Agenda packet — Garden Grove City Council, August 13, 2024 (part 1 of 4)

AGENDA

Garden Grove City Council

Tuesday, August 13, 2024
6:30 PM

Community Meeting Center
11300 Stanford Avenue
Garden Grove, California 92840
Steve Jones
Mayor
Cindy Tran
Mayor Pro Tem – District 3
George S. Brietigam
Council Member – District 1
John R. O’Neill
Council Member – District 2
Joe DoVinh
Council Member – District 4
Stephanie Klopfenstein
Council Member – District 5
Kim B. Nguyen-Penaloza
Council Member – District 6

Meeting Assistance: Any person requiring auxiliary aids and services, due to a disability, to address the City Council, should contact the City Clerk's Office 72 hours prior to the meeting to arrange for accommodations. Phone: (714) 741-5040.

Agenda Item Descriptions: Are intended to give a brief, general description of the item. The City Council may take legislative action deemed appropriate with respect to the item and is not limited to the recommended action indicated in staff reports or the agenda.

Documents/Writings: Any revised or additional documents/writings related to an item on the agenda distributed to all or a majority of the Council Members within 72 hours of a meeting, are made available for public inspection at the same time (1) in the City Clerk's Office at 11222 Acacia Parkway, Garden Grove, CA 92840, during normal business hours; (2) on the City's website as an attachment to the City Council meeting agenda; and (3) at the Council Chamber at the time of the meeting.

Public Comments: Members of the public who attend the meeting in -person and would like to address the City Council are requested to complete a pink speaker card indicating their name and address, and identifying the subject matter they wish to address. This card should be given to the City Clerk before the meeting begins. General comments are made during "Oral Communications" and should be limited to matters under consideration and/or what the City Council has jurisdiction over. Persons wishing to address the City Council regarding a Public Hear ing matter will be called to the podium at the time the matter is being considered.

Manner of Addressing the City Council: After being called by the Mayor, you may approach the podium, it is requested that you state your name for the record, and proceed to address the City Council. All remarks and questions should be addressed to the City Council as a whole and not to individual Council Members or staff members. Any person making impertinent, slanderous, or profane remarks or who becomes boisterous while addressing the City Council shall be called to order by the Mayor. If such conduct continues, the Mayor may order the person barred from addressing the City Council any further during that meeting.

Time Limitation: When any group of persons wishes to address the City Council on the same subject matter, the Mayor may request a spokesperson be chosen to represent the group, so as to avoid unnecessary repetition. At the City Council's discretion, a limit on the total amount of time for public comments during Oral Communications and/or a further limit on the time allotted to each speaker during Oral Communications may be set.

Page 2 of 5 ends

PLEASE SILENCE YOUR CELL PHONES DURING THE MEETING.

AGENDA

ROLL CALL: COUNCIL MEMBER BRIETIGAM, COUNCIL MEMBER O'NEILL, COUNCIL MEMBER

DOVINH, COUNCIL MEMBER KLOPFENSTEIN, COUNCIL MEMBER NGUYEN-

PENALOZA, MAYOR PRO TEM TRAN, MAYOR JONES

INVOCATION

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

PRESENTATIONS

1. Community Spotlight in recognition of Joe Chandler and Joan Grosse for being named the 2024 Strawberry Ball King and Queen/Senior Volunteer Man and Woman of the Year.

[Item 319/2024]

2. Community Spotlight in recognition of the Garden Grove Strawberry Festival Association for organizing the 2024 Garden Grove Strawberry Festival.

[Item 320/2024]

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS (TO BE HELD SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH OTHER LEGISLATIVE

BODIES)

WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS

3. Consideration of a written request from the Union of Vietnamese Student Associations to conduct the 43rd annual UVSA Tet Festival (Action Item)

[Item 318/2024]

RECESS

CONDUCT OTHER LEGISLATIVE BODIES' BUSINESS

RECONVENE

CONSENT ITEMS (CONSENT ITEMS WILL BE ACTED ON SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH ONE

MOTION UNLESS SEPARATE DISCUSSION AND/OR ACTION IS REQUESTED BY A

COUNCIL MEMBER)

4. Adoption of a Proclamation recognizing Joe Chandler and Joan Grosse for being named the 2024 Strawberry Ball King and Queen, and for being named as Senior Volunteer Man and Woman of the Year. (Action Item)

[Item 322/2024]

Page 3 of 5 ends

5. Adoption of a Resolution authorizing submittal of financing and grant application by the City on behalf of the Orange County Water District for building local PFAS water treatment facilities at City’s wells. (Action Item)

[Item 329/2024]

6. Acceptance of the Magnolia Park Improvement Project No. S-1311, as complete. (Action Item)

[Item 305/2024]

7. Appropriation of Fiscal Year 2024-25 Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) funds. (Action Item)

[Item 321/2024]

8. Appropriation of Fiscal Year 2024-25 Public Safety Realignment and Post- Release Community Supervision Funds. (Action Item)

[Item 308/2024]

9. Approval to participate in the 2024-2025 Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program. (Grant Amount: $200,000) (Action Item)

[Item 310/2024]

10. Approval to submit a response to the Grand Jury Report, “E-bikes Friend or Foe.” (Action Item)

[Item 317/2024]

11. Approval to submit a response to the Grand Jury Report, Law Enforcement's Response to Mental Health Calls for Service. (Action Item)

[Item 336/2024]

12. Approval of new lease agreements with the County of Orange for the Tibor Rubin and Chapman Library branches. (Action Item)

[Item 307/2024]

13. Approval of a Subdivision Agreement and Final Tract Map No. 19273 with GGBROOKHURST, 2024, LLC., for the property located at 13252 Brookhurst Street, Garden Grove. (Action Item)

[Item 315/2024]

14. Approval of a contract with Select Electric, Inc., for emergency repair services at the Medal of Honor Bike and Pedestrian Trail. (Cost: 65,544.02) (Action Item)

[Item 323/2024]

15. Authorization of the issuance of purchase orders with Econolite Control Products and JTB Supply Company, Inc., for Fiscal Year 2024-25 for Traffic Control Operations. (Cost: $75,000 Econolite; $125,000 JTB Supply Company) (Action Item) [Item 333/2024]

Page 4 of 5 ends

16. Receive and file the minutes from the meeting held on June 11, 2024. (Action Item)

[Item 334/2024]

17. Receive and file warrants. (Action Item)

[Item 326/2024]

18. Approval to waive full reading of ordinances listed. (Action Item)

[Item 327/2024]

PUBLIC HEARINGS (MOTION TO APPROVE WILL INCLUDE ADOPTION OF EACH RESOLUTION UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED.)

19. Adoption of a Resolution contingently revoking an existing Conditional Use Permit and approving modified Conditional Use Permit No. CUP-284-09 (REV. 2024), for property located at 12941 Main Street, to permit an existing restaurant to operate a billiard parlor with eight (8) pool tables as an incidental use; and the introduction and first reading of an Ordinance amending Chapter

5.40 of the Garden Grove Municipal Code pertaining to pool rooms and approving Zoning Amendment No. A-039-2024 amending Chapters 9.04, and

9.18 of the Garden Grove Municipal Code, entitled:

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GARDEN GROVE APPROVING ZONING AMENDMENT NO. A-039-2024 AND AMENDING CHAPTER

5.40 OF TITLE 5 AND CHAPTERS 9.04 AND 9.18 OF TITLE 9 OF THE GARDEN

GROVE MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO POOL ROOMS, BILLIARD PARLORS AND POOL HALLS, AND INCIDENTAL AMUSEMENT DEVICES. (Action Item)

[Item 286/2024]

COMMISSION/COMMITTEE MATTERS

20. Acceptance of Member Timothy Brady's resignation from the Administrative Board of Appeals. (Action Item)

[Item 335/2024]

ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION

21. Authorization of the issuance of a purchase order to Coastline Equipment for two (2) new John Deere loader tractors. (Cost: $398,818.88) (Action Item)

[Item 312/2024]

22. Approval of an agreement with Blue Violet Networks LLC for the installation of a new security camera system at the Community Meeting Center, Senior Center, Magnolia Park Family Resource Center, and Buena Clinton Family Center. (Cost: $158,015.19) (Action Item)

[Item 306/2024]

Page 5 of 5 ends

23. Approval of Amendment No. 2 for Quality Fence for the Caltrans Fencing Improvement Project. (Cost: $466,459.90) (Action Item)

[Item 316/2024]

24. Award a contract to R. J. Noble Company for the 2024 Arterial Streets Rehabilitation Project, City Project No. CP-1376000.(Cost: $8,270,264) (Action Item)

[Item 325/2024]

MATTERS FROM THE MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, AND CITY MANAGER

25. Discussion of an anti-camping ordinance as requested by Council Member Brietigam.

[Item 330/2024]

ADJOURNMENT

The next Regular Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, August 27, 2024, at 5:30 p.m. in the Community Meeting Center, 11300 Stanford Avenue, Garden Grove, California, 92840. 5 Item 318/2024
Final
City of Garden Grove

INTER-DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM

To:

Lisa L. Kim From: John Montanchez
Dept:

City Manager Dept: Community Services
Date: 8/13/2024

Subject: Consideration of a written request from the Union of Vietnamese Student Associations to conduct the 43rd annual UVSA Tet Festival. (Action Item)

OBJECTIVE

To transmit a written request on behalf of the Union of Vietnamese Student Associations (UVSA) to conduct the 43rd annual UVSA Tet Festival at Garden Grove Park on Saturday, February 1, 2025 and Sunday, February 2, 2025.

BACKGROUND

Founded in 1982, UVSA of Southern California is a 501(c)3 non-profit, community-based and youth-oriented organization designed to provide a united voice for youth and professional leaders from across Southern California. The organization is committed to leadership development, cultural awareness, civic engagemen t, and community service, UVSA is composed entirely of unpaid volunteers including students, alumni, professionals, educators, and community leaders.

The organization has hosted the annual Tet Festival in Orange County for the past 42 years, and several consecutive years in Garden Grove with the last festival held in 2013. Over the past 42 years, the UVSA T et Festival has significantly improved in many areas over time, such as better displays of Vietnamese culture and traditions, and increased collaborati ons with local community organizations. The UVSA allocates a portion of Tet Festival profits to the Tet Community Assistance Fund as means of offering grants to new or existing community projects. UVSA has awarded over $2,000,000 in community grants over t he past 20 years.

In 2024, the UVSA Tet Festival was held at the Costa Mesa Fairgrounds with approximately 20,000 attendees.

DISCUSSION

Staff received a written proposal from the Union of Vietnamese Student Associations (UVSA) to conduct the 43rd annual UVSA Tet Festival at Garden Grove Park on Saturday, February 1, 2025 from 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and Sunday, February 2, 2025 from 10:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. The UVSA Tet Festival will bring together an inte rnational audience across a two -day weekend to sho wcase Vietnamese culture, food and entertainment. Activities will include 6 Item 318/2024

Page 2 of 3 ends

traditional performances, art exhibits, culinary showcases, and cultural games. The festival serves not only as a festivity welcoming the Lunar New Year, but also as an essential platform for celebrating Vietnamese culture, traditions, and unity among the community.

The UVSA would like to host the two-day festival at Garden Grove Park as it offers numerous advantages:
 The central location is easily accessible to the large Vietnamese population in Orange County and the surrounding areas, ensuring high attendance.  The park provides a spacious environment for the diverse range of activities, booths, and entertainment planned for the festival.
 Garden Grove has a history of supporting com munity events, and the local residents have always shown enthusiasm in cultural celebrations.
 The park is equipped to handle large crowds, with ample parking nearby and accessibility features for all attendees.
 Little Saigon, located within Garden Grove and Westminster, represents one of the largest Vietnamese communities outside of Vietnam, making it an ideal location to showcase local businesses.

If the proposal is approved, staff will prepare a formal agreement between the City and the UVSA. The agreement will include the following provisions:
 UVSA will reimburse the City for all of the City’s costs attributable to the operation of the two-day festival.
 UVSA and its contractors and vendors must comply with insurance requirements, including designation of the City of Garden Grove as an additional insured on the insurance policies.
 UVSA will comply with all city, county and state laws and regulations applicable to the two-day festival.

UVSA will be responsible for notifying residents and businesses regarding the event and any roads that will experience closures, as well as the hours for these closures.

7 Item 318/2024

Page 3 of 3 ends

FINANCIAL IMPACT

The UVSA would be required to reimburse the City for all direct costs incurred in support of the two-day festival. Therefore, it is anticipated that there would not be any financial impact to the City to approve the proposal for conducting the 43rd annual UVSA Tet Festival at Garden Grove Park on Saturday, February 1, 2025 and Sunday, February 2, 2025.

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that the City Council:
 Consider the written proposal from the Union of Vietna mese Student Associations to conduct the 43rd annual UVSA Tet Festival at Garden Grove Park on Saturday, February 1, 2025 and Sunday, February 2, 2025; and
 If the proposal is approved, authorize the City Manager to prepare and execute a formal agreement between the City and the Union of Vietna mese Student Associations to conduct the 43rd annual UVSA Tet Festival at Garden Grove Park.

By: Janet Pelayo, Deputy Director

ATTACHMENT

1. Proposal for the 43rd annual UVSA Tet Festival

8 F^-^-
<?JV-1'
j^'i^1&?^VN^TTTfe^-1 4^'^-.^i^^?^i::
2025-s
-•".
-»;1
BQ te55 a&••? IMKI5i a5
K5M Mial
55 M
SfWr^
siaisiis^
•^^:?"il
^s^ '?
Prepared for:

Garden Grove City Council
(714) 576-6411 •
••f- • *'• co n+a [email protected]
Presented by:

MaiLvTran .
12831 Western Ave, Unit B
•
Garden Grove, CA 92841
t;
^ . "rs<
«'—
•'?.-~^f
w
9 Table of Contents............................................................................^ Letter of Intent..................................................................................^ About UVSA.........................................................................................5 UVSATet Festival.............................................................................? Attractions..........................................................................................10 Letters ofSupport..........................................................................18 Past Tet Community Assistant Fund Recipients........20
Thank you............................................................................................21 ^=^
10 ER OFftlTENT
To the City Council of Garden Grove,
On behalf of the Union of Vietnamese Student Associations, I, MaiLyTran, am honored to present our candidacy for the 43rd annual UVSA Tet Festival in Garden Grove, California.

I first attended UVSATet Festival in 2011, at the Garden Grove Park. I was only 8 years old, but I still remember the magic of the event. I did not grow up surrounded by Vietnamese people, so for the first time, I truly felt a sense of belonging. The vibrant ao dais, the traditional music, and the aroma of authentic Vietnamese cuisine created a space both enchanting and comforting. The festival was more than just an event; it was a moment where I felt truly seen and embraced by my community.

That memory has stayed with me throughout the years, inspiring me to be involved in UVSA and to share the beauty of Vietnamese culture with others. It is this personal connection and passion that drives my commitment to bringing the UVSATet Festival back to Garden Grove Park. I want to recreate that same sense of magic and belonging for other Vietnamese-Americans, especially young Vietnamese-Americans, giving them a place where they can feel proud of their heritage.

Our team is committed to organizing a festival that honors our traditions while embracing the community. We plan to include traditional dance and music performances, lion dances, food vendors offering authentic Vietnamese cuisine, cultural exhibits, and a range offamily-friendly activities.
11 Hosting the festival at Garden Grove Park offers numerous advantages:
• The central location is easily accessible to the large Vietnamese population in Orange County and the surrounding areas, ensuring high attendance
• The park provides a spacious environment for the diverse range of activities, booths, and entertainment planned for the festival • Garden Grove has a history of supporting community events, and the local residents have always shown enthusiasm in cultural celebrations • The park is equipped to handle large crowds, with ample parking nearby and accessibility features for all attendees
• Little Saigon, located within Garden Grove and Westminster represents one of the largest Vietnamese communities outside of Vietnam, making it an ideal location to showcase local businesses The 43rd annual UVSA Tet Festival in Garden Grove Park will not only celebrate the Vietnamese New Year but also strengthen the bonds within the community and promote cultural appreciation among all attendees.

Thank you for considering our candidacy. We look forward to the opportunity to bring the Te't Festival to Garden Grove and to contribute to the ongoing legacy of this significant cultural event
Sincerely,
MaiLyTran
Tet Festival Chairwoman 2025
[email protected] | (949)547-8077
fVr%w\.
12 '"a^

IOUT UVA
The Union of Vietnamese Student Associations of Southern California (Tong hoi Sinh vien Viet Nam mien Nam California) The Union of Vietnamese Student Associations of Southern California's mission is to bring together Vietnamese American students and young professionals across Southern California to build unity, to serve the community, and to advocate for social justice issues that affect our community domestically and in Vietnam.

We are a 501(c)(3) non-profit, non-partisan, community-based and youth-oriented organization designed to provide a united voice for youth and professional leaders from across Southern California.

UVSA was founded in 1982 as a means for the Vietnamese diaspora community to organize socially and politically. Committed to leadership development, cultural awareness, civic engagement, and community service, UVSA is composed entirely of unpaid volunteers including students, alumni, professionals, educators, and community leaders.

We are the smallest regional UVSA with the largest concentration of Vietnamese people—300,000 out of 3.1 million Vietnamese- Americans in the United States, or approximately 1 in every 10 Vietnamese-Americans, live in Southern California. 1 in every 5 Vietnamese-Americans live in California (2020 Census).
13 TOUT uvA
Member Schools
Representing the Vietnamese collegiate community from
various colleges across Southern California, Vietnamese Student Associations continue to strive towards their specific missions.

UVSA provides a space for these organizations to collaborate through the Inter-Collegiate Council. Each member organization assigns 1-2 representatives to assist in the coordination of inter- collegiate events. Membership into the Inter-Collegiate Council is voted upon and approved with simple majority of existing council representatives in office.

Constituent Schools
Chapman University
Cal Poly Pomona
CSU Fullerton
CSU Long Beach
CSU Northridge
CSU San Marcos
San Diego State University
UC Irvine
DC Riverside
UC Santa Barbara
UC San Diego
University of Southern California
14 8A TET itSTIvJSf
About the UVSA Tet Festival (Hoi Tet Sinh Vien)
Since its origins in 1982, the UVSA Tet Festival (HQi Tet Sinh Vien) is recognized as the nation's largest Vietnamese Lunar New Year Festival. With over 200 staff members and over 500 day-of volunteers, the UVSA Tet Festival brings together an
international audience across a three day weekend to showcase Vietnamese culture, food, and entertainment. Over the past 42 years, the UVSATet Festival has significantly improved in many areas over time, such as better displays of Vietnamese culture and traditions, and increased collaborations with local community organizations.

The UVSATet Festival has been a cornerstone of Vietnamese cultural celebration, drawing tens of thousands of attendees each year. It serves not only as a festivity welcoming the Lunar New Year but also as an essential platform for celebrating Vietnamese culture, traditions, and unity among the community.

Our organization is dedicated to preserving and showcasing the richness of our heritage during the festival.
15 8A TET ASTIV.AL
What is Tet?
Tet is a celebration of the Lunar New Year, the most observed holiday for Vietnamese people.

Objectives

1. To celebrate Lunar New Year

2. To preserve and promote Vietnamese culture & traditions with the surrounding community

3. To provide opportunities for local businesses to promote their products and services

4. To raise funds for educational and cultural programs in the community

5. To bring Vietnamese youths together and provide them with opportunities for leadership development and community
service
^=~^
^— ^
16 8A TET itSTlvJu.

Lunar New Year
January 29, 2025
Ideal Operational Dates and Hours
Saturday, February 1, 2025; 10AM - 10PM
Sunday, February 2, 2025; 10AM - 9PM
Alternative Operational Dates and Hours
Saturday, February 8, 2025; 10AM - 10PM
Sunday, February 9, 2025; 10AM - 9PM
Location
Garden Grove Park
9301 Westminster Blvd, Garden Grove, CA 92844
Admissions Costs
$8 per guest
Attendance
20,000-25,000 attendees
17 Opening Ceremony
Top left: Lang Vietnam rendition of the Ancestral Altar Procession (Le RiJcic KieuT6).Top right:

Festival directors line up to greet guests during the parade. Bottom left: Lion dance opens the precession to bring forth prosperity and good fortune. Bottom right: Vietnamese veterans holding up both the Southern Vietnamese flag and the American flag. 18 rfAVA
x
Miss Vietnam of Southern California Pageant
•OfWTNUUmDENI ASSOCU-HON;
WESTWINSTHCAliUU
'Aii,,' •/>.„„.» ^•.).^),^iif,

ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUMDIEO EVEN
Top left: The crowning of Miss Vietnam of Southern California 2020 . Top right: The 2024 Royal Court greeting festival goers. Bottom left: The 2023 Royal Court pose for one of their sponsors.

Bottom right: The new Miss Vietnam of Southern California of 2024, Vivian a Nguyen Thai HaVi. ^
19 RAerrf^tS
•y^.

Contests
zz^
\
Top: Community dance competition on the main stage. Top left: Boba drinking contest on the contest stage. Top right: Watermelon eating contest on the contest stage Bottom right: Pho eating contest on the contest stage.
<^^.^-~ -^
20 7h^
Lang Viet Nam (Cultural Village)
Top left: Festival goers write their wishes and tie it to the fence in hopes it comes true. Top right:

Singer with the American flag, LVN flags, and Southern Vietnamese flag in the background.

Bottom left: The Queen and Court Officials of the Ancestral Altar Procession (Le Radc Kieu To).

Bottom right: Singers on the LVN community stage.
21 RACT^S <
Lunar Night
Top left: Sam dance partner with singer for their performance. Top right: Two volunteer singers performing a duel Bottom left: A school group performs a dance using flat palm hats (ba tam).

Bottom right: Singer in bright pink ao dai.
-E^.
22 TRACTI^IS
Food Vendors
S-^ay .. t^Wl.y
Top left: Booths of both local and popular food vendors. Top right: Vendors selling cute anime merchandise and keychains by the carnival. Bottom left: The festival view from the food vendors perspective. Bottom right: Two festival attendees sharing a meal underneath the heat lamps. 23 RACTI^^i
Grand Concert
-<^y f
7^.
jn^t
1?^
^
-^••"•\'
6^
M^
?t^n
M^i
Top: The opening for Grand Festival, featuring famous Asian American and Vietnamese singers.

Top left: Thuy Van Dance company dancing in traditional Northern dresses (ao tut than). Top right: 3am dance group pulling off a spectacular stunt. Bottom right: Instrumentalistsforthe opening lion dance.
24 Spring Wedding
il/^.;;-n^^l'l'i^';;^J^^^j;/:^:/,,;.^
'",- •^•^•\:i.;: •'••w'\'y,\('[y''/:'!i,:'i,^'f- i.At',i-i:. i.' •'V' •,^^"' t',!'•, "•• Y\'W\^'1:':- '•^ '^'(i;1^ ''
Top left: The two lovebirds highlighted for the Spring Wedding, Christy and Quincy. Top right:

The roasted pig is placed for the tea ceremony. Bottom left: Relatives line up in the Lang Vietnam village to watch the ceremony. Bottom right: Relative giving their blessings. ^~^/""— ^
25 ERSUPPOR7
^p\
ocapica
June 28, 2024
Dear Honorable Mayor Jones and City Council Members:

The Orange County Asian and Pacific Islander Community Alliance (OCAPICA) is writing this letter in full support of the Union of Vietnamese Student Associations (UVSA) to host the 43rd annual UVSATet Festival at Garden Grove Park in Garden Grove, California.

OCAPICA was started in 1997 with the mission to build a healthier and stronger community by enhancing the well-being of Asians and Pacific Islanders through inclusive partnerships in the areas of service, education, advocacy, organizing, and research. OCAPICA serves annually over 80,000 community members in 26 different languages in the areas of health, mental health, workforce development, housing, youth and education, and civic engagement. OCAPICA has been working with UVSA and participating in their annual Te't Festival since our inception. UVSA has always organized an incredible Tet that brings out all community members, especially families in Garden Grove.

UVSA continues to grow its presence not only within the community of Little Saigon, but all across Southern California through its partnerships with various universities, local businesses, and sponsors. OCAPICA strongly believes that bringing the UVSA Tet Festival back to Garden Grove Park will be a huge step forward for the city and the Vietnamese community. The City of Garden Grove has always been a part of the history of UVSA's Tet Festival and supporting its communities to celebrate New Year in the city they love and reside in.

OCAPICA looks forward to partnering with UVSA to provide support and opportunities in the Vietnamese and Asian American communities throughout the planning process and execution of the 43rd annual UVSATet Festival.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at [email protected] or 714-636-9095.

Sincerely,
Ma^yAnrj^ Foo
Executive ^Director
26 TTER8PORT

VIETNAMESE AMERICAN ARTS & LETTERS ASSOCIATION
July 3, 2024
Dear City Council of Garden Grove,
On behalf of the Vietnamese American Arts and Letters Association (VAALA), I am writing to express our full support for the Union of Vietnamese Student Associations (UVSA) Te't Festival.

VAALA recognizes the significant cultural, social, and educational value that the Tet Festival brings to the Vietnamese American community and beyond.

For decades, the Tet Festival has served as a vibrant celebration of Vietnamese culture and heritage, providing a unique opportunity for community members to come together in the spirit of unity and joy. It is a time to honor our traditions, celebrate the Lunar New Year, and share the richness of Vietnamese culture with a wider audience. The festival's activities, including traditional performances, art exhibits, culinary showcases, and cultural games, foster a deeper understanding and appreciation of our heritage among attendees of all backgrounds.

We are particularly excited about UVSA's initiative to bring the Tet Festival back to Garden Grove. This city has historically been a central hub for the Vietnamese American community.

Hosting the festival in Garden Grove will provide a wonderful opportunity to celebrate and share our culture with both longtime residents and new visitors, reinforcing Garden Grove's role as a cornerstone of Vietnamese American heritage.

As an organization dedicated to the promotion of Vietnamese American arts and culture, VAALA has always valued initiatives that preserve and enhance our cultural heritage. The Te't Festival aligns perfectly with our mission to "connect and enrich the communities through Vietnamese art and culture." The festival not only serves as a cultural bridge but also as a platform to showcase the talents and creativity within our community.

We believe that with the continued support of the community and partners, the festival will remain a cherished tradition and a beacon of Vietnamese culture for many years to come, especially with its return to Garden Grove. Please feel free to contact me at my email [email protected] if you have any questions or concerns.

Sincerely,
YsaLe
Executive Director
27 fSS
ST TCT CQB^IUNI
SISTANT RJND RKClPIENtS
UVSA allocates a portion ofTet Festival profits to the Tet Community Assistance Fund as means of offering grants to new or existing community projects. UVSA has awarded over
$2,000,000 in community grants over the past 20 years. The following is a list of community projects and organizations that UVSA has awarded grants to:
• CampMed at DC Irvine
• Cao Dai Youth Association
• DeMille Elementary School
• G.l. Joe Search and Rescue - The Joe Le Foundation
• Hat Boi Art Letter Club
• Lien Doan Chi Lang Association
• Medical Educational Missions and Outreach
• OCAVMHAS - Orange County Association for Vietnamese
Mental Health Awareness and Support
• Project MotiVATE, Inc.
• The Association Of Vietnamese Language & Culture Schools of Southern California
• Thieu Nhi Thanh The: Doan Thang Thien
• Vietnamese American Arts and Letters Association
• Vietnamese Artists Friendship Club
• Vietnamese-American Youth Alliance
• Westminster RACES
**Full list can be found at uvsa.org/g rants
28 ^^^,
•:m
\^:<
L '^ ^'^
h"^'^
.'. (. ;
~1 ' \~
• . : * -
'w-.^^
.-t '..'"
THANK YOU!
rf^^'^r
29 Item 322/2024
Final
City of Garden Grove

INTER-DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM

To:

Lisa L. Kim From: Ana Pulido
Dept:

City Manager Dept: Community Relations
Date: 8/13/2024

Subject: Adoption of a Proclamation recognizing Joe Chandler and Joan Grosse for being named the 2024 Strawberry Ball King and Queen, and for being named as Senior Volunteer Man and Woman of the Year. (Action Item)

Attached is a Proclamation in recognition of Joe Chandler and Joan Grosse for being named the 2024 Strawberry Ball Queen and King and Senior Volunteer Woman and Man of the Year, recommended for adoption.

ATTACHMENT

1. Proclamation

30 Proclamation
Joe Chandler and Joan Grosse
2024 Strawberry Ball King and Queen
Senior Volunteer Man and Woman of the Year

WHEREAS, The H. Louis Lake Senior Center named Joe Chandler and Joan Grosse as the 2024 Garden Grove Strawberry Ball King and Queen, and Senior Volunteer Man and Woman of the Year for their spirit of service; and WHEREAS, Joe Chandler was born in Hartford, Connecticut, and has been a resident of Garden Grove for 62 years. Following his 33 years of service with the Garden Grove Fire Department, Joe has dedicated his time to volunteering and helping the Garden Grove community; and WHEREAS, Joe is an active member of the Garden Grove Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) and has volunteered for the Garden Grove Police Department. He also belongs to the National Resource Defense Council, National Wildlife Federation, and the Defenders of Wildlife; and WHEREAS, Joan Grosse, originally from Buffalo, New York, has been a resident of Garden Grove for 54 years. Before retiring, she worked as a registered nurse for 65 years; and
WHEREAS, Joan spends her free time volunteering and serving her community. She has been a volunteer for the Garden Grove Police Department, Garden Grove Community Services Park Patrol, West Anaheim Hospital, and Cerritos Performing Arts Center; and
WHEREAS, Joe Chandler and Joan Grosse’s service to the City and community of Garden Grove goes beyond words and is further exemplified by their selection as the 2024 Garden Grove Strawberry Ball King and Queen, and Senior Volunteer Man and Woman of the Year.

NOW, THEREFORE, WE, the Garden Grove City Council do hereby proclaim and honor Joe Chandler and Joan Grosse as the 2024 Garden Grove Strawberry Ball King and Queen, and Senior Volunteer Man and Woman of the Year.

August 13, 2024

31 Item 329/2024
Final
City of Garden Grove

INTER-DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM

To:

Lisa L. Kim From: William E. Murray
Dept:

City Manager Dept: Public Works
Date: 8/13/2024

Subject: Adoption of a Resolution authorizing submittal of financing and grant application by the City on behalf of the Orange County Water District for building local PFAS water treatment facilities at City’s wells. (Action Item)

OBJECTIVE

For City Council to adopt a resolution authorizing submittal of financing and grant application by the City on behalf of the Orange County Water District (OCWD) for building local per and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) water treatment facilities at City’s wells that were affected by PFAS contamination.

BACKGROUND

On April 10, 2024, the Federal Environmental Protection Agency adopted stricter regulations for PFAS and lowered the maximum contaminant levels to the following:

 PFOA-4.0 ppt (parts per trillion) (lowered by 1.1 ppt)  PFOS-4.0 ppt (lowered by 2.5 ppt)

This new drinking water regulation has resulted in the need for additional water PFAS water treatment facilities to be built within the next three to five years, depending on when the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) adopts state requirements. The sites affected by PFAS contamination include Well 22, 25, 26 and 27. The Orange County Water District will fully fund the planning, design and construction of these new PFAS water treatment facilities.

DISCUSSION

OCWD has requested City’s assistance to apply for a PFAS grant under the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) Emerging Contaminant Principal Forgiveness Program which is administered by the SWRCB. The PFAS grant will be enough to help offset the planning, design and capital construction costs of the new PFAS water treatment facilities at Well 22, 26 and 27.

Construction of the PFAS treatment facility for Well 25 will be fully funded by OCWD . An important requirement of the PFAS grant under the DWSRF Emerging Contaminant Principal Forgiveness Program is that the grant applicant must own and operate the PFAS-contaminated wells, and that is the reason for OCWD’s request of City’s assistance. This grant is part of the 32 Item 329/2024

Page 2 of 2 ends

Bipartisan Infrastructure Law that set aside $5 billion to help agencies in reducing PFAS and other emerging contaminant exposure in drinking water. OCWD will act in a lead capacity as a sub-grantee in applying for the PFAS grant. If this grant is awarded, the City would act as a pass-through agency between the SWRCB and OCWD. As a condition of receiving grant funds, a resolution to authorize the City to act in the capacity of “Authorized Representative” must be approved, adopted and included in the SWRCB’s financial assistance application. A uthorized agents will be the City Manager, the Director of Public Works, or their designees.

FINANCIAL IMPACT

There is no financial impact to adopt a resolution authorizing submittal of financing and grant application by the City on behalf of the Orange County Water District (OCWD) for building local per and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) water treatment facilities at City’s wells that were affected by PFAS contamination. As a pass-through agency, the City will be responsible for the reporting of gran t expenditures and other administrative duties identified by the grantor.

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that the City Council:
 Adopt a Resolution authorizing submittal of financing and grant application by the City on behalf of the Orange County Water District for building local PFAS water treatment facilities at Well 22, 26 and 27.

By: Samuel Kim, P.E.

Deputy Public Works Director/
Water Services Manager

ATTACHMENT(S)

1. Resolution

33 RESOLUTION NO.

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GARDEN

GROVE AUTHORIZING A REPRESENTATIVE TO SIGN AND FILE A

FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE APPLICATION FOR FINANCING AND

GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE WATER RESOURCES
CONTROL BOARD FOR CITY OF GARDEN GROVE WELLS 22, 26 AND 27 PFAS TREATMENT SYSTEMS

WHEREAS, under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, $5 billion has been set aside through the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund program administered by the State Water Resources Control Board to reduce exposure through drinking water to PFAS and other emerging contaminants; and

WHEREAS, the City of Garden Grove staff determined that a treatment plant for PFOA and PFOS compounds is required to reduce concentrations in drinking water extracted from the groundwater basin at existing and future well connections; and

WHEREAS, the Orange County Water District has financed, in its entirety, the technical feasibility study, design and construction of the City of Garden Grove PFAS Water Treatment Facilities and the upcoming Garden Grove Wells 22, 26 and 27 PFAS Water Treatment Facilities; and

WHEREAS, the City Council approved the PFAS Treatment Facilities and Program Agreement with Orange County Water District and agreed to support and assist in the pursuit of grants that may be used to fund the construction of PFAS water treatment projects; and

WHEREAS, the City would be the recipient of any awarded grant funds and act in its capacity as a pass-through agency between the State Water Resources Control Board and the Orange County Water District for grant funds awarded to the City to offset costs associated with the design and construction of the City of Garden Grove Wells 22, 26 and 27 PFAS Water Treatment Facilities.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Garden Grove authorize the City Manager, the Director of Public Works, or their designees to act in the capacity of the "Authorized Representative" with authority to sign and file, for and on behalf of the City, a Financial Assistance Application for a financing and grant agreement with the State Water Resources Control Board for the planning, design, and construction of the City of Garden Grove Wells 22, 26 and 27 PFAS Water Treatment Facilities.

IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the foregoing Authorized Representative(s), or designees, are designated to provide the assurances, certifications, and commitments required for the financial assistance application, including but not limited to executing a 34 Resolution No. _____

Page 2 ends

financial assistance agreement from the State Water Resources Control Board and any amendments or changes thereto.

IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the Authorized Representative(s), or designees, are designated to represent the City in carrying out the City's responsibilities under the financing agreement, including certifying disbursement requests on behalf of the City and compliance with applicable state and federal laws.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Garden Grove City Council on _________, 2024.

Steve Jones
Mayor

ATTEST

Teresa Pomeroy
City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF ORANGE

CITY OF GARDEN GROVE

I, Teresa Pomeroy, City Clerk of the City Council of the City of Garden Grove, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council is seven; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. _____ was duly and regularly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on __________, 2024 by the following vote:

Councilmember Ayes:

Councilmember Noes:

Councilmember Abstained:

Councilmember Absent:

Councilmember Recused:
35 Item 305/2024
Final

City of Garden Grove

INTER-DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM

To:

Lisa L. Kim From: John Montanchez
Dept:

City Manager Dept: Community Services
Date: 8/13/2024

Subject: Acceptance of the Magnolia Park Improvement Project No. S-1311, as complete. (Action Item)

OBJECTIVE

For the City Council to accept Project No. S-1311 - Magnolia Park Improvement Project as complete.

BACKGROUND

On August 22, 2023, the City Council awarded a contract to California Landscape & Design, Inc., in the amount of $ 703,780 for the installation of the Magnolia Park playground . The project also included the installation of rubberized play ground surfacing, demolition and replacement of the picnic shelter, demolition and replacement of perimeter pool fencing , concrete work for the new exercise equipment, as well as the installation of ADA compliant paths of travel.

DISCUSSION

The contractor, California Landscape & Design, Inc., has completed the Magnolia Park Improvement Project in accordance with the plans, specifications, and other contract documents.

FINANCIAL IMPACT

Accepting the Magnolia Park Improvement Project No. S-1311 has no financial impact. The Project was funded by the Prop 68 Per Capita grant and Citywide Park Fee Funds. It was completed within budget. The retention payments will be released within the statutory period after the Notice of Completion has been recorded by the County of Orange.

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that the City Council:
36 Item 305/2024

Page 2 of 2 ends

 Accept Project S-1311 Magnolia Park Improvement Project as complete;  Authorize the City Manager to execute the Notice of Completion of Public Works Improvement and Work; and
 Authorize the Finance Director to release the retention payment when appropriate to do so.

ATTACHMENT

1. Notice of Completion for Magnolia Park Improvement Project.

37 RECORDING REQUESTED BY
When Recorded Mail To:

City Clerk
City of Garden Grove
P. 0. Box 3070
Garden Grove, CA 92842

NOTICE OF COMPLETION

OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND WORK
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that The City of Garden Grove, Orange County, California, has caused a public improvement, to wit:

PROJECT NO. S-1311
Magnolia Park Improvement Project
to be constructed upon the property hereinafter described. The contract for furnishing of all plant, labor, services, materials, and equipment, and all utilities and transportation, including power, fuel, and water, and performing all work necessary to construct and complete, in a good and workmanlike manner in strict accordance with the specifications, plans, and drawings therefore on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Garden Grove, for the construction, installation and completion of the above-described public improvement and work, was heretofore made and entered into with California Landscape & Design, Inc., on the 22nd day of August, 2023, and filed for record in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Garden Grove; that the work upon said public improvement has been completed, and that the Project Manager has notified the City Council that he has made and completed a final inspection of the materials furnished and installed and the work performed in the construction, installation, and completion of said public improvement hereinabove more particularly described and set forth, and has certified in writing to the City Council that all the provisions of the contract and contract documents for the furnishing of all plant, labor, services, materials, and equipment, and the performing of all work necessary for the construction, installation, and completion of said public improvement above described have been fully complied with to his satisfaction as required by the contract document; that final acceptance of the construction, installation, and completion of said public improvement above described was made on the 13th day of August, 2024; that the nature of the title to said property of said City of Garden Grove is as follows: That is to say, it owns said public improvement in fee except the right-of-way upon which it is constructed, and that it owns an easement upon, over, and along said right-of-way for the purpose of the construction, installation, and completion of said public improvement herein above described and the use thereof after said completion; that the property herein above referred to and on which said public improvement is situated is described as follows, to wit; 38 PROJECT NO. S-1311
Magnolia Park Improvement Project
NAME OF SURETY on Labor and Material Bond is:GREAT MIDWEST INSURAN 800 Gessner Road #600
Houston TX 77024
Tel No. 720.289.2002
DATED thisday of20

CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
ATTEST:

By
City Manager
City of Garden Grove
City Clerk
City of Garden Grove

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTS OF ORANGE
I am the Project Manager for Project NO. S-1311.

I have read the foregoing Notice of Completion of Public Improvement and Work, and know the contents thereof; and I certify that the same is true of my own knowledge, except as to those matters, which are therein stated upon my information or belief, and as to those matters I believe to be true.

I certify (or declare), under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on8/13/24atGarden Grove
(Date)(Place)
Mark^Freeman - Project Manager
Community Services Manager
, California
39 Item 321/2024
Final
City of Garden Grove

INTER-DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM

To:

Lisa L. Kim From: Matt West
Dept:

City Manager Dept: City Manager
Date: 8/13/2024

Subject: Appropriation of Fiscal Year 2024-25 Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) funds. (Action Item)

OBJECTIVE

To obtain City Council approval to use moneys provided by the Department of Energy (DOE) formula grant funding allocations for the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) Program, and to appropriate these funds for the FY2024-25 budget.

BACKGROUND

The EECBG Program is authorized under Title V, Subtitle E of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) and was signed into Public Law (PL 110 -140) on December 19, 2007. The EECBG Program is funded by appropriations from the Infrastructure Inv estment and Jobs Act (IIJA) under Section 40552(b). The purpose of the EECBG Program is to assist eligible state, local, and tribal governments in implementing activities that seek to attain increased energy efficiency, conservation, or fossil fuel reduction for their communities. Along these lines, the EECBG Program identifies 14 eligible activity categories that meet the requirements for allowable use of funds. Eligible activity categories include energy efficiency strategy development and implementation, residential and commercial building energy audits, energy efficiency retrofit grants for government agencies and non -profit organizations, and energy conservation programs related to transportation, to name a few.

DISCUSSION

The City of Garden Grove’s allocation from the DOE’s formula grant funds is $199,300. Funds will be implemented through an equipment rebate voucher for the purchase of HVAC retrofits for the Purcell Building located at 12966 Euclid Street.

FINANCIAL IMPACT

The grant funding of $199,300 will be used for the purchase of HVAC retrofits for the Purcell Building located at 12966 Euclid Street . Additional costs necessary for the Purcell Building renovation are included in the amended Fiscal Year 2024-25 budget.

40 Item 321/2024

Page 2 of 2 ends

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that the City Council:

 Approve additional appropriation of $199,300 for the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant funds to the City’s Fiscal Year 2024-25 budget.

ATTACHMENTS

1. EECBG Final Allocation of Funds

2. Equipment Rebate Terms and Conditions

41 1

FINAL ALLOCATION OF FUNDS
Office of State and Community Energy Programs (SCEP)
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
ATTACHMENT 1A: DOE FORMULA GRANT FUNDING ALLOCATIONS TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

FOR THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION BLOCK GRANT (EECBG) PROGRAM This document presents the final formula grant funding allocations by Local Government (Table 1a) for the EECBG Program - Sec. 40552(b) of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) of 2021.

Table 1a. FINAL EECBG Program Formula Grant Funding Allocations to Local Governments Listed Alphabetically by State and Local Government
# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
Total (Local Governments) $299,200,000
1 AK Aleutians East County $75,120
2 AK Fairbanks North Star County $77,080
3 AK Haines County $75,080
4 AK Kenai Peninsula County $76,770
5 AK Ketchikan Gateway County $75,180
6 AK Kodiak Island County $75,250
7 AK Matanuska-Susitna County $77,960
8 AK North Slope County $75,430
9 AK Northwest Arctic County $75,270
10 AK Petersburg County $75,120
11 AK Anchorage City $300,250
12 AK Bethel City $75,220
13 AK Fairbanks City $76,260
14 AK Juneau, City and Borough of City $76,130
15 AK Kenai City $75,270
16 AK Ketchikan City $75,300
17 AK Kodiak City $75,210
18 AK Palmer City $75,250
19 AK Sitka City $75,300
20 AK Wasilla City $75,390
21 AL Baldwin County $246,150
22 AL Calhoun County $79,030
23 AL Etowah County $78,540
24 AL Jefferson County $348,100
25 AL Lee County $78,040
42 2

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
26 AL Madison County $79,430
27 AL Marshall County $78,390
28 AL Mobile County $239,310
29 AL Shelby County $81,530
30 AL Tuscaloosa County $79,010
31 AL Auburn City $131,740
32 AL Birmingham City $252,880
33 AL Decatur City $120,360
34 AL Dothan City $132,400
35 AL Florence City $76,520
36 AL Hoover City $144,130
37 AL Huntsville City $247,820
38 AL Madison City $116,470
39 AL Mobile City $229,820
40 AL Montgomery City $236,570
41 AL Phenix City City $76,270
42 AL Prattville City $76,260
43 AL Tuscaloosa City $158,340
44 AL Vestavia Hills City $76,300
45 AR Benton County $79,920
46 AR Crawford County $77,050
47 AR Faulkner County $76,890
48 AR Garland County $77,030
49 AR Lonoke County $77,380
50 AR Pope County $77,230
51 AR Pulaski County $79,400
52 AR Saline County $77,800
53 AR Washington County $77,520
54 AR White County $77,650
55 AR Benton City $76,200
56 AR Bentonville City $121,190
57 AR Conway City $125,490
58 AR Fayetteville City $148,500
59 AR Fort Smith City $148,220
60 AR Hot Springs City $76,460
61 AR Jonesboro City $137,970
62 AR Little Rock City $245,540
63 AR North Little Rock City $128,080
43 3

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
64 AR Pine Bluff City $76,490
65 AR Rogers City $129,880
66 AR Springdale City $139,790
67 AZ Apache County $77,340
68 AZ Cochise County $77,740
69 AZ Coconino County $77,340
70 AZ Maricopa County $378,940
71 AZ Mohave County $78,940
72 AZ Navajo County $78,750
73 AZ Pima County $368,820
74 AZ Pinal County $273,780
75 AZ Yavapai County $79,820
76 AZ Yuma County $77,550
77 AZ Apache Junction City $76,310
78 AZ Avondale City $138,310
79 AZ Buckeye City $137,550
80 AZ Bullhead City City $76,400
81 AZ Casa Grande City $117,470
82 AZ Chandler City $283,790
83 AZ El Mirage City $76,130
84 AZ Flagstaff City $133,940
85 AZ Gilbert, Town of City $266,640
86 AZ Glendale City $259,960
87 AZ Goodyear City $144,130
88 AZ Lake Havasu City City $117,650
89 AZ Marana, Town of City $113,010
90 AZ Maricopa City $115,350
91 AZ Mesa City $449,620
92 AZ Oro Valley, Town of City $76,610
93 AZ Peoria City $210,950
94 AZ Phoenix City $1,340,660
95 AZ Prescott City $76,750
96 AZ Prescott Valley, Town of City $76,570
97 AZ Queen Creek, Town of City $116,990
98 AZ San Luis City $76,150
99 AZ Scottsdale City $279,950
100 AZ Sierra Vista City $76,620
101 AZ Surprise City $178,140
44 4

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
102 AZ Tempe City $236,650
103 AZ Tucson City $504,750
104 AZ Yuma City $150,960
105 CA Contra Costa County $356,510
106 CA Fresno County $336,680
107 CA Kern County $422,980
108 CA Los Angeles County $1,344,700
109 CA Monterey County $287,340
110 CA Orange County $299,440
111 CA Riverside County $477,090
112 CA Sacramento County $539,610
113 CA San Bernardino County $393,590
114 CA San Diego County $526,750
115 CA San Joaquin County $235,280
116 CA San Luis Obispo County $251,850
117 CA San Mateo County $330,430
118 CA Santa Barbara County $231,840
119 CA Sonoma County $233,790
120 CA Stanislaus County $232,020
121 CA Tulare County $227,670
122 CA Adelanto City $76,240
123 CA Alameda City $133,250
124 CA Alhambra City $136,380
125 CA Aliso Viejo City $113,160
126 CA Anaheim City $344,830
127 CA Antioch City $156,140
128 CA Apple Valley, Town of City $130,740
129 CA Arcadia City $119,080
130 CA Azusa City $112,520
131 CA Bakersfield City $379,310
132 CA Baldwin Park City $127,900
133 CA Beaumont City $112,240
134 CA Bell Gardens City $76,310
135 CA Bellflower City $130,040
136 CA Berkeley City $174,290
137 CA Brea City $76,870
138 CA Brentwood City $121,550
139 CA Buena Park City $137,750
45 5

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
140 CA Burbank City $167,020
141 CA Calexico City $76,300
142 CA Camarillo City $129,470
143 CA Campbell City $76,540
144 CA Carlsbad City $168,480
145 CA Carson City $150,080
146 CA Cathedral City City $112,920
147 CA Ceres City $76,660
148 CA Cerritos City $76,840
149 CA Chico City $153,350
150 CA Chino City $147,470
151 CA Chino Hills City $131,350
152 CA Chula Vista City $271,850
153 CA Citrus Heights City $137,060
154 CA Claremont City $76,300
155 CA Clovis City $161,730
156 CA Coachella City $76,350
157 CA Colton City $116,230
158 CA Compton City $146,080
159 CA Concord City $170,110
160 CA Corona City $197,940
161 CA Costa Mesa City $166,550
162 CA Covina City $113,100
163 CA Culver City City $76,710
164 CA Cupertino City $125,790
165 CA Cypress City $114,160
166 CA Daly City City $146,620
167 CA Danville, Town of City $76,480
168 CA Davis City $124,540
169 CA Delano City $114,850
170 CA Diamond Bar City $114,980
171 CA Downey City $160,140
172 CA Dublin City $127,230
173 CA Eastvale City $123,670
174 CA El Cajon City $155,020
175 CA El Centro City $76,600
176 CA El Monte City $157,090
177 CA Elk Grove City $201,410
46 6

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
178 CA Encinitas City $122,780
179 CA Escondido City $187,670
180 CA Fairfield City $164,990
181 CA Folsom City $139,040
182 CA Fontana City $230,640
183 CA Fountain Valley City $119,070
184 CA Fremont City $254,040
185 CA Fresno City $494,390
186 CA Fullerton City $183,850
187 CA Garden Grove City $199,300
188 CA Gardena City $122,410
189 CA Gilroy City $118,490
190 CA Glendale City $227,620
191 CA Glendora City $114,050
192 CA Hanford City $118,530
193 CA Hawthorne City $139,570
194 CA Hayward City $197,040
195 CA Hemet City $141,750
196 CA Hesperia City $147,140
197 CA Highland City $115,100
198 CA Hollister City $76,350
199 CA Huntington Beach City $221,630
200 CA Huntington Park City $115,290
201 CA Indio City $140,950
202 CA Inglewood City $153,020
203 CA Irvine City $333,830
204 CA Jurupa Valley City $152,660
205 CA La Habra City $119,850
206 CA La Mesa City $120,950
207 CA La Mirada City $76,610
208 CA La Puente City $76,260
209 CA La Quinta City $76,320
210 CA Laguna Niguel City $121,870
211 CA Lake Elsinore City $125,030
212 CA Lake Forest City $139,450
213 CA Lakewood City $132,670
214 CA Lancaster City $203,200
215 CA Lincoln City $76,610
47 7

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
216 CA Livermore City $144,230
217 CA Lodi City $125,810
218 CA Lompoc City $76,480
219 CA Long Beach City $423,290
220 CA Los Angeles City $3,114,200
221 CA Los Banos City $76,450
222 CA Lynwood City $123,660
223 CA Madera City $124,630
224 CA Manhattan Beach City $76,300
225 CA Manteca City $135,340
226 CA Martinez City $76,300
227 CA Menifee City $146,570
228 CA Merced City $140,760
229 CA Milpitas City $137,730
230 CA Mission Viejo City $144,870
231 CA Modesto City $241,720
232 CA Monrovia City $76,310
233 CA Montclair City $76,320
234 CA Montebello City $121,520
235 CA Monterey Park City $121,150
236 CA Moorpark City $76,200
237 CA Moreno Valley City $226,600
238 CA Morgan Hill City $76,540
239 CA Mountain View City $148,010
240 CA Murrieta City $157,040
241 CA Napa City $134,780
242 CA National City City $117,750
243 CA Newark City $76,660
244 CA Newport Beach City $149,950
245 CA Norwalk City $149,530
246 CA Novato City $114,990
247 CA Oakland City $405,710
248 CA Oakley City $76,340
249 CA Oceanside City $201,650
250 CA Ontario City $218,330
251 CA Orange City $189,950
252 CA Oxnard City $224,240
253 CA Pacifica City $76,200
48 8

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
254 CA Palm Desert City $118,040
255 CA Palm Springs City $76,770
256 CA Palmdale City $197,390
257 CA Palo Alto City $141,790
258 CA Paramount City $114,940
259 CA Pasadena City $193,560
260 CA Perris City $134,320
261 CA Petaluma City $121,440
262 CA Pico Rivera City $120,010
263 CA Pittsburg City $128,250
264 CA Placentia City $112,350
265 CA Pleasanton City $140,450
266 CA Pomona City $188,070
267 CA Porterville City $121,930
268 CA Poway City $76,830
269 CA Rancho Cordova City $138,900
270 CA Rancho Cucamonga City $207,660
271 CA Rancho Palos Verdes City $76,370
272 CA Rancho Santa Margarita City $76,570
273 CA Redding City $149,160
274 CA Redlands City $133,300
275 CA Redondo Beach City $127,820
276 CA Redwood City City $142,550
277 CA Rialto City $151,580
278 CA Richmond City $160,550
279 CA Riverside City $325,070
280 CA Rocklin City $127,710
281 CA Rohnert Park City $76,440
282 CA Rosemead City $113,300
283 CA Roseville City $190,900
284 CA Sacramento City $493,300
285 CA Salinas City $195,530
286 CA San Bernardino City $249,590
287 CA San Bruno City $76,430
288 CA San Buenaventura (Ventura) City $161,680
289 CA San Clemente City $123,390
290 CA San Diego City $1,185,290
291 CA San Francisco City $796,610
49 9

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
292 CA San Gabriel City $76,330
293 CA San Jacinto City $112,830
294 CA San Jose City $834,110
295 CA San Juan Capistrano City $76,220
296 CA San Leandro City $143,300
297 CA San Luis Obispo City $76,790
298 CA San Marcos City $146,690
299 CA San Mateo City $155,720
300 CA San Rafael City $123,900
301 CA San Ramon City $140,000
302 CA Santa Ana City $315,020
303 CA Santa Barbara City $146,330
304 CA Santa Clara City $183,290
305 CA Santa Clarita City $240,550
306 CA Santa Cruz City $125,770
307 CA Santa Maria City $158,930
308 CA Santa Monica City $157,730
309 CA Santa Rosa City $210,570
310 CA Santee City $118,300
311 CA Simi Valley City $166,670
312 CA South Gate City $142,040
313 CA South San Francisco City $129,470
314 CA Stanton City $76,230
315 CA Stockton City $316,310
316 CA Sunnyvale City $199,020
317 CA Temecula City $161,250
318 CA Temple City City $76,170
319 CA Thousand Oaks City $174,360
320 CA Torrance City $194,870
321 CA Tracy City $144,040
322 CA Tulare City $125,790
323 CA Turlock City $130,380
324 CA Tustin City $136,890
325 CA Union City City $128,020
326 CA Upland City $134,030
327 CA Vacaville City $151,450
328 CA Vallejo City $164,850
329 CA Victorville City $173,590
50 10

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
330 CA Visalia City $182,320
331 CA Vista City $148,840
332 CA Walnut Creek City $133,700
333 CA Watsonville City $115,420
334 CA West Covina City $153,050
335 CA West Hollywood City $76,330
336 CA West Sacramento City $118,520
337 CA Westminster City $140,430
338 CA Whittier City $140,540
339 CA Wildomar City $76,180
340 CA Woodland City $120,960
341 CA Yorba Linda City $124,310
342 CA Yuba City City $127,270
343 CA Yucaipa City $113,510
344 CO Adams County $79,130
345 CO Arapahoe County $80,830
346 CO Boulder County $79,250
347 CO Douglas County $241,260
348 CO El Paso County $259,440
349 CO Garfield County $77,080
350 CO Jefferson County $269,410
351 CO Larimer County $78,670
352 CO Mesa County $77,900
353 CO Weld County $231,790
354 CO Arvada City $163,520
355 CO Aurora City $360,800
356 CO Boulder City $168,680
357 CO Brighton City $76,340
358 CO Broomfield City $131,980
359 CO Castle Rock, Town of City $126,840
360 CO Centennial City $160,860
361 CO Colorado Springs City $443,290
362 CO Commerce City City $121,660
363 CO Denver City $655,720
364 CO Fort Collins City $206,680
365 CO Grand Junction City $129,430
366 CO Greeley City $158,860
367 CO Lakewood City $194,050
51 11

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
368 CO Littleton City $76,680
369 CO Longmont City $148,550
370 CO Loveland City $134,880
371 CO Northglenn City $76,220
372 CO Parker, Town of City $118,000
373 CO Pueblo City $161,870
374 CO Thornton City $174,930
375 CO Westminster City $159,970
376 CT Bridgeport City $183,780
377 CT Bristol City $119,770
378 CT Danbury City $141,240
379 CT East Hartford, Town of City $114,380
380 CT Enfield, Town of City $76,470
381 CT Fairfield, Town of City $122,250
382 CT Glastonbury, Town of City $76,210
383 CT Greenwich, Town of City $125,290
384 CT Groton, Town of City $76,460
385 CT Hamden, Town of City $119,730
386 CT Hartford City $180,030
387 CT Manchester, Town of City $119,500
388 CT Meriden City $119,600
389 CT Middletown City $76,720
390 CT Milford, Town of City $115,020
391 CT New Britain City $129,710
392 CT New Haven City $184,070
393 CT Norwalk City $144,160
394 CT Norwich City $76,370
395 CT Shelton City $76,470
396 CT Southington, Town of City $76,460
397 CT Stamford City $178,910
398 CT Stratford, Town of City $114,970
399 CT Torrington City $76,200
400 CT Trumbull, Town of City $76,260
401 CT Wallingford, Town of City $76,590
402 CT Waterbury City $159,690
403 CT West Hartford, Town of City $123,890
404 CT West Haven City $115,320
405 DE Kent County $79,060
52 12

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
406 DE New Castle County $403,310
407 DE Sussex County $227,920
408 DE Dover City $76,570
409 DE Elsmere, Town of City $75,200
410 DE Georgetown, Town of City $75,300
411 DE Middletown, Town of City $75,810
412 DE Milford City $75,440
413 DE Millsboro, Town of City $75,250
414 DE Newark City $76,220
415 DE Seaford City $75,320
416 DE Smyrna, Town of City $75,420
417 DE Wilmington City $135,280
418 FL Brevard County $340,910
419 FL Clay County $231,710
420 FL Collier County $365,750
421 FL Escambia County $276,780
422 FL Hillsborough County $831,960
423 FL Lake County $322,790
424 FL Lee County $368,980
425 FL Manatee County $327,640
426 FL Marion County $299,300
427 FL Miami-Dade County $1,134,700
428 FL Okaloosa County $238,090
429 FL Orange County $807,430
430 FL Osceola County $253,060
431 FL Palm Beach County $652,450
432 FL Pasco County $484,970
433 FL Pinellas County $384,470
434 FL Polk County $481,240
435 FL Sarasota County $309,280
436 FL Seminole County $287,440
437 FL St. Johns County $275,490
438 FL Volusia County $255,830
439 FL Altamonte Springs City $76,660
440 FL Apopka City $114,500
441 FL Aventura City $76,470
442 FL Boca Raton City $166,480
443 FL Bonita Springs City $116,540
53 13

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
444 FL Boynton Beach City $134,990
445 FL Bradenton City $120,510
446 FL Cape Coral City $214,130
447 FL Clearwater City $169,090
448 FL Clermont City $76,440
449 FL Coconut Creek City $116,970
450 FL Coral Gables City $77,040
451 FL Coral Springs City $172,940
452 FL Cutler Bay, Town of City $76,430
453 FL Davie, Town of City $155,750
454 FL Daytona Beach City $135,860
455 FL Deerfield Beach City $141,090
456 FL DeLand City $76,370
457 FL Delray Beach City $128,640
458 FL Deltona City $139,630
459 FL Doral City $140,950
460 FL Dunedin City $76,240
461 FL Estero, Village of City $76,270
462 FL Fort Lauderdale City $233,060
463 FL Fort Myers City $149,880
464 FL Fort Pierce City $76,720
465 FL Gainesville City $189,820
466 FL Greenacres City $76,380
467 FL Hallandale Beach City $76,390
468 FL Hialeah City $241,570
469 FL Hollywood City $191,390
470 FL Homestead City $132,180
471 FL Jacksonville City $845,350
472 FL Jupiter, Town of City $123,670
473 FL Kissimmee City $135,670
474 FL Lake Worth Beach City $76,410
475 FL Lakeland City $172,390
476 FL Largo City $140,740
477 FL Lauderdale Lakes City $76,160
478 FL Lauderhill City $126,660
479 FL Margate City $116,820
480 FL Melbourne City $146,130
481 FL Miami City $477,720
54 14

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
482 FL Miami Beach City $144,110
483 FL Miami Gardens City $155,250
484 FL Miramar City $173,180
485 FL North Lauderdale City $76,390
486 FL North Miami City $118,710
487 FL North Miami Beach City $76,420
488 FL North Port City $127,390
489 FL Oakland Park City $76,520
490 FL Ocala City $132,740
491 FL Ocoee City $76,560
492 FL Orlando City $354,540
493 FL Ormond Beach City $76,530
494 FL Oviedo City $76,330
495 FL Palm Bay City $160,090
496 FL Palm Beach Gardens City $123,090
497 FL Palm Coast City $140,020
498 FL Pembroke Pines City $199,350
499 FL Pensacola City $122,770
500 FL Pinellas Park City $118,390
501 FL Plant City City $76,400
502 FL Plantation City $144,340
503 FL Pompano Beach City $164,630
504 FL Port Orange City $120,970
505 FL Port St. Lucie City $221,010
506 FL Riviera Beach City $76,320
507 FL Royal Palm Beach, Village of City $76,270
508 FL Sanford City $123,420
509 FL Sarasota City $125,110
510 FL St. Cloud City $116,940
511 FL St. Petersburg City $275,510
512 FL Sunrise City $149,460
513 FL Tallahassee City $235,360
514 FL Tamarac City $125,590
515 FL Tampa City $413,280
516 FL Titusville City $76,680
517 FL Wellington, Village of City $121,610
518 FL West Palm Beach City $174,630
519 FL Weston City $127,090
55 15

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
520 FL Winter Garden City $76,560
521 FL Winter Haven City $76,800
522 FL Winter Springs City $76,200
523 GA Cherokee County $239,330
524 GA Clayton County $297,940
525 GA Cobb County $557,290
526 GA Columbia County $80,090
527 GA DeKalb County $457,680
528 GA Forsyth County $259,710
529 GA Gwinnett County $752,900
530 GA Hall County $80,290
531 GA Henry County $249,580
532 GA Paulding County $80,370
533 GA Albany City $131,480
534 GA Alpharetta City $138,600
535 GA Athens-Clarke, Unified Government of City $177,160 536 GA Atlanta City $528,330
537 GA
Augusta-Richmond, Consolidated Government
of City $241,400
538 GA Brookhaven City $116,800
539 GA Columbus City $236,000
540 GA Dunwoody City $116,840
541 GA East Point City $76,290
542 GA Gainesville City $76,780
543 GA Johns Creek City $136,030
544 GA Macon City $198,870
545 GA Marietta City $132,490
546 GA Milton City $76,350
547 GA Newnan City $76,470
548 GA Peachtree City City $76,390
549 GA Peachtree Corners City $76,610
550 GA Rome City $76,460
551 GA Roswell City $147,480
552 GA Sandy Springs City $166,910
553 GA Savannah City $199,050
554 GA Smyrna City $116,410
555 GA South Fulton City $152,310
556 GA Stonecrest City $117,060
557 GA Tucker City $76,430
56 16

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
558 GA Valdosta City $121,120
559 GA Warner Robins City $135,070
560 GA Woodstock City $76,200
561 HI Hawaii County $228,640
562 HI Honolulu County $844,500
563 HI Kauai County $77,540
564 HI Maui County $80,750
565 IA Cerro Gordo County $76,530
566 IA Clinton County $76,610
567 IA Dallas County $77,020
568 IA Dubuque County $76,330
569 IA Johnson County $77,580
570 IA Linn County $76,710
571 IA Marshall County $76,390
572 IA Muscatine County $76,520
573 IA Polk County $79,550
574 IA Warren County $76,660
575 IA Ames City $128,040
576 IA Ankeny City $124,300
577 IA Bettendorf City $76,290
578 IA Cedar Falls City $76,450
579 IA Cedar Rapids City $185,610
580 IA Council Bluffs City $122,870
581 IA Davenport City $155,580
582 IA Des Moines City $245,640
583 IA Dubuque City $123,070
584 IA Iowa City City $136,380
585 IA Marion City $76,340
586 IA Sioux City City $140,390
587 IA Urbandale City $76,590
588 IA Waterloo City $129,180
589 IA West Des Moines City $131,740
590 ID Ada County $79,620
591 ID Bingham County $76,610
592 ID Bonner County $76,600
593 ID Bonneville County $76,930
594 ID Canyon County $77,320
595 ID Jefferson County $76,010
57 17

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
596 ID Kootenai County $77,580
597 ID Latah County $76,350
598 ID Nez Perce County $76,480
599 ID Twin Falls County $76,250
600 ID Boise City City $263,780
601 ID Caldwell City $119,140
602 ID Coeur d'Alene City $117,700
603 ID Idaho Falls City $127,230
604 ID Meridian City $162,570
605 ID Nampa City $150,180
606 ID Pocatello City $118,810
607 ID Post Falls City $76,280
608 ID Rexburg City $76,280
609 ID Twin Falls City $115,570
610 IL Cook County $1,072,210
611 IL DuPage County $449,660
612 IL Kane County $286,090
613 IL Lake County $532,900
614 IL Madison County $273,700
615 IL McHenry County $269,860
616 IL St. Clair County $235,430
617 IL Tazewell County $79,520
618 IL Will County $317,610
619 IL Winnebago County $79,530
620 IL Addison, Village of City $76,300
621 IL Arlington Heights, Village of City $133,720
622 IL Aurora City $211,320
623 IL Bartlett, Village of City $76,310
624 IL Belleville City $76,500
625 IL Berwyn City $114,870
626 IL Bloomington City $138,240
627 IL Bolingbrook, Village of City $131,770
628 IL Buffalo Grove, Village of City $76,460
629 IL Calumet City City $76,180
630 IL Carol Stream, Village of City $76,420
631 IL Carpentersville, Village of City $76,200
632 IL Champaign City $144,960
633 IL Chicago City $2,207,610
58 18

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
634 IL Cicero, Town of City $134,860
635 IL Crystal Lake City $76,420
636 IL Decatur City $131,690
637 IL DeKalb City $76,410
638 IL Des Plaines City $123,530
639 IL Downers Grove, Village of City $117,090
640 IL Elgin City $162,280
641 IL Elmhurst City $76,690
642 IL Evanston City $136,420
643 IL Glenview, Village of City $76,820
644 IL Hanover Park, Village of City $76,200
645 IL Hoffman Estates, Village of City $114,480
646 IL Joliet City $187,350
647 IL Lombard, Village of City $76,600
648 IL Moline City $76,520
649 IL Mount Prospect, Village of City $116,860
650 IL Naperville City $191,690
651 IL Normal, Town of City $115,180
652 IL Northbrook, Village of City $76,390
653 IL Oak Lawn, Village of City $118,340
654 IL Oak Park, Village of City $114,770
655 IL Orland Park, Village of City $119,480
656 IL Palatine, Village of City $124,440
657 IL Park Ridge City $76,360
658 IL Peoria City $166,910
659 IL Plainfield, Village of City $76,500
660 IL Quincy City $76,450
661 IL Rock Island City $76,310
662 IL Rockford City $194,270
663 IL Romeoville, Village of City $76,390
664 IL Schaumburg, Village of City $140,980
665 IL Skokie, Village of City $127,120
666 IL Springfield City $170,500
667 IL Streamwood, Village of City $76,250
668 IL Tinley Park, Village of City $115,960
669 IL Urbana City $76,520
670 IL Waukegan City $141,100
671 IL Wheaton City $115,730
59 19

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
672 IL Wheeling, Village of City $76,360
673 IN Allen County $79,000
674 IN Elkhart County $80,390
675 IN Hancock County $77,620
676 IN Hendricks County $80,860
677 IN Johnson County $78,180
678 IN Kosciusko County $77,790
679 IN Lake County $307,890
680 IN LaPorte County $78,820
681 IN Porter County $79,580
682 IN St. Joseph County $78,920
683 IN Anderson City $117,520
684 IN Bloomington City $141,730
685 IN Carmel City $153,650
686 IN Columbus City $117,430
687 IN Elkhart City $121,080
688 IN Evansville City $172,120
689 IN Fishers City $146,540
690 IN Fort Wayne City $281,950
691 IN Gary City $129,280
692 IN Greenwood City $122,730
693 IN Hammond City $133,260
694 IN Indianapolis City $787,040
695 IN Jeffersonville City $76,770
696 IN Kokomo City $122,580
697 IN Lafayette City $134,590
698 IN Lawrence City $76,690
699 IN Merrillville, Town of City $76,300
700 IN Mishawaka City $115,070
701 IN Muncie City $127,260
702 IN New Albany City $76,360
703 IN Noblesville City $125,610
704 IN Portage City $76,280
705 IN Richmond City $76,330
706 IN South Bend City $157,480
707 IN Terre Haute City $123,690
708 IN West Lafayette City $76,750
709 IN Westfield City $76,500
60 20

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
710 KS Butler County $77,230
711 KS Cowley County $76,200
712 KS Crawford County $76,360
713 KS Finney County $76,320
714 KS Ford County $76,190
715 KS Geary County $76,320
716 KS Johnson County $80,080
717 KS Leavenworth County $76,440
718 KS Sedgwick County $79,350
719 KS Shawnee County $76,710
720 KS Hutchinson City $76,430
721 KS Kansas City City $197,600
722 KS Lawrence City $147,530
723 KS Leavenworth City $76,340
724 KS Lenexa City $123,700
725 KS Manhattan City $117,730
726 KS Olathe City $180,830
727 KS Overland Park City $231,030
728 KS Salina City $76,650
729 KS Shawnee City $122,950
730 KS Topeka City $176,910
731 KS Wichita City $381,670
732 KY Boone County $78,710
733 KY Bullitt County $77,720
734 KY Campbell County $78,090
735 KY Hardin County $77,630
736 KY Kenton County $79,220
737 KY Laurel County $77,190
738 KY McCracken County $77,450
739 KY Oldham County $77,210
740 KY Pulaski County $77,280
741 KY Warren County $76,960
742 KY Bowling Green City $135,720
743 KY Covington City $76,440
744 KY Elizabeth, Town of City $76,250
745 KY Florence City $76,230
746 KY Georgetown City $76,340
747 KY Hopkinsville City $76,180
61 21

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
748 KY
Lexington-Fayette, Urban County Government
of City $329,300
749 KY
Louisville/Jefferson, Metropolitan Government
of City $690,810
750 KY Owensboro City $123,460
751 KY Richmond City $76,280
752 LA Ascension County $79,260
753 LA Calcasieu County $79,460
754 LA Jefferson County $359,040
755 LA Lafourche County $78,330
756 LA Livingston County $79,590
757 LA Ouachita County $78,700
758 LA Rapides County $77,830
759 LA St. Landry County $77,820
760 LA St. Tammany County $271,950
761 LA Tangipahoa County $79,540
762 LA Alexandria City $76,750
763 LA Baton Rouge City $432,850
764 LA Bossier City City $126,320
765 LA Houma City $76,230
766 LA Kenner City $124,990
767 LA Lafayette City $266,390
768 LA Lake Charles City $142,110
769 LA Monroe City $76,890
770 LA New Orleans City $381,470
771 LA Shreveport City $224,220
772 MA Barnstable County $81,070
773 MA Amherst, Town of City $76,440
774 MA Andover, Town of City $76,430
775 MA Arlington, Town of City $76,470
776 MA Attleboro City $76,560
777 MA Barnstable, Town of City $76,690
778 MA Beverly City $76,510
779 MA Billerica, Town of City $76,490
780 MA Boston City $659,990
781 MA Braintree, Town of City $76,390
782 MA Brockton City $151,670
783 MA Brookline, Town of City $120,650
784 MA Cambridge City $182,140
62 22

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
785 MA Chelmsford, Town of City $76,320
786 MA Chelsea City $76,360
787 MA Chicopee City $116,600
788 MA Everett City $76,560
789 MA Fall River City $145,730
790 MA Fitchburg City $76,400
791 MA Framingham City $132,170
792 MA Haverhill City $123,100
793 MA Holyoke City $76,420
794 MA Lawrence City $139,690
795 MA Leominster City $76,490
796 MA Lowell City $159,570
797 MA Lynn City $145,930
798 MA Malden City $120,570
799 MA Marlborough City $76,570
800 MA Medford City $117,420
801 MA Methuen, Town of City $112,740
802 MA Natick, Town of City $76,340
803 MA New Bedford City $148,890
804 MA Newton City $145,080
805 MA Peabody City $115,700
806 MA Pittsfield City $76,570
807 MA Plymouth, Town of City $121,930
808 MA Quincy City $149,380
809 MA Revere City $116,740
810 MA Salem City $76,490
811 MA Shrewsbury, Town of City $76,290
812 MA Somerville City $131,920
813 MA Springfield City $197,920
814 MA Taunton City $119,000
815 MA Waltham City $129,590
816 MA Watertown City $76,220
817 MA Westfield City $76,430
818 MA Weymouth, Town of City $117,020
819 MA Woburn City $76,570
820 MA Worcester City $232,230
821 MD Anne Arundel County $488,150
822 MD Baltimore County $712,040
63 23

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
823 MD Carroll County $80,670
824 MD Charles County $80,380
825 MD Frederick County $81,250
826 MD Harford County $266,890
827 MD Howard County $326,870
828 MD Montgomery County $764,010
829 MD Prince George's County $681,220
830 MD St. Mary's County $78,910
831 MD Annapolis City $76,480
832 MD Baltimore City $549,550
833 MD Bowie City $117,040
834 MD College Park City $76,350
835 MD Frederick City $137,000
836 MD Gaithersburg City $130,110
837 MD Hagerstown City $76,550
838 MD Laurel City $76,020
839 MD Rockville City $134,050
840 MD Salisbury City $76,290
841 ME Androscoggin County $76,570
842 ME Aroostook County $77,330
843 ME Cumberland County $79,760
844 ME Hancock County $76,920
845 ME Kennebec County $79,330
846 ME Knox County $76,420
847 ME Oxford County $76,950
848 ME Penobscot County $79,010
849 ME Somerset County $76,720
850 ME York County $80,520
851 ME Auburn City $75,880
852 ME Bangor City $76,320
853 ME Biddeford City $75,790
854 ME Brunswick, Town of City $75,800
855 ME Lewiston City $76,350
856 ME Portland City $133,250
857 ME Sanford City $75,730
858 ME Scarborough, Town of City $75,810
859 ME South Portland City $75,990
860 ME Westbrook City $75,730
64 24

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
861 MI Genesee County $283,080
862 MI Jackson County $80,490
863 MI Kent County $326,600
864 MI Livingston County $81,390
865 MI Macomb County $81,190
866 MI Monroe County $80,090
867 MI Oakland County $434,190
868 MI Ottawa County $229,720
869 MI St. Clair County $80,370
870 MI Wayne County $487,490
871 MI Ann Arbor City $182,360
872 MI Battle Creek City $118,280
873 MI Bloomfield, Charter Township of City $76,510
874 MI Canton, Charter Township of City $145,160
875 MI Chesterfield, Township of City $76,500
876 MI Clinton, Charter Township of City $149,860
877 MI Commerce, Charter Township of City $76,430
878 MI Dearborn City $166,370
879 MI Dearborn Heights City $118,960
880 MI Detroit City $582,030
881 MI East Lansing City $76,850
882 MI Farmington Hills City $140,530
883 MI Flint City $144,050
884 MI Georgetown, Charter Township of City $112,810
885 MI Grand Blanc, Charter Township of City $76,340
886 MI Grand Rapids City $235,280
887 MI Holland, Charter Township of City $76,380
888 MI Independence, Charter Township of City $76,200
889 MI Kalamazoo City $135,750
890 MI Kentwood City $118,670
891 MI Lansing City $168,150
892 MI Lincoln Park City $76,260
893 MI Livonia City $155,220
894 MI Macomb, Township of City $138,090
895 MI Meridian, Charter Township of City $76,480
896 MI Midland City $76,620
897 MI Muskegon City $76,450
898 MI Novi City $126,900
65 25

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
899 MI Orion, Charter Township of City $76,300
900 MI Pittsfield, Charter Township of City $76,400
901 MI Pontiac City $123,740
902 MI Portage City $76,800
903 MI Redford, Charter Township of City $76,600
904 MI Rochester Hills City $131,400
905 MI Roseville City $76,600
906 MI Royal Oak City $119,370
907 MI Saginaw City $76,670
908 MI Saginaw, Charter Township of City $76,420
909 MI Shelby, Charter Township of City $133,950
910 MI Southfield City $142,010
911 MI St. Clair Shores City $117,070
912 MI Sterling Heights City $176,580
913 MI Taylor City $122,780
914 MI Troy City $153,850
915 MI Warren City $187,140
916 MI Waterford, Charter Township of City $126,150
917 MI West Bloomfield, Charter Township of City $122,750 918 MI Westland City $135,220
919 MI Wyoming City $133,940
920 MI Ypsilanti, Charter Township of City $113,970
921 MN Anoka County $240,860
922 MN Carver County $78,560
923 MN Dakota County $79,810
924 MN Hennepin County $282,750
925 MN Ramsey County $80,780
926 MN Scott County $78,460
927 MN St. Louis County $78,900
928 MN Stearns County $78,580
929 MN Washington County $80,160
930 MN Wright County $79,610
931 MN Apple Valley City $114,820
932 MN Blaine City $126,550
933 MN Bloomington City $150,730
934 MN Brooklyn Park City $137,300
935 MN Burnsville City $123,700
936 MN Coon Rapids City $121,480
66 26

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
937 MN Cottage Grove City $76,230
938 MN Duluth City $144,340
939 MN Eagan City $130,890
940 MN Eden Prairie City $128,580
941 MN Edina City $119,340
942 MN Inver Grove Heights City $76,160
943 MN Lakeville City $123,680
944 MN Mankato City $76,630
945 MN Maple Grove City $128,850
946 MN Maplewood City $76,530
947 MN Minneapolis City $424,330
948 MN Minnetonka City $119,890
949 MN Moorhead City $76,470
950 MN Plymouth City $139,830
951 MN Richfield City $76,260
952 MN Rochester City $172,870
953 MN Roseville City $76,370
954 MN Shakopee City $76,550
955 MN St. Cloud City $131,730
956 MN St. Louis Park City $114,140
957 MN St. Paul City $317,800
958 MN Woodbury City $129,800
959 MO Cass County $78,410
960 MO Christian County $77,850
961 MO Clay County $78,540
962 MO Franklin County $78,530
963 MO Greene County $79,080
964 MO Jackson County $79,620
965 MO Jasper County $77,570
966 MO Jefferson County $235,510
967 MO St. Charles County $79,500
968 MO St. Louis County $735,340
969 MO Blue Springs City $117,010
970 MO Cape Girardeau City $76,480
971 MO Chesterfield City $76,990
972 MO Columbia City $176,550
973 MO Florissant City $112,080
974 MO Independence City $163,880
67 27

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
975 MO Jefferson City City $76,770
976 MO Joplin City $119,050
977 MO Kansas City City $477,390
978 MO Lee's Summit City $150,390
979 MO O'Fallon City $142,430
980 MO Springfield City $220,930
981 MO St. Charles City $129,280
982 MO St. Joseph City $133,950
983 MO St. Louis City $330,620
984 MO St. Peters City $118,770
985 MO University City City $76,120
986 MO Wentzville City $76,500
987 MO Wildwood City $76,120
988 MS DeSoto County $77,890
989 MS Harrison County $77,830
990 MS Jackson County $79,900
991 MS Jones County $77,380
992 MS Lafayette County $76,940
993 MS Lamar County $76,910
994 MS Lowndes County $77,090
995 MS Madison County $78,810
996 MS Pearl River County $76,860
997 MS Rankin County $80,400
998 MS Biloxi City $76,850
999 MS Clinton City $75,910
1000 MS Greenville City $76,050
1001 MS Gulfport City $133,890
1002 MS Hattiesburg City $76,920
1003 MS Jackson City $201,980
1004 MS Meridian City $76,380
1005 MS Olive Branch City $76,380
1006 MS Southaven City $116,540
1007 MS Tupelo City $76,530
1008 MT Cascade County $75,790
1009 MT Flathead County $77,670
1010 MT Gallatin County $76,860
1011 MT Lake County $76,060
1012 MT Lewis and Clark County $76,220
68 28

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1013 MT Lincoln County $75,680
1014 MT Missoula County $76,470
1015 MT Park County $75,580
1016 MT Ravalli County $76,490
1017 MT Yellowstone County $76,600
1018 MT Anaconda-Deer Lodge City $75,330
1019 MT Belgrade City $75,330
1020 MT Billings City $165,490
1021 MT Bozeman City $116,320
1022 MT Butte-Silver Bow City $76,200
1023 MT Great Falls City $121,420
1024 MT Havre City $75,330
1025 MT Helena City $76,250
1026 MT Kalispell City $75,940
1027 MT Missoula City $134,040
1028 NC Brunswick County $79,640
1029 NC Buncombe County $80,700
1030 NC Davidson County $80,360
1031 NC Gaston County $79,790
1032 NC Iredell County $79,640
1033 NC Johnston County $229,210
1034 NC Mecklenburg County $81,120
1035 NC Randolph County $79,870
1036 NC Union County $81,610
1037 NC Wake County $329,670
1038 NC Apex, Town of City $117,810
1039 NC Asheville City $158,820
1040 NC Burlington City $120,610
1041 NC Cary, Town of City $210,400
1042 NC Chapel Hill, Town of City $129,010
1043 NC Charlotte City $777,930
1044 NC Concord City $153,940
1045 NC Durham City $297,140
1046 NC Fayetteville City $245,040
1047 NC Gastonia City $137,620
1048 NC Greensboro City $314,150
1049 NC Greenville City $146,850
1050 NC Hickory City $76,750
69 29

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1051 NC High Point City $165,110
1052 NC Holly Springs, Town of City $76,320
1053 NC Huntersville, Town of City $120,070
1054 NC Indian Trail, Town of City $76,350
1055 NC Jacksonville City $139,090
1056 NC Kannapolis City $113,050
1057 NC Mooresville, Town of City $113,610
1058 NC Raleigh City $450,390
1059 NC Rocky Mount City $118,650
1060 NC Salisbury City $76,370
1061 NC Wake Forest, Town of City $76,560
1062 NC Wilmington City $172,690
1063 NC Wilson City $76,800
1064 NC Winston-Salem City $274,010
1065 ND Barnes County $75,370
1066 ND Burleigh County $75,770
1067 ND Cass County $75,660
1068 ND Grand Forks County $75,480
1069 ND McKenzie County $75,530
1070 ND Ramsey County $75,400
1071 ND Rolette County $75,450
1072 ND Walsh County $75,370
1073 ND Ward County $75,750
1074 ND Williams County $75,420
1075 ND Bismarck City $133,550
1076 ND Dickinson City $75,870
1077 ND Fargo City $176,940
1078 ND Grand Forks City $120,420
1079 ND Jamestown City $75,550
1080 ND Mandan City $75,790
1081 ND Minot City $76,670
1082 ND Wahpeton City $75,290
1083 ND West Fargo City $76,250
1084 ND Williston City $76,010
1085 NE Cass County $75,850
1086 NE Dakota County $75,750
1087 NE Dawson County $75,830
1088 NE Douglas County $78,070
70 30

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1089 NE Gage County $75,740
1090 NE Lancaster County $76,020
1091 NE Lincoln County $76,220
1092 NE Sarpy County $78,430
1093 NE Saunders County $75,720
1094 NE Scotts Bluff County $76,260
1095 NE Bellevue City $120,630
1096 NE Columbus City $75,850
1097 NE Fremont City $75,940
1098 NE Grand Island City $116,440
1099 NE Hastings City $75,880
1100 NE Kearney City $76,190
1101 NE Lincoln City $300,090
1102 NE Norfolk City $75,890
1103 NE Omaha City $461,600
1104 NE Papillion City $75,830
1105 NH Belknap County $77,160
1106 NH Carroll County $76,710
1107 NH Cheshire County $77,630
1108 NH Coos County $76,080
1109 NH Grafton County $78,280
1110 NH Hillsborough County $80,440
1111 NH Merrimack County $78,630
1112 NH Rockingham County $244,460
1113 NH Strafford County $77,200
1114 NH Sullivan County $76,450
1115 NH Concord City $76,720
1116 NH Derry, Town of City $76,090
1117 NH Dover City $76,150
1118 NH Hudson, Town of City $75,840
1119 NH Londonderry, Town of City $75,920
1120 NH Manchester City $163,660
1121 NH Merrimack, Town of City $75,970
1122 NH Nashua City $144,610
1123 NH Rochester City $76,080
1124 NH Salem, Town of City $76,090
1125 NJ Bergen County $695,630
1126 NJ Burlington County $349,100
71 31

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1127 NJ Camden County $244,430
1128 NJ Essex County $257,630
1129 NJ Gloucester County $234,830
1130 NJ Monmouth County $380,600
1131 NJ Morris County $422,170
1132 NJ Ocean County $81,110
1133 NJ Somerset County $81,640
1134 NJ Union County $285,940
1135 NJ Atlantic City City $76,540
1136 NJ Bayonne City $124,910
1137 NJ Belleville, Township of City $76,210
1138 NJ Berkeley, Township of City $76,410
1139 NJ Bloomfield, Township of City $112,160
1140 NJ Brick, Township of City $128,690
1141 NJ Bridgewater, Township of City $76,720
1142 NJ Camden City $131,910
1143 NJ Cherry Hill, Township of City $134,260
1144 NJ Clifton City $140,650
1145 NJ East Brunswick, Township of City $76,710
1146 NJ East Orange City $123,800
1147 NJ Edison, Township of City $159,920
1148 NJ Egg Harbor, Township of City $76,600
1149 NJ Elizabeth City $177,390
1150 NJ Evesham, Township of City $76,580
1151 NJ Ewing, Township of City $76,350
1152 NJ Fort Lee, Borough of City $76,320
1153 NJ Franklin, Township of City $126,920
1154 NJ Freehold, Township of City $76,270
1155 NJ Galloway, Township of City $76,250
1156 NJ Gloucester, Township of City $121,580
1157 NJ Hackensack City $76,730
1158 NJ Hamilton, Township of City $142,770
1159 NJ Hillsborough, Township of City $76,380
1160 NJ Hoboken City $118,080
1161 NJ Howell, Township of City $113,320
1162 NJ Irvington, Township of City $116,760
1163 NJ Jackson, Township of City $115,540
1164 NJ Jersey City City $291,330
72 32

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1165 NJ Kearny, Town of City $76,420
1166 NJ Lakewood, Township of City $173,640
1167 NJ Linden City $76,500
1168 NJ Manalapan, Township of City $76,330
1169 NJ Manchester, Township of City $76,500
1170 NJ Marlboro, Township of City $76,350
1171 NJ Middletown, Township of City $123,080
1172 NJ Monroe, Township of (Gloucester County) City $76,180 1173 NJ Monroe, Township of (Middlesex County) City $76,590 1174 NJ Montclair, Township of City $76,400
1175 NJ Mount Laurel, Township of City $76,680
1176 NJ New Brunswick, Township of City $121,880
1177 NJ Newark City $317,540
1178 NJ North Bergen, Township of City $120,810
1179 NJ North Brunswick, Township of City $76,450
1180 NJ Old Bridge, Township of City $121,610
1181 NJ Parsippany-Troy Hills, Township of City $122,450 1182 NJ Passaic City $126,930
1183 NJ Paterson City $190,900
1184 NJ Pennsauken, Township of City $76,290
1185 NJ Perth Amboy City $114,270
1186 NJ Piscataway, Township of City $122,360
1187 NJ Plainfield City $112,690
1188 NJ Sayreville, Borough of City $76,430
1189 NJ South Brunswick, Township of City $76,670
1190 NJ Teaneck, Township of City $76,380
1191 NJ Toms River, Township of City $147,200
1192 NJ Trenton City $145,700
1193 NJ Union City City $123,130
1194 NJ Union, Township of City $120,360
1195 NJ Vineland City $122,730
1196 NJ Washington, Township of City $76,620
1197 NJ Wayne, Township of City $118,460
1198 NJ West New York, Town of City $111,500
1199 NJ West Orange, Township of City $76,600
1200 NJ Winslow, Township of City $76,270
1201 NJ Woodbridge, Township of City $153,300
1202 NM Bernalillo County $78,950
73 33

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1203 NM Dona Ana County $78,650
1204 NM McKinley County $77,520
1205 NM Otero County $76,280
1206 NM Rio Arriba County $76,350
1207 NM San Juan County $77,580
1208 NM Sandoval County $76,540
1209 NM Santa Fe County $77,200
1210 NM Taos County $76,180
1211 NM Valencia County $77,550
1212 NM Alamogordo City $76,060
1213 NM Albuquerque City $512,750
1214 NM Carlsbad City $76,110
1215 NM Clovis City $76,310
1216 NM Farmington City $76,680
1217 NM Hobbs City $76,410
1218 NM Las Cruces City $160,190
1219 NM Rio Rancho City $149,420
1220 NM Roswell City $76,680
1221 NM Santa Fe City $144,530
1222 NV Churchill County $75,870
1223 NV Clark County $844,640
1224 NV Douglas County $76,700
1225 NV Elko County $76,100
1226 NV Humboldt County $75,600
1227 NV Lyon County $76,190
1228 NV Nye County $76,720
1229 NV Pershing County $75,230
1230 NV Washoe County $78,680
1231 NV White Pine County $75,330
1232 NV Boulder City $75,520
1233 NV Carson City City $120,450
1234 NV Elko City $75,750
1235 NV Fernley City $75,730
1236 NV Henderson City $307,600
1237 NV Las Vegas City $583,470
1238 NV Mesquite City $75,720
1239 NV North Las Vegas City $262,780
1240 NV Reno City $280,500
74 34

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1241 NV Sparks City $155,620
1242 NY Dutchess County $259,770
1243 NY Erie County $248,410
1244 NY Monroe County $81,200
1245 NY Niagara County $80,400
1246 NY Oneida County $80,830
1247 NY Onondaga County $278,080
1248 NY Orange County $372,460
1249 NY Saratoga County $81,630
1250 NY Ulster County $81,150
1251 NY Westchester County $282,250
1252 NY Albany City $164,050
1253 NY Amherst, Town of City $179,240
1254 NY Babylon, Town of City $235,330
1255 NY Bethlehem, Town of City $76,160
1256 NY Binghamton City $76,690
1257 NY Brighton, Town of City $76,350
1258 NY Brookhaven, Town of City $429,790
1259 NY Buffalo City $293,740
1260 NY Cheektowaga, Town of City $143,440
1261 NY Clarkstown, Town of City $140,500
1262 NY Clay, Town of City $118,800
1263 NY Clifton Park, Town of City $76,290
1264 NY Colonie, Town of City $146,350
1265 NY Cortlandt, Town of City $76,420
1266 NY Greece, Town of City $144,840
1267 NY Greenburgh, Town of City $149,090
1268 NY Guilderland, Town of City $76,220
1269 NY Hamburg, Town of City $118,990
1270 NY Haverstraw, Town of City $76,230
1271 NY Hempstead, Town of City $649,790
1272 NY Henrietta, Town of City $76,850
1273 NY Huntington, Town of City $233,490
1274 NY Irondequoit, Town of City $111,250
1275 NY Islip, Town of City $328,290
1276 NY Lancaster, Town of City $76,520
1277 NY Long Beach City $76,100
1278 NY Mount Pleasant, Town of City $76,680
75 35

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1279 NY Mount Vernon City $126,920
1280 NY New Rochelle City $133,340
1281 NY New York City $6,875,730
1282 NY Niagara Falls City $76,720
1283 NY North Hempstead, Town of City $263,550
1284 NY Orangetown, Town of City $76,720
1285 NY Ossining, Town of City $76,300
1286 NY Oyster Bay, Town of City $304,060
1287 NY Penfield, Town of City $76,310
1288 NY Perinton, Town of City $76,620
1289 NY Poughkeepsie, Town of City $76,620
1290 NY Ramapo, Town of City $184,790
1291 NY Riverhead, Town of City $76,280
1292 NY Rochester City $248,150
1293 NY Rye, Town of City $76,660
1294 NY Schenectady City $126,660
1295 NY Smithtown, Town of City $163,460
1296 NY Southampton, Town of City $126,880
1297 NY Syracuse City $195,980
1298 NY Tonawanda, Town of City $128,620
1299 NY Troy City $114,100
1300 NY Union, Town of City $117,440
1301 NY Utica City $125,390
1302 NY Webster, Town of City $76,520
1303 NY West Seneca, Town of City $76,510
1304 NY White Plains City $126,510
1305 NY Yonkers City $227,490
1306 NY Yorktown, Town of City $76,250
1307 OH Butler County $248,500
1308 OH Clermont County $225,940
1309 OH Cuyahoga County $557,250
1310 OH Franklin County $81,940
1311 OH Hamilton County $473,280
1312 OH Lake County $81,130
1313 OH Montgomery County $305,670
1314 OH Stark County $302,340
1315 OH Summit County $304,340
1316 OH Warren County $253,250
76 36

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1317 OH Akron City $225,370
1318 OH Beavercreek City $76,640
1319 OH Brunswick City $76,140
1320 OH Canton City $131,670
1321 OH Cincinnati City $334,440
1322 OH Cleveland City $386,700
1323 OH Cleveland Heights City $76,450
1324 OH Columbus City $778,900
1325 OH Cuyahoga Falls City $112,560
1326 OH Dayton City $187,930
1327 OH Delaware City $76,410
1328 OH Dublin City $76,910
1329 OH Elyria City $115,220
1330 OH Euclid City $76,640
1331 OH Fairfield City $76,610
1332 OH Findlay City $76,520
1333 OH Gahanna City $76,250
1334 OH Grove City City $76,460
1335 OH Hamilton City $122,250
1336 OH Hilliard City $76,280
1337 OH Huber Heights City $76,400
1338 OH Kettering City $119,280
1339 OH Lakewood City $110,300
1340 OH Lancaster City $76,420
1341 OH Lima City $76,310
1342 OH Lorain City $122,270
1343 OH Mansfield City $76,760
1344 OH Marion City $76,250
1345 OH Mentor City $76,760
1346 OH Middletown City $113,080
1347 OH Newark City $76,750
1348 OH North Ridgeville City $76,130
1349 OH Parma City $132,830
1350 OH Reynoldsburg City $76,300
1351 OH Springfield City $121,530
1352 OH Strongsville City $76,610
1353 OH Toledo City $285,750
1354 OH Upper Arlington City $76,220
77 37

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1355 OH Warren City $76,400
1356 OH Westerville City $76,500
1357 OH Youngstown City $124,150
1358 OK Canadian County $77,220
1359 OK Creek County $77,390
1360 OK Grady County $76,830
1361 OK Le Flore County $76,660
1362 OK Logan County $76,590
1363 OK Oklahoma County $79,740
1364 OK Pottawatomie County $77,470
1365 OK Rogers County $78,010
1366 OK Tulsa County $79,610
1367 OK Wagoner County $76,900
1368 OK Bartlesville City $76,320
1369 OK Broken Arrow City $156,940
1370 OK Edmond City $146,020
1371 OK Enid City $114,420
1372 OK Lawton City $146,710
1373 OK Midwest City City $117,820
1374 OK Moore City $119,560
1375 OK Muskogee City $76,370
1376 OK Norman City $171,050
1377 OK Oklahoma City City $612,250
1378 OK Owasso City $76,270
1379 OK Stillwater City $76,760
1380 OK Tulsa City $408,420
1381 OR Clackamas County $329,650
1382 OR Deschutes County $78,310
1383 OR Douglas County $78,850
1384 OR Jackson County $79,600
1385 OR Lane County $79,830
1386 OR Linn County $77,780
1387 OR Marion County $80,470
1388 OR Umatilla County $77,740
1389 OR Washington County $324,390
1390 OR Yamhill County $78,660
1391 OR Albany City $117,460
1392 OR Beaverton City $152,000
78 38

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1393 OR Bend City $152,740
1394 OR Corvallis City $122,590
1395 OR Eugene City $212,520
1396 OR Grants Pass City $76,430
1397 OR Gresham City $158,600
1398 OR Hillsboro City $163,840
1399 OR Keizer City $76,270
1400 OR Lake Oswego City $76,440
1401 OR Medford City $143,430
1402 OR Oregon City City $76,260
1403 OR Portland City $602,650
1404 OR Salem City $214,750
1405 OR Springfield City $123,250
1406 OR Tigard City $118,610
1407 PA Allegheny County $751,200
1408 PA Berks County $324,850
1409 PA Bucks County $404,580
1410 PA Chester County $479,860
1411 PA Cumberland County $274,270
1412 PA Delaware County $406,930
1413 PA Lancaster County $411,780
1414 PA Lehigh County $252,780
1415 PA Luzerne County $287,780
1416 PA Montgomery County $594,260
1417 PA Northampton County $264,030
1418 PA Washington County $233,750
1419 PA Westmoreland County $308,180
1420 PA York County $377,890
1421 PA Abington, Township of (Montgomery County) City $118,250 1422 PA Allentown City $170,070
1423 PA Altoona City $76,540
1424 PA Bensalem, Township of City $122,290
1425 PA Bethlehem City $135,180
1426 PA Bristol, Township of City $114,490
1427 PA Cheltenham, Township of City $76,230
1428 PA Erie City $151,020
1429 PA Harrisburg City $120,600
1430 PA Haverford, Township of City $110,660
79 39

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1431 PA
Hempfield, Township of (Westmoreland
County) City $76,460
1432 PA Lancaster City $122,800
1433 PA Lower Merion, Township of City $126,250
1434 PA Lower Paxton, Township of City $114,320
1435 PA Manheim, Township of (Lancaster County) City $76,560 1436 PA Middletown, Township of (Bucks County) City $76,530 1437 PA Millcreek, Township of (Erie County) City $115,710 1438 PA Norristown, Borough of City $76,190
1439 PA Northampton, Township of City $76,280
1440 PA Penn Hills, Township of City $76,340
1441 PA Philadelphia City $1,316,810
1442 PA Pittsburgh City $337,960
1443 PA Reading City $145,490
1444 PA Scranton City $134,690
1445 PA State College, Borough of City $76,560
1446 PA Upper Darby, Township of City $134,340
1447 PA Wilkes-Barre City $76,590
1448 PA York City $76,680
1449 PR Aguada City $76,280
1450 PR Aguadilla City $118,070
1451 PR Arecibo City $142,090
1452 PR Bayamon City $213,340
1453 PR Cabo Rojo City $76,600
1454 PR Caguas City $173,030
1455 PR Canovanas City $76,440
1456 PR Carolina City $191,230
1457 PR Cayey City $76,470
1458 PR Cidra City $76,340
1459 PR Dorado City $76,240
1460 PR Guayama City $76,340
1461 PR Guaynabo City $147,260
1462 PR Gurabo City $76,400
1463 PR Hatillo City $76,330
1464 PR Humacao City $115,070
1465 PR Isabela City $76,450
1466 PR Juana Diaz City $76,560
1467 PR Juncos City $76,290
1468 PR Las Piedras City $76,220
80 40

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1469 PR Manati City $76,420
1470 PR Mayaguez City $134,110
1471 PR Moca City $76,260
1472 PR Ponce City $183,120
1473 PR Rio Grande City $76,580
1474 PR San Juan City $357,770
1475 PR San Lorenzo City $76,250
1476 PR San Sebastian City $76,320
1477 PR Toa Alta City $122,670
1478 PR Toa Baja City $130,000
1479 PR Trujillo Alto City $122,800
1480 PR Vega Alta City $76,200
1481 PR Vega Baja City $115,150
1482 RI Coventry, Town of City $76,130
1483 RI Cranston City $136,300
1484 RI Cumberland, Town of City $76,180
1485 RI East Providence City $76,630
1486 RI North Providence, Town of City $76,090
1487 RI Pawtucket City $128,950
1488 RI Providence City $227,730
1489 RI South Kingstown, Town of City $76,120
1490 RI Warwick City $139,610
1491 RI Woonsocket City $76,470
1492 SC Aiken County $80,820
1493 SC Anderson County $227,180
1494 SC Beaufort County $80,150
1495 SC Berkeley County $80,300
1496 SC Greenville County $393,510
1497 SC Horry County $307,990
1498 SC Lexington County $297,180
1499 SC Richland County $278,170
1500 SC Spartanburg County $282,710
1501 SC York County $226,460
1502 SC Charleston City $195,380
1503 SC Columbia City $198,460
1504 SC Florence City $76,570
1505 SC Goose Creek City $76,520
1506 SC Greenville City $144,320
81 41

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1507 SC Greer City $76,210
1508 SC Hilton Head Island, Town of City $76,420
1509 SC Mount Pleasant, Town of City $142,750
1510 SC Myrtle Beach City $76,580
1511 SC North Charleston City $171,700
1512 SC Rock Hill City $133,080
1513 SC Spartanburg City $76,580
1514 SC Summerville, Town of City $113,980
1515 SC Sumter City $76,610
1516 SD Brookings County $75,360
1517 SD Clay County $75,500
1518 SD Lake County $75,390
1519 SD Lawrence County $75,460
1520 SD Lincoln County $75,840
1521 SD Meade County $75,960
1522 SD Minnehaha County $76,450
1523 SD Oglala Lakota County $75,490
1524 SD Pennington County $76,130
1525 SD Union County $75,590
1526 SD Aberdeen City $76,020
1527 SD Brookings City $75,860
1528 SD Huron City $75,490
1529 SD Mitchell City $75,560
1530 SD Pierre City $75,510
1531 SD Rapid City City $135,960
1532 SD Sioux Falls City $224,030
1533 SD Spearfish City $75,440
1534 SD Watertown City $75,810
1535 SD Yankton City $75,570
1536 TN Blount County $79,600
1537 TN Hamilton County $80,940
1538 TN Knox County $279,650
1539 TN Putnam County $77,840
1540 TN Rutherford County $77,990
1541 TN Sevier County $78,460
1542 TN Shelby County $79,610
1543 TN Sullivan County $78,530
1544 TN Sumner County $77,880
82 42

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1545 TN Williamson County $77,700
1546 TN Bartlett City $117,930
1547 TN Brentwood City $76,730
1548 TN Chattanooga City $234,200
1549 TN Clarksville City $197,220
1550 TN Cleveland City $76,790
1551 TN Collierville, Town of City $113,610
1552 TN Columbia City $76,480
1553 TN Franklin City $145,990
1554 TN Gallatin City $76,540
1555 TN Germantown City $76,430
1556 TN Hendersonville City $120,260
1557 TN Jackson City $132,680
1558 TN Johnson City City $134,060
1559 TN Kingsport City $121,880
1560 TN Knoxville City $239,720
1561 TN La Vergne City $76,330
1562 TN Lebanon City $76,430
1563 TN Memphis City $590,500
1564 TN Mount Juliet City $76,310
1565 TN Murfreesboro City $190,230
1566 TN
Nashville-Davidson, Metropolitan Government
of City $644,440
1567 TN Smyrna, Town of City $117,300
1568 TN Spring Hill City $109,170
1569 TX Bexar County $464,940
1570 TX Brazoria County $268,260
1571 TX Collin County $219,010
1572 TX Denton County $251,160
1573 TX Fort Bend County $456,500
1574 TX Harris County $1,636,340
1575 TX Hidalgo County $357,000
1576 TX Montgomery County $457,580
1577 TX Tarrant County $306,040
1578 TX Travis County $293,610
1579 TX Williamson County $235,100
1580 TX Abilene City $172,590
1581 TX Allen City $151,800
1582 TX Amarillo City $227,860
83 43

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1583 TX Arlington City $369,400
1584 TX Austin City $855,340
1585 TX Baytown City $140,370
1586 TX Beaumont City $168,420
1587 TX Bedford City $76,680
1588 TX Brownsville City $217,400
1589 TX Bryan City $140,860
1590 TX Burleson City $76,610
1591 TX Carrollton City $177,310
1592 TX Cedar Hill City $76,610
1593 TX Cedar Park City $132,620
1594 TX College Station City $167,660
1595 TX Conroe City $145,460
1596 TX Coppell City $76,610
1597 TX Copperas Cove City $76,170
1598 TX Corpus Christi City $322,260
1599 TX Dallas City $1,132,070
1600 TX Denton City $182,710
1601 TX DeSoto City $114,690
1602 TX Duncanville City $76,340
1603 TX Edinburg City $153,020
1604 TX El Paso City $595,490
1605 TX Euless City $117,300
1606 TX Farmers Branch City $76,570
1607 TX Flower Mound, Town of City $132,150
1608 TX Fort Worth City $785,490
1609 TX Friendswood City $76,330
1610 TX Frisco City $224,480
1611 TX Galveston City $118,860
1612 TX Garland City $251,490
1613 TX Georgetown City $128,440
1614 TX Grand Prairie City $220,600
1615 TX Grapevine City $122,650
1616 TX Haltom City City $76,540
1617 TX Harlingen City $132,290
1618 TX Houston City $2,006,020
1619 TX Huntsville City $76,640
1620 TX Hurst City $76,390
84 44

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1621 TX Irving City $284,550
1622 TX Keller City $76,540
1623 TX Killeen City $184,930
1624 TX Kyle City $76,480
1625 TX La Porte City $76,250
1626 TX Lancaster City $76,350
1627 TX Laredo City $271,290
1628 TX League City City $155,210
1629 TX Leander City $116,720
1630 TX Lewisville City $158,370
1631 TX Little Elm City $76,480
1632 TX Longview City $141,720
1633 TX Lubbock City $274,430
1634 TX Mansfield City $129,070
1635 TX McAllen City $190,200
1636 TX McKinney City $219,230
1637 TX Mesquite City $182,880
1638 TX Midland City $180,140
1639 TX Midlothian City $76,150
1640 TX Mission City $140,450
1641 TX Missouri City City $128,070
1642 TX New Braunfels City $143,530
1643 TX North Richland Hills City $125,800
1644 TX Odessa City $165,070
1645 TX Pasadena City $191,680
1646 TX Pearland City $164,610
1647 TX Pflugerville City $120,850
1648 TX Pharr City $135,910
1649 TX Plano City $307,870
1650 TX Port Arthur City $118,760
1651 TX Richardson City $177,400
1652 TX Rockwall City $76,650
1653 TX Rosenberg City $76,330
1654 TX Round Rock City $169,320
1655 TX Rowlett City $119,050
1656 TX San Angelo City $151,890
1657 TX San Antonio City $1,220,460
1658 TX San Juan City $76,170
85 45

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1659 TX San Marcos City $127,080
1660 TX Schertz City $76,400
1661 TX Sherman City $76,610
1662 TX Sugar Land City $164,210
1663 TX Temple City $140,420
1664 TX Texarkana City $76,440
1665 TX Texas City City $114,390
1666 TX The Colony City $76,380
1667 TX Tyler City $162,770
1668 TX Victoria City $126,590
1669 TX Waco City $187,120
1670 TX Waxahachie City $76,430
1671 TX Weslaco City $76,470
1672 TX Wichita Falls City $155,820
1673 TX Wylie City $114,380
1674 UT Box Elder County $76,950
1675 UT Cache County $77,620
1676 UT Davis County $248,800
1677 UT Salt Lake County $80,390
1678 UT Summit County $76,520
1679 UT Tooele County $76,190
1680 UT Uintah County $76,240
1681 UT Utah County $80,710
1682 UT Washington County $77,810
1683 UT Weber County $79,480
1684 UT Bountiful City $76,530
1685 UT Cedar City City $76,240
1686 UT Draper City $117,010
1687 UT Eagle Mountain City $76,330
1688 UT Herriman City $111,860
1689 UT Kearns, Metro Township of City $76,130
1690 UT Layton City $134,230
1691 UT Lehi City $132,310
1692 UT Logan City $117,590
1693 UT Midvale City $76,210
1694 UT Millcreek City $121,210
1695 UT Murray City $116,350
1696 UT Ogden City $145,720
86 46

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1697 UT Orem City $150,350
1698 UT Pleasant Grove City $76,260
1699 UT Provo City $165,350
1700 UT Riverton City $76,480
1701 UT Roy City $76,240
1702 UT Salt Lake City City $264,650
1703 UT Sandy City $148,400
1704 UT Saratoga Springs City $76,170
1705 UT South Jordan City $132,100
1706 UT Spanish Fork City $76,440
1707 UT Springville City $76,190
1708 UT St. George City $149,500
1709 UT Taylorsville City $118,550
1710 UT Tooele City $76,180
1711 UT West Jordan City $158,100
1712 UT West Valley City City $179,460
1713 VA Albemarle County $78,940
1714 VA Arlington County $267,820
1715 VA Chesterfield County $341,610
1716 VA Fairfax County $963,530
1717 VA Hanover County $78,700
1718 VA Henrico County $333,630
1719 VA Loudoun County $350,900
1720 VA Prince William County $421,130
1721 VA Spotsylvania County $79,560
1722 VA Stafford County $80,130
1723 VA Alexandria City $197,700
1724 VA Blacksburg, Town of City $76,680
1725 VA Charlottesville City $76,840
1726 VA Chesapeake City $260,480
1727 VA Danville City $76,580
1728 VA Hampton City $179,420
1729 VA Harrisonburg City $117,870
1730 VA Leesburg, Town of City $76,710
1731 VA Lynchburg City $140,890
1732 VA Manassas City $76,480
1733 VA Newport News City $221,810
1734 VA Norfolk City $271,840
87 47

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1735 VA Portsmouth City $151,150
1736 VA Richmond City $262,500
1737 VA Roanoke City $156,480
1738 VA Suffolk City $144,950
1739 VA Virginia Beach City $418,550
1740 VT Addison County $76,270
1741 VT Caledonia County $76,030
1742 VT Chittenden County $76,390
1743 VT Franklin County $76,680
1744 VT Orange County $75,960
1745 VT Orleans County $75,940
1746 VT Rutland County $76,480
1747 VT Washington County $77,100
1748 VT Windham County $76,120
1749 VT Windsor County $76,590
1750 VT Bennington, Town of City $75,560
1751 VT Brattleboro, Town of City $75,460
1752 VT Burlington City $76,670
1753 VT Colchester, Town of City $75,610
1754 VT Essex, Town of City $75,770
1755 VT Hartford, Town of City $75,380
1756 VT Milton, Town of City $75,340
1757 VT Rutland City $75,600
1758 VT South Burlington City $75,760
1759 VT Williston, Town of City $75,410
1760 WA Clark County $296,170
1761 WA Grant County $78,440
1762 WA King County $474,460
1763 WA Kitsap County $245,220
1764 WA Pierce County $497,770
1765 WA Snohomish County $436,900
1766 WA Spokane County $224,600
1767 WA Thurston County $81,040
1768 WA Whatcom County $79,500
1769 WA Yakima County $80,470
1770 WA Auburn City $141,710
1771 WA Bellevue City $203,560
1772 WA Bellingham City $148,080
88 48

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1773 WA Bothell City $76,740
1774 WA Bremerton City $76,690
1775 WA Burien City $112,300
1776 WA Edmonds City $76,430
1777 WA Everett City $169,950
1778 WA Federal Way City $147,860
1779 WA Issaquah City $76,450
1780 WA Kennewick City $138,680
1781 WA Kent City $179,480
1782 WA Kirkland City $144,580
1783 WA Lacey City $115,460
1784 WA Lake Stevens City $76,130
1785 WA Lakewood City $123,080
1786 WA Longview City $76,370
1787 WA Lynnwood City $76,450
1788 WA Marysville City $124,740
1789 WA Mount Vernon City $76,250
1790 WA Olympia City $122,030
1791 WA Pasco City $131,590
1792 WA Puyallup City $76,570
1793 WA Redmond City $143,150
1794 WA Renton City $157,700
1795 WA Richland City $123,260
1796 WA Sammamish City $121,420
1797 WA Seattle City $681,520
1798 WA Shoreline City $117,070
1799 WA Spokane City $255,210
1800 WA Spokane Valley City $154,350
1801 WA Tacoma City $246,170
1802 WA Vancouver City $223,720
1803 WA Wenatchee City $76,300
1804 WA Yakima City $149,970
1805 WI Brown County $80,630
1806 WI Dane County $266,890
1807 WI Marathon County $78,300
1808 WI Milwaukee County $79,820
1809 WI Outagamie County $79,420
1810 WI Racine County $79,040
89 49

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1811 WI Walworth County $78,630
1812 WI Washington County $79,610
1813 WI Waukesha County $238,860
1814 WI Winnebago County $78,580
1815 WI Appleton City $134,180
1816 WI Beloit City $76,280
1817 WI Brookfield City $76,600
1818 WI Eau Claire City $130,210
1819 WI Fond du Lac City $76,620
1820 WI Franklin City $76,280
1821 WI Green Bay City $159,610
1822 WI Greenfield City $76,240
1823 WI Janesville City $125,580
1824 WI Kenosha City $149,790
1825 WI La Crosse City $119,590
1826 WI Madison City $291,340
1827 WI Menomonee Falls, Village of City $76,470
1828 WI Milwaukee City $522,370
1829 WI New Berlin City $76,430
1830 WI Oak Creek City $76,280
1831 WI Oshkosh City $128,580
1832 WI Racine City $133,580
1833 WI Sheboygan City $76,730
1834 WI Sun Prairie City $76,190
1835 WI Waukesha City $130,460
1836 WI Wausau City $76,500
1837 WI Wauwatosa City $76,940
1838 WI West Allis City $120,530
1839 WV Berkeley County $78,320
1840 WV Cabell County $76,770
1841 WV Harrison County $76,780
1842 WV Jefferson County $76,900
1843 WV Kanawha County $79,470
1844 WV Mercer County $77,060
1845 WV Monongalia County $77,550
1846 WV Putnam County $76,950
1847 WV Raleigh County $76,950
1848 WV Wood County $76,820
90 50

# State/Territory Entity Name Level of
Government Allocation
1849 WV Beckley City $75,680
1850 WV Charleston City $77,040
1851 WV Clarksburg City $75,630
1852 WV Fairmont City $75,670
1853 WV Huntington City $76,800
1854 WV Martinsburg City $75,690
1855 WV Morgantown City $76,250
1856 WV Parkersburg City $76,150
1857 WV Weirton City $75,670
1858 WV Wheeling City $76,050
1859 WY Campbell County $75,520
1860 WY Carbon County $75,510
1861 WY Converse County $75,480
1862 WY Fremont County $75,980
1863 WY Goshen County $75,440
1864 WY Laramie County $76,200
1865 WY Lincoln County $75,670
1866 WY Natrona County $75,740
1867 WY Park County $76,030
1868 WY Teton County $75,450
1869 WY Casper City $119,850
1870 WY Cheyenne City $125,720
1871 WY Evanston City $75,410
1872 WY Gillette City $76,140
1873 WY Green River City $75,380
1874 WY Jackson, Town of City $75,410
1875 WY Laramie City $76,110
1876 WY Riverton City $75,380
1877 WY Rock Springs City $75,820
1878 WY Sheridan City $75,670

91 Template Version 12/19/2023
EECBG Program
Special Terms and Conditions

Special Terms and Conditions

Entity Name:___________________________________ (“Recipient”), which is identified in the Assistance Agreement, and the Office of State and Community Energy Programs (“SCEP”), and Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program (“EECBG”), an office within the United States Department of Energy (“DOE”), enters into this Award, to achieve the project objectives and the technical milestones and deliverables stated in Attachment 1 to this Award.

This Award consists of the following documents, including all terms and conditions therein:

Special Terms and Conditions
Attachment 1 Federal Assistance Reporting Checklist (FARC)1 Attachment 2 NEPA Determination2

The following are incorporated into this Award by reference:
• DOE Assistance Regulations, 2 CFR part 200 as amended by 2 CFR part 910 at http://www.eCFR.gov
.
• National Policy Requirements (November 12, 2020) at
http://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/rtc.jsp
.
• The Recipient’s application/proposal as approved by SCEP. • Public Law 117-58, also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL).

1 The FARC will be provided at a later date.
2 The NEPA Determination is attached to your application in the EECBG Program Voucher Application Portal 92 Special Terms and Conditions

2 Table of Contents
Subpart A. General Provisions ......................................................................................................................... 4 Term 1. Legal Authority and Effect ....................................................................................................................... 4 Term 2. Flow Down Requirement ........................................................................................................................ 4 Term 3. Compliance with Federal, State, and Municipal Law ............................................................................. 4 Term 4. Inconsistency with Federal Law .............................................................................................................. 4 Term 5. Federal Stewardship ................................................................................................................................ 4 Term 6. NEPA Requirements ................................................................................................................................ 4 Term 7. Notice Regarding the Purchase of American-Made Equipment and Products – Sense of Congress .... 5 Term 8. Reporting Requirements ......................................................................................................................... 5 Term 9. Lobbying ................................................................................................................................................... 5 Term 10. Publications ............................................................................................................................................. 5 Term 11. No-Cost Extension ................................................................................................................................... 6 Term 12. Property Standards .................................................................................................................................. 6 Term 13. Insurance Coverage ................................................................................................................................. 6 Term 14. Real Property ........................................................................................................................................... 7 Term 15. Equipment ............................................................................................................................................... 7 Term 16. Supplies .................................................................................................................................................... 8 Term 17. Property Trust Relationship .................................................................................................................... 8 Term 18. Record Retention ..................................................................................................................................... 8 Term 19. Audits ....................................................................................................................................................... 8 Term 20. Indemnity ................................................................................................................................................. 9 Term 21. Foreign National Participation ................................................................................................................ 9 Term 22. Post-Award Due Diligence Reviews ........................................................................................................ 9 Subpart B. Financial Provisions ....................................................................................................................... 10 Term 23. Maximum Obligation ............................................................................................................................. 10 Term 24. Refund Obligation.................................................................................................................................. 10 Term 25. Allowable Costs ..................................................................................................................................... 10 Term 26. Decontamination and/or Decommissioning (D&D) Costs .................................................................... 10 Term 27. Use of Program Income ......................................................................................................................... 10 Term 28. Payment Procedures ............................................................................................................................. 11 Term 29. Budget Changes ..................................................................................................................................... 11 Subpart C. Miscellaneous Provisions .............................................................................................................. 12 Term 30. Environmental, Safety and Health Performance of Work at DOE Facilities ........................................ 12 Term 31. System for Award Management and Universal Identifier Requirements ........................................... 12 Term 32. Nondisclosure and Confidentiality Agreements Assurances ............................................................... 14 Term 33. Contractor Change Notification ............................................................................................................ 15 Term 34. Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters ...................................................................................... 16 Term 35. Export Control ........................................................................................................................................ 18 Term 36. Interim Conflict of Interest Policy for Financial Assistance .................................................................. 18 Term 37. Organizational Conflict of Interest ........................................................................................................ 18 Term 38. Prohibition on Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services or Equipment ............ 19 Term 39. Human Subjects Research ..................................................................................................................... 20 Term 40. Fraud, Waste and Abuse ....................................................................................................................... 21 Subpart D. Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL)-specific requirements ................................................................ 21 Term 41. Reporting, Tracking and Segregation of Incurred Costs ....................................................................... 21 93 Special Terms and Conditions

3 Term 42. Davis-Bacon Requirements ................................................................................................................... 22 Term 43. Buy American Requirement for Infrastructure Projects ...................................................................... 23 Term 44. Affirmative Action and Pay Transparency Requirements .................................................................... 29 Term 45. Potentially Duplicative Funding Notice ................................................................................................ 29 Term 46. Transparency of Foreign Connections................................................................................................... 29 Term 47. Foreign Collaboration Considerations .................................................................................................. 30

94 Special Terms and Conditions

4 Subpart A. General Provisions

Term 1. Legal Authority and Effect
A DOE financial assistance award is valid only if it is in writing and is signed, either in writing or electronically, by a DOE Contracting Officer.

The Recipient may accept or reject the Award. Acknowledgement of award documents by the Recipient’s authorized representative through electronic systems used by DOE, specifically The EECBG Program Voucher Portal (https://doerebates.my.site.com/eecbgvouchers/s/), constitutes the Recipient's acceptance of the terms and conditions of this Award.

Acknowledgement via the EECBG Program Voucher Portal by the Recipient’s authorized representative constitutes the Recipient's electronic signature.

Term 2. Flow Down Requirement
The Recipient agrees to apply the terms and conditions of this Award, as applicable to all subcontractors as required by 2 CFR 200.101, and to require their strict compliance therewith.

Further, the Recipient must apply the Award terms as required by 2 CFR 200.327 to all sub contractors and to require their strict compliance therewith.

Term 3. Compliance with Federal, State, and Municipal Law The Recipient is required to comply with applicable Federal, state, and local laws and regulations for all work performed under this Award. The Recipient is required to obtain all necessary Federal, state, and local permits, authorizations, and approvals for all work performed under this Award.

Term 4. Inconsistency with Federal Law
Any apparent inconsistency between Federal statutes and regulations and the terms and conditions contained in this Award must be referred to the DOE Award Administrator for guidance.

Term 5. Federal Stewardship
SCEP will exercise normal Federal stewardship in overseeing the project activities performed under this Award. Stewardship activities include, but are not limited to, conducting site visits; reviewing performance and financial reports; providing technical assistance and/or temporary intervention in unusual circumstances to address deficiencies that develop during the project; assuring compliance with terms and conditions; and reviewing technical performance after project completion to ensure that the project objectives have been accomplished.

Term 6. NEPA Requirements
DOE must comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) prior to authorizing the use of Federal funds. Based on all information provided by the Recipient, SCEP has made a 95 Special Terms and Conditions

5 NEPA determination by issuing a categorical exclusion (CX) for all activities listed in the Application approved by the Contracting Officer and the DOE NEPA Determination. The Recipient is thereby authorized to use Federal funds for the defined project activities, except where such activity is subject to a restriction set forth elsewhere in this Award.

This authorization is specific to the project activities and locations as described in the Application approved by the Contracting Officer and the DOE NEPA Determination.

If the Recipient later intends to add to or modify the activities or locations as described in the approved Application and the DOE NEPA Determination, those new activities/locations or modified activities/locations are subject to additional NEPA review and are not authorized for Federal funding until the Contracting Officer provides written authorization on those additions or modifications. Should the Recipient elect to undertake activities or change locations prior to written authorization from the Contracting Officer, the Recipient does so at risk of not receiving Federal funding for those activities, and such costs may not be recognized as allowable cost share.

Condition(s):

NEPA Logs if conducting potentially ground disturbing activities.

Term 7. Notice Regarding the Purchase of American-Made Equipment and Products – Sense of Congress
It is the sense of the Congress that, to the greatest extent practicable, all equipment and products purchased with funds made available under this Award should be American-made.

Term 8. Reporting Requirements
The reporting requirements for this Award are identified on the Federal Assistance Reporting Checklist, attached to this Award. Failure to comply with these reporting requirements is considered a material noncompliance with the terms of the Award. Noncompliance may result in withholding of future payments, suspension, or termination of the current award, and withholding of future awards. A willful failure to perform, a history of failure to perform, or unsatisfactory performance of this and/or other financial assistance awards, may also result in a debarment action to preclude future awards by Federal agencies.

Term 9. Lobbying
By accepting funds under this Award, the Recipient agrees that none of the funds obligated on the Award shall be expended, directly or indirectly, to influence congressional action on any legislation or appropriation matters pending before Congress, other than to communicate to Members of Congress as described in 18 U.S.C. § 1913. This restriction is in addition to those prescribed elsewhere in statute and regulation.

Term 10. Publications
96 Special Terms and Conditions

6 The Recipient is required to include the following acknowledgement in publications arising out of, or relating to, work performed under this Award, whether copyrighted or not:

• Acknowledgment: “This material is based upon work supported by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of State and Community Energy Programs (SCEP) under the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) Program Application # XXXXXXXXX”

• Full Legal Disclaimer: “This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof.

The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.”

Abridged Legal Disclaimer: “The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Department of Energy or the United States Government.”

Recipients should make every effort to include the full Legal Disclaimer. However, in the event that recipients are constrained by formatting and/or page limitations set by the publisher, the abridged Legal Disclaimer is an acceptable alternative.

Term 11. No-Cost Extension
As provided in 2 CFR 200.308, the Recipient must provide the Contracting Officer with notice in advance if it intends to utilize a one-time, no-cost extension of this Award. The notification must include the supporting reasons and the revised period of performance. The Recipient must submit this notification in writing to the Contracting Officer and DOE Technology Manager/ Project Officer at least 30 days before the end of the current budget period.

Any no-cost extension will not alter the project scope, milestones, deliverables, or budget of this Award.

Term 12. Property Standards
The complete text of the Property Standards can be found at 2 CFR 200.310 through 200.316.

Also see 2 CFR 910.360 for additional requirements for real property and equipment for For- Profit recipients.

Term 13. Insurance Coverage
97 Special Terms and Conditions

7 See 2 CFR 200.310 for insurance requirements for real property and equipment acquired or improved with Federal funds. Also see 2 CFR 910.360(d) for additional requirements for real property and equipment for For-Profit recipients.

Term 14. Real Property
Subject to the conditions set forth in 2 CFR 200.311, title to real property acquired or improved under a Federal award will conditionally vest upon acquisition in the non-Federal entity. The non-Federal entity cannot encumber this property and must follow the requirements of 2 CFR 200.311 before disposing of the property.

Except as otherwise provided by Federal statutes or by the Federal awarding agency, real property will be used for the originally authorized purpose as long as needed for that purpose.

When real property is no longer needed for the originally authorized purpose, the non-Federal entity must obtain disposition instructions from DOE or pass-through entity. The instructions must provide for one of the following alternatives: (1) retain title after compensating DOE as described in 2 CFR 200.311(c)(1); (2) Sell the property and compensate DOE as specified in 2 CFR 200.311(c)(2); or (3) transfer title to DOE or to a third party designated/approved by DOE as specified in 2 CFR 200.311(c)(3).

See 2 CFR 200.311 for additional requirements pertaining to real property acquired or improved under a Federal award.

Term 15. Equipment
Subject to the conditions provided in 2 CFR 200.313, title to equipment (property) acquired under a Federal award will conditionally vest upon acquisition with the non-Federal entity. The non-Federal entity cannot encumber this property and must follow the requirements of 2 CFR 200.313 before disposing of the property.

Equipment must be used by the non-Federal entity in the program or project for which it was acquired as long as it is needed, whether or not the project or program continues to be supported by the Federal award. When no longer needed for the originally authorized purpose, the equipment may be used by programs supported by DOE in the priority order specified in 2 CFR 200.313(c)(1)(i) and (ii).

Management requirements, including inventory and control systems, for equipment are provided in 2 CFR 200.313(d).

When equipment acquired under a Federal award is no longer needed, the non-Federal entity must obtain disposition instructions from DOE or pass-through entity.

Disposition will be made as follows: (1) items of equipment with a current fair market value of $5,000 or less may be retained, sold, or otherwise disposed of with no further obligation to DOE; (2) Non-Federal entity may retain title or sell the equipment after compensating DOE as 98 Special Terms and Conditions

8 described in 2 CFR 200.313(e)(2); or (3) transfer title to DOE or to an eligible third party as specified in 2 CFR 200.313(e)(3).

See 2 CFR 200.313 for additional requirements pertaining to equipment acquired under a Federal award. See also 2 CFR 200.439 Equipment and other capital expenditures.

Term 16. Supplies
See 2 CFR 200.314 for requirements pertaining to supplies acquired under a Federal award. See also 2 CFR 200.453 Materials and supplies costs, including costs of computing devices.

Term 17. Property Trust Relationship
Real property, equipment, and intangible property, that are acquired or improved with a Federal award must be held in trust by the non-Federal entity as trustee for the beneficiaries of the project or program under which the property was acquired or improved. See 2 CFR 200.316 for additional requirements pertaining to real property, equipment, and intangible property acquired or improved under a Federal award.

Term 18. Record Retention
Consistent with 2 CFR 200.334 through 200.338, the Recipient is required to retain records relating to this Award.

Term 19. Audits

A. Government-Initiated Audits
The Recipient must provide any information, documents, site access, or other assistance requested by SCEP, DOE or Federal auditing agencies (e.g., DOE Inspector General, Government Accountability Office) for the purpose of audits and investigations. Such assistance may include, but is not limited to, reasonable access to the Recipient’s records relating to this Award.

Consistent with 2 CFR part 200 as amended by 2 CFR part 910, DOE may audit the Recipient’s financial records or administrative records relating to this Award at any time. Government-initiated audits are generally paid for by DOE.

DOE may conduct a final audit at the end of the project period (or the termination of the Award, if applicable). Upon completion of the audit, the Recipient is required to refund to DOE any payments for costs that were determined to be unallowable. If the audit has not been performed or completed prior to the closeout of the award, DOE retains the right to recover an appropriate amount after fully considering the recommendations on disallowed costs resulting from the final audit.

DOE will provide reasonable advance notice of audits and will minimize interference 99 Special Terms and Conditions

9 with ongoing work, to the maximum extent practicable.

B. Annual Independent Audits (Single Audit or Compliance Audit) The Recipient must comply with the annual independent audit requirements in 2 CFR 200.500 through .521 for institutions of higher education, nonprofit organizations, and state and local governments (Single audit), and 2 CFR 910.500 through .521 for for-profit entities (Compliance audit).

The annual independent audits are separate from Government-initiated audits discussed in part A. of this Term and must be paid for by the Recipient. To minimize expense, the Recipient may have a Compliance audit in conjunction with its annual audit of financial statements. The financial statement audit is not a substitute for the Compliance audit. If the audit (Single audit or Compliance audit, depending on Recipient entity type) has not been performed or completed prior to the closeout of the award, DOE may impose one or more of the actions outlined in 2 CFR 200.339, Remedies for Noncompliance.

Term 20. Indemnity
The Recipient shall indemnify DOE and its officers, agents, or employees for any and all liability, including litigation expenses and attorneys' fees, arising from suits, actions, or claims of any character for death, bodily injury, or loss of or damage to property or to the environment, resulting from the project, except to the extent that such liability results from the direct fault or negligence of DOE officers, agents or employees, or to the extent such liability may be covered by applicable allowable costs provisions.

Term 21. Foreign National Participation
If the Recipient (including any of its contractors) anticipates involving foreign nationals in the performance of the Award, the Recipient must, upon DOE’s request, provide DOE with specific information about each foreign national to ensure compliance with the requirements for participation and access approval. The volume and type of information required may depend on various factors associated with the Award. The DOE Contracting Officer will notify the Recipient if this information is required.

DOE may elect to deny a foreign national’s participation in the Award. Likewise, DOE may elect to deny a foreign national’s access to a DOE sites, information, technologies, equipment, programs or personnel.

Term 22. Post-Award Due Diligence Reviews
During the life of the Award, DOE may conduct ongoing due diligence reviews, through Government resources, to identify potential risks of undue foreign influence. In the event, a risk is identified, DOE may require risk mitigation measures, including but not limited to, requiring an individual or entity not participate in the Award.

100

Special Terms and Conditions

10 Subpart B. Financial Provisions

Term 23. Maximum Obligation
The maximum obligation of DOE for this Award is the total “Funds Obligated” stated in Block 13 of the Assistance Agreement to this Award.

Term 24. Refund Obligation
The Recipient must refund any excess payments received from SCEP, including any costs determined unallowable by the Contracting Officer. Upon the end of the project period (or the termination of the Award, if applicable), the Recipient must refund to SCEP the difference between (1) the total payments received from SCEP, and (2) the Federal share of the costs incurred. Refund obligations under this Term do not supersede the annual reconciliation or true up process if specified under the Indirect Cost Term.

Term 25. Allowable Costs
SCEP determines the allowability of costs through reference to 2 CFR part 200 as amended by 2 CFR part 910. All project costs must be allowable, allocable, and reasonable. The Recipient must document and maintain records of all project costs, including, but not limited to, the costs paid by Federal funds, costs claimed by its subcontractors, and project costs that the Recipient claims as cost sharing, including in-kind contributions. The Recipient is responsible for maintaining records adequate to demonstrate that costs claimed have been incurred, are reasonable, allowable and allocable, and comply with the cost principles. Upon request, the Recipient is required to provide such records to SCEP. Such records are subject to audit.

Failure to provide SCEP adequate supporting documentation may result in a determination by the Contracting Officer that those costs are unallowable.

The Recipient is required to obtain the prior written approval of the Contracting Officer for any foreign travel costs.

Term 26. Decontamination and/or Decommissioning (D&D) Costs Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Award, the Government shall not be responsible for or have any obligation to the Recipient for (1) Decontamination and/or Decommissioning (D&D) of any of the Recipient’s facilities, or (2) any costs which may be incurred by the Recipient in connection with the D&D of any of its facilities due to the performance of the work under this Award, whether said work was performed prior to or subsequent to the effective date of the Award.

Term 27. Use of Program Income
If the Recipient earns program income during the project period as a result of this Award, the 101

Special Terms and Conditions

11 Recipient must add the program income to the funds committed to the Award and used to further eligible project objectives.

Term 28. Payment Procedures

A. Method of Payment
Payment will be made by reimbursement by CFO through ACH. Equipment rebate voucher applications will be approved for payment by DOE once the equipment has been installed and all required documentation has been provided.

B. Payments
All payments are made by electronic funds transfer to the bank account identified attached to the Recipient’s UEI and identified in the Recipient’s SAM.gov account.

C. Unauthorized Drawdown of Federal Funds
For each budget period, the Recipient may not spend more than the Federal share authorized to that award, without specific written approval from the Contracting Officer. The Recipient must immediately refund SCEP any amounts spent in excess of the authorized amount.

A. Supporting Documents for Agency Approval of Payments

DOE may request additional information from the Recipient to support the payment requests prior to release of funds, as deemed necessary. The Recipient is required to comply with these requests. Supporting documents include invoices, copies of contracts, vendor quotes, proof of installation and other expenditure explanations that justify the payment requests.

Term 29. Budget Changes

A. Budget Changes Generally
The Contracting Officer has reviewed and approved the budget in Attachment 1 to this Award.

Any increase in the total project cost, whether DOE share or Cost Share, which is stated as “Total” in Block 12 to the Assistance Agreement of this Award, must be approved in advance and in writing by the Contracting Officer.

Any change that alters the project scope, milestones or deliverables requires prior written approval of the Contracting Officer. SCEP may deny reimbursement for any failure to comply with the requirements in this term.

102

Special Terms and Conditions

12 B. Transfers of Funds Among Direct Cost Categories
The Recipient is required to obtain the prior written approval of the Contracting Officer for any transfer of funds among direct cost categories where the cumulative amount of such transfers exceeds or is expected to exceed 10 percent of the total project cost stated in the budget on the recipient’s application.

The Recipient is required to notify the DOE Technology Manager/Project Officer of any transfer of funds among direct cost categories where the cumulative amount of such transfers is equal to or below 10 percent of the total project cost, stated in the budget on the recipient’s application.

Subpart C. Miscellaneous Provisions

Term 30. Environmental, Safety and Health Performance of Work at DOE Facilities
With respect to the performance of any portion of the work under this Award which is performed at a DOE -owned or controlled site, the Recipient agrees to comply with all State and Federal Environmental, Safety and Health (ES&H) regulations and with all other ES&H requirements of the operator of such site.

Prior to the performance on any work at a DOE-owned or controlled site, the Recipient shall contact the site facility manager for information on DOE and site-specific ES&H requirements.

The Recipient is required apply this provision to its contractors.

Term 31. System for Award Management and Universal Identifier Requirements

A. Requirement for Registration in the System for Award Management (SAM) Unless the Recipient is exempted from this requirement under 2 CFR 25.110, tThe Recipient must maintain the currency of its information in SAM until the Recipient submits the final financial report required under this Award or receive the final payment, whichever is later. This requires that the Recipient reviews and updates the information at least annually after the initial registration, and more frequently if required by changes in its information or another award term.

B. Unique Entity Identifier (UEI)
SAM automatically assigns a UEI to all active SAM.gov registered entities. Entities no longer have to go to a third-party website to obtain their identifier. This information 103

Special Terms and Conditions

13 is displayed on SAM.gov.

If the Recipient is authorized to make subawards under this Award, the Recipient:

i. Must notify potential subrecipients that no entity (see definition in paragraph C of this award term) may receive a subaward from the Recipient unless the entity has provided its UEI number to the Recipient.

ii. May not make a subaward to an entity unless the entity has provided its UEI number to the Recipient.

C. Definitions
For purposes of this award term:

i. System for Award Management (SAM) means the Federal repository into which an entity must provide information required for the conduct of business as a recipient. Additional information about registration procedures may be found at the SAM Internet site (currently at ).

ii. Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) is the 12-character, alpha-numeric identifier that will be assigned by SAM.gov upon registration.

iii. Entity, as it is used in this award term, means all of the following, as defined at 2 CFR Part 25, subpart C:

1. A Governmental organization, which is a State, local government, or Indian Tribe.

2. A foreign public entity.

3. A domestic or foreign nonprofit organization.

4. A domestic or foreign for-profit organization.

5. A Federal agency, but only as a subrecipient under an award or subaward to a non-Federal entity.

iv. Subaward:

1. This term means a legal instrument to provide support for the performance of any portion of the substantive project or program for which the Recipient received this Award and that the Recipient awards to an eligible subrecipient.

2. The term does not include the Recipient’s procurement of property and services needed to carry out the project or program (for further explanation, see 2 CFR 200.501 Audit requirements, (f) Subrecipients 104

Special Terms and Conditions

14 and Contractors and/or 2 CFR 910.501 Audit requirements, (f) Subrecipients and Contractors).

3. A subaward may be provided through any legal agreement, including an agreement that the Recipient considers a contract.

v. Subrecipient means an entity that:

1. Receives a subaward from the Recipient under this Award; and

2. Is accountable to the Recipient for the use of the Federal funds provided by the subaward.

Term 32. Nondisclosure and Confidentiality Agreements Assurances

A. By entering into this agreement, the Recipient attests that it does not and will not require its employees or contractors to sign internal nondisclosure or confidentiality agreements or statements prohibiting or otherwise restricting its employees or contactors from lawfully reporting waste, fraud, or abuse to a designated investigative or law enforcement representative of a Federal department or agency authorized to receive such information.

B. The Recipient further attests that it does not and will not use any Federal funds to implement or enforce any nondisclosure and/or confidentiality policy, form, or agreement it uses unless it contains the following provisions:

i. ‘‘These provisions are consistent with and do not supersede, conflict with, or otherwise alter the employee obligations, rights, or liabilities created by existing statute or Executive order relating to (1) classified information, (2) communications to Congress, (3) the reporting to an Inspector General of a violation of any law, rule, or regulation, or mismanagement, a gross waste of funds, an abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety, or (4) any other whistleblower protection. The definitions, requirements, obligations, rights, sanctions, and liabilities created by controlling Executive orders and statutory provisions are incorporated into this agreement and are controlling.’’

ii. The limitation above shall not contravene requirements applicable to Standard Form 312, Form 4414, or any other form issued by a Federal department or agency governing the nondisclosure of classified information.

iii. Notwithstanding provision listed in paragraph (a), a nondisclosure or confidentiality policy form or agreement that is to be executed by a person connected with the conduct of an intelligence or intelligence-related activity, 105

Special Terms and Conditions

15 other than an employee or officer of the United States Government, may contain provisions appropriate to the particular activity for which such document is to be used. Such form or agreement shall, at a minimum, require that the person will not disclose any classified information received in the course of such activity unless specifically authorized to do so by the United States Government. Such nondisclosure or confidentiality forms shall also make it clear that they do not bar disclosures to Congress, or to an authorized official of an executive agency or the Department of Justice, that are essential to reporting a substantial violation of law.

Term 33. Contractor Change Notification
Except for contractors specifically proposed as part of the Recipient’s Application for award, the Recipient must notify the Contracting Officer and Project Manager in writing 30 days prior to the execution of new or modified contract agreements, including naming any To Be Determined contractors. This notification does not constitute a waiver of the prior approval requirements outlined in 2 CFR part 200 as amended by 2 CFR part 910, nor does it relieve the Recipient from its obligation to comply with applicable Federal statutes, regulations, and executive orders.

In order to satisfy this notification requirement, the Recipient documentation must, as a minimum, include the following:

• A description of the service to be provided or the equipment to be purchased. • An assurance that the process undertaken by the Recipient to solicit the contractor complies with their written procurement procedures as outlined in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.327.
• An assurance that no planned, actual or apparent conflict of interest exists between the Recipient and the selected contractor and that the Recipient’s written standards of conduct were followed.
3 • A completed Environmental Questionnaire, if applicable. • An assurance that the contractor is not a debarred or suspended entity. • An assurance that all required award provisions will be flowed down in the resulting contract agreement.

3 It is DOE’s position that the existence of a “covered relationship” as defined in 5 CFR 2635.502(a)&(b) between a member of the Recipient’s owners or senior management and a member of a subrecipient’s owners or senior management creates at a minimum an apparent conflict of interest that would require the Recipient to notify the Contracting Officer and provide detailed information and justification (including, for example, mitigation measures) as to why the subrecipient agreement does not create an actual conflict of interest. The Recipient must also notify the Contracting Officer of any new subrecipient agreement with: (1) an entity that is owned or otherwise controlled by the Recipient; or (2) an entity that is owned or otherwise controlled by another entity that also owns or otherwise controls the Recipient, as it is DOE’s position that these situations also create at a minimum an apparent conflict of interest.

106

Special Terms and Conditions

16 The Recipient is responsible for making a final determination to award or modify contractor agreements under this agreement, but the Recipient may not proceed with the contractor agreement until the Contracting Officer determines, and provides the Recipient written notification, that the information provided is adequate.

Should the Recipient not receive a written notification of adequacy from the Contracting Officer within 30 days of the submission of the contractor documentation stipulated above, the Recipient may proceed to award or modify the proposed contractor agreement.

Term 34. Recipient Integrity and Performance Matters

A. General Reporting Requirement
If the total value of your currently active Financial Assistance awards, grants, and procurement contracts from all Federal awarding agencies exceeds $10,000,000 for any period of time during the period of performance of this Federal award, then you as the recipient during that period of time must maintain the currency of information reported to the System for Award Management (SAM) that is made available in the designated integrity and performance system (currently the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS)) about civil, criminal, or administrative proceedings described in paragraph 2 of this term. This is a statutory requirement under section 872 of Public Law 110-417, as amended (41 U.S.C. 2313). As required by section 3010 of Public Law 111-212, all information posted in the designated integrity and performance system on or after April 15, 2011, except past performance reviews required for Federal procurement contracts, will be publicly available.

B. Proceedings About Which You Must Report
Submit the information required about each proceeding that:
i. Is in connection with the award or performance of a Financial Assistance, cooperative agreement, or procurement contract from the Federal Government;
ii. Reached its final disposition during the most recent five-year period; and iii. Is one of the following:

1. A criminal proceeding that resulted in a conviction, as defined in paragraph E of this award term and condition;

2. A civil proceeding that resulted in a finding of fault and liability and payment of a monetary fine, penalty, reimbursement, restitution, or damages of $5,000 or more;

3. An administrative proceeding, as defined in paragraph E of this term, that resulted in a finding of fault and liability and your payment of either a monetary fine or penalty of $5,000 or more or
reimbursement, restitution, or damages in excess of $100,000; or 107

Special Terms and Conditions

17 4. Any other criminal, civil, or administrative proceeding if:
a. It could have led to an outcome described in paragraph B.iii.1, 2, or 3 of this term;
b. It had a different disposition arrived at by consent or compromise with an acknowledgment of fault on your part; and
c. The requirement in this term to disclose information about the proceeding does not conflict with applicable laws and regulations.

C. Reporting Procedures
Enter in the SAM Entity Management area the information that SAM requires about each proceeding described in paragraph B of this term. You do not need to submit the information a second time under assistance awards that you received if you already provided the information through SAM because you were required to do so under Federal procurement contracts that you were awarded.

D. Reporting Frequency
During any period of time when you are subject to the requirement in paragraph A of this term, you must report proceedings information through SAM for the most recent five-year period, either to report new information about any proceeding(s) that you have not reported previously or affirm that there is no new information to report. Recipients that have Federal contract, Financial Assistance awards, (including cooperative agreement awards) with a cumulative total value greater than $10,000,000, must disclose semiannually any information about the criminal, civil, and administrative proceedings.

E. Definitions
For purposes of this term:
i. Administrative proceeding means a non-judicial process that is adjudicatory in nature in order to make a determination of fault or liability (e.g., Securities and Exchange Commission Administrative proceedings, Civilian Board of Contract Appeals proceedings, and Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals proceedings). This includes proceedings at the Federal and State level but only in connection with performance of a Federal contract or Financial Assistance awards. It does not include audits, site visits, corrective plans, or inspection of deliverables.
ii. Conviction means a judgment or conviction of a criminal offense by any court of competent jurisdiction, whether entered upon a verdict or a plea, and includes a conviction entered upon a plea of nolo contendere. iii. Total value of currently active Financial Assistance awards, cooperative agreements and procurement contracts includes—
108

Special Terms and Conditions

18 1. Only the Federal share of the funding under any Federal award with a recipient cost share or match; and

2. The value of all expected funding increments under a Federal award and options, even if not yet exercised.

Term 35. Export Control
The United States government regulates the transfer of information, commodities, technology, and software considered to be strategically important to the U.S. to protect national security, foreign policy, and economic interests without imposing undue regulatory burdens on legitimate international trade. There is a network of Federal agencies and regulations that govern exports that are collectively referred to as “Export Controls.” The Recipient is responsible for ensuring compliance with all applicable United States Export Control laws and regulations relating to any work performed under a resulting award.

The Recipient must immediately report to DOE any export control violations related to the project funded under this award, at the recipient or subrecipient level, and provide the corrective action(s) to prevent future violations.

Term 36. Interim Conflict of Interest Policy for Financial Assistance The DOE interim Conflict of Interest Policy for Financial Assistance (COI Policy) can be found at https://www.energy.gov/management/department-energy-interim-conflict-interest-policy- requirements-financial-assistance. This policy is applicable to all non-Fe deral entities applying for, or that receive, DOE funding by means of a financial assistance award (e.g., a grant, cooperative agreement, or technology investment agreement) and, through the implementation of this policy by the entity, to each Investigator who is planning to participate in, or is participating in, the project funded wholly or in part under this Award. The term “Investigator” means the PI and any other person, regardless of title or position, who is responsible for the purpose, design, conduct, or reporting of a project funded by DOE or proposed for funding by DOE. The Recipient must flow down the requirements of the interim COI Policy to any contracting non-Federal entities, with the exception of DOE National Laboratories. Further, the Recipient must identify all financial conflicts of interests (FCOI), i.e., managed and unmanaged/ unmanageable, in its initial and ongoing FCOI reports.

Prior to award, the Recipient was required to: 1) ensure all Investigators on this Award completed their significant financial disclosures; 2) review the disclosures; 3) determine whether a FCOI exists; 4) develop and implement a management plan for FCOIs; and 5) provide DOE with an initial FCOI report that includes all FCOIs (i.e., managed and unmanaged/unmanageable). Within 180 days of the date of the Award, the Recipient must be in full compliance with the other requirements set forth in DOE’s interim COI Policy.

Term 37. Organizational Conflict of Interest
Organizational conflicts of interest are those where, because of relationships with a parent company, affiliate, or subsidiary organization, the Recipient is unable or appears to be unable to 109

Special Terms and Conditions

19 be impartial in conducting procurement action involving a related organization (2 CFR 200.318(c)(2)).

The Recipient must disclose in writing any potential or actual organizational conflict of interest to the DOE Contracting Officer. The Recipient must provide the disclosure prior to engaging in a procurement or transaction using project funds with a parent, affiliate, or subsidiary organization that is not a state, local government, or Indian tribe. For a list of the information that must be included the disclosure, see Section VI. of the DOE interim Conflict of Interest Policy for Financial Assistance at
https://www.energy.gov/management/department-energy-
interim-conflict-interest-policy-requirements-financial-assistance.

If the effects of the potential or actual organizational conflict of interest cannot be avoided, neutralized, or mitigated, the Recipient must procure goods and services from other sources when using project funds. Otherwise, DOE may terminate the Award in accordance with 2 CFR 200.340 unless continued performance is determined to be in the best interest of the Federal government.

The Recipient must flow down the requirements of the interim COI Policy to any contracting non-Federal entities, with the exception of DOE National Laboratories. The Recipient is responsible for ensuring contractor compliance with this term.

If the Recipient has a parent, affiliate, or subsidiary organization that is not a state, local government, or Indian tribe, the Recipient must maintain written standards of conduct covering organizational conflicts of interest.

Term 38. Prohibition on Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services or Equipment
As set forth in 2 CFR 200.216, recipients and subrecipients are prohibited from obligating or expending project funds (Federal and non-Federal funds) to:
(1) Procure or obtain;
(2) Extend or renew a contract to procure or obtain; or (3) Enter into a contract (or extend or renew a contract) to procure or obtain equipment, services, or systems that uses covered telecommunications equipment or services as a substantial or essential component of any system, or as critical technology as part of any system. As described in Public Law 115-232, section 889, covered telecommunications equipment is telecommunications equipment produced by Huawei Technologies Company or ZTE Corporation (or any subsidiary or affiliate of such entities). (i) For the purpose of public safety, security of government facilities, physical security surveillance of critical infrastructure, and other national security purposes, video 110

Special Terms and Conditions

20 surveillance and telecommunications equipment produced by Hytera Communications Corporation, Hangzhou Hikvision Digital Technology Company, or Dahua Technology Company (or any subsidiary or affiliate of such entities). (ii) Telecommunications or video surveillance services provided by such entities or using such equipment.
(iii) Telecommunications or video surveillance equipment or services produced or provided by an entity that the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Director of the National Intelligence or the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, reasonably believes to be an entity owned or controlled by, or otherwise connected to, the government of a covered foreign country.

See Public Law 115-232, section 889 for additional information.

Term 39. Human Subjects Research
Research involving human subjects, biospecimens, or identifiable private information conducted with Department of Energy (DOE) funding is subject to the requirements of DOE Order 443.1C, Protection of Human Research Subjects, 45 CFR Part 46, Protection of Human Subjects (subpart A which is referred to as the “Common Rule”), and 10 CFR Part 745, Protection of Human Subjects.

Federal regulation and the DOE Order require review by an Institutional Review Board (IRB) of all proposed human subjects research projects. The IRB is an interdisciplinary ethics board responsible for ensuring that the proposed research is sound and justifies the use of human subjects or their data; the potential risks to human subjects have been minimized; participation is voluntary; and clear and accurate information about the study, the benefits and risks of participating, and how individuals’ data/specimens will be protected/used, is provided to potential participants for their use in determining whether or not to participate.

The Recipient shall provide the Federal Wide Assurance number identified in item 1 below and the certification identified in item 2 below to DOE prior to initiation of any project that will involve interactions with humans in some way (e.g., through surveys); analysis of their identifiable data (e.g., demographic data and energy use over time); asking individuals to test devices, products, or materials developed through research; and/or testing of commercially available devices in buildings/homes in which humans will be present. Note: This list of examples is illustrative and not all inclusive.

No DOE funded research activity involving human subjects, biospecimens, or identifiable private information shall be conducted without:

111

Special Terms and Conditions

21 1) A registration and a Federal Wide Assurance of compliance accepted by the Office of Human Research Protection (OHRP) in the Department of Health and Human Services; and
2) Certification that the research has been reviewed and approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB) provided for in the assurance. IRB review may be accomplished by the awardee’s institutional IRB; by the Central DOE IRB; or if collaborating with one of the DOE national laboratories, by the DOE national laboratory IRB.

The Recipient is responsible for ensuring all subrecipients comply and for reporting information on the project annually to the DOE Human Subjects Research Database (HSRD) at https://science.osti.gov/HumanSubjects/Human-Subjects-Database/home . Note: If a DOE IRB
is used, no end of year reporting will be needed.

Additional information on the DOE Human Subjects Research Program can be found at:
https://science.osti.gov/ber/human-subjects

Term 40. Fraud, Waste and Abuse
The mission of the DOE Office of Inspector General (OIG) is to strengthen the integrity, economy and efficiency of DOE’s programs and operations including deterring and detecting fraud, waste, abuse and mismanagement. The OIG accomplishes this mission primarily through investigations, audits, and inspections of Department of Energy activities to include grants, cooperative agreements, loans, and contracts. The OIG maintains a Hotline for reporting allegations of fraud, waste, abuse, or mismanagement. To report such allegations, please visit https
://www.energy.gov/ig/ig-ho
tline.

A
dditionally, the Recipient must be cognizant of the requirements of 2 CFR § 200.113 Mandatory disclosures, which states:

T
he non-F
ederal entity or applicant for a Federal award must disclose, in a timely manner, in writing to the Federal awarding agency or pass-t hrough
entity all violations of Federal criminal law involving fraud, bribery, or gratuity violations potentially affecting the Federal award. Non -F
ederal entities that
have received a Federal award including the term and condition outlined in appendix XII of 2 CFR Part 200 are required to report certain civil, criminal, or administrative proceedings to SAM (currently FAPIIS). Failure to make required disclosures can result in any of the remedies described in § 200.339. (See also 2 CFR part 180, 31 U.S.C. 3321, and 41 U.S.C. 2313.) Subpart D. Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL)-specific requirements

Term 41. Reporting, Tracking and Segregation of Incurred Costs 112

Special Terms and Conditions

22 BIL funds can be used in conjunction with other funding, as necessary to complete projects, but tracking and reporting must be separate to meet the reporting requirements of the BIL and related Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Guidance. The Recipient must keep separate records for BIL funds and must ensure those records comply with the requirements of the BIL.

Funding provided through the BIL that is supplemental to an existing grant or cooperative agreement is one-time funding.

Term 42. Davis-Bacon Requirements
This award is funded under Division D of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL). All laborers and mechanics employed by the recipient, subrecipients, contractors or subcontractors in the performance of construction, alteration, or repair work in excess of $2,000 on an award funded directly by or assisted in whole or in part by funds made available under this award shall be paid wages at rates not less than those prevailing on similar projects in the locality, as determined by the Secretary of Labor in accordance with subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title 40, United States Code commonly referred to as the “Davis-Bacon Act” (DBA).

Recipients shall provide written assurance acknowledging the DBA requirements for the award or project and confirming that all of the laborers and mechanics performing construction, alteration, or repair, through funding under the award are paid or will be paid wages at rates not less than those prevailing on projects of a character similar in the locality as determined by Subchapter IV of Chapter 31 of Title 40, United States Code (Davis-Bacon Act).

The Recipient must comply with all of the Davis-Bacon Act requirements, including but not limited to:
(1) ensuring that the wage determination(s) and appropriate Davis-Bacon clauses and requirements are flowed down to and incorporated into any applicable subcontracts.
(2) being responsible for compliance by any subcontractor with the Davis-Bacon labor standards.
(3) receiving and reviewing certified weekly payrolls submitted by all subcontractors and subrecipients for accuracy and to identify potential compliance issues.
(4) maintaining original certified weekly payrolls for 3 years after the completion of the project and must make those payrolls available to the DOE or the Department of Labor upon request, as required by 29 CFR 5.6(a)(2). (5) conducting payroll and job-site reviews for construction work, including interviews with employees, with such frequency as may be necessary to assure compliance by its subcontractors and as requested or directed by the DOE. (6) cooperating with any authorized representative of the Department of Labor in their inspection of records, interviews with employees, and other actions undertaken as part of a Department of Labor investigation. 113

Special Terms and Conditions

23 (7) posting in a prominent and accessible place the wage determination(s) and Department of Labor Publication: WH-1321, Notice to Employees Working on Federal or Federally Assisted Construction Projects.
(8) notifying the Contracting Officer of all labor standards issues, including all complaints regarding incorrect payment of prevailing wages and/or fringe benefits, received from the recipient, , contractor, or subcontractor employees; significant labor standards violations, as defined in 29 CFR 5.7; disputes concerning labor standards pursuant to 29 CFR parts 4, 6, and 8 and as defined in FAR 52.222-14; disputed labor standards determinations; Department of Labor investigations; or legal or judicial proceedings related to the labor standards under this Contract, a subcontract, or subrecipient award. (9) preparing and submitting to the Contracting Officer, the Office of Management and Budget Control Number 1910-5165, Davis Bacon Semi-Annual Labor Compliance Report, by April 21 and October 21 of each year. Form submittal will be administered through the iBenefits system (https://doeibenefits2.energy.gov) or its successor system.

The Recipient must undergo Davis-Bacon Act compliance training and must maintain competency in Davis-Bacon Act compliance. The Contracting Officer will notify the Recipient of any DOE sponsored Davis-Bacon Act compliance trainings. The Department of Labor offers free Prevailing Wage Seminars several times a year that meet this requirement, at https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/government-contracts/construction/seminars/events .

The Department of Energy has contracted with, a third-party DBA electronic payroll compliance software application. The Recipient must ensure the timely electronic submission of weekly certified payrolls as part of its compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act unless a waiver is granted to a particular contractor or subcontractor because they are unable or limited in their ability to use or access the software.

Davis Bacon Act Electronic Certified Payroll Submission Waiver A waiver must be granted before the award starts. The applicant does not have the right to appeal SCEP’s decision concerning a waiver request.

For additional guidance on how to comply with the Davis-Bacon provisions and clauses, see https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/government-contracts/construction and
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/government-contracts/protections-for-workers-in- construction.

Term 43. Buy American Requirement for Infrastructure Projects

*NOTE: Buy American Requirements only apply to awards over $250,000. Please disregard this section if your total EECBG Program award is less than $250,000. 114

Special Terms and Conditions

24 A. Definitions

Components are defined as the articles, materials, or supplies incorporated directly into the end manufactured product(s).

Construction Materials are an article, material, or supply—other than an item primarily of iron or steel; a manufactured product; cement and cementitious materials; aggregates such as stone, sand, or gravel; or aggregate binding agents or additives—that is used in an infrastructure project and is or consists primarily of non-ferrous metals, plastic and polymer-based products (including
polyvinylchloride, composite building materials, and polymers used in fiber optic cables), glass (including optic glass), lumber, drywall, coatings (paints and stains), optical fiber, clay brick; composite building materials; or enginSCEPd wood products.

Domestic Content Procurement Preference Requirement- means a requirement that no amounts made available through a program for federal financial assistance may be obligated for an infrastructure project unless—
(A) all iron and steel used in the project are produced in the United States;
(B) the manufactured products used in the project are produced in the United States; or
(C) the construction materials used in the project are produced in the United States.

Also referred to as the Buy America Requirement.

Infrastructure includes, at a minimum, the structures, facilities, and equipment located in the United States, for: roads, highways, and bridges; public transportation; dams, ports, harbors, and other maritime facilities; intercity passenger and freight railroads; freight and intermodal facilities; airports; water systems, including drinking water and wastewater systems; electrical transmission facilities and systems; utilities; broadband infrastructure; and buildings and real property; and generation, transportation, and distribution of energy - including electric vehicle (EV) charging.

The term “infrastructure” should be interpreted broadly, and the definition provided above should be considered as illustrative and not exhaustive.

115

Special Terms and Conditions

25 Manufactured Products are items used for an infrastructure project made up of components that are not primarily of iron or steel; construction materials; cement and cementitious materials’ aggregates such as stone, sand, or gravel; or aggregate binding agents or additives.

Primarily of iron or steel means greater than 50% iron or steel, measured by cost.

Project- means the construction, alteration, maintenance, or repair of infrastructure in the United States.

Public- The Buy America Requirement does not apply to non-public infrastructure. For purposes of this guidance, infrastructure should be considered “public” if it is: (1) publicly owned or (2) privately owned but utilized primarily for a public purpose. Infrastructure should be considered to be “utilized primarily for a public purpose” if it is privately operated on behalf of the public or is a place of public accommodation.

B. Buy America Requirement

None of the funds provided under this award (federal share or recipient cost-share) may be used for a project for infrastructure unless:

1. All iron and steel used in the project is produced in the United States—this means all manufacturing processes,
from the initial melting stage through the application of coatings, occurred in the United States;

2. All manufactured products used in the project are
produced in the United States—this means the
manufactured product was manufactured in the United
States; and the cost of the components of the
manufactured product that are mined, produced, or
manufactured in the United States is greater than 55
percent of the total cost of all components of the
manufactured product, unless another standard for
determining the minimum amount of domestic content of
the manufactured product has been established under
applicable law or regulation; and

116

Special Terms and Conditions

26 3. All construction materials are manufactured in the United States—this means that all manufacturing processes for the construction material occurred in the United States.

The Buy America Requirement only applies to articles, materials, and supplies that are consumed in, incorporated into, or permanently affixed to an infrastructure project. As such, it does not apply to tools, equipment, and supplies, such as temporary scaffolding, brought into the construction site and removed at or before the completion of the infrastructure project. Nor does a Buy America Requirement apply to equipment and furnishings, such as movable chairs, desks, and portable computer equipment, that are used at or within the finished infrastructure project but are not an integral part of the structure or permanently affixed to the infrastructure project.

Recipients are responsible for administering their award in accordance with the terms and conditions, including the Buy America Requirement. The recipient must ensure that the Buy America Requirement flows down to all subawards and that the subawardees and subrecipients comply with the Buy America Requirement. The Buy America Requirement term and condition must be included all sub-awards, contracts, subcontracts, and purchase orders for work performed under the infrastructure project.

C. Certification of Compliance

The Recipient must certify or provide equivalent documentation for proof of compliance that a good faith effort was made to solicit bids for domestic products used in the infrastructure project under this Award.

The Recipient must also maintain certifications or equivalent documentation for proof of compliance that those articles, materials, and supplies that are consumed in, incorporated into, affixed to, or otherwise used in the infrastructure project, not covered by a waiver or exemption, are produced in the United States. The certification or proof of compliance must be provided by the suppliers or manufacturers of the iron, steel, manufactured products and construction materials and flow up from all subawardees, contractors and vendors to the Recipient. The Recipient must keep these certifications with the award/project files and be able to produce them upon request from DOE, auditors or Office of Inspector General.

117

Special Terms and Conditions

27 D. Waivers

When necessary, the Recipient may apply for, and DOE may grant, a waiver from the Buy America Requirement. Requests to waive the application of the Buy America Requirement must be in writing to the Contracting Officer. Waiver requests are subject to review by DOE and the Office of Management and Budget, as well as a public comment period of no less than 15 calendar days.

Waivers must be based on one of the following justifications:

1. Public Interest- Applying the Buy America Requirement would be inconsistent with the public interest;

2. Non-Availability- The types of iron, steel, manufactured products, or construction materials are not produced in the United States in sufficient and reasonably available quantities or of a satisfactory quality; or

3. Unreasonable Cost- The inclusion of iron, steel, manufactured products, or construction materials produced in the United States will increase the cost of the overall project by more than 25 percent.

Requests to waive the Buy America Requirement must include the following:

• Waiver type (Public Interest, Non-Availability, or Unreasonable Cost);
• Recipient name and Unique Entity Identifier (UEI);
• Award information (Federal Award Identification Number, Assistance Listing number);
• A brief description of the project, its location, and the specific infrastructure involved;
• Total estimated project cost, with estimated federal share and recipient cost share breakdowns;
• Total estimated infrastructure costs, with estimated federal share and recipient cost share breakdowns;
• List and description of iron or steel item(s), manufactured goods, and/or construction material(s) the recipient seeks to waive from the Buy America Preference, including name, cost, quantity(ies), country(ies) of origin, and relevant Product Service Codes (PSC) and North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes for each;
118

Special Terms and Conditions

28 • A detailed justification as to how the non-domestic item(s) is/are essential the project;
• A certification that the recipient made a good faith effort to solicit bids for domestic products supported by terms included in requests for proposals, contracts, and non-proprietary communications with potential suppliers;
• A justification statement—based on one of the applicable justifications outlined above—as to why the listed items cannot be procured domestically, including the due diligence performed (e.g., market research, industry outreach, cost analysis, cost-benefit analysis) by the recipient to attempt to avoid the need for a waiver. This justification may cite, if applicable, the absence of any Buy America-compliant bids received for domestic products in response to a solicitation; and
• Anticipated impact to the project if no waiver is issued.

The Recipient should consider using the following principles as minimum requirements contained in their waiver request:

• Time-limited: Consider a waiver constrained principally by a length of time, rather than by the specific project/award to which it applies. Waivers of this type may be appropriate, for example, when an item that is “non-available” is widely used in the project. When requesting such a waiver, the Recipient should identify a reasonable, definite time frame (e.g., no more than one to two years) designed so that the waiver is reviewed to ensure the condition for the waiver (“non-availability”) has not changed (e.g., domestic supplies have become more
available).

• Targeted: Waiver requests should apply only to the item(s), product(s), or material(s) or category(ies) of item(s), product(s), or material(s) as necessary and justified. Waivers should not be overly broad as this will undermine domestic preference policies.

• Conditional: The Recipient may request a waiver with specific conditions that support the policies of IIJA/BABA and Executive Order 14017.

DOE may request, and the Recipient must provide, additional information for consideration of this wavier. DOE may reject or grant 119

Special Terms and Conditions

29 waivers in whole or in part depending on its review, analysis, and/or feedback from OMB or the public. DOEs final determination regarding approval or rejection of the waiver request may not be appealed.

Waiver requests may take up to 90 calendar days to process.

Term 44. Affirmative Action and Pay Transparency Requirements All federally assisted construction contracts exceeding $10,000 annually will be subject to the requirements of Executive Order 11246:

(1) Recipients and contractors are prohibited from discriminating in employment decisions on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or national origin.

(2) Recipients and contractors are required to take affirmative action to ensure that equal opportunity is provided in all aspects of their employment. This includes flowing down the appropriate language to all subrecipients, contractors and subcontractors.

(
3) Recipients and contractors are prohibited from taking adverse employment actions against applicants and employees for asking about, discussing, or sharing information about their pay or, under certain circumstances, the pay of their co
-wo
rkers.

T
he Department of Labor’s (DOL) Office of Federal Contractor Compliance Programs (OFCCP) uses a neutral process to schedule contractors for compliance evaluations. OFCCP’s Technical Assistance Guide4 should be consulted to gain an understanding of the requirements and possible actions the recipients, subrecipients, contractors and subcontractors must take.

Term 45. Potentially Duplicative Funding Notice
If the Recipient have or receive any other award of federal funds for activities that potentially overlap with the activities funded under this Award, the Recipient must promptly notify DOE in writing of the potential overlap and state whether project funds (i.e., recipient cost share and federal funds) from any of those other federal awards have been, are being, or are to be used (in whole or in part) for one or more of the identical cost items under this Award. If there are identical cost items, the Recipient must promptly notify the DOE Contracting Officer in writing of the potential duplication and eliminate any inappropriate duplication of funding.

Term 46. Transparency of Foreign Connections

4 See OFCCP’s Technical Assistance Guide at:
https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ofccp/Construction/files/ConstructionTAG.pdf?msclkid=9e397d68c4b111ec 9d8e6fecb6c710ec Also see the National Policy Assurances http://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/rtc.jsp 120

Special Terms and Conditions

30 During the term of the Award, the Recipient must notify the DOE Contracting Officer within fifteen (15) business days of learning of the following circumstances in relation to the Recipient or contractors:

1. The existence of any joint venture or subsidiary that is based in, funded by, or has a foreign affiliation with any foreign country of risk;

2. Any current or pending contractual or financial obligation or other agreement specific to a business arrangement, or joint venture-like arrangement with an enterprise owned by a country of risk or foreign entity based in a country of risk;

3. Any current or pending change in ownership structure of the Recipient or contractors that increases foreign ownership related to a country of risk;

4. Any current or pending venture capital or institutional investment by an entity that has a general partner or individual holding a leadership role in such entity who has a foreign affiliation with any foreign country of risk;

5. Any current or pending technology licensing or intellectual property sales to a foreign country of risk; and

6. Any current or pending foreign business entity, offshore entity, or entity outside the United States related to the Recipient or subrecipient.

Term 47. Foreign Collaboration Considerations
a. Consideration of new collaborations with foreign organizations and governments.

The Recipient must provide DOE with advanced written notification of any potential collaboration with foreign entities, organizations or governments in connection with its DOE-funded award scope. The Recipient must await further guidance from DOE prior to contacting the proposed foreign entity, organization or government regarding the potential collaboration or negotiating the terms of any potential agreement.

b. Existing collaborations with foreign entities, organizations and governments. The Recipient must provide DOE with a written list of all existing foreign collaborations in which has entered in connection with its DOE-funded award scope.

c. Description of collaborations that should be reported: In general, a collaboration will involve some provision of a thing of value to, or from, the Recipient. A thing of value includes but may not be limited to all resources made available to, or from, the recipient in support of and/or related to the Award, regardless of whether or not they have monetary value. Things of value also may include in-kind contributions (such as office/laboratory space, data, equipment, supplies, employees, students).

In-kind contributions not intended for direct use on the Award but resulting in provision of a thing of value from or to the Award must also be reported.

Collaborations do not include routine workshops, conferences, use of the Recipient’s services and facilities by foreign investigators resulting from its standard published 121

Special Terms and Conditions

31 process for evaluating requests for access, or the routine use of foreign facilities by awardee staff in accordance with the Recipient’s standard policies and procedures.

________________________________________________________________ Authorized Signature Date

Name:

Title:

Entity Name:
122
Item 308/2024
Final
City of Garden Grove

INTER-DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM

To:

Lisa L. Kim From: Chief El-Farra
Dept:

City Manager Dept: Police
Date: 8/13/2024

Subject: Appropriation of Fiscal Year 2024-25 Public Safety Realignment and Post- Release Community Supervision Funds. (Action Item)

OBJECTIVE

To obtain City Council approval to use moneys allocated by the State for Public Safety Realignment and Post-Release Community Supervision, and to appropriate these funds for FY 2024-25 budget.

BACKGROUND

Assembly Bill 109, titled “2011 Realignment Legislation Addressing Public Safety,” became effective on July 1, 2011, and provided for the enactment of the “2011 Post -Release Community Supervision Act” (herein after referred to as “AB109”). AB109 requires that certain offenders be released into the community under the supervision of a designated county agency (Orange County Probation).

Prior to this legislation, these offenders would h ave either remained incarcerated in State prison or been released under the supervision of State Parole. AB109 shifted the burden of “supervision” from the State to local law enforcement agencies.

DISCUSSION

Garden Grove received an allocation of approximately $222,960 in FY 2024-25 State AB109 funding for local law enforcement agencies. Additional FY 2024-25 growth funds may also be disbursed after July 1, 2025 , but the amount will not be known until the disbursement is made. This funding provides addit ional resources for local law enforcement services , and supplanting is prohibited by statute.

FINANCIAL IMPACT

Using AB109 funds to supplement funding for public safety-related services creates no burden on the City’s General Fund.

123
Item 308/2024

Page 2 of 2 ends

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that the City Council:

 Authorize the appropriation of Fiscal Year 2024-25 Public Safety Realignment and Post- Release Community Supervision funds to the Police Department budget for FY 2024- 25, as well as any additional FY 2024-25 growth funds disbursed to the City after July 1, 2025.

ATTACHMENT

1. BOS Approved 6.25.24 Attachment O LLE Allocation

124
Attachment O
P
age 1 of 1
Community Corrections Partnership (AB 109)
County Local Revenue 2011 (Fund 100, Department 003, Budget Control 090) On February 29, 2024, the Community Corrections Partnership (CCP) unanimously approved the allocation and distribution of the 2 percent of base funding received to the Local Law Enforcement at the entity level for the 2011 Public Safety Realignment (AB 109) . The 2 percent allocation is estimated at $2,580,550 based on the State’s January Proposed budget. The basis of the following estimated allocations is current State estimates multiplied by approved allocation percentages:
125
Item 310/2024
Final
City of Garden Grove

INTER-DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM

To:

Lisa L. Kim From: Chief El-Farra
Dept:

City Manager Dept: Police
Date: 8/13/2024

Subject: Approval to participate in the 2024-2025 Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program. (Grant Amount: $200,000) (Action Item)

OBJECTIVE

To obtain City Council approval to participate in the Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program through the California Highway Patrol (CHP). Through the proposed grant, the City is eligible to receive $200,000 in federal funds to implement DUI/CDL Checkpoints, selective DUI enforcement operations, and educational activities within the community.

BACKGROUND

With the passage of Proposition 64, the Control, Regulate, and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA), California voters mandated the state set aside funding for the California Highway Patrol to award grants to local governments and qualified nonprofit organizations, as described in the Revenue and Taxation Code Section 34019(f)(3)(B). The Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program marks an essential step toward reducing impaired driving crashes, increasing public awareness surrounding the dangers of impaired driving, and making California roadways a safer place to t ravel. The Garden Grove Police Department has applied for and been awarded similar grants since 1996.

DISCUSSION

The California Highway Patrol works closely with state and local agencies and other traffic safety stakeholders to actively address impaired driving. The CHP will consider various factors in determining specific needs for each grant cycle, including opportunities and projects best suited to prevent the loss of life, injuries, and property damage caused by driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs.

The purpose of the Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program is to provide alternative funding sources to augment, but not supplant, current activities and programs. The CHP will allocate funds for the project categories by California COD of Regulati ons (CCR) sections 1890.05 through 1890.07, as determined by the CHP.

126
Item 310/2024

Page 2 of 2 ends

FINANCIAL IMPACT

The total amount for the fiscal year 2024 -2025 grant will be $200,000. There is no local matching requirement. The City is neither required, nor plans to hire additional personnel or incur additional expenses to participate in the grant program. The California State Controller’s Office appropriates the funding provided, and all grants are awarded on a competitive basis.

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that the City Council:

 Authorize participation in the Cannabis Tax Fund Grant Program (CTFGP);

 Accept CTFGP Grant Funds in the Amount of $200,000.00;

 Authorize the Police Chief, Finance Director and Finance Deputy Director to execute the grant agreement on behalf of the City; and

 Allocate these grant monies to fund Selective Traffic Enforcement Operations.

ATTACHMENT

1. 2024-2025 Cannabis Grant Agreement

127
State of California

DEPARTMENT OF CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL
GRANT AGREEMENT - Page 1
Award Number
17948

1. GRANT TITLE
FY24/25 CTFGP Law Enforcement - Garden Grove Police Department

2. NAME OF ORGANIZATION/AGENCY
Garden Grove Police Department

3. ORGANIZATION/AGENCY SECTION TO ADMINISTER GRANT
Garden Grove Police Department Traffic Unit

4. PROJECT PERFORMANCE PERIOD
From: 07/01/2024 To: 06/30/2025

5. PURCHASE ORDER NUMBER

GRANT OPPORTUNITY INFORMATION DESCRIPTION
Law Enforcement grants provide financial assistance to allied agencies for the education, prevention, and the enforcement of laws related to driving under the influence of alcohol and other drugs, including cannabis and cannabis products.

The intent of the program is to educate the public regarding the dangers of impaired driving, enforce impaired driving laws on the roadway, and improve the Organization/Agency's effectiveness through training and development of new strategies.

7. FUNDS ALLOCATED UNDER THIS GRANT AGREEMENT SHALL NOT EXCEED $200,000.00

8. TERMS AND CONDITIONS
The Grantee agrees to complete the Project, as described in the Project Description. The Grantee's Grant Application, and the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Division 2, Chapter 13, Sections 1890.00-1890.27, are hereby incorporated into this Grant Agreement by reference.

The parties hereto agree to comply with the Terms and Conditions of the following attachments:
• Schedule A - Project Description, Problem Statement, Goals and Objectives, and Method of Procedure • Schedule B - Detailed Budget Estimate
• Schedule B-1 - Budget Narrative
We, the officials named below, hereby swear, under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that we are duly authorized to legally bind the Grant recipient to the above-described Grant Terms and Conditions.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Grant Agreement is executed by the parties hereto.

9. A.

APPROVAL SIGNATURES

AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL OF ORGAN IZATION/AGENCY
Name: Amir EI-Farra
Title: Chief of Police
Phone:(714)741-5202
Address: 11301 Acacia Parkway
Garden Grove, CA 92840
E-Mail: [email protected]
(Signature)(Date)
B.AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL OF CHP
Name: Andrew Beasley Phone: (916) 843-4360
Title: Captain Fax: (916) 322-3169
Address: 601 North 7th Street
Sacramento, CA 95811
E-Mail: ABeaslev(a)chp.ca.cjoy
(Signature)(Date)
C. ACCOUNTING OFFICER OF CHP
Name: C. M. Jones
Title: Commander
Address: 601 North 7th Street
Sacramento, CA 95811
E-Mail: [email protected]
(Signature)
Phone:(916)843-3531
Fax:(916)322-3159

10. AUTHORIZED FINANCIAL CONTACT TO RECEIVE

REIMBURSEMENT PAYMENTS
Name: Patricia Song
Title: Finance Director
Phone:(714)741-5202
Address: 11222 Acacia Parkway
Garden Grove, CA 92840
(Date)
128

TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Grantee shall comply with the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Division 2, Chapter 13 Section 1890, et seq. and all other Terms and Conditions noted in this Grant Agreement. Failure by the Grantee to comply may result in the termination of this Grant Agreement by the California Highway Patrol (hereafter referred to as State). The State will have no obligation to reimburse the Grantee for any additional costs once the Grant Agreement has been terminated.

A. EXECUTION

1. The State (the California Highway Patrol) hereby awards, to the Grantee, the sum of money stated on page one of this Grant Agreement. This funding is awarded to the Grantee to carry out the Project set forth in the Project Description and the terms and conditions set forth in this Grant Agreement.

2. The funding for this Grant Agreement is allocated pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 34019(f)(3)(B). The Grantee agrees that the State's obligation to pay any sum under this Grant Agreement is contingent upon availability of funds disbursed from the California Cannabis Tax Fund to the State. If there is insufficient funding, the State shall have the option to either: 1) terminate this Grant Agreement; whereby, no party shall have any further obligations or liabilities under this Grant Agreement, or 2) negotiate a Grant Agreement Amendment to reduce the grant award and scope of work to be provided under this Grant Agreement.

3. The Grantee is not to commence or proceed with any work in advance of receiving notice that the Grant Agreement is approved. Any work performed by the Grantee in advance of the date of approval by the State shall be deemed volunteer work and will not be reimbursed by the State.

4. The Grantee agrees to provide any additional funding, beyond what the State has agreed to provide, pursuant to this Grant Agreement, and necessary to complete or carry out the Project, as described in this Grant Agreement. Any modification or alteration of this Grant Agreement, as set forth in the Grant Application submitted by the Grantee and on file with the State, must be submitted in writing thirty (30) calendar days in advance to the State for approval.

5. The Grantee agrees to complete the Project within the timeframe indicated in the Project Performance Period, which is on page one of this Grant Agreement.

B. PROJECT ADMINISTRATION

1. The Grantee shall submit all reimbursements, progress, performance, and/or other required reports concerning the status of work performed in furtherance of this Grant Agreement on a quarterly basis, or as requested by the State.

2. The Grantee shall provide the State with a final report showing all Project expenditures, which includes all State and any other Project funding expended, within sixty (60) calendar days after completion of this Grant Agreement.

3. The Grantee shall ensure all equipment which is purchased, maintained, operated, and/or developed is available for inspection by the State.

4. Equipment purchased through this Grant Agreement shall be used for the education, prevention, and enforcement of impaired driving laws, unless the Grantee is funding a portion of the purchased price not dedicated to impaired driving and that portion is not part of the Project costs.

Equipment purchased under this Grant Agreement must only be used for approved Project- related purposes, unless otherwise approved by the State in writing.

5. Prior to disposition of equipment acquired under this Grant Agreement, the Grantee shall notify the State via e-mail, and by telephone, by calling the California Highway Patrol, Impaired Driving Section, Cannabis Grants Unit at (916)843-4360. 129

TERMS AND CONDITIONS
C. PROJECT TERMINATION

1. Grantee or the State may terminate this Grant Agreement at any time prior to the commencement of the Project. Once the Project has commenced, this Grant Agreement may only be terminated if the party withdrawing provides thirty (30) calendar days written notice of their intent to withdraw.
a. If by reason of force majeure the performance hereunder is delayed or prevented, then the term end date may be extended by mutual consent for the same amount of time of such delay or prevention. The term "force majeure" shall mean any fire, flood, earthquake, or public disaster, strike, labor dispute or unrest, embargo, riot, war, insurrection or civil unrest, any act of God, any act of legally constituted authority, or any other cause beyond the Grantee's control which would excuse the Grantee's performance as a matter of law. b. Grantee agrees to provide written notice of an event of force majeure under this Grant Agreement within ten (10) calendar days of the commencement of such event, and within ten (10) calendar days after the termination of such event, unless the force majeure prohibits Grantee from reasonably giving notice within this period. Grantee will give such notice at the earliest possible time following the event of force majeure.

2. Any violations of law committed by the Grantee, misrepresentations of Project information by the Grantee to the State, submission of falsified documents by the Grantee to the State, or failure to provide records by the Grantee to the State when requested for audit or site visit purposes may be cause for termination. If the Project is terminated for the reasons described in this paragraph, the State will have no obligation to reimburse the Grantee for any additional costs once the Grant Agreement has been terminated.

3. The State may terminate this Grant Agreement and be relieved of any payments should the Grantee fail to perform the requirements of this Grant Agreement at the time and in the manner herein provided. Furthermore, the Grantee, upon termination, shall return grant funds not expended by the Grantee as of the date of termination.

4. If this Grant Agreement is terminated, the State may choose to exclude the Grantee from future Grant Opportunities.

D, FINANCIAL RECORDS

1. The Grantee agrees the State, or their designated representative, shall have the right to review and to copy all records and supporting documentation pertaining to the performance of this Grant Agreement. Grantee agrees to maintain such records for possible audit for a minimum of five (5) years after final payment, unless a longer period of records retention is stipulated or required by law. Grantee agrees to allow the auditor(s) access to such records during normal business hours and to allow interviews of any employees who might reasonably have information related to such records. Furthermore, the Grantee agrees to include a similar right for the State to audit all records and interview staff in any subcontract related to performance of this Grant Agreement.

E. HOLD HARMLESS

1. The Grantee agrees to indemnify, defend, and save harmless the State, its officials, agents and employees from any and all claims and losses accruing or resulting to any and all Grantee's staff, contractors, subcontractors, suppliers, and other person, firm or corporation furnishing or supplying work services, materials, or supplies in connection with the performance of this Grant Agreement, and from any and all claims and losses accruing or resulting to any person, agency, firm, corporation who may be injured or damaged by the Grantee in performance of this Grant Agreement.
130

TERMS AND CONDITIONS
F. NONDISCRIMINATION

1. The Grantee agrees to comply with State and federal laws outlawing discrimination, including, but not limited to, those prohibiting discrimination because of sex, race, color, ancestry, religion, creed, national origin, physical disability (including HIV and AIDS), mental disability, medical condition (including cancer or genetic characteristics), sexual orientation, political affiliation, position in a labor dispute, age, marital status, and denial of statutorily-required employment- related leave. (GC 12990 [a-f] and OCR, Title 2, Section 8103.) G. AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT

1. The Grantee assures the State it complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability, as well as all applicable regulations and guidelines issued pursuant to the ADA. (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.) H. DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE

1. The Grantee shall comply with the requirements of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1990 and will provide a drug-free workplace by taking the following actions:
a. Publish a statement notifying employees that unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited and specifying actions to be taken against employees for violations.
b. Establish a Drug-Free Awareness Program to inform employees about:
i. The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace.
ii. The person's or Organization/Agency's policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace. iii. Any available counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs. iv. Penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations. c. Every employee who works on the Project will:
i. Receive a copy of the company's drug-free workplace policy statement. ii. Agree to abide by the terms of the company's statement as a condition of employment on the Grant Agreement.

2. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in suspension of payments under this Grant Agreement, or termination of this Grant Agreement, or both, and Grantee may be ineligible for award of any future Grant Agreements if the department determines that any of the following has occurred:
a. The Grantee has made false certification or violated the certification by failing to carry out the requirements, as noted above. (GC 8350 et seq.)
I. LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES

1. All law enforcement Organization/Agency/Agency Grantees shall comply with California law regarding racial profiling. Specifically, law enforcement Organization/Agency/Agency Grantees shall not engage in the act of racial profiling, as defined in California Penal Code Section 13519.4.
131

TERMS AND CONDITIONS
J. LABOR CODE/WORKERS' COMPENSATION

1. The Grantee is advised and made aware of the provisions which require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions, and Grantee affirms to comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Grant Agreement, (refer to Labor Code Section 3700).

K. GRANT APPLICATION INCORPORATION

1. The Grantee agrees the Grant Application and any subsequent changes or additions approved or required by the State is hereby incorporated into this Grant Agreement.

L. STATE LOBBYING

1. The Grantee is advised that none of the funds provided under this Grant Agreement may be used for any activity specifically designed to urge or influence a state or local legislator to favor or oppose the adoption of any specific legislative proposal pending before any state or local legislative body. Such activities include both direct and indirect (e.g., "grassroots") lobbying activities, with one exception. This does not preclude a state official, whose salary is supported by this Grant Agreement, from engaging in direct communications with the state or local legislative officials, in accordance with customary state and/or local practice.

M. REPRESENTATION AND WARRANTIES

1. The Grantee represents and warrants that:
a. It is validly existing and in good standing under the laws of the State of California, has, or will have the requisite power, authority, licenses, permits, and the like necessary to carry on its business as it is now being conducted and as contemplated in this Grant Agreement, and will, at all times, lawfully conduct its business in compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and rules.
b. It is not a party to any Grant Agreement, written or oral, creating obligations that would prevent it from entering into this Grant Agreement or satisfying the terms herein. c. If the Grantee is a Nonprofit Organization/Agency, it will maintain its "Active" status with the California Secretary of State, maintain its "Current" status with the California Attorney General's Registry of Charitable Trusts, and maintain its federal and State of California tax- exempt status. If the Grantee subcontracts with a Nonprofit as part of this Grant Agreement, the Grantee shall ensure the Nonprofit will maintain its "Active" status with the California Secretary of State, maintain its "Current" status with the California Attorney General's Registry of Charitable Trusts, and maintain its federal and State of California tax-exempt status.
d. All of the information in its Grant Application and all materials submitted are true and accurate.

N. AIR OR WATER POLLUTION VIOLATION

1. Under the state laws, the Grantee shall not be: (1) in violation of any order or resolution not subject to review promulgated by the State Air Resources Board or an air pollution control district; (2) subject to cease and desist order not subject to review issued pursuant to Section 13301 of the Water Code for violation of waste discharge requirements or discharge prohibitions; or (3) finally determined to be in violation of provisions of federal law relating to air or water pollution. 132

TERMS AND CONDITIONS

0. GRANTEE NAME CHANGE

1. Grantee agrees to immediately inform the State, in writing, of any changes to the name of the person within the Organization/Agency/Agency with delegated signing authority.

2. An Amendment is required to change the Grantee's name, as listed on this Grant Agreement. Upon receipt of legal documentation of the name change, the State will process the Amendment. Payment of invoices presented with a new name cannot be paid prior to approval of said Amendment.

P. RESOLUTION

1. A county, city, district, or other local public body shall provide the State with a copy of a resolution, order, motion, or ordinance of the local governing body, which by law, has authority to enter into a Grant Agreement, authorizing execution of the Grant Agreement.

Q. PAYEE DATA RECORD FORM STD. 204

1. This form shall be completed by all non-governmental Grantees.

R. FINANCIAL INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT AGENCY TAXPAYER ID FORM

1. This form shall be completed by all Grantees.

S. CONFLICT OF INTEREST

1. This section serves to make the Grantee aware of specific provisions related to current or former state employees. If Grantee has any questions regarding the status of any person rendering services or involved with the Grant Agreement, the Grantee shall contact the State (California Highway Patrol, Impaired Driving Section, Cannabis Grants Unit) immediately for clarification.

2. Current State Employees:
a. No officer or employee shall engage in any employment, activity, or enterprise, from which the officer or employee receives compensation or has a financial interest, and which is sponsored or funded by any state agency, unless the employment, activity, or enterprise is required, as a condition of regular state employment.
b. No officer or employee shall contract on their own behalf, as an independent Grantee, with any state agency to provide goods or services.

3. Former State Employees:
a. For the two-year period from the date they left state employment, no former state officer or employee may enter into a contract in which they engaged in any of the negotiations, transactions, planning, arrangements, or any part of the declsion-making process relevant to this Grant Agreement while employed in any capacity by any state agency. b. For the 12-month period from the date they left state employment, no former state officer or employee may enter into a contract with any state agency if they were employed by that state agency in a policy-making position in the same general subject area as the proposed Grant Agreement within the 12-month period prior to their leaving state service.

4. The authorized representative of the Grantee Organization/Agency, named within this Grant Agreement, warrants their Organization/Agency and its employees have no personal or financial interest and no present or past employment or activity, which would be incompatible with 133

TERMS AND CONDITIONS
participating in any activity related to this Grant Agreement. For the duration of this Grant Agreement, the Organization/Agency and its employees will not accept any gift, benefit, gratuity or consideration, or begin a personal or financial interest in a party who is associated with this Grant Agreement.

5. The Grantee Organization/Agency and its employees shall not disclose any financial, statistical, personal, technical, media-related, and/or other information or data derived from this Grant Agreement, made available for use by the State, for the purposes of providing services to the State, in conjunction with this Grant Agreement, except as otherwise required by law or explicitly permitted by the State in writing. The Grantee shall immediately advise the State of any person(s) who has access to confidential Project information and intends to disclose that information in violation of this Grant Agreement.

6. The Grantee will not enter into any Grant Agreement or discussions with third parties concerning materials described in paragraph five (5) prior to receiving written confirmation from the State that such third party has a Grant Agreement with the State, similar in nature to this one.

7. The Grantee warrants that only those employees who are authorized and required to use the materials described in paragraph 5 will have access to them.

8. If the Grantee violates any provisions in the above paragraphs, such action by the Grantee shall render this Grant Agreement void.

T. EQUIPMENT-USE TERMS

1. The Grantee agrees any equipment purchased under this Grant Agreement shall be used for impaired driving efforts.

2. Law Enforcement Projects:
a. Oral Fluid Drug Screening Devices and Cannabis/Marijuana Breath Testing Equipment - The Grantee agrees to ensure all personnel using road-side drug testing equipment, including oral fluid drug testing devices and/or cannabis/marijuana breath testing devices, purchased with grant funds from this Grant Agreement, are trained to recognize alcohol and drug impairment.

At a minimum, personnel using these devices should receive Standardized Field Sobriety Testing training. These personnel are also encouraged to attend Advanced Roadside Impaired Driving Enforcement and Drug Recognition Evaluator training. Prior to using these devices, the Grantee agrees to obtain permission from their local prosecutor's office, establish a policy ensuring appropriate use, and require the staff using these devices to receive appropriate training, which may include training from the manufacturer. This will help ensure the equipment is used appropriately. The Grantee shall advise the State (California Highway Patrol, Impaired Driving Section, Cannabis Grants Unit) of any legal challenges or other items of significance that may affect the use or legal acceptance of these devices.

Additionally, the State may request additional information about the performance of these devices, including information about their use, accuracy, and feedback from personnel using the devices.
b. Law Enforcement Vehicles - The Grantee agrees any law enforcement vehicles purchased with Grant funds, from this Grant Agreement, will be primarily used for the enforcement of driving under the influence laws and/or providing public education, related to the dangers of driving under the influence. Additionally, any vehicle purchased using funds from this Grant Agreement shall comply with all California Vehicle Code and California Code of Regulation requirements. The State may require the Grantee to mark these vehicles with a decal and/or emblem, indicating the vehicle is used for driving under the influence enforcement. 134
Schedule A
Garden Grove Police Department
All grant awards, including any adjustments to requested funding, were made by the Cannabis Grants Unit based on the merits of the Grant Application, scale of operation, and in accordance with the Request for Application (RFA) requirements and associated regulations. As a result, not all Project activities and items detailed in Schedule A are applicable. Refer to Schedule B - Detailed Budget Estimate for approved Budget line items and Project activities. Project activities and items that are not clearly identified/specified in the Grant Agreement must be submitted to and approved by CGU prior to purchase.

Project Description
The Garden Grove Police Department provides in-house training to new hires during the new officer orientation period. The training is crucial as officers graduating from the academy are not exposed to DUI related investigations in the field prior to being training by their Training Officers. As part of our field training program, officers in training are exposed to DUI investigations on scene and shadow their senior officers conducting these types of investigations. The department currently has two DRE instructors and one SFST instructor who work within a patrol capacity. These specially trained officers routinely attend DRE training courses and supervise DRE investigations being conducted by officers within the training program. The Department would also like to use utilize this additional funding to send more officers to advanced training courses to become certified trainers within the department.

The Garden Grove Police Traffic Unit along with our Crime Prevention Unit has in the past conducted "Know Your Limit" operations within the city. These operations include brining our PAS machines to different establishments and having citizens voluntarily provide a breath sample to see what their BAG levels were after consuming alcoholic beverages. These operations provide great learning experiences to motorists as most of the time these volunteers believes their BAG was much lower than what the PAS machine indicated.

The Garden Grove Police Department was also fortunate to purchase new Fatal Vision DUI Drug Goggles from the previous 2023/2024 Cannabis Grant. These goggles imitate the affects of Cannabis as it applies to driving and it also imitates combination type drug usage. This equipment has been utilized in school type presentations and also at our Citizen Academy training days. In addition to such operations, our Traffic Unit along with our Crime Prevention Unit has had educational booths at public locations including schools and educating citizens on the dangers of driving impaired including alcohol, drugs and also combinations.

In terms of enforcement efforts, the Garden Grove Police Department would like to increase the total number of DUI saturation operations conducted per year. The department is provided funding to conduct DUI saturation patrols from the OTS Step grant. While this additional funding has helped the department combat impaired driving, additional allocated funding in this category would help us combat the growing issue and trend of impaired driving arrests and fatal traffic collisions. The department conducts such operations throughout the year and doubles the amount of operations within the winter months. Statistically, the winter months have shown to include the highest amount of DUI related offenses and arrests.

Problem Statement & Proposed Solution
Garden Grove is a City located within Orange County, California. With a population of approximately 166,740 as of 2024. Garden Grove is the 32nd largest city within California and the 164th largest City within the United States. Garden Grove is currently growing at a rate of 0.06% annually, but the population has decreased by

0.31% since the most recent census, which recorded a population of 172,800 in 2020. Spanning over 18 square miles, Garden Grove has a population density of 9,593 people per square mile. Garden Grove is a City with a majority being Asian- Americans and is the 7th among top cities of at least 100,000 residents with the highest percentage of Asian- Americans.

With only approximately 176 sworn officers including administrative staff, that is a ratio of one officer per every 1,002 residents spread over the highly densely populated 18 square miles. In regards to traffic enforcement, there are only 11 motor officers to patrol the 18 square miles and 166,740 residents, not including the patrons, visitors and working force within the city.

Traffic collision investigations continue to be on the most common calls for service officers respond to within the city. The City has seen a rising trend in alcohol, drug and combination related injury and non-injury vehicle collisions over the past five years. The trend is common amongst the County of Orange and also in surrounding counties. There has also been an uptick in fatal related traffic collisions involving impairment. 135
Schedule A
In the City of Garden Grove, there has been a total of 65 fatal traffic collisions since the begging of 2017 to the end of 2023. Of those fatalities, 33 of them have involved impaired drivers, as well as over 167 other injury traffic collisions involving impaired drivers. The negative effects of impaired driving have struck our community on several occasions and the Garden Grove Police Department is committed to using all resources available to combat the problem at hand. An example of this is seven members of our Neighborhood Traffic Unit (NTU) received the prestigious MADD award at the closing of 2023. Many of these arrests involved drug and combination type arrests and investigations.

The City of Garden Grove has taken a zero-tolerance type approach towards impaired driving and in the last five years have made over 1900 arrests, and initiated several thousand citizen contacts related to DUI investigations. The City of Garden Grove is committed to the safety of the citizens and our residents and has utilized DUI checkpoints and DUI saturation patrols as a means to deter, locate, and arrest impaired drivers.

In the process, we also make it a point to provide educational opportunities to the members within our community and provide information as to the dangers of impaired driving on our roadways.

Through the opportunities granted to our department through the OTS STEP grant, we have continued our zero tolerance efforts towards eliminating impaired driving within our roadways. The efforts are focused on all motorists and citizens within the community of Garden Grove. Through the use of press releases and social media platforms, an effort is always made to educate the community on the dangers of driving impaired, the costs of being prosecuted for DUI/DUID, and the alternative methods of transportation available to those that may consider driving while impaired. The City of Garden Grove has capitalized on funding provided by the OTS STEP grant and in 2023/2024 we were awarded our first CHP Cannabis Grant. With the financial assistance of both these grants, we have been able to increase our efforts in the battle against impaired driving.

The issue of impaired driving continues to rise. According to the 2018 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) in 2018, 12.6 million motorists drove under the influence of illicit drugs. After alcohol, Marijuana is the drug most commonly found to be located within the blood of drivers involved in traffic collisions. THC (Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinot) can be detected in body fluids for several days and even weeks after usage and is often combined with alcohol.

The vehicle collision risk associated with Marijuana in combination with alcohol, cocaine, or benzodiazepines appears to be greater than that for each drug by itself. According to the Governors Highway Safety Association, 43.6% of fatally injured drivers in 2016 tested positive for drugs and over half of those drivers tested positive for two or more drugs. Based on data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in 2016, among drivers tested in fatal crashes, 44% had used a legal or illicit drug, compared to 38% who tested positive for alcohol. Per TREDS, according to a 2014 study, there were 7,000 new Marijuana users per day. After alcohol, Marijuana was the most commonly detected drug among drivers killed in traffic collisions in 2016,out of 44% of drivers killed in traffic collisions who tested positive for drugs, 41% had used a strain or Marijuana.

DUI STATISTICAL DATA CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
2019-2023
DUI ARRESTS: 715
DUI DRUG ARRESTS: 137
DUI COMBINATION ARRESTS: 41
FATAL TRAFFIC COLLISION STATISTICAL DATA BETWEEN 2019-2023 2019- 05 fatal collisions. 03 involving DUI
2020- 10 fatal collisions. 05 involving DUI
2021- 18 fatal collisions. 02 involving DUI
2022- 07 fatal collisions. 02 involving DUI
2023- 14 fatal collisions. 03 involving DUI
NON- FATAL DUI RELATED TRAFFIC COLLISIONS 2019-2021
2019 Alcohol related collisions- 109. 2020 alcohol related collisions- 80. 2021 alcohol related collisions-1 11 2019 Drug involved collisions- 7. 2020 drug involved collisions-11. 2021 drug involved collisions -11. 2019 Combination involved collisions-3. 2020 Combination involved collisions- 2. 2021 combination involved collisions- 3.
136
Schedule A
Performance Measures/Scope of Work
Ensure 5 sworn Garden Grove Police Department Officers attend SFST and ARIDE by the end of the 4th quarter.

Ensure 1 DRE officer attends DRE Instructor School by the conclusion of the 1st quarter.

Ensure 2 officers attend SFST instructor school by end of 2nd quarter.

Send 2 DRE officers to recertification school (if applicable) during the course of the grant cycle by the end of the 4th quarter.

Ensure 2 DRE instructors attend at least 3 DRE certification trainings by the 4th quarter.

The Garden Grove Police Department is dedicated to meeting the above listed goals and objectives. In order to do this, the department will assign three DUI Saturation Patrols each month. These patrols will be carried out by a DRE trained officer if possible and or by an officer with advanced training such as SFST and ARIDE.

The training goals and objectives outlined will be obtained by sending officers to specialized schools. 60 DUI Saturation Patrols. Q1-15. Q2- 15. Q3-15. Q4- 15.

Conduct 3 DUI checkpoints. Q1-01 . Q3-1. Q4-1
Project Performance Evaluation
The Garden Grove Police Department Traffic Unit with keep extensive notes and use course/ instructor evaluation documentation over the duration of the grant period. This will assist in proper record keeping and quality control. This will be continually monitored and appropriate adjustments will be made when and if necessary. Grant activity progress will be reported one a quarterly basis to ensure actions are being taken towards the set goals outlined.

Additionally, we will use the data compiled to create a "Final Evaluation" section in the fourth quarter of the set grant period. This will provide a summary of the grant's accomplishments, challenges, and other significant activities. This narrative will include whether or not the department met, exceeded, or if we fell short of the objectives outlined. If the department falls short of the goals set, an explanation will be provided in full detail.

Program Sustainability
The Garden Grove Police Department's main goal is to reduce the amount of dangerous DUI drivers on our roadways. In an effort to combat the ongoing trend of DUI related injury/ fatal traffic collisions countywide, our department conducts saturation patrols almost weekly. Due to limited funding, DUI patrols and checkpoints are limited to the money allotted from competitive grants such as the OTS STEP GRANT and the CHP Cannabis Grant. Our department was fortunate to obtain the CHP Cannabis Tax Fund Grant for the first time in 2023 and we are seeing great success while we are still in our first year. We are ambitious and extremely motivated to continue to utilize these funds and make a positive impact in the battle against impaired driving, The long-term goals we have in place are to use these funds immediately for not only enforcement purposes but also for the training purposes as well. The department would like to send more officers to advanced training such as SFST, ARIDE, and DRE. Personnel permitting, training and certification would be a top priority in terms of sustainability and for continued enforcement. Currently, this department does not have as many trained DRE officers as we would like. IF we are to be fortunate enough to continue receiving funding from this grant, our department would be able to send more officers to these advanced trainings and schools.

Having more advanced training as it pertains to DUI enforcement and detection will only continue to make our roads safer.

This department has always embraced partnerships with outside agencies and we have always welcomed engagement and collaborative efforts. As laws continue to change and evolve pertaining to illicit substances, now more than ever an emphasis needs to be placed on enforcement and education as it pertains to impaired driving.
137
Schedule A
Administrative Support
The grant coordinators within this department have become extremely efficient with not only meeting the outlined requirements of past grants awarded, but excelling and exceeding the expectations outlined. Proper use of grant funds is always a top priority for the coordinators and the management that oversee all grant related activities. Currently, officers assigned to the Neighborhood Traffic Unit (NTU), are in charge of managing grants awarded by OTS and the CHP Cannabis Tax Fund Grant. In addition to this, a supervisor within the traffic unit oversees all final decision making and accounts on where funding is being used what resources are being allocated towards. Once the coordinator approves an activity or purchase from grant funding, the supervisor assigned has the final decision to approve or deny the request on the grantee side.

Our grant coordinators also keep an open line of communication with fiscal representatives at the Garden Grove City Hall. These relationships between our officers and accounting personnel ensure that proper documentation and preparation is completed prior to, during and at the end of grant cycles. The command staff within this agency have placed great emphasis on impaired driving and support our efforts to continue to combat the dangers of these illegal and also dangerous actions. This department has the necessary trained personnel to manage such a grant and we are confident we will excel if we are fortunate to continue receiving funding.
138
Schedule B
Detailed Budget Estimate
Award Number
17948
Organization/Agency
Garden Grove Police Department
Total Amount
$200,000.00
Cost Category
Other Direct Costs
Line Item Name
IACP - Registration
Category Sub-Total
Personnel
DUI Saturation Patrol
DUI Checkpoint
Category Sub-Total
Travel
IACP - Attend Travel
Category Sub-Total
Total Cost to Grant
$4,100.00
^4,100.00
$145,200.00
$37,860.00
$183,060.00
$12,840.00
$12,840.00
Grant Total$200,000.001
139
Schedule B-1
Budget Narrative
Garden Grove Police Department
Prior to engaging in grant-funded Saturation Patrols, DUI Checkpoints, or other enforcement activities in areas where the grantee does not have primary traffic jurisdiction, the grantee should consult with the agency having primary traffic jurisdiction.

Other Direct Costs
IACP - Registration
$4,100.00
Registration = $410/person * 10= $4,100.00
Personnel
DUI Checkpoint
$37,860.00
3 DUI checkpoints per year * 11 Officers and 2 Sergeant per DUI Checkpoint, 10 hrs. per Officer. Total salary and benefits = $37,860 (Officer - 10 hrs. X $90 X 11X3 =69,300, Sergeant -10 hrs. X $110 X 2X 3 =$37,860.00).

DUI Saturation Patrol
$145,200.00
60 DUI saturations per year. 11 Officers and 2 Sergeant per DUI saturation, 10 hrs. per Officer. Total salary and benefits = $145,200 (Officer - 10 hrs. X $90 X 11X12 =118,800, Sergeant - 10 hrs. X $110 X 2X 12 =26,400).

Travel
IACP - Attend Travel
$12,840.00
IACP Impaired Driving & Traffic Safety Conference August 16-18, 2024 Washington, DC. Hotel: Per diem rate of $176/per night plus tax = $176*5 night*10 plus $2000 tax = $10,800.00, Airfare = $500.00* 10 officers = 5,000.00, Meal and Incidental Expense $59 /per person * 10 Officers * 5 Days= $2,950.00. 140
Item 317/2024
Final
City of Garden Grove

INTER-DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM

To:

Lisa L. Kim From: Matt West
Dept:

City Manager Dept: City Manager
Date: 8/13/2024

Subject: Approval to submit a response to the Grand Jury Report, “E-bikes Friend or Foe.” (Action Item)

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this report is for the City Council to approve the attached response to the 2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Report, E-bikes Friend or Foe and authorize submittal to the Orange County Grand Jury.

BACKGROUND

On June 20, 2024, the Orange County Grand Jury released its 2023 -24 Grand Jury Report, E-bikes Friend or Foe. The purpose of the report was to investigate how E -bike regulations, education, and safety enforcement have been adopted by Orange County cities and the county in order to strengthen city oversight of safe E-bike use. In compliance with Penal Code 933 and 933.05, the City is required to provide a response to ea ch of the findings and recommendations directed to the City Council by September 19, 2024. Specifically, the City is to respond to three findings and three recommendations.

DISCUSSION

With E -bike sales increasing by almost 145% worldwide over the past tw o years, the regulation of their use has not kept up. According to the Grand Jury report, accidents and incidents related too E-bikes are on the rise, as are complaints from citizens of Orange County about E-bike riders. The Grand Jury investigation into E-bike regulation revealed that outside of the California Vehicle Code, the 34 cities, 13 of which are contract cities with the Orange County Sherriff’s Department, vary significantly in their regulation, safety, enforcement, and education on E-bikes.

The Grand Jury report outlined three findings: (1) The majority of Orange County’s 34 cities do not have ordinances or policies in place, which makes it difficult to address the safe operation and regulation of E-bikes leading to confusion, (2) Due to the increasing incidence of E-bike injuries and deaths, there is a need for consistent and accurate tracking by law enforcement and first responders, which does not exist now, and (3) Training and education 141
Item 317/2024

Page 2 of 2 ends

on E-bike use and safety varies from city to city causing confusion amongst bike riders. The City of Garden Grove agrees with the Grand Jury’s findings.

The Grand Jury report also outlined three recommendations. Cities were advised to (1) establish specific policies that define the rules of the road for use of E-bikes in their communities by December 1, 2024, (2) have a mechanism in place to report accidents, injuries and deaths involving E -bikes by December 1, 2024, and (3) research and develop outreach and education programs regarding the safe operation of E-bikes for their residents by December 1, 2024. The City’s response states that the City has completed recommendations two and three before the deadline and will complete recommendation one before December 1, 2024.

FINANCIAL IMPACT

None.

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that the City Council:

 Approve the attached response and authorize submittal to the Orange County Grand Jury.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Response to Grand Jury Report E-Bikes Friend or Foe

2. Grand Jury Report E-Bikes Friend or Foe

142

July 29, 2024

The Honorable Maria Hernandez
Presiding Judge of the Superior Court of California
700 Civic Center Drive West
Santa Ana, CA 92701

RE: Response to the 2023-24 Orange County Grand Jury Report re E-bikes Friend or Foe.

Dear Judge Hernandez,

In accordance with Penal Code 933.05(a) and (b), t he City of Garden Grove submits the following response to the report, finding s, and recommendations of the 2023-24 Orange County Grand Jury Report titled “E-bikes Friend of Foe”.

FINDINGS

F1. The majority of Orange County’s 34 cities do not have ordinances or policies in place, which makes it difficult to address the safe operation and regulation of E - bikes leading to confusion.

Response: The City of Garden Grove agrees with the above finding.

F2. Due to the increasing incidence of E -Bikes injuries and deaths, there is a need for consistent and accurate tracking by law enforcement and first responders, which does not exist now.

Response: The City of Garden Grove agrees with the above finding.

F3. Training and education on E-bike use and safety varies from city to city causing confusion amongst bike riders.

Response: The City of Garden Grove agrees with the above finding.

RECOMMENDATIONS

R1. Each Orange County city should have specific policies that define the rules of the road for use of E-bikes in their communities by December 1, 2024.

Response: The recommendation has yet to be implemented but will be implemented in the future (before December 2024). The City is fully committed to collaborating with the County 143

and its fellow municipalities on specific policies for E -bikes. Although Garden Grove does not have some areas, such as bike paths, boardwalks, etc., that may generate increased complaints in some cit ies, the City does have issues with E -bikes on city streets involving vehicles and pedestrians. Recently, members of the Traffic Unit met and collaborated with Huntington Beach PD regarding their municipal codes related to E -bikes and the future of enforcement and education.

R2. Each Orange County city should have a mechanism in place to report accidents, injuries and deaths involving E-Bikes by December 1, 2024.

Response: The recommendation has been implemented. The City is fully committed to continuing our collaboration with the County and its fellow municipalities to accurately report statistics related to E -bike accidents that involve injuries or death. Since July 2024, the Garden Grove Police Department has upgraded and purchased software to accuratel y document and report injuries and/or deaths related to E-bikes.

R3. Each Orange County city should re search and develop outreach and education programs regarding the safe operation of E -bikes for their residents by December 1, 2024.

Response: The recommendation has been implemented. The City is fully committed to continuing our collaboration with the County and its fellow municipalities to increase our outreach and education regarding the safe operation of E -bikes. Garden Grove’s Traf fic Unit has obtained the Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) grant in several areas related to E -bike outreach and education. Garden Grove received $23,000 from the OTS grant to conduct eight highly visible bicycle and E-bike enforcement and education operations. Lastly, Garden Grove received $4,000 from the OTS grant for Bicycle and E -bike safety presentations. These presentations will be held at middle and high schools throughout the city.

Social media campaigns related to bicycle and E-bike safety have been shared across multiple social media outlets. Additionally, the Traffic Unit has taught E -bike laws to the entire Police Department and routinely updated any new laws. The Traffic Unit plans on providing brochures at E-bike stores throughout the city to parents and children purchasing E -bikes in Garden Grove. These brochures will address safe riding practices and the rules of the road for E-bikes.

Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the Grand Jury ’s report. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Shawn Park, Assistant to the City Manager, at (714) 741-5371 or by email at [email protected].

Respectfully Submitted,

Steven R. Jones
Mayor of Garden Grove

144

ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY
June 13, 2024
700 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE WEST • SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92701 • 714/834-3320 www.ocgrandjury.org • FAX 714/834-5555
The Honorable Steve Jones
City of Garden Grove
11222 Acacia Parkway
Garden Grove, CA 92840
Dear Mayor Jones:

Enclosed is a copy of the 2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury report, E-bikes Friend or Foe. Pursuant to Penal Code 933.05(f), a copy of the report is being provided to you at least two working days prior to its public release. Please note that under that subsection, "No officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release of the final report." (Emphasis added.) It is required that you provide a response to each of the findings and recommendations of this report directed to your office in compliance with Penal Code 933.05(a) and (b), a copy is enclosed.

Please distribute this report to your governing body.

For each Grand Jury recommendation accepted and not implemented, provide a schedule for future implementation. In addition, by the end of March of each subsequent year, please report on the progress being made on each recommendation accepted but not completed. These annual reports should continue until all recommendations are implemented.

Please mail the response to the recommendations to Maria Hernandez, Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, 700 Civic Center Drive West, Santa Ana, CA 92701, with a separate copy mailed to the Orange County Grand Jury, 700 Civic Center Drive West, Santa Ana, CA 92701, no later than 90 days after the public release date, June 20, 2024, in compliance with Penal Code 933, copy enclosed. The due date then is September 19, 2024.

Should additional time for responding to this report be necessary for further analysis. Penal Code 933.05(b)(3) permits an extension of time up to six months from the public release date. Such extensions should be advised in writing, with the information required in Penal Code 933.05(b)(3), to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, with a separate copy of the request to the Grand Jury.

We tentatively plan to issue the public release on June 20, 2024. Upon public release, the report will be available on the Grand Jury website at www.ocgrandjury.org.

Very truly yours,
/S^' ^.*?-<^^ -£-^^ -^e
T-^
Michael J. Vefrengia, Foreperson
2023-2024 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY
MJV:jm
Enclosures: Grand Jury Report
Penal Code 933, 933.05
Cc: Lisa Kim, City Manager
145
~n m
CD S:
? ^"
Q- CD
0)
CD
H
s
146
E-bikes Friend or Foe
Table of Contents
SUMMARY...................................................................................................................... 1 BACKGROUND.............................................................................................................. 1 REASON FOR THE STUDY...........................................................................................3 METHOD OF STUDY......................................................................................................3 INVESTIGATION AND ANALYSIS................................................................................^ Orange County Transportation Authority................................................................ 4 Orange County Sheriff's Department......................................................................^ Cities Survey.............................................................................................................^ COMMENDATIONS...................................................................................................... 12 FINDINGS..................................................................................................................... 12 RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................................. 13 RESPONSES................................................................................................................ 13 REQUIRED RESPONSES......................................................................................... 14 REFERENCES.............................................................................................................. 18 GLOSSARY.................................................................................................................. 20 APPENDICES............................................................................................................... 21 APPENDIX 1.............................................................................................................. 21 Current County of Orange E-Bike Laws - Unincorporated Areas .................... 21 APPENDIX 2.............................................................................................................. 22 California Vehicle Code Section 312.5 as of December 23, 2023..................... 22 APPENDIX 3.............................................................................................................. 23 California Assembly Bills..................................................................................... 23 APPENDIX 4..............................................................................................................24 County of Orange Ordinance No. -? 8-002............................................................ 24 2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page ii
147
E-bikes Friend or Foe

SUMMARY
The use of electric bicycles (E-bikes) has increased as our communities look to new and novel ways to commute and to reduce our reliance on automobiles. E-bikes are a cost-effective alternative. However, they bring higher risks of accidents and injuries when compared to conventional bicycles. The public deserves education and safety regulations to mitigate this concern.

The 2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury (OCGJ) investigation into E-bike regulation, education, and safety focused on what, if any, pertinent regulations have been adopted by Orange County cities. The OCGJ investigation revealed that outside of the California Vehicle Code, the 34 cities, 13 of which are contract cities with the Orange County Sheriff's Department (OCSD), vary significantly in their regulation, safety (accidents, fatalities, etc.), enforcement, and education on E-bikes. The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) oversees E-bike safety, education, and public outreach for all unincorporated areas. OCTA holds quarterly meetings with all 34 cities in the county to discuss transportation issues including E-bike regulation, safety, education, and enforcement.

There is an urgent need to have consistent ordinances for the regulation and enforcement of safe E-bike use in all cities, school districts, parks, and unincorporated areas. Currently, there are significant differences in policy across cities. The recent surge in E-bike usage calls for immediate action to strengthen city oversight of this issue. This report will highlight the differences between cities' approaches and make recommendations to attain realistic and practical policies for their respective jurisdictions.

BACKGROUND
The modern E-bike was introduced in the 1990s as a pedal assist bike with a battery- powered motor. The OCGJ focused on the 3 classes of E-bikes (see table below).

In most cases, it is hard to tell the difference between a Class 1, 2, or 3 E-bike, as there may be no apparent distinction to the naked eye. It is important that Orange County residents understand the different classes of E-bikes, how fast they can go, and any applicable restrictions or regulations that govern their use. This is particularly pertinent as automobile and bus commuters must now share the road with E-bike riders. 2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 1
148
E-bikes Friend or Foe
What's the Difference?

E-BIKE CLASSIFICATIONS
ThaRoundup.org.

G^b
Class 1
20MPH
Pedal Assisted
No assistance without pedaling
Same rules & access rights as
regular bikes
Class 2
20MPH
Throttle Assisted
Can be ridden without pedaling
Same rules & access rights as
regular bikes
THEROUNDUP.ORC
<^b
Class 3
28MPH
Pedal Assisted / Optional Throttle
No assistance without pedaling
Age limit applies
Usage areas restricted
The ease of use, relatively low price, and convenience of E-bikes have led to their proliferation throughout Orange County. It is estimated that the sales of E-bikes rose by 145% during 2020-to-2021 (World Economic Forum March 12, 2021).

However, along with the proliferation of E-bikes have come inevitable issues regarding their use, including:
• riding on sidewalks
• riding against traffic
• speeding
• bike vs pedestrian collisions
• bike vs motorized vehicle conflicts
• the ability to make unauthorized modifications to the electric motors which allows the E-bikes to exceed their maximum intended speed
There are also issues regarding E-bike rider injuries in accidents, which can be more serious than injuries of riders in bicycle accidents (US Consumer Product Safety Commission October 17, 2023). According to the OCGJ survey sent to city mayors, many do not track or have awareness of the incidence and prevalence of E-bike injuries and fatalities in their respective cities.
2023-2024Orange County Grand JuryPage 2
149
E-bikes Friend or Foe
The OCGJ sent a survey to all Orange County cities to learn each city's policies, availability of safety education, and enforcement of E-bikes. The responses from the cities that answered indicate a wide variety of differences - with some cities having robust training, enforcement measures, and methods of socializing E-bike use in their communities.

The OCGJ recognizes that there cannot be a "one size fits all" approach to the regulation of E-bikes, as all cities in Orange County are unique and have different needs. For example, a large beachside city will have its own unique policies as compared to smaller inland cities. The rapidly expanding use of E-bikes compels cities to ensure a safe environment for riders of E-bikes and all citizens of Orange County.

REASON FOR THE STUDY
As E-bike sales have increased by almost 145% worldwide (World Economic Forum Mar.12,2021)over the past 2 years, the regulation of their use does not seem to have kept up. Accidents and incidents with E-bikes are on the rise, as are complaints from citizens of Orange County about E-bike riders (Voice of OC Sept. 2023). Accordingly, the OCGJ determined that an investigation into E-bikes was needed to bring public awareness to the safe use of E-bikes and the importance of having city-relevant "rules of the road" in place.

This report seeks to press Orange County cities to actively seek common-sense rules for E-bikes to ensure their safe operation among conventional bicycles, pedestrians, and vehicles.

METHOD OF STUDY
Information from this investigation was collected and verified through multiple sources and statements made during interviews and includes extensive research of current online and print articles regarding E-bikes in Orange County. The OCGJ conducted the following activities:
• In-person interviews of representatives from:
o A major retail bike shop that sells both E-bikes and standard bicycles o The Orange County Transportation Authority
o The Orange County Sheriff's Department
o The Central Newport Beach Community Association
• In-person attendance and online viewing of several city council meetings • In-person attendance at a training session hosted by a local city • Review of proposed State legislation that failed, passed, or is in committee 2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 3
150
E-bikes Friend or Foe
• Direct observance of E-bike riders, where they are riding, use of protective gear, passengers, dangerous maneuvers, etc.
• An online survey was distributed to the mayors of 34 cities in Orange County.

Unincorporated areas/divisions were not included in this survey. Mayors and/or representatives from 22 cities responded to this survey

INVESTIGATION AND ANALYSIS
Through interviews and surveys, the OCGJ determined that there is wide variation of rules on E-bikes and limited information regarding the reporting of E-bike incidents, accidents, injuries, and basic rules of the road for E-bikes.

Several news outlets (newspapers, magazines, television, online forums) have published stories about E-bikes. While many acknowledge the benefits of E-bikes, they also detail significant issues for cities to address.

Speeding, unsafe, or reckless operation, riders under 18 years of age not wearing helmets and toddlers riding on the back or front without proper child safety seats present common E-bike regulation and enforcement challenges for law enforcement.

Orange County Transportation Authority
OCTA has published on their website a comprehensive list of regulations listed by city regarding bicycles and E-bikes. As with the OCGJ survey, there are several different rules for E-bike riders dependent on what city they are riding in due to the differences in cities such as availability of bike lanes and the speed at which E-bikes are permitted to travel.

Orange County Sheriff's Department
OCSD enforces the California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 312.5 regarding electric bicycles. In addition, the Sheriff's Department works closely with OCTA to provide E-bike outreach and education to the residents of Orange County. The OCSD Training Bulletin 23-01, issued January 4, 2023, provides the current E-bike enforcement criteria for Sheriff's Deputies.

Cities Survey
OCGJ sent a list of survey questions to all city mayors in Orange County regarding policies in their cities with respect to E-bikes. Of the 34 surveys sent, 22 were completed and returned to the Grand Jury. A sampling of the survey results follows:
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 4
151
E-bikes Friend or Foe
Do you track injuries/deaths from E-bike accidents, injuries, fatalities? Yes 11
No 11
Tracking of E-bike injuries, deaths, property damage and battery fires, 11 of the 22 cities answered that they tracked these items on E-bikes.

The entity responsible for tracking these items varied within each city among law enforcement organizations, city government offices, and local hospitals. There is no standard way to compile and publish accidenVincident information on E-bikes.

To properly track trends in E-bike operation, a robust incident and accident tracking mechanism must be in place. Items that need to be tracked include but are not limited to class of E-bike involved, estimated speed of the E-bike, direction of travel, age of the rider, whether helmets were used, and any injuries sustained. In the process of accident reporting, most police agencies do not distinguish whether the bicycle involved was a conventional bike or an E-bike.
• In your city, who, if anyone, is authorized to enforce infractions? Please select all that apply:

Not Applicable
Police
Sheriff
Lifeguards
Park Rangers
Private Security
Other
3 13
6 0
6 0
0 14
12 10
8 6
4 2
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 5
152
E-bikes Friend or Foe
Of the 22 cities that completed the survey, 100% indicated that some form of law enforcement was the agency authorized to enforce/cite infractions for E-bike riders.

Police Departments, OCSD, or Park Rangers were the organizations authorized for E-bike enforcement.
• In your city, are E-bikes allowed:

YES I NO | UNKNOWN

SIDEWALKS

BIKE LANES

PARK TRAILS

SCHOOL CAMPUSES

VEHICLE LANES

HIGHWAYS
10 21
13 8
16 9
8 0
5 2
0 5
4 1
4 12
6 8
10 cities indicated that E-bikes were authorized on sidewalks, 4 cities answered unknown, and the remaining cities answered that E-bikes were prohibited from sidewalks.
21 cities indicated that E-bikes were authorized in bike lanes with one city responding as unknown.
13 cities indicated that E-bikes are allowed on park trails, 5 cities indicated that E-bikes were prohibited from using park trails, and 4 cities indicated that park trail policy for E-bikes was unknown.
16 cities indicated that E-bikes were authorized in vehicle lanes and 6 cities answered unknown.
5 cities answered no, 8 cities answered unknown, and 9 cities indicated that E-bikes were allowed on highways.

Riding on sidewalks was found to be a contentious issue. One city cited California Assembly Bill 825 (which would have barred local agencies from prohibiting bike use on sidewalks but has since been vetoed) as a reason not to prohibit E-bikes on sidewalks.

When there is no defined bike lane, E-bike riders will ride on sidewalks as a matter of safety. E-bikes, depending on the class, can go up to 28 miles per hour, which is typically faster than a conventional bicycle and much faster than a walking pedestrian. 2023-2024Orange County Grand JuryPage 6
153
E-bikes Friend or Foe
Although most current laws give the bicyclist and pedestrians the right of way, the reaction time for an E-bike rider going over 10 miles per hour on the sidewalk generally does not give the rider adequate opportunity to avoid pedestrians walking on the sidewalk or cars coming out of driveways.
• Does your city have posted speed limits for E-bikes?
Yes 0
No 22
Unknown 0
100% of the cities that answered the OCGJ survey indicated that they do not post speed limits for E-bikes. No reasons were cited as to why they are not posted for E-bikes even though their top speed can be as high as 28 miles per hour or faster if the rider disables speed restrictive devices thus allowing the E-bike to almost double its speed.

There are obvious issues involving where to place speed limit signs for E-bikes. They are allowed to travel in bike lanes, on sidewalks, and in some jurisdictions even allowed to ride in opposition to traffic.
• In your city, are E-bikes expected to travel in the same direction or opposite direction from street traffic?
Same direction
Opposite direction
Both directions
Unknown
16 1
2 3
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 7
154
E-bikes Friend or Foe
Some cities have authorized E-bikes to ride against the flow of traffic. As stated in the OCTAwebsite (in a section entitled "Wrong Way Riding"), riding against traffic is inherently dangerous due to:
> Oncoming cars approach at a much higher speed
> Drivers cannot see E-bike riders when turning left
> E-bike rider is unable to make right turns
> Traffic signals cannot be seen
Is safety training offered by the city for E-bike riders? Yes 8
No 12
Unknown 2
Safety education and/or training for E-bike riders is available only sporadically and is, in most cases, optional. As noted in the survey, only 8 cities indicated that safety training was offered. The Orange County Register published a story (OC Register Jan 3, 2024) about a San Juan Capistrano resident who has taken on educating new E-bike riders as a result of her son being injured on an E-bike. An OCGJ visit to a local retailer of E-bikes found there was no formal training for E-bike purchasers or riders, and the only information to purchasers of E-bikes was a pamphlet. The Huntington Beach Police Department has a safety class every other month which focuses on E-bike safety.

OCTA holds safety "bike rodeos" for E-bike riders. These are a few examples of the education available for E-bike riders, but none is mandatory prior to purchasing or riding an E-bike. Therefore, grass-roots efforts are another important step in promoting education and safety.

The OCGJ interviewed a member of the Central Newport Beach Community Association as to their concerns about education, safety, and enforcement regarding E-bikes. The Association has been active in monitoring E-bike use, specifically on the Balboa peninsula. Its focus has been on a perceived lack of enforcement of existing ordinances and the CVC on streets and the beach boardwalk. Along with education and safety training, the Association prefers active enforcement using radar guns, tickets, and increased law enforcement presence.
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 8
155
E-bikes Friend or Foe
Do the schools/school districts in your city offer safety information and/or certification for student E-bike users on campus?
Yes 7
^ No 2
^ Unknown 13
There are 28 school districts spread across the 34 cities of Orange County. Cities were asked whether schools in their jurisdictions offer safety information to student E-bike riders. Of the 22 cities that responded to the survey, 7 answered yes and 2 answered no. The concerning number that leaps to the eye is that 13 survey respondents stated that they were unaware of their school district's participation in E-bike regulation. At the time of this report, the 5 districts (per district website) that currently require safety training and registration are:
> Capistrano Unified
> Los Alamitos Unified
> Huntington Beach Union
> Irvine Unified
> Ocean View
• Are there any other persons/groups that might be able to provide meaningful or relevant information regarding E-bikes to the Grand Jury? At least 6 cities referred this question to the OCSD. 6 others referred this question to their own police department. Interestingly, at least 6 suggested that their jurisdictional park rangers (if these are in place in their city) would be able to answer the question. 2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 9
156
E-bikes Friend or Foe
Is there outreach by the city being conducted to inform your community of any regulations and safety training?
Yes
^ No
Unknown
10 10
2 Of the 34 cities in Orange County, 22 responded to this question: 10 cities said "yes," 10 cities said "no," and 2 cities indicated "unknown."
An example of outreach is the City of Irvine's Police Department. The outreach has several elements which includes High Visibility Enforcement (HVE) operations to issue administrative citations to juveniles violating vehicle codes on E-bikes. It also hosts E-bike safety courses, E-bike rodeos, and community presentations on E-bike safety.

There are also plans for Public Safety in collaboration with the Irvine Unified School District to implement a parking permit program which will require students riding E-bikes to school to attend workshops on E-bike safety before being issued a parking permit to park their E-bike on campus.
• Does your city regulate the use of E-bikes?
Yes
^ No
Unknown
4 15
3 2023-2024Orange County Grand JuryPage 10
157
E-bikes Friend or Foe
There were 15 cities who responded that they do not regulate E-bikes or their usage.

The OCGJ felt that this statistic, on its own, warranted further investigation and, possibly, further action by such cities.
fetll^"" /.^'^--*

GENERAL COMMENTS FROM SURVEY RESPONDENTS
"I personally promote safe e-bike texts on local Facebook groups... about 16,000 members. I promote e-bike safety every council meeting." "State and local legislation is lagging far behind e-bike technology and there is a lot of confusion amongst e-bike users and police regarding what is lawful and what is unlawful when it comes to e-bikes. "
"Thank you for looking into this. I am a relatively new mayor and although I consider e- Bikes an issue, we have so many other issues that are taking priority. I would like to see e-Bikes banned from all trails that were previously used for bicycles and pedestrians only. They function more like scooters than bicycles."
"E-bikes and bike safety, in general, are very big topics in the community right now and our Police Department is currently doing A LOT to address these items. Besides conducting weekly High Visibility Enforcement (HVE) operations, IPD's traffic staff oftentimes issue administrative citations to juveniles who commit vehicle code violations on their bicycles, including E-bikes and E-scooters. In fact, approximately 50%of our administrative citations are issued to E-bike and E-scooter operators. Rather than paying a fine similar to conventional traffic citations, our administrative citations require the juvenile to attend a 2-hour long bike safety course with a parent or guardian on the weekend at City Hall."
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 11
158
E-bikes Friend or Foe
"Our city will soon be meeting with reps from OCSD in reference to providing additional educational tools for e-bike riders. I have made contact with our local elected officials in reference to securing funds for e-bike enforcement and education." "The issue with E-bike safety is an active project in our traffic safety unit. Currently we are looking at any municipal codes which will assist with safety for e-bike riders and motorists."

COMMENDATIONS
The following agencies contributed to the OCGJ's investigation into the use of E-bikes in Orange County:
• Orange County Transportation Authority has taken a leadership role in outreach and education to all 34 Orange County cities
• Orange County Sheriff's Department has been very proactive in keeping up with the everchanging rules of the road for E-bikes
• Central Newport Beach Community Association provided important data and various studies on E-bike usage in Newport Beach

FINDINGS
In accordance with California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, the 2023-2024 Grand Jury requires (or, as noted requests) responses from each agency affected by the findings presented in this section. The responses are to be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. Based on its investigation titled "E-bikes- Friend or Foe," the 2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury has arrived at three principal findings, as follows:

F1. The majority of Orange County's 34 cities do not have ordinances or policies in place, which makes it difficult to address the safe operation and regulation of E-bikes leading to confusion.

F2. Due to the increasing incidence of E-bike injuries and deaths, there is a need for consistent and accurate tracking by law enforcement and first responders, which does not exist now.

F3. Training and education on E-bike use and safety varies from city to city causing confusion amongst bike riders.
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 12
159
E-bikes Friend or Foe

RECOMMENDATIONS
In accordance with California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, the 2023-2024 Grand Jury requires responses from each agency affected by the recommendations presented in this section. The responses are to be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court.

Based on its investigation described herein, the 2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury makes the following recommendations:

R1. Each Orange County city should have specific policies that define the rules of the road for use of E-bikes in their communities by December 1,2024.

R2. Each Orange County city should have a mechanism in place to report accidents, injuries and deaths involving E-bikes by December 1, 2024.

R3. Each Orange County city should research and develop outreach and education programs regarding the safe operation of E-bikes for their residents by December 1,2024.

RESPONSES
California Penal Code Section 933 requires the governing body of any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official shall comment on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected official's control within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors.

Furthermore, California Penal Code Section 933.05 specifies the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made as follows:
(a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following:
(1) The respondent agrees with the finding.
(2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. 2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 13
160
E-bikes Friend or Foe
(b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions:
(1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action.
(2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation, therefore.
(c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision-making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department.

REQUIRED RESPONSES
Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with Penal Code Section 933.05 are required from:

Findings - 90 Day Response Required
Citv Councils of:

AlisoViejo F1,F2,F3
Anaheim F1,F2,F3
Brea F1,F2,F3
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 14
161
E-bikes Friend or Foe
Buena Park F1, F2, F3
Costa Mesa F1,F2,F3
Cypress F1,F2,F3
Dana Point F1,F2,F3
Fountain Valley F1,F2,F3
Fullerton F1,F2,F3
Garden Grove F1,F2,F3
Huntington Beach F1, F2, F3
Irvine F1, F2, F3
LaHabra F1, F2, F3
LaPalma F1, F2, F3
Laguna Beach F1, F2, F3
Laguna Hills F1,F2,F3
Laguna Niguel F1, F2, F3
Laguna Woods F1, F2, F3
Lake Forest F1, F2, F3
LosAlamitos F1, F2, F3
Mission Viejo F1, F2, F3
Newport Beach F1,F2,F3
Orange F1,F2,F3
Placentia F1, F2, F3
Rancho Santa Margarita F1, F2, F3
SanClemente F1, F2, F3
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 15
162
E-bikes Friend or Foe
San Juan Capistrano F1, F2, F3
Santa Ana F1,F2,F3
Seal Beach F1,F2,F3
Stanton F1,F2,F3
Tustin F1,F2,F3
Villa Park F1,F2,F3
Westminster F1,F2,F3
Yorba Linda F1,F2,F3
Recommendations - 90 Day Response Required
City Councils of:

AlisoViejo R1,R2,R3
Anaheim R1, R2, R3
Brea R1, R2, R3
BuenaPark R1,R2,R3
Costa Mesa R1, R2, R3
Cypress R1, R2, R3
Dana Point R1,R2,R3
Fountain Valley R1, R2, R3
Fullerton R1,R2,R3
Garden Grove R1, R2, R3
Huntington Beach R1, R2, R3
Irvine R1,R2,R3
LaHabra R1,R2,R3
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 16
163
E-bikes Friend or Foe
LaPalma R1,R2,R3
Laguna Beach R1,R2,R3
Laguna Hills R1,R2,R3
LagunaNiguel R1,R2,R3
Laguna Woods R1, R2, R3
Lake Forest R1, R2, R3
Los Alamitos R1, R2, R3
Mission Viejo R1,R2,R3
Newport Beach R1, R2, R3
Orange R1,R2,R3
Placentia R1,R2,R3
Rancho Santa Margarita R1, R2, R3
SanClemente R1,R2,R3
San Juan Capistrano R1, R2, R3
Santa Ana R1, R2, R3
Seal Beach R1,R2,R3
Stanton R1,R2,R3
Tustin R1,R2,R3
Villa Park R1,R2,R3
Westminster R1,R2,R3
Yorba Linda R1,R2,R3
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 17
164
E-bikes Friend or Foe

REFERENCES
2 On Your Side: "Orange County Sees Spike in E-bike Accidents" KCAL NEWS, Nov 3, 2021
https://www.binq.com/videos/search?q=ebike+injur/s+in+oranqe+countv+CA&docid=60 3525694912734209&mid=D1537F514A8F881DE2A9D1537F514A8F881DE2A9&view= detail&FORM=VIRE
Biesiada, Noah , "Orange County Cities Struggle to Handle Electronic Bike Regulations" Voice of OC , Dec 20, 2022 https://voiceofoc.ora/2022/12/orange-countv-cities-struaale- to-handle-electric-bike-requlations/
Biesiada, Noah, "Orange County Cities Crack Down on E-bikes with Stricter Regulations" Voice of OC, Sep 28, 2023 https//0rancie County Cities Crack Down on E- Bikes With Stricter Regulations (voiceofoc.orci)
Connellv, Lavlan, "E-bike Lady educates new riders before hitimq streets on electric bikes" Oranqe County Register, Jan 3, 2024, https//E-bike lady' educates new riders beforejutting streets on^lectric bikes - Oranae County Register (ocregister.com) DMV Motorcycle Handbook, Two Wheel Vehicle Operation, Electric Bicycles https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/handbook/motorcvcle-handbook/two-wheel-vehicle- operation/
"E-Scooter and E-bike-lnjuries Soar-2022 Injuries Increased nearly 21%" Consumer Product Safety Commission, Oct 17, 2023
E-Scooter and E-Bike Iniuries Soar: 2022 Iniuries Increased Nearly 21% I CPSC.qov Fleming, Shawn "Electric Bike Sales grew by 145% in the US Last Year" World Economic Forum, Mar 12, 2021
Sales of electric bicycles are up all over the world I World Economic Forum (weforum.orci)
Fry, Hannah, "On Orange County Beaches, proliferation ofe-bikes brings battle to the boardwalk" Los Angeles Times, Jan 16,2023
https://www.latimes,com/california/storv/2023-01-16/mavhem-on-the-boardwalk-orancie- county-cities-tackle-e-bikes-with-varyina-results
Irvine Watchdog, "Irvine Transportation Commission to propose E-bike safety ordinance" May 14,2023 https://irvinewatchdoq.orq/citv-hall/transportation- commission/in/ine-transportation-commission-to-proppse-e-bike-safety-ordinance/ Kelly, Charles M., "Council approves introduction of e-bike ordinance Cjtv of Seal Beach" Sun News, May 10, 2023, https://www.sunnews.ora/council-apDroves- iniroduction-of-e-bike-ordinance/
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 18
165
E-bikes Friend or Foe
PC Bike, E-Bikes
httDS://octa.neVQettina-around/active/oc-bike/e-bikes/
Orange County Public Works, E-Bike Safety in the County of Orange https://ocip.ocpublicworks.com/e-bike
Grange County Sheriff's Department, E-bike Safety The focus for National Bike Safety Month httDS://www.ocsheriff.Qov/news/e-bike-safetv-focus-national-bike-safetv-month Orange County Sheriff's Office Training Bulletin, Jan 4, 2023 httDS://www.ocsheriff.aov/sites/ocsd/files/2023-01/Bulletin%2023- 01%20Enforcement%20and%20Handlina%20of%20Electric%20Bicvcles%2C%20Motor cvcles%20and%20Motorized%20Scooters Redacted.pdf
Pimental, Joseph, "In Los Alamitos students will need a permit to ride e-bikes to and from school", Spectrum News Jan 23,2023 https://spectrumnews1 .com/ca/la- wesVpublic-safetv/2023/01/20/in-los-alamitos—students-will-need-a-permit-to-nde-e- bikes-to—from-school
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 19
166
E-bikes Friend or Foe

GLOSSARY
CNBCA Central Newport Beach Community Association
CVC California Vehicle Code
E-bike Electric bicycle
HVE High Visibility Enforcement
OCGJ Orange County Grand Jury
OCSD Orange County Sheriff's Department
OCTA Orange County Transportation Authority
2023-2024Orange County Grand JuryPage 20
167
E-bikes Friend or Foe

APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1
Current County of Orange E-Bike Laws - Unincorporated Areas 1 • All E-bikes are required to have a label that describes classification, top assisted speed, and motor wattage.
• Helmets are recommended for all E-bike users. If you are under 18, it's required! • It is illegal to carry passengers on your E-bike unless your bike has an extra permanent seat or when using a child safety seat.
• E-bikes shall not be operated in excess of their designed speed or the speed limit, whichever is lower, on the road, and in no event in excess of 10 miles per hour on paved trails.
• E-bike shall not be operated in excess of 5 miles per hour on sidewalk. • Riding on the road against the flow of traffic is prohibited. 1 Orange County Public Works. 2024. "E-bike Safety in the County of Orange." Accessed May

22. 2024. https://www.ocqov.com .
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 21
168
E-bikes Friend or Foe
APPENDIX 2
California Vehicle Code Section 312.5 as of December 23, 2023 An electric bicycle is a bicycle equipped with fully operable pedals and an electric motor of less than 750 watts. Three classes of electric bicycles have been established:
• Class 1: A low speed pedal-assisted electric bicycle equipped with a motor which provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling and ceases to provide assistance when a speed of 20 mph is reached.
• Class 2: A low speed throttle-assisted electric bicycle equipped with a motor used exclusively to propel the bicycle and NOT capable of providing assistance when a speed of 20 mph is reached.
• Class 3: A low speed pedal-assistect electric bicycle equipped with a speedometer, and a motor which provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling and ceases to provide assistance when a speed of 28 mph is reached.

The operator of a Class 3 electric bicycle:
• Must be 16 years old or older.
• Must wear a bicycle safety helmet.
• Must not transport passengers.
• May ride an electric bicycle in a bicycle lane if authorized by local authority or ordinance.

All electric bicycle classes are exempt from the motor vehicle financial responsibility, driver's license, and license plate requirements (CVC § 24016). 2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 22
169
E-bikes Friend or Foe
APPENDIX 3
California Assembly Bills
Listed below are some of the bills introduced into the State legislature, as published by LegiScan, that have a variety of proposed regulations regarding E-bikes. This is by no means a comprehensive list, and in the interest of brevity we do not include the text of each bill.

AB 458 10/08/2023 Chaptered-Regulation of insurance requirements for businesses renting micro mobility vehicles, a category which includes E-bikes.

AB 1773 04/01/2024 In committee-Where E-bikes are permitted to operate.

AB 1774 04/09/2024. This bill would prohibit a person from selling a product or device that can modify the speed capability of an electric bicycle such that it no longer meets the definition of an electric bicycle.

AB 2234 04/01/2024 In committee: The bill will require anyone over the age of 12 without a valid driver's license to take an online e-bike safety training course and pass a written test to prove they understand traffic safety rules. Those without a valid driver's license must have a state-issued ID to operate an E-bike.

SB 295 06/16/2023 In committee. Allows Public Agency authority to regulate E-bikes, et. al. on public property.

SB 381 10/13/2023 Chaptered-Comprehensive study of E-bikes.

SB 1271 04/11/2024. This bill would clarify that an electric bicycle is a bicycle equipped with fully operable pedals and an electric motor with continuous rated mechanical power of not more than 750 watts. The bill would, if an electric bicycle is capable of operating in multiple modes, require a manufacturer and distributor to include on the label the classification number of the highest classes of which it is capable of operating. Also requires lab accreditation of micro mobility batteries. 2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 23
170
E-bikes Friend or Foe
APPENDIX 4
County of Orange Ordinance No. 18-002

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, CALIFORNIA AMENDING SECTION 2-5-29(n) OF THE CODIFIED ORDINANCES OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, REGARDING PROHIBITED MOTORIZED WHEELED CONVEYANCES.

The Board of Supervisors of the County of Orange ordains as follows:

SECTION 1. Section 2-5-29(n) of the Codified Ordinances of the County of Orange is hereby amended to read as follows:

Sec. 2-5-29.- Vehicle regulation.
(n) Motorized Wheeled Conveyance prohibited. No person shall operate or drive any electric or combustible motorized skateboard, scooter, dirt bike, mini bike, mini motor bike, mini motorcycle, go-kart, go-ped, all-terrain vehicle, quad runner, dune buggy or any similar electric or combustible motorized conveyance in any park, beach or recreational area, with the exception of Class 1 and Class 2 electric bicycles, as defined by the California Vehicle Code, on those regional paved, off-road bikeways designated for such use by the Director of OC Parks, with the approval of the Board of Supen/isors.
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 24
171
California Penal Code Sections §933 and §933.05
CNote: To reduce grand jury requests for additional response information, the grand Jury has bolded those words in §933.05 which should be appropriately included in a response.)
933. (a) Each grand jury shall submit.to the presiding judge of the superior court a final report of its. findings and -recommendations that pertain to county government matters during the fiscal or calendar year. Final reports on any appropriate subject may be submitted to the presiding judge of the superior court at any time during the tenn of service of a grand jury. A final report may be submitted for comment to responsible officers, agencies, or departments, including the county board of supervisors, when applicable, upon finding of the presiding judge that the report is in .compliance with this/title; For. 4S d end of the term, the foreperson and his or her designees shall, upon reasonable notice, be available to clarify the recommendations of the report, _;(b) J3ne,copy:Qf-each.finaLjepj)jt,'jtQgetber responses thereto, found to be in compliance with this title shall be ;: .placed on .file. with the cle.fk;bf.the'court_and remain on file in the office of the clerk. The clerk shall unm'ediately forward a true copy :of the report_a.nd,-.the.:res.pQ.nses to the State Archivist who shall retain that report and all. responses in perpetuity.
.(c) -No later than 90 days after;: the ;grandjury,submits. a final report on the operations of any public agency subject to its ,: -reviewing authority, .the.gpyerning .bodyof-the public agency shall comment to the presiding judge of the superior court -_ :_.:_.- -onthefindings;andTecQmmendatiojii_s.pei^ under the control of the governing body, and eveiy elected - -- county officei^or agency head for vvhic^T the grand juiy has responsibility pursuant t^ shall comment :. .within 6Q;d.ays :to the.-pr.esi.d.il-ig judge of:the:superior court, with an information copy sent to the board of supervisors, on the findings and recomm'endationspertaining to matters under the control of that county officer or agency head and any agency:or:age.ncies_vvhich.that.offic.e.r. or agency head supervises or controls. In any city and county, the mayor .shaUalso comment.onLthe:fin4irigs ancljecommendations. All of these comments and reports shall forthwith be '. -submitted tQ the presiding judge.of-tlie-superior court who impaneled the grand jury, A copy of all responses to grand Jury reports shall be .placed on file:withthe_clerkofthe public agency and the office of the county clerk, or the mayor when.applicable,-and shall remain on file-in those. offices. One copy shall be placed on file with the applicable grand jury final report by, and.in the. co.utrQl of the currently impaneled grand jury, where it shall be maintained for a minimum of five years,
(d) As used in this section "agency" includes a department. 933.03. '(a). For purposes Qf-subdiyiston (.b.);of Section 933, as to each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following;
(1) The respondent agrees with the finding.
:• ;_.<2.) .TherespQndent-.disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion .'qfthe.finding-thatis disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) Fprpurposesofsu..b.div.i.sion.(b) Qf.Secti.o.n.933, as to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity. shall report one of the following actions:
.-_r-:(l):.TheJecoR^e.n.dalioa;h_a^^ with a summary regarding the implemented action. '-.—.-:-(2) ::The_recQmmendation;.has/notyet.b.eeajmp^^ but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation.
...-:(i);_.Th.e.recommeadatio.n-re^:uiFes furthe.ranalysjs, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis -- or study, and at!meframefor-'tlie:matterto be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or \;'\;;.;d&partFnent'be mgmves.ttgated'o.r. reviewed, including the governing body of the public ageacy when applicable, This ,timeframe;shaH not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report. :(4)- The-recommendatipnr-wiU-riQ't.beiirnplemeated because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an eKplanation therefor.
-(c)_';HQwe.ver,-ijE:a.'finding.o.r..r-ec.ommeridatioa'of'the grand juiy addresses budgetary or personnel matters ofacounty :.,, _ :'agency_oi'_de.partmen.t;.headed.by an:-elected offt.cer.,:both the agency or department head and the board of supervisors _:: shalJ:re.spQnd/ifrequ«sted;.by. the .grand Jury., but the response of the board of supervisors shall address only those - budgetary or personnel matters over whic.h it has: some decision making authority. The response of the eTected agency or department held sMl'address._all_as.peets of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department.
(d:) -A grandjuty may lequest-a^subj.ect person or.entity to come before the grand jury for the purpose of reading and ^disGyssmgtMfindLngsofthe;grahd that relates to that person or entity in order to verify the accuracy of the findings prior to their release,
(e) -. During an investigation, the grand jury shall meet with the subject of that investigation regarding the investigation, unless the court, either on its own determination pr upon request of the foreperson of the grand juiy, determines that such a meeting would be detrimental.
(f) Agrand jury shall provide, to the affected agency.acopy of the portion of the grand jury report relating to that person or entity two working days pr.iqr.to itspublic release and after the approval of the presiding judge. No officer, agency, department; or governing body of.a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report priorto the public relsase-of 172
Item 336/2024
Final
City of Garden Grove

INTER-DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM

To:

Lisa L. Kim From: Matt West
Dept:

City Manager Dept: City Manager
Date: 8/13/2024

Subject: Approval to submit a response to the Grand Jury Report, Law Enforcement's Response to Mental Health Calls for Service. (Action Item)

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this report is for the City Council to approve the attached response to the 2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Report, Law Enforcement’s Response to Mental Health Calls for Service, and authorize submittal to the Orange County Grand Jury.

BACKGROUND

On June 5, 2024, the Orange County Grand Jury released its 2023 -24 Grand Jury Report, Law Enforcement’s Response to Mental Health Calls for Service . The purpose of the report was to investigate how Orange County law enforcement leaders, law enforcement educators, and mental health professionals respond to and assist individuals who suffer from mental illness. In compliance with Penal Code 933 and 933.05, the City is required to provide a response to each of the findings directed to the City C ouncil by September 4, 2024.

Specifically, the City is to respond to five findings.

DISCUSSION

Approximately 8.8 million Americans have a severe mental illness such as schizophrenia, severe bi -polar disorder, or major depression with psychiatric features . Without proper treatment, people with severe mental illness are at risk of experiencing negative outcomes that seriously impact them and the people around them. According to the Grand Jury report, approximately one-third of individuals with severe mental illness have their first exposure to mental health treatment through a law enforcement encounter. Consequently, law enforcement officers are often on the front lines of psychiatric care, charged with responding to, addressing, and preventing a mental illness crisis. The Orange County Grand Jury believes that law enforcement in Orange County is a model for training law enforcement personnel on mental health crisis intervention techniques and collaborating with behavioral organizations to improve service and reduce stigma for those affected by mental illness.

The Grand Jury report outlined five findings: (1) Mental health training for law enforcement officers in Orange County exceeds the State’s requirements, resulting in law enforcement 173
Item 336/2024

Page 2 of 2 ends

Garden Grove City CouncilAugust 13, 2024

Garden Grove City Council
August 13, 2024