Agenda, first session — Fairfield City Council, July 16, 2024 (part 1 of 3)

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 Imam Fardibeg Mirza, Fairfield Muslim Center PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
COUNCIL REPORTS
CITY MANAGER REPORT
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
CITY CLERK REPORT

PRESENTATIONS

1.4th of July Parade Awards Presented by Parks & Recreation Program Coordinator Juan Segura
Contact:Juan Segura, (707) 4287584
a

2.Touchstone Golf Operations Update Presented by Mark Luthman, President of Touchstone Golf Contact:Kristina Kaunzinger, (707) 4287470
a

3.Supreme Court Ruling Regarding Grants Pass, Oregon Presented by Police Chief Dan Marshall
Contact:Dan Marshall, (707) 4287366
a
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.

CONVENE MEETING OF THE PARADISE VALLEY MAINTENANCE AND MONITORING

DISTRICT
Packet Page 2 of 441

CONVENE MEETING OF THE PARADISE VALLEY MAINTENANCE AND MONITORING

DISTRICT
PVMMD NEW BUSINESS

4.Discussion and Direction Regarding a Request from Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District Property Owners for Assessment Rebates and Future Assessment Rates and Reserve Fund Balances
Recommended Action
Receive report, open discussion, and provide direction to staff.

Funding Source
N/A
Contact Chris Lewis, (707) 4287089
RECONVENE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
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.

5.Approval of Meeting Minutes from June 2024
Recommended Action
Approve the meeting minutes.

Funding Source
N/A
Contact:Delaney Dombrowski, (707) 4287402
a

6.Resolution 2024178 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Memorandum(s) of Understanding (MOU) Between the City of Fairfield and the City Council Recommended Provider(s) for the Provision of Temporary Emergency Shelter Operations
Recommended Action
Adopt resolution(s).

Funding Source
$1,100,000.00; ($300,000, General Fund; $800,000, Quality of Life Fund) Contact:April Cobb, (707) 4287609
a

7.Resolution 2024179 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 California Wood Recycling, Inc. for Compost Procurement Services
Recommended Action
Adopt resolution.

Funding Source
$361,657; Senate Bill 1383 Grant Funds
Contact:Corey Beavers, (707) 4287528
a

8.Resolution 2024180 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Accepting the Improvements for the Green Valley II Apartments Traffic Signal Improvements as Complete Recommended Action
Packet Page 3 of 441

Funding Source
$482,965.86; Streets Capital Fund
Contact:Roger Dunham, (707) 4287478
a

9.Resolution 2024181 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Increasing Budget Authorization and Change Order Authority for the Grange Middle School Safe Routes to School and Pavement Preservation Project, Federal Aid Project No: CML5132(049) and Authorizing an Update to the Fiscal Year 20242025 Budget; and
Resolution 2024182 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Accepting the Grange Middle School Safe Routes to School and Pavement Preservation Project, Federal Aid Project No:

CML5132(049) as Complete
Recommended Action
Adopt resolutions.

Funding Source
$112,000; Capital Streets Fund
Contact:Roger Dunham, (707) 4287478
a

10.Resolution 2024183 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Summarily Vacating Certain Public Service and Planting and Temporary Construction Easements on Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 0148540060
Recommended Action
Adopt resolution.

Funding Source
N/A
Contact:Alvin Lei, (707) 4287476
a

11.Resolution 2024184 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving Conveyance of an Easement to Solano Irrigation District Within Accessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 0151880140 and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Easement Deed Recommended Action
Adopt resolution.

Funding Source
N/A
Contact:Pavan Prasad, (707) 4287431
a

12.Resolution 2024185 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Vacating a Portion of Certain Public Waterline Easements on Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 0148280520 Recommended Action
Adopt resolution.

Funding Source
N/A
Contact:Alvin Lei, (707) 4287476
a

13.Resolution 2024186 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Ratifying the Emergency Costs for the Lopes Road Landslide
Packet Page 4 of 441

13.Resolution 2024186 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Ratifying the Emergency Costs for the Lopes Road Landslide
Recommended Action
Adopt resolution.

Funding Source
$273,377; Grants (anticipated reimbursement) $91,126; Water Capital Fund Contact:Ryan Panganiban, (707) 4287017
a

14.Resolution 2024187 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving the Plans and Specifications and Awarding a Contract to Cratus, Inc. for the West Texas Utility Relocation Project for the Heart of Fairfield
Recommended Action
Adopt resolution.

Funding Source
$2,086,980; Water Capital Fund
Contact:David Vong, (707) 4287784
a

15.Resolution 2024188 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Suspending Competitive Bidding and Authorizing the City Manager to Purchase Six Replacement Police Vehicles Recommended Action
Adopt resolution.

Funding Source
$376,005; Vehicle Replacement Fund
Contact:David Renschler, (707) 4287414
a
NEW BUSINESS

16.Approve and Order Submitted to the Voters of the City of Fairfield Ordinance 202404 Amending Chapter 10B Business License Taxes of the Fairfield Municipal Code for Modernization and Simplification of the Business License Tax to be Placed on the November 5, 2024 Ballot and Adopt Resolution 2024189
Recommended Action

1. Approve an ordinance (Attachment 1) of the voters of the City of Fairfield amending Chapter 10B Business License Taxes of the Fairfield Municipal Code; and

2. Adopt a resolution (Attachment 2) ordering that the Ordinance be submitted to the qualified electors of the City of Fairfield to modify Chapter 10B Business License Taxes of the Fairfield Municipal Code for modernization and simplification of the Business License Taxes, at the General Election to be held on Tuesday, November 5, 2024.

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

17.Approve and Order Submitted to the Voters of the City of Fairfield Ordinance 202405 Amending Chapter 8, Article III. Transient Occupancy Tax of the Fairfield Municipal Code to Increase the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) from 10% to 12% to be Placed on the November 5, 2024 Ballot and Adopt Resolution 2024190
Recommended Action

1. Approve an ordinance (Attachment 1) of the voters of the City of Fairfield amending Chapter 18 Article III Transient Occupancy Tax of the Fairfield Municipal Code; and Packet Page 5 of 441

CITY OF FAIRFIELDFAIRFIELD CITY COUNCILREGULAR CONCURRENT MEETINGTUESDAY, JULY 16, 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 Imam Fardibeg Mirza, Fairfield Muslim CenterPLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCECOUNCIL REPORTSCITY MANAGER REPORTCITY ATTORNEY REPORTCITY CLERK REPORTPRESENTATIONS1.4th of July Parade Awards Presented by Parks & Recreation Program Coordinator JuanSeguraContact:Juan Segura, (707) 4287584a2.Touchstone Golf Operations Update Presented by Mark Luthman, President of Touchstone GolfContact:Kristina Kaunzinger, (707) 4287470a3.Supreme Court Ruling Regarding Grants Pass, Oregon Presented by Police Chief DanMarshallContact:Dan Marshall, (707) 4287366aPUBLIC 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.CONVENE MEETING OF THE PARADISE VALLEY MAINTENANCE AND MONITORINGDISTRICTPVMMD NEW BUSINESS4.Discussion and Direction Regarding a Request from Paradise Valley Maintenance andMonitoring District Property Owners for Assessment Rebates and Future Assessment Ratesand Reserve Fund BalancesRecommended ActionReceive report, open discussion, and provide direction to staff.Funding SourceN/AContact Chris Lewis, (707) 4287089RECONVENE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCILCONSENT 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.5.Approval of Meeting Minutes from June 2024Recommended ActionApprove the meeting minutes.Funding SourceN/AContact:Delaney Dombrowski, (707) 4287402a6.Resolution 2024178 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the City Manager toExecute the Memorandum(s) of Understanding (MOU) Between the City of Fairfield and the CityCouncil Recommended Provider(s) for the Provision of Temporary Emergency ShelterOperationsRecommended ActionAdopt resolution(s).Funding Source$1,100,000.00; ($300,000, General Fund; $800,000, Quality of Life Fund)Contact:April Cobb, (707) 4287609a7.Resolution 2024179 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the City Manager toExecute a Professional Services Agreement Between the City of Fairfield and California WoodRecycling, Inc. for Compost Procurement ServicesRecommended ActionAdopt resolution.Funding Source$361,657; Senate Bill 1383 Grant FundsContact:Corey Beavers, (707) 4287528a8.Resolution 2024180 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Accepting the Improvements forthe Green Valley II Apartments Traffic Signal Improvements as CompleteRecommended ActionAdopt resolution.Funding Source$482,965.86; Streets Capital FundContact:Roger Dunham, (707) 4287478a9.Resolution 2024181 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Increasing Budget Authorizationand Change Order Authority for the Grange Middle School Safe Routes to School andPavement Preservation Project, Federal Aid Project No: CML5132(049) and Authorizing anUpdate to the Fiscal Year 20242025 Budget; andResolution 2024182 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Accepting the Grange MiddleSchool Safe Routes to School and Pavement Preservation Project, Federal Aid Project No:CML5132(049) as CompleteRecommended ActionAdopt resolutions.Funding Source$112,000; Capital Streets FundContact:Roger Dunham, (707) 4287478a10.Resolution 2024183 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Summarily Vacating CertainPublic Service and Planting and Temporary Construction Easements on Assessor’s ParcelNumber (APN) 0148540060Recommended ActionAdopt resolution.Funding SourceN/AContact:Alvin Lei, (707) 4287476a11.Resolution 2024184 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving Conveyance of anEasement to Solano Irrigation District Within Accessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 0151880140and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Easement DeedRecommended ActionAdopt resolution.Funding SourceN/AContact:Pavan Prasad, (707) 4287431a12.Resolution 2024185 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Vacating a Portion of CertainPublic Waterline Easements on Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 0148280520Recommended ActionAdopt resolution.Funding SourceN/AContact:Alvin Lei, (707) 4287476a13.Resolution 2024186 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Ratifying the Emergency Costsfor the Lopes Road Landslide Recommended ActionAdopt resolution.Funding Source$273,377; Grants (anticipated reimbursement) $91,126; Water Capital FundContact:Ryan Panganiban, (707) 4287017a14.Resolution 2024187 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving the Plans andSpecifications and Awarding a Contract to Cratus, Inc. for the West Texas Utility RelocationProject for the Heart of FairfieldRecommended ActionAdopt resolution.Funding Source$2,086,980; Water Capital FundContact:David Vong, (707) 4287784a15.Resolution 2024188 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Suspending Competitive Biddingand Authorizing the City Manager to Purchase Six Replacement Police VehiclesRecommended ActionAdopt resolution.Funding Source$376,005; Vehicle Replacement FundContact:David Renschler, (707) 4287414aNEW BUSINESS16.Approve and Order Submitted to the Voters of the City of Fairfield Ordinance 202404Amending Chapter 10B Business License Taxes of the Fairfield Municipal Code forModernization and Simplification of the Business License Tax to be Placed on the November 5,2024 Ballot and Adopt Resolution 2024189Recommended Action1. Approve an ordinance (Attachment 1) of the voters of the City of Fairfield amendingChapter 10B Business License Taxes of the Fairfield Municipal Code; and2. Adopt a resolution (Attachment 2) ordering that the Ordinance be submitted to thequalified electors of the City of Fairfield to modify Chapter 10B Business License Taxes ofthe Fairfield Municipal Code for modernization and simplification of the Business LicenseTaxes, at the General Election to be held on Tuesday, November 5, 2024.Funding SourceN/AContact:Savita Chaudhary, (707) 4287582a17.Approve and Order Submitted to the Voters of the City of Fairfield Ordinance 202405Amending Chapter 8, Article III. Transient Occupancy Tax of the Fairfield Municipal Code toIncrease the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) from 10% to 12% to be Placed on the November 5,2024 Ballot and Adopt Resolution 2024190Recommended Action

1. Approve an ordinance (Attachment 1) of the voters of the City of Fairfield amending Chapter 18 Article III Transient Occupancy Tax of the Fairfield Municipal Code; and

2. Adopt a resolution (Attachment 2) ordering that the Ordinance be submitted to the qualified electors of the City of Fairfield to increase the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) rate from 10% to 12% at the General Election to be held on Tuesday, November 5, 2024, and directing the City Attorney to prepare an impartial analysis.

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

18.Public Hearing; and
Resolution 2024191 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Annexing Territory (Green Valley III Apartments) to Community Facilities District No. 20122 (Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation, and Park Maintenance) as Annexation No. 69, 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 2024192 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. 69 (Green Valley III Apartments) Recommended Action
Hold public hearing and adopt resolutions.

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

19.Second Reading of Ordinance 202403 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing an Amendment to the Contract Between the City of Fairfield and the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) Recommended Action
Provide second reading and adopt Ordinance 202403.

Funding Source
N/A
Contact:Farbod Pirouzmand, (707) 4287397
a

20.Public Hearing; and
Resolution 2024193 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield [Approving/Sustaining] [Denying/Overruling] the Appeal of the 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
The council is asked to conduct a hearing and approve/sustain or deny/overrule the appeal of the revocation of business license # 24000256 for Field Gift Shop.

Funding Source
Packet Page 6 of 441

Funding Source
N/A
Contact:David Lim, (415) 7820393
a
ADJOURN TO TUESDAY, AUGUST 20, 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, July 11, 2024.

Packet Page 7 of 441

Agenda Item No: 4.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:July 16, 2024
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT:Discussion and Direction Regarding a Request from Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District Property Owners for Assessment Rebates and Future Assessment Rates and Reserve Fund Balances
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Receive report, open discussion, and provide direction to staff.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District (PVMMD or District) Board will consider requests from certain property owners for the District to issue rebates to the property owners who paid assessments between fiscal year (FY) 20102011 through FY 20232024, and direct staff regarding future PVMMD assessment rates and reserve fund balances.

DISCUSSION
Arcadia Development Company (Arcadia), the previous owners of an area located north of the Paradise Valley Golf Course and east of Interstate 80 known as Areas I, K, and L, desired to develop the property into residential parcels. The City’s conditions of development (COD) required the developer to form a geologic hazard abatement district to address the known and potential hazards in this area.

As a result of the COD and in response to the property owners’ petition of formation, the City formed the PVMMD, a geologic hazard abatement district, in 2010 in accordance with Division 17 of the California Public Resource Code (PRC), to fund the prevention, mitigation, abatement, and control of geologic hazards in the Paradise Valley development Areas I, K, and L. The District is funded by an initial developer deposit of $200,000 and through annual assessments levied upon properties in the District.

During the formation proceedings, the Board adopted the 2010 Plan of Control, a report describing the District boundaries, the geologic hazards within the District, and the plan to mitigate such hazards, as required by Section 26500, et seq., of the PRC. Additionally, the Board adopted the 2010 Engineer’s Report in Attachment 1, a report describing the parcels included in the District, the special benefit conferred upon the parcels, the improvements to be maintained, the District budget, the assessment calculation methodology, and maximum assessment limits for each parcel, as required by Article XIII D Packet Page 8 of 441

The 2010 Engineer’s Report included an estimated annual District budget in Exhibit 3, and a tenyear pro forma budget covering the period from FY 20112012 through FY 20212022 in Exhibit 4. These budgets reflected the estimated ongoing administrative and operational expenses, costs for a major tenyear geologic event, and contributions to District reserves.

Based on the annual District budget, the initial FY 20102011 maximum assessment limits were set at $940 for each of the estimated 150 detached lowdensity residential (LDR) units in Area K and $470 for each of the estimated total 145 mediumdensity residential (MDR) units in Areas I and L. These initial maximum assessment levels were approved with an automatic annual adjustment equal to the percentage change in the San FranciscoOaklandSan Jose (now San FranciscoOaklandHayward) Consumer Price Index (CPI) for All Urban Consumers on June 30 of each year. 2018 Reserve Fund Study
In 2018, the District contracted with ENGEO Incorporated (ENGEO), an expert in the field of geologic hazard abatement districts and author of the 2010 Plan of Control and 2010 Engineer’s Report, to conduct a reserve fund study to determine an appropriate longterm reserve amount to address larger geologic events. ENGEO developed the 2018 Reserve Fund Study shown in Attachment 2 and determined that an appropriate reserve amount was $1.7 million in 2018 dollars based on the existing site conditions, the number of assessable units, and other factors listed on page 2 of the study.

The study concluded that, based on the pro forma budget in the 2010 Engineer’s Report, the $1.7 million target reserve amount would have been reached over a 40year period. The study acknowledged that the then current reserve of $906,000 was approximately double the estimated FY 20172018 amount shown in the 2010 Engineer’s Report pro forma budget and was largely due to expenses being lower than anticipated. The study also acknowledged that at the current assessment amount, adjusted for inflation, the District would achieve the target reserve amount in FY 20262027.

ENGEO proposed two options for consideration. The first option was to consider lowering assessments after the reserve target was met. The second option was to consider reducing the assessment levy commencing in FY 20182019 or at any point thereafter so that the target reserve would be achieved at the end of a 40year period as contemplated in the 2010 Engineer’s Report pro forma budget. The study was not provided to the Board during the regular FY 20182019 annual proceedings, however, the Board approved a levy near the maximum allowable rate for FY 20182019 for all assessable parcels at staff’s recommendation.
2020 Property Owner Concerns and Board Directives
In 2020, some PVMMD property owners expressed their concern to the Board that the reserve fund was accumulating at a rate quicker than the rate estimated in the 2010 Engineer’s Report pro forma budget and the 40year period referenced in the 2018 Reserve Fund Study. On July 20, 2020, the Board directed staff to perform an indepth review of the District’s financial and operational activities.

During FY 20202021, staff and two District property owners formed an ad hoc review committee to accomplish the Board directives.

Staff and the ad hoc committee explored the possibility of a financial audit of the District. Staff consulted with representatives from the City’s external auditors, Eide Bailly, and two geotechnical experts, Cal Engineering and Geology (CE&G) and ENGEO, to consider the scope of work, the goal, and benefits of a financial audit. After several meetings with the ad hoc committee, staff and committee members agreed that a financial audit would not adequately address concerns regarding the pace of reserve fund collection. Staff and the committee members also agreed that PVMMD would hire a consultant to evaluate and substantiate the District’s existing Plan of Control, 2010 Engineer’s Report, Packet Page 9 of 441

In 2022, the PVMMD contracted with ENGEO to develop a revised Plan of Control, a new 2022 Engineer’s Report shown in Attachment 3, and a new 2022 Reserve Fund Study shown in Attachment 4.

All three reports were presented and approved by the Board with Resolution No. PVMMD 202201 in July 2022.

The 2022 Engineer’s Report contained updated District information, such as the anticipated quantity and type of units at full build out, adjusted estimated budget, and a revised assessment rate methodology to reallocate assessments in proportion to the special benefit conferred on each parcel based on current conditions. The revised methodology considered the development type and location of each property, among other factors, and included a “slope mitigation” factor to allocate greater special benefit to properties at or near the toe of the District hillside. PVMMD modified the assessment rates for each development type as shown in Table VII1 of the 2022 Engineer’s Report. The new assessment rates did not exceed the maximum rates approved during the 2010 District formation and Proposition 218 balloting process.

The 2022 Reserve Fund Study used the same methodology applied in the 2018 Reserve Fund Study and adjusted the calculation inputs and other factors to reflect current conditions, such as anticipated quantity and type of units at full build out, site conditions, and historical District expenses. Based on the updated information, the study determined that the new target reserve amount was $1,570,000 in 2022 dollars and confirmed that the District achieved adequate reserves to address largescale geologic repairs and maintenance.

In consideration of the 2022 Reserve Fund Study, from FY 20222023 through FY 20242025, the Board approved levies in the amount needed for operations and maintenance only, excluding contributions to the reserve fund, at staff’s recommendation. 2024 Property Owner Concerns and Requests for Rebates
Several property owners attended the May 7, 2024, Board meeting to voice the same concerns that were expressed in 2020, noting that the 2022 Reserve Fund Study confirmed that the most recent target reserve amount of $1.57 million was achieved in calendar year 2022, just 12 years after the formation of the District, rather than 40 years after formation as referenced in the 2018 Reserve Fund Study.

Some property owners in Area K, the original development in the District, believe they have been disproportionately assessed compared to the property owners in Areas L and I since those property owners did not begin paying assessments until FY 20182019 and FY 20222023, respectively, when their properties were developed, and the majority of the District reserve fund, which is projected to be approximately $1,626,000 by the end of FY 20232024, was mostly funded by Area K property owners.

As a result, some property owners have requested that the District issue rebates to the property owners who paid the assessments from FY 20112012 to present for the difference between the levy amount actually collected and the levy amount that would have been required to reach the target reserve at the end of the 40year period as referenced in the 2018 Reserve Fund Study.

Packet Page 10 of 441

Explanation for Accelerated Collection of Reserves
The reserve fund balance accumulated faster than the estimates shown in the 2010 Engineer’s Report pro forma budget because the total assessment levies collected were greater than the approved budget amount for operations and maintenance expenses each year between FY 20132014 through FY 20202021. Additionally, the District’s expenses were lower than the approved budget amounts for most years from FY 20112012 through FY 20222023.

The District levied an average of 96% of the maximum allowable assessment rate for all assessable LDR units in Area K from FY 20112012 through FY 20202021, as shown in Attachment 5. There were no assessable MDR units in Areas I and L until FY 201819.

Table 2 in Attachment 6 shows that from FY 20132014 through FY 20202021, the approved annual levies for all assessable parcels in all development areas were between $47,258 and $170,664 more than the approved annual budget amount for operations and maintenance expenses.

Pages 6 and 7 of the 2010 Engineer’s Report state that the annual District budget in Exhibit 3 and the 10year pro forma budget in Exhibit 4 were estimates only and were used to determine the initial maximum assessment rates. It explicitly states that the estimates in Exhibit 3 do “not represent the actual budget for any one year of the [district’s] operation.” Table 3 in Attachment 6 shows that from FY 20112012 through FY 20222023 the average annual approved budget for operations and maintenance expenses, excluding contributions to the reserve fund, was $70,403, while the average actual annual expenditures for the same period was $31,491. The unspent assessments collected from FY 20112012 through FY 20222023, which were as little as $9,730 in FY 20192020 and as much as $109,987 in FY 20212022, were added to the District’s reserve fund balance.

The District had significantly lower than expected expenses in most years from FY 20112012 through FY 20222023 largely due to the delayed transfer of three parcels from Arcadia to PVMMD. These parcels contain the open space hillside owned by PVMMD, which is the primary location where most of PVMMD maintenance occurs. Although annual budgets were submitted in preparation for this transfer, the District had minimal actual expenses and nearly 100% of assessments collected prior to the transfer in 2016 were added to the reserve balance.

The lower expenses were also a result of favorable site conditions which allowed for the deferral of some maintenance items between 2016 and 2019.

Additionally, lower expenses were also attributable to the absence of charges for City staff services from 2010 through 2020. The 2012 Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement between the City of Fairfield and the PVMMD allowed for the City to recover costs for the administration and management of the District. However, no City staff costs were charged to the District until 2020. The annual cost for City staff services has been approximately $20,000 annually since FY 20202021. Based on the actual costs since FY 20202021, approximately $200,000 was retained in the District’s reserve balance between FY 20102011 through FY 20192020 since the District did not pay for City staff services.

Lastly, the Engineer’s Reports, Reserve Fund Studies, and pro forma budgets accommodate a large scale geologic event estimated at $200,000 on average every ten years. No such event has occurred since the District’s formation and the District retained at least $200,000 in the reserve fund balance.

Until the 2018 Reserve Fund Study was prepared, the District did not have an expressed established or recommended target reserve amount, nor were there any written policies or GHAD laws to that effect.

At no point from the time the District was formed in 2010 to present has ENGEO made recommendations regarding the time period during which the target reserve should be collected. The 2018 Reserve Fund Study only indicates, for demonstration purposes, that the target reserve would have been achieved at the end of a 40year period if the District followed the estimates in the 2010 Engineer’s Report pro forma budget.

Options for the Board’s Consideration
After receiving feedback from PVMMD property owners at the May 7, 2024, Board meeting, the Board directed staff to research and return with options to address the property owners’ concerns, including the feasibility of issuing assessment rebates.

After consultation with the city attorney, staff determined that issuing rebates to District property owners for assessments paid at any point during the District’s existence is not feasible. Division 17 of the PRC, which governs the PVMMD, does not include provisions that allow for refunds, except upon the dissolution of the District. Since the PVMMD assessments are placed on the annual property tax bills, the state laws that govern the refund of property taxes also apply to the refund of these assessments.

Revenue and Taxation Code (RTC) Section 5097 generally provides that a refund of assessments shall not be made except on a claim filed within four years after making the payment sought to be refunded, and RTC Section 5096 provides that assessments can only be refunded if they were paid more than once, erroneously or illegally collected, or illegally assessed or levied.

None of the PVMMD assessments levied and collected from the time the District was formed to present meet the criteria listed in the RTC and are therefore not eligible for refund. One notable exception to this statement is the assessments levied in FY 20182019 against 25 properties in Area L (the Paradise 360 development). These 25 properties were charged the LDR rate of $1,110.11 instead of the MDR rate of up to $589.45.

Staff affirm that no assessments were paid more than once in any fiscal year, the City employed the appropriate and correct processes and procedures to collect assessments, and all parcels were legally assessed, excluding the exception for the 25 properties noted above.

Staff has prepared two options for the Board’s consideration regarding future assessment levies and the reserve fund balance.

Option No. 1 – Levy Assessments for Operations and Maintenance Costs Only and Maintain the Recommended Reserve Fund Balance of $1.57 Million, Adjusted Each Year for Inflation The Board may choose to continue the levy and collection of assessments to cover annual operations and maintenance costs only and maintain a reserve fund balance of $1.57 million, adjusted each year for inflation, as recommended in the 2022 Reserve Fund Study.

Since the current reserve fund balance is approximately $1,626,000, the District would use $56,000 of reserve funds for operations and maintenance to offset the total assessment levy in FY 20252026.

Each year thereafter, the total assessments levied would be reduced and offset by any surplus remaining from the previous fiscal year or increased to cover the full cost of operations and maintenance plus the amount needed to maintain $1.57 million, adjusted each year for inflation, in the reserve fund.

This option allows the District to retain the reserve fund amount necessary to address any largescale geologic events. However, this option does not address the concerns of Area K property owners regarding the amount of contributions they provided to the reserve fund balance compared to the property owners in Areas I and L.

Option No. 2 – Temporarily Suspend Assessment Levies and Use Portions of the Reserve Fund Balance to Fund Annual Operations and Maintenance Costs Packet Page 12 of 441

Agenda Item No: 4.AGENDA REPORTDATE:July 16, 2024 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, City ManagerSUBJECT:Discussion and Direction Regarding a Request from Paradise Valley Maintenance andMonitoring District Property Owners for Assessment Rebates and Future AssessmentRates and Reserve Fund BalancesRECOMMENDED ACTIONReceive report, open discussion, and provide direction to staff.STATEMENT OF ISSUEThe Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District (PVMMD or District) Board will considerrequests from certain property owners for the District to issue rebates to the property owners who paidassessments between fiscal year (FY) 20102011 through FY 20232024, and direct staff regardingfuture PVMMD assessment rates and reserve fund balances.DISCUSSIONArcadia Development Company (Arcadia), the previous owners of an area located north of theParadise Valley Golf Course and east of Interstate 80 known as Areas I, K, and L, desired to developthe property into residential parcels. The City’s conditions of development (COD) required thedeveloper to form a geologic hazard abatement district to address the known and potential hazards inthis area. As a result of the COD and in response to the property owners’ petition of formation, the City formed thePVMMD, a geologic hazard abatement district, in 2010 in accordance with Division 17 of the CaliforniaPublic Resource Code (PRC), to fund the prevention, mitigation, abatement, and control of geologichazards in the Paradise Valley development Areas I, K, and L. The District is funded by an initialdeveloper deposit of $200,000 and through annual assessments levied upon properties in the District.During the formation proceedings, the Board adopted the 2010 Plan of Control, a report describing theDistrict boundaries, the geologic hazards within the District, and the plan to mitigate such hazards, asrequired by Section 26500, et seq., of the PRC. Additionally, the Board adopted the 2010 Engineer’sReport in Attachment 1, a report describing the parcels included in the District, the special benefitconferred upon the parcels, the improvements to be maintained, the District budget, the assessmentcalculation methodology, and maximum assessment limits for each parcel, as required by Article XIII Dof the California Constitution (also known as Proposition 218).The 2010 Engineer’s Report included an estimated annual District budget in Exhibit 3, and a tenyearpro forma budget covering the period from FY 20112012 through FY 20212022 in Exhibit 4. Thesebudgets reflected the estimated ongoing administrative and operational expenses, costs for a majortenyear geologic event, and contributions to District reserves. Based on the annual District budget, the initial FY 20102011 maximum assessment limits were set at$940 for each of the estimated 150 detached lowdensity residential (LDR) units in Area K and $470 foreach of the estimated total 145 mediumdensity residential (MDR) units in Areas I and L. These initialmaximum assessment levels were approved with an automatic annual adjustment equal to thepercentage change in the San FranciscoOaklandSan Jose (now San FranciscoOaklandHayward)Consumer Price Index (CPI) for All Urban Consumers on June 30 of each year. 2018 Reserve Fund StudyIn 2018, the District contracted with ENGEO Incorporated (ENGEO), an expert in the field of geologichazard abatement districts and author of the 2010 Plan of Control and 2010 Engineer’s Report, toconduct a reserve fund study to determine an appropriate longterm reserve amount to address largergeologic events. ENGEO developed the 2018 Reserve Fund Study shown in Attachment 2 anddetermined that an appropriate reserve amount was $1.7 million in 2018 dollars based on the existingsite conditions, the number of assessable units, and other factors listed on page 2 of the study. The study concluded that, based on the pro forma budget in the 2010 Engineer’s Report, the $1.7million target reserve amount would have been reached over a 40year period. The studyacknowledged that the then current reserve of $906,000 was approximately double the estimated FY20172018 amount shown in the 2010 Engineer’s Report pro forma budget and was largely due toexpenses being lower than anticipated. The study also acknowledged that at the current assessmentamount, adjusted for inflation, the District would achieve the target reserve amount in FY 20262027.ENGEO proposed two options for consideration. The first option was to consider loweringassessments after the reserve target was met. The second option was to consider reducing theassessment levy commencing in FY 20182019 or at any point thereafter so that the target reservewould be achieved at the end of a 40year period as contemplated in the 2010 Engineer’s Report proforma budget. The study was not provided to the Board during the regular FY 20182019 annualproceedings, however, the Board approved a levy near the maximum allowable rate for FY 20182019for all assessable parcels at staff’s recommendation. 2020 Property Owner Concerns and Board DirectivesIn 2020, some PVMMD property owners expressed their concern to the Board that the reserve fundwas accumulating at a rate quicker than the rate estimated in the 2010 Engineer’s Report pro formabudget and the 40year period referenced in the 2018 Reserve Fund Study. On July 20, 2020, theBoard directed staff to perform an indepth review of the District’s financial and operational activities.During FY 20202021, staff and two District property owners formed an ad hoc review committee toaccomplish the Board directives. Staff and the ad hoc committee explored the possibility of a financial audit of the District. Staffconsulted with representatives from the City’s external auditors, Eide Bailly, and two geotechnicalexperts, Cal Engineering and Geology (CE&G) and ENGEO, to consider the scope of work, the goal,and benefits of a financial audit. After several meetings with the ad hoc committee, staff and committeemembers agreed that a financial audit would not adequately address concerns regarding the pace ofreserve fund collection. Staff and the committee members also agreed that PVMMD would hire aconsultant to evaluate and substantiate the District’s existing Plan of Control, 2010 Engineer’s Report,and 2018 Reserve Fund Study. During this time, all financial records were made available to the ad hoccommittee members upon request for their independent review. 2022 Updated Plan of Control, Engineer’s Report, and Reserve Fund StudyAfter a Request for Qualifications process, PVMMD contracted with CE&G in 2021 to evaluate theDistrict’s existing Plan of Control, 2010 Engineer’s Report, and 2018 Reserve Fund Study. CE&G wasunable to provide the necessary services and the contract was canceled in late 2021. In 2022, the PVMMD contracted with ENGEO to develop a revised Plan of Control, a new 2022Engineer’s Report shown in Attachment 3, and a new 2022 Reserve Fund Study shown in Attachment 4.All three reports were presented and approved by the Board with Resolution No. PVMMD 202201 inJuly 2022. The 2022 Engineer’s Report contained updated District information, such as the anticipated quantityand type of units at full build out, adjusted estimated budget, and a revised assessment ratemethodology to reallocate assessments in proportion to the special benefit conferred on each parcelbased on current conditions. The revised methodology considered the development type and locationof each property, among other factors, and included a “slope mitigation” factor to allocate greaterspecial benefit to properties at or near the toe of the District hillside. PVMMD modified the assessmentrates for each development type as shown in Table VII1 of the 2022 Engineer’s Report. The newassessment rates did not exceed the maximum rates approved during the 2010 District formation andProposition 218 balloting process. The 2022 Reserve Fund Study used the same methodology applied in the 2018 Reserve Fund Studyand adjusted the calculation inputs and other factors to reflect current conditions, such as anticipatedquantity and type of units at full build out, site conditions, and historical District expenses. Based on theupdated information, the study determined that the new target reserve amount was $1,570,000 in 2022dollars and confirmed that the District achieved adequate reserves to address largescale geologicrepairs and maintenance. In consideration of the 2022 Reserve Fund Study, from FY 20222023 through FY 20242025, theBoard approved levies in the amount needed for operations and maintenance only, excludingcontributions to the reserve fund, at staff’s recommendation.2024 Property Owner Concerns and Requests for RebatesSeveral property owners attended the May 7, 2024, Board meeting to voice the same concerns thatwere expressed in 2020, noting that the 2022 Reserve Fund Study confirmed that the most recenttarget reserve amount of $1.57 million was achieved in calendar year 2022, just 12 years after theformation of the District, rather than 40 years after formation as referenced in the 2018 Reserve FundStudy. Some property owners in Area K, the original development in the District, believe they have beendisproportionately assessed compared to the property owners in Areas L and I since those propertyowners did not begin paying assessments until FY 20182019 and FY 20222023, respectively, whentheir properties were developed, and the majority of the District reserve fund, which is projected to beapproximately $1,626,000 by the end of FY 20232024, was mostly funded by Area K property owners. As a result, some property owners have requested that the District issue rebates to the property ownerswho paid the assessments from FY 20112012 to present for the difference between the levy amountactually collected and the levy amount that would have been required to reach the target reserve at theend of the 40year period as referenced in the 2018 Reserve Fund Study. Explanation for Accelerated Collection of ReservesThe reserve fund balance accumulated faster than the estimates shown in the 2010 Engineer’s Reportpro forma budget because the total assessment levies collected were greater than the approvedbudget amount for operations and maintenance expenses each year between FY 20132014 throughFY 20202021. Additionally, the District’s expenses were lower than the approved budget amounts formost years from FY 20112012 through FY 20222023.The District levied an average of 96% of the maximum allowable assessment rate for all assessableLDR units in Area K from FY 20112012 through FY 20202021, as shown in Attachment 5. There wereno assessable MDR units in Areas I and L until FY 201819. Table 2 in Attachment 6 shows that from FY 20132014 through FY 20202021, the approved annuallevies for all assessable parcels in all development areas were between $47,258 and $170,664 morethan the approved annual budget amount for operations and maintenance expenses. Pages 6 and 7 of the 2010 Engineer’s Report state that the annual District budget in Exhibit 3 and the10year pro forma budget in Exhibit 4 were estimates only and were used to determine the initialmaximum assessment rates. It explicitly states that the estimates in Exhibit 3 do “not represent theactual budget for any one year of the [district’s] operation.” Table 3 in Attachment 6 shows that from FY 20112012 through FY 20222023 the average annualapproved budget for operations and maintenance expenses, excluding contributions to the reservefund, was $70,403, while the average actual annual expenditures for the same period was $31,491. Theunspent assessments collected from FY 20112012 through FY 20222023, which were as little as$9,730 in FY 20192020 and as much as $109,987 in FY 20212022, were added to the District’sreserve fund balance. The District had significantly lower than expected expenses in most years from FY 20112012 throughFY 20222023 largely due to the delayed transfer of three parcels from Arcadia to PVMMD. Theseparcels contain the open space hillside owned by PVMMD, which is the primary location where most ofPVMMD maintenance occurs. Although annual budgets were submitted in preparation for this transfer,the District had minimal actual expenses and nearly 100% of assessments collected prior to thetransfer in 2016 were added to the reserve balance. The lower expenses were also a result of favorable site conditions which allowed for the deferral ofsome maintenance items between 2016 and 2019. Additionally, lower expenses were also attributable to the absence of charges for City staff servicesfrom 2010 through 2020. The 2012 Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement between the City of Fairfieldand the PVMMD allowed for the City to recover costs for the administration and management of theDistrict. However, no City staff costs were charged to the District until 2020. The annual cost for Citystaff services has been approximately $20,000 annually since FY 20202021. Based on the actualcosts since FY 20202021, approximately $200,000 was retained in the District’s reserve balancebetween FY 20102011 through FY 20192020 since the District did not pay for City staff services. Lastly, the Engineer’s Reports, Reserve Fund Studies, and pro forma budgets accommodate a largescale geologic event estimated at $200,000 on average every ten years. No such event has occurredsince the District’s formation and the District retained at least $200,000 in the reserve fund balance.Until the 2018 Reserve Fund Study was prepared, the District did not have an expressed established orrecommended target reserve amount, nor were there any written policies or GHAD laws to that effect. At no point from the time the District was formed in 2010 to present has ENGEO maderecommendations regarding the time period during which the target reserve should be collected. The2018 Reserve Fund Study only indicates, for demonstration purposes, that the target reserve wouldhave been achieved at the end of a 40year period if the District followed the estimates in the 2010Engineer’s Report pro forma budget. Options for the Board’s ConsiderationAfter receiving feedback from PVMMD property owners at the May 7, 2024, Board meeting, the Boarddirected staff to research and return with options to address the property owners’ concerns, includingthe feasibility of issuing assessment rebates. After consultation with the city attorney, staff determined that issuing rebates to District property ownersfor assessments paid at any point during the District’s existence is not feasible. Division 17 of the PRC,which governs the PVMMD, does not include provisions that allow for refunds, except upon thedissolution of the District. Since the PVMMD assessments are placed on the annual property tax bills,the state laws that govern the refund of property taxes also apply to the refund of these assessments.Revenue and Taxation Code (RTC) Section 5097 generally provides that a refund of assessments shallnot be made except on a claim filed within four years after making the payment sought to be refunded,and RTC Section 5096 provides that assessments can only be refunded if they were paid more thanonce, erroneously or illegally collected, or illegally assessed or levied. None of the PVMMD assessments levied and collected from the time the District was formed to presentmeet the criteria listed in the RTC and are therefore not eligible for refund. One notable exception to thisstatement is the assessments levied in FY 20182019 against 25 properties in Area L (the Paradise360 development). These 25 properties were charged the LDR rate of $1,110.11 instead of the MDRrate of up to $589.45. Staff affirm that no assessments were paid more than once in any fiscal year, the City employed theappropriate and correct processes and procedures to collect assessments, and all parcels were legallyassessed, excluding the exception for the 25 properties noted above. Staff has prepared two options for the Board’s consideration regarding future assessment levies andthe reserve fund balance. Option No. 1 – Levy Assessments for Operations and Maintenance Costs Only and Maintainthe Recommended Reserve Fund Balance of $1.57 Million, Adjusted Each Year for InflationThe Board may choose to continue the levy and collection of assessments to cover annual operationsand maintenance costs only and maintain a reserve fund balance of $1.57 million, adjusted each yearfor inflation, as recommended in the 2022 Reserve Fund Study. Since the current reserve fund balance is approximately $1,626,000, the District would use $56,000 ofreserve funds for operations and maintenance to offset the total assessment levy in FY 20252026.Each year thereafter, the total assessments levied would be reduced and offset by any surplusremaining from the previous fiscal year or increased to cover the full cost of operations andmaintenance plus the amount needed to maintain $1.57 million, adjusted each year for inflation, in thereserve fund. This option allows the District to retain the reserve fund amount necessary to address any largescalegeologic events. However, this option does not address the concerns of Area K property ownersregarding the amount of contributions they provided to the reserve fund balance compared to theproperty owners in Areas I and L.Option No. 2 – Temporarily Suspend Assessment Levies and Use Portions of the Reserve Fund Balance to Fund Annual Operations and Maintenance Costs The Board may choose to suspend the levy and collection of assessments for a period of time or until the reserve fund balance reaches a certain amount, as specified by the Board. The District would use the existing reserve funds to pay for annual operations and maintenance costs until assessments are levied.

This option would relieve all PVMMD property owners of paying assessments for a period of time.

However, this option requires the reserve fund balance to fall below the recommended amount necessary to address any largescale geologic events.

PVMMD is an independent public agency. Should a largescale geologic event or events occur for which repair costs exceed the reserve fund balance, the District may seek financial assistance in the form of a loan or contribution from a public entity or private source, as outlined in Section 26591, et seq. of the PRC. If the District accepted a loan, the annual loan payments may not exceed the total assessment revenue, or maximum assessment rates that were approved in accordance with Proposition 218 procedures at the time of District formation.

Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends Option No. 1 Levy Assessments for Operations and Maintenance Costs Only and Maintain the Recommended Reserve Fund Balance of $1.57 Million, Adjusted Each Year for Inflation.

The Board may modify or provide new direction to staff at any point in future fiscal years.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The financial impact depends on the direction the Board gives staff. All costs associated with this effort will be funded by the Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District Fund (Fund 186).

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
If the Board has additional questions, they may direct staff to return with the necessary information at a later date.

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

Description
Attachment 1: 2010 Engineer’s Report
Attachment 2: 2018 Reserve Fund Study
Attachment 3: 2022 Engineer’s Report
Attachment 4: 2022 Reserve Fund Study
Attachment 5: Maximum Assessment Rates and Levies
Packet Page 13 of 441

Agenda Item No: 4.AGENDA REPORTDATE:July 16, 2024 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, City ManagerSUBJECT:Discussion and Direction Regarding a Request from Paradise Valley Maintenance andMonitoring District Property Owners for Assessment Rebates and Future AssessmentRates and Reserve Fund BalancesRECOMMENDED ACTIONReceive report, open discussion, and provide direction to staff.STATEMENT OF ISSUEThe Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District (PVMMD or District) Board will considerrequests from certain property owners for the District to issue rebates to the property owners who paidassessments between fiscal year (FY) 20102011 through FY 20232024, and direct staff regardingfuture PVMMD assessment rates and reserve fund balances.DISCUSSIONArcadia Development Company (Arcadia), the previous owners of an area located north of theParadise Valley Golf Course and east of Interstate 80 known as Areas I, K, and L, desired to developthe property into residential parcels. The City’s conditions of development (COD) required thedeveloper to form a geologic hazard abatement district to address the known and potential hazards inthis area. As a result of the COD and in response to the property owners’ petition of formation, the City formed thePVMMD, a geologic hazard abatement district, in 2010 in accordance with Division 17 of the CaliforniaPublic Resource Code (PRC), to fund the prevention, mitigation, abatement, and control of geologichazards in the Paradise Valley development Areas I, K, and L. The District is funded by an initialdeveloper deposit of $200,000 and through annual assessments levied upon properties in the District.During the formation proceedings, the Board adopted the 2010 Plan of Control, a report describing theDistrict boundaries, the geologic hazards within the District, and the plan to mitigate such hazards, asrequired by Section 26500, et seq., of the PRC. Additionally, the Board adopted the 2010 Engineer’sReport in Attachment 1, a report describing the parcels included in the District, the special benefitconferred upon the parcels, the improvements to be maintained, the District budget, the assessmentcalculation methodology, and maximum assessment limits for each parcel, as required by Article XIII Dof the California Constitution (also known as Proposition 218).The 2010 Engineer’s Report included an estimated annual District budget in Exhibit 3, and a tenyearpro forma budget covering the period from FY 20112012 through FY 20212022 in Exhibit 4. Thesebudgets reflected the estimated ongoing administrative and operational expenses, costs for a majortenyear geologic event, and contributions to District reserves. Based on the annual District budget, the initial FY 20102011 maximum assessment limits were set at$940 for each of the estimated 150 detached lowdensity residential (LDR) units in Area K and $470 foreach of the estimated total 145 mediumdensity residential (MDR) units in Areas I and L. These initialmaximum assessment levels were approved with an automatic annual adjustment equal to thepercentage change in the San FranciscoOaklandSan Jose (now San FranciscoOaklandHayward)Consumer Price Index (CPI) for All Urban Consumers on June 30 of each year. 2018 Reserve Fund StudyIn 2018, the District contracted with ENGEO Incorporated (ENGEO), an expert in the field of geologichazard abatement districts and author of the 2010 Plan of Control and 2010 Engineer’s Report, toconduct a reserve fund study to determine an appropriate longterm reserve amount to address largergeologic events. ENGEO developed the 2018 Reserve Fund Study shown in Attachment 2 anddetermined that an appropriate reserve amount was $1.7 million in 2018 dollars based on the existingsite conditions, the number of assessable units, and other factors listed on page 2 of the study. The study concluded that, based on the pro forma budget in the 2010 Engineer’s Report, the $1.7million target reserve amount would have been reached over a 40year period. The studyacknowledged that the then current reserve of $906,000 was approximately double the estimated FY20172018 amount shown in the 2010 Engineer’s Report pro forma budget and was largely due toexpenses being lower than anticipated. The study also acknowledged that at the current assessmentamount, adjusted for inflation, the District would achieve the target reserve amount in FY 20262027.ENGEO proposed two options for consideration. The first option was to consider loweringassessments after the reserve target was met. The second option was to consider reducing theassessment levy commencing in FY 20182019 or at any point thereafter so that the target reservewould be achieved at the end of a 40year period as contemplated in the 2010 Engineer’s Report proforma budget. The study was not provided to the Board during the regular FY 20182019 annualproceedings, however, the Board approved a levy near the maximum allowable rate for FY 20182019for all assessable parcels at staff’s recommendation. 2020 Property Owner Concerns and Board DirectivesIn 2020, some PVMMD property owners expressed their concern to the Board that the reserve fundwas accumulating at a rate quicker than the rate estimated in the 2010 Engineer’s Report pro formabudget and the 40year period referenced in the 2018 Reserve Fund Study. On July 20, 2020, theBoard directed staff to perform an indepth review of the District’s financial and operational activities.During FY 20202021, staff and two District property owners formed an ad hoc review committee toaccomplish the Board directives. Staff and the ad hoc committee explored the possibility of a financial audit of the District. Staffconsulted with representatives from the City’s external auditors, Eide Bailly, and two geotechnicalexperts, Cal Engineering and Geology (CE&G) and ENGEO, to consider the scope of work, the goal,and benefits of a financial audit. After several meetings with the ad hoc committee, staff and committeemembers agreed that a financial audit would not adequately address concerns regarding the pace ofreserve fund collection. Staff and the committee members also agreed that PVMMD would hire aconsultant to evaluate and substantiate the District’s existing Plan of Control, 2010 Engineer’s Report,and 2018 Reserve Fund Study. During this time, all financial records were made available to the ad hoccommittee members upon request for their independent review. 2022 Updated Plan of Control, Engineer’s Report, and Reserve Fund StudyAfter a Request for Qualifications process, PVMMD contracted with CE&G in 2021 to evaluate theDistrict’s existing Plan of Control, 2010 Engineer’s Report, and 2018 Reserve Fund Study. CE&G wasunable to provide the necessary services and the contract was canceled in late 2021. In 2022, the PVMMD contracted with ENGEO to develop a revised Plan of Control, a new 2022Engineer’s Report shown in Attachment 3, and a new 2022 Reserve Fund Study shown in Attachment 4.All three reports were presented and approved by the Board with Resolution No. PVMMD 202201 inJuly 2022. The 2022 Engineer’s Report contained updated District information, such as the anticipated quantityand type of units at full build out, adjusted estimated budget, and a revised assessment ratemethodology to reallocate assessments in proportion to the special benefit conferred on each parcelbased on current conditions. The revised methodology considered the development type and locationof each property, among other factors, and included a “slope mitigation” factor to allocate greaterspecial benefit to properties at or near the toe of the District hillside. PVMMD modified the assessmentrates for each development type as shown in Table VII1 of the 2022 Engineer’s Report. The newassessment rates did not exceed the maximum rates approved during the 2010 District formation andProposition 218 balloting process. The 2022 Reserve Fund Study used the same methodology applied in the 2018 Reserve Fund Studyand adjusted the calculation inputs and other factors to reflect current conditions, such as anticipatedquantity and type of units at full build out, site conditions, and historical District expenses. Based on theupdated information, the study determined that the new target reserve amount was $1,570,000 in 2022dollars and confirmed that the District achieved adequate reserves to address largescale geologicrepairs and maintenance. In consideration of the 2022 Reserve Fund Study, from FY 20222023 through FY 20242025, theBoard approved levies in the amount needed for operations and maintenance only, excludingcontributions to the reserve fund, at staff’s recommendation.2024 Property Owner Concerns and Requests for RebatesSeveral property owners attended the May 7, 2024, Board meeting to voice the same concerns thatwere expressed in 2020, noting that the 2022 Reserve Fund Study confirmed that the most recenttarget reserve amount of $1.57 million was achieved in calendar year 2022, just 12 years after theformation of the District, rather than 40 years after formation as referenced in the 2018 Reserve FundStudy. Some property owners in Area K, the original development in the District, believe they have beendisproportionately assessed compared to the property owners in Areas L and I since those propertyowners did not begin paying assessments until FY 20182019 and FY 20222023, respectively, whentheir properties were developed, and the majority of the District reserve fund, which is projected to beapproximately $1,626,000 by the end of FY 20232024, was mostly funded by Area K property owners. As a result, some property owners have requested that the District issue rebates to the property ownerswho paid the assessments from FY 20112012 to present for the difference between the levy amountactually collected and the levy amount that would have been required to reach the target reserve at theend of the 40year period as referenced in the 2018 Reserve Fund Study. Explanation for Accelerated Collection of ReservesThe reserve fund balance accumulated faster than the estimates shown in the 2010 Engineer’s Reportpro forma budget because the total assessment levies collected were greater than the approvedbudget amount for operations and maintenance expenses each year between FY 20132014 throughFY 20202021. Additionally, the District’s expenses were lower than the approved budget amounts formost years from FY 20112012 through FY 20222023.The District levied an average of 96% of the maximum allowable assessment rate for all assessableLDR units in Area K from FY 20112012 through FY 20202021, as shown in Attachment 5. There wereno assessable MDR units in Areas I and L until FY 201819. Table 2 in Attachment 6 shows that from FY 20132014 through FY 20202021, the approved annuallevies for all assessable parcels in all development areas were between $47,258 and $170,664 morethan the approved annual budget amount for operations and maintenance expenses. Pages 6 and 7 of the 2010 Engineer’s Report state that the annual District budget in Exhibit 3 and the10year pro forma budget in Exhibit 4 were estimates only and were used to determine the initialmaximum assessment rates. It explicitly states that the estimates in Exhibit 3 do “not represent theactual budget for any one year of the [district’s] operation.” Table 3 in Attachment 6 shows that from FY 20112012 through FY 20222023 the average annualapproved budget for operations and maintenance expenses, excluding contributions to the reservefund, was $70,403, while the average actual annual expenditures for the same period was $31,491. Theunspent assessments collected from FY 20112012 through FY 20222023, which were as little as$9,730 in FY 20192020 and as much as $109,987 in FY 20212022, were added to the District’sreserve fund balance. The District had significantly lower than expected expenses in most years from FY 20112012 throughFY 20222023 largely due to the delayed transfer of three parcels from Arcadia to PVMMD. Theseparcels contain the open space hillside owned by PVMMD, which is the primary location where most ofPVMMD maintenance occurs. Although annual budgets were submitted in preparation for this transfer,the District had minimal actual expenses and nearly 100% of assessments collected prior to thetransfer in 2016 were added to the reserve balance. The lower expenses were also a result of favorable site conditions which allowed for the deferral ofsome maintenance items between 2016 and 2019. Additionally, lower expenses were also attributable to the absence of charges for City staff servicesfrom 2010 through 2020. The 2012 Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement between the City of Fairfieldand the PVMMD allowed for the City to recover costs for the administration and management of theDistrict. However, no City staff costs were charged to the District until 2020. The annual cost for Citystaff services has been approximately $20,000 annually since FY 20202021. Based on the actualcosts since FY 20202021, approximately $200,000 was retained in the District’s reserve balancebetween FY 20102011 through FY 20192020 since the District did not pay for City staff services. Lastly, the Engineer’s Reports, Reserve Fund Studies, and pro forma budgets accommodate a largescale geologic event estimated at $200,000 on average every ten years. No such event has occurredsince the District’s formation and the District retained at least $200,000 in the reserve fund balance.Until the 2018 Reserve Fund Study was prepared, the District did not have an expressed established orrecommended target reserve amount, nor were there any written policies or GHAD laws to that effect. At no point from the time the District was formed in 2010 to present has ENGEO maderecommendations regarding the time period during which the target reserve should be collected. The2018 Reserve Fund Study only indicates, for demonstration purposes, that the target reserve wouldhave been achieved at the end of a 40year period if the District followed the estimates in the 2010Engineer’s Report pro forma budget. Options for the Board’s ConsiderationAfter receiving feedback from PVMMD property owners at the May 7, 2024, Board meeting, the Boarddirected staff to research and return with options to address the property owners’ concerns, includingthe feasibility of issuing assessment rebates. After consultation with the city attorney, staff determined that issuing rebates to District property ownersfor assessments paid at any point during the District’s existence is not feasible. Division 17 of the PRC,which governs the PVMMD, does not include provisions that allow for refunds, except upon thedissolution of the District. Since the PVMMD assessments are placed on the annual property tax bills,the state laws that govern the refund of property taxes also apply to the refund of these assessments.Revenue and Taxation Code (RTC) Section 5097 generally provides that a refund of assessments shallnot be made except on a claim filed within four years after making the payment sought to be refunded,and RTC Section 5096 provides that assessments can only be refunded if they were paid more thanonce, erroneously or illegally collected, or illegally assessed or levied. None of the PVMMD assessments levied and collected from the time the District was formed to presentmeet the criteria listed in the RTC and are therefore not eligible for refund. One notable exception to thisstatement is the assessments levied in FY 20182019 against 25 properties in Area L (the Paradise360 development). These 25 properties were charged the LDR rate of $1,110.11 instead of the MDRrate of up to $589.45. Staff affirm that no assessments were paid more than once in any fiscal year, the City employed theappropriate and correct processes and procedures to collect assessments, and all parcels were legallyassessed, excluding the exception for the 25 properties noted above. Staff has prepared two options for the Board’s consideration regarding future assessment levies andthe reserve fund balance. Option No. 1 – Levy Assessments for Operations and Maintenance Costs Only and Maintainthe Recommended Reserve Fund Balance of $1.57 Million, Adjusted Each Year for InflationThe Board may choose to continue the levy and collection of assessments to cover annual operationsand maintenance costs only and maintain a reserve fund balance of $1.57 million, adjusted each yearfor inflation, as recommended in the 2022 Reserve Fund Study. Since the current reserve fund balance is approximately $1,626,000, the District would use $56,000 ofreserve funds for operations and maintenance to offset the total assessment levy in FY 20252026.Each year thereafter, the total assessments levied would be reduced and offset by any surplusremaining from the previous fiscal year or increased to cover the full cost of operations andmaintenance plus the amount needed to maintain $1.57 million, adjusted each year for inflation, in thereserve fund. This option allows the District to retain the reserve fund amount necessary to address any largescalegeologic events. However, this option does not address the concerns of Area K property ownersregarding the amount of contributions they provided to the reserve fund balance compared to theproperty owners in Areas I and L.Option No. 2 – Temporarily Suspend Assessment Levies and Use Portions of the ReserveFund Balance to Fund Annual Operations and Maintenance CostsThe Board may choose to suspend the levy and collection of assessments for a period of time or untilthe reserve fund balance reaches a certain amount, as specified by the Board. The District would usethe existing reserve funds to pay for annual operations and maintenance costs until assessments arelevied. This option would relieve all PVMMD property owners of paying assessments for a period of time.However, this option requires the reserve fund balance to fall below the recommended amountnecessary to address any largescale geologic events. PVMMD is an independent public agency. Should a largescale geologic event or events occur forwhich repair costs exceed the reserve fund balance, the District may seek financial assistance in theform of a loan or contribution from a public entity or private source, as outlined in Section 26591, et seq.of the PRC. If the District accepted a loan, the annual loan payments may not exceed the totalassessment revenue, or maximum assessment rates that were approved in accordance withProposition 218 procedures at the time of District formation. Staff RecommendationStaff recommends Option No. 1 Levy Assessments for Operations and Maintenance Costs Only andMaintain the Recommended Reserve Fund Balance of $1.57 Million, Adjusted Each Year for Inflation. The Board may modify or provide new direction to staff at any point in future fiscal years. FINANCIAL IMPACTThe financial impact depends on the direction the Board gives staff. All costs associated with this effortwill be funded by the Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District Fund (Fund 186).PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATIONN/AALTERNATIVE ACTIONIf the Board has additional questions, they may direct staff to return with the necessary information at alater date.STAFF CONTACTChris Lewis, Sr. Management Analyst(707) 428[email protected] COORDINATED WITHCity Attorney's OfficeATTACHMENTS:DescriptionAttachment 1: 2010 Engineer’s ReportAttachment 2: 2018 Reserve Fund StudyAttachment 3: 2022 Engineer’s Report Attachment 4: 2022 Reserve Fund Study
Attachment 5: Maximum Assessment Rates and Levies
Attachment 6: Levy, Budget, and Expenditure Summary
REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Panganiban, Ryan Approved 7/2/2024 8:56 PM
Chaudhary, Savita Approved 7/3/2024 10:55 AM
Dombrowski, Delaney Approved 7/3/2024 11:47 AM
Dombrowski, Delaney Approved 7/3/2024 11:47 AM
Packet Page 14 of 441

Packet Page 15 of 441Attachment 1 Page 1 of 21

Packet Page 16 of 441Attachment 1 Page 2 of 21

Packet Page 17 of 441Attachment 1 Page 3 of 21

Packet Page 18 of 441Attachment 1 Page 4 of 21

Packet Page 19 of 441Attachment 1 Page 5 of 21

Packet Page 20 of 441Attachment 1 Page 6 of 21

Packet Page 21 of 441Attachment 1 Page 7 of 21

Packet Page 22 of 441Attachment 1 Page 8 of 21

Packet Page 23 of 441Attachment 1 Page 9 of 21

Packet Page 24 of 441Attachment 1 Page 10 of 21

Packet Page 25 of 441Attachment 1 Page 11 of 21

Packet Page 26 of 441Attachment 1 Page 12 of 21

Packet Page 27 of 441Attachment 1 Page 13 of 21

Packet Page 28 of 441Attachment 1 Page 14 of 21

Packet Page 29 of 441Attachment 1 Page 15 of 21

Packet Page 30 of 441Attachment 1 Page 16 of 21

Packet Page 31 of 441Attachment 1 Page 17 of 21

Packet Page 32 of 441Attachment 1 Page 18 of 21

Packet Page 33 of 441Attachment 1 Page 19 of 21

Packet Page 34 of 441Attachment 1 Page 20 of 21

Packet Page 35 of 441Attachment 1 Page 21 of 21

GEOTECHNICAL

ENVIRONMENTAL

WATER RESOURCES

CONSTRUCTION SERVICES

2010 Crow Canyon Place, Suite 250  San Ramon, CA 94583  (925) 866-9000  Fax (888) 279-2698 www.engeo.com

Project No.
5698.002.000

March 26, 2018

Ms. Peri Dean
City of Fairfield
1000 Webster Street, 3rd Floor
Fairfield, CA 94533-4883

Subject: Paradise Valley Geologic Maintenance and Monitoring District Fairfield, California

RESERVE FUND STUDY

Dear Ms. Dean:

At your request, ENGEO is providing a Reserve Fund Study for the Paradise Valley Geologic Maintenance and Monitoring District (GMMD) in Fairfield, California. The Geologic Hazard Abatement District (GHAD) was formed on July 6, 2010.

The reserve fund study is based on the levels of expenditure expected to address future maintenance responsibilities and develop appropriate long-term reserves to address larger geologic events. The projected long-term reserve requirement is based on the published work, “Estimating an Appropriate Geologic Hazard Abatement District (GHAD) Reserve” and is provided as an attachment to this study.

GHAD ASSESSMENT

As listed in the approved Engineer’s Report (Reference 1) for FY 2010/11, initial assessment limits for the GHAD were established at $940.00 per low-density residence and $470.00 per medium-density residence. The initial assessment limits for residential units are adjusted annually on June 30 to reflect the percentage change in the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose Consumers Price Index for All Urban Consumers. The inflation adjustment to the assessment limits are shown on Table 1.

TABLE 1: Inflation Limit Adjustments
FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18

ANNUAL CPI
(JUNE) - 2.43% 2.64% 2.56% 3.00% 2.29% 2.67% 3.48%

ASSESSMENT
LIMIT
(LOW DENSITY)
$940.00 $962.84 $988.26 $1,013.56 $1,043.97 $1,067.87 $1,096.39 $1,134.54

ASSESSMENT
LIMIT
(MEDIUM DENSITY)
$470.00 $481.42 $494.13 $506.78 $521.98 $533.94 $548.19 $567.27

The FY 2017/18 assessment roll shows 150 low-density residences levied at a rate of $1,072.56 per unit. The total levy for the 2017/18 FY is $160,884.00.

Packet Page 36 of 441Attachment 2 Page 1 of 15

City of Fairfield 5698.002.000
Paradise Valley Geologic Maintenance and Monitoring District March 1, 2018 RESERVE FUND STUDY Page 2

GMMD RESPONSIBILITIES

Based on the District’s Plan of Control (Reference 2) and Open Space Management Plan (Reference 3), GHAD responsibilities include:

 Sedimentation basins “A”, “C-D”, and “I”.
 Three deflection walls with berms and riprap aprons.
 Maintenance roads.
 Concrete-lined drainage ditches.
 Storm drain inlets, outfalls, and pipelines within the open space area.

In addition to GHAD responsibilities to abate, mitigate, prevent, and control geologic hazards, the GHAD has responsibilities as a landowner within the GHAD-owned parcels, including:

 Vegetation management for fire suppression.
 Litter and debris collection.
 Fencing.

PROJECTED EXPENSES

Based on our experience managing and budgeting for over 25 GHADs over a 25-year period and general experience performing geologic monitoring and maintenance activities, ENGEO prepared the initial Engineer’s Report used to establish the assessment limit for the GHAD. By resolution, the GHAD Board of Directors approved the Engineer’s Report and ordered the assessment in 2010. Since the GHAD was formed, ENGEO has completed two site-monitoring events (Reference 5) to observe and summarize site conditions. To prepare the current GHAD reserve amount, we reviewed the initial Engineer’s Report, the existing site conditions, and revenue and expense information provided by the GHAD. Most of the initial expense estimates remain valid, but some amounts have been adjusted to account for site performance over the past 10 years, since development of Area “L,” or other estimated cost changes since the GHAD was formed in 2011 (Exhibit A).

RESERVE ESTIMATION AND METHODOLOGY

We have estimated the reserve (R) appropriate for the open space using the following factors from the attached paper titled, “Estimating an Appropriate GHAD Reserve” dated June 1999 (Exhibit D). As discussed above, we used the reserve calculation for Geologic Hazard Abatement Districts (GHADs) that are tasked with similar activities as identified for the Open Space Reserve Fund.

 Number of assessed units (n)
 Level of geotechnical risk within the development boundaries (g)  Average value of assessed properties (v)
 Relative density of construction is the maximum number of units expected to be impacted in a major geologic event (d)

Based on these parameters, we estimate that an appropriate long-term reserve for the GMMD for 320 units would be approximately $1,700,000 in current dollars. Use of a total of 320 units within the GHAD assumes construction of the maximum residences within Area “I”, 107 units.

Packet Page 37 of 441Attachment 2 Page 2 of 15

City of Fairfield 5698.002.000
Paradise Valley Geologic Maintenance and Monitoring District March 1, 2018 RESERVE FUND STUDY Page 3

The $1,700,000 reserve amount would allow the GMMD to repair the largest anticipated events within the GMMD, while still having funds to continue its other administration, maintenance, and monitoring functions.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

As discussed above, based on the GHAD responsibilities in the Plan of Control, the initial Engineer’s Report, the above reserve expenditures expected to address future maintenance, replacement, and abatement responsibilities would be approximately $1,700,000. The pro forma budget in the initial Engineer’s Report (Exhibit 4 within Reference 1) estimated that the target reserve would be achieved over a 40-year period. With a current reserve of approximately $906,000, the reserve amount is approximately double the amount estimated to be accumulated by fiscal year 2017/18 in the initial Engineer’s Report. It appears that this is largely due to lower expenses than were anticipated. Since some of these lower expense amounts are due to generally less than normal rainfall amounts since 2011, we expect these expenses to vary over time.

As shown in Exhibit B, at the current assessment amount adjusted for inflation, the GMMD would achieve the target reserve amount in fiscal 2026/27. If the target reserve amount is met, the GHAD Board of Directors could consider lowering the amounts levied on residences within the GMMD.

As an alternative, starting in FY 2018/19 or any time after, the GHAD Board of Directors could consider reducing the amount levied on residences within the GMMD to allow the accumulation of funds to reach the target reserve in a total of 40 years as anticipated in the initial Engineer’s Report. Under this scenario, the fiscal year 2017/18 assessment would have been $878 annually for low-density residential units and $439 for medium-density residential units (Exhibit C). We have assumed that the minimum allowable number of residential units will be constructed in Area “I”.

If you have any questions regarding the contents of this letter, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely,

ENGEO Incorporated

Eric Harrell, CEG Paul C. Guerin, GE
eh/pcg/cjn

Attachments: List of Selected References
Exhibit A: Budget Details
Exhibit B: $1,700,000 Reserve (2017/18 dollars) at Current Assessment Exhibit C: $1,700,000 Reserve (2017/18 dollars) at Initial 40-Year Reserve Accumulation Term
Exhibit D: Estimating an Appropriate GHAD Reserve
Packet Page 38 of 441Attachment 2 Page 3 of 15

5698.002.000
March 26, 2018

LIST OF SELECTED REFERENCES

1. ENGEO; Engineer’s Report for Geologic Maintenance and Monitoring District, Paradise Valley Areas “I”, “K”, and “L”, City of Fairfield, California; July 22, 2010; Project No. 5698.100.101.

2. ENGEO; Plan of Control for Paradise Valley Areas “I”, “K”, and “L” Geologic Maintenance and Monitoring District, Fairfield, California; July 22, 2010; Project No. 5698.100.101.

3. ENGEO; Open Space Management Plan, Paradise Valley, Fairfield, California; March 7, 2008; Project No. 5698.100.101.

4. ENGEO; Monitoring Report (Draft), Paradise Valley Geologic Maintenance and Monitoring District, Fairfield, California; January 31, 2018; Project No. 5698.002.000.

Packet Page 39 of 441Attachment 2 Page 4 of 15

Exhibit A ENGEO INCORPORATED

BUDGET DETAILS
Paradise Valley GMMD
Item No.Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Cost Reoccurrence
Interval (Years)
Annual
Total Budget Comments
1 Administration and Accounting ls 1 $24,000.00 $24,000.00 1.00 $24,000.00 We have reviewed records for GHADs operating within Contra Costa County and on a long term basis these cost have averaged about 10 to 20 percent of the GHADs operating budget. The Paradise Valley GHAD administration and accounting budget estimate of $24,000 (FY 2010/11) is in the typical range for GHAD administration costs.

Membership dues for the California
Association of Geologic Hazard
Abatement Districts
ls 1 $180.00 $180.00 1.00 $180.00 This cost estimate is based of membership fees currently charged by the California Association of GHADs
Insurance - General Liability ls 1 $500.00 $500.00 1.00 $500.00 This estimated cost was obtained from general liability insurance fees for open space from other GHADs within California.

Insurance - Directors and Officers ls 1 $800.00 $800.00 1.00 $800.00 This estimated cost was obtained from Directors and Officers insurance estimates provided for the Leona Quarry and Oakland Area Geologic Hazard Abatement Districts.

Annual Report and Budget
Preparation
ls 1 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 1.00 $4,000.00
GHAD Treasurer ls 1 $2,958.00 $2,958.00 1.00 $2,958.00 Based on fees charged to GHADs in Contra Costa and Alameda Counties.

GHAD Attorney ls 1 $4,732.00 $4,732.00 1.00 $4,732.00 Based on fees charged to GHADs in Contra Costa and Alameda Counties.

Subtotal $37,170.00
2 Professional Services
GHAD Monitoring Event - April and
October
ls 1 $3,549.00 $3,549.00 0.50 $7,098.00 The frequency of monitoring is based on the Plan of Control for the Paradise Valley GHAD. Monitoring budget estimates are based on the fees these services are currently being provided by ENGEO Incorporated for numerous GHADs within Contra Costa County and Alameda County.

Heavy Rainfall Event Monitoring ls 1 $1,775.00 $1,775.00 1.00 $1,775.00 Based on the anticipated frequency of heavy rainfall events as defined in the Plan of Control, 2 heavy rainfall events were included within the budget for estimating purposes. If a heavy rainfall events occur in close proximity to a scheduled monitoring event, the GHAD manager will provide direction regarding the need for additional monitoring.

Subtotal $8,873.00
5698.002.000
March 1, 2018
Packet Page 40 of 441Attachment 2 Page 5 of 15

Exhibit A ENGEO INCORPORATED

BUDGET DETAILS
Paradise Valley GMMD
Item No.Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Cost Reoccurrence
Interval (Years)
Annual
Total Budget Comments
3 Maintenance & Operation
Sedimentation Basin Maintenance -
riser, outfall, spillway and
vegetation/sediment removal
each 3 $5,000.00 $15,000.00 1.00 $15,000.00 Based on the basin design we do not anticipate that the sedimentation basins will contain water for an extended period of time reducing certain maintenance operations such as mosquito abatement and some vegetation management functions. It is anticipated that the majority of funds within this budget items will be used for sediment removal from transported material which is included in this budget item, however a failure of a basin is provided in the Major Repair category.

Sediment/Debris Removal Concrete
lined drainage ditches
lf 6,000 $0.75 $4,500.00 1.00 $4,500.00 This estimated cost was obtained from a review of GHAD records from sites in Contra Costa County.

Sediment/Debris Removal, Storm
Drain Inlets and Pipelines
ls 1 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 1.00 $2,500.00 With the steepness of the site and the storm drain pipelines it is expected that the majority of material entering the storm drain system will not remain in the storm drain system but be transported to the detention basin. This item is to provide for incidental removal of material from the storm drain catch basins.

Access-Maintenance Roadways lf 3,500 $12.00 $42,000.00 15 $2,800.00 We anticipate an overlay of class 2 aggregate base rock on roadways will occur every 15 years.

Subtotal $24,800.00
4 Slope Stabilization and Erosion
Protection
Slope Stabilization ls 1 $24,139.00 $24,139.00 1.00 $24,139.00 This budget items provides for ongoing slope stabilization activities which may include minor landslide repair activities. This figure is comparable to other GHADs of this size.

Erosion Protection ls 1 $24,139.00 $24,139.00 1.00 $24,139.00 This budget items provides for ongoing slope erosion protection activities. This figure is comparable to other GHADs of this size.

Subtotal $48,278.00
5698.002.000
March 1, 2018
Packet Page 41 of 441Attachment 2 Page 6 of 15

Exhibit A ENGEO INCORPORATED

BUDGET DETAILS
Paradise Valley GMMD
Item No.Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Cost Reoccurrence
Interval (Years)
Annual
Total Budget Comments
5 Capital Improvements
Concrete-lined drainage ditch
replacement
lf 2800 $47.00 $131,600.00 50.00 $2,632.00 We have provided for a 50-year replacement cycle for the "U" profile concrete lined drainage ditches. This replacement quantity applies to concrete lined drainage ditch that is not involved with slope instability. Drainage ditches that are involved with slope instability would be repaired or replaced during corrective work for the individual events.

Concrete-lined drainage ditch
replacement
lf 3200 $47.00 $150,400.00 60.00 $2,506.67 We have provided for a 60-year replacement cycle for the "V" profile concrete-lined drainage ditches. This replacement quantity applies to concrete lined drainage ditch that is not involved with slope instability. Drainage ditches that are involved with slope instability would be repaired or replaced during corrective work for the individual events.

Open Space Storm Drain Pipeline
Replacement
lf 1375 $59.00 $81,125.00 75.00 $1,081.67 We have provided for a 75-year replacement cycle for the open space storm drain pipelines. This replacement quantity applies to storm drain system components that are not involved with slope instability. Storm drain system elements that are involved with slope instability would be repaired or replaced during corrective work for the individual events.

Deflection Wall Replacement lf 780 $95.00 $74,100.00 50.00 $1,482.00 The estimated costs for this item anticipates that the replacement consist will involve the rip rap and fabric potion of the deflection wall system. We do not anticipate the "K" rail portion of the defection wall.

Subtotal $7,702.33
6 Major Repair (Annualized)ls 1 $229,946.00 $229,946.00 10.00 $22,994.60 This figure represents the annualized repair cost estimate for a $200,000 (FY 2010/11) repair event that occurs on average every 10 years for the entire Paradise Valley GHAD area. As with the other cost estimate items this budget item is indexed to the Consumer Price Index as outlined in the Engineer's Report. This figure is based on our experience, the geology of the site, the planned grading of the site and the configuration of the site improvements.

Subtotal $22,994.60
TOTAL $149,817.93
5698.002.000
March 1, 2018
Packet Page 42 of 441Attachment 2 Page 7 of 15

Exhibit B Paradise Valley Areas "I", "K" and "L" Geologic Hazard Abatement District Pro Forma Budget
March 1, 2018
FISCAL YEAR (Starting July 1)2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Cumulative No. of Low Density Residential Units (Assessed) 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 Cumulative No. of Medium Density Residential Units (Assessed) 32 63 97 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 Total Residential Units 182 213 247 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 A. INCOME
Assessment 80,442 198,564 221,505 245,284 250,190 255,194 260,298 265,504 270,814 276,230 281,755 287,390 293,137 299,000 B. PROJECTED EXPENSES

1. Administration Legal, Insurance, and Accounting 37,170 37,913 38,672 39,445 40,234 41,039 41,859 42,697 43,551 44,422 45,310 46,216 47,141 48,083 County Fees 364 371 379 386 394 402 410 418 426 435 444 453 462 471

2. Professional Services - Site Monitoring 8,873 9,050 9,231 9,416 9,604 9,797 9,992 10,192 10,396 10,604 10,816 11,032 11,253 11,478

3. Maintenance & Operation 16,063 19,175 22,680 26,318 26,844 27,381 27,929 28,487 29,057 29,638 30,231 30,836 31,452 32,081

4. Slope Stabilization and Erosion Protection 31,269 37,327 44,151 51,233 52,258 53,303 54,369 55,456 56,565 57,697 58,851 60,028 61,228 62,453

5. Sedimentation Basin and Storm Drain Maintenance 4,988 5,955 7,044 8,173 8,337 8,504 8,674 8,847 9,024 9,205 9,389 9,576 9,768 9,963

6. Repair - - - - 255,070 - - - - - - - -

7. Miscellaneous Expenses 22,995 23,455 23,924 24,402 24,891 25,388 25,896 26,414 26,942 27,481 28,031 28,591 29,163 29,746

8. Debt Service - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SUBTOTAL - EXPENSES 121,722 133,246 146,080 159,374 417,632 165,813 169,129 172,512 175,962 179,481 183,071 186,732 190,467 194,276 RESERVE 864,720 65,317 75,425 85,910 (167,442) 89,381 91,168 92,992 94,852 96,749 98,684 100,657 102,670 104,724 EARNINGS 25,942 26,720 29,481 32,628 36,184 32,247 35,895 39,707 43,688 47,844 52,182 56,708 61,429 66,352 CUMULATIVE RESERVE 890,661 982,699 1,087,604 1,206,142 1,074,885 1,196,512 1,323,576 1,456,275 1,594,815 1,739,408 1,890,273 2,047,639 2,211,738 2,382,814

ASSUMPTIONS
Total No. of Low Density Single Family Residential Units 150 150 Annual Assessment per Unit $1,073 $1,073
Total No. of Medium Density Family Residential Units 131 131 Annual Assessment per Unit $536 $536
Annual Increase in Assessment 2.0% 2.0%
Inflation 2.0% 2.0%
Investment Earnings 3.0% 3.0%
Existing Reserve February 24, 2018 $906,000 $906,000
Amount Financed $0 $0
Borrowing Rate 8.0% 8.0%
Term of Loan (years) 0 0
Frequency of Large-Scale Repair (years) 10 10
Cost of Large-Scale Repair (current $) $229,946 $229,946 ESTIMATED ANNUAL EXPENSES IN 2017/2018 DOLLARS

1. Administration, Legal, Insurance, and Accounting 37,170 37,170

2. Professional Services - Site Monitoring 8,873 8,873

3. Maintenance & Operation 24,800 24,800

4. Slope Stabilization and Erosion Protection 48,278 48,278

5. Sedimentation Basin and Storm Drain Outfall Maintenance 7,702 7,702

7. Large Scale Repair (annualized) 22,995 22,995
TOTAL 149,818 149,818
5698.002.000
March 1, 2018

Page 1 of 3 ends

Packet Page 43 of 441Attachment 2 Page 8 of 15

Exhibit B Paradise Valley Areas "I", "K" and "L" Geologic Hazard Abatement District Pro Forma Budget
March 1, 2018
FISCAL YEAR (Starting July 1)
Cumulative No. of Low Density Residential Units (Assessed) Cumulative No. of Medium Density Residential Units (Assessed) Total Residential Units
A. INCOME
Assessment
B. PROJECTED EXPENSES

1. Administration Legal, Insurance, and Accounting
County Fees

2. Professional Services - Site Monitoring

3. Maintenance & Operation

4. Slope Stabilization and Erosion Protection

5. Sedimentation Basin and Storm Drain Maintenance

6. Repair

7. Miscellaneous Expenses

8. Debt Service

SUBTOTAL - EXPENSES

RESERVE

EARNINGS

CUMULATIVE RESERVE

ASSUMPTIONS
Total No. of Low Density Single Family Residential Units 150 Annual Assessment per Unit $1,073
Total No. of Medium Density Family Residential Units 131 Annual Assessment per Unit $536
Annual Increase in Assessment 2.0%
Inflation 2.0%
Investment Earnings 3.0%
Existing Reserve February 24, 2018 $906,000
Amount Financed $0
Borrowing Rate 8.0%
Term of Loan (years) 0
Frequency of Large-Scale Repair (years) 10
Cost of Large-Scale Repair (current $) $229,946
ESTIMATED ANNUAL EXPENSES IN 2017/2018 DOLLARS

1. Administration, Legal, Insurance, and Accounting 37,170

2. Professional Services - Site Monitoring 8,873

3. Maintenance & Operation 24,800

4. Slope Stabilization and Erosion Protection 48,278

5. Sedimentation Basin and Storm Drain Outfall Maintenance 7,702

7. Large Scale Repair (annualized) 22,995
TOTAL 149,818
2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 304,980 311,080 317,301 323,647 330,120 336,723 343,457 350,326 357,333 364,480 371,769 379,205 386,789 394,524 49,045 50,026 51,026 52,047 53,088 54,150 55,233 56,337 57,464 58,613 59,786 60,981 62,201 63,445 480 490 500 510 520 530 541 552 563 574 585 597 609 621 11,708 11,942 12,181 12,424 12,673 12,926 13,185 13,449 13,717 13,992 14,272 14,557 14,848 15,145 32,723 33,378 34,045 34,726 35,421 36,129 36,851 37,589 38,340 39,107 39,889 40,687 41,501 42,331 63,702 64,976 66,275 67,601 68,953 70,332 71,739 73,173 74,637 76,130 77,652 79,205 80,789 82,405 10,163 10,366 10,573 10,785 11,000 11,220 11,445 11,674 11,907 12,145 12,388 12,636 12,889 13,146 369,854 - - - - - - - - 369,854 - - - 30,341 30,948 31,567 32,199 32,843 33,499 34,169 34,853 35,550 36,261 36,986 37,726 38,480 39,250 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 568,016 202,125 206,168 210,291 214,497 218,787 223,163 227,626 232,178 236,822 611,412 246,389 251,317 256,344 (263,036) 108,955 111,134 113,356 115,623 117,936 120,295 122,701 125,155 127,658 (239,643) 132,815 135,471 138,181 71,484 65,738 70,979 76,442 82,136 88,069 94,249 100,685 107,387 114,363 121,624 118,083 125,610 133,442 2,191,263 2,365,955 2,548,068 2,737,866 2,935,625 3,141,630 3,356,174 3,579,560 3,812,101 4,054,122 3,936,102 4,187,000 4,448,082 4,719,705 5698.002.000
March 1, 2018

Page 2 of 3 ends

Packet Page 44 of 441Attachment 2 Page 9 of 15

1. Administration Legal, Insurance, and Accounting
County Fees

2. Professional Services - Site Monitoring

3. Maintenance & Operation

4. Slope Stabilization and Erosion Protection

5. Sedimentation Basin and Storm Drain Maintenance

6. Repair

7. Miscellaneous Expenses

8. Debt Service

SUBTOTAL - EXPENSES

RESERVE

EARNINGS

CUMULATIVE RESERVE

1. Administration, Legal, Insurance, and Accounting 37,170

2. Professional Services - Site Monitoring 8,873

3. Maintenance & Operation 24,800

4. Slope Stabilization and Erosion Protection 48,278

5. Sedimentation Basin and Storm Drain Outfall Maintenance 7,702

7. Large Scale Repair (annualized) 22,995
TOTAL 149,818
2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2055 2056 2057 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150
131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131
281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281
402,415 410,463 418,672 427,046 435,587 444,299 453,185 462,248 471,493 480,923 490,542 500,352 510,359 64,714 66,008 67,328 68,675 70,048 71,449 72,878 74,336 75,823 77,339 78,886 80,464 82,073 634 646 659 673 686 700 714 728 743 757 773 788 804 15,448 15,757 16,072 16,394 16,722 17,056 17,397 17,745 18,100 18,462 18,831 19,208 19,592 43,177 44,041 44,922 45,820 46,737 47,671 48,625 49,597 50,589 51,601 52,633 53,686 54,759 84,053 85,734 87,449 89,198 90,982 92,801 94,658 96,551 98,482 100,451 102,460 104,510 106,600 13,409 13,678 13,951 14,230 14,515 14,805 15,101 15,403 15,711 16,025 16,346 16,673 17,006 - - - - - 450,850 - - - - - 507,730 40,035 40,836 41,652 42,485 43,335 44,202 45,086 45,987 46,907 47,845 48,802 49,778 50,774 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 261,470 266,700 272,034 277,475 283,024 288,685 745,308 300,347 306,354 312,481 318,731 325,106 839,338 140,944 143,763 146,639 149,571 152,563 155,614 (292,124) 161,901 165,139 168,442 171,810 175,247 (328,978) 141,591 150,067 158,882 168,048 177,576 187,480 197,773 194,943 205,648 216,772 228,328 240,332 252,800 5,002,240 5,296,071 5,601,591 5,919,210 6,249,350 6,592,444 6,498,094 6,854,937 7,225,724 7,610,937 8,011,076 8,426,655 8,350,476 Reserve in
2051/52
Dollars: 3,314,211
5698.002.000
March 1, 2018

Page 3 of 3 ends

Packet Page 45 of 441Attachment 2 Page 10 of 15

Exhibit C Paradise Valley Areas "I", "K", and "L" Geologic Hazard Abatement District Pro Forma Budget
March 1, 2018
FISCAL YEAR (Starting July 1)2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Cumulative No. of Low Density Residential Units (Assessed) 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 Cumulative No. of Medium Density Residential Units (Assessed) 32 63 97 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 Total Residential Units 182 213 247 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 A. INCOME
Assessment 80,442 162,544 181,324 200,790 204,806 208,902 213,080 217,342 221,688 226,122 230,645 235,258 239,963 244,762 B. PROJECTED EXPENSES

2. Professional Services - Site Monitoring 8,873 9,050 9,231 9,416 9,604 9,797 9,992 10,192 10,396 10,604 10,816 11,032 11,253 11,478

3. Maintenance & Operation 16,063 19,175 22,680 26,318 26,844 27,381 27,929 28,487 29,057 29,638 30,231 30,836 31,452 32,081

4. Slope Stabilization and Erosion Protection 31,269 37,327 44,151 51,233 52,258 53,303 54,369 55,456 56,565 57,697 58,851 60,028 61,228 62,453

5. Sedimentation Basin and Storm Drain Maintenance 4,988 5,955 7,044 8,173 8,337 8,504 8,674 8,847 9,024 9,205 9,389 9,576 9,768 9,963

6. Repair - - - - 255,070 - - - - - - - -

7. Miscellaneous Expenses 22,995 23,455 23,924 24,402 24,891 25,388 25,896 26,414 26,942 27,481 28,031 28,591 29,163 29,746

8. Debt Service - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SUBTOTAL - EXPENSES 121,722 133,246 146,080 159,374 417,632 165,813 169,129 172,512 175,962 179,481 183,071 186,732 190,467 194,276 RESERVE 864,720 29,298 35,244 41,416 (212,826) 43,089 43,951 44,830 45,726 46,641 47,574 48,525 49,496 50,486 EARNINGS 25,942 26,720 28,400 30,310 32,461 27,051 29,155 31,348 33,633 36,014 38,494 41,076 43,764 46,561 CUMULATIVE RESERVE 890,661 946,679 1,010,323 1,082,048 901,684 971,823 1,044,929 1,121,106 1,200,466 1,283,121 1,369,188 1,458,789 1,552,048 1,649,095

ASSUMPTIONS
Total No. of Low Density Single Family Residential Units 150 150 Annual Assessment per Unit $878 $878
Total No. of Medium Density Family Residential Units 131 131 Annual Assessment per Unit $439 $439
Annual Increase in Assessment 2.0% 2.0%
Inflation 2.0% 2.0%
Investment Earnings 3.0% 3.0%
Existing Reserve February 24, 2018 $906,000 $906,000
Amount Financed $0 $0
Borrowing Rate 8.0% 8.0%
Term of Loan (years) 0 0
Frequency of Large-Scale Repair (years) 10 10
Cost of Large-Scale Repair (current $) $229,946 $229,946 ESTIMATED ANNUAL EXPENSES IN 2017/2018 DOLLARS

1. Administration, Legal, Insurance, and Accounting 37,170 37,170

2. Professional Services - Site Monitoring 8,873 8,873

3. Maintenance & Operation 24,800 24,800

4. Slope Stabilization and Erosion Protection 48,278 48,278

5. Sedimentation Basin and Storm Drain Outfall Maintenance 7,702 7,702

7. Large Scale Repair (annualized) 22,995 22,995
TOTAL 149,818 149,818
5698.002.000
March 1, 2018 Page 1 of 3
Packet Page 46 of 441Attachment 2 Page 11 of 15

Exhibit C Paradise Valley Areas "I", "K", and "L" Geologic Hazard Abatement District Pro Forma Budget
March 1, 2018
FISCAL YEAR (Starting July 1)
Cumulative No. of Low Density Residential Units (Assessed) Cumulative No. of Medium Density Residential Units (Assessed) Total Residential Units
A. INCOME
Assessment
B. PROJECTED EXPENSES

1. Administration Legal, Insurance, and Accounting
County Fees

2. Professional Services - Site Monitoring

3. Maintenance & Operation

4. Slope Stabilization and Erosion Protection

5. Sedimentation Basin and Storm Drain Maintenance

6. Repair

7. Miscellaneous Expenses

8. Debt Service

SUBTOTAL - EXPENSES

RESERVE

EARNINGS

CUMULATIVE RESERVE

ASSUMPTIONS
Total No. of Low Density Single Family Residential Units 150 Annual Assessment per Unit $878
Total No. of Medium Density Family Residential Units 131 Annual Assessment per Unit $439
Annual Increase in Assessment 2.0%
Inflation 2.0%
Investment Earnings 3.0%
Existing Reserve February 24, 2018 $906,000
Amount Financed $0
Borrowing Rate 8.0%
Term of Loan (years) 0
Frequency of Large-Scale Repair (years) 10
Cost of Large-Scale Repair (current $) $229,946
ESTIMATED ANNUAL EXPENSES IN 2017/2018 DOLLARS

1. Administration, Legal, Insurance, and Accounting 37,170

2. Professional Services - Site Monitoring 8,873

3. Maintenance & Operation 24,800

4. Slope Stabilization and Erosion Protection 48,278

5. Sedimentation Basin and Storm Drain Outfall Maintenance 7,702

7. Large Scale Repair (annualized) 22,995
TOTAL 149,818
2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 249,657 254,650 259,743 264,938 270,237 275,642 281,155 286,778 292,513 298,364 304,331 310,417 316,626 322,958 329,417 49,045 50,026 51,026 52,047 53,088 54,150 55,233 56,337 57,464 58,613 59,786 60,981 62,201 63,445 64,714 480 490 500 510 520 530 541 552 563 574 585 597 609 621 634 11,708 11,942 12,181 12,424 12,673 12,926 13,185 13,449 13,717 13,992 14,272 14,557 14,848 15,145 15,448 32,723 33,378 34,045 34,726 35,421 36,129 36,851 37,589 38,340 39,107 39,889 40,687 41,501 42,331 43,177 63,702 64,976 66,275 67,601 68,953 70,332 71,739 73,173 74,637 76,130 77,652 79,205 80,789 82,405 84,053 10,163 10,366 10,573 10,785 11,000 11,220 11,445 11,674 11,907 12,145 12,388 12,636 12,889 13,146 13,409 303,409 - - - - - - - - 369,854 - - - - 30,341 30,948 31,567 32,199 32,843 33,499 34,169 34,853 35,550 36,261 36,986 37,726 38,480 39,250 40,035 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 501,571 202,125 206,168 210,291 214,497 218,787 223,163 227,626 232,178 236,822 611,412 246,389 251,317 256,344 261,470 (251,914) 52,525 53,576 54,647 55,740 56,855 57,992 59,152 60,335 61,542 (307,082) 64,028 65,308 66,615 67,947 49,473 43,400 46,277 49,273 52,391 55,635 59,009 62,519 66,169 69,964 73,910 66,915 70,843 74,927 79,174 1,446,655 1,542,579 1,642,433 1,746,353 1,854,483 1,966,973 2,083,974 2,205,645 2,332,150 2,463,656 2,230,484 2,361,426 2,497,578 2,639,120 2,786,240 5698.002.000
March 1, 2018 Page 2 of 3
Packet Page 47 of 441Attachment 2 Page 12 of 15

1. Administration Legal, Insurance, and Accounting
County Fees

2. Professional Services - Site Monitoring

3. Maintenance & Operation

4. Slope Stabilization and Erosion Protection

5. Sedimentation Basin and Storm Drain Maintenance

6. Repair

7. Miscellaneous Expenses

8. Debt Service

SUBTOTAL - EXPENSES

RESERVE

EARNINGS

CUMULATIVE RESERVE

1. Administration, Legal, Insurance, and Accounting 37,170

2. Professional Services - Site Monitoring 8,873

3. Maintenance & Operation 24,800

4. Slope Stabilization and Erosion Protection 48,278

5. Sedimentation Basin and Storm Drain Outfall Maintenance 7,702

7. Large Scale Repair (annualized) 22,995
TOTAL 149,818
2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2055 2056 2057 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150
131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131 131
281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281 281
336,006 342,726 349,580 356,572 363,703 370,978 378,397 385,965 393,684 401,558 409,589 417,781 66,008 67,328 68,675 70,048 71,449 72,878 74,336 75,823 77,339 78,886 80,464 82,073 646 659 673 686 700 714 728 743 757 773 788 804 15,757 16,072 16,394 16,722 17,056 17,397 17,745 18,100 18,462 18,831 19,208 19,592 44,041 44,922 45,820 46,737 47,671 48,625 49,597 50,589 51,601 52,633 53,686 54,759 85,734 87,449 89,198 90,982 92,801 94,658 96,551 98,482 100,451 102,460 104,510 106,600 13,678 13,951 14,230 14,515 14,805 15,101 15,403 15,711 16,025 16,346 16,673 17,006 - - - - 450,850 - - - - - 507,730 40,836 41,652 42,485 43,335 44,202 45,086 45,987 46,907 47,845 48,802 49,778 50,774 - - - - - - - - - - - - 266,700 272,034 277,475 283,024 288,685 745,308 300,347 306,354 312,481 318,731 325,106 839,338 69,306 70,692 72,106 73,548 75,019 (374,331) 78,050 79,611 81,203 82,827 84,483 (421,557) 83,587 88,174 92,940 97,891 103,035 108,376 100,397 105,751 111,312 117,087 123,085 129,312 2,939,133 3,097,999 3,263,045 3,434,484 3,612,538 3,346,583 3,525,031 3,710,392 3,902,907 4,102,821 4,310,389 4,018,144 Reserve in
2051/52
Dollars: 1,706,852
5698.002.000
March 1, 2018 Page 3 of 3
Packet Page 48 of 441Attachment 2 Page 13 of 15

An important parameter in establishing initial GHAD budgets and in assessing the financial health of mature GHADs is the appropriate level of reserve needed to address probable future geologic events.

The reserve must be unique to each GHAD, and must consider several factors, not all of which are geotechnical in nature.

As an initial approach, a loss history can be compiled based on records of actual losses that have occurred in the region in the last 20 years. If the last 20 years can be assumed to be representative of future years, this loss history can be distilled to obtain a current net present value (NPV) of the statistically-expected loss over a given time period. This can be expressed per dwelling unit, per parcel, or per dollar value of improvements. If, based on historic geologic and rainfall records, it is believed that the last two decades do not represent the full range of expected geologic activity, a correction factor can be applied to the calculated risk to arrive at the expected loss rate.

In converting the expected loss rate to an estimated
reserve (R), consideration must be given to the
following factors.

Number of assessed units (n) in the GHAD.

The reserve per dwelling unit (R/n or
average reserve) should, in theory, diminish
asymptotically with increasing unit count to a
“floor” value.

Level of geotechnical risk (g) within the
GHAD boundaries. Depending on geology,
terrain, prior mitigation measures, grading
techniques, irrigation and age, geotechnical
risk may vary, even within a particular
region.

Average value of assessed properties (v).In
areas of high property values, repair or
reconstruction of private improvements may
be more costly and may require greater
average reserves.

Relative density of construction (d).The
number of units likely to be affected during a
major geologic event will have an impact on
the total reserve.

ESTIMATING AN APPROPRIATE GHAD RESERVE
Uri Eliahu G.E., ENGEO Incorporated, June 1999
Packet Page 49 of 441Attachment 2 Page 14 of 15

Intuitively, this general expression may be applied to a GHAD reserve formula by substituting R/n for y, n for x, dv for a, and gv for b, to arrive at the relationship
R/n=dv/n+gv where:

R is the total reserve
n is the total number of assessed parcels
v is the average value of each residence
g is the geotechnical risk factor
d is a density factor related to the maximum number of
units expected to be impacted in a major geologic event (eg. landslide)
Number of Units (n)
Av
e
r
a
g
e

R
e
s
e
r
v
e

(
R
/
n
)
R/n=dv/n+gv
This formula can be simplified to R=dv + gvn or
R=v(d+gn)
To apply this to a specific situation, g can be estimated based on historical data as described above, and d can be estimated by comparing regional landslide sizes to
average lot sizes. Preliminarily, it appears that d may range from approximately 2 to 10 and g may range from

0.001 to 0.01, depending on the physical characteristics of the assessed areas as described above.
y=a/x+b
In consideration of the forgoing, an expression
describing the average reserve may take the general
hyperbolic form, y = a/x + b
Packet Page 50 of 441Attachment 2 Page 15 of 15

PA R A D IS E V A LL E Y M A IN T E N A N C E A N D M O N IT O R IN G D IS T R IC T (P V M M D )

FAIRFIELD, SOLANO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

ENGINEER'S REPORT
For Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District Areas "I", "K", and "L"

SUBMITTED TO
PVMMD Board of Directors
1000 Webster Street
Fairfield, CA 94533

PREPARED BY
ENGEO Incorporated
July 6, 2022
PROJECT NO.
5698.002.021
';opyriql1I ;!022 hy Ef\lC,EO l11<;01rior,1\•ccl Ttll'.: document n1c1y 110\ he rep1odI1cE:rl in ·Ntmlr, 01 In part bv ,11111118ans ·,vti:,1lso(-,vc"r nor rn:1y 11 bo quol•Jd or c,xccrplerl will1•)Ul lt11-) expre,:s ,vntten consent or l=NC,f.(J lncorporateu
ENGEO
Packet Page 51 of 441Attachment 3 Page 1 of 28

A r e a s 'T K ' a n d L '
5698 002.021
Paradise Valley f\lla1nlenance and Monitoring District
Engineer's Repor~

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CERTIFICATION OF FILING 1
I. INTRODUCTION 3
II. BACKGROUND 3
Ill. GEOLOGIC HAZARD ABATEMENT DISTRICT BOUNDARIES 4
IV. SERVICE LEVELS 4
V. DESCRIPTION OF THE IMPROVEMENTS MAINTAINED BY THE PVMMD 5 VI. ASSESSMENT METHOD AND BENEFIT 5
A. Special Benefit and Proportionality 5

8. Assessment Method 6
VII. ASSESSMENT LIMIT - BUDGET 8
VIII. OWNER RESPONSIBILITIES 9
EXHIBIT A- Legal Description and Plat
EXHIBIT 8 - Budget - Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District EXHIBIT C -Assessment Roll - Fiscal Year 2022/23
ENGEO i of i Julv 6. 2022
Packet Page 52 of 441Attachment 3 Page 2 of 28

Fairfield G eologic Hazard Abatem ent District
56 9 8 00 2 02 1
Paradise Valley M aintenance and fvlonilonng District
_ _ _ __ _ Eng~neer s R e p ?r~

ENGINEER'S REPORT

PARADISE VALLEY MAINTENANCE AND MONITORING DISTRICT
(Pursuant to the Public Resources Code of the State of California, Section 26500 et seq.)

CERTIFICATION OF FILING
This report is presented at the direction of the Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District (PVMMD) Board of Directors. The PVMMD, a Geologic Hazard Abatement District (GHAD) within the meaning of Public Resources Code Division 17, is intended to provide monitoring, maintenance, and repair of improvements related to geologic hazard management within the PVMMD and to levy and collect assessments in order to perform its activities.

The improvements, which are the subject of this report, are defined as any activity necessary or incidental to the prevention, mitigation, abatement, or control of a geologic hazard, construction, maintenance, repair, or operation of improvement; or the issuance and servicing of bonds issued to finance any of the foregoing (Pub. Resources Code § 26505).

This report consists of seven parts, as follows.

CERTIFICATE OF FILING
I. INTRODUCTION
II. BACKGROUND
111. GEOLOGIC HAZARD ABATEMENT DISTRICT BOUNDARIES DIAGRA M IV. SERVICE LEVELS
V. DESCRIPTION OF PVMMD-MAINTAINED IMPROVEMENTS
VI. ASSESSMENT METHOD AND BENEFIT
A. Special Benefit and Proportionality
B. Assessment Method
VII. ASSESSMENT LIMIT -BUDGET
ENGEO Page 11 July 6, 2022
Packet Page 53 of 441Attachment 3 Page 3 of 28

F a ir fie ld G e o lo g ic H a z a rd A b a te m e n t D is tric t 5 6 9 8 0 0 2 .0 2 1
P ar a d is e V a lle y M a in te n a n c e a n d M o n itm in g D is tric t _ _ E n g in e e r s R e p o rt _
The undersigned respectfully submits the enclosed Engineer's Report.

Date: July 6, 2022 By: ENGEO Incorporated
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Engineer's Report was filed on the 5th day of July 2022.

Clerk of the Board
Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District
Fairfield, Solano County, California
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Engineer's Report was approved and confirmed by the PVMMD Board on the 5th day of July 2022.

ENGEO Pa~Je I 2 July 6. 2022
L. ·, . ~· ;,···,: ,., .2
Packet Page 54 of 441Attachment 3 Page 4 of 28

Fairfield G eologic Hazard Abatem ent District
5698 002 021
Paradise Valley Maintenance c111d Monitoring District
_ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ E!1g111eer s ~~P<:10_

ENGINEER'S REPORT
for

PARADISE VALLEY MAINTENANCE AND MONITORING DISTRICT

FAIRFIELD, SOLANO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
I. INTRODUCTION
The establishment of a real-property-related assessment to fund the PVMMD Plan of Control responsibilities is described in this Engineer's Report. A previous Engineer's Report was prepared for the PVMMD, dated July 22, 2010, and was adopted by the PVMMD Board of Directors. The initial Engineer's Report was adopted prior to the completion of construction of developments within Area "I" (The Ridge) and Area "L" (Paradise 360). The PVMMD now wishes to revise and update its Engineer's Report to represent the as-built conditions that reflect the present nature and scope of its services. The purpose of the Engineer's Report is to update and replace the Engineer's Report dated July 22, 2010, and associated assessment.

II. BACKGROUND
The Fairfield City Council formed the Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District (PVMMD or District) on July 6, 2010 (Resolution No. 2010-188), under the authority of the California Public Resources Code, Division 17, Section 26500 et seq. The members of the Fairfield City Council act as the Board of Directors of the PVMMD.

The PVMMD Board of Directors approved the Plan of Control for the Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District (Plan of Control) with the approval of Resolution 2010-211 on July 20, 2010. The Plan of Control describes the PVMMD's responsibilities to permanently monitor and maintain PVMMD improvements within the District. This Engineer's Report describes the establishment of an assessment level to fund PVMMD activities necessary or incidental to geologic hazard mitigation, abatement, and control.

An initial Engineer's Report, dated July 22, 2010, was prepared by a registered professional engineer, certified in the State of California, in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 26651(a) and Section 4(b) of Article XIII (D) of the California Constitution. The Engineer's Report sets forth the estimated budget, the total assessment, the proposed estimate to be levied against each parcel within such territory, and a description of the method used in formulating the estimated assessment limits.

On October 5, 2010, the PVMMD Board of Directors adopted Resolution 2010-274, which approved the assessments against those parcels in the PVMMD as identified on the Boundary Map, which are specially benefited by the PVMMD. Subsequently, a Notice of Assessment and assessment diagram, were recorded, as provided for in Section 3114 of the California Streets and Highway Code, whereupon the assessment attached as a lien upon the properties within the PVMMD. The assessment can be levied in perpetuity at an amount up to the assessment limit, which is adjusted annually based on the percentage change in the San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward Consumers Price Index for All Urban Consumers.

The PVMMD includes residential developments, which were constructed between 2007 and 2021. The quantity and residential product types are described on Table 11-1.

ENGEO Page I 3 July 6. 2022
Packet Page 55 of 441Attachment 3 Page 5 of 28

F a irf ie ld G e o lo g ic H a z a rd A b a te m e n t D is tn c t 5 6 9 8 0 0 2 0 2 1
P a ra d is e I/a lle y M a in te n a n c e a n d M o n ilo n n q D is tric t -·-- -· --··- E n g in e e r s R eport
TABLE 11-1: Development Areas

SING LE-FAMILY VILLA S
DEVELO PM ENT DEVELO PM ENT SINGL-FAMILY RESIDENCES COTT ~GES APARTM ENTS RESIDENCES . (m edium .

AREA NAME (I d ·t ) (m edium d ·t ) (m edium
ow ensi Y density) ensi Y density)
T h e R id ge 20 50
K T h e E sta te s 150
L P ara d ise 3 6 0 68
Ill. GEOLOGIC HAZARD ABATEMENT DISTRICT BOUNDARIES
The land within the PVMMD boundary (PVMMD Area) is shown on the GHAD Boundary Plat in Exhibit A-1. The legal description of the PVMMD Area is included in Exhibit A-2.

IV. SERVICE LEVELS
The PVMMD's activities are those that are necessary or incidental to the prevention, mitigation, abatement, or control of geologic hazards including construction, maintenance, repair, or opera tion of any improvement; and the issuance and servicing of bonds issued to finance any of the foregoing.

The PVMMD provides for the administration and review of facilities within the budgeted limits, including the following services.

1. Oversight of PVMMD operations.

2. In conjunction with the Solano County Assessor's Office, setting the annual levy of assessments on the property tax rolls.

3. Engagement of technical professionals to perform the monitoring duties as described in the PVMMD Plan of Control and as required by various government agencies.

4. Performance of PVMMD maintenance activities in accordance with the Plan of Control.

These maintenance activities include:
• General maintenance of the surface drainage improvements on PVMMD and City-owned Parcels (APN 0167-864-030, 0167-856-080, 0167-841-160, and 0167-951-490). The PVMMD is responsible for monitoring, maintenance, and repair of the concrete-lined drainage ditches, sedimentation basins, riprap-lined spillways, and storm drain inlets, outlets, and pipelines.
• Monitoring and maintenance of deflection walls.
• Monitoring and maintenance of measurement devices, such as piezometers, inclinometers, and tilt meters, if installed in the future by the PVMMD. • Monitoring and repair of slopes and creek banks for erosion, landslide, and related slope instability.

ENGEO PJge I ,1 July 6. 2022
Packet Page 56 of 441Attachment 3 Page 6 of 28

Fairfield G eologic Hazard Abatem ent D istrict
5698 002 021
Paradise Valley M aintenance and M onilorinq D islricl
__ __ _ _ _ __ __ Eng~ne_ec~~epor t
• Maintenance of gravel-surfaced maintenance roads on PVMMD-owned parcels. • Maintenance of gates, fencing, and signage within the PVMMD-owned parcels. • Repair of gravel-surfaced maintenance roads on City-owned parcels (APNs 0167-864-030, 0167-856-080, 0167-841-160, and 0167-951-560) solely to the extent the maintenance roads are damaged by the use of PVMMD equipment on the roadways. • Vegetation control for fire suppression on PVMMD-owned parcels. • General maintenance including litter and graffiti removal on PVMMD-owned parcels.

5. Preparation of annual PVMMD budgets for approval by the PVMMD Board of Directors.

V. DESCRIPTION OF THE IMPROVEMENTS MAINTAINED BY

THE PVMMD
The PVMMD-maintained improvements are described in the Plan of Control. In general, these improvements include drainage systems, including concrete-lined drainage ditches in developed areas and PVMMD-owned parcels; storm drain inlets and outlets on PVMMD-owned parcels; subdrains and outlets; sedimentation basins, and deflection walls.

VI. ASSESSMENT METHOD AND BENEFIT
The PVMMD-maintained improvements described in Section IV are distributed within the PVMMD boundaries. Implementation and protection of these improvements provide a special benefit to all real property assessed within the PVMMD. The improvements and responsibilities listed in Section IV and the adopted Plan of Control provide specific benefits to the properties within the PVMMD Area, and the improvements are constructed for the benefit of those assessed and not the general public. The subject parcels are only being assessed for the reasonable costs of the proportional specific benefits conferred on the parcels.

A. Special Benefit and Proportionality
The improvements described in this document will confer some, or all, of the following special benefits to the assessed parcels within the PVMMD.

1. Protection from slope instability

2. Protection from erosion due to uncontrolled surface water

3. Protection of water quality

4. Protection from wild land fires due to unmanaged vegetation Construction of the PVMMD-maintained improvements and Plan of Control responsibilities are concentrated within the PVMMD-owned parcels and were a requirement to allow for development of Areas "I", "K", and "L"; therefore, the maintenance and repair of these improvements and lands are a special benefit to all residential parcels within the District.

Residential properties not located at or near the toe of the PVMMD-owned parcel slopes listed on Table Vl-1, have a lesser slope protection benefit; therefore, they receive a diminished ENGEO Page I 5 July 6. 2022
Packet Page 57 of 441Attachment 3 Page 7 of 28

F a irf ie ld G e o lo g ic H a z a rd A b a te m e n t D is tnc t 5698 002 021
Paradise Valley Mainlenance and Monitoring District
E n~1r:ee~:3_i3,epoE!.
special benefit and assessments are reduced accordingly. The proportion of benefit with respect to each of these categories is presented below in the assessment allocation formula.

TABLE Vl-1: PVMMD-owned Parcels

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL PARCEL LABEL SUBDIVISION NUMBER AREA (ACRES) NUMBER (APN) 0167-080-050 51.66
0167-080-170 33.65
0167-080-210 E 81-SD-1 6.02
0167-951-570 91-SD-19 0.94
B. Assessment Method
To allocate assessment in proportion to special benefit conferred on assessed parcels/units, a formula has been derived that estimates the special benefit conveyed by the project. The formula includes several factors, which are weighted based on their relative effect on special benefit. All parcels benefit from the monitoring, maintenance, and replacement of PVMMD-maintained improvements and mitigation of geologic hazards to provide continued transportation access, access to amenities, and reduction of the potential property devaluation that could occur in the event of mobilization and manifestation of geologic hazards within the PVMMD. Special benefit is derived considering the following factors, and weighting has been applied to each factor to note its relative importance as compared to other factors. In addition, including a respective parcel's frontage along the toe of the PVMMD-owned slopes, we applied our professional judgment to the factor values regarding the relative efficacy of protective devices and projections of the effects of the Project.

M , = B rt}:?) +HZ:))
R, = ( ( 0 75P (Lr=:(s,)) )CJ)
G, = 0.25P c~~)) + HZ:))
T, = Assessment at Parcel i
B = Total annual assessment-based revenue required to support the GHAD operating budget M = Monitoring, Maintenance, and Repair Assessment Factor at Parcel i R; = Slope Mitigation Factor at Parcel i
G; = Geologic Hazard Factor at Parcel i
P = PVMMD Target Reserve
ENGEO Paqe 16 July 6. 2022
Packet Page 58 of 441Attachment 3 Page 8 of 28

Fairfield Geologic Hazard Abatement Oistnct
5698.002.021 ----- -- ---
Paradise Valley rv1ai11te11a11ce and Monilorinq District _ __ _ E0g1neersRep_Clrt
Ao= Area within a Development
Xo = No. of Parcels/Residential Units within Development AM= Maximum Average Area per Residential Parcel/Unit within a Development Ho= Average Habitable Square Footage per Residence within a Development HM = Maximum Average Habitable Square Footage per Residence within a Development U = Parcel/Unit Area Factor
H = Habitable Square Foot Factor
Xs = No. of Parcels/Residential Units adjacent to the base of an GHAD-owned or City-owned slope within a Development
SF= Length of Slope Frontage within a Development
II~iCSF) = Summation Length of Slope Frontage Parcel i for Parcels i ton • Monitoring, Maintenance, and Repair Siting - As discussed, the PVMMD-maintained improvements and Plan of Control responsibilities were a requirement to allow for development of Areas "I", "K", and "L"; therefore, the maintenance and repair of these improvements and lands are a special benefit to all residential parcels within the District.

The special benefit is conveyed to each parcel based the ratio of the average units per acre for an individual residential unit within each of the developments, weighted at 80 percent. A secondary factor (20 percent) was applied to account for the average habitable square footage ratio of residential units within each of the developments. • Slope Mitigation Siting - Certain parcels at or near the toe of the PVMMD-owned slopes receive a slope instability mitigation special benefit beyond what is received by other residential parcels within the PVMMD. The slope-proximity-related geologic hazards include potential future instability of the natural and graded slopes, large retaining walls, and failure of the PVMMD slope mitigation improvements (sedimentation basins, deflection walls, berms, spillways, and stormwater improvements). The special benefit is calculated by determining the average lineal feet of PVMMD-owned/City parcel frontage per residential unit within each of the developments. For the additional special benefit, the ratio is applied to an amount of 75 percent of the target reserve value. • Geologic Hazard Siting - All residences within the PVMMD receive a geologic hazard benefit. The geologic hazards included in this category include, but are not limited to, slope instability of intra development slopes and retaining walls, erosion, and seismically induced ground deformation. The special benefit is calculated in the same manner as the Monitoring, Maintenance, and Repair Factor. For the additional special benefit, the ratio is applied to an amount equal to 25 percent of the target reserve value. • Parcel/Unit Area Ratio - Is the area within each individual development divided by the number of residential parcels/units, then the quotient is divided by the maximum area per residential parcel/unit.
• Habitable Square Foot Ratio - Is the average habitable area per parcel/unit in a development divided by the development with the maximum habitable area per residential unit.

The weighted values described above have been computed to reflect the relative importance of each factor in the judgment of the PVMMD manager and assessment engineer (ENGEO), then the resulting ratios of the total assessment are assigned to each parcel/unit on a pro-rata basis.

An assessment level is determined for each parcel based on these factors. In overview, a ENGEO Pa90 I 7 July 6. 2022
Packet Page 59 of 441Attachment 3 Page 9 of 28

F a irfie ld G e o lo q ic H a z a rd A b a te m e n t D is lri c l 5 6 9 8 0 0 2 .0 2 1
P a ra d is e V a lle y M a in te n a n c e an d M o ru lo rin q D is lric l E n g 1n_e~_s f3eport_
large-area parcel/unit located at or near the base of the PVMMD-owned parcels/units will derive the greatest special benefit and, therefore, is assessed the largest amount. A small-area parcel/unit located away from the vicinity of the PVMMD-owned parcels receives the least special benefit and is therefore assessed the smallest amount. Other parcels/units will range between these extremes.

TABLE Vl-2: Assessment Ratio per Development Area and Residential Product Type

DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT PRODUCT TYPE ASSESSMENT NUMBER

AREA NAME RATIO OF UNITS
The Ridge Villas -Apartments 0.41 50
The Ridge Cottages 0.42 20
K The Estates Single-Family Residences 1.0 150 (Low Density) L Paradise 360 Single-Family Residences 0.51 68 (Medium Density) In addition to the special benefit ratio identified in Table Vl-2, certain parcels at or near the toe of the PVMMD-owned slopes receive a slope instability mitigation special benefit beyond what is received by other residential parcels within the PVMMD ("Slope Mitigation Parcels/Units"). The slope instability assessment ratio shown on Table Vl-3 is determined by dividing the lineal feet of PVMMD-owned parcel frontage by the number of residential units within each of the developments.

TABLE Vl-3: Slope Instability Assessment Ratio per Development Area and Residential Product Type

DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT PRODUCT TYPE SLOPE INSTABILITY NUMBER

AREA NAME ASSESSMENT RATIO OF UNITS
The Ridge Villas -Apartments 0.35 20
The Ridge Cottages 0.35 6
K The Estates Single-Family Residences 1.0 26 (Low Density) L Paradise 360 Single-Family Residences 0.41 10 (Medium Density) VII. ASSESSMENT LIMIT - BUDGET
The purpose of this Engineer's Report is to establish the assessment level and the apportionment of the assessment within the PVMMD as required under Proposition 218. The annual budget in each subsequent fiscal year will apprise the PVMMD Board of Directors of the estimated budget for the upcoming year.

A financial analysis was performed to provide a framework for an operating budget for the ongoing abatement, mitigation, prevention, and control of geologic hazards within the PVMMD Annexation Area. In preparation of the budget, several factors were considered including:

1. Site geology

2. Remedial grading

3. Proximity of geologic hazards to proposed residences

4. Improvements and structures

5. Site access considerations

6. Elements requiring routine maintenance, including, but not limited to:
• Surface drainage facilities
-
ENGEO Paae I 8 July 6. 2022
L.·,- -. · .. ' C_,-.·--:r .... _(=;
Packet Page 60 of 441Attachment 3 Page 10 of 28

Fairfield G eoloqic H azard A batem e nt D istrr ct
5 6 9 8 .0 0 2 .0 2 1
Parad ise V alle y M aintenanc e and M o nitorin g D istric t Eng ine e rs R e po rt ---
• Graded slopes
• Sedimentation basins and deflection wall
• Fire breaks
Based on the estimated expenses for ongoing operations and allowing for larger (approximately $270,000) geologic events at 20-year intervals and maintenance of a reserve of $1,570,000 by 2051 (Fiscal Year 2022/2023 dollars), a budget was prepared for the purpose of estimating FY 2022/23 assessment levels (Exhibit B). Based on a review of the potential future allocation of the reserve funds, 75 percent was allocated to be a special benefit conferred on the Slope Mitigation Parcels· and 25 percent was allocated to other geologic hazard abatement efforts within all of the assessed parcels (Figure 1 ).

The engineer recommends an annual assessment for the PVMMD as shown on Table Vll-1 in Fiscal Year 2022/2023 dollars). An assessment roll showing the proposed FY 2022/23 assessment limit for each of the parcels/units within the PVMMD is attached (Exhibit C). The proposed initial assessment level will be automatically adjusted annually on June 30 to reflect the percentage change in the San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward Consumers Price Index for All Urban Consumers.

TABLE Vll-1: Recommended Annual Assessment for Fiscal Year 2022/23 DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT PRODUCT TYPE FY 2022/23 NUMBER OF

AREA NAME ASSESSMENT UNITS
The Ridge Villas Apartments $146 30
The Ridge Villas Apartments (Slope) $470 20
The Ridge Cottages $182 14
The Ridge Cottages (Slope) $474 6
K Estates Single-Family Residences $357 124
K Estates Single-Family Residences $1,282 26 (Slope)
L Paradise 360 Single-Family Residences $182 58
L Paradise 360 Single-Family Residences $520 10 (Slope) VIII. OW NER RESPONSIBILITIES
Northern California Retired Officers Community ("Owner") is responsible for managing and maintaining PVMMD Area "I" until the PVMMD accepts responsibility for the PVMMD-maintained improvements as set forth in the Plan of Control. In addition, the Owner is responsible for funding any necessary PVMMD functions or business undertaken for the PVMMD within Area "I" that the PVMMD Officers or Board of Directors determine are necessary before the PVMMD accepts the PVMMD Improvements. If the Owner fails to fund all or a portion of these costs, the costs shall be covered by the funds generated by and for the PVMMD (i.e., through the assessment), and the Owner shall be required to reimburse the PVMMD for such costs before the PVMMD can accept monitoring and maintenance responsibilities for the PVMMD Improvements.

ENGEO Page I 9 July 6, 2022
Packet Page 61 of 441Attachment 3 Page 11 of 28

E X H IB IT A
EXHIBIT 1 - Plat
EXHIBIT 2 - Legal Description
Packet Page 62 of 441Attachment 3 Page 12 of 28

POINT OF

BEGINNING
89~0042759
S8T05'00"E
L 1 - LINE NUMBER
C1 - CURVE NUMBER
(R) - DENOTES RADIAL BEARING
DA TE: APRIL 2010 EX HIB IT 1 SHEET 1 OF 2

G E O LO GIC H A Z A R D AB A T E M E NT DISTR ICT

A RE A 'I', 'K ' & 'L'

PARADISE VALLEY, CITY OF FAIRFIELD, CA
Carlson, Barbee, & Gibson, Inc.

CIVIL ENGINEER S • SURVEYORS • PLANNER S
6111 BOLLINGER CANYON ROAD, SUITE 150 SAN RAMON, CALIFO RNIA 94583 TELEPHONE: (925) 866-0322 FAX: (925) 866-8575
1022-30 G: \1022-30\ACAD\EXHIBIT\EXHIBITB.DWG
Packet Page 63 of 441Attachment 3 Page 13 of 28

LINE TABLE NO. BEARING LENGTH CURVE TABLE
NO. BEARING LENGTH L21 S89'12'50"E 451.79' NO. RADIUS DELTA LENGTH L1 S00'07' 40"W 719.26' L22 N13'4 7'1 O"E 33.81' C1 671.50' 16'17'28" 190.93' L2 S08'25'00"W 93.09' L23 S76'12'50"E 40.00' C2 728.50' 14'43'00" 187.12' L3 S49'31 '00"E 69.31' L24 N13'47'10"E 259.90' C3 471.50' 53·39'32" 441.57' L4 S38'12'00"E 72.96' L25 N48'37'1 O"E 145.45' C4 1017.50' 01'18'40" 23.28' LS S28'11 '00"E 521.48' L26 N48'37'1 O"E 165.41' cs 1089.00' 06'41' 48" 127.28' L6 S23'09'00"E 71.86' L27 N21 '52'1 O"E 432.96' C6 30.00' 92'07'50" 48.24' L7 S22'03'00"E 83.36' L28 N13'32'1 O"E 46.86'
L8 S11 '38'00"E 65.67' L29 N03'47'10"E 159.72'
L9 S07'51'00"E 350.94' L30 N13'12'50"W 149.82'
L10 S57'06'00"E 146.66' L31 N19'02'10"E 372.24'
L11 N66'28'00"E 265.68' L32 N30'12'10"E 252.13'
L12 N70'33'00"E 82.01' L33 N05'30'00"E 244.00'
L13 N76'47'00"E 75.56' L34 N55'59'00"W 142.52'
L14 N82'28'00"E 70.25' L35 S81 '11 '00"W 266.01'
L15 S78'22'00"E 100.21' L36 N52'24'00"W 94.18'
L16 N83'08'00"E 78.21' L37 N35'06'00"E 325.55'
L17 N73'18'40"E 406.40' L38 N30'30'00"E 175.41'
L18 N33'00'00"E 135.61' L39 S00'07' 40"W 266.79'
L19 S05'05'28"E 66.48'
L20 N86'13'12"E 71.50'
DA TE: APRIL 2010 EXHIBIT 1 SHEET 2 OF 2

GEOLOGIC HAZARD ABATEMENT DISTRICT

AREA 'I', 'K' & 'L'

PARADISE VALLEY, CITY OF FAIRFIELD, CA
Carlson, Barbee, & Gibson, Inc.

CIVIL ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS
6111 BOLLINGER CANYON ROAD, SUITE 150 SAN RAMON, CALIFORNIA 94583 TELEPHONE: (925) 866-0322 FAX: (925) 866-8575
1022-30 G: \1022-30\ACAD\EXHIBIT\EXHIBITB_B.DWG
Packet Page 64 of 441Attachment 3 Page 14 of 28

A P R I L 13 , 2 0 1 0
J O B N O .: 1 0 2 2 -3 0
E X H IB I T 2

LEGAL DESCRIPTION

GEOLOGIC HAZARD ABATEMENT DISTRICT

AREAS 'I', 'K' & 'L'

FAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA

REAL PROPERTY, SITUATE IN THE INCORPORATED TERRITORY OF THE CITY OF

FAIRFIELD, COUNTY OF SOLANO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEING ALL OF THAT CERTAIN MAP ENTITLED "THE AREA 'K', PARADISE VALLEY", RECORDED DECEMBER 16, 2004, IN BOOK 81 OF SUBDIVISION MAPS AT PAGE l, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SOLANO COUNTY, AND A

PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND GRANTED TO FIRST AMERICAN TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 30, 1989, IN SERIES NUMBER 1989-0042759 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, IN SAID OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SOLANO COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWESTERN CORNER OF SAID MAP (81 SD 1);

THENCE, ALONG THE WESTERN, SOUTHWESTERN AND SOUTHEASTERN LINE OF SAID MAP (81 SD 1), THE FOLLOWING THIRTY-ONE (31) COURSES:
1) SOUTH 00°07'40" WEST 719.26 FEET,
2) ALONG THE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT 671.50 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO

THE RIGHT, FROM WHICH THE CENTER OF SAID CURVE BEARS SOUTH 08°41'32" WEST, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16°17'28", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 190.93 FEET,
3) ALONG THE ARC OF A REVERSE 728.50 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE

LEFT, FROM WHICH THE CENTER OF SAID CURVE BEARS NORTH
24°59'00" EAST, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 14°43'00", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 187.12 FEET,
4) SOUTH 08°25' 00" WEST 93.09 FEET,
5) SOUTH 49°31'00" EAST 69.31 FEET,
6) SOUTH 38°12'00" EAST 72. 96 FEET,
7) SOUTH 28°11'00" EAST 521.48 FEET,
8) SOUTH 23°09' 00" EAST 71.86 FEET,
9) SOUTH 22°03 I 00" EAST 83.36 FEET,
10) SOUTH 11°38'00" EAST 65.67 FEET,
P, \ 1000 • 1099\1022 • 30\LEGALS\LG·0ll. DOC
Packet Page 65 of 441Attachment 3 Page 15 of 28

LEGAL DESCRIPTION

Page 2 of 4 ends

APRIL 13, 2010
JOB NO . : 10 2 2 - 3 0
11) SOUTH 07°51'00" EAST 350.94 FEET,
12) SOUTH 57°06'00" EAST 146.66 FEET,
13) NORTH 66°28'00" EAST 265.68 FEET,
14) NORTH 70°33'00" EAST 82.01 FEET,
15) NORTH 76°47'00" EAST 75.56 FEET,
16) NORTH 82°28'00" EAST 70.25 FEET,
17) SOUTH 78°22'00" EAST 100.21 FEET,
18) NORTH 83°08'00" EAST 78.21 FEET,
19) NORTH 73°18'40" EAST 406.40 FEET,
20) NORTH 33°00'00" EAST 135.61 FEET,
21) ALONG THE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT 471. 50 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO

THE RIGHT, FROM WHICH THE CENTER OF SAID CURVE BEARS SOUTH 31°15'00" WEST, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 53°39'32", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 441.57 FEET,
22) SOUTH 05°05'28" EAST 66.48 FEET,
23) ALONG THE ARC OF A TANGENT 1,017.50 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 01°18'40", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 23.28 FEET,
24) NORTH 86°13'12" EAST 71.50 FEET,
25) ALONG THE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT 1,089.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE

TO THE RIGHT, FROM WHICH THE CENTER OF SAID CURVE BEARS SOUTH 86°13'12" WEST, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06°41'48", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 127.28 FEET,
26) ALONG THE ARC OF A REVERSE 30.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE

LEFT, FROM WHICH THE CENTER OF SAID CURVE BEARS SOUTH
87°05' 00" EAST, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 92°07' 50"' AN ARC DISTANCE OF 48.24 FEET,
27) SOUTH 89°12'50" EAST 451.79 FEET,
28) NORTH 13°47'10" EAST 33.81 FEET,
29) SOUTH 76°12'50" EAST 40.00 FEET,
P: \1000 - 1099\1022 -J0\LEGALS\LG- 011. doc
Packet Page 66 of 441Attachment 3 Page 16 of 28

L E G A L D E S C R I P T I O N

Page 3 of 4 ends

APRIL 13, 2010
JOB NO.: 1022-30
30) NORTH 13°47' 10" EAST 259. 90 FEET, AND
31) NORTH 48°37' 10" EAST 145 .45 FEET TO THE EASTERN CORNER OF SAID MAP (81 SD 1), SAID CORNER ALSO BEING A POINT ON THE SOUTHEASTERN LINE OF SAID PARCEL OF LAND (89-0042759);
THENCE, ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERN LINE OF SAID PARCEL OF LAND (89- 0042759), THE FOLLOWING EIGHT (8) COURSES:
1) NORTH 48°37'1011 EAST 165.41 FEET,
2) NORTH 21°52'10" EAST 432.96 FEET,
3) NORTH 13°32'10" EAST 46.86 FEET,
4) NORTH 03°47'10" EAST 159.72 FEET,
5) NORTH 13°12'50" WEST 149.82 FEET,
6) NORTH 19°02'10" EAST 372.24 FEET,
7) NORTH 30°12'10" EAST 252.13 FEET, AND
8) NORTH 05°30'00" EAST 244.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERN CORNER

OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND GRANTED TO THE CITY OF
FAIRFIELD BY DEED RECORDED APRIL 28, 1993, IN SERIES NO. 1993-00036610 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, IN SAID OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SOLANO COUNTY;

THENCE, FROM SAID SOUTHEASTERN CORNER, ALONG THE SOUTHERN AND WESTERN LINE OF SAID PARCEL OF LAND (1993-00036610), THE FOLLOWING FIVE (5) COURSES:
1) NORTH 55°59'00" WEST 142.52 FEET,
2) SOUTH s1°11'00" WEST 266.01 FEET,
3) NORTH 52°24' 00" WEST 94.18 FEET,
4) NORTH 35°06' 00" EAST 325.55 FEET, AND
5) NORTH 30°30'00" EAST 175.41 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERN LINE OF SAID PARCEL OF LAND (89-0042759);
P:\1000 - 1099\1022-30\LEGALS\LG-0ll .doc
Packet Page 67 of 441Attachment 3 Page 17 of 28

L E G A L D E S C R I P T I O N

Page 4 of 4 ends

APRIL 13, 2010
JOB NO.: 1022-30

THENCE, ALONG SAID NORTHERN LINE AND WESTERN LINE OF SAID PARCEL OF LAND (89-0042759) I THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) COURSES:
1) NORTH 89°27'40" WEST 2,306.87 FEET,
2) NORTH 88°07'00" WEST 1,098.24 FEET, AND
3) SOUTH 00°07'40" WEST 266.79 FEET TO SAID POINT OF
BEGINNING.

CONTAINING 157.43 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS.

END OF DESCRIPTION
cHRISTOHER s. HARMISON, P.L.s.

L . S . NO . 7 1 7 6
EXPIRES: DECEMBER 31, 2011
P:\1000 - 1099\1022-30\LEGi\LS\LG-Oll.doc
Packet Page 68 of 441Attachment 3 Page 18 of 28

E X H IB IT B
BUDGET - July 6, 2022
Packet Page 69 of 441Attachment 3 Page 19 of 28

---------ENG EO
Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District
Budget - July 6, 2022

ASSUMPTIONS
Total No. of Residential Units - Actual
Equivalent Assessment Units
Equivalent Assessment Units (Slope)
Annual Assessment Limit per Residential Unit (FY 2022/2023) Annual Adjustment in Assessment (estimated)
Inflation ( estimated)
Investment Earnings ( estimated)
Frequency of Large-Scale Repair (years)
Cost of Large-Scale Repair (current$)
ESTIMATED ANNUAL EXPENSES IN 2022/23 DOLLARS
Administration (Manager, Treasurer, Clerk, and Legal Counsel) Outside Administration Services, Membership, and Insurance Monitoring Activities
Maintenance and Operation
Capital Improvements
Major Repair (Annualized)
288
214

39.25 Table Vll-1

2.5%

1.5%
20 $200,000
$19,850
$23,197
$9,000
$36,470
$9,492
$10,000
TOTAL $108.009
5698.002.021
July 6, 2022
Packet Page 70 of 441Attachment 3 Page 20 of 28

E X H IB IT C
ASSESSMENT ROLL - FISCAL YEAR 2022/23
Packet Page 71 of 441Attachment 3 Page 21 of 28

---------ENG E O
[),peel Excelter«:»
BOOK PAGE PARCEL NUMBER STREET STREET ASSESSMENT LIMIT NOTES/UNITS FY 2022/2023 167 80 5 $-
167 80 17 $-
167 80 21 Parcel E $-
167 80 22 6000 Patriot Plaza $- Clubhouse
167 80 22 6001 Patriot Plaza $- Amenities
167 8 22 6002 United Circle $182.00
167 8 22 6003 United Circle $182.00
167 8 22 6004 United Circle $182.00
167 8 22 6005 Honor Place $474.00
167 8 22 6006 Honor Place $474.00
167 8 22 6100 United Circle $4,700.00 6101 - 6110
167 8 22 6200 United Circle $4,700.00 6210- 6210
167 8 22 6211 United Circle $474.00
167 8 22 6212 United Circle $474.00
167 8 22 6213 United Circle $474.00
167 8 22 6214 United Circle $474.00
167 8 22 6215 United Circle $182.00
167 8 22 6216 United Circle $182.00
167 8 22 6217 United Circle $182.00
167 8 22 6218 United Circle $182.00
167 8 22 6219 United Circle $182.00
167 8 22 6220 United Circle $182.00
167 8 22 6221 Pride Lane $- Environmental
Center
167 8 22 6222 Allegiance Court $182.00
167 8 22 6223 Allegiance Court $182.00
167 8 22 6224 Allegiance Court $182.00
167 8 22 6225 Allegiance Court $182.00
167 8 22 6226 Allegiance Court $182.00
167 8 22 6300 United Circle $- Classroom
167 8 22 6400 United Circle $1,460.00 6401 - 6410
167 8 22 6500 United Circle $1,460.00 6501 - 6510
167 8 22 6600 United Circle $1,460.00 6601 - 6610
167 841 1 1408 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 2 1404 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 3 1400 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 4 1396 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 5 1392 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 6 1388 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 7 1384 Couples Circle $1,282.00
5698.002.021
July 6, 2022
Packet Page 72 of 441Attachment 3 Page 22 of 28

---------ENGEO
BOOK PAGE PARCEL NUMBER STREET STREET ASSESSMENT LIMIT NOTES/UNITS FY 2022/2023 167 841 8 1380 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 9 1376 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 10 1372 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 11 1368 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 12 1364 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 13 1360 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 14 1356 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 15 1352 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 16 Parcel B $357.00
167 841 17 4921 Couples Court $1,282.00
167 841 18 4917 Couples Court $357.00
167 841 19 4913 Couples Court $357.00
167 841 20 4909 Couples Court $357.00
167 841 21 4905 Couples Court $357.00
167 841 22 4901 Couples Court $357.00
167 842 1359 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 2 1363 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 3 1367 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 4 1371 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 5 1375 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 6 1379 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 7 1383 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 8 1387 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 9 1391 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 10 1395 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 11 1399 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 12 1403 Couples Circle $357.00
167 843 1394 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 843 2 1390 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 843 3 1386 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 843 4 1382 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 843 5 1378 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 843 6 1374 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 843 7 1370 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 843 8 1366 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 843 9 1362 Stewart Court $357.00
167 843 10 1358 Stewart Court $357.00
167 843 11 1354 Stewart Court $357.00
167 843 12 1350 Stewart Court $357.00
167 851 4845 Duval Street $357.00
5698.002.021
July 6, 2022
Packet Page 73 of 441Attachment 3 Page 23 of 28

---------ENG E O

BOOK PAGE PARCEL NUMBER STREET STREET ASSESSMENT LIMIT NOTES/UNITS FY 2022/2023
167 851 2 4841 Duval Street $357.00
167 851 3 4837 Duval Street $357.00
167 851 4 4833 Duval Street $357.00
167 851 5 4829 Duval Street $357.00
167 851 6 4825 Duval Street $357.00
167 851 7 4821 Duval Street $357.00
167 851 8 4817 Duval Street $357.00
167 851 9 4813 Duval Street $357.00
167 852 1415 Thunderbird Court $357.00
167 852 2 1419 Thunderbird Court $357.00
167 852 3 1422 Thunderbird Court $357.00
167 852 4 1418 Thunderbird Court $357.00
167 852 5 4816 Duval Street $357.00
167 852 6 4820 Duval Street $357.00
167 852 7 4824 Duval Street $357.00
167 852 8 1413 Jones Court $357.00
167 852 9 1417 Jones Court $357.00
167 852 10 1424 Jones Court $357.00
167 852 11 1420 Jones Court $357.00
167 852 12 1428 Duval Street $357.00
167 852 13 1432 Duval Street $357.00
167 852 14 1436 Duval Street $357.00
167 852 15 1440 Duval Street $357.00
167 852 16 1381 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 852 17 1385 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 852 18 1389 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 852 19 1393 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 852 20 1397 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 852 21 1401 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 852 22 1405 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 852 23 1409 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 852 24 1413 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 852 25 1417 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 852 26 1421 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 853 1414 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 853 2 1410 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 853 3 1406 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 853 4 1402 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 853 5 1398 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 854 1422 Stewart Drive $357.00
5698.002.021
July 6, 2022
Packet Page 74 of 441Attachment 3 Page 24 of 28

---------ENG EO

BOOK PAGE PARCEL NUMBER STREET STREET ASSESSMENT LIMIT NOTES/UNITS FY 2022/2023
167 854 2 1418 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 855 1 1407 Couples Circle $357.00
167 855 2 1411 Couples Circle $357.00
167 855 3 1415 Couples Circle $357.00
167 855 4 1419 Couples Circle $357.00
167 855 5 1423 Couples Circle $357.00
167 855 6 1427 Couples Circle $357.00
167 855 7 1431 Couples Circle $357.00
167 856 1 1436 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 856 2 1432 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 856 3 1428 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 856 4 1424 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 856 5 1420 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 856 6 1416 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 856 7 1412 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 856 8 Parcel B $-
167 861 4809 Duval Street $357.00
167 861 2 4805 Duval Street $357.00
167 861 3 4801 Duval Street $357.00
167 861 4 4797 Duval Street $357.00
167 861 5 4793 Duval Street $357.00
167 861 6 Parcel D $-
167 861 7 1401 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 861 8 1405 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 861 9 1409 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 861 10 1413 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 861 11 1417 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 861 12 1421 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 861 13 1425 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 861 14 1429 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 861 15 1433 Annandale Court $357.00
167 861 16 1437 Annandale Court $357.00
167 861 17 1441 Annandale Court $357.00
167 861 18 1445 Annandale Court $357.00
167 861 19 1449 Annandale Court $357.00
167 861 20 1453 Annandale Court $357.00
167 861 21 1446 Annandale Court $357.00
167 861 22 1442 Annandale Court $357.00
167 861 23 1438 Annandale Court $357.00
167 861 24 1434 Stewart Drive $357.00
5698.002.021
July 6, 2022
Packet Page 75 of 441Attachment 3 Page 25 of 28

---------ENG EO
BOOK PAGE PARCEL NUMBER STREET STREET ASSESSMENT LIMIT NOTES/UNITS FY 2022/2023 167 861 25 1430 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 861 26 1426 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 862 1425 Annandale Court $357.00
167 862 2 1429 Annandale Court $357.00
167 862 3 1433 Annandale Court $357.00
167 862 4 1437 Annandale Court $357.00
167 862 5 4800 Chesapeake Court $357.00
167 862 6 4804 Chesapeake Court $357.00
167 862 7 4808 Chesapeake Court $357.00
167 862 8 4805 Chesapeake Court $357.00
167 862 9 1410 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 862 10 1406 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 862 11 1402 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 862 12 4804 Duval Street $357.00
167 862 13 4808 Duval Street $357.00
167 862 14 4812 Duval Street $357.00
167 862 15 1411 Thunderbird Court $357.00
167 863 1 1435 Couples Circle $357.00
167 863 2 1439 Couples Circle $357.00
167 863 3 1443 Couples Circle $357.00
167 863 4 1447 Couples Circle $357.00
167 863 5 1451 Couples Circle $357.00
167 864 1456 Couples Circle $357.00
167 864 2 1452 Couples Circle $357.00
167 864 3 Parcel B $-
167 864 4 1444 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 864 5 1440 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 951 1427 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 2 4431 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 3 4435 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 4 Parcel C $-
167 951 5 4443 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 6 4447 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 7 4451 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 8 4455 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 9 4459 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 10 4463 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 11 4467 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 12 4471 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 13 4475 Tahiti Drive $182.00
5698.002.021
July 6, 2022
Packet Page 76 of 441Attachment 3 Page 26 of 28

---------ENGEO

BOOK PAGE PARCEL NUMBER STREET STREET ASSESSMENT LIMIT NOTES/UNITS FY 2022/2023
167 951 54 Parcel E $-
167 951 55 Parcel D $-
167 951 56 Parcel J $-
167 951 57 Parcel $-
167 952 1 4440 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 952 2 4444 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 952 3 4448 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 952 4 4452 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 952 5 4456 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 952 6 4460 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 952 7 4464 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 952 8 4468 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 952 9 4472 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 952 10 4476 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 952 11 Parcel H $-
167 952 12 4475 Bahama Way $182.00
167 952 13 4471 Bahama Way $182.00
167 952 14 4467 Bahama Way $182.00
167 952 15 4463 Bahama Way $182.00
167 952 16 4459 Bahama Way $182.00
167 952 17 4455 Bahama Way $182.00
167 952 18 4451 Bahama Way $182.00
167 952 19 4447 Bahama Way $182.00
167 952 20 4443 Bahama Way $182.00
167 952 21 4441 Bahama Way $182.00
$112,528.00
5698.002.021
July 6, 2022
Packet Page 77 of 441Attachment 3 Page 27 of 28

---------ENG EO

BOOK PAGE PARCEL NUMBER STREET STREET ASSESSMENT LIMIT NOTES/UNITS FY 2022/2023
167 951 14 4479 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 15 4483 Tahiti Court $182.00
167 951 16 4487 Tahiti Court $182.00
167 951 17 Parcel B $-
167 951 18 Parcel A $-
167 951 19 4500 Tahiti Court $520.00
167 951 20 4496 Tahiti Court $520.00
167 951 21 4492 Tahiti Court $520.00
167 951 22 4488 Tahiti Court $520.00
167 951 23 4484 Tahiti Court $520.00
167 951 24 Parcel G $-
167 951 25 4476 Bahama Way $520.00
167 951 26 4472 Bahama Way $520.00
167 951 27 4468 Bahama Way $182.00
167 951 28 4464 Bahama Way $182.00
167 951 29 4460 Bahama Way $182.00
167 951 30 4456 Bahama Way $182.00
167 951 31 4452 Bahama Way $182.00
167 951 32 4448 Bahama Way $182.00
167 951 33 4444 Bahama Way $182.00
167 951 34 4440 Bahama Way $182.00
167 951 35 4443 Cancun Court $182.00
167 951 36 4447 Cancun Court $182.00
167 951 37 4451 Cancun Court $182.00
167 951 38 4455 Cancun Court $182.00
167 951 39 4459 Cancun Court $182.00
167 951 40 4463 Cancun Court $182.00
167 951 41 4467 Cancun Court $182.00
167 951 42 4471 Cancun Court $520.00
167 951 43 4464 Cancun Court $520.00
167 951 44 4460 Cancun Court $520.00
167 951 45 4456 Cancun Court $182.00
167 951 46 4452 Cancun Court $520.00
167 951 47 4448 Cancun Court $182.00
167 951 48 4444 Cancun Court $182.00
167 951 49 Parcel F $-
167 951 50 4417 Cancun Drive $182.00
167 951 51 4421 Cancun Drive $182.00
167 951 52 4425 Cancun Drive $182.00
167 951 53 4429 Cancun Drive $182.00
5698.002.021
July 6, 2022
Packet Page 78 of 441Attachment 3 Page 28 of 28

GEOTECHNICAL

ENVIRONMENTAL

WATER RESOURCES

CONSTRUCTION SERVICES

COASTAL/MARINE GEOTECHNICS

2010 Crow Canyon Place, Suite 250  San Ramon, CA 94583  (925) 866-9000  Fax (888) 279-2698 www.engeo.com

Project No.
5698.002.021

July 6, 2022

Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District Board of Directors Chair Harry Price
Vice Chair Rick Vaccaro
Boardmember Pam Bertani
Boardmember Catherine Moy
Boardmember Doriss
Boardmember Chuck Timm
Boardmember Scott Tonnesen

Subject: Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District Fairfield, California

RESERVE FUND STUDY

Dear Chair Price and Boardmembers:

ENGEO, the Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District (PVMMD) Services Consultant, is pleased to provide this Reserve Fund Study for the PVMMD in Fairfield, California. The Paradise Valley PVMMD was formed in 2010 and is a Geologic Hazard Abatement District (GHAD) within the meaning of Public Resources Code Division 17. The boundary of the PVMMD encompasses a total of approximately 157.43 acres with PVMMD ownership of approximately

92.27 acres. The PVMMD includes 288 residences which consist of single-family and multi-family residential units. The PVMMD accepted monitoring, maintenance, and ownership responsibilities for selected parcels in 2016 and has been providing services as anticipated in the revised Plan of Control (Reference 1).

This reserve study was undertaken to forecast expenses that can reasonably be expected in the decades ahead and to confirm that sufficient funds are being set aside in the PVMMD’s reserve to pay for these expenses.

The reserve fund study is based on:

• Expenditures expected to address future monitoring, maintenance, and repair responsibilities as outlined in the Plan of Control (Reference 1).

• Long-term reserves to address larger geologic events. The projected long-term reserve requirement is based on the published work, “Estimating an Appropriate Maintenance and Monitoring District (GHAD) Reserve” and is provided as an attachment to this study.

The structure of the PVMMD is shown below.

Packet Page 79 of 441Attachment 4 Page 1 of 30

Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District Board of Directors 5698.002.021 Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District July 6, 2022 RESERVE FUND STUDY Page 2

REVENUE

PVMMD Assessments

As listed in the initial Engineer’s Report (Reference 2) for FY 2010/2011, initial assessment limits for the PVMMD were established at $940.00 per low-density residence and $470.00 per medium-density residence. The initial assessment limits are adjusted annually on June 30 to reflect the percentage change in the San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward Consumers Price Index (CPI) for All Urban Consumers. The inflation adjustments to the assessment limits are shown on Table 1.

TABLE 1: Assessment Limit Inflation Adjustments
FISCAL YEAR 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18

ANNUAL CPI
(JUNE),

SF/OAK/HAY,
1982-84=100
228.11 233.65 239.81 245.94 253.32 259.12 266.04 275.30

APPLIED INFLATION
RATE 2.43% 2.64% 2.56% 3.00% 2.29% 2.67% 3.48%

ASSESSMENT LIMIT
(LOW-DENSITY) $940.00 $962.83 $988.21 $1,013.47 $1,043.89 $1,067.79 $1,096.30 $1,134.46

ASSESSMENT

APPLIED RATE
(LOW-DENSITY)
-- -- $962.00 $987.00 $1,006.74 $1,026.89 $1,047.43 $1,072.57

ASSESSMENT LIMIT
(MEDIUM-DENSITY) $470.00 $481.40 $494.11 $506.74 $521.94 $533.89 $548.15 $567.23

ASSESSMENT

APPLIED RATE
(MEDIUM-DENSITY)
-- -- $481.00 $493.00 $502.86 $513.23 $523.49 $536.05
Packet Page 80 of 441Attachment 4 Page 2 of 30

Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District Board of Directors 5698.002.021 Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District July 6, 2022 RESERVE FUND STUDY Page 3

FISCAL YEAR 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22
ANNUAL CPI (JUNE) 286.06 295.26 300.03 309.50
SF/OAK, 1967=100 3.91% 3.22% 1.62% 3.16%

ASSESSMENT LIMIT
(LOW-DENSITY) $1,178.80 $1,216.7
1 $1,236.37 $1,275.39

ASSESSMENT

APPLIED RATE
(LOW-DENSITY)
$1,110.11 $1,158.9
5 $1,158.95 $878.00

ASSESSMENT LIMIT
(MEDIUM-DENSITY) $589.40 $608.36 $618.18 $637.70

ASSESSMENT

APPLIED RATE
(MEDIUM-DENSITY)
$536.05 $579.22 $579.22 $439.00

The average annual inflation rate since approval of an assessment limit in fiscal year (FY) 2010/11 has been 3.24 percent. As shown on Table 1, the annual levy has been slightly less than the assessment limit until setting of the FY 2021/22 levy. On July 20, 2021, the PVMMD Board of Directors approved Resolution PVMMD 2021-05 (Reference 3) that approved a revised Engineer’s Report that reduced the FY 2021/22 levy for low- and medium-density residential units to $878 and $439, respectively, significantly below the assessment limit. The reduced levy amount below the assessment limit was based on the recommendation in the Reserve Study prepared for the PVMMD in 2018 (Reference 4).

The FY 2021/22 assessment roll identifies of 216 assessed parcels. The low-density residential units are levied at a rate of $878 per unit and the medium-density residential units are levied at a rate of $439 per unit. The total levy for the 2021/22 FY is $161,552.00.

Assessments are levied on the first fiscal year after issuance of a building permit for a residential parcel. Based on a review of construction and the FY 2021/22 assessment roll, an additional 72 residential units will be subject to the levy of an assessment in FY 2022/23. With these additional units, the residential units subject to assessment would total 288.

Inflation and Investment Estimates

Table 2 provides the projected investment returns, inflation, and real rate of return used to prepare the pro-forma budgets for the FY2010/11 Engineer’s Report, 2018 Engineer’s Report, and this Reserve Study.

TABLE 2: Inflation and Investment Estimates
ENGINEER’S REPORT (2010)/RESERVE STUDIES (2018 and 2022) 2010 2018 2022 Investment Return 4.0% 3.0% 2.0%
Inflation 2.0% 2.0% 2.5%
Real Rate of Return 2.0% 1.0% -0.5%

For this Reserve Study, we are estimating an annual investment return of 1.5 percent for the 40-year pro forma budget. The investment return is based on a review of FY 2019/20 and FY 2020/21 actual returns and a discussion with the PVMMD treasurer. For inflation, we are estimating an annual inflation rate of 2.5 percent. This is near the inflation target of 2 percent Packet Page 81 of 441Attachment 4 Page 3 of 30

Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District Board of Directors 5698.002.021 Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District July 6, 2022 RESERVE FUND STUDY Page 4

adopted by the Federal Open Market Committee in January 2012 (Reference 5). In their recent economic projections, Federal Reserve Bank policymakers forecast that inflation for the next 3 years would be at 2.6 percent in 2022, 2.3 percent in 2023 and 2.1 percent in 2024, which is in line with the estimates used in this reserve study, although the reserve study pro forma budget analyzes a period of 40 years.

Higher real rates of return decease the assessment necessary to support the operations of the PVMMD and maintain an appropriate target reserve. If the real rate of return is negative, as is projected in this reserve study, a portion of the assessment is applied to maintaining constant-dollar value for the target reserve funds. If the PVMMD is able to obtain a positive real rate of return over the long term, this could allow for an annual levy below the assessment limit or a reduction in the assessment limit.

PVMMD RESPONSIBILITIES

Based on the District’s Plan of Control (Reference 1), PVMMD responsibilities include:

• General maintenance of the surface drainage improvements on PVMMD and City-owned parcels (APN 0167-864-030, 0167-856-080, 0167-841-160, and 0167-951-490). The PVMMD is responsible for monitoring, maintenance, and repair of the concrete-lined drainage ditches, sedimentation basins, riprap-lined spillways, and storm drain inlets, outlets, and pipelines.

• Monitoring and maintenance of deflection walls.

• Monitoring and maintenance of measurement devices, such as piezometers, inclinometers, and tiltmeters, if installed in the future by the PVMMD.

• Monitoring and repair of slopes and creek banks for erosion, landslide, and related slope instability.

• Maintenance of gravel-surfaced maintenance roads on PVMMD-owned parcels.

• Repair of gravel-surfaced maintenance roads on City-owned parcels (APNs 0167-864-030, 0167-856-080, 0167-841-160, and 0167-951-560) solely to the extent the maintenance roads are damaged by the use of PVMMD equipment on the roadways.

In addition to PVMMD responsibilities to abate, mitigate, prevent, and control geologic hazards, the PVMMD has responsibilities as a landowner within the PVMMD-owned parcels, including:

• Vegetation management for fire suppression
• Litter and graffiti removal
• Fencing, gates, and signage

PROJECTED EXPENSES

ENGEO prepared the initial 2010 Engineer’s Report used to establish the assessment limit for the PVMMD. By resolution, the PVMMD Board of Directors approved the Engineer’s Report and ordered the assessment on October 5, 2010, with the approval of Resolution 2010-274. Since the transfer of Plan of Control responsibilities from the developer to the PVMMD, intermittent Packet Page 82 of 441Attachment 4 Page 4 of 30

Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District Board of Directors 5698.002.021 Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District July 6, 2022 RESERVE FUND STUDY Page 5

site-monitoring events have been completed to observe and provide maintenance and repair recommendations. The most recent site monitoring event was completed on December 13, 2021, (Reference 6).

In general, expenses have been lower than estimated in the approved 2010 Engineer’s Report.

We attribute the additional reserve accumulation to a number of factors including: (1) the PVMMD has not accepted monitoring and maintenance responsibilities for all of the improvements within Area “I”, (2) transfer of ownership for PVMMD-owned parcels and associated District maintenance responsibilities did not occur until 2016, which is later than anticipated in the 2010 Engineer’s Report, (3) 10 of the 15 years since the completion of mass grading have had below-average rainfall; therefore, there has been a reduced level of slope instability and erosion, (4) monitoring and scheduled maintenance have been deferred on PVMMD-maintained improvements and PVMMD-owned parcels, and (5) a large-scale repair (estimated at $200,000 in FY 2010/11 dollars every 10 years) has not yet been necessary within the PVMMD-maintained areas.

Additional details for each of the items contributing to lower actual expenses are provided below.

Transfer of Plan of Control Responsibilities from the Developer to the PVMMD

The PVMMD has maintenance and monitoring responsibilities for all the parcels within the District with the exception of parcels within Area “I” (The Ridge). As construction within The Ridge nears completion, we anticipate that parcels within it will be offered for transfer from the developer to the PVMMD in FY 2022/23. The transfer of the remaining parcels from the developer to the PVMMD will result in additional PVMMD expenses that were anticipated in the 2010 Engineer’s Report and are included in the estimates for this reserve study.

It appears that routine maintenance of PVMMD-maintained improvements has been deferred.

Since a major benefit of being within a GHAD is the ability to conduct preventive maintenance and, therefore, likely reducing repair costs, this reserve study anticipates a prudent level of scheduled preventive maintenance.

Annual Rainfall Data since the Completion of Mass Grading

Annual rainfall data for the Fairfield area are shown on Graph 1. The average rainfall in the Fairfield area is approximately 25 inches per year. Earthwork and major PVMMD-maintained improvements were completed by 2007, and the majority of Plan of Control responsibilities have been transferred from the developer to the PVMMD. Since the completion of mass-grading activities, 10 of the 15 years have had below-average rainfall by an average of approximately 18 percent. The projected expenses used in this study assume average rainfall totals, which may include more slope instability than has occurred since the completion of mass grading activities.

Packet Page 83 of 441Attachment 4 Page 5 of 30

Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District Board of Directors 5698.002.021 Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District July 6, 2022 RESERVE FUND STUDY Page 6

GRAPH 1: Fairfield Area Rainfall Years 2007/08 to 2021/22 (to date)

Expense Estimates

To prepare the current PVMMD reserve fund amount, we reviewed the following documents and conditions.

• 2010 Engineer’s Report
• 2018 Reserve Study
• Site Monitoring Reports from 2013, 2018, 2021, and 2022 • Existing site conditions
• “As-built” plans
• Revenue and expense information

Some of the initial expense estimates remain valid, but other amounts have been adjusted to account for site performance over the past 15 years, “as-built” conditions, and cost estimate bids for maintenance and emergency response items received by other GHADs in the Bay Area.

Adjusted for inflation, annualized PVMMD expenses calculated from the adopted 2010 Engineer’s Report would be $258,726. As shown in Exhibit A and used in the calculations for Exhibit B, the annualized PVMMD expenses are $108,009, which is an over 50 percent decrease in estimated expenses.

Large-Scale Repair

A large-scale landslide or other geologic hazard (estimated at $200,000 in FY 2022/23 dollars every 10 years to repair) has not occurred within the PVMMD-maintained areas. Based on the site performance since mass grading, we have extended the recurrence interval for large scale repairs from 10 to 20 years for estimating expenses for this reserve study.

0.00 5.00

10.00 15.00

20.00 25.00

30.00 35.00

40.00 45.00
Actual Average Rainfall Average Annual Rainfall
Packet Page 84 of 441Attachment 4 Page 6 of 30

Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District Board of Directors 5698.002.021 Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District July 6, 2022 RESERVE FUND STUDY Page 7

RESERVE ESTIMATION AND METHODOLOGY

For the 2010 Engineer’s Report and in the 2018 Reserve Study, we estimated the reserve ® appropriate for the Paradise Valley PVMMD using the following factors from the attached paper titled, “Estimating an Appropriate PVMMD Reserve” dated July 6 1999 (Exhibit C).

• Number of assessed units (n)
• Level of geotechnical risk within the development boundaries (g) • Average value of assessed properties (v)
• Relative density of construction (d)

Table 3 provides the inputs and target reserve amounts calculated in 2007, 2018, and 2022 dollars, respectively.

TABLE 3: Target Reserve Calculations
Paradise Valley Target Reserve R=v(d+gn)
2010 2018 2022
Number of Assessed Units (n) 380 320 288
Average Value of each residence (v) $360,000 $575,000 $687,000 Geotechnical Risk Factor (g) 0.003 0.003 0.001
Density Factor (d) 2 2 2
Target Reserve (Rounded) $1,130,000 $1,700,000 $1,570,000

For the current reserve study, we updated the reserve calculation inputs, as appropriate. A total of 288 residential units constructed are expected to be subject to the levy of a PVMMD assessment. The average value of assessed residential properties is used as a surrogate index to represent local construction costs over time. The average value of assessed properties is based on current values derived from web-based sources. In the initial Engineer’s Report, it was estimated that the assessed values would track with inflation. The current survey of property values allows for an adjustment, as the value of assessed properties has not tracked with the consumer price index measure of inflation.

Items considered in determining the level of geotechnical risk include:

• Site geology including seismic hazards.
• Corrective grading and other geotechnical mitigation measures. • Proximity of geologic hazards to PVMMD-maintained improvements. • Performance of the site improvements.

An earthquake of moderate to high magnitude generated within the San Francisco Bay Region could cause considerable ground shaking at the site, similar to that which has occurred in the past, possibly damaging PVMMD-maintained improvements and causing seismically-induced landslides. The Green Valley fault is located approximately 9.5 miles west of the limits of the PVMMD. Predictions for the nearby segments of the Green Valley fault indicate that there is approximately a 16 percent chance of a 6.7 magnitude earthquake in approximately the next 30 years.

The corrective grading and geotechnical mitigation improvements are not significantly different from those completed during the mass grading for the development and as accounted for in the Packet Page 85 of 441Attachment 4 Page 7 of 30

Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District Board of Directors 5698.002.021 Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District July 6, 2022 RESERVE FUND STUDY Page 8

initial Engineer’s Report. Likewise, the proximity of geologic hazards to PVMMD-maintained improvements does not appear significantly different from those encountered during mass grading for the site. The PVMMD-maintained slopes and improvements appear to be performing somewhat better than anticipated in 2010; therefore, we have reduced the geotechnical risk factor from 0.003 to 0.001. The geotechnical risk factor used in the target reserve calculation ranges between 0.001 to 0.01, where 0.001 represents the lowest risk and 0.01 represents a site with the highest risk. The reduction from 0.003 to 0.001 lowered the calculated target reserve by approximately $400,000.

The relative density of construction is the maximum number of units expected to be impacted by a major geologic event. The existing configuration of the development footprint is similar to that on the site plans available at the time the initial Engineer’s Report was prepared; therefore, the relative density value has not been adjusted.

Based on these parameters, we estimate that an appropriate long-term reserve for the PVMMD for 288 units would be approximately $1,570,000 in current dollars. The $1,570,000 reserve amount would allow the PVMMD to respond to anticipated events within the PVMMD, while still having funds to continue its other administration, maintenance, and monitoring functions.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

With an estimated PVMMD account balance of approximately $1,500,000 at the end of the 2021/22 fiscal year, an adequate reserve appears to have been achieved. In 2010, it was forecast that an adequate reserve would be accumulated over approximately 40 years, but based on lower PVMMD expenses, this has been achieved in 12 years.

Since the revised reserve target has been reached, the PVMMD Manager recommends that the PVMMD Board of Directors consider adjusting the levy on residences within the PVMMD for FY 2022/23 as shown on Table 2. Recommended levies for residential parcels not located at the toe of the GHAD-owned parcels slopes (Slope Mitigation Parcels) would be significantly lower than the anticipated FY 2022/23 assessment limit. Details of the apportionment of the GHAD assessment are provided in the updated 2022 Engineer’s Report (Reference 7). An assessment roll showing the proposed FY 2022/23 assessment limit for each of the parcels/units within the PVMMD is attached (Exhibit D).

TABLE 4: Recommended Assessment Levy for FY2022/23

RESIDENTIAL TYPE NUMBER

OF UNITS

TOTAL ANNUAL

ASSESSMENT LIMIT
SFR (Low Density) – Slope Mitigation Parcel 26 $1,282
SFR (Low Density) 124 $357
SFR (Medium Density) – Slope Mitigation Parcel 10 $520
Cottage (Medium Density) – Slope Mitigation Parcel 6 $474 SFR (Medium Density) 72 $182
Villa (Medium Density) – Slope Mitigation Parcel 20 $470 Villa (Medium Density) 30 $146
TOTAL 288

Packet Page 86 of 441Attachment 4 Page 8 of 30

Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District Board of Directors 5698.002.021 Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District July 6, 2022 RESERVE FUND STUDY Page 9

As provided in the 2010 Engineer’s Report, the annual assessment and assessment limit will be adjusted for inflation. Ongoing assessments, even at an amount lower than the assessment limit, will allow the PVMMD to continue funding its other administration, maintenance, and monitoring functions including a larger repair. We are not recommending that the assessment limit be lowered at this time. The assessment limit would continue to be adjusted for inflation as provided in the approved Engineer’s Report.

If you have any questions regarding the contents of this letter, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely,

ENGEO Incorporated

Eric Harrell, CEG Uri Eliahu, GE

eh/ue/ca

Attachments: List of Selected References
Exhibit A: Expense Details
Exhibit B: Base Pro Forma Budget with $1,570,000 Reserve (2022/23 dollars) Slope Mitigation Parcels Adjustment Pro Forma Budget with $1,570,000 Reserve (2022/23 dollars)
Exhibit C: Estimating an Appropriate GHAD Reserve
Exhibit D: Assessment Roll
Packet Page 87 of 441Attachment 4 Page 9 of 30

5698.002.021
July 6, 2022

LIST OF SELECTED REFERENCES

1. ENGEO. 2022. Revised Plan of Control for Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District (PVMMD), Fairfield, California. February 22, 2022 (Draft). Project No. 5698.002.022.

2. ENGEO. 2010. Engineer’s Report for Geologic Maintenance and Monitoring District, Paradise Valley Areas “I”, “K”, and “L”, City of Fairfield, California. July 22, 2010. Project No. 5698.100.101.

3. ENGEO. 2018. Reserve Fund Study, Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District, Fairfield, California. March 26, 2018. Project No. 5698.002.000.

4. Fairfield, City of, Resolution PVMMD 2021-05, Resolution of the Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District Board Approving the 2021-2022 Supplement to Engineer’s Report, As Modified, and Ordering the Levy of Assessment for the Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District. July 20, 2021.

5. United States Federal Reserve Board of Governors, Federal Open Market Committee Statement of Longer-Run Goals and Policy Strategy, Press Release, January 25, 2012.

6. ENGEO. 2022. Monitoring Report, Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District, Fairfield, California. February 28, 2022 (Draft). Project No. 5698.002.021.

7. ENGEO. 2022. Engineer’s Report for Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District, Areas “I”, “K”, and “L”, Fairfield, Solano County, California. July 6, 2022 (Draft). Project No. 5698.002.021

Packet Page 88 of 441Attachment 4 Page 10 of 30

5698.002.021
July 6, 2022

EXHIBIT A

Expense Details
Packet Page 89 of 441Attachment 4 Page 11 of 30

Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District (PVMMD) Budget Reserve Study Expense Details
=
Item No.Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Cost Reoccurrence Interval (Years)Annual Total Budget Comments 1 Administration and Accounting
GHAD Manager monthly 12 $200 $2,400 1.0 $2,400
Based on a review of previous annual expenses.

Joint Powers Agreement with City of Fairfield to
staff and provide PVMMD Manager services.

GHAD Engineer monthly 12 $1,083 $13,000 1.0 $13,000
Based on a review of previous annual expenses.

Joint Powers Agreement with City of Fairfield to
staff and provide PVMMD Engineer services.

GHAD Treasurer quarterly 4 $425 $1,700 1.0 $1,700
Based on a review of previous annual expenses.

Joint Powers Agreement with City of Fairfield to
staff and provide PVMMD Treasurer services.

GHAD Clerk ls 1 $350 $350 1.0 $350
Based on a review of previous annual expenses.

Joint Powers Agreement with City of Fairfield to
staff and provide PVMMD Clerk services.

GHAD Services Consultant monthly 12 $1,500 $18,000 1.0 $18,000 Contract with ENGEO to support day-to-day
operations of the PVMMD as the PVMMD
Services Consultant.

Legal Cousel ls 1 $2,400 $2,400 1.0 $2,400 From FY 2021-22 Requested Budget approved July 20, 2021
Insurance - Open Space Areas acre 92 $12 $1,104 1.0 $1,104 This cost estimate is based on fees currently
charged to GHADs in California through the
California Association of GHADs.

Membership dues for the California Association
of Geologic Hazard Abatement Districts ls 1 $172 $172 1.0 $172 This cost estimate is based of membership fees
currently charged by the California Association of
GHADs ($100 plus $0.25/residential parcel).

Solano County Assessor's Fees ls 1 $2,121 $2,121 1.0 $2,121 From FY 2021-22 Requested Budget approved July 20, 2021
Advertising ls 1 $300 $300 1.0 $300 From FY 2021-22 Requested Budget approved July 20, 2021
Assessment Roll and Levy Update ls 1 $1,500 $1,500 1.0 $1,500 This cost estimate is based on fees currently charged to similar sized GHADs.

Subtotal $43,047
5698.002.021
July 6, 2022
Packet Page 90 of 441Attachment 4 Page 12 of 30

Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District (PVMMD) Budget Reserve Study Expense Details
=
Item No.Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Cost Reoccurrence Interval (Years)Annual Total Budget Comments 2 Professional Services
GHAD Monitoring Event including
instrumentation - April and October ls 1 $4,000 $4,000 0.5 $8,000 The frequency of monitoring is based on the
adopted Plan of Control requirements for
PVMMD. Monitoring budget estimates are based
on the fees these services are currently being
provided to the GHAD and are based approved
Engineer's Report.

Heavy Rainfall Event Monitoring ls 1 $4,000 $4,000 4.0 $1,000 The frequency of monitoring is based on the
adopted Plan of Control requirements for
PVMMD. Monitoring budget estimates are based
on the fees these services are currently being
provided to the GHAD and are based approved
Engineer's Report.

Subtotal $9,000
5698.002.021
July 6, 2022
Packet Page 91 of 441Attachment 4 Page 13 of 30

Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District (PVMMD) Budget Reserve Study Expense Details
=
Item No.Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Cost Reoccurrence Interval (Years)Annual Total Budget Comments 3 Maintenance & Operation
Subdrains and outlets each 5 $100 $500 5.0 $100
We do not anticipate regular maintenance on the
subdrain outfalls which tend to have low flow
volumes, but this budget figure allows for
maintenance or repair as may be necessary.

Sediment/Debris Removal concrete-lined
drainage ditches.lf 7,230 $0.50 $3,615 1.0 $3,615 Services currently contracted by the other GHAD's with an inflation adjustment.

Annual Vegetation Management on Gravel-
Surfaced Roadways sf 33,650 $0.20 $6,730 1.0 $6,730 Vegetation removal and herbicide treatment.

Slope Stabilization ls 1 $27,000 $27,000 4.0 $6,750
This budget items provides for ongoing slope
stabilization that may include minor landslide
repair activities. This estimate is based on the
approved Engineer's Report and the performance
of the site.

Erosion Repairs ls 1 $27,000 $27,000 3.0 $9,000
This budget items provides for ongoing erosion
repairs and protection. This estimate is based on
the approved Engineer's Report and the
performance of the site.

Maintenance of the 3 onsite sedimentation
basins including, vegetation, and debris
removal.
each 3 $1,500 $4,500 1.0 $4,500 Vegetation and debris removal with proper offsite disposal.

PVMMD-owned Parcel Vegetation Management -
Fire Suppression acre 9 $600 $5,400 1.0 $5,400 Budget anticipates two cuttings per year.

Open Space Litter Collection and Removal each 1 $750 $750 2.00 $375 Budget anticipates two events per year.

Subtotal $36,470
5698.002.021
July 6, 2022
Packet Page 92 of 441Attachment 4 Page 14 of 30

Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District (PVMMD) Budget Reserve Study Expense Details
=
Item No.Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Cost Reoccurrence Interval (Years)Annual Total Budget Comments 4 Capital Improvements
Concrete-lined drainage ditch replacement lf 7,230 $50 $361,500 75.0 $2,410 We have provided for a 75-year replacement
cycle for the concrete-lined drainage ditches for
50 percent of the ditches. This replacement
quantity applies to concrete lined drainage ditch
that is not involved with slope instability.

Drainage ditches that are involved with slope
instability would be repaired or replaced during
corrective work for the individual events.

Open space storm drain pipeline (18-inch
diameter), sedimentation basin inlets and
outfalls (3), and storm drain inlets (19).
lf 1,330 $250 $332,500 75.0 $2,217
We have provided for a 75-year replacement
cycle for 50 percent of the open space storm
drain pipelines and associated facilities. This
replacement quantity applies to system
components that are not damaged due to slope
instability.

Fence lf 3,000 $25 $75,000 25.0 $1,500
PVMMD-owned Parcel fence replacement. Cost
may be shared with adjasent property owners;
therefore, budget is estimate is for 50 percent of
the perimeter fence length.

Gravel-surfaced roadways sf 33,650 $4 $134,600 40.0 $3,365 We anticipate a 3-inch overlay of class 2 aggregate base rock on roadways.

Subtotal $9,492
5698.002.021
July 6, 2022
Packet Page 93 of 441Attachment 4 Page 15 of 30

Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District (PVMMD) Budget Reserve Study Expense Details
=
Item No.Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total Cost Reoccurrence Interval (Years)Annual Total Budget Comments 5 Major Repair (Annualized)ls 1 $200,000 $200,000 20.0 $10,000 This figure represents the annualized repair cost estimate for a $270,000 repair event ($200,000
in FY 2010/11 dollars) that occurs on average
every 20 years. This has been estimated based
on what is considered the most likely failure,
which is in the sedimentation backcuts. We have
estimated that a failure of this type could involve
approximately 3,000 to 5,000 cubic yards of
displaced material (100 feet wide, 100 feet in
length, and up to 15 feet in depth). Based on site
performance to date, we have increaced the
average reoccurance interval for this type of
event to 20 years.

Subtotal $10,000
TOTAL $108,009
5698.002.021
July 6, 2022
Packet Page 94 of 441Attachment 4 Page 16 of 30

5698.002.021
July 6, 2022

EXHIBIT B

Pro Forma Budget with $1,570,000 Reserve
(2022/23 dollars)

Slope Mitigation Parcels Adjustment Pro Forma Budget with $1,570,000 Reserve (2022/23 dollars)
Packet Page 95 of 441Attachment 4 Page 17 of 30

Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District District (PVMMD) FISCAL YEAR (Starting July 1) 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 Cumulative No. of Units (Equivalent)214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 214 A. INCOME
Assessment 76,459 78,371 80,330 82,338 84,397 86,506 88,669 90,886 93,158 95,487 97,874 100,321 102,829 105,400 108,035 110,736 113,504 116,342 119,250 122,231 125,287 128,419 131,630 134,921 138,294 141,751 145,295 148,927 152,650 156,467 B. PROJECTED EXPENSES

1. Administration and Accounting 37,850 38,796 39,766 40,760 41,779 42,824 43,894 44,992 46,117 47,269 48,451 49,662 50,904 52,177 53,481 54,818 56,189 57,593 59,033 60,509 62,022 63,572 65,161 66,791 68,460 70,172 71,926 73,724 75,567 77,457 Solano County Assessor's Fees 1,300 1,332 1,366 1,400 1,435 1,471 1,507 1,545 1,584 1,623 1,664 1,705 1,748 1,792 1,837 1,883 1,930 1,978 2,027 2,078 2,130 2,183 2,238 2,294 2,351 2,410 2,470 2,532 2,595 2,660

2. Professional Services 9,000 9,225 9,456 9,692 9,934 10,183 10,437 10,698 10,966 11,240 11,521 11,809 12,104 12,407 12,717 13,035 13,361 13,695 14,037 14,388 14,748 15,116 15,494 15,881 16,279 16,685 17,103 17,530 17,968 18,418

3. Maintenance & Operation 20,720 21,238 21,769 22,313 22,871 23,443 24,029 24,630 25,245 25,876 26,523 27,186 27,866 28,563 29,277 30,009 30,759 31,528 32,316 33,124 33,952 34,801 35,671 36,563 37,477 38,414 39,374 40,358 41,367 42,402

4. Slope-Erosion Stabilization 15,750 16,144 16,547 16,961 17,385 17,820 18,265 18,722 19,190 19,670 20,161 20,665 21,182 21,712 22,254 22,811 23,381 23,965 24,565 25,179 25,808 26,453 27,115 27,793 28,487 29,200 29,930 30,678 31,445 32,231

5. Repair - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 327,723 - - - - - - - - -

6. Capital Improvement 9,492 9,729 9,973 10,222 10,477 10,739 11,008 11,283 11,565 11,854 12,151 12,454 12,766 13,085 13,412 13,747 14,091 14,443 14,804 15,174 15,554 15,943 16,341 16,750 17,168 17,598 18,038 18,489 18,951 19,424

7. Misc. Expenses 5,197 5,327 5,460 5,597 5,737 5,880 6,027 6,178 6,332 6,490 6,653 6,819 6,989 7,164 7,343 7,527 7,715 7,908 8,106 8,308 8,516 8,729 8,947 9,171 9,400 9,635 9,876 10,123 10,376 10,635 SUBTOTAL - EXPENSES 99,309 101,792 104,336 106,945 109,618 112,359 115,168 118,047 120,998 124,023 127,124 130,302 133,559 136,898 140,321 143,829 147,424 151,110 154,888 158,760 490,452 166,797 170,967 175,241 179,622 184,113 188,716 193,434 198,270 203,226 RESERVE 1,477,150 (23,421) (24,006) (24,607) (25,222) (25,852) (26,499) (27,161) (27,840) (28,536) (29,250) (29,981) (30,730) (31,499) (32,286) (33,093) (33,920) (34,768) (35,638) (36,529) (365,165) (38,378) (39,337) (40,321) (41,329) (42,362) (43,421) (44,507) (45,619) (46,760) EARNINGS 22,500 22,495 22,481 22,458 22,426 22,384 22,332 22,269 22,196 22,111 22,015 21,906 21,785 21,651 21,503 21,342 21,165 20,974 20,767 20,544 20,304 15,131 14,783 14,414 14,026 13,616 13,185 12,731 12,255 11,754 CUMULATIVE RESERVE 1,499,650 1,498,724 1,497,199 1,495,050 1,492,254 1,488,785 1,484,619 1,479,727 1,474,083 1,467,658 1,460,423 1,452,349 1,443,404 1,433,556 1,422,774 1,411,022 1,398,267 1,384,473 1,369,602 1,353,617 1,008,756 985,510 960,955 935,049 907,746 879,000 848,764 816,989 783,624 748,619 Reserve in
ria 2,022
ASSUMPTIONS Dollars
Total No. of Units (eqivilant)214 392,500
Annual Assessment per Unit $357 392,500
Total No. of Units (actual)288
Annual Increase in Assessment 2.50%
Inflation 2.50%
Residential
Type
Number of
Units
Base
Assessment
Ratio
Equivalent
Number of
Units
Annual Base
Assessment
Limit D
Investment Earnings 1.5%
SFR (Low Density) -
Slope 26 1.00 26 $357
Initial Seed Fund $1,500,000 SFR (Low Density)124 1.00 124 $357 Amount Financed $0
SFR (Medium
Density) - Slope 10 0.42 4 $150
Borrowing Rate 8.0%
Cottage (Medium
Density)-slope 6 0.42 3 $150
Term of Loan (yrs.)10
SFR (Medium
Density)72 0.51 37 $182
Frequency of Large-Scale Repair (yrs.)20
Villa (Medium
Density) -Slope 20 0.41 8 $146
Cost of Large-Scale Repair (current $)$200,000
Villa (Medium
Density)30 0.41 12 $146
Assessment Cap (per residential unit)9999 288 214
Expense Deferral Period (Yrs.)0
ESTIMATED ANNUAL EXPENSES IN 2022/23 DOLLARS PROFORMA CATEGORY Administration & Accounting $37,850 Administration & Accounting GHAD Monitoring Program $9,000 Professional Services
Sediment/Debris Removal Drainage Improvements $3,715 Maintenance and Operation Sedimentation Basins $4,500 Maintenance and Operation
Maintenance Roads $6,730 Maintenance and Operation
Revegetation and Vegetation Control $5,775 Maintenance and Operation Erosion -Slope Stabilization (incl. minor landsliding)$15,750 Slope Stabilization and Erosion Protection Maintenance Roadway Gravel Overlay $3,365 Capital Improvement Ditch, Storm Drain, and Fence Replacement $6,127 Capital Improvement Major Repair (Annualized)$10,000 Major Repair
Insurance, Fees, and $5,197 Miscellaneous Expenses
TOTAL $108,009
Preliminary Estimated Budget - July 6, 2022
1 of 1
5698.002.021
July 6, 2022
Packet Page 96 of 441Attachment 4 Page 18 of 30

Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District District (PVMMD)

SLOPE MITIGATION PARCELS
FISCAL YEAR (Starting July 1) 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 Cumulative No. of Units (Equivalent)39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 39.25 A. INCOME
Assessment 36,297 37,205 38,135 39,088 40,065 41,067 42,094 43,146 44,225 45,330 46,464 47,625 48,816 50,036 51,287 52,569 53,884 55,231 56,611 58,027 59,477 60,964 62,488 64,051 65,652 67,293 68,976 70,700 72,467 74,279 B. PROJECTED EXPENSES

1. Administration and Accounting 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Solano County Assessor's Fees - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

2. Professional Services 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

3. Maintenance & Operation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4. Slope-Erosion Stabilization 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5. Repair - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 - - - - - - - - -

6. Capital Improvement 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7. Misc. Expenses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SUBTOTAL - EXPENSES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 RESERVE 369,213 37,205 38,135 39,088 40,065 41,067 42,094 43,146 44,225 45,330 46,464 47,625 48,816 50,036 51,287 52,569 53,883 55,231 56,611 58,027 59,477 60,964 62,488 64,050 65,652 67,293 68,975 70,700 72,467 74,279 EARNINGS 4,994 5,613 6,255 6,921 7,611 8,327 9,067 9,835 10,630 11,452 12,304 13,186 14,098 15,041 16,018 17,027 18,071 19,150 20,266 21,419 22,611 23,842 25,114 26,428 27,786 29,187 30,634 32,129 33,671 35,263 CUMULATIVE RESERVE 374,207 417,025 461,415 507,424 555,101 604,494 655,655 708,636 763,490 820,273 879,041 939,851 1,002,765 1,067,842 1,135,147 1,204,744 1,276,698 1,351,079 1,427,957 1,507,402 1,589,491 1,674,297 1,761,900 1,852,379 1,945,816 2,042,297 2,141,906 2,244,735 2,350,873 2,460,415 Reserve in
ASSUMPTIONS 2,022
Total No. of Units (eqivilant)39.25 Dollars
Annual Assessment per Unit $925 1,177,500
Total No. of Units (actual)288 1,177,500
Annual Increase in Assessment 2.50%
Inflation 2.50%424
Residential
Type
Number of
Units
Base
Assessment
Ratio
Equivalent
Number of
Units
Annual Base
Assessment
Limit
Number of
Units (Slope)
Slope
Assessment
Ratio
Equivalent
Number of
Units
Annual
Slope
Assessment
Limit
Total
Annual
Assessment
Limit
Investment Earnings 1.5%
SFR (Low Density) -
Slope 26 1.00 26 $357 26 1.0 26.0 925 $1,282 Initial Seed Fund $332,916 SFR (Low Density)124 1.00 124 $357 $357 Amount Financed $0
SFR (Medium
Density) - Slope 10 0.50 5 $150 10 0.4 4.0 370 $520 Borrowing Rate 8.0%
Cottage (Medium
Density)-slope 6 0.50 3 $150 6 0.35 2.1 324 $474 Term of Loan (yrs.)10
SFR (Medium
Density)72 0.50 36 $182 $182
Frequency of Large-Scale Repair (yrs.)20
Villa (Medium
Density) -Slope 20 0.30 6 $146 20 0.35 7.0 324 $470 Cost of Large-Scale Repair (current $)$0
Villa (Medium
Density)30 0.30 9 $146 $146
Assessment Cap (per residential unit)9999 288 209 62 39.1 Expense Deferral Period (Yrs.)0
ESTIMATED ANNUAL EXPENSES IN 2022/23 DOLLARS PROFORMA CATEGORY Administration & Accounting $0 Administration & Accounting GHAD Monitoring Program $0 Professional Services
Sediment/Debris Removal Drainage Improvements $0 Maintenance and Operation Sedimentation Basins $0 Maintenance and Operation
Maintenance Roads $0 Maintenance and Operation
Revegetation and Vegetation Control $0 Maintenance and Operation Erosion -Slope Stabilization (incl. minor landsliding)$0 Slope Stabilization and Erosion Protection Maintenance Roadway Gravel Overlay $0 Capital Improvement Ditch, Storm Drain, and Fence Replacement $0 Capital Improvement Major Repair (Annualized)$0 Major Repair
Insurance, Fees, and $0 Miscellaneous Expenses
TOTAL $0
Preliminary Estimated Budget - July 6, 2022 - DRAFT
1 of 1
5698.002.021
Junly 6, 2022
Packet Page 97 of 441Attachment 4 Page 19 of 30

5698.002.021
July 6, 2022

EXHIBIT C

Estimating an Appropriate GHAD Reserve
Packet Page 98 of 441Attachment 4 Page 20 of 30

The reserve must be unique to each GHAD, and must consider several factors, not all of which are geotechnical in nature.

In converting the expected loss rate to an estimated
reserve (R), consideration must be given to the
following factors.

Number of assessed units (n) in the GHAD.

The reserve per dwelling unit (R/n or
average reserve) should, in theory, diminish
asymptotically with increasing unit count to a
“floor” value.

Average value of assessed properties (v).In
areas of high property values, repair or
reconstruction of private improvements may
be more costly and may require greater
average reserves.

Relative density of construction (d).The
number of units likely to be affected during a
major geologic event will have an impact on
the total reserve.

ESTIMATING AN APPROPRIATE GHAD RESERVE
Uri Eliahu G.E., ENGEO Incorporated, June 1999
Packet Page 99 of 441Attachment 4 Page 21 of 30

Intuitively, this general expression may be applied to a GHAD reserve formula by substituting R/n for y, n for x, dv for a, and gv for b, to arrive at the relationship
R/n=dv/n+gv where:

R
e
s
e
r
v
e

5698.002.021
July 6, 2022

EXHIBIT D

Assessment Roll
Packet Page 101 of 441Attachment 4 Page 23 of 30

5698.002.021
July 6, 2022

BOOK PAGE PARCEL NUMBER STREET STREET ASSESSMENT LIMIT
FY 2022/2023 NOTES/UNITS
167 80 5 - - $-
167 80 17 - - $-
167 80 21 Parcel E $-
167 80 22 6000 Patriot Plaza $- Clubhouse
167 80 22 6001 Patriot Plaza $- Amenities
167 8 22 6002 United Circle $182.00
167 8 22 6003 United Circle $182.00
167 8 22 6004 United Circle $182.00
167 8 22 6005 Honor Place $474.00
167 8 22 6006 Honor Place $474.00
167 8 22 6100 United Circle $4,700.00 6101 - 6110
167 8 22 6200 United Circle $4,700.00 6210 - 6210
167 8 22 6211 United Circle $474.00
167 8 22 6212 United Circle $474.00
167 8 22 6213 United Circle $474.00
167 8 22 6214 United Circle $474.00
167 8 22 6215 United Circle $182.00
167 8 22 6216 United Circle $182.00
167 8 22 6217 United Circle $182.00
167 8 22 6218 United Circle $182.00
167 8 22 6219 United Circle $182.00
167 8 22 6220 United Circle $182.00
167 8 22 6221 Pride Lane $- Environmental
Center
167 8 22 6222 Allegiance Court $182.00
167 8 22 6223 Allegiance Court $182.00
167 8 22 6224 Allegiance Court $182.00
167 8 22 6225 Allegiance Court $182.00
167 8 22 6226 Allegiance Court $182.00
167 8 22 6300 United Circle $- Classroom
167 8 22 6400 United Circle $1,460.00 6401 - 6410
167 8 22 6500 United Circle $1,460.00 6501 - 6510
167 8 22 6600 United Circle $1,460.00 6601 - 6610
167 841 1 1408 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 2 1404 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 3 1400 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 4 1396 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 5 1392 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 6 1388 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 7 1384 Couples Circle $1,282.00
Packet Page 102 of 441Attachment 4 Page 24 of 30

5698.002.021
July 6, 2022

BOOK PAGE PARCEL NUMBER STREET STREET ASSESSMENT LIMIT
FY 2022/2023 NOTES/UNITS
167 841 8 1380 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 9 1376 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 10 1372 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 11 1368 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 12 1364 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 13 1360 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 14 1356 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 15 1352 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 841 16 Parcel B $357.00
167 841 17 4921 Couples Court $1,282.00
167 841 18 4917 Couples Court $357.00
167 841 19 4913 Couples Court $357.00
167 841 20 4909 Couples Court $357.00
167 841 21 4905 Couples Court $357.00
167 841 22 4901 Couples Court $357.00
167 842 1 1359 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 2 1363 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 3 1367 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 4 1371 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 5 1375 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 6 1379 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 7 1383 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 8 1387 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 9 1391 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 10 1395 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 11 1399 Couples Circle $357.00
167 842 12 1403 Couples Circle $357.00
167 843 1 1394 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 843 2 1390 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 843 3 1386 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 843 4 1382 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 843 5 1378 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 843 6 1374 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 843 7 1370 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 843 8 1366 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 843 9 1362 Stewart Court $357.00
167 843 10 1358 Stewart Court $357.00
167 843 11 1354 Stewart Court $357.00
167 843 12 1350 Stewart Court $357.00
167 851 1 4845 Duval Street $357.00
Packet Page 103 of 441Attachment 4 Page 25 of 30

5698.002.021
July 6, 2022

BOOK PAGE PARCEL NUMBER STREET STREET ASSESSMENT LIMIT
FY 2022/2023 NOTES/UNITS
167 851 2 4841 Duval Street $357.00
167 851 3 4837 Duval Street $357.00
167 851 4 4833 Duval Street $357.00
167 851 5 4829 Duval Street $357.00
167 851 6 4825 Duval Street $357.00
167 851 7 4821 Duval Street $357.00
167 851 8 4817 Duval Street $357.00
167 851 9 4813 Duval Street $357.00
167 852 1 1415 Thunderbird Court $357.00
167 852 2 1419 Thunderbird Court $357.00
167 852 3 1422 Thunderbird Court $357.00
167 852 4 1418 Thunderbird Court $357.00
167 852 5 4816 Duval Street $357.00
167 852 6 4820 Duval Street $357.00
167 852 7 4824 Duval Street $357.00
167 852 8 1413 Jones Court $357.00
167 852 9 1417 Jones Court $357.00
167 852 10 1424 Jones Court $357.00
167 852 11 1420 Jones Court $357.00
167 852 12 1428 Duval Street $357.00
167 852 13 1432 Duval Street $357.00
167 852 14 1436 Duval Street $357.00
167 852 15 1440 Duval Street $357.00
167 852 16 1381 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 852 17 1385 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 852 18 1389 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 852 19 1393 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 852 20 1397 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 852 21 1401 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 852 22 1405 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 852 23 1409 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 852 24 1413 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 852 25 1417 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 852 26 1421 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 853 1 1414 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 853 2 1410 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 853 3 1406 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 853 4 1402 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 853 5 1398 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 854 1 1422 Stewart Drive $357.00
Packet Page 104 of 441Attachment 4 Page 26 of 30

5698.002.021
July 6, 2022

BOOK PAGE PARCEL NUMBER STREET STREET ASSESSMENT LIMIT
FY 2022/2023 NOTES/UNITS
167 854 2 1418 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 855 1 1407 Couples Circle $357.00
167 855 2 1411 Couples Circle $357.00
167 855 3 1415 Couples Circle $357.00
167 855 4 1419 Couples Circle $357.00
167 855 5 1423 Couples Circle $357.00
167 855 6 1427 Couples Circle $357.00
167 855 7 1431 Couples Circle $357.00
167 856 1 1436 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 856 2 1432 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 856 3 1428 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 856 4 1424 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 856 5 1420 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 856 6 1416 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 856 7 1412 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 856 8 Parcel B $-
167 861 1 4809 Duval Street $357.00
167 861 2 4805 Duval Street $357.00
167 861 3 4801 Duval Street $357.00
167 861 4 4797 Duval Street $357.00
167 861 5 4793 Duval Street $357.00
167 861 6 Parcel D $-
167 861 7 1401 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 861 8 1405 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 861 9 1409 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 861 10 1413 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 861 11 1417 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 861 12 1421 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 861 13 1425 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 861 14 1429 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 861 15 1433 Annandale Court $357.00
167 861 16 1437 Annandale Court $357.00
167 861 17 1441 Annandale Court $357.00
167 861 18 1445 Annandale Court $357.00
167 861 19 1449 Annandale Court $357.00
167 861 20 1453 Annandale Court $357.00
167 861 21 1446 Annandale Court $357.00
167 861 22 1442 Annandale Court $357.00
167 861 23 1438 Annandale Court $357.00
167 861 24 1434 Stewart Drive $357.00
Packet Page 105 of 441Attachment 4 Page 27 of 30

5698.002.021
July 6, 2022

BOOK PAGE PARCEL NUMBER STREET STREET ASSESSMENT LIMIT
FY 2022/2023 NOTES/UNITS
167 861 25 1430 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 861 26 1426 Stewart Drive $357.00
167 862 1 1425 Annandale Court $357.00
167 862 2 1429 Annandale Court $357.00
167 862 3 1433 Annandale Court $357.00
167 862 4 1437 Annandale Court $357.00
167 862 5 4800 Chesapeake Court $357.00
167 862 6 4804 Chesapeake Court $357.00
167 862 7 4808 Chesapeake Court $357.00
167 862 8 4805 Chesapeake Court $357.00
167 862 9 1410 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 862 10 1406 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 862 11 1402 Annandale Drive $357.00
167 862 12 4804 Duval Street $357.00
167 862 13 4808 Duval Street $357.00
167 862 14 4812 Duval Street $357.00
167 862 15 1411 Thunderbird Court $357.00
167 863 1 1435 Couples Circle $357.00
167 863 2 1439 Couples Circle $357.00
167 863 3 1443 Couples Circle $357.00
167 863 4 1447 Couples Circle $357.00
167 863 5 1451 Couples Circle $357.00
167 864 1 1456 Couples Circle $357.00
167 864 2 1452 Couples Circle $357.00
167 864 3 Parcel B $-
167 864 4 1444 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 864 5 1440 Couples Circle $1,282.00
167 951 1 1427 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 2 4431 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 3 4435 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 4 Parcel C $-
167 951 5 4443 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 6 4447 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 7 4451 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 8 4455 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 9 4459 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 10 4463 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 11 4467 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 12 4471 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 13 4475 Tahiti Drive $182.00
Packet Page 106 of 441Attachment 4 Page 28 of 30

5698.002.021
July 6, 2022

BOOK PAGE PARCEL NUMBER STREET STREET ASSESSMENT LIMIT
FY 2022/2023 NOTES/UNITS
167 951 14 4479 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 951 15 4483 Tahiti Court $182.00
167 951 16 4487 Tahiti Court $182.00
167 951 17 Parcel B $-
167 951 18 Parcel A $-
167 951 19 4500 Tahiti Court $520.00
167 951 20 4496 Tahiti Court $520.00
167 951 21 4492 Tahiti Court $520.00
167 951 22 4488 Tahiti Court $520.00
167 951 23 4484 Tahiti Court $520.00
167 951 24 Parcel G $-
167 951 25 4476 Bahama Way $520.00
167 951 26 4472 Bahama Way $520.00
167 951 27 4468 Bahama Way $182.00
167 951 28 4464 Bahama Way $182.00
167 951 29 4460 Bahama Way $182.00
167 951 30 4456 Bahama Way $182.00
167 951 31 4452 Bahama Way $182.00
167 951 32 4448 Bahama Way $182.00
167 951 33 4444 Bahama Way $182.00
167 951 34 4440 Bahama Way $182.00
167 951 35 4443 Cancun Court $182.00
167 951 36 4447 Cancun Court $182.00
167 951 37 4451 Cancun Court $182.00
167 951 38 4455 Cancun Court $182.00
167 951 39 4459 Cancun Court $182.00
167 951 40 4463 Cancun Court $182.00
167 951 41 4467 Cancun Court $182.00
167 951 42 4471 Cancun Court $520.00
167 951 43 4464 Cancun Court $520.00
167 951 44 4460 Cancun Court $520.00
167 951 45 4456 Cancun Court $182.00
167 951 46 4452 Cancun Court $520.00
167 951 47 4448 Cancun Court $182.00
167 951 48 4444 Cancun Court $182.00
167 951 49 Parcel F $-
167 951 50 4417 Cancun Drive $182.00
167 951 51 4421 Cancun Drive $182.00
167 951 52 4425 Cancun Drive $182.00
167 951 53 4429 Cancun Drive $182.00
Packet Page 107 of 441Attachment 4 Page 29 of 30

5698.002.021
July 6, 2022

BOOK PAGE PARCEL NUMBER STREET STREET ASSESSMENT LIMIT
FY 2022/2023 NOTES/UNITS
167 951 54 Parcel E $-
167 951 55 Parcel D $-
167 951 56 Parcel J $-
167 951 57 Parcel I $-
167 952 1 4440 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 952 2 4444 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 952 3 4448 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 952 4 4452 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 952 5 4456 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 952 6 4460 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 952 7 4464 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 952 8 4468 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 952 9 4472 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 952 10 4476 Tahiti Drive $182.00
167 952 11 Parcel H $-
167 952 12 4475 Bahama Way $182.00
167 952 13 4471 Bahama Way $182.00
167 952 14 4467 Bahama Way $182.00
167 952 15 4463 Bahama Way $182.00
167 952 16 4459 Bahama Way $182.00
167 952 17 4455 Bahama Way $182.00
167 952 18 4451 Bahama Way $182.00
167 952 19 4447 Bahama Way $182.00
167 952 20 4443 Bahama Way $182.00
167 952 21 4441 Bahama Way $182.00
$112,528.00

Packet Page 108 of 441Attachment 4 Page 30 of 30

July 1 June 30 CPI % CPI Change Assessment FY Prop 218 Max Actual Levy % of Max Prop 218 Max Actual Levy % of Max 10-11 940.00 0.00 0%470.00 --
2010 2011 233.646 2.43% 11-12 962.84 940.00 98%481.42 -- 2011 2012 239.806 2.64% 12-13 988.26 962.00 97%494.13 -- 2012 2013 245.935 2.56% 13-14 1,013.56 987.01 97%506.78 -- 2013 2014 253.317 3.00% 14-15 1,043.97 1,006.75 96%521.98 -- 2014 2015 259.117 2.29% 15-16 1,067.87 1,026.89 96%533.94 -- 2015 2016 266.041 2.67% 16-17 1,096.39 1,047.43 96%548.19 -- 2016 2017 275.304 3.48% 17-18 1,134.54 1,072.57 95%567.27 -- 2017 2018 286.062 3.91% 18-19 1,178.90 1,110.11 94%589.45 1,110.11 188% 2018 2019 295.259 3.22% 19-20 1,216.86 1,158.95 95%608.43 579.22 95% 2019 2020 300.032 1.62% 20-21 1,236.57 1,158.95 94%618.29 579.22 94% 2020 2021 309.497 3.15% 21-22 1,275.53 878.00 69%637.76 439.00 69% 2021 2022 330.539 6.80% 22-23 1,362.26 340.00 25%681.13 139.00 - 173.00 20% - 25% 2022 2023 340.056 2.88% 23-24 1,401.50 357.00 25%700.75 145.95 - 181.65 20% - 25% 2023 2024 350.25768 3.00% 24-25 1,443.54 372.84 26%721.77 152.86 - 190.15 21% - 26% ATTACHMENT 5
Low-Density Residential (LDR)Medium-Density Residential (MDR) (Base Year)

AREA K AREAS I AND L
PROPOSITION 218 MAX RATES VS. ACTUAL LEVY
Packet Page 109 of 441Attachment 5 Page 1 of 1

FISCAL YEAR 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 17-18 18-19 19-20 20-21 21-22 22-23 23-24 24-25 Approved Levy - 17,860 71,188 132,258 147,991 155,059 158,160 160,884 194,268 187,742 212,649 161,552 72,574 76,203 79,631 Actual Expenditure 25 179 3,822 2,211 6,480 1,551 10,288 32,239 35,820 27,868 79,382 112,336 65,719 121,713 95,631 Difference (25) 17,681 67,366 130,047 141,511 153,508 147,872 128,645 158,448 159,873 133,267 49,216 6,855 (45,511) (16,000) % of Levy Spent 0.0%1.0%5.4%1.7%4.4%1.0%6.5%20.0%18.4%14.8%37.3%69.5%90.6%160%120% FISCAL YEAR 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 17-18 18-19 19-20 20-21 21-22 22-23 23-24 24-25 Approved Levy - 17,860 71,188 132,258 147,991 155,059 158,160 160,884 194,268 187,742 212,649 161,552 72,574 76,203 79,631 Approved Budget (O&M)- 84,943 85,000 85,000 85,000 23,604 23,604 23,604 23,604 37,598 42,550 222,323 108,009 121,713 95,631 Difference - (67,083) (13,812) 47,258 62,991 131,455 134,556 137,280 170,664 150,144 170,099 (60,771) (35,435) (45,511) (16,000) Proportion of Budget to Levy 0.0%475.6%119.4%64.3%57.4%15.2%14.9%14.7%12.2%20.0%20.0%137.6%148.8%160%120% FISCAL YEAR 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 17-18 18-19 19-20 20-21 21-22 22-23 23-24 24-25 Approved Budget (O&M)- 84,943 85,000 85,000 85,000 23,604 23,604 23,604 23,604 37,598 42,550 222,323 108,009 121,713 95,631 Actual Expenditure 25 179 3,822 2,211 6,480 1,551 10,288 32,239 35,820 27,868 79,382 112,336 65,719 121,713 95,631 Difference (25) 84,764 81,178 82,789 78,520 22,053 13,316 (8,635) (12,216) 9,730 (36,832) 109,987 42,290 - - % of Budget Spent 0.0%0.2%4.5%2.6%7.6%6.6%43.6%136.6%151.8%74.1%186.6%50.5%60.8%100%100% TABLE 3 - BUDGET VS. EXPENDITURES
TABLE 1 - LEVY VS. EXPENDITURES
TABLE 2 - LEVY VS. BUDGET
ATTACHMENT 6
LEVY VS. BUDGET VS. EXPENDITURE
Packet Page 110 of 441Attachment 6 Page 1 of 1

Agenda Item No: 5.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:July 16, 2024
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT:Approval of Meeting Minutes from June 2024
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Approve the meeting minutes.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
Minutes need approval by the City Council.

DISCUSSION
The City Council Minutes for June 2024 have been approved by the city attorney and need council approval.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
N/A
PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The council may choose to modify the minutes which will result in bringing this item back at a future date.

STAFF CONTACT
Delaney Dombrowski, Acting Deputy City Clerk
(707) 4287402
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
City Attorney's Office
Packet Page 111 of 441

Agenda Item No: 5.AGENDA REPORTDATE:July 16, 2024 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, City ManagerSUBJECT:Approval of Meeting Minutes from June 2024RECOMMENDED ACTIONApprove the meeting minutes.STATEMENT OF ISSUEMinutes need approval by the City Council.DISCUSSIONThe City Council Minutes for June 2024 have been approved by the city attorney and need councilapproval.FINANCIAL IMPACTN/APUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATIONN/AALTERNATIVE ACTIONThe council may choose to modify the minutes which will result in bringing this item back at a futuredate.STAFF CONTACTDelaney Dombrowski, Acting Deputy City Clerk(707) 428[email protected] WITH City Attorney's Office
ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Attachment 1: City Council Closed Session Minutes 642024 Attachment 2: City Council Minutes 642024
Attachment 3: Housing Authority Minutes 642024
Attachment 4: City Council Closed Session Minutes 6182024 Attachment 5: City Council Minutes 6182024
Attachment 6: PVMMD Minutes 6182024
REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Dombrowski, Delaney Approved 6/17/2024 2:33 PM
Packet Page 112 of 441

Page 1 ends

Fairfield City CouncilJuly 16, 2024

Fairfield City Council
July 16, 2024