Agenda — Hemet City Council, February 25, 2025 (part 1 of 5)

MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL:

Jaculin "Jackie" Peterson
Mayor (District 2)
Carole Kendrick
Mayor Pro Tem (District 1)
Tom Lodge
Council Member (District 3)
Joe Males
Council Member (District 4)
Linda Krupa
Council Member (District 5)

Mark Prestwich
City Manager
Steven Graham
City Attorney
John P. Maier
City Clerk

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA

CITY OF HEMET, CALIFORNIA

Tuesday, February 25, 2025
Hemet Public Library, Second Floor
300 E. Latham Ave., Hemet, California 92543
CLOSED SESSION AT 4:00 P.M.

WORK STUDY SESSION AT 5:00 P.M.

REGULAR MEETING AT 6:00 P.M.

Council Chamber: In-person participation is limited in the Council Chamber in order to maintain social distancing room capacity.

Live Stream: This meeting will be live-streamed on the City's website at hemetca.gov/agenda.

Public Comments: Members of the Public who wish to comment on matters before the Council, in lieu of attending in person, may submit comments on or before 2:00 p.m. the day of the meeting by using the following link: Online Comment Form. Comments will be recorded in the official meeting record.

Teleconference: POTENTIAL USE OF AB 2449’S JUST CAUSE OR EMERGENCY CIRCUMSTANCES PROVISIONS - In the event a City Councilmember joins the meeting virtually under AB 2449, then members of the public can utilize the number below to participate via teleconference. If all participating Councilmembers are physically present, then the call-in feature will be unavailable, but the meeting can still be viewed at the link:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83664507167
Webinar ID: 836 6450 7167
Passcode: 745765
Telephone: Dial (for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location):

US: +1 669 900 6833 or +1 253 215 8782

Notice Regarding Americans with Disability Act
In compliance with the Americans with Disability Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting or if you need agenda documents provided in an alternate format, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (951) 765-2307

Page 1 of 606 ends

at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to ensure that reasonable arrangements can be made (28CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II)

Page

1. CLOSED SESSION – 4:00 P.M.

2. CALL TO ORDER

3. ROLL CALL

4. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD - RULES OF DECORUM, RESOLUTION NO. 4545

 At this time, members of the public may only comment on an item appearing on the Closed Session agenda. Please adhere to the following when addressing the Council:
o Comments will be limited to 3 minutes or less.
o Comments should be directed to the Council as a whole and not directed to individual Council Members.
o Please follow the adopted rules of decorum: Resolution No. 4545.

5. DISCUSSION ITEM

5.A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.8
Property Descriptions:

Stetson & Sanderson
456-050-044 (17.83 acres), 456-050-023 (1.33 acres), 456-050-013 (0.91 acres), 456-050-020 (10 acres), and 456-050-021 (0.87 acres) Auto Mall
456-010-001, 456-010-002, 456-010-031, 456-010-007, 456-010-008, 456-010-032, 456-010-029, 456-010-027, 456-010-034, 456-010-011, 456-010-010, 456-010-039, 456-010-033, 456-010-014, 456-010-036, 456-010-013, 456-010-038, 456-010-015, 456-010-017, 456-010-016, 456-010-018, and 456-010-020
Locksmith
443-131-004, 443-131-005, and 443-131-006
Downtown Properties
443-131-008, 443-140-003, 443-140-024, and 443-140-015
Agency Negotiator: Mark Prestwich, City Manager
Negotiating Parties: Various
Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment

6. ADJOURNMENT OF CLOSED SESSION

7. WORK STUDY SESSION - 5:00 P.M.

8. CALL TO ORDER

Page 2 of 606 ends

9. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
At this time, members of the public may only comment on the Work Study Item. Please adhere to the following when addressing the Council:
 Comments will be limited to 3 minutes or less.
 Comments should be directed to the Council as a whole and not directed to individual Council Members.
 Please follow the adopted rules of decorum: Resolution No. 4545.

10. WORK STUDY ITEM

10.A. Discussion and Appointment of Measure U Citizen Oversight Committee Members
Staff Report #25-034 - Pdf

Recommendation:

It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

Review, discuss, and appoint applicants received for the Measure U Citizen Oversight Committee.
9 - 55

11. ADJOURNMENT OF WORK STUDY SESSION

12. REGULAR MEETING - 6:00 P.M.

13. CALL TO ORDER

14. ROLL CALL

15. INVOCATION

16. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

17. CITY ATTORNEY CLOSED SESSION REPORT

17.A. City Attorney’s Report regarding Closed Session
Recommendation: Information Only

18. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
Welcome to a meeting of the Mayor and City Council of the City of Hemet  Anyone who wishes to speak during public comment or on a particular item will be required to fill out a speaker slip and turn it in to the City Clerk. Each request will cover one speaker.  There is a 3-minute-per-person time limit for all general public comments on non-public hearing items.  All who wish to speak, including Council members and staff, need to be recognized by the Mayor before speaking.
 Members of the public shall comply with the adopted Rules of Decorum, Resolution No. 4545. A copy of which can be requested through the City Clerk’s Office.
 You may also fill out a form and submit your comments online at www.hemetca.gov. Submittal must be done

Page 3 of 606 ends

before 2:00 p.m. the day of the meeting.
 Please state your name and item you are commenting on before speaking.

18.A. Public Comment for Items Listed on the Agenda: Consent and Discussion Items

18.B. Public Comment for Items Not Listed on the Agenda, but within Jurisdictional Matter

19. PRESENTATION

19.A. Riverside County Arts and Culture Month Proclamation Staff Report #25-028 - Pdf
57 - 58

20. CONSENT CALENDAR
All Consent Calendar items will be acted upon by a single action of the City Council unless otherwise requested by an individual Council Member for separate consideration.

20.A. Approval of the City Council Meeting Minutes of February 11, 2025 Staff Report #25-038 - Pdf

Recommendation:

It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

Approve the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of February 11, 2025.
59 - 66

20.B. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2055 of the City Council of the City of Hemet Amending Chapter 58, Article III, Division 2 of the Hemet Municipal Code to Update Provisions Related to the City's Participation in the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program
Staff Report #25-039 - Pdf

Recommendation:

It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

Waive further reading and adopt Ordinance, amending and updating the City’s TUMF ordinance and participation in the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program. 67 - 489

20.C. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Approving the Annexation of the Stetson Corner project (PM 37779) to the City of Hemet Community Facilities District No. 2024-01 (Public Facilities Maintenance)
Staff Report #24-443 - Pdf

Recommendation:

It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, 491 - 545

Page 4 of 606 ends

Approving the Annexation of the Stetson Corner project (PM 37779) to the City of Hemet Community Facilities District No. 2024-01 (Public Facilities Maintenance).

20.D. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Authorizing the City Manager to Execute All Documents Related to the State of California's Governor's Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) for the FEMA Disaster DR-4431: Mid-February 2019 Storms, Flooding, Landslide, and Mudslides
Staff Report #25-030 - Pdf

Recommendation:

It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Authorizing the City Manager to Execute All Documents Related to the State of California's Governor's Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) for the FEMA Disaster DR-4431: Mid-February 2019 Storms, Flooding, Landslide and Mudslides.
547 - 564

20.E. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Approving the Date Stamping Policy and Procedural Requirements Staff Report #25-043 - Pdf

Recommendation:

It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Approving the Date Stamping Policy and Procedural Requirements. 565 - 579

20.F. Adopt a Resolution of the City of Hemet, California, Adding the Deputy Community Development Director Position to the List of Positions Subject to Resolution No. 2024-181 Regarding Compensation and Benefit Parameters for At-Will Employees
Staff Report #25-045 - Pdf

Recommendation:

It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

Adopt a Resolution of the City of Hemet, California, Adding the Deputy Community Development Director position to the list of positions subject to Resolution No. 2024-181, thereby including it within the At-Will employee group.
581 - 587

21. DISCUSSION - ACTION ITEM

21.A. Consideration of Allocations for Program Year 2025 Community Development Block Grant Funding
Staff Report #25-036 - Pdf

589 - 593

Page 5 of 606 ends

Recommendation:

It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

Review and discuss the City Council Ad Hoc Committee's
recommended allocations of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) estimated Program Year 2025 funding in the amount of $885,000 and unallocated funding from prior program years in the amount of $544,700.

21.B. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Approving a Media Access Policy for Disaster Areas
Staff Report #25-048 - Pdf

Recommendation:

It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Approving a Media Access Policy for Disaster Areas.
595 - 606

22. CITY COUNCIL AND STAFF REPORTS

MAYOR PETERSON

1. Investment Oversight Committee

2. Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency

3. Ramona Bowl Board of Directors

4. League of California Cities

5. Homeless Outreach Ad-Hoc Committee

6. Business Outreach Ad-Hoc Committee

7. Cal Trans Liaison Ad-Hoc Committee

8. Veterans Memorial Ad-Hoc Committee

MAYOR PRO TEM KENDRICK

1. Investment Oversight Committee

2. Planning Commission

3. Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency (RCHCA)**

4. Western Riverside County Conservation Authority (RCA)*

5. League of California Cities

6. Community Action Partnership

7. Hemet San Jacinto Water Master Board *

8. CDBG Ad-Hoc Committee

9. Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG)*

COUNCIL MEMBER KRUPA

1. Hemet Housing Authority

2. Hemet Public Library Board of Trustees

3. Cal Trans Liaison Ad-Hoc Committee

4. Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission*

5. League of California Cities

6. Riverside County Transportation Commission

7. Riverside Transit Agency*

8. Western Riverside County Conservation Authority (RCA)*

Page 6 of 606 ends

9. Hemet San Jacinto Water Master Board*

10. WRCOG Regional: Riverside County Waste Management Task Force

11. RCTC: Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee

12. Art and Culture Ad-Hoc

COUNCIL MEMBER LODGE

1. Hemet Housing Authority

2. Clean Up/Graffiti Ad-Hoc Committee

3. League of California Cities

COUNCIL MEMBER MALES

1. League of California Cities

2. Planning Commission

3. Riverside County Transportation Commission

4. Riverside County Transit Agency *

5. Western Riverside Council of Governments *

6. Business Outreach Ad-Hoc Committee

7. CDBG Ad-Hoc Committee

8. Clean Up/Graffiti Ad-Hoc Committee

9. Homeless Outreach Ad-Hoc Committee

10. Veterans Memorial Ad-Hoc Committee

CITY MANAGER MARK PRESTWICH

23. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
The following items are tentatively scheduled and are subject to change. The City Council may ask the City Manager to add specific items to a future agenda by a majority vote.

March 11, 2025:

1. 1st Council Budget Workshop

2. Lobbying and Advocacy Agreement

3. City Branding Agreement

24. ADJOURNMENT

AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
I, John Paul Maier, MMC, City Clerk for the City of Hemet, declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing agenda was posted at City Hall located at 445 E. Florida Ave., the Council Chamber located at 450 E. Latham Ave., Hemet, CA, and the City Website.

Date & Time: February 19, 2025 at 6:00 p.m.

Meeting Schedule: The City Council of the City of Hemet regularly meets on the second and fourth Tuesdays of each month at 7:00 p.m., unless otherwise noted. Closed and Special Sessions will be duly noticed as needed.

Council Agendas: Agendas for Regular Meetings are available for public review on the City’s website at hemetca.gov and in the City Clerk’s Office, 445 E. Florida Ave. typically by 4:00 p.m. on the

Page 7 of 606 ends

Thursday prior to the meeting, but no later than 72 hours prior to the meeting. Agendas for Closed and Special Sessions are made available at least 72 hours prior to the meeting when possible, but no later than 24 hours prior to the meeting.

Livestream: Regular City Council Meetings are available for viewing during the meeting at hemetca.gov.

Use of Equipment: Please contact the City Clerk’s Office if requesting to use the chamber equipment as part of a scheduled presentation 24 hours prior to the meeting at (951) 765-2307.

Disclosure of
Campaign
Contributions
(Levine Act –
Government Code
Section 84308):

Pursuant to Government Code section 84308, members of the Hemet City Council are disqualified and not able to participate in any agenda item involving contracts (other than competitively bid contracts, labor contracts, or personal employment contracts with City of Hemet employees), franchises, discretionary land use permits and other entitlements if the Councilmember received more than $500 in campaign contributions from the applicant or contractor, an agent of the applicant or contractor, or any financially interested participant who actively supports or opposes the City’s decision on the agenda item in the previous 12 months. Members of the Hemet City Council who have received, and applicants, contractors, or their agents who have made, campaign contributions totaling more than $500 to a Councilmember in the previous 12 months are required to disclose that fact for the official record of the subject agenda item and shall not make, participate in making, or in any way attempt to use their official position to influence the subject agenda item.

Disclosures must include the amount of the campaign contribution and identify the recipient Board member and may be made either in writing to the City Clerk prior to the subject hearing or by verbal disclosure at the time of the hearing.

Page 8 of 606 ends

City of Hemet
City Council Meeting

STAFF REPORT

Meeting: City Council Meeting - Feb 25 2025
Department: Administration
Submitted by: Mark Prestwich, City Manager
John Maier, City Clerk;

☐ Receive and File ☐ Consent Calendar ☒ Business Item ☐ Public Hearing

TITLE:

Discussion and Appointment of Measure U Citizen Oversight Committee Members

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

Review, discuss, and appoint applicants received for the Measure U Citizen Oversight Committee.

BACKGROUND:

In accordance with Hemet City Ordinance No. 1918, the Measure U Citizen Oversight Committee consists of seven (7) members appointed by the City Council to serve two (2) year terms. The purpose of the Measure U Citizen Oversight Committee is to independently review and advise upon the City's proposed expenditures of Measure U Funds as well as the actual expenditures of Measure U Funds and review the annual audit conducted of Measure U Funds as required by the Ordinance.

The Committee is advisory only and reports its comments directly to the City Council. Committee members do not receive a City stipend. Based on the term limits established in Ordinance No. 1918, the expiration date for all seven (7) members is March 11, 2025.

ANALYSIS:

Eligible community members must reside within the city limits or the sphere of influence or own a business with primary offices within the city limits. A majority (4 or more) of the Committee members shall be residents of the City of Hemet. It is further stipulated that a minimum of four (4) members shall be residents of Hemet, two (2) members shall be business owners with the principal place of business in the City of Hemet, and at least one (1) member a resident within the City's sphere of influence.

The City Clerk's office has solicited additional applications through advertising on social media, the City Update Newsletter, and an adjudicated local newspaper, the Press Enterprise.

Page 1 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 9 of 606 ends

DISCUSSION:

After a review of current committee members, six (6) members, George "Dick" Clark, George Schaefer (Vice-Chair), Delesia Silva, Kayla Cain, Tammy Chennault (Chair), and Mark Collins, seek reappointment for their commission positions. Committee Member Norm Kyriss has expressed not to be reappointed to the committee.

Three (3) applicants, Stephanie Alee, Juan Chiquito, and Jesse Felix, have been acknowledged, and their applications have been received for consideration for positions on the Measure U Citizen Oversight Committee.

A total of nine (9) applicants are qualified for consideration for appointment to the Measure U Committee:

Stephanie Alee - District 3
Kayla Cain - District 1
Tammy Chennault - District 1
George "Dick" Clark - District 1
Juan Chiquito - District 1
Mark Collins - District 4
Jesse Felix - Sphere of Influence
George Schaefer - District 1
Delesia Silva - District 5

The City Council may choose to ask applicants to answer the following questions in a public interview:

1. Why are you interested in serving on the Measure U Citizen Oversight Committee?

2. How long have you lived in the City or sphere of influence?

The City Council may ask additional questions as a follow-up to further review candidates as part of the appointment process.

The newly appointed Measure U Citizen Oversight Committee Members will serve a two-year term from March 11, 2025, to March 11, 2027.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION:

At the March 14, 2023, Regular City Council Meeting, the City Council reappointed three (3) members, George "Dick" Clark, Tammy Chennault, and George Schaefer. Additionally, the City Council requested that additional applications be solicited for 30 days and interviews for the qualified candidates be conducted at the Regular City Council Meeting on May 9, 2023.

The City Council appointed three (3) members, Norm Kyriss, Delesia Silva, and Kayla Cain, during the Regular City Council Meeting on May 9, 2023. A quorum was established, allowing meetings to commence while the search for the remaining vacancy continued.

The final commissioner, Mark Collins, was appointed on July 11, 2023.

Page 2 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 10 of 606 ends

STRATEGIC PLAN INTEGRATION:

GOAL THREE: COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
To connect and participate in a constant dialogue between members of the community, City staff, and elected officials to promote togetherness and positivity.

Objective 1: Deliver messaging to the Community that connects, is consistent, and relevant.

Objective 2: Increase transparency for the public.

Objective 3: Increase the community's pride within the City.

GOAL FOUR: PARTNERSHIP & COLLABORATION
To pursue partnerships that will increase the opportunities available to the community, including our businesses, unemployed, and youth populations.

Objective 2: Develop concepts and programs to enhance the quality of life services.

Objective 3: Develop programs to offer support to the community's businesses

GOAL FIVE: ORGANIZATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS
To identify the work needed inside the City organization to effectively provide services to the community and ensure financial stability.

Objective 2: Evaluate existing practices to ensure continuity with industry best practices.

Objective 3: Provide Council with policies that are consistent while lessening liabilities.

ALTERNATIVE(S):

1. Provide Alternative direction to the City Manager.

2. Defer appointment to the next Regular City Council meeting to allow additional time to solicit and gather applications.

ATTACHMENT(S):

Attachment 1: Application - Clark, Dick
Attachment 2: Application - Silva, Delesia
Attachment 3: Resume - Silva, Delesia
Attachment 4: Application - Cain, Kayla
Attachment 5: Resume - Cain, Kayla
Attachment 6: Application - Alee, Stephanie
Attachment 8: Resume - Alee, Stephanie
Attachment 9: Application - Chiquito, Juan
Attachment 10: Resume - Chiquito, Juan
Attachment 11: Applcation - Feliz, Jesse
Attachment 12: Application - Collins, Mark
Attachment 13: Application - Chennault, Tammy K
Attachment 14: Application - Schaefer, George
Attachment 15: Resume - Schaefer, George

Page 3 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 11 of 606 ends

yin/i,
CityofHemet
ApplicationforAppointmenttoV olunteerCommissions/Boardleommittees Thankyouforyourinterestinservingyourcommunity.InterestedapplicantsareencouragedtocontacttheCityClerk’sOlficeformoreinformationaboutthebene?tsandresponsibilitiesofAdvisoryBodyservice.Applicationswillbekepton?leforoneyear,duringwhichtimetheapplicantwillbegiventheopportunitytointerviewforanyopeningforwhichtheapplicantiseligible.

CityClerk’soffice(951)765-2316— 445E.FloridaAvenue,Hemet,CA92543ItH n A

1. CONTACTINFORMATION:ULLKpmmkNamei?biLLMl—k?-KillCity:HanaNameandAddressofBusiness(ifapplyingasbusinessowner) MobilePhone HomePhone: N/AlWorkPhone: _ PersonalEmailAddress:WorkEmailAddress:.—

2.APPLYINGFOR(MARKONEORMORE):Applicantsareencouragedtoapplyfornomorethan2AdvisoryBodiesbestsuitingtheirskillsandinterests.Itapplyinglormultiplebodies.pleaserankthoseinorderofpreference“1‘beingmostpreferred.Qualltlcationsformemhorshlp:Meetoneofthefollowingcriteria,1)TheindividualiscurrentresidentoftheCitywhohaslivedinthecityforatleastoneyearimmediatelypriortotheindividual'sappointmenttotheboard,commissionorcommittee:or2)CurrentresidentoftheCityolHemet‘s"Sphereatinlluence'whohaslivedinthecityorinthecity'ssphereofinfluenceforatleastoneyearimmediatelypriortotheindividualsappointmenttotheboard,commissionorcommittee,Seeattachedforspeci?cquali?cations.D PlanningCommission [I HemetPublicLibraryBoardMeasureuCitizenOversightCommitteeU MobileHomeRentReviewCommission

3. QUALIFICATIONS:YouareencouragedtoattacharesumeorotheradditionaldocumentationthatmaybeofinteresttotheCityCouncil'intheirevaluationofyourapplication.AreyouaCityresident7?Yesitofyears_'7-t— ElNoareyouaresidentoitheSphereofIn?uence?ElYes [I NoRelevantExperience(employmentcommunityorganizationsetc]:(Attacnpagesifdesiredl DSlvaoevaor‘MND’L““4““AMérlC?MSTuO/és“Ha/~52[aWNS pour)WildLaNOGiraFL/cWmFamilcltimberoutlet1dole/Jewl1]7\/ LawEwtmD?éze—Cri‘15’:szDe?aéadvov9\+0;2LcefA/w)Demsonar30m‘rmsrae— FFIEMD§orlCavity/PWé’amJZlLVV’LD/l‘ijL AdvisoryBodyExperience(bodyandagency):Current:Haas/qr;M Term:From3/201Z! to"MTPrevious: Term:From to—Council"Ffli~0506it;Cent-mvt,{Wotan)» /Home} Prcxwl' ?/57:[MA/1.x

Page 4 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 12 of 606 ends

4. ADDITIONALINFORMATION:TheCityCouncilwouldlikemoreinformationaboutyourinterestinsewingonanAdvisoryBody.PleaseindicateyourcommentsandviewsrelativetothesubjectmatteroftheAdvisoryBody(ies)forwhichyouareapplying:(Attachpagesifdesired.) Myll-SéoailegeGouevwmdclasSes“its”meMed“WWW/"ad”
we:FWNJmmIN 1‘5/We?rdcmlzoma‘fV?P/EDPLE’1va
MDK?/Jp[Mr—LSout {Ii/112.Wig LawZ‘Néncemew;ramMm}bdéil/ZEQw,big/woeHieMw?m(4”Mg; 4V1W3as S W v; 260tut—1m;47173]J: W; WWWm?wla4-0kaf—brA—Ng[#waLin/g,(?akm MAL/imaméy/th/WEK0%MM.ii, 5 SIGNATUREREADCAREFULLY7Iunderstandthat,iflamappointedtoanAdvisoryBody,Iwillberequiredtocomplywith:TheCity’sEthicsPolicy.AdvisoryBodyPoliciesandCon?ictofInterestCode;applicableprovisionsofthePoliticalReformActincluding?ling?nancialinterestdisclosurestatements(Form700);andapplicableprovisionsoftheBrownAct;andthatImustcompletestate-mandatedethicstrainingandsexualharassmentpreventiontrainingcourses.Iunderstandthat,whileCitystaffwillmakeagoodfaithefforttoeducatemeregardingtheserequirements,IamresponsibleformyconductasanAdvisoryMember.IunderstandthatallAdvisoryBodyMembersserveatthepleasureoftheCityCouncilandmayberemovedfromofficeduetopoorattendance,unacceptableconduct.orforanyotherreason.

IunderstandthatAdvisoryBodymembersarevolunteers,arenotCityemployees,anddonotreceivebene?tsorprotectionsotherthanworkers’compensationincaseofinjuryinthecourseofdutyIunderstandthatthisisapublicdocument,andthatinformationcontainedwithinitmaybeprovidedtothepublicuponrequest.inregardtotheonlineavailabilityofmyinformation.Ideclarethefollowing:

A.IfIamappointed,IauthorizemeCitytopostthefollowingcontactinformation(checkapplicablebelow)onitswebsite.iunderstandthatotherwebsitesnotcontrolledbytheCitymayprovidelinkstoaCitywebpagethathasmypersonalinformationonit.IalsoauthorizetheCitytoupdatemypersonalcontactinformationonitswebsiteifmycontactinformationchanges. |:I CellPhone [I HomePhone I:WorkPhoneElPersonalEmailaddressl:| BusinessEmailaddress Further.ifmyhomeaddressandtelephonenumberareotherwisenon-disclosableundertheCaliforniaPublicRecordsAct(CaliforniaGovernmentCode6250etseq),Iunderstandthatbyagreeingtothereleaseoftheinformationabove,thisinformationmaybeprovidedbytheCityinresponsetoarequestmadeunderthePublicRecordsAct.

OR
MB.Ifiamappointed.IdonotauthorizetheCitytopostmycontactinformationonitswebsite.TheCitymayhowever,discloseontheintemetandinallothervenuesthatfactthatIserveonaCityAdvisoryBody.

ApplicantsSignatu
ll|
ForoneUseOnlyAssignedtoCommissiomcammllteelaoam:DPlanningCommission D Libi-IlyBoard :1EvidenceofHemelResidentaMobileHomeRentReviewCommls?on\j Mam-auCmnmmao DEvidenceSpmo?n?uenoei sunInitials:Exp'ntionofTerm:

Page 5 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 13 of 606 ends

Print
Hemet Public Library Board of Trustees - 3 Year Term
The Library Board consists of five members appointed by the City Council for three year terms. It meets on the 3rd Friday of each month at 10:00 a.m. Responsibilities are statutory and include setting policy on the operation and services of the Library. The Board advises the City Council on the budgetary needs of the Library, its services, and other related matters.

Measure U Citizen Oversight Committee - 2 Year Term
In accordance with Hemet City Ordinance No. 1918, the Measure U Citizen Oversight Committee consists of 7 members appointed by the city council to serve two (2) year terms. The purpose of the committee is to independently review and advise upon the City’s proposed expenditures of Measure U Funds as well as the actual expenditures of Measure U Funds and review of the annual audit conducted of Measure U Funds as required by the Ordinance. The Committee is advisory only and reports its comments directly to the City Council. Eligible community members must reside within the city limits or the sphere of influence or own a business having its primary offices located within the city limits. A majority (4 or more) of the committee members shall be residents of the City of Hemet.

Mobile Home Rent Review Commission - 3 Year Term
Established by Ordinance No. 772, an initiative of the voters of the City of Hemet, this Commission meets by request only and with duties as outlined in the Hemet Municipal Code. It consists of five members appointed by the City Council to 3 year terms. The Commission shall be made up of one mobile home park owner, one mobile home park tenant and three “at large” residents who do not live in mobile home parks.

Planning Commission - 2 Year Term
Created in accordance with the provisions of the State Planning Act, the Commission consists of five members appointed by the City Council to serve two year terms. The Commission meets on the first and third Tuesdays of the month at 6:00 p.m.

Application for Appointment to Volunteer
Commissions/Boards/Committees
Advisory Body Application - Submission #1513
Date Submitted: 2/16/2025
2/18/25, 3:10 PM hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/1513 https://www.hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/1513 1/4Page 6 of 47

10.A.

Page 14 of 606 ends

Page 7 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 15 of 606 ends

Page 8 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 16 of 606 ends

Read Carefully - Complete Section A or B then SIGN
I understand that, if I am appointed to an Advisory Body, I will be required to comply with: the City’s Ethics Policy, Advisory Body Policies and Conflict of Interest Code; applicable provisions of the Political Reform Act including filing financial interest disclosure statements (Form 700); and applicable provisions of the Brown Act; and that I must complete state-mandated ethics training and sexual harassment prevention training courses. I understand that, while City staff will make a good faith effort to educate me regarding these requirements, I am responsible for my conduct as an Advisory Member. I understand that all Advisory Body Members serve at the pleasure of the City Council and may be removed from office due to poor attendance, unacceptable conduct, or for any other reason. I understand that Advisory Body members are volunteers, are not City employees, and do not receive benefits or protections other than workers’ compensation in case of injury in the course of duty. I understand that this is a public document, and that information contained within it may be provided to the public upon request. In regard to the online availability of my information, I declare the following:

If I am appointed, I authorize the City to post the following contact information (check applicable below) on its website. I understand that other websites not controlled by the City may provide link A.1
Cell Phone
Personal Email
Home Phone
Business Email Address
Work Phone
A.2
Further, if my home address and telephone number are otherwise non-disclosable under the California Public Records Act (California Government Code 6250 et seq.), I understand that by agreeing to the release of the informaiton above, this informaiton may be provided by the City in response to a request made under the Public Records Act.

If I am appointed, I do not authorize the City to post my contact informaiton on its website. The City may however, disclose on the internet and in all other venues that fact that I serve on a City Ad B.

Date of Submission* Applicants Signature*
Delesia Silva
Type your full name.
2/16/2025
09:15 PM
2/18/25, 3:10 PM hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/1513 https://www.hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/1513 4/4Page 9 of 47

10.A.

Page 17 of 606 ends

Delesia Silva
_________________ _______________
____
Prof
essional Profile:

With over fourteen years of hands-on experience as a Student Finance Consultant (SFC) and Fiscal Operations Specialist at renowned educational institutions such as National University Systems, DeVry University, Brightwood College, and Ashford University, I have honed my skills in customer service, analytical prowess, and organizational acumen to support students and campus staff members comprehensively in their financial aid journeys. My role involved managing alternative finance options for over 300 students, analyzing and auditing student accounts, and facilitating the smooth processing of financial documents to ensure students' financial clarity.

Before transitioning to the finance role, I was a seasoned sales professional with over five years of experience in achieving and exceeding sales targets. Proven track re cord of building and maintaining strong client relationships, negotiating contracts, and driving revenue growth.

Excellent communication and interpersonal skills with a results-driven approach.

My expertise extends to Title IV funding, encompassing a deep understanding of the rules and regulations governing student aid. I am proficient in utilizing various university software, including CampusVue, Banner, RightNow, VA Once, and AS 400, to manage student accounts receivable, accounts payable, and generate essential reports.

I possess advanced proficiency in Microsoft Office, particularly Excel and Word, leveraging these tools to participate in special projects, track progress, and deliver informative PowerPoint presentations to brief students and staff on Title IV funding.

With excellent time management skills and the ability to multitask effectively, I maintain a balance between daily production requirements and special assignments. My communication skills, both oral and written, are exemplary, enabling me t o compose memos, emails, updates, and briefings, as well as conduct meetings with various stakeholders to advise on student financial outcomes.

Moreover, I have experience in training new hires in the role of Student Finance Consultant and have effectively managed a team of 12 members in pump room operations during my tenure in the U.S. Navy.

I am known for my outstanding interpersonal skills, adaptability to changing environments, and proactive problem -solving approach. As an outgoing, self -motivated team player, I thrive in collaborative settings and am always willing to contribute innovative ideas and solutions to critical situations.

Skills Summary:

Page 10 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 18 of 606 ends

• Exceptional customer service skills, both verbally and in professional written communication.
• Proficient in assisting customers with document completion and follow-up. • Effective communication, adapting style to suit the audience. • Excellent time management and multitasking abilities. • Accurate data entry and document analysis.
• Proficiency in Microsoft Word and Excel.
• Strong critical and analytical thinking skills.
• Ownership of customer issue resolution.
• Collaboration with internal and external departments. • Proficient in filing and keyboarding (44 WPM).
• Successfully managed a portfolio of clients, generating consistent revenue streams through effective sales strategies.
• Cultivated strong relationships with clients through regular communication and personalized service, leading to repeat business and referrals. • Negotiated contracts and pricing agreements to maximize profitability while ensuring customer satisfaction.
• Collaborated with cross-functional teams to develop and implement marketing campaigns to promote product awareness and drive sales.

Academic Education:
• Master of Arts (June 2019), Ashford University, Clinton, IA, Major: Organizational Management (global media).
• Bachelor of Arts (September 2010), Ashford University, Clinton, IA, Major:

Organizational Management.
• Dr.h.c. (In progress June 1, 2024), Trinity International University of Ambassadors, Duluth, Georgia
Employment History:
(December 2023 to Present) Benefits Coordinator REEMedical, Surprise, Arizona (November 2020 to November 2022) Fiscal Operations Specialist National University Systems, Scottsdale, Arizona
(June 2016 to March 2017) VA Certifyin g Official/Student Finance Consultant Brightwood College, San Diego, California
(May 2014 to November 2014) Unpaid Intern/Transcriptionist Department of Veterans Affairs, San Diego, California
(October 2010 to August 2013) Student Finance Consultant DeVry University, San Diego, California

Page 11 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 19 of 606 ends

(June 2010 to October 2010) Finance Advisor United Education Institute, San Marcos, California
(April 2007 to June 2010) Financial Student Advisor Ashford University, San Diego, California (September 2006 to April 2007) Cu stomer Service Representative Santa Barbara Bank and Trust (Volt), San Diego, California
(September 1999 to September 2003) Pump Room Supervisor United States Navy, Norfolk, Virginia
Duties:
• Analyzed and audited student accounts, prepared Final Accounting Letters, and managed student documents for financial aid processing.
• Conducted transcription of court hearings and research of military and medical terminology.
• Counseled students on financial aid opportunities, collaborated with admissions , and education departments, managed Title IV funding processes, and trained and led employees to achieve and exceed sales targets.
• Conducted meetings with third- party processors, tracked student accounts receivable and payable balances, and collected student payments.
• Managed incoming calls, reviewed the National Student Loan Data Base System, and verified enrollment status.
• Reviewed enrollment applications, conducted outbound calls to prospective students, and assisted with tax-related inquiries.
• Supervised a team of 12 members, ensuring the safe and efficient operation of fuel pumps and equipment.

This comprehensive overview of my professional profile, skills, education, and employment history underscores my suitability for the Benefit Consultant Supervisor position. I am confident in my ability to contribute effectively to your team and drive operational excellence within the organization.

Thank you for considering my application. I look forward to the opportunity to discuss how my qualifications align with the needs of your team.

Sincerely,
Delesia Silva, MA

Page 12 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 20 of 606 ends

Application for Appointment to Volunteer
Commissions/Boards/Committees
Advisory Body Application - Submission #1510
Date Submitted: 2/11/2025
2/18/25, 3:19 PM hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/1510 https://www.hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/1510 1/4Page 13 of 47

10.A.

Page 21 of 606 ends

Page 14 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 22 of 606 ends

Page 15 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 23 of 606 ends

Date of Submission* Applicants Signature*
Kayla Cain
Type your full name.
2/11/2025
06:30 PM
2/18/25, 3:19 PM hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/1510 https://www.hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/1510 4/4Page 16 of 47

10.A.

Page 24 of 606 ends

EXPERIENEE
JUN2|]23,

PRESENT
JAN2|]Zl],
JUN2|]23

EDLIEATIIJN

MAYZDZE
DEE2|]Zl]
JUNE2|]ll

KAYLAEAIN
Hemet,California
WithovertwelveyearsoiexperienceinPurchasingandProcurement.Iamaresults—drivenleaderwithaproventrackrecordindeliveringsuccessfuloutcomesfortheFoodServiceDepartmentatValVerdeUni?edSchoolDistrict.MyexpertisespansK.i2educationfoodservices,procurementprocesses,andteammanagement.Inadditiontomyprofessionalexperience,Ihaveactivelycontributedtocommunityinitiativesthroughvolunteerwork.lurtherenhancingmyleadership,organizational,andproblem—solvingskills.Passionateaboutlosteringelhciencyandexcellence,Iameagertoleveragemyskills,leadershipexperience,andcommunityinvolvementintheroleofFoodServiceDirectoratCha?eyjointUnionHighSchoolDistrict

FREIIILIREMENTEEIEIRIJINATIJR,V ALVERDEUSU
— F|]|]|]SERVIEES
IleadprocurementstortheFoodServiceDepartmentandinlandEmpireBuyingCollective,ensuringcompliancewithCDEProcurementThresholds.IsupervisetheBuyeroninventorymanagementandorderingwhilefocusingonwritingRFFsandIFBstailoredtodepartmentneeds.Imonitorcommodityusage,expenditures,andparticipateintheSuperCo-Op.Myresponsibiitiesincludefoodcostsavings,procuringequipmentandservicesforanewCentralKitchen,managinglimitedwarehousespace,programoversightandpersonnelmanagementIresolvevendordisputes,representthedistrictinprofessionalorganizations,andwritealldepartmentPurchaseOrderswhilemonitoringbudgetedspending.Additionally,IcontributedtosecuringandmanagingtheCDFAFarmtoSchoolIncubatorGranL

BUYER,V ALVERDEUSD
—

FIJIJDSERVIEES
ImanagedProcurement.PurchasingandOperationsfortheFoodServicesDepartmencoverseeingUSDAcommodities,commercialproducts,andDODFFavorsproduce.Iwroteandimplementedlull—cycleRFPsandRFQs,ensuringcompliancewithCalilorniaDepartmentofEducationthresholdsandprocedures.Ianalyzedbidsforresponsivenessandresponsibility,handledemergencyprocurements,andcoordinatedcateringagreementswithlocalsmallbusinesses.Additionally,Imanageddailyoperations,includingproductdistribution,receiptcoordination,POcreation,andsourcinginlormationlromdepartmentstakeholders.

HAEHELEIRIJFSEIENEE,PUBLICADMINISTRATIDN
UniversityofPheonix.0nline(DegreeCurrentlyInProgress)Presidentsust— JanuarytoJune2024 ?FERAll?NSRESEILIRIIESMANAGEMENTEERTIFIEATE
CaliforniaStateUniversity,SanMarcosAPICSExtension

HIEHSEHIJIJLDIFLIJMA
RanchoBuenaVistaHighSchoolVistaUni?edSchoolDistrict

Page 17 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 25 of 606 ends

PRIJFESSIIJNALDEVELIJPMENT
FEB2024 INTRIJDUETIDNTI]SEHUDLNUTRITIIJN[EADERSHIF
InstituteofChildNutrition30.5ContinuingEducationUnits
PRIJFESSIIJNALV|]L|JNTEERWIJRK
g??g?nAMERIEANEDMMDDITIESDISTRIBUTIDNASSIJEIATIIJN
PmoeeaingCommitteeEducationatTrainingSubcommittee— SY23/24,24/25ProcessingModernimu'onSubcommittee— SY24/25EducationCommitteeFoodDistributionCredentialProgramTaskForce— SY24/25Con/erencesAndPresentationsAnnualConlerencePresenter— April2025(Procurement20l&202)AnnualConlerenceAttendee— April2023,2024,2025AnnualProcessingCommitteeMeeting— 2024,2025 7'1”
’
EALIFEIRNIASEHIJEILNUTRITIIJNASSIJEIATIIJNEURRENT Chaptenit2| PastPresidentWays&MeansCo-Chair— SY24/25ChapterPresident— SY23/24ChapterPresidentElect—SY22/23Con/erencesandPrelemz?on:Chapter/42lCEUPresenter— December2024(ProcurementBasics)AnnualConlerencePresenter— November2024(RuralNon—Congregatex2)AnnualConlerenceAttendee— 2022,2023,2024LegislativeActionConferenceAttendee— March2023 2022
a

EURRENT SEHIJEILNUTRITIIJNASSIJEIATIIJN
ActiveMemberCon/erencesAnnualConlerenceAttendee— July2024AnnualConlerencePresenter— july2025(RuralNomCongregate) mu7

EURRENT V ALVERDEUNIFIEDSCHIJEILDISTRIET
Committee:InsuranceCommitteeMember— SY22/23,23/24,24/25WellnessCommitteeMember— SY23/24,24/25Con/erencesLeadershipRetreat— SY23/24,24/25LeadershipAcademy— Spring2023CaliforniaAssociationofSchoolBusinessOf?cialsAnnualConference— April2024

EALIFEIRNIASEHIJIJLEMFLDYEESASSUEIATIDN
Committee:andPositionsTreasurerandCommunicationsOf?cer— SY22/23REEFInsuranceAdvisoryCommitteeandV otingBoardMember— March2023ConlerencesAnnualConlerence— July2022

Page 18 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 26 of 606 ends

LISTENINGSESSI|]NFARTIEIFANT
WhiteHouseConferenceonHunger,Nutrition,andHealth—
June2022SNADiversity&EquityinMembership—
June2022SNA&NoKidHungrySupplyChain— May2022CDEFNSUniversalMeals— januarythroughMay2022

SEHIJLARSHIPSEERTIFIEATIIJNS
2024SuperBakery22SecondsSocietyinductee ServSaleManager,Expiresoccober2025SchoolNutritionFoundation Credendal#2l203l352024SuperBakeryMVPAward OSHATen-HourConscruction,Non-ExpiringSchoolNutritionFoundation issuedDecember20l8MemberoftheNationalSocietyofCollegiateScholars

SKILLSANDEXPERTISEPERSIJNALV ALUES
ComplianceOriented-ConllictResolution Leadership-Emparhy-KindnessExtremelyOrganized-MeetsscrictTimelines Collaboration-Honesty-IntegrityHighAttentiontoDerail-ThoughtfulCommunicacorProblemSolving-DispuceResolution MicrosoftandCoogleProducrs-TechnicalWriting Supportive-CrowrhMindsetlnlormal&FormalProcuremenrs QuickLearning-ResultsDriven CA&FedEducationCodeKnowledge PoisedunderPressure
CNlPS-TiranSchoolSoluu'ons

PRIJERAMKNDWLEDEE
CACFFChildandAdultCareFoodProgramNSLPNationalSchoolLunchProgramSBPSchoolBreakfastProgramSFSPSummerFoodServiceProgram550SeamlessSummerOptionCaliforniaUniversalFreeMealsUSDARuralNon-CongregaleSummerFeedingGrantWritingandAdministration

Page 19 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 27 of 606 ends

Application for Appointment to Volunteer
Commissions/Boards/Committees
Advisory Body Application - Submission #1081
Date Submitted: 4/3/2024
2/18/25, 3:26 PM hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/1081 https://www.hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/1081 1/4Page 20 of 47

10.A.

Page 28 of 606 ends

Page 21 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 29 of 606 ends

Page 22 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 30 of 606 ends

Date of Submission* Applicants Signature*
Stephanie Alee
Type your full name.
4/3/2024
02:30 PM
2/18/25, 3:26 PM hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/1081 https://www.hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/1081 4/4Page 23 of 47

10.A.

Page 31 of 606 ends

STEPHANIEBURTON“—R— 9—
AttentivetoDetail0NaturalLeader0 KeenCummunicatorcResourceful-Passiunate

PROFILESUMMARY
Administrativeprofessionalwith20+yearsofleadership,processmanagement,trfinancialexperienceeagertoleveragemyacquiredskillset.Thoroughworkinglcnowledgeofsecuritiesandinvestmentpracticeswithconsistentrecognitionandacknowledgementofcapabilityinofficeadministrationrecordkeeping,reportpreparationinenvironmentsthatdemandstrongorganizational,technical,andinterpersonalskills.Confidentinbuildingbusinessconnectionsandpoisedininteractionswithentryandseniorlevelindividuals.

CoreCompetenciesatQuali?cationsinclude:OfficeOrganization&BusinessAdministrationIRecordstrDatabase ManagementIGeneralAccountingAccountsPayabletrReceivableISchedulingtrAppointmentSettingIMeetingtrEventPlanningIO£?ceCoordinationProjectsIClientSupportIConflictResolutionIWrittentrVerbalCommunication ISystemManagementITrainingtrDevelopmentIPowerPointCreationIHumanResourceProcessesIResearch AnalystIDataCollectionINotaryPublicCommissionII2314178
TechnicalSkills:MSPowerPoint,ExcelSpreadsheets,MSWord,MicrosoftAccess

RELEV ANTEXPERIENCE
2015— CurrentAdministratorUnityo/theFaithMinistriesMenr‘2,CA- Maintainscalendarandprovidesadministrativesupportfororganizationfounders- Draft,edit,proofreadtrdistributeinternalandexternalbusinesscorrespondence- Overseeresourceallocationandbudgeting- Maintainprivacytrconfidentialityaroundsensitivematters- Maximizeadministrativeprocesses&flowtrresolvearisingissues- Collaboratewithleaderstodeveloptrimplementpolicies- Fundraisingcoordinator,conferenceplanner,andvendornegotiator 2016— 2013 AdministrativeSupportSpecialist2005— 2016 DataServicesAdministrator2001— 2005 PrivateClientServicesAdministratorBrandesInvestmentPartnersSanDiego,CA- Compiledtrrevieweddataforinformationincomplexsemiannualreportsandpresentations- Research&postingofdividendspayabletoportfolioaccountingsystem- Advisedandcommunicatedfirm'sproxyandgovernanceproposaldecisions- Assumedresponsibilityfortimelyreportingtoseniormanagementandregulatoryagencies- Initiatedprocesstostandardizetemplatesforassetsandtransactions,maximizingefficiencyfor3apartyreports- CreatedtemplatesusingMicrosoftAccessdatabase,reducingtimefrom40hoursto16hours- Performedadministrativefrmctionsinvariousdepartments:documentpreparationcorrespondence,andreports EDUCATION«3’:PROFESSIONALASSOCIATIONS
MtSanJacintoCollege 2019— InProgressAcquiredCerti?cations:GrantWritingIAssertiveTrainingICaliforniaNotaryCommissionILoanSigningAgent

Page 24 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 32 of 606 ends

Infrastructure Commission - 2 Year Term
Established by Ordinance No. 1958, this commission is intended to periodically review and provide comments regarding public facilities and works of improvement that are planned by the City, including without limitation, City parks, open space and other recreational or community facilities and City capital improvement. The commission shall have its regular meeting on the last Monday of every other month on odd months at 4:00 p.m. The commission shall consist of five (5) voting members appointed by the City Council.

Advisory Body Application - Submission #859
Date Submitted: 6/13/2023
1/28/25, 4:12 PM hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/859 https://www.hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/859 1/4Page 25 of 47

10.A.

Page 33 of 606 ends

Page 26 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 34 of 606 ends

Page 27 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 35 of 606 ends

Date of Submission* Applicants Signature*
Juan C. Chiquito
Type your full name.
6/13/2023
04:45 PM
1/28/25, 4:12 PM hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/859 https://www.hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/859 4/4Page 28 of 47

10.A.

Page 36 of 606 ends

Juan C. Chiquito
Education
Masters in public administration: CSU San Bernardino Projected: Spring 2024 Concentration: Leadership GPA:3.78
Masters of Art, History: University of Idaho, Moscow, ID Last attended: Fall 2020 Overall GPA: 3.4
Bachelor of Arts, Political Science & History Graduated: May 2015 University of Idaho, Moscow, ID Overall GPA: 2.7 Associate of Arts, Political Science Graduated: May 2013 College of the Desert, Palm Desert, CA Overall GPA: 2.6 - Dean’s List (2 Semesters)

WORK EXPERIENCE
Substitute Library Technical Assistant II: Crafton Hills College September 2022-May 2023
- Assist reference librarians with cataloging items into the library system. - Rotate to help with circulation desk staffing.
- Help close the building to end the day.
- Assist students with checking library materials in/out. - Help maintain and upgrade the library collection by buying new items and/or removing obsolete items.

Substitute Library Specialist: College of the Desert April 2022-September 2022 - Staff circulation desk in case of missing permanent staff. - Offer bilingual services to students that need them.
- Check-in/out library materials for students, staff, and community members. - Serve as an information desk for college-related inquiries.

Overnight Supervisor: University of Idaho Library September 2018- August 2021 - Supervision and evaluation of staff and student assistants - Overseeing the circulation desk in the absence of the Circulation manager during night hours
- Serving in library committees and unit/departmental meetings - Metadata ingestion and cleanup for the university/library’s research discovery website (VIVO)
Head Host: Gambino’s (Part-Time) October 2015-July 2020 - Greet the public in a friendly but formal manner, manage wait times for several parties simultaneously, wipe down and clean tables, assist with waiting tables, customer service, cashier responsibilities, phone inquiries, and phone transactions (placing take-out orders and/or take payments over the phone).

Teaching Assistant: University of Idaho, History Department Spring 2016 - Spring 2018 - Grading assignments, attendance, and putting grades into the grade book. - Give one lecture per semester and give feedback on how to improve. - Help create assignments and organize curriculums.
- Provide office hours for students struggling with the course or general inquiries. - Gave feedback to professors on how to improve day-to-day lectures to make classes more enjoyable.

Office Assistant: University of Idaho, CAMP (College Assistance Migrant Program) (Work Study) Fall 2013-Spring 2014

Page 29 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 37 of 606 ends

- Input personal and sensitive data of students updated the program’s database, organized student’s files, and answered and made phone calls.
- Contacted students to inform them of upcoming events and required program expectations.
- Help coordinate between programs affiliated with CAMP.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Department Newsletter Spring 2016, Fall 2017 - University of Idaho History Department’s, The Primary Source. Internship experience. - University of Idaho Library Budget Advisory Committee. FY 2019 SKILLS
- Proficient in Microsoft Office Applications, library databases, office machines, and computer skills.
- FERPA & HIPAA and university policy experience.
- Fluent in Spanish (writing, reading, speaking; native speaker) - Advanced research and analytical skills.
- Metadata Ingestion and Cleanup for department/institution databases. - Well-versed in legislative vernacular

Page 30 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 38 of 606 ends

Advisory Body Application - Submission #896
Date Submitted: 10/15/2023
1/28/25, 4:18 PM hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/896 https://www.hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/896 1/4Page 31 of 47

10.A.

Page 39 of 606 ends

Page 32 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 40 of 606 ends

Page 33 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 41 of 606 ends

Date of Submission* Applicants Signature*
Jesse Flores Felix II
Type your full name.
10/15/2023
02:45 PM
1/28/25, 4:18 PM hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/896 https://www.hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/896 4/4Page 34 of 47

10.A.

Page 42 of 606 ends

Advisory Body Application - Submission #856
Date Submitted: 5/19/2023
2/18/25, 3:42 PM hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/856 https://www.hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/856 1/4Page 35 of 47

10.A.

Page 43 of 606 ends

Page 36 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 44 of 606 ends

Page 37 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 45 of 606 ends

Date of Submission* Applicants Signature*
Mark Collins
Type your full name.
5/19/2023
09:15 AM
2/18/25, 3:42 PM hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/856 https://www.hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/856 4/4Page 38 of 47

10.A.

Page 46 of 606 ends

RECEIVEDJULl32020_ CityClerk’.Off'CityofHemet CityofHZmei'ce ApplicationforAppointmenttoV olunteerCommissionslBoards/Committees Thankyouforyourinterestinservingyourcommunity.InterestedapplicantsareencouragedtocontacttheCityClerk‘sOf?ceformoreinformationaboutthebene?tsandresponsibilities0/AdvisoryBodyservice.Applicationswillbekepton?leforoneyea,duringwhichtimetheapplicantwillbegiventheopportunitytointerviewforanyopeningforwhichtheapplicantiseligible.

CityClerk'sol?ce(951)765—2316— 445E.FloridaAvenue,Hemet,CA92543

1. CONTACTINFORMATION:Name:TammyK.Chennault HomeAddress—gn—City:Hemet Zip:925141NameandAddressofBusiness(ifapplyingasbusinessowner) MobilePhone:-_ HomePhone:WorkPhone:_)~.- PersonalEmailAddress:_ Ma?a—“Address“

2. APPLYINGFOR(MARKONEORMORE):Applicantsareencouragedtoapplyfornomorethan2AdvisoryBodiesbestsuitingtheirskillsandinterests.Ifapplyingformultiplebodies,pleaserankthoseinorderofpreference“1"beingmostpreferred.Quali?cationsformembership:Meetoneofthefollowingcriteria,1)TheindividualiscurrentresidentoftheCitywhohaslivedintheCityforatleastoneyearimmediatelypriortotheIndividualsappointmemtotheboard.commissionorcommittee;or2)CurrentresndentoftheCityofHemet's“Sphereofin?uence"whohaslivedinthecityorInthecity'ssphereofin?uenceforatleastoneyearimmediatelypriortotheindividual'sappointmenttotheboard,commissionorcommittee,Seeattachedforspeci?cquali?cations.D PlanningCommission IE LibraryBoard41E]!IMeasureUCitilenOversightcommitteeEl InfrastructureCommissionCl MobileHomeRentReviewCommission3. QUALlFIcA?ONS:YouareencouragedtoattacharesumeorotheradditionaldocumentationthatmaybeofinteresttothecityCouncilintheirevaluationofyourapplication.AreyouaCityresident?ElYes,itofyears6 CINo,areyouaresidentoftheSphereofIn?uence?[I Yes CINoRelevantExperience(employment.communityorganizations,etc):(AttachMesildesiredlKappaDeltaSorority,CSUSanBernardino(1994-1996)-ChapterHistorian,PhilanthropyChair.AlumnaeRelationsInlandEmpireAlumnaeAssociationofKappaDeltaSorority(1996-1999)- PresidentKappaDeltaSororitySouthernCaliforniaCouncil(1996-2000)- InlandEmpireRepresentativeSubstituteTeacher,ValVerdeUSD(1996—1997)PublicSchoolTeacher,ValVerdeUSD(1997-present)"SeeAttached“AdvisoryBodyExperience(bodyandagency)‘Current:
7 Term:From toPreviouk Term:From to

Page 39 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 47 of 606 ends

4. ADDITIONALINFORMATION:TheCityCouncilwouldlikemoreinformationaboutyourinterestinsewingonanAdvisoryBody.PleaseindicateyourcommentsandviewsrelativetothesubjectmatterofmeAdvisoryBody(ies)forwhichyouareapplying:(Attachpagesifdesired.) IbelieveintheimportanceoiMeasureUtobolsterthefinancingtosupportHemet'spoliceandfiredepartments,andIamoneotthecitizenswhovotedinfavorofthemeasureIstronglybelievethattheMeasureUCitizenOversightCommitteehasaresponsrbilitytothepublicaswellastothepoliceandfiredepartmentstoensurethatthefundsdepositedintheMeasureUaccountareusedappropriately,andthatthedecisionsofthecommitteearetransparenttothegeneralpublic.IwouldliketheopportunitytobeapartofthiscommitteesothatIcanbecomemoreinvolvedinimprovingthesafetyofourcommunity"SeeAttached"5. SIGNATURE:READCAREFULLY—Iunderstandthat.iflamappointedtoanAdvisoryBody,IWillberequlredtocomplywith:theCity'sEthicsPolicy,AdvisoryBodyPoliciesandcon?ictofInterestCode;applicableprovisionsofthePoliticalReformActincluding?ling?nancialinterestdisclosurestatements(Form700);andapplicableprovisionsoftheBrownAct;andthatImustcompletestate-mandatedethicstrainingandsexualharassmentpreventiontrainingcourses.Iunderstandthat,whileCnystaffwillmakeagoodfanhefforttoeducatemeregardingtheserequirements,IamresponsibleformyconductasanAdvisoryMember.IunderstandthatallAdvisoryBodyMembersserveatthepleasureoftheCityCouncilandmayberemovedfromofficeduetopoorattendance,unacceptableconduct.orforanyotherreason.

IunderstandthatAdvisoryBodymembersarevolunteers,arenotCityemployees,anddonotreceivebene?tsorprotectionsotherthanworkers'compensationincaseofinjuryinthecourseofdutyIunderstandthatthisisapublicdocument,andthatinformationcontainedwithinitmaybeprovidedtothepublicuponrequest.Inregardtotheonlineavailabilityofmyinformation.Ideclarethefollowing:

A.IfIamappointed.IauthorizetheCitytopostthefollowingcontactinformation(checkapplicablebelow)onitswebsite,IunderstandthatotherwebsitesnotcontrolledbytheCitymayprovidelinkstoaCitywebpagethathasmypersonalinformationonit.IalsoauthorizetheCitytoupdatemypersonalcontactinformationonitswebsiteifmycontactinformationchanges.

ElCellPhone 1:]HomePhone E]WorkPhoneElPersonalEmailaddress|:| BusinessEmailaddress Further.ifmyhomeaddressandtelephonenumberareotherwisenon-disclosableundertheCaliforniaPublicRecordsAct(CaliforniaGovernmentcode6250etseq).Iunderstandthatbyagreeingtothereleaseoftheinformaltonabove,thisinformaitonmaybeprovidedbytheCityinresponsetoarequestmadeunderthePublicRecordsAct.

OR
I B. ifIamappointed,IdonotauthorizetheCitytopostmycontactinfonnaitononitswebsite.TheCitymayhowever,discloseontheintemetandinallothervenuesthatfactthatIserveonaCityAdvisoryBody, Forone.UuOrlyMindtooommbummmwaum:l:| PlaningCommission C)LibraryBaird n EvidenoedHarlotReside"CItrim Cornmlslm DMaseruUColumbus '3‘ EvidenceSpheleofinflueme)UMobileHomoRommeColumbia" starrinitials:Expim'onof1m;

Page 40 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 48 of 606 ends

E . .

History-SocialScienceDepartmentChair,LakesideMiddleSchool.ValVerdeUSD(2011-2015,2018-present)A V|DCoordinator,LakesideMiddleSchool,ValVerdeUSD(2012-present)ValVerdeTeachersAssociation,SiteRepresentative(2012-present)MarchofDimesCoordinator,LakesideMiddleSchool,ValVerdeUSD(2015-2018)CalFire’sSparkofLoveToyDrive.(Do-coordinatorforLakesideMiddleSchool(2018-present) i . l . .

Incities,suchasHemet,thepubliclibraryplaysacriticalroleinnotjustprovidinginformationbutaccesstoinformationtocitizensofallageswhoresideinthecityandinit’ssphereofin?uence.IbelievethattheHemetPublicLibraryisinneedofindividualswithavisionforchangetohelpguidetheoperationsandservicestomeettheneedsofourcitizensinthe21stCentury.Asateacher,Ihavewitnessedtheconstantlyevolvingservicesthatlibrariesprovideandhavegiveninputtohelpthelibrariesmeettheirneeds.lwouldliketheopportunitytobepartoftheHemetPublicLibraryBoardofTrusteessothatIcanprovideadvicebasedonmypersonalandprofessionalexperiencestohelpguidedecisionsthataffectthecitizensofHemet.

Page 41 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 49 of 606 ends

Application for Appointment to Volunteer
Commissions/Boards/Committees
Advisory Body Application - Submission #1362
Date Submitted: 4/30/2024
2/19/25, 10:59 AM hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/1362 https://www.hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/1362 1/4Page 42 of 47

10.A.

Page 50 of 606 ends

Page 43 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 51 of 606 ends

Page 44 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 52 of 606 ends

Date of Submission* Applicants Signature*
George P Schaefer
Type your full name.
4/30/2024
10:30 AM
2/19/25, 10:59 AM hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/1362 https://www.hemetca.gov/Admin/FormCenter/Submissions/Print/1362 4/4Page 45 of 47

10.A.

Page 53 of 606 ends

George Paul Schaefer

Works at Semi-retired
May 5, 2018 - Present·Hemet, California
Shared with Public

President & CEO at GPS Financial Consultants
1991 - Present·Lakewood, California
Shared with Public

Controller at American Safety & Equipment
March 1, 1988 - Present·Pacoima
Shared with Public

Former Accounting Manager at Kaiser Steel-Fab Division
April 1, 1971 - June 1, 1977·Fontana, California
Shared with Public

Former Controller at Rich Steel
Carson, California
Shared with Public

Former Controller at Western Controls
Garden Grove, California
Shared with Public
College
Add a college

Studied Physcology at Productive Learning
Class of 2015
Shared with Public

Studied Business at California State University, Fullerton Also studied Finance, Chemistry and Computer science·Class of 1971 Was on the JV Track Squad doing javelin, shot put and discus. Worked as student assistant for a professor developing a computer model for sustainable growth of particular business's stocks Shared with Public
High school
Add a high school

Went to Foothill High
Class of 1966
Worked as photographer for school paper, was a student assistant for the chemistry department Shared with Public

Went to Tustin High

Page 46 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 54 of 606 ends

Class of 1962

Page 47 of 47 ends

10.A.

Page 55 of 606 ends

Page 56 of 606 ends

City of Hemet
City Council Meeting

STAFF REPORT

Meeting: City Council Meeting - Feb 25 2025
Department: Administration
Submitted by: Mark Prestwich, City Manager
John Maier, City Clerk;

☐ Receive and File ☐ Consent Calendar ☐ Business Item ☐ Public Hearing

TITLE:

Riverside County Arts and Culture Month Proclamation

STRATEGIC PLAN INTEGRATION:

N/A

ATTACHMENT(S):

Attachment 1: Proclamation - Riverside County Arts & Culture Month

Page 1 of 2 ends

19.A.

Page 57 of 606 ends

WHEREAS, Riverside County has emerged as a leader in Arts and Culture; and WHEREAS, the encouragement of local artists and the steadfast support of the arts community are deemed essential for elevating the quality of life in Riverside County and fostering economic stimulation through tourism, arts and innovation; and
WHEREAS, our vibrant arts and culture scene has been cultivated through extensive partnerships with local nonprofits, private corporations, cities, and strategic allies, collectively contributing to Riverside County's leadership in the arts; and
WHEREAS, a cultural landscape that bolsters the arts and culture community in Riverside County is crucial not only for promoting tourism throughout the County but also for enriching the lives of our residents; and
WHEREAS, the County of Riverside values a dynamic atmosphere that fosters innovation, education, and outreach within the local art community, recognizing these as vital components for the success, health, and advancement of our county.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, Jackie Peterson, Mayor of the City of Hemet, along with the Hemet City Council, do hereby proclaim the month of March 2025 as:

Riverside County Arts & Culture Month
and encourage the arts in our communities and in the region.

PRESENTED FEBRUARY 25, 2025
City of HemetCalifornia
Proclamation
Riverside County Arts & Culture Month
Jackie Peterson, Mayor
Joe Males, Council Member
Tom Lodge, Council Member
Linda Krupa, Council Member
Carole Kendrick, Mayor ProTem

Page 2 of 2 ends

19.A.

Page 58 of 606 ends

City of Hemet
City Council Meeting

STAFF REPORT

Meeting: City Council Meeting - Feb 25 2025
Department: Administration
Submitted by: Mark Prestwich, City Manager
John Maier, City Clerk;

☐ Receive and File ☒ Consent Calendar ☐ Business Item ☐ Public Hearing

TITLE:

Approval of the City Council Meeting Minutes of February 11, 2025

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

Approve the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of February 11, 2025.

STRATEGIC PLAN INTEGRATION:

GOAL THREE: COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
To connect and participate in a constant dialogue between members of the community, City staff, and elected officials to promote togetherness and positivity.

Objective 1: Deliver messaging to the Community that connects, is consistent, and relevant.

Objective 2: Increase transparency for the public.

ATTACHMENT(S):

Attachment 1_ City Council Meeting - Feb 11 2025 - Minutes

Page 1 of 8 ends

20.A.

Page 59 of 606 ends

MINUTES
City Council Meeting
City of Hemet
Temporary City Council Chamber
Tuesday, February 11, 2025

1. CLOSED SESSION – 5:00 P.M.

2. CALL TO ORDER
The City Council of the City of Hemet met on this date in a Closed Session at 5:01 P.M. in the Hemet Public Library, 300 E. Latham Avenue, Hemet, California with Mayor Peterson presiding.

3. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Maier provided the Roll Call as follows:

Present: Mayor Peterson
Mayor Pro Tem Kendrick
Council Members Krupa, Lodge and Males
Staff Present:

City Manager:

City Attorney:

City Clerk:

Mark Prestwich
Steven Graham
John Paul Maier

4. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD - RULES OF DECORUM, RESOLUTION NO. 4545 Mayor Peterson asked for Public Comments; no one spoke.

City Attorney Graham requested to add two items to the Closed Session Agenda as they were brought to the attention of staff after the initial posting of the Agenda. City Attorney Graham noted to add two items to the Closed Session Agenda as Item 5.B: Liability Claims of Kenneth Santiago and the Estate of Jimmy Lopez.

MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM KENDRICK, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER LODGE, CARRIED 5-0, to add two items to the Closed Session Agenda as Item 5.B: Liability Claims of Kenneth Santiago and the Estate of Jimmy Lopez.

The City Council recessed into Closed Session at 5:04 P.M.

Page 2 of 8 ends

20.A.

Page 60 of 606 ends

City Council Meeting
February 11, 2025

5. DISCUSSION ITEMS

5.A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION Pursuant to Paragraph (1) of Subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9 Southstar Engineering and Consulting, Inc. v. City of Hemet Riverside County Superior Court Case No. CVRI2307227
This item was added to the agenda.

5.B CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9
Significant Exposure to Litigation: Liability Claims of Kenneth Santiago and the Estate of Jimmy Lopez

6. ADJOURNMENT OF CLOSED SESSION
Closed Session was adjourned at 6:00 P.M.

7. REGULAR MEETING - 6:00 P.M.

8. CALL TO ORDER
The City Council of the City of Hemet met this date in a Regular Session at 6:05 P.M. in the Hemet Public Library, 300 E. Latham Avenue, Hemet, California with Mayor Peterson presiding.

9. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Maier provided the Roll Call as follows:

Present: Mayor Peterson
Mayor Pro Tem Kendrick
Council Members Krupa, Lodge and Males
Staff Present:

City Manager:

City Attorney:

City Clerk:

Mark Prestwich
Steven Graham
John Paul Maier

10. INVOCATION
Invocation was given by Pastor Mark Garrett.

11. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Lodge.

Page 3 of 8 ends

20.A.

Page 61 of 606 ends

City Council Meeting
February 11, 2025

12. CITY ATTORNEY CLOSED SESSION REPORT

12.A. City Attorney’s Report regarding Closed Session
Action:

City Attorney Graham stated that settlement direction was provided for Item 5.A, CARRIED 5- 0, and there were no other reportable actions from the 5:00 P.M. Closed Session.

13. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
Mayor Peterson asked for Public Comments; no one spoke.

13.A. Public Comment for Items Listed on the Agenda: Consent and Discussion Items

13.B. Public Comment for Items Not Listed on the Agenda, but within Jurisdictional Matter

14. PRESENTATION

14.A National Black History Month Proclamation
Council Member Males presented the National Black History Month Proclamation to the Hemet San Jacinto Chamber of Commerce Executive Director Kevin Saunders.

15. PUBLIC HEARING

15.A An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Hemet Amending Chapter 58, Article III, Division 2 of the Hemet Municipal Code to Update Provisions Related to the City's Participation in the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program
Action:

Public Works Director Noah Rau presented a PowerPoint Presentation on the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program.

Mayor Peterson opened the Public Hearing at 6:24 P.M.

Mayor Peterson asked for Public Comments; no one spoke.

Mayor Peterson closed the Public Hearing at 6:24 P.M.

MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM KENDRICK, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER KRUPA, CARRIED 5-0, to:

Page 4 of 8 ends

20.A.

Page 62 of 606 ends

City Council Meeting
February 11, 2025

1. Introduce and read by title only the attached Ordinance 2055, amending and updating the City’s TUMF ordinance and participation in the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program, as amended; and

2. Adopt the attached Resolution 2024-017, adopting the 2024 Nexus Study and amending the TMUF fee schedule.

16. RECEIVE AND FILE

16.A The City of Hemet Warrant Registers Dated December 26, 2024, in the amount of $1,713,150.89, and January 9, 2025, in the amount of $1,873,692.28. The Payroll Periods of December 9, 2024 – December 22, 2024, in the amount of $1,092,262.15, and December 23, 2024 – January 5, 2025, in the amount of $1,047,654.27
Action:

By consensus, the City Council received and filed the City of Hemet Warrant Registers.

17. CONSENT CALENDAR
By consensus, the City Council removed all items from the Consent Calendar for separate consideration.

17.A Approval of the City Council Meeting Minutes of January 28, 2025 Action:

MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER KRUPA, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER LODGE, CARRIED 5-0, to approve the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of January 28, 2025, as amended.

17.B A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Approving the First Amendment to the Cooperative Agreement for the West Hemet Master Drainage Plan by and Between the City of Hemet and Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute all Documents Related to the Cooperative Agreement Amendment in the Final Form and Format as Approved by the City Attorney Action:

MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM KENDRICK, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER MALES, CARRIED 5-0, to adopt a Resolution 2025-015 of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Approving the First Amendment to the Cooperative Agreement for the West Hemet Master Drainage Plan by and Between the City of Hemet and Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute all Documents Related to the Cooperative Agreement Amendment in the Final Form and Format as Approved by the City Attorney.

Page 5 of 8 ends

20.A.

Page 63 of 606 ends

City Council Meeting
February 11, 2025

17.C A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Approving an Amendment to the City's Classification and Compensation Plan to Include the Job Description Revision and title change from Firefighter Paramedic to Firefighter Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) or Firefighter Paramedic Action:

MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER KRUPA, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER LODGE, CARRIED 5-0, to adopt a Resolution 2025-019 of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, approving an amendment to the City's Classification and Compensation Plan to include the revised job description and title change from Firefighter Paramedic to Firefighter Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) or Firefighter Paramedic, as amended to include a section in the Resolution to add that the City Manager is authorized to execute a side letter agreement, regarding the Firefighter Paramedic to Firefighter Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) or Fire Paramedic as approved as to Form by the City Attorney.

18. DISCUSSION - ACTION ITEMS

18.A A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Rejecting all Bids for the Trash Enclosure Pilot Program
Action:

Public Works Director Noah Rau provided an oral report on Rejecting all Bids for the Trash Enclosure Program.

MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM KENDRICK, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER LODGE, CARRIED 5-0, to adopt a Resolution 2025-016 of the City Council of the City of Hemet, California, Rejecting all Bids for the Trash Enclosure Pilot Program.

18.B A Resolution of the City Council of the City Of Hemet, California, Approving the Sierra Dawn Median Beautification Project; Approving an Agreement Between The City and The Sierra Dawn Estates Home Owners Association (HOA) Regarding the Construction, Funding, and Subsequent Maintenance of The Project in the Final Form and Format Approved by the City Attorney; Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement; and Authorizing the Administrative Services Director to Appropriate $215,000 from General Fund Reserves to the Project
Council Member Lodge stated that he would recuse himself from participating in this item as he lives in the Sierra Dawn Estates. Council Member Lodge left the dais at 6:43 P.M.

Environmental Services Manager Daniel Cortese presented a PowerPoint Presentation, regarding the Sierra Dawn Median Beautification Project.

Action:

MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER KRUPA, SECOND COUNCIL MEMBER MALES, CARRIED 4-0-0-1 (COUNCIL MEMBER LODGE RECUSED), to adopt a Resolution 2025-018 of the City

Page 6 of 8 ends

20.A.

Page 64 of 606 ends

City Council Meeting
February 11, 2025
Council of the City Of Hemet, California, Approving the Sierra Dawn Median Beautification Project; Approving an Agreement Between The City and The Sierra Dawn Estates Home Owners Association (HOA) Regarding the Construction, Funding, and Subsequent Maintenance of The Project in the Final Form and Format Approved by the City Attorney; Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement; and Authorizing the Administrative Services Director to Appropriate $215,000 from General Fund Reserves to the Project.

Council Member Lodge returned to the dais at 6:52 P.M.

18.C Consider the Delegate Representative and Alternate for the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 2025 General Assembly Meeting Held on May 1, 2025 - May 2, 2025
Action:

City Clerk Maier provided an oral report on the 60 th Anniversary of the Southern California Association of Government’s (SCAG) 2025 General Assembly Meeting.

MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER LODGE, SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER MALES, CARRIED 5-0, to select Mayor Pro Tem Kendrick as the Delegate Representative and Council Member Krupa as the Alternate for the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 2025 General Assembly Meeting at the JW Marriott Desert Springs Resort & Spa in Palm Desert.

19. CITY COUNCIL AND STAFF REPORTS
Mayor Peterson asked for Council Comments. Council Member Krupa, Council Member Lodge, Council Member Males, Mayor Pro Tem Kendrick, and Mayor Peterson gave reports.

CITY MANAGER MARK PRESTWICH
City Manager Prestwich announced that the City would host its first Hemet Regional Economic Summit on March 20, 2025 at the Hemet Public Library, noted that Hemet AM would take place on May 23-25 at the Gibbel Skate Plaza, and announced that with the week’s rain forecast, sandbags would be available to all residents at all City fire stations.

20. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Council Member Males requested that the City Manager place an item on the Future Agenda Items List for consideration, regarding a Homeless Update and further urged that the item be presented at the March 25, 2025 City Council Meeting. Mayor Pro Tem Kendrick noted that she has received several complaints from residents about parked motorhomes stationed for more than 72 hours on City streets and requested that the City Manager address the matter.

Page 7 of 8 ends

20.A.

Page 65 of 606 ends

City Council Meeting
February 11, 2025

21. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mayor Peterson adjourned the meeting at 7:18 P.M. The next Regular City Council Meeting will be at 6:00 P.M. on February 25, 2025.

APPROVAL: ATTEST:

_______________________________
Jaculin "Jackie" Peterson

_____________________________
John P. Maier, MBA, MMC
Mayor City Clerk

Page 8 of 8 ends

20.A.

Page 66 of 606 ends

City of Hemet
City Council Meeting

STAFF REPORT

Meeting: City Council Meeting - Feb 25 2025
Department: Public Works
Submitted by: Mark Prestwich, City Manager
Noah Rau, Public Works Director/City Engineer;

☐ Receive and File ☒ Consent Calendar ☐ Business Item ☒ Public Hearing

TITLE:

Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2055 of the City Council of the City of Hemet Amending Chapter 58, Article III, Division 2 of the Hemet Municipal Code to Update Provisions Related to the City's Participation in the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:

Waive further reading and adopt Ordinance, amending and updating the City’s TUMF ordinance and participation in the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program.

BACKGROUND:

The City/County is a Member Jurisdiction of the Western Riverside Council of Governments (“WRCOG”), a joint powers agency comprised of the County of Riverside and eighteen (18) cities located in Western Riverside County. Acting in concert, in 2002-2003, the WRCOG Member Jurisdictions developed a plan whereby the shortfall in funds needed to enlarge the capacity of the Regional System of Highways and Arterials due to new development in Western Riverside County could be made up in part by a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (“TUMF”) on future residential, commercial and industrial development. As a Member Jurisdiction of WRCOG and as a TUMF Participating Jurisdiction, the City participated in the preparation of a certain “Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Fee Nexus Study” (“2002 Nexus Study”) later adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee. Based on the 2002 Nexus Study, the City adopted and implemented an ordinance authorizing the City’s participation in a TUMF Program.

Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act (Gov. Code §§ 66000 et seq.), WRCOG has prepared a new nexus study (“2024 Nexus Study”) to update the fee. On September 9, 2024, the WRCOG Executive Committee reviewed the 2024 Nexus Study and recommended that TUMF Participating Jurisdictions update their fees by amending their applicable TUMF ordinances to reflect changes in the TUMF network and the cost of construction.

Page 1 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 67 of 606 ends

ANALYSIS:

The proposed Ordinance provides the legal basis for a revised TUMF schedule. The actual TUMF schedule will be established through the Resolution.

In accordance with the Mitigation Fee Act, the proposed Ordinance and 2024 Nexus Study:

1. Identify the purpose of the revised fees;

2. Identify the use to which the revised fees are to be put, including identification of any facilities to be financed;

3. Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the fee’s use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed;

4. Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facilities and the type of development project upon which the fees are imposed; and

5. Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fees and the cost of the public facilities or portion or the public facility attributable to the development on which the fees are imposed.

The effective date for the new TUMF Schedule is April 1, 2025.

It is important to note that this process requires a public hearing and at least a 10-day notice period in accordance with California Government Code § 36933. The Public Notice was issued on January 29, 2025.

DISCUSSION:

For reference, the current TUMF schedule that is being revised based on the 2024 Nexus Study is as follows:

1. $10,104 per single-family residential unit

2. $6,580 per multi-family residential unit

3. $1.86 per square foot of an industrial project

4. $7.72 per square foot of a commercial retail project

5. $4.89 per square foot of a service commercial project

6. $2.45 per square foot of a service Class A and B office

Based on the new Nexus Study, the single-family residential unit fees are now broken into four tiers by square feet. The fee for commercial retail projects, service commercial projects and Class A and B offices remain the same as current fees.

PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION:

 On October 18, 2002, WRCOG Executive Committee adopted the "Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Fee Nexus Study (the "2002 Nexus Study''). This foundational study established the framework for the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program.

Subsequently, the City adopted Ordinance No. 1955, marking the original adoption of the TUMF program by the City of Hemet.
 On April 25, 2006, the City adopted Ordinance No. 1757 authorizing the implementation of the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program in accordance with the 2002 Nexus Study and California Government Code Sections 66000 et seq.

Page 2 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 68 of 606 ends

 On January 26, 2010, the City adopted Ordinance No. 1824 amending Division 2, Sections 58- 70 to 58-70.6 of Article III of Chapter 58 of the Hemet Municipal Code. This ordinance incorporated updates from the 2005 Nexus Study, superseding Ordinance No. 1757 and Ordinance No. 1768.
 On July 10, 2017, the WRCOG executive committee reviewed the 2016 Nexus Study and TUMF program and recommended TUMF participating jurisdictions amend their applicable TUMF ordinances to reflect changes in the TUMF network and the cost of construction in order to update the TUMF program. On September 12, 2017, the City adopted Ordinance No. 1938, which adopted the 2016 Nexus Study and updated the TUMF fee schedule.  On March 11, 2025, the City Council introduced and read by title only the attached Ordinance 2055, amending and updating the City’s TUMF ordinance and participation in the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program, as amended; and adopted the Resolution 2024-017, adopting the 2024 Nexus Study and amending the TMUF fee schedule.

STRATEGIC PLAN INTEGRATION:

GOAL THREE: COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
To connect and participate in a constant dialogue between members of the community, City staff, and elected officials to promote togetherness and positivity.

Objective 1: Deliver messaging to the Community that connects, is consistent, and relevant.

Objective 2: Increase transparency for the public.

Objective 3: Increase the community's pride within the City.

GOAL FIVE: ORGANIZATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS
To identify the work needed inside the City organization to effectively provide services to the community and ensure financial stability.

Objective 1: Operate in a financially sustainable manner.

Objective 2: Evaluate existing practices to ensure continuity with industry best practices.

Objective 3: Provide Council with policies that are consistent while lessening liabilities.

Objective 4: Increase employee retention by training and creating a positive workplace.

Objective 5: Streamline fire prevention coordination efforts.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Participating in the TUMF program will provide needed resources to enlarge the capacity of the Regional System of Highways and Arterials due to new development in Western Riverside County.

The cost of this update includes publication costs for noticing the public hearing and staff time for processing. There is no other General Fund impact, and the TUMF is paid by developers directly to WRCOG.

ATTACHMENT(S):

Attachment 1: Ordinance - Update for TUMF 2024 Nexus Study Attachment 2: Exhibit A - Ordinance Map of the Regional System Attachment 3: Exhibit B - Ordinance TUMF 2024 Nexus Study Attachment 4: Proof - PH Notice for TUMF Update

Page 3 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 69 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 1
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28

CITY OF HEMET

HEMET, CALIFORNIA
ORDINANCE NO. 2055

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF HEMET AMENDING CHAPTER 58, ARTICLE III,
DIVISION 2 OF THE HEMET MUNICIPAL CODE TO
UPDATE PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE CITY’S

PARTICIPATION IN THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY

TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE (TUMF)

PROGRAM

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HEMET DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1: AMENDMENT OF CHAPTER 58, ARTICLE III, DIVISION 2 OF THE HEMET MUNICIPAL CODE.

Chapter 58, Article III, Division 2 (WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE PROGRAM) is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:

Sec. 58-70 TITLE. This Ordinance shall be known as the “Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program Ordinance of 2025 (“Ordinance”).

Sec. 58-71 FINDINGS.

A. The City is a member agency of the Western Riverside Council of Governments (“WRCOG”), a joint powers agency comprised of the County of Riverside and 18 cities located in Western Riverside County. Acting in concert, the WRCOG Member Agencies developed a plan whereby the shortfall in funds needed to enlarge

Page 4 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 70 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 2
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
the capacity of the Regional System of Highways and Arterials in Western Riverside County (the “Regional System”) could be made up in part by a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (“TUMF”) on future residential, commercial, and industrial development.

A map depicting the boundaries of Western Riverside County and the Regional System is attached here as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein. As a Member Agency of WRCOG and as a TUMF Participating Jurisdiction, the City participated in the preparation of a certain “Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Fee Nexus Study,” dated October 18, 2002 (the “2002 Nexus Study”), prepared in compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act (Gov. Code §§ 66000 et seq.) and adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee. Based on the 2002 Nexus Study, the City adopted and implemented an ordinance authorizing the City’s participation in a TUMF Program.

B. In 2016, the TUMF Nexus Study (“2016 Nexus Study”) was updated for the purpose of updating the fees. On July 10, 2017, the WRCOG Executive Committee reviewed the 2016 Nexus Study and TUMF Program and recommended TUMF Participating Jurisdictions amend their applicable TUMF ordinances to reflect changes in the TUMF network and the cost of construction in order to update the TUMF Program.

C. On September 12, 2017, the City adopted Ordinance No. 1938, which adopted the 2016 Nexus Study and updated the TUMF.

D. The City adopted Ordinance No. 1938 on September 12, 2017, allowing WRCOG to calculate and collect TUMF on behalf of the City.

E. In 2018, the TUMF Program was altered to adopt a process in which

Page 5 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 71 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 3
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
WRCOG calculates and collects TUMF on behalf of member agencies under the Western Riverside County Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program Ordinance of 2018.

F. WRCOG, with the assistance of TUMF Participating Jurisdictions, has prepared an updated nexus study entitled “Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Nexus Study: 2024 Update” (“2024 Nexus Study”) pursuant to California Government Code sections 66000 et seq. (the Mitigation Fee Act), for the purpose of updating the fees. On September 9, 2024, the WRCOG Executive Committee reviewed the 2024 Nexus Study and TUMF Program and recommended TUMF Participating Jurisdictions amend their applicable TUMF ordinances to reflect changes in the TUMF network and the cost of construction in order to update the TUMF Program.

G. Consistent with its previous findings made in the adoption of Ordinance Nos. 1757, 1824 and 1938, the City Council has been informed and advised, and hereby finds, that if the capacity of the Regional System is not enlarged, and unless development contributes to the cost of improving the Regional System, the result will be substantial traffic congestion in all parts of Western Riverside County, with unacceptable Levels of Service. Furthermore, the failure to mitigate growing traffic impacts on the Regional System will substantially impair the ability of public safety services (police and fire) to respond and, thus, adversely affect the public health, safety and welfare. Therefore, continuation of a TUMF Program is essential.

H. The City Council finds and determines that there is a reasonable and rational relationship between the use of the TUMF and the type of development

Page 6 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 72 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 4
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
projects on which the fees are imposed because the fees will be used to construct the transportation improvements that are necessary for the safety, health and welfare of the residential and non-residential users of the development in which the TUMF will be levied.

I. The City Council finds and determines that there is a reasonable and rational relationship between the need for the improvements to the Regional System and the type of development projects on which the TUMF is imposed because it will be necessary for the residential and non-residential users of such projects to have access to the Regional system. Such development will benefit from the Regional System improvements and the burden of such developments will be mitigated in part by payment of the TUMF.

J. The City Council finds and determines that the cost estimates set forth in the new 2024 Nexus Study are reasonable cost estimates for constructing the Regional System improvements and the facilities that compromise the Regional System, and that the amount of the TUMF expected to be generated by new development will not exceed the total fair share cost to such development.

K. The fees collected pursuant to this Ordinance shall be used to help pay for the design, planning, construction of and real acquisition for the Regional System improvements and its facilities as identified in the 2024 Nexus Study. The need for the improvements and facilities is related to new development because such development results in additional traffic and creates the demand for the improvements.

L. By notice duly given and published, the City Council set the time and

Page 7 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 73 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 5
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
place for a public hearing on the 2024 Nexus Study and the fees proposed thereunder and at least ten (10) days prior to this hearing, the City Council made the 2024 Nexus Study available to the public.

M. At the time and place set for the hearing, the City Council duly considered data and information provided by the public relative to the cost of the improvements and facilities for which the fees are proposed and all other comments, whether written or oral, submitted prior to the conclusion of the hearing.

N. The City Council finds that the 2024 Nexus Study proposes a fair and equitable method for distributing a portion of the unfunded costs of improvements and facilities to the Regional system.

O. The City Council hereby adopts the 2024 Nexus Study and its findings.

The 2024 Nexus Study is attached and incorporated herein as Exhibit “B.” P. The City Council hereby adopts this Ordinance to amend and supersede the provisions of Ordinance No. 1938.

Sec. 58-72 DEFINITIONS
For the purpose of this Ordinance, the following words, terms and phrases shall have the following meanings:

A. “Class ‘A’ Office” means an office building that is typically characterized by high quality design, use of high-end building materials, state of the art technology for voice and data, on-site support services/maintenance, and often includes full service ancillary uses such as, but not limited to a bank, restaurant/office coffee shop, health club, printing shop, and reserved parking. The minimum requirements of an office

Page 8 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 74 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 6
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
building classified as Class ‘A” Office shall be as follows:
(i) minimum of three stories (exception will be made for March JPA, where height requirements exist);
(ii) minimum of 10,000 square feet per floor;
(iii) steel frame construction;
(iv) central, interior lobby; and
(v) access to suites shall be from inside the building unless the building is located in a central business district with major foot traffic, in which case the first floor may be accessed from the street to provide entrances/ exits for commercial uses within the building.

B.“Class ‘B’ Office” means an office building that is typically characterized by high quality design, use of high-end building materials, state of the art technology for voice and data, on-site support services/maintenance, and often includes full service ancillary uses such as, but not limited to a bank, restaurant/office coffee shop, health club, printing shop, and reserved parking. The minimum requirements of an office building classified as Class ‘B” Office shall be as follows:
(i) minimum of two stories;
(ii) minimum of 15,000 square feet per floor;
(iii) steel frame, concrete or masonry shell construction; (iv) central, interior lobby; and
(v) access to suites shall be from inside the building unless the building is located in a central business district with major foot traffic, in which case the

Page 9 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 75 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 7
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
first floor may be accessed from the street to provide entrances/exits for commercial uses within the building.

C.“Development Project” or “Project” means any project undertaken for the purposes of development, including the issuance of a permit for construction.

D.“Gross Acreage” means the total property area as shown on a land division of a map of record, or described through a recorded legal description of the property. This area shall be bounded by road rights of way and property lines.

E. “Habitable Structure” means any structure or part thereof where persons reside, congregate or work and which is legally occupied in whole or part in accordance with applicable building codes, and state and local laws.

F. “Industrial Project” means any development project that proposes any industrial or manufacturing use permitted within the following zoning classifications, as specified in Hemet Municipal Code § 90, Article XXVI and Article XXX: Office Professional (O-P), C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial), C-2 (General Commercial), Commercial Manufacturing (C-M), Business Park (B-P), Limited Manufacturing (M-1), Heavy Manufacturing (M-2), or Specific Plan (SP)with one of the aforementioned zones used as the base zone.

G.“Low Income Residential Housing” means “Residential Affordable Units”: (A) for rental housing, the units shall be made available, rented and restricted to “lower income households” (as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 50079.5) at an “affordable rent” (as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 50053). Affordable units that are rental housing shall be made available, rented, and restricted to lower

Page 10 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 76 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 8
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
income households at an affordable rent for a period of at least fifty-five (55) years after the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for new residential development, and (B) for for-sale housing, the units shall be sold to “persons or families of low or moderate income” (as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 50093) at a purchase price that will not cause the purchaser’s monthly housing cost to exceed “affordable housing cost (as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 50052.5) Affordable units that are for- sale housing units shall be restricted to ownership by persons and families of low or moderate income for at least forty-five (45) years after the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the new residential development.

H.“Multi-Family Residential Unit” means a structure with two or more legal independent residential dwelling units intended for human habitation.

I. “Non-Residential Unit” means retail commercial, service commercial and industrial development which is designed primarily for non-dwelling use, but shall include hotels and motels.

J. “Recognized Financing District” means a Financing District as defined in the TUMF Administrative Plan as may be amended from time to time.

K. “Residential Dwelling Unit” means a building or portion thereof used by one (1) family and containing but one (1) kitchen, which is designed primarily for residential occupancy including single-family and multi-family dwellings. “Residential Dwelling Unit” shall not include hotels or motels.

L. “Retail Commercial Project” means any development project that proposes a retail commercial activity use, not defined as a service commercial project,

Page 11 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 77 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 9
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
permitted within the following zoning classifications, as specified in Hemet Municipal Code § 90: Article XXVI and Article XXX; Office Professional (O-P), C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial), C-2 (General Commercial), Commercial Manufacturing (C-M), Business Park (B-P), Limited Manufacturing (M-1), Heavy Manufacturing (M-2), or Specific Plan (SP) with one of the aforementioned zones used as the base zone, which can include any eating/dining facility residing on the retail commercial development premises.

M. “Service Commercial Project” means any development project that is predominately dedicated to business activities associated with professional or administrative services, and typically consists of corporate offices, financial institutions, legal, and medical offices eating/dining facilities, and other uses related to personal or professional services.

N. “Single Family Residential Unit” means each residential dwelling unit development which is situated on one lot which shares no common wall, foundation, or other interconnection with another dwelling unit.

O.“TUMF Participating Jurisdiction” means a jurisdiction in Western Riverside County which has adopted and implemented an ordinance authorizing participation in the TUMF Program and complies with all regulations established in the TUMF Administrative Plan, as adopted and amended from time to time by the WRCOG.

P. “Disabled Veteran” means any veteran who is retired or is in process of medical retirement from military service who is or was severely injured in a theatre of combat operations and has received a letter of eligibility for the Veterans Administration

Page 12 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 78 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 10
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
Specially Adapted Housing (SAH) Grant Program.

Q. Government/public buildings, public schools, and public facilities means any owned and operated facilities by a government entity in accordance with Section G. Exemptions, Subsection 2. of this Ordinance. A new development that is subject to a long-term lease with a government agency for government/public buildings, public schools, and public facilities shall apply only if all of the following conditions are met:
(i) The new development being constructed is subject to a long-term lease with a government agency.
(ii) The project shall have a deed restriction placed on the property that limits the use to government/public facility for the term of the lease, including all extension options, for a period of not less than 20 years.

Any change in the use of the facility from government shall trigger the payment of the TUMF in effect at the time the change is made. (iii) No less than ninety percent of the total square footage of the building is leased to the government agency during the term of deed restriction the long term and any extensions thereof.
(iv) The new development is constructed at prevailing wage rates. (v) A copy of the lease is provided to the applicable jurisdiction and to WRCOG.
(vi) Based on the facts and circumstances WRCOG determines that the intent of the lease is to provide for a long-term government use, and

Page 13 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 79 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 11
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
not to evade payment of TUMF.

R. “Non-profit Organization” means an organization operated exclusively for exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, and none of its earnings may inure to any private shareholder or individual. In addition, it may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial port of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates. For the purposes of the TUMF Program, the non-profit may be a 501(c) (3) charitable organization as defined by the Internal Revenue Service.

S. “Long-Term Lease” as used in the TUMF Program, a “long-term lease” shall mean a lease with a term of no less than twenty years.

T. “Mixed-Use Development” as used in the TUMF Program, means Developments with the following criteria:
(i) three or more significant revenue-producing uses, and (ii) significant physical and functional integration of project components.

U. “Guest Dwellings” and “Detached Second Units” according to the State of California legal definition as following:
(i) Complies with the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development Accessory Dwelling Unit Handbook and (ii) Are ministerially approved by each jurisdiction’s local codes.

V. “TUMF Administrative Plan” means that the TUMF Administration Plan adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee May 5, 2003, as amended, setting forth detailed administration procedures and requirements for the TUMF program.

Page 14 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 80 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 12
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
Sec. 58-73 Establishment of the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee.

A. Adoption of TUMF Schedule. The City Council shall adopt an applicable TUMF schedule through a separate resolution, which may be amended from time to time.

B.Fee Calculation. The fees shall be calculated by WRCOG according to the calculation methodology fee set forth in the WRCOG TUMF Fee Calculation Handbook adopted July 14, 2003, as amended from time to time. In addition to data in the Fee Calculation Handbook, WRCOG Staff may consider the following items when establishing the appropriate fee calculation methodology:
(i) Underlying zoning of the site
(ii) Land-use classifications in the latest Nexus Study (iii) Project specific traffic studies
(iv) Latest Standardized reference manuals such as the Institute of Traffic Engineers Trip Generation Manual
(v) Previous TUMF calculations for similar uses
(vi) WRCOG staff shall approve final draft credit / reimbursement agreement prior to execution
WRCOG shall have final determination regarding the appropriate methodology to calculate the fee based on the information provided by the local agency. In case of a conflict between the applicant, WRCOG, and/or the local agency regarding the fee calculation methodology, the dispute resolution process in the TUMF Administrative Plan will apply.

Page 15 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 81 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 13
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
C.Fee Adjustment. The fee schedule may be periodically reviewed and the amounts adjusted by the WRCOG Executive Committee. By amendment to the Resolution reference is subsection A, above, the fees may be increased or decreased to reflect the changes in actual and estimated costs of the Regional System including, but not limited to, debt service, lease payments and construction costs. The adjustment of the fees may also reflect changes in the facilities required to be constructed, in estimated revenues received pursuant to this Ordinance, as well as the availability or lack thereof of other funds with which to construct the Regional System. WRCOG shall review the TUMF Program no less than every four (4) years after the effective date of this Ordinance.

D.Purpose. The purpose of the TUMF is to fund those certain improvements to the Regional System as depicted in Exhibit “A” and identified in the 2024 Nexus Study, Exhibit “B.”
E.Applicability. The TUMF shall apply to all new development within the City, unless otherwise exempt hereunder.

F.Exemptions. The following types of new development shall be exempt from the provisions of this Ordinance and in TUMF Administrative Plan:
(i) Low income residential housing as described in Section 3 Definitions, Subsection G of this Ordinance and in the TUMF Administrative Plan. (ii) Government/public buildings, public schools, and public facilities as described in Section 3. Definitions, Subsection Q. of this Ordinance and in the TUMF Administrative Plan. Airports that are public use

Page 16 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 82 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 14
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
airports and are appropriately permitted by Caltrans or other state agency.
(iii) Development Projects which are the subject of a Public Facilities Development Agreement entered into pursuant to Government Code section 65864 et seq, prior to the effective date of Ordinance No.1757, wherein the imposition of new fees are expressly prohibited, provided that if the term of such a Development Agreement is extended by amendment or by any other manner after the effective date of Ordinance No. 1757 the TUMF shall be imposed. (iv) The rehabilitation and/or reconstruction of any habitable structure in use on or after January 1, 2000, provided that the same or fewer traffic trips are generated as a result thereof.
(v) Guest Dwellings and Detached Second Units as described in this Ordinance in Section 3. Definitions, Subsection U. and in the Administrative Plan
(vi) Kennels and Catteries established in connection with an existing single-family residential unit.
(vii) Any sanctuary, or other activity under the same roof of a church or other house of worship that is not revenue generating and is eligible for a property tax exemption (excluding concert venues, coffee/snack shops, book stores, for-profit pre-school day-cares, etc., which would be assessed TUMF).

Page 17 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 83 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 15
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
(viii) Any nonprofit corporation or nonprofit organization offering and conducting full-time day school at the elementary, middle school or high school level for students between the ages of five and eighteen years.
(ix) New single-family homes, constructed by non-profit organizations, specially adapted and designed for maximum freedom of movement and independent living for qualified Disabled Veterans.” (x) Other uses may be exempt as determined by the WRCOG Executive Committee as further defined in the TUMF Administrative Plan.

G. Credit. Regional System improvements may be credited toward the TUMF in accordance with the TUMF Administrative Plan and the following:
(i) Regional Tier:
a. Arterial Credits: If a developer constructs arterial improvements identified on the Regional System, the developer shall receive credit for all costs associated with the arterial component based on approved Nexus Study for the Regional System effective at the time the credit agreement is entered into. WRCOG staff must pre- approve any credit agreements that deviate from the standard WRCOG approved format.
b. Other Credits: In special circumstances, when a developer constructs off-site improvements such as an interchange, bridge, or railroad grade separation, credits shall be determined by

Page 18 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 84 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 16
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
WRCOG and the City in consultation with the developer. All such credits must have prior written approval from WRCOG.
c. The amount of the development fee credit shall not exceed the maximum amount determined by the Nexus Study for the Regional System at the time the credit agreement is entered into or actual costs, whichever is less.
(ii) Local Tier:
a. The local jurisdictions shall compare facilities in local fee programs against the Regional System and eliminate any overlap in its local fee program except where there is a Recognized Financing District has been established.
b. If there is a Recognized Financing District established, the local agency may credit that portion of the facility identified in both programs against the TUMF in accordance with the TUMF
Administrative Plan.

Sec. 58-74. REIMBURSEMENTS.

Should the developer construct Regional System improvements in excess of the TUMF fee obligation, the developer may be reimbursed based on actual costs or the approved Nexus Study effective at the time the agreement was entered into, whichever is less. Reimbursements shall be enacted through an agreement between the developer and the City, contingent on funds being available and approved by WRCOG.

In all cases, however, reimbursements under such special agreements must coincide

Page 19 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 85 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 17
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
with construction of the transportation improvements as scheduled in the five-year Zone Transportation Improvement Program adopted annually by WRCOG.

Page 20 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 86 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 18
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
Sec. 58-75. PROCEDURES FOR THE LEVY, COLLECTION AND
DISPOSITION OF FEES.

A. Authority of the Building Department. The Director of Building & Safety, or his/her designee, is hereby authorized to provide WRCOG with development project specifics for the calculation of TUMF in a manner consistent with the TUMF Administrative Plan.

B. Payment and Collection. Payment of the fees shall be as follows:
(i) All fees collected hereunder shall be collected by WRCOG for deposit, investment, accounting and expenditure in accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance, TUMF Administrative Plan, and the Mitigation Fee Act.
(ii) The fees shall be paid at the time a certificate of occupancy is issued for the Development Project or upon final inspection, whichever comes first (the “Payment Date”). However, this section should not be construed to prevent payment of the fees prior to issuance of an occupancy permit or final inspection. Fees may be paid at the issuance of a building permit, and the fee payment shall be calculated based on the fee in effect at that time, provided the developer tenders the full amount of his/her TUMF obligation. If the developer makes only a partial payment prior to the Payment Date, the amount of the fee due shall be based on the TUMF fee schedule in place on the Payment Date. The fees shall be calculated according

Page 21 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 87 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 19
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
to fee schedule set forth in the Ordinance and the calculation methodology set forth in the Fee Calculation Handbook adopted July 14, 2003, as amended from time to time.
(iii) The fees required to be paid shall be the fee amounts in effect at the time of payment is due under this Ordinance, not the date the Ordinance is initially adopted. The City shall not enter into a development agreement which freezes future adjustments of the TUMF.
(iv) If all or part of any development project is sold prior to payment of the fee, the property shall continue to be subject to the requirement for payment of the fee. The obligation to pay the fee shall run with the land and be binding on all the successors in interest to the property. (v) Fees shall not be waived.

C. Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. The City shall not issue a certificate of occupancy for any Development Project until WRCOG has provided written evidence that it has collected the fee.

D. Appeals. Appeals shall be filed with WRCOG in accordance with the provisions of the TUMF Administrative Plan. Appealable issues shall be the application of the fee, application of credits, application of reimbursement, application of the legal action stay and application of exemption.

E. Reports to WRCOG. The Director of Building and Safety, or his/her designee, shall prepare and deliver to the Executive Director of WRCOG, periodic

Page 22 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 88 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 20
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
reports as will be established under Section 7 of this Ordinance.

Sec. 58-76. APPOINTMENT OF THE TUMF ADMINISTRATOR.

WRCOG is hereby appointed as the Administrator of the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee Program. WRCOG is hereby authorized to collect all fees generated from the TUMF within the City, and to invest, account for and expend such fees in accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance and the Mitigation Fee Act. The detailed administrative procedures concerning the implementation of this Ordnance shall be contained in the TUMF Administrative Plan. Furthermore, the TUMF Administrator shall use the Fee Calculation Handbook adopted July 14, 2003, as amended from time to time, for the purpose of calculating a developer’s TUMF obligation. In addition to detailing the methodology for calculating all TUMF obligations of different categories of new development, the purpose of the Fee Calculation Handbook is to clarify for the TUMF Administrator, where necessary, the definition and calculation methodology for uses not clearly defined in the respective TUMF ordinances.

WRCOG shall expend only that amount of the funds generated from the TUMF for staff support, audit, administrative expenses, and contract services that are necessary and reasonable to carry out its responsibilities and in no case shall the funds expended for salaries and benefits exceed two percent (2%) of the revenue raised by the TUMF Program. The TUMF Administrative Plan further outlines the fiscal responsibilities and limitations of the Administrator.

Secs. 58-77 - 58-90. Reserved.

Page 23 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 89 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 21
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
SECTION 2. EFFECT.

No provisions of this Ordinance shall entitle any person who has already paid the TUMF to receive a refund, credit or reimbursement of such payment. This Ordinance does not create any new TUMF.

SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY.

If any one or more of the terms, provisions or sections of this Ordinance shall to any extent be judged invalid, unenforceable and/or voidable for any reason whatsoever by a court of competent jurisdiction, then each and all of the remaining terms, provisions and sections of this Ordinance shall not be affected thereby and shall be valid and enforceable.

SECTION 4. SUPERSESSION.

This Ordinance supersedes all prior ordinances codified in Chapter 58, Article III, Division 2 of the Hemet Municipal Code, provided this Ordinance is not declared invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction. If, for whatever reason, this Ordinance is declared invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, Chapter 548, Article III, Division 2 of the Hemet Municipal Code as it existed prior to the effective date of this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect.

SECTION 5. CERTIFICATION.

The City Clerk shall certify the passage of this Ordinance and cause it to be published or posted in accordance with law.

Page 24 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 90 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 22
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
INTRODUCED at the regular meeting of Hemet City Council on the 11th day of February, 2025.

APPROVED AND ADOPTED 25th day of February, 2025.
_________________________
Jackie Peterson, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
John Paul Maier, City Clerk

Page 25 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 91 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 23
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
State of California )
County of Riverside )
City of Hemet )
I, John Paul Maier, City Clerk of the City of Hemet, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance is the actual Ordinance adopted by the City Council of the City of Hemet and was passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 25th day of February, 2025.

AYES: Council Members:

NOES: Council Members:

ABSTAIN: Council Members:

ABSENT: Council Members:
_________________________________
John Paul Maier, City Clerk

Page 26 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 92 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 24
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
EXHIBIT “A”

MAP OF REGIONAL SYSTEM

Page 27 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 93 of 606 ends

CITY OF HEMET ORDINANCE NO. 2055 25
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
EXHIBIT “B”
TUMF 2024 NEXUS STUDY

Page 28 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 94 of 606 ends

I ' l
FigureES.3- RegionalSystemofHighwaysandArterials- TUMFNetworkImprovements ammoSanta”Margarita
'
,i \. ISantaAnaI ’
1 Legend
0 Interchange0 Bridge0 RailroadCrossing
1'...TUMFZoneCities[:3CountyBoundaries
UltimateLanes’\z2’\z4N 6
N 8
Mountains5»(ml
Santa
‘5\mLmMargarita
GrandTerrace
Gamer(Mam)-.qw.-.4‘
‘ Inwood-a
Alessandro1 ?
‘ (EhJFK
!
EueaIy—ptus,
mwl'
Esrl,N
,7, ”Yucaipa
BF/ll/MD’VT
lLakevewMum[/75l
\K
I"—~“‘.'I'~,"\\\
up}
K9b
]$6?e em.a
3\om
,.creel\\ ~\/Ee
[o'hanga- “?n/anone., rut; ‘---- 1
BAN/VWGMorongoReservation
‘ l‘..- -_______‘/_\
SobobaReservauon
unseHemet/SanWe
Jacinto
\w,/\,\,\
\gs
,J‘v .
--'5.Census,CountyofRiverside,California’stxateyarks,Esrirliom‘lomrGarmin,SafeGraphrByreauofLandManagemenl, Jacmtb?re.___...pgrk
:th\1dyllwille’)““X
'
ThomaMuunia
FAO,METl/NASArEPA,NPS‘USFWS

Page 29 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 95 of 606 ends

TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE

NEXUS STUDY
2024 UPDATE

FINAL REPORT
Prepared for the Western Riverside Council of Governments In Cooperation with
The City of Banning
The City of Beaumont
The City of Calimesa
The City of Canyon Lake
The City of Corona
The City of Eastvale
The City of Hemet
The City of Jurupa Valley
The City of Lake Elsinore
The City of Menifee
The City of Moreno Valley
The City of Murrieta
The City of Norco
The City of Perris
The City of Riverside
The City of San Jacinto
The City of Temecula
The City of Wildomar
The County of Riverside
Eastern Municipal Water District
March Joint Powers Authority
Riverside County Superintendent of Schools
Riverside Transit Agency
Western Water
Prepared by GHD
As adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee, September 9, 2024

Page 30 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 96 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................................................i LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................. ii ES.0 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ iii ES.1 Introduction and Purpose of the Nexus Study ........................................................ iii ES.2 Future Growth ............................................................................................................ vi ES.3 Need for the TUMF ..................................................................................................... vi ES.4 The TUMF Network ....................................................................................................viii ES.5 TUMF Nexus Analysis ...................................................................................................x ES.6 Fair-Share Fee Calculation ........................................................................................x ES.7 Conclusions ................................................................................................................ xi

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE OF THE NEXUS STUDY ................................................ 1

1.1 Background .............................................................................................................. 1

1.2 TUMF Nexus Study History ......................................................................................... 3

1.3 TUMF Nexus Study Process ....................................................................................... 5

2.3.1. Establish the TUMF Network Project List ............................................................... 7

2.3.2. Determine the TUMF Network Project Costs ....................................................... 8

2.3.3. Determine the TUMF Transit Component ............................................................ 9

2.3.4. Computing the Fee for Residential Developments ..........................................10

2.3.5. Computing the Fee for Non-Residential Developments ..................................10

2.0 FUTURE GROWTH .........................................................................................................13

2.1 Recent Historical Trend ...........................................................................................13

2.2 Available Demographic Data ...............................................................................13

2.3 Demographic Assumptions Used for the Nexus Study Analysis ...........................14

3.0 NEED FOR THE TUMF ....................................................................................................21

3.1 Future Highway Congestion Levels ........................................................................21

3.2 Future Transit Utilization Levels ................................................................................24

3.3 The TUMF Concept ..................................................................................................25

4.0 THE TUMF NETWORK .....................................................................................................27

4.1 Identification of the TUMF Roadway Network ......................................................27

4.2 Backbone Network and Secondary Network .......................................................30

4.3 Future Roadway Transportation Needs .................................................................33

4.4 Public Transportation Component of the TUMF System .......................................37

4.5 Existing Obligated Funding .....................................................................................40

4.6 Unfunded Existing Improvement Needs ................................................................40

4.7 Maximum TUMF Eligible Cost ..................................................................................42

4.8 TUMF Network Evaluation .......................................................................................53

5.0 TUMF NEXUS ANALYSIS .................................................................................................55

5.1 Future Development and the Need for Improvements .......................................55

5.2 Application of Fee to System Components ..........................................................56

5.3 Application of Fee to Residential and Non-Residential Developments .............59

6.0 FAIR-SHARE FEE CALCULATION ...................................................................................60

6.1 Residential Fees .......................................................................................................60

6.2 Non-Residential Fees ...............................................................................................62

7.0 CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................................64

8.0 APPENDICES .................................................................................................................65

Page 31 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 97 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 ii

LIST OF TABLES
Table ES.1 - Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee for Western Riverside County ............ xii Table 2.1 - Base Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County ................14 T
able 2.3 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County (2018 to 2045) .............................................................................................................................17 Table 2.4 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County (Existing to Future Change Comparison) .......................................................................19 Table 3.1 - Regional Highway System Measures of Performance (2018 Existing to 2045 No-Build) ...........................................................................................................................22 Table 4.1 - Unit Costs for Arterial Highway and Street Construction ...................................35 Table 4.2 – Forecasted Daily Traffic in Western Riverside County .......................................36 Table 4.3 - Unit Costs for Transit Capital Expenditures ..........................................................39 Table 4.4 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates ..............................................................................45 Table 4.5 – TUMF Transit Cost Estimates .................................................................................53 Table 4.6 – Regional Highway System Measures of Performance (2018 Existing and 2045 No-Build Scenarios to 2045 TUMF Build Scenario) ..........................................................54 Table 5.1 - 2045 No-Build Peak Period Vehicle Trips by WRCOG Zone ...............................57 Table 5.2 – 2045 No-Build Percent Peak Period Vehicle Trips By WRCOG Zone ................57 Table 5.3 - Backbone-Secondary Network Share Calculation ...........................................58 Table 5.4 - Daily VMT Growth by Trip Purpose for Western Riverside County (2018 - 2045) ..........................................................................................................................................59 Table 6.1 - Fee Calculation for Residential Share .................................................................61 Table 6.2 – Single-Family Residential Fee Adjustments by Unit Size ....................................62 Table 6.3 - Fee Calculation for Non-Residential Share ........................................................63 Table 7.1 - Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee for Western Riverside County ..............64

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure ES.1 - Flowchart of Key Steps in the TUMF Nexus Study Process ................................. v Figure ES.2 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County (2018 to 2045) ......................................................................................................................vii Figure ES.3 - Regional System of Highways and Arterials–TUMF Network Improvements ...i x Figure 1.1 - Flowchart of Key Steps in the TUMF Nexus Study Process ................................. 6 Figure 2.1 – Base Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County ..............15 Table 2.2 - Horizon Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County ............16 Figure 2.2 - Horizon Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County ...........16 Figure 2.3 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County (2018 to 2045) .............................................................................................................................18 Figure 2.4 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County (Existing to Future Change Comparison) .......................................................................20 Figure 4.1 - Regional System of Highways and Arterials for Western Riverside County .....29 Figure 4.2 - The Backbone Network of Highways and Arterials for Western Riverside County ..............................................................................................................................31 Figure 4.3 - Western Riverside County Area Planning Districts (TUMF Zones) .....................32 Figure 4.4 - Regional System of Highways and Arterials–TUMF Network Improvements ...44

Page 32 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 98 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 iii
ES.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ES.1 Introduction and Purpose of the Nexus Study
Western Riverside County includes 18 incorporated cities and the unincorporated county covering an area of approximately 2,100 square miles. Through the mid 2000’s, this portion of Riverside County was growing at a pace exceeding the capacity of existing financial resources to meet increasing demand for transportation infrastructure.

Although the economic recession of the late 2000’s, and the associated crises in the mortgage and housing industries, slowed this rate of growth, the regional economy has recovered and the projected rate of development in Western Riverside County remains high. Similarly, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on travel demand in the region has also passed, with travel demands, especially for the highway network, surpassing pre-pandemic levels. Continued high growth in households and jobs in Western Riverside County could significantly increase congestion and degrade mobility if substantial investments are not made in transportation infrastructure. This challenge is especially critical for arterial roadways of regional significance, since traditional sources of transportation funding (such as the gasoline tax and local general funds) will not be nearly sufficient to fund the needed improvements.

In February 1999, the cities of Temecula, Murrieta and Lake Elsinore, the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG), the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) and the Building Industry Association (BIA) met to discuss the concept of a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) for southwest Riverside County. In August 2000, the concept was expanded to include the entire WRCOG sub- region.

Continued high growth in households and jobs in Western Riverside County could significantly increase congestion and degrade mobility if substantial investments are not made in transportation infrastructure. This challenge is especially critical for arterial roadways of regional significance, since traditional sources of transportation funding (such as the gasoline tax and local general funds) will not be nearly sufficient to fund the needed improvements. While the TUMF cannot fund all necessary transportation system improvements, it is intended to address a current transportation funding shortfall by establishing a new revenue source that ensures future new development will contribute toward addressing its indirect cumulative traffic impacts on regional transportation infrastructure. Funding accumulated through the TUMF Program will be used to construct transportation improvements such as new arterial highway lanes, reconfigured freeway interchanges, railroad grade separations and new regional express bus services that will be needed to accommodate future travel demand in Western Riverside County. By levying a fee on new developments in the region, local agencies will be establishing a mechanism by which developers and in turn new county residents and employees will effectively contribute their “fair share” toward sustaining the regional transportation system.

Page 33 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 99 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 iv
This TUMF Draft Nexus Study is intended to satisfy the requirements of California Government Code Chapter 5 Section 66000-66008 Fees for Development Projects (also known as California Assembly Bill 1600 (AB 1600) or the Mitigation Fee Act) which governs imposing development impact fees in California. The initial WRCOG TUMF Nexus Study was completed in October 2002 and adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee in November 2002. The results of the first review of the Program were documented in the TUMF Nexus Study 2005 Update adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee on February 6, 2006. A second comprehensive review of the TUMF Program was adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee on October 5, 2009. A third comprehensive review of the TUMF Program was conducted following the adoption of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016 RTP/SCS) on April 7, 2016.

The WRCOG TUMF Nexus Study 2016 Update Report was adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee on July 10, 2017.

On September 3, 2020, SCAG adopted Connect SoCal; The 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy of the Southern California Association of Governments (2020 RTP/SCS). The adoption of the 2020 RTP/SCS confirmed new growth forecasts for the region that provide a foundational element for updating the TUMF program and the associated nexus determination prompting WRCOG to initiate the current program update. These forecasts are also integrated into the Riverside County Transportation Analysis Model (RivCoM) used to forecast the cumulative regional traffic impacts of new development on the arterial highway network in Western Riverside County.

The overall process for establishing the TUMF nexus is illustrated in Figure ES.1. Each technical step is denoted with a number on the flow chart with the numbers correlating to the detailed description of each step provided in Section 1.3 of the Nexus Study Report. The flow chart also incorporates color coding of the steps to indicate those steps that involved the application of RivCoM, steps that utilized other input data, steps that are computations of various inputs, and steps that required specific actions of the various WRCOG committees to confirm major variables. Where appropriate, the flow chart also includes specific cross references to the sections or tables included in the Nexus Study document that correlate to the particular step.

This version of the WRCOG TUMF Nexus Study Report documents the results of the fourth comprehensive review of the TUMF Program. This version of the document also incorporates revisions in response to comments received during the formal review of the earlier Draft TUMF Nexus Study 2024 Update. The findings of this report were ultimately adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee on September 9, 2024.

Page 34 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 100 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 v
Figure ES.1 - Flowchart of Key Steps in the TUMF Nexus Study Process

Page 35 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 101 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 vi
ES.2 Future Growth
In preparation for the 2020 RTP/SCS, SCAG undertook robust stakeholder engagement, including participation by WRCOG, Riverside County and the various cities in Western Riverside County, to develop regional demographic forecasts. Using input from regional stakeholders regarding anticipated patterns and rates of development, SCAG compiled and disseminated the forecasts that were ultimately adopted in 2020. The SCAG forecasts adopted for the 2020 RTP/SCS were subsequently used as the basis for RivCoM and are used as the basis for this TUMF Nexus Study Update.

A major distinction between data used for the TUMF Nexus Study 2016 Update and the SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS data used for this 2024 Update is the change in the base year from 2012 to 2018, as well as the change in the horizon year from 2040 to 2045. This shift in the base year and horizon year demographic assumptions of the program carries through all aspects of the nexus analysis, including the travel demand forecasting, network review and fee calculation.

The population of Western Riverside County is projected to increase by 33% in the period between 2018 and 2045. During the same period, employment in Western Riverside County is anticipated to grow by 48%. Figure ES.2 illustrates the forecast growth in population, household and employment for Western Riverside County.

ES.3 Need for the TUMF
The WRCOG TUMF study area was extracted from the greater RivCoM model network for the purpose of calculating measures for Western Riverside County only. Peak period performance measures for the TUMF study area included total vehicle miles of travel (VMT), total vehicle hours of travel (VHT), total combined vehicle hours of delay (VHD), and total VMT experiencing unacceptable level of service (LOS E).

As a result of the new development and associated growth in population and employment in Western Riverside County, additional pressure will be placed on the transportation infrastructure, particularly the arterial roadways, with the peak period VMT on the TUMF Network estimated to increase by 38% between 2018 and 2045. By 2045, 37% of the total VMT on the TUMF Network is forecast to be traveling on facilities experiencing peak period LOS E or worse. Without improvements to the arterial highway system, the total vehicle hours of delay (VHD) experienced by area motorists on the TUMF Network will increase over 5.0% per year. The need to improve these roadways and relieve future congestion is therefore directly linked to the future development which generates the travel demand.

Page 36 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 102 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 vii
Figure ES.2 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County (2018 to 2045)
As population and employment in Western Riverside County grows because of new development, demand for regional transit services in the region is also expected to grow. Weekday system ridership for RTA bus transit services is approximately 16,575 riders per day in Western Riverside County in 2023. By 2045, bus transit services are forecast to serve approximately 57,282 riders per weekday. This represents an average increase of 1,850 weekday riders each year. Based on this rate of ridership growth, weekday ridership is estimated to increase by 40,707 riders per weekday between 2018 and 2045.

The idea behind a uniform mitigation fee is to have new development throughout the region contribute equally to paying the cost of improving the transportation facilities that serve these longer-distance trips between communities. Thus, the fee should be used to improve transportation facilities that serve trips between communities within the region (primarily arterial roadways) as well as the infrastructure for public transportation.

The fee should be assessed proportionately on new residential and non-residential development based on the relative impact of each use on the transportation system.

Page 37 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 103 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 viii
ES.4 The TUMF Network
The Regional System of Highways and Arterials (also referred to as the TUMF Network) is the system of roadways that serve inter-community trips within Western Riverside County and therefore are eligible for improvement funding with TUMF funds. Transportation facilities in Western Riverside County that generally satisfied these guidelines were initially identified, and a skeletal regional transportation framework evolved from facilities where several guidelines were observed. Representatives of all WRCOG constituent jurisdictions reviewed this framework in the context of current local transportation plans to define the TUMF Network, which was subsequently endorsed by the WRCOG Public Works Committee, WRCOG Technical Advisory Committee, TUMF Policy Committee and the WRCOG Executive Committee.

The TUMF Network was reviewed as part of the 2024 Nexus Update to ensure facilities generally still met the previously described performance guidelines, and/or that the scope and magnitude of specific improvements to the TUMF Network were roughly proportional to the impacts needing to be mitigated. This review process resulted in the removal of various facilities from the TUMF Network, as well as various changes in the scope and magnitude of specific improvements to the TUMF Network.

Figure ES.3 illustrates the TUMF improvements to the Regional System of Highways and Arterials.

The total cost of improving the TUMF system is $5.28 billion. Accounting for obligated funds and unfunded existing needs, the estimated maximum eligible value of the TUMF Program is $4.24 billion. The maximum eligible value of the TUMF Program includes approximately $3.87 billion in eligible arterial highway and street related improvements and $154.8 million in eligible transit related improvements. An additional $53.9 million is also eligible as part of the TUMF Program to mitigate the impact of eligible TUMF related arterial highway and street projects on critical native species and wildlife habitat, while $161.2 million is provided to cover the costs incurred by WRCOG to administer the TUMF Program.

Page 38 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 104 of 606 ends

Page 39 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 105 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 x
ES.5 TUMF Nexus Analysis
There is a reasonable relationship between the future growth and the need for improvements to the TUMF system. These factors include:
 Western Riverside County is expected to continue growing as a result of future new development.
 Continuing new growth will result in increasing congestion on arterial roadways.  The future arterial roadway congestion is directly attributable to the cumulative regional transportation impacts of future development in Western Riverside County.  Capacity improvements to the transportation system will be needed to mitigate the cumulative regional impacts of new development.
 Roads on the TUMF network are the facilities that merit improvement through this fee program.
 Improvements to the public transportation system will be needed to provide adequate mobility for transit-dependent travelers and to provide an alternative to automobile travel.

The split of fee revenues between the backbone and secondary highway networks is related to the proportion of highway vehicle travel that is relatively local (between adjacent communities) and longer distance (between more distant communities but still within Western Riverside County). To estimate a rational fee split between the respective networks, the future travel forecast estimates were aggregated to a matrix of peak period trips between zones. The overall result is that 51.1% of the regional travel is attributable to the backbone network and 48.9% is assigned to the secondary network.

In order to establish the approximate proportionality of the future traffic impacts associated with new residential development and new non-residential development, peak period growth in VMT between 2018 and 2045 was derived from RivCoM and aggregated by trip purpose. It was concluded that home-based person trips represent

77.7% of the total future person trips, and the non-home-based person trips represent

22.3% of the total future person trips.

ES.6 Fair-Share Fee Calculation
The balance of the unfunded TUMF system improvement needs is $4.24 billion which is the maximum value attributable to the mitigation of the cumulative regional transportation impacts of future new development in the WRCOG region and will be captured through the TUMF Program. By levying the uniform fee directly on future new developments (and indirectly on new residents and new employees to Western Riverside County), these transportation system users are assigned their “fair share” of the

Page 40 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 106 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 xi
costs to address the cumulative impacts of additional traffic they will generate on the regional transportation system.

Of the $4.24 billion in unfunded future improvement needs, 77.7% ($3.30 billion) will be assigned to future new residential development and 22.3% ($946.5 million) will be assigned to future new non-residential development.

ES.7 Conclusions
Based on the results of the Nexus Study evaluation, it can be demonstrated that there is reasonable relationship between the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new land development projects in Western Riverside County and the need to mitigate these transportation impacts using funds levied through the proposed TUMF Program.

Factors that reflect this reasonable relationship include:
 Western Riverside County is expected to continue growing as a result of future new development.
 Continuing new growth will result in increasing congestion on arterial roadways;  The future arterial roadway congestion is directly attributable to the cumulative regional transportation impacts of future development in Western Riverside County;  Capacity improvements to the transportation system will be needed to mitigate the cumulative impacts of new development;
 Roads on the TUMF network are the facilities that merit improvement through this fee program;
 Improvements to the public transportation system will be needed to provide adequate mobility for transit-dependent travelers and to provide an alternative to automotive travel.

The Nexus Study evaluation has established a proportional “fair share” of the improvement cost attributable to new development based on the impacts of existing development and the availability of obligated funding through traditional sources. The fair share fee allocable to future new residential and non-residential development in Western Riverside County is summarized for differing use types in Table ES.1.

Page 41 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 107 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 xii
Table ES.1 - Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee for Western Riverside County Land Use Type Units Development
Change
Fee Per Unit Total Revenue
($ million)
Single-Family Residential DU 167,491 $15,476 $2,592.0 Multi-Family Residential DU 90,335 $7,816 $706.1
Industrial SF GFA 61,489,565 $2.33 $143.1
Retail SF GFA 6,557,500 $11.21 $73.5
Service SF GFA 66,735,957 $9.76 $651.1
Government/Public SF GFA 3,420,665 $23.07 $78.9
MAXIMUM TUMF VALUE $2,961.0

Page 42 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 108 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE OF THE NEXUS STUDY

1.1 Background

Western Riverside County includes 18 incorporated cities and the unincorporated county covering an area of approximately 2,100 square miles. Through the mid 2000’s, this portion of Riverside County was growing at a pace exceeding the capacity of existing financial resources to meet increasing demand for transportation infrastructure.

In anticipation of the continued future growth projected in Riverside County, several county-wide planning processes were initiated in 1999. These planning processes include the Riverside County General Plan Update, the Community Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process (CETAP) and the Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). Related to these planning processes is the need to fund the mitigation of the cumulative regional transportation impacts of future new development.

Regional arterial highways in Western Riverside County are forecast to carry significant traffic volumes by 2045. While some localized fee programs exist to mitigate the local impacts of new development on the transportation system in specific areas, and while these programs are effective locally, they are insufficient in their ability to meet the regional demand for transportation infrastructure. Former Riverside County Supervisor Buster recognized the need to establish a comprehensive funding source to mitigate the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new development on regional arterial highways. The need to establish a comprehensive funding source for arterial highway improvements has evolved into the development of the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) for Western Riverside County.

Page 43 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 109 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 2 concept of a TUMF. The intent of this effort was to have the southwest area of Western Riverside County act as a demonstration for the development of policies and a process for a regional TUMF Program before applying the concept countywide. From February 1999 to September 2000, the Southwest Area Transportation Infrastructure System Funding Year 2020 (SATISFY 2020) Program progressed with policy development, the identification of transportation improvements, traffic modeling, cost estimates, fee scenarios and a draft Implementation Agreement.

In May 2000, Riverside County Supervisor Tavaglione initiated discussions in the northwest area of Western Riverside County to determine the level of interest in developing a TUMF for that area of the county. Interest in the development of a northwest area fee program was high. In August 2000, the WRCOG Executive Committee took action to build upon the work completed in the southwest area for the SATISFY 2020 program and to develop a single consolidated mitigation fee program for all of Western Riverside County. This action was predicated on the desire to establish a single uniform mitigation fee program to mitigate the cumulative regional impacts of new development on the regional arterial highway system, rather than multiple discrete and disparate fee programs with varying policies, fees and improvement projects. A TUMF Policy Committee comprising regional elected officials was formed to recommend and set policies for staff to develop the TUMF Program and provide overall guidance to all other staff committees.

While the TUMF cannot fund all necessary transportation system improvements, it is intended to address a current transportation funding shortfall by establishing a new revenue source that ensures future new development will contribute toward addressing its indirect cumulative traffic impacts on regional transportation infrastructure. Funding accumulated through the TUMF Program will be used to construct transportation improvements such as new arterial highway lanes, reconfigured freeway interchanges, railroad grade separations and new regional express bus services that will be needed to accommodate future travel demand in Western Riverside County. By levying a fee on new developments in the region, local agencies will be establishing a mechanism by which developers and in turn new county residents and employees will effectively contribute their “fair share” toward sustaining the regional transportation system.

This TUMF Nexus Study is intended to satisfy the requirements of California Government Code Chapter 5 Section 66000-66008 Fees for Development Projects (also known as California Assembly Bill 1600 (AB 1600) or the Mitigation Fee Act), which governs imposing development impact fees in California. The Mitigation Fee Act requires that all local agencies in California, including cities, counties, and special districts follow two basic rules when instituting impact fees. These rules are as follows:

1) Establish a nexus or reasonable relationship between the development impact fee’s use and the type of project for which the fee is required. 2) The fee must not exceed the project’s proportional “fair share” of the proposed improvement and cannot be used to correct current problems or to make improvements for existing development.

Page 44 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 110 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 3 1.2 TUMF Nexus Study History

The TUMF Program is implemented through the auspices of WRCOG. As the council of governments for Western Riverside County, WRCOG provides a forum for representatives from 18 cities, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors, the Eastern Municipal Water District, Western Water, the Riverside County Superintendent of Schools, the March Joint Powers Authority and the Riverside Transit Agency to collaborate on issues that affect the entire subregion, such as air quality, solid waste, transportation and the environment. WRCOG strives to "respect local control, provide regional perspective, and make a difference" to elevate the quality of life throughout the subregion. A current list of the standing WRCOG committees and committee membership that oversee the TUMF program is included in Appendix A.

The initial WRCOG TUMF Nexus Study was completed in October 2002 and adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee in November 2002. Its purpose was to establish the nexus or reasonable relationship between new land development projects in Western Riverside County and the proposed development impact fee that would be used to improve regional transportation facilities. It also identified the proportional “fair share” of the improvement cost attributable to new development.

Consistent with the provisions of the Mitigation Fee Act, the WRCOG Executive Committee has established that the TUMF Nexus Study will be subject of a comprehensive review of the underlying program assumptions at least every five years to confirm the Nexus. Acknowledging the unprecedented and unique nature of the TUMF Program, the Executive Committee determined that the first comprehensive review of the Program should be initiated within two years of initial adoption of the Program primarily to validate the findings and recommendations of the study and to correct any program oversights. The results of the first review of the Program were documented in the TUMF Nexus Study 2005 Update adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee on February 6, 2006. A second comprehensive review of the TUMF Program was conducted in 2008 and 2009 in part to address the impacts of the economic recession on the rate of development within the region and on transportation project costs. The findings of the 2009 review of the program were adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee on October 5, 2009.

A third comprehensive review of the TUMF Program was conducted in 2014 and 2015 leading to a Draft Nexus Study document being distributed for review in August 2015.

The WRCOG Executive Committee subsequently considered comments related to the Draft Nexus Study 2015 Update at the meeting held on September 14, 2015, where it was resolved to “delay finalizing the Nexus Study for the TUMF Program Update until the 2016 Southern California Association of Governments’ 2016 Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy growth forecast is available for inclusion in the Nexus Study”. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) adopted the 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016 RTP/SCS) on April 7, 2016, enabling WRCOG staff to proceed with finalizing the update of the TUMF Nexus Study. The WRCOG TUMF Nexus Study 2016 Update Report was ultimately adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee on July 10, 2017.

Page 45 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 111 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 4 On September 3, 2020, SCAG adopted Connect SoCal; The 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy of the Southern California Association of Governments (2020 RTP/SCS). As stated in the plan document “Connect SoCal embodies a collective vision for the region’s future, through the horizon year of 2045. It is developed with input from a wide range of constituents and stakeholders within the Counties of Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura, including public agencies, community organizations, elected officials, tribal governments, the business community and the public. Connect SoCal is an important planning document for the region, allowing public agencies who implement transportation projects to do so in a coordinated manner, while qualifying for federal and state funding.”

The adoption of the 2020 RTP/SCS confirmed new growth forecasts for the region that were used as the basis to develop the Connect SoCal plan. These forecasts also provide a foundational element for updating the TUMF program and the associated nexus determination prompting WRCOG to initiate the current program update. The 2020 RTP/SCS growth forecasts are used directly in the fee calculation as the basis for determining the anticipated growth in households and employment in the region through the program horizon year of 2045. These forecasts are also integrated into the Riverside County Transportation Analysis Model (RivCoM) used to forecast the cumulative regional traffic impacts of new development on the arterial highway network in Western Riverside County.

Completed in 2021 to succeed the Riverside County Traffic Analysis Model (RIVTAM), RivCoM provides a valuable tool for supporting a variety of transportation planning activities in Riverside County, including the update of the TUMF Nexus Study. RivCoM was developed under the leadership of WRCOG in conjunction with regional partners with the intent to provide jurisdictions in Riverside County with a traffic forecasting tool that, while consistent with the SCAG regional travel demand model, provides a more appropriate level of detail to support transportation planning at the County or City level.

RivCoM is a critical tool for quantifying the cumulative regional traffic impacts of new development as part of the TUMF Nexus Study Update. Utilizing the 2020 RTP/SCS growth forecasts, RivCoM is used to quantify changes in travel demand and traffic conditions on the regional highway network, with a specific focus on the TUMF Network.

RivCoM outputs are used to analyze project eligibility and quantify the fair share of traffic growth that is attributable to new development as inputs to determining the fee.

The adoption of the Connect SoCal plan and the availability of RivCoM to serve as a critical tool for quantifying network impacts for the TUMF Nexus Study Update were key factors driving the schedule for this update of the fee.

To ensure new development continues to contribute a fair share of the cost to mitigate its cumulative regional transportation impacts in the period between the comprehensive review of program assumptions completed at least every five years, the WRCOG Executive Committee has also established that the TUMF Schedule of Fees will be reviewed annually, and adjusted, as needed, on July 1st to reflect current costs. The revised schedule of fees will typically be recalculated in February of each year based

Page 46 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 112 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 5 on the percentage increase or decrease in the Engineering News Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index (CCI) for the twelve (12) month period from January of the prior year to January of the current year, and the percentage increase or decrease in the National Association of Realtors (NAR) Median Sales Price of Existing Single Family Homes in the Riverside/San Bernardino Metropolitan Statistical Area for the twelve (12) month period from the 3rd Quarter of the second year prior to the 3rd Quarter of the prior year (to coincide with the publication of the most recently updated index). If approved by the Executive Committee, the resultant percentage change for each of the indices will be applied to the unit cost assumptions for roadway and bus transit costs, and land acquisition costs, respectively, to reflect the combined effects of changes in eligible project costs on the resultant per unit fee for each defined land use category. The most recent annual cost adjustment to the TUMF Schedule of Fees was adopted by the WRCOG Executive Committee on July 12, 2021.

1.3 TUMF Nexus Study Process

In coordination with WRCOG, city and county representatives and other interested parties have reviewed the underlying assumptions of the Nexus Study as part of this comprehensive program review. In particular, the most recent socioeconomic forecasts developed by SCAG as the basis for the 2020 RTP/SCS were incorporated. This use of the most recent SCAG forecasts resulted in a shift of the program base year from 2012 to 2018, as well as a shift in the program horizon year from 2040 to 2045.

Furthermore, the TUMF Network was re-examined in detail based on travel demand forecasts derived from the most recent version of the Riverside County Model (RivCoM) to more accurately reflect future project needs to address the cumulative regional impacts of new development in Western Riverside County as well as eliminating those projects having been completed prior to the commencement of the Nexus review in 2021.

The subsequent chapters of this Nexus Study document describe the various assumptions, data inputs and analysis leading to the determination of each major variable in the TUMF calculation, and ultimately leading to the determination of the TUMF Schedule of Fees that indicates the maximum “fair share” fee for each of the various use types defined in the TUMF program. The overall process for establishing the TUMF nexus is summarized in this section, including the flow chart in Figure 1.1 that illustrates the various technical steps in this fee calculation process. Each technical step that was followed to determine the TUMF Schedule of Fees and establish the program nexus is summarized below, with the numbers denoted on the flow chart correlating to the steps described. The flow chart also incorporates color coding of the steps to indicate those steps that involved the application of RivCoM, steps that utilized other input data, steps that are computations of various inputs, and steps that required specific actions of the various WRCOG committees to confirm major variables. Where appropriate, the flow chart also includes specific cross references to the sections or tables included in this Nexus Study document that correlate to the particular step.

Page 47 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 113 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 6 Figure 1.1 - Flowchart of Key Steps in the TUMF Nexus Study Process

Page 48 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 114 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 7 2.3.1. Establish the TUMF Network Project List

The roadway network in Western Riverside County must be evaluated to determine how new development activity will impact the performance of the network, and how the resultant traffic impacts can be mitigated by completing various roadway improvements. The following steps integrate the latest SCAG socio-economic forecasts into RivCoM as the basis for determining future roadway deficiencies and identifying the list of eligible improvements to address these future deficiencies. The rational and methodology for accomplishing these steps is further explained in Chapters 2 and 3 of this report, with the resultant TUMF Network described in Chapter 4.

1) The SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS was developed using housing and employment data for 2018 as its base year. This adopted dataset was integrated into RivCoM providing a critical analytic tool to support the Nexus Study Update. 2) The RivCoM model1 has datasets available that represent the capacity of the different facilities in the road network for several different study years. For this nexus update, the RivCoM 2018 base network that was developed following the adoption of the SCAG 2020 RTP was selected as the one most closely resembling current conditions. This network was subsequently reviewed and updated, including a detailed review by WRCOG staff and participating jurisdictions, to identify projects that were completed on the arterial network in the period between 2016 and December 2021. The arterial network was then recoded to reflect the changes to the TUMF Network to create a 2021 Existing Network as the base network for analysis. A second version of the base network was also developed adding only those facilities that had been identified on the 2016 TUMF network that did not currently exist and therefore were not represented by a link(s) in RivCoM. The Supplemental 2021 Existing Network was utilized as the basis for assessing only those projects that did not currently exist on the TUMF Network.
3) RivCoM was run using the 2018 socio-economic data (SED) and the 2021 Existing Networks to produce the baseline volumes on the roads in the TUMF Network. 4) The baseline volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio was then determined. The target LOS for TUMF facilities is “D”, meaning that facilities with LOS “E” or “F”, i.e. those with a V/C ratio of 0.9 or higher, are deemed to have inadequate capacity. The result of this step is a list of roads that have existing capacity deficiencies.

1 The macro-level traffic forecasting was conducted using the Riverside County Transportation Analysis Model (RivCoM).

RivCoM is consistent of SCAG’s six-county model with additional detail (traffic analysis zones and local roads) added within Riverside County. It was developed for use in traffic studies in Riverside County as a replacement for the Riverside County Transportation and Analysis Model (RivTAM) integrating an updated modeling platform to improve run time and reliability, as well as a more focused model area, more detailed network and zone structure, and prost processors to satisfy more recent legislative requirements. RivCoM has both the geographic scope needed to analyze all TUMF facilities and conformity with regional planning assumptions. There is a memorandum of understanding among the jurisdictions of Riverside County that encourages the use of the RivCoM model for use in regional traffic studies.

Page 49 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 115 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 8 5) The SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS was developed using housing and employment data for 2045 as its forecast horizon year. This adopted dataset was also used as the future base year for the TUMF update calculation.
6) RivCoM was run using the 2021 Existing Networks with the land use assumptions for 2045. These “Future No-Build” scenarios was used to determine where deficiencies would occur in the roadway system if development occurred as expected but no roadway improvements were implemented.
7) Comparing the existing capacity deficiencies with the future deficiencies showed where new deficiencies would occur that are entirely attributable to growth in households and employment. Comparing the existing and future traffic volume to capacity ratio on the roads that are currently deficient shows the portion of the future deficiency that is attributable to growth. 8) It is generally acknowledged that the TUMF program cannot and should not attempt to fund every roadway improvement needed in Western Riverside County. WRCOG has adopted a set of selection criteria that was used to choose which roadway improvements would be eligible for TUMF funding. 9) The selection criteria were applied to the forecast deficiencies to identify projects for the TUMF Project List. The project list was subsequently reviewed to confirm the eligibility of proposed projects, including projects previously included in the TUMF program, as well as additional projects requested for inclusion as part of the current update. The project list was then subsequently updated to reflect those projects considered eligible for TUMF funding as part of the 2024 Nexus Study Update.

2.3.2. Determine the TUMF Network Project Costs

The estimated costs of proposed improvements on the TUMF Network are calculated based on the prices of construction materials, labor and land values for the various eligible project types included as part of the TUMF program. The approach and outcomes of the following steps is described in Chapter 4 of this report.

10) The TUMF program has design standards covering the road project components that are eligible for TUMF funding. This ensures that projects in jurisdictions with different design standards are treated equally2.
11) Current cost values for labor and materials such as cement, asphalt, reinforcing steel, etc., as derived from Caltrans cost database, RCTC and other sources, were tabulated and updated to December 2023. Additionally, the ROW cost components per square foot for various land use types were also updated based on current property valuations in Riverside County as researched by Overland, Pacific and Cutler.

2 A jurisdiction may choose to design to a higher standard, but if it does so, TUMF will only fund up to the equivalent of what costs would have been had the TUMF design standards been followed.

Page 50 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 116 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 9 12) The cost values for the contributing labor, materials and land components were applied to estimated quantities of these components for the various roadway project types that are eligible under TUMF to generate aggregate unit cost values for each project type (road costs per lane-mile, typical costs per arterial- freeway interchange, bridge costs per linear foot, etc.). 13) The unit costs from the previous step were then applied to the project list to estimate the costs of the improvements on the TUMF project list. 14) The percentage of each project that was attributable to new development was then applied to the costs of TUMF road projects to find the total road project cost that is attributable to new development.

2.3.3. Determine the TUMF Transit Component

A portion of the TUMF funding is made available for transit services that provide an alternative to car travel for medium-to-long distance intra-regional trips. The eligible transit projects and their associated costs are determined using the following steps, with additional explanation provided in Chapter 4 of this report. 15) Actual average weekday daily ridership for Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) transit bus services was tabulated for 2023.
16) Forecast average weekday daily ridership for RTA bus transit services was retrieved from the SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS Model for horizon year 2045. 17) The growth in ridership between 2023 and 2045 was compared to determine the portion of 2045 average weekday daily ridership that is attributable to existing passengers and the portion attributable to new growth.
18) A proposed transit project list was provided by RTA staff and was reviewed to confirm the validity of the project list to establish a final recommended transit project list to be included as part of the program. The result was the TUMF Transit Project List.
19) RTA provided information on current costs for the listed transit infrastructure. 20) The cost information was then used to determine the cost of the items on the TUMF Transit Project List.
21) The percent attribution from Step 17 was applied to the project cost estimates from the previous step to determine the cost of transit improvements that are attributable to new development.
22) The costs for road and transit projects that are attributable to new development are then combined along with information on other (non-TUMF) funds to determine the total cost for TUMF projects that is to be cover by new development through the imposition of the fees. The available alternate funding sources were reviewed as part of the Nexus update, specifically including the completion of a detailed review of available federal, state and local funding sources administered by RCTC.

Page 51 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 117 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 10 2.3.4. Computing the Fee for Residential Developments

Having determined the total project costs to be covered by new development under the TUMF program, it is necessary to divide these costs among different types of developments roughly in proportion to their expected traffic impacts. The following steps describes the process for determining the proportion attributable to new residential development. The approach for accomplishing these steps along with the findings of this analysis are described in detail in Chapter 5 and Chapter 6 of this report. 23) California legislation encourages the use of vehicle miles of travel (VMT) as the primary indicator of traffic impacts because it combines the number of vehicle trips and the average length of those trips to reflect the proportional impact to the roadway network. As a result, the methodology for determining the relative distribution of traffic impacts between residential and non-residential uses for the purposes of TUMF utilizes a VMT based approach. The RivCoM 2021 Existing Network and 2045 No-Build model runs were examined to determine the VMT of various trip types that would take place in Western Riverside County (excluding through trips). The results were compared to determine the growth in VMT for each trip type. Per WRCOG policy (based on National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) recommended practice) trips originating in or destined for a home are attributed to residential development while trips where neither the origin nor the destination are a home are attributed to non-residential development.
24) The SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS socio-economic forecasts were used to estimate the number of single-family and multi-family dwelling units that will be developed during the 2018 to 2045 period.
25) The Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE’s) trip generation rates, which come from surveys of existing sites for various development types, were then used to estimate the daily number of trips that will be generated by future single- and multi-family developments that will occur in the region from 2018 to 2045. 26) The cost to be covered by residential development was divided into the portion attributable to new single-family dwellings and portion attributable to new multi- family development to calculate the cost share for each use. 27) The cost share for single-family dwellings and multi-family dwellings was divided by the number of dwellings of each type to determine the fee level required from each new dwelling unit to cover their fair share of the cost to mitigate the impacts of new developments.

2.3.5. Computing the Fee for Non-Residential Developments

A process similar to that used for residential units was used to determine the fee level for non-residential development. However, the determination of fees for non-residential development involves additional steps due to the additional complexity of accounting for a greater variety of development types within each use category. Chapter 5 and Chapter 6 of this report provide additional explanation regarding the methodology for accomplishing these steps along with the results of this analysis.

Page 52 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 118 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 11 28) Like many impact fee programs, TUMF groups similar development projects together into general use categories to simplify the administration of the program. TUMF groups the various land use categories found in ITE’s Trip Generation Manual into four non-residential categories (industrial, retail, service, and government/public sector) based on the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), which is also used by the U.S. Census Bureau and SCAG for demographic classifications and is the basis for such classifications in the SCAG Regional Travel Demand Model as well as and the RivCoM model. The ITE trip generation rates for all uses were reviewed for accuracy updated to reflect the most current ITE published rates. The median value for the trip- generation rates for all uses within each category was used in the nexus study to represent the trip-generation characteristics for the category. 29) The trip-generation rates of retail and service uses were adjusted to take into account the share of pass-by trips these uses generate. Pass by trip rates for various retail and service uses were derived from the ITE Trip Generation Manual to determine the median value of all uses as the basis for the adjustment. The ITE pass by trip rates for all uses were reviewed for accuracy and updated to reflect the most current ITE published rates.
30) The SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS socio economic forecasts included non-residential employment for 2018 and 2045. These forecasts were used to estimate the growth in employment in each of the four non-residential uses. 31) The SCAG employment forecasts are denominated in jobs while development applications are typically denominated in square feet of floorspace. The ratio of floorspace per employee was determined as a median value derived from four studies, including a comprehensive study San Bernardino and Riverside Counties conducted in 1990, an OCTA study conducted in 2001, a SCAG study (including a specific focus on Riverside County) conducted in 2001, and the Riverside County General Plan adopted in 2015.
32) The forecast growth in employees was multiplied by the floorspace per employee to produce a forecast of the floorspace that will be developed for each of the four non-residential use types.
33) The trip-generation rate for each of the four uses was multiplied by the forecast of new floorspace to estimate the number of trips generated by each use. 34) The amount of project costs to be covered by non-residential development was split between the four non-residential uses to determine the TUMF cost share for each.
35) The TUMF cost share for each of the four non-residential uses was divided by the forecast growth in floorspace to determine the fee level required from each new square foot of non-residential development to cover their fair share of the cost to mitigate the impacts of new developments.
36) WRCOG has adopted a TUMF Fee Calculation Handbook that allows for fee adjustments to be made to account for unusual circumstances for certain types of residential and non-residential development (fuel filling stations, golf courses, high-cube warehouses, wineries, electric charging stations, etc.) These

Page 53 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 119 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 12 adjustments are intended to calculate a fairer proportional fee based on the unique trip generation characteristics of these development types.

The outcome of this process is a schedule of fees for the various use categories identified as part of the TUMF program. The study conclusions including the Schedule of Fees is presented in Chapter 7 of this report. The schedule of fees represents the maximum fee permissible under California law for the purposes of the TUMF program.

The WRCOG Executive Committee has the option to adopt lower fees, however, in doing so each use category subject to a lower fee would not be contributing a fair share of the cost of their impacts. This would in turn create a funding gap for the program that would necessitate identifying additional project funding from some other source to ensure the cumulative regional impacts of new development are being mitigated fully in accordance with the program.

Page 54 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 120 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 13 2.0 FUTURE GROWTH

2.1 Recent Historical Trend

Western Riverside County experienced robust growth in the period from the late 1990’s to the mid 2000’s. The results of Census 2000 indicate that in the year 2000, Western Riverside County had a population of 1.187 million representing a 30% increase (or 2.7% average annual increase) from the 1990 population of 912,000. Total employment in Western Riverside County in 2000 was estimated by the SCAG to be 381,000 representing a 46% increase (or 3.9% average annual increase) over the 1990 employment of 261,000.

Despite the impacts of the Great Recession and the associated residential mortgage and foreclosure crisis, and more recently with the shifting of population during and following the COVID-19 pandemic, Western Riverside County has continued to grow due to the availability of relatively affordable residential and commercial property, and a generally well-educated workforce. By 2010, the population of the region had grown to 1.742 million, a further 47% growth in population from 2000. Similarly, total employment in the region had also grown from 2000 to 2010 with 434,000 employees estimated to be working in Western Riverside County. This represents a 12% increase from the 381,000 employees working in the region in 2000.

2.2 Available Demographic Data

A variety of alternate demographic information that quantifies future population, household and employment growth is available for Western Riverside County. For earlier versions of the TUMF Nexus Study, the primary available source of consolidated demographic information for Western Riverside County was provided by SCAG. SCAG is the largest of nearly 700 Councils of Government (COG) in the United States and functions as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for six counties in Southern California including Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura and Imperial. SCAG is mandated by the federal government to research and plan for issues of regional significance including transportation and growth management. As part of these responsibilities, SCAG maintains a comprehensive database of regional socioeconomic data and develops demographic projections and travel demand forecasts for Southern California.

In preparation for the 2020 RTP/SCS, SCAG undertook robust stakeholder engagement, including participation by WRCOG, Riverside County and the various cities in Western Riverside County, to develop regional demographic forecasts. Using input from regional stakeholders regarding anticipated patterns and rates of development, SCAG compiled and disseminated the forecasts that were ultimately adopted in 2020, including those specific to Western Riverside County. The SCAG forecasts adopted for the 2020 RTP/SCS were subsequently used as the basis for RivCoM and are used as the basis for this TUMF Nexus Study Update.

Page 55 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 121 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 14 2.3 Demographic Assumptions Used for the Nexus Study Analysis

The SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS data were compared to the 2016 RTP/SCS data used in the TUMF Nexus Study 2016 Update. As can be seen in Table 2.1 and Figure 2.1, the 2018 data reflects an increase in population and single-family households, and a very slight decline in multi-family households. Employment grew substantially overall, with significant growth in industrial employment, largely attributable to the rapid expansion of warehousing and logistics facilities in Western Riverside County. In contrast, there was a notable decline in government and public sector employment in the region from 2012 to 2018

Table 2.1 - Base Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County SED Type 2016 Update
(2012)
2024 Update
(2018) Change Percent
Total Population 1,773,935 1,905,440 131,505 7%
Total Households 525,149 554,573 29,424 6%
Single-Family 366,588 397,407 30,819 8%
Multi-Family 158,561 157,166 -1,395 -1%
Total Employment 460,787 570,420 109,633 24%
Industrial 120,736 169,334 48,598 40%
Retail 65,888 73,814 7,926 12%
Service 253,372 308,703 55,331 22%
Government/Public Sector 20,791 18,569 -2,222 -11%
Source: SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS; SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS

Page 56 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 122 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 15 Figure 2.1 – Base Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County

Table 2.2 and Figure 2.2 compare the socioeconomic forecasts for the program horizon year of 2045 used in the TUMF Nexus Study 2016 Update and 2045 for this study. The most recent forecasts reflect an increase in the horizon year population and households, and a decrease in overall employment in Western Riverside County. The change in employment was not, however, consistent across sectors. The retail employment forecast has decreased approximately 15% from 2040 to 2045, while the industrial employment forecast has increased over 20%. This shift is consistent with the emergence of e-commerce as an alternative to traditional “brick and mortar” retail.

Page 57 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 123 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 16 Table 2.2 - Horizon Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County

SED Type 2016 Update
(2040)
2024 Update
(2045) Change Percent
Total Population 2,429,633 2,533,876 104,243 4%
Total Households 775,231 812,399 37,168 5%
Single-Family 539,631 564,898 25,267 5%
Multi-Family 235,600 247,501 11,901 5%
Total Employment 861,455 846,442 -15,013 -2%
TUMF Industrial 201,328 245,915 44,587 22%
TUMF Retail 101,729 86,929 -14,800 -15%
TUMF Service 528,092 482,958 -45,134 -9%
TUMF Government/Public Sector 30,306 30,640 334 1%
Source: SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS; SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS

Figure 2.2 - Horizon Year Socioeconomic Estimates for Western Riverside County

Page 58 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 124 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 17 Table 2.3 and Figure 2.3 summarize the socioeconomic data obtained from SCAG and used as the basis for completing this Nexus Study analysis. The SCAG employment data for 2018 and 2045 was provided for thirteen employment sectors consistent with the California Employment Development Department (EDD) Major Groups including:

Farming, Natural Resources and Mining; Construction; Manufacturing; Wholesale Trade; Retail Trade; Transportation, Warehousing and Utilities; Information; Financial Activities; Professional and Business Service; Education and Health Service; Leisure and Hospitality; Other Service; and Government. For the purposes of the Nexus Study, the EDD Major Groups were aggregated to Industrial (Farming, Natural Resources and Mining; Construction; Manufacturing; Wholesale Trade; Transportation, Warehousing and Utilities), Retail (Retail Trade), Service (Information; Financial Activities; Professional and Business Service; Education and Health Service; Leisure and Hospitality; Other Service) and Government/Public Sector (Government). These four aggregated sector types were used as the basis for calculating the fee as described in Section 6.2. Appendix B provides a table detailing the EDD Major Groups and corresponding North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Categories that are included in each non- residential sector type.

Table 2.3 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County (2018 to 2045)

SED Type 2018 2045 Change Percent
Total Population 1,905,440 2,533,876 628,436 33%
Total Households 554,573 812,399 257,826 46%
Single-Family 397,407 564,898 167,491 42%
Multi-Family 157,166 247,501 90,335 57%
Total Employment 570,420 846,442 276,022 48%
TUMF Industrial 169,334 245,915 76,581 45%
TUMF Retail 73,814 86,929 13,115 18%
TUMF Service 308,703 482,958 174,255 56%
TUMF Government/Public Sector 18,569 30,640 12,071 65%
Source: SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS

Page 59 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 125 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 18 Figure 2.3 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County (2018 to 2045)
The combined effects of the changes in the base year and horizon year socioeconomic data are modest reductions in the total growth in population and single-family households, but a notable increase in multi-family households. The change in total employment is reduced by 31%, with the most significant reduction in employment growth in the retail sector (-63%), while the industrial sector saw only a slight reduction in total employment growth compared to the 2016 Nexus Update (5%).

The Government/public sector employment growth has increased by 27% from the 2016 Nexus Study to the 2024 Nexus Study, although the total number of jobs increased is relatively small as a share of the total employment. Table 2.4 and Figure 2.4 provide a comparison of the changes in population, households and employment between the 2016 Nexus Update and the 2024 Nexus Update. The table and figure clearly illustrate the reduction in the rate of growth in Western Riverside County largely attributable to the effects of the economic recession. This reduced rate of growth in the region will serve as the basis for reevaluating the level of impact of new development on the transportation system in the next section, as well as providing the basis for the determination of the fair share fee for each land use type.

Page 60 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 126 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 19 Table 2.4 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County (Existing to Future Change Comparison)

SED Type 2016 Update
(2012-2040)
2024 Update
(2018-2045) Difference Percent
Total Population 655,698 628,436 -27,262 -4%
Total Households 250,082 257,826 7,744 3%
Single-Family 173,043 167,491 -5,552 -3%
Multi-Family 77,039 90,335 13,296 17%
Total Employment 400,668 276,022 -124,646 -31%
TUMF Industrial 80,592 76,581 -4,011 -5%
TUMF Retail 35,841 13,115 -22,726 -63%
TUMF Service 274,720 174,255 -100,465 -37%
TUMF Government/Public Sector 9,515 12,071 2,556 27%
Source: SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS; SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS

Page 61 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 127 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 20 Figure 2.4 - Population, Households and Employment in Western Riverside County (Existing to Future Change Comparison)

Page 62 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 128 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 21 3.0 NEED FOR THE TUMF

All new developments have some effect on the transportation infrastructure in a community, city or county due to an increase in travel demand. Increasing usage of the transportation facilities leads to more traffic, progressively increasing VMT, traffic congestion and decreasing the level of service (LOS)3. To meet the increased travel demand and keep traffic flowing, improvements to transportation facilities become necessary to sustain pre-development traffic conditions.

The projected growth in Western Riverside County (33% growth in population and 48% growth in employment in 27 years) and the related growth in VMT can be expected to increase congestion and degrade mobility if substantial investments are not made in the transportation infrastructure. This challenge is especially critical for arterial highways and roadways that carry a significant number of the trips between cities, since traditional sources of transportation improvement funding (such as the gasoline tax and local general funds) will not be nearly sufficient to fund the improvements needed to serve new development. Development exactions generally provide only a fraction of the improvements with those being confined to the area immediately adjacent to the respective development, and the broad-based county-level funding sources (i.e., Riverside County’s half-cent sales tax known as Measure A) designate only a small portion of their revenues for arterial roadway improvements.

This section documents the existing and future congestion levels that demonstrate the need for future improvements to the transportation system to specifically mitigate the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new development. It then describes the TUMF concept that has been developed to fund future new developments’ fair share of needed improvements.

The forecast of future congestion levels is derived from Year 2045 No-Build travel demand forecasts for Western Riverside County developed using RivCoM. The Year 2045 No-Build scenario evaluates the effects of 2045 population, employment and resultant traffic generation on the 2021 existing arterial highway network.

3.1 Future Highway Congestion Levels

To support the evaluation of the cumulative regional impacts of new development on the existing arterial highway system in Western Riverside County, existing (2018) and future (2045) SED were modeled on the existing (2021) arterial highway network using RivCoM. To quantify traffic growth impacts, various traffic measures of effectiveness were calculated for the AM and PM peak periods for each of the two scenarios. The

3 The Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition – A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis (Transportation Research Board, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., 2016, Volume 1 – Concepts, pp 5-3) describes LOS as a “quantitative stratification of performance measure or measures representing quality of service….HCM defines six levels of service, ranging from A to F, for each service measure or combination of measures. LOS A represents the best operating conditions from the traveler’s perspective and LOS F the worst.”

Page 63 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 129 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 22 WRCOG TUMF study area was extracted from the greater regional model network for the purpose of calculating measures for Western Riverside County only. Peak period performance measures for the Western Riverside County TUMF study area included total VMT, total vehicle hours of travel (VHT), total combined vehicle hours of delay (VHD), and total VMT experiencing unacceptable level of service (LOS E). These results were tabulated in Table 3.1. Plots of the Network Extents are attached in Appendix C.

Total Arterial VMT, VHT, VHD and LOS E Threshold VMT were calculated to include all principal arterials, minor arterials and major connectors, respectively. Regional values for each threshold were calculated for a total of all facilities including arterials, freeways, freeway ramps and High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes.

Table 3.1 - Regional Highway System Measures of Performance (2018 Existing to 2045 No-Build)

Measure of Performance*
Peak Periods (Total)
2018 Existing 2045 No-Build % Change % Annual
VMT - Total ALL FACILITIES 23,284,724 29,897,254 28% 0.9% VMT - FREEWAYS 13,514,522 15,490,284 15% 0.5% VMT - ALL ARTERIALS 9,770,202 14,406,970 47% 1.4% TOTAL - TUMF ARTERIAL VMT 6,216,985 8,597,200 38% 1.2% VHT - TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 541,350 915,439 69% 2.0% VHT - FREEWAYS 263,792 399,128 51% 1.5% VHT - ALL ARTERIALS 277,558 516,311 86% 2.3% TOTAL TUMF ARTERIAL VHT 174,455 320,869 84% 2.3% VHD - TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 108,900 338,056 210% 4.3% VHD - FREEWAYS 66,156 170,649 158% 3.6% VHD - ALL ARTERIALS 42,745 167,407 292% 5.2% TOTAL TUMF ARTERIAL VHD 33,249 124,863 276% 5.0% VMT LOS E - TOTAL ALL FACILITIES 5,605,070 13,369,483 139% 3.3% VMT LOS E - FREEWAYS 4,725,471 9,316,891 97% 2.5% VMT LOS E & F - ALL ARTERIALS 879,599 4,052,592 361% 5.8% TOTAL TUMF ARTERIAL VMT w/ LOS E or worse 765,782 3,184,133 316% 5.4% % of TUMF ARTERIAL VMT w/ LOS E or worse 12% 37%
* Based on RivCoM 2018 base network and SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS SED with updated 2021 arterial network as existing in December 2021
NOTES:

Volume is adjusted by PCE factor
VMT = vehicle miles of travel (the total combined distance that all vehicles travel on the system) VHT = vehicle hours of travel (the total combined time that all vehicles are traveling on the system) VHD = vehicle hours of delay (the total combined time that all vehicles have been delayed on the system based on the difference between forecast travel time and free-flow (ideal) travel time) LOS = level of service (based on forecast volume to capacity ratios).

LOS E or Worse was determined by V/C ratio that exceeds 0.9 thresholds as indicated in the Riverside County General Plan.

Page 64 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 130 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 23 The following formulas were used to calculate the respective values:

The calculated values were compared to assess the total change between 2018 Existing and 2045 No-Build scenarios, and the average annual change between 2018 Existing and 2044 No-Build. As can be seen from the RivCoM outputs summarized in Table 3.1, the additional traffic generated by new development will cause peak period VMT on the arterial highway network to increase by approximately 47% by the year 2045 (approximately 1.4% per year). In the absence of additional improvements to the transportation network in Western Riverside County, the growth in VMT will cause congestion on the highway system to increase almost exponentially, with the most significant increase in congestion observed on the arterial highway system that includes the TUMF Network. Many facilities will experience a significant increase in vehicle delay and deterioration in LOS to unacceptable levels because of new development and the associated growth in traffic. According to the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition – A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis (Transportation Research Board, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., 2016), “LOS E describes operation at or near capacity. Operations…at this level are highly volatile because there are virtually no usable gaps within the traffic stream, leaving little room to maneuver within the traffic stream. Any disruption to the traffic stream, such as vehicles entering…or a vehicle changing lanes, can establish a disruption wave that propagates throughout the upstream traffic stream….the physical and psychological comfort afforded drivers is poor.”

The Congestion Management Program for Riverside County (CMP) published by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) in 2011 designates LOS E as the “traffic standards must be set no lower than LOS E for any segment or intersection along the CMP System of Highways and Roadways” in Riverside County. “The intent of the CMP is to more directly link land use, transportation, and air quality, thereby prompting reasonable growth management programs that will effectively utilize new transportation funds, alleviate traffic congestion and related impacts, and improve air quality.” 4 The CMP provides a mechanism for monitoring congestion on the highway system and, where congestion is observed, establishes procedures for developing a deficiency plan to address improvement needs. The reactive nature of the CMP to identify and remediate existing congestion differs from the proactive nature of the TUMF program to anticipate and provide for future traffic needs. For this reason, the TUMF

4 Congestion Management Program for Riverside County – Executive Summary (Riverside County Transportation Commission, 2011) Page ES-3, ES-1
VMT = Link Distance * Total Daily Volume
VHT = Average Loaded (Congested) Link Travel Time * Total Daily Volume VHD = VHT – (Free-flow (Uncongested) Link Travel Time * Total Daily Volume) VMT LOS E or F = VMT (on links where Daily V/C exceeded 0.90)

Note: Volume to capacity (v/c) ratio thresholds for LOS E are based on the Transportation Research Board 2010 Edition of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2010) LOS Maximum V/C Criteria for Multilane Highways with 45 mph Free Flow Speed (Exhibit 14-5, Chapter 14, Page 14-5). .

Page 65 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 131 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 24 program follows the guidance of the Highway Capacity Manual in establishing LOS E as the threshold for unacceptable level of service, and subsequently as the basis for measuring system performance and accounting for existing needs. This approach ensures a more conservative accounting of existing system needs as part of the determination of the “fair share” of mitigating the cumulative regional impacts of future new development on the transportation system.

The continuing need for a mitigation fee on new development is shown by the adverse impact that new development will have on Western Riverside County’s transportation infrastructure, and particularly the arterial highway network. As a result of the new development and associated growth in population and employment in Western Riverside County, additional pressure will be placed on the transportation infrastructure with the total peak period VMT on the Western Riverside County Regional System of Highways and Arterials (RSHA; also referred to as the TUMF Network) estimated to increase by approximately 38% or 1.2% compounded annually.

As shown in Table 3.1, the peak period VMT on arterial facilities within the TUMF Network experiencing LOS E or worse will increase by approximately 316% or 5.4% compounded annually in Western Riverside County in the period between 2018 and 2045. By 2045, 37% of the total VMT on the TUMF arterial highway system is forecast to be traveling on facilities experiencing daily LOS E or worse. Without improvements to the TUMF arterial highway system, the total vehicle hours of delay (VHD) experienced by area motorists on TUMF arterial highways during the peak periods will increase by approximately 5.0% per year. The combined influences of increased travel demand and worsened LOS that manifest themselves in severe congestion and delay highlighting the continuing need to complete substantial capacity expansion on the TUMF arterial highway system to mitigate the cumulative regional impact of increased travel demand resulting from new development.

The RivCoM outputs summarized in Table 3.1 clearly demonstrate that the travel demands generated by future new development in the region will lead to increasing levels of traffic congestion, especially on the arterial roadways. The need to improve these roadways to accommodate the anticipated growth in VMT and relieve future congestion is therefore directly linked to the future development which generates the additional travel demand.

3.2 Future Transit Utilization Levels

In addition to the roadway network, public transportation will play a role in serving future travel demand in the region. Transit represents a critical component of the transportation system by providing an alternative mode choice for those not wanting to use an automobile, and particularly for those who do not readily have access to an automobile. As population and employment in Western Riverside County grows because of new development, demand for regional transit services in the region is also expected to grow.

Page 66 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 132 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 25 While some future transit trips will be accommodated by inter-regional transit services such as Metrolink, a substantial number of the trips within Western Riverside County will be served by bus transit services and for this reason the provision of regional bus transit service is considered integral to addressing the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new developments. Regional bus transit services within Western Riverside County are primarily provided by RTA.

In 2023, RTA reported average weekday daily ridership of 16,575 on their network of buses5. The SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS forecasts for RTA average weekday daily ridership in 2045 is 57,282. These values were used to represent the existing and future transit trips consistent with the analysis of highway trips described in Section 3.1. The existing and future transit ridership were compared to assess the impact of new development on transit demand. Average weekday daily ridership would be expected to grow by 40,707 between 2023 and 2045, or an average increase of 1,850 weekday daily riders each year. Average weekday daily system ridership is summarized in Appendix D.

The future growth in demand for public transit services is reflective of the cumulative regional impacts of new development, and the associated increase in demand for all types of transportation infrastructure and services to accommodate this growth.

Furthermore, bus transit ridership is expected to grow as the improved services being planned and implemented by RTA attract new riders and encourages existing riders to use transit more often as an alternative to driving. Attracting additional riders to bus transit services contributes to the mitigation of the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new development by reducing the number of trips that need to be served on the highway system. The need to provide additional bus transit services within Western Riverside County to satisfy this future demand is therefore directly linked to the future development that generates the demand.

3.3 The TUMF Concept

A sizable percentage of trip-making for any given local community extends beyond the bounds of the individual community as residents pursue employment, education, shopping and entertainment opportunities elsewhere. As new development occurs within a particular local community, this dispersal of trips of all purposes by new residents and the new business that serve them generates additional travel demand and contributes to the need for transportation improvements within their community and in the other communities of Western Riverside County. The idea behind a uniform mitigation fee is to have new development throughout the region contribute uniformly to paying the fair share cost of improving the transportation facilities that serve these trips between communities. Thus, the fee is intended to be used primarily to improve

5 RTA, like most public transportation agencies, have seen significant short-term declines in transit ridership resulting from changes in travel demands, mode choice and trip distribution following the COVID-19 pandemic. RTA’s 2016 actual average weekday daily ridership was 30,700. Post COVID-19, the RTA actual average weekday daily ridership in 2023 was 16,575, a decline of almost 50% of pre-pandemic ridership levels. These levels would be expected to continue to recover toward pre-pandemic levels as potential riders resume more regular work schedules, and apprehension toward the use of transit services for public health reasons wane.

Page 67 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 133 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 26 transportation facilities that serve trips between communities within the region (in particular, arterial roadways and regional bus transit services).

Some roadways serve trips between adjacent communities, while some also serve trips between more distant communities within the region. The differing roadway functions led to the concept of using a portion of the fee revenues for a backbone system of arterial roadways that serve the longer-distance trips (i.e. using TUMF revenues from the entire region), while using a second portion of the fee revenues for a secondary system of arterials that serve inter-community trips within a specific subregion or zone (i.e. using TUMF revenues from the communities most directly served by these roads – to some extent, a return-to-source of that portion of the funds). Reflecting the importance of public transit to provide an alternative to highway travel as part of a balanced regional transportation strategy, a third portion of fee revenues was reserved for improvements to regional bus transit services (i.e. using TUMF revenues from the entire region).

Much, but not all, of the new trip-making in each area is generated by residential development (i.e. when people move into new homes, they create new trips on the transportation system as they travel to work, school, shopping or entertainment). Some of the new trips are generated simply by activities associated with new businesses (i.e. new businesses will create new trips through the delivery of goods and services, etc.).

Apart from commute trips by residents coming to and from work, and the trips of residents coming to and from new businesses to get goods and services, the travel demands of new businesses are not considered to be directly attributable to residential development. The consideration of different sources of new travel demand is therefore reflected in the concept of assessing both residential and non-residential development for their related transportation impacts.

In summary, the TUMF concept includes the following:

 A uniform fee that is levied on new development throughout Western Riverside County.

 The fee is assessed roughly proportionately on new residential and non-residential development based on the relative impact of each new use on the transportation system.

 A portion of the fee is used to fund capacity improvements on a backbone system of arterial roadways that serve longer-distance trips within the region; a portion of the fee is returned to the subregion or zone in which it was generated to fund capacity improvements on a secondary system of arterial roadways that link the communities in that area; and a portion of the fee is used to fund improvements to regional bus transit services that serve trips between the communities within the region.

Page 68 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 134 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 27 4.0 THE TUMF NETWORK

4.1 Identification of the TUMF Roadway Network

An integral element of the initial Nexus Study was the designation of the Western Riverside County Regional System of Highways and Arterials. This network of regionally significant highways represents those arterial and collector highway and roadway facilities that primarily support inter-community trips in Western Riverside County and supplement the regional freeway system. As a result, this system also represents the extents of the network of highways and roadways that would be eligible for TUMF funded improvements. The TUMF Network does not include the freeways of Western Riverside County as these facilities primarily serve longer distance inter-regional trips and a significant number of pass-through trips that have no origin or destination in Western Riverside County6.

The TUMF Network is the system of roadways that serve inter-community trips within Western Riverside County and therefore are eligible for improvement funding with TUMF funds. The RSHA for Western Riverside County was identified based on several transportation network and performance guidelines as follows:

1. Arterial highway facilities proposed to have a minimum of four lanes at ultimate build-out (not including freeways).

2. Facilities that serve multiple jurisdictions and/or provide connectivity between communities both within and adjoining Western Riverside County.

3. Facilities with forecast traffic volumes exceeding 20,000 vehicles per day in the future horizon year.

4. Facilities with forecast volume to capacity ratio of 0.90 (LOS E) or greater in the future horizon year.

5. Facilities that accommodate regional fixed route transit services.

6. Facilities that provide direct access to major commercial, industrial, institutional, recreational or tourist activity centers, and multi-modal transportation facilities (such as airports, railway terminals and transit centers).

Appendix E includes exhibits illustrating the various performance measures assessed during the definition of the RSHA.

Transportation facilities in Western Riverside County that generally satisfied these guidelines were initially identified, and a skeletal regional transportation framework evolved from facilities where several guidelines were observed. Representatives of all WRCOG constituent jurisdictions reviewed this framework in the context of current local transportation plans to define the TUMF Network, which was subsequently endorsed by

6 Since pass-through trips have no origin or destination in Western Riverside County, new development within Western Riverside County cannot be considered responsible for mitigating the impacts of pass-through trips. The impact of pass- through trips and the associated cost to mitigate the impact of pass-through trips (and other inter-regional freeway trips) is addressed in the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) Western Riverside County Freeway Strategic Plan, Phase II – Detailed Evaluation and Impact Fee Nexus Determination, Final Report dated May 31, 2008.

Page 69 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 135 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 28 the WRCOG Public Works Committee, WRCOG Technical Advisory Committee, TUMF Policy Committee and the WRCOG Executive Committee.

The RSHA is illustrated in Figure 4.1. As stated previously, the RSHA represents those regional significant highway facilities that primarily serve inter-community trips in Western Riverside County and therefore also represents the extents of the network of highways and roadways that would be eligible for TUMF funded improvements.

Page 70 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 136 of 606 ends

Page 71 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 137 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 30 4.2 Backbone Network and Secondary Network

As indicated previously, the TUMF roadway network was refined to distinguish between facilities of “Regional Significance” and facilities of “Zonal Significance.” Facilities of Regional Significance were identified as those that typically are proposed to have a minimum of six lanes at general plan build-out7, extend across and/or between multiple Area Planning Districts8, and are forecast to carry at least 25,000 vehicles per day in 2045. The Facilities of Regional Significance have been identified as the “backbone” highway network for Western Riverside County. A portion of the TUMF fee is specifically designated for improvement projects on the backbone system. The backbone network is illustrated in Figure 4.2.

Facilities of Zonal Significance (the “secondary” network) represent the balance of the RSHA for Western Riverside County. These facilities are typically within one zone and carry comparatively lesser traffic volumes than the backbone highway network, although they are considered significant for circulation within the respective zone. A portion of the TUMF is specifically designated for improvement projects on the secondary network within the zone in which it is collected. The WRCOG APD or zones are illustrated in Figure 4.3.

7 Although facilities were identified based on the minimum number of lanes anticipated at general plan buildout, in some cases it was determined that there was not sufficient demand for all additional lanes on some facilities until beyond the current timeframe of the TUMF Program (2045). As a result, only a portion of the additional lanes on these facilities have currently been identified for funding with TUMF revenues, reflecting the cumulative impact of new development through the current duration of the TUMF Program.
8 Area Planning Districts (APD) are the five aggregations of communities used for regional planning functions within the WRCOG area. Area Planning Districts are interchangeably referred to as TUMF Zones.

Page 72 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 138 of 606 ends

Page 73 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 139 of 606 ends

Page 74 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 140 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 33 4.3 Future Roadway Transportation Needs

To calculate a “fair share” fee for new development, it is necessary to estimate the cost of improvements on the TUMF system that will be needed to mitigate the cumulative regional impacts of future transportation demands created by new development.

Estimates of the cost to improve the network to mitigate the cumulative impacts of new development were originally developed based on unit costs prepared for the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) Regional Arterial Cost Estimate (RACE)9, and the WRCOG Southwest District SATISFY 2020 Summary of Cost Estimates10 (TKC/WRCOG 2000). The RACE cost estimates were developed based on a summary of actual construction costs for projects constructed in Riverside County in 1998.

The initial unit cost estimates for the TUMF (based on inflated RACE cost estimates) were reviewed in the context of the SATISFY 2020 Draft Cost Estimates and were consolidated to provide typical improvement costs for each eligible improvement type. The refinement of unit costs was completed to simplify the process of estimating the cost to improve the entire TUMF network. Based on RACE and SATISFY 2020, consolidated cost estimates included typical per mile or lump sum costs for each of the improvement types eligible under the TUMF Program. The resultant revised unit cost estimates were used as the basis for estimating the cost to complete the necessary improvements to the TUMF network to mitigate the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new development.

Variations in the consolidated cost estimates for specific improvement types were provided to reflect differences in topography and land use across the region. Unit costs for roadway construction were originally varied to account for variations in construction cost (in particular, roadway excavation and embankment cost) associated with construction on level (code 1) rolling (code 2) and mountainous (code 3) terrain, respectively. Right-of-way acquisition costs which originally included consideration for land acquisition, documentation and legal fees, relocation and demolition costs, condemnation compensation requirements, utility relocation, and environmental mitigation costs were also varied to account for variations in right-of-way costs associated with urban (developed commercial/residential mixed uses – code 1), suburban (developed residential uses – code 2) and rural (undeveloped uses – code 3) land uses, respectively. Lump sum costs for interchange improvements were originally varied to account for variations in cost associated with new complex, new standard (or fully reconstructed), or major (or partially reconstructed) or minor (individual ramp improvements) interchange improvements.

As part of the 2024 TUMF Nexus Update, the original unit cost categories were revised to generate entirely new unit cost values based on the most recent available construction cost, labor cost and land acquisition cost values for comparable projects within Riverside County. The recalculation of the TUMF unit cost components was completed

9 Parsons Brinckerhoff/Coachella Valley Association of Governments, 1999, Regional Arterial Cost Estimate (RACE)
10 TKC/Western Riverside Council of Governments, 2000, SATISFY 2020 Summary of Cost Estimates

Page 75 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 141 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 34 as part of the 2024 Nexus Update to reflect the effects of significant changes in materials, labor and land acquisition costs including the influences of supply chain disruptions during and following the COVID-19 pandemic, and the elevated rates of inflation prevailing in the past few years. Appendix F provides a detailed outline of the assumptions and methodology leading to the revised TUMF unit cost assumptions developed as part of the 2024 Nexus Update. A new category was also added to the cost assumptions to facilitate the use of intelligent transportation systems (ITS) to enhance traffic flows in arterial corridors that require mitigation but cannot accommodate construction of addition lane capacity.

Section 8.5.1 of the Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP) Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) adopted by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on June 17, 2003, states that “each new transportation project will contribute to Plan implementation. Historically, these projects have budgeted 3% - 5% of their construction costs to mitigate environmental impacts.” This expectation is reiterated in the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Nexus Fee Study Update (Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., October 2020) Section 6 which indicates that “about 44% of the revenue for the program” is expected to be derived from non-fee sources, including ” the Measure A sales tax which is authorized through 2039 and other transportation funding sources such as the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF).” Consistent with the MSHCP Nexus Report, an amount equal to 5% of the construction cost for new TUMF network lanes, bridges and railroad grade separations will be specifically included as part of TUMF Program with revenues to be provided to the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) for the acquisition of land identified in the MSHCP. The relevant sections of the MSHCP document and the most recent MSHCP Nexus Report are included in Appendix F.

Table 4.1 summarizes the unit cost estimate assumptions used to develop the TUMF network cost estimate as part of the current Nexus Update. Table 4.1 also includes a comparison of the original TUMF unit cost assumptions and the 2016 Nexus Study unit cost assumptions that demonstrates the significant increases in unit costs observed during recent years. In most cases the unit cost assumptions have more than doubled from those used for the 2016 Nexus Study. Cost estimates are provided in current year values as indicated.

To estimate the cost of improving the regional network to provide for traffic growth from new development, the network characteristics and performance guidelines (outlined in Section 4.1) were initially used as a basis for determining the needed improvements.

The initial list of improvements was then compared with local General Plan Circulation Elements to ensure that the TUMF network included planned arterial roadways of regional significance. A consolidated list of proposed improvements and the unit cost assumptions were then used to establish an initial estimate of the cost to improve the network to mitigate for future traffic growth associated with new development. This initial list of proposed improvements has since been revised and updated as part of each subsequent Nexus Update to reflect the completion of projects, changing levels of development and associated changes in travel demand and transportation system impacts to be mitigated as part of the TUMF program.

Page 76 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 142 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 35 Table 4.1 - Unit Costs for Arterial Highway and Street Construction

Component
Type
Original Cost
Assumptions as
published
October 18, 2002
Cost Assumptions
per 2016 Nexus
Study
July 10, 2017
Cost Assumptions
per 2024 Nexus
Update
Description
Terrain 1 $550,000 $692,000 $1,132,000 Construction cost per lane mile - level terrain
Terrain 2 $850,000 $878,000 $1,740,000 Construction cost per lane mile - rolling terrain
Terrain 3 $1,150,000 $1,064,000 $2,350,000 Construction cost per lane mile - mountainous terrain
Landuse 1 $900,000 $2,509,000 $7,830,000 ROW cost factor per lane mile - urban areas
Landuse 2 $420,000 $2,263,000 $5,440,000 ROW cost factor per lane mile - suburban areas
Landuse 3 $240,000 $287,000 $490,000 ROW cost factor per lane mile - rural areas
Interchange 1 n/a $50,032,000 $84,190,000
Complex new
interchange/interchange
modification cost
Interchange 2 $20,000,000 $25,558,000 $43,490,000 New interchange/interchange modification total cost
Interchange 3 $10,000,000 $12,343,000 $22,550,000 Major interchange improvement total cost
Bridge 1 $2,000 $3,180 $4,800 Bridge total cost per lane per linear foot
RRXing 1 $4,500,000 $6,376,000 $18,200,000 New Rail Grade Crossing per lane RRXing 2 $2,250,000 $2,733,000 $6,900,000 Existing Rail Grade Crossing per lane ITS 1 $686,400 Infrastructure for ITS of roadway
segments per route mile
Planning 10% 10% 10%
Planning, preliminary engineering
and environmental assessment costs
based on construction cost only
Engineering 25% 25% 25%
Project study report, design,
permitting and construction
oversight costs based on
construction cost only
Contingency 10% 10% 10% Contingency costs based on total segment cost
Administration 4% 4% TUMF program administration based on total TUMF eligible network cost
MSHCP 5% 5%
TUMF component of MSHCP based
on total TUMF eligible construction
cost

As indicated in Table 2.4 and Figure 2.4, the anticipated rate of forecasted growth in Western Riverside County has been reduced by 4% for population, 3% for single-family residential and 31% for employment. This reduced rate of forecasted socioeconomic growth has a commensurate impact on the forecasted daily traffic in the region as demonstrated by the 2016 Nexus Study VMT compared to the 2024 Nexus Update VMT in Table 4.2. As shown in the table, the forecast peak period VMT on the TUMF arterial network in the year 2045 as the basis for the 2024 Nexus Update is more than 5% less than the comparable peak period VMT for 2040 used for the 2016 Nexus Study.

Page 77 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 143 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 36 Table 4.2 – Forecasted Daily Traffic in Western Riverside County

Measure of Performance
2024 Nexus Update 2016 Nexus Study
Peak Period Peak Period
2018 Existing 2045 No-Build 2012 Existing 2040 No-Build VMT - Total ALL FACILITIES 23,284,724 29,897,254 19,532,437 29,277,587 VMT - FREEWAYS 13,514,522 15,490,284 11,019,155 14,487,570 VMT - ALL ARTERIALS 9,770,202 14,406,970 8,513,282 14,790,016 TOTAL - TUMF ARTERIAL VMT 6,216,985 8,597,200 5,585,202 9,089,495

Source: RivCoM 2018 base network and SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS SED with updated 2021 arterial network as existing in December 2021; RivTAM 2012 network and SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS SED with updated 2015 arterial network completed by WSP, September 2016

As a result of the reduced forecast traffic growth in the region, it is anticipated that the cumulative regional impacts of new development on the arterial highway and transit systems in the region is also reduced necessitating a reduction in the projects identified on the TUMF Network to mitigate the impacts of new development. As part of the 2024 Nexus Update, the list of proposed improvements included in the initial Nexus Study and validated during the subsequent Nexus updates was reviewed for accuracy and, where necessary, amended to remove or modify projects that have changed in need to mitigate impacts based on changes in the patterns of growth and travel demand within the region. Projects completed since the adoption of the 2016 Nexus Update were also removed from the network to reflect the fact that mitigation at these locations is no longer required. The specific network changes were screened by the WRCOG Public Works Committee for consistency with TUMF network guidelines including travel demand and traffic performance.

Based on the findings of the network screening, elements of specific projects were revised to reflect necessary network corrections and modifications to project assumptions. A matrix summarizing the disposition of the requests received as part of the 2024 TUMF Nexus Update was developed and is included in Appendix G.

Eligible arterial highway and street improvement types to mitigate the cumulative regional transportation impacts of new development on Network facilities include:

1. Construction of additional Network roadway lanes

2. Construction of new Network roadway segments

3. Expansion of existing Network bridge structures

4. Construction of new Network bridge structures

5. Expansion of existing Network interchanges with freeways

6. Construction of new Network interchanges with freeways

7. Grade separation of existing Network at-grade railroad crossings

8. Installation of ITS along Network roadway segments

All eligible improvement types, except for ITS, provide additional capacity to Network facilities to accommodate future traffic growth generated by new development in Western Riverside County. ITS provides the ability to improve traffic flows along corridors

Page 78 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 144 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 37 where capacity expansion is not possible. Following the comprehensive update of the TUMF Program, the estimated total cost to improve the RSHA for Western Riverside County is $4.84 billion with this cost including all arterial highway and street planning, engineering, design, right-of-way acquisition and capital construction costs, but not including transit, MSHCP or program administration costs that will be subsequently described. It should be noted that the full cost to improve the TUMF Network cannot be entirely attributed to new development and must be adjusted to account for the previous obligation of other funds to complete necessary improvements and unfunded existing needs. Sections 4.5 and 4.6 describe the adjustments to the total TUMF Network improvement need to account for existing needs and obligated funds.

In addition to the arterial highway and street improvement costs indicated above, the TUMF Nexus Update included specific consideration for the TUMF Program obligation to the MSHCP program to mitigate the impact of TUMF network improvements on species and habitat within Western Riverside County. The TUMF obligation to MSHCP was calculated at a rate of 5% of the total construction (capital) cost of new lane segments, bridges and railroad grade separations on the TUMF Network. The total obligation to the MSHCP as indicated in the TUMF Network cost fee table is approximately $64.6 million, although the total obligation specific to the TUMF program is reduced to account for MSHCP obligations associated with improvements addressing existing needs and therefore excluded from TUMF.

The TUMF 2024 Nexus Update similarly includes specific consideration of the costs associated with WRCOG administration of the TUMF Program. The average cost for WRCOG to administer the TUMF Program was calculated at a rate of 4% of the total eligible cost of new lane segments (including interchanges, bridges and railroad grade separations) on the TUMF Network and new transit services. Administration costs incurred by WRCOG include direct salary, fringe benefit and overhead costs for WRCOG staff assigned to administer the program and support participating jurisdictions, and costs for consultant, legal and auditing services to support the implementation of the TUMF program. The total cost for WRCOG administration of the TUMF Program as indicated in the TUMF Network cost fee table is approximately $161.2 million.

The detailed TUMF network cost calculations are provided in Section 4.7, including each of the individual segments and cost components considered as part of the TUMF Program, and the maximum eligible TUMF share for each segment following adjustments for obligated funding and unfunded existing needs as described in subsequent sections.

4.4 Public Transportation Component of the TUMF System

In addition to the roadway network, public transportation plays a key role in serving future travel demand in the region. Public transportation serving inter-community trips is generally provided in the form of public bus transit services and in particular express bus or other high frequency services between strategically located community transit centers. In Western Riverside County, these bus transit services are typically provided by

Page 79 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 145 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 38 RTA. Transit needs to serve future regional travel in Western Riverside County via bus transit include vehicle acquisitions, transit centers, express bus stop upgrades, maintenance facilities and other associated capital improvements to develop express bus or other high frequency inter-community transit bus services within the region.

Metrolink commuter rail service improvements were not included in the TUMF Program as they typically serve longer inter-regional commute trips equivalent to freeway trips on the inter-regional highway system.

The network of regionally significant bus transit services represents those express bus and other high frequency transit bus services that primarily support inter-community trips in Western Riverside County and supplement the regional highway system and inter- regional commuter rail services. As a result, this portion of the bus transit system also represents the extents of the network of bus services that would be eligible for TUMF funded improvements.

The TUMF Bus Transit Network is the system of bus services that serve inter-community trips within Western Riverside County and therefore are eligible for improvement funding with TUMF funds. The Bus Transit Network for Western Riverside County was identified based on several transit network and performance guidelines as follows:

1. Bus transit routes (or corridors comprised of multiple overlapping routes) proposed to have a frequency of greater than three buses per direction during peak hours at ultimate build out.

2. Routes or corridors that serve multiple jurisdictions and/or provide connectivity between communities, both within and adjoining western Riverside County.

3. Routes or corridors with forecast weekday bus ridership in excess of 1,000 person trips per day by 2040.

4. Routes or corridors that are proposed to provide timed interconnections with at least four other routes or corridors at ultimate build out.

5. Routes or corridors that utilize the majority of travel along the TUMF RSHA.

6. Routes or corridors that provide direct access to areas of forecast population and employment growth, major commercial, industrial, institutional, recreational or tourist activity centers, and multi-modal transportation facilities (such as airports, railway terminals and transit centers).

Express bus routes and other high-frequency bus transit routes and corridors in Western Riverside County that generally satisfied the respective guidelines were identified by RTA. Updated cost estimates for improving the infrastructure serving public transportation, including construction of transit centers and transfer facilities, express bus stop upgrades, and capital improvements needed to develop express bus and other high frequency bus transit service within the region were also provided by RTA.

The updated transit unit cost data provided by RTA are shown in Table 4.3.

Page 80 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 146 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 39 Table 4.3 - Unit Costs for Transit Capital Expenditures

Component Type*
Original Cost
Assumptions as
published
October 18, 2002
Cost Assumptions
per 2016 Nexus
Study
July 10, 2017
Cost
Assumptions per
2024 Nexus
Update
Description
Transit Center 1 $6,000,000 $7,465,000
Relocation/expansion of
existing Regional Transit
Center with up to 14 bus
bays and park and ride
Transit Center 2 $6,000,000 $9,000,000 $11,195,000
New Regional Transit Center
with up to 14 bus bays and
park and ride
Transfer Facility $1,000,000 $1,245,000 Multiple route transfer hub O & M Facility $50,000,000 $62,186,000 Regional Operations and Maintenance Facility
Green Technology $100,000 ZEB technology
enhancements
Bus Stop $10,000 $40,000 $50,000 Bus Stop Amenities Upgrade on TUMF Network
BRT Service Capital $540,000 $60,000 $75,000 BRT/Limited Stop Service Capital (per stop**)
Vehicle Fleet 1*** $160,000 Small Sized Bus/Van
Contract Operated
Vehicle Fleet 2 $155,000 $300,000 Medium Sized Bus Contract Operated
Vehicle Fleet 3 $325,125 $585,000 $1,271,000 Large Sized Bus Directly Operated
COA Study $950,000 $1,150,000
Comprehensive
Operational Analysis Study
component of Nexus Study
Update

* Transit Cost Component Types were restructured as part of the 2016 Nexus Update in accordance with the RTA Comprehensive Operational Analysis (January 2015) ** BRT Service Capital Cost Assumption was based on a per mile unit prior to the 2016 Nexus Update. 2016 Nexus Update uses a per stop unit cost for BRT Service Capital *** Vehicle Fleet component was restructured as part of the 2024 Nexus Update with the inclusion of Small Sized Bus/Van Contract Operated as Vehicle Fleet 1 and subsequent renumbering of Vehicle Fleet 2 and 3, respectively

The estimated total cost for future RTA bus transit services to accommodate forecast transit demand is approximately $217.9 million with this cost including all planning, engineering, design and capital improvement costs. Detailed transit component cost estimates are included in Section 4.7. The full cost to improve RTA bus transit services cannot be entirely attributed to new development and must be adjusted to account for existing needs. Section 4.6 describes the adjustments to the total transit cost to account for existing needs.

Page 81 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 147 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 40 4.5 Existing Obligated Funding

For some of the facilities identified in the TUMF network, existing obligated funding has previously been secured through traditional funding sources to complete necessary improvements. Since funding has been obligated to provide for the completion of needed improvements to the TUMF system, the funded cost of these improvements will not be recaptured from future developments through the TUMF Program. As a result, the TUMF network cost was adjusted accordingly to reflect the availability of obligated funds.

To determine the availability of obligated funds, WRCOG staff, in conjunction with RCTC staff, completed a review of the current Federal Transportation improvement Program (FTIP) to identify TUMF eligible projects that were also programmed to receive funding from alternate sources. A table summarizing the obligated funds for segments of the TUMF network is included in Appendix H. A total of $382.9 million in obligated funding was identified for improvements to the TUMF system. The estimated total TUMF network project cost was subsequently reduced by this amount.

4.6 Unfunded Existing Improvement Needs

A review of the existing traffic conditions on the TUMF network (as presented in Table

3.1) indicates that some segments of the roadways on the TUMF system currently experience congestion and operate at unacceptable levels of service. In addition, demand for inter-community transit service already exists and future utilization of proposed inter-community transit services will partially satisfy this existing demand. The need to improve these portions of the system is generated, at least in part, by existing demand, rather than solely the cumulative regional impacts of future new development, so future new development cannot be assessed for the equivalent cost share of improvements providing for this existing need.

To account for existing need in the TUMF Network, the cost for facilities identified as currently experiencing LOS E or F was adjusted. This was done by identifying the portion of any segment of the TUMF Network with a volume to capacity (v/c) ratio of greater than 0.9 (the threshold for LOS E) in the RivCoM 2018 Existing scenario and extracting the share of the overall facility cost to improve that portion. This cost adjustment provides for the mitigation of incremental traffic growth on those TUMF segments with an existing high level of congestion. The following approach was applied to account for incremental traffic growth associated with new development as part of the existing need methodology:

1. Facilities with an existing need were identified by reviewing the RivCoM 2018 Existing scenario assigned traffic on the 2021 existing network and delineating

Page 82 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 148 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 41 those facilities included on the TUMF Cost Fee Summary Table that have an average directional v/c exceeding 0.9011.
a. Weighted directional v/c values were used to determine existing need for network segments, which was calculated by:
i. Determining the length for the portion of each segment (model link), and calculating the ratio of link length to the overall segment length
ii. Generating the average directional v/c for each link, for both directions in AM and PM periods, and multiplying by link/segment length ratio
iii. Determining the maximum peak-period peak-direction v/c for each link, representing the highest directional v/c in either AM or PM
iv. Calculating weighted average v/c for each TUMF segment, based on the sum of all weighted max v/c values of each link within a segment

b. A similar method was used to determine existing need for spot improvements including interchanges, railroad crossings and bridges.

However, no weighting was used in the calculation of existing need for spot improvements. For these facilities, the peak-period peak-direction v/c values (highest directional v/c in either AM or PM) were utilized in the existing need calculation. This was based on the individual link within a network segment where a bridge or railroad crossing is located, or on- and off-ramps in the case of interchanges.

2. Initial costs of addressing the existing need were calculated by estimating the share of a particular roadway segments “new lane” cost, or individual spot improvement cost (including all associated ROW and soft costs).

3. Incremental growth in v/c was determined by comparing the average directional exisitng year v/c for the TUMF facilities (delineated under step one) with the horizon year v/c for the corresponding segments and spot improvements calculated based on the RivCoM 2045 No-Build scenario assigned traffic on the 2021 existing network using the same methodology as the existing year v/c.

11 The RivCoM 2021 Existing Network used for the TUMF Nexus Study analyses reflects the RivCoM 2018 base year network augmented to include highways facilities on the TUMF Network as they existed in December 2021. A second version of the base network was also developed adding only those facilities that had been identified on the 2016 TUMF Nexus study 2040 Build scenario that did not currently exist in December 2021 and therefore were not represented by a link(s) in the RivCoM base network. The Supplemental 2021 Existing Network was utilized as the basis for determining existing and future v/c for only those projects that did not currently exist on the 2021 TUMF Network.

Page 83 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 149 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 42 4. The proportion of the incremental growth attributable to new development was determined by dividing the result of step three with the total 2045 No-Build scenario v/c exceeding LOS E.

5. For those segments experiencing a net increase in v/c over the base year, TUMF will ‘discount’ the cost of existing need improvements by the proportion of the incremental v/c growth through 2045 No-Build compared to the 2018 Baseline v/c (up to a maximum of 100%).

The unfunded cost of existing highway improvement needs (including the related MSHCP obligation) totals $582.6 million. Appendix H includes a detailed breakdown of the existing highway improvement needs on the TUMF network, including the associated unfunded improvement cost estimate for each segment and spot improvement experiencing unacceptable LOS.

For transit service improvements, the cost to provide for existing demand was determined by multiplying the total transit component cost by the share of future transit trips representing existing demand. The cost of existing transit service improvement needs is $63.0 million representing 28.9% of the TUMF transit component. Appendix H includes tables reflecting the calculation of the existing transit need share and the existing transit need cost.

4.7 Maximum TUMF Eligible Cost

A total of $382.9 million in obligated funding was identified for improvements to the TUMF system. Since these improvements are already funded with other available revenue sources, the funded portion of these projects cannot also be funded with TUMF revenues. Furthermore, the total cost of the unfunded existing improvement need is $646.9 million. These improvements are needed to mitigate existing transportation deficiencies and therefore their costs cannot be assigned to new development through TUMF.

Based on the estimated costs described in Sections 4.3 and 4.4, the total value to complete the identified TUMF network and transit improvements, and administer the program is $5.28 billion. Having accounted for obligated funds and unfunded existing needs as described in Sections 4.5 and 4.6, respectively, the estimated maximum eligible value of the TUMF Program is $4.24 billion. The maximum eligible value of the TUMF Program includes approximately $3.87 billion in eligible arterial highway and street related improvements and $154.8 million in eligible transit related improvements. An additional $53.9 million is eligible as part of the TUMF Program to mitigate the impact of eligible TUMF related arterial highway and street projects on critical native species and wildlife habitat, while $161.2 million is provided to cover the costs incurred by WRCOG to administer the TUMF Program.

Figure 4.4 illustrates the various improvements to the RSHA included as part of the TUMF network cost calculation. Table 4.4 summarizes the TUMF network cost calculations for each of the individual segments. This table also identifies the maximum eligible TUMF share for each segment having accounted for obligated funding and unfunded

Page 84 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 150 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 43 existing need. A detailed breakdown of the individual cost components and values for the various TUMF Network segments is included in Appendix H. Table 4.5 outlines the detailed transit component cost estimates. It should be noted that the detailed cost tables (and fee levels) are subject to regular review and updating by WRCOG and therefore WRCOG should be contacted directly to obtain the most recently adopted version of these tables (and to confirm the corresponding fee level).

Page 85 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 151 of 606 ends

Page 86 of 423 ends

20.B.

Page 152 of 606 ends

WRCOG Adopted by WRCOG Executive Committee
TUMF Nexus Study – 2024 Program Update September 9, 2024 45 Table 4.4 - TUMF Network Cost Estimates

AREA PLAN DIST CITY STREETNAME SEGMENTFROM SEGMENTTO TOTAL COST MAXIMUM TUMF SHARE Central Menifee Ethanac Goetz Murrieta $0 $0
Central Menifee Ethanac Murrieta I-215 $0 $0
Central Menifee Ethanac I-215 interchange $32,698,000 $32,698,000 Central Menifee Ethanac Sherman Matthews $2,674,000 $2,674,000 Central Menifee Ethanac BNSF San Jacinto Branch railroad crossing $105,560,000 $105,560,000 Central Menifee Menifee SR-74 (Pinacate) Simpson $1,307,000 $1,307,000 Central Menifee Menifee Salt Creek bridge $4,384,000 $4,384,000 Central Menifee Menifee Simpson Aldergate $0 $0
Central Menifee Menifee Aldergate Newport $0 $0
Central Menifee Menifee Newport Holland $0 $0
Central Menifee Menifee Holland Garbani $0 $0
Central Menifee Menifee Garbani Scott $4,353,000 $4,353,000 Central Menifee Menifee/Whitewood Scott Murrieta City Limit $0 $0 Central Menifee Newport Goetz Murrieta $0 $0
Central Menifee Newport Murrieta I-215 $1,130,000 $1,130,000 Central Menifee Newport I-215 Menifee $0 $0
Central Menifee Newport Menifee Lindenberger $0 $0
Central Menifee Newport Lindenberger SR-79 (Winchester) $0 $0 Central Menifee Scott I-215 Briggs $8,635,000 $8,635,000 Central Menifee Scott I-215 interchange $0 $0
Central Menifee Scott Sunset Murrieta $4,388,000 $4,388,000 Central Menifee Scott Murrieta I-215 $16,949,000 $12,949,000 Central Menifee SR-74 Matthews Briggs $8,254,000 $8,254,000 Central Moreno Valley Alessandro I-215 Perris $13,420,000 $13,420,000 Central Moreno Valley Alessandro Perris Nason $0 $0
Central Moreno Valley Alessandro Nason Moreno Beach $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Alessandro Moreno Beach Gilman Springs $18,019,000 $18,019,000 Central Moreno Valley Gilman Springs SR-60 Alessandro $7,291,000 $7,291,000 Central Moreno Valley Gilman Springs SR-60 interchange $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Perris Reche Vista Ironwood $0 $0 Central Moreno Valley Perris Ironwood Sunnymead $0 $0
Central Moreno Valley Perris SR-60 interchange $32,698,000 $11,192,000 Central Moreno Valley Perris Sunnymead Cactus $0 $0
Central Moreno Valley Perris Cactus Harley Knox $0 $0
Central Moreno Valley Reche Vista Country Heacock $7,486,000 $3,799,000 Central Perris 11th/Case Perris Goetz $4,582,000 $4,582,000 Central Perris Case Goetz I-215 $20,876,000 $20,876,000 Central Perris Case San Jacinto River bridge $1,740,000 $1,235,000 Central Perris Ethanac Keystone Goetz $6,056,000 $6,056,000 Central Perris Ethanac San Jacinto River bridge $5,568,000 $5,568,000 Central Perris Ethanac I-215 Sherman $5,316,000 $5,316,000 Central Perris Goetz Case Ethanac $1,507,000 $999,000 Central Perris Goetz San Jacinto River bridge $5,568,000 $3,398,000 Central Perris Mid-County (Placentia) I-215 Perris $15,655,000 $15,655,000 Central Perris Mid-County (Placentia) I-215 interchange $0 $0 Central Perris Mid-County (Placentia) Perris Evans $22,985,000 $22,985,000 Central Perris Mid-County (Placentia) Perris Valley Storm Channel bridge $8,352,000 $8,352,000 Central Perris Perris Harley Knox Ramona $0 $0
Central Perris Perris Ramona Citrus $7,063,000 $7,063,000 Central Perris Perris Citrus Nuevo $0 $0
Central Perris Perris Nuevo 11th $6,927,000 $6,927,000
Central Perris Perris I-215 overcrossing bridge $0 $0
Central Perris Ramona I-215 Perris $5,039,000 $5,039,000 Central Perris Ramona I-215 interchange $32,698,000 $7,725,000 Central Perris Ramona Perris Evans $0 $0
Central Perris Ramona Evans Mid-County (2,800 ft E of Rider) $0 $0 Central Perris SR-74 (4th) Ellis I-215 $0 $0
Central Unincorporated Ethanac SR-74 Keystone $4,666,000 $4,666,000 Central Unincorporated Gilman Springs Alessandro Bridge Road $30,601,000 $30,601,000 Central Unincorporated Menifee Nuevo SR-74 (Pinacate) $16,684,000 $16,684,000 Central Unincorporated Mid-County Evans Ramona (2,800 ft E of Rider) $12,156,000 $12,156,000 Central Unincorporated Mid-County (Ramona) Ramona (2,800 ft E of Rider) Pico Avenue $0 $0 Central Unincorporated Mid-County (Ramona) Pico Avenue Bridge Road $47,769,000 $47,769,000 Central Unincorporated Mid-County (Ramona) San Jacinto River bridge $36,192,000 $36,192,000 Central Unincorporated Reche Canyon San Bernardino County Reche Vista $0 $0 Central Unincorporated Reche Vista Reche Canyon Country $0 $0 Central Unincorporated Scott Briggs SR-79 (Winchester) $0 $0 Central Unincorporated SR-74 Ethanac Ellis $0 $0
Northwest Corona Cajalco I-15 Temescal Canyon $0 $0
Northwest Corona Cajalco I-15 interchange $0 $0
Northwest Corona Foothill Paseo Grande Lincoln $0 $0
Northwest Corona Foothill Wardlow Wash bridge $0 $0
Northwest Corona Foothill Lincoln California $0 $0
Northwest Corona Foothill California I-15 $0 $0
Northwest Corona Green River SR-91 Dominguez Ranch $0 $0 Northwest Corona Green River Dominguez Ranch Palisades $0 $0 Northwest Corona Green River Palisades Paseo Grande $0 $0 Northwest Eastvale Schleisman San Bernardino County 600' e/o Cucamonga Creek $648,000 $648,000 Northwest Eastvale Schleisman Cucamonga Creek bridge $0 $0 Northwest Eastvale Schleisman 600' e/o Cucamonga Creek Harrison $866,000 $866,000 Northwest Eastvale Schleisman Harrison Sumner $488,000 $488,000 Northwest Eastvale Schleisman Sumner Scholar $7,625,000 $7,625,000 Northwest Eastvale Schleisman Scholar A Street $119,000 $119,000 Northwest Eastvale Schleisman A Street Hamner $209,000 $209,000

Page 87 of 423 ends

Hemet City CouncilFebruary 25, 2025

Hemet City Council
February 25, 2025