Agenda packet — Folsom City Council, March 10, 2026 (part 6 of 9)

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Placer County Water Agency PSA 231
MFP was to be comprised of three major reservoirs: French Meadows, Hell Hole, and American Bar.

American Bar Dam was to be located just south of Foresthill, below the current Oxbow Powerhouse.

American Bar Dam and Reservoir would have provided an additional 100,000 AF of water storage for the people of Placer County, as well as another large hydroelectric plant. Reclamation opposed PCWA’s water right applications for the MFP and speciﬁcally American Bar Dam, because it was planned in the upper reaches of the ﬂooded area of the future Auburn Dam. PCWA had also protested Reclamation’s applications for water on the American River, including for the Auburn Dam. PCWA and Reclamation then entered negotiations to resolve the protests in a way that would allow construction of both projects.

The negotiations resulted in a series of agreements which provided, in pertinent part, that PCWA would abandon plans to build American Bar Dam, instead moving the lowest of the MFP dams to Ralston Afterbay. PCWA also agreed to limit consumptive use diversions from the MFP to 120,000 AFY . In exchange, Reclamation was to provide PCWA with an additional 117,000 AFY of CVP water. This agreement insured PCWA that it had suﬃcient water supplies to meet the demands of Placer County and was memorialized in a 1966 “Agreement and Stipulation” between PCWA and Reclamation. The amount of CVP supply was subsequently agreed to be reduced to 35,000 AFY , which is now provided for in PCWA’s 2020 long-term repayment contract.

PCWA’s consumptive water rights from the MFP are still under development. PCWA’s agreement to limit its diversion of MFP supply to 120,000 AFY subject to Reclamation’s agreement to provide 35,000 AFY provides PCWA with a total of 155,00 AFY from the American River watershed. This amount combined with PCWA’s water delivered by PG&E from the Drum-Spaulding system is suﬃcient to meet buildout demands. This amount diverted from the American River is well within PCWA’s MFP storage capacity of 342,583 AF. Should Reclamation fail to fulﬁll its obligations under the various settlement agreements with PCWA, PCWA would be ready, willing, and able to obtain the full amount from its MFP storage. In addition, PCWA is planning to deliver an additional 47,000 AFY of MFP water for consumptive use downstream of the conﬂuence of the American and Sacramento Rivers. This consumptive use would be in dry years as part of a mitigation strategy for the lower American River, as discussed elsewhere in this document.

Pre-1914 Appropriative Rights
PCWA holds four pre-1914 appropriative water rights for diversion of water from various small creeks and their tributaries in western Placer County. These rights are generally for agricultural purposes, including irrigation and livestock watering.

Surface Water Summary
Table 2 identiﬁes the source, purpose of use, maximum available quantity, and place of use for each PCWA surface water supply.

Page 558 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Placer County Water Agency PSA 232
Table 2. PCWA’s Surface Water Supply Summary
Supply Source Purpose of Use Volume, AFY Place of Use
Water Right Permits
13856 and 13858
American River Irrigation,
Domestic,
Municipal, and
Industrial,
Recreation
120,0001 Western Placer County
and Portions of
Sacramento County (see
Figure 2)
Water Right Permits
13856 and 13858
American River Irrigation,
Domestic,
Municipal, and
Industrial,
Recreation
47,0002 Proposed expanded place
of use to include East Bay
Municipal Utility District
and other potential
downstream buyers
Central Valley Project
Contract
American River3 Municipal and
Industrial
35,000 Place of use pursuant to
contract (generally
PCWA’s Zone 1)
PG&E Water Supply
Agreement (2015)
Yuba and Bear
Rivers
Irrigation and
Domestic
100,400 Western Water System
(generally PCWA’s Zone 6)
PG&E (Zone 3) Purchase
Agreement (1982)
Yuba and Bear
Rivers
Irrigation and
Domestic
25,000 PCWA’s Zone 3
Pre-1914 Appropriative
Right (S000959)
Canyon Creek Irrigation and
Domestic
40 cfs (Max.) Alta, Colfax, Monte Vista
and rural areas (Not
limited to Zone 3)
Pre-1914 Appropriative
Right (S000967)
Tributary to
Auburn Ravine
Irrigation and
Stock Watering
Not Stated “Boardman Canal” Area
Pre-1914 Appropriative
Right (S010397)
South Fork Dry
Creek Tributary to
Coon Creek
Irrigation Not Stated Localized Irrigation Just
East of Auburn
Pre-1914 Appropriative
Right (S010398)
North Fork Dry
Creek Tributary to
Coon Creek
Irrigation Not Stated Localized Irrigation Just
East of Auburn

1. See Contextual Relationship of American River Water Rights and CVP Contract.

2. Environmental ﬂows to be sold downstream, see Surface Water Management.

3. PCWA is pursuing relocation of this point of diversion to the Sacramento River.

Groundwater
PCWA has historically produced a limited quantity of groundwater. PCWA does not anticipate utilizing groundwater to support its normal year water deliveries. PCWA has two wells – the Sunset Well and the Tinker Well – each with a production capacity of about 1,000 AFY . These wells are for backup and dry- year supplies. The proposed Regional University development plans to construct one new well and the current Placer One development plans to construct two new wells, increasing PCWA’s groundwater supply from the current 2,000 AFY to 5,000 AFY in 2040 (Table 1).

Recycled Water
The County of Placer has access to recycled water through its wastewater service arrangements with the cities of Roseville and Lincoln and has dictated use of these supplies as a condition of development in the

Page 559 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Placer County Water Agency PSA 233
Placer Vineyards, Placer One, and Regional University projects. Potential retailers of these supplies are the county, PCWA, and California American Water. Regardless of who the retailer is, these supplies would be available as conditions of those development projects. PCWA anticipates the quantities of recycled water presented in Table 1 to be made available. The details of recycled water delivery are being developed as part of on-going regional planning.

Distribution System
Untreated Water
The PCWA untreated water conveyance system consists of 170 miles of earthen and lined canals, with ﬂumes and pipelines where appropriate, beginning in the community of Alta, ﬂowing southwest, generally following Interstate 80, and ending in Roseville. The main canal in the system is the Boardman Canal, which ﬂows contiguously from Alta to Roseville. In Auburn the canal system begins to distribute outward into branch canals. There are also two canals in western Placer County that divert water from the Auburn Ravine. PCWA purchases water at several connections to the PG&E canal system called “Buy Points,” positioned at key locations between Alta and the end of PG&E’s South Canal. Water can also enter the canal system from accretion ﬂows, pre-1914 water rights, and return ﬂows from PCWA untreated water customers (water that is delivered to customers and ﬂows back into the canal).

PCWA can also pump MFP water out of the North Fork of the American River at the ARPS, into the 3-mile Auburn Tunnel under the City of Auburn to a valved outlet into Auburn Ravine, where the water is delivered to the two canals in western Placer County. MFP water can also be pumped out of the tunnel at the Ophir Road Pump Station into the PG&E South Canal, to PCWA’s Dutch Ravine Canal, or to the Foothill and Ophir (future) water treatment plants.

Treated Water
PCWA owns and operates nine water treatment plants between Alta and Rocklin, producing approximately 40,000 AF of potable water each year. Treated water is distributed by 615 miles of pressurized pipe and delivered to various retail and wholesale customers.

PCWA also has several treated water interties with neighboring water agencies: Nevada Irrigation District, SJWD, the City of Lincoln, and the City of Roseville. Some of these connections are one-way due to pressure diﬀerences, while other connections can ﬂow water in either direction with the use of pumps or pressure-reducing valves.

Current and Projected Demands
PCWA’s water use is broken down into four classiﬁcations: retail treated, retail untreated, wholesale treated, and wholesale untreated. PCWA’s current (2020) treated and untreated retail demands are 101,613 AFY and are projected to increase to 125,134 AFY at buildout. PCWA’s current (2020) treated and untreated wholesale demands are 31,376 AFY and are projected to increase to 128,282 AFY at buildout. Table 3 provides the total current and projected PCWA customer demands for 5-year increments through 2040 and buildout conditions. The treated water demand estimates account for an appropriate amount of water use reduction resulting from the successful implementation of Senate Bill 7x-7, “20 by 2020,” and anticipated reduction from the regulation titled “Making Conservation a California Way of Life.”

Page 560 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Placer County Water Agency PSA 234
Table 3. Summary of PCWA’s Total Customer Demand Projections, AFY Classiﬁcation of Water Use 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Buildout Treated Retail 29,065 33,182 37,773 43,780 52,637 62,036 Untreated Retail 72,548 71,208 69,298 67,681 66,313 63,098 RETAIL SUBTOTAL 101,613 104,390 107,071 111,461 118,950 125,134 Treated Wholesale 11,450 15,413 18,388 22,710 27,032 47,276 Untreated Wholesale 19,926 54,923 58,712 63,289 81,006 81,006 Untreated Downstream1,2 19,000 47,000 47,000 47,000 47,000 47,000 WHOLESALE SUBTOTAL 50,376 117,336 124,100 132,999 155,038 175,282 PCWA TOTAL WATER USE 151,989 221,726 231,171 244,460 273,988 300,416

1. MFP supply to be delivered to an expanded place of use downstream in dry years, see Surface Water Management.

2. This demand will only be in dry years to provide environmental ﬂows to the lower American River, 47,000 AFY will be the maximum amount.

Surface Water and Groundwater Management
PCWA was a signatory to the 2000 Water Forum Agreement. The Water Forum Agreement has two coequal objectives: (1) provide a reliable and safe water supply for the region’s economic and planned development; and (2) preserve the ﬁsh, wildlife, recreational, and aesthetic values of the lower American River.

The Water Forum Agreement’s supportive Environmental Impact Report fully analyzed buildout demand in PCWA’s place of use and identiﬁed purveyor speciﬁc agreements for PCWA’s wholesale customers (City of Roseville, SJWD and SSWD) which placed restrictions on the use of North Fork American River water depending on unimpaired inﬂow into Folsom Reservoir. In addition, PCWA voluntarily agreed to release up to 47,000 AF (27,000 AF for PCWA and 20,000 AFY for the City of Roseville) of additional water
56 (Water Forum environmental releases) in drier years through reoperation of MFP reservoirs.

When projected March through November Unimpaired Inﬂow to Folsom Reservoir (M-N UIFR) is between 950,000 and 400,000 AF, the amount of these environmental releases is linearly interpolated between 0 and 47,000 AF. When projected M-N UIFR is less than 400,000 AF, it is considered a “conference year” where Water Forum participants meet to determine how best to manage the available water, recognizing that there may not be suﬃcient water to meet both deliveries and environmental release requirements speciﬁed in the agreement. Under this program of environmental releases, PCWA has released more than 200,000 AF of water to the lower American River in dry years.

When projected M-N UIFR is greater than 1.6 million AF, there is a provision for PCWA to sell surface water to groundwater pumpers in Sacramento County as part of a conjunctive use program to alleviate groundwater overdraft. PCWA’s place of use was expanded into Sacramento County as shown on Figure

56 The Water Forum environmental releases represent additional water (up to 47,000 AF) in drier years that would not otherwise be released from storage for power generation or for consumptive delivery purposes within western Placer County and northern Sacramento County were it not for the Water Forum Agreement requirements.

Page 561 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Placer County Water Agency PSA 235
2 to provide for this program. The primary purchaser has been SSWD, who has recharged more than 200,000 AF of PCWA water in the North American Subbasin. This program could be expanded to other water purveyors within the current place of use.

The Water Forum environmental releases were intended to oﬀset eﬀects of higher diversion of water from the ARPS (PCWA) and Folsom Dam (City of Roseville) above the historical delivery baseline used in the Water Forum Agreement57. The Water Forum Agreement evaluated the diversion of 35,500 AFY of water from the ARPS with recognition that PCWA would pursue an additional diversion of 35,000 AFY .

Currently it is expected that the ARPS diversions will increase to 70,500 AFY in the future pending additional environmental analysis.
58 This, combined with its PG&E and CVP contract water, is estimated to meet PCWA’s buildout demands. The 35,000 AFY of CVP water is currently being pursued at the Sacramento River (RiverArc Project) pursuant to 2000 Water Forum Agreement.

The following sections provide information on PCWA’s current and projected American River diversions and how PCWA intends to manage surface waters in support of Water Forum objectives in drier, driest, and critically low conditions.

MFP-Related Surface Water Management
PCWA’s Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) license, which was issued in 2020 and has a 40- year term, has numerous requirements that were collaboratively developed to enhance environmental conditions in the MFP area. These conditions include higher instream ﬂow and reservoir storage requirements, spring pulse ﬂows, and reservoir spill ramp down ﬂows. These additional ﬂows have reduced hydropower generation nominally 5%, which will be partially mitigated by the addition of raising Hell Hole Dam for additional wet year storage. Additional measures include large woody material management, trout spawning habitat improvements, and sediment augmentation, among others. All the FERC requirements were developed in anticipation of continued implementation of the Water Forum Agreement.

Current American River Diversions
Table 4 summarizes PCWA’s American River diversions for the previous 10-year period (2014–2023).

PCWA’s current level of American River diversions (2023) was 26,200 AFY .

57 In the Water Forum Agreement, PCWA’s baseline was 8,500 AFY and the assumption was that at full buildout PCWA would divert 35,500 AFY at the ARPS (diﬀerence of 27,000 AFY); the City of Roseville baseline was 19,800 AFY and the assumption was that at full buildout Roseville would divert 39,800 AFY at Folsom Dam in drier years (diﬀerence of 20,000 AFY). The total additional water above baseline for PCWA and City of Roseville is up to 47,000 AFY. 58 In the Water Forum Agreement, PCWA’s baseline was 8,500 AFY and the assumption was that at full buildout PCWA would divert 35,500 AFY at the ARPS (diﬀerence of 27,000 AFY); the City of Roseville baseline was 19,800 AFY and the assumption was that at full buildout Roseville would divert 39,800 AFY at Folsom Dam in drier years (diﬀerence of 20,000 AFY). The total additional water above baseline for PCWA and City of Roseville is up to 47,000 AFY.

Page 562 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Placer County Water Agency PSA 236
Table 4. PCWA’s American River Diversions (2014–2023), AFY

Year

American River
Pump Station

City of
Roseville1
San Juan
Water
District1
Sacramento
Suburban
Water
District1
Central Valley
Project2

Total
2014 16,039 12,164 8,727 0 0 36,930
2015 24,028 18,296 253 0 0 42,577
2016 4,394 1,116 8,884 11,274 0 25,668
2017 3,459 0 9,028 12,145 0 24,632
2018 4,466 0 9,258 12,002 0 25,726
2019 4,457 0 8,274 12,382 0 25,113
2020 10,947 7,146 9,663 661 0 28,417
2021 35,7713 14,267 8,775 0 0 58,813
2022 12,831 27,713 9,570 0 0 50,114
2023 13,088 2,363 0 10,749 0 26,200
Average 12,948 8,307 7,243 5,921 0 34,419

1. MFP water that is rediverted through the municipal intake at Folsom Dam, which is authorized under existing Warren Act contracts held by PCWA’s current wholesale customers.

2. PCWA’s point of diversion for CVP water is Folsom Dam, but its contract also includes potential for other diversions, including the Sacramento River, if the points of diversion are agreed to by the Contracting Oﬃcer.

3. Exceeded 35,000 AF of pumping due to PG&E canal outages and reduced water supply allocation.

Future Projected American River Diversions
Table 5 summarizes PCWA’s projected American River diversions at buildout when the M-N UIFR is above 950,000 AFY . PCWA’s projected American River diversions at buildout are 155,000 AFY; however, this amount would be 120,000 AFY if the RiverArc Project is successful.

See the section above describing the contextual relationship of PCWA’s American River water rights and their CVP contract for an explanation of the 120,000 AFY limitation. The total of 155,000 AFY combined with PCWA’s water delivered by PG&E from the Drum-Spaulding system is suﬃcient to meet buildout demands. In addition to these diversions, PCWA plans in dry-years to divert up to 47,000 AFY of its American River water rights downstream of the conﬂuence with the Sacramento River. This water is associated with continued environmental ﬂows described herein. These ﬂows are currently conducted under one-year water transfers through the State Water Board, however, PCWA is pursuing expansion of its place of use to facilitate these downstream diversions. PCWA’s intent to expand its American River water rights place of use is further stated under the “Project List” and “Caveats and Assurances” of this Purveyor Speciﬁc Agreement.

Page 563 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Placer County Water Agency PSA 237
Table 5. PCWA’s Projected American River Diversions (Buildout), AFY Supply Diversion Point Amount
Water Rights Permits 13856 and
13858 (consumptive)
American River Pump Station, Folsom Dam
Municipal Intake
120,000
Central Valley Project* Folsom Dam, or other diversion point agreed to by the Contracting Oﬃcer
35,000
TOTAL 155,000
*Currently being pursued at the Sacramento River (RiverArc Project) pursuant to 2000 Water Forum Agreement.

Drier Conditions Management
Condition: MN-UIFR is between 950,000 and 400,000 AF.

During drier years, PCWA will divert up to 155,000 AFY from the American River and will replace up to 47,000 AFY (27,000 AFY for PCWA and 20,000 AFY for City of Roseville) of water through reoperation of MFP reservoirs (environmental releases). The environmental releases are intended to oﬀset eﬀects of higher diversion of PCWA’s MFP water from the ARPS (PCWA) and Folsom Reservoir (City of Roseville) above the historical delivery baseline used in the current Water Forum Agreement (8,500 AFY for PCWA and 19,800 AFY for City of Roseville).

This 47,000 AFY is the environmental release at full (buildout) diversion of PCWA’s American River water rights. The amount of these environmental releases would be interpolated between 0 and 47,000 AFY based upon M-N UIFR and the combined PCWA and Roseville diversion rate above baseline in any given year. Although the environmental releases could be interpolated to be less than 10,000 AFY in a speciﬁc year, PCWA will typically release a minimum of 10,000 AFY; this is a change from the 2000 Water Forum Agreement.
59 Figure 3 presents a chart of the calculation of these releases relative to M-N UIFR at full diversion rates above baseline for both PCWA and Roseville; note the minimum of 10,000 AF commencing at M-N UIFR of 950,000 AF. A more comprehensive look-up table at variable PCWA and Roseville combined diversion rates above baseline is provided in Attachment 1 to this Purveyor Speciﬁc Agreement.

59 Released as part of a long-term water delivery contract with a downstream buyer.

Page 564 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Placer County Water Agency PSA 238
Figure 3. Proposed PCWA Environmental Flow Releases60
The environmental releases from PCWA reservoirs represent water (up to 47,000 AFY) that would not otherwise be released in drier years were it not for this commitment. PCWA will make the environmental releases contingent upon the following conditions:

1. Continued cooperation of Reclamation in storage and timing of releases from Folsom Reservoir consistent with PCWA’s recently executed Warren Act Contract.

2. PCWA’s ability to transfer/sell the released water for use below the lower American River on terms acceptable to PCWA. To facilitate this provision, PCWA is pursuing an expanded place of use of its American River Water Rights to include water purveyors that currently purchase these releases through single year transfers.

3. PCWA’s determination that it has suﬃcient water in its reservoirs to make the additional releases to mitigate conditions in dry years without jeopardizing the supply for PCWA’s customers or commitments under PCWA’s FERC license.

Details related to PCWA’s proposal for these environmental releases which support the Water Forum objectives are provided below.

Long-Term Water Delivery Contract
To provide certainty that the environmental releases into the lower American River occur in the future, PCWA executed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) in August 2013 regarding the long-term purchase of the environmental releases. Under the MOU, PCWA would release 10,000 to 47,000 AFY of environmental releases from the MFP into Folsom Reservoir for rediversion at the Freeport Regional Water Authority (FRWA) Intake (Freeport Intake) by EBMUD in years when the projected M-N UIFR is less than 950,000 AFY . The releases would provide

60 Environmental releases in conference years are subject to availability as described.

Page 565 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Placer County Water Agency PSA 239
environmental beneﬁts to the lower American River consistent with the objectives of the Water Forum, as well as increase dry-year water supply reliability for EBMUD.

If EBMUD is unable to use the environmental releases, PCWA would develop a back-up buyer agreement with Reclamation for use of the water downstream of the conﬂuence of the lower American River and Sacramento River. If neither EBMUD nor Reclamation can put to beneﬁcial use the drier year environmental releases, then PCWA would deliver the water to another willing buyer downstream.

Environmental releases may be scheduled and coordinated with the Water Forum and Reclamation. This coordination would be intended to enhance cold-water pool conditions in Folsom Reservoir, thus optimizing the opportunity for maintaining cooler temperatures in the lower American River. This option is subject to terms of PCWA’s recently executed Warren Act Contract with Reclamation for storage of water in Folsom Reservoir longer than 30 days.

Operations
Speciﬁc operations that PCWA is proposing in support of the Water Forum objectives include:
• Temporary storage (greater than 30 days, but less than a year) of environmental releases and/or timing of deliveries to wholesale customers via Folsom Reservoir to enhance cold-water pool and maintain/enhance temperature conditions in the lower American River; subject to Reclamation and regulatory approval.
• Rediversion of environmental releases downstream of the lower American River and Sacramento River conﬂuence for consumptive use in PCWA’s proposed expanded place of use for this water at either the Freeport Intake, or alternatively at other CVP facilities by Reclamation, as appropriate and as authorities allow, or to other downstream buyers. • Collaboration with the Water Forum and Reclamation to optimize the temperature beneﬁts of environmental releases.
• Forego PCWA’s CVP deliveries from Folsom Reservoir on the American River, and instead take delivery from the Sacramento River at RiverArc.

Driest Conditions Management
Condition: MN-UIFR is less than 400,000 AF.

It is recognized that in years when the projected M-N UIFR is less than 400,000 AFY there may not be suﬃcient water available to provide the purveyors within the Water Forum with the driest years quantities speciﬁed in their agreements and provide the expected driest years ﬂows to the mouth of the American River. In those years, PCWA will participate in a conference with other stakeholders on how the available water should be managed.

In the driest of drier years, years when M-N UIFR is less than 400,000 AFY , PCWA would implement actions to preserve MFP storage. PCWA would institute reduced deliveries (water cutbacks), as needed.

In those years, PCWA’s irrigation water deliveries may be reduced by up to 50 percent and PCWA’s

Page 566 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Placer County Water Agency PSA 240
treated water deliveries may be reduced by up to 20 percent.61 In addition, PCWA may use groundwater to reduce shortages in those years.

During Driest Conditions, delivery of environmental ﬂow releases up to 47,000 AF pursuant to “Drier Conditions Management” will be subject to available supplies, as detailed under that section.

Critically Low Storage Conditions
Condition: Potential operations in spring and summer when Folsom Reservoir storage is forecasted to reach 110,000 AF at some point in the next 12-months.

During the spring and summer, if Folsom Reservoir storage is forecasted to reach 110,000 AF at some point in the year, PCWA would conference with stakeholders, including Reclamation, on how available water should be managed.

Condition: Potential operations in summer and fall when Folsom Reservoir storage is below 110,000 AF.

If Folsom Reservoir storage is projected to be below 110,000 AF, PCWA would conference with stakeholders, including Reclamation, on how available water should be managed. PCWA would coordinate with both the City of Roseville and SJWD pursuant to their respective water supply contracts.

Several projects are being pursued to mitigate the frequency of this occurring and/or to mitigate the impact to the co-equal objectives if this does occur. These projects include: the RiverArc Project, the Sacramento Regional Water Bank, the PCWA-Roseville Cooperative Pipeline, and conservation programs.

Compliance with Making Conservation a California Way of Life No later than January 1, 2025, and by January 1 every year thereafter, each urban retail water supplier shall calculate its urban water use objective and beginning January 1, 2027, annually demonstrate compliance with its objective.

The calculation shall be based on the supplier’s water use conditions for the previous state ﬁscal year.

The objective is composed of the sum of the following:

1. A budget for indoor residential water use

2. A budget for outdoor residential water use

3. A budget for commercial, industrial, and institutional landscape with dedicated irrigation meters or equivalent technology

4. A budget for real losses

5. Budgets for variances and temporary provisions

61 PCWA’s existing water conservation eﬀorts support local water supply reliability goals and are consistent with California’s 20x2020 Program and Making Conservation a California Way of Life.

Page 567 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Placer County Water Agency PSA 241
Based on initial calculations, the State Water Board projects PCWA to have 0% reductions required in 2025, 0% reductions required in 2030, less than 5% reductions required in 2035, and 5-10% reductions required in 2040.

PCWA’s Approach to Compliance
PCWA is a leader in water eﬃciency programs in the region. PCWA has a robust water eﬃciency program and will expand on this program as described.

PCWA will continue participation in the Regional Water Eﬃciency Program, especially for regional compliance with the CII best management practices and regional non-functional turf outreach, along with regional messaging. PCWA will also participate in the statewide conservation partnership (CalWEP).

Education and Outreach
PCWA will maintain its Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) WaterSense award-winning education and outreach program as follows:
• Water eﬃciency messaging in newsletters, e-blasts, WaterWiseWednesday social media posts, paid ads on Facebook and Google
• Partnerships with local Master Gardener Programs and California Native Plant Society • Local demonstration gardens to showcase low water use plants and local native plants Enhanced Rebates
Prior to ﬁnal adoption of the regulation, PCWA enhanced its rebate program by adding a leak rebate to assist customers in ﬁnding and ﬁxing indoor and outdoor leaks. In one year, it’s become the Agency’s most utilized rebate. Commercial rebates were added, and rebate amounts were increased for turf replacement, irrigation upgrades, and smart controllers. The enhanced turf replacement can be marketed to assist with replacement of non-functional turf.

Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) Data
As the Agency replaces meters and meter reading technology is replaced with AMI, customers will have real-time access to their water use and could set up leak alerts through a customer portal.

Water usage data will be evaluated and a program developed to notify customers of potential leaks, breaks or overuse.

Customers Services
Water Wise House Calls and Water Wise Business Calls will be oﬀered to help customers ﬁnd ways to use less water.

High-use letters and leak-verify work orders are generated every month after the billing department evaluates consumption, prior to sending a bill.

Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional (CII) Accounts Landscapes of CII mixed use meters will be measured to determine which are ½ acre or greater. New CII requirements will be implemented as follows:
• Classify CII customers into 22 water use categories, deﬁned by Energy STAR and the State Water Board, and maintain the list annually.

Page 568 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Placer County Water Agency PSA 242
• Design and implement best management practices for top CII users. • Design and implement turf replacement programs.

Caveats and Assurances

1. This agreement is entered into with recognition that PCWA has agreed with Reclamation to limit consumptive use of its American River water rights to 120,000 AFY – see section on “Contextual Relationship of American River Water Rights and Central Valley Project (CVP) Contract.” PCWA has a long-term CVP contract with Reclamation for 35,000 AFY . This is a total of 155,000 AFY from the American River. This amount combined with PCWA’s water delivered by PG&E from the Drum-Spaulding system (Yuba and Bear Rivers) is suﬃcient to meet buildout demands. If for any reason these supplies are signiﬁcantly reduced in amount or duration, it will be considered a changed condition, and signatories will work in good faith to renegotiate relevant portions of this Purveyor Speciﬁc Agreement.

2. During dry years, PCWA proposes to release up to 47,000 AFY of water from its upstream reservoirs, pursuant to Attachment 1, for the beneﬁt of the lower American River environment.

This proposal is discussed in detail under “Drier Conditions Management” and included in PCWA’s American River Water Rights Extension currently being processed with the State Water Board. In the 2007 petition for this extension, PCWA’s commitment to the Water Forum and stewardship of its water supply was noted by certain members of the Environmental Caucus in the letter included as Attachment 2. Signatories recognize the continuation of PCWA’s American River Water Rights is integral to achieving the proposed environmental releases. Accordingly, they are willing to support the proposal and highlight the environmental beneﬁts before the State Water Board, including a re-petition for this extension, if necessary, and an expanded place of use to include EBMUD. EBMUD is not a guaranteed buyer, even in dry years, thus it would be advantageous to have a downstream place of use adequate to ensure these environmental releases. For this reason, PCWA is also seeking to add other areas of the CVP , including refuges.

PCWA will keep the parties apprised of the development of this expansion with the State Water Board and the parties will communicate in good faith their concerns, support, or objection to this expansion as it is developed.

3. PCWA and other signatories to this agreement have proposed to divert water from the Sacramento River rather than diverting from the American River. This would allow water to continue to ﬂow down the lower American River. Signatories conditionally endorse this proposal, branded as “RiverArc,” subject to environmental analysis of the impact to the Sacramento River.

This proposal will require certain changes to PCWA’s CVP contract, including a change in point of diversion from Folsom Reservoir to the Sacramento River and expanding PCWA’s CVP place of use to include all western Placer County. Signatories will endorse these changes to PCWA’s CVP subject to continued endorsement of the RiverArc Project. In addition to its CVP contract, PCWA would like to explore an exchange provision to divert its American River water rights at the RiverArc Project.

Project List and Future Water Supply Reliability Eﬀorts The following is a list of PCWA planned projects related to the co-equal objectives of the Water Forum.

These include both structural and non-structural projects.

Page 569 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Placer County Water Agency PSA 243

1. American River Water Rights Extension Project, which includes the following supporting projects:
a. Expanded American River water rights place of use to include the CVP place of use for dry-year supply to EBMUD and other back-up buyers downstream of the conﬂuence with the Sacramento River.
b. Warren Act Contract with Reclamation to provide storage of environmental releases longer than 30-days in Folsom Reservoir and conveyance of water delivered to EBMUD through Folsom South Canal via Freeport Intake (acquired at time of writing this agreement).
c. Enhanced coldwater pool development in Folsom Reservoir by extended storage of environmental releases in Folsom Reservoir, coordinated with the Water Forum and Reclamation.

2. Ecological Forest Health – PCWA is partnering with a diverse group of stakeholders to implement the French Meadows Forest Restoration Project, which is a 28,800 -acre collaborative forest health project intended to reduce wildﬁre risk in the upper Middle Fo rk American River watershed. In an eﬀort to build upon the momentum of the French Meadows Project, PCWA, and several partners, has recently embarked on the Long Canyon Watershed Restoration Project. The Long Canyon Project will use proven forest health and fuels reduction treatments on 16,500 acres in an area near other public and private forest health projects that together provide landscape-level wildﬁre resilience in upper American River watershed.

3. RiverArc Project – PCWA is a partner and the administrator of the RiverArc Project. This project is a proposed regional treated water supply that will construct a new treatment plant and pipelines using an existing diversion on the Sacramento River. This project is intended to shift regional reliance on water supply from the American River to the Sacramento River.

RiverArc is a project that was originated in the Water Forum, with current partners including Sacramento County Water Agency, the City of Sacramento, the City of Roseville, and PCWA.

Other regional water suppliers may join the project in the future.

4. Conservation Programs
a. Treated Water Conservation – PCWA was the ﬁrst water purveyor in the Water Forum to comply with the best management practices of the Urban Water Conservation Council and currently has an EPA WaterSense award-winning program.

PCWA complied with its Senate Bill 7x-7 target of 20% conservation and is preparing for compliance with the regulation resulting from the Conservation as a California Way of Life program.
b. Untreated Water Conservation – Nominally 50% of PCWA’s water use is used for agriculture in its service area. This agriculture is served by an extensive canal system of 170 miles that includes ﬂow control devices, elevated ﬂumes, and “spills” that return water to the watershed at the end of each canal. Though most of this water supply comes from PCWA’s Yuba River source, water conservation is taken very

Page 570 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Placer County Water Agency PSA 244
seriously. PCWA has installed lining to prevent seepage and ﬂow control automation to minimizing spilling, thus reducing water loss in the canal system. c. Looking at the last decade, PCWA is serving a population of 30% more people with 25% less water supply as a result of these conservation programs. The source of this comparison is PCWA’s 2023 year-end report, comparing 2013 to 2023.

5. County-Wide Masterplan – PCWA implemented a County-Wide Masterplan to meet its statutory obligation to support sustainable resource management and water supply needs throughout Placer County. This plan is a process for supporting the development of projects and seeking funding to implement them, organized into eight elements as follows:
a. Unserved Areas
b. Water Infrastructure Reliability
c. Water Supply Reliability
d. Renewable Energy Development
e. Watershed Stewardship
f. Agriculture
g. Conservation and Water Use Eﬃciency
h. Public Education and Outreach
This masterplan is a “living” database of projects that are entered by stakeholders county-wide, thus creating a transparent process for implementation. Funding sources include state and federal grants and PCWA funding from water transfers and net revenues from hydropower sales. Projects include those within PCWA’s service area and the service areas of other public water agencies throughout the Placer County.

6. Placer County Conservation Program (PCCP) – The PCCP will set aside natural lands as a mitigation in balance with proposed development and other activities in western Placer County. This program is being implemented by a Joint Powers Authority of member entities.

The PCCP includes permitting and mitigation for Endangered Species Act (federal), Natural Community and Conservation Planning Act (state), and Clean Water Act (federal). It is the most comprehensive Habitat Conservation Program in the nation. Permit and mitigation fees go to purchase of set-aside properties within the program area. a. Land Development – The demarcation of natural lands and proposed land development has been established in western Placer County under this program. b. PCWA Canal System – PCWA’s canal operations, including projects such as canal lining, have been permitted under the PCCP .
c. PCWA Infrastructure – Certain proposed PCWA treated water infrastructure, including the Ophir Water Treatment Plant and west Placer County transmission main have been permitted under the PCCP .

Page 571 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Placer County Water Agency PSA 245

7. Groundwater:
a. Conjunctive use – In the 2000 Water Forum Agreement, PCWA committed to the sale of American River surface water to SSWD to help recover groundwater levels in the North American Subbasin (NASb). This provision was for “normal” and “wet” years, as deﬁned by Folsom Reservoir Unimpaired Inﬂow, for the ﬁrst ten years of the agreement, and only wet years thereafter. PCWA will continue in this commitment for any willing buyer in the Sacramento County portion of PCWA’s American River water rights place of use, subject to PCWA having adequate water for its service area, adequate storage in MFP reservoirs, and agreeable terms with the buyer.
b. PCWA could expand the geographic extent of selling American River surface water in wet years by expansion of its place of use beyond the current extent in north Sacramento County. This expansion could cover the entire NASb, or beyond that boundary if desired for expanded conjunctive use.
c. Prohibition on use for new development – The County of Placer has a General Plan policy prohibiting groundwater as a sole source of water supply for new development in western Placer County. This policy exists for two reasons: to protect groundwater levels of the NASb and to encourage vesting in the use of MFP supply that was bonded and paid for by the people of Placer County. Groundwater may be used as a backup source in drought years, as described in PCWA’s Urban Water Management Plan. This policy has resulted in stable groundwater levels in Placer County, evidenced by levels relative to Sacramento and Sutter counties. PCWA supports this policy by working with developers in the planning and investment towards water supply infrastructure.

8. Wholesale Water Supply Contracts – PCWA provides both Yuba River and American River water to wholesale customers in its Zone 6 service area of western Placer County and within the American River water rights place of use. Wholesale service is provided pursuant to individually negotiated water supply contracts with the following:
a. City of Roseville, as amended on May 18, 2023, 30,000 to 44,000 AFY via Folsom Reservoir.
b. SJWD, as amended on April 17, 2025, 10,000 AFY via Folsom Reservoir. c. SSWD, as amended on November 16, 2020, 8,000 AFY via Folsom Reservoir. d. EBMUD, as amended on July 30, 2018, 47,000 AFY via Sacramento River at Freeport. e. City of Lincoln, December 10, 2012, 35,986 AFY via treated water deliveries8. f. California American Water, July 6, 2025, 10,825 AFY via treated water deliveries8. g. Small water systems throughout PCWA’s Zone 6 service area, 2,971 AFY via untreated and treated water deliveries.62

62 These wholesale demands are the amounts provided by PCWA’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan.

Page 572 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Placer County Water Agency PSA 246

Attachment 1: Lookup Table of Environmental Flow Releases (AF)

Folsom Mar-Nov Unimpaired Flow Projection (TAF)
400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950
PCWA and Roseville Combined Diversion above 1995 Baseline (AF) 0 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 1,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 2,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 3,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 4,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 5,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 6,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 7,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 8,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 9,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 11,000 11,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 12,000 12,000 10,909 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 13,000 13,000 11,818 10,636 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 14,000 14,000 12,727 11,455 10,182 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 15,000 15,000 13,636 12,273 10,909 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 16,000 16,000 14,545 13,091 11,636 10,182 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 17,000 17,000 15,455 13,909 12,364 10,818 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 18,000 18,000 16,364 14,727 13,091 11,455 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 19,000 19,000 17,273 15,545 13,818 12,091 10,364 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 20,000 20,000 18,182 16,364 14,545 12,727 10,909 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 21,000 21,000 19,091 17,182 15,273 13,364 11,455 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 22,000 22,000 20,000 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 23,000 23,000 20,909 18,818 16,727 14,636 12,545 10,455 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 24,000 24,000 21,818 19,636 17,455 15,273 13,091 10,909 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 25,000 25,000 22,727 20,455 18,182 15,909 13,636 11,364 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 26,000 26,000 23,636 21,273 18,909 16,545 14,182 11,818 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 27,000 27,000 24,545 22,091 19,636 17,182 14,727 12,273 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 28,000 28,000 25,455 22,909 20,364 17,818 15,273 12,727 10,182 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 29,000 29,000 26,364 23,727 21,091 18,455 15,818 13,182 10,545 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 30,000 30,000 27,273 24,545 21,818 19,091 16,364 13,636 10,909 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 31,000 31,000 28,182 25,364 22,545 19,727 16,909 14,091 11,273 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 32,000 32,000 29,091 26,182 23,273 20,364 17,455 14,545 11,636 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 33,000 33,000 30,000 27,000 24,000 21,000 18,000 15,000 12,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 34,000 34,000 30,909 27,818 24,727 21,636 18,545 15,455 12,364 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 35,000 35,000 31,818 28,636 25,455 22,273 19,091 15,909 12,727 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 36,000 36,000 32,727 29,455 26,182 22,909 19,636 16,364 13,091 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 37,000 37,000 33,636 30,273 26,909 23,545 20,182 16,818 13,455 10,091 10,000 10,000 10,000 38,000 38,000 34,545 31,091 27,636 24,182 20,727 17,273 13,818 10,364 10,000 10,000 10,000 39,000 39,000 35,455 31,909 28,364 24,818 21,273 17,727 14,182 10,636 10,000 10,000 10,000 40,000 40,000 36,364 32,727 29,091 25,455 21,818 18,182 14,545 10,909 10,000 10,000 10,000 41,000 41,000 37,273 33,545 29,818 26,091 22,364 18,636 14,909 11,182 10,000 10,000 10,000 42,000 42,000 38,182 34,364 30,545 26,727 22,909 19,091 15,273 11,455 10,000 10,000 10,000 43,000 43,000 39,091 35,182 31,273 27,364 23,455 19,545 15,636 11,727 10,000 10,000 10,000 44,000 44,000 40,000 36,000 32,000 28,000 24,000 20,000 16,000 12,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 45,000 45,000 40,909 36,818 32,727 28,636 24,545 20,455 16,364 12,273 10,000 10,000 10,000 46,000 46,000 41,818 37,636 33,455 29,273 25,091 20,909 16,727 12,545 10,000 10,000 10,000 47,000 47,000 42,727 38,455 34,182 29,909 25,636 21,364 17,091 12,818 10,000 10,000 10,000

Page 573 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Placer County Water Agency PSA 247

Attachment 2: Letter of Support for Petition for Extension of Time with State Water Resources Control Board
Letter continues
on next page.

Page 574 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Placer County Water Agency PSA 248

Attachment 2: Letter of Support for Petition for Extension of Time with State Water Resources Control Board

Page 575 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Sacramento County Water Agency PSA 249

Sacramento County Water Agency
Purveyor Specific Agreement
Updated: January 8, 2026
Purveyor Background
Sacramento County Water Agency (SCWA) encompasses seven service areas and provides retail water service to 70,000 residential and commercial customers in Sacramento County. SCWA also wholesales water to Elk Grove Water District.

SCWA’s seven service areas are served with a unique set of water supplies including surface water, groundwater, and non-potable (recycled) water. Figure 1 presents a map of each of SCWA’s service areas.

Figure 1. SCWA Service Areas

Page 576 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Sacramento County Water Agency PSA 250

Surface Water and Groundwater Management
Current demands in the SCWA service are close to 40 thousand acre-feet (TAF) per year and are expected to grow to just below 80 TAF/year by 2045 (though the updated regulations on water use eﬃciency will need to be considered). The most recent estimates for buildout predict a total demand of 102,400 acre- feet per year (AFY) in the year 2052. Table 1 summarizes SCWA annual demands.

Table 1. SCWA Demands (Nearest TAF Annually)
Current 2045 2052
Demand 40 80 102
The highest surface water availability on a yearly basis is calculated in the 2016 Water System Infrastructure Plan (WSIP) at 89,000 AFY with the lowest being 32,100 AFY . The long-term annual average is 71,858 AFY . Any demand not made up by surface water is ﬁrst made up with recycled water (up to 3,300 AFY at buildout) and ﬁnally groundwater. Table 2 is extracted from Table 4-3, Zone 40 Water Supply Portfolio, in the 2016 WSIP .

Table 2. Surface Water Availability (AFY)
Wet/Average Year Drier Year Driest year Long-term average 89,300 43,350 32,100 71,858
Below is a list of the SCWA service areas outside of Zone 40 and a general description of current supplies. A summary is provided as Table 3.
• Metro Air Park: Water supply delivered from the City of Sacramento to meet current demands of approximately 125 acre-feet and 2045 demands of approximately 5,715 acre-feet. o City of Sacramento Wholesale/Wheeling Agreement - Metro Air Park (1.1 TAF) • Northgate 880: Water supply is derived from SCWA’s groundwater supplies to meet current demands of approximately 1,345 acre-feet and 2045 demands of approximately 1,365 acre-feet. • Arden Park Vista: Water supply is derived from SCWA’s groundwater supplies to meet current demands of approximately 3,560 acre-feet and 2045 demands of 3,217 acre-feet. • Southwest Tract: Water supply is derived from a water supply contract with California American Water to meet current demands of approximately 30 acre-feet and 2045 demands of approximately 24 acre-feet.
o Contract with California American Water is for 30 acre-feet per year • Hood Water Maintenance District: The Hood Water Maintenance District service area water supply is entirely derived from SCWA’s groundwater supplies to meet current demands of approximately 30 acre-feet and 2045 demands projected to be 31 acre-feet. • East Walnut Grove: The East Walnut Grove service area water supply is entirely derived from SCWA’s groundwater supplies to meet current demands of approximately 60 acre-feet and projected 2045 demands of 56 acre-feet.

Page 577 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Sacramento County Water Agency PSA 251

Table 3. Summary of Service Area Descriptions
Service Area Demand (af/yr) Supplies Current 2045
Metro Air Park 125 5,715 City of Sacramento Contract
Northgate 880 1,345 1,365 Groundwater
Arden Park Vista 3,560 3,217 Groundwater
Southwest Tract 30 24 Cal Am Contract
Hood Water Maintenance District 30 31 Groundwater
East Walnut Grove 60 56 Groundwater
Self-supplied groundwater is the sole source of water served in all areas where a contract or entitlement is unavailable. Most of these areas are legacy systems that were taken over by SCWA and are at or near buildout.

Zone 40 Demand and Supply
Below is a general description of Zone 40 and its supplies.

Zone 40 has multiple sources of surface water and remediated groundwater taken through the Freeport Regional Water Authority (FRWA) intake and pipeline and treated at Vineyard Surface Water Treatment Plant (VSWTP), recycled water, and groundwater to meet customer demands (Table 4). • Zone 40 potable water supplies consist of three water rights from the Sacramento River, two Central Valley Project contracts, a contract for remediated groundwater with Aerojet, a contract supply from North Delta Water Agency, and groundwater supplies to meet current demands of approximately 37,620 acre-feet and 2045 demands of 74,388 acre-feet. • Zone 40 non-potable supplies consist of a contract for recycled water supplies from Sacramento Area Sewer District to meet current non-potable demands of approximately 962 acre-feet and 2045 demands of approximately 3,300 acre-feet.

Table 4. Zone 40 Demand (AFY)
Service Area Current 2045
Zone 40 37,620 74,388
Surface Water and Groundwater taken as Surface Water Available in Zone 40 includes:
• Appropriative Water Right Permit 21209 (71 TAF)
• Central Valley Project, SMUD Contract (30 TAF)
• Central Valley Project, Fazio Contract (15 TAF)
• Aerojet Groundwater Extraction and Treatment (GET) Water—remediated Groundwater taken as Surface Water (8.9 TAF)
• License 1062 (805 AF) (Airport Water Right)
• License 4060 (101 AF) (Airport Water Right)
• North Delta Water Agency Contract (450 AF)
• Recycled Water (3.9 TAF)

Page 578 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Sacramento County Water Agency PSA 252

• Southern California Water Company Water - Emergency Supply – (1.6 TAF) • City of Sacramento American River Place of Use (Small Overlap Area – Volume Determined by Demands in Area)
It is evident that the SCWA service area with the largest demand, by far, is the Zone 40 area. The Zone 40 Water Supply Master Plan details operational policy for the area. Groundwater is the last supply source used with preference to surface and recycled water when feasible. SCWA is beginning the process to update the Zone 40 Water Supply Master Plan as of the writing of this Purvey Speciﬁc Agreement (PSA).

Any Zone 40 Water Supply Master Plan will be available to the public for review. The Master Plan is available from SCWA.

Historical SCWA Contributions to the Co-Equal Objectives Since the signing of the original Water Forum Agreement, SCWA has invested heavily in supporting the Water Forum co-equal objectives through investment in its conjunctive use system as described in the 2000 Water Forum Agreement PSA. Conjunctive use is practiced in the largest SCWA service area – Zone

40. The investment and continued partnership in the FRWA intake on the Sacramento River and accompanying VSWTP have been a costly undertaking both for current and future customers in Zone 40.

The FRWA intake is located downstream of the American River conﬂuence and, when opportunities arise, allows for American River water to be diverted after it has traveled the full distance of the Lower American River (LAR), thus allowing this water to be used for LAR corridor health.

Introduction of surface water into the Zone 40 area has directly beneﬁted groundwater elevations in the South American Subbasin. Figure 2 shows the 20 Year Groundwater Level Trends, the green dots indicating increasing groundwater elevations. The map clearly shows that there is a positive trend in groundwater levels in the SCWA service area since the startup of VSWTP and the FRWA intake. This is also in stark contrast to the trends in other parts of the State of California.

Figure 2. 20-Year Groundwater Level Trends

Page 579 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Sacramento County Water Agency PSA 253

SCWA is proud to have met the commitments of its 2000 PSA. Along with the partnership of the caucuses in the Water Forum, the will of the SCWA Board, partnership with East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) through FRWA, investment by current customers, and investment by the development community ensured that there were resulting positive eﬀects.

SCWA has developed a Water Shortage Contingency Plan which addresses the requirements in California Water Code Section 10632 of the Urban Water Management Planning Act. The Water Shortage Contingency Plan may be used by SCWA to address water shortages as they may arise. See the plan, located on SCWA’s website, for an up-to-date list of Water Shortage Stages and Suggested Actions.

Along with SCWA speciﬁc investments, SCWA has also been a major ﬁnancial contributor to the Water Forum Successor Eﬀort and Habitat Management Eﬀort since signing the 2000 Water Forum Agreement.

There have been many projects in and around the LAR that beneﬁted from this funding.

SCWA Surface Water Framework
SCWA’s supply portfolio and location oﬀers unique opportunities to support the Water Forum coequal objectives moving forward. This section reviews those opportunities and describes the proposed framework for commitments related to surface water diversions.

SCWA Opportunities in Water Forum 2050
Opportunities in Zone 40
The FRWA intake facility has a total capacity of 185 MGD while SCWA’s capacity in the facility is 85 million-gallons-per-day (MGD) (equivalent to approximately 95 TAF/year). SCWA has a design treatment capacity of 50 MGD (permitted for 60 MGD at the very upper limit of production) at the VSWTP (equivalent to approximately 56 TAF/year and 67 TAF/year, respectively). Plans include expanding the VSWTP to 100 MGD capacity (112 TAF/year) but this investment is at least 10 years in the future.

Additionally, SCWA has an agreement with the City of Sacramento for ﬁrm capacity of 11 MGD at the Franklin Intertie (12 TAF/year). Table 5 presents a summary of these capacities.

Table 5. Zone 40 Major Surface Water Facilities Capacity Facility Capacity (MGD)
Current Buildout
Freeport Diversion (FRWA) SCWA Share 85 85
Freeport Diversion (FRWA) Total Capacity 185 185
Vineyard WTP Capacity 50/60 100
Franklin Intertie (City of Sacramento) 11 11
In 2023, SCWA’s maximum day surface water production was 31 MGD. 2023 was an unconstrained year and SCWA had full access to its surface water entitlements.

In dry times, SCWA faces surface water curtailments. In the summer of 2022, SCWA had no Central Valley Project water available and Term 91 was in eﬀect, so the Permit 21209 water right was curtailed. This curtailment was based on statewide conditions, despite near average precipitation in the American River watershed. During this time, SCWA was only able to operate the VSWTP part time since the only water supplies available were the smaller, more senior water rights and Aerojet GET water. The vast majority of

Page 580 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Sacramento County Water Agency PSA 254

the SCWA capacity in the FRWA intake and VSWTP plant was unused during this time. SCWA met the majority its demands with groundwater. If SCWA had access to surface water there would have been an opportunity to deliver surface water to customers rather than groundwater, which would have beneﬁtted the groundwater basin. Additionally, since the FRWA intake is located downstream of the conﬂuence of the LAR and the Sacramento River, any American River surface water deliveries would have travelled down the LAR providing beneﬁt to the entirety of the LAR by improving ﬂow conditions. The potential beneﬁts for the LAR could be especially signiﬁcant in years like 2021 when precipitation across the state (including the American River watershed) was exceptionally low through the summer months.

Flows in the LAR in the summer of 2021 were very low, and river temperatures were dangerously warm due to the extended drought conditions. Additional LAR ﬂows, in the form of cold water from upstream or Folsom storage, could have been beneﬁcial if coordinated and timed based on the needs of the river.

Given the junior nature of the majority of SCWA’s surface water entitlements there is capacity available at the FRWA intake and through the VSWTP that could be used to meet SCWA demands. There may be partnership opportunities that could take advantage of this situation to move both more and colder surface water through the LAR.

Any decision to take additional surface water in partnership with others in the region would have to include aﬀordability as a parameter.

The opportunities for SCWA, in its Zone 40 service area, to contribute to both Water Forum co-equal objectives of water supply reliability and river corridor health, while adhering to the guiding principles for surface water diversions are stated below:

1. Increased surface water diversions at the FRWA intake at times when additional ﬂow could help the LAR or beneﬁt the co-equal objectives.
o Utilize partnership opportunities.
 Support the City of Folsom as they explore a partnership which could add reliability to the regional water supply system as well as allow more ﬂow in the LAR. SCWA commits to supporting the eﬀort from a technical perspective as well as working on the aﬀordability of the partnership.
 Support Golden State Water Company with any future planning that could involve partnership and FRWA. SCWA will continue to work on upgraded intertie projects as well as other opportunities as they arise.
 Continue partnership with the City of Sacramento. This partnership has been critical to Bay Delta processes. SCWA and the City of Sacramento have a formal agreement to work together to provide environmental surface water ﬂows as a part of the Regional Water Authority American River Terms for Ecosystem Support and Infrastructure Assistance Needs (ARTESIAN) Project Agreement.

SCWA commits to continuing to foster this partnership and working together to continue to have positive eﬀects on the co-equal objectives. SCWA and the City of Sacramento have removed some barriers to partnership by working on aﬀordability of wholesale supplies, trading of water, and encouraging surface

Page 581 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 S acramento County Water Agency PSA 255

water use above and beyond what would be required to provide environmental ﬂows through groundwater substitution.
 SCWA will continue its partnership with EBMUD. Both are a part of the FRWA Board. SCWA will continue to work with EBMUD on projects that support the coequal objectives such as supporting partnerships that EBMUD develops with others to move more water through the LAR at times those additional ﬂows are a beneﬁt.
 SCWA will continue its partnership with California American Water, working to expand wholesale water delivery to the water company from SCWA’s conjunctive use system.
 SCWA will look to expand partnerships with upstream purveyors to establish projects that could beneﬁt Water Forum co-equal objectives and make full use of the FRWA intake and the SCWA system.2. P
rioritize surface water diversions in wet conditions to allow groundwater recharge. o Eﬀectively this means taking surface water to the maximum extent possible when it is av
ailable.

3. As of 2025, SCWA is piloting an Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) well located on the same parcel as the VSWTP . While SCWA can supply potable water sustainably to its customers today and through buildout, SCWA is looking at ASR opportunities to expand system storage i n
pr
eparation for climate change impacts into the future.

Opportunities Outside of Zone 40
Opportunities exist outside of Zone 40 in the groundwater-supplied service areas where a potential partner is close. For example, there could be the possibility of partnerships that would supply the Northgate 880 and Arden Park service areas with surface water. Entitlements that had a place of use to cover these areas would need to exist and interties would need to be built. Aﬀordability would be a major concern.

Demand Management
SCWA currently lists Water Eﬃciency and Conservation requirements on its website. Some of these include the following:
• SCWA limits the outdoor water schedule of its customers’ lawns and landscapes to certain days based upon street address.
• SCWA recommends water eﬃciency actions such as Stress Your Lawn, Save Your Trees; Check Soil Moisture; Water Plants Early; Transition to a Low-Water Garden; and the overarching B e
W
ater Wise program.
• SCWA currently provides rebates such as Cash for Grass, High Eﬃciency Clothes Washers, High Eﬃciency Toilets.
• SCWA also asks customers to report water waste through the website and provides a discount on the customer’s bill for low water usage.

Page 582 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Sacramento County Water Agency PSA 256

Finally, SCWA maintains a Water Shortage Contingency Plan which details conservation actions to be taken when diﬀerent stages of conservation are required.

Changes in regulations, such as those in the Making Conservation a California Way of Life regulation, have occurred and will continue to change during the life of this agreement. SCWA is legally bound to follow the regulations and SCWA commits to working to meet these requirements. The Making Conservation a California Way of Life regulation will likely require SCWA customers to limit the use of water per the regulation.

SCWA commits to thoroughly exploring the topic of demand management through the Master Plan update process. Part of the scope of work of the update will be to project demands moving forward, compare them to the regulatory requirements, and assess if additional work needs to be done to lower demands. SCWA’s goal would be to develop and implement a cost-eﬀective plan to meet its legal requirements while also providing for the livability of the community and keeping potable water as aﬀordable as possible to the end users.

Framework Summary
This section summarizes the SCWA proposal for Water Forum 2050 commitments related to surface water diversions in terms of their contributions to the coequal objectives and proposed investments (projects).

Contributions to River Corridor Health
• Reduce direct surface water diversions on the LAR by taking water at FRWA. o The FRWA facilities oﬀer a unique opportunity in dry years. When water resources are scarce, and other purveyors may be reducing diversions to allow ﬂow down the American River for out-of-basin transfers and/or relying more heavily on groundwater resources, SCWA can continue to take water at Freeport to alleviate potential stress on the groundwater basin while also allowing surface water to provide ﬂow and temperature beneﬁts for the LAR. Future opportunities would rely on partnerships with other agencies to ensure there are buyers and sellers of water available for any transfers. • Continued long-term funding for the Habitat Management Element (HME) and the Water Forum Successor Eﬀort (WFSE) has been a crucial factor for supporting healthy and viable conditions for LAR salmonids through the installation of critical habitat and development of the Flow Management Standard.

Contributions to Water Supply Reliability
• Reduced dependence on groundwater
o This has been implemented as part of the commitments of the original WFA and the completion of FRWA.
• Delivery of surface water supplies to other service areas.

Future SCWA Projects and Investments
• Regional Water Transfers and Agreements (partnerships)

Page 583 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Sacramento County Water Agency PSA 257

o Ensure aﬀordability in all hydrologic conditions
• Investments in Water Supply Infrastructure
o Improved interties
o Improved groundwater infrastructure including possible ASR o Expand treatment capacity at VSWTP
o Provide surface water supplies to groundwater-only service areas o Continue planning level investment in the RiverArc (or similar northern Sacramento County surface water diversion) project.
o Potential infrastructure to connect existing outlying service areas.

Water Forum Commitments to SCWA
Full Endorsement of the following, including letters of support:
• Support Protection of Existing Surface Water Entitlements Including:
o Signatories will support the continued use of Permit 21209 as an important means to supporting the coequal objectives, speciﬁcally groundwater management and the protection of the LAR. SCWA intends to continue to use Permit 21209 surface water when available to support the coequal objectives and to sustain the groundwater table.

Use of these supplies is often more expensive than groundwater but may be essential to managing groundwater objectives, including drought reserves to be available during curtailments. If the State Water Board or the Legislature proposes global changes to water rights, each Water Forum member may decide what position to take on the proposal without rescinding agreed-upon support for the use of Permit 21209 as an important means to supporting the coequal objectives.
o Signatories will support the use of higher cost surface water supplies when available to build historic use so that groundwater will be available during curtailments. This will require SCWA to continue to use the surface water when it meets the co-equal objectives to build historic use as well as to rest the groundwater table. Use of these supplies is more expensive than groundwater.
• Signatories will support the following Capital Projects which are described in the WSIP and contemplated in the 2005 WSMP or amendments to serve lands within the Urban Services Boundary (as of 12/1/2025) and have completed the CEQA process (before 12/1/2025). No Capital project endorsement is considered Full Endorsement if it wasn’t listed as a capital project in the existing 2016 WSIP .
o Expansion of VSWTP to 100 MGD. The FRWA intake and VSWTP were developed to leave ﬂows in the American River to protect the LAR and the Parkway. Water is diverted downstream of the conﬂuence of the American River and Sacramento River, oﬀ the Sacramento River, at the FRWA intake and treated at the VSWTP to meet potable

Page 584 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Sacramento County Water Agency PSA 258

demands in the Zone 40 area. Expansion of the VSWTP to its ultimate capacity is essential to continue the project to the ultimate extent envisioned in the original Water Forum Agreement.
o Expansion of the Agency’s Transmission Main and water production system, including the North Service Area (NSA) Phase B pipeline project and NSA Terminal Tank Facility, as described in the 2005 Zone 40 Water Supply Master Plan (including amendments up to November of 2025) and further reﬁned in the 2016 Zone 40 Water System Infrastructure Plan to allow surface water to eﬃciently ﬂow to service areas within Zone 40. • SCWA agrees that the Capital Improvement List in the 2016 Zone 40 Water System Infrastructure Plan that is fully endorsed is the one that existed in 2016. Any updates to the capital improvement list will not have full endorsement.
• Signatories will support investment and funding for projects and programs through equitable and fair rates and fees required to honor commitments in this PSA and support the coequal objectives.

Conceptual Endorsement of the following, meaning a commitment by signatories to explore the ideas:
• River Arc Project
• Support for SCWA’s participation in the Water Bank and expansion of conjunctive use • Support for implementation of the South American and North American Groundwater Sustainability Plans
• Partnerships that expand water availability for use through FRWA including expansion of existing entitlement place of use, changes in point of diversion to include FRWA, etc. • Additional interties between partner agencies to expand conjunctive use in the region. • Additional surface water entitlements, either procured or by contract through partnerships.

Page 585 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Sacramento Municipal Utility District PSA 259

Sacramento Municipal Utility District
Purveyor Specific Agreement
Updated: January 8, 2026
Purveyor Background
The Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) serves electricity to most electricity users in Sacramento County and small portions of Yolo and Placer Counties.

SMUD’s core value of environmental leadership is a guiding principle that drives eﬀorts to minimize impacts and encompass all aspects of SMUD operations. These principles support collaborations with the Water Forum and their referenced coequal objectives.

In the 1950s and 60s, SMUD developed a system of reservoirs on the tributaries to the south and middle forks of the American River for power generation. SMUD also developed Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station in the southeastern part of Sacramento County, which was later decommissioned, with Cosumnes Power Plant (CPP) later being constructed nearby. The CPP uses American River water for thermal power generation. SMUD maintains Rancho Seco Lake onsite, which serves as a backup water supply for the CPP .

In 1970, SMUD entered a Water Service Contract (WSC) with U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) for delivery of up to 60,000 acre-feet per year (AFY) of CVP water for municipal and industrial use. In 2006, with concurrence by USBR, SMUD assigned Sacramento County Water Agency (SCWA) the right, title, and interest on a portion of SMUD’s Central Valley Project (CVP) contract consisting of 30,000 AFY . The assignment allowed SCWA rights to renew the contract. The original SMUD WSC agreement expired in 2012 but was replaced by a repayment CVP contract (which does not expire). SMUD currently has a repayment contract with USBR for 30,000 AFY .

The point of diversion for SMUD’s entitlement is the Folsom South Canal. SMUD does not have a current need for this entitlement, though it could require the full amount depending on future energy generation-related needs. Unless or until SMUD determines that it should make a permanent transfer of that entitlement, SMUD may choose to make temporary transfers and any water that would otherwise be diverted under that entitlement will presumably be released by USBR to other entitlement holders or for other beneﬁcial purposes. If SMUD is considering water transfers that are expected to reduce ﬂows in the lower American River, the transfer will be disclosed to the Water Forum.

Page 586 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Sacramento Municipal Utility District PSA 260

The Folsom South Canal is located approximately 3.6 miles west of the SMUD Rancho Seco property. The Canal is a 26.98-mile conveyance owned and operated by USBR as part of the CVP . The canal typically operates at less than 1 percent of its hydraulic capacity and traverses generally south from Lake Natoma on the American River in eastern Sacramento County to a pumping plant owned and operated by East Bay Municipal Utility District. In terms of overall volume conveyed, SMUD is the primary user of the Folsom South Canal, which supplies both the Cosumnes Power Plant and Rancho Seco Lake.

Rancho Seco Lake is an oﬀ-stream storage reservoir located approximately one mile east and upstream of Cosumnes Power Plant. The lake is kept full year-round with Folsom South Canal water and incidental rainfall runoﬀ. Water is delivered through a turnout located approximately 700 feet upstream from the Laguna Creek siphon, on the Folsom-South Canal. Water from the turnout is pumped east through a 3.2- mile long, 66-inch diameter pipeline to the Rancho Seco site, and other pipelines convey water to Rancho Seco Lake and CPP .

Rancho Seco Lake is a small reservoir near Clay Creek. The surface area of Rancho Seco Reservoir is approximately 165 acres and is contained by an earthen dam constructed in 1972. The reservoir has a capacity of 2,850 acre-feet (AF). The maximum dam height is approximately 60 feet, total length is 1,800 feet, and crest width is 28 feet. The dam was designed and constructed to standards established by the State of California, which include consideration for earthquake and extreme ﬂood events.

Surface Water Management
Current Diversions
During the last 10 years, SMUD’s diversions from the American River for consumptive purposes have ranged from 6,131 AF in 2013 to 3,674 AF in 2023. These diversions could increase should SMUD decide to reoperate the CPP to use alternative fuels that have a greater water demand or undertake other power generation related projects with a consumptive demand, including but not limited to hydrogen production or alternative renewable generation. SMUD has also made temporary assignments of its entitlement to the City of Roseville. SMUD will continue to explore and participate in assignments, transfers, and similar arrangements.

Future Projected Diversions
It is diﬃcult to predict how much water SMUD will divert and use over time. SMUD’s current diversions could increase should SMUD decide to reoperate the CPP to use alternative fuels that have a greater water demand or undertake other power generation related projects with a consumptive demand, including but not limited to hydrogen production or alternative renewable generation. SMUD has also made temporary assignments of its entitlement to the City of Roseville. SMUD will continue to explore and participate in assignments, transfers, and similar arrangements.

Drier Conditions Management
In drier years, any assignments of SMUD’s water service entitlement will be subject to USBR’s available supply. The CPP will need to operate during drier years to meet critical local and regional electrical demands. In fact, the need to operate the CPP could increase in drier years due to dry year reductions in hydroelectric supply or potentially higher temperatures leading to increased use of air conditioning.

Page 587 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Sacramento Municipal Utility District PSA 261

Driest Conditions Management
During driest conditions, any assignments of SMUD’s water service entitlement will be subject to USBR’s available supply. The CPP will need to operate during drier years to meet critical local and regional electrical demands. In fact, the need to operate the CPP could increase in drier years due to dry year reductions in hydroelectric supply or potentially higher temperatures leading to increased use of air conditioning.

Critically Low Storage Conditions
In critically low storage years, any assignments of SMUD’s water service entitlement will be subject to USBR’s available supply. The CPP will need to operate during critically low storage conditions years to meet critical local and regional electrical demands. In fact, the need to operate the CPP could increase in drier years due to dry year reductions in hydroelectric supply or potentially higher temperatures leading to increased use of air conditioning.

However, it is recognized that in years when the projected unimpaired inﬂow to Folsom Reservoir is less than 750,000 AF there may not be suﬃcient water available to provide the purveyors with the driest years’ quantities speciﬁed in their agreements and provide the expected driest years’ ﬂows to the mouth of the American River. In those years, SMUD will participate in a conference with other stakeholders on how the available water should be managed. It is also worth noting that the CPP depends on the Folsom South Canal for its water supply. The pumping station needs a canal level of 107 feet at its intake. This requirement, as well as others, would be discussed in stakeholder conferences mentioned above.

Project List
Non-Structural Projects
• Water transfer agreement with Roseville for 2,000 AFY (through February 2026)

Page 588 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Sacramento Suburban Water District PSA 262

Sacramento Suburban Water District
Purveyor Specific Agreement
Updated: November 26, 2025
Sacramento Suburban Water District (SSWD) is committed to supporting good stewardship of the American River watershed and recommits to its membership in the Water Forum as a model for this eﬀort. SSWD will continue its advocacy for the health of the river through actionable, meaningful eﬀorts supporting cold water carry-over at Folsom reservoir, supporting the Flow Management Standard, habitat restoration eﬀorts and advocacy at the federal level with our U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) partners to balance the co-equal goals. Achieving the co-equal goals requires on-going actions, not just in dry years, to keep the river and groundwater basin healthy and ensure a reliable, safe, and sustainable water supply. Ultimately the Water Forum has endeavored to provide “peace on the river” while knowing that a healthy water supply is reliant upon a healthy river.

Purveyor Background
SSWD was formed on February 1, 2002, under the State of California’s County Water District Law by the consolidation of the Arcade Water District (AWD), established in 1956, and the Northridge Water District (NWD), established in 1958.

The Local Area Formation Commission approved the reorganization of Del Paso Manor Water District (DPMWD), established in 1954, into SSWD as of June 30, 2025. After June 30, 2025, DPMWD ceased to exist and SSWD oﬃcially integrated all aspects of the former district into operations of the SSWD as the Del Paso Manor Service Area (DPMSA). The DPMSA will be operated as a separate water system until the DPMSA system facilities have been suﬃciently rehabilitated and replaced to the same standard as the SSWD water system, and the SSWD Board of Directors determines that the two service areas will be merged and operated as a single water system.

SSWD is in Sacramento County, north of the American River and serves a large suburban area, including portions of Citrus Heights, Carmichael, North Highlands, City of Sacramento (City), Antelope, Arden Arcade, and McClellan Park (formerly McClellan Air Force Base). SSWD’s service area covers approximately 37 square miles (23,690 acres of land) and serves water to an estimated population of 199,298 (based on the 2020 census) through approximately 48,853 service connections, 47,162 of which are metered. There are 1,691 unmetered service connections in the DPMSA that will be metered by 2035. SSWD’s territory is substantially built out. Other than residential and commercial in-ﬁll projects,

Page 589 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Sacramento Suburban Water District PSA 263

and industrial and commercial development at McClellan Park, SSWD does not expect signiﬁcant additional development within its territory.

Water System Facilities
SSWD’s distribution system, including storage, pump stations and interconnections, has approximately 720 miles of pipeline that range in size from 48-inch transmission mains down to 4-inch distribution mains. There are 48 emergency interties with neighboring agencies along SSWD’s service boundary.

SSWD has 6 storage tanks with a collective capacity to hold approximately 15.8 million gallons of water.

SSWD has a total of 7 booster pumping stations, three of which are co-located with major storage tanks.

SSWD pumps its groundwater from approximately 80 permitted groundwater wells. All the groundwater wells pump directly into the distribution system and range between 270 and 1,036 feet deep. SSWD also has facilities to receive treated surface water from Folsom Reservoir and the Lower American River.

Groundwater Wells
SSWD currently has 80 permitted wells in the North American Subbasin (NASb) that are connected to the potable water system, with a current production capacity of approximately 125 million gallons per day (MGD).

SSWD is, by regulation, 100% reliant on groundwater to ensure continuous supply to its customers.

Therefore, SSWD must maintain groundwater production capacity necessary to meet 100% of its customers’ needs. SSWD’s groundwater wells and storage facilities are capable of producing 100% of SSWD’s annual water demand.

SSWD pumps from the NASb, which is jointly managed on behalf of SSWD and other municipal pumpers by the Sacramento Groundwater Authority under a Groundwater Sustainability Plan adopted consistent with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). SSWD works with other groundwater pumpers in the basin to sustainably manage groundwater supply consistent with SGMA.

Surface Water
In addition to groundwater, SSWD imports surface water, when available, from two supply sources:

Folsom Reservoir and the Lower American River. SSWD has no surface water rights, but has two contractual entitlements to surface water, one from the Placer County Water Agency (PCWA) for up to 29,000 acre-feet and one from the City for up to 26,064 acre-feet.

When available, SSWD purchases surface water from PCWA supplied from the Middle Fork American River and delivered to Folsom Reservoir. The PCWA water is treated by San Juan Water District (SJWD) at the Peterson Water Treatment Plant pursuant to contract and then conveyed through purchased pipeline capacity in the Cooperative Transmission Pipeline and District-owned transmission pipelines into SSWD’s water distribution system in the North Service Area. SSWD also purchases surface water when available from the City supplied from the Lower American River, which is diverted and treated by the City at its E.A. Fairbairn Water Treatment Plant and conveyed through purchased and District-owned pipeline capacity for distribution to customers in SSWD’s South Service Area.

In addition to the two contractual entitlements, SSWD purchases Central Valley Project Section 215 surface water from USBR under a long-term Warren Act contract when available.

Page 590 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Sacramento Suburban Water District PSA 264

Surface Water and Groundwater Operations
SSWD has no surface water rights.

Contractual Entitlements
As noted, SSWD has two contractual entitlements to surface water, one from the City and one from PCWA. SSWD regularly enters individual annual contracts with USBR to receive surplus Central Valley Project Section 215 water deliveries when available.

One of SSWD’s two predecessor agencies, AWD, entered into an agreement with the City to reserve a water supply for AWD’s service area within the City’s American River Place of Use. That agreement committed a portion of the City’s surface water supplies for future use by AWD, subject to annual payments. After SSWD was formed in 2002, it continued AWD’s payments to the City for the American River Place of Use water supply and AWD’s planning and design of facilities that enabled SSWD to receive treated water from E.A. Fairbairn Water Treatment Plant.

In 2004, SSWD and the City entered into a Wholesale Water Supply Agreement under which the City agreed to supply up to 20 million gallons per day (mgd) of treated surface water to SSWD under the former AWD entitlement. The agreement will continue in full force and eﬀect unless terminated by mutual written agreement of the parties or by operation of law.

In 2000, SSWD’s other predecessor agency, NWD, entered into an agreement to purchase water from PCWA. When SSWD was formed in 2002, it assumed this agreement. The agreement provides that SSWD would buy surface water from PCWA at an increasing volume each year until the maximum contract amount of 29,000 acre-feet per year was reached in 2014 and then maintain this level through the expiration of the agreement in 2025. The PCWA agreement was amended in 2018 to extend its term through 2045. This permitted SSWD to secure a Long-Term Warren Act Contract for the same term (i.e., through 2045) from the USBR to wheel PCWA water supplies through Folsom Reservoir to SJWD for treatment by SJWD and then delivery to SSWD through the Cooperative Transmission Pipeline. The PCWA agreement was further amended in 2020 to reduce SSWD’s annual “take or pay” obligation from 12,000 acre-feet to 8,000 acre-feet, with the provision that if PCWA can make additional water available to SSWD in any year, SSWD has the right to take up to 21,000 acre-feet of additional water in that year.

The PCWA entitlement has limitations.
• American River Flows
o PCWA may not deliver water to SSWD in any year when the March through November unimpaired inﬂow into Folsom Reservoir is less than 1,600,000 acre-feet. o Notwithstanding the foregoing, PCWA may deliver water to SSWD in the following December through February provided water is being released from Folsom Reservoir for purposes of ﬂood protection.
• PCWA Needs
o The agreement is subject to cutback if PCWA needs any portion of the SSWD entitlement to serve PCWA customers in Placer County, or to meet PCWA’s Middle Fork Project power generation obligations to PG&E.

Page 591 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Sacramento Suburban Water District PSA 265

• SSWD Use
o SSWD Customers – SSWD may only use the PCWA water in PCWA’s expanded Place of Use which covers SSWD’s North Service Area.
o Sale and Transfer – SSWD may sell or transfer any portion of its available PCWA entitlement within PCWA’s expanded Place of Use (e.g., to the California American Water Company).

Use
SSWD uses surface water in-lieu of groundwater pumping during water year types or conditions when such supplies can be diverted and used in portions of the SSWD service area when available under PCWA’s and the City’s water rights and it provides beneﬁts to SSWD customers or aids in meeting other local or regional objectives such as in-lieu groundwater recharge, which SSWD actively engages in as part of its Water Forum commitments.

Conjunctive Use Program
As one of the original signatories of the Water Forum Agreement (through its predecessor agency, Northridge Water District), SSWD has operated an active Conjunctive Use Program since 1998. Under this program, SSWD provides treated surface water to its customers under its City and PCWA entitlements in lieu of providing pumped groundwater . This reduces SSWD’s need to extract groundwater, which in turn allows SSWD’s groundwater supplies to be replenished through natural groundwater recharge. This operation is referred to as “in-lieu recharge” or more colloquially as “conjunctive use.”
SSWD’s groundwater wells are in the NASb, which is part of the Sacramento Valley Groundwater Basin.

While groundwater levels normally ﬂuctuate in response to hydrologic conditions, groundwater levels in the NASb declined between 1950 and 2000. There is a regional consensus that this decline was largely the result of excessive groundwater pumping.

Throughout the history of SSWD, investments in its Conjunctive Use Program have had a signiﬁcant eﬀect on bolstering groundwater supplies in the region. By supplementing its supplies with surface water when it is available, SSWD’s groundwater pumping has been reduced, thereby allowing for more groundwater recharge.

SSWD supports maintaining a sustainable groundwater basin in the NASb. Seeking opportunities to recharge groundwater requires focus if the resource is to be present when most needed. SSWD remains cognizant of the need to maintain consistency with local Groundwater Sustainability Plans and meeting the requirements of SGMA.

Water Banking
• SSWD’s in-lieu recharge program has contributed to the regional banking of over 400,000 acre- feet of groundwater since 1998.
• SSWD has banked greater than 245,000 acre-feet of groundwater to improve supply reliability since 2003.
• SSWD ﬁles annual reports with the State Water Resources Control Board to document its eﬀorts to bank groundwater. These eﬀorts have been recognized and substantiated by the State of California Department of Water Resources’ data and reporting.

Page 592 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Sacramento Suburban Water District PSA 266

Aquifer Recovery
• Since 2003, groundwater levels have stabilized in the portion of the NASb from which SSWD pumps water. This was the result, in large part, of an increase in SSWD’s in-lieu recharge practice (i.e., increased surface water purchases by SSWD when available) and enhanced conservation practices on the part of SSWD’s customers spurred by SSWD’s various education and incentive programs.
• Groundwater level recovery, combined with absence of a robust aquifer storage (i.e., direct groundwater recharge) eﬀort in the area, underscore the general eﬀectiveness of conjunctive use programs and in-lieu groundwater banking eﬀorts.
• As demonstrated by historical groundwater level data for the Sacramento Valley, this water supply management strategy reversed the historical trend of groundwater level decline by reducing groundwater pumping to allow the aquifer to naturally stabilize and then begin to recharge.

Demand Management
SSWD’s baseline water usage per capita for the purpose of compliance with Senate Bill (SB) X7-7 was 257 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) for the years 1995-2010, with a 2020 target of 206 gpcd. At the SB X7-7 compliance date of 2020, SSWD customer usage was down to 172 gpcd, meeting the legislative mandate. For the last several years, SSWD’s gpcd has hovered around 143 gpcd. This was achieved through a variety of means, including an accelerated Advanced Meter Infrastructure program and expanded water conservation incentive and outreach eﬀorts.

Moving forward, through the Long Term Water Conservation Framework legislation (SB 606 and Assembly Bill 1668), the State of California created real-time targets for water suppliers, including SSWD, that involve a dramatic water use reduction target over the next 15 years that is tied to a residential indoor water use reduction as well as a landscape water eﬃciency target that involves reporting on landscape water demand as compared to landscape water need (as calculated by the State). This system- wide budget-based water use approach also includes a reduction in water suppliers’ system water loss (gallons per connection per day). To achieve these targets, SSWD anticipates that it will need to dramatically expand customer participation in its programs and anticipates making reﬁnements to existing programs as well as adding programs to achieve these requirements. An analysis and prioritization of potential programs is underway and engagement on this topic with the Water Forum membership is ongoing. Draft and ﬁnal work products will be provided to the Water Forum members.

Current SSWD conservation program elements are advertised on SSWD’s web page:
https://www.sswd.org/departments/conservation
While subject to change, as program eﬀectiveness is evaluated, examples of likely program enhancements beyond existing elements include:
• Monitoring and analysis of meters dedicated solely to irrigation • Expanded rebate programs for all customer classes targeting both indoor and outdoor water eﬃciency eﬀorts
• Enhanced leak repair incentive programs
• Enhanced water and energy partnership rebates

Page 593 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Sacramento Suburban Water District PSA 267

• Enhanced residential water surveys and leak investigations • Enhanced outreach regarding best practices for water eﬃciency and water conservation See “Speciﬁc Demand Management Measures by Water Conservation Stage” in Appendix E of SSWD’s Urban Water Management Plan:
https://www.sswd.org/departments/engineering/reports/urban-water-management-plan SSWD understands that Water Code Section 10632 (a)(3)(A) requires purveyors to plan for reductions of 10%, 20%, 50%, and beyond. SSWD will follow the stages set forth in its Water Shortage Contingency Plan as declared by its Board of Directors based on operational service conditions and water supply availability.

All hyperlinks used within this PSA will be maintained and active for the duration of the agreement, or if changes are made to the online content, the changes will be communicated to the Water Forum and updated links provided.

Current Diversions
N/A
Future Projected Diversions
N/A
Drier Conditions Management
In drier years, SSWD will switch to groundwater in a discretionary fashion to meet customer demands as water resource conditions warrant. Decisions will include, but not are limited to, the need to maintain adequate levels of service, consideration of local surface water resource conditions, groundwater sustainability conditions, and successful outcomes of local banking and extraction program such as the Water Bank or agreements to make water available for the environment (e.g. Healthy Rivers and Landscapes). The surface water supplies available to SSWD (e.g., PCWA, City, USBR) may be subject to signiﬁcant reductions, up to and including curtailment, during dry years (seasonal and climatic shortages).

Based on historical data, SSWD’s water supply available from groundwater has not been impacted by annual hydrology. Groundwater reliability is consistent in all water years and is not subject to vulnerabilities from seasonal and climatic factors. After several consecutive dry years, the groundwater levels may decline, but this does not reduce the pumping capacity of SSWD’s wells. The reliability of SSWD’s groundwater supply is related to its sustainable groundwater pumping yield estimate, water banking eﬀorts, and its reliable well ﬁeld capacity that can be used to meet demands in all water year types.

Driest and Critically Low Storage Conditions Management In the driest years, SSWD will switch to groundwater in a discretionary fashion to meet customer demands as water resource conditions warrant. Decisions will include, but not are limited to, the need to maintain adequate levels of service, consideration of local surface water resource conditions, groundwater sustainability conditions, and successful outcomes of local banking and extraction program

Page 594 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Sacramento Suburban Water District PSA 268

such as the Water Bank or agreements to make water available for the environment (e.g., Healthy Rivers and Landscapes). The surface water supplies available to SSWD from its PCWA and City surface water entitlements may be subject to signiﬁcant reductions, including curtailments, during dry years (seasonal and climatic shortages).

Based on historical data, SSWD’s water supply available from groundwater has not been impacted by annual hydrology. Groundwater reliability is consistent in all water years and is not subject to vulnerabilities from seasonal and climatic factors. After several consecutive dry years, groundwater levels may decline, but this does not reduce the pumping capacity of SSWD’s wells. On average, the groundwater level declines are reduced and recover faster because SSWD’s water banking eﬀorts have protected and increased the reliability of its groundwater supply.

Project List
SSWD understands that to support the coequal objectives and mitigate challenges facing the region under future conditions, structural and non-structural projects will be needed.

Structural
The following infrastructure projects will support eﬀorts to implement SSWD’s Purveyor Speciﬁc Agreement (PSA), and support the coequal objectives.
• New replacement groundwater facilities consistent with adopted groundwater sustainability plans
o Select new replacement wells will strategically be equipped with Aquifer Storage and Recovery capability
• New or improved interties with other purveyors, in particular ones that promote groundwater recharge
• Rehabilitation and modernization of existing water facilities • Structural projects and programs to help ensure the success of the Healthy Rivers and Landscapes Program (previously known as Voluntary Agreements) or similar tributary-speciﬁc programs (e.g., the ARTESIAN program) that improve the ecosystem, protect local water entitlements, and maintain better cold water pool conditions and management in Folson Reservoir and the Lower American River
Non-Structural
• Consolidation of water districts as approved by the State of California or the Local Agency Formation Commission
• Agreements with neighboring purveyors for conjunctive use opportunities and water supply reliability
• Continued water use eﬃciency programs and funding support • Water transfers consistent with groundwater sustainability plans and the California Water Code • Support for identifying underground storage as a beneﬁcial use of surface water • Active participation in management and other actions under the groundwater sustainability plans for the NASb

Page 595 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 Sa cramento Suburban Water District PSA 269

Caveats and Assurances

1. The ability for any individual purveyor to implement the surface water diversions principles will depend on their respective opportunities and constraints.

2. In circumstances where excess water is made available by USBR Article 3(f) of a purveyor’s Water Repayment Contract or by a Section 215 Contract between the purveyor and USBR due to ﬂood control operations at Folsom Reservoir, for the purposes of groundwater recharge, that water would not be counted as diversion water within their PSA, regardless of year type.

3. Acknowledge that the duty of a water purveyor is to provide an aﬀordable, reliable, and high- quality water supply to its customers.

4. Agree that evolving regulatory conditions may trigger changed conditions and Water Forum commitments shall evolve to adapt to those changed conditions.

5. Acknowledge that the achievement of the coequal objectives must consider ramiﬁcations on water aﬀordability, reliability, availability, and quality.

6. Continue to utilize SSWD’s conjunctive use program in a discretionary manner to ensure a safe and reliable water supply is maintained.

Page 596 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 San Juan Water District Consortium PSA 270

San Juan Water District Consortium
Purveyor Specific Agreement
(Includes Citrus Heights Water District, Fair Oaks Water District, Orange Vale Water Company, San Juan Water District, and a portion of the City of Folsom) Updated: January 8, 2026
Purveyor Background
San Juan Water District’s (SJWD) wholesale service area is composed of the SJWD’s retail service area located in both Sacramento and Placer Counties, Citrus Heights Water District (CHWD), Fair Oaks Water District (FOWD), Orange Vale Water Company (OVWC), and a portion of the City of Folsom. These referenced Districts and the relevant portion of the City of Folsom are hereinafter collectively referred to as “the SJWD Consortium”.

SJWD’s wholesale surface water supplies consist of three sources – 33,000 acre-feet (AF) per year of water rights allocations (vintages 1854 and 1928), up to 25,000 AF/year in a water supply agreement with Placer County Water Agency for water from their Middle Fork Project, and 24,200 AF/year of Central Valley Project water supplies in a repayment contract with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation). The water-right water must be provided by Reclamation without diminution, pursuant to a 1954 settlement agreement with SJWD. The other two sources are subject to shortage provisions, but only Reclamation has ever implemented shortage allocations.

These sources of water are all delivered through a municipal and industrial (M&I) intake in Folsom Dam, which is at an elevation that would be subject to air entrainment at approximately 110,000 AF of storage in Folsom Reservoir. All of SJWD’s surface water is diverted from the Folsom Reservoir and treated at the Sidney N. Peterson Treatment Plant. Treated water is then stored in a 62-million-gallon treated storage reservoir.

CHWD and FOWD supplement their surface water supply with groundwater. OVWC may supplement its supply with groundwater in the future. Additional supplies may be available from other sources, via interconnections.

SJWD’s projected 2030 surface water demand in the 2000 Water Forum Agreement was 82,200 AF/year (the full complement of SJWD’s water supplies). In a conference year, under the 2000 Agreement, SJWD’s projected surface water demands would decrease to 54,200 AF/year, which was also the baseline surface water use reported by SJWD for 1995. This use increased in SJWD’s wholesale service area to 57,900

Page 597 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 San Juan Water District Consortium PSA 271

AF/year by 2004 but has since declined to 32,700 AF/year in 2022 (a reduction of 44%). Even if groundwater use in SJWD’s wholesale area is included (a total of 7,200 AF, including a total of 4,000 AF of incremental groundwater pumping for the groundwater substitution transfer in 2022), the total use would be 31% lower than in 2004 (even assuming minimal groundwater use that year).

Surface Water and Groundwater Management
Baseline diversions are those described in SJWD’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), for total and surface water use in 2020. The baseline for the SJWD’s American River diversion is 40,642 AF total and 36,301 AF of surface water diversions.

Agreement for meeting the SJWD Consortium’s water supply needs to the year 2040:

1. Normal years
As it applies to the SJWD Consortium’s portion of the agreement, normal years is deﬁned as follows:
years when the projected March through November unimpaired inﬂow to Folsom Reservoir is greater than 950,000 AF.

In normal years, SJWD will divert and the SJWD Consortium will use no more than 38,603 AF of surface water supplies for customer requirements within the current SJWD wholesale service area. Additional surface water supplies may be used for banking purposes.

2. Drier years
As it applies to the SJWD Consortium’s portion of the agreement, drier years is deﬁned as follows: years when the projected March through November unimpaired inﬂow to Folsom Reservoir is less than 950,000 AF and equal to or greater than 400,000 AF.

In drier years, SJWD will divert and the SJWD Consortium will use a decreasing amount of surface water from 38,603 AF to 30,882 AF within the current SJWD wholesale service area. During drier years, the SJWD Consortium will reduce its surface water demand by additional conservation (up to 20% or as required by the Districts’ Water Shortage Contingency Plans) and potential increased use of groundwater.

3. Driest years
Deﬁned for purposes of the Water Forum Agreement 2050 as follows: years when the projected March through November unimpaired inﬂow to Folsom Reservoir is less than 400,000 AF.

In the driest years, SJWD will reduce its diversion to no more than 30,882 AF for use within the current SJWD wholesale service area, which is lower than its baseline amount. During driest years the SJWD Consortium will reduce its surface water demand by additional conservation (up to 20% or as required by the Districts’ Water Shortage Contingency Plans) and potential increased use of groundwater.

In addition, it is recognized that in years when the projected unimpaired inﬂow to Folsom Reservoir falls below 750,000 AF, there may not be suﬃcient water available to provide the purveyors with the drier or driest years quantities speciﬁed in their Purveyor Speciﬁc Agreements (PSA) and provide the expected driest years ﬂows to the mouth of the American River. In those years, the SJWD Consortium will participate in a conference with other stakeholders on how the available water should be managed. The

Page 598 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 San Juan Water District Consortium PSA 272

conferees will be guided by the conference year principles described in Chapter 4, Section I of the Water Forum Agreement.

Demand Management
As noted in the Demand Management element of this Agreement, “All purveyors commit to abiding by the relevant conservation and water use eﬃciency regulations.” The SJWD Consortium agencies reiterate that commitment in this PSA. The speciﬁc measures that the SJWD Consortium agencies will take to meet these obligations have yet to be deﬁned, and they will evolve over time as the diﬀerent regulatory requirements come into eﬀect. Those measures will be described in the documents referenced below.

However, at the time of the signing of the Water Forum Agreement, the San Juan Consortium agencies do anticipate that a major focus of their programs will be on the use of water on irrigated landscapes, and on assisting their customers in reducing this category of use, to the extent that such reductions are necessary and appropriate to allow SJWD Consortium agencies to meet the requirements of the conservation regulations. The SJWD Consortium agencies will consider the various tools and techniques listed in the Appendix as they develop the suite of actions that they may take to facilitate the required changes in water use on landscapes by their customers.

The SJWD Consortium operates extensive demand management programs throughout the service areas of its members, as well as regionally, partly through the programs operated by the Regional Water Authority (RWA). Information about RWA’s demand management programs is available at the following locations:
https://rwah2o.org/programs/wep/
https://bewatersmart.info/
Information about demand management measures for each member of the SJWD Consortium is available in their respective Urban Water Management Plans, at the following locations:
2020 Urban Water Management Plans:

CHWD (pp. 54-61) https://chwd.org/wp-content/uploads/2020-UWMP-06_21_2021- 1.pdf FOWD (pp. 59-64) https://www.fowd.com/ﬁles/b2161c5ba/FOWD+2020+UWMP_FINAL.pd Folsom (pp. 9-1 – 9-8)
https://www.folsom.ca.us/home/showpublisheddocument/6766/637629066033570000 OVWC (pp. 4-7 – 4-16)
https://www.orangevalewater.com/ﬁles/a20283cf8/OVWC+2020+UWMP+Pubilc+Hearing+July+

13.pdf
SJWD (pp. 4-6 – 4-18)
https://www.sjwd.org/ﬁles/5f7a2a821/SJWD+2020+UWMP+Final+06.23.21.pdf Department of Water Resources statewide library of UWMPs:
https://wuedata.water.ca.gov/

Page 599 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 San Juan Water District Consortium PSA 273

Current information about water eﬃciency programs and activities, including rebates, site surveys, water conservation ordinances, etc. for each consortium member is available on its respective website. Those water eﬃciency web pages include:

CHWD: https://chwd.org/water-eﬃciency/
FOWD: https://www.fowd.com/water-eﬃciency
Folsom: https://www.folsom.ca.us/government/environmental-water-resources/water/water- conservation
OVWC: https://www.orangevalewater.com/drought-stages
SJWD: https://www.sjwd.org/water-eﬃciency
Information is also available for each agency concerning the water use objectives and corresponding annual water use, which are tracked and reported pursuant to the 2024 urban conservation regulations.

That information is available for SJWD Consortium agencies and all aﬀected urban water agencies at DWR’s statewide library website, under the “Urban Water Use Objective Reporting” section, at the following link: https://wuedata.water.ca.gov/.

Demand management and conservation program information is available in the annual water supply and demand assessments that are submitted by water agencies (including SJWD Consortium members).

Those reports are available on DWR’s statewide library webpage, under the “Water Shortage Assessment Reports” section.

The members of the SJWD Consortium will update their water conservation ordinances to include the requirements of AB 1572 before January 1, 2027, as required by that statute.

Critically Low Storage Conditions
SJWD’s sources of water are all delivered through a municipal and industrial (M&I) intake in Folsom Dam, which is at an elevation that would be subject to air entrainment at approximately 110,000 AF of storage in Folsom Reservoir. Because this entrainment could result in signiﬁcant damage to the impellers of the pumps that Reclamation uses to pump the supplies brought through the intake to SJWD, Roseville, and Folsom, this level of storage is one variation of “dead pool” being discussed in the Water Forum. This version of “dead pool” has never occurred.

If the water level drops below the M&I intake, Reclamation would use an emergency pump on one of the three power penstocks in the dam to deliver water to Roseville and SJWD and ﬂoating barges to deliver water to Folsom. The emergency pump has a capacity of 60 cfs (43,500 AF/year), and the barges have a capacity of 30 cfs. These facilities would allow Reclamation to access water in Folsom Reservoir between the 110,000 AF at which the M&I intake goes dry and the approximately 55,000 AF storage level at which the power penstocks go dry – a second version of “dead pool”.

Project List and Future Water Supply Reliability Eﬀorts Projects for which the SJWD Consortium requests conceptual endorsement by all signatories:

1. Infrastructure repair and replacement projects

Page 600 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 San Juan Water District Consortium PSA 274

2. Expansion of water use eﬃciency programs to reduce demands on American River supplies Members of the SJWD Consortium may seek support or endorsement by other Members and/or the Water Forum for the following projects. Should any SJWD Consortium Member choose to seek such support or endorsement, they will do so pursuant to the process deﬁned in in the Water Forum 2050 Agreement.

1. Alternative raw water supply projects to improve reliability and redundancy of delivering raw water from Folsom Reservoir

2. Renovation or installation of facilities necessary to conduct robust conjunctive use activities, such as groundwater production and injection facilities, including those necessary to support expansion of the regional water bank

3. Development and implementation of projects to meet all new regulatory requirements

4. Water rates that are necessary to provide funding to meet the ﬁnancial needs of SJWD Consortium parties

Page 601 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 275

Glossary of Common Terms
Sources of definitions are indicated in italics
Acre-foot (AF)
An acre is about the size of a football field. An acre-foot is the amount of water that would cover one acre of land one foot deep. It equals 325,800 gallons. That is approximately how much water five people use a year for drinking, washing, and landscape watering.

Aquifer
A geologic formation that stores, transmits, and yields significant quantities of water to wells and springs. Water Education Foundation
Anadromous Fish
Fish that spend a part of their life cycle in the sea and return to freshwater streams to spawn.

Best Management Practices (Water Conservation)
A policy, program, practice, rule, regulation, or ordinance of the use of devices, equipment, or facilities that is an established and generally accepted practice that results in more eﬀicient use or conservation of water, or a practice that has been proven to indicate that significant conservation benefits can be achieved. MOU Regarding Water Conservation in California Biological Opinion
A Biological Opinion is a document produced by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as part of a formal consultation under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). It determines whether a proposed action is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat.

California Environmental Quality Act
An act conceived primarily to require public agency decision makers to document and consider the environmental implications of their actions. Guide to the California Environmental Quality Act:

Remy & Thomas
Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA)
Amends the Central Valley Project (CVP) reauthorization act of 1937 and reauthorizes the CVP to add mitigation, protection, and restoration of fish and wildlife as project purposes equal to agricultural and domestic uses, and to make fish and wildlife enhancement a project purpose equal to power. USBR ARWRI

Page 602 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 276

Changed Conditions
This refers to significant changes in circumstances such as laws, regulations, and even the health of the river, which may occur after a Water Forum Agreement 2050 is signed. If changed conditions arise that may interfere with the implementation of the Agreement, the Water Forum will reopen negotiations.

Conjunctive Use
The planned joint use of surface and groundwater to improve overall water supply reliability.

Conservation Pricing
Pricing that provides an incentive to reduce average or peak use, or both.

Contractual Entitlement
A water entitlement based on a contract, such as a contract with the United States Bureau of Reclamation for Central Valley Project water.

Cost-Eﬀective
A case where the financial benefits of a project are greater than the overall cost.

CVPIA Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement
The program-level document, prepared by the United States Bureau of Reclamation, on the Central Valley Project Improvement Act, complies with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act.

Groundwater
The water in an aquifer. For human use and consumption, this water is generally pumped to the surface through a well.

Interested Party
In a negotiation, a person, organization, or entity entrusted to represent those with an interest in the outcome. There are 46 stakeholder organizations participating in the Water Forum.

Inter-basin Transfer
Water transfers from entities outside of a watershed to entities within a watershed.

Landscape Eﬀiciencies
What is achieved through skillful planting and irrigation design, appropriate use of plant materials, and intelligent management to assure landscape development that avoids excessive water demands and is less vulnerable to periods of severe drought.

Page 603 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 277

Low Water Use and Native Plants
Plants that thrive with minimal irrigation typically requiring only one watering per week or less.

This includes native plants adapted to the region's climate, as well as drought-tolerant species.

Native plants often have deep root systems that tap into groundwater, reducing the need for frequent watering.

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
A means of gaining formal consensus between two or more parties on a particular complex issue.

Point of Diversion
The place along the stream channel where a diverter takes control of the water. How to File an Application to Appropriate Water, State Water Resources Control Board Public Trust Doctrine
California’s legal doctrine requires the balancing of competing public interests while protecting the rights of the public to use water courses for commerce, navigation, fisheries, recreation, open space, preservation of ecological units in their natural state, and similar uses for which those lands are uniquely suited. It is based on the California State Constitution and goes back to English Common Law. The California Supreme Court stated, “The state has an aﬀirmative duty to take the public trust into account in the planning and allocation of water resources, and to protect public trust uses whenever feasible.” National Audubon (33Cal.3d 419 1983) Purveyor
An agency or district that provides water to customers for a fee.

Reasonable-Feasible
Practicable and in accord with reason.

Riparian Vegetation
Of, adjacent to, or living on, the bank of a river or, sometimes, of a lake, pond, etc. Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary
State Water Project
California’s state-owned and operated water project, consisting of 22 dams and reservoirs, delivers water 600 miles from the Sacramento Valley to Los Angeles. Water Education Foundation Subsidence
Sinking of the land surface due to a number of factors, of which groundwater extraction is one.

Surface Water Diversions

Page 604 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 278

Water that is diverted and/or pumped from above-ground sources such as rivers, streams, reservoirs, and lakes, as opposed to groundwater, which is water pumped from the aquifer.

Sustainable Yield
Sustainable yield is a balance between pumping and basin recharge, expressed as the number of acre-feet of water per year that can be pumped from the basin on a long-term, average annual basis.

Water Forum
A community collaboration process involving interested organizations and commitment to the coequal objectives of providing a reliable and safe water supply for the region’s economic health and planned development through the year 2050, and preserving the fishery, wildlife, recreational, and aesthetic values of the lower American River.

Water Forum 2050
The formal agreement among the Water Forum representatives will be presented to stakeholder organizations in the fall of 2025 for ratification without revision.

Page 605 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 279

Quick Reference for Common Acronyms
AB Assembly Bill
ACWA Association of California Water Agencies
AF Acre feet
AHTT Ad Hoc Technical Team
ARCH American River Corridor Health Program Area
ARFCD American River Flood Control District
ARFO American River Flows and Operations Program Area
ARG American River Group
ARPF American River Parkway Foundation
BC Business Caucus
BiOp Biological Opinion
CCOWMP City County Oﬃce of Metropolitan Water Planning (the formal title for the Water Forum under the original Water Forum Agreement) CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CFS Cubic feet per second. One cubic foot is about 7.5 gallons.

CII Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional water users/uses CVP Central Valley Project
CVPIA Central Valley Project Improvement Act
DAC Disadvantaged Community
DFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
DOFA Declaration of Full Appropriation
DM Demand Management (water conservation practices)
DPMWD Del Paso Manor Water District
DTA Dry Time Actions (element of the Water Forum Agreement) DWR California Department of Water Resources
EBMUD East Bay Municipal Utility District
EDCWA El Dorado County Water Agency
EID El Dorado Irrigation District
EC Environmental Caucus
ECOS Environmental Council of Sacramento

Page 606 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 280

FOR Friends of the River
FIRO Forecast-Informed Reservoir Operations
FMS Flow Management Standard
FOR Friends of the American River
GFA Governance, Funding, and Administration Program Area HME Habitat Management Element (of the Water Forum Agreement) HR&L Healthy Rivers and Landscapes Program (also known as Voluntary Agreements)
LAFCo Local Agency Formation Commission
LAR Lower American River
LOWV League of Women Voters
M&I Municipal & Industrial
mFMS Modiﬁed Flow Management Standard
MGD Millions of Gallons Per Day
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
NASb North American Subbasin (groundwater)
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NSC Negotiating Steering Committee
PC Public Caucus
PCWA Placer County Water Agency
PSA Purveyor Speciﬁc Agreement
Reclamation U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
RWA Regional Water Authority
SACOG Sacramento Area Council of Governments
SAFCA Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency
SARA Save the American River Association
SASb South American Subbasin (groundwater)
SB Senate Bill
SCGA Sacramento Central Groundwater Authority
SCWA Sacramento County Water Agency
SDAC Severely Disadvantaged Community
SGA Sacramento Groundwater Authority
SJWD San Juan Water District
SME Subject Matter Expert

Page 607 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 281

SRBX Sacramento Regional Builders Exchange
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TAF Thousand Acre Feet
TUCP Temporary Urgent Change Petitions
UIFR Unimpaired Inﬂow into Folsom Reservoir
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USBR U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
VAs Voluntary Agreements
WC Water Caucus
WF Water Forum
WF2050 The current Water Forum Agreement
WFA Water Forum Agreement
WFSE Water Forum Successor Eﬀort (relevant terms from original WFA) WG Working Group
WSCP Water Shortage Contingency Plan (component of Urban Water Management Plans)
WSS Water Supply Sustainability Program Area

Page 608 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 282

List of Appendices
Appendix 1: Advancing the Seven Elements of the First Water Forum Agreement
Appendix 2: ARCAP Two-Year Workplan
Appendix 3: Engagement with the US Bureau of Reclamation Appendix 4: List of Temperature Management Projects and Programs Appendix 5: ARCH Program Planning Matrix
Appendix 6: Declaration of Full Appropriation
Appendix 7: Bridge to the Regional Groundwater Sustainability Agencies and Water Forum 2050
Appendix 8: WSS Demand Management Actions
Appendix 9: Metrics and Reporting Development and Tables Appendix 10: Water Forum and Department of Utilities MOU Appendix 11: Five- and One-Year Water Forum Budget
Appendix 12: Cost Allocation Methodology Description
Appendix 13: Interagency Agreement for Water Forum Administration

Page 609 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A1-1
Appendix 1: Advancing the Seven Elements of the First
Water Forum Agreement
The ﬁrst Water Forum Agreement (WFA), signed in the year 2000, included seven key elements that represent the strategies members used to meet the coequal objectives of water supply reliability and environmental stewardship. Over the past 20 years, these strategies shaped water management in the Sacramento region, addressing both immediate needs and long-term sustainability.

1. Increased Surface Water Diversions

2. Dry Year Actions

3. Flow Standard

4. Habitat Management

5. Water Conservation

6. Groundwater Management

7. Water Forum Successor Eﬀort (WFSE)
The WF2050 Agreement restructures the original seven elements into ﬁve program areas. The following section outlines the original seven elements from the ﬁrst WFA and highlights the progress made under each.

1. Increased Surface Water Diversions
The ﬁrst WFA detailed plans to increase surface water supplies from rivers to support Sacramento's anticipated population and economic growth through 2030. Recognizing that conservation and sustainable groundwater use alone would not meet projected future demand, the agreement speciﬁed the amount of surface water each provider would divert during average, wet, dry, and very dry years, as well as the necessary infrastructure and projects to meet customer demand. Additionally, the agreement included emergency ﬂow strategies to protect salmon and steelhead, as well as measures to reduce river water demand by shifting to groundwater and enhancing conservation eﬀorts.

Progress: This element played a crucial role, alongside the WFA’s Groundwater Management strategy, in restoring the region’s groundwater basin to sustainable levels. By committing to increased surface water use during wet times, water providers allowed groundwater levels to recover. Over the past 20 years, regional groundwater levels have stabilized or risen in many areas.

For example, the Sacramento County Water Agency (SCWA), which was once completely dependent on groundwater, increased its surface water use by 29 percent in 2023 compared to the previous year, thanks to the Freeport Water Intake, a project outlined in the WFA. This shift stored approximately 10,220 acre-feet of groundwater in aquifers, enough to meet the annual needs of over 30,600 households.

Page 610 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A1-2

2. Dry Year Actions
The "Dry Year Actions" section of the WFA was designed to help ensure suﬃcient water supplies during dry years for people while also protecting the environment of the American River. The agreement outlined increased water diversions from the American River in wet and average years, but during dry years, water providers agreed to reduce these diversions to protect ﬁsh, wildlife, and recreation on the river. To compensate for reduced river water in dry years, water providers planned to use strategies such as increasing groundwater use, re-operating reservoirs, increasing conservation, and utilizing recycled water. Each provider had speciﬁc targets for reducing river water use in dry years, which were detailed in the agreement.

Progress: This element was successfully tested over the years and particularly during California’s extreme drought in 2014-15. Members worked together to reduce demands on the river by increasing groundwater use, boosting water conservation eﬀorts, and reoperating reservoirs upstream of Folsom Reservoir. Through the Water Forum’s Dry Year Conference, members also worked together to advise the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation on emergency ﬂow strategies for Folsom Reservoir, aiming to minimize harm to salmon and steelhead as water levels in the lower American River reached historic lows.

3. Flow Standard
The WFA included plans to establish a new ﬂow standard for the lower American River that would improve water releases to better support ﬁsh, especially fall-run Chinook salmon, while also preserving water storage in Folsom Reservoir to safeguard against drought.

Historically, water releases from Folsom Dam did not align with the ﬁsh's life cycle, negatively impacting the ﬁshery. To address this, a team of ﬁsh biologists and experts from agencies such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife collaborated with the Water Forum to design a release pattern that prioritized the needs of the ﬁsh, while still meeting the reservoir’s water supply and ﬂood control objectives.

This new approach involved reducing summer ﬂows to conserve water for increased releases in the fall, to provide better water conditions for salmon. The plan also included ﬂexibility for adjustments based on real-time environmental needs.

Progress: In 2006, the Water Forum published the ﬁrst Flow Management Standard (FMS) for the lower American River . The FMS utilizes the best available science to establish targets for minimum river ﬂows and cold-water storage at Folsom Reservoir, aiming to preserve water storage, mitigate drought impacts, and enhance water temperature in the Lower American River for the beneﬁt of salmon and steelhead. Since then, this science-based methodology has evolved with advancements in modeling and technical analysis, as well as real-world experience. After nearly 20 years of study and reﬁnement, the Modiﬁed FMS is now recognized as the best path forward for protecting and restoring steelhead and fall-run Chinook salmon in the lower American River, while enhancing local water supply reliability without adverse impacts elsewhere in the state.

Page 611 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A1-3
The Modiﬁed FMS is integrated into the most recent federal Biological Opinion, guiding the operation of Folsom Reservoir. To further support its understanding and implementation, the Water Forum is working on a consolidated version of the methodology for reference by the U.S.

Bureau of Reclamation and other state and federal agencies.

Moreover, the Water Forum’s science and habitat work positioned the region to successfully negotiate a voluntary agreement with the State Water Resources Control Board as part of the Healthy Rivers and Landscapes (HR&L) Program. This agreement incorporates the ﬂow management standard in combination with habitat enhancement and increased river ﬂows during dry years.

4. Habitat Management
The Habitat Management Element (HME) of the WFA focused on preserving the ﬁshery, wildlife, recreational, and aesthetic values of the lower American River. The LAR Salmonid Habitat Enhancement Projects are at the core of the program, largely supported by federal funding through the Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA) and State of California funding. Key HME projects included habitat enhancement for salmon and steelhead, such as constructing spawning and rearing habitats. The element also focused on scientiﬁc research to better understand how river operations and enhancement eﬀorts aﬀected ﬁsh migration. The HME also speciﬁed collaboration with partners, including co-convening the Lower American River Task Force with the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency and supporting water-related education.

Progress: The Water Forum’s contribution to the lower American River environment is unmatched. No other organization invests in the lower American River environment like the Water Forum. With support from local, state, and federal partners, it has invested over $38.8 million in habitat improvement and public education since 2000. These eﬀorts include constructing more than 30 acres of spawning beds and 1.2 miles of side channels to support salmon and steelhead rearing.

The pace of the Water Forum’s habitat enhancement work has accelerated signiﬁcantly over the past ﬁve years. In 2020, the Water Forum secured $5 million in Prop 68 funding from the State to support the early implementation of the Healthy Rivers and Landscapes Program (HR&L). This funding complemented existing program resources, enabling faster, larger-scale implementation. The Water Forum focused on reﬁning designs, conducting necessary analyses, and implementing phased construction at each of the 10 approved habitat project sites.

Additionally, the Water Forum assessed other potential habitat enhancement sites along the lower American River and advanced multi-beneﬁt projects, such as the naturalization of Cordova Creek.

The Water Forum employs a science-based approach to habitat improvement and monitoring, linking each study to speciﬁc goals that support adaptive management. This work supports decisions related to the FMS and evaluates the feasibility of future habitat enhancement projects. With a changing climate, this program has become increasingly vital.

Page 612 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A1-4

Moreover, the Water Forum has contributed to the scientiﬁc understanding of anadromous ﬁsh in the lower American River through studies that produce underwater maps and monitor salmon behavior during drought. These studies help identify locations for habitat enhancement that avoid impacts to ﬂood safety. Years of adaptive management have allowed the Water Forum to reﬁne conditions for optimal salmon spawning, such as gravel depth, ﬂow rate, and substrate size, advancing sustainable habitat practices for the river.

The Water Forum's scientiﬁc work has earned it a place as a trusted regional voice among state and federal agencies overseeing Folsom Reservoir and the statewide water system. This work has enabled the Water Forum to provide consensus-based recommendations on critical issues, including temperature modeling, ﬁsheries, and hydrology.

5. Water Conservation
Under the ﬁrst WFA, water providers committed to comprehensive conservation plans to meet regional water needs while reducing reliance on both groundwater and surface water, including diversions from the American River. Initially, providers followed the 2000 Water Conservation Plans speciﬁed in the WFA, with a focus on maximizing conservation in a way that was accountable, measurable, and eﬀective. Later, they adopted Best Management Practices (BMPs) under the guidelines of the California Urban Water Conservation Council (CUWCC) as a means of meeting the state’s water conservation requirements to reduce per capita water use by 20 percent by 2020. These requirements had been mandated by Senate Bill x7-7 of 2009, which created the 20 x 2020 program.

Progress: The WFA led to the creation of the Regional Water Authority and its Water Eﬃciency Program. For over two decades, this program has engaged local water providers in a regional strategy to conserve local water resources, share best practices, and pool resources to maximize impact and meet state requirements. Working together, participants have leveraged funds with other regional utilities, increased economies of scale for securing grants, and optimized advertising dollars for extensive customer outreach. The program also runs a regional school education initiative and manages the customer-focused website BeWaterSmart.info, which promotes water-saving practices across the region.

This award-winning program empowers members to optimize their investments in water eﬃciency and capitalize on available grant opportunities. Since 2003, it has successfully secured nearly $19.9 million in competitive grants to support outreach, advertising, rebate programs, and services that would be challenging for individual agencies to implement independently.

Since 2013, local water use has decreased by 23 percent, despite a 15 percent increase in population. This strong regional eﬀort has positioned local water providers to meet the new Making Conservation a California Way of Life standards set by the State Water Resources Control Board, pursuant to the water conservation legislation adopted in 2018.

Page 613 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A1-5

6. Groundwater Management
The Groundwater Management Element focused on protecting the region’s groundwater resources, which supply about half of the region’s annual water supply. The goal was to help ensure that groundwater remains available for future generations while balancing its use with that of surface water supplies.

As part of the WFA, the region established several local agencies, such as the Sacramento Groundwater Authority (SGA) and Sacramento Central Groundwater Authority (SCGA), to monitor groundwater use and implement a conjunctive use program, a strategic approach to managing groundwater that combines the planned use of both surface water from lakes and rivers and groundwater via wells. The practice optimizes water availability in the region over the long term even as the climate changes.

Progress: The WFA provided a crucial collaborative foundation essential to developing the Sacramento region’s successful conjunctive use program. Over the course of two decades, this program enabled the once-overdrafted North American Subbasin to recover and reach sustainable levels, while also providing a path for water providers to reduce their reliance on the river during critical habitat periods for endangered ﬁsh.

The SGA was a pioneer in groundwater management and served as a model for the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), California’s landmark law passed in 2014 to safeguard California’s groundwater resources for the long term.

SCGA has also played a critical role in implementing sustainable groundwater management in the South American Subbasin. One of the most signiﬁcant eﬀorts underway in this area is the Harvest Water project, California’s largest agricultural water recycling initiative, led by the Sacramento Area Sewer District (SacSewer).

SGMA required local agencies to establish Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) and develop and implement Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) for more than 100 high- and medium-priority subbasins statewide. In the greater Sacramento region, local agencies formed multiple GSAs for the North and South American Subbasins. They were well-positioned to develop GSPs for these subbasins, which were subsequently adopted locally in 2022 and approved by the DWR.

7. Water Forum Successor Eﬀort
The Water Forum Successor Eﬀort (WFSE) was established to guide the ongoing implementation and adaptation of the WFA through 2030. It provides a structured approach to addressing emerging issues, adapting to policy changes, and maintaining continued collaboration among interested parties.

The WFSE was designed to emphasize cooperative problem-solving, requiring participants to engage collaboratively, respect diverse viewpoints, and work toward mutually beneﬁcial

Page 614 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A1-6
solutions. The Agreement also established that all parties involved would participate on equal footing within the WFSE.

Under the structure outlined in the WFA, the City-County Oﬃce of Metropolitan Water Planning oversees the WFSE, funded through agreements with member agencies, primarily water providers. Representatives of member agencies set policy direction, while staﬀ, managed by the City of Sacramento, carry out the work of the WFSE.

Progress: The framework for the WFSE is a hallmark of the Water Forum process and WFA. It has allowed immediate focus on new issues, provided members with ﬂexibility to realign when necessary, and helped sustain trust and momentum throughout the decades of implementation. Membership has remained stable, with many signatories of the ﬁrst WFA still actively involved. New participants continue to join, strengthening the collaborative framework established in the ﬁrst WFA.

Page 615 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A2-1
Appendix 2: ARCAP Two-Year Workplan

SCOPE OF WORK
This workplan describes the intended activities related to the Water Forum American River Climate Adaptation Program (ARCAP) for the first two years of implementation. The focus for the first two years will include confirming the priority issues for resolution, establishing data, tools, and methods for evaluation, conducting analyses, and is also expected to include trial operations. The work will be phased to align with the approved Water Forum budget for the 2026 Fiscal Year (FY) and includes a Progress Report and an opportunity for workplan refinement after the first year. The budget presented within this work plan only includes the activities identified for the first year. The second-year activities and budget will be refined based on the progress made in year one.

ARCAP TASKS
The Work of ARCAP will be organized into the following tasks. Some of these tasks will take place simultaneously and are not necessarily sequential.

Task 1: Water Forum Member Coordination (ongoing)
An ARCAP Working Group will be created to inform and guide the activities of the ARCAP . The Working Group will be co-convened with the Water Forum and RWA, will include two members from each caucus as primary representatives, and will be open to all Water Forum members. The primaries will commit to making reasonable eﬀorts to attend all working group meetings and to review related materials prior to the meetings. The primaries will also be expected to act as representatives of their caucuses by reporting ARCAP progress to the caucus and providing feedback to the Working Group on matters aﬀecting the caucus. The ARCAP working group will be tasked with:
• Reviewing and commenting on work products
• Providing input on program direction, scope, and pace • Deliberating, refining, and providing answers to ARCAP Questions Meetings will be held monthly and supported by facilitation staﬀ, with the option of additional meetings as necessary.

The Working Group decisions and recommendations (including answers to ARCAP Questions) will be developed by consensus and will be presented to the Plenary for approval. This process is consistent with the decision process as defined in the Water Forum Agreement 2050.

Task 2: Refine and Focus ARCAP Questions
The initial list of questions associated with the ARCAP program was identified in the Water Forum

2.0 negotiations. The list is extensive and reflects the broad interests of the Water Forum Members (see ARCAP agreement language, Program Element 1 ). The key questions to be addressed within the first two years of ARCAP implementation will be refined and agreed upon by

Page 616 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A2-2
the ARCAP Working Group within the first three months of this two-year work plan. It is acknowledged that as ARCAP is implemented, the questions to be answered will evolve, be refined, and re-prioritized as necessary.

Task 2 Deliverable: Refined list of questions to be addressed within the two-year work plan, building from ARCAP Program Element 1.

Target Schedule for Completion: Early 2026
Task 3: Regional Data Collection and Synthesis
This task will be divided into two sub-tasks, with the first centered on collecting and synthesizing information directly from Water Forum purveyors, and the second focused on organizing and preparing data and information for the Technical Analysis (Task 4).

Subtask 3.1 Regional Water Purveyor Data Collection and Synthesis Water Forum staﬀ and consultants will coordinate with regional purveyors to identify operational scenarios that address various questions defined in Task 2. The information to be collected about these scenarios will include specific types of transactions that could be implemented to provide measurable quantities of water that could meet the program objectives. The information will be synthesized to provide a regional perspective, illustrating the best opportunities for ARCAP Water to be generated and tracked.

This activity is expected to be done in an iterative manner. Initially, the information collection will focus on identifying operational opportunities and constraints for potential ARCAP actions. Later information collection activities will involve more quantitative information on facility capacities, water demands, and available supplies. This information will be used to refine and answer ARCAP Questions related to the potential performance, rules, or structure.

Data synthesis will involve summarizing and packaging the information into regional overviews, highlighting and illustrating potential ARCAP opportunities. In many cases, WF staﬀ will prepare draft syntheses for consideration and deliberation by the ARCAP Working Group.

Subtask 3.1 Deliverable: Regional Supply and Operations Synthesis Report Target Schedule for Completion: Summer 2026
Subtask 3.2 Other Regional Data Identification, Organization, and Preparation Water Forum staﬀ, with input and guidance from the ARCAP working group, will work to collect and organize data and tools for technical analyses, which are expected to begin in the second year of the ARCAP program. Activities related to subtask 3.2 are outlined below:
• Review and consideration of existing analyses and information o Acknowledging the possibility that some ARCAP questions may be answered by other eﬀorts, consideration will be given to opportunities to align analyses with other regional eﬀorts, including eﬀorts by Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) and the Regional Water Authority (RWA).
• Define Baseline
o A baseline will be established for evaluating program eﬀectiveness. • Identify operational scenarios for evaluation.
o To be informed by the outcomes from Subtask 3.1 (Regional Water Purveyor Data Collection and Synthesis), which the ARCAP Working Group will review.

Page 617 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A2-3
Subtask 3.2 Deliverable: ARCAP Data and Approach Summary Document Target Schedule for Completion: Fall 2026
Task 4: Technical Analyses
This task may include the following activities and will depend on the outcomes of Tasks 2 and 3, and ultimately, the extent of further analysis that is recommended by the working group and approved by the Plenary. The list below provides a preliminary outline of how the work may be organized, which will be refined by the working group.
• Identify hydrologic scenarios for evaluation.
o It will be informed by relevant regional and statewide climate modeling and will be reviewed by the ARCAP Working Group.
• Identify and prepare tools.
o Tools considered for further evaluation will include those capable of analyzing trends and conditions for surface water, groundwater, water temperatures, water distribution analyses, etc.
o Selection of tools will be reviewed by the ARCAP Working Group. • Conduct Analyses
o Operational and hydrologic scenarios will be analyzed, and results will be reviewed and discussed with the ARCAP Working Group at various stages.

Deliverable: ARCAP Technical Analysis Report(s)
Schedule for Completion: TBD
Task 5: Trial Operations and Tracking
It is expected that opportunities may arise to implement certain ARCAP operation scenarios during the first two years of implementation, potentially while technical analyses are still pending. Within Water Forum 2050, it is acknowledged that sources for ARCAP Water will include existing sources and may include operations that are currently being conducted. The ARCAP will provide a mechanism to account for and track the outcomes of these regional activities. Based on the findings of Task 3 (Regional Data Collection and Synthesis), opportunities for early trial runs will be identified and considered by the ARCAP Working Group.

As trial runs are performed, individual reporting will be completed on the outcomes of the specific activities.

Deliverable: Memo(s) reporting results of early trial runs Schedule for Completion: TBD
Task 6: Synthesis and Documentation
This task will involve synthesizing and documenting all ARCAP activities and analyses. Key reporting is listed below; other documentation may be identified after the first-year progress report.

Year One Documentation
• Year One Progress Report
o Summarize all activities completed and outcomes for the first year o Identify areas for refinement for the second year

Page 618 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A2-4
Year Two Documentation (tentative)
• Two-Year Report and Recommendations
o Summarize all activities completed and outcomes
o Recommend next steps and activities for the ARCAP program. These recommendations will be developed with the ARCAP Working Group.

Task 7: Engagement with Partners (ongoing)
Engagement with ARCAP partners will be ongoing during the entire two-year work plan.

Engagement will include regular meetings, coordination, and strategic messaging based on the status of ARCAP activities and the specific partner. Engagement will be guided by input from the ARCAP Working Group. Expected ARCAP partners are listed in the ARCAP Agreement language.

SCHEDULE
Pending: To be added and will reflect the schedule described in the Tasks above after the WF2050 agreement is finalized.

YEAR ONE BUDGET
The budget below reflects the expected costs for the first-year activities of this work plan, including consultants (hours and estimated costs), and indicates the expected level of eﬀort for Water Forum staﬀ (hours and percentage of time for one full-time employee [FTE]). Note, year two costs will be developed as part of the Year One Progress Report.

ARCAP Workplan - Year One Budget
Hours % Time for
Year One Hours $ Hours $
Task 1: Water Forum Member Coordination 72 3.5% 90 $27,000 84 $21,000 Task 2: Refine and Focus ARCAP Questions 20 1.0% 5 $1,500 10 $2,500 Task 3: Regional Data Collection and Synthesis 150 7.2% 150 $45,000 0 $0 Task 4: Technical Analysesa -- -- -- -- -- --
Task 5: Trial Operations and Trackinga -- -- -- -- -- -- Task 6: Synthesis and Documentation 40 1.9% 15 $4,500 0 $0 Task 7: Engagement with Partners 50 2.4% 20 $6,000 0 $0 Total 332 16.0% 280 $84,000 94 $23,500
a. Task 4 and 5 are expected to be initiated in year two of ARCAP implementation and costs will be developed as specifics for the associated activities are refined
WF Staff (1 FTE) Technical Facilitation
Consultants

Page 619 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A3-1
Appendix 3: Engagement with the US Bureau of
Reclamation
The Water Forum’s ongoing engagement with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) has been and will continue to be key to supporting the coequal objectives. The operations of Reclamation at Folsom Reservoir play a critical role in maintaining the health of the lower American River and ensuring the reliability of regional water supplies. By carefully managing water releases from Folsom Dam, Reclamation helps maintain flow conditions that support aquatic ecosystems, including the habitat needs of species like the Central Valley steelhead and Chinook salmon. These operations are also essential for balancing water supply demands for agricultural, municipal, and industrial use in the Sacramento region, especially during periods of drought or fluctuating hydrological conditions.

DESIRED OUTCOMES
The Water Forum will continue to engage and coordinate with Reclamation through various mechanisms and forums and will pursue the following outcomes in eﬀorts to support both coequal objectives. The signatories' shared commitment to the stated outcomes will enhance the region’s ability to adapt to and meet the challenges of climate change.

1. Implementation of the Flow Management Standard (FMS), reflective of the latest data, science, and understanding.
a. This includes all features of the FMS (storage targets, minimum flows, temperature protocols, etc.).

2. Reduce regional risks associated with critically low storage in Folsom Reservoir.

3. Leverage regional actions to support healthy conditions on the LAR and regional water supply reliability.

4. Representation of LAR interests in the development and sharing of best available data, science, and methods in regional and statewide collaborative planning and monitoring eﬀorts.

5. Secure funding for habitat planning, implementation, and monitoring eﬀorts on the LAR.

6. Improvements to infrastructure at Folsom and Nimbus dams necessary to support conditions on the LAR.

7. Balanced considerations for American River interests within broader CVP operations, and the regulatory processes to develop operational plans.

In pursuing these outcomes, Water Forum members will coordinate internally to ensure that messaging and communication are consistent and aligned with the interests of all four caucuses.

Page 620 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A3-2

MECHANISMS FOR ENGAGEMENT
The list below provides an overview of current and planned mechanisms for engagement. This list is likely to change over time.
• Water Forum and Reclamation Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) o “Coordination of Communication and Information-Sharing Activities Related to Lower American River Operations”
o Water Forum intends to work with Reclamation to maintain the current MOU and to seek opportunities to update the MOU as needed.
• American River Group (ARG)
o Monthly meetings with stakeholders on the lower American River to discuss current conditions and planned operations.
o Key participants include Reclamation, CDFW, NMFS, and Water Forum. • Monthly cross-caucus meetings with Reclamation
o Conversations scheduled prior to the ARG meetings provide an opportunity for members to have a more informal discussion with Reclamation. o Focused on real-time operations, management, constraints, and forecasts. • Weekly staﬀ meeting with WF and Reclamation
o Staﬀ hold weekly staﬀ-to-staﬀ meetings to check in on near-term items. • Convening LAR Salmonid Habitat Agency Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) • Participating in and supporting the Central Valley Program Improvement Act, Science Integration Team (CVPIA SIT)
o Structured Decision-Making and Near-Term Restoration Strategy Guidance • HR&L Program Participation and Collaboration
• Ongoing Data Sharing
o Two-way sharing of data and information, including:
 Latest forecasts
 Conditions
 Operations decisions
 Modeling
 Fisheries and physical conditions data
• Utilization of accepted public data venues such as the EDI portal

Page 621 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A4-1
Appendix 4: List of Temperature Management Projects and Programs This will be a living document.

Ways to Support Coequal Objectives
Through Partnership
Project/Idea Type Location
Advocacy or
Coordination
WF Member
Resources
WF Staff
Time
Notes
Upgrade of Temperature Control
Shutters Project Folsom Dam x x
35% design is complete,
and funding is secured
for the remaining design
and implementation
Access cold water below the power
penstocks Idea Folsom Dam
Elephant's Trunk,
additional powerhouse
on lower outlets, power
bypass, etc.

Lake Natoma Temperature Curtain Idea Lake
Natoma lin k
Lake Natoma Shade Idea Lake
Natoma
Lake Natoma Value Planning Study Study Lake
Natoma x x
Upstream Operations
Geothermal river cooling

Page 622 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A5-1
Appendix 5: ARCH Program Planning Matrix
See the following page.

Page 623 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Appendix 5: ARCH Program Planning Matrix
Category Subcategory Action/Idea
Other Opportunities “Outer
Container” Grants * HME Operating Fund*
Habitat + Education LAR Salmon Habitat LAR Spawning and Rearing Program Build + Maintain** 99 1 Habitat + Education LAR Salmon Habitat LAR Rearing Site Planning (RM 0-23) None None Habitat + Education Parkway Multibenefits New LAR tributary restoration projects: Carmichael Creek, Buffalo Creek (43) None None Habitat + Education Parkway Multibenefits LAR Tributaries (ex. Cordova Creek – Phase 2 Design) 75 25 Habitat + Education Parkway Multibenefits LAR Tributaries (ex. Cordova Creek – Ph. 3 Permit + Construct) None None Flows and Ops Decision-
Support Temperature LAR Temperature Modeling. Conduct temperature Modeling, QA/QC, Temperature Management Plan Review, and support Cross-Caucus and ARG discussions (inform seasonal operational and power bypass) 85 15
Flows and Ops Decision-
Support Hydrologic Conditions LAR FMS. Weekly review of river conditions, MRR calculations and forecasting; meetings with Reclamation, and Cross-Caucus to inform operations occur per our FMS.
0 100
Flows and Ops Decision-
Support Water Quality
Dissolved Oxygen Continuous Monitoring Pilot Study. Documenting/analyzing continuous DO concentrations below Nimbus Dam, and at Watt Avenue, which is the regulatory
compliance point for LAR temperatures. This work will inform our understanding of diurnal and seasonal 0 100
Science & Monitoring Temperature
Cordova Creek temperature monitoring. Assists with project planning and baseline conditions understanding – a longer term dataset informs site understanding and illustrates commitment of Water Forum to defensible science when applying for next phase grant funds.
0 100
Science & Monitoring Adaptive Management Gravel Monitoring and Maintenance Plan/Tracking. Required by regulators for continued programmatic authorization of salmon habitat program site implementation (gravel projects) 100 0
Adaptive Management Habitat 5-Year LiDAR/top/2D Model Update. Necessary to document change in the LAR bed and banks as a result of typical flows, high flows, and habitat projects. Understanding how the river changes over time informs future design. 100 0
Science & Monitoring Adaptive Management
Aerial salmonid redd surveys. Measure Habitat Project Effectiveness, Adaptive Management and Project Planning.

Understand effectiveness of project via salmon utilization and comparison of site utilization patterns over time. Expensive but more cost-effective than in-river surveys – covers LAR from Nimbus to confluence. 100 0
Science & Monitoring Adaptive Management In-river salmonid redd surveys. Understand effectiveness of project via salmon utilization. Required by granting agency for funded projects. Cost-prohibitive to conduct for whole river. 100 0
Science & Monitoring Adaptive Management Snorkel (juvenile) surveys. Understand effectiveness of project via salmon utilization. Required by granting agency for funded projects. Cost-prohibitive to conduct for whole river.
100 0
Science & Monitoring Adaptive Management Off-Channel rearing and Growth Study. Understand current extent/effectiveness and inform future need and spatial extent of rearing habitat.
98 2
Science & Monitoring Adaptive Management Emigrating Salmonid Habitat Estimation (ESHE) Model Update. Utilize results from Off-Channel rearing and Growth Study to inform future rearing habitat implementation
98 2
Science & Monitoring Adaptive Management Genetic Mark-Recapture Study. Understand and directly measure production of juvenile fish from habitat sites. Measure Habitat Project/Program Effectiveness Adaptive Management and Project Planning 98 2
Science & Monitoring Adaptive Management Otolith Salmonid Life History Study. Understand behavior and life history of naturally spawning Chinook in LAR and how different water year types influence out-migration timing. 98 2
Habitat + Science
Statewide Voluntary Agreements. Science Committee, Habitat Planning, Funding, Implementation, Tracking, Accounting and Science Plan Development. Ensure VA implementation and accounting leverages Water Forum’s existing and planned program activities appropriately.
0 100
Habitat + Education Upper Watershed Forestry/Watershed health projects (13) X Habitat + Education Parkway Multibenefits Improve Riparian Corridor (38a): Protect existing resources – flow/misuse of Parkway Water Forum Led Efforts
Current Funding Mix (%)

Page 1 of 2 ends

Page 624 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Appendix 5: ARCH Program Planning Matrix
Category Subcategory Action/Idea
Other Opportunities “Outer
Container” Grants * HME Operating Fund*
Water Forum Led Efforts
Current Funding Mix (%)
Habitat + Education ? Ask Leo Intent Improve Riparian Corridor (38b): Increase? Habitat + Education
Partnership/Advocacy Improve Riparian Corridor (38c): Support Regional Parks Natural Resource Management Plan - relevant areas to the HME.

Concurrent with ongoing NRMP and Monitoring Plan Implementation TAC involvement. None None Functional Flows Habitat/Multibenefits Identify needed Fundamental/Functional Flows (28) None None Habitat + Education LAR Salmon Habitat Improve LAR Temperature Infrastructure and Management None None Habitat + Education LAR Salmon Habitat Voluntary Agreements: Habitat Planning/Construction 0 100 Habitat + Education Vegetation Invasive Species Removal on LAR Parkway None None Habitat + Education Other Multibenefits Cosumnes River Projects X None None Habitat + Education Other Multibenefits Sacramento River and Small Tributaries X None None Habitat + Education
Recreation LAR Recreation (core HME programmatic element - no projects) None None Habitat + Education Education Soil Born Farms K-12 Curriculum Support None None Habitat + Education Education Effie Yeaw Nature Center Curriculum/Interpretive Signage None None Habitat + Education Education Promotion of regional waterways and their unique qualities X None None Habitat + Education Education Education on the interconnection of local watersheds and groundwater basins X None None Habitat + Education Education Upper Watershed Forest Health Improvements and Advocacy X None None Habitat + Education Education Regenerative and/or Water-Efficient Landscaping X 50 50 Habitat + Education Parkway Multibenefits Bushy Lake Restoration (Ecocultural/Western pond turtle) None None Science & Monitoring Tracking/Reporting State of the River Report 0 100 Science & Monitoring Potential Need Monitoring for Additional Species and/or Parameters X None None Habitat + Education Partnership/Advocacy Lower American River Task Force 0 100 Habitat + Education Partnership/Advocacy American River Group 0 100 Science & Monitoring Tracking/Reporting FISH Plan Updates X None None Habitat + Education Partnership Mitigation Coordination American River Common Features (SAFCA/USACE) None None Habitat + Education LAR Salmon Habitat Support local funding for spawning and rearing areas in the LAR (46) Hatchery Advocacy Nimbus Fish Hatchery Management and Operations X None None Hatchery Advocacy Nimbus Hatchery genetics/measurement. Increased survival of salmonids (40) X Hatchery Advocacy Improve survival rate of hatchery releases (timing and location of releases) (56) X Hatchery Advocacy Support the creation of a WF team to evaluate the operation of the Nimbus Hatchery to better support the genetics of river- spawning salmonids and to improve the survival skills of hatchery-raised salmonids. (62) X Habitat + Education Upper Watershed Introduce Salmon above Folsom (47) X Science & Monitoring Tracking/Reporting
Coequal objectives with metrics specific to LAR (39)
Habitat Vegetation
Management/Removal of hydrophilic vegetation along the LAR (Spanish Broom, Yellow Star Thistle, Giant Reed (Arundo donax) 100 0
Habitat Vegetation Plant pollinator habitat vegetation on electrical right of ways within the LAR Recreation Flows Provide for recreational (rafting flows) during the period of most use.

Recreation Provide (through donations or outright purchase) webbed garbage bags for each raft Recreation Trails Provide support to Sac County for recreational trail management; specifically restoration of social trails along the LAR.

Habitat Fishery Identify locations off, and fill in side channel stranding pools.

Flows and Ops Temperature Identify use, management and efficiency of EID Temperature Control Device Flows and Ops Temperature
Identify use, management and efficiency of San Juan/Roseville Temperature Control Device located at their water supply intake.

Page 2 of 2 ends

Page 625 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A6-1
Appendix 6: Declaration of Full Appropriation
The WF2050 negotiations included the formation of a subgroup tasked with the review, assessment, and discussion of commitments made in the original Water Forum Agreement related to the existing declaration of full appropriation on the Lower American River. Based on the review and discussion, the subgroup is not recommending the Water Forum pursue an amendment to the Declaration of Full Appropriation (DOFA) in Water Forum Agreement 2050. The explanation follows:

Fully appropriated stream systems are those where there is insuﬀicient supply for new water right applications, either during certain months or conditions, or all year long. The program is administered by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). SWRCB, which administers major parts of California’s water rights system, does not accept applications for new water rights on fully appropriated streams, except in certain specified circumstances. 63 The subgroup confirms their understanding that the American River’s current status as a fully appropriated stream helps reduce potential new competition for scarce water supplies to the benefit of existing rights holders and water users, as well as public trust watershed resources.

The status is therefore a positive one.

The subgroup notes that the SWRCB does not administer the fully appropriated streams program to aﬀect existing water rights and contracts, or applications for assignment of state filings or for rights under the state’s Area of Origin protections such as might be made by one or more of the Water Forum 2050 negotiation participants, as provided for by SWRCB orders. 64 In the SWRCB’s administration of its fully appropriated streams system and its responsibilities under the California Wild & Scenic Rivers Act and realities of the National Wild & Scenic Rivers Act designations in California, SWRCB has issued orders that state or federal wild & scenic river designations result in twelve-month declarations of full appropriations on the designated reaches. SWRCB orders also state that any declaration that a stream system is fully appropriated encompasses all upstream sources that contribute to the stream system if such upstream sources are hydraulically continuous to the stream system.

Thus, the existence of insuﬀicient unappropriated supply at times in the American River watershed and the wild & scenic river status of the lower American River is expected to constrain the acceptance and processing of new water right applications outside of the specified exceptions.

Thus, the subgroup sees little utility in recommending that amendments to the existing declarations of full appropriations be sought in Water Forum 2050.

63 https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/fully_appropriated_streams. 64 SWRCB Order WR 98-08 (in response to a petition to reconsider Order WR 89-25, the SWRCB adopted Order WR 90- 2 on February 15, 1990. Order WR 90-2 modified and aﬀirmed Order WR 89-25 as modified).

Page 626 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A7-1
Appendix 7: Bridge to the Regional Groundwater
Sustainability Agencies and Water Forum 2050
The purpose of this appendix to the Water Forum Agreement is to address the relationship between groundwater management entities and the Water Forum Agreement. The Water Forum Agreement, initially signed in 2000 and revised in 2015, includes a Groundwater Management Element (GME).

In 2014, the State of California passed the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), which created the foundation for the sustainable management of the state’s groundwater basins/subbasins. Under SGMA, to avoid potential state intervention and state control of groundwater, local agencies can signal to the State their intention to form as Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSA) to locally manage groundwater within each subbasin. As required in SGMA and newly completed regulations, GSAs prepared, adopted, and began implementing Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) within subbasins throughout the state.

In the Sacramento County portion of the North American subbasin, the Sacramento Groundwater Authority (SGA) serves as the GSA governed by a joint powers agreement (JPA).

SGA works collaboratively with four other GSAs in the subbasin to implement the North American Subbasin GSP .

In the South American subbasin, there are currently seven GSAs working collaboratively to implement the South American Subbasin GSP . The largest GSA in the basin is the Sacramento Central Groundwater Authority or SCGA, which is governed by a JPA, and whose members are largely signatories to the Water Forum Agreement.

The Cosumnes subbasin includes seven GSAs and is governed by the Cosumnes Groundwater Authority (CGA). The CGA serves as the coordinating body for the Cosumnes subbasin GSAs, facilitating communication, data sharing, and the implementation of projects and management actions.

Because SGMA now defines the sustainability metrics of groundwater through the adopted GSPs, the sustainable yield listed in the original Water Forum Agreement is now obsolete. Also, because groundwater management in the three regional subbasins now includes parties that are not signatories to Water Forum 2050, it is important to define the intersection between regional groundwater management and the Water Forum.

The signatories to the Water Forum who are also members of the SGA JPA and the SCGA JPA recognize the shared goal of managing groundwater resources in Sacramento sustainably.

The signatories also recognize the importance of transparent governance and the sharing of information related to groundwater management.

Page 627 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A7-2
The signatories remain committed to conjunctive use as defined in the original Water Forum Agreement as the balanced use of groundwater and surface water. Conjunctive use prioritizes the use of surface water during wet times and prioritizes groundwater during dry times. The signatories agree that the Sacramento Regional Water Bank will help expand and formalize the practice of conjunctive use.

Page 628 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A8-1
Appendix 8: WSS Demand Management Actions
Acknowledging that each Water Forum purveyor must consider the timing and level of eﬀort required for each potential demand management action in relation to their opportunities and constraints, the list below is provided as a reference for consideration and is not intended to be any form of a mandate. The ability of each purveyor to identify the most eﬀective demand management actions for their respective service area will be critical as the region endeavors to support the coequal objectives while meeting relevant targets and standards.

1. Create and implement policies and programs that convert publicly owned, commercial, and institutional landscaping to low-water use native landscaping that supports native pollinator, insect, bird, and animal species.

2. Implement staggered outdoor irrigation schedules for twice a week during summer (e.g., based upon a last digit of street address) for residential customers, and one day a week for commercial customers.
a. Note: An exception would be needed for newly planted vegetation that requires additional water for healthy root development.

3. Expand and strengthen regional conservation messaging to amplify information about plant watering needs; encourage no irrigation during the cooler, wetter winter months and, in dry winters, significantly reduced irrigation due to lower transpiration rates during the non-growing season.

4. Provide rebates to all customers for indoor and outdoor WaterSense labelled products.

5. Implement programs to identify water users that are using excessive amounts of water (well above the mandated objectives) and support those users in reducing excessive use through education and access to resources (i.e., rebates), as available.

6. Implement water rate structures to promote equity and encourage water conservation (tiered, decoupled, others).

7. Implement leak detection, notification and enforcement.

8. Strengthen and expand regional program(s) that retrofit rental and low-income housing with water eﬀicient devices and landscaping.

9. Expand and strengthen landscape conversion education and incentive programs and emphasize low-water use native plants (which require less summer water and support native pollinator, insect, bird and animal species), and improvements to irrigation practices and systems which increase water-use eﬀiciency.

10. Maintain and strengthen active water waste prevention programs, including public messaging and intervention steps when waste is observed physically or through meter data (i.e., leak alert programs, water waste hotlines).

11. Create messaging and other information programs to positively promote and support customer eﬀorts to help suppliers implement state requirements.

12. Encourage the use of demand management measures such as reuse, gray-water, recycling, and rainwater-harvesting.

13. Establish and support programs targeting implementation of the Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional (CII) Best Management Practices (BMPs).

Page 629 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A9-1
Appendix 9: Metrics and Reporting Development and
Tables
See the following page.

Page 630 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Metrics and Reporting Development and Tables
This appendix provides summary tables of the data and documentation metrics used in the Water Forum metrics and reporting program element, and their respective categories and relevant program areas. The summary tables include the ARFO, ARCH, WSS, and GFA program areas. Metrics related to ARCAP will be developed as the program is launched and the members identify specific to metrics for long-term tracking and reporting. Contextual data are not featured in this appendix. That data is informative in terms of the status of the coequal objectives but is not necessarily indicative of the success of the Water Forum’s activities. A figure and description of steps taken to develop the Water Forum Metrics and Reporting framework are identified in the figure below.

Figure 9.A. Steps taken for development of Metrics and Reporting framework Each step is elaborated in detail as follows:

1. Review of Guiding Principles and Available Data: Guiding principles were reviewed along with available data and information, including existing data reporting mechanisms, to identify potential metrics applicable for each principle.

2. Determine Type of Metrics: An explanation was documented of whether these metrics were quantifiable data, or more qualitative and descriptive in nature (see the Types of Metrics explanation below).

3. Identify Overlaps and Efficiencies: Metrics were reviewed to determine potential overlaps, whereby a given metric could be tracked that demonstrates progress in supporting more than one Guiding Principle. These overlaps can also provide opportunities for efficiencies in reporting by reducing the overall total number of metrics that are tracked and reported.

4. Identify Reporting Mechanism: A potential form of reporting (e.g., Annual Report, Water Forum 2050 Five-Year Status Report, reporting during a standing meeting [Caucus, Plenary]) was identified for each metric. This step leveraged existing forms of reporting and existing venues for Water Forum member and staff engagement, rather than creating additional meetings. Similarly, this step supports providing progress updates that inform standing meetings and existing reporting processes and documentation.

5. Map Reporting Schedule: Metrics were reviewed to create an overall reporting and member engagement timeline that could be pursued within a given year to regularly communicate progress made in supporting the coequal objectives and implementing guiding principles.

Page 631 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Appendix 9: Metrics and Reporting
Category Documentation Metric Decription
Coequal
Objectives ARFO ARCH WSS GFA
WebsiteAnnual ReportMeeting5-Year Status Report
Water Quality Nov-Feb river temperatures relative to upper tolerable thresholds for both species X X   
Water Quality Mar-Oct river temperatures relative to upper tolerable thresholds for both species (where applicable) X X    Water Quality
Maximum weekly average temperature (MWAT), and
temperature on Nov 1. To be presented relative to peak
spring/summer storage.

X X  
Water Quality Dissolved Oxygen X X X  
Storage Storage in Folsom reservoir: annual minimum, end-of- May, and end-of-December X X X X   
Storage Coldwater volume in Folsom Reservoir on October 15th X X X    Habitat Nov-Feb 90% exceedance flows provide access to X% of available spawning habitat X X X 
Reporting MechanismWF2050 Principles

Page 1 of 6 ends

Page 632 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Appendix 9: Metrics and Reporting
Category Documentation Metric Decription
Coequal
Objectives ARFO ARCH WSS GFA
WebsiteAnnual ReportMeeting5-Year Status Report
Reporting MechanismWF2050 Principles
Habitat Mar-Oct flows provide access to X% of available rearing habitat X X X 
Habitat
Number of salmonid habitat projects implemented and
documentation of their total acreage and effectiveness
through utilization monitoring and sharing of data.X X    Habitat
Number (and acreage) of "non-salmonid" natural
resource projects implemented and documentation of
their utility/ effectiveness through relevant monitoring and sharing of data.

X X   
Water Supply Synthesis and reporting of GSP data: change in storage, sustainable yield, GW levels, GW extraction, etc.. X X     Water Supply Summarize and compare SW and data and information and evaluate for trends relative to hydrologic conditionsX X    Water Supply
Synthesis of key demand management data from existing
reporting (to be summarized by region and on a purveyor basis): actual annual and monthly demands, projected
annual demands, and status of meeting relevant
regulations.

X X X   

Page 2 of 6 ends

Page 633 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Appendix 9: Metrics and Reporting
Category Documentation Metric Decription
Coequal
Objectives ARFO ARCH WSS GFA
WebsiteAnnual ReportMeeting5-Year Status Report
Reporting MechanismWF2050 Principles
Water Supply Summary of water supply data summarized by purveyor and region X X X   
Water Supply Annual and seasonal quantification of diversions from the American River x X   
Funding
Total funding from local, state, and federal grant entities leveraged with operating funds in support of a program
area.

X X X X X  
Other Records of participation in Plenary and Caucus meetings X X  Other Unimpaired Inflows to Folsom Reservoir (Mar-Oct) X    Other Number of individuals/organizations reached (e.g., contacted or content read) X X X X X  
Other
Number of individuals engaged (e.g., provided input,
feedback, responded to requests for information or
actively participated in activities).

X X X X X 
Other
Member Survey to understand perspectives on effective
implementation of mutual gains approach,
collaborative participation, and leadership among
members and WF staff.

X X 

Page 3 of 6 ends

Page 634 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Appendix 9: Metrics and Reporting Table
Category
Documentation Metric Description
Coequal
Objectives ARFO ARCH WSS GFA
Project ReportingWebsiteAnnual ReportMeeting(s)5-Year Status Report/Symposia Accountability
FMS documentation will clearly communicate flow
benefits above MRRs, with quantifications where
possible.

X X 
Accountability
FMS documentation will clearly communicate the
importance of DO for river health, with
quantifications where possible.

X X X 
Accountability
Enumerating and documenting the outcome of
meetings attended, briefings held, any beneficial
legislative or regulatory outcomes resulting from
WF efforts related to advocacy to support WF
efforts on the LAR.

X X X X X  
Accountability
Provide a summary of the tools, data, and
assumptions used for GW evaluations within the
SaSB, NaSB, and CSB.

X X 
Accountability
Documentation of implemented and planned
demand management programs and projects
(summarized by region and on a purveyor basis).

X X 
Accountability Maintain documentation on ongoing strategies and outcomes for engagement with Reclamation.X X X X X 
Accountability Document agreed to messages related to water conservation in dry times. X X 
Accountability Document when conferences are convened and include enumeration of meetings conducted.X X 
Benefits
FMS includes evaluation of expected
impacts/benefits to water quality, flows, habitat
availability, and frequency of critically low storage
relative to identified thresholds.

X X X 
Benefits
Annual project/program tracking and reporting
related to opportunities for enhanced operational
flexibility within the American River watershed.

X X X X 
WFA Principles Reporting Mechanism

Page 4 of 6 ends

Page 635 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Appendix 9: Metrics and Reporting Table
Category
Documentation Metric Description
Coequal
Objectives ARFO ARCH WSS GFA
Project ReportingWebsiteAnnual ReportMeeting(s)5-Year Status Report/Symposia WFA Principles Reporting Mechanism
Benefits
Annual project/program tracking and reporting
related to operational and infrastructure
improvements for temperature and other water
quality issues within the American River watershed.

X X X 
Benefits
Annual project/program tracking and reporting
related to opportunities for study and
implementation and utilization of collected data in
LAR-specific and regional/statewide decision
support.

X X  
Benefits
Number of targeted public outreach and education
activities focused on building support for WF
programs and activities and sharing out the results
of WF efforts on the LAR and the contribution made
to broader regional or statewide goals or best
available science.

X X X  
Benefits
Enumerating and documenting the outcome of
meetings attended, briefings held, any beneficial
legislative or regulatory outcomes resulting from
WF collaboration with partners.

X X X X X 
Benefits
Document project monitoring and evaluation
results for corridor health, can include: physical
and fisheries monitoring of project sites based
upon established protocols and other river science,
monitoring and project and special studies results.
x x   
Partnership
Host annual meeting with regional GSAs to present
and discuss GSP status and contents of Annual
Reports.

X X 
Partnership
Host annual meeting to review data and discuss
trends related to regional water use and current
regulations
X X 

Page 5 of 6 ends

Page 636 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Appendix 9: Metrics and Reporting Table
Category
Documentation Metric Description
Coequal
Objectives ARFO ARCH WSS GFA
Project ReportingWebsiteAnnual ReportMeeting(s)5-Year Status Report/Symposia WFA Principles Reporting Mechanism
Partnership
Annual learning and engagement sessions will be
planned and topics will include all aspects of Water
Forum work, and will include communities outside
of the signatories (as relevant).

X X 
Process & Structure
FMS includes features for establishing storage
targets/requirements for early-summer and end-of-
year
X X 
Process & StructureFMS includes evaluation of expected impacts of FMS features on out of basin users X X 
Process & Structure
FMS features, specifically storage and flow
prescription's, are not in conflict with flood rules
and operations
X X 
Process & Structure
Qualitative description and reporting of scientific
data and methodology/methods advocated for and
used, decisions made, overview of progress in
monitoring and reporting processes.

X X  

Page 6 of 6 ends

Page 637 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A10-1
Appendix 10: Water Forum and Department of Utilities
MOU
See the following page.

Page 638 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT
Amended February 6, 2025 1
Memorandum of Understanding for Financial Services Provided to the City County Office of Metropolitan Water Planning (also known as the Water Forum) The following are terms of mutual understanding of responsibilities between the Department of Utilities (DOU) and the City County Office of Metropolitan Water Planning (CCOWMP) as it relates to financial services for the CCOMWP. All parties have collaborated on the contents of this document and have agreed to follow this agreement. The terms of the memorandum will be reviewed on an annual basis to ensure the language is accurate and consistent with current operations. The Executive Director of the CCOMWP reports jointly to the City and County with the primary oversight provide by the Director of Utilities. However, neither DOU nor the CCOMWP is a separate legal entity. Therefore, this MOU does not legally bind the City of Sacramento, the City Council, the DOU or the CCOMWP. The signatures below indicate the understanding by DOU and the CCOMWP to abide by the following terms and conditions of this document. ______________________ ________________________ Pravani Vandeyar, Director Ashlee Casey Interim Executive Director Department of Utilities City County Office of Metropolitan Water Planning The CCOMWP Financial Goal Statement: Provide accurate financial reporting in accordance with the annual adopted budget that optimizes the use of financial resources and provides fiscal transparency. Purpose for Services: DOU and the CCOMWP have agreed to enter into this interdepartmental services agreement for financial oversight provided by DOU to the CCOWMP for accurate financial reporting and fiscal transparency. The CCOMWP will dedicate one Administrative Analyst (position number 00042742) to DOU for these purposes. The assigned CCOMWP Administrative Analyst (position number 00042257) and Senior Staff Assistant will be the primary points of contact for the CCOMWP. DOU Fiscal Operations team members will provide support depending on the expertise needed to accomplish the individual tasks, in an effort to reduce funding impacts on the CCOMWP The DOU assigned CCOMWP Administrative Analyst (position number 00042742) will provide support to DOU to help offset costs to the CCOMWP. DOU will pay 90% and CCOMWP will pay 10% of the leave hours associated with this position. Overview of DOU Services Provided: DOU Fiscal Operations Team will provide financial oversight, including the City annual budget and yearend deliverables, assist with accurate

Page 639 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT
Amended February 6, 2025 2
financial reporting, and day-to-day fiscal oversight including all financial eCAPS approvals. DOU will also provide the following services: Financial Services Review, approve and provide assistance as needed with the preparation of the annual City budget deliverables for the CCOMWP, including, but not limited to, augmentations, net-zero adjustments, position moves, budget adjustments (including revenue, operating, and transfer adjustments), non-budgeted position report, fund analysis, five-year forecast, and Hyperion entry. Review, approve, and provide assistance as needed with the preparation of yearend deliverables as provided by Central Accounting for the CCOMWP. Including but not limited to coordinating project closures, grant roll forward reporting, grant compliance, reclassifying expenses as needed, review and report uncollected revenues, fixing overspent projects, p-card reconciliation, voucher payments, and preparation and/or approval of accounting journals and budget journals as needed for yearend closeout. Review and approve day-to-day, quarterly, and annual financial tasks as required for the adopted budget, including but not limited to quarterly projections, interfund reimbursements, accounting journals, revenue invoicing in eCAPS (grant billings and annual water purveyors), monitor doubtful accounts, etc. Review and approve budget journals, project requests, project closures, and status changes prepared by CCOMWP staff. Approve requisitions and payment vouchers in eCAPS to ensure accuracy, such as the correct budget lines, program codes/projects, sales tax, use tax, etc. Review and approve all grant billing packages, including all granting agency required backup for invoicing requirements, and invoice processing in eCAPS. Grant billing should be completed on a regular basis and wherever possible in the same fiscal year as the expense occurred. Review and approve all training and travel requests in eCAPS and the Supervising Financial Analyst will approve in K2 prior to the DOU Director. Review and approve all council reports, including approval in Legistar. Other financial activities as needed and mutually agreed upon. CCOMWP Deliverables: The CCOMWP will be responsible for the following tasks: Prepare and provide annual City budget deliverables including, but not limited to, augmentations, net-zero adjustments, position moves, budget adjustments (including revenue, operating, and transfer adjustments), non-budgeted position

Page 640 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT
Amended February 6, 2025 3
report, fund analysis, five-year forecast, and Hyperion entry. The budget should align with the approved budget as presented to the Plenary and approved by the Executive Director. Prepare and provide yearend deliverables documents such as project closures, grant billing accuracy and compliance, support for uncollected revenue, preparing p-card reconciliations, and budget journals. Prepare and provide day-to-day, quarterly, and annual financial tasks as required for the adopted budget, including but not limited to quarterly projections, interfund reimbursements, accounting journals, revenue invoicing in eCAPS (grant billings and annual water purveyors), monitor doubtful accounts, etc. Prepare and input budget journals, new project requests, project closures, and project status changes in eCAPS for DOU approval. Obtain, negotiate, review all documentation from outside parties for contracts, change requests, and requisition requests. Provide travel and training documentation for processing. Executive Director or Designee will approve all requisitions, travel, and invoices in K2 for approval in eCAPS by DOU. Program Manager/Senior Engineer will lead the processes for requests for proposals, requests for qualifications, and contracts. Other support for financial activities as needed and mutually agreed upon. Funding: The CCOWMP is responsible for funding the financial oversight provided by DOU and will provide one Administrative Analyst position (position number 00042742) to DOU through this MOU. This position will report to the DOU Supervising Financial Analyst and will be located in DOU (1395 35th Avenue, Sacramento, CA 95822). The costs associated with this position is included in the CCOWMP The DOU Fiscal Operations Team will provide overall financial oversight with a team that includes one Supervising Financial Analyst, one Senior Accountant Auditor, one Program Specialist, one Accountant Auditor, four Administrative Analysts (including one CCOWMP Analysts), one Administrative Technician, and two Accounting Technicians. This support will be paid at actual cost with no markup through an annual interfund transfer based on actual costs charged to Program Code 14B03. DOU will complete an annual review of time spent supporting the CCOWMP and prepare an interfund transfer that will charge or reimburse the CCOWMP based on position costs minus actual costs charged. Utilizing the Fiscal Operations Team to support the CCOWMP allows DOU to assign tasks to all levels, which will minimize costs.

Page 641 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT
Amended February 6, 2025 4
Insurance: During the term of this agreement the CCOWMP shall maintain a policy of commercial general liability insurance in the amount of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. The policy shall include products and completed operations coverage and the City of Sacramento shall be covered by endorsement or policy terms as additional insured.

Page 642 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A11-1
Appendix 11: Five- and One-Year Water Forum Budget
See the following page.

Page 643 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

FY 25 FY 26 FY 27 FY 28 FY 29 FY 30
Adopted Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed
1,393,949 1,050,519 1,029,021 1,062,956 1,099,060 1,133,266 940,286 922,621 1,070,163 1,047,620 1,093,275 1,153,975 Total Revenue Need 2,334,235 1,973,140 2,099,183 2,110,576 2,192,334 2,287,241 Note: FY25 is for informational purposes only and includes the Water Forum 2.0 funding.

Fund 7104 - Habitat Management Element
Water Forum Budget Projection Summary
Fiscal Year 2025/26 - 2029/30
Fund 7103 - Water Forum Successor Effort

Page 1 ends

Page 644 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

FY 25 FY 26
Adopted Proposed
1,393,949 1,050,519
940,286 922,621
Total Revenue Need 2,334,235 1,973,140
Fund 7104 - Habitat Management Element
Fund 7103 - Water Forum Successor Effort
Water Forum Budget Projection Summary

Page 645 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

FY 25 FY 26
Adopted Proposed(4)
1,165,126 1,172,520
Permanent staff(1) 1,165,126 1,082,724
Employee services contingency 413240 89,796
122,516 153,536
75,131 109,006
Leased office space 444010 58,451 53,538
Office Parking spaces 444010 4,680 4,860
Postage 461010 200 207
Printing and Binding 455010 900 932
Office Supplies 461020 2,000 2,070
Rental of Equipment (photocopier) 444020 900 932
Food Program 463010 6,500 6,500
Security Services 434030 1,500 1,148
Insurance 452010 0 38,820
19,385 19,773
Training/Conferences 432010 12,735 12,990
Transportation 458010 1,900 1,938
Meals 458020 925 944
Lodging 458030 2,850 2,907
Other Travel Expenses 458030 975 995
24,000 20,617
Telecommunications 12,000 8,257
Cellular Telephone 453020 2,000 506
Communication Lines 453030 10,000 7,751
Equipment and Software 12,000 12,360
Computer Software 461210 5,500 5,665
Computer Equipment 474410 5,000 5,150
Computer Software Maintenance 443050 1,500 1,545
4,000 4,140
Subscriptions And Publications 464020 1,000 1,035
Memberships and Sponsorships 481150 3,000 3,105
(546,753) (493,037)
Accounting(2) 39,000 0
Legal 9,533 9,628
Citywide Cost Plan(2) 0 52,250
DOU Fiscal & Admin Services (Reimbursement)/Charge (100,000) (103,700) HME Cost Share Reimbursement (495,286) (451,215)
653,060 191,000
Communications and Outreach 433060 50,000 56,000
Facilitation Support 433060 0 70,000
Grant Support 433030 0 30,000
Legal 433020 5,000 25,000
Website and SharePoint 433060 30,000 10,000
Water Forum 2.0 MYOP 568,060
1,393,949 1,024,019
- 26,500
1,393,949 1,050,519
Water Forum Successor Effort (WFSE)
Fund 7103 FY26
Projected Costs
Account
Codes
City of Sacramento/HME - Shared Resources Costs
Consulting Services for General Operations
Total Expenses
Staff / Labor and Benefits
Operating Services and Supplies
Office and Supplies
Travel and Training
Information Technology
Human Resources (recruitment, memberships)
Operating Reserve Needs(3)
Total Revenue Need
Notes:
1) There are no assumptions for additional staff; however, if the Water Forum is successful in obtaining substantial grant funding, an augmentation could be needed in the future. 2) The Accounting budgeted transfer will be deleted in FY26 when the Citywide Cost Plan charges are implemented. The City of Sacramento has covered the Citywide Costs in error since WF inception. The Citywide Cost Plan includes all citywide shared services including but not limited to Finance, Human Resources, City Council, City Clerk, Information Technology, etc. 3) The Operating Reserve will be funded over the first five years of the new agreement to minimize funding impacts to purveyors and to maintain at least $100,000 in available fund balance for unplanned needs. The Operating Reserve excludes costs associated with operating programs. In the event of full revenue loss, programs will be suspended until revenues are available.
4) FY26 Final includes the adjustments for the final position budgeting report, updated liability insurance premium, final adjustments to COS cost share, final adjustments to citywide cost plan, and misc. IT adjustments. Savings will be added to professional services that will later be applied to employee services to support possible overages for Executive Director or Senior Engineer when either position is filled at a higher total compensation rate.Page 646 03/10/2026 Item No.11.

FY 25 FY 26
Adopted Proposed
495,286 451,215
WFSE Cost Share Reimbursement 495,286 451,215
445,000 591,406
Grant Support 30,000 76,406
River Corridor Health - Habitat Enhancement Projects 150,000 - River Corridor Health - Required Monitoring and Decision Support 95,000 120,000 State of the River - Metrics Reporting and Data Informatics/Visualization - 150,000 River Corridor Health Program - Technical Support - 110,000 Flows and Operations - Technical Expertise 170,000 135,000 940,286 1,042,621
491,000 296,000
Grant Reserve Annual Allocation - 18,500
River Corridor Health - Science and Monitoring - (120,000) Grant Match for USBR WaterSMART Grant ($650,000) (195,000) - 296,000 194,500
940,286 922,621
Water Forum Habitat Management Element (HME) Fund 7104 FY26 Projected Costs
Total Revenue Needs
Grant Reserve Funds
Remaining Grant Reserve
City of Sacramento/WFSE - Shared Resources Costs
Consulting Services for Core Programs
Total Expenses

Page 647 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

FY25 FY 26 FY 27 FY 28 FY 29 FY 30
Fund Balance & Reserves
Beginning Fund Balance(1) 285,000 275,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Fund Balance Changes(2) (10,000) 26,500 26,500 26,500 26,500 23,258 Emergency Operating Reserve Balance(3) - (201,500) (26,500) (26,500) (26,500) (23,258) Ending Fund Balance 275,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Operating Reserve Balance 201,500 228,000 254,500 281,000 304,258 Notes:
2) FY25 Fund Balance usage is estimated at $10K for the University Enterprises contract that was not fully spent in FY24.

Future years will be used to fund the Emergency Operating Reserve for WFSE operating costs only. 3) The Emergency Operating Reserve will be funded over the first five years to minimize funding impacts to purveyors. Initial funding comes from remaining WFSE fund balance (7103). In the event of full revenue loss, programs will be suspended until revenues are available. The Reserve will be available for emergencies and will cover 120-day of operating costs, and excludes costs associated with consulting services for general operations and core programs. In addition, the Water Forum will maintain at least $100,000 in available fund balance for unplanned needs.

Water Forum Successor Effort (WFSE - 7103)
Fund 7103 FY26 - FY30
WFSE (7103 Fund) Projected Fund Balance and Reserve Needs Projected
1) FY24 Yearend Actuals have not been audited. The ending fund balance for FY24 and beginning fund balance for FY25 are subject to change until the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) is released in January 2025.

Page 648 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

FY25 FY 26 FY 27 FY 28 FY 29 FY 30
Fund Balance & Reserves
Beginning Fund Balance(1) 541,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Fund Balance Changes(2) (491,000) 18,500 18,500 18,500 18,500 - Transfers to Grant Reserve - (18,500) (18,500) (18,500) (18,500) - Ending Fund Balance 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Grant Fund Reduction for Projects/Matches (195,000) (120,000) - - - - Grant Reserve Balance 296,000 194,500$ 213,000$ 231,500$ 250,000$ 250,000$ Notes:
2) Water Forum will create a grant reserve at the end of FY25 to ensure funding availability to pursue grants by using all but $50,000 of the remaining HME fund balance (7104). There is a need of $195,000 for a grant match in FY25 and grant related operating expenses of $120,000. If grant reserves are used in any given Fiscal Year, the reserve will be replenished to $250,000 over the next five years to limit the impacts on contributors. HME funding was contributed by the County of Sacramento Zone 13 and the City of Sacramento. Funding from the grant match will be used to fund grant related HME efforts only.

Water Forum FY26 - FY30
HME (7104 Fund) Projected Fund Balance and Reserve Needs Projected
1) FY24 Yearend Actuals have not been audited. The ending fund balance for FY24 and beginning fund balance for FY25 are subject to change until the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) is released in January 2026.

Page 649 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A12-1
Appendix 12: Cost Allocation Methodology Description
During negotiations, it was determined that a new cost allocation methodology would be necessary to fund the work of the Water Forum, commencing in Fiscal Year 2025-2026 (FY26).

Previously, funding for multiple agencies was derived from assessments through the Sacramento County Water Agency (SCWA) Zone 13. However, Zone 13 was established 38 years prior without an inflation adjustment, and its revenue has remained static while the Water Forum’s budget grew annually to accommodate inflation. As a result, contributions from Zone 13 towards the Water Forum’s work became unsustainable. Zone 13 funds historically comprised nearly 50% of the Water Forum’s annual budget.

Over several months, water agencies and other funders explored several new funding models to distribute the Water Forum costs equitably. In November 2024, stakeholders agreed on an approach involving proportional cost allocations based on agency connection counts, five-year average groundwater production, and a five-year average of American River diversions. Each dataset is weighted relative to the benefits derived from Water Forum participation (as
summarized in Table 1 below).

Specific adjustments were made for the agencies summarized below to fully capture the unique benefits and opportunities derived from Water Forum membership and participation:

EBMUD: EBMUD’s data was adjusted for the cost allocation calculation to reflect unique characteristics of its service area and water usage relative to the Water Forum. The adjustment was made based on the following factors:

1. EBMUD’s service area lies entirely outside the Sacramento region.

2. EBMUD uses water from the American River only as a dry-year supply and does not rely on groundwater from the Sacramento regional groundwater basins.

3. The American River water used by EBMUD flows through the lower American River (LAR) before being diverted at the Freeport intake.

To account for these considerations, EBMUD’s connection count was adjusted to reflect the proportion of its service area supplied with American River water on an annual basis, using a five-year average.

PCWA: PCWA’s water collection and distribution system is complex, relying on multiple sources and diversion points for its surface water supply. PCWA is also both a wholesaler and a retailer of both treated and untreated water from these multiple sources. For the purposes of the Water Forum cost allocation calculations, only the volume of American River water that is diverted and used within PCWA’s own retail service area, treated and untreated, is included.

PCWA water diverted by or on behalf of its wholesale customers is excluded from PCWA’s cost calculations

Page 650 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A12-2
Golden State: An adjustment was made to GSWC’s data within the Water Forum cost allocation model to account for its unique water supplies and operations. GSWC uses treated groundwater that is discharged into the American River and later diverted at the Carmichael Water District’s intake on the LAR, then the treated water is delivered to GSWC, putting the groundwater back to beneficial use. To accurately reflect this process, both GSWC’s American River diversion and groundwater production volumes were adjusted accordingly in the model.

Table 2 illustrates the application of the agreed-upon funding allocation methodology, which includes the relative percentages for each of the respective datasets, the resulting weighted percentage calculated using the factors listed in Table 1, and the final cost allocations for FY26 for each relevant funder. The weighted percentage shown in Table 2 for each agency will be used for five years, and an updated weighted percentage will be calculated in 2030 to be applied in FY2030-2031 and the subsequent five years (pending approval from the funders).

Table 1. Water Forum Cost Allocation Weighting Factors and Benefits Agency Data Set Weighting Factor Associated Benefits
Connection Counts 0.40
• Environmental Stewardship
• Maintaining peace on the river
• Assistance in the regulatory settings
Groundwater Production 0.20
• Regional water supply reliability
• Support for more conjunctive use
activities
• Regional collaboration and partnerships
for projects, programs, and funding
American River Diversions 0.40
• Regional coordination and strategy with
the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
• Protecting the value and function of the
Lower American River corridor

Page 651 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A12-3
Table 2. Water Forum Cost Allocation Results

Agency
Connections
American River
Diversions
Groundwater
ProductionWeighted %
FY 26 Contribution
Based on
5-Year Avg
2019-2023
El Dorado Irrigation District 0.07 0.09 0.00 0.07 $128,452 Placer County Water Agency 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.06 $109,635 City of Folsom (minus Ashland) 0.04 0.12 0.00 0.06 $119,623 City of Roseville 0.09 0.19 0.00 0.11 $212,506
San Juan Water District - Wholesale1 0.09 0.21 0.05 0.13 $106,938 Citrus Heights Water District 0.04 0.06 0.02 0.04 $81,691 Fair Oaks Water District 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.03 $63,181
Carmichael Water District 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 $53,445
City of Sacramento 0.25 0.19 0.21 0.22 $422,537
Sacramento Suburban Water District 0.08 0.06 0.21 0.10 $187,724 Golden State Water Company 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.03 $61,706
California American Water 0.11 0.00 0.24 0.09 $179,501
Sacramento County Water Agency 0.11 0.00 0.21 0.08 $160,600 East Bay MUD 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.02 $29,602
Total2

1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 $1,917,140

1. San Juan Water District Wholesale contributions include San Juan Retail, Orange Vale, and Ashland (Folsom) service areas.

2. Total funding amount shown excludes contributions of flat fee contributions from SMUD, SAFCA, and EDWA.

Base %

Page 652 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Water Forum Agreement 2050
February 2026 A13-1
Appendix 13: Interagency Agreement for Water Forum
Administration
See the following page.

Page 653 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

THIRD INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT FOR THE

ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT OF THE WATER FORUM

THIS THIRD INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT FOR THE ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT OF THE WATER FORUM (“AGREEMENT”) is made and entered into this __ day of _______ 2025, by and among the City of Sacramento, the El Dorado Irrigation District, the Placer County Water Agency, the City of Folsom, the City of Roseville, the San Juan Water District (retail), Citrus Heights Water District, Fair Oaks Water District, Orange Vale Water Company, Carmichael Water District, Sacramento Suburban Water District, Golden State Water Company, California-American Water, Sacramento County Water Agency (“SCWA”), County of Sacramento, and East Bay Municipal Utility District referred to collectively as “the Parties.”

RECITALS
A. Each of the Parties to this Agreement is a local governmental entity or public water supplier functioning within or adjacent to the Sacramento Metropolitan Area.

B. On October 30, 1991, the Sacramento City Council, the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors and the Board of Directors of SCWA authorized the execution of the "Interagency Agreement for the City-County Office of Water Planning" to create a City County organization known as the City-County Office of Water Planning.

C. The City-County Office of Water Planning, subsequently renamed the City-County Office of Metropolitan Water Planning (hereafter referred to as the “CCOMWP”), was formed to provide City-County staffing necessary to undertake planning and analysis needed for, and to facilitate the participation of numerous stakeholders in, the development of a comprehensive plan to provide a reliable water supply for the region while protecting the environmental values of the area's water resources.

D. On January 9, 2001, the Sacramento City Council, the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors and the Board of Directors of SCWA entered into the “Second Interagency Agreement for the City-County Office of Metropolitan Water Planning” to provide for the continued existence and operation of the CCOMWP.

E. The Parties are all members of the Water Forum, a coalition of business leaders, citizens, environmentalists, water managers, and local governments (individually “Members”).

The Water Forum was governed by the 2000 Water Forum Agreement, updated in October 2015 (the “Water Forum Agreement”). The renegotiation of the Water Forum Agreement through the Water Forum 2050 process resulted in a need to update the Second Interagency Agreement for the City-County Office of Metropolitan Water Planning to reflect participation of all of the Parties. The purpose of this Agreement is to delineate an efficient and effective arrangement for administration and management of Water Forum staff. Funding for the Water Forum staff and operations will be allocated on a cost-share

Page 654 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.
basis between the Parties in a separate funding agreement for the Water Forum (“Funding Agreement”).

F. The City of Sacramento and the County of Sacramento wish to express their long time and continuing support for the Water Forum and its mission of the co-equal objectives.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the Parties hereby agree as follows:

1. Water Forum Office. The renegotiated Water Forum Agreement has restructured roles and responsibilities of the participating water agencies. To reflect those changes, the name of the CCOMWP is hereby changed to the Water Forum Office. The Water Forum Office is a division of the City of Sacramento, not an independent legal entity.

The Water Forum Office is hereby authorized to continue operating in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. This Agreement replaces and supersedes the Second Interagency Agreement for the City-County Office of Metropolitan Water Planning.

2. Objectives and Duties of the Water Forum Office. The objective of the Water Forum Office is to promote the implementation and continued vitality of the Water Forum Agreement. This objective shall be accomplished by providing administrative support and assistance to the Water Forum Members as the Members oversee, monitor, and report on implementation of the Water Forum Agreement. Specific tasks necessary to accomplish this purpose may be performed by Water Forum Office staff, or by other individuals, firms or entities pursuant to contracts or agreements authorized as set forth in Section 5, below.

3. Water Forum Office Operations. The City of Sacramento shall continue to provide the Water Forum Office with suitable office space and administrative, clerical, and technical support resources as an entity of the City of Sacramento. The City of Sacramento will be responsible for overseeing the following arrangements for the Water Forum Office:
a. Procurement of leased office space including conference facilities and necessary furnishings to house the Water Forum Office.
b. Preparation of an operating budget, operating reserves of 120 days, and necessary appropriation resolutions.
c. Establishment of accounting records and procedures for capturing expenditures of the Water Forum Office.
d. Allocation of operating costs for the Water Forum Office on a cost-share basis among the Parties pursuant to the Funding Agreement. "Operating costs" shall include all office lease, equipment, personnel and other staffing costs, contracting costs, and other costs incurred in the performance of the Water

Page 655 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Forum Office's duties, together with associated direct and indirect overhead and other administrative costs.
e. Implementation of the staffing plan for the Water Forum Office including such things as classification of positions, salary resolution amendments, recruitment, and selection.

4. Water Forum Office Costs. The Parties shall fund the Water Forum Office operating costs in accordance with the cost-sharing provisions of the Funding Agreement.

Annual Operating costs shall not exceed the funding available for such costs under the Funding Agreement or available from other funding sources approved by the Parties and shall be consistent with the Water Forum Office budget approved by the Parties.

5. Staff Arrangements.
a. The Water Forum Office shall have an Executive Director and adequate staff to support the following functions: River Corridor Health Program, Water Resources engineering, and administrative support staff. These positions, whether new hires or existing staff, shall be considered City of Sacramento employees. These employees shall continue to be paid at the designated salaries and employee benefits for their respective classifications within the City of Sacramento, and shall be entitled to the same promotions, and merit or other salary increases as City of Sacramento fulltime employees. In addition, the services of other City of Sacramento staff may be used from time to time to provide technical assistance for the Water Forum Office. b. As an entity of the City of Sacramento, the Water Forum Office has established funds that pay the full cost of the assigned positions and any staff assistance for all salaries, employee benefits and indirect employee costs. c. The Executive Director shall be the chief administrative officer of the Water Forum Office, shall supervise the Water Forum Office employees, and shall be responsible for the administration of the Water Forum Office pursuant to this Agreement. The Executive Director shall report to the Director of the City of Sacramento Department of Utilities (“DOU Director”). The DOU Director shall implement a process to solicit the Parties’ input on the selection and performance of the Executive Director but shall retain sole authority to take any and all employment actions related to the Executive Director. d. Water Forum Office staff, including but not limited to the Executive Director, are not employees of any Party other than the City of Sacramento and shall not be entitled to any wages, retirement benefits, or other benefits enjoyed by employees of any Party other than the City of Sacramento. e. When requested by the Water Forum’s Coordinating Committee, or at least every five years, the Water Forum may conduct a compensation survey to

Page 656 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.
ensure that the total compensation of the Executive Director is appropriate.

The compensation survey will be paid for by the Water Forum office. Should the survey indicate the compensation should be adjusted, the City of Sacramento shall consider adjusting the compensation accordingly, but is not required to do so. All Water Forum office employee salaries are funded by the water agencies that contribute to the Water Forum office, the funding for their salaries does not come solely from the City of Sacramento. Nothing in this agreement, in action or intent, will preempt City of Sacramento employment practices.

6. Contracting Procedures. All Water Forum Office contracting shall follow procedures used by the City of Sacramento. The Executive Director may recommend the approval of contracts for services required by the Water Forum Office and the Sacramento City Manager or the City Manager’s designee shall be authorized to approve and execute such contracts in accordance with applicable provisions of the Sacramento City Code relating to authority to enter into contracts. All other contracts shall be submitted to the Sacramento City Council for approval and execution. All contracts shall be approved as to form by the Sacramento City Attorney or use standard formats approved by the Sacramento City Attorney. The City shall require and verify that all contractors and subcontractors maintain insurance coverage that meets the minimum scope and limits of insurance coverage appropriate for the work performed. Costs incurred under contracts that are consistent with the Water Forum Office budget approved by the Parties shall be allocated on a cost-share basis between the Parties as specified in the Funding Agreement.

7. Insurance; Excess liability.
a. The City of Sacramento shall procure and maintain a liability insurance policy sufficient to cover the Water Forum Office’s potential liabilities, with a minimum limit of $1 million per occurrence and $4 million aggregate. The Parties recognize that the coverage and terms of insurance may be subject to change based on insurance market conditions, but the City of Sacramento shall immediately disclose changes and obtain approval of the other Parties to an approach that most closely preserves compliance with requirements of this section. The coverage must be at least as broad in scope as Insurance Services Office (ISO) Commercial General Liability Coverage (Occurrence Form CG00 01) including products and completed operations, property damage, bodily injury, personal and advertising injury, and contractual liability coverage for liabilities assumed under this Agreement as an “insured contract.” The City of Sacramento will provide proof of this insurance to each Party on an annual basis for the duration of this Agreement and will immediately notify Parties of any changes in coverage. Liability coverage will be in effect for Water Forum work plan activities or activities communicated in writing to the Plenary Water Forum.

Page 657 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.
b. The City of Sacramento shall use available insurance proceeds to defray the cost of liability arising from the Water Forum Office or its functions or work.

If the Water Forum Office’s liability insurance, or any other available insurance policy, does not fully cover all liability of the Water Forum Office or of the City of Sacramento arising from a covered employee action, omission, or injuries, then any excess amount of such liability (“Excess Liability”), except Excluded Liability, shall be allocated among the Parties pursuant to the cost allocation formula specified in the Funding Agreement. The term “Excluded Liability” includes each of the following: (i) any liability arising from any employee action, omission, or injury that is intentional, fraudulent, reckless, or outside the course or scope of the employee’s position with the Water Forum; (ii) any liability arising from any class actions, representative actions, actions under the Private Attorneys General Act; or (iii) any liability arising from claims for punitive or exemplary damages; or (iv) recovery of attorneys’ fees. Excess liability costs for Excluded Liability may be submitted to the Parties for consideration through the annual budget process. The Parties (as defined in Attachment A) are to be covered as additional insureds on the Water Forum Office’s CGL policy with respect to liability arising out of this Agreement. For any claims related to this Agreement, the Water Forum Office’s insurance coverage shall be primary and non-contributory as respects the Parties. The Water Forum Office will promptly notify each Party of any claim that has arisen or that may arise and keep them informed as to the status of the claim until resolved.

The City of Sacramento shall procure, maintain, and be solely responsible for the provision of workers’ compensation insurance for its employees assigned to the Water Forum Office or performing duties related to the Water Forum Office. The City shall maintain excess workers’ compensation insurance and waive subrogation against the Parties.

8. Disclaimer of Liability; Mutual Indemnification. No Party nor any officer or employee thereof shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by another Party under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to another Party. Each Party shall fully defend (upon the request of the indemnitee), indemnify, and hold each Party harmless from and against all claims, losses and liabilities occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by the indemnifying Party under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to the indemnifying Party under this Agreement.

Except as limited by this section 8, Excess Liability, except Excluded Liability, may be allocated among the Parties in the manner and circumstances described in subsection (b) of section 7.

9. Effective Date. This Agreement shall become effective when it has been signed by each Party.

Page 658 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

10. Termination. This Agreement shall remain in effect until December 31, 2050, unless terminated sooner in the manner described herein. This Agreement may be terminated by two-thirds written consent of the Parties. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent any individual Party from withdrawing as provided in this Agreement. Upon termination of this Agreement, any surplus funds on hand shall be returned to the then Parties in proportion to the contributions made.

A Party may unilaterally withdraw from this Agreement without requiring termination of this Agreement, effective upon 90 days’ written notice to the other Parties, provided that the withdrawing Party shall remain responsible for any indebtedness incurred by the Party under the Funding Agreement, and further provided that the withdrawing Party pays or agrees to pay its share of debts, liabilities and obligations of the Water Forum Office incurred by the Party under this Agreement prior to the effective date of such withdrawal. Terms of the Funding Agreement may include a not-to-exceed amount equaling a two-year funding obligation from each agency.

If the City of Sacramento wishes to withdraw from this Agreement, the City of Sacramento shall provide 180 days’ written notice to the other Parties; provided that the City of Sacramento shall remain responsible for any indebtedness incurred by the City of Sacramento under any funding agreement, and further provided that the City of Sacramento pays or agrees to pay its share of debts, liabilities and obligations of the Water Forum Office incurred by the City of Sacramento under this Agreement prior to the effective date of such withdrawal. In such case, the City of Sacramento shall cooperate in good faith with other Parties if they wish to continue the Water Forum Office under the auspices of another entity.

11. Notices. Any notices or other communication to be given Parties pursuant to this Agreement shall be given in writing by U.S. Mail, email, or by personal delivery to the Parties at the addresses set forth in Attachment B, incorporated herein by this reference.

12. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended only by a subsequent writing, approved and signed by the authorized representative or agent for each Party, except the representatives and contact information contained in Attachment B may be amended by providing an updated copy of Attachment B to all Parties.

13. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and any attachments hereto constitute the entire Agreement and understanding among the Parties regarding the administration and management of the Water Forum Office. If any provision of this Agreement conflicts with any provision of any other agreement related to the Water Forum Office, the conflicting provision of this Agreement shall control.

14. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall bind, and inure to the benefit of, the successors, assigns, heirs, and legal representatives of the Parties hereto.

Page 659 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

15. Waiver. The waiver at any time by any Party of its rights with respect to a default or other matter arising in connection with this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver with respect to any subsequent default or matter.

16. Construction and Interpretation. The Parties agree and acknowledge that this Agreement has been arrived at through negotiation, and that each Party has had a full and fair opportunity to revise the terms of this Agreement. Consequently, the normal rule of construction that any ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting Party shall not apply in construing or interpreting this Agreement.

17. Counterparts and Digital Signatures. This Agreement may be executed by the Parties in separate counterparts, each of which when so executed and delivered shall be an original. All such counterparts shall together constitute but one and the same instrument. Signatures scanned and transmitted electronically shall be deemed original signatures for purposes of this Agreement, with such scanned signatures having the same legal effect as original signatures. This Agreement may be executed through the use of an electronic signature and will be binding on each party as if it were physically executed.

18. Choice of Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California.

19. Severability. If one or more clauses, sentences, paragraphs or provisions of this Agreement is held to be unlawful, invalid or unenforceable, it is hereby agreed by the Parties that the remainder of the Agreement shall not be affected thereby.

Page 660 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

ATTACHMENT A

ADDITIONAL INSURED

The following Parties to this Agreement are named as additional insured pursuant to Section 7.b of this Agreement:
 City of Sacramento
 El Dorado Irrigation District
 Placer County Water Agency
 City of Folsom
 City of Roseville
 San Juan Water District
 Citrus Heights Water District
 Fair Oaks Water District
 Orange Vale Water Company
 Carmichael Water District
 Sacramento Suburban Water District
 Golden State Water Company
 California-American Water Company
 Sacramento County Water Agency
 County of Sacramento
 East Bay Municipal Utility District

Page 661 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

This page is intentionally left blank
to facilitate double-sided printing
and minimize paper use.

Page 662 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.11.

Folsom City Council
Staff Report

1 MEETING DATE:

3/10/2026
AGENDA SECTION:

New Business
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 11567 - A Resolution Directing the Finance Director to Make a Transfer of $718,278 of Available General Fund Reserve from the General Fund (Fund 010) with $50,000 to the IT Equipment Fund (Fund 603), $334,139 to the Facility Rehabilitation Fund (Fund 602), and $334,139 to the Park/Trail Maintenance Fund (Fund 609)

FROM: Finance Department

RECOMMENDATION / CITY COUNCIL ACTION

The Finance Director respectfully recommends that the City Council pass and adopt Resolution No. 11567 – A Resolution Directing the Finance Director to Make a Transfer of $718,278 of Available General Fund Reserve from the General Fund (Fund 010) with $50,000 to the IT Equipment Fund (Fund 603), $334,139 to the Facility Rehabilitation Fund (Fund 602), and $334,139 to the Park/Trail Maintenance Fund (Fund 609).

BACKGROUND / ISSUE

The Undesignated Fund Balances (Reserves) General Fund Reserve Policy states under the Transfer of Amounts in Excess of Specified Reserve section the following:

“To the extent funds accumulate in excess of the percentage of 20% , such funds shall be transferred to the Capital Projects Fund. This transfer shall be made upon completion of the annual financial audit. It is the intent of the City Council to affect such transfers through a Mid- Year Budget Resolution”

After the completion of the Fiscal Year 2024-25 annual financial audit, the General Fund had an unassigned fund balance of $25,335,749, exceeding the City Council’s top range 20% reserve policy by $718,278. This unassigned fund balance in excess of the 20% reserve policy

Page 663 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.12.
2 is the result of careful financial management by the City Council to allow for this one -time transfer.

FINANCIAL IMPACT

If the City Council approves a one -time transfer of available unassigned fund balance in accordance with the reserve policy , staf f recommends the transfer of $718,278 from the General Fund (Fund 010) with $50,000 to the IT Equipment Fund (Fund 603), $334,139 to the Facility Rehabilitation Fund (Fund 602) , and $334,139 to the Park/Trail Maintenance Rehabilitation Fund (Fund 609). T his transfer would reallocate available General Fund reserves above the established policy threshold to address identified capital and maintenance needs.

POLICY / RULE

Financial Policy VI. Undesignated Fund Balances (Reserves) amended December 12, 2023, states that the City shall maintain an Undesignated Fund Balance (reserve) for the General Fund with a target reserve range of 17% - 20% of the annual operating expenditures.

ATTACHMENT

1. Resolution No. 11567 - A Resolution Directing the Finance Director to Make a Transfer of $718,278 of Available General Fund Reserve from the General Fund (Fund 010) with $50,000 to the IT Equipment Fund (Fund 603), $334,139 to the Facility Rehabilitation Fund (Fund 602), and $334,139 to the Park/Trail Maintenance Fund (Fund 609)

Submitted,

Stacey Tamagni, Finance Director/CFO
Office of Management and Budget

Page 664 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.12.

Resolution No. 11567

Page 1 of 1 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 11567

A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE FINANCE DIRECTOR TO MAKE A TRANSFER OF $718,278 OF AVAILABLE GENERAL FUND RESERVE FROM THE GENERAL FUND (FUND 010) WITH $50,000 TO THE IT EQUIPMENT FUND (FUND 603), $334,139 TO THE FACILITY REHABILITATION FUND (FUND 602), AND $334,139 TO THE PARK/TRAIL MAINTENANCE FUND (FUND 609)

WHEREAS, the City shall maintain an Undesignated Fund Balance (reserve) for the General Fund in the range of 17% - 20%; and

WHEREAS, to the extent funds accumulate in excess of the percentage of 20%, such funds shall be transferred to the Capital Projects Fund; and

WHEREAS, this transfer shall be made upon completion of the annual financial audit; and

WHEREAS, it is the intent of the City Council to affect such transfers through a Mid-Year Budget Resolution; and

WHEREAS, after the completion of the Fiscal Year 2024-25 annual financial audit, the General Fund had an unassigned fund balance of $25,335,749, exceeding the City Council’s top range 20% reserve policy by $718,278; and

WHEREAS, staff recommends transferring the available reserve balance in the General Fund to capital projects funds in accordance with the reserve policy amended by the City Council at the December 12, 2023 City Council meeting; and

WHEREAS, sufficient funds are available in the General Fund unassigned fund balance to make the transfer:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Folsom directs the Finance Director to make a transfer of 718,278 from the General Fund (Fund 010) with $50,000 to the IT Equipment Fund (Fund 603), $334,139 to the Facility Rehabilitation Fund (Fund 602), and $334,139 to the Park/Trail Maintenance Rehabilitation Fund (Fund 609) .

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 10
th day of March, 2026, by the following roll-call vote:

AYES: Councilmember(s):

NOES: Councilmember(s):

ABSENT: Councilmember(s):

ABSTAIN: Councilmember(s):

___________________________________
Justin Raithel, MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________________
Christa Freemantle, CITY CLERK

Page 665 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.12.

This page is intentionally left blank
to facilitate double-sided printing
and minimize paper use.

Page 666 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.12.

Folsom City Council
Staff Report

1 MEETING DATE:

3/10/2026
AGENDA SECTION:

New Business
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 11570 - A Resolution Approving the Parks & Recreation Commission’s Recommendation to Name
Neighborhood Park #1 “Jackrabbit Hill Park”

FROM: Parks and Recreation Department

RECOMMENDATION / CITY COUNCIL ACTION
The Parks & Recreation Department recommends the City Council approve Resolution No. 11570 – A Resolution Approving the Parks & Recreation Commission’s Recommendation to Name Neighborhood Park #1 “Jackrabbit Hill Park”.

BACKGROUND
On September 14, 2021, the City Council approved a recommendation from the Parks & Recreation Commission for a new park and facility naming policy established by Resolution No. 10696. Resolution No. 10696 rescinds and replaces the prior park-naming Resolutions, Nos. 5177 and 3951, by creating a new park and facility naming policy. The new policy offers greater clarity and specific guidelines regarding name selection. The Park Naming Policy states that the Park Naming Subcommittee recommends a primary name, along with two alternative options, to the Parks & Recreation Commission, which then forwards a recommended name to the City Council.

At the June 3, 2025, meeting, the Parks & Recreation Commission reviewed park development priorities and recommended Neighborhood Park #1 (NP1) as the next park to be developed in the Folsom Plan Area. Funding in the Fiscal Year 2025–26 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) to initiate the park design process was approved by the City Council on October 28, 2025.

In alignment with the intent of the Park and Facility Naming Policy and the City’s ongoing commitment to community engagement, staff discussed a request from a Councilmember to explore the potential use of a public voting process to allow residents to express their preference among policy-compliant name options. Under this approach, public voting results would be presented to the City Council for final consideration and approval.

Page 667 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.13.
2 Park Naming Process
On October 14, 2025, the Parks & Recreation Commission Planning and Development Subcommittee met to review a list of eligible park names, including five options recommended by staff: Jackrabbit Hill Park, Hawk Ridge Park, Golden View Park, Horizon Park, and Sanjivini Park. During the meeting, the Subcommittee discussed revising the name Golden View Park to Golden Vista Park and determined not to advance the name Horizon Park, as it was not favored.

The Subcommittee requested that staff conduct additional research on the remaining name options.

Following the Subcommittee meeting, staff conducted further research on the four remaining name options to respond to questions raised by Subcommittee members. This research included correspondence with community members who submitted the names Hawk Ridge Park, Jackrabbit Hill Park, and Sanjivini Park, as well as outreach to a neighborhood resident who has hosted a Diwali festival near Neighborhood Park #1, providing additional cultural context and background related to the name Sanjivini.

On November 14, 2025, the Parks & Recreation Commission Planning and Development Subcommittee convened for its second meeting. Staff presented additional information along with an updated list of three suggested names and one alternate. Following the discussion, the Subcommittee agreed to forward four names to the full Parks & Recreation Commission for public vote to determine the preferred park name, consistent with a Council Member's request.

POLICY / RULE
The City of Folsom City Council approved a new park and facility naming policy established by Resolution No. 10696 in 2021 (Attachment 2). Resolution No. 10696 rescinds and replaces the prior park-naming resolutions, Nos. 5177 and 3951, and establishes a new park and facility naming policy. The new policy offers greater clarity and specific guidelines regarding name selection.

ANALYSIS
Establishing a park name at this stage helps provide context. It can inform the overall theme and character of the park during the design process, including wayfinding, signage, and community identity. Staff scheduled the first park community engagement meeting in January of 2026.

Neighborhood Park #1 is approximately 11.98 acres and located at the corner of Empire Ranch Road and Mangini Parkway. The site is intended to serve surrounding residential neighborhoods and contribute to the City’s broader park system. Below is a vicinity map showing the location of Neighborhood Park #1 (Exhibit A).

Page 668 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.13.
3 Exhibit A – Map of Neighborhood Park #1 Located Next to a Future Elementary School on the Corner of Empire Ranch and Mangini Parkway in the Folsom Plan Area.

According to Resolution 1096 for Park and Facility Naming Policy, it states:

“Neighborhood Parks (typically 7 acres to 10 acres in size) should be named after: 1.

Individuals who donated land or a large financial contribution to a specific facility or park, or 2.

Site-specific names to include geographic location, outstanding feature, design or theme of the park, whether natural geographical or manmade, native plants or wildlife, historical significance such as an event, group culture or place.”

In alignment with the park naming policy, staff reviewed the recommendations collected from the community. Staff grouped names by recurring themes and repetitive recommendations for the park name. Based on this analysis of names, the staff recommended that the subcommittee consider the following names.

Jackrabbit Hill Park
The name Jackrabbit Hill Park reflects the local wildlife, specifically jackrabbits that are frequently seen on and around the NP1 site. Black-tailed Jackrabbits (Lepus californicus) are native to the Folsom area and play an important role in the natural ecosystem. The word “hill” is geographically appropriate given the park’s sloped terrain.

Ten submitted names centered on jackrabbits or rabbits.

One resident noted: “The jackrabbit is a native animal frequently seen in our area, and it has become a beloved and familiar sight for residents. Whether it’s early in the morning or during golden sunsets, spotting a jackrabbit often brings smiles, joy, and a sense of connection to the natural beauty of Folsom.”

Page 669 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.13.
4 Golden Vista Park
The name Golden Vista Park reflects the NP1 site's geographic location, natural beauty, and topography. The NP1 site has a southwest-facing aspect, which will capture views of the sunset.

The name is inspired by the golden-colored landscape, rather than mining history.

Fourteen of the name submissions during the public call reflected themes of gold and golden.

One community member wrote: “When I first moved to Folsom in 2011, my introduction to the Folsom Ranch area was unforgettable. As the sun set over the hills, the entire landscape glowed with a warm, golden light. The fields shimmered like gold, creating a breathtaking scene.”

Hawk Ridge Park
The name Hawk Ridge Park highlights the local wildlife, particularly the various hawk species native to the Folsom area, including the Red-tailed Hawk, Red-shouldered Hawk, Swainson’s Hawk, and Cooper’s Hawk. The term “ridge” also reflects the park’s topography, which features a 20-foot elevation change across the site.

Six of the name submissions during the public call included references to birds of prey or raptors.

One community member wrote:“I think Hawk Ridge Park fits perfectly with the spirit of Folsom and its motto,‘Distinctive by Nature.’ It celebrates the wildlife, open spaces, and beauty that make Folsom such a unique place to live.”

Sanjivini Park
Submitted to reflect the cultural heritage of those living in the Folsom Plan Area, “Sanjivini” is a Sanskrit word meaning “life-giving” or “reviving.” The name symbolizes themes of health and rejuvenation.

Eighteen name submissions reflected broader themes of peace and unity, including Sanjivini.

The submitter shared the following: “A park is often associated with nature, greenery, health, and rejuvenation - all of which align perfectly with the symbolism of Sanjivini. Naming the park Sanjivini Park conveys:
• A place of restoration - where people can rejuvenate, much like the mythical herb restores life. • Connection to nature - since Sanjivini Booti was a plant/herb, it ties naturally to greenery and plants.
• Cultural resonance - the name reflects a sense of Indian heritage, mythology, and respect for natural healing.”

On December 2, 2025, in alignment with the Parks & Recreation Subcommittee, staff recommended that the Parks & Recreation Commission approve the selection of Golden Vista Park, Hawk Ridge Park, Jackrabbit Hill Park, and Sanjivini Park as the name options to be presented to the community for public voting on the preferred name as requested by a City

Page 670 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.13.
5 Council Member. The public voting results would then be presented to the City Council for final approval.

After deliberation the Parks & Recreation Commission voted unanimously on a motion to adopt the name Jackrabbit Hill Park to forward to City Council in line with the existing Park and Facility Naming Policy, with a note stating if City Council would like the Commission to reconsider public input or public voting on the preferred name, to send it back to the Parks & Recreation Commission and revise Resolution No. 10696. The Commission noted that their alternate choices for the park name are Golden Vista Park, Hawk Ridge Park, and Sanjivini Park.

While the Parks & Recreation Commission acted in accordance with the existing policy, the commission recommends that, if we would like the community to vote to select park names in the future, we revise the policy to better reflect the City’s commitment to public engagement in naming new community assets.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact on this decision.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
There is no environmental review required for this decision.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution No. 11570 - A Resolution Approving the Parks & Recreation Commission’s Recommendation to Name Neighborhood Park #1 “Jackrabbit Hill Park”

2. Attachment Resolution No. 10696

3. Park Name Suggestions List

Submitted,

Kelly Gonzalez,
Parks & Recreation Department Director

Page 671 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.13.

Attachment 1

Page 672 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.13.

Resolution No. 11570

Page 1 of 1 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 11570

A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION’S RECOMMENDATION TO NAME NEIGHBORHOOD PARK #1 “JACKRABBIT HILL PARK”

WHEREAS, on September 14, 2021, City Council adopted Resolution No. 10696, which rescinded and replaced prior park naming resolutions and established a comprehensive Park and Facility Naming Policy; and

WHEREAS, the Parks & Recreation Department solicited the community for potential park names in August and September 2025; and

WHEREAS, 131 names were submitted; and

WHEREAS, on December 2, 2025, the Parks & Recreation Commission voted unanimously to recommend the name Jackrabbit Hill Park for Neighborhood Park #1, with alternate name options identified as Golden Vista Park, Hawk Ridge Park, and Sanjivini Park; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Folsom hereby approves the Parks and Recreation Commission's Recommendation to Name Neighborhood Park #1 "Jackrabbit Hill Park".

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 10
th day of March 2026, by the following roll-call vote:

AYES: Councilmember(s):

NOES: Councilmember(s):

ABSENT: Councilmember(s):

ABSTAIN: Councilmember(s):

__________________________________
Justin Raithel, MAYOR

ATTEST:

______________________________
Christa Freemantle, CITY CLERK

Page 673 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.13.

Attachment 2

Page 674 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.13.

Resolution No. 10696

Page 1 of 2 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 10696

A RESOLUTION TO RESCIND AND REPLACE
RESOLUTION NO. 5177 AND RESOLUTION NO. 3951 TO CREATE

A NEW PARK AND FACILITY NAMING POLICY

WHEREAS, Resolution No. 3951, a park-naming policy was adopted by City Council on February 9, 1993: and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 5177, City Council adopted a modification to the park- naming policy on August 27, 1996; and
WHEREAS, Parks and Recreation Commission has forwarded their recommendation to the City Council to rescind and replace the existing park naming policy included in Resolution No. 3951 and 5177 to reflect desired changes expressed by the Community to expand naming options; clarify naming conventions; specifically include language for the naming of facilities, and allow for funding and sponsorship opportunities for entire parks and facilities and/or assets within them;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Folsom hereby rescinds and replaces Resolution No. 3951 and No. 5177 and adopts the following new policy:

PARK NAMING CRITERIA

1. Community Parks/Fields/Facilities should be named after (Community Parks are typically 20-50 acres in size):
a. Individuals/Families (see below)

2. Neighborhood Parks (typically 7 to 10 acres in size) should be named after:
a. Individual who donated land or large financial contribution to a specific facility or park; or
b. Site-Specific Names
i. Geographical location
ii. Outstanding feature, design, or theme of the park, whether natural geographical or manmade
iii. Native plants & wildlife
iv. Historical significance, such as event, group, culture, or place

3. Local Parks (typically 1-3 acres in size) should be named after:
a. Adjacent streets or subdivision in which they are located; or b. Individuals who donated land or large financial contribution to a specific facility or park
If Naming after Individuals or Families:

1. Preference is for an individual to be deceased

2. Only the last name to be used for the formal name

3. Preference is for individual to have left public service for a minimum of 6 years

4. Considerations:
a. Donation of land or large financial contribution to a specific facility b. Died or disabled in the line of duty as part of City service c. Contributed substantially and improved the quality of life in Folsom i. 10+ years of accomplishment
ii. Voluntary work (beyond the normal course of employment)

Page 675 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.13.

Resolution No. 10696

Page 2 of 2 ends

iii. Resume can include: service clubs, civic organizations, school community, elected/appointed positions, non-profit groups, youth sports

5. If named after a family, 1-4 above should apply to 2+ people

Sponsorships for Existing and Future Parks/Facilities

This policy allows for sponsorship opportunities to fund amenities within a park or facility as well as fund a portion of a park or facility. Recognition would be commensurate with said donations or funding. Such recognition could be plaques, signage, and/or other name recognition opportunities within the park or facility.

Process for Naming of Parks and Facilities:

1. Staff opens up the nomination period - this is done on an as-needed basis 2a. Nomination of an individual/family name
a. A public nomination must be submitted in writing with justification. The request should include the proposed name, naming justification, letters of support, requestor contact information, and any other relevant items of support. b. Staff and P&R Commission may submit names
c. Letters of support should be from non-related individuals d. Names will remain on the list for a period of 5 years, at which point they will need to be resubmitted to be considered
2b. Nomination of site-specific name
e. Nominations may be submitted in writing with justification f. Staff will provide site-specific relevant information about each park including but not limited to information about history, groups/individuals, botany/wildlife.

These names may be recycled if not chosen.
g. Parks & Recreation Commission may submit names

3. If not already active, a new Ad-Hoc Park Naming Subcommittee will be formed to review and recommend a primary name to the Parks & Recreation Commission, with two alternate names or choices

4. Parks & Recreation Commission recommends a name to the Folsom City Council

5. Folsom City Council formally adopts a name

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 14
th day of September 2021, by the following roll-call vote:

AYES: Councilmember(s):

NOES: Councilmember(s):

ABSENT: Councilmember(s):

ABSTAIN: Councilmember(s):

______________________________
Michael D. Kozlowski, MAYOR

ATTEST:

__________________________
Christa Freemantle, CITY CLERK

Page 676 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.13.

Attachment 3

Page 677 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.13.

Name Submissions for Neighborhood Park #1
ANGUS Park Heritage Grove Park Pony Express Park
Cattle Ranch Park Heritage Hollow Pony Express Park
Chung Wah Park Kow-O Park Powerhouse Park
Cowbell Farm park Little Farm Park Prison Blues Park
Farmers Market Park Mormon Island Park Pyrite Park
Frontier Park Pioneer Crossing Park Rhoades Ridge Park
Future Frontier Park Pony Express Community Park Southern Pacific Park Golden Spike
Aspen Rise Falcon Park Jackrabbit Park
Blue Oak Meadow Park Folsom Coyote Hill Park Jackrabbit Park Blue Oak Meadows Gentle Jumper’s Grove park Jackrabbit park Buckeye Oak Park Golden Eagle Park Jackrabbit Run Park
Coyote Call Park Grand coyote park Jackrabbits Hill Park Coyote Hill Park Hawk Ridge Park Poppy Park
Coyote Park Hopper’s Summit Park Poppy Park
Desert Cottontail Park Jack Rabbit Park Soaring Raptor Park Eagles' Nest Park Jackrabbit Hill Park Valley Oak Park
Falcon
Native plants & wildlife
Park Name
Historical significance (event, group, culture, or place) Park Name
1Page 678
03/10/2026 Item No.13.

Ahimsa Park Hello Park Sky ball Park
Confluence Park Horizon Park Skyline Park
Data Springs Park Kaleidoscope Park Solara Park
Diversity Park Magic Hill Park Terra Byte Park
Fusion Grove Magic Hill Park Unity Grove Park
Gateway Park Moonlight Park Unity park
Gumby Park Namaste Park Unity Park
Harmony Park Sanctuary Park Urban Oasis Park
Heavenly Park Sanjivini Park Vertex Park
Empire Hills Park Golden Prairie Commons Russell park
Empire Meadows Park Golden View Park Russell ranch park Empire Ranch Park Granite Bluff Park Sierra View Park
Empire Ranch Park Green Heaven park Valley View park
Empire Ranch park Hilltop Park Vista Del Oro Park
Empire Ridge Park Prairie Park Vista Ridge Park
Empire Ridge Park Prairie Point Park White Rock
Empire Vista Park Ranch View Park White Rock Park
Folsom Ranch Vista Park Rock Springs Park White Rock Park Golden Hills Rock Springs Summit Park White Rock Park
Golden Hills Park Rolling Hills White Rock Ranch
Golden Hills Park Rolling Hills Park White Rock Springs Golden Meadows Park Russel Ridge Park
Geographical location
Park Name
Outstanding feature, design, or theme
Park Name
2Page 679
03/10/2026 Item No.13.

Anna Maria Spark Park (or
Spark Park for short)
Escoto Park Nisenan Park
Aquino Family Park Joerger Family Park Perfect Park
Bandaid Laurel A Finta Pyrite Park
Butt cheese lazy govt worker Livermore Park Take the measure G put it up your measure A
Cruntley Park Malcolm X Park Tom Paniagua Park

DO NOT NAME IT AFTER A

PERSON FAMILY OR
POLITICIAN.

Park Name
Ineligible Names
3Page 680
03/10/2026 Item No.13.

Folsom City Council
Staff Report

1 MEETING DATE:

3/10/2026
AGENDA SECTION:

New Business
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 11574– A Resolution Adopting the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Mid-Year Budget for the City of Folsom

FROM: City Manager's Office

RECOMMENDATION / CITY COUNCIL ACTION

Staff recommends that the City Council pass and adopt Resolution No. 11574 – A Resolution Adopting the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Mid-Year Budget for the City of Folsom.

BACKGROUND / ISSUE

The City Manager’s Proposed Preliminary Budget for Fiscal Year 2025–26 was presented to the City Council on May 27, 2025, during a special budget workshop. During the workshop, the City Manager outlined his planned budget review process as follows:

1.) The Preliminary Budget for the fiscal year starting July 1 st is developed and approved
by the City Council in May or June of each year.

2.) The Final Budget is reviewed and approved by the City Council in October or November of each year.

3.) The Mid-Year Budget is reviewed and approved by the City Council typically in February or March of each year.

In addition, the City Manager introduced a new format for the Proposed Preliminary Budget for Fiscal Year 2025-26, highlighted key components of the proposed budget, and responded to questions from the City Council members and community participants.

As part of the Preliminary Budget process, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the Fiscal Year 2025–26 Proposed Preliminary Budget on June 10, 2025. During the hearing, staff presented information to the City Council that included historical revenue and expenditure

Page 681 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.14.
2 trends. The proposed FY 2025-2026 General Fund budget presented that evening anticipated revenues of $114,442,459 and Transfers In of $5,546,145 for a grand total in revenues of $119,988,604. The projected expenditures totaled $121,877,171 with Transfers Out of $1,601,982 for a grand total for expenses of $123,479,153. The budget intended to use $3,490,549 of unassigned General Fund Balance to maintain current services. To provide additional time for the City Council and the public to review the proposed budget City staff asked that the City Council continue the public hearing on the budget until Tuesday, June 24, 2025. This time allowed staff to further review the budget as well as receive feedback from the public and City Council.

On June 24, 2025, the City Council reviewed additional budget modifications that reduced the projected General Fund deficit from $3,490,549 to $3,038,902. In adopting the FY 2025–26 Budget, the City Council acknowledged that staff would continue to pursue cost -saving opportunities and return with additional recommendations for Council and public consideration during the September/October 2025 timeframe.

As part of the Final Budget process, on September 23, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11463 approving Phase One of the General Fund cost-saving measures for FY 2025–26. These measures total ed approximately $3,000,000 in savings for FY 2025–26 and were projected to provide ongoing annual savings. The anticipated cost savings were achieved through the reduction of 20 positions, through the elimination of vacant positions, as well as targeted staffing reductions within the Fire, Police, Finance/Information Technology, City Attorney’s, and Library Departments.

As part of the continuation of the Final Budget process, on October 10, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11482 approving Phase Two of the General Fund cost saving measures for FY 2025–26. The approved Phase Two measures were estimated to generate General Fund savings of $1,159,236 in FY 2025–26 and $2,318,473 in FY 2026–27. These additional savings are primarily associated with service reorganization efforts and the increased use of alternative funding sources within the Comm unity Development, Parks and Recreation, Public Works, and Environmental & Water Resources/Utilities Departments.

ANALYSIS

The City Manager’s Fiscal Year 2025-26 Proposed Mid-Year Budget is available on the City’s web site at
https://www.folsom.ca.us/home/showpublisheddocument/24122

The City Manager’s Proposed Mid-Year Budget for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025–26 represents the cumulative result of all budgetary actions taken since the adoption of the FY 2025–26 Preliminary Budget. The Proposed Mid-Year Budget is comprised of the original adopted FY 2025–26 Preliminary Budget, the Encumbrance Carryforward Budget, all revenue and appropriation adjustments approved by the City Council through formal resolution during the fiscal year, and the modifications associated with the Phase One and Phase Two General Fund cost-saving measures previously adopted by the City Council.

Page 682 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.14.
3 The Encumbrance Carryforward Budget reflects the continuation of authorized but unspent purchase orders (POs) from the prior fiscal year into the current fiscal year. The PO carryforward process ensures that funds committed for goods or services such as contractual services, or material purchases remain available until the related obligations are fulfilled.

Carrying forward the associated budget authority along with the purchase orders is critical to maintaining fiscal integrity, honoring legally binding commitments, and ensuring that previously approved contracts and procurements can be completed without interruption.

In addition, the Proposed Mid- Year Budget incorporates all Council approved revenue increases and appropriation adjustments adopted by resolution during the fiscal year, as well as the expenditure reductions and structural adjustments implemented through the Phase One and Phase Two General Fund cost -saving measures. The amounts reflected in the “Adjustment” column represent the net impact of these cumulative changes when compared to the adopted FY 2025–26 Preliminary Budget.

The City Manager’s Proposed Mid- Year Budget for Fiscal Year 2025 –26 projects total revenues of $116,043,936 and total expenditures of $122,674,754. In addition, the budget includes $5,546,145 in transfers in and $2,478,952 in transfers out, resulting in net transfers of $3,067,193. Collectively, these figures produce expenditures in excess of revenues of $3,563,625.

It is important to note that $3,845,592 of the proposed expenditures represents Encumbrance Carryforward appropriations. These amounts are funded by the General Fund assigned fund balance and are separate and distinct from the General Fund unassigned fund balance, which is used in calculating the City’s General Fund reserve. When the impact of the Encumbrance Carryforward is excluded, projected total revenues exceed total expenditures by approximately $282,000, resulting in a budgeted increase to the General Fund unassigned fund balance.

Under the Proposed Mid-Year Budget, the unassigned General Fund balance for FY 2025–26 is projected to total $25.6 million. This reflects an increase of $3.3 million compared to the FY 2025–26 Adopted Budget unassigned balance of $22.3 million and is $282,000 higher than the actual unassigned General Fund balance of $25.3 million at the close of FY 2024–25.

The improved fiscal position is directly attributable to the comprehensive cost-saving measures implemented by City staff as part of Phase One and Phase Two General Fund budget balancing strategy. At the time of the preliminary budget adoption, the City faced a projected $3.0 million operating deficit. Through disciplined financial management, expenditure reductions, service reorganizations, and the strategic use of alternative funding sources, staff has eliminated the deficit and now projects a modest year-end available balance.

While this outcome reflects significant progress and the diligent efforts of City staff, it is important to note that the City continues to face substantial long-term infrastructure investment needs. Maintaining fiscal stability will require continued prudence, as significant resources must be allocated in future years to address deferred maintenance and critical capital improvements.

Page 683 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.14.
4 ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution No. 11574 – A Resolution A dopting the Fiscal Year 2025- 26 Mid-Year Budget for the City of Folsom

2. City of Folsom Proposed Mid-Year Budget Fiscal Year 2025-26

Submitted,

Bryan Whitemyer, City Manager

Page 684 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.14.

ATTACHMENT 1

Resolution No. 11574 – A Resolution Adopting the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Mid-Year Budget for the City of Folsom

Page 685 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.14.

Resolution No. 11574

Page 1 of 1 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 11574

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 MID-YEAR BUDGET FOR

THE CITY OF FOLSOM

WHEREAS, on the 27th day of May 2025, the City Manager presented to the City Council the City Manager’s FY 2025-26 Proposed Preliminary Budget; and

WHEREAS, on the 10th day of June 2025, a Public Hearing was held and the City Council received presentations from the City Manager and City Staff regarding the FY 2025- 26 Proposed Preliminary Budget; and

WHEREAS, on the 24
th day of June 2025 the City Council reviewed additional budget modifications and adopted the FY 2025-26 Preliminary Budget and acknowledged that staff would return to Council with additional recommendations for cost saving opportunities in September/October 2025; and

WHEREAS, on the 23
rd day of September 2025 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11463 approving Phase One of the General Fund cost saving measures for Fiscal Year 2025- 26 totaling approximately $3 million through the reduction of 20 positions, elimination of vacant positions, as well as targeted staffing reductions with the Fire, Police, Finance/Information Technology, City Attorney’s and Library Departments; and

WHEREAS, on the 10
th day of October 2025 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11482 approving Phase Two of the General Fund cost saving measures for Fiscal Year 2025- 26 totaling approximately $1.2 million in FY 2025-26 and $2.3 million in FY2026-27 through service reorganization efforts and the increased use of alternative funding sources with the Community Development, Parks and Recreation, Public Works, and Environmental & Water Resources/Utilities Departments; and

WHEREAS, The City Manager’s Proposed Mid-Year Budget for Fiscal Year 2025–26 is projected to result in an unassigned General Fund balance of $25.6 million representing an increase of $3.3 million over the adopted Fiscal Year 2025–26 Preliminary Budget unassigned General Fund balance of $22.3 million and the projected balance is also $282,000 higher than the actual unassigned General Fund balance of $25.3 million at the close of FY 2024–25; and

WHEREAS, the City Manager’s FY 2025- 26 Proposed Mid -Year Budget is on file and available for inspection on the City website; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Folsom that City of Folsom Proposed Mid- Year Budget Fiscal Year 2025 -26 is hereby approved and appropriated to the respective departments for their offices and operations in the amounts, and for the objects and purposes, as specified therein.

Page 686 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.14.

Resolution No. 11574

Page 1 of 1 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of March 2026, by the following roll-call vote:

AYES: Councilmember(s):

NOES: Councilmember(s):

ABSENT: Councilmember(s):

ABSTAIN: Councilmember(s):

___________________________________
Justin Raithel, MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________________
Christa Freemantle, CITY CLERK

Page 687 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.14.

ATTACHMENT 2

City of Folsom Proposed Mid-Year Budget Fiscal Year 2025-26

Page 688 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.14.

City of Folsom
State of California

PROPOSED MID-YEAR BUDGET
FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026
March 10, 2026

Mayor
Justin Raithel
Councilmembers
Mike Kozlowski
Sarah Aquino
Barbara Leary
Anna Rohrbough

City Manager
Bryan Whitemyer

Page 689 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.14.

Fund Name Description
Cash Balance
07/01/2025
Projected
Revenues
Projected
Transfers In
Projected
Transfers Out
Projected
Expenditures
Projected
Ending Balance
06/30/2026
010 - General Fund 29,463,308 116,043,936 5,546,145 2,478,952 122,674,754 25,899,683 012 - General Grants Fund 142,447 553,262 0 0 553,262 142,447 031 - SPIF Fee 252,265 0 0 0 0 252,265
032 - SPIF Parkland Fee 272,556 0 0 0 0 272,556
033 - SPIF Facilities Land 11,448 0 0 0 0 11,448
034 - SPIF Off-Site Road Set-Aside 933,338 0 0 0 0 933,338 31,075,362 116,597,198 5,546,145 2,478,952 123,228,016 27,511,737 Special Revenue Funds
201 - Community Development Block Grant 178,968 263,000 0 0 262,000 179,968 203 - Traffic Congestion Relief 6,636 0 0 0 0 6,636
204 - Los Cerros L&L AD 89,423 43,577 0 1,414 132,055 (469) 205 - Briggs Ranch L&L AD 0 80,576 0 2,348 205,812 (127,584) 206 - Transportation System Mgt 353,731 41,000 0 204 35,000 359,527 207 - Natoma Station L&L AD (653,703) 170,279 0 3,805 272,932 (760,161) 208 - Folsom Hghts L&L AD 73,477 22,799 0 354 31,001 64,921 209 - Broadstone Unit 3 L&L 77,786 38,755 0 313 30,746 85,482 210 - Broadstone L&L AD 264,725 398,482 0 4,894 578,029 80,284 212 - Hannaford Cross L&L AD (47,067) 20,165 0 581 35,140 (62,623) 213 - Lake Natoma Shores L&L 77,134 22,733 0 617 38,231 61,019 214 - Cobble Hills/Reflect L&L (80,717) 44,011 0 939 62,304 (99,949) 215 - Prairie Oaks #2 L&L 250,136 323,773 0 7,340 344,324 222,245 219 - Folsom Commnty Cult’l Ser 111,867 3,500 0 0 40,000 75,367 221 - Housing Trust Fund 951,872 62,000 0 553 155,000 858,319 223 - Humbug Willow Creek 56,199 50,000 0 622 23,799 81,778 225 - General Plan Amendment 729,890 110,000 0 368 107,645 731,877 226 - Tree Planting & Replacement 1,408,257 135,000 0 5,554 449,498 1,088,205 230 - Truck Management Plan 651,644 0 0 0 0 651,644
231 - Sierra Estates L&L 12,649 11,853 0 326 13,524 10,652 232 - Lakeridge Estates L&L 274,549 36,643 0 1,282 59,913 249,997 233 - La Collina Del Lago L&L (7,702) 0 0 0 0 (7,702)
234 - Cobble Ridge L&L 138,357 13,909 0 330 22,635 129,301 235 - Road Maintenance & Rehab 3,140,458 2,326,600 0 0 3,484,756 1,982,302 236 - Prairie Oaks Ranch L&L AD (551,377) 196,220 0 2,038 160,733 (517,928) 237 - Silverbrook L&L 98,919 17,292 0 246 11,098 104,867 238 - Folsom Housing Fund 23,960,396 620,000 0 26,395 703,854 23,850,147 240 - Park Dedication (Quimby) 2,819,882 450,000 0 2,193 409,972 2,857,717 243 - Gas Tax 2106 1,759,342 404,616 0 225,000 166,692 1,772,266 244 - Gas Tax 2107 2,543,289 805,619 0 500,000 314,232 2,534,676 245 - Gas Tax 2107.5 2,288,560 878,778 0 225,000 314,232 2,628,106 246 - Planning Services 196,652 499,956 0 8,181 689,371 (944) 247 - Gas Tax 2105 2,214,887 604,942 0 250,000 0 2,569,829 248 - Transportation Tax (SB325) 469,719 89,500 0 0 70,283 488,936 249 - Willow Creek East L&L AD (34,267) 60,059 0 638 25,451 (297) 250 - Blue Ravine Oaks L&L AD 162,732 39,217 0 501 30,320 171,128 251 - Steeplechase L&L AD 23,241 25,268 0 704 38,688 9,117 252 - Willow Creek South L&L AD 443,965 171,748 0 4,584 269,024 342,105 253 - American RV Canyon No L&L (171,826) 105,205 0 4,916 71,608 (143,145) 254 - Historical District 11,056 5,000 0 163 8,000 7,893 260 - Willow Springs L&L 7,732 14,776 0 367 16,131 6,010 262 - Willow Spgs CFD 11 M. Dist. 610,795 215,288 0 4,014 208,565 613,504 266 - CFD #12 Maint. Dist. 1,005,212 630,824 0 13,529 856,184 766,323 City of Folsom
Budget Summary By Fund - Projected Balance
2025-26

Page 1 of 420 ends

Page 690 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.14.

Fund Name Description
Cash Balance
07/01/2025
Projected
Revenues
Projected
Transfers In
Projected
Transfers Out
Projected
Expenditures
Projected
Ending Balance
06/30/2026
City of Folsom
Budget Summary By Fund - Projected Balance
2025-26
267 - CFD #13 ARC Maint. Dist. 2,666 123,278 0 2,636 143,136 (19,828) 270 - ARC No. L&L Dist. #2 210,429 16,503 0 233 9,230 217,469 271 - The Residences at ARC, N 47,302 30,136 0 456 25,762 51,220 273 - Sphere of Influence 62,512 0 0 0 0 62,512
274 - Oaks at Willow Springs 2,855,726 0 0 0 0 2,855,726 275 - ARC L&L Dist. #3 825,061 320,635 0 5,479 419,405 720,812 276 - New Measure A 5,033,347 3,857,552 0 0 4,132,485 4,758,414 278 - Blue Ravine Oaks No. 2 L&L 93,723 25,137 0 1,020 35,637 82,203 281 - Folsom Heights L&L 2 292,211 82,817 0 2,215 95,204 277,609 282 - Broadstone L&L 4 (851,971) 105,454 0 6,883 162,055 (915,455) 283 - CFD #16 Islands Maint. Dist. 881,287 165,481 0 2,283 106,571 937,914 284 - Willow Creek Estates East #2 62,716 86,249 0 1,245 32,102 115,618 285 - Prospect Ridge 65,691 47,948 0 463 32,102 81,074
288 - CFD #18 Maint. District 5,032,995 2,435,382 0 17,930 1,477,113 5,973,334 289 - CFD #19 Maint. District 1,010,634 187,317 0 1,564 99,756 1,096,631 291 - CFD #23 IA1 Maint. District 318,412 166,886 0 714 77,549 407,035 292 - CFD #23 IA2 Maint. District 397,119 34,149 0 75 31,355 399,838 293 - CFD #23 IA3 Maint. District 143,568 155,987 0 288 29,469 269,798 294 - CFD #23 IA4 Maint. District 125,754 135,642 0 191 76,456 184,749 295 - CFD #23 IA5 Maint. District 683,471 0 0 0 0 683,471 296 - CFD #23 IA6 Maint. District 240,914 0 0 2 0 240,912 297 - CFD #23 IA7 Maint. District 111,002 0 0 27 0 110,975 751 - Police Special Revenue 32,347 25,000 0 1,110 50,000 6,237 753 - Zoo Special Revenue 239,725 34,000 0 0 131,000 142,725 760 - Wetland/Open Space Maint 29,426 10,000 0 389 50,000 (10,963) 766 - Police Impound (1,464) 0 0 0 0 (1,464)
Total Special Revenue Funds 63,862,082 18,098,516 0 1,345,516 17,965,169 62,649,913 Debt Service
302 - CCF Debt Service 348,597 0 0 0 0 348,597
305 - 1993 G O School Fac D S 55,578 0 0 0 0 55,578
320 - FSAD Refunding 275,042 0 0 0 0 275,042
321 - 1982-1 Nimbus AD D S 965,627 0 0 0 0 965,627
325 - Traffic Signal COP Refi (22,132) 0 0 0 0 (22,132) 337 - Recreation Facilities COP 96,995 0 0 0 0 96,995
604 - Folsom Ranch Financing Auth 41,127,346 10,689,300 0 0 10,689,300 41,127,346 605 - Folsom Public Financ Auth 28,668,400 6,072,474 0 0 6,072,474 28,668,400 Total Debt Service Funds 71,515,453 16,761,774 0 0 16,761,774 71,515,453 Capital Projects
411 - Supplemental Park Fee 315,801 5,000 0 0 0 320,801 412 - Park Improvements 9,531,116 1,150,000 0 10,162 775,497 9,895,457 414 - Johnny Cash Trl Art Experience 26,907 9,000 0 0 10,000 25,907 416 - CFD #10 Russell Ranch 558,401 13,000 0 436 0 570,965 418 - Prairie Oak 92-2 1915 AD 377 0 0 0 0 377
428 - Police Capital 1,984,695 245,000 0 1,516 0 2,228,179 431 - Redevelopment Agy Cap Pro 2,195 0 0 0 0 2,195
438 - Parkway II CFD #14 2,209,769 50,000 0 1,549 0 2,258,220 441 - Fire Capital 709,072 255,000 0 361 0 963,711
443 - Hwy 50 Imprv Capital 7,083,129 1,230,000 0 5,029 100,000 8,208,100 444 - Hwy 50 Interch Capital 14,285,257 2,600,000 0 10,096 350,000 16,525,161 445 - General Capital 2,990,035 455,000 0 2,234 10,000 3,432,801 446 - Transportation Impr 14,050,176 5,323,755 0 64,470 2,888,924 16,420,537

Page 2 of 420 ends

Page 691 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.14.

Fund Name Description
Cash Balance
07/01/2025
Projected
Revenues
Projected
Transfers In
Projected
Transfers Out
Projected
Expenditures
Projected
Ending Balance
06/30/2026
City of Folsom
Budget Summary By Fund - Projected Balance
2025-26
448 - Drainage Capital Imprv 1,451,639 805,940 0 10,674 1,724,598 522,307 449 - Transit Capital 13,950,176 1,350,000 0 5,128 50,000 15,245,048 451 - Light Rail Transportation 1,402,337 205,000 0 1,467 257,580 1,348,290 452 - General Park Equip Cap 593,251 110,000 0 451 142,876 559,924 456 - Water Impact Fee (Ord 912) 2,505,433 280,000 0 306,917 250,642 2,227,874 458 - Library Development Fund 78,697 0 0 61 78,636 0
459 - Corp Yard Capital 3,229,325 735,000 0 2,170 50,000 3,912,155 470 - FSPA Infrastructure 22,006 500 0 17 0 22,489
472 - FSPA Capital 45,887,106 11,800,000 0 99,993 2,472,058 55,115,055 601 - Vehicle Replacement Fund 84,756 2,000 125,000 66 (175,066) 386,756 602 - Facility Rehab Fund 9,744,769 0 334,139 4,629 3,640,000 6,434,279 603 - IT Equipment Fund 100,000 0 250,000 0 150,000 200,000 607 - Police Vehicle/Equip Fund 0 0 520,982 0 520,982 0 608 - Fire Vehicle/Equip Fund 0 0 756,000 0 756,000 0
609 - Park/Trail Maint/Rehab Fund 791,684 12,792 334,139 0 791,684 346,931 Total Capital Projects Funds 133,588,109 26,636,987 2,320,260 527,426 14,844,411 147,173,519 Enterprise
520 - Water Operating 30,708,469 19,136,000 300,000 1,033,020 28,141,692 20,969,757 521 - Water Impact Fee Fund 3,914,738 340,000 0 5,778 383,879 3,865,081 522 - Water Meters 899,864 295,000 0 10,259 522,139 662,466 530 - Sewer Operating 20,166,173 12,246,435 0 874,169 10,502,489 21,035,950 531 - Sewer Impact Fee Fund 329,183 191,920 0 7,854 90,000 423,249 536 - Facility Augmentation Critical 45,802 500 0 35 0 46,267 537 - Facility Augmentation General 5,107 1,500 0 710 0 5,897 540 - Solid Waste Operating 21,456,206 29,894,633 0 2,010,608 26,411,758 22,928,473 541 - Solid Waste Impact Fee Fund 504,377 107,500 0 371 85,000 526,506 543 - Landfill Closure 1,015 0 60,000 0 100,000 (38,985) 544 - Solid Waste Capital FPA 848,616 445,000 0 31,707 165,000 1,096,909 Total Enterprise Funds 78,879,550 62,658,488 360,000 3,974,511 66,401,957 71,521,570 Internal Service
015 - Compensated Leaves (65,271) 727,360 100,000 0 760,867 1,222 606 - Risk Management 2,397,457 24,299,493 0 0 24,502,777 2,194,173 Total Internal Service Funds 2,332,186 25,026,853 100,000 0 25,263,644 2,195,395 Trust Funds
279 - RDA Obligation Retirement 6,907,342 3,966,043 0 0 3,735,475 7,137,910 280 - RDA SA Trust - Housing 155,567 4,000 0 0 0 159,567 702 - Blue Ravine East Agency 8,948 0 0 0 0 8,948
703 - CFD #23 IA7 Folsom Ranch 96,664 7,500 0 0 3,400 100,764 706 - Legends 93-2 1915 AD Agcy 9,285 0 0 0 0 9,285
707 - Natoma Sta 92-1 1915 AD Agy 22,785 0 0 0 0 22,785 708 - Folsom Auto Plaza 1915 AD 65,669 0 0 0 0 65,669
709 - Lk Natoma Shor 93-1 AD Agy 1,529 0 0 0 0 1,529
710 - Prairie Oaks AD92-2 Refi 73,907 0 0 0 0 73,907
711 - Cobble Hills Rdg AD Agncy 33,727 0 0 0 0 33,727
712 - Ridgeview 95-1 1915 AD Agy 14,507 0 0 0 0 14,507
713 - Cresleigh 95-2 AD Agency 24,577 0 0 0 0 24,577
715 - Hannaford Cross 1915 Refi 47,405 0 0 0 0 47,405
716 - CFD #23 IA2 F Ranch 5,354,429 586,700 0 0 609,659 5,331,470 718 - CFD #23 IA3 F Ranch 3,308,620 526,806 0 0 547,064 3,288,362 719 - CFD #23 IA4 F Ranch 11,509,698 7,500 0 0 576,350 10,940,848 720 - CFD #2013-01 Wtr Fac & Sup 986,608 20,000 0 0 1,473,000 (466,392)

Page 3 of 420 ends

Page 692 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.14.

Fund Name Description
Cash Balance
07/01/2025
Projected
Revenues
Projected
Transfers In
Projected
Transfers Out
Projected
Expenditures
Projected
Ending Balance
06/30/2026
City of Folsom
Budget Summary By Fund - Projected Balance
2025-26
721 - CFD #1 Willow Cr So Refi 5,141 0 0 0 0 5,141
722 - CFD #2 Natoma Station 120,123 0 0 0 0 120,123
723 - CFD #3 Folsom Hgts Refi 434 0 0 0 0 434
724 - CFD #4 Broadstone Refi 57,474 0 0 0 0 57,474
725 - CFD #23 IA5 F Ranch (19,735) 0 0 0 0 (19,735)
726 - CFD #23 IA6 F Ranch (19,672) 7,500 0 0 125 (12,297) 727 - CFD #7 Broadstone #2 336,475 0 0 0 0 336,475
728 - CFD #8 Parkway 38,267 0 0 0 0 38,267
729 - CFD #9 Willow Creek So 49,890 0 0 0 0 49,890
730 - CFD #10 Russell Ranch 10,689,707 4,751,708 0 0 4,786,884 10,654,531 733 - CFD #16 Islands IA2 872,706 305,019 0 0 305,019 872,706 734 - CFD #14 Parkway II 725,200 1,267,619 0 0 1,241,027 751,792 735 - Fol His Dist Bus Imp Dist 32,300 0 0 0 0 32,300
736 - CFD #16 Islands at Parkshore 735,184 272,263 0 0 178,050 829,397 737 - CFD #17 Willow Hill Pipeline 1,545,856 468,922 0 0 451,744 1,563,034 738 - CFD #18 Area Wide 9,437,765 2,290,869 0 0 21,356,337 (9,627,703) 739 - CFD #19 Mangini Ranch 4,215,543 2,676,565 0 0 2,627,710 4,264,398 740 - CFD #20 Russell Ranch 12,472,084 1,505,619 0 0 1,485,819 12,491,884 741 - CFD #21 White Rock Springs Ran 2,462,238 1,334,394 0 0 1,218,499 2,578,133 742 - CFD #22 Folsom Heights (22,294) 0 0 0 0 (22,294)
743 - CFD #23 IA1 F Ranch 4,590,813 1,388,645 0 0 1,371,036 4,608,422 Total Trust Funds 76,946,766 21,387,672 0 0 41,967,198 56,367,240 All Fund Total 458,199,508287,167,488 8,326,405 8,326,405 306,432,169438,934,827

Page 4 of 420 ends

Page 693 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.14.

Summary of General Fund Revenues and Expenditures
Fund 010
FY 2020-21
Actual
FY 2021-22
Actual
FY 2022-23
Actual
FY 2023-24
Actual
FY 2024-25
Actual
FY 2025-26
Adopted
Budget
FY 2025-26
Proposed
Mid-Year Budget
Adjustment
(Mid-Year Budget
Less
Adopted Budget)
Revenues
Taxes 59,967,769 66,075,402 70,086,681 73,208,866 75,631,595 80,622,692 80,622,692 0 Licenses & Permits 4,241,034 4,299,748 4,010,647 4,977,444 3,916,292 4,068,589 4,503,589 435,000 Intergovernmental 9,753,188 10,045,573 12,900,194 14,025,143 13,793,539 11,251,068 11,257,871 6,803 Charges for Services 13,959,335 18,250,447 17,696,356 18,948,237 21,648,606 16,908,910 18,058,910 1,150,000 Fines, Impact Fees 153,339 133,772 133,080 207,365 150,269 110,200 118,200 8,000 Interest 69,519 (951,314) 894,693 2,891,036 2,508,277 600,000 600,000 0 Other Revenue 1,380,315 1,176,601 1,181,058 452,639 (81,380) 881,000 882,674 1,674 Total Revenues 89,524,499 99,030,227 106,902,709 114,710,730 117,567,198 114,442,459 116,043,936 1,601,477 Expenditures
0101100 - City Council 104,152 112,377 118,539 120,089 140,603 155,116 155,116 0 0101200 - City Manager's Office 721,621 700,467 690,940 736,166 775,034 797,322 812,309 14,987 0101203 - City Manager's Office - PIO 460,718 466,083 516,999 547,952 591,635 628,587 631,435 2,848 0101400 - City Clerk 581,740 591,310 648,107 637,181 696,858 752,283 745,502 (6,781) 0101401 - City Clerk - Elections 65,873 0 46,173 0 61,145 0 0 0 0101601 - Finance- Administration 444,849 445,758 551,754 518,758 518,038 586,392 572,774 (13,618) 0101602 - Finance- Disbursements 615,952 564,817 564,266 752,331 799,217 879,197 884,037 4,840 0101603 - Finance - Revenue 795,003 735,201 914,563 970,777 801,284 878,909 1,040,778 161,869 0101604 - Finance - Financial Services 1,146,806 1,182,517 1,281,548 1,200,276 1,267,507 1,642,612 1,780,372 137,760 0101700 - City Attorney 953,138 1,095,212 1,307,443 1,267,677 1,323,800 1,383,331 1,205,147 (178,184) 0101800 - Human Resources 622,182 602,453 673,714 834,153 849,379 1,027,029 1,055,285 28,256 0101904 - IT - Info Svcs 1,843,038 1,840,028 2,007,640 2,142,912 1,900,177 2,294,062 2,457,648 163,586 0101905 - IT- GIS 155,092 196,954 236,417 317,814 337,640 382,527 267,988 (114,539) 0101902 - Parks & Rec - Facilities 1,473,134 1,914,986 2,103,702 3,317,082 3,227,415 2,264,680 3,170,358 905,678 0102700 - Parks & Rec - Administration 799,947 807,163 854,864 898,200 1,016,863 1,081,431 1,139,386 57,955 0102710 - Parks & Rec - Comm & Cultural Svcs 1,368,765 1,982,598 2,680,164 2,694,057 2,926,397 2,792,550 3,200,042 407,492 0102711 - Parks & Rec - Community Facilities 0 0 450 0 0 0 0 0 0102720 - Parks & Rec - Outdoor Sports 1,192,935 1,693,408 2,743,801 2,117,223 2,090,470 2,146,278 1,856,062 (290,216) 0102730 - Parks & Rec - Aquatics 2,576,346 1,724,335 2,217,494 2,189,239 2,099,843 2,140,434 2,365,911 225,477 0103801 - Parks & Rec - Park Maintenance 2,895,757 3,216,766 3,226,003 3,636,625 4,040,954 5,194,579 5,687,875 493,296 0103802 - Parks & Rec - Park Dev 157,489 175,176 264,888 248,862 480,697 580,196 641,513 61,317 0103803 - Parks & Rec - Trails 719,527 608,225 296,443 312,572 238,087 252,775 511,717 258,942 0103805 - Parks & Rec - Municipal Landscaping 1,568,648 1,684,296 2,046,564 2,254,397 2,182,229 1,808,916 1,440,419 (368,497) 0104000 - Parks & Rec - Zoo 1,648,755 1,917,544 2,376,124 3,226,894 2,694,100 2,541,399 2,574,237 32,838 0101909 - Police - Animal Control 233,215 232,439 277,896 390,701 370,594 406,978 419,732 12,754 0102110 - Police - Administration 2,978,264 3,752,555 4,851,227 4,607,086 4,268,887 3,953,669 3,882,964 (70,705) 0102111 - Police - Support Services 3,634,826 3,674,585 4,053,600 3,992,357 4,287,880 4,809,564 4,743,403 (66,161)

Page 5 of 420 ends

Page 694 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.14.

Summary of General Fund Revenues and Expenditures
Fund 010
FY 2020-21
Actual
FY 2021-22
Actual
FY 2022-23
Actual
FY 2023-24
Actual
FY 2024-25
Actual
FY 2025-26
Adopted
Budget
FY 2025-26
Proposed
Mid-Year Budget
Adjustment
(Mid-Year Budget
Less
Adopted Budget)
0102112 - Police - Operations 13,496,724 13,911,636 14,192,085 15,889,941 17,332,593 17,759,513 18,318,291 558,778 0102113 - Police - Investigations 3,221,597 3,104,183 2,885,039 3,301,779 3,675,022 4,492,216 3,602,045 (890,171) 0102220 - Fire - Administration 1,772,999 2,174,459 2,623,131 2,599,250 2,994,305 3,172,887 2,784,141 (388,746) 0102221 - Fire - Emergency Response 20,875,664 22,076,490 21,905,235 23,413,909 26,936,506 26,699,344 25,556,693 (1,142,651) 0102222 - Fire - Prevention 558,290 545,028 417,838 554,070 490,865 502,243 520,109 17,866 0102223 - Fire - Emergency Medical 565,007 949,752 673,950 1,136,681 2,918,427 589,553 1,462,398 872,845 0102300 - Community Development - Admin 725,524 862,562 834,003 1,711,027 1,440,246 1,027,761 1,102,917 75,156 0102310 - Community Development - Engineering 2,853,007 3,464,248 3,843,386 3,070,958 2,522,819 1,890,800 1,833,618 (57,182) 0102320 - Community Development - Building Services 1,699,346 2,055,017 2,778,896 2,633,569 2,403,687 2,367,397 2,416,030 48,633 0102325 - Community Development - Code Enforcement 380,915 407,434 433,132 469,975 433,349 541,018 367,505 (173,513) 0102330 - Community Development - Planning 1,166,814 1,225,619 1,285,672 1,066,760 1,097,707 1,282,288 1,427,677 145,389 0102900 - Library 1,838,898 1,753,515 2,192,763 2,099,362 2,167,758 2,304,966 2,213,336 (91,630) 0103700 - Utilities - Fleet Management 1,217,805 1,228,449 1,621,593 1,463,334 1,422,228 1,778,190 2,004,128 225,938 0105000 - Nondepartmental 3,855,487 6,180,073 7,588,332 8,096,163 9,355,812 8,212,257 9,010,823 798,566 0232601 - Public Works - Engineering 2,219,368 2,109,771 2,161,266 2,145,815 2,088,397 2,496,441 2,527,453 31,012 0233200 - Public Works - Streets 1,748,802 2,173,388 2,470,514 2,997,166 2,365,295 2,482,843 2,341,982 (140,861) 0233201 - Public Works - Traffic 1,858,533 2,032,349 2,054,696 2,140,155 2,350,239 2,444,991 1,943,598 (501,393) Total Expenditures 89,812,552 98,171,225 107,512,854 114,721,296 121,981,992 121,425,524 122,674,754 1,249,230 Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures (288,053) 859,002 (610,145) (10,566) (4,414,794) (6,983,065) (6,630,818) 1,593,477 Transfer In 6,058,559 4,589,055 4,454,442 4,026,857 5,254,900 5,546,145 5,546,145 0 Transfer Out 0 0 0 387,124 3,564,985 1,601,982 2,478,952 876,970 Net Transfers 6,058,559 4,589,055 4,454,442 3,639,733 1,689,915 3,944,163 3,067,193 (876,970) Total Revenues Over (Under) Expenditures 5,770,506 5,448,057 3,844,297 3,629,167 (2,724,879) (3,038,902) (3,563,625) (524,723) Unassigned Fund Balance 25,335,749 22,296,847 25,617,716 Encumbrance Carry Forward 3,845,592 0

Page 6 of 420 ends

Page 695 ends

03/10/2026 Item No.14.

General Fund (010)
Revenues
Account # Account/Description FY 2020-21
Actual
FY 2021-22
Actual
FY 2022-23
Actual
FY 2023-24
Actual
FY 2024-25
Actual
FY 2025-26
Adopted
Budget
FY 2025-26
Proposed
Mid-Year BudgetAdjustment
Taxes
010-0100000-000000-3110100 - Secured Property Taxes 27,521,898 27,955,386 29,873,381 31,336,069 32,085,627 34,332,337 34,332,337 0 010-0100000-000000-3110200 - Unsecured Property Taxes1,040,990 1,024,965 1,042,421 1,145,480 1,235,563 1,223,936 1,223,936 0 010-0100000-000000-3110300 - Other Property Taxes 723,244 1,061,275 1,243,679 840,562 778,913 898,134 898,134 0 010-0100000-000000-3120000 - Real Property Transfer Tx 799,193 1,057,752 1,027,125 797,839 878,847 900,000 900,000 0 010-0100000-000000-3130100 - Sales & Use Tax 25,192,05227,082,74427,254,51826,753,66726,117,43627,135,000 27,135,000 0 010-0100000-000000-3130102 - Safety Prop 172 654,933 818,036 847,861 882,465 821,139 865,000 865,000 0 010-0100000-000000-3140000 - TOT **Confidential Info**1,357,550 2,597,968 2,487,862 2,471,997 2,497,141 2,500,000 2,500,000 0 010-0100000-000000-3140010 - TOT Short Term 0 0 8,503 49,844 100,908 50,000 50,000 0 010-0100000-000000-3180100 - Other Taxes 0 0 36 1,039 2,489 0 0 0 010-0100000-000000-3180101 - Tourism Business Imp 710,605 1,293,451 1,236,493 1,206,444 1,248,571 1,250,000 1,250,000 0 010-0100025-000000-3110100 - Secured Property Taxes 1,832,993 2,939,442 4,667,625 7,217,139 9,217,46410,716,466 10,716,466 0 010-0100025-000000-3110200 - Unsecured Property Taxes 77,043 117,862 182,557 294,788 398,418 437,720 437,720 0 010-0100025-000000-3110310 - FSPA - Other Property Tax 57,268 126,521 214,622 211,534 249,080 314,099 314,099 0 59,967,76966,075,40270,086,68173,208,86675,631,59580,622,692 80,622,692 0 Licenses & Permits
010-0101603-000000-3210100 - Business Licenses 759,547 419,433 739,439 796,261 865,728 735,000 735,000 0 010-0101603-000000-3210102 - Card Room Regulation Fees 50 50 25 11,109 25 25 25 0 010-0101603-000000-3210105 - Ca Disability Access & Ed 38,143 25,617 36,853 17,460 138 30,000 30,000 0 010-0101603-000000-3210106 - 30% Ca Disb Acc & Ed 4,238 1,909 2,162 1,668 1,529 2,000 2,000 0 010-0101603-000000-3210200 - New License Review 20,998 733 12,420 21,366 30,291 7,500 7,500 0 010-0101603-005001-3210105 - Ca Disability Access & Ed 0 0 0 12,880 12,971 0 0 0 010-0101909-000000-3211501 - Animal Licenses 59,340 42,699 37,690 41,815 37,172 50,000 50,000 0 010-0102110-000000-3220100 - Police Alarms Permits 45,212 43,015 50,619 63,575 57,166 40,000 40,000 0 010-0102110-000000-3227000 - Permits - Other Permits 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 010-0102220-000000-3221100 - Fireworks Booth Permit 4,564 4,564 4,564 4,928 5,415 4,564 4,564 0 010-0102220-000000-3221200 - Uniform Fire Code Permits 3,507 12,272 12,951 16,231 30,868 17,000 17,000 0 010-0102300-005001-3210105 - Ca Disability Access & Ed 0 0 0 0 31,125 0 0 0 010-0102310-000000-3222000 - Encroachment Permits 153,159 68,448 111,679 104,747 341,113 125,000 125,000 0 010-0102310-000000-3222100 - Tree Removal Permit 14,497 19,434 16,651 14,673 54,302 20,800 20,800 0 010-0102320-000000-3224000 - Building Permit Fees 3,143,495 3,632,168 2,949,254 3,837,943 2,413,694 3,453,600 3,453,600 0 010-0102320-000000-3225000 - Wide & Overload Permits 23,080 22,836 4,960 3,280 2,320 9,600 9,600 0 010-0102320-000000-3227000 - Permits - Other Permits (31,061) 6,296 21,504 20,826 23,284 0 0 0 010-0102330-000000-3223000 - Home Occupation Permits 2,265 174 9,877 8,683 9,152 8,500 8,500 0 4,241,034 4,299,748 4,010,647 4,977,444 3,916,292 4,503,589 4,503,589 0

Page 9 of 420 ends

Folsom City CouncilMarch 10, 2026

Folsom City Council
March 10, 2026