Fountain Valley City Council
March 18, 2025

AGENDA

CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR

AGENCY TO THE FOUNTAIN

VALLEY AGENCY

FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/

FOUNTAIN VALLEY HOUSING AUTHORITY

Study Session 5:00 p.m.

Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m.

Tuesday, March 18, 2025
Council Chambers
10200 Slater Avenue
Fountain Valley, CA 92708
http://www.fountainvalley.org

MEETING ASSISTANCE: In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, anyone needing special assistance to participate in a meeting of the government bodies listed herein should contact the City Clerk’s Office at (714) 593-4445. Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting allows the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting.

AGENDA COMMUNICATIONS: All revised or additional documents and writings related to an item on this agenda provided to all or a majority of the government body members after distribution of the agenda packet, are available for public inspection (1) in the City Clerk’s Office at 10200 Slater Avenue, Fountain Valley, CA 92708 during normal business hours; and (2) in the Council Chambers at the time of the meeting. Unless directed otherwise by a government body listed herein all actions shall be based on/memorialized by the latest document submitted as a late communication.

PUBLIC COMMENTS/PUBLIC HEARINGS: Persons wishing to address th e Cit y Counci l or othe r government body listed complete a speaker card and give it to the City Clerk prior to the public comment period. Requests to speak will not be accepted after the public comment session begins without permission of the Mayor/Chair. Speakers must limit remarks to a total of (3) three minutes and address the City Council through the Mayor.

Comments to individuals or staff are not permitted. Scheduled Matters, including Public Hearings: Indicate on the card what item you want to address. Unscheduled Matters: Indicate on the card what subject matter you want to address. Comments must be related to issues that are within the jurisdiction of the governing body listed on the agenda. Pursuant to the Brown Act, the governing body may not enter into discussion regarding items not on the agenda.

CONSENT CALENDAR: All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered by the governing bodies listed herein to be routine and will be enacted on simultaneously with one motion without discussion unless separate action and/or discussion is requested by a governing body member, staff, or a member of the public.

PUBLIC HEARINGS: Persons wishing to speak in favor of or in opposition to a proposal are given an opportunity to do so during the public hearing. Those wishing to address a governing body during the hearing are requested to complete the speaker card and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the hearing. If a proposed action is challenged in court, there may be a limitation to
raising only those issues raised during the hearing or in written correspondence received by the governing body at or before the hearing.

Note: The Fountain Valley City Council serves as the Successor Agency to the Fountain Valley Agency for Community Development (Successor Agency), the Fountain Valley Housing Authority, and the Fountain Valley Finance Authority. The Actions of the Successor Agency are separate and apart from the actions of the City Council.

ZOOM LINK INFORMATION
• Participants that choose to watch the City Council meeting through zoom are automatically placed in the waiting room and will only be allowed into the Zoom meeting if they request to make a public comment. In order to make a public comment, you will indicate through the chat feature which item you would like to speak on, and click on the “raise hand” icon to let the administrator know you wish to speak. • All participants are muted unless you are requesting to speak, at which time you will be allowed to unmute and make you comment.
• All public comments are allowed up to 3 minutes to speak.

Topic: City Council
Time: Mar 18, 2025 06:00 PM Pacific Time (US and Canada) Join Zoom Meeting
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85498522031?pwd=Ina4Jv7F8bIUCaRKhCa9C8TavFGcr q.1
Meeting ID: 854 9852 2031
Passcode: 812407

STUDY SESSION
CALL TO ORDER 5:00 p.m.

PUBLIC COMMENTS (Study Session matters only)
Persons wishing to speak on a Study Session matter are requested to identify themselves by completing a blue speaker card indicating the item they want to address and to give the card to the City Clerk prior to the public comment period.

1. Biennial Budget Process – Presentation by Ryan Smith, Finance Director

2. Economic Development Action Plan Update for FY 2023/24 and FY 2024/25 – Presentation by Omar Dadabhoy, Community Development Director / Deputy City Manager and Victor Viramontes, Management Analyst

OPEN SESSION
CALL TO ORDER 6:00 p.m.

INVOCATION Pastor Paul Park
SALUTE TO THE FLAG Council Member Glenn Grandis

CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING AUTHORITY/ ROLL CALL Council Members: Constantine, Grandis, Harper, Vice Mayor / Vice Chair Cunneen, Mayor/Chair Bui

ANNOUNCEMENT OF SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS

CITY MANAGER / MAYOR UPDATE

PRESENTATIONS
• Business Recognition – Sam’s Club – Presentation by Mayor Bui • Business Recognition – TJ Maxx – Presentation by Mayor Bui • Recognition of Eagle Scout – Presentation by Mayor Bui • State of the City Check Presentation to the Rotary Club – Presentation by Mayor Bui

FIRST CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY/ HOUSING AUTHORITY/ PUBLIC COMMENTS (Unscheduled Matters Only)
The Unscheduled Matters Public Comments portion will last 15 Minutes at the beginning of the meeting. Any requests to speak on unscheduled matters after the initial 15 minutes, will be heard at the end of the meeting, unless the Mayor approves an extension of this time. If an individual speaks during the First unscheduled matters time period, they do not get to speak at the end of the meeting as well. Persons wishing to speak on an unscheduled matter are requested to identify themselves by completing a blue speaker and to give the card to the City Clerk. Each person will have up to 3 minutes to speak. The City Clerk will call upon those that wish to speak.

PUBLIC COMMENTS (Scheduled Matters Only)
Persons wishing to speak on Agenda item(s) are requested to identify themselves by completing a blue speaker card indicating the item they want to address and to give the card to the City Clerk prior to the public comment period. Each person will be given up to 3 minutes to speak on the entire Consent Calendar, 3 minutes to speak on each item pulled from the consent calendar, and 3 minutes to speak on any agendized item(s) not appearing on the Consent Calendar.

CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent Calendar Items 1 – 4 will be approved simultaneously with one motion unless separate action/or discussion is requested.

1. Receive and File the Draft Minutes of the March 4, 2025 Regular City Council Meeting

2. Approve the Register of Demands for the period of 2/21/2025 to 3/6/2025 Page 12 Recommended Action: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 to approve the attached Register of Demands representing payments made by the City of Fountain Valley between 2/21/2025 and 3/6/2025 for a total of $2,763,897.57.

3. 2024 Annual State Housing Element Progress Report Page 27 Recommended Action: Review the Housing Element Annual Report and authorize the submission of the report to the California Department of Housing and Community Development and the Governor's Office of Planning and Research prior to the April 1, 2025, deadline

4. City of Fountain Valley Six Month Strategic Objectives Update for September 26, 2024 through March 27, 2025. Page 75
Recommended Action: Receive and file the updated strategic objectives matrix for September 26, 2024 through March 27, 2025

PUBLIC HEARINGS
Each person will have up to 3 minutes to speak on each Public Hearing.

5. Public Hearing to Consider an Appeal of the Planning Commission’s Approval of Resolution No. 24-12, Denying Conditional Use Permit No. 1933 for an Unmanned Wireless Telecommunications Facility on an Existing SCE Transmission Tower Located on the North Sid – Presentation by Matt Jenkins, Senior Planner Page 81 Recommended Action: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1: Adopt a Resolution (Attachment #4) upholding the Planning Commission’s approval of Resolution No. 24-12, denying CUP 1933 for AT&T Mobility to install an unmanned wireless telecommunications facility on an existing SCE transmission tower located on the north side of Talbert Avenue, east of Newland Street, and east of 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave.

ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS

6. Approve the Proposed 2025 Legislative Platform – Presentation by Rick Miller, City Clerk

Recommended Action: Staff is requesting City Council approval of Alternative No. 1 to approve the proposed 2025 Legislative Platform.

7. Annual Comprehensive Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2024 – Presentation by Ryan Smith, Finance Director Page 200
Recommended Action: Receive and File the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024.

COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION

CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY/ HOUSING AUTHORITY/ PUBLIC COMMENTS (Unscheduled Matters Only)
Persons wishing to speak on an unscheduled matter are requested to identify themselves by completing a blue speaker and to give the card to the City Clerk. Each person will have up to 3 minutes to speak. The City Clerk will call upon those that wish to speak.

CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING AUTHORITY AB 1234/GENERAL

COMMENTS

ADJOURN THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR

AGENCY/HOUSING AUTHORITY
The next Regular Meeting of the Fountain Valley City Council is April 1, 2025 at 6:00 p.m., in the Fountain Valley Council Chambers, 10200 Slater Avenue, Fountain Valley.

City of Fountain Valley
Memorandum
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Ryan Smith, Director of Finance/City Treasurer
DATE: March 18, 2025
SUBJECT: Biennial Budget Process
______________________________________________________________________________ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

At the strategic planning session on September 26, 2024, the finance department brought a proposal to transition the City to a Biennial Budget process. City Council expressed interest for the topic to be brought back to a Study Session for a more in-depth presentation and discussion.

This memo and study session presentation are intended to offer more information about a biennial, or 2-year, budget process so that City Council may provide direction on the upcoming budget for Fiscal Year 2025-26.

DISCUSSION:

Annual Budget
Currently, the City operates on an annual budget cycle. Each year, in March, the budget cycle begins with revenue and expenditure projections. The finance department meets with departments, calculates projected payroll cost, projects internal service expenditures, and projects capital improvement needs. Through a series of meetings with department heads and the City Manager, budget priorities are established, and a draft budget is presented to City Council in May. City Council provides feedback on the draft budget and the budget returns to City Council in June for adoption. Upon adoption, the finance department finalizes the 325-page budget document that is published on the City’s website and submitted for review by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). From beginning to end, the annual budget process typically takes upwards of 4 months or roughly 17 weeks to complete.

Six months after the fiscal year commences, city staff engage in a mid-year budget process to update revenues and expenditures for the final six months of the fiscal year. This process typically takes 8 weeks. In total the annual budget cycle (including the mid-year process) takes approximately 25 weeks per year.

Annual Budget Cycle
Process Weeks
Annual Budget 17
Mid-Year Update 8
Annual Budget Total 25

Biennial Budget
A biennial budget, or 2-year budget, is typically enacted in one of two forms. A less common “true” 2-year budget is a single budget adopted for a full 24-month period of appropriations. A more common form, and the form we will focus on for Fountain Valley, is referred to as a “split” or “rolling” model. In this model the City would adopt two individual annual budgets in a single 2- year spending plan. Each year would have its own set of legally appropriated expenditures and revenue projections. Once adopted, revenue and expenditure appropriations would not be transferable among the two years without City Council approval.

The 2-year budget process would begin much the same as the annual budget process. Finance staff would begin the process in March, present the draft 2-year budget to City Council in May, and present the proposed 2-year budget to City Council for adoption in June. Budget staff does not believe this process would add any additional time to the normal budget process, however staff does anticipate some additional time would be needed in the first biennial budget cycle to change the process and forms used to calculate and present the budget. Once adopted the first fiscal year would be identical to the annual budget process. Staff would return to City Council in early February for a Mid-Year Budget update. The total first year if of the 2-year budget cycle (including the mid-year process) is projected to take 25 weeks.

The second year of the 2-year budget cycle would begin with a review of the Year 2 revenue and expenditure appropriations. This process would be much more similar to a mid-year budget process than an annual budget process. Since an annual budget is already adopted for Year 2, staff would just be updating revenues, expenditures, payroll projections, and CIP projections with any new information that has been gathered since the budget was adopted 12 months prior. The review of Year 2 budget is projected to take approximately 9 weeks.

Similar to the current process, six months after Year 2 commences, city staff engage in a midyear budget process to update revenues and expenditures for the final six months of that fiscal year. This process typically takes 8 weeks.

The total budget cycle for Year 2 of the biennial budget process, including the Year 2 review and mid-year budget update, is projected to take approximately 17 weeks. Year 2 budget cycle is expected to take a full 8 weeks less than a full annual budget process.

It its important to note that within the two-year budget cycle, each budget is updated every six months. Although Year 2 of the biennial budget is projected nearly 14 months prior to the beginning of the fiscal year, the budget is reviewed and updated with current information as that Biennial Budget Cycle
Process Weeks
2-Year Budget 17
Year 1 - Mid-Year Update 8
Year 1 Subtotal 25
Year 2 - Review 9
Year 2 - Mid-Year Update 8
Year 2 Subtotal 17
Biennial Budget Total 42

fiscal year begins. It is again reviewed and updated six months later, during the mid-year budget process. The City is never “locked” into a previously projected budget. As new information becomes available, staff will review the budget and bring any updates to City Council for amendments during each six-month review period.

Exhibits 5 and 6 attached at the back of this memo show the full annual and biennial budget processes in a Gantt chart format.

Advantages of a Biennial Budget Process
• Long rang planning – A biennial budget requires departments and budget managers to forecast revenues and expenditures over a longer term. The extended time horizon needed in projecting a 2-year budget promotes healthier budgeting practices, as departments and city staff are looking at projects and needs from a bigger picture view than a single-year budget may provide.
• Departmental Efficiencies – Biennial budgeting is projected to save 8 weeks during Year 2 of the budget cycle. This time can be redeployed to other projects such as improving financial management, conducting internal audits, and/or analyzing program effectiveness.
• Budgeting Efficiencies – Many processes and line items withing the budget process do not change from year to year. In addition, most contracts the city enters into are multiyear, meaning the future year expenditures are already known. Budget staff can take advantage of these items and easily project 2-years of expenditures without the need for additional time or calculations.

When would a Biennial Budget not be the right format?
• Cities with extremely large and complex budgets – Typically cities that have very large or complex budgets have entire budget departments. These departments are solely dedicated to developing and maintaining budgets throughout the year. For these cities, going to a 2-year budget would not gain any efficiencies as staff continues budget work year-round regardless of the budget format.
• Cities in financial distress – Cities that may have a difficult time balancing a single year budget typically don’t engage in a 2-year budget process. For many of these cities, their efforts are focused on balancing the current year budget and ensure current obligations are being met.
• Cities that are heavily reliant on State or Federal funding sources – A city that has a high proportion of its budget coming from a State or Federal funding source may not find a 2- year budget advantageous. Typically, these cities have to wait until the funding government has released its budget proposals in order to project is revenue source and develop their budget.

Other Cities in Orange County on a Biennial Budget Cycle  Brea
 Buena Park
 Dana Point
 Garden Grove
 Irvine
 Laguna Hills
 Laguna Woods
 Lake Forest
 Los Alamitos
 Mission Viejo
 San Clemente
 Tustin
 Yorba Linda

Budget Book Examples
The following exhibits are examples of what the 2-year budget would look like as presented in a proposed budget book. The examples include a Summary of all Fund Balance, General Fund Summary, and a department budget. The examples show the budget that is very similar to the annual budget, however there are now two columns on the right-hand side of the reports that show the two budget years being proposed. Note: These pages are intended to be examples and do not show real budgets or projected budgets.

Exhibit 1 – Summary of Fund Balance – All Funds

Exhibit 2- General Fund Summary

Exhibit 3 – Department Budget Example

Exhibit 4 – Annual Budget Process
City of Fountain Valley
Milestone description a
C
Start Weeks S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S Annual Budget Process
Budget Kickoff Meetings w R 3/1/2025 2Revenue Projections d 3/7/2025 3Payroll Projections h 3/14/2025 3Internal Service Fund Projections w R3/21/2025 2Capital Improvement Plan d 3/21/2025 3Department Meetings h 4/7/2025 1City Manager Meetings w R4/14/2025 1Draft Budget Document Preparation d 4/21/2025 1Draft Budget Staff Report Preparation h 4/21/2025 1Draft Budget Presentation Tr 5/6/2025 1Proposed Budget Preparation w R 5/7/2025 3 Proposed Budget Staff Report Preparation d 5/14/2025 2
Proposed Budget Presentation Tr 6/3/2025 1Adopted Budget Book Preparation w R 6/4/2025 3Adopted Budget Book GFOA submittal d 6/21/2025 1Publish Budget Book to Website Tr 7/1/2025 1Mid-Year Budget Meetings w R12/1/2025 2 Mid-Year Revenue & Expenditure Projections d 12/14/2025 4Mid-Year CIP Projections h 12/14/2025 4 Mid-Year Staff Report Preparation w R1/14/2026 1Mid-Year Budget Presentation Tr 2/1/2026 1 Annual Budget
M
A

M J J A
S
O
N

D J F M
A
M J

Exhibit 5 – Biennial Budget Process
City of Fountain Valley
Milestone description a
C
Start Weeks S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F Biennial Budget Process
Budget Kickoff Meetings w 3/1/2025 2Revenue Projections d 3/7/2025 3Payroll Projections h 3/14/2025 3Internal Service Fund Projections w 3/21/2025 2Capital Improvement Plan d 3/21/2025 3Department Meetings h 4/7/2025 1City Manager Meetings w 4/14/2025 1Draft Budget Document Preparation d 4/21/2025 1Draft Budget Staff Report Preparation h 4/21/2025 1Draft Budget Presentation T 5/6/2025 1Proposed Budget Preparation w 5/7/2025 3 Proposed Budget Staff Report Preparation d 5/14/2025 2
Proposed Budget Presentation T 6/3/2025 1Adopted Budget Book Preparation w 6/4/2025 3Adopted Budget Book GFOA submittal d 6/21/2025 1Publish Budget Book to Website T 7/1/2025 1Mid-Year Budget Meetings w 12/1/2025 2Mid-Year Revenue & Expenditure Projections d 12/14/2025 4Mid-Year CIP Projections h 12/14/2025 4Mid-Year Staff Report Preparation w 1/14/2026 1Mid-Year Budget Presentation T 2/1/2026 1Budget Year 2 - 1st Review Meetings w 5/1/2026 2 Budget Year 2 - Revenue & Expenditure Projections d 5/14/2026 4 Budget Year 2 - CIP Projections h 5/21/2026 4Budget Year 2 - Payroll Projections Update w 5/21/2026 4Budget Year 2 - Staff Report Preparation d 6/21/2026 1Budget Year 2 - Budget Presentation T 7/7/2026 1 Budget Year 2 - Mid-Year Budget Meetings w 12/1/2026 2
Budget Year 2 - Mid-Year Revenue & Expenditure Projectionsd 12/14/2026 4 Budget Year 2 - Mid-Year CIP Projections h 12/14/2026 4 Budget Year 2 - Mid-Year Staff Report Preparation w 1/14/2027 1Budget Year 2 - Mid-Year Budget Presentation T 2/1/2027 1 Biennial Budget
A
M
A

M J J A S O
N

D J F M
A

M J J M
A

M J S O
N
D J F

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL MEMO
To: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: March 18, 2025
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: Study Session – Economic Development Action Plan Update for FY 2023/24 and FY 2024/25
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The purpose of this Study Session item is to provide City Council with an update on the progress on the implementation of the City’s Economic Development Action Pan (EDAP).

The EDAP was approved by City Council on November 7, 2023. A prioritization schedule of EDAP Action Items was presented at the February 20, 2024 City Council meeting and a Receive and File update was provided on September 17, 2024.

DISCUSSION:

As specified in the Six-Month Strategic Objectives and with the beginning of the calendar year, staff is providing another progress report of the EDAP Action Items. The “Status” column to the right of the priority list has been updated and will provide a brief update on all the Action Items for FY 2023/24 and 2024/25 for City Council’s review.

Highlights for FY 2023/24 ongoing Action Items include the following:
• Focus Area 4. Restaurants and Night Life Activity
The City has met with representatives of the Fountain Bowl and the Weekend Night Market to begin planning a night market that will bring visitors to the Fountain Bowl and neighboring businesses.
• Focus Area 6. City Hall Engagement
Developing a toolkit of various business programs has included the following efforts:
o The development of a business resources folder that provides information on business service provider including the Orange County Small Business Development Center (SBDC), SCORE, and the OC Workforce Solutions America’s Job Center of California (AJCC). The folder has been used in business retention efforts including being mailed to new businesses and business visits.
o Increased collaboration with the SBDC including holding the first Fountain Valley Business Clinic, and targeted promotion of their business learning opportunities to Fountain Valley businesses.
• Focus Area 6. City Hall Engagement
The City continues to actively participate in industry organizations and actively engage the business community. This has included the following efforts:
o Preparing to attend the 2025 Innovating Commerce Serving Communities (ICSC) Las Vegas retail conference.
o Collaborating with the Fountain Valley Chamber of Commerce (Chamber). Collaboration with the Chamber has included attending ribbon cuttings for new businesses, attending board meetings and events.
• Focus Area 6. City Hall Engagement
The City continues to strengthen social media presence with active posts on various City social media platforms including the following:
o Highlighting of businesses during the U.S. Small Business Administration’s (SBA) National Small Business Week that included representation from office, restaurant, and industrial businesses in Fiscal Year 2023/24 and will continue in Year 2024/25.
o Highlighting new businesses in the Mayor’s Message.

Initiatives started for FY 2024/25:
• Focus Area 3. Mile Square Park
The current Shopping Center & Retail Guide is in the process of being updated and will include the addition of hotels. Options for dispersing the guide in digital and hard copy formats for organizers of Mile Square Park events will be explored.

• Focus Area 7. Other Economic Development Activities
A small business survey has been developed and being used in conjunction with recently begun business visits. Details on the survey and business visits include the following:
o The business survey has been developed to quickly be completed during business visits, gauge size and expected growth, reason for locating in Fountain Valley, and interest in business learning opportunities including specific business-related subjects. o Business visits have recently begun, and initial visits have been conducted as welcome business visits which target newer businesses.

Business visits will be ramped up during the rest of the 2024/25 FY.

Prepared By: Victor Viramontes, Management Analyst
Reviewed By: Omar Dadabhoy, Community Development Director Approved By: Maggie Le, City Manager
Attachments: 1. EDAP Action Item Priority List With Status Update ATTACHMENT 1
Economic Development Action Plan (EDAP) Action Items Priority Focus Area EDAP Action Item HdL Timeline Partners Success Metrics Status

1. The Crossings Create an inventory of existing businesses, as well as vacant and underutilized spaces, within the area to better evaluate the strengths of business mixes and potential for new
business opportunities.

Near-term
(ongoing)
City, businesses, local
property
owners/managers
-Percent total known
businesses included in
inventory
Completed

2. Shopping
Centers
The city should verify the ownership and property managers for each of the centers and schedule one-on-one meetings with them.

Near-term
(ongoing)
City, businesses, local
property
owners/property
managers
-Percent of total known
owners/managers
verified
-Number of meetings
with owners/managers
Completed
The city should identify existing or pending vacancies with the centers
Near-term
(ongoing)
City, businesses, local
property
owners/property
managers
-Percent of known
vacant or underutilized
spaces identified
Completed
Participate in trade shows such as International Shopping Centers (ICSC) and the American Lodging Investment Summit (ALIS).

Longer-term
(ongoing)
City, businesses, local
property owners
-Filling vacant spaces
with new business
attraction
Completed

3. Mile Square Park Work with hotels for package deals for people and event organizers who are staying in Fountain Valley for Sporting events at Mile Square Park.

Short-term
(ongoing)
City, Hotels -Number of hotels
providing package deal
-Investment/deal
provided by hotels
-Number of Mile Square
Park users who use the
hotel package(s)
City to prepare Hotel Guide using template developed
with new Brand Identity Guidelines. Preliminary
discussions have been had with hotels regarding
discount codes. Staff to follow-up after draft of guide.

Will also explore digital and hard copy distribution
options to Mile Square Park organizers.

4. Restaurants and
Night-Life Activity
Build a restaurant and entertainment guide for visitors, Fountain Valley employees, and residents.

Short-term City, Park District,
Restaurants
-Number restaurants
willing to participate in a
guide program
-Visits/clicks to online
restaurant guide
Completed
Explore the possibility of a Night Market such as La Puente and 626 Market.

Longer-term
(ongoing)
City, restaurants and
community
-Number of events &
participation at events
by restaurants and
attendees
Met with reps from Fountain Bowl and the Weekend
Night Market to begin planning a night market that
will bring visitors to the Fountain Bowl and
neighboring businesses.

Priority 1 Action Items (FY 2023/24)
Priority: Priority 1 Current FY, Priority 2 FY 2024/25, Priority 3 FY 2025/26, Priority 4 FY 2026/27 Page 1 Economic Development Action Plan (EDAP) Action Items Priority

5. Medical and
Health Care
Identify complimentary uses and specific businesses to attract into the city to support the health care industry.

Short-term
(ongoing)
City, local brokers,
property
owners/managers,
medical and
healthcare businesses
-Number of meetings
held with task force
Ongoing outreach

6. City Hall
Engagement
Develop a toolkit for businesses outlining various available programs and incentives.

Short-term City Staff -Creation of material -
Regular review and
maintenance of online
materials
Business resources folder developed that provides info
on business service providers including the SBDC,
SCORE and the AJCC. Also increased Collaboration
with the SBDC.

Actively participate in industry organizations and community engagement to cultivate relationships with tenants, brokers, property owners and other real estate decision maker.

Short-term
(ongoing)
City Staff,
Local/regional
organizations, local
businesses, property
owners/managers
-Attendance at related
meetings
Ongoing, attended ICSC conferences, Chamber events
and board meetings, and grand openings.

Strengthen social media presence with active postings. Short-term (ongoing)
City Staff -Social media postings,
following and
engagement
Ongoing, highlighted small businesses during Small
Business week and begin highlighting new businesses
in the Mayor's Message. These videos have aired on
various city social media platforms.

7. Other Economic
Development
Activities
Tell the Fountain Valley story to better market business and/or development of opportunities in Fountain Valley.

Short-term City, local businesses,
property
owner/managers, real
estate professionals
-Creation of
story/branding for City's
Economic Development
Will discuss with JPW Communications to create
story/branding for City's Economic development
Focus Area EDAP Action Item HdL Timeline Partners Success Metrics Status

1. The Crossings The city should continue to communicate with the property owners in person annually (and their real estate
representatives) to understand their desire for potential for development and be aware of development opportunities
that fit within the property owners and city's objectives.

Longer-term
(ongoing)
City, local businesses,
local property
owners/managers
- Percent of vacant
spaces
-Total vacancy rate
Ongoing. City has directed developers to contact
property owners.

Priority 2 Action Items (FY 2024/25)

1. The Crossings, 2. Shopping Centers, 3. Mile Square Park, 4. Restaurants and Night-Life Activity

5. Medical and Health Care, 6. City Hall Engagement, 7. Other Economic Development Activities Priority: Priority 1 Current FY, Priority 2 FY 2024/25, Priority 3 FY 2025/26, Priority 4 FY 2026/27 Page 2 Economic Development Action Plan (EDAP) Action Items Priority Given the existing mix of home furnishings businesses, one niche option to consider is new short-term branding and marketing opportunities to designate this as a Design + Home Furnishings District in support of existing businesses in the Crossings that fall within those categories.

Longer-term
(ongoing)
City, existing design
and home furnishings
businesses located in
The Crossings
-Percent of businesses
interested in
participating in a Design
+ Home Furnishings
District
To discuss with JPW Communications.

The city should work with existing businesses to undertake a focused marketing campaign to market the businesses in the area to residents and outside the community consumers.

Longer-term
(ongoing)
City, businesses, local
property
owners/managers
-Creation of marketing
campaign -Percent
businesses participating
in marketing campaign
To discuss with JPW Communications.

3. Mile Square Park Analyze the restaurants that are within convenient driving distance from the park. Consider whether there are any voids in types of restaurants that would cater to families
Longer-term City, restaurants -Number of restaurant
voids filled (if voids
exist)
Ongoing
Create hotel and restaurant guides for visitors and event organizers who come to Fountain Valley for sporting or other events held at Mile Square Park on the food and over-night stay options within the city limits. Create a few "templates" for one-day or multi-day visits to Fountain Valley geared towards families or other key users of the Mile Square Park.

Short-term City, Hotels,
Restaurants
-Number hotels and
restaurants willing to
participate in a guide
program
-Visits to online hotel
and restaurant guide
The current Shopping Center & Retail Guide is in the
process of being updated and will include the addition
of hotels. Options for dispersing the guide in digital
and hard copy formats for organizers of Mile Square
events will be explored.

4. Restaurants and
Night-Life Activity
Identify and actively seek unique restauranteurs or
developers willing to come to Fountain Valley and add value, as well as improve aesthetics of existing shopping centers or strip malls.

Longer-term City, property
owners/managers,
restaurants/businesse
s
-Private investment to
improve restaurant
facades
Ongoing
Develop a brand and logo for Fountain Valley restaurants, as well as a tagline for Fountain Valley restaurants as a
destination. Consider co-branding with Kei Concepts, the owner of several restaurants in Fountain Valley, and tie in existing themes of local Fountain Valley restaurants.

Near-term City, restaurants -Creation of brand and
logo
-Creation of restaurant
destination tagline
To discuss with JPW Communications.

5. Medical and
Health Care
Work with Local brokers and property owners to encourage the attraction of medical/healthcare related business.

Longer-term
(ongoing)
City, local brokers,
property
owners/managers,
medical and
healthcare businesses
-Relationships built with
brokers and property
owners/managers
Ongoing
Priority: Priority 1 Current FY, Priority 2 FY 2024/25, Priority 3 FY 2025/26, Priority 4 FY 2026/27 Page 3 Economic Development Action Plan (EDAP) Action Items Priority Identify spaces available to meet the needs of medical related complimentary uses.

Longer-term
(ongoing)
City, local brokers,
property
owners/managers,
medical and
healthcare businesses
-Percent of known
vacant or underutilized
spaces identified
Outreach to uniform stores and suppliers. Meet with
UCI to discuss what may be considered complimentary
uses.

Create restaurant and hotel guide for employees and families of hospital patients.

Short-term City, local brokers,
property
owners/managers,
medical and
healthcare businesses
-Healthcare and medical
facility by-in -Number of
guides distributed and
referenced at
restaurants and hotel
To discuss with UCI rep once guide has been updated
with hotel.

6. City Hall
Engagement
Develop a Business Concierge Service wherein businesses receive one-on-one assistance to navigate through the city's permitting, entitlement and development process.

Short-term
(ongoing)
City Staff In the process of establishing.

Feature business successes, new openings, and
entrepreneurs.

Short-term
(ongoing)
City Staff, local
businesses
-Number of businesses
featured per quarter
Ongoing, attended grand openings, highlighted
business during small business week and new
businesses in the Mayor's Message.

7. Other Economic
Development
Activities
Form a 'Team Fountain Valley' comprised of key city staff to help support existing Fountain Valley businesses as well as quickly advance new development opportunities in Fountain Valley, including having an ombudsman or concierge
program.

Near-term City -Defining roles for
development
ombudsman or
concierge program roles
and assigning staff
In the process of establishing.

Work with leading businesses and business stakeholders in the community in the formulation of a new Shop Local
marketing program to assist independently owned small
businesses in Fountain Valley.

Near-term City, businesses To discuss with JPW Communications.

Constantly seek quality development for Fountain Valley that creates a strong sense of place or placemaking through
consistent design standards, amenities, and effective public spaces.

Longer-term City, local businesses,
property
owners/managers,
real estate
professionals
-Quality development
opportunities/leads
-Number of quality
development leads that
come to fruition
Ongoing, all development applications are held to high
standard in design and function.

Priority: Priority 1 Current FY, Priority 2 FY 2024/25, Priority 3 FY 2025/26, Priority 4 FY 2026/27 Page 4 Economic Development Action Plan (EDAP) Action Items Priority Creation of an Economic Development Tourism Advisory
Group consisting of City Staff, as well as business and Chamber leaders.

Short-term
(ongoing)
City, leisure industry
and other businesses,
Chamber
-Number of meetings
held with Advisory
Group
-Follow through on
recommended Action
Items from the Group
In the process of establishing.

Conduct a survey of the small business community on
identifying barriers to business growth, along with soliciting ways to enhance the business climate in Fountain Valley.

Short-term City, local businesses -Number total responses to survey
A business survey has been developed to quickly be
completed during business visits, gauge size and
expected growth, reason for locating in Fountain
Valley, and interest in business learning opportunities including specific business-related subjects.

Create a business visitation program for Fountain Valley, where key city staff visit businesses monthly to engage in fact finding about needs and wants of local businesses.

Short-term City, local businesses -Number businesses
visited per quarter
Business visits have recently begun, and initial visits have been conducted as welcome business visits
which target newer businesses. Business visits will be
ramped up during the rest of the 2024/25 FY.

Focus Area EDAP Action Item HdL Timeline Partners Success Metrics Status

1. The Crossings The Specific Plan defines the geographic boundaries; however, the city should consider clearly identifying
commercial boundaries within the area to help market and identify existing and future business and development
opportunities more easily.

Short-term City, local property
owners/managers
-Completion of
commercial boundary
identification
The city should identify existing uses that may not be the highest and best use of the property or buildings. If there are uses that appear to be underutilized, work with the property owners to potentially redevelop those properties.

Short-term
(ongoing)
City, businesses, local
property
owners/property
managers
-Number of properties
identified
Assist property owners in marketing the centers and specific businesses
Longer-term
(ongoing)
City, businesses, local
property
owners/property
managers
-Increase in business
customer activity
Priority 3 Action Items (FY 2025/26)

1. The Crossings, 2. Shopping Centers, 3. Mile Square Park, 4. Restaurants and Night-Life Activity

5. Medical and Health Care, 6. City Hall Engagement, 7. Other Economic Development Activities Priority: Priority 1 Current FY, Priority 2 FY 2024/25, Priority 3 FY 2025/26, Priority 4 FY 2026/27 Page 5 Economic Development Action Plan (EDAP) Action Items Priority

2. Shopping
Centers
Work with the property owners on strategies to assist with aesthetic improvements to the centers. Consider programs to waive city fees or pay overtime.

Longer-term
(ongoing)
City, businesses, local
property owners
-Investment in existing
properties

3. Mile Square Park Evaluate pedestrian and bicycle connectivity between Mile Square Park and major retail areas in Fountain Valley to determine opportunities for improvements, such as adding bike lanes or crosswalks, or making improvements for overall safety of pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicular drivers.

Short-term City, park users -Investment in
improving connectivity
from park to retail
centers

4. Restaurants and
Night-Life Activity
Consider a business attraction grant with a focus on
restaurant attraction to help more independently owned
restaurants expand into Fountain Valley.

Short-term City, businesses,
property
owners/managers,
restaurants
-Public investment in
grant program
-Effectiveness of
business attraction grant
Consider a façade improvement grant program for existing restaurants.

Longer-term City -Restaurant
participation
Explore programs to provide city assistance for financing of restaurant specific improvements that may be shared such as grease interceptors.

Long-term City, restaurants,
property owners
-Restaurant and
property owner
participation
Establish Fountain Valley as an 18-hour city by enhancing efforts to attract nighttime entertainment and restaurant operators that appeal to the employee and restaurant
populations.

Long-term
(ongoing)
City, restaurants -increased patronage of
restaurants.

Work with the Vietnamese owned restaurants to organize
and market special events focused on attracting Vietnamese population to Fountain Valley.

Short-term
(ongoing)
City, restaurants and
cafes
-Percent of participating
restaurants
-Number of events &
participation at events
by restaurants and
attendees

6. City Hall
Engagement
Develop an informational/investment packet for specific key industries (food/medical).

Longer-term City Staff -Creation of material -
Regular review and
maintenance of online
materials
Priority: Priority 1 Current FY, Priority 2 FY 2024/25, Priority 3 FY 2025/26, Priority 4 FY 2026/27 Page 6 Economic Development Action Plan (EDAP) Action Items Priority Develop targeted short videos to help tell our story Longer-term City Staff, local businesses
-Creation of short videos
-Regular review and
update videos
(quarterly, biannually, or
yearly)
Depending on resources, may possibly pushed out
Develop an effective brand for marketing Fountain Valley as an outstanding place to live, work, visit, shop, dine and invest.

As part of this effort, ensure that www.ExperienceFV.org is up to date.

Short-term City, local businesses,
property
owners/managers,
real estate
professionals
-Creation of
story/branding for City's
Economic Development
-Updates made to
Experience FV.org
Explore ways to create successful special events such as Restaurant Week, to capitalize on the abundance and
diversity of restaurants in the community.

Short-term City, local businesses,
property
owners/managers
-Creation of restaurant
week
-Participation numbers
for restaurants and
attendees -Number of
events
Focus Area EDAP Action Item HdL Timeline Partners Success Metrics Status

1. The Crossings The Crossing appears to not have a specific identity. The city should undertake the rebranding of the commercial sections of the area, based upon the existing and desired uses.

Longer-term
(ongoing)
City, local property
owners/managers,
existing businesses
located in The
Crossings
-Creation of branding for
the commercial areas of
The Crossings
Allegra provided alternatives. City Council tabled item until branding can correspond with future
development.

Amend the existing Crossings Specific Plan as appropriate. longer-term City, local businesses, local property
owners/mangers
N/A

3. Mile Square Park Explore opportunities for additional recreational amenities and concessions at City-owned property at Mile Square Park.

Longer-term City, park users -Investment in new or
improved recreational
amenities or concessions
Will work with Community Services Dept. as part of
Park and Rec's masterplan.

Priority 4 Action Items (FY 2026/27)

1. The Crossings, 2. Shopping Centers, 3. Mile Square Park, 4. Restaurants and Night-Life Activity

5. Medical and Health Care, 6. City Hall Engagement, 7. Other Economic Development Activities Priority: Priority 1 Current FY, Priority 2 FY 2024/25, Priority 3 FY 2025/26, Priority 4 FY 2026/27 Page 7 Economic Development Action Plan (EDAP) Action Items Priority

6. City Hall
Engagement
Develop a strategic foreign direct investment plan to attract investment.

Longer-term City Staff

7. Other Economic
Development
Activities
Continue to upgrade technology and utility infrastructure to help with economic development efforts.

Longer-term City -Investment in
upgrading technology
and utility for economic
development purposes
Ensure land use policies are appropriate for future
redevelopment or repositioning opportunities aimed at
producing the 'highest and best uses' over the long-term.

Longer-term City, local businesses,
property
owners/managers,
real estate
professionals
-Number of
amendments to land use
policies aimed at
enhancing FV +
effectiveness of those
amendments
Completed as part of the General Plan update but will
reconsider accordingly.

Explore new technology possibilities for Fountain Valley's planning services functions (and their supporting consultants) to electronically accept and process plan review submittals.

Longer-term City -Investment in
upgrading technology
for FV's planning
services
-Improvements in
efficiency due to
technology investment
Consider ways to capitalize on the fact that Fountain Valley is a gateway to leisure destinations Orange County, in particular Huntington Beach and Anaheim.

Longer-term City, local businesses,
property
owners/managers,
real estate
professionals
-Creation of marketing
materials capitalizing on
FV as a gateway city to
leisure destinations
Diversify the business mix in Fountain Valley and work with brokers and developers to fill vacancies with the "right" types of businesses.

Longer-term City, local businesses,
property
owners/managers,
real estate
professionals
-Number of new, diverse
businesses filling
vacancies in Fountain
Valley
Consider new and innovative ways to attract vehicular traffic off the I-405 and into the community (targeted ads, electronic billboards, etc.). Build on previous marketing attempts by incorporating the rebranding or new branding efforts for the major shopping centers, restaurants and night-life, and Mile Square Park.

Longer-term City, local businesses,
property
owners/managers
-Investment in
marketing
-Effectiveness of
marketing efforts

1. The Crossings, 2. Shopping Centers, 3. Mile Square Park, 4. Restaurants and Night-Life Activity Priority: Priority 1 Current FY, Priority 2 FY 2024/25, Priority 3 FY 2025/26, Priority 4 FY 2026/27 Page 8 Economic Development Action Plan (EDAP) Action Items Priority

5. Medical and Health Care, 6. City Hall Engagement, 7. Other Economic Development Activities Priority: Priority 1 Current FY, Priority 2 FY 2024/25, Priority 3 FY 2025/26, Priority 4 FY 2026/27 Page 9

MINUTES OF THE

CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE FOUNTAIN

VALLEY AGENCY

FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/ FOUNTAIN VALLEY

HOUSING AUTHORITY
Closed Session 4:15 p.m.

Study Session 5:15 p.m.

Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m.

Tuesday, March 4, 2025
Council Chambers

CLOSED SESSION
CALL TO ORDER 5:00 p.m.

PUBLIC COMMENTS (Closed Session matters only)

1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Pursuant to Government Code §54957.6.

Agency Designated Representatives: City Manager, Maggie Le, Finance Director, Ryan Smith, Human Resources Director, Carrie Hanes, Community Development Director / Deputy City Manager, Omar Dadabhoy, Human Resources Manager, Tania Knauerhaze, Payroll Administrator, Briana Laszlo, Liebert Cassidy Whitmore Attorney, Laura Drottz Kalty, Attorney for the City, Colin Burns
Employee Organizations: Fountain Valley Municipal Employees Association (Field Services unit), Fountain Valley General Employees Association (FVGEA), Fountain Valley Professional and Technical Employees (P&T)
No Reportable Action

2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—EXISTING LITIGATION
(Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9)
Name of case: Juan Gubbins v. City of Fountain Valley
No Reportable Action

STUDY SESSION
CALL TO ORDER 5:15 p.m.

PUBLIC COMMENTS (Study Session matters only)

1. Discussion Regarding No Tax Tuesday – Presentation by Ryan Smith, Finance Director Ryan Smith presented the concept of No Tax Tuesday to the City Council. The majority of the

Council (Council Members Harper, Constantine, and Grandis) did not support it.

OPEN SESSION
CALL TO ORDER 6:04 p.m.

INVOCATION Cantor Jenna Sagan, Congregation B’nai Tzedek SALUTE TO THE FLAG Mayor Ted Bui

CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING AUTHORITY/ ROLL CALL Council Members Present: Constantine, Grandis, Harper, Vice Mayor/Vice Chair Cunneen, Mayor/Chair Bui

Council Members Absent: None

ANNOUNCEMENT OF SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS
None

CITY MANAGER / MAYOR UPDATE
City Manager Maggie Le provided her update.

PRESENTATIONS
 Certificates of Recognition to the 2025 Miss Fountain Valley Winner Jackelyn Carbajal and Her Court – Presentation by Mayor Bui
Mayor Bui recognized the 2025 Miss Fountain Valley winner, Jackelyn Carbajal, and her court.  Recognition of Council Member Patrick Harper as the 2025 OCTA Bus Driver Champion – Presentation by Mayor Bui
Mayor Bui recognized Council Member Patrick Harper for coming in 1st place in the OCTA Bus Driver competition for executives and board members.

FIRST CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY/ HOUSING AUTHORITY/ PUBLIC COMMENTS (Unscheduled Matters Only)
Dava Garafalo, Thea Stein

CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent Calendar Items 1 – 3 were approved simultaneously.

1. Receive and File the Draft Minutes of the February 18, 2025 Regular City Council meeting

ACTION: Move to Receive and File the Draft Minutes of the February 18, 2025 Regular City Council Meeting
MOTION: Grandis SECOND: Constantine
AYES: Constantine, Grandis, Harper, Cunneen, Bui
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

2. Approve the Register of Demands for the period of 2/7/2025 to 2/20/2025 ACTION: Move to Approve the Register of Demands for the period of 2/7/2025 to 2/20/2025
MOTION: Grandis SECOND: Constantine
AYES: Constantine, Grandis, Harper, Cunneen, Bui
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

3. Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance of the City of Fountain Valley Amending Chapter 14.38 of the Fountain Valley Municipal Code Pertaining to Grease Control ACTION: Move to Approve the Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance of the City of Fountain Valley Amending Chapter 14.38 of the Fountain Valley Municipal Code Pertaining to Grease Control
MOTION: Grandis SECOND: Constantine
AYES: Constantine, Grandis, Harper, Cunneen, Bui
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

PUBLIC HEARING

4. Public Hearing: Appeal of the Planning Commission decision to adopt Resolution 24-12, denying Conditional Use Permit No. 1933. Application and appeal filed by Will Kazimi with Smartlink Group on behalf of AT&T Mobility to install an unmanned wireless telecommunications facility on an existing SCE transmission tower located on the north side of Talbert Avenue, east of Newland Street, and east of 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave.

Recommended Action: Staff requests the City Council continue the appeal hearing to the March 18, 2025 City Council meeting.

Item 4 was continued to the March 18, 2025 Regular City Council Meeting.

ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS

5. Approve the Proposed 2025 Legislative Platform
Item 5 was not approved and continued to the March 18, 2025 Regular City Council meeting.

6. 1) Waive the bidding requirements pursuant to FVMC 2.36.070 Par 4 and authorize staff to issue purchase orders as follows:
 Winner Chevrolet in the amount of $117,262.35 for the purchase of two (2) 2025 Chevrolet Tahoe Police vehicles through the existing State of California contract;
 Olathe Ford Sales, Inc. in the amount of $111,054.50 for the purchase of two (2) 2025 Ford Police Interceptor Utility vehicles through the existing cooperative contract with Sourcewell;
 Olathe Ford Sales, Inc. in the amount of $56,940.20 for the purchase of one (1) 2025 Ford F-150 Responder 4x4 truck through the existing cooperative contract with Sourcewell; and
2) Authorize staff to dispose of the existing vehicles by means that best meet the City’s needs
ACTION: Move to 1) Waive the bidding requirements pursuant to FVMC 2.36.070 Par 4 and authorize staff to issue purchase orders as follows:
 Winner Chevrolet in the amount of $117,262.35 for the purchase of two (2) 2025 Chevrolet Tahoe Police vehicles through the existing State of California contract;
 Olathe Ford Sales, Inc. in the amount of $111,054.50 for the purchase of two (2) 2025 Ford Police Interceptor Utility vehicles through the existing cooperative contract with Sourcewell;
 Olathe Ford Sales, Inc. in the amount of $56,940.20 for the purchase of one (1) 2025 Ford F-150 Responder 4x4 truck through the existing cooperative contract with Sourcewell; and

2) Authorize staff to dispose of the existing vehicles by means that best meet the City’s needs
MOTION: Constantine SECOND: Grandis
AYES: Constantine, Grandis, Harper, Cunneen, Bui
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
.

COUNCIL MEMBER ITEMS FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION
None

CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR AGENCY/ HOUSING AUTHORITY/ PUBLIC COMMENTS (Unscheduled Matters Only)
None
CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING AUTHORITY AB 1234/GENERAL COMMENTS Mayor Bui
February 5 Attended LA Quinta VSA Commemorating the Luna New Year February 6 Attended our City Yard’s employee Super Bowl BBQ and In the afternoon along with my colleague we interview the Advisory Disability Candidates February 7 Attended the Grand Opening of the Scouting America Council February 10 Attended the OCPA Meeting
February 11 Attended the OC Leadership Luncheon and In the evening I attend the Summerfest Meeting
February 12 Attended the Food Truck at the City Yard
February 13 Attended the GAGS’ meeting
February 19 Attended PCTA, OC Sand and OUR FV Community Meeting.

February 20 Attended the FVCF Meeting
February 21 Attended the Baseball Girls Fastback along with Council-member Kim Constantine February 22 Attended FV Little league Opening Ceremony Day along with Council-member Glenn Grandis. In the afternoon, I attend Eagle Scout Court of Honor in recognizing Brandon Clausi for his outstanding achievement. Again Congregation to Brandon.

February 24 Attended our PD Ribbon cutting ceremony
February 25 Attended the FV Chamber of Commerce Board meeting February 26 Attended OC Realtor Panel 2025 and OC San Meeting February 27 Attended 2025 Coast Colleges State of the District March 1 Attended the incoming US Deputy Attorney General Gates congratulation party

Vice Mayor Cunneen
February 19 Attended the quarterly meeting of OUR FV
February 24 Attended the Legislative Committee meeting and the Police Department Ribbon Cutting ceremony
March 1 Attended the Huntington Beach Surf City Rotary Gala Council Member Grandis
February 19 Attended the PCTA meeting, Unhoused Task Force meeting and the OUR FV meeting
March 1 Attended Pony Baseball opening day
March 3 Attended the FV Schools Foundation board meeting and the OCPA marketing Committee meeting
Council Member Constantine
February 19 Attended the Special Meeting of Our Fountain Valley Community / Non-Profit Meeting at the Fountain Valley Recreation Center. The was a great presentation by Doug Grove who’s doing our Parks Master Plan. There’ll be reachouts to the community for feedback about Mile Square Park.

February 20 Participated in our City’s Legislative Committee Meeting with our City Clerk and City Manager at City Hall. Later that morning, attended the sober loving permit Public Hearing at City Hall for those at 8756 La Roca (approved) and for 18871 Santa Marta (denied for several reasons). Later, as our City’s Trustee for the Orange County Mosquito and Vector Control Board, participated in our meet and greet event and monthly board meeting at the OC Mosquito and Vector Control District in Garden Grove. In the evening, I did an to go order from Woody’s Diner in Huntington Beach benefitting our Fountain Valley Friends of the Library, then attended the Fountain Valley Community Foundation Grants Meeting, the monthly Board Meeting, and the Volunteer Meeting at Founders Village Senior and Community Center.

February 21 Watched the CASLAR (California. Sober Living and Recovery Task Force) Sober Living Task Force Meeting on Zoom. In the evening, stopped in at the Fountain Valley Girls Fastpitch Softball Opening Ceremony at the Fountain Valley Sports Park.

February 22 Stopped in to see the batting cages just after the Fountain Valley Little League’s Opening Day Ceremony and Groundbreaking event for our new batting cages on Field 14 at Fountain Valley Sports Park.

February 24 Attended the Permit for Sober Living Home Public Hearing for 9679 Ellis at FV City Hall, then our Fountain Valley Police Department Open House and Ribbon Cutting Ceremony for our remodeled police department. Later, I attended the Permit for Sober Living Home at 8896 Salmon at FV City Hall.

February 25 Attended the Permit for Sober Living Home at 18943 San Felipe at FV City Hall in which the permit was approved, then watched the Orange County Board of Supervisors monthly Board Meeting on the County’s website, attended the Permit for Sober Living Home at 8718 Frazer at FV City Hall, then had a lunch meeting with our City Manager, Maggie at Sizzler on Bushard and Warner. In the evening, I

stopped in at the Love Local event at Black Angus, then attended the Green Valley Homeowner Recreation Association Meeting in the Green Valley Community Room.

February 26 Attended the Permit for Sober Living Home at 17325 Palm at FV City Hall, then watched the Cal Cities Orange County Division for Sponsored Bills Briefing on Zoom.

February 28 Stopped in at the movie for senior citizens “Moneyball” at Founders Village Senior and Community Center.

March 2 Stopped in at the Amuse Foundation event at the Aloha Fair on Beach Blvd., Huntington Beach.

Council Member Harper
February 19 Attended the PCTA meeting
February 24 Attended the OCTA Board Meeting
March 4 Attended the OCTA regional Transportation meeting

ADJOURN THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR AGENCY/HOUSING

AUTHORITY
Mayor Bui adjourned the meeting at 6:53 pm to the next Meeting of the Fountain Valley City Council on March 18, 2025 at 6:00 p.m., in the Fountain Valley Council Chambers, 10200 Slater Avenue, Fountain Valley.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ted Bui, Mayor

Attest:
___________________________
Rick Miller, City Clerk

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
To: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: March 18, 2025
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: City of Fountain Valley Register of Demands for the period of 2/21/2025 to 3/6/2025 Three-Year Strategic Goals
☐ Enhance the culture and environment of “A Nice Place to Live” ☒ Achieve fiscal stability by evaluating processes, and attract and retain revenue producing businesses/opportunities
☐ Attract and retain quality staff through best practices and trends ☐ Maintain, build, and modernize infrastructure to support growth and future needs of the City ☐ Not applicable
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Attached is the Register of Demands for the City of Fountain Valley to be ratified by the City Council.

DISCUSSION:

Pursuant to the State of California’s Government Code 37201 through 37210, the Director of Finance or their designated representative hereby certify to the accuracy of the following demands and to the availability of funds for payment thereof. Demands paid by the city shall be inspected and ratified by the legislative body on the next available Council agenda. The Finance Department has prepared the attached Register of Demands summarizing the City's payments released since the previous City Council meeting.

FINANCIAL ANALYSIS:

The attached Register of Demands represents payments made by the City of Fountain Valley between 2/21/2025 and 3/6/2025 for a total of $2,763,897.57.

ATTORNEY REVIEW:

The Attorney for the City reviewed this staff report and concurs with the recommended action.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:

Not applicable.

Register of Demands
March 18, 2025

ALTERNATIVES:

Alternative No. 1: Approve the attached Register of Demands.

Alternative No. 2: Do not approve as presented and provide direction to staff.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 to approve the attached Register of Demands representing payments made by the City of Fountain Valley between 2/21/2025 and 3/6/2025 for a total of $2,763,897.57.

Prepared by: Ryan Smith, Finance Director
Reviewed by: Colin Burns, City Attorney
Approved by: Maggie Le, City Manager
Attachment 1: Register of Demands 2/21/2025 to 3/6/2025.

City Of Fountain Valley
Register of Demands
2/21/2025 - 3/6/2025
Department
Check
Date Vendor Description Doc #
Check/ACH
# Amount
10000000 NON-DEPARTMENTAL
02/27/25 UC REGENTS 2024 LEADERSHIP ACADEMY 34990 2314376 27,525.00 03/06/25 U.S. BANK CORPORATE CITY PCARDS JAN 2025 - 4246 0445 5574 3131 35070 3481 23,079.43 03/05/25 AMAZON ENGAGEMENT COMMITTEE-DECOR FOR 34141 3439 28.25 TOTAL NON-DEPARTMENTAL 50,632.68
10010104 ADMIN SERVICES
03/06/25 QUANTUM SIGNS & GRAP STATE OF THE CITY STEP & REPEAT 35078 2314430 271.88 02/27/25 TEMPORARY STAFFING WE 2/23/25 - PART TIME ADMIN HELP 34903 3423 538.68 03/05/25 CIR LOUNGE STATE OF THE CITY CATERING 35079 2314390 10,547.00 03/06/25 TEMPORARY STAFFING WE 03/02/25 - PART TIME ADMIN HELP 35081 3480 538.68 TOTAL ADMIN SERVICES 11,896.24
10020200 HUMAN RESOURCES
02/27/25 CPS HUMAN RESOURCE S POLICE CHIEF RECRUITMENT PHASE II AND III 34955 3394 13,500.00 02/27/25 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTIC JAN 2025 HR DEPT LIVESCAN/FINGERPRINT 34947 2314329 241.00 02/27/25 CONCENTRA MEDICAL CE 02/17/25 OCCUPATIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES 34883 2314321 336.60 03/06/25 VERIZON WIRELESS 1/26/24 - 2/25/25 - HR CELL PHONES 35155 2314452 42.06 02/27/25 ESKILL CORPORATION 2025-2026 FOUNDATION PACKAGE 34972 3396 3,000.00 02/27/25 SHAW HR CONSULTING JAN-FEB 2025 HR CONSULTING SERVICES 34993 2314365 2,050.00 02/27/25 THNKS NEW HIRE RECOGNITION 34995 3424 500.00
03/06/25 SHRED-IT USA LLC FEB 2025 - HR SHRED-IT STERICYCLE SERVICE 35083 2314436 128.87 03/06/25 BOB HALL & ASSOCIATE FEB 2025 HR RECRUITMENT SERVICES 35129 2314407 2,100.00 03/06/25 CONCENTRA MEDICAL CE 2/19 - 2/25/25 OCCUPATIONAL MEDICAL 35154 2314411 2,731.80 03/05/25 AMAZON 2/04/2025 OFFICE SUPPLIES 35064 3440 11.80 03/06/25 EXPERIAN 2/1 - 2/28/25 PRE EMPLOYMENT CREDIT 35072 2314414 25.00 03/05/25 BIOMETRICS4ALL, INC FEB 2025- HR RELAY FEES 35068 3441 5.25 TOTAL HUMAN RESOURCES 24,672.38
10030300 PLANNING
02/27/25 AMAZON CALENDAR & LEGAL FILE FOLDERS 34869 3388 20.87 02/27/25 AMAZON DAILY JOURNAL/PLANNER FOR JENKINS 34868 3388 27.34 02/27/25 DE NOVO PLANNING GRO JAN 25 16800 MAGNOLIA PROJECT - CEQA 34900 2314327 3,392.00 03/06/25 AWARDS & TROPHIES CO COMMISSIONER BADGES 35002 2314406 28.32 03/06/25 AWARDS & TROPHIES CO COMMISSIONER NAMEBADGE 35025 2314406 19.16 03/06/25 PCARD ONE TIME PAY FULL REFUND FOR 17980 MAGNOLIA DEV REV 35162 2314427 2,389.00 TOTAL PLANNING 5,876.69
10030301 BUILDING & SAFETY
02/27/25 AMAZON CALENDAR & LEGAL FILE FOLDERS 34869 3388 159.07 02/27/25 TRUE NORTH COMPLIANC JAN 25 BUILDING PLAN REVIEW/STAFFING 34814 3425 1,632.00 TOTAL BUILDING & SAFETY 1,791.07

10040400 FINANCE
02/27/25 GOVERNMENTAL FINANCI FY 2023/24 SCO FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS 34881 2314338 4,600.00 TOTAL FINANCE 4,600.00
10050500 ENGINEERING
02/27/25 AMAZON JAN 2025 - PW ENG OFFICE SUPPLIES 34844 3388 26.09 02/27/25 AMAZON JAN 2025 - PW ENG OFFICE SUPPLIES 34854 3388 12.48 02/27/25 AMAZON JAN 2025 - PW ENG OFFICE SUPPLIES 34859 3388 73.94 02/27/25 AMAZON JAN 2025 - PW ENG OFFICE SUPPLIES 34862 3388 54.36 02/27/25 AMAZON FEB 2025 - PW ENG OFFICE SUPPLIES 34864 3388 83.83 02/27/25 AMAZON FEB 2025 - PW ENG OFFICE SUPPLIES 34865 3388 16.32 02/27/25 AMAZON FEB 2025 - PW ENG OFFICE SUPPLIES 34866 3388 46.48 03/06/25 VERIZON WIRELESS 01/26-02/25/2025 ENG CP - ENV SRVCS 35127 2314451 33.05 03/06/25 CANON SOLUTIONS AMER MAR 2025 - CANON MAINTENANCE & SERVICES 35042 2314408 393.98 TOTAL ENGINEERING 740.53
10050501 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
02/27/25 AMAZON FEB 2025 - PW ENG IPHONE ACCESSORIES PN 34867 3388 44.61 TOTAL TRAFFIC ENGINEERING 44.61
10050502 CONTSRUCTION INSP
02/27/25 DUDEK 12/28/24-01/24/25 - ON-CALL PW INSPECTIONS 34821 2314331 1,160.00 TOTAL CONTSRUCTION INSP 1,160.00
10050503 STREET LIGHTING
03/06/25 SO CALIF EDISON CO 12/23/24 - 1/22/25 TRAFFIC SIGNALS 35003 2314437 5,638.54 TOTAL STREET LIGHTING 5,638.54
10050550 RIGHTS-OF-WAY
03/05/25 SO CALIF EDISON CO 12/4/24-1/3/25 MEDIANS 34970 2314395 135.59 02/27/25 SO CALIF EDISON CO 1/4/25-2/2/25 ROWS 34984 2314369 89.31 03/05/25 JMG SECURITY SYSTEMS IRRIGATION STOCK PARTS FOR MEDIANS & 34929 3450 1,969.19 03/06/25 JHM SUPPLY, INC BACKFLOW ENCLOSURE FOR CITY YARD 35121 2314420 742.60 TOTAL RIGHTS-OF-WAY 2,936.69
10050551 TREE MAINTENANCE
03/06/25 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER BROADLEAF TRIMMING C-2 34931 3470 7,371.52 03/05/25 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER EMERGENCIES ON 11/6/24 34930 3448 835.28 03/05/25 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER EMERGENCY REMOVAL AT 18300 BUSHARD 34932 3448 1,012.50 03/05/25 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER CITY WIDE EMERGENCIES ON 1/8/25 34935 3448 3,005.04 03/05/25 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER BROKEN LIMB & REMOVAL-EMERGENCY WORK 34937 3448 1,011.06 03/05/25 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER TREE REMOVAL ON OAK CIR-EMERGENCY 34939 3448 854.96 03/06/25 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER BROADLEAF TRIMMING OF C-3 34942 3470 5,953.92 03/05/25 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER REQUEST FOR PALM FROND REMOVAL 34938 3448 267.18 03/06/25 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER BROADLEAF TRIMMING OF D-3 34943 3470 8,233.33 03/05/25 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER ROOT PRUNING AT VISTA VIEW PARK 34941 3448 1,603.05 03/05/25 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER REMOVAL AT CAPILLA PARK "EMERGENCY 34936 3448 320.61 03/05/25 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER REMOVAL ON SPURCE ST-EMERGENCY WORK 34940 3448 331.88 03/05/25 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER EMERGENCY REMOVAL AT NATURE TRAIL 34933 3448 1,603.05 03/05/25 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER EMERGENCY TREE REMOVAL ON DAISY AVE. 34934 3448 908.39 03/06/25 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER BROADLEAF TRIMMING OF E-2 34948 3470 6,662.72

03/06/25 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER 1/2025 PARKWAY TREE PLANTING 34949 3470 9,618.83 03/05/25 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER TRANSPLANTING OF PARKWAY TREE ON 34950 3448 267.18 03/05/25 GREAT SCOTT TREE SER BROKEN BRANCH AT PLAVAN PARK- 34951 3448 908.39 TOTAL TREE MAINTENANCE 50,768.89
10050552 PARK MAINTENANCE
02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/16/25 UNIFORMS 34804 2314319 8.96 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/23/25 UNIFORMS 34803 2314319 8.96 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/30/25 UNIFORMS 34860 2314319 8.96 03/05/25 SO CALIF EDISON CO 12/27/25-1/27/25 IRRIG & PARKS 34981 2314399 667.68 03/05/25 SO CALIF EDISON CO 1/6/25-2/3/25 NIEBLAS PARK 34976 2314397 28.04 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/6/25 UNIFORMS 34861 2314319 8.96 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/13/25 UNIFORMS 34863 2314319 8.96 03/05/25 SO CALIF EDISON CO 1/17/25-2/18/25 MCDOWELL PARK 34952 2314394 31.43 03/05/25 JMG SECURITY SYSTEMS IRRIGATION VALVES FOR PARKS 34928 3449 969.75 03/06/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/20/25 UNIFORMS 34968 2314410 13.44 03/06/25 IMPERIAL SPRINKLER S QUICK COUPLING ADDITIONS FOR PARKS 35004 2314419 346.09 TOTAL PARK MAINTENANCE 2,101.23
10050554 PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE
02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/16/25 UNIFORMS 34804 2314319 46.29 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/23/25 UNIFORMS 34803 2314319 46.29 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/30/25 UNIFORMS 34860 2314319 174.25 03/06/25 VULCAN MATERIAL COMP ASPHALT RAMP 34888 2314453 335.07 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/6/25 UNIFORMS 34861 2314319 46.29 02/27/25 VULCAN MATERIAL COMP ASPHALT OIL 34991 2314388 196.65 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/13/25 UNIFORMS 34863 2314319 50.87 03/06/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/20/25 UNIFORMS 34968 2314410 74.45 02/27/25 VULCAN MATERIAL COMP ASPHALT FOR REPAIR 34989 2314387 243.80 TOTAL PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE 1,213.96
10050555 STORM DRAIN MAINT
02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/16/25 UNIFORMS 34804 2314319 9.80 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/23/25 UNIFORMS 34803 2314319 9.80 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/30/25 UNIFORMS 34860 2314319 9.80 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/6/25 UNIFORMS 34861 2314319 50.08 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/13/25 UNIFORMS 34863 2314319 9.80 02/27/25 MICHAEL BAKER INTERN THRU 01/26/25 - NPDES PROG MGMT SUPPORT 34822 3411 2,269.00 02/27/25 SO CALIF EDISON CO 1/15/25-2/13/25 SANDALWOOD PUMP STATION 34973 2314367 1,176.09 03/06/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/20/25 UNIFORMS 34968 2314410 9.80 TOTAL STORM DRAIN MAINT 3,544.17
10050556 TRAFFIC CONTROL
02/27/25 ROADLINE PRODUCTS IN SIGN HARDWARE 34986 3419 2,926.50 03/06/25 FULL TRAFFIC MAINTEN SIGN CAPS & BRACKETS 34887 2314417 687.30 02/27/25 PACIFIC PRODUCTS TRAFFIC SIGNS 34988 2314351 1,479.00 TOTAL TRAFFIC CONTROL 5,092.80
10050557 STREET SWEEPING
03/06/25 SCA OF CA, LLC 1/2025 MONTHLY STREET SWEEPING 34992 3478 33,122.20

TOTAL STREET SWEEPING 33,122.20
10050558 RECREATION CENTER
02/27/25 MERCHANTS LANDSCAPE GENERAL SPORTS PARK MAINT. 34796 3410 35,889.48 02/27/25 MERCHANTS LANDSCAPE RENOVATION ALL FIELDS 34793 3410 35,500.00 02/27/25 MERCHANTS LANDSCAPE 1/2025 GENERAL SPORTS PARK MAINT. 34799 3410 35,889.48 02/27/25 ORANGE COUNTY WATER 10/20/24-02/09/25 RECYCLED WATER USAGE 34724 3412 16,016.68 TOTAL RECREATION CENTER 123,295.64
10060600 FIRE SUPPRESSION
02/27/25 AWARDS & TROPHIES CO ADD ONS TO RETIREMENT PLAQUE 34679 2314312 40.00 02/27/25 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT 1.1.25-1.31.25 COFFEE LEASE SERVICE 34684 2314310 26.92 02/27/25 FLOOD, FREDERICK PARAMEDIC LICENSE RENEWAL - FLOOD 34687 3399 250.00 03/05/25 AMAZON IPAD CASES 35014 3438 295.40
03/05/25 AMAZON JANITORIAL CLEANING SUPPLIES FOR 35015 3438 158.72 03/06/25 PURETEC INDUSTRIAL W DIEONIZED WATER SYSTEM STATION 1 35017 2314429 126.61 03/06/25 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT 2.1.25-2.28.25 STATION 1 COFFEE LEASE 35022 2314403 26.92 03/06/25 TURNOUT MAINTENANCE TURNOUT CLEANING AND REPAIR 35023 2314450 116.20 03/06/25 AT&T MOBILITY 1.9.25-2.8.25 FIRE BACK UP CELLS 35028 2314404 201.20 03/06/25 AT&T MOBILITY 1.9.25-2.8.25 FIRE CELLS 35029 2314405 185.37 03/05/25 AMAZON CREDIT MEMO IPAD CASES 35037 3438 (118.16) 03/05/25 AMAZON KITCHEN KNIVES - STATION 1 35038 3438 86.98 03/06/25 PURETEC INDUSTRIAL W DEIONIZED WATER TANK RENTAL STATION 1 35039 2314429 20.64 03/06/25 PURETEC INDUSTRIAL W DEIONIZED WATER TANK RENTAL 35040 2314429 20.64 TOTAL FIRE SUPPRESSION 1,437.44
10060601 PARAMEDICS
02/27/25 GALLS, LLC DUTY SHORT SLEEVE SHIRTS - LYSDALE 34680 2314337 329.72 02/27/25 GALLS, LLC DUTY LONG SLEEVE SHIRT - LYSDALE 34681 2314337 211.18 02/27/25 GALLS, LLC DUTY SHIRTS AND PANTS - OCHOA 34726 2314337 814.56 02/27/25 GALLS, LLC DUTY SHIRT - OCHOA 34728 2314337 167.00 03/06/25 GALLS, LLC LYSDALE - DUTY UNIFORM BELT 35019 2314418 30.16 03/06/25 GALLS, LLC LYSDALE - DUTY UNIFORM PANTS 35020 2314418 585.08 03/06/25 ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPME PHENIX TECH HELMETS 35021 2314401 3,270.58 03/06/25 GALLS, LLC DUTY BELT - OCHOA 35034 2314418 29.24 TOTAL PARAMEDICS 5,437.52
10060602 AMBULANCE SERVICES
02/27/25 LIFE ASSIST 1st AID/PARAMEDIC SUPPLIES 34689 3409 905.55 02/27/25 LIFE ASSIST 1st AID/PARAMEDIC SUPPLIES 34690 3409 288.44 02/27/25 LIFE ASSIST 1st AID/PARAMEDIC SUPPLIES 34691 3409 163.12 02/27/25 LIFE ASSIST CREDIT MEMO 34694 3409 (211.89)
02/27/25 BOUND TREE MEDICAL 1st AID/PARAMEDIC SUPPLIES 34695 3391 916.89 02/27/25 BOUND TREE MEDICAL 1st AID/PARAMEDIC SUPPLIES 34696 3391 672.50 02/27/25 BOUND TREE MEDICAL 1st AID/PARAMEDIC SUPPLIES 34697 3391 672.50 02/27/25 WITTMAN ENTERPRISES, 1.1.25-1.31.25 AMBULANCE BILLING SERVICES 34720 3431 16,271.26 02/27/25 LIFE ASSIST 1st AID/PARAMEDIC SUPPLIES 34725 3409 619.12 02/27/25 PCARD ONE TIME PAY WITTMAN FEBRUARY REFUND TO LANSFORD 34733 2314355 50.00 02/27/25 PCARD ONE TIME PAY WITTMAN FEBRUARY REFUND TO LANSFORD 34734 2314356 50.00

02/27/25 PCARD ONE TIME PAY WITTMAN FEBRUARY REFUND TO LANSFORD 34736 2314357 50.00 02/27/25 PCARD ONE TIME PAY WITTMAN FEBRUARY REFUND TO SHAW ON 34737 2314353 100.00 02/27/25 PCARD ONE TIME PAY WITTMAN FEBRUARY REFUND TO SHAW ON 34740 2314354 100.00 02/27/25 PCARD ONE TIME PAY WITTMAN FEBRUARY REFUND BS CALIFORNIA 34743 2314352 85.49 03/06/25 CARE AMBULANCE 2.4.25-2.17.25 CONTRACT AMBULANCE 35008 3467 54,662.44 03/06/25 CARE AMBULANCE 2.18.25-3.3.25 CONTRACT AMBULANCE 35009 3467 54,662.44 03/05/25 CARE AMBULANCE PAY PERIOD OT 27 - AMBULANCE SERVICES 35010 3443 329.38 03/05/25 CARE AMBULANCE PAY PERIOD 02 - AMBULANCE SERVICES 35011 3443 214.48 03/05/25 CARE AMBULANCE PAY PERIOD 01 - AMBULANCE SERVICES 35012 3443 137.88 03/06/25 CARE AMBULANCE SURGE 1.1.25-1.31.25 - AMBULANCE SERVICES 35013 3467 25,668.75 03/05/25 BOUND TREE MEDICAL 1st AID/PARAMEDIC SUPPLIES 35024 3442 915.43 03/05/25 LIFE ASSIST 1st AID/PARAMEDIC SUPPLIES 35026 3452 690.35 03/06/25 LIFE ASSIST 1st AID/PARAMEDIC SUPPLIES 35027 3474 1,875.05 03/06/25 SPECTRUM GAS PRODUCT OXYGEN CYLINDER RENTALS STATION 2 35035 2314447 63.60 03/06/25 SPECTRUM GAS PRODUCT OXYGEN CYLINDER RENTAL - STATION 1 35036 2314447 135.15 TOTAL AMBULANCE SERVICES 160,087.93
10060603 FIRE PREVENTION
02/27/25 GRM INFORMATION MANA 1.1.25-1.31.25 FIRE FILE STORAGE 34685 2314342 8.40 02/27/25 VCA CODE 1.1.25-1.31.25 FIRE PLAN CHECKS 34686 3426 1,966.00 03/06/25 AT&T MOBILITY 1.9.25-2.8.25 FIRE CELLS 35029 2314405 45.08 03/06/25 ENTENMANN-ROVIN CO. HARDWARE - FIRE MARSHAL - FIRE 35045 2314413 444.84 TOTAL FIRE PREVENTION 2,464.32
10060604 FIRE RESERVES
02/27/25 AWARDS & TROPHIES CO NAME BAR FOR NEW RESERVE 34678 2314312 18.62 TOTAL FIRE RESERVES 18.62
10060605 DISASTER PREPAREDNESS
03/06/25 AT&T MOBILITY 1.9.25-2.8.25 FIRE CELLS 35029 2314405 45.08 TOTAL DISASTER PREPAREDNESS 45.08
10070700 PATROL
02/27/25 COUNTY OF ORANGE PRE-BOOKING FORMS 34841 2314323 135.20 02/27/25 DELTA GLOVES DEPARTMENT GLOVES 34828 2314328 1,155.60 02/27/25 CITY OF SANTA ANA JAN 2025 - BOOKING FEES 34849 2314320 146.00 02/27/25 AMAZON WALKING TREADMILL 34843 3388 154.35
02/27/25 AMAZON COPY PAPER 34836 3388 12.30
02/27/25 DELTA GLOVES DEPARTMENT GLOVES 34837 2314328 128.40 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 2 FIRST AID REFILL 34830 2314318 179.83 02/27/25 AMAZON HOMELESS ENCAMPMENT SUPPLIES 34832 3388 31.95 02/27/25 CRIME SCENE STERI-CL HOMELESS ENCAMPMENT CLEAN-UP 34829 2314324 5,606.00 02/27/25 FERMIN, DANIELLE MEALS/MILEAGE BASIC CRISIS NEGOTIATIONS 34827 3398 105.80 02/27/25 DALE, MADISON MEALS/MILEAGE CRISIS NEGOTIATIONS 34833 3395 904.80 02/27/25 ARMSTRONG, MCKAYLA MEALS/MILEAGE CLI #1 34835 3390 135.84 03/06/25 PETTY CASH FIELD SER REIMBURSE PETTY CASH 35030 2314428 412.08 TOTAL PATROL 9,108.15
10070701 INVESTIGATION
02/27/25 REWORLD WASTE LLC DRUG DESTRUCTION 34842 2314363 573.76

02/27/25 T-MOBILE USA 24-36520 GPS LOCATE 34852 2314372 115.00 02/27/25 EFFICIENT X-RAY, INC BIOHAZARDOUS WASTE PICKUP 34838 2314334 208.19 02/27/25 THOMSON REUTERS WEST JAN 2025 - PUBLIC RECORD SEARCHES 34839 2314373 613.39 02/27/25 AMAZON PROPERTY SUPPLIES 34845 3388 716.25
03/06/25 PETTY CASH FIELD SER REIMBURSE PETTY CASH 35030 2314428 192.15 TOTAL INVESTIGATION 2,418.74
10070702 TRAFFIC
02/27/25 ALL CITY MANAGEMENT 1/19/25-2/1/25 - CROSSING GUARDS 34848 3387 9,755.00 02/27/25 AMAZON USB AND EXTERNAL HARD DRIVE 34834 3388 102.21 TOTAL TRAFFIC 9,857.21
10070706 L.E. RECORDS
02/27/25 VERITONE, INC REDACT APPLICATION 34831 3427 2,400.00 TOTAL L.E. RECORDS 2,400.00
10070707 CRIME PREVENTION
02/27/25 AMAZON CRIME PREVENTION SUPPLIES 34847 3388 16.10 03/06/25 PETTY CASH FIELD SER REIMBURSE PETTY CASH 35030 2314428 104.00 TOTAL CRIME PREVENTION 120.10
10070708 RANGE
02/27/25 UNITED TACTICAL SYST PEPPERBALL HPA TANK 34851 2314378 234.00 02/27/25 DOOLEY ENTERPRISES, AMMO 34858 2314330 1,842.53 TOTAL RANGE 2,076.53
10070800 ANIMAL CARE SVCS
02/27/25 COUNTY OF ORANGE 10/1/24-12/31/24 ANIMAL CARE SERVICES 34840 2314322 114,431.60 TOTAL ANIMAL CARE SVCS 114,431.60
10080800 RECREATION CENTER
02/27/25 SPECTRUM GAS PRODUCT BALLOON REFILL HELIUM 34662 2314371 26.00 02/27/25 AMAZON RC OFFICE SUPPLIES 34664 3388 120.13
02/27/25 SPECTRUM GAS PRODUCT BALLOON REFILL HELIUM 34663 2314371 26.00 02/27/25 VERIZON WIRELESS 2/2 - 3/1/25 REC CENTER/PARK 34630 2314386 45.02 02/27/25 ULINE EVENT AND PARK TRASH BAGS 34876 2314377 306.62 02/27/25 REC SVCS REFUND WINTER BROCHURE EXCHANGE 34878 2314360 20.00 TOTAL RECREATION CENTER 543.77
10080801 ATHLETICS
02/27/25 VERIZON WIRELESS 2/2 - 3/1/25 REC CENTER/PARK 34630 2314386 37.78 TOTAL ATHLETICS 37.78
10080802 FIELD OPERATIONS
02/27/25 ULINE EVENT AND PARK TRASH BAGS 34876 2314377 300.00 TOTAL FIELD OPERATIONS 300.00
10080810 SENIOR & COMM CENTER
03/06/25 AMAZON OFFICE SUPPLIES 35074 3463 56.74
03/05/25 AMAZON Office Supplies 33734 3438 77.49
03/05/25 AMAZON Office Supplies 33733 3438 135.88
03/06/25 AMAZON OFFICE SUPPLIES 35075 3463 16.25
03/06/25 AMAZON OFFICE SUPPLIES 35095 3463 177.30
03/06/25 AMAZON OFFICE SUPPLIES 35097 3463 58.52

03/06/25 AMAZON OFFICE SUPPLIES 35099 3463 17.38
03/05/25 LEI JES CATERING CATERING - BILLIARDS TOURNAMENT 35050 3451 122.75 02/27/25 BLDG REFUND REFUND FOR RENTAL ON 5/18/25 34818 2314315 100.00 02/27/25 LEI JES CATERING 2/21/25 LUNCH & LEARN CATERING 34873 3408 565.68 03/06/25 AMAZON FELT BUMPERS 35076 3463 4.13
03/06/25 AMAZON SELF ADHESIVE NUMBERS 35077 3463 7.08
03/06/25 AMAZON OFFICE SUPPLIES 35100 3463 42.15
03/06/25 AMAZON SC SUPPLY - Invoice # 1GQD-HYMP-LMHP | 35179 3463 6.30 03/05/25 LEI JES CATERING CATERING - DESSERT VALENTINE DANCE 35052 3451 325.00 03/06/25 LEI JES CATERING CATERING - VALENTINE LUNCHEON 35055 3473 1,040.86 03/06/25 SPARKLETTS SC WATER - FEBRUARY 35177 2314445 64.43 03/06/25 SPECTRUM GAS PRODUCT SC HELIUM TANK RENTAL - FEBRUARY 35178 2314447 13.00 TOTAL SENIOR & COMM CENTER 2,830.94
10080811 SENIOR TRANSPORTATION
02/27/25 CALIFORNIA YELLOW CA NOV 2024 - SENIOR TRANSPORTATION 34924 2314317 10,710.50 02/27/25 CALIFORNIA YELLOW CA DEC 2024 - SENIOR TRANSPORTATION 34926 2314317 9,424.00 03/05/25 CALIFORNIA YELLOW CA JAN 2025 - SENIOR TRANSPORTATION 35057 2314389 10,642.50 TOTAL SENIOR TRANSPORTATION 30,777.00
10080820 CONTRACT CLASSES
02/27/25 WEST GROVE VOLLEYBAL INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT FOR CLASS 332031-B1 34203 3429 150.50 02/27/25 REC SVCS REFUND REFUND FOR CLASS 312012-A3 34723 2314362 96.00 02/27/25 REC SVCS REFUND REFUND FOR CLASS 312040-A1 34731 2314359 149.00 02/27/25 JACKSON, VICKIE LEE INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT 351139-A1 34801 3405 257.40 02/27/25 JACKSON, VICKIE LEE INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT 371136-A1 34812 3406 140.40 02/27/25 WARDECKI, CARRIE L. INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT 371037-A1 34824 3428 1,333.80 02/27/25 POSTMASTER/U.S.POSTA POSTAGE FOR SPRING FOUNTAIN PEN 2025 34875 2314358 5,000.00 02/27/25 WEST GROVE VOLLEYBAL INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT WEST GROVE 34894 3430 539.70 03/06/25 REC SVCS REFUND REFUND FOR CLASS 313013-A3 CANCELATION 34994 2314431 56.00 TOTAL CONTRACT CLASSES 7,722.80
10080821 SPECIAL EVENTS
02/27/25 REC SVCS REFUND EGGS TO STUFF FOR EGG HUNT 2025 34874 2314361 1,380.04 02/27/25 AMAZON TL DECOR 1VXV-LGNL-RPV9 34877 3389 186.54 TOTAL SPECIAL EVENTS 1,566.58
10080823 PARK PATROL
02/27/25 VERIZON WIRELESS 2/2 - 3/1/25 REC CENTER/PARK 34630 2314386 51.48 02/27/25 ULINE EVENT AND PARK TRASH BAGS 34876 2314377 300.00 TOTAL PARK PATROL 351.48
11010050 ISF IS ADMIN CAPITAL
02/27/25 TEMPORARY STAFFING 12/16/24-12/22/24 ERIC FONG 34911 3423 2,772.00 02/27/25 PERISCOPE INTERMEDIA 2025 NIGP 5-DIGIT COMMODITY CODE LICENSE 34901 3413 738.90 02/27/25 BILL'S SOUND SYSTEMS HDMI SWITCH FOR REC CENTER PROJECTOR 34884 2314314 1,152.00 02/27/25 TPX COMMUNICATIONS 2/9 - 3/8/25 CITY & PD PHONE LINES 34910 2314374 4,945.26 02/27/25 CMS SOLUTIONS, INC 2025/2026 NEC SUPPORT RENEWAL 34885 3393 21,765.93 02/27/25 GOLDEN STAR TECHNOLO 2/27/25-2/26/26 BARACCUDA SOFTWARE 34886 3400 26,827.50 02/27/25 TEMPORARY STAFFING 2/17-2/23/2025 ERIC FONG 34904 3423 2,356.20

02/27/25 NMK CORPORATION PALO ALTO CORTEX RENEWAL 34905 2314348 40,861.48 TOTAL ISF IS ADMIN CAPITAL 101,419.27
11094001 ISF IS FINANCE PRJ NON-REC
02/27/25 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES ERP IMPLEMENTATION - PHASE 2 LICENSE 34889 2314375 12,366.75 TOTAL ISF IS FINANCE PRJ NON-REC 12,366.75
11110000 ISF GB CITY HALL
02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/16/25 UNIFORMS 34804 2314319 8.96 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/23/25 UNIFORMS 34803 2314319 8.96 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/30/25 UNIFORMS 34860 2314319 8.96 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/6/25 UNIFORMS 34861 2314319 8.96 02/27/25 CLIMATEC, LLC 2/1/25-4/30/25 TSA AGREEMENT 34927 3392 414.09 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/13/25 UNIFORMS 34863 2314319 8.96 03/06/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/20/25 UNIFORMS 34968 2314410 8.96 02/27/25 DAVID CROWELL ELECTR INSTALL NEW LIGHT FOR SIGNAGE IN COUNCIL 34923 2314326 245.00 03/06/25 SO CALIF EDISON CO 1/7/25-2/4/25 CITY HALL 34977 2314440 6,106.77 TOTAL ISF GB CITY HALL 6,819.62
11150000 ISF GB CITY YARD
03/06/25 SO CALIF EDISON CO 1/4/25-2/2/25 CITY YARD 34980 2314442 2,985.39 02/27/25 CLIMATEC, LLC 2/1/25-4/30/25 TSA AGREEMENT 34927 3392 86.67 02/27/25 AT&T 1/22 - 2/21/25 FS#2/CY/REC PARK PHONES 34906 2314311 212.67 TOTAL ISF GB CITY YARD 3,284.73
11160001 ISF GB FS1
03/05/25 SO CALIF EDISON CO 12/27/24-1/27/25 FIRE STATION #1 34138 2314392 1,400.32 02/27/25 CLIMATEC, LLC 2/1/25-4/30/25 TSA AGREEMENT 34927 3392 69.02 02/27/25 FRONTIER COMMUNICATI 2/13 - 3/12/25 FS#1 PHONE 34908 2314335 220.23 TOTAL ISF GB FS1 1,689.57
11160002 ISF GB FS2
02/27/25 CLIMATEC, LLC 2/1/25-4/30/25 TSA AGREEMENT 34927 3392 69.01 02/27/25 AT&T FS#2 CKT METRO 34907 2314311 58.36
03/05/25 SO CALIF EDISON CO 1/21/25-2/19/25 FIRE STATION #2 34979 2314398 664.67 02/27/25 AT&T 1/22 - 2/21/25 FS#2/CY/REC PARK PHONES 34906 2314311 212.65 TOTAL ISF GB FS2 1,004.69
11160003 ISF GB BUSHARD
02/27/25 CAL-STATE SITE SERVI CONSTRUCTION FENCING 34809 2314316 7,200.00 TOTAL ISF GB BUSHARD 7,200.00
11170000 ISF GB POLICE DEPARTMENT
02/27/25 CLIMATEC, LLC 2/1/25-4/30/25 TSA AGREEMENT 34927 3392 414.09 02/27/25 GRAINGER, INC. PARKING BOLLARDS 34919 2314341 298.17 02/27/25 FRONTIER COMMUNICATI 2/13 - 3/12/25 PD DISPATCH FAX 34909 2314336 114.96 03/06/25 JMG SECURITY SYSTEMS SMOKE DETECTORS ON ROOF-HVAC 35124 3472 2,888.00 03/06/25 SO CALIF EDISON CO 1/7/25-2/4/25 PD 34978 2314441 7,567.32 TOTAL ISF GB POLICE DEPARTMENT 11,282.54
11180000 ISF GB REC CENTER
02/27/25 GRAINGER, INC. RESTROOM AIR FRESHENER 31545 2314340 367.14 03/06/25 SO CALIF EDISON CO 12/30/24-1/28/25 REC CENTER 34134 2314438 1,714.73

03/05/25 SO CALIF EDISON CO 12/30/24-1/28/25 SPORTS PARK 34135 2314391 24.43 03/05/25 SO CALIF EDISON CO 12/30/24-1/28/25 REC MAINT BUILDING 34139 2314393 22.79 03/05/25 SO CALIF EDISON CO 1/7/25-2/4/25 PARK & RIDE 34974 2314396 887.34 02/27/25 PLAYPOWER LT FARMING PLAYGROUND REPAIR 34917 3414 803.59 02/27/25 CLIMATEC, LLC 2/1/25-4/30/25 TSA AGREEMENT 34927 3392 276.06 02/27/25 KEN'S LOCKSMITHERY PONY FLAGPOLE LOCK 34922 2314343 53.88 02/27/25 PROFESSIONAL PLUMBIN SNAKE URINAL TO CLEAR BUILDUP-REC 34918 3415 216.00 02/27/25 PACIFIC BUILDING SPE SP SOCCER WOMEN'S RESTROOM PARTITION 34925 2314350 892.00 02/27/25 AT&T 1/22 - 2/21/25 FS#2/CY/REC PARK PHONES 34906 2314311 212.65 03/06/25 SO CALIF EDISON CO 1/29/25-2/27/25 REC CENTER 35120 2314444 1,811.01 TOTAL ISF GB REC CENTER 7,281.62
11180001 ISF GB SR CENTER
03/06/25 SO CALIF EDISON CO 12/27/24-1/27/25 SENIOR CENTER 34136 2314439 2,286.91 02/27/25 CLIMATEC, LLC 2/1/25-4/30/25 TSA AGREEMENT 34927 3392 276.06 02/27/25 ROAD RUNNER EXTERMIN 2/2025 MONTHLY SERVICE 34920 3417 144.00 02/27/25 ROAD RUNNER EXTERMIN 2/2025 MONTHLY SERVICE 34921 3418 205.00 03/06/25 JMG SECURITY SYSTEMS 2/18/25-3/31/25 & NEW AMS CELL SERVICE/FIRE 35122 3471 1,582.17 TOTAL ISF GB SR CENTER 4,494.14
11250001 PW - FLEET MGMT
03/06/25 RUSH TRUCK CENTERS O CORE CREDIT FROM INVOICE 3034249305 19587 2314434 (433.91) 03/06/25 NAPA AUTO PARTS SHOP TOOLS 34967 2314426 11.85 03/06/25 NAPA AUTO PARTS BATTERY FOR #193 34966 2314425 225.77 02/27/25 NAPA AUTO PARTS STOCK BATTERIES 25393 2314347 677.28 02/27/25 NAPA AUTO PARTS PART FOR UNIT 222 34956 2314347 245.65 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/16/25 UNIFORMS 34804 2314319 75.41 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/23/25 UNIFORMS 34803 2314319 75.41 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/30/25 UNIFORMS 34860 2314319 75.41 02/27/25 NAPA AUTO PARTS PART RETURN CREDITS 34954 2314347 (245.65) 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/6/25 UNIFORMS 34861 2314319 75.41 02/27/25 RINCON TRUCK CENTER, STOCK PARTS 34890 2314364 28.07 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/13/25 UNIFORMS 34863 2314319 75.41 02/27/25 MCPEEK DODGE OF ANAH STOCK PARTS 34895 2314346 132.74 02/27/25 E.G. ENTERPRISES DIESEL SMOG CHECK INSPECTION 34892 2314332 125.00 02/27/25 EBERHARD EQUIPMENT PART FOR UNIT 314 34896 2314333 85.31 03/06/25 AAA OIL, INC. BULK OILS FOR FLEET 35093 3462 1,816.51 02/27/25 RINCON TRUCK CENTER, STOCK PARTS 34891 2314364 165.70 02/27/25 DANIEL'S TIRE SERVIC STOCK TIRES 34893 2314325 1,229.42 02/27/25 EBERHARD EQUIPMENT PART FOR UNIT 305 AND 314 34898 2314333 254.95 02/27/25 SC COMMERCIAL LLC BULK DIESEL FOR FIRE STATION 2 34957 3420 2,449.53 02/27/25 SC COMMERCIAL LLC BULK GAS AND DIESEL FOR FIRE STATION 1 34958 3420 4,731.11 03/06/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/20/25 UNIFORMS 34968 2314410 75.41 03/06/25 RINCON TRUCK CENTER, STOCK PARTS 35118 2314432 185.85 03/06/25 DANIEL'S TIRE SERVIC TIRES FOR UNIT 243 FIRE TRUCK 35094 2314412 812.45 03/06/25 SPECIALISTS AUTOGLAS WINDSHIELD FOR UNIT 319 35119 2314446 519.35 03/06/25 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS BATTERY FOR UNIT 415 35092 2314415 259.50

03/06/25 THEODORE ROBINS FORD UNIT 439 DAMAGED BODY WORKS 35101 2314449 2,941.55 03/06/25 SC FUELS (CARDS) MONTHLY FUEL CARD LOCK FEBRUARY 35096 3477 24,148.44 03/06/25 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS STOCK BATTERIES 35091 2314415 391.06 03/06/25 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS PART FOR UNIT 202 35090 2314415 581.59 TOTAL PW - FLEET MGMT 41,791.58
11250052 ISF FL PW CAPITAL
03/06/25 RUSH TRUCK CENTERS O CAPITAL REPLACEMENT FOR UNIT 8916 34969 2314434 216,288.25 TOTAL ISF FL PW CAPITAL 216,288.25
11360053 ISF EQ FD R&C CAPITAL
02/27/25 KATOM RESTAURANT STATION #1 VULCAN OVEN/STOVE 34946 3407 4,598.33 02/27/25 STRYKER SALES LLC CHEST COMPRESSION SYSTEM 34730 3422 8,020.72 02/27/25 STRYKER SALES LLC CHEST COMPRESSION SYSTEM EQUIPMENT 34698 3422 81,479.00 03/06/25 ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPME FIRE EQUIPMENT - KEY HOSE 35016 2314401 5,626.19 TOTAL ISF EQ FD R&C CAPITAL 99,724.24
11370053 ISF EQ PD R&C CAPITAL
02/27/25 GALLS, LLC VEST - B. STEPHENSON 34853 2314337 890.35 02/27/25 GALLS, LLC VEST - G. HEISE 34855 2314337 890.35 02/27/25 GALLS, LLC VEST - J. FLORES 34856 2314337 890.35 02/27/25 GALLS, LLC VEST - J. BAILEY 34857 2314337 890.35 TOTAL ISF EQ PD R&C CAPITAL 3,561.40
11400000 ISF CITY SELF INSURANCE
03/06/25 CALIF JOINT POWERS I TRUST ACCT RPLNSHMNT-FEB 25 35086 3466 0.00 TOTAL ISF CITY SELF INSURANCE 0.00
11400411 SELF INSURANCE
03/06/25 CARL WARREN & COMPAN CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION-AUG 24 35087 2314409 1,350.00 03/06/25 CALIF JOINT POWERS I TRUST ACCT RPLNSHMNT-FEB 25 35086 3466 500.00 TOTAL SELF INSURANCE 1,850.00
11400430 SELF INSURANCE
03/05/25 TRUST OF PORAC MAR 2025 - PORAC LTD (ACCT 54541) 35000 3460 1,410.00 03/06/25 THE LINCOLN NATIONAL MAR 2025 LIFE INSURANCE/LTD/ADD/EAP 35153 2314448 3,271.99 TOTAL SELF INSURANCE 4,681.99
11500000 ISF EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
03/06/25 MUNICIPAL DENTAL POO MAR 2025 DELTA DENTAL PPO 34772 2314422 11,477.38 03/06/25 MUNICIPAL DENTAL POO FEB 2025 DELTA DENTAL HMO 34773 2314423 2,158.32 03/05/25 FOUNTAIN VALLEY POLI PR PPE250228 - DED 8002 35102 3446 2,350.00 03/05/25 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CRED PR PPE250228 - DED 9500 35103 3444 33,847.60 03/05/25 FOUNTAIN VALLEY FIRE PR PPE250228 - DED 8000 35104 3445 2,887.03 03/06/25 EMPOWER/BENEFITS COR PR PPE250228 - DED 7031,7032,7033,7036 35105 3434 74,011.26 03/06/25 CALIFORNIA STATE DIS PR PPE250228 - DED 6004,6005,6007 35106 3436 1,104.35 03/05/25 MISSION SQUARE RET P PLAN #803216 - PR PPE250228 - DED 2013,2015 35107 3453 2,896.94 03/05/25 MISSION SQUARE RET P PLAN #800389 - PR PE250228 - DED 2011 35108 3454 1,020.42 03/05/25 MISSION SQUARE RET P PLAN #800414 - PR PPE250228 - DED 2014 35109 3455 218.03 03/05/25 MISSION SQUARE RET P PLAN #108536 - PR PPE250228 - DED 2018 35110 3456 576.90 03/05/25 U.S. BANK N.A. PR PPE250228 - DED 7029,7030 35111 3461 3,403.64 03/05/25 FVPOA PAC PR PPE250228 - DED 8005 35112 3447 495.00

03/06/25 INTERNAL REVENUE SER PR PPE250228 - DED 1100,3000 35113 3435 196,189.43 03/06/25 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPME PR PPE250228 - DED 4000 35114 3437 65,268.11 03/05/25 TEAMSTERS LOCAL UNIO PR PPE250228 - DED 8003 35115 3457 262.50 03/05/25 TEAMSTERS LOCAL UNIO PR PPE250228 - DED 8004 35116 3458 375.00 03/05/25 TEAMSTERS LOCAL UNIO PR PPE250228 - DED 8001 35117 3459 362.50 03/06/25 THE LINCOLN NATIONAL MAR 2025 LIFE INSURANCE/LTD/ADD/EAP 35153 2314448 1,409.39 TOTAL ISF EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 400,313.80
11500450 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
02/27/25 STERLING HEALTH SERV JAN 2025 FSA ADMIN FEES 34816 3421 84.00 02/27/25 FASULLO, NICHOLAS TUITION REIMBURSEMENT (BAM 306) 34914 3397 459.00 03/06/25 MUNICIPAL DENTAL POO MAR 2025 DELTA DENTAL PPO 34772 2314422 11,783.34 03/06/25 MISSION SQUARE RET P APR 2025 - PLAN #803210-RETIREE REIMB. 35031 3475 149,528.60 TOTAL EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 161,854.94
23030313 CDBG NEIGHBOORHOOD REVITA
03/06/25 LEIFKES CONSULTING, CDBG HOME IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 35164 2314421 2,880.00 TOTAL CDBG NEIGHBOORHOOD REVITA 2,880.00
30095300 CAPITAL IMP - FACILITIES
02/27/25 J R UNIVERSAL CONSTR 11/01-12/31/24 PP13 PD LOCKER 34912 3404 96,039.26 02/27/25 INTERWEST CONSULTING JAN 2025 - UNIVERSALLY ACCESSIBLE 34819 3402 995.00 02/27/25 INTERWEST CONSULTING JAN 2025 - PD LOCKER IMPROVEMENTS 34820 3403 3,370.00 03/06/25 BRIGHTLY SOFTWARE PROF SVCS FACILITY CONDITION ASSESS & 34999 3465 13,694.30 02/27/25 HOSSEIN PREPARE RFP ON FIRE STATION NO. 1 DESIGN- 34823 3401 3,150.00 TOTAL CAPITAL IMP - FACILITIES 117,248.56
30095301 CAPITAL IMP - ROAD REHAB
03/06/25 DASH CONSTRUCTION CO 12/06/24-01/30/25 PP2 RESIDENTIAL REHAB C3 35005 3468 376,274.77 03/06/25 GMU GEOTECHNICAL, IN THRU 01/31/2025 - MATERIALS TESTING C3 35126 3469 5,044.00 03/06/25 ANNEALTA GROUP FEB 2025 - C3 CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION 35098 2314402 1,096.00 TOTAL CAPITAL IMP - ROAD REHAB 382,414.77
30095303 CAPITAL IMP - OTHER
03/06/25 AGA ENGINEERS, INC JAN 2025 - CITYWIDE TRAFFIC SIGNAL 35006 2314400 1,370.00 03/06/25 AGA ENGINEERS, INC JAN 2025 - CITYWIDE TRAFFIC SIGNAL TIMING 35007 2314400 4,010.00 TOTAL CAPITAL IMP - OTHER 5,380.00
50000000 WF NON-DEPARTMENTAL
02/27/25 ADAME COMMUNICATIONS REFUND FOR CONSTRUCTION WATER METER 34556 2314309 248.75 02/27/25 LENNAR HOMES OF CALI REFUND FOR CONSTRUCTION WATER METER 34557 2314345 2,594.76 02/27/25 #973 OC 405 PARTNERS REFUND FOR CONSTRUCTION WATER METER 34558 2314308 370.75 02/27/25 #966 OC 405 PARTNERS REFUND FOR CONSTRUCTION WATER METER 34559 2314307 863.09 02/27/25 KMS RESOURCE GROUP I REFUND FOR CONSTRUCTION WATER METER 34560 2314344 3.68 02/27/25 #1010 SWINERTON REFUND FOR CONSTRUCTION WATER METER 34562 2314306 4,467.17 02/27/25 UTILITY REFUND UTILITY REFUND - FINALED 12/31/16 34960 2314380 100.00 02/27/25 UTILITY REFUND UTILITY REFUND - FINALED 2/14/25 34961 2314382 190.82 02/27/25 UTILITY REFUND UTILITY REFUND - FINALED 2/20/25 34962 2314381 89.83 02/27/25 UTILITY REFUND UTILITY REFUND - FINALED 2/1/25 34963 2314384 26.98 02/27/25 UTILITY REFUND UTILITY REFUND - FINALED 2/18/25 34964 2314385 25.44 02/27/25 UTILITY REFUND UTILITY REFUND - FINALED 2/19/25 34965 2314383 36.42

TOTAL WF NON-DEPARTMENTAL 9,017.69
50050570 WF WTR PROD. OPNS
02/27/25 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON THERMAL IMAGING 30620 2314370 2,700.00 03/06/25 SHOETERIA, INC. SAFTEY BOOT KEVIN DEASON 12-2024 35084 3479 170.33 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/16/25 UNIFORMS 34804 2314319 13.45 03/06/25 AMAZON SHARPIES 34142 3464 38.22
02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/23/25 UNIFORMS 34803 2314319 13.45 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/30/25 UNIFORMS 34860 2314319 13.45 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/6/25 UNIFORMS 34861 2314319 13.45 02/27/25 REGENCY ENTERPRISES, HAND TOOLS 34916 3416 24.22 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/13/25 UNIFORMS 34863 2314319 13.45 03/06/25 SO CALIF EDISON CO 1/4/25-2/2/25 RES 2 & WELLS 34983 2314443 91,363.89 02/27/25 ORANGE COUNTY WATER 10/20/24-02/09/25 RECYCLED WATER USAGE 34724 3412 112,838.76 03/06/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/20/25 UNIFORMS 34968 2314410 13.45 TOTAL WF WTR PROD. OPNS 207,216.12
50050571 WF DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
02/27/25 GRAINGER, INC. SPRAY PAINT 31382 2314339 922.33 03/06/25 SHOETERIA, INC. JOE MACIAS BOOTS 12/2024 35082 3479 142.87 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/16/25 UNIFORMS 34804 2314319 54.56 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/23/25 UNIFORMS 34803 2314319 74.93 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/30/25 UNIFORMS 34860 2314319 70.85 03/06/25 OMEGA INDUSTRIAL SUP LUBE ALL, ANTI SEIZE 35059 3476 1,082.37 03/06/25 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES HYD WRENCHES 35061 2314416 272.24 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/6/25 UNIFORMS 34861 2314319 106.38 03/06/25 YO FIRE 3/4" FLR AMS 12" REPAIR CLAMP 35058 2314454 950.16 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/13/25 UNIFORMS 34863 2314319 110.25 03/06/25 MUNICIPAL WATER DIST JAN 2025 - TURF REMOVAL & S2D 35049 2314424 791.40 03/06/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/20/25 UNIFORMS 34968 2314410 128.79 03/06/25 ROSEBURROUGH TOOL IN CUTTING BLADES 35060 2314433 872.18 03/06/25 S & J SUPPLY CO., IN 16" BUTT STRAPS 35056 2314435 1,000.50 TOTAL WF DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 6,579.81
50050572 WF WTR QUAL & TREATMENT
02/27/25 SIERRA ANALYTICAL LA WATER QUALITY TESTING SERVICES FY 24/25 34791 2314366 4,578.00 02/27/25 USA BLUE BOOK CHEM KEYS CHLORINE RESIDUAL REAGANTS 34794 2314379 384.53 TOTAL WF WTR QUAL & TREATMENT 4,962.53
50095001 WATER FUND
02/27/25 BIG BEN ENGINEERING 12/1/24-1/31/25 PP1 MT BALDY EUCLID 34913 2314313 256,479.06 TOTAL WATER FUND 256,479.06
50150580 SF SEWER MAINTENANCE
02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/16/25 UNIFORMS 34804 2314319 8.96 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/23/25 UNIFORMS 34803 2314319 8.96 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 1/30/25 UNIFORMS 34860 2314319 8.96 02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/6/25 UNIFORMS 34861 2314319 8.96 03/06/25 AMAZON SAFTEY GEAR, TOOLS AND EQUIPMENT 35125 3463 650.93 02/27/25 SO CALIF EDISON CO 1/13/25-2/11/25 SEWER LIFT STATION 34975 2314368 576.59

02/27/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/13/25 UNIFORMS 34863 2314319 8.96 02/27/25 OC SANITATION DISTRI Q1 2024/2025 FOG INSPECTIONS 34825 2314349 315.88 02/27/25 OC SANITATION DISTRI Q2 2024/2025 FOG INSPECTIONS 34826 2314349 50.83 03/06/25 CINTAS CORPORATION 6 2/20/25 UNIFORMS 34968 2314410 8.96 TOTAL SF SEWER MAINTENANCE 1,647.99
TOTAL $2,763,897.57

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
To: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: March 18, 2025
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: 2024 Annual State Housing Element Progress Report Three-Year Strategic Goals
☒ Enhance the culture and environment of “A Nice Place to Live” ☐ Achieve fiscal stability by evaluating processes, and attract and retain revenue producing businesses/opportunities
☐ Attract and retain quality staff through best practices and trends ☐ Maintain, build, and modernize infrastructure to support growth and future needs of the City
☐ Not applicable
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Government Code Section 65400 requires that each city prepare an annual progress report (APR) on the status and progress in implementing the jurisdiction’s Housing Element. The report must be prepared using forms and definitions adopted by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). This report covers the 2024 calendar year, the third full year of the 6th Housing Element planning cycle (October 15, 2021 – October 15, 2029).

This report also reflects the City’s progress in meeting our Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation as well as the progress to remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of affordable housing for 2024.

Staff has completed the report on the prescribed State forms per HCD instructions. A copy of the report is attached to the Council Action Request (Attachment 1).

DISCUSSION:

The APR shows the city’s progress in meeting their housing goals as outlined in the Housing Element. The information collected is specific to projects that meet the HCD definition of a new housing unit. The information provided is specific to the calendar year for the report. The information included is for the portion of the project that occurred in 2024 only. For instance, if a project received a building permit in 2022 and was finaled in 2024, the only information reported on the 2024 reporting form will be the date the building permit was finaled. If there is not any information to report on a specific table, then it will be left blank per HCD instructions.

2024 Housing Element Progress Report
March 18, 2025

The City continues to make progress towards achieving its RHNA goals for this Housing Element cycle, primarily through the construction of Accessory Dwelling Units. HCD defines Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) as new housing units and allows the City to count ADUs towards their RHNA goals without requiring any deed restrictions if the City can document that ADUs are affordable to low and/or moderate-income households, or if a survey is conducted showing that local rents meet affordability limits.

During the development of the 6th Cycle Housing Element, a survey was conducted on the income level of households that occupy ADUs in the city. That information was averaged with information generated from a Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) ADU household income survey for all Orange County and resulted in the determination that the City could apply an 81% affordability factor to permitted ADUs. This number is divided between extremely low, very low, and low-income households at the rate shown in Table 1 below. The affordability level for the remaining ADUs is divided between moderate and above-moderate income households as seen in the table.

ADU Household Income Levels
Extremely Low
Income
Very Low Income Low Income Moderate Income Above Moderate Income
20% 21% 40% 15% 4%
Table 1
The information captured during the survey also projected that the city had the capacity to permit 384 ADUs during the course of the cycle and 310 would be affordable to lower income households. In 2024, the City issued building permits for 89 ADUs and finalized building permits for 47 ADUs. As construction of ADUs continues to remain popular, the City should easily surpass the projected goal of 384 ADUs within the next two years. Table 2 below shows the progress.

Permits Issued for ADUs by Year
Projected
Goal
10/2021-
12/2021
2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Total Total
Remaining
384 23 58 85 89 232 152
Table 2
Table 3 shows the progress made towards the goal of permitting 310 affordable ADUs.

Permits Issued to ADU ‘s Affordable to Lower Income Households by Year Projected
Goal
10/2021-
12/2021
2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Total Total
Remaining
310 23 47 69 72 211 99
Table 3
Table B from the APR shows the RHNA allocation progress for the 2021-2029 planning cycle.

The 27 permits for single-family homes are reflected in the above moderate income category.

2024 Housing Element Progress Report
March 18, 2025

Table B
Regional Housing Needs Allocation Progress
Permitted Units Issued by Affordability
1 Projectio
n Period 2 3 4
Income Level
RHNA
Allocation
by Income
Level
Projectio
n Period
-
06/30/21-
10/14/21
2 1
2 2
2 3
24 2
5 2
6 2
7 2
8 2
9 Total
Units
to Date
(all
years)
Total
Remaining
RHNA by
Income
Level
Deed
Restrict
ed

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-
Very
Low
NonDeed
Restrict
ed

1,307

16 7

23 35

37 -

-

-

-

-

118

1,189
Deed
Restrict
ed

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-
Low
NonDeed
Restrict
ed

786

-

-

24 34

36 -

-

-

-

-

94 692
Deed
Restrict
ed

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-
Moder
ate
NonDeed
Restrict
ed

834

-

-

9 13

12 -

-

-

-

-

34 800
Above
Moder
ate

1,912

4 2

63 34

31 -

-

-

-

-

134

1,778
Total RHNA

4,839
Total Units

20 9

119

116

116

-

-

-

-

- 380

4,459
Progress toward extremely low-income housing need, as determined pursuant to Government Code 65583(a)(1).
5 6 7
Extremely
low-Income
Need
2 1
2 2
2 3
24 2
5 2
6 2
7 2
8 2
9 Total
Units
to Date
Total Units
Remaining
Extremely LowIncome Units
(Part of Very
Low)

654

-

11 18

18 -

-

-

-

-
47 607
A noteworthy 2024 accomplishment was the update to the City’s User Fee Schedule that was approved by City Council on May 7, 2024, and went into effect on July 8, 2024. The previous

2024 Housing Element Progress Report
March 18, 2025

city-wide User Fee Study was conducted in 2017 and staffing and overhead costs have increased significantly since that time. The updated schedule ensures that the appropriate fee is charged for the various services provided by the City.

Additional information regarding the 2024 progress on Housing Element goals can be reviewed in the attached report.

FISCAL REVIEW:

There is no financial impact for submitting this report however; the submission of this report is a pre-requisite to keep the current Housing Element certified.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:

Not applicable.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REVIEW:

Not applicable.

ATTORNEY REVIEW:

This does not require the Attorney for the City review or approval.

ALTERNATIVES:

Alternative No. 1: Review the Housing Element Annual Progress Report and authorize the submission of the report to the California Department of Housing and Community Development and the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research prior to the April 1, 2025, deadline.

Alternative No. 2: Do not authorize the submission of the report to the California Department of Housing and Community Development and the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research by the April 1, 2025, deadline and provide staff with related direction.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff is requesting City Council approval of Alternative No.1 - Review the Housing Element Annual Progress Report and authorize the submission of the report to the California Department of Housing and Community Development and the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research prior to the April 1, 2025, deadline.

Prepared By: Ashlyn Newman, Neighborhood Improvement Manager Approved By: Omar Dadabhoy, Deputy City Manager/Community Development Director Approved By: Maggie Le, City Manager
Attachment 1: 2024 Annual Housing Element Progress Report

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
To: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: March 18, 2025
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: City of Fountain Valley Six Month Strategic Objectives Update for September 26, 2024 through March 27, 2025.

Three-Year Strategic Goals
☒ Enhance the culture and environment of “A Nice Place to Live” ☒ Achieve fiscal stability by evaluating processes, and attract and retain revenue producing businesses/opportunities
☒ Attract and retain quality staff through best practices and trends ☒ Maintain, build, and modernize infrastructure to support growth and future needs of the City
☐ Not applicable
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

On September 26, 2024 the City Council held a strategic planning session with the executive management team and department managers. The Strategic Plan was then presented to the City Council at the October 15, 2024 City Council Meeting for adoption. Those in attendance collaborated to establish the City’s six-month strategic planning objectives for September 26, 2024, through March 27, 2025. The strategic plan has and will continue to serve as a guideline for both the Council and City staff as we work to achieve our goals over the next few years. The Strategic Plan goals on the attached spreadsheet have been updated so that the City Council can see the progress that has been made on the action items.

DISCUSSION:

During the City’s Strategic Planning session on September 26, 2024, the City Council, executive management team, and department managers discussed achievements and missed opportunities.

Group discussions led to the creation of the City’s six-month strategic planning objectives. As adopted the vision and mission statements are:

The City of Fountain Valley vision statement is:

Fountain Valley is a safe, inclusive, and desirable community where you can live your best life! The City of Fountain Valley mission statement is:

The City of Fountain Valley is a team driven organization committed to providing excellent service to our community through our Core Values: Fiscal Stability, Honesty, Integrity and Ethical Behavior, Teamwork, Innovation, Quality of Life, and Excellent Customer Service.

City of Fountain Valley Strategic Plan
March 18, 2025

Through collaborative efforts, the City Council and City staff finalized the six-month strategic objectives matrix for September 26, 2024, through March 27, 2025 (Attachment No. 1) in support of the new goals for 2023-2026.

FISCAL REVIEW:

The fiscal impact has been budgeted in Fiscal Year 2024-25.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:

Not applicable.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REVIEW:

Not applicable.

ATTORNEY REVIEW:

The Attorney for the City has reviewed this item.

ALTERNATIVES:

Alternative No. 1: Receive and file the updated strategic objectives matrix for September 26, 2024, through March 27, 2025
Alternative No. 2: Direct staff to take an alternate action.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council approve Alternative No. 1.

Prepared by: Maggie Le, City Manager
Reviewed by: Ryan Smith, Finance Director
Approved by: Colin Burns, Attorney for the City
Attachment:

1. Six Month Strategic Objectives Matrix for September 26, 2024 through March 27, 2025

A

C I T Y O F F O U N T A I N V A L L E Y

SIX-MONTH STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES
S e p t e m b e r 2 6 , 2 0 2 4 – M a r c h 2 7 , 2 0 2 5 City of Fountain Valley Vision Statement
Fountain Valley is a safe, inclusive, and desirable community where you can live your best life! City of Fountain Valley Mission Statement
The City of Fountain Valley is a team-driven organization committed to providing excellent service to our community through our core values.

Core Values
Fiscal Stability, Honesty, Integrity and Ethical Behavior, Teamwork, Innovation, Quality of Life, and Excellent Customer Service THREE-YEAR GOAL: ENHANCE THE CULTURE AND ENVIRONMENT OF “A NICE PLACE TO LIVE”

WHEN WHO WHAT STATUS COMMENTS

DONE ON
TARGET
REVISE
D

1. By November
19, 2024 City
Council
Meeting.

Community Services
Director
Present opportunities and challenges related to
bringing more festivals to Fountain Valley.

X Presented at 11/19 City Council
meeting.

2. By December
17, 2024 to the
City Manager.

Police Chief Present a plan for increased community engagement and outreach.

X Presented a memo to the City
Manager on the community policing
strategic plan.

3. By April 1,
2025 City
Council
Meeting.

Community Services
Director
Present a proposal to the City Council for the creation of a 70th Anniversary Committee.

X Staff will present the item to the City
Council on April,1 2025.

B
THREE-YEAR GOAL: ACHIEVE FISCAL STABILITY BY EVALUATING PROCESSES, AND ATTRACT

AND RETAIN REVENUE PRODUCING BUSINESSES/OPPORTUNITIES

WHEN WHO WHAT STATUS COMMENTS

DONE ON
TARGET
REVISE
D

1. By October 1, 2024,
City Council
Meeting
Finance Director Present an update to the City’s Reserve Policy for adoption.

X The City Council approved the City’s
Reserve Policy on October 1.

2. Ongoing with a
progress report by
March 18, 2025,
City Council
Meeting
Deputy City
Manager/Community
Development Director
Continue the implementation of the Economic
Development Action Plan with a focus on the north-east
section of the City.

X Staff continues to implement the
EDA and is reporting on March 18,
2025.

3. By March 27, 2025,
Strategic Planning
Session
Fire Chief, Finance
Director and
Community
Development Director
Present fire impact fee option. X Will provide an update at the strategic planning session on 3/27.

4. By March 4, 2025
City Council
Meeting.

Finance Director and
Attorney for the City
Present the process and strategies, and garner direction from the City Council to place a TOT increase on the
November 2026 Ballot.

X Presented to City Council on 2/18,
and the majority did not support.

5. By March 4, 2025
City Council
Meeting.

Finance Director Present a recommendation for a Biennial Budget process. X Will present at the March 18 meeting.

C
THREE-YEAR GOAL: ATTRACT AND RETAIN QUALITY STAFF THROUGH

BEST PRACTICES AND TRENDS

WHEN WHO WHAT STATUS COMMENTS

DONE ON
TARGE
T
REVIS
ED

1. By January
21, 2025
City Council
Meeting.

The Engagement
Team and HR
Director
Present recommendations based on the 4/10 Pilot Program survey results, which may include a work-from-home
schedule.

X The Engagement Team presented the
4/10 survey results from external
customers and City Hall staff. The City
Council majority supported the permanent
4/10 work schedule at the January 21 City
Council Meeting.

2. By January
21, 2025
City Council
Meeting.

The Employee
Engagement
Committee, Fire
Chief, and Finance
Director.

Present options for the expansion of the Employee
Appreciation Program.

X The Engagement Team presented plans
for 2025 to City Council on January 21.

D
THREE-YEAR GOAL: MAINTAIN, BUILD, AND MODERNIZE INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT

GROWTH AND FUTURE NEEDS OF THE CITY

WHEN WHO WHAT STATUS COMMENTS

DONE ON
TARGET
REVISE
D

1. March 27, 2025
Strategic
Planning Session
Fire Chief, Deputy
City Manager, and
Public Works Director
Present Fire Station 1 funding options. X The directors will present the options for discussion at the
March 27 strategic planning
session.

2. By January 21,
2025, Council
Communicator
IT Director Monitor generative artificial intelligence discussions via the Municipal Information System Association of California and professional organizations to prepare a policy in the organization as needed based on best practices.

Look into options for Generative AI for Fountain Valley and budget costs next fiscal year.

X Continuing to work as a
committee member for AI with
MISAC and monitoring San
Jose AI (Gov AI Coalition). IT
is gathering information to
build a city policy and use.

Microsoft recently released AI
for the government sector. IT
is currently in the process of
purchasing Microsoft AI
licenses that Council
approved. We will begin
Microsoft Co-Pilot AI testing
with department directors. We
will continue monitoring larger
organizations (with security
teams and AI specialist
staffed in their departments)
and look to implement AI in
the future for our city.

3. By March 5, 2025
to the City
Manager
Finance Director,
Police Chief, and
Public Works Director
Present recommendations on the additional upgrades and
updates to the Police Department building.

X The PD E.A.T. presented a
memo with items for
consideration.

4. By October 15,
2024 and March
4, 2025 City
Council Meeting
Public Works Director Secure vendor and provide an update on the Water Master Plan.

X Professional services contract
awarded October 15, 2024.

PW provided an update on
2/18.

5. By February 4,
2025 City Council
Meeting
Community Services
Director
Present recommendations for the installation of an
electronic message board at the entrance to the FV
Recreation Center, as well as a permanent bandstand in
the park.

X Presented at the February 4
and received direction to
bring back with specifics in
April.

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
To: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: March 18, 2025
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: Public Hearing to Consider an Appeal of the Planning Commission’s Approval of Resolution No. 24-12, Denying Conditional Use Permit No. 1933 for an Unmanned Wireless Telecommunications Facility on an Existing SCE Transmission Tower Located on the North Side of Talbert Avenue, East of Newland Street, and East of 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave Three-Year Strategic Goals
☒ Enhance the culture and environment of “A Nice Place to Live” ☐ Attract and retain revenue producing businesses
☐ Achieve fiscal stability in accordance with the 20-Year Financial Plan ☐ Attract and retain quality staff
☐ Not applicable
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC d/b/a AT&T Mobility (AT&T / Appellant) has filed an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision to deny Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 1933 to install an unmanned wireless telecommunications facility on an existing SCE transmission tower located on the north side of Talbert Avenue, east of Newland Street, and east of 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave that is within 100 feet of residential uses (Attachment #1).

CUP 1933 was reviewed at the January 22, 2025, Planning Commission meeting (Attachment #2). After testimony from the applicant and the public, the Planning Commission denied the project based on the inability to make findings related to aesthetics.

The Planning Commission adopted a Notice of Exemption in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and adopted Resolution No. 24-12 denying CUP 1933 for AT&T Mobility.

Staff recommends the City Council conduct a public hearing and consider the appeal filed by New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC, regarding the Planning Commission’s decision to deny CUP 1933 for AT&T Mobility to install an unmanned wireless telecommunications facility on an existing SCE transmission tower located on the north side of Talbert Avenue, east of Newland Street, and east of 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave.

Appeal – Conditional Use Permit 1933 – AT&T
March 18, 2025

DISCUSSION:

Will Kazimi with Smartlink Group, on behalf of AT&T Mobility, submitted a request for a CUP to install an unmanned wireless telecommunications facility on an existing SCE transmission tower located on the north side of Talbert Avenue, east of Newland Street, and east of 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave, which is within 100-feet of residential uses.

Code Requirement:

Pursuant to the Fountain Valley Municipal Code (FVMC) Section 21.28.040.d., wireless telecommunication facilities are allowed on school properties and parks in the Public Institution and Open Space zone if approved through a CUP. Also, and; pursuant to FVMC Section 21.28.050(d), freestanding wireless telecommunication facilities shall be set back at least 100-feet from any parcel with residential uses. The onehundred-foot setback may be reduced subject to review and approval by a CUP.

Setting:

The proposed facility is located on the SCE-owned utility easement that runs from the northern section of the city from the City of Westminster, crossing Warner Avenue, and continuing to the southern end of the city limits at Garfield Avenue - continuing into Huntington Beach. The precise location for the proposed site is on one (1) of the two (2) existing, 126-foot-tall SCE transmission towers located 80 feet to the north of Talbert Avenue. The proposed AT&T facility would have the following setbacks:
 53 feet to the residential property line/block wall to the east  70 feet from the residential building to the east
 80 feet north of Talbert Avenue
 140 feet from the nearest residential building to the west Description:

The proposed wireless facility includes 12 panels of antennas, nine (9) Remote Radio Units (RRUs), one (1) microwave antenna mounted on the SCE transmission tower measuring 57-feet to the top of the antennas, and a 12-foot by 18-foot, 216 square foot, walled enclosure located underneath the SCE tower. The topography slopes downhill to the east in this location. To accommodate a level floor at the tower's base for the wireless equipment, a steel platform attached to concrete pillars is proposed, with an 8-foot-tall wall surrounding the enclosure. Due to the sloping hillside, while the height of the enclosure at the higher grade on the west side is at 8-feet, the height of the enclosure is on the east side facing the rear yard of the residential property at 8678 El Cerro Cir is over 12-feet tall. The applicant has proposed installing faux ivy around the enclosure to act as screening for the structure underneath the SCE tower (Attachment #3).

As part of their meeting on January 22, 2025, and as indicated in the attached Planning Commission Staff Report, the Planning Commission would have had to make four (4) specific findings based on the development standards in Chapter 21.28 in order to

Appeal – Conditional Use Permit 1933 – AT&T
March 18, 2025

approve a wireless facility. If those four (4) findings cannot be met, the Planning Commission shall deny the request.

The Planning Commission determined the proposed wireless facility was dissimilar to other wireless facilities on the SCE towers approved by the City due to the larger enclosure at the tower's base and the proximity to the residential properties to the east.

The Commission also determined that the proposed facility and equipment would be clearly visible from the surrounding neighborhood and Talbert Avenue and has not been designed to the greatest extent feasible to sufficiently screen the site from public view pursuant to the development standards in Chapter 21.28.

The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on January 22, 2025, and adopted Resolution No. 24-12 approving a Notice of Exemption in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and denied CUP 1933 for AT&T Mobility.

APPEAL:

AT&T (Appellant) claims the proposed wireless facility meets the development standards under the FVMC 21.28.040, General provisions for wireless communications facilities on public and private property, and FVMC 21.28.050, Special standards for freestanding, ground-mounted wireless communication facilities on private property.

AT&T indicates the facility is located in the Open Space zoning district with adequate space and has been designed to minimize visual impacts. AT&T also claims that the proposed site is the best available and feasible location for the wireless facility after a thorough search of possible sites within the service coverage area. Additionally, AT&T asserts that approval of the proposal is required under federal law and that state and local governments are precluded from taking action that would prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting wireless coverage.

Facility Need:

AT&T indicates they have identified a significant gap in their in-building service coverage area. The applicant has provided Exhibit 1, included in Attachment 1, showing the existing AT&T wireless coverage area shaded green in the vicinity without the proposed facility; and Exhibit 2, showing the planned coverage area with the proposed AT&T facility. As shown on Exhibit 2, the coverage area for reliable indoor, in-vehicle and outdoor coverage area increases in size around the proposed wireless facility at the SCE tower.

According to the appeal request, closing AT&T’s coverage gap will increase wireless service to the area where more California adults and children rely on mobile phones as their exclusive or primary way of household communication. In addition, AT&T provides communication service to Police and Fire Departments through the First Responder Network Authority (FirstNet), which is a nationwide communication frequency authorized by the federal government for public safety and first responders.

Appeal – Conditional Use Permit 1933 – AT&T
March 18, 2025

Alternatives:

The applicant pursued five (5) alternative locations before their original CUP application submittal. Following the Planning Commission’s denial, the appeal indicated that AT&T made further efforts to identify alternative locations and provided an Alternative Site Analysis with their appeal application (Attachment #2). The analysis included alternative sites, including existing SCE towers, colocations on existing wireless towers, and a possible rooftop location. AT&T indicated they researched a total of 15 alternative sites with the least intrusive means to close the coverage gap indicated by AT&T and were unable to identify an alternative site.

Effective Prohibition:

AT&T claims approval is required under the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, Title 47, U.S.C. 332 (TCA). As the applicant has indicated, the TCA precludes state and local governments from taking action that would prohibit wireless telecommunication service. The act prohibits local governments from discriminating against wireless providers and from denying an application that would prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services. The applicant claims they have identified a significant service coverage gap and that the proposed facility is the least intrusive means to close that gap.

Staff provided an option to the applicant to place the wireless equipment in an underground vault either at the base or further away from the tower. However, SCE indicated they require clearances from the utility vaults which are to be located at the edge of the right-of-way with a 100-foot distance from the tower. SCE indicated there is additional underground utilities in the easement that would also prohibit an underground equipment vault. The proposed above-ground equipment enclosure is proposed under the SCE utility tower that is constructed along a small slope, where typically the topography underneath the SCE utility towers is flat in the SCE easement. Due to this condition, the enclosure wall that faces east, is taller than 8 feet to conceal the underside opening of the equipment area. The size of the equipment enclosure wall on the east elevation is larger than the wall faces facing the north, south, and front facing west elevation. While the enclosure’s footprint is not any larger than the typical equipment enclosure for a wireless facility, the larger exterior walls create a larger visual presence than what is typical for an equipment enclosure for a wireless facility on an SCE tower.

Staff suggested placing the equipment in a vault underground near the SCE tower, but the applicant indicated and staff has confirmed with SCE, that SCE will not allow for underground equipment vaults directly underneath SCE towers.

Substantial Evidence:

The Appellant claims the TCA prohibits the city from denying wireless services, where a city may only deny a wireless application based on “substantial evidence”, where the city must have specific reasons to deny a permit. The appeal indicates Planning Commission denied the application based on aesthetic concerns, which were not “entirely clear by its findings” as stated in the appeal request. The Planning Commission found that the application did not comply with all the applicable standards of FVMC 21.28, Wireless

Appeal – Conditional Use Permit 1933 – AT&T
March 18, 2025

Communications, and denied the request for not meeting the following code requirements and provided the following findings:
 FVMC 21.28.040(g) Visual Impact. Wireless telecommunication facilities shall be located, installed and mounted in a manner to minimize, to the greatest extent possible, the visibility of the antennas and equipment.

This is an increase in visual impact with the proposed above-ground equipment enclosure at the base of the SCE tower which causes added visual blight and detracts from the visual pleasure provided by the open space in the SCE utility easement.
 FVMC 21.28.040(i) Screening. Antennas and accessory wireless equipment, if visible, shall be screened with a solid wall and/or landscaping to the greatest extent possible. The base shall be landscaped to screen equipment cabinets, or the equipment cabinets shall be architecturally compatible with adjacent buildings. All landscaping screening shall be required to be maintained and replaced, if necessary, by the applicant or property owner as long as the associated antenna or wireless equipment is in use.

The proposed antennas will not be screened due to the nature of the existing SCE transmission tower. The proposed antennas would be painted to match the existing tower but are still visible to the public as they would be attached to the steel structure. The proposed equipment enclosure at the base of the SCE tower would consist of a walled enclosure with a faux brick veneer applied to the exterior. The applicant has provided one (1) elevation with faux ivy that could be applied to all four (4) of the exterior walls of the enclosure to give the look of landscaping, should the project be approved. SCE has indicated they will not approve live landscaping underneath their towers for reasons including maintenance and liability.  FVMC 21.28.040(j) Stealthing
(j) Stealthing. All wireless telecommunications facilities shall be stealth unless exempted by federal or state law. Stealthing shall include concealment of any component of the wireless facility. Examples include, but are not limited to, "monopines," flagpoles or windmills designed to conceal wireless communication equipment and those applications where wireless communication equipment is contained within another structure such as a scoreboard or sign. Wireless communication facilities in the public right-of-way shall be subject to the requirements of Section 21.28.100. A wireless communications facility that is not fully assimilated to its surroundings shall be prohibited.  The stealth requirement here cannot be meet with exposed antennas that are clearly visible to the public at attached to the tower at 54-feet above grade. As previously described, the proposed design of the equipment enclosure does not result in an installation that would blend into the existing landscape or topography and is clearly visible to residential with a setback of 53-feet to the property line at the east elevation.

Appeal – Conditional Use Permit 1933 – AT&T
March 18, 2025

The appellant indicates they worked closely with city staff on developing the best possible design for the proposed equipment area, which is the primary reason for the denial of the application. The appellant indicates that the photo simulations submitted by AT&T illustrate the proposed equipment enclosure will resemble a landscape feature and not detract from the aesthetics of the area and would be more visually appealing that other wireless facilities at SCE towers. While the wireless antennas attached to the SCE tower are similar to other facilities located on SCE towers, the proposed equipment enclosure is taller than other approved wireless facility enclosures in proximity to residential. Due to the sloping topography underneath the SCE tower, the exposed enclosure wall is much larger than an enclosure constructed on a flat surface. Staff requested the enclosure wall to be extended to the sloping hillside so as not to create an open void space underneath the proposed enclosure. The proposed enclosure wall height would measure over 12-feet-tall on the east side of the enclosure, that would be setback 53-feet from the residential property line to the east at 8618 El Cerro Cir.

Unreasonable Discrimination:

The appellant indicates that the TCA prohibits unreasonable discrimination among wireless service providers when reviewing wireless applications. In support of their argument, AT&T has noted that the city has approved similar facilities at SCE towers in the same utility easement. The city has approved three (3) wireless facilities in the SCE utility easement, where the appellant indicates that two (2) facilities only have a partially concealed equipment area and one adjacent to Slater Avenue has a chain-link fence enclosure. This analysis of the three (3) locations is incorrect as indicated below:
 Ellis Avenue: CUP 1687 – Clearwire. The Planning Commission approved Resolution No. 09-64 in 2009 for a wireless facility on an SCE tower, north of Ellis Avenue between Santa Alberta and Santa Isadora Street. The site consists of antennas installed at 57-feet above grade, with a 6-foot tall blockwall equipment enclosure located at the base of the tower – 54-feet setback from the residential property line.
 Fulton Park: CUP 1614 – Royal Street Communications. The Planning Commission approved Resolution No. 07-21 that approved a wireless facility on the SCE tower in Fulton Park at 8620 El Lago Ave. Antennas are installed at 53- feet above grade with the 6-foot tall block wall equipment enclosure at the base.

The equipment enclosure is setback 115-feet from residential properties to the west and 400-feet from Fulton School to the east – meeting the city’s 100-foot setback provision.
 Slater Ave –T-Mobile. Administrative Wireless Permit No. 21-07. This wireless permit was administratively approved by staff, subject to new ministerial approval process. The wireless facility is located on the SCE tower in between Santa Maria St. and Santa Lucia St. The equipment is located at the base of the SCE tower behind a 6-foot tall block wall enclosure and not a chain-link fence indicated by the appellant. The equipment enclosure is setback 75-feet to the west property line and 100-feet to the east residential property line.

Appeal – Conditional Use Permit 1933 – AT&T
March 18, 2025

While the three (3) existing approved sites identified are similar to the proposed facility, with visible antennas attached to the SCE tower and a 6-foot tall equipment enclosure at the base; the proposed facility has a much taller and wider enclosure structure facing the residential properties to the east. The SCE tower locations adjacent to Ellis and Slater Avenue are located at the same grade as the adjacent residential properties and have a 6-foot-tall equipment enclosure. The single-family homes adjacent to the SCE utility easement have walls or fences that are 6-feet tall, which is the maximum height allowed in the R-1, single-family zoning district. The Fulton Park facility is at a higher elevation than the residential properties to the west and would be visible to all adjacent properties but has the largest setback from the rear of the residential properties at 115-feet. The proposed enclosure wall facing the closest residential would be in excess of 12-feet tall and 18 feet wide, adding to the visual presence of the facility. The Appellant indicates the facility would be more camouflaged that existing facilities and the equipment area would appear as a landscaping feature below the tower. The applicant provided only one (1) photo simulation (Attachment #3) with the proposed equipment enclosure showing the proposed faux ivy to support their claim that the site will not detract from area aesthetics and would be more visually appealing than other facilities.

SUMMARY:

AT&T claims that there is a significant service coverage gap and they have conducted an analysis of alternative sites in the area and concluded there were no feasible alternatives, and that the approval is required under federal law. Additionally, AT&T contends that the facility has been designed in such a way to minimize visual impacts, blend with the predominant visual backdrop and the existing environment and claims the facility equipment will be obscured by faux foliage to appear as a landscaping feature at the base of the existing SCE tower. AT&T identified the proposed location and contends the design is the best available and least intrusive means to close its significant service coverage gap.

CONCLUSION:

Staff recommends the City Council uphold the Planning Commission’s decision to deny CUP 1933 for AT&T Mobility to install a wireless telecommunication facility on existing SCE transmission tower located on the north side of Talbert Avenue, east of Newland Street, and east of 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

If the City Council decides to deny the appeal, the action would not be subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to Article 18 of the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15270(a), CEQA does not apply to projects that a public agency rejects or disapproves.

Should the City Council opt to affirm the appeal and approve the project, the project would not be exempt from CEQA. Pursuant to Article 19 of the CEQA Guidelines, the proposed project would be exempt pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3, New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. A Notice of Exemption has been prepared and was included in the agenda packet staff report for the January 22, 2025 Planning Commission public hearing.

Appeal – Conditional Use Permit 1933 – AT&T
March 18, 2025

FINANCIAL ANALYSIS:

The applicant paid the appeal fee of $2,655.00 as required by the City’s 2024-25 Fee Schedule.

ATTORNEY REVIEW:

The attorneys for the city have reviewed the attached resolution.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:

Per FVMC Section 21.58.020, public hearing notices were mailed to all property owners and commercial tenants within 1,000-feet of the subject property. The item was published in the Fountain Valley View and notices were posted at City Hall and the Fountain Valley Library.

APPEAL OPTIONS:

The appeal hearing shall be considered a hearing de novo and the review authority may consider any issue(s) associated with the appeal, in addition to the specific grounds for the appeal.

The City Council should conduct a public hearing, consider all oral and written testimony received during the hearing and, following closure of the hearing and deliberations, take one of the following actions pursuant to FVMC Section 21.60.050(f):
(A) By resolution, affirm, affirm in part or reverse the action, the determination, or decision that is the subject of the appeal;
(B) Adopt additional conditions of approval deemed reasonable and necessary, and may even address issues or concerns that go beyond the subject of the appeal; or (C) Disapprove the land use entitlement approved by the previous review authority, even though the appellant only requested a modification or elimination of one or more conditions of approval.
(2) If new or different evidence is presented on appeal, the commission or council, may, but shall not be required to, refer the matter to the director or commission, as applicable, for further consideration.

Per FVMC Section 21.60.050(g), when reviewing an appeal the review authority shall adopt findings in support of the intended action on the appeal. The nature of the findings shall be in compliance with the findings adopted by the original review authority (e.g., Conditional Use Permit—Chapter 21.36, Precise Plan of Design—Chapter 21.44, Variance—Chapter 21.50, etc.).

ALTERNATIVES:

Alternative No. 1: Adopt a Resolution (Attachment #4) upholding the Planning Commission’s approval of Resolution No. 24-12, to deny CUP 1933 for AT&T Mobility to install an unmanned wireless
telecommunications facility on an existing SCE transmission tower

Appeal – Conditional Use Permit 1933 – AT&T
March 18, 2025

located on the north side of Talbert Avenue, east of Newland Street, and east of 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave.

Alternative No. 2: Do not Adopt a Resolution overturning the Planning Commission’s approval and provide direction to staff.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Staff recommends Alternative No. 1: Adopt a Resolution (Attachment #4) upholding the Planning Commission’s approval of Resolution No. 24-12, and deny CUP 1933 for AT&T Mobility to install an unmanned wireless telecommunications facility on an existing SCE transmission tower located on the north side of Talbert Avenue, east of Newland Street, and east of 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave.

Prepared By: Matt Jenkins, Senior Planner
Reviewed By: Omar Dadabhoy, Community Development Director / Deputy City Manager
Approved By: Maggie Le, City Manager
Attachments: 1) AT&T Appeal Request
2) Planning Commission Staff Report W/ attachments from the January 22, 2025 Planning Commission meeting, labeled as pages 22-75
3) Photo simulations
4) City Council Resolution

Attachment #1

Attachment #1

Attachment #1

Aaron M. Shank
[email protected]
Porter Wright
Morris & Arthur LLP
41 South High Street
Suites 2800-3200
Columbus, OH 43215
Direct: 614.227.2110
Fax: 614.227.2100
www.porterwright.com
February 18, 2025

VIA EMAIL
Mayor and City Council
City of Fountain Valley
City Hall
10200 Slater Avenue
Fountain Valley, CA 92507
RE: AT&T’s Appeal from Planning Commission Denial of
Wireless Telecommunications Facility
APN 167-582-30 – AT&T Site ID CLL04583
Dear Mayor Bui, Vice Mayor Cunneen, and Councilmembers Constantine, Grandis, and Harper:

I write on behalf of New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC d/b/a AT&T Mobility (AT&T), to respectfully request the City Council reverse the Planning Commission’s denial of AT&T’s application (“Application”) seeking to place a new stealth wireless telecommunications facility (“Proposed Facility”) to be attached to an existing Southern California Edison transmission tower. AT&T has spent years seeking a solution to its significant gap in wireless service coverage in this portion of the city. In addition to providing more robust and competitive wireless services, including significant improvements to 4G LTE and 5G services, the Proposed Facility will provide FirstNet services to support first responder communications.

AT&T is proposing to place the Proposed Facility in such a way to minimize visual impacts, blend with the predominant visual backdrop and the existing environment, and the facility equipment will be obscured by faux foliage to appear as a landscaping feature at the base of the existing SCE tower. After scouring this gap area to identify alternatives sites and facility designs, AT&T identified the proposed location and design as the best available and least intrusive means to close its significant service coverage gap. AT&T thus requests the Council approve AT&T’s appeal and grant AT&T’s Application for the Proposed Facility.

AT&T’s Proposed Facility
Consistent with Chapter 21.28 of the Fountain Valley Municipal Code, AT&T seeks to attach its antennas to the existing lattice support structure of this SCE transmission tower, with equipment to be concealed behind vinecovered walls at the base of the tower, within the footprint of the tower, to provide and improve vital wireless services for the city’s residents, businesses, and visitors. This proposal meets applicable development standards under Code Section 21.28.040 (general provisions for wireless communication facilities on public and private property) and under Code Section 21.28.050 (special standards for freestanding, ground-mounted wireless communications facilities on private property).1
1 City Staff and the City Planning Commission determined that the Proposed Facility is a “freestanding, ground-mounted” facility even though the antennas Attachment #1

Fountain Valley City Council
February 18, 2025

In particular, the Proposed Facility will be in an Open Space district and is designed to minimize visual impacts. See Code Section 21.28.040(d) & (g). In addition, the Proposed Facility satisfies all required findings under Code Section 21.28.090(e). Specifically, the subject property has adequate space for the Proposed Facility, which will be consistent with – and hardly noticeable adjacent to – the existing utility structures. It is designed to minimize impacts to the property and the surrounding areas. The Proposed Facility is consistent with the intent of Code Chapter 21.28, and it will not adversely impact the public right-of-way.

In addition, the proposed site is the best available and feasible location that AT&T identified after a thorough search of candidate sites within its significant service coverage gap that the facility is intended to close. The proposed stealth design is the least visually impactful for this area. Like so many other similar wireless communications facilities that the city has approved, the antennas of the Proposed Facility will blend with the lattice tower structure. The equipment area will appear simply as a hedge or other landscaping feature at the base of the tower.

AT&T Needs the Proposed Facility to Provide and Improve Wireless Services AT&T’s radio frequency engineers have identified this significant gap in service coverage in the City of Fountain Valley, including a large area that is roughly bordered by Warner Avenue to the north, Bushard Street to the east, Harper Park to the south, and Beach Boulevard to the west. AT&T’s Radio Frequency Statement (Attachment A) identifies the gap and AT&T’s specific service objectives, and it shows how the Proposed Facility will meet those objectives. AT&T’s service coverage maps (which were submitted in the administrative record and are the exhibits to the RF Statement) depict coverage simulated by a sophisticated, industry-standard wireless network engineering tool. AT&T’s service coverage gap in this area is significant as it includes hundreds of homes in several neighborhoods, community parks, schools, commercial districts along Magnolia Street, well-traveled roads throughout the area, and other points of interest in the vicinity.

Placing the Proposed Facility as proposed will close AT&T’s significant gap in in-building coverage. The Proposed Facility will improve critical wireless services to the area, which are needed now more than ever as customers increasingly use mobile phones as their primary communication devices. In fact, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention studies the extent of mobile phone use, and recently found that more than 83% of California adults, and more than 98% of Californians under age 18, rely exclusively or primarily on wireless communications in their homes.2 Additionally, customers rely on their mobile phones to do much more than just voice communication, including E911 service, video streaming, GPS, Internet access, and texting. In fact, California reported to the FCC that there were more than 23.3 million wireless calls and 98,065 texts to 911 in 2023 (the most recent year for state level data).3 will be attached to the existing SCE transmission tower and the equipment area will be entirely within the footprint of the tower. AT&T disagrees with this characterization, but in any event the Proposed Facility complies with the code provisions for a freestanding facility to the extent feasible. As there is no available and feasible location more than 100 feet from nearby residential uses, if Council determines that the proposal is “freestanding,” AT&T respectfully requests a reduction in this setback as authorized under Code Section 21.28.050(d). As discussed below, this reduction is needed to avoid effective prohibition and discrimination.
2 See Wireless Substitution: State-level Estimates from the National Health Interview Survey, 2019, available at https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhis/earlyrelease/Wireless_state_202108-508.pdf. 3 See Sixteenth Annual Report to Congress on State Collection and Distribution of 911 and Enhanced 911 Fees and Charges (Dec. 30, 2024), at 14, available at https://www.fcc.gov/sites/default/files/16thAnnual-911FeeReport-2024.pdf.

Attachment #1

Fountain Valley City Council
February 18, 2025

The Proposed Facility is also an important part of AT&T’s commitment to supporting public safety through its partnership with FirstNet. Created by Congress, the First Responder Network Authority selected AT&T to build and manage this first-ever nationwide first responder wireless network. The Proposed Facility will provide new service on Band 14, which is the nationwide frequency set aside by the U.S. government for public safety. Deployment of FirstNet in the target gap area will improve public safety by putting advanced wireless technologies into the hands of public safety agencies and first responders.

AT&T’s Analysis of Alternatives
AT&T worked hard to carefully select this location to reduce impacts to the community while maintaining a clear line-of-sight for signals to provide reliable in-building wireless service coverage to the target gap area. AT&T thoroughly investigated alternative sites and designs, evaluating numerous properties in this gap area, to make sure that its Proposed Facility is the least intrusive means to close AT&T’s significant service coverage gap.

Following the Planning Commission denial, AT&T made further efforts to identify any other potentially available and technologically feasible in and around the target gap area. Specifically, AT&T investigated additional alternative sites, including collocation on an existing tower, attaching to other SCE towers, and a possible rooftop installation. Unfortunately, none of these additional alternatives is available and feasible to house AT&T’s facility. (See Attachment B, Alternative Sites Analysis.) In all, AT&T analyzed 16 candidate locations, including the Proposed Facility and 15 alternatives.

Regarding facility design, AT&T worked carefully to develop the least visually impactful design, ultimately proposing one that will enhance area aesthetics. AT&T’s initial design involved a space beneath a portion of its equipment area due to the slope on the property and need to keep the equipment area level. After City Staff raised a concern about the appearance of that design, AT&T went back to the drawing board. The revised design eliminates the space below the equipment area by extending all four walls to ground level and concealing the entire equipment area with thick vines. The result, as you can see in photosimulations in the record, is an area that will appear as a landscape feature at the base of the existing tower. AT&T believes this is more aesthetically pleasing than existing conditions and less intrusive than the other city-approved wireless facilities attached to SCE towers in this line of towers.

Approval of AT&T’s Proposal is Required Under Federal Law – Effective Prohibition The federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, 47 U.S.C. § 332 (“TCA”) provides rights to wireless service providers and establishes limitations upon state and local zoning authorities with respect to applications for permits to construct personal wireless service facilities. The United States Supreme Court has explained that the TCA was enacted in part to prioritize and streamline deployment of wireless technologies on a national basis.4
Under the TCA, state and local governments are precluded from taking action that would prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting AT&T from providing personal wireless services. Specifically, the TCA prohibits a local government from denying an application for a wireless telecommunications facility where 4 City of Rancho Palos Verdes v. Abrams, 544 U.S. 113, 115-16 (2005) (“Congress enacted the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (TCA), 110 Stat. 56, to promote competition and higher quality in American telecommunications services and to ‘encourage the rapid deployment of new telecommunications technologies.’ Ibid. One of the means by which it sought to accomplish these goals was reduction of the impediments imposed by local governments upon the installation of facilities for wireless communications, such as antenna towers.”).

Attachment #1

Fountain Valley City Council
February 18, 2025

doing so would “prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services.”5 Courts have found an “effective prohibition” exists where a wireless provider demonstrates (1) a significant gap in its wireless service coverage, and (2) that the proposed facility would provide the “least intrusive means” in relation to the land use values embodied in local regulations, to provide the service coverage necessary to fill that gap.6 The burden then shifts to the local government to prove that another alternative is available, technically feasible, and is less intrusive than the proposed facility.7 In addition, the FCC ruled that an effective prohibition occurs whenever the decision of a local government materially inhibits wireless services.8 The FCC explained that the “effective prohibition analysis focuses on the service the provider wishes to provide, incorporating the capabilities and performance characteristics it wishes to employ, including facilities deployment to provide existing services more robustly, or at a better level of quality, all to offer a more robust and competitive wireless service for the benefit of the public.”9 Thus, a local government “could materially inhibit service in numerous ways – not only by rendering a service provider unable to provide existing service in a new geographic area or by restricting the entry of a new provider in providing service in a particular area, but also by materially inhibiting the introduction of new services or the improvement of existing services.”10 The Ninth Circuit twice upheld the FCC’s material inhibition test for an effective prohibition.11 Here, AT&T has demonstrated its significant service coverage gap and that it seeks the least intrusive means to close that gap.12 AT&T needs to be able to provide reliable in-building service coverage in the gap area. Courts within the Ninth Circuit and across the country have held the in-building standard is an appropriate benchmark for finding a significant service coverage gap exists.13 5 47 U.S.C. §332(c)(7)(B)(i)(II).
6 See e.g., Metro PCS, Inc. v. City and County of San Francisco, 400 F.3d 715, 734-35 (9th Cir. 2005); TMobile USA, Inc. v. City of Anacortes, 572 F.3d 987, 995 (9th Cir. 2009); Sprint PCS Assets, LLC v. City of Palos Verdes Estates, 583 F.3d 716, 726 (9th Cir. 2009). 7 City of Anacortes, 572 F.3d at 998-999.
8 See Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment, Declaratory Ruling and Third Report and Order, FCC 18-133 (September 27, 2018) (“Infrastructure Order”) at ¶¶ 34-42; see also, In the Matter of California Payphone Association Petition for Preemption, Etc., Opinion and Order, FCC 97-251, 12 FCC Rcd 14191 (July 17, 1997). 9 Infrastructure Order at n. 95.
10 Id. at ¶ 37.
11 See City of Portland v. United States, 969 F.3d 1020, 1034 (9th Cir. 2020), cert. denied, City of Portland v. United States, 141 S.Ct. 2855 (2021); Sprint Telephony PCS, L.P. v. Cnty. of San Diego, 543 F.3d 571, 578 (9th Cir. 2008).
12 See Radio Frequency Statement (Attachment A); Alternative Sites Analysis (Attachment B). 13 See, e.g., MetroPCS Inc. v. City & Cnty. of San Francisco, No. 4:02-cv-03442-PJH, 2006 U.S. Dist.

LEXIS 43985, at *10 (N.D. Cal. June 16, 2006) (held that when large “coverage holes” “extend to the interior of buildings,” are actionable under the Act); T-Mobile W. Corp. v. City of Huntington Beach, No. 2:10-cv-02835-CAS (Ex), 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148170, *11-12 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 10, 2012) (held that “providing reliable in-building wireless service . . . is essential, and its absence constitutes a significant gap in coverage”); L.A. SMSA Ltd. P'ship. City of L.A., No. 2:16-cv-04954-FLA, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160046, *21 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2021) (gaps in in-home wireless service coverage constituted a significant coverage gap).

Attachment #1

Fountain Valley City Council
February 18, 2025

Significant Service Coverage Gap. AT&T has clearly demonstrated that the Proposed Facility is needed to close its significant service coverage gap. The new facility will vastly improve wireless voice and data connections, including providing reliable in-building level of service to the target gap area. As you can see by comparing the “before” and “after” coverage maps to AT&T’s RF Statement (Attachment A), AT&T’s service coverage gap is clearly significant. As the “after” coverage map shows, a very large portion of this target gap area will gain new reliable in-building level of wireless service. Again, this area (the new greenshaded area on the “after” coverage map) includes hundreds of homes, parks, schools, commercial districts along Magnolia Street, and more.

Least Intrusive Means. AT&T has also clearly demonstrated that the Proposed Facility is the best available and least intrusive means by which it can close its significant service coverage gap. AT&T worked hard to find this site. AT&T’s Application materials provide a meaningful comparison of alternatives and explain why 15 other sites are unavailable, infeasible, or more intrusive. (See Attachment B.) There was no substantial evidence even suggesting that another location or design would be less intrusive than the Proposed Facility. When a local government rejects a proposed wireless site, it must identify an available, feasible, and less intrusive alternative. 14 The Planning Commission did not identify any alternative location or design, let alone one that is available and feasible. Its denial, if not reversed by City Council, will effectively prohibit AT&T from providing services in violation of federal law. Federal jurisprudence in this area demands that the city propose alternatives or approve the applicant’s proposal. The Ninth Circuit, in adopting the least intrusive means test, explained that the test avoid needlessly repeating the application process by “promis[ing] to ultimately identify the best solution for the community, not merely the last one remaining after a series of application denials.”15 Indeed, under federal court holdings, the city bears the burden to identify a specific available, feasible, and less intrusive alternative.16 Here, City Council must either approve AT&T’s application as proposed, or identify another acceptable location or design to approve.

Approval of AT&T’s Proposal is Required Under Federal Law – Substantial Evidence The TCA also provides that the city may only deny AT&T’s Application based on “substantial evidence.”17 The substantial evidence requirement means that a local government’s decision must be “authorized by applicable local regulations and supported by a reasonable amount of evidence.”18 In other words, a local government must have specific reasons that are both consistent with the applicable regulations and supported by substantial evidence in the record to deny a permit.

As explained above, even if the city could identify some code-based reason to disfavor AT&T’s Proposed Facility, the city is preempted by the TCA from effectively prohibiting wireless services. The Planning Commission’s denial was based on aesthetic concerns related to the fully-concealed equipment area at the base of the SCE tower. Although not entirely clear by its findings, it seems the Planning Commission denied AT&T’s Application because of the appearance of the equipment area at the base of 14 City of Anacortes, 572 F.3d at 998 (“when a locality rejects a prima facie showing, it must show that there are some potentially available and technologically feasible alternatives”). 15 MetroPCS, Inc. v. City & County of San Francisco, 400 F.3d at 735. 16 City of Anacortes, 572 F.3d at 998.
17 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(iii).
18 See, e.g., Anacortes, 572 F.3d at 993 (decision denying wireless siting application “is invalid” if it not supported by its own regulations); Metro PCS, Inc., 400 F.3d at 725.

Attachment #1

Fountain Valley City Council
February 18, 2025

25634395.1
the tower. AT&T worked closely with City Staff in an effort to develop the best possible design for the equipment area. The photosimulations submitted by AT&T illustrate that the proposed equipment area will appear as a landscaping feature below the tower. It will not detract from area aesthetics, and, as discussed next, indeed this is a more visually-appealing design than other existing designs that the city has previously approved.

Approval of AT&T’s Proposal is Required Under Federal Law – Unreasonable Discrimination The TCA prohibits unreasonable discrimination among providers of functionally equivalent services.19 Despite the Planning Commission’s concerns about AT&T’s Proposed Facility, the city has previously approved substantially similar wireless facilities attached to SCE towers. In fact, the city has approved multiple similar facilities along the very same line of towers in the city’s large open space district that runs from Warner Avenue in the north to Bluebird Avenue in the south. Specifically, the city has approved the following wireless communication facilities in this same open space district:
• A wireless facility attached to one of SCE’s towers just north of Ellis Avenue, with a partiallyconcealed equipment area at the base of the tower, and located approximately 60 feet from residential property.
• A wireless facility attached to one of SCE’s towers just south of Fulton Park, with a partiallyconcealed equipment area at the base of the tower. • A wireless facility attached to one of SCE’s towers just north of Slater Avenue, with an equipment area at the base of the tower surrounded by a chain-link fence, and located approximately 70 feet from residential property.

Moreover, the Proposed Facility is designed to be more camouflaged than those existing wireless facilities. Especially because the Proposed Facility is needed to close a very large gap in service coverage, there is no reasonable basis for the city to discriminate against AT&T by denying its Application.

Conclusion
AT&T is working diligently to upgrade its network to provide and improve wireless services in the City of Fountain Valley. AT&T has shown that federal law strongly supports (indeed, requires) approval.

The City Council has an opportunity now to right this wrong. AT&T urges the City Council to approve AT&T’s appeal and its Application.

Sincerely,
Aaron M. Shank
Attachment A: AT&T Radio Frequency Statement
Attachment B: AT&T Alternative Sites Analysis, Updated
19 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(i)(I).

Attachment #1

ATTACHMENT A
Attachment #1

AT&T Mobility Radio Frequency Statement
APN 167-582-30 – Fountain Valley, CA
AT&T Site ID CLL04583
AT&T has experienced an unprecedented increase in mobile data use on its network since the release of the iPhone in 2007. AT&T estimates that in the decade following introduction of the iPhone in 2007, mobile data usage has increased 470,000% on its network. AT&T forecasts its customers’ growing demand for mobile data services to continue. In 2022, wireless data traffic increased to 73.7 trillion megabytes, megabytes, and is expected to increase 58 gigabytes per smartphone per month on average by 2028. Put another way, traffic on AT&T’s wireless network grew by 20% annually over the last three years, and it is predicted to double by 2028. The increased volume of data travels to and from customers’ wireless devices and AT&T’s wireless infrastructure over limited airwaves — radio frequency spectrum that AT&T licenses from the Federal Communications Commission.

Spectrum is a finite resource and there are a limited number of airwaves capable and available for commercial use. Wireless operators license those airwaves from the FCC. To ensure that service quality, AT&T must knit together its spectrum assets to address customers’ existing usage and forecasted demand for wireless services, and it must use its limited spectrum in an efficient manner.

AT&T uses high-band (i.e., 6 GHz and higher), mid-band (i.e., C-Band spectrum, 2300 MHz, 2100 MHz, and 1900 MHz), and low-band (i.e., 850 MHz and 700 MHz) spectrum to provide wireless services. Each spectrum band has different propagation characteristics and signal quality may vary due to noise or interference based on network characteristics at a given location.

To address this dynamic environment, AT&T deploys multiple layers of its licensed spectrum and strives to bring its facilities closer to the customer. The proposed wireless communications facility is to be collocated on an existing Southern California Edison transmission tower that is situated in an Open Space zoning district approximately 75 feet to the north from Talbert Avenue (at coordinates 33.701680, -117.977744) in Fountain Valley, CA (the “Property”), is needed to close a service coverage gap in 4G LTE services in an area is roughly bordered by Warner Avenue to the north, Bushard Street to the east, Harper Park to the south, and Beach Boulevard to the west.

AT&T’s service coverage gap in this area is significant as it includes hundreds of homes in several Docusign Envelope ID: 114455E6-DC0A-4E5A-9EB0-3E7AC02EA90D Attachment #1

2 neighborhoods, community parks, schools, commercial districts along Magnolia Street, welltraveled roads throughout the area, and other points of interest in the vicinity.

The service coverage gap is caused by inadequate infrastructure in the area. AT&T currently has existing sites in the broader geographical area surrounding the Property but, as Exhibit 1 illustrates, these existing sites do not provide sufficient 4G LTE service in the gap area.

Wireless telecommunications is essentially a line-of-sight technology, and AT&T’s antennas need to be high enough to propagate an effective signal throughout the gap area. To meet its coverage objectives for this gap area, AT&T proposes to install a wireless communications facility disguised as a eucalyptus tree. Denial of this proposed facility would materially inhibit AT&T’s ability to provide and improve wireless services in this portion of the city.

The facility at the Property will help to close the gap in coverage and help address rapidly increasing data usage driven by smartphone and tablet usage. This site is part of an effort to fully deploy 4G LTE technology in the area. Specifically, the proposed facility will close this service coverage gap and provide sufficient 4G LTE coverage for AT&T customers in the affected area.

LTE technology also offers low latency, or the processing time it takes to move data through a network, such as how long it takes to start downloading a webpage or file once one has sent the request. Lower latency helps to improve the quality of personal wireless services. What’s more, LTE uses spectrum efficiently, creating more space to carry data traffic and services and to deliver a better overall network experience.

It is important to understand that service problems can and do occur for customers even in locations where the coverage maps on AT&T’s “Coverage Viewer” website appear to indicate that coverage is available. As the legend to the Coverage Viewer maps indicates, these maps display approximate outdoor coverage – not in-building or in-vehicle coverage. Actual coverage in an area may differ from the website map graphics, and it may be affected by such things as terrain, weather, network changes, foliage, buildings, construction, signal strength, high-usage periods, customer equipment, and other factors.

It is also important to note that the signal losses, slow data rates, and other service problems can and do occur for customers even at times when certain other customers in the same vicinity may not experience any problems on AT&T’s network. These problems can and do occur even when certain customers’ wireless phones indicate coverage bars of signal strength on the handset.

Docusign Envelope ID: 114455E6-DC0A-4E5A-9EB0-3E7AC02EA90D Attachment #1

3 The bars of signal strength that individual customers can see on their wireless phones are an imprecise and slow-to-update estimate of service quality. In other words, a customer’s wireless phone can show coverage bars of signal strength, but that customer will still, at times, be unable to initiate voice calls, complete calls, or download data reliably and without service interruptions due to service quality issues.

To determine where equipment needs to be located for the provisioning of reliable service in any area, AT&T’s radio frequency engineers rely on far more complex tools and data sources than just signal strength from individual phones. AT&T uses industry-standard propagation tools to identify the areas in its network where signal strength is too weak to provide reliable in-building service quality. Wireless signal strength is commonly measured and expressed in terms of decibel milliwatts (dBm). Stronger signals are represented by a higher dBm, which is expressed as a negative numeral. For example, -95 dBm is stronger than -105 dBm.

Specifically, to evaluate signal strength and other network parameters, as well as to plan and build its wireless network, AT&T uses highly sophisticated software called Atoll. Atoll uses a variety of databases and information sources, including AT&T network parameters, population data, type of area to be covered, clutter database (obstruction information such as dimensions of buildings, trees, and roads), and terrain information (above sea level height value for each 5 meter by 5 meter area), all to measure and simulate the existing and forecasted network and environment.

Atoll can reliably simulate real-life existing and future wireless service coverage, to help identify and fill gaps in wireless network coverage. A key output from Atoll are coverage maps that simulate signal propagation based on existing data and forecasted propagation based on proposed network changes.

AT&T designs and builds its wireless network to ensure customers receive reliable inbuilding service quality. A stronger signal is required for reliable in-building wireless service, as compared to in-vehicle or outdoor service. Any area that lacks reliable in-building service coverage constitutes a service coverage gap. This in-building level of service is critical as customers increasingly use their mobile devices as their primary communication devices According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), more than 83% of California adults, and more than 98% of Californians under age 18, rely exclusively or primarily on wireless communications in their homes. And California households rely on their mobile phones to do more Docusign Envelope ID: 114455E6-DC0A-4E5A-9EB0-3E7AC02EA90D Attachment #1

4 (E911, video streaming, GPS, web access, text, etc.). In fact, California reported to the FCC that there were more than 23.3 million wireless calls and 98,065 texts to 911 in 2023 (the most recent year for state level data).

The proposed facility at the Property is also a part of AT&T’s commitment to supporting public safety through its partnership with FirstNet, the federal First Responder Network Authority.

Conceived by the 9/11 Commission Report as necessary for first responder communications, Congress created the federal First Responder Network Authority, which selected AT&T to build and manage FirstNet, the first-ever nationwide first-responder wireless network. The proposed facility will provide new service on Band 14, which is the nationwide high-quality spectrum set aside by the U.S. government for public safety. Deployment of FirstNet in the subject area will improve public safety by putting advanced wireless technologies into the hands of public safety agencies and first responders.

Exhibit 1 to this Statement is a map of the existing 4G LTE service coverage (without the proposed installation at the Property) in the area at issue. It includes 4G LTE service coverage provided by other existing AT&T sites. The green shaded areas of the map depict acceptable and reliable in-building coverage. Specifically, the green areas on the map depict areas where AT&T’s existing service coverage is -95 dBm or better. In-building coverage means customers are able to place or receive a call on the ground floor of a building. The yellow shaded areas depict areas within a signal strength range that provide acceptable and reliable in-vehicle service coverage.

Specifically, the yellow areas on the map depict areas where AT&T’s existing service coverage is between -105 dBm and -96 dBm. In these areas, an AT&T customer should be able to successfully place or receive a call within a vehicle. The pink and white shading depicts areas within a signal strength range in which a customer might have difficulty receiving a consistently acceptable level of service. Specifically, the pink areas on the map depict areas where AT&T’s existing service coverage is -113 dBm to 106 dBm; the white areas depict areas where AT&T’s existing service coverage is worse than -113 dBm. The quality of service experienced by any individual customer can differ greatly depending on whether that customer is indoors, outdoors, stationary, or in transit.

Any area in the yellow, pink, or white category is considered inadequate service coverage and constitutes a service coverage gap.

Docusign Envelope ID: 114455E6-DC0A-4E5A-9EB0-3E7AC02EA90D Attachment #1

5 25647544.1
Exhibit 2 is a map that predicts 4G LTE service coverage based on signal strength in the vicinity of the Property if the proposed facility is constructed as proposed in the application. As shown by this map, constructing the proposed facility at the Property closes AT&T’s significant service coverage gap.

My conclusions are based on my knowledge of the Property and with AT&T’s wireless network, as well as my review of AT&T’s records with respect to the Property and its wireless telecommunications facilities in the surrounding area. I have a Bachelor of Science Degree in Electronics and Communications Engineering from Mapua Institute of Technology, Manila, Philippines, and I have worked as an engineering expert in the wireless communications industry for more than 31 years.
__________________________________
Albert Landicho
AT&T Mobility Services LLC
Network, Planning & Engineering
RAN Design & RF Engineering
February 2025
Docusign Envelope ID: 114455E6-DC0A-4E5A-9EB0-3E7AC02EA90D Attachment #1

Existing 4G-LTE Coverage Before Proposed Site CLL04583
Coverage levels:

EXHIBIT 1
Attachment #1

Planned 4G-LTE Coverage With Proposed Site CLL04583 On Air Coverage levels:

EXHIBIT 2
Attachment #1

ATTACHMENT B
Attachment #1

AT&T Mobility – Alternative Sites Analysis
Wireless Telecommunications Facility
at
APN 167-582-30
Fountain Valley, CA
Site ID: CLL04583
AT&T investigated many alternative sites in connection with AT&T’s application seeking to attach antennas to an existing Southern California Edison transmission tower, with concealed equipment situated at the base of the subject tower. The following provides an analysis and meaningful comparison of the alternatives considered:

1. Shopping Center at 17920 Magnolia St. – Unavailable
• Rooftop or Rawland design. Not viable due to the pushback received from the city and surrounding community. Due to that reason, the underlying property owner rejected the proposal and there is no other space available within the property.

2. Collocation with Crown Castle 827481 – Infeasible
• 33.7007, -117.971 This is an existing Crown Castle Slim Line Flagpole. This will require a swap/drop, but there is no available space for the new tower location. There also is no ground space for the equipment. Additionally, AT&T array will not be adequately supported due to the existing design.

3. Collocation with Crown Castle 822891 – Infeasible
• 33.6925, -117.956 This is an existing Crown Castle Monopalm. The available antenna height would be too low to propagate an effective signal. There is also no available ground space for the equipment.

4. Roch Courreges Elementary School – Unavailable
• Proposed Freestanding Structure (Rawland Build) at this Elementary School. School District is not interesting in leasing space for a wireless communications facility.

5. Helm Park – Infeasible
• Proposed Freestanding structure (Rawland Build). There is no available space for a tower and ground equipment

6. SCE Tower #1 – More intrusive than Proposed Facility • 33.708696, -117.977863. A wireless communications facility here would violate the 500' freestanding structure setback under21.28.050(a).

7. SCE Tower #2 - Fulton Park – More intrusive than Proposed Facility • 33.705058, -117.97796. A wireless communications facility here would violate the 500' freestanding structure setback under 21.28.050(a).

Attachment #1

2 25654325.1

8. SCE Tower #3 – Available and feasible.
• 33.701680, -117.977744. Viable. This is AT&T’s currently proposed project site, which involves attaching antennas to the existing SCE transmission tower in an Open Space zoning district, with related equipment concealed by faux landscaping at the base of the tower (and within the footprint of the tower). AT&T’s proposal is substantially similar to other existing wireless communications facilities attached to several other SCE transmission towers in this same line of towers, except that AT&T’s proposal provides much greater and more effective concealment than those other city-approved facilities.

The Proposed Facility is available, feasible, and it is the least intrusive option.

9. SCE Tower #4 – North of La Fiesta Ave – Unavailable
• 33.712245, -117.977995. This is the project site where Dish proposed to install their equipment but was also denied by the city.

10. SCE Tower #5 – Courreges Park – More intrusive than Proposed Facility • 33.697901, -117.977771. A wireless communications facility here would violate the 500' freestanding structure setback under 21.28.050(a).

11. SCE Tower #6 - Harper Park - North of Bluebird Ave – More intrusive than Proposed Facility • 33.690627, -117.977595A wireless communications facility here would violate the 500' freestanding structure setback under 21.28.050(a).

12. SCE Tower #7 - East of Lucia Ln – Infeasible
• 33.719394, -117.978298. This location is too close to existing AT&T wireless communications facility, which risks signal interference and would not close AT&T’s target coverage gap.

13. SCE Tower #8 - Langen Park - East of Lookout Ln – Infeasible • 33.68348, -117.97749. This location is too close to existing AT&T wireless communications facility, which would not close AT&T’s target coverage gap.

14. Beachpoint Church - 17415 Magnolia St, Fountain Valley, CA 92708 – Infeasible • Height restrictions at this location are too low to allow AT&T to close its target coverage gap.

15. Plaza SW C/O Talbert & Magnolia Ave – Unavailable
• 33.700693, -117.972394. AT&T has been investigating this site as a potential alternative, but the property owner has not responded to inquiries.

16. Collocation with SBA CA40745-A – Infeasible
• This location is too close to existing AT&T wireless communications facility, which risks signal interference and would not close AT&T’s target coverage gap.

Conclusion: The Proposed facility is the best available and least intrusive means for AT&T to close its significant service coverage gap in this portion of Fountain Valley.

Attachment #1

Request for
Planning Commission Action
TO: Planning Commission DATE: January 22, 2025
FROM: Matt Jenkins, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: AT&T Mobility – Conditional Use Permit No. 1933 Project Location: SCE Easement
Zoning: P/OS – Parks and Open Space
General Plan: P/OS – Parks and Open Space
Project Applicant: New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC dba AT&T Mobility Project Contact: Will Kazimi – Smartlink Group

Property Owner: Southern California Edison (SCE)

Request:

Request submitted by Will Kazimi with Smartlink Group on behalf of AT&T Mobility to install an unmanned wireless telecommunications facility on an existing SCE transmission tower located on the north side of Talbert Avenue, east of Newland Street, and east of 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave (Attachment #1 – Vicinity Map) within 100 feet of residential uses.

Code Requirement:

Pursuant to the Fountain Valley Municipal Code (FVMC) Section 21.28.040.d., wireless telecommunication facilities are allowed on school properties and parks in the Public Institution and Open Space zone if approved through a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), and;
Pursuant to FVMC Section 21.28.050(d), freestanding wireless telecommunication facilities shall be set back at least one hundred feet from any parcel with residential uses.

The one-hundred-foot setback may be reduced subject to review and approval by a CUP.

Planning Commission Action – CUP 1933
January 22, 2025

Project Description:

Will Kazimi with Smartlink Group, on behalf of AT&T Mobility, is requesting approval of a CUP for the construction and operation of a wireless telecommunications facility located on an existing SCE electrical transmission tower in the Edison easement that runs north to south on the City’s west side, in between Newland Street and Magnolia Street, on the north side of Talbert Avenue (Attachment #2 – Project Description).

The proposed wireless facility includes the following antennas mounted on the SCE transmission tower:
 Twelve (12) panel antennas in three (3) sectors on the SCE transmission tower mounted at 57 feet to the top, 54 feet to center.
 Nine (9) Remote Radio Units (RRUs) in three (3) sectors  One (1) 2-foot microwave antenna
The proposed wireless equipment and cabinets would be located behind a 12 ft. by 18 ft., 216 square foot, walled enclosure located underneath a SCE tower. The topography slopes downhill to the east in this location. To accommodate a level floor at the higher grade for the wireless equipment, a steel platform attached to concrete pilars is proposed.

The enclosure would have an 8-foot-tall wall surrounding the enclosure with a CMU veneer attached.

Due to the sloping hillside, while the height of the enclosure at the higher grade on the west side is at 8 feet, the height of the enclosure is 2+ feet taller on the east side facing the rear yard of the residential property at 8678 El Cerro Cir (Sheet A-5, East Elevation – Attachment #2). The applicant has also indicated the option for installing faux ivy as proposed in the single elevation in Attachment #4.

Setting:

The proposed facility is located on the SCE-owned utility easement that runs from the northern section of the city from the City of Westminster, crossing Warner Avenue, and continuing to the southern end of the city limits at Garfield Avenue - continuing into Huntington Beach. The precise location for the proposed site is on one (1) of the two (2) existing, 126-foot-tall SCE transmission towers located 80 feet to the north of Talbert Avenue. As shown on the plans on Sheet A-1 in Attachment #3, the proposed AT&T facility would have the following setbacks:
 53 feet to the residential property line / block wall to the east  70 feet from residential buildings to the east
 80 feet north of Talbert Avenue
 140 feet from the nearest residential building to the west As indicated in the applicant’s project description letter, AT&T radio frequency (RF) engineers identified a significant gap in wireless coverage in the general area. As shown in the applicant’s propagation maps (Attachment #5), the proposed facility is intended to

Planning Commission Action – CUP 1933
January 22, 2025

provide additional reliable indoor, in-vehicle and outdoor wireless coverage for AT&T customers.

The applicant has provided their Alternative Site Analysis with their application and provided their comments below for the following locations:

Alternative Site Analysis
According to the applicant’s project description (Attachment 2), they examined five possible locations as alternative sites: the Sprouts shopping center at the northeast corner of Magnolia and Talbert; the carwash at Magnolia and Talbert; a facility adjacent to Mimi’s Jewelry located at 18591 Brookhurst; Roch Courreges Elementary School; and Helm Park. For reasons specified in the Project Description, the applicant found that these locations would not support their facility needs.

The Planning Commission did review CUP 1912 on February 8, 2023, for an AT&T wireless facility, where several residents voiced concerns over the proposed 50-foot monopine proposed by AT&T. This item was continued at the applicant’s request, and the applicant has since withdrawn their application due to the reaction from the neighborhood.

Public Comments Received:

The city received correspondence from a resident, Lyle Scheppele, dated November 14th, 2024 in opposition to the proposed project. (Attachment #6).

Findings:

In order to approve a wireless telecommunication facility, the Planning Commission must make four findings based on the development standards in Chapter 21.28. Staff is recommending denial as the following findings can’t be met:
(1) There is adequate space on the property for the antenna and accessory wireless equipment without conflict with existing structures on the property, or reducing required parking, landscaping or other development standards.

The equipment enclosure is proposed on the sloping hillside, where the enclosure floor needs to be level. This design creates a void of space underneath the proposed enclosure that is sealed from entry by extending the enclosure walls to the base, on the north, south, and east elevation. The 8-foot-tall screen wall is designed to follow the contour of the hillside; by doing this, however, increases the size of the enclosure wall, which increases the visible size and presence of the ground-mounted equipment enclosure (Detail #1, East Elevation, Sheet A-5 – Attachment #3 to the staff report).
(2) The design and placement of the antenna and accessory wireless equipment will not adversely impact the use of the property, other structures located on the property or the surrounding area or neighborhood;

Planning Commission Action – CUP 1933
January 22, 2025

The proposed design of the facility consists of the panel antennas attached to the SCE transmission tower and the equipment enclosure at the base of the transmission tower located within the tower’s footprint. The areas sloped topography, along with the low-covering vine landscaping, inhibit recreational use of this area of the SCE utility corridor, providing visual open space with no additional above ground structures in the SCE corridor. The proposed enclosure, even with added faux ivy on the exterior of the enclosure, would be an additional visible structure in the SCE easement, and would not enhance the visual quality of the neighborhood, and would bring more visual blight to the area with utilitarian structures that reduce visual pleasure.
(3) The antenna and accessory wireless equipment as proposed are consistent with the intent of Section 21.28 and comply with the general standards for wireless telecommunication facilities and any special standards; The project does not comply with all applicable standards and requirement of Section 21.28, Wireless Communications. Specifically, the project is not assimilated or stealth as required by the standards outlined in FVMC 21.28.040; specifically the following:
(g) Visual Impact. Wireless telecommunication facilities shall be located, installed and mounted in a manner to minimize, to the greatest extent possible, the visibility of the antennas and equipment.

As described earlier in this report, there will be an increased visual impact with the proposed above-ground equipment enclosure at the base of the SCE tower which causes added visual blight and detracts from the visual pleasure provided by the open space in the SCE utility easement. (i) Screening. Antennas and accessory wireless equipment, if visible, shall be screened with a solid wall and/or landscaping to the greatest extent possible. The base shall be landscaped to screen equipment cabinets or the equipment cabinets shall be architecturally compatible with adjacent buildings. All landscaping screening shall be required to be maintained and replaced if necessary by the applicant or property owner as long as the associated antenna or wireless equipment is in use.

The proposed antennas will not be screened due to the nature of the existing SCE transmission tower. The proposed antennas would be painted to match the existing tower, but are still visible to the public as they would be attached to the steel structure. The proposed equipment enclosure at the base of the SCE tower would consist of a walled enclosure with a faux brick veneer applied to the exterior. The applicant has provided one (1) elevation with faux ivy that could be applied to all four (4) of the exterior walls of the enclosure to give the look of landscaping, should the project be approved. SCE has indicated they will not approve live landscaping underneath their towers for reasons including maintenance and liability.

Planning Commission Action – CUP 1933
January 22, 2025

(j) Stealthing. All wireless telecommunications facilities shall be stealth unless exempted by federal or state law. Stealthing shall include concealment of any component of the wireless facility. Examples include, but are not limited to, "monopines," flagpoles or windmills designed to conceal wireless communication equipment and those applications where wireless communication equipment is contained within another structure such as a scoreboard or sign. Wireless communication facilities in the public right-ofway shall be subject to the requirements of Section 21.28.100. A wireless communications facility that is not fully assimilated to its surroundings shall be prohibited.

The stealth requirement here cannot be meet with exposed antennas that are clearly visible to the public at attached to the tower at 54 feet above grade. As previously described, the proposed design of the equipment enclosure does not result in an installation that would blend into the existing landscape or topography, and is clearly visible to residential with a setback of 53 feet to the property line at the east elevation.

Additionally, the project does not comply with FVMC 21.28.050.d – Special standards for freestanding, ground-mounted wireless communications facilities on private property.
(d) Freestanding wireless telecommunication facilities shall be set back at least one hundred feet from any parcel with residential uses. The onehundred-foot setback may be reduced subject to review and approval by a conditional use permit.

The proposed facility is located on the existing SCE transmission tower and will be located 53 feet from the east residential property line and 70 feet away from the residential home at 8618 El Cerro Cir.

Staff provided an option to the applicant to place the wireless equipment in an underground vault either at the base or further away from the tower. However, SCE indicated they require clearances from the utility vaults which are to be located at the edge of the right-of-way with a 100-foot distance from the tower. SCE indicated there is additional underground utilities in the easement that would also prohibit an underground equipment vault.

The proposed above-ground equipment enclosure is proposed under the SCE utility tower that is constructed along a small slope, where typically the topography underneath the SCE utility towers is flat in the SCE easement. Due to this condition, the enclosure wall that faces east, is taller than 8 feet to conceal the underside opening of the equipment area. The size of the equipment enclosure wall on the east elevation is larger than the wall faces facing the north, south, and front facing west elevation. While the enclosure’s footprint is not any larger than the typical equipment enclosure for a wireless facility, the larger exterior walls create a larger visual presence than what is typical for an equipment enclosure for a wireless facility on an SCE tower. The applicant has provided a single elevation to show possible exterior faux ivy for the enclosure, should the Planning

Planning Commission Action – CUP 1933
January 22, 2025

Commission request this if they wish to approve the request. Staff suggested placing the equipment in a vault underground near the SCE tower, but the applicant indicated and staff has confirmed with SCE, that SCE will not allow for underground equipment vaults directly underneath SCE towers.

The proposed wireless facility is dissimilar to other wireless facilities on the SCE towers approved by the City due to the larger enclosure at the base of the tower and the proximity to the residential properties to the east. The proposed facility and equipment would be clearly visible from the surrounding neighborhood and Talbert Avenue and has not been designed to the greatest extent feasible to sufficiently screen the site from public view.

Environmental Review:

Pursuant to Article 18 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15270(a), CEQA does not apply to projects that a public agency rejects or disapproves. Because this is a resolution to deny CUP 1933, it falls within the scope of CEQA Guidelines 15270(a), and no CEQA action is necessary at this time.

Notice Furnished:

Public hearing notices were mailed to all property owners and commercial tenants within 1,000 feet of the subject property. The item was published in the Fountain Valley View and notices were posted at City Hall and the Recreation Center.

Alternatives:

1. Adopt Resolution No. 24-12 adopting a Notice of Exemption (Attachment #7) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and denying CUP 1933 for AT&T Mobility to install an unmanned wireless telecommunications facility on an existing SCE transmission tower located on the north side of Talbert Avenue, east of Newland Street, and east of 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave.

2. Continue the request and direct staff to prepare a resolution for approval.

3. Continue this request for additional information.

Recommended Action:

Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Alternative #1: Adopt Resolution No. 24-12 adopting a Notice of Exemption in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and denying CUP 1933 for AT&T Mobility to install an unmanned wireless telecommunications facility on an existing SCE transmission tower located on the north side of Talbert Avenue, east of Newland Street, and east of 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave.

Prepared By: Matt Jenkins, Senior Planner
Reviewed By: Steven Ayers, Principal Planner

Planning Commission Action – CUP 1933
January 22, 2025

Approved By: Omar Dadabhoy, Deputy City Manager / Community Development Director
Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map

2. Project Description

3. Plans

4. Faux Ivy Elevation

5. Propagation Maps

6. Letter from Lyle Scheppele

7. Resolution No. 24-12

Planning Commission Action – CUP 1933
January 22, 2025

provide additional reliable indoor, in-vehicle and outdoor wireless coverage for AT&T customers.

The applicant has provided their Alternative Site Analysis with their application and provided their comments below for the following locations:

Alternative Site Analysis
According to the applicant’s project description (Attachment 2), they examined five possible locations as alternative sites: the Sprouts shopping center at the northeast corner of Magnolia and Talbert; the carwash at Magnolia and Talbert; a facility adjacent to Mimi’s Jewelry located at 18591 Brookhurst; Roch Courreges Elementary School; and Helm Park. For reasons specified in the Project Description, the applicant found that these locations would not support their facility needs.

The Planning Commission did review CUP 1912 on February 8, 2023, for an AT&T wireless facility, where several residents voiced concerns over the proposed 50-foot monopine proposed by AT&T. This item was continued at the applicant’s request, and the applicant has since withdrawn their application due to the reaction from the neighborhood.

Public Comments Received:

The city received correspondence from a resident, Lyle Scheppele, dated November 14th, 2024 in opposition to the proposed project. (Attachment #6).

Findings:

In order to approve a wireless telecommunication facility, the Planning Commission must make four findings based on the development standards in Chapter 21.28. Staff is recommending denial as the following findings can’t be met:
(1) There is adequate space on the property for the antenna and accessory wireless equipment without conflict with existing structures on the property, or reducing required parking, landscaping or other development standards.

The equipment enclosure is proposed on the sloping hillside, where the enclosure floor needs to be level. This design creates a void of space underneath the proposed enclosure that is sealed from entry by extending the enclosure walls to the base, on the north, south, and east elevation. The 8-foot-tall screen wall is designed to follow the contour of the hillside; by doing this, however, increases the size of the enclosure wall, which increases the visible size and presence of the ground-mounted equipment enclosure (Detail #1, East Elevation, Sheet A-5 – Attachment #3 to the staff report).
(2) The design and placement of the antenna and accessory wireless equipment will not adversely impact the use of the property, other structures located on the property or the surrounding area or neighborhood;

Planning Commission Action – CUP 1933
January 22, 2025

The proposed design of the facility consists of the panel antennas attached to the SCE transmission tower and the equipment enclosure at the base of the transmission tower located within the tower’s footprint. The areas sloped topography, along with the low-covering vine landscaping, inhibit recreational use of this area of the SCE utility corridor, providing visual open space with no additional above ground structures in the SCE corridor. The proposed enclosure, even with added faux ivy on the exterior of the enclosure, would be an additional visible structure in the SCE easement, and would not enhance the visual quality of the neighborhood, and would bring more visual blight to the area with utilitarian structures that reduce visual pleasure.
(3) The antenna and accessory wireless equipment as proposed are consistent with the intent of Section 21.28 and comply with the general standards for wireless telecommunication facilities and any special standards; The project does not comply with all applicable standards and requirement of Section 21.28, Wireless Communications. Specifically, the project is not assimilated or stealth as required by the standards outlined in FVMC 21.28.040; specifically the following:
(g) Visual Impact. Wireless telecommunication facilities shall be located, installed and mounted in a manner to minimize, to the greatest extent possible, the visibility of the antennas and equipment.

As described earlier in this report, there will be an increased visual impact with the proposed above-ground equipment enclosure at the base of the SCE tower which causes added visual blight and detracts from the visual pleasure provided by the open space in the SCE utility easement. (i) Screening. Antennas and accessory wireless equipment, if visible, shall be screened with a solid wall and/or landscaping to the greatest extent possible. The base shall be landscaped to screen equipment cabinets or the equipment cabinets shall be architecturally compatible with adjacent buildings. All landscaping screening shall be required to be maintained and replaced if necessary by the applicant or property owner as long as the associated antenna or wireless equipment is in use.

The proposed antennas will not be screened due to the nature of the existing SCE transmission tower. The proposed antennas would be painted to match the existing tower, but are still visible to the public as they would be attached to the steel structure. The proposed equipment enclosure at the base of the SCE tower would consist of a walled enclosure with a faux brick veneer applied to the exterior. The applicant has provided one (1) elevation with faux ivy that could be applied to all four (4) of the exterior walls of the enclosure to give the look of landscaping, should the project be approved. SCE has indicated they will not approve live landscaping underneath their towers for reasons including maintenance and liability.

Planning Commission Action – CUP 1933
January 22, 2025

(j) Stealthing. All wireless telecommunications facilities shall be stealth unless exempted by federal or state law. Stealthing shall include concealment of any component of the wireless facility. Examples include, but are not limited to, "monopines," flagpoles or windmills designed to conceal wireless communication equipment and those applications where wireless communication equipment is contained within another structure such as a scoreboard or sign. Wireless communication facilities in the public right-ofway shall be subject to the requirements of Section 21.28.100. A wireless communications facility that is not fully assimilated to its surroundings shall be prohibited.

The stealth requirement here cannot be meet with exposed antennas that are clearly visible to the public at attached to the tower at 54 feet above grade. As previously described, the proposed design of the equipment enclosure does not result in an installation that would blend into the existing landscape or topography, and is clearly visible to residential with a setback of 53 feet to the property line at the east elevation.

Additionally, the project does not comply with FVMC 21.28.050.d – Special standards for freestanding, ground-mounted wireless communications facilities on private property.
(d) Freestanding wireless telecommunication facilities shall be set back at least one hundred feet from any parcel with residential uses. The onehundred-foot setback may be reduced subject to review and approval by a conditional use permit.

The proposed facility is located on the existing SCE transmission tower and will be located 53 feet from the east residential property line and 70 feet away from the residential home at 8618 El Cerro Cir.

Staff provided an option to the applicant to place the wireless equipment in an underground vault either at the base or further away from the tower. However, SCE indicated they require clearances from the utility vaults which are to be located at the edge of the right-of-way with a 100-foot distance from the tower. SCE indicated there is additional underground utilities in the easement that would also prohibit an underground equipment vault.

The proposed above-ground equipment enclosure is proposed under the SCE utility tower that is constructed along a small slope, where typically the topography underneath the SCE utility towers is flat in the SCE easement. Due to this condition, the enclosure wall that faces east, is taller than 8 feet to conceal the underside opening of the equipment area. The size of the equipment enclosure wall on the east elevation is larger than the wall faces facing the north, south, and front facing west elevation. While the enclosure’s footprint is not any larger than the typical equipment enclosure for a wireless facility, the larger exterior walls create a larger visual presence than what is typical for an equipment enclosure for a wireless facility on an SCE tower. The applicant has provided a single elevation to show possible exterior faux ivy for the enclosure, should the Planning

Planning Commission Action – CUP 1933
January 22, 2025

Commission request this if they wish to approve the request. Staff suggested placing the equipment in a vault underground near the SCE tower, but the applicant indicated and staff has confirmed with SCE, that SCE will not allow for underground equipment vaults directly underneath SCE towers.

The proposed wireless facility is dissimilar to other wireless facilities on the SCE towers approved by the City due to the larger enclosure at the base of the tower and the proximity to the residential properties to the east. The proposed facility and equipment would be clearly visible from the surrounding neighborhood and Talbert Avenue and has not been designed to the greatest extent feasible to sufficiently screen the site from public view.

Environmental Review:

Pursuant to Article 18 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15270(a), CEQA does not apply to projects that a public agency rejects or disapproves. Because this is a resolution to deny CUP 1933, it falls within the scope of CEQA Guidelines 15270(a), and no CEQA action is necessary at this time.

Notice Furnished:

Public hearing notices were mailed to all property owners and commercial tenants within 1,000 feet of the subject property. The item was published in the Fountain Valley View and notices were posted at City Hall and the Recreation Center.

Alternatives:

1. Adopt Resolution No. 24-12 adopting a Notice of Exemption (Attachment #7) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and denying CUP 1933 for AT&T Mobility to install an unmanned wireless telecommunications facility on an existing SCE transmission tower located on the north side of Talbert Avenue, east of Newland Street, and east of 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave.

2. Continue the request and direct staff to prepare a resolution for approval.

3. Continue this request for additional information.

Recommended Action:

Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Alternative #1: Adopt Resolution No. 24-12 adopting a Notice of Exemption in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and denying CUP 1933 for AT&T Mobility to install an unmanned wireless telecommunications facility on an existing SCE transmission tower located on the north side of Talbert Avenue, east of Newland Street, and east of 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave.

Prepared By: Matt Jenkins, Senior Planner
Reviewed By: Steven Ayers, Principal Planner

Planning Commission Action – CUP 1933
January 22, 2025

Approved By: Omar Dadabhoy, Deputy City Manager / Community Development Director
Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map

2. Project Description

3. Plans

4. Faux Ivy Elevation

5. Propagation Maps

6. Letter from Lyle Scheppele

7. Resolution No. 24-12

Vicinity Map
Conditional Use Permit No. 1933
AT&T
SCE Utility Easement
NE of Newland and Talbert

On Behalf of

Willy Kazimi
925-699-2227
[email protected]
AT&T Project Number: CLL04583
City of Fountain Valley
Application for CUP
Project Information, ASA, and misc. information for the city AT&T Mobility (AT&T) is requesting an approval for Conditional Use Permit approval for the construction and operation of an unmanned wireless telecommunications facility (cell site), and presents the following project information for your consideration:

Project Location
APN: 167-582-30
Tenant List
Tower Owner: Southern California Edison Company / 2 Innovation Way. Pomona, CA 91768 New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC dba. AT&T Mobility and AT&T Wireless: 1452 Edinger Ave. Tustin, CA 92780. Unmanned Wireless cell facility that will operate autonomously 24/7. 216 square feet and no exclusive parking is being proposed or taken.

AT&T Project Description:

Planned development permit for the Collocation of 216 square feet unmanned-industrial wireless telecommunications facility.

AT&T proposes to collocate an unmanned-industrial wireless telecommunications facility antenna on SCE owned transmission tower. The associated equipment cabinets will be installed adjacent within 12’ x 18’ premises that will be open aired and located securely underneath the same SCE transmission tower. AT&T will work with the city and the community for this project to close the gap-in-coverage that exists within this ring. Detailed SOW is below. • Install 1 steel grating platform on concrete piers
• Install 1 8’ high chain link fence with privacy slats • Install 2 Emerson Power cabinets
• Install 4 Purcell Cabinets
• Install 1 Ciena Panel
• Install 1 AC Panel
• Install 1 telco panel
• Install (P) service lights
• Install 1 GPS antenna
• Install proposed H-Frames
• Install 1 DC-50 Outdoor unit
• Install 12 panel antennae
• Install 9 RRUs (3 Per Sector)
• Install 1 2’ diameter MW antenna
• Install 6 DC-9 Surge Suppressors
• Install (P) Ice Bridge.

Project Objectives
There are several reasons why a wireless carrier requires the installation of a cell site within a specified area to close a “significant gap in coverage:”
• The radio signal must be of sufficient strength to achieve consistent, sustainable, and reliable service to customers at a level sufficient for outdoor, in-vehicle, and in-building penetration with good voice quality • When nearby other sites become overloaded, and more enhanced voice and data services are used (5G and other highspeed data services) signal contracts and a gap is created. With heavy use it is intensified due to the unique properties of digital radio transmissions.

In this specific case, this location was selected because AT&T’s radio-frequency engineers (RF) have identified a significant gap in coverage in this surrounding community as demonstrated on the enclosed radio-signal propagation maps.

Information
This will be an unmanned wireless cell facility just like other cell facilities within city limits that will be operating 24/7. This will be an AT&T mobility cell site meaning all Federal and State approvals are already in place.

Alternative Site Analysis
• Shopping Center at 17920 Magnolia St. – Rooftop or Rawland o Originally proposed and approved by AT&T a faux-tree like design. Not viable due to the pushback received from the city and surrounding community. Due to that reason, the underlying landlord rejected the proposal and there is no other space available within the LL’s property. They don’t want bad blood with the neighborhood and bring negative attention to their future development plans. • Collocation with Crown Castle - 33.7007, -117.971
o This is an existing Crown Castle Slim Line Flagpole. This will require a swap/drop and there is no available space for the new tower location, and there is no ground space for the equipment. Additionally, AT&T array will not be adequately supported due to the existing design. • Collocation with Crown Castle - 33.6925, -117.956
o This is an existing Crown Castle Monopalm. The RAD center would be in the low 30's and would shoot into the existing building. There is also no available ground space for the equipment. Although Monopalms are collocatable, installing more than 1 array will usually defeat the disguised element aka it will not look like a palm tree.
• Roch Courreges Elementary School
o Proposed Freestanding Structure (Rawland Build) This is an Elementary School - School District not interesting.
• Helm Park
o Proposed Freestanding structure (Rawland Build) - No Available Space for a tower and ground equipment In conclusion, our proposed collocation is the most feasible and least intrusive option to meet AT&T’s RF’s objective for this area. Although there are homes to both sides of the park, the park already consists of a row of significantly tall transmission towers and some of them have collocation from other carriers. Since this is an existing park, I don’t anticipate SCE approving brick-and-mortar commercial development anytime in the future.

Findings/Burden of Proof
The site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape.

The requested height of this design is the minimum height needed to fill the significant gap in coverage for this project. Please refer to the attached propagation map.

The proposed use is deemed essential and desirable to the public convenience or welfare.

This new wireless telecommunications facility will provide a positive supplement to the additional AT&T’s WCF which voice and date has an uptick in huge demand. Wireless communications are vastly used in this area and the need for this site was established entirely from increased usage of AT&T services in the vicinity of the requested project. General welfare will be upgraded as there will be a significant upgrade in service for both data and voice. As we realized during this year’s troubling time, the demand for services has significantly increased, especially for the citizens that is learning and working from home.

The proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives and the purpose of the zoning district in which the site is located.

The location proposed for this unmanned wireless cell facility is located in a zone where WCFs are permitted.

The proposed conditional use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, nor be materially injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity.

This unmanned wireless cell facility will not be detrimental to public health, safety, or welfare, nor be material injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. This will be a public benefit as AT&T will be bringing reliable coverage into the area to their consumers and first responders as part of AT&T and U.S. Government’s FirstNet Program.

The proposed conditions use are compatible with existing and future uses to the extent those are known, and will comply with each of the applicable provisions
That is correct. This proposed wireless cell facility is located. AT&T is meeting the city’s development standards here.

If the proposed CUP affects land located within the coastal zone, the proposed conditional use will comply with the provisions of the land use plan of the Certified Local Coastal Program.

Not Applicable here.

Based upon information available at the time of approval, adequate utilities, access roads, drainage, and other necessary facilities exist or will be provided to serve the proposed use.

This unmanned wireless cell facility will only require power and backhaul (telco), which are available on the premises as there is an existing use already established that AT&T can utilize.

GENERAL INFORMATION

Site Selection
Customer demand drives the need for new cell sites. Data relating to incomplete and dropped calls is gathered, drive-tests are conducted, and scientific modeling using sophisticated software is evaluated. Once the area requiring a new site is identified, a target ring on a map is provided to a real estate professional to begin a search for a suitable location.

During an initial reconnaissance, properties for consideration for the installation of a cell site must be located in the general vicinity of the ring, with an appropriate zoning designation, and appear to have enough space to accommodate an antenna structure and the supporting radio equipment. The size of this space will vary depending on the objective of the site. The owners of each prospective location are notified to assess their interest in partnering with AT&T.

Four key elements are considered in the selection process:
• Leasing: The property must have an owner who is willing to enter into a long-term lease agreement under very specific terms and conditions.
• Zoning: It must be suitably zoned in accordance with local land-use codes to allow for a successful permitting process. • Construction: Construction constraints and costs must be reasonable from a business perspective, and the proposed project must be capable of being constructed in accordance with local building codes and safety standards. • Radio Frequency (RF): It must be strategically located to be able to achieve the RF engineer’s objective to close the significant gap with antennas at a height to clear nearby obstructions.

The Benefits to the Community
Approximately 90-percent of American adults subscribe to cell phone service. People of all ages rely increasingly on their cell phones to talk, text, send media, and search the Internet for both personal and business reasons. More and more, they are doing these things in their homes, therefore, becoming reliant on adequate service within residential neighborhoods. In fact, 50-percent of people relocating are not signing up for landline service at their new location and are using their cell phone as their primary communication method.

The installation and operation of the proposed facility will offer improved:
• Communications for local, state, and federal emergency services providers, such as police, fire, paramedics, and other first-responders.
• Personal safety and security for community members in an emergency, or when there is an urgent need to reach family members or friends. Safety is the primary reason parents provide cell phones to their children. Currently 25% of all preteens, ages 9 to 12, and 75% of all teens, aged 13 to 19, have cell phones. • Capability of local businesses to better serve their customers. • Opportunity for a city or county to attract businesses to their community for greater economic development. • Enhanced 911 Services (E911) – The FCC mandates that all cell sites have location capability. Effective site geometry within the overall network is needed to achieve accurate location information for mobile users through triangulation with active cell sites. (Over half of all 911 calls are made using mobile phones.) Safety – RF is Radio
The FCC regulates RF emissions to ensure public safety. Standards have been set based on peer-reviewed scientific studies and recommendations from a variety of oversight organizations, including the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), American National Standards Institute (ANSI), Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Federal Drug Administration (FDA), Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).

Although the purview of the public safety of RF emissions by the FCC was established by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, these standards remain under constant scrutiny. All AT&T cell sites operate well below these standards, and the typical urban cell site operates hundreds or even thousands of times below the FCC’s limits for safe exposure.

AT&T Company Information
AT&T is one of the fastest growing nationwide service providers offering all digital voice, messaging and high-speed data services to nearly 30 million customers in the United States.

AT&T is a “telephone corporation”, licensed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to operate in the 1950.2-1964.8, 1965.2-1969.8 MHz and 1870.2-1884.8-1889.8 MHz frequencies, and a state-regulated Public Utility subject to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). The CPUC has established that the term “telephone corporation” can be extended to wireless carriers, even though they transmit signals without the use of telephone lines.

AT&T will operate this facility in full compliance with the regulations and licensing requirements of the FCC, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the CPUC, as governed by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and other applicable laws.

The enclosed information is presented for your consideration. AT&T requests approval of the proposed location and design. Please contact me at 925-699-2227 for any questions or requests for additional information.

10 CHURCH CIRCLE ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401 TEL: (949) 387-1265 FAX: (949) 387-1275 1452 EDINGER AVE. TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92780 4430 E. MIRALOMA AVE. SUITE D ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA 92807 T-1 VICINITY MAP LEGAL DESCRIPTION Your world. Delivered LOCAL MAP PROJECT TEAM CODE COMPLIANCE SITE INFORMATION DRAWING INDEX APPLICANT / LESSEE 1452 EDINGER AVE. 3RD FLOOR TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92780 Your world. Delivered DRIVING DIRECTIONS TOWER OWNER NAME: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY ADDRESS: 2 INNOVATION WAY CITY,STATE,ZIP: POMONA, CA 91768 LATITUDE: 33° 42' 05.95" (33.701653) N LONGITUDE: 117° 58' 39.86" (117.977739) W LAT./LONG. TYPE: NAD 83 GROUND ELEVATION: 39.5' A.M.S.L. ABOVE GROUND LEVEL: 127.6' A.G.L. APN #: 167-582-30 AREA OF CONSTRUCTION: 216 SQ. FT. ZONING / JURISDICTION: CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY CURRENT ZONING: P/OS - PUBLIC OPEN SPACE PROPOSED USE: UNMANNED TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY HANDICAP REQUIREMENTS: FACILITY IS UNMANNED AND NOT FOR HUMAN HABITATION. HANDICAPPED ACCESS NOT REQUIRED SITE NUMBER: CLL04583 - NSB FA#: 12844783, USID#: 330117 SITE NAME: SCE M9-T2 BARRE-ELLIS #3 & #4 FLOC# OH-7011230 220kV (1955) EAST OF 9610 CAPE CANAVERAL AVE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 92708 ORANGE COUNTY SI5& GENERAL CONTRACTOR NOTES APPROVALS THE FOLLOWING PARTIES HEREBY APPROVE AND ACCEPT THESE DOCUMENTS & AUTHORIZE THE SUBCONTRACTOR TO PROCEED WITH THE CONSTRUCTION DESCRIBED HEREIN. ALL DOCUMENTS ARE SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY THE LOCAL BUILDING DEPARTMENT & MAY IMPOSE CHANGES OR MODIFICATIONS. DISCIPLINE: SIGNATURE: DATE: AT&T RF ENGINEER: AT&T OPERATIONS: SITE ACQUISITION: CONSTRUCTION MANAGER: PROPERTY OWNER: ZONING VENDOR: PROJECT MANAGER: SUBCONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL PLANS & EXISTING DIMENSIONS & CONDITIONS ON THE JOB SITE & SHALL IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE ENGINEER IN WRITING OF ANY DISCREPANCIES BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK OR BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SAME. GENERAL NOTES THE FACILITY IS UNMANNED AND NOT FOR HUMAN HABITATION. A TECHNICIAN WILL VISIT THE SITE AS REQUIRED FOR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE. THE PROJECT WILL NOT RESULT IN ANY SIGNIFICANT DISTURBANCE OR EFFECT ON DRAINAGE; NO SANITARY SEWER SERVICE, POTABLE WATER, OR TRASH DISPOSAL IS REQUIRED AND NO COMMERCIAL SIGNAGE IS PROPOSED. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS ················ BUILDING SUMMARY CLIENT REPRESENTATIVE ENGINEER COMPANY: CASA INDUSTRIES, INC. ADDRESS: 4430 E. MIRALOMA AVE. SUITE D CITY,STATE,ZIP: ANAHEIM, CA 92807 CONTACT: JULIUS SANTIAGO PHONE: (714) 553-8899 EMAIL: [email protected] ATT PROJECT MANAGER APPLICANT RF ENGINEER CONSTRUCTION MANAGER SITE ACQUISITION ZONING COMPANY: AT&T ADDRESS: 1452 EDINGER AVE. CITY,STATE,ZIP: TUSTIN, CA. 92780 CONTACT: IVAN OCEGUEDA PHONE: (562) 210-9855 EMAIL: [email protected] COMPANY: AT&T ADDRESS: 1452 EDINGER AVE. CITY,STATE,ZIP: TUSTIN, CA. 92780 COMPANY: AT&T ADDRESS: 1452 EDINGER AVE. CITY,STATE,ZIP: TUSTIN, CA. 92780 CONTACT: IVAN OCEGUEDA PHONE: (562) 210-9855 EMAIL: [email protected] COMPANY: AT&T ADDRESS: 739 E SANTA CLARA ST., ROOM 217 CITY,STATE,ZIP: VENTURA, CA. 93001 CONTACT: ZAHID GHANI PHONE: (951) 314-9435 EMAIL: [email protected] 1. 2022 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE 2. 2022 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE ADOPTED 2017 NEC 3. 2022 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE 4. 2022 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE 5. 2022 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE 6. 2022 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE 7. COUNTY COASTAL ZONE LAND USE ORDINANCE-TITLE 23 8. COUNTY FIRE CODE ORDINANCE - TITLE 16 9. COUNTY LAND USE ORDINANCE - TITLE 22 10.COUNTY BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION ORDINANCE - TITLE 19 ALL WORKS AND MATERIALS SHALL BE PERFORMED AND INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CURRENT EDITIONS OF THE FOLLOWING CODES AS ADOPTED BY THE LOCAL GOVERNING AUTHORITIES. NOTHING IN THESE PLANS IS TO BE CONSTRUED TO PERMIT WORK NOT CONFORMING TO THE LATEST EDITIONS OF THE FOLLOWING CODES. PROJECT DESCRIPTION OUTDOOR EQUIPMENTS COMPANY: SMARTLINK, LLC ADDRESS: 10 CHURCH CIRCLE CITY,STATE,ZIP: ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401 CONTACT: Will Kazimi PHONE: (925) 699-2227 EMAIL: [email protected] COMPANY: SMARTLINK, LLC ADDRESS: 10 CHURCH CIRCLE CITY,STATE,ZIP: ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401 CONTACT: WILL KAZIMI PHONE: (925) 699-2227 EMAIL: [email protected] COMPANY: SMARTLINK, LLC ADDRESS: 10 CHURCH CIRCLE CITY,STATE,ZIP: ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401 CONTACT: WILL KAZIMI PHONE: (925) 699-2227 EMAIL: [email protected] SI5& Page 126 Page 33

10 CHURCH CIRCLE ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401
TEL: (949) 387-1265
FAX: (949) 387-1275 1452 EDINGER AVE. TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92780 4430 E. MIRALOMA AVE. SUITE D ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA 92807 A-1 OVERALL SITE PLAN 1 TALBERT AVE MAGNOLIA ST 1/32"=1'-0" SCALE: Page 129 Page 36
10 CHURCH CIRCLE ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401
TEL: (949) 387-1265
FAX: (949) 387-1275 1452 EDINGER AVE. TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92780 4430 E. MIRALOMA AVE. SUITE D ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA 92807 A-2 ENLARGED SITE PLAN 1 3/32"=1'-0" SCALE: Page 130 Page 37 1/2"=1'-0" SCALE: 10 CHURCH CIRCLE ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401 TEL: (949) 387-1265 FAX: (949) 387-1275 1452 EDINGER AVE. TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92780 4430 E. MIRALOMA AVE. SUITE D ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA 92807 A-3 EQUIPMENT PLAN 1 Page 131 Page 38 1/2"=1'-0" SCALE: 10 CHURCH CIRCLE ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401 TEL: (949) 387-1265 FAX: (949) 387-1275 1452 EDINGER AVE. TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92780 4430 E. MIRALOMA AVE. SUITE D ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA 92807 A-3 EQUIPMENT PLAN 1 Page 132 Page 39 10 CHURCH CIRCLE ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401 TEL: (949) 387-1265 FAX: (949) 387-1275 1452 EDINGER AVE. TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92780 4430 E. MIRALOMA AVE. SUITE D ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA 92807 A-4 ANTENNA PLAN 1/4"=1'-0" 1 SCALE: 54'-0" RAD CENTER 44'-0" RAD CENTER ··· ANTENNA AND RRU SCHEDULE (PENDING RFDS) 2 Page 133 Page 40 10 CHURCH CIRCLE ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401
TEL: (949) 387-1265
FAX: (949) 387-1275 1452 EDINGER AVE. TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92780 4430 E. MIRALOMA AVE. SUITE D ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA 92807 A-5 NORTH ELEVATION 2 1/8"=1'-0" SCALE: EAST ELEVATION 1 1/8"=1'-0" SCALE: ······ Page 134 Page 41 10 CHURCH CIRCLE ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401
TEL: (949) 387-1265
FAX: (949) 387-1275 1452 EDINGER AVE. TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92780 4430 E. MIRALOMA AVE. SUITE D ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA 92807 A-6 SOUTH ELEVATION 2 1/8"=1'-0" SCALE: WEST ELEVATION 1 1/8"=1'-0" SCALE: ······ Page 135 Page 42 10 CHURCH CIRCLE ANNAPOLIS, MD 21401 TEL: (949) 387-1265 FAX: (949) 387-1275 1452 EDINGER AVE. TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA 92780 4430 E. MIRALOMA AVE. SUITE D ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA 92807 A-7 ANTENNA SPECIFICATIONS 4 ANTENNA SPECIFICATIONS 1 NOT USED 2 ANTENNA SPECIFICATIONS 3 ERICSSON ANTENNA SPECIFICATIONS 5 RRUS SPECIFICATIONS 6 RRUS SPECIFICATIONS 7 RRUS SPECIFICATIONS 8 ERICSSON MW SPECIFICATIONS 10 DC-9 (NEMA) SPECIFICATIONS 9 Page 136 Page 43 E/O 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave
Fountain Valley CA 92708
CLL04583
SCE M9-T2 OH-7011230
Accuracy of photo simulation based upon information provided by project applicant.

Proposed Looking northeast from Talbert Avenue
View 1
Existing
proposed antennas and rrh units
proposed equipment enclosure
with faux ivy
©2024 Google Maps

Accuracy of photo simulation based upon information provided by project applicant.

Proposed Looking northwest from Talbert Avenue
View 2
Existing
proposed antennas and rrh units
E/O 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave
Fountain Valley CA 92708
CLL04583
SCE M9-T2 OH-7011230
©2024 Google Maps

Accuracy of photo simulation based upon information provided by project applicant.

Proposed Looking southwest from El Cerro Court
View 3
Existing
proposed antennas and rrh units
E/O 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave
Fountain Valley CA 92708
CLL04583
SCE M9-T2 OH-7011230
©2024 Google Maps

© 2023 AT&T Intellectual Property. AT&T and globe logo are registered trademarks and service marks of AT& T Intellectual Property and/ or AT& T affiliated companies. All other marks are the property of their respective owners AT&T Proprietary (Internal Use Only) - Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies except under written agreement Site Justification Coverage Maps
Market Name : Southern California Market
Site ID : CLL04583
Site Address : East of 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave., Fountain Valley, CA 92708
ATOLL Completion Date : March 12, 2024

Assumptions
 Propagation of the Site Coverage Plots are based on our current Atoll RF Design Tool that shows the preferred design of AT&T 4G-LTE Network Coverage.
 The propagation referenced in this package is based on Existing and Proposed 4G-LTE Coverage of AT&T users in buildings, in vehicles, and outdoors. The threshold for reliable in-building coverage is based on a signal strength necessary to reliably and consistently make voice calls and use applications indoors, taking into consideration the built and natural environment. The threshold for reliable in-vehicle coverage is based on known signal attenuation from an outdoor signal to the inside of a vehicle. The threshold for reliable outdoor coverage is based on a signal strength necessary to reliably and consistently make voice calls and use applications outdoors taking into consideration the built and natural environment.  For your reference, the scale shown ranges from Reliable to Unreliable Coverage for AT&T users in buildings, in vehicles, and outdoors.
 The Coverage Plots shown in the following slides are based on the following criteria:
 Existing 4G-LTE Coverage Before the Proposed Site: Assuming all other existing neighboring sites are On-Air and the Proposed Site is Off-Air, the propagation is displayed with the legends provided.  Planned 4G-LTE Coverage With the Proposed Site: Assuming all other existing neighboring sites along with the Proposed Site are On-Air, the propagation is displayed with the legends provided.  Standalone 4G-LTE Coverage of the Proposed Site: Assuming all other existing neighboring sites are Off-Air and only the Proposed Site is On-Air, the propagation is displayed with the legends provided.

Proposed S ite CLL04583 (T errain Map)

Proposed S ite CLL04583 (Road Map)

Existing 4G-LT E Coverage Before Proposed S ite CLL04583 Coverage levels:

Planned 4G-LT E Coverage With Proposed S ite CLL04583 On Air Coverage levels:

Standalone 4G-LT E Coverage Of Proposed Site CLL04583
Coverage levels:

Coverage Legend
Reliable indoor, in -vehicle and outdoor coverage: In general, the areas shown in green should have the most coverage and the strongest signal strength and be sufficient for reliable in -building service and connection to the AT&T wireless network. Howeve r, inbuilding coverage can and will be adversely affected by the thickness/construction type of walls, and the user’s location in the building (i.e., in the basement, in the middle of the building with multiple walls, etc.) Unreliable indoor / Reliable in -vehicle and outdoor: The areas shown in yellow should have sufficient coverage and signal strength for reliable device usage in vehicles and outdoors but will not have adequate coverage or signal strength for reliable in -building usage.

Unreliable indoor and in -vehicle / Reliable outdoor: The areas shown in purple should have sufficient coverage and signal strength for reliable device usage outdoors only and will not have adequate coverage or signal strength for reliable in -building or in -vehicle usage.

RESOLUTION NO. 24-12

A RESOLUTION OF THE FOUNTAIN VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION

ADOPTING A NOTICE OF EXEMPTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AND DENYING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) NO. 1933 FOR AT&T TO INSTALL

AN UNMANNED WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON AN

EXISTING SCE TRANSMISSION TOWER LOCATED ON THE NORTH

SIDE OF TALBERT AVENUE, EAST OF NEWLAND STREET, AND EAST OF 9610 CAPE CANAVERAL AVE
WHEREAS, the Telecom Act of 1996 provides that cities retain the right to reasonably regulate telecommunication facilities, etc.; and WHEREAS, pursuant to said authority and the authority of Chapter 21.28 (Wireless Communications) the City has established standards for wireless communications facilities; and
WHEREAS, Will Kazimi with Smartlink Group on behalf of AT&T Mobility has submitted an application for a Conditional Use Permit to establish and operate a wireless telecommunications facility on an existing SCE transmission tower located on the north side of Talbert Avenue, east of Newland Street, and east of 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 21.28.020 of the Fountain Valley Municipal Code (FVMC), the antennas and associated equipment are defined as a wireless telecommunications facility; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted (renderings, diagrams, plot plans, simulations, etc.) providing the evidence needed to make the findings for Conditional Use Permit, etc.; and
WHEREAS, on January 10, 2025, notice of the January 22, 2025 Planning Commission public hearing was mailed to all property owners and occupants within 1,000 feet of the project site and was posted at City Hall and the Recreation Center; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that the proposed wireless telecommunications facility is not consistent with the requirements in Chapter

21.28.040 for wireless facilities to be fully assimilated to its surroundings; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that the proposed Conditional Use Permit is not consistent with the Fountain Valley General Plan.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AND DETERMINE AS FOLLOWS:

Resolution No. 24-12
CUP No. 1933

SECTION 1
The Planning Commission finds that due notice of the public hearings in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 10200 Slater Avenue, was given as required by the Fountain Valley Municipal Code (FVMC), Title 21, and the Statutes of the State of California.

SECTION 2
Pursuant to Section 21.28.090(e) Findings. Approval of a wireless telecommunication facility allowed in this chapter shall require that the following findings be made. These are in addition to any applicable sections or criteria outlined in this code. The commission shall determine that:
(1) There is adequate space on the property for the antenna and accessory wireless equipment without conflict with existing structures on the property, or reducing required parking, landscaping or other development standards.

The equipment enclosure is proposed on the sloping hillside, where the enclosure floor needs to be level. This design creates a void of space underneath the proposed enclosure that is sealed from entry by extending the enclosure walls to the base, on the north, south, and east elevation. The 8-foot-tall screen wall is designed to follow the contour of the hillside; by doing this, however, increases the size of the enclosure wall, which increases the visible size and presence of the ground-mounted equipment enclosure (Detail #1, East Elevation, Sheet A-5 – Attachment #3 to the staff report).
(2) The design and placement of the antenna and accessory wireless equipment will not adversely impact the use of the property, other structures located on the property or the surrounding area or neighborhood;
The proposed design of the facility consists of the panel antennas attached to the SCE transmission tower and the equipment enclosure at the base of the transmission tower located within the tower’s footprint. The areas sloped topography, along with the low-covering vine landscaping, inhibit recreational use of this area of the SCE utility corridor, providing visual open space with no additional above ground structures in the SCE corridor. The proposed enclosure, even with added faux ivy on the exterior of the enclosure, would be an additional visible structure in the SCE easement, and would not enhance the visual quality of the neighborhood, and would bring more visual blight to the area with utilitarian structures that reduce visual pleasure.
(3) The antenna and accessory wireless equipment as proposed are consistent with the intent of Section 21.28 and comply with the general standards for wireless telecommunication facilities and any special standards;

Resolution No. 24-12
CUP No. 1933

The project does not comply with all applicable standards and requirement of Section 21.28, Wireless Communications. Specifically, the project is not assimilated or stealth as required by the standards outlined in FVMC 21.28.040; specifically the following:
(g) Visual Impact. Wireless telecommunication facilities shall be located, installed and mounted in a manner to minimize, to the greatest extent possible, the visibility of the antennas and equipment.

As described earlier in this report, there will be an increased visual impact with the proposed above-ground equipment enclosure at the base of the SCE tower which causes added visual blight and detracts from the visual pleasure provided by the open space in the SCE utility easement. (i) Screening. Antennas and accessory wireless equipment, if visible, shall be screened with a solid wall and/or landscaping to the greatest extent possible. The base shall be landscaped to screen equipment cabinets or the equipment cabinets shall be architecturally compatible with adjacent buildings. All landscaping screening shall be required to be maintained and replaced if necessary, by the applicant or property owner as long as the associated antenna or wireless equipment is in use.

The proposed antennas will not be screened due to the nature of the existing SCE transmission tower. The proposed antennas would be painted to match the existing tower, but are still visible to the public as they would be attached to the steel structure. The proposed equipment enclosure at the base of the SCE tower would consist of a walled enclosure with a faux brick veneer applied to the exterior. The applicant has provided one (1) elevation with faux ivy that could be applied to all four (4) of the exterior walls of the enclosure to give the look of landscaping, should the project be approved. SCE has indicated they will not approve live landscaping underneath their towers for reasons including maintenance and liability. (j) Stealthing. All wireless telecommunications facilities shall be stealth unless exempted by federal or state law. Stealthing shall include concealment of any component of the wireless facility. Examples include, but are not limited to, "monopines," flagpoles or windmills designed to conceal wireless communication equipment and those applications where wireless communication equipment is contained within another structure such as a scoreboard or sign. Wireless communication facilities in the public right-ofway shall be subject to the requirements of Section 21.28.100. A wireless communications facility that is not fully assimilated to its surroundings shall be prohibited.

Resolution No. 24-12
CUP No. 1933

The stealth requirement here cannot be meet with exposed antennas that are clearly visible to the public at attached to the tower at 54 feet above grade. As previously described, the proposed design of the equipment enclosure does not result in an installation that would blend into the existing landscape or topography and is clearly visible to residential with a setback of 53 feet to the property line at the east elevation.

Additionally, the project does not comply with FVMC 21.28.050.d – Special standards for freestanding, ground-mounted wireless communications facilities on private property.
(d) Freestanding wireless telecommunication facilities shall be set back at least one hundred feet from any parcel with residential uses. The onehundred-foot setback may be reduced subject to review and approval by a conditional use permit.

The proposed facility is located on the existing SCE transmission tower and will be located 53 feet from the east residential property line and 70 feet away from the residential home at 8618 El Cerro Cir.

SECTION 3
Findings and Supporting Facts: - The Planning Commission finds that the subject application does not meet the criteria for a Conditional Use Permit found in Chapter 21.36 of the Fountain Valley Municipal Code as follows:

1. The proposed use is allowed within the respective zoning district with the approval of a conditional use permit and complies with all other applicable provisions of this title and this code;
The proposed use is allowed within the Parks and Open Space zoning district with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit; however, the Project does not comply with all other applicable provisions of the Development Code and the Municipal Code. As detailed in Section 2 of this resolution, and subject to FVMC Section

21.28.090(e) Findings, the planning commission must make four (4) findings in addition to any applicable sections or criteria outlined in the code. If the planning commission is unable to make all four (4) of the findings, then the permit shall be denied.

2. The proposed use is consistent with the actions, goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan and any applicable specific plan.

The project is not consistent with General Plan Goal LU-1 and Policy LU-1.1 which requires that new development to be located, scaled, buffered, and designed to minimize negative impacts on existing conforming uses and adjacent neighborhoods. As outlined in the Staff Report, the proposed facility would be located 70 feet from the nearest building on an R1, single-family property and

Resolution No. 24-12
CUP No. 1933

would be visually out of character for the SCE utility corridor that consists of natural vegetation, and no above-ground structures other than the two (2) SCE transmission towers.

3. The design, location, shape, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed use are compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity.

The existing SCE tower is located within an SCE utility corridor running through the city from the north and south, east of Newland Street and west of Magnolia Street. The city benefits from an access easement throughout the SCE utility corridor that provides visual and recreational open space. The proposed facility would attach antennas on the existing SCE utility tower, which makes use of the existing utility tower structure, rather than building new vertical structures.

However, an equipment enclosure located at the base of the SCE tower, with an 8-foot-tall wall with brick veneer is proposed. The topography of the site and area below the SCE tower slopes down towards the single-family homes to the east, specifically two (2) properties located at 8678 and 8679 El Cerro Cir. that back up to the SCE corridor. The equipment enclosure would be most visible at this location. The existing SCE tower and proposed AT&T facility is approximately 70 feet to the west of the single-family home at 8678 El Cerro Cir, and 53 feet from the block wall. Due to the slope underneath the tower, the equipment enclosure is proposed on a platform built up to provide a floor level at the higher grade to the west. This creates a void of space underneath the platform and to conceal and secure the opening, the walled enclosure would extend to the ground following the slope. This creates a large, flat wall facing the homes to the east, which is a larger surface area than the three (3) other elevations. Thus, the most visually impactful elevation of the proposed facility faces the single-family homes to the east, at a distance from 70 feet away.

4. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use being proposed including the provision of public access (e.g., width and pavement type), facilities, and utilities (e.g., drainage, fire protection, sewers, water), shape, size, the absence of physical constraints, and compatibility with adjoining land uses.

An existing driveway serving the SCE utility easement provides primary access to the site from Talbert Avenue for maintenance purposes. Utilities, drainage, and other necessary facilities are available where the utility tower is located.

5. Granting the Conditional Use Permit would not be detrimental to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or welfare, or injurious to persons, property, or improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which the property is located.

Based upon the Telecommunications Act of 1996, local governments cannot regulate the placement of wireless communications facilities on the basis of the environmental health effects of RF emissions. Additionally, wireless facilities are subject to continued compliance with FCC regulations in the future. Therefore, the project is not detrimental to public health, safety or welfare.

Resolution No. 24-12
CUP No. 1933

6. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s Environmental Review Procedures.

The proposed project has been reviewed for compliance with CEQA per Section 4 below.

SECTION 4
Pursuant to Article 18 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15270(a), CEQA does not apply to projects that a public agency rejects or disapproves. Because this is a resolution to deny CUP 1933, it falls within the scope of CEQA Guidelines 15270(a), and no CEQA action is necessary at this time.

SECTION 5
The Planning Commission hereby denies Conditional Use Permit No. 1933 for AT&T to install an unmanned wireless telecommunications facility on an existing SCE transmission tower located on the north side of Talbert Avenue, east of Newland Street, and east of 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2025. ______________________________ ______________________________ Chairman Secretary

E/O 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave
Fountain Valley CA 92708
CLL04583
SCE M9-T2 OH-7011230
Accuracy of photo simulation based upon information provided by project applicant.

Proposed Looking northeast from Talbert Avenue
View 1
Existing
proposed antennas and rrh units
proposed equipment enclosure
with faux ivy
©2024 Google Maps

Accuracy of photo simulation based upon information provided by project applicant.

Proposed Looking northwest from Talbert Avenue
View 2
Existing
proposed antennas and rrh units
E/O 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave
Fountain Valley CA 92708
CLL04583
SCE M9-T2 OH-7011230
©2024 Google Maps

Accuracy of photo simulation based upon information provided by project applicant.

Proposed Looking southwest from El Cerro Court
View 3
Existing
proposed antennas and rrh units
E/O 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave
Fountain Valley CA 92708
CLL04583
SCE M9-T2 OH-7011230
©2024 Google Maps

RESOLUTION NO. ______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AFFIRMING THE
PLANNING COMMISSION’S APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION
NO. 24-12, DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1933 FOR AN

UNMANNED WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICAITONS FACILITY ON AN

EXISTING SCE TRANSMISSION TOWER LOCATED ON THE NORTH

SIDE OF TALBERT AVENUE, EAST OF NEWLAND STREET, AND
EAST OF 9610 CAPE CANAVERAL AVE
WHEREAS, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 provides that cities retain the right to reasonably regulate telecommunication facilities, etc.; and WHEREAS, pursuant to said authority and the authority of Chapter 21.28 (Wireless Communications) the City has established standards for wireless communications facilities; and
WHEREAS, on April 8, 2024, an application was submitted by Will Kazimi with Smartlink Group on behalf of AT&T Mobility (“Applicant”) for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to establish and operate a wireless telecommunications facility on an existing SCE transmission tower located on the north side of Talbert Avenue, east of Newland Street, and east of 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave; and
WHEREAS, Fountain Valley Municipal Code (FVMC) Section 21.12.030 Table 2-8, states that wireless telecommunication facilities are allowed uses with a CUP, subject to the provisions in FVMC Chapter 21.28 – Wireless Communications; and WHEREAS, the Fountain Valley Planning Commission considered the proposed Project at its noticed public hearing on January 22, 2025; and WHEREAS, testimony was received from the applicant and public regarding the proposed Project; and
WHEREAS, on January 22, 2025, the Planning Commission considered the information presented by the Community Development Department, the applicant, and a member of the public, and ultimately voted to deny the application (by a vote of 4-0-1; Commissioner Azzam abstained) to deny CUP 1933; and
WHEREAS, on January 28, 2025, New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC, (“Appellant”), filed an appeal in accordance with FVMC 21.60 on the Planning Commission’s decision to deny CUP 1933; and
WHEREAS, per FVMC Section 21.60.050(f), an appeal hearing shall be considered a hearing de novo and the review authority may consider any issue(s) associated with the appeal, in addition to the specific grounds for the appeal. When reviewing an appeal, the review authority may:

Resolution No. ______

(A) By resolution, affirm, affirm in part or reverse the action, the determination, or decision that is the subject of the appeal;
(B) Adopt additional conditions of approval deemed reasonable and necessary, and may even address issues or concerns that go beyond the subject of the appeal; or (C) Disapprove the land use entitlement approved by the previous review authority, even though the appellant only requested a modification or elimination of one or more conditions of approval.
(2) If new or different evidence is presented on appeal, the commission or council, may, but shall not be required to, refer the matter to the director or commission, as applicable, for further consideration.

WHEREAS, per FVMC Section 21.60.050(g), when reviewing an appeal the review authority shall adopt findings in support of the intended action on the appeal. The nature of the findings shall be in compliance with the findings adopted by the original review authority (e.g., Conditional Use Permit—Chapter 21.36, Precise Plan of Design—Chapter 21.44, Variance—Chapter 21.50, etc.); and
WHEREAS, notices for the March 4, 2025 City Council meeting were mailed out to the property owners and occupants within 1,000-feet of the subject location, in accordance with FVMC Section 21.60.050(a)(3); and
WHEREAS, the appeal was originally scheduled to be heard by City Council on March 4, 2025, and was continued to the specific date of March 18, 2025; and WHEREAS, on March 18, 2025, the City Council took testimony from the Appellant and their representatives and the public; and
WHEREAS, the City Council voted ____ to _____
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1
The City Council finds that due notice of the public hearings in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 10200 Slater Avenue, was given as required by the FVMC, Title 21, and the Statutes of the State of California.

SECTION 2
Findings and Supporting Facts: Pursuant to Section 21.28.090(e) Findings. Approval of a wireless telecommunication facility allowed in this chapter shall require that findings be made in addition to any applicable sections or criteria outlined in the FVMC. The City Council does hereby determine that:

Resolution No. ______

(1) There is adequate space on the property for the antenna and accessory wireless equipment without conflict with existing structures on the property, or reducing required parking, landscaping or other development standards.

The equipment enclosure is proposed on the sloping hillside, where the enclosure floor needs to be level. This design creates a void of space underneath the proposed enclosure that is sealed from entry by extending the enclosure walls to the base, on the north, south, and east elevation. The 8-foot-tall screen wall is designed to follow the contour of the hillside; by doing this, however, increases the size of the enclosure wall, which increases the visible size and presence of the ground-mounted equipment enclosure (Detail #1, East Elevation, Sheet A-5 – Attachment #3 to the staff report).
(2) The design and placement of the antenna and accessory wireless equipment will not adversely impact the use of the property, other structures located on the property or the surrounding area or neighborhood;
The proposed design of the facility consists of the panel antennas attached to the SCE transmission tower and the equipment enclosure at the base of the transmission tower located within the tower’s footprint. The areas sloped topography, along with the low-covering vine landscaping, inhibit recreational use of this area of the SCE utility corridor, providing visual open space with no additional above ground structures in the SCE corridor. The proposed enclosure, even with added faux ivy on the exterior of the enclosure, would be an additional visible structure in the SCE easement, and would not enhance the visual quality of the neighborhood, and would bring more visual blight to the area with utilitarian structures that reduce visual pleasure.
(3) The antenna and accessory wireless equipment as proposed are consistent with the intent of Section 21.28 and comply with the general standards for wireless telecommunication facilities and any special standards; The project does not comply with all applicable standards and requirement of Section 21.28, Wireless Communications. Specifically, the project is not assimilated or stealth as required by the standards outlined in FVMC 21.28.040; specifically the following:
(g) Visual Impact. Wireless telecommunication facilities shall be located, installed and mounted in a manner to minimize, to the greatest extent possible, the visibility of the antennas and equipment.

As described earlier in this report, there will be an increased visual impact with the proposed above-ground equipment enclosure at the base of the SCE tower which causes added visual blight and detracts from the visual pleasure provided by the open space in the SCE utility easement. (i) Screening. Antennas and accessory wireless equipment, if visible, shall be screened with a solid wall and/or landscaping to the greatest extent possible.

Resolution No. ______

The base shall be landscaped to screen equipment cabinets or the equipment cabinets shall be architecturally compatible with adjacent buildings. All landscaping screening shall be required to be maintained and replaced if necessary, by the applicant or property owner as long as the associated antenna or wireless equipment is in use.

The proposed antennas will not be screened due to the nature of the existing SCE transmission tower. The proposed antennas would be painted to match the existing tower, but are still visible to the public as they would be attached to the steel structure. The proposed equipment enclosure at the base of the SCE tower would consist of a walled enclosure with a faux brick veneer applied to the exterior. The applicant has provided one (1) elevation with faux ivy that could be applied to all four (4) of the exterior walls of the enclosure to give the look of landscaping, should the project be approved. SCE has indicated they will not approve live landscaping underneath their towers for reasons including maintenance and liability.
(j) Stealthing. All wireless telecommunications facilities shall be stealth unless exempted by federal or state law. Stealthing shall include concealment of any component of the wireless facility. Examples include, but are not limited to, "monopines," flagpoles or windmills designed to conceal wireless communication equipment and those applications where wireless communication equipment is contained within another structure such as a scoreboard or sign. Wireless communication facilities in the public right-of-way shall be subject to the requirements of Section 21.28.100. A wireless communications facility that is not fully assimilated to its surroundings shall be prohibited.

The stealth requirement here cannot be meet with exposed antennas that are clearly visible to the public at attached to the tower at 54 feet above grade. As previously described, the proposed design of the equipment enclosure does not result in an installation that would blend into the existing landscape or topography and is clearly visible to residential with a setback of 53 feet to the property line at the east elevation.

Additionally, the project does not comply with FVMC 21.28.050.d – Special standards for freestanding, ground-mounted wireless communications facilities on private property.
(d) Freestanding wireless telecommunication facilities shall be set back at least one hundred feet from any parcel with residential uses. The onehundred-foot setback may be reduced subject to review and approval by a conditional use permit.

The proposed facility is located on the existing SCE transmission tower and will be located 53-feet from the east residential property line and 70-feet away from the residential home at 8618 El Cerro Cir.

Resolution No. ______

SECTION 3
Findings and Supporting Facts: The City Council finds that the subject application, as denied by the Planning Commission on January 22, 2025 in Resolution No. 24-12, did not meet the criteria for a CUP found in Chapter 21.36 of the FVMC as follows:

1. The proposed use is allowed within the respective zoning district with the approval of a conditional use permit and complies with all other applicable provisions of this title and this code;
The proposed use is allowed within the Parks and Open Space zoning district with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit; however, the Project does not comply with all other applicable provisions of the Development Code and the Municipal Code. As detailed in Section 2 of this resolution, and subject to FVMC Section 21.28.090(e) Findings, the planning commission must make four (4) findings in addition to any applicable sections or criteria outlined in the code. If the planning commission is unable to make all four (4) of the findings, then the permit shall be denied.

2. The proposed use is consistent with the actions, goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan and any applicable specific plan;
The project is not consistent with General Plan Goal LU-1 and Policy LU-1.1 which requires that new development to be located, scaled, buffered, and designed to minimize negative impacts on existing conforming uses and adjacent neighborhoods.

As outlined in the Staff Report, the proposed facility would be located 70-feet from the nearest building on an R1, single-family property and would be visually out of character for the SCE utility corridor that consists of natural vegetation, and no aboveground structures other than the two (2) SCE transmission towers.

3. The design, location, shape, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed use are compatible with the existing and future land uses in the vicinity; The existing SCE tower is located within an SCE utility corridor running through the city from the north and south, east of Newland Street and west of Magnolia Street.

The city benefits from an access easement throughout the SCE utility corridor that provides visual and recreational open space. The proposed facility would attach antennas on the existing SCE utility tower, which makes use of the existing utility tower structure, rather than building new vertical structures. However, an equipment enclosure located at the base of the SCE tower, with an 8-foot-tall wall with brick veneer is proposed. The topography of the site and area below the SCE tower slopes down towards the single-family homes to the east, specifically two (2) properties located at 8678 and 8679 El Cerro Cir. that back up to the SCE corridor. The equipment enclosure would be most visible at this location. The existing SCE tower and proposed AT&T facility is approximately 70 feet to the west of the single-family home at 8678 El Cerro Cir, and 53-feet from the block wall. Due to the slope underneath the tower, the equipment enclosure is proposed on a platform built up to provide a floor level at the higher grade to the west.

Resolution No. ______

This creates a void of space underneath the platform and to conceal and secure the opening, the walled enclosure would extend to the ground following the slope. This creates a large, flat wall facing the homes to the east, which is a larger surface area than the three (3) other elevations. Thus, the most visually impactful elevation of the proposed facility faces the single-family homes to the east, at a distance from 70 feet away.

4. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and density/intensity of use being proposed including the provision of public access (e.g., width and pavement type), facilities, and utilities (e.g., drainage, fire protection, sewers, water), shape, size, the absence of physical constraints, and compatibility with adjoining land uses; An existing driveway serving the SCE utility easement provides primary access to the site from Talbert Avenue for maintenance purposes. Utilities, drainage, and other necessary facilities are available where the utility tower is located.

5. Granting the Conditional Use Permit would not be detrimental to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or welfare, or injurious to persons, property, or improvements in the vicinity and zoning district in which the property is located; and Based upon the Telecommunications Act of 1996, local governments cannot regulate the placement of wireless communications facilities on the basis of the environmental health effects of RF emissions. Additionally, wireless facilities are subject to continued compliance with FCC regulations in the future. Therefore, the project is not detrimental to public health, safety or welfare.

6. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the city's environmental review procedures.

Pursuant to Article 18 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15270(a), CEQA does not apply to projects that a public agency rejects or disapproves. Because this resolution denies Conditional Use Permit 1933, it falls within the scope of CEQA Guideline 15270(a), and no CEQA compliance is necessary.

SECTION 4
While Sections 2 and 3 of this resolution describe multiple findings required by Title 21 - Zoning Ordinance, which the City Council hereby determines cannot be made, the City Council’s inability to make any one of the findings listed above prevents the City Council from approving the proposed project.

Resolution No. ______

SECTION 6
The City Council hereby upholds the Planning Commission’s approval of Resolution No. 24-12, Denying CUP 1933 for AT&T Mobility to install an unmanned wireless telecommunications facility on an existing SCE transmission tower located on the north side of Talbert Avenue, east of Newland Street, and east of 9610 Cape Canaveral Ave. ____________________________
Ted Bui, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________
Rick Miller, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

HARPER & BURNS LLP
__________________________
Attorneys for the City

CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY

CITY COUNCIL

COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST
To: Honorable Mayor and Agenda Date: March 18, 2025
Members of the City Council
SUBJECT: Approve the Proposed 2025 Legislative Platform Three-Year Strategic Goals
☒ Enhance the culture and environment of “A Nice Place to Live” ☒ Achieve fiscal stability by evaluating processes, and attract and retain revenue producing businesses/opportunities
☒ Attract and retain quality staff through best practices and trends ☒ Maintain, build, and modernize infrastructure to support growth and future needs of the City
☐ Not applicable
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

At the March 4, 2025, City Council meeting, the City Council requested this item be continued for an explanation for an item on the Legislative Platform. The item in question was “Support Legislation that promotes inclusion and equality to obtaining public education”. Staff is requesting that this item be removed from the Legislative Platform as it is education-based and does not exactly align with the Recreation and Community Services platform.

The City Council adopted a revised Legislative Monitoring Program Policy on May 6, 2014, which was originally adopted on May 24, 1999. This policy serves multiple purposes: to establish a Legislative Committee; to provide a general policy framework for the Committee to analyze and take positions on active legislation; and set forth a general communication guide for ensuring the entire City Council stays informed. To proactively enable City staff to respond to fast-moving and quickly changing legislation, the policy also incorporated an annual Legislative Platform. Staff is proposing the adoption of the proposed 2024 Legislative Platform to be responsive on legislation that may impact the City. The Legislative Committee met on February 20, 2025, and February 24, 2025, and is recommending the approval of the proposed 2025 Legislative Platform.

DISCUSSION:

The current Legislative Monitoring Program Policy, adopted by the City Council on May 6, 2014, was established to improve the City’s response to active legislation that concerned specific policy areas (see Attachment No. 1). The procedure set forth calls for the annual appointment of two City Council members, by the Mayor, to the Legislative Committee. This

Approve the Proposed 2024 Legislative Platform
March 18, 2025

Committee currently consists of Council Member Kim Constantine and Vice Mayor Jim Cunneen and, on an annual basis, will recommend a Legislative Platform covering general policies on fiscal, transportation, environmental, liability or risk management, personnel, and community development to the City Council for adoption. The adoption of an annual Legislative Platform is a common practice for a legislative body to proactively set forth the policies it wishes to support or oppose. Through the adoption of more defined broad policy statements staff would be able to respond faster to quick-moving legislation in the Capitol.

The Committee will also meet on an as-needed basis during the legislative sessions to discuss active legislation that is not accounted for in the City’s current Legislative Platform. During these as-needed meetings, staff will present the Committee with the facts and analysis of the active legislation and seek direction from the Committee as to any positions and/or actions to take. Following that, staff will memorialize the Committee’s direction and if no comments or concerns are heard from other City Council Members, appropriate actions such as issuing letters to our legislators will be taken.

The proposed 2025 Legislative Platform (see Attachment No. 2) has been drafted with consideration to legislative policies of the existing Legislative Monitoring Program, the League of California Cities legislative policies, input from all City departments, and input from the City’s Legislative Committee. Any active legislation with policy matter that falls outside of the strict confines of the Legislative Platform will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis by the Legislative Committee as discussed earlier.

FISCAL REVIEW:

There is no fiscal impact related to this item. As bills are introduced and the City considers positions, each bill will be analyzed for any fiscal impact it may have. In keeping with the Policy statements of the Legislative Monitoring Program, the City will generally support the protection of our revenues and oppose bills that have potential costs increase.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:

Not applicable.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REVIEW:

Not applicable.

ATTORNEY REVIEW:

The proposed 2025 Legislative Platform does not contain legal impacts. As bills are introduced and the City consider positions, each bill will be analyzed for their legal impact to the City and the Attorney for the City will be consulted as needed.

ALTERNATIVES:

Alternative No. 1: Approve the proposed 2025 Legislative Platform.

Alternative No. 2: Do not approve the proposed 2025 Legislative Platform and recommend changes to the proposed 2025 Legislative Platform.

Approve the Proposed 2024 Legislative Platform
March 18, 2025

Alternative No. 3: Take no action and have the Legislative Committee review all potential legislative items.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff is requesting City Council approval of Alternative No. 1 to approve the proposed 2025 Legislative Platform.

Prepared by: Rick Miller, City Clerk
Reviewed By: Omar Dadabhoy, Deputy City Manager / Community Development Director
Approved by: Maggie Le, City Manager
Attachments:

1. Adopted Legislative Monitoring Program

2. Proposed 2025 Legislative Platform Redline

3. Proposed 2025 Legislative Platform Clean

1 CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY
202543 LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM
Administrative and Employment Related
 Support legislation modifying the Fair Labor Standards Act to permit adjustable work schedules to meet the needs of management and labor and to eliminate prospective and retroactive overtime payments.
 Support legislation that strengthens or reinforces management rights to include contracting and contract negotiations.
 Support legislation that reduces the City’s liability exposure.  Support legislation promoting alternative technology options when posting and noticing of public hearings and meetings, including online posting, at no cost to the City
 Support legislation that advocates fair and proportionate representation on countywide and regional boards.
 Support legislation to continue the PEPRA system or similar measure.  Support legislation that would define the term “limited duration” when hiring for “extra help” positions.
 Oppose legislation which would increase employee benefits without system reforms which would offset increased employer costs.
 Oppose legislation which would increase employer liability for unemployment compensation, or which would reduce local discretion to manage this risk.  Oppose the imposition of unfunded or inadequately funded state mandates.  Oppose any measure that would divert local funds to the State, or any other entity, to balance its budget.

Recreation & Community Services
 Support legislation that provides funding for transportation services especially for senior citizens, local job-training programs especially for youth and young adults.
 Support legislation that promotes health & wellness for children and seniors, when financially feasible.
 Support measures that promote volunteerism.
 Support legislation and funding for the construction, rehabilitation and maintenance of public facilities, parks and open space at the local, State and Federal levels.
 Support Federal and State funding legislation and other opportunities that promote health and wellness services and education offered to youth, veterans, low income and senior communities.
 Support legislation that promotes inclusion and equality to obtaining public education.
 Support Federal and State funding opportunities that promote our ability to provide public access to technology at community facilities.

2  Support legislation that provides funding for, or otherwise promotes programs to address and increase the level of physical activity among our community’s children.
 Support legislation to provide flexibility to use Parking-in-lieu fees for other infrastructure projects.
 Support efforts to provide an expedited process for the fair distribution of State bond funds and other grant opportunities.
 Oppose efforts that erode funding for vital regional and community services that negatively impact California’s access to parks, open space, bike lanes, after school programming, senior services, facilities that promote physical activity, protect natural resources and strengthen safety and security.  Oppose legislation limiting Fountain Valley’s ability to address homeless issues.  Oppose all efforts of social service and program realignment where funding has not been fully appropriated.

Environment
 Support measure which increase the water supply or improve water quality within the region.
 Support efforts that encourage the use of energy and water conservation techniques, as long as those measures do not contain unnecessary punitive measures to residents, business owners and local agencies.  Support legislation that would protect consumers and small business owners and end excessive energy and water charges.
 Support Federal and State programs and legislation that encourage the use of commercially viable, new clean energy technology, if such clean technology has proven to be cost efficient.
 Support measures that provide greater local control in meeting the environmental needs of the community (i.e. recycling/reclaiming of natural resources and energy efficiency measures).
 Support efforts designed to reduce or eliminate the spread of graffiti.  Support measures that maintain and enhance local authority and economic flexibility to regulate solid waste and recycles.
 Support efforts to streamline and improve the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process.
 Support legislation or grant opportunities for local governments that provide funding for development or enhancing alternative fueling stations for vehicles and energy efficiency upgrades to City facilities.
 Oppose legislation that imposes undue hardship on local agencies to implement environmental/air quality regulations.
 Oppose imposition of unreasonable and/or unfunded water testing and treatment requirements.

Housing, Land Use Planning, and Community Development and Economic Development

3  Support legislation that strengthens the concept of local control with regulatory tools to ensure the City can maintain its quality of life.  Support legislation that supports local businesses and industry, including measures that remove barriers allowing local industries to sell goods and services internationally (i.e., free trade agreements).  Support legislation and funding for the adoption of effective state building codes to promote community building safety and mitigation of natural hazards.  Support legislation that would increase available funding for affordable housing, especially funding for each community to meet the affordability requirement of the RHNA allocation within the eight-year housing element cycle and the express recognition that, absent funding, that the affordable RHNA allocations may be unattainable.
 Support Federal and State financial support for affordable housing for lowincome elderly and disabled individuals.  Support legislation that would provide additional resources, including adequate funding, to local agencies to address regional growth issues such as air quality, water quality, air pollution, ocean water quality, transportation corridors, and homelessness.
 Support efforts that restrict the legal and fiscal capability of local agencies to prepare, adopt and implement fiscal plans for orderly growth, development, beautification and conservation of local planning areas, including, but not limited to, the regulatory authority over zoning, subdivisions, annexations, and redevelopment areas.
 Support state and federal legislation that allows reasonable state and local government oversight of group/sober living home including licensing, location, and occupancy limits similar to state licensing requirements for Community Care Facilities.
 Support legislation allowing greater use of Housing Authority funds to construct and operate navigation centers.
 Support efforts that are designed to provide local governments with the tools necessary to bolster economic development.
 Support legislation and regulatory streamlining initiatives that would enhance the City’s ability to attract and retain businesses as well as encourage business expansion and job retention.
 Support legislation that supports and protects business owners.  Oppose any legislation that is inconsistent with the doctrine of home rule, interferes with local exercise of police powers over local land use, or requires a federal, state, and/or county entity to develop model planning practices and policies.
 Oppose legislation that preempts local government’s ability to regulate and exercise its enforcement powers.
 Oppose additional housing mandates without necessary funding or legislation that penalizes a city if units identified in the Regional Housing Need Assessment (RHNA) are not constructed.
 Oppose any legislation mandate that supersedes local development standards or denies local governments the ability to enforce its development standards.

4  Oppose legislation that mandates increases in density or reduction in parking standards in residential zones.
 Oppose legislation to decrease Federal Community Block Grant funding.  Oppose legislation that would require local governments to compensate property owners for the effects of zoning and ordinary local land use control.  Oppose legislation requiring local governments to allow residential uses in nonresidential zones.  Support Legislation that would authorize a local government to count congregate housing for the elderly toward the locality’s share of the regional housing needs allocation (RHNA).

Public Safety
 Support legislation and funding to strengthen and enforce legal protections for all individuals who are victims of human trafficking and crime, including minors and victims of family violence and sexual assault.
 Support legislative efforts to address the negative impacts of AB 109 (Public Safety Realignment), Proposition 47 (Reduced Penalties for Some Crimes) and Proposition 57 (Parole for Non-Violent Criminals) on local governments and provide local law enforcement with the appropriate tools to reduce criminal activity.
 Support legislation that provides funding support for disaster preparedness, earthquake preparedness, fire suppression and prevention, hazardous materials mitigation, rescue, emergency medical services, Homeland Security, State COPS program, booking fee reimbursement and other local law enforcement activities.
 Support legislation that provides local law enforcement agencies authority to recover any costs associated with complying with any federal, state or court‐ordered licensing, registration and testing requirements.  Support legislation to provide a greater share of and increased latitude to spend asset forfeiture funds.
 Support legislation and funding that promotes comprehensive and effective drug and alcohol education and rehabilitation programs.
 Support efforts to address the illicit use of opioids and hold accountable those who illegally sell and distribute them.
 Support legislative efforts and additional funding to help address the issue of homelessness.
 Support legislation that prohibits drones from interfering with a firefighting operation or other public safety response.
 Support legislation that enhances the 9-1-1 system integration with technology to trace cell phone callers and their location.
 Support legislation that would provide local jurisdictions with increased authority to regulate the sale of automobiles on public streets.
 Support legislation that establishes greater City Council latitude in setting speed limits.

5  Support legislation to vigorously oppose the early release of prisoners, except in cases of extreme health conditions (COVID).
 Support legislation that limits the issuance of alcoholic beverage licenses in areas of high crime or where excessive numbers of licenses exist.  Support legislative efforts to increase the amount of grant funding for local law enforcement operations, including school resource officers, body-worn camera system, and disaster preparedness initiatives.
 Support efforts which strengthen local fire and life safety services, including providing for greater local control over emergency medical and ambulance services to ensure the residents of Fountain Valley receive the highest possible level of emergency care.
 Support legislation that requires maintenance of defensible space in wildfireprone areas.  Support regional efforts to improve interoperability of voice and data communications equipment.
 Support legislation that would provide local jurisdictions with increased authority regulate the sale of automobiles on public streets.
 Support legislation that provides funding for terrorism response training, with broad interpretations of training curriculums.
 Support legislation that would provide increased funding to public safety agencies to enhance training to address community needs such as mental health and homelessness.
 Support legislation that offers drug offenders a chance to avoid a criminal conviction by entering a treatment program that is supervised by a special court, also known as a drug court. Drug court was essentially eliminated with proposition 47 and its elimination has led to more addicted individuals on our streets.
 Support legislation that recognizes mental health treatment non-compliance and addresses the state, county and/or city’s inability to detain and assist those individuals that are refusing to take prescribed medication for a mental health disorder.
 Support legislation that addresses the ongoing impact of wall times (Ambulance Patient Offload Delays) on patient care throughout California.  Support legislation and implementation of State program and policies that promote pedestrian and bicycling safety.
 Support legislation that provides more support to those struggling with substance and opioid abuse.
 Support legislation to prevent the flow of fentanyl into the City, including legislation regarding treatment for addiction and criminal penalties and prosecution for the sale of fentanyl.
 Support ongoing funding to bolster local efforts to support individuals experiencing or at risk of homelessness as well as strengthen state and local partnerships to improve access to wraparound services.
 Oppose legislation to create new financial burdens or erode public safety such as offenders who are now being supervised in the community by county probation

6 departments rather than the California of Corrections and Rehabilitation parole officers.
 Oppose legislation that would impede local law enforcement from addressing crime problems and recovering costs resulting from a crime committed by the guilty party.
 Oppose legislation that would decrease funding for the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program within the Department of Homeland Security.  Oppose legislation, which would eliminate abandoned vehicle programs and a local government’s ability to immediately remove abandoned vehicles.  Oppose legislation that would decrease funding to the various Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) programs.
 Oppose legislation, which would eliminate abandoned vehicle programs and a local government’s ability to immediately remove abandoned vehicles.  Oppose legislation that would allow public access to unencrypted, or sensitive law enforcement information over law enforcement communication systems. (Senate Bill 1000 was defeated in 2022 and will be resubmitted in 2023) Revenue and Taxation
 Support legislation that leads to greater financial independence from federal, state and/or county government, and protects local resources from seizure by federal, state and/or county agencies.
 Supports any measure that would provide greater local control over how local funds are expended.
 Support legislation and funding that preserves and enhances a positive business climate and maintains and grows the business tax base.
 Support legislation that would support new financing tools and programs that would encourage local economic development through tax increment financing.  Support efforts which make funds to support public facilities more available to local municipalities including, but not limited to libraries and open space.  Support legislation to stabilize State and local government financing, to increase funding to local agencies in an equitable manner, and to permit the most costefficient management of State-mandated programs.  Support Federal legislation which would require states to distribute Federal passthrough funds in an equitable manner to local subdivisions of the State.  Support legislation that would redistribute State and Federal revenues to better meet local government responsibilities.
 Support legislation that sources the sales tax generated from online sources to the City they are delivered to as opposed to the current County pool system.  Oppose legislative and administrative efforts by online travel companies to circumvent remittance of transient occupancy taxes to local governments from hotel reservations purchased using the internet.