Agenda, first session — Fairfield City Council, July 2, 2024 (part 1 of 2)

For individuals with hearing or speaking limitations, dial 711 or (800) 7352922 (English). For Spanish, Tagalog or other language, please dial (800) 8553000 and provide the communication assistant with the following City telephone number: (707) 3994010.

DISCLOSURE OF CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS:

Pursuant to Government Code 84308, City Council Members are disqualified and not able to participate in any agenda item involving contracts (other than competitively bid, labor, or personal employment contracts), franchises, discretionary land use permits and other entitlements if the City Council Member received more than $250 in campaign contributions from the applicant or contractor, an agent of the applicant or contractor, or any financially interested participant who actively supports or opposes the City's decision on the agenda item in the 12 months prior to the date the item is on the agenda. Members of the City Council who have received, and applicants, contractors or their agents who have made, campaign contributions totaling more than $250 to a City Council Member in the 12 months prior to the date the item is on the agenda are required to disclose that fact for the official record of the subject proceedings. Disclosures must include the amount of the campaign contribution and identify the recipient City Council Member and may be made either in writing to the City Clerk before the agenda item or by verbal disclosure during consideration.

Members of the public can observe the meeting on Comcast Cable Channel 26, ATT UVerse 99, and webstreamed live at www.youtube.com/user/FFCATV/live . The public may join the meeting via Zoom at https://fairfieldca.zoom.us/j/89060213840?pwd=UUd0WlpEMStLemcxbld4dzVMK3Z5dz09 or via phone (408) 6380968, Webinar ID: 890 6021 3840, Passcode: 7074287400 CALL TO ORDER 6:00 PM
ROLL CALL
Councilmember Doug Carr
Councilmember Doriss Panduro
Councilmember Scott Tonnesen
Councilmember Rick Vaccaro
Councilmember K. Patrice Williams
Vice Mayor Pam Bertani
Mayor Catherine "Cat" Moy
INVOCATION Pastor Jeff Hood, First Baptist Church
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
COUNCIL REPORTS
CITY MANAGER REPORT
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
CITY CLERK REPORT
PUBLIC COMMENTS
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Persons wishing to address the City Council on subjects not on the agenda but within the jurisdiction of the council may do so at this time. The council cannot discuss or take action on matters not on the agenda for this meeting, but councilmembers may briefly respond to statements made or questions raised by the public, ask for clarification from staff, refer the matter to staff, request staff to report back to the council at a subsequent meeting, or place the matter on a future agenda. To speak on an agenda item please use the “raise your hand” feature or press *9 on your phone. Speakers are limited to three minutes per item.

CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters listed on the Consent Calendar are to be approved with one motion unless a member of the City Council or the public requests that separate action be taken on a specific item.

1.Resolution 2024168 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the Purchase of Datacenter Colocation and Disaster Recovery Services from ePlus Technology,Inc.

Recommended Action
Adopt resolution.

Funding Source
$872,715; Fund 522
Contact:Savita Chaudhary (707) 4287582
a

2.Resolution 2024169 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving the Purchase of Packet Page 2 of 249

2.Resolution 2024169 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving the Purchase of Support and Maintenance for City Backup Software and Hardware from ePlus Technology, Inc.

Recommended Action
Adopt resolution.

Funding Source
$230,000; Fund 522
Contact:Savita Chaudhary, (707) 4287582
a

3.Resolution 2024170 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement Between the City of Fairfield and Geographic Technologies Group (GTG) for Geographic Information System (GIS) Consulting Services Recommended Action
Adopt resolution.

Funding Source
$900,000; Fund 522
Contact:Savita Chaudhary, (707) 4287582
a

4.Resolution 2024171 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Accepting the Lee Bell Neighborhood Park Sports Field Lighting Improvements as Complete Recommended Action
Adopt resolution.

Funding Source
N/A
Contact:Roger Dunham, (707) 4287478
a

5.Resolution 2024172 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement Between the City of Fairfield and Parodi Investigative Solutions, LLC for PreEmployment Background Investigation Services Recommended Action
Adopt resolution.

Funding Source
$100,000; General Fund
Contact:Dan Marshall, (707) 4287374
a

6.Resolution 2024173 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Setting A Hearing for July 16, 2024 Re: Appeal of Revocation of Business License # 24000256 for Field Gift Shop Located at 1312 W. Texas Street, Fairfield, CA 94533 Pursuant to Chapter 10 (Section 10B.33) of the Fairfield Municipal Code
Recommended Action
Adopt resolution.

Funding Source
N/A
Contact:David Lim, (415) 4218484
a
NEW BUSINESS

7.Minute Action Approving Mayor's Appointments to the Youth Commission Packet Page 3 of 249

CITY OF FAIRFIELDFAIRFIELD CITY COUNCILREGULAR MEETINGTUESDAY, JULY 2, 2024; 6:00 PMHARRY T. PRICE MEMORIAL COUNCIL CHAMBER, 1000WEBSTER STREET, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 OR VIA ZOOMAGENDANotice to PublicThe City of Fairfield is committed to providing meeting facilities that areaccessible to persons with disabilities and/or have language barriers. To requestmeeting materials in alternative formats, or to request a sign languageinterpreter, realtime captioning, or other accommodation, please contact theCity Clerk's Office, at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting at (707) 4287400.For individuals with hearing or speaking limitations, dial 711 or (800) 7352922(English). For Spanish, Tagalog or other language, please dial (800) 8553000and provide the communication assistant with the following City telephonenumber: (707) 3994010.DISCLOSURE OF CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS:Pursuant to Government Code 84308, City Council Members are disqualified and notable to participate in any agenda item involving contracts (other than competitivelybid, labor, or personal employment contracts), franchises, discretionary land usepermits and other entitlements if the City Council Member received more than $250 incampaign contributions from the applicant or contractor, an agent of the applicant orcontractor, or any financially interested participant who actively supports or opposesthe City's decision on the agenda item in the 12 months prior to the date the item is onthe agenda. Members of the City Council who have received, and applicants,contractors or their agents who have made, campaign contributions totaling more than$250 to a City Council Member in the 12 months prior to the date the item is on theagenda are required to disclose that fact for the official record of the subjectproceedings. Disclosures must include the amount of the campaign contribution andidentify the recipient City Council Member and may be made either in writing to theCity Clerk before the agenda item or by verbal disclosure during consideration.Members of the public can observe the meeting on Comcast Cable Channel 26, ATT UVerse 99, andwebstreamed live at www.youtube.com/user/FFCATV/live . The public may join the meeting via Zoomat https://fairfieldca.zoom.us/j/89060213840?pwd=UUd0WlpEMStLemcxbld4dzVMK3Z5dz09 or viaphone (408) 6380968, Webinar ID: 890 6021 3840, Passcode: 7074287400CALL TO ORDER 6:00 PMROLL CALLCouncilmember Doug CarrCouncilmember Doriss PanduroCouncilmemberScott TonnesenCouncilmember Rick VaccaroCouncilmember K. Patrice Williams Vice Mayor Pam BertaniMayor Catherine "Cat" MoyINVOCATION Pastor Jeff Hood, First Baptist ChurchPLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCECOUNCIL REPORTSCITY MANAGER REPORTCITY ATTORNEY REPORTCITY CLERK REPORTPUBLIC COMMENTS PUBLIC COMMENTSPersons wishing to address the City Council on subjects not on the agenda but within the jurisdictionof the council may do so at this time. The council cannot discuss or take action on matters not on theagenda for this meeting, but councilmembers may briefly respond to statements made or questionsraised by the public, ask for clarification from staff, refer the matter to staff, request staff to report backto the council at a subsequent meeting, or place the matter on a future agenda. To speak on anagenda item please use the “raise your hand” feature or press *9 on your phone. Speakers arelimited to three minutes per item.CONSENT CALENDARAll matters listed on the Consent Calendar are to be approved with one motion unless a member ofthe City Council or the public requests that separate action be taken on a specific item.1.Resolution 2024168 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the Purchase ofDatacenter Colocation and Disaster Recovery Services from ePlus Technology,Inc.Recommended ActionAdopt resolution.Funding Source$872,715; Fund 522Contact:Savita Chaudhary (707) 4287582a2.Resolution 2024169 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving the Purchase ofSupport and Maintenance for City Backup Software and Hardware from ePlus Technology, Inc.Recommended ActionAdopt resolution. Funding Source$230,000; Fund 522Contact:Savita Chaudhary, (707) 4287582a3.Resolution 2024170 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the City Manager toExecute a Professional Services Agreement Between the City of Fairfield and GeographicTechnologies Group (GTG) for Geographic Information System (GIS) Consulting ServicesRecommended ActionAdopt resolution.Funding Source$900,000; Fund 522Contact:Savita Chaudhary, (707) 4287582a4.Resolution 2024171 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Accepting the Lee BellNeighborhood Park Sports Field Lighting Improvements as CompleteRecommended ActionAdopt resolution.Funding SourceN/AContact:Roger Dunham, (707) 4287478a5.Resolution 2024172 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the City Manager toExecute a Professional Services Agreement Between the City of Fairfield and ParodiInvestigative Solutions, LLC for PreEmployment Background Investigation ServicesRecommended ActionAdopt resolution.Funding Source$100,000; General FundContact:Dan Marshall, (707) 4287374a6.Resolution 2024173 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Setting A Hearing for July 16,2024 Re: Appeal of Revocation of Business License # 24000256 for Field Gift Shop Located at1312 W. Texas Street, Fairfield, CA 94533 Pursuant to Chapter 10 (Section 10B.33) of theFairfield Municipal CodeRecommended ActionAdopt resolution.Funding SourceN/AContact:David Lim, (415) 4218484a NEW BUSINESS

7.Minute Action Approving Mayor's Appointments to the Youth Commission Recommended Action
Approve appointments. Perform oath of office.

Funding Source
N/A
Contact:Karen Rees, (707) 4287767
a

8.Minute Action Approving Mayor’s Appointments to the Planning Commission Recommended Action
Approve appointments. Perform oath of office.

Funding Source
N/A
Contact:Karen Rees, (707) 4287767
a

9.Energy Conservation Project Update
Recommended Action
Receive report.

Funding Source
N/A
Contact:Marisa Cumpian, (707) 4287494
a

10.Notice of Funding Availability for Temporary Emergency Shelter Operations Update and Council Input
Recommended Action
Receive recommendations, open discussion, and provide direction.

Funding Source
$1,100,000.00; Homeless Services Division General and Quality of Life Fund Contact:Samantha Burrows, (707) 4287749
a
PUBLIC HEARINGS

11.Public Hearing; and
Resolution 2024174 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Annexing Territory (Woolner Avenue by SolanoNapa Habitat for Humanity) to Community Facilities District No. 20122 (Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation, and Park Maintenance) as Annexation No. 68, Authorizing the Levy of a Special Tax Within the Annexed Territory, and Submitting the Levy of a Special Tax to the Qualified Electors Thereof; and
Resolution 2024175 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Declaring the Results of a Special Annexation Election in Territory Annexed to Community Facilities District No. 20122 (Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation, and Park Maintenance), Determining the Validity of Prior Proceedings, and Directing Recording of Amended Notice of Special Tax Lien for City of Fairfield Community Facilities District No. 20122 (Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation, and Park Maintenance) Annexation No. 68 (Woolner Avenue by SolanoNapa Habitat for Humanity)
Recommended Action
Hold public hearing and adopt resolutions.

Packet Page 4 of 249

Funding Source
N/A
Contact:Valerie Standfill, (707) 4287055
a

12.Public Hearing; and
Resolution 2024176 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving the Comprehensive User Fee Study and Amending the Master Fee Schedule for Fiscal Year 20242025 Police Fees
Recommended Action
Hold public hearing and adopt resolution.

Funding Source
N/A
Contact:Savita Chaudhary, (707) 4287582
a

13.Public Hearing; and
Resolution 2024177 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving the Fiscal Year 2024 2025 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Annual Action Plan Recommended Action
Hold public hearing and adopt resolution.

Funding Source
N/A
Contact:LaTanya Terrones, (707) 4287454
a
ADJOURN TO TUESDAY, JULY 16, 2024, 6:00 P.M., HARRY T. PRICE MEMORIAL COUNCIL CHAMBER.

Any disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and distributed by the City of Fairfield to all or a majority of the Fairfield City Council less than 72 hours prior to that meeting are available for public inspection at City Hall, in the 4th floor lobby, 1000 Webster Street, Fairfield, California during normal business hours.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
I, Delaney Dombrowski, Deputy City Clerk, do hereby certify that I have caused a true copy of the above notice and agenda to be delivered to each of the members of the Fairfield City Council, at the time and in the manner prescribed by law and that this agenda was posted at City Hall, 1000 Webster Street, Fairfield, California on Thursday, June 27, 2024.

Packet Page 5 of 249

Agenda Item No: 1.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:July 2, 2024
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT:Resolution 2024168 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the Purchase of Datacenter Colocation and Disaster Recovery Services from ePlus Technology,Inc.

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The Information Technology (IT) Department seeks approval to purchase datacenter colocation for disaster recovery services through the competitively bid National Association of State Procurement Officials (NASPO) contract from ePlus Technology Inc. (ePlus).

DISCUSSION
The City of Fairfield seeks to acquire colocation space and related managed services as a component of the City’s IT Disaster Recovery Protocols and Cyber Resilience Plan. The City currently only has one datacenter, and the establishment of a disaster recovery site is considered an IT best practice. To ensure high availability of critical systems and services to the City’s community, the IT department is recommending purchasing datacenter colocation and disaster recovery services from ePlus Inc. A colocation facility provides an alternative datacenter location and manages services for the City’s network and server equipment. It provides a secure and controlled environment from which critical systems and applications can operate if the City’s primary datacenter were to experience a failure, natural disaster, or cybersecurity event taking it offline. These services will help to ensure continuity of operations and reduce staff time required to restore critical services.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The services will be procured under the NASPO Master Contract Number: AR2472. Expenditures are available and budgeted in Fund 522, Project OITDTREDOP as part of the Disaster Recovery and Business Continuity Program. The initial services period is five years, or sixty months, for $722,715 with a contingency not to exceed amount of $30,000 per year to support additional system and data growth consuming more colocation services, power, rack space and storage capacity. The IT Department is recommending the option to renew the data center colocation and disaster recovery services as recurring services at the end of the initial fiveyear term. The support and maintenance are funded through Fund Packet Page 6 of 249

Agenda Item No: 1.AGENDA REPORTDATE:July 2, 2024 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, City ManagerSUBJECT:Resolution 2024168 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the Purchaseof Datacenter Colocation and Disaster Recovery Services from ePlus Technology,Inc.RECOMMENDED ACTIONAdopt resolution.STATEMENT OF ISSUEThe Information Technology (IT) Department seeks approval to purchase datacenter colocation fordisaster recovery services through the competitively bid National Association of State ProcurementOfficials (NASPO) contract from ePlus Technology Inc. (ePlus).DISCUSSIONThe City of Fairfield seeks to acquire colocation space and related managed services as a componentof the City’s IT Disaster Recovery Protocols and Cyber Resilience Plan. The City currently only has onedatacenter, and the establishment of a disaster recovery site is considered an IT best practice. Toensure high availability of critical systems and services to the City’s community, the IT department isrecommending purchasing datacenter colocation and disaster recovery services from ePlus Inc. Acolocation facility provides an alternative datacenter location and manages services for the City’snetwork and server equipment. It provides a secure and controlled environment from which criticalsystems and applications can operate if the City’s primary datacenter were to experience a failure,natural disaster, or cybersecurity event taking it offline. These services will help to ensure continuity ofoperations and reduce staff time required to restore critical services.FINANCIAL IMPACTThe services will be procured under the NASPO Master Contract Number: AR2472. Expenditures areavailable and budgeted in Fund 522, Project OITDTREDOP as part of the Disaster Recovery andBusiness Continuity Program. The initial services period is five years, or sixty months, for $722,715 witha contingency not to exceed amount of $30,000 per year to support additional system and data growth consuming more colocation services, power, rack space and storage capacity. The IT Department is recommending the option to renew the data center colocation and disaster recovery services as recurring services at the end of the initial fiveyear term. The support and maintenance are funded through Fund 522, Project OITINFDROP.

Time Period Annual Costs Total Costs for
5year period
Year 1 through Year 5 $144,543 $722,715
Contingency $30,000 $150,000
Total 5year costs $174,543 $872,715
PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The council may choose not to adopt the proposed resolution. The City only has one data center, which would leave the City’s systems without an alternate location to function for the disaster recovery situation. This project was identified as part of the Disaster Recovery and Cyber Resilience Plan strategies that aligns with the council goal of Organizational Excellence.

STAFF CONTACT
Eudora Fleischman, IT Infrastructure and Security Manager (707) 4287527
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Attachment 1: Proposed Resolution
Attachment 2: Proposed Quote
REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Chaudhary, Savita Approved 6/14/2024 9:24 PM
Dombrowski, Delaney Approved 6/17/2024 11:18 AM
Dombrowski, Delaney Approved 6/17/2024 11:18 AM
Packet Page 7 of 249

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-168

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE

OF DATACENTER COLOCATION AND DISASTER RECOVERY SERVICES FROM EPLUS TECHNOLOGY, INC.

WHEREAS, the City’s Information Technology (IT) Department maintains the City’s one datacenter; and

WHEREAS, the IT department is recommending purchasing disaster recovery and colocation services using the National Association of State Procurement Officials (NASPO) competitive contract number AR2472 from approved reseller EPlus Technology, Inc.; and

WHEREAS, a colocation facility provides an alternative datacenter location and manages services for the City’s network and server equipment, providing a secure and controlled environment from which critical systems and applications can operate if the City’s primary datacenter were to experience a failure, natural disaster, or cybersecurity event taking it offline; and

WHEREAS, the contract contains an information security record that would reveal vulnerabilities to, or otherwise increase the potential for an attack on, an information technology system of the City of Fairfield (Government Code 7929.10); and

WHEREAS, the City of Fairfield utilizes a cooperative purchasing agreement with NASPO to conduct competitive bid processes for the same technologies to receive preferred, cost -effective pricing; and

WHEREAS, the City IT department is recommending purchasing the initial five years and then extending the NASPO contract as a recurring purchase.

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

Section 1. The council hereby approves the expenditure of funds from Fund 522, Project OITDTREDOP to purchase disaster recovery and colocation services from approved reseller, EPlus Technology, Inc., in the amount of $722,715 for an initial five-year term, and an additional not to exceed $30,000 contingency per year for additional system and data growth of critical systems for a total not to exceed $872,175 for the five-year term.

Section 2. The resolution further authorizes the future renewals as recurring purchases not to exceed $250,000 annually due to the continuity needed for the datacenter colocation services.

Section 3. The city manager, or his designee, is hereby authorized to take all steps necessary and right to implement this resolution.

Packet Page 8 of 249Attachment 1 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2024-168

Page 2 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of July 2024, by the following vote:

AYES: MEMBERS: MOY/BERTANI/CARR/PANDURO/TONNESEN/VACCARO/WILLIAMS NOES: MEMBERS: _________________________________________________ ABSENT: MEMBERS: _________________________________________________ ABSTAIN: MEMBERS: _________________________________________________

_________________________________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 9 of 249Attachment 1 Page 2 of 2

Packet Page 10 of 249Attachment 2 Page 1 of 3

Packet Page 11 of 249Attachment 2 Page 2 of 3

Packet Page 12 of 249Attachment 2 Page 3 of 3

Agenda Item No: 2.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:July 2, 2024
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT:Resolution 2024169 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving the Purchase of Support and Maintenance for City Backup Software and Hardware from ePlus Technology, Inc.

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The Information Technology (IT) Department seeks approval to renew the support and maintenance of the City's backup application and hardware.

DISCUSSION
The IT Department utilizes a system to support and back up the City’s file, email, and database servers.

The backup system automates these processes and provides immediate access to the backups for data recovery. In April 2022, City Council approved the purchase of a modern backup software and hardware solution from ePlus Technology, Inc. Over the past two years, staff added additional modules for M365 Security Cloud Protection and Ransomware protection. The renewals for the various modules of the current backup application and hardware are from the same vendor, and are currently set to expire across different dates beginning July 29, 2024.

The IT Department now seeks approval to renew and coterminate separate agreements into one agreement with an expiration date of June 1, 2026, for all elements of the City’s backup application and hardware. This will standardize the support renewal dates and reduce staff time required for payment processing.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
Expenditure costs are available and budgeted in Fund 522, Computer Maintenance, as part of the Disaster Recovery and Business Continuity Project OITINFDROP. The support will be procured under the National Association of State Procurement Officials (NASPO) Master Contract Number AR2472.

The renewal period of July 29, 2024 to June 1, 2026 will cost $210,003.96, not inclusive of any taxes, Packet Page 13 of 249

Agenda Item No: 2.AGENDA REPORTDATE:July 2, 2024 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, City ManagerSUBJECT:Resolution 2024169 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving the Purchaseof Support and Maintenance for City Backup Software and Hardware fromePlus Technology, Inc.RECOMMENDED ACTIONAdopt resolution. STATEMENT OF ISSUEThe Information Technology (IT) Department seeks approval to renew the support and maintenance ofthe City's backup application and hardware.DISCUSSIONThe IT Department utilizes a system to support and back up the City’s file, email, and database servers.The backup system automates these processes and provides immediate access to the backups fordata recovery. In April 2022, City Council approved the purchase of a modern backup software andhardware solution from ePlus Technology, Inc. Over the past two years, staff added additional modulesfor M365 Security Cloud Protection and Ransomware protection. The renewals for the various modulesof the current backup application and hardware are from the same vendor, and are currently set toexpire across different dates beginning July 29, 2024.The IT Department now seeks approval to renew and coterminate separate agreements into oneagreement with an expiration date of June 1, 2026, for all elements of the City’s backup application andhardware. This will standardize the support renewal dates and reduce staff time required for paymentprocessing.FINANCIAL IMPACTExpenditure costs are available and budgeted in Fund 522, Computer Maintenance, as part of the Disaster Recovery and Business Continuity Project OITINFDROP. The support will be procured under the National Association of State Procurement Officials (NASPO) Master Contract Number AR2472.

The renewal period of July 29, 2024 to June 1, 2026 will cost $210,003.96, not inclusive of any taxes, and will not exceed $230,000 for the initial term.

It is anticipated that additional renewals for support and maintenance will be funded through Fund 522 Project OITINFDROP, with a price adjustment of no more than a 10% increase per year, subject to budget appropriation.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The council may choose not to adopt the proposed resolution, but this is not recommended as the IT Department intends to streamline repetitive processes, operations, and employee time management.

STAFF CONTACT
Eudora Fleischman, IT Infrastructure and Security Manager (707) 4287527
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Attachment 1: Proposed Resolution
Attachment 2: Proposed Quote
REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Chaudhary, Savita Approved 6/14/2024 9:24 PM
Dombrowski, Delaney Approved 6/17/2024 11:17 AM
Dombrowski, Delaney Approved 6/17/2024 11:17 AM
Packet Page 14 of 249

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-169

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF SUPPORT AND MAINTENANCE FOR CITY’S BACKUP SOFTWARE AND HARDWARE FROM EPLUS TECHNOLOGY, INC.

WHEREAS, the Information Technology (IT) Department utilizes a backup system to support and back up the City’s file, email, and database servers; and

WHEREAS, in April 2022, the council approved a modern backup software and hardware solution with ePlus Technology, Inc.; and

WHEREAS, in the past two years, staff added additional modules for M365 Security Cloud Protection and Ransomware protection; and

WHEREAS, the City utilizes a cooperative purchasing agreement with the National Association of State Procurement Officials (NASPO), to conduct competitive bid processes for the same technologies to receive preferred, cost-effective pricing; and

WHEREAS, the renewals for the various modules of the current backup application and hardware are from the same vendor, and currently set to expire across different dates beginning July 29, 2024, and requires annual support and maintenance renewal; and WHEREAS, the IT Department seeks to renew and co-terminate the annual support for the backup application and hardware from ePlus Technology, Inc. via the State NASPO master contract.

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

Section 1. The council hereby approves the purchase of support with ePlus Technology, Inc. and approves the current and future renewals for the backup software and hardware via the State NASPO Contract Number AR2472.

Section 2. The council hereby approves the expenditure of funds from Fund 522, Project OITINFDROP to renew the support and maintenance services from ePlus for $210,003.96, not inclusive of taxes. The total amount will not exceed $230,000.00 for this initial term through June 1, 2026. Additionally, the council approves future annual renewals for the next five years, Packet Page 15 of 249Attachment 1 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2024-169

Page 2 ends

extending through June 1, 2031, with a price adjustment of no more than a 10% increase per year, subject to budget appropriation.

Section 3. The council hereby authorizes the city manager, or his designee, to execute the purchase and do all other things deemed necessary or useful in implementing this resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of July 2024, by the following vote:

_________________________________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 16 of 249Attachment 1 Page 2 of 2

Packet Page 17 of 249Attachment 2 Page 1 of 2

Packet Page 18 of 249Attachment 2 Page 2 of 2

Agenda Item No: 3.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:July 2, 2024
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT:Resolution 2024170 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement Between the City of Fairfield and Geographic Technologies Group (GTG) for Geographic Information System (GIS) Consulting Services
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The Information Technology (IT) Department seeks approval to enter into a professional services agreement with Geographic Technologies Group (GTG) for Geographic Information System (GIS) consulting services.

DISCUSSION
The City integrates GIS across various departments for tasks such as business applications for infrastructure planning, development, and capital improvement projects (CIP), as well as water utility projects, the Police 911 system, fire maps, and emergency/disaster planning. GIS technologies are powerful tools for improving the quality, accuracy, efficiency, and responsiveness of services provided by the City of Fairfield.

Following a Request for Proposals (RFP) process in 2022, GTG was selected to conduct the Enterprise GIS assessment. The vendor collaborated with staff to produce a fiveyear roadmap and re evaluation for Enterprise GIS due to changes in the GIS architecture, business application technologies, and staff resources to continue to be effective in providing critical services. The new GIS assessment and strategy specifies ways in which recommended solutions will improve the City's operations and overall service delivery, streamline operations to achieve cost efficiencies, increase productivity, and support open and transparent governance.

GTG conducted surveys, interviews, and workshops with City staff to do an assessment and analysis of the City’s current Enterprise GIS. They also helped develop a governance plan outlining the administration, maintenance, and support for the Enterprise GIS. Additionally, they developed an implementation plan to provide a fiveyear roadmap for GIS and recommended a strategy with actions and next steps. This development and planning process involved key staff representing all City departments.

The GIS Master Plan identified 200+ projects over the next five years. The plan serves as a critical tool to measure the City’s current GIS performance, review best practices, and continuously improve to deliver projects and services to the community. The GIS Master Plan is a living document updated every five years, which helps identify and align organizational priorities with our City’s Strategic Goals and departments' vision, mission, and values. Completing the high volume of planned work is not feasible without additional resources. GTG’s extensive experience working with other local municipalities can augment City staff to implement ambitious GIS projects over the next five years. One recent example is the CIP Dashboard, an interactive tool which helps the community to visualize the City’s progress of capital projects.

The focus of this proposed agreement involves the implementation of various GIS projects as outlined in the City’s fiveyear GIS Master Plan. The first project aims to support the City’s transparency initiative through the creation of a Police Transparency Portal. These initiatives will consolidate public safety data, currently available on the City's website, into a centralized location for easy access to key information. Other upcoming projects will consist of the development of StoryMaps for various City departments that visually present data and narratives through interactive maps. StoryMaps enable citizens to easily understand complex information, fostering greater government accountability.

Furthermore, the StoryMaps will allow for the City to share insights, showcase public projects, and solicit feedback, ultimately promoting trust and collaboration between the City and the public.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The total amount requested is not to exceed $180,000 per fiscal year for a total of $900,000 over a five year term for ongoing GIS consulting services. These funds are available in the Computer Services Fund 522, Project OITBSGISOP.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The council may choose not to approve the proposed agreement, however, this is not recommended as it would impact the critical role that GIS plays in the emergency and disaster planning, response, and recovery efforts. Completing the high volume of planned work is not feasible without additional resources.

STAFF CONTACT
Savita Chaudhary, Assistant City Manager
(707) 428 7582
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Attachment 1: Proposed Resolution
Attachment 2: Proposed Agreement
Packet Page 20 of 249

Agenda Item No: 3.AGENDA REPORTDATE:July 2, 2024 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, City ManagerSUBJECT:Resolution 2024170 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the CityManager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement Between the City of Fairfieldand Geographic Technologies Group (GTG) for Geographic Information System (GIS)Consulting ServicesRECOMMENDED ACTIONAdopt resolution.STATEMENT OF ISSUEThe Information Technology (IT) Department seeks approval to enter into a professional servicesagreement with Geographic Technologies Group (GTG) for Geographic Information System (GIS)consulting services.DISCUSSIONThe City integrates GIS across various departments for tasks such as business applications forinfrastructure planning, development, and capital improvement projects (CIP), as well as water utilityprojects, the Police 911 system, fire maps, and emergency/disaster planning. GIS technologies arepowerful tools for improving the quality, accuracy, efficiency, and responsiveness of services providedby the City of Fairfield.Following a Request for Proposals (RFP) process in 2022, GTG was selected to conduct theEnterprise GIS assessment. The vendor collaborated with staff to produce a fiveyear roadmap and reevaluation for Enterprise GIS due to changes in the GIS architecture, business application technologies,and staff resources to continue to be effective in providing critical services. The new GIS assessmentand strategy specifies ways in which recommended solutions will improve the City's operations andoverall service delivery, streamline operations to achieve cost efficiencies, increase productivity, andsupport open and transparent governance.GTG conducted surveys, interviews, and workshops with City staff to do an assessment and analysis ofthe City’s current Enterprise GIS. They also helped develop a governance plan outlining theadministration, maintenance, and support for the Enterprise GIS. Additionally, they developed animplementation plan to provide a fiveyear roadmap for GIS and recommended a strategy with actionsand next steps. This development and planning process involved key staff representing all Citydepartments.The GIS Master Plan identified 200+ projects over the next five years. The plan serves as a critical toolto measure the City’s current GIS performance, review best practices, and continuously improve todeliver projects and services to the community. The GIS Master Plan is a living document updated everyfive years, which helps identify and align organizational priorities with our City’s Strategic Goals anddepartments' vision, mission, and values. Completing the high volume of planned work is not feasiblewithout additional resources. GTG’s extensive experience working with other local municipalities canaugment City staff to implement ambitious GIS projects over the next five years. One recent example isthe CIP Dashboard, an interactive tool which helps the community to visualize the City’s progress ofcapital projects.The focus of this proposed agreement involves the implementation of various GIS projects as outlinedin the City’s fiveyear GIS Master Plan. The first project aims to support the City’s transparency initiativethrough the creation of a Police Transparency Portal. These initiatives will consolidate public safetydata, currently available on the City's website, into a centralized location for easy access to keyinformation. Other upcoming projects will consist of the development of StoryMaps for various Citydepartments that visually present data and narratives through interactive maps. StoryMaps enablecitizens to easily understand complex information, fostering greater government accountability.Furthermore, the StoryMaps will allow for the City to share insights, showcase public projects, andsolicit feedback, ultimately promoting trust and collaboration between the City and the public.FINANCIAL IMPACTThe total amount requested is not to exceed $180,000 per fiscal year for a total of $900,000 over a fiveyear term for ongoing GIS consulting services. These funds are available in the Computer ServicesFund 522, Project OITBSGISOP.PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATIONN/AALTERNATIVE ACTIONThe council may choose not to approve the proposed agreement, however, this is not recommended asit would impact the critical role that GIS plays in the emergency and disaster planning, response, andrecovery efforts. Completing the high volume of planned work is not feasible without additionalresources.STAFF CONTACTSavita Chaudhary, Assistant City Manager(707) 428 [email protected] WITHN/AATTACHMENTS:Description Attachment 1: Proposed Resolution
Attachment 2: Proposed Agreement
REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Chaudhary, Savita Approved 6/17/2024 3:41 PM
Dombrowski, Delaney Approved 6/17/2024 3:45 PM
Dombrowski, Delaney Approved 6/17/2024 3:45 PM
Packet Page 21 of 249

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-170

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD AUTHORIZING THE CITY

MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF

FAIRFIELD AND GEOGRAPHIC TECHNOLOGIES GROUP (GTG) FOR GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

SYSTEM (GIS) CONSULTING SERVICES

WHEREAS, the City integrates GIS across various departments for tasks such as business applications for infrastructure planning, development, and capital improvement projects (CIP), as well as water utility projects, the Police 911 system, fire maps, and emergency/disaster planning; and

WHEREAS, in 2022, after a Request for Proposal (RFP) process in 2022, Geographic Technologies Group (GTG) was selected to conduct the Enterprise GIS assessment and assist staff in the development of a five-year GIS Master Plan; and

WHEREAS, over the next five years, additional support is needed to advance the projects outlined in the five-year GIS Master Plan and to completing the high volume of planned work is not feasible without additional resources.; and

WHEREAS, the IT Department seeks approval to enter into a professional services agreement with GTG for GIS consulting; and

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

Section 1. The council hereby authorizes the city manager, or his designee, to execute the agreement and do all other things deemed necessary or useful in implementing this resolution.

Section 2. The council hereby approves the expenditure of funds from Fund 522, Project OITBSGISOP not to exceed $180,000 per year, or $900,000 for the five-year term through June 30, 2029.

Packet Page 22 of 249Attachment 1 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2024-170

Page 2 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of July 2024, by the following vote:

_________________________________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 23 of 249Attachment 1 Page 2 of 2

1 Revised 1/26/2024

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made at Fairfield, California, as of ________________, 2024, by and between the City of Fairfield, a municipal corporation (the “CITY") and Geographic Technologies Group ("CONSULTANT"), who agree as follows:
1) SERVICES. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall provide to the CITY the services described in Exhibit “A,” which consists of the proposal submitted by CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT shall provide said services at the time, place, and in the manner specified in Exhibit “A.”
2) PAYMENT. CITY shall pay CONSULTANT for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement at the times and in the manner set forth in Exhibit “B.” The payments specified in Exhibit “B” shall be the only payments to be made to CONSULTANT for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement.

CONSULTANT shall submit all billings for said services to the CITY in the manner specified in Exhibit “B.” 3) FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT. CONSULTANT shall, at its sole cost and expense, furnish all facilities and equipment which may be required for furnishing services pursuant to this Agreement. 4) GENERAL PROVISIONS. The general provisions set forth in Exhibit “C” are part of this Agreement. In the event of any inconsistency between said general provisions and any other terms or conditions of this Agreement, the provisions set forth in Exhibit “C” shall control. 5) INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. The insurance requirements set forth in Exhibit “D” are part of this Agreement. In the event of any inconsistency between said general provisions and any other terms or conditions of this Agreement, the requirements set forth in Exhibit “D” shall control. 6) BUSINESS LICENSE. The CONSULTANT shall obtain and keep current a business license for work within the City of Fairfield pursuant to Chapter 10B of the Fairfield City Code, with respect to the gross receipts received pursuant to this Agreement. No payments shall be made to any SERVICE PROVIDER until such business license has been obtained, and all fees paid therefore, by the CONSULTANT. Business license applications and information may be obtained from the Community Development Department, Fairfield City Hall, 1000 Webster Street, Fairfield, CA 94533-4883, (707-428- 7509) and online at www.fairfield.ca.gov/biz .

7) EXHIBITS. All exhibits referred to herein are attached hereto and are by this reference incorporated herein.
8) TERM. This agreement shall be in effect through June 30, 2029. 9) GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE. Should either Party to this Agreement bring legal action against the other, the validity, interpretation, and performance of this Contract shall be controlled by and construed under the laws of California, excluding California’s choice of law rules. Venue for an y such action relating to this Agreement shall be in the Solano County Superior Court. 10) Where applicable, vehicles with a GVWR greater than 8,500 lbs. and light-duty package delivery vehicles operated in California may be subject to the California Air Resources Board Advanced Clean Fleets regulations. Such vehicles may therefore be subject to requirements to reduce emissions of Packet Page 24 of 249Attachment 2 Page 1 of 9

2 Revised 1/26/2024
air pollutants. For more information, please visit the CARB Advanced Clean Fleets webpage at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/advanced-clean-fleets 11)ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement, including any other documents incorporated herein by specific reference, represents the entire and integrated agreement between CITY and CONSULTANT.

This Agreement supersedes all prior oral or written negotiations, representations or agreements. This Agreement may not be modified or amended, nor any provision or breach waived, except in a writing signed by both parties which expressly refers to this Agreement. 12)COUNTERPARTS. This Agreement may be executed in counterpart originals, duplicate originals, or both, each of which is deemed to be an original for all purposes. 13)NOTICES. This Agreement is managed and administered on the CITY’s behalf by the individual named below. All invoices must be submitted and approved by this individual and all notices shall be given to the CITY using the following contact information:

CITY Contact: Savita Chaudhary
E-mail:[email protected]
Address:1000 Webster Street
Fairfield, CA 94533
Telephone: (707)428-7582
Notices must be given to CONSULTANT at the following:

CONSULTANT Contact: ________________
E-mail: ________________
Address: ________________
Telephone: ________________
EXECUTED as of the day first above-stated.

City of Fairfield, a municipal corporation
By:__________________________________

CONSULTANT
By:___________________________________
David Holdstock
[email protected]
3717 National Drive, Ste. 206
Raleigh, NC 27612
919-222-1421
Packet Page 25 of 249Attachment 2 Page 2 of 9

3 Revised 1/26/2024
EXHIBIT “A”

SCOPE OF SERVICE

The purpose of this agreement is to provide as-need resources and support to IT staff for project design and implementation for five-year GIS Master Plan projects.

IT will coordinate the scope and budget of these ad-hoc engagements. Consultant will provide proposal to IT staff’s consideration. Any work shall be agreed to by the CITY and CONSULTANT and shall be billed a fixed price for projects or time and materials basis as agreed upon for the scope of services to the City of Fairfield.

Packet Page 26 of 249Attachment 2 Page 3 of 9

4 Revised 1/26/2024
EXHIBIT “B”

PAYMENT
1) The professional services agreement shall not exceed one hundred eighty thousand dollars ($180,000) per fiscal year.
2) Payment for services shall be made to CONSULTANT on a fixed cost or time and materials basis. The total cost for services rendered under the scope of Services described in Exhibit “A” shall not exceed nine-hundred dollars ($900,000.00) through June 30, 2029. 3) Payment shall be made to CONSULTANT on a fixed cost or time and materials basis, and CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices to [email protected]. 4) CITY shall pay CONSULTANT within 45 days after receipt of CONSULTANT’s invoice.

NON-REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for all costs and expenses incurred by CONSULTANT, personnel of CONSULTANT and subcontractors of CONSULTANT, in connection with the Services, including, without limitation, payment of salaries, fringe benefit contributions, payroll taxes, withholding taxes, and other taxes or levies, office overhead expenses, travel expenses, telephone, and other telecommunication expenses, and document reproduction expenses.

Packet Page 27 of 249Attachment 2 Page 4 of 9

5 Revised 1/26/2024
EXHIBIT “C”

GENERAL PROVISIONS
1) INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT. At all times during the term of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall be an independent contractor and shall not be an employee of CITY. CITY shall have the right to control CONSULTANT only insofar as the results of CONSULTANT's services rendered pursuant to this Agreement; however, CITY shall not have the right to control the means by which CONSULTANT accomplishes services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. 2) LICENSES; PERMITS; ETC. CONSULTANT represents and warrants to CITY that CONSULTANT has all licenses, permits, qualifications, and approvals of whatsoever nature which are legally required for CONSULTANT to practice CONSULTANT's profession. CONSULTANT represents and warrants to CITY that CONSULTANT shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement, any licenses, permits, and approvals which are legally required for CONSULTANT to practice his profession.
3) TIME. CONSULTANT shall devote such services pursuant to this Agreement as may be reasonably necessary for satisfactory performance of CONSULTANT's obligations pursuant to this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall adhere to the Schedule of Activities as described in their Executive Summary.
4) CONSULTANT NOT AN AGENT. Except as CITY may specify in writing, CONSULTANT shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of CITY in any capacity whatsoever as an agent.

CONSULTANT shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement, to bind CITY to any obligation whatsoever.
5) ASSIGNMENT PROHIBITED. No party to this Agreement may assign any right or obligation pursuant to this Agreement. Any attempted or purported assignment of any right or obligation pursuant to this Agreement shall be void and of no effect.
6) PERSONNEL. CONSULTANT shall assign only competent personnel to perform services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that CITY, in its sole discretion, at any time during the term of this Agreement, desires the removal of any person or persons assigned by CONSULTANT to perform services pursuant to this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall remove any such person immediately upon receiving notice from CITY of the desire of CITY for the removal of such person or persons. 7) STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE. CONSULTANT shall perform all services required pursuant to this Agreement. Services shall be performed in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner of the profession in which CONSULTANT is engaged in the geographical area in which CONSULTANT practices his profession. All products which CONSULTANT delivers to CITY pursuant to this Agreement shall be prepared in a workmanlike manner, and conform to the standards of quality normally observed by a person practicing in CONSULTANT's profession. CITY shall be the sole judge as to whether the product of the CONSULTANT is satisfactory.
8) CANCELLATION OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement may be canceled at any time by the CITY at its discretion upon written notification to CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT is entitled to receive full payment for all services performed and all costs incurred up to and including the date of receipt of written notice Packet Page 28 of 249Attachment 2 Page 5 of 9

6 Revised 1/26/2024
to cease work on the project. CONSULTANT shall be entitled to no further compensation for work performed after the date of receipt of written notice to cease work. All completed and incomplete products up to the date of receipt of written notice to cease work shall become the property of CITY. 9) PRODUCTS OF CONSULTING. All products of the CONSULTANT provided under this Agreement shall be the property of the CITY.
10) INDEMNIFY AND HOLD HARMLESS.
a) If AGREEMENT is an agreement for design professional services subject to California Civil Code § 2782.8(a) and CONSULTANT is a design professional, as defined in California Civil Code § 2782.8(c)(2), to the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY and its elected officials, officers, agents, employees and designated volunteers (collectively “CITY Indemnitees”) from and against any and all claims, losses, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses, including attorney’s fees and costs, to the extent they arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT’s duty to defend shall consist of reimbursement of defense costs incurred by CITY in direct proportion to the CONSULTANT’s proportionate percentage of fault. CONSULTANT’s percentage of fault shall be determined, as applicable, by a court of law, jury or arbitrator. In the event any loss, liability or damage is incurred by way of settlement or resolution without a court, jury or arbitrator having made a determination of the CONSULTANT’s percentage of fault, the parties agree to mediation with a third party neutral to determine the CONSULTANT’s proportionate percentage of fault for purposes of determining the amount of indemnity and defense cost reimbursement owed to the CITY.
b) If AGREEMENT is not an agreement for design professional services subject to California Civil Code § 2782.8(a) or CONSULTANT is not a design professional as defined in California Civil Code § 2782.8(c)(2), to the fullest extent allowed by law, CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the CITY Indemnitees from all claims, suits, or actions of every name, kind and description, brought forth on account of injuries to or death of any person or damage to property arising from or connected with the willful misconduct, negligent acts, errors or omissions, ultra-hazardous activities, activities giving rise to strict liability, or defects in design by CONSULTANT or any person directly or indirectly employed by or acting as agent for CONSULTANT in the performance of this Agreement, including the concurrent or successive passive negligence of the CITY Indemnitees.

It is understood that the duty of CONSULTANT to indemnify and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code.

Acceptance of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not relieve CONSULTANT from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This indemnification and hold harmless clause shall apply whether or not such insurance policies are determined to be applicable to any such damages or claims for damages.

Packet Page 29 of 249Attachment 2 Page 6 of 9

7 Revised 1/26/2024
12) LOCAL EMPLOYMENT POLICY. The CITY desires wherever possible, to hire qualified local residents to work on city projects. Local resident is defined as a person who resides in Solano County.

The CITY encourages an active affirmative action program on the part of its contractors, consultants, and developers. When local projects require, subcontractors, contractors, consultants and developers will solicit proposals from qualified local firms where possible.

As a way of responding to the provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act and this program, contractor, consultants, and developers will be asked, to provide no more frequently than monthly, a report which lists the employee's name, job class, hours worked, salary paid, city of residence, and ethnic origin. 13) CONSULTANT NOT A PUBLIC OFFICIAL. CONSULTANT is not a "public official" for purposes of Government Code §§ 87200 et seq. CONSULTANT conducts research and arrives at his or her conclusions, advice, recommendation, or counsel independent of the control and direction of the CITY or any CITY official, other than normal contract monitoring. In addition, CONSULTANT possesses no authority with respect to any CITY decision beyond these conclusions, advice, recommendation, or counsel. 14) EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. When the CITY executes an agreement for or makes payment to CONSULTANT in the amount of $600 (six hundred dollars) or more in any one calendar year, CONSULTANT shall provide the following information to CITY to comply with Employment Development Department (EDD) reporting requirements:
a) Whether CONSULTANT is doing business as a sole proprietorship, partnership, limited liability partnership, corporation, limited liability corporation, non-profit corporation or other form of organization.
b) If CONSULTANT is doing business as a sole proprietorship, CONSULTANT shall provide the full name, address and social security number of the sole proprietor. c) If CONSULTANT is doing business as other than a sole proprietorship, CONSULTANT shall provide CONSULTANT’S federal tax identification number.

Packet Page 30 of 249Attachment 2 Page 7 of 9

8 Revised 1/26/2024
EXHIBIT “D”

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
CONSULTANT shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the CONSULTANT, its agents, representatives, or employees. 1) MINIMUM SCOPE AND LIMITS OF INSURANCE
a) Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence Form CG 00 01) with minimum limits of $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, products and completed operations, and property damage. If Commercial General Liability or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.
b) Automobile Liability coverage (Form CA 00 01 with Code 1 – any auto) with minimum limits of $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. c) Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employers’ Liability insurance, each in the amount of $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. 2) INDUSTRY SPECIFIC COVERAGES
If checked below, the following insurance is also required.

Professional Liability Insurance / Errors and Omissions Liability in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence.

Pollution Liability Insurance in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence Cybersecurity liability Insurance in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence Fidelity / Crime / Dishonesty Bond in the minimum amount of $____________ MCS-90 Endorsement to Business Automobile insurance for transportation of hazardous materials and pollutants
Builder’s Risk / Course of Construction Insurance in the minimum amount of $__________.

3) INSURANCE PROVISIONS
a) DEDUCTIBLES AND SELF-INSURED RETENTIONS. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the CITY. At the option of the CITY, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the CITY, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the CONSULTANT shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. b) The general and automobile liability policies (and if applicable, pollution liability, garage keepers X

Packet Page 31 of 249Attachment 2 Page 8 of 9

9 Revised 1/26/2024
liability and builder’s risk policies) are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
i) The CITY, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of the CONSULTANT; products and completed operations of the CONSULTANT; premises owned, occupied or used by the CONSULTANT; and automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the CONSULTANT. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the CITY, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. ii) For any claims related to this project, the CONSULTANT’S insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the CITY, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insured maintained by the CITY, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be in excess of the CONSULTANT’S insurance and shall not contribute with it. iii) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the CITY, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
iv) The CONSULTANT’S insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer’s liability. v) Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days’ prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the CITY.
vi) The policy limits of coverage shall be made available to the full limits of the policy. The minimum limits stated above shall not serve to reduce the CONSULTANT’S policy limits of coverage.

Therefore, the requirements for coverage and limits shall be (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this agreement, or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named insured, whichever is greater. c) ACCEPTABILITY OF INSURER. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the CITY.

All insurance certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the CITY before work commences. At the request of the CITY, CONSULTANT shall provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements affecting the coverage required by these specifications. d) SUB-CONTRACTORS. CONSULTANT shall require all subcontractors to procure and maintain insurance policies subject to the requirements of Exhibit D. Failure of CONSULTANT to verify existence of sub- contractor’s insurance shall not relieve CONSULTANT from any claim arising from sub-contractors work on behalf of CONSULTANT.

Packet Page 32 of 249Attachment 2 Page 9 of 9

Agenda Item No: 4.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:July 2, 2024
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT:Resolution 2024171 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Accepting the Lee Bell Neighborhood Park Sports Field Lighting Improvements as Complete RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The adoption of the proposed resolution accepts the Lee Bell Neighborhood Park Sports Field Lighting Improvements (Project) as complete.

DISCUSSION
On September 19, 2023, the City adopted Resolution 2023241, approving a contract with Mike Brown Electric Co., Inc. to remove and dispose of the existing light fixtures and poles that exceeded its life expectancy, and furnish and install new light fixtures, poles, and conducts.

The construction authorization for the Project was approved for $757,108. This amount included a total bid of $688,280 and a 10% contingency of $68,828. No contract change orders were issued for the Project resulting in the final cost of $688,280.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
Ongoing maintenance will be managed by the Parks & Recreation department and funded by the General Fund (Fund 101), following the City’s acceptance of the improvements as complete.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
If the council has any questions, acceptance may be delayed so that staff may provide the necessary additional information.

Packet Page 33 of 249

Agenda Item No: 4.AGENDA REPORTDATE:July 2, 2024 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, City ManagerSUBJECT:Resolution 2024171 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Accepting the Lee BellNeighborhood Park Sports Field Lighting Improvements as CompleteRECOMMENDED ACTIONAdopt resolution.STATEMENT OF ISSUEThe adoption of the proposed resolution accepts the Lee Bell Neighborhood Park Sports Field LightingImprovements (Project) as complete.DISCUSSIONOn September 19, 2023, the City adopted Resolution 2023241, approving a contract with Mike BrownElectric Co., Inc. to remove and dispose of the existing light fixtures and poles that exceeded its lifeexpectancy, and furnish and install new light fixtures, poles, and conducts.The construction authorization for the Project was approved for $757,108. This amount included a totalbid of $688,280 and a 10% contingency of $68,828. No contract change orders were issued for theProject resulting in the final cost of $688,280.FINANCIAL IMPACTOngoing maintenance will be managed by the Parks & Recreation department and funded by theGeneral Fund (Fund 101), following the City’s acceptance of the improvements as complete.PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATIONN/AALTERNATIVE ACTIONIf the council has any questions, acceptance may be delayed so that staff may provide the necessary additional information.

STAFF CONTACT
Roger Dunham, Public Works Construction Manager
(707) 4287478
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Attachment 1: Proposed Resolution
REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Panganiban, Ryan Approved 6/18/2024 11:46 AM
Chaudhary, Savita Approved 6/18/2024 12:39 PM
Dombrowski, Delaney Approved 6/18/2024 12:44 PM
Dombrowski, Delaney Approved 6/18/2024 12:44 PM
Packet Page 34 of 249

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-171

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD ACCEPTING THE LEE BELL

NEIGHBORHOOD PARK SPORTS FIELD LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS AS COMPLETE

WHEREAS, the City Council approved a contract with Mike Brown Electric Co., Inc. for the Lee Bell Neighborhood Park Sports Field Lighting Project (Project) on September 19, 2023, by Resolution No. 2023-241; and

WHEREAS, Mike Brown Electric Co. has completed the Project in accordance with the contract approved by council.

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

Section 1. The council hereby accepts the Project as complete pursuant to the agreement between the City and Mike Brown Electric Co. approved by council on September 19, 2023.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of July 2024, by the following vote:

_________________________________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 35 of 249Attachment 1 Page 1 of 1

Agenda Item No: 5.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:July 2, 2024
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT:Resolution 2024172 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement Between the City of Fairfield and Parodi Investigative Solutions, LLC for PreEmployment Background Investigation Services
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The City of Fairfield entered into a professional services agreement with Parodi Investigative Solutions LLC (PIS) in August 2023. The agreement expired on June 30, 2024. The proposed resolution approves an agreement for an additional one year term.

DISCUSSION
The City of Fairfield entered into an agreement with PIS in August 2023, which expired on June 30, 2024. The original agreement authorized preemployment background investigation services for potential employees of the Police Department. The proposed agreement extends services for one year to continue to provide the necessary services for all fiscal year (FY) 2025 hiring needs. The Police Department conducts thorough background investigations of all prospective employees of the Police Department, including but not limited to: Police Officer, Dispatcher, and other nonsworn support personnel. The preemployment background investigation is an integral part of the hiring process confirming candidates have been thoroughly vetted to best ensure the department is hiring employees in compliance with the California Government Code and the California Peace Officers Standards and Training (P.O.S.T.).

Since entering into the original agreement, PIS has been the primary background investigation service utilized by the Police Department. PIS has conducted numerous background investigations for both sworn and nonsworn positions within the Police Department. Their investigations are indepth, thorough, wellwritten, and completed in an appropriate amount of time. Their services are integral in selecting the best qualified candidates for employment with the City of Fairfield.

Packet Page 36 of 249

Agenda Item No: 5.AGENDA REPORTDATE:July 2, 2024 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, City ManagerSUBJECT:Resolution 2024172 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the CityManager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement Between the City of Fairfieldand Parodi Investigative Solutions, LLC for PreEmployment Background InvestigationServicesRECOMMENDED ACTIONAdopt resolution.STATEMENT OF ISSUEThe City of Fairfield entered into a professional services agreement with Parodi Investigative SolutionsLLC (PIS) in August 2023. The agreement expired on June 30, 2024. The proposed resolutionapproves an agreement for an additional one year term.DISCUSSIONThe City of Fairfield entered into an agreement with PIS in August 2023, which expired on June 30,2024. The original agreement authorized preemployment background investigation services forpotential employees of the Police Department. The proposed agreement extends services for one yearto continue to provide the necessary services for all fiscal year (FY) 2025 hiring needs. The PoliceDepartment conducts thorough background investigations of all prospective employees of the PoliceDepartment, including but not limited to: Police Officer, Dispatcher, and other nonsworn supportpersonnel. The preemployment background investigation is an integral part of the hiring processconfirming candidates have been thoroughly vetted to best ensure the department is hiring employeesin compliance with the California Government Code and the California Peace Officers Standards andTraining (P.O.S.T.).Since entering into the original agreement, PIS has been the primary background investigation serviceutilized by the Police Department. PIS has conducted numerous background investigations for bothsworn and nonsworn positions within the Police Department. Their investigations are indepth,thorough, wellwritten, and completed in an appropriate amount of time. Their services are integral inselecting the best qualified candidates for employment with the City of Fairfield.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The total contract price for services shall not exceed $100,000 through FY 2025. Funds for services are budgeted in the General Fund for the Police Department (Fund 101, Division and Responsibility Code 50411, and General Code 9017).

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The council may choose to not adopt the proposed resolution which would result in the Police Department lacking preemployment background investigations for hiring new employees.

STAFF CONTACT
Jausiah Jacobsen, Police Lieutenant
(707) 4287314
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Attachment 1: Proposed Resolution
Attachment 2: Proposed Agreement
REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Marshall, Dan Approved 6/17/2024 4:00 PM
Dombrowski, Delaney Approved 6/17/2024 4:12 PM
Dombrowski, Delaney Approved 6/17/2024 4:12 PM
Packet Page 37 of 249

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-172

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD AUTHORIZING THE CITY

MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF

FAIRFIELD AND PARODI INVESTIGATIVE SOLUTIONS, LLC FOR PRE-EMPLOYMENT

BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION SERVICES

WHEREAS, the Fairfield Police Department acknowledges the pre-employment background investigation is an integral part of the hiring process which confirms candidates have been thoroughly vetted to best ensure the department is hiring employees in compliance with the California Government Code and the California Peace Officers Standards and Training (P.O.S.T.); and

WHEREAS, Parodi Investigative Solutions, LLC (PIS) provides pre-employment background services; and

WHEREAS, the City of Fairfield entered into an agreement with PIS in 2023 for a term, which expired June 30, 2024; and

WHEREAS, entering into an agreement with PIS will ensure continuity of services; and

WHEREAS, both the City of Fairfield and PIS wish to enter into an additional one year agreement.

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

Section 1. The council hereby approves the agreement between the City and PIS for an amount not-to-exceed $100,000.

Section 2. The city manager is authorized to execute the above-mentioned agreement.

Packet Page 38 of 249Attachment 1 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2024-172

Page 2 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of July 2024, by the following vote:

_________________________________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 39 of 249Attachment 1 Page 2 of 2

Packet Page 40 of 249Attachment 2 Page 1 of 9

Packet Page 41 of 249Attachment 2 Page 2 of 9

Packet Page 42 of 249Attachment 2 Page 3 of 9

Packet Page 43 of 249Attachment 2 Page 4 of 9

Packet Page 44 of 249Attachment 2 Page 5 of 9

Packet Page 45 of 249Attachment 2 Page 6 of 9

Packet Page 46 of 249Attachment 2 Page 7 of 9

Packet Page 47 of 249Attachment 2 Page 8 of 9

Packet Page 48 of 249Attachment 2 Page 9 of 9

Agenda Item No: 6.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:July 2, 2024
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT:Resolution 2024173 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Setting A Hearing for July 16, 2024 Re: Appeal of Revocation of Business License # 24000256 for Field Gift Shop Located at 1312 W. Texas Street, Fairfield, CA 94533 Pursuant to Chapter 10 (Section 10B.33) of the Fairfield Municipal Code
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The Fairfield Municipal Code allows the holder of a City business license to appeal the revocation of their license to the council. Fairfield Municipal Code section 10B.33 requires the council to set a time and place for the hearing.

DISCUSSION
On May 24, 2024, the City of Fairfield revoked business license #24000256 for Field Gift Shop located at 1312 West Texas Street. The owner of Field Gift Shop, Hamza Ahmed, has appealed the revocation of their business license #24000256, and has asked for a hearing before the council as provided for under Fairfield Municipal Code section 10B.33.

Staff recommends the council set the appeal of the revocation of business license #24000256 on July 16, 2024 at 6:00 PM during the normal council meeting.

The revocation of the business license of Field Gift Shop is stayed while this matter is under appeal.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The financial impact is minimal, as the hearing will take place during a regularly scheduled council meeting.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A
Packet Page 49 of 249

Agenda Item No: 6.AGENDA REPORTDATE:July 2, 2024 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, City ManagerSUBJECT:Resolution 2024173 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Setting A Hearing forJuly 16, 2024 Re: Appeal of Revocation of Business License # 24000256 for Field GiftShop Located at 1312 W. Texas Street, Fairfield, CA 94533 Pursuant to Chapter 10(Section 10B.33) of the Fairfield Municipal CodeRECOMMENDED ACTIONAdopt resolution.STATEMENT OF ISSUEThe Fairfield Municipal Code allows the holder of a City business license to appeal the revocation oftheir license to the council. Fairfield Municipal Code section 10B.33 requires the council to set a timeand place for the hearing.DISCUSSIONOn May 24, 2024, the City of Fairfield revoked business license #24000256 for Field Gift Shop locatedat 1312 West Texas Street. The owner of Field Gift Shop, Hamza Ahmed, has appealed the revocationof their business license #24000256, and has asked for a hearing before the council as provided forunder Fairfield Municipal Code section 10B.33.Staff recommends the council set the appeal of the revocation of business license #24000256 on July16, 2024 at 6:00 PM during the normal council meeting.The revocation of the business license of Field Gift Shop is stayed while this matter is under appeal.FINANCIAL IMPACTThe financial impact is minimal, as the hearing will take place during a regularly scheduled councilmeeting.PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
By operation of the Municipal Code, the council must set a date and time to hear the appeal of the business license holder. The council can choose whatever date and time they like, and are not bound to set the hearing on July 16, 2024.

STAFF CONTACT
David Lim, City Attorney
(415) 4218484
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
Police Department
ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Attachment 1: Proposed Resolution
REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Dombrowski, Delaney Approved 6/18/2024 3:27 PM
Packet Page 50 of 249

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-173

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD SETTING A HEARING FOR JULY 16, 2024, RE: APPEAL OF REVOCATION OF BUSINESS LICENSE # 24000256 FOR FIELD GIFT SHOP LOCATED AT 1312 WEST TEXAS STREET, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 10 (SECTION 10B.33) OF THE FAIRFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE

WHEREAS, on May 24, 2024, the City of Fairfield declined to renew business license number 24000256 belonging to Field Gift Shop located at 1312 West Texas Street in the City of Fairfield, State of California; and

WHEREAS, Fairfield Municipal Code section 10B.33 states, “Any person aggrieved by any decision of the collector with respect to the issuance or denial of a license, the revocation of a license, or the amount of a license tax may appeal to the council by filing a notice of appeal with the collector within fifteen days of such decision. The notice of appeal shall describe the reason why the decision of the collector should be reversed or modified.”; and

WHEREAS, Field Gift Shop has timely exercised their right of appeal to the council through delivery to the City requesting an appeal of the revocation of their license on June 4, 2024; and

WHEREAS, Fairfield Municipal Code section 10B.33 requires the council to “fix a time and place for hearing such appeal and the collector shall give notice in writing to such person of the time and place of hearing by serving it personally or by depositing it in the post office in the city, postage prepaid, addressed to such person at the address appearing on his last license or application”; and

WHEREAS, Fairfield Municipal Code section 10B.33 states “If a timely appeal is filed, the effect of the decision of the collector shall be stayed until the appeal is decided by the council.”

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

Section 1. A hearing on the revocation of business license number 24000256 belonging to Field Gift Shop located at 1312 West Texas Street in the City of Fairfield, State of California shall be fixed for July 16, 2024, at the regular meeting of the Fairfield City Council which begins at 6:00 PM. The hearing shall be heard at any time during the regular meeting of the City Council and does not need to begin at 6:00 PM.

Section 2. The Collector for the City of Fairfield or their authorized representative shall give notice in writing to the authorized representative of Field Gift Shop of the time and place of the hearing by serving it personally or by depositing it in the post office in the city, postage prepaid, addressed to the person at the address appearing on the last license or application. Notice shall also be given to the attorney of the appellant, if applicable.

Packet Page 51 of 249Attachment 1 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2024-173

Page 2 ends

Section 3. The revocation of business license number 24000256 is hereby stayed until the appeal is decided by the council.

Section 4. The Collector for the City of Fairfield or their authorized representative and City Staff are authorized to do all things proper and necessary to prepare for the appeal hearing on July 16, 2024.

Section 5. In the event the owner or representative of the owner for Field Gift Shop requests a different date to hold the hearing, the city attorney for the City of Fairfield is authorized to set a new date without further approval from the council so long as the owner or representative of the owner for Field Gift Shop agrees to the new date in writing.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of July 2024, by the following vote:

_________________________________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 52 of 249Attachment 1 Page 2 of 2

Agenda Item No: 7.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:July 2, 2024
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT:Minute Action Approving Mayor's Appointments to the Youth Commission RECOMMENDED ACTION
Approve appointments. Perform oath of office.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The City Council is being asked to approve the appointments as follows:

Youth Commission
Term January 1, 2024, to December 31, 2025
Derek Wood
Jaivir Chaudhry

DISCUSSION
Youth Commissioners serve twoyear terms. The commissioners' terms are from January 1, 2024, through December 31, 2025.

Councilmembers Doriss Panduro and Scott Tonnesen interviewed the applicants on June 5, 2024. Both of the interviewed applicants listed above were recommended for appointment, and the recommendations were submitted to Mayor Catherine "Cat" Moy for consideration.

Mayor Moy agreed with the recommendations provided.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
N/A
PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
Packet Page 53 of 249

Agenda Item No: 7.AGENDA REPORTDATE:July 2, 2024 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, City ManagerSUBJECT:Minute Action Approving Mayor's Appointments to the Youth CommissionRECOMMENDED ACTIONApprove appointments. Perform oath of office.STATEMENT OF ISSUEThe City Council is being asked to approve the appointments as follows:Youth CommissionTerm January 1, 2024, to December 31, 2025Derek WoodJaivir ChaudhryDISCUSSIONYouth Commissioners serve twoyear terms. The commissioners' terms are from January 1, 2024,through December 31, 2025.Councilmembers Doriss Panduro and Scott Tonnesen interviewed the applicants on June 5, 2024. Bothof the interviewed applicants listed above were recommended for appointment, and therecommendations were submitted to Mayor Catherine "Cat" Moy for consideration.Mayor Moy agreed with the recommendations provided.FINANCIAL IMPACTN/APUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATIONN/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The council may choose not to approve the mayor’s appointments, thereby leaving vacancies.

STAFF CONTACT
Delaney Dombrowski, Acting Deputy City Clerk
(707) 4287402
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
N/A
REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Dombrowski, Delaney Approved 4/1/2024 2:34 PM
Packet Page 54 of 249

Agenda Item No: 8.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:July 2, 2024
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT:Minute Action Approving Mayor’s Appointments to the Planning Commission RECOMMENDED ACTION
Approve appointments. Perform oath of office.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The City Council is being asked to approve the appointments as follows:

Planning Commission
Term July 1, 2024, to June 30, 2028
Jasmine (Jay) Singh
Rheonna Reese

DISCUSSION
Planning Commissioners serve fouryear terms. The commissioners' terms are from July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2028.

Mayor Moy agreed with the recommendations provided.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
N/A
PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
Packet Page 55 of 249

Agenda Item No: 8.AGENDA REPORTDATE:July 2, 2024 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, City ManagerSUBJECT:Minute Action Approving Mayor’s Appointments to the Planning CommissionRECOMMENDED ACTIONApprove appointments. Perform oath of office.STATEMENT OF ISSUEThe City Council is being asked to approve the appointments as follows:Planning CommissionTerm July 1, 2024, to June 30, 2028Jasmine (Jay) SinghRheonna ReeseDISCUSSIONPlanning Commissioners serve fouryear terms. The commissioners' terms are from July 1, 2024,through June 30, 2028.Councilmembers Doriss Panduro and Scott Tonnesen interviewed the applicants on June 5, 2024. Bothof the interviewed applicants listed above were recommended for appointment, and therecommendations were submitted to Mayor Catherine "Cat" Moy for consideration.Mayor Moy agreed with the recommendations provided.FINANCIAL IMPACTN/APUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATIONN/A ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The council may choose not to approve the mayor’s appointments, thereby leaving vacancies.

STAFF CONTACT
Delaney Dombrowski, Acting Deputy City Clerk
(707) 4287402
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
N/A
REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Dombrowski, Delaney Approved 6/10/2024 4:21 PM
Packet Page 56 of 249

Agenda Item No: 9.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:July 2, 2024
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT:Energy Conservation Project Update
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Receive report.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
On May 16, 2023, the City Council authorized the city manager to issue a notice to proceed to Willdan Energy Solutions (Willdan) to perform an Investment Grade Audit (IGA). Willdan is near completion of the IGA and has provided initial recommendations.

DISCUSSION
Staff has prepared a brief presentation in coordination with Willdan to provide an overview of findings, proposed projects, and an initial financing plan and estimated savings.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
Willdan is performing the IGA at no cost to the City, and there are no direct financial impacts associated with the IGA. Fiscal impacts related to specific energy efficiency measures or infrastructure improvement projects will be brought forward to the council for consideration upon the completion of the IGA.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
The council authorized the city manager to issue a notice to proceed to Willdan to perform an IGA at the May 16, 2023, meeting.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
Staff is not currently seeking council action. The presentation provides a brief description of the energy conservation measures identified during the IGA.

STAFF CONTACT
Marisa Cumpian, Sr. Management Analyst
Packet Page 57 of 249

Agenda Item No: 9.AGENDA REPORTDATE:July 2, 2024 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, City ManagerSUBJECT:Energy Conservation Project UpdateRECOMMENDED ACTIONReceive report.STATEMENT OF ISSUEOn May 16, 2023, the City Council authorized the city manager to issue a notice to proceed to WilldanEnergy Solutions (Willdan) to perform an Investment Grade Audit (IGA). Willdan is near completion ofthe IGA and has provided initial recommendations.DISCUSSIONStaff has prepared a brief presentation in coordination with Willdan to provide an overview of findings,proposed projects, and an initial financing plan and estimated savings.FINANCIAL IMPACTWilldan is performing the IGA at no cost to the City, and there are no direct financial impacts associatedwith the IGA. Fiscal impacts related to specific energy efficiency measures or infrastructureimprovement projects will be brought forward to the council for consideration upon the completion of theIGA.PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATIONThe council authorized the city manager to issue a notice to proceed to Willdan to perform an IGA at theMay 16, 2023, meeting.ALTERNATIVE ACTIONStaff is not currently seeking council action. The presentation provides a brief description of the energyconservation measures identified during the IGA.

STAFF CONTACT
Marisa Cumpian, Sr. Management Analyst
(707) 4287494
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
City Attorney's Office
REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Chaudhary, Savita Approved 6/3/2024 7:59 PM
Ballard, Kelly Approved 6/4/2024 10:42 AM
Ballard, Kelly Approved 6/4/2024 10:42 AM
Packet Page 58 of 249

Agenda Item No: 10.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:July 2, 2024
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT:Notice of Funding Availability for Temporary Emergency Shelter Operations Update and Council Input
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Receive recommendations, open discussion, and provide direction.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
On May 1, 2024, Homeless Services Division staff released a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) in the amount of $1.1 million for Temporary Emergency Shelter Operations. Staff will provide council with a summary of the recommendations from the NOFA Rank and Review Panel.

DISCUSSION
At the April 9, 2024 meeting, the council created an adhoc committee to set criteria by which prospective shelter service providers would be ranked for the NOFA. The Homeless Services Division staff met with the adhoc committee, comprised of Mayor Moy and Councilmembers Carr and Williams, to create and provide guidelines for the NOFA and scoring criteria for a Rank and Review Panel. The NOFA was released on May 1, 2024, and five applications were received on May 24, 2024. The applicants and the requested amounts are listed below:

Applicants Year 1 Year 2 Total Amount
Requested
# Beds
Proposed to
Support
Bay North Church of
Christ (Winter
Shelter)
$550,000.00 $550,000.00 $1,100,000.00 10
Change and New
Beginnings (CANB)
$300,000.00 $300,000.00 $600,000.00 24 to 31
Mission Samoa
HELP Project
(Pallets)
$300,000.00 $300,000.00 $600,000.00 10 to 18
Mission Samoa
Homeless 2 Work
$80,000.00 $80,000 $160,000.00 4
Packet Page 59 of 249

Solano, Alameda, San Joaquin and Orange. The Panel independently reviewed and scored all applications following the scoring criteria as outlined in the NOFA prior to the meeting. After meeting to discuss the applications, the Panel recommended funding the following programs:

Change and New Beginnings – $300,000 per year
Bay North Church of Christ $150,000 per year
Shelter Solano, Inc./Beck Avenue Navigation Center – $100,000 The rank and review process included two steps. First, individual panel members reviewed each application and scored the applications against the criteria established in the NOFA. Following is the average scores of the four panel members for each application reviewed by the Panel:

Project:

Mission
Samoa
HELP
Project
(Pallets)
Mission
Samoa
Homeless 2
Work
Project
CANB Shelter
Solano/BANC
Bay
North
Initial Average Score:159 115 177 182 144
The second step included a meeting of the panel members to discuss the applications and create a final ranking and recommendation based on scores and discussion of the Panel. After review and discussion of the Panel, the following programs and funding amounts were recommended:

Applicants Year 1 Year 2 Total Amount Capacity per
night would
support
Change and New
Beginnings (CANB)
$300,000.00 $300,000.00 $600,000.00 2431
Bay North Church of
Christ (Winter
Shelter)
$150,000 $150,000 $300,000 10
Shelter Solano,
Inc./Beck Avenue
Navigation Center
(BANC)
$100,000 $100,000 $200,000 23
Total:$550,000 $550,000 1,100,000 3644
The Rank and Review Panel arrived at the decision to recommend CANB, Bay North Church of Christ and BANC/Shelter Solano Inc. after reviewing the scoring criteria, demonstrated/potential impact, and results from prior city investment. While BANC/Shelter Solano, Inc initially scored higher than CANB, the Panel decision to rank CANB as their top recommendation was based heavily on the lower costs per bed night, capacity, higher positive housing success rate, and the diversity of the households CANB Packet Page 60 of 249

The Panel recommended Bay North Church of Christ (Winter Shelter) to support a new program in the community, and a current gap in services during winter months. The Panel identified that Bay North’s program was initially scored lower than other programs because it is a new program and did not have data available to highlight experience and impact compared to existing programs. The Panel also recommended Bay North’s application as they identified a winter shelter as an unmet need in the community but did not support funding at the fully requested amount.

While the Mission Samoa HELP Project (Pallets) initially scored higher than the recommended Bay North Church of Christ (Winter Shelter), there were concerns with the application related to data management, capacity, and meeting the required threshold of the NOFA of being a low barrier emergency shelter. The Mission Samoa Homeless 2 Work Program did not meet the minimum threshold of being an emergency shelter as it is a transitional housing program and not eligible for this funding as outlined in the NOFA.

The Rank and Review Panel reviewed and discussed the program outcomes for all programs as reported in the Annual Performance Reports (APR) populated from Solano County’s Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) provided with the NOFA as follows:

Recommended Applicants

CANB BANC
Bay
North
Increased Income
(between entry to exit):28%9%N/A*
Positive Housing
Outcome:73%25%N/A*
*Data not available from Bay North Church of Christ as it is a new program Not Recommended Applicants
MS
HELP
(Pallet)
MS Work
Program
Increased Income
(between entry to exit):4%4%
Positive Housing
Outcome:27%27%
**The same APR was submitted for both Mission Samoa programs.

The recommended applicants cost per bed night based on the recommended funding amounts are:

Recommended Applicants Capacity per night Cost per bed night Change and New Beginnings 24 to 31 $40
BANC/ Shelter Solano, Inc.2 to 3 $94.17
Bay North Church of Christ (Winter
Shelter)10 $99.34
The recommended funding amounts were determined based on the final Rank and Review Panel’s ranking. CANB was recommended to be funded fully as it was unanimously ranked as the top application. The funding amount for Bay North Church of Christ (Winter Shelter) determined based on the rate per night for inclement weather shelters ($1000 per night) and BANC/ Shelter Solano, Inc. was recommended for the remaining amount available in the NOFA.

Packet Page 61 of 249

Agenda Item No: 10.AGENDA REPORTDATE:July 2, 2024 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, City ManagerSUBJECT:Notice of Funding Availability for Temporary Emergency Shelter Operations Update andCouncil InputRECOMMENDED ACTIONReceive recommendations, open discussion, and provide direction.STATEMENT OF ISSUEOn May 1, 2024, Homeless Services Division staff released a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) inthe amount of $1.1 million for Temporary Emergency Shelter Operations. Staff will provide council with asummary of the recommendations from the NOFA Rank and Review Panel.DISCUSSIONAt the April 9, 2024 meeting, the council created an adhoc committee to set criteria by whichprospective shelter service providers would be ranked for the NOFA. The Homeless Services Divisionstaff met with the adhoc committee, comprised of Mayor Moy and Councilmembers Carr and Williams,to create and provide guidelines for the NOFA and scoring criteria for a Rank and Review Panel. TheNOFA was released on May 1, 2024, and five applications were received on May 24, 2024. Theapplicants and the requested amounts are listed below:Applicants Year 1 Year 2 Total AmountRequested # BedsProposed toSupportBay North Church ofChrist (WinterShelter)$550,000.00 $550,000.00 $1,100,000.00 10Change and NewBeginnings (CANB)$300,000.00 $300,000.00 $600,000.00 24 to 31Mission SamoaHELP Project(Pallets)$300,000.00 $300,000.00 $600,000.00 10 to 18Mission SamoaHomeless 2 WorkProgram $80,000.00 $80,000 $160,000.00 4Shelter Solano,Inc./Beck AvenueNavigation Center(BANC)$550,000.00 $550,000.00 $1,100,000.00 16On May 29, 2024, an independent NOFA Rank and Review Panel met to review scores based on theNOFA criteria created by the adhoc committee. The Panel comprised four local governmentprofessionals with extensive expertise in homeless services from four different counties including:Solano, Alameda, San Joaquin and Orange. The Panel independently reviewed and scored allapplications following the scoring criteria as outlined in the NOFA prior to the meeting. After meeting todiscuss the applications, the Panel recommended funding the following programs:Change and New Beginnings – $300,000 per yearBay North Church of Christ $150,000 per yearShelter Solano, Inc./Beck Avenue Navigation Center – $100,000The rank and review process included two steps. First, individual panel members reviewed eachapplication and scored the applications against the criteria established in the NOFA. Following is theaverage scores of the four panel members for each application reviewed by the Panel:Project:MissionSamoaHELPProject(Pallets)MissionSamoaHomeless 2WorkProject CANB ShelterSolano/BANC BayNorthInitial Average Score:159 115 177 182 144The second step included a meeting of the panel members to discuss the applications and create afinal ranking and recommendation based on scores and discussion of the Panel. After review anddiscussion of the Panel, the following programs and funding amounts were recommended:Applicants Year 1 Year 2 Total Amount Capacity pernight wouldsupportChange and NewBeginnings (CANB)$300,000.00 $300,000.00 $600,000.00 2431Bay North Church ofChrist (WinterShelter)$150,000 $150,000 $300,000 10Shelter Solano,Inc./Beck AvenueNavigation Center(BANC)$100,000 $100,000 $200,000 23Total:$550,000 $550,000 1,100,000 3644The Rank and Review Panel arrived at the decision to recommend CANB, Bay North Church of Christand BANC/Shelter Solano Inc. after reviewing the scoring criteria, demonstrated/potential impact, andresults from prior city investment. While BANC/Shelter Solano, Inc initially scored higher than CANB, thePanel decision to rank CANB as their top recommendation was based heavily on the lower costs perbed night, capacity, higher positive housing success rate, and the diversity of the households CANBcan shelter. The Panel recommended Bay North Church of Christ (Winter Shelter) to support a new program in thecommunity, and a current gap in services during winter months. The Panel identified that Bay North’sprogram was initially scored lower than other programs because it is a new program and did not havedata available to highlight experience and impact compared to existing programs. The Panel alsorecommended Bay North’s application as they identified a winter shelter as an unmet need in thecommunity but did not support funding at the fully requested amount.While the Mission Samoa HELP Project (Pallets) initially scored higher than the recommended BayNorth Church of Christ (Winter Shelter), there were concerns with the application related to datamanagement, capacity, and meeting the required threshold of the NOFA of being a low barrieremergency shelter. The Mission Samoa Homeless 2 Work Program did not meet the minimumthreshold of being an emergency shelter as it is a transitional housing program and not eligible for thisfunding as outlined in the NOFA.The Rank and Review Panel reviewed and discussed the program outcomes for all programs asreported in the Annual Performance Reports (APR) populated from Solano County’s HomelessManagement Information System (HMIS) provided with the NOFA as follows:Recommended ApplicantsCANBBANC BayNorthIncreased Income(between entry to exit):28%9%N/A*Positive HousingOutcome:73%25%N/A**Data not available from Bay North Church of Christ as it is a new programNot Recommended ApplicantsMSHELP(Pallet)MS WorkProgramIncreased Income(between entry to exit):4%4%Positive HousingOutcome:27%27%**The same APR was submitted for both Mission Samoa programs.The recommended applicants cost per bed night based on the recommended funding amounts are:Recommended Applicants Capacity per night Cost per bed nightChange and New Beginnings 24 to 31 $40BANC/ Shelter Solano, Inc.2 to 3 $94.17Bay North Church of Christ (WinterShelter)10 $99.34The recommended funding amounts were determined based on the final Rank and Review Panel’sranking. CANB was recommended to be funded fully as it was unanimously ranked as the topapplication. The funding amount for Bay North Church of Christ (Winter Shelter) determined based on the rate per night for inclement weather shelters ($1000 per night) and BANC/ Shelter Solano, Inc. was recommended for the remaining amount available in the NOFA.

Staff seeks council input and direction on the recommendations. Based on council direction, staff will return with service agreements for the selected service providers and amounts at the July 16, 2024 council meeting.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The Homeless Services Division has budgeted $1.1 million for two years from the General and Quality of Life Fund.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
Council requested an adhoc committee to advise and make recommendations regarding the Notice of Funding Availability for Temporary Emergency Shelter operations. The adhoc committee consisted of Mayor Cat Moy and Councilmembers K. Patrice Williams and Doug Carr.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The council may choose to modify the recommendations of the Rank and Review Panel as desired and identify alternative funding amounts. The funding source for the emergency sheltering programs is general fund and therefore not subject to Federal or State competitive grant funding processes.

STAFF CONTACT
Samantha Burrows, Homeless Services Manager
(707) 4287749
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Attachment 1: Emergency Shelter Operations NOFA
Attachment 2: Rank and Review Panel Scoring
REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Dombrowski, Delaney Approved 6/20/2024 11:28 AM
Packet Page 62 of 249

City of Fairfield

Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA)
for
Temporary Emergency Shelter Operations

Proposal Due:

5/24/2024

All inquiries and/or questions shall be submitted in writing to
[email protected]

Packet Page 63 of 249Attachment 1 Page 1 of 25

1 Introduction
According to the Solano County 2022 Point in Time count, there are 1,179 unhoused individuals in Solano County. Approximately, three hundred (300) of those individuals are in the City of Fairfield.

This Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) is part of the City of Fairfield’s commitment to reduce houselessness, the impacts of houselessness in our community and increase bed/interim housing capacity for those who are unhoused.

With this solicitation, The City of Fairfield seeks to provide funding to support one or multiple temporary emergency shelter operations. An emergency shelter is defined as “housing with minimal supportive services for unhoused persons that is limited to occupancy of six months or less by an unhoused person.” Emergency shelters provide services coordinated to meet the immediate safety and survival needs of the individual or family served, including shelter, food, clothing, and other support services. These services are provided in a minimally intrusive environment. At a minimum, emergency shelters provide the following services directly on-site:

• Sleeping accommodations.
• Personal hygiene supplies and facilities, including toilets and wash basins; and • Showers and/ or bathtubs (temporary shelters may provide referrals to other facilities for these services).

Funding
The City of Fairfield (City) will use funds from the Homeless Services Division general and quality of life funds to support this project. Funding is available through this NOFA in the amount of $1.1 million with $550,000 available for the first year and remaining funds available in performance period year two. This is a one-time funding source with total funds expended by June 30, 2026.

This funding is intended to address and support the operational needs of organizations who are providing temporary emergency shelter and services to those who are unhoused in the City of Fairfield. Successful applicants will provide documentation for continued funding beyond the term of this funding. These funds shall not be used to supplant existing funds.

As a requirement to receive funding, the Executive Director of the organization must sign and agree to implement housing first and low barrier guidelines and agree to case conferencing with the Homeless Services Division to ensure these guidelines are being met.

Appropriate Use of Funds
Operational costs and essential services are those necessary to provide safe and healthy residential services and to connect people experiencing houselessness to permanent housing, income, public benefits, health and mental health services, and other support services to end houselessness.

Operational costs and essential services that may be covered by this NOFA.

• Personnel
• Benefits
• Administra�ve Services
• Client Support supplies/flex
funds
• Transporta�on Assistance for
clients
• Land/Building Rent
Packet Page 64 of 249Attachment 1 Page 2 of 25

2 • Program Supplies (Bedding,
Defoliators, emergency supplies,
etc.)
• U�li�es-Telephone/Cellular
Phone
• Maintenance & Repairs
• Minor Equipment/Furniture
• Copier Lease
• Office Supplies
• Vehicle
• Food Service Expense

Eligibility
Non-profit organizations are eligible to apply for funding. Projects must be within the City of Fairfield. The City strongly prefers organizations applying for funding to have experience with assisting unhoused households and aligns program with Housing First Solano Continuum of Care Written Standards for Service. The City may consider organizations without prior experience in the provision of services to the unhoused population provided the organization demonstrates they have project leadership and staff with the expertise and capacity in serving households coming out of houselessness.

Application Timeline:

Release of Request for Proposals: 5/1/2024
Deadline to Submit Questions Regarding this NOFA to:

April Cobb, Management Analyst at [email protected] Subject Line: NOFA-Temporary Emergency Shelter Operations

Question and Answer Meeting (non-mandatory)
Join Zoom Meeting
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/86015744880?pwd=aB29ybytCa5VjJlSjHhI2Ve 1fJQNca.1
Meeting ID: 860 1574 4880
Passcode: 117065

Meeting will be recorded and posted to City of Fairfield Website

5/8/2024 by
2 PM PST

5/9/2024 at
10 AM PST

5/10/2024 by
5 PM PST
Deadlines for Submission of Proposals to:

April Cobb, Management Analyst at [email protected] Subject Line: NOFA
5/24/2024 at
5 PM PST
Announcement of Recommended Awards of Funding 6/5/2024
Funding Recommendation to City Council for Final Approval 6/18/2024

Packet Page 65 of 249Attachment 1 Page 3 of 25

3 Program Description and Guidelines
Successful applicants or service providers will serve City of Fairfield residents who are literally unhoused using housing first and low barrier guidelines, as defined below.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development defines literally unhoused as an individual or family who lacks a fixed, regular, or adequate nighttime residence, meaning:

1. Has a primary nigh�me residence that is a public or private place not meant for human habita�on; or

2. Is living in a publicly or privately operated shelter designated to provide temporary living arrangements (including congregate shelters, transi�onal housing, and hotels and motels paid for by charitable organiza�ons or by federal, state, or local government programs); or

3. Is exi�ng an ins�tu�on where (s)he has resided for 90 days or less and who resided in an emergency shelter or place not meant for human habita�on immediately before entering that ins�tu�on.

Housing First is an unhoused assistance approach that prioritizes providing permanent housing to people experiencing houselessness, thus ending their houselessness and serving as a platform from which they can pursue personal goals and improve their quality of life. This approach is guided by the belief that people need basic necessities like food and a place to live before attending to anything less critical, such as getting a job, budgeting properly, or attending to substance use issues.

Additionally, Housing First is based on the understanding that a person’s choice is valuable in housing selection and supportive service participation, and exercising that choice is likely to make a person more successful in remaining housed and improving their life.

All successful applicants must incorporate the core components of Housing First into their program(s) that are receiving these funds. Housing First is an evidence-based model that uses housing as a tool, rather than a reward, and that centers on providing or connecting those experiencing houselessness to permanent housing as quickly as possible. Under the Housing First model, services offered are delivered in a low barrier, trauma informed, and culturally responsive manner and available on a voluntary basis, without preconditions that make housing contingent on participation in services. Individuals and families assisted with these funds must not be required to receive treatment or perform any other prerequisite activities as a condition for receiving shelter, housing, or other services for which these funds are used.

Low barrier means the requirements for entry and stay are limited or minimal. Low barrier programs and shelters encourage unhoused individuals to seek resources by eliminating obstacles such as sobriety as a requirement for admission. Organizations should have onsite regulations for substance use with an alternative approach to problem solving to keep individuals sheltered.

Harm Reduction and Trauma-Informed Care are evidence based alternative approaches for the unhoused. Harm reduction is an approach or strategy aimed at reducing the risks and harmful effects associated with substance use and addictive behaviors for the individual, the community and society as a whole. The trauma-Informed care approach recognizes the presence of trauma symptoms and acknowledges the role trauma may play in an individual’s life.

The City is seeking organizations with programs that will understand different people need different Packet Page 66 of 249Attachment 1 Page 4 of 25

4 solutions, will work with a person where they are and give them choices and options. Successful programs will provide wrap around or linkages to wrap around services and make all services voluntary. Using the low barrier approach, participants cannot be forced to participate in activities such as groups, taking medication or maintaining sobriety in order to remain housed. Programs can and are encouraged by the City to require participants to actively work towards housing solutions by offering safety, choice, collaboration, trustworthiness and empowerment.

Allowing partners, pets and property is another low barrier approach. There are many unhoused individuals who have partners, pets and property that are very important to them. The City is seeking a provider who recognizes partners, pets, and property as important and has an adequate plan and space for all.

Reporting
The Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) is an electronic database that tracks demographic information and performance outcomes at the client level, using standardized fields that allow for automatic system-wide reporting. All participants in successfully funded City project(s) must be entered in the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) operated by the Continuum of Care in accordance with established policies and procedures. These procedures require providers to ask clients for signed consent to enter their information into the database and to conduct structured interviews at program entry, at program exit, and on the anniversary of each client’s entry into the program (if any clients remain in the program for at least 12 months). Funded agencies must sign a HMIS agency participation agreement and at least one staff person at each successfully funded agency will need to complete a free HMIS user training in order to become certified in HMIS privacy and data security techniques and will need to learn how to enter data correctly into the HMIS software.

Provider must grant City of Fairfield’s Homeless Services Division “viewer access” to the funded project within HMIS database.

Each user who enters data into HMIS will need to pay an annual license fee for new licenses. This is an eligible expense that may be included (if you wish) in the administrative portion of your application budget.

Items that must be tracked in HMIS include:
• The number of houseless persons served.
• The number of unsheltered houseless persons served.
• The average length of �me spent houseless before entry into the program or project. • The number of houseless persons exi�ng the program or project to permanent housing.
• The number of people that return to houselessness a�er exi�ng the program or project.
• The number of people that increased income while in the program. • Progress notes that are essen�al for coordina�on across the homeless response system including document readiness, housing op�ons offered and/or declined, and engagement efforts in ending houselessness.

Packet Page 67 of 249Attachment 1 Page 5 of 25

5 • Readmission status upon exit from the program must be documented in the notes in HMIS. Including �meline for eligibility for reentry.

Additional reporting requirements:
• YTD Served (All)
• YTD Served from City of
Fairfield
• Average length of Stay
(Overall)/Days
• Average length of Stay
(Successful Exit)/Days
• Occupancy Rate
• Average number of people per
day
• % from Fairfield served per day
• Increased income (all exits)
• Increased income (permanent
housing exit)
• Increased income from Fairfield
(at exit)
• Increased income (enrolled in
site-based employment
services)
Exit Destinations (All) and City of Fairfield Exit Destinations:
• Permanent Housing
• Temporary Housing
• Ins�tu�on Se�ng
• Homeless Situa�on
• Unknown
• Posi�ve Housing Outcome
• Other Outcome

Organizations must agree to exclusive referral ability for City of Fairfield supported beds from the City’s Homeless Services Division, County Coordinated Entry Provider and Outreach Provider contracted by the City of Fairfield and agree to bi-monthly case conferencing with the Homeless Services Division Staff.

Monthly reports of program outcomes will be due to the Homeless Services Division by the 10th of each month. Reporting outcomes documentation will be provided upon secured service contract.

Contracting
The contracting process will follow selection of awarded organization(s). Funding recipients must certify their acceptance of standard City of Fairfield contract terms and conditions (Exhibit A) and insurance requirements (Exhibit D). This will include reporting, reimbursement (Exhibit C), and monitoring requirements. Organization must be prepared to enter into contract with the City of Fairfield by June 4, 2024.

Submission of Proposal
The submission of a proposal shall not be deemed an agreement between the applicant and the City. The proposal is an offer by the applicant to perform services in accordance with the NOFA.

Specifically, the following provisions apply:

1. The City shall not be obligated to respond to any proposal submited nor be bound in any manner by the submission of a proposal.

2. Any agreement shall not be binding or valid against the City unless and un�l it is executed by the City and the selected applicant, and the applicant’s insurance, and/or other surety Packet Page 68 of 249Attachment 1 Page 6 of 25

6 guarantee have been accepted by the City.

The proposals received shall become the exclusive property of the City. ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED

IN RESPONSE TO THE NOFA ARE CONSIDERED PUBLIC RECORDS AND WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC UPON REQUEST, unless exempt from disclosure under the Public Records Act or other applicable law. Please do not include confidential information or information that may violate the privacy or intellectual property rights of a third party.

The City reserves the unilateral right to amend this NOFA in writing at any time by both (1) posting the amendment on the City of Fairfield website and (2) sending e-mail notification to any applicants who have already submitted an application. Applicants are responsible for monitoring the website and/or their e-mail periodically in order to make themselves aware of any amendments.

The City reserves the right to reject part or all of one or more Proposals based on failure to meet any requirements stated in this NOFA. If the City does not receive an adequate quantity and/or quality of Proposals by the deadline, then the City, at its sole discretion, may choose to extend the deadline and/or make part or all of the funding available to applicants through a second round of requests for proposals.

The applications will be received by City of Fairfield Homeless Services Division staff and shared with a Rank and Review Panel. The Review Panel may recommend one or multiple Proposers for funding based on the Scoring Criteria. The Review Panel recommendation will be presented to the City for final approval of award of funding. The decision of the City will be final.

Cost of Submitting Proposals The cost of preparing and submitting a proposal is the sole responsibility of the applicant and shall not be chargeable in any manner to the City. The City will not reimburse any applicant for any costs associated with the preparation and submission of a proposal, including but not limited to, expenses incurred in making an oral presentation, or participating in an interview.

Proposal Submittal Format and Requirements
A. Submittals are to be single-sided, standard sized (8.5” x 11”) pages. Submittals are not limited in length; however, brevity and conciseness are encouraged. Number each page. To facilitate review by the Selection Committee, please submit information in accordance with the following format, identifying each item, in order, by the appropriate number and letter.

B. The submittal must provide the following information:

1. Cover sheet to indicate the name of the project, contact informa�on for the people responsible for the applica�on, and the amount of funding requested for this project.

2. Include a signed and dated statement by the agency’s Execu�ve Director sta�ng, “I have reviewed this applica�on, and I hereby cer�fy that the informa�on contained herein is true, complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge.” In addi�on, please indicate that you reviewed and accept the City of Fairfield standard contract without qualifica�on or are reques�ng qualifica�ons and indicate the requested qualifica�ons. If the applicant is a non- profit organiza�on, proof of non-profit status is required and can be submited via a Packet Page 69 of 249Attachment 1 Page 7 of 25

7 determina�on leter from the State Franchise Tax Board or Federal Internal Revenue Service confirming non-profit status.

3. Complete an essay response answering items listed below. The essay response should be no more than 10 pages in length and address all essay topics described below with each sec�on labeled by heading (A-J) for this project. Indicate any similar projects your firm has completed recently.

A. Descrip�on of Program
 Describe the proposed program, including where the program will be located, who the program is intended to serve, the ac�vi�es that are being proposed, how the program will meet the program guidelines described in this NOFA, and how the project will be sustained beyond the funding provided by the City of Fairfield funding, if applicable.

 Describe how the program will maintain capacity for temporary emergency sheltering in Fairfield. Provide specific numbers intended to be served and the length of �me they will be served.

 Provide the proposed program’s site management plan or opera�ons plan and program guidelines/par�cipant handbook.

B. Low-barrier, Housing First policies and prac�ces
 Describe how the project will adopt a Housing First approach in accordance with Sec�on 8255(b) of the State of California Welfare and Ins�tu�ons Code, available at
htps://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCod e=WIC&division=8.&�tle=&part=&chapter=6.5.&ar�cle=

 Describe your experience working with clients “where they are at,” including, cultural competency, diverse family units, mental health and substance use, religious beliefs, criminal histories, sexual orienta�on, and undocumented immigrants.

 Describe how you will implement low-barrier, harm reduc�on, and trauma-informed care principles.

C. Program outcomes
 Provide a minimum of two measurable outcomes of the proposed program for the last two years. Programs in opera�on less than two years, provide outcomes to date.

 If requested funds are for a new program, describe the strategy for outcomes and success in previous programs.

Packet Page 70 of 249Attachment 1 Page 8 of 25

8  Provide success rates in permanent housing solu�ons for the past two years. Programs in opera�on for less than two years provide success rates to date.

 Provide the rate of those returning to houselessness or nega�ve discharges from the program.

 If requested funds are for a new program, describe strategies to minimize returning to houselessness and nega�ve discharges.

 Describe organiza�ons’ plan to lower rates of exits back to houselessness or nega�ve discharges.

 Provide an Annual Performance Report (APR) showing the program’s progress in achieving goals and objec�ves populated directly from HMIS.

D. Timeline Narrative
 Please provide a timeline detailing how the project will be accomplished from start-up to completion of the contract term. The timeline should include/identify start and completion dates for activities, significant milestones and program phases including planning, implementation, completion, and evaluation.

 Describe any difficul�es that you might encounter in implemen�ng your proposed �meline and how you will avoid or overcome these difficul�es.

E. Proven experience and capacity
 Describe your organiza�on’s experience in reducing houselessness and connec�ng unhoused individuals to housing.

 Describe your experience in opera�ng and managing temporary emergency shelter programs in California, including project name, dates/length of �me in opera�on, loca�on(s), capacity, services provided, annual opera�ng budget with funding sources and specific programma�c.

 Include in your descrip�on your organiza�on’s experience related to:

• Policies and prac�ces that address and assess racial and ethnic equity, including equal access and non-discrimina�on, collec�on of racial, ethnic, and linguis�c data, language interpreta�on, partnerships, training, etc.

• Grievance and feedback policies.

• Assessment of safety for people fleeing domes�c violence.

Packet Page 71 of 249Attachment 1 Page 9 of 25

9 • Par�cipa�on in community-based ini�a�ves to reduce
houselessness.

• Working with HMIS and Coordinated Entry systems.

F. Demonstrated experience with diverse populations.
 Describe your organiza�on’s experience in providing services to diverse popula�ons, including individuals and families experiencing chronic houselessness, mental health complica�ons, substance use, religious beliefs, criminal histories, sexual orienta�on, diverse family units, unaccompanied youth, transi�onal age youth, youth exi�ng the foster care system, seniors, and undocumented immigrants.

G. Fiscal management with diverse funding sources
 Describe your organiza�on’s experience successfully administering a complex budget and u�lizing diverse private, local, state, and/or federal funding streams for opera�ons and services.

 Submit a copy of their most recent financial audit if annual gross revenue exceeds $2 million as required by CA Gov. Code 12586(e), or IRS Form 990 if annual gross revenue is less than $2 million. The report should be dated no earlier than 1/1/2022.

 Iden�fy if any organiza�on that is party to this applica�on received any problema�c audit or monitoring findings or concerns within the past 4 years. If so, please describe the findings/concerns and what has been done to address them.

 Explain your organiza�on’s financial management policies and procedures and how they are demonstra�ve of sound financial management prac�ces, including management of program budgets and ability to provide �mely financial reports and corresponding program on a regular basis.

 Provide the following for your organiza�on:

• Dates and circumstances related to any involuntary realloca�on of project funding.

• Dates and circumstances related to any open li�ga�on and/or disputes that could result in a financial setlement.

• Dates and circumstances related to any bankruptcy filing.

Packet Page 72 of 249Attachment 1 Page 10 of 25

10 H. Partnerships with community stakeholders
 Describe your familiarity with the City of Fairfield, the Housing First Solano Con�nuum of Care and Coordinated Entry System, and other providers and resources within the City.

 Describe your strategy for engaging par�cipants in Fairfield.

 Iden�fy any addi�onal or unique resources, capabili�es, or services which your organiza�on would bring to this program .

I. Qualifications of Key Staff
 Describe the role of top leadership in your organiza�on, Execu�ve Board, Board of Directors, and/or trustees and how they contribute to a sustainable and growing organiza�onal environment.

 Describe the relevant residen�al, case management, and/or clinical experience for each staff member/posi�on and their experience with emergency housing services, harm reduc�on and trauma-informed care, as well as any lived experience of houselessness. If you have not yet hired any staff and/or you do not plan to re-assign exis�ng staff, then provide the job descrip�ons for those posi�ons.

 Describe the qualifica�ons/experience of the staff members(s) responsible for financial report prepara�on, management, and submital.

J. Budget and Budget Narrative
 Provide a budget narra�ve explaining the costs outlined in your budget and how the expenses requested are connected to your program.

 Provide the proposed cost per night.

 Describe other funding sources that will be used to support the program and the percentage of City of Fairfield funds used to cover opera�ons of program.

 Describe how your proposed program is an appropriate use of the City of Fairfield’s one-�me funding, and how you will sustain your project a�er the end of the funding term by comple�ng the atach Budget Worksheet (Exhibit E).

Packet Page 73 of 249Attachment 1 Page 11 of 25

11 THRESHOLD

Project-Specific Threshold Factors Status

1. Housing First Emergency Shelter: The project will commit to running a low- barrier, Housing First, program. Does program meet temporary emergency shelter defini�on?
Pass/Fail

2. Coordinated Entry: The project will par�cipate in coordinated entry Pass/Fail

3. HMIS: The project will enter data for all City of Fairfield funded beds into HMIS (or comparable database for domes�c violence services) and grant City of Fairfield’s Homeless Services Division “viewer access” to the funded project within HMIS database.

Pass/Fail

4. Equal Access: The project will provide equal access and fair housing without regard to sexual orienta�on, gender iden�ty, or local residency status. Pass/Fail

5. Connec�on to Mainstream Benefits: Project has a specific plan to coordinate and integrate with other mainstream health, social services, and employment programs and ensure that program par�cipants are assisted to obtain benefits.

If the agency has any current clients, the plan must men�on the percentage of current clients who have obtained at least one mainstream benefit while enrolled in the agency’s program(s).

Pass/Fail

6. Policies: Projects will have policies regarding termina�on of assistance, client grievances, Equal Access/non-discrimina�on, ADA and fair housing requirements, VAWA protec�on, and confiden�ality that are compliant with Pass/Fail

Packet Page 74 of 249Attachment 1 Page 12 of 25

12 SCORING RUBIC

Program Description (30 Points) Scoring Guide Points
Award 2 points for each item Below.
• Loca�on of program
• Ac�vi�es of program.
• Provided how guidelines will be met.
• Project sustainability beyond NOFA
funding.
• Execu�ve Director signed statement.

Provided clear descrip�on of the
program, how the program meets
the scope of the NOFA and how the
project will maintain capacity in the
City of Fairfield.

10 Provided how capacity will be
maintained.
• Specific number served.
• Length of �me will be
served.
10 Provided:
• Site Management Plan or
Opera�ons Plan
• Program guidelines/par�cipant
handbook.
10 Housing First & Low Barrier (25 Points) Scoring Guide Points Clearly iden�fied understanding of and
experience with low-barrier approaches
including Housing First approach in mee�ng
clients “where they are at” harm reduc�on,
and trauma informed approaches.

Yes, the agency offers Housing First
Training to staff.
10 There are no program access
restrictions for clients based on
sobriety or mental health.
5 No, clients are not required to
participate in mandatory classes,
therapy, job training, or interventions.
5 The program provided rare or unique
options, e.g., allowed partners, pets,
and property.
5 Packet Page 75 of 249Attachment 1 Page 13 of 25

13 Program Outcomes (50 Points)
Scoring Guide Points
Provided experience reducing houselessness,
connec�ng unhoused individuals to housing
and has data to support meeting or exceeding
the 30% federal standard for occupancy and
provide Annual Performance Report for last
two years.

HMIS DATA
<5% error award 3 points
5-9.9% award 1.5 points
10-14.9% .5 point
Greater than or equal to 15% error 0 points

Provided a minimum of two
measurable outcomes of the
proposed program for the last two
years. If less than two years, provided
outcomes to date.

New programs: Provided a narrative
proposal of realistic strategy for
outcomes or provided realistic
strategy for outcomes for two years
from a similar program.
20 Provided Annual Performance Report
for the last two years.

5 The percentage of participants that
obtained or maintained permanent
supportive housing is at least 30%.
5 The percentage of participants that
returned to houselessness and
percentage of outcomes list as
“Unknown”.
10 Provided a clear plan to lower rates of
exits back to houselessness or negative
discharges.
5 The percentage of data points that are
recorded as missing, don’t know, client
refused to answer, and/or unable to
calculate. Lower percentages are
better. (See scoring chart to the left)
5 Timeline Narrative (10 points) Scoring Guide Points
The timeline identified and described the
significant phases and activities of the project.

Included timeline detailing how the
project will be accomplished from
start-up to completion of the contract
term.

5 Included difficulties that might occur in
implementing timeline and a plan to
overcome difficulties.

5 Packet Page 76 of 249Attachment 1 Page 14 of 25

14 Qualifications and Experience (25 points) Scoring Guide Points Provided Experience and Capacity

Provided experience with Diverse Populations
Provided:
• Descrip�on of program.
• Policies and Prac�ce for equal
access.
• Grievance and feedback policy.
• Safety Assessment for people
fleeing DV.
• Par�cipa�on in community-
based ini�a�ves.
• Provided clear examples of how
program reduced
houselessness and connected
unhoused individuals to
housing.
20 • Individuals and families
experiencing chronic
houselessness.
• Mental Health Complica�ons.
• Substance Use.
• Religious Beliefs.
• Criminal histories.
• Sexual Orienta�on.
• Seniors.
• Undocumented.

5 Packet Page 77 of 249Attachment 1 Page 15 of 25

15 Fiscal Management with Diverse Funding Sources
(25 points)
Scoring Guide Points
Award 1 point for each category addressed below:
• Private funding.
• Local funding.
• State funding.
• Federal funding.
• Other.

Provided organization’s financial management
policies and procedures.

City of Fairfield funding is a one-time funding
source.

Provided detailed experience
administering a complex budget and
utilizing different funding streams.
5 Submitted a copy of their most
recent financial audit report dated
earlier than 1/1/2022 based on
guidelines in the NOFA
5 Provided problematic audit or
monitoring findings for the past 4 years
and how findings were
addressed/resolved.
5 • Management of program
budget.
• Management of �mely financial
Reports.
• Involuntary realloca�on of
program funds.
• Any open li�ga�on and/or
disputes because of financial
setlement.

5 Provided method or other funding
sources for sustainability beyond the
funding provided by the City of Fairfield
funding and provide
5 Budget and Budget Narrative (20 points) Scoring Guide Points Award 5 points for each item addressed below:
• Cost and expenses clearly outlined.
• Cost per night.
• Other funding sources and percentage of
City of Fairfield funds being used to fund
program.
• Clear plan to sustain program a�er one-
�me funding term ends.

Provided budget narrative. 20

Packet Page 78 of 249Attachment 1 Page 16 of 25

16 Partnerships with Community Stakeholders
Staffing (15 points)
Scoring Guide Points
Award 1.6 points for connection to each agency.
• Housing First Solano Con�nuum of Care
• Solano County Coordinated Entry System
• Other providers or resources within the
City of Fairfield.

Provided detailed description of
community partners and stakeholders
and if/how they connect with these
entities.
5 Provided list of top leadership and how
they contribute to a sustaining and
growing organization.
5 Provided qualifications/experience
of the staff member responsible for
financial report preparation,
management, and submittals.
5 Total 200

Packet Page 79 of 249Attachment 1 Page 17 of 25

17 EXHIBIT “A”

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

THIS AGREEMENT is made at Fairfield, California, as of ________________, 20____, by and between the City of Fairfield, a municipal corporation (the “CITY") and _______________________ ("CONSULTANT"), who agree as follows:
1) SERVICES. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall provide to the CITY the services described in Exhibit “A,” which consists of the proposal submitted by CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT shall provide said services at the time, place, and in the manner specified in Exhibit “A.”
2) PAYMENT. CITY shall pay CONSULTANT for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement at the times and in the manner set forth in Exhibit “B.” The payments specified in Exhibit “B” shall be the only payments to be made to CONSULTANT for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall submit all billings for said services to the CITY in the manner specified in Exhibit “B.” 3) FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT. CONSULTANT shall, at its sole cost and expense, furnish all facilities and equipment which may be required for furnishing services pursuant to this Agreement. 4) GENERAL PROVISIONS. The general provisions set forth in Exhibit “C” are part of this Agreement. In the event of any inconsistency between said general provisions and any other terms or conditions of this Agreement, the provisions set forth in Exhibit “C” shall control. 5) INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. The insurance requirements set forth in Exhibit “D” are part of this Agreement. In the event of any inconsistency between said general provisions and any other terms or conditions of this Agreement, the requirements set forth in Exhibit “D” shall control. 6) BUSINESS LICENSE. The CONSULTANT shall obtain and keep current a business license for work within the City of Fairfield pursuant to Chapter 10B of the Fairfield City Code, with respect to the gross receipts received pursuant to this Agreement. No payments shall be made to any SERVICE PROVIDER until such business license has been obtained, and all fees paid therefore, by the CONSULTANT. Business license applications and information may be obtained from the Community Development Department, Fairfield City Hall, 1000 Webster Street, Fairfield, CA 94533-4883, (707-428-7509) and online at www.fairfield.ca.gov/biz .

7) EXHIBITS. All exhibits referred to herein are attached hereto and are by this reference incorporated herein.
8) TERM. This agreement shall be in effect through _____________; or until the scope of work is completed.
9) GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE. Should either Party to this Agreement bring legal action against the other, the validity, interpretation, and performance of this Contract shall be controlled by and construed under the laws of California, excluding California’s choice of law rules. Venue for any such action relating to this Agreement shall be in the Solano County Superior Court. 10) Where applicable, vehicles with a GVWR greater than 8,500 lbs. and light-duty package delivery vehicles operated in California may be subject to the California Air Resources Board Advanced Clean Fleets Packet Page 80 of 249Attachment 1 Page 18 of 25

18 regula�ons. Such vehicles may therefore be subject to requirements to reduce emissions of air pollutants. For more informa�on, please visit the CARB Advanced Clean Fleets webpage at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our- work/programs/advanced-clean-fleets

11) ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement, including any other documents incorporated herein by specific reference, represents the entire and integrated agreement between CITY and CONSULTANT. This Agreement supersedes all prior oral or written negotiations, representations or agreements. This Agreement may not be modified or amended, nor any provision or breach waived, except in a writing signed by both parties which expressly refers to this Agreement.
12) COUNTERPARTS. This Agreement may be executed in counterpart originals, duplicate originals, or both, each of which is deemed to be an original for all purposes. 13) NOTICES. This Agreement is managed and administered on the CITY’s behalf by the individual named below. All invoices must be submitted and approved by this individual and all notices shall be given to the CITY using the following contact information:

CITY Contact: ________________
E-mail: ________________
Address: ________________
Telephone: ________________
Notices must be given to CONSULTANT at the following:

CONSULTANT Contact: ________________
E-mail: ________________
Address: ________________
Telephone: ________________

EXECUTED as of the day first above-stated.

City of Fairfield, a municipal corporation

By:__________________________________

CONSULTANT

By:___________________________________
Packet Page 81 of 249Attachment 1 Page 19 of 25

19 EXHIBIT “B”

PAYMENT

1) The total contract price for services rendered by CONSULTANT under this Agreement shall be as specified below:

Personnel Hourly Rate

2) Payment shall be made to CONSULTANT on a time and materials basis, and CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices to the __________________ for the same. 3) Any additional meetings or work required beyond that set forth in Exhibit “A” shall be mutually agreed to in writing by the CITY and CONSULTANT and shall be billed on a time and materials basis to the _____________________________.

Packet Page 82 of 249Attachment 1 Page 20 of 25

20 EXHIBIT “C”

GENERAL PROVISIONS

1) INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT. At all times during the term of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall be an independent contractor and shall not be an employee of CITY. CITY shall have the right to control CONSULTANT only insofar as the results of CONSULTANT's services rendered pursuant to this Agreement; however, CITY shall not have the right to control the means by which CONSULTANT accomplishes services rendered pursuant to this Agreement.
2) LICENSES; PERMITS; ETC. CONSULTANT represents and warrants to CITY that CONSULTANT has all licenses, permits, qualifications, and approvals of whatsoever nature which are legally required for CONSULTANT to practice CONSULTANT's profession. CONSULTANT represents and warrants to CITY that CONSULTANT shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement, any licenses, permits, and approvals which are legally required for CONSULTANT to practice his profession. 3) TIME. CONSULTANT shall devote such services pursuant to this Agreement as may be reasonably necessary for satisfactory performance of CONSULTANT's obligations pursuant to this Agreement.

CONSULTANT shall adhere to the Schedule of Activities as described in their Executive Summary. 4) CONSULTANT NOT AN AGENT. Except as CITY may specify in writing, CONSULTANT shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of CITY in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. CONSULTANT shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement, to bind CITY to any obligation whatsoever.
5) ASSIGNMENT PROHIBITED. No party to this Agreement may assign any right or obligation pursuant to this Agreement. Any attempted or purported assignment of any right or obligation pursuant to this Agreement shall be void and of no effect.
6) PERSONNEL. CONSULTANT shall assign only competent personnel to perform services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that CITY, in its sole discretion, at any time during the term of this Agreement, desires the removal of any person or persons assigned by CONSULTANT to perform services pursuant to this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall remove any such person immediately upon receiving notice from CITY of the desire of CITY for the removal of such person or persons. 7) STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE. CONSULTANT shall perform all services required pursuant to this Agreement. Services shall be performed in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner of the profession in which CONSULTANT is engaged in the geographical area in which CONSULTANT practices his profession. All products which CONSULTANT delivers to CITY pursuant to this Agreement shall be prepared in a workmanlike manner, and conform to the standards of quality normally observed by a person practicing in CONSULTANT's profession. CITY shall be the sole judge as to whether the product of the CONSULTANT is satisfactory.
8) CANCELLATION OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement may be canceled at any time by the CITY at its discretion upon written notification to CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT is entitled to receive full payment for all services performed and all costs incurred up to and including the date of receipt of written notice to cease work on the project. CONSULTANT shall be entitled to no further compensation for work performed after the date of receipt of written notice to cease work. All completed and incomplete products up to the date of receipt of written notice to cease work shall become the property of CITY.

Packet Page 83 of 249Attachment 1 Page 21 of 25

21 9) PRODUCTS OF CONSULTING. All products of the CONSULTANT provided under this Agreement shall be the property of the CITY.
10) INDEMNIFY AND HOLD HARMLESS.
a) If AGREEMENT is an agreement for design professional services subject to California Civil Code § 2782.8(a) and CONSULTANT is a design professional, as defined in California Civil Code § 2782.8(c)(2), to the fullest extent permited by law, CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY and its elected officials, officers, agents, employees and designated volunteers (collec�vely “CITY Indemnitees”) from and against any and all claims, losses, liabili�es, damages, costs and expenses, including atorney’s fees and costs, to the extent they arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT’s duty to defend shall consist of reimbursement of defense costs incurred by CITY in direct propor�on to the CONSULTANT’s propor�onate percentage of fault. CONSULTANT’s percentage of fault shall be determined, as applicable, by a court of law, jury or arbitrator. In the event any loss, liability or damage is incurred by way of setlement or resolu�on without a court, jury or arbitrator having made a determina�on of the CONSULTANT’s percentage of fault, the par�es agree to media�on with a third party neutral to determine the CONSULTANT’s propor�onate percentage of fault for purposes of determining the amount of indemnity and defense cost reimbursement owed to the CITY.
b) If AGREEMENT is not an agreement for design professional services subject to California Civil Code § 2782.8(a) or CONSULTANT is not a design professional as defined in California Civil Code § 2782.8(c)(2), to the fullest extent allowed by law, CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the CITY Indemnitees from all claims, suits, or ac�ons of every name, kind and descrip�on, brought forth on account of injuries to or death of any person or damage to property arising from or connected with the willful misconduct, negligent acts, errors or omissions, ultra-hazardous ac�vi�es, ac�vi�es giving rise to strict liability, or defects in design by CONSULTANT or any person directly or indirectly employed by or ac�ng as agent for CONSULTANT in the performance of this Agreement, including the concurrent or successive passive negligence of the CITY Indemnitees.

It is understood that the duty of CONSULTANT to indemnify and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in Sec�on 2778 of the California Civil Code.

CONSULTANT’S responsibility for such defense and indemnity shall survive termination or completion of this agreement for the full period of time allowed by law. 11) PROHIBITED INTERESTS. No employee of the CITY shall have any direct financial interest in this agreement. This agreement shall be voidable at the option of the CITY if this provision is violated. 12) LOCAL EMPLOYMENT POLICY. The CITY desires wherever possible, to hire qualified local residents to work on city projects. Local resident is defined as a person who resides in Solano County. The CITY encourages an active affirmative action program on the part of its contractors, consultants, and developers.

When local projects require, subcontractors, contractors, consultants and developers will solicit proposals from qualified local firms where possible.

Packet Page 84 of 249Attachment 1 Page 22 of 25

22 As a way of responding to the provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act and this program, contractor, consultants, and developers will be asked, to provide no more frequently than monthly, a report which lists the employee's name, job class, hours worked, salary paid, city of residence, and ethnic origin. 13) CONSULTANT NOT A PUBLIC OFFICIAL. CONSULTANT is not a "public official" for purposes of Government Code §§ 87200 et seq. CONSULTANT conducts research and arrives at his or her conclusions, advice, recommendation, or counsel independent of the control and direction of the CITY or any CITY official, other than normal contract monitoring. In addition, CONSULTANT possesses no authority with respect to any CITY decision beyond these conclusions, advice, recommendation, or counsel. 14) EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. When the CITY executes an agreement for or makes payment to CONSULTANT in the amount of $600 (six hundred dollars) or more in any one calendar year, CONSULTANT shall provide the following information to CITY to comply with Employment Development Department (EDD) reporting requirements:
a) Whether CONSULTANT is doing business as a sole proprietorship, partnership, limited liability partnership, corpora�on, limited liability corpora�on, non-profit corpora�on or other form of organiza�on. b) If CONSULTANT is doing business as a sole proprietorship, CONSULTANT shall provide the full name, address and social security number of the sole proprietor. c) If CONSULTANT is doing business as other than a sole proprietorship, CONSULTANT shall provide CONSULTANT’S federal tax iden�fica�on number.

Packet Page 85 of 249Attachment 1 Page 23 of 25

23 EXHIBIT “D”

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

CONSULTANT shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the CONSULTANT, its agents, representatives, or employees. 1) MINIMUM SCOPE AND LIMITS OF INSURANCE
a) Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence Form CG 00 01) with minimum limits of $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, products and completed opera�ons, and property damage. If Commercial General Liability or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/loca�on or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.
b) Automobile Liability coverage (Form CA 00 01 with Code 1 – any auto) with minimum limits of $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. c) Workers’ Compensa�on insurance as required by the State of California and Employers’ Liability insurance, each in the amount of $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. 2) INDUSTRY SPECIFIC COVERAGES
If checked below, the following insurance is also required.

Professional Liability Insurance / Errors and Omissions Liability in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence.

Pollution Liability Insurance in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence Garage Keepers Insurance in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence Fidelity / Crime / Dishonesty Bond in the minimum amount of $____________ MCS-90 Endorsement to Business Automobile insurance for transportation of hazardous materials and pollutants
Builder’s Risk / Course of Construction Insurance in the minimum amount of $__________.

3) INSURANCE PROVISIONS
a) DEDUCTIBLES AND SELF-INSURED RETENTIONS. Any deduc�bles or self-insured reten�ons must be declared to and approved by the CITY. At the op�on of the CITY, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deduc�bles or self-insured reten�ons as respects the CITY, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the CONSULTANT shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related inves�ga�ons, claim administra�on and defense expenses.
b) The general and automobile liability policies (and if applicable, pollu�on liability, garage keepers liability and builder’s risk policies) are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:

Packet Page 86 of 249Attachment 1 Page 24 of 25

24 i) The CITY, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects:
liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of the CONSULTANT; products and completed operations of the CONSULTANT; premises owned, occupied or used by the CONSULTANT; and automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the CONSULTANT. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the CITY, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
ii) For any claims related to this project, the CONSULTANT’S insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the CITY, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insured maintained by the CITY, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be in excess of the CONSULTANT’S insurance and shall not contribute with it. iii) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the CITY, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. iv) The CONSULTANT’S insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer’s liability. v) Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days’ prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the CITY. vi) The policy limits of coverage shall be made available to the full limits of the policy. The minimum limits stated above shall not serve to reduce the CONSULTANT’S policy limits of coverage. Therefore, the requirements for coverage and limits shall be (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this agreement, or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named insured, whichever is greater. c) ACCEPTABILITY OF INSURER. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the CITY.

VERIFICATION OF COVERAGE. CONSULTANT shall furnish the CITY with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this Exhibit D. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf; on forms equivalent to CG 20 10 11 85, subject to CITY approval; and submitted electronically through the Exigis insurance system to: [email protected]. All insurance certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the CITY before work commences. At the request of the CITY, CONSULTANT shall provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements affecting the coverage required by these specifications. d) SUB-CONTRACTORS. CONSULTANT shall require all subcontractors to procure and maintain insurance policies subject to the requirements of Exhibit D. Failure of CONSULTANT to verify existence of sub-contractor’s insurance shall not relieve CONSULTANT from any claim arising from sub-contractors work on behalf of CONSULTANT.

Packet Page 87 of 249Attachment 1 Page 25 of 25

Emergency Shelter Operations NOFA
Rank and Review Panel Scoring
Initial Scoring:

Project:1 - Mission Samoa-
HELP Project (Palets)
2 - Mission
Samoa
Homeless 2
Work Project
3 - CANB 4 - BANC/Shelter Solano 5 -Bay North
Average Initial Score:159 115 177 182 144
Final Recommendation:

Proposal Amount Requested (per
year) Final Ranking
Amount
Recommended
(per year)
Strengths Weakness Other Comments/Notes
1 - Mission Samoa-HELP Project (Palets)$300,000 $0 Cost per night. Exit destination outcomes.

Does not meet the threshold/definition of
low barrier/housing first. Contradictory
information provided in application verse
program orientation booklet. HMIS
report/data provided is for a transitional
housing program. More of a treatment
model verse sheltering. For an employment
focused program, there is low income
change between entry and exit. Capacity
concerns: 10-18 beds is a large range.

Staffing needed more description. Included
same information, outcomes and data on
the two separate applications which was
very confusing.

Confusion as to why two
applications instead of
combining.
2 - Mission Samoa-Homeless to Work
Project $80,000 $0 Some of the outcomes Not emergency shelter/not eligible for this funding.

Does not meet the threshold
requirements for NOFA.
3 - CANB $300,000 1 $300,000
Bed night cost, capacity, &
positive outcomes.

Coordinated entry systems
coordination & history with
community. Diverse
population and impact.

Able to accommodate
different household types.

Adding in navigation.

Timeline narrative. Some barriers.

While BANC has a higher score
initially, unanimously this was
#1 for all 4 panelists once
weigh in results from
investment and household
diversity impact. Had the
lowest bed night costs and
highest positive outcomes.

Packet Page 88 of 249Attachment 2 Page 1 of 2

Emergency Shelter Operations NOFA
Rank and Review Panel Scoring
Proposal Amount Requested (per
year) Final Ranking
Amount
Recommended
(per year)
Strengths Weakness Other Comments/Notes
4 -Beck Avenue Navigation Center/Shelter
Solano $550,000 2 $100,000
Experience, reasonable
workload, case
management and housing
navigation, contact with
clients after exit, data
driven, management plan,
and senior management
experience.

Cost per bed night & lowest outcomes to
housing. Expected more from a larger
agency. Financially high costs for impact. A
lot of contracts to manage.

Panel noted while scored high,
the results from investment
could be better so not #1
recommendation to fund.
5 - Bay North Church (Winter Shelter)$550,000 2 $150,000 New program to seed for
the community to reach
unmet need.

Demonstrated diverse
population experience.

New program so less substance to
application & less demonstrated
experience compared to other programs.

Cost per person (but would like to have it
supported at lower amount)
Winter months shelter. Score is
lower than MS because it is a
new program and unable to
provide same level of data. Tied
for #2 to fund after overall
discussion. Panel liked
supporting to help launch a
new program but not at the
amount asked (Asking ROI too
high for 10 clients).

Per Year Totals:$1,780,000 $550,000
Packet Page 89 of 249Attachment 2 Page 2 of 2

Agenda Item No: 11.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:July 2, 2024
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT:Public Hearing; and
Resolution 2024174 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Annexing Territory (Woolner Avenue by SolanoNapa Habitat for Humanity) to Community Facilities District No. 20122 (Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation, and Park Maintenance) as Annexation No. 68, Authorizing the Levy of a Special Tax Within the Annexed Territory, and Submitting the Levy of a Special Tax to the Qualified Electors Thereof; and
Resolution 2024175 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Declaring the Results of a Special Annexation Election in Territory Annexed to Community Facilities District No. 20122 (Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation, and Park Maintenance), Determining the Validity of Prior Proceedings, and Directing Recording of Amended Notice of Special Tax Lien for City of Fairfield Community Facilities District No. 20122 (Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation, and Park Maintenance) Annexation No. 68 (Woolner Avenue by SolanoNapa Habitat for Humanity) RECOMMENDED ACTION
Hold public hearing and adopt resolutions.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The conditions of approval for the Woolner Avenue by SolanoNapa Habitat for Humanity development require that the property be annexed to Community Facilities District No. 20122 (CFD 20122 or District). CFD 20122 was formed by the City to provide funding for public safety services, open space operation and park maintenance. A public hearing must be held on the question of whether to annex the property to CFD 20122. In the absence of majority protest, the attached resolutions annex the territory to CFD 20122, authorize the levy of a special tax within the annexed territory subject to voter approval, call an election to allow the property owner to cast a ballot on the levy of a special tax, and declare the result of such election.

DISCUSSION
Packet Page 90 of 249

DISCUSSION
By Resolution No. 2012233, the City Council established CFD 20122, a MelloRoos community facilities district (CFD) with the intention that future development within the city would annex to this District. The special taxes collected from the property owners within the District are used to fund public safety services, open space operation, and park maintenance in the Fairfield area.

The property proposed for annexation is owned by SolanoNapa Habitat for Humanity and is located south of Woolner Avenue and west of Columbus Drive within the boundary of assessor’s parcel number (APN) 0028881770, 0028881780, and 0028790, the boundaries of which are depicted on Exhibit A. The original parcels prior to splitting were APNs 0028280210 and 0028280300. The development on the property will be three singlefamily homes (Woolner Avenue by SolanoNapa Habitat for Humanity). Development of this property will change the property’s characteristics and manner in which the property will be used, thereby creating a need for more services funded by CFD 20122.

The City contracts with Willdan Financial Services for the preparation of resolutions and the completion of balloting procedures for the annexation to existing CFDs. This process is a specialty service that the City has contracted out since 1995 on an individual consultant services basis for each development requiring annexation into a MelloRoos CFD.

The council adopted Resolution No. 2024123 on May 21, 2024, to declare its intention to annex the territory to CFD 20122 and set a public hearing for July 2, 2024. Following the public hearing, and in the absence of a majority protest and approval by the property owner, the adoption of the attached resolutions will annex the territory to CFD 20122, call and hold an election of the property owner within the annexed territory, declare the results of the special election, and authorize the levy of the special taxes within the annexed territory, thereby concluding the annexation process.

Once the annexation is complete, the annexation territory will be designated as Annexation No. 68. In accordance with the Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax (RMA) for CFD 20122, the property owner of Annexation No. 68 will not be required to pay annual special taxes for CFD 20122, as these residences will be exempt from the special tax due to being Affordable Housing.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The estimated annual revenue to be received by the City (CFD 20122 Fund 332) for this annexation is estimated to be $0, which is based on the exempt status of Affordable Housing property pursuant to the RMA. If the property no longer is affordable housing in the future, the special tax will be levied on the property pursuant to the rate charged to singlefamily residential property on a perunit basis. The CFD 20122 maximum special tax rates include an automatic annual consumer price index adjustment. The process for the annexation is funded by the developer and no general fund monies are used for this effort.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
If the council has any questions concerning the required annexation of this development, this item may be rescheduled until the next council meeting to allow staff to provide the necessary background information. However, if the annexation is not approved, the conditions of approval for this development would not be fulfilled and the development process would cease.

STAFF CONTACT
Valerie Standfill, Management Analyst
Packet Page 91 of 249

Agenda Item No: 11.AGENDA REPORTDATE:July 2, 2024 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, City ManagerSUBJECT:Public Hearing; and Resolution 2024174 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Annexing Territory(Woolner Avenue by SolanoNapa Habitat for Humanity) to Community FacilitiesDistrict No. 20122 (Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation, and ParkMaintenance) as Annexation No. 68, Authorizing the Levy of a Special Tax Within theAnnexed Territory, and Submitting the Levy of a Special Tax to the Qualified ElectorsThereof; and Resolution 2024175 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Declaring the Results ofa Special Annexation Election in Territory Annexed to Community Facilities District No.20122 (Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation, and Park Maintenance),Determining the Validity of Prior Proceedings, and Directing Recording of AmendedNotice of Special Tax Lien for City of Fairfield Community Facilities District No. 20122(Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation, and Park Maintenance) AnnexationNo. 68 (Woolner Avenue by SolanoNapa Habitat for Humanity)RECOMMENDED ACTIONHold public hearing and adopt resolutions.STATEMENT OF ISSUEThe conditions of approval for the Woolner Avenue by SolanoNapa Habitat for Humanity developmentrequire that the property be annexed to Community Facilities District No. 20122 (CFD 20122 orDistrict). CFD 20122 was formed by the City to provide funding for public safety services, open spaceoperation and park maintenance. A public hearing must be held on the question of whether to annex theproperty to CFD 20122. In the absence of majority protest, the attached resolutions annex the territoryto CFD 20122, authorize the levy of a special tax within the annexed territory subject to voter approval,call an election to allow the property owner to cast a ballot on the levy of a special tax, and declare theresult of such election.DISCUSSIONBy Resolution No. 2012233, the City Council established CFD 20122, a MelloRoos communityfacilities district (CFD) with the intention that future development within the city would annex to thisDistrict. The special taxes collected from the property owners within the District are used to fund publicsafety services, open space operation, and park maintenance in the Fairfield area.The property proposed for annexation is owned by SolanoNapa Habitat for Humanity and is locatedsouth of Woolner Avenue and west of Columbus Drive within the boundary of assessor’s parcel number(APN) 0028881770, 0028881780, and 0028790, the boundaries of which are depicted on ExhibitA. The original parcels prior to splitting were APNs 0028280210 and 0028280300. Thedevelopment on the property will be three singlefamily homes (Woolner Avenue by SolanoNapaHabitat for Humanity). Development of this property will change the property’s characteristics andmanner in which the property will be used, thereby creating a need for more services funded by CFD20122.The City contracts with Willdan Financial Services for the preparation of resolutions and the completionof balloting procedures for the annexation to existing CFDs. This process is a specialty service that theCity has contracted out since 1995 on an individual consultant services basis for each developmentrequiring annexation into a MelloRoos CFD.The council adopted Resolution No. 2024123 on May 21, 2024, to declare its intention to annex theterritory to CFD 20122 and set a public hearing for July 2, 2024. Following the public hearing, and inthe absence of a majority protest and approval by the property owner, the adoption of the attachedresolutions will annex the territory to CFD 20122, call and hold an election of the property owner withinthe annexed territory, declare the results of the special election, and authorize the levy of the specialtaxes within the annexed territory, thereby concluding the annexation process.Once the annexation is complete, the annexation territory will be designated as Annexation No. 68. Inaccordance with the Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax (RMA) for CFD 20122, theproperty owner of Annexation No. 68 will not be required to pay annual special taxes for CFD 20122,as these residences will be exempt from the special tax due to being Affordable Housing.FINANCIAL IMPACTThe estimated annual revenue to be received by the City (CFD 20122 Fund 332) for this annexation isestimated to be $0, which is based on the exempt status of Affordable Housing property pursuant to theRMA. If the property no longer is affordable housing in the future, the special tax will be levied on theproperty pursuant to the rate charged to singlefamily residential property on a perunit basis. The CFD20122 maximum special tax rates include an automatic annual consumer price index adjustment. Theprocess for the annexation is funded by the developer and no general fund monies are used for thiseffort.PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATIONN/AALTERNATIVE ACTIONIf the council has any questions concerning the required annexation of this development, this item maybe rescheduled until the next council meeting to allow staff to provide the necessary backgroundinformation. However, if the annexation is not approved, the conditions of approval for this developmentwould not be fulfilled and the development process would cease.

STAFF CONTACT
Valerie Standfill, Management Analyst
(707) 4287055
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Attachment 1: Proposed Resolution Annexing Territory
Attachment 1a: Exhibit A Ballot
Attachment 2: Proposed Resolution Declaring Results
Attachment 2a: Exhibit A Declaring Results
Attachment 3: Exhibit A Boundary Map
REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Panganiban, Ryan Approved 6/18/2024 11:45 AM
Chaudhary, Savita Approved 6/18/2024 12:39 PM
Dombrowski, Delaney Approved 6/18/2024 12:43 PM
Dombrowski, Delaney Approved 6/18/2024 12:44 PM
Packet Page 92 of 249

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-174

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD ANNEXING TERRITORY (WOOLNER AVENUE BY SOLANO-NAPA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY) TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2012-2 (PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES, OPEN SPACE OPERATION, AND PARK MAINTENANCE) AS ANNEXATION NO. 68, AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX WITHIN

THE ANNEXED TERRITORY, AND SUBMITTING THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX TO THE QUALIFIED

ELECTORS THEROF

WHEREAS, this City Council, on May 21, 2024, adopted Resolution No. 2024-123 (Resolution of Intention) stating its intention to annex certain territory to the City’s existing Community Facilities District No. 2012-2 (Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation, and Park Maintenance) (CFD 2012-2), pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended (Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code) (Act); and

WHEREAS, a copy of the Resolution of Intention, incorporating a description and map of the proposed boundaries of the territory to be annexed to CFD 2012 -2 (Territory) and stating the facilities and services (Services) to be provided and the rate and method of apportionment of the special tax to be levied within the CFD to pay for the Services (Rate and Method), is on file with the city clerk and the provisions thereof are fully incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth herein; and

WHEREAS, the Resolution of Intention set July 2, 2024, as the date of the public hearing on the proposed annexation of the Territory to CFD 2012 -2; and

WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was published in accordance with the Act; and

WHEREAS, on July 2, 2024, this council held a public hearing as required by the Act and the Resolution of Intention relative to the proposed annexation of territory to CFD 2012 -2; and

WHEREAS, at said hearing, interested persons desiring to be heard on all matter s pertaining to the annexation of the Territory to CFD 2012-2 and the levy of said special taxes within the Territory were heard, and a full and fair hearing was held, evidence was presented to this council regarding the annexation and special taxes, and t his council is fully advised as to all matters relating to the annexation of the Territory to CFD 2012-2 and the special taxes; and

WHEREAS, prior to the time fixed for said hearing, written protests had not been filed with the city clerk against the proposed annexation of the Territory to CFD 2012-2 by (i) 50% or more of the registered voters or six registered voters, whichever is more, residing in CFD 2012 -2, or (ii) or more of the registered voters, or six registered, whichever is more, residing in the Territory, or (iii) owners of one-half or more of the area of land in CFD 2012-2 and not exempt from the Packet Page 93 of 249Attachment 1 Page 1 of 4

RES. NO. 2024-174

Page 2 ends

levy of the special tax, or (iv) owners of one-half or more of the area of land in the Territory and not exempt from the levy of the special tax; and

WHEREAS, the special tax proposed to be levied in the Territory to pay for the cost of the Services, including incidental expenses, has not been precluded by a majority protest pursuant to Section 53324 of the Act; and

WHEREAS, Annexation Map No. 68 to CFD 2012-2 has been filed with the county recorder of the County of Solano, which map shows the Territory to be annexed to the CFD in these proceedings, and a copy thereof is on file with the city clerk.

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

Section 1. The above recitals are true and correct and made a part hereof.

Section 2. All prior proceedings taken by this council, with respect to CFD 2012-2 and the proposed annexation of the Territory thereto, have been duly considered and are hereby determined to be valid and in conformity with the Act.

Section 3. This council determines that the project proposed for the Territory will intensify the use of the property, creating a need for more Services under CFD 201 2-2. The Services, which CFD 2012-2 is authorized to finance, are in addition to those provided in or required for the territory within CFD 2012-2 and will not be replacing services already available.

Section 4. The description and map of the boundaries of the Territory, as described in said Annexation No. 68 to the CFD, on file with the city clerk, are hereby finally approved, are incorporated herein by reference, and shall be included within the boundaries of CFD 2012-2, and said Territory is hereby ordered annexed to CFD 2012-2, subject to voter approval of the levy of the special taxes therein as hereinafter provided.

Section 5. The provisions of the Resolution of Intention, which has heretofore been adopted by this council, are by this reference incorporated herein, as if fully set forth herein.

Section 6. It is the intention of this council that, except where funds are otherwise available to pay for the Services, a special tax, secured by recordation of a continuing lien against all non-exempt real property in the Territory, will be levied annually within the boundaries of the Territory from and after the annexation of the Territory to CFD 2012-2. The special taxes shall be those as originally authorized through the formation of CFD 2012-2 and adopted by ordinance of the legislative body of CFD 2012-2. For particulars, reference is hereby made to the Rate and Method. The special tax is hereby authorized, subject to approval by two-thirds of the votes cast within the Territory, Packet Page 94 of 249Attachment 1 Page 2 of 4

RES. NO. 2024-174

Page 3 ends

commencing with fiscal year (FY) 2024-2025, in accordance with the Rate and Method and procedures of the Act within the boundaries of the Territory to pay for the costs of the Services, including incidental expenses.

Section 7. Pursuant to the provisions of the Act, the proposition of the levy of the special tax within the Territory shall be submitted to the voters within the Territory at an election called therefore as hereinafter provided.

Section 8. This council hereby finds that fewer than 12 persons have been registered to vote within the Territory for each of the 90 days preceding the close of the public hearing heretofore conducted and concluded by this council for the purposes of these annexation proceedings.

Accordingly, and pursuant to Section 53326 of the Act, this council finds that for purposes of these proceedings the qualified electors are the landowners within the Territory and that the vote shall be by said landowners, each having one vote for each acre or each portion thereof such landowner owns in the Territory.

Section 9. Pursuant to Section 53326 of the Act, the election shall be conducted by mail ballot, in accordance with the applicable provisions of the California Elections Code governing mail ballot elections of cities, and in particular the provisions of Division 4 (commencing with Section 4000), of that code, insofar as they have not been waived by the unanimous consent of all landowners of the Territory.

Section 10. This council calls a special election to consider the measure described in the ballot referred to in Section 11 below, which election will be held on July 2, 2024, (Election Day) in the office of the city clerk, at City Hall, located at 1000 Webster Street, Fairfield, California.

Section 11. The city clerk will be the election official to conduct th e election and has caused to be provided to each landowner in the Territory, a ballot in the form of Exhibit A hereto, which is hereby approved.

Section 12. The city clerk has accepted the ballots of the qualified electors received prior to 6:00 p.m. on Election Day, whether received by mail or by personal delivery.

Section 13. This council hereby finds that the provisions of Section 53326 of the Act requiring a minimum of 90 days to elapse before said election is for the protection of voters, that the voters have waived such requirement and the date for the election hereinabove specified is established accordingly.

Packet Page 95 of 249Attachment 1 Page 3 of 4

RES. NO. 2024-174

Page 4 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of July 2024, by the following vote:

_________________________________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 96 of 249Attachment 1 Page 4 of 4

EXHIBIT A

City of Fairfield
Community Facilities District No. 2012-2
(Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation, and Park Maintenance) Annexation No. 68

OFFICIAL BALLOT

SPECIAL TAX ANNEXATION ELECTION

This ballot is for the special landowner election. You must return this ballot in the enclosed envelope to the office of the City Clerk of the City of Fairfield no later than 6:00 p.m. on July 2, 2024, either by mail or in person. The City Clerk’s office is located at City Hall, 1000 Webster Street, 4th Floor, Fairfield, California, 94533.

To vote, mark in the voting square after the word “YES” or after the word “NO”. For a list of acceptable marks, please refer to the back of this ballot.

If you wrongly mark, tear, or deface this ballot, return to the City Clerk of the City of Fairfield and obtain another.

BALLOT MEASURE: Shall the City of Fairfield, by and for its Community Facilities District No. 2012-2 (Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation, and Park Maintenance) (the “CFD”), be authorized to levy special taxes within the territory annexed to the CFD pursuant to and as described in the Resolution of Intention of the City of Fairfield adopted by its Council on May 21, 2024?

YES:

NO:

By executing in the space provided below, you also confirm your waiver of the time limit pertaining to the conduct of the election and any requirement for notice of election and analysis and arguments with respect to the ballot measure, as such waivers are described and permitted by Section 53326 (a) and 53327 (b) of the California Government Code.

Acres Owned Within Territory Annexed:

Number of Votes:

Property Owner:

Property Owner/Authorized Representative Signature: ________________________

Packet Page 97 of 249Attachment 2 Page 1 of 1

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-175

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD DECLARING THE RESULTS OF A

SPECIAL ANNEXATION ELECTION IN TERRITORY ANNEXED TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2012-2 (PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES, OPEN SPACE OPERATION, AND PARK

MAINTENANCE), DETERMINING THE VALIDITY OF PRIOR PROCEEDINGS, AND DIRECTING

RECORDING OF AMENDED NOTICE OF SPECIAL TAX LIEN FOR CITY OF FAIRFIELD COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2012-2 (PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES, OPEN SPACE OPERATION, AND PARK MAINTENANCE) ANNEXATION NO. 68 (WOOLNER AVENUE BY SOLANO-NAPA HABITAT

FOR HUMANITY)

WHEREAS, in proceedings heretofore conducted by this City Council pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended (Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code) (Act), this council has heretofore adopted a resolution calling a special election of the qualified landowner electors in the territory of land annexed to Community Facilities District No. 2012-2 (Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation, and Park Maintenance) (CFD 2012-2); and

WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of the resolution, which is hereby incorporated herein by this reference, the special election has been held, and the city clerk has filed a Canvass and Statement of Results of Election (Canvass), a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A; and

WHEREAS, this council has reviewed the Canvass and hereby approves it.

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

Section 1. The above recitals are true and correct and made a part hereof.

Section 2. The issue presented at the special election was the levy of a special tax within the territory annexed to CFD 2012-2, to be levied in accordance with the Rate and Method of Apportionment heretofore approved by this council as described in Resolution No. 2024-174, a “Resolution of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Annexing Territory (Woolner Avenue by Solano-Napa Habitat for Humanity) to Community Facilities District No. 2012-2 (Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation, and Park Maintenance) as Annexation No. 68, Authorizing the Levy of a Special Tax Within the Annexed Territory, and Submitting the Levy of a Special Tax to the Qualified Electors Thereof,” adopted July 2, 2024.

Section 3. Pursuant to the Canvass on file with the city clerk, the issue presented at the special election was approved by the landowners of the territory a nnexed to CFD 2012-2 by more than two-thirds of the landowners voting at the special election.

Packet Page 98 of 249Attachment 3 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2024-175

Page 2 ends

Section 4. Pursuant to the voter approval, this council may levy special taxes within the territory annexed to CFD 2012-2 pursuant to Resolution No. 2024-174, adopted July 2, 2024, as heretofore provided in these proceedings.

Section 5. All prior proceedings taken by this council with respect to CFD 2012-2 and the annexation of the territory thereto have been duly considered and are hereby determined to be valid and in conformity with the Act.

Section 6. Within 15 days of the date hereof, the city clerk shall execute and cause to be recorded in the office of the county recorder of the County of Solano an amendment to the Notice of Special Tax Lien as required by Section 3117.5 of the California Streets and Highway Code.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of July 2024, by the following vote:

_________________________________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 99 of 249Attachment 3 Page 2 of 2

Exhibit A
City of Fairfield
Community Facilities District No. 2012-2
(Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation, and Park Maintenance) Annexation No. 68

CANVASS AND STATEMENT OF RESULTS OF ELECTION

I hereby certify that on this date, I canvassed the returns of the election held on July 2, 2024, in the territory annexed to Community Facilities District No. 2012-2 (Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation, and Park Maintenance) of the City of Fairfield which election is designed as the Special Tax Annexation Election, and the cast for and against the measure are as follows and the total as shown for and against the measure are full, true and correct:

City of Fairfield Community Facilities District
No. 2012-2 (Public Safety Services, Open
Space Operation, and Park Maintenance)
Qualified
Landowner
Votes Votes Cast YES NO
Annexation No. 68 Special Tax Annexation
Election, July 2, 2024 1

BALLOT MEASURE: Shall the City of Fairfield, by and for its Community Facilities District No. 2012-2 (Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation, and Park Maintenance) (the “CFD”) be authorized to levy special taxes within the territory annexed to the CFD pursuant to and as described in the Resolution of Intention of the City of Fairfield adopted by its Council on May 21, 2024?

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I HAVE HEREUNTO SET MY HAND THIS 2nd DAY OF JULY, 2024.

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

By:________________________
City Clerk

Packet Page 100 of 249Attachment 4 Page 1 of 1

Packet Page 101 of 249Attachment 5 Page 1 of 1

Agenda Item No: 12.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:July 2, 2024
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT:Public Hearing; and
Resolution 2024176 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving the Comprehensive User Fee Study and Amending the Master Fee Schedule for Fiscal Year 20242025 Police Fees
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Hold public hearing and adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
Staff recommends that the City Council hold a public hearing regarding the recently completed user fee analysis and consider adopting a resolution updating Police fees and charges for certain services provided by the City of Fairfield for Fiscal Year 2024/2025 as listed in Attachment 3.

DISCUSSION
In October 2023, the City contracted with Willdan Financial Services (Willdan) to conduct a Comprehensive User Fee Study to determine the full costs incurred by the City to support the various activities for which the City charges user fees. Due to the complexity and the breadth of performing a comprehensive review of fees, Willdan employed a variety of fee methodologies to identify the full costs of individual fees and program activities. This report and the appendices herein identify 100% full cost recovery for City services. Attachment 2 Appendix C details the full cost and suggested fees as determined through discussion with departmental staff. The recommended fees identified herein are either at or less than the full cost recovery.

The City of Fairfield recently completed a Comprehensive User Fee Study and revised their user fee schedules to recover 100% of the costs associated with a service provided by the City to members of the public when allowed by law.

A public hearing was held on May 7, 2024, and new and revised fees were approved by Resolution No. 2024111. After the council approved the Resolution, staff identified errors in the Police fees, which were listed incorrectly in the Proposed Master Fee Schedule.

Packet Page 102 of 249

The correct police fees as identified by Willdan User Fee Study are listed in Attachment 2. If approved, the new and revised fees will be effective July 8, 2024, as the fees are not associated with planning, development or public works and are not subject to a 60day waiting period requirement.

The Fairfield Police Department is committed to working in partnership with our community to reduce harm by advancing safety, service, and the quality of life in Fairfield. The department is organized into two bureaus: Operations and Support Services. The Operations Bureau consists of the Patrol, Traffic, Special Enforcement, Youth Services, and Investigations Divisions. The Support Services Bureau consists of the Administrative Services, Community Services, and Records, Property & Dispatch Divisions.

The overall fee update for the Police Department consists of an increase to 25 fees; 8 fees would decrease; 10 new fees would be added; and 15 fees would remain as currently set. The average fee change is a decrease of 5%, mostly driven by the larger decreases in the secondhand dealer and solicitor fees. Details of the Fairfield Police Department fees analysis can be found in the User Fee Study report, Attachment 2 Appendix C starting on page 37.

Inflationary Adjustments
Conducting a User Fee Study for feerelated services and costs annually would be timeintensive for staff and costly. The best practice for User Fee analyses is to undertake such a Study every three to five years. This allows jurisdictions to ensure they account for organizational changes, such as staffing levels, cost of doing business, process efficiencies, code or rule changes, and technology improvements. As a result, developing an annual update mechanism allows jurisdictions to maintain current levels of cost recovery while accounting for increases in staffing or expenditures related to services. Therefore, it is recommended that the City include an inflationary factor, Consumer Price Index (CPI), in the resolution to increase or decrease the fees annually.

The proposed annual fee adjustments will be handled by staff administratively pursuant to adopted resolution commencing in FY 20242025. The Finance Department staff will annually adjust fees effective July 1, starting July 2025. The adjustments will be based on the average of each of the percent change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPIW)in the following three areas: 1) San FranciscoOaklandHayward, CA, 2) West, and 3) U.S. city average.

This CPI data will be obtained from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, or its successor agency, and the comparison will be made between the CPI values for April of the current fiscal year and the preceding April. The new fees shall be rounded to the nearest one (1.00) dollar.

Table 3 – For Illustration Purposes
Consumer Price Index (CPI)Percent Change
San FranciscoOaklandHayward 2.80%
Western Urban Region 3.56%
U.S. Cities 3.32%
Average of All 3 CPIU for adjustments 3.23%
FINANCIAL IMPACT
As currently drafted, it is pertinent to note that the revenue is not intended to fund new services; rather, the revenue is intended to offset the costs of providing existing services that are recoverable from fees. Consequently, while fees may rise annually, typically, labor and contract services costs (the primary driver of feerelated costs), also rise annually. Recalibrating these fees provides an offset of existing expenditures/needs rather than a source of funding for expanded service levels.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
On January 1213, 2024, as a part of the council retreat, the council directed staff to research and Packet Page 103 of 249

Agenda Item No: 12.AGENDA REPORTDATE:July 2, 2024 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, City ManagerSUBJECT:Public Hearing; andResolution 2024176 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving theComprehensive User Fee Study and Amending the Master Fee Schedule for FiscalYear 20242025 Police FeesRECOMMENDED ACTIONHold public hearing and adopt resolution.STATEMENT OF ISSUEStaff recommends that the City Council hold a public hearing regarding the recently completed user feeanalysis and consider adopting a resolution updating Police fees and charges for certain servicesprovided by the City of Fairfield for Fiscal Year 2024/2025 as listed in Attachment 3. DISCUSSIONIn October 2023, the City contracted with Willdan Financial Services (Willdan) to conduct aComprehensive User Fee Study to determine the full costs incurred by the City to support the variousactivities for which the City charges user fees. Due to the complexity and the breadth of performing acomprehensive review of fees, Willdan employed a variety of fee methodologies to identify the full costsof individual fees and program activities. This report and the appendices herein identify 100% full costrecovery for City services. Attachment 2 Appendix C details the full cost and suggested fees asdetermined through discussion with departmental staff. The recommended fees identified herein areeither at or less than the full cost recovery.The City of Fairfield recently completed a Comprehensive User Fee Study and revised their user feeschedules to recover 100% of the costs associated with a service provided by the City to members ofthe public when allowed by law. A public hearing was held on May 7, 2024, and new and revised fees were approved by Resolution No.2024111. After the council approved the Resolution, staff identified errors in the Police fees, whichwere listed incorrectly in the Proposed Master Fee Schedule.The correct police fees as identified by Willdan User Fee Study are listed in Attachment 2. If approved,the new and revised fees will be effective July 8, 2024, as the fees are not associated with planning,development or public works and are not subject to a 60day waiting period requirement. The Fairfield Police Department is committed to working in partnership with our community to reduceharm by advancing safety, service, and the quality of life in Fairfield. The department is organized intotwo bureaus: Operations and Support Services. The Operations Bureau consists of the Patrol, Traffic,Special Enforcement, Youth Services, and Investigations Divisions. The Support Services Bureauconsists of the Administrative Services, Community Services, and Records, Property & DispatchDivisions.The overall fee update for the Police Department consists of an increase to 25 fees; 8 fees would decrease;10 new fees would be added; and 15 fees would remain as currently set. The average fee change is adecrease of 5%, mostly driven by the larger decreases in the secondhand dealer and solicitor fees. Details ofthe Fairfield Police Department fees analysis can be found in the User Fee Study report, Attachment 2 Appendix C starting on page 37.Inflationary AdjustmentsConducting a User Fee Study for feerelated services and costs annually would be timeintensive forstaff and costly. The best practice for User Fee analyses is to undertake such a Study every three to fiveyears. This allows jurisdictions to ensure they account for organizational changes, such as staffinglevels, cost of doing business, process efficiencies, code or rule changes, and technologyimprovements. As a result, developing an annual update mechanism allows jurisdictions to maintaincurrent levels of cost recovery while accounting for increases in staffing or expenditures related toservices. Therefore, it is recommended that the City include an inflationary factor, Consumer Price Index(CPI), in the resolution to increase or decrease the fees annually.The proposed annual fee adjustments will be handled by staff administratively pursuant to adoptedresolution commencing in FY 20242025. The Finance Department staff will annually adjust feeseffective July 1, starting July 2025. The adjustments will be based on the average of each of the percentchange in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPIW)inthe following three areas: 1) San FranciscoOaklandHayward, CA, 2) West, and 3) U.S. city average.This CPI data will be obtained from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, or its successor agency, and thecomparison will be made between the CPI values for April of the current fiscal year and the precedingApril. The new fees shall be rounded to the nearest one (1.00) dollar.Table 3 – For Illustration PurposesConsumer Price Index (CPI)Percent ChangeSan FranciscoOaklandHayward 2.80%Western Urban Region 3.56%U.S. Cities 3.32%Average of All 3 CPIU for adjustments 3.23%FINANCIAL IMPACTAs currently drafted, it is pertinent to note that the revenue is not intended to fund new services; rather,the revenue is intended to offset the costs of providing existing services that are recoverable fromfees. Consequently, while fees may rise annually, typically, labor and contract services costs (theprimary driver of feerelated costs), also rise annually. Recalibrating these fees provides an offset ofexisting expenditures/needs rather than a source of funding for expanded service levels.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
On January 1213, 2024, as a part of the council retreat, the council directed staff to research and review all user fees.

At the March 12, 2024 council study session open to the public, staff presented the proposed increased fee rates for Parks and Recreation (P&R) facilities and for Aquatic Complex admission. The council requested additional information and asked for a comparison of Vacaville and other cities’ fees.

At the April 9, 2024 council study session open to the public, staff delivered a presentation on the User Fee Study and Parks and Recreation (P&R) facilities and Aquatic Complex admission fees.

On April 23, 2024, in accordance with the notification requirements contained in California Government Sections 6600066025, the City of Fairfield provided the companies with a draft of the proposed Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Fee Schedule.

On May 7, 2024, council approved Resolution No. 2024111 for the Proposed Fee Schedule to be effective July 8, 2024.

A notice of public hearing (Attachment 5) was published on April 23, 2024, in the local newspaper, Daily Republic.

On June 13, 2024, in accordance with the notification requirements contained in California Government Sections 6600066025, the City of Fairfield provided the companies with a draft of the proposed Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Fee Schedule.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The council may choose to instruct staff to revise the FY 2024/2025 Police Fees as listed in the Proposed Master Fee Schedule.

STAFF CONTACT
Savita Chaudhary, Assistant City Manager
(707) 4287582
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
City Attorney's Office, City Manager's Office, Finance Department, Police Department ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Attachment 1: Proposed Resolution
Attachment 2: Comprehensive User Fee Study report from Willdan Financial Services (Willdan)
Attachment 3: FY 2024/2025 Proposed Police Fees Effective July 8, 2024 Attachment 4: FY 2024/2025 Proposed Master Fee Schedule Effective July 8, 2024 Attachment 5: Public Hearing Notice Police Fee Schedule Update REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Chaudhary, Savita Rejected 6/3/2024 4:58 PM
Smith, Shawn Approved 6/17/2024 10:48 AM
Chaudhary, Savita Approved 6/17/2024 3:41 PM
Packet Page 104 of 249

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-176

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD APPROVING THE

COMPREHENSIVE USER FEE STUDY AND AMENDING THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 POLICE FEES

WHEREAS, the City of Fairfield follows best municipal financial practices that require the City to establish and maintain all user charges and fees based on the cost of providing services; and

WHEREAS, City Council held a Public Hearing and adopted Resolution No. 2008-24 amending the Police Department Fee Schedule; and

WHEREAS, as a part of the budget process beginning 2023, the council directed staff to research and review user fees; and

WHEREAS, in October 2023, the City retained the services of Willdan Financial Services (Willdan) to conduct a comprehensive user fee study across multiple departments to determine the current service costs; and

WHEREAS, at the April 9, 2024 council study session, staff presented the proposed Citywide User Fee Update, Parks and Recreation (P&R) facilities and Aquatic Complex admission fees. The council provided direction to staff regarding the updated Citywide fee structure to be incorporated for adoption at a future council meeting; and

WHEREAS, on May 7, 2024, the council adopted Resolution No. 2024-111 to adopt the proposed Citywide User Fee Update, Parks and Recreation (P&R) facilities and Aquatic Complex admission fees; and

WHEREAS, on May 21, 2024, after the council approved Resolution No. 2024-111, staff identified errors in the police fees, which were listed correctly in the Willdan User Fee Study and incorrectly in the Proposed Master Fee Schedule; and
WHEREAS, the new and revised Police fees will be effective July 8, 2024, as the fees are not associated with planning, development, or public works and are not subject to a 60-day waiting period requirement; and

WHEREAS, the current fees charged by the City are not sufficient to recover actual processing and administrative costs; and

WHEREAS, the new proposed fees do not exceed the estimated reasonable costs of providing services for which the fees are charged in accordance with Government Code 66014; and Packet Page 106 of 249Attachment 1 Page 1 of 3

RES. NO. 2024-176

Page 2 ends

WHEREAS, Government Code Sections 66016, 66018 and 6062a require notice to be given and data to be made available to the public prior to the open and public hearing; and

WHEREAS, notice was provided in accordance with Government Code Sections 66006 and 66016 to parties requesting notification of fee changes; and

WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the council to allow oral and written comments from the public on the matter of the fees.

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

Section 1. The City of Fairfield Police fees, attached hereto as Attachment 3 and incorporated herein by this reference, are hereby approved, and shall replace fees in the City’s Master Fee Schedule effective July 8, 2024.

Section 2. The finance director is hereby authorized to adjust the fees annually effective July 1, starting July 2025. The adjustments will be based on the average of each of the percent change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) in the following three areas: 1) San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, CA, 2) West, and 3) U.S. city average.

Section 3. The council has determined that the adoption of this resolution does not constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15378(b)(4), as it does not involve any commitment to any specific project which may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment.

Section 4. The city manager, or their designee, is hereby authorized and directed to take all actions necessary to implement this resolution.

Packet Page 107 of 249Attachment 1 Page 2 of 3

RES. NO. 2024-176

Page 3 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of July 2024, by the following vote:

_________________________________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 108 of 249Attachment 1 Page 3 of 3

City of Fairfield
User Fee Study
April 19, 2024
Packet Page 109 of 249Attachment 2 Page 1 of 44

i Comprehensive User Fee Study

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................. i Executive Summary .................................................................................................. 1 User Fee Background ............................................................................................... 2 Background .................................................................................................................................................. 2 California User Fee History .......................................................................................................................... 2 Additional Policy Considerations ................................................................................................................. 3 Study Objective ....................................................................................................... 4 Scope of the Study ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Aim of the Report......................................................................................................................................... 5 Project Approach and Methodology ........................................................................... 6 Conceptual Approach................................................................................................................................... 6 Fully Burdened Hourly Rates........................................................................................................................ 6 Summary Steps of the Study ........................................................................................................................ 7 Allowable Costs ............................................................................................................................................ 7 Methodology ................................................................................................................................................ 8 Quality Control/Quality Assurance .............................................................................................................. 8 Reasons for cost increases/decreases over current fees............................................................................. 8 City Staff Contributions ................................................................................................................................ 9 Fairfield User Fees ................................................................................................. 10 Cost Recovery............................................................................................................................................. 10 Subsidization .............................................................................................................................................. 10 Impact on Demand (Elasticity) ................................................................................................................... 11 Summary .................................................................................................................................................... 11 Planning ............................................................................................................... 12 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 12 Administrative and Tech Fees ................................................................................. 13 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 13 Public Works ......................................................................................................... 14 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 14 Police ................................................................................................................... 15 Packet Page 110 of 249Attachment 2 Page 2 of 44

ii Comprehensive User Fee Study

Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 15 Special Events ....................................................................................................... 16 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 16 Animal Services ..................................................................................................... 17 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 17 Appendix A – Total Allowable Cost to be Recovered .................................................. 1 8 Appendix B – Salary and Benefit Hourly Rates ........................................................... 19 Appendix C – Cost Recovery Analysis ....................................................................... 25

Packet Page 111 of 249Attachment 2 Page 3 of 44

1 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Executive Summary
The City of Fairfield engaged Willdan Financial Services (Willdan) to determine the full costs incurred by the City to support the various activities for which the City charges user fees. Due to the complexity and the breadth of performing a comprehensive review of fees, Willdan employed a variety of fee methodologies to identify the full costs of individual fee and program activities. This report and the appendices herein identify 100% full cost recovery for City services. Appendix C details the full cost and suggested fees as determined through discussion with departmental staff. The recommended fees identified herein are either at or less than full cost recovery.

Packet Page 112 of 249Attachment 2 Page 4 of 44

2 Comprehensive User Fee Study

User Fee Background
Background
As part of a general cost recovery strategy, local governments adopt user fees to fund programs and services that provide limited or no direct benefit to the community as a whole (“User Fees”). As cities struggle to maintain levels of service and variability of demand, they have become increasingly aware of subsidies provided by the General Fund and have implemented cost-recovery targets. To the extent that governments use general tax monies to provide individuals with private benefits, and not require them to pay the full cost of the service (and, therefore, receive a subsidy), the government is limiting funds that may be available to provide other community-wide benefits. In effect, the government is using community funds to pay for private benefits. Unlike most revenue sources, cities have more control over the level of user fees they charge to recover costs, or the subsidies they can institute.

Fees in California are required to conform to the statutory requirements of the California Constitution, Proposition 218, Proposition 26, and the California Code of Regulations. The Code also requires that the City Council adopt fees by either ordinance or resolution, and that any fees in excess of the estimated total cost of rendering the related services must be approved by a popular vote of two-thirds of those electors voting because the charge would be considered a tax and not a fee. There are no fees suggested to be set above the cost of service and as such a public vote is not required.

California User Fee History
Before Proposition 13, in times of fiscal shortages, California cities were able to raise property taxes, which funded everything from police and recreation to development-related services. However, this situation changed with the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978.

Proposition 13 established the era of revenue limitation in California local government. In subsequent years, the state saw a series of additional limitations to local government revenues. Proposition 4 (1979) defined the difference between a tax and a fee: a fee can be no greater than the cost of providing the service; and Proposition 218 (1996) further limited the imposition of taxes for certain classes of fees. As a result, cities were required to secure a supermajority vote in order to enact or increase taxes. Due to the thresholds needed to increase local taxes, cities have less control and very few successful options for new revenues.

The State of California took a series of actions in the 1990’s and 2000’s to improve the State’s fiscal situation, at the expense of local governments. In 2004-05, the Educational Revenue Augmentation Funds (“ERAF”) take-away of property taxes and the reduction of Vehicle License Fees further reduced local tax revenues.

In addition, on November 2, 2010, California voters approved Proposition 26, the “Stop Hidden Taxes Initiative”, which is aimed at defining “regulatory fees” as a special tax rather than a fee, thus requiring approval by two-thirds vote of local voters. These regulatory fees are typically intended to mitigate the societal and environmental impacts of a business or person’s activities. Proposition 26 contains seven categories of exceptions. The fees analyzed as part of a User Fee study typically fall under categories one through five consisting of charges for specific benefits, government service, regulatory need, for use of government property, or a fine/penalty.

Packet Page 113 of 249Attachment 2 Page 5 of 44

3 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Additional Policy Considerations
State regulations require that municipalities update their fee schedules to reflect the actual costs of certain public services primarily benefiting users. User Fees recover costs associated with the provision of specific services benefiting the user, thereby typically reducing the use of General Fund monies for such purposes.

In addition to collecting the direct cost of labor and materials associated with processing and administering user services, it is common for local governments to recover reasonable support costs. Support costs are those costs relating to a local government’s central service departments that are allocable to the local government’s operating departments. Central services support cost allocations were incorporated using the resulting indirect overhead percentages determined through the City’s Cost Allocation Plan. A Cost Allocation Plan identifies the central service functions of the City such as Finance, City Manager, and Human Resources and allocates their cost to the departments and funds of the City that they support. This plan was used in the User Fee study to account for the burden placed upon central services by the operating departments in order to allocate a proportionate share of central service cost through the study.

As labor effort and costs associated with the provision of services fluctuate over time, a significant element in the development of any fee schedule is that it has the flexibility to remain current. Therefore, it is recommended that the City include an inflationary factor in the resolution adopting the fee schedule to allow the City to annually increase or decrease the fees by changes in a pre-approved inflationary index, as described below. However, such inflationary increases shall not exceed the reasonable estimated cost of providing the services each year.

The City may employ many different inflationary factors. The most commonly used and recommended inflator is the Consumer Price Index (CPI) as it is widely well known, understood, and accepted. Since the primary factor for the cost of a City’s services is usually the costs of the personnel involved, tying an inflationary factor that connects more directly to the personnel costs can also be suitable if there is a clear method, or current practice of obtaining said factor.

Each City should use an inflator that they are comfortable with for their specific situation and needs. The analysis performed is a reflection of the cost of service at a point in time, and an inflator is used to project cost increases in future years. But inflators such as CPI will become less and less reliable as a determination of the change in cost of service as each year passes. Since it is incumbent upon each agency to ensure the amount of the fees charged does not exceeds the reasonable estimated costs of providing the services, it is recommended that the City perform an internal review annually with a comprehensive review of services and fees performed every five years, which would include adding, amending, or removing fees for programs/services.

Packet Page 114 of 249Attachment 2 Page 6 of 44

4 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Study Objective
As the City of Fairfield seeks to efficiently manage limited resources and adequately respond to increased service demands, it needs a variety of tools. A User Fee Study provides assurance that the City has the best information and the best resources available to make sound decisions, fairly and legitimately set fees, maintain compliance with state law and local policies, and meet the needs of the City administration and its constituency. Given the limitations on raising revenue in local government, the City recognizes that a User Fee Study is a very cost-effective way to understand the total cost of services and identify potential fee deficiencies. Essentially, a User Fee is a payment for a requested service provided by a local government that primarily benefits an individual or group.

The total cost of each service included in this analysis is based on the full cost of providing City services, including direct salaries and benefits of City staff, direct departmental costs, and indirect costs from central service support. This study determines the full cost recovery fee for the City to provide each service; however, each fee is set at the City’s discretion, up to 100% of the total cost, as specified in this report.

The principal goal of the study was to help the City determine the full cost of the services that the City provides. In addition, Willdan established a series of additional objectives including:
 Developing a rational basis for setting fees
 Identifying subsidy amount, if applicable, of each fee in the model  Ensuring compliance with State law
 Developing an updatable and comprehensive list of fees  Maintaining accordance with City policies and goals
The study results will help the City better understand its true costs of providing services and may serve as a basis for making informed policy decisions regarding the most appropriate fees, if any, to collect from individuals and organizations that require individualized services from the City.

Scope of the Study
The scope of this study encompasses a review and calculation of the user fees charged by the following Fairfield departments and fee groups:
 Planning
 Tech Fees
 Public Works
 Police
 Special Event
 Animal Services
The study involved the identification of existing and potential new fees, fee schedule restructuring, data collection and analysis, orientation and consultation, quality control, communication and presentations, and calculation of individual service costs (fees) or program cost recovery levels.

Packet Page 115 of 249Attachment 2 Page 7 of 44

5 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Aim of the Report
The User Fee Study focused on the cost of City services, as City staff currently provide them at existing, known, or reasonably anticipated service and staff level needs. This report provides a summary of the study results, and a general description of the approach and methods Willdan and City staff used to determine the recommended fee schedule. The report is not intended to document all of the numerous discussions throughout the process, nor is it intended to provide an influential dissertation on the qualities of the utilized tools, techniques, or alternative approaches.

Packet Page 116 of 249Attachment 2 Page 8 of 44

6 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Project Approach and Methodology
Conceptual Approach
The basic concept of a User Fee Study is to determine the “reasonable cost” of each service provided by the City for which it charges a user fee. The full cost of providing a service may not necessarily become the City’s fee, but it serves as the objective basis as to the maximum amount that may be collected.

The standard fee limitation established in California law for such fees is the “estimated, reasonable cost” principle. In order to maintain compliance with the letter and spirit of this standard, every component of the fee study process included a related review. The use of budget figures, time estimates, and improvement valuation clearly indicates reliance upon estimates for some data.

Fully Burdened Hourly Rates
The total cost of each service included in this analysis is primarily based on the Fully Burdened Hourly Rates (FBHRs) that were determined for City personnel directly involved in providing services. The FBHRs include not only personnel salary and benefits (see Appendix B), but also any costs that are reasonably ascribable to personnel for fee cost recovery. The cost elements that are included in the calculation of fully burdened rates are:
 Salaries & benefits of personnel involved
 Operating costs applicable to fee operations
 Departmental support, supervision, and administration overhead  Indirect City-wide overhead costs calculated through the Cost Allocation Plan An important factor in determining the fully burdened rate is in the calculation of productive hours for personnel. This calculation takes the available workable hours in a year of 2,080 and adjusts this figure to 1,650 productive or billable hours to account for calculated or anticipated hours’ employees are involved in non-billable activities such as paid vacation, sick leave, holidays, and other considerations as necessary.

Dividing the full cost, including overhead, of a position by the number of productive hours provides the FBHR.

The FBHRs are then used in conjunction with time estimates, when appropriate for how a service is provided, to calculate a fee’s cost based on the personnel and the amount of their time that is involved in providing each service.

Packet Page 117 of 249Attachment 2 Page 9 of 44

7 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Summary Steps of the Study
The process of the study is straightforward and simple in concept. The following list provides a summary of the study process steps:

Allowable Costs
This report identifies three types of costs that, when combined, constitute the fully burdened cost of a service (Appendix A). Costs are defined as
direct labor, including salary and benefits,
departmental overhead costs, and the City’s
central services overhead, where
departmental and central service overhead
costs constitute support costs. These cost
types are defined as follows:
 Direct Labor (Personnel Costs): The
costs related to staff salaries for
time spent directly on fee-related
services.
 Departmental Overhead: A
proportional allocation of
departmental overhead costs,
including operation costs such as
supplies and materials that are necessary for the department to function.  Central Services Overhead: These costs, as provided via the City’s Cost Allocation Plan, represent services provided by those Central Services Departments whose primary function is to support other City departments.

Data Analysis
Department Interviews
Time Estimates
Labor Costs
Cost Allocation Plan
Building Cost Layers
Direct Services
Indirect Services
Department Overhead
City-Wide Overhead
Set Fees
Define the Full Cost of
Services
Set Cost Recovery Policy
Packet Page 118 of 249Attachment 2 Page 10 of 44

8 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Methodology
The two methods of analysis for calculating fees used in this report are the:

Case Study Method (Standard Unit Cost Build-Up Approach): This approach estimates the actual labor and material costs associated with providing a unit of service to a single user. This analysis is suitable when City staff time requirements do not vary dramatically for a service, or for special projects where the time and cost requirements are easy to identify at the project’s outset. Further, the method is effective in instances when a staff member from one department assists on an application, service or permit for another department on an as-needed basis. Costs are estimated based upon interviews with City staff regarding the time typically spent on tasks, a review of available records, and a time and materials analysis.

Program Cost Approach: In some instances, the underlying data is not available or varies widely, leaving a standard unit cost build-up approach impractical. In addition, market factors and policy concerns (as opposed to actual costs) tend to influence rental based fee levels more than other types of services. Willdan employed a different methodology where appropriate to fit a programs’ needs and goals. Typical programmatic approach cases are valuation-based fees, Recreation programs, and instances where a program cost is divided over the user base to obtain a per applicant cost for shared cost services.

Quality Control/Quality Assurance
All study components are interrelated, thus flawed data at any step in the process will cause the ultimate results to be inconsistent and unsound. The elements of our Quality Control process for User Fee calculations include:
 Involvement of knowledgeable City staff
 Clear instructions and guidance to City staff
 Reasonableness tests and validation
 Internal and external reviews
 Cross-checking
Reasons for cost increases/decreases over current f ees Within the fee tables in Appendix C, the differences are identified between the full costs calculated through the study and the fee levels currently in effect. The reasons for differences between the two can arise from a number of factors including:
 Previous fee levels may have been set at levels less than full cost intentionally, based on policy decisions
 Position staffing levels, seniority, and the positions that complete fee and service activity may vary from when the previous costs were calculated
 Personnel and materials costs could have increased at levels that differed from any inflationary factors used to increase fees since the last study
 Changes in processes and procedures within a department, or the City as a whole Packet Page 119 of 249Attachment 2 Page 11 of 44

9 Comprehensive User Fee Study

 Changes in the demand for services in a City may have also changed the staffing or cost structure of departments over time
City Staff Contributions
As part of the study process, Willdan received tremendous support and cooperation from City staff, which contributed and reviewed a variety of components to the study, including:
 Budget and other cost data
 Staffing structures
 Fee and service structures, organization, and descriptions  Direct work hours (billable/non-billable)
 Time estimates to complete work tasks
 Review of draft results and other documentation
A User Fee Study requires significant involvement of the managers and line staff from the departments on top of their existing workloads and competing priorities. The contributions from City staff were critical to this study. We would like to express our appreciation to the City and its staff for their assistance, professionalism, positive attitudes, helpful suggestions, responsiveness, and overall cooperation.

Packet Page 120 of 249Attachment 2 Page 12 of 44

10 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Fairfield User Fees
Cost Recovery
The cost recovery models, by department/division fee type, are presented in detail in Appendix C. Full cost recovery is determined by summing the estimated amount of time each position (in increments of minutes or hours) spends to render a service. Time estimates for each service rendered were obtained through interviews conducted with City staff for each department/division fee included in the study. The resulting cost recovery amount represents the total cost of providing each service. The City’s current fee being charged for each service, if applicable, is provided in this section, as well, for reference.

It is important to note that the time data used to determine the amount of time each employee spends assisting in the provision of the services listed on the fee schedule is essential in identifying the total cost of providing each service and will differ from City to City depending on staffing, positions involved, experience of staff, the use of consultants, and the policies and procedures in place for each City.

Specifically, in providing services, multiple employees are often involved in various aspects of the process, spending anywhere from a few minutes to several hours on the service.

The primary goal of this study was to identify the cost of City services, to provide information to help the City make informed decisions regarding the actual fee levels and charges. The responsibility of determining the final fee levels is a complicated task. City staff must consider many issues in formulating recommendations, and the City Council must consider those same issues and more in making the final decisions.

City staff assumes the responsibility to develop specific fee level recommendations to present to the City Council. Unfortunately, there are no fixed rules to guide the City, since many of the considerations are based on the unique characteristics of the City of Fairfield, and administrative and political discretion. However, in setting the level of full cost recovery for each fee, one should consider whether the service solely benefits one end user or the general community.

Subsidization
Recalling the definition of a user fee helps guide decisions regarding subsidization. The general standard is that individuals (or groups) who receive a wholly private benefit should pay 100% of the full cost of the services. In contrast, services that are purely public benefit should be funded entirely by the general fund’s tax dollars. Unfortunately, for the decision makers, some services fall into the range between these two extremes.

Further complicating the decision, opponents of fees often assert that the activities subject to the fees provide economic, cultural, “quality of life,” or other community benefits that exceed the costs to the City, but it is important to distinguish the difference between any purported possible benefits that may be conveyed through the result of activities of the service receiver and the direct benefit being conveyed through the City providing the service to the requestor.

It is recommended the City consider such factors during its deliberations regarding appropriate fee levels.

Packet Page 121 of 249Attachment 2 Page 13 of 44

11 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Of course, subsidization can be an effective public policy tool since it can be used to reduce fees to encourage certain activities (such as to ensure public safety) or allow some people to be able to afford to receive services they otherwise could not at the full cost. In addition, subsidies can be an appropriate and justifiable action, such as to allow citizens to rightfully access services, without overburdensome costs.

Despite the intent, it is important for the City and public to understand that subsidies must be covered by another revenue source, typically the General Fund’s other unrestricted funds.

Impact on Demand (Elasticity)
Economic principles of elasticity suggest that increased costs for services (higher fees) will eventually curtail the demand for the services; whereas lower fees may spark an incentive to utilize the services and encourage certain actions. Either of these conditions may be a desirable effect to the City. However, the level of the fees that would cause demand changes is unknown. The cost of service study did not attempt to evaluate the economic or behavioral impacts of higher or lower fees; nevertheless, the City should consider the potential impacts of these issues when deciding on fee levels.

Summary
City staff is recommending setting user fees at suggested fee amounts as detailed in Appendix C. City and departmental goals, City Council priorities, policy initiatives, past performance, implementation issues, and other internal and external factors should influence staff recommendations and City Council decisions. In this case, the proper identification of additional services (new or existing services) and the update to a consistent and comprehensive fee schedule were the primary objectives of this study. City staff has reviewed the full costs and identified the recommended fee levels for consideration by City Council.

The following sections provide background for each department, division, and fee group and the results of this study’s analysis of their fees. For the full list of each fee’s analysis, refer to Appendix C of this report.

Packet Page 122 of 249Attachment 2 Page 14 of 44

12 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Planning
The mission of the Community Development Department is to protect, enhance, and expand the community’s physical, environmental, economic, and historical assets, and ensure building safety. The Department is responsible for current and long-range planning, building plan checks and inspections, and economic development. The professional staff has a wide variety of work experience in government, non- profit organizations, housing, and the private sector. Areas of specialization include planning, economic development and redevelopment, land development, engineering and building construction.

Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services and programs associated with the Planning Division. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.

The analysis of Planning services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach, whereby the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence was determined using staff time involved in providing services to recover the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City central services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that the current fees are under funding the cost for most services. It is recommended that the City increase cost recovery to 100% for Planning services as detailed in Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
 An increase to 50 fees;
 1 fee would change to contract price from a flat fee;  3 fees would decrease;
 15 new fees would be added;
 11 fees would remain as currently set, and;
 the average fee change would be an increase of 110% for currently existing fees.

Packet Page 123 of 249Attachment 2 Page 15 of 44

13 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Administrative and Tech Fees
Administrative and Tech Fees include the technology fund fee for the purpose of this study. The purpose of the fee is to recover the information and technology cost of Building Safety. The technology cost included is the cost needed to implement, maintain, and upgrade systems needed for Building Safety to operate and provide service.

Analysis
The analysis of the technology fee consisted of a program cost approach that looked at the information technology cost for Building Safety and determined a pro rata share of cost that should be recovered for each fee dollar that is charged for Building plan check and inspection activities. The result of the analysis determined a full cost fee of 9.2%. It is recommended that the current fee of 8.38% be increased to full cost recovery as detailed in Appendix C.

Packet Page 124 of 249Attachment 2 Page 16 of 44

14 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Public Works
The mission of the Public Works Department is to provide the highest possible quality of life to the citizens of Fairfield through the delivery of prompt, professional, efficient and personal service. Responsibilities of the department include design, construction, operation and maintenance of streets, water, sewer, drainage/flood control, public buildings, parks, landscaping, fleet, and open space. The department also manages transportation activities including local fixed route, paratransit, reduced taxi program, two park- and-rides, and train station maintenance services. The management team comes from diverse academic backgrounds, including public works administration, civil engineering, traffic engineering, water resources, construction management, and transportation planning and operations. The department consists of five functional areas: Engineering, Operations, Utilities, Transportation, and Fleet Management.

Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services associated with the Public Works Department. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.

The analysis of Public Works services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach whereby the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence was determined using staff time involved with providing the service to recover the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City Central Services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that most services are currently below the cost of providing them, and changes to the schedule were needed to better differentiate specific service needs that didn’t fit within currently existing fees. It is recommended that the City increase cost recovery to 100% for Public Works services as detailed in Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
 an increase to 23 fees;
 5 fees would decrease;
 24 new fees would be added;
 7 fees would remain as currently set, and;
 the average fee change would be an increase of 18% for currently existing fees.

Packet Page 125 of 249Attachment 2 Page 17 of 44

15 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Police
The Fairfield Police Department is committed to working in partnership with our community to reduce harm by advancing safety, service and the quality of life in Fairfield. The department is organized into two bureaus: Operations and Support Services. The Operations Bureau consists of the Patrol, Traffic, Special Enforcement, Youth Services, and Investigations Divisions. The Support Services Bureau consists of the Administrative Services, Community Services, and Record & Dispatch Divisions.

The Fairfield Police Department’s mission: With reverence for human life and the highest degree of ethical and professional conduct, the Fairfield Police Department will, while working in partnership and as guided by the Constitution, safeguard the lives and property of the people we serve, enforce the law and reduce harm to make our community safe for all.

Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services associated with Police Department. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.

The analysis of the Police services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach for fees, excluding penalties, whereby the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence was determined using staff time involved with providing the service to recover the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City Central Services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that most fees are currently set below the full cost of providing service. Staff are recommending that the fees be adjusted as detailed in Appendix C with some increases limited to 25% or full cost, whichever is less. As a result, there would be:
 An increase to 25 fees;
 8 fees would decrease;
 10 new fees would be added;
 15 fees would remain as currently set, and;
 The average fee change is a decrease of 5%, mostly driven by the larger decreases in the secondhand dealer and solicitor fees.

Packet Page 126 of 249Attachment 2 Page 18 of 44

16 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Special Events
The Special Event fee schedule’s purpose is to account for and recover some of the operational cost needs of the City required to facilitate special events throughout the City. Intake, routing, review, and day of event staff needs span multiple departments of the City and can be considerable.

Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services associated with Special Events. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.

The analysis of the Special Events services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach for fees, excluding penalties, whereby the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence was determined using staff time involved with providing the service to recover the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City Central Services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that the project coordination fees are currently heavily subsidizing the full cost of service. That is typical in many cities as there is a desire for special events and they provide enjoyment and benefit to the community. Staff is recommending that the fees be adjusted as detailed in Appendix C with most fees to retain subsidies. As a result, there would be:
 An increase to 7 fees;
 1 new fee would be added;
 The 10 park rental and Traffic Control Installation fee would remain as currently set, and;  the average fee change would be an increase of 11%.

Packet Page 127 of 249Attachment 2 Page 19 of 44

17 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Animal Services
Animal Services are provided by the Solano Animal Control Authority.

Analysis
A program cost analysis was also completed to determine historical cost recovery based on provided services. The analysis found that the Animal Services currently has a cost recovery level of 13%. Staff is recommending that the fees be adjusted as detailed in Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
 An increase to the 9 fees for altered, unaltered, and senior licenses;  All other fees would remain as currently set, and;
 the average fee change would be an increase of 38% to the increased license fees.

Packet Page 128 of 249Attachment 2 Page 20 of 44

18 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Appendix A – Total Allowable Cost to be Recovered
Below are the total allowable costs that may be recovered through User Fees; however, only a portion of the total allowable cost is recovered as staff not only works on services related to User Fees, but also works on an array of other City functions during the operational hours of the City. The amounts listed below will not reconcile to City budgets as costs that should not be included in overhead for personnel in the application of determining fully burdened hourly rates were excluded. Examples of these costs are capital, debt, monetary transfers, contract costs, and any other costs that are charged directly to the service requestor.

City of Fairfield- User Fee
Overhead Rate Calculations
Department
Total Personnel
Services
Department
Operations &
Administration
Direct
Overhead %
Internal Service
Fund Charges
Internal
Service %
Indirect
Overhead
Plan
Allocation
Indirect
Overhead %
CD: Planning 1,225,383 246,281 20% 404,054 27% - 0% PD: Admin Services - Financial Services 708,601 227,608 32% 50,746 5% 10,034 1% PD: Operations - Patrol 17,808,747 2,597,490 15% 5,161,865 25% 1,116,186 4% PD: Operations - Traffic 2,053,447 350,469 17% 293,296 12% 140,075 5% PD: Support - Admin Support 804,504 32,000 4% 736,155 88% 60,595 4% PD: Support - Code Enforcement 949,929 141,347 15% 79,230 7% 71,050 6% PD: Support - Communications 3,535,671 430,550 12% 594,540 15% 270,129 6% PD: Support - Prof Standards 840,101 98,261 12% 57,661 6% 10,644 1% PD: Support - Property 550,925 244,081 44% 84,626 11% 54,882 6% PD: Support - Records 1,164,644 168,564 14% 336,352 25% 126,869 8% PW: Engineering - Development 441,766 65,620 15% 35,919 7% 122,558 23% PW: Engineering - Inspections 468,419 48,000 10% 143,254 28% 93,121 14% PW: Engineering - Traffic 543,184 13,200 2% 42,446 8% 44,768 7% PW: Engineering - Design 152,681 80,370 53% 13,526 6% 197,144 80% PW: Operations 479,616 206,075 43% 1,848,341 270% 122,558 5% PW: Utilities 267,448 62,750 23% 22,409 7% 29,815 8% CD: Building Safety 2,103,907 412,158 20% 223,524 9% 44,768 2% CD: Economic Development 596,835 383,502 64% 49,045 5% 34,131 3% Fire 24,471,675 1,587,865 6% 4,398,259 17% 993,835 3% Parks & Rec 5,269,873 1,718,104 33% 857,848 12% 3,337,266 43% Finance Administration & Budget 902,760 97,304 11% 69,308 7% - 0% Packet Page 129 of 249Attachment 2 Page 21 of 44

19 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Appendix B – Salary and Benefit Hourly Rates
Below are Salary and Benefit hourly rates of staff positions. The hourly rates were used in the study to determine the full cost of each service when combined with the associated overhead rates. They include the salary and benefit costs for each position based on the City’s salary step schedule for positions as well as the appropriate benefits depending on each position’s bargaining unit. The total salary and benefits are then divided by 1,650 productive or billable hours to reduce the total 2,080 workable hours in a year to remove hours when positions are paid but not on the job such as holidays, paid leave, and sick pay. A further reduction of under 10% is made for administrative, general, or non-specific work hours. When a position is used in the study to identify direct work hours spent on a fee or service the applicable overhead rates of the operating unit (shown in Appendix A) is applied to that positions’ salary and benefit rate to determine full cost recovery. For any user fee service request that is outside the scope of the fees detailed in Appendix C, or for services for which there is no fee currently set, the City can charge up to the full cost of the service by using the salary benefit rate of the positions below along with the appropriate overhead factors from Appendix A.

Packet Page 130 of 249Attachment 2 Page 22 of 44

20 Comprehensive User Fee Study

City of Fairfield- User Fee
Salary & Benefit Hourly Rate Calculation
Position S&B Hourly Rate
ACCOUNTANT/AUDITOR II $127.85
ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT I $65.94
ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT II $72.78
ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT SENIOR $80.34
ACCOUNTING MANAGER $171.94
ADMINISTRATION DIV. MANAGER $155.77
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT $90.90
ADMINISTRATIVE TECHNICIAN II $90.90
ADMINISTRATIVE TECHNICIAN LEAD $100.34
AQUATICS PROGRAM COORDINATOR $90.90
ASSIST CITY ENGINEER $176.24
ASSIST PUB WRKS DIR/CITY ENGR $214.73
ASSIST PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR $214.73
ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER $163.65
ASSOCIATE CIVIL ENGINEER $137.68
ASSOCIATE PLANNER $121.69
BATTALION CHIEF BA 112 HR $137.29
BATTALION CHIEF BA 80 HR $192.21
BUDGET ANALYST SENIOR $141.12
BUDGET OFFICER $171.94
BUILDING INSPECTOR I $93.17
BUILDING INSPECTOR II $102.84
BUILDING INSPECTOR III $113.52
BUILDING INSPECTOR SENIOR $125.30
BUILDING INSPECTOR SUPERVISOR $137.68
BUILDING MAINTENANCE MANAGER $148.26
BUILDING MAINTENANCE WRKR II $82.35
BUILDING MAINTENANCE WRKR III $90.90
BUILDING PERMIT TECHNICIAN I $88.68
BUILDING PERMIT TECHNICIAN II $97.89
BUILDING PERMIT TECHNICIAN SR $108.05
BUILDING PLANS EXAMINER $119.27
CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL $180.65
CITY CLERK $5.93
CITY MANAGER $305.28
CITY MANAGERS OFFICE ASSIST II $82.35
CITY TREASURER $5.93
CIVIL ENGINEER SR $151.97
CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER I $76.47
CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER II $84.41
Packet Page 131 of 249Attachment 2 Page 23 of 44

21 Comprehensive User Fee Study

City of Fairfield- User Fee
Salary & Benefit Hourly Rate Calculation
Position S&B Hourly Rate
COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER $159.66
COMMUNICATIONS SUPERVISOR $144.65
COMMUNICATIONS TECHNICIAN $88.68
COMMUNITY SERVICES OFFICER I $69.28
COMMUNITY SERVICES OFFICER II $76.47
COUNCILMEMBER $16.22
CRIME ANALYST $121.69
CRIME PREVENTION SPECIALIST $84.41
CRIME SCENE INVESTIGATOR II $95.50
CROSS CONNECTION SPECIAL A SR $122.25
CROSS-CONNECTION SPECIALIST II $86.52
CUSTODIAN $67.59
CUSTODIAN LEAD $74.61
DEP CITY CLK/MGR CITY COUNCIL $121.69
DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF BA 112 HR $159.12
DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF BA 80 HR $222.77
DIR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT $251.64
DIR OF PARK & RECREATION $251.64
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE $251.64
DIRECTOR OF HOUSING SERVICES $251.64
DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES $251.64
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS $251.64
DISPATCH SUPERVISOR $118.72
DISPATCHER I $92.10
DISPATCHER II $101.67
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROGRAM MGR $121.69
ECON DEV PROJ MGR SENIOR $155.77
ECON DEVELOPMENT DIVISION MGR $199.40
ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN SENIOR $108.05
EQUIPMENT MECHANIC I $86.52
EQUIPMENT MECHANIC II $95.50
EQUIPMENT MECHANIC SENIOR $105.42
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT $115.82
EXECUTIVE OFFICE MANAGER $141.12
FINANCE SUPPORT SUPERVISOR $118.72
FINANCIAL SERVICES MANAGER $171.94
FIRE CAPTAIN $113.40
FIRE CAPTAIN - LIMITED TERM $113.40
FIRE CHIEF $295.21
FIRE ENGINEER $97.44
Packet Page 132 of 249Attachment 2 Page 24 of 44

22 Comprehensive User Fee Study

City of Fairfield- User Fee
Salary & Benefit Hourly Rate Calculation
Position S&B Hourly Rate
FIRE ENGINEER - LIMITED TERM $97.44
FIRE FIGHTER $88.58
FIRE FIGHTER - LIMITED TERM $88.58
FIRE INSPECTOR II $102.84
FIRE INSPECTOR III/PLANS EXAM.$113.52
FIRE MARSHAL $192.21
FIRE MECHANIC SENIOR $110.75
FIRE PREVENTION SUPERVISOR $167.75
FLEET DIVISION MANAGER $163.65
GENERAL SERVICES TECHNICIAN $74.61
HOMELESS ENGAGEMENT WORKER I $95.50
HOMELESS ENGAGEMENT WORKER II $105.42
HOMELESS INTERVENTION CASE MGR $121.69
HOMELESS OUTREACH SPECIALIST $74.61
HOMELESS SERVICES MANAGER $167.75
HOUSING DIVISION MANAGER $155.77
HOUSING PROJECT MANAGER SENIOR $155.77
HOUSING SPECIALIST I $74.61
HOUSING SPECIALIST II $82.35
HOUSING SPECIALIST LEAD $90.90
HUMAN RESOURCES ANALYST I $110.24
HUMAN RESOURCES ANALYST II $121.69
HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGER $171.94
HUMAN RESOURCES TECHNICIAN I $82.35
HUMAN RESOURCES TECHNICIAN II $90.90
INSTRUMENTATION TECH SENIOR $128.44
INSTRUMENTATION TECHNICIAN $116.36
IT ANALYST II $124.73
IT ANALYST SENIOR $144.65
IT MANAGER $167.75
IT TECHNICIAN I $88.68
IT TECHNICIAN II $97.89
LANDSCAPE MAINT INSPECTOR II $102.84
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE MANAGER $148.26
MANAGEMENT ANALYST I $110.24
MANAGEMENT ANALYST II $121.69
MANAGEMENT ANALYST SENIOR $141.12
MAYOR $19.47
MECH/ELEC TECHNICIAN II $113.52
OFFICE ASSISTANT I $61.23
Packet Page 133 of 249Attachment 2 Page 25 of 44

23 Comprehensive User Fee Study

City of Fairfield- User Fee
Salary & Benefit Hourly Rate Calculation
Position S&B Hourly Rate
OFFICE ASSISTANT II $67.59
OFFICE SPECIALIST $74.61
OPERATIONS MANAGER - TRANSIT $141.12
PAL SUPERVISOR $121.69
PARK & REC FACILITIES WKR SR $100.34
PARK & REC ASSISTANT $82.35
PARK & REC MANAGER $148.26
PARK & REC SUPERVISOR $121.69
PARK RANGER $90.90
PARKS & REC SUPERINTENDENT $163.65
PARTS/STORES SPECIALIST II $74.61
PARTS/STORES SPECIALIST-SENIOR $82.35
PAYROLL SPECIALIST II $80.34
PERMIT CENTER SUPERVISOR $127.85
PLANNER SENIOR $134.32
PLANNING COMMISSIONER $13.52
PLANNING DIVISION MANAGER $176.24
POLICE CAPTAIN $251.60
POLICE CHIEF $295.21
POLICE COM ENGAGEMENT MGR $155.77
POLICE COMMUNICATION MANAGER $155.77
POLICE DEPT RECORDS ASSIST I $61.27
POLICE DEPT RECORDS ASSIST I I $67.63
POLICE DEPT RECORDS ASST LEAD $74.65
POLICE DEPT. ASSISTANT $82.35
POLICE LIEUTENANT $218.78
POLICE OFFICER $140.74
POLICE PROPERTY SPECIALIST I $67.59
POLICE PROPERTY SPECIALIST II $74.61
POLICE RECORDS & PROPERTY MGR $155.77
POLICE SERGEANT (AA)$185.61
POLICE SERGEANT (BA)$190.25
POLICE SUPPORT SUPERVISOR $118.72
PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT $148.26
PRINCIPAL PLANNER $163.65
PROGRAM SPECIALIST $69.28
PROPERTY SUPPORT SUPERVISOR $118.72
PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER $141.12
PUBLIC WORKS ASSISTANT $82.35
PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION MGR $148.26
Packet Page 134 of 249Attachment 2 Page 26 of 44

24 Comprehensive User Fee Study

City of Fairfield- User Fee
Salary & Benefit Hourly Rate Calculation
Position S&B Hourly Rate
PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTOR II $102.84
PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTOR III $113.52
PUBLIC WORKS OPERATNS SUPERINT $180.65
PUBLIC WORKS SUPERVISOR $121.69
PURCHASING CLERK $74.61
REAL ESTATE SPECIALIST II $74.61
RECORDS SUPPORT SUPERVISOR $118.72
RECREATION PROGRAM COORDINATOR $90.90
RISK MANAGER $163.65
STREET MAINTENANCE MANAGER $148.26
TRAFFIC CONTROL MAINT WORK III $90.90
TRAFFIC CONTROL/SIGNAL TECH I $95.50
TRAFFIC CONTROL/SIGNAL TECH II $105.42
TRAFFIC ENGINEER $167.75
TRANSPORTATION MANAGER $180.65
TRANSPORTATION PLANNER II $124.73
TRANSPORTATION TECHNICIAN I $88.68
TRANSPORTATION TECHNICIAN SR $108.05
UTILITY WORKER I $74.61
UTILITY WORKER II $82.35
UTILITY WORKER SENIOR $90.90
WATER DISTRIBUTION MANAGER $159.66
WATER DISTRIBUTION OPER III $102.84
WATER DISTRIBUTION OPER IIIA $108.05
WATER DISTRIBUTION OPER SR $119.27
WATER DISTRIBUTION OPERATOR I $80.34
WATER DISTRIBUTION OPERATOR II $88.68
WATER MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR $137.68
WATER PLANT OPERATOR III $116.36
WATER PLANT OPERATOR IV $128.44
WATER QUALITY LAB ANALYST II $108.05
WATER QUALITY LAB SUPERVISOR $148.26
WATER SERVICE REPRESENTIVE I $72.78
WATER SERVICE REPRESENTIVE II $80.34
WATER TREATMENT MANAGER $171.94
WATER TREATMENT SUPERVISOR $148.26
Packet Page 135 of 249Attachment 2 Page 27 of 44

25 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Appendix C – Cost Recovery Analysis
The following tables provide the results of the analysis, resulting full cost recovery amount, and recommended fees. For fees, services, and penalties in which the full cost, existing fee, and suggested fee is listed as “NA,” the amount or percentage was not calculable. This is most common when either the current or the suggested fee includes a variable component that is not comparable on a one-to-one basis, a full cost was not calculated (for penalties, fines, market-based fees, or items not included in the study), or when there is not a current fee amount to compare against.

Packet Page 136 of 249Attachment 2 Page 28 of 44

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT#DescriptionCurrent Fee/ChargeUnitNotesFull CostSubsidy %Suggested FeeUnitFee Δ1PLANNING AND ZONING2 General Plan Amendment $8,276.00includes Planning and PW fees$14,513.06 0% $14,513.00 $6,2373 General Plan Amendment - over 10 acres $26.00per development acre$242.66 0% $242.00per development acre$2164 Specific Plan Amendment $8,276.00includes Planning and PW fees$21,853.57 0% $21,853.00 $13,5775 Specific Plan Amendment - over 10 acres $26.00per development acre$242.66 0% $242.00per development acre$2166 Zoning Ordinance Amendment $7,006.00includes Planning and PW fees$19,592.78 0% $19,592.00 $12,586.007 Zone Change$7,373.00includes Planning and PW fees$11,613.05 0% $11,613.00 $4,240.008 Zone Change - over 10 acres $26.00per development acre$113.04 0% $113.00per development acre$87.009 Zoning Letter (zoning clearance) $250.00$446.20 0% $446.00 $196.0010 Planned Development Zoning $7,679.00includes Planning and PW fees$32,918.03 0% $32,918.00 $25,239.0011 Planned Development Zoning - over 10 acres $26.00per development acre$242.66 0% $242.00per development acre$216.0012 Planned Development Amendment $3,933.00includes Planning and PW fees$11,605.79 0% $11,605.00 $7,672.0013 Annexation$8,753.00includes Planning and PW fees$13,844.04 0% $13,844.00 $5,091.0014 Annexation - over 10 acres $26.00per development acre$113.04 0% $113.00per development acre$87.0015 Pre-Annexation Agreement Hourly RateNA NA Hourly Rate $0.0016 Development Agreement Hourly RateNA NA Hourly Rate $0.0017 Development Agreement Amendment $3,134.00$16,488.82 0% $16,488.00 $13,354.0018 Master Planned Unit Development Permit $7,373.00includes Planning and PW fees$40,634.69 0% $40,634.00 $33,261.0019 Planned Unit Development Permit $4,314.00includes Planning and PW fees$10,128.86 0% $10,128.00 $5,814.0020 Use Permit$4,314.00includes Planning and PW fees$7,151.08 0% $7,151.00 $2,837.0021 Administrative Use Permit $2,922.00includes Planning and PW fees$4,461.97 0% $4,461.00 $1,539.0022 Variance$4,314.00includes Planning and PW fees$7,151.08 0% $7,151.00 $2,837.0023 Administrative Variance $2,922.00includes Planning and PW fees$5,607.27 0% $5,607.00 $2,685.0024 Home Occupation Permit $126.00$223.10 0% $223.00 $97.0026Packet Page 137 of 249Attachment 2 Page 29 of 44

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT#DescriptionCurrent Fee/ChargeUnitNotesFull CostSubsidy %Suggested FeeUnitFee Δ25 Time ExtensionHalf the Planning permit rate, plus hourly Public Works chargeNA NAHalf the Planning permit rate, plus hourly Public Works charge$0.0026 Sign Program$993.00$2,037.63 0% $2,037.00 $1,044.0027 Individual Signs (excludes face changes) $248.00$446.20 0% $446.00plus per individual sign$198.0028Individual Signs (excludes face changes) - per additional individual sign$15.00$55.77 1% $55.00 $40.0029 Freeway Sign$2,483.00$6,722.77 0% $6,722.00 $4,239.0030 Minor Discretionary Review $764.00includes Planning and PW fees$1,579.58 0% $1,579.00 $815.0031 Plan Review$374.00$223.10 0% $223.00 -$151.0032 Custom Home$745.00$2,013.85 0% $2,013.00 $1,268.0033 Second Unit$626.00$446.20 0% $446.00 -$180.0034 Transportation Permit $16.00 per trip NA NA $16.00 per trip $0.0035 Transportation Permit New annual NA NA $90.00 annual NA36Development Review :37 Single-Family Subdivision $4,966.00$7,897.88 0% $7,897.00 $2,931.0038 Single-Family Subdivision - over 50 units $26.00 per unit $113.04 0% $113.00 per unit $87.0039 Multiple-Family Residential $12,048.00includes Planning and PW fees$13,505.15 0% $13,505.00 $1,457.0040 Multiple-Family Residential - over 50 units $26.00per unit $113.04 0% $113.00 per unit $87.0041 Community Design Plan $4,145.00includes Planning and PW fees$7,897.88 0% $7,897.00 $3,752.0042 Commercial$8,644.00includes Planning and PW fees$15,795.76 0% $15,795.00 $7,151.0043 Industrial$8,644.00includes Planning and PW fees$15,795.76 0% $15,795.00 $7,151.0044Minor Development Review :45 Single-Family Subdivision $4,668.00includes Planning and PW fees$10,158.67 0% $10,158.00 $5,490.0046 Multiple-Family Residential $6,483.00includes Planning and PW fees$11,274.17 0% $11,274.00 $4,791.0047 Commercial$5,404.00includes Planning and PW fees$9,013.37 0% $9,013.00 $3,609.0048 Industrial$5,404.00includes Planning and PW fees$9,013.37 0% $9,013.00 $3,609.0049 Architectural & Site Improvement 60%of Building Plan Check FeeNA NA 60%of Building Plan Check Fee$0.0050 Single Family Architectural Plan Check 40%of Building Plan Check FeeNA NA 40%of Building Plan Check Fee$0.0051 Public Hearing Sign $125.00$223.10 0% $223.00 $98.0027Packet Page 138 of 249Attachment 2 Page 30 of 44

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT#DescriptionCurrent Fee/ChargeUnitNotesFull CostSubsidy %Suggested FeeUnitFee Δ52 Pubic Hearing Mailing $0.00for the first 100 labels, $0.58 per label over 100NA NA $0.00for the first 100 labels, plus mailing cost per label over 100$0.0053Appeals:54 Administrative $752.00$3,376.29 0% $3,376.00 $2,624.0055 Planning Commission $1,504.00$4,051.55 0% $4,051.00 $2,547.0056SUBDIVISION57 Lot Line Adjustment/Lot Merger $1,637.00includes Planning and PW fees$1,579.58 0% $1,579.00 -$58.0058 Tentative Parcel Map (less than 5 lots) $5,242.00includes Planning and PW fees$7,897.88 0% $7,897.00 $2,655.0059 Tentative Subdivision Map $11,404.00plus lotincludes Planning and PW fees$16,941.06 0% $16,941.00 plus lot $5,537.0060 Tentative Subdivision Map - per lot $64.00$226.08 0% $226.00 $162.0061ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY62 Categorical Exemption $376.00$892.39 0% $892.00 $516.0063 Negative Declaration $2,830.00includes Planning and PW fees$4,920.09 0% $4,920.00 $2,090.0064 Mitigated Negative Declaration $6,930.00includes Planning and PW fees$7,151.08 0% $7,151.00 $221.0065 Environmental Impact Report EIR contract price + 27.10% admin. ChargeNA NA EIR contract price + 25% admin. Charge-2.1%66 Special Study$504.00NA NAContract price + 25% admin. ChargeNA67 Mitigation Monitoring $1,553.00$4,461.97 0% $4,461.00plus contract price + 16.26% admin. Charge$2,908.0068 Environmental Review Addendum $1,880.00$3,346.48 0% $3,346.00 $1,466.0069 Contract Plan/Map Check $1,880.00$5,637.08 0% $5,637.00 $3,757.0070DFW Fish and Wildlife Impact Fee and Posting Fee for Notice of Determination71 For Negative Declaration $2,814.00NA NA $2,814.00 $0.0072 For Environmental Impact Report $3,889.25NA NA $3,889.25 $0.0073Solano County Posting Fee for Notice of Exemption74 For Categorial Exemption $50.00NA NA $50.00 $0.0075 Additional Plan Check New$675.26 0% $675.00 NA76 Project Coordination Meeting New$446.20 0% $446.00 NA77 Zoning Clearance New$55.77 1% $55.00 NA78 Credit assignment Fee New$904.32 0% $904.00 NA79 Credit reassignment Fee New$452.16 0% $452.00 NA28Packet Page 139 of 249Attachment 2 Page 31 of 44

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT#DescriptionCurrent Fee/ChargeUnitNotesFull CostSubsidy %Suggested FeeUnitFee Δ80 Credit confirmationNew$904.32 0% $904.00NA81 Deferred improvement agreementNew$446.20 0% $446.00NA82 Project coordination meetingNewper meeting after 2nd meeting $904.32 0% $904.00NA83 Tiny home subdivisionNew$10,158.67 0% $10,158.00NA84 Public Hearing advertisingNew$286.55 0% $286.00NA85MPUD Permit Amendment:86 Cost Sharing AmendmentNew$9,043.18 0% $9,043.00NA87 Other AmendmentNew$7,897.88 0% $7,897.00NA88 Tree Mitigation - In-Lieu fee per treeNewcharged for each 15 gallon tree or 1 inch of tree replacementNANA $350.00per 15-gallon tree or 1" of tree mitigationNA89Tree Mitigation - each five 15-gallon trees or fraction thereofNewhours of staff time charged$111.55 0% $111.00NANOTES12345Development acres refers to the improved area or area to be improved within a project; undeveloped land that is to be permanently maintained as natural open space is excluded from the fee calculation.Fee collected by the Building Division at time of construction plan submittalIncludes Solano County Posting fee of $50For projects in Cordelia that require a public hearing, a notice is mailed to a list of individuals that includes several hundred names. To calculate the fee that will be charged for the mailing, contact the Community Development Department at (707) 428-7461.The cost of 15 hours of Community Development staff time will be collected as a deposit for a Pre-Annexation agreement and 50 hours for a Development Agreement; applicant will be charged the balance of the full hourly expense for Community Development staff and the City Attorney prior to scheduling City Council public hearing. The cost of 20 hours of City Attorney staff time will be collected as a deposit for an EIR; applicant will be charged the balance of the full hourly expense for City Attorney EIR costs prior to certification. 29Packet Page 140 of 249Attachment 2 Page 32 of 44

Administrative and Tech Fees#DescriptionCurrent Fee/ChargeUnit Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested FeeFee Δ1Technology Fund Fee is to provide the necessary revenue needed to implement, maintain and upgrade citywide systems needed for operation and customer service, as provided for in Resolution 2009-54. Fee is applicable to Plan Check and Inspection fees for ALL permit types to include Building, Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing, Demolition and Grading Permits.8.38%of the sum of Inspection and Plan Check fees, including addtnl Inspection or Plan Check Service fees9.2% 0% 9.2% 0.8%30Packet Page 141 of 249Attachment 2 Page 33 of 44

Public Works#DescriptionCurrent Fee/ChargeUnitNotesFull CostSubsidy %Suggested FeeFee Δ1 Construction Water Meter$10.00$108.41 0% $108.00$98.002Encroachment Permit Fees3Application Fees:4Encroachment Permit Application Fee (no traffic control plan review) $76.00$189.84 0% $189.00 $113.005Encroachment Permit Application Fee with Traffic Control Plan Review$143.00$434.40 0% $434.00 $291.006 Additional TCP Review (4th or more reviews) $69.00per reviewFee is assessed for City staff review of the 4th or subsequent reviews$81.56 1% $81.00$12.007 Engineering Plan ReviewNewper review$612.21 0% $612.00NA8 Field Investigation Fee$115.00$165.28 0% $165.00$50.009 Encroachment Permit Extension FeeNew$81.43 1% $81.00NA10Inspection Fees;11 Pre-Construction MeetingNewper site$829.56 0% $829.00NA12 Boring utilities$328.00day$650.53 0% $650.00$322.0013 Installing/destroying monitoring wells$183.00day$330.56 0% $330.00$147.0014 Installation/modification of driveway$256.00day$247.92 0% $247.00-$9.0015 Installing/modifying a new utility service$328.00day$678.37 0% $678.00$350.0016 Installing/replacing, backflow device$183.00day$548.62 0% $548.00$365.0017 Placing dumpster, storage unit or sign$183.00day$165.28 0% $165.00-$18.0018 Placing power, street light or sign poles$18.00day$591.19 0% $591.00$573.0019 Installing/replacing curb, gutter, sidewalk $183.00day$330.56 0% $330.00$147.0020 Soil Boring$183.00day$330.56 0% $330.00$147.0021 Installing/replacing pavement striping$256.00day$456.98 0% $456.00$200.0022 Traffic Control (only scope of work)$183.00day$165.28 0% $165.00-$18.0023 Traffic Control (part of larger scope of work) $142.00day$247.92 0% $247.00$105.0024 Traffic signal installation/modification$328.00day$541.69 0% $541.00$213.0025 Tree removal/trimming$183.00day$165.28 0% $165.00-$18.0026 Trenching$328.00day$495.84 0% $495.00$167.0027 Misc. Items$183.00day$256.50 0% $256.00$73.0028Street Trench Cut Fees:29 Arterial$18.00 sq ftNA NA $18.00 $0.0030 Collector $16.00 sq ftNA NA $16.00 $0.0031 Residential$14.00 sq ftNA NA $14.00 $0.0032Wireless Facilities33 Master License AgreementNew / Hourly Rateper agreementNA NA Deposit - $5,000NA34 Site License AgreementNew / Hourly Rateper agreementNA NA Deposit - $5,000NA35 Small Cell Wireless ImplementationNewper site$918.02 0% $918.00NA36 Non-Small Cell Wireless FacilitiesNewper site$207.52 0% $207.00NA37 Eligible Facilities Requests - Spectrum Act 6409(a) Newper site$207.52 0% $207.00NA31Packet Page 142 of 249Attachment 2 Page 34 of 44

Public Works#DescriptionCurrent Fee/ChargeUnitNotesFull CostSubsidy %Suggested FeeFee Δ38 Engineering Plan Check1.35% of the total cost of the subdivision improvementsNA NA1.35% of the total cost of the subdivision improvements$0.0039 Inspection Fees5.5% of the total cost of the subdivision improvementsNA NA5.5% of the total cost of the subdivision improvements$0.0040 Grading Only Permit5.5% of the total cost of the subdivision improvementsNA NA5.5% of the total cost of the subdivision improvements$0.0041 Flood Zone Determination Letter$55.00$229.06 0% $229.00$174.0042 Transportation Permit$16.00$103.76 1% $103.00$87.0043 Lot Line Adjustment or Lot Merger Plan Review $4,599.00$2,882.33 0% $2,882.00-$1,717.0044 Parcel Map Plan Review$4,920.00$4,962.83 0% $4,962.00$42.0045 Final Subdivision Map Plan Review$4,599.00plus lot$5,124.66 0% $5,124.00$525.0046 Final Subdivision Map - per lot$64.00$311.72 0% $311.00$247.0047 Public Landscape Plan Review1.35% of improvement costNA NA 1.35% of improvement cost $0.0048Summary Vacation of City Right-of-Way or Easement$1,195.00$1,929.99 0% $1,929.00$734.0049 Development AgreementNew / Hourly RateNA NA Deposit - $11,500NA50 Grant of Public EasementNew$1,145.12 0% $1,145.00NA51 Public Irrigation Meter ApplicationNew$400.22 0% $400.00NA52 Stormwater Facility InspectionNew$207.52 0% $207.00NA53 Stormwater O&M ReviewNew$586.16 0% $586.00NA54 Dumpster ApplicationNewper site$892.49 0% $892.00NA55 Existing Easement DeterminationNew$207.52 0% $207.00NA56 Record Drawing RequestsNew$207.52 0% $207.00NA57 Certificates of Correction ReviewNew$814.31 0% $814.00NA58 Certificates of Compliance ReviewNew$325.72 0% $325.00NA59 Outdoor Dining License ReviewNew$1,865.29 0% $1,865.00NA60 Communities Facilities District Annexation Fee NewNA NA Deposit TBDNA61Wet Season Construction Site Stormwater InspectionNewper site$247.92 0% $247.00NA62 Consultant ServicesNew / Hourly Rate NA NA Deposit TBDNA63 Enttilement Public Works Staff TimeNew / Hourly Rate NA NA Actual CostNA64 Additional Project Coordination MeetingNewper meetingin-line with CD's project coordination meeting. First two meetings included in application fee.$873.16 0% $873.00NA32Packet Page 143 of 249Attachment 2 Page 35 of 44

Public Works#DescriptionCurrent Fee/ChargeUnitNotesFull CostSubsidy %Suggested FeeFee Δ1) BOND/DEPOSIT: 110% of the value of the work requiring a permit. For work valued at less than $2,000.00, the required bond/deposit shall be $750.00.2) SPECIFIC WORK REQUIRING ONLY A MINIMUM BOND/DEPOSIT OF $750.00: Sanitary Sewer Lateral & Cleanout Installation, Work requiring only Traffic Control, Installation/Repair of Backflow Devices.3) FAIRFIELD-SUISUN SEWER DISTRIT FEES: The Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District (FSSD) provides sewer services to City of Fairfield residents and businesses. If proposed improvements impact or are near a sewer utility main, or appurtenance, additional fees may be assessed by the City as part of this encroachment permit application. Please refer to the FSSD Fee Schedule for more information.4) The cost of 50 hours of Civil Engineer Senior staff time will be collected as a deposit for a Development Agreement; upon depletion of the deposit the applicant will be invoiced, each month, the balance of the full hourly expense for Public Works staff time for the month. The balance shall be paid and check provided to the Public Works Department within 10 business days of applicant's receipt of invoice. The cost of 20 hours of of Civil Engineer Senior staff time will be collected as a deposit for the Master License Agreement and Site License Agreement; applicant will be charged the balance of the full hourly expense for the City Attorney and any remaining Public Works staff time prior to execution of the agreements.5) The above fee schedule assumes a certain amount of staff time. If additional staff time is needed, the applicant will be charged the balance of the full hourly expense for the additional staff and, if applicable, City Attorney time prior to permit issuance, Public Works Department approval, or similar.33NotesPacket Page 144 of 249Attachment 2 Page 36 of 44

Police#DescriptionCurrent Fee/ChargeNotesAuthorityFull CostSubsidy %Suggested FeeUnitFee Δ1 ABC One Day Permit Authorization $27.00City Resolution 83-154 $153.95 68% $50.00 Per Event $23.002 Alarm User Permit & Admin Fine for no permit $38.00City Ordinance 91-6 $83.59 40% $50.00 bi-annual time fee $12.003 Bingo License/Permit $54.00City Ord. 95-6;94-28;85-23 $81.24 14% $70.00 Per Year $16.004 Building Use Per agreementNA NA Per agreement$0.005 Civil Subpoena-Work related appearances $275.00GC 68096.1 & 68097.2 NA NA $275.00 deposit (Hold) $0.006 Civil Subpoena-Record Production $0.10Evid Code 1563 (1) NA NA $0.10 per page $0.007 Civil Subpoena-Record Production: Microfilm $0.20Evid Code 1563 (1) NA NA $0.20 per page microfilm $0.008 Civil Subpoena-Record Production Administration Fee $27.00Set by Statute NA NA $24.00 per hr -$3.009 Clearance Check (passport, immigration) $108.00 Plus Notary City Ord 83-154 $292.69 54% $135.00$27.0010Copies of Police Reports & Traffic Accidents exempt from Public Disclosure$5 for 1-10 pages; $11 for 11-20 pages; $16 for 21-30 pages, $21 for 31-40 pages, $26 for 41-50 pages, $31 for 51-60 pages, $36 for 61-70 pagesGov Code 6253(b) City Resolution 83-154 City Resolution 2009-54$52.16 42% $30.00Up to 10 pages plus additional $.40 page $25.0011 Criminal History Local Review $68.00*Add state fingerprint charge if neededCity Resolution 83-154 PC 13300(f) NA NA $68.00 City $0.0012 Discovery: Documents $0.10$0.97 74% $0.25 Per Page $0.1513Discovery: Staff time is charged in hourly quarters (15 minutes). Records$32.25plus material cost - i.e. usb drive $40.18 15% $34.00 per 15 min $1.7514Discovery: Staff time is charged in hourly quarters (15 minutes). Property$22.73plus material cost - i.e. usb drive $49.35 43% $28.00 per 15 min $5.2715Discovery: Staff time is charged in hourly quarters (15 minutes). Comm$33.40plus material cost - i.e. usb drive $42.83 9% $39.00 per 15 min $5.6016Discovery: Staff time is charged in hourly quarters (15 minutes). Lead/Supervisor$40.27plus material cost - i.e. usb drive $49.07 12% $43.00 per 15 min $2.7317 Emergency Response (police/fire) Actual $City Res 86-26;G.C.53150-53158 NA NA Actual $$0.0018 False Alarm Penalty Police 1st NC; 2nd and all subsequent during each bi-annual period $113City Ordinance 91-6, 06-09 $322.13 22% $250.00$137.0019 Fingerprinting of Public $12.00City Resolution 83-154 $97.94 59% $40.00 rolling fee $28.0020 Firearms Dealer Permit $47.00$155.16 0% $155.00$108.0021 Firearms Storage Fee $4.00NA NA $5.00 per firearm $1.0022 Firearms Storage Fee - Admin Fee $65.00$194.79 58% $81.00 per case $16.0023 Massage Parlor Permit-Establishment $487.00 Plus Fingerprints City Resolution 96-04 $519.52 0% $519.00 City $32.0024 Massage Parlor Permit-Establishment - Fingerprints $66.00 $42 State + $24 FBINA NA $45.00plus DOJ and FBI applicable fees$0.0025 Massage Technician Permit – Individual - Fingerprints $66.00 $42 State + $24 FBINA NA $45.00plus DOJ and FBI applicable fees$0.0026 Nuisance Abatement (does not include vehicles) Actual $NA NA Actual $$0.0027 Photograph Copy Production ACTUAL + STAFF TIME Evidence Code 1563(1) NA NA ACTUAL + STAFF TIME $0.0028 Photograph Copy Production Subpoena Duces Tecum $24.00NA NA $24.00 hr staff time $0.0029 Public Records Act Documents $0.10Gov Code 6254(f)(2) NA NA $0.10 per page $0.0030 Range Agreements Use Per agreementNA NA Per agreement$0.0031 Replacement Permit/ID Card $54.00City Resolution 83-154 $52.16 0% $52.00-$2.0032 Records Checks $9.00City Resolution 83-154 $26.08 23% $20.00per individual checked when requesting agency doesn’t first obtain a DOJ rap sheet. $11.0033Request for Non-Contemporaneous Police Documents (Calls for Service) - Staff Time$47.00$115.14 50% $58.00 hr Records Supervisor $11.0034 Return ResponseActual Expenses City Ordinance 95-11 NA NA Actual Expenses $0.0034Packet Page 145 of 249Attachment 2 Page 37 of 44

Police#DescriptionCurrent Fee/ChargeNotesAuthorityFull CostSubsidy %Suggested FeeUnitFee Δ35 Secondhand Dealer Permit – New $995.00$300 State (add DOJ fingerprint fee if prints required)$259.48 6% $245.00 City -$750.0036 Secondhand Dealer Permit– Renewal (2 yrs) $430.00$300 State (add DOJ fingerprint fee if prints required)$181.90 0% $181.00 City -$249.0037 Solicitor ID Card – New $324.00 Plus $42 State$259.48 0% $259.00 City -$65.0038 Solicitor ID Card – Renewal (3 years) $300.00$155.82 1% $155.00 City -$145.0039 Solicitor Permit (New & Renewal) $300.00$259.48 0% $259.00 City -$41.0040 Taxi ID/Permit$99.00 Plus $42 State City Resolution 83-154 $218.30 34% $145.00 City Initial & Renewal $46.0041 Tow Truck Drivers$112.00 Plus $42 State$218.30 34% $145.00 City Initial & Renewal $33.0042 Vehicle Repossession Release $17.00GC 26751 & 41612 NA NA $15.00-$2.0043 bicycle registrationNew$27.58 2% $27.00NA44 Citation Sign OffNew$74.69 67% $25.00NA45 Code Enforcement ReInspection Fee 185.00$298.22 16% $250.00$65.0046 Vacant Property Registration 185.00$765.59 35% $500.00$315.0047 Abatement and Appeal Administrative Hearings New Plus Hearing Officer Fee$596.45 8% $550.00NA48 Warrant/Red Tag Posting New$220.64 32% $150.00NA49 Administrative Citations - City Code Violations 1st: $100 ea. 2nd: $200 ea. 3rd: $500 ea. Vacant building ordinance $1000 ea. NA NA 1st: $110 ea. 2nd: $220 ea. 3rd: $550 ea. Vacant building ordinance $1000 ea. $10.0050 Admin Animal Hearings New$310.33 3% $300.00NA51 Educational Fee/Youth Services New$316.32 15% $270.00NA52 3rd party redaction of BWC/Videos NewVaries NA Actual CostNA53 Late Fee - Emergency Response NewNA NA $25.00NA54 Cannabis Administrative Citation Fee 500.00 Per plant over 6FMC 25.32.17 25.32.17 Cannabis RegulationsNA NA $500.00$0.0055 CAD IncidentNew$26.08 81% $5.00NA56 Copies of Digital Media (USB) New$57.72 13% $50.00NA57 Towed Vehicle Release - Storage or Impound 151.00City Res 94-185; VC 22850.5; City Res 08-24 (Includes Private Property Vehicle Nuissance Abatement)$288.35 13% $250.00$99.0058Towed Vehicle Release - Impound or Storage with Arrest or Misd Cite280.00Includes CVC 14601, 14602, 14607, 22651 (h), 22651 (p), 23109.City Res 94-185; VC 22850.5; City Res 08-24 ( DUI, Suspended/Unlicensed Driver, Reckless Driving, Exhibition of Speed, etc.)$473.67 16% $400.00$120.0035Packet Page 146 of 249Attachment 2 Page 38 of 44

Special Event#DescriptionTypeCurrent UnitNotesFull CostSubsidy %Suggested FeeFee Δ1 Block PartyProject Coordination $61.00$3,627.38 98% $76.00 $15.002 Minor EventProject Coordination $481.00$2,375.54 75% $601.00 $120.003 Major EventProject Coordination $801.00$3,778.89 74% $1,001.00 $200.004 PARKS AND RECREATION FEES (Applies only to Special Events within City of Fairfield Parks and Recreation Facilities)5 Park Rental Fees6 51 - 250 participantsNon Designated Park Space225.00NANA$225.00 $0.007 251 - 500 participantsNon Designated Park Space300.00NANA$300.00 $0.008 501 - 1000 participantsNon Designated Park Space375.00NANA$375.00 $0.009 1001 + participantsNon Designated Park Space450.00plus $100 each increment of every 1000 participantsNANA$450.00 $0.0010 51 - 150 participantsCleaning and Damage Deposit250.00NANA$250.00 $0.0011 151 - 300 participantsCleaning and Damage Deposit375.00NANA$375.00 $0.0012 301 - 450 participantsCleaning and Damage Deposit500.00NANA$500.00 $0.0013 451 - 600 participantsCleaning and Damage Deposit625.00NANA$625.00 $0.0014 601 - 750 participantsCleaning and Damage Deposit750.00NANA$750.00 $0.0015 751 - 1000 participantsCleaning and Damage Deposit1,250.00NANA$1,250.00 $0.0016 FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU FEES17 Special Events Hourly Inspection FeeInspection Fee278.00per hour Typcially one hour except for larger events$324.000%$324.00$46.0018 ALS / Paramedic Services (Standby) FeeNew FeeNewper hour $519.000%$519.00NA19 PLANNING FEES20 Temporary Retail Sales Events677.00Only for retail sales events in Chapter 25.32.8NANA$846.00 $169.0021 POLICE DEPARTMENT FEES22 Police Officer SecurityCost for Officer135.40two officer minimum per hourone hour minimum$421.76 0%$421.00 $285.6023 PUBLIC WORKS FEES24 Traffic Control Plan Review of Submitted Plans100.00Applicant must prepare Plan. Contact Public Works Transporation Engineering for recommended Plan preparation firms. One hour minimum for review$147.78 15% $125.00 $25.0025 Traffic Control Installation Placement, maintenance, and removal of all traffic control devices to protect event. 0.004-person crew per day$13,223.58 100% $0.00$0.0036Packet Page 147 of 249Attachment 2 Page 39 of 44

Animal Services#DescriptionCurrent Fee/ChargeUnitFee AuthoritySuggested FeeFee Δ1Animal Adoption2 Dog$150.00F&A 31108 $150.00 $03 Cat$120.00F&A 31752 $120.00 $04 Senior Cat/Dog 6 yrs and older Half the applicable adoption fee F&A 31108 & 31752 Half the applicable adoption fee $05Seniors for Seniors (animal 6 years and older citizens age 65 and above)Half of half the applicable adoption feeF&A 31108 & 31752 Half of half the applicable adoption fee $06 Small Animals $20.00F&A 31753 $20.00 $07 Livestock$192.00F&A 17005; CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22$192.00 $08 Barn Cat/Community Cat Program $45.00F&A 31752 $45.00 $09 Special Events VariesCA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22Varies $010Licenses, Tags, and Registration11Animal License (Unaltered)12 1 Year$40.00F&A 30804;Gov't Code 38792; County Code 4-139, 4-142$60.00 $2013 2 Year$76.00F&A 30804;Gov't Code 38792; County Code 4-139, 4-142$114.00 $3814 3 Year$113.00F&A 30804;Gov't Code 38792; County Code 4-139, 4-142$169.50 $5715Animal License (Altered)16 1 Year$20.00F&A 30804.5 31751.3, 31751.5;Gov't Code 38792; County Code 4-139, 4-142$24.00 $417 2 Year$36.00F&A 30804.5 31751.3, 31751.5;Gov't Code 38792; County Code 4-139, 4-142$43.00 $718 3 Year$53.00F&A 30804.5 31751.3, 31751.5;Gov't Code 38792; County Code 4-139, 4-142$64.00 $1119Animal License (Altered) Senior Citizens (65 years+)20 1 Year$10.00F&A 30804.5 31751.3, 31751.5;Gov't Code 38792; County Code 4-139, 4-142$12.00 $221 2 Year$16.00F&A 30804.5 31751.3, 31751.5;Gov't Code 38792; County Code 4-139, 4-142$19.00 $322 3 Year$23.00F&A 30804.5 31751.3, 31751.5;Gov't Code 38792; County Code 4-139, 4-142$28.00 $537Packet Page 148 of 249Attachment 2 Page 40 of 44

Animal Services#DescriptionCurrent Fee/ChargeUnitFee AuthoritySuggested FeeFee Δ23Animal License (Miscellaneous)24 Late Penalty $25.00F&A 30804;Gov't Code 38792; County Code 4-139, 4-144; CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7$25.00 $025 Animal License Transfer $22.00F&A 30804;Gov't Code; CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; 38792$22.00 $026 Animal License Duplicate $18.00F&A 30804;Gov't Code; CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; 38792$18.00 $027Dogs28Dangerous Dog29 Dangerous Dog Tag $34.00County Code 4-55 (b) 8-9; CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7$34.00 $030 Dangerous Dog Permit - First Animal $50.00 per yearF&A 31641 FA&S 31683 County Code 4-55(b) $50.00 $031 Dangerous Dog Permit - Second Animal 25.00 per yearF&A 31641 FA&S 31683 County Code 4-55(b) $25.00 $032 Dangerous Animal Hearing Actual Cost (not to exceed $1,000)F&A 31641 FA&S 31683 County Code 4-55(b) Actual Cost (not to exceed $1,000) $033Facility Licenses34 Commercial Kennel/Cattery License 235.00County Code 4-87 $235.00 $035 Additional Runs (each) 6.00County Code 4-87 $6.00 $036 Hobby Kennel/Cattery License 166.00County Code 4-87 $166.00 $037Board, Redemption, & Impound38 Dog/Cat/Small Animal Board 20.00 per day F&A 31251; County Code 4-22 $20.00 $039 Livestock Board Actual Cost F&A 17095; County Code 4-44 Actual Cost $040 Animal Redemption 40.00F&A 31251; County Code 4-22 $40.00 $041Penalty Fine Unaltered Dogs & Cats (Failure to Spay or Neuter)42 1st Impound 35.00F&A 30804.7; F&A 31751.7 $35.00 $043 2nd Impound 50.00F&A 30804.7; F&A 31751.7 $50.00 $044 3rd Impound 100.00F&A 30804.7; F&A 31751.7 $100.00 $045Other Services46Surrender47Owner Surrender/Euthanasia - Dog/Cat/Small Animal93.00F&A 31251; County Code 4-22 $93.00 $048 Owner Surrender - Litter (Any Species) 100.00F&A 31251; County Code 4-22 $100.00 $049Animal Pickup/Disposal50 Dog/Cat/Small Animal Pickup (requested) 123.00CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22$123.00 $051 Pickup of Livestock Actual or invoiced costCA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22Actual or invoiced cost $052 Dead Animal Disposal 24.00CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22$24.00 $053Rabies Control38Packet Page 149 of 249Attachment 2 Page 41 of 44

Animal Services#DescriptionCurrent Fee/ChargeUnitFee AuthoritySuggested FeeFee Δ54 Rabies Quarantine - Home 48.00H&S 121580; County Code 4-22, 4-150, and 4-153$48.00 $055 Rabies Quarantine - Shelter 175.00 plus boarding feeH&S 121580; County Code 4-22, 4-150, and 4-153$175.00 $056 Health Verification 47.00CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7 $47.00 $057 Rabies Testing (Non Mandated) Actual CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7 Actual $058Spay/Neuter Services59 Dogs - Spay (under 25 lbs) 136.00CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 and 4-180; F&A 30503(a)(1); F&A 31751.3(a)(1)$136.00 $060 Dogs - Spay (25-49 lbs) 150.00CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 and 4-180; F&A 30503(a)(1); F&A 31751.3(a)(1)$150.00 $061 Dogs - Spay (50-75 lbs) 197.00CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 and 4-180; F&A 30503(a)(1); F&A 31751.3(a)(1)$197.00 $062 Dogs - Neuter (under 40 lbs) 119.00CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 and 4-180; F&A 30503(a)(1); F&A 31751.3(a)(1)$119.00 $063 Dogs - Neuter (40-75 lbs) 136.00CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 and 4-180; F&A 30503(a)(1); F&A 31751.3(a)(1)$136.00 $064 Cats - Spay87.00CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 and 4-180; F&A 30503(a)(1); F&A 31751.3(a)(1)$87.00 $065 Cats - Neuter 59.00CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 and 4-180; F&A 30503(a)(1); F&A 31751.3(a)(1)$59.00 $066 Feral Cat Trap and Release Program 31.00CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 and 4-180; F&A 30503(a)(1); F&A 31751.3(a)(1)$31.00 $067Spay - Neuter Procedures for Authorized Rescue Organizations50% of Applicable ProcedureCA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 and 4-180; F&A 30503(a)(1); F&A 31751.3(a)(1)50% of Applicable Procedure $039Packet Page 150 of 249Attachment 2 Page 42 of 44

Animal Services#DescriptionCurrent Fee/ChargeUnitFee AuthoritySuggested FeeFee Δ68 Male - Cryptorchid Add $69CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 Add $69 $069 Female in Heat/Pregnant Spay Add $69CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 Add $69 $070 Prescription Medication 9.00 Plus actual medication costCA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 $9.00 $071 Missed Appointment 31.00CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 $31.00 $072Vaccinations73 DA2PP21.00CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 $21.00 $074 Bordetella21.00CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 $21.00 $075 FVRCP20.00CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 $20.00 $076 Rabies18.00CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 $18.00 $077 Leptospirosis 23.00CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 $23.00 $078 FELV29.00CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 $29.00 $079 Canine influenza 24.00CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 $24.00 $080 FELV/FIV Test 25.00CA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 $25.00 $081Miscellaneous82 After-Hour Calls1st three hours = $292 Time in excess of three hours = $52 per hourCA Constitution Art. XI, § 7; County Code 4-22 1st three hours = $292 Time in excess of three hours = $52 per hour$083 Microchip24.00County Code 4-183 $24.00 $040Packet Page 151 of 249Attachment 2 Page 43 of 44

27368 Via Industria, Suite 200
Temecula, California 92590-4856
800.755.6864 | Fax: 888.326.6864
951.587.3500 | Fax: 951.587.3510
www.willdan.com
Packet Page 152 of 249Attachment 2 Page 44 of 44

City of Fairfield
Police Department
FY 2024/25 Proposed Master Fee Schedule
Description PROPOSED FEE
Effective JULY 08, 2024 Unit Notes
ABC One Day Permit
Authorization $50.00 Per Event
Alarm User Permit & Admin
Fine for no permit $50.00 bi-annual time fee
Bingo License/Permit $70.00 Per Year
Building Use Per agreement
Civil Subpoena-Work related
appearances $275.00 deposit (Hold)
Civil Subpoena-Record
Production $0.10 per page
Civil Subpoena-Record
Production: Microfilm $0.20 per page microfilm
Civil Subpoena-Record
Production Administration Fee $24.00 per hr
Clearance Check (passport,
immigration)$135.00 Plus Notary
Copies of Police Reports &
Traffic Accidents exempt from
Public Disclosure
$30.00 Up to 10 pages plus
additional $.40 page
Criminal History Local Review $68.00 City *Add state fingerprint charge if needed
Discovery: Documents $0.25 Per Page
Discovery: Staff time is
charged in hourly quarters
(15 minutes). Records
$34.00 per 15 min
Discovery: Staff time is
charged in hourly quarters
(15 minutes). Property
$28.00 per 15 min
Discovery: Staff time is
charged in hourly quarters
(15 minutes). Comm
$39.00 per 15 min
Discovery: Staff time is
charged in hourly quarters
(15 minutes).

Lead/Supervisor
$43.00 per 15 min
Emergency Response
(police/fire)Actual $
False Alarm Penalty
Police $250.00
Fingerprinting of Public $40.00 rolling fee
Firearms Dealer Permit $155.00
Firearms Storage Fee $5.00 per firearm
Firearms Storage Fee - Admin
Fee $81.00 per case
Police Proposed Fee Schedule Effective July 8, 2024

Page 1 of 3 ends

Fairfield City CouncilJuly 2, 2024

Fairfield City Council
July 2, 2024