide the Union with an Excel (or similar) spreadsheet(s), sent via email, with a list of all employees (including newly hired). The list shall include: name, date of hire, bargaining unit, appointment type (Temporary Part Time or Career Part Time), job title, department, physical work location, work phone, home phone/cell phone, work email (if applicable), and personal email address. A separate report is sent to the Union monthly from Payroll with membership dates (Full Dues, Non‐member).

The lists shall be provided to the SEIU Local 1021 membership department with a copy to the SEIU Local 1021 Representative. The Union shall provide updated contact information for such purposes.

A. Payroll Deduction and Pay over: The City shall deduct Union dues or fees and premiums for Union sponsored insurance programs in conformity with State and City regulations. The City shall within fifteen (15) days pay to the designated payee all sums deducted. It is further understood and agreed that Management shall not be required to deduct said dues and other deductions, or remit them to the designated payee, when an employee covered hereunder who has previously filed a written authorization requesting such deductions, requests in writing that Management cancel all or any portion of the deductions previously authorized. The City shall recognize any general dues increase as specified by the designated payee and shall be held harmless for any such pay over as stipulated above.

B. Productivity: Employees covered by this Agreement will cooperate fully with management in programs designed to increase the level of overall productivity of mutual benefit to the taxpayers.

C. Health and Safety: The City agrees to provide a safe and healthful work place by complying with all applicable local, state and federal health and safety laws and regulations. FPTEA agrees that all employees must also comply with applicable laws and regulations.

D. Compliance with ADA and Other Civil Rights Laws: This MOU shall be administered and applied in a manner that complies with provisions of federal, state and local disability and anti‐ discrimination statutes. The City reserves the right to administer and interpret the agreement to ensure compliance with such laws. Whenever reasonably possible, the City will advise FPTEA of any upcoming improvements or alterations to the City’s physical plant and grounds made pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act or other similar law, and will solicit FPTEA’s input and suggestions regarding the matter. The City will meet and confer, where required by the Packet Page 555 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 24 of 29

22 Meyers‐Milias‐Brown Act, regarding the impact of any such improvements or alterations on FPTEA represented employees.

E. Joint Labor Management Committee Meetings (JLM): The purpose of the JLM will be to meet, discuss, decide or make recommendations regarding issues of concern to either the Union or the City. The committee will not discuss issues related to discipline, grievances, individual performance problems or negotiations. The committee will meet quarterly, however, the parties may mutually agree to meet more or less frequently as needed. One week prior to the scheduled meeting, the parties shall establish an agenda. Should an agenda not be developed five days prior to the meeting date, then the meeting may be canceled. If, at any time, either party believes that the regular meetings are not generating positive results or promoting a constructive labor management relationship, future meetings may be canceled by one party serving notice to the other of such. Cancellation of meetings will not be subject to the grievance procedure.

ARTICLE 22. REASONABLE SUSPICION DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING In addition to employees already covered under the Department of Transportation (DOT) drug and alcohol testing, all FPTEA employees will participate in reasonable suspicion drug and alcohol testing, following the reasonable suspicion testing procedure in the City of Fairfield Substance Abuse Policy. In the event that two (2) managers disagree on reasonable suspicion testing of an employee, every effort will be made to call in a third trained manager to determine whether reasonable suspicion testing should be conducted.

ARTICLE 23. SEVERABILITY PROVISION
If any provision of this Agreement is held to be contrary to law by court of competent jurisdiction, such provision will not be deemed valid and subsisting, except to the extent permitted by law, but all other provisions will continue in full force and effect.

ARTICLE 24. UNION SECURITY
A. Every employee in the representation unit covered by this Memorandum of Understanding shall, as a condition of employment, become and remain a member in good standing in the Union; or pay to the Union a monthly fair share service fee not greater than regular monthly dues; or, in the case of an employee who certifies he/she is a member of a bona fide religion, body or sect which has historically held conscientious objection to joining or financially supporting public employee organization, pay a sum monthly equal to service fees to a charitable fund chosen by the employee from the list of Napa‐Solano United Way recipient organizations.

B. SEIU shall be solely responsible for providing a legally adequate written notice in full conformance with the requirements of current case law to each new unit employee within thirty (30) days of the date the Union was notified of a new hire informing the employee of the following:
a. the calculation of the monthly membership dues;
b. the calculation of monthly service fees;
c. the procedure for challenging SEIU’s calculation of expenses chargeable to dissenting employees.

Packet Page 556 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 25 of 29

23 C. FPTEA shall furnish the following to the City no later than 30 days after the date the Union was notified of a newly hired unit employee: (1) a signed dues deduction authorization from each unit employee who has elected to become an FPTEA member; (2) the name of each unit employee who has opted to dissent from FPTEA and become a service fee payer; (3) the name of each employee who has certified that he or she is a member of a bona fide religion, body or sect which has historically held conscientious objection to joining or financially supporting public employee organizations, and the name of the charitable fund to which the employee has chosen to direct a sum equal to the monthly service fee.

D. For all unit employees hired after the final date of ratification, except in Paragraph F below, City shall deduct, based on the information provided by the Union pursuant to Paragraph C, one of the following from the pay of each unit employee:

1. Union dues from each employee who has a signed dues deduction authorization on file with the Human Resources Department;

2. the monthly service fee from each employee who does not have a signed membership dues deduction authorization on file and has not dissented from payment of the monthly service fee;

3. an amount equal to the monthly service fee to be directed to a charitable fund from an employee who has certified that he or she is a member of a bona fide religion or sect who holds a conscientious objection to joining or financially supporting an employee organization such as SEIU, as set forth in paragraph 1 above.

E. The City shall deduct one of the amounts set forth in Paragraph D(1)‐(3) above from the pay of a newly hired unit employee within 30 days of FPTEA providing the employee with a notice equivalent to that required by Paragraph B and the City with the information required in Paragraph C.

F. The City shall not make a deduction required by Paragraph D above during any pay period when the unit employee from whose pay the deduction is otherwise required is in an unpaid status or does not have enough earnings to cover the dues or fees.

G. FPTEA agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold the City harmless from any and all claims, demands, suits, or any other action arising from implementation or application of Paragraphs A‐ F of this Section, provided, however, that no duty to indemnify, defend or hold the City harmless shall be imposed where the basis of the claim, demand or suit arises from the negligence or intentional misconduct of the City or its authorized agents or representatives.

H. All employees hired after the date of final ratification shall either become members of the Union (or exercise the options described in paragraph A and B) and shall remain members in good standing with the FPTEA. As of the date of final ratification to the M.O.U., some current employees in the representation unit covered by this M.O.U. are members of the Union and some are not. All current employees who are members of the Union shall maintain their membership in good standing with the Union for the full term of this Agreement.

Packet Page 557 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 26 of 29

24 I. Beginning the first full pay period following ratification of this MOU the City will deduct COPE donations from employees who have elected to have such donations withheld from their paycheck. FPTEA shall be responsible for developing and disseminating the form.

Packet Page 558 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 27 of 29

25 THE SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION/FAIRFIELD
PART‐TIME EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATIONSIGNATURE PAGE FOR FPTEA MOU: JULY 1, 2018 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2022

City of Fairfield SEIU Local 1021/FEA

______________________________ ______________________________ David J. Gassaway Del Mallory
Interim City Manager SEIU 1021 Area Director/Chief Negotiator

______________________________ ______________________________ Date Date

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

Harry T. Price Date
Mayor/Councilmember

Chuck Timm Date
Councilmember

Rick Vaccaro Date
Councilmember

Pam Bertani Date
Councilmember

Catherine Moy Date
Councilmember

Packet Page 559 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 28 of 29

2 SEIU LOCAL 1021/FPTEA CHAPTER

Andrea Zanetti Date
Field Representative/Chief Negotiator
SEIU Local 1021

Denise Lockwood Date
Bargaining Team Member
FPTEA Chapter President

Sarah Webster Date
Bargaining Team Member

Martina Jackson Date
Bargaining Team Member

John Stead‐Mendez Date
SEIU 1021 Executive Director
Field & Programs

Packet Page 560 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 29 of 29

Agenda Item No: 16.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:July 5, 2022
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, Interim City Manager
SUBJECT:Resolutions 2022156 to 2022171 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Granting Preliminary Approval of Fiscal Year 20222023 Engineer’s Reports, Declaring Intention to Order the Levy and Collection of Assessments, and Providing Notice of a Hearing for Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Districts No. 1 – Gateway, No. 3 – Waterman Highlands, No. 5 – Smith Ranch, No. 6 – Peppertree, No. 7 – Rolling Hills, No. 8 – Kolob Estates, No. 10 – Southbrook, No. 11 – Paradise Valley North, No. 12 – Downtown Business District, No. 13 – North Cordelia, No. 14 – Woodlake, No. 15 – Gold Ridge, No. 16 – Creekside at Cordelia, No. 17 – ChadbourneBeckCordelia, No. 18 – Gold Ridge Park, and No. 19 – Corporate Commons
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolutions.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The adoption of these resolutions will grant preliminary approval of the fiscal year (FY) 20222023 engineer’s reports, declare intention to order the levy and collection of assessments, and set the date and provide notice for a public hearing for 16 landscaping and lighting maintenance districts (LLMDs).

DISCUSSION
The City formed these special districts under the State of California Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, California Streets and Highways Code Section 22500, et seq., to provide a funding source for the maintenance of the landscaping and lighting improvements within the various development areas.

The preliminary approval of the engineer’s reports is the first step in the process of levying the annual assessments. Final approval of the assessments requires a public hearing, which has been scheduled for the July 19, 2022, City Council meeting.

Annual assessment amounts for each district are subject to the provisions of Proposition 218 and must be set at or below (1) the assessment amount or range adopted at the time the district was formed, (2) the assessment amount or range adopted after the district was formed, but prior to the passage of Proposition 218 in 1996, or (3) the assessment amount or range adopted in accordance with Proposition 218 proceedings, including applicable Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustments. The Packet Page 561 of 1243

LLMD No. 1 – Gateway:The FY 20222023 assessments for the Gateway district are proposed to increase approximately 11% from the FY 20212022 rates to the maximum allowable rate for each parcel established in 1995. Assessment rates for each parcel vary depending on parcel size.

The total proposed revenue for this district is $205,971, which includes assessments of $205,965 and interest of $6. The special projects for this district include landscape repair.

While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the Gateway district have remained unchanged since 1995, the district’s operation and maintenance costs have increased due to general inflation overtime. The district would be projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately $170,000 by the end of FY 20222023 if services were to be provided at the current levels. In previous fiscal years when a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented with funds from the district’s unreserved fund balance. However, because the unreserved fund balance has been reduced over time, the district is projected to close FY 20212022 with an overall deficit of ($29,710). Pursuant to the Streets and Highways Code Section 22656, the deficit will be carried forward to FY 20222023. To prevent such deficit in FY 20222023, the FY 20222023 engineer’s report reflects an approximate 75% reduction in the landscaping services and irrigation budget from FY 20212022 levels.

On April 19, 2022, staff informed council of the projected deficit and was granted authorization to propose to the district property owners a onetime General Fund loan, issued at 0% interest with a five year repayment term, as a shortterm solution. The staff engaged the district property owners in June 2022, via mailed flyer to inform them of the proposed loan and requested that they affirm their support for, or opposition to, the loan by taking a short online survey posted at www.civicmic.com/city of fairfield/. The website also disclosed historical and current information regarding the district’s formation, legal requirements, operations, and financial position. Staff will return to council after the July 19, 2022, public hearing with results of the property owner engagement to receive council’s direction regarding the issuance of the loan and any applicable budget adjustments and increases to landscape and irrigation services.

The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessment rates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.

LLMD No. 3 – Waterman Highlands:The FY 20222023 assessment for the Waterman Highlands district is proposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rate of $195 per parcel. The assessment is the maximum rate allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1996.

The total proposed revenue for this district is $60,194, which includes assessments of $47,190, a General Fund contribution of $13,000, and interest of $4. The special projects for this district include landscape renovation and repair.

While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the Waterman Highlands district have remained unchanged since 1996, the district’s operation and maintenance costs have increased due to general inflation overtime. The district would be projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately $30,000 in FY 20222023 if services were to be provided at the current levels. In previous fiscal years when a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented with funds from the district’s unreserved fund balance. However, the district is projected to close FY 20212022 with an available fund balance of just over $93,000, which is approximately $30,000 less than the balance required to fully supplement FY 20222023 revenues. To prevent such deficit in FY 20222023, an approximate 40% reduction in the landscaping services budget and 25% reduction in the irrigation budget from FY Packet Page 562 of 1243

On April 19, 2022, staff informed council of the projected deficit and was granted authorization to propose to the district property owners a onetime General Fund loan, issued at 0% interest with a five year repayment term, as a shortterm solution. Staff engaged the district property owners in June 2022, via mailed flyer and virtual community meeting to inform them of the proposed loan and requested that they affirm their support for, or opposition to, the loan by taking a short online survey posted at www.civicmic.com/city offairfield/. The site also disclosed historical and current information regarding the district’s formation, legal requirements, operations, and financial position. Staff will return to council after the July 19, 2022, public hearing with results of the property owner engagement to receive council’s direction regarding the issuance of the loan and any applicable budget adjustments and increases to landscape and irrigation services.

The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessment rates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.

LLMD No. 5 – Smith Ranch (Rancho Solano):The FY 20222023 assessment for the Smith Ranch (also known as “Rancho Solano”) district is proposed to increase from the FY 20212022 rate of $570 per parcel to $663.66 per parcel. The assessment is the maximum rate allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range, which was established in 1999 and is adjusted each year by the October SFOaklandHayward Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers CPI.

The total proposed revenue for this district is $831,766, which includes assessments of $796,392, a General Fund contribution of $35,373, and interest of $1. The special projects for this district include landscape repair.

On April 19, 2022, staff informed council that this district is projected to have a fund balance deficit by FY 20232024 if services continued to be provided at the current levels without a property owner approved assessment rate increase. Staff reported that the City will be engaging with the property owners and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023 to determine future services and assessment rates.

LLMD No. 6 – Peppertree:The FY 20222023 assessment for the Peppertree district is proposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rate of $60 per residential unit. The assessment is the maximum rate allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1996.

The total proposed revenue for this district is $28,320, which includes assessments of $28,320, and interest of $1. There are no special projects planned for this district .

While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the Peppertree district have remained unchanged since 1996, the district’s operation and maintenance costs have increased due to general inflation overtime. The district would be projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately $30,000 in FY 20222023 if services were to be provided at the current levels. In previous fiscal years when a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented with funds from the district’s unreserved fund balance. However, the district is projected to close FY 20212022 with an available fund balance of just over $63,000, which is approximately $30,000 less than the balance required to fully supplement FY 20222023 revenues. To prevent such deficit in FY 20222023, all landscaping services must cease by September 1, 2022.

The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessment rates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.

LLMD No. 7 – Rolling Hills:The FY 20222023 assessments for the Rolling Hills district are proposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rates of $300 per parcel for the Rolling Hills development, and $250 per parcel for the Serpas Ranch development. These assessments are the maximum rates allowable by the district’s adopted assessment ranges. The assessments for commercial properties at the intersection of Hilborn Road and Lyon Road are proposed to increase by the October SFOaklandHayward Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers CPI.

The total proposed revenue for this district is $351,850, which includes assessments of $316,447, a General Fund contribution of $35,374, and interest of $29. There are no special projects planned for this district.

While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the Rolling Hills district have remained unchanged since the 1990s, the district’s operation and maintenance costs have increased due to general inflation overtime. The district was projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately $81,000 by the end of FY 20212022, and an additional deficit of $364,000 by the end of FY 2022 2023 for a total deficit of $445,000 if services continued to be provided at the FY 20202021 levels. In previous fiscal years when a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented with funds from the district’s unreserved fund balance, however, the district’s unreserved fund balance was depleted in FY 20212022.

As a shortterm solution, the council authorized an additional $35,000 General Fund contribution and directed staff to propose to the Rolling Hills property owners a onetime $410,000 General Fund loan, issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term commencing in FY 20232024. The staff conducted a community engagement process, which included a virtual town hall and an online survey.

The loan and additional General Fund contribution were authorized on May 3, 2022, by Resolution No. 202297, and issued in FY 20212022.

The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessment rates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.

LLMD No. 8 – Kolob Estates:The FY 20222023 assessment for the Kolob Estates district is proposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rate of $400 per parcel. The assessment is the maximum rate allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1994.

The total proposed revenue for this district is $53,5111, which includes assessments of $52,000, a General Fund contribution of $1,040, and interest of $71. The special projects for this district include landscape renovation and repair.

On April 19, 2022, staff informed council that this district was projected to have a fund balance deficit in FY 20222023 if services continued to be provided at the current levels without a property owner approved assessment rate increase, however, updated projections indicate that the deficit will not occur Packet Page 564 of 1243

LLMD No. 10 – Southbrook:The FY 20222023 assessments for the Southbrook district are proposed to increase from the FY 20212022 rates of $215 per parcel to $235 per parcel for the original development and annexation areas 19. The FY 20212022 assessment for the Gold Hill Village 3 development, annexation no. 10, was $155.83 per lot, which was a prorated rate due to the timing of the annexation. The FY 20222023 assessment for this development is proposed at $386.26 per lot. The assessments do not exceed the maximum rates allowable by the district’s adopted assessment ranges, which are adjusted each year by the October SFOaklandHayward Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers CPI.

The total proposed revenue for this district is $545,358, which includes assessments of $532,710, a General Fund contribution of $12,485, and interest of $163. The special projects for this district include landscape renovation and repair.

LLMD No. 11 – Paradise Valley North:The FY 20222023 assessment for the Paradise Valley North district is proposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rate of $190 per residential unit. The assessment is the maximum rate allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1995.

The total proposed revenue for this district is $269,659, which includes assessments of $259,160, a General Fund contribution of $10,404, and interest of $95. There are no special projects planned for this district.

While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the Paradise Valley North district have remained unchanged since the 1995, the district’s operation and maintenance costs have increased due to general inflation overtime. The district was projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately $40,000 by the end of FY 20212022, and an additional deficit of $142,000 by the end of FY 20222023 for a total deficit of $182,000 if services continued to be provided at the FY 20202021 levels. In previous fiscal years when a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented with funds from the district’s unreserved fund balance, however, the district’s unreserved fund balance was depleted in FY 20212022.

As a shortterm solution, the council authorized an additional $7,000 General Fund contribution and directed staff to propose to the Paradise Valley North property owners a onetime $175,000 General Fund loan, issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term commencing in FY 20232024. The staff conducted a community engagement process, which included a virtual town hall and an online survey. The loan and additional General Fund contribution were authorized on May 3, 2022, by Resolution No. 202298, and issued in FY 20212022.

The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessment rates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.

LLMD No. 12 – Downtown Business District:The total FY 20222023 assessments for the District are proposed to increase approximately 2% from the total amount levied in FY 20212022. The proposed assessments for individual parcels vary by parcel size and are the maximum rates allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1997.

The total proposed revenue for this district is $62,021, which includes assessments of $62,020, and interest of $1. There are no special projects planned for this district.

In August 2021, the City hired NBS to conduct an initial review of the City’s 16 LLMDs to determine the Packet Page 565 of 1243

In August 2021, the City hired NBS to conduct an initial review of the City’s 16 LLMDs to determine the operational and financial viability of each district. The City planned to initiate Phase 2 of the review in mid to late 2022, which will include an indepth audit of each district’s governing documents, operations, financial and budgetary projections, and administrative best practices.

Based on the results of the initial review, LLMD No. 12 was projected to have sufficient assessment revenue to sustain services and maintain an adequate fund balance reserve through at least FY 2026 2027 based on the automatic CPI adjustment to the annual assessments authorized by Resolution Nos. 1991204 and 1991205. However, in early June 2022, upon further inspection of the district’s historical governing documents, it was determined that the automatic CPI adjustment to the annual assessments authorized by Resolution Nos. 1991204 and 1991205 was superseded by Resolution Nos. 199763 and 1997144 which set static maximum annual assessments for each parcel with no automatic CPI adjustment as a result of a balloting process.

Consequently, the district would be projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately $40,000 in FY 20222023 if services were to be provided at the current levels. In previous fiscal years when a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented with funds from the district’s unreserved fund balance. However, the district is projected to close FY 20212022 with an available fund balance of just over $87,000, which is approximately $40,000 less than the balance required to fully supplement FY 20222023 revenues. To prevent such deficit in FY 20222023, an approximate 45% reduction in the landscaping services budget and 20% reduction in the irrigation budget from FY 20212022 levels is necessary.

The staff will return to council to inform them of the projected deficit and to request authorization to propose to the district property owners a onetime General Fund loan, issued at 0% interest with a five year repayment term, as a shortterm solution. Pending direction from council, the staff will engage the district property owners in July and August 2022, via mailed flyer and/or virtual community meeting to inform them of the proposed loan and request that they affirm their support for, or opposition to, the loan by taking a short online survey posted at www.civicmic.com/city offairfield/. The site will disclose historical and current information regarding the district’s formation, legal requirements, operations, and financial position. The staff will return to council after the July 19, 2022, public hearing with results of the property owner engagement to receive council’s direction regarding the issuance of the loan and any applicable budget adjustments and increases to landscape and irrigation services.

The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessment rates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.

LLMD No. 13 – North Cordelia:The FY 20222023 assessments for the North Cordelia district are proposed as follows: Citation and Pulte developments are proposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rate of $180 per unit; Hidden Meadows subdivision is proposed to increase from the FY 20212022 rate of $850.45 per unit to $882.77 per unit; Village Oaks subdivision is proposed to increase from the FY 20212022 rate of $207.40 per unit to $215.28 per unit; Jayo subdivision is proposed to increase from the FY 20212022 rate of $218.31 per unit to $226.61 per unit; all other subdivisions are proposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rate of $170 per unit. The assessments for commercial properties are proposed to increase by the October SFOaklandHayward All Urban Consumers CPI. The assessments are the maximum rate allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established for each development/subdivision. The maximum rates for the Hidden Meadows, Village Oaks, and Jayo subdivisions are adjusted each year by the October SFOaklandHayward All Urban Consumers CPI.

The total proposed revenue for this district is $644,129, which includes assessments of $613,895, a General Fund contribution of $30,172, and interest of 62. There are no special projects planned for this district.

Packet Page 566 of 1243

Agenda Item No: 16.AGENDA REPORTDATE:July 5, 2022 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, Interim City ManagerSUBJECT:Resolutions 2022156 to 2022171 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield GrantingPreliminary Approval of Fiscal Year 20222023 Engineer’s Reports, Declaring Intentionto Order the Levy and Collection of Assessments, and Providing Notice of a Hearing forLandscaping and Lighting Maintenance Districts No. 1 – Gateway, No. 3 – WatermanHighlands, No. 5 – Smith Ranch, No. 6 – Peppertree, No. 7 – Rolling Hills, No. 8 –Kolob Estates, No. 10 – Southbrook, No. 11 – Paradise Valley North, No. 12 –Downtown Business District, No. 13 – North Cordelia, No. 14 – Woodlake, No. 15 –Gold Ridge, No. 16 – Creekside at Cordelia, No. 17 – ChadbourneBeckCordelia, No.18 – Gold Ridge Park, and No. 19 – Corporate CommonsRECOMMENDED ACTIONAdopt resolutions.STATEMENT OF ISSUEThe adoption of these resolutions will grant preliminary approval of the fiscal year (FY) 20222023engineer’s reports, declare intention to order the levy and collection of assessments, and set the dateand provide notice for a public hearing for 16 landscaping and lighting maintenance districts (LLMDs).DISCUSSIONThe City formed these special districts under the State of California Landscaping and Lighting Act of1972, California Streets and Highways Code Section 22500, et seq., to provide a funding source forthe maintenance of the landscaping and lighting improvements within the various development areas. The preliminary approval of the engineer’s reports is the first step in the process of levying the annualassessments. Final approval of the assessments requires a public hearing, which has been scheduledfor the July 19, 2022, City Council meeting. Annual assessment amounts for each district are subject to the provisions of Proposition 218 and mustbe set at or below (1) the assessment amount or range adopted at the time the district was formed, (2)the assessment amount or range adopted after the district was formed, but prior to the passage ofProposition 218 in 1996, or (3) the assessment amount or range adopted in accordance withProposition 218 proceedings, including applicable Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustments. Thefollowing summaries describe the proposed FY 20222023 annual assessments and any proposedrate adjustments for each district.LLMD No. 1 – Gateway:The FY 20222023 assessments for the Gateway district are proposed toincrease approximately 11% from the FY 20212022 rates to the maximum allowable rate for eachparcel established in 1995. Assessment rates for each parcel vary depending on parcel size. The total proposed revenue for this district is $205,971, which includes assessments of $205,965 andinterest of $6. The special projects for this district include landscape repair.While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the Gateway district have remained unchangedsince 1995, the district’s operation and maintenance costs have increased due to general inflationovertime. The district would be projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately $170,000 bythe end of FY 20222023 if services were to be provided at the current levels. In previous fiscal yearswhen a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented with funds from the district’sunreserved fund balance. However, because the unreserved fund balance has been reduced over time,the district is projected to close FY 20212022 with an overall deficit of ($29,710). Pursuant to theStreets and Highways Code Section 22656, the deficit will be carried forward to FY 20222023. Toprevent such deficit in FY 20222023, the FY 20222023 engineer’s report reflects an approximate75% reduction in the landscaping services and irrigation budget from FY 20212022 levels. On April 19, 2022, staff informed council of the projected deficit and was granted authorization topropose to the district property owners a onetime General Fund loan, issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term, as a shortterm solution. The staff engaged the district property owners in June2022, via mailed flyer to inform them of the proposed loan and requested that they affirm their supportfor, or opposition to, the loan by taking a short online survey posted at www.civicmic.com/city offairfield/. The website also disclosed historical and current information regarding the district’s formation,legal requirements, operations, and financial position. Staff will return to council after the July 19, 2022,public hearing with results of the property owner engagement to receive council’s direction regardingthe issuance of the loan and any applicable budget adjustments and increases to landscape andirrigation services.The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessmentrates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.LLMD No. 3 – Waterman Highlands:The FY 20222023 assessment for the Waterman Highlandsdistrict is proposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rate of $195 per parcel. The assessment is themaximum rate allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1996. The total proposed revenue for this district is $60,194, which includes assessments of $47,190, aGeneral Fund contribution of $13,000, and interest of $4. The special projects for this district includelandscape renovation and repair.While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the Waterman Highlands district have remainedunchanged since 1996, the district’s operation and maintenance costs have increased due to generalinflation overtime. The district would be projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately$30,000 in FY 20222023 if services were to be provided at the current levels. In previous fiscal yearswhen a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented with funds from the district’sunreserved fund balance. However, the district is projected to close FY 20212022 with an availablefund balance of just over $93,000, which is approximately $30,000 less than the balance required tofully supplement FY 20222023 revenues. To prevent such deficit in FY 20222023, an approximate40% reduction in the landscaping services budget and 25% reduction in the irrigation budget from FY20212022 levels is necessary. On April 19, 2022, staff informed council of the projected deficit and was granted authorization topropose to the district property owners a onetime General Fund loan, issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term, as a shortterm solution. Staff engaged the district property owners in June 2022,via mailed flyer and virtual community meeting to inform them of the proposed loan and requested thatthey affirm their support for, or opposition to, the loan by taking a short online survey posted at www.civicmic.com/city offairfield/. The site also disclosed historical and current information regardingthe district’s formation, legal requirements, operations, and financial position. Staff will return to councilafter the July 19, 2022, public hearing with results of the property owner engagement to receivecouncil’s direction regarding the issuance of the loan and any applicable budget adjustments andincreases to landscape and irrigation services.The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessmentrates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.LLMD No. 5 – Smith Ranch (Rancho Solano):The FY 20222023 assessment for the Smith Ranch(also known as “Rancho Solano”) district is proposed to increase from the FY 20212022 rate of $570per parcel to $663.66 per parcel. The assessment is the maximum rate allowable by the district’sadopted assessment range, which was established in 1999 and is adjusted each year by the OctoberSFOaklandHayward Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers CPI. The total proposed revenue for this district is $831,766, which includes assessments of $796,392, aGeneral Fund contribution of $35,373, and interest of $1. The special projects for this district includelandscape repair.On April 19, 2022, staff informed council that this district is projected to have a fund balance deficit byFY 20232024 if services continued to be provided at the current levels without a property ownerapproved assessment rate increase. Staff reported that the City will be engaging with the propertyowners and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023 to determine futureservices and assessment rates.LLMD No. 6 – Peppertree:The FY 20222023 assessment for the Peppertree district is proposed toremain at the FY 20212022 rate of $60 per residential unit. The assessment is the maximum rateallowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1996. The total proposed revenue for this district is $28,320, which includes assessments of $28,320, andinterest of $1. There are no special projects planned for this district .While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the Peppertree district have remainedunchanged since 1996, the district’s operation and maintenance costs have increased due to generalinflation overtime. The district would be projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately$30,000 in FY 20222023 if services were to be provided at the current levels. In previous fiscal yearswhen a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented with funds from the district’sunreserved fund balance. However, the district is projected to close FY 20212022 with an availablefund balance of just over $63,000, which is approximately $30,000 less than the balance required tofully supplement FY 20222023 revenues. To prevent such deficit in FY 20222023, all landscapingservices must cease by September 1, 2022. On April 19, 2022, staff informed council of the projected deficit and was granted authorization topropose to the district property owners a onetime General Fund loan, issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term, as a shortterm solution. Staff engaged the district property owners in June 2022,via mailed flyer and virtual community meeting to inform them of the proposed loan and requested thatthey affirm their support for, or opposition to, the loan by taking a short online survey posted at www.civicmic.com/city offairfield/. The site also disclosed historical and current information regardingthe district’s formation, legal requirements, operations, and financial position. Staff will return to councilafter the July 19, 2022, public hearing with results of the property owner engagement to receivecouncil’s direction regarding the issuance of the loan and any applicable budget adjustments andincreases to landscape and irrigation services.The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessmentrates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.LLMD No. 7 – Rolling Hills:The FY 20222023 assessments for the Rolling Hills district are proposedto remain at the FY 20212022 rates of $300 per parcel for the Rolling Hills development, and $250 perparcel for the Serpas Ranch development. These assessments are the maximum rates allowable by thedistrict’s adopted assessment ranges. The assessments for commercial properties at the intersectionof Hilborn Road and Lyon Road are proposed to increase by the October SFOaklandHayward UrbanWage Earners and Clerical Workers CPI.The total proposed revenue for this district is $351,850, which includes assessments of $316,447, aGeneral Fund contribution of $35,374, and interest of $29. There are no special projects planned forthis district. While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the Rolling Hills district have remainedunchanged since the 1990s, the district’s operation and maintenance costs have increased due togeneral inflation overtime. The district was projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately$81,000 by the end of FY 20212022, and an additional deficit of $364,000 by the end of FY 20222023 for a total deficit of $445,000 if services continued to be provided at the FY 20202021 levels. Inprevious fiscal years when a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented withfunds from the district’s unreserved fund balance, however, the district’s unreserved fund balance wasdepleted in FY 20212022. As a shortterm solution, the council authorized an additional $35,000 General Fund contribution anddirected staff to propose to the Rolling Hills property owners a onetime $410,000 General Fund loan,issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term commencing in FY 20232024. The staffconducted a community engagement process, which included a virtual town hall and an online survey.The loan and additional General Fund contribution were authorized on May 3, 2022, by Resolution No.202297, and issued in FY 20212022. The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessmentrates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.LLMD No. 8 – Kolob Estates:The FY 20222023 assessment for the Kolob Estates district isproposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rate of $400 per parcel. The assessment is the maximum rateallowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1994. The total proposed revenue for this district is $53,5111, which includes assessments of $52,000, aGeneral Fund contribution of $1,040, and interest of $71. The special projects for this district includelandscape renovation and repair.On April 19, 2022, staff informed council that this district was projected to have a fund balance deficit inFY 20222023 if services continued to be provided at the current levels without a property ownerapproved assessment rate increase, however, updated projections indicate that the deficit will not occuruntil FY 20232024. The City will be engaging with the property owners and will conduct a Proposition218 balloting process during FY 20222023 to determine future services and assessment rates. LLMD No. 10 – Southbrook:The FY 20222023 assessments for the Southbrook district are proposedto increase from the FY 20212022 rates of $215 per parcel to $235 per parcel for the originaldevelopment and annexation areas 19. The FY 20212022 assessment for the Gold Hill Village 3development, annexation no. 10, was $155.83 per lot, which was a prorated rate due to the timing of theannexation. The FY 20222023 assessment for this development is proposed at $386.26 per lot. Theassessments do not exceed the maximum rates allowable by the district’s adopted assessmentranges, which are adjusted each year by the October SFOaklandHayward Urban Wage Earners andClerical Workers CPI.The total proposed revenue for this district is $545,358, which includes assessments of $532,710, aGeneral Fund contribution of $12,485, and interest of $163. The special projects for this district includelandscape renovation and repair.LLMD No. 11 – Paradise Valley North:The FY 20222023 assessment for the Paradise Valley Northdistrict is proposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rate of $190 per residential unit. The assessment isthe maximum rate allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1995. The total proposed revenue for this district is $269,659, which includes assessments of $259,160, aGeneral Fund contribution of $10,404, and interest of $95. There are no special projects planned forthis district.While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the Paradise Valley North district haveremained unchanged since the 1995, the district’s operation and maintenance costs have increaseddue to general inflation overtime. The district was projected to have a fund balance deficit ofapproximately $40,000 by the end of FY 20212022, and an additional deficit of $142,000 by the end ofFY 20222023 for a total deficit of $182,000 if services continued to be provided at the FY 20202021levels. In previous fiscal years when a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplementedwith funds from the district’s unreserved fund balance, however, the district’s unreserved fund balancewas depleted in FY 20212022. As a shortterm solution, the council authorized an additional $7,000 General Fund contribution anddirected staff to propose to the Paradise Valley North property owners a onetime $175,000 GeneralFund loan, issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term commencing in FY 20232024. Thestaff conducted a community engagement process, which included a virtual town hall and an onlinesurvey. The loan and additional General Fund contribution were authorized on May 3, 2022, byResolution No. 202298, and issued in FY 20212022.The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessmentrates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.LLMD No. 12 – Downtown Business District:The total FY 20222023 assessments for the District areproposed to increase approximately 2% from the total amount levied in FY 20212022. The proposedassessments for individual parcels vary by parcel size and are the maximum rates allowable by thedistrict’s adopted assessment range established in 1997. The total proposed revenue for this district is $62,021, which includes assessments of $62,020, andinterest of $1. There are no special projects planned for this district.In August 2021, the City hired NBS to conduct an initial review of the City’s 16 LLMDs to determine theoperational and financial viability of each district. The City planned to initiate Phase 2 of the review inmid to late 2022, which will include an indepth audit of each district’s governing documents,operations, financial and budgetary projections, and administrative best practices. Based on the results of the initial review, LLMD No. 12 was projected to have sufficient assessmentrevenue to sustain services and maintain an adequate fund balance reserve through at least FY 20262027 based on the automatic CPI adjustment to the annual assessments authorized by Resolution Nos.1991204 and 1991205. However, in early June 2022, upon further inspection of the district’s historicalgoverning documents, it was determined that the automatic CPI adjustment to the annual assessmentsauthorized by Resolution Nos. 1991204 and 1991205 was superseded by Resolution Nos. 199763and 1997144 which set static maximum annual assessments for each parcel with no automatic CPIadjustment as a result of a balloting process. Consequently, the district would be projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately $40,000 inFY 20222023 if services were to be provided at the current levels. In previous fiscal years when abudget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented with funds from the district’sunreserved fund balance. However, the district is projected to close FY 20212022 with an availablefund balance of just over $87,000, which is approximately $40,000 less than the balance required tofully supplement FY 20222023 revenues. To prevent such deficit in FY 20222023, an approximate45% reduction in the landscaping services budget and 20% reduction in the irrigation budget from FY20212022 levels is necessary.The staff will return to council to inform them of the projected deficit and to request authorization topropose to the district property owners a onetime General Fund loan, issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term, as a shortterm solution. Pending direction from council, the staff will engage thedistrict property owners in July and August 2022, via mailed flyer and/or virtual community meeting toinform them of the proposed loan and request that they affirm their support for, or opposition to, the loanby taking a short online survey posted at www.civicmic.com/city offairfield/. The site will disclosehistorical and current information regarding the district’s formation, legal requirements, operations, andfinancial position. The staff will return to council after the July 19, 2022, public hearing with results of theproperty owner engagement to receive council’s direction regarding the issuance of the loan and anyapplicable budget adjustments and increases to landscape and irrigation services.The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessmentrates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.LLMD No. 13 – North Cordelia:The FY 20222023 assessments for the North Cordelia district areproposed as follows: Citation and Pulte developments are proposed to remain at the FY 20212022rate of $180 per unit; Hidden Meadows subdivision is proposed to increase from the FY 20212022rate of $850.45 per unit to $882.77 per unit; Village Oaks subdivision is proposed to increase from theFY 20212022 rate of $207.40 per unit to $215.28 per unit; Jayo subdivision is proposed to increasefrom the FY 20212022 rate of $218.31 per unit to $226.61 per unit; all other subdivisions are proposedto remain at the FY 20212022 rate of $170 per unit. The assessments for commercial properties areproposed to increase by the October SFOaklandHayward All Urban Consumers CPI. Theassessments are the maximum rate allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range establishedfor each development/subdivision. The maximum rates for the Hidden Meadows, Village Oaks, andJayo subdivisions are adjusted each year by the October SFOaklandHayward All Urban ConsumersCPI.The total proposed revenue for this district is $644,129, which includes assessments of $613,895, a General Fund contribution of $30,172, and interest of 62. There are no special projects planned for this district.

While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the majority of development in the North Cordelia district have remained unchanged since the 1990s, the district’s operation and maintenance costs have increased due to general inflation overtime. The district was projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately $40,000 by the end of FY 20212022, and an additional deficit of $119,000 by the end of FY 20222023 for a total deficit of $159,000 if services continued to be provided at the FY 20202021 levels. In previous fiscal years when a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented with funds from the district’s unreserved fund balance, however, the district’s unreserved fund balance was depleted in FY 20212022.

As a shortterm solution, the council authorized an additional $8,000 General Fund contribution and directed staff to propose to the North Cordelia property owners a onetime $151,000 General Fund loan, issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term commencing in FY 20232024. The staff conducted a community engagement process, which included a virtual town hall and an online survey.

The loan and additional General Fund contribution were authorized on May 3, 2022, by Resolution No. 202299, and issued in FY 20212022.

The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessment rates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.

LLMD No. 14 – Woodlake:The FY 20222023 assessments for the Woodlake district are proposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rates as follows: $206.25 per lot in the Woodlake/Horseshoe Lake Estates subdivision, $251.25 per lot in the Paradise Crest (Annexation No. 1) and Paradise Glen (Annexation No. 2) subdivisions, $95.25 per lot in the Bedford Falls subdivision (Annexation No. 3), $251.25 per lot in the Villages I subdivision (Annexation No. 4), and $251.25 in the Villages II subdivision (Annexation No. 5). These assessments are below the district’s adopted assessment rate maximums for each subdivision, which are adjusted each year by the October SFOaklandHayward All Urban Consumers CPI, as follows: $593 per lot in Woodlake/Horseshoe Lake Estates, $641.98 per lot in Paradise Crest (Annexation No. 1), $629.39 per lot in Paradise Glen (Annexation No. 2), $600.28 per lot in Bedford Falls (Annexation No. 3), $630.81 per lot in Villages I (Annexation No. 4), and $630.17 per lot in Villages II (Annexation No. 5).

The total proposed revenue for this district is $316,796 , which includes assessments of $284,012, a General Fund contribution of $16,646, and interest of $16,138. The special projects for this district include landscape renovation and repair.

LLMD No. 15 – Gold Ridge:The FY 20222023 assessment for the Gold Ridge district is proposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rate of $120 per dwelling for the Madison Subdivision and $150 per dwelling for all other subdivisions. This assessment is below the district’s adopted assessment rate maximums for each subdivision, which are adjusted each year by the October SFOaklandHayward All Urban Consumers CPI, as follows: $419.03 per dwelling in Gold Ridge Units 13, $578.06 per dwelling in Gold Ridge Units 4 and 68 (Annexation No. 1), $475.81 per dwelling Gold Ridge Unit 5 (Annexation No. 2), $273.49 per dwelling in Madison (Annexation No. 3), $518.18 per dwelling in Gold Ridge Unit 9 (Annexation No. 4), $190.69 per dwelling in Gold Ridge North Phase II (Annexation No. 5), $190.69 per dwelling in Gold Ridge Unit 10 (Annexation No. 6), $180.10 per dwelling in Villages at FairfieldVillages IV (Annexation No. 7), and $169.27 per dwelling in Discovery I & III and Gold Ridge IIIA (Annexation No. 8).

The total proposed revenue for this district is $271,326, which includes assessments of $258,810, a General Fund contribution of $5,202, and interest of $7,314. The special projects for this district include landscape renovation and repair.

Packet Page 567 of 1243

Agenda Item No: 16.AGENDA REPORTDATE:July 5, 2022 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, Interim City ManagerSUBJECT:Resolutions 2022156 to 2022171 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield GrantingPreliminary Approval of Fiscal Year 20222023 Engineer’s Reports, Declaring Intentionto Order the Levy and Collection of Assessments, and Providing Notice of a Hearing forLandscaping and Lighting Maintenance Districts No. 1 – Gateway, No. 3 – WatermanHighlands, No. 5 – Smith Ranch, No. 6 – Peppertree, No. 7 – Rolling Hills, No. 8 –Kolob Estates, No. 10 – Southbrook, No. 11 – Paradise Valley North, No. 12 –Downtown Business District, No. 13 – North Cordelia, No. 14 – Woodlake, No. 15 –Gold Ridge, No. 16 – Creekside at Cordelia, No. 17 – ChadbourneBeckCordelia, No.18 – Gold Ridge Park, and No. 19 – Corporate CommonsRECOMMENDED ACTIONAdopt resolutions.STATEMENT OF ISSUEThe adoption of these resolutions will grant preliminary approval of the fiscal year (FY) 20222023engineer’s reports, declare intention to order the levy and collection of assessments, and set the dateand provide notice for a public hearing for 16 landscaping and lighting maintenance districts (LLMDs).DISCUSSIONThe City formed these special districts under the State of California Landscaping and Lighting Act of1972, California Streets and Highways Code Section 22500, et seq., to provide a funding source forthe maintenance of the landscaping and lighting improvements within the various development areas. The preliminary approval of the engineer’s reports is the first step in the process of levying the annualassessments. Final approval of the assessments requires a public hearing, which has been scheduledfor the July 19, 2022, City Council meeting. Annual assessment amounts for each district are subject to the provisions of Proposition 218 and mustbe set at or below (1) the assessment amount or range adopted at the time the district was formed, (2)the assessment amount or range adopted after the district was formed, but prior to the passage ofProposition 218 in 1996, or (3) the assessment amount or range adopted in accordance withProposition 218 proceedings, including applicable Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustments. Thefollowing summaries describe the proposed FY 20222023 annual assessments and any proposedrate adjustments for each district.LLMD No. 1 – Gateway:The FY 20222023 assessments for the Gateway district are proposed toincrease approximately 11% from the FY 20212022 rates to the maximum allowable rate for eachparcel established in 1995. Assessment rates for each parcel vary depending on parcel size. The total proposed revenue for this district is $205,971, which includes assessments of $205,965 andinterest of $6. The special projects for this district include landscape repair.While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the Gateway district have remained unchangedsince 1995, the district’s operation and maintenance costs have increased due to general inflationovertime. The district would be projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately $170,000 bythe end of FY 20222023 if services were to be provided at the current levels. In previous fiscal yearswhen a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented with funds from the district’sunreserved fund balance. However, because the unreserved fund balance has been reduced over time,the district is projected to close FY 20212022 with an overall deficit of ($29,710). Pursuant to theStreets and Highways Code Section 22656, the deficit will be carried forward to FY 20222023. Toprevent such deficit in FY 20222023, the FY 20222023 engineer’s report reflects an approximate75% reduction in the landscaping services and irrigation budget from FY 20212022 levels. On April 19, 2022, staff informed council of the projected deficit and was granted authorization topropose to the district property owners a onetime General Fund loan, issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term, as a shortterm solution. The staff engaged the district property owners in June2022, via mailed flyer to inform them of the proposed loan and requested that they affirm their supportfor, or opposition to, the loan by taking a short online survey posted at www.civicmic.com/city offairfield/. The website also disclosed historical and current information regarding the district’s formation,legal requirements, operations, and financial position. Staff will return to council after the July 19, 2022,public hearing with results of the property owner engagement to receive council’s direction regardingthe issuance of the loan and any applicable budget adjustments and increases to landscape andirrigation services.The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessmentrates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.LLMD No. 3 – Waterman Highlands:The FY 20222023 assessment for the Waterman Highlandsdistrict is proposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rate of $195 per parcel. The assessment is themaximum rate allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1996. The total proposed revenue for this district is $60,194, which includes assessments of $47,190, aGeneral Fund contribution of $13,000, and interest of $4. The special projects for this district includelandscape renovation and repair.While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the Waterman Highlands district have remainedunchanged since 1996, the district’s operation and maintenance costs have increased due to generalinflation overtime. The district would be projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately$30,000 in FY 20222023 if services were to be provided at the current levels. In previous fiscal yearswhen a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented with funds from the district’sunreserved fund balance. However, the district is projected to close FY 20212022 with an availablefund balance of just over $93,000, which is approximately $30,000 less than the balance required tofully supplement FY 20222023 revenues. To prevent such deficit in FY 20222023, an approximate40% reduction in the landscaping services budget and 25% reduction in the irrigation budget from FY20212022 levels is necessary. On April 19, 2022, staff informed council of the projected deficit and was granted authorization topropose to the district property owners a onetime General Fund loan, issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term, as a shortterm solution. Staff engaged the district property owners in June 2022,via mailed flyer and virtual community meeting to inform them of the proposed loan and requested thatthey affirm their support for, or opposition to, the loan by taking a short online survey posted at www.civicmic.com/city offairfield/. The site also disclosed historical and current information regardingthe district’s formation, legal requirements, operations, and financial position. Staff will return to councilafter the July 19, 2022, public hearing with results of the property owner engagement to receivecouncil’s direction regarding the issuance of the loan and any applicable budget adjustments andincreases to landscape and irrigation services.The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessmentrates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.LLMD No. 5 – Smith Ranch (Rancho Solano):The FY 20222023 assessment for the Smith Ranch(also known as “Rancho Solano”) district is proposed to increase from the FY 20212022 rate of $570per parcel to $663.66 per parcel. The assessment is the maximum rate allowable by the district’sadopted assessment range, which was established in 1999 and is adjusted each year by the OctoberSFOaklandHayward Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers CPI. The total proposed revenue for this district is $831,766, which includes assessments of $796,392, aGeneral Fund contribution of $35,373, and interest of $1. The special projects for this district includelandscape repair.On April 19, 2022, staff informed council that this district is projected to have a fund balance deficit byFY 20232024 if services continued to be provided at the current levels without a property ownerapproved assessment rate increase. Staff reported that the City will be engaging with the propertyowners and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023 to determine futureservices and assessment rates.LLMD No. 6 – Peppertree:The FY 20222023 assessment for the Peppertree district is proposed toremain at the FY 20212022 rate of $60 per residential unit. The assessment is the maximum rateallowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1996. The total proposed revenue for this district is $28,320, which includes assessments of $28,320, andinterest of $1. There are no special projects planned for this district .While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the Peppertree district have remainedunchanged since 1996, the district’s operation and maintenance costs have increased due to generalinflation overtime. The district would be projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately$30,000 in FY 20222023 if services were to be provided at the current levels. In previous fiscal yearswhen a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented with funds from the district’sunreserved fund balance. However, the district is projected to close FY 20212022 with an availablefund balance of just over $63,000, which is approximately $30,000 less than the balance required tofully supplement FY 20222023 revenues. To prevent such deficit in FY 20222023, all landscapingservices must cease by September 1, 2022. On April 19, 2022, staff informed council of the projected deficit and was granted authorization topropose to the district property owners a onetime General Fund loan, issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term, as a shortterm solution. Staff engaged the district property owners in June 2022,via mailed flyer and virtual community meeting to inform them of the proposed loan and requested thatthey affirm their support for, or opposition to, the loan by taking a short online survey posted at www.civicmic.com/city offairfield/. The site also disclosed historical and current information regardingthe district’s formation, legal requirements, operations, and financial position. Staff will return to councilafter the July 19, 2022, public hearing with results of the property owner engagement to receivecouncil’s direction regarding the issuance of the loan and any applicable budget adjustments andincreases to landscape and irrigation services.The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessmentrates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.LLMD No. 7 – Rolling Hills:The FY 20222023 assessments for the Rolling Hills district are proposedto remain at the FY 20212022 rates of $300 per parcel for the Rolling Hills development, and $250 perparcel for the Serpas Ranch development. These assessments are the maximum rates allowable by thedistrict’s adopted assessment ranges. The assessments for commercial properties at the intersectionof Hilborn Road and Lyon Road are proposed to increase by the October SFOaklandHayward UrbanWage Earners and Clerical Workers CPI.The total proposed revenue for this district is $351,850, which includes assessments of $316,447, aGeneral Fund contribution of $35,374, and interest of $29. There are no special projects planned forthis district. While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the Rolling Hills district have remainedunchanged since the 1990s, the district’s operation and maintenance costs have increased due togeneral inflation overtime. The district was projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately$81,000 by the end of FY 20212022, and an additional deficit of $364,000 by the end of FY 20222023 for a total deficit of $445,000 if services continued to be provided at the FY 20202021 levels. Inprevious fiscal years when a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented withfunds from the district’s unreserved fund balance, however, the district’s unreserved fund balance wasdepleted in FY 20212022. As a shortterm solution, the council authorized an additional $35,000 General Fund contribution anddirected staff to propose to the Rolling Hills property owners a onetime $410,000 General Fund loan,issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term commencing in FY 20232024. The staffconducted a community engagement process, which included a virtual town hall and an online survey.The loan and additional General Fund contribution were authorized on May 3, 2022, by Resolution No.202297, and issued in FY 20212022. The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessmentrates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.LLMD No. 8 – Kolob Estates:The FY 20222023 assessment for the Kolob Estates district isproposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rate of $400 per parcel. The assessment is the maximum rateallowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1994. The total proposed revenue for this district is $53,5111, which includes assessments of $52,000, aGeneral Fund contribution of $1,040, and interest of $71. The special projects for this district includelandscape renovation and repair.On April 19, 2022, staff informed council that this district was projected to have a fund balance deficit inFY 20222023 if services continued to be provided at the current levels without a property ownerapproved assessment rate increase, however, updated projections indicate that the deficit will not occuruntil FY 20232024. The City will be engaging with the property owners and will conduct a Proposition218 balloting process during FY 20222023 to determine future services and assessment rates. LLMD No. 10 – Southbrook:The FY 20222023 assessments for the Southbrook district are proposedto increase from the FY 20212022 rates of $215 per parcel to $235 per parcel for the originaldevelopment and annexation areas 19. The FY 20212022 assessment for the Gold Hill Village 3development, annexation no. 10, was $155.83 per lot, which was a prorated rate due to the timing of theannexation. The FY 20222023 assessment for this development is proposed at $386.26 per lot. Theassessments do not exceed the maximum rates allowable by the district’s adopted assessmentranges, which are adjusted each year by the October SFOaklandHayward Urban Wage Earners andClerical Workers CPI.The total proposed revenue for this district is $545,358, which includes assessments of $532,710, aGeneral Fund contribution of $12,485, and interest of $163. The special projects for this district includelandscape renovation and repair.LLMD No. 11 – Paradise Valley North:The FY 20222023 assessment for the Paradise Valley Northdistrict is proposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rate of $190 per residential unit. The assessment isthe maximum rate allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1995. The total proposed revenue for this district is $269,659, which includes assessments of $259,160, aGeneral Fund contribution of $10,404, and interest of $95. There are no special projects planned forthis district.While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the Paradise Valley North district haveremained unchanged since the 1995, the district’s operation and maintenance costs have increaseddue to general inflation overtime. The district was projected to have a fund balance deficit ofapproximately $40,000 by the end of FY 20212022, and an additional deficit of $142,000 by the end ofFY 20222023 for a total deficit of $182,000 if services continued to be provided at the FY 20202021levels. In previous fiscal years when a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplementedwith funds from the district’s unreserved fund balance, however, the district’s unreserved fund balancewas depleted in FY 20212022. As a shortterm solution, the council authorized an additional $7,000 General Fund contribution anddirected staff to propose to the Paradise Valley North property owners a onetime $175,000 GeneralFund loan, issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term commencing in FY 20232024. Thestaff conducted a community engagement process, which included a virtual town hall and an onlinesurvey. The loan and additional General Fund contribution were authorized on May 3, 2022, byResolution No. 202298, and issued in FY 20212022.The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessmentrates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.LLMD No. 12 – Downtown Business District:The total FY 20222023 assessments for the District areproposed to increase approximately 2% from the total amount levied in FY 20212022. The proposedassessments for individual parcels vary by parcel size and are the maximum rates allowable by thedistrict’s adopted assessment range established in 1997. The total proposed revenue for this district is $62,021, which includes assessments of $62,020, andinterest of $1. There are no special projects planned for this district.In August 2021, the City hired NBS to conduct an initial review of the City’s 16 LLMDs to determine theoperational and financial viability of each district. The City planned to initiate Phase 2 of the review inmid to late 2022, which will include an indepth audit of each district’s governing documents,operations, financial and budgetary projections, and administrative best practices. Based on the results of the initial review, LLMD No. 12 was projected to have sufficient assessmentrevenue to sustain services and maintain an adequate fund balance reserve through at least FY 20262027 based on the automatic CPI adjustment to the annual assessments authorized by Resolution Nos.1991204 and 1991205. However, in early June 2022, upon further inspection of the district’s historicalgoverning documents, it was determined that the automatic CPI adjustment to the annual assessmentsauthorized by Resolution Nos. 1991204 and 1991205 was superseded by Resolution Nos. 199763and 1997144 which set static maximum annual assessments for each parcel with no automatic CPIadjustment as a result of a balloting process. Consequently, the district would be projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately $40,000 inFY 20222023 if services were to be provided at the current levels. In previous fiscal years when abudget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented with funds from the district’sunreserved fund balance. However, the district is projected to close FY 20212022 with an availablefund balance of just over $87,000, which is approximately $40,000 less than the balance required tofully supplement FY 20222023 revenues. To prevent such deficit in FY 20222023, an approximate45% reduction in the landscaping services budget and 20% reduction in the irrigation budget from FY20212022 levels is necessary.The staff will return to council to inform them of the projected deficit and to request authorization topropose to the district property owners a onetime General Fund loan, issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term, as a shortterm solution. Pending direction from council, the staff will engage thedistrict property owners in July and August 2022, via mailed flyer and/or virtual community meeting toinform them of the proposed loan and request that they affirm their support for, or opposition to, the loanby taking a short online survey posted at www.civicmic.com/city offairfield/. The site will disclosehistorical and current information regarding the district’s formation, legal requirements, operations, andfinancial position. The staff will return to council after the July 19, 2022, public hearing with results of theproperty owner engagement to receive council’s direction regarding the issuance of the loan and anyapplicable budget adjustments and increases to landscape and irrigation services.The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessmentrates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.LLMD No. 13 – North Cordelia:The FY 20222023 assessments for the North Cordelia district areproposed as follows: Citation and Pulte developments are proposed to remain at the FY 20212022rate of $180 per unit; Hidden Meadows subdivision is proposed to increase from the FY 20212022rate of $850.45 per unit to $882.77 per unit; Village Oaks subdivision is proposed to increase from theFY 20212022 rate of $207.40 per unit to $215.28 per unit; Jayo subdivision is proposed to increasefrom the FY 20212022 rate of $218.31 per unit to $226.61 per unit; all other subdivisions are proposedto remain at the FY 20212022 rate of $170 per unit. The assessments for commercial properties areproposed to increase by the October SFOaklandHayward All Urban Consumers CPI. Theassessments are the maximum rate allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range establishedfor each development/subdivision. The maximum rates for the Hidden Meadows, Village Oaks, andJayo subdivisions are adjusted each year by the October SFOaklandHayward All Urban ConsumersCPI.The total proposed revenue for this district is $644,129, which includes assessments of $613,895, aGeneral Fund contribution of $30,172, and interest of 62. There are no special projects planned for thisdistrict.While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the majority of development in the NorthCordelia district have remained unchanged since the 1990s, the district’s operation and maintenancecosts have increased due to general inflation overtime. The district was projected to have a fundbalance deficit of approximately $40,000 by the end of FY 20212022, and an additional deficit of$119,000 by the end of FY 20222023 for a total deficit of $159,000 if services continued to beprovided at the FY 20202021 levels. In previous fiscal years when a budget deficit existed,assessment revenues were supplemented with funds from the district’s unreserved fund balance,however, the district’s unreserved fund balance was depleted in FY 20212022. As a shortterm solution, the council authorized an additional $8,000 General Fund contribution anddirected staff to propose to the North Cordelia property owners a onetime $151,000 General Fundloan, issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term commencing in FY 20232024. The staffconducted a community engagement process, which included a virtual town hall and an online survey.The loan and additional General Fund contribution were authorized on May 3, 2022, by Resolution No.202299, and issued in FY 20212022.The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessmentrates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.LLMD No. 14 – Woodlake:The FY 20222023 assessments for the Woodlake district are proposed toremain at the FY 20212022 rates as follows: $206.25 per lot in the Woodlake/Horseshoe Lake Estatessubdivision, $251.25 per lot in the Paradise Crest (Annexation No. 1) and Paradise Glen (AnnexationNo. 2) subdivisions, $95.25 per lot in the Bedford Falls subdivision (Annexation No. 3), $251.25 per lotin the Villages I subdivision (Annexation No. 4), and $251.25 in the Villages II subdivision (AnnexationNo. 5). These assessments are below the district’s adopted assessment rate maximums for eachsubdivision, which are adjusted each year by the October SFOaklandHayward All Urban ConsumersCPI, as follows: $593 per lot in Woodlake/Horseshoe Lake Estates, $641.98 per lot in Paradise Crest(Annexation No. 1), $629.39 per lot in Paradise Glen (Annexation No. 2), $600.28 per lot in BedfordFalls (Annexation No. 3), $630.81 per lot in Villages I (Annexation No. 4), and $630.17 per lot inVillages II (Annexation No. 5). The total proposed revenue for this district is $316,796 , which includes assessments of $284,012, aGeneral Fund contribution of $16,646, and interest of $16,138. The special projects for this districtinclude landscape renovation and repair.LLMD No. 15 – Gold Ridge:The FY 20222023 assessment for the Gold Ridge district is proposed toremain at the FY 20212022 rate of $120 per dwelling for the Madison Subdivision and $150 perdwelling for all other subdivisions. This assessment is below the district’s adopted assessment ratemaximums for each subdivision, which are adjusted each year by the October SFOaklandHayward AllUrban Consumers CPI, as follows: $419.03 per dwelling in Gold Ridge Units 13, $578.06 per dwellingin Gold Ridge Units 4 and 68 (Annexation No. 1), $475.81 per dwelling Gold Ridge Unit 5 (AnnexationNo. 2), $273.49 per dwelling in Madison (Annexation No. 3), $518.18 per dwelling in Gold Ridge Unit 9(Annexation No. 4), $190.69 per dwelling in Gold Ridge North Phase II (Annexation No. 5), $190.69 perdwelling in Gold Ridge Unit 10 (Annexation No. 6), $180.10 per dwelling in Villages at FairfieldVillagesIV (Annexation No. 7), and $169.27 per dwelling in Discovery I & III and Gold Ridge IIIA (Annexation No.8).The total proposed revenue for this district is $271,326, which includes assessments of $258,810, aGeneral Fund contribution of $5,202, and interest of $7,314. The special projects for this district include landscape renovation and repair.

LLMD No. 16 – Creekside at Cordelia:The FY 20222023 assessments for the Creekside at Cordelia district are proposed to decrease from the FY 20212022 rate of $300 per parcel to $213 per parcel in the Creekside at Cordelia subdivision and the Enclave at Red Top development (Annexation No. 1).

This assessment is below the district’s adopted assessment rate maximum for each subdivision as follows: $365.81 for the Creekside at Cordelia and $379.12 for the Enclave at Red Top.

The total proposed revenue for this district is $44,664, which includes assessments of $44,091, and interest of $573. The special projects for this district include landscape renovation and repair.

LLMD No. 17 – ChadbourneBeckCordelia:The FY 20222023 assessments for the Chadbourne BeckCordelia district are proposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rates which vary depending on parcel size. The assessment rates are below the district’s adopted assessment rate maximums for each parcel.

The total proposed revenue for this district is $288,699, which includes assessments of $280,293, and interest of $8,406. The special projects for this district include landscape renovation and repair.

LLMD No. 18 – Gold Ridge Park:The FY 20222023 assessment for the Gold Ridge Park district is proposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rate of $63.75 per parcel. This assessment is below the district’s adopted assessment rate maximum for each subdivision as follows: $118.10 per parcel in the Gold Ridge Neighborhood Park area, and $118.47 per parcel in the Discovery II & III and Gold Ridge IIIA subdivisions.

The total proposed revenue for this district is $110,020, which includes assessments of $93,203, a General Fund contribution of $14,064, and interest of $2,753. The special projects for this district include landscape repair.

LLMD No. 19 – Corporate Common:The FY 20222023 assessments for the Corporate Commons (also known as Suisun Valley Road/Kaiser) district are proposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rates which vary depending on parcel size. The assessment rates are below the district’s adopted assessment rate maximums for each parcel.

The total proposed revenue for this district is $128,811, which includes assessments of $127,192, and interest of $1,619. The special projects for this district include landscape renovation and repair.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The total proposed FY 20222023 revenue for all districts is $4,212,696, which includes assessments of $4,001,700, General Fund (Fund 011, Division and Responsibility Code 99000) contributions of $173,760, and interest of $37,236. The City’s General Fund contributions are made in accordance with Resolution 91213B and subsequent engineer’s reports for various district formations and annexations to cover a portion of the costs for street lighting, arterial landscaping, and irrigation, which has been determined to be a general public benefit rather than a special benefit to the district property owners.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
Budget and assessment information was presented to the property owners of LLMD Nos. 1, 3, 6, 7, 11, and 13 at various virtual community meetings between JanuaryJune 2022, and on the www.civicmic.com/city offairfield/ website. Budget and assessment information was also shared with the LLMD No. 5 – Smith Ranch and LLMD No. 7 – Rolling Hills landscape committees, the Rancho Solano, Paradise Valley, and North Cordelia homeowners’ associations, and the Rolling Hills Neighborhood Network. Staff will be engaging with the property owners of LLMD No. 12 in JulyAugust 2022. Finally, staff will be returning to council in July to present options for the formation of a new Packet Page 568 of 1243

Agenda Item No: 16.AGENDA REPORTDATE:July 5, 2022 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, Interim City ManagerSUBJECT:Resolutions 2022156 to 2022171 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield GrantingPreliminary Approval of Fiscal Year 20222023 Engineer’s Reports, Declaring Intentionto Order the Levy and Collection of Assessments, and Providing Notice of a Hearing forLandscaping and Lighting Maintenance Districts No. 1 – Gateway, No. 3 – WatermanHighlands, No. 5 – Smith Ranch, No. 6 – Peppertree, No. 7 – Rolling Hills, No. 8 –Kolob Estates, No. 10 – Southbrook, No. 11 – Paradise Valley North, No. 12 –Downtown Business District, No. 13 – North Cordelia, No. 14 – Woodlake, No. 15 –Gold Ridge, No. 16 – Creekside at Cordelia, No. 17 – ChadbourneBeckCordelia, No.18 – Gold Ridge Park, and No. 19 – Corporate CommonsRECOMMENDED ACTIONAdopt resolutions.STATEMENT OF ISSUEThe adoption of these resolutions will grant preliminary approval of the fiscal year (FY) 20222023engineer’s reports, declare intention to order the levy and collection of assessments, and set the dateand provide notice for a public hearing for 16 landscaping and lighting maintenance districts (LLMDs).DISCUSSIONThe City formed these special districts under the State of California Landscaping and Lighting Act of1972, California Streets and Highways Code Section 22500, et seq., to provide a funding source forthe maintenance of the landscaping and lighting improvements within the various development areas. The preliminary approval of the engineer’s reports is the first step in the process of levying the annualassessments. Final approval of the assessments requires a public hearing, which has been scheduledfor the July 19, 2022, City Council meeting. Annual assessment amounts for each district are subject to the provisions of Proposition 218 and mustbe set at or below (1) the assessment amount or range adopted at the time the district was formed, (2)the assessment amount or range adopted after the district was formed, but prior to the passage ofProposition 218 in 1996, or (3) the assessment amount or range adopted in accordance withProposition 218 proceedings, including applicable Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustments. Thefollowing summaries describe the proposed FY 20222023 annual assessments and any proposedrate adjustments for each district.LLMD No. 1 – Gateway:The FY 20222023 assessments for the Gateway district are proposed toincrease approximately 11% from the FY 20212022 rates to the maximum allowable rate for eachparcel established in 1995. Assessment rates for each parcel vary depending on parcel size. The total proposed revenue for this district is $205,971, which includes assessments of $205,965 andinterest of $6. The special projects for this district include landscape repair.While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the Gateway district have remained unchangedsince 1995, the district’s operation and maintenance costs have increased due to general inflationovertime. The district would be projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately $170,000 bythe end of FY 20222023 if services were to be provided at the current levels. In previous fiscal yearswhen a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented with funds from the district’sunreserved fund balance. However, because the unreserved fund balance has been reduced over time,the district is projected to close FY 20212022 with an overall deficit of ($29,710). Pursuant to theStreets and Highways Code Section 22656, the deficit will be carried forward to FY 20222023. Toprevent such deficit in FY 20222023, the FY 20222023 engineer’s report reflects an approximate75% reduction in the landscaping services and irrigation budget from FY 20212022 levels. On April 19, 2022, staff informed council of the projected deficit and was granted authorization topropose to the district property owners a onetime General Fund loan, issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term, as a shortterm solution. The staff engaged the district property owners in June2022, via mailed flyer to inform them of the proposed loan and requested that they affirm their supportfor, or opposition to, the loan by taking a short online survey posted at www.civicmic.com/city offairfield/. The website also disclosed historical and current information regarding the district’s formation,legal requirements, operations, and financial position. Staff will return to council after the July 19, 2022,public hearing with results of the property owner engagement to receive council’s direction regardingthe issuance of the loan and any applicable budget adjustments and increases to landscape andirrigation services.The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessmentrates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.LLMD No. 3 – Waterman Highlands:The FY 20222023 assessment for the Waterman Highlandsdistrict is proposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rate of $195 per parcel. The assessment is themaximum rate allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1996. The total proposed revenue for this district is $60,194, which includes assessments of $47,190, aGeneral Fund contribution of $13,000, and interest of $4. The special projects for this district includelandscape renovation and repair.While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the Waterman Highlands district have remainedunchanged since 1996, the district’s operation and maintenance costs have increased due to generalinflation overtime. The district would be projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately$30,000 in FY 20222023 if services were to be provided at the current levels. In previous fiscal yearswhen a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented with funds from the district’sunreserved fund balance. However, the district is projected to close FY 20212022 with an availablefund balance of just over $93,000, which is approximately $30,000 less than the balance required tofully supplement FY 20222023 revenues. To prevent such deficit in FY 20222023, an approximate40% reduction in the landscaping services budget and 25% reduction in the irrigation budget from FY20212022 levels is necessary. On April 19, 2022, staff informed council of the projected deficit and was granted authorization topropose to the district property owners a onetime General Fund loan, issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term, as a shortterm solution. Staff engaged the district property owners in June 2022,via mailed flyer and virtual community meeting to inform them of the proposed loan and requested thatthey affirm their support for, or opposition to, the loan by taking a short online survey posted at www.civicmic.com/city offairfield/. The site also disclosed historical and current information regardingthe district’s formation, legal requirements, operations, and financial position. Staff will return to councilafter the July 19, 2022, public hearing with results of the property owner engagement to receivecouncil’s direction regarding the issuance of the loan and any applicable budget adjustments andincreases to landscape and irrigation services.The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessmentrates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.LLMD No. 5 – Smith Ranch (Rancho Solano):The FY 20222023 assessment for the Smith Ranch(also known as “Rancho Solano”) district is proposed to increase from the FY 20212022 rate of $570per parcel to $663.66 per parcel. The assessment is the maximum rate allowable by the district’sadopted assessment range, which was established in 1999 and is adjusted each year by the OctoberSFOaklandHayward Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers CPI. The total proposed revenue for this district is $831,766, which includes assessments of $796,392, aGeneral Fund contribution of $35,373, and interest of $1. The special projects for this district includelandscape repair.On April 19, 2022, staff informed council that this district is projected to have a fund balance deficit byFY 20232024 if services continued to be provided at the current levels without a property ownerapproved assessment rate increase. Staff reported that the City will be engaging with the propertyowners and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023 to determine futureservices and assessment rates.LLMD No. 6 – Peppertree:The FY 20222023 assessment for the Peppertree district is proposed toremain at the FY 20212022 rate of $60 per residential unit. The assessment is the maximum rateallowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1996. The total proposed revenue for this district is $28,320, which includes assessments of $28,320, andinterest of $1. There are no special projects planned for this district .While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the Peppertree district have remainedunchanged since 1996, the district’s operation and maintenance costs have increased due to generalinflation overtime. The district would be projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately$30,000 in FY 20222023 if services were to be provided at the current levels. In previous fiscal yearswhen a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented with funds from the district’sunreserved fund balance. However, the district is projected to close FY 20212022 with an availablefund balance of just over $63,000, which is approximately $30,000 less than the balance required tofully supplement FY 20222023 revenues. To prevent such deficit in FY 20222023, all landscapingservices must cease by September 1, 2022. On April 19, 2022, staff informed council of the projected deficit and was granted authorization topropose to the district property owners a onetime General Fund loan, issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term, as a shortterm solution. Staff engaged the district property owners in June 2022,via mailed flyer and virtual community meeting to inform them of the proposed loan and requested thatthey affirm their support for, or opposition to, the loan by taking a short online survey posted at www.civicmic.com/city offairfield/. The site also disclosed historical and current information regardingthe district’s formation, legal requirements, operations, and financial position. Staff will return to councilafter the July 19, 2022, public hearing with results of the property owner engagement to receivecouncil’s direction regarding the issuance of the loan and any applicable budget adjustments andincreases to landscape and irrigation services.The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessmentrates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.LLMD No. 7 – Rolling Hills:The FY 20222023 assessments for the Rolling Hills district are proposedto remain at the FY 20212022 rates of $300 per parcel for the Rolling Hills development, and $250 perparcel for the Serpas Ranch development. These assessments are the maximum rates allowable by thedistrict’s adopted assessment ranges. The assessments for commercial properties at the intersectionof Hilborn Road and Lyon Road are proposed to increase by the October SFOaklandHayward UrbanWage Earners and Clerical Workers CPI.The total proposed revenue for this district is $351,850, which includes assessments of $316,447, aGeneral Fund contribution of $35,374, and interest of $29. There are no special projects planned forthis district. While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the Rolling Hills district have remainedunchanged since the 1990s, the district’s operation and maintenance costs have increased due togeneral inflation overtime. The district was projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately$81,000 by the end of FY 20212022, and an additional deficit of $364,000 by the end of FY 20222023 for a total deficit of $445,000 if services continued to be provided at the FY 20202021 levels. Inprevious fiscal years when a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented withfunds from the district’s unreserved fund balance, however, the district’s unreserved fund balance wasdepleted in FY 20212022. As a shortterm solution, the council authorized an additional $35,000 General Fund contribution anddirected staff to propose to the Rolling Hills property owners a onetime $410,000 General Fund loan,issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term commencing in FY 20232024. The staffconducted a community engagement process, which included a virtual town hall and an online survey.The loan and additional General Fund contribution were authorized on May 3, 2022, by Resolution No.202297, and issued in FY 20212022. The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessmentrates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.LLMD No. 8 – Kolob Estates:The FY 20222023 assessment for the Kolob Estates district isproposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rate of $400 per parcel. The assessment is the maximum rateallowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1994. The total proposed revenue for this district is $53,5111, which includes assessments of $52,000, aGeneral Fund contribution of $1,040, and interest of $71. The special projects for this district includelandscape renovation and repair.On April 19, 2022, staff informed council that this district was projected to have a fund balance deficit inFY 20222023 if services continued to be provided at the current levels without a property ownerapproved assessment rate increase, however, updated projections indicate that the deficit will not occuruntil FY 20232024. The City will be engaging with the property owners and will conduct a Proposition218 balloting process during FY 20222023 to determine future services and assessment rates. LLMD No. 10 – Southbrook:The FY 20222023 assessments for the Southbrook district are proposedto increase from the FY 20212022 rates of $215 per parcel to $235 per parcel for the originaldevelopment and annexation areas 19. The FY 20212022 assessment for the Gold Hill Village 3development, annexation no. 10, was $155.83 per lot, which was a prorated rate due to the timing of theannexation. The FY 20222023 assessment for this development is proposed at $386.26 per lot. Theassessments do not exceed the maximum rates allowable by the district’s adopted assessmentranges, which are adjusted each year by the October SFOaklandHayward Urban Wage Earners andClerical Workers CPI.The total proposed revenue for this district is $545,358, which includes assessments of $532,710, aGeneral Fund contribution of $12,485, and interest of $163. The special projects for this district includelandscape renovation and repair.LLMD No. 11 – Paradise Valley North:The FY 20222023 assessment for the Paradise Valley Northdistrict is proposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rate of $190 per residential unit. The assessment isthe maximum rate allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1995. The total proposed revenue for this district is $269,659, which includes assessments of $259,160, aGeneral Fund contribution of $10,404, and interest of $95. There are no special projects planned forthis district.While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the Paradise Valley North district haveremained unchanged since the 1995, the district’s operation and maintenance costs have increaseddue to general inflation overtime. The district was projected to have a fund balance deficit ofapproximately $40,000 by the end of FY 20212022, and an additional deficit of $142,000 by the end ofFY 20222023 for a total deficit of $182,000 if services continued to be provided at the FY 20202021levels. In previous fiscal years when a budget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplementedwith funds from the district’s unreserved fund balance, however, the district’s unreserved fund balancewas depleted in FY 20212022. As a shortterm solution, the council authorized an additional $7,000 General Fund contribution anddirected staff to propose to the Paradise Valley North property owners a onetime $175,000 GeneralFund loan, issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term commencing in FY 20232024. Thestaff conducted a community engagement process, which included a virtual town hall and an onlinesurvey. The loan and additional General Fund contribution were authorized on May 3, 2022, byResolution No. 202298, and issued in FY 20212022.The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessmentrates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.LLMD No. 12 – Downtown Business District:The total FY 20222023 assessments for the District areproposed to increase approximately 2% from the total amount levied in FY 20212022. The proposedassessments for individual parcels vary by parcel size and are the maximum rates allowable by thedistrict’s adopted assessment range established in 1997. The total proposed revenue for this district is $62,021, which includes assessments of $62,020, andinterest of $1. There are no special projects planned for this district.In August 2021, the City hired NBS to conduct an initial review of the City’s 16 LLMDs to determine theoperational and financial viability of each district. The City planned to initiate Phase 2 of the review inmid to late 2022, which will include an indepth audit of each district’s governing documents,operations, financial and budgetary projections, and administrative best practices. Based on the results of the initial review, LLMD No. 12 was projected to have sufficient assessmentrevenue to sustain services and maintain an adequate fund balance reserve through at least FY 20262027 based on the automatic CPI adjustment to the annual assessments authorized by Resolution Nos.1991204 and 1991205. However, in early June 2022, upon further inspection of the district’s historicalgoverning documents, it was determined that the automatic CPI adjustment to the annual assessmentsauthorized by Resolution Nos. 1991204 and 1991205 was superseded by Resolution Nos. 199763and 1997144 which set static maximum annual assessments for each parcel with no automatic CPIadjustment as a result of a balloting process. Consequently, the district would be projected to have a fund balance deficit of approximately $40,000 inFY 20222023 if services were to be provided at the current levels. In previous fiscal years when abudget deficit existed, assessment revenues were supplemented with funds from the district’sunreserved fund balance. However, the district is projected to close FY 20212022 with an availablefund balance of just over $87,000, which is approximately $40,000 less than the balance required tofully supplement FY 20222023 revenues. To prevent such deficit in FY 20222023, an approximate45% reduction in the landscaping services budget and 20% reduction in the irrigation budget from FY20212022 levels is necessary.The staff will return to council to inform them of the projected deficit and to request authorization topropose to the district property owners a onetime General Fund loan, issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term, as a shortterm solution. Pending direction from council, the staff will engage thedistrict property owners in July and August 2022, via mailed flyer and/or virtual community meeting toinform them of the proposed loan and request that they affirm their support for, or opposition to, the loanby taking a short online survey posted at www.civicmic.com/city offairfield/. The site will disclosehistorical and current information regarding the district’s formation, legal requirements, operations, andfinancial position. The staff will return to council after the July 19, 2022, public hearing with results of theproperty owner engagement to receive council’s direction regarding the issuance of the loan and anyapplicable budget adjustments and increases to landscape and irrigation services.The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessmentrates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.LLMD No. 13 – North Cordelia:The FY 20222023 assessments for the North Cordelia district areproposed as follows: Citation and Pulte developments are proposed to remain at the FY 20212022rate of $180 per unit; Hidden Meadows subdivision is proposed to increase from the FY 20212022rate of $850.45 per unit to $882.77 per unit; Village Oaks subdivision is proposed to increase from theFY 20212022 rate of $207.40 per unit to $215.28 per unit; Jayo subdivision is proposed to increasefrom the FY 20212022 rate of $218.31 per unit to $226.61 per unit; all other subdivisions are proposedto remain at the FY 20212022 rate of $170 per unit. The assessments for commercial properties areproposed to increase by the October SFOaklandHayward All Urban Consumers CPI. Theassessments are the maximum rate allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range establishedfor each development/subdivision. The maximum rates for the Hidden Meadows, Village Oaks, andJayo subdivisions are adjusted each year by the October SFOaklandHayward All Urban ConsumersCPI.The total proposed revenue for this district is $644,129, which includes assessments of $613,895, aGeneral Fund contribution of $30,172, and interest of 62. There are no special projects planned for thisdistrict.While the annual authorized maximum assessments for the majority of development in the NorthCordelia district have remained unchanged since the 1990s, the district’s operation and maintenancecosts have increased due to general inflation overtime. The district was projected to have a fundbalance deficit of approximately $40,000 by the end of FY 20212022, and an additional deficit of$119,000 by the end of FY 20222023 for a total deficit of $159,000 if services continued to beprovided at the FY 20202021 levels. In previous fiscal years when a budget deficit existed,assessment revenues were supplemented with funds from the district’s unreserved fund balance,however, the district’s unreserved fund balance was depleted in FY 20212022. As a shortterm solution, the council authorized an additional $8,000 General Fund contribution anddirected staff to propose to the North Cordelia property owners a onetime $151,000 General Fundloan, issued at 0% interest with a fiveyear repayment term commencing in FY 20232024. The staffconducted a community engagement process, which included a virtual town hall and an online survey.The loan and additional General Fund contribution were authorized on May 3, 2022, by Resolution No.202299, and issued in FY 20212022.The City will continue to engage with the property owners regarding future services and assessmentrates, and will conduct a Proposition 218 balloting process during FY 20222023.LLMD No. 14 – Woodlake:The FY 20222023 assessments for the Woodlake district are proposed toremain at the FY 20212022 rates as follows: $206.25 per lot in the Woodlake/Horseshoe Lake Estatessubdivision, $251.25 per lot in the Paradise Crest (Annexation No. 1) and Paradise Glen (AnnexationNo. 2) subdivisions, $95.25 per lot in the Bedford Falls subdivision (Annexation No. 3), $251.25 per lotin the Villages I subdivision (Annexation No. 4), and $251.25 in the Villages II subdivision (AnnexationNo. 5). These assessments are below the district’s adopted assessment rate maximums for eachsubdivision, which are adjusted each year by the October SFOaklandHayward All Urban ConsumersCPI, as follows: $593 per lot in Woodlake/Horseshoe Lake Estates, $641.98 per lot in Paradise Crest(Annexation No. 1), $629.39 per lot in Paradise Glen (Annexation No. 2), $600.28 per lot in BedfordFalls (Annexation No. 3), $630.81 per lot in Villages I (Annexation No. 4), and $630.17 per lot inVillages II (Annexation No. 5). The total proposed revenue for this district is $316,796 , which includes assessments of $284,012, aGeneral Fund contribution of $16,646, and interest of $16,138. The special projects for this districtinclude landscape renovation and repair.LLMD No. 15 – Gold Ridge:The FY 20222023 assessment for the Gold Ridge district is proposed toremain at the FY 20212022 rate of $120 per dwelling for the Madison Subdivision and $150 perdwelling for all other subdivisions. This assessment is below the district’s adopted assessment ratemaximums for each subdivision, which are adjusted each year by the October SFOaklandHayward AllUrban Consumers CPI, as follows: $419.03 per dwelling in Gold Ridge Units 13, $578.06 per dwellingin Gold Ridge Units 4 and 68 (Annexation No. 1), $475.81 per dwelling Gold Ridge Unit 5 (AnnexationNo. 2), $273.49 per dwelling in Madison (Annexation No. 3), $518.18 per dwelling in Gold Ridge Unit 9(Annexation No. 4), $190.69 per dwelling in Gold Ridge North Phase II (Annexation No. 5), $190.69 perdwelling in Gold Ridge Unit 10 (Annexation No. 6), $180.10 per dwelling in Villages at FairfieldVillagesIV (Annexation No. 7), and $169.27 per dwelling in Discovery I & III and Gold Ridge IIIA (Annexation No.8).The total proposed revenue for this district is $271,326, which includes assessments of $258,810, aGeneral Fund contribution of $5,202, and interest of $7,314. The special projects for this district includelandscape renovation and repair.LLMD No. 16 – Creekside at Cordelia:The FY 20222023 assessments for the Creekside at Cordeliadistrict are proposed to decrease from the FY 20212022 rate of $300 per parcel to $213 per parcel inthe Creekside at Cordelia subdivision and the Enclave at Red Top development (Annexation No. 1).This assessment is below the district’s adopted assessment rate maximum for each subdivision asfollows: $365.81 for the Creekside at Cordelia and $379.12 for the Enclave at Red Top. The total proposed revenue for this district is $44,664, which includes assessments of $44,091, andinterest of $573. The special projects for this district include landscape renovation and repair.LLMD No. 17 – ChadbourneBeckCordelia:The FY 20222023 assessments for the ChadbourneBeckCordelia district are proposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rates which vary depending onparcel size. The assessment rates are below the district’s adopted assessment rate maximums foreach parcel. The total proposed revenue for this district is $288,699, which includes assessments of $280,293, andinterest of $8,406. The special projects for this district include landscape renovation and repair.LLMD No. 18 – Gold Ridge Park:The FY 20222023 assessment for the Gold Ridge Park district isproposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rate of $63.75 per parcel. This assessment is below thedistrict’s adopted assessment rate maximum for each subdivision as follows: $118.10 per parcel in theGold Ridge Neighborhood Park area, and $118.47 per parcel in the Discovery II & III and Gold RidgeIIIA subdivisions. The total proposed revenue for this district is $110,020, which includes assessments of $93,203, aGeneral Fund contribution of $14,064, and interest of $2,753. The special projects for this districtinclude landscape repair.LLMD No. 19 – Corporate Common:The FY 20222023 assessments for the Corporate Commons(also known as Suisun Valley Road/Kaiser) district are proposed to remain at the FY 20212022 rateswhich vary depending on parcel size. The assessment rates are below the district’s adoptedassessment rate maximums for each parcel. The total proposed revenue for this district is $128,811, which includes assessments of $127,192, andinterest of $1,619. The special projects for this district include landscape renovation and repair.FINANCIAL IMPACTThe total proposed FY 20222023 revenue for all districts is $4,212,696, which includes assessmentsof $4,001,700, General Fund (Fund 011, Division and Responsibility Code 99000) contributions of$173,760, and interest of $37,236. The City’s General Fund contributions are made in accordance withResolution 91213B and subsequent engineer’s reports for various district formations and annexationsto cover a portion of the costs for street lighting, arterial landscaping, and irrigation, which has beendetermined to be a general public benefit rather than a special benefit to the district property owners.PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATIONBudget and assessment information was presented to the property owners of LLMD Nos. 1, 3, 6, 7, 11,and 13 at various virtual community meetings between JanuaryJune 2022, and on the www.civicmic.com/city offairfield/ website. Budget and assessment information was also shared withthe LLMD No. 5 – Smith Ranch and LLMD No. 7 – Rolling Hills landscape committees, the RanchoSolano, Paradise Valley, and North Cordelia homeowners’ associations, and the Rolling Hills Neighborhood Network. Staff will be engaging with the property owners of LLMD No. 12 in JulyAugust 2022. Finally, staff will be returning to council in July to present options for the formation of a new Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District Oversight Committee.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
If council has any questions regarding the adoption of these resolutions, this item may be rescheduled until the next council meeting to allow staff to provide the necessary background information. However, not approving these resolutions may prevent the City from collecting assessments for the 20222023 tax year.

STAFF CONTACT
Chris Lewis, Management Analyst
(707) 4287089
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
City Attorney's Office
ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Attachment 1: Proposed Resolution Maintenance District No. 1 Gateway Attachment 2: Proposed Resolution Maintenance District No. 3 Waterman Highlands Attachment 3: Proposed Resolution Maintenance District No. 5 Smith Ranch Attachment 4: Proposed Resolution Maintenance District No. 6 Peppertree Attachment 5: Proposed Resolution Maintenance District No. 7 Rolling Hills Attachment 6: Proposed Resolution Maintenance District No. 8 Kolob Estates Attachment 7: Proposed Resolution Maintenance District No. 10 Southbrook Attachment 8: Proposed Resolution Maintenance District No. 11 Paradise Valley North Attachment 9: Proposed Resolution Maintenance District No. 12 Downtown Business District
Attachment 10: Proposed Resolution Maintenance District No. 13 North Cordelia Attachment 11: Proposed Resolution Maintenance District No. 14 Woodlake Attachment 12: Proposed Resolution Maintenance District No. 15 Gold Ridge Attachment 13: Proposed Resolution Maintenance District No. 16 Creekside at Cordelia Attachment 14: Proposed Resolution Maintenance District No. 17 ChadbourneBeck Cordelia
Attachment 15: Proposed Resolution Maintenance District No. 18 Gold Ridge Park Attachment 16: Proposed Resolution Maintenance District No. 19 Corporate Commons Attachment 17: Exhibit A's by Maintenance District No.

Attachment 18: Supplements to the Engineer's Report by Maintenance District No.

REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Kaushal, Paul Approved 6/20/2022 8:52 PM
Beavers, Esther Approved 6/21/2022 11:19 AM
Beavers, Esther Approved 6/21/2022 11:19 AM
Packet Page 569 of 1243

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-156

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 ENGINEER’S REPORT, DECLARING INTENTION TO ORDER THE LEVY AND

COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS, AND PROVIDING NOTICE OF A HEARING FOR LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 – GATEWAY

WHEREAS, on June 4, 1991, this City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-136, A Continuing Resolution Directing Preparation of Annual Report for Maintenance Assessment Districts.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. Pursuant to said resolution, the engineer designated therein prepared a report in accordance with Section 22565 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code for Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 – Gateway (District). Said report, on file in the office of the city clerk, as supplemented by the supplemental report for fiscal year (FY) 2022- 2023, ordered by the council and on file in the office of the city clerk, has been duly considered by this council and is hereby deemed sufficient and given preliminary approval. Said report, as supplemented, shall constitute the engineer’s report for FY 2022-2023 (Engineer’s Report).

Section 2. It is the intention of this council to levy and collect assessments within Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 – Gateway for the FY 2022-2023. The proposed services and improvements for the District, and any substantial chang es proposed to be made, are generally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof.

Section 3. Said District consists of the lots and parcels shown on the boundary map of the District on file with the city clerk in the City of Fairfield.

Section 4. The FY 2022-2023 assessments for the District are proposed to increase from the amounts levied in FY 2021-2022 to the maximum rate for each parcel allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1995.

Section 5. Reference is hereby made to the aforementioned engineer’s report, on file with the city clerk, for a full and detailed description of the improvements, the boundaries of Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 – Gateway, and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within said district. Within said district, any public property owned by any public agency or in use in the performance of a public function may be assessed.

Packet Page 570 of 1243Attachment 1 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2022-156

Page 2 ends

Section 6. This council hereby orders that a public hearing shall be held before this council in the regular meeting place thereof at the Council Chamber, Civic Center, 1000 Webster Street, Fairfield, California, or in any other manner as specified on the regular meeting agenda, as follows:

The hearing shall be held on July 19, 2022, at the hour of 6:00 p.m., for the purposes of this council’s determination whether the public interest, convenience, and necessity require that the proposed levy be made, and this council’s final action upon the engineer’s report and the assessment therein. The agenda will be available on the City’s website, www.fairfield.ca.gov , at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

Section 7. The city clerk shall cause notice of the hearing to be given by publishing, at least ten days prior to the date of the hearing specified in this resolution, a copy of this resolution once in the Daily Republic, a newspaper published and circulated in the city.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: PRICE / BERTANI / MOY / PANDURO / TIMM / TONNESEN / VACCARO

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 571 of 1243Attachment 1 Page 2 of 2

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-157

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 ENGINEER’S REPORT, DECLARING INTENTION TO ORDER THE LEVY AND

COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS, AND PROVIDING NOTICE OF A HEARING FOR LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 – WATERMAN HIGHLANDS

WHEREAS, on June 4, 1991, this City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-136, A Continuing Resolution Directing Preparation of Annual Report for Maintenance Assessment Districts.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. Pursuant to said resolution, the engineer designated therein prepared a report in accordance with Section 22565 et seq. of the Calif ornia Streets and Highways Code for Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 3 – Waterman Highlands (District). Said report, on file in the office of the city clerk, as supplemented by the supplemental report for fiscal year (FY) 2022-2023, ordered by the council and on file in the office of the city clerk, has been duly considered by this council and is hereby deemed sufficient and given preliminary approval.

Said report, as supplemented, shall constitute the engineer’s report for FY 2022-2023 (Engineer’s Report).

Section 2. It is the intention of this council to levy and collect assessments within Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 3 – Waterman Highlands for the FY 2022- 2023. The proposed services and improvements for the District, and any substantial changes proposed to be made, are generally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof.

Section 3. Said District consists of the lots and parcels shown on the boundary map of the District on file with the city clerk in the City of Fairfield.

Section 4. The FY 2022-2023 assessment for the District is proposed to remain at the FY 2021-2022 rate of $195 per parcel. The proposed assessment is the maximum rate allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1996.

Section 5. Reference is hereby made to the aforementioned engineer’s report, on file with the city clerk, for a full and detailed description of the improvements, the boundaries of Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 3 – Waterman Highlands, and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within said district. Within said district, any public property owned by any public agency or in use in the performance of a public funct ion may be assessed.

Packet Page 572 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2022-157

Page 2 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: PRICE / BERTANI / MOY / PANDURO / TIMM / TONNESEN / VACCARO

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 573 of 1243Attachment 2 Page 2 of 2

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-158

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 ENGINEER’S REPORT, DECLARING INTENTION TO ORDER THE LEVY AND

COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS, AND PROVIDING NOTICE OF A HEARING FOR LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 5 – SMITH RANCH

WHEREAS, on June 4, 1991, this City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-136, A Continuing Resolution Directing Preparation of Annual Report for Maintenance Assessment Districts.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. Pursuant to said resolution, the engineer designated therein prepared a report in accordance with Section 22565 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code for Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 5 – Smith Ranch (District). Said report, on file in the office of the city clerk, as supplemented by the supplemental report for fiscal year (FY) 2022-2023, ordered by the council and on file in the office of the city clerk, has been duly considered by this council and is hereby deemed sufficient and given preliminary approval. Said report, as supplemented, shall constitute the engineer’s report for FY 2022-2023 (Engineer’s Report).

Section 2. It is the intention of this council to levy and collect assessments within Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 5 – Smith Ranch for the FY 2022-2023. The proposed services and improvements for the District, and any substantial changes proposed to be made, are generally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof.

Section 3. Said District consists of the lots and parcels shown on the boundary map of the District on file with the city clerk in the City of Fairfield.

Section 4. The FY 2022-2023 assessment for the District is proposed to increase from the FY 2021-2022 rate of $570 per parcel to $663.66 per parcel. The proposed assessment is the maximum rate allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range, which was established in 1999 and is adjusted each year by the October SF-Oakland-Hayward Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers Consumer Price Index (CPI).

Section 5. Reference is hereby made to the aforementioned engineer’s report, on file with the city clerk, for a full and detailed description of the improvements, the boundaries of Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 5 – Smith Ranch, and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within said district. Within said district, any Packet Page 574 of 1243Attachment 3 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2022-158

Page 2 ends

public property owned by any public agency or in use in the performance of a public function may be assessed.

The hearing shall be held on July 19, 2022, at the hour of 6:00 p.m., for the purposes of this council’s determination whether the public interest, convenience, and necessity require that the proposed levy be made, and this council’s final action upon the engine er’s report and the assessment therein. The agenda will be available on the City’s website, www.fairfield.ca.gov , at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: PRICE / BERTANI / MOY / PANDURO / TIMM / TONNESEN / VACCARO

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 575 of 1243Attachment 3 Page 2 of 2

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-159

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 ENGINEER’S REPORT, DECLARING INTENTION TO ORDER THE LEVY AND

COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS, AND PROVIDING NOTICE OF A HEARING FOR LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 – PEPPERTREE

WHEREAS, on June 4, 1991, this City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-136, A Continuing Resolution Directing Preparation of Annual Report for Maintenance Assessment Districts.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. Pursuant to said resolution, the engineer designated therein prepared a report in accordance with Section 22565 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code for Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 6 – Peppertree (District). Said report, on file in the office of the city clerk, as supplemented by the supplemental report for fiscal year (FY) 2022-2023, ordered by the council and on file in the office of the city clerk, has been duly considered by this council and is hereby deemed sufficient and given preliminary approval. Said report, as supplemented, shall constitute the engineer’s report for FY 2022-2023 (Engineer’s Report).

Section 2. It is the intention of this council to levy and collect assessments within Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 6 – Peppertree for the FY 2022-2023. The proposed services and improvements for the District, and any substantial changes proposed to be made, are generally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof.

Section 3. Said District consists of the lots and parcels shown on the boundary map of the District on file with the city clerk in the City of Fairfield.

Section 4. The FY 2022-2023 assessment for the District is proposed to remain at the FY 2021-2022 rate of $60 per unit. The proposed assessment is the maximum rate allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1996.

Section 5. Reference is hereby made to the aforementioned engineer’s report, on file with the city clerk, for a full and detailed description of the improvements, the boundaries of Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 6 – Peppertree, and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within said district. Within said district, any public property owned by any public agency or in use in the performance of a public function may be assessed.

Packet Page 576 of 1243Attachment 4 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2022-159

Page 2 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: PRICE / BERTANI / MOY / PANDURO / TIMM / TONNESEN / VACCARO

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 577 of 1243Attachment 4 Page 2 of 2

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-160

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 ENGINEER’S REPORT, DECLARING INTENTION TO ORDER THE LEVY AND

COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS, AND PROVIDING NOTICE OF A HEARING FOR LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 – ROLLING HILLS

WHEREAS, on June 4, 1991, this City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-136, A Continuing Resolution Directing Preparation of Annual Report for Maintenance Assessment Districts.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. Pursuant to said resolution, the engineer designated therein prepared a report in accordance with Section 22565 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code for Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 7 – Rolling Hills (District). Said report, on file in the office of the city clerk, as supplemented by the supplemental report for fiscal year (FY) 2022-2023, ordered by the council and on file in the office of the city clerk, has been duly considered by this council and is hereby deemed sufficient and given preliminary approval. Said report, as supplemented, shall constitute the engineer’s report for FY 2022-2023 (Engineer’s Report).

Section 2. It is the intention of this council to levy and collect assessments within Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 7 – Rolling Hills for the FY 2022-2023. The proposed services and improvements for the District, and any substantial changes proposed to be made, are generally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof.

Section 3. Said District consists of the lots and parcels shown on the boundary map of the District on file with the city clerk in the City of Fairfield.

Section 4. The FY 2022-2023 assessments for the District are proposed to remain at the FY 2021-2022 rates of $300 per parcel for the Rolling Hills development, and $250 per parcel for the Serpas Ranch development. The proposed assessments are the maximum rates allowable by the district’s adopted assessment ranges. The assessments for commercial properties at the intersection of Hilborn Road and Lyon Road are proposed to increase by the October SF-Oakland- Hayward Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers Consumer Price Index (CPI).

Section 5. Reference is hereby made to the aforementioned engineer’s report, on file with the city clerk, for a full and detailed description of the improvements, the boundaries of Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 7 – Rolling Hills, and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within said district. Within said district, any Packet Page 578 of 1243Attachment 5 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2022-160

Page 2 ends

public property owned by any public agency or in use in the performance of a public function may be assessed.

The hearing shall be held on July 19, 2022, at the hour of 6:00 p.m., for the purposes of this council’s determination whether the public interest, convenience, and necessity require tha t the proposed levy be made, and this council’s final action upon the engineer’s report and the assessment therein. The agenda will be available on the City’s website, www.fairfield.ca.gov , at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: PRICE / BERTANI / MOY / PANDURO / TIMM / TONNESEN / VACCARO

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 579 of 1243Attachment 5 Page 2 of 2

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-161

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 ENGINEER’S REPORT, DECLARING INTENTION TO ORDER THE LEVY AND

COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS, AND PROVIDING NOTICE OF A HEARING FOR LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 8 – KOLOB ESTATES

WHEREAS, on June 4, 1991, this City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-136, A Continuing Resolution Directing Preparation of Annual Report for Maintenance Assessment Districts.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. Pursuant to said resolution, the engineer designated therein prepared a report in accordance with Section 22565 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code for Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 8 – Kolob Estates (District). Said report, on file in the office of the city clerk, as supplemented by the supplemental report for fiscal year (FY) 2022-2023, ordered by the council and on file in the office of the city clerk, has been duly considered by this council and is hereby deemed sufficient and given preliminary approval. Said report, as supplemented, shall constitute the engineer’s report for FY 2022-2023 (Engineer’s Report).

Section 2. It is the intention of this council to levy and collect assessments within Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 8 – Kolob Estates for the FY 2022-2023. The proposed services and improvements for the District, and any substantial changes proposed to be made, are generally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof.

Section 3. Said District consists of the lots and parcels shown on the boundary map of the District on file with the city clerk in the City of Fairfield.

Section 4. The FY 2022-2023 assessment for the District is proposed to remain at the FY 2021-2022 rate of $400 per parcel. The proposed assessment is the maximum rate allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1994.

Section 5. Reference is hereby made to the aforementioned engineer’s report, on file with the city clerk, for a full and detailed description of the improvements, the boundaries of Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 8 – Kolob Estates, and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within said district. Within said district, any public property owned by any public agency or in use in the performance of a public function may be assessed.

Packet Page 580 of 1243Attachment 6 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2022-161

Page 2 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: PRICE / BERTANI / MOY / PANDURO / TIMM / TONNESEN / VACCARO

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 581 of 1243Attachment 6 Page 2 of 2

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-162

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 ENGINEER’S REPORT, DECLARING INTENTION TO ORDER THE LEVY AND

COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS, AND PROVIDING NOTICE OF A HEARING FOR LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 10 – SOUTHBROOK

WHEREAS, on June 4, 1991, this City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-136, A Continuing Resolution Directing Preparation of Annual Report for Maintenance Assessment Districts.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. Pursuant to said resolution, the engineer designated therein prepared a report in accordance with Section 22565 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code for Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 10 – Southbrook (District). Said report, on file in the office of the city clerk, as supplemented by the supplemental report for fiscal year (FY) 2022-2023, ordered by the council and on file in the office of the city clerk, has been duly considered by this council and is hereby deemed sufficient and given preliminary approval. Said report, as supplemented, shall constitute the engineer’s report for FY 2022-2023 (Engineer’s Report).

Section 2. It is the intention of this council to levy and collect assessments within Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 10 – Southbrook for the FY 2022-2023. The proposed services and improvements for the District, and any substantial changes proposed to be made, are generally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof.

Section 3. Said District consists of the lots and parcels shown on the boundary map of the District on file with the city clerk in the City of Fairfield.

Section 4. The FY 2022-2023 assessments for the District are proposed to increase from the FY 2021-2022 rates of $215 per parcel to $235 per parcel for the original development and annexation areas 1-9, and from $155.83 per lot to $386.26 per lot for the Gold Hill Village 3 development, annexation no. 10. The proposed assessment s do not exceed the maximum rates allowable by the district’s adopted assessment ranges, which are adjusted each year by the October SF-Oakland-Hayward Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers Consumer Price Index (CPI).

RES. NO. 2022-162

Page 2 ends

assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within said district. Within said district, any public property owned by any public agency or in use in the performanc e of a public function may be assessed.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: PRICE / BERTANI / MOY / PANDURO / TIMM / TONNESEN / VACCARO

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 583 of 1243Attachment 7 Page 2 of 2

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-163

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 ENGINEER’S REPORT, DECLARING INTENTION TO ORDER THE LEVY AND

COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS, AND PROVIDING NOTICE OF A HEARING FOR LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 11 – PARADISE VALLEY NORTH

WHEREAS, on June 4, 1991, this City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-136, A Continuing Resolution Directing Preparation of Annual Report for Maintenance Assessment Districts.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. Pursuant to said resolution, the engineer designated therein prepared a report in accordance with Section 22565 et seq. of the Calif ornia Streets and Highways Code for Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 11 – Paradise Valley North (District). Said report, on file in the office of the city clerk, as supplemented by the supplemental report for fiscal year (FY) 2022-2023, ordered by the council and on file in the office of the city clerk, has been duly considered by this council and is hereby deemed sufficient and given preliminary approval.

Said report, as supplemented, shall constitute the engineer’s report for FY 2022-2023 (Engineer’s Report).

Section 2. It is the intention of this council to levy and collect assessments within Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 11 – Paradise Valley North for the FY 2022- 2023. The proposed services and improvements for the District, and any substantial changes proposed to be made, are generally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof.

Section 3. Said District consists of the lots and parcels shown on the boundary map of the District on file with the city clerk in the City of Fairfield.

Section 4. The FY 2022-2023 assessment for the District is proposed to remain at the FY 2021-2022 rate of $190 per parcel. The proposed assessment is the maximum rate allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1995.

Section 5. Reference is hereby made to the aforementioned engineer’s report, on file with the city clerk, for a full and detailed description of the improvements, the boundaries of Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 11 – Paradise Valley North, and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within said district. Within said district, any public property owned by any public agency or in use in the performance of a public function may be assessed.

Packet Page 584 of 1243Attachment 8 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2022-163

Page 2 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: PRICE / BERTANI / MOY / PANDURO / TIMM / TONNESEN / VACCARO

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 585 of 1243Attachment 8 Page 2 of 2

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-164

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 ENGINEER’S REPORT, DECLARING INTENTION TO ORDER THE LEVY AND

COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS, AND PROVIDING NOTICE OF A HEARING FOR LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 12 – DOWNTOWN BUSINESS DISTRICT

WHEREAS, on June 4, 1991, this City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-136, A Continuing Resolution Directing Preparation of Annual Report for Maintenance Assessment Districts.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Said report, on file in the office of the city clerk, as supplemented by the supplemental report for fiscal year (FY) 2022-2023, ordered by the council and on file in the office of the city clerk, has been duly considered by this council and is hereby deemed sufficient and given preliminary approval. Said report, as supplemented, shall constitute the engineer’s report for FY 2022-2023 (Engineer’s Report).

Section 2. It is the intention of this council to levy and collect assessments within Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 12 – Downtown Business District for the FY 2022-2023. The proposed services and improvements for the District, and any substantial changes proposed to be made, are generally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof.

Section 3. Said District consists of the lots and parcels shown on the boundary map of the District on file with the city clerk in the City of Fairfield.

Section 4. The total FY 2022-2023 assessments for the District are proposed to increase approximately 2% from the total amount levied in FY 2021 -2022. The proposed assessments for individual parcels vary by parcel size and are the maximum rates allowable by the district’s adopted assessment range established in 1997.

Section 5. Reference is hereby made to the aforementioned engineer’s report, on file with the city clerk, for a full and detailed description of the improvements, the boundaries of Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 12 – Downtown Business District, and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within said district. Within said Packet Page 586 of 1243Attachment 9 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2022-164

Page 2 ends

district, any public property owned by any public agency or in use in the performance of a public function may be assessed.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: PRICE / BERTANI / MOY / PANDURO / TIMM / TONNESEN / VACCARO

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 587 of 1243Attachment 9 Page 2 of 2

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-165

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 ENGINEER’S REPORT, DECLARING INTENTION TO ORDER THE LEVY AND

COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS, AND PROVIDING NOTICE OF A HEARING FOR LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 13 – NORTH CORDELIA

WHEREAS, on June 4, 1991, this City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-136, A Continuing Resolution Directing Preparation of Annual Report for Maintenance Assessment Districts.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. Pursuant to said resolution, the engineer designated therein prepared a report in accordance with Section 22565 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code for Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 13 – North Cordelia (District). Said report, on file in the office of the city clerk, as supplemented by the supplemental report for fiscal year (FY) 2022-2023, ordered by the council and on file in the office of the city clerk, has been duly considered by this council and is hereby deemed sufficient and given preliminary approval. Said report, as supplemented, shall constitute the engineer’s report for FY 2022-2023 (Engineer’s Report).

Section 2. It is the intention of this council to levy and collect assessments within Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 13 – North Cordelia for the FY 2022-2023. The proposed services and improvements for the District, and any substantial changes proposed to be made, are generally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof.

Section 3. Said District consists of the lots and parcels shown on the boundary map of the District on file with the city clerk in the City of Fairfield.

Section 4. The FY 2022-2023 assessments for the District are proposed as follows: Citation and Pulte developments are proposed to remain at the FY 2021-2022 rate of $180 per unit; Hidden Meadows subdivision is proposed to increase from the FY 2021-2022 rate of $850.45 per unit to $882.77 per unit; Village Oaks subdivision is proposed to increase from the FY 2021-2022 rate of $207.40 per unit to $215.28 per unit; Jayo subdivision is proposed to increase from the FY 2021-2022 rate of $218.31 per unit to $226.61 per unit; all other subdivisions are proposed to remain at the FY 2021-2022 rate of $170 per unit; and commercial properties are proposed to increase by the October SF-Oakland-Hayward All Urban Consumers Consumer Price Index (CPI).

The proposed assessments are the maximum rates allowable by the district’s adopted assessment ranges. The maximum rates for the Hidden Meadows, Village Oaks, and Jayo subdivisions are adjusted each year by the October SF-Oakland-Hayward All Urban Consumers Consumer Price Index (CPI).

Packet Page 588 of 1243Attachment 10 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2022-165

Page 2 ends

Section 5. Reference is hereby made to the aforementioned engineer’s report, on file with the city clerk, for a full and detailed description of the improvements, the boundaries of Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 13 – North Cordelia, and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within said district. Within said district, any public property owned by any public agency or in use in the performance of a public function may be assessed.

The hearing shall be held on July 19, 2022, at the hour of 6:00 p.m., for the purposes of this council’s determination whether the public interest, convenience, and necessity require that the proposed levy be made, and this council’s final action upon the en gineer’s report and the assessment therein. The agenda will be available on the City’s website, www.fairfield.ca.gov , at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: PRICE / BERTANI / MOY / PANDURO / TIMM / TONNESEN / VACCARO

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK
Packet Page 589 of 1243Attachment 10 Page 2 of 2

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-166

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 ENGINEER’S REPORT, DECLARING INTENTION TO ORDER THE LEVY AND

COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS, AND PROVIDING NOTICE OF A HEARING FOR LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 14 – WOODLAKE

WHEREAS, on June 4, 1991, this City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-136, A Continuing Resolution Directing Preparation of Annual Report for Maintenance Assessment Districts.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. Pursuant to said resolution, the engineer designated therein prepared a report in accordance with Section 22565 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code for Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 14 – Woodlake (District). Said report, on file in the office of the city clerk, as supplemented by the supplemental report for fiscal year (FY) 2022-2023, ordered by the council and on file in the office of the city clerk, has been duly considered by this council and is hereby deemed sufficient and given preliminary approval. Said report, as supplemented, shall constitute the engineer’s report for FY 2022-2023 (Engineer’s Report).

Section 2. It is the intention of this council to levy and collect assessments within Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 14 – Woodlake for the FY 2022-2023. The proposed services and improvements for the District, and any substantial changes proposed to be made, are generally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof.

Section 3. Said District consists of the lots and parcels shown on the boundary map of the District on file with the city clerk in the City of Fairfield.

Section 4. The FY 2022-2023 assessments for the District are proposed to remain at the FY 2021-2022 rates as follows: $206.25 per lot in the Woodlake/Horseshoe Lake Estates subdivision, $251.25 per lot in the Paradise Crest (Annexation No. 1) and Paradise Glen (Annexation No. 2) subdivisions, $95.25 per lot in the Bedford Falls subdivision (Annexation No. 3), $251.25 per lot in the Villages I subdivision (Annexation No. 4), and $251.25 in the Villages II subdivision (Annexation No. 5). The proposed assessments do not exceed the maximum rates allowable by the district’s adopted assessment ranges, which are adjusted each year by the October SF- Oakland-Hayward All Urban Consumers Consumer Price Index (CPI).

RES. NO. 2022-166

Page 2 ends

Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 14 – Woodlake, and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within said district. Within said district, any public property owned by any public agency or in use in the performance of a public function may be assessed.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: PRICE / BERTANI / MOY / PANDURO / TIMM / TONNESEN / VACCARO

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK
Packet Page 591 of 1243Attachment 11 Page 2 of 2

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-167

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 ENGINEER’S REPORT, DECLARING INTENTION TO ORDER THE LEVY AND

COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS, AND PROVIDING NOTICE OF A HEARING FOR LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 15 – GOLD RIDGE

WHEREAS, on June 4, 1991, this City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-136, A Continuing Resolution Directing Preparation of Annual Report for Maintenance Assessment Districts.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. Pursuant to said resolution, the engineer designated therein prepared a report in accordance with Section 22565 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code for Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 15 – Gold Ridge (District). Said report, on file in the office of the city clerk, as supplemented by the supplemental report for fiscal year (FY) 2022-2023, ordered by the council and on file in the office of the city clerk, has been duly considered by this council and is hereby deemed sufficient and given preliminary approval. Said report, as supplemented, shall constitute the engineer’s report for FY 2022-2023 (Engineer’s Report).

Section 2. It is the intention of this council to levy and collect assessments within Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 15 – Gold Ridge for the FY 2022-2023. The proposed services and improvements for the District, and any substantial changes proposed to be made, are generally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof.

Section 3. Said District consists of the lots and parcels shown on the boundary map of the District on file with the city clerk in the City of Fairfield.

Section 4. The FY 2022-2023 assessment for the District is proposed to remain at the FY 2021-2022 rate of $120 per dwelling for the Madison Subdivision and $150 per dwelling for all other subdivisions. The proposed assessment does not exceed the maximum rates allowable by the district’s adopted assessment ranges for each subdivision, which are adjusted each year by the October SF-Oakland-Hayward All Urban Consumers Consumer Price Index (CPI).

Section 5. Reference is hereby made to the aforementioned engineer’s report, on file with the city clerk, for a full and detailed description of the improvements, the boundaries of Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 15 – Gold Ridge, and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within said district. Within said district, any Packet Page 592 of 1243Attachment 12 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2022-167

Page 2 ends

public property owned by any public agency or in use in the performance of a public function may be assessed.

The hearing shall be held on July 19, 2022, at the hour of 6:00 p.m., for the purposes of this council’s determination whether the public interest, convenience, and necessity require that the proposed levy be made, and this council’s final action upon the engine er’s report and the assessment therein. The agenda will be available on the City’s website, www.fairfield.ca.gov , at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: PRICE / BERTANI / MOY / PANDURO / TIMM / TONNESEN / VACCARO

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 593 of 1243Attachment 12 Page 2 of 2

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-168

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 ENGINEER’S REPORT, DECLARING INTENTION TO ORDER THE LEVY AND

COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS, AND PROVIDING NOTICE OF A HEARING FOR LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 16 – CREEKSIDE AT CORDELIA

WHEREAS, on June 4, 1991, this City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-136, A Continuing Resolution Directing Preparation of Annual Report for Maintenance Assessment Districts.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. Pursuant to said resolution, the engineer designated therein prepared a report in accordance with Section 22565 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code for Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 16 – Creekside at Cordelia (District). Said report, on file in the office of the city clerk, as supplemented by the supplemental report for fiscal year (FY) 2022-2023, ordered by the council and on file in the office of the city clerk, has been duly considered by this council and is hereby deemed sufficient and given preliminary approval.

Said report, as supplemented, shall constitute the engineer’s report for FY 2022-2023 (Engineer’s Report).

Section 2. It is the intention of this council to levy and collect assessments within Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 16 – Creekside at Cordelia for the FY 2022- 2023. The proposed services and improvements for the District, and any substantial changes proposed to be made, are generally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof.

Section 3. Said District consists of the lots and parcels shown on the boundary map of the District on file with the city clerk in the City of Fairfield.

Section 4. The FY 2022-2023 assessments for the District are proposed to decrease from the FY 2021-2022 rate of $300 per parcel to $213 per parcel in the Creekside at Cordelia subdivision and the Enclave at Red Top development (Annexation No. 1). The proposed assessment does not exceed the maximum rates allowable by the district’s adopted assessment ranges for each subdivision, which are adjusted each year by the October SF-Oakland-Hayward All Urban Consumers Consumer Price Index (CPI).

RES. NO. 2022-168

Page 2 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: PRICE / BERTANI / MOY / PANDURO / TIMM / TONNESEN / VACCARO

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 595 of 1243Attachment 13 Page 2 of 2

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-169

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 ENGINEER’S REPORT, DECLARING INTENTION TO ORDER THE LEVY AND

COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS, AND PROVIDING NOTICE OF A HEARING FOR LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 17 – CHADBOURNE-BECK-CORDELIA

WHEREAS, on June 4, 1991, this City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-136, A Continuing Resolution Directing Preparation of Annual Report for Maintenance Assessment Districts.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 2. It is the intention of this council to levy and collect assessments within Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 17 – Chadbourne-Beck-Cordelia for the FY 2022-2023. The proposed services and improvements for the District, and any substantial changes proposed to be made, are generally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof.

Section 3. Said District consists of the lots and parcels shown on the boundary map of the District on file with the city clerk in the City of Fairfield.

Section 4. The FY 2022-2023 assessments for the District are proposed to remain at the FY 2021-2022 rates which vary depending on parcel size. The assessment rates are below the district’s adopted assessment rate maximums for each parcel.

Section 5. Reference is hereby made to the aforementioned engineer’s report, on file with the city clerk, for a full and detailed description of the improvements, the boundaries o f Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 17 – Chadbourne-Beck-Cordelia, and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within said district. Within said district, any public property owned by any public agency or in use in the performance of a public function may be assessed.

Packet Page 596 of 1243Attachment 14 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2022-169

Page 2 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: PRICE / BERTANI / MOY / PANDURO / TIMM / TONNESEN / VACCARO

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 597 of 1243Attachment 14 Page 2 of 2

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-170

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 ENGINEER’S REPORT, DECLARING INTENTION TO ORDER THE LEVY AND

COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS, AND PROVIDING NOTICE OF A HEARING FOR LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 18 – GOLD RIDGE PARK

WHEREAS, on June 4, 1991, this City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-136, A Continuing Resolution Directing Preparation of Annual Report for Maintenance Assessment Districts.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. Pursuant to said resolution, the engineer designated therein prepared a report in accordance with Section 22565 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code for Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 18 – Gold Ridge Park (District). Said report, on file in the office of the city clerk, as supplemented by the supplemental report for fiscal year (FY) 2022-2023, ordered by the council and on file in the office of the city clerk, has been duly considered by this council and is hereby deemed sufficient and given preliminary approval. Said report, as supplemented, shall constitute the engineer’s report for FY 2022-2023 (Engineer’s Report).

Section 2. It is the intention of this council to levy and collect assessments within Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 18 – Gold Ridge Park for the FY 2022-2023.

The proposed services and improvements for the District, and any substantial changes proposed to be made, are generally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof.

Section 3. Said District consists of the lots and parcels shown on the boundary map of the District on file with the city clerk in the City of Fairfield.

Section 4. The FY 2022-2023 assessment for the District is proposed to remain at the FY 2021-2022 rate of $63.75 per parcel. The proposed assessment does not exceed the maximum rates allowable by the district’s adopted assessment ranges for each subdivision, which are adjusted each year by the October SF-Oakland-Hayward All Urban Consumers Consumer Price Index (CPI).

Section 5. Reference is hereby made to the aforementioned engineer’s report, on file with the city clerk, for a full and detailed description of the improvements, the boundaries of Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 18 – Gold Ridge Park, and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within said district. Within said district, any Packet Page 598 of 1243Attachment 15 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2022-170

Page 2 ends

public property owned by any public agency or in use in the performance of a public function may be assessed.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: PRICE / BERTANI / MOY / PANDURO / TIMM / TONNESEN / VACCARO

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 599 of 1243Attachment 15 Page 2 of 2

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-171

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023 ENGINEER’S REPORT, DECLARING INTENTION TO ORDER THE LEVY AND

COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS, AND PROVIDING NOTICE OF A HEARING FOR LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 19 – CORPORATE COMMONS

WHEREAS, on June 4, 1991, this City Council adopted Resolution No. 91-136, A Continuing Resolution Directing Preparation of Annual Report for Maintenance Assessment Districts.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. Pursuant to said resolution, the engineer designated therein prepared a report in accordance with Section 22565 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code for Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 19 – Corporate Commons (District). Said report, on file in the office of the city clerk, as supplemented by the supplemental report for fiscal year (FY) 2022-2023, ordered by the council and on file in the office of the city clerk, has been duly considered by this council and is hereby deemed sufficient and given preliminary approval.

Said report, as supplemented, shall constitute the engineer’s report for FY 2022-2023 (Engineer’s Report).

Section 2. It is the intention of this council to levy and collect assessments within Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 19 – Corporate Commons for the FY 2022- 2023. The proposed services and improvements for the District, and any substantial changes proposed to be made, are generally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and hereby made a part hereof.

Section 3. Said District consists of the lots and parcels shown on the boundary map of the District on file with the city clerk in the City of Fairfield.

Section 5. Reference is hereby made to the aforementioned engineer’s report, on file wit h the city clerk, for a full and detailed description of the improvements, the boundaries of Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 19 – Corporate Commons, and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within said district. Within said district, any public property owned by any public agency or in use in the performance of a public function may be assessed.

Packet Page 600 of 1243Attachment 16 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2022-171

Page 2 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: PRICE / BERTANI / MOY / PANDURO / TIMM / TONNESEN / VACCARO

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 601 of 1243Attachment 16 Page 2 of 2

EXHIBIT A

LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 – GATEWAY

DESCRIPTION OF WORK

1. The landscaping and accent lighting improvements located behind the street curb and gutter on the Solano Mall side of Gateway Boulevard.

2. The landscaping and accent lighting improvements located in the median islands along Gateway Boulevard.

3. The perimeter landscaping improvements located behind the street curb and gutter and along the back of property lines, and the sound-wall along the northern boundary of the Gateway area.

4. Landscaping improvements located behind the street curb and gutter of Maupin Lane.

5. Landscaping improvements located behind the street curb and gutter of Gateway Court.

6. The public lighting facilities and improvements within the entire Maintenance District area.

Packet Page 602 of 1243Attachment 17 Page 1 of 18

EXHIBIT A

LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 – WATERMAN HIGHLANDS

DESCRIPTION OF WORK

1. Easterly and westerly sides of Ten Gate Road commencing at the intersection of Ten Gate Road and Waterman Boulevard and extending northerly 1700 feet along Ten Gate Road to a point approximately 100 feet north of the intersection of Canton Lane and Ten Gate Road.

2. Northerly side of Waterman Boulevard commencing at a point on Waterman Boulevard 650 feet west of its intersection with Ten Gate Road and extending easterly 1800 feet along Waterman Boulevard to its intersection with Hilborn Road. Any turf between the curb and sidewalk within this reach shall be excluded from the maintenance district.

3. Westerly side of Hilborn Road commencing at the intersection of Waterman Boulevard and Hilborn Road and extending northerly along Hilborn Road to its intersection with Vista Grande. Any turf between the curb and sidewalk within this reach shall be excluded from the maintenance district.

4. All lands owned by the City of Fairfield designated as open space within the District and encompassing approximately 13 acres.

5. The open space area and bike trail adjacent to the westerly boundary of the District between Waterman Boulevard and Vista Grande are excluded.

6. The maintenance of all other landscape improvements necessary to maintain the facilities within the District.

7. No costs associated with the streetlights shall be borne by the District.

Packet Page 603 of 1243Attachment 17 Page 2 of 18

EXHIBIT A

LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 5 – SMITH RANCH

DESCRIPTION OF WORK

1. All street light facilities within the limits of the district on private streets (behind the gates) and on Rancho Solano Parkway.

2. Rancho Solano Parkway: All landscaping in the median island and in the parkway strips between the curb and the public right-of-way on Rancho Solano Parkway.

3. Behind the Gates: All landscaping in median islands, in parkway strips and on slopes shown to be landscaped behind the gates as a part of the Rancho Solano Landscaping Contracts Phases I III.

4. All lands designated as open space within the district.

5. Any other necessary maintenance to sustain the integrity of the landscape and lighting improvements within the District.

Packet Page 604 of 1243Attachment 17 Page 3 of 18

EXHIBIT A

LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 - PEPPERTREE

DESCRIPTION OF WORK

1. The landscaped areas located between the curb and sidewalk along both sides of Peppertree Drive.

2. The landscaped areas located on the south side of Cement Hill Road from approximately 525 feet west of the western intersection of Peppertree Drive and Cement Hill Road to approximately 660 feet east of the same intersection. This area represents landscaping installed as a part of the landscaping contracts for Laurel Park Unit No. 1 and Laurel Park Estates.

Packet Page 605 of 1243Attachment 17 Page 4 of 18

EXHIBIT A

LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 – ROLLING HILLS

DESCRIPTION OF WORK

1. Maintenance of all street lights in the public right-of-way.

2. Hilborn Road, Lyon Road & Martin Road: Maintenance of all landscaping in the median islands and in the parkway strips between the curb and public right-of-way on both sides of the road.

3. Residential Streets: Maintenance of all landscaping between the curb and sidewalk on all residential streets, except in the Sanctuary development.

4. Maintenance of all lands owned by the City of Fairfield designated as open space.

5. Any other necessary maintenance to sustain the integrity of the landscape and lighting improvements within the District.

6. Solano Foothills Drive: Maintenance of all landscaping in the parkway strips on both sides of the road.

Packet Page 606 of 1243Attachment 17 Page 5 of 18

EXHIBIT A

LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 8 – KOLOB ESTATES

DESCRIPTION OF WORK

1. All irrigation between the curb and sidewalk and all streetlights on residential streets.

2. All landscaping on the east side of Oliver Road and on the south side of Waterman Boulevard between the sidewalk and the western and northern perimeter of the Kolob Estates subdivision.

3. All landscaping along the eastern perimeter of Kolob Estates Unit No. 2 that is on the slope behind lots 43 and 51.

4. All lands owned by the City of Fairfield designated as open space.

5. All other landscape improvements necessary to maintain the facilities within the subdivision.

Packet Page 607 of 1243Attachment 17 Page 6 of 18

EXHIBIT A

LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 10 – SOUTHBROOK

DESCRIPTION OF WORK

1. All landscaping between the curb and sidewalk and all streetlights on residential streets.

2. All landscaping in the median and on both sides of Gold Hill Road.

3. All street lights and landscaping in the median and on both sides of Lopes Road.

4. All landscaping and street lighting at neighborhood entry medians off of Gold Hill Road and Lopes Road.

5. All lands owned by the City of Fairfield designated as open space.

6. All other landscape improvements necessary to maintain the facilities within the subdivision.

Packet Page 608 of 1243Attachment 17 Page 7 of 18

EXHIBIT A

LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 11 – PARADISE VALLEY NORTH

DESCRIPTION OF WORK

A. Maintenance Funded by the District:

1. All street lights and landscaping in the median and on both sides of Paradise Valley Drive.

2. All median landscaping and street lighting at neighborhood entry medians off of Paradise Valley Drive.

3. All street lights and landscaping in the median and on both sides of Manuel Campos Parkway.

4. All street lights and landscaping between the curb and freeboard wall along the northeastern perimeter of the subdivision.

5. All streetlights and landscaping on the berm between Paradise Valley Drive and Interstate 80 along the western perimeter of the subdivision.

6. All lands owned by the City of Fairfield designated as open space.

7. All other landscape improvements necessary to maintain the facilities within the subdivision.

B. Maintenance Not Funded by the District:

1. Maintenance of the Paradise Valley Golf Course.

2. Maintenance of the Paradise Valley Recreation Area.

Packet Page 609 of 1243Attachment 17 Page 8 of 18

EXHIBIT A

LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 12 – DOWNTOWN BUSINESS DISTRICT

DESCRIPTION OF WORK

1. The public right-of-way on Texas Street between Pennsylvania Avenue and Jefferson Street.

2. The public right-of-way on Madison Street between Missouri Street and Empire Street.

MAINTENANCE TO BE PAID FOR BY THE DISTRICT

1. Landscape maintenance within the District including maintenance of all trees, shrubs, vines, and planted pots. Landscape maintenance shall include periodically replanting annual flowers. Lower maintenance shrubs or perennials should be substituted for annuals where and when appropriate.

2. Water for landscape irrigation and for maintenance and cleaning operations.

3. Maintenance and replacement costs for all streetlights within the District including replacement of damaged poles, periodic pole painting, and replacement of luminaries.

4. Electricity charges to power all streetlights within the District.

5. Maintenance related to the repair of landscape accent lights and pergola lights including needed replacement of bulbs.

6. Electricity required for landscape accent lights, pergola lights, irrigation controllers, and maintenance operations.

7. Maintenance of brick sidewalks including replacement of damaged bricks and periodic cleaning of surfaces.

8. Removal of graffiti and periodic cleaning of benches, columns, walls, and raised planters.

9. Maintenance and repair of pergolas.

10. Trash pickup and litter removal.

Packet Page 610 of 1243Attachment 17 Page 9 of 18

MAINTENANCE TO BE PAID FOR BY THE CITY'S OPERATIONS

1. Maintenance of all asphalt concrete pavement within the District.

2. Maintenance of concrete pavers located in Texas Street crosswalks, and in the Madison Street parking plaza between Empire Street and Missouri Street, including replacement of damaged materials and periodic cleaning of surfaces.

3. Repair of raised planters at intersection corners.

4. Replacement of structures.

5. The City will maintain all other landscape and lighting improvements not specifically itemized in Section A, "Maintenance To Be Paid For By The Maintenance District," of this section.

Packet Page 611 of 1243Attachment 17 Page 10 of 18

EXHIBIT A

LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 13 – NORTH CORDELIA

DESCRIPTION OF WORK

1. Maintenance of all streetlights in the public right-of-way within the limits of the District.

2. Green Valley Road: All landscaping in the median islands and in the parkway strips between the curb and public right-of-way.

3. New Neitzel Road: All landscaping in the median islands and in the parkway strips between the curb and public right-of-way.

4. Business Center Drive: All landscaping in the median islands and in the parkway strips between the curb and public right-of-way.

5. Suisun Valley Road: All landscaping in the western parkway strip between the curb and public right-of-way.

6. Mangels Boulevard: All landscaping in the median islands and in the parkway strips between the curb and public right-of-way.

7. WestAmerica Drive: All landscaping in the median islands and in the northern parkway strip between the curb and public right-of-way.

8. Green Valley Creek: All riparian landscaping.

9. Residential Developments: All median and parkway landscaping installed in the public right-of-way.

10. Maintenance of firebreaks for all lands designated as open space within the District.

11. Maintenance of ecological area and wetlands.

12. Maintenance of landscaping in the PG&E parkways.

13. Maintenance of landscaped trails.

14. Any other necessary maintenance to sustain the integrity of landscape and lighting improvements within the District.

Packet Page 612 of 1243Attachment 17 Page 11 of 18

EXHIBIT A

LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 14 – WOODLAKE

DESCRIPTION OF WORK

1. Maintenance of all streetlights in the public right-of-way within the limits of the District.

2. Maintenance of landscaped medians along Manuel Campos Parkway and Clay Bank Road within the limits of the District.

3. Maintenance of parkway perimeter landscaping along Manuel Campos Parkway and Clay Bank Road within the limits of the District.

4. Maintenance of in-tract landscaping on Lakefront Court.

5. Maintenance of in-tract open space on Gulf Drive.

6. Maintenance of landscaped medians.

7. Maintenance of parkway landscaping on both the north and south sides of Manuel Campos Parkway, and on both the east and west sides of Clay Bank Road.

8. Parkway landscaping on the western side of Portland Drive.

9. Various landscaped parkways on the collector streets within the District that provide access to the properties within the Bedford Falls subdivision.

10. The linear park located north and adjacent to the Bedford Falls development as well as other park sites within the District including landscaping and amenities (tot lot, basketball court, picnic tables, benches, and bike racks).

11. Open space and wetland areas that will be constructed in the adjacent Villages of Fairfield.

12. All lands owned by the City of Fairfield designated as open space.

Packet Page 613 of 1243Attachment 17 Page 12 of 18

EXHIBIT A

LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 15 – GOLD RIDGE

DESCRIPTION OF WORK

1. Maintenance of all streetlights in the public right-of-way within the limits of the District.

2. Maintenance of parkway and median landscaping along Joseph Gerevas Drive.

3. Maintenance of parkway perimeter landscaping along the west side of Peabody Road, extending the length of the District a distance of approximately 1,170 linear feet.

4. Maintenance of in-tract landscaping along Digerud Drive and Huber Drive.

5. Maintenance of in-tract entry medians on Santa Nella Lane, Pinkerton Lane, Fowler Lane, Goodman Lane, Woodard Lane, and McInnis Lane.

6. Perimeter landscaping along Putah South Canal.

7. Maintenance of parkway and median landscaping along Joseph Gerevas Drive.

8. Median landscaping along Wells Lane, Cox Lane, Parr Lane, Duren Circle and an unnamed street in the eastern portion of the District.

9. Maintenance of in-tract landscaping along Ellis Godfrey Drive, Josiah Wing Drive, Pullen Lane, Digured Drive, Lockie Lane, W.R. Glusen Drive, Huck Road, and along an unnamed street intersecting with W.R. Glusen Drive.

10. Maintenance of parkway and median landscaping along Joseph Gerevas Drive.

11. Maintenance of landscape along W.R Glusen Road.

12. Maintenance of parkway and median landscaping along Peabody Road, beginning at Putah South Canal and extending southward to approximately 440 feet south of Water Works Lane.

13. Entryway and median landscape on both the north and south side of Huber Drive, from Peabody Road eastward to West Gramercy Circle

14. Maintenance in two round about, along Elis Godfrey, Huck Road, and Noonan Road.

15. Maintenance of a water quality basin.

Packet Page 614 of 1243Attachment 17 Page 13 of 18

EXHIBIT A

LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 16 – CREEKSIDE AT CORDELIA

DESCRIPTION OF WORK

1. Maintenance of all streetlights in the public right-of-way within the limits of the District.

2. Maintenance of parkway perimeter landscaping along Red Top Road and Oakbrook Drive.

3. Maintenance of entryway landscaping.

4. Maintenance of median landscaping along Red Top Road.

5. Maintenance of concrete work along Red Top Road.

6. Perimeter block wall maintenance along Red Top Road and Oakbrook Drive.

Packet Page 615 of 1243Attachment 17 Page 14 of 18

EXHIBIT A

LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 17 – CHADBOURNE-BECK-CORDELIA

DESCRIPTION OF WORK

1. Schedule A

The landscaping and improvements located in the median island on Chadbourne Road, Beck Avenue, Courage Drive, North Watney Way, and South Watney Way. The landscaping and improvements located within the northwest and southwest corners of the intersection of Beck Avenue and Courage Drive, and within the area of the sanitary sewer pump station.

2. Schedule B

The landscaping and improvements located in the areas behind the curbs along the northerly and southerly sides of Courage Drive, at the intersection of North Watney Way, along the westerly and easterly sides of Beck Avenue north of the intersection with Southern Pacific Railroad, along the westerly side of Beck Avenue south of the intersection with Southern Pacific Railroad, along the westerly and easterly sides of Chadbourne Road except the area along the easterly side of Chadbourne Road between Cordelia Road and Maxwell Court; the median islands' landscaping and improvements located approximately 1880 feet east of the railroad right-of-way off Cordelia Road extending approximately 600 feet in length to the north; and, landscaping and improvements in the area located along the southerly side of the Alonzo Drainage Channel.

3. Schedule C

The public lighting facilities and improvements within the District area.

4. Schedule D

The landscaping and Improvements located in the areas behind the curbs along the northerly and southerly sides of Meyer Road.

Packet Page 616 of 1243Attachment 17 Page 15 of 18

EXHIBIT A

LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 18 – GOLD RIDGE PARK

DESCRIPTION OF WORK

1. Turf, shrub and groundcover maintenance within the limits of the District

2. Irrigation maintenance

3. Playground maintenance

4. Maintenance of landscape along Joseph Gerevas Drive and Falati Lane

5. Maintenance of hardscape and park features

6. Graffiti removal, power wash and trash removal

7. Park lights

Packet Page 617 of 1243Attachment 17 Page 16 of 18

EXHIBIT A

LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 19 – CORPORATE COMMONS

DESCRIPTION OF WORK

1. Landscaping and improvements in the median islands on Kaiser Drive and Business Center Drive West, around the lakes, and along Dan Wilson Creek, and maintenance of the two lakes including fountain maintenance.

2. Medians with trees and turf on Kaiser Drive from Suisun Valley Road until Campus Lane of approximately 480 feet in length.

3. Medians along the eastern boundaries of the district with trees, landscaping and turf on Business Center Drive West from Suisun Valley Road east to Suisun Creek.

4. Parkway landscaping, turf and trees approximately 20-feet on the north and south sides of Kaiser Drive from Suisun Valley Road until Campus Lane.

5. Park-like improvements including turf and trees surrounding the lakes west of Dan Wilson Creek.

6. Benches along Kaiser Drive.

7. The proposed retention basin and bio-retention basin.

8. Landscaping and improvements along the east side of Suisun Valley Road, which include large oak trees and meandering sidewalk near the northern boundary of the district from Interstate 80 south close to Solano College Road.

9. Landscaping and improvements to the areas behind the curbs on Kaiser Drive and Business Center Drive west.

10. Four entryways and the landscaping on Kaiser Drive, which includes two at the northeastern and southeastern intersections with Suisun Valley Road and two at the northwestern and southwestern intersections with Campus Lane, including the improvements, concrete returns, retaining walls and shrubs.

11. Landscaping of the vacant lots on the north and south sides of the intersection of Kaiser Drive and Business Center Drive.

12. Two entryways and their landscaping, shrubs, concrete returns and retaining walls on Business Center Drive at its northwestern and northeastern intersection with Executive Court.

Packet Page 618 of 1243Attachment 17 Page 17 of 18

13. One entryway and its landscaping, shrubs, concrete returns, retaining walls at the northwestern intersection of Kaiser Drive and Business Center Drive.

14. The median landscaping on Suisun Valley Road from approximately 500 feet north of Interstate 80 north towards Solano College Road.

15. All public street lighting within the commercial and residential subdivisions of the District.

16. Public street lighting, traffic signals and other public lighting facilities on the streets within the District.

Packet Page 619 of 1243Attachment 17 Page 18 of 18

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 – GATEWAY

ENGINEER’S REPORT

FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023

CONTENTS

1. Assessment

2. Method of Apportionment

3. Description of Work

4. Summary Statement of Influencing Factors for Maintenance District Budget

5. Certifications

6. District Budget

7. Assessments for Each Parcel

Packet Page 620 of 1243Attachment 18 Page 1 of 462

1 ASSESSMENT

WHEREAS, on June 4, 1991, the City Council of the City of Fairfield, California, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, adopted Resolution No. 91-136, A Continuing Resolution Directing Preparation of Annual Reports for Maintenance Assessment Districts;

WHEREAS, said resolution directed the undersigned to prepare and file a report pursuant to Section 22565 et seq. of said Act;

NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned, by virtue of the power vested in me under said Act and the order of the council of said city, hereby makes the following assessment to cover the portion of the estimated cost of the maintenance of said improvements and the costs and expenses incidental thereto to be paid by said district.

The amount to be paid for the maintenance of said improvements, and the expenses incidental thereto, are as shown in section 6 of this report.

Reference is made to the original assessment diagram for the maintenance district dated July 1984, which is hereby amended by the assessment roll contained herein.

I do hereby assess the net amount upon all assessable lots or parcels of land within said landscaping and lighting maintenance assessment district by apportioning that amount among the several lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the maintenance of said improvements.

Each lot or parcel of land assessed is described in the assessment list by reference to its parcel number as shown on the assessor's maps of the County of Solano for the fiscal year (FY) 2022- 2023 and includes all of such parcel excepting those portions thereof within existing public roads or right of way to be acquired in these proceedings for public road purposes. For a more particular description of said property, reference is hereby made to the deeds and maps on file and of record in the office of the county recorder of said County.

Dated: July 19, 2022 ____________________________
Ryan Panganiban
City Engineer/Asst. Director of Public Works
R.C.E. No. 74795
Expires 12/31/23

Packet Page 621 of 1243Attachment 18 Page 2 of 462

2 METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF ASSESSMENT

1. Maintenance of Gateway Boulevard Landscaping Improvements Solano Mall Side:

The cost of maintenance of perimeter landscaping improvements (i.e. landscaping behind the street curb and gutter) shall be assessed on an area basis to the Solano Mall properties. The areas assigned to the assessed parcels shall be their actual areas.

2. Maintenance of Gateway Boulevard Landscaping Improvements Median Islands:

The cost of maintenance of landscaping improvements within the median islands along Gateway Boulevard shall be assessed on an area basis to the Solano Mall and Gateway area properties. The areas assigned to the assessed parcels shall be their actual areas.

3. Maintenance of Gateway Area Perimeter Landscaping Improvements:

The cost of the maintenance of perimeter landscaping improvements (i.e. landscaping behind the street curb and gutter and along the back of property lines) and sound wall along the northern boundary of the Gateway area shall be assessed on an area basis to the Gateway area properties excluding assessor’s parcel number 0033-250-030. The areas assigned to the assessed parcels shall be their actual areas.

4. Maintenance of Maupin Lane Landscape Improvements:

The cost of the maintenance of parkway landscaping along Maupin Lane shall be assessed on an area basis to the Maupin Lane properties fronting on the improvements.

5. Maintenance of Lighting Improvements:

The cost of the maintenance of lighting improvements for the District are to be assessed on an area basis to all properties in the District.

Packet Page 622 of 1243Attachment 18 Page 3 of 462

3 DESCRIPTION OF AUTHORIZED WORK

The following is a brief description of the improvements that may be maintained contingent upon available budget and resources:

1. The landscaping and accent lighting improvements located behind the street curb and gutter on the Solano Mall side of Gateway Boulevard.

2. The landscaping and accent lighting improvements located in the median islands along Gateway Boulevard.

3. The perimeter landscaping improvements located behind the street curb and gutter and along the back of property lines, and the sound-wall along the northern boundary of the Gateway area.

4. Landscaping improvements located behind the street curb and gutter of Maupin Lane.

5. Landscaping improvements located behind the street curb and gutter of Gateway Court.

6. The public lighting facilities and improvements within the entire Maintenance District area.

Packet Page 623 of 1243Attachment 18 Page 4 of 462

4 SUMMARY STATEMENT OF INFLUENCING FACTORS

FOR MAINTENANCE DISTRICT BUDGET

The FY 2022-2023 assessments for the Gateway district are proposed to increase approximately 11% from the FY 2021-2022 rates. Assessment rates for each parcel vary depending on parcel size and are equal to the district’s adopted assessment range maximums for each parcel. Despite the fact that an arterial standard street, Gateway Boulevard, runs through this landscaping and lighting district, the street does not provide general benefit as it is not used as a thoroughfare.

Gateway Boulevard is designed to carry local traffic within the development. Travis Boulevard and Pennsylvania Avenue provide the through traffic route. Therefore, the only general benefit within this district paid by the City are the street lighting facilities.

Packet Page 624 of 1243Attachment 18 Page 5 of 462

5 CITY OF FAIRFIELD

LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 – GATEWAY

ENGINEER’S REPORT CERTIFICATIONS
FISCAL YEAR 2022-2023

The undersigned respectfully submits the enclosed report as directed by City Council.

Dated: July 19, 2022

Ryan Panganiban
City Engineer/Asst.Director of Public Works
R.C.E. No. 74745
Expires 12/31/23

I, the city clerk of the City of Fairfield, California, hereby certify that the Engineer’s Report, together with assessment roll thereto attached, was approved and confirmed by the council of the City of Fairfield, California, and filed with me on July 19, 2022.

City Clerk
City of Fairfield

I, the city clerk of the City of Fairfield, California, hereby certify that the enclosed assessment roll was filed with the auditor of the County of Solano, California, on or before August 10, 2022.

City Clerk
City of Fairfield
Packet Page 625 of 1243Attachment 18 Page 6 of 462

LLMD NO. 1 - GATEWAY
FY 2022-2023 BUDGET
FUND DIVISION PROJECT OBJECT FY20-21 ACTUAL FY21-22 PROJECTED FY22-23 PROJECTED 072 99 000 6106 - SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 124,319 185,507 205,965 072 99 000 6401 - INT INC ON POOLED INVESTMENTS 657 5 6 TOTAL REVENUE 124,976 185,512 205,971
072 68 001 8101 - SALARIES (16,101)(18,920)(18,244)
072 68 001 8103 - OVERTIME (523)(600)-
072 68 001 8105 - LEAVE TIME (1,053)(2,827)(2,894)
072 68 001 8107 - EMERGENCY PAID SICK LEAVE (104)--
072 68 001 8111 - BUDGETED SALARY SAVINGS -871 1,325
072 68 001 8201 - LEAVE PAYOFFS (1)--
072 68 001 8209 - SOCIAL SECURITY TAXES (252)(318)(308) 072 68 001 8210 - DEFERRED COMPENSATION (1,599)(764)(643) 072 68 001 8211 - ICMA VANTAGECARE RETIREE HLTH (115)(138)(126) 072 68 001 8212 - POB ER RATE (937)(1,088)(1,111)
072 68 001 8219 - UNIFORM/EQUIP/BOOT/AUTO (23)(46)(23)
072 68 001 8220 - MEDICAL/DENTAL/VISION (4,089)(5,164)(4,461) 072 68 001 8221 - DENTAL AND VISION (211)(306)(262)
072 68 001 8231 - BUDGETED BENEFITS SAVINGS -410 1,012
072 68 001 8235 - LIFE/DISABILITY INSURANCE (63)(70)(66) 072 68 001 8238 - SPECIAL COMPENSATION (135)(150)-
072 68 001 8240 - PERS-MISCELLANEOUS-CLASSIC (338)(304)(2,234) 072 68 001 8241 - PERS-MISCELLANEOUS-PEPRA (1,683)(2,091)- 072 68 001 8242 - PERS-MISCELLANEOUS-UNFUND LIAB (4,177)(5,019)(4,845) 072 68 001 8405 - LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE -(66,000)(18,000) 072 68 001 8441 - OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES (63,174)-- 072 68 001 8702 - PG&E-ELECTRICITY (3,910)(4,000)(5,000) 072 68 001 8704 - WATER SERVICES (111,222)(110,000)(30,000) 072 68 001 8814 - WC INSURANCE CHARGES (1,140)(700)(388) 072 68 001 8830 - VACATION/SICK LEAVE CHARGES (1,589)(900)(1,709) 072 68 001 8911 - OTHER CONSULTING SERVICES -(5,000)(80,000) 072 68 001 9003 - ADVERTISING -(300)(309)
072 68 001 9505 - PJCT CST-CONSTRUCTION (3,376)(1,200)(4,000) 072 99 000 8836 - COST ALLOCATION (10,339)--
072 99 000 9038 - COUNTY ADMIN EXPENSES (1,243)(1,282)(1,320) TOTAL EXPENSES (227,398)(225,906)(173,606)
REVENUE 124,976 185,512 205,971
EXPENSES (227,398)(225,906)(173,606)
NET SURPLUS/DEFICIT (102,422)(40,394)32,365
BEGINNING FUND BALANCE 117,365 12,683 (29,710)
MKT VAL-UNREALIZED GAIN/LOSS (2,259)(2,000)(2,000)
NET SURPLUS/DEFICIT (102,422)(40,394)32,365
ENDING FUND BALANCE 12,683 (29,710)654
Packet Page 626 of 1243Attachment 18 Page 7 of 462

LLMD NO. 1 - GATEWAY
FY 2022-2023 ASSESSMENTS BY PARCEL

PARCEL COUNT BOOK PAGE PARCEL ASSESSMENT
1 33 220 1 11,250.00$
2 33 220 2 5,600.00$
3 33 220 3 2,000.00$
4 33 220 4 13,500.00$
5 33 220 5 2,500.00$
6 33 220 7 6,500.00$
7 33 220 8 2,000.00$
8 33 220 11 7,100.00$
9 33 230 74 22,000.00$
10 33 230 75 9,000.00$
11 33 230 77 4,146.81$
12 33 230 78 3,631.85$
13 33 230 79 7,995.48$
14 33 230 80 6,423.49$
15 33 230 81 2,927.16$
16 33 230 82 2,412.20$
17 33 230 83 2,493.51$
18 33 230 84 9,486.17$
19 33 230 85 216.83$
20 33 230 87 2,547.71$
21 33 230 88 4,607.57$
22 33 230 89 867.31$
23 33 230 90 243.93$
24 33 240 1 850.00$
25 33 240 3 6,500.00$
26 33 240 4 1,250.00$
27 33 240 5 9,000.00$
28 33 240 7 350.00$
29 33 240 8 1,500.00$
30 33 240 10 5,000.00$
31 33 240 11 500.00$
32 33 240 12 6,750.00$
33 33 240 13 16,012.12$
34 33 240 14 237.88$
35 33 240 16 948.57$
36 33 240 17 7,186.34$
37 33 240 18 865.09$
38 33 250 1 3,500.00$
39 33 250 2 4,750.00$
40 33 250 3 65.00$
41 33 250 4 4,500.00$
42 33 250 5 2,250.00$
43 33 250 6 4,500.00$
TOTAL ASSESSMENT 205,965.00$

Page 1 of 2 ends

Fairfield City CouncilJuly 5, 2022

Fairfield City Council
July 5, 2022