Gabe Sasser
Project Manager
RANGE OF EXPERIENCE
Gabe is a Project Manager in our Northern California office. He supports clients throughout California to develop cost -of-service studies and rate updates for water, wastewater, and solid waste fees and charges.
Since joining HF&H in 2019, he has served our clients as an analyst and project manager over the course of more than sixty
engagements. Clients benefit from his technical experience as a registered civil engineer. As a certified Project Management Professional, he is a proven communicator, conscientious of client budget and schedule. Agencies can depend on the Proposition 218 compliant solutions Gabe provides due to his technical background and rate modeling proficiency. Gabe seeks to help clients balance their solid waste, water, and wastewater ratemaking needs while ensuring fiscal stability.
EXPERTISE
• Rates and Charges – Multi-year financial modeling, cost -of- service analysis, rate structure design
• Development Impact Fees – Water and wastewater capacity and connection charges; stormwater impact fees
• Proposition 218 compliance
RECENT PROJECTS
• City of Redwood City – Solid Waste Cost of Service Studies (2022-2024)
• City of Redwood City – Franchise Fee Justification (2024) • West Valley Solid Waste Management Authority – Franchise Fee Justification, Vehicle Impact Analysis
• City of Whittier – Franchise Fee Justification
• City of Santee – Franchise Fee Justification
• City of Azusa – Franchise Fee Justification
• City of Foster City – Solid Waste Cost of Service Study, Franchise Fee Justification
• City of San Mateo – Solid Waste Cost of Service Studies (2020- 2025)
• Town of Hillsborough – Solid Waste Cost of Service Study , Solid Waste Rate Updates (2021-2025)
• City of Santa Maria – Landfill Fee Model
Industry Experience
• Water, wastewater,
stormwater, and solid
waste utilities
• Rate making for
municipal-owned utilities
• Enterprise
reimbursements
Education and
Certifications
• B.S., Civil Engineering,
California Polytechnic
State University – San
Luis Obispo
• Registered Civil Engineer
C88906, California
• Project Management
Professional (PMP) -2023
Professional History
• HF&H Consultants, LLC:
2019 to present
• Gas Transmission
Systems, Inc: Project
Manager, 2016-2019,
2012-2014
• Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar:
Assistant Engineer, 2014-
2016
Professional
Memberships
• Project Management
Institute
• American Water Works
Association
• Association of California
Water Agencies
Contact Information
(925) 900-6005
[email protected]
“My passion is merging our client’s operational and environmental initiatives through detailed financial analysis.”
RANGE OF EXPERIENCE
Danielle Derby specializes in providing rate and audit services within our solid waste and recycling practice. She has experience reviewing costs for programs and services that comply with SB 1383 regulations, performing index, cost-based, and special rate reviews for solid waste rate adjustment, and performing compliance reviews. Her expertise lies in executing cost of service studies for jurisdictions looking to enact solid waste rates that are compliant with Proposition 218 , which requires extensive data gathering, financial modeling, and communication with stakeholders . Danielle also works with the contract services side of HF&H by assisting with solid waste procurements. Her work ranges from evaluating proposer cost forms; benchmarking proposed programs, comparing operating statistics and rates; and supporting negotiations. Prior to joining HF&H, Danielle worked as an auditor at
PricewaterhouseCoopers.
Annually, Danielle assists multiple jurisdictions with their rate setting adjustment application review and calculation. Currently, she is assisting the City of San Jose with its annual commercial rate adjustment and the City of Livermore with its cost- based rate adjustment by comparing contractor’s rate applications to the applicable methodologies within their respective franchise agreements. In the coming months , Danielle will continue to support the City of Sunnyvale with its annual contractor’s compensation adjustment which requires detailed reconciliation and projection of various expense categories. Danielle has assisted the City of Oakland with its annual rate setting for the past 4 years and plans to assist the City once again in March.
EXPERTISE
• Financial modeling/assurance for cost of service rate structures
• Data gathering and detailed support validation
• Cost review and compliance for franchise agreements
• Annual index or cost-based rate reviews
RECENT ENGAGEMENTS
• City of Oakland: Annual Solid Waste Rate Setting
• City of San Jose: Annual Commercial Rate Setting
• City of Sunnyvale: Annual Contractor
RECENT CLIENTS
DANIELLE DERBY
Senior Associate
Historical Experience
Clients Served: 84
Past Engagements: 192
Education
B.S., Accounting, Saint
Mary’s College, Moraga
Certified Public Accountant
License Number: 138309
Professional History
HF&H Consultants, LLC: 2019
to present
PricewaterhouseCoopers:
2016 to 2019
Speaking Engagements
SWANA SoCal Webinar:
Commodity Market Trends
(2022)
Cal Recycle Zone Works:
Commodity Markets &
Influences (2022)
Contact Information
(925) 900-5950
[email protected]
La Velda Peterson
Assistant Analyst
RANGE OF EXPERIENCE
As an Assistant Analyst, La Velda provides support to HF&H’s Rates and Audit team. She specializes in developing water and wastewater rates in compliance with Proposition 218. She has experience performing index reviews and water use analyses and communicating customer bill impacts.
Prior to joining HF&H, in April 2025, La Velda worked in treasury and risk management at Sacramento Municipal Utility District. Here, she performed net present value analysis for potential clean energy projects, managed interest rate swap transactions, and assisted in bond transactions.
She also worked at the California Department of Justice in the fiscal services section. Here she performed year-end financial analysis by breaking down spending by department and month.
La Velda earned her Bachelor of Science in Business
Administration (Finance) from California State University Sacramento.
La Velda’s professional and educational background has
equipped her with the means necessary to support her clients in the water and wastewater industry.
EXPERTISE
• Financial Modeling
• Data Analysis
• Customer Bill Impacts
RECENT PROJECTS
• City of Hillsborough – Water Rate Study
• City of Pleasanton – Index Rate Review
• South Coast Water District – Water and Sewer Rate Study • City of Redwood City – Water Rate Study
• City of West Sacramento – Water and Sewer Rate Study
RECENT CLIENTS
Education and
Certifications
• B.S., Business
Administration (Finance)/
Minors in Economics and
Environmental Studies,
California State
University, Sacramento
Professional History
• HF&H Consultants, LLC:
2025 to present
• Sacramento Municipal
Utility District (SMUD):
2023-2024
• California Department of
Justice 2023
Contact Information
(925) 977-6954
[email protected]
ATTACHMENT 2
Required Forms
NON-COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT
(Submit with Proposal)
TO: THE CITY OF HANFORD
The undersigned, in submitting aproposalfor performing thefollowingwork by contract,being duly sworn, deposes and says:
That he/she has not, either directly or indirectly, entered into any agreement, participated in any collusion, or otherwise taken any action in restraint of free competition in connection with such contract.
Work to be performed: RFP No. 2025-14
Refuse Rate Study
Proposer's Name: / ¢HA ) f. y o0 soy
Signature of Proposer: .&;, L /~
Til e: S N Ioe Vt [ S r 7
Business Address: 9 0 Y4/ A o / ALL Y o A , u u7 lo
2 Aw9 uT ck , cA 4 s q 'Place of Residence: BP [CLA, CA s at«eor: CALIF/¢
cows or Ce01RAel'
on l y, )yet» a . Phy 2o 2 5 s torer e,
2722,3,3±, -'£ . .. . rsevidence to be the person(s) whose name(s@ are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me tha@' she/they executed the same inf@yher/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by 'her/their signature(s) onthe instrumentthe person(s), orthe entity upon behalf ofwhichthe person(s) acted,executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct
WITNESS m~ nd and official seal.
se ar s 4au> 7)»ThomasF.Noon,Ji
-NotaryPublic
(Seal) TiioinisF.o oi JR lCOMM. #2435068 z
NotaryPublic-California 3ContraCostaCounty ....
Comm.ExpiresFeb. 13,2027
RFP 2025-14
Refuse Rate Study
23
RFP 2025-14
Refuse Rate Study
24 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION INSURANCE CERTIFICATE
(Submit with Proposal)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss
CITY OF HANFORD )
I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every employer to be insured against liability for workers’ compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work under this contract.
Company: ____________________________________________________________________________ Business Address: _____________________________________________________________________ Signature: ____________________________________________________________________________ Name of Signing Official: _______________________________________________________________ Title of Signing Official: ________________________________________________________________ Date: ____________________________________________________ Company Seal:
HF&H Consultants, LLC
590 Ygnacio Valley Road, Suite 105, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Senior Vice President
May 16, 2025
Richard Simonson
Docusign Envelope ID: 005EE2B2-6B78-46AE-951E-12A8D68FDA35
RFP 2025-14
Refuse Rate Study
25 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE
(EXECUTIVE ORDER 11246)
(Submit with Proposal)
Equal Opportunity Clause
Unless exempted by rules, regulations or orders of the Secretary of Labor issued pursuant to Executive Orders 10925, 11114 or Section 204 of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, during the performance of each contract with the City of Hanford, the Proposer agrees as follows:
1. The proposer will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, gender, national origin, or political affiliation. The proposer will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, gender, national origin, or political affiliation. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment upgrading, demotion or transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation, and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The proposer agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices to be provided by the contracting officer setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause.
2. The proposer will, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees, placed by or on behalf of the proposer, state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, gender, national origin or political affiliation.
3. The proposer will send to each labor union or representative of workers with which he has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, a notice to be provided by the agency contracting officer, advising the labor union or the workers’ representative of the proposer commitments under Section 202 of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and shall post copies of the notice on conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment.
4. The proposer will comply with all provisions of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and the rules, regulations and relevancy orders of the Secretary of Labor.
5. The proposer will furnish all information and reports required by Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and by the rules, regulations and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor, or pursuant thereto, and will permit access to his books, records and accounts by the contracting agency and the Secretary of Labor for purposes of investigation to ascertain compliance with such rules, regulations and orders.
6. In the event of the proposer’s non-compliance with the non-discrimination clauses of this subcontract or with any of such rules, regulations or orders, this subcontract may be canceled, terminated or suspended, in whole, or in part and the proposer may be declared ineligible for further government contracts in accordance with the procedures authorized in accordance with Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and such other sanctions may be imposed and remedies invoked as provided in Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, or by rule, regulation or order of the Secretary of Labor, or otherwise provided by law.
7. The proposer will include the provisions of Paragraphs (1) through (7) in every subcontract or purchase order unless exempted by rules, regulations or orders of the Secretary of Labor issued pursuant to Section 204 of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, so that such provisions will be binding upon each subcontractor or vendor. The proposer will take such action with respect to any subcontract or purchase order as the contracting agency may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions including sanctions for non-compliance. Provided, however, that in the event the proposer becomes involved in, or is threatened with litigation with a subcontractor or vendor as a result of such direction by the contracting agency, the proposer may request the United States to enter into such litigation to protect the interest of the United States.
Company Name: _________________________________________________________ Business Address: ________________________________________________________ Signature: _______________________________________________________________ Name of Signing Official (type): _____________________________________________ Title of Signing Official (type): ______________________________________________ Date: ___________________________________________________________________ (Seal) HF&H Consultants, LLC
590 Ygnacio Valley Road, Suite 105, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Senior Vice President
May 16, 2025
Richard Simonson
Docusign Envelope ID: 005EE2B2-6B78-46AE-951E-12A8D68FDA35
RFP 2025-14
Refuse Rate Study
26 AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE (Submit with Proposal)
By submission of a bid, the BIDDER certifies it will comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C., 12101 et. seq., and will maintain compliance throughout the life of this Contract. By commencing performance of the Contract work, the selected BIDDER certifies to the Americans with Disabilities Act compliance.
Company: ____________________________________________________________________________ Business Address: _____________________________________________________________________ Signature: ____________________________________________________________________________ Name of Signing Official: _______________________________________________________________ Title of Signing Official: ________________________________________________________________ Date: ____________________________________________________ Company Seal:
HF&H Consultants, LLC
590 Ygnacio Valley Road, Suite 105, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Senior Vice President
May 16, 2025
Richard Simonson
Docusign Envelope ID: 005EE2B2-6B78-46AE-951E-12A8D68FDA35
RFP 2025-14
Refuse Rate Study
27 CITY OF HANFORD, CA OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FOR
CONTRACTORS AND CONSULTANTS
(Submit with Proposal)
NAMES OF PRINCIPALS, PARTNERS, AND/OR TRUSTEES:
NAMES OF PRINCIPALS, PARTNERS, AND/OR TRUSTEES:
Firm Name: _______________________________________________________________________ Firm Address: _____________________________________________________________________ List the names of all principals, partners, and/or trustees. For corporations provide names of officers, directors and all stockholders owning more than 10% equity interest in corporation:
Rob Hilton
Richard Simonson
Laith Ezzet
Submitte
d by: Name ___________________________________________________________________ Date ________________________________
HF&H Consultants, LLC
590 Ygnacio Valley Road, Suite 105, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Richard Simonson
May 16, 2025
Docusign Envelope ID: 005EE2B2-6B78-46AE-951E-12A8D68FDA35
RFP 2025-14
Refuse Rate Study
28 STATE OF CALIFORNIA DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE CERTIFICATION STD.21 (REV.12-93)
(Submit with Proposal)
I, the official named below, hereby swear that I am duly authorized legally to bind the contractor or grant recipient to the certification described below. I am fully aware that this certification, executed on the date below, is made under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California.
Contractor Proposer Firm Name: ________________________________________________________ Federal ID Number: __________________________________________________________________ BY (Authorized Signature): ____________________________________________________________ Date Executed: ______________________________________________________________________ Printed Name of Person Signing: ________________________________________________________ Telephone Number (Including Area Code): ________________________________________________ Title: ______________________________________________________________________________ Contractor/Proposer Firm’s Mailing Address: ______________________________________________ The contractor or grant recipient named above hereby certifies compliance with Government Code Section 8355 in matters relating to providing a drug-free workplace. The above-named contractor or grant recipient will:
1. Publish a statement notifying employees that unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited and specifying actions to be taken against employees for violations, as required by Government Code Section 8355(a).
2. Establish a Drug-Free Awareness Program as required by Government Code Section 8355(b), to inform employees about all of the following:
(a) The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace,
(b) The person’s or organization’s policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace, (c) Any available counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs, and (d) Penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations.
3. Provide as required by Government Code Section 8355(c), that every employee who works on the proposed contract or grant:
(a) Will receive a copy of the company’s drug-free workplace policy statement, and (b) Will agree to abide by the terms of the company’s statement as a condition of employment on the contract or grant.
4. At the election of the contractor or grantee, from and after the “Date Executed” and until ____________ (NOT TO EXCEED 36 MONTHS), the state will regard this certificate as valid for all contracts or grants entered into between the contractor or grantee and this state agency without requiring the contractor or grantee to provide a new and individual certificate for each contract or grant. If the contractor or grantee elects to fill in the blank date, than the terms and conditions of this certificate shall have the same force, meaning effect and enforceability as if a certificate were separately, specifically, and individually provided for each contract or grant between the contractor or grantee and this state agency.
HF&H Consultants, LLC
94-3097242
May 16, 2025
Richard Simonson
(925) 997-6957
Senior Vice President
590 Ygnacio Valley Road, Suite 105, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Docusign Envelope ID: 005EE2B2-6B78-46AE-951E-12A8D68FDA35
RFP 2025-14
Refuse Rate Study
29 IRAN CONTRACTING ACT CERTIFICATION
(Public Contract Code Section 2200 et seq.)
(Submit with Proposal)
As required by California Public Contract Code Section 2204, the Contractor certifies subject to penalty for perjury that the option checked below relating to the Contractor’s status in regard to the Iran Contracting Act of 2010 (Public Contract Code Section 2200 et seq.) is true and correct:
Please check the appropriate option:
The Contractor is not:
(1) Identified on the current list of persons and entities engaged in investment activities in Iran prepared by the California Department of General Services in accordance with subdivision (b) of Public Contract Code Section 2203; or
(2) A financial institution that extends, for 45 days or more, credit in the amount of $20,000,000 or more to any other person or entity identified on the current list of persons and entities engaging in investment activities in Iran prepared by the California Department of General Services in accordance with subdivision (b) of Public Contract Code Section 2203, if that person or entity uses or will use the credit to provide goods or services in the energy sector in Iran. The City has exempted the Contractor from the requirements of the Iran Contracting Act of 2010 after making a public finding that, absent the exemption, the City will be unable to obtain the goods and/or services to be provided pursuant to the Contract. The amount of the Contract payable to the Contractor for the Project does not exceed $1,000,000 over the life of the contract (up to 5 years).
Signature:__________________________________ Printed Name:_____________________ Title:______________________________________ Agency Name:____________________ Date:____________________
Note: In accordance with Public Contract Code Section 2205, false certification of this form shall be reported to the California Attorney General and may result in civil penalties equal to the greater of $250,000 or twice the Contract amount, termination of the Contract and/or eligibility to bid on contracts for three years.
Senior Vice President
Richard Simonson
HF&H Consultants, LLC
May 16, 2025
X
Docusign Envelope ID: 005EE2B2-6B78-46AE-951E-12A8D68FDA35
RFP 2025-14
Refuse Rate Study
30 CALIFORNIA LEVINE ACT STATEMENT
(Submit With Proposal Attachment 8)
California Government Code Section 84308, also known as the “Levine Act,” can prohibit members of the Hanford City Council from participating in any action related to a “license, permit, or entitlement for use” if he or she receives any political contributions, which total more than $500 during the twelve (12) months prior to and for twelve (12) months following the date of a final decision on such “license, permit, or entitlement for use,” from the person or company submitting a proposal or application to the City or any person who is not directly a party to the proposal or application but who actively supports or opposes a particular decision involving a “license, permit, or other entitlement” and who has a financial interest in the decision (“Participant”).
Government Code Section 84308 defines “license, permit, or entitlement for use” as “all business, professional and land use licenses and permits and all other entitlements for use, including all entitlements for land use, all contracts (other than competitively bid, labor, or personal employment contracts), and all franchises.”
The following website contains a list of current Hanford City Council Members, https://cityofhanfordca.com/1269/City-Council. You are responsible for reviewing the names of Hanford City Council Members prior to making the following disclosure:
1. Have you, your company, any agent on behalf of you or your company, or, to the best of your actual knowledge, a Participant made any political contributions of more than $500 to a Hanford City Council Member or a candidate running for Hanford City Council during the twelve (12) months preceding the date of the submission of your proposal or application or the anticipated date of any City Council action related to this proposal or application? YES:_____ NO:_____
If YES, please identify the City Council Member(s) and/or candidates for Hanford City Council and date(s) of contribution in the space below:
Council Member(s) or Candidate(s) Name Date of Contribution(s):
______________________________ ________________________ ______________________________ ________________________ I declare under the penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
Answering YES to the question above does not preclude the City of Hanford from approving a “license, permit, or entitlement for use” for you or your firm or from taking any subsequent action. It does, however, preclude the identified Hanford City Council Member(s) from participating in any actions related to the approval process.
No party, or agent to a party, to a pending proceeding involving a “license, permit, or other entitlement for use” or Participant, or agent to a Participant, shall make a contribution of more than $500 to any City Council Member(s) or City Council candidate during the proceeding and for twelve (12) months following the date of a final decision is rendered by the City in the proceeding.
X
Docusign Envelope ID: 005EE2B2-6B78-46AE-951E-12A8D68FDA35
RFP 2025-14
Refuse Rate Study
31 NOTICE: The disclosure duty under state law continues for twelve (12) months after the final decision on a “license, permit, or other entitlement for use.” If the above information regarding contributions changes during such twelve (12) month period, then the undersigned is required to update this disclosure form. _______________________________________ ____________________ Signature of Authorized Individual Date
_______________________________________
Printed or Typed Name of Authorized Individual
_______________________________________
Print or Type Name of Company
Richard Simonson
May 16, 2025
HF&H Consultants, LLC
Docusign Envelope ID: 005EE2B2-6B78-46AE-951E-12A8D68FDA35
ATTACHMENT 3
Signed Addenda
RFP 2025-14
Refuse Rate Study
Addendum No. 1
City of Hanford, CA
315 N. Douty Street
Hanford, CA 93230
[email protected]
(559) 585-2152
ADDENDUM NO. 1
Issued: Thursday, May 8, 2025
Project: Refuse Rate Study
Project No.: RFP 2025-14
Bids Due: Wednesday, May 21, 2025 @ 2:00 p.m.
Addendum No. 1 is being issued to provide answers to questions received via Bidnet and the propos er conference. This addendum becomes part of the bid documents for this project and must be signed and submitted with the Proposal.
Questions/Responses
Q1: Will the City provide a copy of the previous Rate Study? R1: Please see attached document.
PROPOSER ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF ADDENDUM NO. 1
Proposer to sign and submit with Proposal.
Firm: _______________________________________ Date: ________________________________
By: _______________________________________
Signature
HF&H Consultants, LLC
May 19, 2025
Docusign Envelope ID: 47F524DD-61E4-454D-91BA-557A13FA6449
Proposal to Perform a
Solid Refuse Rate Study
Submitted by
Solid Waste Consultants
to Local Government
May 21, 2025
This page is intentionally left blank.
May 21, 2025
Ms. Lisa Valencia
Purchasing
City of Handford
315 N. Douty Street
Handford, CA 93230
MSW Consultants, a California corporation, is pleased to submit this proposal to prepare a Refuse Rate Study for the City of Hanford. We specialize in solid waste consulting for local governments, with expertise in finance, economics, and public policy. We do not work with private haulers, ensuring full independence and avoiding conflicts of interest. We are well-qualified to support the City in the following areas:
Demonstrated Ability and Technical Competence: Our team brings over 30 years of experience supporting public agencies across California. We have completed financial and rate studies for more than 80 jurisdictions, including cost of service evaluations, rate design, and compliance strategies aligned with California regulations.
Proven Track Record: Our past performance reflects our ability to deliver clear, actionable results.
References will confirm our responsiveness, technical rigor, and skill in communicating complex financial and policy issues to support informed decision-making.
Ability to Perform Within Project Time Frame: Our team is fully California-based. We can execute this work efficiently, with timely site visits, close coordination, and minimal travel-related delays. We are well-versed in working within typical municipal timelines and budgets.
Practical Deliverables: We build Excel-based rate models that are transparent, easy to use, and designed for ongoing utility by City staff. Quick-reference guides and clear documentation ensure long- term usability.
Thank you for your time, and we appreciated meeting your team during the May 7 virtual information session. Should you have any questions about our proposal, please contact me directly at (951) 704- 9776 or via email at [email protected].
Sincerely yours,
David Davis, CMA I President, MSW Consultants
41760 Ivy St., Suite 203, Murrieta, CA 92562
(951) 704-9776
www.msw-consultants.com
Proposal for Solid Waste and
Recycling Rate Study
Table of Contents
General Information ................................................................................................................ 1 References ............................................................................................................................................... 1 Project Approach ..................................................................................................................... 2 Background and Key Issues .................................................................................................................... 2 Rate-making Objectives .......................................................................................................................... 2 Approach ................................................................................................................................................. 3 Tasks ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 Staff Qualifications and Experience ...................................................................................... 10 C.1 Resumes ................................................................................................................................................ 11 Related Experience ................................................................................................................ 15 Project Timeline ..................................................................................................................... 17 Proposed Fee Structure and Schedules (submitted separately) ......................................... 18 Conflict of Interest and Proposal Forms ............................................................................... 19
Attachment 1 – Cost Based Rates: The Route to Collection Efficiency
1 of 19
General Information
MSW Consultants is a California Corporation. Located at 41760 Ivy St., Murrieta Ca 92562. Our Federal Tax ID is 27-319650. Our firm officers are David Davis, President, and Chrisinda Davis- Chief Financial Officer.
References
City of Lompoc
Ms. Christie Donnelly, Management Service Director
(805)875-8274
[email protected]
City of Pasadena
Mr. Thanos Gautier, Public Works Administrator (626) 744-6472 [email protected]
City of Prescott
Ms. Carey Oberheim, Financial and Business Operations Manager (928) 777-1653 [email protected]
City of Santa Barbara
Mr. Dustin Merback, Environmental Specialist, (805) 564-5671 [email protected]
City of Santa Maria
Ms. Jennifer Alvarado, Management Analyst (805) 925-0951 x7239 [email protected]
2 of 19
Project Approach
Background and Key Issues
The City of Hanford provides solid waste collection service to all residential and commercial customers in the City. The City also provides street sweeping service, which is delivered via a third party vendor.
The City does not provide rolloff services.
The City bills for solid waste services in conjunction with its billing for other utility services such as water, sewer, and stormwater. The City’s fleet of refuse vehicles is maintained by the City’s central fleet services department. The City accounts for its solid waste revenues and expenses in a solid waste enterprise fund.
Key issues that must be addressed in this rate study include:
• Providing adequate funding for capital expenditures, especially replacement vehicles required due to changing regulations.
• Providing adequate funding to cover the cost of increases in disposal tipping fees. • Anticipating the impact on the enterprise fund of the annexation of new areas into the City. • Providing adequate funding to pay for the transition from rear-loading vehicles to front loading vehicles in the commercial sector.
• Providing adequate funding for the City to fully comply with the organics collection requirements of SB 1383.
• Potentially providing funding to cover the cost of upgrading the City’s information technology infrastructure to integrate the City’s routing and container inventory systems with its billing system.
• Analyzing and considering alternate rate structures.
• Complying with Proposition 218. The City’s fees must reflect the nexus between the amount charged to the customer, and the cost of providing the service.
Rate-making Objectives
The objectives of the rate study are to design rates that will:
• Generate sufficient revenue to meet financial obligations • Maintain appropriate reserves per City financial policies • Comply with legal, regulatory, and debt covenant requirements • Ensure equity across and within customer classes
• Design rates that are easy to understand and administer • Encourage recycling through price signals
• Maintain regional competitiveness
• Promote rate stability over time
3 of 19
Approach
The primary objective of this study is to analyze the City’s solid waste operating and capital costs and determine rates that align with the City’s solid waste program goals. Our approach to this study will be to perform three interrelated analyses over a five year planning period:
• Financial Plan – The “big picture.” We will analyze the total amount of current and projected operating and capital expenditures, available cash reserves, any planned debt financing, and required debt service coverage requirements. The result of this analysis provides the revenue requirement, which is matched with the projected rate revenues from the rates. This ensures that the City will generate sufficient revenues to meet its financial obligations. • Cost of Service Analysis. We will allocate the revenue requirement in the Financial Plan among the enterprise fund’s service sectors (e.g., single-family vs. multi-family (2-4)). This ensures that costs are equitably charged to the various types of customers. • Rate Design / Customer-level rate analysis. We will analyze the cause-and-effect relationship between the activities undertaken and resources used to provide various levels of service.
Rates are designed to reflect the nexus between the rates charged to customers, and the costs incurred to deliver that service (labor, vehicle, disposal, etc.). This analysis ensures that the City’s collection rates are equitable among customers, and compliant with Proposition 218.
We will explore up to four rate structure alternatives.
T asks
Summary of Tasks
In this section, we describe the key tasks that will be completed as part of the solid waste rate study.
The project begins with coordination between our team and City staff to confirm the project scope, schedule, roles, and data needs. We will collect and review financial, operational, and contractual data to support the rate analysis, and work with staff to clarify rate-setting objectives. A regional rate survey will also be completed to compare Hanford’s structure to those of similar agencies.
Subsequent tasks include evaluating the City’s current rate structure, developing up to four rate alternatives, and preparing a five-year cost-of-service analysis. We will deliver a draft report, a user- friendly Excel rate model, and proposed rate schedules that reflect both system costs and policy priorities. Throughout the project, we will meet with City staff, present at public workshops and hearings, and provide Proposition 218 compliance support. Final deliverables will include all required documentation, tools, and meeting participation to support implementation.
Task Descriptions
4 of 19
Task 1 - Project Management
The purpose of this task is to ensure that all stakeholders have a common understanding of the project objectives, information needed, and key issues; and that the project will be completed on schedule and under budget. To start this project, we will conduct a project kick-off call with the City team to:
• Identify members of City staff, and others who will play a key role in the project. • Determine the roles and responsibilities of participants from the City and MSW. • Establish a project schedule and key milestone dates. • Discuss a preliminary list of needed information (discussed in the next task).
During the project, we will also host and conduct bi-weekly project status meetings.
Deliverables
• Kick-off meeting and meeting minutes
• Bi-weekly status reports
Task 2 - Investigation and Data Collection
The purpose of this task is to identify data needs, and coordinate with City staff to obtain all the information necessary to support the rate analysis. We will prepare a list of needed financial and operational information. The financial information we will need will likely include, but not be limited to, the following:
• The general ledger trial balance for the most recently completed two fiscal years. The general ledger trial balance includes detailed line-item revenues and expenditures for the City, as well as the beginning and ending reserve balance.
• Fiscal year-to-date revenues and expenditures.
• Debt service schedules (if applicable)
• Operating and capital budgets.
The operational information that we will need will likely include, but not be limited to, the following:
• Customer census data including the number and type of single-family customers, residential cart subscription data, and commercial customer service levels (i.e., number and size of bins, number of weekly pickups).
• Number of tons of solid waste and recyclables collected by customer sector. • The City’s solid waste plan and any relevant technical memos. • Contractual information regarding the City’s material delivery arrangements with various transfer, processing, and landfill facilities.
Deliverables
5 of 19
• List of needed information
Task 3 - Survey Regional Solid Waste Rates and Facilities We will conduct a survey of regional solid waste rates from other jurisdictions and disposal facilities.
We will work with City staff to identify agencies and facilities to be included, and to identify any key issues to address in the survey. We will include both rate data and associated service information (e.g., street sweeping) to identify and quantify any distinguishing characteristics.
We will summarize the survey information in an easy-to-understand format. This will enable the City to evaluate the reasonableness of the rates we design in the cost of service study. We may also use this survey to evaluate the structure of the City’s rates.
Deliverables
• Easy-to-understand rate survey.
Task 4 - Review the Existing Rate Structure and Evaluate Alternatatives The purpose of these tasks is to evaluate the appropriateness of the City’s current rate structure compared to other approaches. The rate survey we conduct in Task 3 will inform this task.
We will analyze both the City’s residential and commercial rate structures, and discuss the advantages and disadvantages with City staff. For example, the City currently offers only a 96 gallon waste container and has flat rate structure. We will discuss the pros and cons of offering smaller size residential containers and transitioning to a variable rate structure. We will also discuss the advantages and disadvantages of transitioning the City’s commercial rates to a structure that provides customers an incentive to select more bins and fewer pickups (as described in the ‘Cost Based Rates’ article in Attachment 1).
We will evaluate up to five (5) alternate rate structures. We will discuss these rate structures in the context of the rate-making objective outlined above. Based on our discussions with City staff, we will prepare a memo describing the pros and cons of each alternative rate structure we discuss with the City. This memo may include quantitative examples.
Deliverables
• Memo describing the pros and cons of each alternative rate structure Task 5 - Develop Cost of Service Rate Analysis
The purpose of this task is to achieve the project’s key objectives of ensuring that the City’s rates generate an adequate amount of revenue to meet the City’s financial obligations and
6 of 19
rate-making objectives. In this task, we will identify the nexus between individual rates and the cost of each level of service. To do this, we will:
• Develop a rate model that mirrors the financial behavior of the City’s solid waste enterprise fund. The model will project expenses, revenue requirements, and the resulting need for changes in the solid waste rates for a period of at least 5 years.
Based on this model, we will develop the cost-of-service analysis and a rate schedule that includes planned adjustments over a five-year period. • Construct and document the model in a manner that allows the City to understand the formulas that are utilized, and how variables affect rate calculations. The City will be able to use the model in the future to evaluate actual performance against projections and to adjust as necessary.
Chart 1 – Example Rate Model Dashboard
• Include a user-friendly dashboard that produces reports and graphs based on changeable revenue and expenditure variables similar to the one shown above in Chart 1.
• Include narratives that clearly specify the assumptions and methodology used in establishing the rates.
• Ensure that proposed rate structures are easy to understand and administer; and can be accommodated within the City’s existing utility billing system. • Recommend proposed rate structures that support our evaluation of alternate rate
7 of 19
structures as described in Task 4, and address the City’s rate-making objectives. • Consider changes in the rate calculations including projected cost of services including:
o Increased costs associated with the impacts of transitioning to front end loading trucks.
o Growth (or decline) in disposal tonnages, and increases in tipping fees. o Changes in operations and maintenance expenses and programs including staffing.
o Any appropriate automatic adjustments or pass -through components (e.g., inflation factors, fuel, disposal costs, health insurance, etc.) o Projected capital expenditures, including replacement and expansion- related costs for both infrastructure and equipment
o Compliance with new regulations
o Increased costs from new or anticipated changes to regulations. o Plans for equipment purchases and operational changes. • Attend a meeting with staff to review the preliminary work products.
Deliverables
• Rate model with cost of service analysis across the City’s customer classes, and in compliance with Proposition 218
Task 6 - Develop Solid Waste Rate Recommendations
The purpose of this task is to harvest all the analysis up to this point and develop a proposed rate adjustment plan. We will prepare a slide deck to outline the rate adjustment plan. We will meet with City staff to discuss our findings and proposed rate adjustments. Based on the City’s feedback, we will incorporate revisions and finalize the rate study accordingly. If the City requests, we will provide a copy of the rate model and provide guidance and training on how to use it for sensitivity analysis.
Deliverables
• Rate adjustment plan
• Slide deck of rate adjustment plan
Task 7 - Conduct Public Workshop(s)
The purpose of this task is to obtain buy-in from the public and elected officials. We will plan, conduct and participate in up to four meetings to present our preliminary findings, and to solicit input from
8 of 19
stakeholders. We will prepare slide decks to clearly summarize key findings, rate alternatives, and recommendations. We will facilitate a public workshop to communicate results and gather input from the Council, City staff, and community members. We are a California-based firm. As such, we are well-positioned to attend these meetings in person.
Deliverables
• Slide deck presentation summarizing key findings
• Participation in up to four meetings
Task 8 - Proposition 218 Assistance
The purpose of this task is to ensure that the City’s rates are approved in compliance with Prop 218.
We will provide guidance to ensure the City’s solid waste rates comply with all applicable provisions of Proposition 218, including Sections 13C and 13D of the State Constitution. This includes confirming that all fees maintain a defensible nexus between the charges imposed and the cost of providing service. We will prepare the required Proposition 218 Notice—both in English and Spanish—as part of our scope, and ensure conformance with relevant legal precedents, including cases addressing tiered rate structures. We will advise City staff throughout the process to support full compliance and minimize legal risk.
Deliverables
• Prepare Proposition 218 Notice (English and Spanish)
Task 9 - Prepare Draft and Final Report and Rate Model
The purpose of this task is to communicate our recommendations to the City. We will prepare a draft report (see links to example workproducts in Section 1.1). Our report will summarize the project background, objectives, methodology, and recommendations related to cost-of-service rates.
Administrative draft versions of all key work products will be provided to City staff, including the revenue requirement analysis, five-year financial forecast, cost-of-service results, rate structures, and supporting narrative materials. We will submit our report in draft form for the City’s review and comment. Once we have received feedback from City staff, we will finalize the report. The report will be sufficient to serve as the ‘Engineers Report’ in the context of Prop 218.
As described above, the model will include a user friendly dashboard, and documented in a manner that allows the City to understand the formulas, and how variables affect the rate calculations. The model will serve as a management tool that the City can use in future rate analyses. For example, the City may use the model to evaluate actual performance compared to projections. The model will become property of the City, and may be used by the City for any purpose.
Deliverables
9 of 19
• Final rate model
• Draft and final reports
Task 10 - Attend Public Hearings on Solid Waste Rates
The purpose of this task is to participate in the public meeting pursuant to the ‘majority protest’ process under Prop 218. This will entail our participation at two meetings of the City Council. At the first meeting, the City Council will consider the final rate plan. If the Council approves the rate plan, it will authorize the distribution of the 45-day notice and set the date and time for the Prop 218 public hearing.
At the second meeting, the Council will consider the protests submitted in response to the 45-day notice, and conduct a public hearing. If the City receives protests from fewer than 50% of property owners, the Council may vote to approve the rate plan. If a majority of the Council approves the rate plan, the new rates will go into effect.
We will prepare meeting materials and present our findings in person at both of these meetings. We will answer any questions from the Council and the public. We are a California-based firm. As such, we are well-positioned to attend these meetings in person.
Deliverables
• Participate in the Proposition 218 Public Hearing
10 of 19
Staff Qualifications and Experience
The key personnel for this project will be comprised of the following individuals: David L. Davis, CMA, Arisha Ashraf, Girard Mobley, Craig D. Stroud, CPA. Our staff will be fully dedicated and responsive to the City’s needs. Key personnel will be available for the duration of this project and no key personnel will be removed or replaced without written permission from the City.
David Davis, CMA – President - Mr. Davis will serve as the Project Director for this project. He will serve as the main point of contact and have overall responsibility for the project. He is a Certified Management Accountant (CMA) and an expert in solid waste macro- and micro-economics.
Arisha Ashraf – Project Manager – Ms. Ashraf will serve as Project Manager. She has led rate modeling and cost-of-service analyses for more than a dozen California municipalities and brings two years of small business management experience. Her background in economics and quantitative modeling supports both the technical and strategic aspects of this project.
Girard Mobley – Project Manager – Mr. Mobley will also serve as Project Manager. He is a skilled financial analyst and project manager. He has extensive experience in conducting audits on waste haulers for municpalities, performing rate analysis, and rate survey comparisons Craig D. Stroud, CPA – Senior Consultant – Mr. Stroud will be available to provide various technical advice as needed. He has conducted several solid waste cost of service studies. He is a Certified Public Accountant (CPA) and operational analyst with over 20 years of experience revamping the operations of companies. Mr. Stroud will oversee the day-to-day operation to ensure all milestone and deadlines are met and review all reports.
11 of 19
C.1 Resumes
David Davis – Project Director - Mr. David Davis is a Certified Management Accountant (CMA) with over 30 years of experience in the field of solid waste management. Mr. Davis’s expertise lies in working with municipal managers to maximize the value of the solid waste services provided to their ratepayers. He has held executive management positions in both the private and public sectors and has extensive experience in providing business advisory services to local government in the field of solid waste management.
As a chief financial executive for local hauling and landfill divisions of a national solid waste management company, Mr. Davis was
responsible for financial reporting, budgeting, cost analysis, billing, and collections. He also managed the accounting and rate analysis sections of the City of Riverside’s Department of Public Utilities.
Mr. Davis has specific experience in: 1) analysis and design of customer rates for refuse collection, transfer, processing and disposal operations; 2) development and evaluation of competitive proposals for waste collection, recycling, and transfer service ; 3) feasibility studies for waste processing, waste transfer, and landfill gas projects; 4) verification of the proper payment of solid waste fees; 5) management reviews of solid waste operations; 6) evaluation of alternative waste diversion programs; 7) solid waste program planning and funding; and, 8) evaluating internal management controls.
CREDENTIALS
EXPERIENCE
30 Years
EDUCATION
BA, Finance, Cal State
Fullerton, 1983
LICENSES &
CERTIFICATIONS
Certified Management
Accountant (CMA)
PROFESSIONAL
AFFILIATIONS
Solid Waste Association
of North America,
Southern California
Waste Management
Forum (Chair)
Zero Waste
Practitioner
12 of 19
Arisha Ashraf – Project Manager - Ms. Ashraf has a strong track record in utility rate modeling, cost -of-service analysis, and environmental economics, exclusively supporting public agencies in California. At Raftelis Financial Consultants, she conducted rate studies and developed equitable, transparent rate structures for over a dozen California municipal utilities. Her work included Excel-based rate models designed for long-term usability by City staff, with clear documentation and user guides aligned with municipal operations.
Her background includes financial planning for public-sector projects with multi -million-dollar annual revenues, rate forecasting, and economic analysis to support informed decision -making by city councils and utility boards. She has authored comprehensive rate reports explaining methodology, cost allocations, and rate alternatives—ensuring decision-makers understand policy trade-offs and financial implications. She has also provided sustainability and waste management assistance to municipalities and businesses under state and federal programs, focusing on regulatory compliance, GHG reduction, and resource efficiency.
Ms. Ashraf holds a Ph.D. in Environmental Economics & Policy, a Master’s in International Sustainable Development from Brown University, and dual undergraduate degrees in Biology and International Relations from Boston University. With her California- specific experience, public-sector orientation, and technical depth, she brings the independence, rigor, and practical approach required to deliver a high-quality Refuse Rate Study for the City of Hanford.
CREDENTIALS
EXPERIENCE
15 years
EDUCATION
PhD, Environmental
Economics and Policy,
University of California,
Riverside
LICENSES &
CERTIFICATIONS
Recycling 101 Certificate
(Oregon State University
Extension)
PROFESSIONAL
AFFILIATIONS
Southern California
Waste Management
Forum (Member)
National Stewardship
Action Council (Member)
13 of 19
Girard Mobley – Project Manager - Mr. Mobley is a skilled financial analyst and project manager. He has extensive experience in conducting audits on waste haulers for municipalities, and in providing recycling outreach and education to commercial waste generators. He graduated from San Diego State University with a BS in Business Administration with a focus on Finance and a minor in Economics. He is also a certified practitioner in the zero waste principles and practices.
Mr. Mobley has been with MSW Consultants since March 2019. In that time, he has worked on solid waste consulting engagements for the County of Santa Barbara, and the cities of Chula Vista, La Habra, La Palma, Lomita, Norco, Orange, Rolling Hills, Signal Hill, Vernon, Whittier, and Rancho Palos Verdes.
Mr. Mobley has audited the accounting records of over 20 waste haulers. He also oversees the recycling survey program in the City of Vernon providing outreach and educational resources to over 400 commercial waste generators. He regularly educates commer cial waste generators about the requirements of AB 341 and AB 1826.
Prior to joining MSW Consultants, he served for 20 in the United States Marine Corps.
CREDENTIALS
EXPERIENCE
25 Years
EDUCATION
BS, Finance, San Diego
State University, 2014
LICENSES &
CERTIFICATIONS
SWANA Certified Zero
Waste Practitioner
PROFESSIONAL
AFFILIATIONS
California Resource
Recovery Association
(Member)
14 of 19
Craig Stroud Senior Consultant - Mr. Stroud is a Certified Public Accountant (CPA) and operational analyst with over 28 years of experience revamping the operations of companies. He is very familiar with corporate internal controls and accounting systems. He has served in managerial, operational, analysis and marketing roles within the professional services, Department of Defense, healthcare, and e- commerce industries.
Mr. Stroud has been with MSW Consultants since February 2017. In that time, he has conducted solid waste consulting engagements for the cities of Auburn, Alabama, Copperas Cove, Texas, and Prescott, Arizona. Additionally, he has conducted hauler compliance audits for the California cities of Chula Vista, Orange, Placentia, Rancho Palos Verdes, and Vernon. He has audited the accounting records of over 15 waste haulers including the local divisions of Athens Services and Republic Services.
As a revenue analyst with Science Application International Corporation (SAIC) Mr. Stroud was responsible for executing extensive data queries and financial models to maximize program staffing revenue. He has built multiple departments within companies, from conception to operational profitability. Mr. Stroud is a veteran of the U.S. Air Force. He graduated from California Polytechnical State University, San Luis Obispo with a BS in Business management, with a focus on accounting. He earned his CPA while employed as an auditor with the national CPA firm Ernest & Young.
CREDENTIALS
EXPERIENCE
28 Years
EDUCATION
BS, Business
Administration-
Accounting, Cal Poly San
Luis Obispo, CA
LICENSES &
CERTIFICATIONS
Certified Public
Accountant (CPA)
PROFESSIONAL
AFFILIATIONS
Southern California
Waste Management
Forum (Member)
15 of 19
Related Experience
City of Lompoc - Solid Waste Rate Studies From 2001 through the present, we have developed and updated a solid waste rate model to allocate costs between the City’s landfill and collection operations, and among single family, multi-family, and commercial customers. We use our rate model as a tool to project revenues, expenditures, and cash balances for the City’s solid waste enterprise fund. Our work has included developing new landfill and collection service rates based on allocated costs. We also designed volume -based rates to provide customers w ith an incentive to recycle.
Proposed and final cost: $45,000. Contact: Ms. Christie Donnelly, Management Service Director (805) 875-8274
[email protected]
Click here for example workproduct-City of Lompoc
City of Pasadena - Solid Waste Rate Study
In 2024, we conducted a cost-of-service study for the City. Our work included preparing a rate model that mirrors the behavior of the solid waste enterprise fund and using that model to prepare a proforma projection of the enterprise fund’s operating results. We also designed cost-based rates to reflect the relationship between the cost of service and the amount charged to ratepayers. Our work also included developing a rate model that mirrored the financial performance of the City’s solid waste enterprise fund, allocating costs among single- family multi-family, and commercial customers, and developing alternate rate adjustment scenarios. Proposed cost: $49,000; final cost: $75,000 (Increased cost due to additional analysis requested by City). Contact: Thanos Gautier, Public Works Administrator (626) 744- 6472 [email protected]
Click here for example workproduct – City of Pasadena
City of Prescott, AZ - Solid Waste Rate Study
In 2018 and 2022, we conducted solid waste rate studies for the City. This work included developing a solid waste rate model to allocate costs between the City’s transfer station and collection operations, and among single family, multi-family, and commercial customers. We use our rate model as a tool to project revenues, expenditures, and cash balances for the City’s solid waste enterprise fund. Our work has included developing new tipping fees and collection service rates based on allocated costs. The study was designed to fund the City’s significant capital expenditure program for new and replacement route vehicles. Proposed and final cost: $35,000. Contact: Ms. Carey Oberheim, Financial and Business Operations Manager (928) 777-1653 [email protected] Click here for example workproduct – City of Prescott
16 of 19
City of Santa Barbara – Solid Waste Rate Study
In 2023, we conducted a cost-of-service study for the City. The City performs the billing function, and the hauler is paid from the residual amount collected by the City after City program costs and fees are deducted. Our work entailed preparing a financial plan and cost of service and rate design analysis.
In 2017, we assisted the City in evaluating the method for setting tipping fees for the Tajiguas Resource Recovery Project, and for allocating project costs among several participating jurisdictions in Santa Barbara County. In 2013, we assisted the City in a financial review of its exclusive waste hauler, MarBorg Industries, Inc. We allocated MarBorg’s revenues, expenses, and profitability among the various jurisdictions it serves in Santa Barbara County. We analyzed the impact of various negotiating deal points on MarBorg’s revenue and profitability in the City of Santa Barbara. Proposed cost:
$100,000; final cost: $109,000. (Increased cost due to additional analysis requested by City).
Contact: Mr. Dustin Merback, Environmental Specialist, (805) 564-5671 [email protected]
Click here for example workproduct- City of Santa Barbara City of Santa Maria – Solid Waste Rate Study
In 2021, we completed a solid waste rate study and landfill pricing strategy analysis for the City. Our work included preparing a rate model that mirrors the financial performance of the City’s solid waste enterprise fund, projecting revenues and expenses over a 20-year planning horizon, allocating cost among residential, commercial, and landfill operations, and assessing the impact of various capital funding scenarios. We prepared debt service calculations, including debt service coverage ratios. The model was used to evaluate various waste import scenarios and pricing strategies. We prepared a report of our findings that was used to support the City’s Prop 218 rate approval process. Proposed cost: $86,000; final cost: $106,000. (Increased cost due to additional analysis requested by City).Contact: Ms. Jennifer Alvarado, Management Analyst (805) 925 -0951 x7239 [email protected]
Click here for example workproduct – City of Santa Maria
17 of 19
Project Timeline
We will conduct this study according to the schedule shown below in Error! Reference source not found..
Task Description Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun 1 Project Management
2 Investigation and Data Collection
3 Survey Regional Solid Waste Rates and Facilities
4 Review the Existing Rate Structure and Evaluate Alternatives 5 Develop Cost of Service Rate Analysis
6 Develop Solid Waste Rate Recommendation
7 Conduct Public Workshops
8 Prop 218 Assistance
9 Prepare Draft and Final Report and Rate Model
10 Attend Public Hearings on Solid Waste Rates
18 of 19
Proposed Fee Structure and Schedules (submitted separately)
19 of 19
Conflict of Interest and Proposal Forms
MSW Consultants does not have any financial, business or other relationship with the City or any member of the City staff that may have an impact on the outcome of this project. MSW Consultants has no clients that may have a financial interest in the outcome of this project.
Proposal Forms
1. Addendum #1
2. Worker Compensation Insurance Certificate
3. Equal Employment Opportunity Compliance Certificate
4. Americans With Disabilities Act Compliance Certificate
5. City of Hanford Ownership Disclosure for Contractors and Consultants
6. Drug Free Workplace Certification
7. Iran Contracting Certification Act
8. California Levine Act Statement
9. Non-collusion Affidavit
11.G.
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 7/1/2025 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR
SUBJECT:
Approval of the purchase of one (1) Cimline M1 150 gallon crack sealing machine from Haaker Equipment of La Verne, CA in the amount of $81,741.67 and appropriation of $81,741.67 from Fleet Reserve Fund 0448 to cover the purchase.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation:
That the City Council authorize the appropriation of $81,741.67 from Fleet Reserve Fund 0448 and approve the procurement of one (1) Cimline M1 150 gallon crack sealing machine from Haaker Equipment of La Verne, CA.
Recommended Motion:
That by motion, the City Council authorize the appropriation of $81,741.67 from Fleet Reserve Fund 0448 and approve the procurement of one (1) Cimline M1 150 gallon crack sealing machine from Haaker Equipment of La Verne, CA.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Hanford Streets Division performs routine crack sealing as a preventative maintenance measure to extend the operational life of local streets and protect the integrity of the City’s infrastructure. Crack sealing is essential in preventing water intrusion, which can lead to structural failure in both asphalt surfaces and the underlying sub-base.
The Division currently utilizes a Cimline 150-gallon crack seal machine, originally purchased in 2019.
While equipment of this type typically has a useful life expectancy of 8 to 10 years, the City's current unit sustained unexpected damage in the summer of 2024 when it was parked adjacent to a City Refuse truck that unexpedicatly caught fire. As a result, the machine suffered significant heat-related damage.
City staff made efforts to restore the unit to a functional condition through in-house repairs but were ultimately unsuccessful. The unit was then sent to the manufacturer for further evaluation. Following a detailed inspection, the manufacturer concluded that the unit was beyond repair and could not be restored to operational status.
To address this equipment loss, Fleet Services solicited three quotes for a replacement unit from the following vendors:
• Haaker Equipment
• Craftco Equipment
• Sealmaster
After careful review, Haaker Equipment was the only vendor able to provide a quotation for a 150- gallon machine matching the City’s operational needs. Therefore, Haaker Equipment was selected as the preferred vendor, offering a replacement unit at a cost of $81,741.67.
This replacement is critical to ensure the Streets Division can continue its essential pavement preservation efforts and maintain the long-term health of Hanford’s road infrastructure.
The procurement of this equipment is essential to resume critical pavement preservation operations and maintain the City's commitment to infrastructure longevity and public safety.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Staff have confirmed that there are enough funds in the Fleet Reserve Fund to fully fund this purchase.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Haaker Cracksealer Quote
2. Crafco Quote
3. Sealmaster Quote
4. Sole Source
11.H.
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 7/1/2025 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR
SUBJECT:
Approval of Blanket Purchase Orders (BPO's) and Purchase Orders (PO's) over $50,000 for the Police Department in the combined amount of $437,297 for fiscal year 2025/2026.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council, by motion, approve the following Blanket Purchase Order (BPO) and Purchase Order (PO) for a combined total of $437,297 for fiscal year 2025/2026.
Recommended Motion: I move to approve the blanket purchase order and purchase order listed in this report for a total of $437,297 for fiscal year 2025/2026.
BACKGROUND:
Per the City of Hanford Purchasing Policy, the City Council has the sole authority to authorize purchases exceeding $50,000. These purchase orders have continuously been used for the services listed above and is expected to exceed the $50,000 threshold again next fiscal year. All purchase orders and contracts will be monitored by staff on an annual basis to ensure cost-saving procedures are utilized. The Animal Shelter services contract will be in need of updating. As those contract discussions occur with the county, city council will be provided with final updates for approval as they occur.
VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DEPARTMENT COMMENT
Kings County
Sheriff's Office
BPO - Animal
control and shelter
services
$355,000 15180000 Sole source, only
entity currently that
can provide shelter
services to the
department
Sun Ridge
Systems, Inc.
PO - RIMS Annual
Software
$82,297 15121000 Sole source,
required annual
maintenance for
PD dispatch and
record
management
software that has
been in use since
2010
FISCAL IMPACT:
Purchase Orders total $437,297 in approved spending. These expenses come out of previously approved budget appropriations for the impacted department for fiscal year 2025/2026.
ATTACHMENTS:
None
11.I.
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 7/1/2025 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR
SUBJECT:
Approval of Blanket Purchase Orders (BPO's) $50,000 or greater for the Finance Division in the amount of $362,000 for fiscal year 2025/2026.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council, by motion, approve the following annual blanket purchase orders for a combined total of $362,000 for fiscal year 2025/2026.
Recommended Motion: I move to approve the blanket purchase orders listed below for a total of $362,000 for fiscal year 2025/2026.
BACKGROUND:
Per the City of Hanford Purchasing Policy, the City Council has the sole authority to authorize purchases $50,000 or greater. These purchase orders have continuously been used for the services listed and are expected to exceed the $50,000 threshold again next fiscal year. The blanket purchase orders cover annual contracts and general services provided to various City of Hanford departments, including communications, building supplies and materials needed for maintenance in daily operations, and uniform needs. All blanket purchase orders and contracts will be monitored by staff on an annual basis to insure cost-saving procedures are being utilized.
VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT COMMENT
HD Supply, Inc. BPO - Various as-needed
supplies & materials
$57,000 Supplies and materials for
miscellaneous day to day
operations
Comcast
Business
BPO – Internet service/
various sites
$93,000 City contract-television,
internet, ethernet, and
ethernet services
Verizon Wireless BPO – Wireless Servies $78,000 Multiple PO’s for cell phone lines, Ipad lines, Aircards
Vestis Group,
Inc.
BPO- Uniform Rental/Floor
Mats & Supplies
$79,000 City contract- uniform
rentals/towels/floor
mats/supplies
T-Mobile USA,
Inc.
BPO-Wireless Services $55,000 Cell Phone/iPad lines
FISCAL IMPACT:
The blanket purchase orders total $362,000 of approved spending. These expenses will come out of previously approved budget appropriations across all impacted departments for fiscal year 2025/2026.
ATTACHMENTS:
None
11.J.
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 7/1/2025 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR
SUBJECT:
Adoption of Resolution 25-39-R approving the City of Hanford's annually updated Investment Policy for FY 2025-2026
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation: That City Council, by motion, adopt Resolution 25-39-R approving the City of Hanford's annually updated Investment Policy for FY 2025-2026
Recommended Motion: I move to adopt Resolution 25-39-R approving the City of Hanford's annually updated Investment Policy for FY 2025-2026
BACKGROUND:
The City of Hanford’s Investment Policy reaffirms the City’s commitment to the responsible and prudent management of public funds. It ensures full compliance with all applicable state and local laws governing public investments, while continuing to uphold the highest standards of fiscal stewardship.
The primary purpose of this document is to outline the City’s investment objectives, procedures, and controls. It is designed to support a disciplined, transparent, and methodical investment approach.
The policy adheres to the SLY approach- prioritizing Safety, Liquidity, and Yield—by safeguarding principal, ensuring sufficient liquidity to meet the City’s daily cash flow needs, and striving to generate a competitive return on investments within a low-risk profile.
In accordance with Government Code Sections 53646 and 53607, the Investment Policy is submitted annually to the City Council for review and adoption. As part of this process, the Council formally delegates investment authority to the Deputy City Manager/Finance Director to act as the City Treasurer for a one-year term, or until such delegation is revoked.
Following a thorough review, staff has introduced a series of substantive updates and refinements to the Investment Policy to enhance its clarity, detail, and comprehensiveness and comply with industry best practices for California's public sector agencies and districts per policy standards and criteria set forth by California Municipal Treasurers Association (CMTA).
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Exhibit A-City of Hanford Investment Policy 2025-2026
2. Resolution 25-39-R
City o
f Hanford
Investment Policy
2025-2026
Exhibit A
TA
BLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction….......................................................................1
2.0 Scope…..................................................................................1
3.0 Prudence…............................................................................1
4.0 Inv estment Objectiv es…....................................................2
5.0 Delegation of Authority…...................................................3
6.0 Ethics and Conflicts of Interest….......................................4
7.0 Authorized Financial Dealers and Institutions…..............4
8.0 Authorized and Suitable Inv estments…..........................5
9.0 Rev iew of Inv estment Portfolio…......................................7
10.0 Inv estment Pools/Money Markets/Mutual Funds….......7
11.0 Collateralization…................................................................8
12.0 Custody….............................................................................. 8
13.0 Additional Div ersification….................................................9
14.0 Maximum Maturities…..........................................................9
15.0 Internal Controls…................................................................9
16.0 Performance Standards…..................................................9
17.0 Reporting.…..........................................................................9
18.0 Inv estment Policy Adoption…...........................................10
19.0 Glossary…..............................................................................10
City of Hanford, California
Investment Policy
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The City
of Hanford (City) has a fiduciary responsibility to maximize the productive use of its liquid assets entrusted to its care and to manage those public funds wisely and prudently.
The purpose of this document is to provide guidelines for the investment of the City’s cash balances and to outline the policies and controls essential to ensuring the safety and strength of the City’s investment portfolio. This policy conforms to all applicable federal, state and local laws governing the investment of public funds, including the State of California Government Code. Related activities that comprise fiscally sound cash management include accurate cash projections, the expeditious collection of revenue, the control of disbursements, cost-effective banking relations, and a short-term borrowing program that coordinates working capital requirements and investment opportunities. It is the policy of the City to adhere to the SLY approach- prioritizing Safety, Liquidity, and Yield—by safeguarding principal, ensuring sufficient liquidity to meet the City’s daily cash flow needs, and striving to generate a competitive return on investments within a low-risk profile.
2.0 SCOPE
This policy applies to all funds and investment activities under the direct authority of the City.
It also covers any funds held by fiscal agents in connection with the issuance of any bonds by the City. When issuing bonds, the City shall invest the bond proceeds in accordance with the applicable trust indenture.
The funds covered by this policy are accounted for in the City's Audited Financial Statements or Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) and include:
• General Fund
• Special Revenue Funds
• Debt Service Funds
• Capital Project Funds
• Enterprise Funds
• Internal Service Funds
• Trust and Agency Funds
• Funds Held by Fiscal Agents
• Any new funds created by the City Council (unless specifically exempted)
3.0 PRUDENCE
The standard of prudence to be used by City investment officials responsible for the investment of public funds shall be the “prudent person” standard as set forth in California Code Section 53600.3 and shall be applied in the context of managing the overall City
portfoli
o of funds. City investment officials acting in accordance with written procedures and the investment policy and exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual’s security risk or market price changes, provided deviations from expectations are reported in a timely fashion and appropriate action is taken to control adverse developments.
4.0 INVESTMENT OBJECTIVES
4.1 Safety. Preservation of Capital (Safety)- the protection of principal is the foremost consideration when undertaking investment decisions that affect public funds. The objective is to mitigate credit and interest rate risk.
A. Credit Risk is the risk of loss of principal and accrued interest due to the failure of the security issuer. Credit Risk can be mitigated by:
• Limiting investments to the safest types of securities. Nationally recognized ratings services will be utilized wherever possible to scrutinize the creditworthiness of investments.
• Diversifying the investment portfolio so that potential losses are minimized.
B. Interest rate risk is the risk that the market value of securities will fall due to a rise in general market interest rates. It is the policy of the City to hold individual securities to maturity. Interest rate risk can be mitigated by:
• Holding individual securities to maturity - Structuring the investment portfolio so that securities mature to meet cash flow requirements for ongoing operations, thereby avoiding the need to sell securities on the open market prior to maturity. • Employing a laddering strategy, as appropriate and as market conditions allow for, whereby staggering maturities of individual securities so the investments come due in increments assuring a stable liquidity pattern.
• Limiting maturities of individual securities and the average maturity of the overall portfolio.
4.2 Liquidity. A suff
icient portion of the portfolio shall be maintained in liquid short-term securities which can be converted to cash if necessary to meet all daily cash flow and operating requirements. Since all cash requirements cannot be anticipated, investments in securities shall have an active secondary market for resell.
4.3 Yield. Yield should become a consideration only after the basic requirements of safety and liquidity have been met. The investment portfolio shall be designed to attain a market average rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, considering the City's risk constraints, the cash flow characteristics of the portfolio, and State and Local laws, ordinances or resolutions that restrict investments. Examples of yield benchmarks are U. S.
Treasuries from bills to 5 year notes and the average Federal Funds Rate.
4.4 Public Trust. All participants in the investment process shall act as custodians of the public trust. Investment officials shall recognize that the investment portfolio is subject to public review and evaluation. The overall program shall be designed and managed with a degree of professionalism that is worthy of public trust. It is the City's intent, at the time of purchase, to hold all investments until maturity. In a diversified portfolio it must be recognized that occasional measured losses are inevitable, and must be considered within the context of the overall portfolios investment return, provided that adequate diversification has been implemented.
4.5 Procurement of Services. The City has established procurement practices to pre-qualify accountants, auditors, financial institutions, broker/dealers, financial advisors, and other outside consultants with which the City does business.
5.0 DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY
California Government Code Section 53607 provides the authority of the legislative body of the local agency to invest the funds of the local agency or to delegate that authority to the Treasurer of the local agency. Such delegation is to be reviewed annually and may be renewed by the City Council. The adoption of this policy renews the Deputy City Manager/Finance Director (individual who currently oversees the Finance Dept) as the City’s Treasurer to manage the investment needs of the City, subject to supervision and constraints established in this policy. The Treasurer shall establish written procedures for the operation and management of the City’s investment portfolio consistent with this Policy. The procedures should include reference to safekeeping, wire transfer processes, banking service contracts, and collateral or depository agreements. Such procedures shall include explicit delegation of authority to persons responsible for investment transactions. No person may engage in any investment transaction except as provided under the terms of this Policy and the investment procedures established by the Treasurer.
6.0 ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The Cit
y Treasurer and those employees that are involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activities that could conflict with proper execution of the investment program or impair their ability to make impartial investment decisions.
These individuals are required to complete the Fair Political Practices Commission Page 6 of 43 Rev. 04/07/2022 Form 700, Statement of Economic Interests Disclosure, requiring annual disclosure on material financial interests. These same individuals must undergo two hours of Ethics training within one year of employment and every two years thereafter.
All persons, firms, broker/dealers, financial institutions, and advisors providing investment services or bond issue assistance shall disclose to the City Manager and the Treasurer all fee sharing, fee-splitting and commission arrangements with other entities or persons prior to the City agreeing to buy an investment or issue bonds.
7.0 AUTHORIZED FINANCIAL DEALERS, INSTITUTIONS AND REGISTERED INVESTMENT ADVISERS The City Treasurer shall maintain a list of qualified financial institutions and broker/dealers authorized to transact investment purchases with the City. The financial entities eligible to transact investment business with the City are nationally or state chartered banks, federal reserve bank, federal or state savings and loan institutions, credit unions and registered primary securities dealers and qualified regional dealers under SEC Rule 15c3-1 (net capital rule).
The City may engage in the services of an external SEC registered Investment Adviser that meets criteria established by the Treasurer. All investments made under contract will be purchased in the City’s name and in accordance with guidelines established by the City’s investment policy.
7.1 Broker/Dealers must:
A. Be licensed by the State of California as a broker dealer, as defined in Section 25004 or the Corporations Code.
B. Be a member of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA).
C. Provide a written statement that the institution has reviewed the City’s Investment Policy and California Government Code Section 53600 et seq. and that all securities offered to the City shall comply fully with all provisions of the City’s Policy and the California Government Code.
E. Comply with the City of Hanford insurance requirements for professional services agreements for general, professional and automotive liability.
Moreo
ver, all financial institutions providing investment services should be reputable, trustworthy, knowledgeable, and experienced in public agency investing.
8.0 AUTHORIZED AND SUITABLE INVESTMENTS
Investment of City funds shall be maintained within the statutory limits imposed by the California Government Code Sections 53600, 53601, 53601.5, 53601.6, and 53635. Within the investments permitted by the Code, the City seeks to further restrict eligible investments to those established in Figure 1 below as published by the California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission. In the event a discrepancy is found between this Policy and the Code, the more restrictive parameters will take precedence. Within the context of these limitations the following investments are authorized:
8.1 Prohibited Practices and Investments. Fed
eral and state laws notwithstanding, any
investment not specifically described herein including, but not limited to: repurchase agreements, reverse repurchase agreements, derivatives, options, futures, inverse floaters, first mortgages or trust deeds, collateralized mortgage obligations (CMO’s), limited partnerships, real estate investments trusts (REIT’s), open or closed-end mutual funds, unregulated investment pools, common stock, preferred stock, commodities, precious metals, foreign currency denominated securities, securities with high price volatility, limited marketability (less than three active bidders), and any other speculative investment deemed inappropriate under the prudent investor standard are strictly prohibited. Purchasing debt securities issued by the City or any affiliated legal entity is prohibited.
In addition, any investment transaction that might impair public confidence in the City government is to be avoided. Purchasing or selling securities on margin is prohibited.
Leveraging or borrowing money for the purpose of investing is specifically prohibited. In addition, the Policy prohibits active trading and speculation, i.e., the purchase of securities with the intent to profit from favorable market changes in market prices or market conditions.
9.0 REVIEW OF INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO
The securities held by the City must be in compliance with Section 8.0 Authorized and Suitable Investments at the time of purchase. The Treasurer will review the portfolio at least quarterly to ensure securities are still in compliance and determine if it is necessary to report to Council any major or critical incidences of noncompliance.
10.0 INVESTMENT POOLS/MONEY MARKETS/MUTUAL FUNDS
Governmental sponsored investment pools and/or mutual funds are included in Section 8.0 Authorized and Suitable Investments; therefore, the City must perform due diligence and a thorough investigation of the pool and/or fund prior to investing and on a continual basis.
The investigation will include review of the following items:
A. A description of eligible investment securities, and a written statement of investment policy and objectives.
B. A description of interest calculations and how it is distributed, and how gains and losses are treated.
C. A description of how the securities are safeguarded (including the settlement processes), and how often are the securities priced and the program audited.
D. A description of who may invest in the program, how often, and what size deposits and withdrawals are allowed.
E. A s
chedule for receiving statements and portfolio listings.
F. A list of any reserves, retained earnings, etc. utilized by the pool.
G. A fee schedule, when and how it is assessed.
H. Pool eligibility for bond proceeds and/or pool policy on accepting such proceeds.
The City further stipulates that money market/mutuals funds are restricted to funds that are permitted in Section 8.0 Authorized and Suitable Investments.
11.0 COLLATERALIZATION
Collateralization will be required on two types of investments: certificates of deposit and repurchase agreements. Collateral for non-negotiable certificates of deposit must comply with Government Code 53652. In addition, if the CD is not FDIC /NCUA insured or goes over the FDIC/NCUA $250,000 limit, collateral is required equal to 110% of market value of principal and accrued interest. The City will only place in a certificate of deposit that amount of principal which is covered by FDIC or NCUA insurance (per Government Code Section 53653).Collateral for repurchase agreements shall be 102 %of market value of principal and accrued interest.
The City chooses to limit collateral to the following: US Treasury securities or Federal Agency securities. This will provide an additional level of security due to inevitable changes in market conditions. Collateral will always be held by an independent third party with whom the City has a current custodial agreement. A clearly marked evidence of ownership (safekeeping receipt) must be supplied to the City and retained. The right of collateral substitution is granted, within the parameters and constraints of this Policy.
Section 53649 of the California Government Code specifies that the City Treasurer is responsible for entering into deposit contracts with each depository. Investments held with third parties and applicable collateral for the investment shall be properly collateralized in accordance with requirements of the California Government Code.
12.0 CUSTODY
To protect against fraud, embezzlement, or losses caused by a collapse of an individual securities dealer, all securities, including collateral for repurchase agreements, shall be held in a custodial account in the name of the City by a third-party custodian. All security transactions should be conducted on a delivery-versus-payment (DVP) basis, and evidenced by custodial receipts. The custodian must act as an agent of the City under the terms of a custody agreement designated by the Treasurer.
The only exception to foregoing custody accounts shall be depository accounts and deposits into approved investment Pools as allowed in Section 8.0 Authorized and Suitable Investments.
13.0 ADDITIONAL DIVERSIFICATION
The Cit
y will diversify the investment portfolio by the type of investment, issuer, and maturity dates to mitigate risk in the investment portfolio. With the exception of U. S. Treasury securities, Government Agencies, and authorized pools such as LAIF, not more than 30% of the City’s total investment portfolio will be invested in a single security type or with a single financial institution. Each Government Agency issuer name is limited to not more than 30% of the City’s total investment portfolio.
14.0 MAXIMUM MATURITIES
It is the City’s policy to buy and hold investments until maturity. To the extent possible, the City will attempt to match its investments with anticipated cash flow requirements.
Investments will have a maximum remaining maturity of only the limitations imposed by government statute or five (5) years from purchase, whichever is shorter. Reserve funds may be invested in securities exceeding 5 years based on the permissible investment maturities dictated by City Council approval.
15.0 INTERNAL CONTROLS
A system of internal controls shall be established to prevent losses of public funds arising from fraud, employee error, and misrepresentations of third parties, unanticipated changes in financial markets or imprudent actions by employees of the City. An annual audit of internal control and investment practices, policies and procedures will be conducted by the City’s external auditor.
16.0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Subject to the priority of investment objectives in Section 4.0, this section sets forth the performance standards for the City’s investment portfolio. Investment performance is continually monitored and evaluated by the Treasurer. The investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of obtaining a rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, commensurate with the investment risk constraints and liquidity needs.
17.0 REPORTING
The Treasurer shall make a quarterly report of the City’s current investment portfolio and transactions to the legislative body.
So long as the City Council’s annual delegation of investment authority to the City Treasurer pursuant to Government Code Section 53607 is effective, the Treasurer shall make the above-described quarterly report of all investment transactions to the City Council.
18.0 INVESTMENT POLICY ADOPTION
The City
Council has charged the Treasurer with the responsibility to review the policy annually and to recommend changes. The policy shall be reviewed annually by the City Council and any modifications made thereto must be approved the City Council.
19.0 GLOSSARY
GLOSSARY
AGENCIES: Federal agency securities and/or Government -sponsored enterprises which include: Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB), Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA), Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FHLMC), Federal Farm Credit Bank (FFCB), Federal Agricultural Mortgage Association (Farmer Mac), Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA)
ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT (ACFR): The official annual report for the City of Hanford. It includes five combined statements for each individual fund and account group prepared in conformity with GAAP. It also includes supporting schedules necessary to demonstrate compliance with finance- related legal and contractual provisions, extensive introductory material, and a detailed Statistical Section.
BANKERS’ ACCEPTANCE (BA): A draft or bill or exchange accepted by a bank or trust company. The accepting institution guarantees payment of the bill, as well as the issuer.
BENCHMARK: A comparative base for measuring the performance or risk tolerance of the investment portfolio. A benchmark should represent a close correlation to the level of risk and the average duration of the portfolio’s investments.
BID: The price offered by a buyer of securities. (When you are selling securities, you ask for a bid.)
See Offer.
BOND: A financial obligation for which the issuer promises to pay the bondholder a specified stream of future cash flows, including periodic interest payments and a principal repayment.
BROKER: A broker brings buyers and sellers together for a commission.
CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT (CD): A time deposit with a specific maturity evidenced by a certificate. Large-denomination CD’s are typically negotiable.
COLLATERAL: Securities, evidence of deposit or other property which a borrower pledges to secure repayment of a loan. Also refers to securities pledged by a bank to secure deposits of public monies.
COMMERCIAL PAPER: Commercial paper is the trade name applied to unsecured promissory notes issued b y finance and industrial companies to raise funds on a short term b asis.
COUPON: (a
) The annual rate of interest that a bond's issuer promises to pay the bondholder on the bond's face value. (b) A certificate attached to a bond evidencing interest due on a payment date.
CUSTODY: A banking service that provides safekeeping for the individual securities in a customer's investment portfolio under a written agreement which also calls for the bank to collect and pay out income, to buy, sell, receive and deliver securities when ordered to do so by the principal.
DEALER: A dealer, as opposed to a broker, acts as a principal in all transactions buying and selling for his own account.
DELIVERY VERSUS PAYMENT (DVP): There are two methods of delivery of securities: delivery versus payment and delivery versus receipt. Delivery versus payment is the delivery of securities with an exchange of money for the securities. Delivery versus receipt is delivery of securities with an exchange of a signed receipt for the securities.
DISCOUNT: The difference between the cost price of a security and its value at maturity when quoted at lower than face value. A security selling below original offering price shortly after sale is also considered to be at a discount.
DIVERSIFICATION: Dividing investment funds among a variety of securities offering independent returns.
FEDERAL AGENCY: Federal agencies are special government organizations set up for a specific purpose. Some examples include: FAMCA, FFCB, FHLB, FHLMC, and FNMA.
FEDERAL AGRICULTURAL MORTGAGE CORPORATION: Also known as Farmer Mac or FAMCA, is a stockholder -owned, publicly traded company that was chartered by the United States federal government in 1988 to serve as a secondary market in agricultural loans such as mortgages for agricultural real estate and rural housing.
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION (FDIC): A federal agency that insures bank deposits, currently up to $250,000 per entity.
FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK (FFCB): GSE that issues debt securities on behalf of the banks of the Farm Credit System to support rural communities and U.S. agriculture. Established by Congress in 1916 as the authority for certain predecessor entities, the Farm Credit System is the oldest of the Government-sponsored enterprises.
FEDERAL FUNDS RATE: The rate of interest at which Fed funds are traded. This rate is currently pegged by the Federal Reserve through open-market operations.
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS (FHLB): Government- sponsored wholesale banks (currently 12 regional banks) that lend funds and provide correspondent banking services to member commercial banks, thrift institutions, credit unions, and insurance companies. The mission of
the FHL
Bs is to liquefy the housing -related assets of its members who must purchase stock in their district bank.
FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION (FHLMC): FHLMC is a stockholder owned , government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) chartered by Congress in 1970 to keep money flowing to mortgage lenders in support of homeownership and rental housing for middle-income Americans. The FHLMC, also known as Freddie Mac, purchases, guarantees, and sec uritizes mortgages to form mortgage-backed securities.
FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (FNMA): FNMA, or Fannie Mae, was chartered under the Federal National Mortgage Association Act in 1938. FNMA is a federal corporation working under the auspices of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). It is the largest single provider of residential mortgage funds in the United States. Fannie Mae, as the corporation is called, is a private stockholder -owned corporation. The corporation's purchases include a variety of adjustable mortgages and second loans in addition to fixed - rate mortgages. FNMA securities are also highly liquid and are widely accepted. FNMA assumes and guarantees that all security holders will receive timely payment of principal and interest.
FEDERAL OPEN MARKET COMMITTEE (FOMC): Consists of seven members of the Federal Reserve Board and five of the twelve Federal Reserve Bank Presidents. The President of the New York Federal Reserve Bank is a permanent member, while the other Presidents serve on a rotating basis. The Committee periodically meets to set Federal Reserve guidelines regarding purchases and sales of Government Securities in the open market as a means of influencing the volume of bank credit and money.
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM: The central bank of the United States created by Congress and consisting of a seven-member Board of Governors in Washington, D. C., 12 regional banks and about 5,700 commercial banks that are members of the system.
GOVERNMENT NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (GNMA or Ginnie Mae): Mortgage- backed securities influencing the volume of affordable housing loans and that are guaranteed by GNMA. Security holder is protected by full faith and credit of the U.S.
Government. Underlying mortgages for Ginnie Mae securities include those issued, insured, or guaranteed by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Rural Development (RD), and the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Office of Public and Indian Housing (PIH).
The term “pass throughs” is often used to describe Ginnie Maes.
LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND (LAIF): LAIF was est ablished by the Sta te to ena ble
treasurers to place funds in a pool for investment. Each agency is limited to an investment of $65 million per acc ount.
LIQUIDITY: A liquid asset is one that can be converted easily and rapidly into cash without a substantial loss of value. In the money market, a security is said to be liquid if the spread between bid and asked prices is narrow and reasonable size can be done at those quotes.
MARKET VALUE: T
he price at which a security is trading and could presumably be purchased or sold.
MASTER REPURCHASE AGREEMENT: A written contract covering all future transactions between the parties to repurchase – reverse repurchase agreements that establish each party’s rights in the transactions. A master agreement will often specify, among other things, the right of the buyer-lender to liquidate the underlying securities in the event of default by the seller borrower.
MATURITY: The date upon which the principal or stated value of an investment becomes due and payable.
MONEY MARKET: The market in which short -term debt instruments (bills, commercial paper, bankers’ acceptances, etc.) are issued and traded.
NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED STATISTICAL-RATING ORGANIZATION (NRSRO): A nationally recognized statistical rating corporation (NRSRO) is a credit rating agency that issues credit rating that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) permits other financial firms to use for certain regulatory purposes.
NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION (NCUA): Created by the U.S. Congress in 1970, the National Credit Union Administration is an independent federal agency that insures deposits at federally insured credit unions, protects the members who own credit unions, and charters and regulates federal credit unions. Insured CDs up to a 250,000 limit.
PORTFOLIO: Collection of securities held by an investor.
PRIMARY DEALER: A group of government securities dealers who submit daily reports of market activity and positions and monthly financial statements to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and are subject to its informal oversight. Primary dealers include Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) – registered securities broker-dealers, banks, and a few unregulated firms.
PRUDENT PERSON RULE: An investment standard. In some states the law requires that a fiduciary, such as a trustee, may invest money only in a list of securities selected by the custody state – the so-called legal list. In other states the trustee may invest in a security if it is one which would be bought by a prudent person of discretion and intelligence who is seeking a reasonable income and preservation of capital.
RATE OF RETURN: The yield obtainable on a security based on its purchase price or its current market price. This may be the amortized yield to maturity on a bond the current income return.
REPURCHASE AGREEMENT (RP OR REPO): A holder of securities sells these securities to an investor with an agreement to repurchase them at a fixed price on a fixed date. The security “buyer” in effect lends the “seller” money for the period of the agreement, and the terms of the agreement are structure to compensate him for this. Dealers use RP extensively to finance their positions. Exception: When the Fed is said to be doing RP, it is lending money, or increasing
bank r
eserves.
SAFEKEEPING: A service to customers rendered by banks for a fee whereby securities and valuables of all types and descriptions are held in the bank’s vaults for protection.
SECONDARY MARKET: A market made for the purchase and sale of outstanding issues following the initial distribution.
SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION (SEC): Agency created by Congress to protect investors in securities transactions by administering securities legislation.
SEC RULE 15C3-1: See Uniform Net Capital Rule.
SUPRANATIONALS: A supranational organization is formed by a group of countries through an international treaty with specific objectives such as promoting economic development.
Supranational organizations also issue debt in the United States. The most recognized supranational debt is the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD or World Bank), International Finance Corporation (IFC) and Inter -American Development Bank (IADB). The City can only invest in the above-named Supranational organizations, as outlined in Section VIII.
TREASURY BILLS: A non-interest bearing discount security issued by the U.S. Treasury to finance the national debt. Most bills are issued to mature in three months, six months, or one year.
TREASURY BONDS: Long-term coupon -bearing U.S. Treasury securities issued as direct obligations of the U.S. Government and having initial maturities of more than ten years.
TREASURY NOTES: Medium- term coupon -bearing U.S. Treasury securities issued as direct obligations of the U.S. Government and having initial maturities from two to 10 years
UNIFORM NET CAPITAL RULE: Securities and Exchange Commission requirement that member firms as well as nonmember broker -dealers in securities maintain a maximum ratio of indebtedness to liquid capital of 15 to 1; also called net capital rule and net capital ratio.
Indebtedness covers all money owed to a firm, including margin loans and commitments to purchase securities, one reason new public issues are spread among members of underwriting syndicates. Liquid capital includes cash and assets easily converted into cash.
YIELD: The rate of annual income return on an investment, expressed as a percentage. (a) INCOME YIELD is obtained by dividing the current dollar income by the current market price for the security. (b) NET YIELD or YIELD TO MATURITY is the current income yield minus any premium above par or plus any discount from par in purchase price, with the adjustment spread over the period from the date of purchase to the date of maturity of the bond.
RESOLUTION No. 25-39-R
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HANFORD APPROVING THE CITY INVESTMENT POLICY FOR FY 2025/2026
WHEREAS, California Government Code section 53646 recommends that public agencies have their investment policy reviewed and approved annually by the local governing body at a public meeting; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code section 53646 also states that any change in the investment policy shall be considered by the governing body of the local agency at a public meeting; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to delegate the authority to the City Treasurer to invest City funds in accordance with the Investment Policy, and to require the City Treasurer to provide quarterly reports of the investment portfolio and transactions to the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Hanford hereby approves the attached City Investment Policy for FY 2025/2026, attached as Exhibit A.
PASSED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Hanford at a regular meeting duly held on this 1st day of July, 2025 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
_________________________________
TRAVIS PAYDEN
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 1st day of July, 2025.
Date: ____________________
_________________________________
City Clerk
11.K.
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 7/1/2025 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR
SUBJECT:
Council: Approval of the appointment of Vice Mayor Nancy Howze to the Kings County Association of Governments (KCAG), the Kings County Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Service Authority (KCAVASA), and the Kings Area Regional Transit (KART) Boards, replacing former Mayor Lou Martinez's representation on these boards.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation: That the City Council, by motion, approve the appointment of Vice Mayor Nancy Howze to the Kings County Association of Governments (KCAG), the Kings County Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Service Authority (KCAVASA), and the Kings Area Regional Transit (KART) Boards, replacing former Mayor Lou Martinez's representation on these boards.
BACKGROUND:
The attached list outlines the City Council appointments originally made during the regular City Council meeting held on December 17, 2024. At the regular meeting on June 17, 2025, the City Council formally accepted and approved the resignation of Lou Martinez from his role as Mayor. In addition to his duties as Mayor, Mr. Martinez also served as the City's primary representative on several intergovernmental boards and committees, consistent with the traditional assignment of such roles to the Mayor. Per past practice, the Mayor serves as the primary representative on KCAG, KCAVASA, and KART, with the Vice Mayor serving as the alternate. However, due to conflicts with the new Mayor, Travis Paden’s work schedule, he is unavailable to attend some of the meetings.
Vice Mayor Nancy Howze has expressed interest in taking over as the primary representative on the boards previously served on by former Mayor Martinez.
FISCAL IMPACT:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Council Representation 2025
2. Letter from Lou Martinez
2025 COUNCIL REPRESENTATION ON BOARDS,
CO
MMISSIONS, COMMITTEES
Organization Primary
Appointment
Alternate
Appointment
Kings Economic Development Corporation
(Last Monday each month – 11:30 am)
Mark Kairis N/A
Kings County Association of Governments
(4th Wednesday each month – 4:30 pm)
Requires Form 700
Lou Martinez Travis Paden
Kings County Area Public Transit Agency (KART)
(4th Wednesday each month – 1:30 pm)
Requires Form 700
Lou Martinez Travis Paden
Kings County Abandoned Vehicle Authority
As needed (4th Wednesday each month – 4:30 pm)
Requires Form 700
Lou Martinez Travis Paden
Kings Community Action Organization (KCAO)
(3rd Wednesday each month - 4:30 pm)
Requires Form 700
Nancy Howze Travis Paden
Kings Waste and Recycling Authority (KWRA)
(2nd Wednesday each month - 8:00 am)
Requires Form 700
Mark Kairis Lou Martinez
Mid-Kings River Groundwater Sustainability Agency
(2nd Tuesday of each month – 1:00 pm)
(Alternate not required)
Requires Form 700
Kimber Regan N/A
Kings County Area Disaster Council
(Meets 2-3 times a year)
Director of Emergency Services, Fire Chief, or the City Manager Mario Cifuentez Fire Chief
Kings County Commission On Aging
(3rd Thursday each month – 2:30 pm) Community Member
The City Council’s within Kings County shall appoint one person each.
Susie Chavez
Kings Mosquito Abatement District Board
(3rd Thursday of each month – 9:00 am)
One (1) member from each of the three (3) cities (Corcoran, Hanford, and Lemoore) 3 Year Term
Cindy Harris
(Exp. 12/31/2026)
12.A.
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 7/1/2025 AGENDA SECTION: PUBLIC HEARING
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing to accept public comment and Adoption of Resolution No. 25-34-R approving the Annual Action Plan for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) 2025.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation:
1. That the City Council conduct the public hearing and accept comments about the CDBG proposed 2025-26 Action Plan; and
2. Adopt Resolution No. 25-34-R Authorizing and Approving the proposed 2025-26 Annual Action.
BACKGROUND:
The City is entering Program Year Two of its five-year Consolidated Plan for Fiscal Years 2024–2028. As part of its federal entitlement requirements, the City must prepare and submit an Annual Action Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the upcoming fiscal year.
The Consolidated Plan, approved by the City Council on May 7, 2024, outlines a multi-year strategy for utilizing Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to support community development goals. CDBG funding is used to foster viable urban communities by investing in projects that provide decent housing, create suitable living environments, and expand economic opportunities—primarily for low- and moderate-income residents.
The Annual Action Plan details the specific projects and activities that will be funded each year under the Consolidated Plan.
2025-2026 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN (ATTACHMENT A)
As presented during the Study Session on March 4, 2025, the City of Hanford must adopt the 2025 Annual Action Plan to identify projects for the upcoming fiscal year. At that time, staff estimated a CDBG budget of $544,484.
Based on this estimate, the City Council directed staff to allocate funding to the following projects:
On May 14, 2025, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) announced the City’s current CDBG allocation: $523,508. Additionally, the City anticipates receiving approximately $25,000 in program income— revenue generated from previously funded activities, such as loan repayments or proceeds from the sale of property improved with CDBG funds. The City will also carry over $38,456 from the prior year, bringing the total available budget to $586,964. As a result, the staff has revised the proposed activities to reflect the finalized funding.
ADMINISTRATION (20%) FUNDING
Total Funding Allocated $117,382
PUBLIC SERVICES (Subject to
15%)
FUNDING
Kings Tulare Homeless Alliance -
Continuum of Care/Point-In-Time
Count/LINC
$10,000
Kings Commission on Aging $45,000
Fair Housing $13,000
Kings Community Action
Organization- Overnight Shelter
$20,040
Total Public Service Allocated: $88,040
AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUNDING
City of Hanford -Emergency/Minor
Home Repair Program
Total Funding Allocated $181,542
PUBLIC FACILITY
IMPROVEMENTS
FUNDING
Total Funding Allocated $200,000
Total Funding Allocated: $586,964
Alternate Projects
The following projects will serve as examples of other projects in the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan. Projects may be funded from the Alternate Projects List if additional funding is available or if a funded project is canceled or delayed beyond the grant year. Factors to be taken into consideration when selecting from the Alternate Projects list include priority rank on the list, available funding based on the funding caps (ex. (15%), Public Service Cap), eligibility of the project for the available funding source, and timeframe for completion concerning the time for expending funds.
Preferential consideration will be given to projects that demonstrate the ability to spend CDBG funds on time, consistent with the City’s goal to meet CDBG timeliness rules, and projects that meet the community’s needs defined in the Consolidated Plan.
Project List Funding
City of Hanford -Emergency/Minor
Home Repair Program
$200,000
First-Time Homebuyer Assistance $15,000
Additional funding for Public
Service Subrecipients
Subject to 15%
CAP
Public Review:
The Action Plan was released for a 30-day public review period on May 20, 2025, with a public notice of availability published in the Hanford Sentinel on April 2, 2025. No comments have been received as of the preparation of this
report. Public comments received before the closing of the comment period on June 21, 2025, will be summarized in the final document.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 2025 ACTION PLAN DRAFT
2. Summary of CDBG Funding Recommendations APP25
3. Resolution 25-34-R
ATTACHMENT A
THE CITY OF HANFORD, CA
PROGRAM YEAR
2025-2026
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT (CDBG)
DRAFT ANNUAL ACTION PLAN
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 2 AP-05 Executive Summary - 24 CFR 91.200(c), 91.220(b) .......................................................................... 2 AP-10 Consultation – 91.100, 91.200(b), 91.215(l) .................................................................................... 6
1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 6 AP-12 Participation – 91.105, 91.200(c) .................................................................................................. 15 Expected Resources ..................................................................................................................................... 18 AP-15 Expected Resources – 91.220(c)(1,2) ............................................................................................ 18 Annual Goals and Objectives........................................................................................................................ 22 Projects ................................................................................................................................................... 25 AP-35 Projects – 91.220(d) ...................................................................................................................... 25 AP-38 Project Summary ........................................................................................................................... 28 -50 Geographic Distribution – 91.220(f) ................................................................................................... 33 Affordable Housing ...................................................................................................................................... 34 AP-55 Affordable Housing – 91.220(g) .................................................................................................... 34 AP-60 Public Housing – 91.220(h) ........................................................................................................... 35 AP-65 Homeless and Other Special Needs Activities – 91.220(i) ............................................................. 37 AP-75 Barriers to affordable housing – 91.220(j) ..................................................................................... 40 AP-85 Other Actions – 91.220(k) ............................................................................................................. 41 Program Specific Requirements ................................................................................................................... 43
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 2 | P a g e
Executive Summary
AP-05 Executive Summary - 24 CFR 91.200(c), 91.220(b)
1. Introduction
The City of Hanford (City) is an Entitlement Jurisdiction that receives federal funds from the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to invest in local communities. The City gets HUD funding through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program, which is designed to assist low- and moderate-income (LMI) households.
The primary objective of the CDBG program is to develop viable communities by providing decent housing, a suitable living environment, and expanded economic opportunities. CDBG grantees can utilize the resources they receive for Planning and Administration , Public Services, and Capital Improvement Projects (CIP), public facilities and infrastructure, and CIP Housing Rehabilitation.
Planning and Administration costs include staffing, general management, oversight, and coordination. Public Service projects pr ovide social services and/or other direct support to individuals and households needing assistance.
The City’s entitlement allocation is $ 523,508 in CDBG funding for Program Year 2025.
The Action Plan incorporates the Consolidated Plan, which outlines a comprehensive plan establishing a unified, coordinated vision for community development, benefiting low -income residents and areas from 2024 to 2028.
The City of Hanford gathers input from citizens, consults its community development partners, and conducts extensive research to determine housing and community development needs. The City of Hanford also partners with nonprofit and for -profit organizations, neighborhood groups, and other local governments to undertake specific actions using the strategies developed. A vital element of this Consolidated Plan is its collaborative nature.
2. Summarize the objectives and outcomes identified in the Plan The overview will focus on the findings and discoveries from the assessment of needs . The plan outlines the various necessities and efficiently how to deal with any shortcomings. By understanding these objectives and outcomes, the city of Hanford’s administration can align its strategies and actions to resolve the following points:
• Invest in neighborhood infrastructure in low and moderate-income areas. • Invest in remediation of access and mobility barriers in all neighborhoods. • Continue to expand the housing rehabilitation assistance to low and moderate-income residents. • Continue to expand down payment assistance to low and moderate-income residents. • Invest in public facility improvements that serve low- and moderate-income residents. • Invest in capacity and programmatic enhancements for service providers primarily serving low— and extremely low-income residents, particularly those at risk of experiencing poverty. • homelessness.
• Invest in neighborhood and strategic planning to help identify community needs
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 3 | P a g e
CDBG-funded programs. Each activity or program funded with CDBG must fall under one of three objectives and one of three outcomes. The framework for selecting these objectives and outcomes is HUD’s CPD Outcome Performance Measurement System. Here are the goals and outcomes to choose from:
Objectives
• Creating Suitable Living Environments refers to activities designed to benefit communities, families, or individuals by addressing issues in their living environment, ranging from physical problems with the environment to social issues. • Providing Decent Housing encompasses a wide range of housing activities aimed at meeting the individual, family, or community's housing needs. • Creating Economic Opportunities applies to economic development, commercial revitalization, or job creation activities.
Outcomes
• Availability/Accessibility applies to activities that make services, infrastructure, public services, public facilities, housing, or shelter available or accessible to low- and moderate-income people, including people with disabilities. • Affordability applies to activities that provide affordability in various ways to low- and moderate-income people and is appropriate to use whenever an activity lowers the cost, improves the quality, or increases the affordability of a product or service benefits a low-income household.
Performance measurement is a crucial process that enables organizations to assess and evaluate the effectiveness of their programs in meeting the needs of their target audience. By systematically collecting and analyzing data, performance measurement provides insights into how healthy programs perform and whether they achieve their intended outcomes. It serves as a valuable tool for decision -making, enabling organizations to identify areas for improvement, make informed adjustments, and optimize resource allocation
3. Evaluation of past performance
The City of Hanford prepares the Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER) annually to assess the impacts of projects and programs in the City. The CAPER provides specific accomplishments for the goals developed through the Consolidated Plan process.
4. Summary of Citizen Participation Process and consultation process The Citizen Participation Plan outlines the framework and process for developing and implementing Hanford’s housing and community development program, as required by HUD. The citizen participation plan is essential to the consolidated plan, ensuring that residents have a voice in shaping their communities' future. This subtopic aims to comprehensively understand the citizen participation plan and its significance. The citizen participation plan outlines how local governments engage with residents, community organizations, and stakeholders in decision -making. Utilizing survey tools can assist researchers in gaining insight i nto and understanding the public's perception. Their opinions are invaluable and should be a resource tool in shaping housing policies.
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 4 | P a g e
5. Summary of public comments
A summary of public comments will be included in the Final Action Plan before its submission to HUD.
All public meetings were properly noticed, as required by the Brown Act. Additionally, the notices included requests for physical accommodation and documents in alternative formats.
The meetings aimed to inform the community about the Action Plan process, identify opportunities to improve collaborative efforts, and eliminate service delivery gaps to develop and sustain decent and affordable housing, suitable living environments, and e xpanded community and economic opportunities.
To maximize participation in preparing the 2025-2026 Action Plan, the city held a public meeting on March 4, 2025, during the City Council study session.
The Action Plan was made available to the public from May 20, 2025, to June 21, 2025.
The City will hold a Public Hearing for approval of the document on July 1, 2025.
6. Summary of comments or views not accepted and the reasons for not accepting them All comments are accepted.
7. Summary
The City of Hanford has undertaken diligent and good-faith efforts to reach all community segments that may benefit from the CDBG programs. The City of Hanford will continue focusing on maximizing impact and addressing the needs, priorities, and goals outlined in the 2024-2028 Consolidated Plan and the 2025-2026 Action Plan.
PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies 24 CFR 91.200(b)
1. Describe agency/entity responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source
The following are the agencies/entities responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administering the grant program and funding source.
Agency Role Name Department/Agency
Lead Agency HANFORD Community Development Department CDBG Administrator HANFORD Community Development Department Table 1 – Responsible Agencies
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 5 | P a g e
Narrative
This document is the Action Plan for the City of Hanford, an entitlement community, for 2025-2026.
Hanford receives the following funds annually from HUD: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG); the City is not Entitlement City to HOME, which is state-funded through an application.
The Community Development Department's Housing Division is the primary federal entitlement fund administrator.
Consolidated Plan Public Contact Information
Sandra Lerma
Housing Administrative Analyst
559-585-4766
317 N Douty Street
Hanford, CA 93230
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 6 | P a g e
AP-10 Consultation – 91.100, 91.200(b), 91.215(l)
1. Introduction
The City's Housing Division, part of the Community Development Department and its consultant, Chrysalis Research Consulting LLC, conducted thorough community engagement outreach efforts to gather public input on potential community improvements that could be addressed using federal entitlement funds.
This division manages all funds and carries out housing development activities. The City of Hanford, along with various public and private agencies, social service organizations, nonprofits, department heads, and representatives, collaborated to gather inf ormation and feedback on the most effective use of CDBG resources.
In conclusion, an online survey regarding community and housing needs was created and made available on the city's website. The survey was also provided in paper format at the Community Development and Finance/Utility Departments. A
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 7 | P a g e
Provide a concise summary of the jurisdiction’s activities to enhance coordination between public and assisted housing providers and private and governmental health, mental health, and service agencies (91.215(I)).
The city of Hanford has a healthy working relationship with the various stakeholders, community partners, and social service providers. With the combined inputs of multiple benefactors, Hanford is leveraging its resources to pursue the city's development n eeds. These partnerships are essential for several reasons, including gaining new insight into problem -solving, building upon successful efforts, and leveraging scarce resources. The city of Hanford will achieve the goals outlined in this consolidated pl an by strengthening the network of residents, faith -based organizations, service providers, lenders, for‐profit and nonprofit developers, and state and federal agencies.
The city of Hanford has strengthened its ability to work collaboratively with partners to address the gaps in its housing delivery system. Recognizing the importance of affordable and adequate housing options for its residents, Hanford has fostered strong collaboration to uncover voids in housing development services. Through these efforts, Hanford has identified key areas where the housing system falls short and developed effective strategies to bridge these gaps.
The City of Hanford continues to explore ways to expand its services by coordinating resources with various local agencies. The housing division of the Department of Community Department continues to create partnerships and initiatives to fill institutional gaps and foster institutional coordination.
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 8 | P a g e
Describe coordination with the Continuum of Care and efforts to address the needs of homeless people (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans, and unaccompanied youth) and people at risk of homelessness.
Hanford has initiated homeless reduction measures by embracing collaboration with partners and employing innovative strategies coupled with Hanford's Continuum of Care (CoC). Members of the CoC, such as the Kings County Homelessness Collaborative, joined w ith cooperative associations from internal and adjacent municipalities to combat homelessness. The Housing Authority of Kings County has also taken an initiative-taking, unified approach in response to this challenge of reducing homelessness.
The Housing Authority of Kings County has also adopted a proactive, unified approach in response to this challenge of reducing homelessness. The Housing Authority of Kings County (HAKC) recognizes that homelessness has no borders and has joined with neighboring municipalities. HAKC has worked tirelessly to bring city officials, community organizations, and stakeholders from various municipalities within Kings County.
HAKC aims to create a comprehensive and coordinated response to the housing crisis by fostering these partnerships. Through joint initiatives and shared resources, the unification of cities under HAKC enables the efficient allocation of funding and service s. This collaboration allows for better identification of individuals experiencing homelessness and ensures that they receive appropriate support tailored to their specific needs.
Describe consultation with the Continuum(s) of Care that serves the jurisdiction's area in determining how to allocate ESG funds, develop performance standards and evaluate outcomes, and develop funding, policies, and procedures for administering HMIS. • The City of Hanford does not utilize ESG Funds.
2. Describe Agencies, groups, organizations, and others who participated in the process and describe the jurisdiction's consultations with housing, social service agencies, and other entities.
Provide a concise summary of the jurisdiction’s activities to enhance coordination between public and assisted housing providers and private and governmental health, mental health and service agencies (91.215(l))
The city of Hanford has a healthy working relationship with the various stakeholders, community partners, and social service providers. With the combined inputs of multiple benefactors, Hanford is leveraging its resources to pursue the city's development n eeds. These partnerships are essential for several reasons, including gaining new insight into problem -solving, building upon successful efforts, and leveraging scarce resources. The city of Hanford will achieve the goals outlined in this consolidated pl an by strengthening the network of residents, faith -based organizations, service providers, lenders, for‐profit and nonprofit developers, and state and federal agencies.
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 9 | P a g e
The city of Hanford has strengthened its ability to work collaboratively with partners to address the gaps in its housing delivery system. Recognizing the importance of affordable and adequate housing options for its residents, Hanford has fostered strong collaboration to uncover voids in housing development services. Through these efforts, Hanford has identified key areas where the housing system falls short and developed effective strategies to bridge these gaps.
The City of Hanford continues to seek ways to expand the services it provides by coordinating resources with various agencies. The housing division of the Department of Community Department continues to create partnerships and initiatives to fill instituti onal gaps and foster institutional coordination.
Describe coordination with the Continuum of Care and efforts to address the needs of homeless people (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans, and unaccompanied youth) and people at risk of homelessness.
Hanford has initiated homeless reduction measures by embracing collaboration with partners and employing innovative strategies coupled with Hanford's Continuum of Care (CoC). Members of the CoC, such as the Kings County Homelessness Collaborative, joined w ith cooperative associations from internal and adjacent municipalities to combat homelessness. The Housing Authority of Kings County has also taken an initiative-taking, unified approach in response to this challenge of reducing homelessness.
The Housing Authority of Kings County has also adopted a proactive, unified approach in response to this challenge of reducing homelessness. The Housing Authority of Kings County (HAKC) recognizes that homelessness has no borders and has joined with neighboring municipalities. HAKC has worked tirelessly to bring city officials, community organizations, and stakeholders from various municipalities within Kings County.
HAKC aims to create a comprehensive and coordinated response to the housing crisis by fostering these partnerships. Through joint initiatives and shared resources, the unification of cities under HAKC enables the efficient allocation of funding and service s. This collaboration allows for better identification of individuals experiencing homelessness and ensures that they receive appropriate support tailored to their specific needs.
Describe consultation with the Continuum(s) of Care that serves the jurisdiction's area in determining how to allocate ESG funds, develop performance standards for and evaluate outcomes of projects and activities assisted by ESG funds, and develop funding, policies and procedures for the operation and administration of HMIS Not applicable. The City does not receive ESG funding. The Alliance applies on behalf of the applicants.
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 10 | P a g e
3. Describe Agencies, groups, organizations and others who participated in the process and describe the jurisdiction’s consultations with housing, social service agencies and other entities. See Table #2 (page 11, 12, 13)
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 11 | P a g e
Agency/Group
/
Organization
Agency/Group/
Organization
Type
What section
of the Plan
was
addressed by
Consultation?
Briefly describe how the
Agency/Group/Organization was
consulted. What are the anticipated
outcomes of the consultation or areas
for improved coordination?
Housing
Authority of
Kings County -
PHA
Public Agency AP-60
NA-35
The Housing Authority of Kings County
(HAKC) was interviewed for their input on
the housing and community development
needs and goals for the City of Hanford.
The HAKC consulted on the various
means and processes it uses to serve the
community by providing housing
services.
HAKC has dedicated itself to serving the
community through various means,
focusing on providing housing services.
With this goal in mind, the authority has
consulted extensively to ensure it meets
the community's needs effectively and
efficiently.
In addition to providing affordable
housing options, HAKC offers
educational resources and support
services for community residents. This
includes financial management classes,
job training programs, and access to
health and wellness resources. By
providing these services, the authority
aims to empower its residents and help
them achieve self-sufficiency.
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 12 | P a g e
King’s Tulare
Homeless
Alliance
Housing
Services
NA-40 The KTHA (Kings Tulare Homeless
Alliance) is a non-profit organization that
aims to help the homeless population in
the Kings and Tulare counties. They offer
temporary shelter solutions to protect
people without housing from the
elements and provide them with a safe
space to sleep. They assist individuals
and families in transitioning from
homelessness to stable housing through
various support programs. They
collaborate with healthcare providers to
ensure our homeless community
members' physical and mental well-
being. They provide job search
assistance, resume workshops, and skills
training to help individuals gain
employment and financial independence.
They are ensuring that no one in our
community goes hungry by providing
access to nutritious meals and food
supplies.
Kings
Community
Action
Organization
Social Services NA-40
NA-45
NA-50
The agency has been invited to
participate in public hearings and a 30-
day plan review. The consultation is
expected to enhance data and planning
within the specified areas. Discussions
of the Navigation Center to help improve
the homeless population was discussed.
Kings County
Homeless
Collaborative
Homeless
Services
NA-40 Collaborative participated/hosted a
public meeting to discuss the housing
survey availability and the opportunity
for the 30-day review of plans. The
anticipated outcome of the consultation
is improved data and collaborative
planning within the selected sections
above.
Champions
Recovery
Alternative
Programs, INC
Social Services NA-40
NA-45
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 13 | P a g e
Federal
Communicatio
ns
Commission
Other - Federal MA-50 Broadband Internet Needs
Internet search for data related to the
broadband internet needs for the City of
Hanford. https://broadbandmap.fcc.gov
Information from the Federal
Communications Commission was used
to address HUD’s requirement to discuss
broadband access and “the digital
divide.” Refer to Section MA-50.
Comcast
U.S. Census
Bureau
Federal
Department
MA-60
MA-65
Census Date
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ma-65 Environmental Justice Screening and
Mapping tools for Socioeconomic
Indicators for Low-Income Populations
Table 2 – Agencies, groups, organizations who participated
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 14 | P a g e
Identify any Agency Types not consulted and provide rationale for not consulting
Other local/regional/state/federal planning efforts considered when preparing the Plan Name of
Plan
Lead
Organization
How do the goals of your Strategic Plan overlap with the goals of each plan?
Continuum
of Care
Kings Tulare
Continuum of
Care
The Kings Tulare Continuum of Care (KTCOC) is a
collaborative network of organizations and individuals
working together to end homelessness in Kings and Tulare counties in California. The KTCOC provides a wide range of services to address the various needs of the homeless
population in Kings and Tulare counties. These services include, but are not limited to, KTCOC’s operation of
emergency shelters for individuals and families, providing a safe and temporary place.
County of
Kings
Housing
Element
City of Hanford The Housing Element identifies the community's housing needs, goals, and objectives to address those needs, and outlines the community's efforts to pursue specific policies and programs to achieve its goals and objectives. The
Strategic Plan supports the Housing Elements plan to ensure that there is an adequate supply of affordable housing to meet the current and future needs of the population.
Currently, the City’s Housing Element is under state review.
Table 3 – Other local / regional / federal planning efforts
Narrative (optional)
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 15 | P a g e
AP-12 Participation – 91.105, 91.200(c)
1. Summary of citizen participation process/Efforts made to broaden citizen participation Summarize the citizen participation process and how it impacted goal setting
The Citizen Participation Plan (CPP) is a critical document outlining how the local government will involve its citizens in decision -making. It is a roadmap for fostering open communication and collaboration between the government and its residents. CPP fosters public engagement and interaction between the city administration and the everyday citizens to gain various perspectives and insights about public affairs.
The Citizen Participation Plan is a valuable resource for residents of Hanford to actively engage in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of various City programs financially supported by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) t hrough federal entitlement grants.
These grants include, but are not limited to, the Community Development Block Grant. The plan promotes transparency and accountability by involving citizens in decision -making, allowing the government to become more trans parent and accountable for its actions. This fosters trust and builds a positive relationship between the government and its residents.
Public Meeting
An in-person presentation was held during a public meeting to solicit community and stakeholder input for the development of this AP.
Public Review of Draft Documents
A 30-day public review was held from May 20, 2025, through June 21, 2025. Copies of the Draft AP were made available for the public at the following locations: ▪ City Website ▪ City Hall, and the Community Development Department ▪ Main Library. The final Con Plan, amendments, Annual Action Plans, and performance reports will be available for seven years at Hanford’s Community Development Department.
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 16 | P a g e
Sort
Order
Mode of
Outreach
Target of
Outreach
Summary of
response &
attendance
Summary of
comments
received
Summary
of
comments
not
accepted
and
reasons
URL
(If
applicable)
1 Newspaper
Ad
Non-English
Speaking -
Specify other
language:
Spanish
Non-
targeted/broad
community
Notices on
the
community
outreach and
community
surveys were
posted in the
Hanford
Sentinel
newspaper.
Comments
are
summarized
in Appendix A
None
Received
All
comments
were
accepted
2 Website
Posting
Non-English
Speaking -
Specify other
language:
Spanish
Non-
targeted/broad
community
Approximately
250 people
were reached
through the
Alliance's
notification
system
regarding the
community
needs survey
and ConPlan
and Action
Plan.
Comments
are
summarized
in Appendix A
None
Received
All
comments
were
accepted
Public Hearing Citizen Participation Outreach
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 17 | P a g e
3 Public
Meeting
Non-English
Speaking -
Specify other
language:
Spanish
Non-
targeted/broad
community
The City
conducted a
public
meeting on
March 4,
2025, for
discussions
on housing
and
community
development
needs.
Over 40 in
Attendance
Comments
are
summarized
in Appendix A
(forthcoming)
All
comments
were
accepted
4 Public
Hearing
Non-English
Speaking -
Specify other
language:
Spanish
Non-
targeted/broad
community
The City will
hold a public
hearing
before
Hanford City
Council on
July 1, 2025.
Comments
are
summarized
in Appendix A
(forthcoming)
All
comments
will be
accepted
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 18 | P a g e
Table 4 – Citizen Participation Outreach
Expected Resources
AP-15 Expected Resources – 91.220(c)(1,2)
Introduction
The City of Hanford is an entitlement jurisdiction for CDBG funds, and the 2025 allocation is $523,508 in FY 26 CDBG funds. In addition, $25,000 in estimated program income from CDBG activities is included. Estimated program income is incorporated into the City's annual budgeting process.
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 19 | P a g e
Anticipated Resources
Program Source
of
Funds
Uses of
Funds
Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected
Amount
Available
Remainder
of ConPlan
$
Narrative
Description Annual
Allocation:
$
Program
Income:
$
Prior Year
Resources: $
Total:
$
CDBG public -
federal
Acquisiti
on
Admin
and
Planning
Economic
Developm
ent
Housing
Public
Improve
ments
Public
Services
523,508 25,000 38,456 586,964 $1,640,109
For planning
purposes, the
City estimates
the availability of
approximately
$3.1 million in
CDBG allocations
over the five-year
Consolidated
Plan period. This
estimate
assumes stable
allocations over
the planning
period. In
addition, the City
anticipates a
total program
income of
$375,000 over
five years from a
revolving loan
fund for housing
rehabilitation
activities.
Specifically, a
program income
of $373,861 was
received for FY
2024-2025, and it
is estimated at
$100,000 for FY
2025-2028.
Table 5 - Expected Resources – Priority Table
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 20 | P a g e
Explain how federal funds will leverage those additional resources (private, state and local funds), including a description of how matching requirements will be satisfied The City leverages federal and local housing funds by supporting non-profit organizations developing affordable housing. The City, or its partners, provides matching funds for housing -related services to several programs, which include the following:
• First-Time Homebuyers program. In this program, low- and moderate-income families may qualify for a low-interest second mortgage loan to purchase a home. As funding is available, this program may be administered internally. • Homeowner rehabilitation program—This program is provided to Hanford homeowners with unhealthy and unsafe conditions. It also removes barriers for disabled persons. • Development of a homeless navigation center/shelter
• The City will also be receiving, on an annual basis, Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) funding, which will assist with matching requirements. • Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA). PLHA will provide a permanent source of funding to all local governments in California to help cities and counties implement plans to increase the affordable housing stock. Funding will help Hanford with the following eligible uses, which include increasing the supply of housing for households at or below 60% of area median income; Increasing assistance to affordable owner-occupied workforce housing; assisting people experiencing or at risk of homelessness; facilitating housing affordability, particularly for lower- and moderate-income households; and promoting projects and programs to meet Hanford's unmet share of regional housing needs allocation.
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 21 | P a g e
If appropriate, describe publicly owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that may be used to address the needs identified in the plan
The City of Hanford does not have land to accommodate the uses identified in this plan.
Discussion
See the above discussion.
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 22 | P a g e
Annual Goals and Objectives
AP-20 Annual Goals and Objectives
Goals Summary Information
Sort
Order
Goal Name Start
Year
End
Year
Category Geographic
Area
Needs Addressed Funding Goal Outcome
Indicator
1 Housing 2025 2026 Affordable
Housing
CITY OF
HANFORD
Housing CDBG:
$181,542
Homeowner
Housing Added:
2 Household
Housing Units
Homeowner
Housing
Rehabilitated: 50
Household
Housing Unit
2 Community
Development
Enhancement
– Public
Facilities
2025 2025 Homeless CITY OF
HANFORD
Neighborhood
Preservation
and Public
Facilities
CDBG:
$200,000
Public Facility or
Infrastructure
Activities for
Low/Moderate
Income Housing
Benefit: 1
Household
Assisted
3 Public Services 2025 2026 Non-Housing
Community
Development
CITY OF
HANFORD
Public Services CDBG:
$88,040
Public service
activities for
Low/Moderate
Income Housing
Benefit: 300
Households
Assisted
Homelessness
Prevention:
15000 Persons
Assisted
Other: 73 Other
4 Program
Administration
2025 2026 Program
Administration
CITY OF
HANFORD
Administration
Community
Development
CDBG:
$117,382
Other: 1 Other
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 23 | P a g e
Table 6 – Goals Summary
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 24 | P a g e
Goal Descriptions
1 Goal Name Housing
Goal
Description
Homeowner Housing Rehabilitation: 50
Alternate Activity: First Time Homebuyer: 2
Goal Description:
The City of Hanford seeks to increase the affordable housing stock by supporting the planning, design, and construction of new housing units; homeownership through new or existing home buyer, including down payment assistance; housing rehabilitation, including home improvement assistance programs, affordable rental housing construction for special needs families; the building or converting existing buildings for homeless housing; housing construction—partner with CHDO agencies for project work.
2 Goal Name Community Development/Enhancement
Goal
Description
Neighborhood Preservation and Public Facilities
Shelter and Services for the Homeless
1 Facility
Goal Description:
Improving recreational spaces, supporting community and social service facilities, enhancing existing infrastructure such as streets and sidewalks, curbs and other public facilities lighting, and addressing public safety concerns. Improvements to
local nonprofit community facilities such as youth or senior centers and emergency homeless shelters.
3 Goal Name Public Services
Goal
Description
Public Services
Shelter and Services for the Homeless
Senior Services
Youth Services
Goal Description:
The City of Hanford will address community and special needs through increased mental and behavioral health public services. This is to meet the public’s need for assistance with substance abuse, domestic violence, and general mental health needs. • Hanford will assist homeless prevention services working with the Continuum of Care Kings/Tulare Counties.
• Provide funding for youth programs and scholarship programs. 4 Goal Name Program Administration
Goal
Description
Administration Community Development
Goal Description:
Planning and Administration of the City's CDBG Program.
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 25 | P a g e
Projects
AP-35 Projects – 91.220(d)
Introduction
One-year action Plans are required for each of the five years of the Five-Year Consolidated Plan. The Action Plan implements the strategies in the Consolidated Plan to address the housing needs of Hanford's low—and moderate-income citizens. The city's administration approves and measures all projects, which must comply with the Consolidated Plan and all local, state, and federal regulations.
Each project must be carefully evaluated and prioritized within each specific year of the Action Plan. This will ensure that resources are appropriately allocated and utilized while allowing for flexibility should any unforeseen changes or developments w ithin the community. Additionally, the Action Plan provides transparency and accountability for each project regarding how government funds are utilized to address housing needs.
Depending on the project, some of the CDBG funding will be blended with other local, state, and federal sources for each project. This is to ensure that all resources are maximized and utilized effectively to address the housing needs of Hanford residents . The Action Plan also outlines each project's specific goals and objectives, along with a timeline for completion to stay on track with meeting the overall objectives outlined in the Consolidated Plan.
Furthermore, the Action Plan also includes a monitoring and evaluation component to measure the progress and success of each project. This allows for adjustments or modifications to be made to ensure that the desired outcomes are achieved. The City's administration oversees this process and reports on the results to the community.
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 26 | P a g e
Projects
Table 7 - Project Information
# Project Name
1 Program Administration
2 Homeowner Rehabilitation
3 Public Services- Commission on Aging
4 Public Services-Homeless Services-KCAO
5 Public Service- Youth & Elder Adults
Scholarship Program - Parks and Community
Services
6 Public Services – Homeless
Collaborative -COC/KTHA
7 Public Services- CSET- Fair Housing
8 Community Development Enhancement
Public Facilities
9 First Time Homebuyers-Alternate
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 27 | P a g e
Describe the reasons for allocation priorities and any obstacles to addressing underserved needs One-Year Action Plans are required for each of the five years of the Five-Year Consolidated Plan. The Action Plan implements the strategies outlined in the Consolidated Plan to address the housing needs of Hanford's low -income and moderate -income citizens. All projects are approved and measured by the City's administration and must comply with the Consolidated Plan. The projects also must comply with all local, state, and federal regulations.
Each project must be carefully evaluated and prioritized within each specific year of the Action Plan. This will ensure that resources are appropriately allocated and utilized while allowing for flexibility should any unforeseen changes or developments w ithin the community. Additionally, the Action Plan provides transparency and accountability for each project regarding how government funds are utilized to address housing needs.
Depending on the project, some of the CDBG funding will be blended with other local, state, and federal sources for each project. This is to ensure that all resources are maximized and utilized effectively to address the housing needs of Hanford residents . The Action Plan also outlines each project's specific goals and objectives, along with a timeline for completion to stay on track with meeting the overall objectives outlined in the Consolidated Plan.
Furthermore, the Action Plan also includes a monitoring and evaluation component to measure the progress and success of each project. This allows for adjustments or modifications to achieve the desired outcomes. The City's administration oversees this process and reports on the results to the community.
Backup Projects: The City may include a backup list of projects in the Action Plan. Should funding become available, projects completed below budget, canceled, or delayed for various reasons will be activated. Approval of the Action Plan by the City Council and HUD will be considered approval for the backup projects. Activating the backup projects does not constitute a substantial amendment to the Action Plan. The following projects will be considered as alternate projects.
Housing Rehabilitation
(Additional funding will be added to the total)
$ 200,000
First-time Homebuyer Assistance $ 150,000
Additional funding for Public Service Subrecipients Subject to 15% CAP Additional funding for Administration and Planning Subject to 20% CAP
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 28 | P a g e
AP-38 Project Summary
1 Project Name Program Administration
Target Area Program Administration
Goals Supported Citywide
Needs Addressed All
Funding All
Description CDBG: $117,382
Target Date Effective and cost-efficient implementation of the CDBG program.
Estimate the number and
type of families that will
benefit from the proposed
activities
6/30/2026
Location Description N/A
Planned Activities Citywide
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 29 | P a g e
2 Project Name Homeowner Rehabilitation
Target Area Citywide
Goals Supported Create a suitable living environment.
Needs Addressed Ensure equal access to housing opportunities. Property Repairs
Funding CDBG: $181,542
Activity: $163,542 Activity Delivery: $18,000
Description The City of Hanford will continue to offer the Emergency Repair Program. This program offers qualifying residents the chance to finance emergency home repairs. The
program provides up to $24,999 per household. Repairs
include, but are not limited to, roof repair or replacement, water meter replacement, heating and air repair or
replacement, exterior painting, and accessibility
improvements. It is anticipated that 15 households will be assisted through the program.
Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the number and
type of families that will
benefit from the proposed
activities.
Approximately eight (8) income-eligible homeowners will benefit from the proposed activity.
Location Description Citywide
Planned Activities The City will fund 15 LMI homeowners for housing repairs and improvements.
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 30 | P a g e
3 Project Name Public Services-Kings Commission on Aging Target Area Citywide
Goals Supported Public Services- Older Adults
Needs Addressed Provide public services for low- and moderate-income residents.
Funding CDBG: $45,000 priority project for additional funding, should it become available.
Description Provide public services for low- and moderate-income residents and older people.
Target Date 6/30/2025
Estimate the number and
type of families that will
benefit from the proposed
activities
Approximately 300 people will benefit from the proposed activities.
Location Description Citywide.
Planned Activities Age Well Senior Services: Home Delivered Meals (100 people)
4 Project Name Public Service- Homeless Services-KCAO
Target Area Citywide
Goals Supported Public Services – Homelessness
Needs Addressed
Funding CDBG: $20,040
Description Provide funding to community-based organizations that offer critical services for the homeless and other special needs populations as determined via a competitive
application.
Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the number and
type of families that will
benefit from the proposed
activities.
Approximately 30 people will benefit from the proposed
activities.
Location Description City-Wide
Planned Activities CDBG funds will provide program support for operating overnight centers to assist unhoused individuals in
Hanford.
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 31 | P a g e
5 Project Name Public Service- Youth & Elder Adults Scholarship Program - Parks and Community Services
Target Area Citywide
Goals Supported Public Services – Fair Housing
Needs Addressed
Funding CDBG: $13,000
Description
Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the number and
type of families that will
benefit from the proposed
activities
Other:
Location Description Citywide
Planned Activities Provide fair housing education
6 Project Name Community Development Enhancement
Target Area Citywide
Goals Supported Public Facilities and Infrastructure Improvements Needs Addressed • Community Improvements
• Navigation Centers
• Housing
Funding $200,000
Description Provide a new facility (i.e., shelter) or upgrade/enhance an existing one.
Target Date 6/30/2028
Estimate the number and
type of families that will
benefit from the proposed
activities
Other: 1
Location Description Citywide
Planned Activities To be determined
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 32 | P a g e
7 Project Name Public Services – Homeless Collaborative -COC/KTHA Target Area City-Wide
Goals Supported Support special needs programs and services Needs Addressed • Provide support services for the City's residents Funding $10,000
Description The Kings Tulare Continuum of Care (COC) is a non-profit organization that partners with several area agencies to address the homeless’ needs in Hanford. CDBG funds will help fund a variety of activities, including, but not limited to, the Annual Project Homeless Connect and the Point in Time census.
Target Date 06/30/2026
Estimate the number and
type of families that will
benefit from the proposed
activities
An estimated 250 LMI persons will benefit from this
activity
Location Description LMI area
Planned Activities The Kings Tulare Continuum of Care (COC) is a non-profit organization that partners with several area agencies to address the homeless’ needs in Hanford. CDBG funds will help fund a variety of activities, including, but not limited to, the Annual Project Homeless Connect and the Point in Time census.
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 33 | P a g e
-50 Geographic Distribution – 91.220(f)
Description of the geographic areas of the entitlement (including areas of low-income and minority concentration) where assistance will be directed The City of Hanford will allocate funds to highly redeveloped areas. This will help to stimulate economic growth and create jobs, resulting in a more vibrant and thriving community.
Geographic Distribution
Target Area Percentage of Funds
CITY OF HANFORD 100
Table 8 - Geographic Distribution
Rationale for the priorities for allocating investments geographically The allocation of resources is often based on geographic areas. These areas were chosen because they have a history of chronic poverty. This means that the people living in these regions have been struggling with poverty for an extended period. These areas have higher rates of persistent unemployment and are typically in the moderate to low-income category.
CDBG funding directed toward public services is a citywide public service benefit. Public Facilities are based upon CDBG requirements, such as the area benefit noted above, limited clientele, or income qualifications; affordable housing will be citywide, which encompasses CDBG Target Areas.
Other programs may benefit within the CDBG Target areas as well; however, they are allowed citywide.
The average household income is at or below 80% of the area’s median income. This is an essential factor because it helps to determine the level of need in a particular region. The lower the AMI, the higher the poverty level and resource need.
Discussion
The City of Hanford has had success in its geographic allocation of housing and community development investments. Private investment has been drawn into all areas where a concentrated investment of CDBG and other resources has been used to remove blight and create new affordable housing opportunities.
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 34 | P a g e
Affordable Housing
AP-55 Affordable Housing – 91.220(g)
Introduction
The Division of Neighborhood Housing and Revitalization is slated to rehabilitate eight (8) homeowner units.
One Year Goals for the Number of Households to be Supported Homeless 8
Non-Homeless 0
Special-Needs 0
Total 8
Table 9 - One Year Goals for Affordable Housing by Support Requirement
One Year Goals for the Number of Households Supported
Through
Rental Assistance 0
The Production of New Units 0
Rehab of Existing Units 8
Acquisition of Existing Units 0
Total 8
Table 10 - One Year Goals for Affordable Housing by Support Type
Discussion
Eliminating many of the physical signs of poverty is a critical element in improving the quality of life for the City of Hanford residents . Along with improving the quality and availability of affordable housing, poverty and housing are interconnected issues that impact the well -being of individuals, families, and communities.
The lack of affordable housing is a significant contributor to poverty, and living in poverty often makes it difficult for people to afford adequate housing. The City of Hanford has implemented strategies to reduce poverty and improve access to quality housing to address these challenges.
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 35 | P a g e
AP-60 Public Housing – 91.220(h)
Introduction
The housing and infrastructure goals for the City of Hanford within the next year are ambitious but obtainable. The City will continue aiding moderate —to low -income residents facing housing insecurity with supportive services and financial aid. Federal fun ds (CDBG funds) and state funds (HOME funds) will be utilized to develop a self-sustainable society.
Actions planned during the next year to address the needs to public housing The City of Hanford does not own or operate public housing. However, the City of Hanford does collaborate with the Housing Authority of King County to increase the availability of affordable housing options within the city. The City of Hanford also is developing several strategies that will be implemented within the following year:
Actions to encourage public housing residents to become more involved in management and participate in homeownership
The City of Hanford hosts council meetings on the first and third Tuesdays of each month. These meetings are open to the public, and community organizations are encouraged to attend and share their insights and ideas for addressing poverty and aiding low -income families. Regular communication and collaboration between the city and community organizat ions will help identify gaps in services and find ways to support those who need to be updated about initiatives that can benefit them.
The City of Hanford also uses social media such as Instagram and Twitter to connect with residents who want to be kept in the loop about community initiatives and events. Occasionally, polling will be available online, an additional communication conduit a llowing residents to express their opinions and provide feedback on city policies and initiatives. This also allows the city to gather information on the specific needs of low-income families in the community.
For individuals who are not computer savvy or lack internet literacy, community officials have taken proactive measures to reach out to these community members by having paper surveys in public meeting spaces. Their opinions and inputs are also considered and incorporated into policymaking and initiatives. This inclusive approach ensures that all voices are heard and considered when implementing specific policy considerations.
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 36 | P a g e
Home Buyers
The City of Hanford also has first-time home buyer programs to assist low-income families seeking home ownership. The program provides various resources, such as workshops, classes, and educational materials, to help individuals make informed decisions when purchasing their first home. This initiative aims to promote self-sufficiency and financial stability for low-income families in the community.
In addition to these efforts, the City of Hanford works closely with local nonprofit organizations and community groups to provide resources and support for low -income families. These partnerships allow for a more comprehensive approach to addressing the n eeds of low -income families and creating a sense of collaboration and unity within the community. Transitioning families from public housing to possible home ownership is the goal of wealth building through housing equity. This not only helps families achi eve financial stability but also contributes to the economic growth of the community.
If the PHA is designated as troubled, describe the manner in which financial assistance will be provided or other assistance
Not applicable.
Discussion
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 37 | P a g e
AP-65 Homeless and Other Special Needs Activities – 91.220(i) Introduction
The City of Hanford has taken a proactive approach to addressing issues faced by the homeless and disabled. There are annual initiatives revolving around funding food delivery services and sheltering that prioritize the benefit of disenfranchised populations.
The City of Hanford has partnered with the Kings County Homeless Collaborative and the Kings- Tulare Homeless Alliance to assist displaced populations. This collaborative effort aims to support homeless individuals and offer valuable resources to help them regain life stability. The partnership entails a concerted effort to provide meaningful aid to those in need, address the root causes of homelessness, and prevent its recurrence.
Describe the jurisdictions one-year goals and actions for reducing and ending homelessness including
Reaching out to homeless people (especially unsheltered people) and assessing their individual needs
This section outlines the City's goals for the upcoming year and the actions it will take to implement the homeless strategy outlined in the SP-60 Homelessness Strategy. Additionally, it will describe the jurisdiction's objectives for the year and the specific activities it will undertake to cater to the housing and supportive service requirements of non-homeless populations who need supportive housing.
Addressing the emergency shelter and transitional housing needs of homeless people The Point in Time Count and HIC Housing Inventory Count are markers used to measure the number of resources on hand compared to the number of individuals who are homeless. These numbers are used as a metric to measure the resources needed to assist the homeless population. Also, it is crucial to the efficiency of fund allocation to maximize the effects of funding specific projects.
The City of Hanford allows various shelters and nonprofits to apply for funding. This spreads the funds across several organizations, potentially reaching more people. The allocated funds will be used by shelters that host citizens who need emergency shelt ering as well as those who are stable enough to transition out of shelters and move into market-rate housing.
Helping homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living, including shortening the peri od of time that individuals and families experience homelessness, facilitating access for homeless individuals and families to affordable housing units, and preventing individuals and families who were recently homeless from becoming homeless again
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 38 | P a g e
All programs offered by the Homeless Alliance, including emergency, transitional, and permanent housing, provide supportive services to their clients. These supportive services are designed and implemented based on the program's target population and partnerships within the community. The primary goal of these services is to connect individuals and families with mainstream benefits and income support, education, employment services, as well as health and life -skills services. These connections are a crucial component in assisting clients towards self-sufficiency, reducing episodes of homelessness, and preventing recidivism. The programs that serve these vulnerable subpopulations include the following:
Champions, KCAO, and Kings County Behavioral Health: permanent supportive housing (PSH) programs for chronically homeless individuals and families with children.
Westcare: Rapid Re -housing and Homeless Prevention for veterans and their families through the SSVF program.
Aspiranet: transitional housing program for young people aged between 18-24.
The Salvation Army: Rapid Re -housing and Homeless Prevention services for homeless individuals and families.
The continued allocation of CDBG funds to sidewalks and related neighborhood infrastructure will increase accessibility and safety for underserved populations , allowing them to traverse the City more easily.
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 39 | P a g e
Helping low-income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, especially extremely low- income individuals and families and those who are: being discharged from publicly funded institutions and systems of care (such as health care facilities, mental health facilities, foster care and other youth facilities, and corrections programs and institutions); or, receiving assistance from public or private agencies that address housing, h ealth, social services, employment, education, or youth needs.
All Homeless Alliance programs, including emergency, transitional, and permanent housing, provide supportive services for their clients. The supportive services are designed and implemented by each program based on the target population and partnerships within the community. The primary goal of supportive services is to connect individuals and/or families with mainstream benefits and income support, education, employment services, and health and life -skills services. These linkages are essential in assisting clients with self-sufficiency, reducing homelessness, and preventing relapses.
Programs that serve vulnerable subpopulations include:
Champions, KCAO, and Kings County Behavioral Health - Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) programs for chronically homeless individuals, families, and families with children.
Westcare - Rapid Re -housing and Homeless Prevention services for veterans and their families through the SSVF program.
Aspiranet - Transitional housing program for youth aged 18-24.
The Salvation Army - Rapid Re-housing and Homeless Prevention services for homeless individuals and families.
Discussion
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 40 | P a g e
AP-75 Barriers to affordable housing – 91.220(j)
Introduction:
The City of Hanford will monitor and review public policies for discriminatory practices. The City of Hanford has committed to monitoring and reviewing public policies to avoid discriminatory practices or impacts on housing availability. As part of the Consolidated Plan, the City has also completed an Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. The aim is to remove barriers to affordable housing development wherever possible. The analysis identified specific goals to make housing more affordable, which include reducing housing costs and impacting housing availability.
Actions it planned to remove or ameliorate the negative effects of public policies that serve as barriers to affordable housing such as land use controls, tax policies affecting land, zoning ordinances, building codes, fees and charges, growth limitations, and policies affecting the return on residential investment
GOAL 3. Remove or mitigate potential governmental constraints to the extent feasible and appropriate to housing production, maintenance, improvement, and affordability. • Policy 3.1 Offer regulatory and financial incentives, as available and appropriate, to encourage the construction of quality housing.
• Policy 3.2 Review local ordinances and building regulations to ensure they do not impede housing investment.
• Policy 3.3 Utilize planned developments and other creative mechanisms to facilitate the construction of more innovative, well-designed housing projects. • Policy 3.4 Ensure that developments are processed efficiently to minimize holding costs and comply with the Permit Streamlining Act.
Discussion:
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 41 | P a g e
AP-85 Other Actions – 91.220(k)
Introduction:
This section will describe the City’s planned actions to carry out the following strategies outlined in the Consolidated Plan:
• Foster and maintain affordable housing.
• Continue First time services, and rehab multifamily.
• Assist the Low to Moderate Income Earners and Homeless Population • Develop scholarship Program.
Actions planned to address obstacles to meeting underserved needs Despite the City’s best efforts and efforts of service providers, there continue to be obstacles to meeting the underserved needs in the City of Hanford. Some of these needs The City of Hanford is facing several challenges in meeting the needs of its underserved population, despite the efforts of service providers. Among these challenges are the shortage of housing due to increasing population growth, a tight rental market, and rising housing costs that surpass household income growth. There are also concer ns regarding aging in place for the growing elderly population. To address these issues, the City has a plan under the AP 2025 CDBG Program which includes:
• Leveraging financial resources and applying for additional public and private funds. • Providing financial assistance for housing rehabilitation. • Funding for public service activities.
• Public facility improvements.
• Funding for code enforcement activities.
Actions planned to foster and maintain affordable housing Hanford prioritizes providing affordable housing opportunities and maintaining its existing housing stock. To achieve this, the city has developed several strategies, including implementing a first-time homebuyer program to assist low- to moderate-income individuals with financing and ensuring their housing costs fall within their affordability range. An owner-occupied rehabilitation program has also been implemented to support low -income homeowners in preserving their homes. Ongoing code enforcement services are also in place.
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 42 | P a g e
Actions planned to reduce lead-based paint hazards
LBP remediation is a crucial component of the rehab program for owner-occupied homes. All homes are tested for lead-based paint, and any LBP found is appropriately addressed.
Actions planned to reduce the number of poverty-level families The City of Hanford has made the decision to allocate a portion of its CDBG funding to support educational initiatives in the region. The main objective is to invest in the success of students who show academic potential, with the hope that they will contribute to the city's growth and development through their academic achievements.
Actions planned to develop institutional structure
The city of Hanford's long-term goals align with the development of institutional structures. Although scholarships encourage higher education, more overall funding is needed to pursue immediate goals.
Actions planned to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies
The City of Hanford is committed to continuing its collaboration and coordination efforts with social service providers, housing agencies, community and economic development organizations, county, federal, and state agencies, as well as with the private and non-profit sectors. The aim is to meet the needs of individuals and families with a target income within the City of Hanford.
Discussion:
2025-2026 DRAFT Annual Action Plan 43 | P a g e
Program Specific Requirements
AP-90 Program Specific Requirements – 91.220(l)(1,2,4)
Introduction:
Projects that will be funded by the CDBG funds available for the year are listed in the Projects Table.
Program income available for use on these projects is also identified.
Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG)
Reference 24 CFR 91.220(l)(1)
Projects planned with all CDBG funds expected to be available during the year are identified in the Projects Table. The following identifies program income that is available for use that is included in projects to be carried out.
1. The total amount of program income that will have been received before the start of the next program year and that has not yet been reprogrammed 0
2. The amount of proceeds from section 108 guarantees that will be used during the year to address the priority needs and specific objectives identified in the grantee's strategic plan. 0
3. The amount of surplus funds from urban renewal settlements 0
4. The amount of any grant funds returned to the line of credit for which the planned use has not been included in a prior statement or plan 0
5. The amount of income from float-funded activities 0
Total Program Income: 0
Other CDBG Requirements
1. The amount of urgently need activities 0
2. The estimated percentage of CDBG funds that will be used for activities that benefit people of low and moderate income. Overall Benefit - A consecutive period of one, two or three years may determine that a minimum overall benefit of 70% of CDBG funds is used to benefit people of low and moderate income. Specify the years covered that include this Annual Action Plan.
100
%
Resources:
2025 Estimated Entitlement Allocation 523,508.00$
2025 Estimated Program Income 25,000.00$
Prior Year Resources 38,456.00$
Total FY 2025/26 CDBG Resources 586,964.00$
Expenditures:
Planning & Administration (20% cap= $117,392)
Total Administration 117,382.00$
Public Services:
Kings Tulare Homeless Alliance - Continuum of Care/Point-In-Time Count/LINC 10,000.00$ Kings Commission on Aging 45,000.00$
Fair Housing 13,000.00$
Kings Community Action Organization- Overnight Shelters 20,040.00$ Public Services (15% Cap = $85,422)
88,040.00$
Affordable Housing:
City of Hanford - Emergency/Minor Home Repair Program 163,542.00$ Homeowner Rehabiliation - Activity Delivery 18,000.00$
Total Affordable Housing 181,542.00$
Public Facility Improvements:
King Community Action - Food Bank Service Center 200,000.00$ Total Public Facility Improvements 200,000.00$
Total FY 2025/26 CDBG Expenditures 586,964.00$
Table 1: Program Year 2025 -2025 CDBG Annual Action Plan Administration and Planning:
Summary of Funding Recommendations
*Any increase or decrease of FY 25/26 CDBG annual allocation and/or program income will be directed to the CDBG Emergency Repair Program, First-Time Homebuyer and Public Services (subject to 15% cap) *
Attachment B
ATTACHMENT C
RESOLUTION NO. 25-34-R
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HANFORD
APPROVING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ACTION PLAN FOR THE ACTION PLAN YEAR 2025-26
At a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford, duly called and held July 1, 2025, upon motion of Council Member_______________, and seconded by Council Member _____, and carried, the following resolution, which was adopted:
WHEREAS the City of Hanford opted to become an Entitlement Community within the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program in November 2003, allowing the city to receive an allocation directly from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) each year; and
WHEREAS, the City of Hanford should receive in CDBG Entitlement Funds in Program Year 2025-26; and
WHEREAS, the $523,508 in annual funds are to be used to benefit low- to moderate income households and neighborhoods in the elimination or prevention of slum and blight for such programs as housing rehabilitation, affordable homeownership assistance, neighborhood improvement, community services, as well as community development activities, such as the construction or rehabilitation of community infrastructure and facilities and economic development: and WHEREAS, under the provisions of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, the thirty-day review period for the Action Plan for the program year 2025- 26 will expire on June 21, 2025, and all comments received shall be incorporated in the final document.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council adopt the Community Development Block Grant Action Plan from July 1, 2025, to June 30, 2026.
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford duly called and held on the 1st day of July 2025, by the following vote:
l HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Hanford at a meeting thereof held on July 1, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
APPROVED:
Lou Martinez
MAYOR of the City of Hanford
ATTEST: ___________________________
Nataiie Corral
CITYCLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF KINGS ) ss
CITY OF HANFORD )
l, Nataiie Corral, City Clerk of the City of Hanford, certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford on the 1st day of July 2025.
Date: ____________________________
City Clerk
12.B.
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 7/1/2025 AGENDA SECTION: PUBLIC HEARING
SUBJECT:
Annexation No. 166, Island #15: A proposal to annex a substantially surrounded county island, totaling 93.56 acres, into the City of Hanford from the Kings County jurisdiction.
Prezone No. 0014-25: A proposal to prezone the proposed territory to be annexed as R-L-12 Low- Density Residential (12,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) and R-L-5 Low-Density Residential (5,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) consistent with the 2035 Hanford General Plan Land Use Map.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommended Motion:
1. Certify the Notice of Exemption, in accordance with CEQA.
2. Introduce and waive the first reading of Ordinance No. 25-03, approving Prezone No. 0014-25.
3. Adopt Resolution 25-37-R, initiating proceedings for Annexation No. 166 and direct staff to file the appropriate forms with the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) of Kings County.
BACKGROUND:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Annexation No. 166, Island #15
The site is a substantially surrounded county island, totaling 93.56 acres, generally located south of Fargo Avenue, north of Leland Way, west of 9 ¼ Ave. (see Attachment 1) The LAFCo determination of what constitutes an island is attached as Attachment 2. Sixty percent is the established substantially surrounded island threshold, according to LAFCo.
Prezone No. 0014-25
Prezone No. 0014-25 is a proposal to prezone the proposed territory to be annexed as R-L-12 Low- Density Residential (12,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) and R-L-5 Low-Density Residential (5,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) consistent with the Low-Density Residential designation on the 2035 Hanford General Plan Land Use Map. The specific proposed prezoning is illustrated on the Zoning Map shown in Attachment 3.
In accordance with Kings County Zoning, the area is currently zoned RRE Rural Residential and AL
10 Limited Agricultural-10.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
General Plan Land Use Designations
The General Plan designates the various substantially surrounded properties as Low-Density Residential. The following policies apply to these land use designations.
3.4.1 Low Density Residential
The expected density range for Low Density Residential is 2 to 10 units per gross acre with an expected average of 4 units per gross acre.
Policy L31 Purpose of the Low-Density Residential Land Use Designation
Establish the Low-Density Residential land use designation to provide mainly single-family development on lot sizes typically found in urban settings.
Policy L32 Typical Uses in the Low-Density Residential Land Use Designation
Define the uses allowed in the Low-Density Residential land use designation to include residential uses in a variety of single-family lot types. Duplexes, second dwelling units, and home occupations can also be allowed when made compatible with the residential nature of the neighborhood.
Policy L33 Size of Lots in the Low-Density Residential Land Use Designation
While it is recognized that existing lot sizes of 10,000 to 40,000 square feet are included in this designation, new individual lot sizes shall range from 5,000 to 10,000 square feet in size. Under Planned Unit Development provisions, smaller lot sizes at higher densities may be permitted when clustered around shared open space amenities or through density bonus policies.
Annexation Policies
The General Plan also has policies regarding annexation of land into the city limits. The Planning Commission is charged with reviewing proposed annexations and making a finding that the proposed annexation is consistent with the policies of the General Plan, and then forward that finding to the City Council. The Hanford Planning Commission found that Annexation 166 is consistent with the Hanford General Plan Policies L15, L16, and L17.
Policy L15 Initiation of Annexations
Consider initiation of annexation of land into the City of Hanford only when the following criteria are met:
1. The land is within the Primary Sphere of Influence.
2. The capacity of the water, sewer, fire, school, and police services are adequate to service the area to be annexed or will be adequate at the time that development occurs.
3. Land for development within the City limits is insufficient to meet the current land use needs.
4. The territory to be annexed is contiguous to existing developed areas.
Policy L16 County Islands
Initiate annexation of County islands when it is found that urban services are needed and can be provided or made available in the near future.
Policy L17 Plan for Services
Prepare and make publicly available a written Plan for Services that describes how urban services will be provided prior to initiating an annexation.
State Law
To facilitate the annexation of county islands to contiguous cities, the state legislature has adopted specific provisions in the Government Code that require LAFCo annexation approval and waiver of protest proceedings if LAFCo makes certain findings and determinations. Those determinations are found in Government Codes 56375(a)(4) and 56375.3.
Government Code Section 56375
(a)(4) A commission shall not disapprove an annexation to a city, initiated by resolution, of contiguous territory that the commission finds any of the following:
(A) Surrounded or substantially surrounded by the city to which the annexation is proposed or by that city and a county boundary or the Pacific Ocean if the territory to be annexed is substantially developed or developing, is not prime agricultural land as defined in Section 56064, is designated for urban growth by the general plan of the annexing city and is not within the sphere of influence of another city.
(B) Located within an urban service area that has been delineated and adopted by a commission, which is not prime agricultural land, as defined by Section 56064, and is designated for urban growth by the general plan of the annexing city.
(C) An annexation or reorganization of unincorporated islands meeting the requirements of Section 56375.3.
Government Code Section 56375.3
(a) In addition to those powers enumerated in Section 56375, a commission shall approve, after notice and hearing, the change of organization or reorganization of a city, and waive protest proceedings pursuant to Part 4 (commencing with Section 57000) entirely, if all of the following are true:
(1) The change of organization or reorganization is initiated on or after January 1, 2000. (2) The change of organization or reorganization is proposed by resolution adopted by the affected city.
(3) The commission finds that the territory contained in the change of organization or reorganization proposal meets all the requirements set forth in subdivision (b). (b) Subdivision (a) applies to territory that meets all the following requirements:
(1) It does not exceed 150 acres in area, and that area constitutes the entire island. (2) The territory constitutes an entire unincorporated island located within the limits of a city or constitutes a reorganization containing several individual unincorporated islands. (3) It is surrounded in either of the following ways:
(A) Surrounded, or substantially surrounded, by the city to which annexation is proposed or by the city and a county boundary or the Pacific Ocean.
(B) Surrounded by the city to which annexation is proposed and adjacent cities. (4) It is substantially developed or developing. The finding required by this paragraph shall be based upon one or more factors, including, but not limited to, any of the following factors:
(A) The availability of public utility services.
(B) The presence of public improvements.
(C) The presence of physical improvements upon the parcel or parcels within the area. (5) It is not prime agricultural land, as defined by Section 56064. (6) It will benefit from the change of organization or reorganization or is receiving benefits from the annexing city.
(7) This subdivision does not apply to any unincorporated island within a city that is a gated community where services are currently provided by a community services district.
Planning Commission
A public hearing was held on May 27, 2025. Deputy City Manager Waters presented the staff report and City Attorney Mizote provided the following legal points:
1. The Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) is a completely separate governing body and has final authority.
2. The Planning Commission is tasked with considering if what is being proposed is consistent with the City of Hanford General Plan.
3. A "No" vote can only be made if a finding cannot be made.
Following the presentation of the staff report and legal points, the public comment portion of the public hearing was opened:
IN FAVOR
None.
OPPOSED
Dennis Aldean - asked if there would be an environmental review and if the City would take into consideration all the wildlife in the area.
Director Waters responded that every project in California must have an environmental analysis.
Depending on the project, some qualify for an exemption, and this project will be exempt.
Art Castenada - asked why only one side of 9 1/4 Avenue is being annexed.
Director Waters replied that this is the only part that is technically an island (60% touching City)
Motions were made to:
1. Recommend adoption of the Notice of Exemption, in accordance with CEQA.
2. Adopt Resolution No. 2025-20, recommending approval of Prezone No. 0014-25 to the City Council.
3. Find that the proposed Annexation No. 166 is consistent with the Hanford General Plan Policies L15, L16, and L17 and forward Annexation No. 166, to the City Council, with a recommendation that an application be made to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) of Kings County.
All motions were passed by a 4-0 vote.
PROJECT EVALUATION
Annexation No. 166
The project is a request to annex a substantially surrounded island into the City of Hanford from the Kings County jurisdiction. The premise and guidance for the proposal is given by State law, which finds that county islands should generally be annexed into a city so they may receive more efficient delivery of services, as a city is usually more equipped to provide urban level services than a county or other entity.
Annexation of land into Hanford allows previously undeveloped land to become available for development and allows the City of Hanford to provide the territory that is annexed with its full range of City services.
The General Plan also has policies regarding annexation of land into the city limits. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed annexation and made a finding that the proposed annexation is consistent with the policies of the General Plan. On May 27, 2025, the Planning Commission found that Annexation 166 was consistent with Hanford General Plan Policies L15, L16, and L17.
Policy L15 Initiation of Annexations
Consider initiation of annexation of land into the City of Hanford only when the following criteria are met:
1. The land is within the Primary Sphere of Influence.
Analysis: The substantially surrounded island is within the Primary Sphere of Influence.
2. The capacity of the water, sewer, fire, school, and police services are adequate to service the area to be annexed or will be adequate at the time that development occurs.
Analysis: Table 1 shows which services are currently being provided by the County.
Table 1
Current Island Annexation Service Providers
Law Enforcement: County
Fire / Emergency Service: County
Water Supply: Private
Water Distribution: Private
Wastewater Collection: Private
Wastewater Disposal: Private
Solid Waste Collection*: Private
Flood Control/Drainage: County
Street Maintenance: County
Street Lighting: County
Parks and Recreation: County
* Solid waste collection in the County islands is currently optional.
Water
The area is currently on private wells. Were the City to annex the island, the City has the capacity to add the existing residential units to its water system. The City encourages property owners to hook up the house to city water, but the existing well can be retained long term for watering the property as
long as a backflow device is installed on the domestic water service. Residents will only be required to connect to the City water system when major work on their well is needed to provide water. Minor work, such as cleaning or pump replacement, will not trigger a requirement to connect to the City water system.
Sewer
The area is currently served by private septic services. The City would not require hookup to City sewer service if the home’s septic tank is operating properly. If the septic system violates State or local health codes, then both City and County ordinances require connection to the City system if one is available within 200 feet of the property. The City will issue permits for a new septic tank or substantial work on the leach field if a City sewer line is not within 200 feet of the property.
Fire and Police
The County is currently responsible for police, emergency, and fire protection of the substantially surrounded County island proposed to be annexed.
The Police Department’s current staffing ratio is 1.09 officers per 1,000 residents. The General Plan Background Report suggests a ratio of 1.1 to 1.2 is appropriate for similar cities of the size of Hanford. Annexation of the County island will result in an increase in population of persons who will need to be served by the City’s Police Department.
The City’s current ISO rating is 2 (ISO rating is on a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being best). Due to the City’s ability to provide such services to its current population, there is no evidence indicating that the addition of residents resulting from the island annexations would be too great for the City to adequately serve. The City continues to be able to use the County’s fire services in times of need, therefore the overall fire service capacity will not be affected.
School
There would be no change to school districts because of the island annexation. Since no new development is proposed, the annexation will not affect school enrollment.
Utilities/Public Services
Natural gas, electricity, and communications public services would not change because of annexation of the county island.
3. Land for development within the City limits is insufficient to meet the current land use needs.
Analysis: The proposed annexation of the substantially surrounded county island is not to accommodate any specific proposed development project. Instead, the purpose of the proposed annexation is to further good local government and make available the full range of City services to both developed and undeveloped county island areas. Therefore, this requirement is not relevant to the proposal.
4. The territory to be annexed is contiguous to existing developed areas.
Analysis: The island is substantially surrounded by developed areas within the city limits of Hanford.
Policy L16 County Islands
Initiate annexation of County islands when it is found that urban services are needed and can be provided or made available in the near future.
Analysis: The City has the capacity to provide all of the services currently being provided by the County. Because of their proximity inside the city limits, the provision of service within the county island can be more efficiently provided by the City. Additional water and sewer can be made available to the island area if the property desires City water and/or sewer or if their individual systems fail.
Policy L17 Plan for Services
Prepare and make publicly available a written Plan for Services that describes how urban services will be provided prior to initiating an annexation.
Analysis: The Plan for Services was described in the letter to property owners dated March 27, 2025 - attached as Attachment 4. The letter describes the City’s intention to provide services to the substantially surrounded county island, when the property has the choice to add City services, and when additional City services will be required.
Prezone No. 0014-25
Prezone No. 0014-25 would be consistent with the land use designations shown on the 2035 General Plan Land Use Map. This will ensure that zoning after annexation is consistent with the General Plan.
Most land use designations in the General Plan are only consistent with one corresponding zone in the Zoning Ordinance. The Low-Density Residential land use designation can be consistent with the R-L-5 and R-L-12 zones. In these cases, the specific prezoning is recommended based on the size of the existing parcels in the particular annexation area and the adjacent surrounding zoning.
In accordance with the Hanford Municipal Code Section 17.86.030, before a zone change may be approved, all of the following findings shall be made by the reviewing authority:
1. That the amendment is internally consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan and the Municipal Code.
Analysis: Prezone No. 0014-25 is internally consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan, specifically consistent with Land Use Policies L15, L16, and L17. There is not a plan for development at this time. Most of the parcels proposed for annexation are already developed at the densities consistent with the proposed prezoning.
2. That the amendment would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare of the community.
Analysis: There is no evidence that annexation of the county island into the city limits would negatively affect health, safety, or welfare. On the contrary, the coordination of services between the City and County will be improved by reducing inefficiencies through annexation.
3. That the amendment would maintain the appropriate balance of land uses within the City.
Analysis: The proposed prezoning is consistent with the land use designations established in the
General Plan.
4. That the anticipated land uses on the subject site would be compatible with existing and future surrounding uses.
Analysis: It is anticipated that the undeveloped sites in the substantially surrounded county island area will eventually develop in a manner consistent with the proposed prezoning.
Favorable Factors for Annexation
Favorable and unfavorable factors for annexation have been adopted by LAFCO. The existence of favorable or unfavorable factors should not decide approval or denial; however, a substantial number of favorable or unfavorable factors may determine approval or denial of the proposal.
1. The proposed area is close to urban development and municipal-type services and would enhance its potential for full development.
Analysis: The island is substantially surrounded by urban development. City services are available to the island area.
2. The proposed annexation conforms to the adopted General Plan.
Analysis: As discussed above, there is evidence to support a finding that annexation of the island is consistent with Policies L15, L16, and L17 of the General Plan. The island area will be prezoned so that zoning after annexation is consistent with the 2035 General Plan Land Use Designation Map.
3. The proposed area is consistent with the sphere of influence.
Analysis: The island is within the Sphere of Influence adopted by LAFCo.
4. The proposed annexation comes with 100% consent of all landowners.
Analysis: The island annexation does not come with 100% consent of the landowners. However, as previously stated, State law encourages the annexation of county islands and waives the protest hearings at LAFCo that determine landowner consent for island annexations like the one being proposed here. The City staff held an open-forum community meeting on April 23, 2025, in the training room of City Hall, to address any questions posed by landowners.
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL
Based on the information and analysis above, City staff recommends that the following findings be made:
1. The substantially surrounded county island is within the Primary Sphere of Influence.
2. There is capacity in the City water and sewer systems to add the parcels currently on individual water and sewer systems if those property owners either desire to hook up or are required to because their systems fail.
3. Inclusion of the island in the city limits will not negatively affect the Police or Fire Department’s ability to provide their services to the community.
4. There would be no change to school districts because of the island annexation.
5. The proposed annexation of the island is not to accommodate any specific proposed development project. The purpose of the proposed annexations is to further good local government and make available the full range of City services to both developed and undeveloped county island areas.
6. The island is substantially surrounded by developed areas within the city limits of Hanford.
7. Because of the proximity inside the city limits, the provision of service within the substantially surrounded county island can be more efficiently provided by the City.
8. The prezoning is internally consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan and the Municipal Code.
9. The prezoning would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare of the community.
10. The prezoning would maintain the appropriate balance of land uses within the City.
11. The anticipated land uses on the subject site would be compatible with existing and future surrounding uses, except where uses are deemed legally existing non-conforming.
12. A portion of the island is developed and the entire island is substantially surrounded by urban development. City services are available to the island area.
13. State law encourages the annexation of county islands to further the goal of effective and efficient provision of local government services.
14. Based on the above findings, Annexation No. 166 is consistent with the Hanford General Plan Policies L15, L16, and L17.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
In accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Annexation No. 166 and Prezone No. 0014-25 were determined to be exempt from CEQA per Categorical Exemption Class 19 (Annexation of areas containing existing public or private structures developed to the density allowed by the current prezoning) per CEQA Guidelines Section 15319(a) and per Categorical Exemption Class 5 (Section 15305 Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations of the CEQA Guidelines) per CEQA Guidelines Sectoin 15305. A Notice of Exemption has been prepared for the project in accordance with CEQA – Attachment 5.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Planning Commission:
Noticing of the project was published in the newspaper on May 16, 2025. Notices were mailed to property owners within the annexation territory and to property owners within 300 feet of the annexation territory on May 15, 2025.
No comments were received prior to the Planning Commission hearing. Public comments received
during the May 27, 2025 hearing are discussed above.
City Council:
Noticing of the project was published in the newspaper on June 20, 2025. Notices were mailed to property owners within the annexation territories and to property owners within 300 feet of the annexation territories on June 18, 2025.
No additional comments have been received as of the date of preparation of this report.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Certify the Notice of Exemption, in accordance with CEQA.
2. Introduce and waive the first reading of Ordinance No. 25-03, approving Prezone No. 0014-25.
3. Adopt Resolution 25-37-R, initiating proceedings for Annexation No. 166 and direct staff to file the appropriate forms with the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) of Kings County.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No Impact to the General Fund
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Ordinance 25-03 Prezone
2. Resolution 25-37-R Annexation 166
3. Island Annexation and Legal Description
4. LAFCO Island Determination
5. Prezone Map
6. Island 15 Notice and FAQ
7. Notice of Exemption
ORDINANCE NO. 25-03
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HANFORD PREZONING ANNEXATION 166, CONSISTENT WITH THE 2035 HANFORD GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP
The City Council of the City of Hanford does ordain as follows:
Section 1: The following described territory situated in the City of Hanford is hereby prezoned under the terms of Chapter 17.86 of the Hanford Municipal Code:
Annexation 166: filed by the City of Hanford
FROM:County zoning RRE Rural Residential and AL 10 Limited Agricultural-10 TO:City zoning R-L-12 Low-Density Residential and R-L-5 Low-Density Residential On property described as follows:
93.56 acres, generally located south of Fargo Avenue, north of Leland Way, west of 9 ¼ Ave, as depicted in attached Exhibit A; and
Section 2: The Council does hereby find as a fact that this Ordinance has been recommended for passage by the Planning Commission of the City of Hanford after public hearing before the Planning Commission after notice required by Section 17.70.100 of the Hanford Municipal Code and Government Code Section 65854. The City Council that the Project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), per Categorical Exemption Class 19 (Annexation of areas containing existing public or private structures developed to the density allowed by the current prezoning) and per Categorical Exemption Class 5 (Minor alterations in land use limitations). The City Council hereby finds that the prezoning is required to achieve the objectives of the zoning regulations as set forth in Section 17.06.010 of the Hanford Municipal Code, and that this Ordinance has been introduced by the City Council after public hearing held on the 1st day of July 2025 at 7:00 p.m. of said day after notice required under the provisions of Section 65856 of the Government Code.
Section 3: This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its passage, and shall be published once in the Hanford Sentinel within fifteen (15) days after its passage, and the zoning will apply to such property in the event of subsequent annexation to the City under the provisions of Section 65859 of the Government Code.
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford duly called and held on the 1st day of July, by the following roll call vote:
ATTEST:
Natalie Corral
APPROVED
_________________________
MAYOR of the City of Hanford
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 ordinance was duly introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford on the 1 st day of July, 2025 and it was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford held on the _______ day of ______________, 2025.
Dated: _____________________ _____________________________ Natalie Corral
City Clerk
Exhibit A
From: County zoning RRE Rural Residential and AL 10 Limited Agricultural-10 To: City zoning R-L-12 Low-Density Residential and R-L-5 Low-Density Residential
RESOLUTION NO. 25-37-R
A RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION BY THE CITY OF HANFORD REQUESTING THE
LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION TO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS FOR ANNEXATION NO. 166: A REQEST TO ANNEX A SUBSTANTIALLY SURROUNDED COUNTY ISLAND, TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 93.56 ACRES, INTO THE CITY OF HANFORD FROM THE KINGS COUNTY JURISDICTION.
RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Hanford, that, WHEREAS, the City of Hanford desires to initiate proceedings pursuant to the Cortese-Knox- Hertzberg Local Reorganization Act of 2000, Division 3, commencing with Section 5600 of the California Government Code, an affected City, as defined therein, may by resolution adopted by its legislative body make a proposal for a change of organization and request initiation of proceedings thereon; and WHEREAS, notice of intent to adopt this resolution of application has been given, and this Council has conducted a public hearing based upon this notification; and WHEREAS, the principal reasons for the proposed annexation are as follows:
1. The substantially surrounded county island is within the Primary Sphere of Influence.
2. There is capacity in the City water and sewer systems to add the parcels currently on individual water and sewer systems if those property owners either desire to hook up or are required to because their systems fail.
3. Inclusion of the island in the city limits will not negatively affect the Police or Fire Department’s ability to provide their services to the community.
4. There would be no change to school districts because of the island annexation.
5. The proposed annexation of the island is not to accommodate any specific proposed development project. The purpose of the proposed annexations is to further good local government and make available the full range of City services to both developed and undeveloped county island areas.
6. The island is substantially surrounded by developed areas within the city limits of Hanford.
7. Because of the proximity inside the city limits, the provision of service within the substantially surrounded county island can be more efficiently provided by the City.
8. The prezoning is internally consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan and the Municipal Code.
9. The prezoning would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare of the community.
10. The prezoning would maintain the appropriate balance of land uses within the City.
11. The anticipated land uses on the subject site would be compatible with existing and future surrounding uses, except where uses are deemed legally existing non-conforming.
12. A portion of the island is developed and the entire island is substantially surrounded by urban development. City services are available to the island area.
13. State law encourages the annexation of county islands to further the goal of effective and efficient provision of local government services.
14. Based on the above findings, Annexation No. 166 is consistent with the Hanford General Plan Policies L15, L16, and L17.
WHEREAS, the following agency would be affected by the proposed jurisdictional changes:
Agency Nature of Change
City of Hanford Annexation
WHEREAS, the territory proposed to be annexed is inhabited, and a map and description of the boundaries of the territory are attached hereto as:
Annexation 166: Exhibit A (annexation map) and (legal description) and by this reference incorporated herein, and,
WHEREAS, the proposal is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Hanford; and WHEREAS, it is desired to provide that the proposed annexation be subject to the following terms and conditions:
1. That the annexation areas be prezoned as follows:
a.Annexation 166: R-L-12 Low-Density Residential (12,000 square foot minimum lot size) and R-L-5 Low-Density Residential (5,000 square foot minimum lot size)
WHEREAS, this proposal will be consistent with the spheres of influence for all agencies which would be affected by the annexation; and
WHEREAS, the City Council determined that the Project was Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), per Categorical Exemption Class 19 (Annexation of areas containing existing public or private structures developed to the density allowed by the current prezoning) and Categorical Exemption Class 5 (Minor alterations in land use limitations).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Resolution of Application is hereby adopted and approved by the City Council of the City of Hanford and the Local Agency Formation Commission of Kings County is hereby requested to take proceedings of the annexation of territory as authorized in the manner provided by the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford held on the 1st day of July 2025, by the following vote:
AYES: Council Member ________________________
________________________
________________________
________________________
________________________
NOES:Council Member ________________________ ABSTAIN:Council Member ________________________ ABSENT:Council Member ________________________ __________________________________________
MAYOR
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF KINGS )
CITY OF HANFORD ) SS
I, Natalie Corral, City Clerk of the City of Hanford, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Hanford at a regular meeting thereof held on the 1st day of July, 2025.
Dated: ______________________
__________________________________
City Clerk
Exhibit A: Annexation 166
Exhibit A
Geographic Description
City of Hanford
Annexation 2025-____
Annexation to the City of Hanford
That portion of the Northeast Quarter of Section 19, Township 18 South, Range 22 East, Mount Diablo Meridian in the County of Kings, State of California, described as follows:
Beginning at the North Quarter Corner of said Section 19 thence S89°37’47”E along the North line of the Northeast Quarter, said North line also being the centerline of Fargo Ave., a distance of 572.88 feet to the Northeast corner of Parcel Map 14-95 per map recorded in Book 14 of Parcel Maps at Page 95 K.C.R. and the True Point of Beginning;
Course 1: Thence continuing S89°37’47”E along the North line of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 1128.72 feet;
Course 2: Thence S00°08’20”E 2680.95 feet to a point on the South line of the Northeast Quarter, said South line also being the centerline of Leland Way;
Course 3: Thence N89°46’01”W along the South line of the Northeast Quarter a distance of 1702.57 feet to the Center of said Section 19;
Course 4: Thence N00°07’03”E along the West line of the Northeast Quarter, a distance of 2020.14 feet to the Southwest corner of Parcel Map 14-95;
Course 5: Thence S89°29’10”W along the South line of Parcel Map 14-95 a distance of 853.48 feet;
Course 6: Thence N00°07’26”W along the East line of Parcel Map 14-95 a distance of 386.52 feet;
Course 7: Thence N89°37’47”W along an easterly line as shown on Parcel Map 14-95 a distance of 280.50 feet;
Course 8: Thence N00°07’26”W along an easterly line of Parcel Map 14-95, a distance of 280.50 feet to the True Point of Beginning.
Containing 93.59 acres, more or less.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT | 317 N. DOUTY ST. HANFORD, CA 93230 559.585.2500 | WWW.HANFORD.CITY
March 27, 2025
To: Property Owners within Substantially Surrounded Island #15
Re: Effect of Annexation on County Island #15
This letter serves as notice that the City of Hanford is proposing to initiate the annexation of substantially surrounded county-islands, in accordance with the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (CKH Act) and the State of California’s Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) guidelines.
Substantially surrounded islands are areas of land where the City of Hanford surrounds land within Kings County’s Jurisdiction by more than 60%. The City and County have agreed that it is in both parties’ best interest to annex these islands to reduce inefficiencies and deficiencies of services provided.
Prior to initiation of the annexation of the County islands, the City of Hanford wishes to inform property owners within the County islands of the effect of annexation into the City limits. This letter provides answers to some of the most frequently asked questions associated with annexation. Please review the information below.
Should you have any questions not addressed by this letter, or wish to discuss further, please contact the staff - member associated with the topic you wish to discuss.
Any remaining questions will be addressed during an open -forum community meeting, which will be held on April 23, 2025 from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. in the Training Room of City Hall, 319 N. Douty Street, Hanford, CA 93230.
PUBLIC COMMENT: All interested parties are invited to attend the meeting and/or send written comments to Natalie Corral, City Clerk, City of Hanford, 319 N. Douty Street, Hanford CA 93230; [email protected] To ensure comments will be considered, all comments are requested to be submitted to the City by 12:00 p.m. the day of the meeting.
Frequently Asked Questions:
1. What is annexation?
The Cortese -Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 governs annexation of unincorporated areas to a City. Annexation is a reorganization that changes the governmental authority from one jurisdiction (the County) to another (the City). Th e Kings County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) reviews and approves annexation requests. For more information regarding LAFCO, please visit the website at http://www.kingslafco.com/
2. What is an island?
An unincorporated “island” is a relatively small pocket of land currently served by the Kings County, but substantially surrounded by the City of Hanford. Generally, in accordance with Section 56375.3 of the Government Code, LAFCO characterizes an “island” as follows:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT | 317 N. DOUTY ST. HANFORD, CA 93230 559.585.2500 | WWW.HANFORD.CITY
a. the land is substantially surrounded by a city, is substantially developed or developing, is not prime agricultural land, is designated for urban growth in the city’s general plan, and is not within the Sphere of Influence of another city, and
b. the land is located within an urban service area designated by the LAFCO, is not prime agricultural land, and is designated for urban growth in the city’s general plan, and
c. the land area does not exceed 150 acres.
Although islands are completely or substantially surrounded by a city, they remain under the land use and service authority of the County. The State Legislature determined that the continued existence of these islands created problems for cities, counties, island residents, adjacent city residents, and various agencies and special districts responsible for providing services and facilities. Consequently, the State modified the procedures to encourage cities to undertake island annexations by limiting the du e process otherwise afforded other types of annexations.
3. What is the streamlined process for island annexation?
In 1999, the California Legislature adopted AB 1555 (codified in Government Code Section 56375.3) that encouraged cities to annex small unincorporated islands. The law allows cities to annex islands without protest proceedings or elections, provided the island meets special criteria. By law, LAFCO must approve an annexation request submitted by a city if all the criteria mentioned in Question #2 above are satisfied.
The proposed island annexation satisfies the specified criteria; therefore, protest proceedings are not required.
Finance Department
Contact Finance, Utility Billing via phone (559)585-2510 or email, [email protected], regarding the information below:
1. Will my utility bills increase?
The cost to residents for City utilities will be as follows (based on utility rates effective July 1, 2024):
Rates as of July 1, 2024 @ 11 Units of Water
Water Service 19.85
Water Consumption 24.64
Sewer Service 27.63
Storm Drain Service 5.04
Trash Service/Street Sweeping 29.99
Total 107.15
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT | 317 N. DOUTY ST. HANFORD, CA 93230 559.585.2500 | WWW.HANFORD.CITY
2. Will my property taxes increase?
No change will occur. All properties are taxed at the same rates whether annexed to the City or not (approximately one percent of assessed value). That is, City and County property owners pay the same tax rates. Thus, property tax assessments will not be affected by annexation. However, if the property is resold, or if new improvements to the property are constructed, the assessed value of the property will most likely increase. This increase, however, has nothing to do with a property being in the City or the County.
Public Works Department
Contact the Public Works Department via phone (559)585-2550 or email, [email protected], regarding the information below:
1. Must I hook up to the City's sewer system if I already have a septic system?
Not at this time. Neither the County nor the City can require you to have sewer service if you are using a properly operating septic system. However, if your septic system violates State and/or local health and building codes, both County and City ordinanc es require most homeowners to connect to a sewer system if one is available within 200 feet of the property.
2. Can I replace my septic tank or do substantial work on the leach field once I am in the City?
The city will issue permits for new septic tank work or substantial work on the leach field only if the sewer line is not within 200 feet of your property line. Minor work on the leach field is allowed.
3. Can I keep my existing well and continue to use it after annexation to the City?
Yes. Existing wells can be retained after annexation. The City encourages property owners to hook up the house to city water, but the existing well can be retained long term for watering the property as long as a backflow device is installed on your domestic water service.
4. Is there a time in which I must connect the house to city water?
No. You will only be required to connect to city water when major work on the well is needed. Minor work, such as cleaning or pump replacement, will not require connection.
5. If I already have City water and sewer service, will my water and sewer bills go up after annexation?
No; however, the City will begin street sweeping the annexed areas and that charge will now appear on your bill.
6. What about curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street trees, storm drains, or streetlights?
There is no requirement that curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street trees, storm drains, or streetlights be installed as part of the annexation. The City may require a developer to make off -site improvements, which may include improvements along the frontage of individual properties. If a property owner undertakes substantial building
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT | 317 N. DOUTY ST. HANFORD, CA 93230 559.585.2500 | WWW.HANFORD.CITY
remodeling or new building construction on an individual lot basis after annexation, then curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street trees and streetlights may be required to be constructed along the frontage of property. If desired by a neighborhood, a special district could be established to install these items at the cost of the property owners within the newly established district.
7. I now have trash service from a private contractor, can I keep my existing service and for how long?
You would have 12 months after annexation before you are required to sign up for City trash service. Currently, the city trash service for solid waste, and recycling and green waste is $29.99 per month ( inclusive of street sweeping; fees subject to change). The City also provides a spring clean -up for a free pickup truck load to the dump. This service is included in the normal service fees.
Fire Department
Contact the Fire Department via phone (559)585-2545 or email, [email protected], regarding the information below:
1. Who will be responsible for Fire protection?
Fire protection service will be provided by the City Fire Department upon annexation.
Police Department
Contact the Police Department, via phone (559)585-4540 or email, [email protected] , regarding the information below:
1. Who will be responsible for Police protection?
Police protection service will be provided by the City Police Department.
Kings County Elections Office
Contact the Kings County Elections Office via phone (559)852-4401 or email, [email protected], regarding the information below:
1. What changes will annexation have on elections?
The Kings County Elections Department conducts Federal, State, School, County, City and Special District elections. After annexation, residents of the areas affected would become citizens of the City, entitled to vote in City elections, and eligible to hold City elective and appointive positions.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT | 317 N. DOUTY ST. HANFORD, CA 93230 559.585.2500 | WWW.HANFORD.CITY
Community Development Department – Planning Division
Contact Senior Planner, Gabrielle Myers, via phone (559)585-2578 or email, [email protected], regarding the information below:
1. What effects will annexation have on zoning?
The county island will be pre-zoned, based on the General Plan Designation for the area.
The ordinance can be viewed at this address: http://qcode.us/codes/hanford/
Island
# General Location General Plan Designation Pre-Zoning
15 South of Fargo Avenue, West of
9 ¼ th Avenue
Low-Density Residential R-L-12 Low-Density Residential
R-L-5 Low-Density Residential
County Island #15
General Plan Designation: Low-Density Residential
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT | 317 N. DOUTY ST. HANFORD, CA 93230 559.585.2500 | WWW.HANFORD.CITY
Pre-Zone: R-L-12 Low-Density Residential (12,000 square-foot minimum lot size) and R-L-5 Low-Density Residential
2. What effects will annexation have on the uses allowed? If a use is allowed in the County, but not allowed in the City, what happens?
A use shall be deemed nonconforming if it was lawfully commenced while under the jurisdiction of Kings County, but which, after annexation of the site into the City, does not conform to the use regulations of the City
For example: If you are legally operating (have a valid business license and all required permits for operation/structures) a vehicle repair shop in Kings County, currently, but upon annexation the use is not allowed in the City’s zone district, you may still operate. However, if you discontinue the use for a period of six months or more, the non-conforming use shall not be able to reestablish. A nonconforming use may be expanded by up to 10% of its exiting floor area if a condition al use permit is granted. The expansion of a nonconforming use or structure may be allowed only one time per use.
3. What is the permitting process like in the City?
The permitting and entitlement process is a similar process and requirements as Kings County.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT | 317 N. DOUTY ST. HANFORD, CA 93230 559.585.2500 | WWW.HANFORD.CITY
4. I have various animals in the County, can I keep them in the City?
An animal raising use that is nonconforming due to annexation or adoption or amendment to this title shall be allowed to continue, provided that the intensity of the animal raising use (i.e., type and number of animals) shall not change or increase. The provi sions for abandonment or discontinuance shall not apply.
Please note that you are limited to the allowances approved by Kings County.
Community Development Department – Building and Code Enforcement Contact Building Official, Tom Webb, via phone (559)585-2584 or email, [email protected] regarding the information below:
1. Does the City of Hanford have Code Enforcement?
Yes, the City of Hanford does have Code Enforcement officers and will enforce the City ordinances upon annexation on a complaint-basis. Code enforcement issues include, but are not limited to:
a. Abandoned vehicles
b. Junk and debris
c. Property maintenance
d. Building without permits
2. Will my address be changed?
It depends, if you currently do not have a City -style address, you will be reassigned one; City -style addressing is typically four numbers verses County-style, which is five.
a. The City will notify you and the post-office of the change Community Development Department – Housing Division
Contact Housing Analyst, Sandra Lerma-Martinez, via phone (559)585-4766 or email, [email protected], regarding the information below:
1. Upon annexation, homeowners will now be eligible to apply for City assistance programs (formerly, while being located outside of city limits, owners were not eligible for these programs).
Should you have any questions not addressed by this letter, or wish to discuss further, please contact the staff - member associated with the topic you wish to discuss. Thank you!
Sincerely,
Jason Waters
Deputy City Manager
(559)585-2590
[email protected]
Notice of Exemption 2025-25
To: Office of Planning and Research
P.O. Box 3044, Room 212
Sacramento, CA 95812-3044
County Clerk
County of Kings
Kings County Government Center
Hanford, CA 93230
From: City of Hanford – Gabrielle Myers (Senior Planner) 317 N. Douty Street
Hanford, CA 93230
(559)585-2578
Project Title: Annexation 166 and Prezone No. 0014-25
Project Location – South of Fargo Avenue, north of Leland Way, west of 9 ¼ Ave.
Project Location – City: Hanford Project Location – County: Kings County Description of Nature, Purpose and Beneficiaries of Project: Annexation No. 166 (Island #15): A proposal to annex a substantially surrounded county island, totaling 93.56 acres, into the City of Hanford from the Kings County jurisdiction. Prezone No. 0014-25: A proposal to prezone the proposed territory to be annexed as R-L-12 Low-Density Residential (12,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) and R- L-5 Low-Density Residential (5,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) consistent with the 2035 Hanford General Plan Land Use Map.
Name of Public Agency Approving Project: Kings LAFCO (responsible agency)_______ Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: City of Hanford Exempt Status: (check one)
Ministerial (Sec. 21080(b)(1); 152698);
Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(b)(3); 15269 (a));
Emergency Project (Sec. 21080(b)(4); 15269(b)(c));
Categorical Exemption: State type and section number: 15305 Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations; 15319 (a) Annexation of Existing Facilities and Lots for Exempt Facilities Statutory Exemption. State code number:
Reasons why project is exempt:
See attached
Lead Agency Contact Person: Jason Waters Telephone: (559) 585-2590 Signature: Date: July 1, 2025 Title: Deputy City Manager Signed by Lead Agency Date received for filing at OPR:
Signed by Applicant
Applicant Information:
Name: Jason Waters
Address: 317 N. Douty Street, Hanford CA 93230
Phone Number: (559)585-2590
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Annexation No. 166 (Island #15): A proposal to annex a substantially surrounded county island, totaling 93.56 acres, into the City of Hanford from the Kings County jurisdiction. Prezone No. 0014-25: A proposal to prezone the proposed territory to be annexed as R-L-12 Low-Density Residential (12,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) and R-L-5 Low-Density Residential (5,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size) consistent with the 2035 Hanford General Plan Land Use Map.
EXEMPTIONS:
•Class 5 15305: Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations: consists of minor alterations in land use limitations in areas with an average slope of less than 20%, which do not result in any changes in land use or density. •Class 4 15319 (a): Annexations of Existing Facilities and Lots for Exempt Facilities: consist of annexations to a city or special district of areas containing existing public or private structures developed to the density allowed by the current zoning or pre-zoning of either the gaining or losing governmental agency whichever is more restrictive, provided, however, that the extension of utility services to the existing facilities would have a capacity to serve only the existing facilities.
REASONS WHY PROJECT IS EXEMPT
The Project proposes the annexation of a substantially surrounded county island. At this time, the annexation and prezoning are the only requested entitlements. No other land uses or development projects have been proposed.
The annexation area will be Prezoned consistent to the existing General Plan land use designation. The existing uses will be allowed to operate within the City limits. The City wishes to initiate annexations in an effort to reduce the number of county islands/peninsulas found within the City limits. The continued existence of these occurrences increases the difficulty for the City to adequately provide all municipal services to the neighboring parcels due to the inconsistent nature of the City’s jurisdictional boundary. In addition, some of these annexation areas are already receiving some of the City’s municipal services, however, the City is not collecting any property tax to offset the cost of providing services.
CEQA Guidelines allow exemptions to streamline the environmental review process and play a key role in project planning and development. These exemptions acknowledge that environmental impacts for some types of projects are known to be less-than-significant, will not increase land use density beyond what is allowed, and the public would benefit from having them implemented. The proposed annexation would promote orderly development and would provide standardized services to those who live in or would move into the annexed areas.
CONCLUSION
Approval of the propose annexation does not grant authority to develop the land encompassed within Island #15 areas.
Any future development proposals would be subject to subsequent development-related entitlement review processed through the City, which will require its own consideration as a “project” under the CEQA Guidelines, and possible environmental analysis. The annexation and the establishment of the zone districts by Prezoning will not impact the physical environment. The Project is consistent with current General Plan land uses and are not anticipated to be altered.
Therefore, the Project is not expected to have a significant environmental impact and the exemption under CEQA is warranted.
Government Code - GOV
TITLE 1. GENERAL [100 - 7931.000]
( Title 1 enacted by Stats. 1943, Ch. 134. )
DIVISION 7. MISCELLANEOUS [6000 - 7599.200]
( Division 7 enacted by Stats. 1943, Ch. 134. )
CHAPTER 2. Fees [6100 - 6111]
( Chapter 2 enacted by Stats. 1943, Ch. 134. )
6103.
(a) Neither the state nor any county, city, district, or other political subdivision, nor any public officer or body, acting in the public officer’s or body’s official capacity on behalf of the state, or any county, city, district, or other political subdivision, shall pay or deposit any fee for the filing of any document or paper, for the performance of any official service, or for the filing of any stipulation or agreement that may constitute an appearance in any court by any other party to the stipulation or agreement. This section does not apply to civil jury fees or civil jury deposits. This section does not apply to the State Compensation Insurance Fund or where a public officer is acting with reference to private assets or obligations that have come under that officer’s jurisdiction by virtue of that officer’s office, or where it is specifically provided otherwise. (b) No fee shall be charged to any of the public agencies named in this section to defray the costs of reporting services by court reporters. Such fees shall be recoverable as costs as provided in Section 6103.5. (c) This section shall apply to probate referees, as described in Part 12 (commencing with Section 400) of Division 2 of the Probate Code.
(Amended by Stats. 2022, Ch. 851, Sec. 4. (SB 688) Effective January 1, 2023.)
12.C.
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 7/1/2025 AGENDA SECTION: PUBLIC HEARING
SUBJECT:
A public hearing to consider the Adoption of Resolution 25-38-R Ordering the Levy and Collection of Assessments as outlined in the 2025/2026 Annual Engineer's Report, which has been prepared pursuant to Chapter 3 of the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. The proposed assessments outlined in the Engineer's Report are less than or equal to the authorized maximum assessment for each Landscape Assessment District.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation: A public hearing to consider the Adoption of Resolution 25-38-R Ordering the Levy and Collection of Assessments as outlined in the 2025/2026 Annual Engineer's Report, which has been prepared pursuant to Chapter 3 of the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972.
Recommended Motion: Adoption of Resolution 25-38-R Ordering the Levy and Collection of Assessments as outlined in the 2025/2026 Annual Engineer's Report, which has been prepared pursuant to Chapter 3 of the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972.
Background:
BACKGROUND:
Each fiscal year, the City establishes the Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Districts (LLMD) assessments based on an estimate of the costs to maintain, operate, and service the authorized improvements within each District, as well as available revenue, including assessment revenues, fund balances, general benefit contributions and any additional City contributions from available sources. The City of Hanford currently has 43 Districts.
The City contracts with Willdan Financial Services to prepare the Annual Engineer's Report for the forty-three Landscaping and Lighting Assessment Districts within the City. Over the past year, Willdan Financial Services, the Parks and Community Services Department, and the Finance Department have partnered to decrease the level of service within the deficient Landscape Assessment Districts (LADs). This strategy is working, and all the deficient LADs are now trending toward financial self-sufficiency.
The City contracts landscape maintenance services to Clean Cut Landscape Management Inc. As part of the ongoing maintenance and servicing of the landscape improvements associated with each district, the City has established various maintenance frequencies referred to as Service Levels:
Service Level A: Landscape improvements are serviced every week.
Service Level B: Landscape improvements are serviced every week (March through October) and every two weeks (November-February)
Service Level C: Landscape improvements are serviced every two weeks.
Service Level D: Landscape improvements are serviced every two weeks (March through October) and every four weeks (November through February) Service Level E: Landscape improvements are serviced once every month.
Service Level F: Landscape improvements are serviced six times per year.
In accordance with Chapter 3 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (“Act”), an Annual Engineer’s Report addressing adjustments based on a review of the costs of maintenance of public improvements must be prepared and submitted to the City Council for action. The Streets and Highway Code, as referenced in the Act, requires the holding of a public hearing for Landscape Districts identified in the Annual Engineer’s Report as showing an increase, decrease, or no change in the annual assessment amount.
A public hearing will be held at the City Council meeting on July 15, 2025. The City Council shall consider all public input before taking final action on confirming and levying the assessments proposed in the Annual Engineer’s Report. Regarding the Districts identified in the Annual Engineer’s Report showing an increase in the annual assessment amount, the City Council must consider all protests against the proposed increase in the assessment amount and tabulate any protests delivered to the City before the close of the public hearing. Per Article XXX D, Section 4 of the California Constitution, if the ballots submitted in opposition to the increased assessment exceed those submitted in favor of the increased assessment, the assessment amount shall not be increased. If the increase in the assessment to maintain the current level of service for the existing landscape area is voted down, the current level of service may be reduced. In tabulating the protests, the protests shall be weighed according to the proportional financial obligation of each affected parcel of real property.
The 2025/2026 Annual Engineer’s Report identifies an increase in the annual assessment from the previous year and the reasons for the increase, including the imposition of 2.1% Standard Annual CPI Increase (December 2023) in accordance with California Government Code section 53739(b)(1) for the following Districts:
District Name
93-02 Vintage Estates
01-01 Pacific Grove Units 1 through 3 and N. Pointe Units 1 through 4 01-02 Cambridge Homes Units 1 through 3
01-03 Poppy Hills Units 1 and 2
01-04 Silver Oaks Units 1 through 5
02-01 Ashton Park Units 1 through 4
03-01 Le Parc Units 1 through 3
04-01 Sidonia Units 1 and 2 and Sidonia Estates II 04-02 Cambridge Homes/Majesty II, #2
04-03 Cambridge Homes - Majesty - #2, Cambridge Homes Units 1 through 6, Cambridge Homes - Vineyards Units1 through 4 04-04 Sierra Heights Units 1 and 2
05-01 Mission Park
05-02 Cooper Valley
06-01 Quail Park Subdivision
07-02 South Gate Addition, Greenbrier Gardens, and Live Oak North 09-01 Victory Estates
09-02 Independence Units 1 and 2
14-01 Independence Units 3 and 4
15-01 Silver Oaks Addition III Units 1 and 2, Lennar Homes Units 1 and 2, and Lennar Homes
15-02 The Greens II
16-01 Woodside Homes
16-02 Mynderup Units 1 and 2
18-01 Bella Vista Units 1 through 4
19-01 Pacific Grove Addition II
19-02 The Enclave
20-01 Woodside Homes
21-01 San Joaquin Valley Homes
The 2025/2026 Annual Engineer's Report identifies the maximum assessment rates are at the maximum assessment rate and do not include an inflationary adjustment for the following Districts"
District Name
90-01 Pinecastle Addition Units 1 and 2
90-02 Park Monterey Units 1 and 2
90-03 Massionette Estates Unit 7 and 8
90-04 Hyde Park
91-01 Sierra Vista
92-01 Portofino Estates
92-02 Cielo En Tierra No. 1
93-01 Vintage Estates
94-01 Gateway Estates
94-02 Stonecrest Units 1 through 9
94-03 Quail Run
97-01 Rosewood Estates
97-02 Summer Field
97-03 Country Crossing Units 1 through 5
98-01 Crystal Springs
98-02 Mountain View Estates Units 1 through 6
The Annual Assessments for each of the remaining Districts are at or below Fiscal Year 2023/2024.
The Annual Engineer’s Report also provides the following information as required by Article XIII D, Section 4 of the California Constitution:
1. Identifies all real property parcels with a special benefit conferred upon them and upon which the assessment will be imposed.
2. Determines the appropriate special benefit derived by each parcel of the real property in relation to the entirety of the cost of maintenance of the public improvements.
3. Identifies the special benefit conferred on each parcel of real property.
4. Establishes that the assessment imposed on each parcel of real property does not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportionate special benefit conferred on that parcel of real property.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The expenses incurred for the maintenance, operation, and improvement of facilities and services within each Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District (LAD) shall be fully funded through assessments levied on the properties within the respective district. These assessments are calculated and collected on an annual basis (see report), ensuring that the cost burden is equitably distributed among the benefiting parcels in accordance with the level of service and improvements provided.
Districts are self-funded and should not bear the city any direct cost. Those that require more funding
should be balloted to property owners to see if they are willing to fund maintenance needs appropriately.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. RESOLUTION 25-38-R Intention to Levey Assessments 2025-2026
2. FY25-26 Hanford LLMD Consolidated ER (Ver 06.23.25 -- IM 07.01.25, PH 07.15.25) Final
3. FY25-26 Hanford LLMD Assessment Roll (IM 07.01.25, PH 07.08.25)
- 1 -
RESOLUTION NO. 2 5 - 3 8 - R
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF HANFORD APPROVING THE
2025-2026 ANNUAL ENGINEER’S REPORT AND
DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND
COLLECT ASSESSMENTS
At a r e g u l a r meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford duly called and held on July 1, 2 0 2 5 at 7 :00 p.m., it was moved by Council Member , seconded by Council Member , and duly carried that the following resolution be adopted:
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Landscaping & Lighting Act of 1972 (Act), the City of Hanford has established the following landscape and lighting assessment districts within the City limits of the City of Hanford.
ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS
90-01 Pinecastle Addition, Unit No. 1, 2, 3 and 4 – (Located East of 10 th Avenue and North of Fargo Avenue)
90-02 Park Monterey, Unit No. 1 and 2 – (Located West of Douty Street and North of Sherwood Drive)
90-03 Mansionette Estates, No. 7 and 8 – (Located West of Douty Street and North Encore Drive)
90-04 Hyde Park – (Located East of 12 th Avenue and North of Hanford-Armona Road) 91-01 Sierra Vista (Tract 641)/New Dimensions (Tract 703/713), No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 – (Located West of 11th Avenue and South of Hanford-Armona Road)
92-01 Portofino, No. 1, 2, 3 and 4 – (Located East of Neill Way and South of Fargo Avenue) 92-02 Cielo En Tierra, No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 – (Located West of 11th Avenue and South of Fargo Avenue)
93-01 Vintage Estates – (Located West of 12th Avenue and North of Grangeville Boulevard) 93-02 Walnut Forest, No. 1, 2 and 3 – (Located West of 11th Avenue and North of Hume Avenue) 94-01 Gateway Estates – (Located West of 10th Avenue and North of Encore Drive) 94-02 Stonecrest, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 – (Located West of 11th Avenue and North of Fargo Avenue)
94-03 Quail Run Estates, No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 – (Located East of 11th Avenue and North of Pepper Drive)
97-01 Rosewood Estates, No. 1 and 2 – (Located East of 12th Avenue and South of Grangeville Boulevard)
97-02 Summer Field Addition, No. 2 – (Located West 91/4 Avenue and South of Florinda Street) 97-03 Country Crossing, No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 – (Located West of Centennial Drive and North of Lacey Boulevard)
98-01 Crystal Springs, No. 1, 2 and 3 – (Located West of 91/4 Avenue and North of Grangeville Boulevard)
- 2 -
98-02 Mountain View Estates, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 – (Located West of 11th Avenue and North of Houston Avenue)
01-01 Pacific Grove (Tract 680/777)/N. Pointe (Tract 778), No. 1, 2, 3 and 4 – (Located East of 12th Avenue and North of Grangeville Boulevard)
01-02 Cambridge Homes (Tract 770), No. 1, 2 and 3 – (Located West of 11th Avenue and North of Pepper Drive)
01-03 Poppy Hills, No. 1 and 2 – (Located West of 11th Avenue and North of Pepper Drive) 01-04 Silver Oaks, No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 – (Located West of 12th Avenue and North of Grangeville Boulevard)
02-01 Ashton Park, No. 1, 2, 3 and 4 – (Located West of 12th Avenue and North of Lacey Boulevard)
03-01 La Parc, No. 1, 2 and 3 – (Located West of 11th Avenue and South of Fargo Avenue) 04-01 Sidonia Estates, No. 1 and 2 (Tract 810)/Sidonia Estates II (Tract 814) – (Located East of 12th Avenue and North of Hume Avenue)
04-02 Cambridge Homes (Tract 799)/Majesty II (Tract 830) – (Located East of 11th Avenue and South of Flint Avenue)
04-03 Cambridge Homes (Tract 795/826)/Vineyards (Tract 825), No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 – (Located East of 12th Avenue and South of Fargo Avenue)
04-04 Sierra Heights (Tract 802/803), No. 1 and 2 – (Located West of 9th Avenue and North of Fargo Avenue)
05-01 Mission Park – (Located West of Highway 43 and South of Flint Avenue) 05-02 Copper Valley – (Located West of 12th Avenue and South of Fargo Avenue) 06-01 Quail Park Subdivision – (Tract 794), No. 1 and 2, Located West of 11th Avenue and South of Flint Avenue)
07-02 South Gate Addition – (Tract 811)/Greenbrier Gardens (876)/ Live Oak North (902) - (Located West of 12th Avenue and South of Hanford-Armona Road)
09-01 Victory Estates – (Located West of University Avenue and North of Grangeville Boulevard) 09-02 Independence (Tract 843), No. 1 and 2 - (Located West of 12th Avenue and North of Greenfield Avenue)
14-01 Independence (Tract 843), No. 3 and 4 - (Located West of 12th Avenue and North of Merritt Street)
15-01 Silver Oaks Addition III (Tract 887/922), No. 1, 2, and 3 - (Located West of Centennial Drive and North of West Berkshire Lane)
15-02 The Greens II (Tract 823) - (Located West of 9 ¼ Avenue and North of Grangeville Boulevard)
16-01 Woodside Homes (Tract 917) – (Located West of Centennial Drive and South of Grangeville Blvd)
16-02 Myderup (Tract 914), No. 1 and 2 – (Located East of 12th Avenue and North of Hume Avenue)
18-01 Bella Vista (Tract 918/919), No. 1, 2, and 3 – (Located West of Centennial Drive and South of Fargo Avenue)
19-01 Pacific Grove Addition No. 2 (Tract 916) – (Located East of 12th Avenue and North of Bristol Lane)
19-02 Enclave (Track 915) – (Located South of Lacey Blvd. and West Centennial Ave.) 20-01 Woodside Homes (Track 928) – (Located North of Centennial Ave and South of 12th Ave.) 21-01 San Joaquin Valley Homes (Track 929) – (Located North of 13th Ave and West of Devon St.) (collectively Districts).
- 3 -
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Act, it is necessary that the City Council review an annual report (Engineer’s Report), which sets forth a full and detailed description of the improvements and boundaries of each District and any zones therein and the proposed annual assessments to be levied upon assessable lots and parcels of land within each District;
WHEREAS, Willdan Financial Services, the appointed Assessment Engineer for the City of Hanford has prepared and filed with the City Clerk, an Engineer’s Report for fiscal year 2023/2024 pursuant to Chapter 3 of the Act , which includes: (1) a full and detailed description of the improvements and boundaries of each District and any zones therein; (2) identifies the proposed annual assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within each District; (3) identifies all parcels of real property which will have a special benefit conferred upon them and upon which the assessment will be imposed; (4) determines the proportionate special benefit derived by each parcel of real property in relationship to the entirety of the cost of maintenance of the public improvements; (5) identifies the special benefit conferred on parcels of real property; and (6) establishes that the assessment imposed on each parcel of real property does not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportionate special benefit conferred on that parcel of real property.
WHEREAS, the Engineer’s Report identifies an increase in the annual assessment from the previous year and the reasons for the increase, including the imposition of 2.1% Annual CPI Increase (December 2023) in accordance with California Government Code section 53739(b)(1) for the following Districts:
1. 93-02 Walnut Forest Units 1 through 3
2. 01-01 Pacific Grove Units 1 through 3 and N. Pointe Units 1 through 4
3. 01-02 Cambridge Homes Units 1 through 3
4. 01-03 Poppy Hills Units 1 and 2
5. 01-04 Silver Oaks Units 1 through 5
6. 02-01 Ashton Park Units 1 through 4
7. 03-01 Le Parc Units 1 through 3
8. 04-01 Sidonia Units 1 & 2 and Sidonia Estates II
9. 04-02 Cambridge Homes/Majesty II, #2
10. 04-03 Cambridge Homes-Majesty II #2, Cambridge Homes Units 1 through 6, Cambridge Homes-Vineyards Units 1 through 4
11. 04-04 Sierra Heights Units 1 and 2
12. 05-01 Mission Park
13. 05-02 Copper Valley
14. 06-01 Quail Park Subdivision
- 4 -
15. 07-02 South Gate Addition, Greenbrier Gardens, & Live Oak North
16. 09-01 Victory Estates
17. 09-02 Independence Units 1 & 2
18. 14-01 Independence Units 3 & 4
19. 15-01 Silver Oak Addition II Units 1 and 2, and Lennar Homes
20. 15-02 The Greens II
21. 16-01 Woodside Homes
22. 16-02 Mynderup Units 1 and 2
23. 18-01 Bella Vista Units 1 through 4
24. 19-01 Pacific Grove Addition II
25. 19-02 The Enclave
26. 20-01 Woodside Homes
27. 21-01 San Joaquin Homes
WHEREAS, the Report identifies the maximum assessments rates are at the maximum assessment rate and do not include an inflationary adjustment for the following Districts:
28. 90-01 Pinecastle Addition, Units 1 through 4
29. 90-02 Park Monterey, Units 1 and 2
30. 90-03 Mansionette Estates, Units 7 and 8
31. 90-04 Hyde Park
32. 91-01 Sierra Vista
33. 92-01 Portofino Estates
34. 92-02 Cielo En Tierra, No. 1
35. 93-01 Vintage Estates
36. 94-01 Gateway Estates
37. 94-02 Stonecrest, Units 1 through 9
38. 94-03 Quail Run
39. 97-01 Rosewood Estates
40. 97-02 Summer Field
41. 97-03 Country Crossing, Units 1 through 5
42. 98-01 Crystal Springs
43. 98-02 Mountain View Estates, Units 1 through 6
WHEREAS, the existing improvements within each District include decorative block fencing, landscaping and irrigation systems;
WHEREAS, interested parties should refer to the Engineer’s Report, a copy of which is on file with the City Clerk for the City of Hanford, for a full and detailed description of the improvements, the boundaries of the assessment districts and any zones therein, and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within the districts;
- 5 -
WHEREAS, there are no substantial changes proposed to the existing improvements in any District; and
WHEREAS, Streets and Highways Code Section 22624(e) requires the City Council of the City of Hanford to give notice of the time and place for hearing by the City’s legislative body on the levy of the proposed assessments.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Hanford approves the Engineer’s Report as submitted for each District; RESOLVED FURTHER, that the City Council of the City of Hanford declares its intention to levy and collect assessments for fiscal year 2025/2026 within each respective District and each lot thereof, as set forth in the Engineer’s Report for fiscal year 2025/2026.
RESOLVED FURTHER, that the City Council of the City of Hanford shall hold a public hearing on the levy of the proposed assessments set forth in the Engineer’s Report, which public hearing shall occur on July 15, 2025 at the hour of 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers of the Civic Auditorium in Hanford, California. At such public hearing, affected property owners will be afforded an opportunity to give oral testimony and submit written comments regarding the proposed assessments.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Hanford at a meeting thereof held on July 1, 2025 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Travis Payden
MAYOR of the City of Hanford
Attest:
___________________________
NATALIE CORRAL
CITY CLERK
City of Hanford
Fiscal Year 2025/2026
Consolidated Engineer’s Report
Landscaping and Lighting Assessment
Districts
Incorporating Forty-three District Numbers:
90-01, 90-02, 90-03, 90-04, 91-01, 92-01, 92-02, 93-01, 93-02, 94-01, 94-02, 94-03, 97-01, 97-02, 97-03, 98-01, 98-02, 01-01, 01-02, 01-03, 01-04, 02-01, 03-01, 04-01, 04-02, 04-03, 04-04, 05-01, 05-02, 06-01, 07-02, 09-01, 09-02, 14-01, 15-01, 15-02, 16-01, 16-02, 18-01, 19-01, 19-02, 20-01, and 21-01
Intent Meeting: July 1, 2025
Public Hearing: July 15, 2025
CITY OF HANFORD
400 N. DOUTY ST.
HANFORD, CA 93230
JUNE 2025
PREPARED BY
WILLDAN FINANCIAL SERVICES
27368 Via Industria
Suite 200
Temecula, CA 92590
T. 951.587.3500|800.755.6864
F. 951.587.3510|888.326.6864
Property Tax Information Line
T. 866.807.6864
www.willdan.com
ENGINEER'S REPORT AFFIDAVIT
City of Hanford
Landscaping and Lighting Assessment Districts
Fiscal Year 2025/2026
City of Hanford,
Kings County, State of California
This Report and the enclosed descriptions, budgets and diagram outline the proposed improvements and assessments for the forty-three (43) Landscaping and Lighting Assessment Districts in the City of Hanford for fiscal year 2025/2026, which includes each lot, parcel, and subdivision of land within District Nos. 90-01, 90-02, 90-03, 90-04, 91-01, 92-01, 92-02, 93-01, 93-02, 94-01, 94-02, 94-03, 97-01, 97-02, 97-03, 98-01, 98-02, 01-01, 01-02, 01-03, 01-04, 02-01, 03-01, 04-01, 04-02, 04-03, 04-04, 05-01, 05-02, 06-01, 07-02, 09-01, 09-02, 14-01, 15-01, 15-02, 16-01, 16-02, 18-01, 19-01, 19-02, 20-01, and 21-01, as the same existed at the time of the passage of the Resolution of Intention. Reference is hereby made to the Kings County Assessor’s maps for a detailed description of the lines and dimensions of parcels within the Districts. The undersigned respectfully submits the enclosed Report as directed by the City Council.
Dated this ____________ day of ______________, 2025.
Willdan Financial Services
Assessment Engineer
On Behalf of the City of Hanford
By: ________________________________
Jim McGuire
Principal Consultant, Project Manager
By: ________________________________
Tyrone Peter
PE # C 81888
Table of Contents
Introduction ............................................................................................... 1 Report Content and Annual Proceedings ................................................................ 2 Part I - Plans and Specifications .............................................................. 5 Description of Improvements ................................................................................... 5 Specific District Improvements and Services ......................................................... 6 Part II - Method of Apportionment ......................................................... 15 Legislative Requirements for Assessments ......................................................... 15 Benefit Analysis ....................................................................................................... 16 Assessment Methodology ...................................................................................... 18 Part III - Estimate of Costs...................................................................... 20 Annual Inflationary Adjustment (Assessment Range Formula) .......................... 20 Annual District Budgets .......................................................................................... 21 Part IV - District Diagrams ...................................................................... 24 Part V - Assessment Rolls ...................................................................... 69
Hanford Landscaping and Lighting Assessment Districts
Engineer’s Annual Report
Fiscal Year 2025/2026
Introduction
The City of Hanford (“City”), under the provisions of the Landscap ing and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code (“1972 Act”) and in compliance with the substantive and procedural requirements of the California State Constitution, Article XIII D (“California Constitution”), annually levies and collects special assessments for the City’s Landscaping and Lighting Assessment Districts designated and referred to as:
(hereafter referred to collectively as “LLMD” and individually as “Districts”) that fund, in whole or in part, the maintenance and operation of local landscaping or landscaping and lighting improvements that provide special benefits to properties within those individual Districts.
District No. Subdivision Name District No. Subdivision Name 90-01 Pinecastle Addition Units 1 - 4 90-02 Park Monterey Units 1 & 2 90-03 Mansionette Units 7 & 8 90-04 Hyde Park
91-01 Sierra Vista & New Dimensions Units 1 - 5 92-01 Portofino Unit Units 1 - 4 92-02 Cielo En Tierra Units 1 - 5 93-01 Vintage Estates 93-02 Walnut Forest Units 1 - 3 94-01 Gateway Estates
94-02 Stonecrest Units 1 - 9 94-03 Quail Run Estates Units 1 - 5 97-01 Rosewood Estates Units 1 & 2 97-02 Summer Field Addition #2 97-03 Country Crossing Units 1 - 5 98-01 Crystal Springs Units 1 - 3 98-02 Mountain View Estates Units 1 - 6 01-01 Pacific Grove Units 1 - 3 and N. Pointe Units 1 - 4
01-02 Cambridge Homes Units 1 - 3 01-03 Poppy Hills Units 1 & 2 01-04 Silver Oaks Units 1 - 5 02-01 Ashton Park Units 1 - 4 03-01 Le Parc Units 1 - 3 04-01 Sidonia Units 1 & 2 and Sidonia Estates II 04-02 Cambridge Homes/Majesty II, #2 04-03
Cambridge Homes -Majesty II - #2,
Cambridge Homes Units 1 - 6,
Cambridge Homes- Vineyards Units 1 - 4
04-04 Sierra Heights Units 1 & 2 05-01 Mission Park
05-02 Copper Valley 06-01 Quail Park Subdivision
07-02 South Gate Addition, Greenbrier Gardens, &
Live Oak North 09-01 Victory Estates
09-02 Independence Units 1 & 2 14-01 Independence Units 3 & 4 15-01 Silver Oaks Addition III Units 1 and 2, Lennar
Homes Units 1 and 2, and Lennar Homes 15-02 The Greens II 16-01 Woodside Homes 16-02 Mynderup Units 1 & 2
18-01 Bella Vista Units 1 - 4 19-01 Pacific Grove Addition II 19-02 The Enclave 20-01 Woodside Homes
21-01 San Joaquin Valley Homes
Hanford Landscaping and Lighting Assessment Districts
Engineer’s Annual Report
Fiscal Year 2025/2026
Report Content and Annual Proceedings
This Consolidated Engineer’s Report (the “Report”) has been prepared pursuant to Chapter 1, Article 4 and Chapter 3 of the 1972 Act, and presented to the City Council for their consideration and approval of the proposed improvements and services to be provided within the Districts and the levy and collection of annual assessments related thereto for fiscal year 2025/2026. This Report generally describes the improvements and proposed assessments to be levied in connection with the special benefits the properties will receive from the maintenance and servicing of the improvements within each of the designated Districts for fiscal year 2025/2026. The annual assessments to be levied on properties within these Districts provide a source of funding to fund in whole or in part, the continued operation and maintenance of the landscaping improvements or landscaping and lighting improvements and services to be provided by the City through the LLMD that provide special benefits to the properties within each of those Districts and respective developments.
Each fiscal year, the City establishes the LLMD assessments based on an estimate of the costs to maintain, operate and service the authorized improvements within each District , as well as available revenues including assessment revenues, fund balances, general benefit contributions and any additional City contributions from available sources. The costs of the improvements and the proposed annual assessments budgeted and assessed against properties within each District may include, but are not limited to the estimated expenditures for regular annual main tenance and repairs; incidental expenditures related to the operation and administration of the District; deficits or surpluses from prior years (fund balance) ; revenues from other sources; and the collection of funds for operational reserves and/or periodic repairs, replacements and rehabilitation projects as authorized by the 1972 Act. The net annual cost to provide the improvements for each District are allocated to the benefiting properties within each District respectively based on an established method of apportionment (refer to Assessment Methodology in Part II - Method of Apportionment) that calculates the proportional special benefit and assessment for each parcel within those Districts. Thus, each parcel is assessed proportionately for only those improvements, services, and expenses for which the parcel receive s special benefit.
The word “parcel,” for the purposes of this Report, refers to an individual property assigned its own Assessor’s Parcel Number (“APN”) by the Kings County Assessor’s Office. The Kings County Auditor/Controller uses APNs and specific Fund Numbers to identify properties to be assessed on the tax roll for the District assessments.
At a noticed annual Public Hearing, the City Council will accept all public comments and written protests regarding the District s and the annual levy of assessments. Based on those public comments and written protests, the City Council may order amendments to the Report or confirm the Report as submitted. Following final approval of the Report and confirmation of the assessments, the City Council will by Resolution, order the improvements to be made and confirm the levy and collection of assessments for fiscal year 2025/2026 pursuant to the 1972 Act. The assessment for each parcel as approved will be placed on the fiscal year 2025/2026 property tax roll by the Kings County Auditor/Controller and collected together and in the same manner as other property taxes for such parcels.
As required by the 1972 Act, this Engineer’s Report describes the improvements to be provided, maintained, and serviced by the District s, an estimated budget for the improvements for each District, and the proposed assessments to be levied upon each assessable lot or parcel within those Districts for fiscal year 2025/2026.
Hanford Landscaping and Lighting Assessment Districts
Engineer’s Annual Report
Fiscal Year 2025/2026
This Report consists of five (5) parts:
Part I
Plans and Specifications: This section contains a general description of the District s, and the improvements and services that provide special benefits to the parcels within those Districts. The improvements and appurtenant facilities that provide special benefits to the properties within the Districts and for which parcels are assessed may include, but is not limited to local landscaping, neighborhood parks, basins, street lights, and related amenities as well as associated incidental expenses (City Administration expenses and County Fees), and fund balances authorized by the 1972 Act. The plans and specifications contained in this Report generally describe the nature and extent of the improvements . More detailed information regarding the specific plans and specifications associated with the improvements in each District may be on file in the Public Works Department and by reference are made part of this Report.
Part II
Method of Apportionment: This section includes a discussion of the general and special benefits associated with the improvements to be provided within the LLMD (Benefit Analysis), which includes a discussion of the proportional costs of the special benefits and a separation of costs considered to be of general benefit (and therefore not assessed). This section of the Report also outlines the basis upon which the estimated costs to provide such improvements are apportioned to each parcel of land within the Districts in proportion to the special benefits to be received (the method of calculating each property’s proportional special benefit assessment ). This method of apportionment is consistent with the previously approved and adopted method of apportionment for each District.
Part III
Estimate of Costs : Identifies the estimated annual funding costs ( budgets) required for the maintenance and operation of the improvements in each of the Districts, including, but not limited to, annual maintenance and service expenses, utility costs, related incidental expenses, and fund balances authorized by the 1972 Act and deemed appropriate to support the improvements, even though not all costs identified in t hese budgets are necessarily supported fully by the current assessment revenues. Those improvements and/or costs determined to be of general benefit shall be funded by a City contribution. In addition to the general benefit costs, the City may provide additional funding to support the maintenance and operation of the improvements considered to be of special benefit. Ultimately, City staff shall make the determination of which improvements, and the extent of the services and activities that shall be provided based on available revenues.
This section also identifies and outlines an Assessment Range Formula (inflationary adjust) that has been previously approved and adopted for specified Districts (most but not all Districts), which provides for an annual adjustment to the maximum assessment rates, establishing limits on future assessments, but also providing for reasonable cost adjustments due to inflation.
Hanford Landscaping and Lighting Assessment Districts
Engineer’s Annual Report
Fiscal Year 2025/2026
Part IV
District Diagrams: This section of the Report contains diagram s showing the general location and boundaries of the Districts for fiscal year 2025/2026 which incorporate the parcels determined to receive special benefits from the improvements within each District. The lines and dimensions of each lot, parcel, and subdivision of land contained in the diagram for each District is inclusive of the parcels listed or referenced in “Part V - Assessment Roll” of this Report and the corresponding County Assessor’s parcel maps for said parcels as they existed at the time this Report was prepared and shall in corporate all subsequent subdivisions, lot-line adjustments, or parcel changes therein. Reference is hereby made to the Kings County Assessor’s maps for a detailed description of the lines and dimensions of each lot and parcel of land within the Districts.
Part V
Assessment Rolls: The assessment amounts to be levied and collected in fiscal year 2025/2026 for each parcel is provided in the Assessment Roll, and these assessments are based on each parcel’s calculated proportional special benefit as outlined in Part II - Method of Apportionment and the annual assessment rates established by the estimated budgets (refer to Part III - Estimate of Costs).
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, portion, zone, or subzone of this Engineer’s Report is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions of this Engineer’s Report and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, portion, zone, or subzone thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, portions, zones, or subzones might subsequently be declared invalid or unconstitutional.