The beginning of the Late Horizon is set variously at 1500 and 800 YBP, with a consensus for the shorter chronology. Increasing evidence suggests the importance of the Middle-Late Horizon transition (A.D. 800 to 1200) in the understanding of south-central California. This corresponds to the so-called Medieval Climatic Anomaly, a period of climatic instability that included major droughts and resulted in demographic disturbances across much of the west (Jones et al. 1999). It is also believed to have resulted in major population decline and abandonments across southcentral California, involving as much as 90 percent of the interior populations in some regions including the Carrizo Plain (Whitley et al. 2007). It is not clear whether site abandonment was accompanied by a true reduction in population or an agglomeration of the same numbers of people into fewer but larger villages. What is clear is that Middle Period villages and settlements were widely dispersed across the landscape; many at locations that lack contemporary evidence of fresh water sources. Late Horizon sites, in contrast, are typically located where fresh water was available during the historical period, if not currently.
370
Section 8, Item J.
2. Environmental and Cultural Background
Fowler Well Number 9 Project 9
The Late Horizon then can be best understood as a period of recovery from a major demographic collapse. One result is the development of regional archaeological cultures as the precursors to ethnographic Native California; suggesting that ethnographic life-ways recorded by anthropologists extend at least 800 years into the past.
The position of southern San Joaquin Valley prehistory relative to patterns seen in surrounding areas is still somewhat unknown. The presence of large lake systems in the valley bottoms can be expected to have mediated some of the desiccation seen elsewhere. But, as the reconstruction of Soda Lake in the Carrizo Plain demonstrates (see Whitley et al. 2007) environmental perturbations had serious impacts on lake systems too. Identifying certain of the prehistoric demographic trends for the southern San Joaquin Valley and determining how these trends (if present) correlate with those seen elsewhere, is a current important research objective.
2.4 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
Spanish explorers first visited the San Joaquin Valley in 1772, but its lengthy distance from the missions and presidios along the Pacific Coast delayed permanent settlement for many years, including during the Mexican period of control over the Californian region. In the 1840s, Mexican rancho owners along the Pacific Coast allowed their cattle to wander and graze in the San Joaquin Valley. The Mexican government granted the first ranchos in the southern part of the San Joaquin Valley in the early 1840s, but these did not result in permanent settlement. It was not until the annexation of California in 1848 that the exploitation of the southern San Joaquin Valley began (Pacific Legacy 2006).
The discovery of gold in northern California in 1848 resulted in a dramatic increase of population, consisting in good part of fortune seekers and gold miners, who began to scour other parts of the state. After 1851, when gold was discovered in the Sierra Nevada Mountains in eastern Kern County, the population of the area grew rapidly. Some new immigrants began ranching in the San Joaquin Valley to supply the miners and mining towns. Ranchers grazed cattle and sheep, and farmers dry-farmed or used limited irrigation to grow grain crops, leading to the creation of small agricultural communities throughout the valley (Caltrans 2007).
After the American annexation of California, the southern San Joaquin Valley became significant as a center of food production for this new influx of people in California. The expansive unfenced and principally public foothill spaces were well suited for grazing both sheep and cattle (Boyd 1997). As the Sierra Nevada gold rush presented extensive financial opportunities, ranchers introduced new breeds of livestock, consisting of cattle, sheep and pig (Boyd 1997).
With the increase of ranching in the southern San Joaquin came the dramatic change in the landscape, as non-native grasses more beneficial for grazing and pasture replaced native flora (Preston 1981). After the passing of the Arkansas Act in 1850, efforts were made to reclaim small tracts of land in order to create more usable spaces for ranching. Eventually, as farming supplanted ranching as a more profitable enterprise, large tracts of land began to be reclaimed for agricultural use, aided in part by the extension of the railroad in the 1870s (Pacific Legacy 2006). 371
Section 8, Item J.
2. Environmental and Cultural Background
10 Fowler Well Number 9 Project
Following the passage of state-wide ‘No-Fence’ laws in 1874, ranching practices began to decline, while farming expanded in the San Joaquin Valley in both large land holdings and smaller, subdivided properties. As the farming population grew, so did the demand for irrigation. Settlers began reclamation of swampland in 1866 and built small dams across the Kern River to divert water into the fields. By 1880, 86 different groups were taking water from the Kern River. Ten years later, 15 major canals provided water to thousands of acres in Kern County.
During the period of reclaiming unproductive land in the southern San Joaquin Valley, grants were given to individuals who had both the resources and the finances to undertake the operation alone.
One small agricultural settlement, founded by Colonel Thomas Baker in 1861 after procuring one such grant, took advantage of reclaimed swampland along the Kern River. This settlement became the City of Bakersfield in 1869, and quickly became the center of activity in the southern San Joaquin Valley, and in the newly formed Kern County. Located on the main stage road through the San Joaquin Valley, the town became a primary market and transportation hub for stock and crops, as well as a popular stopping point for travelers on the Los Angeles and Stockton Road.
The Southern Pacific Railroad reached the Bakersfield area in 1873, connecting it with important market towns elsewhere in the state, dramatically impacting both agriculture and oil production (Pacific Legacy 2006).
Three competing partnerships developed during this period which had a great impact on control of water, land reclamation and ultimately agricultural development in the San Joaquin Valley:
Livermore and Chester, Haggin and Carr, and Miller and Lux, perhaps the most famous of the enterprises. Livermore and Chester were responsible, among other things, for developing the large Hollister plow (three feet wide by two feet deep), pulled by a 40-mule team, which was used for ditch digging. Haggin and Carr were largely responsible for reclaiming the beds of the Buena Vista and Kern lakes, and for creating the Calloway Canal, which drained through the Rosedale area in Bakersfield to Goose Lake (Morgan 1914). Miller and Lux ultimately became one of the biggest private property holders in the country, controlling the rights to over 22,000 square miles. Miller and Lux’s impact extended beyond Kern County, however. They recognized early-on that control of water would have important economic implications, and they played a major role in the water development of the region
(http://www.mariposaresearch.net/santaclararesearch/SCBIOS/hmiller.html). They were also embroiled for many years in litigation against Haggin and Carr over control of the water rights to the Kern River.
The San Joaquin Valley was dominated by agricultural pursuits until the oil boom of the early 1900s, which saw a shift in the region, as some reclaimed lands previously used for farming were leased to oil companies. Nonetheless, the shift of the San Joaquin Valley towards oil production did not halt the continued growth of agriculture (Pacific Legacy 2006). The Great Depression of the 1930s brought with it the arrival of great number of migrants from the drought-affected Dust Bowl region, looking for agricultural labor. These migrants established temporary camps in the valley, staying on long past the end of the drought and the Great Depression, eventually settling in towns such as Bakersfield where their descendants live today (Boyd 1997).
The city of Fresno (originally “Fresno Station”), the county seat for Fresno County, located a short distance east of the APE, was founded in 1872 and incorporated in 1885. It was initially developed 372
Section 8, Item J.
2. Environmental and Cultural Background
Fowler Well Number 9 Project 11
as a railway station along the Central Pacific Railroad, but quickly expanded with the development of irrigation in the region. Farmers saw success with the cultivation of wheat, grapes, and cattle.
Eventually, Fresno County became one of the most agriculturally-rich counties in the United States (https://www.fresno.gov/darm/historic-preservation/history-of-fresno/).
Following the completion of the transcontinental railroad in 1869, the Central Pacific Railroad, predecessor to the Southern Pacific Railroad, began construction of a Central Valley route to connect southern California with the commerce center of the San Francisco Bay. The segment through Fowler was laid around 1872. Thomas Fowler, a State Senator from 1869–1872, owned the ranch where a railroad switch was built by the Central Pacific Railroad (HMdb.org 2010). The town developed around the railroad switch and became known as Fowler’s Switch. The Valley branch of the historic Southern Pacific Railroad is presently owned and operated by the Union Pacific Railroad. (State of California Office of Historic Preservation 2019). A post office branch was established in Fowler in 1882 (Durham 1998), the name was eventually shortened and the City of Fowler was incorporated in 1908 (CALAFCO 2013). In May 1973, Fowler’s Switch was registered as a California Point of Interest for its local significance to Fowler. The marker for the Fowler Switch is located at the intersection of East Merced Street and South 7th Street (City of Fowler 2022).
373
Section 8, Item J.
374
Section 8, Item J.
3. Archival Records Search
Fowler Well Number 9 Project 13
3. ARCHIVAL RECORDS SEARCH
In order to determine whether the Project study area had been previously surveyed for cultural resources, and/or whether any such resources were known within it, an archival records search was conducted by the staff of the SSJVIC on February 6th, 2023. This study is included in Confidential Appendix A of this report and is summarized below.
The records search was completed to determine: (i) if prehistoric or historical archaeological sites had previously been recorded within the study area; (ii) if the study area had been systematically surveyed by archaeologists prior to the initiation of this field study; and/or (iii) whether the surrounding region was known to contain archaeological sites and to thereby be archaeologically sensitive. Records examined included archaeological site files and maps, the NRHP, Historic Property Data File, California Inventory of Historic Resources, and the California Points of Historic Interest. The NAHC SLF were also searched to determine whether tribal cultural resources are present.
According to the IC records search (Confidential Appendix A), no previous studies have been conducted for the project area, and no resources of any kind are known to exist within it. According to the records search, three surveys have previously been conducted within 0.5-mi of the Project study area (Table 1) but there are no known resources located within a 0.5-mi radius of the Project.
Table 1. Survey Reports within 0.5-mi of the Study Area Report No Year Author (s)/Affiliation Title
FR-01636 1998 Price, Barry A. / Applied
EarthWorks, Inc.
Cultural Resources Assessment - Pacific Bell Mobile
Services Facility CV-520-04, Fowler, Fresno County,
California
FR-01837 2000 Billat, Lorna / EarthTouch, LLC. Nextel Communications Wireless Telecommunications Service Facility, Fresno County
FR-02108 2005 Martinez, Al / Michael Brandman
Associates
Request for SHPO Review of FCC Undertaking (FAT-054AFowler) An SLF request was reviewed by the NAHC on March 15th, 2023. The results for the SLF search were negative. Additionally, the NAHC provided a list of Native American tribes who have knowledge of the project area. ASM wrote to contacts provided by the NAHC for additional information pertaining to the project on February 24th, 2023 and March 15th, 2023. Additional follow-up emails were sent on March 27th, 2023. One response was received by the Traditional Choinumni Tribe stating that they have no knowledge of cultural resources, areas, or concerns within the project area. The results of the previous consultation are available in Confidential Appendix A.
375
Section 8, Item J.
376
Section 8, Item J.
4. Methods and Results
Fowler Well Number 9 Project 15
4. METHODS AND RESULTS
An intensive Phase I survey of the Fowler Well Number 9 Project study area was conducted by ASM Assistant Archaeologist Maria Silva, B.A. The field methods employed included intensive pedestrian examination of the ground surface for evidence of archaeological sites in the form of artifacts, surface features (such as bedrock mortars, historical mining equipment), and archaeological indicators (e.g., organically enriched midden soil, burnt animal bone); the identification and location of any discovered sites, should they be present; tabulation and recording of surface diagnostic artifacts; site sketch mapping; preliminary evaluation of site integrity; and site recording, following the California Office of Historic Preservation Instructions for Recording Historic Resources, using DPR 523 forms. Parallel survey transects spaced at 15-m intervals were employed for the inventory.
The study area was surveyed on February 14th, 2023. Soils throughout the study area are alluvial sandy loam with gravels. The study area currently consists of an excavated stormwater run-off catchment basin with a narrow collar of intact native soils along the perimeter of the property.
Vegetative cover was minimal and consisted of invasive weed species (see Figures 2a and 2b) and ground surface visibility overall can be considered very good and adequate for Phase I coverage.
4.1 INVENTORY RESULTS
No cultural resources of any kind were identified during the field survey. A substantial portion of the study area had been excavated to create the existing basin, and it is likely that much of the surrounding surface has been disturbed due to its location near a major intersection and surrounding suburban development, as well as potential infrastructural improvements on-site. 377
Section 8, Item J.
4. Methods and Results
16 Fowler Well Number 9 Project
Figure 2a: Fowler Well Number 9 Project study area looking toward the intersection of E.
South and Stanford Avenues. View toward the southwest.
Figure 2b: Fowler Well Number 9 Project study area looking toward residential areas along Stanford Avenue. View toward the northwest.
378
Section 8, Item J.
5. Summary and Recommendations
Fowler Well Number 9 17
5. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A Phase I survey was conducted for the Fowler Well Number 9 Project, Fresno County, California.
A records search was conducted at the SSJVIC, California State University, Bakersfield. This indicated that the study area had not been the subject of any previous studies and no previously identified resources were present. Three previous surveys have been conducted within 0.5-mi of the study area, but no resources had been recorded within that same radius. The NAHC Sacred Lands Files were also consulted with negative results. Outreach letters and follow-up emails were sent to tribal organizations on the NAHC contact list. One response wasreceived by the Traditional Choinumni Tribe stating that they have no knowledge of cultural resources, areas, or concerns within the project area.
The Phase I survey fieldwork was conducted with parallel transects spaced at 15-m intervals across the APE. No cultural resources of any kind were identified within the study area.
5.1 RECOMMENDATIONS
An intensive Phase I survey demonstrated that the Fowler Well Number 9 Project, Fresno County, California, does not contain significant or unique historical resources. A finding of No Significant Impact is recommended.
In the unlikely event that archaeological materials are discovered during construction of the project, it is recommended that a qualified archaeologist be contacted to evaluate the discovery. 379
Section 8, Item J.
380
Section 8, Item J.
References
Fowler Well Number 9 19
REFERENCES
Boyd, W.H.
1997 Lower Kern River Country 1850-1950: Wilderness to Empire. Kings River Press, Lemoore.
CALAFCO
2013 "California Cities by Incorporation Date". California Association of Local Agency Formation Commissions. Archived from the original MS Word document, retrieved April 12, 2023.
Caltrans
1999 General Guidelines for Identifying and Evaluating Historic Landscapes. Sacramento:
Caltrans.
2000 Water Conveyance Systems in California: Historic Context Development and Evaluation Procedures. Sacramento: Caltrans.
2007 A Historical Context and Archaeological Research Design for Agricultural Properties in California. Sacramento: Caltrans.
2008 A Historical Context and Archaeological Research Design for Mining Properties in California. Sacramento: Caltrans.
City of Fowler
2022 2040 General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report.
Cook, S. F.
1978 Historical Demography. In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8, California, R. F. Heizer, editor, pp. 91-98. Washington, D.C., Smithsonian Institute.
Driver, H.E.
1937 Cultural Element Distributions: VI, Southern Sierra Nevada. University of California Anthropological Records 1(2):53-154. Berkeley
Duke, Thomas Samuel
1910 Celebrated Criminal Cases of America. James H. Barry Company, San Francisco, California.
Elsasser, A.
1962 Indians of Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks. Three Rivers: Sequoia Natural History Association.
Fenenga, F.
1952 The Archaeology of the Slick Rock Village, Tulare County, California. American Antiquity 17:339-347.
381
Section 8, Item J.
References
20 Fowler Well Number 9 Project
Fredrickson, D.A. and J. Grossman
1977 A San Dieguito component at Buena Vista Lake, California. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 4:173-190.
Gayton, A.H.
1930 Yokuts-Mono Chiefs and Shamans. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 24. Berkeley, 361-420. 1948 Yokuts and Western Mono Ethnography. University of California Anthropological Records 10:1–290. Berkeley.
Gifford, E.W. and W.E. Schenck
1926 Archaeology of the Southern San Joaquin Valley. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 23(1):1-122.
Harrington, John Peabody
n.d. Yokuts ethnographic notes. National Anthropological Archives.
Hewes, G.
1941 Archaeological reconnaissance of the central San Joaquin Valley. American Antiquity 7:123-133.
The Historical Marker Database
2010 “Fowler's Switch”, www.hmdb.org/m.asp?m=26132; Accessed April 12, 2023.
Horne, S.P.
1981 The Inland Chumash: Ethnography, Ethnohistory and Archaeology. Ph.D. dissertation, UCSB. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.
Jones. T.L., G.M. Brown, L.M. Raab, J.L. McVickar, W.G. Spaulding. D.J. Kennett, A. York and P.L. Walker
1999 Demographic Crisis in Western North America during the Medieval Climatic Anomaly. Current Anthropology 40:137-170.
King, C., C. Smith and T. King
n.d. Archaeological Report Related to the Interpretation of Archaeological Resources Present at the Vasquez Rocks County Park. Report on file, UCLA AIC.
Kroeber, A.L.
1925 Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 78.
Washington, D.C.
Latta, F. F.
1976 Handbook of the Yokuts Indians. Bear State Books, Santa Cruz.
Moratto, M.
1984 California Archaeology. New York: Academic Press.
382
Section 8, Item J.
References
Fowler Well Number 9 21
Morgan, W.A.
1914 History of Kern County, California with Biographical Sketches. Los Angeles:
Historic Record Company.
Pacific Legacy, Inc.
2006 Southern San Joaquin Valley Oil Fields Comprehensive Study. Manuscript on file, BLM Bakersfield office.
Powers, Stephen
1971 The Yokuts Dance for the Dead. In R.F. Heizer and M.A. Whipple, editors, pp. 513- 519, The California Indians: A Source Book (second edition). Berkeley, University of California Press (original 1877).
1976 Tribes of California. Berkeley, University of California Press (original 1877).
Preston, William L.
1981 Vanishing Landscapes: Land and Life in the Tulare Lake Basin. Berkeley, University of California Press.
Schiffman, R.A. and A.P. Garfinkel
1981 Prehistory of Kern County: An Overview. Bakersfield College Publications in Archaeology, Number 1.
Shallat, Todd.
1978 "Water and the Rise of Public Ownership on the Fresno Plain: 1850 to 1978." Fresno County Public Works. http://www.fresnofloodcontrol.org/water_resources; Accessed 2022.
Siefkin, Nelson
1999 Archaeology of the Redfeldt Mound (CA-KIN-66), Tulare Basin, California. M.A.
Thesis, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, California State University, Bakersfield.
Sutton, M.Q.
1988a An Introduction to the Archaeology of the Western Mojave Desert, California.
Archives of California Prehistory, No. 14. Salinas: Coyote Press. 1988b On the Late Prehistory of the Western Mojave Desert. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 24(1):22-29.
W&S Consultants
1994 Phase II Test Excavations and Determinations of Significance at CA- LAN-2133, - 2233, -2234, -2235, -2236, -2240, -2241 and -2242, Los Angeles County, California.
Manuscript on file, CSUF AIC.
1999 Class III Inventory/Limited Archaeological Testing Program for the Ducor Telephone Project, Kennedy Meadows, Tulare County, California. Manuscript on file, CSUB AIC.
383
Section 8, Item J.
References
22 Fowler Well Number 9 Project
2004 Class II Inventory of the Carrizo Plain National Monument, San Luis Obispo County, California. Report on file, BLM Bakersfield office.
2006 Phase II Test Excavations and Determinations of Significance for the Tejon Mountain Village Project, Kern County, California. Report on file, Tejon Ranch Company.
Wedel, W.
1941 Archaeological Investigations at Buena Vista Lake, Kern County, California. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 130.
Whitley, D.S.
1992 Shamanism and Rock Art in Far Western North America. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 2(1):89-113.
2000 The Art of the Shaman: Rock Art of California. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
Whitley, D.S. and M.P. Beaudry
1991 Chiefs on the Coast: The Development of Complex Society in the Tiquisate Region in Ethnographic Perspective. The Development of Complex Civilizations in Southeastern Mesoamerica, W. Fowler, ed., pp. 101-120. Orlando: CRC Press.
Whitley, D.S., G. Gumerman IV, J. Simon and E. Rose
1988 The Late Prehistoric Period in the Coso Range and Environs. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 24(1):2-10.
Whitley, D.S., J. Simon and J.H.N. Loubser
2007 The Carrizo Collapse: Art and Politics in the Past. In A Festschrift Honoring the Contributions of California Archaeologist Jay von Werlhof, ed RL Kaldenberg, pp. 199-208. Ridgecrest: Maturango Museum Publication 20.
384
Section 8, Item J.
CONFIDENTIAL APPENDIX A:
Records Search and Native American Heritage Commission
Outreach Materials
385
Section 8, Item J.
February 6, 2024
Attachment 6: Response to Comments on Mitigated Negative Declaration 386
Section 8, Item J.
City of Fowler
128 S. 5th Street
Fowler, CA 93625
RESPONSE TO PUBLIC
COMMENTS
City of Fowler Well No. 9 Project
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
(State Clearinghouse Number 2023120334)
January 2024
Prepared by:
387
Section 8, Item J.
RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS
State Clearinghouse Number 2023120334
City of Fowler 1-2 | Page
Table of Contents
California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) .................................................................. 4 Comment 1/a ......................................................................................................................... 4 Response 1/a ......................................................................................................................... 4 Comment 1/b ......................................................................................................................... 4 Response 1/b ......................................................................................................................... 4 Comment 1/c ......................................................................................................................... 4 Response 1/c ......................................................................................................................... 5 Comment 1/d ......................................................................................................................... 5 Response 1/d ......................................................................................................................... 5 Comment 1/e ......................................................................................................................... 5 Response 1/e ......................................................................................................................... 6 Comment 2 ............................................................................................................................ 6 Response 2 ............................................................................................................................ 6 Comment 3 ............................................................................................................................ 7 Response 3 ............................................................................................................................ 7 Comment 4 ............................................................................................................................ 7 Response 4 ............................................................................................................................ 7 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) ................................................................ 9 Comment 1 ............................................................................................................................ 9 Response 1 ............................................................................................................................ 9 Comment 2 ............................................................................................................................ 9 Response 2 ............................................................................................................................ 9 388
Section 8, Item J.
RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS
State Clearinghouse Number 2023120334
City of Fowler 1-3 | Page
The following are the City of Fowler’s responses to comments received during the public review period for the Initial Study (IS) and Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), dated December 2023, prepared for the Fowler Well No. 9 Project. The Notice of Intent to adopt an IS was circulated for public review from December 13, 2023, through January 12, 2024. Two (2) comment letters were received from the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD).
Comments received did not result in significant changes to the IS. Although there are some changes to the IS as a result of comments, no new unavoidable significant effects were identified, and mitigation measures were not lessened as a result of responding to comments. 389
Section 8, Item J.
RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS
State Clearinghouse Number 2023120334
City of Fowler 1-4 | Page
LETTER A
California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)
(January 12, 2024)
Comment 1/a
The commenter states that increased pumping in a critically overdrafted basin may cause potentially significant environmental impacts or contribute to a cumulative impact. The commenter requests the inclusion of the amount of water pumped by the City of Fowler in an average year as the CEQA Baseline to ensure that adequate groundwater resources are available to meet longterm demands.
Response 1/a
Comment noted. The City of Fowler pumped, from groundwater sources, an average of 681,810,000 gallons of water per year over the last two years as indicated by City staff. The installation of this well will address redundancy within the existing water system and provide a more reliable water supply to the west side of the City of Fowler. The Project is not a result of population growth, nor will it directly or indirectly promote population growth. As referenced in the City of Fowler 2021 Water Model Report (Attachment A), the existing City system is sufficient to provide water for the City’s Average Day and Maximum Day Demands. As such, the Project is being developed to correct deficiencies in fire flow and redundancy on the west side of the City (west of State Route 99). Any future development within the City would need to comply with the City’s General Plan policies and the South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (SKGSA) policies related to overdraft.
Comment 1/b
The commenter requests that the IS/MND identify the City’s sustainable yield for groundwater extraction, the City’s current water demand, and if there will be sufficient water to serve the population of Fowler now and for the life of the well during normal, dry, and multiple dry years.
Response 1/b
Comment noted. The City of Fowler is a member agency of the SKGSA whose approved Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) considers the planned growth of the City and required groundwater pumping as part of its plan for sustainability. The GSP does not provide an established sustainability yield figure for the City of Fowler; however, the GSP does identify the City’s plans for groundwater recharge to offset any planned increased groundwater pumping. The City continues to implement recharge projects in accordance with the GSP. This specific Project is not intended to substantially increase groundwater pumping, but rather intended to provide redundancy and a more reliable water supply to the west side of the City. As stated in the IS/MND (PDF page 85), the new well will supplement City water supplies and would not result in direct or indirect population growth beyond what is planned for in the General Plan. Additionally, as stated in the IS/MND (PDF page 81), though the proposed well is expected to add to the City’s available water supply, the well would not increase current total water production (groundwater pumping).
Comment 1/c
390
Section 8, Item J.
RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS
State Clearinghouse Number 2023120334
City of Fowler 1-5 | Page
The commenter states that if the new well is to increase the amount of water being pumped, the IS/MND will need to provide analysis on how basin impacts will be monitored and what minimization or mitigation measures will be implemented to mitigate impacts over the City’s sustainable yield.
Response 1/c
Comment noted. As stated above in Responses 1/a and 1/b, the City of Fowler’s purpose for the installation of the well is to address water redundancy and ensure adequate water supply for the City’s water system. The City’s Water Model Report prepared in 2021 (Attachment A) shows that the existing Well #8 is the only well located in and serving the west half of the City; this was identified as a potential issue should the well become non-operational. This proposed Project would alleviate any potential water supply issues resulting from a non-operational Well #8 and would provide a more reliable source of water to the west portion of the City.
Comment 1/d
The commenter requested an explanation as to how the Project will comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Plan approved by DWR.
Response 1/d
Comment noted. As previously mentioned in response 1/b, the GSP does not provide an established sustainability yield figure for the City of Fowler, however, the GSP does identify the City’s plans for groundwater recharge to offset any planned increased groundwater pumping. The City continues to implement recharge projects in accordance with the GSP. This specific Project is not intended to substantially increase groundwater pumping, but rather intended to provide redundancy and a more reliable water supply to the west side of the City. As stated in the IS/MND (PDF page 85), the new well will supplement City water supplies and would not result in direct or indirect population growth beyond what is planned for in the General Plan. Additionally, as stated in the IS/MND (PDF page 81), though the proposed well is expected to add to the City’s available water supply, the well would not increase current total water production (groundwater pumping).
Comment 1/e
The commenter states that the IS/MND concludes that because the Project would not result in direct or indirect population growth beyond what is planned for in the General Plan, the Project would not result in significant cumulative impacts and all potential impacts would be reduced to less than significant though mitigation measures and regulatory requirements. This arises the following additional requests from the commenter:
i. The commenter states that under Water Supply and Distribution in the General Plan, the General Plan does not identify a sustainable water supply allocation based on population growth, but instead requires the preparation of a Water System Master Plan to identify an adequate supply of water to meet future demands. Based on this the commenter requests that support be provided to indicate that the groundwater basin has an adequate supply of water for water that will be pumped over the CEQA baseline. 391
Section 8, Item J.
RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS
State Clearinghouse Number 2023120334
City of Fowler 1-6 | Page
ii. The commenter request to indicate what mitigation measures referred to above were specified for groundwater.
Response 1/e
Comment noted. The portion of the document presented by the commenter (PDF page 85) is in reference to all mitigation measures in the document and how these measures will help mitigate potential impacts throughout the various environmental impact areas addressed in the document.
The following are responses to the additional requests by the commenter:
i. As previously mentioned, the GSP does not provide an established sustainability yield, as such water supply allocation based on population growth is not reflected on the City’s General Plan. As stated in Responses 1/a and 1/c the main objective of the Project is to address system redundancy and provide a more reliable source of water to the west side of the City of Fowler. The Project will ensure that the existing water system along with the installation of Well #9 will be able to provide a more reliable water delivery to the City and its residents.
ii. As mentioned above, no additional groundwater pumping will be required as part of this Project. The CEQA baseline is sufficient to provide adequate water service for the City and its residents, as such no mitigation measure would be required for groundwater at this time.
Any future development within the City would need to comply with the City’s General Plan policies and the South Kings GSA policies related to overdraft.
Comment 2
The commenter states that the Project will install multiple impervious surfaces on a site that is currently pervious. As a result, the commenter requests that the IS/MND discuss the stormwater infrastructure that will be installed to control runoff that can result from the new impervious surfaces.
Response 2
Comment noted. The IS/MND will be updated to reflect that Project would be designed to reduce or eliminate potential drainage impacts from the Project, including runoff. This will be accomplished by having any potential runoff be directed to an existing stormwater drain inlet located in the southwest corner of the site.
As discussed above in Response 2, the IS/MND (PDF Page 62) was amended as follows:
“The Project includes changes to the existing stormwater drainage pattern of the area through the backfilling of the site and installation of impermeable (concrete/asphalt) surfaces and/or structures associated with the new groundwater well. It is not expected that the increase in impermeable surface will substantially alter the drainage pattern of the area. While the installation of these impervious surfaces would change the existing drainage pattern of the site, design of the Project would reduce any impact by ensuring that runoff would flow and be directed to an existing stormwater drain inlet located in the southwest corner of the site.
Additionally, standard construction practices and compliance with State and federal regulations, City ordinances and regulations, the California Building Code, and adherence to professional engineering 392
Section 8, Item J.
RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS
State Clearinghouse Number 2023120334
City of Fowler 1-7 | Page
design approved by the City of Fowler will reduce or eliminate potential drainage impacts from the Project. Therefore, any impacts resulting from drainage patterns would be less than significant.” Comment 3
The commenter requested that the IS/MND include discussion for possible connection of a Granulated Activated Carbon (GAC) treatment system included within the Project design site plan (PDF page 16).
Response 3
Comment noted. While the site plan included in the document does mention a possible future GAC treatment system on site, a possible treatment system is not covered in this environmental document.
As stated within the document (PDF page 12), space on site has been reserved to accommodate for future treatment equipment, if required, which would have its own environmental review process.
Comment 4
The commenter requests that the IS/MND be updated to include analysis of water discharge associated with the Project. The commenter states that due to the nature of the of the Project discharges occur in the development, construction, and operation of groundwater wells.
Response 4
Comment noted. As the Project is under one acre in size a SWPPP is not required; however, as stated within the IS/MND the Project would comply with listed Best Management Practices (PDF page 61) in order to reduce any water/pollutants discharge during development and construction of the Project. Additionally, water discharge that can occur during construction activities such as earth moving or drilling would be directed to an existing storm drain inlet located in the southwest corner of the site. The inlet would direct the water to a ponding basin for groundwater recharge. Any discharge associated with operation of the well would be as a result of maintenance either to repair any arising issues or routine maintenance to ensure proper operation. Water discharge due to maintenance would also be directed to the existing storm drain inlet. This information will be included in an updated version of the IS/MND.
As discussed above in Response 4, the IS/MND (PDF Page 61) was amended as follows:
“Construction activities could temporarily increase runoff, erosion, and sedimentation. Construction activities also could result in soil compaction and wind erosion effects that could adversely affect soils and reduce the revegetation potential at construction sites and staging areas.
Three general sources of potential short-term construction-related water pollution or discharge associated with the proposed Project are: 1) the handling, storage, and disposal of construction materials containing pollutants; 2) the maintenance and operation of construction equipment; and 3) earth moving activities which, when not controlled, may generate soil erosion and transportation, via storm runoff or mechanical equipment. Generally, routine safety precautions for handling and storing construction materials may effectively mitigate the potential pollution of stormwater by these materials. These same types of common sense, Best Management Practices (BPMs) procedures can be extended to non-hazardous stormwater pollutants such as sawdust and other solid wastes. 393
Section 8, Item J.
RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS
State Clearinghouse Number 2023120334
City of Fowler 1-8 | Page
Additionally, any water discharge associated with construction activities such as earth moving or drilling, as well as discharge associated with operation and maintenance of the well would be directed to an existing storm drain inlet located in the southwest corner of the site. The inlet would direct the water to a ponding basin for groundwater recharge.
Poorly maintained vehicles and heavy equipment leaking fuel, oil, antifreeze, or other fluids on the construction site are also common sources of stormwater pollution and soil contamination. In addition, grading activities can greatly increase erosion processes. Two general strategies are recommended to prevent construction silt from entering local storm drains. First, erosion control procedures should be implemented for those areas that must be exposed. Secondly, the area should be secured to control offsite migration of pollutants. These BMPs are expected to reduce short term construction-related impacts to less than significant.
Once constructed, the Project will provide supplemental water to the City. The water extracted by the new groundwater well will be in compliance with the requirements of the Division of Drinking Waters. As previously mentioned, any water discharge associated with operation or maintenance would be directed to the existing storm drain inlet on There are no water discharge activities associated with the well, once constructed. Therefore, any impacts would be less than significant.” 394
Section 8, Item J.
State Water Resources Control Board
January 12, 2024
City of Fowler
Attn: Amy Wilson
400 E. Main Street, Suite 300
Visalia, CA 93291
CITY OF FOWLER (CITY), INITIAL STUDY (IS)/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (MND) FOR THE WELL 9 PROJECT (PROJECT); STATE CLEARINGHOUSE # 2023120334
Dear Ms. Amy Wilson:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the IS/MND for the proposed Project. The State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Drinking Water (State Water Board, DDW) is responsible for issuing water supply permits pursuant to the Safe Drinking Water Act.
This Project is within the jurisdiction of the State Water Board, DDW’s Fresno District.
DDW Fresno District issues domestic water supply permit amendments to the public water systems serviced with a new or modified source of domestic water supply or new domestic water system components pursuant to Waterworks Standards (Title 22 CCR chapter 16 et. seq.). A public water system requires a water supply permit amendment when changes are made to a domestic water supply source, storage, or treatment and for the operation of new water system components- as specified in the Waterworks Standards. The City will need to apply for a water supply permit amendment for this Project.
The State Water Board, DDW, as a responsible agency under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), has the following comments on the City’s IS/MND:
· The IS/MND states the City can pump an additional 6.8 million gallons per day from their current wells (PDF 61). And as a result, adequate groundwater resources are available to meet long-term demands (PDF 61). However, increased pumping in a critically overdrafted basin may cause potentially significant environmental impacts or contribute to a cumulative impact. o Define the current CEQA baseline: how much water is pumped in an average year?
o Please identify the City’s sustainable yield for groundwater extraction, the City’s current water demand, and if there will be sufficient water to serve the population of Fowler now and for the life of the well during normal, dry, and multiple dry years.
395
Section 8, Item J.
Amy Wilson - 2 - January 12, 2024
o If the new well will increase the amount of water that will be pumped compared to the CEQA baseline, please indicate how basin impacts will be monitored and what minimization or mitigation measures will be implemented to mitigate impacts over the City’s sustainable yield. [Please note: “If there is substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the lead agency, that the project may have a significant effect on the environment, an environmental impact report shall be prepared,” California Public Resources Code, division 13 environmental quality, chapter 2.6 general, section 21080 (d).]
o Please also explain if the Project will comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Plan approved by DWR on August 4, 2023. o The IS/MND indicates that the Project is intended to supplement the City’s water supplies and would not result in direct or indirect population growth beyond what is planned for in the General Plan (PDF page 85). And so concludes, the Project would not result in significant cumulative impacts and all potential impacts would be reduced to less than significant though mitigation measures and regulatory requirements (PDF page 85) § Under Water Supply and Distribution in the General Plan, the General Plan does not identify a sustainable water supply allocation based on population growth, but instead requires the preparation of a Water System Master Plan to identify an adequate supply of water to meet future demands (PDF page 100). Please provide support that the groundwater basin has an adequate supply of water for water that will be pumped over the CEQA baseline, through the Water System Master Plan or other groundwater basin planning documents or discuss cumulative impacts to the basin. § No mitigation measures were specified in the document for the groundwater. Please indicate what mitigation measures are being referred to in this statement or remove the reference.
· The Project will install multiple impervious surfaces on a site that is currently pervious. Please discuss the stormwater infrastructure that will be installed to control runoff.
· The Project designs include possible connection of a Granulated Activated Carbon (GAC) treatment system (PDF page 16). Please include a discussion on the possible operational impacts of the GAC treatment system in the event it is installed. Be sure to discuss spent GAC disposal, backwash discharge, and discharge permits.
· The IS/MND indicates there are no water discharge activities associated with the well (PDF page 61), however discharges occur in the development, construction, and operation of groundwater wells. Please update the CEQA document to reflect this.
When the CEQA review process is completed, please forward the following items with your permit application to the State Water Board, DDW Fresno District Office at [email protected]:
396
Section 8, Item J.
Amy Wilson - 3 - January 12, 2024
· Copy of the IS/MND with all comment letters received and the lead agency responses as appropriate.
· Copy of the Resolution or Board Minutes adopting the IS/MND, and · Copy of the date stamped Notice of Determination filed at the Fresno County Clerk’s Office and the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse.
Please contact Lori Schmitz of the State Water Board at (916) 449-5285 or [email protected], if you have any questions regarding this comment letter.
Sincerely,
Lori Schmitz
Lori Schmitz
Environmental Scientist
Division of Financial Assistance
Special Project Review Unit
1001 I Street, 16th floor
Sacramento, CA 95814
Cc:
Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse
Sudarshan Poudyal
Associate Sanitary Engineer
Fresno District
Tricia Wathen
Acting District Engineer
Fresno District
397
Section 8, Item J.
RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS
State Clearinghouse Number 2023100352
LETTER B
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) (January 11, 2024)
Comment 1
The commenter states that based on information provided on the IS/MND the Project is not expected to exceed any of the significance thresholds as identified in the District’s Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. To further reduce the possibility of any construction-related diesel exhaust emissions impacts, the commenter recommends the use of the cleanest available off-road construction equipment.
Response 1
Comment noted.
Comment 2
The commenter states that any Project subject to the SJVAPCD rules and regulations would reduce its impacts on air quality through compliance with the District’s regulatory framework. This is accomplished by the issuing of permits for many types of air pollution sources, and regulation of some activities that do not require permits. The commenter additionally provides a list of potential permits and regulations that may be required during Project implementation.
The following list is provided as potential requirements by the District that this Project may be subject to:
District Rule 2010 (Permits Required) and Rule 2201 (New and Modified Stationary Source Review) and may require District permits. Prior to construction, the Project proponent should submit to the District an application for an Authority to Construct (ATC) and Permit to Operate (PTO).
The Project proponent may be required to submit a Construction Notification Form or submit and receive approval of a Dust Control Plan prior to commencing any earthmoving activities as described in Regulation VIII, specifically Rule 8021– Construction, Demolition, Excavation, Extraction, and Other Earthmoving Activities. The Project may be subject to the following District rules: Rule 4102 (Nuisance) and Rule 4641 (Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and Maintenance Operations) Response 2
Comment noted. Project will comply with regulations and obtain necessary permits for Project construction and operation.
398
Section 8, Item J.
January 11, 2024
Dawn E. Marple
City of Fowler
Planning Department
128 S. 5th Street
Fowler, CA 93625
Project: Well No. 9 Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration District CEQA Reference No: 20231223
Dear Ms. Marple,
The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (District) has reviewed the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) from the City of Fowler (City) for the project mentioned above. Per the IS/MND, the project consists of the construction of a new groundwater 720 foot well on an approximately 0.5-acre site (Project). The Project is located on the Northeast corner of E. South Avenue and Stanford Avenue in Fowler, CA.
The District offers the following comments at this time regarding the Project:
Project Related Emissions
Based on information provided in the MND, Project specific annual criteria pollutant emissions from construction and operation are not expected to exceed any of the significance thresholds as identified in the District’s Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (GAMAQI):
https://ww2.valleyair.org/media/g4nl3p0g/gamaqi.pdf.
Construction Emissions
The District recommends, to further reduce impacts from construction-related diesel exhaust emissions, the Project should utilize the cleanest available offroad construction equipment. 399
Section 8, Item J.
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 2 of 3 District Reference No: 20231223
January 11, 2024
District Rules and Regulations
The District issues permits for many types of air pollution sources, and regulates some activities that do not require permits. A project subject to District rules and regulations would reduce its impacts on air quality through compliance with the District’s regulatory framework. In general, a regulation is a collection of individual rules, each of which deals with a specific topic. As an example, Regulation II (Permits) includes District Rule 2010 (Permits Required), Rule 2201 (New and Modified Stationary Source Review), Rule 2520 (Federally Mandated Operating Permits), and several other rules pertaining to District permitting requirements and processes.
The list of rules below is neither exhaustive nor exclusive. Current District rules can be found online at: www.valleyair.org/rules/1ruleslist.htm. To identify other District rules or regulations that apply to future projects, or to obtain information about District permit requirements, the project proponents are strongly encouraged to contact the District’s Small Business Assistance (SBA) Office at (559) 230-5888.
District Rules 2010 and 2201 - Air Quality Permitting for Stationary Sources
Stationary Source emissions include any building, structure, facility, or installation which emits or may emit any affected pollutant directly or as a fugitive emission. District Rule 2010 (Permits Required) requires operators of emission sources to obtain an Authority to Construct (ATC) and Permit to Operate (PTO) from the District. District Rule 2201 (New and Modified Stationary Source Review) requires that new and modified stationary sources of emissions mitigate their emissions using Best Available Control Technology (BACT).
This Project may be subject to District Rule 2010 (Permits Required) and Rule 2201 (New and Modified Stationary Source Review) and may require District permits. Prior to construction, the Project proponent should submit to the District an application for an ATC. For further information or assistance, the project proponent may contact the District’s SBA Office at (559) 230-5888.
District Rule 9510 - Indirect Source Review (ISR)
Per District Rule 9510 section 4.4.3, a development project on a facility whose primary functions are subject to District Rule 2201 or District Rule 2010 are exempt from the requirements of the rule. The District has reviewed the information provided and has determined that the primary functions of this Project are subject to District Rule 2201 (New and Modified Stationary Source Review Rule) or District Rule 2010 (Permits Required). As a result, District Rule 9510 requirements and related fees do not apply to the Project referenced above. 400
Section 8, Item J.
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Page 3 of 3 District Reference No: 20231223
January 11, 2024
District Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions)
The project proponent may be required to submit a Construction Notification Form or submit and receive approval of a Dust Control Plan prior to commencing any earthmoving activities as described in Regulation VIII, specifically Rule 8021 – Construction, Demolition, Excavation, Extraction, and Other Earthmoving Activities.
Should the project result in at least 1-acre in size, the project proponent shall provide written notification to the District at least 48 hours prior to the project proponents intent to commence any earthmoving activities pursuant to District Rule 8021 (Construction, Demolition, Excavation, Extraction, and Other Earthmoving Activities). Also, should the project result in the disturbance of 5- acres or more, or will include moving, depositing, or relocating more than 2,500 cubic yards per day of bulk materials, the project proponent shall submit to the District a Dust Control Plan pursuant to District Rule 8021 (Construction, Demolition, Excavation, Extraction, and Other Earthmoving Activities). For additional information regarding the written notification or Dust Control Plan requirements, please contact District Compliance staff at (559) 230-5950.
The application for both the Construction Notification and Dust Control Plan can be found online at: https://ww2.valleyair.org/media/fm3jrbsq/dcp-form.docx Information about District Regulation VIII can be found online at:
https://ww2.valleyair.org/dustcontrol
Other District Rules and Regulations
The Project may also be subject to the following District rules: Rule 4102 (Nuisance) and Rule 4641 (Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and Maintenance Operations).
If you have any questions or require further information, please contact Dylan Casares by e-mail at [email protected] or by phone at (559) 230-6574.
Sincerely,
Brian Clements
Director of Permit Services
For: Mark Montelongo
Program Manager
401
Section 8, Item J.
RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS
State Clearinghouse Number 2022010548
City of Fowler 1-10 | Page
Attachment A
City of Fowler 2021 Water Model
Report
402
Section 8, Item J.
City of Fowler
2021 Water Model Report
April 23, 2021
403
Section 8, Item J.
Table of Contents
Executive Summary....................................................................................................................i Analysis....................................................................................................................................................i Recommendations.....................................................................................................................................i Chapter 1 Background and Purpose .........................................................................................1
1.1 Background and Purpose .............................................................................................................1
1.2 Design Criteria.............................................................................................................................2 Chapter 2 System Data Collection.............................................................................................3
2.1 Existing System...........................................................................................................................3
2.1.1 Water Storage .................................................................................................................3
2.1.2 Emergency Backup.........................................................................................................3
2.1.3 Pipe Network ..................................................................................................................4
2.1.4 Wells...............................................................................................................................5
2.1.5 Water Supply ..................................................................................................................5
2.1.6 SCADA and Logic Controls...........................................................................................6
2.2 Existing System Demands...........................................................................................................7
2.2.1 Water Production............................................................................................................8
2.2.2 Well Usage .....................................................................................................................8 Chapter 3 Existing Water System Simulations .........................................................................9
3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................9
3.2 Existing System – Average Day Analysis...................................................................................9
3.2.1 Existing System Deficiencies.........................................................................................11
3.3 Existing – Maximum Day Demands............................................................................................11
3.3.1 Maximum Day Simulation .............................................................................................12
3.3.2 Maximum Day + Fire Flow Simulation..........................................................................13
3.3.3 Maximum Day – Well #8 Out of Service.......................................................................15
3.3.4 Maximum Day – Well #8 Out of Service (with South Avenue Interconnect)................16 Chapter 4 Recommendations.....................................................................................................17
4.1 Water Model Summary & Recommendations.............................................................................17 Appendix A..................................................................................................................................18 404
Section 8, Item J.
Executive Summary
Analysis
The City of Fowler (City) water system is supplied by six groundwater wells feeding into a single pressure zone. System pressures are approximately 50 – 55 psi. The system does not include any surface water storage other than small hydropneumatic tanks located at each well site.
The water model and analysis was evaluated under the following criteria:
• A total, system-wide average day demand of 1.6 mgd and a maximum day demand of 2.9 mgd based on current water production data.
• A maximum day peaking factor of 1.8
It was determined that city water wells are adequate for average day and maximum day demands, however, due to undersized pipe sizing and limited interconnection, only partial fire flows can be supplied during a maximum day demand. Additionally, the City would not be able to supply the west half of the system during a maximum day demand if Well #8 should become non-operational.
Recommendations
In order to correct these deficiencies and provide for future water system demands, the following improvements should be pursued:
• Construction of a new municipal well west of State Route 99 having a minimum output of 1,200 gallons per minute.
• Construct a new pipeline connection crossing State Route 99 connecting the west and east portions of the water system to provide additional interconnectivity. • Install backup generators on wells not so equipped to ensure availability during power outages. • Adjust SCADA settings to account for ground elevation differences within the system. • Continue to monitor addition water demands as new development occurs and add additional wells as necessary to provide sufficient fire flows throughout the City. • Construct 12-inch diameter waterlines in a quarter-mile spaced transmission grid main system. 405
Section 8, Item J.
1 1.1 Background and Purpose
The City of Fowler (City) is located in central Fresno County, approximately twelve miles southeast of Fresno, California. Incorporated in 1908, the City had a 2010 census population of 5,570 citizens (see Figure 1). The City water system has approximately 1,800 service connections and is supplied by six (6) groundwater wells which pump into a single hydraulic pressure zone.
Figure 1 - City of Fowler, California (aerial view)
The purpose of developing the water model is to obtain an understanding of the operational characteristic of the water system, determine any immediate deficiencies in the current system, and identify improvements to correct these deficiencies.
Chapter 1
Background and Purpose
406
Section 8, Item J.
2 1.2 Design Criteria
The water system was evaluated per the design criteria as provided in Table 1. These data points can be considered as generally accepted modeling criteria and were used as the basis in evaluating pipe flow, fire flow and low pressures within the water distribution system.
Table 1 - Water System Design Criteria
407
Section 8, Item J.
3 2.1 Existing System
The City’s water distribution network is a single pressure zone system. Shown in Figure 2, this zone is relatively flat with elevations ranging from 320’ in the northeast quadrant of the City to approximately 300' is the southwest quadrant. All sources of water (6 wells) for the City are fed into this singular pressure zone. At present, all wells are operational with well pumping capacities as shown in Table 2.
Table 2 - Water Model Nodes (By Pressure Zone)
2.1.1 Water Storage
The City does not utilize any water storage tanks. The existing elevated water storage tank has been taken out of service. All city water storage is provided by the relatively shallow groundwater table which contains a sufficient volume of water to satisfy all operational and emergency water requirements. This type of system is considered a ‘pumped zone’ as it relies entirely upon electricity in providing water service pressure to all end users.
2.1.2 Emergency Backup
During times of emergency when the electrical power grid is shut off and unavailable, it is critical for a pumped water system to have electrical backup in the form of diesel powered generators. In such instances, generators can be designed to either start automatically or be turned on manually. Emergency diesel generators are installed at Well #7 (1,700 gallons per minute (gpm)) and Well #8 (1,100 gpm), allowing for a total emergency water delivery of approximately 2,800 gpm, sufficient to provide adequate fire flows during an emergency event.
Chapter 2
System Data Collection
408
Section 8, Item J.
4 Figure 2 - City of Fowler Water Distribution System and Pipe Sizes
2.1.3 Pipe Network
Table 3 presents the overall lengths and sizes of pipe within the City water system. Using an effective replacement cost for each pipe diameter, the City has approximately $20.6 million in existing pipeline infrastructure contained within approximately 200,000 linear feet of pipe capable of storing 433,000 gallons of water within the water distribution system at any given time.
409
Section 8, Item J.
5 Table 3 - Existing Water Distribution Pipes
2.1.4 Wells
As illustrated in Figure 2, existing wells provide water pressure and supply for the City. As provided in Table 2, the overall combined pumping capacity of the well system is approximately 5,935 gpm (~8.5 mgd). Well #2 and Well #4 are controlled with static motors while Wells #5A, #6, #7 and #8A are controlled by variable frequency drive (VFD) motors.
Each well is equipped with a pressure tank or surge tank in order to diminish transient water hammer effects that could be experienced in a smaller water distribution system with multiple VFD’s operating at the same time. Pictures for each well site are included in Appendix A of this report.
2.1.5 Water Supply
The City water system is supplied entirely by groundwater. As shown in Figure 3, the City of Fowler is an independent water utility and is a member of the South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (SKGSA) as mapped by the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). A total, maximum day pumping capacity of the six (6) city wells is approximately 8.5 million gallons per day (assuming all wells run continually for 24 hours). Presently, the City consumes approximately 1.6 million gallons per day on an average day and approximately 2.5 million gallons on a maximum day. The ability of the City to utilize wells to meet daily peak demand is dependent upon the ability of the distribution system to deliver the water within the system. Well supply as well as the distribution system capacity will determine the system’s ability to service a new growth area for operational and fire flows. 410
Section 8, Item J.
6 Figure 3 – Boundary of the South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA)
2.1.6 SCADA and Logic Controls
The City utilizes an advanced Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system to assist in management and control of the water system. The SCADA system is capable of gathering and recording system data in order to quickly evaluate and mitigate any mechanical and/or operational malfunctions within the water distribution system. The SCADA system is also used to change pump ‘on and off’ pressure settings and is able to be adjusted as necessary to cycle pump usage and frequency of pumping in order to better balance the operational usage and mechanical life cycle of all pumps in the water distribution system.
SCADA controls for each well site are as shown in Table 4.
Table 4 - Existing SCADA Control Settings for City Wells South Kings GSA
411
Section 8, Item J.
7 2.2 Existing System Demands
According to SCADA and other data provided by City staff, monthly water production is provided in Table 5.
Table 5 - Monthly, Annual and Per Capita Water Consumption 412
Section 8, Item J.
8 2.2.1 Water Production
The average monthly water production in the winter months is approximately 31.7 million gallons while the average water production in the summer months is roughly 66.3 million gallons. During a 12 month period, the average monthly production is approximately 48.9 million gallons. This monthly value translates to an average day demand of 1,629,727 gallons per day (or 1,132 gpm).
Over the two year reporting period (2018-2020), the overall usage on a gallon per capita day (gpcd) basis ranged from a low of 115 gpcd to a high of 319 gpcd (almost a 200% increase).
This large swing is indicative of the amount of water that is traditionally used for landscaping and irrigation during the summer months.
2.2.2 Well Usage
While the City operates 6 wells, cycling between these wells is necessary to provide adequate excising of the wells and to meet water demands in various parts of the city.
Figure 4 below illustrates the amount of water produced by each well over the 2 year reporting period and the total production (by month). As this figure illustrates, Well #7 is producing the large majority of potable water for the City.
Figure 4 – Monthly Water Production
413
Section 8, Item J.
9 3.1 Introduction
The hydraulic water model was initially calibrated to existing conditions under an average day demand. Once calibrated, the model was then placed under two operational scenarios. The first scenario was Existing-Average Day Demands while the second scenario evaluated ExistingMaximum Day Demands. Each analysis and relevant hydraulic information is provided herein.
Since the City is relatively small in size, demands were allocated in the hydraulic model by uniformly applying the average day demand to each analysis node. For example, the existing system hydraulic model consists of approximately 345 analysis nodes with an average daily flow rate of 1,132 gallons per minute (as shown in Table 5). Thus, each analysis node was populated with an average day demand of 3.28 gallons per minute.
As shown in Table 5, the total average day demand applied to the model was approximately
1.629 mgd while the maximum day demand was 2.933 mgd, which was established by using a peaking factor of 1.8 on top of the average day demands. The average day demand relates to a population of approximately 7,000 citizens consuming roughly 221 gpcd.
Both the Average Day and the Maximum Day models were analyzed under a 24-hour extended period simulation, applying the diurnal curve as provided in Figure 5. This curve represents how system demands rise and fall throughout a 24-hour day.
Figure 5 - City of Fowler Diurnal Curve (Hourly Water Use)
3.2 Existing System – Average Day Analysis
The analysis of this scenario determined that the system operates efficiently under normal conditions (~1,132 gpm). During the Average Day, Well #7 can provide most, if not all, of the Chapter 3
Existing Water System Simulations
414
Section 8, Item J.
10 daily supply required by the City. Figure 6 illustrates how Well #7 (5007), Well #2 (5002) and Well #8 (5008) would operate during a normal 24 hour period.
Figure 6 – Average Day Pumping Operation
The analysis showed that larger pressure variations could occur in the southern region of the City as it is both distant from the primary wells and the area does not contain a large amount of looping and network intertie to the rest of the water system.
Transient Flows and Variable Frequency Drives
The current SCADA configuration for the City operates Well #7 as the primary and then calls on Well #8 to cycle on as the secondary. Since both wells are VFD operated this can result in transient waves propagating across the system:
o Considering that Well #7 and Well #8 are located on opposite sides of the City, as Well #8 experiences a lower pressure setting and turns on, it will begin to push a higher pressure wave back across the city. This wave would take many minutes before Well #7 would experience this higher pressure wave and begin to slow down its motor.
o As Well #8 speeds up, it would push a stronger wave across the system. As Well #7 experiences this higher wave, it will slow down many minutes later after Well #8 has increased its speed. Well #7 could continue to slow down and Well #8 could speed up to such a point that Well #7 begins to experience a lower pressure and then speeds up to compensate for its lower pressure, thus creating a back and forth cycle where both wells are reacting to each other.
The City operates 4 VFD wells and 2 Static wells. Referring back to Table 5, the City has a combined Static Well capacity of 785 gpm and a combined VFD capacity of 5,150 gpm. In a closed water system with no elevated water storage tank or pressure relief valves, it is important 415
Section 8, Item J.
11 for operations staff to ensure that future well cycling takes into consideration the relationship between Static and VFD operated wells and how to best modify SCADA operations accordingly.
3.2.1 Existing System Deficiencies
Under a normal, average day demand, no deficiencies were evident. However, upon review of the overall system, the following long term planning issues should be considered:
• Currently only 3 – 6” water lines cross State Route 99 as interconnect between the east half and the west half of the City water system (Figure 7). • Well #8 is the only well located on the west side of State Route 99, serving the west half of the City.
• Due to their geographic location, Well #5 and Well #6 disproportionately serve the southeastern portion of the water system.
• A large fire demand could cause transient and pressure issues during fire suppression.
Figure 7 – Interconnect Piping Across State Route 99
3.3 Existing – Maximum Day Demands
The maximum day demand represents peak water usage, most usually during the summer months. It is also during this time of year that the likelihood of fire is increased due to dry, arid conditions. Thus, while the results of a maximum day demand are informative, it is the fire flow simulation which illustrates the ability of the water system to provide for both the maximum day demand plus fire flow.
416
Section 8, Item J.
12 3.3.1 Maximum Day Simulation
Analysis of this scenaro determined that the system operates efficiently under maximum day conditions (2,036 gpm). This simulation assumed that during a maximum day, both Well #7 and Well #4 would be continuously operational and that Wells #8, #6, #5 and #4 would have SCADA settings that would turn pumps on and off, dependent upon system demands increasing and decreasing throughout the day. Figure 8 illustrates how each well would turn on and off during a maximum day event.
Figure 8– Maximum Day Pump Operation
This simulation was conducted by modifying the existing SCADA operations as provided in Table 4 of this report. The current SCADA settings utilized by City staff for well set points and pressure ranges do not take into account the ground elevation differences across the system.
Table 6 illustrates what the static pressures would be at each well when the discharge pressure at Well #7 is set at 55 psi. For example, there is a 16 foot vertical difference between Well #8 and Well #7, translating into a nearly 7 psi static pressure increase at Well #8 versus Well #7.
Referring to Table 4, the current SCADA set point for Well #8 is 50 psi which, when is actually 12 psi lower than Well #7 when accounting for the difference in ground elevations.
Table 6 – Ground Elevations and Static Pressure Differences (Well 7 @ 55 psi) 417
Section 8, Item J.
13 3.3.2 Maximum Day + Fire Flow Simulation
Fire flows requirements vary from one community to another. Flow requirements are dictated by the underlying land use – which can vary from 1,500 gpm for single family residential housing to 2,500 gpm for commercial and industrial land uses. Flow rates, if not determined by the local fire service provider, can be determined by the International Services Organization (ISO) or the American Water Works Association (AWWA) Manual M31 – Distribution System Requirements for Fire Protection. Required fire flows for the various land uses within the City can be found in Table 1 of this report.
The software utilized in this modeling provides for a fireflow analysis. This analysis allows for each node in the water distribution system to be given a fireflow demand and modeled accordingly. The resulting analysis output report determines which nodes in the system dropped below optimal pressures when a fire demand was applied. Such an analysis is useful in the identification of system deficiencies such as undersized pipes or insufficient looping and pipe networking.
Table 7 presents the 'worst case' output of a fireflow analysis which was conducted on a ‘node by node’ basis across the entire water distribution system at a clock time of 4 pm (which is not the peak hour on a max day). The data indicates that the City does not possess a sufficient water distribution system which allows for at least 1,000 gpm at every pipe or portion of the water distribution system.
For example, when the simulation attempted to deliver 1,500 gpm to Node 170, the residual pressure recorded at this node dropped to -120.34 psi (theoretical). The simulation indicates that in order to maintain a residual pressure of 20 psi at Node 170, the maximum water volume that could theoretically be delivered would be approximately 647 gpm. Fire nodes which could not deliver at least 1,000 gpm at a residual pressure of 20 psi are shown in Figure 9.
In most instances of 'worst case' fire flows, the fire demand was applied at the end of a long, 6" dead-end pipe, with the exception being the subdivision located near the intersection of Sumner Avenue and Laker Lane (see Figure 10) which appears to be served by a singular 6” pipe under Sumner Ave. This condition could be corrected by constructing (or verifying presence) of a second point of connection along the intersection of Nelson Avenue and Laker Lane. 418
Section 8, Item J.
14 Table 7 - Maximum Day Fire Flows (Worst Case)
Figure 9 – Maximum Day Fire Flows (Worst Case)
Figure 10 – Maximum Day Fire Flows (Sumner and Laker)
Some nodes provide less than the 1,500 gpm stipulated by the City of Fowler for residential land uses. This is typical in any community water distribution system, particularly in older parts of town with 6" distribution mains installed in long cul-de-sac streets. Such data does not always imply that a fire could not be adequately suppressed. The data simply indicate that the desired flow of 1,500 gpm, in these instances, is not achievable during a maximum day water demand. 419
Section 8, Item J.
15 While the City may possess a sufficient water supply in the form of wells and pumping capacity, the City does not retain a high degree of interconnection and pipe sizing between these wells in providing a sufficient degree of water protection during maximum day fire flow events. This condition is discussed further as provided in Section 3.3.3 of this report.
3.3.3 Maximum Day – Well #8 Out of Service
As Well #8 is the only well servicing the west half of the city, this simulation was conducted in order to evaluate a sudden non-operational status of Well #8 – forcing all water supply for western Fowler through the 3 – 6” water lines crossing State Route 99.
The results indicate that the City would not be able to provide sufficient water pressure to the entire west half of the City during the peak hours of a maximum day with Well #8 nonoperational. As shown in Figure 11, pressures during the peak hours would drop below the minimum pressure of 20 psi.
Figure 11– System Pressures without Well #8
Well #8 has a backup diesel generator to ensure that the well remains operational during power outages; however, sudden mechanical and/or equipment failure cannot always be prevented. As a result, the City should pursue installation of another well site in the western half of its system.
Additionally, the City should also pursue constructing a new 12” water line under State Route 99 in the approximate alignment of South Avenue as well as Adams Avenue, connecting to the water transmission main in Sunnyside Avenue.
This simulation also indicates Wells #5 and #6 are too distant from the 6” lines crossing State Route 99; and the pipe network connecting these wells to the rest of the water distribution system are presently undersized for these two wells to be effective mitigating a low pressure condition in the west half of the City.
In effect, the City can be considered a bifurcated water system, consisting of a South Zone (Well #5 and Well #6), a West Zone (Well #8) and an East Zone (Well #7, Well #2 and Well #4).
Under normal, average day operational parameters, these regions can share water with one another with little pressure drop or reduction in water supply, but during significant fire flow events or well outages, these areas are not readily able to serve another portion of the system given the sub-standard interconnecting piping layout of primarily 6” transmission mains within the existing water system.
420
Section 8, Item J.
16 3.3.4 Maximum Day – Well #8 Out of Service (with South Avenue Interconnect) A simulation was additionally conducted to determine the effects of Well #8 being out of service and the benefits of installing 3,400 linear feet of 12” water main under State Route 99 along the South Avenue alignment from Golden State Boulevard to Fowler Ave.
The simulation determined that this pipe would remedy the absence of Well #8 during both a maximum day event as well as provide sufficient fire flow demands. Figure 12 illustrates the volume of flow along this future pipe during a Maximum Day + Fire flow simulation.
To mitigate the deficiencies in this scenario, the South Avenue pipeline could be constructed as shown in Figure 12 or a new well can be constructed in the west quadrant as an interim solution.
As a long term solution, both solutions should be pursued.
Figure 12 – Maximum Day + Fire Flow in Future South Ave. Trunk (w/ Well #8 Out of Service) 421
Section 8, Item J.
17 4.1 Water Model Summary & Recommendations
The development of the hydraulic water model identified deficiencies in the water system related to providing fire flows during the maximum daily demand scenario. In order to correct these deficiencies and provide for future water system demands, the following improvements should be pursued:
• Construction of a new municipal well west of State Route 99 having a minimum output of 1,200 gallons per minute.
• Construct a new pipeline connection crossing State Route 99 connecting the west and east portions of the water system to provide additional interconnectivity. • Install backup generators on wells not so equipped to ensure availability during power outages.
• Adjust SCADA settings to account for ground elevation differences within the system. • Continue to monitor addition water demands as new development occurs and add additional wells as necessary to provide sufficient fire flows throughout the City. • Construct 12-inch diameter waterlines in a quarter-mile spaced transmission grid main system.
Chapter 4
Recommendations
422
Section 8, Item J.
18 Well 2
Well 4
Appendix A
423
Section 8, Item J.
19 Well 5
Well 6
424
Section 8, Item J.
20 Well 7
Well 8
425
Section 8, Item J.
February 6, 2024
Attachment 7: Resolution No. 2705
426
Section 8, Item J.
RESOLUTION NO. 2705
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOWLER ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLATION FOR THE CITY OF FOWLER WELL NO. 9 PROJECT AND APPROVING THE CITY OF FOWLER WELL NO. 9 PROJECT WHEREAS, the California legislature passed the Budget Act of 2021 and authorized the establishment of the Small Community Drought Relief program (Program); and WHEREAS, the California legislature has made funds available for eligible projects under the Program; and
WHEREAS, the City of Fowler (City) applied for a grant under the Program in order to construct a new well on the west side of the city, where water supply reliability and pressure is a point of concern; and
WHEREAS, the California Department of Water Resources, as the head of the Program, awarded the City with grant funds in order to support the design and construction of the City of Fowler Well No. 9 Project (Project); and
WHEREAS, the City has proposed to construct the Project on Assessor’s Parcel Number 343-280-60 & -61, two parcels which are owned by the City and are planned Low Density Residential by the City’s General Plan and designated as R-1-10 (One Family Residential – 10,000 square foot lots) by the City’s official zoning map; and WHEREAS, public facilities are conditionally allowed within the R-1-10 zone district; and
WHEREAS, the City’s zoning ordinance shall not apply to the location or construction of facilities for the production, generation, storage, treatment, or transmission of water in accordance with Government Code section 53091, subdivision (e), and therefore the site is suitable for the proposed use; and
WHEREAS, the Project site is currently being used as a retention basin, the backfilling of the basin would not inhibit the City from providing appropriate storm drainage to the area of the Project or its residents; and
WHEREAS, the City has determined that pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA; see Pub. Res. Code § 21000, et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR § 15000, et seq.) that preparation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) in conjunction with the Project was necessary to evaluate the potential impacts of the Project to the environment; and
WHEREAS, the MND was submitted to the State Clearinghouse of the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (State Clearinghouse No. 2023120334), and circulated for public review and comment for 30 days, commencing on December 13, 2023, and ending on January 12, 2024; 427
Section 8, Item J.
and
WHEREAS, the MND, including an analysis of potential environmental impacts and a discussion of Mitigation Measures, has been prepared, circulated, and made available for public comment in accordance with CEQA (see Pub. Res. Code § 21000, et seq.; and 14 CCR § 15000, et seq.); and
WHEREAS, the City received two comment letters from public agencies, including the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District and the State Water Resources Control Board – Division of Drinking Water; and
WHEREAS, the City has considered responses received and has incorporated them as necessary into the final version of the MND; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15074, the City, as the lead agency, may adopt an MND if it finds that in light of the whole record that the Project, with the inclusion of mitigation measures, would not have a significant impact to the environment; and WHEREAS, at a regular meeting on February 6, 2024, at 6:00pm, the Fowler City Council considered adoption of an MND for the Project and considered the approval of the Project; and WHEREAS, the City Council has independently reviewed and considered the MND for the Project, as well as the Project as a whole, and has evaluated and considered all written and oral comments and other information provided during the public hearing, including the staff report is hereby incorporated by this reference in its entirety.
NOW THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE ENTIRE RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS, THE CITY COUNCIL FINDS AND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct.
2. The Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project are adequate, reflect the City’s independent judgment and analysis, and have been completed in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.
3. That the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration were presented to the City Council, and were independently reviewed, evaluated, and considered, including all comments, written and oral, received from persons who reviewed the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration, or who otherwise commented on the Project prior to approving the Project.
4. On the basis of the whole record, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment with the adoption of the mitigation measures as identified in Table 5-1 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
5. The Mitigated Negative Declaration and the mitigation monitoring program for the Project as set forth in Table 5-1 therein, are hereby adopted.
428
Section 8, Item J.
6. The City Council directs that the record of these proceedings shall be contained in the City’s Planning Department located at 128 S. 5th Street, Fowler, CA 93625, and the custodian of the record shall be the City Planner or other person designated by the Community and Economic Development Director.
7. The City Planner, or his/her designee, is hereby authorized to file a notice of determination for the Project in accordance with CEQA and to pay any fees required for such filing.
8. The City of Fowler Well No. 9 Project is hereby approved.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of February 2024, at a regular meeting of the Fowler City Council by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
APPROVED:
___________________________
Daniel T. Parra, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Angela Vasquez, City Clerk
429
Section 8, Item J.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: February 6, 2024
FROM: Yvonne Hernandez, Recreation Supervisor
SUBJECT: APPROVE a $2,000 donation request from Fowler High School Sober Grad Committee for Fiscal Year 2023-24.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff recommend the City Council approve a $2,000 donation to the Fowler High School Sober Grad requested for Fiscal Year 2023-24.
BACKGROUND
The Fowler High School Sober Grad celebrates the accomplishments of the high school senior by giving them a safe environment, which includes an alcohol and drug free place to celebrate their graduation.
The Fowler High School Sober Grad will be performing volunteer clean up at the City-Wide Yard Sale event on Saturday, April 20, 2024, for this donation.
PUBLIC NOTICE
This item does not require a public hearing and was noticed as a part of the City Council Agenda.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This action does not constitute a “project” pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
General Plan Goal OS-3
Recreational programming and facilities meet the needs of community members of all ages and abilities.
FISCAL IMPACT
The City of Fowler received a $5,000 recycling grant from the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) for FY 2023-24, and this donation will be funded from this grant.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Staff is not aware of any conflicts of interest.
430
Section 8, Item K.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: February 6, 2024
FROM: Yvonne Hernandez, Recreation Supervisor
SUBJECT: APPROVE an agreement with Fireworks America in an amount not to exceed $25,750 for Fiscal Year 2023-2024.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff recommend approval of an agreement with Fireworks America in an amount of $25,750 for Fiscal Year 2023-2024.
BACKGROUND
The fireworks display is organized by the City of Fowler Recreation Department. It is a free admission show, with live music, food booths, and activities for kids. It is a safe and sane way for families to enjoy a 23-minute fireworks show.
PUBLIC NOTICE
This item does not require a public hearing and was noticed as a part of the City Council Agenda.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This action does not constitute a “project” pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
General Plan Goal OS-3
Recreational programming and facilities meet the needs of community members of all ages and abilities.
FISCAL IMPACT
Funds associated with this agreement are included in the FY 2023-24 budget, which was adopted by Council on June 6, 2023.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Staff is not aware of any conflicts of interest.
Attachments:
- Independence Day Agreement
431
Section 8, Item L.
CITY OF FOWLER
AGREEMENT FOR VENDOR SERVICES AT A CITY EVENT
This Vendor Services Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into between the City of Fowler, a California general law city ("City") and Fireworks & Stage FX America, LLC ("Vendor") (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Parties") with respect to the following recitals, which are a substantive part of this Agreement. This Agreement shall be effective on Q/6/2024 ("Effective Date").
RECITALS
A. City desires to obtain a firework display and the services of a licensed pyrotechnic operator ("Services") as more fully described in Exhibit A, which is incorporated herein by reference, for its Independence Day Celebration to take place on July 4, 2024, at Fowler High School ("Event").
B. Vendor is engaged in the business of furnishing the Services and hereby warrants and represents that Vendor is qualified, experienced, and capable of performing the Services, and possesses any required licenses, certifications, security/bonding, and/or training necessary to perform the Services.
C. City desires to retain Vendor, and Vendor desires to provide the City with the Services, on the terms and conditions as set forth in this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and mutual agreements herein, City and Vendor agree as follows:
AGREEMENT
1. Scope of Services. Vendor shall perform the Services described in the Recitals and detailed in Exhibit A. Changes in the scope of Services, including the work performed and/or deliverables produced, shall be made in writing and particularly describe the changes in Services, including payment/costs and schedule/term, as applicable.
2. Facilities. City will designate the specific location(s) and size for Vendor's booth, food truck, tent, cart, or other facilities ("Facilities"), if applicable, and will designate acceptable use of City electricity, water, or other utilities. Vendor shall provide its own Facilities and shall be solely responsible for setting up and taking down such Facilities and for clean-up of the area.
Vendor may begin setting up in coordination with City Contact Person, Yvonne Hernandez ([email protected]). Vendor must have disassembled its Facilities and completed clean up after one (1) hour following the conclusion of the Event. Vendor shall not unreasonably interfere with the operations of City or with any other vendor or contractor.
3. Personnel. Vendor shall provide all personnel reasonably appropriate to satisfactorily provide the Services, including but not limited to supervisory and licensed personnel. City shall provide security and safety personnel, including any firefighters on standby that may be required 432
Section 8, Item L.
433
Section 8, Item L.
434
Section 8, Item L.
435
Section 8, Item L.
436
Section 8, Item L.
437
Section 8, Item L.
438
Section 8, Item L.
439
Section 8, Item L.
440
Section 8, Item L.
441
Section 8, Item L.
442
Section 8, Item L.
443
Section 8, Item L.
444
Section 8, Item L.
445
Section 8, Item L.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: February 6, 2024
FROM: MARGARITA MORENO, Finance Director
SUBJECT: RECEIVE AND FILE the City of Fowler Cash and Investment Report for the Second Quarter ending December 31, 2023
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City earned $121,018 in interest income during the Second Quarter of Fiscal Year 2023-24.
BACKGROUND
The Cash and Investment Report provides a detaiedl financial summary of cash and investments for the City of Fowler. The cash balances of the City of Fowler are invested in Local Area Investment (LAIF), California Asset Management Program (CAMP) Joint Powers Authority Pool, and California Cooperative Liquid Assets Securities System (California CLASS).
As additional information, to ensure proper internal controls a dual approval procedure is required for any withdrawals by City Staff from all of the above entities.
PUBLIC NOTICE
This item does not require a public hearing and was noticed as a part of the City Council Agenda.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This action does not constitute a “project” pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
Interest income on City investments supports the implementation of the entire General Plan including its goals, policies, and action items.
FISCAL IMPACT
Interest earned will be allocated as a part of year-end process. 446
Section , Item 10A.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Staff is not aware of any conflicts of interest.
Attachments
- Cash & Investment Report
447
Section , Item 10A.
448
Section , Item 10A.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: February 6, 2024
FROM: MARGARITA MORENO, Finance Director
SUBJECT: Actions pertaining to the Fiscal Year 2023-24 mid-year budget report and budget amendments:
i. ACCEPT the Fiscal Year 2023-24 mid-year budget report. ii. APPROVE Resolution No. 2706 Fiscal Year 2023-24 budget amendments.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Fiscal Year 2023-24 mid-year budget report reflects the City’s revenues and expenditures through December 31, 2023. The mid-year budget report provides the data to inform any necessary budget amendments to ensure that the budget is balanced at the end of the Fiscal Year.
BACKGROUND
Staff recommend several budget amendments based on operational changes during the first half of the Fiscal Year, as well as staff’s stronger understanding of departmental operations and base budget needs. Below is a summary of revenues received and expenditures made for each fund type through December 31, 2023.
GENERAL FUND
The General Fund covers core services such as police, fire, public works, community development, parks, recreation, and the senior center. Sales and property taxes are the two largest sources of revenue in the General Fund. Revenues in the General Fund are at 23% and expenditures are at 55% at mid-year, as follows:
REVENUES
As summarized in Attachment A, General Fund revenues received through December 31, 2023, total 23% of the annual budget estimates, while expenditures at 55%. It is important to note that certain revenues are collected at various times throughout the year and not reflected in the mid-year report.
449
Section , Item 10B.
PROPERTY TAX
Revenues are at 2% of budget
The major portion of property tax revenue is not scheduled to be distributed to cities until the end of December or early January and therefore not reflected in this report.
PERMITS/LICENSES
Revenues are at 27% of budget
The City received 27% of permits/licenses fees through December 31, 2023.
Building permits are at $163,569 and plan check fees at $20,634 which make up a large portion of these estimated revenues. Additionally, business license renewals are not due until December 31, 2023 and therefore not reflected in this report.
FINES & FEES
Revenues are at 21% of budget
Fines and Fees are on target through December 31, 2023 at 21%.
USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY RENTAL INCOME
Revenues are at 867% of budget
The City has received 867% of use of money & property rental income, in which the majority of revenues is due to the City’s current investments reflecting interest income at $121,018 through December 31, 2023. The remaining revenues are from rental income received from Unwired broadband for the water tower. An adjustment to interest income revenues will be allocated to eligible funds as part of the yearend process.
MOTOR VEHICLE IN LIEU
Revenues are at 0% of budget
The Vehicle License (VLF) Fee payment will be received in the third quarter and is therefore reflected 0% at mid-year. The motor vehicle in lieu revenues are property tax shares allocated to cities and counties by the State.
SALES TAX
Revenues are at 38% of budget
The City has received 38% of sales tax revenues. Sales tax revenues are the largest revenue source in the General Fund. Sales tax is received two months in arrears, therefore, only reflecting four months of revenue at mid-year.
TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX
Revenues are at 36% of budget
Transient occupancy taxes are received on a quarterly basis, the first payment received in October is at 36% at mid-year. The second quarter payment is not reflected in the mid-year report.
FRANCHISE FEES
Revenues are at 16% of budget
Franchise fees are received on a quarterly basis. The first payment was received in October. The second quarter payment is not reflected in the mid-year.
SERVICES & OTHER FEES
Revenues are at 35% of budget
450
Section , Item 10B.
Revenues from services & other fees are currently at 35% and are anticipated to meet budgeted expectations. These revenues are from various sources such as recreation, inspection, planning, park maintenance, and special police services.
GRANTS
Revenues are at 38% of budget
Two allocations have been received from Local Public Safety Funds (LPSF). Staff anticipate grants to be on target at end of year.
OTHER MISC REVENUE
Revenues are at 127% of budget
Revenues from other sources at are currently at 127%. These miscellaneous revenues include donations, P.O.S.T reimbursements, restitution, and other refunds. It is typical for revenues in this category to reflect higher percentages than budgeted. A proposed budget amendment is needed to adjust for a one-time revenues received for the closure of the 2010 refunding bonds that were paid in full as of the second quarter.
TRANSFER IN
Revenues are at 0% of budget
A general ledger entry will be done to allocate the transfer in and transfer out to the appropriate funds at year end. In the second quarter a budget amendment is needed to increase General Fund transfer in from COPS grant.
EXPENDITURES
As summarized in Attachment A, the City has expended roughly 55% of its General Fund appropriations as of December 31, 2023. All departments are on target to their budgeted lines from actual to budget for mid-year. The mid-year budget review provides the City with an opportunity to make any necessary adjustments to ensure that the budget is balanced at the end of the fiscal year. As such, staff is recommending various budget amendments to reflect changes through the first half of the budget year.
As summarized in Attachment B, the summary of all funds revenues reflects the revenues and expenditures for the mid-year ending December 31, 2023, by fund type as summarized below:
ENTERPRISE FUNDS
WATER UTILITY FUNDS
Revenues 47% | Expenses 49%
Through December 31, 2023, expenses are at 49% of budget and revenues slightly lower at 47% of budget. Staff anticipate the Water Utility Fund budget to be on target for year end.
451
Section , Item 10B.
SPECIAL REVENUES
UTILITY USERS TAX
Revenues 57% | Expenses 25%
Utility User’s Tax are paid to the City one month in arrears. Five-month revenues are at $285,554 or 57% of budget, and expenses at 25%. At end of year transfer entry will be done to reconcile all transfers from UUT.
DISTRICT SALES TAX (MEASURE N)
Revenues 42% | Expenses 2%
District Sales Tax Funds are received on a monthly basis. Revenues are $750,245.
Revenues are received two months in arrears; therefore, this number only reflects four months of revenue. Expenses are currently at 2% of budget. A budget amendment is proposed to increase expenses to be offset by revenues received for the second quarter and to carryover equipment expenses from the prior year.
COPS GRANT
Revenues 109% | Expenses 0%
COPS grant reimbursements are processed once expenses are made. The expenses will be adjusted at year end. A budget amendment is proposed to adjust revenues to actual for additional revenues received to be offset by COPS transfer out to General Fund to offset Police expense.
RECYCLE GRANT
Revenues 0% | Expenses 20%
Recycle grant reimbursements are processed once expenses are made. Staff anticipates to be on target at end of year.
GAS TAX
Revenues 40% | Expenses 0%
Highway User Tax (gas tax) revenues are received monthly. The 40% reflects revenues received through the second quarter.
TRAFFIC CONGESTION RELIEF FUND-STREET PROJECTS
Revenues 0% | Expenses 0%
Traffic Congestion Relief Fund revenues are received for expenses for the Adams Avenue reconstruction project. A budget amendment is needed to bring revenues to actual for prior expense from Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBG) grant.
ARPA
Revenues 0% | Expenses 20%
American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds have been received at 100% in the prior Fiscal Year. The expenses are currently at 20% for the second quarter. Expenses budgeted for this fund include improvements for the Water Tower Rehabilitation and Visual Identity projects.
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUND ART 3 & 8
Revenues 169% | Expenses 5%
452
Section , Item 10B.
LTF revenues are generated from Fresno County. Expenses include utilities, PG&E, and street sweeping. A budget amendment is needed to bring revenues to actual to both Art 3 & Art 8 at mid-year.
MEASURE C
Revenues 70% | Expenses 0%
Measure C revenues are received on a monthly basis. $174,804 have been received through the second quarter. A budget amendment is proposed to increase expenses for Panzak ADA Improvements.
SB1 ROAD MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION FUNDS
Revenues 70% | Expenses 0%
SB1 revenues are received monthly from the State. Budgeted expenses include street paving projects to be completed by end of year.
ACTIVE TRANSPORT PROGRAM (ATP)
Revenues 8% | Expenses 3%
Revenues are received as expenses are incurred. Budgeted expenses include the Golden State Bike Trail Project.
SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BLOCK GRANT (STBG)
Revenues 0% | Expenses 0%
Revenues are received as expenses are incurred. Budgeted expenses include Manning Reconstruction Project.
MEASURE C TOD
Revenues 0% | Expenses 0%
Revenues are received as expenses are incurred for the Main Street Bikeway to Transit project. A budget amendment is needed to adjust improvement expenses to actual in the second quarter.
HCD SB2 GRANT
Revenues 0% | Expenses 0%
Revenues are received as expenses are incurred for the General Plan and Zoning Code update as reimbursement basis. A budget amendment is needed to adjust improvement expenses to actual in the second quarter.
CDBG
Revenues 1% | Expenses 0%
CDBG grant funds are currently at 1% for revenues and 0% for expenses in the second quarter for CDBG loan reimbursements.
STATE GRANT AB178
Revenues 0% | Expenses 0%
Revenues and Expenses at mid-year are at 0%. Revenues were received prior year to offset budgeted expenses for Police Department Headquarters & Senior Center construction to be on target by end of year.
DWR STATE GRANT
Revenues 0% | Expenses 1%
453
Section , Item 10B.
Revenues and Expenses at mid-year are at 1% for the Well 9 project.
BIKE PED TRAILS SUST TRAN
Revenues 0% | Expenses 0%
Revenues are received as expenses are incurred for the Bike, Pedestrian and Trails Master Plan. A budget amendment is needed to adjust planning consultant expenses to actual in the second quarter.
AB1600 IMPACT FEES
Due to high volume of development activity in the City and the newly-adopted impact fees, the various AB1600 revenues are reflecting a range from 24% to 83% for the mid-year. A budget amendment for AB1600 Water and Fire is proposed to adjust improvement expenses to actual in the second quarter.
DEBT SERVICE FUNDS
The long-term debt service 88-1 reflects 1% at mid-year. The remaining debt service of 100% reflects the final debt service payment made in September for the 2010 Refunding Bonds paid in full for the first quarter.
SUCCESSOR AGENCY FUNDS
RDA SUCCESSOR FUND
Revenues 13% | Expenses 92%
The Successor RDA is responsible for the 2010 refunding bonds debt service. The 13% reflects the final debt service payment made in September for the 2010 Refunding Bonds paid in full for the first quarter.
BUDGET AMENDMENTS
As summarized in Attachment C, staff propose several mid-year budget amendments to align the expenditures and revenues to the budget. The following budget amendments are proposed:
GENERAL FUND
Revenues
To bring revenues to actual in Miscellaneous Revenue for one-time revenues and in General Fund Transfer In to accommodate increased revenues.
Expenses
To bring expenses to actual several adjustments are needed, an increase to Police Department overtime to be offset by additional COPS grant funding received in the second quarter, an increase to salaries wages transfers from Parks to Streets due to staff reorganization, and increase to Information Technology for rents & leases and computer support due to developing a true base budget, and an increase to Streets for engineering consulting expense due to increase in projects. 454
Section , Item 10B.
SPECIAL FUNDS
District Sales Tax
An adjustment to increase revenues to actual for a Police Department equipment expense reimbursed by Grant Administrator City of Fresno for a technology grant from California Bureau of State and Community Corrections (BSCC). An adjustment to expenses is also needed for a prior year carryover for expense in police equipment that were paid in the second quarter.
Traffic Congestion Relief Fund-Streets Project
An adjustment is needed in revenues to record reimbursement for the ongoing Adams reconstruction phase 2 expenses incurred in prior years.
COPS Grant
An adjustment is needed in revenues to record additional COPS funding to be offset in expenses for a transfer out in COPS to a transfer in General Fund to be offset Police Department overtime expense.
LTF Art 3 & Art 8
An adjustment is needed to record additional revenues in Art 3 & Art 8 received to be offset by Bicycle & Pedestrian and 4
th & 5th Paving Projects expenses.
Measure C
An adjustment is needed to record additional improvements expense for Panzak ADA Improvements.
Measure C TOD Grant
An adjustment is needed to record additional planning consultant expenses for the grant reimbursement Bikeway to Transit design and for General Plan and Zoning Code update.
HCD SB2
An adjustment is needed to record additional planning consultant expenses for General Plan and zoning ordinance.
Bike Ped Trails Sust Grant
An adjustment is needed to record additional planning consultant expenses for the Bike, Pedestrian and Trails Master Plan.
AB1600 Impact Fees Funds
Two adjustments are needed to record additional improvements expenses for the completion of the solar project in Fire Impacts fees that was budgeted in prior year and in Water Impact Fees for a developer water line upsize.
Successor Agency
An adjustment to revenues is needed to record one-time revenue received for the closing out of the 2010 Ref Bond reserves.
455
Section , Item 10B.
PUBLIC NOTICE
This item does not require a public hearing and was noticed as a part of the City Council Agenda.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This action does not constitute a “project” pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
This action is not associated with a specific General Plan Goal, Policy, or Action Item. However, this action is consistent with the General Plan’s Community Vision and Supporting Principles.
FISCAL IMPACT
After the budget amendments, revenues and expenditures for all fund types are expected to be on target for the mid-year second quarter.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Staff is not aware of any conflicts of interest.
Attachments:
- A: General Fund Summary
- B: All Fund Summary
- Resolution 2706 Budget Amendment & Attachment C
456
Section , Item 10B.
ATTACHMENT A
GENERAL FUND SUMMARY REVENUES PERCENTAGE MID-YEAR BUDGET
BUDGET AS OF REVENUES PROJECTED VS
REVENUES 2023-2024 12/31/2023 12/31/2023 YEAR END PROJECTED PROPERTY TAX 955,250 18,652 2% 955,250 0
PERMITS/LICENSES 858,100 230,556 27% 858,100 0
FINES & FEES 11,500 2,449 21% 11,500 0
USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY RENTAL 14,500 125,730 867% 14,500 0 VLF 839,700 0 0% 839,700 0
SALES TAX 1,730,000 656,347 38% 1,730,000 0
TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX 153,000 55,604 36% 153,000 0
FRANCHISE FEES 428,200 68,573 16% 428,200 0
SERVICES FEES & OTHER 111,550 38,896 35% 111,550 0
GRANTS 337,650 128,148 38% 337,650 0
OTHER MISC REVENUE 64,666 81,964 127% 81,964 17,298
TRANSFER IN 745,325 0 0% 745,325 0
TOTAL REVENUES $6,249,441 $1,406,918 23% $6,266,739 $17,298
EXPENDITURES PERCENTAGE MID-YEAR BUDGET
BUDGET AS OF EXPENDITURES PROJECTED VS
EXPENDITURES 2023-2024 12/31/2023 12/31/2023 YEAR END PROJECTED CITY COUNCIL 44,320 23,412 53% 44,320 0
ADMINISTRATION 454,384 253,696 56% 454,384 0
CITY CLERK 147,500 58,110 39% 147,500 0
FINANCE 312,861 187,028 60% 312,861 0
CITY ATTORNEY 180,000 93,400 52% 180,000 0
GENERAL GOVERNMENT 253,962 198,490 78% 253,962 0
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 74,150 84,320 114% 84,320 10,170 POLICE 1,881,958 1,090,482 58% 1,881,958 0
FIRE 269,616 241,002 89% 269,616 0
ANIMAL CONTROL 7,000 381 5% 7,000 0
PUBLIC WORKS-STREET 754,531 375,540 50% 754,531 0
PLANNING 516,035 276,582 54% 516,035 0
BUILDING 419,353 173,108 41% 419,353 0
PUBLIC WORKS-PARK MAINT 639,055 238,106 37% 639,055 0
RECREATION 166,484 108,135 65% 166,484 0
SENIOR CENTER 161,643 72,040 45% 161,643 0
TOTAL EXPENSES $6,282,852 $3,473,830 55% $6,293,022 $10,170 457
Section , Item 10B.
ATTACHMENT B
REVENUES EXPENSES
MID YEAR
ALL FUND SUMMARY MID-YEAR BUDGET MID-YEAR BUDGET PROJECTED 2023-2024 REVENUES AS PERCENT PROJECTED VS 2023-2024 EXPENSES AS PERCENT PROJECTED VS REVENUES/ BUDGET OF 12/31/23 REC'S YTD YEAR END PROJECTED BUDGET OF 12/31/23 USED YTD YEAR END PROJECTED (EXPENSES)
GENERAL FUND
General Fund $6,249,441 $1,406,918 23% $6,266,739 $17,298 $6,282,852 $3,473,830 55% $6,293,022 10,170 $7,128
ENTERPRISE FUNDS
Water Utility 1,586,600 751,373 47% 1,586,600 0 2,037,094 993,751 49% 2,037,094 0 0Water Well Maintenance 113,000 0 0% 113,000 0 0 0 0% 0 0 0Groundwater Recharge CID 50,000 0 0% 50,000 0 410,669 410,669 100% 410,669 0 0 TCP 602,000 0 0% 602,000 0 2,800,000 16,409 1% 2,800,000 0 0 Sub-total $2,351,600 $751,373 32% $2,351,600 $0 $5,247,763 $1,420,829 27% $5,247,763 $0 $0
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
Utility Users Tax 500,000 285,554 57% 500,000 0 1,169,960 293,670 25% 1,169,960 0 0 District Sales Tax 1,800,000 750,245 42% 1,800,000 0 4,176,047 87,462 2% 4,176,047 0 0COPS Grant 125,000 136,159 109% 136,159 11,159 125,000 0 0% 125,000 0 11,159Recycle Grant 5,000 0 0% 5,000 0 5,000 1,000 20% 5,000 0 0Gas Tax 179,847 71,720 40% 179,847 0 93,600 0 0% 93,600 0 0 Streets Projects 0 262,941 0% 262,941 262,941 0 0 0% 0 0 262,941 ARPA Funding 0 0 0% 0 0 283,000 56,806 20% 283,000 0 0
LTF Article 3 16,000 27,062 169% 27,062 11,062 30,000 0 0% 30,000 0 11,062 LTF Article 8 709,069 1,270,568 0% 1,270,568 561,499 618,000 33,472 5% 618,000 0 561,499 Measure C 250,338 174,804 70% 250,338 0 194,663 0 0% 194,663 0 0 Road Maint & Rehab SB1 172,102 120,970 70% 172,102 0 323,096 0 0% 323,096 0 0 Active Trnsport Pln (ATP) 600,000 49,640 8% 600,000 0 600,000 20,779 3% 600,000 0 0 Srfc Trns Blck Grnat -STBG 900,000 0 0% 900,000 0 900,000 0 0% 900,000 0 0 Measure C TOD 0 0 0% 0 0 0 8,540 0% 8,540 8,540 (8,540) HCD SB2 Grant 0 0 0% 0 0 0 13,383 0% 13,383 13,383 (13,383) CDBG 16,000 7,167 1% 16,000 0 0 0 0% 0 0 0State Grant AB178 0 0 0% 0 0 4,000,000 0 0% 4,000,000 0 0 DWR State Grant 2,100,000 0 0% 2,100,000 0 2,100,000 27,202 1% 2,100,000 0 0Bike Ped Trails Sust Tran 0 0 0% 0 0 7,926 24,087 0% 24,087 16,161 (16,161) AB1600 General Service 60,000 21,840 36% 60,000 0 143,563 18,563 13% 143,563 0 0AB1600 Law Enforcement 60,000 15,395 26% 60,000 0 450,000 67,792 15% 450,000 0 0AB1600 Fire 123,406 61,631 50% 123,406 0 475,000 30,115 6% 475,000 0 0AB1600 Trf Mtgtn & Impact 80,000 40,541 51% 80,000 0 0 0 0% 0 0 0AB1600 Parks 80,000 64,275 80% 80,000 0 1,030,000 254,698 25% 1,030,000 0 0 AB1600 Water 140,000 43,731 31% 140,000 0 0 23,581 0% 23,581 23,581 (23,581) AB1600 Ground Wtr Rchrg 50,000 0 0% 50,000 0 50,000 0 0% 50,000 0 0 AB1600 Sewer 80,000 66,338 83% 80,000 0 0 0 0% 0 0 0
AB1600 Storm Drain 80,000 19,117 24% 80,000 0 0 0 0% 0 0 0 Caltrans SR 99/Manning 150 0 0% 150 0 0 0 0% 0 0 0
Sub-total $8,126,912 $3,489,696 1% $8,973,573 $846,661 $16,774,855 $961,150 6% $16,836,521 $61,666 $784,995
DEBT SERVICE FUNDS
Debt Service 88-1 39,285 0 0% 39,285 0 0 0 0% 0 0 0Assesmt Dist 1993-R Debt Svc 80,341 0 0% 80,341 0 27,764 27,763 100% 27,764 0 0 Assesmt Dist 1993-1 Hospital Bdg Lease 15,600 0 0% 15,600 0 15,600 15,600 100% 15,600 0 0 Assesmt Dist 1993-1 Merced Rehab 93,600 0 0% 93,600 0 93,600 93,600 100% 93,600 0 0Assesmt Dist 1994-R Debt Svc 169,633 15,293 1% 169,633 0 134,880 134,879 100% 134,880 0 0 Sub-total $398,459 $15,293 9% $398,459 $0 $271,844 $271,842 100% $271,844 $0 $0
SUCCESSOR AGENCY FUNDS
Successor Agency 2000 RDA Loan 111,260 14,604 13% 111,260 0 111,260 102,746 92% 111,260 0 0 Sub-total $111,260 $14,604 13% $111,260 $0 $111,260 $102,746 92% $111,260 $0 $0
FINANCE AUTHORITY FUND
Public Financing Authority (PFA) 365,821 0 0% 365,821 0 364,396 4,250 1% 364,396 0 0 Sub-total $365,821 0 0% $365,821 $0 $364,396 $4,250 $0 $364,396 $0 $0 458
Section , Item 10B.
RESOLUTION NO. 2706
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOWLER
APPROVING AND ADOPTING BUDGET AMENDMENTS FOR VARIOUS FUNDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023/2024
WHEREAS, the FY 2023/2024 Annual Budget reflects the City of Fowler’s ongoing commitment to providing core services; and
WHEREAS, the FY 2023/2024 Annual Budget was approved by the City Council on June 6, 2023, by Resolution 2645, and any subsequent amendments must be approved by Resolution; and
WHEREAS, a budget amendment is necessary to align the expected revenues and expected expenses.
WHEREAS, the budget amendment attached hereto as Attachment C specifies the various proposed budget amendments for various funds.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Fowler City Council hereby resolves that the FY 2023/2024 budget be amended as described in Attachment C hereto to provide the necessary funding to various funds.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of February 2024, at a regular meeting of the Fowler City Council by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
APPROVED:
___________________________
Daniel T. Parra, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Angela Vasquez, City Clerk
459
Section , Item 10B.
ATTACHMENT C
REQUEST FOR BUDGET AMENDMENT
Resolution No. 2706
Requested by: Margarita Moreno Budget Amounts
Account Numbers: Fund Name Description Increase Decrease Revenues
100-3706 General Fund-Misc Revenues $ 57,000
100-3900 General Fund- Transfer In $ 11,159
201-3706 Measure N-Misc Revenues $ 10,000
211-3650 Streets Project-Revenues $ 262,942
220-3605 LTF-Art 3-Revenues $ 11,062
225-3606 LTF-Revenues $ 561,499
850-3706 Successor Agency-Misc Revenues $ 14,604
Expenses
6120-5030 General Fund-Police-Overtime $ 11,159
6170-5180 General Fund-Information Technology-Rent & Leases $ 35,000 6170-5230 General Fund-Information Technology-Computer Support $ 47,000 6200-5010 General Fund-Streets-Salaries-Full Time $ 15,000 6200-5510 General Fund-Streets-Engeering Consulting $ 70,000 6260-5010 General Fund-Parks-Salaries-Full Time $ 15,000 2010-5715 Measure N -Equipment $ 22,371
2060-5900 COPS Grant-Transfer Out $ 11,159
2300-5710 Measure C-Improvements $ 57,500
2380-5520 Measure C TOD Grant-Planning Consultant $ 16,500 2380-5710 Measure C TOD Grant-Improvements $ 127,267
2390-5520 HCD SB2 Grant $ 26,508
2580-5520 Bike Ped Trails Sust Tran-Planning Consultant $ 124,650 7300-5710 AB1600 Fire-Improvements $ 15,503
7600-5710 AB1600 Water-Improvements $ 23,581
Reason(s) for Budget Amendment:
Finance Director
Signature Date
City Manager
Signature Date
City Council: Approved Resolution #__________ Denied
Journal Entry No. _______________ Date Posted ___________ By: ____________________________ To align expenses and revenues to second quarter FY 2023/24 budget, staff request budget amendments to the following funds:
General Fund Revenues: Second quarter adjustments for projected year-end to actual:
• General Fund-Misc Revenues, $57,000: To adjust to actual revenues for one-time revenues received for closing out of the 2010 Ref Bond reserves . • General Fund-Transfer In, $11,159: To adjust to actual transfer in from COPS Grant to offset Police overtime.
General Fund Expenses: Second quarter adjustments for projected year-end to actual:
• Fund-Police-Overtime, $11,159: To adjust to actual funding transfered from COPS to offsett Police Department overtime. • General Fund-Information Technology-Rent & Leases, $35,000: To adjust to actual to develop a true base for expenses. • General Fund-Information Technology-Computer Support, $47,000: To adjust to actual to develop a true base for expenses. • General General Fund-Streets-Salaries, $15,000: To adjust to actual an increase in salaries expenses for Public Works Department reorganization from Parks.
• General Fund-Streets-Engineering Consulting, $70,000: To adjust to actual engineering consultant for City operations and certain fee based items such encroachment permits.
• General Fund-Parks-Salaries, $15,000: To adjust to actual a decrease in salaries expenses for Public Works Department reorganization to Streets.
Special Revenue Funds: Second quarter adjustments for projected year-end to actual:
• Measure N-Misc Revenues, $10,000: To adjust to actual police equipment reimbursement for a technology grant (BSCC) from Grant Administrator City of Fresno.
• Street Projects-Program Income, $262,942: To adjust to actual revenues for Adams Avenue reconstruction project expenses reimbursement for prior year.
• LTF Art 3-Revenues, $11,062: To adjust to actual revenues received from LTF to offset Bicycle & Pedestrian expenses. • LTF Art 8-Revenus, $561,499: To adjust to actual revenues received from LTF to offset 4th & 5th Paving expenses. • Successor Agency, $14,604: To adjust to acutal revenues for one-time revenues received for closing out of the 2010 Ref Bond reserves.
Special Expenses Funds: Second quarter adjustments for projected year-end to actual:
• Measure N- Equipment, $22,371: Adjust to actual police equipment carryover from prior year expesnes. • COPS Grant-Transfer Out, $11,159: To adjust to actual transfer out to general fund to offset Police Department overtime expenses. • Measure C-Improvements, $57,500: To adjust to actual expenses Panzak ADA improvements. • Measure C TOD-Planning Consultant, $16,500: To adjust to actual grant expense reimbursement for Bikewary to Transit design. • Measrue C TOD-Improvements, $127,267: To adjust to actual grant expense for actual construction to Bikeway to Transit project. • HCD SB2 Grant-Planning Consultant, $26,508: To adjust to actual grant expense for general plan and zoning ordinance. • Bike Ped Trails Sust Grant-Planning Consulting, $124,650: Adjust to actual grant expense for Bike, Pedestrian and Trails Master Plan. • AB1600-Fire-Improvements, $15,503: Adjust to actual completion of fire station solar project carryover from prior year. • AB1600-Water-Improvements, $23,581: Adjust to actual expense for Woodside Homes reimbursement for upsizing a water line, per the terms of their Subdivision Agreement.
460
Section , Item 10B.