215 North 5th Street ● Redlands, CA 92374 ● Tel: (909) 307-0046 ● Fax: (909) 307-0056 ● www.ecorpconsulting.com an experienced team of more than 150 CEQA and NEPA specialists, environmental permitting specialists, environmental analysts, terrestrial and aquatic biologists, wetland specialists, paleontologists, archaeologists/cultural resource specialists, air quality/noise analysis specialists, geographic information systems (GIS) specialists, and unmanned aerial systems (UAS-drones) specialists.
PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
The City of Gardena is proposing a series of roadway improvements to Redondo Beach Boulevard (Project). The Project Site includes a 2.1-mile stretch of roadway between Vermont Avenue and Crenshaw Boulevard. The Project includes traffic signal modification, road resurfacing, road reconstruction at spot locations, new raised landscape median installation, curb ramp improvements, sidewalk repair, and curb and gutter repair. The CEQA Lead Agency would be the City of Gardena.
This proposal is for an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) and supporting technical studies.
SCOPE OF WORK
Task 1 – Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis The assessment of air quality and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions will quantify emissions generated by the Proposed Project using the most recent version of the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) software. CalEEMod is a statewide land use emissions computer model designed to quantify pollutant emissions associated with a variety of land use projects. A general description of the phases of construction and its timing will be required. Project criteria air pollutant emissions will be compared to the thresholds of significance promulgated by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), including SCAQMD’s recommended Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs). LSTs were developed in response to SCAQMD Governing Boards' Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative (I-4). Additional CEQA Guidelines Appendix G thresholds will also be evaluated, including the potential for the Proposed Project to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, to cause objectionable odors, or to impede attainment of the current SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan. Project GHG emissions will be assessed against the SCAQMD numeric bright‐line threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO2e annually.
For efficiency and to reduce costs, ECORP proposes to evaluate potential air quality and GHG emission-related impacts in the body of the Initial Study. The analysis will be supported by modeling documentation, which would be included as an appendix to the Initial Study.
Task 1 Deliverables:
♦ Air Quality Initial Study Section
♦ Greenhouse Gas Emissions Initial Study Section
Mr. Gary Solsona
August 29, 2025
(P25-479)
215 North 5th Street ● Redlands, CA 92374 ● Tel: (909) 307-0046 ● Fax: (909) 307-0056 ● www.ecorpconsulting.com Task 2 – Cultural Resources Inventory and Report
ECORP will conduct a cultural resources inventory of the Project Area; an approximately 2.1-mile segment of Redondo Beach Boulevard. The scope of work for the cultural resources inventory includes a records search of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) and literature review for the Project Area, a Sacred Lands File search with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), a pedestrian field survey of the Project Area, and preparation of a cultural resources inventory report. The cultural resources inventory will be conducted under the direct supervision of a Registered Professional Archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for prehistoric and historic archaeology. This study will be conducted pursuant to compliance with CEQA and Section 106 of the NHPA and its implementing regulations in 36 CFR 800.
ECORP will conduct a cultural resources records search of the CHRIS at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) at the California State University, Fullerton campus. The SCCIC is the official repository of cultural resources reports and site records for several counties in southern California, including Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, and Ventura. The CHRIS records search will identify the locations and extent of previous surveys conducted within a half mile (0.5 mile) of the Project Area and will determine if there are any known cultural resources (i.e., prehistoric [precontact] or historic archaeological sites or historic-period features) located within or near the Project Area. In addition, the records search will identify resources listed on or determined eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and/or the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) located within or near the Project Area.
ECORP will request a search of the Sacred Lands File from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The Sacred Lands File search will identify any known sensitive or sacred Native American resources located within or near the Project Area. It should be noted that the Sacred Lands File search will not constitute consultation in compliance with Senate Bill (SB) 18, Assembly Bill (AB) 52, or Section 106 of the NHPA. SB 18, AB 52, and Section 106 consultation are separate processes from cultural technical studies and are not included as part of this scope.
ECORP will seek out and request information from local historical societies in the Project vicinity.
Local historical societies may have information beyond what is held at the Information Center or a search of local and regional historic registries.
ECORP will complete an intensive field survey of the entire approximately 2.1-mile linear Project Area. ECORP will survey all accessible portions of the Project Area using pedestrian transect intervals spaced 10 to 15 meters apart, where possible. The Project Area will be examined for evidence of cultural resources, including pre-contact and historic-period (i.e., over 50 years of age) cultural deposits and features. If any resources are identified in the Project Area, the location and nature of the resources will be preliminarily noted in accordance with the standards of the California Office of Mr. Gary Solsona
August 29, 2025
(P25-479)
215 North 5th Street ● Redlands, CA 92374 ● Tel: (909) 307-0046 ● Fax: (909) 307-0056 ● www.ecorpconsulting.com Historic Preservation (OHP). A cursory review of historic-period maps indicates that Redondo Beach Boulevard is more than 50-years-old, and the Lead Agency may require the road segment be recorded and evaluated. The costs for recording and evaluating this segment of Redondo Beach Boulevard is included below as an optional task. For costing purposes, ECORP assumes that no other cultural resources will need to be recorded. Should additional cultural resources be encountered then a separate scope and cost will be prepared for any recording of these additional resources and evaluation of eligibility to be included in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) or the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) based on the level of effort required.
ECORP will prepare a cultural resources inventory report that is co-compliant with CEQA and Section 106 to document the methods and results of the CHRIS records search, Sacred Lands File search, and field survey. The report will include a brief summary of the environmental setting and cultural background of the Project Area and will describe any cultural resources within the Project Area in detail. The report will also present recommendations for further work, if needed. All correspondence with the NAHC will be provided as attachments to the report.
Task 2 Deliverables:
♦ Draft and Final Cultural Resources Inventory Report
Task 2 Data Needs:
♦ In order to submit a deliverable under the schedule provided above, ECORP will require receipt of the following information:
♦ Boundary files: the client (or its Agent) will provide an AutoCAD file(s) or ESRI shapefile(s) of the project footprint/impact areas as closed polyline or polygon features. ECORP requests that the AutoCAD or ESRI GIS file(s) be provided in a defined and clearly stated coordinate system, with project footprint/impact areas clearly designated on either single layer, or on multiple layers, with clear direction given to what layers constitute the project footprint and or impact areas. ♦ Project description: the client (or its Agent) will provide a written description of the project, including a description of the depths of disturbance and type of activity being proposed, to the level of detail known at the time of contract execution.
Task 3 (OPTIONAL) – Recording and Evaluation of Redondo Beach Boulevard Based on preliminary review, the 2.1-mile-long portion of Redondo Beach Boulevard is more than 50 years old. If the Project will alter Redondo Beach Boulevard, the Lead Agency may require the road to be recorded and evaluated for eligibility for inclusion in the CRHR or NRHP.
ECORP will, under the direction of or by an Architectural Historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s professional standards for architectural historians, record Redondo Beach Boulevard and evaluate it for eligibility for inclusion in the CRHR or NRHP. ECORP will carry out archival research to Mr. Gary Solsona
August 29, 2025
(P25-479)
215 North 5th Street ● Redlands, CA 92374 ● Tel: (909) 307-0046 ● Fax: (909) 307-0056 ● www.ecorpconsulting.com assist in the evaluation of the resource from the historical period. Redondo Beach Boulevard will be recorded using California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) Series 523 forms. The recording and evaluation results of Redondo Beach Boulevard will be included in the Cultural Resources Inventory Report.
Task 4 – Energy Consumption Analysis
ECORP proposes to analyze Project energy consumption in the body of the Initial Study where potential impacts related to Project energy consumption will be assessed against the Office of Planning and Research’s proposed standards of significance: i.e., whether the Project result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy, or wasteful use of energy resources; and, whether the Project would conflict with an applicable plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.
There are no established thresholds of significance, statewide or locally, for what constitutes a wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy for a proposed roadway rehabilitation project. Therefore, for the purposes of this analysis, the amount of energy necessary for Project implementation will be quantified and compared to that consumed in Los Angeles County as a whole. Where appropriate, the analysis would be supported by modeling documentation, which would be included as an appendix to the Initial Study.
Task 4 Deliverables:
♦ Energy Consumption Initial Study Section
Task 5 – Noise Impact Analysis
The evaluation of noise impacts associated with the Project will be completed by staff members who are noise experts. The applicable noise criteria for the Project Area will be discussed for land uses adjacent to, and nearby, the Project Site as they will be the basis for the Project impact determination and whether mitigation is necessary. Since the Project consists of rehabilitation to an existing roadway and associated facilities, baseline noise measurements are not proposed.
Construction would occur during implementation of the Proposed Project. Noise levels from construction sources will be analyzed using the Federal Highway Administration Roadway Construction Noise Model and based on the anticipated equipment to be used. In order to evaluate the potential health-related effects (physical damage to the ear) from construction noise, construction noise will be evaluated in terms of hourly equivalent continuous noise levels (Leq) and the frequency of occurrence at nearby land uses. In addition to construction noise, an analysis of vibration impacts will be prepared based on the California Department of Transportation’s vibration analysis guidance.
The evaluation of the Project’s contribution to noise increases over existing conditions will be addressed. Since the Project is proposing road rehabilitation to an existing roadway, onsite Mr. Gary Solsona
August 29, 2025
(P25-479)
215 North 5th Street ● Redlands, CA 92374 ● Tel: (909) 307-0046 ● Fax: (909) 307-0056 ● www.ecorpconsulting.com operational noise impacts will be addressed qualitatively. Offsite traffic noise would be negligible since the Project would not generate a substantial number of new traffic trips. Therefore, operational traffic noise will also be addressed qualitatively.
ECORP proposes to evaluate potential noise-related impacts in the body of the Initial Study. The analysis will be supported by modeling documentation, which would be included as an appendix to the Initial Study.
Task 5 Deliverables:
♦ Noise Initial Study Section
Task 6 – CEQA Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) Task 6A – Administrative Draft IS/MND
An IS/MND will be prepared using the approved checklist format from the City of Gardena or Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. ECORP will prepare a description of the Project including the location of the project area (including a project map), a brief description of the environmental setting, an identification of environmental effects using the above-referenced checklist format, a brief substantiation of the checklist entries, and a list of references and preparers. ECORP will conduct a literature review including of queries of the latest versions of the CDFW, California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB), and California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants. In addition, range maps of sensitive species, and other site-specific reports regarding biological resources that are relevant to evaluating the biological resources on the site will be reviewed. All sensitive and/or listed species which could occur in the Project Area will be identified. ECORP will conduct a paleontological record search through the Western Science Center for the Proposed Project and a qualified paleontologist will review the results of the record search. A site visit by an Environmental Analyst will be conducted. ECORP will provide mitigation measures (if required) that can be developed using existing data.
Task 6B – Prepare and Distribute Draft IS/MND
After receipt of one (1) set of integrated comments on the Administrative Draft IS/MND from the City, ECORP will prepare a complete Draft IS/MND. Following City review, ECORP will make any necessary changes and the document will be mailed to addressees on the City’s CEQA mailing list and to the State Clearinghouse. ECORP will also prepare the Notice of Intent (NOI) to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Notice of Completion (NOC) and file them with the Los Angeles County Clerk and the State Clearinghouse, as appropriate. The NOI will be published in the newspaper.
Mr. Gary Solsona
August 29, 2025
(P25-479)
215 North 5th Street ● Redlands, CA 92374 ● Tel: (909) 307-0046 ● Fax: (909) 307-0056 ● www.ecorpconsulting.com Task 6C – Final IS/MND and MMRP
The Lead Agency (City) must consider any comments received on the IS/MND when making a decision on the Project. A Final IS/MND will be prepared and will include copies of the comment letters, responses to the comments, any errata, or other changes to the Draft IS/MND, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP, if required). For costing, we have assumed that five (5) comment letters containing four (4) comments each will be received (or a total of 20 comments). A Notice of Determination (NOD) will also be prepared and filed. It has been assumed that the City/Client will pay any fees associated with the NOD and these fees are not included in our cost estimates. The NOD fee effective January 1, 2025 is $2,968.75. The County Clerk filing fee is $75.
Task 6 Deliverables:
♦ Electronic submittal of the Administrative Draft, Draft, and Final IS/MND ♦ Five (5) bound copies and one (1) electronic copy of the Draft and Final IS/MND for City use ♦ Five (5) copies of the Draft IS/MND and up to fifty (50) copies of the NOI to mailing list ♦ Electronic upload of the IS/MND, notices, and State Clearinghouse summary form to the CEQA Database
♦ NOI, NOC, and NOD
SCHEDULE
ECORP is confident that we can meet the expected time frame of the completion of the IS/MND according to the schedule below. This schedule can be modified based on the needs of the client or the City. We propose to prepare the Administrative Draft IS/MND concurrently with the technical studies to stay on schedule. The technical studies refer to Tasks 1 through 5 of this proposal and any other technical studies (e.g. traffic studies) prepared for the project that would be incorporated into the IS/MND. The technical studies will need to be completed prior to the Draft IS/MND (Task 6B) being completed and the start of the 30-day public review period. The schedule is estimated at 6 to 8 months.
Table 1 – Schedule
Tasks Time Frame for Completion
Task 1 – Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis 7 weeks from receipt of requested data Task 2 – Cultural Resources Inventory 16 weeks from receipt of requested data1 Task 3 (Optional) – Recording and Evaluation of Redondo Beach Boulevard 16 weeks from receipt of requested data1
Task 4 – Energy Consumption Analysis 7 weeks from receipt of requested data Task 5 – Noise Impact Assessment 7 weeks from receipt of requested data Mr. Gary Solsona
August 29, 2025
(P25-479)
215 North 5th Street ● Redlands, CA 92374 ● Tel: (909) 307-0046 ● Fax: (909) 307-0056 ● www.ecorpconsulting.com Tasks Time Frame for Completion
Task 6A – Administrative Draft IS/MND 17 weeks from receipt of project description and completed site plan
City Review 2 weeks
Task 6B – Prepare and Distribute Draft IS/MND and Notices 2 weeks from receipt of City/Client comments Public/Agency Review 30 calendar days
Task 6C – Final IS/MND, MMRP, and Notice of Determination 3 weeks from end of public review period City Review 2 weeks
Notice of Determination Filed with the Los Angeles County Clerk within 5 business days of MND adoption
Notes: 1 = ECORP was notified by several Information Centers of the California Historical Resources Information System and California Native American Heritage Commission of expected delays in processing or scheduling records search requests as a result of staffing shortages. As a result, the schedule of completion of work under this task may be affected. ECORP will keep the Client apprised of any schedule implications as they become known, but will not be held responsible for delays to the project as a result of delays outside of ECORP’s control.
COST ESTIMATE
This scope of work will be performed on a time-and-materials basis as detailed in Table 2.
Table 2 – Cost Breakdown
Activity Cost ($)
Technical Studies
Task 1 – Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis $4,081 Task 2 – Cultural Resources Inventory and Report $10,600 Task 4 – Energy Consumption Analysis $1,060
Task 5 – Noise Impact Analysis $3,498
Task 6 – CEQA Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) Task 6A – Administrative Draft IS/MND $23,638
Task 6B – Prepare and Distribute Draft IS/MND (includes NOI and NOC) $6,625 Task 6C – Final IS/MND and MMRP (includes Responses to Comments and NOD) $5,936 TOTAL COST (without optional task) $55,438
OPTIONAL TASK
Task 3 (OPTIONAL) – Recording and Evaluation of Redondo Beach Boulevard $2,544 TOTAL COST (with optional task) $57,982
Costing Assumptions
♦ Work will begin subsequent to ECORP’s receipt of the fully executed agreement. ♦ Cost and schedule estimates are based on our best judgment of the requirements known at the time of the proposal and can be influenced favorably or adversely by Client needs and other circumstances, including agency or other delays. ECORP will perform the services and accomplish Mr. Gary Solsona
August 29, 2025
(P25-479)
215 North 5th Street ● Redlands, CA 92374 ● Tel: (909) 307-0046 ● Fax: (909) 307-0056 ● www.ecorpconsulting.com the objectives within the presented costs and schedule. However, if the scope of work or schedule changes, ECORP will offer separate proposals for any out-of-scope work. ♦ ECORP Consulting, Inc., assumes that, by receipt of notice to proceed, full access to the property will be provided by the Client, including keys to locked gates and advance notice to existing property tenants of our right of entry.
♦ Archaeological test programs and evaluation of historic period buildings are not included in the scope of work. Should these services be required, they will be separately negotiated. ♦ This scope does not include costs for consultation with Native American groups and/or the State Historic Preservation Office. If these services are required (i.e., in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and/or SB-18), a separate scope and cost will be provided based on the necessary level of effort.
♦ In compliance with the terms of agreement between ECORP and the California Office of Historic Preservation, one unbound copy of the final report will be submitted to the appropriate confidential Information Center within 60 days of completion, where it will be archived and remain confidential (accessible only by qualified archaeologists; note that this is required, regardless of project status, and does not affect project approval). ♦ Cultural resources location information is exempt from the California Public Records Act and Freedom of Information Act, and therefore, reports that include site location information are considered confidential and are not intended for public distribution. ♦ ECORP was notified by several Information Centers of the California Historical Resources Information System and California Native American Heritage Commission of expected delays in processing or scheduling records search requests as a result of staffing shortages. As a result, the schedule of completion of work under this task may be affected. ECORP will keep the Client apprised of any schedule implications as they become known, but will not be held responsible for delays to the project as a result of delays outside of ECORP’s control. ♦ It is assumed that ECORP Consulting, Inc., can use and rely on the data and information contained in the project related documents provided by the Client. ECORP Consulting, Inc., will not perform a technical review of these documents, and will not be responsible for the content or accuracy of these studies.
♦ Change orders will be issued and signed by the Client and ECORP Consulting, Inc., before starting additional work not provided for in the original proposal. If the Client's authorized representative is not available for a signature, the additional out-of-scope work will not commence until the change order is signed.
♦ This cost is valid for a period of 90 days from the date of this the proposal. Beyond 90 days, ECORP Consulting, Inc., reserves the right to reevaluate the cost.
Mr. Gary Solsona
August 29, 2025
(P25-479)
215 North 5th Street ● Redlands, CA 92374 ● Tel: (909) 307-0046 ● Fax: (909) 307-0056 ● www.ecorpconsulting.com ♦ Color copies, equipment, and other direct expenses are reimbursed with a 14% administrative handling charge (excluding mileage). These charges are included in the cost estimate, above. ♦ Mileage is reimbursed at the current IRS rate. These charges are included in the cost estimate, above.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit this proposal. If you have any questions regarding this proposal, please contact me at (909) 307-0046 or [email protected].
Sincerely,
ECORP Consulting, Inc.
Jesus “Freddie” Olmos
Principal Environmental Planner
Southern California Regional CEQA/NEPA Group Manager
Jesus “Freddie” Olmos
Principal Environmental Planner
Mr. Olmos’ 25 years of professional experience (19 with ECORP) involves California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis and document preparation for government agencies and private clients. He has prepared and managed a variety of environmental documents, including Initial Studies/Mitigated Negative Declarations (IS/MNDs), Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs), Environmental Impact Statements (EISs), Environmental Assessments (EAs), and Findings of No Significant Impact (FONSIs), including Addendum CEQA/NEPA documentation. While his experience focuses on environmental report writing and permit preparation, he also has experience with biological resources monitoring and surveying for public facilities construction and research projects.
Proficient in oral and written Spanish. Mr. Olmos is experienced in the bilingual English-Spanish translation of notices, documents, and handouts for CEQA and biological/cultural resources projects.
Education
B.A., Environmental Analysis & Design, with a minor in Urban & Regional Planning, University of California, Irvine
Registrations, Certifications, Permits and Affiliations Advanced NEPA Workshop, National Association of Environmental Professionals, 2020 Caltrans Environmental Compliance Training Course for Local Agency Partners and Consultants – Categorical Exemptions and Categorical Exclusions, Caltrans, 2013 OSHA 24-Hour HAZWOPER Training, 2008
Association of Environmental Professionals
American Planning Association, Member
Professional Experience
CEQA/NEPA and Caltrans Environmental Documentation for the Ontario Avenue Widening Project, Riverside County – City of Corona as a Subconsultant to KOA/Lochner. Project Manager for the CEQA IS/MND, NEPA CE, and associated technical studies. The City of proposed to widen Ontario Avenue at Interstate 15 (I-15) from the intersection of Ontario Avenue with Compton Avenue to the intersection of Ontario Avenue with State Street. The improvements were intended to address existing and future traffic deficiencies associated with existing and future commercial and residential development in the City. The City applied for a federal Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) Grant adminstered by the Caltrans Local Assistance Program. ECORP prepared the Natural Environment Study – Minimal Impacts (NES-MI), Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Assessment, Noise Analysis Report, Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Cultural Resources documents (APE, ASR, HPSR), and Paleontological Jesus “Freddie” Olmos (Continued)
Assessment. All documents were prepared per Caltrans' Local Asssistance Procedures Manual and Standard Environmental Reference in an expedited timeframe to meet funding requirements set by Caltrans and the RAISE Grant.
Improvements on State Route 74 (SR-74) and the Interstate 15 (I-15) Ramp Intersections, Riverside County – City of Lake Elsinore as a Subconsultant to MetroPointe Engineers. Project Manager for the preparation of a Preliminary Environmental Assessment Report (PEAR) and an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND). A PEAR and an IS/MND were prepared in support of the proposed project’s Project Study Report/Project Report (PSR/PR). A supporting air quality technical study was also prepared. The City of Lake Elsinore proposed roadway improvements at the SR-74/I-15 Interchange. Traffic from approved commercial projects adjacent to Central Avenue (SR-74) and the east and west side of I-15 have caused the need to build Central Avenue to general plan standards and widen the ramp intersections.
The estimated cost of the improvements is $1.8 million, which the City of Lake Elsinore will fund. The environmental documents were prepared according to City and Caltrans standards.
Bellflower Boulevard/Imperial Highway Improvements Project, Los Angeles County – City of Downey as a Subconsultant to KFM Engineering. Project Manager for CEQA IS/MND for the improvement of the Bellflower Boulevard/Imperial Highway intersection in the City of Downey. The Proposed Project included the construction of right-turn lanes in the eastbound, southbound, and northbound approaches and the reconstruction of all four curb returns to provide 50-foot radii. The goal of this project was to accommodate an increase in projected traffic volume growth, improve the level of service (LOS) to acceptable levels, and allow for safe truck movements.
Milligan Drive Bridge Renovation Project, Orange County – City of Laguna Beach as a Subconsultant to Ardurra. Project Manager. ECORP prepared cultural resources documents in support of a Caltrans encroachment permit and CEQA Categorical Exemption (CE) for the renovation of the Milligan Drive Bridge at Laguna Canyon Road. Before the concrete channel was constructed the crossing at the location of the existing bridge was a ditch with a low flow crossing. The bridge was constructed within the area that was filled at the time of the channel construction. The project grading was either filled or excavation within the fill placed in 1957 when the concrete channel was constructed. Due to the historic age of the bridge the following cultural documents were prepared by ECORP per Caltrans standards: Project Area Limits (PAL) Map, Archaeological Survey Report (ASR), Historical Resources Evaluation Report (HRER), and a Historical Resources Compliance Report (HRCR). The HRCR also included the findings required by Caltrans for compliance with CEQA and for state-owned resources under Public Resources Code (PRC) 5024.
Jeronimo Road Streetscape Project, Orange County – City of Lake Forest, as a Subconsultant to NUVIS Landscape Architecture & Planning. Project Manager for the CEQA Initial Study and Environmental Information Form for this streetscape improvement project. ECORP prepared a CEQA Initial Study for the construction of a raised median with meandering rock and planting pockets, planting improvements to the parkway, and a new irrigation system along Jeronimo Road from Los Alisos Boulevard to El Toro Road in the City of Lake Forest.
www.ecorpconsulting.com
FEE SCHEDULE FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
ECORP Consulting, Inc. – 2025 Rates
Classification1 ........................................................................................................................Rate/Hour Principal V ............................................................................................................................................... $420 Principal IV .............................................................................................................................................. $350 Principal III............................................................................................................................................... $300 Principal II................................................................................................................................................ $255 Principal I................................................................................................................................................. $240 Professional XI......................................................................................................................................... $255 Professional X.......................................................................................................................................... $235 Professional IX......................................................................................................................................... $215 Professional VIII ...................................................................................................................................... $200 Professional VII ....................................................................................................................................... $185 Professional VI ........................................................................................................................................ $175 Professional V ......................................................................................................................................... $165 Professional IV ........................................................................................................................................ $150 Professional III......................................................................................................................................... $140 Professional II.......................................................................................................................................... $130 Professional I........................................................................................................................................... $120 Technician IV........................................................................................................................................... $115 Technician III ........................................................................................................................................... $110 Technician II ............................................................................................................................................ $100 Technician I ............................................................................................................................................... $90 Project Admin III...................................................................................................................................... $130 Project Admin II....................................................................................................................................... $110 Project Admin I........................................................................................................................................ $100 1 Technical and Professional classifications include biologists, regulatory permitting specialists, archaeologists, architectural historians, paleontologists, air quality/greenhouse gas specialists, noise specialists, planners, CEQA/NEPA specialists, UAS pilots, and other technical professionals.
Expense Reimbursement/Other:
1. Computers, facsimile, and telephone are included in the billing rates, and there is no additional charge.
2. Reproduction, equipment and other direct expenses are reimbursed at cost plus a 14% administrative handling charge (excluding mileage).
3. The hourly rates for Subconsultants will be billed at the hourly rate indicated, plus a 12% administrative handling charge.
4. Mileage will be billed at the current IRS rate, adjusted annually.
5. Per Diem, depending upon location, may be charged where overnight stays are required.
6. Expert Witness Testimony, including Depositions, is billed at time and a half.
7. Non-standard invoicing will be billed at the hourly rates for support personnel.
8. Hourly rates will escalate at a rate of 3% per annum. eCPR Public Search
Public Works Support
Contractors
Projects
Services
Your information
KK
KK Kathy Kondor Kondor
Logout
Home Customer Account Lookup ECORP CONSULTING, INC.
Search
ECORP CONSULTING, INC.
Customer Account Lookup
Name
ECORP CONSULTING, INC.
Customer Account
Type
ECORP CONSULTING, INC.
Contractor
Website
(empty)
Email
[email protected]
Address 1
2525 Warren Drive
Address_2
City
Rocklin
State
CA
Zip
95677
Contractor Status
2/7/25, 9:15 AM ECORP CONSULTING, INC.
https://services.dir.ca.gov/gsp?id=dir_public_form&table=x_cdoi2_csm_portal_customer_account_lookup&sys_id=d06457e9fbd30250a371f89ebeefdc… 1/2 Related Lists
Historical Registration Dates 1
CSLB
Legal Name
ECORP CONSULTING, INC.
Business Structure
Business Phone
7146480630
Registration Number
President
Bjorn Gregersen
PWCR
1000012875
Registration Start Date
2024-07-01
Registration End Date
2026-06-30
Doing Business As (DBA)
Crafts
Legacy Registration Date
2024-07-01
Legacy Registration Expiration
2026-06-30
DIR Approved
Corporation - S corp
Terms & Conditions
Privacy Policy
Disclaimer
Nondiscrimination Notice
Accessibility
dir.ca.gov
Copyright 2024 State of California
2/7/25, 9:15 AM ECORP CONSULTING, INC.
https://services.dir.ca.gov/gsp?id=dir_public_form&table=x_cdoi2_csm_portal_customer_account_lookup&sys_id=d06457e9fbd30250a371f89ebeefdc… 2/2 City of Gardena
Gardena City Council
Meeting
AGENDA REPORT
SUMMARY
Agenda Item No. 16D.
Section: DEPARTMENTAL
ITEMS - PUBLIC WORKS
Meeting Date: October 14,
2025
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE GARDENA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TITLE: Public Hearing: Resolution No. 6714, Public Electric Vehicle Charging Rates, Adopt Resolution 6714 to Establish a Fee for Public Electric Vehicle Charging Stations, Approve Electric Vehicle Charging Rates and Approve Matrix Consulting Group to Complete a Fee Study for $10,000 in Addition to 10% Contingency, for a total of $11,000
COUNCIL ACTION REQUIRED:
Staff Recommendation:
Conduct the Public Hearing
Allow each Speaker Three (3) Minutes
Staff Recommendation for Motion:
Adopt Resolution 6714
Approve Electric Vehicle Charging Rates
Approve Matrix Consulting Group's Fee Study
RECOMMENDATION AND STAFF SUMMARY:
Southern California Edison (SCE) is in the process of installing the infrastructure to support the City’s 71 Public Electric Vehicle (EV) Chargers. These will be installed at Rowley Park, Arthur Johnson Park and the Parking Lot next to the Police Department on 162nd Street. Once installed, the public will be able to use these EV chargers.
Staff is requesting the City Council approve the charging rates for the public EV chargers.
The City will only charge users for the costs incurred by the City for the EV chargers which consists of the cost for electricity the vehicle obtains from the EV charger and the $0.03/kWh for the contractor’s fee.
In regards to the cost for the electricity, SCE’s EV Time of Use rate varies depending on the time of day. The amount varies from peak to off peak hours. During the summer, the rates currently range from $0.23/kWh to $0.64/kWh. During the winter, the rates currently range from $0.13/kWh to $0.44/kWh.
The table below shows the total rates that would be charged, based on SCE’s current rates, which will change over time. The City will continue to pass through the cost from SCE based on any changes to their rates.
Summer Weekdays - June to September
Time of Day Cost of Electricity Noodoe Fee Total
9 PM to 4 PM $0.23/kWh $0.03/kWh $0.26/kWh
4 PM to 9 PM $0.64/kWh $0.03/kWh $0.67/kWh
Summer Weekend - June to September
Time of Day Cost of Electricity Noodoe Fee Total
9 PM to 4 PM $0.23/kWh $0.03/kWh $0.26/kWh
4 PM to 9 PM $0.40/kWh $0.03/kWh $0.43/kWh
Winter - October to May
Time of Day Cost of Electricity Noodoe Fee Total
9 PM to 8 AM $0.25/kWh $0.03/kWh $0.28/kWh
8 AM to 4 PM $0.13/kWh $0.03/kWh $0.16/kWh
4 PM to 9 PM $0.44/kWh $0.03/kWh $0.47/kWh
The City’s proposed EV charging rates are significantly lower than commercial charging stations in the area. The rates for other charging stations in the City are shown below.
EVgo located on Normandie Ave and Redondo Beach Blvd – $0.59/kWh to $0.74/kWh US Bank located on Western Ave and Redondo Beach Blvd – $0.69/kWh EVgo located on Vermont Ave and Redondo Beach Blvd – $0.52/kWh to $0.73/kWh Target located on Van Ness Ave and Redondo Beach Blvd – $0.48/kWh to $0.72/kWh The City is also entitled to be compensated for the initial costs to purchase the chargers, and for the ongoing maintenance and operation costs for the chargers. After data is gathered based on the amount of usage of the electric vehicle chargers, Matrix Consulting Group will conduct a fee study to determine what rates the City should charge users per kWh. The fee study will be $10,000 in addition to 10% contingency. Matrix Consulting Group recently conducted fee studies for other local municipalities as well and is the subject matter expert.
Staff is requesting the City Council conduct the public hearing, allow each speaker three (3) minutes to speak, adopt resolution 6714, approve EV Charging rates and approve Matrix Consulting Group’s Fee Study in the amount of $10,000, plus a 10% contingency, for a total of $11,000.
At this time, Staff is requesting the City Council conduct the Public Hearing and allow three (3) minutes for each speaker.
FISCAL IMPACT/COST:
Pass through for EV Charging rate for electricity and maintenance Consultant Fee Study - $11,000 from General Fund
APPROVED:
___________________________
Clint Osorio, City Manager
Attachments
2025 EV Charging Fee Public Notice.pdf
Resolution 6714.pdf
City of Gardena EV Charging Rates.pdf
Matrix Consulting Group EV Charging Rate Proposal.pdf
CITY OF GARDENA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN as required by Section 6062a of the Government Code, the City Council of the City of Gardena will conduct a public hearing to receive and consider all evidence and reports presented relating to the adoption of Resolution No. 6714 to establish and/or adjust citywide fees and services charges, for which users make a direct payment proportionate to the services rendered. A copy of the fee schedule is on file in the City Clerk’s Office.
The public hearing will be held on Tuesday, October 14, 2025, commencing at 7:30 PM. in the City Council Chambers of City Hall located at 1700 W. 162nd Street, Gardena.
The proposed fee schedule are available for public review at the Office of the City Clerk, 1700 W 162nd Street, Gardena, CA 90247, Monday to Thursday 7:30 AM - 5:30 PM, Friday 7:30AM - 4:30PM or electronically on the City’s website at https://cityofgardena.org/pw-permits-fees/.
All interested persons are notified to attend and express their opinions on this topic. Any person wishing to testify may file a written statement by email to the Deputy City Clerk at [email protected] by 5:00 PM of the public hearing date, and/or may appear and be heard at said public hearing.
If you challenge the nature of the proposed actions in court, you will be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raises at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Gardena City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing.
This notice is dated the 25th day of September 2025.
1 RESOLUTION NO. 6714
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF GARDENA, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING A FEE
FOR PUBLIC ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING
STATIONS
WHEREAS, the City of Gardena bears the costs associated with electric vehicle charging stations, and;
WHEREAS, such electric vehicle charging stations are used by the public, and; WHEREAS, the City desires to charge a fee for the use of such electric vehicle charging stations, which does not exceed the reasonable cost of providing the service, and;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GARDENA, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE, AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council hereby adopts an electric vehicle charging station fee based on the kWh rate of electricity Southern California Edison is charging in addition to the $0.03/kWh fee for the contractor’s expense, effective November 14, 2025. The Council hereby directs the City Clerk to revise the City’s Master Fee Schedule accordingly.
SECTION 2. The adoption of this Resolution approves a charge for the purpose of meeting the direct cost of electricity and the contractor’s fee for the electric vehicle charging stations for public use and is therefore exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code 21080 et seq., pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21080(b)(8)(A) and Section 15273(a)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution; shall cause the same to be entered among the original Resolutions of said City; and shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council of said City in the minutes of the meeting at which the same is passed and adopted.
Passed, approved, and adopted this 14 day of October , 2025.
Docusign Envelope ID: 7A3DB9EB-7EE4-4CE2-A23D-CD2FD63F2DA4 RESOLUTION NO. 6714
2 TASHA CERDA, Mayor
ATTEST:
MINA SEMENZA, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CARMEN VASQUEZ, City Attorney
Docusign Envelope ID: 7A3DB9EB-7EE4-4CE2-A23D-CD2FD63F2DA4 City of Gardena
Electric Vehicle Rates
Summer Weekdays – June to September
Time of Day Cost of Electricity Noodoe Fee Total
9 pm to 4 pm $0.23/kWh $0.03/kWh $0.26/kWh
4 pm to 9 pm $0.64/kWh $0.03/kWh $0.67/kWh
Summer Weekend – June to September
Time of Day Cost of Electricity Noodoe Fee Total
9 pm to 4 pm $0.23/kWh $0.03/kWh $0.26/kWh
4 pm to 9 pm $0.40/kWh $0.03/kWh $0.43/kWh
Winter – October to May
Time of Day Cost of Electricity Noodoe Fee Total
9 pm to 8 am $0.25/kWh $0.03/kWh $0.28/kWh
8 am to 4 pm $0.13/kWh $0.03/kWh $0.16/kWh
4 pm to 9 pm $0.44/kWh $0.03/kWh $0.47/kWh
MATRIX CONSULTING GROUP
1875 S Grant Street, Suite 960
San Mateo, CA 94402
August 15, 2025
Hong Lee
Program Coordinator
City of Gardena
1717 West 162nd St.
Gardena, CA 90247
Dear Ms. Lee:
Matrix Consulting Group is pleased to submit this quote to conduct a cost-of-service analysis for Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Stations for the City of Gardena. We have worked with many jurisdictions on calculating these costs – Los Altos, Pacific Grove, Redwood City, and most recently, Manhattan Beach. It is our understanding that the City is considering the acquisition of EV charging stations and seeks to determine the appropriate rate to assess once the stations are installed and operational for at least 6 months to 1 year.
The following sections provide an outline of the services to be performed, a schedule of work, and a fixed-price quote.
SCOPE OF WORK
The City is looking to determine the actual cost of providing EV charging stations to the public, which would include maintenance, electricity usage, and annual replacement costs. While these fees are not subject to the same Proposition 26 and 218 guidelines as user fees, the City needs to consider the full cost of the service when setting the EV charging rate. To accomplish this assessment, we would take the following steps:
v Data Collection and Analysis: The project team would request data needs such as the number of anticipated charging stations, spaces, hours allowed, maintenance contracts, and or anticipated cost, total anticipated electricity usage, and replacement costs. v Draft EV Fee Structure: Discuss with staff an appropriate fee structure, such as a singular fee per hour or varied fees based upon the type of charging station and facility available, hours of usage, and the concept of “idle” charging.
v Calculate Draft EV Fees: Based upon the direct costs of EV (maintenance, electricity, replacement) and indirect costs (overhead for administering the program), we would calculate the full cost per kilowatt hour.
v Draft Memo: Develop a draft memo that outlines the scope of the study, the methodology, and the draft rate(s) calculated.
QUOTE TO CONDUCT EV FEE ANALYSIS
MATRIX CONSULTING GROUP 2
v Final Memo and Rates: Finalize the memo and EV Charging rates based upon feedback from City staff.
v Presentation (Optional): If needed, we will present the findings of the analysis at one (1) Council meeting.
Conducting this study will allow the City to have a better understanding of the cost of providing these services and options for appropriately passing that cost on to the users of those services.
SCHEDULE
Studies of this nature typically take approximately 8-10 weeks to complete. This includes the time for gathering data, as well as reviewing assumptions and revisiting data collection. All timelines can be developed and adjusted per City staff schedules, availability, and goals. If needed, stakeholder presentations would occur after finalizing the methodology.
PRICE
We could perform this EV Charging Fee assessment at the level of detail described in the project task section of this quote for a fixed price of $10,000. Please note this price assumes no onsite meetings or presentations. If any on-site work or the optional presentation is needed, that would be billed at $500 per trip. Our typical approach to invoicing is monthly, up to the total contract amount.
Our typical practice is to bill for hours worked monthly, with our contracts set up at a fixed price. We are also open to billing on a task or deliverable basis.
* * *
We appreciate the opportunity to provide services to the City of Gardena. Should you have any questions regarding this quote, don't hesitate to get in touch with me at [email protected] or by phone at 650- 858-0507. Thank you.
Courtney Ramos
COURTNEY RAMOS
Senior Vice President
Matrix Consulting Group
City of Gardena
Gardena City Council
Meeting
AGENDA REPORT
SUMMARY
Agenda Item No. 16E.
Section: DEPARTMENTAL
ITEMS - PUBLIC WORKS
Meeting Date: October 14,
2025
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE GARDENA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TITLE: Award Contract for the Public Works Building HVAC Replacement Project, JN 570, to Thermal Concepts, Inc. in the amount of $103,209; Approve Budget Appropriation and Project Contingency; and Declare California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Exemption
COUNCIL ACTION REQUIRED:
Staff Recommendations:
Approve Construction Contract
Approve Budget Appropriation
Approve Project Contingency
Declare CEQA Exemption
RECOMMENDATION AND STAFF SUMMARY:
The Heating, Ventilation & Air Conditioning (HVAC) system in the Public Works Main Building has experienced multiple failures over the past year. The existing rooftop unit (RTU), original to the building constructed in 1990, has significantly deteriorated. Some of its components are no longer available, and the unit is currently operating at reduced capacity, with the main circuit not fully functional.
Although several maintenance repairs have been attempted over the past year, replacement of the RTU — or at minimum, its coil — is now necessary. However, the cost to replace the coil alone is approximately half the cost of replacing the entire unit and would not include a warranty due to the unit's age. Therefore, staff recommends full replacement of the rooftop unit.
To that end, staff solicited quotes for the removal of the existing unit and installation of a new 20-ton rooftop unit at the Public Works Building. Proposals were received from the following contractors:
Organization Bid Amount
1. Thermal Concepts, Inc., Chino $103,209
2. Allison Mechanical, Inc., Redlands $115,000
3. FM Thomas Air Conditioning, Inc., Brea $123,758
The lowest responsible bidder, Thermal Concepts, Inc., is a licensed contractor with a solid performance history and has successfully completed several previous projects for the City.
Staff respectfully recommend that City Council award the construction contract for the Public Works Building HVAC Replacement Project, JN 570, to Thermal Concepts, Inc. in the amount of $103,209, and additionally:
1. Approve a budget appropriation of $103,209 from Deferred Maintenance Funds for the contract award.
2. Approve a 15% project contingency in the amount of $15,500 to cover unforeseen conditions that may arise due to the age and condition of the existing equipment.
3. Declare the project categorically exempt under CEQA, pursuant to Class 1, Section 5301(d), as it involves the rehabilitation of existing facilities.
FISCAL IMPACT/COST:
Source of Funds
Budget Appropriation
(Deferred Maintenance Funds)
$118,709
Total $118,709
Estimated Expenditures
Construction Contract Award $103,209
15% Project Contingency $15,500
Total $118,709
APPROVED:
___________________________
Clint Osorio, City Manager
Attachments
JN 570_CEQA Notice of Exemption.pdf
Thermal_Concepts_Inc._Contract_AATF - TCI Signed Final.pdf
NOTICE OF EXEMPTION
Project Title: Public Works Building HVAC Replacement Project, JN570.
Project Location (Specific): 1717 W. 162nd Street
Project Location (City): Gardena Location (County): Los Angeles County Description of nature, purpose and beneficiaries of project: The project involves removal of the existing unit which has deteriorated due to age and installation of a new roof top unit. Beneficiary: staff and general public.
Name of public agency approving project: City of Gardena Name of person or agency carrying out project: City of Gardena Exempt Status: (Check One)
Ministerial: (P.R.C. Sec. 21080[b][1]; Guidelines Sec. 15268) Declared Emergency: (P.R.C. Sec. 21080[b][3]; Guidelines Sec. 15269[a]) Emergency Project (P.R.C. Sec. 21080[b][4]; Guidelines Sec. 15269[b][c]) X Categorical Exemption: Section 15301 Class 1, Existing Facilities Other: Guidelines Sec. 15061):
_______________________________________________________________________ Reason why project is exempt: Rehabilitation of existing Public Works HVAC Unit.
Contact person: Kevin Kwak Telephone: 310-217-9643
If filed by applicant:
1. Attach certified document of exempting finding.
2. Has a notice of exemption been filed by the public agency approving the project? Yes No
Date received for filing:
Clint Osorio Date
Environmental Quality Officer
NOTE: Exempt from Dept. of Fish & Game Wildlife Fee in accordance with de minimis impact finding (735.5[c])
Chris Parra / Secretary
10/08/2025
James Salgado / President
City of Gardena
Gardena City Council
Meeting
AGENDA REPORT
SUMMARY
Agenda Item No. 18A.
Section: DEPARTMENTAL
ITEMS -
TRANSPORTATION
Meeting Date: October 14,
2025
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE GARDENA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TITLE: Approve Contract for the Customization of Maintenance Service Truck for a Contract Total of $104,365.50 and a Project Total of $114,802.05
COUNCIL ACTION REQUIRED:
Staff Recommendation: Approve Contract
RECOMMENDATION AND STAFF SUMMARY:
In January 2025, GTrans purchased a Ford Super Duty F-350XL maintenance service truck using a California purchasing cooperative from Watsonville Fleet Group. This vehicle will replace the existing service truck originally purchased in 2002, having reached 23 years in service and over 65,000 miles. The purchase was made under the City Manager's purchasing authority threshold of $50,000. The new vehicle is now on-site.
These types of vehicles are typically purchased as base models, and then the work of customization or "upfitting" the specialized equipment may be contracted to a third party. With the vehicle in place, GTrans is ready to upfit the vehicle for use in the field to support its fleet operations. GTrans' maintenance service truck is essentially a mobile workshop designed to transport tools, equipment and spare parts needed to support GTrans' fleet of buses and other vehicles in the field. These specialized vehicles are essential for our mechanics to perform some on-site services, reducing downtime by enabling quick, on-the-spot fixes for broken equipment and hauling materials like fuel and lubricants.
The work of upfitting the maintenance shop truck is available through a Sourcewell purchasing cooperative agreement from National Auto Fleet Group, with the work performed by their subcontractor, California Truck Equipment Co. The Sourcewell cooperative allows GTrans to procure goods and services jointly with other participants in purchasing cooperatives to obtain better pricing through volume purchases. National Auto Fleet Group will provide and install components such as locked compartments for equipment storage, hose reels, 10 and 20 gallon storage tanks/pumps (for engine oil, automatic transmission fluid and coolant), air compressor, drain tanks, tie downs, tommy liftgate, trailer equipment, a 10-LED strobe system, light bar, two 24-volt jump start systems with auxiliary battery and power connectors, metal cab protector, etc.
The price to complete this work is $104,365.50 inclusive of sales tax and fees. Staff has reviewed the pricing and determined it to be fair and reasonable. GTrans wishes to include a 10 percent contingency of $10,436.55, to accommodate any unforeseen expenditures or additions that may be required. Such expenditures would not be allowed unless agreed upon in advance by GTrans management. The total project cost with recommended contingency is $114,802.05.
Therefore, staff respectfully requests that the City Council approve the installation contract for the upfitting of GTrans' maintenance service truck with National Auto Fleet Group, at a cost of $104,365.50 and a project total of $114,802.05, which includes a 10 percent contingency.
FISCAL IMPACT/COST:
GTrans has capital funds in the FY26 budget, previously approved by City Council for this purchase. There is no impact to the General Fund.
APPROVED:
___________________________
Clint Osorio, City Manager
Attachments
National Auto Fleet Group Quote #32780.pdf
City of Gardena
Gardena City Council
Meeting
AGENDA REPORT
SUMMARY
Agenda Item No. 18B.
Section: DEPARTMENTAL
ITEMS -
TRANSPORTATION
Meeting Date: October 14,
2025
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE GARDENA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TITLE: Authorization to Lease-to-Own One (1) 2025 Volkswagen ID. Buzz Vehicle from Enterprise Fleet Management with a Down Payment in the Amount of $74,383.06, and Monthly Fees Over a 60-Month Period in the Amount of $11,761.00 for a Total Requested Amount of $86,144.06 COUNCIL ACTION REQUIRED:
Staff Recommendation: Approve Purchase
RECOMMENDATION AND STAFF SUMMARY:
As GTrans continues to expand its zero-emission fleet of revenue vehicles in compliance with California's environmental and air quality regulations, GTrans is also pursuing zero-emission vehicles for our non-revenue light duty vehicles. We are seeking a fully electric minivan that supports our zero-emission sustainability goals, while also meeting our needs for transporting multiple people and larger items to outreach events and meetings. The Volkswagen ID. Buzz meets these needs and stands out as the only fully electric minivan available for purchase in the United States.
The ID. Buzz offers a highly versatile platform ideal for administrative, operational, and light transport use. Its dual power sliding doors provide easy access for both equipment and personnel, streamlining loading and unloading in busy environments. The flexible interior configuration includes folding and removable second and third-row seats, which can be adjusted to accommodate various cargo needs when required. The vehicle will provide ample space to safely transport multiple staff members, along with the materials, supplies, and equipment necessary for community events, presentations, and other engagement activities, including 7X support on Sunday game days.
Typical items include event furniture, pop-up tents, promotional materials, and containers with heavier supplies. By deploying the ID. Buzz van for these purposes, the existing Bolt Powered by GTrans vans currently used for similar tasks can remain in regular service for operational needs, reducing both costs and the impact of taking them out of service. Beyond its practical benefits, the ID. Buzz van will be wrapped with a visually distinctive design to offer opportunities for photo engagement, social media visibility, and increased community recognition at public events.
The vehicle supports DC fast charging, allowing the battery to charge from approximately 10% to 80% in just 30 minutes, minimizing downtime and enabling more continuous use throughout the day.
GTrans is able to take advantage of a Sourcewell purchasing cooperative as well as a master equity lease agreement with the City of Gardena to purchase this vehicle. The down payment for the Volkswagen ID. Buzz is $74,383.06, with monthly fees over a 60-month period totaling $11,761.00. The total cost amounts to $86,144.06.
Staff has reviewed the pricing and terms and determined the cost to be fair and reasonable.
Therefore, Staff respectfully recommends that the City Council approve the lease to purchase one (1) 2025 Volkswagen ID. Buzz vehicle from Enterprise Fleet Management with a down payment in the amount of $74,383.06, and monthly fees over a 60-month period in the amount of $11,761.00 for a total requested amount of $86,144.06.
FISCAL IMPACT/COST:
GTrans has capital funds in the FY26 budget, previously approved by City Council for this purchase. There is no impact to the General Fund.
FY2025/26 FY2026/27 FY2027/28 FY2028/29 FY2029/30 FY2030/31 Grand Total
$76,087.21 $2,272.20 $2,272.20 $2,272.20 $2,272.20 $968.05 $86,144.06 APPROVED:
___________________________
Clint Osorio, City Manager
Attachments
Mockup GTrans ID. Buzz.pdf
EFM Quote 9322428 - 2025 Volkswagen ID. Buzz 1st Edition.pdf Mockup
GTrans’VW ID. Buzz
!" #$%#& '(
)*+,
-./0
1
&2345678 & 9:;< =>>
?+@A6
(
"BCD4;
E
FG+H9IJK:BL
M5JNO?
PQR@ N,
STTS
UOS!A
A<
V
4
>W
M3D
M4A
U< XL46YZ<[?
P
UAS
< X:
4/
M6\
U< X"8
6
\
U< ]
D^_LW8
`
UOS!A
< X
V
4
>W
M"=M
U<
PVV4
\ W
a
U< XLM=
;V6
US!
S<O XYZ6
#999*bRb*H2* c9bN*@H *+*+*G@+b*dR 9K 99eG+H9@G R*G+@@+b*dR f Ig*h N+ *
+eiN ;
E!a66
8
$j+ Q 9 _W`-D
g*+ Q 9 ;=7W
3BYZ/
D
L
8L
k+Hf9JK(Z V
lFmn UA<Y
4
V
4
>P =
_;4
EW
M`
U<
;VM
"6EoA<
[
UAT<A -
D4/6
D8_ 6:
6
"
BL=pqM
\4`
rstufsvJ 9& *G9Kn*9$jH9R+*b#++ *9?e+H@ #++ *99&*bN*
-6
W4
M(44
\6
U<
M
4P=
p
4/
p
4 (44
/
p
4 /
U<
US
<TwWD6
M4; 8-8
V
44;=M
p4 AA
U<\=44-
MW8 T
M
-
46A! ]E-
48
D8 U<
W-
4
:M4^x 5L
6_A6
yAPZ4`xY
6/3D
M40
:M4=
rz{fu|#++ *9?e+H@?R}J 9
UA<w
YZ A<
[?
P
rs|~fu{J 9& *G9Kn*9g*H9R+*b#++ *9?e+H@ UB<
"=M 534=
O-
D6
U
<LE
M
D8;=
/6Y
=
p66
=4
48
!
_
=
5
ED
M4M
6 46M
E4=ED
M4`
_=
6L=pqM
=6
6
PVVE4`
0
6=
6p6L=M744M
M
xTA
B(\-!
D-6
(=
/6P8
\=44-
MP8
6
87
D
D
;M pAS!
<
(
V
6\-Y=6
7
44p
D7
DED
M4MEp
D
6=
<(
V
6\-Y=6
_
(
V
6\4
-8
`7
44p
D/666=MDED
M4=
D-6
]VB
(_(=
`/6P8
6D44DE44
8D
6p4
8
6
D/66=
D-6
]VB(_(=
`/6P8
7
D6VM
6=MDED
M4<
/66 =6
6=MME8
DED
M466
D
LM
AA
D-6
]VB(_(=
`/6P8
=
4
DED
M4
664<
/66Dp=
D
>6
D
6ED
M4!86
46
DED
M4
D
66
DD
D-6
(=
/6P8
<:
DE
/66
46=66
MMV
4
E
DED
M4!/6686
D
/666D44DE
D
8D
M44M
86!
M4=
8!p=
4
!U
6V64!
6
M=!466E4=<
k$??$$
1 JgJk$#J$
X:0;:
PY(L:Y(-LY] ( ://(;]0;(/:3("<
A
V
4
>V
MED
M4 pq=6
4M
4 =M
=6
E
M!V4=6V4
E
6
MD8</66Dp66
86
/66 =M
=p
6 =M
=
M
E6
D/66!7D
MDp
6
M
E6DEp=6p/66
=M
DMV
4
>V
M
DED
M4<
-
D446MD87
44pq=6
4M
D
6
D4
E
_6=pqM
4`<
TYD
M4=6
D
M6
M66E
M6644
D
6
EME
M/66<0
7 D6
8
D
M4=6
6=MDM6
D
6:E
MLMD=4=
!446=MD
M6E
M6
pV p(
V
6\4
-8
!:M<!446=MD
M6Vp4p/66644
DMM=
(
V
6\4
-8
!:M<!V=6=
D
M
6V
-
MP8
pp
7/66(
V
6\4
-8
!:M<VE
D
6=MD
M6p
8p
44p(
V
6\-Y=6
!Vp4
D
M
(
V
6\-Y=6
!6446=
D
>8
M44M
pD4(
V
6\4
-8
!:M<
I*$*$dR+Kk@nR R i
~uvvv|
W
]
^
^
W- W8AO
!"#$$ % &'()((
*"+!$ ,-$
.$!,#$$ * &()((
/
&'()((
/
0 &()((
/
&'()((
1223456
7 84 849:;<==>=?
@!$
A(BCDECD(DF(EGFBG(F@H @I$D"J'
!""#$%&'$'
(&)*)+,-
)'.+/0
0)'
1% 2340
567879:;<==>6?
;
5 -'@ ABCD4B ABC(E
3$FG$'
AC(#( AC##D
$'
$'
H-) A#C A#C
IJ>K5678L
;M
%N$)')1 EB4+OPQR-'S)
$)')1 PT+
!
UP)V)$&+3NW$-)$$0$'
0!)V@
;M
5
;
M M;
5
;
5 3FX% 3
P'
$YGG'@$'
03 03
40 3)
Z''
10'
+0G&Y!$Z$'@ 03
03 EB4[ OPQR-'S)
AEB AEE
Y
\')$Y'&]'$
@!&&
@!&&
H]# ,-1^#$%&'$'
Y_ 03
03 H`% ,H) AD AD
*] %*&'&Y'$
@]'$O
0HQ
@!&&
@!&&
0] %HZa'
$'
*&'&]'$O
0HQ AD( A##
3F +
+#O(U#Q%H-)'
Ha Ab Ab
R]3Y
2 R]3P*
H
XSY
2/03R%X3 A A
PT[
!
UP)V)$&+3NW$-)$$0$'
0!)V@ XH XH
03 Y` 3
YN*$' 03
03 03
%X %
'
10'
%@$)'@R$) 03
03 03
S S,*14C(Da 03
03 03
*
*&'1
'@.)P)RNU3!@-@)
X.'$'
03 03
03 03 T$&cY@$'._
$'$&\)
$0$ 03
03 03
3R P)V)$&+3NW$-)$$0$'
0!)V@ 03
03 03
3* 3')1^Y+0
03 03
d !ZG)&'P)$@$'
P$ A#b4 A#4b
d%H *).'R')))UTZW'
H
@$ Ab A(
effghijkjj eflgmfnkjj
oL9p9qrs<7J?tL>uL
>JLv<IJL v<IJLIlnwwiwh
P)'
$&F
EU(U(1E1PR PbVB
!
"#
$
%
&
$'
$
"()
*
+,
(
,)-
(
)-
$'
.)
/
)-
0
(1
2
(1
#,)-
3'1
12
)
-),
)4
5(,
,(
(,
$
6),
!34,
)
.)
&
(
!34,
#)
)
!
(
)
(
7)
!34,
#)
!
(
)
0,
4 (
8-,')9
,
!
,
&#
&4:
/)
;(
13)
)
!-)-
+)'))4
.
+)))-
+, )4
4
,39)
#)
4)))-
.
,
#,
&
.
+)))-
4)))-
12
(
4),
/1
5 )#
#)
)
#
, )
-,
)#
5
0
<
'
)
(
)-
)-
=)4,
>?
+
+),
4
4),
12
)-
12,
4),
>
=.++?
.('
+
+),
185(
*
@
('
;
):86428$
&
&,
(
4-
44
,
/1
A)1
(1
1)1
12
'
)
(
)-
B3
42 1)
B8%
C)
&
A)1
,)-
1)1
&
D,
)
:,
)
7,,
)
)
,,
)
)
7)-
D
&
)-
:8
.
E4:)-
3,4:)-
/
'
)
D55F
(
:
;
):
"
+),
:#!
):82428
,
5)-
A2,
2
)-
12,
12
)
,
,)->
)
,
,
4()-
$3 -2
&'1
0
3)-2
'1
.
3 )-
&'1
0
3 )-
'1
$'
)
/
)-
C)
0
,,
)
,
'
)
(
)-3
'
@-
$
"()
6 E):
+))4
--
)
-)4
5"5
CA
+3
5#
*
54
G3
-)4
4
)4)
'-)
5
)'-)
12
'4
4')
)
+
(2,
#)
)
4 (2,
,
+)
,
'!,
#,
4)
,
12
4'
!
@,'
,,
)
-,'
!
$'
$
)
'
)
(
)-
!)
&
$
)
!)
5!4:
5-
/4:
%
!4:
-
(4:
7/
5-
!)
)
)3(),
-
$'
'H
#
&)
.44
/1
)
44
(1
/1
.44
"
,
I
B<C
$+
(1
,
.+
/1
"
,
B
)
B<JC
.+
(1
,
)) )
086$85,,
12
:3
4)
&
$
5
. (,#
KJJA
(,#
L
,9
-(24
L
,9
$-,
5-),
/4
-,
-),
(4
C4
.4'
&
'4
4'
5(
5)
'
C,
(3
)
'
',
5)-
A2,
&
+),
)-312,
)
4),
5(:
B%
2 )8:)
(:
7))
.44
+(!,
#
)3'24,
%@
E;
)!,
A3
=4,,
,
(,)
L
M
)4,
,
,?
))
44
B
&1
E+$
<
B
1
E+$
)
/)
")
JN8<%8<J<G
J%
GN
JG
/0 /-
%
#
O
!" #
$% &
"
"
%
'
( ')
"%
"
#
*
*
%
!
"
%
*
'
+
%!
$,
!
"
!+
"
"
+-%
+-%
-
!
!.
%
/
'
'
+
/-
-
-
'
0
*
/
"
.
"
1
-"
"
""
/
"
% #
"#
!
-#
-"#
/-
-"
/-+
-
'
'
/' "/'
-
2
/'
3/'
/-
-
/-!
&
-
%
/-
-
%
*
%
"
%
'
"
"
.
'
+
4
5
.
'
#
'
#
'
+
"
6+
*
'
6
'
/"
+
7
&
&
!
&*%
-!
&
-
-
*'
-
-
+
.
89&53&585:83:98:+0 +: ;
!
"
#"
$%
!
&
%
&
'!
(
"
#"
%
'%
)$
*+
$,
"
$
!
" %
%
!
%
-
$
."
$
#"
/0'
#"
'
1"
'
20'
"
"
!
%
#"
'
%
%0
#"
3"
"
4$'
$
4 $
#"
" %
'
" %
"
56026
0
%
4$
"
$
4 $
#"
$
0$'
&
'
%
'76076
0
%
&
'
#"
%
'
#"
1 %
8%
-0
*
%
$
"%
%
!
3
$"
%%
$"
$
%
9
%
4 "
'
"
9
9
1 %
:%
%
'%
3
$
$
0
"1
"
4
'
0 '
1%
%
(/(0%9;
<
=0
"
>6?4(24(6(7627?673
5$5
City of Gardena
Gardena City Council
Meeting
AGENDA REPORT
SUMMARY
Agenda Item No. 18C.
Section: DEPARTMENTAL
ITEMS -
TRANSPORTATION
Meeting Date: October 14,
2025
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE GARDENA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TITLE: RESOLUTION NO. 6713 (1) Establishing the Bus Operator Unit and (2) Certifying the International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, and Transportation Workers (SMART) as the exclusively recognized employee organization to represent the Bus Operator Unit COUNCIL ACTION REQUIRED:
Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 6713
RECOMMENDATION AND STAFF SUMMARY:
On March 27, 2025 the City of Gardena received a Decertification Petition filed by SMART with the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB), to decertify the Gardena Municipal Employees Association as the exclusive representative of the Bus Operator Unit ("Unit"), as well as seeking SMART to be recognized as the exclusive representative of this Unit, comprised of 77 City employees. On April 1, 2025 PERB sent a letter to all parties to ascertain whether the City had adopted local rules concerning decertification petitions in accordance with the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act ("MMBA") Section 3507 concerning the administration of employer-employee relations.
In response to the petition and Request for Local Rules, on April 10, 2025, the City submitted a letter to PERB confirming the City does infact have adopted local rules in accordance with MMBA Section 3507 concerning the administration of employer-employee relations. The City's Employer-Employee Relations Resolution constitutes Rule 23 of the City's Personnel Rules and Regulations, which was adopted by the City Council as Resolution No. 6301. The letter described how the City's Personnel Rules and Regulations include procedures for both decertification (Section 23.8) and severance (Section 23.10); thereby, establishing PERB lacked jurisdiction over the petition at issue pursuant to PERB Regulation 61000.
In notices dated April 15, 2025 and May 16, 2025, PERB acknowledged the City's response and agreed PERB lacked jurisdiction over the SMART petition. On May 5, 2025 SMART withdrew the initial petition.
On June 2, 2025, the City received a petition from SMART for Severance, as well as seeking to represent a new bargaining unit comprised of the Bus Operator classification. The State Mediation and Conciliation Services ("SMCS"), a division of PERB, was requested to conduct a card check, for verification of member support. SMART submitted proof to SMCS on June 9, 2025. SMCS confirmed SMART had the support of a majority of employees in the proposed bargaining unit.
The City conferred with GMEA representatives informing them of the Bus Operator Unit request to sever and get their stance regarding the petition. On July 11, 2025 GMEA informed the City that it does not oppose SMART's Petition for Severance.
In accordance with the City's Employer-Employee Relations Resolution and the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, staff proposes the City recognize SMART as the Exclusive Recognized Employee Organization representing a new unit, to be known as the Bus Operator Unit, comprised of the following classifications:
1. Bus Operator
2. Relief Bus Operator
3. Relief Bus Operator Trainee
Staff respectfully recommends City Council adopt Resolution No. 6713 FISCAL IMPACT/COST:
No fiscal impact
APPROVED:
___________________________
Clint Osorio, City Manager
Attachments
Attachment 1 - Resolution No. 6713.pdf
RESOLUTION NO. 6713
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GARDENA, CALIFORNIA, (1) ESTABLISHING THE BUS
OPERATOR UNIT AND (2) CERTIFYING THE
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SHEET METAL, AIR,
RAIL AND TRANSPORTATION WORKERS (SMART)
AS THE EXCLUSIVELY RECOGNIZED EMPLOYEE
ORGANIZATION TO REPRESENT THE BUS OPERATOR
UNIT
WHEREAS, Section 23 of the City of Gardena’s Resolution 6301 (Personnel Rules and Regulations) constitutes the City’s Employer-Employee Relations Resolution (EERR), which establishes rules, policies and procedures regarding the administration of employer-employee relations in accordance with Section 3507 of the Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Bus Operator, Relief Bus Operator, and Relief Bus Operator Trainee classifications are presently part of the General Employees Unit represented by the Gardena Municipal Employees Association; and
WHEREAS, the International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers (“SMART”) filed a recognition petition dated June 2, 2025 requesting to be formally acknowledged as an Exclusively Recognized Employee Organization representing a new unit comprised of the Bus Operator classification (the “Bus Operators Unit”); and
WHEREAS, the City Manager, in his capacity as Employee Relations Officer, determined that the petition met the requirements of the EERR and, provided that the proposed bargaining unit included the Relief Bus Operator and Relief Bus Operator Trainee classifications, the proposed unit is an appropriate unit pursuant to Section 23.11 of the EERR; and
WHEREAS, the State Mediation and Conciliation Services conducted a card check and confirmed on June 9, 2025 that a majority of the employees in the proposed Bus Operator Unit had signed authorization cards for SMART to serve as the Exclusively Recognized Employee Organization of the Bus Operators Unit; and WHEREAS, the City Manager, in his capacity as the Employee Relations Officer under the EERR, now recommends that City Council formally (1) establishes a bargaining unit consisting of the Bus Operator, Relief Bus Operator, and Relief Bus Operator Trainee classifications, to be identified as the Bus Operator Unit, and (2) certifies and recognizes SMART as the Exclusively Recognized Employee Organization representing the Bus Docusign Envelope ID: F45CD09D-B173-484E-910C-83EBAC525397 RESOLUTION NO. 6713
Operator Unit in accordance with the EERR and the Meyers-Milias Brown Act (California Government Code section 3500 et seq.).
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THEH CITY OF GARDENA, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY FIND DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Establishes a separate bargaining unit consisting of the job classifications of Bus Operator, Relief Bus Operator, and Relief Bus Operator Trainee and identified as the Bus Operators Unit.
SECTION 2. That the City Council of the City of Gardena certifies and recognizes SMART as the exclusively recognized employee organization representing the Bus Operator Unit.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution; shall cause the same to be entered among the original Resolutions of said City; and shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council of said City in the minutes of the meeting at which the same is passed and adopted.
Passed, approved, and adopted this _14th__ day of __October__ 2025. ___________________________________
TASHA CERDA, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
MINA SEMENZA, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________
CARMEN VASQUEZ, City Attorney
Docusign Envelope ID: F45CD09D-B173-484E-910C-83EBAC525397