COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
FEE NAME/DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE FEE AMOUNT COMMENT
Site Plan Review:
Initial Minor (Existing Buildings no Expansion, Addition of one Residential Unit, Patio Covers, Carports, Solar Panels and Change of Occupancy within integrated shopping centers, the Historic District, and the mall) $1,130.00 Increased by CPI-U 2.7% with Rounding Initial Major or Subdivision/Parcel Map $3,440.00 Increased by CPI-U 2.7% with Rounding Resubmittal (First Resubmittal no Charge) $847.00 Increased by CPI-U 2.7% with Rounding Specific Plan $10,142.00 Deposit + Actual Cost + 10% Increased by CPI-U 2.7% with Rounding Specific Plan Amendment $5,058.00 Deposit + Actual Cost + 10% Increased by CPI-U 2.7% with Rounding Time Extensions $565.00 Increased by CPI-U 2.7% with Rounding Temporary Use Permit $282.00 Increased by CPI-U 2.7% with Rounding Right-of-Way Abandonment $5,392.00 Increased by CPI-U 2.7% with Rounding Variance $4,005.00 Increased by CPI-U 2.7% with Rounding Variance - Minor Deviation $1,130.00 Increased by CPI-U 2.7% with Rounding Variance - Signs $3,440.00 Increased by CPI-U 2.7% with Rounding Variance - Single Family Parcel $2,850.00 Increased by CPI-U 2.7% with Rounding Zone Change:
Pre-Zone $4,467.00 Increased by CPI-U 2.7% with Rounding Rezone and Text Amendment $8,961.00 Increased by CPI-U 2.7% with Rounding Zoning Verification Letter $154.00 Increased by CPI-U 2.7% with Rounding Williamson Act Permits:
Contract Cancellation $6,881.00 Deposit + Actual Cost + 10% Increased by CPI-U 2.7% with Rounding Disestablishment $2,285.00 Increased by CPI-U 2.7% with Rounding New Contract $565.00 Increased by CPI-U 2.7% with Rounding Notice of Full Non-renewal $154.00 Increased by CPI-U 2.7% with Rounding Notice of Partial Non-renewal $565.00 Increased by CPI-U 2.7% with Rounding Appeal $1,130.00 Increased by CPI-U 2.7% with Rounding
Tentative Subdivision Map - Up to 106 lots $7,700.00 + $50.00 Recording Fee Split fee - to recover cost Tentative Subdivision Map - 107 - 199 lots $8,500.00 + $50.00 Recording Fee Split fee - to recover cost Tentative Subdivision Map - 200 - 500 lots $9,300.00 + $50.00 Recording Fee Split fee - to recover cost Tentative Subdivision Map - Over 500 lots $10,300.00 + $50.00 Recording Fee Split fee - to recover cost CD of documents $10.00 Remove, only digital
APPLICATION/PERMIT, CONTINUED
SUBDIVISION OF LANDS
MISCELLANEOUS Page 1440 of 1793
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
FEE AMOUNT COMMENT
Photovoltaic Systems - Residential & Small Commercial (up to 49KW) Plan Check Inspection Total 1 - 15 Kilowatts $200.00 Each $225.00 $425.00 Each (includes P.I. Fee) Lowered inspection fee, per AB1124. Residential solar not to exceed $450 SolarApp+ $157.50 New fee
FEE NAME/DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE
ELECTRICAL FEES, CONTINUED
Unit Fees:
COMMENT
PERMIT ISSUANCE PLAN CHECK INSPECTION UNIT
$20.00 first address $3.15 Each Additional Each Added first address $20.00 New fee
$50.00 $52.50 $105.00 up to 400 Sq Ft Combine into "Exterior Coverings" fee $50.00 $35.00 $70.00 up to 400 Sq Ft Combine into "Exterior Coverings" fee $50.00 $52.50 $96.60 up to 400 Sq Ft Combine into "Exterior Coverings" fee $0.16 $0.21 Sq Ft Combine into "Exterior Coverings" fee $50.00 $78.25 $210.00 Each Increased inspection fee
MISCELLANEOUS & CODE COMPLIANCE FEES
FEE NAME/DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE FEE AMOUNT
Address Assignments: Subdivisions
Address Assignments: Infill Lot
Swimming Pools/Spas
Siding - Stone and Brick Veneer
Additional Siding (all types)
Stucco
All Others
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
COMMENT
Altered Animal License Permit- 1 Year $20.00 Added "Altered" Altered Animal License Permit- 2 Year $30.00 Added "Altered" Altered Animal License Permit- 3 Year $40.00 Added "Altered" Altered Multi-Animal (Up to 3 dogs)
Permit- 1 Year $50.00
Removed "(Up to 3 dogs)" to align with
ordinance
Altered Multi-Animal (Up to 3 dogs)
Permit- 2 Year $75.00
Removed "(Up to 3 dogs)" to align with
ordinance
Altered Multi-Animal (Up to 3 dogs)
Permit- 3 Year $100.00
Removed "(Up to 3 dogs)" to align with
ordinance
Breeder Permit $500.00 Annual Added "Annual" for clarity Replacement Dog/Cat Tag $10.00 per Tag Moved from PD
License Transfer Fee $10.00 per Occurance New
Unaltered Animal License $60.00 Annual New
ANIMAL LICENSE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
FEE NAME/DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE FEE AMOUNT COMMENT
Annual Fire and Life Inspection without fire Sprinklers (A, B, M, L, S) *Assemblies great then 49 people shall be inspected quarterly per Occurrence $105.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Fire and Life Safety Inspection With Fire Sprinklers per Issuance $157.50 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Additional fee when greater then 30 minutes for fire sprinkler buildings >30 mins $105.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee All Other Inspection Type not Listed *Minimum 1 Hour per Hour $105.00 New fee (CD) Re-Inspection 2nd per Occurrence $105.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Re-Inspection 3rd per Occurrence $105.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Special Inspection <5000 sqft *Minimum 1 Hour per Hour $105.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Special Inspection >5,000 sqft (C, F, H, I) *Minimum 1 Hour per Hour $105.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Additional Service Fee per Hour $105.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Weed Abatement General Code Violation Moved from Fire/Changed Wording 1st Violation $200.00 Moved from Fire/Seperated Fees
2nd Violation $400.00 Moved from Fire/Seperated Fees
3rd Violation $800.00 Moved from Fire/Seperated Fees
Emergency Abatement Fee for Imminent Fire Hazard
(Three attempts made) per Issuance Actual Cost + 33% Description Change + Fee Change Tent/Membrane Inspection per Occurrence $105.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Hotel/Motel 1-50 Units (R-1) per Occurrence $105.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Hotel/Motel +50 Units (R-1) per Occurrence $210.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Multi-Family Dwellings Inspection: Moved from Fire
1-20 Units (R-2) per Occurrence $105.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee 21-50 Units (R-2) per Occurrence $131.25 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee 51-100 Units (R-2) per Occurrence $157.50 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee +100 Units (R-2) per Occurrence $210.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Schools per Occurrence $105.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Hood Suppression Inspection
*Commercial hood system shall be inspected semi annual per Occurrence $105.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Hood Suppression Plan Check per Issuance Actual Cost + 33% Moved from Fire/Fee Change Refrigerant an Monitoring System *Minimum 1 Hour per Hour $105.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Tank Inspection *Minimum 1 Hour per Hour $105.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Tank Plan Review per Issuance Actual Cost + 33% Moved from Fire/Fee Change
FIRE/LIFE SAFETY FEES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
FEE NAME/DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE FEE AMOUNT COMMENT
Spray booth Inspection *Minimum 1 Hour per Hour $105.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Spray Booth Plan Review per Issuance Actual Cost + 33% Moved from Fire/Fee Change Prospective License Pre-Inspection for all Child and Adult Day Care per Issuance $105.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Residential Care Home 24 Hour Care R 3.1 (et al.) per Issuance $131.25 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Residential Care Home 24 Hour Care Re-Inspection- R 3.1 (et al.) per Issuance $105.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Mobile Food Vendor Annual Inspection per Issuance $105.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Fire Alarm Plan Review: Moved from Fire
1-15 Devices per Issuance Actual Cost + 33% Moved from Fire/Fee Change 16-50 Devices per Issuance Actual Cost + 33% Moved from Fire/Fee Change 51-100 Devices per Issuance Actual Cost + 33% Moved from Fire/Fee Change 101-500 Devices per Issuance Actual Cost + 33% Moved from Fire/Fee Change +500 Devices per Issuance Actual Cost + 33% Moved from Fire/Fee Change Fire Alarm Inspection & Testing per Occurrence $131.25 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Re-Inspection on Testing Devices per Occurrence $105.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Fire Sprinkler Plan Review:
1-100 Heads per Issuance Actual Cost + 33% Moved from Fire/Fee Change 101-300 Heads per Issuance Actual Cost + 33% Moved from Fire/Fee Change 301-500 Heads per Issuance Actual Cost + 33% Moved from Fire/Fee Change +500 Heads per Issuance Actual Cost + 33% Moved from Fire/Fee Change Underground Fire Line Inspection per Occurrence $131.25 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Underground Fire Line Plan Review per Issuance Actual Cost + 33% Moved from Fire/Fee Change Residential Field Inspection per Occurrence $105.00 Moved from Fire/Fee Change Residential Plan Review Less Than 5000 sqft per Issuance Actual Cost + 33% Moved from Fire/Fee Change Residential Plan Review Greater Than 5000 sqft per Issuance Actual Cost + 33% Moved from Fire/Fee Change Hazardous Materials Operational:
Permit H-1 per Issuance $472.50 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Permit H-2 per Issuance $420.00 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Permit H-3 per Issuance $393.25 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Permit H-4 per Issuance $341.25 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Permit H-5 per Issuance $288.75 Moved from Fire/Lower Fee Fire and Life Safety Citation:
First Offense $500.00 Moved from Fire/Increased Fee
Second Offense $100.00 Moved from Fire/Increased Fee
Third Offense $2,000.00 Moved from Fire/Increased Fee Page 1444 of 1793
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
FIRE FEE POLICE FEE WATER FEE
PER UNIT PER UNIT PER UNIT COMMENT
Low Density Residential $663.56 $360.07 $3,014.48 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Medium Density Residential $373.00 $532.43 $1,685.14 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% High Density Residential $187.41 $172.69 $1,020.26 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Neighborhood Commercial $0.55 $0.74 $1.28 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Regional Commercial $0.46 $0.32 $1.13 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Service Commercial $0.70 $0.10 $1.55 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Highway Commercial $0.55 $0.25 $1.28 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Office Residential $0.24 $0.44 $1.39 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Office $0.26 $0.27 $0.89 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6%
Neighborhood Mixed Use $0.55 $0.71 $1.61 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Corridor Mixed Use $0.55 $0.48 $1.45 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Downtown Mixed Use $0.09 $0.42 $0.31 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Light Industrial $0.16 $0.01 $1.81 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Heavy Industrial $0.16 $0.01 $1.84 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Open Space $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6%
Public Facilities $0.06 $0.09 $1.55 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Educational Facilities $0.00 $0.00 $0.81 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6%
LAND USE CATEGORY
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
WASTEWATER PARKS FEE STORM DRAIN
PER UNIT PER UNIT PER ACRE
Low Density Residential $2,581.62 $3,327.88 $2,934.01 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Medium Density Residential $2,066.59 $2,980.37 $3,227.41 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% High Density Residential $1,884.29 $2,632.83 $3,520.79 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Neighborhood Commercial $0.87 $0.00 $5,281.21 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Regional Commercial $0.90 $0.00 $5,281.21 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Service Commercial $0.88 $0.00 $5,281.21 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Highway Commercial $0.87 $0.00 $5,281.21 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Office Residential $1.87 $0.00 $3,520.79 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Office $0.88 $0.00 $5,281.21 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6%
Neighborhood Mixed Use $1.70 $0.00 $5,281.21 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Corridor Mixed Use $1.22 $0.00 $5,281.21 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Downtown Mixed Use $0.53 $0.00 $4,222.89 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Light Industrial $1.01 $0.00 $4,694.40 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Heavy Industrial $1.16 $0.00 $4,694.40 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Public Facilities $0.88 $0.00 $4,107.60 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Educational Facilities $0.54 $0.00 $4,107.60 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6%
LAND USE CATEGORY COMMENT
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
FEE NAME/DESCRIPTION OF
SERVICE COMMENT
Water and Wastewater
Hydraulic modeling to identify utility
impacts. Estimate based fee Moved to Public Works
Traffic Impact Analysis Peer
Estimate based fee Moved to Public Works
Developer Agreements
Estimate based fee Moved to Public Works
Inspection Fees Subdivisions
Inspection Final Fee Moved to Public Works
Removed
The actual City and/or consultant cost of improvement
FEE AMOUNT
Actual City and/or Consultant time and materials plus a 10% admin fee
Actual City and/or Consultant time and materials plus a 10% Actual City and/or Consultant time and materials plus a 10% Initial deposit of 1% of initial estimated
construction cost of all improvements as
prepared by developer's engineers.
Payment due prior to inspection of
improvements. The deposit is to be
replenished once 25% of funds remaining.
Actual City and/or Consultant cost for construction
inspection(s) and/or other construction support services plus a 10% admin fee
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
FEE NAME/DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE FEE AMOUNT
REFUSE FEES
LAND USE CATEGORY PER UNIT COMMENT
Residential Container/Equip $600.66 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Commercial
Per No. of 1 cubic yard dumpsters $1,052.71 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Per No. of 2 cubic yard dumpsters $1,325.17 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Per No. of 3 cubic yard dumpsters $1,411.87 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Per No. of 4 cubic yard dumpsters $1,795.79 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6%
CIRCULATION FEES
LAND USE CATEGORY PER UNIT COMMENT
Single-Family Residential $4,165.20 Dwelling Unit Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Multi-Family Residential $2,924.78 Dwelling Unit Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Senior Residential/Assisted Living $1,514.61 Dwelling Unit Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Hotel/Motel (per room) $2,651.52 Room Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Retail (<100KSF) unless specifically listed below $12,142.23 1,000 Sq Ft Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Retail (>100KSF) $9,169.12 1,000 Sq Ft Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Convenience Store- Without Gas Station $109,906.35 1,000 Sq Ft Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Gas Station- With or Without Convenience Store $16,065.93 Fueling Position Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Motor Vehicle Sales, Minor and Major Repair $2,300.26 1,000 Sq Ft Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Restaurant- No Drive-thru $23,485.18 1,000 Sq Ft Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Restaurant with Drive-thru- Stand-alone $107,337.30 1,000 Sq Ft Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Restaurant with Drive-thru Within a Shopping Center $28,857.23 1,000 Sq Ft Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% General Office/Bank $5,167.95 1,000 Sq Ft Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Medical/Dental Office $10,453.58 1,000 Sq Ft Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Government $3,164.33 1,000 Sq Ft Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Industrial/Service Commercial $2,080.04 1,000 Sq Ft Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Warehouse/Distribution < 100,000 sq ft $1,715.71 1,000 Sq Ft Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Warehouse/Distribution > 100,000 sq ft $825.10 1,000 Sq Ft Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Mini Storage > 100,000 sq ft $825.10 1,000 Sq Ft Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Religious Institution or Public Facility $2,247.36 1,000 Sq Ft Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Other uses option $403.33 Trip Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Page 1448 of 1793
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
FEE NAME/DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE FEE AMOUNT
DEVELOPMENT FEE
FOR
TYPE OF FEE SINGLE FAMILY COMMENT
Storm Drainage per Acre $2,934.01 Moved to separate from breakdown and add unit
BENEFIT DISTRICT
SANITARY SEWER AREA PER ACRE COMMENT
9th Ave Area of Benefit District (10th Ave to
Area generally south of Hanford-Armona Road $1,032.66 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Area located Between Hanford-Armona Rd and Lacey Blvd $1,535.08 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Areal located between Lacey Blvd and Grangeville Blvd $2,312.61 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Area located between Grangeville Blvd and Hwy 43 $3,188.85 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% 12th Ave Area of Benefit District (11-1/2 Ave
Area generally south of Hanford-Armona Road $713.74 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Area located Between Hanford-Armona Rd and Lacey Blvd $1,101.75 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Area located between Lacey Blvd and Grangeville Blvd $1,497.96 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Area located between Grangeville Blvd and Fargo Ave $1,990.35 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Area located between Fargo Ave and Flint Ave $2,755.64 Fee Increase ENRCC 2.6% Page 1449 of 1793
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
FEE NAME/DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE
ITEM CREDIT PER UNIT UNIT COMMENT
Water:
Groundwater Well (1,500 gpm) $1,448,824.65 Each Remove
Pump Station (3 @ 3,100 gpm) $4,831,993.46 Each Remove
Pump Station (4 @ 1,400 gpm) $3,305,529.77 Each Remove
Storage Tank (1.5 MG) at Developer's Cost Each Updated Fee Amount Land for Storage Tank or Well
Appraised value or
Developer's Cost, whichever
is less. Acre Updated Fee Amount
Wastewater:
Lift Station $3,560.00 GPM Increased Fee
IMPACT FEE CREDITS FROM WATER, WASTEWATER AND STORM DRAINANGE IMPACT FEES
FEE AMOUNT
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
FEE NAME/DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE FEE AMOUNT COMMENT
DEVELOPMENT IMPROVEMENT ENGINEERING SERVICES
Final Subdivision & Parcel Map Filing and Review Fee
$1,073.00
(Kings County recording fees paid
separately by the applicant)
Avg (15) hours for initial map intake, processing, coordination & subsequent project mgmt + (2) hours of staff admin time to facilitate recording of the map at recorder's office. Assoc. Surveyor @ $64.85/hr x 15 = $972.75 Administration @ $50/hr x 2 = $100 Total = $1,072.75
Parcel Merger/Lot Line Adjustment Filing Fee
$ 1,725.00
(Kings County recording fees paid
separately by the applicant)
Add "Lot Line Adjustment" fee line item from Planning Division section. This is now handled by PW., Change description and added "Filling Fee" Under fee amount: add the the $50 recording fee time to the orginal $1675 amount and add wording "Kings County recording fees paid separately by the applicant" Surveyor Map & Plan Review Actual City and/or Consultant cost for revew, plus a 10% admin fee
Add "Surveyor Map & Plan Review" fee line item from Planning Division section.
This is now handled by PW.
Water and Wastewater Impact Analysis
Hydraulic modeling to identify utility impacts. Estimate based fee Actual City and/or Consultant time
and materials plus a 10% admin
fee
Moved from Impact Fees section
Traffic Impact Analysis Peer Review
Estimate based fee
Actual City and/or Consultant time
and materials plus a 10% admin
fee
Moved from Impact Fees section
Developer Agreements
Estimate based fee
Actual City and/or Consultant time
and materials plus a 10% admin
fee
Moved from Impact Fees section
Inspection Fees Subdivisions
Inspection Final Fee
The actual City and/or consultant
cost of improvement inspections
plus a 10% admin fee
Moved from Impact Fees section
Fee of 2% of the estimated construction costs of all subdivision project improvements, as prepared by developer's engineer, plus a 10% admin fee for engineering services consisting of 1% for engineering services and 1% for management and inspection. Additional fees may apply for plan checks beyond the initial City consultant review.
1% - Due at time of plans submittal
(includes initial City consultant
review costs); and,1% - Due at time
of map recordation or prior to
construction, plus a 10% admin
fee.
Description Change: Fee of 2% of the estimated construction costs of all subdivision project improvements, as prepared by developer's engineer, plus a 10% admin fee for engineering services consisting of 1% for engineering services and 1% for management and inspection. Additional fees may apply for plan checks beyond the initial City consultant review.
Fee Amount Description Change: 1% - Due at time of plans submittal (includes initial City consultant review costs); and,1% - Due at time of map recordation or prior to construction. plus a 10% admin fee.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
FEE NAME/DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE FEE AMOUNT COMMENT
GRADING PLAN REVIEW
Residential: Single Family Residence $1,078.00 Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding Two or Three Units $1,849.00 Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding Four through Eight Units $3,132.00 Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding Eight or More Units $4,519.00 Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding Commercial: Sites less than one-half acre $2,773.00 Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding Sites from one-half to one acre $4,313.00 Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding Sites one to five acres $5,854.00 Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding Sites over five acres $5,854.00 plus $87/acre Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding Permit Extensions $26.00 Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding
ENCROACHMENT PERMIT
Annual Permit $257.00 Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding
Annual Permit (Utilities) $1,027.00 Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding Annual Permit (Trees) $924.00 Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding Regular Encroachment Permit $375.00 Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding
TRANSPORTATION PERMIT
Annual Permit $92.00 Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding
Regular Transportation Permit $17.00 Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding Page 1452 of 1793
REFUSE DEPARTMENT
FEE NAME/DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE FEE AMOUNT COMMENT
1YD (4 Empties per month) $89.42 Includes a 10% increase, to reflect the rate study increase approved 2YD (4 Empties per month) $112.46 Includes a 10% increase, to reflect the rate study increase approved 3YD (4 Empties per month) $135.52 Includes a 10% increase, to reflect the rate study increase approved Delivery Fee (for each eighteen (18) 96 gallon containers up to 54 event cans) $30.93 Increase by 10% to remain consistent with the new rate study approved Empty Fee (per container per empty and disposal of waste) $13.62 Increase by 10% to remain consistent with the new rate study approved Cleaning Fee (per container to clean and restock) $2.48 Increase by 10% to remain consistent with the new rate study approved Delivery Fee (each bin up to five (5) 2yd or 3yd commercial bins) $30.93 Increase by 10% to remain consistent with the new rate study approved Empty Fee (per 2yd bin) $28.47 Increase by 10% to remain consistent with the new rate study approved Empty Fee (per 3yd bin) $33.41 Increase by 10% to remain consistent with the new rate study approved Cleaning Fee (per container to clean and restock) $18.56 Increase by 10% to remain consistent with the new rate study approved 96G Extra Empty $13.42 New-Rate previously approved by council, increased by 10% to remain consistent with the new rate study approved 64G Extra Empty $10.52 New-Rate previously approved by council, increased by 10% to remain consistent with the new rate study approved 1YD Extra Empty $22.36 New-Rate previously approved by council, increased by 10% to remain consistent with the new rate study approved 2YD Extra Empty $28.14 New-Rate previously approved by council, increased by 10% to remain consistent with the new rate study approved 3YD Extra Empty $33.91 New-Rate previously approved by council, increased by 10% to remain consistent with the new rate study approved 4YD Extra Empty $39.67 New-Rate previously approved by council, increased by 10% to remain consistent with the new rate study approved 6YD Extra Empty $51.18 New-Rate previously approved by council, increased by 10% to remain consistent with the new rate study approved 1st Violation (Escalating Fine) $0.00 New-Mandated by CalRecycle (1st violation is a warning for education) 2nd Violation (Escalating Fine) $50.00 New-Mandated by CalRecycle 3rd Violation (Escalating Fine) $100.00 New-Mandated by CalRecycle 4th Violation (Escalating Fine) $250.00 New-Mandated by CalRecycle Monthly Lock Service Fee $9.90 New-Rate previously approved by council, increased by 10% to remain consistent with the new rate study approved Passenger Tires $10.00 New-consistant with KWRA charges Truck Tires $15.00 New-consistant with KWRA charges
Appliances $15.00 New-consistant with KWRA charges
Miscellaneous
Temporary Bin Rental
Special Event Can Services
Special Event Bin Services
Contamination Violation
Extra Empties
WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT
FEE NAME/DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE FEE AMOUNT COMMENT
Flow per Gallon per Day $0.11 per Gallon per Day 5% increase, to recover increasing cost BOD per Pound per Day $32.81 per Pound per Day 5% increase, to recover increasing cost TSS per Pound per Day $32.81 per Pound per Day 5% increase, to recover increasing cost Permit Fee for: Fats, Oils, and Grease (FOG) / Food Service Establishment / Non-significant Industrial User/Commercial User
$300.00 per Five-Year Permit New fee - to recover cost
Boundary Overages
Wastewater Permits
AIRPORT DEPARTMENT
FEE NAME/DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE FEE AMOUNT COMMENT
Covered T-Spaces (1-10 & 20-40) $99.00 per Month Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding T-Hangar Spaces (11-19) $204.00 per Month Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding Port-a-Port (1,200 sq. ft. or less) $701.00 per Year Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding Port-a-Port (1,800 sq. ft. to 2,100 sq. ft.) $713.00 per Year Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding Hangar Ground Lease (0 to 1,600 sq. ft.) $897.00 per Year Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding Hangar Ground Lease (1,601 sq. ft. to 2,300 sq. ft.) $1,000.00 per Year Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding Hangar Ground Lease (2,301 sq. ft. to 4,500 sq. ft.) $1,093.00 per Year Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding Hangar Ground Lease (4,501 sq. ft. to 5,000 sq. ft.) $2,104.00 per Year Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding Hangar Ground Lease (5,001 sq. ft. and above) $0.429 per sqft Increase by CPI-U 2.7%+Rounding Heavy Appliance Electricity Surcharge $41.00 per Month SCE rate increase of 10%+Rounding Page 1455 of 1793
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
A public hearing will be held before the Hanford City Council on Tuesday, June 16, 2026, at 7:00 p.m., in the Hanford City Council Chambers, Civic Auditorium, 400 N. Douty Street, Hanford, California, pertaining to the following:
To adopt a City of Hanford Master Fee Schedule for FY 2026-27 A copy of the proposed Master Fee Schedule is available for inspection.
Requests can be made by email to [email protected].
All interested persons may appear to present testimony at the hearings.
If you challenge any action or decision by the City Council regarding the subject of the public hearing described in this notice in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing.
If you have questions or are in need of a translator or special services, please call the City Clerk at (559) 585-2515 at least five (5) days prior to the meeting to make arrangements.
Publish: June 3, 10, 2026
Ad# 597219 Page 1456 of 1793
14.B.
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 6/16/2026 AGENDA SECTION: PUBLIC HEARING
SUBJECT:
Community Development: Roadway Abandonment No. 2026-01, a request by San Joaquin Valley Homes to abandon approximately 8,145 square feet of right-of-way, Millerton Street, an undeveloped street. The project is located east of S. Alpine Avenue, along Millerton Street.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council of the City of Hanford adopt Resolution No. 26-43-R approving the abandonment of an 8,145 square-foot portion of right-of-way, Millerton Street, an undeveloped street.
Recommended Motion: I move to adopt Resolution No. 26-43-R, abandoning an 8,145 square-foot portion of Millerton Street.
BACKGROUND:
Abandonment No. 2026-01 is a request by San Joaquin Valley Homes to abandon approximately 8,145 square feet of right-of-way, Millerton Street, an undeveloped street, as shown in Figure 1 (and Attachment 1).
The road abandonment is sought to abandon the portion of Millerton Street located south of lots 215 and 216 of Tract 865 Unit II in order for the developer to finalize Tract 865 Unit II and allow issuance of the Notice of Completion for this tract. The cost of utility connection within Millerton Street to accommodate development of these two remaining lots exceeded the developer’s ability, due to utility connection costs associated with only developing a portion of the street and therefore, the intent is to abandon the right-of-way, merge the lots with the property to the east, and develop these lots with future Tract 912, when funds are in place to develop Millerton Street wholly. In order to ensure adequate access to the slough/basin to the south, an access easement will be granted to the City – Attachment 2.
Tract 865 Unit II is attached for reference – Attachment 3.
Tentative Tract 912 is attached for reference – Attachment 4.
Figure 1: Area to be Abandoned
Figure 2: Aerial Showing Abandonment Location
(proposed abandonment area shown in red)
Figure 3:
Tract 865 Unit II
(proposed abandonment area shown in red)
The Planning Commission made a finding of General Plan consistency for the Road Abandonment on April 28, 2026. Resolution No. 2026-06 is attached – Attachment 5.
General Plan Designation and Zoning for the Area:
The General Plan designates the property to the north of the area to be abandoned as Low-Density Residential. The property is zoned R-L-5 Low-Density Residential, in accordance with the LowPage 1459 of 1793 Density designation. The area to the south is designated as Open Space and zoned CO Conservation, as shown in Figure 4 and Figure 5.
Figure 4. General Plan Land Use Designation
Figure 5 Zone District
Adjacent Land Uses: Surrounding land uses are as follows:
Zoning General Plan
Designation
Land Use
North
R-L-5 Low-Density Residential Vacant – Lots 215 and
216 of Tract 865 Unit II
East R-L-5 Low-Density Residential Vacant (future Live Oak East -Tentative Tract
912)
South CO Open Space Slough/Basin
West R-L-5 Low-Density Residential Single-Family Residential Tract 865
General Plan Conformity
The Planning Commission determined conformity of the proposal with the General Plan on April 28, 2026.
Figure 6: Circulation Map
Millerton Street is designated as a local road and is therefore not shown on the Circulation map. The proposed roadway abandonment would not limit circulation, as the portion of the street proposed to be abandoned is undeveloped and does not provide connectivity to adjacent roadways. Therefore, the proposed abandonment does not conflict with the General Plan.
Section 65402(a) of the Government Code pertaining to Conservation and Planning states, in part, the following: “If a general plan or part thereof has been adopted, no real property shall be acquired by dedication or otherwise for street, square, park or other public purposes, and no real property shall be disposed of, no street shall be vacated or abandoned, and no public building or structure shall be constructed or authorized, if the adopted general plan or part thereof applies thereto, until the location, purpose and extent of such acquisition or disposition, such street vacation or abandonment, or such public building or structure have been submitted to and reported upon by the planning agency as to conformity with said adopted general plan or part thereof.” (emphasis added) Interpretation of Zone Boundary Line
An additional finding of ambiguity was made by the Planning Commission, determining that the area of abandonment and the adjacent property be designated in the General Plan as Low-Density Residential and zoned R-L-5 Low-Density Residential.
On April 28, 2026, the Hanford Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2026-06, recommending that the Hanford City Council adopt a Finding of Conformity with the Hanford General Plan and adopt a Finding of Ambiguity clarification pertaining to the land use and zoning on the abandoned property, subject to the following conditions:
1. That a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan be developed for the abandonment area.
2. That the abandonment area be kept free of weeds and debris.
3. That the developer is responsible for all costs associated with the abandonment, including, but not limited to recording fees and review by the City Attorney.
4. That a timber barricade be maintained, prohibiting access to and through Millerton Street.
5. That an access easement be recorded and maintained for continued City access to the slough/basin.
PROCEDURE FOR ROAD ABANDONMENT
The California Streets and Highways Code governs the procedure for road and alley way abandonment. The procedure requires that a "Notice of Intent to Abandon” is adopted by the City Council prior to holding a public hearing to abandon the street.
1. Utility Notification:
On April 1, 2026, planning staff notified all utility companies that may be affected by the proposed roadway abandonment. A fourteen (14) day response time for the utility companies was allowed.
A response was received by Southern California Gas Company (dated April 2, 2026) noting that SoCal Gas has a 2-inch plastic main crossing Alpine Ave on the south side of Millerton St.
SoCalGas company requested that their rights must remain intact if the street vacation affected this facility. The response letter is attached as Attachment 6.
Upon review by the Engineering and Surveying Divisions, the main remains unaffected by the proposed abandonment; therefore, no easement is required.
2. Planning Commission:
As stated earlier in the report, the purpose of the Planning Commission review is to determine whether or not the right-of-way abandonment proposal is consistent with the Hanford General Plan. If the requested abandonment is deemed to be consistent with the Hanford General Plan, the Planning Commission may recommend approval of the abandonment to the City Council. As previously mentioned, Resolution No. 2026-06 was adopted by the Hanford Planning Commission on April 28, 2026, making a Finding of Conformity with the Hanford General Plan and adopting a Finding of Ambiguity Clarification pertaining to the land use and zoning of the abandonment area.
3. Notice of Intent to Abandon:
The Notice of Intent to Abandon was adopted through Resolution No. 26-24-R (Attachment 7) by the Hanford City Council on May 19, 2026 and the public hearing was set for June 16, 2026. The Notice of Intent to Abandon was published in the Hanford Sentinel for two (2)
successive weeks on May 27, 2026 and June 3, 2026, as well as posted on the area to be abandoned. Concurrently, staff notified by mail all property owners within 300 feet of the abandonment. Notices were mailed on May 27, 2026.
4. City Council Public Hearing:
The City Council holds a public hearing and receives evidence on the proposed Roadway Abandonment. If all the evidence submitted finds the right-of-way unnecessary for present or future public street purposes, the City Council may adopt a resolution ordering the closure of the street or abandonment of right-of-way.
5. Recordation:
Staff provide the applicant with the resolution ordering the vacation. the applicant will then record the documents with the Kings County Recorder. Upon successful recordation, the title of the land reverts to the respective Owner(s) identified as the fee title owner(s) in the Title Report, subject to any restrictions.
As part of the right-of-way abandonment, the City Council must declare the right-of-way to be exempt surplus for purposes of the Surplus Land Act. As part of the process, the City Attorney's Office submitted a proposed resolution to HCD for review, prior to later formal adoption. The City Council will adopt the resolution once HCD’s preliminary approval is received. The tentative date for this adoption is July 21, 2026. The adopted resolution will be submitted to HCD for final approval, and, once such approval is received, the City may deed the R/W to the owner of the abutting property.
NOTIFICATION
On April 1, 2026 planning staff notified all utility companies that may be affected by the proposed roadway abandonment. (see Utility Consultation, above).
The Notice of Intent to Abandon was published in the Hanford Sentinel for two (2) successive weeks on May 27th and June 3, 2026. Concurrently, public notices to adjoining property owners within 300 feet were mailed and the Notice of Intent to Abandon was posted on the area to be abandoned.
One response was received from SoCal Gas, as discussed above, however no public comments were received.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
This project is categorically exempt from further environmental review, as per Section 15305/Class 5 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. There are no exceptions to this exemption, as per Section 15300.2 Exceptions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. A Notice of Exemption has been prepared and is attached as Attachment 8.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Conditions of approval for the road abandonment appear in the resolution and as follows:
1. That a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan be developed for the abandonment area.
2. That the abandonment area be kept free of weeds and debris.
3. That the developer is responsible for all costs associated with the abandonment, including, but not limited to recording fees and review by the City Attorney.
4. That a timber barricade be maintained, prohibiting access to and through Millerton Street.
5. That an access easement be recorded and maintained for continued City access to the slough/basin.
FISCAL IMPACT:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 26-43-R
2. Attachment 1 - Road Abandonment No. 2026-01
3. Attachment 2 - Access Easement
4. Attachment 3 - Tract 865-II
5. Attachment 4 - TT 912
6. Attachment 5 - PC Resolution
7. Attachment 6 - So Cal Gas 04012026_Utility Consultation
8. Attachment 7 - 26-24-R signed
9. Attachment 8 - Notice of Exemption No. 2026-25
Recording Requested By:
City of Hanford
When Recorded Return To:
City of Hanford
Attn: City Clerk
319 N. Douty Street
Hanford, CA 93230
RESOLUTION 26-43-R
ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HANFORD APPROVING ROADWAY ABANDONMENT NO. 2026-01 ABANDONING APPROXIMATELY 8,145
SQUARE FEET OF RIGHT OF WAY, MILLERTON STREET, AN UNDEVELOPED STREET, LOCATED EAST OF S. ALPINE AVENUE, ALONG MILLERTON STREET.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of Hanford did on April 28, 2026, at a regular meeting of said Commission, adopt Resolution No. 2026-06, for Roadway Abandonment No. 2026-01 adopting a Finding of Conformity with the Hanford General Plan and adopt a Finding of Ambiguity clarification pertaining to the land use and zoning on the abandoned property, subject to the following conditions:
1. That a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan be developed for the abandonment area.
2. That the abandonment area be kept free of weeds and debris.
3. That the developer is responsible for all costs associated with the abandonment, including, but not limited to recording fees and review by the City Attorney.
4. That a timber barricade be maintained, prohibiting access to and through Millerton Street.
5. That an access easement be recorded and maintained for continued City access to the slough/basin.
WHEREAS, the City Council of Hanford did on May 19, 2026, at a regular meeting of said Council motion to declare the intention of the City Council abandon approximately 8,145 square feet of right-of-way, Millerton Street, an undeveloped street, Roadway Abandonment No. 2026-01 and hereinafter described, and
WHEREAS, notices of said proposed Roadway Abandonment No. 2026-01 having been posted upon said property on May 27, 2027 in accordance with Section 8320 of Streets and Highway Code of the State of California, and publication of notice of said Intention and of the time and place of the public hearing set therein having been published on May 27, 2026 in the manner prescribed by law for publishing resolution of the City of Hanford pursuant to Section 8320 of the Streets and Highway Code of the State of California, and WHEREAS, on the 16th day of June 2026, the City Council of the City of Hanford, after notice given by said posting and publishing as provided by law, held a public hearing and received evidence on the proposed Roadway Abandonment No. 2026-01, and the said City Council of the
City of Hanford having found from all the evidence submitted that the portion of the public street described in said Resolution of Intention are unnecessary for present public street purposes, and should be abandoned.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Hanford does hereby determine that the portion of said street identified in Roadway Abandonment No. 2026-01 Exhibit “A,” which is attached hereto and made a part hereof and hereinafter described should be vacated and abandoned, and the City Council of the City of Hanford does hereby order the vacation and abandonment of said portion of said public street in the City of Hanford, described more particularly described as follows:
Being a portion of W. Millerton Street as shown on that certain map entitled "Tract No. 865 Live Oak East Unit No. 2" recorded on June 2, 2022, in Volume 27 of Licensed Surveyors' Plats, at Page 05, Document No. 2210639, Kings County Records, situate in the Southwest Quarter of Section 2, Township 19 South, Range 21 East, Mount Diablo Meridian, County of Kings, California, said property being more particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING at the Northeast corner of said W. Millerton Street, said point being also the southeast corner of Lot 216 as shown on said Live Oak East Unit No. 2 final map; thence Along the East line of said W. Millerton Street, South 00°03'03" West 60.00 feet to the Southeast corner of said W. Millerton Street; thence
Along the South line of said W. Millerton Street, North 89° 11 '27" West 133.43 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the Northeast, having a radius of 330.00 feet and having a central angle of 00°31 '08"; thence
Continuing along said South line of W. Millerton Street and along the arc of said curve, 2.99 feet to a radial line of said curve which bears North 01 °19'41" East; thence Leaving said South line of W. Millerton Street, on the prolongation of said radial 60.00 feet to a point on the North line of said W. Millerton Street, said point being also the beginning of a non-tangent curve concave to the Northeast, having a radius of 270.00 feet to which beginning a radial line bears South 01 °19'41" West and having a central angle of 00°31 '08"; thence
Along said North line of W. Millerton Street and being also the arc of said curve, 2.45 feet; thence
Continuing along said North line, South 89°11 '27" East 132.64 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 8, 145 square feet, more or less.
SUBJECT TO all easements and/or rights-of-way of record.
This legal description as described is delineated on the accompanying "Plat to Accompany Legal Description" and made a part hereof for reference purposes.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the City Clerk shall cause a certified copy of this Order, attested by the City Clerk, under seal of the City, to be duly recorded in the County Recorder’s Office of the County of Kings, State of California.
ORDERED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford, duly called and held on the 16th day of June 2026, by the following vote:
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Hanford at a regular meeting thereof held on June 16, 2026 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBER________________________________________________ NOES: COUNCIL MEMBER________________________________________________ ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBER________________________________________________ ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBER________________________________________________
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 at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford on the 16th day of June 2026.
Date:____________________
APPROVED:______________________
MARK KAIRIS
MAYOR of the City of Hanford
ATTEST:__________________________
NATALIE CORRAL
CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-06
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HANFORD FINDING ROADWAY ABANDONMENT 2026-01 CONSISTENT WITH THE HANFORD GENERAL PLAN.ROADWAY ABANDONMENT NO. 2026-01, A REQUEST BY SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY HOMES TO ABANDON APPROXIMATELY 8,145 SQUARE FEET OF RIGHT-OF-WAY, MILLERTON STREET, AN UNDEVELOPED STREET. THE RECOMMENDATION ALSO INCLUDES A FINDING OF
AMBIGUITY CLARIFICATION PERTAINING TO THE LAND USE AND ZONING ON THE ABANDONED PROPERTY. THE PROJECT IS LOCATED EAST OF S. ALPINE AVENUE, ALONG MILLERTON STREET.
At a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Hanford duly called and held on April 28, 2026 on motion of Commissioner NORRIS, seconded by Commissioner ESPARZA, and duly carried, the following resolution was adopted:
WHEREAS, the Hanford Planning Commission, at its regularly scheduled meeting on April 28, 2026, received evidence regarding the proposed Roadway Abandonment No. 2026-01 and resulting general plan and zoning ambiguity; and
)
WHEREAS, Pursuant to Section 15305/Class 5 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines, the project is exempt from environmental review. A Notice of Exemption has been prepared for the project in accordance with CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the City's Planning Commission determined at its April 28, 2026, meeting that the roadway abandonment as depicted and described in Exhibit A is consistent with the City's General Plan; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, on the basis of the application for the Roadway Abandonment, the documentation and information provided by the staff report, and evidence submitted, the Planning Commission for the City of Hanford hereby makes the following findings:
1. The proposed roadway abandonment would not limit circulation on the adjacent roadways, and therefore is not in conflict with any portion of the Hanford General Plan, including the Circulation Element.
2. That in accordance with Section 17.06.050 of the Hanford Municipal Code, the Planning Commission may determine the boundary line when ambiguity exists and determines:
a. That the zoning boundary lines were established to follow the public street adjacent to the property, which is to be abandoned.
b. That the abandonment of Millerton Street right-of-way creates an ambiguity in the zoning boundary lines.
c. That the areas to be added to the adjoining parcel(s) be designated as LowDensity Residential in the General Plan and R-L-5 Low-Density Residential on the Zoning Map .
...J
NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that pursuant to Government Code 65402 that the road abandonment is consistent with the City of Hanford General Plan and that where the boundary lines will be relocated, that the area of abandonment shall be designated Low-Density Residential and zoned R-L-5 Low-Density Residential subject to the following conditions:
1. That a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan be developed for the abandonment area.
2. That the abandonment area be kept free of weeds and debris.
3. That the developer is responsible for all costs associated with the abandonment, including, but not limited to recording fees and review by the City Attorney.
4. That a timber barricade be maintained, prohibiting access to and through Millerton Street.
5. That an access easement be recorded and maintained for continued City access to the slough/basin.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Hanford City Planning Commission by the following votes:
AYES: Commissioners NORRIS, ESPARZA, HAM
NOES: Commissioners NONE
ABSTAIN: Commissioners NONE
ABSENT: Commissioners NELSON, GILL, Alternate Commissioner MclLWAINE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF KINGS )ss.
CITY OF HANFORD )
I, Jason Waters, Secretary of the City of Hanford Planning Commission, do hereby certify the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Hanford at a regular meeting thereof held on the 28
th day of April, 2026
Jason Waters, Secretary
Exhibit A
Roadway Abandonment No. 2026-01
)
Exhibit A
Roadway Abandonment No. 2026-01
)
LEGEND l
'----,--r----------~_,.--, IND/CA TES AREA TO BE ')
GRANT DEEDED TO SJVH
LSP LICENSED SURVEYORS'
PLATS
32'
I
I
tF0".J1'08:
R=300.00
L=2.72'
I
I
APN 011-590-024
N01i9'41.E(R)-
30.00'
APN 011-590-025
LJVE oAl< £AS1
UNJ1 NO. 2.c::
21-Lsp-O:?
215 216
POINT OF
NORTH LINE I COMMENCEMENT
W. MILLERTON STREET] SOUTHEAST CORNER
OF LOT 215 ±: - - - --i,-- 7
W. MILLERTON STREET- L- ._
(PREVIOUSLY - S00"4B'33•w , ~
ABANDONED} 30.00' g ~
_r- TRUE POINT ~ (I)
,,- S89i1'27•E 66.18' -,, / OF BEGINNING ::::i ~
"'- CENTERLINE OF t; ~
W. MILLERTON STREET ~ §
- soowrss» g / ~
30.00' ~
j ''-N89i1'21•w 66.18' _,, J J
tFO".J1'08• SOUTH LINE W. MILLERTON STREET
R=330.00' oAJ< £AS1 SOUTHEAST
L=2.99' LJVE ~O 1 CORNER OF
UNJ1 1 · 9 3 W. MILLERTON
ze-LsP- STREET
LOT *A*
SLOUGH
AREA
2,071 SQUARE FEET
0 30 60
SCALE: 1' • 30'
• CML ENGINEERING • SURVEYING • PLANNING •
620 12th Street Modesto, C4 95354
(209) 524-3525 Phone (209) 524-3526 Fax
PLAT TO ACCOMPANY
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
l YING IN A PORnON OF THE
SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECnON 2,
TOWNSHIP 19 SOUTH, RANGE 21 EAST,
MOUNT DIABLO MERIDIAN.
CITY OF HANFORD, COUNTY OF KINGS,
STA TE OF CAUFORNIA
JOB NO: J13-1238
SCAL£· AS SHOWN
DR BY: NC
FILE: tJ-12J8 lots 215-216 south
0 skJa IK18ffl11N1/s.dwg
DATE: February 9, 2026
LEGEND
32'
! 5::
•
: h
a
-.:i
I
.s ~
~
0 ~
~
1 I ....,
i
~
c,j
) 1---
I
/
f
I 'IO'
' \
\
'
APN 011-590-024
IND/CA TES AREA TO BE
GRANT DEEDED TO SJVH
LSP LICENSED SURVEYORS'
PLATS
APN 011-590-025
LJV£ oAJ< £AST
UNJT NO- 2c::
2 7-LsP-O~
215 216
POINT OF
NORTH LINE (COMMENCEMENT ._
W. MILLERTON STREET7 SOUTHWE:ST CORNER ~
OF LOT 216 ~ / --z-----c-- Ci)
f W. MILLERTON STREET ~
(PREVIOUSLY b ~ !l::
ABANDONED) /r- TRUE POINT t-r) ::;:j ~
Soo
.'4B'TT•w Ta 00~ OF BEGINNING ._ ~
,J,J ,JI • --- S89it'21·£ 66.86' -,~ CJ)<
CENTERUNE OF___,,/' \ L5 :3::
W. MILLERTON STREET ARE A I
~ Noo•48'.J.J.£ -
t .JO.DO' 2,012 SQUARE FEET 'g ~
\, I ,
-------"'--S-OU-TH -LI-NE-_/ ~---"""""~,_ -N-89-i1-'27--•w -67.-2-6']--' ~' c:::, ~ W. MILLERTON STREET .-,
uvz oAl< r: ~~J:1:~A~"{- S J
UNJT NO- 93 W. MILLERTON ~
2s-LsP- STREET ~
LOT •A• ~
SLOUGH
0 30 60
SCALE: 1• • 30'
PLAT TO ACCOMPANY
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
• • LYING IN A PORTlON OF TH£ B~ Growp, IMC. sounoest ouART£R oe s£c110N 2, TOWNSHIP 19 SOUTH, RANG£ 21 £AST,
• CML ENGINEERING • SURVEYING • PLANNING • MOUNT DIABLO MERIDIAN. 620 12th Street Modesto, C'1 95354 CITY OF HANFORD, COUNTY OF KINGS, (209) 524-3525 Phone (209) 524-3526 Fax STAT£ OF CALIFORNIA JOB NO: JTJ-1238
SCALE: AS SHOWN
DR BY: NC
r:z•1 C", 1J-12JB /o/;s 215-216 south
r nu:: sAA, «1S6f11Bfll:s.dwg
DAT£· February 9, 2026
....__-r----.------------.- I IND/CA TES AREA FOR I - PROPOSED ACCESS
EASEMENT
LSP LICENSED SURVEYORS'
PLATS
APN 011-590-025
LEGEND
32'
!
:
I
~
~
~
I ....,
i
~
r,j
J--_
I
I '10'
APN 011-590-024
215
LJVE oAJ< £AS1
Uf\111 NO, ~ 216
21-LsP-O='
l )
b:0•31'08·
[
R=210.po·
L=2.45
-
POINT OF BEGINNING
NORTHEAST CORNER OF
W. MILLERTON STREET
AND TH£ SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF LOT 216 l
S8971'27•£ 132.64'
NORTH LINE W. MILLERTON STREET
AREA
8,145 SQUARE FEET
W. MILLERTON STREET
(PREVIOUSLY ABANDONED)
SOUTH LINE W. MILLERTON STREET
!'',,_ N8971'21•w 133.43'
[_ b:031 '08• £AS1
R=330.00' LJVE oAJ< 1
L=2.99' Uf\111 no.
zs-Lsp-93
SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF
W. MILLERTON
STREET
LOT •A•
SLOUGH
0 30 60
SCALE: 1" • 30'
BngiHeerit1g Grmtp1 IMC.
PLAT TO ACCOMPANY
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
LYING IN A PORnON OF TH£
SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF S£CnON 2,
TOWNSHIP 19 SOUTH, RANG£ 21 £AST,
MOUNT DIABLO MERIDIAN.
JOB NO: JTJ-1238
SCALE: AS SHOWN
DR BY: NC
FILE: tJ-t2JB lots 21s-216
• tKJSem«lis.dwg
620 12th Street Modesto, C4 95354 CITY OF HANFORD, COUNTY OF KINGS, 1-------=-- ----1 (209) 524-3525 Phone (209) 524-3526 Fax STAT£ OF CALIFORNIA DATE: February 9, 2026 • CML £NG/NEERING • SURVEYING • PLANNING •
Exhibit B
Access Easement
)
..._--.---.------------.- I IND/CA TES AREA FOR I - PROPOSED ACCESS
EASEMENT
LSP LICENSED SURVEYORS'
PLATS
APN: 011-520-024 APN: 011-520-025
LEGEND
32'
! ~
-
I }-...
C)
-...:i
I
~ ~
~
0 ~
r ~
I ...,
i
~
r,j
I-- '.i? ~ }iJ ..
-
-o "f-C> 0)«:)
I r-,(0
-
I
~
40'
215
tr=o·:,1 'oe:
R=27O.OO'
L=2.45'
LJV£ oAJ< £AST
UNJT NO, ~
21-LsP-O:;,
216
POINT OF BEGINNING
NORTHEAST CORNER OF
W. MILLERTON STREET
AND THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF LOT 216
I
S89i1'27"E 132.64'
NORTH LINE W. MILLERTON STREET
AREA
8,145 SQUARE FEET
W. MILLERTON STREET
(PREVIOUSLY ABANDONED)
SOUTH LINE W. MILLERTON STREET
SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF
W. MILLERTON
STREET
LOT •A"
SLOUGH
0 30 60
SCALE: 1" • 30'
PLAT TO ACCOMPANY
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
• • l YING IN A PORTTON OF THE E~ Growp1 IMC. souTHWEsT ouARTER oe sEcTToN 2, TOWNSHIP 19 SOUTH, RANGE 21 EAST.
• CML £NG/NEERING • SURVEYING • PLANNING • MOUNT DIABLO MERIDIAN. 620 12th Street Modesto, C4 95354 CITY OF HANFORD, COUNTY OF KINGS, (209) 524-3525 Phone (209) 524-3526 Fax STA TE OF CALIFORNIA JOB NO: J13-1238
SCALE: AS SHOWN
DR BY: NC
"'Z' r:-. 1J-12.J8 tots 215-216
r, u;;.. easemt111fs.dwg
DATE: March 1 J, 2025
EXHIBIT "A"
ACCESS EASEMENT
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
)
Being a portion of W. Millerton Street as shown on that certain map entitled "Tract No. 865 Live Oak East Unit No. 2" recorded on June 2, 2022, in Volume 27 of Licensed Surveyors' Plats, at
Section 2, Township 19 South, Range 21 East, Mount Diablo Meridian, County of Kings, California, said property being more particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING at the Northeast corner of said W. Millerton Street (previously abandoned), said point being also the southeast corner of Lot 216 as shown on said Live Oak East Unit No. 2 final map; thence
Along the East line of said W. Millerton Street (previously abandoned), South 00°03'03" West
60.00 feet to the Southeast corner of said W. Millerton Street (previously abandoned); thence Along the South line of said W. Millerton Street (previously abandoned), North 89°11 '27" West 133.~3 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the Northeast, having a radius of 330.00 feet and having a central angle of 00°31 '08"; thence Continuing along said South line of W. Millerton Street (previously abandoned) and along the arc of said curve, 2.99 feet to a radial line of said curve which bears North 01 °19'41" East; thence
Leaving said South line of W. Millerton Street (previously abandoned), on the prolongation of said radial 60.00 feet to a point on the North line of said W. Millerton Street (previously abandoned), said point being also the beginning of a non-tangent curve concave to the Northeast, having a radius of 270.00 feet to which beginning a radial line bears South 01 °19'41" West and having a central angle of 00°31 '08"; thence Along said North line of W. Millerton Street (previously abandoned) and being also the arc of said curve, 2.45 feet; thence
Continuing along said North line, South 89°11 '27" East 132.64 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 8,145 square feet, more or less.
SUBJECT TO all easements and/or rights-of-way of record.
This legal description as described is delineated on the accompanying "Plat to Accompany Legal Description" and made a part hereof for reference purposes. 3-IB·ZS
12/19/2024
ACCESS EASEMENT (ENTIRE WIDTH)
North:
Line Course: s 00°03'03" w 60.00' North:
Line Course: N 89°11'27" w 133.43' North:
Curve Delta: 00°31'08" Radius: 330.00
Radial In: N 00°48'33" E
Radial Out: s 01°19'41" w RP North:
End North:
Line Course: N 01°19'41" E 60.00' North:
Curve Delta: 00°31'08" Radius: 270.00
3493.1691 East
3433.1639 East
3435.0482 East
Length: 2.99 Tangent: 1.49
Chord: N 88°55'53" W 2.99
3765.0153 East:
3435.1039 East:
3495.0878 East
10333. 0719
10333.0185
10199.5970
10204.2572
10196.6091
10197.9996
Length: 2.45 Tang~nt: 1.22
Chord: S 88°55'53" E 2.45
Radial In: N 01°19'41" E
Radial Out: s 00°48'33" w RP North: 3765.0153 East: 10204.2572 End North: 3495.0422 East: 10200.4443
Line Course: s 89°11'27" E 132.64' North: 3493.1691 East : 10333.0719 Perimeter: 391. 51 AREA: 8,145 SF 0.187 ACRES
)
Mapcheck Closure - (Uses listed courses, radii, and deltas) Error Closure: 0.00015 Course: N89°51'48"W
Error North: -0.00000 East: 0.00015
Precision 1:2,587,424.83
)
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT | 317 N. DOUTY ST. HANFORD, CA 93230 559.585.2500 | WWW.HANFORD.CITY
April 1, 2026
NOTIFICATION OF ROAD ABANDONMENT
City of Hanford Water
Pacific Gas & Electric
Southern California Edison Company
Southern California Gas Company
SBC
Comcast
RE: Notification to Utilities concerning Road Abandonment No. 2026-01 The Community Development Department of the City of Hanford is requesting your comments concerning Road Abandonment No. 2026-01. The application was filed by the City of Hanford requesting the following:
Abandonment of approximately 8,145 square feet of dedicated street right-of-way on Millerton Street, east of S. Alpine Avenue.
See enclosed Exhibits and legal descriptions.
Please review this project and provide any comments and/or recommendations that you feel are appropriate, including any scientific or factual information that would be useful in our evaluation. It is the lead agency (City of Hanford) opinion that a Categorical Exemption (Section 15305.a) should be processed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. CEQA Guidelines Section 15305.a allows for minor alterations in land use limitations in areas with a slope of less than 20% and includes minor lot line adjustments not resulting in the creation of any new parcel.
It is requested that your comments, if any, be transmitted to this office, by Friday, April 17, 2026.
Failure to comment will indicate approval of the project and no additional information will be sent to you. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this project please call me at (559) 585-2578.
Sincerely,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Gabrielle Myers
Principal Planner
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT | 317 N. DOUTY ST. HANFORD, CA 93230 559.585.2500 | WWW.HANFORD.CITY
I (do) (do not) have comments regarding this Road Abandonment Application _______________________________________________________________ Signature Agency Date
Attachment
cc: File
SoCal Gas 04/02/26
SoCal Gas has a 2-inch plastic main crossing Alpine Ave on the south side of Millerton St. SCG's rights must remain in tact if the street vacation affects this facility.
Notice of Exemption 2026-25
To: Office of Planning and Research
P.O. Box 3044, Room 212
Sacramento, CA 95812-3044
County Clerk
County of Kings
Kings County Government Center
Hanford, CA 93230
From: City of Hanford
317 North Douty Street
Hanford, CA 93230
Project Title: Roadway Abandonment No. 2026-01
Project Location –
Millerton Street, East of Alpine Avenue
Project Location – City: Hanford Project Location – County: Kings County Description of Nature, Purpose and Beneficiaries of Project: Finding of Conformity for Roadway Abandonment No. 2026- 01, a request by San Joaquin Valley Homes to abandon approximately 8,145 square feet of right-of-way, Millerton Street, an undeveloped street. The recommendation also includes a finding of ambiguity clarification pertaining to the land use and zoning on the abandoned property.
Name of Public Agency Approving Project: City of Hanford, Planning Division Name of Person or Agency Carrying Out Project: CM Construction Services Exempt Status: (check one)
Ministerial (Sec. 21080(b)(1); 152698);
Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(b)(3); 15269 (a));
Emergency Project (Sec. 21080(b)(4); 15269(b)(c));
Categorical Exemption: State type and section number: Minor alterations in land use limitations (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15305/Class 5)
Statutory Exemption. State code number:
Reasons why project is exempt:
The City of Hanford determined the project to be exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15305 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Section 15305 states that Class 5 exemptions consist of projects characterized as minor alterations in land use limitations. This project involves the abandonment of a roadway that will not result in the creation of new lots or increased densities.
Lead Agency
Contact Person: Gabrielle Myers Area Code/ Telephone: (559) 585-2578 Signature:
Signed by Lead Agency
Date: June 16, 2026 Title: Principal Planner
Date received for filing at OPR:
Signed by Applicant
15.A.
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 6/16/2026 AGENDA SECTION: GENERAL BUSINESS SUBJECT:
Adoption of Resolution 26-39-R, Amending the City Council Handbook of Rules and Procedures to Establish a Remote Participation Disruption Policy and Public Comment Registration Procedures RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 26-39-R approving amendments to the City Council Handbook of Rules and Procedures to incorporate a Remote Participation Disruption Policy and a Public Comment registration procedures.
BACKGROUND:
At the May 5, 2026, Study Session, the City Council approved by consensus to direct staff to prepare an amendment to the City Council Handbook of Rules and Proceduresa Remote Participation Disruption Policy and Public Comment Sign-Up Policy.
The proposed amendments are included in the attached updated Handbook. The language for the Remote Participation Disruption Policy is derived from Senate Bill 707 (SB 707). The proposed Public Comment Sign-Up Policy would establish a speaker registration process for all individuals wishing to address the City Council, whether attending in person or participating remotely. A speaker registration process is necessary to effectively administer public participation through the City's remote participation platform, which requires speakers to register in advance in order to be recognized and called upon to provide public comment during the meeting.
The proposed handbook language states:
"Members of the public wishing to address the City Council, whether in person or remotely, shall complete the applicable speaker registration process established by the City before being recognized to speak."
The proposed changes are intended to promote fairness, maintain decorum, and support the orderly administration of City Council meetings. Establishing a speaker registration process for both remote and in-person public comment will help ensure that all speakers have an opportunity to be heard and that public comments are administered in an efficient and organized manner. Similar procedures are utilized by other public agencies and are compatible with the software platform the City will use to manage public participation.
May 5, 2026 Council Discussion:
The Ralph M. Brown Act requires that, with limited exceptions, all meetings of a legislative body of a local agency be open and public and that all persons be permitted to attend and participate. In 2025, the Legislature adopted Senate Bill 707, which amends the Brown Act and establishes additional teleconference and public access requirements for city councils and county boards of supervisors, beginning July 1, 2026.
SB 707 becomes operative July 1, 2026, and remains in effect until January 2030. Beginning July 1, 2026, the Hanford City Council will be required to:
• Provide members of the public with the option to attend meetings through a two-way telephonic service or a two-way audiovisual platform.
• Continue to provide live webcasting of meetings; and
• Translate meeting agendas into any language spoken by at least 20 percent of the City’s population. Based on demographic data, the language required to be translated for the City of Hanford under SB 707 is Spanish, as it is spoken by at least 20 percent of the City’s population.
Additionally, SB 707 requires the City Council to adopt a formal policy, on or before July 1, 2026, addressing disruptions to remote participation. Staff recommends adding the attached draft disruption policy to the City Council Handbook of Rules and Procedures. Staff will bring back a resolution to formally adopt the policy, which will mirror the meeting disruption guidelines that are already outlined in SB 707, which requires the legislative body to take a recess and attempt to restore service for at least one hour. If service cannot be restored within one hour, the legislative body must conduct a rollcall vote confirming that good faith efforts were made and that the public interest in continuing the meeting outweighs the need for remote access. (Cal. Gov. Code § 54953.4(b)(1)).
Note that the public will still be able to view the City Council meeting on the City’s website and at the meeting location.
The City will utilize a program to provide public access to meetings through a two-way telephonic service. The platform will allow remote participants to listen to the meeting and to provide public comment when allowed by the City Clerk. In-person speakers will be called first, followed by remote participants for the public comment periods. Remote participants will be audio-only and will not have the ability to enable video. This feature will be integrated with Microsoft Teams to manage remote public comments.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Implementation of Senate Bill 707 will require updates to the City’s meeting software systems to support two-way remote public comment. The total cost is estimated not to exceed $11,000, which falls within the City Manager’s approval authority and does not require separate City Council approval.
Ongoing annual costs for maintenance and subscriptions will vary based on usage and will be incorporated into future budgets for City Council action.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution 26-39-R
2. Updated Handbook of Rules and Procedures
3. Exhibit A - Disruption of Remote Participation During a Meeting
RESOLUTION NO. 26-39-R
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HANFORD AMENDING THE
HANFORD CITY COUNCIL HANDBOOK OF RULES AND PROCEDURES TO ADOPT
POLICIES REGARDING DISRUPTION OF REMOTE PARTICIPATION DURING A
COUNCIL MEETING AND PUBLIC COMMENT REGISTRATION PROCEDURES WHEREAS, On October 3, 2025, Governor Newsom signed into law Senate Bill 707 (SB 707), which amended the Brown Act to diversify and increase public engagement in meetings of local legislative bodies; and
WHEREAS, Among the requirements of SB 707, qualifying legislative bodies provide a telephonic or internet-based remote access option for members of the public to observe and participate in meetings; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Hanford will provide members of the public with the option to participate remotely through a two-way telephonic or internet-based service and to provide public comment through such remote participation; and WHEREAS, SB 707 requires the City Council adopt a policy, on or before July 1, 2026, that establishes the procedure for recessing and reconvening a meeting in the event of disruption of remote participation and the efforts that the City Council and staff shall make an attempt to restore the service.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Hanford that the Hanford City Council Handbook of Rules and Procedures is hereby amended to incorporate:
1. The Disruption of Remote Participation During Council Meetings procedures attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference; and
2. The Public Comment Registration and Sign-Up Procedures set forth in the Hanford City Council Handbook of Rules and Procedures.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is authorized to update and maintain the official Hanford City Council Handbook of Rules and Procedures to reflect the amendments.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of June 2026, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
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 ___________________, 2024.
Date:
City Clerk
HANDBOOK OF
RULES AND
PROCEDURES
HANFORD CITY
COUNCIL
PREFACE
As provided by California Government Code Section 36813, the City Council of the City of Hanford established the Handbook of Rules and Procedures contained therein. The Handbook shall be in effect upon adoption by the City Council and shall remain in effect until such time as it is amended or new rules are adopted in the manner provided herein.
In addition to the Handbook of Rules and Procedures, the City Council has included in this document other information which may be useful to the City Council, Commissions, administrative staff, and the general public. This document is to be known as “The Handbook of Rules and Procedures of the City Council of the City of Hanford.”
Adopted: June 21, 2016
Resolution: 16-31-R
Amended: June 6, 2017
Resolution: 17-34-R
Amended: August 15, 2017
Resolution: 17-44-R
Amended: July 7, 2020
Resolution: 20-14-R
Amended: November 7, 2023
Resolution: 23-46-R
Amended: April 15, 2025
Resolution: 25-13-R
Amended: November 4, 2025
Resolution: 25-63-R
Amended: June 16, 2026
Resolution: 26-39-R
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1 – GENERAL POWERS AND DUTIES
A. The City of Hanford ................................................................................1 B. Council Elections....................................................................................1 C. Vacancies ..............................................................................................2 D. Mayor/Vice Mayor Selection ..................................................................2 E. Mayor as Presiding Officer and Duties Thereto .....................................2 F. Vice Mayor .............................................................................................2 G. Compensation........................................................................................3 H. City Manager..........................................................................................3 I. City Clerk .................................................................................................3 J. City Attorney ............................................................................................4 K. Triangle of Policy, Process & Product.....................................................5 L. Municipal Code.......................................................................................5 M. Interference in Staff Functions...............................................................5 CHAPTER 2 – CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
A. Rules of Order........................................................................................6 B. Regular Meetings ...................................................................................6 C. Special Meetings....................................................................................6 D. Study Sessions ......................................................................................6 E. Closed Sessions.....................................................................................7 F. Emergency Meetings..............................................................................8 G. Agenda ..................................................................................................8 H. Call to Order...........................................................................................8 I. Quorum....................................................................................................8 J. Lack of Quorum ......................................................................................8 K. Rules of Discussion................................................................................9
1. Motions ..............................................................................................9
2. Voting ................................................................................................9
3. Abstention/Recuse: Conflict of Interest..............................................9
4. Tie Votes..........................................................................................10 L. Recognition to Speak, Council Member ..............................................10
1. Interruptions.....................................................................................10
2. Public Hearings................................................................................10 M. Council Members’ Obligation After Absence .......................................10 N. Adjournment of Meeting.......................................................................11 O. Recess.................................................................................................11 P. Agenda Items of Order.........................................................................11 Q. Audio Recordings.................................................................................11 R. Video Recordings.................................................................................11 S. Disruption of Remote Participation During a Meeting………………….11 T. Agenda Format for Meetings................................................................12
U. Components of Meeting .......................................................................12
1. Public Comments............................................................................12
2. Consent Calendar...........................................................................13
3. Public Hearings...............................................................................13
4. General Business............................................................................13
5. Council Reports/Comments ............................................................13 V. Ordinances...........................................................................................13 W. Resolutions...........................................................................................14 X. Recognitions/Proclamations ................................................................14 Y. Minutes.................................................................................................14 Z. Appeals ................................................................................................14 CHAPTER 3 - DECORUM
A. Enforcement of Decorum .....................................................................15 B. Conduct in the City Council Chambers ................................................15
1. Council Chambers Defined.............................................................15
2. Council Dais....................................................................................15
3. Rules of Decorum for the Public .....................................................15
4. Rules of Conduct and Safety ..........................................................16
5. Removal from the Council Chambers .............................................16 C. Courtesy...............................................................................................16
1. Council Members............................................................................16
2. Public Speakers..............................................................................16 D. Disciplining a Disruptive Member.........................................................17 E. Noise in the Lobby................................................................................18 F. Distribution of Literature and Other Materials
in City Council Chambers .....................................................................18 CHAPTER 4 – PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES, AND OTHER
ACCOLADES
A. Purpose................................................................................................19 B. Guidelines ............................................................................................19 C. Policy ...................................................................................................19 CHAPTER 5 – ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
A. Rules and Procedures Administration ..................................................21
1. Review of City Council Rules and Procedures................................21
2. Adherence to Rules and Procedures ..............................................21
3. City Attorney as Rules and Procedures Advisor.............................21 B. Conflict with City Municipal Code, Administration Policies, State or Federal Law............................................................................21 C. Personal Social Media Usage ..............................................................21
1 CHAPTER 1
GENERAL INFORMATION, POWERS AND DUTIES
A. THE CITY OF HANFORD
The City of Hanford has a City Council/City Manager form of government.
Under this form of government, the elected City Council sets the policies for the operation of the Hanford City Government. The Council is responsible to the citizens for:
• Establishing community-wide goals that address short- and long-range needs. • Formulating policies that define a course of action that shape city operations. • Providing quality services within available resources. • Acting as a link between the professional staff and local citizens.
City Council members are local leaders. The electorate expects the Council to set the tone and direction for municipal operations. Strategic planning and goal setting are the tools that enable a Council to define their vision and determine methods for accomplishing their goals.
The administrative responsibility of the City rests with the City Manager, who is appointed by the City Council. The City Manager has the responsibility to apply and administer Council’s policies through the day-to-day operation of the City. The City Manager is the chief administrative officer of the city and directs the totality of city operations.
Teamwork between the Council and the City Manager is a key element of the council-manager form of government. The pooling of skills is essential to resolve the many complex problems that face the City today. The council-manager form of government seeks to enhance the effectiveness of local policy-making and municipal operations by bringing together skilled lawmakers, community representatives, and experts in municipal administration and management.
B. COUNCIL ELECTIONS
The City Council consists of five (5) members, elected by district. Each Council Member serves four-year staggered terms, without limit. Elected Officials serve until his/her successor has been elected and qualified. Elections are held in November of even numbered years.
2 C. VACANCIES
Vacancies on the City Council shall be filled in accordance with California Government Code 36512.
California Government Code Section 36502 specifies the conditions under which a vacancy occurs.
D. MAYOR/VICE MAYOR SELECTION
Following a General Municipal Election, the Mayor and Vice-Mayor shall be selected at the meeting where election results are confirmed, and the new City Council members are seated. (This meeting will either be in late November or early December).
In alternating years (i.e. when there is no General Municipal Election) the Mayor and Vice-Mayor shall be selected at the first Regular City Council meeting in December. The selection process is conducted pursuant to Robert’s Rules of Order as Rosenberg’s Rules is silent on the matter.
Consistent with Robert’s Rules, the City Attorney shall oversee the nominations and elections of the Mayor and Vice-Mayor. Council members may nominate one or more candidates. The different names shall be repeated by the City Attorney as they are made, and then the vote is taken on each in the order in which they were nominated, until one is elected. The nominations need not be seconded. These positions typically serve a period of one (1) year.
Although the Mayor and the Vice-Mayor have additional ceremonial, parliamentary and administrative responsibilities as described below and elsewhere in this Handbook, with respect to the establishment of policies, voting, and in other significant areas, all members are equal.
E. MAYOR AS PRESIDING OFFICER AND DUTIES THERETO
The Mayor shall be recognized as the official head of the City of Hanford for all ceremonial purposes and by the Governor for military purposes. In the time of public danger or emergency, the Mayor may, with the consent of the City Council, cause order to be maintained and enforce laws. The Mayor shall act as the Presiding Officer at all meetings of the City Council and perform such other duties consistent with the office as may be imposed by the City Council. The Mayor may move, second, and debate from the Chair, subject to such limitations of debate as are imposed on all Council Members by these rules and shall not be deprived of any of the rights and privileges of a Council Member as such Presiding Officer. The Mayor shall possess no veto power.
The Mayor shall preserve strict order and decorum at all times. The Mayor shall state each item coming before the City Council, and shall upon conclusion of said
3 presentation related thereto call for the vote. Following the vote, the Mayor shall announce the results of the vote. The Mayor is eligible to vote on all motions, and shall direct the order of participation of Council Members. The Mayor shall, in all instances, have the last chance to speak. The Mayor shall sign all ordinances and resolutions adopted by the City Council during the Mayor’s presence. The Mayor shall sign all agreements and/or contracts, except where otherwise instructed or set forth by policy.
F. VICE MAYOR
In the absence of the Mayor, the Vice Mayor shall possess and perform the power and duties of the Mayor. In that capacity, the Vice Mayor shall sign ordinances and resolutions adopted in his/her presence. The Vice Mayor shall also sign all agreements and/or contracts, except where otherwise instructed or set forth by policy.
G. COMPENSATION
Salaries for the City Council Members may be fixed in accordance with Section 36516 of the Government Code of the State of California. Council Members may be reimbursed for actual and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of their official duties as allowed by Government Code Section 36514 and any resolutions or ordinances adopted by the City.
H. CITY MANAGER
The City Manager, appointed by the City Council, is responsible for the overall administration of the City in response to the policies and programs established by the City Council. The City Manager is responsible for forecasting the program and service needs of the City and its related financial, personnel, and capital improvement requirements. The City Manager is a significant liaison with the community and other levels of government.
I. CITY CLERK
The City Clerk is appointed by the City Manager and is the local official for elections, local legislation, the Public Records Act, the Political Reform Act, and the Brown Act (open meeting laws). The City Clerk, in consultation with the City Attorney, ensures that actions are in compliance with all federal, state and local statutes and regulations and that all actions are properly executed, recorded, and archived.
The statutes of the State of California prescribe the basic functions and duties of the City Clerk, and the Government Code and Election Code provide precise and specific responsibilities and procedures to follow.
4 The Office of the City Clerk is a service department within the municipal government upon which the City Council, all city departments, and the general public rely on for information regarding the operations and legislative history of the city. The City Clerk serves as the liaison between the public and City Council and provides related municipal services. The City Clerk provides clerical support to the City Council.
J. CITY ATTORNEY
The City Attorney, appointed by the City Council, is responsible for providing necessary legal services and guidance to the City Council, the City Manager, department heads, and city boards, commissions and committees to ensure that city functions are performed on a sound legal basis.
In the event that it is deemed necessary and in the best interest of the City to contract for either Special or Conflict Counsel to act in the place of the City Attorney, the City Manager shall bring forth a recommendation to the City Council for approval at a regular or special meeting and be designated to execute the necessary documentation to facilitate those contracts. If outside legal counsel is required due to a reason other than a conflict of interest affecting the City Attorney, the City Manager shall confer with the City Attorney regarding the hiring of Special Counsel.
Communications from the City Attorney’s Office may be confidential and shall be treated as attorney-client privilege. Only the City Council, as an entire body, may waive the privilege, and not individual Council Members.
During the normal course of a Council Member carrying out the duties of office, it is common practice to discuss issues or ask questions of city staff, including the City Attorney. For the purpose of this policy statement, the intent is to regulate an individual Council Member’s authority to cause work to be performed by the City Attorney.
When an individual Council Member poses a question to the City Attorney, the City Attorney shall estimate the amount of time required to answer the question.
In the event the City Attorney believes the amount of time for research involved in answering the question will generate a bill in excess of $600.00, the City Attorney will notify the Council Member that the answer will exceed policy limitations. If the submitting Council Member continues to seek an answer to the question, the Council Member will pose the question to the Council, as a body, at a Council Meeting and must obtain a consensus of the majority of the Council Members present at the meeting in order for the City Attorney to work on the question.
Legal work involving questions or inquiries that require less than $2,500.00, per year, in billable hours by the City Attorney may be authorized by the submitting Council Member without the need of obtaining the Council’s approval.
5 K. TRIANGLE OF POLICY, PROCESS & PRODUCT
The City Council establishes the Policy—establishing vision and direction for the community’s future.
The City Clerk, in consultation with the City Attorney oversees the Process— ensuring that the decision-making process complies with federal, state, and local regulation and that it is properly recorded.
The City Manager provides the Product—which is the primary reason for the existence of local government: to provide services to the taxpayer that the taxpayers cannot (or will not) provide for themselves.
L. MUNICIPAL CODE
The Hanford Municipal Code sets forth the regulatory, penal and administrative laws of general application to the city. These laws are enforceable by the City, and violation constitutes a misdemeanor or infraction.
Other directives and policies of the City Council are recorded in resolutions or by minute action of the Council.
M. INTERFERENCE IN STAFF FUNCTIONS
The City Council shall deal with the administrative services of the City through the City Manager, except for the purpose of inquiry, and neither the City Council nor any member thereof, shall give orders to subordinates of the City Manager.
No member of the City Council shall publicly criticize or censure any staff member of the City, and shall instead relay any criticism of a staff member privately through the City Manager.
The City Council shall deal with the Office of the City Attorney only through the City Attorney or his/her designees, except for the purpose of inquiry, and neither the City Council nor any member thereof, may give orders to subordinates of the City Attorney without the City Attorney’s consent.
6 CHAPTER 2
CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
A. RULES OF ORDER
The City Council shall determine its own rules of order and amend them from time to time or adopt new rules as it deems necessary. The City of Hanford shall follow Rosenberg’s Rules of Order and incorporate the procedures set forth in this chapter.
The City Attorney acts as the parliamentarian and advises the Mayor when points of order are raised.
B. REGULAR MEETINGS
Regular meetings of the City Council shall be open to the public and held on the first and third Tuesdays of every month, at the hour of 7:00 p.m. The business to be considered during the council meeting is detailed on a printed agenda. State law (the Ralph M. Brown Act) requires that public notice be given at least 72 hours before the regular meeting indicating the time and place of the meeting. An agenda of each meeting is posted at City Hall. Regular meetings may be adjourned or continued to a specified time and place.
Whenever the day fixed for any regular meeting of the City Council falls upon a day designated as a holiday, such meeting may be held at the same hour on the next succeeding day, not a holiday, as if it were a regular meeting or the meeting may be cancelled.
C. SPECIAL MEETINGS
A special meeting may be ordered whenever the public business may require it or upon the request from three members of the City Council. Whenever a special meeting shall be called, notice of such meeting shall be provided at least 24 hours prior to the time of the meeting pursuant to State law.
Ordinances may not be adopted at special meetings; only urgency ordinances may be adopted at such meetings. Items not listed on the agenda shall not be considered at the special meeting.
D. STUDY SESSIONS
The City Council may meet in a “study session” for the purpose of acquiring information on a particular subject(s) and collaborating with the public through individual public comment periods. These sessions are considered special meetings and shall be open to the public and comply with the Brown Act.
Additionally, as special meetings, Council may act upon an item contained in the
7 agenda and may provide formal direction to staff consistent with the agenda wording for each item.
E. CLOSED SESSIONS
Consistent with Government Code Section 54954.2 the Council may hold closed sessions during any regular or special meeting, or any time otherwise authorized by law to consider or hear any matter which is authorized by State law to be heard or considered in closed session.
The general subject matter for consideration shall be expressed in an open meeting before such session is held. After closed session the legislative body must reconvene to open session and may be required to disclose action taken, if any.
Closed sessions may be held to discuss certain matters specified by law, including:
• Personnel matters to consider the appointment, employment, performance, or dismissal of a public employee
• Matters of national and public safety
• Labor negotiations
• License applications by persons with criminal records • Real estate negotiations
• Anticipated litigation
The legislative body in a closed session can consider only matters covered in its agenda descriptions. City Council Members shall keep all written materials and verbal information provided to them in closed session in complete confidence in accordance with Government Code section 54963. No mention of information in these materials should be made to anyone unless allowed by this statute.
If the City Council in closed session has provided direction to city staff on proposed terms and conditions for any type of negotiations whether it be related to property acquisition or disposal, a proposed or pending claims or litigation, and/or employee negotiations, all contact with the other party should be by the designated representative handling the negotiations or litigation. A Council Member should not have any contact or discussions with the other party or its representative(s) involved concerning the negotiation during this time and not communicate any discussion conducted in closed sessions. All public statements, information, press releases, should be handled by the designated representative or spokesperson.
Government Code Section 54963 (a) – (f) outlines the injunctive relief and disciplinary actions that may be imposed on those who divulge confidential
8 closed session discussions, without first receiving authorization from the legislative body.
F. EMERGENCY MEETINGS
Emergency meetings may be called by the City Council with one-hour notice to its members and local news media. The City Council may not meet in closed session during an emergency meeting. Except for the 24-hour notice requirement, the special meeting requirements set forth above shall apply in emergency meetings.
G. AGENDA
In order to facilitate the orderly conduct of the business of the citizens of Hanford, the City Manager and City Clerk shall set the agenda, in addition to any direction by the City Council. The City Clerk shall arrange such matters as may have been timely provided, for inclusion in the agenda. Copies of the agenda are available at City Hall and at the council meeting, as well as posted on the city’s website.
H. CALL TO ORDER
The meetings of the City Council shall be called to order by the Mayor, or in the Mayor’s absence, by the Vice Mayor. In the absence of the Mayor and Vice Mayor, the meeting shall be called to order by the most senior Council Member present. This person shall serve as the Council’s presiding officer until the arrival of the Mayor or Vice Mayor, or until adjournment of the meeting.
I. QUORUM
Three members of the City Council shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. A majority of a quorum shall be sufficient to pass any action taken by the City Council except on such matters, which, by law, require a greater majority. All ordinances require at least three affirmative votes. Approval of resolutions and all orders for the payment of money also require an affirmative vote by a majority of the entire Council.
J. LACK OF QUORUM
If a majority of the City Council are absent from any meeting, the remaining members of the City Council may declare the meeting adjourned or if no member of the City Council is present, the City Clerk may adjourn the meeting. If a meeting is adjourned for less than five calendar days, no new agenda need be posted so long as a new item of business is not introduced. A copy of the order of adjournment must be posted within 24 hours after the adjournment, at or near the door of the place where the meeting was held.
9 K. RULES OF DISCUSSION
1. Motions
Action items listed on the council agenda in accordance with applicable law or added as an action item on a council agenda, in accordance with applicable law, may be voted on by the council.
Following a presentation of the item by staff, the Mayor will open discussion to the City Council for questions and comments. When there appears to be no further discussion or all of the Council Members have had the opportunity to speak, the Mayor may call for a motion.
Motions may be made by any member of the council, including the presiding officer, providing that before a motion is offered by the presiding officer, the opportunity for making a motion should be offered to the other members of the council. Any member of the council, other than the person offering the motion, may second a motion. Following a motion and a second, and any further discussion, the Mayor shall call upon the City Clerk for the vote.
2. Voting
The City Council utilizes an electronic voting system. In the absence of an electronic voting system, the clerk shall ask for votes by “voice vote” on all matters before it, unless a roll call vote is required by law or is requested by the Mayor. Unless a Council Member states that he or she is not voting, silence shall be recorded as an affirmative vote. The Presiding Officer shall announce the results of the vote.
A majority, also known as a simple majority, is a subset of a group that is more than half of the members present.
A two-thirds majority means that two-thirds of the quorum must agree to the proposition. It is much stronger than a simple requirement. In the event of an absence the vote would have to be unanimous.
3. Abstention/Recuse: Conflict of Interest
Council Members shall disqualify themselves if they have a financial conflict of interest or any other disqualification prescribed by law in a matter before the City Council. In such event, they may not participate in the discussion or the vote. Council Members shall state the specific reason for such disqualification. The disqualified Council Member shall leave the Council dais and exit the Chambers to the West Wing room until
10 the conclusion of the agenda item unless applicable State law or regulations permit otherwise.
It should be noted, however, a Council Member may speak as a member of the public, on his/her own behalf – as opposed to on behalf of someone else – on a matter that directly affects his/her financial interest even when conflicted out. Thus, while a Council Member would have to disqualify him/herself on a matter affecting a piece of property in which the Council Member has a financial interest, he/she could address the Council, speaking to what the impact would be to his/her property.
In some instances, a Council Member may determine that it is appropriate to abstain from voting on a matter even though no financial conflict of interest exists. If a City Council member abstains from voting, their vote will count as a negative. A Council Member is counted as present for quorum purposes, but his/her abstention is effectively a negative vote.
For example, if a matter requires three affirmative votes for approval and one Council Member abstains, at least three other Council Members must cast affirmative votes for the matter to be approved.
4. Tie Votes
A tie vote results in a lost motion. In such an instance, any member of the Council may offer a motion for further action. If there is no action by an affirmative vote, the result is no action. If the matter involves an appeal, and affirmative vote does not occur, the result is that the decision appealed stands as decided by the decision-making person or body from which the appeal was taken.
L. RECOGNITION TO SPEAK, COUNCIL MEMBER
Every Council Member desiring to speak shall address the Mayor and, upon recognition by the Mayor, shall confine his or her remarks to the item coming before the City Council.
1. Interruptions:
A Council Member, once recognized, may voice concerns, comments or ask staff to provide explanation or clarification of the item before the City Council, without interruption, unless out of order with the rules and procedures established herein and/or the Mayor call the item to order.
2. Public Hearings:
Council Members should not speak to the merits of an issue, other than to ask questions, until the public comment has been closed.
11 N. ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING
Regular meetings shall conclude no later than 9:00 p.m., unless the time is extended by a majority consensus of the Council.
The Mayor shall adjourn the meeting. In the instance of the lateness of the hour the Mayor may also adjourn the meeting to a date and time specific to continue discussions on either the remainder of the agenda or on a specific item for discussion.
O. RECESS
At any point during a meeting the Mayor may call for a brief recess.
P. AGENDA ITEMS OUT OF ORDER
The Mayor may, with the consent of the City Council, modify the order of the agenda at the meeting, if such modifications would promote fluidity in the process and discussions.
Q. AUDIO RECORDINGS
All regular meetings (except closed sessions) of the City Council are audio recorded, as well as special meetings. Workshops or meetings that require extensive interaction with the public, staff, and City Council may not be recorded if the length of the meeting is anticipated to be unusually long or if simultaneous discussions are expected to occur.
R. VIDEO RECORDINGS
All regular meetings (except closed sessions) of the City Council are video recorded, as well as any special meetings held in the Council Chambers. The City of Hanford allows the use of additional recordings as long as they are not being disruptive to the proceedings or to those in attendance. Any equipment being used should not block aisles, exits, or the view of others. If the use of equipment is determined to be disruptive by the legislative body, the use of said equipment may be banned. Council has identified an area against the East wall of the Chambers, just south of the Director’s box, where all video camera equipment should be setup for recording.
S. DISRUPTION OF REMOTE PARTICIPATION DURING A MEETING
If a disruption of internet service prevents members of the public from remotely attending or observing the meeting, the City Council shall recess the meeting for at least one hour, during which time staff shall make good faith efforts to restore the service. During such recess, the City Council may meet in closed session. The City Council shall not reconvene the open session of them meeting until at least one hour
12 following the disruption, or until internet service is restored, whichever is earlier.
Upon reconvening the open session, the City Council shall adopt, by roll-call vote, a formal finding affirming that good faith efforts were made to resolve the internet service and that the public interest in resuming the meeting outweighs the public interest in remote public access.
T. AGENDA FORMAT FOR MEETINGS
The agenda format for the Hanford City Council will be prepared to allow for an efficient method to conduct city business. The format and order of business will be established by the City Clerk, unless modifications are approved by the City Council.
U. COMPONENTS OF MEETING
The following sections of a regular meeting agenda shall set forth the guidelines of decorum for each respective section of the agenda.
1. Public Comments
Members of the public wishing to address the City Council, whether in person or remotely, shall complete the applicable speaker registration process established by the City before being recognized to speak.
For regular meetings, this is the time for citizens to comment on subject matters within the jurisdiction of the Hanford City Council, including matters listed on the meeting’s agenda and other matters not appearing on the agenda. For special meetings, citizen comments are, pursuant to the Brown Act (Government Code § 54950, et seq.) limited to matters on the agenda, and public comment will be accepted after each agenda item.
The Council cannot legally discuss or take official action on citizen requests that are introduced under this section.
This is also the time for citizens to comment on items listed under the Consent Calendar or General Business, or to request an item from the Consent Calendar be pulled for discussion purposes. Comments related to Public Hearing items will be heard at the time the item is discussed.
Each speaker will be allowed three minutes. As a courtesy, but not required, the speaker should state his/her name and provide their city of residence.
Any documents submitted by a member of the public to the City Clerk for the purposes of handing out to the City Council will be distributed and made a part of the record. The City Clerk will not read the documents out loud, but note who the correspondence was from.
13 2. Consent Calendar
All Consent Calendar Items are considered routine and will be enacted in one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these matters unless a request is made, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Calendar to be discussed and voted upon by a separate motion.
3. Public Hearings
A public hearing is only required where a specific law or ordinance applicable to the item expressly requires a hearing or a hearing is required for constitutional reasons (usually to ensure "due process"). Sometimes the decision is made to hold a public hearing even though one is not required by law. In this case, the agenda documents will state that the public hearing is optional. Staff will open the item by providing a report , then the Mayor will open the hearing to public comments. Public comments are subject to the rules and regulation of the Hanford Municipal Code. After closing public comments, the Mayor will allow the Council to provide questions or comments to the staff prior to making a motion.
Once public comments are closed it is inappropriate for the public to speak except to answer an inquiry of a Council Member addressed through the Mayor. However, public comments may be re-opened by a majority approval by the Council to hear new information.
4. General Business
Any other remaining items requiring action may be placed in this section.
Items that do not need action, but are to provide informational or receive direction from the City Council may also be placed under General Business.
5. Council Reports/General Reports
Brief, information-only reports, from City Council and/or Staff may provide updates to the City Council on major events or projects that may be of public interest. This is also the time for Council members to provide committee reports and to report on any meetings attended at the City’s expense.
6. Items for Future Agendas
Any Council Member may request a matter which is not otherwise scheduled on a City Council agenda to be placed on a future agenda. The Council Member referring the item shall provide sufficient information as to the nature of the item. The City Council by concurrence of a majority may direct the City Manager to put the item on a future agenda.
V. ORDINANCES
Ordinances are the laws of the municipality. City councils are given the power to pass ordinances by Government Code Section 37100 as long as those
14 ordinances are not in conflict with the laws and Constitution of the State of California or the United States. Approval of an ordinance requires a first reading or introduction and a second reading and adoption, with at least five days between readings (except an urgency ordinance). The passage of an ordinance requires the affirmative votes of at least three (3) council members. The ordinance or a summary is then published in the local newspaper and becomes effective thirty (30) days later. The thirty (30) day time frame is known as a referendum period. A referendum period is required by state law and is a time frame in which any citizen can file a petition challenging the legality of a recently adopted ordinance. An ordinance is an action that can be repealed or amended only by a subsequent ordinance.
In matters deemed by the City Council to warrant immediate action to preserve peace, public safety or health, an urgency/emergency ordinance may be passed immediately upon introduction at either a regular or special meeting, and can be effective immediately.
W. RESOLUTIONS
A resolution sets forth the action of the council on certain types of policy, procedural, or administrative matters. It requires only one reading and may be changed by subsequent resolution.
X. RECOGNITIONS/PROCLAMATIONS
The City Council may recognize individuals, organizations, or activities during the meetings. Other organizations may also present recognitions to the City.
Y. MINUTES
The City Council utilizes summary minutes, which include the motions made, action taken, and a brief summary of council, staff and/or public comments. The audio recording may be used for reference, but it is not the official record of the meeting.
The City Clerk shall prepare the Minutes, and upon approval of the City Council, it shall become the official record.
Z. APPEALS
The filing of an appeal shall have the effect of staying the issuance of any permit or action until such time as the matter on appeal is resolved. If there are subsequent items to come before the Council that are subject to the outcome of the appeal, those items shall be listed following the item for appeal on the agenda, the decision of which shall be factored upon the Council’s decision on appeal.
15 CHAPTER 3
DECORUM
A. ENFORCEMENT OF DECORUM
The City Manager shall designate the Chief of Police, or his/her designated representative as a sergeant-at-arms when necessary to attend City Council meetings for the purpose of maintaining order and decorum in the City Council Chambers, lobby, or other designated meeting location. Upon instructions from the Mayor, the sergeant-at-arms shall eject any person from the City Council Chambers, in conformance with State law.
B. CONDUCT IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1. Council Chambers Defined
Council Chambers shall be, in addition to the usual and customary meeting location, any location or facility wherein a majority of the legislative body may meet for an open and public meeting as defined by the Brown Act, whether it be a regular meeting, special meeting, or emergency meeting.
2. Council Dais
The City Council seating area, most commonly referred to as the Council Dais is restricted to Council and city staff at all times. Loitering or the dissemination of materials are not permitted in the area directly in front of the City Council seating area, commonly referred to as the well, unless invited by a Council Member to step forward. Written or photographic materials are to be handed to the City Clerk for dissemination to the Council, and made part of the record.
3. Usage of Electronic Communication Devices at the Dais It shall be the policy of the City Council that City Council Members, and any other members of the City’s Boards, Commissions, and Committees, shall not use electronic communications (i.e.text, emails) with anyone in the public, or between themselves, while at the dais and/or participating in a public meeting. Nothing in this policy shall preclude a Council Member from having their phone on the dais with them in the event of an emergency.
4. Rules of Decorum for the Public
Members of the audience shall not engage in disorderly or boisterous conduct, including the utterance of loud, threatening or abusive language, clapping, whistling, and stamping of feet or other acts which disturb, disrupt, impede or otherwise render the orderly conduct of the city meeting infeasible. A member of the audience engaging in any such conduct shall,
16 at the discretion of the presiding officer or a majority of the City Council, be subject to ejection from the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.3(c).
5. Rules of Conduct and Safety
When the City Council is in session, all persons present must preserve safety and order. Members of the public should sit in the seats provided, subject to ADA compliance, unless addressing the Council or entering or leaving the Council Chambers. Members of the public shall not block the aisles or exits in any manner. Members of the public should not bring audible equipment into the Council Chambers, including cellular phones or pagers, without first either turning said equipment off or to a silent mode.
6. Removal from the Council Chambers
Any person who commits the following acts in respect to a meeting of the City shall be removed from the Council Chambers per Government Code Section 54957.9.
(a) Disorderly, contemptuous or insolent behavior toward the City or any member thereof, tending to interrupt the due and orderly course of said meeting; and,
(b) A breach of the peace, boisterous conduct or violent disturbance, tending to interrupt the due and orderly course of said meeting; and,
(c) Disobedience of any lawful order of the Mayor, which shall include an order to be seated or to refrain from addressing the City Council; and,
(d) Any other unlawful interference with the due and orderly course of said meeting.
C. COURTESY
1. Council Members
Council Members shall accord the utmost courtesy to each other, city employees and the public appearing before the City Council, and shall refrain at all times from rude and derogatory remarks, public criticism of staff, remarks as to integrity, abusive comments and statement as to motives and personalities.
2. Public Speakers
Members of the public have the right to attend City Council meetings and to address the City Council on specific agenda items and under the Public Comments section of the agenda. The right of the public to address the City Council includes their right to criticize the policies, procedures, programs, or services of the City, and the acts or omissions of the City Council members. Criticisms that do not relate to city business will not be
17 tolerated.
While the City Council meeting is in session, all persons must preserve order and decorum. A person who addresses the City Council under a specific agenda item or under Public Comments may not engage in speech or conduct which is likely to provoke others to violent or riotous behavior, which disturbs the peace of the meeting by loud and unreasonable noise, which is outside of the Council’s jurisdiction, repetitive, or which disrupts, disturbs, or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of any City Council meeting.
The Mayor or other presiding officer shall request that a person who is breaching the rules of decorum cease such conduct. If, after receiving such a warning, the person persists in breaching the rules of decorum, the Mayor or other presiding officer may order the person to leave the City Council meeting. If such person does not leave, the Mayor or presiding officer may request any law enforcement officer who is on duty at the meeting as sergeant-at-arms to remove the person from the Council Chambers. In the event there is no one from law enforcement present, the Mayor or presiding officer may direct the City Manager to contact law enforcement.
D. DISCIPLINING A DISRUPTIVE MEMBER
If one member engages in disruptive behavior, it is the responsibility of the City Council to remind the disruptive member about their duties. The failure of the governing body to deal with a misbehaving member or commissioner can also have legal consequences for the locality. For example:
1. A City Council member or Commissioner that mistreats staff members by using inappropriate language, asking the staff member to perform personal tasks, hugging or touching staff in an inappropriate manner, etc. may be putting the locality at risk for a lawsuit alleging harassment or a hostile work environment. If the governing body does not take appropriate steps to avoid the appearance of agreement with the objectionable behavior of a fellow member or commissioner, the inappropriate behavior may be considered to have been sanctioned by the governing body.
2. A member that leaks a confidential legal opinion of the local government attorney can result in the loss of the attorney client privilege and with the loss of the attorney client privilege it is possible the opinion can be used in court against the locality. In order to protect the attorney client privilege the other members of the governing body need to take affirmative action against the member that leaked the opinion.
In some instances meeting one-on-one outside of a public meeting can rectify a
18 misunderstanding or correct inappropriate behavior. The manner in which a situation is addressed may be on a case by case basis. If the behavior continues or if the actions are more severe, the City Council may determine other methods of discipline.
The Mayor, with the approval by a majority of the Council, may remove a Commissioner from their seat. Similarly, a Council Member may be removed from his or her standing committee assignments as well as assignments to outside committees.
One of the most common forms of discipline is for the governing body to “censure” a fellow council member. A censure is a public statement condemning the member’s inappropriate behavior with the hopes of reforming him or her so that he or she will not behave in the same way again. Members can be censured for misconduct at meetings, failing to follow proper procedures, violating confidentiality, illegal or immoral conduct, absenteeism, lying, disloyalty, working against the organization, conspiracy, and violating other values that the Hanford City Council holds dear. With a consensus of the Council, a censure may be placed on a future agenda. Censures are then approved by a resolution.
E. NOISE IN THE LOBBY
Noise emanating from the lobby outside the City Council Chambers which disrupts City Council meetings shall not be permitted.
F. DISTRIBUTION OF LITERATURE AND OTHER MATERIALS IN CITY
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
No person, other than city staff, shall distribute flyers, leaflets, placards or other literature or circulate any petition within the City Council Chambers.
Flyers, leaflets, placards or literature may only be distributed to the Council by a member of the public under Public Comments, or by a project applicant/appellant pertaining to city business as may be referenced on the agenda, by approaching the City Clerk and requesting such material be distributed on their behalf.
Hand-held signs are permitted in the Council Chambers, but they cannot block the view of others in the audience or prevent the public from freely entering or exiting the room.
19 CHAPTER 4
PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES, AND OTHER ACCOLADES
A. PURPOSE
The purpose of this policy is to establish uniform procedures, criteria, and identify authority.
B. GUIDELINES
The following are basic guidelines for recognition.
Proclamations – Generally proclaims certain periods of time (days, weeks, or months) in honor of an event or activity. Proclamations also may recognize individuals for extraordinary contributions they have made to the community.
They contain several biographical or informational paragraphs. Examples include Fire Prevention Week, Arbor Day, and American Red Cross Month.
Certificates – Certificates are prepared in response to the type of recognition desired and are to express appreciation for exemplary service or performance to individuals, teams, or organizations.
Other Tokens of Appreciation – These items include various forms of Hanford memorabilia and are distributed at the discretion of individual City Council Members, City Clerk or City Manager. For example, the City Clerk is often contacted for lapel pins and forwards them to the requesting parties.
C. POLICY
It is the policy of the City of Hanford to recognize individuals and/or organizations for their outstanding performance, or honor special events and dates with proclamations, certificates, plaques, or other tokens of appreciation in accordance with the criteria set forth below.
1. Request for proclamations, certificates or plaques from City Council Members, city departments, residents, and local organizations must be submitted to the City Clerk’s office, in writing, at least two (2) weeks prior to the event.
2. Requests should specify:
(a) Reason why recognition should be granted; and
(b) Information that will assist the Mayor, City Council, or City Manager in arriving at a decision.
3. Requests by individuals or organizations for proclamations or certificates of recognition/appreciation are subject to approval by the
20 Mayor and City Manager. The Mayor and City Manager will determine if it will be presented at a City Council meeting or will direct the City Clerk to forward the accolade to the recipient.
4. All requests for plaques, framed certificates, or custom gifts to visiting officials/dignitaries, elected officials, individuals or organizations shall be approved by the Mayor and City Manager.
5. Individual Council Members shall have the discretion to direct the City Clerk to prepare certificates (not framed) or another token of appreciation that he or she will personally present.
6. Requests for plaques, gifts or awards to city employees for dedicated service to the city shall be approved by the City Manager.
7. The Mayor and City Manager shall have the discretion to determine the appropriate type of honor for special or unusual circumstances that may arise and may warrant deviation from this policy.
21 CHAPTER 5
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES
A. RULES AND PROCEDURES ADMINISTRATION
1. Review of City Council Rules and Procedures – The Council will review and revise the Handbook of Rules and Procedures as needed.
2. Adherence to Rules and Procedures – During City Council discussions, deliberations and proceedings, the Mayor bears the primary responsibility to ensure that the City Council, staff and members of the public adhere to the Council’s adopted protocol.
3. City Attorney as Rules and Procedures Advisor – With the consensus of a majority of the Council, the City Attorney may be directed to interpret the City Council’s adopted Rules and Procedures and proposed changes.
B. CONFLICT WITH CITY MUNICIPAL CODE, ADMINISTRATION
POLICIES, STATE OR FEDERAL LAW
If there is any conflict contained hereinabove with the City Municipal Code, Administration Policies, State or Federal Law, such laws shall prevail.
C. PERSONAL SOCIAL MEDIA USAGE
City elected and appointed officials are not prohibited from using social media platforms to express their opinions and views. However, postings and user profiles on an official’s personal social media accounts must not state or imply that the views, conclusions, statements, or other content contained therein are official statements, positions, or communications of the City, or that they represent the views of the City. If it can reasonably interpreted that the official is speaking on behalf of the City, the official shall provide a disclaimer on the account stating that their opinions and views do not reflect the opinions and views of the City (e.g., “The postings on this page are my own and do not represent the City of Hanford’s positions, strategies, or opinions.”). This disclaimer aids in protecting a City official’s lawful rights, but the use of a disclaimer does not shield against discipline for violations of this policy.
If a City official’s conduct on a social media platform adversely affects their performance or the performance of their fellow officials or is detrimental to the mission and function of the City, or otherwise adversely affects members of the public served by the City, City employees, or the City’s interests, the City Council may take disciplinary action against the official. Disciplinary action against an official appointed by the Council may include removal from the body to which the official is appointed, and discipline of an elected official may include censure, as
22 defined in this Handbook.
Officials will not display the City of Hanford seal or other official City logos, emblems, or patches on their personal social media accounts.
City officials shall utilize non-work email addresses and phone numbers when establishing personal social media accounts.
The provisions of this section apply to all social media accounts utilized by City officials, including accounts that an official maintains for personal, non-City use and to accounts that an official utilizes to communicate with the public in his or her capacity as a City official.
23
DRAFT POLICY
DISRUPTION OF REMOTE PARTICIPATION DURING A MEETING
POLICY STATEMENT TO BE ADDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL HANDBOOK OF RULES AND PROCEDURES, CHAPTER 2, COUNCIL MEETINGS -
POLICY STATEMENT:
If a disruption of internet service prevents members of the public from remotely attending or observing the meeting, the City Council shall recess the open session for at least one hour, during which time staff shall make good faith efforts to restore the service. During such recess, the City Council may meet in closed session. The City Council shall not reconvene the open session of the meeting until at least one hour following the disruption, or until internet service is restored, whichever is earlier.
Upon reconvening the open session, the City Council shall adopt, by roll-call vote, a formal finding affirming that good faith efforts were made to resolve the internet service and that the public interest in resuming the meeting outweighs the public interest in remote public access.
15.B.
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 6/16/2026 AGENDA SECTION: GENERAL BUSINESS SUBJECT:
Adoption of Resolution No. 26-36-R, approving the Annual Engineer's Report and Intention to Levy and Collect Assessments as outlined, pursuant to Chapter 3 of the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. The proposed assessments outlined in the Engineer's Report are less than or equal to the authorized maximum assessment for each landscape assessment district, and set July 21, 2026, as the Public Hearing date to consider the increases in assessments as proposed.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation:
That the City Council, by motion, adopt the attached Resolution approving the Annual Engineer’s Report and Intention to Levy and Collect assessments pursuant to Chapter 3 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 for the following 44 districts:
District Subdivision
90-01 Pinecastle Addition (Tract 606), Unit No. 1, 2, 3 and 4 90-02 Park Monterey (Tract 610/657), Unit No. 1 and 2
90-03 Mansionette Estates (Tract 596), No. 7 and 8
90-04 Hyde Park (Tract 619)
91-01 Sierra Vista (Tract 641)/New Dimensions (Tract 703/713), No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 92-01 Portofino (Tract 607), No. 1, 2, 3 and 4
92-02 Cielo En Tierra (Tract 652), No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 93-01 Vintage Estates (Tract 634)
93-02 Walnut Forest (Tract 673), Unit No. 1, 2 and 3
94-01 Gateway Estates (Tract 712)
94-02 Stonecrest (Tract 708/709), No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 94-03 Quail Run Estates (Tract 696), No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 97-01 Rosewood Estates (Tract 711), No. 1 and 2
97-02 Summer Field Addition No. 2 (Tract 742)
97-03 Country Crossing (Tract 743/772), No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 98-01 Crystal Springs (Tract 747), No. 1, 2 and 3
98-02 Mountain View Estates (Tract 759), No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 01-01 Pacific Grove (Tract 680/777)/N. Pointe (Tract 778), No. 1, 2, 3 and 4 01-02 Cambridge Homes (Tract 770), No. 1, 2 and 3
01-03 Poppy Hills (Tract 771/796), No. 1 and 2
01-04 Silver Oaks (Tract 769), No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5
02-01 Ashton Park (Tract 776), No. 1, 2, 3 and 4
03-01 Le Parc (Tract 788), No. 1, 2 and 3
04-01 Sidonia Estates, No. 1 and 2 (Tract 810)/Sidonia Estates II (Tract 814) 04-02 Cambridge Homes (Tract 799)/Majesty II (Tract 830) 04-03 Cambridge Homes (Tract 795/826)/Vineyards (Tract 825/826), No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 04-04 Sierra Heights (Tract 802/803), No. 1 and 2
05-01 Mission Park9Tract 812)
05-02 Copper Valley (Tract 835)
06-01 Quail Park Subdivision (Tract 794)
07-02 South Gate Addition (Tract 811)/Greenbrier Gardens (Tract 876)/Live Oak North (Tract 902)
09-01 Victory Estates (Tract 877)
09-02 Independence (Tract 843), No. 1 and 2
14-01 Independence (Tract 843), Unit No. 3 and 4
15-01 Silver Oaks Addition III (Tract 887/922)
15-02 The Greens II (Tract 823)
16-01 Woodside Homes (Tract 917)
16-02 Mynderup (Tract 914)
18-01 Bella Vista (Tract 918)
19-01
19-02
20-01
20-02
21-01
Pacific Grove (Tract 916)
Enclave (Tract 915)
Woodside Homes (Tract 928)
Lennar Homes (Tract 934)
San Joaquin Valley Homes (Tract 929)
Recommended Motion: I move to adopt the attached Resolution approving the Annual Engineer’s Report and Intention to Levy and Collect assessments pursuant to Chapter 3 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 for the listed districts.
BACKGROUND:
In accordance with Chapter 3 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (“Act”), an Annual Engineer’s Report addressing adjustments to assessments based on a review of the costs of maintenance of public improvements must be prepared and submitted to the City Council for action. The Streets and Highway Code, as referenced in the Act, requires the holding of a public hearing for Districts identified in the Annual Engineer’s Report as showing an increase, decrease or no change in the annual assessment amount. At the public hearing, scheduled for July 21, 2026, the City Council shall consider all public input prior to taking final action on confirming and levying the assessments proposed in the Annual Engineer’s Report.
Regarding the Districts identified in the Annual Engineer’s Report as showing an increase in the annual assessment amount, the City Council must consider all protests against the proposed increase in the assessment amount and tabulate any ballots delivered to the City prior to the close of the public hearing.
If the ballots submitted in opposition to the increased assessment amount exceed the ballots submitted in favor of the increased assessment amount, the assessment amount shall not be increased. If the increase in the assessment to maintain the current level of service for the existing landscape area is voted down, the current level of service may be reduced. In tabulating the ballots, the ballots shall be weighed according to the proportional financial obligation of each affected parcel of real property.
The Annual Engineer’s Report also provides the following information as required by Article XIII D, Section 4 of the California Constitution:
1. Identifies all parcels of real property which will have a special benefit conferred upon them and upon
which the assessment will be imposed;
2. Determines the proportionate special benefit derived by each parcel of real property in relationship to the entirety of the cost of maintenance of the public improvements;
3. Identifies the special benefit conferred on each parcel of real property;
4. Establishes that the assessment imposed on each parcel of real property does not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportionate special benefit conferred on that parcel of real property.
For sake of clarity, the Districts within this report are grouped under one og three categories and are as follows:
1. The Annual Engineer’s Report identifies a proposed increased assessment amount for the following districts that were recently balloted:
DISTRICT Current
Assessment
Proposed
Assessment
94-03 Quail Run Estates (Tract 696), No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 $59.00 $268.08 92-02 Cielo En Tierra (Tract 652), No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 $28.70 $160.94 98-01 Crystal Springs (Tract 747), No. 1, 2 and 3 $38.00 $149.11 92-01 Portofino (Tract 607), No. 1, 2, 3 and 4 $50.80 $241.14 94-01 Gateway Estates (Tract 712) $26.10 $153.76
90-04 Hyde Park (Tract 619) $62.30 $165.76
The proposed increased assessment ballot for the above listed Districts also includes an imposition of Standard Annual CPI Increase in accordance with California Government Code section 53739(b)(1).
The addition of an “adjustment for inflation” must abide by the same criteria as an increase in assessment.
This first category of Districts are the ones identified having significant deficits which staff is currently working on determining financial solutions to resolve. A copy of the FY26-27 Draft Ballot Information for each of these six districts is included in this report as Attachment 3.
2. The annual assessment amounts for each affected parcel in the following Districts having no change in the assessment amount, is as follows:
DISTRICT Current
Assessment
Proposed
Assessment
90-01 Pinecastle Addition (Tract 606), Unit No. 1, 2, 3 and 4 $139.50 $139.50 90-02
90-03
Park Monterey (Tract 610/657), Unit No. 1 and 2
Mansionette Estates (Tract 596), No. 7 and 8
$82.00
$49.10
$82.00
$49.10
91-01 Sierra Vista (Tract 641)/New Dimensions (Tract 703/713), No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6
$18.30 $18.30
93-01 Vintage Estates (Tract 634) $153.80 $153.80
94-02
97-01
Stonecrest (Tract 708/709), No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 Rosewood Estates (Tract 711), No. 1 and 2
$85.00
$51.30
$85.00
$51.30
97-02 Summer Field Addition No. 2 (Tract 742) $42.70 $42.70 97-03 Country Crossing (Tract 743/772), No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 $62.70 $62.70 98-02 Mountain View Estates (Tract 759), No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 $89.00 $89.00
Category 2 DIstricts are those for which there is no change in the annual assessment amount.
3. The annual assessment amounts for each affected parcel in the following Districts having an increase in the assessment amount based on the imposition of 3.0% Standard Annual CPI Increase (December 2025) in accordance with California Government Code section 53739(b)(1) are as follows:
DISTRICT Current
Assessment
Proposed
Assessment
93-02 Walnut Forest, No. 1, 2 and 3 $49.42 $50.90
01-01 Pacific Grove/N. Pointe, No. 1, 2, 3 and 4 (Tract 777) $42.46 $43.73 01-02 Cambridge Homes (Tract 770), No. 1, 2 and 3 $49.80 $51.29 01-03 Poppy Hills, No. 1 and 2 $43.78 $45.09
01-04 Silver Oaks, No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 $78.64 $81.00
02-01 Ashton Park, No. 1, 2, 3 and 4 $131.10 $135.03
03-01 Le Parc, No. 1, 2 and 3 (Tract 788/789) $67.44 $69.46 04-01 Sidonia Estates, (Tract 810), No. 1 and 2/(Tract 814) $35.30 $36.36 04-02 Cambridge Homes (Tract 799)/Majesty II (Tract 830) $260.20 $268.00 04-03 Cambridge Homes (Tract 795/826)/Vineyards (Tract
825),
$157.34 $162.06
04-04 Sierra Heights, No. 1 and 2 $472.12 $486.28
05-01 Mission Park (Tract 812) $130.04 $133.94
05-02 Copper Valley (Tract 835) $103.64 $106.75
06-01 Quail Park Subdivision (Tract 794), No. 1 and 2 $229.96 $236.86 07-02 South Gate Addition (Tract 811), Greenbrier Gardens (Tract 876), Live Oak West (Tract 902)
$46.44 $47.83
09-01 Victory Estates (Tract 877) $197.24 $203.16
09-02 Independence (Tract 843), No. 1 and 2 $209.00 $215.27 14-01 Independence (Tract 843), Unit No. 3 and 4 $228.30 $235.15 15-01 Silver Oaks Addition III (Tract 887/922/927) $454.94 $337.30* 15-02 The Greens II (Tract 823) $258.64 $266.40
16-01 Woodside Homes (Tract 917) $234.78 $241.82
16-02 Mynderup, No. 1 and 2 (Tract 914) $173.20 $178.40 18-01 Bella Vista/Bonterra, No. 1, 2, 3, and 4 (Tract 918/919) $543.68 $301.03* 19-01
19-02
20-01
20-02
21-01
Pacific Grove Addition II (Tract 916)
The Enclave (Tract 915)
Woodside Homes (Tract 929)
Lennar Homes (Tract 934)
San Joaquin Valley Homes (Tract 928)
$546.72
$173.04
$354.56
$312.09*
$185.70
$563.12
$178.23
$361.64*
$321.45
$432.78*
Districts in Category 3 follow a 3.0% Annual CPI increase. *(Current Assessment based on estimate prepared for the formation or restructuring of the District) Attached is a copy of the Annual Engineer’s Report and ballots which includes a summary of the maintenance costs based on the “current assessment” amount and Resolution of Intention to Levy and Collect which establishes the proposed assessment amounts for each District for the 2026-27 Fiscal Year, and the date, time and place for the public hearing for confirming and levying the proposed assessments.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The following districts have been determined to have a funding shortfall as has been previously presented to Council. Draft FY26-27 Ballots are included in this report and referenced as Attachment 3:
94-03 Quail Run Estates (Tract 696), No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 $59.00 $268.08 92-02 Cielo En Tierra (Tract 652), No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 $28.70 $160.94 98-01 Crystal Springs (Tract 747), No. 1, 2 and 3 $38.00 $149.11 92-01 Portofino (Tract 607), No. 1, 2, 3 and 4 $50.80 $241.14 94-01 Gateway Estates (Tract 712) $26.10 $153.76
90-04 Hyde Park (Tract 619) $62.30 $165.76
If the proposed increase in the annual assessment for the districts cannot be imposed, maintenance services for the districts may have to be reduced in order to maintain expenditures within available funding.
The following districts are also projected to have a funding shortfall and are recommend to be balloted for an increase to the annual assessment for FY 2027-28. 92-02 Mansionette Estates (Tract 596), No. 7 and 8
98-01 Sierra Vista (Tract 641)/New Dimensions (Tract 703/713), No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 92-01 Stonecrest (Tract 708/709), No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 94-01 Country Crossing (Tract 743/772), No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 Other than the above list of districts, the remaining districts identified in the Annual Engineer’s Report as showing no change in the annual assessment have sufficient funding to maintain their current level of service through calendar year 2026.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution 26-36-R
2. 2026 LAD Engineer's Report
3. FY26-27 Ballots
- 1 -
RESOLUTION NO. 26-36-R
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF HANFORD APPROVING ANNUAL
ENGINEER’S REPORT AND DECLARING ITS
INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS
At a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford duly called and held on June 16, 2026, at 7:00 p.m., it was moved by Council Member _______________, seconded by Council Member _______________, and duly carried that the following resolution be adopted:
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Landscaping & Lighting Act of 1972 (Act), the City of Hanford has established the following landscape and lighting assessment districts within the City limits of the City of Hanford.
ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS
90-01 Pinecastle Addition, Unit No. 1, 2, 3 and 4 – (Located East of 10th Avenue and North of Fargo Avenue)
90-02 Park Monterey, Unit No. 1 and 2 – (Located West of Douty Street and North of Sherwood Drive)
90-03 Mansionette Estates, No. 7 and 8 – (Located West of Douty Street and North Encore Drive)
90-04 Hyde Park – (Located East of 12th Avenue and North of Hanford-Armona Road) 91-01 Sierra Vista (Tract 641)/New Dimensions (Tract 703/713), No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 – (Located West of 11th Avenue and South of Hanford-Armona Road) 92-01 Portofino, No. 1, 2, 3 and 4 – (Located East of Neill Way and South of Fargo Avenue)
92-02 Cielo En Tierra, No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 – (Located West of 11th Avenue and South of Fargo Avenue)
93-01 Vintage Estates – (Located West of 12th Avenue and North of Grangeville Boulevard)
93-02 Walnut Forest, No. 1, 2 and 3 – (Located West of 11th Avenue and North of Hume Avenue)
94-01 Gateway Estates – (Located West of 10th Avenue and North of Encore Drive) 94-02 Stonecrest, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 – (Located West of 11th Avenue and North of Fargo Avenue)
94-03 Quail Run Estates, No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 – (Located East of 11th Avenue and North of Pepper Drive)
97-01 Rosewood Estates, No. 1 and 2 – (Located East of 12th Avenue and South of Grangeville Boulevard)
97-02 Summer Field Addition, No. 2 – (Located West 91/4 Avenue and South of Florinda Street)
97-03 Country Crossing, No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 – (Located West of Centennial Drive and North of Lacey Boulevard)
98-01 Crystal Springs, No. 1, 2 and 3 – (Located West of 91/4 Avenue and North of Grangeville Boulevard)
- 2 -
98-02 Mountain View Estates, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 – (Located West of 11th Avenue and North of Houston Avenue)
01-01 Pacific Grove (Tract 680/777)/N. Pointe (Tract 778), No. 1, 2, 3 and 4 – (Located East of 12th Avenue and North of Grangeville Boulevard) 01-02 Cambridge Homes (Tract 770), No. 1, 2 and 3 – (Located West of 11th Avenue and North of Pepper Drive)
01-03 Poppy Hills, No. 1 and 2 – (Located West of 11th Avenue and North of Pepper Drive) 01-04 Silver Oaks, No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 – (Located West of 12th Avenue and North of Grangeville Boulevard)
02-01 Ashton Park, No. 1, 2, 3 and 4 – (Located West of 12th Avenue and North of Lacey Boulevard)
03-01 La Parc, No. 1, 2 and 3 – (Located West of 11th Avenue and South of Fargo Avenue) 04-01 Sidonia Estates, No. 1 and 2 (Tract 810)/Sidonia Estates II (Tract 814) – (Located East of 12th Avenue and North of Hume Avenue)
04-02 Cambridge Homes (Tract 799)/Majesty II (Tract 830) – (Located East of 11th Avenue and South of Flint Avenue)
04-03 Cambridge Homes (Tract 795/826)/Vineyards (Tract 825), No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 – (Located East of 12th Avenue and South of Fargo Avenue) 04-04 Sierra Heights (Tract 802/803), No. 1 and 2 – (Located West of 9th Avenue and North of Fargo Avenue)
05-01 Mission Park – (Located West of Highway 43 and South of Flint Avenue) 05-02 Copper Valley – (Located West of 12th Avenue and South of Fargo Avenue) 06-01 Quail Park Subdivision – (Tract 794), No. 1 and 2, Located West of 11th Avenue and South of Flint Avenue)
07-02 South Gate Addition – (Tract 811)/Greenbrier Gardens (876)/ Live Oak North (902) - (Located West of 12th Avenue and South of Hanford-Armona Road) 09-01 Victory Estates – (Located West of University Avenue and North of Grangeville Boulevard)
09-02 Independence (Tract 843), No. 1 and 2 - (Located West of 12th Avenue and North of Greenfield Avenue)
14-01 Independence (Tract 843), No. 3 and 4 - (Located West of 12th Avenue and North of Merritt Street)
15-01 Silver Oaks Addition III (Tract 887/922), No. 1, 2, and 3 - (Located West of Centennial Drive and North of West Berkshire Lane)
15-02 The Greens II (Tract 823) - (Located West of 9 ¼ Avenue and North of Grangeville Boulevard)
16-01 Woodside Homes (Tract 917) –(Located West of Centennial Drive and South of Grangeville B lvd)
16-02 Myderup (Tract 914), No. 1 and 2 – (Located East of 12th Avenue and North of Hume Avenue)
18-01 Bella Vista (Tract 918/919), No. 1, 2, and 3 – (Located West of Centennial Drive and South of Fargo Avenue)
19-01 Pacific Grove Addition No. 2 (Tract 916) – (Located East of 12th Avenue and North of Bristol Lane)
19-02 The Enclave Units I & II (Tract 915) – (Located West of Centennial Drive and North of Millenium Way)
20-01 Woodside Homes II Units I & II (Tract 929) – (Located East of 13th Avenue and North of Devon Street)
20-02 Lennar Homes (Tract 934) – (Located East of 13th Avenue and South of Grangeville Boulevard)
21-01 San Joaquin Valley Homes (Tract 928) – (Located East of Centennial Drive and South of Fargo Avenue)
(collectively Districts).
- 3 -
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Act, it is necessary that the City Council review an annual report prepared by the City Engineer for the City of Hanford (Engineers Report), which sets forth a full and detailed description of the improvements and boundaries of each District and any zones therein and the proposed annual assessments to be levied upon assessable lots and parcels of land within each District;
WHEREAS, the City Engineer for the City of Hanford has prepared and filed with the City Clerk, an Engineers Report which includes: (1) a full and detailed description of the improvements and boundaries of each District and any zones therein; (2) identifies the proposed annual assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within each District; (3) identifies all parcels of real property which will have a special benefit conferred upon them and upon which the assessment will be imposed; (4) determines the proportionate special benefit derived by each parcel of real property in relationship to the entirety of the cost of maintenance of the public improvements; (5) identifies the special benefit conferred on each parcel of real property; and (6) establishes that the assessment imposed on each parcel of real property does not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportionate special benefit conferred on that parcel of real property.
WHEREAS, the Engineer’s Report identifies the need for an increase in the annual assessment from the previous year and the reasons for the increase for the following Districts:
1. 90-04 Hyde Park
2. 92-01
3. 92-02
Portofino Estates
Cielo En Tierra, No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5
4. 94-01 Gateway Estates
5. 94-03
6. 98-01
Quail Run Estates
Crystal Springs, No. 1, 2, and 3
WHEREAS, the Report identifies a decrease or no change in the annual assessment from the previous year for the following Districts:
a) 90-01 Pinecastle Addition, Unit 1, 2, 3 and 4
b) 90-02 Park Monterey, Unit No. 1 and 2
c) 90-03 Mansionette Estates, No. 7 and 8
d) 91-01 Sierra Vista (Tract 641)/New Dimensions (Tract 703/713), No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6
e) 93-01 Vintage Estates
f) 94-02
g) 97-01
Stonecrest, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9
Rosewood Estates, Unit No. 1 and 2
h) 97-02 Summer Field
i) 97-03 Country Crossing, No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5
- 4 -
j) 98-02 Mountain View Estates, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 WHEREAS, the Report identifies the annual assessment amounts for each affected parcel in Districts with an increase in the assessment amount based on the imposition of 3.0% Standard Annual CPI Increase (December 2025) in accordance with California Government Code section 53739(b)(1) is as follows:
a) 93-02 Walnut Forest, No. 1, 2 and 3
b) 01-01 Pacific Grove/N. Pointe, No. 1, 2, 3 and 4
c) 01-02 Cambridge Homes (Tract 770), No. 1, 2 and 3
d) 01-03 Poppy Hills, No. 1 and 2
e) 01-04 Silver Oaks, No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5
f) 02-01 Ashton Park, No. 1, 2, 3 and 4
g) 03-01 Le Parc, No. 1, 2 and 3
h) 04-01 Sidonia Estates, (Tract 810), No. 1 and 2/(Tract 814) i) 04-02 Cambridge Homes (Tract 799)/Majesty II (Tract 830) j) 04-03 Cambridge Homes (T 795/826)/Vineyards (T 825), k) 04-04 Sierra Heights, No. 1 and 2
l) 05-01 Mission Park
m) 05-02 Copper Valley
n) 06-01 Quail Park Subdivision (Tract 794), No. 1 and 2 o) 07-02 South Gate Addition (Tract 811)/Greenbrier Gardens (Tract 876)/Live Oak West (Tract 902)
p) 09-01 Victory Estates
q) 09-02 Independence (Tract 843), No. 1 and 2
r) 14-01 Independence (Tract 843), Unit No. 3
s) 15-01 Silver Oaks Addition III (Tract 887/922)/Lennar Homes (Tract 927) t) 15-02 The Greens II (Tract 823)
u) 16-01 Woodside Homes
v) 16-02 Mynderup, No. 1 and 2 (Tract 914)
w) 18-01 Bella Vista, No. 1, 2 and 3 (Tract 918/919)
x) 19-01
y) 19-02
z) 20-01
aa) 20-02
bb) 21-01
Pacific Grove Addition II (Tract 916)
The Enclave Units I and II (Tract 915)
Woodside Homes II (Tract 929) Units I and II
Lennar Homes (Tract 934)
San Joaquin Valley Homes (Tract 928)
WHEREAS, the existing improvements within each District include decorative block fencing, landscaping and irrigation systems;
WHEREAS, interested parties should refer to the Engineer’s Report, a copy of which is on file with the City Clerk for the City of Hanford, for a full and detailed description of the improvements, the boundaries of the assessment district and any zones therein, and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within the district; WHEREAS, there are no substantial changes proposed to the existing improvements in any District; and
- 5 -
WHEREAS, Streets and Highways Code Section 22624(e) requires the City Council of the City of Hanford to give notice of the time and place for hearing by the City’s legislative body on the levy of the proposed assessments.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Hanford approves the Engineers Report as submitted for each District; RESOLVED FURTHER, that the City Council of the City of Hanford declares its intention to levy and collect the assessments for each respective District and each lot thereof, as set forth in the Engineers Report for the fiscal year 2026-2027.
RESOLVED FURTHER, that the City Council of the City of Hanford held a public hearing on the levy of the proposed assessments set forth in the Engineer’s Report, which public hearing occurred on April 07, 2026, and May 19, 2026 at the hour of 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers of the Civic Auditorium in Hanford, California. At such public hearings, affected property owners are afforded an opportunity to give oral testimony and submit written comments regarding the proposed assessments. The proposed increased assessment and Standard Annual CPI Increase was set forth in this Engineer’s Report for the following Districts:
1. 90-04 Hyde Park
2. 92-01
3. 92-02
Portofino Estates
Cielo En Tierra, No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5
4. 94-01 Gateway Estates
5. 94-03 Quail Run Estates
6. 98-01 Crystal Springs, No. 1, 2, and 3
At said public hearings, affected property owners within the four (4) of the six (6) above listed Districts subject to the proposed increased assessment and Standard Annual CPI Increase were afforded an opportunity to give oral testimony and submit written ballots identifying affected property owners’ support or opposition to the proposed increase in the assessment amount and imposition of the Standard Annual CPI Increase.
Districts 90-04 Hyde Park, 92-02 Cielo En Tierra, 94-01 Gateway Estates, and 98-01 Crystal Springs were reported to have received a majority opposing an increased assessment. With the public hearing for the following districts 92-01 Portofino Estates and 94-03 Quail Run Estates set
- 6 -
for July 21, 2026, at the hour of 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers of the Civic Auditorium in Hanford, California.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Hanford at a regular meeting thereof held on June 16, 2026, by the following vote:
COUNCIL MEMBERS: HOWZE, KAIRIS, MARTINEZ, PADEN, REGAN
AYES: ________________________________________________________________ NOES: ________________________________________________________________ ABSTAIN: ________________________________________________________________ ABSENT: ________________________________________________________________
NATALIE CORRAL
CITY CLERK
of the Council of the City of Hanford
APPROVED
_____________________________
MARK KAIRIS
MAYOR of the City of Hanford
ENGINEER'S REPORT
ANNUAL REPORT AND CONFIRMATION OF DIAGRAMS
LEVYING ASSESSMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-2027
(Pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972)
Section 22500 et seq. of the Streets and Highway Code
Frank J. Senteno, P.E., Engineer of Work for Landscape Assessment District Nos.: 90-01 (Includes 90-01-A, 90-01-B, and 90-01-C, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 90-01), 90-02, (Includes 90-02-A, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 90-02), 90-03 (Includes 90-03-A, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 90-03), 90-04, 91-01 (Includes 91-01-A, 91-01-B, 91-01-C, 91-01-D, and 91-01-E, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 91-01), 92-01 (Includes 92-01-A, 92-01-B, and 92-01-C, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 92- 01), 92-02 (Includes 92-02-A, 92-02-B, 92-02-C, and 92-02-D, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 92-02), 93-01, 93-02 (Includes 93-02-A, and 93-02-B, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 93-02), 94-01, 94-02 (Includes 94-02-A, 94-02-B, 94-02-C, 94-02-D, 94-02-E, 94-02-F, 94-02-G, and 94-02-H, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 94-02), 94-03 (Includes 94-03-A, 94-03-B, 94-03-C, and 94-03-D, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 94-03), 97-01 (Includes 97-01-A, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 97-01), 97-02, 97- 03 (Includes 97-03-A, 97-03-B, 97-03-C, and 97-03-D, Fourth Restructuring of lots in Original District 97-03), 98-01 (Includes 98-01-A, and 98-01-B, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 98-01), 98-02 (Includes 98-02-A, 98-02-B, 98-02-C, 98-02-D and 98-02-E, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 98-02), 01-01 (Includes 01-01-A, 01-01-B, and 01-01-C Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 01-01), 01-02 (Includes 01-02-A, and 01-02-B, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 01-02), 01-03 (Includes 01-03-A, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 01-03), 01-04 (Includes 01-04-A, 01-04-B, 01-04-C, and 01-04-D, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 01-04), 02-01 (Includes 02-01-A, 02-01-B, and 02-01-C, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 02-01), 03-01 (Includes 03-01-A, and 03-01-B, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 03-01), 04-01 (Includes 04-01-A, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 04-01, 04-01-B First Annexation of Additional lots in Original District 04-01-A), 04-02 (Includes 04-02-A, Annexation and Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 04-02), 04-03 (Includes 04-03-A, 04-03-B, 04-03-C, 04-03-D, and 04-03-E, Fifth Restructuring of lots in Original District 04-03), 04-04, 15-01 (Includes 15-01-A, 15-01-B, 15-01-C, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 15-01), 05-02, 06-01 (Includes 06-01-A, First Restructuring of lots in Original District 06-01), 07-02 (Includes 07-02-A, First Annexation of Additional lots in Original District 07-02), 09-01, 09-02 (Includes 09-02-A, First Restructuring of lots in Original District 09-02), 14-01 (Includes 14-01-A, First Restructuring of lots in Original District 14-01), 15-01 (Includes 15-01-A, First Restructuring of lots in Original District 15-01), and 15-02, 16-01, 16-02 (Includes 16-02-A, First Restructuring of lots in Original District 16-02), 18-01 (Includes 18-01-A, 18-01-B, 18-01-C, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 18-01), and 19-01, 19-02, 20-01(Includes 20-01-B, First Restructuring of lots in Original District 20-01), 21-01 (Includes 21-01-A, 21-01-B, 21-01-C, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 21-01), 20-02, City of Hanford, Kings County California, submits this Annual Engineer’s Report for Assessment Districts, as directed by the City Council, pursuant to Sections 22620-22631 of the Streets and Highway Code (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972).
The improvements, which are the subject of this report, are briefly described as follows:
The maintenance of landscaping and irrigation systems, and block fencing/walls, located within each said Assessment District.
This report consists of five parts, as follows:
Exhibit "A" - Plans and specifications for the improvements are filed with the City Clerk.
Although separately bound, the plans and specifications are a part of this report and are included in it by reference.
Exhibit "B" - An estimate of the cost of the maintenance of the improvements in each District. including incidental costs and expenses in connection therewith. Expenses are generally comprised of Total Direct Maintenance Expenses and Total Incidental Expenses. Total Direct Expenses include contract and staff landscape costs, utilities, repair and/or replacement costs.
Indirect Costs include all incidental costs such as contract and staff overhead, project management, and filing fees. Costs are based on actual invoices or tracked costs.
Exhibit "C" - A list of the names and addresses of the affected owners of real property, and assessment of the estimated cost of the maintenance of the improvements on each benefited parcel of land in each District, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll for taxes, or as known to the Clerk. Although separately bound, the list is a part of this report and is included in it by reference, and is on file at the City Clerk’s office.
Exhibit "D" - A statement of the method by which the undersigned has determined the amount proposed to be assessed against each parcel, a determination of the proportionate special benefit derived by each parcel of real property in relationship to the entirety of the cost of maintenance of the public improvements located in each District, and a determination that the assessment imposed on each parcel of real property in each District does not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportionate special benefit conferred on each parcel of real property.
Exhibit "E" - A diagram showing all of the parcels of real property within each District, which will have a special benefit conferred upon it and upon which the assessment will be imposed and the identification of the special benefit to each parcel in each District. The diagram is keyed to Exhibit "C" by assessment number. Although separately bound, the “diagram” is a part of this report and is included in it by reference, and is on file at the City Clerk’s office.
Respectfully submitted,
Frank J. Senteno, P.E.
Utilities & Engineering Director
City of Hanford, CA
MO
EXHIBIT "A"
PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
FOR IMPROVEMENTS
(Pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972)
The plans and specifications for each Assessment District have been filed separately with the Clerk of the legislative body and are incorporated in this Report by reference.
ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS
90-01, Pinecastle Addition, Unit No. 1, 2, 3, and 4 (Includes 90-01-A, 90-01-B, and 90-01-C, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 90-01)
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates, and Jardin Landscape Architect/Construction for the City Engineer. 90-02, Park Monterey, No. 1, and 2 (Includes 90-02-A, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 90-02)
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by the Malone Design Group for the City Engineer.
90-03, Mansionette Estates, Unit No. 7, and 8 (Includes 90-03-A, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 90-03)
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by David J. Weiland for the City Engineer.
90-04, Hyde Park
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Home Development, Inc. for the City Engineer.
91-01, Sierra Vista/New Dimensions, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (Includes 91-01-A, 91-01-B, 91-01-C, 91- 01-D, and 91-01-E, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 91-01) Plans and specifications for the improvements for 91-01 (Original District) are those prepared by Heritage Builders for the City Engineer.
Plans and specifications for the improvements for 91-01-A, 91-01-B, 91-01-C, 91-01-D, and 91-01-E are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Don Young Landscape Architect for the City Engineer.
92-01, Portofino, No. 1, 2, 3, and 4 (Includes 92-01-A, 92-01-B, and 92-01-C, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 92-01)
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Jardin Landscape Architect/Construction for the City Engineer.
EXHIBIT “A” Cont....
92-02, Cielo En Tierra, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 (Includes 92-02-A, 92-02-B, 92-02-C, and 92-02-D, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 92-02) Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Jardin Landscape Architect/Construction for the City Engineer. 93-01, Vintage Estates
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Jardin Landscape Architect/Construction for the City Engineer. 93-02, Walnut Forest, No. 1, 2, and 3 (Includes 93-02-A, and 93-02-B, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 93-02)
Plans and specifications for the improvements for 93-02 (Original District), and 93-02-A are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Land Development, Inc. for the City Engineer.
Plans and specifications for the improvements for 93-02-B are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Hakkoh Development for the City Engineer. 94-01, Gateway Estates
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Kaufman and Broad for the City Engineer.
94-02, Stonecrest, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 (Includes 94-02-A, 94-02-B, 94-02-C, 94-02-D, 94-02- E, 94-02-F, 94-02-G, and 94-02-H, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 94-02) Plans and specifications for the improvements for 94-02 (Original District) are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Centex Homes for the City Engineer.
Plans and specifications for the improvements for 94-02-A, 94-02-B, 94-02-C, 94-02-D, 94-02-E, 94- 02-F, 94-02-G, and 94-02-H are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Ono Design Group for the City Engineer.
94-03, Quail Run Estates, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 (Includes 94-03-A, 94-03-B, 94-03-C, and 94-03-D, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 94-03) Plans and specifications for the improvements for 94-03 (Original District) are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and R. J. Hill Co. for the City Engineer.
Plans and specifications for the improvements for 94-03-A, 94-03-B, 94-03-C, and 94-03-D are those prepared by Giannetta Engineering and Don Young Landscape Architecture for the City Engineer. 97-01, Rosewood Estates, No. 1, and 2 (Includes 97-01-A, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 97-01)
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates for the City Engineer.
EXHIBIT “A” Cont....
97-02, Summer Field Addition, No. 2
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates for the City Engineer.
97-03, Country Crossing, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 (Includes 97-03-A, 97-03-B, 97-03-C, and 97-03-D, the Fourth Restructuring of Lots in Original District 97-03) Plans and specifications for the improvements for 97-03 (Original District), 97-03-A, and 97-03-B are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Ennis Development, Inc. for the City Engineer.
Plans and specifications for the improvements for 97-03-C, and 97-03-D are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Quad Knopf, Inc. for the City Engineer. 98-01, Crystal Springs, No. 1, 2, and 3 (Includes 98-01-A, and 98-01-B, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 98-01)
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Don Young for the City Engineer.
98-02, Mountain View Estates, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (Includes 98-02-A, 98-02-B, 98-02-C, 98-02-D, and 98-02-E, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 98-02) Plans and specifications for the improvements for 98-02 (Original District), and 98-02-A are those prepared by Lane Engineers, Inc. and Nahial Landscaping for the City Engineer.
Plans and specifications for the improvements for 98-02-B, 98-02-C, 98-02-D, and 98-02-E are those prepared by Lane Engineers, Inc. and Quad Knopf, Inc. for the City Engineer. 01-01, Pacific Grove/North Pointe, No. 1, 2, 3, and 4 (Includes 01-01-A, 01-01-B, and 01-01-C, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 01-01) Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Paul Daley Homes, A California Corporation, for the City Engineer. 01-02, Cambridge Homes (Tract 770), No. 1, 2, and 3 (Includes 01-02-A, and 01-02-B, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 01-02)
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Central Pacific Builders, Inc., for the City Engineer. 01-03, Poppy Hills, No. 1 and 2 (Includes 01-03-A, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 01-03)
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Gary G. Gianetta and Broussard Associates for the City Engineer.
EXHIBIT “A” Cont....
01-04, Silver Oaks, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 (Includes 01-04-A, 01-04-B, 01-04-C, and 01-04-D, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 01-04)
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Centex Homes, Inc. for the City Engineer.
02-01, Ashton Park, No. 1, 2, 3, and 4 (Includes 02-01-A, 02-01-B, and 02-01-C, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 02-01)
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and McMillin Homes, Inc. for the City Engineer.
03-01, Le Parc, No. 1, 2, and 3 (Includes 03-01-A, and 03-01-B, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 03-01)
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Ennis Development, Inc. for the City Engineer.
04-01, Sidonia Estates, No. 1 and 2 (Includes 04-01-A, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 04-01, 04-01-B First Annexation of Additional Lots in Original District 04-01-A) Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by R. L. Schafer & Associates and Patrick T. Corrigan for the City Engineer.
Plans and specifications for the improvements for Sidonia Estates II (Tract 814) are those prepared by GDR Engineering, Inc., for the City Engineer.
04-02, Cambridge Homes (Tract 799)/Majesty II (Tract 830), (Includes 04-02-A, the Annexation and Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 04-02) Plans and specifications for the improvements for both tracts are those prepared by ZumwaltHansen & Associates and Lennar Fresno, Inc. for the City Engineer. 04-03, Cambridge Homes (Tract 795)/Vineyards (Tract 825)/Cambridge Homes (Tract 826), No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (Includes 04-03-A, 04-03-B, 04-03-C, 04-03-D, and 04-03-E, the Fifth Restructuring of Lots in Original District 04-03)
Plans and specifications for the improvements for Cambridge Homes (Tract 795) are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Lennar Fresno, Inc. for the City Engineer.
Plans and specifications for the improvements for Vineyards (Tract 825) and Cambridge Homes (Tract 826) are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates, Lennar Fresno, Inc. and McMillin Homes for the City Engineer.
04-04, Sierra Heights (Tracts 802 & 803), No. 1, and 2
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Forrester, Weber & Associates and Jerry Irons for the City Engineer.
EXHIBIT “A” Cont....
05-01, Mission Park (Tract 812), (Includes 05-01-A, the first Annexation of Additional Property in Original District 05-01)
Plans and specifications for the improvements 05-01 (Original District) Tract 812 are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Sue Moore Construction for the City Engineer.
Plans and specifications for the improvements for 05-01-A, Mission Park (Tract 812) are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Daley Enterprises for the City Engineer. 05-02, Copper Valley
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Centex Homes, Inc. for the City Engineer.
06-01, Quail Park Subdivision (Tract 794), (Includes 06-01-A, the First Restructuring of Lots in Original District 06-01)
Plans and specifications for the improvements 06-01 (Original District) Tract 794 are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Ennis Homes, and for the City Engineer.
Plans and specifications for the improvements for 06-01-A, Quail Park (Tract 794) are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates for Woodside Homes, and for the City Engineer. 07-02, South Gate Addition (Tract 811)/ Greenbrier Gardens (Tract 876)/ Live Oak North (Tract 902), (Includes 07-02-A, the First Annexation of Additional Lots in Original District 07-02) Plans and specifications for the improvements for 07-02 (Original District) Tract 811 are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Madison Chase Homes L.L.C. for the City Engineer.
Plans and specifications for the improvements for 07-02-A, Greenbrier Gardens (Tract 876) and Live Oak North (Tract 902) are those prepared by NorthStar Engineering Group for the City Engineer.
09-01, Victory Estates
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Hanford Church of the Nazarene, a California Corporation, for the City Engineer. 09-02, Independence (Tract 843), No. 1 and 2, (Includes 09-02-A, the First Restructuring of Lots in Original District 09-02)
Plans and specifications for the improvements for 09-02 (Original District) are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates for Lennar Fresno, Inc., for the City Engineer.
Plans and specifications for the improvements for 09-02-A are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates, Broussard Associates Landscape Architects for Lennar Fresno, Inc., for the City Engineer.
EXHIBIT “A” Cont....
14-01, Independence (Tract 843), No. 3 and 4, (Includes 14-01-A, the First Restructuring of Lots in Original District 14-01)
Plans and specifications for the improvements for 14-01 are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates for Lennar Fresno, Inc., for the City Engineer.
Plans and specifications for the improvements for 14-01-A are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates for Lennar Homes of California, for the City Engineer. 15-01, Silver Oaks Addition III (Tract 887 & 887-2), Units I & II/Lennar Homes (Tract 922) Units I & II/Lennar Homes (Tract 927), (Includes 15-01-A, 15-01-B, 15-01-C, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 15-01)
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Lennar Fresno, Inc., for the City Engineer.
15-02, The Greens II (Tract 823)
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by AW Engineering and Wathen Castanos Homes, Inc., for the City Engineer.
16-01, Woodside Homes (Tract 917)
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Woodside Homes, for the City Engineer.
16-02, Mynderup (Tract 914), Units I & II, (Includes 16-02-A, the First Restructuring of Lots in Original District 16-02)
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and San Joaquin Valley Homes, for the City Engineer.
Plans and specifications for the improvements for 16-02-A are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and San Joaquin Valley Homes, for the City Engineer. 18-01, Bella Vista/Bonterra (Tract 918 & 919) (Includes 18-01-A, 18-01-B, 18-01-C, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 18-01)
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and San Joaquin Valley Homes, for the City Engineer.
19-01, Pacific Grove 2 (Tract 916)
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Paul Daley Homes, A California Corporation, for the City Engineer. 19-02, The Enclave Units 1 & II (Tract 915)
Unit 1 Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by 4-Creeks and Holly Hills Group for the City Engineer.
Unit 2 Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by 4-Creeks and Holly Hills Group, for the City Engineer.
EXHIBIT “A” Cont....
20-01, Woodside Homes II (Tract 929), Units I & II, (Includes 20-01-B, the First Restructuring of Lots in Original District 20-01)
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and Woodside Homes, for the City Engineer.
20-02, Lennar Homes (Tract 934)
Plans and specifications for the improvements for 14-01 are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates for Lennar Fresno, Inc., for the City Engineer. 21-01, San Joaquin Valley Homes (Tract 928) (Includes 21-01-A, 21-01-B, 21-01-C, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 21-01)
Plans and specifications for the improvements are those prepared by Zumwalt-Hansen & Associates and San Joaquin Valley Homes, for the City Engineer.
Exhibit "B"
FUND
NO
DISTRICT
NO SUDIVISION LOTS NEW- SF
Total Direct
Maintenance
Expense
Total Incidental
Expenses
TOTAL ANNUAL
EXPENSE @
6/30/2026
General
Benefit
Special
Benefit
Expense
Reserve
Fund
Beginning Fund
Balance as of
7/01/2026
FY/2026/2027
Assessment Rate
Per Parcel
FY 2026/2027
Proposed
Assessment
(Balance to Levy)
Total Direct
Maintenance
Expense
Total Incidental
Expenses
Estimated Fund
Balance as of
07/01/2027
0240 90-01 Pinecastle (Tracts 606, 606-2, 606-3, and 606-4) 352 67,750 20,570 $ 6,392 $ 26,962 $ - $ 26,962 $ - $ (117,581) $ 139.50 $ (49,104) $ 46,192 $ 5,060 $ (115,433) $ 0241 90-02 Park Monterey (Tracts 610 and 657) 53 8,625 4,084 $ 659 $ 4,743 $ - $ 4,743 $ - $ (8,780) $ 82.00 $ (4,346) $ 5,086 $ 659 $ (7,381) $ 0242 90-03 Mansionette (Tracts 596 and 596-2) * 84 16,425 4,160 $ 1,170 $ 5,330 $ - $ 5,330 $ - $ 3,377 $ 49.10 $ (4,124) $ 3,835 $ 1,177 $ 4,265 $ 0243 90-04 Hyde Park (Tract 619) * 14 1,425 809 $ 333 $ 1,142 $ - $ 1,142 $ - $ (63) $ 62.30 $ (872) $ 821 $ 171 $ 57 $ 0244 91-01 Sierra Vista and New Dimensions (Tracts 641, 703, 703-2, 713-3, 713-4, & 713-5) * 285 12,974 4,460 $ 1,930 $ 6,390 $ - $ 6,390 $ - $ 1,156 $ 18.30 $ (5,216) $ 3,922 $ 1,930 $ 1,792 $ 0245 92-01 Portofino (Tracts 607, 607-2, 607-3, & 607-4) * 78 19,167 3,510 $ 1,305 $ 4,815 $ - $ 4,815 $ - $ 6,563 $ 50.80 $ (3,962) $ 175 $ 1,088 $ 3,863 $ 0246 92-02 Cielo En Tierra (Tracts 652, 652-2, 652-3, 652-4, & 652-5) * 98 11,735 4,615 $ 2,037 $ 6,652 $ - $ 6,652 $ - $ 7,008 $ 28.70 $ (2,813) $ 204 $ 924 $ 5,324 $ 0247 93-01 Vintage Estates (Tract 634) 29 10,460 3,707 $ 819 $ 4,526 $ - $ 4,526 $ - $ (10,365) $ 153.80 $ (4,460) $ 5,529 $ 819 $ (8,478) $ 0248 93-02 Walnut Forest (Tracts 673, 673-2, & 673-3) * 169 15,637 8,206 $ 1,487 $ 9,693 $ - $ 9,693 $ - $ 696 $ 50.90 $ (8,602) $ 6,200 $ 3,066 $ 1,360 $ 0249 94-01 Gateway Estates (Tract 712) * 114 8,185 2,195 $ 1,155 $ 3,350 $ - $ 3,350 $ - $ 12,202 $ 26.10 $ (2,975) $ 370 $ 946 $ 10,543 $ 0250 94-02 Stonecrest (Tracts 708, 708-2, 727-4, 727-5, 727-6, 727-8, & 727-9) * 541 173,903 76,472 $ 6,114 $ 82,586 $ - $ 82,586 $ - $ 38,814 $ 85.00 $ (45,985) $ 39,681 $ 5,754 $ 38,264 $ 0251 94-03 Quail Run Estates (Tracts 696, 696-2, 696-3, 696-4, & 696-5) * 272 47,535 11,713 $ 4,110 $ 15,823 $ - $ 15,823 $ - $ 38,785 $ 59.00 $ (16,048) $ 14,870 $ 3,200 $ 40,806 $ 0252 97-01 Rosewood Estates (Tracts 711 & 711-2) 44 6,300 2,100 $ 473 $ 2,573 $ - $ 2,573 $ - $ (1,180) $ 51.30 $ (2,257) $ 2,696 $ 473 $ (268) $ 0253 97-02 Summerfield (Tract 742) * 30 4,650 880 $ 327 $ 1,207 $ - $ 1,207 $ - $ 7,485 $ 42.70 $ (1,281) $ 188 $ 327 $ 6,718 $ 0254 97-03 Country Crossing (Tracts 743,743-2, 743-3, 772-4, & 772-5) * 251 46,415 19,610 $ 3,102 $ 22,712 $ - $ 22,712 $ - $ 25,768 $ 62.70 $ (15,738) $ 17,923 $ 1,343 $ 29,297 $ 0255 98-01 Crystal Springs (Tracts 747, 747-2, & 747-3) * 126 14,435 2,506 $ 1,436 $ 3,942 $ - $ 3,942 $ - $ 4,995 $ 38.00 $ (4,788) $ 190 $ 1,218 $ 1,615 $ 0256 98-02 Mountain View (Tracts 759, 759-2, 759-3, 759-4, 759-5, & 759-6) 162 30,991 9,488 $ 2,074 $ 11,562 $ - $ 11,562 $ - $ (34,136) $ 89.00 $ (14,418) $ 13,606 $ 2,074 $ (32,874) $ 0257 01-01 Pacific Grove (Tracts 680, 777-2, 778-3, & 778-4) 148 12,152 8,856 $ 1,270 $ 10,126 $ - $ 10,126 $ - $ (13,570) $ 43.73 $ (6,472) $ 9,386 $ 1,270 $ (9,386) $ 0258 01-02 Cambridge Homes (Tracts 770, 770-2, & 770-3) 198 35,222 5,997 $ 2,325 $ 8,322 $ - $ 8,322 $ - $ (7,329) $ 51.29 $ (10,155) $ 9,400 $ 2,325 $ (5,760) $ 0259 01-03 Poppy Hill (Tracts 771 & 796-2) 86 11,782 3,159 $ 930 $ 4,089 $ - $ 4,089 $ - $ (24,423) $ 45.09 $ (3,878) $ 6,154 $ 930 $ (21,216) $ 0260 01-04 Silver Oaks (Tracts 769, 769-2, 769-3, 769-4 & 769-5) 489 95,556 34,420 $ 6,133 $ 40,553 $ - $ 40,553 $ - $ (32,311) $ 81.00 $ (39,609) $ 34,620 $ 6,133 $ (31,167) $ 0261 02-01 Ashton Park (Tracts 776, 776-2, 776-3, & 776-4) 182 63,922 15,538 $ 3,367 $ 18,905 $ - $ 18,905 $ - $ (30,270) $ 135.03 $ (24,575) $ 21,792 $ 3,367 $ (29,686) $ 0262 03-01 Le Parc (Tracts 788, 788-2, & 788-3) 128 30,628 9,503 $ 1,848 $ 11,351 $ - $ 11,351 $ - $ (35,810) $ 69.46 $ (8,891) $ 10,817 $ 1,848 $ (32,036) $ 0263 04-01 Sidonia (Tracts 810 and 810-2) 233 22,184 9,009 $ 2,108 $ 11,117 $ - $ 11,117 $ - $ (55,919) $ 36.36 $ (8,472) $ 11,796 $ 2,108 $ (50,487) $ 0264 04-02 Cambridge Homes/ Majesty II (Tracts 799 and 830) 75 63,824 20,131 $ 2,925 $ 23,056 $ - $ 23,056 $ - $ (45,753) $ 268.00 $ (20,100) $ 26,020 $ 2,925 $ (36,908) $ 0265 04-03 Cambridge Homes/ Vineyards Tracts 795, 795-2, 799, 825-3, 826-4, & 826-5 445 167,767 65,140 $ 6,439 $ 71,579 $ - $ 71,579 $ - $ (96,998) $ 162.06 $ (72,117) $ 68,223 $ 6,439 $ (94,453) $ 0266 04-04 Sierra Heights (Tracts 802 and 803) 16 16,047 5,566 $ 861 $ 6,427 $ - $ 6,427 $ - $ (34,042) $ 486.28 $ (7,780) $ 9,593 $ 861 $ (31,368) $ 0267 05-01 Mission Park (Tract 812) 40 7,225 3,875 $ 496 $ 4,371 $ - $ 4,371 $ - $ (19,269) $ 133.94 $ (5,358) $ 5,873 $ 496 $ (18,257) $ 0268 05-02 Copper Valley (Tract 835) 150 44,126 13,754 $ 2,495 $ 16,249 $ - $ 16,249 $ - $ (33,859) $ 106.75 $ (16,013) $ 17,999 $ 2,495 $ (29,378) $ 0269 06-01 Quail Park (Tract 794) 144 149,650 24,658 $ 8,864 $ 33,522 $ (7,066) $ 26,455 $ - $ (13,992) $ 236.86 $ (34,108) $ 30,180 $ 4,110 $ (13,810) $ 0270 09-01 Victory Estates (Tract 877) 14 7,077 2,340 $ 403 $ 2,743 $ - $ 2,743 $ - $ (15,765) $ 203.16 $ (2,844) $ 4,365 $ 403 $ (13,842) $ 0271 09-02 Independence I and II (Tract 843) 121 56,252 18,934 $ 2,916 $ 21,850 $ - $ 21,850 $ - $ (66,820) $ 215.27 $ (26,048) $ 27,501 $ 2,916 $ (62,451) $ 0272 07-02 South Gate/ Greenbrier Tracts 811, 876, & 902) 233 51,090 14,004 $ 2,173 $ 16,177 $ - $ 16,177 $ - $ (71,842) $ 47.83 $ (11,144) $ 13,517 $ 2,091 $ (67,378) $ 0273 14-01 Independence III and IV (Tract 843) 175 76,555 28,361 $ 7,380 $ 35,741 $ - $ 35,741 $ - $ (89,425) $ 235.15 $ (41,151) $ 45,909 $ 5,683 $ (78,985) $ 0274 15-01 Silver Oaks III (Tracts 887, 8887-2, 922, & 927) 468 412,396 137,517 $ 8,447 $ 145,964 $ - $ 145,964 $ - $ (653,469) $ 337.30 $ (157,856) $ 167,766 $ 8,447 $ (635,112) $ 0275 15-02 Greens II (Tract 823) 34 16,416 4,956 $ 942 $ 5,898 $ - $ 5,898 $ - $ (13,709) $ 266.40 $ (9,058) $ 8,450 $ 942 $ (13,375) $ 0276 16-01 Woodside Homes (Tract 917) 54 16,628 4,679 $ 1,074 $ 5,753 $ - $ 5,753 $ - $ (26,298) $ 241.82 $ (13,058) $ 12,378 $ 1,074 $ (25,904) $ 0277 16-02 Mynderup (Tracts 914 and 914-2) 113 36,403 15,340 $ 2,862 $ 18,202 $ - $ 18,202 $ - $ (31,538) $ 178.40 $ (20,159) $ 19,071 $ 2,862 $ (29,764) $ 0278 18-01 Bella Vista/ Bonterra (Tracts 918 and 919) 267 185,001 53,556 $ 15,242 $ 68,798 $ - $ 68,798 $ - $ (260,660) $ 301.03 $ (80,375) $ 141,045 $ 15,242 $ (184,747) $ 0279 19-01 Pacific Grove II (Tract 916) 22 13,128 4,055 $ 703 $ 4,758 $ - $ 4,758 $ - $ (46,630) $ 563.12 $ (12,389) $ 13,576 $ 703 $ (44,740) $ 0280 19-02 Enclave (Tract 915) 66 - 39 $ 235 $ 274 $ - $ 274 $ - $ (52,434) $ 178.23 $ (11,763) $ 33,999 $ 235 $ (29,963) $ 0281 20-01 Woodside Homes (Tract 929) 158 159,707 77,962 $ 5,412 $ 83,374 $ - $ 83,374 $ - $ (112,126) $ 361.64 $ (57,139) $ 60,083 $ 5,345 $ (103,836) $ 0282 21-01 San Joaquin Valley Homes (Tract 928) 242 243,390 61,747 $ 7,047 $ 68,794 $ - $ 68,794 $ - $ (175,637) $ 432.78 $ (104,733) $ 122,474 $ 6,980 $ (150,915) $ 0286 22-02 Lennar Homes (Tract 934) 161 105,217 - $ 225 $ 225 $ - $ 225 $ - $ 225 $ 321.45 $ (51,753) $ 32,842 $ 5,346 $ (13,340) $ * Districts with a deficit fund balance
Fund Balance: For purposes of this schedule, positive fund balances are presented in parentheses to indicate available funding sources, while amounts shown without parentheses represent funding deficits.
FY 2025/2026 TOTAL ESTIMATED
EXPENSES FY 2026/2027 ESTIMATED
EXHIBIT "C"
ASSESSMENT ROLL
A list of the names and addresses of the affected owners of real property, and assessment of the estimated cost of the maintenance of the improvements on each benefited parcel of land in each District, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll for taxes, or as known to the Clerk, is on file at the City Clerk’s office.
EXHIBIT "D"
METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF ASSESSMENT
(PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972)
ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS
The improvements to be maintained in each District provide special benefits to all of the parcels within each District above and beyond general benefits conferred on parcels located in each District or to the public at large. Specifically, the particular and distinct special benefits include:
1. Reduction of traffic noise level from the street located adjacent to each District;
2. Restriction of unwanted pedestrian access onto the lots and parcels within each District;
3. Enhancement of appearance of the entrance into the subdivision, which is included within each District;
4. Reduction of impact of dust and other particular matter onto the lots and parcels within each District.
The proportionate special benefit to each parcel in each District in relationship to the entirety of the cost to maintain and operate the improvements identified herein is equal to all parcels. The assessment applicable to each lot does not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on each parcel. This is established as follows:
90-01, Pinecastle Addition, Units No. 1, 2, 3, and 4 (Includes 90-01-A, 90-01-B, and 90-01-C, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District No. 90-01) 100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 352 lots. 90-02, Park Monterey, Units No.1, and 2 (Includes 90-02-A, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District No. 90-02)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 53 lots. 90-03, Mansionette Estates, No. 7, and 8 (Includes 90-03-A, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District No. 90-03)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 84 lots. 90-04, Hyde Park
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 14 lots.
Exhibit ″D″ Cont. . . .
91-01, Sierra Vista/New Dimensions, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (Includes 91-01-A, 91-01-B, 91-01-C, 91-01-D, and 91-01-E, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District No. 91-01) 100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 285 lots. 92-01, Portofino, No. 1, 2, 3, and 4 (Includes 92-01-A, 92-01-B, and 92-01-C, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District No. 92-01)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 78 lots. 92-02, Cielo En Tierra, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 (Includes 92-02-A, 92-02-B, 92-02-C, and 92-02-D, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District No. 92-02) 100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 98 lots. 93-01, Vintage Estates
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 30 lots. 93-02, Walnut Forest, Unit No. 1, 2, and 3 (Includes 93-02-A, and 93-02-B, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District No. 93-02)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 169 lots. 94-01, Gateway Estates
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 114 lots. 94-02, Stonecrest, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 (Includes 94-02-A, 94-02-B, 94-02-C, 94-02-D, 94- 02-E, 94-02-F, 94-02-G, and 94-02-H, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 94-02) 100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 541 lots. 94-03, Quail Run Estates, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 (Includes 94-03-A, 94-03-B, 94-03-C, and 94-03-D, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 94-03). 100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 272 lots. 97-01, Rosewood Estates, No. 1, and 2 (Includes 97-01-A, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 97-01)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 44 lots. 97-02, Summer Field Addition No. 2
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 30 lots.
Exhibit ″D″ Cont. . . .
97-03, Country Crossing No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 (Includes 97-03-A, 97-03-B, 97-03-C, and 97-03-D, the Fourth Restructuring of Lots in Original District 97-03) 100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 251 lots of which one (1) lot is ″Designated Remainder″ per the Tentative Tract Map for the development. 98-01, Crystal Springs No. 1, 2, and 3 (Includes 98-01-A, and 98-01-B, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 98-01)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 126 lots. 98-02, Mountain View Estates No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (Includes 98-02-A, 98-02-B, 98-02-C, 98-02-D, and 98-02-E, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 98-02) 100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 162 lots. 01-01, Pacific Grove/North Pointe, No. 1, 2, 3, and 4 (Includes 01-01-A, 01-01-B, and 01-01-C, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 01-01) 100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 148 lots. 01-02, Cambridge Homes (Tract 770), No. 1, 2, and 3 (Includes 01-02-A, and 01-02-B, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 01-02)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 198 lots. 01-03, Poppy Hills No. 1, and 2 (Includes 01-03-A, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 01-03)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 87 lots. 01-04, Silver Oaks No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 (Includes 01-04-A, 01-04-B, 01-04-C, and 01-04-D, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 01-04)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 489 lots. 02-01, Ashton Park No. 1, 2, 3, and 4 (Includes 02-01-A, 02-01-B, and 02-01-C, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 02-01)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 182 lots. 03-01, Le Parc, No. 1, 2, and 3 (Includes 03-01-A, and 03-01-B, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 03-01)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 128 lots.
Exhibit ″D″ Cont. . . .
04-01, Sidonia Estates, No. 1 and 2 (Tracts 810 & 814), (Includes 04-01-A, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 04-01, 04-01-B First Annexation of Additional Lots in Original District 04- 01-A)
18.03% of the cost of special benefit divided equally between 42 lots in Tract 810 Unit I.
55.79% of the cost of special benefit divided equally between 130 lots in Tract 810 Unit II.
26.18% of the cost of special benefit divided equally between 61 lots in Tract 814. 04-02, Cambridge Homes (Tract 799) /Majesty II (Tract 830), (Includes 04-02-A, the Annexation and Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 04-02) 100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 75 lots. 04-03, Cambridge Homes (Tract 795)/Vineyards (Tract 825)/Cambridge Homes (Tract 826), No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (Includes 04-03-A, 04-03-B, 04-03-C, 04-03-D, and 04-03-E, the Fifth Restructuring of Lots in Original District 04-03)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 424 lots of which one (1) lot is ″Designated Remainder″ per the Tentative Tract Map for the development. 04-04, Sierra Heights (Tracts 802 & 803), No. 1, and 2
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 16 lots. 05-01, Mission Park (Tract 812), (Includes 05-01-A, the first Annexation of Additional Property in Original District 05-01)
92.5% of the cost of special benefit divided equally between 39 lots in Tract 812.
07.5% of the cost of special benefit to be assessed to APN 007-030-019 in Tract 812. 05-02, Copper Valley
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 150 lots. 06-01, Quail Park Subdivision (Tract 794), No. 1 and 2, (Includes 06-01-A, the First Restructuring of Lots in Original District 06-01)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 144 lots. 07-02, South Gate Addition (Tract 811)/ Greenbrier Gardens (Tract 876)/ Live Oak North (Tract 902), (Includes 07-02-A, the First Annexation of Additional Lots in Original District 07-02) 100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 133 lots. 09-01, Victory Estates
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 14 lots. 09-02, Independence (Tract 843), No. 1 and 2, (Includes 09-02-A, the First Restructuring of Lots in Original District 09-02)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 121 lots.
Exhibit ″D″ Cont. . . .
14-01, Independence (Tract 843), No. 3 and 4, (Includes 14-01-A, the First Restructuring of Lots in Original District 14-01)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 175 lots. 15-01, Silver Oaks Addition III (Tract 887 & 887-2), Units I & II/Lennar Homes (Tract 922) Units I & II/Lennar Homes (Tract 927), (Includes 15-01-A, 15-01-B, 15-01-C, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 15-01)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 468 lots. 15-02, The Greens II (Tract 823)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 34 lots. 16-01, Woodside Homes (Tract 917)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 60 lots. 16-02, Mynderup (Tract 914), Units I & II, (Includes 16-02-A, the First Restructuring of Lots in Original District 16-02)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 113 lots. 18-01, Bella Vista/Bonterra (Tract 918 & 919) (Includes 18-01-A, 18-01-B, 18-01-C, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 18-01)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 267 lots. 19-01, Pacific Grove 2 (Tract 916)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 18 lots. 19-02, The Enclave Units 1 & II (Tract 915)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 66 lots. 20-01, Woodside Homes II (Tract 929), Units I & II, (Includes 20-01-B, the First Restructuring of Lots in Original District 20-01)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 158 lots. 20-02, Lennar Homes (Tract 934)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 161 lots. 21-01, San Joaquin Valley Homes (Tract 928) (Includes 21-01-A, 21-01-B, 21-01-C, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 21-01)
100% of the cost of special benefit divided equally by 242 lots.
EXHIBIT "E"
DIAGRAM
A diagram showing all of the parcels of real property within each District, which will have a special benefit conferred upon it and upon which the assessment will be imposed and the identification of the special benefit to each parcel in each District. The diagram is keyed to Exhibit "C" by assessment number, is a part of this report and is on file at the City Clerk’s office.
Exhibit “E”
90-01, Pinecastle Addition, Unit No. 1, 2, 3, and 4 (Includes 90-01-A, 90-01-B, and 90-01- C, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 90-01)
Exhibit “E”
90-02, Park Monterey, No. 1, and 2 (Includes 90-02-A, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 90-02)
Exhibit “E”
90-03, Mansionette Estates, Unit No. 7, and 8 (Includes 90-03-A, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 90-03)
Exhibit “E”
90-04, Hyde Park
Exhibit “E”
91-01, Sierra Vista/New Dimensions, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (Includes 91-01-A, 91-01-B, 91- 01-C, 91-01-D, and 91-01-E, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 91-01)
Exhibit “E”
92-01, Portofino, No. 1, 2, 3, and 4 (Includes 92-01-A, 92-01-B, and 92-01-C, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 92-01)
Exhibit “E”
92-02, Cielo En Tierra, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 (Includes 92-02-A, 92-02-B, 92-02-C, and 92- 02-D, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 92-02)
Exhibit “E”
93-01, Vintage Estates
Exhibit “E”
93-02, Walnut Forest, No. 1, 2, and 3 (Includes 93-02-A, and 93-02-B, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 93-02)
Exhibit “E”
94-01, Gateway Estates
Exhibit “E”
94-02, Stonecrest, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 (Includes 94-02-A, 94-02-B, 94-02-C, 94-02- D, 94-02-E, 94-02-F, 94-02-G, and 94-02-H, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 94-02)
Exhibit “E”
94-03, Quail Run Estates, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 (Includes 94-03-A, 94-03-B, 94-03-C, and 94- 03-D, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 94-03)
Exhibit “E”
97-01, Rosewood Estates, No. 1, and 2 (Includes 97-01-A, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 97-01)
Exhibit “E”
97-02, Summer Field Addition, No. 2
Exhibit “E”
97-03, Country Crossing, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 (Includes 97-03-A, 97-03-B, 97-03-C, and 97- 03-D, the Fourth Restructuring of Lots in Original District 97-03)
Exhibit “E”
98-01, Crystal Springs, No. 1, 2, and 3 (Includes 98-01-A, and 98-01-B, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 98-01)
Exhibit “E”
98-02, Mountain View Estates, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (Includes 98-02-A, 98-02-B, 98-02-C, 98-02-D, and 98-02-E, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 98-02)
Exhibit “E”
01-01, Pacific Grove/North Pointe, No. 1, 2, 3, and 4 (Includes 01-01-A, 01-01-B, and 01-01- C, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 01-01)
Exhibit “E”
01-02, Cambridge Homes (Tract 770), No. 1, 2, and 3 (Includes 01-02-A, and 01-02-B, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 01-02)
Exhibit “E”
01-03, Poppy Hills, No. 1 and 2 (Includes 01-03-A, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 01-03)
Exhibit “E”
01-04, Silver Oaks, No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 (Includes 01-04-A, 01-04-B, 01-04-C, and 01-04-D, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 01-04)
Exhibit “E”
02-01, Ashton Park, No. 1, 2, 3, and 4 (Includes 02-01-A, 02-01-B, and 02-01-C, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 02-01)
Exhibit “E”
03-01, Le Parc, No. 1, 2, and 3 (Includes 03-01-A, and 03-01-B, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 03-01)
Exhibit “E”
04-01, Sidonia Estates, No. 1 and 2 (Includes 04-01-A, the Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 04-01, 04-01-B First Annexation of Additional Lots in Original District 04-01-A)
Exhibit “E”
04-02, Cambridge Homes (Tract 799)/Majesty II (Tract 830), (Includes 04-02-A, the Annexation and Final Restructuring of Lots in Original District 04-02)
Exhibit “E”
04-03, Cambridge Homes (Tract 795)/Vineyards (Tract 825)/Cambridge Homes (Tract 826), No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (Includes 04-03-A, 04-03-B, 04-03-C, 04-03-D, and 04-03-E, the Fifth Restructuring of Lots in Original District 04-03)
Exhibit “E”
04-04, Sierra Heights (Tracts 802 & 803), No. 1, and 2
Exhibit “E”
05-01, Mission Park (Tract 812), (Includes 05-01-A, the first Annexation of Additional Property in Original District 05-01)
Exhibit “E”
05-02, Copper Valley
Exhibit “E”
06-01, Quail Park Subdivision (Tract 794), (Includes 06-01-A, the First Restructuring of Lots in Original District 06-01)
Exhibit “E”
07-02, South Gate Addition (Tract 811)/ Greenbrier Gardens (Tract 876)/ Live Oak North (Tract 902), (Includes 07-02-A, the First Annexation of Additional Lots in Original District 07-02)
Exhibit “E”
09-01, Victory Estates
Exhibit “E”
09-02, Independence (Tract 843), No. 1 and 2, (Includes 09-02-A, the First Restructuring of Lots in Original District 09-02)
Exhibit “E”
14-01, Independence (Tract 843), No. 3 and 4, (Includes 14-01-A, the First Restructuring of Lots in Original District 14-01)
Exhibit “E”
15-01, Silver Oaks Addition III (Tract 887 & 887-2), Units I & II/Lennar Homes (Tract 922) Units I & II/Lennar Homes (Tract 927), (Includes 15-01-A, 15-01-B, 15-01-C, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 15-01)
Exhibit “E”
15-02, The Greens II (Tract 823)
Exhibit “E”
16-01, Woodside Homes (Tract 917)
Exhibit “E”
16-02, Mynderup (Tract 914), Units I & II, (Includes 16-02-A, the First Restructuring of Lots in Original District 16-02)
Exhibit “E”
18-01, Bella Vista/Bonterra (Tract 918 & 919) (Includes 18-01-A, 18-01-B, 18-01-C, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 18-01
Exhibit “E”
19-01, Pacific Grove 2 (Tract 916)
Exhibit “E”
19-02, The Enclave Units 1 & II (Tract 915)
Exhibit “E”
20-01, Woodside Homes II (Tract 929), Units I & II, (Includes 20-01-B, the First Restructuring of Lots in Original District 20-01)
Exhibit “E”
21-01, San Joaquin Valley Homes (Tract 928) (Includes 21-01-A, 21-01-B, 21-01-C, Final Restructuring of lots in Original District 21-01)
Exhibit “E”
20-02, Lennar Homes (Tract 934)
N
Not a
part
Not a
part
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: 90-04 Hyde Park
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 $62.30 to $165.76
Please consider the enclosed documents, which include an 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 reserve 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 14 lots, with total current year benefit assessments equaling $872.20. The projected expenses are detailed as follows:
Annual Benefit District Assessment Reserve - Cash Balance as of June 30, 2024 $182.43 Annual Benefit District Assessment Revenue Collected Amount $858.20 Proposed Expenses for the Fiscal Year $(766.29)
TOTAL PROJECTED ENDING CASH BALANCE $274.34
Projected CY Assessment Reserve - Cash Balance as of June 30, 2025 $274.34 Annual Benefit District Assessment Revenue Proposed Collection Amount $872.20 Proposed Expenses for the Fiscal Year $(763.00)
TOTAL PROJECTED ENDING CASH BALANCE $383.54
Projected CY Assessment Reserve - Cash Balance as of Jun 30, 2026 $383.54 Annual Benefit District Assessment Revenue Proposed Collection Amount $872.20 Proposed Expenses for the Fiscal Year $(717.54)
TOTAL PROPOSED ENDING CASH BALANCE $538.20
Based on the current benefit district assessment revenue and proposed expenses the total cash balance is $538.20 for the projected fiscal year 2026.
Existing Amount Proposed Amount Increase
Monthly Per Lot $5.20 $13.81 $8.61
Annually Per Lot $62.30 $165.76 $103.46
Annually Per District $872.20 $2,320.60 $1,448.40
The cost to you to keep the maintenance up in your District will be an additional $103.46 per year, or $8.61 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: Hyde Park
Fiscal Year Cash Balance: 2025 $ $383.54
Projected Fiscal Year Cash Balance: 2026 $ $538.20
Number of Lots multiplied by Assessment per Lot 14 X $62.30 $872.20
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 July 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
May 19, 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, May 19, 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 May 19, 2026, or hand deliver the ballot to the City Clerk at the time of the Public Hearing on May 19, 2026. If delivered in person, the ballot must be in a sealed envelope, or it cannot be accepted.
If you have any questions 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. 90-04 HYDE PARK BENEFIT DISTRICT
City of Hanford, City Clerk’s Office
319 N. Douty Street
Hanford, CA 93230
Re: 90-04 Hyde Park District Ballot
BALLOT (HYDE PARK)
Proposal: Increase the annual benefit district assessment amount from $62.30 to $165.76 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)
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: 92-01 PORTOFINO DISTRICT 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 $50.80 to $241.14
Please consider the enclosed documents, which include an 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 reserve 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 78 lots, with total current year benefit assessments equaling $3,962.40. The projected expenses are detailed as follows:
Annual Benefit District Assessment Reserve - Cash Balance as of June 30, 2024 $(4,733.60) Annual Benefit District Assessment Revenue Collected Amount $3,903.45 Proposed Expenses for the Fiscal Year $(7,325.58)
TOTAL PROJECTED ENDING CASH BALANCE $(8,155.73)
Projected CY Assessment Reserve - Cash Balance as of June 30, 2025 $(8,155.73) Annual Benefit District Assessment Revenue Proposed Collection Amount $3,962.40 Proposed Expenses for the Fiscal Year $(4,361.00)
TOTAL PROJECTED ENDING CASH BALANCE $(8,554.33)
Projected CY Assessment Reserve - Cash Balance as of June 30, 2026 $(8,554.33) Annual Benefit District Assessment Revenue Proposed Collection Amount $3,962.40 Proposed Expenses for the Fiscal Year $(3,716.98)
TOTAL PROPOSED ENDING CASH BALANCE $(8,308.91)
Based on the current benefit district assessment revenue and proposed expenses the total cash balance is $(8,308.91) for the projected fiscal year 2026.
Existing Amount Proposed Amount Increase
Monthly Per Lot $4.23 $20.10 $15.87
Annually Per Lot $50.80 $241.14 $190.34
Annually Per District $3,962.40 $18,809.16 $14,846.76
The cost to you to keep the maintenance up in your District will be an additional $190.34 per year, or $15.87 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: PORTOFINO DISTRICT
Fiscal Year Cash Balance: 2025 $ (8,554.33)
Projected Fiscal Year Cash Balance: 2026 $ (5,775.00)
Number of Lots multiplied by Assessment per Lot 78 X $50.80 $3,962.40
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 July 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 May 19, 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
July 21, 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, July 21, 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 July 21, 2026 or hand deliver the ballot to the City Clerk at the time of the Public Hearing on July 21, 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. 92-01 PORTOFINO BENEFIT DISTRICT
City of Hanford, City Clerk’s Office
319 N. Douty Street
Hanford, CA 93230
Re: 92-01 PORTOFINO District Ballot
BALLOT (PORTOFINO)
Proposal: Increase the annual benefit district assessment amount from $50.80 to $241.14 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)
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 an 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 reserve 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 July 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:
A. 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 July 21, 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. 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)
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: 94-01 GATEWAY 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 $26.10 to $153.76
Please consider the enclosed documents, which include an 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 reserve 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 114 lots, with total current year benefit assessments equaling $2,975.70. The projected expenses are detailed as follows:
Annual Benefit District Assessment Reserve - Cash Balance as of June 30, 2024 $(10,379.52) Annual Benefit District Assessment Revenue Collected Amount $2,890.88 Proposed Expenses for the Fiscal Year $(4,704.76)
TOTAL PROJECTED ENDING CASH BALANCE $(12,193.40)
Projected CY Assessment Reserve - Cash Balance as of June 30, 2025 $(12,193.40) Annual Benefit District Assessment Revenue Proposed Collection Amount $2,975.40 Proposed Expenses for the Fiscal Year $(2,774.00)
TOTAL PROJECTED ENDING CASH BALANCE $(11,992.00)
Projected CY Assessment Reserve - Cash Balance as of June 30, 2026 $(11,992.00) Annual Benefit District Assessment Revenue Proposed Collection Amount $2,975.40 Proposed Expenses for the Fiscal Year $(2,498.98)
TOTAL PROPOSED ENDING CASH BALANCE $(11,515.58)
Based on the current benefit district assessment revenue and proposed expenses the total cash balance is $(11,515.58) for the projected fiscal year 2026.
Existing Amount Proposed Amount Increase
Monthly Per Lot $2.18 $12.81 $10.63
Annually Per Lot $26.10 $153.76 $127.66
Annually Per District $2,975.40 $17,528.78 $14,553.38
The cost to you to keep the maintenance up in your District will be an additional $127.66 per year, or $10.63 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: GATEWAY ESTATES
Fiscal Year Cash Balance: 2025 $ $(11,992.00)
Projected Fiscal Year Cash Balance: 2026 $ $(11,515.58) Number of Lots multiplied by Assessment per Lot 114 X $26.10 $2,975.40
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 July 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 May 19, 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
May 19, 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, May 19, 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 May 19, 2026 or hand deliver the ballot to the City Clerk at the time of the Public Hearing on May 19, 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. 94-01 GATEWAY ESTATES BENEFIT DISTRICT
City of Hanford, City Clerk’s Office
319 N. Douty Street
Hanford, CA 93230
Re: 94-01 GATEWAY ESTATES District Ballot
BALLOT (GATEWAY ESTATES)
Proposal: Increase the annual benefit district assessment amount from $26.10 to $153.76 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)
Gateway Estates LAD No. 94-01
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 an 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 reserve 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 July 21, 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
July 21, 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, July 21, 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 July 21, 2026 or hand deliver the ballot to the City Clerk at the time of the Public Hearing on July 21, 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
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: 98-01 CRYSTAL SPRINGS
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 $38.00 to $149.11
Please consider the enclosed documents, which include an 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 reserve 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 126 lots, with total current year benefit assessments equaling $4,788.00. The projected expenses are detailed as follows:
Annual Benefit District Assessment Reserve - Cash Balance as of June 30, 2024 $(5,200.02) Annual Benefit District Assessment Revenue Collected Amount $4,666.94 Proposed Expenses for the Fiscal Year $(5,874.67)
TOTAL PROJECTED ENDING CASH BALANCE $(6,407.75)
Projected CY Assessment Reserve - Cash Balance as of June 30, 2025 $(6,407.75) Annual Benefit District Assessment Revenue Proposed Collection Amount $4,788.00 Proposed Expenses for the Fiscal Year $(3,473.00)
TOTAL PROJECTED ENDING CASH BALANCE $(5,092.75)
Projected CY Assessment Reserve - Cash Balance as of June 30, 2026 $(5,092.75) Annual Benefit District Assessment Revenue Proposed Collection Amount $4,788.00 Proposed Expenses for the Fiscal Year $(2,987.98)
TOTAL PROPOSED ENDING CASH BALANCE $(3,292.73)
Based on the current benefit district assessment revenue and proposed expenses the total cash balance is $(3,292.73) for the projected fiscal year 2026.
Existing Amount Proposed Amount Increase
Monthly Per Lot $3.17 $12.43 $9.26
Annually Per Lot $38.00 $149.11 $111.11
Annually Per District $4,788.00 $18,787.81 $13,999.81
The cost to you to keep the maintenance up in your District will be an additional $111.11 per year, or $9.26 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: CRYSTAL SPRINGS
Fiscal Year Cash Balance: 2025 $ $(5,092.75)
Projected Fiscal Year Cash Balance: 2026 $ $(3,292.73)
Number of Lots multiplied by Assessment per Lot 126 X $38.00 $4,788.00
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 July 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 May 19, 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
May 19, 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, May 19, 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 May 19, 2026 or hand deliver the ballot to the City Clerk at the time of the Public Hearing on May 19, 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. 98-01 CRYSTAL SPRINGS BENEFIT DISTRICT
City of Hanford, City Clerk’s Office
319 N. Douty Street
Hanford, CA 93230
Re: 98-01 CRYSTAL SPRINGS District Ballot
BALLOT (CRYSTAL SPRINGS)
Proposal: Increase the annual benefit district assessment amount from $38.00 to $149.11 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)
15.C.
AGENDA
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: 6/16/2026 AGENDA SECTION: GENERAL BUSINESS SUBJECT:
Presentation on a Wastewater Rate Study and Authorization to proceed with a Proposition 218 process and set the Hearing Date & Time for August 18, 2026 at 7pm for a proposed Wastewater Rate increase.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation:
That City Council:
1. Receive a presentation from Lechowicz & Tseng Municipal Consultants on a Wastewater Rate Study; and
2. Provide direction to Staff and Consultants to begin a Proposition 218 process and set the date of the required public hearing for August 18, 2026.
Recommended Motion:
I move to Authorize staff and consultants to begin the Proposition 218 process and set the date of the required public hearing for August 18, 2026.
BACKGROUND:
The City Council approved the award of a Design-Build Contract to Opterra Energy Services in the amount of $59,987,749, which is subject to upward adjustment, for the combined Solar Photovoltaic and Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) Energy-Related Improvement Project at the May 19, 2026 City Council Meeting. This item includes a presentation on a Wastewater Rate Fee Study and a recommendation to proceed with the Prop 218 rate increase process; a prerequisite needed to acquire funding for the WWTF Project and to sustain the City’s Wastewater Fund as has been previously presented to the City Council.
The Wastewater Fund is a self-supporting Enterprise Fund, which provides services for a fee.
Charges for service through rates are the primary source of funding for operations, maintenance, and also Wastewater-related capital improvement program (CIP) projects. These CIP’s are typically restricted to maintenance, replacement, normal wear and tear improvements of the existing in-use infrastructure. This Fund is different than Wastewater Impact Fees, which are development-driven fees that are legally restricted to mitigating wastewater impacts caused by new development.
Wastewater Rates were last adjusted in March 2024 through adoption of Resolution 24-03-R. Prior to that, the last sewer rate increase was July 1, 2011 (adopted under Resolution No. 09-77-R on November 17, 2009) almost 15-years ago. This proposed fee study reflects updated operational and infrastructure needs that are significantly greater than what was represented in 2023-2024. In addition to the needed improvements at the WWTF covered through the Opterra Contract, the current Wastewater’s CIP reflects a significant amount of infrastructure maintenance that’s been either deferred to future years and/or has been non-existent throughout the years. For example, the City has lacked a basic citywide proactive pipeline maintenance program (cured in place lining, spot repairs, replacement, etc) including video inspection. The new CIP represents a step in the right direction but will require additional resources in the future to catch up on pipeline maintenance as that infrastructure continues to age. Other new major CIP items include the replacement of the WWTF Headwork’s Internal Lift Number 2 (previously presented to City Council), rehabilitation of the WWTF’s Sludge Drying Beds, and ongoing Rehabilitation of Sewer Lift Stations. Staff conducted a conscientious effort to identify, estimate, and include those basic necessary CIP’s needed in the next five years.
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. Proposition 218 (Prop 218), approved in 1996, added Article XIII D to the California Constitution. All increases to property-related fees, such as water, wastewater, and solid waste fees and charges, must satisfy Prop 218 requirements. It applies to most utility charges and fees; however electric and gas utility charges are specifically exempted from the definition of propertyrelated charges in the statute. The City is required to provide notice of proposed increases to the sewer, water, and refuse collection service fees and charges to all affected ratepayers and record receipt of all written protests during a public hearing. Prop 218 prohibits increases to fees and charges if a majority of the affected ratepayers submit written opposition to the proposed increase.
Any new rates (if warranted) are recommended to be in place by September 1, 2026.
Wastewater Rate Fee Study:
The consultant, Lechowicz & Tseng (L&T), and staff provided Council with a preliminary look at the wastewater needs, including the then Opterra Project estimate, at the September 16, 2025 City Council Meeting. After receiving Council comment and direction from the September 16th meeting, in addition to the approval of the Opterra Contract on May 19, 2026, staff and the consultant
reviewed and modified the study and addressed the prior issues raised by Council.
Working in conjunction with both L&T and NHA Advisors, an updated version of the study that establishes the rates to be proposed as part of the Proposition 218 process has been developed to include two potential funding scenarios. The first includes capital interest to balance out year-to-year fee rates (albeit higher overall cost), and the second, with no capitalized interest, having higher upfront rate increases but lower overall cost. Scenario one is based on the Council's feedback to balance out year-to-year rates. The rates below are based on L&T's work on the Sewer Rate Study Update to update the cost of services to fund the aforementioned sewer capital improvements, operational costs, and debt financing (including Opterra contract).
To accomplish financing and to provide assistance regarding financing feasibility, estimated costs of borrowing and debt service, NHA Advisors worked with L&T using the below provided project cost information. Prior to finalizing any debt issuance NHA will analyze the costs and benefits of a public bond offering versus other financing mechanisms to provide the City with the most competitive rates/costs. Today's meeting/action does not establish debt issuance, that will be brought to City Council for consideration and approval after the Prop 218 rate is complete.
For purposes of determining the estimated cost of financing, the amount to be financed was determined as follows:
Project Cost
(Including Solar)
$59,987,749
Less: Solar Cost
Included in Project
Cost
($2,974,520)
Less: Solar Cost
Discount
($705,480)
Less: City WW Fund
Cash Contributions
($2,000,000)
Plus: Owner's
Contingency
$2,500,000
Plus: City Plan
Check/Construction
Services
$2,691,390
Total Project Costs
to be Financed
$59,499,139
The following Funding Options are proposed and offered for Council's consideration and selection.
Each demonstrate how they would be adjoined to the existing approved rate fees:
Option 1: With Capitalized Interest
Jul 1,
2025
Jul 1, 2026 Sept 1, 2026 July 1,
2027
July 1,
2028
Jul 1 ,
2029
Jul 1,
2030
% Increases 12.0% 5% 13.5% 13.5% 13.5% 13.5% 13.5%
Single Family Rate $30.95 $32.50 $36.89 $41.87 $47.52 $53.94 $61.22 Option 2: NO Capitalized Interest
Jul 1,
2025
Jul 1, 2026 Sept 1, 2026 July 1,
2027
July 1,
2028
Jul 1 ,
2029
Jul 1,
2030
% Increases 12.0% 5% 20% 20% 15% 7% 5%
Single Family Rate $30.95 $32.50 $39.00 $46.80 $53.82 $57.59 $60.47 2023 Approved Rate Study:
Jul 1,
2025
Jul 1, 2026 Jul 1, 2027
% Increases 12.0% 5.0% 5.0%
Single Family Rate $30.95 $32.50 $34.13
The graph below depicts how the first year fees compare to neighboring jurisdictions:
Next Steps:
June 16 – City Council provides direction
July 2 – Print and mail Proposition 218 notice of hearing to customers and property owners August 18 – Proposition 218 public hearing (47 days after postmark date) September 1 – Absent a majority protest, new rates can go into effect
FISCAL IMPACT:
There will be a minor fiscal impact charged to the Wastewater Fund for mailing of notices to property owners and residents for any proposed rate increase. City Council's direction today will help shape how the City can adequately fund the Wastewater Division and its capital needs. The proposed fiveyear wastewater rate plan will fund future operating and capital costs, maintain reserve levels, and financial metrics that comply with approved fiscal policies.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Prop 218 Wastewater Fee Rate Update
Prop 218 Wastewater Fee Rate Update
Agenda
• Introduction and
Background
• Sewer Rate Presentation –
L & T
• Financials – NHA Advisors
• Next Steps / Timeline
Wastewater Fees:
• Operating Expenses
• WWTF Project
• CIP
WWTF BUDGET SUMMARY
4 Project Cost (including Solar Project) -
Opterra:
$59,987,749
Less:Solar Cost included in project Cost: ($2,974,520)
Less: Solar Cost Discount: ($705,480)
Less: City WW Fund Cash Contribution ($2,000,000)
Plus: Owner's Contingency $2,500,000
Plus: City Plan Check and Construction
Mgmt Support Services (Carollo)
$2,691,390
Estimated Amount to be Financed: $59,499,139
Updated 5-Year CIP
5 • Basic NEED type projects:
• Deficiencies
• Deferred Maintenance (Pipeline and Lift Station
Maintenance)
• Significant investment over 5-years
• Covers contingency for WWTF project, Aging Solar Panel components, New Headworks Internal Lift, Drying Beds
• Updated costs
Updated 5-Year CIP
6
7
Sewer Rate Update
City of Hanford
June 16, 2026
Background
LT conducted the sewer rate study and published the rate study report October 2023
The wastewater fund was in bad financial shape and was not covering operating + debt service costs
The City did not have a formal wastewater master plan The 2023 rate study provided funding for $7.4M of identified capital improvement projects over 5 years which included $2M of treatment expansion reserves/set aside
9 Feb 1, ‘24 July 1, ‘24 July 1, ‘25 July 1, ‘26 July 1, ‘27 % Increases 35% 12% 12% 5% 5%
Single Family
Rate $24.67 $27.63 $30.95 $32.50 $34.13
Implemented Approved via
Prop 218
Planned to
go into effect
Financial Update
10 This 5-year financial plan reflects updated information:
Updated operating costs and customer projections
Updated cash balances: about $1.5M in O&M and $5.9M in Capital $25.8M of projects to correct existing deficiencies over the next five years (about 3.5X the amount of projects in the prior rate study) In addition, the City will finance about $60M for the treatment plant upgrade
The solar project will provide net savings in utility costs WWTP upgrade will provide about $1.16M/yr of operations savings The combined project will result in about $4.15M to $4.67M of new debt annually based on selected financing scenario
Bottom line: what rates are needed to fund the WWTP debt service and how can the City mitigate impacts to customers?
WWTP Debt Service Options
11 OPTION 1: High capitalized interest
PROS: Lower initial costs to customers because debt service payments phased-in over time CONS: Higher total interest costs paid over 30 years; about $8.1M of additional cost compared to Option 2 OPTION 2: No capitalized interest
PROS: Lower total cost to the City over 30 years
CONS: Higher initial costs to customers due to higher initial debt service payments (no phase-in) OPTION 1 OPTION 2
Project Funds Raised $59,499,139 $59,499,139
Estimated Capitalized Interest $7,464,398 $0
Fiscal Year Ended Debt Service Debt Service
2026 $0 $0
2027 $0 $1,838,872
2028 $0 $3,198,038
2029 $1,798,650 $3,198,038
2030 $4,673,294 $4,152,313
2031 to 2057 About $4,670,000 per year About $4,150,000 per year TOTAL COST OVER THE DEBT $132,583,913 $124,501,353
Difference ($8,082,560)
Rate Projection
12 July 1, ‘25 July 1, ‘26 July 1, ‘27
% Increases 12% 5% 5%
Single Family $30.95 $32.50 $34.13
2023 Approved Rate Study
July 1, ‘25 July 1, ‘26 Sept 1, ‘26 July 1, ‘27 July 1, ‘28 July 1, ‘29 July 1, ‘30 % Increases 12% 5% 13.5% 13.5% 13.5% 13.5% 13.5%
Single Family $30.95 $32.50 $36.89 $41.87 $47.52 $53.94 $61.22 OPTION 1: Capitalized Interest
OPTION 2: NO Capitalized Interest
July 1, ‘25 July 1, ‘26 Sept 1, ‘26 July 1, ‘27 July 1, ‘28 July 1, ‘29 July 1, ‘30 % Increases 12% 5% 20% 20% 15% 7% 5%
Single Family $30.95 $32.50 $39.00 $46.80 $53.82 $57.59 $60.47
Survey
13
Schedule
14 June 16 – City Council provides direction
July 2 – Print and mail Proposition 218 notice of hearing to customers and property owners
August 18 – Proposition 218 public hearing (47 days after postmark date) September 1 – Absent a majority protest, new rates can go into effect Each year, the City Council will review the sewer rates and can implement rates up to but not greater than the rates noticed to customers
Wrap Up
15
Additional Financing Background (if needed)
16
Net Revenue Pledge
17 When an issuer sells sewer revenue bonds,
it makes a covenant with bond investors
that it will raise rates as needed (or reduce
expenses as needed) to cover debt service Debt Service Coverage ensure that there are sufficient net revenues to pay debt service and
provides cushion
Debt service coverage calculation is defined
in the bond covenants (see right)
Common covenants range from 110% to
125% (City’s current minimum is 120%)
One key driver for rate increases is
ensuring that there are sufficient net
revenues to support the debt financing
necessary for the WWTF Upgrade Project
Capitalized Interest Considerations
18 Financing a capital project is a strategy to align the project cost with its useful life, such that ratepayers who benefit in future years from the project are also
paying their share of the cost
Public agencies can also defer or delay repayments
through debt structuring strategies
Both financing options in the rate modeling use some form of deferral/delaying of repayment
Capitalizing interest is a tool available to further “ease in” the cost of capital projects and mitigate near-term ratepayer impact
However, capitalizing interest comes with a cost: resulting in higher amount of borrowing, interest accruing on interest Many issuers use capitalized interest for large projects and bond markets do not view it in a negative light
Key Consideration: Pay Now vs Pay Later
Definition: Capitalized Interest is pre-funding the first (few) interest payments on a bond financing; the
overall financed amount increases to include the prefunded interest
Present Value Comparison
19 While the cumulative cashflow
difference between the two
scenarios is $8.082 million, the
timing of these cashflows are an
important consideration
Present value comparison is an
ideal way to compare different
cashflows
$1 million today should have greater
value than $1 million in 30 years
In present value (2026) terms,
the difference between the two
options is much less: $576,000
Assumes discounting at 5.3% per
annum to June 2026
FYE
Option 1
Estimated Debt Service
Option 2
Estimated Debt Service Difference Present Value(2026)
2026 $0 $0 $0 $0
2027 $0 $1,838,872 -$1,838,872 -$1,746,317
2028 $0 $3,198,038 -$3,198,038 -$2,884,210
2029 $1,798,650 $3,198,038 -$1,399,388 -$1,198,541
2030 $4,673,294 $4,152,313 $520,981 $423,749
2031 $4,668,838 $4,154,419 $514,419 $397,352
2032 $4,671,231 $4,153,638 $517,594 $379,681
2033 $4,670,213 $4,154,838 $515,375 $359,025
2034 $4,670,650 $4,152,888 $517,763 $342,534
2035 $4,672,281 $4,152,656 $519,625 $326,464
2036 $4,669,975 $4,153,881 $516,094 $307,925
2037 $4,668,600 $4,151,431 $517,169 $293,035
2038 $4,672,763 $4,150,175 $522,588 $281,202
2039 $4,672,200 $4,149,850 $522,350 $266,927
2040 $4,671,781 $4,150,194 $521,588 $253,122
2041 $4,671,244 $4,150,944 $520,300 $239,788
2042 $4,670,325 $4,151,838 $518,488 $226,926
2043 $4,668,763 $4,152,613 $516,150 $214,533
2044 $4,671,163 $4,153,006 $518,156 $204,527
2045 $4,672,131 $4,152,756 $519,375 $194,689
2046 $4,671,406 $4,151,600 $519,806 $185,044
2047 $4,668,725 $4,154,144 $514,581 $173,964
2048 $4,668,694 $4,150,125 $518,569 $166,488
2049 $4,670,788 $4,154,150 $516,638 $157,519
2050 $4,669,613 $4,150,825 $518,788 $150,213
2051 $4,669,775 $4,154,756 $515,019 $141,616
2052 $4,670,750 $4,150,550 $520,200 $135,842
2053 $4,672,013 $4,152,813 $519,200 $128,756
2054 $4,673,038 $4,151,019 $522,019 $122,940
2055 $4,673,300 $4,154,644 $518,656 $116,000
2056 $4,672,275 $4,153,163 $519,113 $110,258
2057 $4,669,438 $4,151,181 $518,256 $104,536
Total $132,583,913 $124,501,353 $8,082,560 Page 1671 of 1793 $575,587 Credit Rating Considerations
20 The Sewer Fund currently has an “A+”/Stable
credit rating from S&P Global Ratings
This credit rating is supported by strong historical
financial performance: particularly all-in debt service coverage of 160% and cash equal to four years operating Approximately 45% of S&P’s scoring criteria is
outside of the City’s direct control (orange
series in pie chart)
Approximately 55% of the criteria are within
City’s control, the majority of which is based
on cash balances and debt service coverage
Key inflection points:
Cash: $5 million legally available cash balance moves the credit into a higher category (the $5-$20M category)
Coverage: Actual coverage of 160% moves into a higher category vs Actual coverage in the 140%-159% range