Hanford City Council
August 4, 2026

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 3- 95 LNAS Economic Impact
According to the JLUS, 751 military and contractor/civilian personnel were projected at LNAS, increasing Lemoore’s population by approximately 2,320 persons by 2028. As of December 2021, LNAS employs approximately 8,500 military and civilian personnel and contributes an estimated $947 million to the local economy, according to a 20 20 LNAS Economic Impact Assessment (EIA) . It is the largest employer in Kings County.

Additionally, per the 2020 EIA, the base generates about 17,084 jobs for the county, which includes military personnel, Department of Defense civilians and contractors, contracts, payroll employees, transient personnel, and retirees/veterans. The naval hospital on base serves over 17,249 active and retired military, military dependents and personnel in the county. The installation feeds about 2,000 students to local college campuses and 1,600 students to the area’s Central Union School District.

According to the LNAS Master Plan, the retirement community associated with LNAS contributes $253 million to the local economy, including those of Merced, Tulare and Fresno counties. Expenditures from 2010 to 2035 by LNAS are projected to exceed $468 million to the surrounding counties.

HELIPORTS
There are five heliport -helipads located in Kings County for private use only, and include the following:
• landing pad at JG Boswell Company in Corcoran;
• helistop at the Hanford Community Hospital;
• heliport at the Adventist Health Medical Center in Hanford; • landing pad at Westlake Farms airfield in Stratford; and • heliport for Kings County Fire Department at Houston Avenue.

Hanford Municipal Airport does not have a separate helipad for helicopter operations. However, helicopters are used for chemical applications, air ambulance service, and for private use. According to the 201, Hanford Municipal Airport Master Plan, the annual aircraft operations of helicopters utilizing Hanford Municipal Airport facilities is projected to be 2,000 in 2025.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 4-1 CHAPTER 4 : AIR QUALITY

OVERVIEW
The San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB) experiences some of the poorest air quality in the nation. The Valley’s long and narrow 250- mile bowl shape collects and holds emissions from vehicles, industry, agriculture, and various other sources. The long hot summers, ideal for agriculture production and stagnant foggy winters, contribute to the region’s ability to produce and retain harmful air pollutants. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) was created as an agency with authority to regulate sources of air pollution and develop plans that will achieve and maintain air quality standards. SJVAPCD’s monitoring stations are shown in Figure 4-1 below.

The SJVAB exceeds many of the health -based standards set by both the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and California’s Air Resources Board (CARB) for criteria pollutants such as ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, and particulate matter 10 microns or less (PM 10) and particulate matter 2.5 microns or less (PM 2.5).

Specifically, the Valley is designated as a nonattainment area for meeting federal and state 1-hour and 8 -hour ground level ozone and nonattainment area for PM 2.5. Announced in October 2006 by the U.S. EPA, the previous status of Serious nonattainment for PM -10 has improved to the attainment level for the standard. The SJVAB continue s to work towards achieving and maintaining the attainment status of all criteria pollutants.

For designated areas that do not meet established air quality standards including the SJVAB, the 1990 Federal Clean Air Act Amendments (FCAAA) and the California Clean Air Act (CCAA) of 1988 required the implementation of transportation control measures (TCM).

The goal of a TCM is to bring a region into compliance with state and federal air quality standards. TCMs are defined as any strategy to reduce vehicle trips, vehicle use, vehicle miles traveled, vehicle idling or traffic congestion for the purpose of reducing motor vehicle emissions. The remainder of this section will be devoted to TCMs that the San Joaquin Valley has identified.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 4-2

FIGURE 4-1 : AIR MONITORING SITES IN THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY Source: SJVAPCD

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 4-3

AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLANS
The Regional Transportation Plan must provide for the expeditious implementation of TCMs included in the State Implementation Plan (SIP). Opportunities to support federal and statewide goals concerning air quality in transportation plans must also be identified. As a Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA) and Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), KCAG will continue to fulfill its responsibility in developing, funding, and implementing transportation control strategies that will collectively improve the Valley’s air .

Prior air quality control efforts are detailed in Appendix III.

TRANSPORTATION CONTROL MEASURES
The Federal Clean Air Act Amendments (FCAA) defines a TCM as including, but not limited to: programs for improved public transit; high occupancy vehicle lanes; employer -based transportation management plans; trip reduction ordinances; traffic flow improvements; park-and-ride lots; rideshare services; bicycle and pedestrian programs, etc. Best available control measures (BACM) are an example of a TCM.

AIR QUALITY PROGRAMS

KINGS COUNTY TCM PROGRAMS
KCAG and each local jurisdiction have undertaken TCM programs and projects to implement the SJVAPCD air quality plans at the local level. The following is a summary of those efforts.

Traffic Flow Improvements
Traffic flow improvements will ease congestion and reduce pollutants. New signals, signal synchronization, addition of turn lanes, construction of roundabouts, smoother railroad crossings, and construction of interchanges are being carried out to facilitate smooth, uncongested traffic flow. The process of paving and widening road shoulders will also reduce the amount of dust in the air that cars and trucks produce as they travel on roads.

Local jurisdictions have sought to improve traffic operating conditions by replacing four -way stop signs with traffic -actuated signals or by upgrading existing traffic signals. Other improvements that have been implemented include adding turn lanes and pockets, constructing roundabouts, median barriers, and other channelization techniques.

Actions to improve vehicle traffic flow should be carefully evaluated because they may become counterproductive to other methods in reducing air pollution by encouraging more VMT. Traffic flow improvements should be accompanied by actions to improve and encourage the use of transit and rideshare services.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 4-4 Public Transit
Public transit is an alternative to the private automobile to reduce pollution. It is also an essential service that provides transportation to those of low mobility so that they may be able to take advantage of what the county offers in commercial, business, medical, educational, employment, and social/recreational opportunities. Increasing the ridership of local transit systems to reduce the use of single -occupant autos can be accomplished through monitoring transit routes and making changes where indications suggest they be made such as a dding routes, providing better passenger information systems, increasing marketing efforts, and integrating transit modes for improved convenience.

Public transit improvements by the Kings Area Regional Transit (KART) and Corcoran Area Transit (CAT) systems have been implemented and are ongoing as a result of increased ridership from past successful improvements. Expanded fixed routes, changes in route schedules, addition of commuter routes, acquisition of newer and larger buses, and the placement of passenger amenities at bus stops have all made a positive impact on ridership.

Both the Kings County Area Public Transit Agency (KCAPTA) and the city of Corcoran have integrated multimodal transit facilities with Amtrak service to provide centralized transportation services, thereby encouraging public use of transit while reducing potential air pollutants in the region. The City of Lemoore has a KART transit stop and an Amtrak bus stop located in the central business district next to the SJVRR tracks, which would also serve as a stop for the Cross Valley service in the future.

Contributions from the private sector can be utilized to reduce government cost in providing public transit. While new developments have traditionally provided parking facilities to accommodate vehicle trips, such developments have also provided facilities that encourage and accommodate transit as a means of mitigating increased vehicle traffic produced by their development.

Rideshare Programs
Ridesharing is an alternative and complementary to local public transit for reducing single- occupant vehicle travel. Ridesharing reduces air pollution, automobile congestion, fuel consumption, and the need for additional road and parking capacity by increasing the vehicle occupancy rate.

Kings County residents can utilize the convenient online ridesharing services through either the Valley Rides , KART vanpools, or CalVans services. These programs provide computerized commuter matching, employer outreach, and public awareness through marketing efforts. Signs along major highways provide the toll- free phone number for commuters to request rideshare information. KCAG staff take part in various special events to promote ridesharing and are involved in committees to develop commuter options. More information can be found online at www.valleyrides.com, www.kartbus.org, or www.calvans.org.

The County of Kings has implemented an “Emergency Ride Home Program” to encourage ridesharing by its employees. Often, people are not willing to carpool for fear that they could be stranded at their workplace and be unable to return home for an emergency. This

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 4-5 program offers a sense of security to potential rideshare participants by offering a choice of options for a return home for unexpected emergencies.

Employer-sponsored vanpools with tax incentives for vehicle purchase is another form of ridesharing. Local governments could make employers aware of these programs through their local development regulations. Where a large employer proposes a new plant or land use, part of the traffic and circulation concerns could be addressed through ridesharing and vanpool programs supported by the employer. KCAPTA implemented a vanpool program in 2001 that grew to over 200 employer vans and 150 farm worker vans in California and neighboring states, now known as the CalVans program and operated by the California Vanpool Authority. In 2021, KCAPTA developed a new KART Vanpool program and contracted with Enterprise to manage the vanpool.

Two studies, the South Valley Rideshare Study and the San Joaquin Valley Express Transit Study, were completed in 2009 to evaluate future transit needs and better coordinate vanpooling efforts throughout the San Joaquin Valley. These studies pointed to vanpooling as a means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and increasing inter- county transportation choices with lower operating costs than traditional transit options.

California Vanpool Authority (CalVans)
As a result of the rideshare studies and the continued popularity of vanpooling, a new joint powers agency (JPA), the California Vanpool Authority (CalVans), was formed with several councils of government (COG) throughout the Valley and the state, creating a regional agency for vanpool services. CalVans started by providing vanpool services to transport workers from throughout the Central Valley to job sites. Most of the job sites of vanpool participants include the California State prisons in Avenal, Corcoran, Kern County, and Coalinga. However, due to the success of the program, it has now extended beyond the San Joaquin Valley and into several California counties. Currently, the following agencies are members of the JPA for CalVans:
• Association of Monterey Bay Area
Governments
• Imperial County Transportation
Commission
• Madera County Transportation
Commission
• Riverside County Transportation
Commission
• San Joaquin Council of
Governments
• Santa Barbara County
Association of Governments
• Stanislaus Council of
Governments
• Tulare County Association of
Governments
• Ventura County Transportation
Commission

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 4-6 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
The use of bicycle and walk mode can be promoted for commuter and recreational travel that has the primary benefits of reducing traffic congestion and providing a non -polluting transportation mode.

Bicycle facilities in the unincorporated county area consist mainly of bike routes on a shared- use basis with automobiles. Within the urban areas, Class II (Bike Lane) facilities have been provided, along with shared-use routes. Generally, road resurfacing improvements and the provision of wider road shoulders offer a good riding surface that benefits both the motorist and the cyclist.

The Kings County Bicyclists is a local bicycling group organized to encourage the implementation of bicycle facilities in Kings County. With their assistance, bicycle plans have been prepared for the region that guide the development and installation of bicycle facilities throughout the county and each city.

Since bicycles may share the roadway with automobiles, safety is imperative in bicycle use.

Promoting bicycle safety is generally carried out by local police departments within Kings County.

For example, each year the Hanford Police Department presents the “Stop on a Dime” Program to elementary schools in Hanford. Many police departments also provide bicycle registration programs on a continual basis with no fee charged. Bicycle safety programs are also offered at the request of local schools.

Measures to encourage the use of bicycle and walk modes along with measures to increase transit ridership mutually assist each other because the modes are often complimentary.

In addition, in enabling people to make short trips on foot instead of car, the use of walk mode contributes to improving air quality conditions. Creating safe opportunities for walking is critical to improving the safety of pedestrians, especially for young pedestrians with preference of walking to school. The County of Kings has completed the Safe Routes to School project for Kettleman City and Home Garden. In order to provide children with safer access to school, the projects involve constructing new sidewalk and curb/gutters, installing bicycle racks, installing lighted- in-ground crosswalks, and improving drainage facilities. The City of Corcoran received ATP grant funds in 2021 for Safe Routes to School infrastructure improvements.

Alternative Fuel Vehicles/ Electric Vehicles
Although it does not impact travel behavior, decreases in vehicle emissions can be achieved through the use of cleaner burning fuels.

A significant number of alternative fuel projects have been funded by KCAG, our local agencies, the SJVAPCD, and utility companies which have made it possible to further the implementation of alternative fuels throughout the Valley.

Kings County has constructed a compressed natural gas (CNG) fueling facility at its corporate yard and has converted a major portion of its vehicle fleet to CNG. KART has also converted its fleet to CNG use. Additionally, the City of Lemoore, in conjunction with the Lemoore Union High School District, Lemoore Union Elementary School District, Central Unified School District, and Island Union Elementary School District, constructed a CNG fueling facility for multiple agency use, which is also available to the public. Other public agencies and school districts within Kings County have

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 4-7 also constructed alternative fueling stations and are in the process of converting their vehicle fleets.

As for supporting the use of electric vehicles, local agencies have successfully purchased electric vehicles and installed electric vehicle charging stations through grant funds from the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District and Southern California Edison. KCAG has prepared the 2020 Electric Vehicle Readiness Plan and has identified regional needs for electric vehicles. Local agencies have added electric vehicle chargers to public facilities and encouraging the construction of electric vehicle charging stations on new projects. The City of Corcoran received a Caltrans SB 1 Sustainable Communities grant in FY 21- 22 for the development of an Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Plan that will evaluate the physical and financial feasibility of developing a public charging network within the city that will help the city meet its target for converting the city vehicle fleet to electric and lay the groundwork for a network to support residents’ use of electric vehicles.

There has also been significant private EV charging facility investment in Kings County due to its strategic location between Silicon Valley and Los Angeles along I -5. In 2021, Tesla announced plans to expand its 40 -supercharger facility in Kettleman City with an additional 56 chargers, creating one of the world’s largest Tesla charging facilities.

KCAG has adopted a Zero Emission Bus Implementation Plan that provides guidance for KCAPTA and City of Corcoran to determine the appropriate and most efficient zero emission infrastructure system for each operator.

Passenger Rail and Support Facilities
Passenger rail and support facilities are provided to give travelers an alternative to the automobile for longer trips. Amtrak intercity passenger rail service is available with the “Gold Runner” service.

This service provides an ideal opportunity for inter- modal connections in support of other regional public and private transportation providers at station locations.

Two stations are located within Kings County at Hanford and Corcoran. These stations have been upgraded into intermodal facilities that include options to transfer to other transportation providers for increased transit efficiency. Caltrans has implemented rail and signal projects to speed up the trains to reduce travel time in an effort to increase ridership. N ew passenger rail cars have been placed in service on the “Gold Runner” , which include more modern passenger amenities. Over

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 4-8 time, trains have been added to the service to provide six daily round trips between Bakersfield and Oakland/Sacramento. Marketing campaigns are used to promote the Gold Runner ’s trains through television and radio advertisements. Fare promotions have also contributed to increased ridership.

Assembly Bill 1779 (AB 1779) authorized regional government agencies’ ability to form the San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority (SJJPA), in order to move the governance/management of the existing San Joaquin intercity rail service to interregional control. The Hanford station has the fourth highest ridership on the “Gold Runner” rail corridor. The importance of keeping this corridor intact and available to Kings County and our neighbor counties prompted the participation of KCAG in the recently formed SJJPA. The intent of the SJJPA is to bring the decision -making for the corridor closer to the actual riders and to focus improvements where they will best benefit the riders.

Park-and-Ride Lots
Park-and-ride lots help to decrease emissions by reducing the number of single occupancy vehicles and promoting transit use.

KCAPTA also sought funding for an additional Park & Ride lot with CMAQ funds, which will be constructed just north of the new KART Hanford station in FY 2024-25.

Telecommunications / Teleworking
Caltrans and the SJVAPCD have developed telecommunications systems that may be used by other agencies to reduce the need for trips to meetings of a regional nature.

Teleconferencing websites such as Webex, Zoom, and Teams have allowed for the reduction in travel to attend meetings in person. The ability to allow employees to work remotely from home has also greatly reduced the need for travel.

Alternative Work Schedules
Alternative work schedules can decrease emissions by smoothing existing peak -hour traffic across more hours to decrease idling in congestion. Efforts should be made to maintain existing carpools and to encourage new carpools to increase the effectiveness of alternative work schedules.

VALLEYWIDE TCM PROGRAMS
Smoking Vehicle Program
To encourage vehicle operators to maintain their vehicles and improve tailpipe emissions, the SJVAPCD has implemented a program that will notify owners that their vehicle is visibly emitting excessive tailpipe smoke. A toll-free number is available for people to call and report “smoking vehicles”. The SJVAPCD then contacts the vehicle owner and asks them to voluntarily have the vehicle checked or repaired.

This program is districtwide and includes Kings County. Since 1993, there have been more than 32,000 reports of smoking vehicles. About 50% of vehicle owners who respond to a notification sent to them say they have repaired their vehicles.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 4-9 Employer Trip Reduction Programs
The SJVAPCD adopted Rule 9410 - Employer Based Trip Reduction in December of 2009 to help reduce mobile emissions sources. A menu -based program, employers select options to meet a point-based criteria to help their employees reduce their single occupant vehicle usage. Some of the programs eligible for use in an eTRIP are detailed in this chapter.

Healthy Air Living Program
The SJVAPCD developed an educational program to notify the public when unhealthy levels of air pollution are forecasted during the summer months. On these days, the public is encouraged to reduce emissions by avoiding the use of gas -powered garden equipment, aerosol spray cans, charcoal lighter fluid for barbecue grills, oil- based paint, and non -essential automobile use. The public is notified by radio and television and through employers who sign up to participate and notify their employees. This program has recently rebranded and expanded to include The Healthy Air Living, a multipronged outreach effort that offers support and tools to help Valley schools make informed decisions about outdoor activities in relation to air quality. T here are nearly 700 employers, representing 300,000 employees that are participating in the Spare the Air Program within the Valley.

In the winter months, particulate matter pollution from lighting a fireplace or stove that burns wood, pellets, or manufactured logs contributes to unhealthy air quality. The “Check Before You Burn” Program is initiated between November and February each year. This program helps to discourage or prohibit the use of burning when the air quality is expected to be unhealthy.

Residents who disregard the program may receive a Notice of Violation and be subject to fines.

Fines for first-time violations start at $50. There are several exemptions to this program including homes in areas without natural gas service or homes above 3,000 feet elevation. More information on any program sponsored by the SJVAPCD can be found online at www.valleyair.org.

SJVAPCD INCENTIVE PROGRAMS
The SJVAPCD has developed programs for governmental entities, private businesses, residents, and technology improvements that have been implemented valley wide to affect emission reductions in Kings County. The following are some of the highlighted programs. More information on SJVAPCD programs that can help improve the air is available online at www.valleyair.org.

SB 836 Wildfire Smoke Clean Air Centers Pilot Program
The SB 836 (2019) Clean Air Centers Pilot Program distributes air filtration devices at low - or no- cost to facilities in areas that have had high cumulative smoke exposure in areas proximate to vulnerable populations. SJVAPCD has been allotted $693,750 to spend on this pilot program.

Emergency Vehicle Replacement Program
SJVAPCD works with local jurisdictions and emergency departments to replace older diesel emergency vehicles (e.g. ladder trucks for fire departments) with newer vehicles running cleaner engine technologies.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 4- 10 Alternate Fuel Mechanic Training
As the San Joaquin Valley moves towards cleaner-air technology, workforce development is needed to ensure that mechanics know how to service alternative fuel vehicles. Government agencies, private companies, or public educational institutions currently using alternative fuels programs, servicing an alternative fuels system, or making the transition to alternative fuel fleets (including the operation of alternative fuel infrastructure) are eligible for annual education/training grants.

Tune In, Tune Up Car Repair Program
The District, through Valley Clean Air Now (Valley CAN), a 501(c)(3) public charity, offers a free car emission test at Tune In, Tune Up events throughout the San Joaquin Valley. Residents in the Valley may have opportunity to be eligible to receive incentives to repair, replace, or be provided directions on scrapping their high polluting vehicle. These free Saturday events occur in various locations throughout the Valley all year long.

Public Benefit Grant Program
This general-purpose grant program assists local governments, public educational institution s, and special districts to purchase alternative fuel vehicles, enhance transportation strategies, implement community projects that reduce fuel use and emissions, and install electric vehicle and alternative fuel infrastructure.

Charge up! Program
The Charge up! Program provides incentives for public agencies and businesses in the Valley to install electric vehicle Level 2 chargers for public access to promote clean air alternative fuel technologies and the use of zero emission vehicles. Publicly accessible EV chargers must be available for the public at a minimum of 30 hours per week during hours that would be reasonably used by the public.

Vanpool Voucher Incentive Program
The purpose of this program is to encourage commuter rideshare practices among frequent long - distance riders in the Valley, thus reducing air pollution emission from passenger vehicles. Valley residents are provided with subsidies to participate in vanpool instead of using single occupant vehicle commutes to work.

Zero-Emission School Bus Replacement Incentive and Infrastructure Programs These programs provide monetary incentives to replace existing yellow public school buses with clean replacements and money to install charging equipment.

Heavy Vehicle Replacement Programs
These programs provide incentives and grants to provide replacement or repowering across a wide variety of heavy vehicles, including waste haulers, tractors, heavy duty trucks, off -road mobile equipment, and yard vehicles.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 5-1 CHAPTER 5 :

REVENUE FORECAST

OVERVIEW
This revenue forecast is intended to provide an overview of the revenues reasonably expected from specific federal, state, and local governmental funding programs to support the transportation investment identified during the 24- year planning period in the Regional Transportation Plan. The Plan assumes a total of roughly $2 billion in projected revenues to be available through 2049.

The RTP provides projections for local, state, and federal funds and distinguishes between formula and competitive funding sources. Formula funds were systematic and were projected based on previous funding cycles specific to each member agency with an assumed annual escalation of 3%. Competitive funding, such as grant programs, were less certain and were based on past performance by KCAG’s member agencies, program applicability, and an assumed capture rate based on Kings County’s proportion of population and state-maintained centerline miles of roadway.

Summaries of the revenue projections by type of funding (i.e., local, state, federal) and formula vs. competitive funding sources are provided in Figure 5-1 and Figure 5-2 respectively. The annualized breakdown is shown in Figure 5-3. The full numeric details are included at the end of this chapter as Table 5-1.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 5-2

FIGURE 5-1: FORECAST REVENUES BY SOURCE
Source: KCAG

FIGURE 5-2: FORMULA VS COMPETITIVE FUNDS BREAKDOWN
Source: KCAG

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 5-3

FIGURE 5-3: ANNUAL PROJECTED FUNDING BREAKDOWN BY SOURCE Source: KCAG

KEY LEGISLATION

INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT AND JOBS ACT
The 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) is a fully funded five -year surface transportation reauthorization bill, representing $1.2 trillion in transportation spending, with roughly $550 billion in new investment spending. Its provisions include an increase of funding to the Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBGP), a nearly $6 billion increase in Federal highway -aid dollars going to California from the previous surface reauthorization (the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act), $384 million to support California’s efforts to build an electric vehicle charging network, and roughly $4 billion for a new bridge program. The IIJA is set to expire in September 2026, however funding can continue if Congress approves an extension or reauthorization.

CALIFORNIA SENATE BILL 862
Senate Bill ( SB) 862 of 2014 is a California budget trailer bill that established long- term funding for the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) beginning in F Y 2015-16. SB 862 directed Cap -and-Trade proceeds to support transit, affordable housing, and sustainable communities. The bill created the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 5-4 Program (AHSCP), the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) , and the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP).

CALIFORNIA SENATE BILL 1
Senate Bill (SB) 1, the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017, commits $54 billion over ten years toward transportation spending in California. SB 1 established or expanded a number of popular grant programs, including the Active Transportation Program, Local Partnership Program, and the State Highway Operations Protection Program.

ASSUMPTIONS
The assumptions used for each of the various federal, state, and local revenue projections are based upon the best available data provided for KCAG and Caltrans. These assumptions are based upon current information and do not reflect any attempt to predict future federal, state, or local actions or to resolve current pending issues. Kings County, while primarily rural, is considered an urbanized area and is eligible for funding from additional programs not available to rural areas. Most funds assumed modest growth, that is, an assumption was made that funding sources would, on average, grow 3% year to year. The numbers are in constant 2025 dollars.

The following information was used to develop the funding forecast table:

LOCAL FUNDING
Information on local transportation funds and transit fares was from KCAG. Both were assumed to grow modestly over 2 4 years, as transit agencies recover from the COVID -19 pandemic and economic indicators show steady receipts from the statewide sales tax.

Gas tax distribution data was obtained from the California State Controller’s Office. An average of recent years was used to develop a forecast, which was projected to grow modestly over the next 24 years.

STATE FUNDING
Information for the State Highway Operations and Protection Program (SHOPP), the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), and the Active Transportation Program (ATP) are from Caltrans. Estimates for the county are based on historic averages and assumed to grow modestly over time. STIP funds are marked as $0 until FY 2026/27 as KCAG draws down its STIP advance for the county.

Information about funding sources for the State Transit Assistance (STA), Public Transportation Account (PTA), and SB 862’s Low Carbon Transit Operations Program are based on historical data from the State Controller’s Office and are assumed to grow modestly over time.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 5-5 After the county’s high speed rail segment is completed (post 2029), it is anticipated that KCAG will pursue transit and intercity rail capital project funds in order to assist with the regional intercity replacements of the Gold Runner (formerly San Joaquin ) service. Due to the acute need for intercity services, arising particularly from the loss of reliable service between Hanford and Corcoran, KCAG believes that it may be in good position to pursue these funds.

Data for the Local Streets and Roads and Sustainable Communities Planning Grant programs under SB1 comes from Caltrans. SB 1 programs are expected to last the lifetime of the revenue projection. Historic averages are used to calculate the estimate, which is likely to grow modestly over time. The cities of Hanford and Lemoore have implemented transportation impact fees, making them eligible for competitive Local Partnership Program (LLP) funds. It is assumed that in a few years’ time, local agencies will be eligible for funds, and that their applications will net, on average, around $100,000 a year, based on pre -SB1 estimates. Historic information is used to inform the averages for the sustainable communities planning grant, which is then grown modestly over the projection timeframe.

For the Trade Corridor Enhancement Program and Solutions for Congested Corridors Program, it is assumed that future anticipated growth will require some funds in these areas, especially given the nature of regional goods movement in the San Joaquin Valley .

These are assumed proportionate to the total share captured under the Local Streets and Roads Program, and only needed every three cycles similar to current planning cycles.

The limited number of aviation facilities in the county contributes to the small share of aviation funding. Hanford Municipal Airport is undergoing a multi-year upgrade including an Airport Land Use Compatibility Update (ALCUP), constructing new fuel tanks, pavement maintenance, and reconstructing ramps and its taxiway. Airport funds are categorized under State programs in Table 5-1 but include Federal funding totals. Local match funds for the completion of the Hanford Municipal Airport runway reconstruction are included for completeness.

State rail assistance, which would go through the San Joaquin Valley Joint Powers Authority, is not considered as part of the estimates for Kings County.

FEDERAL FUNDING
Federal transit administration formula funding estimates are derived from historic funding levels and are assumed to grow modestly over time. Kings County is well-positioned to win FTA Section 5310 competitive grant funding for social service transit spending and is assumed to win the new fleet capital request and an ongoing allotment of similar size to its current operations grant request, grown modestly over time.

Funding for the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program, Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBGP) (and any successor program), Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), Highway Infrastructure Program (HIP), and Highway Bridge Program (HBP) are drawn from current funding levels. No funding is assumed for high priority projects and grade crossing protection (USC Section 130).

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 5-6 The impact of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) is not yet clear. However, given the rural allotments available for construction funds and the completed Kings County Electric Vehicle Readiness Plan, it is reasonable to assume that Kings County will acquire some of these funds moving forward. The total estimates from these two programs are from Caltrans, and the funds flowing into Kings are estimated as appropriate from the proportion of centerline miles, proportion of highway bridges in the county, and proportion of population. These funds are forecast to be renewed for one highway authorization, for a total of ten program years.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 5-7 TABLE 5-1: REVENUE PROJECTION FOR KINGS COUNTY

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6-1 CHAPTER 6 :

REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION NEEDS

OVERVIEW
Kings County is committed to the improvement of its transportation network. This chapter details the financially-constrained list of planned multimodal improvements including capital and operational costs in Kings County . The complete list of financially constrained and unconstrained planned improvements is provided in Appendix IV.

As described in Chapter 5, the projected revenue estimate for the region is just over $2 billion over 25 years. The projected expenditure for the region over the same time period is $1.5 billion. The vast majority of expenditures are projected to be maintenance and operating costs for street and transit systems. As such, the fiscally constrained list falls below the projected revenue line for Kings County. Table 6 -1 shows projected expenditures by jurisdiction.

Projected revenue and expenditures are shown in Figure 6-1. Expenditures by project type are shown in Figure 6-2. The primary project type is roadway projects, with the primary roadway project consisting of rehabilitation, reconstruction, and overlay as shown in Figure 6-3. Investments by jurisdictions are shown in Figure 6-4, with the City of Hanford having the largest number of investments from projects.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6-2 Table 6-1: Projected Expenditures by Jurisdiction
1 Includes operating, maintenance, and financially constrained project costs. Operating costs are estimated.

Source: KCAG, Cities of Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, Lemoore, Kings County, KCAPTA

FIGURE 6-1 : COMPARISON OF PROJECTED REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES Source: KCAG, Cities of Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, Lemoore, County of Kings, KCAPTA Jurisdiction Operating Costs1 ($) Capital Costs ($) Total Expenditures ($) Avenal $68,305,673 $28,614,639 $96,920,312
Corcoran $87,476,290 $25,485,921 $112,962,211
Hanford $92,278,549 $93,362,770 $185,641,319
Lemoore $19,412,526 $3,611,000 $23,023,526
County $712,044,356 $32,615,800 $744,660,156
KART $245,470,440 $37,683,101 $283,153,541
CAT $42,772,966 $372,000 $43,144,966
Total $1,267,760,800 $221,745,231 $1,489,506,031

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6-3

FIGURE 6-2: BREAKDOWN OF EXPENDITURES BY TYPE

FIGURE 6-3 : LISTED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS BY PRIMARY PROJECT TYPES Note that operating costs are excluded
Source: KCAG, Cities of Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, Lemoore, County of Kings, KCAPTA

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6-4

FIGURE 6-4 : INVESTMENTS BY JURISDICTIONS
Note that operating costs are excluded.

Source: KCAG, Cities of Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, Lemoore, County of Kings, KCAPTA, Caltrans Table 6-2 through Table 6-10 and Figure 6-5 through Figure 6-14 that follow show the breakdown of projects by jurisdiction and cost and type. Note that Corcoran does not include a roadway project map due to the lack of identified project limits.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6-5 AVENAL
TABLE 6-2 : AVENAL TIER I FINANCIALLY CONSTRAINED PROJECTS

Note: Excludes SHOPP and CMAQ Projects
Source: City of Avenal
T ype Location P roject Limits Description Estimated Cost Open to Traffic Roadway Projects Avenal Cutoff Road A pproaching California Aqueduct Guardrail Replacement $600,000 2028 Roadway Projects 7th Ave M ariposa St to SR 269 Reconstruct and improve curb/ramps $875,000 2030 Roadway Projects Central Ave S an Joaquin St to Fresno St Reconstruct and improve curb/ramps $775,000 2030 Roadway Projects Stanislaus St S an Joaquin St to SR 33 Reconstruct and improve curb/ramps $2,640,000 2035 Roadway Projects Merced St S an Joaquin St to SR 33 Reconstruct and improve curb/ramps $2,640,000 2035 Roadway Projects Avenal Cutoff Road C A Aqueduct to I-5 Bridge Crossing Reconstruct and stripe $7,500,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects 7th Ave M ariposa St to SR 269 Si dewal k Improvements $3,114,639 2027 Active Transportation Projects 7th Ave M ari posa St to Merced St N e w bike facility (Class II) $100,000 2027 Active Transportation Projects First Avenue Reef-Sunset Middle School to Laneva Blvd (SR 33) Continuous bike lanes (Buffered Class II) $250,000 2 027 Active Transportation Projects San Joaquin Street I ntersection with Park Ave Pedestrian Crossing Improvements $800,000 2028 Active Transportation Projects Seventh Avenue M ariposa St to Laneva Blvd (SR 33) Continuous bike lanes (Class II) $300,000 2030 Active Transportation Projects Hanford Avenue F resno St to Tamarack E.S. New bi ke route (Class III) $10,000 2030
Active Transportation Projects Monterey Street 7 th Ave to Park Ave New bi ke route (Class III) $10,000 2030
Active Transportation Projects Big Tar Canyon Road 7 th Ave to Sports Complex Paved multi-use path $3,000,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects San Joaquin Street S kyline Blvd. (SR 269) to Lavena Blvd. (SR 33) Multi-Use Path (Class I) $3,000,000 2035
Active Transportation Projects Hydril Road S kyl i ne Bl vd. to Just west of Ave. 36 Paved multi-use path $3,000,000 2035 Avenal

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6-6

FIGURE 6-5 : PROJECT COST BREAKDOWN BY TYPE , AVENAL
Source: City of Avenal

FIGURE 6-6 : AVENAL ROADWAY PROJECT LOCATIONS
Source: City of Avenal

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6-7

CORCORAN
TABLE 6-3: CORCORAN TIER I FINANCIALLY CONSTRAINED PROJECTS Corcoran
Type Location Project Limits Description Estimated
Cost Open to Traffic
Roadway Projects Various Locations Various Locations Pavement Maintenance Program $529,200 2027 Roadway Projects Various Locations Various Locations Pavement Maintenance Program $555,660 2029 Roadway Projects Various Locations Various Locations Pavement Maintenance Program $583,443 2031 Roadway Projects Various Locations Various Locations Pavement Maintenance Program $612,615 2033 Roadway Projects Various Locations Various Locations Pavement Maintenance Program $643,246 2035 Roadway Projects Various Locations Various Locations Pavement Maintenance Program $675,408 2037 Roadway Projects Various Locations Various Locations Pavement Maintenance Program $709,179 2039 Roadway Projects Various Locations Various Locations Pavement Maintenance Program $744,638 2041 Roadway Projects Various Locations Various Locations Pavement Maintenance Program $781,869 2043 Roadway Projects Various Locations Various Locations Pavement Maintenance Program $820,963 2045 Active Transportation
Projects Orange Avenue Seventh Ave to Dairy Ave. Bike lanes (Class II) or bike route (Class III) $79,200 2035 Active Transportation
Projects 6 1/2 Avenue Orange Ave. to Sherman Ave. Bike lanes (Class II) or bike route (Class III) $79,200 2035 Active Transportation
Projects Dairy Avenue Niles Ave. to Orange Ave. Bike lanes (Class II) or bike route (Class III) $39,000 2035 Active Transportation
Projects Dairy Avenue Oregon Ave. to Pueblo Ave. Bike lanes (Class II) or bike route (Class III) $39,000 2035 Active Transportation
Projects Letts Avenue Sherman Ave. to Oregon Ave. Bike lanes (Class II) or bike route (Class III) $39,000 2035 Active Transportation
Projects Letts Avenue North Ave. to Patterson Ave. Bike lanes (Class II) or bike route (Class III) $19,500 2035 Active Transportation
Projects Otis Avenue Orange Ave. to Whitley Ave. Shared-use Path (Class I or Class IV) $6,750,000 2035
Active Transportation
Projects Chittenden Avenue Brokaw Ave. to Bainum Ave. Bike lanes (Class II) or bike route (Class III) $54,000 2035 Active Transportation
Projects King Avenue Bainum Ave. to Corcoran State Prison Bike lanes (Class II) or bike route (Class III) $139,500 2035

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6-8 Active Transportation
Projects Dairy Avenue Niles Ave. to Ottowa Ave. Sidewalk gap closure $1,518,000 2035 Active Transportation
Projects Josephine Avenue Gable Ave. to Ottowa Ave. Sidewalk gap closure $2,428,800 2035 Active Transportation
Projects Letts Avenue North Ave. to Oregon Ave. Sidewalk gap closure $990,000 2035 Active Transportation
Projects Otis Avenue Cardoza Ave. to North of Patterson Ave. Gap on the west side $60,000 2035 Active Transportation
Projects Orange Avenue Dairy Ave. to Letts Ave. Gap on the south side $156,000 2026 Active Transportation
Projects North Avenue 6 1/2 Ave. to Otis Ave. Sidewalk gap closure $660,000 2035 Active Transportation
Projects Patterson Avenue Miller Ave. to Otis Ave. Sidewalk gap closure $1,716,000 2035 Active Transportation
Projects Sherman Avenue 6 1/2 Ave. to King Ave. Sidewalk gap closure $1,716,000 2035 Active Transportation
Projects Bainum Avenue Dairy Ave. to King Ave. Sidewalk gap closure $500,000 2035 Active Transportation
Projects Oregon Avenue Dairy Ave. to Yosemite Dr Sidewalk gap closure $862,500 2035 Corcoran Area Transit Various Locations Various Locations Install bus shelters with advertising $60,000 2026 Corcoran Area Transit CAT Buses CAT Buses Purchase and install new electronic fare boxes $96,000 2026 Corcoran Area Transit CAT Buses CAT Buses Beginning stages of Implementation of Zero Emission fleet $120,000 2024
Corcoran Area Transit CAT Buses CAT Buses Beginning stages of Implementation of cashless fare box $96,000 2029

Note: Excludes SHOPP, HSIP and CMAQ Projects
Source: City of Corcoran

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6-9

FIGURE 6-7 : PROJECT COST BREAKDOWN BY TYPE , CORCORAN Source: City of Corcoran

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 10

HANFORD
TABLE 6-4 : HANFORD TIER I FINANCIALLY CONSTRAINED PROJECTS Hanford
Type Location Project Limits Description Estimated
Cost
Open to
Traffic
Roadway Projects 10th Avenue Fargo Ave. to SR 43 Rehabilitate/Overlay $2,828,800 2027 Roadway Projects 10th Avenue Grangeville Blvd. to Fargo Ave. Rehabilitate/Overlay $1,200,000 2035 Roadway Projects 11th Avenue Hanford Armona Rd. to 4th St. Rehabilitate/Overlay $1,443,100 2027 Roadway Projects 12th Avenue Hayden Ave. Install traffic signals and pedestrian facilities $1,026,705 2030
Roadway Projects 12th Avenue Houston Ave. Install traffic signals and pedestrian facilities $415,000 2027
Roadway Projects 12th Avenue Butterfield Ave. to Houston Ave. Widen from 2 to 4 lanes $1,661,100 2027 Roadway Projects 9th Avenue Lacey Blvd. to Grangeville Blvd. New arterial roadway – 4 lanes w/ median $11,433,162 2027 Roadway Projects 9th Avenue UPRR Railroad Crossing Construct Railroad Crossing $2,374,546 2028 Roadway Projects 9 1/4 Avenue Lacey Blvd. to Grangeville Blvd. Rehabilitate/Overlay $2,276,200 2029 Roadway Projects Aspen Street Fargo Ave. to Encore St. Rehabilitate/Overlay $545,800 2029 Roadway Projects Campus Drive Lacey Blvd. to Sixth St. Rehabilitate/Overlay $582,116 2027 Roadway Projects Centennial Drive Lacey Blvd. to Merrit St. Rehabilitate/Overlay $1,071,160 2027 Roadway Projects E Lacey Boulevard 10th Ave. to 9th Ave. Widen from 2 to 4 lanes w/ left turn pockets $4,685,000 2027
Roadway Projects E Lacey Boulevard 9th Ave. to Sierra Dr. Widen from 2 to 4 lanes w/ left turn pockets $4,685,000 2028
Roadway Projects Florinda Street 9 1/4 Ave. to 9th Ave. Construct Roadway $10,364,600 2028 Roadway Projects Garner Street Lacey Blvd. to Goleta Way Alignment and Road Reconstruction $615,647 2027 Roadway Projects Grangeville Boulevard 9th Ave. Roundabout $5,181,880 2027 Roadway Projects Grangeville Boulevard BN&SF Preliminary Planning and Right of Way - Railroad Crossing Grade Separation $4,070,000 2029

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 11 Roadway Projects Greenfield Avenue Elm St. to Campus Dr. Rehabilitate/Overlay $736,500 2029 Roadway Projects Hanford-Armona Road West of 11th Ave. (DMV) Construct Center Median $206,861 2029 Roadway Projects Harold Street Hanford-Armona Rd. to South End Rehabilitate/Overlay $396,700 2029 Roadway Projects Hume Avenue 11th Ave. to Butternut St. Rehabilitate/Overlay $1,249,100 2029 Roadway Projects Idaho Street 10th Ave. to 11th Ave. Rehabilitate/Overlay $1,249,100 2029 Roadway Projects Iona Avenue 10th Ave. to 11th Ave. Rehabilitate/Overlay $1,246,900 2029 Roadway Projects Mall Drive 12th Ave. to Lacey Blvd. Rehabilitate/Overlay $1,794,277 2027 Roadway Projects Northstar Drive 11th Ave. to Aspen Ave. Rehabilitate/Overlay $856,300 2029 Roadway Projects Rodgers Road 11th Ave. Upgrade Traffic Signal $179,133 2027 Active Transportation Projects 10th Avenue Hwy. 43 to Houston Ave. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $3,082,620 2035 Active Transportation Projects 11 1/2 Avenue Davis St. to State St. Bike Boulevard (Class IIIB) $651,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects 11th Avenue Flint Ave. to Houston Ave. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $3,132,140 2035 Active Transportation Projects 11th Avenue Ivy Street Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $161,500 2030 Active Transportation Projects 12th Avenue Flint Ave. to Houston Ave. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $3,132,140 2035 Active Transportation Projects 12th Avenue Hanford-Armona Road Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $490,000 2030 Active Transportation Projects 3rd Street 10th Ave. to 9th Ave. Bike Route (Class III) $12,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects 12th Avenue Graham Street Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $8,500 2035 Active Transportation Projects 13th Avenue Fargo Ave. to Front Street Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $1,658,920 2035 Active Transportation Projects 2nd Street Phillips St. to 10th Ave. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $427,110 2035 Active Transportation Projects 3rd Street 11th Ave. Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $170,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects 4th Street 11th Ave. Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $55,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects 4th Street 11th Ave. Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $170,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects 6th Street 11th Ave. to 10th Ave. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $637,570 2035

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 12 Active Transportation Projects 7th Street Mall Dr. to Williams St. Bike Lane (Class II) $495,200 2035 Active Transportation Projects 8 1/2 Avenue Leland Way to Florinda St. Bikeway Separated (Class IV) $1,750,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects 8th Street Santa Fe Ave. to Phillips St. Bike Boulevard (Class IIIB) $42,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects 9 1/4 Avenue Leland Way to Lacey Blvd. Bike Boulevard (Class IIIB) $1,057,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects 9th Avenue Leland Way to Lacey Blvd. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $1,250,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects 9th Avenue Douty St. to 10th Ave. Bike Boulevard (Class IIIB) $350,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Alpine Avenue Hume Ave. to Houston Ave. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $315,690 2035 Active Transportation Projects Aspen Avenue Pepper Dr. to Fargo Ave Bike Lane (Class II) $185,700 2035 Active Transportation Projects Berkshire Way/Kings Road Grangeville Blvd. to Fitzgerald Ln. Bike Boulevard (Class IIIB) $203,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Cameron Street 11th Ave. to 10th Ave. Bike Boulevard (Class IIIB) $707,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Cameron Street 10th Ave. Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $117,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Campus Drive Lacey Blvd. to UPRR Railroad Bikeway Separated (Class IV) $717,500 2035 Active Transportation Projects Centennial Drive Lacey Blvd. to 12th Ave. / Mall Dr. Shared Use Bike Path (Class 1) $879,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Centennial Drive Lacey Blvd. to Fargo Ave. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $1,238,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects China Alley Phillips St. to White St. Shared Use Bike Path (Class 1) $791,100 2035 Active Transportation Projects Cortner Street Glacier Way to Douty St. Bike Boulevard (Class IIIB) $630,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Court Street Irwin St. to Douty St. Shared Use Bike Path (Class 1) $131,850 2035 Active Transportation Projects Davis Street Peoples Trail to 11th Ave. Bike Boulevard (Class IIIB) $700,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Davis Street 11th Ave. Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $490,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Davis Street Grant Street Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $242,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Dawn Lane Martin Luther King Elementary Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $26,500 2035 Active Transportation Projects Dawn Lane Hume Ave. Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $315,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Dawn Lane 11th Ave. Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $444,000 2035

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 13 Active Transportation Projects Devon Street 13th Ave. to Centennial Dr. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $309,500 2035 Active Transportation Projects Douty Street Flint Ave. to Hanford Armona Rd. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $2,519,330 2035 Active Transportation Projects Douty Street Court Street Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $53,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Douty Street 8th Street Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $64,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Douty Street China Alley Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $3,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Douty Street Seventh Street Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $40,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Douty Street Longfield Center Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $236,500 2035 Active Transportation Projects Elm Street Greenfield Ave. to 11th Ave. Bikeway Separated (Class IV) $227,500 2035 Active Transportation Projects Encore Drive Aspen St. to Fargo Ave. Bike Boulevard (Class IIIB) $889,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Fargo Avenue 13th Ave. to Hwy. 43 Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $1,826,050 2035 Active Transportation Projects Fifth Street Irwin Street Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $8,500 2035 Active Transportation Projects Fifth Street Redington Street Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $17,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Fifth Street 11th Ave. Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $327,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Fitzgerald Lane Fargo Ave. to Grangeville Blvd. Bike Lane (Class II) $631,380 2035 Active Transportation Projects Flint Avenue 12th Ave. to Hwy. 43 Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $1,238,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Florinda Street 11th Ave. to 10th Ave. Bike Lane (Class II) $619,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Florinda Street 10th Ave. to 9 1/4 Ave. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $464,250 2035 Active Transportation Projects Florinda Street 10th Ave. to 9 1/4 Ave. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $146,250 2035 Active Transportation Projects Florinda Street Whitmore Ave. Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $15,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Garner Street Seventh St./11th Ave. to Lacey Blvd Bike Lane (Class II) $191,890 2035
Active Transportation Projects Glacier Way Flint Ave. to Cortner St. Bike Lane (Class II) $854,220 2035 Active Transportation Projects Grangeville Boulevard 13th Ave. to 9th Ave. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $2,475,000 2035

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 14 Active Transportation Projects Grangeville Boulevard 9th Ave. to 7th Ave. Bikeway Separated (Class IV) $1,750,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Grangeville Boulevard Douty Street Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $184,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Grangeville Boulevard N. Kensington Way Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $10,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Grangeville Boulevard 10th Ave. Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $7,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Green Street China Alley (West) to China Alley (East) Bike Boulevard (Class IIIB) $7,000 2035
Active Transportation Projects Greenfield Avenue Centennial Dr. to Lacey Blvd. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $1,108,010 2035 Active Transportation Projects Hanford-Armona Road 13th Ave. to 10th Ave. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $1,857,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Hanford-Armona Road Harris Street Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $230,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Hanford-Armona Road 11th Ave. Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $640,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Hanford-Armona Road Casa Del Sol Apartments Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $83,500 2035 Active Transportation Projects Harris Street 2nd St. to Hanford Armona Rd. Bike Boulevard (Class IIIB) $399,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Harris Street Coe Park to Ball Park Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $15,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Harris Street Lincoln Elementary School Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $175,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Hill Street Harris Street Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $8,500 2035 Active Transportation Projects Hume Avenue 12th Ave. to 11th Ave. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $619,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Irwin Street W. Lacey Blvd. to Civic Center Park Bike Boulevard (Class IIIB) $21,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Ivy Street 11th Ave. to 10th Ave. Bike Boulevard (Class IIIB) $707,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Kensington Way Fargo Ave. to Grangeville Blvd. Bike route (Class IIIB) $700,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Kings County Drive / Mall Drive
12th Ave. / Liberty St. to 12th Ave.
/ Centennial Dr. Bike Lane (Class II) $315,690 2035
Active Transportation Projects Lacey Boulevard 10th Street Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $344,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Lacey Boulevard 11th Ave. Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $585,500 2035

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 15 Active Transportation Projects Lacey Boulevard Campus Dr. (Peoples Trail) Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $816,500 2035 Active Transportation Projects Leland Way Douty St. to 9 1/4 Ave. Bike Boulevard (Class IIIB) $840,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Leland Way 9 1/4 Ave. to 8 1/2 Ave. Bikeway Separated (Class IV) $1,400,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Leoni Drive Cortner St. to Grangeville Blvd. Bike Boulevard (Class IIIB) $434,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Liberty Street Centennial Dr. to 12th Ave. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $198,080 2035 Active Transportation Projects Mall Drive Lacey Blvd. to 12th Ave Bike Lane (Class II) $328,070 2035 Active Transportation Projects McCreary Avenue 11th Ave. to Douty St. Bike Boulevard (Class IIIB) $357,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Muscat Place 12th Ave. to Fitzgerald Ln. Bike Boulevard (Class IIIB) $168,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Neill Way Fargo Ave. to Leland Way Bike Boulevard (Class IIIB) $357,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Peoples Trail (Peoples Ditch) Flint Ave. to Rodgers Rd. Shared Use Bike Path (Class 1) $3,809,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Peoples Trail (Peoples Ditch) UPRR Railroad to Hume Ave. Shared Use Bike Path (Class 1) $2,007,050 2035 Active Transportation Projects Peoples Trail (Peoples Ditch) Greenfield Ave. to Lacey Blvd. Shared Use Bike Path (Class 1) $747,150 2035 Active Transportation Projects Pepper Drive Glacier Way to Aspen St. Bike Lane (Class II) $433,300 2035 Active Transportation Projects Phillips Street Fourth St. to Second St. Bike Lane (Class II) $123,800 2035 Active Transportation Projects Phillips Street Lacey Blvd. to Fourth St. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $216,650 2035 Active Transportation Projects Redington Street 6th St. to Dewey St. Bike Lane (Class II) $173,320 2035 Active Transportation Projects Rodgers Road Grangeville Blvd. to Dead End North Bike route (Class III) $102,500 2035
Active Transportation Projects Rodgers Road 11th Ave. to Grangeville Blvd. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $371,400 2035 Active Transportation Projects Rodgers Road (Hidden Valley Park) Dead End North to Cortner St. Shared Use Bike Path (Class 1) $146,500 2035 Active Transportation Projects Sangiovese Street Centennial Dr. to 12th Ave. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $309,500 2035 Active Transportation Projects Scott Street Phillips Street Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $27,000 2035

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 16 Active Transportation Projects Seventh Street Santa Fe Ave. Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $68,500 2035 Active Transportation Projects Seventh Street 11th Ave. Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $354,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Sixth Street 11th Ave. Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $87,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Sixth Street Douty Street Pedestrian Project-Preliminary Planning $34,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects State-Kimball-Echo-
Bonnyview 11 1/2 Ave. to 11th Ave. Bike Boulevard (Class IIIB) $686,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects University Avenue Grangeville Blvd. to Greenfield Ave. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $284,740 2035
Active Transportation Projects White Street China Alley to Seventh St. Buffered Bike Lane (Class IIB) $14,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects W. Lacey Boulevard 13th Ave. to Irwin St. Bike Lane (Class II) $284,380 2035 Active Transportation Projects White Street China Alley to Seventh St. Bike Boulevard (Class IIIB) $8,000 2035 Note: Excludes SHOPP and CMAQ Projects
Source: City of Hanford

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 17

FIGURE 6-8 : COST BREAKDOWN BY PROJECT TYPE, HANFORD
Source: City of Hanford

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 18

FIGURE 6-9 : HANFORD ROADWAY PROJECT LOCATIONS
Source: City of Hanford

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 19

LEMOORE
TABLE 6-5 : LEMOORE TIER I FINANCIALLY CONSTRAINED PROJECTS Lemoore
Type Location Project Limits Description Estimated Cost Open to Traffic Roadway Projects Olive Ave B St to Redwood Ln Overlay $150,000 2028 Roadway Projects Oakdale Ln Vine St to Lum Ave Overlay $150,000 2028 Roadway Projects E St Fox St to Follett Overlay $150,000 2028 Roadway Projects W Deodar Ln Spruce Ave to Glendale Ave Overlay $420,000 2030 Roadway Projects S Byron Ave Bush St to South End Overlay $85,000 2035 Roadway Projects Cambridge Dr Bush St to Olive St Overlay $90,000 2035 Roadway Projects W Burlwood Ln Lemoore Ave to Juniper Ln Overlay $108,000 2027 Roadway Projects Bush St Lemoore Ave to D St Overlay $198,000 2028 Roadway Projects W D St Lemoore Ave. to Olive St Overlay $240,000 2029 Roadway Projects Hanford Armona Rd Lemoore Ave to Liberty Dr Overlay $240,000 2028 Roadway Projects Hanford Armona Rd Liberty Dr to 19th Ave Overlay $210,000 2029 Roadway Projects Hanford Armona Rd 19th Ave to SR 41 Overlay $240,000 2030 Roadway Projects Iona Ave Vine St to 19th Ave Overlay $300,000 2033 Roadway Projects Lemoore Ave SR 198 to Bush St Overlay $240,000 2034 Roadway Projects Lemoore Ave UPRR to Cinnamon Dr Overlay $240,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects 19th Avenue D St. to Silverado Dr. Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Hill Street (east side) E St. to Bush St. Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Follett Street Cinnamon Dr. to Bush St. Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Cinnamon Dr. (south
side) Hill St. to Hanford Armona Rd. Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 20 Active Transportation Projects Bush Street (south side) College Ave. to State Route 41 Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Bush Street Lemoore Ave. to Bush Pl. / Barcelona Dr. Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Bush Street (east side) Bush Pl. / Barcelona Dr. to E. D St. Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Cedar Lane (north side) 19½ Ave. to Lum Dr. Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Silverado Drive (south
side) 19 1/2 Ave. to 19th Ave. Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects 19th Avenue Hanford-Armona Rd. to Silverado Dr. / City Park Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035
Active Transportation Projects Liberty Drive Hanford-Armona Rd. to Cinnamon Dr. Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Vine Street Bush St. to Cedar Ln. Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Fox Street Hanford-Armona Rd. to Bush St. Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Eton Avenue / Follett
Street Brentwood Dr. to Bush St. Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Lemoore Avenue Glendale Ave. to Bush St. / Lemoore H.S. Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Daphne Lane (incl.
extension) Heritage Park to San Joaquin Valley R.R. Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Hanford-Armona Road Apricot Ave. to Cinnamon Dr. Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Cinnamon Drive 19 1/2 Ave. to Hanford-Armona Rd. Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects D Street W. Bush St. to E. Bush St. Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Bush Street (incl.
extension) 19 ½ Ave. to San Joaquin Valley R.R. Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Cedar Lane (incl.
extensions) 19 ½ Ave. to Lemoore Ave. Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035 Active Transportation Projects Silverado Avenue 19 ½ Ave. to 19th Ave. / City Park Preliminary Planning $25,000 2035

Note: Excludes SHOPP, HSIP and CMAQ Projects
Source: City of Lemoore

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 21

FIGURE 6- 10: COST BREAKDOWN BY PROJECT TYPE, LEMOORE
Source: City of Lemoore

FIGURE 6- 11: LEMOORE ROADWAY PROJECT LOCATIONS
Source: City of Lemoore

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 22

COUNTY OF KINGS (INCLUDING ARMONA, HOME GARDEN, STRATFORD, AND KETTLEMAN CITY) TABLE 6-6 : COUNTY OF KINGS TIER I FINANCIALLY CONSTRAINED PROJECTS County of Kings
Type Location Project Limits Description Estimated Cost Open to Traffic Roadway Projects Grangeville Blvd SR 43 to 6th Ave Reconstruct $ 2,500,000 2035 Roadway Projects Grangeville Blvd 5th Ave to 6th Ave Overlay $ 591,600 2035 Roadway Projects Grangeville Blvd 1st Ave to 2 1/2 Ave Overlay $ 382,800 2035 Roadway Projects Grangeville Blvd 2 1/2 Ave to Highline Canal Reconstruct $ 591,600 2035 Roadway Projects Grangeville Blvd Highline Canal to 5th Ave Overlay $ 382,800 2035 Roadway Projects 18th Ave Laurel Ave to Kansas Ave Overlay $ 500,000 2034 Roadway Projects 10th Ave Nevada Ave to Whitley Ave Overlay $ 1,020,000 2030 Roadway Projects 10th Ave Whitley Ave to Redding Ave Reconstruction $ 6,200,000 2026 Roadway Projects 10th Ave Seattle Ave to Utica Ave Seal Coat $ 784,800 2026 Roadway Projects 14th Ave Jersey Ave to Kansas Ave Overlay $ 534,000 2030 Roadway Projects Excelsior Ave SR 41 to 22nd Ave Overlay $ 774,000 2030 Roadway Projects Excelsior Ave SR 43 to 6th Ave Reconstruct 1 mile $ 1,521,600 2027 Roadway Projects Laurel Ave Avenal Cutoff Rd to SR 41 Overlay $ 1,412,400 2029 Roadway Projects Nevada Ave Avenal Cutoff Rd to SR 41 Overlay $ 1,632,000 2030 Roadway Projects Avenal Cutoff Rd 29th Ave to CA Aqueduct Reconstruction $ 5,800,000 2026

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 23 Roadway Projects 9th Ave SR 198 to Houston Ave Overlay $ 261,600 2029 Roadway Projects Utica Ave 11th Ave to 16th Ave Overlay $ 1,082,400 2030 Roadway Projects 6th Ave Utica Ave to Virginia Ave Overlay $ 682,800 2030 Roadway Projects 6th Ave Virginia Ave to Xavier Ave Overlay $ 774,000 2030 Roadway Projects 6th Ave Kern County Xavier Ave Overlay $ 886,800 2031 Roadway Projects Virginia Ave 4th Ave to 6th Ave Overlay $ 1,020,000 2035 Roadway Projects Utica Ave 16th Ave to 20th Ave Overlay $ 968,400 2031 Roadway Projects Utica Ave 6th Ave to 11th Ave Overlay $ 1,350,000 2032 Active
Transportation
Projects
6th Avenue Burris Park Dr. to Flint Ave Class III with stripe $ 56,400 2035 Active
Transportation
Projects
10th Avenue Houston Ave. to Kansas Ave Class III with stripe $ 72,000 2035 Active
Transportation
Projects
10th Avenue Nevada Ave to Whitney Ave Class III with stripe $ 33,600 2035 Active
Transportation
Projects
10 1/2 Avenue Kansas Ave to Nevada Ave. Class III with stripe $ 60,000 2035 Active
Transportation
Projects
12 3/4 Avenue Fresno County Line to Excelsior Ave. Class III with stripe $ 18,000 2035 Active
Transportation
Projects
18th Avenue Lemoore City Limit to Jackson Ave Class II $ 38,400 2035 Active
Transportation
Projects
Fargo Avenue 14th Ave to BN Santa Fe RR / Hanford
city limit Class III with stripe $ 30,000 2035
Active
Transportation
Projects
Flint Avenue 18th Ave to 6th Ave Class III with stripe $ 144,000 2035

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 24 Active
Transportation
Projects
Jackson Avenue Avenal Cutoff Rd. to 18th Ave Class III with stripe $ 60,000 2035 Active
Transportation
Projects
Nevada Avenue Avenal Cutoff Rd. to Hwy 41 Class III with stripe $ 88,800 2035 Active
Transportation
Projects
Whitley Avenue 10th Ave. to 7th Ave. / Corcoran city
limit Class III with stripe $ 36,000 2035
Unincorporated
Kings County Priority
Pedestrian Project -
Armona
14th Ave to Front St Sidewalks along 14th Avenue and Front Street Preliminary Concept Planning $ 25,000 2035 Unincorporated
Kings County Priority
Pedestrian Project -
Armona
14th Ave to North of Hwy
198
New or restriped crosswalks and
crossing signs along 14th Avenue north
of Highway 198 and near schools
Preliminary Concept Planning $ 25,000 2035
Unincorporated
Kings County Priority
Pedestrian Project -
Armona
Ambrose/C Streets or at
Railroad Avenue/D Street
Pedestrian crossings across the railroad
ROW at Ambrose/C Streets or at
Railroad Avenue/D Street
Preliminary Concept Planning $ 25,000 2035
Unincorporated
Kings County Priority
Pedestrian Project -
Armona
East of 14th Ave to North of
Front St
Footpaths in new developments east of
14th Avenue and north of Front Street Preliminary Concept Planning $ 25,000 2035 Unincorporated
Kings County Priority
Pedestrian Project -
Armona
Armona North to Front Street
Cut-throughs from cul-de-sacs in the
Armona North subdivision onto Front
Street
Preliminary Concept Planning $ 25,000 2035
Unincorporated
Kings County Priority
Pedestrian Project -
Armona
Front St to W. Hanford Multi-use path from Front Street to west Hanford Preliminary Concept Planning $ 25,000 2035 Unincorporated
Kings County Priority
Pedestrian Project -
Home Garden
Home Garden Sidewalks and crosswalks along the
major roads Preliminary Concept Planning $ 25,000 2035

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 25 Unincorporated
Kings County Priority
Pedestrian Project -
Home Garden
Home Garden Multi-use paths in new developments in
the Northwest Growth Area Preliminary Concept Planning $ 25,000 2035 Unincorporated
Kings County Priority
Pedestrian Project -
Home Garden
10th/Home Avenues Traffic-calming design for the
intersection of 10th/Home Avenues Preliminary Concept Planning $ 25,000 2035 Unincorporated
Kings County Priority
Pedestrian Project -
Kettleman City
Kettleman City Sidewalks along the major roads in the
residential area Preliminary Concept Planning $ 25,000 2035 Unincorporated
Kings County Priority
Pedestrian Project -
Kettleman City
Ninth St
Multi-use path south of Ninth Street
between the residential and highway
commercial areas
Preliminary Concept Planning $ 25,000 2035
Unincorporated
Kings County Priority
Pedestrian Project -
Stratford
Stratford Sidewalks along the major roads Preliminary Concept Planning $ 25,000 2035 Unincorporated
Kings County Priority
Pedestrian Project -
Stratford
Stratford Multi-use path along 20 ½ Avenue south
of 6th Street Preliminary Concept Planning $ 25,000 2035

Note: Excludes SHOPP, HSIP and CMAQ Projects
Source: County of Kings

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 26

FIGURE 6- 12: COST BREAKDOWN BY PROJECT TYPE, COUNTY OF KINGS Source: County of Kings

FIGURE 6- 13: COUNTY OF KINGS ROADWAY PROJECT LOCATIONS Note that only projects in unincorporated areas shown. Pavement Rehabilitation includes chip seal, overlay, and reconstruction. Source: County of Kings

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 27

KINGS COUNTY AREA PUBLIC TRANSIT AGENCY (KCAPTA )
TABLE 6-7 : KCAPTA TIER I FINANCIALLY CONSTRAINED PROJECTS KCAPTA
Type Location Project Limits Description Estimated Cost Open to Traffic KART Capital Projects KART Fleet Transit Capital Program Replace CAD/AVL System on Fixed
Route Buses
$1,000,000 2027
KART Capital Projects KART Fleet Transit Capital Program Purchase Zero- Emission Buses
(15)
$22,500,000 2030
KART Capital Projects KART Fleet Transit Capital Program Bus Expansion Zero-Emission
(4)
$4,000,000 2028
KART Capital Projects New KART
Intermodal
Station
Transit Capital Program Construct Zero-
Emission Bus
Fueling Station
$10,000,000 2030
KART Capital Projects New KART
Intermodal
Station
Transit Capital Program Purchase
Equipment
needed for
Maintenance of
Transit Center
$150,000 2026
KART Capital Projects KART Fleet Transit Capital Program Replace Scrubber $10,101 2026 KART Capital Projects KART Fleet Transit Capital Program Replace A/C Recovery
Machine
$7,000 2026
KART Capital Projects KART Fleet Transit Capital Program Replace Tire Changer with Lift
$16,000 2026

Source: KCAPTA

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 28

FIGURE 6- 14: COST BREAKDOWN BY PROJECT TYPE, KCAPTA

CALTRANS S TATE HIGHWAY OPERATION AND P ROTECTION PROGRAM Short-range state system projects are presented under several programs, including the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP). Eligible interregional road system routes and intercity rail routes for the Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP) under the STIP program are identified in Sections 164.10 through 164.20 of the Streets and Highways Code. Within Kings County, Interstate 5 and State Highways 41 and 198 are specified as eligible routes, along with the Gold Runner intercity rail service. These routes are also categorized as high emphasis routes, focus routes, and gateways, which should be considered a priority for programming improvements in the STIP. Project improvements to meet the concepts of the Strategic Plan for each route are included in the short - and long-range highway plans. Table 6-8 shows SHOPP program improvements in the County.

TABLE 6-8 : KINGS COUNTY SHOPP PROJECT LIST
State
Route Post Miles Location Main Project Type Programmed
Year Cost ($K)
41 28.400/R39.800
Near Stratford, from
Nevada Avenue to
Route 198.

Environmental
mitigation for
revegetation and
monitoring for
pavement
rehabilitation project
0W820.
2025/26 $791
198 R14.800/R21.500
In and near Hanford,
from 14th Avenue to

0.5 mile east of Route
43 Rehabilitate
pavement, and bridge
soffit and deck, and
upgrade complete
streets features,
guardrail and Traffic
Management System
(TMS) elements.
2025/26

2027/28
$3,000

$100

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 29 State
Route Post Miles Location Main Project Type Programmed
Year Cost ($K)
41 11.970/R48.200
In and near Kettleman
City, from 0.3 mile
north of Utica Avenue to
the Fresno County line;
also on Route 33, 43,
198, and 269 at various
locations.

Rehabilitate drainage
systems. Project will
address 93 drainage
system(s).
2025/26

2027/28
$1,750

$11,985
41 33/33.01
In the unincorporated
community of Stratford,
in Kings County, at the
intersection of SR 41
and Laurel Ave./Main
St.

Stratford Roundabout 2028/29 $5,450
5 16.2/26.7
Near Avenal from 0.4
mi south of Route 5/41
Separation to Fresno
County Line.

Kettleman I-5 CAPM 2030/31 $38,700
198 5/12.11
In Kings County from
Avenal Cut off OC to
14th Ave. under
crossing.

Lemoore 198 CAPM 2031/32 $29,000
269 0/5.615 Near Avenal, on SR 263
from I-5 to SR 33
SHOPP Pavement
Project 2033/34 $9,327
Source: Caltrans SHOPP Project List 2026/2027 through 2033/2034

CALTRANS H IGHWAY SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a federal program that is distributed by State transportation agencies (Caltrans). The program focuses on highway improvements that reduce fatalities and serious injuries on public roads. HSIP projects are identified based on crash frequency, potential, and crash rates. Table 6-9 lists HSIP projects within Kings County by jurisdiction. Note that shaded rows indicate that projects were previously included in the jurisdictions project lists, however project costs were not double counted.

TABLE 6-9 : KINGS COUNTY HSIP PROJECT LIST
Jurisdiction Location Description HSIP Cycle Project Cost Corcoran Intersection of Whitley Ave
and Pickerell Ave.

Install pedestrian
crossing at an
uncontrolled intersection
with enhanced safety
features.

Cycle 11 $250,000
Corcoran Plymouth Avenue near 4th
Avenue.

Upgrade existing
guardrails and end
treatments.

Cycle 11 $255,100

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 30 Jurisdiction Location Description HSIP Cycle Project Cost Kings County
Intersections: Excelsior
Avenue and 13 1/4th
Avenue, Excelsior Avenue
and 11th Avenue,
Grangeville Avenue and
7th Avenue, Idaho Avenue
and 17th Avenue, Jersey
Avenue and 19th Avenue,
and Jackson Avenue and
14th Avenue.

Install left-turn lane;
upgrade intersection
pavement markings;
install flashing beacons
at stop-controlled
intersections; install
flashing beacons as
advance warning.

Cycle 11 $552,900
Avenal The intersection of San
Joaquin St and Park Ave.

Upgrade pedestrian
crossing with rectangular
rapid flashing beacons
(RRFBs), curb
extensions, traffic signs,
stripes and pavement
markings.

Cycle 12 $350,000
Avenal
Along First Avenue from
Kings Street to Reef-
Sunset Middle School.

Install buffered Class II
bicycle lanes. Cycle 12 $350,000
Avenal
On Avenal Cutoff Road
approximately 100 feet
southwest of the California
Aqueduct.

Upgrade existing
guardrails and end
treatments.

Cycle 12 $600,000
Corcoran The intersection of Bainum
Avenue and Letts Avenue.

Upgrade pedestrian
crossing at uncontrolled
intersection with
enhanced safety features
including flashing
beacons and curb
extensions.

Cycle 12 $350,000
Corcoran Paris Avenue/Plymouth
Avenue.

Upgrade existing
guardrails and end
treatments.

Cycle 12 $510,000
Lemoore The intersection of 19th
Ave and Freedom Dr.

Upgrade pedestrian
crossing with enhanced
safety features including
in-roadway warning
lights, bulb-outs, signs,
stripes and pavement
markings.

Cycle 12 $350,000
Lemoore Cedar Lane from Bluejay
Avenue to Lum Drive.

Install buffered Class II
bicycle lanes. Cycle 12 $350,000
Source: HSIP Cycle 11 and 12 Project Lists, Caltrans.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 31

CONGESTION MITIGATION AND AIR QUALITY (CMAQ) PROGRAM
The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program prioritizes cost -effective methods of reducing airborne pollutants. Table 6-10 shows CMAQ projects programmed for the next 4 years.

Note that except for the KCAPTA park -and-ride project, these funds were not included in the local agency lists above.

TABLE 6- 10: CMAQ PROJECTS
Jurisdiction Description Programmed
Year Cost ($)
Various
Agencies
Scope: Projects are consistent with 40
CFR Part 93.126 Exempt Tables 2 and
Table 3 categories - Bicycle and
pedestrian facilities (both motorized
and Non-motorized)
25/26-
29/30 $7,555,601
Various
Agencies
Scope: Projects are consistent with 40
CFR Part 93.126 Exempt Table 3
categories - Intersection Signalization
Projects
25/26-
26/27 $1,550,000
Source: KCAG

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 32

MAJOR CHANGES TO TRANSPORTATION IN KINGS COUNTY

PUBLIC TRANSIT
Major changes to transportation in Kings County are in its public transit system. Having outgrown its former bus station, KCAPTA recently completed the construction of a new KART Transit Center in Hanford. The location is shown in Figure 6-15.

FIGURE 6- 15: NEW KART HANFORD BUS STATION LOCATION
Source: KART Station Site Selection Study

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 33

THE FUTURE OF RAIL SERVICE IN KINGS COUNTY
California State Rail Plan
The State of California Department of Transportation Division of Rail has issued its “2024 California State Rail Plan”. This Plan developed and implemented a statewide rail blueprint to guide future planning and investment decisions in the near and long term.

Some key objectives of proposed route improvements identified for the Gold Runner Route include:
• Connections to High Speed Rail in Merced
• Additional regional service to enhance High Speed Rail connections • Increased passenger train frequencies
Cross Valley Rail Corridor Plan
In 2016, the Tulare County Association of Governments (TCAG), building off prior regional planning efforts, utilized the High Speed Rail (HSR) Authority’s Station Area Partnership Program to develop the Cross Valley Rail Corridor Plan. That work, done in partnership with KCAG and other regional partners, is a long -term vision for connectivity and transit -oriented development in several cities along the Cross Valley Corridor. The Plan envisions improved intercity bus service and ultimately passenger rail service along an existing freight railroad, connecting cities between Huron, in Fresno County, and Porterville, in Tulare County. The service would then provide a connection for communities along this route to the proposed Kings/Tulare HSR in Hanford.

The Cross Valley Rail Corridor Plan identifies potential sites and other planning accommodations for passenger rail service, including walkable, mixed- use (residential and commercial uses developed together) communities with easy access to public transit facilities.

South of Merced Integration Study
After consideration of future high speed rail service, the proposed future route of the Gold Runner (formerly San Joaquins) will terminate in Merced, where passengers will transfer to the HSR to Bakersfield. KCAPTA and KCAG have worked in consultation with other governments and governing bodies in the region to develop an updated plan for future services.

Consultation between KCAG, KCAPTA, and other regional governing bodies focused on three objectives: bus connectivity from Corcoran, Hanford, and Wasco to rail service after the loss of the Gold Runner Service, integrating and assisting in implementation of the Cross Valley Rail, and finding complementary regional uses for existing BNSF slots that would no longer be used by the Gold Runners. A graphic of the bus network is available in Chapter 4.

The plan formalizes regional commitments to connectivity via multiple modes, even after the loss of rail service to downtown Hanford and Corcoran.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNIT IES STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 6- 34

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

ALTERNATIVE FUELS/ELECTRIC VEHICLE FACILITIES
In 2020, KCAG led an effort to create an Electric Vehicle Readiness Plan, assessing the ability of jurisdictions to create Electric Vehicle (EV) infrastructure within their boundaries. Kings County now hosts one of the world’s largest Tesla supercharger facilities, located on both sides of I -5 south of Kettleman City. Local jurisdictions are advancing plans to build additional EV chargers, and growth of charger availability in the region is expected to increase rapidly in the near future.

In specific efforts, the City of Avenal is installing three EV chargers at City Hall using CMAQ funds and the City of Corcoran has won a grant to examine implementing EV charging citywide. The $320,479 grant, under the Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant program, will enable the city to better scope the technical details and facility needs for EVs in Corcoran. In 2024, KCAG completed the Zero Emission Vehicle Rollout and Implementation Plan for both KCAPTA and City of Corcoran to determine the appropriate and most efficient zero emission infrastructure system for each operator.

INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) is the application of advanced information processing, communications, vehicle sensing, and traffic control technologies to the surface transportation system. The objective of ITS is to promote more efficient use of the existing highway and transportation network, increase safety and mobility, and decrease the environmental impacts of congestion.

The impact of the pandemic has shown the capacity for increased work-from-home. Kings County is following the expansion of broadband in the State closely, particularly the open -source middle-mile broadband program of SB 156, which expects to lay 79 miles of fiber in Kings County. Expanding service in Kings County will decrease VMT by expanding work-from-home options and improving the ability of the county to deploy ITS interventions.

CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER PLANS
To the maximum extent practicable, this RTP/SCS is consistent with other planning documents produced by KCAG, including the STIP, ITIP, RTIP, and other financial documents.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7-1 CHAPTER 7 :

SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY

INTRODUCTION

LEGISLATION
California Senate Bill 375, the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008, requires Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), including the Kings County Association of Governments (KCAG), to prepare a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) as an integrated component of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The purpose of the SCS is to coordinate transportation, land use, and housing planning in a manner that supports reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks.

Assembly Bill 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, established the State’s initial framework for reducing statewide GHG emissions. Senate Bill 32, adopted in 2016, strengthened this framework by requiring statewide GHG emissions to be reduced to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. More recently, the 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality identifies a pathway for California to achieve carbon neutrality and reduce anthropogenic GHG emissions by 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2045, consistent with Assembly Bill 1279. Transportation remains the largest source of statewide GHG emissions, accounting for roughly 40 percent of California’s total emissions in recent years. However, additional state and local actions are needed to achieve the transportation system reductions necessary to meet our climate goals, which is approximately 25 percent reduction in statewide per capita GHG emissions by 2035 relative to 2005. The per capita GHG emissions reduction target for Kings County is currently 13% by 2035.

To help achieve necessary reductions from transportation sector, AB 32 scoping plan relies on regional planning as required by SB 375, which has three major components: 1) to use the regional transportation planning process to help achieve AB 32 goals; 2) to use CEQA streamlining as an incentive to encourage residential projects which help achieve AB 32 goals to reduce GHG; and 3) to coordinate the regional housing needs allocation process with the regional transportation planning process. Although SB 375 requires consideration of land uses, transportation, and housing in concert, SB 375 does not infringe on the land use jurisdiction of the cities and counties.

SB 150 (Allen, Chapter 646, Statutes of 2017) requires the California Air Resources Board to prepare a progress report every four years evaluating implementation of SB 375. This progress report uses data-supported metrics to assess progress on transportation, housing, and land use strategies, identifies best practices and challenges to achieving greater reductions, and discusses the impact of State policies and funding.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7-2 Building on the existing regional transportation planning landscape, SB 375 requires MPOs to develop a “Sustainable Communities Strategy” incorporated to the regional transportation plan that demonstrates how the region will meet the greenhouse gas emissio n targets by integrating transportation, land use and housing in the planning process. Specifically, SB 375 requires that the SCS:
• Identify the general location of uses, residential densities, and building intensities within the region;
• Identify areas within the region sufficient to house all the population of the region, including all economic segments of the population, over the course of the planning period of the regional transportation plan;
• Identify areas within the region sufficient to house an eight- year projection of the regional housing need for the region;
• Identify a transportation network to service the transportation needs of the region; • Gather and consider the best practically available scientific information regarding resource areas and farmland in the region;
• Set forth a forecasted development pattern for the region, which, when integrated with the transportation network, and other transportation measures and policies, will reduce greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles and light trucks to achieve, if there is a feasible way to do so, the greenhouse gas emissions reductions target approved by the state board; and • Quantify the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions projected to be achieved by the SCS and, if the SCS does not achieve the targeted reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, set forth the difference between the amount that the SCS would reduce greenhouse ga s emissions and the target for the region.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7-3

BACKGROUND
Kings County is comprised of four incorporated cities
Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford and Lemoore, and four
unincorporated communities Armona, Home Garden,
Kettleman City, and Stratford . While KCAG is a
metropolitan planning organization, having one urbanized area with a population of 50,000 or more, Kings County is a predominantly rural, agriculture-based County, with the highest percentage of land enrolled in the protected farm- lands programs in California. The county covers 1,391 square miles with more than 90 percent of all land devoted to agricultural uses. The Kings County population is 153,754. The county and four cities have coincidental restrictions on growth outside the primary urban boundaries of the cities.

In developing the 2026 RTP/SCS, KCAG and the RTP Stakeholder Advisory Group considered the following:
• land use decisions of our local agencies as the foundation for sustainable development in our region;
• the direction of SB 375 to consider farmland transportation investments and farm -to-market transportation needs; and
• the recommendations of the reports noted above in developing the recommended scenarios through the public, our respective elected officials, and cities and county.

During the development of the SCS, KCAG reviewed the general plans with its member agencies on policy direction and land use patterns, which serve as the foundation for transportation planning and establishing the latest planning assumptions (LPA) for RTP/SCS update s. A consistent theme throughout all the general plans is the primary goal of preserving farmland through minimizing its conversion to residential or even commercial development. Other consistent themes particularly among cities were: incentivizing infill development; providing amenities such as shopping and transit access; preserving open spaces near housing, particularly high density developments; encouragement of using a good housing mix with emphasis on higher density residential development near existing employment centers, commercial development and parks; and connectivity of neighborhoods to services and facilities.

BLUEPRINT
The multi-jurisdictional Kings County Blueprint effort was initiated in September of 2005, when the KCAG Commission agreed to move forward with a joint grant application with the seven Councils of Governments (COGs) in the San Joaquin Valley . The grant was successfully awarded, and an unprecedented planning effort began. With both a regional Valleywide perspective and a local county focus, the Blueprint was the first significant land use planning effort to consider the future vision and important quality of life characteristics for 2050.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7-4 The Kings County Blueprint was spearheaded by KCAG staff who worked closely with the Cities of Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, and Lemoore and the County of Kings. Naval Air Station (NAS) Lemoore also became a close partner in the lat ter part of the effort. The Kings County Blueprint Principles were developed by planners from the member agencies and NAS Lemoore that built upon and reflect the values of Kings County residents. The principles were adopted by the KCAG Commission on August 27, 2008 and include the following:

1. The cities and the County of Kings will retain local land use authority.

2. Direct future growth to existing urbanized areas within Kings County to ensure orderly and sufficient provision of services and infrastructure.

3. Concentrate urban growth within the Blueprint Urban Growth Boundaries for cities and Community Service Districts to minimize outward expansion into important farmlands.

4. Preservation of agricultural lands surrounding cities and communities shall serve as open space buffers that separate and maintain the individual identities and uniqueness of the cities and communities within Kings County.

5. Balance the countywide need for urban growth and economic development with reinforced preservation of the County’s prioritized agricultural resources.

6. Enhance economic development connectivity through transportation highway infrastructure improvements that focus on expanding State Route 198 and State Route 43 to four lanes through Kings County.

7. Improve air quality through enhanced commuter connectivity by implementing alternative transportation modes and enhancing existing modes and supporting the continuation of Amtrak passenger rail service through Kings County on the existing BNSF alignment.

8. Create a range of housing alternatives and minimum and maximum densities that meet the changing needs of Kings County residents.

9. Protect the many natural resources and sensitive environmental habitats, such as the Kings River corridor and wetlands, from urban encroachment.

10. Provide for an encroachment -free operating environment for Naval Air Station Lemoore in coordination with the City of Lemoore and the County of Kings.

The Kings region will continue to benefit from the proactive and smart growth planning policies of our member agencies and collaborative planning efforts such as the Kings County Blueprint.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7-5

NAVAL AIR STATION LEMOORE JOINT LAND USE STUDY
The Naval Air Station Lemoore Joint Land Use
Study (JLUS) is another example of a multi-
jurisdictional planning collaboration in the Kings
region. The JLUS grant program encourages
cooperative land use planning between military
installations and the adjacent communities so that
future community growth and development are
compatible with the training and operational
missions of the installation . The initial JLUS
planning effort focused primarily on policies and
recommendations and entailed examin ing the existing and future planned land uses in the area surrounding Naval Air Station Lemoore, including the military training area. Kings County Association of Governments (KCAG) was the sponsor of the initial JLUS study participating on behalf of the City of Lemoore and the Counties of Fresno and Kings. KCAG worked in close partnership with the Naval Air Station Lemoore and was responsible for the leadership, coordination, and management of the overall grant as provided by the Department of Defense Office of Economic Adjustment. KCAG will again be a key stakeholder during the development of the JLUS update.

The Lemoore Naval Air Station (LNAS) and the City of Lemoore are conducting an Installation Readiness Study to inform the development of risk -based strategies and action plans, which may lead to further analysis and design solutions for shared infrastructure that serve LNAS and surrounding communities. A cornerstone of the project is the comprehensive NAS Lemoore Installation Readiness Review, analyzing vital infrastructure components of water availability, electrical infrastructure, wastewater infrastructure, and communications infrastructure.

REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION
SB 375 reinforces the linkage between Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) and the RTP process to better integrate housing, land use, and transportation planning . The regional housing need projection determination (RHND) was received from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) during its 6th cycle. Based on the allocation determination by HCD and the subsequent consultation process, KCAG developed the RHNA Methodology and prepared the 2023 Kings County Regional Housing Need Assessment Plan to allocate each jurisdiction’s fair share of new housing units that are projected to be needed from June 30, 2023 and ending on January 31, 2032. Given that the Housing Element cycle is eight years, the Kings County RHNA Plan is applicable to this 2026 RTP/SCS and the following 2030 RTP/SCS update cycle.

SB 375 requires the SCS to "identify areas within the region sufficient to house an eight -year projection of the regional housing need for the region". SB 375 also requires consistency between the RHNA and the development pattern of the SCS. The Kings County RHNA and SCS are consistent in both development patterns and quantity of housing units. The two land use scenarios of the SCS meet this requirement and supplies enough residential housing capacity by jurisdiction to meet the housing need of 9,429 units projected for the June 30, 2023 through January 31, 2032 period for the KCAG region.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7-6 Available housing capacity in each KCAG member jurisdiction in the SCS preferred scenario will be adequate to accommodate each jurisdiction’s respective share of housing need to be allocated by KCAG’s proposed RHNA methodology. Available residential capacity in each jurisdiction will therefore be sufficient to accommodate at minimum that jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need and KCAG’s RHNA allocation plan allocates housing units within the region consistent with the development pattern of the SCS. Table 7-1 shows the identified housing need by jurisdiction, including very low- and low-income categories, in the RHND provided by HCD.

TABLE 7-1 : REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS DETERMINATION

INCOME CATEGORY PERCENT TOTAL HOUSING
VERY LOW 23.9% 2,257
LOW 17.7% 1,672
MODERATE 18.6% 1,753
ABOVE MODERATE 39.7% 3,747
TOTAL 100% 9,429
Source: Cycle 6 HCD RHNA Targets

PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
SB 375 REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
SB 375 requires the preparation of a public participation plan specifically for the SCS outreach prior to the development of the SCS . This requirement may be met by amending the existing federally required participation plan or by creating a supplemental participation plan. KCAG chose to adopt a supplemental document to the existing participation plan .The most recent version of the Supplemental Public Participation Plan for the 2026 RTP/SCS was adopted by the KCAG Transportation Policy Committee on October 22, 2025.

The 2026 Supplemental PPP established strategies for public outreach to encourage the active participation of a broad range of stakeholder groups in the planning process including, but not limited to, affordable housing advocates, transportation advocates, neighborhood and community groups, environmental advocates, representatives from the home building industry, broad -based business organizations, landowners, commercial property interests, all population sectors, and homeowner associations. These stakeholder groups were not only solicited to participate in the 2026 RTP/SCS update public workshops but were the foundation for the membership of the RTP Stakeholder Advisory Group.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7-7 SB 375 requires counties with a population of 500,000 or more to hold at least three workshops.

Though our population is substantially smaller, KCAG held two in-person public workshops during the first phase of the outreach effort and an additional two workshops following the development of proposed SCS scenarios in the cities of Avenal and Hanford. Spanish interpretation services were provided at each workshop.

Public hearings will be held at two KCAG Commission meetings prior to adoption . These RTP/SCS hearings will be conducted on July 22, 2026 and August 26, 2026.

TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
The KCAG Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) membership consists of: county and city public works and planning directors, city managers, county administrative officer, Caltrans District 6 staff, a Kings County Area Public Transit Agency (KCAPTA) representative, a Lemoore NAS representative, a San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District representative, a Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe representative, Kings County Environmental Health Department representative, and a California Highway Patrol representative. All meetings are open to the public and provide an opportunity for public comment.

The TAC was provided regular updates on the progress of the outreach efforts with the general public and the RTP/SCS Stakeholder Advisory Group. The monthly TAC meeting ensured regular communication with local member agencies and other stakeholders that had questions and concerns raised during the RTP/SCS development process were addressed in time. The TAC provided valuable information regarding land use policies and insight into the local needs of KCAG member agencies to inform the RTP/SCS development as well as recommendations to the KCAG policy board for selection of the preferred SCS scenario.

STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY GROUP
KCAG formed a Stakeholder Advisory Group that included representatives from affordable housing advocates, transportation advocates, neighborhood and community groups, environmental advocates, home builder representatives, broad- based business organizations, landowners, commercial property interests, and homeowner associations . KCAG also invited representatives of other segments of the population of Kings County , such as the agricultural community, goods movement, Native American Tribe, senior citizens, bicyclists, economic development interests, public health, elected representatives (at the local, state, and federal level), education, and the Lemoore Naval Air Station to help develop the alternative scenarios for the RTP/SCS.

The role of the Stakeholder Advisory Group was to inform the entire RTP/SCS development process on SCS scenario development and selection . The Stakeholder Advisory Group also provide s recommendations to the KCAG policy board for selection of the preferred SCS scenario.

PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROGRAM
Public engagement was a key component of the 2026 RTP/SCS process. KCAG used a combination of in -person, online, and direct outreach methods to share information, gather feedback, and

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7-8 understand transportation priorities from residents, community members, partner agencies, and stakeholders across Kings County.

Goals
The public engagement process was guided by the following goals:
• Build awareness of the 2026 RTP/SCS and explain how the Plan will guide regional transportation investments and policy decisions.
• Provide meaningful opportunities for residents, stakeholders, and partner agencies to share input throughout the planning process.
• Reach community members through both traditional public meetings and informal pop-up events held in locations where people already gather.
• Provide online participation options for people who cannot attend in-person events. • Use public and stakeholder input to inform the development of the final RTP/SCS, including transportation priorities, policy direction, and investment strategies.

Engagement Approach
KCAG used a multi -pronged engagement approach to reach a broad cross -section of the Kings County community. This approach included both formal and informal participation opportunities. Public workshops provided a structured setting for sharing project information and gathering input, while pop- up events allowed the project team to meet residents at existing community events and have shorter, more casual conversations.

The online survey provided another way for people to participate in their own time.

Engagement was conducted in phases to support the
development of the RTP/SCS. Early outreach focused on
introducing the project, building awareness, and gathering input on existing transportation conditions, challenges, and priorities.

Later outreach focused on sharing draft concepts, confirming community priorities, and collecting feedback to help refine the final Plan. All in person engagement events included Spanish-speaking staff that were able to provide interpretation for those with Limited English Proficiency (LEP). All written materials including promotional materials, surveys, project cards, and the project website included Spanish translations.

OUTREACH ACTIVITIES COMPLETED
KCAG conducted the following outreach activities to support development of the 2026 RTP/SCS.

Project Website and Online Information
Project information was maintained by KCAG staff online at www.kings -regionalvision.com, which provided a central location for RTP/SCS materials, engagement opportunities, and project updates.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7-9 The project website included information about the purpose of the RTP/SCS, the planning process, upcoming events, and ways to provide feedback.

Website information included:
• Project overview and background
• RTP/SCS process and timeline
• Public workshop information
• Online survey link
• Project materials and resources
• Contact information for questions and comments

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 10 Online Survey
An online survey was developed to gather input
from residents and stakeholders on transportation
needs and priorities across Kings County. The
survey provided an opportunity for people to share
feedback even if they were unable to attend an in-
person event or workshop.

The survey was available from October 2025 to
April 2026 and received 104 responses. Surveys
were collected digitally through SurveyMonkey and
from community members at pop-up events. The
survey asked participants about their current
travel patterns and behaviors, potential
transportation improvements to meet their needs,
and opinions on roadway safety, and transit use.

Survey promotion included social media posts
through partner agencies and organizations,
emails to the community project list, direct outreach to the stakeholder group, and promotion at in- person events include pop-ups and workshops.

A summary of survey findings is provided in Appendix IX.

Pop-Up Events
Project staff held pop -up events throughout Kings County to share information about the RTP/SCS and gather input from community members. Pop-ups were held at existing community events and locations where residents were already gathering.

This approach helped reach people who may not typically attend public workshops or formal planning meetings.

At each pop-up event, project team members shared information about the RTP/SCS, answered questions, promoted the online survey, and gathered feedback on transportation needs and priorities. Materials included business cards with project information, flyers, and printed surveys.

Pop-up events were held at the following locations and times:
• April 22, 2026 from 4 – 7 p.m.: Earth Day Resource Fair, Hanford • April 23, 2026 from 4 – 6 p.m.: Tabling at KART Transit Center, Hanford • April 24, 2026 from 5 – 8 p.m.: Farmers and Artisan Market, Corcoran • May 1, 2026 from 8 – 10 a.m.: Tabling at KART Transit Center, Hanford

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 11 • May 1, 2026 from 4 – 9 p.m.: Old Timers Day, Avenal
• May 2, 2026 from 12 – 8 p.m.: Salsa Festival, Lemoore Public Workshops
KCAG hosted two rounds of public workshops to share
information about the RTP/SCS and gather input at key
points in the planning process. The first round introduced the RTP/SCS, provided background on regional transportation planning, and asked participants to share feedback on
existing transportation needs, challenges, and priorities in their communities. The second round shared updated project information and gathered feedback on proposed SCS
scenarios.

The workshops provided an opportunity for community members to ask questions, review project materials, and provide input through discussion, filling out the survey, and sharing notes on board exhibits with project information . Workshop feedback helped the project team better understand community priorities and refine the RTP/SCS. Workshops were held on the following dates and at the locations below.

• October 28, 2025 6 – 7:30 p.m., Avenal Theater,
233 East Kings Street, Avenal
• October 29, 2025 6 – 7:30 p.m., Training Room,
Administrative Offices, Hanford
• June 23, 2026 5:30 – 7 p.m., Avenal Theater,
233 East Kings Street, Avenal
• June 24, 2026 5:30 – 7 p.m., Transit Center,
Administrative Building, 210 East 7th Street, Hanford

Draft Plan Public Review
The Draft 2026 RTP/SCS was released for public review on July 13 , 2026 and made available for a 55-day public review and comment period. During this period, KCAG will invite residents, partner agencies, stakeholders, and interested members of the public to review the Draft Plan and provide comments before the RTP/SCS is finalized and considered for adoption. The Draft Plan was made available through KCAG’s website and KCAG’s interagency- consultation procedures. KCAG will also hold two public hearing(s)/meeting(s) during the Draft Plan review period to provide an overview of the Draft RTP/SCS, answer questions, and receive public comments.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 12

WHAT WE HEARD
Feedback received through the public engagement process was reviewed to identify common themes and priorities for the 2026 RTP/SCS. Input was gathered through the community survey, public workshops, pop-up events, and partner and stakeholder outreach. Overall, participants emphasized the need to maintain the existing transportation system, improve transit service, expand walking and biking options, address safety concerns, and strengthen connections to jobs, schools, services, and regional destinations. Key themes across all feedback sources include:
• Roadway maintenance and operations: Maintaining and repairing roads was one of the most frequently identified priorities. Participants raised concerns about pavement and roadway conditions, rail crossings, and the need for targeted roadway improvements in growing areas.

Comments also identified needs for improved striping, signal timing, intersection safety, and roadway widening where appropriate.
• Transit service and amenities: Transit was a major theme across survey responses and open- ended comments. Participants requested more routes and stops, more frequent service, later service, weekend/Sunday service, and better regional connections to destinations such as Visalia, Fresno, Tulare County, Fresno State, College of the Sequoias, and Coalinga. Transit stop amenities were also frequently mentioned, including the need for shelters, benches, lighting, shade, and clearer information when stops are moved, or service changes occur. • Walking, biking, and trails: Participants frequently identified the need for more connected sidewalks, bike lanes, trails, safe crossings, and lighting. These needs were especially noted near schools, parks, transit stops, downtown areas, rural roads, and neighborhoods where people may walk or bike out of necessity. Workshop participants identified active transportation needs in multiple communities, including Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, Home Garden, and other areas. • Safety for all users: Safety is a recurring theme across comments about roads, transit, walking, and biking. Participants identified concerns related to speeding, pedestrian visibility, unsafe crossings, bicycle safety, lighting, and personal safety at or near transit stops. Many comments focused on the need to make transportation safer for children, older adults, people with disabilities, transit riders, pedestrians, and bicyclists. • Regional connectivity and access: Participants emphasized the importance of transportation connections to jobs, schools, healthcare, shopping, and services. Survey responses identified the distance between housing, jobs, and services as a major transportation barrier. Comments also highlighted the need for stronger connections between smaller communities, rural areas, and larger regional destinations.
• Growth, sustainability, and emerging mobility: Participants generally support planning for growth in a way that improves access and reduces transportation impacts. Feedback also included support for reducing air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions through improved transit, active transportation, electric vehicle charging, clean vehicle technology, and other mobility strategies.

Workshop participants identified potential electromobility improvements in Corcoran and Avenal, including near Corcoran Community Park, the Corcoran Train Station, East Kings Street, Hydril Road, and the Avenal Sand Drags area.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 13 • SCS Scenarios: Feedback on the proposed scenarios during the second round of workshops was limited. T wo participants provided input, with o ne selecting Scenario B, which focused on residential infill, and one selected Scenario D, which maintained Scenario A land use assumptions while increasing investment in enhanced mobility strategies.

CONCLUSION
The most frequently mentioned priorities were road maintenance, improved transit service, expanded sidewalks and bike lanes, safer crossings and lighting, and stronger connections between communities and key destinations. Participants also emphasized the importance of considering rural communities, disadvantaged communities, and people who do not have reliable access to a car. This feedback helped confirm the need for a balanced transportation strategy that maintains the existing system while improving safety, mobility, access, and sustainability across Kings County.

MEMBER AGENCY COORDINATION
The SCS builds on existing land use plans from KCAG’s member agencies and as per SB 375, may not supersede local land use decisions. KCAG collaborated closely with member agencies to incorporate current and evolving land use plans into the SCS document. This included coordination with tribal lands via the Tachi Indian Tribe and federally controlled land at the Lemoore Naval Air Station. Public agencies were also invited to provide baseline planning and land use information to the RTP Stakeholder Working Group as previously noted and were given the opportunity to analyze how the recommendations of the public and Stakeholder Working Group fit with their general plans and would affect future land use decisions.

KCAG regularly consulted and coordinated with the Standing Committees and Boards throughout the entire SCS development process. The following list of Committees were actively engaged in the development of the RTP and SCS.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 14 KCAG Commission and Transportation Policy Committee (TPC) The Transportation Policy Committee (TPC) serves as the governing board for KCAG with final approving authority on policy decisions and all RTPA activities. The TPC is a committee of the KCAG Commission and composed of members of the regular KCAG Commission with the addition of the Director of the Caltrans District 6 representing the Director of Caltrans Headquarters.

KCAG Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) is comprised of members from the cities of Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, Lemoore, and the County of Kings, in addition to others . The primary responsibility of the TAC is to review all issues that KCAG will consider and to provide technical input to advise the Commissioners in making their decisions on a broad range of planning issues . The Committee includes county and city public works and planning directors, city managers, county administrative officer, Caltrans District 6 staff, a Kings County Area Public Transit Agency (KCAPTA) representative, a Lemoore NAS representative, a San Joaq uin Valley Air Pollution Control District representative, Kings County Public Health representative, and a Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe representative.

Social Services Transportation Advisory Council (SSTAC) The SSTAC is a statutorily created committee with specific responsibilities that include advising the TPC on transit needs issues of the elderly, persons with disabilities, and low -income citizens. The members of the SSTAC consist of representatives of social service providers and transit users from the needs group listed previously, as well as citizens who are interested in the transit planning process.

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE / SOCIAL EQUITY IN THE SCS
Setting
Kings County, as an agricultural area, consists of a mix of population types (with 12.4% senior citizen,

73.7% self-identified as minority, and 4 1.9% with a primary language other than English). The average annual income is more than 25% below the statewide median, with 14.4% of the population earning below the poverty line, and unemployment figures are nearly double that of the state level.

These conditions complicate the distribution of benefits and burdens of the transportation investments in Kings County.

Definition
Environmental Justice (EJ) is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. It is the identification and assessment of adverse effects of programs, policies, or activities on minority and low-income population groups.

KCAG’s goal is to ensure that all people, regardless of race, color, national origin or income, are protected from disproportionate negative or adverse impacts of transportation projects and that all populations share in the benefits of transportation improvements in Kings County. The emphasis on

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 15 EJ is intended to protect low -income and minority individuals across the Kings County region by identifying and addressing any disproportionately high and adverse effects of the Plan on minority and low-income populations (i.e., EJ communities).

A number of federal and state laws and regulations govern how EJ is incorporated into the 2026 RTP/SCS. These include:
• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination by recipients of federal funds on the basis of race, color or national origin and which ensures that no person is excluded from participation in or denied the benefits of federally funded programs. • Section 11135 of the California Government Code, which expands Title VI protections to prevent discrimination in state activities on the basis of sex, religion, ancestry, ethnic group identification, age, mental disability, physical disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, or sexual orientation.
• 2024 California Regional Transportation Plan Guidelines, which provide guidance for incorporating Title VI, environmental justice, social equity, meaningful public participation, and consultation with disadvantaged and underserved communities into the development and evaluation of an RTP/SCS.
• Federal metropolitan transportation-planning regulations, including 23 CFR Part 450, which requires MPOs to maintain an open and accessible public-participation process and to seek out and consider the needs of populations traditionally underserved by existing transportation systems, including low-income and minority households. • FTA Circular 4702.1B, which provides Title VI compliance guidance for recipients of Federal Transit Administration funding, including MPO requirements for Title VI programs, demographic analysis, public participation, language access, and the evaluation of transportation investments.

Based on federal and state requirements and guidance, KCAG has two primary responsibilities in addressing EJ while developing the 2026 RTP/SCS. First, KCAG must ensure there is equity in the distribution of potential benefits and burdens resulting from the proposed transportation investments identified in the Plan. Second, KCAG’s planning process itself must provide an equal opportunity for all segments of the population to provide input into the transportation planning process.

KCAG’s efforts to address EJ and provides results from three EJ specific performance measures, as well as a benefits and burdens analysis evaluating the equity of t he Plan’s decision-making and investment strategy. The Plan EJ benefits and burdens are compared against Scenario B (”Residential Infill Trend”). This chapter also provides an overview of the outreach efforts associated with the planning process for the 2026 RTP/SCS.

Assessing Equity: Performance Measures
To determine whether EJ Communities (i.e., low-income and minority populations) in Kings County have an equitable share in the 2026 RTP/SCS’s transportation investments and are not

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 16 disproportionately impacted by such investments, KCAG analyzes demographic and travel data from the transportation demand model. This analysis evaluates how EJ Communities are considered in the transportation investment strategies compared to non-EJ Communities. This analysis involves three key steps:

1. Collect socio-economic data on target populations

2. Identify and locate low‐income and minority populations (i.e., EJ communities or EJ areas)

3. Quantitatively assess the benefits and burdens of the transportation plan with respect to EJ communities
Basic socio-economic information for Kings County was collected from the Census Bureau. Specifically, data from the 2020-2024 American Community Survey (ACS) was gathered to establish racial, ethnic, and income-distribution patterns in the region. Census data offers the advantage of providing a diverse demographic profile at the census block level that roughly corresponds to the Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) used in the travel-demand forecasting model.

The Census Block Group, which is the
smallest level of geography for which
both racial/ethnic and income data are
available, was chosen as the
geographic unit of analysis. Census
Bureau definitions of racial and ethnic
populations were used to identify
minority status among persons living
in Kings County. Minority persons are
those who identify as Black or African
American, American Indian or Alaska
Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian or
Other Pacific Islander, some other
race, multiple races, or
Hispanic/Latino of any race . The ACS
estimates of median household
income were used to define “low -
income” populations for Kings County.

For the 2026 RTP/SCS, EJ areas are defined as those Census Block Groups that contained 60 percent or more of minority populations or had a median household income of $49,245 or less. These are Census Block Groups with slightly higher minority concentrations than the co untywide average (47 percent) or with households making 80 percent or less of the median household income for the county ($61,556). Census Block Groups with populations less than one person per acre were eliminated from the analysis. EJ and non-EJ Census Block Groups were then translated into the traffic analysis zones (TAZs), which represent the basic geographical unit of the travel demand model. All TAZs that were more than 50 percent covered by an identified EJ Census Block Group were included as EJ TAZs.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 17 To determine if the proposed plan investments unduly benefit or burden any one population under the Plan, three performance measures were developed to compare the social equity impacts expected by 2035 within EJ areas and non-EJ areas.

Percentage of Households in Disadvantaged Communities
An analysis of households found that the number of units in TAZs within disadvantaged communities was 37.5 percent using baseline conditions . Both land use scenarios developed for the SCS decreased the number of households within disadvantaged communities by half a percent to 37 percent.

Percentage of Low- Income Housing/Minority Population Within a Half -Mile of Major Regional Transit Center
For populations with limited financial, physical or other means, having convenient access to transit is critical. To analyze the equity of the Plan’s transit investments, a comparison of households with walking access (i.e., within one half- mile) to a transit stop in EJ areas versus non -EJ areas was prepared. Under 2035 conditions, the percent of EJ households able to access a major regional transit station, ranged from 5.48 percent to 5.58 percent in the future - an increase from the 5.26 percent baseline.

Percentage of Housing Within 500 feet of a Major Transportation Corridor Proximity to major transportation facilities
can increase a population’s exposure to
health-based air contaminants emitted from
motor vehicles, as well as from road dust. To
determine the proportion of EJ communities
that may be subject to these conditions, an
analysis was performed to compare the
percentage of the EJ households relative to
non-EJ households located within 500 feet of
a major transportation facility, defined as any
interstate or Caltrans . Given that well over
90% of the planned housing growth out to
2035 will be within the incorporated areas
versus unincorporated county, the percent of
EJ households within 500 feet of a major
transportation corridor will increase to 11.9
percent relative to 8.1% under baseline
conditions. This is not the result of new
roadway expenditures but more compact development patterns around existing infrastructure.

Benefits and Burdens Analysis
The 2026 RTP/SCS contains no capacity-increasing projects on state-owned highways or interstates.

The overwhelming majority of roadway projects within the county are for roadway repair and

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 18 rehabilitation. While in many cases these are not closing the gap between disadvantaged and well- off communities, they do not add to the environmental burden faced by EJ communities. However, the plan makes significant funding available likely to benefit lower-income and minority communities.

Significant funding is going towards active transportation, which is more likely to assist low -income and minority communities in safer alternatives for short -distance travel. In addition, KCAPTA is investing in additional service and has worked to bring Míocars to the community, better connecting the community and giving lower -income residents additional mobility opportunities through transit and electric vehicle carsharing.

Equity and Outreach
For our purposes, environmental justice refers to equity in the distribution of benefits and costs arising from transportation policies, programs and projects included in the 2026 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and the 2025 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP).

The KCAG Public Participation Plan (PPP), which was adopted in December 2011, includes the practices of environmental justice. A Supplemental PPP was developed and adopted on October 22, 2025 for the 2026 RTP/SCS efforts. The PPPs include enhanced outreach approaches to Environmental Justice populations to meet state and federal principles and to eliminate participation barriers to active participation in all populations.

KCAG’s transportation decision making process has an inclusive approach to consider the human environment and the adverse impacts that transportation projects may have. This agency also looks at safety and mobility, which are key elements in achieving environmental justice.

The environmental justice impacts analyzed include: human health and safety, economic development, society and culture, and natural environment. The projects and programs included in the RTP and FTIP will not have a disproportionately adverse effect on the low -income or minority populations of Kings County.

In response to Title VI and Environmental Justice requirements, KCAG has placed an increased emphasis on reaching out to and soliciting input from the historically underserved populations in Kings County (i.e., low-income, minority, Native American, elderly, and persons with disabilities), as detailed in the Environmental Justice chapter of this document.

CONCLUSION
The region-wide EJ/Equity analysis, based on the three identified performance measures, indicates that the Plan will not have a disproportionate negative impact on the identified EJ communities. The plan also makes available funding to complete bicycle and pedestrian networks, expand transit service, and expand regional electric carsharing. These improvements are highly likely to improve mobility for EJ communities and lower overall emissions in the County. In addition, the planning and outreach process applied during the development of the 2026 RTP/SCS provided disadvantaged communities with equal and ample access to provide input and participate in the plan’s development.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 19

SCS IMPLEMENTATION, RECENT PROGRESS, AND ACHIEVEMENT
California has established ambitious climate change goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 and 80% under 1990 levels by 2050. KCAG has been collaborating with local agencies to ensure that the region is continuing to work toward the State’s 2030 and 2050 climate change goals by encouraging land use and transportation decisions that minimize greenhouse gas emissions. The adopted scenario within the 2022 RTP/SCS incorporated land use policies from recently updated general plans and transportation policies that were included in the Transit Development Plan (TDP). KCAG built upon these ongoing efforts in the 2026 RTP/SCS. The adopted per capita GHG emission reduction target for KCAG is 13% for 2035.

Many of the projects listed in the 2022 RTP/SCS have been successfully completed or are currently in the process of implementation. The following projects highlight the efforts that Kings County is pursuing as part of the SCS implementation that clearly demonstrates how state visions and goals are realized on a local and regional level.

KART SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS
Fixed Route Service and Planning
KCAPTA has continued to improve KART fixed -route
service through route planning, service coordination, and future expansion planning. The 2022 Hanford Fixed Route Schedule Study evaluated how KART routes could be
updated following relocation of the Hanford Transit
Center. The study recommended more direct and bi -
directional routes, improved route spacing, fewer one-way loops, and continued timed transfers to make the system easier to use and more efficient.

Future Service Expansion
KCAPTA and the City of Hanford are
coordinating on improvements along East
Lacey Boulevard to support future fixed -
route service. The corridor currently
lacks some of the sidewalks, bus stops,
and ADA -accessible infrastructure
needed for reliable transit service.

Planned corridor improvements will help
prepare the area for future KART service
while improving pedestrian, bicycle, and
transit access.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 20 Operations Improvements
KART has implemented technology and facility improvements to improve the rider experience and support more reliable operations. Riders can access real -time bus arrival information through the KART app, text messaging, route lookups, and stop -based arrival tools. The new Hanford Transit Center also improves transfers, provides better access to regional services, and supports future service growth.

New Mobility Services
KART continues to provide important regional connections between Hanford, Lemoore, Avenal, Corcoran, Laton, Visalia, Fresno, and Naval Air Station Lemoore. These services connect residents to jobs, schools, medical services, shopping, and regional transportation options, including Amtrak and other transit providers.

KART Vanpools
KCAPTA began operating a new vanpool program in Kings County in 2020 through non -exclusive operating contracts. The program provides a shared commute option for workers and helps reduce single-occupant vehicle trips, particularly for longer regional commutes. In 2025, 50 vehicles were in operation with annual revenue miles of 1,031,747, revenue hours of 20,852, and annual ridership of 192,594. Total passenger miles trips traveled for 2025 were 6,327,444. As of the FY 2026– 27 KCAG Overall Work Program, the KCAPTA Vanpool Program includes 38 operating vans and has generated more than $2 million in additional federal transit funding through annual FTA apportionments. The program supports KART’s broader role in improving regional mobility, expanding commute choices, and maintaining farebox revenue compliance for public transit operations.

Future Planning Efforts
KCAPTA has completed the new KART Multi-
Modal Transit Center in downtown Hanford,
with the facility scheduled to open for local
and out -of-town routes in February 2026.

The new transit center supports improved
transfers, regional connections, and future
service growth. With this major facility
investment completed, KCAPTA’s next
capital priorities focus on transitioning the
KART fleet to zero -emission vehicles and
preparing the supporting infrastructure
needed for electric bus operations.

Through KCAG’s SB 125 transit funding
strategy, KCAPTA has identified capital
projects including electric bus charging infrastructure, battery -electric bus purchases, and a bus operator training simulator. The charging infrastructure project is planned for KCAPTA’s maintenance

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 21 facility on Davis Street in Hanford and includes design, engineering, electric bus charging equipment, a charging management system, solar bus canopies, and related site improvements such as grading, drainage, and paving. These improvements will support the long-term transition from compressed natural gas vehicles to battery- electric buses. KCAPTA has also identified funding for new 35 -foot battery-electric buses and electric micro -transit vehicles, helping modernize the fleet while supporting cleaner and more reliable transit service.

INTERCITY RAIL
Increased regional cooperation
KCAG continues to participate in regional planning efforts that strengthen Kings County’s connection to the broader San Joaquin Valley and statewide passenger rail network. Regional cooperation has become increasingly important as agencies plan for the integration of Amtrak Gold Runner service, Gold Runner Thruway bus connections, the Cross Valley Corridor, and future high-speed rail. Partner agencies have established agreements and shared planning efforts to define roles, improve transfers, coordinate service planning, and support station-area access. Together, these efforts are intended to create a more seamless regional passenger transportation system that better connects Kings County residents to jobs, education, services, and statewide travel options.

High Speed Rail Planning
Kings County will play an important role in California’s future high -speed rail system through the planned Kings/Tulare High -Speed Rail Station near Hanford. Local and regional partners are advancing station access, transit -oriented development, and connectivity planning to ensure the future station is integrated with local transit, active transportation, regional bus service, and surrounding land uses. The City of Hanford and partner agencies developed the Kings-Tulare HSR Station Transit-Oriented Development and Connectivity Plan, which is also being coordinated with Cross Valley Corridor service planning.

Cross Valley Corridor
The Cross Valley Corridor is a major regional mobility effort intended to improve east -west connections between Kings and Tulare counties. In the near term, the corridor is being advanced as phased bus service, including the Cross Valley Express, with service planned between Naval Air Station Lemoore, Hanford, Visalia, and Lindsay. The future Kings/Tulare High-Speed Rail Station is planned as the central connection point for the corridor. Over the long term, the corridor has been described as having potential for rail service between communities such as Huron and Porterville, but current implementation is focused on high-quality regional bus service that can connect to high- speed rail when service begins.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 22

VANPOOLS
CalVans Growth
In 2012, the California Vanpool Authority (CalVans)
was established as a joint powers agency and currently
operates within 17 counties. CalVans is able to provide safe, affordable vans to eligible agricultural
farmworkers traveling to the field and general vanpools for employment destinations and for students.

CalVans’ general and agricultural vanpools show a
trend in growth over a 5 -year period, and as a result, CalVans is planning to increase the number of available vans in its fleet.

MOBILITY ENHANCEMENTS
Traffic Signalization
KCAG continuously works with local jurisdiction s to identify and address the local needs for traffic mitigation. Recent and programmed improvements include traffic signal projects, intersection upgrades, and operational enhancements funded through the FTIP. These projects help address localized congestion, improve traffic flow, and support emissions reductions by reducing vehicle idling and delay.

Roundabouts
KCAG and its partner agencies continue to evaluate and program roundabouts and other intersection improvements to improve safety, reduce delay, and support more efficient travel in the Kings region.

Programmed improvements include a roundabout at 22nd Avenue and Grangeville Boulevard, an intersection heavily used by commuters traveling to Naval Air Station Lemoore and local agriculture uses. Caltrans is also advancing the Kettleman Roundabout Project at State Route 41 and Bernard

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 23 Drive, and at State Route 41 and Laurel Avenue in Stratford, which are planned to improve safety and traffic operations in an area affected by commercial traffic and regional travel demand. Together, these projects reflect a continued focus on improving high -demand intersections, reducing severe collision potential, and supporting more reliable travel for residents, workers, and visitors.

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION
Safe Routes to Schools Projects and Active Transportation Plans KCAG and its member agencies have continued to
advance active transportation planning to support
safer and more connected walking and bicycling
throughout Kings County. KCAG completed the 2025
Regional Active Transportation Plan, which updates
the prior regional plan and provides a countywide
framework for bicycle, pedestrian, trail, and Safe
Routes to School improvements in Kings County and
the cities of Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, and Lemoore.

The plan identifies prioritized improvements that
improve access to schools, jobs, transit, parks,
shopping, health care, and other key destinations, and
includes a regional Complete Streets Policy with a goal of reducing fatalities and serious injuries to zero by 2035. Additionally, the cities of Avenal and Corcoran have recently completed and adopted Active Transportation Plans to encourage walking and bicycling, improve safety, reduce pedestrian- and bicyclist-related collisions, and support reduced automobile use.

A number of grants in California and at the Federal level support the implementation of active transportation infrastructure either directly or indirectly. Agencies in Kings County have been fairly successful winning ATP and CMAQ grants and have programmed ATP projects extensively in the Tier I improvements list.

ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE
Local Agency Implementation
As for supporting the use of electric vehicles,
local agencies have successfully purchased
electric vehicles and installed electric vehicle
charging stations through grant funds from the
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
and Southern California Edison. Local agencies
have added electric vehicle chargers to public
facilities and encouraging the construction of
electric vehicle charging stations on new
projects.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 24 KCAG adopted the Kings County Electric Vehicle Readiness Plan in 2020 to guide the siting and implementation of plug-in electric vehicle charging infrastructure and to help local agencies identify best practices and funding opportunities. The plan supports KCAG’s broader SB 375 greenhouse gas reduction efforts by preparing the region for increased electric vehicle use and future charging demand.

KCAPTA is also advancing EV charging infrastructure as part of KART’s transition to zero- emission transit operations. Through the SB 125 transit funding strategy, KCAPTA identified electric bus charging infrastructure, charging management software, battery-electric bus purchases, and related capital improvements to support the transition from compressed natural gas buses to battery-electric buses. The electric bus charging project is planned for KCAPTA’s maintenance facility on Davis Street in Hanford and includes design, engineering, charging equipment, charging management systems, and related site improvements.

KCAG supports the development of infrastructure for the use of alternative fuel vehicles in government and private business . Local agencies have applied for and received grant funds from the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District and Southern California Edison to purchase electric vehicles and install electric vehicle charging stations.

EFFICIENT AND EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT
Climate Action Plan (CAP)
The cities of Avenal and Hanford collaborated to develop a Regional Climate Action Plan (CAP) in 2014 that identifies voluntary, cost- effective measures to reduce GHG emissions . It includes measures to encourage low carbon and alternative fuel vehicles, electric vehicle readiness, and employer-based transportation demand management. Elements of the CAP were incorporated into the Avenal and Hanford General Plan updates.

Public Health Partnership
KCAG, in collaboration with other Kings County organizations, participates in the Kings Partnership for Prevention efforts to develop a County Nutrition Action Plan in a way to achieve health equity through climate action. The goals are to promote active transportation, prioritizing infill and transit- oriented development, encourage local food systems and healthy diets, and green the built environment to provide access to trees, parks, and open spaces . Surveys during the community needs assessment process identified the lack of transportation as a barrier to eating healthy foods, participating in active living, access to health care, and having a healthy environment.

Telework and Other Flexible Working Arrangements
KCAG and local agencies continue to monitor broadband access as part of broader transportation demand management and equity efforts. Expanding broadband in rural and underserved communities can support telework, telehealth, online education, and access to public services, which may reduce some commute and service-related vehicle trips.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 25 Since the prior RTP/SCS, California has continued to advance the Statewide Middle -Mile Broadband Initiative, including planned broadband corridors along major highways such as I-5 and SR 198.

These investments could improve broadband access for communities such as Lemoore, Hanford, and unincorporated areas of Kings County.

Kings County has also continued to identify broadband expansion as a local priority, including recent broadband expansion projects announced in 2025. In addition, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District continues to implement Rule 9410, the Employer Based Trip Reduction rule, which encourages larger employers to reduce single -occupant commute trips through strategies such as telecommuting, alternative work schedules, ridesharing, transit, bicycling, and walking.

Induced Demand Resulting from Roadway Capacity Increasing Projects Since the implementation of Senate Bill (SB) 743 and California’s broader climate and transportation policies focused on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle travel, transportation planning and environmental review in California have increasingly emphasized the relationship between roadway capacity expansion and induced vehicle miles traveled (VMT). State agencies including the California Air Resources Board (CARB), the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), and Caltrans have incorporated induced travel considerations into CEQA transportation analysis, Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) evaluations, and transportation funding and policy guidance for capacity-increasing projects.

Induced VMT refers to the increase in driving that occurs after roadway capacity is expanded. When new lanes or road improvements significantly reduce travel time or the perceived “cost” of driving, latent demand (i.e., people who previously suppressed taking trips, traveling longer distances, changing routes or destinations, or shifting travel from other modes or times of day ) is released resulting in greater on-road activity (see induced demand graph below).

Source: Caltrans Traffic Analysis Framework 1st Edition

King County’s travel characteristics are a critical consideration in interpreting induced VMT results and selecting an appropriate analytical approach. The County is predominantly suburban and rural in nature, with relatively low levels of recurring congestion and, therefore, correspondingly lower levels of suppressed (latent) travel demand compared to major metropolitan regions. Under these conditions, induced travel effects are expected to be more limited, as increases in roadway capacity are unlikely to generate the substantial travel time savings needed to significantly alter travel

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 26 behavior, as highlighted in recent research, including the Rural Induced Demand Study1. The Rural Induced Demand Study (California Rural County Task Force, 2025) and the recently released Investigating the Ability to Assess VMT Impacts of Rural Capacity-Enhancing Projects (Caltrans and UC Berkeley Institute of Transportation Studies, June 2026) indicate that induced demand is indeed less prevalent/likely in rural areas (i.e., sensitive to rural versus urban area type).

The 2026 RTP/SCS does include some new or widened lower-classification roadways. The need for these roadway projects is not for congestion relief but to provide necessary access to approved/planned residential parcels of which over 98% is occurring within city limits . Hence, all the local planned roadways in the 2026 RTP/SCS are growth serving – not growth inducing (i.e., will not serve to open up new land for unplanned development outside of established city boundaries) .

Given the nature of the existing land use, limited future growth patterns, and lack of congestion within Kings County, these lower functional classification of roadway improvements are not anticipated to generate long-term induced growth and therefore travel demand (i.e., residential or employment development). Also note, that short-term induced demand (i.e., route diversion, longer vehicle trip lengths, or mode shifts) due to improved accessibility is adequately captured by the KCAG travel demand model. Network plots showing expected network improvements relative to future planned growth are shown below in Figure 7-1 and Figure 7-2.

1 https://www.nctc.ca.gov/Reports/RCTF-Rural-Induced-Demand-Study/index.html

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 27

FIGURE 7-1 : COUNTYWIDE EXPECTED IMPROVEMENTS
Source: KCAG Modeling Information

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 28

FIGURE 7-2 : EXPECTED IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN HANFORD
Source: KCAG Modeling Information

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 29 2026 SCS DEVELOPMENT

SCENARIO DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Scenario planning is a method by which several scenarios are developed, studied under future year conditions, and their relative performance evaluated. In the context of the KCAG 2026 RTP/SCS, scenario planning was used to study four different scenarios. A scenario can reflect a different set of land use patterns, development characteristics, and/or transportation investments. The analysis demonstrates how the different sets of investments and land uses create different future outcomes.

KCAG staff initiated the SCS development process in February 2026. In collaboration with the RTP/SCS Stakeholder Advisory Group members, KCAG explored various strategies that not only contribute to reducing GHG emission but also are practical given the rural setting in Kings County.

KCAG met with each of the RTP/SCS Stakeholder Advisory Group members in May 2026 to finalize the scenarios for analysis.

The need to integrate transportation investments with land use decisions on growth and housing is an explicit feature of SB 375. As a result, MPO regions such as Kings County should achieve specified regional targets for reducing greenhouse gases from cars and light trucks and identify specific areas in the region to accommodate the projected population growth during the timeframe of the Plan.

Developing possible scenarios of land use and transportation investments starts with demographic growth forecasts. The 2026 RTP/SCS relies on a regional forecast of future demographics. As described in Chapter 1, the forecasts were developed from the Department of Finance population and the General Plans of KCAG’s member local agencies. The forecasts were reviewed by the local agencies.

Although Kings County is relatively rural area, mixed -use infill development and higher density development are already seen in part of the urbanized areas. In addition, the mixed use and infill development projects are encouraged in the latest Hanford general plan update. Land use changes that were modeled in the scenarios above the base incorporated infill development projects within the cities of Lemoore and Hanford.

Using the demographic projections, three unique land use scenarios were developed. Each land use scenario was developed to help ensure that choices over land use transportation investments were consistent with one another. Land use choices in a scenario included decisions over development patterns, such as where to locate new housing, new commercial developments, and new mixed-use areas relative to existing communities (e.g., infill vs. converted farmland or open space).

Transportation investments choices for a given scenario include decisions for spending levels on active transportation investments, roadway system management and operational investments, transit service improvements, vanpool formation, passenger rail enhan cements, elect ric vehicle charging infrastructure investments, and broadband expansion to facilitate telecommuting, tele-shop and tele-health opportunities particularly for disadvantaged communities in Kings County.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 30 Since the 2022 RTP/SCS, KCAG, in coordination with its member agencies have developed several regional plans to prioritize transportation investments and facilitate implementation. These key transportation investment areas are described below.

Active Transportation
Active transportation strategy is to encourage the
construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

Altering people’s travel behavior from driving to
walking and biking not only is beneficial for their health but also contributes to the efforts in mitigating
greenhouse gas emissions. KCAG developed the Kings
County Regional Active Transportation Plan ( 2025)
which identifies prioritized bicycle and pedestrian
projects and provide support for local jurisdictions to apply for active transportation related grants. KCAG
and its member agencies continuously collaborate to
prepare active transportation related grant
applications to secure funding for implementation of identified active transportation projects. Active transportation projects to install construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities at various locations within the region have and will also continue to be funded through Congestion Mitigation Air Quality Program (CMAQ).

Alternative Fuel Vehicles
The deployment and market penetration of alternative fuel vehicles and the readiness of supporting infrastructures available throughout the region are critical to reduce greenhouse gases. In the past few years, our local member agencies have been active in applying for and successfully to secure funds for alternative fuel vehicle purchase, including Compressed Natural Gas vehicles and Plug -in Electric vehicles. To echo the state’s ambitious action to promote zero emission vehicles, KCAG developed the Regional EV Readiness Plan (April 2020) to identify effective strategies to encourage the adoption of electric vehicles. In the meantime, local agencies will keep up the efforts to secure funds to purchase alternative vehicles for the public fleet and install supporting facilities, moving towards a cleaner energy future.

Mobility Improvement
Mobility improvement comprises transit system and
ridesharing program. Pilot Flex Route Program for Hanford and Lemoore is expected to provide evening services for students and residents to request transportation between bus stop locations only. This will greatly improve connectivity with direct trips and ride times between destinations. Ridership is expected to increase by serving areas more frequently to meet growing needs while balancing operational costs. A passenger mobile app will be available to enable a better public transit

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 31 experience. Ridesharing programs include CalVans Vanpool Expansion program and Agricultural Vanpool program, and the KART Vanpool program to help reduce the single occupancy vehicle travels. Transit changes that were able to be modeled in the scenarios above the base incorporated increased transit stop coverage within the Lemoore Naval Air Station and service to the Santa Rosa Rancheria and Tachi Palace.

Operational Improvement
Operational improvement comprises traffic signal installation, signal synchronization and roundabout construction to mitigate traffic congestion. More traffic signalization projects are programmed and expected to be implemented to relieve traffic congestion in the region.

SCS SCENARIO ALTERNATIVES
Scenario A. Current Trend
Scenario A (Current Trend) reflects the planned general plan growth detailed in the local agency general plans. These growth patterns are consistent with growth historically seen in Kings County with most residential and non-residential growth occurring within the incorporated cities of Hanford, Lemoore, Corcoran, and Avenal. Although Kings County is a relatively rural area, mixed -use infill development and higher density development are already seen in part of the urbanized areas. In addition, the mixed use and infill development projects are encouraged in all the local agency general plans – most recently in the Hanford general plan update. This includes a mix of infill development in downtown areas with some development in new growth areas but still within urban growth lines.

Over 98 percent of countywide housing growth is projected to occur within incorporated cities with less than 2 percent growth in unincorporated communities . Likewise, 95 percent of employment growth under the Current Trend scenario is in the cities while 5 percent is in existing unincorporated communities. Development Priority Areas are shown in Figure 7-3 through Figure 7-5 show the development areas in the County. These areas and their priority weights determine the allocation of future growth for Scenario A. Figure 7-6 through Figure 7-8 show the geographic distribution of residential housing unit increments out to 2050. The 2035 SCS Scenario A increments were interpolated using the 2023 model baseline and 2050.

The housing type distribution under Scenario A is approximately 77% detached single-family homes over multi-family housing which constitute 23% of residential land use. The distribution of new residential development reflects an 80/20 percent split of single-family housing relative to new multi- family housing.

Transportation investments in Scenario A prioritize roadway rehabilitation and roadway system preservation. No new roadway capacity of state highway facilities is planned prior to 2035 .

Transportation investment in Scenario A is dedicated to roadway maintenance with increased funding for alternative transportation improvements such as transit and bicycle/pedestrian improvements.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 32

FIGURE 7-3 : DEVELOPMENT PRIORITY AREAS (SCENARIO A)
Source: KCAG Model Information

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 33

FIGURE 7-4 : HANFORD DEVELOPMENT PRIORITY AREAS (SCENARIO A) Source: KCAG Model Information

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 34

FIGURE 7-5 : LEMOORE DEVELOPMENT PRIORITY AREAS (SCENARIO A) Source: KCAG Model Information

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 35

FIGURE 7-6: 2050 HOUSEHOLD INCREMENT (SCENARIO A: 2035 INTERPOLATED ) Source: KCAG Model Information

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 36

FIGURE 7-7 : 2050 HANFORD HOUSEHOLD INCREMENT (SCENARIO A: 2035 INTERPOLATED ) Source: KCAG Model Information

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 37

FIGURE 7-8 : 2050 LEMOORE HOUSEHOLD INCREMENT (SCENARIO A:2035 INTERPOLATED) Source: KCAG Model Information

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 38 Scenario A Summary:
• Current Trend Land Use (consistent with local agency General Plans) • Tier I CIP list Investment Portfolio – with significant investments toward roadway maintenance, KART service enhancements and fleet replacement and maintenance, and construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. A summary of the Tier I CIP investment portfolio are shown in Figure 7-9 and Figure 7-10.

FIGURE 7-9 : ANTICIPATED REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES (SCENARIOS A, B, C)

FIGURE 7- 10 : ANTICIPATED REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES (SCENARIOS A, B, C)

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 39 Scenario B. Residential Infill
Scenario B (Residential Infill) reflects efforts in several jurisdictions currently revising their zoning codes to accommodate new accessory dwelling units (AB 1584) and lot split (SB 9) flexibility. Since the 2022 RTP/SCS, every jurisdiction in Kings County has updated its zoning code to address these legislative changes. Each jurisdiction tracks the number of permitted ADUs and lot splits. This scenario reflects the potential market response for increases in Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) development and lot -split activity in established detached single family residential areas of Kings County. This scenario reflects a reallocation of single-family detached dwelling unit (SFDU) growth which will decrease the numbers of new SFDU assumed to be developed and increase the assumptions for ADUs within high probability neighborhoods within the cities and developed unincorporated areas of Kings County. This effectively focuses on more residential development nearer to downtown cores in close proximity to jobs and services. It also limits development in new growth areas by limiting the need for new residential development in unincorporated communities.

As shown in Figure 7-11, compared to Scenario A, established residential neighborhoods in this scenario will absorb approximately 452 ADUs by 2035 providing a slightly higher residential density relative to Scenario A.

FIGURE 7- 11 : ADU GROWTH (SCENARIO B)
Identical to Scenario A, transportation investments in Scenario B prioritize roadway rehabilitation and roadway system preservation. No new roadway capacity of state highway facilities is assumed.

Transportation investment in Scenario A is dedicated to roadway maintenance with increased funding for alternative transportation improvements such as transit and bicycle/pedestrian improvements.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 40 Scenario B Summary:
• Residential Infill Land Use (consistent with local agency General Plans but recognizes moderate ADU and Lot Split Activity likely to occur).
• Tier I CIP list Investment Portfolio – with significant investments toward roadway maintenance, KART service enhancements and fleet replacement and maintenance, and construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. A summary of the Tier I CIP investment portfolio are shown in Figure 7-9 and Figure 7-10.

Scenario C. Land Use Efficiency
Land Use Efficiency Scenario – assumes all future growth occurs in VMT Efficient areas (15 percent below countywide average VMT/capita (residential uses) and VMT/employee (non-residential uses).

This scenario reflects the influence of SB 743 and CEQA streamlining to direct future growth that is VMT efficient. Using the KCAG travel demand model, all traffic analysis zones (TAZs) were analyzed for the VMT/capita and VMT/employee efficiency for residential and non -residential uses, respectively. Consistent with OPR’s SB 743 implementation guidance, TAZs that generate VMT/capita or VMT/employee 85% or less of the countywide average for the same metrics were identified as VMT efficient. TAZs that generate between 85% and 100% of the countywide average are considered VMT neutral and TAZs that generate over 100% as VMT inefficient. The results were thematically mapped as “green,” “yellow” and “red” respectively in Figure 7-12 (VMT/capita) and Figure 7-13 (VMT/employee). As shown, given the relative remoteness, the unincorporated areas as well as cites of Avenal and Corcoran have very few VMT efficient areas for residential development . Most VMT efficient areas for residential development are in areas in or surrounding the cities of Lemoore and Hanford. Figure 7-13 reveals similar geographic characteristics for non -residential uses. These maps provided the guidance for reallocating any future development in Scenario A planned in VMT neutral (yellow) or inefficient (red) areas to VMT efficient (green) areas. Any reallocation of land use was conditioned on the VMT efficient TAZ had development capacity to “absorb” the additional growth and that the area contained developable land.

Identical to Scenario A, transportation investments in Scenario C prioritize roadway rehabilitation and roadway system preservation. No new roadway capacity of state highway facilities is assumed by 2035. Transportation investment in Scenario A is dedicated to roadway maintenance with increased funding for alternative transportation improvements such as transit and bicycle/pedestrian improvements.

Scenario C Summary
• Land Use Efficiency – growth in only VMT efficient areas. • Tier I CIP list Investment Portfolio – with significant investments toward roadway maintenance, KART service enhancements and fleet replacement and maintenance, and construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. A summary of the Tier I CIP investment portfolio are shown in Figure 7-9 and Figure 7-10.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 41

FIGURE 7- 12 : COUNTYWIDE VMT EFFICIENT TAZS – RESIDENTIAL GROWTH (SCENARIO C)

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 42

FIGURE 7- 13 : COUNTYWIDE VMT EFFICIENT TAZS - NON -RESIDENTIAL GROWTH (SCENARIO C) Scenario D. Current Trend with Enhanced Transportation Investment Scenario D couples the Current Trend (Scenario A) land use with the enhanced investments in electromobility (i.e., ZEV charging infrastructure), broadband expansion (serving areas that currently have no or poor broadband access), active transportation infrastructure (advancing more projects identified in the active transportation plans) and passenger rail (i.e., High Speed Rail).

Scenario D Summary
• Current Trend Land Use (consistent with local agency General Plans). • Tier I CIP List with higher investment in Alternative Mode/ZEV Charging Infrastructure/Broadband Investment Focus and construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

SCENARIO COMPARISON S
The comparison of the scenarios is shown in Figure 7-14 to Figure 7-20. The comparisons include person trips by trip purpose, average trip length/distance, mode share percentages, daily VMT prior to applying the VMT reductions from VMT reducing projects and programs, daily VMT reductions

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 43 resulting from projects and programs, and daily CO2 emission reductions resulting from projects and programs.

As shown, there is not significant variation in travel characteristics between the four SCS scenarios.

This includes trip purpose, average trip length/distance, and mode share percentages . This was anticipated given that these metrics reflect existing plus net new growth with the growth increment being just 6.25% for total households from 2023 to 2035 and 2.5% for total employees . Slight reductions in average trip lengths are projected to occur under Scenario C (Land Use Efficiency) with lower VMT relative to the other scenarios. However, this scenario only decreases daily VMT by 13,782 relative to Scenario A (Current Trend). This reflects the fact that much of the Current Trend growth is already planned in VMT efficient areas . It also suggests that with such limited planned growth, KCAG’s member agencies are limited in generating significant VMT and GHG reduction benefits solely through directing future development in VMT efficient areas. Conversely, far greater VMT and GHG emission reductions are possible through implementing KCAG’s RTP Tier I list of transportation improvements and strategies given that these strategies apply to both future and existing development.

FIGURE 7- 14 : PERSON TRIPS BY PURPOSE (SCENARIOS A, B, C) Scenario D is identical to Scenario A
Source: KCAG Model Information

FIGURE 7- 15 : TRIPS BY TRIP LENGTH (SCENARIOS A, B, C )

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 44 Scenario D is identical to Scenario A
Source: KCAG Model Information

FIGURE 7- 16 : TRIPS BY MODE AND AVERAGE TRIP LENGTH (SCENARIOS A, B, C ) Scenario D identical to Scenario A – but with off-model adjustments show greater bike mode share Source: KCAG Model Information

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 45

FIGURE 7- 17 : AVERAGE TRIP LENGTH BY MODE AND PURPOSE (SCENARIO A, B, C ) Scenario D identical to Scenario A
Source: KCAG Model Information

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 46

FIGURE 7- 18 : DAILY VMT – ISOLATING EFFECT OF LAND USE BY SCENARIO Source: KCAG Model Information

FIGURE 7- 19 : DAILY VMT REDUCTION BY PROJECT TYPE AND SCENARIO Source: KCAG Off-Model Workbook Information

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 47

FIGURE 7- 20 : DAILY CO2 EMISSION REDUCTION RESULTS BY PROJECT TYPE & SCENARIO Source: KCAG Off-Model Workbook

SCENARIO SELECTION
The four proposed scenarios were presented in public workshops in June 2026, with visualized tools to showcase the completed, ongoing and future projects to demonstrate the effectiveness of each of the strategies incorporated into the 2026 RTP/SCS. Feedback from the workshops and the modeling results were presented to KCAG’s Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), the RTP/SCS Stakeholder Committee and the KCAG Board to select the preferred scenario for the 2026 RTP/SCS. The KCAG Stakeholder Advisory Committee met in May 2026 and again in June 2026 to discuss and review the SCS scenarios. Based on those meetings, KCAG Stakeholder Advisory Committee recommended Scenario A (Current Trend). The KCAG Transportation Policy Committee held public meetings on July 22, 2026 to review the four SCS scenarios and formally selected Scenario A as the preferred scenario on August 26, 2026.

TOOLS AND METHODS
In the simplest terms, the scenario inputs and the local agency land use information is developed and processed in GIS and Excel Workbooks then fed into the travel demand modeling software. The resulting data related to the interaction of land use and transportation and its effect on vehicle miles traveled is then provided as an output. This new output is subsequently entered into the EMFAC air quality modeling software, which measures the actual GHG reductions. Since the 2022 RTP/SCS, the KCAG MIP model has been updated to a 2023 base year with the new 2023 population information, employment data, traffic counts, travel data, transit coverage, including updated land use information from recent General Plan updates and amendments for local agencies. This is described in more detail below.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 48 Modeling
KCAG will utilize the following tools to estimate GHG emissions for the 2026 RTP/SCS, each of which are described in more detail below:
1) Scenario Planning/Land Use Model;
2) MIP1 Travel Model;
3) EMFAC 2014 Emissions Factor Model;
4) Off-Model Adjustments.

Off-model adjustments are required to quantify reductions in vehicle miles of travel or direct GHG emissions reductions for strategies (i.e., projects or programs) that are beyond the sensitivity of the travel demand model to measure. The methodology describing off- model quantification is documented herein.

Scenario Planning/ Land Use Model
Scenario modeling allows evaluation of the impacts of the RTP/SCS policies on regional land use. In particular, the scenario planning approach is a way to explore what it would take to achieve the revised SB 375 per capita emissions targets. Scenario modeling tools use building blocks that describe the different types of land uses that exist within the metropolitan area or are planned for the future. The output of the scenario modeling tools forms the fundamental input to the MIP transportation model.

MIP1 Travel Demand Model
To address recommend ed model enhancements identified by ARB as part of the 2022 RTP/SCS process, the following improvements to the KCAG MIP1 model for the 2026 RTP/SCS were made:
• Updated the base year housing, population and demographic characteristic inputs based on the 2020 United States Census, the 2023 American Community Survey (ACS) and building permit information for 2020 to 2023 from local agencies in Kings County; • Updated the base year employment by address and type using a database purchased from Data Axle;
• Updated developed acreage estimates based on GIS analysis; • Updated auto operating cost assumptions consistent with all SJV travel models; • Updated indicators of transit coverage for each TAZ in the model, which are used to estimate transit accessibility. These were estimated from available route mapping; • Added a coded fixed-route transit network;
• Developed parcel-based land use forecasts and allocation using GIS tools; • Recalibrated the auto ownership model based on 2020 Census ownership proportions;

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 49 • Calibrated new household trip generation rates based on the 2022 Central California Travel Survey (CCTS);
• Updated the MIP1 trip distribution process based on a composite impedance representing times and costs for all travel modes, as opposed to the more traditional process of using auto times only. The composite impedances are used with a traditional gravity model to determine trip destinations from each origin TAZ. The trip distribution calculations are done separately for households with no available vehicles and households with available vehicles, to represent the different choices made based on accessibility;
• Updated observed targets for mode choice calibration based on the 2022 Central California Travel Survey (CCTS) and observed transit ridership counts from the National Transit Database . The mode choice targets are stratified by trip purpose;
• Recalibrated the MIP1 mode choice model that identifies the shares of trips for each origin - destination pair and each trip purpose that would use each travel mode, including transit . The KCAG model currently does not assign these transit trips to a transit network, but the assigned auto trips do reflect reductions due to transit, bicycle and pedestrian trips . The mode choice model is sensitive to socioeconomic data such as income and vehicle availability. Different auto occupancy rates are applied by trip purpose, based on the results of the mode choice step; and • Updated calibration of vehicle -miles of travel based on 2023 Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) data.

Modeling Interregional Trips
The 2026 model update replaced the prior estimation of interregional trips which was based exclusively on the California Statewide Travel Demand Model (STM). The base year interregional trips are based on 2023 traffic counts (from Caltrans and other local sources) at each county boundary gateway road. The Replica data product, which is modeled based on tracking of cell phone and GPS devices as well as detailed demographic data, was applied to estimate the percentages of trips at each major gateway which have an origin or destination within Kings County versus trips which pass through Kings County. The Replica information was also used to estimate the percentages of trips to and from each county outside Kings County for each major gateway. Estimates of the proportions of through trips connecting each pair of Kings County gateways were derived from th e current (2022) STM. Forecasts of interregional trips were developed by applying the DOF population growth rates for each external county to the trips to and from that county at each gateway, resulting in a weighted average growth forecast for each gateway.

For the purpose of preparing the GHG emissions analysis for the 2026 RTP/SCSs, all emissions from through trips (trips without an origin and a destination in the MPO region) are excluded. In addition, the portion of VMT attributable to trips that either begin or end within the region, but travel to/from neighboring regions (IX/XI) has been included for all portions of the trip within the MPO region.

Accounting for interregional travel, or travel that crosses MPO boundaries, continues to be a key issue for SB-375 implementation across the state. The issue is especially important when considering the area covered by SJV MPOs, which in aggregate experience a higher proportion of through traffic

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 50 relative to other regions (as a percent of total vehicle miles traveled) . Statewide discussions to determine how to account for interregional travel across the state should continue.

Emissions Modeling
KCAG will use ARB's emissions modeling software EMFAC2014 to complete GHG emissions estimates for the SCS scenario and the alternatives. Choice of using EMFAC2014 (versus an updated version) is premised on achieving consistency with previous SCS cycles . For off-model estimation of GHG emission reductions at the project level, KCAG will use the latest version of EMFAC which is EMFAC2021.

EMFAC includes an “SB 375 Emission Analysis” mode that estimates and reports CO2 emissions in tons per day from appropriate light -duty vehicle classes (LDA, LDT1, LDT2 and MDV) without including impacts of existing statewide GHG reduction strategies, such as more stringent light- duty vehicle fuel economy standards. In order to ensure a coordinated approach and reduce potential for user errors, EMFAC2014 modeling instructions and EMFAC output post -processing worksheet have been developed for the SJV MPOs in consultation with ARB. The approach uses Transportation Data Templates that convert travel model outputs into EMFAC2014 inputs including VMT and speed distributions specific to the region. Per RTAC recommendation, the VMT modeled for SB 375 purposes does not include through trips.

In addition, the 2026 RTP/SCS emissions modeling approach incorporates ARB’s “Methodology to Calculate CO2 Adjustment to EMFAC Output for SB 375 Target Demonstration.” The EMFAC output post-processing worksheet calculates per capita CO2 reductions from 2005 base year for 2020, 2035, and RTP horizon year 2049 using CO2 emissions modeled with EMFAC2014 and the latest total population projections for the region. The spreadsheet also incorporates the ARB CO2 Adjustment Methodology by applying the difference between CO2 per capita reductions modeled with EMFAC2011 and EMFAC2014 using 2014 RTP activity data to reductions achieved by the 2018 RTP/SCS using EMFAC2014.

Auto operating costs were updated for the 2026 RTP/SCS consistent with the San Joaquin Valley AOC Update Methodology as detailed in Appendix V.

The 2023 Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) data was used to update future gasoline and diesel fuel price projections from 2023 to 2049. Specifically, the average projections between high and low oil scenarios of the AEO were used to develop fuel forecast factors that were then applied to 2023 California average retail fuel prices as reported by the EIA. Electricity costs were based on 2023 Transportation Energy Demand Forecast published by the California Energy Commission (CEC) and linearly forecast between 2035 through 2049 since CEC data was not available post 2035.

Non-fuel costs associated with vehicle maintenance were updated based on 2023 “Your Driving Costs” report from AAA depending on vehicle type and extrapolated through 2049 assuming 2% increase per year. All costs were then converted to 2023 dollars consistent with the travel model validation year.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 51 Off-Model Adjustments
Similar to other traditional four-step travel demand models, the KCAG model is not sensitive to the impacts of Transportation Demand Management/Transportation Systems Management (TDM/TSM) projects such as Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), bike and pedestrian projects, passenger rail service, vanpool and rideshare programs, charging infrastructure and electric vehicle market penetration or factors contributing to greater telecommuting activity. In these instances, “off-model” strategies using methodologies commonly used in transportation research literature, previously approved or cited by ARB, and consistent with the other California MPOs must be applied. The measures/strategies that off -model adjustments were applied to a given SCS scenario, and the methodology reference source are provided in Table 7-2. Additional technical descriptions , assumptions and inputs of the electric vehicle charging infrastructure, regional transit , and broadband expansion off-model analyses are provided in Appendix XV. Inputs used to quantify all other off-model adjusts were based on the 2026 KCAG Tier I capital improvement list.

The GHG reductions that KCAG has been able to show from modeling and off-model adjustments are reflected below for each scenario in Table 7-3 and Table 7-4. Table 7-4 shows the GHG per Capita reductions relative to the GHG Target for Kings County. As shown, all Scenarios meet the 2035 GHG Reduction Target of 13 percent reduction in GHG per Capita relative to 2005.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 52 TABLE 7-2 : OFF -MODEL CATEGORIES

MEASURE/STRATEGY SCENARIOS REFERENCE

TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS
(NOT REFLECTED IN KCAG
MODEL)
Scenarios A, BC, D D CARB SB375 Guidelines,
November 2019

BIKE & PEDESTRIAN
FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS Scenarios A, B, C, D CARB SB375 Guidelines, November 2019
BIKE SHARE Not Quantified CARB SB375 Guidelines,
November 2019
TELECOMMUTING Scenario D CARB SB375 Guidelines,
November 2019
RULE 9410 (E -TRIP) Scenarios A, BC, D D SJVAPCD Rule9410 CAR SHARING Scenarios A, B, C, D CARB SB375 Guidelines, November 2019
PARKING MANAGEMENT Not Quantified CARB SB375 Guidelines, November 2019

ELECTRIC VEHICLE
INCENTIVE Not Quantified CARB SB375 Guidelines,
November 2019

ELECTRIC VEHICLE

CHARGING

INFRASTRUCTURE
Scenarios A, BC, D D CARB SB375 Guidelines,
November 2019
TSM –ITS Scenarios A, BC, D D CARB SB375 Guidelines,
November 2019

PASSENGER RAIL SERVICE
(SAN JOAQUINS/AMTRAK) Scenarios A, BC, D D SJV Strategy VANPOOLS/CALVANS Scenarios A, B, C, D CARB SB375 Guidelines, November 2019

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 53 TABLE 7-3 : EMISSION REDUCTION PER SCENARIO

MEASURE/STRATEGY
2035 REDUCTION (TONS/DAY)
Scenario A Scenario B Scenario C Scenario D

TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS (NOT
REFLECTED IN KCAG MODEL) 20.17 20.17 19.99 19.99

BIKE & PEDESTRIAN FACILITY
IMPROVEMENTS 3.91 3.91 3.91 37.71
BIKE SHARE Not Quantified Not Quantified Not Quantified Not Quantified TELECOMMUTING Not Quantified Not Quantified Not Quantified 7.94 RULE 9410 (E -TRIP) 13.45 13.45 13.45 13.45
CAR SHARING 6.13 6.13 6.13 6.13
PARKING MANAGEMENT Not Quantified Not Quantified Not Quantified Not Quantified ELECTRIC VEHICLE INCENTIVE Not Quantified Not Quantified Not Quantified Not Quantified

ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING
INFRASTRUCTURE 5.82 5.82 5.82 5.82
TSM–ITS 3.05 3.05 3.05 3.05

PASSENGER RAIL SERVICE (SAN
JOAQUINS/AMTRAK) 16.22 16.22 16.22 16.22
VANPOOLS/CALVANS 3.93 3.93 3.93 3.93
TOTAL REDUCTION 72.68 72.68 72.50 114.24
Source: DKS Associates, 2026.

TABLE 7-4: GREENHOUSE GAS PER CAPITA EMISSION REDUCTIONS OF SCS SCENARIOS

SCENARIO GHG REDUCTIONS
20202 2035
ARB GHG TARGETS -5.99% -13.00%
SCENARIO A -10.3% -14.2%
SCENARIO B -10.3% -14.2%
SCENARIO C -10.3% -14.1%
SCENARIO D 10.77% -19.2%
Source: DKS Associates, 2026.

2 Given that the 2020 modeled VMT for Kings County close matches the “ground truth” 2020 Highway Performance Management System (HPMS) VMT (within the 3% tolerance), continued compliance with the 2020 GHG per capita target as demonstrated in the KCAG 2018 RTP/SCS is assumed.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 54 Pursuant to Section 176 (c)(4) of the 1990 Federal Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA), MPOs such as KCAG must demonstrate that the RTP conforms to the applicable State Implementation Plan (SIP).

This process is described in the Federal Transportation Air (FTA) Quality Conformity Rule . The purpose of conformity is to ensure that regional transportation planning and programming remain consistent with state and local air quality planning efforts to expeditiously achieve and/or maintain the health-based National Ambient Air Quality Standard s (NAAQS). Analysis completed as part of the 2026 RTP/SCS indicates that all four SCS scenarios meet the established on-road mobile source emissions budgets for ozone (8-hour Standard), PM-10 (Annual Standard) and PM2.5 (Annual and 24-hour Standards) . Federal conformity documentation of the 2026 RTP/SCS is provided in Appendix VI.

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 55

PERFORMANCE MEASURES
TABLE 7-5 : RTP/SCS PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Performance Measure Description

Preservation of Agricultural and
Resource Lands
The agricultural component of Kings County is
part of America’s best producing farmland and
part of the culture of the San Joaquin Valley.

It is the desire and the goal of every decision-
making body to preserve it.

Environmental, Economic
Opportunities, and Equity in
access
The basic components of Sustainability.

Reduce Emissions
Meet not only the GHG reduction targets, but
also the air quality improvement requirements
of the state and federal air quality acts.

Improve Public Health
Increased active transportation options,
improved community health outcomes
through a decrease in obesity and diabetes
and an improvement in cardiovascular health.

System Preservation
Maintain system pavement and bridges;
improve system reliability, mobility, and
safety. Implement appropriate elements of
“fix-it-first” approach.

Economic Development
Consider Jobs/housing balance and proximity,
commercial corridors and clusters, commute
patterns, transit corridors, and highway
access improvements

GOALS AND BENEFITS
SB 375 provides opportunities for streamlined review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as an incentive for development that is consistent with an adopted Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) or Alternative Planning Strategy that CARB has accepted as meeting the applicable regional greenhouse gas reduction targets. Depending on project characteristics and eligibility requirements, streamlining provisions may apply to:
• Residential/mixed use projects streamlining (Public Resources Code Section 21159.28) • Transit priority projects streamlining (Public Resources Code Sections 21155-21155.3)

2026 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN & SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY • JULY 13, 2026 • 7- 56 Eligibility is determined on a project-specific basis and depends on factors such as land use, density, location near qualifying transit, consistency with the SCS, and applicable environmental and affordable housing requirements. KCAG will continue coordinating with its member agencies to identify and support the use of available CEQA streamlining provisions where appropriate

NEXT STEPS
Implementation of the 2026 RTP/SCS will continue in the form of delivering transportation projects designed and selected in the RTP to achieve, to the extent practicable , the modeled and off-model improvements in air quality and reductions in GHG emissions from passenger cars and light duty trucks. This SCS chapter will be subject to all future RTP updates as mandated every four years.

KCAG looks forward to improving the RTP/SCS process and prolonging the stakeholder communication exchange for future updates.

12.B.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 8/4/2026 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Approval of the Minutes of the June 16, 2026, Meeting

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation: Approve the minutes of the June 16, 2026, Meeting.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. June 16, 2026 Meeting Minutes

12.C.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 8/4/2026 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Action to Declare Abandoned Right-of-Way as Exempt Surplus Property

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council, by motion, adopt Resolution No. 26-52- R, which will declare approximately eight thousand, one hundred forty-five (8,145) square feet of Millerton Street right-of-way to be exempt surplus property.

Recommended Motion: I move to approve Resolution No. 26-52-R, which will declare a portion of the Millerton Street right-of-way to be exempt surplus property.

BACKGROUND:

The City is in the process of abandoning a small section of Millerton Street right-of-way. The City Council considered the abandonment at its May 19, 2026 meeting.

The section of to-be-abandoned right-of-way is located south of lots 215 and 216 of Tract 865, Unit II.

The right-of-way is being abandoned for the developer to finalize Tract 865, Unit II and allow issuance of a 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.

At the conclusion of the abandonment process, ownership of the right-of-way will be transferred by the developer that owns lots 215 and 216. The Millerton Street right-of-way will be dedicated back to the City after it is improved by the developer.

The location of the to-be-abandoned right-of-way is shown below.

The City must satisfy the requirements of the Surplus Land Act (Government Code Sections 54220- 54234) whenever it disposes of land. In the present case, the Millerton St. right-of-way is eligible for “exempt surplus land” treatment because: (i) it is less than one-half (1/2) acre in area and is not contiguous to land owned by the state or the City that is used for open-space or low- and moderate-

income housing purposes; and (ii) the area is right-of-way that will be conveyed to the owner of adjacent properties. A determination of exempt surplus land status will allow the City to dispose of the right-of-way without having to satisfy typical Surplus Land Act requirements, including the requirement that the land be offered to other government agencies and “housing sponsors” for purchase.

If the Council adopts Resolution No. 26-52-R, a copy will be submitted to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for verification that the right-of-way is exempt surplus property. Once HCD’s confirmation is received, the City may transfer the right-of-way to the owner of lots 215 and 216.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution 26-52-R for Exempt Surplus Property Finding - Millerton Street

1 RESOLUTION NO. 26-52-R

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HANFORD,

CALIFORNIA, DECLARING UNUSED RIGHT-OF-WAY

TO BE EXEMPT SURPLUS PROPERTY

At a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford, duly called and held on August 4 , 2026, at 7:00 p.m., it was moved by Council Member _________________, and seconded by Council Member ____________________, and duly carried that the following resolution be adopted:

WHEREAS, the City of Hanford (“City”) owns approximately eight thousand, one hundred forty-five (8,145) square feet of right-of-way (“Right-of-Way”) in fee simple; and

WHEREAS, the Right-of-Way comprises a portion of West Millerton Street; and

WHEREAS, Lots 215 and 216 (“Lots 215 and 216”) of Kings County Tract No. 865, Unit 2 are located immediately north of the Right -of-Way, and a City storm drainage basin is located immediately south of the Right-of-Way; and

WHEREAS, the developer of Lots 215 and 216 has requested to defer the construction of required infrastructure improvements, including, without limitation, curb, gutter, sidewalk, drive approach, and paving of roadway (full road width extending from existing pavement), underground utilities of storm drain, sanitary sewer, and water main and services, dry utilities services of electric, telephone, gas, cable TV, and park strip landscaping and irrigation (collectively “Infrastructure Improvements”); and

WHEREAS, the developer of Lots 215 and 216 intends to develop the lots and the Infrastructure Improvements when Kings County Tract No. 912, which abuts Kings County Tract No. 865, Unit 2, is developed;

WHEREAS, as a condition of approval of the developer’s request to defer construction of the Infrastructure Improvements, the City will abandon the unimproved Right-of-Way, which the City previously accepted through the final map for Kings County Tract No. 865, Unit 2; and

WHEREAS, the to -be-abandoned Right -of-Way is more particularly described in the attached Exhibit “A-1,” which is incorporated herein by reference; and

WHEREAS, t he developer will maintain and will be liable for the condition of the unimproved Right-of-Way area prior to the construction of the Infrastructure Improvement and rededication of the Right-of-Way to the City; and

WHEREAS, the Right-of-Way will be rededicated to the City after the construction of the Infrastructure Improvements and the City’s acceptance of the same; and

WHEREAS, the City has no use for the Right-of-Way until the construction of the Infrastructure Improvements; and

2 WHEREAS, for purposes of Government Code Section 54221(f)(2), the Right-of-Way is not: (i) within a coastal zone; (ii) adjacent to a historical unit of the State Parks System; (iii) listed on, or determined by the State Office of Historic Preservation to be eligible for, the National Register of Historical Places; or (iv) within the Lake Tahoe region as defined by Government Code Section 66905.5.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Hanford finds the following for purposes of Government Code Section 54221(f)(1):

1. The Right-of-Way: (a) is less than one-half (1/2) acre in area; and (b) is not contiguous to land owned by the state or the City for open -space or low - and moderate-income housing purposes; and

2. The Right-of-Way will be abandoned and will be conveyed to the owner of abutting property through the right -of-way abandonment process described in Streets & Highways Code Section 8300, et seq.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City Council hereby declares the Right-of-Way to be exempt surplus property for purposes of the Surplus Land Act (Government Code Section 54220, et seq.).

PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this _____ day of _________, 2026 by the following vote:

AYES: ________________________________________________________________________ NOES: ________________________________________________________________________ ABSTAIN: ____________________________________________________________________ ABSENT: _____________________________________________________________________

Approved _______________________________

MARK KAIRIS
Mayor
Attest:

________________________

NATALIE CORRAL

CITY CLERK

3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF KINGS ) ss

CITY OF HANFORD )

I, Natalie Corral, City Clerk of the City of Hanford, do hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hanford held on the ______ day of _______________, 2026.

Date:

City Clerk

12.D.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 8/4/2026 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Authorize a response to County of Kings Grand Jury Report, Keeping Our Firefighters/EMS Safe in Kings County - Personnel Protective Equipment

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council by motion, approve; (i) the attached HFD response to the 2025-2026 County of Kings Grand Jury Report, Keeping Our Firefighters/EMS Safe in Kings County - Personnel Protective Equipment, and (ii) the Mayor's signature of a transmittal letter under which the response will be sent to the Presiding Judge of the Kings County Superior Court.

Recommended Motion: I move to approve the response to the Grand Jury Report, Keeping Our Firefighters/EMS Safe in Kings County and that the cover letter be signed by the City Mayor.

BACKGROUND:

The 2025-2026 County of Kings Grand Jury issued the attached report Keeping Our Firefighters/EMS Safe in Kings County - Personnel Protective Equipment, which pertains to fire safety and medical personnel being equipped with ballistic gear when responding to dangerous incident calls. These ballistic items include ballistic vests and ballistic helmets.

As noted in the report, there has been a surge in first responders, including firefighters and medical personnel, being exposed to dangerous situations such as assault, shooting, terrorism and violent protest. As a result, the Grand Jury emphasizes the need for Kings County Fire Agencies to revise and update their personal protective equipment policies to ensure the mandated usage of ballistic gear during dangerous situations.

The Hanford Fire Department concurs with both of the findings outlined in the Grand Jury's report and has already implemented the attached Policy 905 which echoes the findings in the Grand Jury Report. Policy 905 states that personnel are authorized to utilize Department-issued ballistic PPE whenever there is reasonable belief circumstances warrant its use. Supervisors may also require the use of Ballistic PPE whenever known or anticipated hazards present an elevated risk of violence.

HFD Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment may include:

• NIJ-rated ballistic vest/body armor

• Ballistic helmet
• Rifle-rated plates (if equipped)
• Ballistic eye protection
• High-visibility FIRE/EMS identification
• Integrated Tactical Emergency Casualty Care (TECC) medical kit FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact at this time.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. HFD Response to GJ Report re Fire Ballistic PPE.

2. Letter to Judge Ciuffini Re: City Response to HFD PPE Ballistic Gear.

3. Fire Department Vests

4. Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment POLICY 905

1 CITY OF HANFORD’S RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY REPORT 2025-2026

Keeping Our Firefighters/EMS Safe in Kings County
Personnel Protective Equipment

* * * * *

The following is the response of the Hanford City Council and the Chief of the Hanford Fire Department (collectively “the City”) to the Grand Jury Report for the 2025-2026 session (“the Report”) entitled “Keeping our (sic) Firefighters/EMS in Kings County – Personnel Protective Equipment.”

Grand Jury Finding 1:

“Recent incidents involving violence toward emergency responders such as the incident in Idaho last year highlight the need for enhanced protective equipment to ensure that our firefighters and EMS are protected during high- risk calls. Our first responders must always be ready to face potential dangers with the equipment necessary to save the lives of all involved, including their own. This equipment should include ballistic vests and helmets for all county and city firefighters.”

City’s Response to Finding 1:

The City concurs with Finding 1.

Recommendation 1:

“Body armor and helmets should be required equipment available on each engine and worn in any scenario where there is potential for violence, domestic violence, gunfire, terrorism, and any situation where there is a possibility for escalation.”

City’s Response to Recommendation 1:

The City has implemented Recommendation 1.

Grand Jury Finding 2:

“There is a need for Kings County (including Corcoran which is covered by County Fire), Avenal, Hanford, and Lemoore Fire Departments to have policies and procedures in place for the use of ballistic vests and helmets by firefighters and EMS in dangerous situations such as assaults, shootings, terrorism, and violent protests. These safety items provide critical protection against firearms and other threats encountered during emergency responses.”

City’s Response to Finding 2:

The City concurs with Finding 2.

2 Recommendation 2:

“Kings County (including Corcoran which is covered by County Fire), Avenal, Hanford and Lemoore Fire Departments should update their policies and procedures to include for the use of ballistic vests and helmets by firefighters and EMS in dangerous situations such as assaults, shootings, terrorism, violent protests and any situations where there is potential for a dangerous situation to escalate. These changes should be completed by October 2026.”

City’s Response to Recommendation 2:

The City has implemented Recommendation 2. Policy 905 of the Hanford Fire Department’s Policy Manual contains provisions regarding ballistic personal protective equipment. A copy of Policy 905 is attached hereto as Exhibit “A,” which is incorporated herein by reference.

EXHIBIT “A”

Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) - 1 Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/07/14, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Hanford City FD
Policy
905

Hanford City FD Policy Manual
Fire Policy

Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) 905.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The Hanford Fire Department is committed to reducing or eliminating occupational risks and hazards whenever possible to improve the safety of its members.

The purpose of this policy is to establish standards governing the deployment, use, inspection, maintenance, storage, replacement, accountability, and training requirements for Department-issued Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE).

Ballistic PPE is intended to reduce the risk of injury to personnel operating during Active Shooter/Hostile Event Response (ASHER), Rescue Task Force (RTF) operations, civil disturbances, tactical law enforcement support incidents, and other incidents where ballistic threats may reasonably exist.

The use of Ballistic PPE is intended solely as a risk reduction measure and shall not replace sound tactical decision - making, scene security, law enforcement protection, Unified Command, or established Incident Command System (ICS) principles.

Nothing within this policy authorizes personnel to enter unsecured areas, assume unnecessary risk, or perform law enforcement functions.

905.2 POLICY
The Hanford Fire Department recognizes that violence directed toward emergency responders has increased nationwide. The Department shall provide Ballistic PPE to members assigned to duties where ballistic threats may reasonably be encountered.

Personnel are authorized to utilize Department-issued Ballistic PPE whenever they reasonably believe circumstances warrant its use. Supervisors may also require the use of Ballistic PPE whenever known or anticipated hazards present an elevated risk of violence.

Hanford City FD Policy Manual
Fire Policy
Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) - 2 Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/07/14, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Hanford City FD

Personnel shall not self -deploy into Hot Zones or other unsecured areas. Ballistic PPE does not make personnel bulletproof and does not eliminate operational risk. Members shall continually evaluate risk versus benefit and withdraw whenever the threat exceeds the level of protection provided by assigned PPE or law enforcement protection is no longer available.

905.3 DEFINITIONS
Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE)

Protective equipment designed to reduce injury from ballistic and fragmentation threats. Department issued equipment may include:

• NIJ-rated ballistic vest/body armor
• Ballistic helmet
• Rifle-rated plates (if equipped)
• Ballistic eye protection
• High-visibility FIRE/EMS identification
• Integrated Tactical Emergency Casualty Care (TECC) medical kit

Hot Zone

An area where an active threat exists and law enforcement contact teams are actively engaging the threat.

Warm Zone

An area cleared by law enforcement where a potential threat may still exist and where Rescue Task Force operations may occur under armed law enforcement protection.

Cold Zone

A secure area free from known threats.

Hanford City FD Policy Manual
Fire Policy
Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) - 3 Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/07/14, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Hanford City FD

Rescue Task Force (RTF)

A coordinated team consisting of law enforcement officers and Fire/EMS personnel operating in the Warm Zone to provide rapid casualty care and evacuation.

905.4 AUTHORIZED USE
Ballistic PPE shall be worn when directed by Incident Command, Unified Command, a supervisor, or when responding to incidents including, but not limited to:

• Active Shooter/Hostile Event incidents
• Rescue Task Force operations
• Tactical law enforcement operations requiring Fire/EMS support • Terrorism-related incidents
• Incidents involving credible threats against responders • Civil unrest, riots, looting, or organized demonstrations with potential for violence • Incidents involving gunfire or reports of ongoing shooting • Incidents involving confrontations between rival gangs, motorcycle gangs, or organized criminal enterprises • Incidents involving groups with a known history of violence • Search warrant standbys or barricaded suspect incidents • Hostage incidents
• High-risk law enforcement operations
• Any incident where law enforcement recommends Ballistic PPE • Any incident where Unified Command determines ballistic protection is appropriate • Any situation in which the Company Officer determines that enhanced protection is prudent based upon a risk assessment
• Personnel shall only enter Warm Zones following authorization by Unified Command and law enforcement.
905.5 OPERATIONAL USE
Personnel operating while wearing Ballistic PPE shall:

• Operate under the Incident Command System.
• Maintain accountability at all times.
• Operate only within assigned operational zones.

Hanford City FD Policy Manual
Fire Policy
Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) - 4 Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/07/14, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Hanford City FD

• Remain assigned to an identified Rescue Task Force or operational group. • Maintain continuous communication with Incident Command. • Coordinate closely with law enforcement escorts.
• Utilize Tactical Emergency Casualty Care (TECC) principles. • Limit time within Warm Zones to mission-essential activities. • Continuously reassess hazards and report changing threat conditions. • Withdraw immediately if law enforcement protection is withdrawn or scene conditions become unsafe.

Personnel shall not:

• Enter Hot Zones.
• Pursue suspects.
• Perform law enforcement functions.
• Separate from assigned law enforcement escorts.
• Enter uncleared structures or rooms.
• Initiate fire suppression in unsecured areas unless specifically authorized through Unified Command following a documented risk-benefit assessment.
905.6 EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS
Each Ballistic PPE deployment package shall include, at a minimum:

• NIJ-rated Level IIIA ballistic vest or Department-approved equivalent • Ballistic helmet Ballistic eye protection
• High-visibility FIRE/EMS identification
• Protective gloves
• Integrated TECC medical kit

The TECC kit shall include, at a minimum:

Hanford City FD Policy Manual
Fire Policy
Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) - 5 Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/07/14, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Hanford City FD

• Two tourniquets
• Hemostatic dressing
• Pressure dressing
• Chest seals
• Trauma shears
• Nasopharyngeal airway with lubricant
• Protective gloves

Equipment configurations may be modified by the Training Division to reflect operational needs and current TECC recommendations.

905.7 DONNING AND DOFFING
Prior to deployment personnel shall:

• Inspect Ballistic PPE for serviceability.
• Verify ballistic panels and plates are correctly installed. • Confirm all straps and retention systems function properly. • Verify TECC equipment is complete.
• Properly adjust the vest and helmet.
• Ensure identifying markings are visible.
• Conduct a buddy inspection whenever practical.
• Report deficiencies immediately.

Personnel should don Ballistic PPE before arrival whenever practical and operationally safe.

Ballistic PPE shall only be removed after personnel have returned to a Cold Zone and Incident Command authorizes demobilization.

Following deployment personnel shall:

Hanford City FD Policy Manual
Fire Policy
Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) - 6 Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/07/14, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Hanford City FD

• Inspect equipment.
• Replace expended medical supplies.
• Report damage or deficiencies.
• Clean equipment in accordance with manufacturer recommendations. • Return equipment to its assigned storage location.

905.8 INSPECTION, MAINTENANCE, AND STORAGE
Personnel assigned Ballistic PPE shall inspect equipment:

• At the beginning of each shift.
• Following each deployment.
• During monthly station equipment inspections.

Inspections shall include:

• Exterior carrier condition
• Ballistic panel integrity
• Plate condition
• Helmet shell and suspension
• Fasteners and retention systems
• Identification markings
• TECC medical inventory

Personnel shall clean equipment only in accordance with manufacturer instructions. Ballistic panels shall not be machine washed, submerged, or cleaned with bleach or harsh chemicals unless specifically authorized by the manufacturer.

Ballistic PPE shall be stored:

Hanford City FD Policy Manual
Fire Policy
Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) - 7 Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/07/14, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Hanford City FD

• In a clean, dry environment.
• Protected from excessive heat, sunlight, moisture, chemicals, and physical damage. • In a manner that prevents folding or deformation of ballistic panels. • In an accessible location that permits rapid deployment during emergencies.

905.9 REMOVAL FROM SERVICE AND REPLACEMENT
Ballistic PPE shall immediately be removed from service when:

• Manufacturer service life has expired.
• Equipment sustains ballistic impact.
• Equipment sustains stab or puncture damage.
• Panels become cracked, torn, delaminated, or deformed. • Helmet integrity is compromised.
• Equipment fails inspection.
• Equipment is contaminated or exposed to conditions that may compromise protective performance.

Any Ballistic PPE involved in a ballistic strike, significant blunt force impact, chemical contamination, or fire damage shall immediately be removed from service pending manufacturer evaluation or replacement.

The Training Division shall maintain records documenting:

• Date of purchase
• Date placed into service
• Inspection history
• Maintenance and repair history
• Replacement schedule

905.10 TRAINING

Hanford City FD Policy Manual
Fire Policy
Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) - 8 Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/07/14, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Hanford City FD

Personnel issued Ballistic PPE shall successfully complete initial and annual refresher training that includes:

• Active Shooter/Hostile Event Response (ASHER)
• Rescue Task Force operations
• Incident Command System and Unified Command
• Tactical Emergency Casualty Care (TECC)
• Capabilities and limitations of Ballistic PPE
• Donning and doffing procedures
• Equipment inspection and maintenance
• Casualty evacuation techniques
• Warm Zone operations
• Scenario-based practical exercises
• Timed deployment drills

905.11 RESPONSIBILITIES
Fire Chief

The Fire Chief shall ensure adequate resources are available to maintain an effective Ballistic PPE program.

Training Division

The Training Division shall:

• Maintain issuance and training records.
• Coordinate inspections.
• Maintain replacement schedules.
• Evaluate equipment performance.
• Update procedures to reflect changes in applicable standards and best practices. • Conduct an annual review of the Ballistic PPE program.

Hanford City FD Policy Manual
Fire Policy
Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) - 9 Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/07/14, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Hanford City FD

Company Officers

Company Officers shall:

• Ensure personnel comply with this policy.
• Verify operational readiness.
• Conduct periodic inspections.
• Require Ballistic PPE whenever operational hazards warrant. • Report deficiencies through the chain of command.

Members

Members shall:

• Properly maintain assigned equipment.
• Complete required inspections.
• Report deficiencies immediately.
• Participate in required training.
• Utilize Ballistic PPE in accordance with this policy.

905.12 REFERENCES
• Hanford Fire Department Active Shooter/Hostile Event Response (ASHER) Procedures • Hanford Fire Department Rescue Task Force Procedures
• National Incident Management System (NIMS)
• California Incident Command System (ICS)
• NFPA 3000 – Standard for an Active Shooter/Hostile Event Response (ASHER) Program • National Institute of Justice (NIJ) Ballistic Resistance Standards

Hanford City FD Policy Manual
Fire Policy
Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE)

10 • Tactical Emergency Casualty Care (TECC) Guidelines • U.S. Department of Homeland Security Active Shooter Preparedness Guidance • International Association of Fire Chiefs Active Shooter Toolkit • International Association of Fire Fighters Active Shooter Best Practices

ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT | 319 N. DOUTY ST. HANFORD, CA 93230 559.585.2500 | WWW.HANFORD.CITY
August 4, 2026
The Honorable Kathy Ciuffini, Presiding Judge
Kings County Superior Court
1640 Kings County Drive
Hanford, CA 93230
RE: City of Hanford Response to Grand Jury Report, Keeping Our Firefighters/EMS Safe in Kings County Personnel Protective Equipment Dear Judge Ciuffini:

The City of Hanford (“City”) hereby responds to the Kings County Grand Jury’s 2025-2026 Report, Keeping Our Firefighters/EMS Safe in Kings County Personnel Protective Equipment. The enclosure represents the response of the Hanford City Council, City Manager, Christopher Tavarez, and Fire Chief, Daniel Perkins.

The City appreciates the Grand Jury’s diligence and trusts that the enclosure addresses the
Grand Jury’s findings and recommendations.

Sincerely,

CITY OF HANFORD
By: ______________________________

MARK KAIRIS
Mayor
Enclosure

1 Keeping our Firefighters/EMS Safe in Kings County
Personnel Protective Equipment
May 11, 2026

Summary

Firefighters, as first responders, are often exposed to dangerous situations such as assaults, shootings, terrorism, and violent protests. Given the rise in violent incidents targeting emergency personnel, it is essential for fire departments in Kings County, Avenal, Corcoran (within County Fire), Hanford, and Lemoore to reevaluate their safety policies, procedures and protocols and use the updated policies during all dangerous situations.

These updated policies should include the use of ballistic vests and helmets during dangerous incidents. These safety items provide critical protection against firearms and other threats encountered during emergency responses.

Background

During the 1920’s and 1930’s, fire departments used their apparatus as roadblocks during dangerous incidents. The apparatus itself contained a 12-gauge shotgun, and a .38-caliber revolver, in case criminals were encountered before police officers arrived. These traditions continued until the late 1960’s as there were anti-war protests and general civil unrest after the assassinations of President John Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King. Task forces were formed which consisted of several engines and ladders as well as a chief officer. They traveled with police or national guard escorts.

Historically, Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and medical first responders have worked in “cold zones” outside of active danger areas. As time progressed, they more often worked in semi-cleared “warm zones” under second line police coverage. This history is important as fire personnel are currently facing a resurgence of assaults, stabbings, shootings, protests, and potential terrorist attacks aimed at first responders even on routine calls.

While attempting to give aid to patients, first responders were stabbed, shot, and attacked.

It has become clear that these situations are no longer limited to urban settings as seen in Idaho’s ambush last year. Two Idahoan firefighters were killed and another injured when they were ambushed while responding to a fire in June 2025. As a result, many fire departments are reevaluating their safety protocols and increasing training for personnel to better prepare for violent encounters on emergency calls.

Because of increased risks, firefighters require protective equipment to ensure their safety.

Whether they are being singled out or because they are first responders, they must always

2 be ready to face potential dangers with the equipment necessary to save lives of innocent residents as well as their own. Due to increasing incidents where emergency personnel face potentially violent situations, there is a need for Kings County, Avenal, Hanford, and Lemoore Fire Departments to have policies and procedures for the use of ballistic vests and helmets by firefighters and EMS.

Nearby towns such as Fresno, Lodi and Stockton are taking a proactive approach to safety by including ballistic vests and helmets for first responders in the Central Valley. The trend follows national movements, with many California agencies utilizing this equipment for Rescue Task Force protocols, aimed at increasing survival rates in hostile environments.

Fire departments have been preparing for dangerous situations for years and now have the gear to match their training. “The goal for any armor is to maximize ballistic protection while minimizing its impact on job performance.” It is important to choose armor that is not too bulky or too heavy.

Methodology (Investigative tech used-research, observations, interviews):

The Grand Jury interviewed members of several Kings County departments and reviewed various sources of information including:

Ballistic vests: Facing potential dangers in the fire service https://www.firerescue1.com/fire-products/personal-protective-equipment- ppe/articles/ballistic-vests-facing-potential-dangers-in-the-fire-service- Bpnen5pNiX3GfPQg

California City Firefighters Get Body Armor
https://www.firefighterclosecalls.com/california-city-firefighters-get-body-armor

Fresno Fire Department now has ballistic helmets and vests https://abc30.com/post/fresno-fire-department-now-has-ballistic-helmets- vests/17877819

The Case for Ballistic Protection in Fire and EMS https://www.narescue.com/nar-blog/the- case-for-ballistic-protection-in-fire-and-ems-part-1.html Violence Against Firefighters and EMTs, Reports, Info (The Secret List) https://www.firefighterclosecalls.com/violence-against-firefighters-and-emts-reports-info- the-secret-list/
Not Just for Cops: The importance of body armor for firefighters and medical first responders https://execdefense.com/not-just-for-cops-the-importance-of-body-armor-for- firefighters-and-medical-first-responders/

3 Rescue Task Force Vests/Ballistic Protection https://www.narescue.com/law- enforcement-tems-products/rescue-task-force-vests-ballistic- protection.html?srsltid=AfmBOooXzws349ritdKbvHlSpixOs-wKLvCShdlegOKEoAKY0- Gt0L1A
California Fire Foundation (CFF) grant opportunities
https://www.cafirefoundation.org/what-we-do/for-grant-
seekers?gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=22328747644&gclid=CjwKCAjwhLPOBhBiEiwA8 _wJHHPU9eaL01HIwK8YGxzNdAbI98zTT8fPBcqbaW1iGE_c5eu7MY3z9BoCqVAQAvD_BwE

Discussion

What has changed? Over the last few years there has been a decline in policing with many officers leaving the job. First responders need law enforcement present at any dangerous or hostile scene to keep responders and the scene safe. Without law enforcement presence, first responders are in increased danger.

Ballistic vests are designed to be worn during active shooters, civil unrest, and other potentially violent calls. They allow firefighters to address life-threatening emergencies and remove patients from hazardous areas without waiting for a scene to be fully secured. The first hour of a person’s injury can be critical to their survival so it is important for patients to have care as fast as possible.

Presently there are no state regulations prohibiting firefighters from wearing body armor, and its use is considered an added measure of safety for personnel operating in dangerous "warm zones." After reviewing Kings County Municipal Codes and consulting with local fire service officials, the Grand Jury found that there are no ballistic vests or helmets required in fire engines, but fire investigators are allowed to use body armor in combination with prescribed safety procedures. Please see Appendix A for Kings County Fire Policies.

Hanford Fire Department Policy and Procedures Manual section 332.4(a)(1) addresses the wearing of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) by merely stating the following: Members tasked with entry should wear PPE appropriate for the circumstances. Protective ballistic vests and helmets are not mentioned. Please see Appendix B for the current policy and procedures regarding Active Shooter and Other Violent Incidents.

Hemet, a city in San Jacinto Valley, Riverside County, purchased eighteen bullet-resistant protective vests in 2025 for their firefighters after there were nine attacks on Hemet police.

The attacks were targeting the police but there were booby traps believed to be set to kill first responders. The body armor weighs about five pounds and will be worn when firefighters respond to threatening calls or deadly situations. The department spent

4 approximately $600 on each vest. Other departments have previously worn bullet-resistant vests such as Riverside County, Cal-Fire arson and law enforcement units.

As of September 2025, Fresno Fire Department has equipped their department with ballistic vests and helmets at a cost of approximately $128,000 funded from the general budget. They are used in high-risk, dangerous, or volatile situations and allow firefighters to enter hazardous scenes to treat patients before the scene is fully secured. The Fresno Mayor said, “It gives our firefighters the same level of protection as our police officers as they work side by side with those officers out in the field in some very dangerous situations”.

Other Fire agencies such as Stockton, Lodi, Sunnyvale, Vallejo, and Cal Fire Fresno-Kings County Fire Departments are making use of protective vests and helmets. (Vallejo and the Sunnyvale Department of Public Safety have had this safety equipment for years and even cross-trained police and fire fighters).

Pros of wearing ballistic vests and helmets:

• Crucial protection against firearms in active shooter situations, domestic violence incidents and other calls involving potential gunfire.

• Defense against edged weapons and blunt force trauma . Vests can be designed to protect against stabbing, slashing, and blunt force trauma from agitated individuals, falling debris, or shrapnel.

• Enhanced safety in hazardous environments. Offers additional layer of protection in unpredictable environments, allowing firefighters to operate in “warm zones” where immediate medical care can be provided to victims sooner, potentially saving lives.

• Increased confidence. Having this protective equipment can boost firefighter morale and confidence, allowing them to focus on their duties without constantly worrying about an unsecured scene.

• Alignment with standards. The National Fire Protection Agency (NFPA) and the International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) recommend the use of ballistic protective equipment as PPE in active shooter and hostile events response. This aligns with industry’s best practices.

Cons of wearing ballistic vests and helmets:

• Weight and bulk. Added weight and bulk can restrict movement and agility, which are essential for tasks like climbing, running, and carrying people to safety.

5 • Mobility restriction. The gear may interfere with the range of motion required to perform physically demanding firefighting and advanced medical care tasks.

• Heat stress. Wearing additional layers can contribute to heat stress and fatigue, which raises health concerns for firefighters already working in hot environments.

• Cost and logistics. Procuring, maintaining, storing, and transporting specialized ballistic gear for an entire department presents significant financial and logistical challenges.

• Policy and training issues. Many departments lack clear policies on when the gear should be worn, and insufficient training on its proper use and integration with existing PPE.

There are differences in body armor for police and first responders such as firefighters and EMS. Paramedic body armor often features flexible panels or cutaways at the shoulders to allow for greater arm mobility during CPR or patient lifting.

• Appearance. Usually bright red, yellow, or high-visibility orange, sometimes with reflective striping to resemble turnout gear.

• Design. Often “one size fits most” with wide adjustment straps, as they are often shared among multiple crew members.

• Key Features. Designed for rapid, intermittent use on violent scenes rather than all- day wear. They feature clear “Fire” or “EMS” patches to avoid being mistaken for law enforcement. They are designed to hold medical supplies.

• Mobility. Cut to allow for bending and reaching to perform medical skills. They sometimes feature four-panel designs that offer better protection for the sides compared to traditional two-piece clamshell police vests.

6 Police armor prioritizes all-day wearability, quick, heavy equipment access, and protection over flexibility.

• Appearance. Typically solid black, “LAPD Blue,” or grey. Often worn as an outer carrier with Modular Lightweight Load-carrying Equipment (Molle webbing) for gear.

It is a standardized system of heavy-duty nylon stitching used to securely attach pouches, tools, and accessories.

• Design. Often fitted specifically to the officer for comfort during long shifts.

• Key Features. Designed for maximum concealability (under a shirt), quick access to gear-like radios and can carry a significant amount of extra ammunition.

• Protection Level. Soft armor, which protects against most handgun rounds, sometimes with hard plate pockets for rifle protection.

Vests may be worn over or under turnout gear and also come in different weights and fabrics to lessen heat stress. A quality bulletproof vest typically costs between $300 to $1,500 depending on the level of protection and any additional features.

Grants are available from the following:

• Assistance to Firefighters Grant (AFG -FEMA): Ballistic Protective Equipment (BPE)-defined as one vest, one helmet, a triage bag, and goggles is an eligible expense for fire and EMS agencies to support “warm zone” operations.

7 • Patrick Leahy Bulletproof Vests Partnership (BVP -DOJ): Reimburses up to 50% of the cost of body armor for law enforcement officers, which can apply to public safety officers in some departments.

• The California Fire Foundation (CFF): offers grant opportunities to fire departments, firefighter associations and community-based organizations whose vital projects focus on keeping California and our first responders safe.

• Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation Grants: Provides quarterly grants, often in the $15,000-$20,000 range for PPE, including body armor, for departments within sixty miles of a location.

• Gary Sinise Foundation : Offers grants for equipment for underfunded or volunteer fire/EMS departments.

• Cal Water Firefighter Grant: Supports fire departments in California with purchasing safety equipment.

• National Volunteer Fire Council (NVFC): Administers programs like the Good Neighbor Firefighter Safety Program, supported by State Farm, offering grants for gear.

Ballistic vests and helmets should be worn when there are signs of escalating hostility, such as threats of violence, presence of weapons, or aggressive behavior during domestic violence or active shooter situations. The following should be taken into consideration when purchasing PPE such as ballistic vests and helmets.

• Threat Level. The bullet-resistant vest or helmets should be rated to protect against the specific threats firefighters are likely to encounter. This includes ballistic threats, stabbing, slashing, blunt force trauma, and different rounds such as handguns or rifles.

• Comfort and Mobility. The gear must be comfortable and allow for unrestricted movement to ensure that firefighters can perform their duties effectively.

• Durability. The gear must be durable and able to withstand harsh conditions, heat, flames, and exposure to hazardous substances.

• Compatibility with other protective gear such as turnout gear, helmets, and SCBA (self-contained breathing apparatus). This ensures that firefighters can wear all necessary equipment without compromising their safety or performance.

8 Findings/Recommendations:

F1. Recent incidents involving violence toward emergency responders such as the incident in Idaho last year highlight the need for enhanced protective equipment to ensure that our firefighters and EMS are protected during high-risk calls. Our first responders must always be ready to face potential dangers with the equipment necessary to save the lives of all involved, including their own. This equipment should include ballistic vests and helmets for all county and city firefighters.

R1. Body armor and helmets should be required equipment available on each engine and worn in any scenario where there is potential for violence, domestic violence, gunfire, terrorism, and any situation where there is a possibility for escalation.

F2. There is a need for Kings County (including Corcoran which is covered by County Fire), Avenal, Hanford, and Lemoore Fire Departments to have policies and procedures in place for the use of ballistic vests and helmets by firefighters and EMS in dangerous situations such as assaults, shootings, terrorism, and violent protests. These safety items provide critical protection against firearms and other threats encountered during emergency responses.

R2. Kings County (including Corcoran which is covered by County Fire), Avenal, Hanford and Lemoore Fire Departments should update their policies and procedures to include for the use of ballistic vests and helmets by firefighters and EMS in dangerous situations such as assaults, shootings, terrorism, violent protests and any situations where there is potential for a dangerous situation to escalate. These changes should be completed by October 2026.

REQUIRED RESPONSE

Kings County Board of Supervisors
1400 W. Lacey Boulevard
Hanford, California 93230

Avenal City Council
919 Skyline Boulevard
Avenal, California 93204

Hanford City Council
319 N. Douty Street
Hanford, California 93230

9 Lemoore City Council
711 W. Cinnamon Drive
Lemoore, California 93245

INVITED RESPONSE

John Chamberlin, Fire Chief
Kings County Fire Department
280 Campus Drive
Hanford, California 93230

Jacob McAfee, Fire Chief
Avenal Fire Department
919 Skyline Boulevard
Avenal, California 93204

Daniel Perkins, Fire Chief
Hanford City Fire Department
350 W. Grangeville Boulevard
Hanford, California 93230

David Jones, Fire Chief
Lemoore Volunteer Fire Department
210 Fox Street
Lemoore, California 93245

Requirements and how to respond to a Grand Jury Report
§ 933. Findings and Recommendations (Excerpt)

No later than 90 days after the grand jury submits a final report on the operations of any public agency subject to its reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency shall comment to the presiding judge of the superior court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body, and every elected county officer or agency head for which the grand jury has responsibility pursuant to Section 914.1 shall comment within 60 days to the presiding judge of the superior court, with an information copy sent to the board of supervisors, on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of that county officer or agency head and any agency or agencies which that officer or agency head supervises or controls.

In any city and county, the mayor shall also comment on the findings and recommendations. All of these comments and reports shall forthwith be submitted to the

10 presiding judge of the superior court who impaneled the grand jury. A copy of all responses to grand jury reports shall be placed on file with the clerk of the public agency and the office of the county clerk, or the mayor when applicable, and shall remain on file in those offices...

As used in this section, “agency” includes a department. § 933.05. Responses to Findings (Excerpt)
(a) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury finding , the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following:
(1) The respondent agrees with the finding.
(2) The respondent disagrees with wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor.
(b) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury’s recommendation , the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions:
(1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action.
(2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation.
(3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report.
(4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation, therefore.
(c) However, if a finding or recommendation of the grand jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the board of supervisors shall respond if requested by the grand jury, but the response of the board of supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department.

11 (f) A grand jury shall provide the affected agency with a copy of the portion of the grand jury report relating to that person or entity two working days prior to its public release and after the approval of the presiding judge. No officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release of the final report. (Emphasis added.)

Appendix A

Kings County Fire Department, Policy Manual

409.16 BODY ARMOR
It is the policy of the Kings County Fire Department to maximize investigator safety through the use of body armor in combination with prescribed safety procedures. While body armor provides a significant level of protection, it is not a substitute for the observance of investigator safety procedures.

409.16.1 ISSUANCE OF BODY ARMOR
The Fire Marshal shall ensure that body armor is issued to all investigators when the investigator begins service as a Peace Officer with the Fire Investigations Unit and that, when issued, the body armor meets or exceeds the standards of the National Institute of Justice. The Fire Marshall shall establish a body armor replacement schedule and ensure that replacement body armor is issued pursuant to the schedule or whenever the body armor becomes worn or damaged to the point that its effectiveness or functionality has been compromised.

409.16.2 USE OF SOFT BODY ARMOR
Generally, the use of body armor is required subject to the following:
a. Investigators shall only wear agency-approved body armor. The words “Fire Investigator” or Fire Marshal” shall be clearly displayed on the front and back of the vest in contrasting colors.
b. Investigators shall wear body armor anytime they are in a situation where they could reasonably be expected to take enforcement action.
c. Investigators may be excused from wearing body armor when they are functioning primarily in an administrative or support capacity and could not reasonably be expected to take enforcement action.
d. Body armor shall be worn when an Investigator is working in uniform or taking part in Department range training.
e. An investigator may be excused from wearing body armor when he/she is involved in undercover or plainclothes work that his/her supervisor determines could be compromised by wearing body armor, or when a supervisor determines that other circumstances make it inappropriate to mandate wearing body armor.

12 409.16.4 CARE AND MAINTENANCE OF SOFT BODY ARMOR
Soft body armor should never be stored for any period of time in an area where environmental conditions (e.g., temperature, light, humidity) are not reasonably controlled) e.g., normal ambient room temperature/humidity conditions). Such as in automobiles or automobile trunks.

Soft body armor should be cared for and cleaned pursuant to the manufacturer’s care instructions provided with the soft body armor. The instructions can be found on labels located on the external surface of each ballistic panel. The carrier should also have a label that contains care instructions. Failure to follow these instructions may damage the ballistic performance capabilities of the armor. If care instructions for the soft body armor cannot be located, contact the manufacturer to request care instructions. Soft body armor should not be exposed to any cleaning agents or methods not specifically recommended by the manufacturer, as noted on the armor panel label.

Soft body armor should be replaced in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommended replacement schedule.

Appendix B

Hanford City Fire Department Policy Manual, Fire Policy

332.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
Violence committed in schools, workplaces, and other locations by any individual or group of individuals who are determined to target or kill persons or to create mass causalities presents a difficult situation for Fire/Emergency Medical Services (EMS). The purpose of this policy is to identify guidelines and factors that will assist members in making decisions in these rapidly unfolding and tense situations.

332.2 POLICY
The Hanford City Fire department will endeavor to plan for a rapid response to violent incidents involving an active shooter or other violent situations. The Hanford City Fire Department is committed to preparing and planning for rapid responses to these incidents by coordinating with law enforcement and other EMS personnel, as well as with those responsible for operating sites that may be the potential target of a violent incident.

332.3 ACTIVE SHOOTERT/VIOLENT INCIDENT PLAN
The Fire Chief should designate a member who is responsible for developing and managing an active shooter/violent incident (AS/VI) plan to assist in the Hanford City Fire Department’s response to an AS/VI.

13 The AS/VI plan should address:
a. Any applicable EMS Mass Casually Incident (MCI) protocols. b. Identification of state, local, and regional agencies that are likely to respond to an AS? Kings County Fire Policy Manual 409.16-409.16.4 establishes that The Fire Marshal shall ensure that body armor is issued to all investigators when the investigator begins service as a Peace Officer with the Fire Investigations Unit and that, when issued, the body armor meets or exceeds the standards of the National Institute of Justice. The Fire Marshall shall establish a body armor replacement schedule and ensure that replacement body armor is issued pursuant to the schedule or whenever the body armor becomes worn or damaged to the point that its effectiveness or functionality has been compromised.” c. Procedures to facilitate interagency sharing of information related to AS/VI. d. The joint development of protocols for responding to AS/Vis with fire, EMS, and law enforcement personnel, including but not limited to:

1. Identification of likely critical incident target sites and the availability of plans or schematics of such locations and associated outcomes.

2. Effects and outcomes of cascading or complex coordinated incidents.

3. Rapid entry and evacuation routes.

4. Equipment needs.

5. Communication interoperability.

6. Tactical EMS (TEMS) personnel or Rescue Task Forces (RTFs) deployment. e. Any mutual aid agreements that may exist.
f. Integrated use of the National Incident Management System and Incident Command System approach by personnel is likely to respond to an AS/VI. Emphasis should be placed on the establishment of a Unified Command. g. Any guidelines for an AS/VI that are established by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Interagency Board, and the National Fire Protection Association.
h. Common Communications and terminology to be utilized by responding personnel. i. Use of readily identifiable and visible identification by responding personnel to make them easily discernible.
j. Procedures and agreements governing self-deployment of emergency response personnel.
k. Identification of which personnel will need additional personal protective equipment (PPE), including ballistic gear (e.g., vests, helmets) and what training will be needed for the use of such gear.
l. Coordination and planning with local hospitals regarding communication and patient distribution.
m. Procedures for dissemination of information to the public during and after an AS/VI. n. Procedures for continuity of [agency department] operations during and after an AS/VI.
o. Establishing areas designated for victim reunification and recovery. p. Procedures for completion of post-incident reviews of AS/Vis.

14 The AS/VI plan manager should, in conjunction with appropriate law enforcement and other EMS personnel, review the [agency name]’s plan annually and make any necessary updates.

332.4 FIRST RESPONDERS
When responding to AS/Vis, members must decide, often during difficult and rapidly evolving circumstances, whether to enter the scene or to stage at a safe area. When deciding on a course of action members should:
a. Determine whether law enforcement has secured the scene or developed a plan for entry. If the scene has not been secured, members should work in teams with law enforcement and other EMS personnel on scene to develop a plan for entry and contact with victims with life-threatening injuries.

1. Members tasked with entry should wear PPE appropriate for the circumstances. b. Coordinate with available law enforcement personnel to create a staging area for additional member resources.
c. Identify and prepare members for operations in areas of higher risk. If appropriate. d. Decide whether individuals who are under imminent threat can be moved out of danger with reasonable safety.
e. Plan for rapid triage, treatment, and extraction of individuals with life=threatening injuries (e.g., in a warm zone).
f. Utilize TEMS support personnel or RTFs, if available.

1. In areas where there is a known hazard or direct and immediate threat to life) i.e., a hot zone), members should await arrival of TEMS support personnel or RTFs.

2. Members who unexpectedly find themselves in a hot zone should limit treatment to the control of life-threatening external hemorrhage by use of tourniquets or hemostatic gauze and the repositioning of airways. g. Rapid extraction to safety is paramount.
h. Coordinate full triage and transport of patients to definitive care outside of the area of imminent threat.
i. Consider the risk of fire hazards and secondary devices at any main or secondary scenes if there is a reasonable belief that improvised explosive devices have been or may be used.

332.5 TRAINING
This AS/VI plan manager should coordinate with the Training Officer so that members are provided with AS/VI training. The training should include:
a. Review of the AS/VI plan.
b. Review of any applicable EMS MCI protocols.
c. Review of trauma care guidelines in high threat pre-hospital situations and the various treatment methods available during an AS/VI.
d. Interagency training with law enforcement and other EMS personnel. e. Reality-based training at locations that may be a potential target of critical incidents.

15 The AS/VI plan manager should ensure that all training sessions and exercises are documented and that all training records are kept in accordance with the department Records Management Policy.

Hanford City FD Policy Manual
Fire Policy
Published with permission by Hanford City FD
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/07/14, All Rights Reserved. 905
Policy
Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) 905.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The Hanford Fire Department is committed to reducing or eliminating occupational risks and hazards whenever possible to improve the safety of its members.

The purpose of this policy is to establish standards governing the deployment, use, inspection, maintenance, storage, replacement, accountability, and training requirements for Department-issued Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE).

Ballistic PPE is intended to reduce the risk of injury to personnel operating during Active Shooter/Hostile Event Response (ASHER), Rescue Task Force (RTF) operations, civil disturbances, tactical law enforcement support incidents, and other incidents where ballistic threats may reasonably exist.

The use of Ballistic PPE is intended solely as a risk reduction measure and shall not replace sound tactical decision- making, scene security, law enforcement protection, Unified Command, or established Incident Command System (ICS) principles.

Nothing within this policy authorizes personnel to enter unsecured areas, assume unnecessary risk, or perform law enforcement functions.
905.2 POLICY
The Hanford Fire Department recognizes that violence directed toward emergency responders has increased nationwide. The Department shall provide Ballistic PPE to members assigned to duties where ballistic threats may reasonably be encountered.

Personnel are authorized to utilize Department-issued Ballistic PPE whenever they reasonably believe circumstances warrant its use. Supervisors may also require the use of Ballistic PPE whenever known or anticipated hazards present an elevated risk of violence.

Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) - 1

Hanford City FD Policy Manual
Fire Policy
Published with permission by Hanford City FD
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/07/14, All Rights Reserved.

Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) Personnel shall not self-deploy into Hot Zones or other unsecured areas. Ballistic PPE does not make personnel bulletproof and does not eliminate operational risk. Members shall continually evaluate risk versus benefit and withdraw whenever the threat exceeds the level of protection provided by assigned PPE or law enforcement protection is no longer available.
905.3 DEFINITIONS
Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) Protective equipment designed to reduce injury from ballistic and fragmentation threats. Department issued equipment may include:

Hot Zone
An area where an active threat exists and law enforcement contact teams are actively engaging the threat.

Warm Zone
An area cleared by law enforcement where a potential threat may still exist and where Rescue Task Force operations may occur under armed law enforcement protection.

Cold Zone
A secure area free from known threats.
• NIJ-rated ballistic vest/body armor
• Ballistic helmet
• Rifle-rated plates (if equipped)
• Ballistic eye protection
• High-visibility FIRE/EMS identification
• Integrated Tactical Emergency Casualty Care (TECC) medical kit Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) - 2

Hanford City FD Policy Manual
Fire Policy
Published with permission by Hanford City FD
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/07/14, All Rights Reserved.

Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) Rescue Task Force (RTF)
A coordinated team consisting of law enforcement officers and Fire/EMS personnel operating in the Warm Zone to provide rapid casualty care and evacuation.
905.4 AUTHORIZED USE
Ballistic PPE shall be worn when directed by Incident Command, Unified Command, a supervisor, or when responding to incidents including, but not limited to:
905.5 OPERATIONAL USE
Personnel operating while wearing Ballistic PPE shall:
• Active Shooter/Hostile Event incidents
• Rescue Task Force operations
• Tactical law enforcement operations requiring Fire/EMS support • Terrorism-related incidents
• Incidents involving credible threats against responders • Civil unrest, riots, looting, or organized demonstrations with potential for violence • Incidents involving gunfire or reports of ongoing shooting • Incidents involving confrontations between rival gangs, motorcycle gangs, or organized criminal enterprises • Incidents involving groups with a known history of violence • Search warrant standbys or barricaded suspect incidents • Hostage incidents
• High-risk law enforcement operations
• Any incident where law enforcement recommends Ballistic PPE • Any incident where Unified Command determines ballistic protection is appropriate • Any situation in which the Company Officer determines that enhanced protection is prudent based upon a risk assessment
• Personnel shall only enter Warm Zones following authorization by Unified Command and law enforcement.
• Operate under the Incident Command System.
• Maintain accountability at all times.
• Operate only within assigned operational zones.

Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) - 3

Hanford City FD Policy Manual
Fire Policy
Published with permission by Hanford City FD
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/07/14, All Rights Reserved.

Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) Personnel shall not:
905.6 EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS
Each Ballistic PPE deployment package shall include, at a minimum:

The TECC kit shall include, at a minimum:
• Remain assigned to an identified Rescue Task Force or operational group. • Maintain continuous communication with Incident Command. • Coordinate closely with law enforcement escorts.
• Utilize Tactical Emergency Casualty Care (TECC) principles. • Limit time within Warm Zones to mission-essential activities. • Continuously reassess hazards and report changing threat conditions. • Withdraw immediately if law enforcement protection is withdrawn or scene conditions become unsafe. • Enter Hot Zones.
• Pursue suspects.
• Perform law enforcement functions.
• Separate from assigned law enforcement escorts.
• Enter uncleared structures or rooms.
• Initiate fire suppression in unsecured areas unless specifically authorized through Unified Command following a documented risk-benefit assessment.
• NIJ-rated Level IIIA ballistic vest or Department-approved equivalent • Ballistic helmet Ballistic eye protection
• High-visibility FIRE/EMS identification
• Protective gloves
• Integrated TECC medical kit
Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) - 4

Hanford City FD Policy Manual
Fire Policy
Published with permission by Hanford City FD
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/07/14, All Rights Reserved.

Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) Equipment configurations may be modified by the Training Division to reflect operational needs and current TECC recommendations.
905.7 DONNING AND DOFFING
Prior to deployment personnel shall:

Personnel should don Ballistic PPE before arrival whenever practical and operationally safe.

Ballistic PPE shall only be removed after personnel have returned to a Cold Zone and Incident Command authorizes demobilization.

Following deployment personnel shall:
• Two tourniquets
• Hemostatic dressing
• Pressure dressing
• Chest seals
• Trauma shears
• Nasopharyngeal airway with lubricant
• Protective gloves
• Inspect Ballistic PPE for serviceability.
• Verify ballistic panels and plates are correctly installed. • Confirm all straps and retention systems function properly. • Verify TECC equipment is complete.
• Properly adjust the vest and helmet.
• Ensure identifying markings are visible.
• Conduct a buddy inspection whenever practical.
• Report deficiencies immediately.

Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) - 5

Hanford City FD Policy Manual
Fire Policy
Published with permission by Hanford City FD
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/07/14, All Rights Reserved.

Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) 905.8 INSPECTION, MAINTENANCE, AND STORAGE
Personnel assigned Ballistic PPE shall inspect equipment:

Inspections shall include:

Personnel shall clean equipment only in accordance with manufacturer instructions. Ballistic panels shall not be machine washed, submerged, or cleaned with bleach or harsh chemicals unless specifically authorized by the manufacturer.

Ballistic PPE shall be stored:
• Inspect equipment.
• Replace expended medical supplies.
• Report damage or deficiencies.
• Clean equipment in accordance with manufacturer recommendations. • Return equipment to its assigned storage location.
• At the beginning of each shift.
• Following each deployment.
• During monthly station equipment inspections.
• Exterior carrier condition
• Ballistic panel integrity
• Plate condition
• Helmet shell and suspension
• Fasteners and retention systems
• Identification markings
• TECC medical inventory
Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) - 6

Hanford City FD Policy Manual
Fire Policy
Published with permission by Hanford City FD
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/07/14, All Rights Reserved.

Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) 905.9 REMOVAL FROM SERVICE AND REPLACEMENT
Ballistic PPE shall immediately be removed from service when:

Any Ballistic PPE involved in a ballistic strike, significant blunt force impact, chemical contamination, or fire damage shall immediately be removed from service pending manufacturer evaluation or replacement.

The Training Division shall maintain records documenting:
905.10 TRAINING
• In a clean, dry environment.
• Protected from excessive heat, sunlight, moisture, chemicals, and physical damage. • In a manner that prevents folding or deformation of ballistic panels. • In an accessible location that permits rapid deployment during emergencies. • Manufacturer service life has expired.
• Equipment sustains ballistic impact.
• Equipment sustains stab or puncture damage.
• Panels become cracked, torn, delaminated, or deformed. • Helmet integrity is compromised.
• Equipment fails inspection.
• Equipment is contaminated or exposed to conditions that may compromise protective performance. • Date of purchase
• Date placed into service
• Inspection history
• Maintenance and repair history
• Replacement schedule
Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) - 7

Hanford City FD Policy Manual
Fire Policy
Published with permission by Hanford City FD
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/07/14, All Rights Reserved.

Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) Personnel issued Ballistic PPE shall successfully complete initial and annual refresher training that includes:
905.11 RESPONSIBILITIES
Fire Chief
The Fire Chief shall ensure adequate resources are available to maintain an effective Ballistic PPE program.

Training Division
The Training Division shall:
• Active Shooter/Hostile Event Response (ASHER)
• Rescue Task Force operations
• Incident Command System and Unified Command
• Tactical Emergency Casualty Care (TECC)
• Capabilities and limitations of Ballistic PPE
• Donning and doffing procedures
• Equipment inspection and maintenance
• Casualty evacuation techniques
• Warm Zone operations
• Scenario-based practical exercises
• Timed deployment drills
• Maintain issuance and training records.
• Coordinate inspections.
• Maintain replacement schedules.
• Evaluate equipment performance.
• Update procedures to reflect changes in applicable standards and best practices. • Conduct an annual review of the Ballistic PPE program.

Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) - 8

Hanford City FD Policy Manual
Fire Policy
Published with permission by Hanford City FD
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/07/14, All Rights Reserved.

Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) Company Officers
Company Officers shall:

Members
Members shall:
905.12 REFERENCES
• Ensure personnel comply with this policy.
• Verify operational readiness.
• Conduct periodic inspections.
• Require Ballistic PPE whenever operational hazards warrant. • Report deficiencies through the chain of command.
• Properly maintain assigned equipment.
• Complete required inspections.
• Report deficiencies immediately.
• Participate in required training.
• Utilize Ballistic PPE in accordance with this policy. • Hanford Fire Department Active Shooter/Hostile Event Response (ASHER) Procedures • Hanford Fire Department Rescue Task Force Procedures
• National Incident Management System (NIMS)
• California Incident Command System (ICS)
• NFPA 3000 – Standard for an Active Shooter/Hostile Event Response (ASHER) Program • National Institute of Justice (NIJ) Ballistic Resistance Standards Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) - 9

Hanford City FD Policy Manual
Fire Policy
Published with permission by Hanford City FD
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/07/14, All Rights Reserved.

Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) • Tactical Emergency Casualty Care (TECC) Guidelines
• U.S. Department of Homeland Security Active Shooter Preparedness Guidance • International Association of Fire Chiefs Active Shooter Toolkit • International Association of Fire Fighters Active Shooter Best Practices Ballistic Personal Protective Equipment (Ballistic PPE) - 10

12.E.

AGENDA

STAFF REPORT

MEETING DATE: 8/4/2026 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR

SUBJECT:

Authorize a response to the County of Kings Grand Jury Report, Consolidated Fire Communications in Kings County.

RECOMMENDATION:

Recommendation: Staff recommends that City Council by motion, approve; (i) the attached response to the 2025-2026 County of Kings Grand Jury Report Consolidated Fire Communications in Kings County, and (ii) the Mayor's signature of a transmittal letter under which the response will be sent to the Presiding Judge of the Kings County Superior Court.

Recommended Motion: I move to approve the response to the Grand Jury Report, Consolidated Fire Communications in Kings County and that the cover letter be signed by the City Mayor.

BACKGROUND:

The 2025-2026 County of Kings Grand Jury issued the attached report, Consolidated Fire Communications in Kings County which discusses inefficient communication infrastructures with first- responder agencies within Kings County, including fire, sheriff, police departments, out-of-county ambulance providers and state and federal emergency operators that may result in delays in resource deployment, prolonged response times, confusion/chaos among agencies, and a higher risk of firefighter injury or death. In response to this, the Grand Jury recommended the implementation of a county-wide radio channel trunking technology.

Although the Hanford Fire Department does concur with some of the findings of the Grand Jury, specifically, the inefficient communication infrastructure with first responder agencies. It does not agree nor will it implement a city-wide radio channel trunking technology. HFD has found that this technology, while popular, will not properly address the issues at hand. Rather, there are other more cost-effective and efficient means to address the issues identified by the Grand Jury. Like implementing IP linked simulcasted P-25 compliant radio core or P-25 cross band gateways that allow the UHF and VHF signals to be linked or patched in the communications center.

Therefore, HFD would request further analysis be completed through the development and potential formation of a committee made up of all segments of public safety, including HFD, whose aim is to evaluate the regional communications needs and work towards a collectively supported communications engineering study completed by a neutral third party expert.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact at this time.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Response to GJ Report re Consolidated Fire Communications in Kings County

2. Letter to Judge Ciuffini re City Response to Consolidated Communications

3. Consolidated Fire Communication

1 CITY OF HANFORD’S RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY REPORT 2025-2026

Consolidated Fire Communications in Kings County

* * * * *

The following is the response of the Hanford City Council and the Chief of the Hanford Fire Department (collectively “the City”) to the Grand Jury Report for the 2025-2026 session (“the Report”) entitled “Consolidated Fire Communications in Kings County.”

Grand Jury Finding 1:

“Kings County as well as its four cities of Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, and Lemoore are unable to reliably communicate with other first responders such as sheriff, police departments, out- of-county ambulance providers and state and federal emergency operator s. The lack of a duplex system where two-way communication is possible simultaneously, the use of outdated technology, lack of infrastructure in the valley, and incompatible radio frequencies prevents the seamless coordination between agencies during emergencies. This causes delays in resource deployment, prolonged response times, confusion/chaos among agencies, and a higher risk of firefighter injury or death.”

City’s Response to Finding 1:

The City concurs with Finding 1

The City has implemented the following multi- year, multi- phased plan to address the findings of the Grand Jury.

With recent voter approval of the City of Hanford’s tax measure known as Measure H, one of the City’s first year goals is to identify and fix communications abilities within the Fire Department, the Hanford Fire Department purchased (60) new handheld TRI-Band radios and (12) Apparatus TRI-Band radios.

These radios are part of a multi- phase multi -year approach to address known issues plaguing the department as well as the region. As the Grand Jury pointed out, first responders are “unable to reliably communicate with other first responders such as sheriff, police de partments, out-of-county ambulance providers and state and federal emergency operators” as they operate on separate UHF frequencies.

With the addition of these specific radios, both on apparatus and carried by all members of the Hanford Fire Department (“HFD”), interoperability- using the law enforcement and EMS UHF channels that were not accessible with the older radios - has been achieved by HFD. These Tri - Band radios allow the end-user to create banks of channels with multiple frequencies, seamlessly allowing the end user to move from one frequency type to another, a function that could not be done with the older radio models.

2 The City agrees with the assertion by the Grand Jury that these types of issues are very prevalent within the Central Valley and also agrees that “the use of outdated technology, lack of infrastructure in the valley, and incompatible radio frequencies prevents the seamless coordination between agencies during emergencies.”

Although the City is aware that HFD’s actions to date do NOT solve all of the issues identified, it is but one piece of the MULTI-FACETED problem that HFD has addressed since the creation of the Grand Jury’s report as the radios mentioned above were placed into service by HFD on 7/4/2026.

Lastly, with respect to the finding that the radio issue “causes delays in resource deployment, prolonged response times, confusion/chaos among agencies, and a higher risk of firefighter injury or death,” the issue forms the basis of needed changes that HFD has undertaken to address these concerns and encourages its fellow agencies throughout Kings County to similarly act.

Grand Jury Finding 2:

“It is of the utmost importance that firefighters can easily communicate with each other and with Incident Command during fire emergency situations. According to the National Institute for Occupation Safety and Health (NIOSH) inadequate communications are one of the five most commonly causal factors that are present in nearly all of firefighter line-of-duty deaths.”

City’s Response to Finding 2:

The City concurs with Finding 2.

Recommendations 1 and 2:

“The communications systems in Kings County as well as its four cities – Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, and Lemoore - should be on a universal duplex trunking system, as Kern County is establishing, which accommodates all public safety entities (local and state wide) in an emergency or disaster situation.”

City’s Response to Recommendations 1 and 2:

The City will not implement Recommendations 1 and 2.

Although radio channel trunking technology has grown in popularity, it is NOT the most cost effective and efficient means to address the items identified by the Grand Jury. This is due, in part, to the cost of trunking in general, as well as cost effectiveness and proprietary elements built into these types of complex systems. The trunking ability (although assisting in the VHF - known weaknesses regarding in-building coverage by utilizing UHF available channels) does not address the other elements that must also be dealt with to increase operational communications ability (i.e. the expansion and increased placement of communications towers that would house

3 the UHF and VHF receivers and transmitters as well as other microwave backhaul systems throughout the region that assist in the rural varied terrain areas).

Without addressing the tower and repeater transmitter issues, a trunking system has a limited capability of getting the trunked signal back from the end- user to those who need to hear the radio communications either on the emergency scene or in the communications center.

This weakened end -user transmitting signal is the PRIMARY issue inherent in all VHF radio systems. As the Grand Jury has noted within their own research, this weakness has led to serious injury and or death of firefighters as noted by NIOSH within the Grand Jury’s research as well.

However, there are other options that address these known issues and increase functionality of the VHF/UHF backhauled system as well. Those options are as follows:

• IP linked Simulcasted P -25 Compliant Radio core (IP based r adio-over-IP) or RoIP;

And

• P-25 Cross Band gateways that allow the UHF and VHF signals to be linked or patched in the communications center. This allows the same functionality at a fraction of the price.

Additionally, if a trunked system were to be implemented a significant question is - Where and who would maintain the CORE?

The CORE is licensed and maintained typically by one agency in their communications center. An issue exists as to location of the communications center. For example, the center may be located within a City-operated facility as the City is the home to the majority of residents within Kings County. Additionally, another issue exists as there is currently no single entit y that could absorb all the traffic for the separate agencies.

This then begs the question of the need to build a Common Communications Center with abilities to handle all regional public safety communications traffic. This is another expense that must also be considered as the estimated cost approaches $25 -40 million dollars depending upon the size and complexity of the building.

There are currently options that would have similar functions that are more cost effective, allowing for better application of the communications infrastructure needs of each partner agency within Kings County. Therefore, the City does not intend to implement the recommendation that it participate in a trunking system unless the results of a collaborative regional communications study show that trunking is the best and most cost-effective means to upgrade the communications capabilities within the region.

4 Grand Jury Finding 3:

“Technology does exist to merge Ultra High Frequency, Very High Frequency, 700 MHz, and 800 MHz. Ultra -High Frequency and Very High Frequency are radio frequencies used by emergency services, and the use of a trunking system allows multiple agencies to communicate seamlessly across these frequencies. Kings County, Tulare County and Fresno County are some of the last to trend in this direction.”

City’s Response to Finding 3:

The City partially agrees with Finding 3.

It is true that trunking operates as described in the Grand Jury Report; however, alternative technology provides similar results.

The IP linked simulcasted P-25 compliant RoIP radio system and P-25 cross band gateways provide similar function at far less cost.

While the assertion that “Kings County, Tulare County and Fresno County are some of the last to trend in this direction” is true, the referenced counties have not completed the transition in large part due to significant costs associated with a trunking system.

The Central Valley has historically been sheltered from large catastrophic natural disasters that bring attention to this interoperability Achille’s heel and which support requests for federal and state funding post-incident that is needed to complete large infrastructure projects like the one recommended by the Grand Jury. Furthermore, the l ion’s share of the agencies in Kings County do not have Transport Advanced Life Support Fire -Based ambulances that could allow for a secured revenue stream to support these actions. These enterprise functions in other comparable counties have been shown to free up additional monies that could be used to establish these types of infrastructure improvements.

Recommendation 3:

“The establishment of a county- wide trunking system should be a high priority within Kings County. All fire departments countywide and other first responders should be involved in creating a committee/commission to plan, create, coordinate, and implement a unified trunking system to benefit both our emergency responders as well as our citizens. First steps should be taken by October 2026.”

City’s Response to Recommendation 3:

The City will not implement Recommendation 3.

As stated above, a countywide trunking system is not the only answer to the interoperability issue experienced in Kings County. There is a myriad of viable answers to the problems presented

5 in the report.

Therefore, HFD suggests further analysis be completed through the development and formation of a committee made up of all segments of Public Safety, including HFD, whose aim is to evaluate the regional communications needs and work toward a collectively supported communications engineering study completed by neutral third -party communications experts to produce a non-biased, non-binding report of the communications needs of the region.

The results of the report would then be utilized by agencies within the region to best pursue regionalized monies in the form of grants, bonds, or other financing mechanisms to best address the identified issues.

ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT | 319 N. DOUTY ST. HANFORD, CA 93230 559.585.2500 | WWW.HANFORD.CITY
August 4, 2026
The Honorable Kathy Ciuffini, Presiding Judge
Kings County Superior Court
1640 Kings County Drive
Hanford, CA 93230
RE: City of Hanford Response to Grand Jury Report, Consolidated Fire Communications in Kings County
Dear Judge Ciuffini:

The City of Hanford (“City”) hereby responds to the Kings County Grand Jury’s 2025-2026 Report, Consolidated Fire Communications in Kings County. The enclosure represents the response of the Hanford City Council, City Manager Christopher Tavarez, and Fire Chief Daniel Perkins.

The City appreciates the Grand Jury’s diligence and trusts that the enclosure addresses the Grand Jury’s findings and recommendations.

Sincerely,

CITY OF HANFORD
By: ______________________________

MARK KAIRIS
Mayor
Enclosure

1 Consolidated Fire Communications in Kings County
June 4, 2026

Summary

Coordination between Kings County and neighboring law enforcement agencies can be hindered when agencies are on different radio frequencies resulting in delayed resource deployment and prolonged response times. Inadequate communications are one of the five most commonly causal factors that are present in nearly all of firefighter line-of-duty deaths.

Technology does exist to merge Ultra High Frequency (UHF), Very High Frequency (VHF), 700 (digital) and 800 (analog). UHF, VHF, 700 and 800 are radio frequencies frequently used by emergency services. Merging these frequencies in a multi band approach is considered the best practice for interoperability and operational flexibility. The use of a trunking system allows multiple agencies to communicate seamlessly across these frequencies providing safety for emergency responders and citizens alike.

Background (choice of topic/general background):

In California’s 58 counties there does not exist a single unified number of consolidated city- county-state communication systems, although there are efforts by Santa Clara County and San Mateo County at this time to consolidate their communication systems. Currently Kings County and the cities of Avenal, Corcoran, Hanford, and Lemoore fire departments cannot communicate with police departments or with other counties, the state, or the federal government during crisis situations. This lack of interoperability/coordination hampers emergency response coordination, resource deployment, resulting in potentially delaying or prolonging critical assistance and response times during fires or disasters. (Interoperability refers to the ability of different fire departments and agencies to communicate seamlessly across radio systems, networks, and Unified Command [all agencies working together] during emergencies such as crude oil derailments or active shooter situations).

The importance of reliable, state-of-the-art communication equipment cannot be overstated.

Firefighters need to be able to communicate with each other, dispatch, and Incident Command whether they are in a commercial building, residence or outside in wildland areas. For this reason, the Grand Jury will focus on firefighter radio equipment such as multi-band radios, (while radio antennas and a country-wide consolidated dispatch are also crucial for safety, they will not be the primary subject of this report).