Hanford City Council
April 7, 2026

City Council Meeting
Agenda
April 7, 2026
7:00 PM – Regular Meeting
Council Chambers
400 N. Douty St.

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

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

ROLL CALL BY THE CITY CLERK:

PUBLIC COMMENT:

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

STUDY SESSION:

A. Annual Comparison of Hanford Police Department Operational Statistics – 2024 and 2025
B. Heroes Park update and funding discussion and potential action to decline the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) Grant from the National Park Service for approximately $1.9 million for Phase 1 of the Heroes Park project, which is $4 million less than the requested amount, saving the City approximately $4 million in unfunded construction costs
CLOSED SESSION FOR DISCUSSION OF THE FOLLOWING:

A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS (GC 54956.8) APNs: 012045001, 012045010, 012045004, 012045005, 012046019, 012046005, 012046006, 012046007, 012045001, 012045009, 012045008, 012045007, 012045006, 012045007
Negotiating Party: Solis Martin Vieyra & Araujo Fanny Castro, Miya Farms, PRE 4 LLC,

MCMASTER, WILLIAM T & KATHLEEN S H/W, EBERT JEANNINE, ALANIS, RICHARD &

LINDA TRUST,
Agency Negotiators: Chris Tavarez, Jason Waters, and Nick Matoian B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS (GC 54956.8)

Address: 109 E. Eighth Street
Negotiating Party: Carnegie Museum of Kings County
Agency Negotiators: Chris Tavarez, Jason Waters, and Ty Mizote C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION (GC 54956.9(d)(1)) Request for Settlement Authority for workers compensation claim HAN240012 D. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-ANTICIPATED LITIGATION (54956.9 (d)(2)) 1 Case.

E. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-ANTICIPATED LITIGATION (GC 54956.9(d)(4)) 1 Case.

CALL TO ORDER REGULAR SESSION:

ROLL CALL:

INVOCATION:

Dr. Pat Newton
FLAG SALUTE:

RECOGNITION:

A. Proclamation Celebrating Arbor Day and the planting of new trees at city parks.

B. Proclamation declaring April as Financial Literacy Month in the City of Hanford PUBLIC COMMENT:

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

CONSENT CALENDAR:

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

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

B. Public Works: Purchase of one (1) 2026 Ford F-250 from Keller Ford of Hanford, CA in the amount of $58,888.29 and approval of appropriation of $58,889 from Fleet Reserves (0448) to fully fund the purchase.

C. Utilities and Engineering: Second reading and adoption of 26-03 for levying special taxes within the City of Hanford Community Facilities District No. 2025-2 (Public Maintenence Services)
D. Police: Authorization to apply for the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) Proposition 64 Public Health and Safety (PH&S) Grant Program for up to $1,000,000 to be used to fund the total compensation of a Cannabis Enforcement Officer (CEO) and related expenses for the full five-year grant term and to purchase a patrol vehicle for the

CEO; and if awarded, approve Resolution 26-19-R for the acceptance of the grant, amend the budget to recognize the grant, appropriate up to $1,000,000 in the General Fund for the Police Department, and authorize the City Manager or Police Chief to execute the grant agreement.

PUBLIC HEARING:

A. Public Works: PUBLIC HEARING – To receive ballots and public testimony on proposed funding changes/assessment increases for 2026/27 of the Quail Run Estates Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District in the City of Hanford. Following close of Public Hearing, ballots will be opened and tabulated, with results certified and reported prior to the close of the City Council Regular Session. Authorization for staff to implement assessment changes based on certified results.

B. Public Works: PUBLIC HEARING – To receive ballots and public testimony on proposed funding changes/assessment increases for 2026/27 of the Cielo En Tierra Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District in the City of Hanford. Following close of Public Hearing, ballots will be opened and tabulated, with results certified and reported prior to the close of the City Council Regular Session. Authorization for staff to implement assessment changes based on certified results.

C. Public Works: PUBLIC HEARING – To receive ballots and public testimony on the proposed rate increase for the City of Hanford Refuse Division. Following the close of the Public Hearing, ballots will be opened and tabulated, with results certified and reported prior to the close of the City Council Regular Session. Authorization for staff to implement rate increases based on certified results.

GENERAL BUSINESS:

A. Utilities and Engineering: Authorize a Change Order for $565,000.00 to the existing Professional Engineering Services contract with QK for Complete Streets Design services on East Lacey Boulevard (10th Avenue to Sierra Drive) B. Administration: Authorization to apply for the Extreme Heat and Community Resilience Program (EHCRP) Round 2 Grant through the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (LCI) for $2.5 to $4 million to enhance the East Lacey Corridor Improvement Project; and if awarded, amend the budget to recognize the grant and appropriate in the Gas Tax Fund.

C. Parks and Community Services: Receive the presentation of the proposed July 4th Hanford's Freedom Fest & Fireworks Show, adopt proposed fees as outlined in the report, and appropriate $77,000 from the General Fund to support the event and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract with Fireworks America COUNCIL REPORTS/GENERAL REPORTS:

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

A. INFORMATION REPORT — MARCH WARRANT REGISTER
ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDAS:

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

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

April 17: Mother + Son Dance 6:00 pm - 9:00 pm Tickets and Information April 18: Father + Daughter Dance 6:00 pm - 9:00 pm Tickets and Information April 21: Regular City Council Meeting
2026 National Community Survey Now Available More Information and Survey ADJOURNMENT:

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

4.A.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 4/7/2026 AGENDA SECTION: STUDY SESSION

SUBJECT:

Annual Comparison of Hanford Police Department Operational Statistics – 2024 and 2025

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation: Receive the Hanford Police Department 2024 and 2025 Annual Statistics Presentation.

BACKGROUND:

The Hanford Police Department conducts an annual review of department-wide operational statistics to evaluate workload, service delivery, and performance trends. A comparison of calendar years 2024 and 2025 provides City leadership and the community with a transparent overview of changes in calls for service, enforcement activity, investigative workload, and support functions. This review supports informed decision-making, accountability, and long-term planning.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None. This report is informational only and reflects operational activity within existing, approved budget allocations. No additional fiscal impact is associated with receiving this report.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Hanford Police Departments 2025

HANFORD POLICE

DEPARTMENT
2025 Annual Report

HANFORD POLICE ORGANIZATION CHART

PART 1 CRIMES
Crime Type 2024 2025 % Change
Homicide 5 6 20%
Rape 29 18 −38%
Robbery 32 15 −53%
Aggravated
Assault 221 178 −19%
Burglary 102 94 −8%
Theft 468 415 −11%
Arson 20 8 −60%

USE OF FORCE

COMPARISON
(2024 VS 2025)
Category 2024 2025
Officer Contacts 64,062 64,013
Use of Force
Incidents 31 27
Use of Force Rate 0.05% 0.04%
Taser Deployments 12 11
Defensive Tactics 5 4
Hospitalizations 0 0
Fatalities 0 1

OPERATIONS

DIVISION
Ø 24/7 front-line police services
Ø Primary responder to calls for service
Ø Proactive enforcement and visibility citywide
Ø Field operations impacting public safety
Ø Traffic Unit and K-9 Unit support operations

PATROL

RESPONSE
Metric 2024 2025 % Change
Calls for Service 48,554 45,315 -7%
Traffic Stops 7,932 7,356 -7%
Citations 1,748 1,655 -5%
Felony Arrests 701 746 6%
Misdemeanor
Arrests 1,943 1,794 -8%
Reports 7,934 5,553 -30%

RESPONSE TIMES
Call Priority 2024 2025 % Change
Priority 1 –
Emergency 5 min 4 min -20%
Priority 2–3
Urgent (Non-
Emergency)
17 min 12 min -29%

TRAFFIC &

ENFORCEMENT

ACTIVITY
Metric 2024 2025 % Change
Calls 645 567 -12%
Collisions 326 293 -10%
Fatal Collisions 4 2 -50%
Injury Collisions 72 80 11%
Property
Damage Only 131 136 3.8%
Citations 963 668 -31%

K-9 UNIT ACTIVITY
Metric 2024 2025 % Change
K-9 Teams 4 4 0%
Active Teams 3 1 -68%
Training Hours 245 287 17%
Searches 58 27 -53%
Narcotics Seized 68.5 g 2.74 g -96%
Deployments 110 39 -65%
Suspects
Apprehended 11 2 -82%

SWAT

DEPLOYMENTS BY

JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction 2024 2025
Hanford 4 3
Lemoore 3 0
Corcoran 2 3
Other Cities 4 0

SUPPORT

DIVISION
Ø Investigations and specialized operational support
Ø Focus on complex cases and offender accountability
Ø Case preparation for prosecution
Units
Ø Detective Bureau
Ø Street Crimes Unit (SCU)
Ø HART Team
Ø Property & Evidence
Ø Animal Control

DETECTIVE
BUREAU
Metric 2024 2025 % Change
Homicides 5 6 20%
Attempted Homicides 15 9 -40%
Search Warrants 115 151 31%
Reports 609 799 31%
ICAC Tips 110 112 1.8%
ICAC Investigations 50 56 12%
Callouts 50 32 -36%

STREET CRIMES
UNIT
Metric 2024 2025 % Change
Cases 76 89 17%
Search
Warrants 50 93 86%
Arrests 50 86 72%
Reports 341 455 33%
Firearms
Seized 25 17 -32%

HART TEAM
Metric 2024 2025 % Change
Calls 1,398 4,833 246%
Reports 118 112 -5%
Arrests 122 118 -3%
Reunification 70 32 -54%
Clean-ups 50 13 -74%
Contacts 1,093 3,767 245%
Homeless
Population 417 302 -28%

ANIMAL CONTROL
Metric 2025
Calls 1,537
Reports 46
Citations 20
Captured Animals 1,608
Dog Hearings 13
Self-Initiated Contacts 513

PROPERTY &

EVIDENCE
Metric 2024 2025 % Change
Physical Evidence Items 10,381 11,632 12%
Digital Evidence Items 63,713 80,784 27%
Total Property 377,174 472,966 25%
Discovery Requests 3,640 3,810 5%
Lab Trips 110 50 55%
Evidence Purging (Hours) 620 832 34%
Property Released 1,040 1,055 1%
NIBIN Submissions 15 50 233%
Call Outs 6 5 −17%

ADMINISTRATIVE

DIVISION
Ø Supports department-wide operations, compliance and
community services
Ø Manages critical communications, records, and school
safety
Ø Enables effective enforcement, investigation and
prosecution
Units
Ø Communications Center
Ø Records Division
Ø School Resource Officer (SRO) Program

SCHOOL

RESOURCE

OFFICERS
Metric 2024 2025 % Change
Presentations 232 316 36%
Home Visits 266 321 20%
Student
Counseling 503 1,023 103%
Calls for Service 381 380 -0.3%
Reports 142 196 38%
Arrests 97 64 -34%
After School
Events 344 112 -67%

COMMUNICATIONS CENTER
Ø 24/7 multi-agency emergency
communications center
Ø Serves four public safety agencies across
two cities
Ø High-volume call handling with fixed
staffing levels
Year Calls
2024 130,206
2025 158,315

Ø 5,163 cases processed
Ø 21,117 attachments reviewed and managed
Ø 1,878 cases submitted to the District Attorney
Ø 1,306 subpoenas processed
Records
Ø Manages police reports and official records
Ø Ensures legal compliance and accurate data entry
Ø Supports public access and information requests
Ø Staffed by 3 Records Assistants
Ø Supervised by a Senior Records Assistant
2025 Records Division – Key Metrics

4.B.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 4/7/2026 AGENDA SECTION: STUDY SESSION

SUBJECT:

Heroes Park update and funding discussion and potential action to decline the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) Grant from the National Park Service for approximately $1.9 million for Phase 1 of the Heroes Park project, which is $4 million less than the requested amount, saving the City approximately $4 million in unfunded construction costs

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation: That the City Council receive a project update and consider action to decline the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) Grant from the National Park Service for approximately $1.9 million for Phase 1 of the Heroes Park project, which is $4 million less than the requested amount, saving the City approximately $4 million in unfunded construction costs.

Recommended Motion: I move to authorize the City Manager to formally decline the LWCF grant for Phase 1 of the Heroes Park project, which is $4 million less than the requested amount, saving the City approximately $4 million in unfunded construction costs.

BACKGROUND:

Heroes Park Phase 1 represents the initial development of the City’s 40-acre regional park site. The project is intended to deliver a comprehensive recreational facility serving a wide range of community needs.

Under the current Proposition 68 program, Phase 1 is planned to include three multi-use athletic fields; two multi-age play structures with shade and lighting; an amphitheater; two outdoor basketball courts; a skate park; a dog park; a community/learning garden; an 18-hole disc golf course; an outdoor fitness area; a 190-space parking lot; two restroom facilities; public art; and a water feature.

These amenities collectively establish the core functionality of the park and reflect the original development scope associated with the Proposition 68 funding application.

Subsequently, the City applied for funding through the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF).

The LWCF application introduced additional development elements, most notably a 16-court pickleball complex and expanded development intensity across the full 40-acre site. The City subsequently received a grant award notice in the amount of $1.9M, significantly less than the $6 million originally requested.

Following a comparative evaluation of the original Proposition 68 scope and the expanded program associated with LWCF, staff has assessed the financial, schedule, and long-term operational implications of accepting and obligating the federal grant.

Financial Risk

The LWCF grant amount received is significantly less than the amount applied for. Staff had requested a grant amount of $6M for the additional park enhancements that included the 16- pickleball courts. This deeply affected the project’s budget, making it infeasible to move forward with the grant. See additional details in the Fiscal Impact of this report.

Schedule Risk
The LWCF grant requires full federal obligation prior to initiating construction. The obligation process typically requires a minimum of twelve months and may extend longer. Proposition 68 requires construction completion by December 2027. If LWCF obligation extends one year or more, the remaining construction window would be reduced to less than six months. Based on the size and complexity of this project, a six-month construction duration is not considered feasible.

Although the City has submitted a request for a Proposition 68 extension, approval is pending and not guaranteed. Proceeding with LWCF under this uncertainty exposes the project to substantial schedule risk.

Long-Term Encumbrance
Acceptance and obligation of the LWCF grant would place the full 40-acre site under permanent federal protection/land deed restriction. Future modifications, reconfiguration, or revenue-generating adjustments would require federal review and a cumbersome and prolonged permitting process. This would also make it difficult to engage in any future revenue-generating enterprises. This materially reduces long-term flexibility for park evolution and financial sustainability.

Assessment
The LWCF grant expands the overall scope of Phase 1 while increasing both the funding gap and schedule exposure. In contrast, proceeding under the original Proposition 68 scope reduces the immediate deficit, improves schedule feasibility, maintains local control, and preserves the opportunity to phase additional amenities, including pickleball courts, as future funding becomes available.

For these reasons, staff recommends that the City decline to accept and obligate the LWCF grant for Phase 1 and proceed under the original Proposition 68 program.

Staff remains committed to delivering a financially responsible and constructible first phase of Heroes Park while preserving flexibility for future expansion.

FISCAL IMPACT:
**The current construction figures are planning-level estimates and will be refined as design progresses.**

Under the original Proposition 68 scope, the total estimated project cost is approximately $17.5 million, with available funding of approximately $15.0 million, resulting in a projected funding gap of roughly $2.5 to $3.0 million. When the expanded scope associated with the LWCF grant is included, the estimated total project cost increases to approximately $24.0 million. Combined funding under both grants would total approximately $17.0 million, increasing the projected funding gap to approximately $7.0 to $7.5 million.

Scenario Estimated Total
Cost
Available
Funding Funding Gap
Proposition 68 (Original Scope) $17.5 million $15.0 million $2.5 – $3.0 million Proposition 68 + LWCF
(Expanded Scope) $24.0 million $17.0 million $7.0 – $7.5 million

While the LWCF grant provides approximately $1.9 million in additional funding, the amenities introduced through the expanded program - most notably the 16-court pickleball complex and development intensity across the full 40 acres - substantially increase construction costs, infrastructure requirements, and long-term maintenance obligations. The result is a significantly larger funding deficit rather than a reduction in financial exposure. It is important to note, that the $1.9 million award was about $4 million less than what was originally requested by the City.

In summary, Staff recommends that City decline the LWCF Grant based on the following reasons:

1. It places the project at financial risk and creates a significant budget deficit;

2. The grant requirements will adversely impact the State Prop 68 Grant deadline; and

3. The grant requires the park site to be placed in a federal land deed restriction.

ATTACHMENTS:

None

321 N. DOUTY ST. HANFORD, CA 93230
559.585.2500 | WWW.HANFORD.CITY
City of Hanford Proclamation
Celebrating Arbor Day and the planting of
new trees at Hidden Valley Park

Whereas, in 1872, J. Sterling Morton proposed to the Nebraska Board of Agriculture that a special day be set aside for the planting of trees; and Whereas, this special day, called Arbor Day, was first observed with the planting of more than a million trees in Nebraska; and Arbor Day is now observed throughout the nation and the world; and
Whereas, the City of Hanford recognizes that trees enhance the beauty of our residential streets, community parks, business districts, and school grounds; and Whereas, trees enrich our lives by providing numerous environmental benefits, including shade, reduced heating and cooling costs, temperature moderation, cleaner air, life- giving oxygen, and essential habitats for wildlife; and Whereas, trees in our community increase property values, enhance the economic vitality of business areas, and contribute to the overall beautification of our city; and Whereas, the Arbor Day tradition continues in Hanford through the planting of trees each spring, an effort that has helped earn the City recognition as a Tree City USA community.

Now, therefore, the Hanford City Council does hereby celebrate April 11, 2026, as Arbor Day in the City of Hanford. I encourage all citizens to celebrate Arbor Day and support efforts to protect our trees and woodlands.

Furthermore, we urge everyone to plant trees, bringing joy to the heart and promoting the well-being of this and future generations.

Dated this day of April 11, 2026.
______________________________
Mark Kairis, Mayor
______________________________
Nancy Howze, Vice Mayor
______________________________
Travis Paden, Council Member
______________________________
Kimber Regan, Council Member
______________________________
Lou Martinez, Council Member

City of Hanford Proclamation
Designating the Month of April as
Financial Literacy Month

WHEREAS, financially informed communities are stronger communities; and

WHEREAS, financial education reduces barriers and expands opportunity; and

WHEREAS, economic resilience begins with financial literacy; and

WHEREAS, when people understand money, communities thrive; and

WHEREAS, financial literacy supports long-term financial stability for families; and

WHEREAS, strong financial habits start with strong education; and

WHEREAS, financial learning is a community investment; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED, that the Hanford City Council hereby proclaims April 2026 as Financial Literacy Month in Hanford.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the City extends its gratitude to the various local financial institutions that are working to promote the value of financial literacy during the month of April and beyond.

Presented on the 7
th day of April 2026.

Mark Kairis, Mayor

12.B.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 4/7/2026 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Purchase of one (1) 2026 Ford F-250 from Keller Ford of Hanford, CA in the amount of $58,888.29 and approval of appropriation of $58,889 from Fleet Reserves (0448) to fully fund the purchase.

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation:

That the City Council approve the appropriation of $58,889 from Fleet Reserves (0448) and approve the purchase of one (1) 2026 Ford F-250 from Keller Ford of Hanford, CA in the amount of $58,888.29.

Recommended Motion:

1. That by motion, City Council approves the appropriation of $58,889 from Fleet Reserves (0448)

2. That the City Council approve the purchase of one (1) 2026 Ford F-250 from Keller Ford of Hanford, CA in the amount of $58,888.29

3. Declare unit #136 surplus and authorize the sale of the truck.

BACKGROUND:

Street Division vehicle #136, a 2009 Ford F-250 with approximately 167,000 miles, has exceeded its useful service life. The unit has accumulated a lifetime repair cost of $20,862 and has recently developed significant engine issues. Staff estimates that necessary repairs would cost approximately $15,000, which is not considered cost-effective given the age and condition of the vehicle.

The City of Hanford Fleet Division recommends removing the vehicle from service due to its current condition and ongoing maintenance demands. Although the unit is currently out of service, it remains a critical asset for Street Division operations. Its absence has required the redistribution and sharing of vehicles within the Public Works Department, impacting operational efficiency and service delivery.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The Fleet Reserves Fund will fully fund this purchase. Proceeds from the sale of Unit #136 will be deposited back into the fund to offset costs.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Keller Ford Quote

2. Future Ford of Clovis Quote

3. National Auto Fleet Group Quote

12.C.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 4/7/2026 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Second reading and adoption of 26-03 for levying special taxes within the City of Hanford Community Facilities District No. 2025-2 (Public Maintenence Services)

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation:

Staff recommends that City Council, by motion, waive the second reading and adopt Ordinance 26- 03, approving the levy of special taxes for CFD 2025-02.

Recommended Motion:

I move to waive the second reading and adopt Ordinance 26-03 approving the levy of special taxes for CFD 2025-02.

BACKGROUND:

On February 17, 2026, the City Council adopted a Resolution to make changes to the rate and method of apportionment of the special tax established for Community Facilities District 2025-2 (Public Maintenance Services).

On March 17, 2026, a public hearing was held to receive public testimony and property owner protests, if any, with regard to amendment of the Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax for CFD 2025-02.

After receiving public testimony, the City Council adopted (1) Resolution 26-15-R, calling for a special tax election for CFD 2025-2, (2) Resolution 26-16-R, declaring the results of a special election, and (3) Resolution 26-17-R, making certain amendments to the Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax for CFD 2025-02.

Due to a favorable vote by property owners, the City Council introduced an Ordinance authorizing the levy of the modified special tax within the boundaries of CFD 2025-2. The levy of the special tax in CFD 2025-2 was approved by at least 2/3 of the qualified electors. The city clerk directed the recording of a notice of special tax, and the ordinance ordering the levy of modified special tax within CFD No. 2025-2 was introduced, to be followed by the second reading and adoption of the Ordinance on April 7, 2026.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The estimated annual revenue received by the City for CFD 2025-2 will increase from the original estimate of $95,757 which is based on the maximum special tax rates for Fiscal Year 2025/26 for an estimated 177 single family residential parcels to $135,190. This amount is expected to increase as development of additional property occurs within CFD 2025-2 due to annexations. The special tax for the CFD includes an annual CPI adjustment. No General Fund monies are used for this effort.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Aerial Maps

2. Ordinance No. 26-03

B

B

ORDINANCE NO. 26-03

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HANFORD, CALIFORNIA,

LEVYING SPECIAL TAXES WITHIN THE CITY OF HANFORD COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2025-2 (PUBLIC MAINTENANCE SERVICES)

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Hanford established the Community Facilities District No. 2025-2 (Public Maintenance Services) (the “CFD”) by adoption of Resolution No. 2025- 22-R on July 1, 2025, and annexing territory into the CFD by adoption of Resolution No. 25-59-R on October 21, 2025 (each the “Resolutions of Formation”); and

WHEREAS, the City Council, on February 17, 2026, adopted Resolution No. 2026-06-R entitled “A Resolution of Consideration of the City Council of the City of Hanford to Make Changes to the Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax Established for Community Facilities District No. 2025-2 (Public Maintenance Services)” (the “Resolution of Consideration”); and

WHEREAS, a copy of the Resolution of Consideration, stating the Proposed Amendments to be provided in the Amended and Restated Rate and Method of Apportionment of the Special Tax to be levied within the Community Facilities District No. 2025-2 (Public Maintenance Services) (the “CFD”) to pay for the services of the CFD, is on file with the City Clerk and the provisions thereof are fully incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth herein; and

WHEREAS, the Resolution of Consideration set March 17, 2026 as the date of the public hearing; and

WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing regarding the Amended and Restated Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax were published in accordance with Government Code section 6061; and

WHEREAS, on March 17, 2026, this City Council held a public hearing as required by the Act and the Resolution of Consideration relative to the proposed amendments to the rate and method of apportionment of special tax of the CFD; and

WHEREAS, at the hearing all interested persons desiring to be heard for or against the proposed increase of the special tax as specified in the proposed Amended and Restated Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax of the CFD were heard and a full and fair hearing was held; and

WHEREAS, written protests with respect to the amendment of the Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax of the CFD have not been filed with the City Clerk by fifty percent (50%) or more of the registered voters residing within the territory of the CFD or property owners of one-half (1/2) or more of the area of land within the CFD and not exempt from the proposed special taxes; and

WHEREAS, an election was held within the CFD in which the affected landowners approved said propositions by ballots cast in the election.

WHEREAS, the City Council, on March 17, 2026, adopted Resolution No. 2026-17-R entitled “A Resolution of Change of the City Council of the City of Hanford Relating to and Making Certain

Amendments to the City of Hanford Community Facilities District No. 2025-2 (Public Maintenance Services)” (the “Resolution of Change”); and

WHEREAS, the City Council is fully advised in this matter;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Hanford as follows:

Section 1. By the passage of this Ordinance, this City Council hereby authorizes and levies special taxes within the District, pursuant to the Act, at the rate and in accordance with the Amended and Restated Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax appended as Exhibit B to the Resolution of Consideration (the “Amended Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax”), which, along with the Resolution of Change are by this reference incorporated herein. The Special Tax is hereby levied to pay for the Services for the CFD according to the Amended and Restated Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax, commencing in fiscal year 2025-26 and in each fiscal year thereafter.

Section 2. The Finance Director of the City or her designee is hereby authorized and directed each fiscal year to determine the specific special tax rate and amount to be levied for each parcel of real property within the CFD, in the manner and as provided in the Amended and Restated Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax.

Section 3. Exemptions from the levy of the Special Tax shall be as provided in the Resolution of Consideration and the applicable provisions of the Act. In no event shall special taxes be levied on any parcel within the CFD in excess of the maximum tax specified in the Amended and Restated Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax.

Section 4. All of the collections of the special tax shall be used as provided for in the Act and in the Resolutions of Formation, including, but not limited to, the payment of costs of providing the Services, the payment of City costs in administering the CFD and the costs of collecting and administering the special tax.

Section 5. The special taxes shall be collected from time to time as necessary to meet the financial obligations of the CFD. The special taxes will be collected in the same manner as ordinary ad valorem property taxes, and the special taxes shall have the same lien priority, and be subject to the same penalties and the same procedure and sale in cases of delinquency as provided for ad valorem taxes. In addition, the provisions of California Government Code section 53356.1 shall apply to delinquent special tax payments. The Finance Director or her designee is hereby authorized and directed to provide all necessary information to the auditor/tax collector of the County of Kings and to take all actions necessary to effect proper billing and collection of the special tax, so that the special tax shall be levied and collected in sufficient amounts and at the times necessary to satisfy the financial obligations of the CFD in each fiscal year.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, any special taxes that cannot be collected on the County tax roll, or are not so collected, may be collected through direct billing by the City.

Section 6. If for any reason a court with jurisdiction finds any portion of this ordinance to be invalid or finds the special tax to be inapplicable to any particular parcel, then the balance

of this ordinance and the application of the special tax to the remaining parcels shall not be affected.

Section 7. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force immediately as a tax measure; and before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after its passage the same shall be published, with the names of the members voting for and against the same, at least once in a newspaper of general circulation published and circulated in the CFD.

Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Hanford at a regular meeting being held on March 17, 2026 by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

APPROVED

Mark Kairis
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 day of , 2026.

___________________.

Natalie Corral
City Clerk
City of Hanford

12.D.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 4/7/2026 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Authorization to apply for the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) Proposition 64 Public Health and Safety (PH&S) Grant Program for up to $1,000,000 to be used to fund the total compensation of a Cannabis Enforcement Officer (CEO) and related expenses for the full five-year grant term and to purchase a patrol vehicle for the CEO; and if awarded, approve Resolution 26-19-R for the acceptance of the grant, amend the budget to recognize the grant, appropriate up to $1,000,000 in the General Fund for the Police Department, and authorize the City Manager or Police Chief to execute the grant agreement.

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council, by motion, authorize the Police Department to apply for the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) Proposition 64 Public Health and Safety (PH&S) Grant Program for up to $1,000,000 to be used to fund the total compensation of a Cannabis Enforcement Officer (CEO) and related expenses for the full five-year grant term and to purchase a patrol vehicle for the CEO; and if awarded, approve Resolution 26-19-R for the acceptance of the grant, amend the budget to recognize the grant, appropriate up to $1,000,000 in the General Fund for the Police Department, and authorize the City Manager or Police Chief to execute the grant agreement.

Recommended Motion: I move to authorize the Police Department to apply for the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) Proposition 64 Public Health and Safety (PH&S) Grant Program for up to $1,000,000 to be used to fund the total compensation of a Cannabis Enforcement Officer (CEO) and related expenses for the full five-year grant term and to purchase a patrol vehicle for the CEO; and if awarded, approve Resolution 26-19-R for the acceptance of the grant, amend the budget to recognize the grant, appropriate up to $1,000,000 in the General Fund for the Police Department, and authorize the City Manager or Police Chief to execute the grant agreement.

BACKGROUND:

Through Proposition 64, the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA), the California Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) is offering grant funding to local governments to address public health and safety concerns associated with the passing of AUMA.

The Proposition 64 Public Health and Safety (PH&S) Grant Program is open to local jurisdictions that allow the retail sale of cannabis in storefronts. The grant aims to support local efforts to investigate and deter illicit cannabis activity and to provide education to the community about the dangers associated with illicit cannabis.

The Hanford Police Department (HPD) would like to apply for Cohort 4 of the grant to establish a

Cannabis Enforcement Unit with the creation of a new sworn officer position within the Hanford Police Department, the Cannabis Enforcement Officer. The Cannabis Enforcement Officer will address gaps in cannabis compliance, enforcement, and youth access prevention. The Cannabis Enforcement Officer will be responsible for conducting compliance checks at local cannabis retailers, completing required background checks for cannabis retail employees and investigating illicit cannabis activity. Additionally, the officer will be proactive within the community at community events and schools to provide education to the public.

The Hanford Police Department is requesting up to $1,000,000 in grant funding. The funding will be used to cover the total compensation of the Cannabis Enforcement Officer, and to purchase a laptop and patrol vehicle to be used by the Cannabis Enforcement Officer. Funds will also be used for training and miscellaneous supplies that the officer may need. The grant period is a five-year term, from July 1, 2026, through December 31, 2031. There are no matching funds associated with this grant and an appropriation will be made for the awarded amount to expend the funds as the reimbursements occur after the fact.

The application period for the Prop 64 PH&S Grant Program closed on March 30, 2026. Due to this deadline, staff submitted the application prior to receiving City Council approval. However, should Council choose not to approve the application, HPD can withdraw from consideration.

If HPD is awarded the grant, staff is requesting that the City Council authorize the City Manager or Police Chief to execute the grant agreement.

FISCAL IMPACT:

If awarded, the fiscal impact will total up to $1,000,000, paid by the BSCC Prop 64 PH&S grant. Up to $1,000,000 will need to be appropriated to the General Fund for the Police Department. Police staff will coordinate with the City's Finance department with the specific awarded amount when award announcements are made. The City will be reimbursed by the grant administrator for costs associated with the grant over a five year period.

The grant will cover the officer's wages, a vehicle, training material and a laptop computer for presentations. The grant will not cover firearms and basic duty gear needed for the officer position.

The estimated fiscal impact would be a one-time cost of approximately $6000 from the general fund to purchase needed duty equipment. Additionally, the grant would not cover 5% specialty pay for an officer assigned to this position, as it covers general wages only.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. 26-19-R

2. Prop 64 Grant NOFA

3. Prop 64 Cohort 4 RFP

RESOLUTION 26-19-R

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HANFORD

AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE AND EXECUTION OF A GRANT AGREEMENT

FROM THE CALIFORNIA BOARD OF STATE AND COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS Approving the Application for
PROPOSITION 64 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY GRANT PROGRAM

WHEREAS the City of Hanford Police Department desires to participate in the Proposition 64 Public Health and Safety Grant Program funded through the California State and Local Government Law Enforcement Account and administered by the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC); and
WHEREAS successful Applicants will enter into an agreement with the BSCC to complete the Grant Scope during the five-year enforcement period of July 1, 2026, through December 31, 2031.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chief of Police of the City of Hanford be authorized on behalf of the City Council of the City of Hanford to submit the grant proposal for this funding and sign the Grant Agreement with the BSCC, including any amendments thereof.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City of Hanford Police Department agrees to abide by the terms and conditions of the Grant Agreement as set forth by the BSCC.

///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford held on April 07, 2026 by the following vote:

AYES: _______________________________________________________________ NOES:_______________________________________________________________ ABSENT:_____________________________________________________________ ABSTAIN:_____________________________________________________________

__________________________
Mark Kairis
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 _____day of ______, 20___.

Date: ____________________

_________________________________
City Clerk

NOTICE OF FUNDS AVAILABILITY (NOFA)
AND

RELEASE OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP)

DATE: February 13, 2026

TO: California Counties, Cities, and City/County

FROM: Aaron R. Maguire, Executive Director

SUBJECT: AVAILABILITY OF FUNDING FOR THE PROPOSITION 64 PUBLIC HEALTH & SAFETY GRANT PROGRAM – COHORT 4

The Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) is announcing the release of the Proposition 64 Public Health & Safety (Prop 64 PH&S) Grant Program Cohort 4 Request for Proposals (RFP). The Prop 64 PH&S Grant Program directs revenue from the cultivation and sale of cannabis to projects that promote public health and safety.

Eligible applicants for the Prop 64 PH&S Grant Program are local governments (i.e., Counties, Cities, and City/County) in California that allow the retail sale of cannabis in storefronts, or —if the jurisdiction has a population of 10,000 residents or fewer —allow cannabis delivery serving both medicinal and adult ‑use consumers. These eligibility criteria reflect statutory updates enacted through Senate Bill 141 (2025). Additional details regarding eligibility are provided in the RFP.

This RFP makes available approximately $125 million through a competitive process for projects that address local impacts associated with the implementation of the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act. Activities and strategies must fall wi thin one of four Project Purpose Areas (PPAs):

• Public Safety/Enforcement
• Public Health
• Youth Development/Youth Prevention and Intervention
• Environmental Impacts

To ensure equitable distribution of funds, applicant jurisdictions will compete within population‑based categories:

• Small jurisdictions: fewer than 50,000 residents
• Medium jurisdictions: 50,000–500,000 residents
• Large jurisdictions: more than 500,000 residents

Proposition 64 NOFA Page 2
Funding will be allocated as follows:

• 15% for small jurisdictions ($18.75 million)
• 35% for medium jurisdictions ($43.75 million)
• 30% for large jurisdictions ($37.5 million)
• Remaining 20% awarded competitively across all jurisdictions

Maximum grant request amounts are:

• Up to $1 million for small jurisdictions
• Up to $4.5 million for medium jurisdictions
• Up to $6 million for large jurisdictions

Priority points will be awarded to applicants dedicating at least 7 0% of their total grant award to illicit cannabis enforcement efforts, defined as coordinated activities to identify, investigate, disrupt, and deter illicit commercial cannabis operations.

Proposals must be received through the BSCC ‑Submittable Application online portal by 3:00 p.m. PST on Monday, March 30 2026. Instructions for using the portal are located on the BSCC Prop 64 homepage, as well as in the Prop 64 Cohort 4 RFP Instruction Packet and mandatory documents for upload.

A Virtual Grant Information Session for prospective applicants will be held on Monday, March 2, 2026, at 10:30 a.m. PST. Please visit the Prop 64 Grant Page to access the Zoom link. It is also included in the RFP.

The BSCC staff cannot assist the applicant or its partners with the actual preparation of the proposal. Any technical questions concerning the RFP, the proposal process, programmatic issues, and/or the BSCC ‑Submittable Application process must be submitted by email to [email protected].

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

Proposition 64
Public Health and
Safety Grant Program

Eligible Applicants:

California Counties and Cities Eligible Per Requirements of Revenue & Taxation Code § 34019, subd. (f)(3)(C).

Grant Term: July 1, 2026 to December 31, 2031
(Includes 5-year service delivery and six months for evaluation and audit)

RFP Released: February 13, 2026
Letters of Intent Due: March 13, 2026
Proposals Due: March 30, 2026
Prop 64 Cohort 4 RFP

This page intentionally left blank

Table of Contents

Contents
PART I: GRANT INFORMATION ...................................................................................... 1 Questions About the Grant ................................................................................................. 1 Background and Purpose of the Grant ............................................................................... 1 BSCC Executive Steering Committee & Scoring Panel Processes .................................... 2 Funding Information ........................................................................................................... 2 Grant Period ....................................................................................................................... 2 Proposal Due Date & Submission Instructions ................................................................... 3 How to Submit a Letter of Intent ......................................................................................... 5 Virtual Grant Information Session ...................................................................................... 5 Eligibility to Apply ............................................................................................................... 6 Allowable Uses of Grant Funds & Project Purpose Areas .................................................. 8 Grant Funding & Applicant Categories ............................................................................. 15 Data Collection, Reporting and Evaluation Requirements ................................................ 16 Additional BSCC Grant Requirements ............................................................................. 19 Overview of the RFP Process .......................................................................................... 24 Key Dates ......................................................................................................................... 28 PART II: PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS .......................................................................... 29 BSCC Submittable Application Portal............................................................................... 29 Proposal Narrative and Budget / Rating Factors .............................................................. 29 Proposal Abstract ............................................................................................................. 29 Mandatory Attachments for RFP Submission ................................................................... 37 APPENDIX A .................................................................................................................... 39 APPENDIX B .................................................................................................................... 40 APPENDIX C ................................................................................................................... 56 APPENDIX D ................................................................................................................... 60 APPENDIX E .................................................................................................................... 61 APPENDIX F .................................................................................................................... 62 APPENDIX G ................................................................................................................... 64 APPENDIX H ................................................................................................................... 66 APPENDIX I ..................................................................................................................... 68 APPENDIX J .................................................................................................................... 69

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE

All documents submitted as a part of the Proposition 64 Public Health and Safety Grant Program proposal are public documents and may be subject to a request pursuant to the California Public Records Act. The BSCC cannot ensure the confidentiality of any information submitted in or with this proposal.

(Gov. Code, §§ 7920 et seq.)

PART I, Page | 1

IT IS IMPORTANT TO READ THIS ENTIRE RFP DOCUMENT PRIOR
TO INITIATING THE APPLICATION PROCESS!
Questions About the Grant
This Request for Proposal (RFP) provides the necessary information to submit a proposal for the Proposition 64 Public Health and Safety (Prop 64) Grant Program to the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC). BSCC staff cannot assist the applicant or its partners with the actual preparation of the proposal.

Technical questions concerning the RFP, the proposal process, or programmatic issues must be submitted by email to: [email protected]. BSCC will accept and respond to written questions about this RFP through March 10, 2026. A frequently asked questions and answers (FAQ) document will be posted to the BSCC website and periodically updated through March 20, 2026.

Background and Purpose of the Grant
In November of 2016, voters approved Proposition 64, the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA). AUMA legalized the recreational use of marijuana in California for individuals 21 years of age and older. Proposition 64 also provides that a portion of the tax revenue from the cultivation and retail sale of cannabis or cannabis products will be appropriated. Section 34019 of the Revenue and Taxation Code (RTC), relating to cannabis, was amended by Senate Bill No. 141, CH. 18, in June 2025. For administration of funding, the RTC states:

To the Board of State and Community Corrections for making grants to local governments to assist with law enforcement, fire protection, or other local programs addressing public health and safety associated with the implementation of the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act. A local government shall be eligible for a grant only if it either allows the retail sale of cannabis in storefronts or, for jurisdictions with a population of 10,000 residents or less, allows cannabis delivery in the ju risdiction that serves both medicinal and adult -use consumers.

The Board of State and Community Corrections shall prioritize grant awards for local governments whose grant application includes illicit cannabis enforcement.

The board may award grants both competitively and based on a formula to provide consistent and ongoing funding for local governments to implement the programs described in this subparagraph. (Rev. & Tax Code, § 34019, subd. (f)(3)(C).)

PART I: GRANT INFORMATION

PART I, Page | 2
BSCC Executive Steering Committee & Scoring Panel Processes The BSCC uses Executive Steering Committees (ESCs) and Scoring Panels to develop grant requirements and evaluate grant proposals. ESCs and Scoring Panels are composed of subject matter experts, community partners, and interested parties representing both the public and private sectors. The BSCC makes every attempt to include diverse representation on ESCs and Scoring Panels, in breadth of experience, geography, and demographics.

The BSCC will use a Scoring Panel process to evaluate Prop 64 Cohort 4 proposals and develop funding recommendations for the Board. The Board may approve, reject, or revise those recommendations. Members of the Scoring Panel are not paid for their time but are reimbursed for travel expenses incurred to attend meetings. If the BSCC is unable to convene a full Scoring Panel, BSCC staff may participate in the rating process.

Conflicts of Interest
Existing law prohibits any grantee, subgrantee, partner, or like party who participates on the Prop 64 Scoring Panel from receiving funds from the Prop 64 grants awarded under this RFP. Applicants who are awarded grants under this RFP are responsible for reviewing the Scoring Panel membership roster and ensuring that no grant dollars are passed through to any entity represented by any member of the Scoring Panel. Please check the BSCC Prop 64 home page for updated information on the Scoring Panel.

Funding Information
The total funding available through the Cohort 4 RFP is $125 million. All grant funds are contingent on timely deposits made available to the BSCC through the Proposition 64 Initiative (the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act) via the State and Local Government Law Enforcement Account.

Grant Period
Proposals selected for funding will be under agreement from : July 1, 2026 , to December 31, 2031.

The agreement includes a 5-year grant project period starting on July 1, 2026, and ending on June 30, 2031. An additional six months (July 1, 2031, to December 31, 2031) will be included in the term of the grant agreement for the sole purpose of finalizing and submitting a required Local Evaluation Report and a required audit (both described later in this RFP).

PART I, Page | 3
Proposal Due Date & Submission Instructions
The Prop 64 Grant Proposal Package is available exclusively through the Submittable online application portal. All proposals must be submitted through Submittable no later than 3:00 p.m. (PST) on March 30, 2026. At 3:00 p.m. (PST), the portal will automatically close and will no longer accept applications. Late submissions will not be considered.

IMPORTANT: Do not wait until the last minute to upload your proposal! The submission process may take a significant amount of time depending on the complexity of the proposal and the number of attachments. Allow ample time to create an account, complete all required fields, and upload all required documents. Even if you have started the proposal submission process prior to 3:00 p.m., unless the entire upload process is complete by 3:00 p.m., your proposal will be disqualified.

Submission Instructions
This RFP Instruction Packet contains all the necessary information to successfully complete and submit the Prop 64 Cohort 4 Grant Proposal.

Proposals for the Prop 64 Cohort 4 Grant must be submitted through the BSCC Submittable Application Portal . The BSCC Submittable Application Portal, Prop 64 Grant Application, and all required attachments are available on the BSCC website.

Step 1. From the Prop 64 Grant homepage (https://www.bscc.ca.gov/proposition-64- public-health-safety-grant-program/), the Prop 64 RFP is accessible by clicking the “Click here to Submit; Powered by Submittable” button.

Step 2. You will be prompted to create a free Submittable account and log in (or sign into an existing account) prior to accessing the online RFP.

Step 3. After an account is established, applicants may proceed with the submission process. Applicants will be prompted to complete a series of questions, including the identification of key grant contacts, and a Project Narrative consisting of four sections.

Step 4. As part of the RFP process, applicants will also be required to download and complete the following mandatory attachments, which can be found on the Prop 64 homepage. These include:

1. Letter of Eligibility

2. Budget Attachment

3. Project Work Plan

4. Criteria and Assurance for Non -Governmental Organizations that Receive BSCC Grant Funds as a Subcontractor

5. Certification of Compliance with BSCC Policies on Debarment, Fraud, Theft, and Embezzlement

PART I, Page | 4
Step 5. Once these mandatory attachments have been completed and saved, applicants must upload them at specific prompts within the BSCC Submittable Application Portal prior to submission. Blank attachments will not be accepted.

Note: To save any changes made to an application in the Submittable Application Portal, applicants must click the “Save Draft” button at the end of the proposal page. Most fields within the RFP require information to be entered; therefore, the system will not allow proposal submission if all mandatory fields are not completed. Once you have successfully submitted the proposal thr ough the BSCC Submittable Application Portal, you will receive an email acknowledging receipt.

Authorization to Submit a Proposal
For this RFP, applications must include authorization from the appropriate governing body of the applicant jurisdiction. While staff may prepare and upload the application materials, the individual designated as the Authorized Official in Submittable must be one of the following:
• For counties: A member of the Board of Supervisors or the Chief County Administrative Officer.
• For cities: A member of the City Council or the Administrative Office of the City.

The Authorized Official is the individual with the legal authority to sign the application and enter into a grant agreement on behalf of the jurisdiction.

Having Technical Issues?
If you experience technical difficulties with submitting your proposal through the Submittable Application Portal, you should submit a Help Ticket through Submittable, as the BSCC does not control that site. Also , please email the BSCC at:

[email protected] and/or call the BSCC main line at (916) 445-5073 and ask to speak to someone about the Prop 64 RFP process.

Please note: The Submittable Help Desk operates in the Central Time Zone and is only available until 3:00 p.m. (PST). Applicants are strongly encouraged to begin the application process early to ensure access to technical assistance and to avoid last‑minute submission issues.

Please allow sufficient time for Submittable and the BSCC to provide technical assistance. Be advised that applicants contacting Submittable or the BSCC on the day proposals are due may not receive timely responses.

PART I, Page | 5
Planning to Apply? How to Submit a Letter of Intent
Applicants interested in applying for a Prop 64 grant are asked (but are not required) to submit a non-binding letter indicating their intent to apply. These letters will aid the BSCC in planning for the proposal evaluation process.

There is no formal template for the letter. Please submit the letter in Microsoft Word or as a PDF, on applicant letterhead, and include the following information:

1. Name of the city or county;

2. Name of the Lead Public Agency (LPA);

3. Name of a contact person; and

4. A brief statement indicating the applicant’s intent to submit a proposal.

Please submit Letters of Intent via email to [email protected] by March 13, 2026. Identify the email subject line as “Prop 64 Letter of Intent.”

Failure to submit a Letter of Intent is not grounds for disqualification, nor will prospective applicants that submit a Letter of Intent and decide later not to apply be penalized.

Want To Learn More About the Prop 64 Grant Before You Apply? Prospective applicants are invited to attend a virtual Grant Information Session.

Attendance at the virtual information session is not a requirement.

The purpose of the Prop 64 Grant Information Session is to answer technical questions from prospective applicants and provide clarity on RFP instructions. Topics may include, but are not limited to, proposal submission instructions, eligibility, funding, budgeting, and reporting requirements. There is no preference given to applicants who attend the Grant Information Session. Details are listed below:

Virtual Grant Information Session
for Prospective Prop 64 Cohort 4 Applicants
DATE: Monday, March 2, 2026
TIME: 10:30 a.m.

Public access options for this meeting include:
• Join by Zoom: https://us02web.zoom.us/s/87549719367
• Call in: +16699009128 pin:875 4971 9367
Webinar ID: 875 4971 9367

PART I, Page | 6
Eligibility to Apply
Applicants eligible to apply for the Prop 64 Cohort 4 Grant must be a local jurisdiction* that either:

1. Allows the retail sale of cannabis in storefronts.

OR

2. For jurisdictions with a population of 10,000 residents or less, allow s cannabis delivery in the jurisdiction that serves both medicinal and adult-use consumers.

* For purposes of this RFP, “local jurisdiction” means a city, county, or city and county in the State of California. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 26001(am).).

Please note: If the local jurisdiction only restricts the retail sale of cannabis to specific locations pursuant to local zoning ordinances, or if the local jurisdiction requires licensure for specific retail sales activities provided that such restrictions do not result in the prohibition of all retail sales in the local government’s jurisdiction/authority, the local jurisdiction may be eligible to apply for the Prop 64 Cohort 4 Grant.

Local jurisdictions in California must meet the above eligibility criteria by March 30, 2026, to be considered for funding under the Prop 64 Cohort 4 Grant Program and must maintain eligibility for the duration of the grant period.

Proof of Eligibility
It is up to the applicant to demonstrate to the BSCC that they meet the eligibility criteria listed above. Prospective applicants are advised to consult with local counsel.

Applicants are required to submit a Letter of Eligibility (as part of the RFP submittal process), detailing how the city, county, or city and county meets the above criteria, including the dates the regulations, ordinances, or amendments to local jurisdiction charters became enacted/effective (see Appendix A). Jurisdictions in the process of legalizing the cultivation or retail sale of marijuana or marijuana products will be ineligible for current funding under the Prop 64 Cohort 4 Grant Program.

Additionally, if a grant award is made to a city, county, or city and county (eligible at the time of award) but becomes ineligible post -award, the contract with the Grantee will be terminated and any remaining funds will cease to be disbursed for the rest of the contract term.

Applicants may want to review the data compiled by the Department of Cannabis Control (DCC) for their jurisdiction at: https://cannabis.ca.gov/cannabis-laws/where-cannabis- businesses-are-allowed/. The BSCC will not use this data to determine ineligibility;

PART I, Page | 7
however, the BSCC may consider the information contained on the DCC’s website to request additional eligibility information from the applicant.

Designating a Lead Public Agency
All Prop 64 Grant applicants must designate a Lead Public Agency (LPA) to serve as the coordinator for all grant activities. The LPA must be a governmental agency with local authority of or within that city, county, or city and county. The applicant may choose to fill the role of LPA itself, or it may designate a department, agency, or office under its jurisdiction to serve as the LPA. The role of the LPA is to coordinate with local government agencies and non -governmental organizations (if applicable) to ensure successful implementation of the grant program. The LPA is responsible for data collection and management, overseeing evaluative activities, and will serve as the primary point of contact with the BSCC.

Questions About Eligibility
• Can an eligible local jurisdiction submit more than one proposal? Yes, eligible local jurisdictions may submit up to two (2) proposals for Prop 64 Cohort 4 funding consideration. Each proposal must have a different Lead Public Agency and different scope of work. For example, a county may submit one proposal focused primarily on Project Purpose Area 1 (see Project Purpose Area definitions later in this document ) with the Sheriff’s Department as Lead Public Agency and a second proposal focused primarily on Project Purpose Area 2 with the Public Health Department as Lead Public Agency.

• Are Prop 64 Cohort 3 Grantees eligible to apply?
Yes, eligible local jurisdictions that are currently receiving Prop 64 Cohort 3 Grant funds are eligible to apply for Cohort 4 funding but must designate a different Lead Public Agency than the one named in its current Cohort 3 Grant Agreement. For example, if the County Department of Public Health is the Lead Public Agency on the Cohort 3 Grant, the County Probation Department may apply for Cohort 4 funds.

• Can an ineligible jurisdiction receive Prop 64 PH&S grant funds as part of a collaborative proposal, such as a regional task force?
No, local governments that are ineligible to receive Prop 64 PH&S grant funds based on the eligibility criteria contained in Section 34019 of the Revenue and Taxation Code may not receive grant funding through a ny type of subcontract or interagency agreement.

PART I, Page | 8
Allowable Uses of Grant Funds
Applicants must propose projects that fall within one or more of the following four (4) Project Purpose Areas (PPAs), listed here and defined below:
• PPA 1: Public Safety/Enforcement
• PPA 2: Public Health
• PPA 3: Youth Development/Youth Prevention and Intervention • PPA 4: Environmental Impacts

Applicants may either implement new activities, strategies, or programs, OR expand existing activities, strategies, or programs (without the supplantation of funds – see Supplanting definition on page 20). Project activities, strategies, and programmatic efforts may overlap within the listed PPAs. Each identified PPA activity, strategy, and programmatic effort does not have to relate to another identified PPA need(s). See the Glossary of Terms (Appendix J) for additional information.

All project components and activities must link to the intent of the Prop 64 Initiative: addressing local impacts to public health and safety resulting from the legalization of adult use recreational cannabis in California.

Priority Points for PPA 1
In accordance with RTC Sec. 34019(f)(3)(C), the BSCC must “prioritize grant awards for local governments whose proposals include illicit cannabis enforcement activities.”

For purposes of this grant, “enforcement” refers to the coordinated activities undertaken by a local jurisdiction to identify, investigate, disrupt, and deter illicit commercial cannabis operations. Enforcement includes administrative, civil, and criminal actions that uphold state and local cannabis laws through inspections, investigations, nuisance abatement efforts, legal proceedings, and multiagency operations designed to protect public health, consumer safety, the environment, and the integrity of the licensed cannabis market.

Applicants that dedicate 70 percent of the Project Budget to enforcement activities, excluding any amount budgeted for indirect costs, will receive Priority Points (additional information provided later in this document).

Project Purpose Area 1: Public Safety/Enforcement
Projects funded under this purpose area must support local efforts to identify, investigate, disrupt, and deter illicit commercial cannabis activity. Activities should strengthen public safety, uphold state and local cannabis laws, and reduce the harms ass ociated with unlicensed cannabis operations.

PART I, Page | 9
➢ PPA 1: Purpose
To enhance a jurisdiction’s capacity to conduct coordinated enforcement and public safety operations that address illegal cannabis cultivation, manufacturing, distribution, and retail activity, while protecting community health, consumer safety, and the integrity of the licensed cannabis market.

➢ PPA 1: Allowable Uses of Funds
Activities may include, but are not limited to:
• Enforcement and Public Safety Operations
- Inspections, compliance checks, and follow-up investigations - Multi-agency operations targeting unlicensed storefronts, delivery services, cultivation sites, or manufacturing locations
- Surveillance, controlled buys, and other investigative activities permitted under local policy
- Site stabilization and hazard mitigation at illicit cultivation or manufacturing sites
- Retail theft prevention and response
- Cannabis delivery compliance operations
• Personnel and Staffing
- Overtime or backfill for law enforcement, code enforcement, fire, or environmental health personnel
- Dedicated cannabis enforcement officers, investigators, or inspection staff - Temporary or limited term staff supporting enforcement operations, complaint response, or case preparation
- Analysts supporting intelligence, mapping, data analysis, or case tracking • Equipment and Supplies
- Protective safety equipment (PPE, respirators, gloves, etc.) - Radios, cameras, tablets, and field data collection tools - Vehicles or vehicle modifications used for enforcement or inspection activities
- Evidence collection supplies and secure storage equipment - Environmental testing kits (e.g., water, soil, pesticide residue) • Technology and Data Systems
- Case management systems for tracking enforcement actions - Mapping and analytics tools to identify hotspots and complaint trends - Track-and-trace or other technology system updates
- Data sharing platforms to coordinate with state or regional partners • Legal and Administrative Actions
- Administrative citations, hearings, and permit revocation proceedings - Civil actions, nuisance abatement cases, injunctions, or cost recovery efforts
- Contracted legal support for complex enforcement matters

PART I, Page | 10
• Public Information, Outreach, and Community Planning
- Public education on identifying licensed retailers and reporting illegal activity
- Community planning or development efforts related to cannabis impacts - Outreach campaigns addressing safety risks of illicit cannabis products • Environmental and Infrastructure Impacts
- Fire protection, fuel mitigation, and wildland/urban interface planning - Water storage or resource protection related to illegal cultivation - Transportation or infrastructure impacts associated with enforcement operations

➢ PPA 1: Intended Outcomes
Projects should demonstrate how activities will:
• Reduce the prevalence of illicit commercial cannabis operations. • Improve community safety and environmental conditions. • Increase compliance with state and local cannabis laws. • Strengthen coordination among enforcement, regulatory, and public health partners.
• Protect consumers from unsafe, untested cannabis products.

➢ PPA 1: Partnership Expectations
Applicants are encouraged to collaborate with:
• Law enforcement agencies
• Code enforcement and environmental health departments • Fire and hazardous materials teams
• State and regional cannabis enforcement partners
• Community-based organizations supporting outreach and reporting

Project Purpose Area 2: Public Health
Projects funded under this purpose area must support public health strategies that protect community safety, improve health outcomes, and reduce harms associated with cannabis activity. Public health efforts should strengthen local capacity to educate the community, monitor health impacts, and implement policies or infrastructure improvements that promote safe, healthy environments.

➢ PPA 2: Purpose
To enhance a jurisdiction’s ability to implement education, prevention, environmental health, and behavioral health strategies that safeguard community wellbeing. This includes activities that protect and improve the health of communities through education, policy and infrastructure development, environmental monitoring, and health-focused interventions.

PART I, Page | 11
➢ PPA 2: Program Expectations
Public health projects should:
• Promote community education and outreach related to cannabis impacts. • Strengthen environmental health protections, including monitoring and mitigation.
• Improve behavioral and mental health access for individuals affected by cannabis-related harms.
• Support policy, infrastructure, and system improvements that enhance community health
• Ensure services are culturally relevant, trauma -informed, and accessible to diverse populations.

➢ PPA 2: Allowable Uses of Funds
Activities may include, but are not limited to:
• Education, Training, and Outreach
- Public health training for staff and partners
- Community education campaigns and public information efforts - Outreach on cannabis product safety and legal market awareness • Environmental and Regulatory Health
- Inspection of cannabis businesses for health and safety compliance - Pesticide impact monitoring and mitigation
- Air quality monitoring and response
- Drinking water and wastewater system updates
- Environmental system upgrades related to cannabis impacts • Behavioral and Mental Health Services
- Behavioral health treatment related to cannabis use
- Mental health services addressing cannabis-related harms - Early intervention and supportive services
• Testing, Safety, and Infrastructure
- Cannabis product safety testing or verification
- Purchase of testing or safety equipment
- Infrastructure improvements that support public health protections

➢ PPA 2: Intended Outcomes
Projects should demonstrate how activities will:
• Improve community health and safety.
• Increase public awareness of cannabis-related health risks. • Expand access to behavioral and mental health services. • Enhance local capacity to monitor, prevent, and respond to public health impacts.

PART I, Page | 12
➢ PPA 2: Partnership Expectations
Applicants are encouraged to collaborate with:
• Local health departments
• Environmental health agencies
• Behavioral and mental health providers
• Community-based organizations
• Regulatory and cannabis licensing partners

Project Purpose Area 3: Youth Development/Youth Prevention and Intervention ➢ PPA 3: Purpose
To improve outcomes for youth by implementing trauma -informed, culturally relevant, developmentally appropriate, and community driven programs that prevent substance use, promote healthy decision making, and build the competencies needed for successful transition into adulthood. For the purposes of this RFP, youth are defined as individuals under the age of 21, consistent with the legal age for cannabis use and purchase.

➢ PPA 3: Program Expectations
Youth development, prevention, and intervention programs should:
• Address the prevention of youth cannabis use and addiction, including preventing exposure, delaying initiation, and reducing progression from use to misuse.
• Promote healthy behaviors and environments that minimize illness, injury, and other harms associated with substance use.
• Engage youth in intentional, prosocial activities within their communities, schools, peer groups, and families.
• Recognize and build upon youth strengths, fostering supportive relationships and providing opportunities for growth.
• Increase protective factors such as positive family support, caring adults, positive peer groups, strong sense of self and self-esteem, engagement in school and community activities

➢ PPA 3: Allowable Uses of Funds
Activities may include, but are not limited to:
• Youth Development and Skill Building
- Peer mentoring or community-based mentoring
- Job training, internships, and apprenticeships
- Leadership development and prosocial activities
• Prevention and Early Intervention
- Cannabis-specific substance use education
- Early intervention services for youth at risk of misuse - Family strengthening and caregiver support programs

PART I, Page | 13
• Behavioral Health Supports
- Cannabis substance use treatment for youth
- Trauma-informed group or individual services
- Case management and wraparound supports
• Justice Related Supports
- Juvenile record expungement clinics
- Diversion programs that redirect youth from justice involvement • Outreach and Engagement
- Youth outreach programs in schools, community centers, and neighborhoods
- Culturally responsive engagement strategies tailored to local needs

➢ PPA 3: Intended Outcomes
Projects should demonstrate how activities will:
• Reduce youth cannabis use and related harms.
• Strengthen protective factors and resilience.
• Improve youth engagement in school, family, and community. • Increase access to culturally relevant prevention and intervention services. • Support positive youth development and long-term wellbeing.

➢ PPA 3: Partnership Expectations
Applicants are encouraged to collaborate with:
• Schools and school-based service providers
• Youth serving community-based organizations
• Behavioral and mental health providers
• Family support and caregiver organizations
• Culturally rooted community groups
• Local government youth programs or youth advisory councils • Justice partners supporting diversion or expungement services

Project Purpose Area 4: Environmental Impacts
Projects funded under this purpose area must support environmental protection and mitigation strategies that address the harms associated with illicit cannabis activity.

Environmental impact work focuses on preventing human injury, protecting natural resources, and reducing exposure to hazardous physical, chemical, and biological agents in air, water, soil, food, and other environmental settings.

➢ PPA 4: Purpose
To strengthen a jurisdiction’s capacity to identify, evaluate, and mitigate environmental hazards resulting from cannabis-related activities. For the purposes of this RFP, environmental impact refers to efforts that protect human health and

PART I, Page | 14
ecological systems by limiting exposure to harmful substances and restoring damaged environments.

➢ PPA 4: Program Expectations
Environmental impact projects should:
• Prevent or reduce exposure to hazardous materials associated with illicit cannabis operations.
• Protect natural resources, including water, soil, air, and wildlife. • Improve environmental monitoring, remediation, and compliance. • Support community health and safety through environmental hazard mitigation.
• Ensure activities are science-based, culturally informed, and responsive to local environmental conditions.

➢ PPA 4: Allowable Uses of Funds
Activities may include, but are not limited to:
• Environmental Monitoring and Mitigation
- Sediment, soil, or water testing
- Pesticide impact assessments and mitigation
- Odor abatement and nuisance abatement efforts
- Aquatic protections and watershed restoration
• Hazardous Materials and Cleanup
- Hazardous waste cleanup at illicit cultivation or processing sites - Removal of chemicals, fertilizers, fuel, or other contaminants - Remediation of environmental damage caused by illegal cannabis activity • Infrastructure and Resource Protection
- Water system and water storage improvements
- Fire protection, fuel mitigation, and wildland/urban interface planning - Technology or software supporting environmental monitoring or compliance
• Regulatory and Compliance Activities
- Cultivation related code enforcement
- Environmental inspections and compliance checks
- Coordination with environmental health, forestry, or natural resource agencies

➢ PPA 4: Intended Outcomes
Projects should demonstrate how activities will:
• Reduce environmental harms associated with illicit cannabis operations • Improve community health and safety through environmental protections • Restore or protect natural resources and ecosystems

PART I, Page | 15
• Strengthen local capacity to monitor, prevent, and respond to environmental hazards
• Enhance compliance with environmental and land use regulations

➢ PPA 4: Partnership Expectations
Applicants are encouraged to collaborate with:
• Environmental health departments
• Forestry and natural resource agencies
• Water quality and watershed protection organizations
• Fire protection and hazardous materials teams
• Community-based environmental organizations

Grant Funding & Applicant Categories
A total of $125 million in state funding is available for local projects through this RFP, contingent on timely deposits to the BSCC through the Proposition 64 Initiative (the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act) via the State and Local Government Law Enforcement Account.

The total available funding will be awarded within four (4) categories . The amount of funding allocated to each category, and the maximum amount of grant funds an applicant in each category can apply for, are shown in the following table:

* The categorization of a city or county as small, medium, or large is based on city and county population figures published by the California Department of Finance (see Appendix B). Applicant should check Appendix B to determine the Applicant Category in which they will compete.

Applicant Category by
Jurisdiction Size*
Population
Size Range
Maximum
Grant
Amount
Percent
of Total
Available
Funding
Total
Available
Funding
1 Small Cities & Counties < 50,000 $1,000,000 15% $18,750,000 2 Medium Cities & Counties 50,000-
500,000 $4,500,000 35% $43,750,000
3 Large Cities & Counties > 500,000 $6,000,000 30% $37,500,000 4 Highest-rated proposals that did not receive an award in Categories 1, 2, or 3 will compete for remaining funds, regardless of size.
20% $25,000,000
Total Funding: $125,000,00

PART I, Page | 16
Recognizing that different sized jurisdictions have different capacities, resources, and needs, and in an effort to distribute funding equitably across the state, these categories were established by the original Prop. 64 Executive Steering Committee. Appl icants will initially compete in either Category 1, 2, or 3, and will compete only against other applicants within their category.

Funds allocated to Categories 1-3 will be awarded first. Once the funding assigned to a category is exhausted, any remaining proposals in that category will compete together in Category 4, regardless of county size.

If a proposal is only partially fundable within Category 1, 2, and/or 3 due to insufficient funds remaining, that proposal will receive full funding using funds from Category 4. If any of the three (3) categories do not have a sufficient number of qualified applicants to fully expend its allocation, the remaining funds will be added to Category 4.

If an applicant or grantee relinquishes an award, the BSCC may offer that award to the next qualifying applicant(s) on the ranked list.

Building the Project Budget
Applicants are strongly encouraged to request only the amount of funds needed to support their proposal and an amount that can be justified with supporting documentation.

All applicants must build their proposal, objectives, activities, timelines, and budg et information for all five (5) years of the grant cycle (which includes the 6 -month period for the completion and submission of the evaluation and audit requirements). For example, if an applicant is requesting $3,000,000, the budget detail must clearly illustrate how that $3,000,000 will be allocated across the entire five (5) years (see Budget Section for instructions).

No Match Requirement
There is no match requirement for the Prop 64 Grant Program.

Data Collection, Reporting and Evaluation Requirements
Projects selected for funding will be required to submit Quarterly Progress Reports (QPRs) to the BSCC and complete an evaluation of their grant -funded project that focuses on the achievement of the project’s goals and objectives. Completion of the evaluation requires the submission of a Local Evaluation Plan (LEP) and Local Evaluation Report (LER). A summary of the QPRs, LEP, and LER follows. More detailed information and evaluation-related resources will be made available to grantees.

The BSCC will also be conducting a statewide evaluation of the impact of projects funded by the Proposition 64 grant program. The focus of the statewide evaluation is to report on the impact of the grant funds across all, and subgroups, of the grant-funded projects. This

PART I, Page | 17
contrasts with grantees’ evaluation of their grant -funded projects which focus on their project’s specific goals and objectives. The primary data collection instrument for the BSCC’s statewide evaluation will be the QPR and information gathered from grante es through their LEPs, LERs, and interviews.

Quarterly Progress Reports
Grant recipients are required to submit QPRs to the BSCC. QPRs are a critical element in the BSCC’s monitoring and oversight process and the primary data collection tool for the BSCC’s statewide evaluation.

A brief outline of the types of information and data grantees will be required to report through the QPRs follows. Once grants are awarded, BSCC staff will update the design of the QPR to ensure the data collected reflects the projects that were funded. Applicable forms and instructions will be available to grantees on the BSCC’s website after the Grantee Orientation.

Types of data and information gathered through the QPRs:
• Grantee progress in implementing common project implementation activities (i.e., partnerships, staffing, training, enforcement activities, public safety activities, data collection/evaluation and quality assurance). For each activity, grantees will report their implementation status (not yet started, planning, implementation started, complete/established, N/A) and provide a narrative description of their progress, accomplishments, and/or challenges.
• Grantee progress in achieving their project’s goals and objectives. For each goal and its associated objectives, grantees will describe their progress toward achieving the goal, any challenges achieving the goal or objectives, and, if applicable, how the challenges are being addressed.
• Aggregate data for project activities and participants, if applicable, including:
o Activities undertaken and/or services provided or received during the reporting period by specific categories (e.g., storefront closures, nuisance abatement, environmental remediations, community surveys, community educational events, inspections, complaints responded to, etc.). o For project’s that plan to serve participants: Demographic information for age, gender identity, race or ethnicity, risk level, education, and employment status.
o Outcomes achieved (e.g., sustained closures, remediations completed, deterrence effects observed, number of inspections completed, number of illegal cultivation areas identified, number of youth with reduced assessed risk status, number of youth with reduc ed frequency of cannabis use, number of public awareness campaigns initiated, other positive outcomes).

PART I, Page | 18
Grantees will report on outcomes appropriate for their project and participants (if applicable).
• Project-level quantitative and qualitative (narrative) information related to local impacts due to the legalization of adult use recreational cannabis in California and project highlights or success stories.

Local Evaluation Plan (LEP)
The purpose of the LEP is to ensure that the grantee has a plan in place at the beginning of the project to collect the data and information necessary to, at the conclusion of the grant period, report on the extent to which the project’s goals and objectives, as included in the proposal, were achieved. The LEP is expected to include a detailed description of the data and information that will be collected for each goal and its associated objectives and detailed descriptions of the data management, analysis and reporting plans. The plan should be developed before the project starts or during project implementation before services or activities begin. Generally, modifications to the plan may occur during the grant period to address challenges or lessons learne d. Appendix C provides the guidelines for the LEP. The LEP will be due no later than December 31, 2026.

Local Evaluation Report (LER)
The purpose of the LER is to document the extent to which the project achieved its goals and objectives. Implementation of the LEP should ensure the grantee has the data and information necessary to do so. Appendix C provides the guidelines for the LER. The LER will be due no later than December 31, 2031.

Recommendation for Data Collection Evaluation Efforts
To ensure that grantees can comply with the BSCC’s data collection and reporting requirements in a meaningful way that benefits the applicants, their communities, and the State of California, it is highly recommended that grantees budget at least five (5) percent of the total grant award for data co llection and evaluation efforts. These efforts include the resources necessary to complete the QPRs, develop and write the LEP, implement the LEP, analyze data, and write the required LER.

Applicants are also encouraged to use outside evaluators to ensure objective and impartial evaluations. Specifically, applicants are encouraged to partner with institutions of higher learning universities, state universities, community colleges, and other research entities.

In addition, applicants are strongly encouraged to identify research partners early on and include them in the development of the proposal, so that the goals and objectives listed in the Project Work Plan are measurable.

PART I, Page | 19
Additional BSCC Grant Requirements
Grant Agreement
Applicants approved for funding by the BSCC Board are required to enter into a grant agreement with the BSCC. Grantees must agree to comply with all terms and conditions of the BSCC Grant Agreement. A sample BSCC Grant Agreement can be found on the BSCC Prop 64 website . The BSCC Grant Agreement start date is expected to be July 1, 2026.

A BSCC Grant Agreement is considered fully executed only after:
• It is signed by both the Grantee and the BSCC, and
• The BSCC is in receipt of all required attachments including documentation of signing authority (i.e., Governing Board Resolution).

Work, services, and encumbrances cannot begin prior to the grant agreement start date.

Any work, services, and encumbrances that occur after the start date but prior to grant agreement execution may not be reimbursed. Grantees and all subgrantees are responsible for maintaining their grant agreement, all invoices, records, and relevant documentation for at least three (3) years after the final payment under the grant agreement.

Please note: The BSCC may elect not to enter into a grant agreement with your organization if any of the following are true:
• The applicant had a BSCC grant terminated in the past three years. • The applicant has overdue deliverables that have not been submitted (e.g., Final Local Evaluation Report, Audit Report, etc.).
• The applicant has unpaid financial obligations due to the BSCC.

Signing Authority
Before the grant award can be finalized and funds awarded, successful applicants must submit either a resolution from its governing board that delegates authority to the individual authorized to execute the grant agreement or sufficient documentation indicating that the individual who signs the grant agreement has been vested with plenary authority to execute grant agreements (e.g., a municipal ordinance or city/county ordinance/charter delegating such authority to a city manager or department head).

This documentation is not required at the time of proposal submission, but applicants are advised that the grant agreement will not be fully executed, nor will any financial invoices be processed for reimbursement until the required documentation has been received by the BSCC. For reference, a sample governing board resolution can be found in Appendix D.

PART I, Page | 20
Supplanting Prohibited
Supplanting is the deliberate reduction in the amount of federal, state, or local funds being appropriated to an existing program or activity because grant funds have been awarded for the same purposes.

Supplanting is strictly prohibited for all BSCC grants. BSCC grant funds shall be used to support new program activities or to augment existing funds which expand current program activities. BSCC grant funds shall not be used to replace existing funds.

It is the responsibility of the grantee to ensure that supplanting does not occur. The grantee must keep clear and detailed financial records to show that grant funds are used only for allowable costs and activities.

Audit Requirements
Grantees are required to provide the BSCC with a program specific compliance audit that covers the service delivery period of the grant (July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2031).

The audit report will be due no later than December 31 , 2031. The program specific compliance audit must be performed by a certified public accountant or a participating county or city auditor that is organizationally independent from the participating county or city’s project financial management functions. Expenses for the final audit may be reimbursed for actual costs up to $25,000.

In addition, the BSCC reserves the right to call for a program compliance or financial audit at any time between the execution of the grant agreement and three (3) years following the end of the grant period.

The Department of General Services, the California State Auditor, and the Department of Finance or their designated representative shall also have the right to review and to copy any records and supporting documentation pertaining to the performance of this grant.

Mandatory Grantee Orientation
Following the start of the grant period, BSCC staff will conduct a mandatory grantee orientation (on a date to be determined later). The purpose of this mandatory session is to review the program requirements, invoicing, and budget modification processes, data collection and reporting requirements, as well as other grant management and monitoring activities. Typically, the project director, financial officer, and day-to-day contact must attend. Grantees are strongly encouraged to include their evaluator, if already hired/designated.

PART I, Page | 21
Travel Policies
Travel is usually warranted when personal contact by project staff is the most appropriate method of conducting project -related business. Travel to and from training conferences may also be allowed. The most economical method of transportation, in terms of direct expenses to the project and the employee's time away from the project, must be used.

Projects are required to include sufficient per diem and travel allocations for project - related personnel, as outlined in the grant award, to attend any mandated BSCC training conferences or workshops outlined in the terms of the program. • Units of Government . Units of government may follow either their own written travel and per diem policy or the State’s policy. Units of government that plan to use cars from a state, county, city, district carpool, or garage may budget either the mileage rate established by th e carpool or garage, or the state mileage rate, not to exceed the loaning agency rate.
• Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs). An NGO receiving the BSCC funds must use the State travel and per diem policy, unless the grantee’s written travel policy is more restrictive than the State's, in which case it must be used.

Reimbursement is allowed for the cost of commercial carrier fares, parking, bridge, and road tolls, as well as necessary taxi, bus, and streetcar fares. This policy applies equally to NGOs that receive grant funds directly from the BSCC and those that receive grant funds indirectly through a subcontract with another NGO that received a BSCC grant award.
• Out-of-State Travel . Out-of-state travel is restricted and only allowed in exceptional situations. Even if previously authorized in the grant award, grantees must submit to the BSCC a separate formal request (on grantee letterhead) to the BSCC for approval that includes a detailed justification and budget information.

Grantees must receive written approval from the BSCC prior to incurring expenses for out-of-state travel.
• International Travel. State grant funds may not be used for international travel.

Debarment, Fraud, Theft, or Embezzlement
It is the policy of the BSCC to protect grant funds from unreasonable risks of fraudulent, criminal, or other improper use. As such, the Board will not enter into contracts or provide reimbursement to applicants that have been:

1. debarred by any federal, state, or local government entities during the period of debarment; or

2. convicted of fraud, theft, or embezzlement of federal, state, or local government grant funds for a period of three years following conviction.

Furthermore, the BSCC requires grant recipients to provide an assurance that there has been no applicable debarment, disqualification, suspension, or removal from a federal,

PART I, Page | 22
state or local grant program on the part of the grantee at the time of application and that the grantee will immediately notify the BSCC should such debarment or conviction occur during the term of the grant contract.

The BSCC also requires that all grant recipients include, as a condition of award to a subgrantee or subcontractor, a requirement that the subgrantee or subcontractor will provide the same assurances to the grant recipient. If a grant recipient wishes to consider a subgrantee or subcontractor that has been debarred or convicted, the grant recipient must submit a written request for exception to the BSCC along with supporting documentation.

All applicants must complete a Certification of Compliance with the BSCC Policies Regarding Debarment, Fraud, Theft, and Embezzlement (shown in Appendix E) certifying that they are in compliance with the BSCC’s policies on debarment, fraud, theft and embezzlement.

Criteria for Non -Governmental Organizations Receiving BSCC Grant Funds as a Subcontractor
The Prop 64 Grant Program includes requirements that apply to nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) receiving BSCC grant funds as subcontractors. Grantees are responsible for ensuring that all subcontracted third parties continually meet these requirements as a condition of receiving any Prop 64 funds.

Any nongovernmental organization that receives Prop 64 as a subcontractor must:
• Be duly organized, in existence, and in good standing for at least six (6) months prior to the start date of the applicant’s grant agreement with the BSCC Note:

NGOs that have recently reorganized or merged with other qualified NGOs that were in existence prior to the six-month requirement are also eligible, provided all necessary agreements have been executed and filed with the California Secretary of State prior to the start date of the applicant’s grant agreement. • Be registered with the California Secretary of State’s Office, if applicable • Have a valid business license, Employer Identification Number (EIN), and/or Taxpayer Identification Number (if a sole proprietorship) • Possess any state or local licenses or certifications required to provide the proposed services (e.g., facility licensing by the Department of Health Care Services), if applicable.

Grantees must ensure that all subcontracted NGOs maintain compliance with these requirements throughout the duration of the grant. Failure to meet or maintain these requirements may result in disallowed costs, withholding of funds, or other corrective action by the BSCC. All applicants must complete a Criteria and Assurance for Non - Governmental Organizations that Receive BSCC Grant Funds as a Subcontractor (shown in Appendix F).

PART I, Page | 23
Comprehensive Monitoring Visits
BSCC staff will monitor each project to assess whether the project is in compliance with grant requirements and making progress toward grant objectives. Monitoring visits may also occur to provide technical assistance on fiscal, programmatic, evaluative, and administrative requirements.

For your reference, the Comprehensive Monitoring Visit checklist can be found on the BSCC Corrections Planning and Grant Programs homepage.

PART I, Page | 24
Overview of the RFP Process
Confirmation of Receipt of Proposal
Upon submission of a proposal, applicants will receive a confirmation email generated by the Submittable Application Portal stating that the proposal has been received.

Technical Compliance Review and Eligibility Assessment
All proposals will undergo a technical compliance review before moving forward to the proposal rating process. Items that will result in disqualification are listed in the table below. Applicants that are disqualified during this phase of the process will be notified by the BSCC.

DISQUALIFICATION CRITERIA

PLEASE READ THOROUGHLY

NOTE: Disqualification means the proposal will not move forward to the Scoring Panel for the Proposal Rating Process and, therefore, will NOT be considered for funding.

The following will result in an automatic disqualification:

• Proposal submission is not completed by 3:00 P.M. (PST) March 30, 2026. (Allow sufficient time to upload all required documents in the BSCC Submittable Application Portal. Do not wait until the last minute!) • Proposal and all required attachments are not submitted via the BSCC Submittable Application Portal. Email submissions will not be accepted. • The applicant is not an eligible county or city in California, per Revenue and Taxation Code § 34019, subd. (f)(3)(C).
• The applicant does not use the approved project budget template as found on the Prop 64 Grant homepage. Altered versions of the approved project budget template will not be accepted.
• The funding request exceeds the maximum award amount for the applicant’s category, as based on jurisdiction size, i.e.,
o The funding request from a small city or county exceeds $1 million. o The funding request from a medium city or county exceeds $4.5 million o The funding request from a large city or county exceeds $6 million • Any of the mandatory attachments are illegible, blank, will not open, or are corrupted.

PART I, Page | 25
Proposal Rating Process
Unless disqualified, proposals will advance to the Proposal Rating Process. Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the BSCC’s Grant Proposal Evaluation Process, and as described below. Scoring Panel members will read and assign ratings to each proposal in accordance with the prescribed rating factors listed in the table below. Scoring Panel members will base their ratings on how well an applicant addresses the criteria listed under each rating factor within the proposal narrative and budget sections. Scoring Panel member ratings, once submitted to the BSCC, will be final.

At the conclusion of this process, applicants will be notified of the funding recommendations. It is anticipated the BSCC Board will act on the recommendations at its meeting on June 25, 2026. Neither applicants nor their partners or subcontractors are permitted to contact members the Scoring Panel or the BSCC Board to discuss proposals.

Rating Factors
The five (5) Rating Factors that will be used and the maximum points assigned to each are shown in the table below. A percent value has been assigned to each of the five (5) Rating Factors, correlating to its importance within the overall project (refer to Percent of Total Value column).

Applicants will be asked to address Rating Factors 1-4 in narrative form as a part of their proposal. The Project Budget (Rating Factor 5) is a separate attachment.

Prop 64 Grant Program Rating Factors and Point Values
Rating Factor Point
Range
Percent of
Total Value
Weighted Rating
Factor Score
1 Project Need 0 - 5 20% 40
2 Project Description 0 - 5 40% 80
3 Project Organizational
Capacity & Coordination 0 - 5 15% 30
4 Project Evaluation 0 - 5 15% 30
5 Project Budget 0 - 5 10% 20
Maximum Rating Factor Score: 100% 200
Priority Points: 20
Maximum Possible Total Score: 220

PART I, Page | 26
Scoring Panel members will rate an applicant’s response to each Rating Factor on a scale from 0 to 5, according to the Six -Point Rating Scale shown below. Each Rating Factor then will be weighted according to the Percent of Total Value associated with the Rating Factor to arrive at the final Weighted Rating Factor Score. The Weighted Rating Factor Scores are then added together for a Total Score.

The maximum possible proposal score is 200 (not including priority points).

Six Point Rating Scale

Scoring Threshold/Minimum Score
To be considered for funding, a proposal must meet a threshold of 50 percent (70%) of the maximum rating factor score, i.e., a minimum score of 100 total points (before the addition of priority points), to be considered for funding.

Priority Points
Revenue and Taxation Code section 34019, subd ivision (f)(3)(C), mandates that the “Board of State and Community Corrections shall prioritize grant awards for local governments whose grant application includes illicit cannabis enforcement.”

For the purposes of the Prop 64 Grant Cohort 4 RFP, the BSCC will provide an additional 20 points to the final weighted score of an applicant’s proposal, if that applicant budgets a minimum of 70 percent of its total grant fund request for illicit cannabis enforcement activities, under Project Purpose Area 1 (Public Safety/Enforcement). Additional instructions will be provided in the Project Budget Attachment.

An applicant can earn priority points only after the minimum scoring threshold is met.

If awarded Prop 64 Grant Cohort 4 funding, the applicant’s proposed budget will be incorporated by reference into the BSCC Grant Agreement. Therefore, grant recipients who were provided priority points MUST maintain a minimum of 70 percent of its project expenditures on illicit cannabis enforcement activities in order to continue receiving grant- funded reimbursements.

PART I, Page | 27
BSCC Funding Decisions

1. Applicants will first compete for funds within the applicable Applicant Category (1, 2 or 3), based on jurisdiction size, according to the table below:

2. Once the proposals have been scored and ranked, the BSCC will move down the ranked lists to fund all qualified applicants in Categories 1, 2 and 3 until all funds assigned to those categories are exhausted.

3. If a proposal is only partially fundable within Category 1, 2, or 3 due to insufficient funds remaining in that category, that proposal will receive full funding using funds from Category 4. Note: If Category 1, 2, or 3 do not have a sufficient number of qualified applicants to fully expend its allocation, the leftover funds will be added to Category 4.

4. Once any partially funded proposals from Categories 1, 2, or 3 are fully funded, all remaining qualified proposals will be moved to Category 4 and compete for the remaining funds regardless of county size. This ensures that only the highest quality proposals in Categories 1, 2, and 3 are funded.

In the event two proposals have identical proposal scores, the tie will be resolved by evaluating the individual rating factor scores of the two proposals, starting with the highest weighted rating factor (Rating Factor 2, Project Description). If an identical score occurs on this rating factor, rating factor scores will be used based on the descending weight valued until the tie is broken.

Applicant Category by
Jurisdiction Size*
Population
Size Range
Maximum
Grant
Amount
Percent
of Total
Available
Funding
Total
Available
Funding
1 Small Cities & Counties < 50,000 $1,000,000 15% $18,750,000 2 Medium Cities & Counties 50,000-
500,000 $4,500,000 35% $43,750,000
3 Large Cities & Counties > 500,000 $6,000,000 30% $37,500,000 4 Highest-rated proposals that did not receive an award in Categories 1, 2, or 3 will compete for remaining funds, regardless of size.
20% $25,000,000
Total Funding: $125,000,00

PART I, Page | 28
Key Dates
The following table shows a timeline of key dates related to the Prop 64 Grant solicitation process.

Activity Date
Release Request for Proposals February 13, 2026
Grant Information Session March 2, 2026
Letter of Intent Due (optional) March 13, 2026
Proposals Due to the BSCC Submittable Application Portal by 3:00 p.m. PST March 30, 2026
Proposal Rating Process and Development of Funding
Recommendations
April 2026 to
June 2026
BSCC Board Considers Funding Recommendations June 25, 2026 Notices to Applicants June 25, 2026
Grant Period Begins July 1, 2026
Mandatory Cohort 4 Grantee Orientation August 2026
Local Evaluation Plan (LEP) Due November 20,
2026
Grant Service Delivery Period Ends June 30, 2031
Final Evaluation Report (LER) and Audit Due/Grant Ends December 31, 2031

PART II, Page | 29

The following section contains pertinent information on how to complete the Prop 64 Cohort 4 Grant Proposal Package. The proposal and all required attachments are provided on the BSCC Prop 64 Grant homepage.

BSCC Submittable Application Portal
Applicants will complete the Prop 64 Cohort 4 application by accessing the BSCC Submittable Application Portal (refer to Submittable Instructions beginning on page 3) and responding to a series of prompts.

The Submittable Application Portal will not allow applicants to submit the narrative sections until they comply with all character limit requirements. In addition, the Submittable Application Portal will not allow applicants to submit their application without uploading all required document attachments.

Character Counter
The BSCC Submittable Application Portal includes an automatically enabled character counter. This feature shows the number of characters used and the remaining number of characters before the limit is met. Character limits include all letters/numbers, punctuation, and spaces.

If the limit is exceeded, a red prompt will appear with the message "You have exceeded the character limit."

Proposal Narrative and Budget / Rating Factors
Proposal Abstract
The applicant will be prompted to complete a proposal abstract, which should provide a summary of the proposed project. This section will not be included in the rating of the Proposal but will be posted to the BSCC website if the project is funded . The total character count for this section is 2800 (approximately equivalent to 1 page in Microsoft Word).

PART II: PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

PART II, Page | 30

Proposal Rating Factors
The five (5) rating factors will be addressed in two separate parts, the Proposal Narrative and the Project Budget, as shown in the table below:

Section Prop 64 Rating Factors Percent of
Total Value Addressed in:
1 Project Need 20%
Proposal
Narrative
2 Project Description 40%
3 Project Organizational Capacity
and Coordination 15%
4 Project Evaluation 15%
5 Project Budget 10% Separate Excel
Attachment

Proposal Narrative
Applicants will complete the Proposal Narrative by responding to a series of prompts once inside the Submittable Application Portal.

The Proposal Narrative must address Rating Factors 1 -4: the Project Need, Project Description, Project Organizational Capacity and Coordination and Project Evaluation sections, while aligning with the contents of the Project Budget Attachment (Rating Factor 5). Sources cited must be included within Proposal Narrative.

Within each section, address the Rating Criteria (found on the following pages) in a cohesive, comprehensive narrative format. Within the Proposal Narrative, each Rating Factor has a character limit as shown below:

Rating Factor Total
Characters
Microsoft Word
Equivalent*
1 Project Need 8,400 Up to 3 (Three) Pages
2 Project Description 14,000 Up to 5 (Five) Pages
3 Project Organizational Capacity and
Coordination 5,600 Up to 2 (Two) Pages
4 Project Evaluation 5,600 Up to 2 (Two) Pages
*Assumes text is in a Microsoft Word document in Arial 12-point font with one-inch margins on all four sides and at 1.5-line spacing.

PART II, Page | 31

Section 1: Project Need (Percent of Total Value: 20%)
Within this section, address the criteria that defines the Project Need rating factor (see table below) in a cohesive, comprehensive, and concise narrative format.

Project Need: The applicant described a need that is pertinent to the intent of the grant.

The elements that comprise this Rating Factor are listed below. Addressing each element does not in itself merit a high rating; although each element is to be addressed (when applicable), it is the quality of the response to each t hat will be evaluated. The response will be evaluated with a single rating based on a scale of 0-5.

1.1 Demonstrate how the need(s) are related to the intent of Proposition 64.

1.2 Demonstrate how the need(s) are related to the selected Project Purpose Areas.

1.3 Describe local service gaps that contribute to the need for the proposed Prop 64 project are identified.

1.4 Provide relevant local qualitative and/or quantitative data with citations in support of the Prop 64 project need(s).

1.5 Describe the process that was used to determine the need(s), including soliciting input from key stakeholders (e.g., community, public, private).

PART II, Page | 32

Section 2: Project Description (Percent of Total Value: 40%) Within this section, address the criteria that defines the Project D escription rating factor (see table below) in a cohesive, comprehensive, and concise narrative format.

Project Description: The applicant provided a description of the project that is related to the identified need and the intent of the grant. The elements that comprise this Rating Factor are listed below. Addressing each element does not in itself merit a high rating; although each element is to be addressed (when applicable), it is the quality of the response to each that will be evaluated. The response will be evaluated with a single rating based on a scale of 0-5.

2.1 Describe the proposed project that will address the need(s) discussed in the Project Need section. The description should:
• Describe the components of the proposed project that links to each corresponding Project Purpose Area (PPA).
• Describe the target area and/or population which will be the focus of the project, including how and why it was selected.
• For projects serving participants , provide an estimate of how many individuals will be served and the process for determining which services/activities an individual/group will receive.

2.2 Describe the proposed Prop 64 project goals and objectives and the impact that includes the relationship to the need and intent of the Prop 64 Grant. • Attachment: Also provide a completed Work Plan ( Appendix G) that is appropriate for the proposed project and aligns with the need and intent of Prop 64 Grant. The plan identifies the top three goals and objectives, with a minimum of one goal pertaining to each identified PPA, as well as how these will be achieved in terms of the activities, responsible staff/partner agencies, outcome measures, data so urces and start and end dates. The work plan addresses selected PPAs (as applicable) that are related to the need and intent of the grant.

2.3 Provide rationale for the proposed Prop 64 project which includes:
• The selection of evidence -based, promising, informed, or innovative practices, interventions, and services, as applicable.
• A description of relevant evidence or research to support the selection of the proposed project for the target area/population and the community. (See Appendix H for resource information.)

2.4 Describe, in relation to 1.3, what extent to which the proposed Proposition 64 project will use existing resources or projects.

PART II, Page | 33

Section 3. Project Organizational Capacity and Coordination (Percent of Total Value: 15%)
Within this section, address the criteria that defines the Project O rganizational Capacity and Coordination rating factor (see table below) in a cohesive, comprehensive, and concise narrative format.

Project Organizational Capacity and Coordination : The applicant described their organization’s ability to implement the project. The elements that comprise this Rating Factor are listed below. Addressing each element does not in itself merit a high rating; although each element is to be addressed (when applicable), it is the quality of the response to each that will be evaluated. T he response will be evaluated with a single rating based on a scale of 0-5.

3.1 Describe the applicant’s ability to administer the proposed project. In the description include:
• What the applicant’s current infrastructure is for administering the proposed program.
• The staffing required and available to operate the project including staff qualifications and training.
• The extent to which existing resources will be used.
• Project management and oversight to ensure the proposed project is implemented as intended.

3.2 If collaborating with other partner agencies, describe:
• The process to select project partners or potential partners (agencies, contractors, stakeholders, private and/or public).
• Suitability of the services provided by the project partners or potential partners.
• If partners are to be selected after the grant is awarded, then specify the process and criteria for selecting those partners.

3.3 Describe the timeline for the execution of contract(s) and the implementation of services such that they are in place in a reasonable timeframe to support the project. Include a description of readiness to proceed, if funded.

PART II, Page | 34

Section 4. Project Evaluation (Percent of Total Value: 15%) Within this section, address the criteria that defines the Project Evaluation Rating Factor (see table below) in a cohesive, comprehensive, and concise narrative format.

Project Evaluation: The applicant described how it will collect data and evaluate the effectiveness of the project. The elements that comprise this Rating Factor are listed below. Addressing each element does not in itself merit a high rating; although each element is to be addressed (when applicable), it is the quality of the response to each that will be evaluated. The response will be evaluated with a single rating based on a scale of 0-5.

4.1 Describe the plan to determine the staff and/or entity that will be conducting the project evaluation and how monitoring activities will be incorporated into the various phases of the project (e.g., start-up, implementation, service delivery period).
• Provide the qualifications of the staff or evaluator selected to evaluate the project, as they relate to experience with evaluation, data collection, analysis.
• If an evaluator is to be selected after the grant is awarded, specify the process and criteria for selection.
• Describe the preliminary plan for monitoring the project to ensure that the project components are implemented as intended.

4.2 Describe the plan to collect data to measure the success and impact of your project in line with the goals and objectives listed in the Work Plan (see Rating Factor 2.2). If the outcomes you propose to track require you to collect data from an outside entity, describe your plan for obtaining data and entering into data sharing agreements if needed.

PART II, Page | 35

Section 5. Project Budget (Percent of Total Value: 10%) Within this section, address the criteria that defines the Project Budget rating factor (see table below) in a cohesive, comprehensive, and concise narrative format.

NOTE: The Project Budget document is a separate Excel attachment that when completed will be uploaded into the BSCC Submittable Application Portal.

Project Budget (Attachment): The applicant provided a complete Project Budget Attachment for the project. The elements against which the Budget Attachment will be rated are listed below. Addressing each element does not in itself merit a high rating; although each element is to be addressed (when applicable), it is the quality of the response to each that will be evaluated. The response will be evaluated with a single rating based on a scale of 0-5.

5.1 Please provide complete and detailed budget information in each section of the Prop 64 Grant Project Budget Attachment (see instructions below) that includes:
• Line-item detail sufficient to describe each requested budget item. • A brief explanation (narrative) justifying each budget line item.

5.2 For each section, ensure expenses are appropriate for the grant’s intent, the project’s goals, and planned activities within the selected Project Purpose Area(s), as applicable.

Project Budget Instructions
As part of the application process, applicants are required to complete and upload a Project Budget (“Prop 64 Cohort 4 Budget Attachment”) in the identified field on the BSCC Submittable Application Portal. The Prop 64 Cohort 4 Budget Attachment (an Excel workbook) is provided on the BSCC Prop 64 Grant homepage . A sample is provided in Appendix I.

• Detailed instructions for completing the Budget Attachment are listed in the Instructions tab of the Excel workbook.

• DO NOT USE AN ALTERED VERSION OF THE BSCC BUDGET TEMPLATE.

Applicants that do not use the BSCC Budget Template will be disqualified.

Applicants are solely responsible for the accuracy and completeness of the information entered in the Budget Attachment. All project costs must be directly related to the objectives and activities in the project.

Do not submit an annual budget; the grant funds requested in the Budget Attachment must cover the entire 5-year grant service period as well as the 6-month evaluation and audit period.

PART II, Page | 36

Generally, once an award is approved by the Board, the proposed budget becomes the approved grant budget and will be incorporated in the standard BSCC Grant Agreement.

However, applicants should be aware that budgets will be subject to review and approval by BSCC staff to ensure all proposed costs listed within the Project Budget are allowable and eligible for reimbursement. In these situations, the revised grant budget will be used for the BSCC Grant Agreement. For additional guidance related to grant budgets, refer to the February 2026 BSCC Grant Administration Guide.

PART II, Page | 37

Mandatory Attachments for RFP Submission
The following five attachments must be uploaded into the BSCC Submittable Application Portal when prompted . BLANK ATTACHMENTS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

All of these attachments can be downloaded from the Prop 64 Grant homepage.

1. Project Budget Attachment
See “Project Budget Instructions” on preceding page, and sample “Project Budget” in Appendix I.

2. Letter of Eligibility
Applicants must provide a Letter of Eligibility detailing how the city or county meets the eligibility criteria contained in the Revenue and Taxation Code, § 34019, subd. (f)(3)(C).

There is no required format for the Letter of Eligibility. An applicant may either use the template provided on the Prop 64 Grant homepage or create their own (see Appendix A as a sample). However, if an applicant creates their own letter, it must:
✓ Be on the county or city letterhead.
✓ Include the titles of the regulations, ordinances, or amendments to local government charters.
✓ Include the dates the regulations, ordinances, or amendments to local government charters became enacted/effective.

3. Certification of Compliance with BSCC Policies on Debarment, Fraud, Theft and Embezzlement
Please see Appendix E as a sample. This form is available online and must be completed, signed, and uploaded into the BSCC Submittable Application Portal.

4. Criteria and Assurance for Non -Governmental Organizations that Receive BSCC Grant Funds as a Subcontractor
Please see Appendix F as a sample. This form is available online and must be completed, signed, and uploaded into the BSCC Submittable Application Portal.

5. Project Work Plan
Please see Appendix G as a sample. This form is available online and must be completed and uploaded into the BSCC Submittable Application Portal. *Governing Board Resolution (optional at time of submission) Please see Appendix D for sample language. An entity’s governing board’s resolution is optional for upload at the time of application but must be submitted before the g rant agreement can be executed.

APPENDICES, Page | 38

APPENDICES

APPENDICES, Page | 39

REQUIRED ATTACHMENT: Applicants will be prompted to upload this document to the BSCC Submittable Application Portal. This is a sample.

Download a fillable form from the Prop 64 Grant homepage.

Before grant funds can be awarded and a contract executed under the Proposition 64 Cohort 4 Grant Program, the applying local jurisdiction (and all jurisdictions receiving funds as a subcontractor or partner) must provide assurance that it is eligible to r eceive funding pursuant to Section 34019, subdivision (f)(3)(C) of the Revenue and Taxation Code, as amended by Senate Bill 141 (2025). It specifically provides that a local government may be eligible for a grant “only if it either allows the retail sale o f cannabis in storefronts or, for jurisdictions with a population of 10,000 residents or less, allows cannabis delivery in the jurisdiction that serves both medicinal and adult-use consumers.” For definitions, please refer to the Revenue and Taxation Code, Section 34010 and the BSCC Glossary (Appendix J).

Below is sample assurance language that, at a minimum, must be included in the Letter of Eligibility submitted to the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC).

Applicants may use the form provided by the BSCC or create their own.

As an applicant, our jurisdiction allows:

The retail sale of cannabis in storefronts.

Regulation(s), ordinance(s), and or amendment(s) to our local government charter(s) that ensure the above are true. Provide information including enacted/effective date(s) here: >

For jurisdictions with a population of 10,000 residents or fewer:

As an applicant, our jurisdiction allows:

Cannabis delivery in the jurisdiction that serves both medicinal and adult-use consumers.

Regulation(s), ordinance(s), and or amendment(s) to our local government charter(s) that ensure the above are true. Provide information including enacted/effective date(s) here: >

Documentation detailed above will be provided to the BSCC upon request.

AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE
(This document must be signed by the person who is authorized to sign the Grant Agreement.)

NAME OF AUTHORIZED OFFICER TITLE TELEPHONE NUMBER

STREET ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP CODE

EMAIL ADDRESS

AUTHORIZED OFFICER SIGNATURE (Blue Ink Only or E-signature) DATE

APPENDIX A
SAMPLE Letter of Eligibility

APPENDICES, Page | 40

Note: These tables are provided so that eligible jurisdictions know which applicant category they will compete in (small, medium or large), however, inclusion in these tables does not mean a local government is eligible for a grant. (Rev. & Tax. Code, § 34019, subd. (f)(3)(C).)

Source: CA Department of Finance, January 2025 City Population Ranked by Size and State/County Population Estimates with Annual Percent Change, January 1, 2024 and 2025.

Large Counties (Population > 500,000)
If eligible, may apply for up to $6 million
County Population
Alameda 1,662,482
Contra Costa 1,158,225
Fresno 1,037,053
Kern 923,961
Los Angeles 9,876,811
Orange 3,175,427
Riverside 2,495,640
Sacramento 1,604,745
San Bernardino 2,207,424
San Diego 3,330,139
San Francisco 842,027
San Joaquin 805,856
San Mateo 748,337
Santa Clara 1,922,259
Stanislaus 555,765
Ventura 829,005

Large Cities (Population >500,000)
If eligible, may apply for up to $6 million
City Population
Fresno City 557,032
Los Angeles City 3,835,263
Sacramento City 527,979
San Diego City 1,408,937
San Francisco City 842,027
San Jose City 979,415

APPENDIX B
California Counties and Cities by Population Category

APPENDICES, Page | 41
Medium Counties (Population 50,001–500,000)
If eligible, may apply for up to $4.5 million
County Population
Butte 207,525
El Dorado 190,770
Humboldt 133,817
Imperial 186,499
Kings 154,015
Lake 67,254
Madera 162,599
Marin 254,550
Mendocino 89,827
Merced 293,080
Monterey 438,831
Napa 136,124
Nevada 100,354
Placer 421,446
San Benito 66,822
San Luis Obispo 279,337
Santa Barbara 447,132
Santa Cruz 263,710
Shasta 180,201
Solano 449,839
Sonoma 482,848
Sutter 100,257
Tehama 64,827
Tulare 487,209
Tuolumne 54,357
Yolo 225,433
Yuba 85,023

APPENDICES, Page | 42
Medium Cities (Population 50,001–500,000)
If eligible, may apply for up to $4.5 million
City Population
Alameda City 79,020
Alhambra City 82,374
Aliso Viejo City 50,213
Anaheim City 341,773
Antioch City 116,781
Apple Valley Town 75,262
Arcadia City 56,116
Bakersfield City 419,238
Baldwin Park City 70,848
Beaumont City 59,708
Bellflower City 76,656
Berkeley City 128,348
Brentwood City 65,747
Buena Park City 82,667
Burbank City 106,146
Camarillo City 68,927
Carlsbad City 116,368
Carson City 91,812
Cathedral City 51,651
Chico City 113,847
Chino City 95,206
Chino Hills City 77,314
Chula Vista City 281,401
Citrus Heights City 86,280
Clovis City 129,121
Colton City 53,278
Compton City 93,692
Concord City 122,650
Corona City 159,157
Costa Mesa City 110,321
Covina City 51,090
Cupertino City 59,831
Daly City 102,155

APPENDICES, Page | 43
Davis City 65,423
Delano City 52,831
Diamond Bar City 53,539
Downey City 111,871
Dublin City 74,691
Eastvale City 69,799
El Cajon City 104,932
El Monte City 107,986
Elk Grove City 182,842
Encinitas City 61,956
Escondido City 150,425
Fairfield City 120,720
Folsom City 92,577
Fontana City 219,172
Fountain Valley City 56,560
Fremont City 232,619
Fullerton City 141,469
Garden Grove City 171,492
Gardena City 60,263
Gilroy City 62,205
Glendale City 192,212
Glendora City 51,254
Hanford City 61,238
Hawthorne City 85,653
Hayward City 162,359
Hemet City 91,934
Hesperia City 101,792
Highland City 57,088
Huntington Beach City 193,134
Huntington Park City 53,051
Indio City 92,539
Inglewood City 106,305
Irvine City 318,629
Jurupa Valley City 105,928
La Habra City 61,202
La Mesa City 60,908

APPENDICES, Page | 44
Laguna Niguel City 65,257
Lake Elsinore City 73,783
Lake Forest City 87,639
Lakewood City 80,596
Lancaster City 177,768
Lincoln City 54,520
Livermore City 85,899
Lodi City 67,093
Long Beach City 462,561
Lynwood City 66,660
Madera City 66,443
Manteca City 93,733
Menifee City 115,316
Merced City 98,039
Milpitas City 81,915
Mission Viejo City 91,740
Modesto City 219,765
Montebello City 62,732
Monterey Park City 59,269
Moreno Valley City 210,823
Mountain View City 86,513
Murrieta City 111,789
Napa City 77,736
National City 58,965
Newport Beach City 82,654
Norwalk City 101,075
Novato City 51,690
Oakland City 426,457
Oceanside City 174,340
Ontario City 184,404
Orange City 139,724
Oxnard City 198,733
Palm Desert City 51,980
Palmdale City 167,097
Palo Alto City 68,794
Paramount City 52,371

APPENDICES, Page | 45
Pasadena City 140,631
Perris City 81,240
Petaluma City 59,094
Pico Rivera City 60,858
Pittsburg City 76,374
Placentia City 53,982
Pleasanton City 77,232
Pomona City 153,042
Porterville City 63,622
Poway City 50,379
Rancho Cordova City 85,451
Rancho Cucamonga City 175,992
Redding City 93,534
Redlands City 73,488
Redondo Beach City 68,091
Redwood City 82,073
Rialto City 105,565
Richmond City 113,594
Riverside City 320,337
Rocklin City 73,172
Rosemead City 50,501
Roseville City 158,494
Salinas City 160,645
San Bernardino City 222,727
San Buenaventura (Ventura) City 108,985
San Clemente City 62,865
San Jacinto City 54,990
San Leandro City 87,813
San Marcos City 97,123
San Mateo City 104,315
San Rafael City 59,885
San Ramon City 83,391
Santa Ana City 315,325
Santa Barbara City 86,451
Santa Clara City 134,587
Santa Clarita City 232,377

APPENDICES, Page | 46
Santa Cruz City 62,972
Santa Maria City 112,208
Santa Monica City 93,212
Santa Rosa City 178,452
Santee City 59,568
Simi Valley City 124,815
South Gate City 92,955
South San Francisco City 65,397
Stockton City 320,877
Sunnyvale City 159,673
Temecula City 112,220
Thousand Oaks City 122,468
Torrance City 143,261
Tracy City 98,215
Tulare City 73,002
Turlock City 72,219
Tustin City 79,326
Union City 66,657
Upland City 79,140
Vacaville City 103,181
Vallejo City 122,207
Victorville City 141,013
Visalia City 146,978
Vista City 101,599
Walnut Creek City 69,927
Watsonville City 51,101
West Covina City 109,428
West Sacramento City 55,403
Westminster City 90,295
Whittier City 87,850
Woodland City 61,623
Yorba Linda City 66,267
Yuba City 70,453
Yucaipa City 54,838

APPENDICES, Page | 47
Small Counties (Population < 50,000)
If eligible, may apply for up to $1 million
County Population
Alpine 1,177
Amador 39,563
Calaveras 44,722
Colusa 22,026
Del Norte 26,544
Glenn 29,369
Inyo 18,800
Lassen 28,716
Mariposa 16,917
Modoc 8,491
Mono 12,684
Plumas 18,885
Sierra 3,170
Siskiyou 43,311
Trinity 15,884

Small Cities (Population < 50,000)
If eligible, may apply for up to $1 million
City Population
Adelanto City 37,150
Agoura Hills City 19,904
Albany City 20,578
Alturas City 2,657
Amador City 196
American Canyon City 22,396
Anderson City 10,967
Angels City 3,570
Arcata City 19,001
Arroyo Grande City 17,910
Artesia City 16,359
Arvin City 19,991
Atascadero City 30,134
Atherton Town 7,007

APPENDICES, Page | 48
Atwater City 31,862
Auburn City 13,286
Avalon City 3,383
Avenal City 13,315
Azusa City 48,988
Banning City 31,949
Barstow City 24,811
Bell City 33,315
Bell Gardens City 38,471
Belmont City 28,206
Belvedere City 2,058
Benicia City 26,195
Beverly Hills City 31,945
Big Bear Lake City 4,953
Biggs City 1,973
Bishop City 3,850
Blue Lake City 1,136
Blythe City 15,400
Bradbury City 902
Brawley City 28,952
Brea City 47,900
Brisbane City 4,676
Buellton City 5,091
Burlingame City 31,552
Calabasas City 22,797
Calexico City 40,073
California City 13,317
Calimesa City 10,994
Calipatria City 6,061
Calistoga City 5,160
Campbell City 43,281
Canyon Lake City 11,004
Capitola City 9,670
Carmel-by-the-Sea City 3,049
Carpinteria City 12,735
Ceres City 49,305

APPENDICES, Page | 49
Cerritos City 47,871
Chowchilla City 18,742
Claremont City 37,299
Clayton City 10,743
Clearlake City 16,533
Cloverdale City 8,678
Coachella City 44,384
Coalinga City 17,608
Colfax City 1,996
Colma Town 1,411
Colusa City 6,536
Commerce City 12,146
Corcoran City 21,612
Corning City 8,268
Coronado City 22,610
Corte Madera City 9,966
Cotati City 7,290
Crescent City 6,056
Cudahy City 22,132
Culver City 40,403
Cypress City 49,499
Dana Point City 32,730
Danville Town 42,960
Del Mar City 3,950
Del Rey Oaks City 1,546
Desert Hot Springs City 33,262
Dinuba City 26,025
Dixon City 20,174
Dorris City 830
Dos Palos City 5,712
Duarte City 23,746
Dunsmuir City 1,628
East Palo Alto City 29,133
El Centro City 46,007
El Cerrito City 25,862
El Paso de Robles City 31,061

APPENDICES, Page | 50
El Segundo City 16,983
Emeryville City 13,471
Escalon City 7,232
Etna City 662
Eureka City 26,122
Exeter City 10,233
Fairfax City 7,407
Farmersville City 10,392
Ferndale City 1,361
Fillmore City 17,035
Firebaugh City 8,714
Fort Bragg City 7,187
Fort Jones City 663
Fortuna City 12,198
Foster City 32,658
Fowler City 7,667
Galt City 26,092
Goleta City 32,747
Gonzales City 8,434
Grand Terrace City 12,803
Grass Valley City 13,364
Greenfield City 20,785
Gridley City 7,302
Grover Beach City 12,411
Guadalupe City 8,851
Gustine City 6,021
Half Moon Bay City 11,303
Hawaiian Gardens City 13,561
Healdsburg City 10,972
Hercules City 26,225
Hermosa Beach City 19,014
Hidden Hills City 1,746
Hillsborough Town 11,254
Hollister City 43,492
Holtville City 5,685
Hughson City 7,977

APPENDICES, Page | 51
Huron City 6,932
Imperial Beach City 26,369
Imperial City 22,866
Indian Wells City 4,862
Industry City 431
Ione City 9,037
Irwindale City 1,509
Isleton City 764
Jackson City 4,822
Kerman City 17,535
King City 14,344
Kingsburg City 13,285
La Canada Flintridge City 20,160
La Habra Heights City 5,503
La Mirada City 48,233
La Palma City 15,110
La Puente City 37,546
La Quinta City 38,796
La Verne City 32,300
Lafayette City 25,054
Laguna Beach City 22,763
Laguna Hills City 30,309
Laguna Woods City 17,183
Lakeport City 5,026
Larkspur City 12,731
Lathrop City 38,596
Lawndale City 30,860
Lemon Grove City 28,163
Lemoore City 27,692
Lindsay City 12,725
Live Oak City 9,658
Livingston City 14,441
Loma Linda City 25,322
Lomita City 20,407
Lompoc City 43,424
Loomis Town 6,689

APPENDICES, Page | 52
Los Alamitos City 12,006
Los Altos City 31,720
Los Altos Hills Town 8,548
Los Banos City 48,896
Los Gatos Town 33,355
Loyalton City 730
Malibu City 10,604
Mammoth Lakes Town 7,040
Manhattan Beach City 34,051
Maricopa City 1,024
Marina City 23,086
Martinez City 36,817
Marysville City 12,717
Maywood City 24,496
McFarland City 14,213
Mendota City 12,710
Menlo Park City 33,311
Mill Valley City 13,688
Millbrae City 23,164
Monrovia City 38,920
Montague City 1,195
Montclair City 37,526
Monte Sereno City 3,637
Monterey City 27,273
Moorpark City 34,754
Moraga City 16,637
Morgan Hill City 46,599
Morro Bay City 10,404
Mount Shasta City 3,179
Mountain House City 28,795
Needles City 4,791
Nevada City 3,336
Newark City 48,886
Newman City 12,389
Norco City 25,221
Oakdale City 23,231

APPENDICES, Page | 53
Oakley City 46,826
Ojai City 7,559
Orange Cove City 9,717
Orinda City 19,351
Orland City 8,704
Oroville City 19,653
Pacific Grove City 14,871
Pacifica City 37,217
Palm Springs City 44,476
Palos Verdes Estates City 12,999
Paradise Town 11,088
Parlier City 14,649
Patterson City 25,868
Piedmont City 10,806
Pinole City 18,261
Pismo Beach City 7,804
Placerville City 10,642
Pleasant Hill City 33,601
Plymouth City 1,122
Point Arena City 452
Port Hueneme City 20,838
Portola City 2,098
Portola Valley Town 4,285
Rancho Mirage City 17,120
Rancho Palos Verdes City 40,727
Rancho Santa Margarita City 46,341
Red Bluff City 14,466
Reedley City 26,603
Ridgecrest City 28,386
Rio Dell City 3,232
Rio Vista City 10,338
Ripon City 15,753
Riverbank City 26,090
Rohnert Park City 44,062
Rolling Hills City 1,677
Rolling Hills Estates City 8,545

APPENDICES, Page | 54
Ross City 2,309
San Anselmo City 12,551
San Bruno City 42,631
San Carlos City 29,535
San Dimas City 34,209
San Fernando City 23,692
San Gabriel City 38,953
San Joaquin City 3,654
San Juan Bautista City 2,078
San Juan Capistrano City 35,329
San Luis Obispo City 49,534
San Marino City 12,330
San Pablo City 31,507
Sand City 373
Sanger City 27,037
Santa Fe Springs City 18,680
Santa Paula City 31,658
Saratoga City 31,110
Sausalito City 6,941
Scotts Valley City 11,831
Seal Beach City 24,400
Seaside City 32,019
Sebastopol City 7,367
Selma City 24,585
Shafter City 23,455
Shasta Lake City 10,133
Sierra Madre City 10,870
Signal Hill City 11,421
Solana Beach City 12,986
Soledad City 27,310
Solvang City 5,755
Sonoma City 10,507
Sonora City 5,116
South El Monte City 19,535
South Lake Tahoe City 21,022
South Pasadena City 26,287

APPENDICES, Page | 55
St Helena City 5,349
Stanton City 40,552
Suisun City 29,036
Susanville City 12,270
Sutter Creek City 2,538
Taft City 7,087
Tehachapi City 11,476
Tehama City 428
Temple City 36,322
Tiburon Town 8,910
Trinidad City 296
Truckee Town 16,928
Tulelake City 851
Twentynine Palms City 24,257
Ukiah City 16,325
Vernon City 207
Villa Park City 5,738
Walnut City 28,214
Wasco City 26,235
Waterford City 9,169
Weed City 2,716
West Hollywood City 35,284
Westlake Village City 7,918
Westmorland City 2,084
Wheatland City 4,012
Wildomar City 37,077
Williams City 5,589
Willits City 4,838
Willows City 6,475
Windsor Town 25,625
Winters City 8,021
Woodlake City 8,005
Woodside Town 5,206
Yountville City 2,638
Yreka City 7,879
Yucca Valley Town 22,027

APPENDICES, Page | 56

FOR REFERENCE ONLY

Guidelines for the Local Evaluation Plan and Local Evaluation Report For the Prop 64 Cohort 4 grant program, the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) requires grantees to complete a Level One Evaluation of their grant -funded project. A Level One Evaluation focuses on achievement of the project’s goals and objectives. Demonstration of completing this requirement will require the submission of two documents, a Local Evaluation Plan and a Local Evaluation Report. Both are described below along with their due dates.

• Local Evaluation Plan (LEP) – A written document that describes the data collection, management, and analysis and reporting plan that will be implemented to ensure that achievement of the project’s goals and objectives can and will be assessed. Ideally it should be developed before the project starts or during project implementation, before services or activities begin.
• Local Evaluation Report (LER) – A written document that provides the interpretation of various data elements intended to assess whether the project was successful in achieving its goals and objectives.

These guidelines identify the minimum required content that must be included within each document, respectively.

Local Evaluation Plan
Cover Page
The cover page provides a descriptive report title and identifies the grantee(s), author(s), project period, and funding source.

Project Overview
This section provides a concise overview of the project's activities, services, or interventions, emphasizing their relevance to the target population (if applicable). The information provided should focus on the essential information necessary to understa nd the project's goals and objectives (next section). It should not describe the need for the project. This section shall not exceed two (2) pages in length.

Data Collection Plan
For each of the project’s goals and associated objectives, this section identifies the data elements—along with their source and frequency of collection —that will be used to measure achievement. To complete this section, first use the table template provid ed (refer to example below) to list each of the project’s goals and associated objectives as

APPENDIX C
Level One Evaluation Requirements for Prop 64 PH&S Grantees

APPENDICES, Page | 57
documented in the grant agreement.1 The goals and objectives shall be those within the grant agreement unless changes were preapproved by the assigned BSCC Field Representative. One table template should be used for each goal and its associated objectives.

Next, complete each table by listing, on separate rows, each distinct data element that will be collected to measure achievement toward the respective goal or its objective(s).

For each data element, use the remaining columns to identify the data source, frequency of data collection, and the goal or objective that is the target. Definitions for these terms follow.
• Data element – a basic unit of information, or data, to be collected that has a unique meaning (e.g., gender, race, city, age, arrest date, graduation rate). Please note that the data elements must be logically related to the respective goal or objective it is intended to assess.
• Data source – the location from which the data element originates (e.g., intake form, case management system, standardized assessment, interview, focus group, MOU with partner agency).
• Frequency of data collection – defines how often the data element will be collected or pulled from the data source (e.g., at enrollment, at project/program exit/completion, every 6 months, annually, quarterly, during case management sessions, at course completion).
• Target – the goal or objective(s) that the data element is intended to assess.

Data Collection Plan for Goal 1 (Table Template)

1 The goals and objectives shall be those within the grant agreement unless changes were preapproved by the assigned BSCC Field Representative.

APPENDICES, Page | 58
Data Management
This section provides a concise description of the process that will be used to acquire, validate, store, protect, and monitor the data elements identified in the section(s) above.

The description shall not exceed one page and should, at a minimum, include:
• Identification of who is responsible for implementing the data collection plan(s). • Detail data sharing agreements with external partners, if applicable. • How the data will be monitored throughout the duration of the project and adjustments, if needed, will be identified and made in a timely manner to the data collection plan(s).
• How incomplete or inconsistent data will be identified and corrected. • Where the data will be stored and kept secure.

Data Analysis and Reporting
This section provides a concise description of the process that will be used to analyze and present the data in a meaningful way. The description shall not exceed one page and should, at a minimum, include:
• Identification of who is responsible for analyzing the data. • How the data will be used to determine achievement of the goal(s) or objective(s) (e.g., comparison between two points in time).
• The analytical tools that will be used (e.g., Excel, Sheets, SPSS, SAS, R). • Identification of who is responsible for communicating the findings and writing the LER.

Local Evaluation Report
Cover Page
The cover page provides a descriptive report title and identifies the grantee(s), author(s), project period, and funding source.

Project Overview
This section provides a concise overview of the project's activities, services, or interventions, emphasizing their relevance to the target population (if applicable). The information provided should focus on the essential information necessary to understa nd the project's goals and objectives (next section). It should not describe the need for the project. This section shall not exceed two (2) pages in length.

Goal Achievements
For each of the project’s goals, this section(s) should highlight the most important results and analyses of the data elements collected that describe the extent to which the goal was achieved. Follow the results with a brief narrative that provides necessary context to understand the findings. The report writer can decide the proper heading(s) for this section(s). That is, rather than “Goal Achievements” as a single heading and section, a heading that is appropriate for each goal and its achievement can be used to organize

APPENDICES, Page | 59
the report (e.g., “Recidivism was Reduced by 50 Percent”, “85 Percent of Participants Actively Engaged in Treatment”). The goals and objectives of the project should be clearly provided either within the text of this section or by providing the data collec tion tables from the LEP as an appendix.2

Discussion
This section is the final portion of the report and provides a holistic description of the meaning, importance, and relevance of the achievements reported. The content may also include a discussion of limitations, challenges, recommendations for future projects, and lessons learned. This section shall not exceed one (1) page in length.

Grantee Highlights
This section provides the grantee the opportunity to share a brief, visually appealing highlight or success story that provides additional information related to the project’s success over the grant cycle. Optional graphs, charts, or photos may be included .3 This highlight may be included in a statewide report for the grant program. While every effort will be made to include these in a statewide report, inclusion in the report is not guaranteed. This section shall not exceed one (1) page in length.

Appendix (Optional)
The appendix(ices) may be provided to present the Data Collection table for each goal from the Local Evaluation Plan. Other content may be provided as appropriate.

2 These should be the original goals and objectives for the project as defined in the project’s proposal unless they were modif ied with the approval of the assigned BSCC Field Representative. If they were modified, indicate so and provide a brief explanati on for the modification.
3 The BSCC will only accept photographs in which all persons depicted are over 18 years of age and have consented to both being photographed and to the use and release of their image. By submitting photographs to the BSCC, the submitter acknowledges that all approvals have been obtained from the subjects in the photograph(s) and that all persons are over 18 years of age. Further, by submitting the photographs, the submitter irrevocably authorizes the BSCC to edit, alter, copy, exhibit, publish or distri bute the photographs for purposes of publicizing BSCC grant programs or for any other lawful purpose. All photographs submitted will b e considered public records and subject to disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act.

APPENDICES, Page | 60

FOR REFERENCE ONLY

Before grant funds can be reimbursed, a grantee must either (1) submit a resolution from its governing board that delegates authority to the individual authorized to execute the grant agreement or (2) provide sufficient documentation indicating that the prospective grantee has been vested with plenary authority to execute grant agreements (e.g., a city council or county board of supervisors delegating such authority to an agency head).

Below is assurance language that, at a minimum , must be incl uded in the resolution submitted to the Board of State and Community Corrections.

WHEREAS the (insert name of Local Government) desires to participate in the Proposition 64 Public Health and Safety Grant Program funded through the California State and Local Government Law Enforcement Account and administered by the Board of State and Community Corrections (hereafter referred to as the BSCC).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the (insert title of designated official) be authorized on behalf of the (insert name of Governing Board) to submit the grant proposal for this funding and sign the Grant Agreement with the BSCC, including any amendments thereof.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the (insert name of Local Government) agrees to abide by the terms and conditions of the Grant Agreement as set forth by the BSCC.

Passed, approved, and adopted by the (insert name of Governing Board) in a meeting thereof held on (insert date) by the following:

Ayes :

Notes :

Absent :

Signature : Date :

Typed Name and Title:

ATTEST:

Signature : Date :

Typed Name and Title:

APPENDIX D
Sample Governing Board Resolution

APPENDICES, Page | 61

REQUIRED ATTACHMENT: Applicants will be prompted to upload this document to the BSCC Submittable Application Portal. This is a sample.

Download a fillable form from the Prop 64 Grant homepage.

It is the policy of the BSCC to protect grant funds from unreasonable risks of fraudulent, criminal, or other improper use. As such, the Board will not enter into contracts or provide reimbursement to applicants that have been:

1. debarred by any federal, state, or local government entities during the period of debarment; or

2. convicted of fraud, theft, or embezzlement of federal, state, or local government grant funds for a period of three years following conviction.

Furthermore, the BSCC requires grant recipients to provide an assurance that there has been no applicable debarment, disqualification, suspension, or removal from a federal, state or local grant program on the part of the grantee at the time of application and that the gra ntee will immediately notify the BSCC should such debarment or conviction occur during the term of the Grant contract.

The BSCC also requires that all grant recipients include, as a condition of award to a subgrantee or subcontractor, a requirement that the subgrantee or subcontractor will provide the same assurances to the grant recipient. If a grant recipient wishes to consi der a subgrantee or subcontractor that has been debarred or convicted, the grant recipient must submit a written request for exception to the BSCC along with supporting documentation.

By signing below, applicant affirms that:
• I/We are not currently debarred by any federal, state, or local entity from applying for or receiving federal, state, or local grant funds.
• I/We have not been convicted of any crime involving theft, fraud, or embezzlement of federal, state, or local grant funds within the last three years. We will notify the BSCC should such debarment or conviction occur during the term of the grant contract. • I/We will hold subgrantees and subcontractors to these same requirements.

A grantee may make a request in writing to the Executive Director of the BSCC for an exception to the debarment policy. Any determination made by the executive director shall be made in writing.

AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE
(This document must be signed by the person who is authorized to sign the Grant Agreement.)

NAME OF AUTHORIZED OFFICER TITLE TELEPHONE NUMBER

STREET ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP CODE

EMAIL ADDRESS

AUTHORIZED OFFICER SIGNATURE (Blue Ink Only or E-signature) DATE

APPENDIX E
Certification of Compliance with BSCC Policies
Regarding Debarment, Fraud, Theft, and Embezzlement

APPENDICES, Page | 62

REQUIRED ATTACHMENT: Applicants will be prompted to upload this document to the BSCC Submittable Application Portal. This is a sample.

Download a fillable form from the Prop 64 Grant homepage.

The Proposition 64 Public Health and Safety (Prop 64 PH&S) Grant Program, Cohort 4, includes requirements that apply to non -governmental organizations that receive BSCC grant funds as subcontractors. Grantees are responsible for ensuring that all subcontracted third parties continually meet these requirements as a condition of receiving any Prop 64 PH&S funds. These requirements are as follows.

Any non-governmental organization that receives Prop 64 PH&S funds as a subcontractor must:
• Have been duly organized, in existence, and in good standing for at least six (6) months prior to the start date of the grantee’s grant agreement with the BSCC.

Note: Non-governmental organizations that have recently reorganized or have merged with other qualified non-governmental organizations that were in existence prior to the six (6) month date are also eligible, provided all necessary agreements have been executed and filed with the California Secretary of State prior to the start date of the applicant’s grant agreement with the BSCC.
• Be registered with the California Secretary of State’s Office, if applicable. • Have a valid business license, Employer Identification Number (EIN) and/or Taxpayer ID (if sole proprietorship).
• Have any other state or local licenses or certifications necessary to provide the services requested (e.g., facility licensing by the Department of Health Care Services), if applicable.

In the table below, provide the name of the grantee and list all subcontracted third parties.

APPENDIX F
Criteria and Assurance for Non-Governmental Organizations that Receive BSCC Grant Funds as a Subcontractor
Name of City or
County Applicant:

Name of Subcontracted
Third-Party NGO Address Email / Phone Meets All
Requirements
Yes ☐ No ☐
Yes ☐ No ☐
Yes ☐ No ☐
Yes ☐ No ☐

APPENDICES, Page | 63

Grantees are required to update this list and submit it to the BSCC any time a new third- party subcontract with an NGO is executed after the initial assurance date. Grantees shall retain (on-site) applicable source documentation for each subcontracted party that verifies compliance with the requirements listed in the Prop 64 PH&S Grant RFP. These records will be subject to the records and retention language found in the standard BSCC Grant Agreement.

Unless prior approval is obtained, the BSCC prohibits disbursement or reimbursement to any NGO that does not meet the requirements listed above and for which the BSCC does not have a signed Criteria and Assurance form on file.

A signature below is an assurance that all requirements listed above have been met.

AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE
(This document must be signed by the person who is authorized to sign the Grant Agreement.)

NAME OF AUTHORIZED OFFICER TITLE TELEPHONE NUMBER

STREET ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP CODE

EMAIL ADDRESS

AUTHORIZED OFFICER SIGNATURE (Blue Ink Only or E-signature) DATE

APPENDICES, Page | 64

REQUIRED ATTACHMENT: Applicants will be prompted to upload this document to the BSCC Submittable Application Portal.

This is a sample. Download a fillable form from the Prop 64 Grant homepage.

Instructions: Applicants must complete a Project Work Plan using the format below. Provided goals and objectives must have a clear relationship to the need and intent of the grant. The Project Work Plan must attempt to identify activities/services and estimate timelines for the entire grant term. The plan must identify the top three goals and corresponding objectives, with a minimum of one goal pertaining to each identified PPA. Completed plans should identify:

1. the project’s top goals and objectives.

2. how the goal(s) will be achieved in terms of the activities/services, responsible staff/partners, and the timelines.

3. a list of the data elements to be collected.

Name of City or
County Applicant:

(1) Goal: >
Objectives (A., B., etc.)

A.>
B.

C.

Project activities/services that support the identified goal and objectives:

Responsible staff/partners Timeline
Start Date End Date

1.>

2. 3.

1.>

2. 3.

1.>

2. 3.

1.>

2. 3.

List the data elements that will be used to measure the extent to which the goal and its objectives are achieved. See Appendix G for the definition of a data element. >

APPENDIX G
SAMPLE: Prop 64 PH&S Grant Project Work Plan

APPENDICES, Page | 65
(2) Goal: >
Objectives (A., B., etc.)

A.>
B.

C.

Project activities/services that support the identified goal and objectives:

Responsible staff/partners Timeline
Start Date End Date

1.>

2. 3.

1.>

2. 3.

1.>

2. 3.

1.>

2. 3.

List the data elements that will be used to measure the extent to which the goal and its objectives are achieved. See Appendix G for the definition of a data element. >

(3) Goal: >
Objectives (A., B., etc.)

A.>
B.

C.

Project activities/services that support the identified goal and objectives:

Responsible staff/partners Timeline
Start Date End Date

1.>

2. 3.

1.>

2. 3.

1.>

2. 3.

1.>

2. 3.

List the data elements that will be used to measure the extent to which the goal and its objectives are achieved. See Appendix G for the definition of a data element. >

APPENDICES, Page | 66

FOR REFERENCE ONLY
The websites provided below may be useful to applicants in the proposal development process. This list is not exhaustive, and it is offered as a suggested starting point for applicants to use in researching evidence-based programs, practices, and strategies.

Blueprints for Violence Prevention
http://www.colorado.edu/cspv/blueprints/index.html

Board of State and Community Corrections
http://www.bscc.ca.gov/s_web-basedresourcesonevidence-basedpractices/

California Institute of Behavioral Health Solutions
http://www.cibhs.org/evidence-based-practices-0

Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy
http://evidencebasedprograms.org/

CrimeSolutions.gov
http://www.crimesolutions.gov/

Evaluating Drug Control and System Improvement Projects Guidelines for Project Supported by the Bureau of Justice Assistance https://www.bja.gov/evaluation/guide/documents/nijguide.html

Justice Research and Statistic Association
http://www.jrsa.org/

National Child Traumatic Stress Network
https://www.NCTSN.Org

National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS)
“Preventing and Reducing Youth Crime and Violence: Using Evidence -Based Practice.” A report prepared by Peter Greenwood, Ph.D., for the California Governor’s Office of Gang and Youth Violence Policy, 2010.
https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=255934

National Institute of Corrections
http://nicic.gov/Library/

National Reentry Resource Center
http://nationalreentryresourcecenter.org/

Office of Justice Programs – Crime Solutions.gov
http://www.CrimeSolutions.gov

APPENDIX H
Evidence-Based Practices: Resources

APPENDICES, Page | 67

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Model Program Guide http://www.ojjdp.gov/mpg/

Promising Practices Network
http://www.promisingpractices.net/

Reducing Recidivism to Increase Public Safety: A Cooperative Effort by Courts and Probation Hon, J. Richard Couzens, Placer County Superior Court (Ret.) http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/EVIDENCE-BASED-PRACTICES-Summary-6-27-

11.pdf

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration https://www.samhsa.gov/ebp-resource-center

The National Documentation Centre on Drug Use
http://www.drugsandalcohol.ie/3820//

Washington State Institute for Public Policy
http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/

APPENDICES, Page | 68

REQUIRED ATTACHMENT: Applicants will be prompted to upload this document to the BSCC Submittable Application Portal. This is a sample showing the summary budget table only. Download the complete fillable attachment from the Prop 64 Grant homepage.

APPENDIX I
Project Budget Attachment
Budget Categories
A. Grant Funds for
PPA 1: Public
Safety/Enforcement
B. Grant Funds
for PPA 2, 3,
and/or 4
Total Requested
Grant Funds
(A+B)

1. Salaries and Benefits $0 $0 $0

2. Services and Supplies $0 $0 $0

3. Professional Services or Public Agency
Subcontracts $0 $0 $0

4. Non-Governmental Organization (NGO)
Subcontracts $0 $0 $0

5. Equipment/Fixed Assets $0 $0 $0

6. Other (Travel, Training, etc.) $0 $0 $0

7. Indirect Cost (For PPAs 1-4) $0 $0
TOTAL $0 $0 $0

APPENDICES, Page | 69

FOR REFERENCE

TERMS DEFINED BY THE PROPOSITION 64 INITIATIVE

Cannabis has the same meaning as set forth in Section 11018 of the Health and Safety Code and shall also mean medicinal cannabis. (Rev. & Tax. Code, § 34010(b)(4).) Cannabis accessories has the same meaning as in Section 11018.2 of the Health and Safety Code. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 26001(h).

Cannabis products has the same meaning a s in Section 11018.1 of the Health and Safety Code. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 26001(l).

Commercial cannabis activity includes the cultivation or the possession, manufacture, distribution, processing, storing, laboratory testing, packaging, labeling, transportation, delivery, or sale of cannabis and cannabis products as provided for in this division, or acting as a cannabis event organizer for temporary cannabis events. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 26001(q).)
Customer means a natural person 21 years of age or older or a natural person 18 years of age or older who possesses a physician’s recommendation, or a primary caregiver. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 26001(t).)
Delivery means the commercial transfer of cannabis or cannabis products to a customer. “Delivery” also includes the use by a retailer of any technology platform. (Bus. & Prof.

Code § 26001(v).)
Distribution means the procurement, sale, and transport of cannabis and cannabis products between licensees. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 26001(y).).

License means a state license issued under this division, and includes both an A-license and an M -license, as well as a testing laboratory license. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 26001(ah).).

Licensee means any person or entity holding a license under this division, regardless of whether the license held is an A -license or an M -license, and includes the holder of a testing laboratory license. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 26001(aj).).

Licensing authority means the department and any state agency currently or formerly responsible for the issuance, renewal, or reinstatement of the license, or the state agency authorized to take disciplinary action against the licensee. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 26001(ak).).

Local jurisdiction means a city, county, or city and county. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 26001(am).).

Manufacture means to compound, blend, extract, infuse, package, label, or otherwise make or prepare a cannabis product. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 26001(ar).).

APPENDIX J
Glossary of Terms for the Prop 64 Grant, Cohort 4

APPENDICES, Page | 70
Marijuana has the same meaning as Cannabis (see above).

Medicinal cannabis patient means a qualified patient, as defined in Section 11362.7 of the Health and Safety Code, who possesses a physician’s recommendation that complies with Article 25 (commencing with Section 2525) of Chapter 5 of Division 2 of the Business and Professions Code, or a qualified patient or primary caregiver for a qualified patient issued a valid identification card pursuant to Section 11362.71 of the Health and Safety Code. (Bus & Prof. Code § 34010(b)(17))
Nursery means a licensee that produces only clones, immature plants, seeds, and other agricultural products used specifically for the planting, propagation, and cultivation of cannabis. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 26001(at).).

Operation means any act for which licensure is required under the provisions of this division, or any commercial transfer of cannabis or cannabis products. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 26001(au).).

Package means any container or receptacle used for holding cannabis or cannabis products. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 26001(aw).).

Purchaser means the customer who is engaged in a transaction with a licensee for purposes of obtaining cannabis or cannabis products. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 26001(bc).).

Retail sale has the same meaning as set forth in Section 6007. (Bus & Prof. Code § 34010(b)(21))
Retailer means a person authorized to engage in the retail sale and delivery of cannabis or cannabis products to customers. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 26001(bd).).

Sell, sale, and to sell includes any transaction whereby, for any consideration, title to cannabis or cannabis products is transferred from one person to another, and includes the delivery of cannabis or cannabis products pursuant to an order placed for the purchase of the same and soliciting or receiving an order for the same, but does not include the return of cannabis or cannabis products by a licensee to the licensee from whom the cannabis or cannabis product was purchased. (Bus. & Prof. Code § 26001(be).).

OTHER TERMS USED IN THIS RFP

Audit, Program Specific Compliance
An independent examination of an organization’s adherence to the laws, regulations, and requirements applicable to the funded program. This audit evaluates whether program activities, financial transactions, and related documentation comply with all materi al requirements established in the governing authorities. (See 2 CFR § 200.507, Program Specific Audits.)
Community-Based Organization
A community-based organization (CBO) is a nongovernmental organization that provides services to a community consisting of individuals, groups, or other organizations that

APPENDICES, Page | 71
constitute the local or community service population. In the context of the Prop 64 PH&S Grant Program, a CBO is generally considered to be a non -government, non -law enforcement organization that provides services individuals that are at risk of involvement or already involved with the justice system. In this RFP, CBOs and nonprofit organizations are referred to as NGOs or Non-Governmental Organizations.

Community-Driven
Community-driven practices are programs and strategies that are derived from the traditional practices of a particular racial, ethnic, or cultural community and have been determined effective by the community.

Cultural Relevance
Cultural relevance acknowledges the influence of the youth’s identity characteristics on the youth’s experience of the world and incorporates perspectives into the program’s environment. These identity characteristics include racial/ethnic, gender, class, religion, educational, sexual orientation, gender identity, family heritage, disability, and any other identity the youth communicate as important.

Every grantee and sub -grantee/sub-recipient that receives Prop 64 PH&S Grant funds should utilize programs, practices, and approaches that embed cultural relevancy.

Developmentally Appropriate
A service or intervention may be considered developmentally appropriate if it is based on a child’s level of need, or developmental stage, rather than the child’s chronological age.

Evidence-based / Promising Practices
Evidence-based practices are programs and strategies that have been found effective at improving positive or preventing negative health outcomes, using rigorous scientific research methods. Programs and strategies may be evidence -based across all populations, or only for particular cultures and identities.

Promising practices are programs and strategies that have shown some positive results and potential for improving desired health outcomes. They may have evidence from use in real-world settings, a strong theoretical framework, and/or expert opinion, but have not been fully replicated in scientific studies. Depending on the level of scientific evidence, these are sometimes referred to as “evidence -informed,” “research-supported,” or “emerging” practices.

Applicants may find it helpful to review the information on evidence -based practices in Appendix C of this RFP as well as in the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration’s (SAMHSA) Guide to Evidence -Based Practices available at:
https://www.samhsa.gov/ebp-resource-center.

Service Need Determination
In considering whether to provide diversion services to potential program participants, service providers receiving funding under this grant must use an approach that is trauma- informed, culturally relevant and developmentally appropriate. Approaches could include, but are not limited to, surveys or interviews. Applicants must thoroughly explain and justify their proposed approach for deciding which youth will be selected or chosen for program

APPENDICES, Page | 72
participation. Every applicant must identify some methodology for determining whether a potential program participant would benefit from services and how youth will be matched with specific services that provide those benefits.

Trauma
Trauma is an experience that causes intense physical and psychological stress reactions.

It can refer to a single event, multiple events, or a set of circumstances that is experienced by an individual as physically and emotionally harmful or threatening and that has lasting adverse effects on the individual’s physical, social, emotional, cognitive, or spiritual well- being.

Trauma-Informed
A Trauma-Informed approach is one in which all parties involved recognize and respond appropriately to the impact of traumatic stress designed to the youth ’s individual needs and ensure the physical and psychological safety of all youth, family members, and staff.

Trauma-informed care is an organizational structure and system framework that involves understanding, recognizing, and responding to traumatic stress reactions and the effects of all types of trauma. Trauma -informed care also emphasizes raising aw areness and providing resources about trauma and the impact of trauma on youth, family members and staff.

Youth
Youth is defined as under the age of 21 (i.e., individuals not of legal age to use and purchase cannabis products).

EVALUATIVE TERMS

Local Evaluation Plan and Local Evaluation Report4
The purpose of the Local Evaluation Plan and the Local Evaluation Report is to identify whether the program achieved its goals and objectives. Outcome measures are designed to answer the question: “What results did the program produce?” Examples of outcome measures could include:
• Results of pre/post surveys (e.g., improvements in the number of high school graduates or reductions in law enforcement contacts).
• Implementation of programs aimed at increasing the number of youth enrolled in mentoring programs.
• Changes in policies that improve access to alcohol and substance use prevention services for youth.

Goal versus Objective
Goals and objectives are necessary components of the Local Evaluation Plan and the Project Work Plan. These common terms are sometimes used interchangeably because both refer to the intended results of program activities. Goals are longer -term than

4Justice Research and Statistics Association, Juvenile Justice Evaluation Center. (2003, June). Juvenile Justice Program Evaluation: An overview (Second Edition) p. 7. Retrieved from http://www.jrsa.org/pubs/juv-justice/program-evaluation.pdf.

APPENDICES, Page | 73
objectives, more broadly stated and govern the specific objectives to which program activities are directed.

In proposals, goals are defined by broad statements of what the program intends to accomplish, representing the long-term intended outcome of the program5.

Examples of goal statements6:
• To reduce the number of youths who commit serious offenses. • To reduce the number of youths who exhibit a pattern of chronic offending. • To divert youth who commit nonviolent offenses from state juvenile correctional institutions.
• To restore the losses suffered by the victims of crimes. • To make improvements in academic behavior and/or achievement. • To reduce rates of youth substance use in the target area.

Objectives are statements of specific, measurable aims of program activities. Objectives detail the tasks that must be completed to achieve goals. Descriptions of objectives in the proposals should include three elements7:
1) Direction – the expected change or accomplishment (e.g., improve, maintain); 2) Timeframe – when the objective will be achieved; and 3) Target Population – who is affected by the objective.

Examples of program objectives8:
• By the end of the program, drug -addicted youth will recognize the long -term consequences of drug use.
• To place eligible youth in an intensive supervision program within two weeks of adjudication to ensure their accountability and the community’s safety. • To ensure the youth in this program carry out all the terms of the mediation agreements they have worked out with their victims by program completion. • To improve the self-discipline and study habits of youth enrolled.

5 Justice Research and Statistics Association, Juvenile Justice Evaluation Center. (2003, June). Juvenile Justice Program Evaluation: An overview (Second Edition). Retrieved from http://www.jrsa.org/pubs/juv-justice/program-evaluation.pdf. See also New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services. A Guide to Developing Goals and Objectives for Your Program. Retrieved from http://www.criminaljustice.ny.gov/ofpa/goalwrite.htm. 6 Id. at p. 4.
7 Justice Research and Statistics Association, Juvenile Justice Evaluation Center. (2003, June). Juvenile Justice Program Evaluation: An overview (Second Edition) p. 5. Retrieved from http://www.jrsa.org/pubs/juv-justice/program-evaluation.pdf. 8 Id.

APPENDICES, Page | 74
Principles of Effective Intervention
During the past two decades, there has been renewed interest in examining correctional research. These efforts have been led by researchers such as Gendreau, Andrews, Cullen, Lipsey and others. 9 Much evidence has been generated, leading to the conclusion that many rehabilitation programs have, in fact, produced significant reductions in recidivism. The next critical issue became the identification of those characteristics most commonly associated with effective programs. Through the work of numerous scholars (Andrews et al., 1990 10; Cullen and Gendreau, 2000 11; Lipsey 199912), several “principles of effective intervention” have been identified. These principles can be briefly categorized as the following:
• Assess Risk/Needs
• Enhance Intrinsic Motivation
• Target Interventions
o Risk Principle
o Needs Principle
o Responsivity Principle
o Dosage
o Treatment Principle
• Skill Train with Directed Practice
• Increase Positive Reinforcement
• Engage Ongoing Support in Natural Communities
• Measure Relevant Processes/Practices
• Provide Measurement Feedback

9 For a thorough review of this research, see Cullen, F.T. and B.K. Applegate. 1998. Offender rehabilitation: Effective correct ional intervention. Brookfield, Vt.: Ashgate Darthmouth.
10 Andrews, D.A., I. Zinger, R.D. Hoge, J. Bonta, P. Gendreau and F.T. Cullen. 1990. Does correctional treatment work? A clinically relevant and psychologically informed meta-analysis. Criminology 28(3):369-404. 11 Cullen, F.T. and P. Gendreau. 2000. Assessing correctional rehabilitation: Policy, practice, and prospects. In Criminal justi ce 2000: Volume 3 – Policies, processes, and decisions of the criminal justice system, ed. J. Horney, 109 -175. Washington, D.C.:

U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. 12 Lipsey, M.W. 1999. Can intervention rehabilitate serious delinquents? The Annuals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 564(2):142-166.

13.A.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 4/7/2026 AGENDA SECTION: PUBLIC HEARING

SUBJECT:

PUBLIC HEARING – To receive ballots and public testimony on proposed funding changes/assessment increases for 2026/27 of the Quail Run Estates Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District in the City of Hanford. Following close of Public Hearing, ballots will be opened and tabulated, with results certified and reported prior to the close of the City Council Regular Session. Authorization for staff to implement assessment changes based on certified results.

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation: Staff recommends that City Council take the following actions:

1. Conduct a Public Hearing to receive ballots and public testimony on the proposed funding changes, amendment, and assessment increases for the maintenance of the balloted Quail Run Estates Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District.

2. Direct staff to open and tabulate ballots, and to certify the results

3. With a majority vote that approves changes:
a. Direct staff to implement the proposed changes.
b. Authorize the placing of the increased assessment amount on the 2026/27 Property Tax Roll.

Recommended Motion:

1. Move to open the Public Hearing to receive public input on the proposed assessment increases to the balloted Landscape & Lighting Maintenance Assessment District.

2. Certify the results of the balloted District and, if passed, move to approve the recommended assessment increases of the balloted Landscape & Lighting Maintenance District and place the increases on the 2026/27 Kings County property tax roll.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Hanford has been allowing the developers of subdivisions to form assessment districts under the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972, which are subject to the requirements of Proposition 218, in lieu of using homeowners’ associations for the maintenance of common features such as common area landscaping, irrigation systems, streetlights, and trees on local streets. The maintenance of these improvements is a special benefit to the development and enhances the land values to the individual property owners in the district. Through an established Landscape & Lighting Maintenance District (LLMAD), each property owner pays an equal portion of the total annual costs to maintain the common landscape areas in their neighborhood and are assessed their portion on their property taxes each year.

The Quail Run Estates subdivision was originally established and approved by City Council in 1994, and was completed over five (5) construction phases, bringing the total lots within the Landscape and Lighting District to 272.

The original maintenance assessment was $37.00 per lot and was later increased to the current $59.00 assessment by ballot in 2008. The Quail Run Estates District was later balloted in 2021 to increase the assessment and maintain a balanced budget, but failed to receive the required majority vote. The district has now fallen further into a budget deficit and staff has again presented a ballot measure to increase the maintenance assessment to the property owners within the Quail Run Estates Landscape and Lighting District.

On February 4, 2026, the City mailed 272 ballots to parcels within the Quail Run Estates (94-03) LLMAD asking property owners to consider an assessment increase for common area landscaping and lighting for their neighborhood. The increase includes a park amenity replacement program, tree maintenance, landscape enhancements in the common area landscape, raising the assessment enough to eliminate the deficit balance, and pay for maintenance costs on an ongoing annual basis that have increased since the Quail Run Estates 94-03 District was formed.

On Saturday, February 21, 2026, City staff conducted a community meeting where approximately 30 of the Quail Run Estates residents/property owners attended. In this meeting, staff shared information on the current state of funding in the district’s account, maintenance areas, and previous maintenance contract specifications. Staff also shared the balloting process that would need to be completed to increase the tax assessment to perform maintenance of the common area landscape and what the increased assessment would fund. Staff addressed several concerns and questions from residents/property owners.

PUBLIC HEARING, BALLOTING AND APPROVAL PROCESS
Proposition 218 requires that creation of, additions, or increases to a property-based assessment not previously approved shall be subject to a ballot vote of all the affected property owners. For the district being balloted for increases, each property can only submit one ballot vote, and all votes are equally weighted; approval or denial of the proposed increase is determined by a simple majority of the returned ballots for each LLMAD balloted.

At the public hearing, property owners can address the Council regarding the increase. The City Clerk’s office has collected the sealed returned ballots and will accept any additional ballots up to the close of the Public Hearing.

After public testimony has been received, staff will open and tabulate the ballot votes and present the results to Council later in the Council meeting. Should the simple majority of the ballots cast for any balloted LLMAD approve the proposed assessment increase and changes, Council may then approve the recommended changes for the district and the increase will be added to the 2026/27 Tax Roll. Should the LLMAD fail to approve their assessment increase, the LLMAD will not have enough available funding to support continued maintenance of the district at current levels and staff has been directed to subsequently reduce the level of maintenance of the trees, turf, and shrub areas. The reduction in services will take effect 60 days from the public hearing date.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Table 1 shows the current and projected financial condition of the Quail Run Estates Landscape and Lighting District annual shortfall. The City issued ballots to districts that are in a deficit and are in need of an increase to their annual assessment to continue maintenance.

TABLE 1: Projected LLMAD Cash Balances

Table 2 displays the Quail Run Estates District's proposed annual assessment increase. The proposed increase, if approved, will fund a park amenity replacement program, tree maintenance, and landscape enhancements in the common area landscape, will raise the assessment enough to eliminate the deficit balance, and pay for maintenance costs on an ongoing annual basis. The increase in the benefit assessment will be implemented in the 2026/27 tax roll.

District
# District Name
Lots
#
Beg. Cash
Balance
06/30/25
2025/26
Assessment
Revenue
2025/26
Operating
Expenses
(estimated)
Ending
Balance
06/30/26
(estimated)
94-03 Quail Run Estates 272 ($40,745.68) $16,048.00 ($14,522.00) ($39,219.68)

TABLE 2: Proposed Assessment

District
#
District
Name
Lots
#
Current Annual
Assessment
Proposed Annual
Assessment
Proposed %
Increase in
Assessment
District Lot District Lot
94-03 Quail
Run
Estates

272
$16,048.00 $59.00 $72,918.15 $268.08 354%

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Ballot_2026 Hfd LAD 94-03 QUAIL RUN

CITY OF HANFORD
Department of Public Works
Focused On Our Community 24/7
900 South 10th Avenue • HANFORD, CA 93230-5234 • (559) 585-2550

«DATE_MAILED»

«OWNER_NAME»
«PO_ADDRESS»
«PO_CITY_ZIP»

Subject: Maintenance of common landscape for
Lighting and Landscape District: 94-03 QUAIL RUN ESTATES Proposed Benefit Assessment Increase for Fiscal Year: 2026 and an Annual Adjustment for Inflation Allowance for the district.

Service
Level
Level No
Service

Dear «OWNER_NAME» :

The maintenance of the common landscaping (lawn mowing, planting and replanting of plants and trees, sprinkler maintenance, etc.) for your subdivision is funded by your payment of a benefit assessment through a Lighting and Landscaping District . The common landscaping is maintained at the service level mentioned above. In order to improve this level of service, the City is seeking your support of an increase in the assessment amount you currently pay and establishing an annual Consumer Price Index ( CPI) adjustment. The maintained landscaping and improvements visually enhance your neighborhood, add value to the surrounding properties and increase your quality of life.

This letter includes a ballot. The City is requesting you return the enclosed ballot indicating your choice, either approving or disapproving increasing the annual benefit assessment amount, and the establishment of an annual CPI adjustment allowance. The approval of the assessment increase and the CPI adjustment will allow the City to make changes in the benefit assessment fee to balance the district’s finances and increase the current level of service to an A service. The increased assessment amount will also provide funds to refurbish the district’s landscaping over a period of time as reserves are replenished.

Proposal:

Current
Rate
Proposed
Rate
Increase the annual benefit assessment and establish
an annual benefit district CPI adjustment allowance in
accordance with California Government Code Section
53739(b)(1).
from $59.00 to $268.08

Please consider the enclosed documents, which include a n informational page about the district, a ballot form , a return envelope, Notice of Public Hearing and a map depicting the landscape areas maintained by your district.

If you have questions or concerns, you may contact Alvin Dias, Deputy Public Works Director at 559- 415-7189 or Russ Sterling , Public Works Director at 559-585-2565. Thank you for your time and consideration.

INFORMATION

The City is proposing an increase in the Benefit District Assessment Amount in order to keep up with maintenance costs for the common landscape areas in the District and to create a small rese rve to complete landscape enhancement projects and help offset any future unexpected maintenance costs.

Keeping the landscaped common areas maintained helps to keep neighborhoods looking good and helps to maintain property values. Currently your district is comprised of 272 lots, with a total current year benefit assessment equaling $16,048.00. The projected expenses are detailed as follows:

Annual Benefit District Assessment Reserve - Cash Balance as of June 30, 2024 $(31,528.62) Annual Benefit District Assessment Revenue Collected Amount $15,944.74 Expenses for the Fiscal Year $(25,161.80)
TOTAL PROJECTED ENDING CASH BALANCE $(40,745.68)

Projected CY Assessment Reserve - Cash Balance as of June 30, 2025 $(40,745.68) Annual Benefit District Assessment Revenue Proposed Collection Amount $16,048.00 Proposed Expenses for the Fiscal Year $(14,522.00)
TOTAL PROJECTED ENDING CASH BALANCE $(39,219.68)

Projected CY Assessment Reserve - Cash Balance as of June 30, 2026 $(39,219.68) Annual Benefit District Assessment Revenue Proposed Collection Amount $16,048.00 Proposed Expenses for the Fiscal Year $(12,839.42)
TOTAL PROPOSED ENDING CASH BALANCE $(36,011.10)

Based on the current benefit district assessment revenue and proposed expenses the total cash balance is $(36,011.10) for the projected fiscal year 2026.

Existing Amount Proposed Amount Increase
Monthly Per Lot $4.92 $22.34 $17.42
Annually Per Lot $59.00 $268.08 $209.08
Annually Per District $16,048.00 $72,918.15 $56,870.15

The cost to you to keep the maintenance up in your District will be an additional $209.08 per year, or $17.42 per month.

You will see this as an increase in the Property Benefit Assessment included on your County of Kings real property tax bill.

District: 94-03 QUAIL RUN ESTATES
Fiscal Year Cash Balance: 2025 $ $(39,219.68)
Projected Ending Fiscal Year Cash Balance: 2026 $ $(36,011.10) Number of Lots multiplied by Assessment per Lot 272 X $59.00 $16,048.00

In addition to the proposed benefit assessment increase, the City is proposing that an annual benefit CPI adjustment allowance be established in accordance with California Government Section 53739(b)(1). The annual benefit assessment amount will be adjusted by the CPI on an annual basis in accordance with the following formula:

Commencing with fiscal year 2026 and on January 1 or each fiscal year (“Adjustment Date”) thereafter during the life of the District, the Total Annual Assessment amount for the next fiscal year shall be an amount equal to the greater of:
(i) the Total Annual Assessment amount in effect immediately prior to the Adjustment Date; or (ii) the product obtained by multiplying the Total Annual Assessment amount in effect immediately prior to the Adjustment Date by a fraction, the numerator of which is the Index published nearest but prior to the Adjustment Date and the denominator of which is the Index published nearest but prior to January 1 of the first year of the Adjustment becomes effective.

The term “Index” means the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose Consolidated Statistical Area, 1982- 1984, equal 100, published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the United States Department of Labor. If the Bureau of Labor Statistics revises the Index, the Bureau of Labor Statistics will be the sole judge of the comparability of successive indexes, but if that agency fails to supply indexes that it deems comparable or if no succeeding index is published, the City shall determine an appropriate alternative published price index.

This annual CPI adjustment allowance process is already being used in districts created after 2001. If approved, the annual inflation allowance will allow the City to better fiscally manage the district and to more closely match benefit assessment revenue to the actual costs incurred.

On the last page is a ballot which gives you, the property owner, certain options:

Yes. I approve of the proposed Benefit Assessment Increase with a CPI Adjustment Allowance for Fiscal Year 2026. If a majority of the returned ballots select YES, it will allow the City to secure funding from your District for the current increased costs of maintenance and utilize a CPI adjustment inflation formula to offset future maintenance cost increases . With the proposed Benefit Assessment Increase the current cash balance deficiency will be repaid and funding will become available to fund enhancement projects for the district.

No. I do not approve of the proposed Benefit Assessment Increase for Fiscal Year 2026. If a majority of the returned ballots select NO, it will cause the City to re-evaluate the level of maintenance provided to your District, which will likely result in reduced maintenance, such as reduced watering and/or reduced frequency of mowing and trimming of the common areas.

It is very important that you complete and return your ballot. Ballots that are not returned will not be counted. If the “no” ballots exceed the number of “yes” ballots, the proposed fee increase and automatic CPI adjustment will not occur. If only a few people return ballots to the City, those few people will make the decision for the entire district.

The failure to raise assessment fees will result in a reduction in maintenance services, which will result in a deterioration of the landscaping and/or other improvements.

If the CPI adjustment is approved, any future increase in assessment fees that exceed the CPI adjustment will require the City to distribute ballots and seek owner approval.

If you want maintenance of the landscaping and other improvements to improve from the current level, it will be necessary to vote “yes” and to return your ballot to the City.

Notice of Public Hearing

A Public Hearing for this proposal will be held on April 07, 2026, at the hour of 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers of the Civic Auditorium at 400 N. Douty Street, Hanford, CA. The ballots will be counted and the results announced at the end of the City Council Special Meeting that same evening. At this meeting, affected citizens will have an opportunity to speak to Council, and may also change their ballot vote if desired.

City of Hanford City Clerk’s Office
319 N. Douty Street
Hanford, CA 93230

April 07, 2026

BALLOT INSTRUCTIONS
Completion and Return Instructions:

1. Fill out the ballot at the bottom of this page. Be sure to print your name, mark your choice, sign, and date the ballot (the ballot will not be counted without your signature)

2. Fold this page so the address above is visible.

3. Insert this page into the provided return envelope so the Clerk’s address is visible through the window of the envelope.

4. Place appropriate postage on the return envelope and mail it.

5. In order to be counted, the ballot must arrive at the above address (City Clerk’s Office) on or before 5:00pm, April 07, 2026.

6. ALTERNATIVE DELIVERY: You may also hand deliver the ballot to the City Clerk’s office at 319 N. Douty Street, Hanford, CA, on or before 5:00pm on April 07, 2026 or hand deliver the ballot to the City Clerk at the time of the Public Hearing on April 07, 2026. If delivered in person, the ballot must be in a sealed envelope, or it cannot be accepted.

If you have any question or concerns about the ballot process or Increase in the Annual Benefit District Assessment or Annual Benefit District Assessment Adjustment for Inflation Allowance, please contact Alvin Dias, Deputy Public Works Director at 559 -415-7189 or Russ Sterling, Public Works Director at 585-2565.

DISTRICT No. 94-03 QUAIL RUN ESTATES BENEFIT DISTRICT
City of Hanford, City Clerk’s Office
319 N. Douty Street
Hanford, CA 93230

Re: 94-03 QUAIL RUN ESTATES District
Ballot

BALLOT (QUAIL RUN ESTATES)
Proposal: Increase the annual benefit district assessment amount from $59.00 to $268.08 and establish an Annual Benefit District Assessment adjustment for inflation allowance.

«OWNER_NAME», owning property with Assessment Number «APN» :

(Check one) Fee Increase APPROVES DISAPPROVES

_________________________________________________ ______________________ (Property Owner Signature) (Date)

_________________________________________________
(Print Name)

Quail Run Estates 94-03

N U T

13.B.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 4/7/2026 AGENDA SECTION: PUBLIC HEARING

SUBJECT:

PUBLIC HEARING – To receive ballots and public testimony on proposed funding changes/assessment increases for 2026/27 of the Cielo En Tierra Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District in the City of Hanford. Following close of Public Hearing, ballots will be opened and tabulated, with results certified and reported prior to the close of the City Council Regular Session. Authorization for staff to implement assessment changes based on certified results.

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation:Staff recommends that City Council take the following actions:

1. Conduct a Public Hearing to receive ballots and public testimony on the proposed funding changes, amendment, and assessment increases for the maintenance of balloted Cielo En Tierra Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District.

2. Direct staff to open and tabulate ballots, and to certify the results

3. With a majority vote that approve changes:
a. Direct staff to implement the proposed changes.
b. Authorize the placing of the increased assessment amount on the 2026/27 Property Tax Roll.

Recommended Motion:

1. Move to open the Public Hearing to receive public input on the proposed assessment increases to the balloted Landscape & Lighting Maintenance Assessment District.

2. Certify the results of the balloted District and, if passed, move to approve the recommended assessment increases of the balloted Landscape & Lighting Maintenance District and place the increases on the 2026/27 Kings County property tax roll.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Hanford has been allowing the developers of subdivisions to form assessment districts under the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972, which are subject to Proposition 218, in lieu of using homeowners’ associations for the maintenance of common features such as common area landscaping, irrigation systems, streetlights, and trees on local streets. The maintenance of these improvements is a special benefit to the development and enhances the land values to the individual property owners in the district. Through an established Landscape & Lighting Maintenance District (LLMAD), each property owner pays an equal portion of the total annual costs to maintain the common landscape areas in their neighborhood and are assessed their portion on their property taxes each year.

The Cielo En Tierra subdivision was originally established and approved by City Council in 1992, and was

completed over five (5) construction phases, bringing the total lots within the Landscape and Lighting District to 98.

The original maintenance assessment was $28.70 per lot. The Cielo En Tierra District was later balloted in 2008 and 2009 to increase the assessment and maintain a balanced budget, but failed to receive the required majority vote in both ballot attempts. The district has now fallen further into a budget deficit and staff has again presented a ballot measure to increase the maintenance assessment to the property owners within the Cielo En Tierra Landscape and Lighting District.

On February 5, 2026, the City mailed 98 ballots to parcels within the Cielo En Tierra (92-02) LLMAD asking property owners to consider an assessment increase for common area landscaping and lighting for their neighborhood. The increase includes tree maintenance, landscape enhancements in the common area landscape, raising the assessment enough to eliminate the deficit balance, and pay for maintenance costs on an ongoing annual basis that have increased since the Cielo En Tierra 92-02 District was formed.

On Saturday, February 21, 2026, City staff conducted a community meeting where one of the Ciello En Tierra residents/property owners attended. In this meeting, staff shared information on the current state of funding in the district’s account, maintenance areas, and previous maintenance contract specifications. Staff also shared the balloting process that would need to be completed to increase the tax assessment to perform maintenance of the common area landscape and what the increased assessment would fund. Staff addressed concerns and questions from the resident/property owner.

PUBLIC HEARING, BALLOTING AND APPROVAL PROCESS
Proposition 218 requires that creation of, additions, or increases to a property-based assessment not previously approved shall be subject to a ballot vote of all the affected property owners. For the district being balloted for increases, each property can only submit one ballot vote, and all votes are equally weighted; approval or denial of the proposed increase is determined by a simple majority of the returned ballots for each LLMAD balloted.

At the public hearing, property owners can address the Council regarding the increase. The City Clerk’s office has collected the sealed returned ballots and will accept any additional ballots up to the close of the Public Hearing.

After public testimony has been received, staff will open and tabulate the ballot votes and present the results to Council later in the Council meeting. Should the simple majority of the ballots cast for any balloted LLMAD approve the proposed assessment increase and changes, Council may then approve the recommended changes for the district and the increase will be added to the 2026/27 Tax Roll. Should the LLMAD fail to approve their assessment increase the LLMAD will not have enough available funding to support continued maintenance of the district at current levels and staff has been directed to subsequently reduce the level of maintenance of the trees, turf, and shrub areas. The reduction in services will take effect 60 days from the public hearing date.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Table 1 shows the current and projected financial condition of the Cielo En Tierra Landscape and Lighting District annual shortfall. The City issues ballots to districts that are in a deficit and are in need of an increase to their annual assessment to continue maintenance.

TABLE 1: Projected LLMAD Cash Balances

Table 2 displays the Cielo En Tierra District proposed annual assessment increase. The proposed increase, if approved, will fund tree maintenance, and landscape enhancements in the common area landscape, raise the assessment enough to eliminate the deficit balance, and pay for maintenance costs on an ongoing annual basis.

The increase in the benefit assessment will be implemented in the 2026/27 tax roll.

TABLE 2: Proposed Assessments
District # District Name
Lots
#
Beg. Cash
Balance
06/30/25
2025/26
Assessment
Revenue
2025/26
Operating
Expenses
(estimated)
Ending
Balance
06/30/26
(estimated)
92-02 Cielo En Tierra 98 ($3,631.40) $2,812.60 ($5,392.00) ($6,210.80)

District # District Name Lots #
Current Annual
Assessment
Proposed Annual
Assessment
Proposed %
Increase in
Assessment
District Lot District Lot
92-02 Cielo En Tierra 98 $2,812.60 $28.70 $15,771.76 $160.94 460%

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Ballot_2026 Hfd LAD 92-02 CIELO EN TIERRA

CITY OF HANFORD
Department of Public Works
Focused On Our Community 24/7
900 South 10th Avenue • HANFORD, CA 93230-5234 • (559) 585-2550

«DATE_MAILED»

«OWNER_NAME»
«PO_ADDRESS»
«PO_CITY_ZIP»

Subject: Maintenance of common landscape for
Lighting and Landscape District: 92-02 Cielo En Tierra
Proposed Benefit Assessment Increase for Fiscal Year: 2026 and an Annual Adjustment for Inflation Allowance for the district.

Service
Level
Level No
Service

Dear «OWNER_NAME» :

The maintenance of the common landscaping (lawn mowing, planting and replanting of plants and trees, sprinkler maintenance, etc.) for your subdivision is funded by your payment of a benefit assessment through a Lighting and Landscaping District . The common landscaping is maintained at the service level mentioned above. In order to improve this level of service, the City is seeking your support of an increase in the assessment amount you currently pay and establishing an annual Consumer Price Index ( CPI) adjustment. The maintained landscaping and improvements visually enhance your neighborhood, add value to the surrounding properties and increase your quality of life.

This letter includes a ballot. The City is requesting you return the enclosed ballot indicating your choice, either approving or disapproving increasing the annual benefit assessment amount, and the establishment of an annual CPI adjustment allowance. The approval of the assessment increase and the CPI adjustment will allow the City to make changes in the benefit assessment fee to balance the district’s finances and increase the current level of service to an A service. The increased assessment amount will also provide funds to refurbish the district’s landscaping over a period of time as reserves are replenished.

Proposal:

Current
Rate
Proposed
Rate
Increase the annual benefit assessment and
establish an annual benefit district CPI adjustment
allowance in accordance with California
Government Code Section 53739(b)(1).
from $28.70 to $160.94

Please consider the enclosed documents, which include a n informational page about the district, a ballot form , a return envelope, Notice of Public Hearing and a map depicting the landscape areas maintained by your district.

If you have questions or concerns, you may contact Alvin Dias, Deputy Public Works Director at 559- 415-7189 or Russ Sterling , Public Works Director at 559-585-2565. Thank you for your time and consideration.

INFORMATION

The City is proposing an increase in the Benefit District Assessment Amount in order to keep up with maintenance costs for the common landscape areas in the District and to create a small rese rve to help offset any future unexpected maintenance costs . Keeping the landscaped common areas maintained helps to keep neighborhoods looking good and helps to maintain property values .

Currently your district is comprised of 98 lots, with total current year benefit assessments equaling $2,812.60. The projected expenses are detailed as follows:

Annual Benefit District Assessment Reserve - Cash Balance as of June 30, 2024 $(418.69) Annual Benefit District Assessment Revenue Collected Amount $2,675.28 Proposed Expenses for the Fiscal Year $(5,887.99)
TOTAL PROJECTED ENDING CASH BALANCE $(3,631.40)

Projected CY Assessment Reserve - Cash Balance as of June 30, 2025 $(3,631.40) Annual Benefit District Assessment Revenue Proposed Collection Amount $2,812.60 Proposed Expenses for the Fiscal Year $(5,392.00)
TOTAL PROJECTED ENDING CASH BALANCE $(6,210.80)

Projected CY Assessment Reserve - Cash Balance as of June 30, 2026 $(6,210.80) Annual Benefit District Assessment Revenue Proposed Collection Amount $2,812.60 Proposed Expenses for the Fiscal Year $(4,997.70)
TOTAL PROPOSED ENDING CASH BALANCE $(8,395.90)

Based on the current benefit district assessment revenue and proposed expenses the total cash balance is $(8,395.90) for the projected fiscal year 2026.

Existing Amount Proposed Amount Increase
Monthly Per Lot $2.39 $13.42 $11.03
Annually Per Lot $28.70 $160.94 $132.24
Annually Per District $2,812.60 $15,771.76 $12,959.16

The cost to you to keep the maintenance up in your District will be an additional $132.24 per year, or $11.03 per month.

You will see this as an increase in the Property Benefit Assessment included on your County of Kings real property tax bill.

District: Cielo En Tierra
Fiscal Year Cash Balance: 2025 $ $(6,210.60)
Projected Fiscal Year Cash Balance: 2026 $ $(8,395.90)
Number of Lots multiplied by Assessment per Lot 98 X $28.70 $2,812.60

In addition to the proposed benefit assessment increase, the City is proposing that an annual benefit CPI adjustment allowance be established in accordance with California Government Section 53739(b)(1). The annual benefit assessment amount will be adjusted by the CPI on an annual basis in accordance with the following formula:

Commencing with fiscal year 2026 and on J uly 1 or each fiscal year (“Adjustment Date”) thereafter during the life of the District, the Total Annual Assessment amount for the next fiscal year shall be an amount equal to the greater of:
(i) the Total Annual Assessment amount in effect immediately prior to the Adjustment Date; or (ii) the product obtained by multiplying the Total Annual Assessment amount in effect immediately prior to the Adjustment Date by a fraction, the numerator of which is the Index published nearest but prior to the Adjustment Date and the denominator of which is the Index published nearest but prior to July 1 of the first year of the Adjustment becomes effective.

The term “Index” means the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose Consolidated Statistical Area, 1982- 1984, equal 100, published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the United States Department of Labor. If the Bureau of Labor Statistics revises the Index, the Bureau of Labor Statistics will be the sole judge of the comparability of successive indexes, but if that agency fails to supply indexes that it deems comparable or if no succeeding index is published, the City shall determine an appropriate alternative published price index.

This annual CPI adjustment allowance process is already being used in districts created after 2001. If approved, the annual inflation allowance will allow the City to better fiscally manage the district and to more closely match benefit assessment revenue to the actual costs incurred.

On the last page is a ballot which gives you, the property owner, certain options:

Yes. I approve of the proposed Benefit Assessment Increase for Fiscal Year 2026. If a majority of the returned ballots select YES, it will allow the City to secure funding from your District for the current increased costs of maintenance and utilize a CPI adjustment inflation formula to offset future maintenance cost increases . With the proposed Benefit Assessment Increase the current cash balance deficiency will be repaid and funding will become available to fund enhancement projects for the district.

No. I do not approve of the proposed Benefit Assessment Increase for Fiscal Year 2026. If a majority of the returned ballots select NO, it will cause the City to re-evaluate the level of maintenance provided to your District, which will likely result in reduced maintenance, such as reduced watering and/or reduced frequency of mowing and trimming of the common areas.

It is very important that you complete and return your ballot. Ballots that are not returned will not be counted. If the “no” ballots exceed the number of “yes” ballots, the proposed fee increase and automatic CPI adjustment will not occur. If only a few people return ballots to the City, those few people will make the decision for the entire district.

The failure to raise assessment fees will result in a reduction in maintenance services, which will result in a deterioration of the landscaping and/or other improvements.

If the CPI adjustment is approved, any future increase in assessment fees that exceed the CPI adjustment will require the City to distribute ballots and seek owner approval.

If you want maintenance of the landscaping and other improvements to remain at the current level, it will be necessary to vote “yes” and to return your ballot to the City.

Notice of Public Hearing

A Public Hearing for this proposal will be held on April 07, 2026, at the hour of 5.30 PM in the Council Chambers of the Civic Auditorium at 400 N. Douty Street, Hanford, CA. The ballots will be counted and the results announced at the end of the City Council Special Meeting that same evening. At this meeting, affected citizens will have an opportunity to speak to Council, and may also change their ballot vote if desired.

City of Hanford City Clerk’s Office
319 N. Douty Street
Hanford, CA 93230

April 07, 2026

BALLOT INSTRUCTIONS
Completion and Return Instructions:

1. Fill out the ballot at the bottom of this page. Be sure to print your name, mark your choice, sign, and date the ballot (the ballot will not be counted without your signature)

2. Fold this page so the address above is visible.

3. Insert this page into the provided return envelope so the Clerk’s address is visible through the window of the envelope.

4. Place appropriate postage on the return envelope and mail it.

5. In order to be counted, the ballot must arrive at the above address (City Clerk’s Office) on or before 5:00pm, April 07, 2026.

6. ALTERNATIVE DELIVERY: You may also hand deliver the ballot to the City Clerk’s office at 319 N. Douty Street, Hanford, CA, on or before 5:00pm on April 07, 2026 or hand deliver the ballot to the City Clerk at the time of the Public Hearing on April 07, 2026. If delivered in person, the ballot must be in a sealed envelope, or it cannot be accepted.

If you have any question or concerns about the ballot process or Increase in the Annual Benefit District Assessment or Annual Benefit District Assessment Adjustment for Inflation Allowance, please contact Alvin Dias, Deputy Public Works Director at 559 -415-7189 or Russ Sterling, Public Works Director at 585-2565.

DISTRICT No. 92-02 CIELO EN TIERRA BENEFIT DISTRICT
City of Hanford, City Clerk’s Office
319 N. Douty Street
Hanford, CA 93230

Re: 92-02 Cielo en Tierra District Ballot

BALLOT (CIELO EN TIERRA)
Proposal: Increase the annual benefit district assessment amount from $28.70 to $160.94 and establish an Annual Benefit District Assessment adjustment for inflation allowance.

«OWNER_NAME», owning property with Assessment Number «APN»:

(Check one) Fee Increase APPROVES DISAPPROVES

_________________________________________________ ______________________ (Property Owner Signature) (Date)

_________________________________________________
(Print Name)

13.C.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 4/7/2026 AGENDA SECTION: PUBLIC HEARING

SUBJECT:

PUBLIC HEARING – To receive ballots and public testimony on the proposed rate increase for the City of Hanford Refuse Division. Following the close of the Public Hearing, ballots will be opened and tabulated, with results certified and reported prior to the close of the City Council Regular Session.

Authorization for staff to implement rate increases based on certified results.

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation:

Staff recommends Council hold a Public Hearing, count protest votes and consider approval of Resolution 26-20-R for the City of Hanford refuse rate adjustments effective May 1, 2026.

Recommended Motion:

I move to adopt resolution 26-20-R for the City of Hanford refuse rate adjustments effective May 1, 2026.

BACKGROUND:

City Council has the authority to approve rate changes when necessary to ensure the continued recovery of costs for services and to secure reinvestment into the system infrastructure for long-term sustainability. As part of the recommended approval today, Council would be accepting the 2025 Hanford Refuse Rate Study.

At the April 1, 2025, meeting, Council received a presentation on the current status of the Refuse Division fund balances and the challenges the division faced. At that time, Council authorized staff to issue a request for proposals (RFP) to conduct a more current and complete rate study.

City staff issued the RFP and received three proposals. Four staff members independently evaluated each proposal on pre-determined criteria and selected R3 Consultants to perform a Prop 218 rate study and a performance evaluation on all the Refuse operation and City Fleet operations.

At the December 2, 2025, Council meeting, Council and the public received a presentation on the results of the current rate study and the proposed rate increases needed to support the Refuse Division.

The last Refuse Rate Study was performed in 2022 and adopted by Council at the October 18, 2022, meeting. Before that increase, it had been two years without a proper rate increase and the Refuse Division was already trending towards a deficit. The 2022 rate did not take into consideration several variables that essentially affected the operating budget, which is now currently at an approximately

$3.0 million dollar deficit as of the latest FY25 audit.

The 2022 rate study assumed only minor increases, for inflation, in contracted tipping fees over the course of the previous study. At the time of the previous study, tipping fees at KWRA were $58 a ton for general waste and $40 a ton for recycling and green waste. Currently, those charges have increased to $75 for general waste and $55 a ton for recycling and $40 a ton for green waste, vast increases that the City of Hanford was not aware of at the time and increases that exceeded the inflationary increases.

Another reason for the shortfall in the previous rate study was a projection of 3.5% increase in all cost components, including commercial bins, residential containers and vehicles. The cost of one residential refuse truck, at the time of the 2022 rate study, was $310,000 and currently the actual cost is $510,000 as of the last vehicle purchase, a 65% increase. Commercial refuse bins and residential carts have increased 25% since the last rate study as well.

It is assumed, at the time of the previous rate study completion, that staff was unaware of pending airboard regulations that would accelerate the replacement of outdated vehicles. Due to this airboard mandate, the City was required, by the State, to replace three trucks at a cost of $459,000 each, ahead of the scheduled replacement timeframe.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Rates are proposed to be increased by an average of 10% on May 1, 2026, followed by four increases over the next 4 years at a rate of 10% on July 1, 2027, and 5% each of the remaining three years.

Rate increases that follow are to fund the replacement of aging vehicles through contributions to the Fleet Reserve Fund, incorporate an industry standard routing program to better track missed and contaminated containers and fund one (1) full-time receptionist for the Refuse Division.

ALTERNATIVE

The alternative is to not issue a rate increase. The consequences of not doing so will be inadequate funding to effectively operate the City's Refuse Enterprise Fund, primarily, the inability to replace outdated and out-of-compliance vehicles, along with the inability to maintain cost recovery for the increased tipping fees that the City is obligated to pay under contract.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. 2025 Prop 218 Public Notice

2. 2025 Refuse Enterprise Financial Analysis and Rate Study

1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
1314
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 7677
78 79
80 81
82 83
84 85
86 87
88 89
90 94
95 96
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
120
121

B C D E F G H I J K L M N

CITY OF HANFORD
SOLID WASTE RATE MODEL Rate Model Summary (RM 1)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
FY 27 FY 28 FY 29 FY 30 FY 31 FY 32 FY 33 FY 34 FY 35 FY 36 FY 25/26 FY 25/26 FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FY 31/32 FY 32/33 FY 33/34 FY 34/35 FY 35/36 SUMMARY RESULTS Original
Budget
Ammended
Budget Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Projected Revenue $ 11,714,012.28 11,714,012$ 13,058,578$ 14,557,126$ 15,499,462$ 16,500,191$ 18,806,031$ 18,429,888$ 19,340,332$ 20,296,299$ 21,300,063$ 22,354,017$ Expenditures $ 11,638,710.00 11,925,285$ 13,278,869$ 13,728,658$ 14,349,271$ 14,997,620$ 15,570,150$ 16,164,633$ 16,781,914$ 17,422,872$ 18,088,417$ 18,779,496$ Overall Surplus/(Shortfall) 75,302$ (211,273)$ (220,291)$ 828,468$ 1,150,191$ 1,502,571$ 3,235,881$ 2,265,254$ 2,558,418$ 2,873,427$ 3,211,647$ 3,574,520$ as % of Total Expenditures 0.6% -1.8% -1.7% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 20.8% 14.0% 15.2% 16.5% 17.8% 19.0% Annual Revenue Increase = 11.48% 11.48% 6.47% 6.46% 13.97% -2.00% 4.94% 4.94% 4.95% 4.95% Annual Expense Increase = 11.35% 3.39% 4.52% 4.52% 3.82% 3.82% 3.82% 3.82% 3.82% 3.82% Operating Reserve
Beginning of FY (July 1) (3,010,494)$ (3,221,767)$ (3,442,058)$ (2,613,590)$ (1,463,399)$ 39,172$ 3,275,053$ 5,540,308$ 8,098,725$ 10,972,152$ 14,183,799$ End of FY (June 30) (3,221,767)$ (3,442,058)$ (2,613,590)$ (1,463,399)$ 39,172$ 3,275,053$ 5,540,308$ 8,098,725$ 10,972,152$ 14,183,799$ 17,758,319$ % of Expenditures -27.0% -25.9% -19.0% -10.2% 0.3% 21.0% 34.3% 48.3% 63.0% 78.4% 94.6% Months of Expenditures -3.2 -3.1 -2.3 -1.2 0.0 2.5 4.1 5.8 7.6 9.4 11.3 Other Reserve Fund Balances
Equipment Replacement Fund (FYE) (RM 5) 4,430,767$ 3,375,053$ 2,201,375$ 1,371,425$ 1,265,306$ (1,045,788)$ 282,745$ 1,663,830$ (467,408)$ 795,033$ 2,346,582$ Solid Waste CIP Fund (FYE) (RM 7) 816,132$ 722,132$ 1,156,613$ 465,076$ 338,795$ 865,659$ 970,431$ 1,109,780$ 1,285,074$ 1,497,737$ 1,749,244$ Residential Collection Rate 26.79$ 29.47$ 32.42$ 34.04$ 35.74$ 37.53$ 39.40$ 41.37$ 43.44$ 45.61$ 47.89$ Residential Street Sweeping Rate 4.40$ 4.84$ 5.32$ 5.59$ 5.87$ 6.16$ 6.47$ 6.79$ 7.13$ 7.49$ 7.87$ Residential Rate (with Street Sweeping) 31.19$ 34.31$ 37.74$ 39.63$ 41.61$ 43.69$ 45.87$ 48.17$ 50.58$ 53.10$ 55.76$ $ Change Residential 3.12$ 3.43$ 1.89$ 1.98$ 2.08$ 2.18$ 2.29$ 2.41$ 2.53$ 2.66$ % Change Residential 10.00% 10.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% Commercial 96G Can Collection Rate 48.82 53.70$ 59.07$ 62.03$ 65.13$ 68.38$ 71.80$ 75.39$ 79.16$ 83.12$ 87.28$ Commercial Street Sweeping Rate 4.40$ 4.84$ 5.32$ 5.59$ 5.87$ 6.16$ 6.47$ 6.79$ 7.13$ 7.49$ 7.87$ Commercial Can Rate (with Street Sweeping) 53.22$ 58.54$ 64.40$ 67.62$ 71.00$ 74.55$ 78.27$ 82.19$ 86.30$ 90.61$ 95.14$ $ Change Commercial Can 5.32$ 5.85$ 3.22$ 3.38$ 3.55$ 3.73$ 3.91$ 4.11$ 4.31$ 4.53$ % Change Commercial Can 10.00% 10.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% Commercial 3 YD Bin (1x/wk) Collection Rate 123.2 135.52$ 149.07$ 156.53$ 164.35$ 172.57$ 181.20$ 190.26$ 199.77$ 209.76$ 220.25$ Commercial Street Sweeping Rate 4.40$ 4.84$ 5.32$ 5.59$ 5.87$ 6.16$ 6.47$ 6.79$ 7.13$ 7.49$ 7.87$ Commercial 3 YD Bin Rate (with Street Sweeping) 127.60$ 140.36$ 154.40$ 162.12$ 170.22$ 178.73$ 187.67$ 197.05$ 206.91$ 217.25$ 228.11$ $ Change Commercial 3 YD Bin 12.76$ 14.04$ 7.72$ 8.11$ 8.51$ 8.94$ 9.38$ 9.85$ 10.35$ 10.86$ % Change Commercial 3 YD Bin 10.00% 10.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00%

REVENUE AND EXPENSE ADJUSTMENTS
RATE ADJUSTMENT TIMING INPUTS FY 25/26 FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FY 31/32 FY 32/33 FY 33/34 FY 34/35 FY 35/36 Rate Adjustment Effective Date - July 1st July 1st July 1st July 1st July 1st July 1st July 1st July 1st July 1st July 1st July 1st Note: All fiscal years begin July 1st, and the default rate adjustment date is July 1st. Any later rate adjustment date will result in decreased rate revenues for the projected fiscal year.

RATE/REVENUE ADJUSTMENT INPUTS FY 25/26 FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FY 31/32 FY 32/33 FY 33/34 FY 34/35 FY 35/36 Revenue Category Rate Revenue? Note: These percentages may be overridden for specific revenue line items on page RM2.

SFD Res. Garbage Rates Yes 0.0% 10.0% 10.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% SFD Res. Recycling Rates Yes 0.0% 10.0% 10.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% SFD Res. Organics Rates Yes 0.0% 10.0% 10.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% Comm. Garbage Rates Yes 0.0% 10.0% 10.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% Comm. Recycling Rates Yes 0.0% 10.0% 10.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% Comm. Organics Rates Yes 0.0% 10.0% 10.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% Street Sweeping - Res. Rates Yes 0.0% 10.0% 10.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% Street Sweeping - Comm. Rates Yes 0.0% 10.0% 10.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% Non-Rate Revenue No 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Actual Overall Revenue Adjustment (per RM2) 0.0% 9.8% 9.8% 4.9% 4.9% 4.9% 4.9% 4.9% 4.9% 4.9% -13.3% User Overridden Revenue Adjustments on RM2? None None None None None None None None None None None EXPENDITURE ADJUSTMENT INPUTS FY 25/26 FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FY 31/32 FY 32/33 FY 33/34 FY 34/35 FY 35/36 Expenditure Category - Note: These percentages may be overridden for specific expenditure line items on page RM2.

No Adjustment - 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Labor / Wages - 0.0% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% Fuel - 0.0% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% Vehicle Replacement - 0.0% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% Vehicle Maintenance - 0.0% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% All Other - 0.0% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% Disposal/Processing - 0.0% 3.35% 3.35% 3.35% 3.35% 3.35% 3.35% 3.35% 3.35% 3.35% 3.35% Retirement - 0.0% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% Workers Compensation - 0.0% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% Health Insurance - 0.0% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 5% Annual Adjustment - 0.0% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% 3.96% Actual Overall Expense Adjustment (per RM2) 2.5% 11.35% 3.39% 4.52% 4.52% 3.82% 3.82% 3.82% 3.82% 3.82% 3.82% User Overridden Expense Adjustments on RM2? None None None None None None None None None None None Note: All non-"User Input" cells on this sheet are
protected to prevent accidental changes. There is no
password to unprotect. (Go to "Review" tab → click
"Unprotect Sheet" to unprotect.)
Calculated Shortfall

CELL DATA SOURCES
User Input
Calculated Value
Calculated Surplus
Year
Jordan Muratsuchi:

Per City 9/23/25 Trial
Balance
CIP annual expenses for
Years 6-10 based on averge
of Years 1-5 = $710K
annually
This is In addition to the
Residential and Commercial
Collection Rate per City and is
separetly shown on the bill
K:\Russ\2025 Refuse Enterprose Financial Analysis and Rate Study / Rate Model Summary (RM1) 3/26/2026 / 1:31 PM

14.A.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 4/7/2026 AGENDA SECTION: GENERAL BUSINESS

SUBJECT:

Authorize a Change Order for $565,000.00 to the existing Professional Engineering Services contract with QK for Complete Streets Design services on East Lacey Boulevard (10th Avenue to Sierra Drive)

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation:

That the City Council, by motion, authorizes the City Manager to execute a change order for $565,000.00 to the existing Professional Engineering Services contract with QK for Complete Streets Design services on East Lacey Boulevard.

Recommended Motion:

I move to authorize the City Manager to issue a change order for $565,000.00 to the existing Professional Engineering Services contract with QK for Complete Streets Design services on East Lacey Boulevard.

BACKGROUND:

The East Lacey Boulevard roadway reconstruction project between 10th Avenue and east of Sierra Drive is currently in the PS&E phase with QK, Inc. providing consultant services. Since the project's inception, numerous factors have influenced its development, including:
• Coordinating with the High-Speed Rail Authority to create a corridor from Downtown to the High-Speed Rail station,
• Coordination with the Perkins & Will Transportation Oriented Development (TOD) grant planning study north of Lacey Boulevard between 9th Avenue and State Route 43, • Programming of federal funding through a Congressional Earmark largely secured through the efforts of Congressman David Valadao,
• Coordinating with Caltrans regarding the 9th at State Hightway198 interchange, • Coordination with the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) for an at-grade railroad crossing and utility boring at two locations beneath the tracks,
• Coordination with Southern California Edison (SCE) and other joint utilities to establish an underground service district (Rule 20 district) from 10th Avenue to west of the UPRR crossing,
• A traffic study of the intersection of 9th Avenue at Lacey Boulevard to evaluate future traffic conditions and intersection layout,
• Coordination with the Downtown RAISE Grant project to ensure consistency in design goals,

• Evaluation of the 10th Avenue at Lacey Boulevard intersection for operational deficiencies.

The cumulative impacts of these efforts required the East Lacey Boulevard project to be reassessed for overall consistency.

On September 20, 2022, the City Council awarded a Design Engineering contract for the project to QK, Inc. in the amount of $869,482.90. The project included preparation of plans, specifications, and estimates for installing curb and gutter and sidewalk within the project limits, as well as providing pedestrian and bicycle safety improvements. Initial Master plans included two lanes of traffic in each direction, a dual left turn lane in the median, no street parking, sidewalks, and "Share the Road" bicycle facilities along the corridor.

This design concept would have resulted in a five-lane arterial roadway that promotes higher vehicle speeds and may discourage bicycle and pedestrian use. In May 2023, the city received 60% design plans, with the final construction documents scheduled to be completed in December 2024. At that time, it was determined that the project was not consistent with the other planned and ongoing projects in the area. As a result, the consultant proposed conducting a traffic analysis to determine whether the corridor could function effectively as two-lane roadway utilizing a Complete Streets “road diet” approach.

In June 2024, Council authorized a change order to perform an Operational Traffic Analysis at the intersection of 9th Avenue and Lacey Boulevard. The analysis evaluated the feasibility of a reduction in travel lanes, and compliance with National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements associated with the federal Congressional Earmark Funding.

Staff also revisited the original goals for the Congestion Mitigated Air Quality (CMAQ) grant, which emphasizes bicycle and pedestrian improvements, and determined that this project presents a unique opportunity to implement a Complete Streets design approach. This approach would incorporate features such as curb bulb outs, shade trees, designated bicycle lanes and enhanced pedestrian crossings.

The traffic analysis evaluated future traffic volumes, circulation patterns and volumes and preliminary project right of way needs at the intersection. The analysis concluded that a single travel lane in each direction on East Lacey Boulevard is feasible. This finding allows the city to pursue a corridor design that safely accommodates all modes of transportation. A Complete Streets approach includes raised medians at strategic locations, separated and protected bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and design elements intended to reduce vehicle speeds and improve overall safety.

The City continues to meet regularly wit the High-Speed Rail Authority (HSRA) to coordinate station area improvements and provide updates on the East Lacey Boulevard project. The HSRA has consistently encouraged the city to establish East Lacey Boulevard as a primary connection between Downtown and the future High Speed Rail station. In response, the city is pursuing a design that transforms East Lacey Boulevard into a landmark corridor that supports all modes of transportation including vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles, and transit. This approach aligns with the HSRA’s emphasis on multimodal accessibility.

The East Lacey Boulevard project will include Complete Street improvements from 10th Avenue to approximately 150 feet east of Sierra Avenue. As previously presented to City Council, the

'Complete Streets' concept is a transportation policy and design approach that promotes safe, comfortable, and accessible streets for all users, regardless of travel mode. The Complete Streets Act of 2008 (AB 1358) requires cities and counties in California to consider the needs of all users in General Plan updates. This concept encompasses a wide range of design elements to accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and transit users of all ages and abilities, with the goal of creating safer, more equitable, and environmentally sustainable communities.

In August 2025, the City Council authorized staff to pursue the Complete Streets approach for this project. The process included an engineering traffic analysis of the corridor, a City Council presentation, and two public outreach events that invited stakeholders along the corridor as well as members of the general public.

Based on funding requirements and the results of the process, the proposed concept plan will include a single travel lane in each direction, along with protected pedestrian and bicycle pathways and designated bus stop locations. Staff requested that the design engineers provide a scope of work and cost estimate to update the existing plans to meet the Complete Streets objectives of the project. Revising the 60% improvement plans will require some additional redesign and associated costs along the corridor, as outlined in the attached proposal. The previously proposed roadway profile will remain largely unchanged.

Enhanced safety features, including curb bulb-outs, raised medians, and protected bicycle lanes, will be strategically incorporated into the project design. This change order will implement the necessary redesign elements to achieve the Complete Streets approach and incorporate aesthetic features that create continuity between project phases.

According to the attached change order proposal, the consultant will revise the project layout and prepare plans, specifications, and estimates for a total estimated fee of $565,000.00.

In response to public input and the City’s efforts to ensure clear communication with affected property owners, the proposed change order also includes time for the consultant to meet individually with approximately 80 property owners. These meetings will provide property owners with a clear understanding of the proposed improvements, allow them to review project impacts to their frontages, and offer an opportunity for feedback. Union Pacific Railway (UPRR) is currently designing the at-grade railroad crossing on East Lacey Boulevard, with completion of those plans anticipated to coincide with the City’s PS&E phase. Additionally, Southern California Edison (SCE) is preparing final Rule 20 underground district plans between 10th Avenue and east of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) crossing. Once the project plans reach the 90% design stage, the city will apply to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to initiate the Right of Way phase, allowing appraisals and acquisition of necessary property interests to proceed.

Additional right of way needs are expected to be limited primarily to intersections to accommodate truck turning movements, and along 9th Avenue to allow the arterial connection between the future State Highway 198 interchange to Grangeville Boulevard. Federal requirements stipulate that the NEPA clearance must be obtained prior to initiating any discussions with property owners regarding right of way acquisition.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The FY 25/26 Capital Improvements Budget provides funding for this project in the amount of $12,049,850.00, with an additional $7,315,245.00 from the Congressional Earmark which is not yet appropriated. The funding for the project is summarized as follows:

FY 2025-2026
East Lacey Boulevard from 10th Avenue to east of Sierra Drive Budget

FUND FUND DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
0359 STORM DRAIN CAPITAL $ 792,230.00
0362 WASTEWATER CAPITAL $ 399,280.00
0181 TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE $ 2,417,290.00
0044 GAS TAX $ 1,126,291.00
0045 GAS TAX RMRA $ 4,550,500.00
0050 TDA $ 1,356,500.00
0055 CMAQ $ 457,099.00
0391 WATER CAPITAL $ 950,660.00
SUBTOTAL $ 12,049,850.00

CONGRESSIONAL EARMARK FROM VALADAO
- (NOT YET APPROPRIATED)
$ 7,315,245.00
TOTAL $ 19,365,095.00

There are five previously approved change orders for the project totaling $137,781.46:

1. CCO1 – Potholing - $49,088.36

2. CCO2 – Traffic Analysis – $26,050.00

3. CCO3 – NEPA Environmental Analysis - $58,290.00

4. CCO4 – Remove DBE Requirements – No cost

5. CCO5 – Prepare Valadao Event Exhibit - $4,353.10

Including these previously approved change orders, the current Professional Engineering Services Contract with QK is a total of $1,007,264.36. Approval of the Change Order request will increase QK's contract to $1,572,264.36. The change order additional work will provide the design to include
• Adjust the curb and gutter alignment and layout to allow the bicycle and pedestrian to operate as a shared pathway or separated by a protected bike lane in the roadway; • Center medians, turn pockets, truck turns, street parking, and bicycle lane protection medians;
• Complete landscape and irrigation construction drawings for installation of infrastructure for future improvements of street trees and planted medians; • Infrastructure for future lighted pedestrian walkways; • An encased water main crossing under the UPRR;
• A traffic analysis at 10th Avenue for operational deficiencies; • A traffic analysis of 9th Avenue for a potential roundabout; • Separating the storm drain construction plans into a separate bid package; • Providing the additional engineering necessary to coordinate the at-grade crossing approvals with UPRR;
• Meeting with individual property owners (approximately 80 properties) to provide understanding and review improvements. Property owner meetings are anticipated to occur in July–August 2026.

The fee breakdown for the additional change order services is shown on the attached Change Order. No. 6. The City currently has sufficient funding in the 0181 Transportation Impact Fee fund

available to fully fund the additional work.

The project schedule is a critical aspect of the project. Due to funding requirements, the city must have the project obligated and awarded for construction by September 2027. The consultant has fully committed to the attached project scheduled to meet this goal. The schedule shows plans and specifications to be completed by December 2026. At this time, staff will also be completing right of way acquisition and certification so that the project can then be submitted to Caltrans for construction funding authorization by late May 2027. The project will advertise and be awarded for construction by September 2027 and it is anticipated that construction will begin in October 2027.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Change Order #6 - Complete Streets

2. Schedule

January 21, 2026 (Revised March 25, 2026)
Lisa Dock
City Engineer
City of Hanford
900 South 10th Avenue
Hanford, CA 93230
Subject: Additional Services for the East Lacey Boulevard Pedestrian Facilities Project Dear Lisa Dock:

QK is pleased to present this proposal to provide the City of Hanford (City) with additional professional engineering, land surveying, and landscape architecture services related to the East Lacey Boulevard Pedestrian Facilities Project from 10th Avenue to Sierra Drive and the Traffic Signal Project at Lacey Boulevard and 9th Avenue (project).

At the inception of this project, the proposed Lacey Boulevard alignment was to be designed to maximize traffic flow.

At the City’s direction, the City and QK have been working to modify the Lacey Boulevard alignment and geometric configuration to incorporate a complete streets and road diet concept, allowing for reduced speeds and safer interactions among vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists. The plans for Lacey Boulevard were completed to approximately 60%, including submittal to the utility companies for design prior to the change in scope. This amendment identifies the additional services required to complete the final design.

QK proposes preparing a preliminary geometric layout that includes curb and gutter, sidewalk, driveway, and median locations. This layout will also identify turnaround locations and will solidify the geometry for both phases of Lacey Boulevard, including a shared bicycle and pedestrian pathway from 10 th Avenue to the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR)
and an on-pavement protected bike lane from the UPRR to Sierra Drive. Once this geometric layout is completed, QK and the City will complete a final layout, and the City will provide QK with direction to move forward.

The next most important step would be to identify the pole relocations for the utility companies, separation of the basin plans, and application to the UPRR for the utility crossings of both the storm drain pipeline and the water line extension.

QK will then include landscaping and irrigation design for the median east of the UPRR, additional traffic analysis for 10 th Avenue intersection operational improvements, and additional scope as described further.

Thank you for your continued confidence in the QK team. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this proposal further, please contact John Doyel or Jennifer Minear at (559) 733-0440. We look forward to beginning this work upon your approval.

Sincerely,
John Doyel, PE, PLS Amber Aguayo
Director of Engineering CFO/COO
Enclosure: Scope of Services and Fee Estimate
cc: Jennifer Minear, QK
P250613/220295.01

CB/AP/JM/JM/TI/JD

Scope of Services and Fee Estimate

Lisa Dock Page 1 of 14
January 21, 2026 (Revised March 25, 2026)

BACKGROUND
The Lacey Boulevard project consists of the improvement of East Lacey Boulevard from 10th Avenue to 150 feet east of Sierra Avenue in the City of Hanford ( project). The 60% submittal was submitted to the City in May 2023. Power pole relocation plans were prepared for the City and submitted to the utility companies to begin utility relocation design; the latest was provided in June 2024. The project was put on hold by the City for the following reasons, including: an additional traffic study/road diet prepared by JLB Traffic Engineering, Inc. (JLB) to study a complete concept of streets , additional federal funding from the high-speed rail project, Caltrans plans for the 9 th Avenue interchange, and community outreach by the City on driveway locations.

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
QK has been requested to provide additional services for the Lacey Boulevard project. These include:
• Separating the project’s two storm drain basin designs into one stand -alone storm drain basin construction project.
• Additional design services and Railroad coordination for the 9th Avenue water line extension. • Additional Railroad coordination and design services for the at-grade railroad crossing with Lacey Boulevard. • Design of replacement of the sanitary sewer main from 9th Avenue to the Costco development. • Additional design services due to road diet and public comments. • Additional signage and striping services due to road diet (Subconsultant – JLB). • Operation traffic analysis for 10th Avenue (JLB).
• Potential roundabout analysis at 9th Avenue (JLB).
• Reroute storm drain and jack and bore under UPRR at the 8-3/4 Avenue location.

APPROACH/SCOPE OF SERVICES
The following scope of services applies to additional services for Lacey Boulevard.

TASK 1.0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT
QK will provide overall project management for these additional services. The project management responsibilities include:
• Administration of the project through the increased project scope and schedule. • Prepare and maintain the master project schedule with additional updates. • Coordinate and conduct project meetings beyond the original scope of the project. These include meetings with the City regarding the road diet, traffic studies, and additional R ailroad coordination.

• Oversee all work items identified in this scope of services. • Prepare and submit project invoices monthly through the increased project scope and schedule .

Deliverables:
• Project schedule (monthly progress updates)
• Response to questions/correspondence
• Project invoices (monthly)
TASK 2.0 ADDITIONAL UTILITY COORDINATION
QK will provide additional Railroad coordination and design services for at -grade railroad crossing plans and utility coordination due to relocated curb and gutter alignments and additional design elements added to the project.

There has been an expansion of coordination and design services required for the East Lacey Boulevard at -grade railroad crossing improvements. This is due to the City of Hanford’s updated design concept stemming from the road

Lisa Dock – City of Hanford Page 2 of 14
January 21, 2026 (Revised March 25, 2026)
diet study and the Railroad’s feedback during the August 2025 on-site diagnostic meeting. The original assumptions underestimated the complexity and duration of the R ailroad’s review and permitting, necessitating additional engineering, coordination, and documentation efforts.

Additional efforts will also be required to coordinate with utility companies on the revisions to the required power pole plan. The City intends to maximize the number of poles eligible for utility -funded undergrounding; however, recent changes to Rule 20 limits and the new road diet design require updates to the utility pole layout. Furthermore, the City’s plan to incorporate ne w median lighting introduces additional coordination needs to reconcile existing versus proposed lighting during the utility coordination phase.

Key drivers for scope expansion:
• City’s Updated Design Concept: Incorporation of medians, shared-use path, revised curb returns, and pedestrian enhancements that impact railroad signal infrastructure and utility pole design. • Railroad Requirements: San Joaquin Valley Railroad ( SJVRR)/UPRR feedback during the site visit necessitates relocation of crossing arms, extended gate arms, and pedestrian safety upgrades. • Rule 20 updates: Draft power pole plans will need to be adjusted due to the Rule 20 extents revisions . • Extended Review Timeline: Railroad permitting and plan review timelines have proven significantly longer than anticipated, requiring sustained coordination and iterative submittals. • Utility Coordination Gaps: The utility coordinator (RISE Utility, formerly Omni) has not provided the expected support, requiring the design team to assume additional responsibilities. • Railroad ADA Pedestrian Crossing: The revised railroad pedestrian crossing design , based on Railroad feedback and the revised shared -use path concept from the City, warrants additional survey information to be acquired at the railroad crossing location.

To streamline the approval process, we will follow a phased submittal approach modeled after our coordination with Caltrans. Instead of submitting the full road widening plans, QK will prepare a standalone 30% layout exhibit focused on the railroad crossing area for initial review by the City and Railroad . This was suggested at the August 2025 on - site meeting with the Railroad. This targeted submittal allows the Railroad to provide early feedback without reviewing unrelated project elements.

After receiving comments, QK will incorporate the updates into the revised 60% Phase 2 i mprovement plans (Task

8.0). For subsequent Railroad reviews, QK will submit only the relevant sheets showing work within the railroad right- of-way. This approach keeps the full project plans up to date while reducing the cost and effort of producing a separate railroad-specific set of plans.

This task will exclude the engineering design of railroad items. It is assumed that the R ailroad will coordinate with their own design consultant for the design of railroad -specific items. This is a similar approach to previous railroad crossing designs within the City, i.e., Campus Drive. These include:
• Concrete crossing panels.
• At-grade crossing arms.
• Service meter.
• Coordination with the Railroad’s design consultant.

Deliverable:
• 30% at-grade railroad crossing plans for City and Railroad review TASK 3.0 PS&E PHASE – STORMWATER BASIN
The original project scope included a storm drain system and the design of two off -site basins as part of the road project, but did not treat them as stand -alone plan sets. This amendment will include the cost of separating the project’s basin design as a stand-alone plan set to facilitate basin-specific review, permitting, and construction.

Lisa Dock – City of Hanford Page 3 of 14
January 21, 2026 (Revised March 25, 2026)
Using the information discussed with the City during the project’s M aster Plan and 60% design task, QK’s team will prepare 90% and 100% plans, specifications, and estimates (PS&E) for review and approval by the City.

QK’s team will prepare the construction documents and obtain approvals through the City and all affected stakeholders. The City will provide front-end, boilerplate documents approved by the City Attorney for use in the Stormwater Basin PS&E documents. This phase includes services through final design PS&E and other related work.

QK will include the cost of advertising leading to the physical construction of the projects in the bidding phase services under Task 4.0.

The PS&E portion includes the following services.
• Preparation of PS&E:
o Plans will be prepared at a scale of 1” = 20’ and shall include profiles and details necessary to construct the project. The design shall comply with the approved Master Plan and City Standards.

o QK has delivered a 60% PS&E submittal. QK will deliver 90% Stormwater Basin PS&E submittal and 100% PS&E submittal.
o Construction plans shall include topographic survey, demolition plan, storm drain basins, construction detail plans, and other identified plans necessary for the construction of the project.

o Stormwater compliance documentation will be required from the awarded contractor. o Construction Specifications will be prepared following the City-provided format. • The City will prepare the Contract Specifications, and QK shall prepare the Special Provisions and Technical Specifications utilizing the City Master Specifications Template. • The City will provide a Master Specification that QK will utilize and modify accordingly in the preparation of the Special Provisions and Technical Specifications.
o The construction cost estimate shall be provided and updated for the Stormwater Basin project. o QK shall provide and share electronic documents, spreadsheets, AutoCAD files, survey notes, ties, and legal boundary information upon request throughout the project development. QK shall provide a complete set of project file documents and electronic data noted, complete and on a thumb drive, to the City at project completion (i.e., bid-ready and approved construction documents received).

o Both originally formatted files and converted .pdf copies of project bidding documents will be included.

Subtask 3.1 90% PS&E
Upon City direction and/or approval of the 60% PS&E, QK’s team will complete the full 90% PS&E package for submittal. All comments to the 60% PS&E will be addressed as appropriate.

Subtask 3.2 90% Submittal
The 90% PS&E will be submitted to the City for review and comment. Prior to submittal of the 90% PS&E to the City, QK’s team will conduct an internal Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) review of the complete PS&E package and will revise the package as needed.

Deliverables:
• Full-sized plans – 24” x 36” (two sets) for submittal to the City • Specifications (one set) for submittal to the City
• Estimates of probable costs (one set) for submittal to the City • City’s red-line comments to the 60% submittal

QK will meet with the City after reviewing the 90% submittal to discuss the comments received. QK will obtain direction and/or approval in writing on the 90% submittal before proceeding to the 100% PS&E.

Lisa Dock – City of Hanford Page 4 of 14
January 21, 2026 (Revised March 25, 2026)
Subtask 3.3 100% PS&E
Upon City direction and/or approval of the 90% PS&E, QK’s team will complete the full 100% PS&E package for submittal. All comments to the 90% PS&E will be addressed as appropriate.

QK’s construction management team will also provide a final constructability review of the 100% PS&E package and will inform the design team of any issues that need to be addressed. QK will advise the City on any remaining civil elements that may have constructability concerns. QK and the City will discuss any improvements to the plans that will assist prior to bidding.

Subtask 3.4 100% Submittal
The 100% PS&E will be submitted to the City for review and comment. Prior to submittal of the 100% PS&E to the City, QK’s team will conduct an internal QA/QC review of the complete PS&E package and will revise the package as needed.

Deliverables:
• Full-sized plans – 24” x 36” (two sets) for submittal to the City • Specifications (one set) for submittal to the City
• Estimates of probable costs (one set) for submittal to the City • City’s red-line comments to the 90% submittal

QK will meet with the City after review of the 100% submittal to discuss the comments received. QK will obtain written direction and/or approval on the 100% submittal package before providing the final, signed contract documents.

Subtask 3.5 Furnish Contract Documents
Once final approval for the project is received from the City, QK will prepare the final, signed PS&E package and submit it to the City for bidding. The City’s red-line comments to the 100% submittal will also be returned.

Deliverables:
• Full-sized, signed plans (two sets) for submittal to the City • Signed Specifications (one set) for submittal to the City • Estimates of probable costs (one set) for submittal to the City • City’s red-line comments to the 100% submittal

QK will provide the 90% and 100% PS&E documents in electronic format (Microsoft Excel and Word, PDF , and 2026 AutoCAD Civil 3D) and up to three hard copies, if needed. The signed final PS&E document will be provided in hard copy format with signed plans on mylar or vellum, and in electronic format (Microsoft Excel and Word, PDF, and 2026 AutoCAD Civil 3D).

TASK 4.0 BIDDING SERVICES PHASE – STORMWATER BASIN
Upon approval of the PS&E (Task 3.0), the City will bid and advertise the project . QK will provide bidding services as needed, on a Time -and-Materials (T&M) basis, at the approved rates per the Consultant Agreement . The bidding services include:
• Review and respond to bid questions as needed.
• Assist with addenda as needed.
• Attend pre-bid meeting as needed.

Lisa Dock – City of Hanford Page 5 of 14
January 21, 2026 (Revised March 25, 2026)
Deliverables:
• Meeting notes from the pre-bid meeting
• Assistance with the preparation of addenda as requested by the City TASK 5.0 CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION SERVICES PHASE – STORMWATER BASIN Upon award and/or execution of the Stormwater Basins contract with the selected contractor (Tasks 3.0 and 4.0), QK shall provide construction administration services as needed, on a T&M basis, at the approved rates per the Consultant Agreement. The construction administration services include:
• Review of RFIs and submittals as needed.
• Attending the pre-construction meeting (to be determined).

It is understood that the City will serve as the Project Manager, Contract and Labor Compliance Coordinator, and Project Engineer/RE throughout the construction phase.

Any other requests for QK services during construction will be provided on an as -needed basis, on a T&M basis, per a separate contract amendment. Construction staking, if needed, will be provided per separate contract amendment.

Deliverables:
• Responses to RFIs and submittals as requested by the City • Meeting notes from the pre-construction meeting
TASK 6.0 ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES AND RAILROAD COORDINATION FOR THE 9 TH AVENUE WATER LINE EXTENSION AND 8-3/4 AVENUE STORM DRAIN CROSSING Per the existing contract, QK will provide utility coordination services for the utility relocations and adjustments identified in the current Master Plan, the updated documents, and construction documents. An additional scope to the underground crossing design and coordination scope was added per discussion with the City. The City desires a water line to be extended from Lacey Boulevard to the north along 9 th Avenue, beginning at Lacey Boulevard and ending north of the railroad r ight-of-way. The design fee will anticipate a maximum of 50’ water line extension north of the railroad right -of-way and will utilize existing topographic survey performed for the storm drain crossing with the special track survey. The original master planned design included a storm drain pipeline crossing at 9 th Avenue, which required an easement within the railroad right -of-way parallel with the tracks to reach the storm drain basin. After initial submittals to the railroad company, the parallel easement was not approved, and the storm drain design was required to be revised to cross at the 8 ¾ Avenue crossing to reach the storm drainage basin. The design fee will include submittals and processing for approvals and construction of two jack and bore crossings of the railroad (9
th Avenue and 8 – 3/4 Avenue). Encasements will extend beyond the railroad right-of-way and meet all UPRR/SJVRR permitting requirements .

Deliverables:
• Inclusion of water design at 9th Avenue crossing in the design plans (Task 8.0) and coordination efforts with the Railroad for permitting approvals.
• Redesign of storm water system to jack and bore under the UPRR at the 8 -3/4 Avenue crossing location and coordinate efforts with the Railroad for permitting and approvals.

TASK 7.0 ADDITIONAL LAND SURVEYING SERVICES AND RIGHT-OF-WAY PHASE – ROAD DIET QK has previously performed right-of-way services and land surveying services for the project. To comply with ADA requirements for pedestrian railroad crossings, supplemental survey services are needed to provide an updated ADA- compliant topographic survey at the proposed at -grade railroad crossing location and at the relocated jack and

Lisa Dock – City of Hanford Page 6 of 14
January 21, 2026 (Revised March 25, 2026)
bore location of the storm drain pipeline crossing on 8-3/4 Avenue. The survey data collected will be incorporated into the existing topographic data set.

Subtask 7.1 Topographic Survey
Utilizing GPS technologies, QK will perform a supplemental topographic survey at two locations. The first location shall be the at -grade railroad crossing area for the preparation of the necessary survey and engineering maps.

Pedestrian crossing locations. This survey will be referenced to stations providing elevation data in NAVD88, utilizing the City’s 2004 datum benchmark system as used in the existing East Lacey Boulevard plans. Additionally, at the 8 - 3/4 Avenue railroad crossing, QK will perform sup plemental topographic survey for the jack and bore of the storm drain pipeline and will include special track survey data per UPRR requirements. Our scope of services will consist of the following elements to provide supplemental surveying at two locations:

Topographic Survey:
• Obtain permits required to enter railroad property to collect the topographic survey and special track survey data
• Spot elevations to determine contours, including the track and top and toe of slopes. • Above-ground features at two locations , including curb, gutter , and sidewalk, buildings/structures (if any), fences, footprint of existing sanitary sewer lift station, power poles, signs, basin, well(s), visible above-ground utilities, access roads, railroad lines, and site features not already collected wit h the original topographic survey.
• Locations, depths, size, and type of sanitary sewer and storm drain lines and manholes. • Collect USA markings, if any, observed in the project area. • Perform special track survey meeting all requirements of the Railroad requirements for jacking and boring under the railroad tracks
• Post-process field data and analyze the accuracy and completeness of data. • Import topographic data into AutoCAD and reduce it to a readable, 20’ scale CAD drawing. • Create a surface to illustrate contours.
• QA/QC review of files by a professional land surveyor. • Provide CAD drawing at 1” = 20’ scale.

Deliverable:
• Topographic survey, including points, planimetric data, and surface information in AutoCAD Civil 3D 202 6 format
Exclusions and Assumptions:
• Record of Survey is excluded.
• Identifying or setting property corners is excluded.
• Subsurface utilities are excluded.
• Utility research is excluded.

Subtask 7.2 Legal Descriptions, Exhibits of Right-of-Way, and Easements QK will provide the necessary documentation for right-of-way certification as outlined in the original RFP and this task for the City’s use . QK submitted l egal descriptions and appraisal exhibits to the City for review in December 2023 .

With the initial contract, there were 20 locations for right-of-way which were provided by QK. Of the current 20 right- of-way acquisition and legal description locations, there are six locations where the revised improvements based on the road diet will require an update to the previously completed items.

Lisa Dock – City of Hanford Page 7 of 14
January 21, 2026 (Revised March 25, 2026)
For this subtask, QK will:
• Update previously prepared legal descriptions and exhibits for right-of-way; legal descriptions shall include:
o Southeast corner of 9 ½ Avenue
o Southwest corner of 9 ½ Avenue
o All four corners of 9th Avenue
Deliverable:
• Legal descriptions and exhibits as identified above (assumed up to six affected properties) in PDF format , signed and stamped by a licensed land surveyor
Subtask 7.3 Appraisal Exhibits
Upon approval of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA documents, the City will proceed with right -of-way acquisitions and utility relocations identified in the preliminary engineering phase. First, the City will submit a request for funding authorization for the r ight-of-way/utility relocation phase (E-76). Once the funding request is approved, the City will pursue right -of-way appraisals and acquisition. The City will utilize the legal descriptions and exhibits prepared by QK and hire a third -party appraiser and land acquisitionist to acquire the necessary right-of-way and easements identified in the preliminary engineering phase.

For this task, QK will:
• Prepare appraisal exhibits for the revised six parcels . The e xhibits will show the acquisition of right -of-way and easements, along with existing and proposed improvements to be used for appraisals and negotiations. • The information provided will be the legal descriptions and exhibits prepared in Subt ask 7.2 and the improvement plans prepared in Task 8.0.

Deliverable:
• Legal descriptions, exhibits, and improvement plans prepared in Subtask 7.2 and Task 8.0 TASK 8.0 ADDITIONAL PS&E PHASE – ROAD DIET
The City conducted a Traffic Operations Analysis Report (road diet) with JLB, which resulted in a revised design that enhances safety, mobility, and access for all road users and lowers the project's construction costs . The additional PS&E phase for the East Lacey Boulevard i mprovements will commence with a revised scope to address recent changes in project requirements. The updated scope reflects the City’s adoption of a road diet traffic study, updated road cross sections, relocation of curb and gutter to accommodate bike lanes, the addition of new medians and curb bulb outs, landscaping, street trees and irrigation, installation of streetlights and pedestrian lighting, confirmation of proposed utilities in relation to the new medians, integration of a shared -use path and pro tected bike lanes , and consideration of public comments received to date.

Due to the significant design changes and the elapsed time since the original 60% submittal (completed in 2023), the PS&E phase will restart with a new 30% layout and 60% design submittals. These submittals will:

• Incorporate all new design elements and public input. • Provide opportunities for City review and feedback.

Upon completion and approval of the revised 60% submittal, the project will resume the original contract scope at the 90%, 100%, and f inal PS&E packages in accordance with the project schedule established by QK and the City , leveraging prior work where applicable and focusing on finalizing bid -ready documents.

Lisa Dock – City of Hanford Page 8 of 14
January 21, 2026 (Revised March 25, 2026)
Key elements to be addressed:
• Road Diet Implementation: Redesign of the corridor to reduce travel lanes, introduce new medians, and improve traffic flow and safety for all users.

• Street Lighting: Integration of new lighting infrastructure to enhance visibility and safety along the corridor . • Shared Use Path: Design and incorporation of a shared use path to support pedestrian and bicycle mobility, consistent with active transportation objectives.

• Utility Coordination: Comprehensive re -confirmation of existing and proposed wet and dry utilities, with particular attention to conflicts and adjustments required by new medians and other design changes . • Public Engagement: Incorporation of public comments received to date, ensuring the final design reflects community priorities and concerns.

• Additional Utility Relocation: Design of replacement of sewer main from 9 th Avenue east to the Costco development to increase the size of the main and allow for additional capacity to serve the areas east of Highway 43.

Subtask 8.1 Preliminary Engineering Design (30% Concept) QK’s team will coordinate to provide preliminary engineering services to move the project forward to civil engineering design, including resolving any outstanding issues raised by the team and/or the City during previous tasks.

QK will create visual materials for use in presentation to the City Council that tells the story of the vision for the project.

The overall vision for the City of Hanford’s streetscape will be developed in collaboration with the City to create a new complete street along East Lacey Blvd. Design elements could include bollards, trail markers, signage, and street crossing lights. The new theme could be entitled “Where the Past Ignites the Future”. QK will develop inspirational story boards of how the street w ill incorporate past themes with future design elements. QK will provide street planview/sections that will demonstrate various streetscape treatment scenarios between landscape buffers, vehicles, bike lanes, on-street parking and pedestrian circulation.

Based on recent conversations with the City, QK will also provide Complete Streets concepts to discuss with the City.

QK will work with their partner s to research and gather complete streets concepts to propose to the City Engineer.

QK will work with the City Engineer to determine which Complete Streets concepts are appropriate for the project and incorporate them into the preliminary design plan.

QK will complete a preliminary design plan, including the intersection geometric layout, curb returns, striping, lane widths, utilities, streetlights, medians, bus stops, and driveway locations. Typical sections will be incorporated for the different portions of the project. Any potential conflicts with utilities, existing features, and right -of-way will be identified. The preliminary design plan will be at a 1” = 40’ scale to aid in horizontal layout purposes.

QK will meet with the City to review the preliminary design and get City approval prior to 60% design. Meeting notes will be prepared summarizing discussion items and identifying action items, the party responsible, and the resolution date. Meeting minutes will be distributed to attendees within two business days of the meeting .

Deliverables:
• Full-sized hard copy plans – 24” x 36” (two sets) for submittal to the City • One electronic copy of plans in PDF format
• Updated basis of design memo and exhibits in PDF format • Provide up to 2 draft iterations of visual materials for City Council meeting for City review and feedback in electronic PDF format

Lisa Dock – City of Hanford Page 9 of 14
January 21, 2026 (Revised March 25, 2026)
Subtask 8.2 60% PS&E
Upon City direction and/or approval of the preliminary engineering design plan, QK’s team will update the 60% PS&E package previously submitted to the City with the updated project requirements. All comments to the 30% plans will be addressed as appropriate.

East Lacey Boulevard will be divided into two separate projects with two separate construction documents (PS&E).

Both projects will be utilizing federal funding and therefore PS&R will follow all applicable federal funding requirements. The two projects will be bid and awarded separately as described below.

• Phase 1 – Bid package for Phase 1 will include both Phase 1(a) and Phase 1(b) improvements, with separate bid forms to track the improvement costs for the separate funding programs. Phase 1 bid package will include:

o Phase 1(a) - East Lacey Boulevard from the west right-of-way of SJVRR/UPRR to approximately 150 feet east of Sierra Avenue (Active Transportation Program (ATP) funding and Congressional CDS funding). o Phase 1(b) - Traffic signal installation at Lacey Boulevard and 9th Avenue (Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program ( CMAQ) funding and Congressional CDS funding ) – scope of services done under separate contract.
• Phase 2 – Bid Package for Phase 2 will include
o East Lacey Boulevard from 10 th Avenue to the west boundary of SJVRR right -of-way (Active Transportation Program (ATP) funding and Congressional CDS funding) QK’s team will prepare the construction documents and obtain approvals through the City and all affected stakeholders. The City will provide front-end, boilerplate documents approved by the City Attorney for use in the PS&E documents. This phase includes services through final design PS&E and other related work. QK will include the cost of advertising leading to the physical construction of the projects in the bidding phase services of the previous contract.

The PS&E portion includes the following services.
• Preparation of PS&E (RCE/PE)
o Plans will be prepared at a scale of 1” = 20’ and shall include profiles and details necessary to construct the project. The design shall utilize the approved Master Plan and follow City Standards. Curb ramps may be detailed at a larger scale, 1” = 5’, to demonstrate sufficient detail. Where underground piping is constructed, plan and profile views shall be shown on the same sheet.

o QK will deliver a 60% PS&E submittal. Subsequent 90% PS&E submittal, and 100% PS&E submittals will continue with the original contract.
o Construction plans shall include topographic survey, demolition plan, street improvement plan, storm utility plan and profiles, incorporation of existing storm drain basins (Task 3.0) , signing, striping and markings plan, construction detail plans, and other identified plans necessary for the construction of the project.

o Stormwater compliance documentation will be required from the awarded contractor. o Construction Specifications will be prepared following the City -provided format for federally funded projects.
 The City will prepare the Contract Specifications, and QK shall prepare the Special Provisions and Technical Specifications utilizing the City Master Specifications Template.

 The City will provide a Master Specification that QK will utilize and modify accordingly in the preparation of the Special Provisions and Technical Specifications. o The construction cost estimate shall be provided and updated with each submittal phase. o QK shall provide and share electronic documents, spreadsheets, AutoCAD files, survey notes, ties, and legal boundary information upon request throughout the project development. QK shall provide a complete set of project file documents and electronic data noted, complete and on a thumb drive, to the City at project completion (i.e., bid-ready and approved construction documents received).

Lisa Dock – City of Hanford Page 10 of 14
January 21, 2026 (Revised March 25, 2026)
o Both originally formatted files and converted .pdf copies of project bidding documents will be included.

Deliverables:
• Full-sized hard copy plans – 24” x 36” (two sets) for submittal to the City • One electronic copy of plans in PDF format
• Estimates of probable costs (one set) for submittal to the City in PDF format • City’s red-line comments to the 30% submittal in PDF format TASK 9.0 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT DESIGN SERVICES – ROAD DIET QK’s landscape architecture team will provide landscape design services for Lacey Boulevard based on the road diet requirements as expressed in the meeting with the City and QK design team. The following will be included in the design services:

Subtask 9.1 Street Tree Master Plan
Based on the kick -off meeting with City staff, QK will prepare a plan to identify street tree locations and provide a Master Plan plant palette from 10 th Street to the Cross Valley Corridor to be used for future planning of proposed trees along the corridor. QK will revise the Master Plan based on changes requested by the City during their review.

The Master Plan will be used for future sleeve and tree well locations within the construction drawings.

Deliverables:
• Street tree Master Plan in PDF format
• Master Plan plant palette in PDF format
Subtask 9.2 Landscape and Irrigation – Construction Drawings Based on the preliminary civil design, QK will provide a preliminary landscape plan for the proposed enhancements along Lacey Boulevard for City staff review and comment .

The landscape plans shall incorporate medians, curb
bulbouts, street trees, and bus stops in the design and will include infrastructure conduits for future landscaping installations.

The planting will be from the Master Plan plant palette (Subtask 9.1) and will include low- water-use plants. The plan will provide median and intersection treatments along Lacey Boulevard.

After City staff review the preliminary landscape plan, QK will make adjustments based on their comments . QK will prepare the 60% and 100% construction plans , including a Landscape Plan, an Irrigation Plan, Details and Specifications, showing proposed and future improvements and how the system will ultimately function. QK will provide the water-use calculations required by the Model Water-Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO). QK will also provide an estimate of the probable cost for the proposed and future landscape and irrigation improvements.

For budgeting purposes, two rounds of revisions are anticipated. Design services exclude any roundabout improvements, monuments, hardscape improvements, and landscape art.

Deliverables:
• Preliminary landscape planting plan exhibit in PDF format • 60% landscape and irrigation improvement plans for proposed and future construction in PDF format • 100% landscape and irrigation improvement plans for proposed and future construction in PDF format TASK 10.0 ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC DESIGN SERVICES – ROAD DIET QK’s team will revise the 60% signal, pavement delineation, and signage design plans to reflect changes in the Lacey Boulevard concept, providing updated layouts for intersection geometrics, traffic signal equipment, intersection safety lighting, pole locations, protected bike lanes and shared pedestrian/bike paths and transitions, medians, parking, bus stops, and vehicular signal types. These plans will be prepared in accordance with the City of Hanford’s