3 12/19/25 (Z:\01-Proposals\01-Proposals by Year\2025\Environmental Planning\20252263.P West Yost_North Bay WTP) Preservation (OHP). The cultural resources inventory report is a summary document used by the applicant as a consultation and decision-making document. The preparation of the report includes the following tasks as necessary components, and the results of these tasks will be summarized in the report:
• GIS Mapping. LSA will develop project area mapping in consultation with the owner/ representative that depicts location, vicinity, project area footprint, records search, and ethnographic maps. The project area, developed in coordination with the applicant, is defined as the area within which a project may directly or indirectly cause changes in the character or use of historic properties, should any be present. For historic architectural resources, indirect changes (such as visual or vibratory effects) may occur in parcels adjacent to the proposed project area. • Record Search/Research. LSA will conduct a records search of the project area and surrounding 0.5- mile radius through the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) housed at California State University, Sonoma. The purpose of this records search is to obtain and review archaeological reports and cultural resources previously recorded within the project area and 0.5-mi buffer, to inform assessments of built environment and other cultural resources that may be at risk of adverse effects as a result of proposed project activities. LSA will also consult other sources, including historic-period maps and aerial photographs, to inform land use patterns and the site’s sensitivity for surface and subsurface archaeological cultural resources within the project area.
• Pedestrian Survey. After receiving the records search results, an LSA archaeologist will conduct a cultural resource inventory of the project area. This cultural resource inventory will be implemented as a Class III intensive pedestrian survey of the project area, in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s (SOI) Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation (48 FR 44716, September 29, 1983). Fieldwork will be directed and documented by an LSA archaeologist individually meeting the SOI Professional Qualifications Standards (36 CFR 61 and 48 FR 44716) for archaeology and an archaeologist crew member supervised by the SOI-Professionally Qualified archaeologist. As there is currently no specified project area footprint, this scope assumes the pedestrian survey will take place on an approximately 148-acre area containing and immediately surrounding the North Bay Regional Water Treatment Plant (NBRWTP) facility in Solano County, California. Any necessitated increase in survey area will require a contract amendment and a schedule adjustment may be necessary.
• Cultural Resources Inventory Report. Upon completion of the preceding tasks, LSA will prepare a Draft and Final Cultural Resources Inventory Report. The report will include the natural context and historic and ethnographic contexts pertaining to the project region, along with a records search and literature review, Tribal consultation summaries if applicable, field methodologies, survey results, anticipated negative findings (see below), and recommendations for cultural resource management strategies (if applicable). This estimate includes one set of comments from the client and one round of minor comments from the City (requiring a total of 8 hours or less) in response to the Draft Report.
In the event of positive archaeological findings, more than one set of comments requiring response, or other potential issues necessitating any substantive unanticipated effort and/or expenditure of budget (i.e., not within this scope of work or cost estimate), a contract amendment will be required.
4 12/19/25 (Z:\01-Proposals\01-Proposals by Year\2025\Environmental Planning\20252263.P West Yost_North Bay WTP) Task 3.3 Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis LSA will prepare an Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Technical Memorandum for the proposed project in response to the Environmental Checklist questions. LSA will assess the proposed project’s impacts related to air quality and climate change (greenhouse gas [GHG] emissions). LSA will perform the analysis consistent with applicable City of Fairfield and the Bay Area Air District (Air District) procedures and requirements.
Construction activities associated with project development, including grading and ground disturbance, could increase concentrations of particular matter. This increase could contribute to existing air pollution and has the potential to exceed regional air emission thresholds established by the City of Fairfield and the Air District. The proposed project would also generate GHG emissions. Typically, an individual project does not generate sufficient GHG emissions to influence climate change significantly on its own; therefore, the issue of climate change is cumulative in nature. The proposed project would generate GHG emissions that would cumulatively contribute to climate change.
Following the Air District guidelines, LSA will prepare a draft Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Technical Memorandum to identify existing air quality conditions and potential air quality and greenhouse gas impacts resulting from the proposed project, by undertaking the following subtasks:
• Describe Existing Environmental Setting: LSA will provide a brief summary of information related to air quality and global climate change along with the climate/meteorological conditions in the project vicinity.
• Describe the Existing Regulatory Framework: The existing regulatory framework for air quality and global climate change will identify applicable federal, State, and City of Fairfield policies, regulations, and programs.
• Determine the Project's Consistency with Adopted Plans. LSA will review adopted plans related to clean air and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in the State of California, the Bay Area Air District, and the City of Fairfield, and determine the project's consistency with these plans. • Assess Project Construction Emissions. Construction activities associated with the proposed project would generate increased particulate emissions associated with site preparation, grading, soil hauling, and other construction activities on the project site. Construction equipment exhaust would also be a known source of air pollution. LSA will calculate the regional construction emissions using the California Emissions Estimator Model version 2022.1 (CalEEMod). • Assess Project Operation-Period Air Quality Impacts. Regional emissions of criteria air pollutants associated with long-term operations from vehicle trips will be calculated with CalEEMod. In addition, emissions associated with stationary sources, such as on-site energy consumption and landscaping equipment will be estimated.
• Health Risk Assessment: Based on the project location and nearby sensitive receptors, LSA will prepare a construction health risk assessment (HRA) that will summarize cancer risk and non-cancer risk (chronic and acute) and will compare the results of the HRA with the SJVAPCD’s recommended thresholds. Supporting modeling and technical information for the HRA will be attached to the memorandum as an appendix.
5 12/19/25 (Z:\01-Proposals\01-Proposals by Year\2025\Environmental Planning\20252263.P West Yost_North Bay WTP) • Assess Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions. LSA will qualitatively evaluate the project’s impact on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by providing an assessment of greenhouse gas thresholds identified in the Bay Area Air District’s 2022 CEQA Guidelines. Consistent with the Air District’s CEQA Guidelines and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5, if a project is consistent with an adopted qualified Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy that meets the standards, it can be presumed that the project would not have a significant greenhouse gas emission impact. The City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) meets the requirements for a qualified Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy. As such, LSA will evaluate whether the proposed project would be consistent with the City’s CAP. LSA will also recommend mitigation measures to be consistent with the CAP, as necessary. • Identify Mitigation Measures: LSA will identify, where necessary, practical mitigation measures to address any significant project or cumulative impacts. Measures established by the Air District for dust suppression will be identified to reduce construction impacts. Mitigation measures designed to reduce the project's short-term construction and long-term air quality and GHG impacts to the extent feasible will be identified, if needed. Both an evaluation of the potential mitigation measures and a discussion of their effectiveness will be provided. • Prepare Memorandum. LSA will submit one digital copy of the draft Memorandum to the project team for review. Based on one set of comments, LSA will prepare a final Memorandum. This estimate includes one set of comments from the client and one round of minor comments from the City (requiring a total of 8 hours or less) in response to the Draft Report.
LSA will submit a digital copy of the draft Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Technical Memorandum to the project applicant for review. Based on one set of consolidated comments, LSA will prepare a final Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Technical Memorandum, to be delivered to the project applicant in PDF Format.
Task 3.4: Noise Impact Analysis
LSA will prepare a noise and vibration analysis for the project in response to the Environmental Checklist questions in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. LSA will prepare a technical noise and vibration impact analysis consistent with all applicable local jurisdiction procedures and requirements as well as applicable vibration standards identified by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). The Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis will be completed by undertaking the following subtasks:
• Applicable Standards and Existing Environment: LSA will prepare a technical noise and vibration impact analysis consistent with all applicable City procedures and requirements and applicable vibration standards identified by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). LSA will analyze the potential noise and vibration impacts compared to the Cities of Fairfield and Vacaville Noise Elements and Municipal Code Noise Ordinance criteria, as applicable.
LSA will conduct up to two long-term ambient noise level measurements within the project area. The long-term ambient noise level will be documented for 24 hours. These ambient noise levels will be used to assess the existing ambient noise environment in the project vicinity.
6 12/19/25 (Z:\01-Proposals\01-Proposals by Year\2025\Environmental Planning\20252263.P West Yost_North Bay WTP) • Construction Noise Impact Analysis: LSA will analyze the short-term construction noise and vibration impacts on adjacent noise -sensitive uses. Construction would occur during implementation of the project. Noise impacts from construction sources will be analyzed based on the equipment expect ed to be used, the length of a specific construction task, the equipment power type (gasoline or diesel engine), horsepower, load factor, and the percentage of time in use. FTA -recommended or industry- recognized empirica l noise emission levels will be used for the construction equipment. The construction noise impact will be evaluated in terms of maximum levels (L max), and the frequency of occurrence at adjacent sensitive locations. Analysis requirements will be based on the sensitivity of the area and the Cities’ criteria. Noise abatement measures designed to reduce short -term impacts to acceptable noise levels in the vicinity of the project site will be determined where necessary. • Construction Vibration Impact Analysis: Vibration impacts from construction sources will be analyzed based on the equipment expected to be used. The FTA-recommended equipment vibration levels will be used for the construction equipment expected to be used. The construction vibration impact will be evaluated in terms of peak particle velocity (PPV, or inches per second [in/sec]) and the vibration decibel levels for building damage and human annoyance, respectively. Analysis requirements will be provided based on the sensitivity of the area directly adjacent to the project site.
• Off-site Stationary Noise Analysis: Long-term noise impacts associated with the proposed equipment will be evaluated. The City and County noise criteria for stationary sources will be used to assess potential stationary source noise impacts. Using the project site plan, LSA will determine future stationary sources noise impacts from proposed project incorporating equipment noise specifications from the manufacturers or published noise levels from similar equipment. • Mitigation Measures: If necessary, LSA will determine temporary construction-related noise and vibration reduction features which can be incorporated into the project plans, designed to reduce short-term construction noise and vibration impacts, as well as long-term operational impacts. • Noise and Vibration Report: LSA will summarize the above findings in a draft technical report that will also include the settings and regulatory requirements. LSA Noise Staff will respond to one round of consolidated comments from the client and Cities after which a Final Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis memorandum will be provided. This estimate includes one set of comments from the client and one round of minor comments from the City (requiring a total of 8 hours or less) in response to the Draft Report.
Task 3.5 Water Quality and Hydrology Technical Memorandum.
LSA will prepare a Hydrology and Water Quality Report that evaluates project-related and cumulative impacts to water quality, groundwater, hydrology, and floodplains. • The Hydrology and Water Quality Report: LSA will prepare a report that includes a discussion of the existing setting, applicable federal, State, regional and local regulations, and applicable CEQA significance thresholds related to hydrology and water quality. The impact analysis will include a qualitative response to each of the CEQA thresholds in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines.
LSA will evaluate the need for best management practices (BMPs) to ensure compliance with federal, State, and local National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements and local ordinances during construction and operation. However, because the
7 12/19/25 (Z:\01-Proposals\01-Proposals by Year\2025\Environmental Planning\20252263.P West Yost_North Bay WTP) analysis is at a programmatic level, the Hydrology and Water Quality Report will not specify specific construction, source control, site design, low impact development, design pollution prevention, or treatment control Best Management Practices (BMPs) or drainage improvements. This estimate includes one set of comments from the client and one round of minor comments from the City (requiring a total of 8 hours or less) in response to the Draft Report.
PHASE 4: CEQA COMPLIANCE- INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Task 4.1: Administrative Draft IS/MND
LSA will provide environmental planning services to support the development and environmental clearance of the North Bay Regional Water Treatment Plant Expansion and Pipeline Project. LSA will prepare an Administrative Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration based on the Applicant- provided technical studies and independent analysis and prescribe mitigation where necessary to reduce environmental impacts of the project to less than significant levels. LSA will review the relevant General Plans, project plans, pertinent environmental data, and other relevant documents to ascertain the extent of potential environmental impacts. LSA will address the following environmental factors presented in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines as they relate to the project, applicable City standards, and/or the standards of State or federal entities:
Aesthetics Mineral Resources
Agriculture and Forestry Resources Noise
Air Quality Population and Housing
Biological Resources Public Services
Cultural Resources Recreation
Energy Transportation
Geology and Soils Tribal Cultural Resources
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Utilities and Service Systems Hazards and Hazardous Materials Wildfire
Hydrology and Water Quality Mandatory Findings of Significance Land Use and Planning
The Administrative Draft IS/MND will be provided to the City of Fairfield for review and comment.
Following one round of consolidated comments, LSA will produce the Public Review Draft IS/MND.
LSA will complete the Administrative Draft Initial Study within four weeks of receipt of all required project materials, final technical studies and completion of Assembly Bill 52 (AB52) consultation results.
Task 4.2: Native American Consultation Assistance
At the request of the lead agency, LSA will request a record search of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) held by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for any information regarding cultural resources of traditional or cultural value to Tribal organizations located within the project area. In addition, LSA may draft and distribute AB 52 consultation letters via email (or USPS Certified Mail, if necessary) to Tribal contacts identified by the NAHC, and will conduct up to two rounds of follow-up emails on behalf of the applicant if no responses are received. Should NEPA documentation be required due to federal funding or permitting, LSA will notify interested Tribal parties of project details for comment as part of the
8 12/19/25 (Z:\01-Proposals\01-Proposals by Year\2025\Environmental Planning\20252263.P West Yost_North Bay WTP) Section 106 consultation and maintain communications with Tribal parties. All correspondence with Tribal parties, including letters and emails, will be compiled in an administrative record and included as an attachment to the final report. This scope assumes no meetings with Tribal stakeholders.
Task 4.3: Public Review Draft IS/MND
LSA will make any minor necessary revisions to the Administrative Draft and prepare a Screencheck Draft IS/MND for approval by the City. LSA will make any minor necessary revisions to the Screencheck Draft IS/MND to prepare the Public Review Draft IS/MND. The MND will be circulated for the full 30-day public review period. LSA will prepare the Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt an MND, Notice of Completion (NOC), and State Clearinghouse Summary Form, and will submit the IS/MND and all associated documents electronically to the State Clearinghouse.
It is assumed that the City of Fairfield, as the CEQA Lead Agency, will be responsible for:
• Preparing and providing the agency and public distribution list • Publishing the NOI in a newspaper of general circulation • Provide the IS/MND on the City’s website for public review • Noticing adjacent and nearby property owners in accordance with CEQA requirements • File the NOI with the Solano County Clerk-Recorder
Task 4.4: Public Review/Response to Comments
At the conclusion of the public review period, LSA will review all public and agency comments received on the Draft IS/MND and prepare written responses to up to three (3) comment letters. Draft responses will be submitted to the City for review and approval. Should more than three substantive comment letters be received, or should additional technical studies be necessary, LSA may require a budget adjustment and written authorization to proceed.
Task 4.5: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
LSA will prepare a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) to implement the mitigation measures outlined in the Initial Study for the project in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15097.
The mitigation measures would be included in a matrix check -off format for ease of tracking their implementation.
Task 4.6: Final IS/MND and Notice of Determination
Based on the City’s review and approval of the draft Final IS/MND, LSA will prepare a Final IS/MND that incorporates the response to comments and MMRP. Upon project approval and adoption of the MMRP, LSA will prepare the Notice of Determination (NOD) and submit it electronically to the State Clearinghouse within five (5) days of its adoption.
It is assumed that the City will file the NOD with the Solano County Clerk-Recorder and will be responsible for paying the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) environmental filing fee and any applicable county filing fees.
9 12/19/25 (Z:\01-Proposals\01-Proposals by Year\2025\Environmental Planning\20252263.P West Yost_North Bay WTP) Deliverables
• Administrative Draft IS/MND (MS Word and PDF format)
• Public Review Draft IS/MND (MS Word and PDF format)
• NOI, NOC, and State Clearinghouse Summary Form
• Draft and Final Response to Comments
• Draft and Final MMRP
• Final IS/MND (with figures and appendices)
• Draft Notice of Determination (NOD)
PHASE 5: PERMITTING
Based on the final pipeline alignment, project description, and technical study findings, LSA will assist with identifying, preparing, and submitting permit applications and supporting documentation required for federal and State regulatory compliance. The Project area may cross multiple jurisdictional boundaries, including aquatic resources regulated by federal and State agencies. As such, the following permits and coordination are anticipated.
Task 5.1: Agency Permits
Based on potential impacts to jurisdictional waters, sensitive biological resources, and other regulated features, the following regulatory authorizations may be required:
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) – Nationwide Permit (NWP) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act for discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S. (Aquatic Resources Delineation to support the permitting efforts is discuss in Task 2.3.2). • State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) – Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification. Given that the Project spans two Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) jurisdictions (San Francisco Bay and Central Valley/Sacramento), coordination with both boards will be required.
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) – Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSAA) under Section 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code for activities affecting the bed, bank, or channel of a stream or associated riparian habitat. A Section 2081 of the California Fish and Game Code Incidental Take Permit for effects to state listed threatened and endangered species.
• CDFW and US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) – Incidental take authorized.
LSA will assist in preparing draft permit applications, including required maps, technical reports, and attachments. Once reviewed and approved by the Cities, LSA will finalize and submit the applications on their behalf.
10 12/19/25 (Z:\01-Proposals\01-Proposals by Year\2025\Environmental Planning\20252263.P West Yost_North Bay WTP) Task 5.2: Aquatic Resources Delineation.
An Aquatic Resources Delineation Report (ARDR) will be prepared in accordance with the USACE Minimum Standards for Acceptance of Aquatic Resources Delineation Reports, dated January 2016 and the USACE Regulatory Guidance Letter 16-01 (October 2016) regarding Preliminary Jurisdictional Delineations. The report will include a description of the setting, a discussion of the methods and results, the completed wetland data forms, location and vicinity maps, and a preliminary delineation map showing the limits of all potential jurisdictional waters of the United States/State on the site.
Task 5.3: Alternatives Analysis.
A narrative alternatives analysis will be prepared to support the Section 404 with USACE and Section 401 with SWRCB permitting processes. The analysis will describe the range of considered alternatives, including the preferred alignment, and provide justification for why the selected alternative represents the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative (LEDPA) in accordance with Clean Water Act guidelines.
Task 5.4: Initial Take Permit.
If the Project has the potential to result in take of State-listed species, LSA will provide technical input to support preparation of an Incidental Take Permit (ITP) application to CDFW under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA), including relevant biological survey data, avoidance and minimization measures, and proposed mitigation. Additionally, USFWS will need to provide Incidental take authorized under either a Section 7 consultation through the USACE permit process or Section 10 Habitat Conservation Plan.
Task 5.5: Travis Air Force Base Coordination.
Due to the proximity of the Project to Travis Air Force Base and the associated County’s Land Use Compatibility Plan (LUCP) restrictions regarding wildlife hazards, LSA will coordinate with the appropriate environmental and airspace compliance contacts at the base to ensure that the Project does not conflict with the LUCP precluded uses. Potential wildlife hazard compatibility issues include new settling ponds and construction of mitigation wetlands. A summary of coordination, correspondence, and any resulting conditions will be documented for inclusion in CEQA and permit filings.
Deliverables
• Draft and Final Permit Application Packages (USACE NWP, SWRCB 401 Certification, CDFW LSAA), including all appropriate figures to support the application and project • Aquatic Resources Delineation Report (ARDR) with maps and data forms • Alternatives Analysis Report (required for SWRCB permitting and possibly USACE depending on amount of wetland fill)
• Incidental Take Permit (ITP) supporting materials (if applicable) • Documentation of coordination with Travis Air Force Base
11 12/19/25 (Z:\01-Proposals\01-Proposals by Year\2025\Environmental Planning\20252263.P West Yost_North Bay WTP) OPTIONAL: NEPA COMPLIANCE FOR FEDERALLY FUNDED PROJECTS If NEPA documentation is required due to federal funding or permitting, LSA can assist in preparing the appropriate level of NEPA compliance documentation, such as a Categorical Exclusion or Environmental Assessment. This may include:
• Coordination with the federal lead agency identified for the grant or permitting process • Preparation of cross-cutting federal environmental compliance documentation, including Section 106 and Section 7 consultations as applicable
• Integration of environmental analyses, technical studies, impact assessments, and mitigation measures into NEPA documentation
Please note: Identification of the NEPA lead agency is not included in this scope. If an Environmental Assessment or additional NEPA documentation is required, a separate scope of work and budget will be provided at that time, specific to the needs and requirements of the individual federal agency. All technical studies prepared under this proposal will be completed at a level suitable for NEPA, facilitating efficient incorporation into federal compliance documents and supporting timely project review.
ASSUMPTIONS
• This proposal does not include focused surveys, handling of special status species, or documentation beyond what has been described in this scope of work. If after the biological field survey, focused surveys are warranted, an additional scope and fee will be provided. • West Yost will provide all additional project details required for completion of the required permit applications beyond what is described in this proposal. • In the event of positive archaeological findings, more than one set of comments requiring response, or other potential issues necessitating any substantive unanticipated effort and/or expenditure of budget (i.e., not within this scope of work or cost estimate), a contract amendment will be required. • This proposal does not include the preparation of a long-term routine maintenance Agreement or any other long-term maintenance permits.
• This proposal does not include mitigation and permitting fees which may be required by regulatory agencies. The client will pay all permits, notifications, and processing fees directly to each applicable agency.
• LSA has no influence on the timeliness of review or issuance of permits by outside agencies such as CDFW, USACE, SWRCB and RWQCB.
• The client will provide access to the site for field surveys. • All mitigation costs and fees will be paid by the client. • NEPA documentation and assistance will be provided under a different scope and budget, if requested.
12 12/19/25 (Z:\01-Proposals\01-Proposals by Year\2025\Environmental Planning\20252263.P West Yost_North Bay WTP)
COST ESTIMATE
Table A. Cost Estimate
Task Cost Estimate
PHASE 2: Project Management
Project Management and Coordination $12,000
Project Description $5,700
PHASE 3: Technical Studies
Biological Resources $22,100
Cultural Resources $15,500
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases $11,500
Noise Assessment $10,100
Water Quality Assessment $6,600
PHASE 4: CEQA Compliance Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) Administrative Draft IS/MND $25,000
Native American Consultation (AB 52) $5,300
Public Review Draft and Notices (NOC and NOI) $7,200
Public Review Response to Comments $3,000
MMRP $2,000
Final IS/MND and NOD $3,000
PHASE 5: Agency Permitting
United States Army Corps of Engineers 404 Nationwide Permit $10,700 State Water Resources Control Board 401 Certification $14,800 California Department of Fish and Wildlife Streambed Alteration Agreement $18,100 Aquatic Resources Delineation $11,600
Alternatives Analysis $20,300
CDFW and USFWS Initial Take Permit (ITP) and Section 7 Authorization $18,100 Travis Airforce Base Coordination $7,100
Reimbursables
Reimbursables (Record Search, Mileage, Lodging, Meals) $3,000 TOTAL COST $232,700
Note: This scope and budget continues from the NTP for Phase 1: Preliminary Assessment Assistance (Tasks 1.1 and 1.2) and therefore starts at Phase 2.
THE ABOVE STATED TERMS ARE HEREBY ACCEPTED AND AUTHORIZED.
CONSULTANT: CLIENT:
LSA Associates, Inc. West Yost
Company Company
Authorized Signature Authorized Signature
Name Name
Title Title
Date Date
13 12/19/25 (Z:\01-Proposals\01-Proposals by Year\2025\Environmental Planning\20252263.P West Yost_North Bay WTP)
Scope of Work – Pipeline Alignment Study [Task 92]
Attachment D
100 Howe Avenue
Suite 110S
Sacramento CA 95825
916.306.2250 phone
530.756.5991 fax
westyost.com
Engineering Services Scope of Work - Pipeline Alignment Study for Transmission Mains associated with the North Bay Regional Water Treatment Plant Expansion Program
This scope pr ovides the City of Vacaville (City) with recommended services, budget and schedule for a pipeline alignment study for transmission mains identified as part of the North Bay Regional Water Treatment Plant (NBR WTP) Expansion Program (Program). The proposed work would be conducted as a separate task under West Yost’s existing NBR WTP Program Management contract administered by the City of Fairfield. The work would consume a portion of the as -needed budget currently reserved for services such as are proposed here.
BACKGROUND
West Yost is supporting the Cities of Fairfield and Vacaville in developing contract documents for a future expansion of the North Bay Regional Water Treatment Plant (NBR WTP). As part of this effort, several studies and tests are being conducted to inform the scope of the expansion. For the City of Vacaville, a hydraulic evaluation was completed to determine the transmission mains needed to convey the increased water supply from the expanded NBR WTP. The evaluation identified three critical segments of new or replacement transmission mains that must be implemented for the City to be able to hydraulically convey the expanded water supply.
One of the proposed pipeline segments will span the distance from the NBR WTP to existing transmission mains near the south boundary of Vacaville, most likely at the intersection of Vanden Road and Leisure Town Road. This alignment was originally proposed in the 2023 Water Master Plan and has since been confirmed through recent hydraulic modeling. Figure 8 -1 from the 2023 Water Master Plan, included as Attachment A, on the ri ght figure tit led “DE Plant Site / NBR Plant Ex pansion” illustrates this pipeline alignment (refer to H-XP-PIPE-05).
The conceptual alignment of this pipeline presents implementation challenges, as it is currently crosses a conservation easement. Therefore, the purpose of this scope of work is to identify up to three alternative alignments, each beginning at the NBR WTP and terminating at the intersection of Vanden Road and Leisure Town Road. The findings and recommendations of this study will define the pipeline improvements to support development of a detailed design scope and budget. This will enable the City to advance the pipeline construction either independently, or in conjunction with the NBR WTP expansion.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
The following are the proposed tasks for this scope of services, each further described in the sections below:
• Task 1. Project Management
Attachment 4
August 22, 2025
X-X-XXX-XXX-XXX
• Task 2. Pipeline Alignment Study
Task 1. Project Management
In this task, West Yost will perform project team management and quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) reviews.
Task 1.1. Project Administration
Monitor progress of tasks and coordinate completion of work products, including monitoring task budgets and project schedule . A report of budget status on a task -by-task basis, in addition to any schedule changes, will be provided with each invoice.
Task 1.2. Kickoff Meeting
Lead an in-person kickoff meeting to discuss the study activities and any action items as necessary to initiate the project. The kickoff meeting will also include identification of the alternatives to be evaluated further by engaging a diverse group of staff (planning and engineering/leadership) from both Fairfield and Vacaville, as well as a representative from the environmental review team for the NBR Expansion Program.
Task 1.2. Project Workshops
Attend up to two virtual project workshops to review and discuss findings of the pipeline alignment study following the draft and final submissions.
Task 1 Assumptions
• The kickoff meeting will be an in-person meeting at the NBR WTP or Easterly WWTP, for a duration of 1.5 to 2 hours.
• Steve Foreman of LSA will provide insights and share knowledge of the environmental considerations in the vicinity of the NBR WTP under a separate budget on behalf of the overall NBR Expansion Program.
• It is assumed that the project workshops will be held virtually, via Microsoft teams, for a duration of one hour.
Task 1 Deliverables
• West Yost will provide meeting agendas and an action item list.
Task 2. Pipeline Alignment Study
In this task, West Yost will conduct a study to assist the Cities in selecting the preferred alignment alternative.
Task 2.1. Alignment Study Technical Memorandum
The pipeline alignment study will be informed by a combination of field reconnaissance and a review of existing documentation and records provided by both Vacaville and Fairfield . West Yost will first summarize the applicable design requirements as provided by the City of Vacaville, or agreed upon at the kick-off meeting. Any alternatives unlikely to meet those criteria will be eliminated from further consideration.
Evaluation of the remaining potential alignments, up to three, will consider several key criteria, including but not limited to the following:
August 22, 2025
X-X-XXX-XXX-XXX
• Right-of-Way (ROW) Availability and Constraints. This includes identifying existing public and private ROWs, easements, and utility corridors, as well as assessing the need for new easement acquisitions or coordination with other agencies and property owners. • Constructability. This will include an assessment of physical and/or logistical factors that may affect construction, such as: topography, existing infrastructure, utility conflicts, access limitations, and geotechnical conditions.
• Environmental Impacts: Potential environmental constraints will be reviewed, including impacts to sensitive habitats, wetlands, protected species, and cultural resources. The study will also consider permitting requirements and mitigation strategies. • Cost Considerations: Preliminary cost estimates will be developed for each viable alignment alternative, taking into account construction, materials, permitting, land acquisition, long- term maintenance, and implementation.
Findings and recommendations will be documented in a technical memorandum (TM). The memorandum will include a map of the alignments evaluated, a comparative analysis of alternatives, a summary of key constraints and opportunities , and a summary of the recommended design criteria . The TM will also include preliminary plan and profile drawings of the preferred alternative showing surface features based on readily available imagery and topographic data. Potential utility conflicts will be shown in plan view only, and only to the extent they can be identified by existing information. An Underground Service Alert inquiry will not be performed at this preliminary phase of the project.
It is important to note that the scope does not include updates to the Vacaville hydraulic model. However, a desktop hydraulic performance evaluation will be prepared to assess the relative hydraulic performance of the different alignments considered.
Task 2 Assumptions
• Vacaville and Fairfield will supply existing records of infrastructure that the pipeline will cross or will be connected to.
• Vacaville and Fairfield will provide a single consolidated set of comments to the Draft Pipeline Alignment Study Technical Memorandum.
• West Yost will evaluate up to three (3) alignment alternatives. • West Yost will provide LSA a preliminary draft for review and comment on environmental aspects of the evaluation.
Task 2 Deliverables
• Draft Pipeline Alignment Study Technical Memorandum
• Final Pipeline Alignment Study Technical Memorandum
PROJECT BUDGET
West Yost’s proposed level of effort and budget for each of the tasks described above is shown in Table 1.
West Yost will perform the scope of services described above on a time-and-expenses basis, tracked as a separate task under the existing NBR WTP Expansion Program Management contract. A budget augmentation for the NBR WTP Expansion Program Management budget is not requested at this time; however, the proposed work will consume a portion of the existing “As Needed Services” budget. Any additional related services not included in this scope of services will be performed only after receiving authorization and agreement on budget allocation.
August 22, 2025
X-X-XXX-XXX-XXX
Table 1. Estimated Project Hours and Budget
Task
Level of Effort,
hours
Estimated Budget,
dollars
Task 1. Project Management 34 11,800
Task 2. Project Alignment Study 288 83,400
Total Project Hours and Budget 322 95,200
SCHEDULE
West Yost anticipates providing the draft Technical Memorandum within ten (10) weeks after receiving notice to proceed and all required data.
Attachments: A. Figure 8-1 from 2023 Water Master Plan
X-X-XXX-XXX-XXX
Figure 8-1 from 2023 Water Master Plan
Attachment A
0 1
0.5 Miles
Notes:
1. The Lower Lagoon Valley, Montessa, and Vanden Meadows projects are already in the development phase, therefore the infrastructure associated with these projects isn't included in the CIP .
2. The only CIP Projects not shown on this figure are the studies listed in Table 8-2 (EX-BASE-STU-01 through EX-BASE-STU-06).
3. The recommended pipeline rehabilitation and replacement priority improvements are presented on Figure 8-2.
[
P
S
±
"
)
U
T
3 Q
X
W
X
W
U
T
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
[
P
S
±
Putah South Canal
N
u
t T
re
e
R
d
R
i
v
e
r
a
R
d
L
e
w
is
R
d
A
l
l
i
s
o
n
D
r
M
e
r
i
d
i
a
n
R
d
N
A l a m o D r
L
e
is
u
re
T
o
w
n
R
d
M a r s h a l l R d
V
a
c
a
V
a
l
l
e
y
P
k
w
y
E
M
o
n
t
e
V
i
s
t
a
A
v
S
O
r
c
h
a
r
d
A
v
H a w k i n s R d
D
a
v
is
S
t
M
a
s
o
n
S
t
Y
e
l
l
o
w
s
t
o
n
e
D
r
F r y R d
B
ro
w
n
S
t
E l m i r a R d
P
e
a
b
o
d
y
R
d
B
r
o
w
n
s
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d
M
e
rid
ia
n
R
d
A
S
t
M i d w a y R d
W e b e r R d
C a n t e l o w R d
P
l
e
a
s
a
n
t
s
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d
C
h
e
r
r
y
G
l
e
n
R
d
L
y
o
n
R
d
N
O
rc
h
a
rd
A
v
V
a
c
a
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d
B
u
c
k
A
v
G
i
b
s
o
n
C
a
n
y
o
n
R
d
S
o
u
t
h
A
S
t
S
t
i
e
g
e
r
H
i
l
l
R
d
M c C r o r y R d
Well 5
Well 8
Well 9
Well 14
Figure 8-1
Recommended
CIP Projects
City of Vacaville
Water Master Plan
Horizon Supply Transmission
Beyond Horizon Supply
Transmission
Horizon Backbone (H-BASE-BB-01)
Beyond Horizon Backbone
(B-BASE-BB-01)
North Orchard Pipelines
Existing Pipelines
Urban Growth Boundary
North Orchard Zone
North Orchard Expansion
U
T
North Orchard Reservoir
X
W
North Orchard PRS
[
P
S
±
North Orchard (Wykoff) BPS
[
P
S
±
Existing BPS Improvement
"
)
Existing Well - Horizon
Improvement (H-BASE-POW-01)
3 Q
Horizon WTP
U
T
Horizon Reservoir
"
)
Horizon Well
WEST YOST - N:\Clients\001 Vacaville\60-20-95 Vacaville WMPU\GIS\MXD\F8-1_CIP.mxd - wjones - 1/13/2023 U
T
"
)
X
W
X
W
3 Q
3 Q
U
T
[
P
S
±
"
)
"
)
"
)
"
)
[
P
S
±
N
u
t T
re
e
R
d
R
i
v
e
r
a
R
d
L
e
w
is
R
d
A
l
l
i
s
o
n
D
r
M
e
r
i
d
i
a
n
R
d
N
A l a m o D r
L
e
is
u
re
T
o
w
n
R
d
M a r s h a l l R d
V
a
c
a
V
a
l
l
e
y
P
k
w
y
E
M
o
n
t
e
V
i
s
t
a
A
v
S
O
r
c
h
a
r
d
A
v
H a w k i n s R d
D
a
v
is
S
t
M
a
s
o
n
S
t
Y
e
l
l
o
w
s
t
o
n
e
D
r
F r y R d
B
ro
w
n
S
t
E l m i r a R d
P
e
a
b
o
d
y
R
d
B
r
o
w
n
s
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d
M
e
rid
ia
n
R
d
A
S
t
M i d w a y R d
W e b e r R d
C a n t e l o w R d
P
l
e
a
s
a
n
t
s
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d
C
h
e
r
r
y
G
l
e
n
R
d
L
y
o
n
R
d
N
O
rc
h
a
rd
A
v
V
a
c
a
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d
B
u
c
k
A
v
G
i
b
s
o
n
C
a
n
y
o
n
R
d
S
o
u
t
h
A
S
t
S
t
i
e
g
e
r
H
i
l
l
R
d
M c C r o r y R d
Putah South Canal
Well 5
Well 8
Well 9
Well 14
Greenfield Site WTP
DE Plant Site / NBR Plant Expansion
H-BASE-NO-01
¿
H-BASE-PIPE-01
¿
H-BASE-PIPE-02
H-GS-WTP-01
¿
H-BASE-PIPE-03
H-BASE-NO-01
¿
H-BASE-PIPE-01
¿
H-BASE-PIPE-02
¿
H-BASE-PIPE-03
¿
H-GS-PIPE-01
¿
H-GS-PIPE-02
¿
H-GS-PIPE-03
¿
H-GS-PIPE-04
¿
H-GS-PIPE-06
North Orchard
Upper Zone
North Orchard
Upper Zone
Greenfield Site WTP
¿
H-GS-PIPE-05
H-BASE-TKPS-01
Northeast Reservoir
¿
H-GS-PIPE-07
¿
H-BASE-PIPE-04
EX-BASE-POW-01
H-BASE-GW-01
Well 17
Vine Street BPS
Backup Power
H-XP-WTP-01
DE Plant Site
H-XP-WTP-02
NBR Plant Expansion
Northeast Reservoir
H-BASE-GW-01
Well 17
EX-BASE-POW-01
Vine Street BPS
Backup Power
¿
H-XP-PIPE-01
¿
H-XP-PIPE-02
¿
H-XP-PIPE-03
¿
H-XP-PIPE-04
¿
H-XP-PIPE-05
¿
H-XP-PIPE-06
¿
¿
B-XP-PIPE-02
¿
H-BASE-PIPE-04
¿
H-GS-PIPE-08
¿
B-XP-PIPE-01
B-BASE-TKPS-01
H-BASE-TKPS-01
B-BASE-TKPS-01
¿
18"
18"
24"
§
¨
¦
505
§
¨
¦
505
§
¨
¦
80 §
¨
¦
80
CITY OF FAIRFIELD
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-293
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH WEST YOST ASSOCIATES FOR THE PROVISION OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR THE NORTH BAY REGIONAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION PROGRAM, UPDATING THE 5-
YEAR CAPITAL IM PROVEM ENT PLAN TO INCLUDE THE NORTH BAY REGIONAL WATER
TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZING AN UPDATE TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 BUDGET
WHEREAS, the North Bay Regional Water Treatment Plant (NBRWTP) is jointly owned by the Cities of Vacaville and Fairfield, but is operated by City of Fairfield staff; and WHEREAS, governance, ownership and operation of NBRWTP is outlined in a joint powers agreement (JPA), which was executed in 1987; and
WHEREAS, governance, ownership and oversight powers defined with the JPA are carried out through a Joint Powers Policy Committee (JPPC); and
WHEREAS, over 20 years ago, long range planning for the cities of Vacaville and Fairfield projected that the NBRWTP would require an expansion; and WHEREAS, both cities are experiencing growth in accordance with their adopted general plans and, accordingly, need to consider planning for the future treatment plant expansion that was originally contemplated in the JPA; and
WHEREAS, both Cities have either completed or substantially completed their respective water system master plans and, correspondingly, each have independently identified and concluded that it is time to consider planning for the facility expansion originally envisioned in the JPA; and WHEREAS, in order to begin design and construction of the NBRWTP expansion project, the JPPC needs to formally reconvene to evaluate future treatment capacity strategies, identify funding arrangements and determine project delivery; and
WHEREAS, the JPPC has determined that due to the nature and technical complexity of the NBRWTP expansion, West Vost Associates has the knowledge, experience and number of staff capable of providing the best value for both Cities; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the JPA, the Cities of Vacaville and Fairfield have been depositing funds into a reserve fund that is intended to be used for pre-design efforts; and
RES. NO. 2024-293
WHEREAS, the JPA stipulates that all direct and indirect costs incurred by the administering party shall be reimbursed out of the JPA fund; and
WHEREAS, funding was not allocated for this project in the City's approved fiscal year (FY) 2024- 2025 Budget, thus requiring a budget adjustment of $1,993,100 to North Bay Regional Fund (Fund 465) for the North Bay Regional Water Treatment Plant Expansion Project; and WHEREAS, the revised appropriation constitutes an update to the FY 2024-2025 Budget approved pursuant to Resolution No. 2023-149.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:
Section 1. The city manager is hereby authorized to execute a professional services agreement with West Yost Associates for the provision of professional engineering and management services for the NBRWTP Expansion Program for an amount not to exceed $1,993,100.
Section 2. The council authorizes the city manager to take all steps necessary to implement this resolution.
Section 3. The council hereby approves a budget amendment of $1,993,100 to increase appropriations to the NBR Fund (Fund 465) for the North Bay Regional Water Treatment Plant Expansion Project.
RES. NO. 2024-293
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of December 2024, by the following vote:
AYES: MEMBERS: MOY [B ERTAN l[CARR[ PAN DURO[SANDH U[TON N ESEN[WILLIAMS NOES: MEMBERS: ~ C-AJLJ
ABSENT: MEMBERS: N O V\JLI
ABSTAIN: MEMBERS: ~ Ov\Q...,
MAYOR
ATTEST:
~ t.tf:u+- CITY CLERK
Agenda Item No: U.12
AGENDA REPORT
DATE: December 17, 2024
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution 2024-XX 293
Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement with West Yost Associates for the Provision of Professional Services for the North Bay Regional Water Treatment Plant Expansion Program, Updating the 5-Year Capital Improvement Plan to Include the North Bay Regional Water Treatment Plant Expansion Project, and Authorizing an Update to the Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Budget
Funding Source: $1,993,100; North Bay Regional Fund
Contact: Michael J. Hether, (707) 428-7493
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.
STATEMENT OF ISSUE
City Council approval would authorize the city manager to execute an agreement with West Yost Associates (WYA) to provide professional engineering and management services for program development of the North Bay Regional Water Treatment Plant (NBRWTP) expansion. NBRWTP is jointly owned by the Cities of Vacaville and Fairfield but is operated by City of Fairfield staff.
Governance, ownership and operation of NBRWTP is outlined in a joint powers agreement (JPA), which was executed in 1987. Both cities are experiencing growth in accordance with their adopted general plans and, accordingly, need to consider planning for a future treatment plant expansion that was originally contemplated in the JPA.
DISCUSSION
Fairfield Municipal Utilities (FMU) provides water to the cities of Fairfield and Vacaville on a continuous basis and employs staff who are responsible for the operation of Fairfield's water system, a portion of which includes the NBRWTP. NBRWTP was conceived and constructed out of a need to realize access to the North Bay Aqueduct (NBA), both of which were completed in 1988. Back then, both cities needed a new treatment plant capable of accessing and treating the
new delta water supply that the NBA would bring to Solano and Napa counties. While NBRWTP was jointly constructed by the Cities of Vacaville and Fairfield, the plant facilities are operated by City of Fairfield staff through a JPA.
The JPA explicitly defines governance, ownership, and oversight powers, which are carried out through a Joint Powers Policy Committee (JPPC). The JPPC provides broad policy oversight to execute the duties and responsibilities defined by the JPA. While the JPPC consists of city staff from both Cities (Vacaville Utilities Director and Fairfield Assistant Public Works Director), the City of Fairfield is designated as the administering party on behalf of both cities. The JPPC used to meet regularly but has reverted to an as-needed basis over time. At a minimum, the JPPC formally convenes on an annual basis to adopt the JPA budget.
The JPA stipulates that all direct and indirect costs incurred by the administering party shall be reimbursed out of the JPA fund. Conversely, the JPA requires each City to make annual contributions to a reserve fund whose sole purpose is to provide a secure source of funding for emergencies, major equipment rehabilitation, replacement, or future expansions. Over 20 years ago, long-range planning for the cities of Vacaville and Fairfield projected that the NBRWTP would require an expansion, but there have been no efforts taken to implement a facility expansion to date. Both Cities have either completed or substantially completed their respective water system master plans, and correspondingly, each has independently identified and concluded that it is time to consider planning for the facility expansion originally envisioned in the JPA.
Master plans are guidance documents used as planning tools to ensure that systems can meet future needs. Generally, master plans are a best management practice used to identify systemw ide improvements, which can span decades. Well-writt en master plan documents contain in-depth analysis of the physical condition, operating capabilities, and criticality, which are then used to info rm decision-making. Finally, while master plans include a comprehensive list of projects across the document's planning horizon, they do not include design details or facility expansion plans.
In order to begin the design and construction of the NBRWTP expansion project, there are a series of legal, technical, and financial determinations that both Cities must consider. Befo re any engineering efforts can begin, the Cities must engage to discuss changes to the existing JPA, evaluate future treatment capacity strategies, identify funding arrangements, and determine project delivery, all of which must be summarized into a business case. The means to engage and achieve these efforts will be through a formal reconvening of the JPPC. This specific scope of work will result in laying the foundation to begin design efforts, which are expected to take place over the next two years.
Over the next couple of years, both Cities will have updated their general plans, which will allow the JPPC to lay the foundation to begin the next steps for the NBRWTP expansion. Updates to general plans always include an assessment of an existing or compilation of a water utility master plan to support buildout. As it pertains to water utility master plans, the City of Vacaville has completed its water master plan, and the City of Fairfield is near completion of its water master
plan. Due to the technical complexity of developing a water master plan, both Cities had solicited qualified consultants who specialize in water utility systems, and WYA was selected in both cases because WYA staff have current and historical knowledge of both Cities' water utility systems.
The JPPC requested a statement of qualifications from WYA to facilitate the review and evaluation of their experience. WYA has performed similar program development and pre-design efforts on regional facilities owned by multiple agencies. The JPPC has determined that due to the nature and technical complexity of the NBRWTP expansion, WYA has the knowledge, experience and number of staff capable of providing the best value for both Cities.
FINANCIAL IM PACT
The total cost to complete the NBRWTP plant expansion program is an amount not to exceed $1,993,100. Pursuant to the JPA, both Cities have been depositing funds into a reserve fund that is intended for this purpose.
The JPA also specifies that the administering party shall reimburse all direct and indirect costs incurred out of the JPA fund. Both parties wish to pursue the NBRWTP expansion and, consequently, intend to split all costs to complete this work, excluding the evaluation of Vacaville's capacity strategy ($103,000).
The NBRWTP Plant Expansion Project was not included in the fiscal year (FY) 2024-2025 Capital Budget. Therefore, a budget amendment is required to authorize an increase in appropriations of $1,993,100 to the NBR Fund (Fund 465).
The NBR Fund (Fund 465) will utilize previously collected reserves. The estimated timing and split of the reserves are as follows:
City of Fairfield (FY 2025):
City of Vacaville (FY 2025):
City of Fairfield (FY 2026):
City of Vacaville (FY 2026):
$334,550
$430,850
$610,500
$617,200
Total Fairfield contribution: $945,050
Total Vacaville contribution: $1,048,050
PUBLIC CONTACT/ ADVISORY BODY RECOM M ENDATION
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The council may choose not to authorize the city manager to execute the agreement. However, this would be inconsistent with the authority vested in the JPPC through the JPA.
COORDINATED WITH
City Attorney's Office
STAFF CONTACT
Michael J. Hether, Assistant Director Public Works/ Utilities (707) 428-7493
rn [email protected] .gov
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2: Proposed Resolution
Attachment 3: Proposed Agreement - West Yost
Attachment 4: Statement of Qualifications - West Yost
Attachment 5: NBRWTP Joint Powers Agreement
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
Execution Date: \2 / \q / ·2,;i--z,Ji
Close Date: 01,o (~o/ Z.,o z ~
Retention Schedule: C.L-- + c;
Destruction Date: O!,,/~o/ ,Z,.• 3,
Les o i--i v--< - J. ci J
THIS AGREEMENT is made at Fairfield, California, as of Dec.e,yv,Jxr l9. 20.M , by and between the City of Fairfield, a municipal corporation (the "CITY") and West Yost ("CONSULTANT"), who agree as follows:
1) SERVICES. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall provide to the CITY the services described in Exhibit "A," which consists of the proposal submitted by CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT shall provide said services at the time, place, and in the manner specified in Exhibit "A."
2) PAYMENT. CITY shall pay CONSULTANT for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement at the times and in the manner set forth in Exhibit "B." The payments specified in Exhibit "B" shall be the only payments to be made to CONSULTANT for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement.
CONSULTANT shall submit all billings for said services to the CITY in the manner specified in Exhibit "B." 3) FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT. CONSULTANT shall, at its sole cost and expense, furnish all facilities and equipment which may be required for furnishing services pursuant to this Agreement. 4) GENERAL PROVISIONS. The general provisions set forth in Exhibit "C" are part of this Agreement. In the event of any inconsistency between said general provisions and any other terms or conditions of this Agreement, the provisions set forth in Exhibit "C" shall control. 5) INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. The insurance requirements set forth in Exhibit "D" are part of this Agreement. In the event of any inconsistency between said general provisions and any other terms or conditions of this Agreement, the requirements set forth in Exhibit "D" shall control. 6) BUSINESS LICENSE. The CONSULTANT shall obtain and keep current a business license for work within the City of Fairfield pursuant to Chapter 10B of the Fairfield City Code, with respect to the gross receipts received pursuant to this Agreement. No payments shall be made to any SERVICE PROVIDER until such business license has been obtained, and all fees paid therefore, by the CONSULTANT. Business license applications and information may be obtained from the Community Development Department, Fairfield City Hall, 1000 Webster Street, Fairfield, CA 94533-4883, {707-428- 7509) and online at www.fairfield.ca.gov/biz.
7) EXHIBITS. All exhibits referred to herein are attached hereto and are by this reference incorporated herein.
8) TERM. This agreement shall be in effect through June 30, 20260 9) GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE. Should either Party to this Agreement bring legal action against the other, the validity, interpretation, and performance of this Contract shall be controlled by and construed under the laws of California, excluding California's choice of law rules. Venue for any such action relating to this Agreement shall be in the Solano County Superior Court. 10) Where applicable, vehicles with a GVWR greater than 8,500 lbs. and light-duty package delivery vehicles operated in California may be subject to the California Air Resources Board Advanced Clean Fleets regulations. Such vehicles may therefore be subject to requirements to reduce emissions of Revised 6/28/2024
air pollutants. For more information, please visit the CARS Advanced Clean Fleets webpage at https:// wwl.arb.ca.qov/our-work/proqrams/advanced-clean-fleets 11) ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement, including any other documents incorporated herein by specific reference, represents the entire and integrated agreement between CITY and CONSULTANT.
This Agreement supersedes all prior oral or written negotiations, representations or agreements. This Agreement may not be modified or amended, nor any provision or breach waived, except in a writing signed by both parties which expressly refers to this Agreement. 12) COUNTERPARTS. This Agreement may be executed in counterpart originals, duplicate originals, or both, each of which is deemed to be an original for all purposes. 13) NOTICES. This Agreement is managed and administered on the CITY's behalf by the individual named below. All invoices must be submitted and approved by this individual and all notices shall be given to the CITY using the following contact information:
CITY Contact: Bryan Heinzelman, P.E.
E-mail: [email protected]
Address: 1000 Webster Street, Third Floor, Fairfield, CA 94533 Telephone: (707) 428-7034
Notices must be given to CONSULTANT at the following:
CONSULTANT Contact: Jeffrey D. Pelz, P.E.
E-mail: [email protected]
Address: 200 Research Park Drive, Suite 100, Davis, CA 95618 Telephone: (530) 792-3259
EXECUTED as of.the day first above-stated.
CONSULTANT
Jeffrey D. Pelz, Vice President
Revised 6/28/2024
Initial Scope of Services (FY 24/25 and FY 25/ 26)
NBRWTP Expansion Program Management
Task 3.4. Additional Studies
Beyond the sampling and data collection needs identified under Tasks 3.2 and 3.3, additional, targeted studies are needed to address concerns related to power availability, pretreatment (flocculation/ sedimentation) facilities, and filtration facilities. Accordingly, the following special studies are included in this scope:
• Distributed Energy Resources (DER) Evaluation
• Pretreatment Challenge Testing
• Filter Challenge Testing
The DER Evaluation involves assessing the potential for Fairfield to make use of its existing photovoltaic array in conjunction with a battery power storage system to allow for more flexible NBRWTP operations during peak demand periods and potentially provide seamless transition from and to the electric utility.
The Pretreatment Challenge Testing involves stress testing each of the three NBRWTP flocculation/ sedimentation units to determine the actual capacity of each unit in comparison to the rated capacity of each. As part of this effort, West Yost will assist with the development of a draft test protocol. Testing would be performed by Fairfield staff with assistance from West Yost.
The Filter Challenge Testing involves analyzing the performance of the existing filters over the full range of historical loading rates, evaluating the impact of the effective size of the granulated activated carbon and sand media layers on filter headloss and run times, and analyzing the relationship between clarified washwater parameters and filter runtimes under a variety of operational scenarios. Based upon the results of this analysis, a protocol will be developed and implemented to test the existing filters at a range of loading rates to better understand their ability to meet performance goals. Testing would be performed by Fairfield staff with assistance from West Yost.
It is expected that NBRWTP staff will conduct the challenge tests, however, 20 hours has been included to provide as needed on-site assistance. A subconsultant will be retained by West Yost to collect media core samples.
For each of these additional studies, draft and final TMs will be produced to document the findings.
Task 3 Assumptions
• Two workshops with NBRWTP staff; one ahead of testing protocol development and one to review the results of the data analysis and challenge tests.
• One meeting each (three total) with NBRWTP staff to discuss implementation of the three additional studies
• One meeting with DDW to discuss pretreatment testing protocol • City staff will extract data and collect and analyze samples with limited assistance from West Yost commensurate with an agreed budget allocation
• The budget includes an allowance for subconsultant services that will be adjusted when the media sam ling sco e is determined
W EST YOST 4 City of Fairfield
City of Vacaville
Initial Scope of Services (FY 24/ 25 and FY 25/ 26)
NBRWT P Expansion Program Management
Task 3 Deliverables
• Workshop/meeting agendas and summary notes
• Draft and final sampling and data collection plan (Task 3.2) • Draft and final TM of findings (Task 3.3)
• Draft and final pretreatment testing protocol (Task 3.4) • Draft and final filter testing protocol (Task 3.4)
• Draft and final DER evaluation TM (Task 3.4)
• Draft and final pretreatment testing results TM(Task 3.4) • Draft and final filtration testing results TM Task 3.4) TASK 4. VACAVILLE CAPACITY PLANNING
Vacaville is faced with important decisions regarding the buildout of its water supply portfolio and needs to more clearly define its future surface water and groundwater supply mix. Of particular importance, the continued use of existing facilities needs to be defined, including its Diatomaceous Earth Water Treatment Plant (DEWTP) and several of its existing water supply wells, which are aging and experiencing water quality issues due to contaminants of concern (i.e., Cr6+). These issues are relevant to the expansion of the NBRWTP as assumptions made for other City facilities directly impact the allocation of treatment capacity needed for Vacaville and cost allocations between the two Cities. Accordingly, Vacaville needs to finalize its plan for using NBRWTP capacity, in both the near/medium-term and the long-term. Key subtasks to be performed under Task 4 include:
• Task 4.1. Refinement of Demand Projections
• Task 4.2. Evaluation of Surface Water and Groundwater Supply Options • Task 4.3. Vacaville Capacity Strategy TM
Each of these tasks are described further in the following sections.
Task 4.1. Refinement of Demand Projections
The City of Vacaville completed a Water Master Plan Update (Vacaville WMPU) in February 2023 that examined different water supply alternatives in light of growing water demands and emerging water quality concerns. The demand projections developed as part of the Vacaville WMP are based on a series of conservative assumptions and development information available at the time of preparation of the Vacaville WMPU. In this task, demand projections will be reviewed to better define Vacaville's surface water needs in both the near/medium-term and the long-term. This includes reviewing updated production information and determining if demand trends are growing at a rate similar to or less than what was defined in the Vacaville WMPU.
Task 4.2. Evaluation of Surface Water and Groundwater Supply Options The Vacaville WMPU considered two different surface water treatment options: (1) construction of a new WTP facility, (2) expansion of its share of the NBRWTP coupled with a rebuilding of the DEWTP. The WMPU did not, however, consider consolidating all surface water treatment at the NBRWTP. In addition, as mentioned above, the City's existing groundwater well facilities have been impacted by CR6+. Recently issued regulations for Cr6+ have impacted Wells 3, 9, 14, 15, and 16, which all have concentrations of Cr6+ that exceed the MCL of 10 micrograms per liter. As a result, future surface water supply planning should factor in the need for blending and/or planned wellhead treatment options as well as considering W EST YOST 5 City of Fairfield
City of Vacaville
Initial Scope of Services (FY 24/25 and FY 25/ 26)
NBRWTP Expansion Program Management
increased surface water supplies. Under near-term conditions the City will likely need to rely on additional surface water deliveries in the interim while it concurrently works on addressing wells with Cr6+.
Using the updated demand projections developed under Task 4.1, the evaluation of additional supply alternatives will be accomplished as follows:
1. Conduct a Supply Strategy Alternatives Workshop to identify which new long-term and interim supply alternatives will be modeled to determine treatment and conveyance capacity needs under both near-term and long-term demand scenarios. During the workshop West Yost and City staff will agree on up to four scenarios to be evaluated using the City's hydraulic model to identify infrastructure and associated sizing. The following parameters will be agreed upon for each scenario to be evaluated:
a. Demand Scenario: Buildout, Long-term (Pre-Buildout), or Interim (near term/ mid term). b. Status of DE Plant: Converted to Storage/Blending facility, or Fully Abandoned. c. Treatment Location: NBR Capacity plus (if any) Capacity within Vacaville d. Groundwater Wells: Producing at Sustainable Yield, or Producing at Less Than Sustainable Yield due to loss of capacity for Cr6+ mitigation.
Based on conversations with City staff and internally, the following alternatives are likely examples of the four scenarios that will be refined and adopted at the workshop for subsequent modeling:
Option A: Buildout Scenario
• Demands: Buildout per the WMPU or refined based on Task 4.1 • Wells producing at the sustainable yield
• DE plant site used only for blending of water from selected wells • NBR producing the balance of supply needed to meet demands Option B: Highest Potential Need from NBR
• Same as Option A, except reduced well production
• Possible Variation: Use long-term (pre-buildout) demands Option C: Interim Conditions (tests near-term adequacy of existing conveyance) • Demands projected for near- to mid-term
• All wells impacted by Cr6+ assumed to be offline
• DE plant not operational
• NBR producing the balance of supply needed to meet demands Option D: Interim Condition with Full Groundwater
• Same as Option C, except wells producing at the sustainable yield • DE plant site used only for blending of water from selected wells
2. Perform a hydraulic evaluation of the identified alternatives to assess the improvements necessary to meet demands. The evaluation will include preparing planning-level estimates of capital costs for each evaluated scenario.
W EST YOST 6 City of Fairfield
City of Vacaville
Initial Scope of Services (FY 24/ 25 and FY 25/ 26)
NBRWTP Expansion Program Management
3. Meet with City staff to review the results and select project criteria for the NBRWTP Expansion Program. Specifically, what near-term and long-term capacity is needed at the NBRWTP for Vacaville, and what near-term and long-term offsite improvements are needed to accommodate the NBRWTP supply.
Task 4.3. Vacaville Capacity Strategy TM
Upon completion of the investigations performed under Tasks 4.1 and 4.2, a TM of findings will be produced that will document decisions about Vacaville's capacity needs from the NBRWTP, including conceptual offsite transmission facilities. A draft TM will be produced for Vacaville staff review and will be finalized based on comments and input received. Fairfield's NBRWTP capacity needs will be summarized under Task 5.
Task 4 Assumptions
• One workshop with Vacaville staff to discuss the parameters of the modeling to be performed under Tasks 4.2.
• Hydraulics will be evaluated for up to four scenarios • One meeting with Vacaville staff to discuss and agree on a basis for Vacaville's NBR capacity needs and offsite infrastructure.
Task 4 Deliverables
• Agenda and summary notes for the workshop and meeting with Vacaville staff • Draft and final NBRWTP Car1acit Strategy,__T_M ~
TASK 5. FACILITIES PLANNING
Under this task, facilities planning will be performed that results in a Benchmark Project that will provide the basis for the detailed design of NBRWTP improvements by a suitable design team to be selected at a later time. The facilities planning will define and evaluate a potential capacity phasing for meeting near and long-term capacity needs and will include a planning level cost estimate. The Facilities Plan will be based on the findings and conclusions of the May 24, 2024 technical memorandum (TM) titled "NBRWTP Condition Assessment, Performance Evaluation, and Expansion Analysis" (May 2024 NBRWTP TM), supplemented as described below. The key subtasks to be performed under Task 5 include:
• Task 5.1. Raw and Treated Water Quality Characterization • Task 5.2. Existing Facilities Description
• Task 5.3. Need for Project
• Task 5.4. Treatment Performance and Technology Goals
• Task 5.5. Benchmark Project Development
• Task 5.6. Project Implementation and Schedule
• Task 5.7. Cost Estimates
• Task 5.8. Benchmark Design Report
WEST YOST 7 City of Fairfield
City of Vacaville
Initial Scope of Services (FY 24/25 and FY 25/ 26)
NBRWTP Expansion Program Management
Task 5.1. Raw and Treated Water Quality Characterization West Yost will update historical raw and treated water quality characterizations prepared as part of Fairfield's recent Public Utilities Master Plan (PUMP), which included available data from 2018 to 2022.
More recent data from 2022 through 2024, including parameters recorded as a result of data collection activities under Task 3, will be incorporated into the PUMP datasets and analyses. The intent of this task is to prepare a comprehensive set of relevant source water quality and plant performance data for use by a plant expansion design team.
Task 5.2. Existing Facilities Description
Descriptions of existing NBRWTP facilities from Fairfield's recent PUMP will be updated and expanded, as appropriate, to provide additional background on the NBRWTP and its relationship with major treated drinking water infrastructure in Fairfield and Vacaville.
Task 5.3. Need for Project
West Yost will prepare a summary of the need for the proposed NBRWTP improvements, incorporating results from the PUMP (including condition-, capacity-, and performance-based drivers), as well as Tasks 3 and 4 from this scope of work. The principal changes to information previously developed as part of Fairfield's PUMP will be an updated presentation of capacity-based improvement needs to reflect Vacaville's capacity requirements, and to update discussion of performance-based improvements reflecting results from Tasks 3.3 and 3.4.
Task 5.4. Treatment Performance and Technology Goals
This task will focus on identifying and defining the Cities' preferences and expectations for the characteristics and performance of an expanded and modified NBRWTP, including definition of acceptable treatment technologies and equipment. West Yost will lead a workshop with representatives from both cities to identify and assess a range of technically feasible approaches to modifying and expanding the NBRWTP. A framework will be developed for screening options. Screening criteria may include (but are not limited to) constructability, capital and operating costs, treated water quality, operational flexibility, and ability to meet anticipated and/or potential changes to treated water quality regulations. A TM summarizing and documenting the Cities' preferences and expectations will be prepared; the TM will serve as the basis for establishing relevant constraints and/ or prescriptive requirements for incorporation into future project procurement documents. The purpose of this task is not to confine the future design to specific technologies, but rather to identify any constraints that the Cities desire to imposed on the future design.
Task S.S. Benchmark Project Development
The purpose of the Benchmark Project will be to identify and define one approach to satisfying the Cities' needs for improvements to the NBRWTP and related offsite infrastructure that would be included in a combined project. The Benchmark Project will establish the type, size, configuration, and performance of key project elements that the Cities' believe would achieve the project's capacity and performance requirements, and will serve as the basis for estimated capital and operating costs for the improved facilities. Where appropriate, the Benchmark Project is anticipated to include a degree of conservatism in terms of design criteria, operational complexity, cost, and site planning.
W EST YOST 8 City of Fairfield
City of Vacaville
Initial Scope of Services {FY 24/ 25 and FY 25/ 26)
NBRWT P Expansion Program Management
West Yost will lead a joint Project Scoping Workshop to identify which offsite infrastructure projects will be included in a combined project with the NBRWTP improvements, and which offsite project will proceed in parallel as separate projects. The scope of offsite projects to be considered for Vacaville will be based on findings developed under Task 4. The scope of offsite projects to be considered for Fairfield (if any) will be based on the PUMP with input from City staff.
Development of the Benchmark Project will include updates and refinements to facility-specific discussions in Fairfield's PUMP, modified to reflect the results ofT ask 3, Task 4, and Task 5.4 of this scope of work. Design criteria will be presented in sufficient detail to communicate the Cities' performance expectations and preferences, and to provide a basis for evaluation of future proposals for design and construction of the improvements.
Key deliverables prepared under this subtask will include design criteria tables and conceptual site plans for the NBRWTP and selected offsite improvements, including conceptual pipeline alignments.
Task 5.6. Project Implementation and Schedule
The objectives of this task will be to identify and characterize - in sufficient detail for planning purposes - the types, sequencing, and durations of the various steps necessary to implement the project. West Yost will work with the Cities to outline requirements for environmental documentation and permitting, non environmental permitting, land acquisition, procurement document development, bid/ proposal evaluation, design and construction, facility startup and commissioning, and project closeout. A project schedule will be developed with appropriate durations, relationships, and sequencing of key activities.
Environmental consultant input may be warranted during this subtask, and may be added to the scope and budget if determined to be necessary.
Task 5. 7. Cost Estimates
Capital and operating cost estimates will be developed for the Benchmark Project, as well as the supporting engineering, environmental, land acquisition, legal, other administrative activities necessary to support the project. Construction costs will rely primarily on parametric estimating tools incorporating actual facility cost data from recently constructed projects, and will be supported where necessary with more focused, quantity-based estimates for certain facilities. Operating costs will rely on the estimated power, chemical, labor, and equipment replacement and repair needs associated with the Benchmark Project. A 20- to 30-year lifecycle cost analysis will be prepared to combine capital and operating costs.
Task 5.8. Benchmark Design Report
Based on the May 2024 NBRWTP TM, depending on the updated capacity and phasing plan, treatment improvements are expected to include intake screening, ozonation facilities, flash mixing, pretreatment trains (i.e., flocculation/sedimentation basins), dual media filters, washwater equalization basins, washwater clarifiers, and sludge lagoons. Other onsite improvements include yard piping, electrical improvements, pumping and metering facilities, and chemical storage. Offsite improvements may include treated water transmission, blending, storage and pumping facilities. The capacity and phasing options will be based on those presented in the May 2024 NBRWTP TM and one of the options will be refined based on discussions with the staff of both Cities. The improvement and options defined in Tasks 5.1 through 5.4 will serve as the basis for preliminary site layouts showing the expanded NBRWTP.
WESTYOST 9 City of Fairfield
City of Vacaville
Initial Scope of Services (FY 24/ 25 and FY 25/ 26)
NBRW TP Expansion Program Management
The likely CEQA documentation and actions will be identified, and will affect both the costs and schedule for improvements. Similarly, an assessment of environmental permits and non-environmental permits (e.g., encroachment permits) will be performed. Additionally, potential property purchases and/or easement acquisitions will be identified.
Upon completion of Tasks 5.1 through 5.7, all of the activities under Task 5 will be documented in a Benchmark Project Report that will be submitted to the appropriate staff from both Cities for review and comment.
Task 5 Assumptions
Three meetings with the staff of both Cities to discuss improvements, options, layouts, criteria, costs, and schedule
• Hydraulic evaluations (if needed) to further define offsite improvements for Fairfield would be performed under separate contract, or under an added scope and budget for this task • Meetings with environmental and/or regional water agencies will be identified but are not included in this scope
• One meeting to discuss land/easement acquisition
• One meeting to review/discuss the Benchmark Project Report • Evaluation of North Bay Aqueduct and Putah South Canal conveyance capacity will be evaluated under an added scope item, if necessary
The scope and design criteria for any Project elements addressing repair and rehabilitation needs will be S(:!ecified by Ci!)'. staff and incor orated in the Benchmark Project ReRort.
Task 5 Deliverables
• Preliminary NBRWTP site layouts
• NBRWTP design criteria and performance goals (TM or Draft report section) • Offsite facility design criteria summary
• Preliminary cost and schedule summaries
• Draft and final Benchmark Project Report
• Agendas and summarv notes for each meeting and workshoR TASK 6. OUTSIDE FUNDING
Several potential funding mechanisms exist to support the expansion of the NBRWTP. Funding is expected to include some combination of water rates, connection fees, low-interest loans, and/or state and federal grants. Rate studies will be performed independently by both Cities, and it is assumed that a financing plan will be developed by others, as needed to support the internal funding strategy.
The focus of this task will be on the identification of loan and grant funding options available to support the NBRWTP expansion. If warranted, future scope and budget authorizations may include assistance in preparing funding applications, construction labor compliance monitoring, grant/loan administration, and reporting. The initial key subtasks include:
• Task 6.1. Funding Research
• Task 6.2. Meetings with Funding Agencies
• Task 6.3. Funding Strategy TM
• Task 6.4. Ongoing Opportunity Monitoring
W EST YOST 10 City of Fairfield
City of Vacaville
Initial Scope of Services (FY 24/ 25 and FY 25/ 26)
NBRWTP Expansion Program Management
Potential funding sources available for this project include:
• Federal Funding Programs
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation WaterSMART Drought Response Program for Drought Resiliency Projects: Funding can be up to $3,000,000 per project, with a SO percent cost share
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation WaterSMART Planning and Project Design Program. Per project funding can be up to $400,000 with a SO percent cost share Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.
Maximum per project funding is not specified but awards are often in the tens of millions of dollars per project with a 25 percent cost share U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Midsize and Large Drinking Water System Infrastructure Resilience and Sustainability Grant. Per project funding can be up to $5 million with a 10 percent cost share
• State Funding Programs
Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan program: Offers interest rates at less than half the municipal bond rate
California Infrastructure Bank (I-Bank): Program funding is available in amounts ranging from $50,000 to $25,000,000, with loan terms of up to 30 years Additional state funding program may become available in FY25/26 if the Safe Drinking Water, Wildfire Prevention, Drought Preparedness, and Clean Air Bond Act of 2024 (otherwise known as the Proposition 4 California Climate Bond) is passed by voters in November 2024. This bond proposes to allocate $3.8 billion to water projects The scope for Task 6 will involve investigating and tracking the status of available outside funding sources, meeting with relevant funding agencies, and documenting the efforts and findings in a TM. Ongoing monitoring and maintaining an up-to-date list of opportunities is also proposed.
Task 6 Assumptions
• One meeting with Fairfield and Vacaville staff to discuss potential available funding options • Three meetings with funding agencies
• Periodic meetings to review updates to the list of opportunities (Funding Opportunity Matrix or tracking spreadsheet) will be held in conjunction with routine project team meetings • A Financing Plan will be develoRed seRarately by others Task 6 Deliverables
• Agendas and summary notes for each meeting
• Funding Opportunity Matrix or tracking spreadsheet
• Draft and final funding strategy TM - ~ -
TASK 7. PROJECT DELIVERY METHOD EVALUATION
A variety of project delivery methods may be available for the NBRWTP expansion and related offsite projects, including traditional design-bid-build as well as collaborative project delivery methods such as progressive design-build. Key subtasks include:
WESTYOST 11 City of Fairfield
City of Vacaville
Initial Scope of Services {FY 24/ 25 and FY 25/ 26)
NBRWTP Expansion Program Management
• Task 7.1. Consultations with Staff and Legal Counsels of Both Cities • Task 7.2. Project Delivery Methods TM
• Task 7.3. Presentations to City Councils
One meeting with the staff of both Cities, and another one that includes legal counsels will be conducted to review and compare options, discuss needs and constraints, and develop a preferred delivery method.
In the initial meeting, West Yost will present a summary of the pros and cons of each available project delivery method as it relates specifically to this project. The information will be summarized and presented in a brief draft TM for presentation to both City Councils with a recommended approach based on the staff discussions. The TM will then be finalized based on feedback from the City Councils.
Task 7 Assumptions
• One meeting with Fairfield and Vacaville staff and a second that includes legal counsels to discuss available/preferred project delivery methods
• Two resentations (one each,._) t;;.;;o;...C.;;.i""!Y'--"'-Co.;;.u;;;;.n;.;.c;;..;.i;.;;;ls ___.
Task 7 Deliverables
• Agendas and summary notes for each meeting
• Presentation slides for delivery to City Councils
• Draft and final P.roject delive!:'{, recommendations TM TASK 8. BUSINESS CASE DOCUMENTATION
Upon completion of Tasks 3 through 7, West Yost will develop a business case document. The document will be useful to both Cities in presenting to their respective City management and councils regarding the need for the NBRWTP expansion and the participation of both Cities. Key subtasks to be performed under Task 8 include:
• Task 8.1. Business Case Report
• Task 8.2. City Council Presentations/Hearings
The Business Case Report will describe the key drivers behind the need for NBRWTP expansion and will rely heavily on the work products completed under the previous tasks. Key drivers include water quality concerns (especially emerging contaminants, such as chromium-VI and PFAS), future demand projections, and the need for water supply diversity. The report will also summarize the need for an updated JPA, the extent of facilities required for NBRWTP expansion, preliminary costs and schedule information, environmental and permitting steps, and the funding strategy. All relevant materials will be presented at City Council sessions/hearings for both Cities.
Task 8 Assumptions
• Two City Council meetings/hearings (one for each City) • A formal economic justification will not be required, given the nature of the project drivers • Planning level costs with ample contingencies will be presented • The budget and scope for this task will be reviewed and updated (if necessary) as the project is further defined
Task 8 Deliverables
WESTYOST 12 City of Fairfield
City of Vacaville
Initial Scope of Services {FY 24/ 25 and FY 25/ 26)
NBRWTP Expansion Program Management
• Agendas and summary notes for each meeting/hearing
• Draft and final Business Case Report
• Presentation materials for City Council meetings/hearings -------~--------' TASK 9. PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND PROGRAM COORDINATION West Yost will serve as an advisor and program manager for both Cities from now through completion of construction. In this role, West Yost will guide the Cities through multiple aspects of the program, coordinating the combined efforts to advance the Project. This task is initially authorized through June 2026, and is expected to be extended and adapted as the Project and program management needs are further defined. Accordingly, the initial budget for Task 9 is based on an assumed level of effort that will be affected by many outside factors. The allocation of budget to program management activities under this task will be monitored and adjusted collaboratively with the Cities' project manager.
Key subtasks to be performed under Task 9 include:
• Task 9.1. Program Management Plan (PMP)
• Task 9.2. Program Budgeting and Cashflow Projections
• Task 9.3. Program Schedule
• Task 9.4. Progress Monitoring and Invoicing
The subtasks are further described as follows.
Task 9.1. Program Management Plan {PMP)
The PMP will describe the processes and controls necessary to successfully execute the Project, and will be revised and updated as the Project proceeds. Accordingly, the PMP will address the roles and responsibilities of each Project team member, the project controls needed to manage various aspects of the program (such as document management, scheduling, change management, accounting, and budgeting), and the quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures to be followed.
Task 9.2. Program Budgeting and Cashflow Projections
Program budgeting will involve cost projections in both summary and line-item form for all elements of the Project. Updates will be performed at least semi-annually, and the task/line-item structure will be adapted as the Project progresses and the budget is refined over time. Annual cash flow projections will be maintained as part of the budgeting process.
Task 9.3. Program Schedule
A detailed Program schedule will be maintained, with updates on an as-needed basis, approximately quarterly. In the future, the Program schedule will incorporate or reference design and construction schedules developed by the entity(ies) selected to design and construct the facilities.
Task 9.4. Progress Monitoring and Invoicing
Biweekly virtual meetings with the Project Manager(s) for the Cities will be held to review Project progress, action items, critical path items, and upcoming meetings or decisions needed. West Yost will use a Project SharePoint site to post relevant information and documents, including the Action Item Log WESTYOST 13 City of Fairfield
City of Vacaville
Initial Scope of Services (FY 24/ 25 and FY 25/ 26)
NBRWTP Expansion Program Management
and Decision Log. Monthly invoices will be prepared that include a summary of the work completed under each task.
Task 9.5 Program Technical Team Meetings
Program technical team meetings will be held at least bi-monthly to make decisions and keep senior staff informed. These meetings will be an important tool for building and maintaining project momentum.
Monthly technical team meetings are planned for the first seven months of the program.
TASK 10. AS-NEEDED SERVICES
Services may be added to this scope of work based on project needs, for example:
Potential activities that may be initiated within the time frame of this initial scope of work, before the end of FY 25/ 26:
• Collaborative Delivery Procurement Document Development • Communications (Presentations, Management Briefings)
• Public Outreach
• SCADA Assessment and Implementation/ Programming
• Cyber-lnformed Engineering Review
• Specialty Subconsulting, including but not limited to:
Environmental
Financial Planning
Surveying
Right-of-Way/ Property Acquisition
Potential activities beyond FY 25/ 26:
• Collaborative Delivery Contract Oversight
• Design Review
• Construction Monitoring
• Senate Bill 991 Reporting
A budget allowance is included for Task 10; however, a specific scope of work and associated budget will be agreed to and authorized by the Cities prior to performing services under this task or new tasks.
GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS
• The Project will include the first phase of expansion at the NBR • The Project will include some offsite transmission facilities to connect to Vacaville's distribution system, and possibly blending facilities
• The Project may include some offsite facilities (prior to distribution system connection) for Fairfield
W EST YOST 14 City of Fairfield
City of Vacaville
Initial Scope of Services (FY 24/ 25 and FY 25/ 26)
NBRWTP Expansion Program Management
• Some data collection and analysis is needed to better define the Project. The Cities will collect and West Yost will evaluate raw data as time allows without unnecessarily delaying start of design
• Program Management: In addition to the Project encompassing the NBRWTP expansion plus any combined offsite improvements, West Yost will assist with monitoring, coordinating and performing tasks associated with other related activities and projects, including other capital projects
• West Yost's scope and budget will be adapted to fit the needs of the Cities over the course of the program.
• The initial scope and budget authorization generally includes work that precedes preparation of project procurement documents; however, preparation of procurement documents could be initiated before the end of FY 25/26 if authorized as an additional task. • Environmental review (CEQA/NEPA) and permitting may be added under West Yost's contract, but is not initially included
• Legal counsel will be provide through the Cities' legal departments, including (if needed) outside specialty counsel for collaborative delivery contracting
UNKNOWNS POTENTIALLY AFFECTING SCOPE, SCHEDULE AND/ OR BUDGET The following list identifies some of the unknowns that could change the schedule and budget:
• Environmental review (CEQA/NEPA) requirements for offsite facilities • Environmental review (CEQA/NEPA) requirements for treatment (onsite) facilities • Extent of offsite facilities needed
• The mix of offsite improvements to be included in the main Project contract vs. separate projects/contracts
• Design and construction procurement method(s) to be selected for each element of the Project
• Property acquisition needed for offsite facilities
• Number of alternatives and/or phases to be considered • Level of prescriptiveness included in Benchmark Design Report, which could affect the amount of analysis needed before design begins
W EST YOST 15 City of Fairfield
City of Vacaville
Attachment B
Program Schedule
NBR Expansion: Program Schedule (July - June Fiscal Year) ATTACHMENT B Rev: 10-10-2024 ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Half 2, 2025 Half 1, 2026 Half 2, 2026 Half 1, 2027 Half 2, 2027 Half 1, 2028 D J F M A M J J A 5 0 N D _ _l F M l-~ /\L J J A _ _s_ Q_ N p J F M - A M _ ___l - J_ A 2_9 N Q 0 NBR Expansion Program 1620 days Mon 12/ 9/ 2<Thu 3/ 6/ 31 1 NTP for Program Management Services 0 days Mon 12/9/24 Mon 12/9/24 • ~ /9 2 Task 9: Project Management and Program Coordination 1620 days Mon 12/ 9/ 24 Thu 3/6/ 31 3 Task 9.1: Program Management Plan 2 mans Mon 12/9/24 Tue 2/4/25 i~ rF1 4 FY 24/25 (Tasks 9.2 - 9.5) 142 days Mon 12/9/24 Mon 6/30/25 T s General Program Management (Tasks 9.2 - 9.4) 142 days Mon 12/9/24 Mon 6/30/25 I 7 Task 9.5: Program Team Technical Meetings 17) 142 days Mon 12/9/24 Mon 6/30/25 8 FY 25/26 (Tasks 9.2 - 9.5) 256 days Tue 7/1/25 Tue 6/ 30/26 I
I
1 9 General Program Management (Tasks 9.2 - 9.4) 256 days Tue 7/1/25 Tue 6/30/26 - 11 Task 9.5: Program Team Technical Meetings (6) 256 days Tue 7/1/25 Tue 6/30/26 - 12 FY 26/27 - FY 30/31 (Tasks 9.2 - 9.5) 1222 days Wed 7/1/26 Thu 3/6/31 I ~ -tfi-HttH;fi-l-4ftfli1-fi+i.;.._..illfit1Ji111!111i-Ututth:_ .. _ .. - - ·--· ..... 13 14 Task 1: Memorandum of Understanding 100 days Mon 12/9/ 24 Wed 4/30/25 1S Task 1.1: Framework for MOU 1 man Mon 12/9/24 Tue 1/7 /25 I • 16 Task 1.2: Meeting with Legal Counsels 1 man Wed 1/8/25 Tue 2/4/25 t+ 17 Task 1.3: City Council Study Sessions [OPTIONAL] 2 mans Wed 2/5/25 Wed 4/2/25 I 18 Task 1.4: Draft, Revised Draft, and Final MOU 4 mans Wed 1/8/25 Wed 4/30/25 19 20 Task 2: Joint Powers Agreement Update 180 days Thu 5/ 1/25 Thu 1/ 15/26 I I 21 Task 2.1: JPA Review/Draft Modifications 4 mans Thu 5/1/25 Fri 8/22/25 22 Task 2.2: Council Workshops 1 man Mon 8/25/25 Mon 9/22/25 J I t-1 23 Task 2.3: Revised JPA 4 mans Tue 9/23/25 Thu 1/15/26 I 24 I 25 Task 3: Data Collection and Additional Studies 205 days Tue 12/31/ 24 Mon 10/20/25 26 Task 3.1: Existing Information Review Workshop 5 days Tue 12/31/24 Tue 1/7 /25 ~ 27 Task 3.2: Sampling and Data Collection Plan 15 days Wed 1/8/25 Tue 1/28/ 25 .--, 33 Task 3.3: Data Collection and Analysis 190 days Wed 1/22/25 Mon 10/20/25 42 Task 3.4: Additional Studies 150 days Wed 1/22/25 Fri 8/22/ 25 47 48 Task 4: Vacaville Capacity Strategy 160 days Mon 12/9/24 Fri 7 /25/25 49 Task 4.1: Refinement of Demand Projections 40 days Mon 12/ 9/ 24 Tue 2/ 4/ 25 r-i-1 S3 Task 4.2: Evaluation of Surface and Groundwater 80 days Wed 2/5/25 Thu 5/29/25 Supply Options
63 Task 4.3: Vacaville Capacity Strategy TM 40 days Fri 5/30/25 Fri 7/25/25 r--, 64 Draft TM 1 man Fri 5/30/25 Thu 6/26/25
-t 6S Meeting with City 1 wk Fri 6/27 /25 Thu 7/3/25
66 Final TM 3 wks Mon 7/7/25 Fri 7 /25/25 t.- 67
68 69
70
NBR Expansion: Program Schedule (July - June Fiscal Year) ATTACHMENT B Rev: 10-10-2024 ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Half 2, 2025 Half 1, 2026 Half 2. 2026 Half 1, 2027 Half 2, 2027 Half 1, 2028 D J F M A M J J A s 0 N D J F M A M J J A s 0 N D J F M - A M 1 J A s 0 N D 71 Task 5: Facilities Planning 340 days Wed 1/8/25 Thu 5/7/ 26 I I I I - I I I I 72 Task 5.1: Raw at Treated Water Quality 220 days Wed 1/8/25 Mon 11/17 /25 Characterization
75 Task 5.2: Existing Facilities Description 60 days Wed 1/8/25 Wed 4/2/25 r----, 76 Touch up (maybe expand) descriptions from PUMP 3 mons Wed 1/8/25 Wed 4/2/25 .... -- 77 Task 5.3: Need for Project 20 days Mon 8/25/25 Mon 9/22/25 ii 78 Merge commentary from PUMP with results from 1 mon Mon 8/25/25 Mon 9/22/25 & Tasks 3 and 4
79 Task 5.4: Treatment Performance and Technology 40 days Mon 8/25/25 Mon 10/20/25 Goals
80 Treatment performance and technology goals 1 man Mon 8/25/25 Mon 9/22/25 LL workshop
81 Goals TM or Draft Report Chapter 1 mon Tue 9/23/25 Mon 10/20/25 I I 82 Task 5.5: Benchmark Project Development 120 days Fri 6/27/25 Wed 12/17 /25 1-I 83 Refine PUMP analyses with updated capacity 1 mon Mon 8/25/25 Mon 9/22/25 requirements
L 84 Refine design criteria and unit process improvement 1 mon Tue 9/23/25 Mon 10/20/25 descriptions
85 Limited vendor outreach, if needed 1 mon Tue 9/23/25 Mon 10/20/25 - 86 Develop Vacaville offsite improvements design 3 mans Mon 7/7/25 Mon 9/29/25 I
criteria and description
87 Develop Fairfield offsite improvements design criteria 3 mons Mon 7/7/25 Mon 9/29/25 and description
88 Develop plant electrical design criteria for resilience 4 mans Fri 6/27 /25 Mon 10/20/25 (more detailed than PUMP)
l I 89 Evaluate SCADA Needs 4 mans Fri 6/27/25 Mon 10/20/25 90 Project Scoping Workshop 1 mon Tue 10/21/25 Mon 11/17 /25 ,ilaal- 91 Prepare updated overall WTP site plan 2 mans Tue 10/21/25 Wed 12/17/25 I I 92 Prepare conceptual Vacaville transmission main 2 mons Mon 8/18/25 Mon 10/13/25 ~L-t alignment drawings ~
93 Task 5.6: Project Implementation and Schedule 40 days Thu 12/18/25 Thu 2/12/26 94 Identify environmental, permitting, and land 1 man Thu 12/18/25 Thu 1/15/26 acquisition requirements I 95 Develop overall implementation sequencing and 2 mons Thu 12/18/25 Thu 2/12/26 --- schedule
I 96 Task 5.7: Cost Estimating 80 days Tue 10/21/25 Thu 2/12/26 101 Task 5.8: Prepare Benchmark Design Report 160 days Tue 9/23/25 Thu 5/7/26 102 Draft Report 6 mons Tue 9/23/25 Thu 3/12/26
I 103 Review by Cities 1 mon Fri 3/13/26 Thu 4/9/26
- 104 Final Benchmark Project Report 1 mon Fri 4/10/26 Thu 5/7/26 I ,_ I 105 I 106
107 I
NBR Expansion: Program Schedule (July - June Fiscal Year) ATTACHMENT B Rev: 10-10-2024 ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Half 2, 2025 Half 1, 2026 Half 2, 2026 Half 1, 2027 Half 2, 2027 Half 1, 2028 -- D J F M. A M J J A s 0 N 0 J F M A M J J A s 0 _ .ti Q___J _ .f__ M - A _ tyi __ / _ J ~ - s Q_ __ ]'J - Q 108
I -r -
109 Task 6: Outside Funding 1620 days Mon 12/9/24 Thu 3/6/31 I -
110 Task 6.1: Funding Research 6 mons Mon 12/9/24 Thu 5/29/25 111 Task 6.2: Meetings with Funding Agencies 2 mons Thu 4/3/25 Thu 5/29/25 +t 112 Task 6.3: Funding Strategy TM 2 mons Fri 5/30/25 Fri 7/25/25 [ ,- 113 Task 6.4: Ongoing Opportunity Monitoring 18 mons Mon 12/9/24 Thu 5/7 /26 114 Future Tasks 1500 days Fri 5/30/25 Thu 3/6/31 I
I
11S Develop Funding Applications 6 mons Fri 5/30/25 Mon 11/17 /25 T - ttlt1+ rtttttttnt,c-t,111titt, - ~ 116 Provide Post-Application Support 18 mons Tue 11/18/25 Thu 4/8/27 : .'.~ ttl .. 1111111111 .. H+H- =ml +mmr:Hn:7H+H:Ym,mcr-::mmt 117 Finalize Funding Agreement(s) 2 mons Fri 4/9/27 Thu 6/3/27 ~ 118 Provide Funding Reporting and Compliance 49 mons Fri 6/4/27 Thu 3/6/31 ~ Monitoring
119
120 Task 7: Project Delivery Method Evaluation 140 days Fri 5/30/25 Thu 12/18/25 121 Task 7.1: Consultations with Staff and Legal Counsel 3 mans Fri 5/30/25 Mon 8/25/25 '..cJ 122 Task 7.2: Project Delivery Methods TM 2 mons Mon 8/25/25 Tue 10/21/25 LllillC!ll!ff I 123 Task 7.3: Presentations to City Councils 2 mons Tue 10/21/25 Thu 12/18/25 ,-....... 124 125 Task 8: Business Case Documentation 120 days Thu 12/18/25 Thu 6/4/26 126 Task 8.1: Business Case Report 100 days Thu 12/18/25 Thu 5/7 /26 I 130 Task 8.2: City Council Presentations/Hearings 1 mon Fri 5/8/26 Thu 6/4/26 I - 131
132 Task 10: As-Needed Services 1500 days Mon 12/9/24 Thu 9/19/30 I 133 Budget Allowance (FY 24/25 and 25/26) 398 days Mon 12/9/24 Tue 6/30/26 134
13S Communications 1500 days Mon 12/9/24 Thu 9/19/30 I 136 Communicate with Management and Elected Officials 1500 days Mon 12/9/24 Thu 9/19/30 - - -- -
Thu 5/1/25 Fri 7/28/28 137 Public Outreach 840 days I 138 Communicate with the Rate Payers 18 mons Thu 5/1/25 Thu 9/24/26 :rtmttt:zartt-tittm,ttffll lfri:"itttltttt·,rttm,111mmt1tt=t ttmttt:r,thrttitmttt!lt 139 Outreach to Project Neighborhood(s) 12 mons Fri 8/27/27 Fri 7/28/28 -
140 SCADA l day Mon 12/9/24 Mon 12/9/24 I
141 Network Assessment 1 day Mon 12/9/24 Mon 12/9/24 I
142 Programming and Configuration 1 day Mon 12/9/24 Mon 12/9/24 J 143 Cyber-lnformed Engineering (CIE) Review l day Mon 12/9/24 Mon 12/9/24 144 General Assessment 1 day Mon 12/9/24 Mon 12/9/24
l 145 CIE Design Review 1 day Mon 12/9/24 Mon 12/9/24
146 Specialty Subconsulting l day Mon 12/9/24 Mon 12/9/24 147 Financial Planning 1 day Mon 12/9/24 Mon 12/9/24
148 Surveying 1 day Mon 12/9/24 Mon 12/9/24
149 Right-of-Way/ Property Acquisition 1 day Mon 12/9/24 Mon 12/9/24 T I
NBR Expansion: Program Schedule (July - June Fiscal Year) ATTACHMENT B Rev: 10-10-2024 ID Task Name Duration Start Finish
D
Half 2, 2025 Half 1, 2026
J F M A M J A S
150
151
152
153
154
Environmental Review 14 mans
COLLABORATIVE DELIVERY (Example - Progressive DB) 1620 days [Optional] Develop Procurement Guidance Document 1 mon
155
156
157
Develop RFO/RFP 6 mans
Develop Draft Collaborative Delivery Contract 6 mans
Conduct Outreach to Prospective Teams and Hold 6 mans
Meetings
Issue RFO/RFP (Progressive Design Build) 158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171 KEY
(, 'ji ...:l l' I , , •~:, \•. ·I
Select PDB Team
Negotiate Contract and Award
-~1,.-p .:1,~' •. •Jl·,. I,_, .. Ii ·1;; I t;f,,11~ 1° ··, ;p .. _;I Negotiate GMP
Issue Notice to Proceed with Phase 2
n,,I ·,., 1.,,_.._.1;: · J ;-_: ( ,_·,n:.lrL( t ln11 t_,,_.-._-f1t1·1,1:, Final Completion
Manage Collaborative Delivery Contract
Quality Assurance/ Construction Monitoring
Senate Bill 991 Reporting
0 N
Half 1, 2028
J A S O N D
O days
} 1 •i "'
l,} 1- ;c 1,
2 mans
o days
~ , L l , j.
0 days
56 mons
40 mans
700 days
Thu 5/1/25
Mon 12/ 9/ 24 Thu 3/ 6/31
Tue 11/18/25 Thu 12/18/25
Thu 12/18/25 Thu 6/4/26
Thu 12/18/25 Thu 6/4/26
Thu 12/18/25 Thu 6/4/26
Thu 6/4/26 Thu 6/4/26
I· 1,;. ':,/Jt
Fri 6/2/28
Thu 6/4/26
I ,I I - ;1
2 mans
2 mans
Fri 7 /31/26 Thu 9/24/26
Fri 9/25/26 Thu 11/19/26
t·1 I • 1l, I ,11t.·J
~ +i.;:;fl.lCFi "ttttt :....'irtb
Half 2, 2026 Half 1, 2027 Half 2, 2027
O J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J
-,il-hEmH,~fm ,,;>1-flb,;; ~ r:- - - - - - - - - - - - - - f:iHI
1 4nu: -~~;:.:...u.i-i!H:t.L4HH!m ~
act • ., ll!lttt! Ul!ti±d:!w.
4: 1;1 ·'"" ·· .u= :-' .. ,.
6/4
.ttt 1
~ ~
Thu 7/27/28
Thu 7 /27 /28 Thu 7 /27 /28
f-~1 I ,II ~ - ,·: :, I
Thu 3/6/31 Thu 3/6/31
Fri 11/20/26 Thu 3/6/31
Fri 2/11/28 Thu 3/6/31
Fri 6/2/28 Thu 2/6/31
23!i" ..;,.:~ 1=
172
173
1 J::k lucluded 111 l11itiJl Sco1JI.! & BuJgct
TJ:J Nut lucluded in l11it1;.i! Scope & Bud1,;t:t ltm'"'c;mtmtml "' i ttt!'irmf'
Attachment C
Fee Estimate by Subtask
Fee Estimate by Fiscal Year (July-June) Attachment C Rev: 10-10-24 ID Task Name .Cost '25 '26
0 jNBR Expansion Program $1,993,09 $765,475 $1,227,619
NTP for Program Management Services $
2 Task 9: Project Management and Program Coordination $954,77 $366,876 $587,897 3 Task 9.1: Program Management Plan $14,432 $14,432
4 FY 24/ 25 (Tasks 9.2 - 9.5) $352,44 $352,444
5 General Program Management (Tasks 9.2 - 9.4) $300,92 $300,926 7 Task 9.5: Program Team Technical Meetings (7) $51,51 $51,518 8 FY 25/ 26 (Tasks 9.2 - 9.5) $587,89 $587,897
9 General Program Management (Tasks 9.2 - 9.4) $547,80 $547,805 11 Task 9.5: Program Team Technical Meetings (6) $40,09 $40,092 12 FY 26/27 - FY 30/31 (Tasks 9.2 - 9.5) $
13 14 Task 1: Memorandum of Understanding $53,77 $53,770 15 Task 1.1: Framework for MOU $16,57 $16,576
16 Task 1.2: Meeting with Legal Counsels $6,77 $6,773
17 Task 1.3: City Council Study Sessions [OPTIONAL] $8,10 $8,104 18 Task 1.4: Draft, Revised Draft, and Final MOU $22,31 $22,318 19 20 Task 2: Joint Powers Agreement Update $58,50 $14,436 $44,067 21 Task 2.1: JPA Review/ Draft Modifications $27,49 $14,436 $13,061 22 Task 2.2: Council Workshops $19,452 $19,452
23 Task 2.3: Revised JPA $11,553 $11,553
24 25 Task 3: Data Collection and Additional Studies $199,46 $127,502 $71,963 26 Task 3.1: Existing Information Review Workshop $6,10 $6,109 27 Task 3.2: Sampling and Data Collection Plan $19,57 $19,575 33 Task 3.3: Data Collection and Analysis $86,83 $26,284 $60,546 42 Task 3.4: Additional Studies $86,95 $75,534 $11,417
47 48 Task 4: Vacaville Capacity Strategy $103,01 $96,324 $6,694 49 Task 4.1: Refinement of Demand Projections $14,52 $14,524 53 Task 4.2: Evaluation of Surface and Groundwater Supply $66,06 $66,066 Options
63 Task 4.3: Vacaville Capacity Strategy TM $22,42 $15,734 $6,694 64 Draft TM $14,543 $14,543
65 Meeting with City $2,97 $1,191 $1,786
66 ' Final TM $4,90 $4,908
67 68
69 70
71 Task 5: Facilities Planning $296,39 $12,102 $284,294 72 Task 5.1: Raw at Treated Water Quality Characterization $7,12 $4,711 $2,411 75 Task 5.2: Existing Facilities Description $6,81 $6,814 76 Touch up (maybe expand) descriptions from PUMP $6,81 $6,814 77 Task 5.3: Need for Project $5,22 $5,221
78 Merge commentary from PUMP with results from Tasks 3 $5,221 $5,221 and 4
NBR Expansion Program Page 1
Fee Estimate by Fiscal Year (July-June) Attachment C Rev: 10-10-24 ID .Task Name jcost '25 '26
79 Task 5.4: Treatment Performance and Technology Goals $21,97 $21,973 80 Treatment performance and technology goals workshop $11,103 $11,103 81 Goals TM or Draft Report Chapter $10,87 $10,870
82 Task 5.5: Benchmark Project Development $123,22 $576 $122,651 83 Refine PUMP analyses with updated capacity requirements $6,74 $6,748 84 Refine design criteria and unit process improvement $6,831 $6,831 descriptions
85 I
Limited vendor outreach, if needed $5,95 $5,957
86 Develop Vacaville offsite improvements design criteria and $7,87 $7,875 description
87 Develop Fairfield offsite improvements design criteria and $6,24 $6,244 description
88 Develop plant electrical design criteria for resilience (more $10,192 $255 $9,937 detailed than PUMP)
89 Evaluate SCADA Needs $12,863 $322 $12,541
90 Project Scoping Workshop $12,33 $12,330
91 Prepare updated overall WTP site plan $25,87 $25,875 92 Prepare conceptual Vacaville transmission main alignment $28,313 $28,313 drawings
93 Task 5.6: Project Implementation and Schedule $48,987 94 Identify environmental, permitting, and land acquisition $21,628 requirements
95 Develop overall implementation sequencing and schedule $27,359 $27,359 96 Task 5. 7: Cost Estimating $35,26 $35,266
101 Task 5.8: Prepare Benchmark Design Report $47,78 $47,785 102 Draft Report $32,00 $32,003
103 Review by Cities $
104 Final Benchmark Project Report $15,782 $15,782
105
106
107
108 Task 6: Outside Funding $49,61 $29,830 $19,788
109 Task 6.1: Funding Research $7,95 $7,952
110 Task 6.2: Meetings with Funding Agencies $5,35 $5,358 111 Task 6.3: Funding Strategy TM $14,822 $8,152 $6,670 112 Task 6.4: Ongoing Opportunity Monitoring $21,48 $8,368 $13,118 113
118
119 Task 7: Project Delivery Method Evaluation $56,25 $8,005 $48,249 120 Task 7.1: Consultations with Staff and Legal Counsel $21,832 $8,005 $13,827 121 Task 7.2: Project Delivery Methods TM $14,30 $14,308 122 Task 7.3: Presentations to City Councils $20,11 $20,114 123
124 Task 8: Business Case Documentation $60,06 $60,065
125 Task 8.1: Business Case Report $45,97 $45,978
129 Task 8.2: City Council Presentations/ Hearings $14,08 $14,087 130
131 Task 10: As-Needed Services $161,23 $56,629
NBR Expansion Program Page 2
EXHIBIT "B"
PAYMENT
1) The total contract price for services rendered by CON SU LT ANT under this Agreement shall not exceed $1,993,100.
2) Payment shall be made to CONSULTANT in accordance with the CONSULTANT'S price proposal as accepted by the City, and CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices to the CITY for the same.
3) Any additional meetings or work required beyond that set forth in Exhibit "A" shall be mutually agreed to in writing by the CITY and CONSULTANT, and shall be billed on a time and materials basis to the City of Fairfield.
4 Revised 6/28/2024
Fee Estimate by Fiscal Year (July-June) Attachment C Rev: 10-10-24 ID .Task Name [Cost '25 I '26 I
0 INBR Expansion Program $1,993,09 $765,475 $1,227,619
j NTP for Program Management Services $
2 1 Task 9: Project Management and Program Coordination $954,77 $366,876 $587,897 3 Task 9.1: Program Management Plan $14,432 $14,432
4 FY 24/25 (Tasks 9.2 - 9.5) $352,44 $352,444
5 General Program Management (Tasks 9.2 - 9.4) $300,92 $300,926 7 Task 9.5: Program Team Technical Meetings (7) $51,51 $51,518 8 FY 25/ 26 (Tasks 9.2 - 9.5) $587,89 $587,897
9 General Program Management (Tasks 9.2 - 9.4) $547,80 $547,805 11 Task 9.5: Program Team Technical Meetings (6) $40,092 $40,092 - 12 FY 26/27 - FY 30/31 (Tasks 9.2 - 9.5) $
13 14 Task 1: Memorandum of Understanding $53,77 $53,770 15 Task 1.1: Framework for MOU $16,57 $16,576 -
16 Task 1.2: Meeting with Legal Counsels $6,773 $6,773
17 I Task 1.3: City Council Study Sessions [OPTIONAL] $8,10 $8,104 18 Task 1.4: Draft, Revised Draft, and Final MOU $22,31 $22,318 19 20 Task 2: Joint Powers Agreement Update $14,436 $44,067 21 Task 2.1: JPA Review/ Draft Modifications $14,436 $13,061 22 Task 2.2: Council Workshops $19,452
23 Task 2.3: Revised JPA $11,553
24 ·-·
25 Task 3: Data Collection and Additional Studies $199,46 $127,502 $71,963 26 Task 3.1: Existing Information Review Workshop $6,10 $6,109 27 Task 3.2: Sampling and Data Collection Plan $19,57 $19,575 33 Task 3.3: Data Collection and Analysis $86,83 $26,284 $60,546 42 Task 3.4: Additional Studies $86,95 $75,534 $11,417
47 - 48 Task 4: Vacaville Capacity Strategy $103,01 $96,324 $6,694 49 Task 4.1: Refinement of Demand Projections $14,52 $14,524 53 Task 4.2: Evaluation of Surface and Groundwater Supply $66,06 $66,066 Options
63 Task 4.3: Vacaville Capacity Strategy TM $22,42 $15,734 $6,694 64 Draft TM $14,54 $14,543
65 Meeting with City $2,97 $1,191 $1,786 -
66 Final TM $4,90 $4,908
67 68
69 70
71 Task 5: Facilities Planning $296,39 $12,102 $284,294 72 Task 5.1: Raw at Treated Water Quality Characterization $7,12 $4,711 $2,411 . 75 Task 5.2: Existing Facilities Description $6,81 $6,814 76 Touch up (maybe expand) descriptions from PUMP $6,81 $6,814 77 Task 5.3: Need for Project $5,22 $5,221
78 Merge commentary from PUMP with results from Tasks 3 $5,22 $5,221 and 4
NBR Expansion Program Page 1
Fee Estimate by Fiscal Year (July-June) Attachment C Rev: 10-10-24 ID .Task Name Cost '25 '26 I
79 Task 5.4: Treatment Performance and Technology Goals $21,97 $21,973 80 Treatment performance and technology goals workshop $11,103 $11,103 81 Goals TM or Draft Report Chapter $10,87 $10,870
82 Task 5.5: Benchmark Project Development $123,22 $576 $122,651 83 Refine PUMP analyses with updated capacity requirements $6,74 $6,748 84 Refine design criteria and unit process improvement $6,831 $6,831 descriptions
85 Limited vendor outreach, if needed $5,95 $5,957
86 Develop Vacaville offsite improvements design criteria and $7,875 $7,875 description
87 Develop Fairfield offsite improvements design criteria and $6,244 description
88 Develop plant electrical design criteria for resilience (more $10,19 $255 $9,937 detailed than PUMP)
89 Evaluate SCADA Needs $12,863 $322 $12,541
90 Project Scoping Workshop $12,33 $12,330
91 Prepare updated overall WTP site plan $25,87 $25,875 92 Prepare conceptual Vacaville transmission main alignment $28,31 $28,313 drawings
93 Task 5.6: Project Implementation and Schedule $48,98 $48,987 94 Identify environmental, permitting, and land acquisition $21,62 $21,628 requirements
95 Develop overall implementation sequencing and schedule $27,35 $27,359 96 Task 5.7: Cost Estimating $35,26 $35,266
101 Task 5.8: Prepare Benchmark Design Report $47,78 $47,785 102 Draft Report $32,003 $32,003
103 Review by Cities $
104 Final Benchmark Project Report $15,78 $15,782
105
106
107
108 Task 6: Outside Funding $49,61 $29,830 $19,788
109 Task 6.1: Funding Research $7,95 $7,952
110 Task 6.2: Meetings with Funding Agencies $5,35 $5,358 111 Task 6.3: Funding Strategy TM $14,82 $8,152 $6,670
112 Task 6.4: Ongoing Opportunity Monitoring $21,48 $8,368 $13,118 113 I
118
119 Task 7: Project Delivery Method Evaluation $56,25 $8,005 $48,249 120 Task 7.1: Consultations with Staff and Legal Counsel $21,832 $8,005 $13,827 121 Task 7.2: Project Delivery Methods TM $14,30 $14,308 122 Task 7.3: Presentations to City Councils $20,11 $20,114 123
124 Task 8: Business Case Documentation $60,06 $60,065
125 Task 8.1: Business Case Report $45,97 $45,978
129 Task 8.2: City Council Presentations/ Hearings $14,08 $14,087 130 '
131 Task 10: As-Needed Services $161,23 $56,629 $104,603 NBR Expansion Program Page 2
li'l/ W EST YOST • W ater. Eng ineered.
2024 Billing Rate Schedule
(Effective January 1, 2024, through December 31, 2024)*
POSITIONS
ENGINEERING
LABOR CHARGES (DOLLARS PER HOUR)
Principal/Vice President $355
Engineer/Scientist/Geolo ist Manager I/ II $335 I $351
Principal Engineer/Scientist/Geologist I/ II $302 / $322 Senior Engineer/Scientist/Geologist I/ II $272 / $286
Associate Engineer/Scientist/Geologist I/ II $226 / $243 Engineer/Scientist/Geologist I/ II $176 / $205
Engineering Aide $106
Field Monitorin Services $131
Administrative I/ II/ Ill/ IV $97 I $121 / $145 / $160
ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
Engineering Tech Manager I/ II $349 / $351
Princieal Tech Seecialist I/ II $320 I $331
Senior Tech Specialist I/ II $293 / $306
Senior GIS Analyst $265
GIS Analyst $251
Jechnical Specialist I/ II/ Ill/ IV $187 / $213 / $239 I $267 Technical Analyst I/ II $134 / $160
Technical Anal st Intern $108
Cross-Connection Control Specialist I/ II/ Ill/ IV $140 / $151 / $110 I $189 CAD Mana er
CAD Designer I/ II $164 / $185
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
Senior Construction Manager
Construction Manager I/ II/ Ill/ IV
Resident Inspector (Prevailing Wage Groups 4 / 3 / 2 / 1) Apprentice lnspecto_r _
CM Administrative I/ II
Field Services
$338
$201 / $215 / $228 / $289
$181 / $201 / $224 / $232
$164
$87 I $118
$232
■ Hourly rates include charges for technology and communication, such as general and CAD computer software, telephone calls, routine in-house copies/prints, postage, miscellaneous supplies, and other incidental project expenses. ■ Outside services, such as vendor reproductions, prints, and shipping; major West Yost reproduction efforts; as well as engineering supplies, etc., will be billed at the actual cost plus 15%. ■ The Federal Mileage Rate will be used for mileage charges and will be based on the Federal Mileage Rate applicable to when the mileage costs were incurred. Travel other than mileage will be billed at cost. ■ Subconsultants will be billed at actual cost plus 10%. ■ Expert witness services, research, technical review, analysis, preparation, and meetings will be billed at 150% of standard hourly rates. Expert witness testimony and depositions will be billed at 200% of standard hourly rates. ■ A finance charge of 1.5% per month (an annual rate of 18%) on the unpaid balance will be added to invoice amounts if not paid within 45 days from the date of the invoice. "This schedule is updated annually Page 1 of 2
" ' ' W EST YOST • W ater. Engineered.
2024 Billing Rate Schedule
(Effective January 1, 2024, through December 31, 2024)* Equipment Charges
EQUIPMENT BILLING RATES
2" Purge Pump & Control Box $300 / day
Aquacalc / Pygmy or AA Flow Meter $28 / day
Emergency SCADA System $35 / day
Field Vehicles (Groundwater) $1 / mile
Gas Detector $80 / day
Generator $60 / day
Hydrant Pressure Gauge $10 / day
-- ~- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Hydrant Pressure Recorder, lmi;iulse (Transient) - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - ~ - - - - $55 / day Hydrant Pressure Recorder, Standard $40 / day
-----------·-~--------------~ Low Flow Pump Back Pack $135 / day Low Flow Pump Controller $200 / day
Powers Water Level Meter $32 / day
Precision Water Level Meter 300ft $30 / day
Precision Water Level Meter 500ft $40 / day
Precision Water Level Meter 700ft $45 / day
QED Sample Pro Bladder Pump $65 /_da_.y _ _.
Skydio 2+ Drone (2 hour mimimum)
Stora e Tank
Sump Pump
Transducer Communications Cable
Transducer Components (per installation)
$24 / day
$10 / day
Trimble GPS - Geo 7x
Tube Length Counter
Turbidity Meter
Turbidity Meter (2100Q Portable)
Vehicle (Construction Mana ement)
Water Flow Probe Meter
$23 / day
$220 / day
$22 / day
- - --, $30 I day
$35 / day
----------------- $ 10 / hour
$20 / day
Water Quality Meter
Water Quality Multimeter
---~~------~-. Well Sounder
$50 Ida
$185 / day
$30 /_d_a,,_ _.
' This schedule is updated annually Page 2 of 2
~ , , W EST YOST
• W ater. Engineered.
2025 Billing Rate Schedule
(Effective January 1, 2025, through December 31, 2025}*
POSITIONS LABOR CHARGES (DOLLARS PER HOUR)
Principal/ Vice President $373
Engineer/Scientist/Geologist Manager I/ II $352 / $369
Principal Engineer/Scientist/ Geologist I/ II $317 / $338 Senior Engineer/Scientist/Geologist I/ II $286 $300
Associate Engineer/ Scientist/Geologist I/ II $237 / $255 En ineer/Scientist/Geolo ist I/ II $185 / $215
Engineering Aide $111
Field Monitoring Services $138
Administrative I/ II/ Ill/ IV $102 / $127 / $152 / $168
ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
Engineering Tech Manager I/ II $366 I $369
Principal Tech Specialist I/ II $336 I $348
Senior Tech Specialist I/ II $308 I $321
Senior GIS Analyst $278
GIS Analyst $264
Technical Si:>ecialist I/ II/ Ill/ IV $196 I $224 / $251 / $280 Technical Analyst I/ II $141 / $168
Technical Analyst Intern $113
Cross-Connection Control Specialist I/ II/ Ill/ IV $147 / $159 / $179 / $198 CAD Manager $222
CAD Designer I/ II $172 / $194
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
Senior Construction Manager $355
Construction Manager I/ II/ Ill/ IV $211 / $226 / $239 / $303 Resident Inspector (Prevailing Wage Gro ups 4 / 3 / 2 / 1) $190 I $211 / $235 / $244 A i:>rentice lnsi:>ector
CM Administrative I/ II
$172
$91 / $124
Field Services $244
■ Hourly rates include charges for technology and communication, such as general and CAD computer software, telephone calls, routine in-house copies/prints, postage, miscellaneous supplies, and other incidental project expenses. ■ Outside services, such as vendor reproductions, prints, and shipping; major West Yost reproduction efforts; as well as engineering supplies, etc., will be billed at the actual cost plus 15%. ■ The Federal Mileage Rate will be used for mileage charges and will be based on the Federal Mileage Rate applicable to when the mileage costs were incurred. Travel other than mileage will be billed at cost. ■ Subconsultants will be billed at actual cost plus 10%. ■ Expert witness services, research, technical review, analysis, preparation, and meetings will be billed at 150% of standard hourly rates. Expert witness testimony and depositions will be billed at 200% of standard hourly rates. ■ A finance charge of 1.5% per month (an annual rate of 18%) on the unpaid balance will be added to invoice amounts if not paid within 45 days from the date of the invoice. * This schedule is updated annually Page 1 of 2
" ' ' W EST YOST • W ater. Eng ineered.
2025 Billing Rate Schedule
(Effective January 1, 2025, through December 31, 2025)* Equipment Charges
EQUIPMENT I
BILLING RATES
2" Purge Pump & Control Box $300 / day
Aqua ca le/ Pygmy or AA Flow Meter $28 / da
Emergency SCADA System $35 / day
Field Vehicles Groundwater $1.02 / mile
Gas Detector $80 / day
Generator $60 / day
Hydrant Pressure Gauge $10 / day
Hydrant Pressure Recorder, Impulse (Transient) $55 / da Hydrant Pressure Recorder, Standard $40 / day
Low Flow Pum Back Pack $135 / da-,,
Low Flow Pump Controller $200 / day ___________ , _ Powers Water Level Meter $32 / day Precision Water Level Meter 300ft $30 / day
Precision Water Level Meter 500ft $40 / day
------- Precision Water Level Meter 700ft $45 / day
QED Sample Pro Bladder Pum $65 / day
Skydio 2+ Drone (2 hour mimimum) $100 / hour
Storage Tank - ~ - - - - - - ~ - ~ - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $20 da-,, Sump Pump $24 / day
Transducer Communications Cable $10 / day
Transducer Components (per installation) $23 / day
Trimble GPS - Geo 7x $220 / day
Tube Length Counter $22 / day
Turbidit Meter $30 / da
Turbidity Meter (2100Q Portable) $35 / day
Vehicle Construction Management)
Water Flow Probe Meter
Water Quality Meter
Water Quality Multimeter $185 / day
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Well Sounder - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - •- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - $30 /da ~ This schedule is updated annually Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT "C"
GENERAL PROVISIONS
1) INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT. At all times during the term of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall be an independent contractor and shall not be an employee of CITY. CITY shall have the right to control CONSULTANT only insofar as the results of CONSULTANT's services rendered pursuant to this Agreement; however, CITY shall not have the right to control the means by which CONSULTANT accomplishes services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. 2) LICENSES; PERMITS; ETC. CONSULTANT represents and warrants to CITY that CONSULTANT has all licenses, permits, qualifications, and approvals of whatsoever nature which are legally required for CONSUL TANT to practice CONSUL TANT's profession. CONSULTANT represents and warrants to CITY that CONSULTANT shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement, any licenses, permits, and approvals which are legally required for CONSULTANT to practice his profession.
3) TIME. CONSULTANT shall devote such services pursuant to this Agreement as may be reasonably necessary for satisfactory performance of CONSULTANT's obligations pursuant to this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall adhere to the Schedule of Activities as described in their Executive Summary.
4) CONSULTANT NOT AN AGENT. Except as CITY may specify in writing, CONSULTANT shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of CITY in any capacity whatsoever as an agent.
CONSULTANT shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement, to bind CITY to any obligation whatsoever.
5) ASSIGNMENT PROHIBITED. No party to this Agreement may assign any right or obligation pursuant to this Agreement. Any attempted or purported assignment of any right or obligation pursuant to this Agreement shall be void and of no effect.
6) PERSONNEL. CONSULTANT shall assign only competent personnel to perform services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that CITY, in its sole discretion, at any time during the term of this Agreement, desires the removal of any person or persons assigned by CONSULTANT to perform services pursuant to this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall remove any such person immediately upon receiving notice from CITY of the desire of CITY for the removal of such person or persons. 7) STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE. CONSULTANT shall perform all services required pursuant to this Agreement. Services shall be performed in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner of the profession in which CONSULTANT is engaged in the geographical area in which CONSULTANT practices his profession. All products which CONSULTANT delivers to CITY pursuant to this Agreement shall be prepared in a workmanlike manner, and conform to the standards of quality normally observed by a person practicing in CONSULTANT's profession. CITY shall be the sole judge as to whether the product of the CONSULTANT is satisfactory.
8) CANCELLATION OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement may be canceled at any time by the CITY at its discretion upon written notification to CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT is entitled to receive full payment for all services performed and all costs incurred up to and including the date of receipt of written notice 5 Revised 6/28/2024
to cease work on the project. CONSULTANT shall be entitled to no further compensation for work performed after the date of receipt of written notice to cease work. All completed and incomplete products up to the date of receipt of written notice to cease work shall become the property of CITY. 9) PRODUCTS OF CONSULTING. All products of the CONSULTANT provided under this Agreement shall be the property of the CITY.
10) INDEMNIFY AND HOLD HARMLESS.
a) If AGREEMENT is an agreement for design professional services subject to California Civil Code § 2782.8(a) and CONSULTANT is a design professional, as defined in California Civil Code § 2782.8(c)(2), to the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY and its elected officials, officers, agents, employees and designated volunteers (collectively "CITY lndemnitees") from and against any and all claims, losses, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses, including attorney's fees and costs, to the extent they arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT's duty to defend shall consist of reimbursement of defense costs incurred by CITY in direct proportion to the CONSULTANT's proportionate percentage of fault. CONSULTANT's percentage of fault shall be determined, as applicable, by a court of law, jury or arbitrator. In the event any loss, liability or damage is incurred by way of settlement or resolution without a court, jury or arbitrator having made a determination of the CONSULTANT's percentage of fault, the parties agree to mediation with a third party neutral to determine the CONSULTANT's proportionate percentage of fault for purposes of determining the amount of indemnity and defense cost reimbursement owed to the CITY.
b) If AGREEMENT is not an agreement for design professional services subject to California Civil Code § 2782.8(a) or CONSULTANT is not a design professional as defined in California Civil Code § 2782.8(c)(2), to the fullest extent allowed by law, CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the CITY lndemnitees from all claims, suits, or actions of every name, kind and description, brought forth on account of injuries to or death of any person or damage to property arising from or connected with the willful misconduct, negligent acts, errors or omissions, ultra-hazardous activities, activities giving rise to strict liability, or defects in design by CONSULTANT or any person directly or indirectly employed by or acting as agent for CONSULTANT in the performance of this Agreement, including the concurrent or successive passive negligence of the CITY lndemnitees.
It is understood that the duty of CONSULTANT to indemnify and hold harmless includes the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code.
Acceptance of insurance certificates and endorsements required under this Agreement does not relieve CONSULTANT from liability under this indemnification and hold harmless clause. This indemnification and hold harmless clause shall apply whether or not such insurance policies are determined to be applicable to any such damages or claims for damages.
CONSULTANT'S responsibility for such defense and indemnity shall survive termination or completion of this agreement for the full period of time allowed by law. 11) PROHIBITED INTERESTS. No employee of the CITY shall have any direct financial interest in this agreement. This agreement shall be voidable at the option of the CITY if this provision is violated. 6 Revised 6/28/2024
12) LOCAL EMPLOYMENT POLICY. The CITY desires wherever possible, to hire qualified local residents to work on city projects. Local resident is defined as a person who resides in Solano County.
The CITY encourages an active affirmative action program on the part of its contractors, consultants, and developers. When local projects require, subcontractors, contractors, consultants and developers will solicit proposals from qualified local firms where possible.
As a way of responding to the provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act and this program, contractor, consultants, and developers will be asked, to provide no more frequently than monthly, a report which lists the employee's name, job class, hours worked, salary paid, city of residence, and ethnic origin. 13) CONSULTANT NOT A PUBLIC OFFICIAL. CONSULTANT is not a "public official" for purposes of Government Code§§ 87200 et seq. CONSULTANT conducts research and arrives at his or her conclusions, advice, recommendation, or counsel independent of the control and direction of the CITY or any CITY official, other than normal contract monitoring. In addition, CONSULTANT possesses no authority with respect to any CITY decision beyond these conclusions, advice, recommendation, or counsel. 14) EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. When the CITY executes an agreement for or makes payment to CONSULTANT in the amount of $600 (six hundred dollars) or more in any one calendar year, CONSULTANT shall provide the following information to CITY to comply with Employment Development Department (EDD) reporting requirements:
a) Whether CONSULTANT is doing business as a sole proprietorship, partnership, limited liability partnership, corporation, limited liability corporation, non-profit corporation or other form of organization.
b) If CONSULTANT is doing business as a sole proprietorship, CONSULTANT shall provide the full name, address and social security number of the sole proprietor. c) If CONSULTANT is doing business as other than a sole proprietorship, CONSULTANT shall provide CONSULTANT'S federal tax identification number. 7 Revised 6/28/2024
EXHIBIT "D"
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
CONSULTANT shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the CONSULTANT, its agents, representatives, or employees. 1) MINIMUM SCOPE AND LIMITS OF INSURANCE
a) Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence Form CG 00 01) with minimum limits of $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, products and completed operations, and property damage. If Commercial General Liability or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate Jim it shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.
b) Automobile Liability coverage (Form CA 00 01 with Code 1 - any auto) with minimum limits of $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. c) Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employers' Liability insurance, each in the amount of $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. 2) INDUSTRY SPECIFIC COVERAGES
If checked below, the following insurance is also required. 0 Professional Liability Insurance/ Errors and Omissions Liability in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence.
D Pollution Liability Insurance in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence D Garage Keepers Insurance in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence D Fidelity/ Crime/ Dishonesty Bond in the minimum amount of $ _ D MCS-90 Endorsement to Business Automobile insurance for transportation of hazardous materials and pollutants
D Builder's Risk/ Course of Construction Insurance in the minimum amount of $ _ 3) INSURANCE PROVISIONS
a) DEDUCTIBLES AND SELF-INSURED RETENTIONS. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the CITY. At the option of the CITY, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the CITY, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the CONSULTANT shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. b) The general and automobile liability policies (and if applicable, pollution liability, garage keepers 8 Revised 6/28/2024
liability and builder's risk policies) are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
i) The CITY, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of the CONSULTANT; products and completed operations of the CONSULTANT; premises owned, occupied or used by the CONSULTANT; and automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the CONSULTANT. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the CITY, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. ii) For any claims related to this project, the CONSULTANT'S insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the CITY, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insured maintained by the CITY, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be in excess of the CONSULTANT'S insurance and shall not contribute with it. iii) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the CITY, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
iv) The CONSULTANT'S insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. v) Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the CITY.
vi) The policy limits of coverage shall be made available to the full limits of the policy. The minimum limits stated above shall not serve to reduce the CONSULTANT'S policy limits of coverage.
Therefore, the requirements for coverage and limits shall be (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this agreement, or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named insured, whichever is greater. c) ACCEPTABILITY OF INSURER. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the CITY.
VERIFICATION OF COVERAGE. CONSULTANT shall furnish the CITY with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this Exhibit D. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf; on forms equivalent to CG 20 10 11 85, subject to CITY approval; and submitted electronically through the Exigis insurance system to: [email protected].
All insurance certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the CITY before work commences. At the request of the CITY, CONSULTANT shall provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements affecting the coverage required by these specifications. d) SUB-CONTRACTORS. CONSULTANT shall require all subcontractors to procure and maintain insurance policies subject to the requirements of Exhibit D. Failure of CONSULTANT to verify existence of sub contractor's insurance shall not relieve CONSULTANT from any claim arising from sub-contractors work on behalf of CONSULTANT.
9 Revised 6/28/2024
12/18/24, 8:30 AM Business Search
I
. . > I • ' ~ •~ -~ • ' ' ' '
~ Home (:) Report a Problem
Business Search
Search By: Business Name v Value: west yost
SRecify Start Date Rang~ (QRtional)
Account # Business Name
24000548 West Yost &. Associates, Inc.
Start Date
5/ 1/ 2024
Expire Date Address Phone Website
17 l ,·:c 2020 RESEARCH PARK DR !/ 100, (530) 756-5905
DAVIS, CA 95618-6148
Total records found: ·1
l'oMfed by Hdl;'
https://eservices.fairfield.ca.gov/HdlWeb/Search/SearchBy 1 /1
12/18/24, 8:31 AM
CIT Y OF
FAIRFIELD CA L I F O R N I A
City of Fairfield, CA
Welcome Melissa - MY. Account - Logout
l _in_bo: _ Records Configuration Reports Help
West Yost & Associates Inc.
Account: 32435
- - - JI - - - - - - -- - - - - - - '
I Edit Account .., Place Hold Archive Account ~ Request Compliance View Audit Trail
'?,, Log Note 1 Log Meeting Log Call Log Email ~ Send Email Assign Task Add Contact
I Dashboard
RISKworks Account Compliance Status:
Number of Active Evaluation(s):
Total Number of Evaluations:
Compliant Evaluations:
Non Compliant Evaluations:
TBD Evaluations:
Compliant
1 9
1 0
0 Items Requiring Attention: 0
Organizational Unit
El City of Fairfield, CA
Public Works
El Action It ems
There are no pending tasks. Click here to add one.
El Evaluations
O Evaluation Agreement Agreement
ID Number End Date
Compliance Effective Expiration Started T St Status ype Date Date age 1 0 191553 PO#20511
i I
!Compliant 18/27 /20241 Consultant I 9; 1;2024 9/ 1/2025 / Services I j
add ) edit ) renew ) archive )
View Active and Archived Evaluations
rn Documents
https ://fairfield .riskworks. com/applications/Compliance/Profile_ view.asp?ComplianceProfile I D=920DABA3- 75CF-4070-A44 9-57 8C79807 E20&refererU. . . 1 /2
12/18/24, 8:31 AM
l±l Account Information
City of Fairfield, CA
m Contacts
l±l History
- - - - - -- - -
Copyright Exigis LLC, 2002 - 2024. All rights reserved. Version 10.10.0 Revision: 2526 https://fairfield.riskworks.com/applications/Compliance/Profile_view.asp?ComplianceProfilelD=920DABA3-75CF-4070-A449-578C79807E20&refererU... 2/2
Agenda Item No: P.10
AGENDA REPORT
DATE: June 16, 2026
TO: Acting Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution 2026 -127 HR Amendment No. 3 with Concern for the Employee Assistance Program
Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Amendment No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with Concern for the Employee Assistance Program
Funding Source: $40,000; Workers Comp
Contact: Farbod Pirouzmand, (707) 428-7397
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.
STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The Human Resources (HR) Department seeks approval to amend its current Professional Services Agreement with Concern: Employee Assistance Program (EAP) for employee assistance services by increasing the not-to-exceed amount.
DISCUSSION
Concern: Employee Assistance Program was selected in January 2023, as the new EAP provider for the City of Fairfield. Their work -based program is designed to assist employees address personal issues that may impact their overall health and well -being. Concern: EAP foc uses on providing the fastest path to better outcomes for real world issues and offers fast response and critical incident stress debriefing for first responders. Concern is uniquely qualified to connect city safety personnel with competent counselors who specialize in helping public safety personnel.
The City of Fairfield entered into a two-year agreement with Concern: EAP on January 1, 2023, with an end date of December 31, 2024, and a not-to-exceed amount of $100,000. On December 30, 2024, Amendment No. 1 extended the terms of the contract to December 31, 2025, and increased the not -to-exceed amount by $50,000. On November 26, 2025, Amendment No. 2
extended the terms once more to December 31, 2026, but did not increase the not-to-exceed amount. As the need for these services continues, the Human Resources Department requests approval of Amendment No. 3 to increase the not-to-exceed amount by $40,000 to fund services through the end of the current contract term.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The amount of the proposed amendment is $40,000. The funds for this amendment are accounted for in Workers Comp (54215100-8946) and would cover the cost for the remainder of the calendar year.
PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The council may choose not to approve this resolution. However, if the amendment is not approved, this would delay the payment of current invoices and disrupt services for employees who are currently utilizing them.
COORDINATED WITH
N/A
STAFF CONTACT
Farbod Pirouzmand, Assistant City Manager/Director of HR (707) 428-7397
[email protected]
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2: Proposed Resolution
Attachment 3: Proposed Agreement
CITY OF FAIRFIELD
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-127
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH CONCERN FOR THE EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
WHEREAS, On J anuary 1, 202 3, the City of Fairfiel d entered into a Professional Services Agreement with Concern: Employee Assistance Program (EAP) to provide employee assistance services to the City of Fairfield; and
WHEREAS, the original agreement established a not-to-exceed amount of $100,000; and
WHEREAS, Amendment No. 1 extended the terms to December 31, 2025, and increased the not- to-exceed amount by $50,000; and
WHEREAS, Amendment No. 2 only extended the terms, the current not-to-exceed amount of $150,000 has been reached and additional funds are needed to continue utilizing consultant’s services through the current term date of December 31, 2026.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:
Section 1. T he council hereby app roves Amendment No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with Concern: EAP , increasing in the not-to-exceed amount from $1 50,000 to $190,000.
Section 2. The city manager or authorized designee is hereby authorized to execute said amendment on behalf of the City of Fairfield.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of June 2026, by the following vote:
AYES: MEMBERS: BERTANI/CARR/PANDURO/SANDHU/TONNESEN/WILLIAMS NOES: MEMBERS: _________________________________________________ ABSENT: MEMBERS: _________________________________________________ ABSTAIN: MEMBERS: _________________________________________________ _________________________________________________
ACTING MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________
CITY CLERK
1 Revised September 2024
AMENDMENT NO. 3
TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD AND CONCERN: EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
This Amendment No. 3 , made by and entered into as of the _____ day of __________, 20 26, by and between the CITY of FAIRFIELD, a municipal corporation (hereinafter “CITY”), and CONCERN: Employee Assistance Program (hereinafter CONSULTANT), for the purpose of reviewing the Professional Services Agreement (hereinafter “AGREEMENT”) dated January 1, 2023, between the parties. This Amendment does not take effect until signed by both parties.
The revisions to the AGREEMENT are limited to those specific below. All other provisions of the AGREEMENT remain in effect as set forth in the previous legal services agreement.
The AGREEMENT is amended as follows:
1. The AGREEMENT modifies “Exhibit A” of the original contract, which specifies the maximum compensation payable to the consultant not to exceed $100,0 00 (“Original Term”) .
Amendment No. 1 increased the not-to-exceed amount by an additional $50,000 to reflect a maximum not-to-exceed amount of $150,000. Amendment No. 2 only modified the terms of the agreement from January 1, 2026, to December 31, 2026. While Amendment No. 3 seeks to increase the not- to-exceed amount by an additional $ 40,000, bringing the total not- to- exceed amount to $190,000; all other terms and conditions of the contract remain the same.
Except as specifically set forth herein, all terms and conditions of the AGREEMENT between the CITY and CONSULTANT, dated January 1, 2023, shall remain in full force and effect.
In Witness whereof, the parties through their authorized representatives, have affixed their signature.
CITY OF FAIRFIELD
a municipal corporation (CITY)
By
David Gassaway, City Manager
CONCERN: Employee Assistance Program
By
(Cecile Currier, CEO)
Docusign Envelope ID: 83C5D25D-7383-8042-8035-22376CB135C5
Agenda Item No: P.11
AGENDA REPORT
DATE: June 16, 2026
TO: Acting Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution 2026 -128 PD Napa -Solano SANE/SART Memorandum of Understanding
Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Fairfield and Napa -Solano SANE/SART for the Provision of Sexual Assault Exam Services for the Police Department
Funding Source: $130,000; General Fund
Contact: Dan Marshall, (707) 428-7374
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.
STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The Police Department (PD) seeks approval to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Napa-Solano SANE/SART for the provision of sexual assault exam services for all adult and child victims.
DISCUSSION
Napa-Solano SANE/SART is a 501(c)(3) agency providing regional sexual assault examiner services since 1988. Napa-Solano SANE/SART is regarded as an expert in this highly specialized field. Since 2017, PD has contracted Napa-Solano SANE/SART for conducting Sexual Assault Response Team (SART) examinations. SART kits play a critical role in preserving evidence related to sexual assault and must be completed promptly and meticulously. Specially trained SANE nurses carry out these examinations for both child and adult victims, ensuring proper evidence collection.
The proposed MOU is for one year with a not to exceed amount of $130,000.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The MOU with Napa-Solano SANE/SART for th e provision of sexual assault exam services will authorize a not-to-exceed contract for $130,000. Funds for services are budgeted in the General Fund for PD (Fund 101, Division and Responsibility Code 50101, and General Code 8902).
PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The council may choose not to approve the proposed resolution.
COORDINATED WITH
City Attorney’s Office
STAFF CONTACT
Nicholas McDowell, Police Captain
(707) 428-7513
[email protected]
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2: Proposed Resolution
Attachment 3: Proposed MOU
CITY OF FAIRFIELD
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-128
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD AND NAPA SOLANO SANE/SART FOR THE PROVISION OF
SEXUAL ASSAULT EXAM SERVICES FOR THE FAIRFIELD POLICE DEPARTMENT
WHEREAS, Napa-Solano SANE/SART provides sexual assault evidentiary examinations of adults & minors; and
WHEREAS, On July 1, 2025, the City of Fairfield entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Napa-Solano SANE/SART for the provision of sexual assault exam services for all adult and child victims for the City of Fairfield; and
WHEREAS, the current term will end on June 30, 2026; and
WHEREAS, entering into an agreement with Napa-Solano SANE/SART will ensure continuity of services; and
WHEREAS, the City and Napa-Solano SANE/SART wish to enter into a one year agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:
Section 1. The agreement between the City and Napa-Solano SANE/SART is entered into for a period of one year, expiring on June 30, 2027.
Section 2. The city manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute, on behalf of the City of Fairfield, the proposed MOU between the City and Napa-Solano SANE/SART in an amount not- to-exceed $130,000.
Section 3. The city manager is hereby authorized to execute any necessary future amendments to the agreement.
RES. NO. 2026-128
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of June 2026, by the following vote:
AYES: MEMBERS: BERTANI/CARR/PANDURO/SANDHU/TONNESEN/WILLIAMS NOES: MEMBERS:
ABSENT: MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: MEMBERS:
ACTING MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
Memorandum of Understanding Between Napa Solano SANE-SART and Fairfield Police Department Purpose The Memorandum of Understanding (referred to as MOU or Agreement) between Napa Solano SANE-SART (SANE-SART) and the City of Fairfield, a California Municipal corporation, through the City of Fairfield’s Police Department, (City or Client) stipulates that the parties agree to the following regarding the provision of sexual assault and domestic violence forensic examinations, including suspect examination. The term of this MOU shall be effective as of July 1, 2026, and shall expire June 30, 2027. Background SANE-SART has provided forensic nursing consultative services to sexual assault / abuse victims and suspects at law enforcements’ request since 1988. Through the years, our program has evolved and is presently considered an agency of unparalleled excellence and leadership in providing forensic services, both locally and throughout Northern California. Service Provided SANE-SART will provide the following services with the term of Agreement (collectively “Services”): • 24/7 Access to forensic examinations for Fairfield PD, including all other Solano County city and county jurisdictions, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF Monday through Thursday 0200–1000 • Victim Sexual Assault Forensic Examinations • Victim Domestic Violence Forensic Examinations • Suspect Forensic Examinations Services are to be provided in person at a local emergency department or the Courage Center 2 (Solano Child Advocacy Center) in Fairfield, CA. Payment Total compensation and payments under this MOU shall not exceed the amount of one hundred thirty thousand ($130,000) dollars. Fairfield Police Department will compensate SANE-SART for all Services as described above. SANE-SART shall submit invoices according to its July 1, 2026 billing rates. Fairfield Police Department will provide payment upon receipt of invoices, and within thirty (30) business days of a complete and correct invoice. Examination rates are as follows: ● Victim Sexual Assault Forensic Examinations: $2,800 per examination ● Suspect Forensic Examinations: $2,800 per examination
● Victim Domestic Violence Forensic Examinations: $1,200 per examination Once a forensic examiner has been activated, the full examination rate applicable to the examination type shall be charged regardless of whether a forensic examination is completed. Activation occurs at the time the on-call examiner is contacted and dispatched in response to a request for services. Record Keeping Records of examinations, including reports and photos, will be kept by SANE-SART. All evidence collected by the examiner will be given to a Fairfield Police Department law enforcement office at the end of the examination. Reports will be transmitted electronically. Conflict Resolution When conflicts arise, SANE-SART and Fairfield Police Department agree to bring concerns, or disagreements forward in a direct manner, to engage in a problem-solving process, and to seek mutually beneficial solutions. Nothing in this MOU shall prevent either party from seeking judicial review before a court of competent jurisdiction. Termination The City may terminate this MOU upon 30 days prior written notice. Termination of this Agreement shall not affect the City’s obligation to pay for all fees earned and reasonable costs necessarily incurred by SANE-SART as provided in herein, subject to any applicable setoffs. SANE-SART shall return to City any fees paid for services not rendered. Indemnification and Hold Harmless To the extent permitted by law, SANE-SART shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the Client and its agents, officers and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses, judgments, liabilities, expenses and other costs, including litigation costs and attorneys’ fees, directly arising out of or resulting from, SANE-SART’s negligence or willful misconduct in the performance of this Agreement by the SANE-SART or SANE-SART’s officers, employees, agents, representatives or subcontractors and resulting in or attributable to personal injury, death, or damage or destruction to tangible or intangible property, including the loss of use. Notwithstanding the foregoing, SANE-SART’s obligation to indemnify Client and its agents, officers and employees for any judgment, decree or arbitration award shall extend only to the percentage of negligence or responsibility of the SANE-SART in contributing to such claim, damage, loss, and expense. SANE-SART’s obligation to defend, indemnify and hold the Client and its agents, officers, and employees harmless under the provisions of this paragraph is not limited to or restricted by any requirement in this Agreement for SANE-SART to procure and maintain a policy of insurance.
Governing law The rights and obligations of the Parties under or arising out of, and the enforcement and interpretation of, this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Client and SANE-SART will seek to resolve disputes arising out or relating to this Agreement through discussion. If that is not successful, Client and SANE-SART will resolve the dispute before a court of competent jurisdiction located in Solano County, California. Insurance Requirements SANE-SART shall obtain and maintain at all times during the term of this MOU, insurance coverage in amounts that are commercially reasonable and in accordance with the requirements in Exhibit “A”. The insurance requirements set forth in Exhibit “A” are part of this MOU. In the event of any inconsistency between said general provisions and any other terms or conditions of this MOU, the requirements set forth in Exhibit “A” shall control. Confidentiality SANE-SART shall keep confidential all information obtained or learned while furnishing or receiving Services under this Agreement and to not disclose or reveal such information for any purpose not directly connected with the matter for which Services are provided unless required by valid court order, lawful government agency request, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, or Public Records Act (PRA) request. Notice Any notice, communication, amendment, addition, or deletion to this Agreement, including change of address of either party during the term of this Agreement, which Consultant or Client shall be required or may desire to make shall be in writing and shall be personally served or, alternatively, sent by prepaid first-class mail to the respective parties as follows: To City: Fairfield Police Department 1000 Webster St. Fairfield, CA 94533 To SANE-SART: SANE-SART 1261 Travis Blvd. Suite 260 Fairfield CA, 94533 Governing Law and Venue This MOU shall be deemed to be made under and shall be governed by and construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of California. Any action brought to enforce the terms or provisions of this MOU shall have venue in the state or federal courts of Solano County, California.
Entire Agreement This MOU supersedes any and all other agreements, either oral or in writing, between any of the parties herein with respect to the subject matter hereof and contains all the agreements between the parties with respect to such matter. Each party acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises or agreements, oral or otherwise, have been made by any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any party, which are not embodied herein, and that no other agreement, statement or promise not contained in this MOU shall be valid or binding. Amendment This MOU may only be modified, amended, changed, added to, or subtracted from by the mutual consent of the parties hereto if such amendment or change is in written form and executed with the same formalities as this MOU and attached to the original MOU to maintain continuity. Required Licenses, Certificates and Permits and Compliance with Laws Any licenses, certificates or permits required by the federal, state, county, or municipal governments for SANE-SART to provide the Services must be procured by SANE-SART and be valid at the time SANE-SART enters into this MOU. Further, during the term of this MOU, SANE-SART must maintain such licenses, certificates, and permits in full force and effect. Licenses, certificates, and permits may include but are not limited to driver’s licenses, professional licenses or certificates and business licenses. Such licenses, certificates and permits will be procured and maintained in force by SANE-SART at no expense to the City. SANE-SART shall comply will all applicable local, state and Federal Laws, rules and regulations. Construction Headings or captions to the provisions of this MOU are solely for the convenience of the parties, are not part of this MOU, and shall not be used to interpret or determine the validity of this MOU. Any ambiguity in this MOU shall not be construed against the drafter, but rather the terms and provisions hereof shall be given a reasonable interpretation as if both parties had in fact drafted this MOU. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties through their duly authorized representatives have executed this MOU on the date set forth beneath their respective signatures. Fairfield Police Department SANE-SART
By:___________________________ By:___________________________ Name: David Gassaway
Title: City Manager
Date:_________________________
"City"
Name: Kari A. Cordero, RN, MS,
PMHNP-BC, SANE-A/P
Title: Executive Director
Date: 05/19/2026
"SANE-SART”
EXHIBIT “A” INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS SANE-SART shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the SANE-SART, its agents, representatives, or employees. 1) MINIMUM SCOPE AND LIMITS OF INSURANCE a) Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence Form CG 00 01) with minimum limits of $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, products and completed operations, and property damage. If Commercial General Liability or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. b) Automobile Liability coverage (Form CA 00 01 with Code 1 – any auto) with minimum limits of $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. c) Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employers’ Liability insurance, each in the amount of $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. 2) INDUSTRY SPECIFIC COVERAGES If checked below, the following insurance is also required. [X] Professional Liability Insurance / Errors and Omissions Liability in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence. [ ] Pollution Liability Insurance in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence [ ] Garage Keepers Insurance in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence [ ] Fidelity / Crime / Dishonesty Bond in the minimum amount of $___________ [ ] MCS-90 Endorsement to Business Automobile insurance for transportation of hazardous materials and pollutants [ ] Builder’s Risk / Course of Construction Insurance in the minimum amount of $__________. 3) INSURANCE PROVISIONS a) DEDUCTIBLES AND SELF-INSURED RETENTIONS. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the CITY. At the option of the CITY, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or
self-insured retentions as respects the CITY, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the SANE-SART shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. b) The general and automobile liability policies (and if applicable, pollution liability, garage keepers liability and builder’s risk policies) are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: i) The CITY, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of the SANE-SART; products and completed operations of the SANE-SART; premises owned, occupied or used by the SANE-SART; and automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the SANE-SART. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the CITY, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. ii) For any claims related to this project, the SANE-SART’S insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the CITY, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insured maintained by the CITY, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the SANE-SART’S insurance and shall not contribute with it. iii) Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policies including breaches of warranties shall not affect coverage provided to the CITY, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. iv) The SANE-SART’S insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer’s liability. v) Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days’ prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the CITY. vi) The policy limits of coverage shall be made available to the full limits of the policy. The minimum limits stated above shall not serve to reduce the SANE-SART’S policy limits of coverage. Therefore, the requirements for coverage and limits shall be (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this agreement, or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named insured, whichever is greater.
c) ACCEPTABILITY OF INSURER. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the CITY. VERIFICATION OF COVERAGE. SANE-SART shall furnish the CITY with original endorsements effecting coverage required by this Exhibit D. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf; on forms equivalent to CG 20 10 11 85, subject to CITY approval; and submitted electronically through the Exigis insurance system to: [email protected]. All insurance certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the CITY before work commences. At the request of the CITY, SANE-SART shall provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications. d) SUB-CONTRACTORS. SANE-SART shall require all subcontractors to procure and maintain insurance policies subject to the requirements of Exhibit A. Failure of SANE-SART to verify existence of sub-contractor’s insurance shall not relieve SANE-SART from any claim arising from sub-contractors work on behalf of SANE-SART.
Agenda Item No: Q.1
AGENDA REPORT
DATE: June 16, 2026
TO: Acting Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: Discussion of Consideration for a Resolution to Place a Ballot Measure for an Appointive City Clerk
Discussion of Whether to Consider Scheduling for the July 7, 2026 City Council Meeting a Resolution to Place a Ballot Measure Changing the Office of City Clerk to an Appointive Position on the Ballot at the November 3, 2026 General Municipal Election
Funding Source: To be determined; General Fund
Contact: Farbod Pirouzmand, (707) 428-7397
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Receive report, open discussion, and provide direction to staff.
STATEMENT OF ISSUE
Staff requests the council consider scheduling for July 7, 202 6, a resolution to place a ballot measure before Fairfield voters to change the Office of City Clerk from an elected position to an appointive position pursuant to California Government Code Sections 36508 through 36510.
DISCUSSION
The City of Fairfield is a full-service municipal organization serving a population of approximately 120,000 residents. Organizational excellence is one of the six strategic goals of the council, defined as striving to become a leader in local g overnment best practices. Given the growth of the city and increasing operational complexity of the organization and state laws , the responsibilities associated with the Office of the City Clerk have become increasingly specialized and technical in nature. Hiring a professional City Clerk is best practice for full service municipal government.
The City Clerk’s Office plays a critical role in ensuring compliance with numerous state laws governing public meetings, elections, records retention, public notici ng requirements, transparency mandates, and municipal procedures. In addition, the office is responsible for
supporting the legislative functions of the council, including agenda preparation, records management, maintenance of official proceedings, and compliance with the California Brown Act and California Public Records Act.
The current City Clerk, Karen Rees, reported at the March 17, 2026, city council meeting that she will not run for re -election when her term ends in 2028. Ms. Rees expressed the need for a professional city clerk based on her observation during her tenure starting in 2014, that the city has grown in size and complexity. She recommended to the council that the City Clerk’s position change from elected to appointed.
Modern municipal governance requires a high level of technical expertise and professional experience in municipal law, election administration, records management, and agenda coordination. A 2022 survey by the city of Carlsbad, CA, found that 80% of California cities had transitioned to an appointive city clerk model. This allows cities to recruit and retain experienced municipal professionals with specialized training and certifications necessary to effectively administer increasingly complex legal and procedural requirements. Staff surveyed comparable jurisdictions to determine which ones have elected versus appointed City Clerks pursuant to Council Resolution 2000-156, which sets out the city’s compensation philosophy.
City General Law / Charter City Clerk Structure
Alameda Charter Appointed
Antioch General Law Elected
Concord General Law Appointed
Hayward Charter Appointed
Livermore General Law Appointed
Napa General Law Appointed
Pittsburg General Law Elected
Pleasanton General Law Appointed
Richmond Charter Appointed
Sacramento Charter Appointed
San Leandro Charter Appointed
Vacaville General Law Elected
Vallejo Charter Appointed
As the above survey indicates , only Antioch, Pittsburg and Vacaville have elected City Clerks.
Under California Government Code Sections 36508 through 36510, general law cities may submit to the voters the question of whether the Office of City Clerk should become appointive rather than elective. If approved by a majority of voters, the council would thereafter appoint the City Clerk upon expiration of the current term of office.
Proposed Language for Appointed City Clerk
Election on November 3, 2026
Shall the office of city clerk be appointive?
YES
NO
Transitioning to an appointive City Clerk structure would provide the City Council with the ability to recruit candidates based on professional qualifications, municipal experience, technical expertise, and demonstrated knowledge of California municipal law and legislative administration. This approach is intended to strengthen organizational continuity, ensure procedural compliance, and support the effective administration of City Council operations.
Approval of the proposed resolution would place the measure before Fairfield voters for consideration at the November 3, 2026, General Municipal Election.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Staff is working on a funding plan for a City Clerk position, if the voters approve this change. The median salary for this position , based on jurisdictions outlined in Resolution 2000 -156, is approximately $150,000. This additional cost will not be realized until the end of the current City Clerk’s term in December of 2028.
PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
City Council may decline to submit the measure to the voters and retain the current elected City Clerk or provide alternative direction to staff.
COORDINATED WITH
City Attorney’s Office and City Clerk’s Office
STAFF CONTACT
Farbod Pirouzmand, Assistant City Manager / Director of Human Resources (707) 428-7397
[email protected]
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2: Draft Appointive City Clerk Resolution
Attachment 3: Draft Appointive City Clerk Ordinance
1 RESOLUTION NO. ___
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN ORDINANCE AND ORDERING THAT A
MEASURE BE SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS OF THE CITY AT THE
GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 3,
2026, TO CHANGE THE OFFICE OF CITY CLERK TO AN APPOINTIVE
POSITION
WHEREAS, the model of governance under Government Code Section 36501 requires general law cities to each have a city council, city clerk, city treasurer, chief of police, fire chief, and any subordinate officers or employees provided by law; WHEREAS, a city clerk oversees vital municipal functions pursuant to Government Code section 40801 et seq. , such as maintaining official records, administering oaths and affirmations, taking and certifying affidavits and depositions pertaining to city business, keeping meeting minutes, recording, publishing, and certifying city ordinances, and additional duties as prescribed by ordinance or other state laws, including the administration of elections as a neutral elections official under the Political Reform Act and ensuring compliance with state transparency laws such as the Ralph M. Brown Act (“Brown Act”) and the Public Records Act (“PRA”); WHEREAS, among other requirements, the city clerk must ensure compliance with state open meeting laws and ensure that legislative actions , including, but not limited to, the preparation of legislative agendas, publication of meeting notices, and posting of agendas, abide by the Brown Act;
WHEREAS, the city clerk is also entrusted with maintaining City of Fairfield (“City”) records, including the retention of records, the organization of the City’s records, and their indexing and retrieval, as well as responding to requests for City records under the PRA;
WHEREAS, a city clerk is either elected by a majority of voters or appointed; WHEREAS, the position of the Fairfield City Clerk is currently an elected office; WHEREAS, the duties, responsi bilities and requirements of a city c lerk have evolved and i ncreasingly demand extensive technical knowledge and experience in election law, records management and retention requirements , public transparency laws, digital archiving and cybersecur ity, technology systems, and compliance with other State laws, as well as professional training, education, and certification; WHEREAS, under State law, elected city clerk candidates are only required to be adult residents and registered voters of the City , and are not required to possess specific education, certification, pu blic agency experience, records management training, election administration experience, or legal compliance expertise; WHEREAS, the City Clerk liaises between the general public and City Council, and provides related municipal services and information regarding the operations and
2 legislative history of the City upon which the City Council, all City departments, and the public rely;
WHEREAS, since the role of the City Clerk is integral to day-to-day City operations, the City requires a candidate that has the professional education or training and knowledge in addition to the technical skills necessary to understand and administer the wide range of laws and responsibilities that are required of the position; WHEREAS, a 2022 survey conducted by City of Carlsbad staff found that of the 482 California cities at that time, 383 , or 79.5% of cities, now have an appointed City Clerk and only 99 cities, or 20.5%, have an elected City Clerk; WHEREAS, the percentage of elected City Clerks in California has continued to decline and has trended in favor of appointed positions; WHEREAS, an appointed City Clerk may be held accountable through professional performance standards, regular evaluation, and the same administrative expectations applied to other professional City staff , while the elected City Clerk remains directly accountable to Fairfield voters for the effective operation of City government;
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to submit to the voters of the City at the General Municipal Election to be held on November 3, 2026 , a measure relating to whether the office of City Clerk shall be appointive; and WHEREAS, if the measure is adopted, the City Council may delegate to the City Manager the appointment authority for the position to ensure the hiring of a professional with the skills and expertise needed to fulfill the increasingly complex and technical duties of a City Clerk.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Fairfield hereby finds, determines, orders, and resolves as follows:
Section 1. The facts set forth in the recitals of this Resolution are true and correct, and establish the factual basis for the City Council’s adoption of this Resolution.
Section 2. On June __ , 2026, the Fairfield City Council called a General Municipal Election to be held in the City on November 3, 2026 (“General Municipal Election”) and requested that the Solano County Board of Supervisors consolidate said election with the Statewide General Election to be held on the same date. Pursuant to California Elections Code Sections 9222 and 10201, the City Council hereby orders that at said General Municipal Election , a ballot measure to convert the office of the City Clerk to an appointive position be submitted to the voters for consideration. The full text of the pro posed ordinance to make the office of the Ci ty Clerk appointive is attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. The measure to be submitted to the voters shall appear and be printed on the ballot as follows:
3 City of Fairfield Appointive City Clerk Measure
Shall the office of City Clerk be appointive?
YES
NO
Section 3. The proposed ordinance shall only take effect if at least a majority of those voting on the question vote in favor of it at the General Municipal Election.
Section 4. The City Attorney is hereby directed to prepare an impartial analysis of the measure pursuant to Elections Code Section 9280.
Section 5. The City Council directs that arguments for and against the measure may be filed in accordance with applicable law, and that all members of the City Council are authorized to file the argument in favor of the measure to be voted on at such General Municipal Election pursuant to Elections Code Section 9282. Rebuttal arguments shall not be accepted in connection with this measure.
Section 6. In all particulars not recited in this Resolution, the election shall be held and conducted as provided by law fo r holding municipal elections. All persons qualified and registered to vote in the City of Fairfield as of the date of such election shall be entitled to vote. The ballots to be used at the election shall be in the form and content as required by State law.
Section 7. Notice of the time and place of holding the General Municipal Election is hereby given and the City Clerk is authorized, instructed, and directed to give further or additional notice of the election, in the time, form and manner as required by law, and to publish a synopsis of the measure as required by law.
Section 8. The City Clerk is hereby directed to submit a complete certified copy of this Resolution to the Solano County Registrar of Voters Office and to the Solano County Board of Supervisors.
Section 9. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall certify the passage and adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this ___ day of ___________, 2026 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ______________________________________
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ______________________________________
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: _______________________________________
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: _______________________________________
4 __________________________
[insert name], Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Karen L. Rees, City Clerk
5 EXHIBIT A
1 EXHIBIT A
ORDINANCE NO. ___
AN ORDINANCE OF THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD,
CALIFORNIA, ADDING A NEW ARTICLE IX (CITY CLERK) TO
CHAPTER 2 (ADMINISTRATION) OF THE FAIRFIELD MUNICIPAL
CODE TO CHANGE THE OFFICE OF CITY CLERK TO AN APPOINTIVE OFFICE
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 36502, the office of the City Clerk of the City of Fairfield is currently an elective office; WHEREAS, Government Code Section 36508 and Elections Code Section 9222 authorize the City Council to submit to the electors the question of whether the elective City Clerk shall be an appointive office and, if a majority of voters voting on the measure approve it, the office shall become appointive;
WHEREAS, changing the office of City Clerk to an appointive office would allow the City to appoint an individual, including an appointment through employment, that has the professional education, training, experience and knowledge in addition to the technical skills necessary to understand and administer the wide range of laws and legal responsibilities of the City Clerk;
WHEREAS, this measure would provide the City Council with the authority to delegate the appointment authority for the City Clerk position to the City Manager to ensure the selection of a professional with the skills and expertise needed for the position of City Clerk; and
WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this ordinance have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, the People of the City of Fairfield do ordain as follows:
Section 1. Chapter 2 of the Fairfield Municipal Code is hereby amended to add a new Article IX to read as follows:
"ARTICLE IX — CITY CLERK
2.43 — Appointment.
Pursuant to Government Code Sections 36501 and 36508 through 36510, the City Clerk shall be appointed and serve at the pleasure of the City Council. Notwithstanding the foregoing, pursuant to Government Code Section 36510, the City Council may by ordinance, vest in the City Manager its authority to appoint the City Clerk. The appointed person shall not be required to be a City resident or elector.
2 2.44 — Compensation.
The City Clerk shall receive such compensation as shall be fixed by resolution or ordinance of the City Council.
2.45 — Powers and duties.
A. The City Clerk shall have the powers, duties and responsibilities granted to and imposed upon the office of the City Clerk pursuant to the following:
1. The provisions of Chapter 2 of Part 3 of Division 3 of Title 4 of the Government Code (commencing with Section 40801), with the exception of the financial and accounting duties set forth in Government Code Sections 40802 through 40805;
2. Other state laws, with the exception of those financial powers and duties imposed upon the City Clerk by Title 4, Division 3, Part 2, Chapter 4 of the Government Code (commencing with Section 37201); and
3. The provisions of the Fairfield Municipal Code.
B. The City Clerk shall also perform such other duties as may be required of the City Clerk by the City Manager or the City Council.” Section 2. If a majority of the voters voting on this measure at the November 3, 2026 General Municipal Election approve this Ordinance, it shall take effect 10 days after the City Council declares and certifies the results of the election, as required by applicable law. The position of City Clerk shall be filled by appointment thereafter upon the earlier of either a vacancy in the office or at the expiration of the current term of office of the incumbent in accordance with Government Code Section 36510.
Section 3. Notwithstanding Elections Code Section 9217, the City Council may subsequently amend this Ordinance without voter approval, except that voter approval shall be required to re-instate the position of an elected City Clerk.
Section 4. To the extent the terms an d provisions of this Ordinance may be inconsistent or in conflict with the terms or provisions of any prior City ordinance, motion, resolution, rule or regulation governing the same subject, the terms of this Ordinance shall prevail.
Section 5. In interpre ting this Ordinance or resolving any ambiguity, this Ordinance shall be interpreted in a manner that effectively accomplishes its stated purpose.
Section 6. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance for any reason is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The people of the City of Fairfield hereby declare that they would have adopted this Ordinance, and each section, subsection,
3 subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, without regard to whether any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
Section 7. The City Clerk is hereby directed to publish this ordinance at least once, within 15 days after the election results are certified, in a newspaper of general circulation published and circulated in the City of Fairfield.
Section 8. The Mayor is hereby dire cted to attest to the adoption of this Ordinance by signing where indicated below upon certification by the City Clerk that a majority of those electors voting on this Ordinance have voted in the affirmative.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED BY THE VOTERS OF THE CITY OF
FAIRFIELD, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AT THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION HELD ON NOVEMBER 3, 2026.
_________________________
[insert name], Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Karen L. Rees, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________________
David Lim, City Attorney
Agenda Item No: Q.2
AGENDA REPORT
DATE: June 16, 2026
TO: Acting Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: Discussion of Consideration for a Resolution to Place a Ballot Measure for Amending Sales Tax
Discussion of Whether to Consider Scheduling for the July 7, 2026 , City Council Meeting a Resolution to Place a Ballot Measure Extending and Increasing the City’s Sales Tax by 1% on the Ballot at the November 3, 2026, General Municipal Election
Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Farbod Pirouzmand, (707) 428-7397
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Receive report, open discussion, and provide direction to staff.
STATEMENT OF ISSUE
Staff requests the City Council consider scheduling for July 7, 2026, a resolution to place a ballot measure before Fairfield voters a ballot measure extending and increasing the city’s sales tax by 1% on the ballot at the November 3, 2026, general municipal elections.
DISCUSSION
In November 2012, Fairfield voters approved Measure P, a 1% local transactions and use tax designed to provide locally controlled funding for essential city services and infrastructure improvements. The revenues generated by the measure helped protect public safety services, repair streets and road s, improve youth and senior services, and maintain Fairfield’s overall quality of life. All revenues generated by Measure P remain local and cannot be taken by the State. The Measure also called for an oversight committee of Fairfield residents to ensure the use of revenues for the services it was intended to fund.
In November 2016, Fairfield voters approved an extension of Measure P through March 31, 2033.
The ballot measure stated that the extension would preserve local funding for neighborhood police patrols, firefighting and emergency response, crime prevention programs, street
maintenance, parks and recreation services, and other general governmental services, while maintaining independent oversight and annual audits.
Since its original passage, Measure P has become an important revenue source supporting core city operations and municipal services.
Measure P Accomplishments
Measure P revenues have supported a variety of community investments and operational priorities throughout the city. According to the most recent annual reporting by the Measure P Citizen Oversight Committee, Measure P funding contributed to roadway and infrastructure improvements, including major roadway projects, pothole repair programs, and pedestrian safety improvements. In 2025, more than 3,000 potholes were repaired and approximately 200 crosswalks upgraded citywide.
Measure P revenues have also supported public safety services, including maintaining police staffing levels, emergency response capabilities, firefighting services, neighborhood patrols, and crime prevention programs. The revenues from this measure have been a critical funding source for preserving public safety operations and maintaining emergency response times.
Measure P funding has supported homelessness out reach and intervention programs, including the Homeless Intervention Team (HIT), Homeless Engagement and Response Team (HEART), shelter operations, outreach partnerships, and contracted services focused on connecting unhoused individuals with shelter and supportive services. In 2025, local outreach efforts funded through Measure P assisted with shelter placement for approximately 315 individuals.
Measure P revenues continue to support parks, recreation programs, youth and senior services, community events, and general municipal operations intended to preserve Fairfield’s quality of life. In 2025, Measure P revenues helped support services in the following departments:
Department Expenditure
Police $12.5 Million
Fire $6 Million
Public Works $4.1 Million
Parks & Recreation $1.7 Million
Current Fiscal Conditions
Like many California municipalities, Fairfield continues to experience inflation of operational costs associated with infrastructure maintenance, public safety operations, pension obliga tions, homelessness response efforts, and construction costs. The fiscal year 2024 -2025 budget required the city to implement multiple strategies to address an estimated $20 million shortfall, including staffing reductions, expenditure reductions, deferred maintenance projects, and operational efficiencies.
The City has also undertaken additional efforts intended to improve long -term fiscal sustainability, including reducing departmental budgets, increasing cost recovery through fee increases, maintaining emergency reserves, and establishing pension reserve funding strategies.
In the last two fiscal years, staff have cut the city’s structural deficit from a projected $20 million to $11 million. Cost mitigation strategies included:
● Frozen 24.5 positions – including 4 sworn police officers ● Reduced discretionary spending
● Deferred maintenance
● Used one-time funds to balance ongoing costs
● Negotiated no cost-of-living adjustments (no pay raises) for employees Despite these efforts, expenses continue to grow in several key operational areas:
o PERS - $6 million increase since 2020 (64%)
o Medical - $1.4 million increase since 2020 (27%)
o General Liability Insurance - $2 million increase since 2020 (143%) o Internal Services - $14.1 million increase since 2020 (114%) o Cost increases driven by electricity, cybersecurity, enterprise software
Streets and Roads
Maintaining Fairfield’s transportation infrastructure remains a significant financial challenge. The City’s current Pavement Condition Index (PCI) is reported at 64, slightly below the statewide average of 65. Current roadway maintenance funding levels are insufficient to fully m aintain or improve pavement conditions over the long term due to increasing construction and material costs. Fairfield currently spends approximately $9 million annually on roadway maintenance, however, approximately $18 million annually would be necessar y to maintain the current PCI level on an ongoing basis.
Potential Measure P Update
Proposed Language for Transaction and Use Tax Measure
Election on November 3, 2026
THE FAIRFIELD TRANSACTION AND USE TAX MEASURE
To provide and protect funding for Fairfield’s services, such as police, fire, 911 emergency response, neighborhood safety, street and sidewalk repair, homelessness prevention and response and general governmental use, shall an ordinance be adopted to extend the City’s sales tax and increase the rate by up to one-cent per dollar until ended by voters, adding approximately $ 24 million annually, with independent citizen oversight, annual audits, public spending reports, and all funds locally controlled?
YES
NO
As part of ongoing fiscal planning discussions, the city council has evaluated options that could assist in maintaining essential municipal services and infrastructure investments over the long term. One option discussed publicly is a potential Measure P Update that would extend the existing local transactions and use tax while increasing the rate by an additional one cent, subject to voter approval.
Based on staff’s preliminary estimates, a one -cent increase could generate approximately $24 million annually in additional locally controlled revenue. The additional revenues will be used to continue to support public safety operations, emergency response services, roadwa y maintenance, parks and recreation services, homelessness response programs, and facility maintenance.
Any new Measure P revenues would continue to fall under the purview of the Measure P Citizen Oversight Committee with the same accountability provisions that currently exist such as annual independent audits, citizen oversight, and annual reporting to the community regarding revenues and expenditures.
To qualify for the ballot, 2/3 of the City Council (at least 5 out of 7 members) are required to vote affirmatively to approve the transaction and use tax ordinance. If a council member is absent from the meeting, 5 City Council Members are still required to vote affirmatively for the item to qualify for the ballot. If approved by the council, and then passed by a majority of the voters (50% plus 1) on Tuesday, November 3, 2026, it would go into effect on April 1, 2027.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The proposed Measure P rate increase of one percent would provide approximately a $24 million increase in revenue per year to the general fund. The projections are based on current economic data and trends and are subject to change with economic activity within the City.
PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
The city hired consultants, Probolsky Research and Willia m Barry Campaigns, to assist with creating the ballot language and educational materials, which included polling research to advise Council on the measure. Probolsky Research conducted two surveys, one in November of 2025 and a second one in May of 2026. The surveys included standard polling questions asking prospective voters about the measure. Prospective voters received email, text message, and phone call requests to participate in the surveys. The surveys were commissioned by Probolsky Research to colle ct input about the Measure P ballot measure. The results of the latest survey are attached to this report to provide additional information for the council on making their final decision to place the measures on the November ballot.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
State law requires that such measures coincide with local City Council elections for public vote on the November 2026 General Election. The council can forgo placing the revenue measure on the November ballot. If council chooses not to place the Measure P Upd ate on the November
ballot, then staff will return to council with a list of proposed service cuts to close the structural deficit.
COORDINATED WITH
City Attorney’s Office and Finance Department
STAFF CONTACT
Farbod Pirouzmand, Assistant City Manager / Director of Human Resources (707) 428-7397
[email protected]
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2: City of Fairfield Sales Tax Measure Tracking Survey Attachment 3: Draft Sales Tax Resolution
Attachment 4: Draft Sales Tax Ordinance
City of Fairfield
Sales Tax Measure Tracking Survey
Results Presentation
May 2026
Opinion Research on
Elections and Public Policy
PROBOLSKY RESEARCH
100 Pine Street, Suite 1250 San Francisco CA 94111
Newport Beach
(949) 855-6400
San Francisco
(415) 870-8150
Washington DC
(202) 559-0270
City of Fairfield – Sales Tax Measure Tracking Survey
Survey Methodology*
1 Survey Details
Mode Phone (landline and mobile)
Online (email and text to web)
Language English and Spanish
Length 15 minutes
Target
Respondents
City of Fairfield likely 2026 General Election voters
Survey Fielding April 29 – May 6, 2026
Margin of Error +/-5%
Survey
Participants
400
Sample
The sample was developed from the voter files originally compiled by the Solano County Registrar of Voters. We
matched the demographics of City of Fairfield likely 2026 General Election voters.
Data Collection Explained
Interviews were conducted with live interviewers by phone (33%) and online survey methods (66%). Phone
participants were interviewed through landline (25%) and mobile (75%) calls. Online participants were invited by email (50%) and text message (50%) to access the survey by computer, tablet, or smart phone.
Respondents in all modes chose their preferred language, English (95%) and Spanish (5%).
Security measures precluded individuals from completing the survey more than once.
*Due to rounding, totals shown on charts may not add up to 100% Probolsky Research is a Latina- and woman-owned market and opinion research firm with corporate, election, government, and nonprofit clients.
Question 1: In your own words, what do you feel is the most important issue facing Fairfield today? [OPEN ENDED QUESTION]*
2 21.3%
12.0%
10.3%
8.3%
8.0%
7.8%
6.0%
5.5%
4.5%
3.8%
1.5%
1.0%
1.0%
1.0%
1.0%
0.8%
0.8%
0.5%
0.5%
3.3%
0.3%
0.5%
0.8%
Homelessness
Jobs/Economy
Public safety/Drugs/Crime
Cost of living/Inflation/Affordability
Transportation /Traffic/Roads
Housing affordability
Over population/Controlling growth/Development
Government
Spending/Budget
Lack of entertainment/Shopping/Amenities
Education/Schools/Higher education
Environmental issues
Healthcare
Moral issues
Taxes
Poverty
Police brutality/Racial injustice
Water/Drought
Immigration/Illegal immigration
Other
Nothing/None
Unsure
N/A/Refused
*Open-ended responses reflect what is top of mind for voters without prompts. Results may appear lower in percentage, but still highlight the most urgent and spontaneous concerns.
Homelessness stands out as the top-of-mind issue
mentioned in Fairfield
2026
34.5%
16.0%
8.3%
6.5%
6.0%
6.0%
5.0%
4.8%
3.0%
2.3%
1.5%
1.0%
1.0%
1.0%
2.5%
0.3%
0.5%
Homelessness
Public safety/Drugs/Crime
Over population/Controlling growth/Development
Housing affordability
Infrastructure/Transportation/Traffic/Roads
Quality of life/Community wellbeing
Government
Jobs/Economy
Inflation/High cost of living
Environmental issues
Moral issues
Education/Schools/Higher education
Poverty
Taxes
Other
Nothing/No issues
Unsure
2025
Question 2: How would you rate the overall quality of life in Fairfield? 3 50.0%
39.8%
8.5%
1.8%
Good Fair Poor Unsure
90% rate the overall quality of life in Fairfield as
good or fair
89.8%
48.0% 50.0%
41.5% 39.8%
10.3% 8.5%
0.3% 1.8%
2025 2026
Good
Fair
Poor
Unsure
Question 3: What are your top sources for news and information about Fairfield? Select all that apply. 4 44.5%
39.8%
39.5%
26.8%
23.3%
13.0%
12.8%
10.5%
5.5%
2.8%
10.8%
2.5%
2.3%
Local news channels
Friends/Family/Neighbors – word of mouth
City's social media pages
Daily Republic
City's website, www.fairfield.ca.gov
Local radio station
City newsletters
Fairfield weekly newsletter
The Reporter
Vallejo Times-Herald
Something else
Nothing
Unsure
Local news channels and word of mouth are the
top sources of information about Fairfield
Question 4: Please indicate which, if any, of these social apps and websites you use regularly. Select all that apply. 5 61.3%
42.3%
36.0%
34.0%
17.3%
14.0%
10.5%
5.8%
4.3%
2.5%
1.8%
7.5%
2.8%
Facebook
YouTube
Instagram
Nextdoor
Linkedin
X
Reddit
Threads
Snapchat
Bluesky
Other
Nothing
Unsure
Facebook is the top app/website used regularly by
voters
Question 5: In general, are you satisfied or unsatisfied with the job the City of Fairfield is doing providing services to residents? 6 58.5%
38.0%
3.5%
Satisfied Unsatisfied Unsure
59% are satisfied with the job the City is doing
providing services to residents
56.5% 58.5%
39.0% 38.0%
4.5% 3.5%
2025 2026
Satisfied
Unsatisfied
Unsure
Question 6: Are you satisfied or unsatisfied with the firefighting, medical aid, emergency preparedness, and rescue services provided by the Fairfield Fire Department? 7 81.0%
7.3%
11.8%
Satisfied Unsatisfied Unsure
81% are satisfied with the services provided by the
Fairfield Fire Department
83.3% 81.0%
8.0% 7.3%8.8% 11.8%
2025 2026
Satisfied
Unsatisfied
Unsure
Question 7: Are you satisfied or unsatisfied with the public safety services provided by the Fairfield Police Department? 8 70.3%
22.5%
7.3%
Satisfied Unsatisfied Unsure
70% are satisfied with the services provided by the
Police Department
68.5% 70.3%
25.0% 22.5%
6.5% 7.3%
2025 2026
Satisfied
Unsatisfied
Unsure
Question 8: Are you satisfied or unsatisfied with the services provided by the City of Fairfield Public Works Department, including street maintenance, street sweeping, traffic signals and streetlights, sidewalks/trees, and stormwater/drainage? 9 59.3%
38.5%
2.3%
Satisfied Unsatisfied Unsure
59% are satisfied with the services provided by the
Public Works Department
60.0% 59.3%
39.0% 38.5%
1% 2.3%
2025 2026
Satisfied
Unsatisfied
Unsure
Question 9: Are you satisfied or unsatisfied with how the City maintains parks and recreation facilities? 10 67.5%
25.0%
7.5%
Satisfied Unsatisfied Unsure
68% are satisfied with how the city maintains
parks and recreation facilities
62.0% 67.5%
28.3% 25.0%
9.8% 7.5%
2025 2026
Satisfied
Unsatisfied
Unsure
Providing effective public safety, responding to homelessness, and maintaining streets are the most important issues for voters
Question 13: Now we have a list of issues that may be relevant to residents of Fairfield. Please select all the ones that are very important to you personally. 11 65.3%
59.0%
55.5%
47.0%
42.5%
39.8%
36.3%
35.8%
33.5%
31.8%
16.0%
14.0%
8.5%
Providing effective public safety, including 911 emergency… Responding to homelessness
Maintaining streets, sidewalks, and crosswalks
Managing city finances
Keeping local taxes low
Managing growth and development
Improving traffic flow
Maintaining facilities and services for youth and seniors Maintaining parks and recreation facilities
Preparing for disasters like earthquakes, flooding, and wildfires Creating new open spaces and parks
Supporting local non-profits
Other
Question 14: Thinking of the same list of issues, please select all the ones that you are personally satisfied with. 12 44.3%
31.3%
19.3%
18.8%
18.5%
11.0%
10.0%
10.0%
8.8%
8.3%
8.0%
8.0%
1.0%
14.3%
8.0%
Providing effective public safety, including 911 emergency… Maintaining parks and recreation facilities
Maintaining streets, sidewalks, and crosswalks
Preparing for disasters like earthquakes, flooding, and wildfires Maintaining facilities and services for youth and seniors Creating new open spaces and parks
Supporting local non-profits
Improving traffic flow
Managing growth and development
Managing city finances
Responding to homelessness
Keeping local taxes low
Other
None of these
Unsure
Voters are most satisfied with public safety
services
Question 13: Now we have a list of issues that may be relevant to residents of Fairfield. Please select all the ones that are very important to you personally.
Question 14: Thinking of the same list of issues, please select all the ones that you are personally satisfied with. 13 The largest gap between importance and satisfaction
is in responding to homelessness at 65%
59.0%
47.0%
55.5%
42.5%
39.8%
36.3%
65.3%
35.8%
31.8%
16.0%
14.0%
33.5%
8.0%
8.3%
19.3%
8.0%
8.8%
10.0%
44.3%
18.5%
18.8%
11.0%
10.0%
31.3%
Responding to homelessness
Managing city finances
Maintaining streets, sidewalks, and crosswalks
Keeping local taxes low
Managing growth and development
Improving traffic flow
Providing effective public safety, including 911 emergency medical/Police/Fire response
Maintaining facilities and services for youth and seniors Preparing for disasters like earthquakes, flooding, and wildfires Creating new open spaces and parks
Supporting local non-profits
Maintaining parks and recreation facilities
Importance Satisfaction
51.0%
38.7%
36.2%
34.5%
31.0%
26.3%
21.0%
17.3%
13.0%
5.0%
4.0%
2.2%
Delta
Now please consider the following ballot measure that will come before Fairfield voters this year. Please indicate if you would vote yes, or vote no.
Question 15: To prevent cuts to Fairfield’s Fire and Police Departments, maintain rapid responses to 911 emergencies, strengthen public safety by preserving neighborhood patrols, fix potholes and repair neighborhood streets, and for general government use, shall Fairfield’s Measure P be renewed and extended, until ended by voters, and increase the rate by one cent per dollar, adding approximately twenty two million dollars annually, with strict accountability, annual audits, citizen oversight, and all funds staying in Fairfield? 14 59.8%
27.5%
12.8%
Vote yes Vote no Unsure
Initial vote: The measure has majority support
55.3% 59.8%
36.5%
27.5%
8.3%
12.8%
2025 2026
Vote yes
Vote no
Unsure
Now we have some additional information about the potential ballot measure. Please consider each message and indicate whether it makes you more likely to vote yes or more likely to vote no on the proposed sales tax increase. If it makes no difference to you, just say so.
Question 18: Every dollar generated by this sales tax measure would stay and be used in Fairfield and cannot be taken by the state or federal government. Does knowing this make you more likely to vote yes or more likely to vote no on the proposed sales tax increase? 15 58.3%
19.0%
16.0%
6.8%
More likely to vote yes
Makes no difference to me
More likely to vote no
Unsure
20.9%
39.1%
35.5%
4.5% More likely to vote yes
Makes no difference to
me
More likely to vote no
Unsure
43.1%
11.8%
13.7%
31.4%
More likely to vote yes
Makes no difference to
me
More likely to vote no
Unsure
initially vote no
initially said unsure
58% are more likely to vote yes knowing that every dollar from the sales tax would stay in Fairfield and couldn’t be taken by the state or federal government
Now we have some additional information about the potential ballot measure. Please consider each message and indicate whether it makes you more likely to vote yes or more likely to vote no on the proposed sales tax increase. If it makes no difference to you, just say so.
Question 19: This sales tax measure will require independent citizens oversight, mandatory financial audits, and yearly reports to the community to ensure the funds are spent as promised. Does knowing this make you more likely to vote yes or more likely to vote no on the proposed sales tax increase? 16 53.8%
22.0%
18.8%
5.5%
More likely to vote yes
Makes no difference to me
More likely to vote no
Unsure
17.3%
40.9%
40.0%
1.8% More likely to vote yes
Makes no difference to
me
More likely to vote no
Unsure
45.1%
11.8%
19.6%
23.5%
More likely to vote yes
Makes no difference to
me
More likely to vote no
Unsure
initially vote no
initially said unsure
54% are more likely to vote yes knowing that the measure requires citizen oversight and financial audits
Now we have some additional information about the potential ballot measure. Please consider each message and indicate whether it makes you more likely to vote yes or more likely to vote no on the proposed sales tax increase. If it makes no difference to you, just say so.
Question 22: Sales tax is not charged on groceries, prescriptions or services. Does knowing this make you more likely to vote yes or more likely to vote no on the proposed sales tax increase?
17 41.5%
33.5%
18.8%
6.3%
More likely to vote yes
Makes no difference to me
More likely to vote no
Unsure
10.9%
49.1%
37.3%
2.7% More likely to vote yes
Makes no difference to
me
More likely to vote no
Unsure
33.3%
17.6%
25.5%
23.5%
More likely to vote yes
Makes no difference to
me
More likely to vote no
Unsure
initially vote no
initially said unsure
42% are more likely to vote yes knowing that sales tax is not charged on groceries, prescriptions or services
Now we have some additional information about the potential ballot measure. Please consider each message and indicate whether it makes you more likely to vote yes or more likely to vote no on the proposed sales tax increase. If it makes no difference to you, just say so.
Question 23: Without new revenue, the City’s cost-cutting options include park closures, fewer police patrols, fire station brownouts, reduced community events, and cuts to street and facilities maintenance. Does knowing this make you more likely to vote yes or more likely to vote no on the proposed sales tax increase? 18 52.3%
20.8%
19.8%
7.3%
More likely to vote yes
Makes no difference to me
More likely to vote no
Unsure
18.2%
38.2%
37.3%
6.4% More likely to vote yes
Makes no difference to
me
More likely to vote no
Unsure
31.4%
13.7%
25.5%
29.4%
More likely to vote yes
Makes no difference to
me
More likely to vote no
Unsure
initially vote no
initially said unsure
52% are more likely to vote yes knowing without added
revenue, the City may have to reduce patrols, close parks, brown out fire stations, and cut maintenance and events
19 Message Effectiveness
Positive messages Percent More Likely
to Vote Yes
Every dollar generated by this sales tax measure would stay and be used in Fairfield and cannot be taken by the state or federal government. 58.3%
This sales tax measure will require independent citizens oversight, mandatory financial audits, and yearly reports to the community to ensure the funds are spent as promised. 53.8%
Without new revenue, the City’s cost-cutting options include park closures, fewer police patrols, fire station brownouts, reduced community events, and cuts to street and facilities maintenance. 52.3% The City is operating under a budget deficit, and if the sales tax measure does not pass, the City would likely need to deplete reserves and eventually lay off employees to maintain fiscal stability. 45.0% Over the past few years, the City has taken many steps to be even more fiscally responsible. The City has reduced department budgets by more than 5% and frozen 25 vacant positions, including police officers. 44.0% Sales tax is not charged on groceries, prescriptions or services. 41.5% Measure P revenues go into the City’s General Fund and may be used for a wide range of services, including efforts to address homelessness. The City is also moving forward with projects such as Vista Ridge, for which the City received $23 million from the state of California to convert an existing hotel into permanent housing with support services for people experiencing homelessness.
37.8%
In the November 2024 election, 4 of 7 Solano County cities increased their sales tax. Vacaville is also considering a one-cent sales tax, and Fairfield’s current 8.375% is lower than in 5 of 7 nearby cities. 37.5%
Knowing what you know now, if the election were held today, how would you vote on this ballot measure? Question 26: To prevent cuts to Fairfield’s Fire and Police Departments, maintain rapid responses to 911 emergencies, strengthen public safety by preserving neighborhood patrols, fix potholes and repair neighborhood streets, and for general government use, shall Fairfield’s Measure P be renewed and extended, until ended by voters, and increase the rate by one cent per dollar, adding approximately twenty two million dollars annually, with strict accountability, annual audits, citizen oversight, and all funds staying in Fairfield? 20 Informed vote: The measure retains majority
support
59.8%
27.5%
12.8%
58.5%
31.8%
9.8%
Vote yes Vote no Unsure
initial Informed initial initialInformed Informed
53.5% 58.5%
37.0% 31.8%
9.5% 9.8%
2025 2026
Vote yes
Vote no
Unsure
If there was an election in Fairfield today, would you vote yes or no on the following ballot measure? Question 29: Shall the office of the City Clerk for the City of Fairfield be appointive? 21 25.8%
32.5%
41.8%
Vote yes Vote no Unsure
42% are unsure about their vote for making the
City Clerk office appointive
23.5% 25.8%
35.3% 32.5%
41.3% 41.8%
2025 2026
Vote yes
Vote no
Unsure
Demographics
22
23 Respondent demographics by gender, age, ethnicity, years of residency, education, party and zip code
45.8%
54.3%
Male
Female
14.5%
8.0%
14.3%
27.3%
36.0%
18-29
30-39
40-49
50-64
65+
21.0%
44.5%
10.3%
5.8%
18.5%
Latino/Hispanic
White/Caucasian
Black/African American
Asian/Pacific Islander
Other
Gender Age Ethnicity Years of Residency Education Party Zip code
2.8%
4.3%
9.3%
17.8%
65.0%
1.0%
0-2 years
3-5 years
6-10 years
11-19 years
20+ years
Prefer not to answer
52.3%
25.5%
16.8%
5.5%
Democrat
Republican
No Party Preference
Other
62.3%
37.8%
No college
College
53.8%
45.0%
1.3%
94533
94534
94535
Questions?
Adam Probolsky, President
O: 949-855-6400 | M: 949-697-6726
E: [email protected]
Sergio Martinez, Senior Research Analyst
E: [email protected]
Opinion Research on
Elections and Public Policy
PROBOLSKY RESEARCH
100 Pine Street, Suite 1250 San Francisco CA 94111
Newport Beach
(949) 855-6400
San Francisco
(415) 870-8150
Washington DC
(202) 559-0270
1 RESOLUTION NO. _________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN ORDINANCE AND ORDERING THAT A
MEASURE BE SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS OF THE CITY AT THE
GENERAL MU NICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 3,
2026, TO EXTEND THE CITY’S TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX AND INCREASE BY 1% THE LOCAL TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX
FROM 1% TO 2 % UNTIL ENDED BY VOTERS , WITH THE T AX
ADMINISTERED BY THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TAX AND
FEE ADMINISTRATION
WHEREAS, the City of Fairfield (“City”) expects to mai ntain general municipal services for City residents, businesses , and visitors at the levels they expect and deserve; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has been informed by staff that the City needs additional local funds to fund vital City programs and services, such as homeless services and prevention, maintaining response times from public safety, road maintenance, and parks and recreation programing; and
WHEREAS, additional sources of local revenue will help the City maintain local control over its revenue and promote fiscal sustainability; and
WHEREAS, if approved by the voters, the revenue from this measure will be subject to transparency and accountability provisions such as financial audits and citizen oversight to ensure that all funds will remain in Fairfield for the local general services on which local residents and businesses rely, and that no ne of the new funding can be taken by the Federal or State governments; and
WHEREAS, the City Council proposes to submit to the voters of the City an Ordinance to extend the City of Fairfield’s local transactions and use tax and increase the rate of such tax.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Fairfield hereby finds, determines, orders, and resolves as follows:
Section 1. The facts set forth in the recitals of this Resolution are true and correct, and establish the factual basis for the City Council’s adoption of this Resolution.
Section 2. Section 7285.9 of the Revenue and Taxation Code authorizes any city to levy, increase, or extend a transactions and use tax for general purposes at a rate of
0.125 percent, or a multiple thereof, and Section 7294.3 of the Revenue and Taxation Code authorizes any city in Solano County to exceed the 9.25% transactions and use tax cap by up to 0.5%, subject to approval by a two -thirds vote of all of the members of the City Council and by a majority of the qualified voters of the City voting in an election on the issue.
2 Section 3. By Resolution No. ____, adopted on July ____, 2026, the City Council has previously called and given notice of the General Municipal Election to be held in the City on November 3, 2026 , and to be consolidated with the statewide general election conducted on the same date . Pursuant to California Elections Code Sections 9222 and 10201, the City Council hereby orders that at the said election, a Transactions and Use Tax Ordinance be submitted to the voters for consideration. The full text of the City of Fairfield’s Transactions and Use Tax Ordinance is attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A and is incorporated herein by reference. The measure to be submitted to the voters shall appear and be printed on the ballot as follows:
City of Fairfield Measure P Update Measure
To provide and protect funding for Fairfield’s services, such as police, fire, 911 emergency response, neighborhood safety, street and sidewalk repair, homelessness prevention and response, and general governmental use, shall an ordinance be adopted to extend the City’s sales tax and increase the rate by up to one-cent per dollar until ended by voters, adding approximately $ 24 million annually, with independent citizen oversight, annual audits, public spending reports, and all funds locally controlled?
YES
NO
Section 4. The City Council, by at least 2/3 vote, hereby approves the proposed City of Fairfield Transactions and Use Tax Ordinance , attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A, to be submitted to the voters. The proposed measure is a general tax, as defined in Article XIIIC of the California Constitution, to be extended and increased by 1%, from the rate of 1% to 2% on transactions and uses in the City as defined in the Ordinance, to be collected by the California Department of Tax and Fee Ad ministration. The Ordinance shall not take effect unless and until approved by a vote of at least a majority of voters voting on the question at the election.
Section 5. The City Attorney is hereby directed to prepare an impartial analysis of the measure pursuant to Elections Code Section 9280.
Section 6. The City Council d irects that arguments for and against the measure may be filed in accordance with applicable law, and that Councilmember[s] [insert name(s)] are authorized to file an argument in favor of the measure.
Section 7. In all particulars not r ecited in this Resolution, the election shall be held and conducted as provided by law for holding municipal elections. All persons qualified and registered to vote in the City of Fairfield as of the date of such election shall be entitled to vote.
Section 8. Notice of the time and place of holding the General Municipal Election is hereby given and the City Clerk is authorized, instructed, and directed to give further or additional notice of the election, in the time, form and manner as required by law, and to publish a synopsis of the measure as required by law.
3 Section 9. The City Clerk is hereby directed to submit a complete certified copy of this Resolution to the Solano County Registr ar of Voters Office and to the Solano County Board of Supervisors.
Section 10. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this ___ day of ___________, 2026 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: _________________________________________
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ________________________________________
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: _________________________________________
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: _________________________________________
____________________________
[insert name], Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Karen L. Rees, City Clerk
4 EXHIBIT A
1 EXHIBIT A
ORDINANCE NO._________
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTED BY THE VOTERS OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD AMENDING SECTIONS OF ARTICLE VII OF CHAPTER 18 OF THE FAIRFIELD
MUNICIPAL CODE TO EXTEND AND INCREASE THE RATE OF THE EXISTING TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX BY 1%, FROM 1% TO 2% UNTIL ENDED BY
VOTERS, TO BE ADMINISTERED BY THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TAX
AND FEE ADMINISTRATION
THE VOTERS OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD DO HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Section 18.74 of Article VII of Chapter 18 of the Fairfield Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows (additional text underlined, deleted text struck through):
“18.74. Transactions Tax Rate.
For the privilege of selling tangible personal property at retail, a tax is hereby imposed upon all retailers in the incorporated territory of the City at the rate of 1.0 2.0% of the gross receipts of any retailer from the sale of all tangible personal property sold at retail in said territory on and after the operative date of this ordinance.”
Section 2. Section 18.76 of Article VII of Chapter 18 of the Fairfield Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows (additional text underlined, deleted text struck through):
“18.76. Use Tax Rate.
An excise tax is hereby imposed on the storage, use or other consumption in the City of tangible personal property purchased from any retailer on and after the operative date of this ordinance for storage, us e or other consumption in said territory at the rate of 1.0
2.0% of the sales price of the property. The sales price shall include delivery charges when such charges are subject to state sales or use tax regardless of the place to which delivery is made.”
Section 3. Section 18.86 of Article VII of Chapter 18 of the Fairfield Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows (additional text underlined, deleted text struck through):
“18.86. Termination Date.
The authority to levy the tax imposed by this ordinance shall remain in effect until repealed by the voters of the City of Fairfield. expire on March 31, 2033, at 11:59 p.m.”
2 Section 4. CDTFA. All references in Article VII of Chapter 18 of the Fairfield Municipal Code to the “State Board of Equalization” are hereby amended to instead refer to the “California Department of Tax and Fee Administration.”
Section 5. Authority for Transactions and Use Tax . The City of Fairfield’s 1% increase of its transactions and use tax rate, resulting in a total City transactions and use tax rate of 2%, is authorized under Revenue and Taxation Code Sections 7285.9 and 7294.3. Revenue and Taxation Code Section 7285.9 provides the authority for 1.875% of the 2% total City transactions and use tax rate, and Revenue and Taxation Code Section 7294.3 provides the authority for 0.125% of the 2 % total City transactions and use tax rate.
Section 6. Intended Amendment. It is the intent of the voters to amen d Article VII only as specified in this Ordinance to extend and increase the rate of the existing City of Fairfield (“City”) transactions and use tax in Article VII of Chapter 18 of the Fairfield Municipal Code. Except as specifically amended in this Ordinance, the remaining provisions of Article VII of Chapter 18 of the Fairfield Municipal Code shall remain in full force and effect. If the transactions and use tax increase of 1.0% in this Ordina nce is found to be invalid for any reason, the City Council may reduce such increase to 0.875%, for a total City transactions and use tax rate of 1.875%.
Section 7. Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the Ordinance and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.
Section 8. Effective Date and Expiration. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon approval by the voters and shall remain in e ffect until repealed by the voters of the City of Fairfield.
APPROVED at a regular meeting of the City C ouncil of the City of Fairfield on July __, 2026 and
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the voters of the City of Fairfield, State of California, at the General Municipal Election held on November 3, 2026.
_____________________________
[insert name], Mayor
3 Attest:
_____________________________
Karen L. Rees, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
_________________________
David Lim, City Attorney
Agenda Item No: Q.3
AGENDA REPORT
DATE: June 16, 2026
TO: Acting Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: CM Presentation and Discussion About School Resource Officers
Presentation by Fairfield Police Department on the Use of School Resource Officers at Schools in Fairfield Requested by Councilmember Sandhu
Funding Source: N/A
Contact: David Gassaway, (707) 428-7400
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Receive report, open discussion, and provide direction to staff.
STATEMENT OF ISSUE
Considering recent events at Fairfield High School, Councilmember Sandhu requested a presentation by the Fairfield Police Department on the School Resource Officer (SRO) program.
DISCUSSION
Fairfield Police Department’s (FPD) Youth Services Unit maintains a close partnership with school administrators at Armjio High School, Fairfield High School, Rodriguez High School, Vanden High School, as well as middle schools and Public Safety Academy. The program, in partnership with both Fairfield-Suisun Unified School District (FSUSD) and Travis Unified School District (TUSD), provides opportunities for officers to build trust with youth in the community and support a safe environment on school campuses.
SROs complete at least 40 hours of specialized training to work with students. SROs are a special assignment generally viewed as a sought -after placement by officers within FPD. Officers assigned as an SRO are typically seen as having excellent interpersonal skills to interact extensively with school administrators, teachers, students, and demonstrate a passion to mentor youth in the community.
There are currently five SRO assignments to cover the high school s and middles schools in Fairfield. Additionally, FSUSD contracts with FPD for a Cadet Tra ining Officer, generally assigned to a Community Services Officer (CSO). The costs for SROs and the CSO are split under Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) with both school districts (Attachments 1-3). In addition to support on campus, SROs work in partnership with the districts on maintaining legally required Comprehensive School Safety Plans to address campus risks and prepare for emergency situations.
The Solano County Civil Grand Jury conducted a review of SRO programs in July of 2025. Their findings were positive and recommended an expansion of SRO coverage in schools. The report and responses are attached for reference.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The contract for SROs with FSUSD and TUSD is split 50/50 for the salary cost of the top step police officer position. Other benefit costs are not included. FSUSD shares the cost of four SROs totaling $312,764 paid by the District. TUSD’s share of cost for one SRO is $78,191. The contract with FSUSD for one CSO is also 50/50 cost split with the District paying $38,604. In total, the school districts pay a total of $429,559 of salary costs for five officers and one CSO.
PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
N/A
COORDINATED WITH
Police Department
STAFF CONTACT
David Gassaway, City Manager
(707) 428-7400
[email protected]
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2: MOU for SROs with Fairfield-Suisun USD
Attachment 3: MOU for CSO with Fairfield-Suisun USD
Attachment 4: MOU for SRO with Travis USD
Attachment 5: Solano County Civil Grand Jury Report on SROs Attachment 6: City of Fairfield Response to Grand Jury Report Attachment 7: Fairfield-Suisun USD Response to Grand Jury Report
2024-2025
SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICERS
July 1, 2025
FINAL 250701 School Resource Officers
- 2 -
School Resource Officers
Solano County Civil Grand Jury 2024-2025
I. SUMMARY
The Solano County Civil Grand Jury (Jury) reviewed the operations and effects of having Police Officers from Fairfield Police Department (FPD) and Vacaville Police Departments (VPD) assigned as School Resource Officers (SROs) within their public schools. We found that the officers receive special training for this sought-after position, and that most SROs prefer to stay in the role as long as possible. The Program has been active in various school districts in the county for at least 30 years. It was clear to this Jury that the presence of SROs in those two Solano County cities’ school districts is very beneficial and should be operated in a manner to maximize efficiency within the program.
II. INTRODUCTION
The topic of SROs has been in the news recently. We researched which local school districts within Solano County have SRO programs. We reviewed the two largest districts in the county – Fairfield-Suisun Unified School District (FSUSD) and Vacaville Unified School District (VUSD).
FINAL 250701 School Resource Officers
- 3 -
This report discusses our methodology and findings, and presents recommendations for program modifications. We learned the program is valued by teachers, administration, students, and parents; their feedback highlights the importance of SROs in maintaining a safe and supportive school environment. The SROs strive to foster positive relationships with students and staff alike. Their role extends beyond law enforcement, encompassing mentorship, conflict resolution, and community engagement. For example, the SROs help with outreach to homeless children to ensure they are able to attend school. The presence of SROs in schools provides an enhanced feeling of safety to students as well as teachers and staff. As SRO programs continue to evolve, maintaining open communication among the police, schools, and the community will be key to their ongoing success.
III. STATEMENT OF FACTS
A School Resource Officer is a police officer who has completed at least 40 hours of specialized training to work with students. SRO positions are viewed favorably within Police Departments (PDs) as a desirable assignment and are actively sought. Appointments are awarded to officers who have excellent interpersonal skills and a desire to serve in this specialized position. An SRO is assigned to a high school or middle school. They also may be called upon occasionally to assist at an elementary school. They interact extensively with students and teachers and at times with staff and parents.
SRO programs first appeared in the 1950s, but did not become widespread until the late 1990s, especially after the Columbine shooting in 1999. Federal support came in the form of the U.S.
Department of Justice's Office of Community Oriented Policing Services program, which heavily subsidized the hiring of SROs. According to national survey data of 2,400 public
FINAL 250701 School Resource Officers
- 4 -
schools1 collected by the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) in 2022, 52% of public schools in the United States reported having sworn law enforcement officers, including SROs, present at school at least once per week. The number varied significantly based on the size of the school.
In California, Education Code (EDC) Section 38000 authorizes, but does not mandate, school districts to employ peace officers, including SROs, to ensure the safety of school district personnel and students, as well as the security of school district property. In 2024 California AB 3038 proposed to mandate armed police officers on every California school campus. However, this Bill failed in the State Assembly.
A School Resource Officer program was adopted in the Vacaville Unified School District in 1974. The Fairfield-Suisun Unified School District has had the program in place since at least 2002.
Staffing
FSUSD has a total of five SROs, one at each of three high schools (Rodriguez, Fairfield, Armijo), Grange Middle School, and the Public Safety Academy. The Rodriguez SRO is shared with nearby Green Valley Middle School. VPD has allotted funding for four SROs to be assigned to the VUSD; however, one position is currently vacant. Vacaville SROs cover all public schools, but the priority is high schools and middle schools. Both districts’ SROs work four ten-hour days per week, either Monday through Thursday or Tuesday through Friday.
1 https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d23/tables/dt23_233.70.asp
FINAL 250701 School Resource Officers
- 5 -
SROs frequently are called away from their assigned campuses to cover calls from non-staffed schools and to respond to external non-school-related calls requiring extra police presence.
Additionally, SROs may be absent from their campuses for extended periods of time for personal reasons or training.
Officers in Vacaville can remain in an SRO position for four years with a possible two-year extension, for a total of six years. Most Vacaville SROs stay for the entire period of eligibility.
Fairfield has a five-year maximum limit on any assignment in the police department. Solano County schools have the following SROs:
Solano County SROs
District SRO Number Schedule
Benicia Yes 1 10 hours/4 days
Dixon Yes 1 8 hours/5 days
Fairfield-Suisun Yes 5 10 hours/4 days
River Delta (Rio Vista) No
Travis Yes 1 10 hours/4 days
Vacaville Yes 4 (1 vacancy) 10 hours/4 days
Vallejo No
FINAL 250701 School Resource Officers
- 6 -
Funding
The SRO programs in both Vacaville and Fairfield are funded by their respective police departments and school districts. In Fairfield, the SRO costs are split equally between the city and the school district.
The Vacaville Police Department fully funds the salaries of officers assigned to the SRO program and provides supplemental funding for counseling services. Additionally, the Vacaville School District contributes $70,000 to support a Diversion Program (to provide an alternative to the juvenile justice system), as well as student counseling.
Training
Training for each officer varies, however the State of California mandates 40 hours of training for all SROs. A full week of basic training is offered by the National Association of School Resource Officers (NASRO) over the summer, and advanced training is available at NASRO conferences throughout the year. SROs also can take advantage of online courses and department in-house training. Training focuses on mental health topics, fostering interpersonal communications, and building relationships, as well as serving students with special needs.
Training also includes a three-day “Active Attacker” course, safety protocol, NARCAN® use, and human trafficking. On-the-job training takes place daily. Former SROs also are a good source of information and advice.
FINAL 250701 School Resource Officers
- 7 -
Responsibilities
As required by California Education Code Section 44276.1, SROs ensure their schools are a safe, secure, and peaceful place for students to learn. This includes keeping them safe from threats inside and outside the school. SROs also evaluate potential infrastructure improvements to fencing, gates, access points, grounds supervision, and surveillance cameras.
SRO duties include in-service training for school staff, such as active-threat drills, presentations on drugs and alcohol, and anti-bullying. Interviewees stated that joint training between SROs and school staff is limited.
Another important SRO role is serving as a liaison between the school and the community. In addition to providing safety and law enforcement, SROs may refer students and parents to outside social services.
Challenges
Some interviewees stated that school populations do not always have a clear perception of the legal constraints on SROs, such as what they are required versus allowed to do. For example, they are not able to tow cars or make arrests for bullying. They also identified another obstacle, which is that sometimes parents want to blame the SROs or teachers for challenges with their child. It can be difficult for parents to accept that their child is having problems on campus or is in trouble.
FINAL 250701 School Resource Officers
- 8 -
School Safety Plans
California Education Code Sections 32280-32289.5 mandate that all public schools (kindergarten through grade 12) develop and maintain Comprehensive School Safety Plans (CSSP) to address campus risks, prepare for emergencies, and ensure a safe learning environment for students and staff. SROs work as part of School Safety Teams including students, staff, and teachers to create and document safety procedures for the schools. California law encourages school Safety Plans to “include clear guidelines for the roles and responsibilities of mental health professionals, community intervention professionals, school counselors, School Resource Officers, and police officers on school campuses, if the school district uses these people.” Both FSUSD and VUSD have Safety Plans. These Plans cover preparedness, including monthly drills on the actions of Hold, Secure, Lockdown, Evacuate, and Shelter.
Communications
Having SROs on campus reduces delays when immediate law enforcement presence is necessary. If needed, SROs can call for additional law enforcement or other emergency assistance, reaching those agencies more rapidly than if they were not present in the schools.
They use their radios to communicate frequently with each other and with the school administration. They sometimes use radios to provide rapid alerts informing the school population about potentially dangerous situations either within or near the school. VUSD uses the Catapult™ app to communicate with PD and staff for emergencies. Both FSUSD and VUSD use the ParentSquare™ app to contact parents and students for emergency and routine communications.
FINAL 250701 School Resource Officers
- 9 -
SROs serve as an important liaison between schools and the city Police Departments. Officers hold regularly-scheduled meetings among themselves, as well as with school administrators, to reduce bureaucratic barriers.
SRO communications also serve to combat misinformation. Social media can pose an especially great challenge, including the spreading of rumors (e.g., fake shooters, bomb threats). Incidents at schools are front page news. They are posted to social media platforms almost immediately and people re-post and comment. This can lead to parents arriving at school believing there is an imminent threat when there is not. The goal is to get ahead of news/rumors whenever possible and respond safely, immediately, lawfully, and avoid campus congestion.
Outreach and Referrals
SROs strive to build mutual trust to make themselves approachable to students. Besides being a Police Officer, SROs sometimes act as counselor, mentor, or guide. In order to accomplish this, they must build relationships with students and staff.
Participating in civics class instruction, attending sports events, and coaching at some schools help make SROs part of the school community. Having SROs as a helpful presence at schools, whether just to say “hello” in the halls or by providing a safe harbor, lets students see police officers as human beings. This familiarity is very helpful to police/community relations, especially given the negative perceptions in some students’ homes and neighborhoods. SROs also participate in community events, including Police Activity League (PAL) events.
FINAL 250701 School Resource Officers
- 10 -
The presence of SROs appears to have resulted in a corresponding general reduction in violence, fights, confrontations, and vaping incidents. The objective is not to arrest students, but to use different avenues to keep students on a positive track. For example, Diversion Programs provide an alternative to jail. One such program in Vacaville helps keep students from entering the juvenile justice system. The Fairfield Police Department no longer has a Diversion Program, so students from FSUSD may be sent to the Solano County Diversion Program.
IV. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
FINDING 1
SROs are called away frequently from their assigned campuses to cover calls from non-staffed schools and to respond to external, non-school-related, calls which require extra police presence.
RECOMMENDATION 1
Increase staffing to expand SRO coverage for absences to accommodate health, training, outside assistance calls, and afterschool events.
FINDING 2
The current four-day, ten-hour staffing schedule results in frequent coverage gaps.
RECOMMENDATION 2
Change SRO scheduling from four ten-hour shifts to five eight-hour shifts to improve coverage and minimize staffing gaps.
FINDING 3
SRO assignments prioritize high school campuses and have limited coverage of other schools.
FINAL 250701 School Resource Officers
- 11 -
RECOMMENDATION 3
1. Assign SROs to all middle school campuses
2. Provide for easier on-call access to elementary schools
3. Allow for roving assignments, including part-time; and
4. Add a Community Services Officer (CSO) to each district to assist with Diversion Programs and home visits.
FINDING 4
SROs and school staff need more joint training.
RECOMMENDATION 4
Expand joint training between SROs and school staff to:
1. enable SROs to better interact with students and become more integrated with school staff; and
2. provide active-attacker training between staff and SROs.
FINDING 5
Social media, widely-used by students, is not fully leveraged by SROs or administrators to combat misinformation.
RECOMMENDATION 5
Conduct more social media outreach to:
1. combat misinformation regarding school threats and keep family members from flooding campuses; and
2. disseminate useful information about resources and activities.
FINAL 250701 School Resource Officers
- 12 -
V. COMMENTS
The presence of armed officers in schools is seen by some critics as creating a climate of fear and vulnerability for students, and contributing to the "school-to-prison pipeline." This review did not support those beliefs and, in fact, confirmed that conscientious and effective measures are in place to overcome such concerns.
In March 2024 a Fairfield SRO was arrested after allegations that he was exchanging inappropriate text messages and photos with some students. The Officer was removed immediately from his position and was criminally charged. This type of situation is extremely rare within SRO Programs. The strict oversight by the PD and School, resulting in the rapid response to this unfortunate situation, appeared to be sufficient and commendable. A replacement SRO was assigned immediately to ensure continuity of coverage and, to our knowledge, there have been no additional incidents.
Other districts may wish to institute an SRO program in their schools if funding and personnel become available.
VI. METHODOLOGY
• Interviewed personnel from Vacaville and Fairfield Police Departments. • Interviewed school staff from VSD and FSUSD.
• Surveyed all School District Superintendents within Solano County about their SRO programs.
FINAL 250701 School Resource Officers
- 13 -
• Reviewed school websites.
• Reviewed NASRO website.
• California, Education Code (EDC) Section 38000, Chapter 1. Security Departments:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=EDC&divisio n=3.&title=2.&part=23.&chapter=1.&article=
• California, Education Code (EDC) Section 32286, Article 5. School Safety Plans:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=EDC§i onNum=32286.&article=5.&highlight=true&keyword=school+safety+plan • California AB 3038: https://trackbill.com/s3/bills/CA/2023/AB/3038/analyses/assembly- education.pdf
• NASRO: https://www.nasro.org/
• NASRO Training Courses: https://www.nasro.org/training/training-courses/ • Institute of Education Sciences (IES) Digest of Education Statistics:
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d23/tables/dt23_233.70.asp • Examining the Impact of School Resource Officers and Possible Alternatives juvjustice.org/blog/1491
FINAL 250701 School Resource Officers
- 14 -
VII. REQUIRED RESPONSES
• Fairfield Police Department
• Fairfield-Suisun Unified School District
• Vacaville Police Department
• Vacaville Unified School District
VIII. COURTESY COPIES
• Benicia Unified School District
• Dixon Unified School District
• River Delta Unified School District (Rio Vista)
• Travis Unified School District
• Vallejo Unified School District
CI
TY MANAGER’S OFFICE
September 17, 2025
Honorable Judge Alesia Jones
Presiding Judge of the Superior Court SENT VIA EMAIL
Solano County Superior Court
600 Union Avenue
Fairfield, CA 94533
Re
: City of Fairfield Response to 2024-2025 Solano County Grand Jury Report Entitled : School Resource Officers (SRO)
D
ear Honorable Judge Alesia Jones:
The following is the City of Fairfield’s response to the above- mentioned Grand Jury Report which was approved by the City Council on September 16, 2025.
FI
NDING 1 – “SROs are called away frequently from their assigned campuses to cover calls from non -staffed schools and to respond to external, non- school related, calls which require extra police response.”
RECOMMENDATION 1 – “Increase staffing to expand SRO coverage for absences to accommodate health, training, outside assistance calls, and afterschool events.” CI
TY AND POLICE DEPARTMENT’S RESPONSE:
The City of Fairfield acknowledges this finding. The SRO position is highly valuable to our department, and our goal is to keep officers on campus as much as possible. However, public safety needs may arise that require additional officers to respond to incidents throughout the city. In such cases, SROs may be called away to ensure the safety of the entire Fairfield community. Due to a structural budget deficit, we currently lack the resources to hire additional officers, and four positions remain frozen.
FINDING 2 – “The current four -day, ten- hour staffing schedule results in frequent coverage gaps.”
Letter to Honorable Judge Alesia Jones
Re: City of Fairfield Response to 2024-2025 Solano County Grand Jury Report Entitled:
School Resource Officers (SRO)
September 17, 2025
RECOMMENDATION 2 – “Change SRO scheduling from four ten -hour shifts to five eight-hour shifts to improve coverage and minimize staffing gaps.”
CITY AND POLICE DEPARTMENT’S RESPONSE:
We agree with this finding. The 4/10 schedule is a negotiated benefit between the Fairfield Police Officers’ Association and the City of Fairfield. This agreement is not under the direct control of the Police Department. We understand the concern and will continue to evaluate ways to address coverage needs within the constraints of existing agreements.
FINDING 3 – “SRO assignments prioritize high school campuses and have limited coverage of other schools.”
RECOMMENDATION 3 –
“1. Assign SROs to all middle school campuses
2. Provide for easier on-call access to elementary schools
3. Allow for roving assignments, including part-time; and
4. Add a Community Services Officer (CSO) to each district to assist with Diversion Programs and home visits.”
CITY AND POLICE DEPARTMENT’S RESPONSE:
We concur with this finding. While we would like to expand the program to include junior high schools, our current staffing levels only allow us to cover four high schools and one junior high school—a comparatively high number within our region. Given our limited resources, we must balance school safety needs with the broader needs of the community and ensure we can respond appropriately to incidents citywide.
FINDING 4 – “SROs and school staff need more joint training.”
RECOMMENDATION 4 – “Expand joint training between SROs and school staff to:
1. enable SROs to better interact with students and become more integrated with school staff; and
2. provide active-attacker training between staff and SROs.”
Letter to Honorable Judge Alesia Jones
Re: City of Fairfield Response to 2024-2025 Solano County Grand Jury Report Entitled:
School Resource Officers (SRO)
September 17, 2025
CITY AND POLICE DEPARTMENT’S RESPONSE:
We agree with the Grand Jury's findings and recommendations in this area. Enhanced training and coordination are essential, and we will bring this recommendation forward to Fairfield-Suisun Unified School District (FSUSD) leadership to initiate discussions on implementing joint training in the near future.
FINDING 5 – “Social Media, widely -used by students, is not fully leveraged by SROs or administrators to combat misinformation.”
RECOMMENDATION 5 – “Conduct more social media outreach to:
1. combat misinformation regarding school threats and keep family members from flooding campuses; and
2. disseminate useful information about resources and activities.”
CITY AND POLICE DEPARTMENT’S RESPONSE:
The Police Department actively uses social media to alert and inform the community, including school -related issues. We work closely with FSUSD to ensure our communication is aligned. However, due to the rapid pace and wide range of platforms used by young people, it is not feasible for officers to fully monitor or respond to all social media activity in real time. While we understand and appreciate the intent of the recommendation, it is a significant challenge given current staffing and technological limitations.
The SRO program is extremely important to the Fairfield Police Department. We value the relationships built between our officers and students, and we recognize the importance of fostering positive interactions that prevent negative law enforcement encounte rs in the future.
We wish we had the resources to place an officer on every campus. Thank you again for your thoughtful evaluation of our program and your dedication to improving public safety in our schools and community. Please let me know if you have any further questions.
Sincerely,
DAVID J. GASSAWAY
City Manager
Letter to Honorable Judge Alesia Jones
Re: City of Fairfield Response to 2024-2025 Solano County Grand Jury Report Entitled:
School Resource Officers (SRO)
September 17, 2025
Attachment 1: Solano County Grand Jury Letter Dated July 3, 2025 – Sc hool Resource Officers Attachment 2: Solano County Civil Grand Jury 2024-2025 School Resource Officers cc: Ci
ty Council
Dan Marshall, Police Chief
Agenda Item No: Q.4
AGENDA REPORT
DATE: June 16, 2026
TO: Acting Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: CM Discussion, Consideration, and Possible Appointment to Fill Vacant Mayor’s Position Pursuant to California Government Code section 34902
Funding Source: N/A
Contact: David Lim, (415) 782-8484
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Receive report, open discussion, and provide direction to staff.
STATEMENT OF ISSUE
Discuss and consider vacant mayor’s position caused by resignation of Mayor Catherine “Cat” Moy on Tuesday, June 9, 2026; discuss appointment procedures; and consider appointing a new mayor.
DISCUSSION
On June 9, 2026, Mayor Catherine “Cat” Moy submitted a letter of resignation to th e city clerk, city manager, and city attorney, and forwarded the letter to local media outlets (Attachment 2).
In the City of Fairfield, the Office of Mayor is a directly elected position by the entire City and serves a four-year term. Under Government Code section 34903, the mayor is a member of the City Council and has all the powers and duties of a member of the council.
Under Government Code section 34902:
In the case of a vacancy in the office of the mayor for any reason, the council shall fill the vacancy by appointment. If the council fails to fill it within 60 days, it shall call an election to fill the vacancy to be held on the next established electio n date to be held not less than 114 days thereafter. A person appointed or elected to fill a vacancy shall hold office for the unexpired term of the former incumbent.
Under the law, the council shall fill the vacancy by August 9, 2026, which is the 60th day from the June 9 resignation by Mayor Moy. Any person selected to fill the vacancy shall hold the seat until the next election for mayor, which is Tuesday, November 3, 2026.
If the vacancy is not filled within those 60 days, the seat shall remain va cant and be filled at the general election on Tuesday, November 3, 2026, which is the next regularly scheduled election for the mayor position.
Options for City Council
The council may take any of the suggested options below, or any option that it deems appropriate and in line with Government Code Section 34902.
OPTION #1: Appoint a Person to Fill the Vacant Mayor’s Seat Via An Application Process
Under this option, the council would appoint a person to fill the vacant seat within 60 days (August 9).
If the council chooses this option, the city attorney recommends that the City open an “application window” to allow all interested persons eligible to fill the office of Mayor to apply for the position with the city clerk, allow the city clerk to verify each applicants eligibility for office, and then choose from the pool of applicants at an open and public general meeting of the council.
To be eligible to hold office, a person must be a registered voter at the time they apply for the office, and they must reside in the City limits.
Under this option, the council could authorize the city clerk to open and advertise an application window for the next two weeks, then present all applications at the July 7, 2026, council meeting for consideration and potential appointment of an applicant.
OPTION #2: Appoint a Person to Fill the Vacant Mayor’s Seat Tonight
While this is a legally permiss ible option, the city attorney does not recommend this approach, as the city clerk would not be able to verify the eligibility of any possible appointee, and it would not allow the council to consider all interested parties.
OPTION #3: Leave the Seat Vacant and Call for the Seat to Be Filled on November 3
Under this option, the council would pass a resolution to decline to fill the vacant seat by appointment and call for the seat to be filled at the General Election on Tuesday, November 3, 2026. It is recommended that if the council chooses this option, it do so no later than the July 7, 2026, council meeting, so that the election on November 3 is “not less than 114 days” from when the council calls the election.
Please note, that the council may choose Option #1, and if no suitable candidate is found on July 7, the council may then pivot and choose Option #3.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact on this matter as the appointment to the vacant mayor’s position is cost neutral, and the General Election for Mayor on November 3, 2026, is already scheduled.
PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The council must take action on this item as required by law, but may either appoint someone to the vacant seat or let the vacant seat be filled at the General Election of November 3, 2026.
COORDINATED WITH
N/A
STAFF CONTACT
David Lim, City Attorney
(415) 421-8484
[email protected]
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2: Resignation Letter of Mayor Catherine “Cat” Moy
Agenda Item No: R.1
AGENDA REPORT
DATE: June 16, 2026
TO: Acting Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: Ordinance 2026-04 CD Amending Section 11.13.2 of the Fairfield Municipal Code
Amending Chapter 11, Section 11.13.2 (Also Known as Rancho Solano Private Roads) of the Fairfield Municipal Code to Allow the Rancho Solano Master Association to Authorize On -Street Parking Between the Hours of 2:00 AM and 5:00 AM
Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Noah Rumbaoa, (707) 428-7450
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Hold public hearing; waive full reading, read by title only and introduce ordinance for first reading.
STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The Community Development Department is proposing an amendment to Fairfield Municipal Code (FMC) Section 11.13.2, which prohibits on -street parking on Rancho Solano private roads between 2:00 am and 5:00 am. The proposed language would authorize the Rancho Solano Master Association (Master Association) to allow on-street parking during these hours.
DISCUSSION
On September 18, 1990, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 90 -21, which added Article XIII (also known as Enforcement of the Vehicle Code on Private Streets) to Chapter 11 of the FMC.
This section affirms that local City traffic ordinances, along with the California Vehicle Code (CVC), continue to apply on private streets within Rancho Solano. FMC Section 11.13.2 includes a provision prohibiting on -street parking on Rancho Solano priva te roads between 2:00 am and 5:00 am.
Staff have drafted an amendment to FMC Section 11.13.2 that would allow the Rancho Solano Master Association (Master Association) to authorize on-street parking during these hours. The
Master Association would be responsible for establishing a mechanism to allow on-street parking (e.g. a parking permit system) and for enforcing the on-street parking restriction.
The proposed ordinance also includes minor text corrections and a figure identifying private roads within Rancho Solano.
Environmental Review
Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the proposed amendment to the FMC is exempt from the provisions of CEQA because it can be seen with certainty that adoption of the proposed amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
N/A
PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
Staff provided the following notifications for this public hearing: Mailed public hearing notices to all property o wners within Rancho Solano and published a public hearing notice in the Daily Republic newspaper, both on May 27, 2026. As the date of this agenda report’s publication, staff received three emails with questions relating to the proposed ordinance (Attachment 6).
The Master Association also conducted a survey among Rancho Solano homeowners, which identified support for establishing a parking permit system within Rancho Solano. The Master Association’s survey results are included as Attachment 5.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The council may also choose to do any of the following:
1. Provide direction to staff to modify the proposed ordinance. Staff would return the item to council at a future date for consideration.
2. Deny the proposed ordinance. Denial of the proposed amendments would prevent the Master Association from authorizing on -street parking between 2:00 am and 5:00 am on private streets within Rancho Solano.
COORDINATED WITH
City Attorney’s Office
STAFF CONTACT
Noah Rumbaoa, Associate Planner
(707) 428-7450
[email protected]
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2: Proposed Ordinance
Attachment 3: Location Map
Attachment 4: Letter from Rancho Solano Master Association Attachment 5: Rancho Solano Master Association Survey Results Attachment 6: Public Comments
CITY OF FAIRFIELD
ORDINANCE NO. 2026-04
AMENDING CHAPTER 11, SECTION 11.13.2 (ALSO KNOWN AS RANCHO SOLANO
PRIVATE ROADS) OF THE FAIRFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW THE RANCHO
SOLANO MASTER ASSOCIATION TO AUTHORIZE ON-STREET PARKING BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 2:00 AM AND 5:00 AM
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Statement of Intent
A. On September 18, 1990, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 90-21, which added Article XIII, also known as Enforcement of Vehicle Code on Private Streets, to Chapter 11 of the Fairfield Municipal Code.
B. The Community Development Department has proposed to amend the Fairfield Municipal Code to allow the Rancho Solano Master Association to authorize on-street parking on Rancho Solano private roads between the hours of 2:00 am and 5:00 am.
C. On June 16, 2026, council held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed revisions to the Fairfield Municipal Code in accordance with the rules and regulations regarding such.
SECTION 2. Chapter 11, Article XIII, Section 11.13.2 Rancho Solano private roads is hereby modified within the Fairfield City Code to read as follows:
11.13.2 Rancho Solano private roads.
a) Definitions. The "Rancho Solano Private Roads" are all of the private roads located within the real property described in Exhibit B to the "Development Agreement for the Rancho Solano Development, dated April 12, 1985 and recorded June 12, 1985, in Book 1985, Page 50327 as Instrument 25637 of the Official Records of Solano County", and as shown in Figure 11-1: Rancho Solano Private Roads below.
ORD. NO. 2026-04
Figure 11-1: Rancho Solano Private Roads
b) The Rancho Solano is a common interest development as defined by section 1351 of the California cCivil cCode. The Rancho Solano Master Association (“Master Association”) has, pursuant to a resolution of its Board of Directors, submitted to the City a petition as required by section 21107.7 of the California vVehicle cCode.
c) Chapter 11 of the Fairfield cCity cCode shall apply to the Rancho Solano pPrivate rRoads.
d) The provisions of the California vVehicle cCode shall apply to the Rancho Solano pPrivate rRoads.
e) Signs. The city traffic engineer shall determine the appropriate placement of stop signs on the Rancho Solano pPrivate rRoads as described in Fairfield cCity cCode §
11.4 and California vVehicle cCode § 21107.5. No stop sign shall be placed or
ORD. NO. 2026-04
erected on the Rancho Solano pPrivate rRoads without the prior approval of the traffic engineer.
f) Parking. No parking shall be allowed on the Rancho Solano pPrivate rRoads between the hours of 2:00 am and 5:00 am, unless authorized by the Master Association.
SECTION 3. Pursuant to C alifornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the proposed amendment to the Fairfield Municipal Code is exempt from the provisions of CEQA because it can be seen with certainty that adoption of the proposed amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment.
SECTION 4. If any provision of this Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the council intends that such invalidity will not affect the validity of the remaining provisions of their application and, to this end, the provision of this Ordinance are severable.
SECTION 5. Findings. The council hereby makes the following findings:
A. That the facts set forth in the Statement of Intent of this Ordinance are true and correct.
B. That this Ordinance complies with California law s, including the California Vehicle Code (VEH).
C. That this Ordinance would not be detrimental to the public int erest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City.
D. That this Ordinance is in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
SECTION 6. This Ordinance shall be effective 30 days following its adoption by council.
A summary of this Ordinance shall, within 15 days after passage, be published in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California with the names of the City Councilmembers voting for and against it.
INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Fairfield on the 16th day of June 2026, and
ORD. NO. 2026-04
PASSED AND ADOPTED this ___ day of _________________ 2026, by the following vote:
AYES: MEMBERS: MOY/BERTANI/CARR/PANDURO/SANDHU/TONNESEN/WILLIAMS NOES: MEMBERS: _________________________________________________ ABSENT: MEMBERS: _________________________________________________ ABSTAIN: MEMBERS: _________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________
CITY CLERK
November 4, 2024
Officer Jeremy Profitt
City of Fairfield Police Department
1000 Webster Street
Fairfield, CA 94533
Dear Officer Profitt,
I am writing this letter on behalf of the Board of Directors of Rancho Solano Master Association after having several conversations with the Planning Division Manager, Dave Feinstein.
For the past 20+ years, the Rancho Solano Master Association has been issuing a limited number of parking permits to allow guests of homeowners and tenants within Rancho Solano to park on our private roads overnight.
Our management company and security guards have been responsible for issuing these permits within the guidelines provided by the Board. Earlier this year it came to our attention that the wording of the current City parking ordinance and our CC Rs does not provide the authority to issue permits. Following this finding and meetings with homeowners, we sent out a survey to our homeowners which indicated that 71 % of them would like us to amend our rules to allow us to establish a parking permit system.
We would like to request a revision of the City of Fairfield parking ordinance 11.13.2 which states, "No parking shall be allowed on the Rancho Solano private roads between the hours of 2:00 am and 5:00 am." We suggest the following wording be added to the ordinance, "unless authorized by the Association or a valid permit has been granted by the Association."
Our plan is to follow the City Ordinance with a mirrored amendment to our CC Rs.
Your assistance in this matter will be greatly appreciated. Please contact me directly either by phone or email if you have any questions or would like to discuss this in more detail.
Best regards,
Howard Edelman, President
Rancho Solano Master Association
Cell (415) 939-3395
Email [email protected]
Cc: David Feinstein, Planning Division Manager
C/0 The Kelly Company, 430 Cemon Street• Vacaville, CA 95688 • Tel: (707) 447-7797 • Fax: (707) 447-2863 www.ranchosolanohoa.com
RECEIVED
OCT l5 7075
CITY OT FAIRFIELD
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
MAR 16 2026
ATTACHMENT 4Page 723 of 1351
Rancho Solano Master Association Survey Responses
September 23, 2024
{1598.01/00755320.1}
For
Permits
Against
Permits
152 52
RV
Parking
No RVs Set #
Permits
Define
Limited
Do Risk
Assess
Only
guests of
residents
10 1 20 6 1 17
No
Permits
All the
time
Want old
system
Permit
any, no
citations
Request
use of Golf
Overflow
lot
Like the
idea of
app
and/or
paid for
permits to
control
Office
to issue
permits
No RVs
15 3 43 2 1 7 3 1
Parking in
designated
spots some
neighborhood
s
Extend
no
parkin
g hours
Enforc
e
Garage
Use
Less
Restrictive
parking (3
day
allowance)
Better
identificati
on of who
to cite
Fine
s too
steep
Window
Sticker
permit for
homeowner
s reg
vehicles
Cite
Vehicle
Owner, not
Homeowne
r
5 2 4 1 2 2 1 2
RECEIVED
OCT l5 7075
CITY OT FAIRFIELD
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
MAR 16 2026
ATTACHMENT 5
ATTACHMENT 6
Public Comments
On May 27, 2026, the City mailed public hearing noces to all property owners within Rancho Solano and published a public hearing noce in the Daily Republic newspaper. Since then, City staff has received the following correspondence:
1. J. Craig Courtney and Mary L. Miller – May 28, 2026
2. Tina Werblin – May 30, 2026
3. John DiMichele – May 31, 2026
1 Rumbaoa, Noah
From: Rumbaoa, Noah
Sent: Wednesday, 3 June, 2026 09:21
To: J. Craig Courtney
Subject: RE: Rancho Solano on-Street Pkg. Ordinance Amendment OA2026-0001 Attachments: Draft Ordinance Language.pdf
Good morning,
Thank you for your email regarding the proposed Rancho Solano On-Street Parking Ordinance Amendment. The proposed amendment would con nue to prohibit on-street parking between the hours of 2:00 am and 5:00 am. As currently wri&en, the Fairfield Municipal Code does not allow on-street parking at all during these hours, even if the Master Associa on approves it. The proposed amendment would grant the Rancho Solano Master Associa on the authority to allow on-street parking during that me (e.g. through a permit).
I have a&ached a copy of the dra/ ordinance for your review. Text underlined in red are the proposed addi ons; text in red strikeout are the proposed dele ons.
Please let me know if you have any ques ons or would like to discuss further.
Best regards,
Noah Rumbaoa (he/him) | Associate Planner Community Development | City of Fairfield O | (707) 428-7450 1000 Webster Street 2nd Floor, Fairfield, CA 94533 www.fairfield.ca.gov City Hall is closed every other Friday. Click HERE to see the schedule.
Planning Division Service Update:
Fairfield BUILD is now live! The City’s new online permiEng system has launched, and TRAKiT is no longer in use. For system issues or ques ons, contact us at fairfieldbuild@fairfield.ca.gov More info: Fairfield.ca.gov/BUILD
-----Original Message-----
From: J. Craig Courtney < >
Sent: Thursday, 28 May, 2026 15:44
To: Rumbaoa, Noah <nrumbaoa@fairfield.ca.gov>
Subject: Rancho Solano on-Street Pkg. Ordinance Amendment OA2026-0001
[You don't o/en get email from . Learn why this is important at h&ps://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIden fica on ]
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organiza on. Do not click links or open a&achments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Dear Noah,
We just rec’d your mailed Public Hearing No ce & wish to voice our strongest possible desire to have the current ordinance against parking on our Rancho Solano streets btw 2-5AM, upheld.
Our family purchased (on the ) new in 1995, & have resided here since t hen, giving us an unparalleled perspec ve on this issue.
2 If you are interested in the basis of this reasoning, please contact us @ your convenience. Your public no ce did not request commentary.
J. Craig Courtney
Mary L. Miller
Sent from my iPhone
1 Rumbaoa, Noah
From: Rumbaoa, Noah
Sent: Monday, 1 June, 2026 11:23
To: 'Tina W.'
Subject: RE: Rancho Solano On-street parking ordinance amendment -OA2026-0001 - June 16 City Council meeting
Attachments: Draft Ordinance Language.pdf
Hi Tina,
Thank you for your email. Because this amendment does not amend the Fairfield Zoning Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 25), the amendment was not reviewed by the Planning Commission. The City Council is the decision-making body for any ordinance amendments.
The agenda will include a staff report describing the proposed amendment and compliance with CEQA. I’ve also attached the proposed text amendments for your review. Text shown in underline are additions to the Municipal Code, while text in strikeout are deletions.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Best regards,
Noah Rumbaoa (he/him) | Associate Planner
Community Development | City of Fairfield
O | (707) 428-7450
1000 Webster Street 2 nd Floor, Fairfield, CA 94533
www.fairfield.ca.gov
City Hall is closed every other Friday. Click HERE to see the schedule.
Planning Division Service Update :
Fairfield BUILD is now live! The City’s new online permitting system has launched, and TRAKiT is no longer in use.
For system issues or questions, contact us at [email protected] More info: Fairfield.ca.gov/BUILD
From: Tina W. < >
Sent: Saturday, 30 May, 2026 09:48
To: Rumbaoa, Noah <[email protected]>
Subject: Rancho Solano On-street parking ordinance amendment -OA2026-0001 - June 16 City Council meeting
Dear Planner Rumbaoa,
Can you please tell me if this amendment went through the Planning Commission? If so, do you know the
date so I can review the agenda and the public documents? You don't often get email from [email protected] . Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
2 Also, when the agenda is posted on the website, will it include a copy of your report and the CEQA report?
Thank you, and have a great day.
Tina
--
Tina Werblin
1 Rumbaoa, Noah
From: John DiMichele < >
Sent: Monday, 1 June, 2026 11:58
To: Rumbaoa, Noah
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Rancho Solano On-Street Parking Ordinance Amendment Noah,
Thanks for the quick reply. I think the HOA could do a better job communicating and explaining this type of amendment.
Thank you. John
On Monday, June 1, 2026 at 11:28:30 AM PDT, Rumbaoa, Noah <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi John,
Thank you for your email. I’d be happy to provide additional information.
The proposed ordinance amendment would not change the on-street parking hours. Under the proposed ordinance, on-street parking would continue to be prohibited between the hours of 2:00 am and 5:00 am. The proposed ordinance would allow the Rancho Solano Master Association to authorize on-street parking during those hours, such as through the issuance of permits. This is not explicitly allowed under the current Fairfield Municipal Code.
I’ve attached the draft ordinance amendment for your review. Text shown in underline are additions to the Municipal Code, while text in strikeout are deletions. A full staff report will be published on the City’s website prior to the City Council meeting on June 16.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Best regards,
Noah Rumbaoa (he/him) | Associate Planner
Community Development | City of Fairfield
O | (707) 428-7450
1000 Webster Street 2nd Floor, Fairfield, CA 94533
www.fairfield.ca.gov
City Hall is closed every other Friday. Click HERE to see the schedule.
Planning Division Service Update:
Fairfield BUILD is now live! The City’s new online permitting system has launched, and TRAKiT is no longer in use.
For system issues or questions, contact us at [email protected] More info: Fairfield.ca.gov/BUILD
You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
2 From: John DiMichele < >
Sent: Sunday, 31 May, 2026 17:54
To: Rumbaoa, Noah <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Rancho Solano On-Street Parking Ordinance Amendment
Noah,
Where do I find the detail information on the public hearing regarding the parking hours amendment? We have not received any information from the Rancho Solano HOA or the city regarding the proposed amendment.
Thank you
John DiMichele
You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Agenda Item No: R.2
AGENDA REPORT
DATE: June 16, 2026
TO: Acting Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution 2026-129 Approving Fiscal Year 2026 -2027 Smith Ranch Assessment District Engineer’s Report, Budget, and Assessments
Approving the Fiscal Year 202 6-2027 Engineer’s Report, Confirming the Boundaries and Assessment, and Ordering the Levy and Collection of Assessments for the Smith Ranch Assessment District
Funding Source: $7,103; Smith Ranch Assessment District Fund
Contact: Chris Lewis, (707) 428-7089
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Hold public hearing and adopt resolution.
STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The adoption of this resolution will approve the fiscal year (FY) 2026-2027 Engineer’s Report and provide for the levy and collection of assessments within the Smith Ranch Assessment District (District) for the maintenance of streets, storm drainage, and other infrastructure within the District.
DISCUSSION
The City formed the Di strict in 1986 to fund the construction of public infrastructure improvements in the Rancho Solano subdivision and to provide ongoing maintenance and repairs thereof.
The engineer’s report contains a complete description of the lots and parcels of land within the boundaries of the District, an estimate of maintenance and repair costs during the next fiscal year, and the assessment levies upon lots and parcels of land.