Agenda packet — Guadalupe City Council, April 11, 2023 (part 1 of 2)

April 11, 2023 City of Guadalupe Council Meeting Agenda Page 1 of 5 City of Guadalupe
AGENDA
Regular Meeting of the Guadalupe City Council
Tuesday, April 11, 2023, at 6:00 pm
City Hall, 918 Obispo Street, Council Chambers
The City Council meeting will broadcast live streamed on the City of Guadalupe’s Official YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaxeHWd9JkmvKnGFU8BAYQQ If you choose not to attend the City Council meeting but wish to make a comment during Community Participation Forum or on a specific agenda item, please submit via email to [email protected] no later than 2:00 pm on Tuesday, April 11, 2023.

Please be advised that, pursuant to State Law, any member of the public may address the City Council concerning any item on the Agenda, before or during Council consideration of that item. If you wish to speak on any item on the agenda, including any item on the Consent Calendar or the Ceremonial Calendar, please submit a speaker request form for that item. If you wish to speak on a matter that is not on the agenda, please do so during the Community Participation Forum.

The Agenda and related Staff reports are available on the City’s website: www.ci.guadalupe.ca.us Friday before Council meeting.

Any documents produced by the City and distributed to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available the Friday before Council meetings at the Administration Office at City Hall 918 Obispo Street, Monday through Friday between 8:00 am and 4:30 pm, and also posted 72 hours prior to the meeting. The City may charge customary photocopying charges for copies of such documents. Any documents distributed to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda less than 72 hours before the meeting will be made available for inspection at the meeting and will be posted on the City’s website and made available for inspection the day after the meeting at the Administrator Office at City Hall 918 Obispo Street, Monday through Friday between 8:00 am and 4:30 pm.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, including review of the Agenda and related documents, please contact the Administration Office at (805) 356.3891 at least 72 hours prior to the meeting. This will allow time for the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting.

1. ROLL CALL:

Council Member Christina Hernandez
Council Member Gilbert Robles
Council Member Megan Lizalde
Mayor Pro Tempore Eugene Costa Jr.

Mayor Ariston Julian

2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
April 11, 2023 City of Guadalupe Council Meeting Agenda Page 2 of 5

3. MOMENT OF THANKS, APPRECIATION OR CONDOLENCES.

4. AGENDA REVIEW
At this time the City Council will review the order of business to be conducted and receive requests for, or make announcements regarding, any change(s) in the order of business.

5. CEREMONIAL CALENDAR
a. Swearing-in Andrew Breda, Police Officer
b. Life Saving Award:
• Fire Engineer David Bonifacio
• Police Officer Michael Kuhbander
• Police Officer Omar Ruiz
c. Proclamations:
• Guadalupe Food Bank Volunteer Recognition
• Donate Life Month
• National Child Abuse Awareness and Prevention Month
• Sexual Assault Awareness & Prevention Month

6. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION FORUM
Each person will be limited to a discussion of three (3) minutes or as directed by the Mayor.

Pursuant to the provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on these matters unless they are listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future City Council meeting.

7. CONSENT CALENDAR
The following items are presented for City Council approval without discussion as a single agenda item in order to expedite the meeting. Should a Council Member wish to discuss or disapprove an item, it must be dropped from the blanket motion of approval and considered as a separate item.

A. Waive the reading in full of all Ordinances and Resolutions. Ordinances on the Consent Calendar will be adopted by the same vote cast as the first meeting unless City Council indicates otherwise.

B. Approve payment of warrants for the period ending April 3, 2023.

C. Approve the Minutes of the City Council regular meeting of March 28, 2023.

D. Adopt Resolution No. 2023-23 authorizing the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder for the Wastewater Effluent Irrigation Pump Station Rehabilitation Project.

April 11, 2023 City of Guadalupe Council Meeting Agenda Page 3 of 5 E. Adopt Resolution No. 2023-24 approving a contract with Ashley & Vance Engineering, Inc. in the amount of $95,792.00 for development of a conceptual site plan document, including specifications and an engineer’s estimate to complete the minimum improvements necessary for the City’s corporation yard at 303 Obispo St., to serve as an effective electric bus parking area, and authorizing the Mayor to sign on behalf of the City.

F. Adopt Resolution No. 2023-25 authorizing the Mayor to execute a professional services contract with Andrew Goodwin Designs (AGD) for the design of the Le Roy Park Phase II Project.

G. Adopt Resolution No. 2023-26 approving an update to the City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan and incorporating it by reference into the Air Quality and Safety Element of the City’s General Plan 2042.

H. Approve Amendment No. 1 to the City’s agreement with Los Amigos de Guadalupe (LADG) and approve an agreement with Tom Brandeberry for the Royal Theater Project.

I. MONTHLY REPORTS FROM DEPARTMENT HEADS

1. Planning Department report for March 2023

2. Building Department report for March 2023

3. Public Works / Engineering report for March 2023

8. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT: (Information Only)

9. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY REPORT: (Information Only)

REGULAR BUSINESS

10. Social Media Use Policy.

Written report: Hannah Sanchez, Recreation Services Manager Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2023-27 approving a social media use policy.

11. Approving the Associate Planner job description, pay scale, and authorizing the recruitment process for this position.

Written report: Todd Bodem, City Administrator
Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2023-28 establishing the classification and job description/pay scale for the Associate Planner position within the Building and Planning Department and authorizing the recruitment process.

April 11, 2023 City of Guadalupe Council Meeting Agenda Page 4 of 5

12. Appointments to various board and committees.

Written report: Todd Bodem, City Administrator
Recommendation: That the Mayor, with the approval of the City Council, appoint Council members to various boards and committees representing the City of Guadalupe.

13. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

14. ANNOUNCEMENTS – COUNCIL ACTIVITY/COMMITTEE REPORTS

15. ADJOURNMENT TO CLOSED SESSION MEETING

CLOSED SESSION

16. Conference with Labor Negotiators
(Subdivision (a) of Gov. Code Section 54957.6)
Agency designated representatives: City Administrator and Human Resources Manager Employee organizations: Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Local 620 and Guadalupe Police Officers Association (POA)

17. Public Employee Performance Evaluation
(Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b))
Title: Director of Public Safety

18. ADJOURNMENT TO OPEN SESSION MEETING

19. CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENTS

20. ADJOURNMENT
I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing agenda was posted on the City Hall display case and website not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting. Dated this 6th day of April 2023.
______________________________
Todd Bodem, City Administrator
Todd Bodem
April 11, 2023 City of Guadalupe Council Meeting Agenda Page 5 of 5

PROPOSED FUTURE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS
Council Meeting: Date and Subject Department Agenda Category City Council & Recreation Joint Meeting
Facility Fee Schedule Workshop Recreation & Parks Dept. Workshop Tuesday, April 25, 2023, at 6:00 pm / Regular Meeting
Waste Management Agreement Extension Public Works Department Regular Business First Reading of Ordinance – City Hall Parking Regular Business Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Audited Financial Statements and
Single Audit Report
Finance Department Regular Business
Adoption and Approval of the Guadalupe Resiliency Plan LADG Regular Business Appeal of Code Compliance Hearing Officer’s Decision
(866 Guadalupe Street)
City Attorney Regular Business
Tuesday, May 9, 2023, at 6:00 pm / Regular Meeting
Tuesday, May 23, 2023, at 6:00 pm / Regular Meeting
Other Unscheduled Items Proposed
Date of Item
Department Agenda Category
Tree Ordinance Public Works New Business
Sidewalk Vending Ordinance Planning Department New Business Food Truck and Special Event Ordinance Planning Dept New Business Gift Policy City Attorney New Business
Benefit for Unrepresented Employees Human Resources New Business Al’s Union Property New Business
Rent Stabilization New Business
Central Coast Community Energy 3CE July 25, 2023 Presentation Agenda Item No. 5C

Agenda Item No. 7B

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GUADALUPE
Prepare�
Veronica Fabian
Finance Account Clerk
Agenda of April 11, 2023
An ie ereyra-Leon
Acco nting Supervisor
Approved by:

Todd Bodem
City Administrator
SUBJECT: Payment of warrants for the period ending April 03, 2023, to be approved for payment by the City Council. Subject to having been certified as being in conformity with the budget by the Finance Department staff.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council review and approved the listing of hand checks and warrants to be paid on April 12, 2023.

BACKGROUND:

Submittal of the listing of warrants issued by the City to vendors for the period and explanations for disbursement of these warrants. An exception, such as an emergency hand check may be required to be issued and paid prior to submittal of the warrant listing, however, this warrant will be identified as "Ratify" on the warrant listing.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 March 28, 2023 City of Guadalupe Council Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 12

MINUTES
City of Guadalupe
Regular Meeting of the Guadalupe City Council
Tuesday, March 28, 2023, at 6:00 pm
City Hall, 918 Obispo Street, Council Chambers

1. ROLL CALL:

Council Member Christina Hernandez
Council Member Gilbert Robles
Council Member Megan Lizalde
Mayor Pro Tempore Eugene Costa Jr.

Mayor Ariston Julian
The mayor called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. All the members were present. (Note: the abbreviation, “CM” for “Council Member” will be used in these minutes.)

2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

3. MOMENT OF THANKS, APPRECIATION OR CONDOLENCES.

Mayor Julian asked for a moment of silence for the 26+ lives lost in the hurricanes of western Mississippi and Alabama. Condolences and best wishes for their recovery. Also, to the Covenant School in Nashville where three young nine-year-old children and three adults lost their lives. And to the 35 who perished in a detention center in Juarez, Mexico.

4. AGENDA REVIEW
There were no changes to the agenda.

5. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION FORUM
Charlene Estabillo: “Mayor, City Council and Staff, two weeks ago, there was the dedication to my husband, Ron Estabillo – the Boys & Girls Club Ron Estabillo Club House. At that time, I did thank the City and the Boys & Girls Club for such an honor for Ron and to us. But I did want to come tonight to personally thank the City because if it wasn’t for all of you and the Boys and Girls Club, this never would have happened. It is such an honor to us and to Ron. He loved his city, his community, and the kids. That’s what life was all about for him. You can ask anybody about Ron…this town was his life. I just feel so honored to have his name placed on the Boys & Girls Club for him. I was told that if they ever built a new building, it would continue to be the ‘Ron Estabillo Clubhouse’. I just want to personally thank all of you for the participation you gave and for your help to have that all happen.

Thank you very much.”
Agenda Item No. 7C
March 28, 2023 City of Guadalupe Council Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 12 Mayor Julian commented, “Behind every good man is a better woman and family. There was word that after he left us, they wanted to name O’Connell Park after Ron, the auditorium after Ron…they probably wanted to name Guadalupe after Ron. All of us here have been touched by what he has done, and you all have done in support of the kids in Guadalupe. That clubhouse being named after him really indicates his importance to Guadalupe and the community and always will be. We appreciate you coming here tonight. When we had a ceremony in his honor in the auditorium it was packed. That speaks highly of him and his family. He came back to make sure the youth prospered by his hand on everyone. So, thank you for coming here tonight.” Jose Romo: “I’m the owner of Romo’s downtown. For the last couple of years, there’s been an issue of leaving cars parked in front of my business all day and all night. I’d like to see you extend the twohour parking signage towards my business to help me out. Right now, it stops at 8th and Guadalupe Streets.” Mayor Julian said, “The two-hour parking…but no one pays attention. Not even the business owners. They don’t even adhere. We’ll let Chief Cash deal with this issue or have the City Attorney look at our ordinance.” CM Lizalde said that we’re noticing a trend here. Mr. Romo added, “People park there and just leave. They live in the general area. We need to protect the businesses as the city grows.”
Albert Nunez, Jr.: “The Rancho de Guadalupe Historical Society would just like to thank the City and the community for supporting our Treasure Sale last. I don’t have the exact figures on what was made, but I do know we were successful and that we did better than the year before and we will continue to grow. Also, I want to thank the City for working with Hannah and Mayra who were wonderful for my working on the display case. We got a lot of valuable feedback which encourages me for May, Asian-American Pacific Islander Month, and September, for Hispanic Heritage Month, and then for October, Filipino Heritage Month. Thank you for the support there. Also, we want to thank Mayor Julian for your generous donation of woodwork to auction off at the Treasure Sale. It was really successful, and we really appreciated your support…whether you’re leading the city against national disaster, or distributing food at our food bank, it is a testament to your leadership and that you have our back. It’s always nice to know. So, thank you so much.” The mayor said, “It was teamwork. Thank you for what you do for the Historical Society and for the display case here at City Hall. For many years it was void of what this community is all about. So, thank you for your work.”

6. CONSENT CALENDAR
The following items are presented for City Council approval without discussion as a single agenda item in order to expedite the meeting. Should a Council Member wish to discuss or disapprove an item, it must be dropped from the blanket motion of approval and considered as a separate item.

A. Waive the reading in full of all Ordinances and Resolutions. Ordinances on the Consent Calendar will be adopted by the same vote cast as the first meeting unless City Council indicates otherwise.

B. Approve payment of warrants for the period ending March 20, 2023.

C. Approve the Minutes of the City Council regular meeting of March 14, 2023.

March 28, 2023 City of Guadalupe Council Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 12 D. Adopt, on the second reading, Ordinance No. 2023-509 amending the City’s zoning ordinance (Guadalupe Municipal Code Chapter 18) to rezone various properties to achieve consistency with the adopted 2042 General Plan Land Use Diagram and other amendments to the zoning ordinance.

E. Adopt Resolution No. 2023-21 authorizing the filing of a claim with the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments for allocation of Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds for fiscal year 2023-2024.

F. Adopt Resolution No. 2023-22 approving a one-year contract extension with Santa Maria Organization of Transportation Helpers Inc. (SMOOTH) for transit services, with a rate adjustment of 10.5%.

G. MONTHLY REPORTS FROM DEPARTMENT HEADS

1. Public Safety Department:
a. Police Department report for February 2023
b. Fire Department report for February 2023
c. Code Compliance report for February 2023

2. Human Resources report for February 2023

3. Recreation and Parks report for February 2023

4. City Treasurer’s report for December 2022, January 2023 Motion was made by Council Member Costa, Jr. and seconded by Council Member Lizalde to approve the Consent Calendar. 5-0 Motion passed.

7. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT: (Information Only)
Mr. Bodem reported the following:

Tomorrow, 3/29/23, he will be attending a meeting of Northern County Housing Affordability Forum in Santa Maria from and after that meeting, he’ll attend the “Crossing the Street Infrastructure Forum” meeting.

EMC Planning Group (with the City staff blessing/recommendation) to nominate them for the 2023 Central Coast Planning Awards this year. EMC’s nomination has won the 2023 Planning Award pertaining to the City of Guadalupe 2042 General Plan. The award was for a Comprehensive Plan Award: Small Jurisdiction. All levels of awards (Excellence and Merit) are eligible to proceed to the American Planning Award (APA) California Award nomination process. They will also be submitting the project for an award at the State level once nominations are open.

Housing Cycle 6 Element Update: This was a housing item that was not completed by EMC and needed further funding that we used ARPA funds to pay for a consultant, Dr. Cornelius Nuworsoo of March 28, 2023 City of Guadalupe Council Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 12 Cal Poly. A rough draft of the HE chapters has yet to be completed for his final review prior to submitting for the City’s review. The HE deadline is June 2023.

CM Lizalde asked for an update on the commercial property at Pasadera, whether it’s moved up or pushed back. Mr. Bodem said, “Everything is hinging on the market, infrastructure…more to do with market interest and underground lines, costs associated with that. Not ready yet. It will be once we get things together relating to the signaling and crossing issues. On Monday, we’re meeting on to talk about how we can work with the railroad and the bridge and all that.” CM Lizalde also thanked Mr. Bodem for the Social Media Policy update. Mr. Bodem said that Hannah Sanchez is working on that policy.

Mayor Julian commented more on the commercial area at Pasadera. He said, “Five-to-eight years ago, DJ Farms asked PG&E to do a study for electrical. The cost was $10,000 just to do the study.

The word is that it will cost $1M to bring power into that development. Cal Trans and the railroad have to get together. SBCAG’s pushing plans to meet with Cal Trans, and they want to meet with us so we can get an update where they are. Every time there’s a change in their staffing, the plans go on the backburner causing delays. Craig Smith wants to move forward. Without the crossing in southern Pasadera and no building going on, we’re looking at 340 homes. There were plans to move City Hall there. We said ‘no’ that we’d stay here but they provide us with that money which is $3M.

That’s based on occupancy for each of those homes. So, you don’t get any money unless those homes are built. That ties into commercial development, too. And big supermarkets won’t come in unless there are more people. We have 8,500 now and that’s a lot of people.” There was a meeting last Friday with the County Supervisor, County staff, Rep. Carbajal’s staff, etc. to talk about the flooding issue. Shannon Sweeney said, “They talked about mostly short-term but some long-term ideas on how to address flooding. It was good to know that the county is having conversations with the Bureau of Reclamation to limit Twitchell Dam releases below their contractual amounts to help protect downstream infrastructure, including facilities in the City of Guadalupe. It was good that Carbajal’s rep was there at the meeting to discuss funding. Mayor Julian added that the County put out a report on ‘Guadalupe 2010 Flood’ which highlights issues same as now. He also mentioned that Mr. Lupe Alvarez, prior mayor, had gone to Washington, D.C. to lobby for monies to extend the levee. The mayor asked that the report be copied and distributed to the council. Mr. Bodem to follow through.

Janice Davis gave an update on Finance: “The “window” in the Finance Department will be open from 8:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. We’re still in the middle of implementation but close to being done… that will have someone on the phone and the window at the same time. We’ll put this information at the bottom of the billing, notices on window and doors, as well as on our voicemail message. Tyler conversion is almost done. It’ll be the first or second week in April before going live. The final draft of the audit will be finished this Friday. The audit report will be scheduled for the 4/11 agenda.” Mr.

Bodem added, “The State Controller’s Report was completed. We’re looking at the 23/24 budget now.” Then the mayor said, addressing Ms. Davis, “You came in the middle of a lot that was going March 28, 2023 City of Guadalupe Council Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 12 on. Thank you for putting a handle on all of that. Especially, with people asking why the office is closed. So, thank you and the staff for moving on that.” CM Hernandez asked, “ Is there any update on Pioneer Street? I know the school had to move the bus stop route and they’re waiting on that pavement road.” Ms. Sweeney said, “I need six (6) working days with no rain. With the continuing storms, we don’t see that happening until well into April.”
Mr. Bodem asked Ms. Sweeney to talk about our water supply. Ms. Sweeney said, “The City has two supplies of water: local ground water and purchased State water. The last three (3) years we’ve used ground water because we’ve had limited availability of State water. If we get our full allotment, 100 percent, that’s about one-half of our water supply for the year. State issued a 75% allocation last week.” She added, “There was a gentleman who spoke on February 28th and said there were a lot of complaints about the water. It would be good if people called about water issues. Once we heard there was a problem, we decreased use of State water, changed the blend to improve the quality of the water. Ground water and State water taste different but both are perfectly safe to drink.” CM Lizalde said, “Thank you for the update. Sometimes, community members may be hesitant. The more we can reiterate who to call and when to call when something is happening, that’s always a positive thing to have out there.” Ms. Sweeney said again to call if there are water issues so they can deal with the issues. CM Hernandez asked for the phone number to report water complaints. Mr. Bodem said he’d get that number to the Council.

8. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY REPORT: (Information Only) Chief Cash reported the following:

I sent out a notice that FEMA approved Santa Barbara County’s Emergency Operational Plan with the Guadalupe annex. The Santa Barbara County Mitigation Plan was finally approved which was a two-year process. That makes all of Santa Barbara County eligible for FEMA funding.

We’ve been contacted by a lot of residents and GBA requesting we do emergency preparedness training. We’re trying to put together something that’s workable but that depends on staff, supplies, etc. We’ve never been registered as a certified “CERT” trainer site but now we are registered and are getting that. CERT stands for “Community Emergency Response Team”. There is one trainer in the Fire Department and we’re getting more to have residents prepared for earthquakes, flooding, with necessary supplies, etc…to be ready for an incident. Volunteers stepped up. This Thursday, we’re putting together an auxiliary program to be able to call on resources during a crisis. That’s part of the ‘After Action Plan’. It’s going to be centered on our residents having that training and be able to assist during an emergency.”
Santa Barbara County Emergency Operations Center…at a meeting with over one hundred people, we got a lot of accolades saying, “we want to use that model (Guadalupe).” We don’t have a model…people just came…we’re putting one together a model now so that we’ll be prepared. The March 28, 2023 City of Guadalupe Council Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 12 mayor added, “There’s a woman who lives in Pasadera, Grace B., who had contact with the Presbyterian Church in Nipomo. They were the first to ask what we needed. There’s a list of people and resources that helped with all of this.”

REGULAR BUSINESS

9. Budgetary appropriation to fund the Emergency Preparedness Coordinator position.

Written report: Michael Cash, Director of Public Safety Recommendation: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2023-23 appropriating funding to the Police’s budget for the Emergency Preparedness Coordinator position subject to a successful promotional recruitment process.

Chief Cash gave a brief background on the item. He said, “We’re looking for funding for an internal promotional process. We had done an external recruitment process, and there were external candidates who dropped off. I redirected an internal employee to help during emergencies. If internal recruitment is successful, it will add $5,000 to the budget; if not, we’d need to come back to the council. But we want to open it up to any internal candidates.” Mayor Julian said, “There are a lot of components here. Todd approved the process for the internal recruitment. I’ve never seen a resolution with such detail. To get to the point, we’re looking at the $5,000 for this fiscal year?” City Attorney Sinco said, “No, the additional $5,000 would be ongoing.” Mr. Bodem asked, “Code enforcement is important. How would that be managed?” Chief Cash said, “The Fire Department still has a portion of code enforcement. We’d push code enforcement back to the Fire Department. The current incumbent does long-term investigations. If those issues come up, then, as a police department, we’ll pivot and handle those issues. We had a meeting last week with staff and FEMA. We’re on a good course for recovery of funds. The part that we’re working on is through mitigation to protect infrastructure and to be able to get funding to protect infrastructure from future funding aspects. So, we’re dealing with three fronts: recovery of funds, mitigation to build infrastructure and long-term ways to deal with actual flooding. That internal person has been our go-between with FEMA to be able to process the necessary paperwork. We don’t have additional personnel to handle all of this.” Ms. Sweeney said it would cost between $40K to $250K for mitigation projects we need to consider for future protection. Chief Cash said that in 2010, almost exactly the same thing happened.

Mr. Bodem asked, “One question from residents will be what will this person do in non-emergency times on the down times?” Chief Cash said, “A resident recently asked when they can get trained.

We need trainers and it’s easier to have them in-house than to go outside to bring people in to be trained. So, one is training our residents and the other is building our infrastructure. Everyone here saw that we didn’t get assistance relief for almost two-to-three days from outside the city. Everyone else was having the same issues. How do we sustain ourselves during an emergency? Having this person would deal with training on a yearly basis, help to build infrastructure, and help with grants from FEMA and elsewhere to get supplies. There’s another component we need to consider. That’s March 28, 2023 City of Guadalupe Council Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 12 our animals and for our seniors. A lot of times they get left out when these emergencies happen.

We have a lot of people that need assistance who are homebound. We’ll be dealing with that at a meeting on Thursday building that infrastructure. How do we address that? We do that with food, but a lot of people can’t get out so how do we address them?” Training and building that infrastructure are what this person will be doing on a regular basis in order for us to sustain ourselves.”
Mayor Julian said, “Code enforcement. On the February report, there were three (3) code enforcement issues…one was for 72-hour parking. My concern is that when people talk about trailers and 72-hour parking, and we see in the report that there was only one in the whole city, that’s not true. If the Fire Department gets these duties, we need to listen to what people are saying in terms of code enforcement.”
CM Lizalde asked, “That was my concern, too, in reading the report. Also, we’re doing internal recruitment. Are we shifting things, creating a vacancy that is also vital? I’m a huge supporter of hiring from within. This code enforcement position is so public, and we’ve had such an issue with code enforcement, it does raise the question of are we promoting someone based on experience when that position really hasn’t been tended to publicly? That’s a concern. The current incumbent in code enforcement position doesn’t have all the requirements for the current position. That concerns me. Are we just promoting someone who hasn’t had a chance to fulfill the requirements of their current position, whether it was due to Covid, delays in training? Those are some of my concerns. What types of candidates are we hiring? What sort of vetting are we doing? Are we just putting someone there because we need someone there or are we doing our due diligence to find the right candidate to invest our limited funds? I definitely think the position is needed. But I am very concerned with this particular proposal and how this is shifting those positions. I don’t see a win in there for me.” CM Hernandez added, “It just feels like there’s another pothole that we’re creating. Is it financially feasible to sustain this position long-term?” Janice Davis said, “With the current budget now, it’s already constrained. I don’t have the figures going forward to say whether this will cause an issue. I just don’t know. Right now, doing the midyear review…I don’t have that in front of me so maybe I can come back with the correct answer. As far as I know, I don’t think that it’s feasible this fiscal year, but we can consider for next fiscal year.” City Attorney Sinco added, “At the council meeting before, there was a request to hire two (2) police officers and Emergency Preparedness Coordinator and keep the code enforcement position. The Council said there was no budget for that request. I believe, though, there was some direction to try to do something along these lines, especially for the Emergency Preparedness Coordinator position.

This is a proposal for a way for the Council to fund that need if that is the high priority. In the staff report, code enforcement remains a high priority. There will still be a way to continue code enforcement If the code enforcement candidate was successful with this internal promotion. I don’t think there’s any other internal candidate, but I’m not sure. If the Council wants to go externally, and an external candidate is hired, there’d have to be funding or we’d have to lay someone off.

That’s not really an option that was pushed. But you just can’t do both this year and not ongoing, March 28, 2023 City of Guadalupe Council Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 12 at least as far as we know. I just wanted to explain what we can do given the constraints.” CM Lizalde then added, “And maybe that’s the answer right now. If this is the best that we can do given the constraints, maybe we need to wait until next fiscal year. We’re going to be prepping the budget for the next year and this is something we can think about.” The mayor said, “Looking at the budget, we projected $100,000 for cannabis that we didn’t yet. For train-the-trainer, can this person step in? Santa Maria ha a part-time emergency trainer who trains the community.” Chief Cash responded, “Yes, anyone in that position would be trained to give training. The internal person has been to some of the schools that do the training, and I’ve given that person training. Santa Barbara County Office of Emergency Services has helped this internal person, too.”
Mayor Julian said, “We have three (3) months remaining in this budget here. We’ve heard from the Finance Director that it’s touchy in terms of where we are now. I don’t want to be in a position where we say that we should have waited until our numbers come in.” CM Lizalde then said, “We don’t want to rush the candidate who has only been doing this for a short time. The duties on the job description…it’s not just training community members. There are other things that this person would be responsible for. Does this internal person have previous experience or is this new to them? Does this person have the experience, not the current event, but previously that this job title requires?” Chief Cash said, “Has some experience but I’m going to be there. If the internal person is not hired, nothing will get done. There’s a lot of internal training assistance in the office. This is being handed off by a lot of other people who are helping to bring this along because this has to be done. If we don’t have somebody there, that ball stops.” CM Hernandez questioned if all the duties and responsibilities for code compliance now fall on the Fire Department. Chief Cash said, “That’s what would happen. This is not new to them. When we brought this person over, the Fire staff are still doing day-to-day code compliance. The code compliance/enforcement person does long-term investigations.” CM Lizalde said, “We know code compliance needs attention. Is the Fire Department taking it all in? Is that realistic? The code compliance position was created to take off of the Fire Department. Is that history correct?” Chief Cash said, “Some of that is. When you say, ‘code compliance’, a lot of that was done by our police officers. We’re now down to three (3). With the limited officers, that’s where you see a lot of the drop going on. We don’t have personnel to handle a lot of these things.

Police officers have been doing code compliance.” CM Lizalde then said, “So, does the code compliance do the backfill when we’re short on officers to give citations? You said this main focus is long-term investigations.” Chief said, “He does it all, but his main focus is long-term.” CM Lizalde said that when we see the numbers so low, that’s concerning.

CM Costa, Jr. said, “Make the emergency preparedness position a ‘trainee’. The internal person has to be trained. We should have a ‘trainee’ job title.” City Attorney said, “If you’re suggesting a lesser position, we don’t have a classification for that, if that’s what you’re suggesting.” CM Costa, Jr.

March 28, 2023 City of Guadalupe Council Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 12 added, “What I’m saying is that this individual has to be trained. We’re going to be paying for an increase, a promotion, when this person still has to be trained. If that’s the case, we should be looking at doing a ‘trainee’ title.” CM Lizalde added, “We’re paying at a journey level. The internal person doesn’t have the experience.” Chief Cash, “We have police officers. They all start off as trainees but they’re police officers. If they come in, they have to be trained in how we do things.

Everyone will be a trainee. Will there be different levels? Of course.” At this point, Mr. Bodem suggested a combination of code enforcement and emergency preparedness. City Attorney Sinco said, “That’s a valid point. I did propose early on in looking at this to have two (2) part-time positions, equivalent to a full-time position. It was a proposal, but the Chief didn’t think it was viable. It is possible to create a new position, half-time code enforcement and half-time emergency preparedness. There’d be different pay rates for each function, or a blended rate but we could explore. If you want us to do more work on that and come back, we could do that with some numbers and a proposal.” Mr. Bodem suggested leaving at the same pay rate for emergency preparedness.

CM Lizalde said that there are more options to explore fiscally, more research to do and getting back.

Mayor Julian said, “I think what CM Costa, Jr. mentioned as far as a ‘trainee’ position. When a police officer comes in, they already have P.O.S.T. training. They’re ready to go…they have the training where this position is going to ramp up. We know who we’re talking about. This individual is important to the City of Guadalupe. He’s done well dealing with the disaster, being able to speak Spanish and connecting with people being there on the front lines. You’re not going to find anyone more able to take the position. It’s just the training component.” Chief Cash said, “Our last Emergency Preparedness Coordinator, I trained him for five (5) years prior. I taught at the Emergency Preparedness Academy in Maryland, and I sent him there. Only a few people have gone there. If you look at all the emergency preparedness staff in the County, they’re getting on-the-job training. No one’s really gone to an academy like the police or fire go to an academy. They’re all civilians with all on-the-job training. Anyone who came here would have to go through the training.

I’m not specifically advocating for a certain individual. I’m advocating for assistance. If we don’t have someone there helping to shepherd some of this stuff through, it’s going to fall through the cracks.”
The mayor said, “To Todd’s point, there needs to be a blended job/amount. This person is stepping up, going out and getting these certificates and training. It’s going to take more than the current level in terms of what we’re paying. I think a blended amount and with Finance’s look at the budget, and what that might be with a blended role, then once fully engaged with training, then move to have that person handle community training. But this should go back to staff to look at everything.

There are a lot of moving parts to this. We don’t want to disregard code enforcement which is important to the City. In this manner, it will give us that bridge between keeping code enforcement working with the Fire Department still and having the trainer. The job announcement for the Emergency Preparedness Coordinator for Santa Maria shows prior experience in the field of emergency preparedness required. The individual we’re talking about doesn’t have that yet… looking at the next fiscal year regarding training and pay.” March 28, 2023 City of Guadalupe Council Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 12 CM Robles asked about the timeframe for the emergency preparedness academy. Chief Cash said, “It’s a two-week academy but it’s not offered until the latter part of the year.” CM Robles then said, “A blended job seems realistic but the budget’s just not there.” Then Chief Cash said, “I want to be fair to the person who’s there now. That person is doing the job now without being additionally compensated. I’m trying to train that person and that person understands that. But eventually I have that person go back to their regular duties in your code enforcement job.” CM Lizalde said, “This is a civilian position. My concern is when we’re doing hiring practices, this individual hasn’t been able to complete getting certificates for their current position, not for any fault, just that there aren’t any certificates yet.” Chief Cash said, “I specifically put the Santa Maria code enforcement position. We asked more than what was really required.” CM Lizalde then asked, “I’m looking at our job description and there are specific requirements for certifications. We have to abide by those requirements. We can’t omit certain requirements after we’ve hired someone. Now, we’re going to another recruitment where this person will potentially have additional requirements that need to be obtained. That’s a lot to take on…complete what they already started and ask them to take on almost another full-time job with responsibilities and take on training. Is that realistic for an individual who hasn’t, through no fault of their own, obtained those initial certifications and will not be able to obtain those? The internal person was hired in 2021 but hasn’t obtained the necessary certifications. I just want to be very transparent that we have good hiring practices in place so that on paper, we can say that this individual met these requirements…that within one year, these certifications were obtained, etc. There’s no bias or that we let this person in because they’ve been a longtime employee and we get caught in poor hiring practices. Need to be careful if we’re looking at blending positions or we’re doing other things that we’re mindful of that because this is all public and that will come under the microscope.” Chief Cash said, “I want to put this on the table. A lot was pushed back because of Covid. A lot of people couldn’t get those certifications, training or anything. Now with Hancock and a few others, it is priority…who gets the priority for the limited classes and trainers right now. For the ‘832’, police and security are in the forefront now. For the code compliance officer, I’ve talked with the academy people to help me find a slot for them. I’m on a wait list like everyone else. Can those be completed? Yes, we’re now on a trajectory and we can start planning. We have the same issue with our police officers who have to go to Fresno for their training because they can’t get the classes here. And some of those were pushed back.”
Mayor Julian reiterated, “This needs to go back to staff. There have been a lot of comments from both the Council and staff. Look at a blended position, training requirements, trainee issue, financial side, etc. Get some numbers. It’s pretty complex right now.” It was the consensus of the City Council to have City staff review options on this issue. No motion was made on Resolution No. 2023-23.

March 28, 2023 City of Guadalupe Council Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 12 The mayor said that he appreciates the Council’s discussion and staff’s responses on this matter to let the community see that we’re staying on top of this.

10. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
CM Lizalde noted that the Social Media Policy is scheduled on the 4/11/2023 agenda.

City Attorney Sisco: Code compliance issue to be scheduled for the 4/25/2023 agenda.

11. ANNOUNCEMENTS – COUNCIL ACTIVITY/COMMITTEE REPORTS
Mayor Julian: SBCAG has 12 members on the board. Wherever a meeting is, by order of the State, they have to have a majority of directors at one particular site. Can still zoom meetings but you have to give specific information on your location. This would also include APCD and Cal Vans…any County or committee meeting. There’s a lot coming down with the Brown Act.

Regarding the flood victims, Mireya Pina from the Little House at the Park, received monies from, I believe, the Santa Barbara Foundation. People involved with the flooding received $1500 each about a month ago. There are still issues ongoing. There was a resident who returned and had a car that wasn’t working and said it would cost $3,000 to fix. At the barbecue fundraiser held by the Knights of Columbus, $8,000 was raised. Little House by the Park and Family Services will be cutting checks for $500 each to the flood victims. A lot of them are just starting work now. A lot weren’t working as of last week. Almost all now have housing. One family will be moving to a home. They’re all in a safe place now. A special food distribution was held with four (4) pallets for the flood victims. Both the Fire and Police Departments helped. Also, ten individuals from families involved in the flooding helped. They took food home for those who were working. So, they’re helping each other out which is nice to see.

CM Hernandez: At the recent dodgeball tournament, Christina was named “Dodgeball Tournament Champion. Earth Day is April 22nd. We’ll be partnering up with Community Cleaners and will be out in Guadalupe from 9am to 11am. Judy Baca was awarded the National Medal of Art. Some of her paintings are hung here at City Hall.

CM Robles: Boys & Girls Club have a teen night this Thursday, 3/30. Free membership will be given for the first twenty-five attendees, between ages 13-18. Bonsai Class at the Cultural Center, every third Sunday of the month. Wrestling is in its second week of practice. There is a novice Paso Robles tournament on April 8th with about twenty-four kids, 6-7 girls. They’re learning about discipline, nutrition, and body exercises.

CM Lizalde: I saw the April Parks & Recreation newsletter came out online. Softball is coming. Thank you to Gilbert Robles and other adults who are taking on wrestling. That’s just not a sport. There’s a lot of interaction with adults for those youths and they’re learning a lot of wonderful skills. So, thank you for doing that for our youth.

March 28, 2023 City of Guadalupe Council Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 12

12. ADJOURNMENT
Motion was made by Council Member Lizalde and seconded by Council Member Costa, Jr. to adjourn the meeting. 5-0 Motion passed. The meeting was adjourned at 7:26 p.m.

Prepared by: Approved by:
_________________________________ _____________________________________ Amelia M. Villegas, City Clerk Ariston Julian, Mayor

Page 1 of 2 ends

Agenda Item No. 7D

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GUADALUPE
Agenda of April 11, 2023

_______________________________ _________________________________ Prepared by: Approved by:

Shannon Sweeney, Todd Bodem, City Administrator
Public Works Director/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Wastewater Effluent Irrigation Pump Station Rehabilitation Project – Notice of Completion
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council approve the filing of a Notice of Completion for the Wastewater Effluent Irrigation Pump Station Rehabilitation Project and authorizing the City Clerk to file it with the County Recorder.

DISCUSSION:

The 2014 Wastewater Master Plan identified the need to replace the wastewater effluent irrigation pump station. Plans and specifications for this project were completed in April 2021. $522,821 was budgeted in the Fiscal Year 2021-22 budget and carried over into the 2022-23 budget for construction of this project.

On May 21, 2021, the City solicited a Request for Bids for the wastewater effluent irrigation pump station replacement construction, and Request for Proposal for inspection services for this project. Both were sent to a list of potential bidders, made available on the City’s website, and advertised in the Santa Maria Times. The deadline to receive bids and proposals was 2:00 p.m., June 29, 2021.

The City received one construction bid of $477,800.00. This bid, from W.M. Lyles Company, was found to be responsive and meet the City’s needs.

The City issued a contract to W.M. Lyles on July 13, 2021, in the amount of $477,800.00. A preconstruction meeting was held on July 27, 2021. A Notice to Proceed was issued on August 27, 2021.

This project was plagued with Covid related delays including supply chain issues, lack of responsiveness from other agencies, and inability to deliver materials during the port backlog. The contractor was very good about communicating issues with City staff, and City staff felt it best to remain flexible with the scheduling since these items were outside of the contractor’s control.

Shannon Sweeney

Page 2 of 2 ends

The switchgear for this project was approved by PG&E in July 2022. Although ordered immediately after approval, the switchgear did not arrive on site until November 2022. Site construction began in earnest on December 10, 2022. At that time, the construction schedule indicated a completion date of January 11, 2023. However, rain starting on December 26, 2022 caused project construction delays, and the flood on January 9/10 filled the construction excavation site with river water. Construction work to obtain an operable system was completed on February 2, 2023. Lack of responsiveness from PG&E delayed actual operation until February 17, 2023.

A final walk-through was held on March 3, 2023. At that walk-through, a punch list of items to be addressed was developed, including programming the variable frequency drives and timer controls, pressure switch installation, cabinet parts installation, and submittal of formal change order requests.

All of these items are scheduled to be completed by the time retention is expected to be released to the City’s satisfaction.

One item associated with this project that will not be completed per contract is the flowmeter installation because the flowmeter cannot be installed until the holding ponds are drained at least two more feet. Since this is not expected to happen within the next two months, the Contractor has issued a credit change order for this item, this portion of the contract will not be paid by the City at this time, and the flowmeter will be installed later under separate agreement.

FISCAL IMPACT:

During the construction project, several items generated change orders. The largest change order was related to the fact that the January 9/10 storm flooded the project excavation. The only way to move forward with the construction project following the flooding was to slurry backfill the excavation at an additional cost of $22,704. The sum of the change orders was $29,376 or 6% more than the original contract cost, well within Council’s approved 15% contingency allowance. The final cost of construction is $507,176.00. The sum of all costs on the project, including inspection is $535,556.00, which, if not for the flooding, would have remained within the $522,821.00 budget.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution No. 2023-23

2. Notice of Completion
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-23

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GUADALUPE TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY CLERK

TO FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION WITH THE COUNTY RECORDER FOR THE WASTEWATER

EFFLUENT IRRIGATION PUMP STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT WHEREAS, the City issued a Request for Bids concerning the Wastewater Effluent Irrigation Pump Station Rehabilitation Project on May 21, 2021, for which bids were opened on June 29, 2021; and WHEREAS, on July 13, 2021, the City Council approved a construction contract with W. M. Lyles Company for the Wastewater Effluent Irrigation Pump Station Rehabilitation Project for $477,800.00; and,
WHEREAS, the work has been completed to the satisfaction of City Staff; and, WHEREAS, the contract was completed within the approved contingency.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Guadalupe as follows:

SECTION 1. Approve filing of the Notice of Completion for the Wastewater Effluent Irrigation Pump Station Rehabilitation Project, and Authorize the City Clerk to immediately file the notice of completion with the County Recorder; and
SECTION 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized to make minor changes herein to address clerical errors, so long as substantial conformance of the intent of this document is maintained.

In doing so, the City Clerk shall consult with the City Administrator and City Attorney concerning any changes deemed necessary.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting on the 11th day of April 2023 by the following vote:

MOTION:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

I, Amelia M. Villegas, City Clerk of the City of Guadalupe DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution, being C.C. Resolution No. 2023-23, has been duly signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk, all at a regular meeting of the City Council, held April 11, 2023, and that same was approved and adopted.

ATTEST:
_________________________________ ____________________________________ Amelia M. Villegas, City Clerk Ariston Julian, Mayor
ATTACHMENT 1
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________
Philip F. Sinco, City Attorney
K
APN # N/A

NOTICE OF COMPLETION

NO TRANSFER OF PROPERTY
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN PURSUANT TO CIVIL CODE SECTION 3039:

1. The undersigned is the corporate officer for the City of Guadalupe, owner of property hereinafter described.

2. The FULL NAME of owner is: City of Guadalupe

3. The FULL ADDRESS of the owner is: 918 Obispo Street, Guadalupe, CA 93434

4. The NATURE OF THE INTEREST OF THE OWNER is in fee.

5. All work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was completed on March 3, 2023.

6. The work done was the Wastewater Effluent Irrigation Pump Station Rehabilitation Project No. 2020-04.

7. THE NAME OF THE ORIGINAL CONTRACTOR, if any, for such work of improvements in the City of Guadalupe: W.M. Lyles Company

8. The property if which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of Guadalupe, County of Santa Barbara, State of California.

Dated: _________________________ ___________________________________ (Signature of Owner Name In Paragraph 2)
Todd Bodem, City Administrator

VERIFICATION
I, the undersigned, say:

I am Amelia M. Villegas, the City Clerk, declared of the foregoing Notice of Completion; I have read said Notice of Completion and know the contents thereof; the same is true of my own knowledge. I declare under penalty or perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on the _________________________ at the City of Guadalupe, California ___________________________________, City Clerk of the City of Guadalupe (Signature) Amelia M. Villegas

RECORDING REQUEST BY
City of Guadalupe

AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO
Todd Bodem, City Administrator
918 Obispo Street
P.O. Box 908
Guadalupe, CA 93434
ATTACHMENT 2

Page 1 of 2 ends

Agenda Item No. 7E

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GUADALUPE
Agenda of April 11, 2023

_______________________________ _________________________________ Prepared by: Approved by:

Shannon Sweeney Todd Bodem, City Administrator
Public Works Director/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Adoption of a resolution approving a contract with Ashley & Vance Engineering, Inc. in the amount of $95,792.00 for development of a conceptual site plan and plans and specifications for the proposed electric bus parking area at 303 Obispo Street in Guadalupe and authorizing the Mayor to sign on behalf of the City.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt a resolution approving a contract with Ashley & Vance Engineering, Inc. in the amount of $95,792.00 for development of conceptual site plan documents, including specifications and an engineer’s estimate to complete the minimum improvements necessary forthe City’s corporation yard at 303 Obispo St., Guadalupe to serve as an effective electric bus parking area, and authorizing the Mayor to sign on behalf of the City.

BACKGROUND:

In 2018, the California Air Resources Board passed a regulation for public transit agencies to gradually transition to 100 percent zero-emission bus fleets by 2040. In 2022, the City of Guadalupe funded the purchase of a 35-foot electric transit bus. This bus is scheduled for delivery in August 2023. Additional grant funds from an Affordable Housing and Community Development (AHSC) grant from the Escalante Project under development by the Housing Authority Santa Barbara County are available to construct an electric bus charging and parking area.

The City issued a Request for Proposals on March 3, 2023, by posting on the City’s website, advertising in the local paper, and sending via email to four consulting services. One proposal, from Ashley & Vance Engineering, Inc., was received by the deadline of March 23, 2023.

DISCUSSION:

Ashley & Vance Engineering, Inc. provided civil and structure engineering services for the Escalante Meadow project and for the structural assessment of City Hall. Their staff are knowledgeable and experienced in working with the City.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Funding for these services is included in the Fiscal Year 2022 – 23 budget. The AHSC grant is funding Shannon Sweeney

Page 2 of 2 ends

$767,409.87 toward this project. Completion of these services are vital in order for the City to successfully charge its new electric bus.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution No. 2023-24

2. Agreement between the City and Ashley & Vance Engineering, Inc.

Page 1 of 2 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-24

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GUADALUPE

APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH ASHLEY & VANCE ENGINEERING INC FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR SITE IMPROVEMENTS AT 303 OBISPO ST. AND AUTHORIZING

THE MAYOR TO SIGN ON BEHALF OF THE CITY
WHEREAS, Affordable Housing and Community Development (AHSC) grant funding of $767,409.87 is reserved for site improvements at the City’s corporation yard at 303 Obispo St. to accommodate charging and parking of the City’s new electric bus; and WHEREAS, the City announced a Request for Proposals on March 3, 2023, to select a qualified consultant firm to develop a conceptual site plan and specifications for the proposed electric bus parking area at 303 Obispo Street, and received one proposal by the deadline of March 23, 2023; and WHEREAS, Ashley & Vance Engineering, Inc. has provided high-quality services and excellent responsiveness on previous projects.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Guadalupe as follows:

SECTION 1. That the City Council of the City of Guadalupe adopt a resolution approving an agreement with Ashley & Vance Engineering, Inc. in the amount of $95,792.00 for professional engineering design services and granting the City Administrator the ability to approve payments up to 15% beyond the original cost proposal.

SECTION 2. That the Mayor is authorized to sign this agreement on behalf of the City.

SECTION 3. The City Clerk is hereby authorized to make minor changes herein to address clerical errors, so long as substantial conformance of the intent of this document is maintained.

In doing so, the City Clerk shall consult with the City Administrator and City Attorney concerning any changes deemed necessary.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting on the 11th day of April 2023 by the following vote:

MOTION:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

I, Amelia Villegas City Clerk of the City of Guadalupe DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution, being Resolution No. 2023-24, has been duly signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk, all at a regular meeting of the City Council, held April 11, 2023, and that same was approved and adopted.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 2 of 2 ends

Page 1 of 2 ends

Agenda Item No. 7F

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GUADALUPE
Agenda of April 11, 2023

_______________________________ _________________________________ Prepared by: Approved by:

Shannon Sweeney, Todd Bodem, City Administrator
Public Works Director/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Leroy Park Phase II Design Project Notice of Award RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2023-25 authorizing the Mayor to execute a professional services contract with Andrew Goodwin Designs (AGD) for the design of the Leroy Park Phase II Project.

DISCUSSION:

On March 26, 2019, the City entered into an agreement with AGD for design and construction services for the architectural, engineering, and landscape design services for the Leroy Park and Community Center Rehabilitation Project. These initial design services included design of the entire project, including a 2,200 square-foot multipurpose room. When the entire project was put out to bid, construction costs far exceeded the funding, and the project was restructured to eliminate the multipurpose room, the west parking lot, and the rear amphitheater. Phase I of the project which included all remaining items, was completed in March 2022.

An additional $1.7 million was earmarked in the current federal congressional budget to complete the multipurpose room. The City has submitted most of a grant application to United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to secure thisfunding. The City has until September 2023 to complete the application, have USDA deem it complete, and secure the funding. One of the outstanding application items is a preliminary architectural report, that must be done by an architect. The City does not have an architect on staff to complete this work.

AGD is the architectural firm that initially led the team that designed the entire project. City staff asked the grant manager if the initial architectural firm may be hired directly to complete the design work for this project even if the initial contract has expired, or if the City is required per the terms of the grant to competitively bid architectural services. The grant manager indicated that the City may enter into such an agreement without going out for proposal. The City Attorney has also advised that obtaining proposals is not necessary under the City’s Municipal Code or the City’s Purchasing Guidelines in this specific situation.

Shannon Sweeney

Page 2 of 2 ends

This design project is budgeted in the FY 22 – 23 budget. The scope of the remaining design services includes developing plans and specifications specific to the multipurpose room, to bring that portion of the project up to current code, plan check, bid negotiations, construction administration, and as-built documentation.

Staff recommends awarding the contract to AGD for a total of $190,050.00. It is also recommended to authorize the City Administrator to approve contract change orders up to 15% over the contract amount if deemed necessary.

FISCAL IMPACT:
$1,700,000 was earmarked for this project. The preliminary architecture report, included as a task in this proposal is one of two remaining items required to complete the grant application for the project. If the grant application is completed and accepted by September 2023, the grant funds will be secured. This proposal for design services in the amount of $190,050.00 is higher than the design costs estimated in June 2022 of $136,493.00 for design. However, soliciting proposals for a new design consultant is unlikely to result in cost savings, since AGD has been involved with this project since the beginning, and Phase II was designed into the original plan. The total engineer’s estimate in June 2022 of 1,549,922.58 is below the earmarked funding for this project, and therefore it is believed that the grant funds are sufficient to cover the additional design costs.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution No. 2023-25

2. Agreement between the City and Andrew Goodwin Design

Page 1 of 2 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-25

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GUADALUPE APPROVING AN AGREEMENT

WITH ANDREW GOODWIN DESIGNS (AGD) FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES FOR

THE ARCHITECTURAL, ENGINEERING, LANDSCAPING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE LEROY PARK

COMMUNITY CENTER REHABILITATION PROJECT PHASE II AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN

THE AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY
WHEREAS, AGD was originally hired on March 26, 2019, for design services for the Le Roy Park Community Center Rehabilitation Project, which included design of a multipurpose room; and WHEREAS, construction of the project in its entirety exceeded available funding, so the project was broken down into two parts; construction of phase I of which was completed in 2022, and construction of the multipurpose room deferred; and
WHEREAS, an additional $1.7 million has been earmarked in the current federal congressional budget to build the multipurpose room and this funding can be secured through completion of the grant application which requires completion of a preliminary architectural report; and WHEREAS, the grant does not require that the City go out for proposals for these architectural services and the City may contract with original design team; and Whereas, AGD’s proposal of $190,050.00 is higher than the original estimate for design services of $136,493.00 but the extra expense, added to the original phase II estimate of $1,549,922.58, still remains below the earmarked funds of $1.7 million.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Guadalupe as follows:

SECTION 1. That the City Council of the City of Guadalupe adopt a resolution approving an agreement with AGD in the amount of $190,050.00 for Le Roy Park Phase II design services and granting the City Administrator the ability to approve payments up to 15% beyond the bid.

SECTION 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized to make minor changes herein to address clerical errors, so long as substantial conformance of the intent of this document is maintained.

In doing so, the City Clerk shall consult with the City Administrator and City Attorney concerning any changes deemed necessary.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting on the 11th day of April 2023 by the following vote:

MOTION:

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 2 of 2 ends

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

I, Amelia M. Villegas City Clerk of the City of Guadalupe DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution, being Resolution No. 2023-25, has been duly signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk, all at a regular meeting of the City Council, held April 11, 2023, and that same was approved and adopted.

EXHIBIT A

Page 1 of 2 ends

Agenda Item No. 7G

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GUADALUPE
Agenda of April 11, 2023

________________________________ __________________________________ Prepared by: Approved by:

Michael Cash, Director of Public Safety Todd Bodem, City Administrator SUBJECT: Adopt an update to the City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan and incorporate it by reference into the Air Quality and Safety Element of the City’s General Plan 2042.

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2023-26 approving an update to the City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan and incorporating it by reference into the Air Quality and Safety Element of the City’s General Plan 2042.

BACKGROUND:

In accordance with the City of Guadalupe General Plan, the City Council adopted the current City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, an annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, at its meeting on August 8, 2017. The Council subsequently approved a resolution at its meeting on September 11, 2018, incorporating this plan into the Safety Element of the City’s General Plan which also allowed the City to qualify for additional mitigation funding after a disaster.

The City Council recently approved an updated general plan (General Plan 2042) on November 22, 2022.

General Plan 2042 combined a new “air quality” element (required by legislation passed in 2016) with the previously required safety element. This element is referred to as the “Air Quality and Safety Element” in General Plan 2042. Section 8.1 of this element noted:

The safety portion of this element incorporates Guadalupe’s local hazard mitigation plan in accordance with Government Code § 65302.6. Per Government Code § 65302, if a local jurisdiction has incorporated its local hazard mitigation plan into its safety element, the risks associated with climate change must be addressed in the local hazard mitigation plan at its next update.

The Air Quality and Safety Element identifies the primary risks of climate change in the City as posed by overall drier conditions, lower average rainfall, and an increased number of high-intensity storm events.

This means that flooding and wildfire events could become common, and the number of high-heat days could increase, posing a threat to vulnerable populations. These are the risks that are required to be addressed in the City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan in the next update.

Michael Cash

Page 2 of 2 ends

During 2022, an update to the County of Santa Barbara (County) Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) was prepared. The 2022 MJHMP update was prepared with input and coordination from each of the county’s eight incorporated cities, six special districts, the County, citizen participation, responsible officials, and support from the State of California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The City (represented by Director of Public Safety, Michael Cash) participated in the 2022 MJHMP Mitigation Advisory Committee (MAC) and Local Planning Team (LPT). Chief Cash reviewed all portions of the MJHMP pertaining to the City, and incorporated relevant components into what is now an annex to the updated MJHMP. This annex to the MJHMP qualifies as the City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.

While content related to the City of Guadalupe may require revisions to meet the plan approval requirements, changes occurring after adoption will not require the City Council to re-adopt any further iterations of the plan. Subsequent plan updates following the approval period for this plan will require separate adoption resolutions.

DISCUSSION:

City staff are seeking City Council approval to adopt the update to the City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, an annex to the 2022 Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan.

Adopting the LHMP and amending the General Plan to incorporate the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan by reference is exempt from environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) through the use of the “General Rule” Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines as adoption of the Amendment will have no potential adverse impact upon the environment because the LHMP will act a guidebook for hazard mitigation strategies but does not implement any specific project, action, or funding.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Adoption of the February 2023 City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, an annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan has no negative financial impact and will allow the City to qualify for additional mitigation funding after a disaster.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution No. 2023-26

Page 1 of 2 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-26

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY GUADALUPE TO ADOPT AN UPDATE TO THE CITY

OF GUADALUPE LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN AND INCORPORATE IT BY REFERENCE IN THE CITY’S AIR QUALITY AND SAFETY ELEMENT OF GENERAL PLAN 2042 WHEREAS, in 2006, the state adopted Assembly Bill (AB) 2140 which added provisions specifying what is to be included in a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) and requiring a linkage between a local jurisdiction's LHMP and the Safety Element of its General Plan; and WHEREAS, AB 2140 provides cities the authority to adopt by reference their respective local hazard mitigation plans as part of the safety elements of their general plans and by doing so, a city becomes eligible for additional funding from the California Office of Emergency Services (OES) under the California Disaster Assistance Act, and
WHEREAS, additional funding from OES made available through this General Plan amendment is in the public interest; and
WHEREAS, AB 2140 can be met by either including the LHMP language specific to AB 2140 as part of the Safety Element or to incorporate the LHMP by reference into the Safety Element of the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council recently approved an updated general plan (General Plan 2042) on November 22, 2022, that combined the mandatory air quality element with the required safety element in General Plan 2042 (referred to as the “Air Quality and Safety Element”, and which identifies the primary risks of climate change in the City as posed by overall drier conditions, lower average rainfall, and an increased number of high-intensity storm events, and that as a result, flooding and wildfire events could become common, and the number of high-heat days could increase, posing a threat to vulnerable populations; and
WHEREAS, this element also states that these risks of climate change are required to be addressed in the next update to the City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan; and WHEREAS, an update to the County of Santa Barbara (County) Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) was prepared, including the City’s LHMP which is an annex to the 2022 MJHMP, and which annex addresses the risks to the City as a result of climate change.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Guadalupe as follows:

SECTION 1. The City Council adopts an update to its LHMP, attached hereto as Exhibit “A” which, among other things, addresses the risks of climate change, and hereby incorporates it by reference into the Air Quality and Safety Element of General Plan 2042 in accordance with the requirements of AB 2140; and
SECTION 2. The City of Guadalupe will submit this adoption resolution to the California Office of Emergency Services and FEMA Region IX officials to enable the plan's final approval in ATTACHMENT 1

Page 2 of 2 ends

accordance with the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 and to establish conformance with the requirement of AB 2140.

SECTION 3. The City Clerk is hereby authorized to make minor changes herein to address clerical errors, so long as substantial conformance of the intent of this document is maintained.

In doing so, the City Clerk shall consult with the City Administrator and City Attorney concerning any changes deemed necessary.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting on the 11th day of April 2023, by the following vote:

MOTION:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

I, Amelia M. Villegas, City Clerk of the City of Guadalupe DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution, being Resolution No. 2023-26, has been duly signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk, all at a regular meeting of the City Council, held April 11, 2023, and that same was approved and adopted.

ATTEST:
______________________________ ____________________________________ Amelia M. Villegas, City Clerk Ariston Julian, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________
Philip F. Sinco, City Attorney
City of Guadalupe
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
An Annex to the Santa Barbara County
Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan
February 2023

EXHIBIT A
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan i
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table of Content

1.0 Introduction....................................................................................................................................................1

2.0 Plan Purpose and Authority........................................................................................................................2

3.0 Planning Process...........................................................................................................................................5

3.1 Overview...................................................................................................................................................5

3.2 Mitigation Advisory Committee (MAC)................................................................................................ 6

3.3 Local Planning Team (LPT)......................................................................................................................7

3.4 Public Outreach and Engagement........................................................................................................ 8

4.0 Capability Assessment.................................................................................................................................8

4.1 Existing Institutions, Plans, Policies, and Ordinances.......................................................................... 9

4.1.1 Fire Department:..............................................................................................................................9

4.1.2 Building and Planning Department (Contract Services): ........................................................10

4.1.3 Public Works Department: ..........................................................................................................11

4.1.4 Engineering Department (Contract Service): ............................................................................11

4.1.5 Police Department:........................................................................................................................11

4.2 Administrative and Technical Capacity .............................................................................................12

4.3 Legal and Regulatory Capabilities....................................................................................................13

4.4 GIS, Computer and Communication Technology..............................................................................14

4.5 Financial Resources................................................................................................................................14

4.6 Education and Outreach Capabilities................................................................................................15

4.7 Relevant Plans, Policies, and Ordinances..........................................................................................16

4.7.1 Integrated Regional Multi-Hazard Emergency Response Plan for the Cities of Santa Maria and Guadalupe....................................................................................................16

4.7.2 City Of Guadalupe General Plan.............................................................................................16

4.7.3 Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances..........................................................................................21

4.7.4 The Storm Water Management Program ................................................................................21

4.7.5 Building Codes...............................................................................................................................22

4.7.6 Floodplain Management Ordinance.........................................................................................22

4.7.7 National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and Repetitive Loss (RL) Properties ................23

4.7.8 SEMS Multi-Hazard Functional Plan ..........................................................................................23

4.8 Opportunities for Mitigation Capability Improvements.................................................................24

5.0 Hazard Assessment....................................................................................................................................25

5.1 Overview.................................................................................................................................................25

5.2 Hazard Screening/Prioritization.........................................................................................................25

5.3 Pandemic/Public Health Emergency ..................................................................................................26

5.4 Earthquake & Liquefaction ..................................................................................................................26

5.5 Extreme Heat & Windstorm.................................................................................................................28

5.6 Dam/Levee Failure................................................................................................................................29

5.7 Train Accident.........................................................................................................................................31

5.8 Flooding...................................................................................................................................................31

5.9 Agriculture Pests & Other Agricultural Hazards..............................................................................32

5.10 Hazardous Materials Release.............................................................................................................32

6.0 Vulnerability Assessment...........................................................................................................................33

6.1 Earthquake & Liquefaction ..................................................................................................................35

6.2 Extreme Heat & Windstorm.................................................................................................................39

6.3 Dam/Levee Failure................................................................................................................................39

6.4 Flood ........................................................................................................................................................42

6.5 Wildfire...................................................................................................................................................42

7.0 Mitigation Strategy ...................................................................................................................................44

7.1 Mitigation Priorities...............................................................................................................................44

7.1.1 Goals and Objectives..................................................................................................................44 ii February 2023

7.2 Mitigation Progress ...............................................................................................................................46

7.3 Mitigation Approach.............................................................................................................................46

7.4 Implementation Plan..............................................................................................................................47

8.0 Plan Maintenance.......................................................................................................................................52

8.1 Monitoring, Evaluating, and Updating the plan ..............................................................................52

8.2 Implementation through Existing Plans and Programs....................................................................52

8.3 Ongoing Public Outreach and Engagement.....................................................................................53

8.4 Point of Contact......................................................................................................................................53

9.0 References...................................................................................................................................................53 List of Figures
Figure 4-1. General Plan Land Use Map.......................................................................................................18 Figure 4-2. Regional Seismic Hazards ............................................................................................................20 Figure 5-1. Santa Barbara County Probability of Shaking 2% in 50 Years..........................................27 Figure 5-2. Location of Santa Maria River Levee Segments......................................................................30 Figure 6-1. City of Guadalupe Critical Facilities and Earthquake Groundshaking Potential (San Luis Range 7.2 Magnitude ShakeMap) ............................................................................37 Figure 6-2. City of Guadalupe Critical Facilities and Liquefaction Potential .........................................38 Figure 6-3. City of Guadalupe Critical Facilities in Twitchell Dam Inundation Zone..............................41 Figure 6-4. City of Guadalupe Critical Facilities within Wildfire Threat Zones.....................................43 List of Tables
Table 3-1. Mitigation Advisory Committee (MAC) Meetings Summary..................................................... 6 Table 3-2. City of Guadalupe Local Planning Team 2022......................................................................... 7 Table 3-3. Local Planning Team Activity Summary ....................................................................................... 7 Table 4-1. City of Guadalupe Administrative and Technical Capacity..................................................12 Table 4-2. City of Guadalupe: Legal and Regulatory Capability ..........................................................13 Table 4-3. City of Guadalupe Fiscal Capability.........................................................................................15 Table 5-1. City of Guadalupe Local Priority Hazards...............................................................................26 Table 6-1. Critical Facilities in the City of Guadalupe...............................................................................34 Table 6-2. Summary of Potential Impacts to Critical Facilities..................................................................34 Table 6-3. City of Guadalupe at Risk to the High Liquefaction Hazard by Property Type...............35 Table 6-4. City of Guadalupe Critical Facilities Vulnerable to Liquefaction.........................................36 Table 6-5. City of Guadalupe at Risk to Dam Inundation Hazard ..........................................................39 Table 6-6. City of Guadalupe Critical Facilities Vulnerable to Inundation from Dam/Levee Failure...............................................................................................................................................40 Table 6-7. City of Guadalupe at Risk to Wildfire Threat .........................................................................42 Table 6-8. City of Guadalupe Critical Facilities Vulnerable to Wildfire ...............................................42 Table 7-1. Status of Previous Mitigation Actions..........................................................................................46

1.0. Introduction
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 1
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Natural and human-caused disasters can lead to death, injury, property damage, and interruption of business and government services. When they occur, the time, money, and effort to respond to and recover from these disasters divert public resources and attention from other important programs and problems.

However, the impact of foreseeable yet often unpredictable natural and human-caused events can be reduced through mitigation planning. History has demonstrated that it is less expensive to mitigate against disaster damage than to repeatedly repair damage in the aftermath. A mitigation plan states the aspirations and specific courses of action jurisdictions intend to follow to reduce vulnerability and exposure to future hazard events.

The City of Guadalupe (City) recognizes the consequences of disasters and the need to reduce the impacts of all hazards, natural and human-caused. This annex was prepared in 2022 as part of the update to the County of Santa Barbara (County) Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP). This annex serves as the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) for the City. The LHMP was last comprehensively updated in 2017 as an annex to the 2017 MJHMP. Since 2017, the City has:
• Incorporated the LHMP goals, objectives, and mitigation actions into its local plans and processes, including the General Plan Safety Element by reference and specific hazard planning efforts (e.g., Stormwater Management Program, CERT trainings). • Used the LHMP’s assessment of capabilities, hazards, and vulnerabilities to inform planning, capital improvements, programs, decision-makers, and the public. • Implemented mitigation actions through the City’s general plan, capital improvement program, maintenance programs, grant programming, community outreach, and budget process. • Reviewed and evaluated mitigation annually.

This update to the LHMP builds on and refines the MJHMP’s assessment of hazards and vulnerabilities countywide to develop a mitigation plan for the City. The City participated in the 2022 MJHMP Mitigation Advisory Committee (MAC) and Local Planning Team (LPT), reviewed all portions of the MJHMP pertaining to the City, and incorporated relevant components into this annex.

It contains updated capability assessment information, a current vulnerability assessment, and an updated/revised mitigation strategy. The methodology and process for developing this annex build on approaches employed in the 2022 MJHMP and are explained throughout the following sections.

The 2022 MJHMP update was prepared with input and coordination from each of the county’s eight incorporated cities, six special districts, the County, citizen participation, responsible officials, and support from the State of California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The process to update the MJHMP and this LHMP included over a year of coordination with representatives from all participating agencies within the County and County representatives who comprised the MAC (described further in Section

3.0 below). The City is a participating agency in the County’s MJHMP update.

The City’s LHMP is used by local emergency management teams, decision-makers, and agency staff to implement needed mitigation to address known hazards. The MJHMP and this annex can also be used as a tool for all stakeholders to increase community awareness of local hazards and risks and

2.0. Plan Purpose and Authority
2 February 2023
provide information about options and resources available to reduce those risks. Informing and educating the public about potential hazards helps all county residents and visitors protect themselves against their effects.

Risk assessments were performed that identified and evaluated priority hazards that could impact the City. Vulnerability assessments summarize the identified hazards’ impact on the City. Estimates of potential dollar losses to vulnerable structures are presented. The risk and vulnerability assessments were used to determine mitigation goals and objectives to minimize near-term and long-term vulnerabilities to the identified hazards. These goals and objectives are the foundation for a comprehensive range of specific attainable mitigation actions (see Section 7.0, Mitigation Strategy).

2.0 PLAN PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY
Federal legislation historically provided funding for disaster preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation. The Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA) of 2000, also commonly known as “The 2000 Stafford Act Amendments” (the Act), constitutes an effort by the federal government to reduce the rising cost of disasters. The legislation reinforces the importance of mitigation planning and emphasizes planning for disasters before they occur.

Section 322 of the DMA requires local governments to develop and submit mitigation plans to qualify for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) funds. The 2022 MJHMP meets the statutory requirements of DMA 2000 (P.L. 106-390), enacted October 30, 2000, and 44 CFR Part 201 – Mitigation Planning, Interim Final Rule, published February 26, 2002. The HMA grants include the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program, and the Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) program. Additional FEMA mitigation funds include the HMGP Post Fire funding associated with Fire Management Assistance Grant (FMAG) declarations and the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) funding associated with the 2018 Disaster Recovery Reform Act (DRRA).

DMA 2000 specifically addresses mitigation planning at the state and local levels. It identifies requirements that allow HMGP funds to be used for planning activities and increases the amount of HMGP funds available to states that have developed a comprehensive, enhanced mitigation plan before a disaster. State, county, and local jurisdictions must have an approved mitigation plan in place before receiving post-disaster HMGP funds. These mitigation plans must demonstrate that their proposed projects are based on a sound planning process that accounts for the risk to and the capabilities of the individual communities.

Local governments have certain responsibilities for implementing Section 322, including:
• Preparing and submitting a local mitigation plan;
• Reviewing and updating the plan every five years; and • Monitoring mitigation actions and projects.

To facilitate implementation of the DMA 2000, FEMA created an Interim Final Rule (the Rule), published in the Federal Register in February of 2002 at section 201 of 44 CFR. The Rule spells out the mitigation planning criteria for states and local communities. Specific requirements for local mitigation planning efforts are outlined in section §201.6 of the Rule.

2.0. Plan Purpose and Authority
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 3
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan In March 2013, FEMA released The Local Mitigation Planning Handbook (Handbook) as the official guide for local governments to develop, update and implement local mitigation plans. The Handbook complements and references the October 2011 FEMA Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide (Guide) to help “Federal and State officials assess Local Mitigation Plans in a fair and consistent manner.” Local jurisdictions must demonstrate that proposed mitigation actions are based upon a sound planning process that accounts for the inherent risk and capabilities of the individual communities as stated in section §201.5 of the Rule. The Handbook and Guide were consulted to ensure thoroughness, diligence, and compliance with the DMA 2000 planning requirements.

DMA 2000 is intended to facilitate cooperation between state and local authorities, prompting them to work together. It encourages and rewards local and state pre-disaster planning and promotes sustainability as a strategy for disaster resistance. This enhanced planning network is intended to enable local and state governments to articulate accurate needs for mitigation, resulting in a faster allocation of funding and more effective risk reduction projects.

This LHMP was prepared as an annex to the County’s MJHMP in compliance with DMA 2000 and applicable FEMA guidance. The following pages show the resolutions that adopt the City’s 2022 LHMP.

2.0. Plan Purpose and Authority
4 February 2023
[INSERT CITY RESOLUTION(S) ADOPTING PLAN UPDATE]

3.0. Planning Process
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 5
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

3.0 PLANNING PROCESS

3.1 OVERVIEW
The planning process implemented for the County’s 2022 MJHMP update, including the City’s LHMP update, utilized two different planning teams to review progress, inform and guide the update, and directly review and prepare portions of the plan, including each jurisdictional annex. The first team is the Mitigation Advisory Committee (MAC) and the second is the Local Planning Team (LPT).

All eight incorporated cities and the six special districts joined the County as participating agencies in the preparation of the MJHMP update, including cities of Buellton, Carpinteria, Goleta, Guadalupe, Lompoc Santa Barbara, Santa Maria, and Solvang; and special districts Cachuma Operation and Maintenance Board (COMB), Carpinteria Valley Water District (CVWD), Goleta Water District (GWD), Montecito Fire Protection District (MFPD), Montecito Water District (MWD), and Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District (SMVWCD). Each of the participating agencies had representation on the MAC and was responsible for the administration of their own LPT. In addition, the MAC included representatives from other state and local agencies with an interest in hazard mitigation in Santa Barbara County, including local non-profit organizations, special districts, and state and federal agencies. This composition ensures diverse input from an array of voices representing all communities within Santa Barbara County.

Both the MAC and the LPTs focused on these underlining philosophies, adopted from the FEMA Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide:
• Focus on the mitigation strategy
The mitigation strategy is the plan’s primary purpose. All other sections contribute to and inform the mitigation strategy and specific hazard mitigation actions. • Process is as important as the plan itself
In mitigation planning, as with most other planning efforts, the plan is only as good as the process and people involved in its development. The plan should also serve as the written record, or documentation, of the planning process.
• This is the community’s plan
To have value; the plan must represent the current needs and values of the community and be useful for local officials and stakeholders. Develop the mitigation plan in a way that best serves your community’s purpose and people.
• Intent is as important as Compliance
Plan reviews will focus on whether the mitigation plan meets the intent of the law and regulation; and ultimately that the plan will make the community safer from hazards.

As a result, the planning process incorporated the following steps:
• Plan Preparation

3.0. Planning Process
6 February 2023
• Form/validate planning team members
• Establish common project goals
• Set expectations and timelines
• Plan Development
• Validate and revise the existing conditions/situation within the planning area; • Develop and review the risk to hazards (exposure and vulnerability) within the planning area;
• Review and identify mitigation actions and projects within the planning area; • Finalize the Plan
• Review and revise the plan
• Approve the plan locally and with state and federal reviewers • Adopt and disseminate the plan

3.2 MITIGATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE (MAC)
The City participated as a MAC member to prepare this LHMP as an annex to the 2022 MJHMP.

The City was represented by Michael Cash, Chief of Police and Director of Public Safety on the MAC.

The MAC meetings were designed to discuss each component of the MJHMP with MAC members and coordinate annex updates. Table 3-1 below provides a list and the main purpose and topics of each MAC meeting.

Table 3-1. Mitigation Advisory Committee (MAC) Meetings Summary Date Purpose
March 2021
MAC Meeting #1 (virtual)
Provided an overview of the project and why the plan is being revised Reviewed FEMA guidance and processes
Discussed roles and responsibilities of the participating jurisdictions September 2021
MAC Meeting #2 (virtual)
Reviewed goals of the project, role of the MAC
Summarized public outreach results
Presented hazards assessment and displayed select draft hazard maps Conducted interactive exercise to rank hazards
October 2021
MAC Meeting #3 (virtual)
Provided results of hazard ranking methodology
Presented vulnerabilities assessment
Discussed mitigation goals, objectives, and strategies
Reviewed County goals from 2017 and compared them to new goals Conducted interactive exercise on potential mitigation goals and strategies October 2021 MAC Meeting #4 (virtual)

3.0. Planning Process
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 7
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Date Purpose
Collected feedback on 2017 mitigation strategies
Conducted interactive exercise on mitigation strategies for key hazards unaddressed in previous MJHMP
Discussed annex updates
January 2022
MAC Meeting #5 (virtual)
Presented draft plan
Discussed key MAC/LPT review needs and key issues
Discussed annex updates to dovetail with plan update
March 2022
MAC Meeting #6 (virtual)
Review and discuss public comments received on the draft plan Recommend a revised draft plan to decision-makers
Review annex updates for review and approval

3.3 LOCAL PLANNING TEAM (LPT)
Table 3-2 lists the City’s LPT. These individuals collaborated to identify the City’s critical facilities, provide relevant plans, report on the progress of City mitigation actions, and provide suggestions for new mitigation actions.

Table 3-2. City of Guadalupe Local Planning Team 2022
Department Name Title
Police Michael Cash Chief of Police & Director of Public Safety Emergency Services Zach Jones Former Emergency Services Coordinator Public Works Shannon Sweeney Public Works Director
Administration Todd Bodem City Administrator
The Guadalupe LPT members worked directly with the Santa Barbara County Office of Emergency Management (OEM), the consultant team, and each other to provide data, recommended changes, and continually work on the MJHMP and LHMP updates throughout the planning process. The City LPT met virtually as needed during the planning process to discuss data needs and organize data collection. Table 3-3 below outlines a timeline of the LPT's activities throughout the planning process.

Table 3-3. Local Planning Team Activity Summary
Meeting Dates Summary of Activity
February 2020 LPT kickoff meeting to discuss stakeholder and public involvement and refine the scope of hazard analysis
April 2021 to January
2022
Collated data to share with hazard mitigation planning team, including hazard identification, refreshed data layers for maps, and geographic settings.

Completed Plan Update Guides to directly inform hazard priorities and mitigation capabilities
January and March 2022
Reviewed new maps and local vulnerabilities.

Provided input on the status of 2017 LHMP mitigation strategies.

Reviewed draft mitigation strategies and provide feedback.

4.0. Capability Assessment
8 February 2023
Meeting Dates Summary of Activity
Reviewed and finalized 2022 LHMP

3.4 PUBLIC OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT
As a participating agency in the 2022 MJHMP update, the City was directly involved in the outreach program undertaken by the County for the 2022 MJHMP update, which involved extensive outreach during 2021 and early 2022. The City’s MAC and LPT members participated in public outreach efforts for the MJHMP and LHMP update planning process by distributing notices for the 6-monthlong community hazards survey (refer to Section 3.4.1 of the 2022 MJHMP) and three public workshops (refer to Section 3.4.4 of the MJHMP). The Public Outreach Plan (POP) employed a diversity of tools to maximize notification and participation. The POP was responsive to limitations presented by the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and focused on direct bilingual outreach using a variety of digital tools, including a fact sheet, social media posts, emails, and press releases.

Multiple platforms and tools were used to publicize opportunities to participate. All public and stakeholder meetings were hosted virtually through Microsoft Teams, and all outreach completed for the project was conducted via electronic communications. Many of the meetings used an interactive tool called Slido to collect feedback during meetings. Slido allows audience members to answer questions during presentations, helping the County collect direct detailed feedback and facilitate discussion. All written notices were made available in English and Spanish.

In April 2022, the LHMP was completed and made available for public review, concurrent with review by FEMA and CalOES. In addition, the opportunity for the community to be heard was permitted during the City Council meeting before the adoption of this plan.

4.0 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
Guadalupe is located in northern Santa Barbara County within the Santa Maria Valley. The City lies about 10 miles west of the City of Santa Maria. It is 85 feet above sea level and contains a land area of 1.31 square miles. The City lies approximately three miles from the Pacific Ocean along State Route (SR) 1, which runs through the center of the downtown central business district.

Surrounding the city on the East, West, and South are several square miles of flat, open agricultural land.

According to 2019 U.S. Census Bureau data, the City is home to 7,719 residents. This population is projected to grow to 9,873 residents by 2050, which is the highest growth rate projected in the county (SBCAG 2018). The average household size in Guadalupe is 3.93 and the median household income is $48,680 (US Census Bureau 2019). Guadalupe boasts one of the lowest crime rates in California. Guadalupe is home to two museums; the Guadalupe Cultural Arts & Educational Center and the Guadalupe Historical Society. Several events are held each year in downtown Guadalupe, including various festivals and parades. Guadalupe is the gateway to the Guadalupe Dunes, which supports passive recreation and resource conservation on the coastline outside the City. Guadalupe Dunes County Park is a popular place for fishing. The Dunes Center provides hiking with a variety

4.0. Capability Assessment
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 9
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan of natural wonders. The City is surrounded by agricultural land and agriculture is the primary economic driver in Guadalupe.

The City’s LPT identified current capabilities available for implementing hazard mitigation activities, including administrative, technical, legal, and fiscal capabilities. This assessment includes a summary of departments and their responsibilities associated to hazard mitigation planning, as well as codes, ordinances, and plans already in place associated to hazard mitigation planning. The assessment also t provides Guadalupe’s fiscal capabilities that may apply to providing financial resources to implement identified mitigation action items.

4.1 EXISTING INSTITUTIONS, PLANS, POLICIES, AND ORDINANCES The Mayor and City Council are elected by the voters of the City of Guadalupe. The City Council exercises the legislative powers of the City and other City officials oversee the daily operations.

The Council appoints the City Administrator. City administration includes the officials appointed by the City Council and officials elected by the citywide vote, including the City Clerk, Treasurer, Director of Public Safety (Police and Fire Chief,) Public Works supervisor, Finance Director, Human Services Director, Parks and Recreation Director, Contracted City Planner, Contracted City Engineer and Contracted City Attorney. Guadalupe has a Mayor and four Council members. The City of Guadalupe’s organizational chart is listed in this section. Department heads under contract are noted as (C). Primary City Departments involved in activities related to hazard mitigation include the following:

4.1.1 Fire Department:
• Administration: Develop, implement and monitor policies, procedures, budgets, fees, automatic aid agreements, mutual aid agreements, and liaison with other City departments and outside agencies.
• Fire and Life Safety Program: Manage Building and Planning Departments, coordinate adoption of codes and ordinances, review site and building plans for fire code compliance, develop and present public education programs and manage the City’s General Code Complianceprogram.
• Operations and Emergency Medical Services: Maintain the department’s personnel, apparatus, equipment, and fire stations in a state of readiness to respond to the community’s needs, develop and implement standard operating procedures for various types of emergency responses, respond to all types of emergencies, and train and interact with neighboring jurisdictions and regional agencies. Manage the department’s EMT program, respond to medical emergencies and other calls for service, and participate with other community and regional health care providers to reduce public illness and injury.

4.0. Capability Assessment
10 February 2023
Chart 1-1. City of Guadalupe Organizational Chart
• Emergency Planning and Management: Coordinate the City’s Disaster Preparedness Program, liaison with all City departments and divisions, as well as other public and private organizations.

Develop, coordinate and implement hazard-specific response plans, and maintain the operational readiness of the City’s Emergency Management Team, the Emergency Operations Center (EOC), and other key elements.

4.1.2 Building and Planning Department (Contract Services):
• Coordinate adoption and amending of building, plumbing, electrical, and mechanical codes.

Develop building ordinances.
• Review site and building plans for compliance with building codes and ordinances. • Damage assessment of structures from multiple causes to facilitate repairs and future occupancy • Develop and maintain City general plan, zoning ordinances, and development standards.

4.0. Capability Assessment
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 11
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • Oversight of City development process assuring compliance with zoning and general plan, including environmental impact reports, design review, historic preservation, landscape review, habitat conservation, floodway prohibitions, and floodplain developmentstandards.

4.1.3 Public Works Department:
• Maintains City infrastructure (assets) ranging from streets to parks to buildings, and infrastructure • Responds to City emergencies, including EOC response in disasters and assisting police and fire departments with traffic and perimeter control efforts, traffic collision clean up, and evacuation routing.
• Operates, maintains, and enhances both the water distribution and sewer collection systems within the City of Guadalupe. Also has oversight of solid waste management program. Solid waste collection is done through a private contractor.
• Responsible for planning and implementation associated with the following City plans:
• Water Quality Emergency Notification Plan
• Water Division Emergency Response Plan
• Sewer Overflow Response & Prevention Plan
• Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) Operations Plan

4.1.4 Engineering Department (Contract Service):
• Reviews engineering on private and public grading, floodways, retention basins, transportation infrastructure, and structures to assure compliance with federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and ordinances on seismic and structural stability. • Develops engineering ordinances and policies that help protect and preserve City infrastructure • Evaluates all circulation elements for projected traffic impacts • Determines needed infrastructure improvements, drainage systems, water systems, and water/sewer treatment capabilities
• Provides response personnel for evaluation of damaged infrastructure and rescue situations. • Provides technical assistance as needed in the City’s EOC • Coordinates other response agencies assisting with damage assessment

4.1.5 Police Department:
• Responds to safety concerns involving threats and/or damage to life or property. Acts as the enforcement entity for violations of state and local laws and ordinances • Primary emergency responders to acts of civil disobedience and public disorders and terrorism. • Security and support personnel during emergency rescue and management • Investigative services for crimes that occur within thecity

4.0. Capability Assessment
12 February 2023
• Participates in the development of emergency response plans and implements the emergency response plans and policies, focusing on evacuation procedures and traffic control

4.2 ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL CAPACITY
The administrative and technical capabilities of Guadalupe, as shown in Table 4-1, include staff, personnel, and department resources available to implement the actions identified in Section 7.0, Mitigation Plan of this LHMP. Specific resources reviewed include those involving technical personnel such as planners/engineers with knowledge of land development and land management practices, engineers trained in construction practices related to building and infrastructure, planners and engineers with an understanding of natural or manmade hazards, and floodplain managers.

Guadalupe’s department heads multitask in many areas because of budgetary constraints. The City of Guadalupe has an Emergency Manager position to oversee all factors of Emergency Management within the City. While the former Emergency Manager was involved with this LHMP update, this position is currently open.

Table 4-1. City of Guadalupe Administrative and Technical Capacity Personnel Resources Yes/No Department/Position
Planner/engineer with knowledge of land development/land management practices Yes Building/Business Manager
Engineer/professional trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure Yes Public Works/ Public Works Director Planner/engineer/scientist with an understanding of natural hazards Yes Police Department/ Emergency Manager
Personnel skilled in GIS Yes Public Works/ Public
Works Director
Full-time building official No
Floodplain manager No
Emergency manager Yes Police Department/
Emergency Manager
Grant writer No
Other personnel No
GIS Data Resources
(Hazard areas, critical facilities, land use, building footprints, etc.) No Warning Systems/Services
(Reverse 9-11, cable override, outdoor warning signals) Yes Police Department/
Emergency Manager &
Everbridge Mass
Notification System

4.0. Capability Assessment
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 13
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Personnel Resources Yes/No Department/Position
Other

4.3 LEGAL AND REGULATORY CAPABILITIES
The legal and regulatory capabilities of the City are shown in Table 4-2, including existing ordinances and codes that affect the physical or built environment of Guadalupe. Examples of legal and/or regulatory capabilities can include the City’s building codes, zoning ordinances, subdivision ordnances, special purpose ordinances, growth management ordinances, site plan review, general plans, capital improvement plans, economic development plans, emergency response plans, and real estate disclosure plans.

Table 4-2. City of Guadalupe: Legal and Regulatory Capability Regulatory Tool
(ordinances, codes, plans) Yes/No
General Plan Yes
Zoning ordinance Yes
Subdivision ordinance Yes
Growth management ordinance No
Floodplain ordinance Yes
Other special-purpose ordinances (stormwater, steep slope, wildfire) Yes Building code Yes
Fire code Yes
Fire department ISO rating 4
Erosion or sediment control program No
Stormwater management program No
Site plan review requirements Yes
Capital improvements plan Yes
Economic development plan Yes
Local emergency operations plan Yes
Other special plans No
Flood insurance study or other engineering studies for streams No Elevation certificates (for floodplain development) No
Emergency operations plan Under development

4.0. Capability Assessment
14 February 2023

4.4 GIS, COMPUTER AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY
The City Fire Department is trained in fire, rescue, EMS, and hazardous material. Guadalupe is fully functional on the internet and is in the process of website development. The City has a basic website that is operational.

The City has a dedicated television channel available for community service information (noncommercial) through its contract with Charter Cable TV. This channel is available for both prerecorded and live information broadcasts.

Table 4-3 shows specific financial and budgetary tools available to Guadalupe such as community development block grants; capital improvements project funding; authority to levy taxes for specific purposes; fees for water and sewer services; impact fees for developers for new development; ability to incur debt through general obligations bonds; Guadalupe Redevelopment Agency and withholding spending in hazard-prone areas.

4.5 FINANCIAL RESOURCES
The City’s major economic drivers for its revenue base are sales tax, population growth, employment, construction, property values, and commercial activities. During the ongoing COVID19 pandemic, which began in 2020, the national, state, and local economy has been very slow. As a result, the City has seen a significant decrease in revenues and has experienced a reduction in services and staff. California’s budget has diminished rapidly due to decreased tax revenues. The overall health of California’s economy has a significant influence on local cities and counties, as local government appropriations are usually the first to have their appropriations diminished due to downturns in the economy.

The General Fund balance is an important element that can show the City’s financial strengths or weaknesses. The revenue budget for the City contains more than 50 line items representing different sources, each governed by a distinct set of conditions particular to that revenue source. The largest revenue factor and the core of the resource base that enables the City’s provision of community services is the local revenue portion of Guadalupe’s General Fund. The City’s revenue base is determined by different community conditions such as the current population, employment and income, economic activity within the City, and the growth of invested value from residential and commercial construction, business investment in plant and equipment, and demand for local real property. National, state, and regional economic conditions can also affect the City’s revenue base by creating demand for community goods and services produced within Guadalupe. The largest expenditure categories are for operations and maintenance.

4.0. Capability Assessment
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 15
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table 4-3. City of Guadalupe Fiscal Capability
Financial Resources Accessible or Eligible to
Use (Yes/No)
Has This Been Used for
Mitigation in the Past? Comments
Community Development
Block Grants (CDBG) Y Y
The City has recently
formed a resilience
committee that will
oversee these types of
grants.

Capital improvements
fd
Y N
Authority to levy taxes for
specific purposes N N
Fees for water and sewer
service Y N The City currently charges for water and sewer Incur debt through general
obligation bonds N N
Incur debt through special
tax bonds N N
Incur debt through private
bd
N N
Federal Grant Programs
(Hazard Mitigation Grant
Program)
Y Y

4.6 EDUCATION AND OUTREACH CAPABILITIES
This type of local capability refers to education and outreach programs and methods already in place that could be used to implement mitigation activities and communicate hazard-related information. Examples include natural disaster or safety-related school programs; participation in community programs such as Firewise or StormReady; and activities conducted as part of hazard awareness campaigns such as an Earthquake Awareness Month (February each year), National Preparedness Month (September), or the Great California ShakeOut (a statewide earthquake drill that happens annually on the third Thursday of October). The City can capitalize on its existing educational capacities, even non-hazard related such as school partnerships, and build new capabilities to educate the larger community on hazard risk and mitigation options.

In addition to the countywide resources described in Section 4.2.5, County Education and Outreach Capabilities, the City conducts community outreach to its citizens on special events and community information updates. Public safety training seminars are conducted on an annual basis to respond to natural and man-made disasters.

4.0. Capability Assessment
16 February 2023

4.7 RELEVANT PLANS, POLICIES, AND ORDINANCES
The City of Guadalupe has a range of guidance documents and plans for each of its departments.

These include a General Plan, with the 2019-2027 Housing Element. The City uses building codes, zoning ordinances, subdivision ordinances, and various planning strategies to address how and where development occurs. One of the essential ways the City guides its future is through policies laid out in the General Plan. The LHMP directly informs these plans and is used to evaluate the need for adjustments or updates to existing plans and programs. The City considers the LHMP’s assessment of capabilities, hazards, and vulnerabilities to inform planning, capital improvements, programs, decision-makers, and the public. The City also implements mitigation actions through the City’s general plan, capital improvement program, maintenance programs, grant programming, community outreach, and budget process.

4.7.1 Integrated Regional Multi-Hazard Emergency Response Plan for the Cities of Santa Maria and Guadalupe
The Integrated Regional Multi-Hazard Emergency Response Plan for the Cities of Santa Maria and Guadalupe is constructed to delineate the planning area's procedures and policies when responding to a major emergency event. This includes any significant threat or potential disaster which could impact the health, safety, and property of the public within the planning area. Emphasis is placed on saving lives, preserving property, and minimizing the effects of the disaster. While emergency response and recovery activities are contingent upon the type and extent of the disaster, this plan is flexible enough to be used in all emergencies, including weather events. The hazards identified for Guadalupe include Earthquakes, Flood/Dam Failures, Hazardous Materials, and Transportation accidents. The Plan was adopted in 2016.

4.7.2 City of Guadalupe General Plan
Land Use Element
The City of Guadalupe is still developing and designates its land use zones to reflect the character of the City. Industrial uses support the local employment and are planned with appropriate buffer zones to create a pleasant environment. Commercial zones are divided into two types, with the central business district that encourages pedestrian circulation and a general commercial district that allows for more vehicles and is geared towards tourist services.

Residential areas are designed and planned by housing densities. When defining the residential zoning, the City of Guadalupe finds a delicate balance between urban areas and open spaces.

The Agricultural Land Use designation is involved primarily with active agricultural uses while the Open Space Land Use designation is a combination of grazing activities, sensitive environmental habitats, and passive recreational areas.

The Public Facilities/Parks Land Use category is concerned with water, sewage, drainage, school, parks, and fire protection services to provide for continued development and expansion of the City of Guadalupe. The quality and adequacy of public facilities are two of the most important factors of an expanding economy and the growth of a community. The Point Sal Dunes Specific Plan reserves open space along the Santa Maria River, and for parks.

4.0. Capability Assessment
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 17
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Since the last update of the City’s LHMP in 2017, land use and population in the City have not substantially changed. Modest development has occurred consistent with the adopted Land Use Element and has primarily comprised infill development and redevelopment within the City limits.

There has been no expansion of the City boundary or its Sphere of Influence (SOI) and no comprehensive changes to the Land Use Element that would result in substantial densification.

Further, City population has not substantially changed. As a result, the City’s level of vulnerability to hazards analyzed in Section 6.0, Vulnerability Assessment, has not substantially changed due to land use, development, or population growth since the last update of the LHMP.

Housing Element
The 2019-2027 Housing Element Update provides a comprehensive analysis of Guadalupe’s demographic, economic, and housing characteristics as required by State Law. The housing component of the general plan requires local governments to balance the need for growth, including the need for additional housing, against other competing local interests. In 2017, Guadalupe's housing stock consisted of approximately 1,983 residential units. Of these, 77 percent were singlefamily houses or condos, 23 percent were multi-family units including 1 percent mobile homes and trailers. From 2010 to 2017, the City had an increase in housing units from 1,810 units in 2010 to 1,983 units in 2017, a 9.6 percent increase in units. Over that same time frame, the population grew from 5,659 in 2017 to 7,313 in 2017, an 8 percent increase. Guadalupe is committed to affordable homes for residents with an emphasis on increased energy efficiency in new and existing homes. In October 2017, graduate students from the City and Regional Planning Department of the California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, conducted a citywide walking survey to identify the general structural conditions of homes in Guadalupe. The 2017 housing survey revealed that most of the housing stock (81 percent) was in sound condition. A very small proportion was considered dilapidated and in need of replacement. The general trend depicts the increase in overall quality of housing until 2010 when new additions to the housing stock halted. This increase in quality could be partially due to rehabilitation grant programs funded by the now-defunct Guadalupe Redevelopment Agency and partially due to newly constructed housing.

4.0. Capability Assessment
18 February 2023
Figure 4-1. General Plan Land Use Map

4.0. Capability Assessment
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 19
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Residential development in the City is constrained by environmental factors, including City boundaries and limits, protected agriculture, coastal zone proximity, flood zones, and seismic faults.

About 60 acres in Guadalupe lies within the coastal zone. The City annexed this land in 1990 and prepared a local coastal plan (LCP) that was certified by the California Coastal Commission. The uses for the site include a community park, single-family residences, open space, and the City’s wastewater treatment plan. The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Public Resources Code Section 2621, et seq.) restricts development on the surface traces of known active faults mapped by the State Geologist. However, the San Simeon Earthquake in 2003 did affect many buildings in Guadalupe, primarily because they are Unreinforced Masonry buildings (URM). The City has areas within 100-year and 500-year flood zones, but none of these lands are currently developed or are considered for future development.

Safety Element
The Safety Element is designed to allow for planning that will prevent development in areas that may be at risk to natural and human-made hazards. Such hazards include seismic activity, flooding, fire hazard areas, and noise impact areas. The overall goal is to protect public health, welfare, and safety from the potential hazards of flooding, earthquakes, and fire. The LHMP is incorporated by reference in the Safety Element.

Seismic Activity
There are no known faults within the City of Guadalupe. The closest faults are the Pezzoni fault, approximately 10 miles south of Guadalupe, and the Santa Maria fault, approximately 8 miles to the east. Safety measures related to seismic activity and earthquakes involve prevention of damage and restitution of services. Building requirements should follow recommendations set forth by the California Building Code, which establishes building requirements for all new structures based on predicated earthquake intensities.

The City of Guadalupe will utilize the Goals, Objectives, and Policies as outlined in the City’s General Plan, including Goal SF 4, Protection from seismic hazards and associated soil and ground instability.

Flooding
Policies to mitigate the risks of floods include:
• Policy SF 2.1.1: Review new development for compliance with Building Construction standards outlined in California Code of Regulations, Title 19, Appendix G • Policy SF 2.1.2: Locate, when feasible, new essential public facilities outside of flood hazard zones.
• Policy SF 2.1.3: Protect the community from flooding through levee failure. • Policy SF 2.2.1: Implement National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) activities.

4.0. Capability Assessment
20 February 2023
Figure 4-2. Regional Seismic Hazards
Fire
Fire protection is an important safety consideration for the City of Guadalupe. Fire capabilities of new developments must be carefully planned to give maximum service at minimum cost. Land use, circulation, water, and fire service are all important factors of service costs and system adequacy.

The City recognizes the importance of circulation, to minimize response time to fires and other emergencies, and submits all subdivision plans to the Fire Chief for review and approval.

Policies to encourage quicker and better fire response include:
• Program SF 6.1.2.1: Require new development to provide adequate access to emergency vehicles, including adequate widths, turning radii, hard standing areas, and vertical clearance. • Program SF 6.1.2.2: Develop a plan to widen critical rights-of-way that do not provide adequate clearance for emergency vehicles. For areas that are not feasibly accessible to

4.0. Capability Assessment
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 21
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan emergency vehicles, develop a continency plan to reach and evacuate people in need of treatment.
• Program SF 6.1.2.3: Implement a text message alert system for natural and manmade hazards near and within the City, including text-to-911capabilities. • Program SF 6.1.2.4: Maintain emergency response times to under 15 minutes (the national average) within the City limits.

4.7.3 Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances
The State of California has empowered all cities and counties to adopt zoning ordinances. The City of Guadalupe adopted a zoning ordinance in August 2020. Local land use controls include the Zoning Ordinance, which shapes the form and intensity of land use and residential development.

Consistent with the General Plan, the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a range of zones and dwelling unit densities. Zoning ordinance regulations related to hazard mitigation relate to the risk assessment for hazards within the City, including flooding. Examples of zoning regulations for hazard mitigation include development within the floodplain of the Santa Maria River to prevent undue damage or destruction of development from flood water.

The City of Guadalupe has a five-member Planning Commission, which is an advisory body to the City Council. The Commission was established under State Law to provide relief in special cases where the exact application of the terms of the ordinance would be unduly restrictive and cause hardship, in addition to generally reviewing zoning and subdivision proposals. The Planning Commission hears and decides upon the interpretation and the application of the provisions of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. Although the Commission has certain discretionary powers in making its decisions, the Commission must always abide by and comply with the powers granted to it by the local Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances and the state’s enabling acts. Additionally, the Planning Commission may recommend actions to the City Council and the Planning Commission’s actions may be appealed to the City Council.

4.7.4 The Storm Water Management Program
The California Regional Water Quality Control Board for the Central Coast Region (Water Board) adopted the Post-Construction Requirements (PCRs) in July 2013. As of March 6, 2014, development projects that create or replace 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surfaces (roofs or pavement) must incorporate specified measures to reduce runoff. Projects that create or replace less than 5,000 square feet of impervious surface qualify as small, Tier 1 Projects. Projects that create or replace 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface except for detached singlefamily homes, and single-family homes that create or replace 15,000 square feet or more of impervious surface, require a more comprehensive Stormwater Control Plan (SCP), either Tier 2 or Tier 2 and 3. The City of Guadalupe is utilizing the County of Santa Barbara Project Clean Water’s Stormwater Technical Guide as a guide in determining which Tier(s) apply to proposed projects.

The City of Guadalupe’s Public Works Department continually maintains the City’s storm water system. The system has approximately 2.1 miles of underground storm water system piping; approximately 1.1 miles of an open ditch that fronts agricultural properties and receives field runoff as well as storm runoff; approximately 0.5 miles of an open ditch that carries excess water

4.0. Capability Assessment
22 February 2023
which accumulates in an area known as Guadalupe Wetlands/ Lake and also receives agricultural runoff; 83 drop inlets; 3 box culverts with runs of approximately 125 ft.; and 22 manholes equipped with drop inlets and four outlet sites. This is what functions as the City of Guadalupe’s current storm water system.

4.7.5 Building Codes
The State of California has adopted the California Building Codes, which is enforced in the City of Guadalupe. The California Uniform Statewide Building Code is based on the International Building Code with state amendments. The City has adopted the California Building Codes with local amendments. A copy is available for review in the City’s Building & Planning Department.

The City provides for and enforces state, City, and County Codes for building residential and commercial structures, enforcing environmental codes and guidelines for maintaining existing structures.

The City of Guadalupe Fire Department has an ISO rating of 4. The ISO is an insurer-supported organization that provides advisory insurance underwriting and rating information to insurers. The ISO uses a rating scale of 1 to 10 with 1 being the highest rating given.

4.7.6 Floodplain Management Ordinance
Chapter 15.12 of the City Municipal Code outlines the City’s Floodplain Management Ordinance.

The City of Guadalupe refers to the Santa Barbara County Floodplain Ordinance by reference. It is important to note, however, that many parts of the City flood due to storm water infrastructure, not because of their proximity to the 100-year floodplain.

The FIRMs were developed through the NFIP and were last updated in September 2005 and made available in GIS format as Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps. These are shown in Section 5.3.3 which discusses the location and extent of the flooding hazard throughout Santa Barbara County.

The FIRMs are used by both the public and private sectors to determine flood insurance requirements and rates and to administer the City's Floodplain Management Ordinance.

Floodplain districts identified in the FIRMs include the following flood hazard zones and definitions:
• Zone A is the flood insurance rate zone that corresponds to the 100-year floodplains that are determined in the Flood Insurance Study by approximate methods. Because detailed hydraulic analysis is not performed for such areas, no Base Flood Elevations or flood hazard factors are determined.
• Zone AO is the flood insurance rate zone that corresponds to areas of 100- year shallow flooding where depths are between one (1) and three (3) feet; average depths of inundation are shown, but no flood hazard factors are determined.
• Zone A1-A30 is the flood insurance rate zone that corresponds to areas of 100-year flood; base flood elevations and flood hazard factors are determined. • Zone B is the flood insurance rate zone that corresponds to areas between limits of the 100- year flood and 500-year flood, or certain areas subject to 100-year flooding with average

4.0. Capability Assessment
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 23
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan depths less than one (1) foot or where the contributing drainage area is less than one square mile; or areas protected by levees from the base flood. • Zone C is the flood insurance rate zone that corresponds to areas of minimal flooding.

All potential development projects located within floodplains must follow an established development review process. Developments involving drainage ditches or watercourses in floodplains must receive federal, state, and local review and permits as required by the Floodplain Administrator and the Guadalupe MunicipalCode.

4.7.7 National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and Repetitive Loss (RL) Properties The City is part of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The NFIP aims to reduce the impact of flooding on private and public structures. It does so by providing affordable insurance to property owners and by encouraging communities to adopt and enforce floodplain management regulations. These efforts help mitigate the effects of flooding on new and improved structures.

Repetitive loss properties are defined as property that is insured under the NFIP that has filed two or more claims over $1,000 each within any consecutive 10-year period since 1978. The City of Guadalupe has no “Repetitive Loss” properties that are insured under the NFIP. The City has several “Repetitive Loss” properties within the community, but none are insured under the NFIP.

The primary water flow that affects these “Repetitive Loss” properties originates outside of the jurisdiction of the City of Guadalupe and 100% of the flow pathway is also outside of the City’s jurisdiction. The City has been in communication with the various jurisdictional authorities, which include, but are not limited to: U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Santa Barbara County Flood Control, State Regional Water Quality Control Board, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, CA Department of Fish & Game, and the owners of private property outside of the City’s jurisdiction. As of this date, several options have been discussed, however, none of the options have been implemented, due to the projected costs identified, a lack of revenue sources to fund any of these options and the existing permitting process which is very onerous and in essence serves to dissuade anyone from embarking down that pathway.

4.7.8 SEMS Multi-Hazard Functional Plan
In early October 2004, the City of Guadalupe submitted its Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) Multi-Hazard Functional Plan to the State of California for approval. The Plan discusses mitigation in the form of training and exercises, which are essential at all levels of government to make emergency operations personnel operationally ready. All emergency plans should include provisions for training. The objective is to train and educate public officials, emergency response personnel, and the public. The best method for training staff to manage emergency operations is through exercises. Exercises are conducted regularly to maintain the readiness of operational procedures.

Exercises provide personnel with an opportunity to become thoroughly familiar with the procedures, facilities, and systems that will be used in emergencies. There are several forms of exercises:

4.0. Capability Assessment
24 February 2023
• Tabletop exercises provide a convenient and low-cost method designed to evaluate policy, plans, and procedures and resolve coordination and responsibilities. Such exercises are a good way to see if policies and procedures exist to handle certain issues. • Functional exercises are designed to test and evaluate the capability of an individual function such as evacuation, medical, communications, or public information. • Full-scale exercises simulate an actual emergency. They typically involve complete emergency management staff and are designed to evaluate the operational capability of the emergency management system. Hazard Assessment
All City employees had completed the Introductory SEMS/NIMS training and plans are in progress for advanced SEMS/NIMS training based on job responsibilities. However, through attrition, there are some employees in need of the introductory course which will be corrected over time.

4.8 OPPORTUNITIES FOR MITIGATION CAPABILITY IMPROVEMENTS The City continuously strives to mitigate the adverse effects of potential hazards through its existing capabilities while also evaluating the opportunities for improvements. Based on the capability assessment, the City has existing regulatory, administrative/technical, education/outreach, and fiscal mechanisms in place that help to mitigate hazards. In addition to these existing capabilities, there are opportunities for the City to expand or improve on these policies and programs to further protect the community:
• Regulatory Opportunities: As part of this update, the City will comply with AB 2140 by amending its Safety Element to incorporate the LHMP by reference. The City will consider the LHMP in policy, land use plans, and programs, including flood management. For example, the seeks to prepare a master drainage study to identify and resolve flood issues in the City. • Administrative/Technical Opportunities: The City continues to improve its resilience to ensure emergency response operations are sustained during a hazardous event, including seismic upgrades to unreinforced masonry buildings and improvements to public safety facilities and planning. Enhancements to hazard training for staff in partnership with the County and other agencies or stakeholders would improve the City’s ability to mitigate hazards with the latest knowledge and resources. The City aims to address hydrologic issues through continued improvements to its drainage and stormwater management infrastructure. As an ongoing commitment to improvements, Public Safety staff will reinspect building for shelters and safe places for family reunification centers. Food storage and distribution centers will be selected along with medical triage preparation sites.
• Outreach Opportunities: Enhanced community outreach, emergency notifications, and trainings would further enhance the City’s capabilities to respond to and recover from hazards. The City could expand outreach through digital tools such as social media, participate in the Great California ShakeOut, and increase FireWise outreach events and media coverage. • Fiscal Opportunities: The City can update its CIP to include hazard mitigation actions from the LHMP. The City will continue to seek grants (e.g., HMGP, BRIC) to fund these CIP projects and

5.0. Hazard Assessment
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 25
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan related projects in the City’s mitigation strategy. The City can seek opportunities to partner with the County and/or other stakeholder agencies in grant applications to address regional hazards more effectively. The City could also consider expanding its fiscal capabilities through its annual budget process and other revenue measures (e.g., raising taxes, property assessments, bonds).

5.0 HAZARD ASSESSMENT

5.1 OVERVIEW
The purpose of this section is to review, update, and/or validate the hazards identified for the 2022 City of Guadalupe LHMP. The intent is to confirm and update the description, location and extent, and history of hazards facing the City now and in the future. This assessment also considers the potential exacerbating effects of climate change. The importance of this review is to ensure that decisions and mitigating actions are based on the most up-to-date information available.

Another purpose of this section is to screen the hazards to determine their relative probability and severity to inform the risk posed to various communities and resources. This assessment will provide an understanding of the significance by ranking hazards by their priority in the City.

In 2021, the MAC reviewed and revised 1) the list of hazards by community or geographic area; 2) the information and material presented for each hazard; and 3) the prioritization of the hazards.

The City refined the list of hazards applicable to the City and confirmed the hazard prioritization.

The following sections provide the results of this effort.

5.2 HAZARD SCREENING/PRIORITIZATION
As described in the 2022 MJHMP, the City is susceptible to natural and human-caused hazards. This LHMP update identifies and screens these hazards. Screening hazards intends to help prioritize which hazards present the greatest risks to the community. The potential extent, probability, frequency, and magnitude of future occurrences were all used to identify and prioritize the list of hazards most relevant in the City. The City LPT completed the Plan Update Guide to rank the hazards and identify key hazards to help inform this assessment (Appendix A). As summarized in Table 5-1, the local priority hazards in the City are based on the screening of frequency/probability of occurrence, geographic extent, potential magnitude/severity of the hazard, and overall significance. Local experience, MAC/LPT input, and community feedback also informed the assessment of local priority hazards. After reviewing the localized hazard maps and exposure/loss assessment provided in the 2022 MJHMP, the following hazards were identified by the Guadalupe LPT as their top seven. A brief rationale for each hazard is included below. This assessment of key hazards in the City is provided in addition to the 2022 MJHMP’s comprehensive assessment of regional hazards that may affect the City.

5.0. Hazard Assessment
26 February 2023
Table 5-1. City of Guadalupe Local Priority Hazards
Hazard Type and Ranking Score Planning Consideration
Based on Hazard Level
Pandemic/Public Health Emergency 10 Significant
Earthquake 9 Significant
Extreme Heat and Windstorm 6 Significant
Dam/Levee Failure 6 Moderate
Train Accident 7 Moderate
Flooding 5 Moderate
Agricultural Pests 3 Low

5.3 PANDEMIC/PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY
The City, as well as the county, state, nation, and the entire world, is vulnerable to outbreaks, epidemics, and pandemics caused by either newly emerging or existing diseases spread person to person, through a vector such as a mosquito, or both. A significant public health emergency can have a considerable impact on the population, the economy, and essential public services (e.g., fire and police protection, medical services, etc.). Populations identified by the county as especially vulnerable to human health hazards include undocumented persons, senior citizens, senior citizens living alone, persons with existing chronic health conditions, persons experiencing houselessness, overcrowded households and neighborhoods, low-resourced ethnic minorities people of color, households in poverty, communities with a high-pollution burden, and those without health insurance. Undocumented or nonEnglish speaking individuals may be less able to understand such pandemic-related instructions or receptive to responding to government outreach, while lower-income households may lack the means to comply with the direction. Trends of the COVID-19 pandemic further revealed vulnerable groups within Santa Barbara County population, including residents of Guadalupe.

Guadalupe residents’ health care needs are often met regionally by medical resources in Santa Maria and Lompoc. As demonstrated by the Covid-19 pandemic, health care resources were strained throughout the county. Further, hospitality, retail, tourism, and hospitality industries have been adversely affected economically through reduced activity and a limited workforce, including business in the City.

5.4 EARTHQUAKE & LIQUEFACTION
A more complete description of the earthquake and liquefaction hazards is found in Chapter 5.0, Hazard Assessment of the 2022 MJHMP. Santa Barbara County officials have indicated that the City of Guadalupe is located in Seismic Zone 4, which is the highest potential status for earthquake activity in the state of California. Problems that may occur as a result of a light-to-heavy damaging earthquake include building collapse (particularly un-reinforced masonry structures) causing mass injuries, hazardous materials releases, major fires, utility disruptions, major natural gas leaks, communication disruptions, need for evacuation and rescue, command and coordination problems, roadway and transportation system disruptions, and hospital/school disruptions, to list a few. In general, the most common injuries are a result of unsecured nonstructural items.

5.0. Hazard Assessment
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 27
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 5-1. Santa Barbara County Probability of Shaking 2% in 50 Years

5.0. Hazard Assessment
28 February 2023
Most of the downtown consists of unreinforced masonry (URM) buildings. The City has identified 24 buildings within the city limits that are URM, two of which are city-owned. In 2007, the City Redevelopment Agency allocated approximately $3 million in RDA funds in the form of grants to assist owners of URM buildings in retrofitting their buildings to seismic safety standards. At this time, the owners of 23 of the 24 buildings are participating in the URM Retrofit Grant Program.

In addition to the threat to URM buildings, many of the non-URM buildings in the City are more than 50 years old and are subject to damage due to an earthquake. While the retrofits are in progress, the threat to buildings and their occupants remains a strong concern. Public facilities and a significant portion (>70%) of the residential occupancies within the City are old construction and have a potential for incurring serious damage in the event of an earthquake.

The City lies within a high liquefaction potential zone. When liquefaction of the soil does occur, buildings and other objects on the ground surface may tilt or sink, and lightweight buried structures (such as pipelines) may float toward the ground surface. Liquefied soil may be unable to support its weight or that of structures, which could result in loss of foundation bearing or differential settlement. Liquefaction may also result in the development of cracks in the ground surface followed by the emergence of a sand/water mixture, typically referred to as a sand-boil. In areas underlain by thick deposits of saturated, loose granular sediment (such as alluvial valleys or beaches), subsidence as much as several feet may result.

Both direct and indirect consequences of a major earthquake will severely stress the resources of the City and will require a high level of self-help, coordination, and cooperation. Out-of-city assistance from other local, regional, state, federal and private agencies may be delayed since earthquakes tend to be large regional events.

5.5 EXTREME HEAT & WINDSTORM
Extreme heat is defined by FEMA as temperatures that hover 10 °F or more above the regional average high temperature or over 100 °F in California and last for at least three days or even as long as several weeks (FEMA 2021b). Extreme heat is a function of heat and relative humidity. A heat index describes how hot the heat‐humidity combination makes the air feel. As relative humidity increases, the air seems warmer than it is because the body is less capable of cooling itself or regulating heat via evaporation of perspiration. As the heat index rises, so do health risks such as heat exhaustion, sunstroke, and heatstroke. Extreme heat can also threatens human health from potentially high levels of ground-level ozone in urban environments. Those at the greatest risk of heat-related stress and injuries include the elderly, small children, individuals who work outside, patients with chronic medical conditions, those on prescription medication therapy, and people with weight and alcohol problems, especially during heat waves in areas where moderate climate usually prevails. Extreme heat occurs when temperatures rise significantly above normal levels, and the key metric is the number of extreme heat events per year and heatwave duration. “Extreme heat” is a relative term—temperatures of 100 °F are normal in places like Palm Springs, but almost unprecedented in the City.

As described in Section 5.4.1, Extreme Heat/Freeze of the MJHMP, in any given year, the City can be subject to extreme heat conditions. The hottest months are usually summer from June to September. As temperatures rise due to climate change, the City will face a greater risk of death

5.0. Hazard Assessment
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 29
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan from dehydration, heatstroke/exhaustion, heart attack, stroke, and respiratory distress caused by extreme heat, as well as increased stress on water quantity and quality, degraded air quality, and increased potential for more severe or catastrophic natural events such as heavy rain, droughts, and wildfire. Extreme heat has also been shown to accelerate wear and tear on the natural gas system and electrical infrastructure.

As described in Section 5.4.2, Windstorm of the MJHMP, Santa Barbara County is at risk of windstorms at any given time during the calendar year. The City is located in a particularly windy region of the County, approximately 5 miles inland from the Guadalupe Dunes shoreline. Santa Barbara County is known to experience Santa Ana winds that can adversely affect the City. High winds can damage infrastructure and exacerbate wildfire risks (see also, Section 5.3.1, Wildfire of the MJHMP).

5.6 DAM/LEVEE FAILURE
The Santa Maria River travels along the northern border of the City. There is an existing levee along the south side of the river, which ends at the intersection of Highway 1. Along the northern border of the City, west of Highway 1, there is no levee structure and the primary protection from river flooding in that area is the difference in elevation between the river and adjacent properties.

The estimated difference in elevation between the river and adjacent properties ranges from approximately 10 to 15 feet. The lack of a levee structure leaves the commercial, residential, agricultural, and open space properties within this area at risk of flooding should there be major rains or a failure of the Twitchell Dam. The City is continuing to investigate the possibility that an old landfill site may be present just outside of the city limits, as indicated by the Santa Barbara County Environmental Health Department. This site is generally located north of the City limits, in the vicinity of Peralta Street, between existing commercial and agricultural uses and the Santa Maria River Levee. Should the existing levee fail, the resultant flooding could unearth the old landfill contents and distribute them throughout the area. Further research is ongoing as to the status of this suspected landfill site.

Dam failure can result from several natural or manmade causes. Structural failure caused by seismic activity can cause inundation by the action of a seismically induced wave, which overtops the dam without causing dam failure. This action is referred to as a seiche.

Flooding as a result of a dam or levee failure could cause loss of life, property damage, and other ensuing hazards, as well as the displacement of persons residing in the inundation path. Damage to electric generating facilities and transmission lines could also impact life support systems in communities outside the immediate hazard areas. Property adjacent to and in the water flow area as identified by the Twitchell Dam inundation maps must be evacuated during a levee or dam failure. The facilities that may qualify for temporary housing and/or temporary shelters are within the identified inundation zone and thus are not available. The City does not have a suitable relocation facility and thus evacuations will require re-location outside of the City. The City’s contract Engineer will review flood protection considerations when new projects go through the City’s approval process, the Planning Commission, and City Council.

5.0. Hazard Assessment
30 February 2023
Figure 5-2. Location of Santa Maria River Levee Segments

5.0. Hazard Assessment
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 31
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

5.7 TRAIN ACCIDENT
The Union Pacific Railroad bisects the City from north to south paralleling Highway 1 adjacent to the main downtown corridor of the City. The railroad carries both passengers and cargo through the City daily. While the City has only had two derailment incidents, the potential for train-related incidents is ever-present, and some of the cargo carried by the trains include hazardous materials.

The coast route of the Union Pacific Railroad passes through the City of Guadalupe and the County of Santa Barbara west and south of Santa Maria. Several northbound and southbound freight trains pass through the area daily. Materials shipped include explosives, compressed and liquefied gases, petroleum products, agricultural chemicals, industrial chemicals, radioactive materials, hazardous wastes, and military ordinance and rocket fuels destined to Vandenberg SFB.

Another concern is that in some areas of the City, the trains pass in very close proximity to residential and commercial occupancies (in some cases within +-35 feet), which provides a potential threat to the occupants of these structures. Because the railroad passes through the downtown corridor of the City, should a train carrying hazardous materials be involved in an incident and those materials are released, the entire City could be at significant risk. In addition, any incident along the railroad right-of-way could adversely affect the ability of emergency services to respond to calls for service promptly. The long-term closure of Highways 1 or 166 could also significantly affect the City’s economy as we are dependent on tourism to generate sales tax dollars.

5.8 FLOODING
The general topography of Guadalupe and the Santa Maria Valley is flat resulting in minor to moderate flooding issues following heavy rainfall in a short period. When heavy rains occur and/or the Santa Maria River is close to breaching its banks, Guadalupe residents near Pioneer Street are must evacuate as a result of the intense flooding. Numerous flood control retention basins have been constructed by the City of Santa Maria, Santa Barbara County Flood Control, and private developers. These retention basins have been successful in mitigating a majority of the local flooding resulting from rainfall. There are still areas that are subject to flooding when heavy rains occur.

Additionally, during periods of heavy prolonged rainfall, these retention basins become large, open bodies of water which must be monitored by police, park rangers, and flood control personnel to prevent persons from dangerously entering the basins for recreational purposes. In 2005, the City Council adopted Ordinance 2005-10 which added Section 10-4 to the Municipal Code regulating access and use of retention basin facilities.

The City of Guadalupe sustained flood damage in February 1993, February 1998, March 2001, December 2010, and March 2011 due to heavy rains. A Local Emergency was declared on February 5, 1998, March 21, 2001, and December 19, 2010, following substantial storm flooding.

As the City continues to grow and approach build-out, the increase in the impervious landscape will exacerbate the flooding problems; however, new development may also help attenuate flood hazards. For example, the Santa Barbara County Public Works Department recorded rainfall of

3.97 inches on 12/16/2010. In January of 2021, the City of Guadalupe recorded nearly the same amount of rainfall within the same period, yet no flooding occurred. This is potentially due to the new development that was built on Pioneer Street, which now allows for improved ground

5.0. Hazard Assessment
32 February 2023
absorption and water runoff. Flooding can still present a problem in this area if maintenance is not performed regularly, such as cleaning storm drains before rains.

A Wetlands Lake with undersized culverts affects Gularte Tract and Mary Buren Elementary School, City Hall, and the entire downtown core of the City. The most concerning areas for storm-related flooding are the 800 – 900 block of Pioneer Street, 4700 Block of 11th Street, the wastewater treatment plant, and most of the western portion of the City bordering the Santa Maria River. This threat is due to the area's low elevation relative to the Santa Maria River and the lack of a levee structure between the river and this area. The majority of the western portion of the City faces a moderate to high risk of flooding due to the lack of a levee structure between the Santa Maria River and the properties. Another concern that has been identified that increases the flooding threat is the recent wildfires in the watershed east of the Santa Maria Valley. These fires have removed vegetation from rural land and resulted in increased runoff rates, and a significant portion of this runoff and sediment that would travel down the Santa Maria River, increasing the threat to the City.

5.9 AGRICULTURE PESTS & OTHER AGRICULTURAL HAZARDS
The agriculture industry is a major factor in the City’s economy. The City is surrounded by agricultural activities, employing hundreds, if not thousands of people, which contributes significantly to the local economy. The City is home to a multi-million dollar produce processing facility that employs several hundred community residents. There are several different threats to the agricultural industry locally.

The threats include but are not limited to pest infestation, disease, intentional vandalism and terrorism, the fallout from the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, and adverse weather. With agriculture being such a vital industry to the community, the loss of any portion of this industry would be devastating to the local economy and it is in the City’s best interest to work toward protecting this vital industry.

The agricultural industry uses large quantities of ammonia to operate their refrigeration systems, and there are significant quantities of fertilizers and pesticides stored and dispensed in the community. Anhydrous ammonia is an efficient and widely used source of nitrogen fertilizer.

However, it is one of the most potentially dangerous chemicals used in agriculture. Ammonia gas is colorless and has a sharp, penetrating odor. When used as an agricultural fertilizer, it is compressed into a liquid. In the liquid state, it is stored in specially designed tanks strong enough to withstand internal pressures of at least 250 pounds per square inch (psi). During warm weather, the temperature of the liquid anhydrous ammonia in the tank increases and the liquid expands, causing the vapor pressure in the tank to increase. When pressure is released, liquid anhydrous ammonia quickly converts to a gas. When injected into the soil, the liquid ammonia expands into a gas and is readily absorbed in the soil moisture. Similarly, in contact with the eyes, skin, or mucous membranes, ammonia will cause rapid dehydration and severe burns.

5.10 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RELEASE
Highway 1 and Highway 166 pass through the community and local and interstate trucks regularly pass through the City. One of the primary threats to the community from these trucks is the large quantities of diesel fuel they carry and the proximity of the highways to storm drainage systems that serve the region. Highway 166 East is a major connector between U.S. 101 and the San Joaquin

6.0. Vulnerability Assessment
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 33
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Valley. In addition, Highway 166 East is a designated transportation route for explosives and rocket fuels destined for Vandenberg Space Force Base (SFB). Other commodities transported on these routes include but are not limited to compressed and liquefied gases, petroleum products, agricultural chemicals, industrial chemicals, and hazardous wastes.

In addition, any long-term closure of Highways 1 or 166 due to an incident related to these highways will severely limit access to the City by mutual aid providers and disaster relief assistance.

The closure of Highways 1 or 166 could also significantly affect the City’s economy as we are dependent on tourism to generate sales tax dollars.

Pipelines also pose a risk to the City. ConocoPhillips operates a large pipeline that transports up to 84,000 barrels of crude oil per day (3.5 million gallons) from the Sisquoc Pump Station westward toward the Santa Maria Pump Station where the oil is heated, then into the City of Santa Maria, then north to the Santa Maria Refinery in Arroyo Grande, 8 miles north of Guadalupe. This single pipeline (some segments are 10 inches wide; some are 12 inches in diameter) enters the City’s east side along Battles Road then turns north at “Suey Junction” (a valve station west of Depot Street near the Minami Community Center) and travels north along Railroad Avenue and continues beyond the City, crossing the river. The maximum pressure for this pipeline is 800 pounds per square inch.

Oil and gas fields also pose a risk to the City. Thousands of wells have been dug throughout the region, with many abandoned since. Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) gas is found in high concentrations in the Santa Maria and Guadalupe oil fields. H2S is a colorless, acidic gas, almost as toxic as hydrogen cyanide and between 5 and 6 times more toxic than carbon monoxide. H2S gas is heavier than air. Because of this, H2S gas becomes concentrated close to the ground, accumulating in low areas such as well cellars and ditches. The principal threat of Hydrogen Sulfide gas to human life is poisoning by inhalation. Whenever H2S gas is present, respiratory protection is of extreme importance. The sense of smell cannot be relied upon to indicate either the presence or concentration of the H2S gas.

The City of Guadalupe Fire Department works closely with local industry and monitors and audits risk management and prevention programs. The City of Guadalupe Fire Department is also involved with Hazardous Material guidelines per CUPA (County Fire Hazardous Material Unit) established Business Plans are complied with. Regular site visits are also performed with CUPA.

6.0 VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
The vulnerability assessment builds on the hazard assessment provided in Section 5.0 to estimate losses where data is available and consider a specific list of critical facilities identified within the City of Guadalupe. The City identified 17 critical facilities to be included in the Vulnerability Assessment portion of the LHMP. These facilities primarily included utilities, government, and educational structures. Of the available data, it was shown that these buildings are worth approximately $42,500,000 in structural value (Table 6-1).

6.0. Vulnerability Assessment
34 February 2023
Table 6-1. Critical Facilities in the City of Guadalupe Type Name Address Total Building
Value
Communications Guad AC -
Utilities Pioneer St. Sewer Lift Station 800 Pioneer St $2,500,000 Utilities Laguardia St. Sewer Lift Station 4200 Laguardia $2,500,000 Wastewater
Treatment Plant Wastewater Plant 5200 West Main Street $25,000,000 Water Tank Pioneer St Water Tank 500 Block Of Pioneer St $5,000,000 Water Tank Obispo St. Water Tank & Equipment 303 Obispo Street $5,000,000 RMP Facilities Apio Cooling 4595 West Main Street -
RMP Facilities Puritan Ice Company 4585 West Main Street - Clinic Marian Community Health ClinicGuadalupe 4723 W. Main St - Clinic Community Health Centers Of The Central
Coast- Guadalupe 4581 10th St -
EMS Station Guadalupe Fire Department Station 2 1025 Guadalupe Street - EMS Station Guadalupe Fire Department Station 1 918 Obispo Street - Senior Center Guadalupe Senior Citizens Center 4545 10th Street $2,500,000 Education Mary Buren Elementary 1050 Peralta St. -
Education Kermit Mckenzie Junior High 4710 W. Main St. - Education Guadalupe Preschool 120 Tognazzini Ave. -
Police Guadalupe Police Department 4490 10th Street -
Using a GIS and the mapped extents of the hazards affecting the City, it was determined which critical facilities are exposed to which hazards depending on whether they fall within the mapped hazard area. The results of the exposure analysis are included in this section. A further description of the threats and methodologies used in this analysis is provided in Chapter 6.0, Vulnerability Assessment of the 2022 MJHMP. As the City continues to assess its vulnerability, the collection of better and more complete data will help to improve the risk assessment process to direct planning and mitigation decisions.

Table 6-2. Summary of Potential Impacts to Critical Facilities Hazard Type Specific Risk Count % of Critical
Facilities Impacted Exposure ($)
Flood FEMA Flood Zone 0 0 $0
Dam
Inundation/Levee
Failure
Twitchell Dam Failure 17 100% $42,000,000
Wildfire Low to Moderate
Fire Wildfire Threat 2 12% $5,000,000

6.0. Vulnerability Assessment
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 35
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Hazard Type Specific Risk Count % of Critical
Facilities Impacted Exposure ($)
Earthquake
High Liquefaction
Potential 17 100% $42,000,000
Regional Ground
Shaking 17 100% $42,000,000

6.1 EARTHQUAKE & LIQUEFACTION
Chapter 6.0, Vulnerabilities Assessment of the 2022 MJHMP addresses regional seismicity under two scenarios that include the City of Guadalupe. The 2,500-year scenario considers general seismicity from multiple faults in the region and a 7.0 magnitude event. The methodology utilizes probabilistic seismic hazard contour maps developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the 2018 update of the National Seismic Hazard Maps that are included with Hazus-MH. A deterministic scenario was also prepared to predict the outcome of a specific earthquake event. The deterministic scenarios used USGS provided ShakeMap datasets to model a Magnitude 7.2 earthquake of the San Luis Range would generate in terms of damages and losses for the chosen area of interest (i.e., northern Santa Barbara County, including the City). Figure 6-1 is the ShakeMap produced for this scenario.

As described in the MJHMP, regional losses to people and property would include the City. As shown in the San Luis Range ShakeMap scenario, the north and central parts of the county would perceive much stronger shaking and would likely receive the most severe damage when compared to the rest of the county. The entire City would perceive severe to extreme shaking and would likely receive moderate/heavy to very heavy damage. Direct effects of ground shaking could damage buildings and create dangerous debris and unstable structures. Displaced residents would likely seek shelter in the City, including residents from outside the City. Further, fires often occur after an earthquake. Because of the number of fires and the lack of water to fight the fires, they can often burn out of control.

The City lies in an area with a high liquefaction severity class. Regional earthquakes could cause liquefaction in the City, which could damage buildings and utilities when soils become unstable.

Based on the GIS analysis conducted for the 2022 MJHMP, the City has 1,957 improved parcels valued at over $522 million in the high liquefaction severity zone. Based on this analysis, which accounts for residents only and not workers, 7,243 residents are living in this hazard zone within the City. While liquefaction would not likely affect all areas uniformly during an earthquake, this analysis indicates the extent and scale of vulnerabilities to liquefaction during a large earthquake.

Table 6-3. City of Guadalupe at Risk to the High Liquefaction Hazard by Property Type Property Tyle Improved Parcel Count Total Value Population Agricultural 0 $0
Commercial 68 $33,802,616
Exempt 19 $2,149,334

6.0. Vulnerability Assessment
36 February 2023
Property Tyle Improved Parcel Count Total Value Population Industrial 24 $50,745,388
Mixed Use 1 $1,279,578 4
Residential 1,842 $433,781,642 7,239
Improved Vacant 3 $248,620
Total 1,957 $522,007,177 7,243
As listed in Table 6-4, all critical facilities in the City would be vulnerable to damage or destruction from ground shaking and liquefaction during a significant regional earthquake (Figure 6-2; see also, Section 6.2.1, Earthquake (Groundshaking) and Section 6.3.3, Liquefaction (Earthquake) of the 2022 MJHMP).

Table 6-4. City of Guadalupe Critical Facilities Vulnerable to Liquefaction Type Name Hazard Type/Source Total Building
Value
Communications Guad AC Twitchell Dam Failure -
Utilities Pioneer St. Sewer Lift Station Twitchell Dam Failure $2,500,000 Utilities Laguardia St. Sewer Lift Station Twitchell Dam Failure $2,500,000 Wastewater
Treatment Plant Wastewater Plant Twitchell Dam Failure $25,000,000 Water Tank Pioneer St Water Tank Twitchell Dam Failure $5,000,000 Water Tank Obispo St. Water Tank & Equipment Twitchell Dam Failure $5,000,000 RMP Facilities Apio Cooling Twitchell Dam Failure -
RMP Facilities Puritan Ice Company Twitchell Dam Failure - Clinic Marian Community Health ClinicGuadalupe
Twitchell Dam Failure -
Clinic Community Health Centers Of The
Central Coast- Guadalupe
Twitchell Dam Failure -
EMS Station Guadalupe Fire Department Station 2 Twitchell Dam Failure - EMS Station Guadalupe Fire Department Station 1 Twitchell Dam Failure - Senior Center Guadalupe Senior Citizens Center Twitchell Dam Failure $2,500,000 Education Mary Buren Elementary Twitchell Dam Failure - Education Kermit Mckenzie Junior High Twitchell Dam Failure - Education Guadalupe Preschool Twitchell Dam Failure -
Police Guadalupe Police Department Twitchell Dam Failure -

6.0. Vulnerability Assessment
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 37
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 6-1. City of Guadalupe Critical Facilities and Earthquake Groundshaking Potential (San Luis Range

7.2 Magnitude ShakeMap)

6.0. Vulnerability Assessment
38 February 2023
Figure 6-2. City of Guadalupe Critical Facilities and Liquefaction Potential

6.0. Vulnerability Assessment
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 39
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

6.2 EXTREME HEAT & WINDSTORM
Extreme heat poses the greatest danger for the City’s outdoor laborers who support the county’s agriculture economy. Exertional heat illness occurs across a wide age range and in numerous industries and occupations, including the following: agriculture, construction, firefighting, warehousing, delivery, and service work. Outdoor laborers are exposed to extreme temperatures and at higher risk of heat-related illnesses than other populations of the county. The elderly, children, people with certain medical conditions, and the houseless are also vulnerable to exposure.

However, any populations working or recreating outdoors during periods of extreme cold or heat are exposed, including otherwise young and healthy adults and houseless populations. Adults and young people are commonly out in temperatures of extreme heat, whether due to commuting for work or school, conducting property maintenance such as lawn care, or for recreational reasons.

Windstorms could have a considerable impact on the population, built environment, lifeline infrastructure, and the economy of the City. Severe winds can directly impact the City by damaging or destroying buildings, knocking over trees, and damaging power lines and electrical equipment.

Secondary impacts of damage caused by wind events often result from damage to communication, transportation, or medical infrastructure. High winds can lead to Public Safety Power Shutdowns (PSPS) that can impact the local economic drivers and key services. During severe wind events, electricity transmission lines can be damaged or turned off by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), causing widespread power outages and hardships for City residents. Downed power and communications transmission lines, coupled with disruptions to transportation, create difficulties in reporting and responding to emergencies. These indirect impacts of a wind event put tremendous strain on a community. In the immediate aftermath, the focus is on emergency services. Vulnerable groups are especially exposed to the indirect impacts of high winds, particularly the loss of electrical power. These populations include the elderly or disabled, especially those with medical needs and treatments dependent on electricity. Nursing homes, community-based residential facilities, and other special needs housing facilities are also vulnerable if electrical outages are prolonged since backup power generally operates only minimal functions for a short period.

6.3 DAM/LEVEE FAILURE
Failure of Twitchell Dam would inundate portions of the cities of Santa Maria and Guadalupe, as well as Highway 1, with relatively little evacuation time. Based on the GIS analysis conducted for the 2022 MJHMP, Guadalupe, 1,957 properties with a total value of over $522 million are vulnerable to the catastrophic flooding that would occur if the Twitchell Dam and levee system on the Santa Maria River failed. In Guadalupe, approximately 7,243 residents within the inundation zone may need to be evacuated, cared for, and possibly permanently relocated. This information is summarized in Table 6-5 below.

Table 6-5. City of Guadalupe at Risk to Dam Inundation Hazard Property Type Improved Parcel Count Total Value Population Commercial 68 $33,802,616
Exempt 19 $2,149,334
Industrial 24 $50,745,388

6.0. Vulnerability Assessment
40 February 2023
Property Type Improved Parcel Count Total Value Population Mixed Use 1 $1,279,578 4
Residential 1,842 $433,781,642 7,239
Improved Vacant 3 $248,620
Total 1,957 $522,007,177 7,243
Further, as listed in Table 6-6, all critical facilities in the City would be vulnerable to damage or destruction from flooding due to dam and levee failure (see also, Section 6.6.3, Dam Failure and Section 6.6.8, Levee Failure of the 2022 MJHMP).

Table 6-6. City of Guadalupe Critical Facilities Vulnerable to Inundation from Dam/Levee Failure Type Name Hazard Type/Source Total Building
Value
Communications Guad AC Twitchell Dam Failure -
Utilities Pioneer St. Sewer Lift Station Twitchell Dam Failure $2,500,000 Utilities Laguardia St. Sewer Lift Station Twitchell Dam Failure $2,500,000 Wastewater
Treatment Plant Wastewater Plant Twitchell Dam Failure $25,000,000 Water Tank Pioneer St Water Tank Twitchell Dam Failure $5,000,000 Water Tank Obispo St. Water Tank & Equipment Twitchell Dam Failure $5,000,000 RMP Facilities Apio Cooling Twitchell Dam Failure -
RMP Facilities Puritan Ice Company Twitchell Dam Failure - Clinic Marian Community Health ClinicGuadalupe Twitchell Dam Failure - Clinic Community Health Centers Of The
Central Coast- Guadalupe Twitchell Dam Failure -
EMS Station Guadalupe Fire Department Station 2 Twitchell Dam Failure - EMS Station Guadalupe Fire Department Station 1 Twitchell Dam Failure - Senior Center Guadalupe Senior Citizens Center Twitchell Dam Failure $2,500,000 Education Mary Buren Elementary Twitchell Dam Failure - Education Kermit Mckenzie Junior High Twitchell Dam Failure - Education Guadalupe Preschool Twitchell Dam Failure -
Police Guadalupe Police Department Twitchell Dam Failure -

6.0. Vulnerability Assessment
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 41
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 6-3. City of Guadalupe Critical Facilities in Twitchell Dam Inundation Zone

6.0. Vulnerability Assessment
42 February 2023

6.4 FLOOD
Approximately 2 acres (0.25 percent) of the City lies within the FEMA 1 percent annual chance flood zone. No improved parcels lie within a FEMA flood zone. No critical facilities are vulnerable to this flood hazard zone (Figure 6-4; see also, Section 6.3.3, Flood of the 2022 MJHMP).

6.5 WILDFIRE
The county has extensive areas within mapped Fire Hazard Severity Zones and Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) areas. These hazard areas generate vulnerability for life and structures, including critical facilities, throughout the county, but most severely within rural foothills areas where dry vegetation, steep slopes, and difficult access combine to create a high probability of wildfire. Based on these maps, the City has 21 acres (2.8 percent) within High Wildfire Threat areas, 68 acres (8 percent) within Moderate Wildfire Threat areas, and 71 acres (8.4 percent) within Low Wildfire Threat areas. Most of these areas are residential with limited vulnerabilities in commercial and industrial areas.

Based on the GIS analysis conducted for the 2022 MJHMP, in Guadalupe, 103 properties with a total value of over $34 million are vulnerable to wildfire. In Guadalupe, approximately 397 residents live in high, moderate, or low wildfire threat areas. This information is summarized in Table 6-7 below.

Table 6-7. City of Guadalupe at Risk to Wildfire Threat Property
Type
Improved Parcel Count by Wildfire Threat Level
Total Value Population Extreme Very
High High Moderate Low Total
Agricultural 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0
Commercial 0 0 0 1 0 1 $1,050,296
Exempt 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0
Industrial 0 0 0 1 0 1 $1,134,365
Mixed Use 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0
Residential 0 0 7 74 20 101 $32,554,110 397
Improved
Vacant 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0
Total 0 0 7 76 20 103 $34,738,771 397
Two of the City’s critical facilities fall within either low or moderate wildfire threat areas, as listed in Table 6-8 (see also, Section 6.3.1, Wildfire of the 2022 MJHMP).

Table 6-8. City of Guadalupe Critical Facilities Vulnerable to Wildfire Type Name Hazard Source/Type Total Building
Value
Water Tank Obispo St. Water Tank & Equipment Low Wildfire Threat $5,000,000 Education Kermit Mckenzie Junior High Moderate Wildfire Threat -

6.0. Vulnerability Assessment
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 43
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Figure 6-4. City of Guadalupe Critical Facilities within Wildfire Threat Zones

7.0. Mitigation Strategy
44 February 2023
The City’s MAC and LPT members acknowledged that the WUI and fire threat data assessed for this update is developed on a statewide basis and does not consider the placement of local neighborhoods within the geography. Based on these maps, Guadalupe falls within wildfire hazard zones. However, on a local level, the City’s LPT does not consider the above-listed critical facilities to be at risk of wildfire. The City is surrounded by cultivated agricultural operations on flat terrain, which have a slim chance of spreading wildfires into the City.

7.0 MITIGATION STRATEGY
In preparation for the 2022 LHMP update, the City’s LPT made no revisions to the countywide goals and objectives because they continue to reflect the needs of the City; see also, Chapter 7.0, Mitigation Plan of the 2022 MJHMP. This section contains the City’s updated and most current mitigation strategy as of 2022.

7.1 MITIGATION PRIORITIES

7.1.1 Goals and Objectives
The City’s LPT accepted and agreed to the following goals and objectives for the 2022 update.

These goals and objectives represent a vision of long-term hazard reduction or enhancement of capabilities.

The updated goals and objectives of this plan are:

Goal 1: Ensure future development is resilient to known hazards.

Objective 1.A: Ensure development in known hazardous areas is limited or incorporates hazardresistant design based on applicable plans, development standards, regulations, and programs.

Objective 1.B: Educate developers and decision-makers on design and construction techniques to minimize damage from hazards.

Goal 2: Protect people and community assets from hazards, including critical facilities, infrastructure, water, and public facilities.

Objective 2.A: Enhance the ability of community assets, particularly critical facilities, to withstand hazards.

Objective 2.B: Use the best available science and technology to better protect life and property.

Objective 2.C: Upgrade and replace aging critical facilities and infrastructure.

Objective 2.D: Ensure mitigation actions encompass vulnerable and disadvantaged communities to promote social equity.

Goal 3: Actively promote understanding, support, and funding for hazard mitigation by participating agencies and the public.

7.0. Mitigation Strategy
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 45
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Objective 3.A: Engage, inform, and educate the public on tools and resources to improve community resilience to hazards, reduce vulnerability, and increase awareness and support of hazard mitigation activities.

Objective 3.B: Ensure effective outreach and communications to vulnerable and disadvantaged communities.

Objective 3.C: Increase awareness and encourage the incorporation of hazard mitigation principles and practice among public, private, and nonprofit sectors, including all participating agencies.

Objective 3.D: Ensure interagency coordination and joint partnerships with the County, cities, state, tribal, and federal governments.

Objective 3.E: Continuously improve the County’s capability and efficiency at administering pre- and post-disaster mitigation programs, including providing technical support to cities and special districts and providing support for implementing local mitigation plans.

Objective 3.F: Monitor and publicize the effectiveness of mitigation actions implemented countywide.

Objective 3.G: Position the County and participating agencies to apply for and receive grant funding from FEMA and other sources.

Goal 4: Minimize the risks to life and property associated with urban and human-caused hazards.

Objective 4.A: Minimize risks from biological hazards, including disease, invasive species, and agricultural pests.

Objective 4.B: Be prepared and respond to urban hazards, including terrorism, cyber threats, and civil disturbance.

Objective 4.C: Minimize risks from energy production, including hazardous oil and gas activities.

Goal 5: Prepare for, adapt to, and recover from, the impacts of climate change and ensure regional resiliency.

Objective 5.A: Use the best available climate science to implement hazard mitigation strategies in response to climate change.

Objective 5.B: Identify, assess, and prepare for impacts of climate change.

Objective 5.C: Coordinate with the public, private, and nonprofit sectors to implement strategies to address regional hazards exacerbated by climate change.

Objective 5.D: Ensure climate change hazard mitigation addresses vulnerable and disadvantaged communities.

7.0. Mitigation Strategy
46 February 2023

7.2 MITIGATION PROGRESS
Since 2017, the City has incorporated the LHMP goals, objectives, and mitigation actions into its local plans and processes, including the General Plan Safety Element by reference, specific hazard planning efforts (e.g., Stormwater Management Program), the City’s grant pursuits, and capital improvement planning. Ongoing monitoring and evaluation of the LHMP by the City ensured mitigations are implemented and tracked. Key mitigation actions completed since 2017 include ongoing CERT trainings, but others have been deferred to the 2022 LHMP. The City’s LPT reviewed the mitigation actions listed in the 2017 LHMP to determine the status of each action. Once reviewed, deferred projects from 2017 were renumbered to reflect 2022 updates (see Table 7- 1).

Table 7-1. Status of Previous Mitigation Actions
Mitigation
Action # Mitigation Action Description Status Comments In 2022 Update? 2016‐1 Community Emergency Response Team (CERT)
Training Ongoing X
2016‐2
Develop the previously proposed combination
Public Works and Fire facility, and upgrade the
facility design to serve as a fire station to
accommodate existing and future staffing.

Deferred X
2016‐3 Disaster Early Warning System and Evacuation
Plan Deferred X
2016‐4 Prepare Drainage Study and Master Plan Deferred X 2016‐5 Earthquake retrofit program for Unreinforced
Masonry Buildings. Deferred X
2016‐6 Mitigation of Repetitive Flooding Deferred X

7.3 MITIGATION APPROACH
A simplified Benefit-Cost Review was applied to both deferred and new mitigation actions to prioritize the mitigation recommendations for implementation. The priority for implementing mitigation recommendations depends upon the overall cost-effectiveness of the recommendation

7.0. Mitigation Strategy
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 47
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan when considering monetary and non-monetary costs and benefits associated with each action.

Additionally, the following questions were considered when developing the Benefit-Cost Review:
• How many people will benefit from the action?
• How large an area is impacted?
• How critical are the facilities that benefit from the action? • Environmentally, does it make sense to do this project for the overall community? Section 7.4, Implementation Plan provides a benefit-cost review for each mitigation recommendation, as well as a relative priority rank (High, Medium, and Low) based upon the judgment of the Planning Team. The general category guidelines are listed below:
• High – Benefits are perceived to exceed costs without further study or evaluation • Medium – Benefits are perceived to exceed costs but may require further study or evaluation before implementation
• Low – Benefits and costs evaluation requires additional evaluation before implementation Discussion of the rationale for these priorities is included in the mitigation action descriptions below.

7.4 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
2022-1. Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) Training Work with the City of Santa Maria, Alan Hancock College, and the Orfalea foundation to schedule CERT training courses for Guadalupe residents. Advertise the training courses on the City’s government access channel and in the Santa Maria Times. Coordinate with Senior Citizens groups, downtown merchants, and property owners to ensure they are notified of training courses. Conduct training courses twice a year at different times and locations. CERT is a positive and realistic approach to emergency and disaster situations where citizens may initially be on their own and their actions can make a difference. While people will respond to others in need without the training, one goal of the CERT program is to help them do so effectively and efficiently without placing themselves in unnecessary danger. In the CERT training, citizens learn to identify community hazards, including seismic, flood, extreme weather, hazard materials release, and other applicable hazards. Community members would learn to manage utilities and put out small fires, treat the three medical killers by opening airways, controlling bleeding, and treating for shock, provide basic medical aid, search for and rescue victims safely, organize themselves, and spontaneous volunteers to be effective, and collect disaster intelligence to support first responder efforts.

7.0. Mitigation Strategy
48 February 2023
Mitigation Priority and Performance
Estimated Cost/Funding Source
$20,000 annually/ FEMA Hazard Mitigation Program/Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities Grant, Orfalea Foundation Grant, General fund for time and materials
Responsible Agency/Department City of Guadalupe Fire Department Cost-Benefit Consideration
Cost Beneficial - The relatively low cost of instituting CERT training and other education programs should easily be offset by damages avoided if only a portion of the community participates in training.

Comments
This project was adapted from 2016-1 (GEN 1 from 2004) included as part of the 2017 LHMP. This is a Medium priority as the City has limited staff available to present the program regularly.
2022-2. Public Safety Facility
Develop the previously proposed combination Public Works and Public Safety Facility to provide emergency response and resilience in the City, and upgrade the facility design to serve to accommodate existing and future staffing.

Mitigation Priority and Performance
Priority Medium
Hazards Mitigated Earthquake, Dam/Levee Failure, Train Accident, Wildfire, Flood, Agriculture, Hazardous Materials, Extreme Heat, Windstorm
Estimated Timeline 2027
Estimated Cost/Funding Source
$3 million/ FEMA Hazard/Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant, General Fund, special revenue funds, State Grants, Federal Grants, Santa Barbara County funding, Private Grants
Responsible Agency/Department City of Guadalupe Fire Department, Building Department, Public Works Department
Cost-Benefit Consideration
Highly Cost Beneficial. This facility would provide a new location for Public Works personnel and equipment and provide a new and safer facility for the Fire Department operations.

Comments
This project was adapted from 2016-2 (GEO 1 from 2004) included as part of the 2017 LHMP. This is a Medium priority as we will need to identify funding to modify the existing plans to expand the scope of the project.

There is currently no funding identified, and no real prospects for funding soon for this project. An original estimate was obtained for the project without the proposed alterations and that was approximately $3 million. 2022-3. Disaster Early Warning System and Evacuation Plan Develop a Disaster Early Warning System and Evacuation Plan in the event of a major earthquake, levee failure, flood, train derailment, wildfire, or hazardous materials leak. Explore strategies to develop an early warning/public emergency notification system. Finish development of a comprehensive evacuation plan.

Mitigation Priority and Performance
Priority High
Hazards Mitigated Earthquake, Dam/Levee Failure, Train Accident, Wildfire, Flood, Agriculture, Hazardous Materials

7.0. Mitigation Strategy
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 49
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Mitigation Priority and Performance
Estimated Timeline 2025
Estimated Cost/Funding Source $TBD/ General Fund, FEMA Hazard/Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant, Brownfield Act, Federal Grants, State Grants, and Private Grants.

Responsible Agency/Department City of Guadalupe Fire Department, Public Safety Department, Building Department, Public Works Department
Cost-Benefit Consideration
Highly Cost Beneficial – The cost of developing an early warning and evacuation plan would easily be offset by the reduction in injuries and potential loss of life if residents were not immediately informed of a disaster and if no evacuation plan were in place. A disaster early warning plan could include working in conjunction with the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Department to prepare a database of all phone numbers in Guadalupe, both residential and commercial so that a Reverse 911® system could be used in the event of an emergency, including the voluntary registration of cell phone numbers into the Reverse 911® System database. The acquiring of a general community warning system such as a siren or public address system could prove to be very costly and is currently beyond the capability of the City’s General Fund. While this type of system is beneficial, it does come with a significant amount of labor-intensive public education. Another option is a low-power AM or FM radio station, which could be used to provide emergency messages to the community
Comments
This project was adapted from 2016-3 (GEO 2/HML 1/TDR 1 from 2004) included as part of the 2017 LHMP. This is a high priority as there have been several threats to the community identified in this plan which would benefit from the warning system. The threats to the community identified and that would be of benefit from the acquisition of this type of system could be categorized as "Low Occurrence, High Consequence". A potential funding source has been identified which makes it very viable.
2022-4. Prepare Drainage Study and Master Plan
Prepare a Drainage Study and Master Plan for the City that would identify drainage strengths and weaknesses in the City and surrounding areas. The study would show potential vulnerabilities and potential mitigation measures. Preparation of a Drainage Master Plan would identify existing facilities and potential upgrades and provide the Planning Commission and the City Council with usable guidelines on drainage before granting new project approval. A Drainage Master Plan would also identify potential drainage vulnerabilities and suggest mitigation measures.

Mitigation Priority and Performance
Priority Low
Hazards Mitigated Earthquake, Dam/Levee Failure, Flood
Estimated Timeline 2027
Estimated Cost/Funding Source
$TBD/ General Fund, FEMA Hazard/Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant, CREF, Recreational, Duneship trails to the beach, County Levee, and bike path funding.

Responsible Agency/Department City Engineer, Public Works, County Flood Control, and Flood Consultant.

Cost-Benefit Consideration
Cost Beneficial – This strategy can be cost-beneficial. Extreme flooding and erosion can cause huge losses and create safety hazards for residents and transient visitors. Preparation of a Drainage Study and Master Plan would identify potential vulnerabilities and subsequently implement mitigation measures that can be expected to produce benefits significantly higher than

7.0. Mitigation Strategy
50 February 2023
Mitigation Priority and Performance
the cost of a Drainage Study. Erosion of levee which serves as a future bike path. Erosion of floodplain leading to dunes which serve as a future trail to the beach. Wetlands preservation and development of recreational walkways, riding trails, and educational nature continuum to dunes, beach, and levee.

Comments
This project was adapted from 2016-4 (FLD 1 from 2004) included as part of the 2017 LHMP. This is a low priority as there is no funding available for this planning process, and even less funding available to implement the results of the planning process. We will continue to monitor the marketplace for funding, and once identified, we will pursue the funding. 2022-5. Earthquake retrofit program for Unreinforced Masonry Buildings Follow up on all URM buildings to ensure they meet the December 31, 2012 retrofit deadline. Notify URM building owners and tenants that after the deadline, all URM buildings that are not in compliance will have to be vacated and will be posted and research legal authorities.

Mitigation Priority and Performance
Priority High
Hazards Mitigated Earthquake
Estimated Timeline 2022
Estimated Cost/Funding Source
$TBD/ Follow up work will be financed by City General Fund using existing Staff. Funding for URM building retrofits after December 31, 2010, will be from private sources acquired by the building owners.

Responsible Agency/Department
Fire Department and Building Department with support from Planning Department, Engineering Department, Police Department, Public Works Department, City Administrator, City Council, Contract City Attorney, unreinforced masonry building owners, and local business merchants.

Cost-Benefit Consideration
Highly Cost Beneficial: The City committed approximately $3 million in Redevelopment Agency funds in the form of grants to assist URM building owners with seismic retrofitting of their buildings. The State of California has established a deadline of December 31, 2012, for completion of the seismic retrofitting of URM buildings. The City has an obligation to its residents and visitors to ensure that those URM buildings that are not retrofitted are posted “Unsafe to Occupy” and their continued use prohibited both for their safety and to comply with State Law. Follow up through legal actions as appropriate using the services of the Contract City Attorney may also be necessary
Comments
This project was adapted from 2016-5 (GEO 3 from 2004) included as part of the 2017 LHMP. This is a high priority as the entire downtown core of the City consists of URM buildings. While the City Redevelopment Agency has provided grant funding to assist the property owners in getting the retrofitting completed, the need to ensure the retrofitting of the URM buildings is brought to closure is vital to the economic survival of our community.

7.0. Mitigation Strategy
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 51
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2022-6. Mitigation of Repetitive Flooding of the 800-900 blocks of Pioneer Street and the LeRoy Park area, and protection of the northwest portion of the City from flooding Working with federal, state, and local officials, along with the private property owners of the affected areas, develop and implement a plan to extend the Santa Maria River Levee west from the Highway 1 bridge (where it currently terminates) to at least the western city limits. As an alternative, continue the extension of the levee to include the Guadalupe Dunes County Park to protect access to the beach.

Develop alternatives to the construction of the levee extension as a temporary alternative until the levee extension project can be accomplished.

Mitigation Priority and Performance
Priority High
Hazards Mitigated Flood, Dam/Levee Failure
Estimated Timeline 2027
Estimated Cost/Funding Source
$TBD/ There are no specific funding sources identified that are available at this time. Potential sources for funding could include, Federal Grants, FEMA Disaster Mitigation Funds, FEMA Hazard/Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant, State Grants and Disaster Mitigation Funds, County Disaster Mitigation Funds, Private Grants, and other federal funding allocations.

Responsible Agency/Department City Administrator, with support from federal, state, and local entities Cost-Benefit Consideration
Highly Cost Beneficial: The City has incurred several disaster declarations due to flooding from the Santa Maria River and the lack of a protective levee structure along the City’s northern border, west of Highway 1. The City’s wastewater treatment plant is very vulnerable to inundation from the river flow, and damage to that facility would be catastrophic to the community. In addition, the recent storm damage to the access road to the Guadalupe Dunes County Park has virtually eliminated vehicle access to the parking area for the park and has significantly reduced the number of visitors to the beach, as they must now walk nearly one mile from the temporary parking area to the beach. This reduction in visitors has adversely affected the City’s tourism revenues (sales tax) associated with patronization of the local stores and restaurants.

Comments
This project was adapted from 2016-6 included as part of the 2017 LHMP.

This is a high priority as the City has experienced repeated losses in the 800 block of Pioneer Street due to flooding from storms. This area is in desperate need of both immediate (temporary) and permanent (long-term) solutions to the flooding problems. The ideal solution would be the extension of the Santa Maria River Levee west from its current terminus at the Highway 1 bridge, to the western City limits. However, that process will be very protracted and expensive as there are numerous federal, state, and local entities that must be involved and approve the project. Even a short-term solution such as a pilot channel in the river to move the flow of the river to the north side of the riverbed requires extensive review and permitting from numerous federal, state, and local entities. In addition to the onerous permitting process, any solution, temporary or permanent is going to involve tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions of dollars to bring to fruition. That funding is not currently available, and in this current economy, it is unlikely to become available any time soon

8.0. Plan Maintenance
52 February 2023

8.0 PLAN MAINTENANCE

8.1 MONITORING, EVALUATING, AND UPDATING THE PLAN
Since the last LHMP in 2017, the LPT has monitored, evaluated, and updated the plan on a continuing and as-needed basis. The City was successful in implementing the 2017 mitigation actions as noted in Table 7-1. The remaining mitigation actions outlined in the 2017 LHMP are ongoing at the time of this 2022 update.

The City of Guadalupe will be responsible for ensuring that this annex is monitored on an ongoing basis. The City will continue to participate in the countywide MAC and attend the annual meeting organized by the County Office of Emergency Management to discuss items to be updated/added in future revisions of this plan. The MJHMP is evaluated by the MAC annually to determine the effectiveness of programs, and to reflect changes in land development or programs that may affect mitigation priorities. This includes re-evaluation of goals, objectives, and mitigation actions for each jurisdiction by the MAC. The MAC also reviews the goals and mitigation actions to determine their relevance to changing situations in the county, as well as changes in State or Federal regulations and policy. The MAC reviews the risk assessment portion of the MJHMP and its annexes to determine if this information should be updated or modified, given any new available data. The responsible parties for the mitigation actions report on the status of their projects, the success of various implementation processes, difficulties encountered, success of coordination efforts, and which strategies should be revised. Any updates or changes necessary for the City’s LHMP will be forwarded to the County Office of Emergency Management for inclusion in further updates to the MJHMP.

Major disasters affecting the City of Guadalupe’s community, legal changes, notices from Santa Barbara County (lead agency for the County-wide Plan), and other significant events may trigger revisions to this plan or convening of the LPT. The City of Guadalupe LPT, in collaboration with the Santa Barbara County Office of Emergency Management, and the other communities of the County, will determine how often and when the plan should be updated.

To remain eligible for mitigation grant funding from FEMA, the City is committed to revising the plan at a minimum of every five years. The City’s Director of Public Safety or the City’s designee will contact the county four years after this plan is approved to ensure that the county plans to undertake the plan update process. The jurisdictions within Santa Barbara County should continue to work together on updating this multi-jurisdictional plan.

8.2 IMPLEMENTATION THROUGH EXISTING PLANS AND PROGRAMS
The City implements the LHMP through existing plans, programs, and procedures, as detailed in Section 4.0, Capability Assessment. This LHMP provides a baseline of information on the hazards impacting the City and the existing institutions, plans, policies and ordinances that help to implement the LHMP (e.g., General Plan, building codes, floodplain management ordinance). The General Plan and the LHMP annex are complementary documents that work together to achieve the goal of reducing risk exposure to the City’s citizens. An update to a general plan may trigger an update to the hazard mitigation plan. Implementation responsibilities of mitigation actions is integrated into

9.0. References
City of Guadalupe Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 53
Annex to the Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan the operational functions of the responsibility parties identified, including responsibility for seeking funding needed for implementation.

The City incorporates the LHMP by reference into its General Plan Safety Element. Under AB 2140, the City may adopt its current, FEMA-approved LHMP into the Safety Element of the General Plan.

This adoption makes the City eligible to be considered for part or all of its local-share costs on eligible Public Assistance funding to be provided by the state through the California Disaster Assistance Act (CDAA) (see Section 2.0, Plan Purpose and Authority for the adopting resolutions).

The LHMP has also been prepared to support the City’s effort to prepare a master drainage plan and evacuation plan. The Floodplain Management Ordinance applies in concert with the City’s zoning ordinance and building codes to reduce flooding hazards from land use. The LHMP also includes several mitigations addressing earthquake retrofits to support the City’s efforts to reduce groundshaking hazards.

The information contained within this LHMP, including results from the Vulnerability Assessment and the Mitigation Strategy, is used by the City to help inform updates and the development of local plans, programs, and policies. The City may utilize the hazard information when developing and implementing the City’s capital improvement programs and the Planning and Building Divisions may utilize the hazard information when reviewing a site plan or other type of development applications.

8.3 ONGOING PUBLIC OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT
The public will continue to be involved whenever the plan is updated and as appropriate during the monitoring and evaluation process. Before the adoption of updates, the City will provide the opportunity for the public to comment on the updates. A public notice will be published before the meeting to announce the comment period and meeting logistics. Moreover, the City will engage stakeholders in community emergency planning. As described in Section 3.4, Public Outreach and Engagement, the public outreach strategy used during development of the current update will provide a framework for public engagement through the plan maintenance process. It can be adapted for ongoing public outreach as determined to be feasible by the MAC and the LPT.

8.4 POINT OF CONTACT
Comments or suggestions regarding this plan may be submitted at any time to Michael Cash, Chief of Police & Director of Public Safety using the following information:

Michael Cash, Chief of Police & Director of Public Safety City of Guadalupe
918 Obispo Street
Guadalupe, CA 93434
[email protected]
(805) 219-9444

9.0 REFERENCES
The City of Guadalupe General Plan, available at City Hall

Page 1 of 2 ends

Agenda Item No. 7H

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GUADALUPE
Agenda of April 11, 2023
_______________________________
Prepared by:

Todd Bodem, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Approval for the amended scope of work and budget for the City’s agreement with Los Amigos de Guadalupe (LADG) and approval of an agreement with Tom Brandeberry for the Royal Theater Project
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the Council approve the amended budget for the City’s Agreement with Los Amigos de Guadalupe (to remove the Royal Theater Project), and also, to approve a standard City consultant agreement with Tom Brandeberry (for the Royal Theater Project).

Proposed motion: “I move that the Amendment No. 1 to the City’s Agreement with Los Amigos de Guadalupe be approved and that the agreement between the City and Tom Brandeberry also be approved, and to authorize the Mayor to sign both documents on behalf of the City.”
BACKGROUND:

Rural Community Development Corporation of California (RCDCC) entered into a consultant agreement with the City in October of 2018 to manage the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) contract (#17CDBG12099) which included project management of the Le Roy Park and Community Center renovation and the completion of the Resilience-Guadalupe Plan. On October 27, 2020, the City entered into a new agreement with RCDCC and added management of two more grants CDBG CV1 (20CDBGCV100085) and CDBG ED (20CDBG12089) to RCDCC.

On March 4, 2021, RCDCC changed its name to Los Amigos de Guadalupe (LADG), and the City Council substituted LADG in place of RCDCC in the October 27, 2020, agreement at its meeting on April 13, 2021, by way of a novation agreement.

A further amendment to the City’s agreement with LADG was approved by the City Council at its meeting on November 8, 2022, to include new and assumed responsibilities related to the City’s Senior Meals Program and the Microenterprise Program in addition to its continued administration duties for prior grants and the resiliency plan. This amendment to the City/LADG agreement also included the renovation of the Royal Theatre (Royal Theater Project). Accordingly, a new scope of work and budget

Page 2 of 2 ends

was prepared to be substituted in place of the existing scope of work and budget under the agreement between the City and LADG. (Attachment 1).

DISCUSSION:

Recently, LADG advised Tom Brandeberry that it lacked the capacity as an organization to continue the responsibility for the Royal Theater Project. Mr. Brandeberry had created RCDCC and LADG, and was originally LADG’s chief executive, but subsequently decided to take a lesser role as an employee for LADG in the last few years. His sole employment responsibilities for LADG were related to the Royal Theater Project, and with LADG’s decision, the City discussed entering into a consultant agreement with Mr.

Brandeberry for the Royal Theater Project (and removing this from the City’s current agreement with LADG). Mr. Brandeberry agreed, as did LADG.

The City’s existing agreement with LADG is attached hereto (Attachment 1) with the current scope of work and budget (Exhibits A and B, respectively), but with the proposed changes to Exhibit B indicated in “redline” (strikeouts for deletions and underlining for additions). The only changes made are to Section 4 on page 1 and to Exhibit B (Cost Proposal and Budget). Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement between the City and LADG (reflecting these changes) is attached hereto as Attachment 2. Pursuant to Amendment No. 1, Section 4 on page 1 of the original agreement is replaced as is Exhibit B.

The proposed consultant agreement with Mr. Brandeberry is attached hereto as Attachment 3. This agreement includes Exhibit A (Scope of Work) and Exhibit B (Cost Proposal and Budget) for the Royal Theater Project.

FISCAL IMPACT:

LADG’s services are entirely funded by grant proceeds, and also, all costs to the City related to the Royal Theater Project will be paid (or reimbursed) by grant funds (and tax credit funding), and therefore, there is no impact to the City’s general fund revenues.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Agreement between LADG and the City of Guadalupe dated November 22, 2022 (with edits to Exhibit B to show proposed changes).

2. Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement between LADG and the City of Guadalupe.

3. Agreement between the City and Tom Brandeberry for the Royal Theater Project.

ATTACHMENT 1

EXHIBIT A & B to this agreement - Approved by Council at the November 22, 2022 meeting Motion made by: Council Member Cardenas 2nd by Council Member Ramirez 5/0

Exhibit B
Exhibit B - Cost Proposal/Budget
Budget Item Amount Comments
Contract Administration
CDBG
$27,000 Remaining Amounts for 20CDBG12089 (microenterprise) 20CDBGCV23-00015 (senior meals).

Note: work also includes closing out the
17CDBG12099 and the 20CDBGCV1-0085
contracts.

Resilience Plan $15,000 Remaining work/funds from 17CDBG12099 Senior Meals Program $180,000 Remaining funds to operate the Senior Meals Program. This amount represents the staffing costs
needed for LADG to operate a congregate and home
delivery senior meals program. These funds have also
been used to purchase all the equipment needed to a
permitted kitchen, repairs to bring it up to permitting and fire department standards, and to pay for all
facility operating costs.

Microenterprise
Program
$40,000 Remaining CDBG ED operating costs to run the
program that includes both technical and financial
assistance. Available funds also include addition
$150,000 set aside for Grants (max $10,000 for
eligible Guadalupe micro-businesses). Remaining
operating funds could be moved to the Grant funds
bucket. Contract end date: 6/30/2024
Royal Theatre 300,000 The Royal Theatre Project will have three sources of funds that LADG will manage on behalf of the City:
federal Economic Development Administration,
California Arts Council and Historic Tax Credits (this
could be both state and federal tax credits). LADG
will both manage the project, as we have been doing
to date, and administer each funding source to ensure
project/funding and reporting compliance
requirements.

Project Manager (3 years $52,000 per year)
Grant Manager (4 years $120,000)
Other Costs (4 years $28,000)
End dates vary on each contract with the earliest
being 2027.

TOTAL $562,000
$262,000
*Note,: not included above is the remaining in City ARRP funds to support the economic development work at LADG that is not fundable under the above grants, which has a remaining amount of $25,000.

The above is based on two types of work LADG is completing for the city. Firstly, each contract has unique requirements from reporting to funds requests, to maintaining public reports. This contract management work is required for the life of each grant and includes numerous “close out” requirements (see scope of work). Secondly, as per the city request, LADG is implement activities: operating a Senior Meals program (delivery and congregate), a microenterprise assistance program, along with the Royal Theatre project. LADG will continue to support the city in whatever way the city needs support and LADG has the staff, volunteers, and interns to help.

AMENDMENT NO. 1
TO

AGREEMENT BETWEEN

THE CITY OF GUADALUPE
AND

LOS AMIGOS DE GUADALUPE
This Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement between the City of Guadalupe (“City”) and Los Amigos de Guadalupe (“LADG”), originally entered into on April 13, 2021, as amended on November 8, 2022 (“Agreement), is entered into by and between the City and LADG on April 11, 2023.

WHEREAS, City and Rural Community Development Corporation of California (RCDCC) entered into a consultant agreement on October of 2018 to manage the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) contract (#17CDBG12099) which included project management of the Le Roy Park and Community Center renovation and the completion of the Resilience-Guadalupe Plan; and
WHEREAS, on October 27, 2020, the City entered into a new agreement with RCDCC and added management of two more grants CDBG CV1 (20CDBGCV100085) and CDBG ED (20CDBG12089) to RCDCC; and
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2021, RCDCC changed its name to Los Amigos de Guadalupe (LADG), and the City Council substituted LADG in place of RCDCC in the October 27, 2020, agreement at its meeting on April 13, 2021, by a novation agreement; and WHEREAS, a further amendment to the City’s agreement with LADG was approved by the City Council at its meeting on November 22, 2022, to include new and assumed responsibilities related to the City’s Senior Meals Program and the Microenterprise Program in addition to its continued administration duties for prior grants and the resiliency plan; and WHEREAS, LADG recently decided that it lacked the capacity as an organization to continue the responsibility for the Royal Theater Project (“Project”), and therefore, it is necessary to remove this Project from LADG’s responsibilities under its agreement with the City.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, the parties agree as follows:

All of the terms and conditions of the original Agreement remain the same, except as follows:

Section 4. Compensation and Method of Payment.

ATTACHMENT 2
(a) Subject to any limitations set forth in this Agreement, City agrees to pay Consultant the amounts specified in the revised Exhibit B (Cost Proposal and Budget) attached to this Amendment No. 1 and hereby made a part of the Agreement.

CITY: CONSULTANT:

CITY OF GUADALUPE LOS AMIGOS DE GUADALUPE
By: _____________________________ By: __________________________ Ariston D. Julian, Mayor Alejandra Mahoney, CEO
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________
Philip F. Sinco, City Attorney
Exhibit B - Cost Proposal/Budget
Budget Item Amount Comments
Contract Administration
CDBG
$27,000 Remaining Amounts for 20CDBG12089 (microenterprise) 20CDBGCV23-00015 (senior meals).

Note: work also includes closing out the
17CDBG12099 and the 20CDBGCV1-0085 contracts.

Resilience Plan $15,000 Remaining work/funds from 17CDBG12099 Senior Meals Program $180,000 Remaining funds to operate the Senior Meals Program. This amount represents the staffing costs
needed for LADG to operate a congregate and home
delivery senior meals program. These funds have
also been used to purchase all the equipment
needed to a permitted kitchen, repairs to bring it up
to permitting and fire department standards, and to
pay for all facility operating costs.

TOTAL $262,000
*Note: not included above is the remaining in City ARRP funds to support the economic development work at LADG that is not fundable under the above grants, which has a remaining amount of $25,000.

The above is based on two types of work LADG is completing for the city. Firstly, each contract has unique requirements from reporting to funds requests, to maintaining public reports. This contract management work is required for the life of each grant and includes numerous “close out” requirements (see scope of work). Secondly, as per the city request, LADG is implement activities: operating a Senior Meals program (delivery and congregate), a microenterprise assistance program. LADG will continue to support the city in whatever way the city needs support and LADG has the staff, volunteers, and interns to help.

AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES

BETWEEN

THE CITY OF GUADALUPE
AND

THOMAS BRANDEBERRY
THIS AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES (the "Agreement") is made and entered into this 11th day of April 2023, by and between the CITY OF GUADALUPE, a municipal corporation ("City") and Thomas Brandeberry ("Consultant").

In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows:

Section 1. Term of Agreement. Subject to the provisions of Section 19 (Termination of Agreement) of this Agreement, the term of this Agreement shall be for a period of up to four (4) years from the date of execution of this Agreement, as first shown above. Such term may be extended upon written agreement of both parties to this Agreement.

Section 2. Scope of Services. Consultant agrees to perform the services set forth in Exhibit A (Scope of Services) and made a part of this Agreement.

Section 3. Additional Services. Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement which are in addition to or outside of those set forth in this Agreement or listed in Exhibit A unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the City Council or City Administrator of City.

Consultant shall be compensated for any such additional services in the amounts and in the manner agreed to by the City Council or City Administrator.

Section 4. Compensation and Method of Payment.
(a) Subject to any limitations set forth in this Agreement, City agrees to pay Consultant the amounts specified in Exhibit B (Cost Proposal and Budget) and made a part of this Agreement.
(b) Each month Consultant shall furnish to City an original invoice for all work performed and expenses incurred during the preceding month. The invoice shall detail charges by the following categories: labor (by subcategory), travel, materials, equipment, supplies, subconsultant contracts, and miscellaneous expenses. City shall independently review each invoice submitted by Consultant to determine whether the work performed, and expenses incurred, are in compliance with the provisions of this Agreement and Scope of Services. In the event that no charges or expenses are disputed, the invoice shall be approved and paid according to the terms set forth in subsection (c). In the event City disputes any charges or expenses, City shall return the original invoice to Consultant with specific items in dispute identified for correction and re-submission. All undisputed charges shall be paid in accordance with this Agreement and Scope of Services.

ATTACHMENT 3
(c) Except as to any charges for work performed or expenses incurred by Consultant, which are disputed by City, City will cause Consultant to be paid within thirty (30) days of receipt of Consultant's invoice.
(d) Payment to Consultant for work performed pursuant to this Agreement shall not be deemed to waive any defects in work performed by Consultant. (e) Consultant shall have the right to suspend services if not paid in accordance with this Agreement.

Section 5. Inspection and Final Acceptance. City may inspect and accept or reject any of Consultant's work under this Agreement, either during performance or when completed, if the work is found to be defective or not in compliance with the defined Scope of Services. Acceptance of any of the Consultant's work by City shall not constitute a waiver of any of the provisions of this Agreement, including but not limited to, Sections 15 and 16, pertaining to indemnification and insurance, respectively. Consultant agrees to cooperate in any such inspection.

Section 6. Ownership of Documents. All original maps, models, designs, drawings, photographs, studies, surveys, reports, data, notes, computer files, paper files, and other documents prepared, developed or discovered by Consultant in the course of providing any services pursuant to this Agreement shall become the sole property of City and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by City without the permission of the Consultant. Reuse of any materials outside the scope of this Agreement shall be at the sole risk of the City.

Section 7. Consultant's Books and Records.
(a) Consultant shall maintain any and all documents and records demonstrating or relating to Consultant's performance of services pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain any and all ledgers, books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, or other documents or records evidencing or relating to work, services, expenditures and disbursements charged to City pursuant to this Agreement. Any and all such documents or records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be sufficiently completed and detailed so as to permit an accurate evaluation of the services provided by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement. Any and all such documents or records shall be maintained for three (3) years from the date of execution of this Agreement and to the extent required by laws relating to the audits of public agencies and their expenditures.
(b) Any and all records or documents required to be maintained pursuant to this section shall be made available for inspection, audit and copying, upon reasonable notice during regular business hours, upon written request by City or its designated representative.

Copies of such documents or records shall be provided directly to the City for inspection, audit and copying when it is practical to do so; otherwise, unless an alternative is mutually agreed upon, such documents and records shall be made available at Consultant's address indicated for receipt of notices in this Agreement. The City shall compensate the Consultant for all costs associated with providing these materials to the City. (c) Where City has reason to believe that any of the documents or records required to be maintained pursuant to this section may be lost or destroyed due to dissolution or termination of Consultant's business, City may, by written request, require that custody of such documents or records be given to the requesting party and that such documents and records be maintained by the requesting party. Access to such documents and records shall be granted to City, as well as to its successors-in-interest and authorized representatives.

Section 8. Status of Consultant.
(a) Consultant is and shall at all times during the terms of this Agreement remain a wholly independent Consultant and not an officer, employee or agent of City.

Consultant shall have no authority to bind City in any manner, nor to incur any obligation, debt or liability of any kind on behalf of or against City, whether by contract or otherwise, unless such authority is expressly conferred under this Agreement or is otherwise expressly conferred in writing by City.
(b) The personnel performing the services under this Agreement on behalf of Consultant shall at all times be under Consultant's exclusive direction and control. Neither City nor any elected or appointed boards, officers, officials, employees or agents of City, shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that Consultant or any of Consultant's officers, employees or agents are in any manner officials, employees or agents of City.
(c) Neither Consultant nor any of Consultant's officers, employees or agents shall obtain any rights to retirement, health care or any other benefits which may otherwise accrue to City's employees. Consultant expressly waives any claim Consultant may have to any such rights.

Section 9. Standard of Performance. Consultant represents and warrants that it has the qualifications, experience and facilities necessary to properly perform the services required under this Agreement in a thorough, competent and professional manner. Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of its ability, experience and talent, perform all services described herein. In meeting its obligations under this Agreement, Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing services similar to those required of Consultant under this Agreement.

Section 10. Compliance With Applicable Laws, Permits and Licenses.

Consultant shall keep itself informed of and comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, statutes, codes, ordinances, regulations and rules in effect during the term of this Agreement applicable to Consultant. Consultant shall obtain any and all licenses, permits and authorizations necessary to perform the services set forth in this Agreement. Neither City, nor any elected or appointed boards, officers, officials, employees or agents of City, shall be liable at law or in equity as a result of any failure of Consultant to comply with this section.

Section 11. Nondiscrimination. Consultant shall not discriminate, in any way, against any person on the basis of race, color, religious creed, national origin, ancestry, sex, age, disability, marital status or sexual orientation in connection with or related to the performance of this Agreement.

Section 12. Unauthorized Aliens. Consultant hereby promises and agrees to comply with all of the provisions of the Federal Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C.A. sections 1101, et seq., as amended, and in connection therewith, shall not employ unauthorized aliens for the performance of work and/or services covered by this Agreement, and should any liability or sanctions be imposed against City for such use of unauthorized aliens, Consultant hereby agrees to and shall reimburse City for the cost of all such liabilities or sanctions imposed, together with any and all costs, including attorney's fees, incurred by City.

Section 13. Conflicts of Interest. Consultant will comply with all conflict-ofinterest laws and regulations including, without limitation, the City’s Conflict of Interest Code (on file in the City Clerk’s Office). All officers, employees and/or agents of Consultant who will be working on behalf of the City pursuant to this Agreement, may be required to file Statements of Economic Interest with the Fair Political Practices Commission. Therefore, it is incumbent upon Consultant to notify that City of any staff changes relating to this Agreement.

A. In accomplishing the scope of services of this Agreement, all officers, employees and/or agents of Consultant, unless as indicated in Subsection B, will be performing a very limited and closely supervised function, and, therefore, unlikely to have a conflict of interest arise. No disclosures are required for any officers, employees, and/or agents of Consultant, except as indicated in Subsection B. ____________
Initials
B. In accomplishing the scope of services of this Agreement, Consultant will be performing a specialized or general service for the City, and there is substantial likelihood that the Consultant’s work product will be presented, either written or orally, for the purpose of influencing a governmental decision. As a result, Consultant shall be subject to Disclosure Category “1” of the City’s Conflict of Interest Code.

Section 14. Confidential Information; Release of Information. (a) All information gained or work product produced by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential, unless such information is in the public domain or already known to Consultant. Consultant shall not release or disclose any such information or work product to persons or entities other than City without prior written authorization from the City Administrator, except as may be required by law. (b) Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subconsultants, shall not, without prior written authorization from the City Administrator or unless requested by the City Attorney of City, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, responses to interrogatories or other information concerning the work performed under this Agreement. A response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena.
(c) If Consultant, or any officer, employee, agent or subconsultant of Consultant, provides any information or work product in violation of this section, then City shall have the right to reimbursement and indemnity from Consultant for any damages, costs and fees, including attorney's fees, caused by or incurred as a result of Consultant's conduct.
(d) Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or sub consultants be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder. City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant or be present at any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, this right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct, or rewrite said response. Consultant shall be compensated for all costs associated with complying with this section.

Section 15. Indemnification.
(a) City and its respective elected and appointed boards, officials, officers, agents, employees and volunteers (individually and collectively, "Indemnitees") shall have no liability to Consultant or any other person for, and Consultant shall indemnify, defend, protect and hold harmless Indemnitees from and against, any and all liabilities, claims, actions, causes of action, proceedings, suits, damages, judgments, liens, levies, costs and expenses of whatever nature, including reasonable attorney's fees and disbursements (collectively, "Claims") which Indemnitees may suffer or incur or to which Indemnitees may become subject by reason of or arising out of any injury to or death of any person(s), damage to property, loss of use of property, economic loss or otherwise occurring as a result of or allegedly caused by Consultant's performance of or failure to perform any services under this Agreement or by the negligent or willfully wrongful acts or omissions of Consultant, its agents, officers, directors, sub consultants or employees, committed in performing any of the services under this Agreement.
(b) If any action or proceeding is brought against Indemnitees by reason of any of the matters against which Consultant has agreed to indemnify Indemnitees as provided above, Consultant, upon notice from City, shall defend Indemnitees at Consultant's expense by counsel acceptable to City, such acceptance not to be unreasonably withheld.

Indemnitees need not have first paid for any of the matters to which Indemnitees are entitled to indemnification in order to be so indemnified. The insurance required to be maintained by Consultant under Section 16 shall ensure Consultant's obligations under this section, but the limits of such insurance shall not limit the liability of Consultant hereunder.

The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement.
(c) The provisions of this section do not apply to Claims occurring as a result of the City's sole negligence or willfully wrongful acts or omissions. (d) City agrees to indemnify Consultant for any such neglect or willfully wrongful acts committed by City or its officers, agents or employees.

Section 16. Insurance. Consultant agrees to obtain and maintain in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work provided by Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees in performance of this Agreement. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A-:VII. All insurance policies shall be subject to approval by City as to form and content.

These requirements are subject to amendment or waiver, if so approved in writing by City Administrator. Consultant agrees to provide City with copies of required policies upon request.

Prior to the beginning of and throughout the duration of the Work, Consultant and its subconsultants shall maintain insurance in conformance with the requirements set forth below.

Consultant will use existing coverage to comply with these requirements. If that existing coverage does not meet the requirements set forth herein, Consultant agrees to amend, supplement, or endorse the existing coverage to do so. Consultant acknowledges that the insurance coverage and policy limits set forth in this section constitute the minimum amount of coverage required. Any insurance proceeds available to Consultant or its subconsultants in excess of the limits and coverage identified in this Agreement and which is applicable to a given loss, claim or demand, will be equally available to City.

Consultant shall provide the following types and amounts of insurance. Without limiting Consultant’s indemnification of City, and prior to commencement of Work, Consultant shall obtain, provide and maintain at its own expense during the term of this Agreement, policies of insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form satisfactory to City:

A. Minimum Scope of Insurance: Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
(1) Insurance Services Office Form Commercial General Liability coverage (Occurrence Form CG 0001).
(2) Insurance Services Office Form No. CA 0001 covering Automobile Liability, including code 1"any auto" and endorsement CA 0025, or equivalent forms subject to written approval of City.
(3) Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers' Liability insurance and covering all persons providing services on behalf of the Consultant and all risks to such persons under this Agreement, along with a waiver of subrogation endorsement.
(4) Errors and omission liability insurance appropriate to the Consultant's profession, if necessary or requested by the City.

B. Minimum Limits of Insurance: Consultant shall maintain limits of insurance no less than:
(1) General Liability Insurance: Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance with coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CG 00 01, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate, for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage, and a $2,000,000 completed operations aggregate.

The policy shall provide or be endorsed to provide that City and its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be additional insureds under such policies. This provision shall also apply to any excess/umbrella liability policies. The policy must include contractual liability that has not been amended. Any endorsement restricting standard ISO “insured contract” language will not be accepted. This insurance and any umbrella or excess liability insurance shall be maintained for a minimum of three years or as long as there is a statutory exposure to completed operations claims, with the City and its officers, officials, employees, and agents continued as additional insured.
(2) Automobile Liability: Consultant shall maintain automobile insurance at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CA 00 01 covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of the Consultant arising out of or in connection with Work to be performed under this Agreement, including coverage for any owned, hired, non-owned or rented vehicles, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 combined single limit for each accident. (3) Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Consultant shall maintain Workers’ Compensation Insurance (Statutory Limits) and Employer’s Liability Insurance (with limits of at least $1,000,000) for Consultant’s employees in accordance with the laws of the State of California, Section 3700 of the Labor Code. In addition, Consultant shall require each subConsultant to similarly maintain Workers’ Compensation Insurance and Employer’s Liability Insurance in accordance with the laws of the State of California, Section 3700 for all of the subConsultant’s employees. Consultant shall submit to City. (4) Errors and Omissions Liability: $1,000,000 per claim as appropriate for the profession, if required by the City.

C. Other Provisions: Insurance policies required by this Agreement shall contain the following provisions:
(1) Notice of Cancellation: Each insurance policy required by this Agreement shall be endorsed and state the coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by the insurer or other party to this Agreement, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested has been given to City. (2) Primary/noncontributing: Coverage provided by Consultant shall be primary and any insurance or self-insurance procured or maintained by City shall not be required to contribute with it. The limits of insurance required herein may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and noncontributory basis for the benefit of City before the City’s own insurance or self-insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured.
(3) City’s Rights of Enforcement: In the event any policy of insurance required under this Agreement does not comply with these requirements or is canceled and not replaced, City has the right but not the duty to obtain the insurance it deems necessary and any premium paid by City will be promptly reimbursed by Consultant or City will withhold amounts sufficient to pay premium from Consultant payments. In the alternative, City may cancel this Agreement. (4) Waiver of Subrogation: All insurance coverage maintained or procured pursuant to this agreement shall be endorsed to waive subrogation against City, its elected or appointed officers, agents, officials, employees and volunteers or shall specifically allow Consultant or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these specifications to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss. Consultant hereby waives its own right of recovery against City and shall require similar written express waivers. (5) Enforcement of Contract Provisions (non estoppel): Consultant acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of the City to inform Consultant of non-compliance with any requirement imposes no additional obligations on the City nor does it waive any rights hereunder.
(6) Requirements not Limiting: Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this Section are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits or other requirements, or a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue and is not intended by any party or insured to be all inclusive, or to the exclusion of other coverage, or a waiver of any type. If the Consultant maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by the Consultant. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City.
(7) Prohibition of Undisclosed Coverage Limitations: None of the coverages required herein will be in compliance with these requirements if they include any limiting endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted to City and approved of in writing. (8) Separation of Insureds: A severability of interests provision must apply for all additional insureds ensuring that Consultant’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the insurer’s limits of liability. The policy(ies) shall not contain any cross-liability exclusions. (9) Pass through Clause: Consultant agrees to ensure that its subconsultants, subconsultants, and any other party involved with the project who is brought onto or involved in the project by Consultant, provide the same minimum insurance coverage and endorsements required of Consultant. Consultant agrees to monitor and review all such coverage and assumes all responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is provided in conformity with the requirements of this section. Consultant agrees that upon request, all agreements with consultants, subconsultants, and others engaged in the project will be submitted to City for review. (10) City’s Right to Revise Requirements: The City reserves the right at any time during the term of the contract to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving the Consultant a ninety (90) day advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to the Consultant, the City and Consultant may renegotiate Consultant’s compensation.
(11) Self-insured Retentions: Any self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by City. City reserves the right to require that self-insured retentions be eliminated, lowered, or replaced by a deductible. Self-insurance will not be considered to comply with these specifications unless approved by City.
(12) Timely Notice of Claims: Consultant shall give City prompt and timely notice of claims made or suits instituted that arise out of or result from Consultant’s performance under this Agreement, and that involve or may involve coverage under any of the required liability policies.
(13) Additional Insurance: Consultant shall also procure and maintain, at its own cost and expense, any additional kinds of insurance, which in its own judgment may be necessary for its proper protection and prosecution of the Work.

Section 17. Assignment. The expertise and experience of Consultant are material considerations for this Agreement. City has an interest in the qualifications of and capability of the persons and entities who will fulfill the duties and obligations imposed upon Consultant under the Agreement. In recognition of that interest, Consultant shall not assign or transfer this Agreement or any portion of this Agreement or the performance of any of Consultant's duties or obligations under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the City Council.

Any attempted assignment shall be ineffective, null and void, and shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement, entitling City to any and all remedies at law or in equity, including summary termination of this Agreement. City acknowledges, however, that Consultant, in the performance of its duties pursuant to this Agreement, may utilize sub consultants.

Section 18. Continuity of Personnel. Consultant shall make every reasonable effort to maintain the stability and continuity of Consultant's staff assigned to perform the services required under this Agreement. Consultant shall notify City of any changes in Consultant's staff assigned to perform the services required under this Agreement, prior to any such performance.

Section 19. Termination of Agreement.
(a) City may terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, at any time by giving thirty (30) days' written notice of termination to Consultant. In the event such notice is given, Consultant shall cease immediately all work in progress. (b) Consultant may terminate this Agreement at any time upon thirty (30) days' written notice of termination to City.
(c) If either Consultant or City fail to perform any material obligation under this Agreement, then, in addition to any other remedies, either Consultant or City may terminate this Agreement immediately upon written notice. (d) Upon termination of this Agreement by either Consultant or City, all property belonging exclusively to City which is in Consultant's possession shall be returned to City. Consultant shall furnish to City a final invoice for work performed and expenses incurred by Consultant, prepared as set forth in Section 4 of this Agreement. This final invoice shall be reviewed and paid in the same manner as set forth in Section 4 of this Agreement.

Section 20. Default. In the event that Consultant is in default under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall not have any obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default and may terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to Consultant.

Section 21. Excusable Delays. Consultant shall not be liable for damages, including liquidated damages, if any, caused by delay in performance or failure to perform due to causes beyond the control of Consultant. Such causes include, but are not limited to, acts of God, acts of the public enemy, acts of federal, state or local governments, acts of the City, court orders, fires, floods, epidemics, strikes, embargoes, and unusually severe weather. The term and price of this Agreement shall be equitably adjusted for any delays due to such causes.

Section 22. Cooperation by City. All public information, data, reports and maps as are existing and available to City as public records, and which are necessary for carrying out the work as outlined in Exhibit A, shall be furnished to Consultant in every reasonable way to facilitate, without undue delay, the work to be performed under this Agreement.

Section 23. Notices. All notices required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be personally delivered, or sent by telecopier or United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows:

To City: City Administrator
City of Guadalupe
918 Obispo Street
Guadalupe, CA 93434
To Consultant: Tom Brandeberry
1904 5th Street
Sacramento, California 95811
Notice shall be deemed effective on the date personally delivered or transmitted by facsimile or, if mailed, three (3) days after deposit of the same in the custody of the United States Postal Service.

Section 24. Authority to Execute. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the Consultant represents and warrants that they have the authority to so execute this Agreement and to bind Consultant to the performance of its obligations hereunder.

Section 25. Binding Effect. This Agreement shall be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the parties.

Section 26. Modification of Agreement. No amendment to or modification of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and approved by the Consultant and by the City Council. The parties agree that this requirement for written modifications cannot be waived and that any attempted waiver shall be void.

Section 27. Waiver. Waiver by any party to this Agreement of any term, condition or covenant of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any other term, condition or covenant. Waiver by any party of any breach of the provisions of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any other provision, nor a waiver of any subsequent breach or violation of any provision of this Agreement. Acceptance by City of any work or services by Consultant shall not constitute a waiver of any provisions of this Agreement.

Section 28. Law to Govern; Venue. This Agreement shall be interpreted, construed and governed according to the laws of the State of California. In the event of litigation between the parties, venue in state trial courts shall lie exclusively in the County of Santa Barbara.

In the event of litigation in a U.S. District Court, venue shall lie exclusively in the Central District of California, in Los Angeles.

Section 29. Attorney's Fees, Costs and Expenses. In the event litigation or other proceeding is required to enforce or interpret any provision of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such litigation or other proceeding shall be entitled to any award of reasonable attorney's fees, costs and expenses, in addition to any other relief to which it may be entitled.

Section 30. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including the attached exhibits, is the entire, complete, final and exclusive expression of the parties with respect to the matters addressed therein and supersedes all other agreements or understandings, whether oral or written, or entered into between Consultant and City prior to the execution of this Agreement. No statements, representations, or other agreements, whether oral or written, made by any party which are not embodied herein shall be valid and binding. No amendment to this Agreement shall be valid and binding unless in writing duly executed by the parties or their authorized representatives.

Section 31. Severability. If a term, condition or covenant of this Agreement is declared or determined by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby, and the Agreement shall be read and construed without the invalid, void or unenforceable provision(s).

Section 32. Preparation of Agreement. This Agreement is the product of negotiation and preparation by and among the parties and their respective attorneys. The parties, therefore, expressly acknowledge and agree that this Agreement shall not be deemed prepared or drafted by one party or another, or any party's attorney, and will be construed accordingly.

CITY: CONSULTANT:

CITY OF GUADALUPE THOMAS BRANDEBERRY
By:______________________________ By:_________________________________ Ariston Julian, Mayor Thomas Brandeberry

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

__________________________________
Phillip Sinco, City Attorney

Exhibit A – Scope of Work
Scope of Work:

Consultant will manage the following three funding sources as they relate to the renovation of the Royal Theatre (Project):
● Economic Development Administration
● California Arts Council
● Tax Credits (NMC and/or HTC)
On behalf of the City, Consultant will ensure that all contract obligations are completed, and completed within the contract periods. This includes all reporting requirements, submission of all required documents, and reimbursement request, and primary contact work with funding agencies.

Consultant will ensure an open communication with the City on all necessary communications between the City and the funding sources. Consultant will also provide, as needed, any presentation, training, or written explanation of the funding sources and their requirements for the contacting period as requested by City.

Consultant will travel to Guadalupe, as needed, and at the direction of the City, for project meetings, site visits, and other project related needs. Consultant’s time spent traveling to Guadalupe shall be charged at Consultant’s hourly rate. Any other travel that may be necessary for this Project must be approved by City and, if approved, all reasonable costs for lodging and meals shall be payable in addition to actual travel time.

For the Project’s federally funded grant, Consultant will provide the City with the technical assistance on all federal requirements (NEPA, prevailing wage, procurement, Section 3, MBE/WBE, etc.) and either implement these requirements or ensure appropriate consultants are hired and compensated within the Project’s budget as set forth on Exhibit B.

Coordinate all Project construction work with the contractor, inspector, labor compliance, design team and the City staff and any other contracted entity to ensure compliance with all funding sources. Consultant will also coordinate periodic meeting with all parties to ensure the project is proceeding in accordance with schedules or other timelines.

Consultant will submit budgets and updated budgets as needed.

Consultant will submit reports and make presentations to the city council at the request of City Council or staff.

Consultant will continue the above until the project has the Certification of Occupancy and all grant funded contracts have been successfully closed out.

Exhibit B - Cost Proposal/Budget
Royal Theatre Project: $293,610.75
The Royal Theatre Project will have three sources of funds that Consultant will manage on behalf of the City: federal Economic Development Administration, California Arts Council and Historic Tax Credits (this could be both state and federal tax credits). Consultant will manage the project and administer each funding source to ensure project/funding and reporting compliance requirements.

Project Management costs are estimated at approximately $50,000 per year for three (3) years – total of $150,000.

Grant Management costs are estimated at approximately $30,000 per year for four (4) years - total of $120,000.

Other costs are estimated at approximately $10,000 per year for four (4) years – total of $30,000.

NOTE: the budgeted amount of $293,610.75 reflects the original grant funded budget of $300,000 less monies paid to Los Amigos de Guadalupe for its services related to the Royal Theater Project to date in the amount of $6,389.25).

Consultant will submit monthly billing with descriptions of work completed.

Hourly Rate: $75 per hour
Travel: Actual cost including but not limited to reasonable meals and lodging in addition to hourly rate charged for time spent traveling.

PLANNING DEPARTMENT
City of Guadalupe
918 Obispo Street
P.O. Box 908
Guadalupe, CA 93434
Tel (805) 356-3903
To: Mr. Mayor and City Councilmembers
From: Larry Appel, Contract Planning Director
Date: April 1, 2023 Planning Report Covering March 2023

MINISTERIAL PROJECTS
Zoning Clearances Approved 1
Zoning Clearances Denied 0
Zoning Verification Letters 0
Business Licenses Approved 1
Business Licenses Denied 0
ADUs approved 2
AUP for short-term rental 0

DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS
Please refer to the next page for specific projects and their current status.

If you have any questions regarding any projects listed in this report, please contact me at [email protected] or call (805) 598-8385.

Agenda Item No. 7I. 1
Ministerial Permit Report– March 2023
(Reported 4-1-2023)
Zoning Clearance Approvals
2023-017-ZC AT&T Antenna replacement (tower) 4500 Tenth Street ADU Approvals2023-018-ZC Edwards 2 ADUs 849 Pioneer Street Business License Approvals
Nana’s Place. Baked goods 4814 Carlin Dr
Business License Denials
None
Guadalupe City Planning Department
Planning Processing Summary for February 2023
(4-1-23 update)
Case No. Name Submittal
Date
Comp. Date Status OK for Bldg.

Permit Issuance
2022-088-LM -
Voluntary Lot
Merger
Trudy Brands December 5,
2022
Under Review. NO
2022-093-LS -
Residential Lot
Split
Lupe Alvarez December 19,
2022
Under state SB9 Code provisions at 246
Egret Lane. Under review
NO
Ordinance No.
2023- 509
Consistency Rezone January 2023 N/A Second Reading approved on 3-28-23 NO 2022-063-LM Mahoney Lot Merger August 11,
2022
INC 9-11-22 Incomplete Application Letter sent on
September 11, 2022.

NO
2022-065-LLA - La
Guardia
La Guardia
Townhomes lot line
adjustment
August 22,
2022-
COMP. Changed from an LLA to Lot Merger per
Govt. Code and approved by City Engineer
December 2023.

NO
2022-016-GPZ
2022-017-DR
2022-018-VTTM
Snowy Plover 3-10-22 Incomplete 4-
09-22
Application resubmitted on February 24,
2023. Second Incomplete letter sent 3-24-23.

NO
2022-048-CUP Element 7 Retail
cannabis dispensary
INC 9-17-22 January resubmittal by applicant. Review by staff and cannabis consultant.

NO
2023-013-LS
SB-9 Split
Reed Lot Split 3-7-23 Initial 30-day review NO
No$ = unreimbursed planning work
$ = projects where a fixed fee has been paid
4-1-23
Agenda Item No. 7I. 2
Building Inspections Log - March 2023

1 Public Works/Engineering Report
March 2023
Development
151 Obispo
City staff met with the owners of 151 Obispo onsite on March 8 to discuss sidewalk installation along Obispo Street, which includes removal of several trees. As discussed at a previous City Council meeting, the City will be responsible for a portion of the work.

The group agreed upon the work to be done, the City’s portion of it, and how to proceed.

Pasadera
On March 28, City and Pasadera staff met with Caltrans maintenance staff to discuss flooding in the Pasadera development residential neighborhood. Caltrans indicated that most of the water in the ditch on the south side of Main Street was contributed from adjacent agricultural fields east of Pasadera and that Caltrans is powerless to stop this from occurring. Caltrans did agree to inspect the culvert to ensure that it was clean with no obstructions to flow. Caltrans did so on March 29 and let the City know that it is clean and flowing. Staff asked if he can be placed on priority list when storms are expected, but Caltrans would not commit to that.

Other
On March 29, staff redlined the encroachment permit application drawings submitted by Frontier Communications because their drawings were inconsistent with City standards.

Future applications from Frontier Communications will be expected to be consistent with City standards, since their subcontractor hesitated to deviate from plans even when the permit directed them to follow standards. Future installation of broadband communications infrastructure will be incumbent on Frontier Communications abiding by this direction.

City staff reviewed numerous encroachment permit applications in March. A number of these applications had to be reviewed multiple times and resubmitted with revisions because they involved the addition of driveway approaches to accommodate accessory dwelling unit driveways and did not meet standards. City standards are very specific about requirements, including a minimum of 20 feet between driveway approaches on a single lot, and a minimum of 5 feet distance from utilities installed in the sidewalk.

Agenda Item No. 7I. 3
2 Benefit Districts
Guadalupe Assessment District
Vegetation along the north wall of W. Main St. from Calle Cesar Chavez to Pioneer Street has overgrown beyond basic maintenance. A landscape contractor was hired to drastically reduce the volume of vegetation, one block at a time. The first block, just east of Calle Cesar Chavez, was completed at the end of February. Staff was unsatisfied with the work and met with the contractor on March 1 to discuss expectations. The contractor agreed to redo the work to the City’s expectations. Upon completion of that walk, the contractor was asked to complete an additional block in March. Additional work along the street will be completed in the coming months as the contractor is available following completion of the other priority work through town.

General
Special projects
Public Works staff worked on several special projects requested by others along with normal tasks of emptying streets trash cans twice a week, daily street inspection, bulky trash pickup, and weekly cleaning of the pedestrian bridge in the month of March including:
• March 1: a maintenance worker resigned as of February 21. Only one field staff person is available to complete all Public Works field maintenance tasks and projects until this maintenance worker position is filled. Meeting with Cassia landscape to discuss Guadalupe Assessment District vegetation clearing. Public Works and recreation staff met to review the 50% Central Park design drawings and develop comments.
• March 2: Coordination with Ace Tree Service on tree trimming down Guadalupe Street.
• March 6: maintenance worker interviews, all day.
• March 7: Assisted wastewater staff in addressing broken effluent spray field. • March 8: Follow up on streetlight outage on Herado Drive. • March 9: Storm preparation.
• March 13: Followup on illegal contractor heavy equipment parking. • March 14: Coordination with Ace Tree Service on tree trimming down Guadalupe Street.
• March 16: Cleaned glass from alley near O’Connell Park. • March 21: maintenance worker last day today.
• March 22: Pothole repair.
• March 27: Corporation yard cleanup and landfill run.
3 • March 30: Weed spraying through much of town. Trash cleanup at Pasadera Park.
• March 31: Assisted wastewater staff in addressing broken effluent spray field.

Contact Caltrans regarding numerous potholes on state highways.

The Public Works Director participated in the following meetings in March:
• March 1: Meeting with Cassia Landscape to discuss Guadalupe assessment District vegetation clearing. Public Works and recreation staff met to review the 50% Central Park design drawings and develop comments. Meeting with PG&E to discuss progress on the electrical service upgrade for the Corporation yard at 303 Obispo Street to accommodate electric vehicle charging. • March 2: Technical Transportation Advisory Committee (TTAC) meeting.

Central Park design project monthly progress meeting.
• March 6: Maintenance worker interviews, all day.
• March 7: Guadalupe broadband infrastructure assets discussion. • March 8: Field meeting to discuss sidewalk for 151 Obispo Street business.

Discussion with consultant on wastewater regulatory requirements. Meeting to discuss capacity planning documentation requirements from Calrecycle. 2022 pavement rehabilitation weekly field meeting.
• March 9: Central Coast Water Authority Operating Committee Meeting. Meeting to discuss LCTOP allocations.
• March 13: Met with Regional Water Quality Control Board to discuss wastewater treatment plant river discharge status. FEMA exploratory call. • March 14: Central Coast Community Energy (3CE) quarterly member agencies meeting.
• March 15: Biweekly meeting with PG&E regarding local service upgrades at 303 Obispo St. to accommodate electric vehicle charging.
• March 16: Manager Team Building session.
• March 17: Proterra weekly check-in meeting for electric bus manufacture. • March 22: Water tower maintenance discussion with BB&K. LCTOP North County regional prepaid transit fares discussion.
• March 23: FEMA recovery scoping meeting.
• March 24: Meeting with County, politicians, regarding flooding. • March 28: Waste Management contract extension discussion. Meeting with Caltrans and Pasadera regarding 166 flooding. Meeting with CDBG on $3 million grant funding for wastewater lift station projects.
• March 29: Meeting with developer and engineer on Snowy Plover property. • March 30: Meeting with wastewater consultant on revised permit. Meeting with Proterra on results from electric bus inspection.
4 Parks
Central Park
In February, the design consultant for the Central Park renovation project, Pacific Coast Land Design, delivered 50% design drawings and an updated cost estimate for City staff review. A monthly progress meeting was held on March 2. City staff met on March 1 to review drawings and submit comments. The consultant is preparing to present the 50% design to the Recreation and Parks Commission in April. City staff met with attorneys from BB&K on March 22 to determine how to proceed with much needed maintenance on the elevated water tank.

Leroy Park Phase II
On January 31, City staff submitted the grant application for the $1.7 million earmarked for Leroy Park phase II, which is the addition of the multipurpose building to the community center at Leroy Park. One known outstanding issue was the fact that the federal environmental paperwork, called NEPA, completed for the entire project for the first grant, which was administered by the Housing and Urban Development agency, was not sufficient for United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), which is the federal agency administering the phase II grant. The program manager from USDA indicated that the supplement to our existing meet the would be sufficient, and all of it could be done by city staff except for the biological resources supplement. On March 6, the biological supplement to the NEPA was submitted to the grant manager. The other two remaining elements, some financial information and the architect’s report, are in progress. The City is on track to finalize this grant by the September 2023 deadline.

Streets
2022 Pavement Rehabilitation Project
Construction on this project began on December 5. Concrete work was scheduled to be completed during the month of December, with pavement rehabilitation scheduled for the month of January. However, significant rain events the last week of December and continuing through March have greatly impacted the schedule. The consultant has requested and staff have approved numerous rain days, which will extend this project well into April. This project has required significant staff attention due to several curb ramp redesigns, unanticipated underground conditions, rescheduling due to rain, the holidays, supply chain issues (the asphalt plant shut down because of equipment failure on a critical business day), and trying to accommodate the installation of conduit and fiber optics for high-speed Internet in the same location so that brand-new asphalt will not need to be torn up just after installation. To add to the challenge, the subcontractor to Frontier Communications performed subpar work, much of which needs to be redone to meet City standards or even their own plans. Most of the overlay portion of the 5 project was completed the week of February 27, and the full depth reclamation on Pioneer and Santa Barbara Streets is scheduled to start April 5 and continue through April 14.

Transit
EV Buses
Fil Simas, traveled to North Carolina at the end of March to inspect the City’s new electric bus. After several small defects were identified and repaired, the City conditionally accepted the bus on March 30. However, since the charger for the bus will not be available until August, and it is not recommended to keep the battery uncharged, the City is planning to keep the bus at the manufacturer’s facility for a storage fee until the charger is installed.

State Transit Assistance (STA)
On March 23, staff submitted STA reimbursement request for 2022 – 2023 in the amount of $77,879.12.
303 Obispo Street Site Improvements
City electric vehicles, including some of the transit buses, will be parked, stored, and charged at the City’s corporation yard at 303 Obispo Street The City issued a request for proposals for design services to accommodate this need. The City received one proposal by the due date of March 23.

Water
AMI
City staff continues to replace manual read water meters with touch read meters as the first phase of converting its water meter reading system to Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI). 503 meters need to be replaced. Staff replaced 96 of these meters in January, 50 meters in February, and 62 meters in March.

State Water
On March 24, CCWA project participants were informed that the State Water Table A allocation for 2023 has increased from 35% to 75%, or 454 acre-feet (almost half our annual demand of 1,009 acre-feet). Staff raised the flow of State Water to 325 gallons per minute to maximize use of this water. In addition, Article 21 water is available but does not count against our Table A allocation. This occurs when San Lewis Reservoir “spills.” We are receiving an estimated 9 acre-feet a week of this water and are expected to continue doing so for several more weeks.

By March 6, the City received 3 quotes to replace the cluster of valves in the intersection of 10th St. and Olivera. The bids ranged from $27,200.02 $29,486. This work was awarded to the low bid, R Baker. This work is scheduled to be completed in early April.
6 Regulatory
The City submitted its electronic annual report (EAR) to the State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Drinking Water, on March 23.

Wastewater
Regulatory
No sewer system overflows occurred in March 2023.

During the month of March, the City continued to discharge undisinfected treated effluent to the river. The combination of storms and Twitchell releases have caused the river to flow bank to bank and the spray field ended up under water. Discharges to the river cannot stop until the spray field is put back together and the effluent station can be restarted. This may occur the second week in April. City staff submits an update at the end of every week to the Board to discuss status, progress, and any water quality results available.

City staff and its consultant, MKN, continue to work on various documents associated with its wastewater master plan and requested by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (Board). The Off-specification Contingency Plan was completed and submitted to the Board prior to the due date of March 1, but was rejected by the Board on March 27 and must be revised and resubmitted. The City submitted a memo discussing the appropriateness of our desired effluent sample point, and this report also got rejected by the Board for lack of data. The City will be gathering data and resubmitting. On March 15, the Board issued draft discharge requirements for a new permit. City staff has until April 17 to comment.

Grit Removal
The City issued a purchase order in December 2022 for parts needed to place the grit removal system back in service. Staff has been calling the company weekly for updates on when to expect these parts. On March 28 staff finally got an update that these parts should be available in June.

Aerators
Background: In December, City staff purchased two replacement aerators for the wastewater treatment plant process. These aerators were scheduled for delivery in January. At the end of January, City staff was informed that these aerators were on backorder until at least the end of February. Because these aerators are such a critical element of our treatment process, staff contacted Nipomo Community Services District who has two spare aerators. They have agreed to let us borrow the aerators until ours arrive. Update: The second of the two aerators will be installed in early April. One of the borrowed aerators began malfunctioning and the City will repair it before returning it. 7 Effluent Pump Station Rehabilitation
Substantial completion walk-through occurred on March 3. Installation of the meter was removed from this project since it can only occur once the ponds are lowered by a minimum of 2 feet. As pump station cannot pump more than 1 inch per day in the absence of rain, flowmeters are not expected to be installed until May. The contractor has issued a credit for this portion of the work so that their project can be closed out.

Highway 1 Lift Station Replacement Project
The notice to proceed on this project was issued March 20. Initially, this $1.5 million project was to be paid for out of wastewater cash balance. However, on March 28, City staff received word that CDBG funds applied for in 2020 have become available, and state staff is 95% certain that these funds can be applied to this project even though it has already been awarded. City staff will work with the state on providing the necessary updates and will find out with certainty by June whether the CDBG funds are applicable.

Until then, City staff has asked the contractor for some flexibility on timing, as any money spent on project prior to the contract being signed will not be eligible for reimbursement.

Pioneer Lift Station Replacement Project
City staff is waiting for the encroachment permit from Caltrans. $989,000 of this project will be funded through state Proposition 1, Round 2 funding. The remainder of the project will be funded through the CDBG grant mentioned above. This project will be bid for construction after the CDBG contract is signed.
8 Project
# Account # 2022-23 TOTAL
2022-23 Spent/
Encumbered March 2023 Update
100 Buildings089-104 89-4444-3044 155,127 $ 9,358 $ Transition well under way 089-105 89-4444-3045 40,840 $ 089-106 89-4444-3077 90,000 $ RFP issued March 24 089-107 89-4444-3076 70,000 $
089-108 89-4444-3075 170,000 $ 26,527 $ PG&E design underway 089-109 New Royal Theatre 5,459,320 $
089-110 New Library Relocation 30,000 $
089-111 New City Hall Restroom Redesign - $ canceled $154,000 funds transferred to 089-112 089-112 New 554,000 $ 79,665 $ city hall structural assessment+painting bid 200 Parks
089-201 New 4,882,054 $ 611,887 $ 50% design drawings submitted in February. 089-204 New CDBG (Leroy Phase 2) 1,700,000 $ Two remaining elements for grant application underway 300 Streets, Sidewalks, Bicycle Facilities
089-307 89-4444-3067 200,000 $ 089-308 89-4444-3068 1,700,000 $ 1,471,237 $ Under construction 089-309 89-4444-3097 100,000 $ 100,000 $ Under construction 089-310 New 293,809 $ Developer to address. Drawings submitted and approved 089-311 89-4444-3092 60,000 $ 400 Water
089-406 89-4444-3093 95,000 $ 8,000 $ Attorney met with staff March 22089-407 89-4444-3094 200,000 $ 87,016 $ Meters purchased for conversion 146 of 503 installed 089-408 89-4444-3095 50,000 $ 089-409 89-4444-3096 450,000 $ 379,255 $ Completed 8/9/22 089-410 New 40,000 $ Draft RFQ prepared500 Wastewater
089-503 89-4444-3083 522,821 $ 535,556 $ Pumps began operation February 27. 089-504 89-4444-3084 1,200,000 $ 1,527,264 $ Notice of award issued February 28 089-510 89-4444-3090 90,000 $ 600 Transit
089-603 New 1,700,000 $ 1,138,772 $ Bus ready. Scheduled to be delivered in August 089-602 New 494,000 $
Transfer to CIP fund 089: 20,346,971 $ 5,974,537 $
Completed/Cancelled
General Plan UpdatePublic Facilities Master Plan (w/ parks & library)American Legion wood repairBuilding improvements (PD Electrical, misc)City Hall Upgrades (roof & assoc. building repairs)CDBG (Central Park)11th st multimodal path designStreet Rehabilitation FY 22/23Sidewalk repairsLa Guardia SidewalkElevated Tank Repairs/Evaluate Antenna RevenueAdvanced Metering Infrastructure Phase 1SCADA ImprovementsWest Main WaterlineBonita Tank DemolitionEffluent Irrigation Pump Station RehabilitationHwy 1 Lift StationAIPS vaultEV Bus and chargingAmtrak Train Station Rehab (design)

PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS
Financial Accounting Software
City of Guadalupe
Capital Improvement Projects Budget - Fiscal Year 22-23 Storm Drain Improvements
CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT
April 11, 2023
(Information below may be subject to change)

1. Guadalupe Cannabis Program
The City Administrator presented a draft Community Benefit (CBA) to our folks at the proposed cannabis processing plant located at 151 Obispo. Both parties will meet each other in person on April 11 to talk about the city’s proposal. The agreement is well vetted and will be presented to the City Council for their consideration soon. Negotiations will start occurring for the two (2) cannabis retailers in the coming months too.

All three (3) cannabis operators are still in the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) entitlement phase and soon shifting to Building Permit application phase.

2. Santa Maria Valley Railroad (SMVRR) Pasadera Bridges The City Administrator and Pasadera Project Manager (Pasadera Civil Engineer) met on April 4th with Santa Maria Valley Railroad (SMVRR) to find solutions to advance the construction of the two bridges that are needed to cross the RR tracks to build out the balance of the Pasadera housing development for another 450 homes.

The purpose of the meeting was to open discussion on the overall strategy and to look at the bigger picture including and beyond this project. Staff thinks there is potential to get state and federal funding, but we all need to work together to get a win-win-win situation. As previously mentioned, SMVRR has two objectives: i) improve safety and ii) enhance the infrastructure to mitigate any risk of any potential incident. We believe there is a path forward.

The previous engineer’s estimate for the spur upgrade was $900,000. It was felt that costs are projected to decrease. The city and developer do not agree on the amount of contribution SMVRR is asking.

Developer/City Position: The City/Developer (developer paid) agrees to reimburse SMVRR for the costs incurred as a direct result of this project (e.g., flagging, engineering, safety items such as installation of fencing to prevent trespassing, etc.). Again, the City/Developer do not agree to pay for improvements or betterment of the railroad (e.g. new rail and ties, ballast, etc.) because the installation of the new bridges does not impact the railroad operations or maintenance of their facility; the planned bridges are compliant with all standards, specs and requirements specified in the UPRR/BNSF Joint Grade Separation guidelines as well as AREMA standards (American Railroad Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association) Agenda Item No. 8
Action Step: SMVRR Civil Engineer will provide an updated cost estimate for spur replacement and then the stakeholders will regroup and identify possible options.

3. Complete Draft of 2023-31 Housing Element
A complete Draft of the 6th Cycle Housing Element was issued to the City Administrator and the Contract Planning Director for their review and comment. This draft includes the ADDITIONAL section which the California Department Housing and Community Development (HCD) Guidelines now require on “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing” in the new section labeled 7.3 Appendix C. The submission also includes the “Completeness Checklist” for Housing Elements prepared from January 2021.

City Staff will review and comment on the draft and send it to Dr. Nuworsoo. Soon after that, the city can submit the draft to HCD for review. Once we have a solid strategy, then we will include other stakeholders such as Caltrans.

4. Santa Barbara Arts Council Central Coast Creative Corps (CCCC) Grant On April 4th the City Administrator, Recreation and Parks Manager, and Council Member Christina Hernandez met with LADG representatives (Alejandra Mahoney and Tiffany Gonzalez) to talk about a potential grant from the Santa Barbara Arts Council. The Santa Barbara County Office of Arts and Culture announced the Central Coast Creative Corps (CCCC) Program, a new grant opportunity open to 501c3 nonprofits, tribal governments, and government agencies in the Central Coast Region. The pilot program offers 23 awards of $140,000 for organizations to hire a local artist or culture bearer to develop art-driven campaigns addressing public health, climate resilience/emergency preparedness, civic engagement, or social justice. Applications are due by May 1, 2023.

This program invites everyone to create new approaches for understanding and caring for ourselves, each other, and the environment via the “Arts.”

Funded by the California Arts Council, the workforce development pilot provides organizations $100,000 to compensate an artist for work on the initiative; with $20,000 allocated for artist-community engagement, including art supplies and materials; and $20,000 to the organization for program administration. Priority will go to organizations serving communities that demonstrate the highest levels of need, as indicated by the CA Healthy Places Index.

The City must commit to collaborating with an artist or culture bearer for a one-year period from September 2023 to August 2024, with an additional three-month period required for project exploration and design. Applicants do not need to have a project or artist identified, as projects will be facilitated after funding is awarded.

Guidelines and information can be found at
www.sbac.ca.gov/creative-corps
The committee of city staff and LADG are in the process developing ideas for the grant application and they will sit in on a grant works shop coming soon.

5. Royal Theater Lot Merger
The city is in the process of merging the three lots into one APN/lot for the Royal Theater.

This process is required via the grant requirements and makes one cohesive and clear property title.

Marshall Fargen, Fargen Engineers, will send the originals for the Royal Theatre Merger. They will add the city project number to the documents.

Once the City gets the originals, Tom Brandeberry (consultant) will try to complete the recordable Certificate of Merger document for Mayor's signature and notarization next week.

Then, once the surveyor's Map, legal and Certificate are stamped and signed by the City Engineer, we should be able to send it to the County Recorder.

Sidenote, the city continues to seek additional historic and market tax credits…. more on this as it develops.

Andrew Goodwin Design (AGD), City’s consultant architect is developing the bid documents now as we are getting closer to commence with remodeling the existing theater and construction for the new addition.

6. North County Housing Affordability Listening Session – Wednesday, March 29 On behalf of the Santa Barbara Foundation (SBF), Council Member Hernandez, Alejandra Mahoney (LADG) and the City Administrator participated in a “SWOT” analysis where the attendees provided a community input session on housing affordability. The participants understand that housing affordability is one of the greatest issues facing our communities and a top priority for the SBF. In 2023, SBF is focused on finding opportunities to engage and partner with government, nonprofit, and private sector leaders working on housing access and affordability, particularly for working families.

The group came out of the meeting and learned about opportunities to align strategies and investments and decrease barriers in order to ensure affordable homes for all of the community members. Given the diversity of Santa Barbara County, they are hosting four listening sessions with cross-sector leaders across the region to better understand the specific issues and opportunities in each locality. More to come………

7. Cross-Industry Infrastructure Forum, Wednesday, March 29 Alejandra Mahoney/Tiffany Gonzalez (LADG) Garrett Matsuura (GBA) and the City Administrator met in Santa Maria for the EconAlliance Infrastructure Forum (3-29).

The topics were:
• Cross-Industry Infrastructure Survey Results
• Large Nonprofit Infrastructure Survey Results
• Key North County Housing Projects
• North County Healthcare Employer Needs Survey Results • Key County Infrastructure Projects
• Infrastructure Investment Act: Overview/Opportunities • County Strategy BROADBAND and North County FIBER RING This was a very good forum and it allowed for extensive networking with key stakeholders.

8. Recreation Economy for Rural Communities (RERC) Workshop – April 12-13 Le Roy Park Guadalupe is one of 25 towns selected to receive planning assistance through the federal Recreation Economy for Rural Communities program sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the USDA Forest Service, the Appalachian Regional Commission, and the Northern Border Regional Commission. With the support of a team of consultants and federal and state partners, our community will develop an action plan to revitalize Guadalupe’s downtown and increase the accessibility of, participation in, and visibility of outdoor recreation to stimulate economic development and enhance quality of life.

The planning process will unfold over the coming five months, with a two-day facilitated community workshop as the focal point. The workshop will take place April 12-13, 2023, at the Ron Estabillo Clubhouse, Leroy Park, 4689 11th Street. Participants will collaborate to develop goals and specific actions to strengthen Guadalupe’s recreation economy and downtown amenities. All community members are invited to attend both days. Look for preworkshop information at place and place and register to attend the free community planning event at:
https://bit.ly/RERCGuadalupeRegistration

The discussion will touch on: creating safe, convenient, resilient, and free multi-modal access from Guadalupe to the beach; creating opportunities for youth to pursue their interests outdoors, engage in science and nature learning, and take active roles in Guadalupe’s outdoor recreation economy; supporting a vibrant downtown that reflects the community’s rich cultural diversity and identity; increasing lodging options to attract visitors to Guadalupe and lengthen their stays; and promoting Guadalupe as an attractive destination for adventure, heritage, and recreation tourism, agritourism, and ecotourism.

The local host committee for the workshop includes representatives from:
• Los Amigos de Guadalupe
• The City of Guadalupe
• The County of Santa Barbara
• Coastal Conservancy
• Guadalupe-Nipomo Dunes Center
• Santa Barbara County Trails Council
• Boys & Girls Clubs of Mid Central Coast
• Guadalupe Visual and Performing Arts Center
• Guadalupe Business Association
• Lupe's Company
Note: Lunch will be provided for our State/Federal visitors on Wednesday - Sponsored by Los Amigos de Guadalupe and Lobo Butcher Shop.

Lobo will be cooking lunch to include 3x BBQ Pulled Pork Sliders with Slaw, chips, and choice of water/Pepsi/7Up.

Anyone who is a member of the RERC Steering Committee are all welcome to purchase the same lunch for $10 but Ernesto needs to know how many of you would like meals. Please get back Garret Matsuura by 4-7-23 so I can let him know how many additional lunches he will be preparing on Wednesday.

9. Recreation and Parks Commission Minutes – 3-7-2023
Please see attachment 1 of the March 7, 2023, Recreation and Parks Commission Minutes for your review.

10. Grants Memo of Opportunities
Attachment 2, please find this month’s grants memo from Townsend Public Affairs.

Townsend Public Affairs is the grant writing firm the city hired to write in conjunction with city staff to eventually procured a $5M grant for the renovation of the Royal Theater. Staff will evaluate these opportunities and see if there is a fit. If you have any questions or would like to discuss any opportunities in more detail, please let me know!

MINUTES

CITY OF GUADALUPE

REGULAR MEETING OF THE RECREATION AND PARKS COMMISSION
TUESDAY, MARCH 7, 2023
Call to Order: Recreation Commission Chair-Joe Harris called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.

1. Roll Call: Recreation Manager, Hannah Sanchez, noted the Commissioner attendance as follows:

Commission Chair: Joseph Harris- Present
Commissioner: Enrique Ortiz- Absent
Commissioner: Emily Dreiling- Present
Commissioner: Michael Jimenez - Present
Commissioner: Trevor Lamberson - Absent

2. Pledge of Allegiance
Commissioner Chair Joe Harris was recognized and led the Commission in the pledge of allegiance.

3. Community Participation Forum
No participation.

4. Consent Calendar
A. Motion was made by Dreiling, seconded by Jimenez to approve the March 7, 2023, regular meeting minutes. All ayes, 3/0. Motion passed.

Regular Business

5. Boys and Girls Club Update
Current
• ADA is low and we need help promoting we are open. Currently we have about 10 students from McKenzie who attend the club.

Events
• Ribbon Cutting - Thursday, March 9, 2023 from 5:30pm to 7:30pm • Back A Youth Night - Thursday, March 30, 2023 from 5pm to 7:30pm • Teen Night - Friday, March 31, 2023 from 5:30pm to 8:30pm March 7, 2023
o Open to the first 25 teens to sign up
o Every Friday in April special hour from 5pm to 6pm for teen activities City of Guadalupe Recreation & Parks Commission Minutes ATTACHMENT 1

State Capitol Office ▪ 925 L Street • Suite 1404 • Sacramento, CA 95814 • Phone (916) 447-4086 • Fax (916) 444-0383 Federal Office ▪ 600 Pennsylvania SE • Suite 207 • Washington, DC 20003 • Phone (202) 546-8696 • Fax (202) 546-4555 Southern California Office ▪ 1401 Dove Street • Suite 330 • Newport Beach, CA 92660 • Phone (949) 399-9050 • Fax (949) 476-8215 Central California Office ▪ 744 P Street • Suite 308 • Fresno, CA 93721 • Phone (949) 399-9050 • Fax (949) 476-8215 Northern California Office ▪ 300 Frank Ogawa Plaza • Suite 204 • Oakland, CA 94612 • Phone (510) 835-9050 • Fax (510) 835-9030

Page 1 of 7 ends

Guadalupe City CouncilApril 11, 2023

Guadalupe City Council
April 11, 2023