Hanford City Council
April 1, 2025

City Council Meeting
Agenda
April 1, 2025
7:00 PM – Regular Meeting
Council Chambers
400 N. Douty St.

Council Members will meet in-person in the Council
Chambers. The meeting will also be lived streamed on the City’s website: http://livestream.hanford.city/

4:00 PM CALL TO ORDER CLOSED SESSION AND STUDY SESSION:

ROLL CALL BY THE CITY CLERK:

PUBLIC COMMENT:

Study Sessions are considered Special Meetings under the Brown Act. Accordingly, comments from the public are limited to items listed on the agenda (GC 54954.3a). Public Comment will be accepted during each agenda item. A maximum of three minutes is allowed for each speaker. Please begin your comments by stating your name and providing your city of residence.

CLOSED SESSION FOR DISCUSSION OF THE FOLLOWING:

A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (GC 54956.9)(d)(1))

Jason Stingley v. City of Hanford, City of Hanford Police Department, Parker Sever, Jeff Davis, Stephanie Huddleston
U.S. District Court – Eastern District of California – Case No.: 1:23-cv-00089

Patrick Jurdon v. City of Hanford; City of Hanford Police Department; Parker Sever, Gabriel Jimenez, James Lutz, Karl Anderson, James Edlund U.S. District Court – Eastern District of California – Case No.: 1:23-cv-01695

B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-ANTICIPATED LITIGATION (54956.9 (d)(2))

2 Cases.

STUDY SESSION:

A. Recognition of Employees of the Year and Service Award Recipients B. Presentation of the preliminary Fiscal Year 2025/26 and 2026/27 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and Council direction to staff regarding project priorities and scheduling.

C. Review of the Handbook of Rules and Procedures for the Hanford City Council and discussion of potential amendments
CALL TO ORDER REGULAR SESSION:

ROLL CALL:

INVOCATION:

FLAG SALUTE:

CLOSED SESSION ACTION REPORT:

RECOGNITION:

A. Badge Pinning Ceremony and Oath of Office for Officer Christopher Kaious and Officer Juan Gonzalez
COUNCIL REPORTS/GENERAL REPORTS:

Brief information-only reports from City Council and/or Staff, including committee reports and reports by City Council related to meetings attended at City expenses (AB1234).

PUBLIC COMMENT:

This is the time for citizens to comment on subject matters within the jurisdiction of the Hanford City Council. This is also the public’s opportunity to request an item from the Consent Calendar be pulled for discussion purposes or to comment on any item on the agenda. State law does not allow the Council to discuss or take action on issues not on the agenda, except that members of the Council or staff may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by persons exercising their public testimony rights (Gov. Code sec. 54954.2). A maximum of three minutes is allowed for each speaker. Please begin your comments by stating your name and providing your city of residence.

CONSENT CALENDAR:

Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be enacted in one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these matters unless a request is made and then the item will be removed from the Consent Calendar to be discussed and voted upon by a separate motion.

A. Waive reading in full of resolutions and ordinances and approval and adoption of same by reading the title only.

B. City Attorney: Approval of the Settlement Agreement with Jason Stingley and Authorization for staff to take all necessary actions to carry out the terms of the settlement.

C. City Attorney: Approval of the Settlement Agreement with Patrick Jurdon and Authorization for staff to take all necessary action to carry out the terms of the settlement.

D. Human Resources: Amendment to the Executive Management Employees Association (EMEA) Compensation and Benefit Summary.

E. Human Resources: Amendment to the General Employees Management Association (GEMA) Memorandum of Understanding.

F. Human Resources: Amendment to the Service Employees International Union Local 521 Unit Memorandum of Understanding
G. Human Resources: Amendment to the Hanford Professional Firefighters Local 3898, IAFF Professional Firefighters Unit Memorandum of Understanding H. Community Development: Approval of Historic Resources Permit No. 0018-25, a request to make exterior modifications to the Old Courthouse, 113 Court Street, by removal of an exterior window and portion of wall, in order to accommodate a required ADA-accessible lift and entry. The building is a contributing building within the Historic Overlay Zone District, located at 113 Court Street (APN 010-265-001).

I. Community Development: Approval of the 2nd reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 25-02, approving Prezone No. 0005-23, a request to prezone land proposed to be annexed as R-L-5 Low-Density Residential, in accordance with the General Plan designation for the territory, Low-Density Residential. The Project is located south of Hanford Armona Road, between 12th and 13th Avenues (APN 011-040-008, -010, and - 027).

J. Community Development: Authorization to enter into a contract with Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc., (ESRI) for annual subscription fees for Geographical Information System (GIS) software for a three-year term for $60,300 annually. Approve appropriation of $60,300 in the General Fund for the current fiscal year.

K. Utilities and Engineering: Approval of the City's acceptance of two Grants of Easements for right-of-way purposes and for slope purposes, for the Billingsley Ranch Development, Tract No. 937, located at the southwest corner of Hanford Armona Road and Aquifer Drive.

GENERAL BUSINESS:

A. Administration: Council direction regarding funding appropriations for the Downtown Crow Abatement and consideration of Approval of a Professional Services Agreement with Hawk on Hand, in the amount of $53,600 to continue to provide Falconer services in Downtown Hanford and areas outside the Business Improvement District for Calendar Year 2025 services.

B. Public Works: Presentation regarding the City of Hanford's Refuse Division's current budget challenges and potential need for a prop 218 rate study.

C. Utilities and Engineering: Authorize the City Manager to execute the purchase of the Wastewater Treatment Facility (WTTF) Solar Project’s needed Electrical Switchgear from OneSource Distributors of Fresno, CA in the amount of $130,528.85 and provide direction to Staff regarding expanding the WTTF’s operating capacity to 12MGD (Million Gallons per Day).

ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDAS:

At this time, any Council Member may ask a question for clarification or may request a matter, which is not otherwise scheduled on a City Council agenda, to be placed on a future agenda. The Council Member referring the item shall provide sufficient information as to the nature of the item. The City Council, by concurrence of a majority, may direct the City Manager to put the item on a future agenda. (GOV. CODE SEC. 54954.2)

A. Council Future Agenda Items
B. Upcoming Events and Important Dates:

April 15: Regular City Council Meeting
April 23-25: League of Cal Cities Leaders Summit, Sacramento May 6: Regular City Council Meeting
May 20: Regular City Council Meeting
ADJOURNMENT:

Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available to public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office located at 319 N. Douty Street, Hanford, California 93230, during normal business hours. Such agendas are also available at the city’s website, www.cityofhanfordca.com subject to staff’s ability to post the agenda before the meeting. If you need a disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s office, 559-585-2515, 319 N. Douty Street, Hanford, California 93230, at least 2 days prior to the meeting {28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title II}

5.A.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 4/1/2025 AGENDA SECTION: STUDY SESSION

SUBJECT:

Recognition of Employees of the Year and Service Award Recipients

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation: That the City Council recognize the two employees of the year and the sixteen (16) City of Hanford employees that are celebrating 10 or more years of service this year.

Safety Employee of the Year: Police Officer Ernest Escalera Jr.

General Employee of the Year: IT Analyst, Manuel Azevedo

Employees will be presented with Certificates of Recognition and bios will be read for the 20-year and 25-year Service Award recipients that are in attendance:

Title First Name Last Name Date of Hire Years of
Service
Fire Captain Michael Briones 12/5/1994 30
Senior Refuse Collector Rick Loya 7/12/1999 25
Police Captain James Lutz 8/9/1999 25
Police Officer Lawrence Diener 8/9/1999 25
Fire Captain Dennis Springer 7/12/2004 20
Fire Captain Derek Wiesser 7/19/2004 20
Building Official Thomas Webb 7/19/2004 20
WWTP Operator II Eugene
(Alex)
Elszy 11/22/2004 20
Utilities Supervisor Mauel Gallegos 11/22/2004 20

Certificates of Recognition will be presented to the 15-year and 10-year Service Award recipients in attendance:Manuel

Title First Name Last Name Date of Hire Years of
Service
Police Officer Joshia Ragsdale 3/16/2009 15
Fire Captain Scott Mellon 7/27/2009 15
City Engineer Lisa Dock 12/14/2009 15
Police Officer Jonathan Rivera 1/6/2014 10
Fire Engineer Andrew Barksdale 3/3/2014 10
Fire Engineer Christopher Frediani 3/3/2014 10
Police Sergeant Jarred Cotta 12/8/2014 10

ATTACHMENTS:

None

5.B.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 4/1/2025 AGENDA SECTION: STUDY SESSION

SUBJECT:

Presentation of the preliminary Fiscal Year 2025/26 and 2026/27 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and Council direction to staff regarding project priorities and scheduling.

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council receive a presentation of the preliminary Fiscal Year 2025/26 and 2026/27 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP); Provide feedback to staff regarding project priorities and scheduling.

Recommended Motion: No action is required; However, City Council feedback is requested.

BACKGROUND:

The Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) serves as a long-range planning tool that identifies and prioritizes major infrastructure and capital projects throughout the City of Hanford. Updated biennially, the CIP outlines planned investments in essential public assets such as streets, water and sewer systems, parks, public safety facilities, and other municipal infrastructure. The plan lays out projects for at least the next five years, of which the first two years are appropriated in the budget; future years are for planning purposes. In total, there are over $460 million in capital projects identified; In the first budget year approximately $36 million and the second year $44 million. Prioritization and planning is integral for the delivery of projects that the CIP provides.

The Fiscal Year (FY) 2025/26 and 2026/27 CIP continues the City's commitment to maintaining and improving critical infrastructure while aligning with the City Council’s strategic priorities, including public safety, sustainability, economic development, and quality of life for residents. This review provides an opportunity for the Council to evaluate proposed projects, assess funding sources and expenditure timelines, and offer guidance on project prioritization.

Finance and Engineering staff have compiled the proposed CIP in coordination with all City departments, ensuring that projects are appropriately scoped, scheduled, and financially planned.

This review marks the initial step in the formal adoption process, which will culminate with the approval of the FY 2025/26 and 2026/27 Operating and Capital Budgets planned at the June 3, 2025, City Council meeting.

The budget adoption schedule for FY26 and FY27 is as follows:

April 1, 2025 - 1st Capital Improvement Plan review, (Enterprise Funds, related impact fee funds, internal service and reserve funds) (TODAY)
April 15, 2025 - 2nd Capital Improvement Plan review, (General Fund, Measure H, Transportation and remaining funds)
May 6, 2025 - Operating Budget review
May 20, 2025 - Overall budget final review/wrap up, Personnel Master June 3, 2025 - Public Hearing for budget adoption, Budget Book presentation and Vacancy Rate Report (AB 2561)
FISCAL IMPACT:

In total, projects in the CIP draft have approximately $460 million in overall needs currently identified.

This does not mean all the projects are funded; this lays out a potential plan for delivery contingent on the availability of funding and other resources. The Fiscal Year 2025/26 and 2026/27 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is a planning document and does not, in itself, authorize expenditures.

However, the projects identified in the CIP are anticipated to be funded through a combination of sources, including but not limited to:
• General Fund allocations
• Enterprise Funds (e.g., Water, Sewer, Solid Waste)
• Special Revenue Funds
• State and federal grants
• Development impact fees
• Other restricted funds

The total estimated cost of all proposed CIP projects over the two-year period will be refined as part of the upcoming budget development process. Final appropriation of funds for specific projects will occur with the adoption of the FY 2025/26 and 2026/27 Budget. Projects included in the CIP will be subject to available funding, and adjustments may be made based on Council direction and updated revenue projections.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. 4.1.25 cip draft for council

CITY OF HANFORD
Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2026-2030
Funding Source Project Number Request Title Project Total Historical FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 Future Total 0001 General Fund Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $0.00 -$913,110.00 -$1,610,450.00 -$12,734,332.83 -$26,107,957.83 -$26,245,492.83 Capital requests -$2,096,084.00 -$4,111,140.00 -$15,123,882.83 -$17,573,625.00 -$137,535.00 -$1,391,280.00 Grant funding $1,182,974.00 $3,413,800.00 $4,000,000.00 $4,200,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 Ending Fund balance available -$913,110.00 -$1,610,450.00 -$12,734,332.83 -$26,107,957.83 -$26,245,492.83 -$27,636,772.83 0001 General Fund NEW REPLACE DOWNTOWN BANNER POLES-CONTINGENT ON GRANT FUNDING $1,391,280.00 $0.00 $1,391,280.00 $1,391,280.00 NEW GENERATOR - CIVIC AUDITORIUM (PUBLIC SAFETY RADIOS) $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 NEW GENERATOR - PAL BUILDING DISASTER RECOVERY $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 NEW REGISTRATION SOFTWARE FOR PARKS AND REC DEPARTMENT $45,718.00 $39,648.00 $3,035.00 $3,035.00 $45,718.00 822649 HEROES PARK **822649 - GF GRANT FUNDED $11,947,892.00 $3,747,892.00 $4,000,000.00 $4,200,000.00 $11,947,892.00 NEW EQUIPMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION INSPECTORS AND USA POSITION (MULTI-FUNDED) $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 NEW UTILITY TRUCK FOR USA POSITION (MULTI-FUNDED) $10,750.00 $10,750.00 $10,750.00 NEW PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING REMODEL (MULTI FUNDED) $48,000.00 $5,500.00 $42,500.00 $48,000.00 NEW HARRIS BALL PARK / BROWN STREET PARKING LOT $425,000.00 $425,000.00 $425,000.00 825607 INDOOR MULTI-GENERATIONAL FACILITY (MULTI-FUNDED)**825607 $600,000.00 $25,000.00 $575,000.00 $600,000.00 NEW PEREGRINE DATA SYSTEM $100,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $100,000.00 NEW PARKS DEPT. TRUCK/ RPL 65 (MULTI-FUNDED) $35,589.00 $35,589.00 $35,589.00 NEW PARKS DEPT. TRUCK/ RPL 68 (MULTI-FUNDED) $36,499.00 $36,499.00 $36,499.00 NEW PARKS DEPT. TRUCK/ RPL 64 (MULTI-FUNDED) $36,259.00 $36,259.00 $36,259.00 NEW BUILDING DEPT. TRUCK (EV)/ RPL 88 (MULTI-FUNDED) $40,526.00 $40,526.00 $40,526.00 NEW PLANNING DEPT. TRUCK (EV)/ RPL 221 $58,366.00 $58,366.00 $58,366.00 NEW STREETS DEPT. TRUCK/ RPL 136 (MULTI-FUNDED) $31,959.00 $31,959.00 $31,959.00 NEW PARKS DEPT. TRUCK/ RPL 62 (MULTI-FUNDED) $36,499.00 $36,499.00 $36,499.00 NEW CITY HALL GENERATOR/ RPL 379, SUPPORTS EOC (MULTI-FUNDED) $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 NEW PD GENERATOR/ RPL 224 (MULTI-FUNDED) $155,323.00 $155,323.00 $155,323.00 NEW PARKS DEPT. TRUCK (EV)/ RPL 107 $58,366.00 $58,366.00 $58,366.00 NEW FIRE VEHICLE/ RPL 112 (MULTI-FUNDED) $3,865.00 $3,865.00 $3,865.00 NEW PD VEHICLE/ RPL 611 $46,625.00 $46,625.00 $46,625.00 NEW PD VEHICLE/ RPL 11 $36,835.00 $36,835.00 $36,835.00 NEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REMODEL (MULTI-FUNDED) $150,000.00 $150,000.00 $150,000.00 823602 VETERANS BUILDING REHAB (MULTI-FUNDED)-CONTINGENT ON GRANT FUNDING **823602 $709,530.00 $58,530.00 $651,000.00 $709,530.00 825603 COURTHOUSE PARKING LOT RECONSTRUCTION **825603 $949,000.00 $949,000.00 $949,000.00 NEW REPLACE THE DRIVEWAY APPROACH AT THE GOLDEN ONE CREDIT UNION PUBLIC PARKING LOT $35,000.00 $35,000.00 $35,000.00 NEW 12TH AVE AT HAYDEN AVE-CONTINGENT ON GRANT FUNDING (MULTI-FUNDED) $821,364.00 $107,664.00 $713,700.00 $821,364.00 NEW GRANGEVILLE BLVD AT 9TH AVE ROUNDABOUT-CONTINGENT ON GRANT FUNDING (MULTI-FUNDED) $5,181,880.00 $340,780.00 $386,100.00 $4,455,000.00 $5,181,880.00 NEW FAST TRACK HANFORD: HIGH SPEED RAIL CONNECTIVITY AND HISTORIC DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT- $15,523,000.00 $500,000.00 $3,533,250.00 $11,489,750.00 $15,523,000.00 NEW GRADE SEPARATION DESIGN-CONTINGENT ON GRANT FUNDING (MULTI-FUNDED) $1,656,000.00 $676,000.00 $980,000.00 $1,656,000.00 NEW ITS PLAN-CONTINGENT ON GRANT FUNDING $183,000.00 $183,000.00 $183,000.00 NEW CARNEGIE BUILDING REHAB-CONTINGENT ON GRANT FUNDING (MULTI-FUNDED) $422,800.00 $422,800.00 $422,800.00 NEW AGRICULTURAL MITIGATION PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 NEW SEPARATE ELECTRIC SERVICE FROM COURTHOUSE TO BASTILLE (DUE TO SALE) $80,000.00 $80,000.00 $80,000.00 NEW REPLACE DRIVEWAY APPROACH AT CITY PARKING LOT #4 $49,500.00 $49,500.00 $49,500.00 NEW REPLACE DRIVEWAY APPROACH AT CITY HALL PARKING LOT $57,680.00 $57,680.00 $57,680.00 824605 CITY REFUSE ENCLOSURES REBUILD (13) LOCATIONS (MULTI-FUNDED) **824605 $684,793.83 $684,793.83 $684,793.83 NEW PUBLIC WORKS ENCLOSED WAREHOUSE (MULTI-FUNDED) $250,000.00 $250,000.00 $250,000.00 NEW EXPLOSIVE BREACHING KIT $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 NEW ROMEO X SIGHTS $29,560.00 $29,560.00 $29,560.00
NEW SNIPER NIGHT VISION $18,800.00 $18,800.00 $18,800.00 NEW DRONE PROGRAM EXPANSION $69,000.00 $19,000.00 $50,000.00 $69,000.00 NEW EVIDENCE 3D SCANNING MACHINE $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 NEW IN CAR CAMERAS $241,680.00 $120,840.00 $120,840.00 $241,680.00 NEW LESS LETHAL SHOTGUNS $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 NEW CRITICAL INCIDENT RESPONSE MONITORING SYSTEM $36,000.00 $36,000.00 $36,000.00 NEW AUTO EXTRICATION EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT $270,000.00 $90,000.00 $90,000.00 $90,000.00 $270,000.00 NEW NEW FIRE ENGINE 42 EQUIPMENT PURCHASE $170,000.00 $170,000.00 $170,000.00 NEW NEW FIRE ENGINE 41 EQUIPMENT PURCHASE $170,000.00 $170,000.00 $170,000.00 NEW FLOCK CAMERAS (12) $79,000.00 $43,000.00 $36,000.00 $79,000.00 NEW RIFLE REPLACEMENT $125,000.00 $125,000.00 $125,000.00 NEW REPLACE F-250 BATTALION CHIEF PICK UP WITH BUILD-UP/ RPL 168 $90,000.00 $90,000.00 $90,000.00 PAGE 1 OF 12

CITY OF HANFORD
Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2026-2030
Funding Source Project Number Request Title Project Total Historical FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 Future Total NEW CENTENNIAL AND COE PARK BASKETBALL RENOVATION $300,000.00 $150,000.00 $150,000.00 $300,000.00 NEW ADA PARKS/RECREATION MODIFICATIONS $133,500.00 $44,500.00 $44,500.00 $44,500.00 $133,500.00 Total 0001 General Fund $44,181,438.83 $3,747,892.00 $2,096,084.00 $4,111,140.00 $15,123,882.83 $17,573,625.00 $137,535.00 $1,391,280.00 $44,181,438.83 0004 Accumulated Capital Outlay Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $187,033.00 $187,033.00 $187,033.00 $187,033.00 $187,033.00 $187,033.00 Capital requests $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Ending Fund balance available $187,033.00 $187,033.00 $187,033.00 $187,033.00 $187,033.00 $187,033.00 0004 Accumulated Capital Outlay 821611/822609 YAC CONCESSION BLDG RESTORATION **821611/822609 $305,541.00 $305,541.00 $0.00 $305,541.00 820634 CITY HALL SECURITY PROJECT **820634 $46,495.00 $46,495.00 $0.00 $46,495.00 Total 0004 Accumulated Capital Outlay $352,036.00 $352,036.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $352,036.00 0011 Measure H Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Capital requests -$15,458,000.00 -$15,619,000.00 -$17,950,000.00 -$13,725,000.00 -$15,557,000.00 -$27,925,000.00 Estimated revenue $15,458,000.00 $15,619,000.00 $17,950,000.00 $13,725,000.00 $15,557,000.00 $27,925,000.00 Ending Fund balance available $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0011 Measure H NEW MEASURE H: EXISTING PARKS ADDITIONAL MAINTENANCE $970,000.00 $160,000.00 $162,000.00 $162,000.00 $162,000.00 $162,000.00 $162,000.00 $970,000.00 NEW MEASURE H: FIRE LADDER TRUCK $2,400,000.00 $2,400,000.00 $2,400,000.00 NEW MEASURE H: FIRE ENGINE $1,200,000.00 $1,200,000.00 $1,200,000.00 NEW MEASURE H: COMMUNITY CLEANUP AND ABATEMENT FOR CODE COMPLIANCE $600,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $600,000.00 NEW MEASURE H: CITY OWNED BUILDING MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT $1,650,000.00 $151,000.00 $299,000.00 $300,000.00 $300,000.00 $300,000.00 $300,000.00 $1,650,000.00 NEW MEASURE H: EXISTING PARKS ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS $1,695,000.00 $280,000.00 $283,000.00 $283,000.00 $283,000.00 $283,000.00 $283,000.00 $1,695,000.00 NEW MEASURE H: FIRE STATION IMPROVEMENTS/EQUIPMENT $600,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $600,000.00 NEW MEASURE H: TWO (2) PARK MAINTENANCE VEHICLES $120,000.00 $120,000.00 $120,000.00 NEW MEASURE H: TWO (2) CODE ENFORCEMENT VEHICLES $120,000.00 $120,000.00 $120,000.00 NEW MEASURE H: FIRE COMMUNICATIONS UPDATE PROJECT $849,000.00 $849,000.00 $849,000.00 NEW MEASURE H: ROAD REHABILITATION AND PAVEMENT PRESERVATION $36,900,000.00 $6,000,000.00 $6,180,000.00 $6,180,000.00 $6,180,000.00 $6,180,000.00 $6,180,000.00 $36,900,000.00 NEW MEASURE H: FIRE STATION #4 $8,720,000.00 $600,000.00 $295,000.00 $7,825,000.00 $8,720,000.00 NEW MEASURE H: PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING $48,000,000.00 $6,000,000.00 $7,000,000.00 $3,000,000.00 $6,600,000.00 $4,600,000.00 $20,800,000.00 $48,000,000.00 NEW MEASURE H: TWO (2) COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT OFFICER VEHICLES $290,000.00 $130,000.00 $160,000.00 $290,000.00 NEW MEASURE H: EIGHT (8) NEW POLICE VEHICLES AND UPFITTING FOR NEW SWORN STAFF $2,120,000.00 $848,000.00 $1,272,000.00 $2,120,000.00 Total 0011 Measure H $106,234,000.00 $0.00 $15,458,000.00 $15,619,000.00 $17,950,000.00 $13,725,000.00 $15,557,000.00 $27,925,000.00 $106,234,000.00 0044 Gas Tax Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available -$711,093.00 -$3,773.00 $990,302.00 $935,901.00 $1,654,180.00 $1,561,180.00 Capital requests -$892,680.00 -$605,925.00 -$1,654,401.00 -$881,721.00 -$1,693,000.00 -$638,000.00 Estimated revenue $1,600,000.00 $1,600,000.00 $1,600,000.00 $1,600,000.00 $1,600,000.00 $1,600,000.00 Ending Fund balance available -$3,773.00 $990,302.00 $935,901.00 $1,654,180.00 $1,561,180.00 $2,523,180.00 0044 Gas Tax NEW STREETS DEPT. TILT TRAILER $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 NEW LACEY BLVD WIDEN/RECONST MAGNA CARTA TO 13TH (MULTI-FUNDED) $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 823644 GRADE SEP FEASBLTY/GRGVL (MATCHING FUNDS) **823644 $302,801.00 $302,801.00 $0.00 $302,801.00 823618 PAVEMENT RESURFACING TREATMENT **823618 $1,135,617.00 $1,135,617.00 $1,135,617.00 823615 STREET DIVISION MAINTENANCE **823615 $3,187,500.00 $637,500.00 $425,000.00 $425,000.00 $425,000.00 $425,000.00 $425,000.00 $425,000.00 $3,187,500.00 823614 NEW SIDEWALK/ADA IMPROVEMENTS **823614 $410,968.00 $50,968.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $410,968.00 NEW ANNUAL INTERSECTION UPGRADES $612,000.00 $153,000.00 $153,000.00 $153,000.00 $153,000.00 $612,000.00 NEW PLACE LANDSCAPE BARK IN CENTER MEDIANS $165,000.00 $55,000.00 $55,000.00 $55,000.00 $165,000.00 NEW HAROLD ST WIDENING & RECONSTRUCTION $496,721.00 $100,000.00 $396,721.00 $496,721.00 NEW CENTER MEDIAN ON HANFORD ARMONA WEST OF 11TH AVE - DMV $206,861.00 $40,000.00 $166,861.00 $206,861.00 NEW HARRIS STREET ABANDONMENT AT COE PARK (MULTI-FUNDED) $95,925.00 $45,000.00 $50,925.00 $95,925.00 825604 CITY STANDARD PLANS AND SPECS UPDATE **825604 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $0.00 $40,000.00 825606 GRANGEVILLE MEDIAN AND CROSSWALKS FROM HARRIS TO KENSINGTON **825606 $674,540.00 $674,540.00 $674,540.00 825605 RECONSTRUCTION-GARNER AVE FROM LACEY TO GOLETA WAY (MULTI-FUNDED) $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $0.00 $100,000.00 PAGE 2 OF 12

CITY OF HANFORD
Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2026-2030
Funding Source Project Number Request Title Project Total Historical FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 Future Total NEW GLENN AVE FROM PLEASANT TO GRANGEVILLE ABANDONMENT $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 NEW STREETS DEPT. ROLLER/ RPL 182 (MULTI-FUNDED) $23,473.00 $23,473.00 $23,473.00 NEW STREETS DEPT ASPHALT PATCH TRUCK /RPL 135 (MULTI-FUNDED) $131,207.00 $131,207.00 $131,207.00 Total 0044 Gas Tax $8,632,613.00 $2,266,886.00 $892,680.00 $605,925.00 $1,654,401.00 $881,721.00 $1,693,000.00 $638,000.00 $8,632,613.00 0045 RMRA Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $1,782,307.00 $3,182,307.00 $4,582,307.00 $5,982,307.00 $7,382,307.00 $8,782,307.00 Capital requests $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Estimated revenue $1,400,000.00 $1,400,000.00 $1,400,000.00 $1,400,000.00 $1,400,000.00 $1,400,000.00 Ending Fund balance available $3,182,307.00 $4,582,307.00 $5,982,307.00 $7,382,307.00 $8,782,307.00 $10,182,307.00 0045 RMRA 824620 LACEY WIDEN/RECON/10TH-SIERRA P#2 **824620 $750,000.00 $750,000.00 $0.00 $750,000.00 823619 LACEY WIDEN/RECON/10TH-SIERRA **823619 $2,196,500.00 $2,196,500.00 $2,196,500.00 Total 0045 RMRA $2,946,500.00 $2,946,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,946,500.00 0050 T D A - Transportation Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $7,027,266.00 $4,686,850.00 $182,221.00 -$3,619,230.00 -$6,217,672.00 -$7,504,827.00 Capital requests -$3,540,416.00 -$5,704,629.00 -$5,001,451.00 -$5,148,442.00 -$10,587,155.00 -$9,202,000.00 Estimated revenue $1,200,000.00 $1,200,000.00 $1,200,000.00 $1,200,000.00 $1,200,000.00 $1,200,000.00 Estimated HSR revenue $1,350,000.00 $8,100,000.00 $8,125,000.00 Ending Fund balance available $4,686,850.00 $182,221.00 -$3,619,230.00 -$6,217,672.00 -$7,504,827.00 -$7,381,827.00 0050 T D A - Transportation NEW INTERSECTION AND ROADWAY UPGRADES - IMPACTED BY HSR $17,575,000.00 $1,350,000.00 $8,100,000.00 $8,125,000.00 $17,575,000.00 823619 LACEY WIDEN/RECON/10TH-SIERRA **823619 $1,356,500.00 $1,356,500.00 $0.00 $1,356,500.00 NEW RFB CROSSWALKS/SIGNS $137,000.00 $68,500.00 $68,500.00 $137,000.00 NEW RADAR FEEDBACK SIGNS (22) $99,000.00 $99,000.00 $99,000.00 NEW SIGN MANUFACTURING PROGRAM $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 NEW INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED STREET SIGNS (16) $111,200.00 $111,200.00 $111,200.00 NEW VIDEO DETECTION DEVICES (30) $690,000.00 $690,000.00 $690,000.00 NEW ZINC BLUE BACKUPS (50) $730,000.00 $365,000.00 $365,000.00 $730,000.00 NEW COBALT CONTROLLERS (31) $131,750.00 $131,750.00 $131,750.00 NEW 12TH AVE AT HAYDEN AVE-CONTINGENT ON GRANT FUNDING (MULTI-FUNDED) $205,341.00 $26,916.00 $178,425.00 $205,341.00 NEW GRANGEVILLE BLVD. FROM MUSTANG TO WELL TANK 6 $477,004.00 $47,582.00 $55,332.00 $374,090.00 $477,004.00 NEW GRADE SEPARATION DESIGN-CONTINGENT ON GRANT FUNDING (MULTI-FUNDED) $414,000.00 $169,000.00 $245,000.00 $414,000.00 823618 PAVEMENT RESURFACING TREATMENT **823618 $4,875,000.00 $975,000.00 $975,000.00 $975,000.00 $975,000.00 $975,000.00 $4,875,000.00 823613 SIDEWALK/MISC CONCRETE REPAIRS **823613 $376,408.00 $76,408.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $376,408.00 NEW MALL DR CIR FROM 12TH AVE TO LACEY BLVD. $1,794,277.00 $300,000.00 $1,494,277.00 $1,794,277.00 NEW INSTALL STAMPED CONCRETE IN MEDIANS (TURN POCKETS) $725,340.00 $120,890.00 $604,450.00 $725,340.00 NEW HUME AVE. CIR FROM 11TH AVE TO BUTTERNUT DR. $974,660.00 $162,443.00 $812,217.00 $974,660.00 NEW GREENFIELD AVE CIR FROM ELM ST. TO CAMPUS DR. $883,416.00 $147,236.00 $736,180.00 $883,416.00 NEW GRANGEVILLE BLVD CIR FROM 10TH AVE TO DOUTY ST $859,170.00 $143,195.00 $715,975.00 $859,170.00 NEW REPLACE AC SIDEWALK ON FLINT AVE BETWEEN 11TH AVE AND JOSHUA ST $253,701.00 $253,701.00 $253,701.00 NEW CENTENNIAL DR CIR FROM LACEY BLVD TO MARRIT ST $1,071,160.00 $178,527.00 $892,633.00 $1,071,160.00 NEW CAMPUS DR. CIR FROM LACEY BLVD TO 6TH ST $582,116.00 $97,019.00 $485,097.00 $582,116.00 NEW RRFB CROSSWALKS RADAR SIGNS AT MULTIPLE LOCATIONS $352,481.00 $352,481.00 $352,481.00 NEW RODGERS RD AT 11TH AVE TRAFFIC SIGNAL UPGRADE $179,133.00 $179,133.00 $179,133.00 NEW RECONSTRUCTION NORTHSTAR DR FROM 11TH AVE TO ASPEN ST $1,036,344.00 $180,000.00 $856,344.00 $1,036,344.00 825606 GRANGEVILLE MEDIAN AND CROSSWALKS FROM HARRIS TO KENSINGTON **825606 $592,794.00 $95,201.00 $497,593.00 $592,794.00 825605 RECONSTRUCTION-GARNER AVE FROM LACEY TO GOLETA WAY (MULTI-FUNDED) $515,647.00 $515,647.00 $515,647.00 NEW 9TH AVE ST FRONTAGE AT HEROES PARK (MULTI-FUNDED) $2,618,306.00 $90,639.00 $158,639.00 $2,369,028.00 $2,618,306.00 NEW SPEED STUDY UPDATE (EVERY 5 YEARS) $187,000.00 $85,000.00 $102,000.00 $187,000.00 NEW FEASIBILITY STUDY - PROTECTED BIKE LANES ON DOUTY ST $160,000.00 $85,000.00 $75,000.00 $160,000.00 NEW E BIKE CHARGING STATIONS - DOWNTOWN $325,000.00 $55,000.00 $270,000.00 $325,000.00 NEW FIRE STATION 3 SIGNAL PREEMTION DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION $685,000.00 $70,000.00 $415,000.00 $200,000.00 $685,000.00 824607 GRANGEVILLE BLVD. - COMPLETE SIDEWALK BETWEEN DOUTY STREET AND HARRIS STREET **824607 $108,900.00 $108,900.00 $108,900.00 PAGE 3 OF 12

CITY OF HANFORD
Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2026-2030
Funding Source Project Number Request Title Project Total Historical FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 Future Total Total 0050 T D A - Transportation $41,132,648.00 $1,948,555.00 $3,540,416.00 $5,704,629.00 $5,001,451.00 $5,148,442.00 $10,587,155.00 $9,202,000.00 $41,132,648.00 0055 CMAQ Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Capital requests -$204,684.00 -$305,011.00 -$334,887.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Estimated revenue $204,684.00 $305,011.00 $334,887.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Ending Fund balance available $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0055 CMAQ 823619 LACEY WIDEN/RECON/10TH-SIERRA **823619 $568,912.00 $568,912.00 $0.00 $568,912.00 820644 TRAF SIGNAL/12TH AV TO HUME **820644 $357,000.00 $357,000.00 $0.00 $357,000.00 822645 9TH AVE & LACEY SIGNAL **822645 $148,832.00 $23,332.00 $125,500.00 $148,832.00 NEW ANNUAL INTERSECTION SIGNALIZATION PROJECT (MULTI-FUNDED)-CONTINGENT ON GRANT FUNDING $303,807.00 $43,807.00 $260,000.00 $303,807.00 NEW 12TH AT HOUSTON SIGNAL AND 12TH FROM BUTTERFIELD TO HOUSTON (MULTI-FUNDED)-CONTINGENT ON GRA $415,275.00 $35,377.00 $45,011.00 $334,887.00 $415,275.00 Total 0055 CMAQ $1,793,826.00 $949,244.00 $204,684.00 $305,011.00 $334,887.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,793,826.00 0058 ARPA Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Capital requests $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Ending Fund balance available $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0058 ARPA 821611/822609 YAC CONCESSION BLDG RESTORATION **821611/822609 $1,282,446.00 $1,282,446.00 $1,282,446.00 823647 ARPA HIDDEN VALLEY PARK CONCEPTUAL PLAN **823647 $69,400.00 $69,400.00 $69,400.00 Total 0058 ARPA $1,351,846.00 $1,351,846.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,351,846.00 0161 12th Ave Sewer Benefit AD Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $1,493,942.00 $1,493,942.00 $1,493,942.00 $1,493,942.00 $1,493,942.00 $1,493,942.00 Capital requests $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Ending Fund balance available $1,493,942.00 $1,493,942.00 $1,493,942.00 $1,493,942.00 $1,493,942.00 $1,493,942.00 0161 12th Ave Sewer Benefit AD 823628 12TH AVE SEWER TRUNK MAIN OVERSIZING **823628 $203,911.00 $203,911.00 $0.00 $203,911.00 Total 0161 12th Ave Sewer Benefit AD $203,911.00 $203,911.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $203,911.00 0180 Parks Facility Impact Fees Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $4,760,100.00 $4,744,100.00 $3,743,175.00 $2,643,175.00 -$3,806,825.00 -$4,606,825.00 Capital requests -$216,000.00 -$1,200,925.00 -$1,300,000.00 -$6,650,000.00 -$1,000,000.00 -$1,000,000.00 Estimated revenue $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 Ending Fund balance available $4,744,100.00 $3,743,175.00 $2,643,175.00 -$3,806,825.00 -$4,606,825.00 -$5,406,825.00 0180 Parks Facility Impact Fees NEW DEVELOPER REIMBURSEMENT (MULTI-FUNDED) $5,021,000.00 $21,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $5,021,000.00 822649 HEROES PARK **822649 - GF GRANT FUNDED $1,788,858.00 $1,788,858.00 $1,788,858.00 825607 INDOOR MULTI-GENERATIONAL FACILITY (MULTI-FUNDED)**825607 $5,853,610.00 $53,610.00 $150,000.00 $5,650,000.00 $5,853,610.00 NEW HARRIS STREET ABANDONMENT AT COE PARK (MULTI-FUNDED) $95,925.00 $45,000.00 $50,925.00 $95,925.00 825612 CITY'S DEV IMPACT FEES UPDATE (MULTI-FUNDED) **825612 $13,200.00 $13,200.00 $13,200.00 823609 PARK DEV OVERSIZING REQUIREMNT **823609 $600,000.00 $150,000.00 $150,000.00 $150,000.00 $150,000.00 $600,000.00 Total 0180 Parks Facility Impact Fees $13,372,593.00 $2,005,668.00 $216,000.00 $1,200,925.00 $1,300,000.00 $6,650,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $13,372,593.00 0181 Transportation Impact Fees Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $4,177,431.00 $2,534,750.00 $790,593.00 -$16,857,984.00 -$26,486,424.00 -$26,286,424.00 Capital requests -$2,642,681.00 -$2,744,157.00 -$18,648,577.00 -$10,628,440.00 -$800,000.00 -$800,000.00 Estimated revenue $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 Ending Fund balance available $2,534,750.00 $790,593.00 -$16,857,984.00 -$26,486,424.00 -$26,286,424.00 -$26,086,424.00 0181 Transportation Impact Fees NEW CONSTRUCT 9TH AVE. ACROSS UPRR WITH RAILROAD CROSSING $2,374,546.00 $421,146.00 $82,100.00 $1,871,300.00 $2,374,546.00 PAGE 4 OF 12

CITY OF HANFORD
Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2026-2030
Funding Source Project Number Request Title Project Total Historical FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 Future Total NEW CONSTRUCT FLORINDA STREET FROM 9 1/4 AVE TO 9TH AVE $8,913,556.00 $754,134.00 $1,060,982.00 $7,098,440.00 $8,913,556.00 NEW DEVELOPER REIMBURSEMENT (MULTI-FUNDED) $5,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $800,000.00 $800,000.00 $800,000.00 $800,000.00 $800,000.00 $5,000,000.00 NEW LACEY BLVD WIDEN/RECONST MAGNA CARTA TO 13TH (MULTI-FUNDED) $3,355,000.00 $625,000.00 $2,730,000.00 $3,355,000.00 823619 LACEY WIDEN/RECON/10TH-SIERRA **823619 $2,356,438.00 $2,356,438.00 $0.00 $2,356,438.00 820644 TRAF SIGNAL/12TH AV TO HUME **820644 $1,487,269.00 $1,487,269.00 $0.00 $1,487,269.00 822645 9TH AVE & LACEY SIGNAL **822645 $998,197.00 $998,197.00 $998,197.00 NEW GRANGEVILLE BLVD AT 9TH AVE ROUNDABOUT-CONTINGENT ON GRANT FUNDING (MULTI-FUNDED) $706,620.00 $46,470.00 $52,650.00 $607,500.00 $706,620.00 823616 UNSCH ARTERIAL UPGR/TRAF SIGNL **823616 $1,800,000.00 $450,000.00 $450,000.00 $450,000.00 $450,000.00 $1,800,000.00 NEW ANNUAL INTERSECTION SIGNALIZATION PROJECT (MULTI-FUNDED)-CONTINGENT ON GRANT FUNDING $1,215,228.00 $175,228.00 $1,040,000.00 $1,215,228.00 NEW CONSTRUCTION OF 9TH AVE BETWEEN E. LACEY AND GRANGEVILLE $11,433,162.00 $328,916.00 $250,000.00 $10,854,246.00 $11,433,162.00 NEW 9TH AVE. N OF LELAND WAY ALIGNMENT STUDY $120,000.00 $120,000.00 $120,000.00 825604 CITY STANDARD PLANS AND SPECS UPDATE **825604 $80,000.00 $80,000.00 $0.00 $80,000.00 820640 12TH AVE SPRINGCREST TO HUME **820640 $606,700.00 $472,057.00 $134,643.00 $606,700.00 NEW 12TH AT HOUSTON SIGNAL AND 12TH FROM BUTTERFIELD TO HOUSTON (MULTI-FUNDED)-CONTINGENT ON GRA $1,661,100.00 $141,506.00 $180,045.00 $1,339,549.00 $1,661,100.00 825612 CITY'S DEV IMPACT FEES UPDATE (MULTI-FUNDED) **825612 $13,200.00 $13,200.00 $13,200.00 Total 0181 Transportation Impact Fees $42,121,016.00 $5,857,161.00 $2,642,681.00 $2,744,157.00 $18,648,577.00 $10,628,440.00 $800,000.00 $800,000.00 $42,121,016.00 0182 Fire Protection Impact Fee Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $1,040,936.00 $1,140,936.00 $1,240,936.00 $1,340,936.00 $1,440,936.00 $1,540,936.00 Capital requests $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Estimated revenue $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 Ending Fund balance available $1,140,936.00 $1,240,936.00 $1,340,936.00 $1,440,936.00 $1,540,936.00 $1,640,936.00 0182 Fire Protection Impact Fee 825612 CITY'S DEV IMPACT FEES UPDATE (MULTI-FUNDED) **825612 $13,200.00 $13,200.00 $0.00 $13,200.00 Total 0182 Fire Protection Impact Fee $13,200.00 $13,200.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $13,200.00 0183 Police Protection Impact Fee Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $86,105.00 $186,105.00 $286,105.00 $386,105.00 $486,105.00 $586,105.00 Capital requests $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Estimated revenue $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 Ending Fund balance available $186,105.00 $286,105.00 $386,105.00 $486,105.00 $586,105.00 $686,105.00 0183 Police Protection Impact Fee 825612 CITY'S DEV IMPACT FEES UPDATE (MULTI-FUNDED) **825612 $13,200.00 $13,200.00 $0.00 $13,200.00 Total 0183 Police Protection Impact Fee $13,200.00 $13,200.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $13,200.00 0184 Storm Drain Impact Fee Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $687,179.00 $674,579.00 $1,089,279.00 -$6,472,731.00 -$11,915,406.00 -$11,415,406.00 Capital requests -$512,600.00 -$85,300.00 -$8,062,010.00 -$5,942,675.00 $0.00 $0.00 Estimated revenue $500,000.00 $500,000.00 $500,000.00 $500,000.00 $500,000.00 $500,000.00 Ending Fund balance available $674,579.00 $1,089,279.00 -$6,472,731.00 -$11,915,406.00 -$11,415,406.00 -$10,915,406.00 0184 Storm Drain Impact Fee NEW RELOCATION OF MALL OR HANSEN BASIN $4,983,000.00 $30,000.00 $953,000.00 $4,000,000.00 $4,983,000.00 NEW REGIONAL BASIN S88 $2,500,000.00 $2,500,000.00 $2,500,000.00 825611 UTILITY MASTER PLAN UPDATE **825611 $339,474.00 $339,474.00 $0.00 $339,474.00 NEW HAYDEN ST. EAST OF 12TH AVE. - REGIONAL BASIN $2,532,975.00 $148,200.00 $46,200.00 $1,192,100.00 $1,146,475.00 $2,532,975.00 NEW ACQUISITION AND CONSTRUCTION OF REGIONAL STORM BASIN AT GRAGEVILLE AT SH43 $2,709,410.00 $126,200.00 $1,787,010.00 $796,200.00 $2,709,410.00 NEW 10 1/2 AVE AND HOUSTON AVE SD PIPE TO HOUSTON $1,877,200.00 $208,200.00 $39,100.00 $1,629,900.00 $1,877,200.00 825612 CITY'S DEV IMPACT FEES UPDATE (MULTI-FUNDED) **825612 $13,200.00 $13,200.00 $13,200.00 824604 CENTENNIAL DR STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS SOUTH OF BERKSHIRE LN **824604 $24,000.00 $24,000.00 $0.00 $24,000.00 823624 HOUSTON AV PIPELIN/SAND SLOUGH **823624 $50,377.00 $50,377.00 $0.00 $50,377.00 Total 0184 Storm Drain Impact Fee $15,029,636.00 $427,051.00 $512,600.00 $85,300.00 $8,062,010.00 $5,942,675.00 $0.00 $0.00 $15,029,636.00 0185 Water System Impact Fee Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $2,784,081.00 $1,648,906.00 $1,746,747.00 -$22,491,522.00 -$31,671,796.00 -$34,634,646.00 Capital requests -$2,235,175.00 -$1,002,159.00 -$25,338,269.00 -$10,280,274.00 -$4,062,850.00 -$7,658,448.00 Estimated revenue $1,100,000.00 $1,100,000.00 $1,100,000.00 $1,100,000.00 $1,100,000.00 $1,100,000.00 Ending Fund balance available $1,648,906.00 $1,746,747.00 -$22,491,522.00 -$31,671,796.00 -$34,634,646.00 -$41,193,094.00 PAGE 5 OF 12

CITY OF HANFORD
Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2026-2030
Funding Source Project Number Request Title Project Total Historical FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 Future Total 0185 Water System Impact Fee NEW CONSTRUCT FLORINDA STREET FROM 9 1/4 AVE TO 9TH AVE $1,451,044.00 $122,766.00 $172,718.00 $1,155,560.00 $1,451,044.00 NEW DEVELOPER REIMBURSEMENT (MULTI-FUNDED) $3,240,000.00 $740,000.00 $500,000.00 $500,000.00 $500,000.00 $500,000.00 $500,000.00 $3,240,000.00 NEW DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF SEWER AND WATER TRUNKLINE UTILITIES IN 9TH AVENUE BETWEEN E. LACEY A $3,000,997.00 $149,475.00 $2,851,522.00 $3,000,997.00 825611 UTILITY MASTER PLAN UPDATE **825611 $210,433.00 $210,433.00 $0.00 $210,433.00 NEW ANNUAL WATER MASTER PLAN CIP PROJECT $6,275,140.00 $217,793.00 $2,552,729.00 $253,320.00 $2,969,150.00 $282,148.00 $6,275,140.00 NEW 3RD AND HANFORD MARKET PLACE WATER MAIN & WELL $4,131,800.00 $387,300.00 $161,600.00 $3,582,900.00 $4,131,800.00 825612 CITY'S DEV IMPACT FEES UPDATE (MULTI-FUNDED) **825612 $13,200.00 $13,200.00 $13,200.00 NEW NEW GROUNDWATER WELLS (W5, W9, W1) $26,878,000.00 $708,400.00 $12,178,400.00 $6,521,200.00 $593,700.00 $6,876,300.00 $26,878,000.00 NEW NEW WATER TANK RESERVOIR #6B (MULTI-FUNDED) $3,750,000.00 $250,000.00 $3,500,000.00 $3,750,000.00 823640 INDUSTRIAL PARK WATER STORAGE **823640 (MULTI-FUNDED) $1,850,194.00 $1,850,194.00 $1,850,194.00 Total 0185 Water System Impact Fee $50,800,808.00 $223,633.00 $2,235,175.00 $1,002,159.00 $25,338,269.00 $10,280,274.00 $4,062,850.00 $7,658,448.00 $50,800,808.00 0186 Wastewater Impact Fee Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $3,628,942.00 $3,722,698.00 $4,422,698.00 -$4,896,880.00 -$6,778,027.00 -$11,808,576.00 Capital requests -$906,244.00 -$300,000.00 -$10,319,578.00 -$2,881,147.00 -$6,030,549.00 -$3,032,567.00 Estimated revenue $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 Ending Fund balance available $3,722,698.00 $4,422,698.00 -$4,896,880.00 -$6,778,027.00 -$11,808,576.00 -$13,841,143.00 0186 Wastewater Impact Fee NEW WTTF EXPANSION $9,000,000.00 $2,250,000.00 $2,250,000.00 $2,250,000.00 $2,250,000.00 $9,000,000.00 NEW DEVELOPER REIMBURSEMENT (MULTI-FUNDED) $1,800,000.00 $300,000.00 $300,000.00 $300,000.00 $300,000.00 $300,000.00 $300,000.00 $1,800,000.00 NEW DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF SEWER AND WATER TRUNKLINE UTILITIES IN 9TH AVENUE BETWEEN E. LACEY A $4,267,219.00 $212,543.00 $4,054,676.00 $4,267,219.00 825611 UTILITY MASTER PLAN UPDATE **825611 $240,883.00 $240,883.00 $0.00 $240,883.00 NEW ANNUAL SEWER MASTER PLAN CIP PROJECT $8,352,866.00 $343,701.00 $3,714,902.00 $331,147.00 $3,480,549.00 $482,567.00 $8,352,866.00 825612 CITY'S DEV IMPACT FEES UPDATE (MULTI-FUNDED) **825612 $13,200.00 $13,200.00 $0.00 $13,200.00 825609 WWTP3RD INTERNAL LIFT ADDITION **825609 $1,433,209.00 $1,383,209.00 $50,000.00 $1,433,209.00 Total 0186 Wastewater Impact Fee $25,107,377.00 $1,637,292.00 $906,244.00 $300,000.00 $10,319,578.00 $2,881,147.00 $6,030,549.00 $3,032,567.00 $25,107,377.00 0187 Refuse/Recycle Impact Fee Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $516,683.00 $716,683.00 $916,683.00 $1,116,683.00 $1,316,683.00 $1,516,683.00 Capital requests $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Estimated revenue $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 Ending Fund balance available $716,683.00 $916,683.00 $1,116,683.00 $1,316,683.00 $1,516,683.00 $1,716,683.00 0187 Refuse/Recycle Impact Fee 825612 CITY'S DEV IMPACT FEES UPDATE (MULTI-FUNDED) **825612 $13,200.00 $13,200.00 $0.00 $13,200.00 Total 0187 Refuse/Recycle Impact Fee $13,200.00 $13,200.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $13,200.00 0250 Landscape Assessment District (LAD) Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available -$4,980.00 -$4,980.00 -$4,980.00 -$54,980.00 -$54,980.00 -$54,980.00 Capital requests $0.00 $0.00 -$50,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Ending Fund balance available -$4,980.00 -$4,980.00 -$54,980.00 -$54,980.00 -$54,980.00 -$54,980.00 0250 Landscape Assessment District (LAD) NEW GLACIER PLAY EQUIPMENT-LAD $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 Total 0250 Landscape Assessment District (LAD) $50,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $50,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $50,000.00 0301 Airport Capital Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $0.00 -$56,752.00 -$56,752.00 -$56,752.00 -$56,752.00 -$56,752.00 Capital requests -$56,752.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Ending Fund balance available -$56,752.00 -$56,752.00 -$56,752.00 -$56,752.00 -$56,752.00 -$56,752.00 0301 Airport Capital NEW REPLACE 70 FT OF SEWER LINE AT THE AIRPORT FBO BUILDING $16,386.00 $16,386.00 $16,386.00 NEW AIRPORT TRUCK (EV)/ RPL 63 (MULTI-FUNDED) $40,366.00 $40,366.00 $40,366.00 Total 0301 Airport Capital $56,752.00 $0.00 $56,752.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $56,752.00 0307 Refuse Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available -$3,784,528.00 -$4,498,360.70 -$5,224,521.20 -$9,614,218.34 -$10,064,218.34 -$10,064,218.34 Capital requests -$729,832.70 -$742,160.50 -$4,405,697.14 -$466,000.00 -$16,000.00 -$16,000.00 PAGE 6 OF 12

CITY OF HANFORD
Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2026-2030
Funding Source Project Number Request Title Project Total Historical FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 Future Total Estimated revenue $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Grant funding $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 Ending Fund balance available -$4,498,360.70 -$5,224,521.20 -$9,614,218.34 -$10,064,218.34 -$10,064,218.34 -$10,064,218.34 0307 Refuse NEW PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING REMODEL (MULTI FUNDED) $15,993.20 $1,832.70 $14,160.50 $15,993.20 NEW REFUSE DEPT. TRUCK 1-TON/ RPL 60 $74,627.00 $74,627.00 $74,627.00 NEW REFUSE DEPT. AUTOMATED TRUCK/ RPL 141 $442,418.00 $442,418.00 $442,418.00 NEW REFUSE DEPT. REAR LOAD TRUCK/ RPL 157 (MULTI-FUNDED) $173,714.00 $173,714.00 $173,714.00 NEW REFUSE DEPT. REAR LOAD TRUCK/ RPL 154 (MULTI-FUNDED) $224,896.00 $224,896.00 $224,896.00 NEW REFUSE DEPT. REAR LOAD TRUCK/ RPL 153 (MULTI-FUNDED) $228,926.00 $228,926.00 $228,926.00 NEW REFUSE DEPT. AUTOMATED TRUCK/ RPL 146 $442,418.00 $442,418.00 $442,418.00 NEW REFUSE DEPT. AUTOMATED TRUCK/ RPL 144 $442,418.00 $442,418.00 $442,418.00 NEW REFUSE DEPT. AUTOMATED TRUCK/ RPL 142 $442,418.00 $442,418.00 $442,418.00 NEW REFUSE DEPT. REAR LOAD TRUCK/ RPL 343 $470,896.00 $470,896.00 $470,896.00 824303 REFUSE SERVICE TRUCK (NEW) **824303 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $0.00 $75,000.00 825303 FRONT LOAD REFUSE TRUCK (NEW) **825303 $450,000.00 $450,000.00 $0.00 $450,000.00 NEW FORKLIFT (NEW) $150,000.00 $150,000.00 $150,000.00
NEW REFUSE SERVICE TRUCK (NEW) $85,000.00 $85,000.00 $85,000.00 NEW AUTOMATED REFUSE TRUCK (NEW) $900,000.00 $450,000.00 $450,000.00 $900,000.00 823307 FRONT LOAD REFUSE TRUCK (NEW) **823307 $370,080.00 $370,080.00 $0.00 $370,080.00 824605 CITY REFUSE ENCLOSURES REBUILD (13) LOCATIONS (MULTI-FUNDED) **824605 $586,966.14 $75,000.00 $511,966.14 $586,966.14 NEW PUBLIC WORKS ENCLOSED WAREHOUSE (MULTI-FUNDED) $101,000.00 $101,000.00 $101,000.00 825604 CITY STANDARD PLANS AND SPECS UPDATE **825604 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 823308 REFUSE SCALES/NEW **823308 $160,000.00 $125,000.00 $35,000.00 $160,000.00 NEW REFUSE TRAILER FOR RESIDENTIAL CANS $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 825001 REFUSE SOLAR COMPACTORS (GRANT FUNDED) **825001 $96,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $96,000.00 825008 REFUSE CAMERA SYSTEM **825008 $149,000.00 $50,000.00 $99,000.00 $149,000.00 824002 AUTOMATED REFUSE CONTAINERS **824002 $647,340.00 $103,340.00 $272,000.00 $272,000.00 $647,340.00 822606 REFUSE OFFICE BREAKROOM **822606 $223,504.00 $223,504.00 $0.00 $223,504.00 824001 COMMERCIAL/RECYCLE/ORG DUMPSTERS **824001 $1,144,119.00 $264,119.00 $440,000.00 $440,000.00 $1,144,119.00 Total 0307 Refuse $8,121,733.34 $1,746,043.00 $729,832.70 $742,160.50 $4,405,697.14 $466,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $8,121,733.34 0310 Public Housing Authority Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $7,657.00 -$82,343.00 -$82,343.00 -$82,343.00 -$82,343.00 -$82,343.00 Capital requests -$90,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Ending Fund balance available -$82,343.00 -$82,343.00 -$82,343.00 -$82,343.00 -$82,343.00 -$82,343.00 0310 Public Housing Authority NEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REMODEL (MULTI-FUNDED) $90,000.00 $90,000.00 $90,000.00 Total 0310 Public Housing Authority $90,000.00 $0.00 $90,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $90,000.00 0340 Building Safety Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $972,900.00 $788,500.00 $1,188,500.00 $1,588,500.00 $1,988,500.00 $2,388,500.00 Capital requests -$584,400.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Estimated revenue $400,000.00 $400,000.00 $400,000.00 $400,000.00 $400,000.00 $400,000.00 Ending Fund balance available $788,500.00 $1,188,500.00 $1,588,500.00 $1,988,500.00 $2,388,500.00 $2,788,500.00 0340 Building Safety NEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REMODEL (MULTI-FUNDED) $460,000.00 $460,000.00 $460,000.00 NEW ELECTRIC VAN FOR SENIOR BUILDING INSPECTOR $62,200.00 $62,200.00 $62,200.00 NEW ELECTRIC VAN FOR BUILDING INSPECTOR $62,200.00 $62,200.00 $62,200.00 Total 0340 Building Safety $584,400.00 $0.00 $584,400.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $584,400.00 0359 Storm Drain Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $2,629,889.00 $1,781,216.30 $953,162.80 -$6,019,315.20 -$10,034,812.20 -$11,949,324.20 Capital requests -$864,672.70 -$844,053.50 -$6,988,478.00 -$4,031,497.00 -$1,930,512.00 -$318,681.00 Estimated revenue $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 Ending Fund balance available $1,781,216.30 $953,162.80 -$6,019,315.20 -$10,034,812.20 -$11,949,324.20 -$12,252,005.20 PAGE 7 OF 12

CITY OF HANFORD
Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2026-2030
Funding Source Project Number Request Title Project Total Historical FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 Future Total 0359 Storm Drain NEW LIFT STATION 31 UPGRADE $5,945,000.00 $215,000.00 $2,565,000.00 $3,165,000.00 $5,945,000.00 NEW ANNUAL STORM DRAIN IMP PROJECT $4,068,700.00 $168,800.00 $1,663,000.00 $194,100.00 $1,829,300.00 $213,500.00 $4,068,700.00 NEW BASIN 55 LAND ACQUISITION $450,000.00 $450,000.00 $450,000.00 NEW EQUIPMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION INSPECTORS AND USA POSITION (MULTI-FUNDED) $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 NEW UTILITY TRUCK FOR USA POSITION (MULTI-FUNDED) $10,750.00 $10,750.00 $10,750.00 NEW PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING REMODEL (MULTI FUNDED) $16,003.20 $1,833.70 $14,169.50 $16,003.20 NEW CHINA ALLEY - UTILITY REPLACEMENT /RECONSTRUCTION (MULTI-FUNDED) $187,500.00 $15,000.00 $172,500.00 $187,500.00 825602 DOWNTOWN FLOOD CONTROL IMPROVEMENTS **825602 $1,312,650.00 $488,400.00 $824,250.00 $1,312,650.00 NEW LACEY BLVD WIDEN/RECONST MAGNA CARTA TO 13TH (MULTI-FUNDED) $500,000.00 $500,000.00 $500,000.00 NEW LIFT STATION REHAB $100,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $100,000.00 823619 LACEY WIDEN/RECON/10TH-SIERRA **823619 $792,230.00 $792,230.00 $0.00 $792,230.00 NEW PUBLIC WORKS ENCLOSED WAREHOUSE (MULTI-FUNDED) $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 825604 CITY STANDARD PLANS AND SPECS UPDATE **825604 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 NEW PLEASANT SOUTH OF GREENFIELD - STORMDRAIN $425,473.00 $55,789.00 $369,684.00 $425,473.00 NEW MS4 PERMIT - ANNUAL PROJECT $487,718.00 $90,200.00 $93,728.00 $97,397.00 $101,212.00 $105,181.00 $487,718.00 NEW EIGHTH ST AT IRWIN ST STORM DRAIN $1,445,000.00 $20,000.00 $1,425,000.00 $1,445,000.00 823624 HOUSTON AV PIPELIN/SAND SLOUGH **823624 $463,852.00 $463,852.00 $0.00 $463,852.00 825301 VACUUM TRUCK (REPL 174) **825301 $453,880.00 $453,880.00 $0.00 $453,880.00 822621 TREE TRIM/REMOVAL PROGRAM **822621 $373,400.00 $73,400.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $373,400.00 823621 INCR FLOW CAP/PEOPLE DITCH **823621 $60,704.00 $60,704.00 $0.00 $60,704.00 823620 CURB AND GUTTER INSTALL **823620 $157,682.00 $22,682.00 $45,000.00 $45,000.00 $45,000.00 $157,682.00 Total 0359 Storm Drain $17,363,042.20 $2,385,148.00 $864,672.70 $844,053.50 $6,988,478.00 $4,031,497.00 $1,930,512.00 $318,681.00 $17,363,042.20 0362 WWTP/Sewer Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $1,273,728.00 $988,882.00 $107,282.00 -$5,279,320.00 -$9,171,810.00 -$13,461,626.00 Capital requests -$884,846.00 -$1,481,600.00 -$5,986,602.00 -$4,492,490.00 -$4,889,816.00 -$4,187,538.00 Estimated revenue $600,000.00 $600,000.00 $600,000.00 $600,000.00 $600,000.00 $600,000.00 Ending Fund balance available $988,882.00 $107,282.00 -$5,279,320.00 -$9,171,810.00 -$13,461,626.00 -$17,049,164.00 0362 WWTP/Sewer 825019 WWTF SWITCHGEAR **825019 $400,000.00 $400,000.00 $0.00 $400,000.00 NEW WTTF EXPANSION $6,000,000.00 $1,500,000.00 $1,500,000.00 $1,500,000.00 $1,500,000.00 $6,000,000.00 NEW EQUIPMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION INSPECTORS AND USA POSITION (MULTI-FUNDED) $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 NEW UTILITY TRUCK FOR USA POSITION (MULTI-FUNDED) $10,750.00 $10,750.00 $10,750.00 NEW CHINA ALLEY - UTILITY REPLACEMENT /RECONSTRUCTION (MULTI-FUNDED) $375,000.00 $30,000.00 $345,000.00 $375,000.00 NEW WWTP TRUCK 1-TON/ RPL 108 (MULTI-FUNDED) $62,525.00 $62,525.00 $62,525.00 NEW WWTP TRUCK (EV)/ RPL 333 (MULTI-FUNDED) $44,346.00 $44,346.00 $44,346.00 NEW WWTP TRUCK (EV)/ RPL 334 (MULTI-FUNDED) $40,546.00 $40,546.00 $40,546.00 NEW WWTP LOADER/ RPL 258 $165,581.00 $165,581.00 $165,581.00 NEW LACEY BLVD WIDEN/RECONST MAGNA CARTA TO 13TH (MULTI-FUNDED) $400,000.00 $400,000.00 $400,000.00 823619 LACEY WIDEN/RECON/10TH-SIERRA **823619 $399,280.00 $399,280.00 $0.00 $399,280.00 NEW ANNUAL SEWER MAINT. IMPROVEMENT PROJECT $4,551,188.00 $223,300.00 $1,876,700.00 $234,465.00 $1,970,535.00 $246,188.00 $4,551,188.00 NEW PUBLIC WORKS ENCLOSED WAREHOUSE (MULTI-FUNDED) $101,000.00 $101,000.00 $101,000.00 825604 CITY STANDARD PLANS AND SPECS UPDATE **825604 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 NEW COLLECTION PORTABLE INSPECTION CAMERA $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 NEW CHLORINE INJECTION MANIFOLD REBUILD $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 NEW SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE ROACH CONTROL $170,050.00 $25,000.00 $26,250.00 $27,500.00 $28,900.00 $30,400.00 $32,000.00 $170,050.00 NEW WASTEWATER FACILITY INLET MANHOLE COATING $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 NEW WASTEWATER FACILITY BUILDING ROOF REPAIR $300,000.00 $300,000.00 $300,000.00 NEW VACUUM TRUCK $1,040,000.00 $0.00 $1,040,000.00 $1,040,000.00 NEW TRACTOR WITH LOADER BUCKET/ RPL 185 $250,000.00 $250,000.00 $250,000.00 NEW TAILING DRYING BED RAMP $46,000.00 $46,000.00 $46,000.00 NEW STORAGE POND FENCING $40,250.00 $40,250.00 $40,250.00 NEW STANDARDIZE LIFT STATION GENERATOR HOOK-UPS $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 NEW SLUDGE DRYING BED LINNING $2,850,400.00 $661,500.00 $695,500.00 $728,900.00 $764,500.00 $2,850,400.00 NEW SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE RECOATING $679,500.00 $100,000.00 $105,000.00 $110,000.00 $115,500.00 $121,500.00 $127,500.00 $679,500.00 NEW PLANT HEADWORKS MCC ROOM A/C REPLACEMENT $35,000.00 $35,000.00 $35,000.00 NEW WASTEWATER OPERATIONS STORAGE UNIT $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 PAGE 8 OF 12

CITY OF HANFORD
Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2026-2030
Funding Source Project Number Request Title Project Total Historical FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 Future Total NEW LIFT STATION REHABILITATION $1,120,150.00 $165,000.00 $173,250.00 $181,500.00 $190,600.00 $200,000.00 $209,800.00 $1,120,150.00 NEW INTERNAL LIFT PUMP TUBE #2 $1,157,600.00 $1,157,600.00 $1,157,600.00 NEW INTERNAL LIFT PUMP TUBE #1 $1,050,000.00 $1,050,000.00 $1,050,000.00 NEW SLUDGE LAGOON DREDGE PUMP REPLACEMENT $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 NEW FACILITY PICKUP TRUCK (EV)/ RPL 338 (MULTI-FUNDED) $41,056.00 $41,056.00 $41,056.00 NEW EFFLUENT PUMP STATION VALVE REHAB $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 NEW COLLECTION STORAGE UNIT $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 NEW COLLECTION SERVICE TRUCK $148,750.00 $0.00 $148,750.00 $148,750.00 NEW COLLECTION PORTABLE FLOW METER $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 NEW COLLECTION MAINTENANCE TRUCK $80,000.00 $80,000.00 $80,000.00 NEW COLLECTION LIFT STATION PUMP REPLACEMENT $222,500.00 $32,500.00 $34,100.00 $35,800.00 $37,900.00 $40,000.00 $42,200.00 $222,500.00 NEW CHLORINE CONTACT CHAMBER VALVE REPLACEMENT $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 NEW CCTV INSPECTION SERVICES $408,200.00 $60,000.00 $63,000.00 $66,200.00 $69,500.00 $72,900.00 $76,600.00 $408,200.00 NEW (2) SECONDARY SEDIMENTATION BASIN COATING $240,000.00 $240,000.00 $240,000.00 824621 DESIGN & CONST OF SCE-OWNED FACILITY $13,038.00 $13,038.00 $0.00 $13,038.00 823627 SEWER SYSTEM VIDEO INSP **823627 $10,953.00 $10,953.00 $0.00 $10,953.00 NEW SPARE BARSCREEN MOTOR $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 825011 SPARE MOTOR SCREW PUMP **825011 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $0.00 $40,000.00 824302 PICKUP TRUCK (NEW) UNIT 109 **824302 $64,855.00 $64,855.00 $0.00 $64,855.00 825304 PICKUP TRUCK (NEW) **825304 $65,000.00 $65,000.00 $0.00 $65,000.00 822627 PROTECTIVE GRATING **822627 $27,142.00 $27,142.00 $0.00 $27,142.00 Total 0362 WWTP/Sewer $22,963,160.00 $1,040,268.00 $884,846.00 $1,481,600.00 $5,986,602.00 $4,492,490.00 $4,889,816.00 $4,187,538.00 $22,963,160.00 0391 Water Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available -$758,777.00 $2,368,310.30 $3,384,480.80 $3,332,823.80 $4,343,976.80 $8,617,176.80 Capital requests -$2,479,464.70 -$8,555,271.50 -$5,051,657.00 -$3,988,847.00 -$726,800.00 -$3,173,600.00 Estimated revenue $5,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 Grant funding $606,552.00 $4,571,442.00
Ending Fund balance available $2,368,310.30 $3,384,480.80 $3,332,823.80 $4,343,976.80 $8,617,176.80 $10,443,576.80 0391 Water NEW EQUIPMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION INSPECTORS AND USA POSITION (MULTI-FUNDED) $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 NEW UTILITY TRUCK FOR USA POSITION (MULTI-FUNDED) $10,750.00 $10,750.00 $10,750.00 NEW PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING REMODEL (MULTI FUNDED) $16,003.20 $1,833.70 $14,169.50 $16,003.20 NEW CHINA ALLEY - UTILITY REPLACEMENT /RECONSTRUCTION (MULTI-FUNDED) $375,000.00 $30,000.00 $345,000.00 $375,000.00 NEW WATER DEPT. TRUCK 1-TON/ RPL 97 (MULTI-FUNDED) $40,781.00 $40,781.00 $40,781.00 NEW WATER DEPT. TRUCK/ RPL 58 $64,329.00 $64,329.00 $64,329.00 NEW WATER DEPT. TRUCK (EV)/ RPL 75 $58,366.00 $58,366.00 $58,366.00 NEW WATER DEPT. TRUCK (EV)/ RPL 69 $58,366.00 $58,366.00 $58,366.00 NEW LACEY BLVD WIDEN/RECONST MAGNA CARTA TO 13TH (MULTI-FUNDED) $500,000.00 $500,000.00 $500,000.00 822635 WATER MAIN REPL PROGRAM **822635 $1,400,000.00 $700,000.00 $700,000.00 $1,400,000.00 823619 LACEY WIDEN/RECON/10TH-SIERRA **823619 $950,660.00 $950,660.00 $0.00 $950,660.00 NEW INDUSTRIAL PARK WATER MAIN LOOP AND 500K GAL TANK-CONTINGENT ON GRANT FUNDING $5,177,994.00 $606,552.00 $4,571,442.00 $5,177,994.00 NEW ANNUAL WATER INFRASTRUCTURE MAINT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT $9,774,600.00 $236,600.00 $2,864,000.00 $248,400.00 $3,007,200.00 $260,800.00 $3,157,600.00 $9,774,600.00 NEW PUBLIC WORKS ENCLOSED WAREHOUSE (MULTI-FUNDED) $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 825604 CITY STANDARD PLANS AND SPECS UPDATE **825604 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 NEW 9TH AVE ST FRONTAGE AT HEROES PARK (MULTI-FUNDED) $654,577.00 $22,660.00 $39,660.00 $592,257.00 $654,577.00 NEW REPLACE GENERATOR TO WELL #35 AT FIRE STATION NO.1 / RPL 323 (MULTI-FUNDED) $25,727.00 $25,727.00 $25,727.00 NEW TANK 4 BOOSTER PUMP(S) UPGRADE $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 NEW ANNUAL WELL INSPECTION $96,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $96,000.00 NEW NEW WATER TANK RESERVOIR #6B (MULTI-FUNDED) $15,647.00 $15,647.00 $15,647.00 NEW PURCHASE TWO REPLACEMENT WELL MOTORS $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00 NEW REPLACE CHLORINE PUMPS CITYWIDE $140,000.00 $70,000.00 $70,000.00 $140,000.00 NEW WELL 45 ARSENIC TREATMENT $3,000,000.00 $500,000.00 $2,500,000.00 $3,000,000.00 825608 WELL MEDIA FILTRATION **825608 $1,500,000.00 $250,000.00 $250,000.00 $250,000.00 $250,000.00 $250,000.00 $250,000.00 $1,500,000.00 822634 WATER SYS SECURITY UPGRADES **822634 $615,740.00 $615,740.00 $0.00 $615,740.00 823640 INDUSTRIAL PARK WATER STORAGE **823640 (MULTI-FUNDED) $7,595,846.00 $7,595,846.00 $0.00 $7,595,846.00 824609 WELL PUMP REHAB/WELL 42 AND WELL 38 **824609 $220,000.00 $120,000.00 $100,000.00 $220,000.00 823637 NEW WATER SUPPLY WELL 51 & 52 **823637 $3,194,504.00 $3,194,504.00 $0.00 $3,194,504.00 PAGE 9 OF 12

CITY OF HANFORD
Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2026-2030
Funding Source Project Number Request Title Project Total Historical FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 Future Total 825600 BADGER METER REPLACEMENT **825600 $16,526,600.00 $16,526,600.00 $0.00 $16,526,600.00 823635 METER REPAIR/REPLACEMENT PROGRAM **823635 $1,019,585.00 $119,585.00 $100,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $1,019,585.00 Total 0391 Water $53,368,575.20 $29,392,935.00 $2,479,464.70 $8,555,271.50 $5,051,657.00 $3,988,847.00 $726,800.00 $3,173,600.00 $53,368,575.20 0414 Computer Replacement Reserve Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $406,698.00 $113,698.00 $72,698.00 $72,698.00 $72,698.00 $72,698.00 Capital requests -$293,000.00 -$41,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Ending Fund balance available $113,698.00 $72,698.00 $72,698.00 $72,698.00 $72,698.00 $72,698.00 0414 Computer Replacement Reserve NEW VXRAIL SERVERS REPLACEMENT AND GENERATOR PURCHASE $250,000.00 $250,000.00 $250,000.00 800121 FY COMPUTER REPLACEMENTS **800121 $117,180.00 $33,180.00 $43,000.00 $41,000.00 $117,180.00 Total 0414 Computer Replacement Reserve $367,180.00 $33,180.00 $293,000.00 $41,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $367,180.00 0415 Information Technology Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available -$245,891.00 -$245,891.00 -$245,891.00 -$282,726.00 -$282,726.00 -$282,726.00 Capital requests $0.00 $0.00 -$36,835.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Estimated revenue $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Ending Fund balance available -$245,891.00 -$245,891.00 -$282,726.00 -$282,726.00 -$282,726.00 -$282,726.00 0415 Information Technology NEW IT DEPT. VEHICLE/ RPL 105 $36,835.00 $36,835.00 $36,835.00 Total 0415 Information Technology $36,835.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $36,835.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $36,835.00 0416 Bldg Maint Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $153,547.00 $72,013.00 $2,939.00 -$38,147.00 -$38,147.00 -$38,147.00 Capital requests -$81,534.00 -$69,074.00 -$41,086.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Estimated revenue $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Ending Fund balance available $72,013.00 $2,939.00 -$38,147.00 -$38,147.00 -$38,147.00 -$38,147.00 0416 Bldg Maint NEW BUILDING MAINT. TRUCK/ RPL 94 $64,329.00 $64,329.00 $64,329.00 NEW BUILDING MAINT. TRUCK (EV)/ RPL 303 $58,366.00 $58,366.00 $58,366.00 NEW BUILDING MAINT. TRUCK (EV)/ RPL 120 (MULTI-FUNDED) $41,086.00 $41,086.00 $41,086.00 NEW (33) 8FT LONG FOLDING TABLES FOR CIVIC $10,708.00 $10,708.00 $10,708.00 NEW (32) 8FT FOLDING TABLES (18) ROUND TABLES FOR CIVIC $17,205.00 $17,205.00 $17,205.00 Total 0416 Building Maint $191,694.00 $0.00 $81,534.00 $69,074.00 $41,086.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $191,694.00 0417 Building Reserves Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $1,064,643.00 $772,742.00 $60,951.00 -$247,874.00 -$388,481.00 -$534,713.00 Capital requests -$291,901.00 -$711,791.00 -$308,825.00 -$140,607.00 -$146,232.00 -$152,081.00 Ending Fund balance available $772,742.00 $60,951.00 -$247,874.00 -$388,481.00 -$534,713.00 -$686,794.00 0417 Building Reserves 823602 VETERANS BUILDING REHAB (MULTI-FUNDED)-CONTINGENT ON GRANT FUNDING **823602 $28,350.00 $28,350.00 $28,350.00 NEW PD - REPAINT INTERIOR $52,150.00 $52,150.00 $52,150.00 NEW PD - REPAINT EXTERIOR $45,675.00 $45,675.00 $45,675.00 NEW CITY HALL - REPAINT EXTERIOR AND REFINISH DOORS $32,791.00 $32,791.00 $32,791.00 NEW COE PARK - REPAINT EXTERIOR (MULTI-FUNDED) $8,745.00 $8,745.00 $8,745.00 NEW LONGFIELD CENTER - REPAINT EXTERIOR (MULTI-FUNDED) $65,160.00 $65,160.00 $65,160.00 NEW CIVIC AUD - REPLACE CARPET IN EAST WING (MULTI-FUNDED) $18,416.00 $18,416.00 $18,416.00 NEW CIVIC AUD - REPLACE RAMP DOORS (2 SETS) (MULTI-FUNDED) $19,080.00 $19,080.00 $19,080.00 NEW CARNEGIE BUILDING REHAB-CONTINGENT ON GRANT FUNDING (MULTI-FUNDED) $422,800.00 $15,500.00 $331,500.00 $75,800.00 $422,800.00 NEW TRANSFER ALL CITY FACILITIES TO VALLEY ALARM BURGLAR $17,500.00 $17,500.00 $17,500.00 NEW TRANSFER ALL CITY FACILITIES TO VALLEY ALARM FIRE $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 NEW FACILITIES MASTER PLAN $310,000.00 $140,000.00 $170,000.00 $310,000.00 NEW ANNUAL FACILITY ADA IMPROVEMENTS $729,120.00 $25,000.00 $130,000.00 $135,200.00 $140,607.00 $146,232.00 $152,081.00 $729,120.00 PAGE 10 OF 12

CITY OF HANFORD
Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2026-2030
Funding Source Project Number Request Title Project Total Historical FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 Future Total 824603 CARNEGIE BUILDING ROOF UNDERLAYMENT REPLACEMENT **824603 $45,425.00 $45,425.00 $0.00 $45,425.00 Total 0417 Building Reserves $1,825,212.00 $73,775.00 $291,901.00 $711,791.00 $308,825.00 $140,607.00 $146,232.00 $152,081.00 $1,825,212.00 0447 Fleet Operations Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Capital requests -$184,491.00 -$36,835.00 -$1,715,442.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Estimated revenue $184,491.00 $36,835.00 $1,715,442.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Ending Fund balance available $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0447 Fleet Operations NEW FLEET DEPT. VEHICLE/ RPL 329 $36,835.00 $36,835.00 $36,835.00 NEW FLEET - FUEL DISPENSING CARD READER $150,000.00 $150,000.00 $150,000.00 NEW FLEET SHOP EQUIPMENT $34,491.00 $34,491.00 $34,491.00 NEW FLEET SHOP EXPANSION $1,715,442.00 $1,715,442.00 $1,715,442.00 Total 0447 Fleet Operations $1,936,768.00 $0.00 $184,491.00 $36,835.00 $1,715,442.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,936,768.00 0448 Fleet Reserve Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $18,397,857.00 $18,068,069.00 $18,055,199.00 $16,944,837.00 $16,912,937.00 $16,912,937.00 Capital requests -$329,788.00 -$12,870.00 -$1,110,362.00 -$31,900.00 $0.00 -$46,250.00 Ending Fund balance available $18,068,069.00 $18,055,199.00 $16,944,837.00 $16,912,937.00 $16,912,937.00 $16,866,687.00 0448 Fleet Reserve NEW CITY HALL GENERATOR/ RPL 379, SUPPORTS EOC (MULTI-FUNDED) $12,870.00 $12,870.00 $12,870.00 NEW PD GENERATOR/ RPL 224 (MULTI-FUNDED) $49,950.00 $49,950.00 $49,950.00 NEW REPLACE GENERATOR TO WELL #35 AT FIRE STATION NO.1 / RPL 323 (MULTI-FUNDED) $23,949.00 $23,949.00 $23,949.00 NEW WWTP TRUCK 1-TON/ RPL 108 (MULTI-FUNDED) $31,900.00 $31,900.00 $31,900.00 NEW WATER DEPT. TRUCK 1-TON/ RPL 97 (MULTI-FUNDED) $41,846.00 $41,846.00 $41,846.00 NEW WWTP TRUCK (EV)/ RPL 333 (MULTI-FUNDED) $14,020.00 $14,020.00 $14,020.00 NEW BUILDING MAINT. TRUCK (EV)/ RPL 120 (MULTI-FUNDED) $17,280.00 $17,280.00 $17,280.00 NEW PARKS DEPT. TRUCK/ RPL 65 (MULTI-FUNDED) $28,740.00 $28,740.00 $28,740.00 NEW PARKS DEPT. TRUCK/ RPL 68 (MULTI-FUNDED) $27,830.00 $27,830.00 $27,830.00 NEW PARKS DEPT. TRUCK/ RPL 64 (MULTI-FUNDED) $28,070.00 $28,070.00 $28,070.00 NEW BUILDING DEPT. TRUCK (EV)/ RPL 88 (MULTI-FUNDED) $17,840.00 $17,840.00 $17,840.00 NEW AIRPORT TRUCK (EV)/ RPL 63 (MULTI-FUNDED) $18,000.00 $18,000.00 $18,000.00 NEW PD MOTORCYCLE/ RPL 38 $31,000.00 $31,000.00 $31,000.00 NEW STREETS DEPT. TRUCK/ RPL 136 (MULTI-FUNDED) $32,370.00 $32,370.00 $32,370.00 NEW PARKS DEPT. TRUCK/ RPL 62 (MULTI-FUNDED) $27,830.00 $27,830.00 $27,830.00 NEW REFUSE DEPT. REAR LOAD TRUCK/ RPL 157 (MULTI-FUNDED) $297,182.00 $297,182.00 $297,182.00 NEW REFUSE DEPT. REAR LOAD TRUCK/ RPL 154 (MULTI-FUNDED) $246,000.00 $246,000.00 $246,000.00 NEW REFUSE DEPT. REAR LOAD TRUCK/ RPL 153 (MULTI-FUNDED) $241,970.00 $241,970.00 $241,970.00 NEW WWTP TRUCK (EV)/ RPL 334 (MULTI-FUNDED) $17,820.00 $17,820.00 $17,820.00 NEW FIRE VEHICLE/ RPL 112 (MULTI-FUNDED) $32,970.00 $32,970.00 $32,970.00 NEW STREETS DEPT. ROLLER/ RPL 182 (MULTI-FUNDED) $56,300.00 $56,300.00 $56,300.00 NEW STREETS DEPT ASPHALT PATCH TRUCK /RPL 135 (MULTI-FUNDED) $168,890.00 $168,890.00 $168,890.00 823304 WATER TRENCH WKR/REPL 320 **823304 $5,500.00 $2,517.00 $2,983.00 $5,500.00 824301 FIRE ENGINE PUMPER/REPL 161 **824301 $41,344.00 $41,344.00 $0.00 $41,344.00 825300 BATTALION CHIEF PICKUP (NEW) **825300 $80,000.00 $80,000.00 $0.00 $80,000.00 NEW FACILITY PICKUP TRUCK (EV)/ RPL 338 (MULTI-FUNDED) $17,310.00 $17,310.00 $17,310.00 NEW COLLECTION SERVICE TRUCK $46,250.00 $0.00 $46,250.00 $46,250.00 825301 VACUUM TRUCK (REPL 174) **825301 $346,120.00 $346,120.00 $0.00 $346,120.00 Total 0448 Fleet Reserve $2,001,151.00 $469,981.00 $329,788.00 $12,870.00 $1,110,362.00 $31,900.00 $0.00 $46,250.00 $2,001,151.00 0452 Aquatics Cap/Eq Repl Res Beginning Fund (estimated) balance available $193,887.00 $18,887.00 $13,887.00 $8,887.00 $8,887.00 $8,887.00 Capital requests -$175,000.00 -$5,000.00 -$5,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Ending Fund balance available $18,887.00 $13,887.00 $8,887.00 $8,887.00 $8,887.00 $8,887.00 PAGE 11 OF 12

CITY OF HANFORD
Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Years 2026-2030
Funding Source Project Number Request Title Project Total Historical FY2026 FY2027 FY2028 FY2029 FY2030 Future Total 0452 Aquatics Cap/Eq Repl Res 824617 PLUNGE WATER SLIDE REPAIR **824617 $185,000.00 $175,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $185,000.00 Total 0452 Aquatics Cap/Eq Repl Res $185,000.00 $0.00 $175,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $185,000.00 Total Funding Sources $462,441,351.57 $59,098,605.00 $35,750,246.10 $44,177,901.50 $129,433,039.97 $86,862,665.00 $47,577,449.00 $59,541,445.00 $462,441,351.57 PAGE 12 OF 12

5.C.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 4/1/2025 AGENDA SECTION: STUDY SESSION

SUBJECT:

Review of the Handbook of Rules and Procedures for the Hanford City Council and discussion of potential amendments

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation:Staff recommends that the City Council receive the presentation, review the Handbook, and provide direction to staff regarding any potential amendments that may be recommended by the majority of Council.

BACKGROUND:

Historically, past City Councils have adopted various policies and rules pertaining to City Council meetings, decorum, appointments to Commissions, and several other subjects. These policies were memorialized in a varied manner as resolutions, ordinances, and regular documents, all of which had been officially approved at Council meetings.

On June 21, 2016, the Hanford City Council formally adopted the Handbook of Rules and Procedures, in order to create one (1) single document for all rules and procedures and to eliminate the multiple references to other regulations. Since the initial adoption, there have been several amendments to the Handbook, which have included, but are not limited to, changes to the length of the Public Comment period and the size of various commissions.

At the November 7, 2023 City Council meeting, Council adopted Resolution 23-46-R, amending the Handbook of Rules and Procedures to include various amendments as recommended by Council.

That version is attached and those amendments included:

• Clarification of the time frame for the selection of Mayor and Vice-Mayor and the procedure for selecting the officers
• Removal of city departments as that information is regularly updated in the Council-adopted budget
• Clarification on Study Sessions and the legal ability of Council to provide formal direction on those matters
• Amendments to the "Components of the Meeting" to reflect current practice • Addition of a policy on the useage of electronic communication by Council members while on the dais

Staff will make a presentation to Council regarding the various sections of the Handbook and provide detail into those sections that relate to recent Council discussions or Public Comment at meetings.

FISCAL IMPACT:

No fiscal impact as a result of this presentation and review.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Handbook of Rules and Procedures - 2023 Final

2. Professional Governance Standards

3. Limited Public Forum advice

4. A City Council Member’s Role With Respect to Individual City Employees

HANDBOOK OF

RULES AND

PROCEDURES

HANFORD CITY

COUNCIL

PREFACE

As provided by California Government Code Section 36813, the City Council of the City of Hanford established the Handbook of Rules and Procedures contained therein. The Handbook shall be in effect upon adoption by the City Council and shall remain in effect until such time as it is amended or new rules are adopted in the manner provided herein.

In addition to the Handbook of Rules and Procedures, the City Council has included in this document other information which may be useful to the City Council, Commissions, administrative staff, and the general public. This document is to be known as “The Handbook of Rules and Procedures of the City Council of the City of Hanford.”

Adopted: June 21, 2016
Resolution: 16-31-R

Amended: June 6, 2017
Resolution: 17-34-R

Amended: August 15, 2017
Resolution: 17-44-R

Amended: July 7, 2020
Resolution: 20-14-R

Amended: November 7, 2023
Resolution: 23-46-R

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1 – GENERAL POWERS AND DUTIES

A. The City of Hanford .............................................................................. 1 B. Council Elections .................................................................................. 1 C. Vacancies ............................................................................................. 2 D. Mayor/Vice Mayor Selection ................................................................. 2 E. Mayor as Presiding Officer and Duties Thereto .................................... 2 F. Vice Mayor ............................................................................................ 2 G. Compensation ...................................................................................... 3 H. City Manager ........................................................................................ 3 I. City Clerk ............................................................................................... 3 J. City Attorney........................................................................................... 4 K. Triangle of Policy, Process & Product ................................................... 5 L. Municipal Code ..................................................................................... 5 M. Interference in Staff Functions ............................................................. 5

CHAPTER 2 – CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS

A. Rules of Order ...................................................................................... 6 B. Regular Meetings ................................................................................. 6 C. Special Meetings .................................................................................. 6 D. Study Sessions ..................................................................................... 6 E. Closed Sessions ................................................................................... 7 F. Emergency Meetings ............................................................................ 8 G. Agenda ................................................................................................. 8 H. Call to Order ......................................................................................... 8 I. Quorum .................................................................................................. 8 J. Lack of Quorum ..................................................................................... 8 K. Rules of Discussion .............................................................................. 9

1. Motions ............................................................................................ 9

2. Voting ............................................................................................... 9

3. Abstention/Recuse: Conflict of Interest ............................................ 9

4. Tie Votes ........................................................................................ 10 L. Recognition to Speak, Council Member ............................................. 10

1. Interruptions ................................................................................... 10

2. Public Hearings .............................................................................. 10 M. Council Members’ Obligation After Absence ...................................... 10 N. Adjournment of Meeting ..................................................................... 10 O. Recess ............................................................................................... 11 P. Agenda Items of Order ....................................................................... 11 Q. Audio Recordings ............................................................................... 11 R. Video Recordings ............................................................................... 11 S. Agenda Format for Meetings .............................................................. 11

T. Components of Meeting ...................................................................... 12

1. Public Comments .......................................................................... 12

2. Staff Communications ................................................................... 12

3. Consent Calendar ......................................................................... 12

4. Public Hearings ............................................................................. 12

5. General Business .......................................................................... 13

6. Council Reports/Comments .......................................................... 13 U. Ordinances ......................................................................................... 13 V. Resolutions ......................................................................................... 14 W. Recognitions/Proclamations .............................................................. 14 X. Minutes ............................................................................................... 14 Y. Appeals .............................................................................................. 14

CHAPTER 3 - DECORUM

A. Enforcement of Decorum .................................................................... 15 B. Conduct in the City Council Chambers ............................................... 15

1. Council Chambers Defined ........................................................... 15

2. Council Dais .................................................................................. 15

3. Rules of Decorum for the Public .................................................... 15

4. Rules of Conduct and Safety......................................................... 16

5. Removal from the Council Chambers ........................................... 16 C. Courtesy ............................................................................................. 16

1. Council Members .......................................................................... 16

2. Public Speakers ............................................................................ 16 D. Disciplining a Disruptive Member ....................................................... 17 E. Noise in the Lobby .............................................................................. 18 F. Distribution of Literature and Other Materials
in City Council Chambers .................................................................. 18

CHAPTER 4 – PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES, AND OTHER

ACCOLADES

A. Purpose .............................................................................................. 19 B. Guidelines .......................................................................................... 19 C. Policy .................................................................................................. 19

CHAPTER 5 – ADMINISTRATIVE RULES

A. Rules and Procedures Administration ................................................ 21

1. Review of City Council Rules and Procedures .............................. 21

2. Adherence to Rules and Procedures ............................................ 21

3. City Attorney as Rules and Procedures Advisor ............................ 21 B. Conflict with City Municipal Code, Administration Policies, State or Federal Law .......................................................................... 21

1 CHAPTER 1

GENERAL INFORMATION, POWERS AND DUTIES

A. THE CITY OF HANFORD

The City of Hanford has a City Council/City Manager form of government.

Under this form of government, the elected City Council sets the policies for the operation of the Hanford City Government. The Council is responsible to the citizens for:

• Establishing community-wide goals that address short- and long-range needs.

• Formulating policies that define a course of action that shape city operations.

• Providing quality services within available resources.

• Acting as a link between the professional staff and local citizens.

City Council members are local leaders. The electorate expects the Council to set the tone and direction for municipal operations. Strategic planning and goal setting are the tools that enable a Council to define their vision and determine methods for accomplishing their goals.

The administrative responsibility of the City rests with the City Manager , who is appointed by the City Council. The City Manager has the responsibility to apply and administer Council’s policies through the day-to-day operation of the City. The City Manager is the chief administrative officer of the city and directs the totality of city operations.

Teamwork between the Council and the City Manager is a key element of the council-manager form of government. The pooling of skills is essential to resolve the many complex problems that face the City today. The council-manager form of government seeks to enhance the effectiveness of local policy-making and municipal operations by bringing together skilled lawmakers, community representatives, and experts in municipal administration and management.

B. COUNCIL ELECTIONS

The City Council consists of five (5) members, elected by district. Each Council Member serves four-year staggered terms, without limit. Elected Officials serve until his/her successor has been elected and qualified. Elections are held in November of even numbered years.

2 C. VACANCIES

Vacancies on the City Council shall be filled in accordance with California Government Code 36512.

California Government Code Section 36502 specifies the conditions under which a vacancy occurs.

D. MAYOR/VICE MAYOR SELECTION

Following a General Municipal Election, the Mayor and Vice-Mayor shall be selected at the meeting where election results are confirmed and the new City Council members are seated. (This meeting will either be in late November or early December).

In alternating years (i.e. when there is no General Municipal Election) the Mayor and Vice-Mayor shall be selected at the first Regular City Council meeting in December. The selection process is conducted pursuant to Robert’s Rules of Order as Rosenberg’s Rules is silent on the matter.

Consistent with Robert’s Rules, the City Attorney shall oversee the nominations and elections of the Mayor and Vice-Mayor. Council members may nominate one or more candidates. The different names shall be repeated by the City Attorney as they are made, and then the vote is taken on each in the order in which they were nominated, until one is elected. The nominations need not be seconded. These positions typically serve a period of one (1) year.

Although the Mayor and the Vice-Mayor have additional ceremonial, parliamentary and administrative responsibilities as described below and elsewhere in this Handbook, with respect to the establishment of policies, voting, and in other significant areas, all members are equal.

E. MAYOR AS PRESIDING OFFICER AND DUTIES THERETO

The Mayor shall be recognized as the official head of the City of Hanford for all ceremonial purposes and by the Governor for military purposes. In the time of public danger or emergency, the Mayor may, with the consent of the City Council, cause order to be maintained and enforce laws. The Mayor shall act as the Presiding Officer at all meetings of the City Council and perform such other duties consistent with the office as may be imposed by the City Council. The Mayor may move, second, and debate from the Chair, subject to such limitations of debate as are imposed on all Council Members by these rules and shall not be deprived of any of the rights and privileges of a Council Member as such Presiding Officer. The Mayor shall possess no veto power.

The Mayor shall preserve strict order and decorum at all times. The Mayor shall state each item coming before the City Council, and shall upon conclusion of said

3 presentation related thereto call for the vote. Following the vote, the Mayor shall announce the results of the vote. The Mayor is eligible to vote on all motions, and shall direct the order of participation of Council Members. The Mayor shall, in all instances, have the last chance to speak. The Mayor shall sign all ordinances and resolutions adopted by the City Council during the Mayor’s presence. The Mayor shall sign all agreements and/or contracts, except where otherwise instructed or set forth by policy.

F. VICE MAYOR

In the absence of the Mayor, the Vice Mayor shall possess and perform the power and duties of the Mayor. In that capacity, the Vice Mayor shall sign ordinances and resolutions adopted in his/her presence. The Vice Mayor shall also sign all agreements and/or contracts, except where otherwise instructed or set forth by policy.

G. COMPENSATION

Salaries for the City Council Members may be fixed in accordance with Section 36516 of the Government Code of the State of California. Council Members may be reimbursed for actual and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of their official duties as allowed by Government Code Section 36514 and any resolutions or ordinances adopted by the City.

H. CITY MANAGER

The City Manager, appointed by the City Council, is responsible for the overall administration of the City in response to the policies and programs established by the City Council. The City Manager is responsible for forecasting the program and service needs of the City and its related financial, personnel, and capital improvement requirements. The City Manager is a significant liaison with the community and other levels of government.

I. CITY CLERK

The City Clerk is appointed by the City Manager and is the local official for elections, local legislation, the Public Records Act, the Political Reform Act, and the Brown Act (open meeting laws). The City Clerk, in consultation with the City Attorney, ensures that actions are in compliance with all federal, state and local statutes and regulations and that all actions are properly executed, recorded, and archived.

The statutes of the State of California prescribe the basic functions and duties of the City Clerk, and the Government Code and Election Code provide precise and specific responsibilities and procedures to follow.

4 The Office of the City Clerk is a service department within the municipal government upon which the City Council, all city departments, and the general public rely on for information regarding the operations and legislative history of the city. The City Clerk serves as the liaison between the public and City Council and provides related municipal services. The City Clerk provides clerical support to the City Council.

J. CITY ATTORNEY

The City Attorney, appointed by the City Council, is responsible for providing necessary legal services and guidance to the City Council, the City Manager, department heads, and city boards, commissions and committees to ensure that city functions are performed on a sound legal basis.

In the event that it is deemed necessary and in the best interest of the City to contract for either Special or Conflict Counsel to act in the place of the City Attorney, the City Manager shall bring forth a recommendation to the City Council for approval at a regular or special meeting and be designated to execute the necessary documentation to facilitate those contracts. If outside legal counsel is required due to a reason other than a conflict of interest affecting the City Attorney, the City Manager shall confer with the City Attorney regarding the hiring of Special Counsel.

Communications from the City Attorney’s Office may be confidential and shall be treated as attorney-client privilege. Only the City Council, as an entire body, may waive the privilege, and not individual Council Members.

During the normal course of a Council Member carrying out the duties of office, it is common practice to discuss issues or ask questions of city staff, including the City Attorney. For the purpose of this policy statement, the intent is to regulate an individual Council Member’s authority to cause work to be performed by the City Attorney.

When an individual Council Member poses a question to the City Attorney, the City Attorney shall estimate the amount of time required to answer the question.

In the event the City Attorney believes the amount of time for research involved in answering the question will generate a bill in excess of $600.00, the City Attorney will notify the Council Member that the answer will exceed policy limitations. If the submitting Council Member continues to seek an answer to the question, the Council Member will pose the question to the Council, as a body, at a Council Meeting and must obtain a consensus of the majority of the Council Members present at the meeting in order for the City Attorney to work on the question.

Legal work involving questions or inquiries that require less than $2,500.00, per year, in billable hours by the City Attorney may be authorized by the submitting Council Member without the need of obtaining the Council’s approval.

5 K. TRIANGLE OF POLICY, PROCESS & PRODUCT

The City Council establishes the Policy—establishing vision and direction for the community’s future.

The City Clerk, in consultation with the City Attorney oversees the Process— ensuring that the decision-making process complies with federal, state, and local regulation and that it is properly recorded.

The City Manager provides the Product—which is the primary reason for the existence of local government: to provide services to the taxpayer that the taxpayers cannot (or will not) provide for themselves.

L. MUNICIPAL CODE

The Hanford Municipal Code sets forth the regulatory, penal and administrative laws of general application to the city. These laws are enforceable by the City, and violation constitutes a misdemeanor or infraction.

Other directives and policies of the City Council are recorded in resolutions or by minute action of the Council.

M. INTERFERENCE IN STAFF FUNCTIONS

The City Council shall deal with the administrative services of the City through the City Manager, except for the purpose of inquiry, and neither the City Council nor any member thereof, shall give orders to subordinates of the City Manager.

No member of the City Council shall publicly criticize or censure any staff member of the City, and shall instead relay any criticism of a staff member privately through the City Manager.

The City Council shall deal with the Office of the City Attorney only through the City Attorney or his/her designees, except for the purpose of inquiry, and neither the City Council nor any member thereof, may give orders to subordinates of the City Attorney without the City Attorney’s consent.

6 CHAPTER 2

CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS

A. RULES OF ORDER

The City Council shall determine its own rules of order and amend them from time to time or adopt new rules as it deems necessary. The City of Hanford shall follow Rosenberg’s Rules of Order and incorporate the procedures set forth in this chapter.

The City Attorney acts as the parliamentarian and advises the Mayor when points of order are raised.

B. REGULAR MEETINGS

Regular meetings of the City Council shall be open to the public and held on the first and third Tuesdays of every month, at the hour of 7:00 p.m. The business to be considered during the council meeting is detailed on a printed agenda. State law (the Ralph M. Brown Act) requires that public notice be given at least 72 hours before the regular meeting indicating the time and place of the meeting. An agenda of each meeting is posted at City Hall. Regular meetings may be adjourned or continued to a specified time and place.

Whenever the day fixed for any regular meeting of the City Council falls upon a day designated as a holiday, such meeting may be held at the same hour on the next succeeding day, not a holiday, as if it were a regular meeting or the meeting may be cancelled.

C. SPECIAL MEETINGS

A special meeting may be ordered whenever the public business may require it or upon the request from three members of the City Council. Whenever a special meeting shall be called, notice of such meeting shall be provided at least 24 hours prior to the time of the meeting pursuant to State law.

Ordinances may not be adopted at special meetings; only urgency ordinances may be adopted at such meetings. Items not listed on the agenda shall not be considered at the special meeting.

D. STUDY SESSIONS

The City Council may meet in a “study session” for the purpose of acquiring information on a particular subject(s) and collaborating with the public through individual public comment periods. These sessions are considered special meetings and shall be open to the public and comply with the Brown Act.

Additionally, as special meetings, Council may act upon an item contained in the

7 agenda and may provide formal direction to staff consistent with the agenda wording for each item.

E. CLOSED SESSIONS

Consistent with Government Code Section 54954.2 the Council may hold closed sessions during any regular or special meeting, or any time otherwise authorized by law to consider or hear any matter which is authorized by State law to be heard or considered in closed session.

The general subject matter for consideration shall be expressed in an open meeting before such session is held. After closed session the legislative body must reconvene to open session and may be required to disclose action taken, if any.

Closed sessions may be held to discuss certain matters specified by law, including:

• Personnel matters to consider the appointment, employment, performance, or dismissal of a public employee
• Matters of national and public safety
• Labor negotiations
• License applications by persons with criminal records • Real estate negotiations
• Anticipated litigation

The legislative body in a closed session can consider only matters covered in its agenda descriptions. City Council Members shall keep all written materials and verbal information provided to them in closed session in complete confidence in accordance with Government Code section 54963. No mention of information in these materials should be made to anyone unless allowed by this statute.

If the City Council in closed session has provided direction to city staff on proposed terms and conditions for any type of negotiations whether it be related to property acquisition or disposal, a proposed or pending claims or litigation, and/or employee negotiations, all contact with the other party should be by the designated representative handling the negotiations or litigation. A Council Member should not have any contact or discussions with the other party or its representative(s) involved concerning the negotiation during this time and not communicate any discussion conducted in closed sessions. All public statements, information, press releases, should be handled by the designated representative or spokesperson.

Government Code Section 54963 (a) – (f) outlines the injunctive relief and disciplinary actions that may be imposed on those who divulge confidential

8 closed session discussions, without first receiving authorization from the legislative body.

F. EMERGENCY MEETINGS

Emergency meetings may be called by the City Council with one-hour notice to its members and local news media. The City Council may not meet in closed session during an emergency meeting. Except for the 24-hour notice requirement, the special meeting requirements set forth above shall apply in emergency meetings.

G. AGENDA

In order to facilitate the orderly conduct of the business of the citizens of Hanford, the City Manager and City Clerk shall set the agenda, in addition to any direction by the City Council. The City Clerk shall arrange such matters as may have been timely provided, for inclusion in the agenda. Copies of the agenda are available at City Hall and at the council meeting, as well as posted on the city’s website.

H. CALL TO ORDER

The meetings of the City Council shall be called to order by the Mayor, or in the Mayor’s absence, by the Vice Mayor. In the absence of the Mayor and Vice Mayor, the meeting shall be called to order by the most senior Council Member present. This person shall serve as the Council’s presiding officer until the arrival of the Mayor or Vice Mayor, or until adjournment of the meeting.

I. QUORUM

Three members of the City Council shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. A majority of a quorum shall be sufficient to pass any action taken by the City Council except on such matters, which, by law, require a greater majority. All ordinances require at least three affirmative votes. Approval of resolutions and all orders for the payment of money also require an affirmative vote by a majority of the entire Council.

J. LACK OF QUORUM

If a majority of the City Council are absent from any meeting, the remaining members of the City Council may declare the meeting adjourned or if no member of the City Council is present, the City Clerk may adjourn the meeting. If a meeting is adjourned for less than five calendar days, no new agenda need be posted so long as a new item of business is not introduced. A copy of the order of adjournment must be posted within 24 hours after the adjournment, at or near the door of the place where the meeting was held.

9 K. RULES OF DISCUSSION

1. Motions
Action items listed on the council agenda in accordance with applicable law or added as an action item on a council agenda , in accordance with applicable law, may be voted on by the council.

Following a presentation of the item by staff, the Mayor will open discussion to the City Council for questions and comments. When there appears to be no further discussion or all of the Council Members have had the opportunity to speak, the Mayor may call for a motion.

Motions may be made by any member of the council, including the presiding officer, providing that before a motion is offered by the presiding officer, the opportunity for making a motion should be offered to the other members of the council. Any member of the council, other than the person offering the motion, may second a motion. Following a motion and a second, and any further discussion, the Mayor shall call upon the City Clerk for the vote.

2. Voting
The City Council utilizes an electronic voting system. In the absence of an electronic voting system, the clerk shall ask for votes by “voice vote” on all matters before it, unless a roll call vote is required by law or is requested by the Mayor. Unless a Council Member states that he or she is not voting, silence shall be recorded as an affirmative vote. The Presiding Officer shall announce the results of the vote.

A majority, also known as a simple majority, is a subset of a group that is more than half of the members present.

A two-thirds majority means that two-thirds of the quorum must agree to the proposition. It is much stronger than a simple requirement. In the event of an absence the vote would have to be unanimous.

3. Abstention/Recuse: Conflict of Interest
Council Members shall disqualify themselves if they have a financial conflict of interest or any other disqualification prescribed by law in a matter before the City Council. In such event, they may not participate in the discussion or the vote. Council Members shall state the specific reason for such disqualification. The disqualified Council Member shall leave the Council dais until the conclusion of the agenda item unless applicable State law or regulations permit otherwise.

10 It should be noted, however, a Council Member may speak as a member of the public, on his/her own behalf – as opposed to on behalf of someone else – on a matter that directly affects his/her financial interest even when conflicted out. Thus, while a Council Member would have to disqualify him/herself on a matter affecting a piece of property in which the Council Member has a financial interest, he/she could address the Council, speaking to what the impact would be to his/her property.

In some instances, a Council Member may determine that it is appropriate to abstain from voting on a matter even though no financial conflict of interest exists. If a City Council member abstains from voting, their vote will count as a negative. A Council Member is counted as present for quorum purposes, but his/her abstention is effectively a negative vote.

For example, if a matter requires three affirmative votes for approval and one Council Member abstains, at least three other Council Members must cast affirmative votes for the matter to be approved.

4. Tie Votes
A tie vote results in a lost motion. In such an instance, any member of the Council may offer a motion for further action. If there is no action by an affirmative vote, the result is no action. If the matter involves an appeal, and affirmative vote does not occur, the result is that the decision appealed stands as decided by the decision-making person or body from which the appeal was taken.

L. RECOGNITION TO SPEAK, COUNCIL MEMBER

Every Council Member desiring to speak shall address the Mayor and, upon recognition by the Mayor, shall confine his or her remarks to the item coming before the City Council.

1. Interruptions:

A Council Member, once recognized, may voice concerns, comments or ask staff to provide explanation or clarification of the item before the City Council, without interruption, unless out of order with the rules and procedures established herein and/or the Mayor call the item to order.

2. Public Hearings:

Council Members should not speak to the merits of an issue, other than to ask questions, until the public comment has been closed.

N. ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING

11 Regular meetings shall conclude no later than 10:00 p.m., unless the time is extended by a majority consensus of the Council.

The Mayor shall adjourn the meeting. In the instance of the lateness of the hour the Mayor may also adjourn the meeting to a date and time specific to continue discussions on either the remainder of the agenda or on a specific item for discussion.

O. RECESS

At any point during a meeting the Mayor may call for a brief recess.

P. AGENDA ITEMS OUT OF ORDER

The Mayor may, with the consent of the City Council, modify the order of the agenda at the meeting, if such modifications would promote fluidity in the process and discussions.

Q. AUDIO RECORDINGS

All regular meetings (except closed sessions) of the City Council are audio recorded, as well as special meetings. Workshops or meetings that require extensive interaction with the public, staff, and City Council may not be recorded if the length of the meeting is anticipated to be unusually long or if simultaneous discussions are expected to occur.

R. VIDEO RECORDINGS

All regular meetings (except closed sessions) of the City Council are video recorded, as well as any special meetings held in the Council Chambers. The City of Hanford allows the use of additional recordings as long as they are not being disruptive to the proceedings or to those in attendance. Any equipment being used should not block aisles, exits, or the view of others. If the use of equipment is determined to be disruptive by the legislative body, the use of said equipment may be banned. Council has identified an area against the East wall of the Chambers, just south of the Director’s box, where all video camera equipment should be setup for recording.

S. AGENDA FORMAT FOR MEETINGS

The agenda format for the Hanford City Council will be prepared to allow for an efficient method to conduct city business. The format and order of business will be established by the City Clerk, unless modifications are approved by the City Council.

12 T. COMPONENTS OF MEETING

The following sections of a regular meeting agenda shall set forth the guidelines of decorum for each respective section of the agenda.

1. Public Comments
For regular meetings, this is the time for citizens to comment on subject matters within the jurisdiction of the Hanford City Council, including matters listed on the meeting’s agenda and other matters not appearing on the agenda. For special meetings, citizen comments are, pursuant to the Brown Act (Government Code § 54950, et seq.) limited to matters on the agenda, and public comment will be accepted after each agenda item.

The Council cannot legally discuss or take official action on citizen requests that are introduced under this section.

This is also the time for citizens to comment on items listed under the Consent Calendar or General Business, or to request an item from the Consent Calendar be pulled for discussion purposes. Comments related to Public Hearing items will be heard at the time the item is discussed.

Each speaker will be allowed three minutes, but the Mayor has the discretion to shorten the time limit to make an efficient use of the Council’s time. As a courtesy, but not required, the speaker should state his/her name and provide their city of residence.

Any documents submitted by a member of the public to the City Clerk for the purposes of handing out to the City Council will be distributed and made a part of the record. The City Clerk will not read the documents out loud, but note who the correspondence was from.

2. Council Reports/General Reports
Brief, information-only reports, from City Council and/or Staff may provide updates to the City Council on major events or projects that may be of public interest. This is also the time for Council members to provide committee reports and to report on any meetings attended at the City’s expense.

3. Consent Calendar
All Consent Calendar Items are considered routine and will be enacted in one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these matters unless a request is made, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Calendar to be discussed and voted upon by a separate motion.

4. Public Hearings
A public hearing is only required where a specific law or ordinance applicable to the item expressly requires a hearing or a hearing is required for constitutional reasons (usually to ensure "due process"). Sometimes

13 the decision is made to hold a public hearing even though one is not required by law. In this case, the agenda documents will state that the public hearing is optional. Staff will open the item by providing a report , then the Mayor will open the hearing to public comments. Public comments are subject to the rules and regulation of the Hanford Municipal Code. After closing public comments, the Mayor will allow the Council to provide questions or comments to the staff prior to making a motion.

Once public comments are closed it is inappropriate for the public to speak except to answer an inquiry of a Council Member addressed through the Mayor. However, public comments may be re-opened by a majority approval by the Council to hear new information.

5. General Business
Any other remaining items requiring action may be placed in this section.

Items that do not need action, but are to provide informational or receive direction from the City Council may also be placed under General Business.

6. Items for Future Agendas
Any Council Member may request a matter which is not otherwise scheduled on a City Council agenda to be placed on a future agenda. The Council Member referring the item shall provide sufficient information as to the nature of the item. The City Council by concurrence of a majority may direct the City Manager to put the item on a future agenda.

U. ORDINANCES

Ordinances are the laws of the municipality. City councils are given the power to pass ordinances by Government Code Section 37100 as long as those ordinances are not in conflict with the laws and Constitution of the State of California or the United States. Approval of an ordinance requires a first reading or introduction and a second reading and adoption, with at least five days between readings (except an urgency ordinance). The passage of an ordinance requires the affirmative votes of at least three (3) council members. The ordinance or a summary is then published in the local newspaper and becomes effective thirty (30) days later. The thirty (30) day time frame is known as a referendum period. A referendum period is required by state law and is a time frame in which any citizen can file a petition challenging the legality of a recently adopted ordinance. An ordinance is an action that can be repealed or amended only by a subsequent ordinance.

In matters deemed by the City Council to warrant immediate action to preserve peace, public safety or health, an urgency/emergency ordinance may be passed immediately upon introduction at either a regular or special meeting, and can be effective immediately.

14 V. RESOLUTIONS

A resolution sets forth the action of the council on certain types of policy, procedural, or administrative matters. It requires only one reading and may be changed by subsequent resolution.

W. RECOGNITIONS/PROCLAMATIONS

The City Council may recognize individuals, organizations, or activities during the meetings. Other organizations may also present recognitions to the City.

X. MINUTES

The City Council utilizes summary minutes, which include the motions made, action taken, and a brief summary of council, staff and/or public comments. The audio recording may be used for reference, but it is not the official record of the meeting.

The City Clerk shall prepare the Minutes, and upon approval of the City Council, it shall become the official record.

Y. APPEALS

The filing of an appeal shall have the effect of staying the issuance of any permit or action until such time as the matter on appeal is resolved. If there are subsequent items to come before the Council that are subject to the outcome of the appeal, those items shall be listed following the item for appeal on the agenda, the decision of which shall be factored upon the Council’s decision on appeal.

15 CHAPTER 3

DECORUM

A. ENFORCEMENT OF DECORUM

The City Manager shall designate the Chief of Police, or his/her designated representative as a sergeant-at-arms when necessary to attend City Council meetings for the purpose of maintaining order and decorum in the City Council Chambers, lobby, or other designated meeting location. Upon instructions from the Mayor, the sergeant-at-arms shall eject any person from the City Council Chambers, in conformance with State law.

B. CONDUCT IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS

1. Council Chambers Defined
Council Chambers shall be, in addition to the usual and customary meeting location, any location or facility wherein a majority of the legislative body may meet for an open and public meeting as defined by the Brown Act, whether it be a regular meeting, special meeting, or emergency meeting.

2. Council Dais
The City Council seating area, most commonly referred to as the Council Dais is restricted to Council and city staff at all times. Loitering or the dissemination of materials are not permitted in the area directly in front of the City Council seating area, commonly referred to as the well, unless invited by a Council Member to step forward. Written or photographic materials are to be handed to the City Clerk for dissemination to the Council, and made part of the record.

3. Usage of Electronic Communication Devices at the Dais It shall be the policy of the City Council that City Council Members, and any other members of the City’s Boards, Commissions, and Committees, shall not use electronic communications (i.e.text, emails) with anyone in the public, or between themselves, while at the dais and/or participating in a public meeting. Nothing in this policy shall preclude a Council Member from having their phone on the dais with them in the event of an emergency.

4. Rules of Decorum for the Public
Members of the audience shall not engage in disorderly or boisterous conduct, including the utterance of loud, threatening or abusive language, clapping, whistling, and stamping of feet or other acts which disturb, disrupt, impede or otherwise render the orderly conduct of the city meeting infeasible. A member of the audience engaging in any such conduct shall, at the discretion of the presiding officer or a majority of the City Council,

16 be subject to ejection from the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.3(c).

5. Rules of Conduct and Safety
When the City Council is in session, all persons present must preserve safety and order. Members of the public should sit in the seats provided, subject to ADA compliance, unless addressing the Council or entering or leaving the Council Chambers. Members of the public shall not block the aisles or exits in any manner. Members of the public should not bring audible equipment into the Council Chambers, including cellular phones or pagers, without first either turning said equipment off or to a silent mode.

6. Removal from the Council Chambers
Any person who commits the following acts in respect to a meeting of the City shall be removed from the Council Chambers per Government Code Section 54957.9.

(a) Disorderly, contemptuous or insolent behavior toward the City or any member thereof, tending to interrupt the due and orderly course of said meeting; and,
(b) A breach of the peace, boisterous conduct or violent disturbance, tending to interrupt the due and orderly course of said meeting; and,
(c) Disobedience of any lawful order of the Mayor, which shall include an order to be seated or to refrain from addressing the City Council; and,
(d) Any other unlawful interference with the due and orderly course of said meeting.

C. COURTESY

1. Council Members
Council Members shall accord the utmost courtesy to each other, city employees and the public appearing before the City Council, and shall refrain at all times from rude and derogatory remarks, public criticism of staff, remarks as to integrity, abusive comments and statement as to motives and personalities.

2. Public Speakers
Members of the public have the right to attend City Council meetings and to address the City Council on specific agenda items and under the Public Comments section of the agenda. The right of the public to address the City Council includes their right to criticize the policies, procedures, programs, or services of the City, and the acts or omissions of the City Council members. Criticisms that do not relate to city business will not be tolerated.

17 While the City Council meeting is in session, all persons must preserve order and decorum. A person who addresses the City Council under a specific agenda item or under Public Comments may not engage in speech or conduct which is likely to provoke others to violent or riotous behavior, which disturbs the peace of the meeting by loud and unreasonable noise, which is outside of the Council’s jurisdiction, repetitive, or which disrupts, disturbs, or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of any City Council meeting.

The Mayor or other presiding officer shall request that a person who is breaching the rules of decorum cease such conduct. If, after receiving such a warning, the person persists in breaching the rules of decorum, the Mayor or other presiding officer may order the person to leave the City Council meeting. If such person does not leave, the Mayor or presiding officer may request any law enforcement officer who is on duty at the meeting as sergeant-at-arms to remove the person from the Council Chambers. In the event there is no one from law enforcement present, the Mayor or presiding officer may direct the City Manager to contact law enforcement.

D. DISCIPLINING A DISRUPTIVE MEMBER

If one member engages in disruptive behavior, it is the responsibility of the City Council to remind the disruptive member about their duties. The failure of the governing body to deal with a misbehaving member or commissioner can also have legal consequences for the locality. For example:

1. A City Council member or Commissioner that mistreats staff members by using inappropriate language, asking the staff member to perform personal tasks, hugging or touching staff in an inappropriate manner, etc. may be putting the locality at risk for a lawsuit alleging harassment or a hostile work environment. If the governing body does not take appropriate steps to avoid the appearance of agreement with the objectionable behavior of a fellow member or commissioner, the inappropriate behavior may be considered to have been sanctioned by the governing body.

2. A member that leaks a confidential legal opinion of the local government attorney can result in the loss of the attorney client privilege and with the loss of the attorney client privilege it is possible the opinion can be used in court against the locality. In order to protect the attorney client privilege the other members of the governing body need to take affirmative action against the member that leaked the opinion.

In some instances meeting one-on-one outside of a public meeting can rectify a misunderstanding or correct inappropriate behavior. The manner in which a situation is addressed may be on a case by case basis. If the behavior continues

18 or if the actions are more severe, the City Council may determine other methods of discipline.

The Mayor, with the approval by a majority of the Council, may remove a Commissioner from their seat. Similarly, a Council Member may be removed from his or her standing committee assignments as well as assignments to outside committees.

One of the most common forms of discipline is for the governing body to “censure” a fellow council member. A censure is a public statement condemning the member’s inappropriate behavior with the hopes of reforming him or her so that he or she will not behave in the same way again. Members can be censured for misconduct at meetings, failing to follow proper procedures, violating confidentiality, illegal or immoral conduct, absenteeism, lying, disloyalty, working against the organization, conspiracy, and violating other values that the Hanford City Council holds dear. With a consensus of the Council, a censure may be placed on a future agenda. Censures are then approved by a resolution.

E. NOISE IN THE LOBBY

Noise emanating from the lobby outside the City Council Chambers which disrupts City Council meetings shall not be permitted.

F. DISTRIBUTION OF LITERATURE AND OTHER MATERIALS IN CITY

COUNCIL CHAMBERS

No person, other than city staff, shall distribute flyers, leaflets, placards or other literature or circulate any petition within the City Council Chambers.

Flyers, leaflets, placards or literature may only be distributed to the Council by a member of the public under Public Comments, or by a project applicant/appellant pertaining to city business as may be referenced on the agenda, by approaching the City Clerk and requesting such material be distributed on their behalf.

Hand-held signs are permitted in the Council Chambers, but they cannot block the view of others in the audience or prevent the public from freely entering or exiting the room.

19 CHAPTER 4

PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES, AND OTHER ACCOLADES

A. PURPOSE

The purpose of this policy is to establish uniform procedures, criteria, and identify authority.

B. GUIDELINES

The following are basic guidelines for recognition.

Proclamations – Generally proclaims certain periods of time (days, weeks, or months) in honor of an event or activity. Proclamations also may recognize individuals for extraordinary contributions they have made to the community.

They contain several biographical or informational paragraphs. Examples include Fire Prevention Week, Arbor Day, and American Red Cross Month.

Certificates – Certificates are prepared in response to the type of recognition desired and are to express appreciation for exemplary service or performance to individuals, teams, or organizations.

Other Tokens of Appreciation – These items include various forms of Hanford memorabilia and are distributed at the discretion of individual City Council Members, City Clerk or City Manager. For example, the City Clerk is often contacted for lapel pins and forwards them to the requesting parties.

C. POLICY

It is the policy of the City of Hanford to recognize individuals and/or organizations for their outstanding performance, or honor special events and dates with proclamations, certificates, plaques, or other tokens of appreciation in accordance with the criteria set forth below.

1. Request for proclamations, certificates or plaques from City Council Members, city departments, residents, and local organizations must be submitted to the City Clerk’s office.

2. Requests should specify:

(a) Reason why recognition should be granted; and
(b) Information that will assist the Mayor, City Council, or City Manager in arriving at a decision.

3. Requests by individuals or organizations for proclamations or certificates of recognition/appreciation are subject to approval by the Mayor and City Manager. The Mayor and City Manager will determine if

20 it will be presented at a City Council meeting or will direct the City Clerk to forward the accolade to the recipient.

4. All requests for plaques, framed certificates, or custom gifts to visiting officials/dignitaries, elected officials, individuals or organizations shall be approved by the Mayor and City Manager.

5. Individual Council Members shall have the discretion to direct the City Clerk to prepare certificates (not framed) or another token of appreciation that he or she will personally present.

6. Requests for plaques, gifts or awards to city employees for dedicated service to the city shall be approved by the City Manager.

7. The Mayor and City Manager shall have the discretion to determine the appropriate type of honor for special or unusual circumstances that may arise and may warrant deviation from this policy.

21 CHAPTER 6

ADMINISTRATIVE RULES

A. RULES AND PROCEDURES ADMINISTRATION

1. Review of City Council Rules and Procedures – The Council will review and revise the Handbook of Rules and Procedures as needed.

2. Adherence to Rules and Procedures – During City Council discussions, deliberations and proceedings, the Mayor bears the primary responsibility to ensure that the City Council, staff and members of the public adhere to the Council’s adopted protocol.

3. City Attorney as Rules and Procedures Advisor – With the consensus of a majority of the Council, the City Attorney may be directed to interpret the City Council’s adopted Rules and Procedures and proposed changes.

4. B. CONFLICT WITH CITY MUNICIPAL CODE, ADMINISTRATION

POLICIES, STATE OR FEDERAL LAW

If there is any conflict contained hereinabove with the City Municipal Code, Administration Policies, State or Federal Law, such laws shall prevail.

PROFESSIONAL GOVERNANCE STANDARDS

The Individual Council Member
In California’s public governance system, a councilmember is a person elected or appointed to serve on a city council. Individual council members bring unique skills, values and beliefs to their council. In order to govern effectively, individual council members must work with each other and the city manager to ensure a high quality of living for all Hanford citizens.

TO BE EFFECTIVE, AN INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBER:

1. Keeps ongoing oversight and monitoring of City-adopted Goals and objectives as the primary focus.

2. Values, supports and advocates for all citizens throughout the City of Hanford.

3. Recognizes and respects differences of perspective and style on the council and among staff, and the community.

4. Acts with dignity, and understands the implications of personal demeanor and behavior.

5. Keeps confidential matters confidential.

6. Participates in professional development and commits the time and energy necessary to be an informed and effective leader.

7. Understands the distinctions between council and staff roles, and refrains from performing management functions that are the responsibility of the city manager and staff.

8. Understands that authority rests with the council as a whole and not with individuals.

2 PROFESSIONAL GOVERNANCE STANDARDS

The Council as a Governing Body
Councils, not individual council members, govern Cities. While understanding their separate roles, the council and city manager work together as a “governance team.” This team assumes collective responsibility for building unity and creating a positive organizational culture in order to govern effectively.

TO OPERATE EFFECTIVELY, THE COUNCIL MUST HAVE A UNITY OF PURPOSE AND:

1. Keep the city focused on quality of living for all Hanford citizens.

2. Communicate a common vision.

3. Operate openly, with trust and integrity.

4. Govern in a dignified and professional manner, treating everyone with civility and respect.

5. Govern within city-adopted policies, codes, ordinances and procedures.

6. Take collective responsibility for the council’s performance.

7. Periodically evaluate its own effectiveness.

8. Ensure opportunities for the diverse range of views in the community to inform council deliberations.

3 PROFESSIONAL GOVERNANCE STANDARDS

The Council’s Job
The primary responsibilities of the council are to set a direction for the city, provide a structure by establishing policies, ensure accountability and provide community leadership on behalf of the city and all its citizens. To fulfill these responsibilities, there are a number of specific jobs that effective councils must carry out.

EFFECTIVE COUNCILS:

1. Involve the community and staff in striving toward a common vision for the city focused on quality of living and responsive to the needs of all citizens.

2. Adopt, evaluate and update policies, codes and ordinances consistent with the law and the city’s vision and goals.

3. Maintain accountability by adopting annual goals and monitoring progress through measurable objectives.

4. Hire and support the city manager so that the vision, goals and policies of the city can be implemented.

5. Conduct regular and timely evaluations of the city manager based on the goals and performance of the city, and ensure that the city manager holds city personnel accountable.

6. Adopt a fiscally responsible budget based on the city’s vision and goals, and regularly monitor the fiscal health of the city.

7. Ensure that a safe, healthy and appropriate public environment is provided to all citizens.

8. Establish a framework for the city’s collective bargaining process and adopt responsible agreements.

9. Provide community leadership on city issues and advocate on behalf of Hanford citizens at the local, state and federal levels.

League of California Cities 2013 Spring Conference
Meritage Hotel, Napa

Dealing With Difficult Situations at City
Council Meetings: Legal and Practical
Considerations for City Attorneys

Friday, May 10, 2013 General Session; 10:30 – 11:15 a.m.

David Kahn, Renne Sloan Holtzman Sakai
Facilitated by: Michael Jenkins, City Attorney, Hermosa Beach, Rolling Hills and West Hollywood

League of California Cities 2013 Spring Conference
Meritage Hotel, Napa

Notes:______________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________

Dealings With Disruptions at Public
Meetings: Legal and Practical
Considerations for the Public Attorney

by
Randy Riddle, Esq.

David E. Kahn Esq.

350 SANSOME ST., SUITE 300
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94104
TELEPHONE: (415) 678-3800

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 The Legal Framework ......................................................................................................... 1 The Brown Act .................................................................................................................... 1 Other Statutory Provisions .................................................................................................. 3 First Amendment Principles Governing Legislative Body Meetings ................................. 4 General Considerations for Mitigating Disruptive Conduct ............................................... 7 Dealing With Specific Types of Disruptive Conduct By Members of the Public .............. 9 Practical Pointers ............................................................................................................... 13

1 of 13

DEALINGS WITH DISRUPTIONS AT PUBLIC MEETINGS:

LEGAL AND PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE PUBLIC ATTORNEY Introduction
The Ralph M. Brown Act,1 as well as court decisions applying broader constitutional principles, recognizes the general right of the public to attend and, to some extent participate in, meetings of local legislative bodies.2 Those meetings often involve controversial, divisive and highly charged issues that can result in disruptions by members of the public and, at times, by members of the legislative body itself. This article discusses both legal and practical considerations for resolving disruptions at public meetings, with a focus on the role of the public attorney.

The Legal Framework
A local legislative body seeking to address a disruption in its meetings must do so consistent with governing law, including the Brown Act, other state statutory provisions, and First Amendment considerations developed by federal and state courts. A public attorney plays a critical role in advising his or her clients about these legal constraints, and providing practical recommendations for conducting effective meetings with these legal considerations in mind.

The Brown Act
The primary body of law governing the conduct of meetings of local legislative bodies in California is the Brown Act. This discussion focuses on those provisions of the Brown Act that address participation by members in meetings of legislative bodies, and the authority of those bodies to address behavior that disrupts the ability of the body to conduct the public’s business.

For a more comprehensive guide to the Brown Act, refer to Open & Public IV: A Guide to the Ralph M. Brown Act, published by the League of California Cities. 3 1 Government Code section 54950 et seq.
2 The Brown Act applies to “legislative bodies” which is defined in Government Code section 54952. 3 This excellent publication is available at
http://www.cacities.org/UploadedFiles/LeagueInternet/86/86f75625-b7df-4fc8-ab60-de577631ef1e.pdf.

The Attorney General’s 2003 guide to the Brown Act, although now somewhat out of date, is another valuable source of information about this statutory scheme:
http://caag.state.ca.us/publications/2003_Main_BrownAct.pdf.

2 of 13

The Brown Act seeks to strike a balance between the right of the public to participate in meetings of their legislative bodies with the need for those bodies to conduct the public’s business effectively and productively. Of course, the extent to which the Brown Act strikes the proper balance is a matter for debate.

The Brown Act generally requires the public’s business to be conducted in open and public meetings, and that the public be provided prior notice of the matters that will be considered at a meeting.4 The Brown Act also recognizes the right of the public to participate in meetings by providing comment on agenda items, and on matters not on the agenda but within the subject matter jurisdiction of the body.5 Moreover, individuals, as well as members of the news media, may record public meetings.6
The Brown Act specifically provides that a legislative body may not “prohibit public criticism of the policies, procedures, programs, or services of the agency, or of the acts or omissions of the legislative body.”7 Federal courts, employing a First Amendment analysis, have similarly invalidated rules aimed at shielding public employees and officials from public criticism at meetings.8
The Brown Act authorizes legislative bodies to adopt reasonable regulations on public participation. This authority includes adopting regulations on public testimony.9 Such regulations must be enforced fairly and without regard to the viewpoint of the speaker.

Similarly, the body may regulate the recording or broadcast of the meeting upon making a

4 Government Code §§ 54953 and 54954.
5 Government Code § 54954.3; see Galbiso v. Orosi Public Utility Dist. (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 1063, 1075 (The Brown Act’s objectives “include facilitating participation in local government decisions. . . . .”).
6 Government Code § 54953.3.
7 Government Code § 54953.3.
8 See Baca v. Moreno Valley Unified School Dist. (C.D. Cal. 1996) 936 F.Supp. 719; Leventhal v. Vista Unified School Dist. (S.D. Cal. 1997) 973 F.Supp. 951.
9 Government Code § 54953.3.

3 of 13

finding that the noise, illumination, or obstruction of view from the recording would constitute a persistent disruption of the proceedings.10
Significantly, the Brown Act also expressly authorizes the legislative body to remove from a meeting those persons who willfully interrupt the proceedings.11 If order still cannot be restored, the legislative body may order that the room be cleared. The legislative body must allow members of the news media who have not participated in the disturbance to remain in the meeting room and observe the meeting. The legislative body may establish a process to permit individuals not responsible for the disturbance to reenter the meeting room.12 Other Statutory Provisions
Independently of the Brown Act, California Penal Code section 403 makes it a misdemeanor to willfully disturb or break up a lawful assembly or meeting unless the person has legal authority to do so. McMahon v. Albany Unified School District13 discusses the application of this statute.

In McMahon, the plaintiff dumped bags of garbage on the floor during a school board meeting.

He was arrested for violating section 403, and sued for unlawful arrest. The court concluded that the plaintiff's arrest was proper because he initially had been warned not to dump the trash, and the body was unable to proceed with the meeting because of plaintiff's conduct. As the court explained, absent arresting the plaintiff, “[e]ither the meeting would have been further delayed at some point while McMahon picked up the garbage or other speakers would have had to stand near the trash in order to address the board and audience members would have been forced to peer over a mound of garbage in order to watch a public body perform its duty.”14 Accordingly, the court concluded, the trash dumping did not merely “disturb the sensibilities” of the board members. Rather, it actually impaired the ability of the body to effectively conduct its meeting.

Finally, California Government Code section 36813 – which is not part of the Brown Act – authorizes a city council to address disruptions by members of the council. That provision states

10 Government Code §§ 54953.5 and 54953.6.
11 Government Code § 54957.9.
12 Ibid.
13 (2002) 104 Cal.App,4th 1275.
14 Id. at 1289.

4 of 13

that a city council “may punish a member or other person for disorderly behavior at a meeting.” In exercising this authority, the council must act within constitutional constraints.15 First Amendment Principles Governing Legislative Body Meetings Providing advice to a body about its ability to address disruptions of its meetings would be difficult enough if the governing law consisted solely of these state statutory provisions. Courts, however, have concluded that a city council meeting is a limited public forum for purposes of First Amendment analysis.16 As the Ninth Circuit has explained, “[c]itizens have an enormous first amendment interest in directing speech about public issues to those who govern their city.”17 Accordingly, the provisions of the Brown Act and Penal Code section 403 authorizing the legislative body to address disruptions must be implemented consistent with First Amendment principles.

In White v. City of Norwalk, the Ninth Circuit Court upheld a city ordinance that authorized the city council to order removed individuals who uttered “personal, impertinent, slanderous or profane” remarks if the remarks “disrupted, disturbed, or otherwise impeded” the conduct of the meetings. The court explained that the presiding officer should not rule speech out of order “simply because he disagrees with it, or because it employs words he does not like.” 18 The court
explained, however, that under the challenged ordinance, “[s]peakers are subject to restriction only when their speech ‘disrupts, disturbs or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of the Council meeting.’ So limited, we cannot say that the ordinance on its face is substantially and fatally overbroad.”19 More specifically, the court stated:

A speaker may disrupt a Council meeting by speaking too long, by being unduly repetitious, or by extended discussion of
irrelevancies. The meeting is disrupted because the Council is prevented from accomplishing its business in a reasonably efficient

15 See Nevens v. City of Chino (1965) 233 Cal.App.2d 775, 778 (in invalidating prohibition on tape recording city council meetings, court explained that rules adopted under section 36813 cannot be “too arbitrary and capricious, too restrictive and unreasonable.”). 16 White v. City of Norwalk (9th Cir. 1990) 900 F.2d 1421, 1425. 17 Ibid.
18 Ibid.
19 Ibid.

5 of 13

manner. Indeed, such conduct may interfere with the rights of other speakers.

Of course the point at which speech becomes unduly repetitious or largely irrelevant is not mathematically determinable. The role of a moderator involves a great deal of discretion. Undoubtedly, abuses can occur, as when a moderator rules speech out of order simply because he disagrees with it, or because it employs words he does not like. But no such abuses are written into Norwalk’s ordinance, as the City and we interpret it. Speakers are subject to restriction only when their speech ‘disrupts, disturbs or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of the Council meeting.’ So limited, we cannot say that the ordinance on its face is substantially and fatally overbroad.
20 In Norse v. City of Santa Cruz,21 the Ninth Circuit explained that city councils may “regulate not only the time, place, and manner of speech in a limited public forum, but also the content of speech – as long as content-based regulations are viewpoint neutral and enforced that way.”22 Indeed, the city council may “close an open meeting by declaring that the public has no First Amendment right whatsoever once the public comment period has closed.”23

20 Ibid.; see also Steinburg v. Chesterfield County Planning Comm’n (4th Cir. 2008) 527 F.3d 377, 384- 385 (rejecting First Amendment challenge to removal of individual for failing to address matters relevant to the subject of the meeting); Rowe v. City of Cocoa (11th Cir. 2004) 358 F.3d 800, 803 (“As a limited public forum, a city council meeting is not open for endless public commentary speech but instead is simply a limited platform to discuss the topic at hand”); Eichenlaub v. Township of Indiana (3d Cir. 2004) 385 F.3d 274, 281 (body may remove a “repetitive and truculent” speaker in order to prevent ‘badgering’ and ‘constant interruptions.”); Galena v. Leone 199 (3d Cir. 2011) 638 F.3d 186 (member of the public who continues to interrupt meeting by making “objections” may be removed from meeting); (Jones v.

Heyman (11th Cir. 1989) 888 F.2d 1328, 1329 (presiding officer may require that speakers adhere to the agenda); Scroggins v. City of Topeka, Kansas (D. Kan. 1998) 2 F.Supp.2d 1362 (upholding a viewpoint neutral city council rule prohibiting personal attacks); but see Richard v. City of Pasadena (C.D. Cal. 1995) 889 F.Supp. 384 (invalidating rule requiring members of the city council “[t]o perform responsibilities in a manner that is efficient, courteous, responsive and impartial” on the ground that it was unconstitutionally vague and did not require that the regulated conduct be disruptive); see generally But It’s My Turn to Speak! When Can Unruly Speakers at Public Hearings Be Forced to Leave or Be Quiet (2009) 41 Urb.Law 579.
21 (9th Cir. 2010) 629 F.3d 966.
22 Id. at 975.
23 Ibid.

6 of 13

The Norse court emphasized, however, that city councils may not “extinguish all First Amendment rights” at a public meeting.24 For example, a member of the public may not be ordered removed from the meeting merely for making an inflammatory gesture, such as a “Nazi salute,” unless this conduct was itself actually disruptive.25 The court in Norse emphasized that city councils are not free to define “disruption” in whatever manner they choose. Rather, the court explained that “[a]ctual disruption means actual disruption. It does not mean constructive disruption, technical disruption, virtual disruption, nunc pro tunc26 disruption, or imaginary disruption.”27
The Ninth Circuit recently emphasized the requirement that both the city rules of order regulating conduct at public meetings – and the actual application of those rules – be limited to conduct that is actually disruptive, at least to the extent that the person is to be removed from the meeting for the conduct.28 Because the challenged ordinance regulating “insolent” conduct during a meeting could not be narrowly construed to apply only when the “insolent” conduct actually disrupted the meeting, the court invalidated that provision of the ordinance.29 In applying rules prohibiting disruptions of meetings, the requirement of viewpoint neutrality is critically important. Courts have invalidated orders that individuals be removed from meetings where the courts concluded that the actions were based on the viewpoints of the speakers, or speech offended the sensibilities of the public officials. 30 California courts have also applied First Amendment principles to limit the circumstances in which a body may order a member of the public removed from a meeting for behavior the body

24 Id. at 975-976.
25 Id. at 976; see also Leonard v. Robinson (6th Cir. 2007) 477 F.3d 347, 352 (single utterance of obscenity did not constitute disruption sufficient to justify individual’s removal from meeting). 26 I.e., “disruption” that is determined retroactively. 27 Id. at 976.
28 Acosta v. City of Costa Mesa (9th Cir. 2012) 694 F.3d 960, 971-972. 29 Ibid. The court, however, severed that provision from the ordinance to save it from complete invalidation. See id. at 977-978.
30 Norse, supra, 629 F.3d at 976; see also Monteiro v. City of Elizabeth (3d Cir. 2006) 436 F.3d 397; Musso v. Hourigan (2d Cir. 1988) 836 F.2d 736, 739; Kindt v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd. (9th Cir. 1995) 67 F.3d 266, 270-71 (“[L]imitations on speech at meetings must be reasonable and viewpoint neutral. . . .”).

7 of 13

deems to be disruptive. In re Kay31 involved the scope of Penal Code section 403. The court recognized that the orderly conduct of public meetings protects the right to free speech because “[f]reedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all.”32 The court concluded, however, that Penal Code section 403 does not “grant to the police a ‘roving commission’ to enforce Robert’s Rules of Order.”33 Accordingly, the court held that section 403 must be limited to those situations where a member of the public substantially impairs the conduct of the meeting by intentionally committing acts in violation of implicit customs or usages or of explicit rules for governance of the meeting, of which he knew, or as a reasonable man should have known.” 34 The court expressly cautioned
that, “[i]f any audience participation is permitted the rules regulating who may speak cannot be used to silence a participant merely because his views happen to be unpopular with the audience or with the government sponsors of the meeting.”35
General Considerations for Mitigating Disruptive Conduct With these legal principles in mind, and before discussing specific disruptive situations, we will provide some general thoughts on steps that can be taken to prevent or reduce the degree of disruption at public meetings, based on our experience.

1. Encourage the Adoption of Council Rules That Clarify the Types of Behavior Deemed Disruptive.

Having specific rules that identify the types of conduct deemed disruptive, rather than have this issue addressed through ad hoc rulings, is a critical first step. In adopting your rules, look to rules that have been upheld by courts, such as those challenged in White v. City of Norwalk.

Consistent with Norwalk and Norse, those rules should make clear that they prohibit only behavior that actually disrupts the meeting, and that they will be applied in a viewpoint neutral manner.

31 (1970) 1 Cal.3d 930.
32 Id. at 941.
33 Ibid.
34 Id. at 943.
35 Id. at 943, fn.10.

8 of 13

2. If a Highly Charged Issue is on the Agenda, Encourage the Presiding Officer to Explain These Rules, and How They Will Be Applied.

We think that this practice serves multiple purposes. First, it reminds the presiding officer and other council members of how disruptions must be handled, and that the rules must be applied in an even-handed manner. Second, it lets the audience know at the outset that rules prohibit disruptions, and what the consequences will be if someone does choose to actually disrupt the meeting. Third, should someone be removed from the meeting, and later challenge the removal in court, it will assist in the defense of the action.

3. Meet With the Presiding Officer, and if Appropriate a Police Department Representative, Before the Meeting to Ensure That Everyone is on the Same Page About How Disruptions Will Be Handled.

In many cities, a police officer serves as the sergeant-at-arms responsible for carrying out the directives of the presiding officer, or city council. In addition, to the extent that a member of the audience engages in conduct that violates Penal Code section 403, police officers may be involved in arresting an individual for violating that section. We have found that it is very helpful to meet with the presiding officer, police chief or designee, and, if appropriate, the city manager to ensure that everyone has the same understanding and expectations about the circumstances and process that would lead to a member of the audience being removed, and perhaps cited for violating Penal Code section 403. For example, everyone should be on the same page about the need for the challenged conduct to be actually disruptive, that actions to address such conduct be done even-handedly without reference to the viewpoint of the member of the public, and the interaction between the presiding officer and police officer or other sergeant-at-arms.

4. Encourage the Presiding Officer to Provide at Least One Warning Before Ordering a Disruptive Individual from the Meeting Room.

Given the rights of the public under the Brown Act and First Amendment, it is our view that except in the most extreme cases, the presiding officer should clearly warn the individual that his or her conduct is actually disrupting the meeting, and request that it cease, before taking action to have the individual removed from the meeting room.

9 of 13

5. Encourage the Agenda to Be Organized in the Manner Most Likely to Ensure that the Critical Business of the Council Can Be Completed Even if Disruptions Are Anticipated With Respect to a Particular Agenda Item.

This is a practical, rather than legal consideration, and must be assessed on a case-by-case basis.

If there are important, but not controversial, matters on the same agenda as a highly charged item, it may be best to have the council address those matters early in the meeting, before tensions rise, nerves fray, and the decision-making process becomes impaired.

6. Encourage All of Your Clients to Remain Calm and Focused, and Provide an Example Through Your Own Demeanor.

Again, this is a practical consideration, but an important one. It has been our experience that the public feeds off of rancor and discord among members of the council. There are certainly limits as to what a city attorney can do when tempers flare, but addressing legal questions that arise in a calm and assured manner may help the situation.

Dealing With Specific Types of Disruptive Conduct By Members of the Public We cannot, of course, address every type of disruption that might occur during a public meeting.

Nevertheless, we will now discuss types of disruption that we have seen arise with some frequency, offer some suggestions for addressing them, and hopefully spark further suggestions at the conference discussion of this topic, and on the listserv. One important role the public attorney can play, apart from providing guidance to the council and presiding officer “on the fly” when disruptions occur, is to discuss these more common types of disruptions with new presiding officers, and advise the officers of the legal constraints under which they must operate.

1. A Speaker Refuses to Leave the Microphone After His or Her Speaking Time Has Expired.

In our experience, this is one of the most common types of “disruptions” that can occur during a council meeting. The Ninth Circuit has identified this type of conduct as one that can result in an actual disruption, and one that is within the discretion of the presiding officer to address. 36 Nonetheless, this is the quintessential example of a situation where at least one warning should be issued before any effort is made to remove the speaker for disrupting the meeting. We have

36 White v. City of Norwalk, supra, 900 F.2d at 1425.

10 of 13

found that it can be effective to provide to the city clerk – who is likely to viewed as more impartial than an elected presiding officer – the ability to turn off the microphone (if one is used) once the person has been warned that his or her speaking time has expired.

This is a situation where enforcing the rule in an even-handed is extremely important. If the audience senses that the presiding officer is not enforcing the time limits against speakers on one side of an issue, the ability to enforce the time limits can be undermined, and it can lead to unruly behavior by others in the audience.

2. Speakers Insist on Addressing Matters Clearly Not Relevant to the Agenda Item.

This type of “disturbance” can be a difficult one to properly police. It can arise in different ways. First, a speaker may use his time to comment on something that is indisputably irrelevant to the specific agenda item. For example, in connection with an item to declare June as City Attorney Month, a speaker uses his time to talk about the need to fix potholes on Main Street.

Second, a speaker may seek to speak during general public comment about a specific item on that agenda but that the council has not yet reached, and that will have its own time set aside for public comment. Third, a speaker may attempt to discuss a subject that is not on the agenda, nor within the subject matter jurisdiction of the city council, such as using his time to advertise for sale his used Subaru.

Again, the approach to be used depends on the extent of the problem caused by this practice. If there are thirty items on the agenda, and it becomes apparent that the individual is committed to speaking about the same clearly irrelevant subject on each of those items, then after a clear warning to the individual, ordering him or her removed may be appropriate. In more isolated cases, we believe that the more practical solution is encourage the person to address the agenda item, and leave it at that. Apart from the fact that it is unlikely that a single isolated instance will rise to the level of an actual disruption, is likely to take more time to remedy the problem than it would be hear the person out.

3. Verbal Disruptions from the Audience
A council’s consideration of a particularly controversial matter can lead to heated emotions on both sides of the issue. At times these emotions can manifest themselves in the form of outbursts

11 of 13

from the audience, either while individuals are providing public comment, or during the council’s deliberation of the issue.

Addressing this species of disruption depends on how widespread, noisy and continuous the outbursts are. If individual members of the audience causing the actual disturbance can be identified – and if warnings are not effective in quieting the outbursts – those specific individuals may removed. If the outbursts come from a significant portion of the audience, removing individuals is unlikely to be effective, and may even exacerbate the problem with the remaining audience members. Instead, following warnings, the more practical and effective practice would be to call a brief recess. In addition to giving the crowd an opportunity to cool off, it also provides an opportunity to confer with the presiding officer, city manager and police representative about next steps in the event the nature of the outbursts constitute an actual disturbance of the meeting.

And that brings us to the “nuclear” option: ordering that the room be cleared. We have never seen that option exercised, and there are compelling reasons – legal, political and practical – for choosing not to resort to an option that could result in photos in the next day’s newspaper of police officers ushering folks out of a public meeting. We believe that almost any alternative is preferable – including threatening the use of the option, or continuing the matter to later in the meeting or to some future meeting.

If the option is to be exercised, strict adherence to the statutory requirement – including allowing the press back in and determining whether others should be allowed in – should be followed.

You may also wish to consider allowing individuals back in one at a time to provide public comments, and broadcasting the audio of the meeting to an area where those who have been removed can listen, assuming the availability of the necessary technology.

4. When It’s a Council Member Who is Difficult
Council meetings are difficult enough for a City Attorney when it is members of the public that engage in belligerent and disruptive behavior. The issues in dealing with disruptive behavior are compounded when it is a member of the City Council or a city board or commission who is misbehaving or disrupting the meeting by refusing to comply with the mayor’s request for order

12 of 13

or by making ad hominem personal attacks or accusations involving other Council members or staff.

In addition to the First Amendment rights that all citizens speaking at public meetings have, as discussed above, elected officials have the additional First Amendment protection arising from holding public office. In Carter v. Commission on Qualifications of Judicial Appointments,37 the court stated that “the right to hold public office, either by election or appointment, is one of the valuable rights of citizenship.”
38 Restrictions on the First Amendment rights of elected and appointed officials is likely subject to more stringent review than those of non-elected citizens.39 In the case involving the refusal of the Georgia House of Representatives to seat Julian Bond because of his statements on the Vietnam draft, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that “the manifest function of the First Amendment in a representative government requires that legislators be given the widest latitude to express their views on issues of policy.”40 In Miller v. Town of Hull,41 the First Circuit affirmed a 42 U.S.C section 1983 jury verdict, including punitive damages, against a town council that attempted to remove members of an appointed city redevelopment authority based on the authority’s exercise of First Amendment rights in supporting a subsidized housing project that the town council opposed.

In addition, as previously noted, the Brown Act in Government Code section 54954.3 protects public criticism of the agency:

The legislative body of a local agency shall not prohibit public criticism of the policies, procedures, programs, or services of the agency, or of the acts or omissions of the legislative body. Nothing in this subdivision shall confer any privilege or protection for expression beyond that otherwise provided by law.

It follows that a city attorney must exercise great caution in advising that a council member or board member is disruptive and subject to removal from a public meeting. Absent clear behavior that is threatening to public safety or involves physical conduct that disrupts a meeting, a court is

37 (1939) 14 Cal.2d 179.
38 Id. at 182.
39 See Huntley v. Public Util. Com. (1968) 69 Cal. 2d 67. 40 Bond v. Floyd (1966) 385 U.S. 116, 135-136.
41 (1st Cir. 1989) 878 F. 2d 523.

13 of 13

likely to find issues of fact precluding summary judgment and requiring an evidentiary showing of the constitutional basis for the exclusion.

For example, in Vacca v. Barletta,42 acting chair Barletta told Vacca, a member of the school board, that he would not continue with a “screaming debate” where Vacca was “aggressively challenging” the school superintendent. Barletta called a recess, and shortly after the meeting resumed three police officers physically dragged the protesting Mr. Vacca from his seat, handcuffed him, and took him to the police station for the duration of the meeting. Good drama, but bad decision, as the summary judgment for Barletta was reversed by the First Circuit based on disputed facts on whether Vacca’s removal was content-neutral for disruption or for constitutionally protected speech. It should be noted that the case does not say that Barletta acted on the advice of the board’s counsel, who perhaps was not present and did not have the chance to counsel his client.

Practical Pointers
• Be extremely cautious in advising that an elected Council member can be removed or excluded from a public meeting, as absent compelling evidence on a tape of the meeting it will be setting the Council member up to claim he/she is being targeted for First Amendment expression, is likely to aggravate rather than calm the situation in the long term, and may result in a lawsuit against the agency and mayor claiming violation of federal constitutional rights.
• If a meeting becomes unruly or difficult, a recess is often a good way to provide a short respite from the arguing and accusations and to provide the opportunity for Council members to cool down and hopefully return as adults to the podium. • When a Councilmember continues to return to points already made and wants to speak multiple times and at length on the same issues, the parliamentary procedure motion to end debate and call the question is an effective method to move the item along.

42 (1st Cir. 1991) 933 F. 2d 31.

League of California Cities 2013 Spring Conference
Meritage Hotel, Napa

This page left intentionally blank.

March 1, 2007 Legal Notes Melanie M. PoturicaDavid A. Urban A City Council Member’s Role With
Respect to Individual City Employees
Melanie M. Poturica is managing partner at the law firm of Liebert Cassidy Whitmore in Los Angeles, and can be reached at [email protected]. David A. Urban is an attorney with the firm, and can be reached at [email protected].

In the public eye, city council members are at the top of the city’s government structure, presiding over large and small bureaucracies that may include police officers, firefighters and many other types of employees charged with serving the public interest. Accordingly, when residents are aggrieved by or interested in the conduct of a particular employee, they may view their council member as that employee’s ultimate “boss” or de facto CEO of the city, who can cause the employee to be disciplined or even terminated, and who could certainly take such lesser actions as communicating with the employee’s direct supervisor or reviewing the employee’s personnel file for information relevant to the issue.

City councils often have appointing authority over the city’s highest officials, such as the city manager and city attorney. But otherwise, individual council members and the council as a body have virtually no role with regard to individual city employees. In fact, a council member’s role with respect to such employees probably has more in common with that of a city resident (who is an interested “outsider” looking at the city employment structure) than with that of a private company’s CEO.

This article describes several legal reasons why city council members’ roles with regard to individual employees have such substantial limitations and includes some practical approaches for dealing with individual employees.

WHY A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER’S ROLE IS SO LIMITED
City council members are meant to act as part of the council, not individually. A primary reason why council members have virtually no role with regard to individual city employees is that applicable law provides that council members will act as a body, not as individuals. Indeed, the law requires that, with limited exceptions, the council conduct city business only through duly convened meetings “in full view of the public.”1 Thus, when an individual city council member takes unilateral action, his or her conduct may well lose the sanction of the law. The council member may then lose certain protections and immunities from liability, and his or her actions may more easily be rescinded or disputed.2

Legislative immunity is limited. Second, city council members may well not have legislative immunity with regard to actions toward individual employees. This is particularly true if the council member acts unilaterally. Typically, when a city council member acts as a legislator, he or she has absolute immunity. But that immunity can be lost when the legislator takes actions outside the “sphere of legitimate legislative activity.”3 Accordingly, if a council member takes any unilateral actions concerning an individual employee, he or she could risk loss of legislative immunity. Even actions taken collectively with the full council might conceivably lack immunity if they relate to specific individuals instead of furthering general city policy.

Under California law, city council members can be liable for invasion of privacy, among other things. Third, the threat of liability presents another factor that limits council member roles toward individual employees. One potential type of liability is for invasion of privacy. In one case, Braun v. City of Taft, a city council member was subject to censure by the council for removing documents from a city employee’s personnel file and revealing them to the press.

Although the court ultimately determined that the particular documents were public records that could legally be disclosed, the court remanded the case to the council to allow it to decide whether the member should suffer censure for other reasons. These possible reasons included his “unilateral decision regarding [the documents’] suitability for disclosure.”4 Other courts have articulated that public employees can have limited privacy rights in their personnel files.5 Employees can thus argue that improper review and/or disclosure should result in personal liability for invasion of privacy.6
Other officials, such as city managers, are charged with overseeing city employees. Fourth, council member actions with regard to individual employees may be considered suspect because other high level city officials are officially charged with supervising and/or overseeing individual employees. Most cities appoint city managers to provide overall supervision to a city’s human resources function. Because a designated official already has this responsibility, there should be little need for city council members to become involved with individual employees.7

PRACTICALADVICEFORDEALINGWITHINDIVIDUALEMPLOYEES

PRACTICAL ADVICE FOR DEALING WITH INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYEES
Refrain from doing so, unless it is a part of one’s obligations to the city. The most prudent course for a city council member is to refrain from taking action or otherwise becoming involved in any supervisory role, with respect to individual city employees.

Proceed as part of properly convened city council meetings and not individually. If a council member must become involved in decisions with respect to an individual employee, the member should not act unilaterally but should instead act as part of the council. The member should also act pursuant to the requisite formalities that will ensure legislative immunity applies.

The city manager or other appropriate city employee should interface with employees. Tasks such as reviewing employee personnel files, gathering information from supervisors and providing instruction as to particular employees should be done by the city manager or other official charged with overseeing the city’s employment structure. This is true even for matters of public interest. If city residents object to the conduct of particular employees, the council can respond by asking the city manager to investigate and take appropriate action regarding the objections. For example, in a small city experiencing resident complaints about rude police officers, the council should itself refrain from taking direct action as to those officers. Instead, it can ask the city manager to investigate and respond to the issue globally. The city manager can then, as part of his or her comprehensive response, take appropriate employment action as to the officers in question.

Comply with the Brown Act. The Ralph M. Brown Act provides that certain official bodies, including city councils, may only act through duly called and regularly held meetings that are open to the public. A city council can conduct closed meetings to discuss certain personnel matters. These include meetings in which the council discusses the “appointment, employment, evaluation of performance, discipline, or dismissal of a public employee …”8 This closed meeting exception, however, may apply only to the council’s consideration of employees over whom the council has appointing authority (for example, city managers, city attorneys and others). A California attorney general opinion describes that the closed meeting exception does not apply to a body’s consideration of an employee over whom it does not have

appointing authority.9 Lack of compliance with the Brown Act may lead to adverse legal consequences, which include voiding the actions that the council takes.

Consult with legal counsel. These issues can be complex. Also, situations where council members must take a role with regard to city employees will be rare. Council members should obtain legal advice when such circumstances arise to ensure they undertake their role appropriately.

FOOTNOTES:
[1] Wolfe v. City of Fremont, 144 Cal. App. 4th 533, 541, 543 (2006); see also Moreno v. King, 127 Cal. App. 4th 17, 20 (2005) (city council’s termination of finance director was ineffective because of failure strictly to comply with notice provisions of Brown Act). [2] See Braun v. City of Taft, 154 Cal. App. 3d 332, 338-40, 347-48 (1984) (considering council member’s censure for unilaterally disclosing personnel records to the public). [3] Bogan v. Scott-Harris, 523 U.S. 44, 54, 118 S. Ct. 966, 140 L.Ed.2d 79 (1998) (council members have immunity from civil rights liability for all actions taken “in the sphere of legitimate legislative activity”). For legislative immunity under federal law, courts apply a four- part test: “(1) whether the act involves ad hoc decision-making, or the formulation of policy; (2) whether the act applies to a few individuals, or to the public at large; (3) whether the act is formally legislative in character; and (4) whether it bears all the hallmarks of traditional legislation.” Kaahumanu v. County of Maui, 315 F.3d 1215, 1220 (9th Cir. 2003). “Whether an act is legislative turns on the nature of the act, rather than on the motive or intent of the official performing it.”Bogan, 523 U.S. at 54.
[4] Braun, 154 Cal. App. 3d at 338-40, 347-48.
[5] Id. at 346-48.
[6] See Hill v. National Collegiate Athletic Assn., 7 Cal. 4th 1, 35-38 (1994).

[7] Indeed, at least one Attorney General Opinion describes that the Brown Act closed meeting exception does not apply to a body’s discussion of employees over whom the body does not have appointing authority.See 85 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 77 (2002). This supports the position that a council should delegate decision-making over such employees, since it would otherwise have to consider their performance in open session.
[8] Cal. Gov. Code § 54957(b)(1).
[9] 85 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 77 (2002).

ABOUT LEGAL NOTES
This column is provided as general information and not as legal advice. The law is constantly evolving, and attorneys can and do disagree about what the law requires. Local agencies interested in determining how the law applies in a particular situation should consult their local agency attorneys.

This article appears in the March 2007 issue of Western City Did you like what you read here? Subscribe to Western City

14.B.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 4/1/2025 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Approval of the Settlement Agreement with Jason Stingley and Authorization for staff to take all necessary actions to carry out the terms of the settlement.

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council approve the Settlement Agreement with Jason Stingley and direct staff to take all necessary action to carry out the terms of the settlement.

Recommended Motion: I move to: (i) approve the Settlement Agreement regarding the lawsuit filed against the City by Jason Stingley; (ii) authorize and direct the City Manager to execute the Settlement Agreement on the City’s behalf; and (iii) and authorize and direct the City Manager to carry out the terms of Settlement Agreement.

BACKGROUND:

Prior to the filing of this action, Plaintiff Jason Isaiah Stingley (hereafter also referred to as “Stingley”) filed a complaint with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (“DFEH”). He received a “Right-to-Sue” letter from the DFEH before the filing of his civil complaint in Kings County Superior Court.

City of Hanford (hereafter also referred to as “City”), City of Hanford Police Department (the “Department”), Parker Sever (“Sever”), in his individual and official capacity, Jeff Davis (“Davis”), and Stephanie Huddleston (“Huddleston”), in their individual capacities (collectively hereafter, “Defendants”).

Stingley was hired by the Hanford Police Department on or about July 5, 2006. He was employed by the Department until January 3, 2022. Stingley claimed he was subjected to a prolonged pattern of racial discrimination, harassment, and retaliation, culminating in his resignation on December 20, 2021.

The City’s legal counsel worked closely with PRISM before and during Mediation. The parties attended mediation on March 17, 2025, with a proposed settlement agreement for the amount of $287,500.00, which has been approved by PRISM. It is recommended that the City Council approve the settlement as outlined above. The full settlement agreement is attached hereto.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The City’s self-insured retention amount is $100,000.00, and PRISM will pay the portion of the settlement, fees, and costs in this matter that exceed $100,000.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. 2025.03.18 Settlement Agreement - Stingley

1 GENERAL RELEASE AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

THIS GENERAL RELEASE AND AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made by JASON STINGLEY (“Stingley”) and the C ITY OF HANFORD (“City”), CITY OF HANFORD POLICE DEP ARTMENT , P ARKER SEVER, In His Individual and Official Capacity; JEFF DA VIS, In His Individual Capacity; STEPHANIE HUDDLESTON, In Her Individual Capacity, and any and all employees, agents, personnel, officers or elected officials who are now or have been employed by or served for the CITY OF HANFORD, whether known or unknown and whether or not involved in the incident or named in the suit for damages referred to below, all of which entities and persons are hereinafter referred to as "Defendants." Defendants and Stingley are collectively referred to as “Parties” herein.

RECITALS
WHEREAS, Stingley filed a Complaint in the United States District Court, Eastern District, on January 20, 2023 , which complaint was amended on March 7, 2023 and again on June 27, 2023, case number 1:23-cv-00089-KES-BAM alleging: (1) Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection/Hostile Work Environment in Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, (2) Retaliation for Exercising First Amendment Right To Free Speech In Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, (3) Municipal Liability in Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, (4) Employment Discrimination in Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981, (5) Disparate Treatment In Violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, (6) Racial Discrimination (Hostile Work Environment) in Violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, (7) Retaliation in Violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act , (8) Discrimination on the Basis of Race in Violation of Cal. Gov’t Code §12940(k), (9) Failure to Prevent Race Discrimination in Violation of Cal. Gov’t Code §12940(k), (10) Hostile Work Environment on the Basis of Race in Violation of Cal. Gov’t Code §12940(J)(1), (11) Retaliation in Violation of Cal. Gov’t Code § 1102.5(b), (12) Violation of Cal. Gov’t § 8547 (“Whistleblower Protection Act ”), (13) Interference with Rights in Violation of Cal. Civ. Code 52.1 (Bane Act), (14) Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (“Complaint”);
WHEREAS, Stingley and Defendants desire to enter into this Agreement so as to provide for payment in full settlement and discharge of all causes of action alleged in the Complaint which Stingley has or may have against Defendants; WHEREAS, by virtue of negotiating, entering into and/or performing the terms of this Agreement, Stingley hereto agrees and acknowledges that each other party does not make any admission of any wrongdoing or fault, and that each party expressly denies any and all allegations of liability, fault, and wrongdoing. This settlement, and the execution and performance of this Agreement is the result of the negotiated compromise of disputed claims, and is not intended to be and shall not be a finding or admission of any liability , fault, or wrongdoing, nor an admission of, or finding with respect to, any disputed fact or legal contention.

2 WHEREAS, the Parties wish to settle the above- entitled action without further litigation.

NOW, THEREFORE it is hereby agreed by and between the Parties:

1. ACTIONS. The Parties, in consideration of the promises made herein, agree as follows:

a. Within 30 days of the City Council of the City of Hanford’s approval of this Agreement:
i. City agrees to pay a total sum of Two Hundred Eighty-Seven Thousand Five Hundred Dollars and Zero Cents ($287, 500.00) (“Settlement Payment”).
ii. City agrees that the Settlement Payment , for physical, mental, and emotional damages, will be paid by check payable to the “Trust Account of Bonner Law for Jason Stingley ” and will be delivered to Bonner Law.
iii. Said payment will fully and finally settle all of Stingley’ claims against City for damages, attorneys’ fees, costs, expenses, and interest arising from and related to this litigation.

b. Stingley agrees to dismiss with prejudice his Complaint in the above- captioned matter within 2 days of receipt of the Settlement Payment.

2. RELEASE. Stingley hereby releases and forever discharges Defendants and the City’s current and former employees, agents, personnel, officers or elected officials in the above referenced action, from any and all manner of action, claims, demands, grievances, causes of action, suits, debts, dues, contracts, agreements, accounts, judgments, damages and liabilities of any nature whatsoever, whether in law or in equity, whether or not now known, suspected or claimed, as of the effective date of this Agreement. This wavier includes but is not limited to personnel grievances, declaratory relief actions and suits in equity, claims for personal injuries, harassment, retaliation, constructive discharge, wrongful termination, disability, violations of the Fair Employment and Housing Act of California and 42 USCA § 2000( e) and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1983, and 1985, violations of the Americans With Disabilities Act, the Older Workers' Benefits Protection Act, hostile work environment, discrimination, violations of civil rights, and any California or United States Constitutional claims, arising out of the incident referred to and described in the allegations of any administrative charge, as well as any pleadings on file in the aforementioned proceedings, which arise prior to the date of this Agreement. This Agreement shall be a fully binding and complete settlement between Stingley and Defendants and the liability insurance carriers for Defendants.

3 Stingley agrees that he has accepted the Settlement Payment specified herein as a complete compromise of matters involving disputed issues of law and fact. Stingley accepts payment of the Settlement Payment as a full and final resolution in settlement of all claims arising from or in any way connected with the subject matter of this Agreement.

3. CIVIL CODE § 1542 WAIVER . In signing this Agreement, Stingley hereby waives the provisions of Civil Code section 1542, which provides as follows:

A general release does not extend to claims that the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release and that, if known by him or her, would have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor or released party.

Stingley understands he may have sustained damages which have not manifested themselves and which are presently unknown or unanticipated, but nevertheless, Stingley , in consideration of this settlement, deliberately intends to and does hereby release and waive these possible future claims arising out of the incident referred to and described in the pleadings on file in the aforementioned proceedings.

4. EXCLUDED FROM RELEASE AND WAIVER. Notwithstanding paragraphs 2 and 3 above, Stingley expressly retains any and all rights to any worker’s compensation claims that are known or unknown, even if the injuries causing the claims predate this release.

5. COMPROMISE. The liability for all claims and allegations set forth hereinabove and in the legal action identified herein is denied by C ity. This General Release and Agreement shall never be treated as an admission of liability or responsibility at any time for any purpose. This Agreement shall never be used by any party or third party in court as evidence of an admission of liability or responsibility.

6. ENFORCEMENT. The terms of this Agreement are made under California law and shall be enforceable by the procedures set forth in the California Code of Civil Procedure or applicable federal law. In addition, the Parties agree (pursuant to the provisions of Business and Professions Code Section 467.4) that this Agreement is enforceable at law and/or admissible as evidence at a judicial or administrative proceeding to enforce the terms and conditions of this settlement.

4 7. TAXES. Stingley acknowledges he is solely responsible for any and all potential tax liabilities he would owe for the Settlement Payment to be made to h im pursuant to this Agreement. Stingley agrees C ity makes no representations to him regarding the tax consequences of such payment.

8. ADVICE OF COUNSEL . The Parties warrant and represent that, in executing this Agreement, they have been provided the opportunity to confer with legal counsel of their choice. The P arties represent that they fully understand the meaning of this document and enter into this Agreement knowingly and voluntarily, and that prior to entering into this Agreement they had the opportunity to fully discuss with legal counsel of their choice the remedies available to the Parties. They further acknowledge and represent that, in executing this Agreement, they have not relied on any inducements, promises, or representations other than those stated in this Agreement. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges and warrants that the party's execution of this Agreement is free and voluntary.

9. EXECUTION OF OTHER DOCUMENTS . Each party to this Agreement shall cooperate fully in the execution of any and all other documents and the completion of any additional actions that may be necessary or appropriate to give full force and effect to the terms and intent of this Agreement.

10. ENTIRE AGREEMENT . The Parties understand and agree that this Agreement constitutes the sole Agreement between the parties regarding the above- captioned Complaint and that, in signing this Agreement, the Parties have not relied on any other promises, inducement, or representations other than as expressly set forth herein in deciding to sign this Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the sole Agreement between the Parties as to the above-captioned Complaint and may only be modified in a writing signed by all Parties.

11. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this Agreement is held to be invalid and/or unenforceable, the Agreement shall be considered as if the invalid and/or unenforceable portion did not exist, with all remaining portions considered valid and enforceable.

12. INTERPRETATION. The Parties agree that this Agreement shall be interpreted or construed in a neutral manner, as though drafted jointly by the Parties, and that any legal rule to the effect that ambiguity shall be resolved against the drafting party shall not apply to any interpretation of

5 this Agreement. The headings used herein are for reference only and shall not affect the construction or interpretation of the Agreement.

13. A TTORNEY’S FEES. The Parties shall bear their own attorney’s fees, costs, and expert expenses incurred in connection with the Complaint and/or the negotiation and execution of this Agreement.

14. GOVERNING LAW. This Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California and any actions based on interpretation of this Agreement shall be filed in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Kings, if in state court, or the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, if in federal court.

15. SIGNA TURES. In signing this Agreement, the Parties agree, understand, and intend that this Agreement shall be binding and enforceable as permitted under law. Each party, in signing this Agreement, warrants they have the authority to bind the entity or individual on whose behalf the party has signed.

16. COUNTERP ARTS. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, and all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same agreement. Faxed, electronic and/or email signatures shall be acceptable signatures for purposes of binding the parties to the terms of this Agreement.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be duly executed as follows:

6 Date: _____________ ________________________________

Jason Stingley, Plaintiff

Date: _____________ ________________________________
Mario Cifuentez, on behalf of City of
Hanford, Defendant

Date: _____________ ________________________________
Stephanie Huddleston, on behalf of City
of Hanford Police Department, Defendant

Date: _____________ ________________________________

Date: _____________

Date: _____________

Parker Sever, in his individual and official
capacity, Defendant

________________________________
Jeff Davis, in his official capacity,
Defendant

________________________________
Stephanie Huddleston, in her official
capacity, Defendant

7 APPROVED AS TO FORM
AND CONTENT :

Date: _____________

Date: _____________

________________________________
A. Cabral Bonner, Esq., Attorney for
Plaintiff

________________________________
Christina D. Smith, Esq., Attorney for
Defendants

14.C.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 4/1/2025 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Approval of the Settlement Agreement with Patrick Jurdon and Authorization for staff to take all necessary action to carry out the terms of the settlement.

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council approve the Settlement Agreement with Patrick Jurdon and direct staff to take all necessary action to carry out the terms of the settlement.

Recommended Motion: I move to: (i) approve the Settlement Agreement regarding the lawsuit filed against the City by Patrick Jurdon; (ii) authorize and direct the City Manager to execute the Settlement Agreement on the City’s behalf; and (iii) and authorize and direct the City Manager to carry out the terms of Settlement Agreement.

BACKGROUND:

Plaintiff Patrick Jurdon (hereafter also referred to as “Jurdon”) filed a complaint with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (“DFEH”) the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”). He received a “Right-to-Sue” letter from the EEOC prompting the filing of his First Amended Complaint (the “Complaint”) in the Kings County Superior Court.

On or about December 7, 2023, Plaintiff filed the instant action against Defendants City of Hanford (hereafter also referred to as “City”), City of Hanford Police Department (the “Department”), Parker Sever (“Sever”), in his individual and official capacity, and Gabriel Jimenez (“Jimenez”), James Lutz (“Lutz”), Karl Anderson (“Anderson”), and James Edlund (“Edlund”) in their individual capacities (collectively, “Defendants”). In his Complaint, Jurdon alleged that Defendants engaged in hostility and harassment against him, culminating in various disciplinary actions, which he claimed were retaliatory.

The parties attended mediation on February 24, 2025. On that same day, the mediator, Judge Black, sent a Mediator’s Proposal for Case Resolution. The proposal included the following:

1. The City will pay Jurdon the sum of $205,000.00 within 30 days of all parties executing the formal settlement agreement and upon approval of the settlement agreement by the Hanford City Council.

2. The pending litigation will be dismissed with prejudice within 10 days of payment, with each party bearing its own attorneys’ fees and court costs.

City’s Legal Counsel worked closely with PRISM before and during Mediation. PRISM has approved

the settlement amount as stated above. It is recommended that the City Council approve the settlement as outlined above. The full settlement agreement is attached hereto.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The City’s self-insured retention amount is $100,000.00, and PRISM will pay the portion of the settlement, fees, and costs in this matter that exceed $100,000.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. 2025.03.13 Settlement Agreement- Jurdon

1 GENERAL RELEASE AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTTHIS GENERAL RELEASE AND AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made by PATRICK JURDON (“Jurdon”) and the CITY OF HANFORD (“City”), the CITY OF HANFORD POLICE DEPARTMENT, PARKER SEVER, in his individual and official capacity, and GABRIEL JIMENEZ, JAMES LUTZ, KARL ANDERSON, and JAMES EDLUND, in their individual capacities, and any and all employees, agents, personnel, officers or elected officials who are now or have been employed by or served for the CITY OF HANFORD, whether known or unknown and whether or not involved in the incident or named in the suit for damages referred to below, all of which entities and persons are hereinafter referred to as "Defendants." Defendants and Jurdon are collectively referred to as “Parties” herein.RECITALSWHEREAS, Jurdon filed a Complaint in the United States District Court, Eastern District, on December 7, 2023 , which complaint was amended on February 1, 2024, case number 1:23-cv-016695-NODJ-SKO alleging: (1) Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection/Hostile Work Environment in Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, (2) Retaliation for Exercising First Amendment Right To Free Speech In Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, (3) Municipal Liability in Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, (4) Employment Discrimination Violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981, (5) Disparate Treatment In Violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, (6) Retaliation in Violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, (7) Failure to Prevent Race Discrimination in Violation of Cal. Gov’t Code §12940(k), (8) Hostile Work Environment on the Basis of Race in Violation of Cal. Gov’t Code §12940(J)(1), (9) Retaliation in Violation of Cal. Gov’t Code § 1102.5(b), (10) Violation of Cal. Gov't § 8547 ("Whistleblower Protection Act”), (11) Interference with Rights in Violation of Cal. Civ. Code 52.1 (Bane Act), (12) Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (“Complaint”);WHEREAS, Jurdon and Defendants desire to enter into this Agreement so as to provide for payment in full settlement and discharge of all causes of action alleged in the Complaint which Jurdon has or may have against Defendants;WHEREAS, by virtue of negotiating, entering into and/or performing the terms of this Agreement, Jurdon hereto agrees and acknowledges that each other party does not make any admission of any wrongdoing or fault, and that each party expressly denies any and all allegations of liability, fault, and wrongdoing. This settlement, and the execution and performance of this Agreement is the result of the negotiated compromise of disputed claims, and is not intended to be and shall not be a finding or admission of any liability, fault, or wrongdoing, nor an admission of, or finding with respect to, any disputed fact or legal contention. WHEREAS, the Parties wish to settle the above-entitled action without further litigation.

2 NOW, THEREFORE it is hereby agreed by and between the Parties:1.ACTIONS. The Parties, in consideration of the promises made herein, agree as follows:a.Within 30 days of the City Council of the City of Hanford’s approval of this Agreement:i.City agrees to pay a total sum of Two Hundred Five Thousand Dollars and Zero Cents ($205,000.00) (“Settlement Payment”).ii.City agrees that the Settlement Payment, for physical, mental, and emotional damages, will be paid by check payable to the “Trust Account of Bonner Law for Patrick Jurdon” and will be delivered to Bonner Law. iii.Said payment will fully and finally settle all of Jurdon’ claims against City for damages, attorneys’ fees, costs, expenses, and interest arising from and related to this litigation. b.Jurdon agrees to dismiss with prejudice his Complaint in the above-captioned matter within 2 days of receipt of the Settlement Payment.2.RELEASE. Jurdon hereby releases and forever discharges Defendants and the City’s current and former employees, agents, personnel, officers or elected officials in the above referenced action, from any and all manner of action, claims, demands, grievances, causes of action, suits, debts, dues, contracts, agreements, accounts, judgments, damages and liabilities of any nature whatsoever, whether in law or in equity, whether or not now known, suspected or claimed, as of the effective date of this Agreement. This wavier includes but is not limited to personnel grievances, declaratory relief actions and suits in equity, claims for personal injuries, harassment, retaliation, constructive discharge, wrongful termination, disability, violations of the Fair Employment and Housing Act of California and 42 USCA § 2000( e) and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1983, and 1985, violations of the Americans With Disabilities Act, the Older Workers' Benefits Protection Act, hostile work environment, discrimination, violations of civil rights, and any California or United States Constitutional claims, arising out of the incident referred to and described in the allegations of any administrative charge, as well as any pleadings on file in the aforementioned proceedings, which arise prior to the date of this Agreement. This Agreement shall be a fully binding and complete settlement between Jurdon and Defendants and the liability insurance carriers for Defendants.

3 Jurdon agrees that he has accepted the Settlement Payment specified herein as a complete compromise of matters involving disputed issues of law and fact. Jurdon accepts payment of the Settlement Payment as a full and final resolution in settlement of all claims arising from or in any way connected with the subject matter of this Agreement. 3.CIVIL CODE § 1542 WAIVER. In signing this Agreement, Jurdon hereby waives the provisions of Civil Code section 1542, which provides as follows:A general release does not extend to claims that the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release and that, if known by him or her, would have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor or released party. Jurdon understands he may have sustained damages which have not manifested themselves and which are presently unknown or unanticipated, but nevertheless, Jurdon, in consideration of this settlement, deliberately intends to and does hereby release and waive these possible future claims arising out of the incident referred to and described in the pleadings on file in the aforementioned proceedings.4.EXCLUDED FROM RELEASE AND WAIVER. Notwithstanding paragraphs 2 and 3 above, Jurdon expressly retains any and all rights to any worker’s compensation claims that are known or unknown, even if the injuries causing the claims predate this release.5.COMPROMISE. The liability for all claims and allegations set forth hereinabove and in the legal action identified herein is denied by City. This General Release and Agreement shall never be treated as an admission of liability or responsibility at any time for any purpose. This Agreement shall never be used by any party or third party in court as evidence of an admission of liability or responsibility.6.ENFORCEMENT. The terms of this Agreement are made under California law and shall be enforceable by the procedures set forth in the California Code of Civil Procedure or applicable federal law. In addition, the Parties agree (pursuant to the provisions of Business and Professions Code Section 467.4) that this Agreement is enforceable at law and/or admissible

4 as evidence at a judicial or administrative proceeding to enforce the terms and conditions of this settlement.7.TAXES. Jurdon acknowledges he is solely responsible for any and all potential tax liabilities he would owe for the Settlement Payment to be made to him pursuant to this Agreement. Jurdon agrees City makes no representations to him regarding the tax consequences of such payment.8.ADVICE OF COUNSEL. The Parties warrant and represent that, in executing this Agreement, they have been provided the opportunity to confer with legal counsel of their choice. The Parties represent that they fully understand the meaning of this document and enter into this Agreement knowingly and voluntarily, and that prior to entering into this Agreement they had the opportunity to fully discuss with legal counsel of their choice the remedies available to the Parties. They further acknowledge and represent that, in executing this Agreement, they have not relied on any inducements, promises, or representations other than those stated in this Agreement. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges and warrants that the party's execution of this Agreement is free and voluntary.9.EXECUTION OF OTHER DOCUMENTS. Each party to this Agreement shall cooperate fully in the execution of any and all other documents and the completion of any additional actions that may be necessary or appropriate to give full force and effect to the terms and intent of this Agreement.10.ENTIRE AGREEMENT. The Parties understand and agree that this Agreement constitutes the sole Agreement between the parties regarding the above-captioned Complaint and that, in signing this Agreement, the Parties have not relied on any other promises, inducement, or representations other than as expressly set forth herein in deciding to sign this Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the sole Agreement between the Parties as to the above-captioned Complaint and may only be modified in a writing signed by all Parties.11.SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this Agreement is held to be invalid and/or unenforceable, the Agreement shall be considered as if the invalid and/or unenforceable portion did not exist, with all remaining portions considered valid and enforceable.12.INTERPRETATION. The Parties agree that this Agreement shall be interpreted or construed in a neutral manner, as though drafted jointly by

5 the Parties, and that any legal rule to the effect that ambiguity shall be resolved against the drafting party shall not apply to any interpretation of this Agreement. The headings used herein are for reference only and shall not affect the construction or interpretation of the Agreement.13.ATTORNEY’S FEES. The Parties shall bear their own attorney’s fees, costs, and expert expenses incurred in connection with the Complaint and/or the negotiation and execution of this Agreement.14.GOVERNING LAW. This Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California and any actions based on interpretation of this Agreement shall be filed in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Kings, if in state court, or the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, if in federal court.15.SIGNATURES. In signing this Agreement, the Parties agree, understand, and intend that this Agreement shall be binding and enforceable as permitted under law. Each party, in signing this Agreement, warrants they have the authority to bind the entity or individual on whose behalf the party has signed.16.COUNTERPARTS. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, and all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same agreement. Faxed, electronic and/or email signatures shall be acceptable signatures for purposes of binding the parties to the terms of this Agreement.IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be duly executed as follows:Date: _____________________________________________Patrick Jurdon, PlaintiffDate: _____________________________________________Mario Cifuentez, on behalf of City of Hanford, Defendant

6 Date: _____________________________________________Stephanie Huddleston, on behalf of City of Hanford Police Department, DefendantDate: _____________________________________________Date: _____________Date: _____________Date: _____________Date: _____________ Parker Sever, in his individual and official capacity, Defendant________________________________Gabriel Jimenez, in his official capacity, Defendant________________________________James Lutz, in his official capacity, Defendant________________________________Karl Anderson, in his official capacity, Defendant________________________________James Edlund, in his individual capacity, DefendantAPPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT:Date: _____________Date: _____________________________________________A. Cabral Bonner, Esq., Attorney for Plaintiff________________________________Christina D. Smith, Esq., Attorney for Defendants

14.D.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 4/1/2025 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Amendment to the Executive Management Employees Association (EMEA) Compensation and Benefit Summary.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council, by motion, approve the attached Side Letter Agreement with the Executive Management Employees Association and authorize City staff to amend all other documents that may be necessary to implement said changes.

BACKGROUND:

As a result of a recent audit conducted by the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) the findings outlined changes that are required to be made in reference to Educational Incentive Pay for represented classifications. To comply with CalPERS regulations, specifically the Public Employees’ Retirement Law (PERL), the City has added a Special Assignment Pay section and amended its Certificate Pay section to Educational Pay of EMEA’s Compensation and Benefits Summary. Furthermore, the City will revise the manner in which these incentives are reported and amend the information reported to CalPERS for represented employees (if applicable).

City staff have worked with CalPERS Office of Audit Services (OFAS) to draft a Side Letter Agreement that meets their requirements. This agreement has also been reviewed and approved by EMEA. To complete the CalPERS Audit Resolution Action Plan, such an agreement must be formally adopted by the City’s governing body (City Council).

FISCAL IMPACT:

Due to the clarifying nature of these amendments, the fiscal impact is anticipated to be minimal.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. EMEA Side Letter Agreement 5 CalPERS Audit

SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT #5

BETWEEN

EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION (EMEA)
AND

THE CITY OF HANFORD
for the July 1, 2021 to Present

The City of Hanford (“City”) and the Executive Management Employees Association (“EMEA”) hereby enter into this Side Agreement to amend the Compensation and Benefits Summary (“Summary”) between the City and EMEA. This Side Agreement to the Summary removes “Certificate Pay” language and adds “Educational Pay” and “Special Assignment Pay” language.

“Certificate Pay

The City will implement a five percent (5%) certification pay for state issued licenses or certificates related to the position provided it benefits the job and the City. It is expressly understood that positions and assignments eligible for pay will be d etermined solely at the discretion of the City Manager.

The City will pay for certification, license, or registration renewals currently required by the City as minimum qualifications on the City’s adopted job classifications or on certifications, licenses and/or registrations approved for Certificate Pay as identified above.”

“Educational Pay
Certified Public Accountant Incentive - Employees assigned to the position of Finance Director (or equivalent title) who obtain and maintain a Certified Public Accountant license shall receive a five percent (5%) increase to their base salary per month, payable with the normal payroll effective the first full pay period after the City receives confirmation of the license. This compensation shall be available to all employees assigned to the position of Finance Director (or equivalent title) without exclusion.

Engineering Registration Premium - Employees assigned to the position of Public Works Director and/or Utilities and Engineering Director (or equivalent title) who have taken and passed a California engineering proficiency exam and are registered with the State of California shall receive a five percent (5%) increase to their base salary per month, payable with the normal payroll effective the first full pay period after the City receives confirmation of the license. This compensation shall be available to all employees assigned to the position of Public Works Director and/or Utilities and Engineering Director (or equivalent title) without exclusion.

The City will pay for the cost associated with maintaining and renewing such licenses.

Any other licenses /certificates obtained by employees assigned to the Executive Management Employees Association will be reviewed by the City Manager to determine if it is related to the position and benefits the job and the City. It is expressly understood that positions and assignments eligible for additional pay (5% maximum) will be determined solely at the discretion of the City Manager and unlike the licenses described above will not be reported to CalPERS as pensionable income.”

“Special Assignment Pay
Water Certification Premium - Employees assigned to the position of Public Works Director and/or Utilities and Engineering Director (or equivalent title) who routinely and consistently are assigned to test local water quality for compliance with governmental health standards and have obtained a Grade V or higher water distribution, water treatment or wastewater treatment certificate shall receive a five percent (5%) increase to their base salary per month payable with the normal payroll effective the first full pay period after the City receives the certificate.

The City will pay for the cost associated with maintaining and renewing such certifications.

Any other licenses/certificates obtained by employees assigned to the Executive Management Employees Association will be reviewed by the City Manager to determine if it is related to the position and benefits the job and the City. It is expressly understood that positions and assignments eligible for additional pay (5% maximum) will be determined solely at the discretion of the City Manager and unlike the licenses described above will not be reported to CalPERS as pensionable income.”

Except as amended herein, each and every term and condition of the Summary shall remain in full force and effect, and this Side Letter Agreement shall be incorporated into the Summary as adopted.

Furthermore, these updates supersede what is written in the Policy of Administration for Executive Management Employees.

Agreed this 1st day of April 2025

For the City:

/s/
Mario Cifuentez
City Manager

For the EMEA:

/s/
Chris Tavarez
Finance Director

14.E.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 4/1/2025 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Amendment to the General Employees Management Association (GEMA) Memorandum of Understanding.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council, by motion, approve the attached Side Letter Agreement with the General Employees Management Association and authorize City staff to amend all other documents that may be necessary to implement said changes.

BACKGROUND:

As a result of a recent audit conducted by the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) the findings outlined changes that are required to be made in reference to Educational Incentive Pay for represented classifications. To comply with CalPERS regulations, specifically the Public Employees’ Retirement Law (PERL), the City has added a Special Assignment Pay section and amended its Certification Pay section to Education Pay in GEMA’s MOU. Furthermore, the City will revise the manner in which these incentives are reported and amend the information reported to CalPERS for represented employees (if applicable).

City staff have worked with CalPERS Office of Audit Services (OFAS) to draft a Side Letter Agreement that meets their requirements. This agreement has also been reviewed and approved by GEMA. To complete the CalPERS Audit Resolution Action Plan, such an agreement must be formally adopted by the City’s governing body (City Council).

FISCAL IMPACT:

Due to the clarifying nature of these amendments, the fiscal impact is anticipated to be minimal.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. GEMA Side Letter Agreement CalPERS Audit

SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT #5

BETWEEN

GENERAL EMPLOYEES MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION (GEMA)
AND

THE CITY OF HANFORD
for the July 1, 2021 to Present

The City of Hanford (“City”) and the General Employees Management Association (“GEMA”) hereby enter into this Side Agreement to amend the Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) between the City and GEMA. This Side Agreement to the MOU adds Section 2.10 “Special Assignment Pay” and amends Section 2.12 “Certificate Pay to Education Pay”

“2.10 Special Assignment Pay

Water Certification Premium - Employees assigned to the positions of Utilities Manager, Utilities Supervisor, Wastewater Treatment Plant Manager, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Supervisor who are routinely and consistently assigned to test local water quality for compliance with governmental health standards as a regular part of their job duties and have obtained a Grade V or higher water distribution, water treatment, or wastewater treatment certi ficate shall receive a five percent (5%) increase to their base salary per month, payable with the normal payroll, effective the first full pay period after the City receives proof of the employee's certification. This compensation shall be provided on an ongoing basis, provided the certification is maintained and remains valid.

The City will pay for the cost associated with maintaining and renewing such certifications.

Any other licenses/certificates obtained by employees assigned to the General Employees Management Association will be reviewed by the City Manager to determine if it is related to the position and benefits the job and the City. It is expressly understood that positions and assignments eligible for additional pay (5% maximum) will be determined solely at the discretion of the City Manager and unlike the specific certifications described above will not be reported to CalPERS as pensionable income.”

“2.12 Certificate Pay

The City will implement a five percent (5%) certification pay for state issued licenses or certificates related to the position provided it benefits the job and the City. It is expressly understood that positions and assignments eligible for pay will be d etermined solely at the discretion of the City Manager. If any of the certificates, licenses and/or registrations are identified

by the City to be minimum qualifications on the adopted job classifications, premium pay for that particular certificate, license and/or registration shall not be paid.

The City will pay for certification, license, or registration renewals currently required by the City as minimum qualifications on the City’s adopted job classifications or on certifications, licenses and/or registrations approved for Certificate Pay as identified above.

2.12 Education Pay

Educational Incentive - Employees assigned to the position of Environmental Compliance Supervisor shall receive a five percent (5%) increase to their base salary per month, effective the first full pay period after the City receives proof of the employee's Environmental Complianc e Inspector certification. This compensation shall be provided on an ongoing basis, provided the certification is maintained and remains valid.

The City will pay for the cost associated with maintaining and renewing such certification.

Any other licenses/certificates obtained by employees assigned to the General Employees Management Association will be reviewed by the City Manager to determine if it is related to the position and benefits the job and the City. It is expressly understood that positions and assignments eligible for additional pay (5% maximum) will be determined solely at the discretion of the City Manager and unlike the specific certification described above will not be reported to CalPERS as pensionable income.”

Except as amended herein, each and every term and condition of the MOU shall remain in full force and effect, and this Side Letter Agreement shall be incorporated into the MOU as adopted.

Agreed this 1st day of April 2025.

For the City:

/s/
Mario Cifuentez
City Manager

For the GEMA:

/s/
Robert Buchanan
Interim President

14.F.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 4/1/2025 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Amendment to the Service Employees International Union Local 521 Unit Memorandum of Understanding

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council, by motion, approve the attached Side Letter Agreement with the Service Employees International Union Local 521 and authorize City staff to amend all other documents that may be necessary to implement said changes.

BACKGROUND:

As a result of a recent audit conducted by the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) the findings outlined changes that are required to be made in reference to Educational Incentive Pay for represented classifications. To comply with CalPERS regulations, specifically the Public Employees’ Retirement Law (PERL), the City has added an Educational Pay and Special Assignment Pay section and amended its Certification and Training section of SEIU’s MOU.

Furthermore, the City will revise the manner in which these incentives are reported and amend the information reported to CalPERS for represented employees (if applicable).

City staff have worked with CalPERS Office of Audit Services (OFAS) to draft a Side Letter Agreement that meets their requirements. This agreement has also been reviewed and approved by SEIU. To complete the CalPERS Audit Resolution Action Plan, such an agreement must be formally adopted by the City’s governing body (City Council).

FISCAL IMPACT:

Due to the clarifying nature of these amendments, the fiscal impact is anticipated to be minimal.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. SEIU Side Agreement -CalPERS Audit

SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT #5

BETWEEN
SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION (SEIU LOCAL 521)
AND

THE CITY OF HANFORD
for the July 1, 2021 to Present

The City of Hanford (“City”) and the Service Employees International Unit (“SEIU Local 521”) hereby enter into this Side Agreement to amend the Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) between the City and SEIU Local 521. This Side Agreement adds Section 2.21 “Educational Pay” and Section 2.22 “Special Assignment Pay” to the MOU and amends Section 2.18 “Certification and Training.”

“2.18 Certification and Training

The City shall ensure that adequate time and availability of the employee is made to attend all required training prior to the expiration of any required certifications.

All employees, regardless of shift length, are expected to return to work and complete the remainder of their shift unless the location of the training would not allow them to return in a safe, timely and sensible manner. An employee will not be required to use any accrued benefit time and will be credited the length of their regular shift if they are not able to return to work after attending training, as long as the reason for not returning to work is a result of uncontrollable circumstances and approved by that employee’s supervisor. When not returning to work after training is a result of illness or other personal reason, then appropriate benefits will need to be used. If the employee is uncertain whether or not to report back to work, they shall check with their supervisor and/or Department Head. The Department Head shall have final discretion. At no time shall an employee’s training, travel time and work time exceed their regularly scheduled work day except under one of the following conditions:

1. The combined training and travel time exceeds the length of an employee’s regular shift, the employee shall receive overtime pay (the employee shall immediately report this scenario to their supervisor should this occur).

2. The employee and management mutually agree that upon return from training, the employee can report to work and continue an overtime shift, if applicable.

The City will pay for costs associated with completing courses or achieving certifications or licenses, which are required by the City (whether State mandated or City option). If an employee is required to take an examination to obtain a certificate or li cense, payment for the first

examination will be pre-paid by the City. Costs shall include transportation or mileage paid at the IRS approved rate, tuition and fees. The City also agrees to pay the costs associated with renewal for any license or certification so long as it is requir ed. An example of such requirements is the license for certification for water systems operator.

If an employee fails an examination, all costs associated to re -take the examination except transportation or mileage reimbursement which shall be at the employee’s expense (does not apply to transportation or mileage).

The City will determine how many and which Utilities Maintenance Worker(s) will be required to obtain and maintain Backflow Tester, Backflow Specialist and Water Sampler A certifications. A two percent (2%) stipend will be paid for each certificate held by those employees required to maintain the certificate by the Department Head.

The City will determine how many and which employees will be required to obtain and maintain a Certified Access Specialist Certificate. A two percent (2%) stipend will be paid to those employees required to maintain the certificate by the Department Head.

“2.21 Educational Pay

Building Inspectors assigned to inspect buildings and sites for compliance with applicable state and federal construction related accessibility standards may be required to take educational courses to obtain and maintain a Certified Access Specialist Certificate to enhance their job performance.

A two percent (2%) increase for Certified Access Specialist premium will be paid to an employee’s base salary per month payable with the normal payroll effective the first full pay period after the City receives proof of the employee’s certification. This compensation shall be provided on an ongoing basis, provided the certification is maintained and remains valid.

“2.22 Special Assignment Pay

Water Certification Premium:

Utilities Maintenance Workers routinely and consistently assigned to test local water quality for compliance with governmental health standards are eligible to earn an additional two percent (2%) of their base pay as a Water Certification Premium for each qualifying assignment. This includes assignments such as Backflow Testing, Backflow Specialist duties, or Water Sampling. Workers holding certifications and assigned to these specific tasks will r eceive the premium for each assignment performed, up to a maximum of six percent (6%) of their base pay. Increases will be made to the employee’s base salary per month, payable with the normal payroll effective the first full pay period after the City rece ived proof of the employee’s certification. This compensation shall be provided on an ongoing basis, provided the certification is maintained and remains valid.

Except as amended herein, each and every term and condition of the MOU shall remain in full force and effect, and this Side Letter Agreement shall be incorporated into the MOU as adopted.

Agreed this 1st day of April 2025.

For the City:

/s/
Mario Cifuentez
City Manager

For the SEIU:

/s/
Michael Carter
SEIU Representative

14.G.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 4/1/2025 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Amendment to the Hanford Professional Firefighters Local 3898, IAFF Professional Firefighters Unit Memorandum of Understanding

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council, by motion, approve the attached Side Letter Agreement with the Hanford Professional Firefighters Local 3898, IAFF Professional Firefighters Unit and authorize City staff to amend all other documents that may be necessary to implement said changes.

BACKGROUND:

As a result of a recent audit conducted by the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) the findings outlined changes that are required to be made in reference to Educational Incentive Pay for represented classifications. To comply with CalPERS regulations, specifically the Public Employees’ Retirement Law (PERL) the City has removed the pay provision language outlining employees must reach step “D” to receive Educational Incentive Pay and omitted reference to other documents to determine Educational Incentive Pay eligibility. Furthermore, the City will revise the manner in which this incentive is reported and amend the information reported to CalPERS for represented employees (if applicable).

City staff have worked with CalPERS Office of Audit Services (OFAS) to draft a Side Letter Agreement that meets their requirements. This agreement has also been reviewed and approved by the Hanford Professional Firefighter Unit. To complete CalPERS Audit Resolution Action Plan, such an agreement must be formally adopted by the City’s governing body (City Council).

FISCAL IMPACT:

Due to the clarifying nature of these amendments, the fiscal impact is anticipated to be minimal.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. IAFF-HPFF Side Agreement -CalPERS Audit

SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT #1

BETWEEN
HANFORD PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS LOCAL 3898,

IAFF PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS UNIT

AND

THE CITY OF HANFORD
for the July 1, 2021 to Present
The City of Hanford (“City”) and the Hanford Professional Firefighters Local 3898, IAFF Professional Firefighters Unit (“IAFF”) hereby enter into this Side Agreement to amend the Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) between the City and IAFF. This Side Agreement to the MOU amends Section 2.16 “Educational Incentive Pay”

“Educational Incentive Pay

I. Employees Firefighters, Fire Engineers and Fire Captains (hired prior to April 21, 2020 the date the current MOU was ratified ) shall continue to receive the agreed upon Education Incentive Pay structure identified below. Firefighters must have reached step “D” in their salary range to be eligible.

A. For completion of thirty (30) college units, fifteen of which must be in Fire Science: $150.00 one-time payment (not reportable to City’s retirement system).

B. For completion of an Associate or Bachelor Degree: $40.00 per month . $480.00 per calendar year split into 26 pay periods of $18.46.

C. Upon successful completion of the didactic portion of the CA Office of the State Fire Marshall (OSFM), State Fire Training (SFT) of the state for Firefighter 2 requirement, employees shall receive 2.5% of base salary per month payable with the normal payroll effective the first full pay period after the City receives the certificate.

D. Upon successful completion of the didactic portion of the CA Office of the State Fire Marshall (OSFM), State Fire Training (SFT ) for of the state Fire/Company Officer requirement, employees shall receive 5% of base salary per month payable with the normal payroll effective the first full pay period after the Fire Chief or his designee has confirmed completion of all education and instruction . that is required by the CA Office of the State Fire Marshall (OSFM) has been met.

E. Upon successful completion of the didactic portion of the CA Office of the State Fire Marshall (OSFM), State Fire Training (SFT ) for of the state Chief Officer

requirement, employees shall receive 5% of base salary per month payable with the normal payroll effective the first full pay period after the Fire Chief or his designee has confirmed completion of all education and instruction . that is required by the CA Office of the State Fire Marshall (OSFM) has been met.

Employees assigned to the position of Battalion Chief are only eligible for additional compensation for Chief Fire Officer certificate as their base salary already includes 2.5% for Firefighter 2 and 5% for Fire/Company Officer certificates.

II. New employees Firefighters, Fire Engineers and Fire Captains (hired on or after the date the current MOU is ratified April 21, 2020) shall only receive Education Incentive Pay for Fire/Company Officer at the rank of Firefighter or above, or Chief Officer at the rank of Captain or above. Employees can only receive compensation for one certificate at a time. In addition, Firefighters must have reached step “D” in their salary range to be eligible.

A. For completion of thirty (30) college units, fifteen of which must be in Fire Science: $150.00 one-time payment (not reportable to City’s retirement system).

B. For completion of an Associate or Bachelor Degree: $40.00 per month. $480.00 per calendar year split into 26 pay periods of $18.46.

C. Upon successful completion of the didactic portion of the CA Office of the State Fire Marshall (OSFM), State Fire Training ( SFT) for of the state Firefighter 2 requirement, employees shall receive 2.5% of base salary per month payable with the normal payroll effective the first full pay period after the City receives the certificate.

D. Upon successful completion of the didactic portion of the CA Office of the State Fire Marshall (OSFM), State Fire Training (SFT) for of the state Fire/Company Officer requirement, employees shall receive 5% of base salary per month payable with the normal payroll effective the first full pay period after the Fire Chief or his designee has confirmed completion of all education and instruction that is required by the CA Office of the State Fire Marshall (OSFM) has been met.

E. Upon successful completion of the didactic portion of the CA Office of the State Fire Marshall (OSFM), State Fire Training ( SFT) for of the state Chief Officer requirement, employees shall receive 7.5% of base salary per month payable with the normal payroll effective the first full pay period after the Fire Chief or his designee has confirmed completion of all education and instruction that is required by the CA Office of the State Fire Marshall (OSFM) has been met.

III. Battalion Chiefs (hired prior to April 21, 2020) shall receive the following Educational Incentive Pay:

A. For completion of thirty (30) college units, fifteen of which must be in Fire Science:
$150.00 one-time payment (not reportable to City’s retirement system).

B. For completion of an Associate or Bachelor Degree: $480.00 per calendar year split into 26 pay periods of $18.46.

C. For Chief Fire Officer certificate, Battalion Chiefs shall receive 5% of base salary per month payable with the normal payroll effective the first full pay period after the City receives the certificate. (Battalion Chiefs are not eligible to receive compensation for a Firefighter 2 or Fire/Company Officer certification as their base salary was previously adjusted to include such certification).

IV. Battalion Chiefs (hired on or after April 21, 2020) shall receive the following Educational Incentive Pay:

A. For completion of thirty (30) college units, fifteen of which must be in Fire Science: $150.00 one-time payment (not reportable to City’s retirement system).

B. For completion of an Associate or Bachelor Degree: $480.00 per calendar year split into 26 pay periods of $18.46.

C. For Chief Fire Officer certificate, Battalion Chiefs shall receive 7.5% of base salary per month payable with the normal payroll effective the first full pay period after the City receives the certificate. (Battalion Chiefs are not eligible to receive compensation for a Firefighter 2 or Fire/Company Officer certification as their base salary was previously adjusted to include such certification).

Except as amended herein, each and every term and condition of the MOU shall remain in full force and effect, and this Side Letter Agreement shall be incorporated into the MOU as adopted.

Agreed this 1st day of April 2025.

For the City:

/s/
Mario Cifuentez
City Manager

For the IAFF:

/s/
Jared Turner
President

14.H.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 4/1/2025 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Approval of Historic Resources Permit No. 0018-25, a request to make exterior modifications to the Old Courthouse, 113 Court Street, by removal of an exterior window and portion of wall, in order to accommodate a required ADA-accessible lift and entry. The building is a contributing building within the Historic Overlay Zone District, located at 113 Court Street (APN 010-265-001).

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff Recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt Resolution No. 25-13-R, approving Historic Resource Permit No. 0018-25, subject to the conditions set forth within the resolution.

Recommended Motion:

1. I move to adopt Resolution No. 25-13-R, approving Historic Resource Permit No. 0018-25, subject to the conditions set forth within the resolution.

BACKGROUND:

Historic Resources Permit 0018-25 is a request to make exterior modifications to the Old Courthouse, 113 Court Street, by removal of an exterior window and portion of the wall along the east side of the building, in order to accommodate a new ADA-accessible lift and entry, as shown in Attachment 1.

The project is located at 113 Court Street (APN 010-265-001), see Figure 1, which is the location of the Old Courthouse. The Old Courthouse is a contributing building within the Historic Overlay Zone District. Additionally, the Old Courthouse is on the National Registry of Historic Places.

The National Register of Historic Places is the nation's official list of buildings, structures, objects, sites, and districts worthy of preservation because of their significance in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture. The National Register recognizes resources of local, state and national significance which have been documented and evaluated according to uniform standards and criteria.

Authorized under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the National Register is part of a national program to coordinate and support public and private efforts to identify, evaluate, and protect

historic and archeological resources. The National Register is administered by the National Park Service, which is part of the U. S. Department of the Interior.

California resources listed in the National Register, and California Historical Landmarks #770 and above, are automatically listed in the California Register. See listing from National Register – Figure

2. Figure 1: Property Aerial

Figure 2: Listing from National Register

The site is designated in the General Plan as Downtown Mixed Use (see Figure 3) and zoned MX-D Downtown Mixed Use (see Figure 4), in accordance with the General Plan.

Figure 3: General Plan Designation
(Parcel outlined in bold; approximate location outlined in red) Downtown Mixed Use

Figure 4: Zoning
(Parcel outlined in bold; approximate location outlined in red) MX-D Downtown Mixed Use

The property is a contributing building located in the Historic District, shown below – outlined in black.

Figure 5: Contributing Building Designation

"Contributing building” means a structure within a historic district which retains scale, mass and other architectural characteristics to the degree that it contributes to the sense of time and place of the immediate area and the district. The building may have individual architectural significance or may be one of a grouping of background buildings that jointly contribute to the character of the immediate area and the district. Contributing buildings may reflect interim modifications if those modifications do not irreparably detract from the character of the building or if the modifications reflect an architectural style or particular era important to the development of the City. Contributing buildings shall also include structures that have a strong historical tie to activities, events, or individuals important in the development of the City.

In accordance with Municipal Code Section 17.48, alterations to the exterior of a building located within the Historic Overlay Zone are required to be approved through a Historic Resources Permit, which must be approved by the City Council.

Section 17.48.040

No improvement or exterior architectural feature of any improvement shall be constructed or altered or enlarged which is located in the Historic Overlay District or identified as a historic site outside the District, unless a permit is issued pursuant to the terms of this chapter. The section shall not apply to any interior alteration which has no effect on the condition or appearance of any exterior architectural feature of an improvement. No structure listed on a State or National Register shall be moved or demolished, unless a permit is issued pursuant to the terms of this chapter.

Section 17.48.070

1. A historic resource permit shall be required for any alteration of the exterior features of a building within a designated historic district, or a designated historic building or site, or to construct a new building or improvements upon property within a designated historic district except as otherwise provided in this Chapter 17.48, the City Council shall determine whether a historic resources permit shall be issued. A permit shall not be required for ordinary maintenance and repairs as defined in this section.

2. Permit Procedures. An application for a historic resource permit shall be made on a form prescribed by the Community Development Department and shall be accompanied by the fees established by resolution of the City Council. The application shall include the information required by Section 17.60.020 for site plan review, complete elevation drawings of the proposed alterations, samples of proposed colors and materials, color photographs of all sides of any existing improvement, building or structure on the site, and such other information as may be required by the Community Development Department. If applicable, the application shall include the information required by Chapter 17.58 (permit for conditional uses) and Chapter 17.62 (planned unit development).

3. Applications for permits requiring City Council approval shall be placed on the next regular meeting of the City Council. The City Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the permit.

Building Description

The Old Courthouse was the location of the former Kings County Courthouse. The building is an example of neo-classical revival style and is one of the oldest public buildings in continual use in Central California. The building was constructed in 1886 with a later addition built in 1913/14. The building has two principal levels, plus a full basement level, which is partly below grade. Construction materials are brick for the exterior and interior bearing walls, concrete for the footings and floor slab at grade, wood trusses at the roof, granite at exterior walls and for the two center columns at the south portico, and granite at the exterior steps. Exterior brick for the walls is a yellow/buff color.

See full building description in the National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form – Attachment 2.

Proposal

On November 5, 2024 City Council Members unanimously approved the Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) between the City and Esteem Land Company LLC (Barrelhouse Brewing Company) and authorized City Manager Mario Cifuentez to complete the necessary documents to sell the Kings County Courthouse to the company.

Barrelhouse representatives first expressed interest in acquiring the Courthouse in 2022 under an agreement that would give them ownership of the building, while ensuring the City would preserve the building's historic integrity.

Today, most suites in the Courthouse are vacant (one suite is leased currently), due to required repairs and ADA accessibility upgrades.

This application represents a request to make exterior modifications to the Old Courthouse by removal of an exterior window and portion of the wall along the east side of the building, in order to accommodate a new ADA-accessible lift and entry.

As noted on the attached plans:

Lower Floor Plan
• Plan p. A2.1 (keynote 2) removal of exterior window – La Bella Spa

Main Floor Plan
• Plan p. A2.2 (keynote 11) exterior wall and window to be removed

Proposed Main Floor Plan:
• A 2.4 New ADA lift and entry shown

Elevations are included in Attachment 1, and as follows for the east side of the Courthouse:

Figure 6: East Side Elevation

A specification of the lift has been provided – see Attachment 3. The proposed lift will be slightly off- white/greyish.

The project has been evaluated for consistency with the Design Criteria set forth in Section

17.48.150 of the Hanford Municipal Code. Applicable excerpts appear below:

17.48.100 Building permits.

Before a building permit shall be issued for any structure, improvement or building proposed as part of the approved historic resource permit application, the building department shall secure written approval from the Community Development Department that the proposed improvements are in conformity with an approved historic resource permit. Before a building, improvement or structure may be occupied, the Community Development Department shall notify the Building Official that the site and such building improvement or structure thereon have been developed in conformity with an approved historic resource permit.

Analysis: The Building Official has been notified of the Historic Resource Permit required for this location and project. No permits will be issued prior to Council’s approval of the HRA.

17.48.150 Design Criteria

A. The design criteria set forth in this section are intended to provide guidance to both the City Council and Community Development Department and property owners regarding the improvements to structures, buildings, improvements or sites designated as historic or located in historic districts.

The design criteria set forth in this section shall be used in evaluating applications for historic resource permits and for other related issues as determined by the Community Development Department.

1. Contributing Buildings. The design criteria shall be used to insure the preservation and enhancement of the historical and architectural characteristics of the historic structures through restoration of those structures. The restoration of a structure to their exact former appearance shall be permitted but not required.

B. Design Guidelines. The following design guidelines are to be used to formulate plans for the rehabilitation, preservation, and continued use of old buildings consistent with the intent of this chapter. The guidelines apply to buildings of all occupancy and construction types, sizes and materials and to all permanent and temporary construction on the exterior of historic buildings as well as new attached or adjacent construction.

1. Every reasonable effort shall be made to use the building, structure or site for its originally intended purpose or for a compatible use which requires minimum alteration of the building, structure or site.

Analysis: The proposed use of the Old Courthouse is a compatible use which requires minimum alteration to the building, except for upgrades to the building, including ADA-accessibility improvements proposed herein.

1. The distinguishing original qualities or character of a building, structure or site and its environment shall not be destroyed. The removal or alteration of any historic material or distinctive architectural feature should be avoided when possible.

Analysis: The proposal to accommodate the ADA-accessible landing and lift will not destroy the original qualities or character of the structure. The work is limited to the east side of the building, the removal of a removal of exterior window for the lower floor tenant and the removal of the exterior

wall and window for the main floor tenant, as outlined in red, below.

Figure 7: East Side Area of Work

Figure 8: East Side Elevation (zoom)

9. Contemporary design for alterations and additions to existing buildings, structures or sites shall not be discouraged when such alterations and additions do not destroy significant historical, architectural or cultural material and such design is compatible with the size, scale, color, materials and character of the property, neighborhood or environment.

Analysis: The proposed ADA lift will impact the original features of the building through the removal of the two windows and portions of the wall, however, ADA upgrades are necessary for continued use of the structure. Additionally, the proposed modifications are considered limited and minimal.

10. Wherever possible, new additions or alterations to buildings, structures or sites shall be done in such a manner that if such additions or alterations were to be removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the building, structure or site would be unimpaired.

Analysis: In the future, if needed, the ADA lift and entry could be removed and the building returned to its original form, by replicating the material used, without compromising the integrity of the structure.

C. Rehabilitation Standards. The provisions of this subsection are intended to provide reasonable design for the rehabilitation of historic buildings so that the basic historic and architectural presentation of the buildings is retained and enhanced.

2. Windows and Doors.

a. Where they still exist, the original sills, lintels, frames, sash, muntins, and glass of windows and transoms should be preserved. The original doorway elements, including sills, lintels, frames and the doors, should also be retained. When they must be replaced, the replacements should duplicate the originals in design and materials.

c. The original proportions of wall openings should be retained. The blocking of any existing opening to accommodate standard sash and glass sizes, to hide ceilings lowered beneath the tops of existing windows, or for any other reason should not be allowed.

Analysis: The applicant proposes to remove two original window locations, in order to accommodate the new ADA lift and landing; however, this is consistent with past practice to allow for safety modifications to the building, consistent with State and Federal regulations (i.e. Fire Code and ADA- law).

E. General Building Standards. The standards set forth in this subsection should be applied to all alterations or new construction in the historic district.

1. Color.

a. Exterior colors should harmonize with other colors on the same building and on the streetscape.

Exterior colors should complement the colors of neighboring buildings and should be selected to be mutually supportive and beneficial to the overall historic character of the streetscape.

b. Where wood or metal surfaces of windows, doors, porches and details, other than cornices, are to be painted, the following colors shall be used: During the early twentieth century, muted colors and earth colors were favored. They included gray, dark brown, dark green, blue gray, beige, brick red, and terra cotta. A slightly grayish-white paint, was frequently used for major surface areas and for details. This grayish-white is an appropriate choice for window sash and frames and for other details.

In some instances, black or dark gray may be appropriate for the fixed window or door frame. If the original color of a cornice cannot be determined, grayish-white, buff or sandstone color are preferred choices.

Analysis: The proposed ADA lift will be a neutral, slightly off-white greyish color.

Findings for Approval

Staff has found that the application consistent with Section 17.48 of the Hanford Municipal Code and advises that the approval of the historic resources permit will allow private investment in the Downtown area, enhance property values, allow the increase of economic and financial benefits to the City and its property owners and inhabitants, and recommends the City Council make the following findings:

1. That the proposal will not impact the Historic Overlay Zone since the site is designated as noncontributing.

2. That the proposed project will provide a complementary setting and environment in the Historic District.

3. That the proposed project will promote and encourage continued private ownership and utilization of structures so that the objectives set forth in this section can be attained under this policy.

4. That the request will not adversely affect the public health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Hanford.

Recommendation:

The City Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the permit.

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution 25-13-R, approving Historic Resources Permit HRA0018-25, subject to the following conditions:

1. That the applicant adhere to the design criteria for the Historic Overlay Zone, set forth in Section 17.48 of the Hanford Municipal Code.

2. That the alterations shall be completed in accordance with the proposed changes, as shown in Attachment 1 and 3 (Exhibit A and B of the resolution). Future changes may be approved by the Community Development Director or forwarded to the City Council for review.

3. That the ADA-lift be a white/greyish color to be verified and approved by the Community Development Department.

4. That should the ADA lift and landing be removed in the future, the building shall be restored to its original form, utilizing the same materials existing throughout the remainder of the building.

5. That the applicant shall contact the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) to ensure that the proposal is consistent with the requirements of the State of California, as a listed Historical Landmark.

6. That approval of this project does not exempt compliance with all applicable sections of the Zoning Ordinance, Public Works Improvement Standards, fees, or other City Ordinances.

Staff Recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt Resolution No. 25-13-R, approving Historic Resource Permit No. 0018-25, subject to the conditions set forth within the resolution.

Applicant:

Kevin Nickell
Carvalho Construction
22841 Grangeville Boulevard
Lemoore, CA 93245
FISCAL IMPACT:
n/a

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution No. 25-13-R

2. HRA0018-25

3. National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form (1977)

4. Specification

5. Notice of Exemption - 15301 Existing Faciliites

RESOLUTION 25-13-R

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HANFORD APPROVING HISTORIC RESOURCES PERMIT HRA0018-25, A REQUEST TO MAKE EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE OLD COURTHOUSE, 113 COURT STREET,

BY REMOVAL OF AN EXTERIOR WINDOW AND PORTION OF THE WALL, IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE A NEW ADA-ACCESSIBLE LIFT AND ENTRY. THE

BUILDING IS A CONTRIBUTING BUILDING WITHIN THE HISTORIC OVERLAY ZONE DISTRICT, LOCATED AT 113 COURT STREET (APN 010-265-001).

At a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford duly called and held on April 1, 2025, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Civic Auditorium, it was moved by Council Member ____________, and seconded by Council Member ____________, and duly carried, that the following resolution be adopted:

WHEREAS, an application, filed by Kevin Nickell, for Historic Resources Permit HRA0018-25, as shown in Exhibit A, was presented to the City Council; and

WHEREAS, the proposed project is located at 113 Court Street (APN 010-265-001); and

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Hanford, at a regular meeting on April 1, 2025, reviewed the request for Historic Resources Permit HRA0018-25; and

WHEREAS, Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines categorically exempts “Existing Facilities” from Environmental Review; and

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Hanford reviewed the application for the Historic Resources Permit HRA00 18-25 and found that the application is consistent with Section 17.48 of the Hanford Municipal Code, that the approval of the historic resources permit will allow private investment in the Downtown area, enhance property values, allow the increase of economic and financial benefits to the City and its property owners and inhabitants, and make the following findings:

1. That the proposal will not impact the Historic Overlay Zone since the site is designated as noncontributing.

2. That the proposed project will provide a complementary setting and environment in the Historic District.

3. That the proposed project will promote and encourage continued private ownership and utilization of structures so that the objectives set forth in this section can be attained under this policy.

4. That the request will not adversely affect the public health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Hanford.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Hanford hereby approves Historic Resources Permit HRA0018-25, subject to the following conditions:

1. That the applicant adhere to the design criteria for the Historic Overlay Zone, set forth in Section

17.48 of the Hanford Municipal Code.

2. That the alterations shall be completed in accordance with the proposed changes, as shown in Exhibits A and B. Future changes may be approved by the Community Development Director or forwarded to the City Council for review.

3. That the ADA-lift be a white/greyish color to be verified and approved by the Community Development Department.

4. That should the ADA lift and landing be removed in the future, the building shall be restored to its original form, utilizing the same materials existing throughout the remainder of the building.

5. That the applicant shall contact the State Historic Preservation Officer ( SHPO) to ensure that the proposal is consistent with the requirements of the State of California , as a listed Historical Landmark. [email protected]

6. That approval of this project does not exempt compliance with all applicable sections of the Zoning Ordinance, Public Works Improvement Standards, fees, or other City Ordinances.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , that the City Council of the City of Hanford hereby approves Historic Resources Permit HRA0018-25. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford duly called and held on April 1, 2025 by the following vote:

AYES: _______________________________________________________________________ NOES: _______________________________________________________________________ ABSTAIN: ____________________________________________________________________ ABSENT: _____________________________________________________________________

APPROVED: __________________________
Lou Martinez
MAYOR of the City of Hanford
ATTEST:

NATALIE CORRAL

CITY CLERK

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF KINGS ) ss

CITY OF HANFORD )

I, NATALIE CORRAL, City Clerk of the City of Hanford, do hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford held on the 1
st day of April 2025.

Date: _________________

NATALIE CORRAL

CITY CLERK

Exhibit A
Plan

NOT FORCONSTRUCTION

DATEISSUECOUNTY COURTHOUSE REMODELOWNER /XXXXXXXXX
THESE DOCUMENTS INCLUDE ORIGINAL WORK, INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE, AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF RYAN BROCKETT ARCHITECT INC. THE DESIGN AND INFORMATION REPRESENTED IN THESE DRAWINGS ARE SOLELY FOR USE WITH THIS PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE TRANSFERRED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED WITHOUT EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE ARCHITECT.

02.04.25DRAFT113 COURT ST, HANFORD, CA 93230APN / 010-265-001 2024 BROCKETT ARCHITECTS/INTERIORSCBROCKITECTURE.COM
104 S. Main St. Unit BTempleton, CA 93465Studio 805/ 400 [email protected] Architect C-32384 SCALE:0 1OVERALL SITE PLAN1" = 20'-0"204080
OVERALLSITE PLANA1.1

NOT FORCONSTRUCTION

DATEISSUECOUNTY COURTHOUSE REMODELOWNER /XXXXXXXXX
THESE DOCUMENTS INCLUDE ORIGINAL WORK, INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE, AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF RYAN BROCKETT ARCHITECT INC. THE DESIGN AND INFORMATION REPRESENTED IN THESE DRAWINGS ARE SOLELY FOR USE WITH THIS PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE TRANSFERRED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED WITHOUT EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE ARCHITECT.

02.04.25DRAFT113 COURT ST, HANFORD, CA 93230APN / 010-265-001 2024 BROCKETT ARCHITECTS/INTERIORSCBROCKITECTURE.COM
104 S. Main St. Unit BTempleton, CA 93465Studio 805/ 400 [email protected] Architect C-32384 0N 81/8" = 1'-0"SCALE:42116 1ENLARGED SITE PLANENLARGEDSITE PLANA1.2

SHEET LEGEND

SHEET NOTES
KEYNOTES01SAMPLE KEYNOTE02SAMPLE KEYNOTE03SAMPLE KEYNOTE04SAMPLE KEYNOTE05SAMPLE KEYNOTE

1.REFER TO SITE PLAN GENERAL NOTES ON SHEET T2.12.THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO VERIFY LOT LINES,PRIOR TO FOUNDATION INSPECTION, THE LOT CORNERS SHALL BESTAKED AND SETBACKS MARKED BY A LICENSED SURVEYOR3.SEE CIVIL PLANS FOR CAL FIRE TURNAROUND AREA PER CAL FIRESTANDARDS4.SEE SHEET A1.2 FOR ENLARGED SITE PLAN

PROPERTY LINESETBACK LINEWATER LINESEWER LINEPOWER LINEGAS LINE

1 105'-2"
UPUP
UP
UP
UPUP
UP
UPUP
UP
(E) VACANT SPACE
(E) SALONCOTOURE
(E) ELEC /MECHROOM(E) ELEC(E) ELEVROOM(E) STOR(E) SALON STOR (E) SALON
(E) CHAMBEROFFICE
(E) CHAMBEROFFICE
(E) CHAMBEROFFICE
(E) VACANT SPACE(E) VACANT SPACE
(E) VACANT SPACE
(E) VACANT SPACE
(E) VACANT SPACE
(E) VACANT SPACE
(E) SALON
(E) SALON
(E) SALON
(E) CHAMBERSTOR
(E) CHAMBERSTOR
(E) STOR
(E) SALON
(E) STOR
(E) LOWER FLOOR
(E) LA BELLASPA
2 24'-4"17'-0"
1'-10"14'-0"
(E) COMMON SPACE
(E) COMMON SPACE

NOT FORCONSTRUCTION

DATEISSUECOUNTY COURTHOUSE REMODELOWNER /XXXXXXXXX
THESE DOCUMENTS INCLUDE ORIGINAL WORK, INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE, AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF RYAN BROCKETT ARCHITECT INC. THE DESIGN AND INFORMATION REPRESENTED IN THESE DRAWINGS ARE SOLELY FOR USE WITH THIS PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE TRANSFERRED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED WITHOUT EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE ARCHITECT.

02.04.25DRAFT113 COURT ST, HANFORD, CA 93230APN / 010-265-001 2024 BROCKETT ARCHITECTS/INTERIORSCBROCKITECTURE.COM
104 S. Main St. Unit BTempleton, CA 93465Studio 805/ 400 [email protected] Architect C-32384 EXISTINGLOWER FLOORPLANA2.1SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0" 1EXISTING LOWER FLOOR PLAN

SHEET LEGEND

SHEET NOTES

KEYNOTES

1.REFER TO FLOOR GENERAL NOTES ON SHEET T2.12.SEE DOOR & WINDOW SCHEDULES ON SHEET A6.13.REFER TO REFLECTED CEILING PLAN FOR CEILING HEIGHTS.4.GRIDLINES ARE TO FACE OF CONCRETE OR FRAMING, OR CENTERLINEOF STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.5.FLOOR PLAN DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF FRAMING, CENTERLINE OFDOOR, WINDOW OR FIXTURE, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.6.CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LAYOUT, ROUGH FRAMING AND FINISHDIMENSIONS WITH INTERIOR DOOR AND FINISH SELECTIONS.7.PROVIDE ADEQUATE BLOCKING IN WALLS FOR CABINETS AND OTHERWALL MOUNTED ACCESSORIES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TOHANDRAILS, SHELVING AND BATHROOM FIXTURES.8.WHERE RECESSED FIXTURES OCCUR IN WALLS OR HORIZONTALASSEMBLIES, THE FIRE RATING OF THOSE ASSEMBLIES SHALL BEMAINTAINED.9.AT ALL PENETRATIONS AND INTERSECTIONS OF FIRE-RATEDPARTITIONS, PROVIDE FIRE SEALANT AND/OR FIRE STOPPING TOMAINTAIN CONTINUITY OF PARTITION RATING.10.WHERE DOOR IS LOCATED WITHOUT DIMENSION AT THE CORNER OFA ROOM IT SHALL BE 4" FROM FACE OF FRAMING OF ADJACENT WALLTO ROUGH DOOR OPENING.11.WHERE THRESHOLDS ARE REQUIRED, PROVIDE ACCESSIBLETHRESHOLDS WITH MAXIMUM 1/2" ELEVATION CHANGE. 01CLEAN, REPAIR, & REPLACE AS NEEDED, V.I.F.02(E) WINDOW TO BE REMOVED N 08 421
(E) WALL TO REMAIN(E) TO BE REMOVED

5 6
7 8
11 3'-712"17'-8"
6'-11" 20'-11"
17'-3"
17'-1"
8'-10"
17'-4"
19'-2"
16'-5"
15'-4"
5'-6"13'-11"
5'-0"
SAFE
(E) DISPLAYWIND.
10'-3" GRAND ENTRY

BACK ENTRY
(E) CL
105'-2"
13 2
4 9
(E) JAN
HALL
(E) RR

FRONT ENTRY
(E) OPENAREA
10 (E) OFFICE39'-0" X 22'-11"
(E) OFFICE31'-3" X 20'-10"
(E) OFFICE35'-4" X 24'-8"
(E) OPEN AREA38'-8" X 23'-0"
(E) OPEN AREA38'-8" X 15'-5"
(E) OFFICE21'-2" X 19'-2" (E) CHAMBER OFCOMMERCE39'-8" X 24'-4" 10'-4"
(E) OFFICE16'-10" X 24'-4"
16'-712"
5'-1"
9'-7"
5'-3"

NOT FORCONSTRUCTION

DATEISSUECOUNTY COURTHOUSE REMODELOWNER /XXXXXXXXX
THESE DOCUMENTS INCLUDE ORIGINAL WORK, INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE, AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF RYAN BROCKETT ARCHITECT INC. THE DESIGN AND INFORMATION REPRESENTED IN THESE DRAWINGS ARE SOLELY FOR USE WITH THIS PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE TRANSFERRED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED WITHOUT EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE ARCHITECT.

02.04.25DRAFT113 COURT ST, HANFORD, CA 93230APN / 010-265-001 2024 BROCKETT ARCHITECTS/INTERIORSCBROCKITECTURE.COM
104 S. Main St. Unit BTempleton, CA 93465Studio 805/ 400 [email protected] Architect C-32384 EXISTINGMAIN FLOORPLANA2.2SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0" 1EXISTING MAIN FLOOR PLAN

SHEET LEGEND

SHEET NOTES

KEYNOTES

1.REFER TO FLOOR GENERAL NOTES ON SHEET T2.12.SEE DOOR & WINDOW SCHEDULES ON SHEET A6.13.REFER TO REFLECTED CEILING PLAN FOR CEILING HEIGHTS.4.GRIDLINES ARE TO FACE OF CONCRETE OR FRAMING, OR CENTERLINEOF STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.5.FLOOR PLAN DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF FRAMING, CENTERLINE OFDOOR, WINDOW OR FIXTURE, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.6.CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LAYOUT, ROUGH FRAMING AND FINISHDIMENSIONS WITH INTERIOR DOOR AND FINISH SELECTIONS.7.PROVIDE ADEQUATE BLOCKING IN WALLS FOR CABINETS AND OTHERWALL MOUNTED ACCESSORIES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TOHANDRAILS, SHELVING AND BATHROOM FIXTURES.8.WHERE RECESSED FIXTURES OCCUR IN WALLS OR HORIZONTALASSEMBLIES, THE FIRE RATING OF THOSE ASSEMBLIES SHALL BEMAINTAINED.9.AT ALL PENETRATIONS AND INTERSECTIONS OF FIRE-RATEDPARTITIONS, PROVIDE FIRE SEALANT AND/OR FIRE STOPPING TOMAINTAIN CONTINUITY OF PARTITION RATING.10.WHERE DOOR IS LOCATED WITHOUT DIMENSION AT THE CORNER OFA ROOM IT SHALL BE 4" FROM FACE OF FRAMING OF ADJACENT WALLTO ROUGH DOOR OPENING.11.WHERE THRESHOLDS ARE REQUIRED, PROVIDE ACCESSIBLETHRESHOLDS WITH MAXIMUM 1/2" ELEVATION CHANGE. 01(E) WALLS TO REMAIN, U.N.O.02(E) WINDOWS TO REMAIN, U.N.O.03(E) DOORS TO REMAIN, U.N.O.04(E) STAIRS TO REMAIN05(E) WALL TO BE REMOVED, TYP.06(E) DOOR TO BE REMOVED, TYP.07(E) COLUMN TO BE REMOVED, TYP., SEE STRUCTURAL08(E) GLASS CASE TO BE REMOVED, TYP.09(E) RAILING TO BE REPLACED10(E) TILE TO REMAIN, REPAIR WHERE NEEDED, V.I.F.11(E) EXTERIOR WALL & WINDOW TO BE REMOVED N 08 421
(E) WALL TO REMAIN(E) TO BE REMOVED

24'-4"
19'-4"
17'-312"3'-712"33'-2"
9'-6"9'-10"
6'-11"
6'-7"
12'-112"
6'-5"
3'-10"8'-1112"
5'-0" 4'-0"
10'-1"
5'-0"4'-11"3'-11"
20'-10"
18'-8"5'-2" 13'-9"
10'-0"
10'-0"
UPUP
(E) MENSRESTROOM8'-11" X 12'-11"(E) WOMENSRESTROOM10'-1" X 13'-5" (E) OFFICE16'-4" X 10'-8"
(E) OPENAREA26'-2" X 18'-8"(E) STORAGEROOM26'-7" X 12'-10" (E) HALLWAY
(E) STORAGE
(E) OFFICE10'-8" X 12'-3"
(E) OPEN ROOM31'-6" X 15'-6"
(E) OPEN ROOM22'-1" X 36'-7"
(E) HALL
(E) BACK BALCONY
(E) COFFEEBAR7'-5" X 11'-5"
(E) CL
(E) KITCHEN30'-11" X 15'-7"
(E) EVENT SPACE35'-1" X 50'-11"
(E) ENTRYWAY
(E) SAFE
(E) BACK BALCONY(E) PREP ROOM
(E) COURTROOM33'-2" X 19'-6"(E) OFFICE20'-11" X 24'-4"
105'-2"
(E) FP
(E) ELEV
1 4'-6"
18'-8"
6'-5"
12'-9"
10'-6"11'-8"
5'-10"
16'-7"
(E) SKYLIGHT

NOT FORCONSTRUCTION

DATEISSUECOUNTY COURTHOUSE REMODELOWNER /XXXXXXXXX
THESE DOCUMENTS INCLUDE ORIGINAL WORK, INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE, AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF RYAN BROCKETT ARCHITECT INC. THE DESIGN AND INFORMATION REPRESENTED IN THESE DRAWINGS ARE SOLELY FOR USE WITH THIS PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE TRANSFERRED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED WITHOUT EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE ARCHITECT.

02.04.25DRAFT113 COURT ST, HANFORD, CA 93230APN / 010-265-001 2024 BROCKETT ARCHITECTS/INTERIORSCBROCKITECTURE.COM
104 S. Main St. Unit BTempleton, CA 93465Studio 805/ 400 [email protected] Architect C-32384 EXISTINGUPPER FLOORPLANA2.3SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0" 1EXISTING UPPER FLOOR PLAN

SHEET LEGEND

SHEET NOTES

KEYNOTES

1.REFER TO FLOOR GENERAL NOTES ON SHEET T2.12.SEE DOOR & WINDOW SCHEDULES ON SHEET A6.13.REFER TO REFLECTED CEILING PLAN FOR CEILING HEIGHTS.4.GRIDLINES ARE TO FACE OF CONCRETE OR FRAMING, OR CENTERLINEOF STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.5.FLOOR PLAN DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF FRAMING, CENTERLINE OFDOOR, WINDOW OR FIXTURE, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.6.CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LAYOUT, ROUGH FRAMING AND FINISHDIMENSIONS WITH INTERIOR DOOR AND FINISH SELECTIONS.7.PROVIDE ADEQUATE BLOCKING IN WALLS FOR CABINETS AND OTHERWALL MOUNTED ACCESSORIES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TOHANDRAILS, SHELVING AND BATHROOM FIXTURES.8.WHERE RECESSED FIXTURES OCCUR IN WALLS OR HORIZONTALASSEMBLIES, THE FIRE RATING OF THOSE ASSEMBLIES SHALL BEMAINTAINED.9.AT ALL PENETRATIONS AND INTERSECTIONS OF FIRE-RATEDPARTITIONS, PROVIDE FIRE SEALANT AND/OR FIRE STOPPING TOMAINTAIN CONTINUITY OF PARTITION RATING.10.WHERE DOOR IS LOCATED WITHOUT DIMENSION AT THE CORNER OFA ROOM IT SHALL BE 4" FROM FACE OF FRAMING OF ADJACENT WALLTO ROUGH DOOR OPENING.11.WHERE THRESHOLDS ARE REQUIRED, PROVIDE ACCESSIBLETHRESHOLDS WITH MAXIMUM 1/2" ELEVATION CHANGE.12.

N 08 421
(E) WALL TO REMAIN
01CLEAN, REPAIR, & REPLACE AS NEEDED, V.I.F.

(E) JAN
(N) STOR
HALL
(N) ADAENTRY(N) ADALIFT
105'-2"(E) JANRR
X
XX
(R) TENANT 139'-0" X 22'-11"
(R) TENANT 231'-3" X 20'-10"
(R) TENANT 335'-4" X 24'-8"
(R) TENANT 438'-8" X 23'-0"
(R) TENANT 538'-8" X 15'-5"
(R) TENANT 639'-3" X 24'-4" (E) CHAMBER OFCOMMERCE39'-8" X 24'-4"

FRONT ENTRY
(N) MEN'S RR18'-0" X 10'-5"(N) WOMEN'S RR10'-6" X 24'-7"(N) VESTIBULE16'-2" X 8'-0" (N) STOR
(N) STOR
X

NOT FORCONSTRUCTION

DATEISSUECOUNTY COURTHOUSE REMODELOWNER /XXXXXXXXX
THESE DOCUMENTS INCLUDE ORIGINAL WORK, INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE, AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF RYAN BROCKETT ARCHITECT INC. THE DESIGN AND INFORMATION REPRESENTED IN THESE DRAWINGS ARE SOLELY FOR USE WITH THIS PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE TRANSFERRED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED WITHOUT EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE ARCHITECT.

02.04.25DRAFT113 COURT ST, HANFORD, CA 93230APN / 010-265-001 2024 BROCKETT ARCHITECTS/INTERIORSCBROCKITECTURE.COM
104 S. Main St. Unit BTempleton, CA 93465Studio 805/ 400 [email protected] Architect C-32384 PROPOSEDMAIN FLOORPLANA2.4SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0" 1PROPOSED MAIN FLOOR PLAN

SHEET LEGEND

SHEET NOTES

KEYNOTES

1.REFER TO FLOOR GENERAL NOTES ON SHEET T2.12.SEE DOOR & WINDOW SCHEDULES ON SHEET A6.13.REFER TO REFLECTED CEILING PLAN FOR CEILING HEIGHTS.4.GRIDLINES ARE TO FACE OF CONCRETE OR FRAMING, OR CENTERLINEOF STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.5.FLOOR PLAN DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF FRAMING, CENTERLINE OFDOOR, WINDOW OR FIXTURE, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.6.CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LAYOUT, ROUGH FRAMING AND FINISHDIMENSIONS WITH INTERIOR DOOR AND FINISH SELECTIONS.7.PROVIDE ADEQUATE BLOCKING IN WALLS FOR CABINETS AND OTHERWALL MOUNTED ACCESSORIES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TOHANDRAILS, SHELVING AND BATHROOM FIXTURES.8.WHERE RECESSED FIXTURES OCCUR IN WALLS OR HORIZONTALASSEMBLIES, THE FIRE RATING OF THOSE ASSEMBLIES SHALL BEMAINTAINED.9.AT ALL PENETRATIONS AND INTERSECTIONS OF FIRE-RATEDPARTITIONS, PROVIDE FIRE SEALANT AND/OR FIRE STOPPING TOMAINTAIN CONTINUITY OF PARTITION RATING.10.WHERE DOOR IS LOCATED WITHOUT DIMENSION AT THE CORNER OFA ROOM IT SHALL BE 4" FROM FACE OF FRAMING OF ADJACENT WALLTO ROUGH DOOR OPENING.11.WHERE THRESHOLDS ARE REQUIRED, PROVIDE ACCESSIBLETHRESHOLDS WITH MAXIMUM 1/2" ELEVATION CHANGE. 2X6 WD FRAMED WALL AT 16" O.C. W/ GYP. BD.2X4 WD FRAMED WALL AT 16" O.C. W/ GYP. BD. 01INFILL (E) DOOR02(N) GLASS DOORS AT PREVIOUSLY (E) GLASS CABINET03(N) TILE AT HALLWAYS, TYP.04 REPLACE (E) RAILS W/ (N) STEEL CODE COMPLIANT RAILS, TYP05INFILL (E) GLASS CABINET N 08 421
1A2.5

5'-3"3'-0"3'-0"3'-0"
10'-512"
(N) STOR
(N) MEN'S RR18'-0" X 10'-5"
(N) WOMEN'S RR10'-6" X 24'-7"
(N) VESTIBULE16'-2" X 8'-0"
5'-3"2'-10"2'-10"5'-2"
30"X48" CLR
30"X48" CLR30"X48" CLR
18" MAX.
2'-0"
60"X59" CLR
60"X33" CLR
60"X59" CLR
60"X33" CLR (N) STOR
(N) STOR
6'-0"
9'-1"6'-0"5'-812"
5'-612"
6'-012"
9 10
2 5
4 3
1 6
8 11
2 5 1
7 3 6

NOT FORCONSTRUCTION

DATEISSUECOUNTY COURTHOUSE REMODELOWNER /XXXXXXXXX
THESE DOCUMENTS INCLUDE ORIGINAL WORK, INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE, AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF RYAN BROCKETT ARCHITECT INC. THE DESIGN AND INFORMATION REPRESENTED IN THESE DRAWINGS ARE SOLELY FOR USE WITH THIS PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE TRANSFERRED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED WITHOUT EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE ARCHITECT.

02.04.25DRAFT113 COURT ST, HANFORD, CA 93230APN / 010-265-001 2024 BROCKETT ARCHITECTS/INTERIORSCBROCKITECTURE.COM
104 S. Main St. Unit BTempleton, CA 93465Studio 805/ 400 [email protected] Architect C-32384 ENLARGEDMAIN FLOORPLANA2.5
SCALE:3/8" = 1'-0" 1ENLARGED MAIN FLOOR PLAN

SHEET LEGEND

SHEET NOTES
SHEET LEGEND 1SHEET LEGEND 2SHEET LEGEND 3

KEYNOTES

1.REFER TO FLOOR GENERAL NOTES ON SHEET T2.12.SEE DOOR & WINDOW SCHEDULES ON SHEET A6.13.REFER TO REFLECTED CEILING PLAN FOR CEILING HEIGHTS.4.GRIDLINES ARE TO FACE OF CONCRETE OR FRAMING, OR CENTERLINEOF STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.5.FLOOR PLAN DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF FRAMING, CENTERLINE OFDOOR, WINDOW OR FIXTURE, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.6.CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LAYOUT, ROUGH FRAMING AND FINISHDIMENSIONS WITH INTERIOR DOOR AND FINISH SELECTIONS.7.PROVIDE ADEQUATE BLOCKING IN WALLS FOR CABINETS AND OTHERWALL MOUNTED ACCESSORIES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TOHANDRAILS, SHELVING AND BATHROOM FIXTURES.8.WHERE RECESSED FIXTURES OCCUR IN WALLS OR HORIZONTALASSEMBLIES, THE FIRE RATING OF THOSE ASSEMBLIES SHALL BEMAINTAINED.9.AT ALL PENETRATIONS AND INTERSECTIONS OF FIRE-RATEDPARTITIONS, PROVIDE FIRE SEALANT AND/OR FIRE STOPPING TOMAINTAIN CONTINUITY OF PARTITION RATING.10.WHERE DOOR IS LOCATED WITHOUT DIMENSION AT THE CORNER OFA ROOM IT SHALL BE 4" FROM FACE OF FRAMING OF ADJACENT WALLTO ROUGH DOOR OPENING.11.WHERE THRESHOLDS ARE REQUIRED, PROVIDE ACCESSIBLETHRESHOLDS WITH MAXIMUM 1/2" ELEVATION CHANGE. 2X6 WD FRAMED WALL AT 16" O.C. W/ GYP. BD.2X4 WD FRAMED WALL AT 16" O.C. W/ GYP. BD. 01(N) ACCESSIBLE TOILET, GRAB BARS & ACCESSORIES; MOUNT BOTHGRAB BARS AT SAME HEIGHT 33" MIN - 36" MAX TO THE TOP OF THEGRIPPING SURFACE; ALLOW FOR 1-1/2" CLEARANCE BETWEENBOTTOM OF GRAB BARS AND THE TOP OF ANY ACCESSORIES, TOILETTANKS AND FLUSH VALVES, PER CBC 11B-609.402 (N) ACCESSIBLE SIDE-OPENING WATER CLOSET DOOR; PROVIDE 34"CLEAR OPENING WIDTH AT COMPARTMENT DOOR WITH 4" MAX STILEWIDTH; DOORS SHALL BE SELF-CLOSING W/ COMPLIANT HARDWARECBC 11B-40403(N) FLOOR DRAIN04(N) WALL-HUNG TYPE ACCESSIBLE URINAL, SEE DETAIL 12/A7.205(N) ACCESSIBLE HAND SINK06(N) WALL-MOUNTED ACCESSIBLE PAPER TOWEL DISPENSER07(N) DOOR, TYP.08(N) WALL, TYP.09(E) GLASS CABINET TO BE FILLED10(N) ADA ENTRY DOOR11(N) ADA LIFT N

STOR
HALL
(N) ADAENTRY(N) ADALIFT
STOR
JANRR

FRONT ENTRY
STOR

NOT FORCONSTRUCTION

DATEISSUECOUNTY COURTHOUSE REMODELOWNER /XXXXXXXXX
THESE DOCUMENTS INCLUDE ORIGINAL WORK, INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE, AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF RYAN BROCKETT ARCHITECT INC. THE DESIGN AND INFORMATION REPRESENTED IN THESE DRAWINGS ARE SOLELY FOR USE WITH THIS PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE TRANSFERRED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED WITHOUT EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE ARCHITECT.

02.04.25DRAFT113 COURT ST, HANFORD, CA 93230APN / 010-265-001 2024 BROCKETT ARCHITECTS/INTERIORSCBROCKITECTURE.COM
104 S. Main St. Unit BTempleton, CA 93465Studio 805/ 400 [email protected] Architect C-32384 MAIN FLOORRCPA2.6

SHEET LEGEND

SHEET NOTES

KEYNOTES

1.REFER TO FLOOR GENERAL NOTES ON SHEET T2.12.SEE DOOR & WINDOW SCHEDULES ON SHEET A6.13.REFER TO REFLECTED CEILING PLAN FOR CEILING HEIGHTS.4.GRIDLINES ARE TO FACE OF CONCRETE OR FRAMING, OR CENTERLINEOF STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.5.FLOOR PLAN DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF FRAMING, CENTERLINE OFDOOR, WINDOW OR FIXTURE, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.6.CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LAYOUT, ROUGH FRAMING AND FINISHDIMENSIONS WITH INTERIOR DOOR AND FINISH SELECTIONS.7.PROVIDE ADEQUATE BLOCKING IN WALLS FOR CABINETS AND OTHERWALL MOUNTED ACCESSORIES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TOHANDRAILS, SHELVING AND BATHROOM FIXTURES.8.WHERE RECESSED FIXTURES OCCUR IN WALLS OR HORIZONTALASSEMBLIES, THE FIRE RATING OF THOSE ASSEMBLIES SHALL BEMAINTAINED.9.AT ALL PENETRATIONS AND INTERSECTIONS OF FIRE-RATEDPARTITIONS, PROVIDE FIRE SEALANT AND/OR FIRE STOPPING TOMAINTAIN CONTINUITY OF PARTITION RATING.10.WHERE DOOR IS LOCATED WITHOUT DIMENSION AT THE CORNER OFA ROOM IT SHALL BE 4" FROM FACE OF FRAMING OF ADJACENT WALLTO ROUGH DOOR OPENING.11.WHERE THRESHOLDS ARE REQUIRED, PROVIDE ACCESSIBLETHRESHOLDS WITH MAXIMUM 1/2" ELEVATION CHANGE.

SCALE:3/8" = 1'-0" 1ENLARGED MAIN FLOOR REFLECTED CEILING PLANN

1ST FLOOR LEVEL+/- 6'-0"
T.O. 2F PLATE+/- 32'-3"
F.F.0'-0"
2ND FLOOR LEVEL+/- 17'-10"
6'-412"
14 6'-8"6'-2"
5'-412"
32 NOT FORCONSTRUCTION

DATEISSUECOUNTY COURTHOUSE REMODELOWNER /XXXXXXXXX
THESE DOCUMENTS INCLUDE ORIGINAL WORK, INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE, AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF RYAN BROCKETT ARCHITECT INC. THE DESIGN AND INFORMATION REPRESENTED IN THESE DRAWINGS ARE SOLELY FOR USE WITH THIS PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE TRANSFERRED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED WITHOUT EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE ARCHITECT.

02.04.25DRAFT113 COURT ST, HANFORD, CA 93230APN / 010-265-001 2024 BROCKETT ARCHITECTS/INTERIORSCBROCKITECTURE.COM
104 S. Main St. Unit BTempleton, CA 93465Studio 805/ 400 [email protected] Architect C-32384 SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0" 2SIDE EXTERIOR ELEVATION / EASTEXTERIORELEVATIONSA3.1

SHEET LEGEND

SHEET NOTES
SHEET LEGEND 1SHEET LEGEND 2SHEET LEGEND 3
KEYNOTESSCALE:3/16" = 1'-0" 1FRONT EXTERIOR ELEVATION / SOUTH

1.REFER TO EXTERIOR ELEVATION GENERAL NOTES ON SHEET T2.12.GRIDLINES ARE TO FACE OF CONCRETE OR FRAMING, OR CENTERLINEOF STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.3.EXTERIOR MATERIALS ARE SHOWN GENERICALLY. ACTUALMATERIALS TO BE SELECTED BY ARCHITECT OR OWNER.

COMP SHINGLE ROOF, SPEC TBD, TYP.JAMES HARDIE "ARTISAN" VERTICAL V-GROOVEFIBER CEMENT SIDING W/ LOCK JOINT SYSTEM,5/8" THICK; COLOR TBD, TYP. REFER TOMANUFACTURERS INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONSSOLID-SAWN 1X WOOD VERTICAL TONGUE &GROOVE SIDING, MIN 4" BOARD WIDTH OVER 5/8"TYPE-X GYP BOARD; STAIN COLOR TBD, TYP. 01(E) WINDOW TO REMAIN, TYP.02(E) WINDOW TO BE REMOVED, SEE MAIN FLOOR PLAN03(E) ADA LIFT, SPEC _______04(E) DOOR TO REMAIN, TYP.

NOT FORCONSTRUCTION

DATEISSUECOUNTY COURTHOUSE REMODELOWNER /XXXXXXXXX
THESE DOCUMENTS INCLUDE ORIGINAL WORK, INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE, AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF RYAN BROCKETT ARCHITECT INC. THE DESIGN AND INFORMATION REPRESENTED IN THESE DRAWINGS ARE SOLELY FOR USE WITH THIS PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE TRANSFERRED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED WITHOUT EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE ARCHITECT.

02.04.25DRAFT113 COURT ST, HANFORD, CA 93230APN / 010-265-001 2024 BROCKETT ARCHITECTS/INTERIORSCBROCKITECTURE.COM
104 S. Main St. Unit BTempleton, CA 93465Studio 805/ 400 [email protected] Architect C-32384 SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0" 2SIDE EXTERIOR ELEVATION / WEST

SHEET LEGEND

SHEET NOTES
SHEET LEGEND 1SHEET LEGEND 2SHEET LEGEND 3

KEYNOTES

1.SAMPLE SHEET NOTE2.SAMPLE SHEET NOTE3.SAMPLE SHEET NOTE EXTERIORELEVATIONSA3.2
SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0" 1REAR EXTERIOR ELEVATION / NORTH01SAMPLE KEYNOTE02SAMPLE KEYNOTE03SAMPLE KEYNOTE04SAMPLE KEYNOTE05SAMPLE KEYNOTE

Exhibit B
Specification

42"[1067]min
1/2
DATE:JOB No.LOCATIONARCHITECTGENERALCONTRACTOR
mmINCHESTOTALTRAVEL
CHECKED BY:DWN. BY:

SCALE:N.T.S.

No. OFLANDINGS 2
REV
/
DRAWING No.INSTALLATION DETAILSAND SPECIFICATIONSFLEX LIFT TOWERHEIGHT[TH] LIFTINGRANGE[LR]
SPECIFICATIONSPLATFORM SIZE36"x48" [914mm x 1219mm]FOOTPRINT51"x48" [1295mm x 1219mm]MAX LOAD750lb [340kg]SPEED8fpm [0.04mps]DRIVE TYPESCREW NUT SYNCHRONOUS BELT DRIVEMOTOR SPEC1/2 HP [0.37kW] POWER SUPPLY110V / 1PH / 60HzSAFETY PLATE BENEATH PLATFORMNON-LOAD-BEARING BACKUP SAFETY NUT

BASE LEGS ANCHORED TO GROUND

PLAN VIEWVARIABLE DIMENSIONS
1/2
DATE:JOB No.LOCATIONARCHITECTGENERALCONTRACTOR
mmINCHESTOTALTRAVEL
CHECKED BY:DWN. BY:

SCALE:N.T.S.

No. OFLANDINGS 2
REV
/
DRAWING No.INSTALLATION DETAILSAND SPECIFICATIONSFLEX LIFT 36"[914]48"[1219]
LIFTING RANGE[LR]TOWER HEIGHT[TH]SHORT COVERTALL COVER28" [711]5012" [1283] 6112" [1562] 52" [1321] 72" [1829] 96" [2438]120" [3048]144" [3658]168" [4267] LANDING BARRIER TYPEROUGH OPENING WIDTHROUGH OPENING HEIGHTRAM 36x42 STEEL GATE4412" [1130] N/ARAM 36x42 ALUM & GLASS GATE4412" [1130] N/ARAM 36x80 ALUM. & GLASS DOOR (MANUAL)4412" [1130] 8214" [2089]RAM 36x80 ALUM. & GLASS DOOR (AUTO)4412" [1130] 8614" [2191]FIRE RATED 36x80 (MANUAL & NON-CONCEALED AUTO)4412" [1130] 8414" [2140]FIRE RATED 36x80 (CONCEALED AUTO)4412" [1130] 8634" [2203] *NOTE: CONSULT DETAILED SPEC SHEET FOR LANDING BARRIER DETAILS 15"[381]

TOWERSUPPORTWALL

OPTIONALWALL
32-3/4"[832] LANDINGBARRIERROUGH OPENING(SEE GATE SPEC) 3"CLEARANCEIF WALL ISIN PLACE
55"[1397]

FOLDING RAMP

NOT FORCONSTRUCTION

DATEISSUECOUNTY COURTHOUSE REMODELOWNER /XXXXXXXXX
THESE DOCUMENTS INCLUDE ORIGINAL WORK, INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE, AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF RYAN BROCKETT ARCHITECT INC. THE DESIGN AND INFORMATION REPRESENTED IN THESE DRAWINGS ARE SOLELY FOR USE WITH THIS PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE TRANSFERRED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED WITHOUT EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE ARCHITECT.

02.04.25DRAFT113 COURT ST, HANFORD, CA 93230APN / 010-265-001 2024 BROCKETT ARCHITECTS/INTERIORSCBROCKITECTURE.COM
104 S. Main St. Unit BTempleton, CA 93465Studio 805/ 400 [email protected] Architect C-32384 SCALE:0 1OVERALL SITE PLAN1" = 20'-0"204080
OVERALLSITE PLANA1.1

NOT FORCONSTRUCTION

DATEISSUECOUNTY COURTHOUSE REMODELOWNER /XXXXXXXXX
THESE DOCUMENTS INCLUDE ORIGINAL WORK, INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE, AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF RYAN BROCKETT ARCHITECT INC. THE DESIGN AND INFORMATION REPRESENTED IN THESE DRAWINGS ARE SOLELY FOR USE WITH THIS PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE TRANSFERRED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED WITHOUT EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE ARCHITECT.

02.04.25DRAFT113 COURT ST, HANFORD, CA 93230APN / 010-265-001 2024 BROCKETT ARCHITECTS/INTERIORSCBROCKITECTURE.COM
104 S. Main St. Unit BTempleton, CA 93465Studio 805/ 400 [email protected] Architect C-32384 0N 81/8" = 1'-0"SCALE:42116 1ENLARGED SITE PLANENLARGEDSITE PLANA1.2

SHEET LEGEND

SHEET NOTES
KEYNOTES01SAMPLE KEYNOTE02SAMPLE KEYNOTE03SAMPLE KEYNOTE04SAMPLE KEYNOTE05SAMPLE KEYNOTE

1.REFER TO SITE PLAN GENERAL NOTES ON SHEET T2.12.THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO VERIFY LOT LINES,PRIOR TO FOUNDATION INSPECTION, THE LOT CORNERS SHALL BESTAKED AND SETBACKS MARKED BY A LICENSED SURVEYOR3.SEE CIVIL PLANS FOR CAL FIRE TURNAROUND AREA PER CAL FIRESTANDARDS4.SEE SHEET A1.2 FOR ENLARGED SITE PLAN

PROPERTY LINESETBACK LINEWATER LINESEWER LINEPOWER LINEGAS LINE

1 105'-2"
UPUP
UP
UP
UPUP
UP
UPUP
UP
(E) VACANT SPACE
(E) SALONCOTOURE
(E) ELEC /MECHROOM(E) ELEC(E) ELEVROOM(E) STOR(E) SALON STOR (E) SALON
(E) CHAMBEROFFICE
(E) CHAMBEROFFICE
(E) CHAMBEROFFICE
(E) VACANT SPACE(E) VACANT SPACE
(E) VACANT SPACE
(E) VACANT SPACE
(E) VACANT SPACE
(E) VACANT SPACE
(E) SALON
(E) SALON
(E) SALON
(E) CHAMBERSTOR
(E) CHAMBERSTOR
(E) STOR
(E) SALON
(E) STOR
(E) LOWER FLOOR
(E) LA BELLASPA
2 24'-4"17'-0"
1'-10"14'-0"
(E) COMMON SPACE
(E) COMMON SPACE

NOT FORCONSTRUCTION

DATEISSUECOUNTY COURTHOUSE REMODELOWNER /XXXXXXXXX
THESE DOCUMENTS INCLUDE ORIGINAL WORK, INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE, AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF RYAN BROCKETT ARCHITECT INC. THE DESIGN AND INFORMATION REPRESENTED IN THESE DRAWINGS ARE SOLELY FOR USE WITH THIS PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE TRANSFERRED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED WITHOUT EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE ARCHITECT.

02.04.25DRAFT113 COURT ST, HANFORD, CA 93230APN / 010-265-001 2024 BROCKETT ARCHITECTS/INTERIORSCBROCKITECTURE.COM
104 S. Main St. Unit BTempleton, CA 93465Studio 805/ 400 [email protected] Architect C-32384 EXISTINGLOWER FLOORPLANA2.1SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0" 1EXISTING LOWER FLOOR PLAN

SHEET LEGEND

SHEET NOTES

KEYNOTES

1.REFER TO FLOOR GENERAL NOTES ON SHEET T2.12.SEE DOOR & WINDOW SCHEDULES ON SHEET A6.13.REFER TO REFLECTED CEILING PLAN FOR CEILING HEIGHTS.4.GRIDLINES ARE TO FACE OF CONCRETE OR FRAMING, OR CENTERLINEOF STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.5.FLOOR PLAN DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF FRAMING, CENTERLINE OFDOOR, WINDOW OR FIXTURE, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.6.CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LAYOUT, ROUGH FRAMING AND FINISHDIMENSIONS WITH INTERIOR DOOR AND FINISH SELECTIONS.7.PROVIDE ADEQUATE BLOCKING IN WALLS FOR CABINETS AND OTHERWALL MOUNTED ACCESSORIES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TOHANDRAILS, SHELVING AND BATHROOM FIXTURES.8.WHERE RECESSED FIXTURES OCCUR IN WALLS OR HORIZONTALASSEMBLIES, THE FIRE RATING OF THOSE ASSEMBLIES SHALL BEMAINTAINED.9.AT ALL PENETRATIONS AND INTERSECTIONS OF FIRE-RATEDPARTITIONS, PROVIDE FIRE SEALANT AND/OR FIRE STOPPING TOMAINTAIN CONTINUITY OF PARTITION RATING.10.WHERE DOOR IS LOCATED WITHOUT DIMENSION AT THE CORNER OFA ROOM IT SHALL BE 4" FROM FACE OF FRAMING OF ADJACENT WALLTO ROUGH DOOR OPENING.11.WHERE THRESHOLDS ARE REQUIRED, PROVIDE ACCESSIBLETHRESHOLDS WITH MAXIMUM 1/2" ELEVATION CHANGE. 01CLEAN, REPAIR, & REPLACE AS NEEDED, V.I.F.02(E) WINDOW TO BE REMOVED N 08 421
(E) WALL TO REMAIN(E) TO BE REMOVED

5 6
7 8
11 3'-712"17'-8"
6'-11" 20'-11"
17'-3"
17'-1"
8'-10"
17'-4"
19'-2"
16'-5"
15'-4"
5'-6"13'-11"
5'-0"
SAFE
(E) DISPLAYWIND.
10'-3" GRAND ENTRY

BACK ENTRY
(E) CL
105'-2"
13 2
4 9
(E) JAN
HALL
(E) RR

FRONT ENTRY
(E) OPENAREA
10 (E) OFFICE39'-0" X 22'-11"
(E) OFFICE31'-3" X 20'-10"
(E) OFFICE35'-4" X 24'-8"
(E) OPEN AREA38'-8" X 23'-0"
(E) OPEN AREA38'-8" X 15'-5"
(E) OFFICE21'-2" X 19'-2" (E) CHAMBER OFCOMMERCE39'-8" X 24'-4" 10'-4"
(E) OFFICE16'-10" X 24'-4"
16'-712"
5'-1"
9'-7"
5'-3"

NOT FORCONSTRUCTION

DATEISSUECOUNTY COURTHOUSE REMODELOWNER /XXXXXXXXX
THESE DOCUMENTS INCLUDE ORIGINAL WORK, INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE, AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF RYAN BROCKETT ARCHITECT INC. THE DESIGN AND INFORMATION REPRESENTED IN THESE DRAWINGS ARE SOLELY FOR USE WITH THIS PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE TRANSFERRED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED WITHOUT EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE ARCHITECT.

02.04.25DRAFT113 COURT ST, HANFORD, CA 93230APN / 010-265-001 2024 BROCKETT ARCHITECTS/INTERIORSCBROCKITECTURE.COM
104 S. Main St. Unit BTempleton, CA 93465Studio 805/ 400 [email protected] Architect C-32384 EXISTINGMAIN FLOORPLANA2.2SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0" 1EXISTING MAIN FLOOR PLAN

SHEET LEGEND

SHEET NOTES

KEYNOTES

1.REFER TO FLOOR GENERAL NOTES ON SHEET T2.12.SEE DOOR & WINDOW SCHEDULES ON SHEET A6.13.REFER TO REFLECTED CEILING PLAN FOR CEILING HEIGHTS.4.GRIDLINES ARE TO FACE OF CONCRETE OR FRAMING, OR CENTERLINEOF STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.5.FLOOR PLAN DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF FRAMING, CENTERLINE OFDOOR, WINDOW OR FIXTURE, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.6.CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LAYOUT, ROUGH FRAMING AND FINISHDIMENSIONS WITH INTERIOR DOOR AND FINISH SELECTIONS.7.PROVIDE ADEQUATE BLOCKING IN WALLS FOR CABINETS AND OTHERWALL MOUNTED ACCESSORIES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TOHANDRAILS, SHELVING AND BATHROOM FIXTURES.8.WHERE RECESSED FIXTURES OCCUR IN WALLS OR HORIZONTALASSEMBLIES, THE FIRE RATING OF THOSE ASSEMBLIES SHALL BEMAINTAINED.9.AT ALL PENETRATIONS AND INTERSECTIONS OF FIRE-RATEDPARTITIONS, PROVIDE FIRE SEALANT AND/OR FIRE STOPPING TOMAINTAIN CONTINUITY OF PARTITION RATING.10.WHERE DOOR IS LOCATED WITHOUT DIMENSION AT THE CORNER OFA ROOM IT SHALL BE 4" FROM FACE OF FRAMING OF ADJACENT WALLTO ROUGH DOOR OPENING.11.WHERE THRESHOLDS ARE REQUIRED, PROVIDE ACCESSIBLETHRESHOLDS WITH MAXIMUM 1/2" ELEVATION CHANGE. 01(E) WALLS TO REMAIN, U.N.O.02(E) WINDOWS TO REMAIN, U.N.O.03(E) DOORS TO REMAIN, U.N.O.04(E) STAIRS TO REMAIN05(E) WALL TO BE REMOVED, TYP.06(E) DOOR TO BE REMOVED, TYP.07(E) COLUMN TO BE REMOVED, TYP., SEE STRUCTURAL08(E) GLASS CASE TO BE REMOVED, TYP.09(E) RAILING TO BE REPLACED10(E) TILE TO REMAIN, REPAIR WHERE NEEDED, V.I.F.11(E) EXTERIOR WALL & WINDOW TO BE REMOVED N 08 421
(E) WALL TO REMAIN(E) TO BE REMOVED

24'-4"
19'-4"
17'-312"3'-712"33'-2"
9'-6"9'-10"
6'-11"
6'-7"
12'-112"
6'-5"
3'-10"8'-1112"
5'-0" 4'-0"
10'-1"
5'-0"4'-11"3'-11"
20'-10"
18'-8"5'-2" 13'-9"
10'-0"
10'-0"
UPUP
(E) MENSRESTROOM8'-11" X 12'-11"(E) WOMENSRESTROOM10'-1" X 13'-5" (E) OFFICE16'-4" X 10'-8"
(E) OPENAREA26'-2" X 18'-8"(E) STORAGEROOM26'-7" X 12'-10" (E) HALLWAY
(E) STORAGE
(E) OFFICE10'-8" X 12'-3"
(E) OPEN ROOM31'-6" X 15'-6"
(E) OPEN ROOM22'-1" X 36'-7"
(E) HALL
(E) BACK BALCONY
(E) COFFEEBAR7'-5" X 11'-5"
(E) CL
(E) KITCHEN30'-11" X 15'-7"
(E) EVENT SPACE35'-1" X 50'-11"
(E) ENTRYWAY
(E) SAFE
(E) BACK BALCONY(E) PREP ROOM
(E) COURTROOM33'-2" X 19'-6"(E) OFFICE20'-11" X 24'-4"
105'-2"
(E) FP
(E) ELEV
1 4'-6"
18'-8"
6'-5"
12'-9"
10'-6"11'-8"
5'-10"
16'-7"
(E) SKYLIGHT

NOT FORCONSTRUCTION

DATEISSUECOUNTY COURTHOUSE REMODELOWNER /XXXXXXXXX
THESE DOCUMENTS INCLUDE ORIGINAL WORK, INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE, AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF RYAN BROCKETT ARCHITECT INC. THE DESIGN AND INFORMATION REPRESENTED IN THESE DRAWINGS ARE SOLELY FOR USE WITH THIS PROJECT AND SHALL NOT BE TRANSFERRED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED WITHOUT EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE ARCHITECT.

02.04.25DRAFT113 COURT ST, HANFORD, CA 93230APN / 010-265-001 2024 BROCKETT ARCHITECTS/INTERIORSCBROCKITECTURE.COM
104 S. Main St. Unit BTempleton, CA 93465Studio 805/ 400 [email protected] Architect C-32384 EXISTINGUPPER FLOORPLANA2.3SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0" 1EXISTING UPPER FLOOR PLAN

SHEET LEGEND

SHEET NOTES

KEYNOTES

1.REFER TO FLOOR GENERAL NOTES ON SHEET T2.12.SEE DOOR & WINDOW SCHEDULES ON SHEET A6.13.REFER TO REFLECTED CEILING PLAN FOR CEILING HEIGHTS.4.GRIDLINES ARE TO FACE OF CONCRETE OR FRAMING, OR CENTERLINEOF STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.5.FLOOR PLAN DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF FRAMING, CENTERLINE OFDOOR, WINDOW OR FIXTURE, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.6.CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY LAYOUT, ROUGH FRAMING AND FINISHDIMENSIONS WITH INTERIOR DOOR AND FINISH SELECTIONS.7.PROVIDE ADEQUATE BLOCKING IN WALLS FOR CABINETS AND OTHERWALL MOUNTED ACCESSORIES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TOHANDRAILS, SHELVING AND BATHROOM FIXTURES.8.WHERE RECESSED FIXTURES OCCUR IN WALLS OR HORIZONTALASSEMBLIES, THE FIRE RATING OF THOSE ASSEMBLIES SHALL BEMAINTAINED.9.AT ALL PENETRATIONS AND INTERSECTIONS OF FIRE-RATEDPARTITIONS, PROVIDE FIRE SEALANT AND/OR FIRE STOPPING TOMAINTAIN CONTINUITY OF PARTITION RATING.10.WHERE DOOR IS LOCATED WITHOUT DIMENSION AT THE CORNER OFA ROOM IT SHALL BE 4" FROM FACE OF FRAMING OF ADJACENT WALLTO ROUGH DOOR OPENING.11.WHERE THRESHOLDS ARE REQUIRED, PROVIDE ACCESSIBLETHRESHOLDS WITH MAXIMUM 1/2" ELEVATION CHANGE.12.

N 08 421
(E) WALL TO REMAIN
01CLEAN, REPAIR, & REPLACE AS NEEDED, V.I.F.