Irwindale City Council
December 11, 2024

CITY OF IRWINDALE
5050 N. IRWINDALE AVE., IRWINDALE CA 91706 • PHONE: (626) 430-2200

NOTICE AND AGENDA FOR THE AMENDED SPECIAL AND

REGULAR MEETING OF THE

CITY COUNCIL

SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE

IRWINDALE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY

HOUSING AUTHORITY

RECLAMATION AUTHORITY
December 11, 2024
SPECIAL MEETING – 5:15 P.M.

REGULAR MEETING – 6:00 PM
ALBERT F. AMBRIZ - Mayor
LARRY G. BURROLA - Mayor Pro Tem
MARK A. BRECEDA - Councilmember
MANUEL R. GARCIA - Councilmember
H. MANUEL ORTIZ - Councilmember
Via Zoom Webinar: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87104592389 In the event that a Zoom broadcast is unavailable, staff will promptly notify the public through its social media platforms. The public meeting will proceed in accordance with The Brown Act.

Listen Over Phone: 1-669-900-6833; Webinar ID: 871-0459-2389

December 11, 2024

Spontaneous Communications: The public is encouraged to address the City Council on any matter listed on the agenda or on any other matter within its jurisdiction. The City Council will hear public comments on items listed on the agenda during discussion of the matter and prior to a vote. The City Council will hear public comments on matters not listed on the agenda during the Spontaneous Communications period.

Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future City Council meeting.

Americans with Disabilities Act: In compliance with the ADA and Government Code section 54953(g), the City Council has adopted a reasonable accommodation policy to swiftly resolve accommodation requests. The policy can be found on the City’s website: https://www.irwindaleca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/8075/AB2449-Reasonable-Accommodation-Policy. If you need special assistance to participate in a City Council or Commission meeting or other services offered by this City, including an electronic or printed copy of the City’s reasonable accommodation policy, please contact City Hall at (626) 430-2200. Notification of at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service.

Note: Staff reports are available for inspection at the office of the Chief Deputy City Clerk, City Hall, 5050 N.

Irwindale Avenue, during regular business hours (8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Thursday).

Compensation for Board Members: Compensation for the members of the Irwindale City Council is $750.16 a month. In accordance with Government Code Section 54952.3, Councilmembers will not receive any additional compensation or stipend for the convening of the regular meetings of the Successor Agency to the Irwindale Community Redevelopment Agency. Councilmembers will receive additional compensation of $50/meeting, not to exceed $150 per month, for the convening the regular meetings of the Irwindale Housing Authority and an additional compensation of $300/meeting for convening the regular meetings of the Irwindale Reclamation Authority.

December 11, 2024

Code of Ethics
As City of Irwindale Council Members, our fundamental duty is to serve the public good. We are committed to the principle of an efficient and professional local government. We will be exemplary in obeying the letter and spirit of Local, State and Federal laws and City policies affecting the operation of the government and in our private life. We will be independent and impartial in our judgment and actions.

We will work for the common good of the City of Irwindale community and not for any private or personal interest. We will endeavor to treat all people with respect and civility. We will commit to observe the highest standards of morality and integrity, and to faithfully discharge the duties of our office regardless of personal consideration. We shall refrain from abusive conduct, personal charges or verbal attacks upon the character or motives of others.

We will inform ourselves on public issues, listen attentively to public discussions before the body, and focus on the business at hand. We will base our decisions on the merit and substance of that business. We will be fair and equitable in all actions, claims or transactions. We shall not use our official position to influence government decisions in which we have a financial interest or where we have a personal relationship that could present a conflict of interest, or create a perception of a conflict of interest.

We shall not take advantage of services or opportunities for personal gain by virtue of our public office that are not available to the public in general. We shall refrain from accepting gifts, favors or promises of future benefit that might compromise our independence of judgment or action or give the appearance of being compromised.

We will behave in a manner that does not bring discredit or embarrassment to the City of Irwindale. We will be honest in thought and deed in both our personal and official lives.

Ultimate responsibility for complying with this Code of Ethics rests with the individual elected official. In addition to any other penalty as provided by law, violation of this Code of Ethics may be used as a basis for disciplinary action or censure of a Council Member.

These things we hereby pledge to do in the interest and purposes for which our government has been established.

Irwindale City Council

December 11, 2024

SPECIAL MEETING

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL: Councilmembers: Mark A. Breceda, Manuel R. Garcia, H. Manuel Ortiz; Mayor Pro Tem Larry G. Burrola; Mayor Albert F. Ambriz

3. AB 2449 DISCLOSURES
Remote participation by a member of the legislative body for just cause or emergency circumstances

4. SPONTANEOUS COMMUNICATIONS
Spontaneous communications are limited to the special meeting agenda items only.

5. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Request to Approve Amendment No. 1 to the Amended and Restated Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Between the City of Irwindale and the City of Azusa for the Development of the City of Irwindale-owned North Kincaid Pit, which is Located within the Boundaries of Both Jurisdictions (APNs: 8616-022-905, 8616-022-906 & 8616-001-270) Agenda amended on Tuesday, 12/10/24 at 5:00 p.m. to add Item 5A Department: Engineering
Recommendation: (1) Approve the attached Amended and Restated MOU between the City of Irwindale and the City of Azusa for the development of the City of Irwindale-owned North Kincaid Pit, which is located within the boundaries of both jurisdictions; and (2) Authorize the City Manager to execute the amended and restated Memorandum of Understanding, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, on behalf of the City.

6. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
A. Public Employee Performance Evaluation
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54957

Title: City Manager
B. Conference with Real Property Negotiator
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54956.8
Property: 14905 Los Angeles Street, Irwindale CA
Agency Negotiator: Julian Miranda, Executive Director
Negotiating Parties: Marianna Diaz
Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment

December 11, 2024

Property: 5059 Allen Drive (APN 8417-030-004)
Agency Negotiator: Theresa Olivares, Assistant City Manager Negotiating Parties: HH and TJY Investment Company
Under Negotiation: Price and terms

7. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION

8. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION

9. ADJOURNMENT

REGULAR MEETING

10. CALL TO ORDER

11. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

12. INVOCATION

13. ROLL CALL: Councilmembers: Albert F. Ambriz, Mark A. Breceda, Larry G. Burrola, Manuel R.

Garcia, and H. Manuel Ortiz;

14. AB 2449 DISCLOSURES
Remote participation by a member of the legislative body for just cause or emergency circumstances

15. CHANGES TO THE AGENDA

16. COUNCIL MEMBER TRAVEL REPORTS

17. DECLARING RESULTS OF NOVEMBER 5, 2024 ELECTION
A. Declaring Results of November 5, 2024 General Municipal Election Department: City Clerk
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2024-107-3584 entitled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE, CALIFORNIA, RECITING THE FACT OF THE CONSOLIDATED GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION HELD ON NOVEMBER 5, 2024, ACCEPTING THE OFFICIAL CANVASS

AND OFFICIAL STATEMENT OF VOTES CAST FROM THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES REGISTRAR RECORDER’S OFFICE, AND DECLARING THE RESULTS AND SUCH OTHER MATTERS AS PROVIDED BY LAW” reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof.

18. ADMINISTRATION OF OATHS OF OFFICE TO MARK A. BRECEDA, LARRY G. BURROLA, AND MANUEL R.

GARCIA

19. REORGANIZATION OF CITY COUNCIL

December 11, 2024

A. Reorganization of the City Council
Department: City Clerk
Recommendation: Councilmembers elect Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore.

20. ROLL CALL OF NEWLY SEATED CITY COUNCIL

21. COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS

22. INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEES/PROMOTIONS

23. PROCLAMATIONS / PRESENTATIONS / COMMENDATIONS
A. Farewell Message from U.S. Congresswoman Grace Napolitano

24. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approve the minutes of the Special/Regular/Joint meetings held October 23, 2024, October 30, 2024, and November 13, 2024
Department: City Clerk
Recommendation: Approve
B. Warrants / Demands / Payroll
Department: Finance
Recommendation: Approve
C. Approval of the 2025 Local Appointments List
Department: City Clerk
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2024-89-3566 entitled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, REGARDING THE PREPARATION OF THE 2025 LOCAL APPOINTMENTS LIST AND POSTING OF THE SAME” reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof.

D. Development Impact Fee Compliance Report Required Pursuant to Government Code § 66006.

Department: Finance
Recommendation:

That the City Council review, receive and file the Development Impact Fee Compliance Report for Fiscal Year ending on June 30, 2024.

E. Award a Professional Services Agreement to Willdan Financial Services for Development Impact Fee Study Update
Department: Finance

December 11, 2024

Recommendation: That the City Council of the City of Irwindale authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with Willdan Financial Services for a Development Impact Fee Study Update for an amount not to exceed $65,520.

F. Amendment No. 1 to Contract Services Agreement with PlanetBids, Inc. for Electronic Procurement Software System Services.

Department: Finance
Recommendation: That the City Council of Irwindale Approve Amendment No. 1 to the Contract Services Agreement with PlanetBids, Inc. for Electronic Procurement (eProcurement) Software System Services, and authorize the City Manager to enter into Amendment No. 1 to the Contract Services Agreement with PlanetBids, Inc, subject to City Attorney approval as to form.

G. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 781 Establishing a Supplemental Transactions and Use Tax Ordinance, Adoption of Resolution No. 2024-99-3576 Approving Administrative Agreements with the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, and Resolution No. 2024-100-3577 Authorizing the Examination of Transactions and Use Tax Records, and Approving Professional Services Agreement with Hinderliter, de Llamas and Associates Department: Finance
Recommendation: (1) Adopt on second reading by title only with further reading waived Ordinance No. 781 entitled, “AN ORDINANCE OF THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE, CALIFORNIA ADDING CHAPTER 3.58 TO TITLE 3 OF THE IRWINDALE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ENACT A

SUPPLEMENTAL TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX (SALES TAX) AT A RATE OF ONE-QUARTER OF A PERCENT (1/4%), EFFECTIVE AFTER LOS ANGELES COUNTY MEASURE H EXPIRES OR REPEALS, TO BE ADMINISTERED BY THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TAX AND FEE ADMINISTRATION”; and (2) Adopt Resolution No. 2024-99-3576 entitled: “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF IRWINDALE AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS WITH THE

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TAX AND FEE ADMINISTRATION TO ADMINISTER AND OPERATE THE CITY’S SUPPLEMENTAL TRANSACTIONS AND USE (SALES) TAX”; and (3) Adopt Resolution No. 2024-100-3577 entitled: “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE DESIGNATING AND AUTHORIZING CERTAIN CITY EMPLOYEES TO REVIEW AND EXAMINE THE CITY’S

TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX RECORDS OF THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TAX AND FEE ADMINISTRATION”; and (4) Authorize a professional services agreement with Hinderliter, de Llamas and Associates (HdL) for transactions tax audit and information services.

H. Amendment to Post Office Lease
Department: Finance
Recommendation: That the City Council approve the Amendment to the Lease between the City of Irwindale and the United States Postal Service for the extension of the lease of the post office site located at 16025 Calle Del Norte, Irwindale and authorize the City Manager to enter into a lease renewal agreement with the United States Post Office and broker agreement with Jones, Lang LaSalle Americas, Inc. subject to City Attorney approval as to form.

I. Update and Expenditure Plan for Use of the Remaining American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Funding.

Department: Finance

December 11, 2024

Recommendation: That the City Council (1) Receive an update regarding the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA), and (2) Adopt Resolution No. 2024-108-3585 entitled, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Irwindale Amending the FY 2024-2025 Operating Budget and Appropriating American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds for Various City Needs".

J. Approval of Memorandum of Understanding with the Irwindale Police Officers' Association (IPOA) Department: Human Resources
Recommendation: Approve the Memorandum of Understanding by and between the City of Irwindale and the Irwindale Police Officers' Association July 1, 2024 – June 30, 2027.

K. Amendment No. 1 to Contract Services Agreement with Norman A. Traub Associates LLC for Personnel Investigative Services and Related Budget Appropriation Department: Human Resources
Recommendation: (1) Adopt Resolution No. 2024-101-3578 entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE AUTHORIZING THE APPROPRIATION OF FIFTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($55,000.00) FROM GENERAL FUND RESERVES FOR PERSONNEL INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF IRWINDALE AND NORMAN A. TRAUB ASSOCIATES LLC"; and (2) Approve Amendment No. 1 to Contract Services Agreement with Norman A. Traub LLC.

L. Contract Amendment No. 3 with LSA
Department: Community Development
Recommendation: Approve the attached Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement for Contract Services with LSA Associates, Inc. for the preparation and completion of the Initial Study and Environmental Impact Report to be prepared in association with land use entitlement applications for property located at 500 Speedway Drive, Irwindale, CA 91706.

M. Contract Amendment No. 2 - Environmental Science Associates (ESA) Department: Community Development
Recommendation: (1) Approve Amendment No. 2 to Agreement for Professional Services between the City of Irwindale and Environmental Science Associates (ESA) for a budget amendment in the amount of $139,581.00 to complete the Housing Element, Safety Element, and Environmental Justice Element and environmental document; and (2) Approve Resolution No. 2024-103-3580 entitled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2024/2025 BUDGET BY APPROPRIATING $139,581.00 FOR AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING CONTRACT WITH ENVIRONMENTAL

SCIENCE ASSOCIATES (ESA) TO COMPLETE THE PREPARATION OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT, SAFETY

ELEMENT, AND DEVELOPMENT OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT, AND THE APPROPRIATE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DOCUMENT”
N. Second Reading - Ordinance No. 790 to Add Chapter 9.68 of Title 9 to the Irwindale Municipal Code
Department: City Attorney

December 11, 2024

Recommendation: Adopt on second reading Ordinance No. 790, entitled: “AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE, ADDING CHAPTER 9.68 OF TITLE 9 TO THE

IRWINDALE MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROHIBIT UNLAWFUL CAMPING AND STORAGE OF PERSONAL PROPERTY.”
O. Second Reading - Ordinance No. 791 to Add Chapter 9.72 of Title 9 to the Irwindale Municipal Code
Department: City Attorney
Recommendation: Adopt on second reading Ordinance No. 791 entitled “AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE ADDING CHAPTER 9.72 OF TITLE 9 OF THE IRWINDALE

MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROHIBIT ANY UNSANCTIONED GOVERNMENT-SPONSORED RELOCATION OF UNHOUSED PERSONS TO THE CITY OF IRWINDALE.”
P. Approval of Construction Change Orders for the Aquatic Center Swimming Pool Renovation Project; P-1062
Department: Engineering
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2024-111-3588 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE (1) APPROVING CONSTRUCTION CHANGE ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF $290,856.92 FOR THE AQUATIC CENTER SWIMMING POOL RENOVATION PROJECT (P1062) TO INCREASE THE CONTRACT FROM $611,886.69 TO $902,743.61; AND (2) APPROVING AN UPDATED 10% PROJECT CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $90,274.36 TO COVER ANY UNFORESEEABLE CONDITIONS THAT MAY ARISE DURING CONSTRUCTION" Q. Acceptance of the Construction of the Irwindale Park Improvements Project Phase IV & V - P-1011 Department: Engineering
Recommendation: (1) Ratify changes to the original scope of work and accept the improvements and maintenance responsibilities for the constructed improvements for the Irwindale Park Improvements Project Phase IV & V; (2) approve the final construction project amount of $5,940,342.54; (3) authorize the City Clerk to record the Notice of Completion; (4) authorize the Finance Director to release the 5% retention amount for the construction project; and (5) adopt Resolution No. 2024-110-3587 entitled “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE APPROPRIATING AN ADDITIONAL $607,674.02 FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO THE IRWINDALE PARK IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT PHASE IV & V; P-1011”.

R. Declaration of Surplus Equipment
Department: Finance
Recommendation: Receive and file.

25. SPONTANEOUS COMMUNICATIONS
This is the time set aside for members of the audience speak on items not on this agenda that are within the City Council’s subject matter jurisdiction. State law prohibits any Council discussion or action on such communications unless 1) the Council by majority vote finds that a catastrophe or emergency exists; or 2) the Council by at least four votes finds that the matter (and need for action thereon) arose

December 11, 2024

within the last five days. Since the Council cannot participate (except as stated), it is requested that all such communications be made in writing to be included on the next agenda for full discussion and action
All members of the public are asked to observe the City’s Rules of Procedure and Public Meeting Decorum. The City’s Rules of Procedure and Public Meeting Decorum can be found on the City’s website, and Chapter 2.40 of the Irwindale Municipal Code. You may also contact the City Clerk’s Office for copies.

Each speaker will be limited to 3 minutes unless such time limits are extended. If a member of the public wishes to donate their time to another speaker, both persons must be physically present and in attendance of the meeting. The Presiding Officer may, in his or her discretion, extend the 3-minute time limitation for the particular subject for all speakers. Organized groups of persons wishing to address the Council on the same subject should select a spokesperson to represent the group, so as to avoid unnecessary repetition. In no event shall the total amount of speaking time for exceed 6 minutes per person for the subject under discussion.

The Council may regulate a speaker who is speaking too long or out of order, being unduly repetitious, discussing irrelevancies, or extending to items not within its subject matter jurisdiction. Please be reminded that discrimination, abusive use of profanity, unruly disruption, and violent or physically threatening conduct is discouraged. Members of the public shall not disrupt the orderly conduct of the meeting. The Presiding Officer will request that a person cease any disruptive conduct, and if not immediately stopped, will direct the person to be removed from the meeting.

Public Comments will be heard in the following order:
1: In-person attendees
2: Teleconference attendees
3: In-person and teleconference attendees who have not previously provided comments on the matter(s) being discussed by the legislative body

26. NEW BUSINESS
At this time, members of the audience may ask to be heard regarding an item on New Business.

A. Mayor's Appointments of Delegates and Alternates
Department: City Clerk
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2024-106-3583 entitled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE APPOINTING DELEGATES AND ALTERNATES AS OFFICIAL REPRESENTATIVES OF THE CITY" reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof.

B. Appointment of Parks & Recreation Commissioners
Department: City Clerk

December 11, 2024

Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2024-104-3581 entitled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE APPOINTING TWO (2) MEMBERS TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE” reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof.

C. Appointment of Senior Citizen Commissioners
Department: City Clerk
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2024-105-3582 entitled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE APPOINTING TWO (2) MEMBERS TO THE SENIOR CITIZEN COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE FOR TERMS EXPIRING DECEMBER 31, 2027” reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof.

D. Annual Report by City of Irwindale Inclusion Specialist (Verbal Presentation) Department: Public Services
Recommendation: Receive and file the City of Irwindale Inclusion Specialist Annual Report.

27. PUBLIC HEARINGS
At this time, members of the audience may ask to be heard regarding an item on Public Hearings.

28. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT

29. REQUESTS FOR AGENDA ITEMS BY CITY COUNCIL
If a City Council Member is interested in a task or project, the City Council Member shall request that the item be agendized in this section.

30. ADJOURN

SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE IRWINDALE COMMUNITY

REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY

31. AB 2449 DISCLOSURES
Remote participation by a member of the legislative body for just cause or emergency circumstances

32. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approve the minutes of the Regular meetings held October 23, 2024, and November 13, 2024 Department: City Clerk
Recommendation: Approve
B. Warrants / Demands / Payroll
Department: Finance
Recommendation: Approve

December 11, 2024

C. Consideration of Resolution No. SA 2024-102-3579 of the City of Irwindale as Successor Agency to the Irwindale Community Redevelopment Agency Approving a Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule and Administrative Budget for July 1, 2025 through June 30, 2026 Department: Finance
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. SA 2024-102-3579 entitled “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY

OF IRWINDALE AS SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE IRWINDALE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT

AGENCY APPROVING A RECOGNIZED OBLIGATION PAYMENT SCHEDULE AND ADMINISTRATIVE BUDGET FOR THE TWELVE-MONTH FISCAL PERIOD BEGINNING JULY 1, 2025 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2026.”

33. SPONTANEOUS COMMUNICATIONS
This is the time set aside for members of the audience to speak on items not on this agenda.

Spontaneous Communications for the Successor Agency are subject to the same State prohibitions and City guidelines as cited on the City Council agenda.

34. NEW BUSINESS
At this time, members of the audience may ask to be heard regarding an item on New Business.

35. PUBLIC HEARINGS
At this time, members of the audience may ask to be heard regarding an item on Public Hearings.

36. ADJOURN

HOUSING AUTHORITY

37. AB 2449 DISCLOSURES
Remote participation by a member of the legislative body for just cause or emergency circumstances

38. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approve the minutes of the Special/Regular/Joint meetings held October 23, 2024, October 30, 2024, and November 13, 2024
Department: City Clerk
Recommendation: Approve
B. SB 341 Annual Report for Fiscal Year (FY) 2023-2024
Department: Administration
Recommendation: Receive and file the SB 341 Annual Report for FY 2023-2024 and direct that such report be filed with the City of Irwindale City Clerk's office and the Department of Housing and Community Development.

C. AMENDED - Irwindale Housing Authority Annual Report for Fiscal Year (FY) 2023-2024 Department: Administration

December 11, 2024

Recommendation: Receive and file the FY 2023-2024 Amended Irwindale Housing Authority Annual Report and direct that such report be filed with the City of Irwindale City Clerk's office and the Department of Housing and Community Development.

39. SPONTANEOUS COMMUNICATIONS
This is the time set aside for members of the audience to speak on items not on this agenda.

Spontaneous Communications for the Housing Authority are subject to the same State prohibitions and City guidelines as cited on the City Council agenda.

40. NEW BUSINESS
At this time, members of the audience may ask to be heard regarding an item on New Business.

41. PUBLIC HEARINGS
At this time, members of the audience may ask to be heard regarding an item on Public Hearings.

42. ADJOURN

RECLAMATION AUTHORITY
As required by Government Code section 54954.3, members of the City Council are also members of the Reclamation Authority, which is concurrently convening with the City Council this evening and each Council Member is paid an additional stipend of $300 for attending the Reclamation Authority meeting.

43. AB 2449 DISCLOSURES
Remote participation by a member of the legislative body for just cause or emergency circumstances

44. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Minutes of the Regular Meeting held September 11, 2024 Department: City Clerk
Recommendation: Approve
B. 2024 Fourth Quarter Mining Report of Nine (9) SMARA Pits Department: Engineering
Recommendation: Receive and file this report.

C. Investment Quarterly Report for Fiscal Quarter Ending September 30, 2024 Department: Finance
Recommendation: Receive and file the Investment Quarterly Report for the fiscal quarter ending September 30, 2024.

45. SPONTANEOUS COMMUNICATIONS

December 11, 2024

This is the time set aside for members of the audience to speak on items not on this agenda.

Spontaneous Communications for the Reclamation Authority are subject to the same State prohibitions and City guidelines as cited on the City Council agenda.

46. NEW BUSINESS
At this time, members of the audience may ask to be heard regarding an item on New Business.

47. PUBLIC HEARINGS
At this time, members of the audience may ask to be heard regarding an item on Public Hearings.

48. ADJOURN

AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
I, Laura M. Nieto, Chief Deputy City Clerk, certify that I caused the agenda for the regular meeting of the City Council, Irwindale Successor Agency to the Irwindale Community Redevelopment Agency, Housing Authority, and Reclamation Authority, to be held on December 11, 2024, be posted at the City Hall, Library, and Post Office on December 7, 2024.

Laura M. Nieto, MMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk

Item #5.A.

Date: December 11, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Julian A. Miranda, City Manager
Issue: Request to Approve Amendment No. 1 to the Amended and Restated Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Between the City of Irwindale and the City of Azusa for the Development of the City of Irwindale-owned North Kincaid Pit, which is Located within the Boundaries of Both Jurisdictions (APNs: 8616-022-905, 8616-022-906 & 8616-001-270) Agenda amended on Tuesday, 12/10/24 at 5:00 p.m. to add Item 5A City Manager's Recommendation:
(1) Approve the attached Amended and Restated MOU between the City of Irwindale and the City of Azusa for the development of the City of Irwindale-owned North Kincaid Pit, which is located within the boundaries of both jurisdictions; and (2) Authorize the City Manager to execute the amended and restated Memorandum of Understanding, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, on behalf of the City.

Administrative Action:

Submitted / Prepared by:

Eddie Chan, Director of Engineering / Building Official Reviewed by:

Adrian R. Guerra, City Attorney
Kambiz Borhani, Finance Director / City Treasurer

Approved by:

Julian A. Miranda, City Manager
Background and Analysis:

The North and South Kincaid Pits were an unimproved former mining quarry owned by the City and located within the boundaries of both the City of Irwindale and City of Azusa, with a total area of approximately 35 acres. The Cities of Irwindale and Azusa previously entered into an MOU on July 23, 2003, for the purposes of developing the North Kincaid Pit. However, land use entitlements were not obtained, and the development proposal never materialized due to the property's local water retention significance. In 2005, the North Kincaid Pit was purchased by the former Irwindale Community Redevelopment Agency.

Following approval of the Long-Range Property Management Plan in December 2014, the City purchased the Kincaid Pit for government purposes to secure access for water basin maintenance. In 2015, staff identified a solution to move water through the North Kincaid pit to the South Kincaid pit to allow for commercial development purposes on the North Kincaid site. A Notice of Exemption for the grading operation was prepared and filed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the City's Environmental Guidelines in order to fill the North Kincaid pit and prepare it for future development. In February 2017, a new MOU between Irwindale and Azusa was approved, but never fully executed. On June 14, 2017, Five Points, LLC (Developer) purchased the Kincaid Pit from the City.

On December 18, 2018, the City Council approved the amended and restated MOU to reaffirm the commitment to the commercial development of the North Kincaid site and describe the process for the remediation, grading, and backfilling of the North Pit and the use of the South Pit as a retention basin designed to receive stormwater flows from the North pit.

The Kincaid Pit is located within the boundaries of both the City of Irwindale and City of Azusa, east of Irwindale Avenue and bisected by the 1-210 Freeway, which divides the pit into the North Pit and South Pit. The 6.21-acre site (located in Irwindale) and the 8.67-acre site (located in Azusa) collectively make up the North pit and are occupied by two freeway oriented digital billboards. In an effort to improve the condition of the site and positively affect the local economy, staff within the Cities of Irwindale and Azusa believe the development of the Kincaid Pit is best accomplished through a cooperative agreement between the Cities and the Developer. Such an agreement will assure a consistent project design and efficient approval and development process. Concurrent with the remediation operations in the North Pit, stormwater drainage improvements would be installed to convey stormwater under the I-210 Freeway to the South Pit.

It is now necessary for the City Council to consider Amendment No. 1 to the amended and restated MOU between the City of Irwindale and the City of Azusa to memorialize the understanding for the processing and administration of the Remediation Phase and Development Phase of the site.

The MOU contains the following elements:
• Identifies that the Remediation Phase must go through each city's permitting process. • Each City will collect their corresponding engineering, plan check, permitting, and inspection fees.
• Irwindale will be the lead agency responsible for processing the environmental reviews for the project, and Azusa will be a responsible agency.
• Irwindale will obtain the environmental consultant, subject to Azusa's approval.

Fiscal Impact:

Both Cities have incurred legal costs to prepare and negotiate the subject MOU as part of their due process. However, the costs associated with the execution of the MOU will be fully borne by the Developer, including the remediation and fill operation that must be completed before any development can take place.

Attachments:

1. Amendment No. 1 to Amended and Restated MOU for Developoment of Kincaid Pit by and Between the City of Irwindale and the City of Azusa

2. 2018 Amended and Restated MOU for Development of Kincaid Pit

01005.0006/1037240.2
AMENDMENT NO. 1

TO AMENDED AND RESTATED MEMORANDUM OF

UNDERSTANDING FOR DEVELOPMENT OF KINCAID PIT BY AND

BETWEEN THE CITY OF IRWINDALE AND THE CITY OF AZUSA
This AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AMENDED AND RESTATED MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR DEVELOPMENT OF KINCAID PIT (“Amendment No. 1”) by and between the CITY OF IRWINDALE (“Irwindale”) and the CITY OF AZUSA (“Azusa”) is effective as of the __ day of _______, 2024. Irwindale and Azusa are sometimes referred to herein individually as “party” or collectively as “parties.”

RECITALS
A. The Kincaid Pit is unimproved real property located within the boundaries of both Irwindale and Azusa and is bisected by the 210 Freeway, divided into the North Pit and the South Pit (referred to herein as “Site”).

B. Irwindale and Azusa entered into that certain Memorandum of Understanding for Development of Kincaid Pit dated July 23, 2003. The parties approved a new Memorandum of Understanding by action of Irwindale’s City Council on February 22, 2017 and Azusa’s City Council on February 6, 2017 (“2017 MOU”), which was never fully executed.

C. Thereafter, the parties entered into an Amended and Restated Memorandum of Understanding for Development of Kincaid Pit dated December 12, 2018 (“Agreement”), which amended and restated the 2017 MOU in its entirety for the purposes of reaffirming the Parties’ commitment to the development of the Site through continuous cooperation to accomplish development of the site as a major regional retail center.

D. The Agreement divided the development of the Site into two phases, the remediation and grading phase (“Remediation Phase”), and implementation of land use entitlements and development of commercial and/or industrial facilities (“Development Phase”).

It was understood and agreed by the parties that the Development Phase must go through a land use entitlement process to be determined by each city and would be subject to noticed public hearings.

E. The Parties desire to memorialize their agreement and understanding that each City shall be responsible for the processing and administration of the Remediation Phase and Development Phase within the boundary of their jurisdiction.

01005.0006/1037240.2
TERMS

1. Contract Changes. The Agreement is amended as provided herein. a. Section 1.02, “Purpose of Agreement”, is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows (added text shown in bold italics, deleted text shown in strikethrough):
“This Agreement amends and restates the 2017 MOU in its entirety. This Agreement identifies the steps the parties will follow to process the Remediation of the Site. It is expressly understood and agreed by the parties that the Remediation Phase must go through a permitting process to be determined by each City. It is expressly understood and agreed by the parties that the Development Phase must go through a land use entitlement process to be determined by each City and will be subject to noticed public hearings. The parties agree to cooperate and coordinate processing of each jurisdiction’s respective permit processes and/or entitlement processes as well as inspection and oversight of the Remediation Phase concurrently, to the extent reasonably possible. Nothing herein shall imply any prejudgment concerning the Development Project nor does this Agreement imply any obligation on the part of any party to enter into any agreement or approve any particular land use entitlement that may result from the negotiations contemplated herein.”
b. Section 2.01, “Remediation Phase”, is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows (added text shown in bold italics, deleted text shown in strikethrough):
“On July 25, 2018, Irwindale approved that certain Agreement for Performance of Remediation and Grading Work, which in relevant part, describes the Remediation the Developer must follow to include removal of deleterious materials below the present pit bottom at the Site in compliance with California Regional Quality Control Board requirements, importation of clean soil fill materials, receipt, placement and compaction of up Los Angeles County generated debris basin sediment, and construction of a storm water retention and detention basins and related surface storm water drainage improvements. Irwindale does not anticipate any further approvals required from the Irwindale City Council to accomplish the Remediation. Similarly, Azusa has confirmed that the approval of grading and other related permits to allow for the Remediation may be accomplished administratively and that no public hearing is required. Azusa currently has one open permit GRD-19-01 at the Site, which it shall continue to process until the permit is closed, and collect the requisite fees according to Azusa’s fee schedule. To this end, both Azusa and Irwindale will be responsible for administering process all such permits required for the Remediation Phase in a timely manner so that the timeline set forth in Section 2.03 is not delayed.

Said permit(s) shall be issued upon the mutual completion of the engineering plan check performed by each City and in concurrence with the permit procurement procedures of each agency, including but not limited to the developer’s payment of permit fees, furnishing a certificate of insurance, and procuring City business license. Each City will perform inspection and oversight over the permits issued from their jurisdiction, and will coordinate inspection and oversight over the

01005.0006/1037240.2
Remediation Phase. The parties agree that no further agreements are required to be processed between themselves to accomplish the Remediation Phase.” c. A new subsection (a), “Fees”, is hereby added to Section 2.01, “Remediation Phase” of the Agreement, to read in its entirety as follows:
“Each City will collect their corresponding engineering, plan check, permitting, and inspection fees for those portions of the Site located within their boundaries, respectively, in accordance with their respective schedule of fees. Each City shall be separately and solely responsible for collection of any applicable fees from the developer.”
d. Section 2.02, “Development Phase”, is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows (added text shown in bold italics, deleted text shown in strikethrough):
“Irwindale and Azusa will process those Project entitlements for the portions of the Site located within their boundaries, respectively. To the extent permitted by law, the parties will cooperate to process the separate land use entitlement applications for the Development Phase simultaneously pursuant to each jurisdiction’s Development Code and any applicable state planning and zoning law requirements. Such cooperation may include, but is not limited to, cooperation in the preparation of environmental documents to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and holding joint public hearings by Irwindale and Azusa to consider Project entitlements.

Irwindale will be the lead agency principally responsible for processing the environmental reviews necessary for the Project. As permitted under CEQA, Azusa will be a responsible agency, and cooperate with Irwindale in the preparation of any environmental document required for the Project and utilize such documents for its consideration in adopting mitigation measures and issuing necessary entitlements for the Project. Irwindale shall be responsible for obtaining an environmental consultant, subject to approval by Azusa not to be unreasonably withheld.” e. A new subsection (a), “Fees”, is hereby added to Section 2.02, “Development Phase” of the Agreement, to read in its entirety as follows:
“The parties will collect all land use entitlement fees for those portions of the Site located within their boundaries, respectively, and in accordance with each party’s comprehensive fee schedule.”

2. Continuing Effect of Agreement. Except as amended by this Amendment No. 1, all provisions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect. From and after the date of this Amendment No. 1, whenever the term “Agreement” appears in the Agreement, it shall mean the Agreement, as amended by Amendment No. 1.

3. Affirmation of Agreement; Warranty Re Absence of Defaults. Irwindale and Azusa each ratify and reaffirm each and every one of the respective rights and obligations arising under the Agreement. Each party represents and warrants to the other that there have been no written or

01005.0006/1037240.2
oral modifications to the Agreement other than as provided herein. Each party represents and warrants to the other that the Agreement is currently an effective, valid, and binding obligation.

Azusa represents and warrants to Irwindale that, as of the date of this Amendment No. 1, Irwindale is not in default of any material term of the Agreement and that there have been no events that, with the passing of time or the giving of notice, or both, would constitute a material default under the Agreement.

Irwindale represents and warrants to Azusa that, as of the date of this Amendment No. 1, Azusa is not in default of any material term of the Agreement and that there have been no events that, with the passing of time or the giving of notice, or both, would constitute a material default under the Agreement.

4. Adequate Consideration. The parties hereto irrevocably stipulate and agree that they have each received adequate and independent consideration for the performance of the obligations they have undertaken pursuant to this Amendment No. 1.

5. Authority. The persons executing this Amendment No. 1 on behalf of the parties hereto warrant that (i) such party is duly organized and existing, (ii) they are duly authorized to execute and deliver this Amendment No. 1 on behalf of said party, (iii) by so executing this Amendment No. 1, such party is formally bound to the provisions of the Agreement, as amended and (iv) the entering into this Amendment No. 1 does not violate any provision of any other agreement to which said party is bound.
[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]

01005.0006/1037240.2
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 1 on the date and year first-above written.

CITY OF IRWINDALE
By:

Julian A. Miranda, City Manager
ATTEST:

Laura M. Nieto, Chief Deputy City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Adrian R. Guerra, City Attorney

CITY OF AZUSA
By:

Sergio Gonzales, City Manager
ATTEST:

City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

City Attorney

AMENDED AND RESTATED MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

FOR DEVELOPMENT OF KINCAID PIT
This AMENDED AND RESTA D MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
Agreement") is made this 11& day ofeCL*Mb- 1 72018, by and among the CITY OF IRWINDALE (°` Irwindale"), and the CITY OF AZUSA (" Azusa") Irwindale and Azusa are sometimes hereinafter referred to individually as " party" or collectively as " parties."

RECITALS
The parties enter into this Agreement on the basis of the following facts, understandings, and intentions.

A. The Kincaid Pit (i) is unimproved real property located within the boundaries of both Irwindale and Azusa, ( ii) is bisected by the 210 Freeway and divided into the North Pit and the South Pit, and ( iii) is depicted on Exhibit " A" attached hereto and incorporated herein Site").

B. Irwindale and Azusa each have jurisdiction over permitting of any development over that portion of the Site within their respective boundaries, and believe that the development of the Site is best accomplished through a cooperative agreement among Irwindale, Azusa, and Developer to assure a consistent and efficient approval and development process.

C. The parties anticipate that the filling operation required to rehabilitate the Site from the condition left by the effects of mining require significant investment. The fill operation is scheduled to take approximately forty- eight ( 48) months after the full execution of this Agreement to complete and significant funds will be required to place engineered fill at the Site.

D. The parties previously entered into that certain Memorandum of Understanding for Development of Kincaid Pit dated July 23, 2003. Thereafter, the parties approved a new Memorandum of Understanding by action of Irwindale' s City Council on February 22, 2017 and Azusa' s City Council on February 6, 2017 (" 2017 MOU"), which was never fully executed.

E. The parties now wish to amend and restate the 2017 MOU by this MOU to reaffirm the parties' commitment to the development of Kincaid Pit through continuous cooperation to accomplish development of the Site as a major regional retail center.

Preliminarily, the parties wish to describe the process for the remediation of grading of the Site through this MOU and generally describe the steps required for implementing zoning and land use changes to facilitate the future development of improvements thereon, subject to the approval of separate instruments by the parties, as described herein.

AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, incorporating and in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein; parties mutually agree to the following:

SECTION 1. NATURE OF NEGOTIATIONS.
1

1. 01 Good Faith. Irwindale and Azusa agree that, for the period set forth in Section

3. 01 herein (" Negotiation Period"), they will negotiate diligently and in good faith to process the grading and development of the Site (" Project") in two ( 2) phases, the remediation and grading phase ( collectively " Remediation Phase") and implementation of land use entitlements and development of commercial and/ or industrial facilities (" Development Phase"). The Remediation Phase will be processed by the parties as set forth in this Agreement. The Development Phase, on the other hand, will require the parties to prepare and enter into any agreement necessary or desirable (" Development Instruments") to allow for entitlement approvals and the development of the Site consistent with the provisions of this Agreement, all rules, regulations, standards, and criteria set forth in the respective Cities' General Plans, and any applicable zoning regulations that may hereinafter be adopted by the parties for their respective jurisdictions. The Project will be processed by Irwindale and Azusa and accomplished by Five Points, LLC, the developer selected by Irwindale, and its subcontractors ( collectively, Developer"), and subject to the terms Irwindale, Azusa, and the selected Developer agree upon.

1. 02 Purpose of Agreement. This Agreement amends and restates the 2017 MOU in its entirety. This Agreement identifies the steps the parties will follow to process the Remediation of the Site. It is expressly understood and agreed by the parties that the Development Phase must go through a land use entitlement process to be determined by each City and will be subject to noticed public hearings. Nothing herein shall imply any prejudgment concerning the Development Project nor does this Agreement imply any obligation on the part of any party to enter into any agreement or approve any particular land use entitlement that may result from the negotiations contemplated herein.

SECTION 2. REMEDIATION AND DEVELOPMENT PHASES.

2. 01 Remediation Phase. On July 25, 2018, Irwindale approved that certain Agreement for Performance of Remediation and Grading Work, which in relevant part, describes the Remediation the Developer must follow to include removal of deleterious materials below the present pit bottom at the Site in compliance with California Regional Quality Control Board requirements, importation of clean soil fill materials, receipt, placement and compaction of up Los Angeles County generated debris basin sediment, and construction of a storm water retention and detention basins and related surface storm water drainage improvements. Irwindale does not anticipate any further approvals required from the Irwindale City Council to accomplish the Remediation. Similarly, Azusa has confirmed that the approval of grading and other related permits to allow for the Remediation may be accomplished administratively and that no public hearing is required. To this end, both Azusa and Irwindale will process all such permits required for the Remediation in a timely manner so that the timeline set forth in Section 2. 03 is not delayed. The parties agree that no further agreements are required to be processed between themselves to accomplish the Remediation Phase.

2. 02 Development Phase. Irwindale and Azusa will process those Project entitlements required for the portions of the Site located within their boundaries, respectively.

To the extent permitted by law, the parties will cooperate to process the separate land use entitlement applications for the Development Phase simultaneously pursuant to each jurisdiction' s Development Code and any applicable state planning and zoning law requirements.

Such cooperation may include, but is not limited to, cooperation in the preparation of environmental documents to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA), 2

and holding joint public hearings by Irwindale and Azusa to consider Project entitlements.

Irwindale will be principally responsible for processing the environmental reviews necessary for the Project. As permitted under CEQA, Azusa will cooperate with Irwindale in the preparation of any environmental document required for the Project and utilize such documents for its consideration in adopting mitigation measures and issuing necessary entitlements for the Project.

2. 03 Schedule of Performance. The goal will be to ( a) commence filling the North Pit by January 31, 2019, ( b) commence construction of the above -grade improvements ( e.g., buildings) by December 31, 2023, and ( c) open the Project by December 31, 2024, with an understanding that the opening of the Project may be phased. The Development Instruments shall contain a more detailed Schedule of Performance.

2. 04 Sales Tax Sharing Agreement. h-windale and Azusa intend to share sales tax revenues evenly, if any, produced from the Project, regardless of where the sales tax generating sources are located on the Site. Such sales tax sales agreement shall be negotiated in good faith by the parties.

SECTION 3. DURATION OF NEGOTIATIONS.

3. 01 Period of Exclusive Negotiation. The period of negotiation shall be one ( 1) year from the date this Agreement is signed by the parties ( the " Term"). The parties understand and agree that should the Period of Negotiation end without agreement on the Schedule of Performance contemplated in Section 2. 02, no party shall be liable to the other party for costs incurred in the Remediation Phase.

3. 02 Early Termination. If any of the parties determine that the Project is not economically feasible, or if Irwindale or Azusa find progress with respect to the Schedule of Performance set forth in Section 2. 02 is unsatisfactory in its reasonable discretion, then such party may terminate this Agreement by delivering written notice thereof to the other parties. No party shall be liable to the other party for costs incurred in the Remediation Phase.

SECTION 4. SELECTED DEVELOPER' S RESPONSIBILITIES.

4. 01 The Developer selected will prepare such studies, reports, and analysis, as shall be necessary to permit Developer to determine the feasibility ofthe Project. Developer shall obtain any additional permits from other agencies as necessary.

4. 02 The design of the Project shall be " Spanish Mission" architecture consistent with the design guidelines of both Irwindale and Azusa, or such other design theme as may be agreed by the parties in the Development Instruments. It is agreed that Developer shall also obtain architectural review and other approvals for the Project from both Irwindale and Azusa for the portions of the Project that fall within the boundaries of the respective Cities. The Developer will be solely responsible for obtaining all approvals and entitlements for the Project, arranging the financing for the Project, and constructing all improvements upon the Site.

4. 03 It is also agreed that development of the Site by Developer may necessitate changes to existing circulation and access patters that lead to the Site, including access from 3

surrounding properties and streets. The parties agree to cooperate in the redesign of such access and circulation patterns to accommodate improved access to the Site and Project.

SECTION 5. MISCELLANEOUS.

5. 01 Indemnification. Each party shall defend and indemnify the other party against, any and all claims, demands, liability, judgments, awards, fines, mechanics' liens or other liens, labor disputes, losses, damages, expenses, attorneys' fees, and court costs related to this Agreement and arising either directly or indirectly from any act, error, omission, or negligence of Irwindale or Azusa or its respective agents, officers, or employees.

5. 02 Governing Laws and Venue. This Agreement has been negotiated and executed in the State of California and shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of California. In the event of any legal action to enforce or interpret this Agreement, the sole and exclusive venue shall be a court of competent jurisdiction located in Los Angeles County, California.

5. 03 Severability. If any term or portion of this Agreement is held to be invalid, illegal, void or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day first above written.

SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE.]

CITY (
Lo
ATTEST:
ty Clerk
APPROVE A TO q
City Attorney

CITY OF AZUSA
By: S -&- r- ^ 77r--
City Manager
Z<fTES
Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
40_&
City Attome

Item #17.A.

Date: December 11, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Julian A. Miranda, City Manager
Issue: Declaring Results of November 5, 2024 General Municipal Election City Manager's Recommendation:

Adopt Resolution No. 2024-107-3584 entitled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

IRWINDALE, CALIFORNIA, RECITING THE FACT OF THE CONSOLIDATED GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION HELD ON NOVEMBER 5, 2024, ACCEPTING THE OFFICIAL CANVASS AND OFFICIAL STATEMENT OF VOTES CAST FROM THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES REGISTRAR RECORDER’S OFFICE, AND DECLARING THE RESULTS AND SUCH OTHER MATTERS AS PROVIDED BY LAW” reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof.

Administrative Action:

Submitted by:

Theresa Olivares, Assistant City Manager
Prepared by:

Laura Nieto, Chief Deputy City Clerk
Reviewed by:

Adrian R. Guerra, City Attorney
Approved by:

Julian A. Miranda, City Manager

Background and Analysis:

A Consolidated General Municipal Election was held and conducted in the City of Irwindale, California, on Tuesday, November 5, 2024, as required by law.

The results of the November 5, 2024 Consolidated General Municipal Election have been canvassed by the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder / County Clerk’s Office. On completion of the canvass of votes, Elections Code §§10263-10264 requires the city council to adopt a resolution reciting the election and results including (1) the whole number of ballots cast in the City; (2) the names of the persons voted for; (3) for what office each person was voted for; (4) the measures voted upon; (5) the number of votes given at each precinct to each person, and for and against each measure; (6) the total number of votes given to each person, and for or against each measure.

In consolidated elections, the city council must meet to declare the results at the next regularly scheduled city council meeting, or a special meeting called for this purpose, following the presentation of the 28-day canvass from the county elections official.

The results of the November 5, 2024 Consolidated General Municipal Election are hereby transmitted for adoption through Resolution No. 2024-107-3584, certifying the same. It would now be appropriate for the City Council to adopt the resolution, certifying the election results.

Fiscal Impact:

There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.

Attachments:

1. Resolution No. 2024-107-3584 Declaring the Results of November 5, 2024 Election

2. Certificate of the Canvass of the Election Returns for the November 5, 2024 General Election

Resolution No. 2024-107-3584

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-107-3584

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF IRWINDALE, CALIFORNIA, RECITING THE FACT OF THE CONSOLIDATED GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION HELD ON NOVEMBER 5, 2024, ACCEPTING THE

OFFICIAL CANVASS AND OFFICIAL STATEMENT OF VOTES CAST FROM THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES REGISTRAR RECORDER’S OFFICE,

AND DECLARING THE RESULTS AND SUCH OTHER

MATTERS AS PROVIDED BY LAW
WHEREAS, a Consolidated General Municipal Election was held and conducted in the City of Irwindale, California, on Tuesday, November 5, 2024, as required by law; and WHEREAS, notice of the election was given in time, form and manner as provided by law; that elections officers were appointed and in all respects the election was held and conducted and the votes were cast, received and canvassed and the returns made and declared in time, form and manner as required by applicable provisions of the Elections Code of the State of California for the holding of elections in charter cities and the provisions of the City of Irwindale’s Charter; and
WHEREAS, the Los Angeles County Registrar Recorders Office canvassed the returns of the election and has certified the results to this City Council; the results are received, attached and made a part hereof as “Exhibit A;” and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Irwindale now desires to adopt this resolution reciting the November 5, 2024 Consolidated Municipal Election and declaring its results.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 2. The Chief Deputy City Clerk shall enter on the records of the City Council of the City, a statement of the result of the election, showing: (1) the whole number of ballots cast in the City; (2) the names of the persons voted for; (3) for what office each person was voted for; (4) the measures voted upon; (5) the number of votes given at each precinct to each person, and for and against each measure; (6) the total number of votes given to each person, and for or against each measure.

SECTION 3. The whole number of ballots cast in the precinct except vote by mail voter ballots was 310, that the whole number of vote by mail voter ballots cast in the City was 439, making a total of 749 ballots cast in the City.

Resolution No. 2024-107-3584

SECTION 4. The names of persons voted for at the election for Member of the City Council are as follows:

Manuel R. Garcia
Mark A. Breceda
Larry G. Burrola
Marguerite S. Lopez-Sapien
SECTION 5. One measure, Measure IR, was voted upon and passed.

SECTION 6. The number of votes given at each precinct and the number of votes given in the City for each of the persons above-named for the office of Member of the City Council for which they were candidates, and for and against the measure are listed in Exhibit A, and incorporated herein by reference.

SECTION 7. The City Council does declare and determine that: Manuel R. Garcia was elected as Member of the City Council for the full term of four years; Mark A. Breceda was elected as Member of the City Council for the full term of four years; and Larry G. Burrola was elected as a Member of the City Council for the full term of four years.

SECTION 8. The Chief Deputy City Clerk shall immediately make and deliver to each of the persons so elected a Certificate of Election signed by the Chief Deputy City Clerk and authenticated; the Chief Deputy City Clerk shall also administer to each person elected the Oath of Office prescribed in the Constitution of the State of California and shall have them subscribe to it and file it in the office of the Chief Deputy City Clerk. Each and all of the persons so elected shall then be inducted into the respective office to which they have been elected.

SECTION 9. That the Chief Deputy City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of December 2024. _____________________________
Albert F. Ambriz, Mayor

Resolution No. 2024-107-3584

ATTEST:
_______________________________
Laura M. Nieto, MMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA }
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES } ss.

CITY OF IRWINDALE }
I, Laura M. Nieto, Chief Deputy City Clerk of the City of Irwindale, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2024-107-3584 was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Irwindale at a regular meeting held on the 11th day of December 2024, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:

Laura M. Nieto, MMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 11/05/24 GENERAL ELECTION 48.1 -Page- 105 IRWINDALE CITY GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION Member of the City Council FINAL OFFICIAL V2

STATEMENT OF VOTES CAST

BY PRECINCT
Location Registration
Ballots
Cast

M S LOPEZ-SAPIENMANUEL R GARCIAMARK A BRECEDALARRY G BURROLA IRWINDALE - 3000003A* 264 119 129 133 133
VOTE BY MAIL SERIAL 6631 315 137 173 168 148
TOTAL 798 579 256 302 301 281
IRWINDALE - 3000004C* 34 11 18 16 20
VOTE BY MAIL SERIAL 6633 99 40 51 41 39
TOTAL 197 133 51 69 57 59
IRWINDALE - 3000008A* 10 3 7 6 1
VOTE BY MAIL SERIAL 6637 19 9 16 15 14
TOTAL 43 29 12 23 21 15
IRWINDALE - 3000009A* 0 0 0 0 0
VOTE BY MAIL SERIAL 6640 5 3 4 4 2
TOTAL 9 5 3 4 4 2

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 11/05/24 GENERAL ELECTION 48.2 -Page- 106 IRWINDALE CITY GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION Member of the City Council FINAL OFFICIAL V2

STATEMENT OF VOTES CAST

BY PRECINCT
Location Registration
Ballots
Cast

M S LOPEZ-SAPIENMANUEL R GARCIAMARK A BRECEDALARRY G BURROLA PRECINCT TOTAL 310 133 154 155 154
VBM TOTAL 439 189 244 228 203
GRAND TOTAL 1,051 749 322 398 383 357

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 11/05/24 GENERAL ELECTION 249.1 -Page- 1356

IRWINDALE CITY SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION - MEASURE IR
FINAL OFFICIAL V2

STATEMENT OF VOTES CAST

BY PRECINCT
Location Registration
Ballots
Cast
YESNO
IRWINDALE - 3000003A* 264 174 60
VOTE BY MAIL SERIAL 6631 315 204 89
TOTAL 798 579 378 149
IRWINDALE - 3000004C* 34 22 8
VOTE BY MAIL SERIAL 6633 99 38 49
TOTAL 197 133 60 57
IRWINDALE - 3000008A* 10 4 3
VOTE BY MAIL SERIAL 6637 19 13 5
TOTAL 43 29 17 8
IRWINDALE - 3000009A* 0 0 0
VOTE BY MAIL SERIAL 6640 5 3 2
TOTAL 9 5 3 2

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 11/05/24 GENERAL ELECTION 249.2 -Page- 1357

IRWINDALE CITY SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION - MEASURE IR
FINAL OFFICIAL V2

STATEMENT OF VOTES CAST

BY PRECINCT
Location Registration
Ballots
Cast
YESNO
PRECINCT TOTAL 310 200 71
VBM TOTAL 439 258 145
GRAND TOTAL 1,051 749 458 216

Item #19.A.

Date: December 11, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Julian A. Miranda, City Manager
Issue: Reorganization of the City Council
City Manager's Recommendation:

Councilmembers elect Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore.

Administrative Action:

Submitted by:

Theresa Olivares, Assistant City Manager
Prepared by:

Laura Nieto, Chief Deputy City Clerk
Approved by:

Julian A. Miranda, City Manager
Background and Analysis:

In accordance with Ordinance No. 711, B (vii), it is appropriate at this time for the City Council to reorganize, including the selection of a new Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore. In order to complete the reorganization, the following procedure is recommended:

The Chief Deputy City Clerk opens the nominations for the office of Mayor. Any Councilmember may nominate and no second to the nomination is required.

1. After receiving all nominations, the Chief Deputy City Clerk closes the nominations.

2. The Chief Deputy City Clerk then conducts the election of the Mayor by roll call vote. If there is

more than one nomination, a roll call vote is conducted in order nominated until a Mayor is elected by majority vote.

3. The new Mayor then opens nominations for Mayor Pro Tempore in the same manner as above.

4. After receiving all nominations, the Mayor then closes the nominations.

5. The Mayor then conducts the election of the Mayor Pro Tempore by roll call vote. If there is more than one nomination, a roll call vote is conducted in the order nominated until a Mayor Pro Tempore is elected by majority vote.

Fiscal Impact:

There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.

Attachments:

None

IRWINDALE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS OCTOBER 23, 2024
5050 N. IRWINDALE AVENUE WEDNESDAY
IRWINDALE, CALIFORNIA 91706 5:00 P.M.

The Irwindale CITY COUNCIL and HOUSING AUTHORITY met in a special joint meeting at the above time and place.

ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Mark A. Breceda, Manuel R. Garcia, H. Manuel Ortiz; Mayor Pro Tem Larry G. Burrola;
Mayor Albert F. Ambriz
Also Present: Julian A. Miranda, City Manager; Adrian Guerra, City Attorney; Theresa Olivares, Assistant City Manager; and Laura Nieto, Chief Deputy City Clerk
AB 2449 DISCLOSURES None.

SPONTANEOUS
COMMUNICATIONS There were no speakers.

RECESS TO At 5:00 p.m., the City Council met in Closed Session to discuss the CLOSED SESSION following:

Conference with Real Property Negotiator
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54956.8
Property: 16124 Calle de Paseo
Agency Negotiator: Fernando Lopez, Housing Coordinator
Parties: Valerie R. Sanchez, Leonard B. Aguayo, and Kenneth Aguayo, each as 1/3 as tenants in common
Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment
ACTION: Discussed, direction provided to staff; no reportable action (Board Members Breceda and Garcia did not participate due to potential conflicts of interest).

Property: 4846 Irwindale Avenue
Agency Negotiator: Julian A. Miranda, City Manager
Negotiating Parties: Linda Edeggers
Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment
ACTION: Discussed, direction provided to staff; no reportable action (Board Members Breceda and Garcia did not participate due to potential conflicts of interest).

Property: 16249 Arrow Highway
Negotiating Parties: Bravo Real Estate Services Group and Julian A.

Miranda, City Manager
Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment

CC / HA MINUTES OCTOBER 23, 2024
SPECIAL MEETING PAGE 2
ACTION: Discussed, direction provided to staff; no reportable action (Board Member Breceda did not participate due to potential conflicts of interest).

Property: 16359 Arrow Highway
Agency Negotiator: Julian A. Miranda, City Manager
Negotiating Parties: 39 Dalton Financial Ltd. Partnership Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment
ACTION: This item was removed from the agenda and was not discussed.

Property: 14905 Los Angeles Street, Irwindale CA
Agency Negotiator: Juliana Miranda, Executive Director
Negotiating Parties: Marianna Diaz
Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment
ACTION: Discussed, direction provided to staff; no reportable action.

Property: 15821 Hidalgo Street
Agency Negotiator: Fernando Lopez, Housing Coordinator
Negotiating Parties: Lydia Fonseca
Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment
ACTION: Discussed, direction provided to staff; no reportable action (Board Member Breceda did not participate due to potential conflicts of interest)
RECONVENE IN At 6:13 p.m., the City Council reconvened in Open Session.

OPEN SESSION
RECESS TO At 8:04 p.m., the City Council met in Closed Session to discuss the CLOSED SESSION following:

Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation
Initiation of litigation (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(4)
Number of Cases: One
ACTION: Information provided; no action taken
RECONVENE IN At 8:22 p.m., the City Council reconvened in Open Session.

OPEN SESSION

CC / HA MINUTES OCTOBER 23, 2024
SPECIAL MEETING PAGE 3
ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned at 8:22 p.m.
________________________________
Laura M. Nieto, MMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk

IRWINDALE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS OCTOBER 23, 2024
5050 N. IRWINDALE AVENUE WEDNESDAY
IRWINDALE, CALIFORNIA 91706 6:38 P.M.

The Irwindale CITY COUNCIL met in regular session at the above time and place.

ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Mark A. Breceda, Manuel R. Garcia, H. Manuel Ortiz; Mayor Pro Tem Larry G. Burrola;
Mayor Albert F. Ambriz
Also Present: Julian A. Miranda, City Manager; Adrian Guerra, City Attorney; Theresa Olivares, Assistant City Manager; Christopher Hofford, Chief of Police; Kambiz Borhani, Director of Finance / City Treasurer; Eddie Chan, Director of Engineering / Building Official; Elizabeth Rodriguez, Public Services Director; Mary Hull, Human Resources Manager, and Laura Nieto, Chief Deputy City Clerk AB 2449 DISCLOSURES None.

CHANGES TO THE
AGENDA
CITY MANAGER City Manager Miranda mentioned that Item No. 18A, the presentation MIRANDA by Los Angeles County Assessor Jeff Prang, and Item No. 35A, the Global Subordination Policy, will be tabled to a future meeting.

COUNCILMEMBER

TRAVEL REPORTS
MAYOR PRO TEM Mayor Pro Tem Burrola, Councilmembers Breceda and Garcia, and BURROLA, Mayor Ambriz reported on their attendance at the recent League of COUNCILMEMBERS California Cities conference.

BRECEDA AND GARCIA,

AND MAYOR AMBRIZ

COUNCILMEMBER

COMMENTS
MAYOR AMBRIZ Mayor Ambriz requested to adjourn the meeting in memory of Carrie Fraijo Rodriguez.

COUNCILMEMBER Councilmember Ortiz reported on his attendance at a Gold Line board ORTIZ meeting held October 10.

INTRODUCTION OF

NEW EMPLOYEES /

PROMOTIONS

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 23, 2024
REGULAR MEETING PAGE 2
ITEM NO. 17A INTRODUCTION OF MAINTENANCE LEAD WORKER PABLO

INTRODUCTION OF GAMEZ

MAINTENANCE LEAD
WORKER PABLO The introduction was made.

GAMEZ
ITEM NO. 17B INTRODUCTION OF MAINTENANCE WORKER I JIMMY RIOS

INTRODUCTION OF
MAINTENANCE The introduction was made.

WORKER 1

JIMMY RIOS
ITEM NO. 17C INTRODUCTION OF MAINTENANCE WORKER I GARY

INTRODUCTION OF STROBEHN

MAINTENANCE
WORKER I GARY The introduction was made.

STROBEHN
ITEM NO. 17D INTRODUCTION OF IRWINDALE DISPATCHER SAMANTHA

INTRODUCTION OF KROST

IRWINDALE
DISPATCHER The introduction was made.

SAMANTHA KROST
ITEM NO. 17E INTRODUCTION OF IRWINDALE DISPATCHER MOLLIE

INTRODUCTION OF RADENBAUGH

IRWINDALE
DISPATCHER The introduction was made.

MOLLIE RADENBAUGH
ITEM NO. 17F INTRODUCTION OF POLICE ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK JESSICA

INTRODUCTION OF RODAS
POLICE
ADMINISTRATIVE The introduction was made.

CLERK JESSICA RODAS

PROCLAMATIONS /

PRESENTATIONS /

COMMENDATIONS
ITEM NO. 18A PRESENTATION BY LOS ANGELES COUNTY ASSESSOR JEFF

PRESENTATION BY PRANG
LOS ANGELES CO.

ASSESSOR JEFF This presentation will be made at a future meeting.

PRANG
ITEM NO. 18B IRWINDALE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE QUARTERLY UPDATE

IRWINDALE CHAMBER

OF COMMERCE
QUARTERLY UPDATE Chamber President / CEO Lily Phan presented the update.

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 23, 2024
REGULAR MEETING PAGE 3
ITEM NO. 18C IRWINDALE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BUSINESSES OF THE

IRWINDALE CHAMBER MONTH

OF COMMERCE
BUSINESSES OF THE Presentations were made to the following businesses:

MONTH
1) IDS Real Estate Group – August 2024
2) Absolute International Security – September 2024
3) LifeWave – October 2024
ITEM NO. 18D PROCLAIMING OCTOBER AS NATIONAL BULLYING

PROCLAIMING AWARENESS MONTH

OCTOBER AS
NATIONAL BULLYING The proclamation was made.

AWARENESS MONTH
ITEM NO. 18E PROCLAIMING OCTOBER AS BREAST CANCER AWARENESS

PROCLAIMING MONTH

OCTOBER AS
BREAST CANCER The proclamation was made.

AWARENESS MONTH
ITEM NO. 18F PROCLAIMING OCTOBER AS NATIONAL COMMUNITY

PROCLAIMING PLANNING MONTH

OCTOBER AS
NATIONAL COMMUNITY The proclamation was made.

PLANNING MONTH
ITEM NO. 18G PROCLAIMING RED RIBBON WEEK

PROCLAIMING RED
RIBBON WEEK The proclamation was made.

CONSENT CALENDAR
MOTION A motion was made by Councilmember Ortiz, seconded by Councilmember Breceda, to approve the Consent Calendar, with the exception of Item Nos. 19D and 19F, which were removed for separate consideration, reading ordinances by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was unanimously approved.

ITEM NO. 19A WARRANTS / DEMANDS / PAYROLL

WARRANTS /
DEMANDS / The warrants / demands / payroll were approved.

PAYROLL
ITEM NO. 19B APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE CITY OF IRWINDALE

APPROVING COUNCIL PROCEDURES
AMENDMENT NO. 1

TO THE CITY OF

IRWINDALE COUNCIL

PROCEDURES

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 23, 2024
REGULAR MEETING PAGE 4
RESOLUTION NO. Resolution No. 2024-86-3563, entitled:
2024-86-3563
ADOPTED “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

IRWINDALE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND ADOPTING
REVISED COUNCIL PROCEDURES,” was adopted.

ITEM NO. 19C INDEMNITY AGREEMENT – IRWINDALE BUSINESS CENTER

INDEMNITY NORTH
AGREEMENT –
IRWINDALE BUSINESS The City Council approved and authorized the City Manager to CENTER NORTH execute the City of Irwindale and LIT Reliance II, LP Indemnity Agreement (Agreement), subject to City Attorney approval as to form, to indemnify the City for any liability and costs associated with the drainage before issuing the grading permit for the development of the property located at 16005 E. Foothill Blvd, Irwindale, CA 91702 ITEM NO. 19E INVESTMENT QUARTERLY REPORT FOR FISCAL QUARTER INVESTMENT ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2024

QUARTERLY REPORT
FOR FISCAL QUARTER The City Council, Successor Agency Board, and Housing Authority ENDING Board received and filed the Investment Quarterly Report for the SEPTEMBER 30, 2024 fiscal quarter ending September 30, 2024.

END OF CONSENT CALENDAR
ITEM NO. 19D CLAIM REJECTION – RICHARD GOMEZ V. CITY OF IRWINDALE CLAIM REJECTION –
RICHARD GOMEZ V.

CITY OF IRWINDALE
COUNCILMEMBER Councilmember Breceda declared a potential conflict of interest with BRECEDA this item and exited the Council Chambers at 7:15 p.m.

COUNCILMEMBER Councilmember Garcia stated that he requested to discuss this item GARCIA as he feels that the City should reimburse the homeowner for the expenses he incurred in repairing the irrigation system at his home as a result of the damage it incurred by a tree that the City is requiring the homeowner to maintain. He noted that the homeowners are required to maintain the trees as well as the irrigation systems, but felt that they were pressured into signing the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions and suggested that the City’s Public Works department maintain the trees. He stated his preference in approving the claim and paying the claimant.

MOTION A motion was made by Councilmember Garcia to reimburse the homeowner for his expenditures.

CITY MANAGER City Manager Miranda requested that this matter be placed on the MIRANDA closed session agenda for further discussion.

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 23, 2024
REGULAR MEETING PAGE 5
CITY ATTORNEY City Attorney Guerra concurred in discussing this matter in closed GUERRA session.

MAYOR AMBRIZ Mayor Ambriz concurred and asked whether any additional staff would be needed to discuss this matter, to which City Manager Miranda confirmed that there would be.

Mayor Ambriz requested to table this matter to October 30.

FRED BARBOSA Fred Barbosa spoke in favor of approving the claim.

CONSENSUS REACHED Consensus was reached amongst the Councilmembers present to table this matter to the meeting of October 30.

ITEM NO. 19F WRITTEN REPORT DESCRIBING THE MEASURES TAKEN TO

WRITTEN REPORT ALLEVIATE THE CONDITIONS WHICH LED TO THE ADOPTION DESCRIBING THE OF ORDINANCE NO. 785 WHICH IMPOSED A TEMPORARY

MEASURES TAKEN TO MORATORIUM PROHIBITING THE PROCESSING OF

ALLEVIATE THE APPLICATIONS OR APPROVALS FOR ANY ALL BILLBOARDS

CONDITIONS WHICH

LED TO THE

ADOPTION OF
ORDINANCE NO. 785

WHICH IMPOSED A

TEMPORARY

MORATORIUM

PROHIBITING THE

PROCESSING OF

APPLICATIONS OR

APPROVALS FOR ANY

AND ALL BILLBOARDS
COUNCILMEMBER Councilmember Breceda returned to the Council Chambers at 7:19 BRECEDA p.m.

FRED BARBOSA Fred Barbosa requested to pull this item from the Consent Calendar for separate consideration.

CITY ATTORNEY City Attorney Guerra advised that a moratorium is in effect for 45 days GUERRA and that, during that time, staff will be analyzing the draft ordinance to determine whether modifications are needed to address the potential impacts from converting static billboards to electronic billboards and whether the fee impacts identified in the ordinance need to be amended. He advised that state law allows for the ordinance to be extended for 10 months and 15 days, though at this time, staff is not anticipating recommending an extension to the Council. Staff will be expediting the review and, once the ordinance is presented and adopted, the moratorium in place would be dissolved.

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 23, 2024
REGULAR MEETING PAGE 6
FRED BARBOSA Fred Barbosa suggested excluding the three companies that had previously applied for billboard conversions, to which City Attorney Guerra advised that the original ordinance and the ordinance extension would exempt those applications currently on file and would not be subject to the moratorium.

ORDINANCE NO. 785 A motion was made by Councilmember Garcia, seconded by ADOPTED Councilmember Breceda, to adopt and issue the written report on Ordinance No. 785, entitled:
“REPORT OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE
ON URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 785 IMPOSING A MORATORIUM

ON THE PROCESSING OR APPROVAL OF ANY APPLICATIONS

FOR BILLBOARDS, NEW CONSTRUCTION OF BILLBOARDS, OR

THE REPLACEMENT OR CONVERSION OF STATIC BILLBOARDS

TO BILLBOARDS WITH A DIGITAL DISPLAY, AS REQUIRED BY
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65858.” The motion was
unanimously approved, thereby adopting the ordinance, reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof.

SPONTANEOUS

COMMUNICATIONS
ANGEL NIEVES Angel Nieves spoke on his hope for keeping a portion of the Irwindale Speedway open for legal street racing.

RECESS At 7:43 p.m., the Council took a short recess.

RECONVENE At 7:35 p.m., the Council reconvened in Open Session with all members present.

NEW BUSINESS None.

PUBLIC HEARINGS
ITEM NO. 22A APPROVAL OF THE ADJUSTMENT OF SCHEDULE OF FEES & APPROVAL OF THE CHARGES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025

ADJUSTMENT OF

SCHEDULE OF FEES &

CHARGES FOR
FY 2024-2025
DIRECTOR BORHANI Director Borhani presented the staff report.

OPEN At 7:43 p.m., Mayor Ambriz opened the public hearing.

PUBLIC HEARING
CLOSE There being no additional speakers, Mayor Ambriz closed the public PUBLIC HEARING hearing at 7:44 p.m.

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 23, 2024
REGULAR MEETING PAGE 7
RESOLUTION NO. Resolution No. 2024-85-3562, entitled:
2024-85-3562
ADOPTED “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

IRWINDALE, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING AND ADJUSTING FEES

FOR CERTAIN CITY SERVICES IN THE COMPREHENSIVE
SCHEDULE OF FEES AND CHARGES,” was adopted on the motion of Mayor Pro Tem Burrola, seconded by Councilmember Breceda, and unanimously approved.

CITY MANAGER’S
REPORT
CITY MANAGER City Manager Miranda presented the following report:

MIRANDA
1) The Irwindale Community Foundation is hosting a drive-up holiday gift card giveaway for residents on November 2.
2) The City has partnered with the County of Los Angeles to host a 4-day Vote Center at the Dan Diaz Recreation Center, beginning November 2.
3) The annual Veterans Day Ceremony has been scheduled for November 11 and will be conducted in front of City Hall. 4) The City is currently accepting applications for a full-time Assistant Planner and a full-time Maintenance Aide.
5) Phase 3 of the Residential Street Resurfacing Project will begin October 28 and is anticipated to be completed by December 13. 6) He also provided details on upcoming Recreation Department events and activities.

DIRECTOR CHAN As requested by City Manager Miranda, Director Chan followed up on a concern brought up by Mayor Ambriz regarding line-of-sight issues at Mountain Avenue. Staff determined that the issue could be mitigated by restricting parking in Mountain Avenue, south of Ambriz Street. Since Mountain Avenue falls under the jurisdiction of the County of Los Angeles, staff has submitted a service request to the County, which has agreed with the City’s findings and has scheduled red curb painting by the end of the month.

Director Chan also noted that the Council has previously requested the installation of a 4-way stopping intersection at Shrode and Mountain, which also falls under the County’s jurisdiction. Staff submitted a service request to the County and is awaiting their response.

The final request had to do with the repair of pavement on Azusa Canyon Road, south of Arrow Highway. Staff will include this repair in the Residential Street Resurfacing Project and expects this repair to be completed within two months.

MAYOR PRO TEM Mayor Pro Tem Burrola asked which other streets would be BURROLA addressed in the resurfacing project, to which Director Chan advised

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 23, 2024
REGULAR MEETING PAGE 8
that Peck Road, Meridian, Alice Rodriguez Circle, Citrus View, and Puente will be improved. Also added is the ramp at Irwindale Avenue and Calle del Norte, which has a broken sidewalk.

COUNCILMEMBER Councilmember Breceda noted that Citrus View is a private street and BRECEDA asked that Director Chan confirm that it would be repaved, to which Director Chan corrected himself and indicated that he meant to say Park Rose.

Responding to a question by Councilmember Breceda, City Manager Miranda noted that staff is looking into whether Citrus View could be paved and whether lighting could be installed. He noted that Director Chan would provide an update at the next meeting.

COUNCILMEMBER Councilmember Ortiz requested that the manholes on Azusa Canyon ORTIZ Road from Arrow Highway to Olive Street since they may need repair.

FUTURE AGENDA

ITEMS REQUESTED

BY COUNCIL MEMBERS
MOTION A motion was made by Councilmember Ortiz, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Burrola, to add an item to a future agenda to consider the creation of a moratorium on businesses that move onto a site and operate under the same conditions and environmental impact report of the business that previously operated at the site, since many new businesses cause impacts such as additional truck traffic. The motion was unanimously approved.

CITY MANAGER City Manager Miranda advised that planning staff is looking into the MIRANDA EIR for the subject site and will provide an update on what is and is not allowed at the site.

ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m., in memory of Carrie Fraijo Rodriguez. ________________________________
Laura M. Nieto, MMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk

IRWINDALE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS OCTOBER 30, 2024
5050 N. IRWINDALE AVENUE WEDNESDAY
IRWINDALE, CALIFORNIA 91706 10:00 A.M.

The Irwindale CITY COUNCIL and HOUSING AUTHORITY met in a special joint meeting at the above time and place.

ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Mark A. Breceda, Manuel R. Garcia, H. Manuel Ortiz; Mayor Pro Tem Larry G. Burrola;
Mayor Albert F. Ambriz
Also Present: Julian A. Miranda, City Manager; Adrian Guerra, City Attorney; Theresa Olivares, Assistant City Manager; and Laura Nieto, Chief Deputy City Clerk
AB 2449 DISCLOSURES None.

SPONTANEOUS
COMMUNICATIONS There were no speakers.

RECESS TO At 10:04 a.m., the City Council met in Closed Session to discuss the CLOSED SESSION following:

Liability Claims:

Pursuant to Gov. Code Section 54956.95
Claimant: Richard Gomez
Agency claimed against: City of Irwindale, Irwindale Housing Authority
ACTION: Information provided to the Council and Board; no action taken (Councilmember Breceda did not participate due to a potential conflict of interest).

Conference with Labor Negotiator
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54957.6
Agency Designated Representatives: Julian A. Miranda, City Manager; Adrian Guerra, Legal Counsel; Mary Hull, Human Resources Manager
Employee Organizations: ICEA
ACTION: Discussion held; direction provided to staff; no reportable action taken.

CC / HA MINUTES OCTOBER 30, 2024
SPECIAL MEETING PAGE 2
Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation
Pursuant to Government Code Sections 54954.5(c), 54956.9(d)(1) Name of Case: Five Points, LP vs. City of Irwindale
Case Number: 22STCV01394
ACTION: Update provided; direction provided to staff; no reportable action taken (Councilmember Breceda did not participate due to a potential conflict of interest).

RECONVENE IN At 10:50 a.m., the City Council reconvened in Open Session.

OPEN SESSION

CONSENT CALENDAR
MOTION A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Burrola, seconded by Councilmember Ortiz, to approve the Consent Calendar, except for Item No. 10B, which was removed for separate consideration. The motion was unanimously approved.

ITEM NO. 10A APPROVE A FEE WAIVER FOR THE TOURNAMENT OF ROSES,

APPROVE A FEE WAIVING CITY TRANSPORTATION / OVERSIZED VEHICLE FEES

WAIVER FOR THE

TOURNAMENT OF

ROSES, WAIVING A CITY

TRANSPORTATION /

OVERSIZED VEHICLE
FEES
RESOLUTION NO. Resolution No. 2024-87-3564, entitled:
2024-87-3564
ADOPTED “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

IRWINDALE RETROACTIVELY APPROVING A FEE WAIVER FOR
THE PASADENA TOURNAMENT OF ROSES 501(C)(3)

NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION, WAIVING CITY
TRANSPORTATION / OVERSIZED VEHICLE FEES OF $1,024.00,”
was adopted.

END OF CONSENT CALENDAR
ITEM NO. 10B CLAIM REJECTION – RICHARD GOMEZ V. CITY OF IRWINDALE CLAIM REJECTION - (Continued from October 23, 2024)
RICHARD GOMEZ V.

CITY OF IRWINDALE
COUNCILMEMBER Councilmember Breceda declared a potential conflict of interest and BRECEDA exited the Council Chambers at 10:53 a.m.

CITY MANAGER City Manager Miranda presented the staff report.

MIRANDA

CC / HA MINUTES OCTOBER 30, 2024
SPECIAL MEETING PAGE 3
COUNCILMEMBER Councilmember Garcia suggested approving the claim and GARCIA suggested for an updated policy to be presented to the Council with information on how to address future claims that relate to city / homeowner locations to provide clarity to staff.

SUZANNE GOMEZ Suzanne Gomez agreed with Councilmember Garcia.

MOTION A motion was made by Councilmember Garcia, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Burrola, to approve the claim and direct staff to present an updated policy addressing how claims should be handled when they relate to city / homeowner rights of way. The motion was unanimously approved; Councilmember Breceda absent.

PUBLIC HEARINGS
ITEM NO. 11A URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 789 TO EXTEND FOR AN URGENCY ORDINANCE ADDITIONAL 10 MONTHS AND 15 DAYS A TEMPORARY

TO EXTEND FOR AN MORATORIUM PROHIBITING THE PROCESSING OF ADDITIONAL 10 APPLICATIONS OR APPROVALS FOR ANY AND ALL MONTHS AND 15 DAYS BILLBOARDS

A TEMPORARY

MORATORIUM

PROHIBITING THE

PROCESSING OF

APPLICATIONS OR

APPROVALS FOR ANY

AND ALL BILLBOARDS
COUNCILMEMBER Councilmember Breceda returned to the Council Chambers at 10:55 BRECEDA a.m.

CITY ATTORNEY City Attorney Guerra presented the staff report. He noted that this GUERRA ordinance would exempt certain properties that already have applications in progress and advised that staff hopes to avoid having the moratorium span the entire 10 months and 15 days.

OPEN At 10:59 a.m., Mayor Ambriz opened the public hearing.

PUBLIC HEARING
CLOSE There being no speakers, Mayor Ambriz closed the public hearing.

PUBLIC HEARING
URGENCY ORDINANCE Urgency Ordinance No. 789, entitled:

ADOPTED ON
FIRST READING “AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE, CALIFORNIA, EXTENDING BY 10 MONTHS AND 15 DAYS THE
ORIGINAL 45 DAY MORATORIUM ESTABLISHED BY INTERIM
URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 785, PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65858, PROHIBITING THE

PROCESSING OR APPROVAL OF ANY APPLICATIONS FOR

CC / HA MINUTES OCTOBER 30, 2024
SPECIAL MEETING PAGE 4

BILLBOARDS, NEW CONSTRUCTION OF BILLBOARDS, OR THE

REPLACEMENT OR CONVERSION OF STATIC BILLBOARDS TO

BILLBOARDS WITH A DIGITAL DISPLAY, AND DECLARING THE

UREGENCY THEREOF AND THAT IT SHALL TAKE EFFECT

IMMEDIATELY AND FINDING THE ADOPTION OF THE

ORDINANCE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT,” was passed, approved, and
adopted, reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof, on the motion of Mayor Pro Tem Burrola, seconded by Councilmember Ortiz, and unanimously approved.

ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned at 11:00 a.m.
________________________________
Laura M. Nieto, MMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk

IRWINDALE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS NOVEMBER 13, 2024
5050 N. IRWINDALE AVENUE WEDNESDAY
IRWINDALE, CALIFORNIA 91706 4:32 P.M.

The Irwindale CITY COUNCIL and PLANNING COMMISSION met in a special joint meeting at the above time and place.

ROLL CALL: Present:

Councilmembers Mark A. Breceda, Manuel R. Garcia,
H. Manuel Ortiz; Mayor Pro Tem Larry G. Burrola;
Mayor Albert F. Ambriz
Commissioners: Albert Acosta, Casey J. Miranda, Joseph V.

Rodriguez, II; Vice Chair Richard Chico (arrived at 4:48 p.m.); Chair Maricela Frymark
Also Present: Julian A. Miranda, City Manager; Adrian Guerra, City Attorney; Theresa Olivares, Assistant City Manager; Marilyn Simpson, Community Development Director; and Laura Nieto, Chief Deputy City Clerk
AB 2449 DISCLOSURES None.

SPONTANEOUS

COMMUNICATIONS
FRED BARBOSA Fred Barbosa suggested for the City to take the Five Points property via eminent domain.

STUDY SESSION ON

BATTERY ENERGY

STORAGE SYSTEMS
DIRECTOR SIMPSON Director Simpson introduced Craig Lewis of the Clean Coalition, who presented a PowerPoint update and provided the following details:
1) Clean Coalition’s mission and renewable energy end-game. 2) Key terms
3) Clean Coalition’s experience with BESS
4) An overview of the grid and where BESS play
5) The proliferation of BESS
6) BESS pro’s and con’s.
7) BESS grid services
8) The need to exercise caution with such facilities
9) BESS examples
10)Valecito Energy Storage Resilience (VESR)
11)Goleta Load Pocket
12)Greenbark BESS
13)The lack of resiliency of natural gas infrastructure 14)Humidor as a major BESS in California
15)Effects of energy storage on peak demand

CC / PC MINUTES NOVEMBER 13, 2024
SPECIAL MEETING PAGE 2
ROBERT DIAZ Responding to questions from Robert Diaz, Mr. Lewis advised that the project would create approximately $2 million per year in tax revenue for Los Angeles County and would benefit from the job creation for local community members as the project is constructed.

He noted that developers would also pay fees to the city. Additionally, the developer could create a solar microgrid similar to those found at high schools, which result in tremendous savings. He stated that developers are generally open-minded regarding the types of community benefits that they could offer.

Mr. Diaz also asked about the best use of available land, to which Mr.

Lewis stated that each jurisdiction could decide what is best for their land, though he stated that battery storage systems bring tremendous value.

GARY NORRIS Gary Norris, who identified himself as an independent economist, spoke on peak power loads and past rolling black/brownouts and pointed out that there have been no additional black/brownouts since an additional 5gw were made available through BESS systems.

FRED BARBOSA Fred Barbosa stated that BESS fires should be classified as Class B, not Class A, as it currently shows. He also asked about the accumulation of gasses within the system and whether they are filtered out. He then asked about sales tax revenue for the City and whether this project would impact nearby projects.

SUZANNE GOMEZ Suzanne Gomez asked about the toxicity levels of gasses that are released and about the processes used to put out fires. She also requested information about recycling and encouraged the Council to investigate this further.

MAYOR AMBRIZ Mayor Ambriz stated that staff has noted the questions asked and may be able to address them at a future meeting.

COMMISSIONER Commissioner Miranda asked about supply lines, fire suppression MIRANDA systems, mitigation of seepage, safeguards, and end of life procedures.

CRAIG LEWIS Responding to a comment by Fred Barbosa, Mr. Lewis advised that BESS fires are in fact categorized as Class A fires. Regarding emergency procedures, the developers would put together an emergency response plan to be coordinated with emergency responders, who would receive training on how to respond to any type of issues that may arise at the battery facility. He added that: 1) energy from the batteries to the grid and vice versa could be accomplished through underground or overground connections, depending on site factors; 2) battery recycling implementation is being researched by many parties; 3) air and soil seepage and toxicity levels have been researched extensively and elevated toxicity is only present within 25 feet from the battery cabinet. He noted that battery

CC / PC MINUTES NOVEMBER 13, 2024
SPECIAL MEETING PAGE 3
systems are designed to be isolated at specific cells / cabinets to prevent the issue from growing.

COMMISSIONER Responding to a follow up question from Commissioner Miranda, Mr.

MIRANDA Lewis advised that Clean Coalition has facilitated six solar microgrids for schools in the Santa Barbara Unified School District, and that their high schools have battery energy storage systems on site.

MAYOR AMBRIZ Mayor Ambriz thanked Mr. Lewis for the information provided and requested that the matter be further discussed at a future meeting.

ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned at 5:33 p.m.
________________________________
Laura M. Nieto, MMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk

IRWINDALE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS NOVEMBER 13, 2024
5050 N. IRWINDALE AVENUE WEDNESDAY
IRWINDALE, CALIFORNIA 91706 5:30 P.M.

The Irwindale CITY COUNCIL and HOUSING AUTHORITY met in a special joint meeting at the above time and place.

ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Mark A. Breceda, Manuel R. Garcia, H. Manuel Ortiz; Mayor Pro Tem Larry G. Burrola;
Mayor Albert F. Ambriz
Also Present: Julian A. Miranda, City Manager; Adrian Guerra, City Attorney; Theresa Olivares, Assistant City Manager; and Laura Nieto, Chief Deputy City Clerk
AB 2449 DISCLOSURES None.

SPONTANEOUS
COMMUNICATIONS There were no speakers.

RECESS TO At 5:41p.m., the City Council met in Closed Session to discuss the CLOSED SESSION following:

Public Employee Performance Evaluation
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54957
Title: City Manager
ACTION: This item will be discussed at the end of the regular meeting.

Conference with Real Property Negotiator
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54956.8
Property: 16359 Arrow Highway
Agency Negotiator: Julian A. Miranda, City Manager
Negotiating Parties: 39 Dalton Financial Ltd. Partnership Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment
ACTION: This item will be discussed at the end of the regular meeting.

Property: 16249 Arrow Highway
Negotiating Parties: Bravo Real Estate Services and Julian A.

Miranda, City Manager
Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment
ACTION: Update provided by staff, no direction or action taken (Councilmember Breceda abstained and did not participate in discussing this matter).

CC / HA MINUTES NOVEMBER 13, 2024
SPECIAL MEETING PAGE 2
Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation
Pursuant to Government Code Sections 54954.5(c), 54956.9(d)(1) Name of Case: Five Points, LP vs. City of Irwindale
Case Number: 22STCV01394
ACTION: Update provided by the City Attorney and City Manager; direction provided by Council; no action taken (Councilmember Breceda abstained and did not participate in discussing this matter).

Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation
Initiation of Litigation (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(4)
Number of Cases: One
ACTION: Information provided, direction provided to staff; no action taken (Councilmember Breceda abstained and did not participate in discussing this matter).

RECONVENE IN At 6:08 p.m., the City Council recessed in Open Session.

OPEN SESSION
RECESS TO At 8:08 p.m., the City Council reconvened in Closed Session to CLOSED SESSION discuss the following:

Public Employee Performance Evaluation
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54957
Title: City Manager
ACTION: Evaluation conducted; no action taken
Conference with Real Property Negotiator
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54956.8
Property: 16359 Arrow Highway
Agency Negotiator: Julian A. Miranda, City Manager
Negotiating Parties: 39 Dalton Financial Ltd. Partnership Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment
ACTION: Discussed, update provided; no action taken, and no direction provided.

ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
________________________________
Laura M. Nieto, MMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk

IRWINDALE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS NOVEMBER 13, 2024
5050 N. IRWINDALE AVENUE WEDNESDAY
IRWINDALE, CALIFORNIA 91706 6:09 P.M.

The Irwindale CITY COUNCIL met in regular session at the above time and place.

ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Mark A. Breceda, Manuel R. Garcia, H. Manuel Ortiz; Mayor Pro Tem Larry G. Burrola;
Mayor Albert F. Ambriz
Also Present: Julian A. Miranda, City Manager; Adrian Guerra, City Attorney; Theresa Olivares, Assistant City Manager; Christopher Hofford, Chief of Police; Kambiz Borhani, Director of Finance / City Treasurer; Eddie Chan, Director of Engineering / Building Official; Elizabeth Rodriguez, Public Services Director; Mary Hull, Human Resources Manager, and Laura Nieto, Chief Deputy City Clerk AB 2449 DISCLOSURES None.

CHANGES TO THE
AGENDA None.

COUNCILMEMBER
TRAVEL REPORTS None.

COUNCILMEMBER

COMMENTS
MAYOR PRO TEM Mayor Pro Tem Burrola requested that El Nido Park and the park at BURROLA Alice Rodriguez Circle be closed from dusk until dawn.

COUNCILMEMBER Councilmember Breceda noted that a light pole belonging to a BRECEDA business to the rear of a homeowner on Alice Rodriguez circle is too bright and requested that staff take steps to block the light from shining onto the homeowner’s property.

INTRODUCTION OF

NEW EMPLOYEES /

PROMOTIONS
ITEM NO. 17A ALEX TONG, ASSISTANT ENGINEER

ALEX TONG,
ASSISTANT ENGINEER The introduction was made.

ITEM NO. 17B ALEXANDRA PURPERO, PUBLIC WORKS SERVICES OFFICE

ALEXANDRA PURPERO, SPECIALIST
PUBLIC WORKS SVCS.

OFFICE SPECIALIST The introduction was made.

PROCLAMATIONS /

PRESENTATIONS /
COMMENDATIONS None.

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 13, 2024
REGULAR MEETING PAGE 2

CONSENT CALENDAR
MOTION A motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem Burrola, seconded by Councilmember Ortiz, to approve the Consent Calendar; The motion was unanimously approved; Councilmember Breceda abstaining on Item Nos. 19K and 19M and Councilmember Garcia abstaining on Item No. 19M due to potential conflicts of interest.

ITEM NO. 19A MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL AND REGULAR MEETINGS HELD MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 9, 2024

SPECIAL AND REGULAR
MEETINGS HELD The minutes were approved as presented.

OCTOBER 9, 2024
ITEM NO. 19B WARRANTS / DEMANDS / PAYROLL

WARRANTS /
DEMANDS / The warrants / demands / payroll were approved.

PAYROLL
ITEM NO. 19C ACCEPTANCE OF CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY ACCEPTANCE OF CA (OTS) FEDERAL GRANT FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,000

OFFICE OF TRAFFIC FOR TRAFFIC SAFETY EDUCATION AND IMPAIRED DRIVING

SAFETY (OTS) ENFORCEMENT

FEDERAL GRANT

FUNDS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $100,000

FOR TRAFFIC SAFETY

EDUCATION AND

IMPAIRED DRIVING

ENFORCEMENT
RESOLUTION NO. Resolution No. 2024-83-3560, entitled:
2024-83-3560
ADOPTED “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

IRWINDALE APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE 2024-2025 SELECTIVE TRAFFIC

ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (STEP) SUB-RECIPIENT

AGREEMENT BETWEEN CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF TRAFFIC

SAFETY (OTS) AND THE CITY OF IRWINDALE AND APPROVING

THE ACCEPTANCE AND APPROPRIATION OF THE CALIFORNIA

OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY FEDERAL GRANT FUNDS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $100,000 FOR THE SELECTIVE TRAFFIC
ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM (STEP),” was adopted.

ITEM NO. 19D ACCEPTANCE OF CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY ACCEPTANCE OF CA (OTS) FEDERAL GRANT FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $135,000

OFFICE OF TRAFFIC FOR TRAFFIC RECORDS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (TRIP)

SAFETY (OTS)

FEDERAL GRANT

FUNDS IN THE

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 13, 2024
REGULAR MEETING PAGE 3
AMOUNT OF $135,000

FOR TRAFFIC

RECORDS

IMPROVEMENT

PROJECT (TRIP)
RESOLUTION NO. Resolution No. 2024-84-3561, entitled:
2024-84-3561
ADOPTED “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

IRWINDALE APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE 2024-2025 TRAFFIC RECORDS

IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (TRIP) SUB-RECIPIENT AGREEMENT

BETWEEN CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY (OTS)

AND THE CITY OF IRWINDALE AND APPROVING THE

ACCEPTANCE AND APPROPRIATION OF THE CALIFORNIA

OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY FEDERAL GRANT FUNDS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $135,000 FOR THE TRAFFIC RECORDS
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (TRIP),” was adopted.

ITEM NO. 19E APPROVAL OF A JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY AGREEMENT TO

APPROVAL OF A JOIN THE PUBLIC RISK INNOVATION, SOLUTIONS, AND JOINT POWERS MANAGEMENT (“PRISM”) AUTHORITY FOR BENEFITS FOR CITY AUTHORITY AGMT. EMPLOYEES

TO JOINT THE
“PRISM” AUTHORITY

FOR BENEFITS FOR

CITY EMPLOYEES
RESOLUTION NO. Resolution No. 2024-91-3568, entitled:
2024-91-3568
ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

IRWINDALE APPROVING A JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY

AGREEMENT TO JOIN THE PUBLIC RISK INNOVATION,
SOLUTIONS, AND MANAGEMENT (“PRISM”) AUTHORITY AND

DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO THE CITY MANAGER TO ACT ON

BEHALF OF THE CITY COUNCIL IN MATTERS RELATED TO THE
JPA,” was adopted.

ITEM NO. 19F CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED PERSONNEL ADJUSTMENTS

CONSIDERATION OF

PROPOSED

PERSONNEL

ADJUSTMENTS
RESOLUTION NO. Resolution No. 2024-90-3567, entitled:
2024-90-3567
ADOPTED "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE REPEALING AND REPLACING RESOLUTION NO.
2024-76-3553, AND ESTABLISHING THE NUMBER OF

POSITIONS, SCHEDULE OF CLASSES, AND COMPENSATION

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 13, 2024
REGULAR MEETING PAGE 4
FOR CITY EMPLOYEES,” was adopted and the proposed personnel adjustments proposed in the staff report were authorized.

ITEM NO. 19G APPROVAL OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE

APPROVAL OF MOU IRWINDALE CITY EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATION (ICEA)

WITH THE ICEA
The Memorandum of Understanding by and between the City of Irwindale and the Irwindale City Employees Association July 1, 2024 – June 30, 2027, was approved.

ITEM NO. 19H APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT NO. 3 WITH PLACEWORKS, INC.

APPROVAL OF
AMENDMENT NO 3 Amendment No. 3 with PlaceWorks, Inc. for the preparation of an WITH PLACEWORKS, Initial Study and Environmental Impact Report to be prepared INC. in association with land use entitlement applications for property located at 13620 Live Oak Lane, Irwindale, CA 91706, was approved.

ITEM NO. 19I REQUEST TO APPROVE THE PARADE PERMIT AND A FEE

REQUEST TO WAIVER FOR THE PROCESSION OR PARADE LICENSE FEE APROVE THE FOR THE “OUR LADY OF GUADALUPE CHURCH FIESTA”

PARADE PERMIT AND PROCESSION BEING HELD BY OUR LADY OF GUADALUPE A FEE WAIVER FOR CHURCH ON DECEMBER 7-8, 2024

THE PROCESSION OR

PARADE LICENSE FEE
FOR THE “OUR LADY

OF GUADALUPE
CHURCH FIESTA”

PROCESSION
RESOLUTION NO. Resolution No. 2024-96-3573, entitled:
2024-96-3573
ADOPTED “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

IRWINDALE APPROVING THE PARADE PERMIT AND A FEE

WAIVER FOR THE PROCESSION LICENSE FEE FOR THE OUR
LADY OF GUADALUPE CHURCH FIESTA ON DECEMBER 7-8,
2024,” was adopted.

ITEM NO. 19J APPROVE THE SAFE, CLEAN WATER PROGRAM TRANSFER APPROVE THE SAFE, AGREEMENT NO. 2024MP37 FOR THE MUNICIPAL PROGRAM

CLEAN WATER TO CONTINUE RECEIVING MEASURE W FUNDS

PROGRAM TRANSFER
AGREEMENT NO. The City Council approved the Safe, Clean Water Program Transfer 2024MP37 FOR THE Agreement No. 2024MP37 for the Municipal Program between the MUNICIPAL PROGRAM City of Irwindale and the Los Angeles County Flood Control District in TO CONTINUE order to continue receiving Measure W Funds subject to City Attorney RECEIVING MEASURE approval as to form and approved:

W FUNDS

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 13, 2024
REGULAR MEETING PAGE 5
RESOLUTION NO. Resolution No. 2024-94-3571, entitled:
2024-94-3571
ADOPTED “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

IRWINDALE APPROVING CONTINUED PARTICIPATION IN THE

SAFE, CLEAN WATER PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING THE

MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE TRANSFER AGREEMENT WITH LOS
ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT,” was adopted.

ITEM NO. 19K APPROVAL OF CONSTRUCTION CHANGE ORDERS FOR THE APPROVAL OF 2023-2024 RESURFACING PROJECT: RESIDENTIAL
CONSTRUCTION RESURFACING PROJECT – PHASE III; P-1053

CHANGE ORDERS FOR
THE 23/24

RESURFACING
PROJECT;

RESIDENTIAL

RESURFACING
PROJECT – PHASE III;
P-1053
RESOLUTION NO. Resolution No. 2024-95-3572, entitled:
2024-95-3572
ADOPTED “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE (1) APPROVING CONSTRUCTION CHANGE
ORDERS IN THE AMOUNT OF $130,471.71 FOR THE 2023-2024
RESURFACING PROJECT: RESIDENTIAL RESURFACING
PROJECT – PHASE III TO INCREASE THE CONTRACT FROM
$962,098.50 TO $1,092,570.21; (2) APPROVING AN UPDATED 5% PROJECT CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $54,629 TO

COVER ANY UNFORSEEABLE CONDITIONS THAT MAY ARISE
DURING CONSTRUCTION; AND (3) APPROPRIATING AN
ADDITIONAL $62,189.82 FROM THE GENERAL FUND AND
$74,805.89 FROM THE MINING IMPACT FUND TO THE
RESIDENTIAL RESURFACING PROJECT – PHASE III; P-105,” was adopted; Councilmember Breceda abstaining.

ITEM NO. 19L ACCEPTANCE OF THE IRWINDALE VETERANS MONUMENT ACCEPTANCE OF IMPROVEMENT PROJECT – PHASE II; P-1059

THE IRWINDALE
VETERANS MONUMENT The City Council ratified changes to the original scope of work and IMPROVEMENT accepted the improvements and maintenance responsibilities for the PROJECT – PHASE II; constructed improvements of the Irwindale Veterans Monument P-1059 Improvement Project – Phase II, approved the final construction project amount of $210,487.07 under the construction contract with Mariposa Landscapes, Inc.; authorized the City Clerk to record the Notice of Completion; and authorized the Finance Director to release the 5% retention amount for the construction project.

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 13, 2024
REGULAR MEETING PAGE 6
ITEM NO. 19M APPROVAL OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE CITY OF APPROVAL OF PLANS IRWINDALE PUBLIC LIBRARY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT; P-1044

AND SPECIFICATIONS
FOR THE CITY OF The City Council approved the plans and specifications for the IRWINDALE PUBLIC Public Library Improvement Project, authorized staff to solicit bids for LIBRARY construction of the project; and:

IMPROVEMENT

PROJECT
RESOLUTION NO. Resolution No. 2024-98-3575, entitled:
2024-98-3575
ADOPTED “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

IRWINDALE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE PLANS AND

SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE IRWINDALE PUBLIC LIBRARY

IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, FINDING THE PROJECT

CATEGORICALLY EXCLUDED FROM THE NATIONAL
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (“NEPA”) PURSUANT TO 24 CFR

58.35 (A)(1), AND FINDING THE PROJECT EXEMPT FROM THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIROINMENTAL QUALITY ACT (“CEQA”) UNDER
CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15302,” was adopted;
Councilmembers Breceda and Garcia abstaining.

ITEM NO. 19N APPROVE THE CLEAN OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT VOUCHER

APPROVE THE CLEAN INCENTIVE PROGRAM (CORE)

OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT

VOUCHER INCENTIVE

PROJECT (CORE)
RESOLUTION NO. Resolution No. 2024-97-3574, entitled:
2024-97-3574
ADOPTED “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

IRWINDALE AUTHORIZING CITY STAFF TO APPLY FOR AND

ACCEPT THE CLEAN OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT VOUCHER

INCENTIVE PROJECT (CORE), WAIVE THE FORMAL BIDDING

PROCEDURES PURSUANT TO IRWINDALE MUNICIPAL CODE
SECTION 3.44.080(E), APPROPRIATE FUNDING TO PURCHASE

A CLEAN OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT AND ELECTRIC CHARGING

STATIONS, AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER
INTO A PURCHASE AGREEMENT,” was adopted.

END OF CONSENT CALENDAR

SPONTANEOUS

COMMUNICATIONS
JAMES HUNLEY James Hunley spoke against the closure of the Irwindale Speedway and made allegations of environmental contamination.

POLICE CHAPLAIN Police Chaplain Robert Treittler thanked the Council for honoring him ROBERT TREITTLER by placing his name on the City’s Veterans’ Monument.

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 13, 2024
REGULAR MEETING PAGE 7

NEW BUSINESS
ITEM NO. 21A INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 790 INTRODUCTION AND TO ADD CHAPTER 9.68 OF TITLE 9 TO THE IRWINDALE

FIRST READING OF MUNICIPAL CODE
ORDINANCE NO. 790

TO ADD CHAPTER

9.68 OF TITLE 9 TO

THE IRWINDALE

MUNICIPAL CODE
DEPUTY CITY Deputy City Attorney Ji Hea Oh presented the staff report.

ATTORNEY OH
FRED BARBOSA Fred Barbosa demanded to see the study that shows why a dedicated bike lane was necessary. He opposed bike lanes since, in his view, it would displace unhoused individuals from living in their vehicles.

DENA ZEPEDA Dena Zepeda questioned the need to store the belongings of unhoused individuals and stated that some of the individuals would take advantage of the requirement to have the City store their items.

She opposed storing and paying for storing their items since many of the unhoused individuals refuse assistance.

MAYOR PRO TEM In response to several questions by Mayor Pro Tem Burrola, Attorney BURROLA Oh stated that non-hazardous items that are associated with either a “notice to remove” or “notice to vacate” would be stored for up to 60 days. This time frame would avoid any challenges of search and seizure under the 4th Amendment and due process requirements.

City Manager Miranda added that the storage site would still have to be identified.

CITY ATTORNEY City Attorney Guerra indicated that the storage location would be up GUERRA to staff to identify as long as it reasonably secures the belongings and avoids damage to the stored items.

COUNCILMEMBER In response to a question by Councilmember Breceda, City Manager BRECEDA Miranda indicated that the City has not experienced any issues in the past regarding the storage of such items and briefly touched on previous efforts to clean up homeless encampments.

CITY ATTORNEY City Attorney Guerra advised that the concept is modeled after the GUERRA Supreme Court case “Grants Pass” and is structured to avoid potential challenges.

ASSISTANT CITY Assistant City Manager Olivares advised that past cleanup events MANAGER OLIVARES took place along the riverbed, which was preceded by proper notification to affected individuals. She also noted that the Council would also consider an anti-encampment ordinance, which in

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 13, 2024
REGULAR MEETING PAGE 8
conjunction with this item, would address homelessness issues on public property.

COUNCILMEMBER Councilmember Ortiz asked whether stored items must be kept for ORTIZ the entire 60-day period, to which Attorney Oh advised that 60 days is the maximum storage time allowed before the City would either recycle or discard the items, assuming nobody claims them.

COUNCILMEMBER Councilmember Garcia asked about the success rate of these types GARCIA of ordinances within other communities, to which Attorney Oh indicated that she could not speak directly to their issues. However, she noted that this issue is a matter of concern for many cities and that it is new in terms of enforcement. She also pointed out that many cities seem to be taking similar approaches and that she will be monitoring them to gauge their effectiveness.

Councilmember Garcia also asked about the bike lanes that Mr.

Barbosa referred to, to which Assistant City Manager Olivares advised that he may be referring the bike lanes that end at the wash bay behind Our Lady of Guadalupe, which are not contained within the City’s jurisdiction.

COUNCILMEMBER Councilmember Ortiz stated that he was present for the soft opening ORTIZ of the bike lane and advised that it has not been opened to the public yet.

ORDINANCE NO. 790 Ordinance No. 790, entitled:

INTRODUCED FOR
FIRST READING “AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE, ADDING CHAPTER 9.68 OF TITLE 9 TO THE

IRWINDALE MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROHIBIT UNLAWFUL
CAMPING AND STORAGE OF PERSONAL PROPERTY,” was
introduced for first reading, reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof, on the motion of Councilmember Breceda, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Burrola, and unanimously approved.

ITEM NO. 21B INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 791 INRRODUCTION AND TO ADD CHAPTER 9.72 OF TITLE 9 TO THE IRWINDALE

FIRST READING OF MUNICIPAL CODE
ORDINANCE NO. 791
TO ADD CHAPTER 9.72
OF TITLE 9 TO THE

IRWINDALE MUNICIPAL
CODE
DEPUTY CITY Deputy City Attorney Oh presented the staff report.

ATTORNEY OH
FRED BARBOSA Fred Barbosa asked who “the violation is written to”.

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 13, 2024
REGULAR MEETING PAGE 9
DENA ZEPEDA Dena Zepeda stated that officers from other law enforcement agencies drop off unhoused individuals in Irwindale and asked who would be fined and/or jailed for such action, to which Attorney Oh advised that the violation would result in a penalty of a misdemeanor and, per the City code, would be prosecuted either by a fine or six months of imprisonment or both, and would be directed to whichever governmental agency violated the ordinance. She added that the intent of the ordinance is to deter these types of actions.

ORDINANCE NO. 791 Ordinance No. 791, entitled:

INTRODUCED FOR
FIRST READING “AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE ADDING CHAPTER 9.72 OF TITLE 9 OF THE

IRWINDALE MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROHIBIT ANY

UNSANCTIONED GOVERNMENT-SPONSORED RELOCATION
OF UNHOUSED PERSONS TO THE CITY OF IRWINDALE,” was
introduced for first reading, reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof, on the motion of Councilmember Ortiz, seconded by Councilmember Breceda, an unanimously approved.

PUBLIC HEARINGS
ITEM NO. 22A SITE PLAN & DESIGN REVIEW (DA) NO. 01-2024 –

SITE PLAN & DESIGN MAINTENANCE AND WASH BAY CANOPY STRUCTURE REVIEW (DA) NO.
01-2024 – MAINT.

AND WASH BAY

CANOPY STRUCTURE
DIRECTOR SIMPSON Director Simpson presented the staff report.

CITY ATTORNEY City Attorney Guerra requested that, during the deliberation of this GUERRA item, each Councilmember indicate whether they visited the subject site in recent months.

ANTHONY BERTRAN Anthony Bertran, who spoke on behalf of the applicant, briefly provided some project details and stated that approval of this item would allow the company to submit the final plans for review to obtain a construction permit to have the facility completed by spring 2025.

OPEN At 7:15 p.m., Mayor Ambriz opened the public hearing.

PUBLIC HEARING.

ROBERT DIAZ Robert Diaz expressed concern regarding heavy traffic around the subject site and asked whether the three existing traffic lanes on eastbound Live Oak could be expanded to four. He also asked where trash would be transported to if trucks are to be washed at this site.

DIRECTOR SIMPSON Director Simpson indicated that the trash trucks themselves would not be washed in the wash bays. Rather, tractor trailers would be

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 13, 2024
REGULAR MEETING PAGE 10
washed, and these would not transport any household refuse. She added that anything to be washed there would go through a filtration system. Regarding the roadway, nothing is changing from the envelope of the project.

WILLIAM GONZALES William Gonzales stated that he lives about 100 yards way from the site and that the project would affect his family. He expressed concern over excessive noise past 10 pm and odors from the site and stated that the project would decrease the value of his home.

DIRECTOR SIMPSON Director Simpson stated that the project has a condition of approval for the standard maintenance and wash bay operations that would be allowed to occur only from 7 am to 10 pm, and that the business must always comply with the City’s noise ordinance.

DR. JEFF HARVEY Dr. Jeff Harvey introduced himself as the City’s environmental consultant and advised that he reviewed the proposed plans, including noise and visual aspects of the project. He concluded that there are no new types or magnitude of environmental impacts, including noise. He added that noise is shielded by an 8-foot block wall and four tall buildings across the street in Baldwin Park that block the view and sound from the property to the nearest houses.

ROBERT DIAZ Robert Diaz asked whether the 6-foot block wall at the subject property line would impede seeing pedestrians at the sidewalk. He suggested having a setback so that drivers and pedestrians could better see each other, to which Dr. Harvey advised that the wall is 8- feet tall and advised that the truck drivers would not be speeding to exit the site and onto the street. He added that, as the drivers stop their vehicles, they would be able to see whether there are any pedestrians present.

GARY CLIFFORD Gary Clifford, with Athens Services, added that there is no vehicle access on Live Oak; it is only located on Arrow Highway, and that this area is conditioned with signals.

FRED BARBOSA Fred Barbosa suggested installing mirrors to avoid accidents.

DIRECTOR CHAN Director Chan agreed that line of sight should not be an issue and concurred that the trucks would be entering and exiting on Arrow Highway.

WILLIAM GONZALES In response to questions from William Gonzales, Mr. Bertan advised that the gated access on Live Oak is for the Fire Department only. All other trucks would enter and exit on Arrow Highway. He added that Athens is also performing improvements at the intersection of Baldwin Park and Live Oak Avenues.

DENA ZEPEDA Dena Zepeda thanked Director Simpson for the report and suggested that the Council approve the request.

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 13, 2024
REGULAR MEETING PAGE 11
BELLA HERNANDEZ A letter from Bella Hernandez wherein she expressed opposition to the project was read into the record. She requested that a new environmental impact report for the project be prepared.

CLOSE There being no additional speakers, Mayor Ambriz closed the public PUBLIC HEARING hearing.

COUNCILMEMBER In reply to a question by Councilmember Ortiz, Director Simpson ORTIZ advised that the location of the wash bays had been relocated to increase efficiency.

Councilmember Ortiz inquired about another structure that he has observed being built, to which Mr. Bertran advised that this structure is the bale storage building. He noted that his team worked with city staff to secure a permit for the Material Recovery Facility and then his team followed-up with a plan for the separate building, which is designed to help mitigate potential fire risks.

Councilmember Ortiz then asked about the plans for the convenience store, to which Mr. Bertran indicated that there exists a ¾ acre pad where the convenience store will be built.

MAYOR PRO TEM Mayor Pro Tem Burrola stated his understanding that the wash basin BURROLA would be enclosed, to which Director Simpson advised that it would have walls on the sides but would not have any doors.

Mayor Pro Tem Burrola also asked about the facility’s hours of operation, to which Director Simpson advised that it would operate from 7 am to 10 pm and would be required to follow the City’s noise ordinance.

Mayor Pro Tem Burrola then asked about the types of vehicles that would enter the facility, to which Mr. Bertran advised that Athens’ refuse collection vehicles are housed and stored at a yard on Vincent Avenue, and all work / washing that is performed on those vehicles are conducted there. He further advised that semi-truck trailers would be washed at the subject site.

All councilmembers acknowledged having toured the Material Recovery Facility in recent months.

RESOLUTION NO. Resolution No. 2024-92-3569, entitled:
2024-92-3569
ADOPTED “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

IRWINDALE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SITE PLAN AND DESIGN
REVIEW (DA) NO. 01-2024 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A
±5,520 SQUARE FOOT MAINTENANCE AND WASH BAY

STRUCTURE FOR THE MATERIALS RECOVERY FACILITY /

TRANSFER STATION (MRF / TS) ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT
2200 ARROW HIGHWAY, IRWINDALE, CA 91706 (APN 8535-001-

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 13, 2024
REGULAR MEETING PAGE 12
039), IN THE M-2 (HEAVY MANUFACTURING) ZONE, SUBJECT

TO CONDITIONS AS STATED HEREIN, FINDING THE PROJECT

EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ACT (“CEQA”) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION
15162, AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS OF FACT,” was passed, approved, and adopted, on the motion of Councilmember Breceda, seconded by Councilmember Garcia, and unanimously approved.

CITY MANAGER’S
REPORT
CITY MANAGER City Manager Miranda presented the following report:

MIRANDA
1) The City Clerk’s Office is currently accepting applications for commission vacancies through December 2.
2) A special Planning Commission meeting will be held tomorrow. 3) A LA Metro Rail Safety workshop will be held this Friday. 4) The Irwindale Park rededication plaque has been installed at the park.
5) He also provided details on upcoming Recreation activities.

REQUESTS FOR

AGENDA ITEMS BY

CITY COUNCIL
DIRECTOR CHAN As previously requested by the Council, Director Chan provided an update on Citrus View Street and mentioned that the residents along the street wish to have streetlights installed. Since it is a private street, one option could be the approval of a street light installation request policy, which would outline the procedures, responsibility, and criteria for evaluating and responding to street light installation requests.

Another option would be to have the street’s residents dedicate the street to the City and, should the City accept, it would be obligated to maintain the street, including paving and accessibility to public use.

COUNCILMEMBER Councilmember Breceda requested to place this matter on the BRECEDA agenda for the January 22, 2025, Council meeting for further discussion.

COUNCILMEMBER Councilmember Garcia stated that streetlights are a safety issue and GARCIA requested that Director Chan communicate with Southern California Edison to apply for additional streetlights and have them bill the City MAYOR AMBRIZ Mayor Ambriz suggested waiting to act until a detailed staff report is presented to the Council
COUNCILMEMBER Councilmember Breceda reiterated his request for a detailed report BRECEDA be presented to the Council at its January 22, 2025, meeting, to include information relating to potential costs, street dedication, and a policy relating to street light installation requests.

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 13, 2024
REGULAR MEETING PAGE 13
ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned at 7:50 p.m.
________________________________
Laura M. Nieto, MMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk

November 2024
Reference
Number Vendor Name Date Amount
WFB-46 CJPIA Excess Pool 11/6/2024 11,512.25
ACH US Bank 11/12/2024 33,716.26
Report Total: 45,228.51
Electronic Payments
November 1 - 30, 2024

Accounts Payable
User:

Printed:
stapia
12/2/2024 5:52 PM
Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
103260 ALLIAN02 Alliant Insurance Svcs, Inc.- Irvine Main 11/07/2024 2,660.00 103261 AMAZON1 Amazon Capital Services, Inc. 11/07/2024 786.33 103262 Ayala01 Leonor Ayala 11/07/2024 720.00
103263 AZUSALW Azusa Light & Water 11/07/2024 432.00
103264 BALLI01 Shayna Balli 11/07/2024 260.95
103265 BARRA01 Krystle Barraza 11/07/2024 200.00
103266 NEST01 ReadyRefresh, Blue Triton Brands, Inc. 11/07/2024 1,011.34 103267 CALIFO02 California American Water 11/07/2024 1,510.32 103268 CARDEN01 Rudy Cardenas 11/07/2024 200.00
103269 CHARTE01 Charter Communications 11/07/2024 469.03 103270 DGINV01 Convergint Technologies LLC 11/07/2024 4,988.00 103271 CYPH01 Cypherworx, Inc 11/07/2024 1,909.62
103272 EDDCAS Employment Development Dept. 11/07/2024 6,485.00 103273 ENVIO22 Envision WC CDJR AUTO LLC 11/07/2024 9,198.91 103274 ESPI11 Victoria M. Espino 11/07/2024 240.00
103275 EVANS02 Gloria Evans 11/07/2024 375.00
103276 FAMI12 Nicole Familari 11/07/2024 300.00
103277 FLORE01 Karla Flores 11/07/2024 980.00
103278 FRONT01 Frontier Communications 11/07/2024 43.23 103279 GLOBAL04 Global Payments Company 11/07/2024 50.00 103280 SOUTHE17 Golden State Water Company 11/07/2024 1,964.23 103281 GONZA22 Inez Gonzalez 11/07/2024 300.00
103282 HDL01 Hdl Software, LLC 11/07/2024 34.56
103283 HOYEN Noelle Hoye 11/07/2024 840.00
103284 MAINTE01 Maintex 11/07/2024 115.88
103285 MIRAND25 Blanche V. Miranda 11/07/2024 650.00
103286 MIRAN10 Julian A. Miranda 11/07/2024 89.38
103287 MORALE15 Elizabeth Morales-Velazquez 11/07/2024 184.74 103288 MSL01 MSL Electric Inc. 11/07/2024 4,500.00
103289 NORMAN02 Norman A. Traub Associates 11/07/2024 6,463.26 103290 OPTUM01 OptumRx, Inc. 11/07/2024 44,959.25
103291 PROPRINT Pro Printing, Inc. 11/07/2024 55.75
103292 RAMI20 Joanna Ramirez 11/07/2024 300.00
103293 RANCHO01 Rancho Duarte Florist 11/07/2024 150.00 103294 RILE01 Antoinette Riley 11/07/2024 300.00
103297 ROBLES03 Michael Robles 11/07/2024 300.00
103298 SCFUELS SC Fuels 11/07/2024 6,376.93
103299 GASCOM SoCalGas 11/07/2024 2,686.14
103300 TATUM01 Blanca Tatum 11/07/2024 75.00
103301 NORTHR The Northridge Group, Inc. 11/07/2024 15,000.00 103302 VALLEY01 Valley County Water District 11/07/2024 3,214.87 103303 VISION01 Vision Service Plan - (CA) 11/07/2024 1,558.97 103304 WAGONER Pamela Wagoner 11/07/2024 910.00
103305 NATURAL0 Clean Coalition 11/14/2024 20,000.00
AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (12/2/2024 5:52 PM) Page 1

Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
Report Total (44 checks): 143,848.69
AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (12/2/2024 5:52 PM) Page 2

Accounts Payable
User:

Printed:
stapia
12/2/2024 7:10 PM
Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
103307 AMAZON1 Amazon Capital Services, Inc. 11/14/2024 1,347.92 103308 ATHENS Athens Services 11/14/2024 6,049.43
103309 MIJACA Balcon Holdings, Inc. 11/14/2024 108.00
103310 CALIFO02 California American Water 11/14/2024 6,718.24 103311 CALI12 California Consulting Inc. 11/14/2024 4,700.00 103312 CARRI01 Kavisha Carrillo 11/14/2024 300.00
103313 CINTAS Cintas Corporation #693 11/14/2024 141.49 103314 BALDWI02 City of Baldwin Park 11/14/2024 875.00
103315 CONCE01 Concentra 11/14/2024 973.00
103316 ESPINO10 Iris Espino 11/14/2024 150.00
103317 SOUTHE17 Golden State Water Company 11/14/2024 329.17 103318 HOMEDE Home Depot Credit Services 11/14/2024 1,391.25 103319 IRWIND21 Irwindale Hand Wash & Auto Detail 11/14/2024 1,043.61 103320 LANCES Lance, Soll & Lunghard LLP 11/14/2024 5,220.00 103321 LIEBERT Liebert Cassidy Whitmore 11/14/2024 100.00 103322 MART20 Sam A. Martinez 11/14/2024 253.55
103323 OFFICE03 ODP Business Solutions, LLC 11/14/2024 325.35 103324 PALACI01 Joanna Palacios 11/14/2024 178.48
103325 RIOHON01 Rio Hondo College 11/14/2024 456.00
103326 RIOHON01 Rio Hondo College 11/14/2024 50.00
103327 ACCOUN Robert Half 11/14/2024 537.39
103328 SANG03 San Gabriel Valley Police Chiefs' Assoc. 11/14/2024 400.00 103329 SECT01 Sectran Security Inc. 11/14/2024 124.07
103330 SIERRA01 Sierra Chevrolet 11/14/2024 155.10
103331 SMART& Smart & Final 11/14/2024 2,422.78
103332 SCE02 Southern California Edison 11/14/2024 42,152.89 103333 TOTALCOM Total Compensation Systems Inc 11/14/2024 1,237.50 103334 VALLEY01 Valley County Water District 11/14/2024 19,510.46 103335 CALIFO56 California State Disbursement Unit 11/14/2024 604.15 103336 CALIFO57 California State Disbursement Unit 11/14/2024 143.07 103337 FRANC06 Franchise Tax Board 11/14/2024 488.25
103338 FRANCH07 Franchise Tax Board 11/14/2024 520.08
103339 LOSANG31 Los Angeles County Sheriff's Dept. 11/14/2024 103.28 103340 TONY01 Antonio Garcia Bonilla 11/14/2024 2,154.44 103341 ACUNA03 Luana Acuna 11/21/2024 351.68
103342 AGUILA07 Berlyn Aguila 11/21/2024 414.55
103343 AMAZON1 Amazon Capital Services, Inc. 11/21/2024 586.73 103344 AMERIC34 American Fidelity Assurance Co 11/21/2024 5,350.66 103345 ARTIC01 Arctic Glacier U.S.A, Inc. 11/21/2024 4,030.70 103346 AT&T06 AT & T 11/21/2024 1,724.84
103347 CINGULAR AT & T Mobility 11/21/2024 1,807.96
103348 MIJACA Balcon Holdings, Inc. 11/21/2024 138.00
103349 NEST01 ReadyRefresh, Blue Triton Brands, Inc. 11/21/2024 741.00 103350 CALIFO02 California American Water 11/21/2024 577.82 103351 CALIFO03 California JPIA 11/21/2024 15,793.00
103352 CAMPOS03 Manuel Campos 11/21/2024 181.37
103353 GALLARDC Claudia Carlos 11/21/2024 1,500.00
AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (12/2/2024 7:10 PM) Page 1

Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
103354 CINTAS Cintas Corporation #693 11/21/2024 543.49 103355 CONVER Converse Consultants, Inc. 11/21/2024 17,698.20 103356 CORNEJOD Diego Cornejo 11/21/2024 2,187.00
103357 CORY02 Shawn Cory 11/21/2024 97.41
103358 PMIDEN Delta Dental Insurance Company 11/21/2024 1,300.76 103359 PMIDEN01 Delta Dental of California 11/21/2024 13,922.75 103360 ECOLAB01 ECOLAB 11/21/2024 12.35
103361 ESPINO10 Iris Espino 11/21/2024 18.64
103362 FARIAS01 Ginger Farias 11/21/2024 184.00
103363 FRONT01 Frontier Communications 11/21/2024 688.28 103364 FRONT01 Frontier Communications 11/21/2024 353.86 103365 TONY01 Antonio Garcia Bonilla 11/21/2024 8,169.65 103366 HERNAN36 Jacqueline Hernandez 11/21/2024 151.20
103367 HOFFOR01 Christopher Hofford 11/21/2024 25.00
103368 LANDSC Landscape Warehouse III Inc. 11/21/2024 429.08 103369 MAINTE01 Maintex 11/21/2024 78.86
103370 MITCH01 Eunice MItchell 11/21/2024 300.00
103371 NATION23 National Union Fire Insurance 11/21/2024 731.73 103372 NICH01 Nichols Lumber & Hardware CO 11/21/2024 1,240.71 103373 NORMAN02 Norman A. Traub Associates 11/21/2024 9,716.32 103374 NUNE25 Cesar Nunez 11/21/2024 158.56
103375 OFFICE03 ODP Business Solutions, LLC 11/21/2024 156.63 103376 OPTUM01 OptumRx, Inc. 11/21/2024 30,097.09
103377 ORKINP Orkin Pest Control 11/21/2024 2,084.91
103378 PARRA01 Catherine Parra-Haynes 11/21/2024 600.00 103379 PHASEII PARS 11/21/2024 1,750.00
103380 PONCE10 Lorraine Ponce 11/21/2024 450.00
103381 LEGAL03 Pre-Paid Legal Services, Inc. 11/21/2024 110.65 103382 RAMOS07 Maria Ramos 11/21/2024 200.00
103383 RANCHO01 Rancho Duarte Florist 11/21/2024 382.57 103384 ROSENO RSG Inc. 11/21/2024 2,896.25
103385 RUBIO11 Briana Rubio 11/21/2024 80.00
103386 SANCH11 Amanda Sanchez 11/21/2024 80.00
103387 SILV01 Randy Silva 11/21/2024 292.75
103388 STANDA01 Standard Insurance Co. RV 11/21/2024 448.45 103389 STANDA03 Standard Insurance Company 11/21/2024 2,521.43 103390 STATEO01 State Of California 11/21/2024 288.00
103391 SUPER01 Super Birthday Inc. 11/21/2024 600.00
103392 SWEET02 Sweet Moments Photobooth LLC 11/21/2024 375.00 103393 TAPIA11 Sylvia Tapia 11/21/2024 1,500.00
103394 TEXAS01 Texas Life Insurance Co. 11/21/2024 4,316.74 103395 verizonw Verizon Wireless 11/21/2024 3,253.23
103396 VISION01 Vision Service Plan - (CA) 11/21/2024 6,520.18 103397 WILL01 April Williams 11/21/2024 360.00
103398 ZEPEDA07 Priscilla Zepeda 11/21/2024 234.23
103399 ALLCI01 All City Management Services, Inc 11/27/2024 2,172.60 103400 AZBUS01 A-Z Bus Sales 11/27/2024 34.44
103401 AZUSAP01 Azusa Plumbing Supply 11/27/2024 378.03 103402 B&BTIR B & B Tires Service 11/27/2024 85.00
103403 BAKER01 Baker & Taylor Books 11/27/2024 196.27
103404 MIJACA Balcon Holdings, Inc. 11/27/2024 406.00
103405 BARNEY Barney's Locksmith Service 11/27/2024 43.66 103406 BILLST Bill's Truck Repair, Inc. 11/27/2024 2,628.10 103407 BMI01 BMI 11/27/2024 435.00
103408 BRITEW BriteWorks, Inc. 11/27/2024 12,847.12
103409 SANGAB11 California Newspapers Partnership 11/27/2024 3,391.02 103410 CDW01 CDW Government 11/27/2024 808.20
AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (12/2/2024 7:10 PM) Page 2

Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
103411 CIVIC02 CivicPlus, LLC 11/27/2024 3,028.20
103412 COMPLE01 Complete Paperless Solutions, LLC 11/27/2024 17,828.89 103413 COUNTY04 County of Los Angeles 11/27/2024 15,416.66 103414 LOSANG33 County of Los Angeles 11/27/2024 116,738.36 103415 DAVIDE David Evans & Associates Inc 11/27/2024 1,408.60 103416 DUDEK01 Dudek 11/27/2024 1,080.00
103417 BATE01 Elior Inc. 11/27/2024 4,611.25
103418 EPOCH01 EPOCH 11/27/2024 3,915.00
103419 FCG01 FCG Consultants Inc. 11/27/2024 15,220.10
103420 FILLG01 Fill Good Landscaping 11/27/2024 565.00
103421 FWEP01 FWEP Aquisitioin Inc 11/27/2024 173.46
103422 GARVEY Garvey Equipment Co 11/27/2024 342.19
103423 GEN01 General Technologies and Solutions (GTS) LLC 11/27/2024 39,557.02 103424 GEOLOG Geologic Associates 11/27/2024 22,268.39
103425 1Glendor Glendora Chevrolet 11/27/2024 8.27
103426 GRAND10 Grand Slam Safety,LLC 11/27/2024 43.10
103427 ICMA ICMA 11/27/2024 1,200.00
103428 INTELL01 Intelli-tech, Inc. 11/27/2024 14,969.48 103429 ITERIS Iteris, Inc. 11/27/2024 980.00
103430 JOEAGO Joe A. Gonsalves & Son 11/27/2024 2,375.00 103431 COORYE Samir M. Khoury 11/27/2024 15,568.00
103432 LANDSC Landscape Warehouse III Inc. 11/27/2024 147.18 103433 MIDAS Manuel C Muratalla 11/27/2024 76.98
103434 MARIPO Mariposa Landscapes, Inc. 11/27/2024 66,305.05 103435 MARXBR Marx Bros Fire Extinguisher Co 11/27/2024 800.00 103436 MERCUR Mercury Fence Co., Inc. 11/27/2024 300.00 103437 METR01 Metrocell Construction, Inc. 11/27/2024 50,147.00 103438 MOUNT01 MNRO Holdings, LLC 11/27/2024 55.37
103439 NAN01 Nancy K Bohl Inc 11/27/2024 4,166.00
103440 NATION25 National Auto Fleet Group 11/27/2024 52,275.63 103441 OFFICE03 ODP Business Solutions, LLC 11/27/2024 343.98 103442 OFFICE02 Office Solutions 11/27/2024 492.24
103443 PERF03 Performance Elevator Contractors, Inc. 11/27/2024 380.00 103444 PITNEY06 Pitney Bowes, Inc 11/27/2024 982.47
103445 PROPRINT Pro Printing, Inc. 11/27/2024 3,698.16
103446 PURCHA Purchase Power 11/27/2024 2,167.83
103447 RANCHO01 Rancho Duarte Florist 11/27/2024 293.74 103448 SEMA02 SEMA INC 11/27/2024 3,448.60
103449 SIERRM01 Marcos Sierra 11/27/2024 3,027.57
103450 STUMPFEN Stump Fence Co. 11/27/2024 2,290.00
103451 TAB01 TAB Products Co. LLC 11/27/2024 525.00
103452 TPX 01 TPX Communications 11/27/2024 313.52
103453 ARAM01 Vestis Services, LLC 11/27/2024 497.80
103454 WALT01 Walters Wholesale Electric Co. 11/27/2024 497.07 103455 WESTCO05 West Coast Arborists, Inc. 11/27/2024 1,031.50 103456 HDSUP01 WHITE CAP, L.P. 11/27/2024 82.24
103457 YTIRES Y Tire Sales 11/27/2024 30.00
103458 Z&K01 Z&K Consultants, Inc. 11/27/2024 35,644.00 103459 ACUNA03 Luana Acuna 11/27/2024 146.88
103460 AMAZON1 Amazon Capital Services, Inc. 11/27/2024 1,337.65 103461 AZUSALW Azusa Light & Water 11/27/2024 889.26
103462 BURN01 Mark Burnett 11/27/2024 425.00
103463 BURROL08 Larry Burrola 11/27/2024 109.60
103464 CAMPOS03 Manuel Campos 11/27/2024 177.34
103465 CINTAS Cintas Corporation #693 11/27/2024 283.97 103466 ESPI11 Victoria M. Espino 11/27/2024 120.00
103467 EVANS02 Gloria Evans 11/27/2024 225.00
AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (12/2/2024 7:10 PM) Page 3

Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
103468 FLORE01 Karla Flores 11/27/2024 420.00
103469 GAMEZ01 Pablo Gamez 11/27/2024 447.28
103470 HARDY01 Joseph Hardy 11/27/2024 43.55
103471 HOVE01 Armando Hovey 11/27/2024 500.00
103472 IRWIND21 Irwindale Hand Wash & Auto Detail 11/27/2024 606.81 103473 ITERIS Iteris, Inc. 11/27/2024 620.00
103474 JONES03 Richard D Jones, A Professional Law Corporation 11/27/2024 49.15 103475 MODEL01 Model 1 Commercial Vehicle, Inc. 11/27/2024 92.69 103476 OFFICE03 ODP Business Solutions, LLC 11/27/2024 93.69 103477 PETTYC05 City of Irwindale-Admin Petty Cash 11/27/2024 457.89 103478 PROPRINT Pro Printing, Inc. 11/27/2024 55.75
103479 ACCOUN Robert Half 11/27/2024 693.40
103480 SCFUELS SC Fuels 11/27/2024 5,123.49
103481 SCE02 Southern California Edison 11/27/2024 5,256.48 103482 UNITED11 United Site Services of CA Inc 11/27/2024 589.50 103483 WAGONER Pamela Wagoner 11/27/2024 210.00
103484 CALIFO56 California State Disbursement Unit 11/27/2024 604.15 103485 CALIFO57 California State Disbursement Unit 11/27/2024 143.07 103486 CALIFO58 California State Disbursement Unit 11/27/2024 100.00 103487 CITY01 City of Hope 11/27/2024 34.00
103488 FRANC06 Franchise Tax Board 11/27/2024 488.25
103489 FRANCH07 Franchise Tax Board 11/27/2024 262.14
103490 ICEA Irwindale City Employee Assoc. 11/27/2024 936.00 103491 IMEA Irwindale Mgmt Employee Assoc. 11/27/2024 500.00 103492 IRWIND02 Irwindale Police Officers Assoc. 11/27/2024 3,068.00 103493 LOSANG31 Los Angeles County Sheriff's Dept. 11/27/2024 154.87 103494 ACCO01 ACCO Engineering Systems 12/11/2024 8,491.00 103495 ALLCI01 All City Management Services, Inc 12/11/2024 977.67 103496 AZBUS01 A-Z Bus Sales 12/11/2024 3,221.87
103497 BAKER01 Baker & Taylor Books 12/11/2024 84.50
103498 CONVER Converse Consultants, Inc. 12/11/2024 10,949.00 103499 COSTA01 Costar Realty Information, Inc. 12/11/2024 438.90 103500 COUNTY04 County of Los Angeles 12/11/2024 12,785.83 103501 CSG01 CSG Consultants 12/11/2024 7,831.25
103502 DASH01 Dash Medical Gloves, LLC 12/11/2024 209.52 103503 DAVIDE David Evans & Associates Inc 12/11/2024 508.00 103504 DEMCOI Demco, Inc. 12/11/2024 433.31
103505 DIVISI01 Division of the State Architect 12/11/2024 493.90 103506 DOGWAS01 Dog Waste Depot 12/11/2024 479.58
103507 ECORP01 ECORP Consulting, Inc. 12/11/2024 10,285.00 103508 ENVIRO05 Environmental Science Associates (ESA) 12/11/2024 4,692.00 103509 FWEP01 FWEP Aquisitioin Inc 12/11/2024 129.66
103510 GEOLOG Geologic Associates 12/11/2024 55,398.10
103511 HDLCOR HdL Coren & Cone 12/11/2024 3,162.64
103512 INTERS02 Interstate Batteries 12/11/2024 180.19
103513 INTER01 Interwest Consulting Group 12/11/2024 2,332.50 103514 KIML01 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 12/11/2024 860.15 103515 LAWE01 Law Enforcement Medical Services, Inc. 12/11/2024 1,225.00 103516 LEWISE Lewis Engraving, Inc. 12/11/2024 14.33
103517 PRAXAI Linde Gas & Equipment Inc 12/11/2024 21.95 103518 LSA01 LSA Associates, Inc. 12/11/2024 5,332.50
103519 MAINTE01 Maintex 12/11/2024 2,169.50
103520 MIDAS Manuel C Muratalla 12/11/2024 1,445.97
103521 NATION25 National Auto Fleet Group 12/11/2024 232,717.50 103522 NOVA01 Nova Geotechnical & Inspection Services - SoCal 12/11/2024 21,458.77 103523 ORTCO01 Ortco Inc. 12/11/2024 8,100.00
103524 PLACE01 PlaceWorks, Inc. 12/11/2024 3,063.17
AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (12/2/2024 7:10 PM) Page 4

Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
103525 PROPRINT Pro Printing, Inc. 12/11/2024 215.00
103526 ADAMPP Proffesional Police Supply Inc. 12/11/2024 1,514.01 103527 RANCHO01 Rancho Duarte Florist 12/11/2024 75.00
103528 ROGELI Rogelio's Upholstery 12/11/2024 269.10
103529 ROYAL04 Royal Industrial Electric 12/11/2024 886.28 103530 SOUTH09 Southern Computer Warehouse Inc, 12/11/2024 1,735.43 103531 ARAM01 Vestis Services, LLC 12/11/2024 105.87
103532 WALT01 Walters Wholesale Electric Co. 12/11/2024 1,743.13 103533 WESTCO05 West Coast Arborists, Inc. 12/11/2024 1,129.20 103534 WEST06 Westrux International, Inc. 12/11/2024 125.00 103535 YTIRES Y Tire Sales 12/11/2024 30.00
103536 ZOHO01 Zoho Corporation 12/11/2024 2,197.80
Report Total (230 checks): 1,217,593.50
AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (12/2/2024 7:10 PM) Page 5

Payroll Batch 409-11-24

DATE OF ISSUE DEPARTMENT AMOUNT
11/14/24
11 City Council 1,731.15
13 City Administrative Office 61,106.53
14 Finance Department 28,302.15
35 Police Department 219,792.99
40 Recreation Department 34,032.28
41 Aquatics Department 6,834.59
42 Senior Citizens' Center 20,678.40
44 Library 16,496.05
51 Planning & Community Development 23,610.09
52 Public Works - Engineering 30,199.06
57 Public Works - Services 55,505.87
Gross Payroll 498,289.16
Required Deductions (145,342.37)
Voluntary Deductions (22,088.30)
Net Payroll 330,858.49
Payroll Batch 415-11-24

DATE OF ISSUE DEPARTMENT AMOUNT
11/15/24
57 Public Works - Services 12,881.87
Gross Payroll 12,881.87
Required Deductions (4,911.79)
Voluntary Deductions -
Net Payroll 7,970.08
Payroll Batch 423-11-24, 424-11-24, 425-11-24, 426-11-24

DATE OF ISSUE DEPARTMENT AMOUNT
11/27/24
11 City Council 5,867.49
13 City Administrative Office 61,458.00
14 Finance Department 28,497.94
35 Police Department 221,696.37
40 Recreation Department 35,430.61
41 Aquatics Department 3,822.49
42 Senior Citizens' Center 20,879.36
44 Library 15,685.53
51 Planning & Community Development 24,853.23
52 Public Works - Engineering 30,199.06
57 Public Works - Services 54,564.26
Gross Payroll 502,954.34
Required Deductions (146,489.13)
Voluntary Deductions (22,870.47)
Net Payroll 333,594.74

CITY OF IRWINDALE

PAYROLL WARRANT REGISTER
November 2024

Item #24.C.

Date: December 11, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Julian A. Miranda, City Manager
Issue: Approval of the 2025 Local Appointments List
City Manager's Recommendation:

Adopt Resolution No. 2024-89-3566 entitled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, REGARDING THE PREPARATION OF THE 2025 LOCAL APPOINTMENTS LIST AND POSTING OF THE SAME” reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof.

Administrative Action:

Submitted by:

Theresa Olivares, Assistant City Manager
Prepared by:

Laura Nieto, Chief Deputy City Clerk
Reviewed by:

Adrian R. Guerra, City Attorney
Approved by:

Julian A. Miranda, City Manager

Background and Analysis:

Government Code Sections 54970-54975 (the “Maddy Act”) require municipal agencies to prepare and post a list of appointments of all regular and ongoing boards, commissions, and committees. This list is known as the Local Appointments List.

The Maddy Act was enacted to ensure that members of the public are aware of opportunities to serve on local commissions. The Maddy Act mandates that on or before December 31 of each year, the City Council shall prepare an appointments list of all regular and ongoing boards, commissions, and committees which are appointed by the City Council.

The list must include (a) A list of all appointive terms which will expire during the next calendar year, with the name of the incumbent appointee, the date of appointment, the date the term expires, and the necessary qualifications for the position; and (b) A list of all boards, commissions, and committees whose members serve at the pleasure of the legislative body, and the necessary qualifications for each position.

The Chief Deputy City Clerk will be directed to make the Local Appointments List available to members of the public consistent with the requirements of the Maddy Act, including posting at the City Hall bulletin board, City’s website (www.irwindaleca.gov) and the Irwindale Public Library.

Fiscal Impact:

None
Attachments:

1. Resolution No. 2024-89-3566 List of Local Appointments

Resolution No. 2024-89-3566

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-89-3566

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IRWINDALE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, REGARDING THE PREPARATION OF THE 2025

LOCAL APPOINTMENTS LIST AND POSTING OF THE SAME
WHEREAS, the Maddy Act, California Government Code Section 54970 et seq., requires the City Council to prepare a Local Appointments List, which lists all regular and ongoing boards, commissions and committees which are appointed by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the Local Appointments List is required to be made available to members of the public; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Irwindale desires to adopt the City of Irwindale’s 2025 Local Appointments List, and make the same available to the public.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF IRWINDALE DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE, FIND AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The Mayor has prepared an appointments list of all regular and ongoing boards, commissions, and committees which are appointed by the City Council, the 2025 Local Appointments List, which is attached as Exhibit “A”. The City Council has reviewed and approves the Local Appointments List as prepared. The Chief Deputy City Clerk is directed to make the Local Appointments List available to members of the public consistent with the requirements of the Maddy Act, including posting at Irwindale City Hall’s bulletin board, City of Irwindale website and the Irwindale Public Library located at 5050 Irwindale Avenue, Irwindale, CA 91706.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Irwindale at a regular meeting held on the 11th day of December 2024. __________________________
Albert F. Ambriz, Mayor
ATTEST:

Laura M. Nieto, MMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk

Resolution No. 2024-89-3566

STATE OF CALIFORNIA }
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES } ss.

CITY OF IRWINDALE }
I, Laura M. Nieto, Chief Deputy City Clerk of the City of Irwindale, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2024-89-3566 was adopted at an regular meeting of the Irwindale City Council held on the 11th day of December 2024 by the following vote of the Council:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:
__________________________
Laura M. Nieto, MMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk

Resolution No. 2024-89-3566

Exhibit “A”

LOCAL APPOINTMENTS LIST

NOTICE OF COMMISSION VACANCIES
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Irwindale encourages residents to apply for positions on City Boards, Commissions, and Committees that will have vacancies in 2025.

Commissioners are appointed by the City Council and are volunteers who serve three year terms (Planning Commissioners serve four year terms) beginning January 1 and must reapply after each term.

The following is a complete list of expiring appointed terms for 2025, names of incumbents and the dates of their appointment.

PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION
Name of Appointee Date of Appointment /
Reappointment
Term Expiration
Carmen Roman Appointed: 9/23/20
Re-appointed: 12/14/22
December 31, 2025
Michelle Duran Appointed: 12/14/22 December 31, 2025
The Parks and Recreation Commission provides policy direction to the City Council in administering the City’s parks and recreation programs. The five member body meets on the first Wednesday of each month at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.

PLANNING COMMISSION
Name of Appointee Date of Appointment /
Reappointment
Term Expiration
Joseph V. Rodriguez II Appointed: 12/13/23 December 31, 2025 Casey J. Miranda Appointed: 6/12/24 December 31, 2025
The Planning Commission provides land use policy direction to the City Council. The fivemember body meets on the third Wednesday of each month at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.

Resolution No. 2024-89-3566

SENIOR CITIZEN COMMISSION
Name of Appointee Date of Appointment /
Reappointment
Term Expiration
Christina Fraijo Appointed: 12/14/22 December 31, 2025
The Senior Citizen Commission provides policy direction to the City Council in administering the city’s senior citizen programs. The five-member body meets on the fourth Monday of each month at 9:00 a.m. in the City Council Chambers.

IRWINDALE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION
Name of Appointee Date of Appointment /
Reappointment
Term Expiration
Steven Hillgren (Business
Representative)
Appointed: 07/24/24 June 30, 2025
George Silva (Business
Representative)
Appointed: 07/24/24 June 30, 2025
The Irwindale Community Foundation’s specific and primary purpose is to support the City of Irwindale and the residents of the City of Irwindale by providing funding, through grants, donations and corporate support, for community benefits and services to benefit the community.

No person shall be eligible for appointment to the any City Commission unless he or she is a resident of the City of Irwindale, age fifty years or older (for the Senior Citizen Commission only) and a registered, qualified voter of the City at the time of appointment. At all times during such commissioner's term of office he or she shall continue to be a resident and a registered, qualified voter of the city.

Laura M. Nieto, MMC
Chief Deputy City Clerk
Date Posted:

Item #24.D.

Date: December 11, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Julian A. Miranda, City Manager
Issue: Development Impact Fee Compliance Report Required Pursuant to Government Code § 66006.

City Manager's Recommendation:

That the City Council review, receive and file the Development Impact Fee Compliance Report for Fiscal Year ending on June 30, 2024.

Administrative Action:

Submitted / Prepared by:

Kambiz Borhani, Finance Director / City Treasurer
Reviewed by:

Adrian R. Guerra, City Attorney
Kambiz Borhani, Finance Director / City Treasurer
Approved by:

Julian A. Miranda, City Manager

Background and Analysis:

The Development Impact Fees are charged to new development, and represents the new development project’s fair share of costs for future infrastructure and facility needs that will be needed to meet the City’s growth demands.

The City Council of the City of Irwindale adopted Development Impact Fee Ordinance No. 726 (IMC Section 3.50) on July 11, 2018, and the fees became effective sixty (60) days after. On December 9, 2020, the City Council approved Resolution No. 2020-98-3258 approving adjustments of the City’s DIF and the fees became effective sixty (60) days after adoption.

Pursuant to Government Code Section 66006, a local agency which levies Development Impact Fees shall make available to the public a report providing certain information set forth in Government Code Section 66006(b)(1) and shall review that information at the next regularly scheduled public meeting not less than 15 days after the information has been made available to the public.

Commencing on November 26, 2024, copies of the Development Impact Fee Compliance report, attached as Exhibit A, were made available to the public for review in the City Clerk’s Office, as well as posted on the City’s website. At this December 11, 2024, City Council meeting, the City Council is asked to review the information that has been made available to the public in accordance with Government Code Section 66006.

The purpose of this report is to provide the community with information as to the status and use of development impact fees collected and to meet the reporting requirement of Government Code Section 66006 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2024.

Fiscal Impact:

There is no fiscal impact with the acceptance of this report.

Attachments:

1. Development Impact Fee Compliance Report for fiscal year ending June 30, 2024

1 | Page
City of Irwindale
Development Impact Fee Annual Report
Fiscal Year 2023-2024

INTRODUCTION
The following is a report, which was prepared to comply with California Government Code Section 66006. This section requires an annual disclosure and review of collected development impact fees and expenditures. This review is prepared in compliance with the requirements of the Government Code1. The Development Impact Fees are meant to fund the cost of key capital facilities that will be needed to meet the City’s growth demands.

The City Council of the City of Irwindale adopted the Development Impact Fee (“DIF”) Ordinance No. 726 on July 11, 2018. On December 9, 2020, the City Council approved Resolution No. 2020-98-3258 approving adjustments of the City’s DIF and the fees became effective sixty (60) days after adoption.

State law requires any local agency that imposes development impact fees to prepare and make available an annual report providing specific information about those fees within 180 days after the last day of each Fiscal year. The annual compliance reporting requirements are as follows:

1. A brief description of the type of fee in the account or fund, included as Section 1.

2. The amount of the fee, included as Section 2.

3. The beginning and ending balance of the account or fund, included as Section 3.

4. The amount of the fees collected and the interest earned, included as Section 4.

5. An identification of each public improvement on which fees were expended and the amount of the expenditures on each improvement, including the total percentage of the cost of the public improvement that was funded with fees.

Included as Section 5.

6. An identification of an approximate date by which the construction of the public improvement will commence if the local agency determines that sufficient funds have been collected to complete financing on an incomplete public improvement, 1 Unless otherwise specified herein, all statutory references are to the Government Code.

2 | Page
as identified in paragraph (2) of the subdivision (a) of Section 66001, and the public improvement remains incomplete. Included as Section 6.

7. A description of each inter-fund transfer or loan made from the account or fund, including the public improvement of which the transferred or loaned fees will be expended, and the case of an inter-fund loan, the date on which the loan will be repaid and the rate of interest that the account or fund will receive on the loan.

Included as Section 7.

8. The amount of refunds made pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 66001 and any allocation pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 66001. Included as Section 8.

3 | Page

RESPONSES TO THE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
Section 1: A brief description of the type of fee in the account or fund a. Administrative Facilities – The purpose of the fee is to ensure that the new development funds its fair share of administrative facilities.

A fee schedule is presented based on the planned facilities standard of administrative facilities in the City of Irwindale to ensure that new development provides adequate funding to meet its needs. b. Transportation Facilities – The purpose of this fee is to fund the needed transportation facilities, including roadway segments and intersection improvements, to accommodate new development. c. Library Facilities – The purpose of this fee is to fund the needed Library facility. The Library facilities in Irwindale serve both residents and businesses. Therefore, demand for services and associated facilities are based on the City’s service population including residents and workers.
d. Storm Drain Facilities – The purpose of this Storm Drain Facilities fee is to accommodate growth within the City of Irwindale and to fund new development, including storm drain facility infrastructure. e. Police Facilities – The purpose of the police impact fee is to fund the police facilities needed to serve new development. Irwindale currently provides police services from a single police station. A proposed fee is presented based on the system plan standard of police facilities per capita.
f. Sewer Facilities – The purpose of this Sewer Facilities fee is to accommodate growth within the City of Irwindale and to fund new development, including sewer facilities infrastructure. g. Parks and Recreation Facilities – The purpose of the parkland and park facilities impact fee is to fund the park facilities needed to serve new development. The maximum justified impact fee is presented based on the existing plan standard of parkland and park facilities per capita.

4 | Page
Section 2. Current Fee Schedule
Section 3. The beginning and ending balance of the account or fund The beginning balance is as of July 1, 2023, and the ending balance is as of June 30, 2024.

Section 4. The amount of fees collected and the interest earned Fees were collected and interest was earned during July 1, 2023, and the ending June 30, 2024.

Land Use
Admin
Facilities
Police
Facilities
Parks
& Rec
Facilities
Library
Facilities
Transportation
Facilities
Storm
Drain
Facilities
Sewer
Facilities
Residential - Per Dwelling Unit
Single Family $ 6,390 $ 8,466 $ 17,519 $ 1,148 $ 3,992 $ 723 $ 31 Multifamily 3,019 3,999 8,276 542 2,787 476 15
Nonresidential - Fee per 1,000 Sq Ft
Commercial $ 1,452 $ 1,924 $ 3,468 $ 210 $ 7,096 $ 542 $ 27 Office 1,897 2,512 4,527 275 5,084 166 23
Industrial 705 934 1,684 102 3,370 383 3
Impact Fee Type
Beginning
Balance
July 1, 2023
Ending
Balance
June 30, 2024
Admin Facilities $ 427,692.13 $ 825,813.25
Police Facilities $ 566,470.42 $ 1,093,880.46
Parks & Rec Facilities $ 1,021,285.86 $ 1,972,193.08
Library Facilities $ 61,820.17 $ 119,408.51
Transportation Facilities $ 2,040,009.98 $ 3,942,963.79 Storm Drain Facilities $ 231,309.66 $ 447,550.80
Sewer Facilities $ 1,906.36 $ 3,615.41
Total $ 4,350,494.58 $ 8,405,425.30

5 | Page
Section 5. An identification of each public improvement on which the fees were expended and the amount of the expenditure of each improvement, including the total percentage of the cost of the public improvement that was funded with fees.

Section 6. An identification of an approximate date by which the construction of the public improvement will commence if the local agency determines that sufficient funds have been collected to complete financing on an incomplete public improvement, as identified in paragraph (2) of the subdivision (a) of Section 66001, and the public improvement remains incomplete.

Although Projects 8245 and 8804 Design phase have commenced, the date of construction has yet to be determined.

Impact Fee Type Fees Collected Interest Earned Total
Admin Facilities $ 398,121.12 $ 22,111.14 $ 420,232.26
Police Facilities $ 527,410.04 $ 29,291.69 $ 556,701.73 Parks & Rec Facilities $ 950,907.22 $ 52,812.18 $ 1,003,719.40 Library Facilities $ 57,588.34 $ 3,198.38 $ 60,786.72
Transportation Facilities $ 1,902,953.81 $ 105,687.65 $ 2,008,641.46 Storm Drain Facilities $ 216,241.14 $ 12,009.76 $ 228,250.90 Sewer Facilities $ 1,709.05 $ 94.92 $ 1,803.97
Total $ 4,054,930.72 $ 225,205.72 $ 4,280,136.44
Project
No. Description
Amount
Budgeted
Percentage
of Project to
be Funded
Amount
Expended
Percentage
of Budget
Expended
8245 Civic Center - Exterior
Improvement 849,575.00 68% - 0%
8804
Construction of New 8" VCP
Sewer Main Extension on
Arrow Hwy 66,000.00 20% 14,599.45 22%
Total $ 915,575.00 $ 14,599.45

6 | Page
Section 7. A description of each inter-fund transfer or loan made from the account or fund, including the public improvement of which the transferred or loaned fees will be expended, and the case of an inter-fund loan, the date on which the loan will be repaid and the rate of interest that the account or fund will receive on the loan.

The amount expended for Project 8804 was transferred from Development Impact Fees (Fund 47) to Capital Improvement Program (Fund 48) project expenditure accounts respectively.

Section 8. The amount of refunds made pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 66001 and any allocation pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 66001.

No refunds from Development Impact Fee Funds due to sufficient funding or unexpended revenues have occurred.

Item #24.E.

Date: December 11, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Julian A. Miranda, City Manager
Issue: Award a Professional Services Agreement to Willdan Financial Services for Development Impact Fee Study Update
City Manager's Recommendation:

That the City Council of the City of Irwindale authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract with Willdan Financial Services for a Development Impact Fee Study Update for an amount not to exceed $65,520.

Administrative Action:

Submitted / Prepared by:

Kambiz Borhani, Finance Director / City Treasurer
Reviewed by:

Adrian R. Guerra, City Attorney
Kambiz Borhani, Finance Director / City Treasurer
Approved by:

Julian A. Miranda, City Manager

Background and Analysis:

A development impact fee ("DIF") is a monetary exaction charged by the local government to a developer in connection with the implementation of an approved development project. A DIF can vary widely from one jurisdiction to the next because of differing facility needs. With the passage of Assembly Bill 1600, known as the 1987 Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Section 66000 and following), the State of California recognized the burden on local governments from the rising costs associated with needed infrastructure and population increases associated with new development.

The Mitigation Fee Act secured a system for identifying and collecting specific fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions that local jurisdictions could regularly impose when properties are developed.

To provide funding for future construction or expansion of government facilities, public safety facilities, traffic facilities, and park facilities necessary to mitigate the impact of new development, the City adopted Ordinance No. 726 on July 11, 2018, establishing the DIF program. DIF is a one-time fee charged to new development projects, not existing residences or businesses, collected prior to or at the time the building permit is issued.

On June 27, 2018, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2018-49-3043 which established a new DIF for residential (single family and multifamily) and Nonresidential (commercial, office & industrial) starting after the said date. Industry's best practices recommend that municipal agencies, when feasible, perform a DIF study update (also known as nexus study) every eight years. Therefore, a Request for Proposal (RFP) for a comprehensive DIF Study Update was issued on September 23, 2024, with submittal date of October 28, 2024.

Staff selected Willdan Financial Services to conduct the study since they were originally engaged to perform the DIF study for the City of Irwindale years ago. Their study includes analysis and calculation of fees necessary to enable the City to maintain its public facilities and infrastructure standards as new development creates increases in service demands. The Fee Study identified the need to review current DIF amounts and, if necessary, to be adjusted for inflation-related construction costs.

Staff recommend the City Council consider awarding the contract to Willdan Financial Services for the proposed amount of $65,520.

Fiscal Impact:

The Fiscal Year 2024-2025 adopted budget has sufficient funding for DIF Study Update. No additional funding is being requested.

Attachments:

1. Willdan Financial Services Proposal 10.28.2024

2. Professional Services Contract - Willdan DIF Study Update

City of Irwindale
Development Impact Fee
Study Update
Proposals for

Development Impact Fee Study Update i
City of Irwindale, CA
Cover Page
Development Impact Fee Study Update
27368 Via Industria, Suite 200
Temecula, CA 92590
Tel: (800) 755-6864 | Fax: (951) 587-3510
Contact Person
James Edison, JD, MPP
Managing Principal
Email: [email protected] | Tel #: (510) 912-4687
October 28, 2024

Development Impact Fee Study Update ii
City of Irwindale, CA
Table of Contents
COVER PAGE .....................................................................................................................................................................I TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................................................................. II QUESTIONNAIRE/RESPONSE TO SCOPE OF SERVICES..............................................................................3 A. Company and General Information.........................................................................................................3 Letter of Transmittal............................................................................................................................................4 Primary Contact..................................................................................................................................................5 B. Qualifications and Experience of the Firm .......................................................................................... 1 Firm History and Organizational Chart ...............................................................................................................1 Primary Business................................................................................................................................................3 Development Impact Fee Study Update Engagement Office ............................................................................3 Broad Experience ...............................................................................................................................................3 Similar Studies....................................................................................................................................................4 Unique Qualifications..........................................................................................................................................6 C. Qualifications and Experience of Proposed Project Team ......................................................... 7 Proposed Project Team......................................................................................................................................7 Resumes.............................................................................................................................................................7 James Edison, JD, MPP, MA .............................................................................................................................8 Carlos Villarreal, MPP ......................................................................................................................................10 Response to Scope of Services .......................................................................................................................12 Summary of Approach......................................................................................................................................12 Calculating the Fee Schedule...........................................................................................................................14 Related Approach Issues .................................................................................................................................14 Work Plan .........................................................................................................................................................16 Statement of Differentiated Services ................................................................................................................19 Project Disclaimer.............................................................................................................................................19 D. Reporting...........................................................................................................................................................20 E. Fees ......................................................................................................................................................................20 Development Impact Fee Study Update ..........................................................................................................20 Notes: ...............................................................................................................................................................20 Hourly Rates .....................................................................................................................................................21 F. Exceptions to Specifications.....................................................................................................................21 G. References ........................................................................................................................................................ 22 H. Implementation Schedule ........................................................................................................................ 23 Development Impact Fee Study Update ..........................................................................................................23 I. Certificate(s) of Insurance.........................................................................................................................24

Development Impact Fee Study Update 3
City of Irwindale, CA
Questionnaire/Response to Scope of Services
A. Company and General Information
Company name and address.

Willdan Financial Services
27368 Via Industria, Suite 200
Temecula, CA 92590

T 951.587.3500 ▪ 800.755.6864 | F 951.587.3510 ▪ 888.326.6864 | 27368 Via Industria, Suite 200, Temecula, CA 92590 | www.willdan.com 4 Letter of Transmittal
Letter of transmittal signed by an individual authorized to bind the respondent, stating that the respondent has read and will comply with all the terms and conditions of the RFP.

October 28, 2024
Mr. Kambiz Borhani
Finance Director/City Treasurer
City of Irwindale
5050 North Irwindale Avenue
Irwindale, California 91706
Re: Proposal to Conduct a Development Impact Fee Study Update for the City of Irwindale Dear Mr. Borhani:

Willdan Financial Services (“Willdan”) is pleased to present this proposal to the City of Irwindale (“City”) to conduct a Development Impact Fee Study Update. Willdan’s project approach helps to ensure the preparation of an impact fee study that will withstand technical challenges and public scrutiny. Given Willdan’s unmatched impact fee experience, we are particularly well positioned to serve the City and help achieve established long-term goals. Outlined below are the advantages and benefits that Willdan will provide for the City.

Direct Recent Experience with the City of Irwindale — Willdan has successfully partnered with the City on multiple occasions, the proposed project manager, James Edison, has worked with you and other City staff on a number of projects over the past years. Most recently, our District Administration Services was retained by the City for Special Tax Consulting. Through these engagements, we’ve developed relationships with key City Staff, gained an understanding of the City Council and its objectives and sensitivities, and acquired a knowledge of the community. Our team will bring this same level of professionalism and expertise, understanding of the community, and our knowledge of the City’s staff and systems to this proposed engagement. Where possible, we will leverage our knowledge of the City and relationships with key staff to facilitate and expedite our data gathering and work, focusing less time on data gathering and more on analysis. This allows us to provide meaningful analysis and insight that other firms are unable to match, and our understanding of the City reduces questions and streamlines the process, allowing City Staff to focus their time on direct City operations.

Unmatched experience implementing and defending fee programs. Willdan’s impact fee staff has assisted more than 100 California government agencies with the development and/or update of all fee types and is fortunate to be in a position that will provide a tremendous benefit to the City. Each project has required defensible documentation and thorough coordination of fee program changes for different agency departments and stakeholders within the business community. In some cases, Willdan has been required to negotiate fees with stakeholders and, on occasion, defend them in meetings and public forums.

We are particularly strong in advising our clients on the advantages and disadvantages of different fee schedule structures (citywide versus multiple-fee districts/zones; more versus fewer land-use categories; etc.) and methods of fee calculation that are based on the City’s and stakeholder priorities. Impact fees also need to be developed in compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act (California Government Code Section 66000 et seq., also known as Assembly Bill 1600) so that they are defensible and transparent. We are also current on the changes to fee programs and the adoption of nexus studies resulting from AB 602, which took effect in 2022.

Innovative Methodologies. As Willdan operates nationally, we possess unique experiences in numerous jurisdictions dealing with multiple challenges. Our ability to produce studies that accommodate various options and viewpoints ensures fair-minded and sensible projects. Our methodology and approach to impact fees has proven to be effective for Cities and Counties, the development community, and the public. Utilizing focus groups, with established guidelines, during the study, fully informs the development community and the public of the justification of the impact fees, and their positive effect on community growth.

Best-in-class impact fee team that can work immediately to prepare an impact fee program. The Willdan team begins a project by evaluating the agency’s existing fee program, if available, and current capital planning policies and funding programs. Not all capital projects are amenable to funding from impact fee programs, and we identify sources that complement fee revenues to fully fund the capital improvement program. The team’s Principal-in-Charge James Edison and Project Manager Carlos Villarreal are well respected by our clients for their skill in proactively organizing a clear, consensus-based project approach.

Mr. Kambiz Borhani
Finance Director/City Treasurer
City of Irwindale
Proposal to Conduct a Development Impact Fee Study Update October 28, 2024 | Page 5
Successful project completion. Willdan has successfully completed many development impact fee studies, including most recently in the Cities of McFarland, Riverbank, Santa Paula, Morgan Hill, Hollister, Pismo Beach, Santa Clara, Murrieta, Moreno Valley, Bell Gardens, Pomona, Fountain Valley, and the Counties of Riverside, San Benito, and Stanislaus. These fee programs were approved by their respective Councils and Boards.

Our approach is geared toward delivering work on schedule and presenting results at public meetings and council workshops to stakeholders and elected officials who typically do not want or need to see the deep detailed analysis. The Willdan Team is experienced at communicating complex analytical results in a manner that is easy to understand by non-finance-oriented individuals. We have coordinated or participated in numerous public and staff workshops regarding fees and cost of service-based charges.

Primary Contact
General information about the primary contact who would be able to answer questions about the proposal.

Include name, title, telephone number, and email address of the individual.

Willdan Financial Services
Proposal Contact
James Edison, JD, MPP
Managing Principal
27368 Via Industria, Suite 200 | Temecula, CA 92590
Tel#: (800) 755-6864 | Email: [email protected]
As a Vice President of Willdan Financial Services, I am authorized to bind the firm to the terms of this proposal, as well as the subsequent agreement. Willdan has read and will comply with all the terms and conditions of the RFP.

Sincerely,

WILLDAN FINANCIAL SERVICES
Chris Fisher
Vice President / Director

Development Impact Fee Study Update 1
City of Irwindale, CA
B. Qualifications and Experience of the Firm
Firm History and Organizational Chart
A brief history of your organization, including the size of the firm, location of the office from which of the work on this engagement is to be performed, and the number of and nature of the professional staff to be employed in this engagement.

Willdan Financial Services is an operating division
within Willdan Group, Inc. (WGI), which was founded
in 1964 as an engineering firm working with local
governments. Today, WGI is a publicly traded
company (WLDN). WGI, through its divisions, provides
professional technical and consulting services that
ensure the quality, value and security of our nation’s
infrastructure, systems, facilities, and environment.

The firm has pursued two primary service objectives
since its inception—ensuring the success of its clients and enhancing its surrounding communities.

A financially stable company, Willdan has over 1,600
employees working in more than a dozen states
across the U.S. Our employees include a number of
nationally recognized Subject Matter Experts for all
areas related to the broadest definition of connected
communities—three of whom are committed to
contribute their expertise throughout the duration
of the City of Irwindale’s Development Impact Fee
Study Update engagement.

Willdan has solved economic, engineering and energy challenges for local communities and delivered industry-leading solutions that have transformed government and commerce. Today, we are leading our clients into a future accelerated by change in resources, infrastructure, technology, regulations, and industry trends.

Size of Firm and Years in Business
Established on June 24, 1988, Willdan Financial Services, is a national firm and is one of the largest public sector economic and financial analysis consulting firms in the United States. Since that time, we have helped over 800 public agencies successfully address a broad range of infrastructure challenges.

WFS Office Locations
The following table provides the location of our Division Headquarters, as well as our satellite offices.

Willdan Financial Services
Office Locations
Division Headquarters
27368 Via Industria, Suite 200, Temecula, California 92590 | Tel: (800) 755-6864 | Fax: (888) 326-6864 Aurora, CO
3190 S. Vaughn Way
Suite 550, Office 523
Aurora, Colorado 80014
(303) 990-4616
Orlando, FL
200 South Orange Avenue
Suite 1550
Orlando, Florida 32801
(407) 872-2467
Plano, TX
5500 Democracy Lane
Suite 130
Plano, Texas 75024
(972) 378-6588
Oakland, CA
66 Franklin Street
Suite 300
Oakland, California 94607
(510) 832-0899
Phoenix, AZ
1440 E. Missouri Ave
Suite C-170
Phoenix, Arizona 85014
(602) 870-7600
Washington, DC
1025 Connecticut Ave. NW
Suite 1000
Washington, DC 20036
(202) 510-0511

Development Impact Fee Study Update 2
City of Irwindale, CA
Organizational Structure
The organization chart located below represents Willdan Financials Services’ reporting structure, including the operating groups and the responsible manager.

Employee Structure
Our staff of 80 full-time employees support our clients by conducting year-round workshops and on-site training to assist them in keeping current with the latest developments in our areas of expertise.

Employee Structure
Title Count
President & CEO 1
Vice President – Group Director 2
Vice President 4
Assistant Director 4
Principal Consultant 10
Project Manager 14
Analyst 26
Analyst Assistant 12
Administration 7
Slate of Officers
Willdan Financial Services
Slate of Officers
Michael Bieber
Chief Executive Officer
Mark J. Risco
President and CEO
Creighton K. Early
Chief Financial Officer
Chris Fisher
Vice President / Director
Gladys Medina
Vice President / Director
Dan Jackson
Vice President
Jeff McGarvey
Vice President
Josephine Moses
Vice President
Kate Nguyen
Secretary
Rebekah Smith
Assistant Secretary
Cathy Steele
Assistant Secretary

Development Impact Fee Study Update 3
City of Irwindale, CA
Primary Business
The services your firm offers, which may distinguish it from other firms.

Willdan assists local public agencies by providing the following services:

Willdan Financial Services
Primary Services
▪ User fee studies
▪ Cost allocation plan studies
▪ Utility rate and cost of service studies
▪ Real estate economic analysis
▪ Municipal advisory services
▪ District administration services
▪ Property tax audits
▪ Economic development strategic plans
▪ Development impact fee establishment and analysis
▪ Tax increment finance district formation and
amendment
▪ Feasibility studies
▪ Housing development and implementation strategies
▪ Arbitrage and continuing disclosure services
▪ Debt issuance support
▪ Long-term financial plans and cash flow modeling
Development Impact Fee Study Update Engagement Office
Location of the office from which the work on this engagement will be performed.

The City of Irwindale Development Impact Fee Study Update engagement will be conducted from the Temecula office, Willdan Financial Services Division Headquarters.

Broad Experience
Willdan has been preparing impact fee nexus studies since the passage of the Mitigation Fee Act. Our commitment to public agencies and public solutions has helped us develop the broad finance expertise that will be utilized to support the City’s Development Impact Fee Study. Willdan has worked on virtually every aspect of municipal finance, including fiscal and economic impact studies related to development and reorganization, the financing of infrastructure and services through special district or supplemental taxes, and even working under contract as a department head of an entire municipality. This experience has provided Willdan team members with deep insight into the sources of municipal revenue and the costs of services.

Managing Principal James A. Edison and his team have
worked with public agencies on many community
development projects, including the full range of analysis related to feasibility, economic and fiscal impacts,
infrastructure finance, and negotiations with private
developers. Willdan is thoroughly familiar with both the Act and with the technical and policy issues surrounding impact fees. .

Development Impact Fee Study Update 4
City of Irwindale, CA
Similar Studies
Profile of the type of accounts and clients that are similar to the City’s DIF Update engagement.

Listed below, is a list of the public agencies in which similar services are currently in progress, or have been completed, in the previous five years by the project team included within this submission.

Willdan Financial Services
Development Impact Fee Experience
Partial Client List
City of Alameda, CA City of Pacifica, CA
City of Antioch, CA City of Patterson, CA
City of Arcadia, CA City of Parkland, FL
City of Artesia, CA City of Petaluma, CA
City of Bakersfield, CA City of Pismo Beach, CA
City of Banning, CA City of Pittsburg, CA
City of Bell Gardens, CA City of Pleasant Hill, CA
City of Bellflower, CA City of Pomona, CA
City of Brea, CA City of Rancho Mirage, CA
City of Buena Park, CA City of Redwood City, CA
City of Calexico, CA City of Rialto, CA
City of Calimesa, CA City of Richmond, CA
City of Carpinteria, CA City of Rio Rancho, NM
City of Chino Hills, CA City of Riverbank, CA
City of Clovis, CA City of Rolling Hills Estates, CA
City of Coachella, CA City of Rosemead, CA
City of Commerce, CA City of San Carlos, CA
City of Compton, CA City of San Fernando, CA
City of Corona, CA City of San Jacinto, CA
City of Covina, CA City of San Marcos, CA
City of Cudahy, CA City of Vallejo, CA
City of Dixon, CA City of Santa Clara, CA
City of Dublin, CA City of Sebastopol, CA
City of El Monte, CA City of Selma, CA
City of El Segundo, CA City of Sierra Madre, CA
City of Emeryville, CA City of Soledad, CA
City of Fillmore, CA City of South Gate, CA
City of Fountain Valley, CA City of South San Francisco, CA City of Fremont, CA City of St. Helena, CA
City of Garden Grove, CA City of Tehachapi, CA
City of Gilroy, CA City of Thousand Oaks, CA
City of Gonzales, CA City of Tracy, CA

Development Impact Fee Study Update 5
City of Irwindale, CA
Willdan Financial Services
Development Impact Fee Experience
Partial Client List
City of Goose Creek, SC City of Upland, CA
City of Guadalupe, CA City of Visalia, CA
City of Greenfield, CA City of Wasco, CA
City of Grover Beach, CA Coachella Valley Association of Governments, CA City of Hawthorne, CA Contra Costa Fire Protection District, CA City of Healdsburg, CA County of Clay, FL
City of Hercules, CA County of Kern, CA
City of Hollister, CA County of Kings, CA
City of Hughson, CA County of Los Angeles, CA
City of Huntington Beach, CA County of Madera, CA
City of Huntington Park, CA County of Merced, CA
City of Indian Wells, CA County of Placer, CA
City of Irvine, CA County of Riverside, CA
City of Irwindale, CA County of Sacramento, CA
City of Kingsburg, CA County of San Benito, CA
City of La Mesa, CA County of San Diego, CA
City of La Verne, CA County of San Joaquin, CA
City of Las Cruces, NM County of San Luis Obispo, CA
City of Lake Elsinore, CA County of Santa Barbara, CA
City of Lake Forest, CA County of Solano, CA
City of Lancaster, CA County of Sonoma, CA
City of Lawndale, CA County of Stanislaus, CA
City of Livermore, CA County of Tulare, CA
City of Long Beach, CA County of Yolo, CA
City of McFarland, CA East Contra Costa Fire Protection District, CA City of Madera, CA Kern Council of Governments, CA
City of Manteca, CA Nevada County Consolidated Fire District, CA City of Menifee, CA Rodeo-Hercules Fire Protection District, CA City of Moreno Valley, CA San Gorgonio Memorial Healthcare District, CA City of Morgan Hill, CA Stanislaus Council of Governments, CA City of Mountain View, CA Tehachapi Valley Rec. & Park District, CA City of Murrieta, CA Town of Mead, CO
City of Newport Beach, CA Town of Windsor, CA
City of Norco, CA Tulare County Association of Governments, CA City of Oroville, CA Village of Taos Ski Valley, NM

Development Impact Fee Study Update 6
City of Irwindale, CA
Unique Qualifications
The Services your firm offers which may distinguish it from other firms.

Willdan is uniquely qualified to assist the City with the proposed Development Impact Fee Study Update. The following are specific advantages that we will provide for the proposed engagement.

Direct Experience with the City
In addition to our broad history working with the City, the proposed team prepared the City’s last impact fee updates and has been working with the City on a range of issues related to impact fees and infrastructure finance on an ongoing basis. Our familiarity with the City means that we can work quickly and efficiently and anticipate potential implementation issues.

Breadth of Experience
Willdan is the leading firm in California providing services to complete Development Impact Fee Study projects, and one of the leaders throughout the Country. We have completed hundreds of successful similar studies in California, including more than thirty (30) in the past two years alone, in addition to projects in Arizona, Texas and Florida.

Project Dedication and Team Consistency
Willdan has assembled a project team of two (2) subject matter experts within the Financial Consulting Services group, whom have worked together for at least ten (10) years, to conduct the City of Irwindale Development Impact Fee Study Update engagement. This duo understands how to work efficiently and effectively together, has addressed a wide range of project objectives and challenges, and has coordinated or participated in numerous public stakeholder and staff workshops regarding fees and cost of service-based charges.

Community Investment
Much of our success in developing impactful programs and studies is due to our experiences in meeting with citizen / stakeholder groups and elected officials. Our ability to explain technical information in a concise, understandable manner is a fundamental reason for our high degree of success. Willdan staff takes the time to include and inform the Community.

Proven Professionals
The Team’s quality is often as important as the consulting firm’s reputation. Willdan is known for its personal, customized service.

Our team will work with the City’s professional staff to provide the long-term service, that is our prime goal.

The team presented within this proposal
has worked collectively on numerous
projects, such as the one requested by the
City of Irwindale; an established work
practice between the team members has
been forged, this proven long-standing
system has benefited our clients.

Development Impact Fee Study Update 7
City of Irwindale, CA
C. Qualifications and Experience of Proposed Project Team Proposed Project Team
A biography of the primary staff that will be responsible for the work to be performed for the City, a brief biography of principals of the Firm, & an organizational chart for the individuals assigned to the City’s account.

Our management and supervision of the project team is very simple: staff every position with experienced, capable personnel in sufficient numbers to deliver a superior product to the City, on time and on budget. With that philosophy in mind, we have selected experienced professionals for this engagement.

We are confident that our team possesses the depth of experience that will successfully fulfill your desired work performance. Willdan’s Temecula office will have primary responsibility for managing this project. The table below identifies the team members proposed to serve.

City of Irwindale | Primary Staff
Key Team Member Project Role Responsibility to the Engagement James Edison, JD, MPP
Managing Principal Principal-in-Charge
▪ Ensure client satisfaction, flow of communication, and management of the project
▪ Technical guidance
▪ Project oversight
▪ Quality assurance & control, and
▪ Meeting and presentation attendance
Carlos Villarreal, MPP
Principal Consultant
Project Manager
▪ Collect, interpret, and disseminate key data
▪ Day to day contact
▪ Production of key elements of the analyses
▪ Model development
▪ Report preparation, and
▪ Meeting and presentation attendance
Project Team Stability
Mr. Edison has been assigned to serve as the principal-in-charge; he has been selected for this role due to his vast experience, which includes the preparation and supervision of numerous fee studies, as well as his experience presenting to governing bodies, stakeholders, and industry groups.

Resumes
Resumes for our project team are provided on the following pages.

Development Impact Fee Study Update 8
City of Irwindale, CA
Education
Juris Doctorate,
University of
California, Berkeley,
School of Law
Master of Public
Policy, Goldman
School of Public
Policy, University of
California, Berkeley
Bachelor of Arts,
magna cum laude,
Harvard University
Professional
Registrations
Member of State Bar,
California
Affiliations
Council of
Development Finance
Agencies
CFA Society of
San Francisco
Congress for the
New Urbanism
Urban Land Institute
Seaside Institute
International Economic
Development Council
26 Years’
Experience
James Edison, JD, MPP, MA
Principal-in-Charge
Mr. James Edison specializes in the nexus between public and private, with expertise in publicprivate partnerships, and the benefits of economic development to municipalities and state, provincial, regional, and national governments. He possesses deep expertise in land use economics, with a specialty in finance and implementation, including fiscal impact and the public and private financing of infrastructure and development projects, both in the U.S. and internationally. Mr. Edison’s public-sector experience includes local and regional economic impact studies; fiscal impact evaluations; new government formation strategies; and the creation of impact fees, assessments, and special taxes to fund infrastructure and public facilities. He has conducted numerous evaluations of the economic and fiscal impact of specific plans and consulted on a wide variety of land use planning topics related to community revitalization and the economic and fiscal impacts of development.

As a former bond attorney, Mr. Edison understands the legal underpinnings and technical requirements of public financing instruments and has advised both public and private clients on the use of individual instruments, and the interaction between those instruments and the needs of developers and project finance.

Related Experience
County of Riverside, CA – Comprehensive Impact Fee Update: Mr. Edison led the effort to establish a comprehensive fee program for the County, including facilities fees for fire, police, parks, criminal justice, libraries, and traffic. He prepared the technical and analytical documents necessary to calculate the fee and establish the necessary nexus to collect it, as well as presented the fees during public hearings to the County Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, Mr. Edison is currently leading an update to the County’s development impact fees for 2030.

City of Moreno Valley, CA – Comprehensive Development Impact Fee Study: Mr. Edison was the principal-in-charge for the City’s comprehensive impact update. Fee categories included arterial streets, traffic signals, interchanges, parks, recreation, fire, police, library, corporation yard, maintenance equipment, and animal shelter facilities.

City of Murrieta, CA – Master Facilities Plan and Development Impact Fee Calculation Report Update: Mr. Edison served as the principal-in-charge of the City’s study to update their Master Facilities Plan and Development Impact Fee Calculation Report, to ensure that new development pays the capital costs associated with growth. Willdan was recently re-selected, through competitive bid, to update the Impact Fees.

City of Cudahy, CA – Development Impact Fee Study: Mr. Edison led the Willdan team that helped the City analyze impact fees needed to support future development in the City of Cudahy through buildout of the City’s General Plan.

City of Indian Wells, CA – Development Impact Fee Study: Mr. Edison served as the principalin-charge for the City Indian Wells’ update to their development impact fees. The fee program was comprised of a variety of fee categories including transportation, public facilities, recreation, park, and storm drain.

City of Fountain Valley, CA – Development Impact Fee Update Study: Mr. Edison served as the project manager for the City of Fountain Valley’s update to their development impact fees. Fees included the park impact fee, traffic improvement fee, transportation impact fee, utility infrastructure impact fee and general plan surcharge fee.

City of Alameda, CA – Comprehensive Impact Fee Update: Mr. Edison led the Willdan team that updated the City of Alameda’s impact fee programs, as well as created a separate impact fee program for Alameda Point, the former Alameda Naval Air Station.

City of Santa Clara, CA – Parks Fee Update: Mr. Edison served as principal-in-charge of the City’s park impact fee update. This project included a demographic analysis and estimation of the cost of acquiring and improving public park land.

Development Impact Fee Study Update 9
City of Irwindale, CA
City of Fremont, CA – Comprehensive Impact Fee Update: Mr. Edison led the Willdan team in the successful update of the impact fee programs for the City of Fremont. The effort included an update of the City’s transportation impact fee program and capital improvement program.

City of Manteca, CA – Fire Impact Fee Update: Mr. Edison served in the capacity of project manager for the update of the City’s fire services impact fee program.

City of Carpinteria, CA – Development Impact Fee Update: Mr. Edison was the project manager for the City of Carpinteria’s Development Impact Fee update study engagement. The study included updates to the following fees: highways and bridges, streets and thoroughfares, traffic control, parking, storm drain, general government, aquatic, park and recreation, and open space. The City has engaged Willdan again to update their impact fees.

City of McFarland, CA – Impact Fee Study Update: Mr. Edison was the principal-in-charge and technical advisor on the update to the City’s development impact fee program. The study included the following facility fee categories; general government, law enforcement, park and recreation, fire protection, water, sewer, storm drain, and traffic.

County of San Benito, CA – Comprehensive Impact Fee Study: Mr. Edison served as technical advisor to the County’s Impact Fee Study. The study included updates to the following fees: capital improvements, road equipment, fire mitigation, and park and recreation.

Stanislaus County Council of Governments, CA – Regional Transportation Fee Update: Mr.

Edison worked on an update of the County’s transportation impact fee program. Key tasks included a revised capital improvement program and fee model, along with a public participation process that ensures buy-in from the communities of Stanislaus County and the County government itself.

County of Tulare, CA – Countywide Impact Fees: Mr. Edison served as project manager for a study that involved the creation of an impact fee program for the County. The study included a range of facilities such as public protection, library, and parks, as well as a transportation facilities impact fee with different fees calculated for two zones in the County.

City of Fillmore, CA – North Fillmore Specific Plan Nexus Study: Mr. Edison is currently assisting the City with an analysis of development impact fees needed to finance public facilities necessary for the development of the North Filmore Specific Plan. Public facilities included in this analysis include water, sewer systems, recycled water, and streets.

City of Pismo Beach, CA – Development Impact Fee Update: Mr. Edison served in the role of principal-in-charge of an update to the City’s impact fee program. The program included the following facilities: police, fire protection, park and recreation improvements, water system improvements, wastewater, traffic, and general government/administrative facilities. Prior to fee program adoption, a stakeholder meeting was held to inform the public about the project, and to solicit feedback from the development community.

City of Morgan Hill, CA – Development Impact Fee Update: Mr. Edison served as principal-incharge of an update to the City’s existing nexus study, which included general government, fire, police, parks and recreation, library, and storm drain fee categories. The project scope included stakeholder outreach.

J. Edison
Resume Continued

Development Impact Fee Study Update 10
City of Irwindale, CA
Education
Master of Public Policy,
Goldman School of
Public Policy,
University of California,
Berkeley
Bachelor of Arts,
Geography, University
of California, Los
Angeles; Minor in Public
Policy and Urban
Planning
Areas of Expertise
Fiscal Impact Analyses
Development Impact
Fees
Public Facilities
Financing Plans
GIS Analysis
18 Years’ Experience
Carlos Villarreal, MPP
Project Manager
Mr. Carlos Villarreal, a Financial Consulting Group Principal Consultant, is proposed to serve in the role of project manager due to his experience documenting nexus findings for development impact fees, preparing capital improvement plans, facilitating stakeholder involvement, and analyzing the economic impacts of fee programs. He has supported adoption of fee programs funding a variety of facility types.

Related Experience
City of Murrieta, CA – Master Facilities Plan and Development Impact Fee Calculation Report Update: Mr. Villarreal served as the project manager of the City’s study to update their Master Facilities Plan and Development Impact Fee Calculation Report, to ensure that new development pays the capital costs associated with growth. Willdan was recently re-selected, through competitive bid, to update the Impact Fees.

City of Long Beach, CA – Park Impact Fee Update: Willdan assisted with an update to the City’s existing park impact fees, with Mr. Villarreal serving in the role of project manager. The project included updating demographic data and facility planning to properly update park facility standards.

He used this information to then calculate impact fees for single family and multi-family residential dwelling units and prepare a nexus study documenting the revised fees and the required legal findings under the Mitigation Fee Act.

County of Los Angeles/City of Santa Clarita, CA – Law Enforcement Facilities Fee Study: Mr.

Villarreal assisted with the development of an impact fee program to fund law enforcement facilities serving the City of Santa Clarita, and other Antelope Valley jurisdictions within the County of Los Angeles. The analysis involved the comparison of law enforcement facilities serving incorporated and unincorporated areas.

County of Riverside, CA – Comprehensive Impact Fee Update: Mr. Villarreal was the lead analyst in the effort to establish a comprehensive fee program for the County, including facilities fees for fire, police, parks, criminal justice, libraries, and traffic. He assisted in the preparation of the technical and analytical documents necessary to calculate the fees and establish the necessary nexus. Mr. Villarreal is once again serving on the project team to update the County’s impact fees through 2030.

City of Moreno Valley, CA – Comprehensive Development Impact Fee Study: Mr. Villarreal served as the project manager for the City’s comprehensive impact update. Fee categories included arterial streets, traffic signals, interchanges, parks, recreation, fire, police, library, corporation yard, maintenance equipment, and animal shelter facilities. In 2022 the City added a public arts fee and workforce development facility fee.

City of Pismo Beach, CA – Development Impact Fee Update: Mr. Villarreal served in the role of project manager for the City’s impact fee project. The program included: police, fire protection, park and recreation improvements, water system improvements, wastewater, traffic, and general government/administrative facilities. Prior to fee program adoption, a stakeholder meeting was held to inform the public about the project, and to solicit feedback from the development community.

City of Carpinteria, CA – Development Impact Fee Update: Mr. Villarreal was the lead analyst to update the City of Carpinteria’s impact fees, which included highways and bridges, streets and thoroughfares, traffic control, parking, storm drain, general government, aquatic, park and recreation, and open space. The City has engaged Willdan again to update their impact fees and Mr. Villarreal is serving in the role of project manager.

County of San Benito, CA – Comprehensive Impact Fee Study: As project manager, Mr.

Villarreal assisted the County with the preparation of an updated and expanded impact fee program. The study included updates to the following fees: capital improvements, road equipment, fire mitigation, and park and recreation.

Development Impact Fee Study Update 11
City of Irwindale, CA
County of Stanislaus, CA – Impact Fee Study Update: Mr. Villarreal served in the role of project manager for a study updating the County’s existing impact fee program. The program includes a range of facilities, like public protection, library, and parks. The study also included a transportation facilities impact fee, with different fees calculated for two zones in the County. Considerable stakeholder outreach was an integral component of this project.

City of Soledad, CA – Development Impact Fee Study Update: Mr. Villarreal managed the update of the City’s impact fee program, specifically changes in demographics, growth projections, project costs, and facility standards. In particular, the City had to revise its capital facilities needs to accommodate a much lower amount of growth than what was projected before 2007. The resulting fees funded new development’s share of planned facilities, while not overburdening development with unnecessary costs.

City of Morgan Hill, CA – Development Impact Fee Update: Mr. Villarreal served as lead analyst assisting with an update to the City’s existing nexus study, including general government, fire, police, parks and recreation, library, and storm drain fee categories. The project scope included stakeholder outreach. The City engaged Willdan again to update the study and Mr. Villarreal served in the role of project manager.

City of Oroville, CA – Impact Fee Study Update: Mr. Villarreal served as project manager for a study updating the City’s development impact fee program, including parks, law enforcement, general government, fire suppression, and traffic facilities. The fee program was adopted by the City Council in 2015. The City engaged Willdan again to update the 2015 study, and Mr. Villarreal served in the role of project manager.

City of McFarland, CA – Development Impact Fee Study Update: Mr. Villarreal served as project manager updating the City’s development impact fee program. The study comprehensively updated the City’s fee program, incorporating new facility master planning and infrastructure costs necessary to facilitate expected development in the City through 2040. The study included the following facility fee categories; general government, law enforcement, park and recreation, fire protection, water, sewer, storm drain, and traffic. The fees were adopted by the City Council in 2020.

C. Villarreal
Resume Continued

Development Impact Fee Study Update 12
City of Irwindale, CA
Response to Scope of Services
Project Understanding
This section outlines Willdan Financial Services’ (“Willdan”) understanding of the situation surrounding the City of Irwindale’s (“City”) desire to conduct a development impact fee study update, as well as identify the project objectives and discusses the background regarding public facilities financing in California. Also outlined is an overview of our impact fee project approach. Listed below are the development impact fees that are to be updated by this study. ▪ Administrative Facilities
▪ Library Facilities
▪ Police Facilities
▪ Parks and Recreation Facilities
▪ Transportation Facilities
▪ Storm Drain Facilities
▪ Sewer Facilities
Project Objectives
The objective of this project is to update development impact fees pursuant to State law. To accomplish this objective, this study will:
▪ Develop a technically defensible fee justification, based on the reasonable relationship and deferential review standards;
▪ Review and facility standards, capital facilities plans and costs, and development and growth assumptions; ▪ Provide a schedule of maximum-justified fees by land use category; and ▪ Provide comprehensive documentation of assumptions, methodologies, and results, including findings required by the Mitigation Fee Act.

Public Facilities Financing in California
The changing fiscal landscape in California during the past 40 years has steadily undercut the financial capacity of local governments to fund infrastructure. Four dominant trends stand out:

1. The passage of a string of tax limitation measures starting with Proposition 13 in 1978 and continuing through the passage of Proposition 218 in 1996;

2. Declining popular support for bond measures to finance infrastructure for the next generation of residents and businesses;

3. Steep reductions in Federal and State assistance; and

4. Permanent shifting by the State of local tax resources to the State General Fund to offset deficit spending brought on by recessions.

Faced with these trends, many cities and counties have had to adopt a policy of "growth pays its own way." This policy shifts the burden of funding infrastructure expansion from existing rate and taxpayers onto new development. This funding shift has been accomplished primarily through the imposition of assessments, special taxes, and development impact fees, also known as public facilities fees. Assessments and special taxes require approval of property owners or registered voters and are appropriate when the funded facilities are directly related to the developing property.

Development impact fees, on the other hand, are an appropriate funding source for facilities that benefit development jurisdiction-wide. Development fees need only a majority vote of the legislative body for adoption.

Summary of Approach
Willdan’s methodology for calculating public facilities fees is both simple and flexible. Simplicity is important so that the development community and the public can easily understand the justification for the fee program. At the same time, we use our expertise to reasonably ensure that the program is technically defensible.

Flexibility is important, so we can tailor our approach to the available data, and the agency’s policy objectives. Our understanding of the technical standards established by statutes and case law suggests that a range of approaches are technically defensible. Consequently, we can address policy objectives related to the fee program, such as economic development and affordable housing. Flexibility also enables us to avoid excessive engineering costs associated with detailed facility planning. We calculate the maximum justifiable impact fee and provide flexibility for the agency to adopt fees up to that amount.

Development Impact Fee Study Update 13
City of Irwindale, CA
Development impact fees are calculated to fund the cost of facilities required to accommodate growth. The four steps followed in an impact fee study include:
▪ Estimate existing development and future growth: Identify a base year for existing development and a growth forecast that reflects increased demand for public facilities; ▪ Identify facility standards: Determine the facility standards used to plan for new and expanded facilities; ▪ Determine facilities required to serve new development and their costs: Estimate the total amount and cost of planned facilities, and identify the share required to accommodate new development; and ▪ Calculate fee schedule: Allocate facilities costs per unit of new development to calculate the public facilities fee schedule.

We discuss key aspects of our approach to each of these steps in the subsections that follow.

Growth Projections
In most cases, we recommend use of long-range market-based projections of new development. By “long-range” we suggest 20 to 30 years to: capture the total demand often associated with major public facility investments; and support analysis of debt financing, if needed. In contrast to build out projections, market-based projections provide a more realistic estimate of development across all land uses. Build out projections typically overestimate commercial and industrial development because of the oversupply of these land uses relative to residential development.

Facility Standards
The key public policy issue in development impact fee studies is the identification of facility standards (second bullet above). Facility standards document a reasonable relationship between new development and the need for new facilities. Standards ensure that new development does not fund deficiencies associated with existing development.

Our approach recognizes three separate components of facility standards:

1. Demand standards determine the amount of facilities required to accommodate growth. Examples include park acres per thousand residents, square feet of library space per capita, or gallons of water per day. Demand standards may also reflect a level of service such as the vehicles-to-capacity (V/C) ratio used in traffic planning;

2. Design standards determine how a facility should be designed to meet expected demand, for example park improvement requirements and technology infrastructure for office space. Design standards are typically not explicitly evaluated as part of an impact fee analysis but can have a significant impact on the cost of facilities.

Our approach incorporates current facility design standards into the fee program to reflect the increasing construction cost of public facilities; and

3. Cost standards are an alternate method for determining the amount of facilities required to accommodate growth based on facility costs per unit of demand. Cost standards are useful when demand standards were not explicitly developed for the facility planning process. Cost standards also enable different types of facilities to be analyzed based on a single measure (cost or value), useful when disparate facilities are funded by a single fee program.

Examples include facility costs per capita, per vehicle trip, or cost per gallon of water per day.

Identifying New Development Facility Needs and Costs
We can take several different approaches to identify facility needs and costs to serve new development. Typically, this is a two-step process: 1) identify total facility needs; and 2) allocate to new development its fair share of those needs.

Total facility needs are often identified through a master facility planning process that typically takes place concurrent with or prior to conducting the fee study. Engineered facility plans are particularly important in the areas of traffic, water, sewer, and storm drain due to the specialized technical analysis required to identify facility needs.

There are three common methods for determining new development’s fair share of planned facilities costs: 1) the existing inventory method; 2) the planned facilities method; and 3) the system plan method. Often the method selected depends on the degree to which the community has engaged in comprehensive facility master planning to identify facility needs.

The formula used by each approach and the advantages and disadvantages of each method is summarized as follows:

Development Impact Fee Study Update 14
City of Irwindale, CA
Existing Inventory Method
The existing inventory method allocates costs based on the ratio of existing facilities to demand from existing development as follows:

Current Value of Existing Facilities = $/unit of demand Existing Development Demand Under this method new development funds the expansion of facilities at the same standard currently serving existing development. By definition, the existing inventory method results in no facility deficiencies attributable to existing development. This method is often used when a long-range plan for new facilities is not available. Only the initial facilities to be funded with fees are identified in the fee study. Future facilities to serve growth are identified through an annual Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and budget process, possibly after completion of a new facility master plan.

Planned Facilities Method
The planned facilities method allocates costs based on the ratio of planned facility costs to demand from new development as follows:

Cost of Planned Facilities = $/unit of demand
New Development Demand
This method is appropriate when specific planned facilities can be identified that only benefit new development.

Examples include street improvements to avoid deficient levels of service or a sewer trunk line extension to a previously undeveloped area. This method is appropriate when planned facilities would not serve existing development. Under this method new development funds the expansion of facilities at the standards used for the master facility plan.

System Plan Method
This method calculates the fee based on the ratio of the value of existing facilities plus the cost of planned facilities divided by demand from existing plus new development:

Value of Existing Facilities + Cost of Planned Facilities = $/unit of demand Existing + New Development Demand This method is useful when planned facilities need to be analyzed as part of a system that benefits both existing and new development. It is difficult, for example, to allocate a new fire station solely to new development when that station will operate as part of an integrated system of fire stations that work together to achieve the desired level of service.

Police substations, civic centers, and regional parks are examples of similar facilities.

The system plan method ensures that new development does not pay for existing deficiencies. Often, facility standards based on policies such as those found in General Plans are higher than existing facility standards. This method enables the calculation of the existing deficiency required to bring existing development up to the policy-based standard. The local agency must secure non-fee funding for that portion of planned facilities, required to correct the deficiency, to ensure that new development receives the level of service funded by the impact fee.

Calculating the Fee Schedule
At its simplest, the fee schedule uses the cost per unit of demand discussed in the last subsection to generate the fee schedule. This unit cost is multiplied by the demand associated with a new development project to calculate the fee for that project. The fee schedule uses different demand measures by land use category to provide a reasonable relationship between the type of development and the amount of the fee. We are familiar with a wide range of methods for identifying appropriate land use categories and demand measures depending on the particular study.

Related Approach Issues
Funding and Financing Strategies
In our experience, one of the most common problems with impact fee programs and with many CIPs is that the program or plan is not financially constrained to anticipated revenues. The result is a “wish list” of projects that generate community expectations that often cannot be fulfilled. Our approach is to integrate the impact fee program into the local agency’s existing CIPs while encouraging those plans to be financially constrained to available resources. We clearly state the cost of correcting existing deficiencies, if any, to document the relationship between the fee program and the need for additional non-fee funding.

Development Impact Fee Study Update 15
City of Irwindale, CA
We can also address one of the most significant drawbacks of an impact fee program – the inability to support conventional public debt financing, so projects can be built before all fee revenues have been received. In collaboration with financial advisors and underwriters, we have developed specific underwriting criteria so that fees can be used to pay back borrowing if another source of credit exists. Typically, this approach involves the use of Certificates of Participation or revenue bonds that are calibrated so that they can be fully repaid using impact fee revenues.

Economic Development Concerns
The development community often is concerned that fees and other exactions will become too high for development to be financially feasible under current market conditions. Local agencies have several strategies to address this concern, including:
▪ Conducting an analysis of the total burden placed on development, by exactions, to see if feasibility may be compromised by the proposed fees;
▪ Gathering similar data on the total fee burden imposed by neighboring or competing jurisdictions; ▪ Developing a plan for phasing in the fees over several years to enable the real estate market to adjust; ▪ Providing options for developers to finance impact fees through assessments and other types of financing districts; and
▪ Imposing less than the maximum justified fee.

If less than the maximum justified fee is imposed, we will work with staff to identify alternative revenues sources for the CIP. The CIP should remain financially feasible to maintain realistic expectations among developers, policy-makers, and the public.

Stakeholder Participation
Stakeholder participation throughout the study supports a successful adoption process. Our approach is to create consensus first around the need for facilities based on agreed upon facility standards. Second, we seek consensus around a feasible funding strategy for these needs, leading to an appropriate role for impact fees.

Gaining consensus among various groups requires a balanced discussion of both economic development and community service objectives. Often, our approach includes formation of an advisory committee to promote outreach to and input from the development community and other stakeholders. We have extensive experience facilitating meetings to explain the program and gain input.

Program Implementation
Fee programs require a certain level of administrative support for successful implementation. Our final report will include recommendations for appropriate procedures, such as:
▪ Regularly updating development forecasts;
▪ Regularly updating fees for capital project cost inflation; ▪ Regularly updating capital facility needs based on changing demands; ▪ Developing procedures for developer credits and reimbursements; and ▪ Including an administrative charge in the fee program.

Development Impact Fee Study Update 16
City of Irwindale, CA
Work Plan
Willdan will work with the City to update its impact fees consistent with the Mitigation Fee Act and other relevant laws.

We want to ensure that our scope of services is responsive to the City’s needs and specific local circumstances. We will work with the City to revise our proposed scope based on input prior to approval of a contract, and as needed during the course of the study.

Task 1: Identify Policy Issues
Objective: Identify and discuss potential policy issues raised by the study. Kick-off meeting with staff to review data needs, policy issues, schedule and discuss potential additional fee categories.

Description: Review agency documents related to existing capital planning policies and funding programs including existing impact fees. Bring policy issues to City staff’s attention, as appropriate, during the project and seek guidance prior to proceeding. Potential policy issues include:
▪ Changes in implementation resulting from AB 602 and recent cases, including the Sheetz decision; ▪ Changes in approach and nexus findings necessary to comply with AB 602 and recent cases, including the Sheetz decision;
▪ Potential new impact fees for consideration
▪ Adequacy of General Plan and other public facility planning policies (e.g., level of service standards); impact fee ordinances and resolutions, and prior nexus studies; ▪ Availability of existing public facility master plans and CIPs to identify needed facilities; ▪ Types of facilities to be funded by each fee;
▪ Land use categories for imposition of fees;
▪ Nexus approach to determining facility standards;
▪ Nexus approach to allocating cost burden among land uses, including need for separate fee zones; ▪ Potential alternative funding sources, if needed;
▪ Funding existing deficiencies, if identified; and
▪ Implementation concerns and strategies.

Deliverables: (1) Information requests; and (2) revised project scope and schedule (if needed).

Task 2: Identify Existing Development and Future Growth Objective: (1) Identify estimates of existing levels of development; and (2) identify a projection of future growth consistent with current planning policy.

Description: Identify base year for estimating existing levels of development and for calculating facility standards based on existing facility inventories (see Task 3). Include entitled development that would be exempt from fee program.

Consult with City staff to identify growth projections to a defined long-range planning horizon (10 to 30 years). Projections provide a basis for determining the facilities needed to accommodate growth (see Task 4). Consider projections from regional metropolitan planning agencies and other available sources - City staff to provide estimates and projections by zone if needed.

Develop approach for converting land use data to measure of facility demand. For example, identify population and employment density factors to convert population and employment estimates to dwelling units and building square footage.

Select appropriate approach for each impact fee based on:
▪ Available local data on facility demand by land use category; ▪ Approaches used by other agencies; and
▪ Support for other agency policy objectives.

Changes to estimates and projections during subsequent tasks could cause unanticipated effort and require an amendment to the scope of services and budget. Obtain approval of estimates and projections from City staff prior to proceeding.

Development Impact Fee Study Update 17
City of Irwindale, CA
Task 3: Determine Facility Standards
Note: Conduct Tasks 3, 4, and 5 separately for each intended facility and fee type. Conduct tasks concurrently because of the effect of facility standards (Task 3), facility needs (Task 4), and alternative funding (Task 5) on the fee calculation.

Objective: Determine standards to identify facilities required to accommodate growth.

Description: Identify and evaluate possible facility standards depending upon the facility type, current facility inventory data, and available facility planning documents. Consider use of: (1) adopted policy standards (e.g., General Plan, master facility plans); (2) standards derived from existing facility inventories; or (3) standards derived from a list of planned facility projects. City staff to provide policies, inventories, and project lists. Willdan will work with the City to identify additional costs that might be eligible for funding by the DIF.

Task 4: Determine Facilities Needs and Costs
Objective: Identify the type, amount and cost of facilities required to accommodate growth and correct deficiencies, if any.

Description: Quantify total planned facilities based on growth projection from Task 2 and facility standards from Task

3. Express planned facilities in general quantities such as acres of parkland, or as a specific list of capital projects from a master facility plan.

Location of planned facilities may or may not be specified. If only a general description of planned facilities is available through the planning horizon, City staff to provide a list of specific capital projects for use of fee revenues during the short term (e.g., five years).

Distinguish between: (1) facilities needed to serve growth (that can be funded by impact fees); and (2) facilities needed to correct existing deficiencies (that cannot be funded by impact fees). Use one of three cost allocation methods (existing inventory, system plan, or planned facilities).

Gather planning-level data on new facilities costs based on lump sum project cost estimates, or unit costs and project quantities (acres, building square feet, lane miles, etc.). Consider recent City experience, local market data such as land transactions, and consultant team experience from prior projects. Inflate older cost estimates to base year using appropriate cost indices.

The revised facility costs will form the basis of the capital improvement program needed for compliance with AB 602.

This scope of work does not include additional engineering analysis, including traffic engineering, to identify total facility needs, existing deficiencies, or cost estimates. Any such engineering/design work can be provided under a separate contract with Willdan Engineering or a third party. However, Willdan can use rough descriptions and comparables to calculate a reasonable cost estimate sufficient for use in the DIF study.

Task 5: Identify Funding and Financing Alternatives
Objective: Determine the extent of alternative (non-fee) funding available for new facilities.

Description: If impact fees are going to only partially fund a capital project, the Mitigation Fee Act requires the agency report on the anticipated source and timing of the additional funding every five years. There are two types of alternative funding sources that we will identify:

1. Funding from non-impact fee sources to correct existing deficiencies; and

2. Funding from new development other than impact fees that must be credited against new development’s impact fee contributions, possibly including taxes paid to finance facilities.

Identify anticipated alternative funding based on information from City staff or note that funds are still to be identified based on a list of probable funding alternatives. If fees will fund debt service include financing costs in the total cost of facilities.

Assume facilities to be funded predominantly on a pay-as-you-go basis. Scope does not include a cash flow analysis to analyze effect of timing of fee revenues on financing costs.

Development Impact Fee Study Update 18
City of Irwindale, CA
Task 6: Fee Comparison Analysis
Objective: Provide a comparison of the current and proposed impact fees to those of comparable/surrounding jurisdictions in Los Angeles County.

Description: Willdan will compare a total of five Los Angeles County jurisdictions to be selected by the City.

Typically, Willdan prepares an analysis of fees charged to a series of prototype developments (such as residential, retail, etc.) to provide an “apples to apples” comparison, but the exact methodology will be determined in consultation with the City. This comparison will be limited to four other jurisdictions.

Task 7: Calculate Fees and Prepare Report
Objective: Provide technically defensible fee report that comprehensively documents project assumptions, methodologies, and results.

Description: Generate fee schedule to apportion facility costs to individual development projects. Use facility costs per unit of demand multiplied by demand by land use category based on data developed in prior tasks.

Prepare draft report tables for City staff to review, that document each step of the analysis, including schedule of maximum justified fees by facility type land use category and all other requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act.

Following one (1) round of comments from City staff on the quantitative analysis and fee schedules, prepare administrative draft report. Following one (1) round of comments on administrative draft, prepare public draft for presentation to interested parties, the public and elected officials. This public review draft will be presented and public stakeholder meetings and at a Council informational session.

Prepare final report, if necessary, based on comments received on the public draft report. If requested, post the report on our website for public access. Note that as of January 2022, the Nexus study is adopted separately from the fees, and with a 30-day notice.

Fees will be calculating residential land uses in compliance with AB 602.

Provide legal counsel with copies of fee resolutions and ordinances used by other jurisdictions.

Deliverables: If necessary, we will provide up to two (2) bound copies of the draft report, one (1) unbound copy, one (1) Microsoft Word copy; and up to ten (10) bound paper copies, and one (1) unbound copy of the final report.

Task 8 Meetings
Objective: The project manager or other necessary Willdan staff will attend project meetings. A member of the Impact Fee project team will attend up to four (4) in-person meetings and presentations throughout the City’s engagement. Phone conferences are not considered meetings for the purposes of this scope.

Optional: Optional stakeholder and Council meetings may be requested by the City.

Staff Support
To complete our tasks, we will need the cooperation of City of Irwindale staff. We suggest that the City assign a key individual to represent the City as the project manager who can function as our primary contact. We anticipate that the City’s project manager will:
▪ Coordinate responses to requests for information;
▪ Coordinate review of work products; and
▪ Help resolve policy issues.

Willdan will rely on the validity and accuracy of the City’s data and documentation to complete the analysis. Willdan will rely on the data as being accurate without performing an independent verification of accuracy and will not be responsible for any errors that result from inaccurate data provided by the client or a third party.

Development Impact Fee Study Update 19
City of Irwindale, CA
Statement of Differentiated Services
Extensive Public Sector Experience
Willdan has delivered industry-leading financial, energy and engineering solutions that have transformed government and commerce for 60 years. Willdan Financial Services advises governments throughout the United States and abroad about financial and economic consulting. We serve all levels of government and collaborate with government staff, constituents, developers, officials, and other professional services firms.

Experienced Team
Our employees know and understand the problems facing local government under the current economic climate, and we have oriented our practice to support an agency’s modified budget policies and public service priorities.

Financial Stability
Willdan Group, Inc. (WGI)has sustained a healthy financial performance record due to the outstanding performance of our operating divisions and a strong, dependable reputation in municipal consulting. Detailed financial statements and annual reports are included on our webpage (http://ir.willdangroup.com/). As a publicly traded company (NASDAQ ticker: WLDN), must provide public financial information as required by the SEC.

Furthermore, Willdan Financial Services is not currently involved in any condition (e.g., bankruptcy, pending litigation, planned office closures, impending merger) that may impede our ability to complete this engagement.

Project Disclaimer
The City of Irwindale further represents, acknowledges, and agrees that:
(i) The City uses, or may use, the services of one or more municipal advisors registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) to advise it in connection with municipal financial products and the issuance of municipal securities;
(ii) The City is not looking to Willdan to provide, and City shall not otherwise request or require Willdan to provide, any advice or recommendations with respect to municipal financial products or the issuance of municipal securities (including any advice or recommendations with respect to the structure, timing, terms, and other similar matters concerning such financial products or issues);
(iii) The provisions of this proposal and the services to be provided hereunder as outlined in the scope of services are not intended (and shall not be construed) to constitute or include any municipal advisory services within the meaning of Section 15B of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and the rules and regulations adopted thereunder;
(iv) For the avoidance of doubt and without limiting the foregoing, in connection with any revenue projections, cashflow analyses, feasibility studies and/or other analyses Willdan may provide the City with respect to financial, economic or other matters relating to a prospective, new or existing issuance of municipal securities of the City, (A) any such projections, studies and analyses shall be based upon assumptions, opinions or views (including, without limitation, any assumptions related to revenue growth) established by the City, in conjunction with such of its municipal, financial, legal and other advisers as it deems appropriate; and (B) under no circumstances shall Willdan be asked to provide, nor shall it provide, any advice or recommendations or subjective assumptions, opinions or views with respect to the actual or proposed structure, terms, timing, pricing or other similar matters with respect to any municipal financial products or municipal securities issuances, including any revisions or amendments thereto; and
(v) Notwithstanding all of the foregoing, the City recognizes that interpretive guidance regarding municipal advisory activities is currently quite limited and is likely to evolve and develop during the term of the potential engagement and, to that end, the City will work with Willdan throughout the term of the potential Agreement to ensure that the Agreement and the services to be provided by Willdan hereunder, is interpreted by the parties, and if necessary amended, in a manner intended to ensure that the City is not asking Willdan to provide, and Willdan is not in fact providing or required to provide, any municipal advisory services.

Financial Stability
▪ In business for 60 years
▪ Approximately 1,600 employees
▪ Fiscal Year 2023 Consolidated
Contract Revenue of $510M
▪ Market capitalization of $537M
(September 2024)
▪ $50 million Line of Credit with the
ability to increase up to $60 million

Development Impact Fee Study Update 20
City of Irwindale, CA
D. Reporting
Detail proposed meeting availability for phone calls and face to face meetings. A presence at City Council meetings may be needed from time to time.

A member of the Impact Fee project team will attend up to four (4) in-person meetings and presentations throughout the City’s engagement. Phone conferences are not considered meetings for the purposes of this scope. Optional stakeholder and Council meetings may be requested by the City.

Provide a sample fee study report and discuss the type(s) of reports and related study information that is provided to the client.

A sample fee study report prepared for the City of Cudahy has been provided at the end of the proposal.

E. Fees
Provide your fees for the proposed services. Fee quotes should be detailed by service.

Willdan proposes a fixed fee of $65,520 to conduct the Development Impact Fee Study Update on the City’s behalf.

The tables below provide a breakdown of the fee to complete each study by task and project team member.

Development Impact Fee Study Update
Notes:

Outline billing and payment expectations, including timing and method of payment. ▪ Our fee includes all direct expenses associated with the project. ▪ We will invoice the City monthly based on percentage of project completed. ▪ Additional services may be authorized by the City and will be billed at our then-current hourly overhead consulting rates.
▪ City shall reimburse Willdan for any costs Willdan incurs, including without limitation, copying costs, digitizing costs, travel expenses, employee time and attorneys' fees, to respond to the legal process of any governmental agency relating to City or relating to the project. Reimbursement shall be at Willdan 's rates in effect at the time of such response.
▪ The cost of preparing the user fee study can be included in the resulting new fee schedule. Therefore, over time, the City can recover the initial outlay of funds that was required to complete the studies. ▪ Willdan will rely on the validity and accuracy of the City’s data and documentation to complete the analysis.

Willdan will rely on the data as being accurate without performing an independent verification of accuracy and will not be responsible for any errors that result from inaccurate data provided by the client or a third party.

Development Impact Fee Study Update 21
City of Irwindale, CA
Hourly Rates
Describe any remaining fees not previously detailed in the above.

Additional services may be authorized in writing by the City and will be billed at our then current hourly consulting rates.

Our current hourly rates are identified in the table below.

Willdan Hourly Rate Schedule
Position Team Member Hourly Rate
Vice President - Director $250
Managing Principal James Edison $240
Principal Consultant Carlos Villarreal $210
Senior Project Manager $185
Project Manager $165
Senior Project Analyst $135
Senior Analyst $125
Analyst II $110
Analyst I $100
F. Exceptions to Specifications
Although the specifications in the requirements section represent the City's anticipated needs, there may be instances in which it is in the City's best interest to permit exceptions to specifications and accept alternatives. It is extremely important that Firms make very clear where an exception is taken to the specifications and how alternatives will be provided. Therefore, exceptions, conditions, or qualifications to the provisions of the City's specifications must be clearly identified as such, together with the reasons, and inserted in this section of the proposal. If the Firm does not make it clear that an exception is taken, the City will assume the proposal is responding to and will meet the specification as written.

Willdan Financial Services hereby acknowledges the specifications within the City’s RFP and has taken the information contained therein into full consideration in the formulation of this proposal, and therefore does not request any exceptions.

Development Impact Fee Study Update 22
City of Irwindale, CA
G. References
Please provide the name, contact person, and phone number of three existing clients, preferably local governments, whom we may contact for references. Indicate the length of time for the engagement.

Below are recent project descriptions, including client contact information, that are similar in nature to those requested by the City of Irwindale. We are proud of our reputation for customer service and encourage you to contact these clients regarding our commitment to completing the projects within budget and agreed upon timelines. A list of our similar projects is included in Section B – Qualifications and Experience of the Firm.

City of Moreno Valley, CA
Development Impact Fee Study
Willdan was retained to perform a comprehensive update the City’s impact fee program in 2020. The City’s fee program included a variety of impact fee categories including: arterial streets, traffic signals, interchanges, parks, recreation, fire, police, library, corporation yard, maintenance equipment, and animal shelter facilities. The nexus study justified fees that were significantly higher than the City’s current fees, partially because the fees had not been comprehensively updated in some time. Willdan worked with City staff to recommend a phased approach to implementing the fees, so that the City could increase its fees on a regular schedule, so that developers could have certainty about what the fees would be in the near future Upon completion of the comprehensive update, Willdan was retained again to create a fee to fund workforce development facilities and a public arts impact fee, which were both adopted by the City in late 2022.

Client Contact: Michael Lloyd, PE, Public Works Director 14177 Frederick Street, Moreno Valley, CA 92553
Tel #: (951) 413-3100 | Email: [email protected]
Project Dates: 2020-2023
County of Riverside, CA
Development Impact Fee Study
Willdan assisted the County of Riverside with an update of its comprehensive impact fee program in 2014. The fee categories were broad and diverse including countywide facilities such as jail detention facilities and county parks and trails; unincorporated only facilities such as fire stations and libraries; and County planning area specific facilities including storm drain and traffic improvements. Other facilities needed to be differentiated between the Eastern and Western portions of the County due to separation by distance, as well as varying level of facilities by region.

The process was lengthy, involving significant efforts to inform staff of methodological differences between the Willdan methodology and the methodology of the previous consultant.

Willdan was again selected in October 2019, through competitive bid, to update the County’s development impact fees for 2030 and is currently engaged in this effort.

Client Contact: Serena Chow, Administrative Services Manager II 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, CA 92501
Tel #: (951) 955-6619 | Email: [email protected]
Project Dates: 2019-Current
City of Fillmore, CA
Development Impact Fee Update
The City of Fillmore charges a wide range of development impact fees to new development. The City sought to comprehensively update its impact fee program for potential changes in demographics, growth projections, project costs and facility standards. The resulting fees funded new development’s share of planned facilities, while not overburdening development with unnecessary costs. Willdan developed a technically defensible fee justification based on the reasonable relationship and deferential review standards; provided a schedule of maximum-justified fees by land use category; engaged stakeholders to facilitate public support for the impact fee; and provided comprehensive documentation of all assumptions, methodologies, and results.

Client Contact: Kevin McSweeney, Planning and Community Development Director 250 Central Avenue, Fillmore, CA 93015
Tel #: (805) 834-1084 | Email: [email protected] Project Dates: 2017-Current

Development Impact Fee Study Update 23
City of Irwindale, CA
H. Implementation Schedule
Include a detailed implementation schedule with an estimated project start date of November 18, 2024 and note key project milestones and timelines for deliverables. Identify any assumptions used in developing the schedule.

Willdan understands time is of the essence for the City to begin this engagement. These schedules can only be met with the cooperation of City staff. Delays in responding to our requests for data and review will result in corresponding delays to the project schedules. If that is the case, we will notify the City immediately of the possible impact on the schedule.

Development Impact Fee Study Update

Development Impact Fee Study Update 24
City of Irwindale, CA
I. Certificate(s) of Insurance
The City will require the successful prosper to provide Certificates of Insurance evidencing required coverage types and the minimum limits.

Willdan has reviewed the City’s insurance requirements and will comply with the policy limits stated within. Provided below is a copy of our sample certificate of insurance for your review and consideration. .

27368 Via Industria, Suite 200
Temecula, CA 92590-4856
951.587.3500 | 800.755.6864 | Fax: 951.587.3510
www.willdan.com

CITY OF CUDAHY

DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE STUDY
FINAL
APRIL 7, 2021
Oakland Office Corporate Office Other Regional Offices
66 Franklin Street 27368 Via Industria Memphis, TN
Suite 300 Suite 110 Orlando, FL
Oakland, CA 94607 Temecula, CA 92590 Phoenix, AZ
Tel: (510) 832-0899 Tel: (800) 755-MUNI (6864) Sacramento, CA Fax: (510) 832-0898 Fax: (909) 587-3510 Seattle, WA
www.willdan.com

This page intentionally left blank.

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................... 1 Background and Study Objectives 1
Facility Standards and Costs 1
Use of Fee Revenues 2
Development Impact Fee Schedule Summary 2
Other Funding Needed 3

1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................ 5 Public Facilities Financing in California 5
Study Objectives 5
Fee Program Maintenance 6
Study Methodology 6
Types of Facility Standards 6
New Development Facility Needs and Costs 7
Organization of the Report 8

2. GROWTH FORECASTS...................................................................... 9 Land Use Types 9
Existing and Future Development 9
Occupant Densities 10

3. TRAFFIC FACILITIES ....................................................................... 12 Trip Demand 12
Trip Growth 14
Planned Facilities 14
Cost Per Trip 15
Fee Schedule 16

4. PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES................................................ 17 Service Population 17
Existing Parkland and Park Facilities Inventory 17
Parkland and Park Facilities Unit Costs 18
Parkland and Park Facility Standards 19
Mitigation Fee Act 19
Quimby Act 20
City of Cudahy Parkland and Park Facilities Standards 20 Facilities Needed to Accommodate New Development 20
Parks Cost per Capita 21
Use of Fee Revenue 22
Fee Schedule 22

5. GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES ................................................ 24 Service Population 24

City of Cudahy Development Impact Fee Study
ii
Existing Facility Inventory 25
Facility Standard 25
Fee Revenue Projection 26
Fee Schedule 26

6. PARKING FACILITIES IN-LIEU FEE..................................................... 28 Parking Requirements 28
Parking Facilities Unit Costs 29
Use of Fee Revenue 29
Fee Schedule 29

7. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES................................................................... 31

8. IMPLEMENTATION .......................................................................... 32 Impact Fee Program Adoption Process 32
Inflation Adjustment 32
Reporting Requirements 32
Programming Revenues and Projects with the CIP 34
Reimbursements 34

9. MITIGATION FEE ACT FINDINGS ...................................................... 35 Purpose of Fee 35
Use of Fee Revenues 35
Benefit Relationship 35
Burden Relationship 35
Proportionality 36

1 Executive Summary
This report summarizes an analysis of development impact fees needed to support future development in The City of Cudahy through buildout of the City’s General Plan. It is the City’s intent that the costs representing future development’s share of public facilities and capital improvements be imposed on that development in the form of a development impact fee, also known as a public facilities fee. The public facilities and improvements included in this analysis are divided into the fee categories listed below:
▪ Traffic Facilities
▪ Parks and Recreation Facilities
▪ General Government Facilities
▪ Parking Facilities
▪ Art in Public Places
Background and Study Objectives
The primary policy objective of a development impact fee program is to ensure that new development pays the capital costs associated with growth. The primary purpose of this report is to calculate and present fees that will enable the City to expand its inventory of public facilities, as new development creates increases in service demands.

The City imposes public facilities fees under authority granted by the Mitigation Fee Act (the Act), contained in California Government Code Sections 66000 et seq. This report provides the necessary findings required by the Act for adoption of the fees presented in the fee schedules contained herein.

All development impact fee-funded capital projects should be programmed through the City’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Using a CIP can help the City identify and direct its fee revenue to public facilities projects that will accommodate future growth. By programming fee revenues to specific capital projects, the City can help ensure a reasonable relationship between new development and the use of fee revenues as required by the Mitigation Fee Act.

Facility Standards and Costs
There are three approaches typically used to calculate facilities standards and allocate the costs of planned facilities to accommodate growth in compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act requirements.

The existing inventory approach is based on a facility standard derived from the City’s existing level of facilities and existing demand for services. This approach results in no facility deficiencies attributable to existing development. This approach is often used when a long-range plan for new facilities is not available. Only the initial facilities to be funded with fees are identified in the fee study. Future facilities to serve growth will be identified through the City’s annual capital improvement plan and budget process and/or completion of a new facility master plan. This approach is to calculate the parks and recreation fees and the general government facilities fees in this report.

The planned facilities approach allocates costs based on the ratio of planned facilities that serve new development to the increase in demand associated with new development. This approach is appropriate when specific planned facilities that only benefit new development can be identified, or when the specific share of facilities benefiting new development can be identified. Examples include street improvements to avoid deficient levels of service or a sewer trunk line extension to

City of Cudahy Development Impact Fee Study
2 a previously undeveloped area. This approach is used to calculate the traffic facilities, art in public places and the parking in-lieu facilities fees in this report.

The system plan approach is based on a master facility plan in situations where the needed facilities serve both existing and new development. This approach allocates existing and planned facilities across existing and new development to determine new development’s fair share of facility needs. This approach is used when it is not possible to differentiate the benefits of new facilities between new and existing development. Often the system plan is based on increasing facility standards, so the City must find non-impact fee revenue sources to fund existing development’s fair share of planned facilities. This approach is not used in this report.

Use of Fee Revenues
The Mitigation Fee Act requires that this analysis “Identify the use to which the fee is to be put. If the use is financing public facilities, the facilities shall be identified. That identification may, but need not, be made by reference to a capital improvement plan as specified in Section 65403 or 66002, may be made in applicable general or specific plan requirements, or may be made in other public documents that identify the public facilities for which the fee is charged.” 1 Each
chapter in this report identifies the appropriate use of impact fee revenues for each particular impact fee category.

Impact fee revenue must be spent on new facilities or expansion of current facilities to serve new development. Facilities can be generally defined as capital acquisition items with a useful life greater than five years. Impact fee revenue can be spent on capital facilities to serve new development, including but not limited to land acquisition, construction of buildings, infrastructure, the acquisition of vehicles or equipment, information technology, software licenses and equipment.

Development Impact Fee Schedule Summary
Table E.1 summarizes the development impact fees that meet the City’s identified needs and comply with the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act. The table shows fees for development projects that meet their parking requirements onsite. Projects that cannot meet onsite parking requirements can pay the parking in-lieu fee for each required offsite parking space. 1 California Government Code §66001 (a) (2).

City of Cudahy Development Impact Fee Study
3 Table E.1: Maximum Justified Impact Fee Summary
Land Use
Traffic
Facilities
Parks and
Recreation
Facilities1
General
Government
Facilities
Total
(Onsite
Parking)2
Residential - Fee per Dwelling Unit
Single Family $ 2,037 $ 11,624 $ 1,395 $ 15,056
Multifamily 1,365 10,303 1,237 12,905
Nonresidential - Fee per 1,000 Sq. Ft.

Commercial $ 3,174 $ - $ 196 $ 3,370
Office 3,174 - 233 3,407
Industrial 1,945 - 110 2,055
Sources: Tables 3.5, 4.9, 5.5.
1 Mitigation Fee Act fee show n. Quimby fees in lieu of parkland dedication only apply to development occurring in subdivisions. Quimby in-lieu fees are $37,884 per single family unit and $33,579 per multifamily unit. 2 Assumes that development project provides parking onsite. Maximum justified fee of $29,170 in-lieu of providing one space onsite. Refer to City's municipal code parking standards for detailed parking requirements.

Other Funding Needed
Impact fees may only fund the share of public facilities related to new development in Cudahy.

They may not be used to fund the share of facility needs generated by existing development or by development outside of the City. As shown in Table E.2, approximately $14.6 million in additional funding will be needed to complete the facility projects the City currently plans to develop if fees are adopted at the maximum justified fee level. The “Additional Funding Required” column shows non-impact fee funding required to fund a share of the improvements partially funded by impact fees. Non-fee funding is needed because these facilities are needed partially to remedy existing deficiencies and partly to accommodate new development. To the extent that the City adopts fees that are lower than the maximum justified amount, the non-fee funding requirements may increase, depending on the fee category and methodology.

The City will need to develop alternative funding sources to fund existing development’s share of the planned facilities. Potential sources of revenue include but are not limited to existing or new general fund revenues, existing or new taxes, special assessments, and grants.

City of Cudahy Development Impact Fee Study
4 Table E.2: Additional Funding Required
Fee Category
Total Project
Cost
Projected
Impact Fee
Revenue
Additional
Funding
Required
Traffic Facilities $ 28,256,598 $ 13,670,799 $ 14,585,799 Parks and Recreation Facilities1 14,601,000 14,601,000 - General Government Facilities 2,869,597 2,869,597 -
Total $ 45,727,195 $ 31,141,396 $ 14,585,799
Sources: Tables 3.3, 4.6 and 5.4.
1 Total project cost show n if no development occurs in subdivisions. Impact fees w ill fully fund new development's share of park and recreation facilities.

5 1. Introduction
This report presents an analysis of the need for public facilities to accommodate new development in the City of Cudahy. This chapter provides background for the study and explains the study approach under the following sections:
▪ Public Facilities Financing in California;
▪ Study Objectives;
▪ City of Cudahy Impact Fee Program;
▪ Fee Program Maintenance;
▪ Study Methodology; and
▪ Organization of the Report.

Public Facilities Financing in California
The changing fiscal landscape in California during the past 40 years has steadily undercut the financial capacity of local governments to fund infrastructure. Three dominant trends stand out:
▪ The passage of a string of tax limitation measures, starting with Proposition 13 in 1978 and continuing through the passage of Proposition 218 in 1996; ▪ Declining popular support for bond measures to finance infrastructure for the next generation of residents and businesses;
▪ Unfunded state and federal mandates; and,
▪ Steep reductions in federal and state assistance.

Faced with these trends, many cities and counties have had to adopt a policy of “growth pays its own way.” This policy shifts the burden of funding infrastructure expansion from existing ratepayers and taxpayers onto new development. This funding shift has been accomplished primarily through the imposition of assessments, special taxes, and development impact fees also known as public facilities fees. Assessments and special taxes require the approval of property owners and are appropriate when the funded facilities are directly related to the developing property. Development impact fees, on the other hand, are an appropriate funding source for facilities that benefit all development jurisdiction-wide. Development impact fees need only a majority vote of the legislative body for adoption.

Study Objectives
The primary policy objective of a public facilities fee program is to ensure that new development pays the capital costs associated with growth. The primary purpose of this report is to establish impact fees for Cudahy to ensure that growth pays its own way. The proposed fees will enable the City to expand its inventory of public facilities as new development leads to increases in service demands.

The City can impose public facilities fees under authority granted by the Mitigation Fee Act (the Act), contained in California Government Code Sections 66000 et seq. This report provides the necessary findings required by the Act for adoption of the fees presented in the fee schedules presented in this report.

Cudahy is nearly built out but anticipates some growth forecast through the buildout of the General Plan. While the magnitude of growth is small, the lack of available space to provide public facilities will present many challenges in accommodating even small increases in service population. This growth will create an increase in demand for public services and the facilities

City of Cudahy Development Impact Fee Study
6 required to deliver them. Given the revenue challenges described above, Cudahy has decided to use a development impact fee program to ensure that new development funds the share of facility costs associated with growth. This report makes use of the most current available growth forecasts and facility plans to create an impact fee program for the City to ensure that the fee program accurately represents the facility needs resulting from new development.

Fee Program Maintenance
Once a fee program has been adopted it must be properly maintained to ensure that the revenue collected adequately funds the facilities needed by new development. To avoid collecting inadequate revenue, the inventories of existing facilities and costs for planned facilities must be updated periodically for inflation, and the fees recalculated to reflect the higher costs. The use of established indices for each facility included in the inventories (land, buildings, and equipment), such as the Engineering News-Record, is necessary to accurately adjust the impact fees. For a list of recommended indices, see Chapter 8.

While fee updates using inflation indices are appropriate for annual or periodic updates to ensure that fee revenues keep up with increases in the costs of public facilities, it is recommended to conduct more extensive updates of the fee documentation and calculation (such as this study) when significant new data on growth forecasts and/or facility plans become available. For further detail on fee program implementation, see Chapter 8.

Study Methodology
Development impact fees are calculated to fund the cost of facilities required to accommodate growth. The six steps followed in this development impact fee study include:

1. Estimate existing development and future growth: Identify a base year for existing development and a growth forecast that reflects increased demand for public facilities;

2. Identify facility standards: Determine the facility standards used to plan for new and expanded facilities;

3. Determine facilities required to serve new development: Estimate the total amount of planned facilities, and identify the share required to accommodate new development;

4. Determine the cost of facilities required to serve new development: Estimate the total amount and the share of the cost of planned facilities required to accommodate new development;

5. Calculate fee schedule: Allocate facilities costs per unit of new development to calculate the development impact fee schedule; and

6. Identify alternative funding requirements: Determine if any non-fee funding is required to complete projects.

The key public policy issue in development impact fee studies is the identification of facility standards (step #2, above). Facility standards document a reasonable relationship between new development and the need for new facilities. Standards ensure that new development does not fund deficiencies associated with existing development.

Types of Facility Standards
There are three separate components of facility standards:
 Demand standards determine the amount of facilities required to accommodate growth, for example, park acres per thousand residents, square feet of library space per capita, or gallons of water per day. Demand standards may also reflect a level of service such as the vehicle volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio used in traffic planning.

City of Cudahy Development Impact Fee Study
7  Design standards determine how a facility should be designed to meet expected demand, for example, park improvement requirements and technology infrastructure for City office space. Design standards are typically not explicitly evaluated as part of an impact fee analysis but can have a significant impact on the cost of facilities. Our approach incorporates the cost of planned facilities built to satisfy the City’s facility design standards.
 Cost standards are an alternate method for determining the amount of facilities required to accommodate growth based on facility costs per unit of demand. Cost standards are useful when demand standards were not explicitly developed for the facility planning process. Cost standards also enable different types of facilities to be analyzed based on a single measure (cost or value) and are useful when different facilities are funded by a single fee program. Examples include facility costs per capita, cost per vehicle trip, or cost per gallon of water per day.

New Development Facility Needs and Costs
Several approaches are used to identify facility needs and costs to serve new development. This is often a two-step process: (1) identify total facility needs, and (2) allocate to new development its fair share of those needs.

There are three common methods for determining new development’s fair share of planned facilities costs: the existing inventory method, the planned facilities method, and the system plan method. The formula used by each approach and the advantages and disadvantages of each method is summarized below:

Existing Inventory Method
The existing inventory method allocates costs based on the ratio of existing facilities to demand from existing development as follows:

Current Value of Existing Facilities
Existing Development Demand
Under this method new development will fund the expansion of facilities at the same standard currently serving existing development. The existing inventory method results in no facility deficiencies attributable to existing development. This method is often used when a long-range plan for new facilities is not available. Only the initial facilities to be funded with fees are identified in the fee study. Future facilities to serve growth are identified through an annual capital improvement plan and budget process, possibly after completion of a new facility master plan.

This approach is to calculate the parks and recreation fees and the general government facilities fees in this report.

Planned Facilities Method
The planned facilities method allocates costs based on the ratio of planned facility costs to demand from new development as follows:

Cost of Planned Facilities
New Development Demand
This method is appropriate when planned facilities will entirely serve new development, or when a fair share allocation of planned facilities to new development can be estimated. An example of the former is a Wastewater trunk line extension to a previously undeveloped area. An example of the latter is a portion of a roadway that has been identified as necessary to mitigate the impact from new development through traffic modeling analysis. Under this method new development will fund the expansion of facilities at the standards used in the applicable planning documents.

This approach is used to calculate the traffic facilities, art in public places and parking in-lieu facilities fees in this report.
= $/unit of demand
= $/unit of demand

City of Cudahy Development Impact Fee Study
8 System Plan Method
This method calculates the fee based on the value of existing facilities plus the cost of planned facilities, divided by demand from existing plus new development:

Value of Existing Facilities + Cost of Planned Facilities Existing + New Development Demand
This method is useful when planned facilities need to be analyzed as part of a system that benefits both existing and new development. It is difficult, for example, to allocate a new fire station solely to new development when that station will operate as part of an integrated system of fire stations that together achieve the desired level of service.

The system plan method ensures that new development does not pay for existing deficiencies.

Often facility standards based on policies such as those found in General Plans are higher than the existing facility standards. This method enables the calculation of the existing deficiency required to bring existing development up to the policy-based standard. The local agency must secure non-fee funding for that portion of planned facilities required to correct the deficiency to ensure that new development receives the level of service funded by the impact fee. This approach is not used in this report.

Organization of the Report
The determination of a public facilities fee begins with the selection of a planning horizon and development of growth projections for population and employment. These projections are used throughout the analysis of different facility categories and are summarized in Chapter 2.

Chapters 3 through 7 identify facility standards and planned facilities, allocate the cost of planned facilities between new development and other development, and identify the appropriate development impact fee for the following facility categories:
▪ Traffic Facilities
▪ Parks and Recreation Facilities
▪ General Government Facilities
▪ Parking Facilities In-Lieu Fee
▪ Art in Public Places
Chapter 8 details the procedures that the City must follow when implementing a development impact fee program. Impact fee program adoption procedures are found in California Government Code Sections 66016 through 66018.

The five statutory findings required for adoption of the proposed public facilities fees in accordance with the Mitigation Fee Act are documented in Chapter 9. = $/unit of demand

9 2. Growth Forecasts
Growth projections are used as indicators of demand to determine facility needs and allocate those needs between existing and new development. This chapter explains the source for the growth projections used in this study based on a 2020 base year and a planning horizon of buildout of the City’s General Plan.

Estimates of existing development and projections of future growth are critical assumptions used throughout this report. These estimates are used as follows:
▪ The estimate of existing development in 2020 is used as an indicator of existing facility demand and to determine existing facility standards. ▪ The estimate of total development at buildout of the General Plan is used as an indicator of future demand to determine total facilities needed to accommodate growth and remedy existing facility deficiencies, if any. ▪ Estimates of growth from 2020 through buildout are used to (1) allocate facility costs between new development and existing development, and (2) estimate total fee revenues.

The demand for public facilities is based on the service population, dwelling units or nonresidential development creating the need for the facilities.

Land Use Types
To ensure a reasonable relationship between each fee and the type of development paying the fee, growth projections distinguish between different land use types. The land use types that impact fees have been calculated for are defined below. ▪ Single family: Detached and attached one-unit dwellings. ▪ Multifamily: All attached multifamily dwellings including duplexes and condominiums.
▪ Commercial: All commercial, retail, educational, and hotel/motel development. ▪ Office: All general, professional, and medical office development. ▪ Industrial: All warehouse, manufacturing, and other industrial development.

Some developments may include more than one land use type, such as a mixed-use development with both multifamily and commercial uses. Another similar situation would be a warehousing facility that contains office space. In those cases, the facilities fee would be calculated separately for each land use type included within the building.

The City has the discretion to determine which land use type best reflects a development project’s characteristics for purposes of imposing an impact fee and may adjust fees for special or unique uses to reflect the impact characteristics of the use.

Existing and Future Development
Table 2.1 shows the estimated number of residents, dwelling units, employees, and building square feet in Cudahy, both in 2020 and at buildout of the City’s General Plan. The base year estimates of residents and dwelling units comes from the California Department of Finance. The future dwelling unit projection total is based on the increase in dwelling units from the City’s General Plan and assumes that the proportion of single family to multifamily units will remain constant through buildout. The projection of residents at buildout also comes from the City’s General Plan.

City of Cudahy Development Impact Fee Study
10 Estimates of existing and projected building square footage come from the City's General Plan "Realistic Buildout" Scenario in General Plan Table LU 4.

Estimates of base year employees come from the U.S. Census Bureau, LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics, OnTheMap Application. Future employees are estimated based on the increase in nonresidential building square footage and assume the same ratio of commercial to office to industrial employees as currently exists in the City. 2020 Buildout Increase
Residents1
24,164 30,607 6,443
Dwelling Units2
Single Family 3,460 4,323 863
Multifamily 2,320 2,899 579
Total 5,780 7,222 1,442
Building Square Feet (000s)3
1,283 5,173 3,890
Employment4
Commercial 1,105 4,455 3,350
Office 1,318 5,314 3,996
Industrial 539 2,174 1,635
Total 2,962 11,943 8,981
Table 2.1: Citywide Demographic Assumptions
Sources: Cudahy 2040, General Plan, 2017; California Department of Finance (DOF), Table E-5, 2020; U.S. Census Bureau, OnTheMap Application, http://onthemap.ces.census.gov, Willdan Financial Services. 3 Estimates of existing and projected building square footage from the City's General Plan "Realistic Buildout" Scenario in Table LU 4. 1 Current population from California Department of Finance (DOF).

Projection total for buildout from General Plan, Table LU 4. 2 Current values from DOF. Total dw elling units at buildout is from the General Plan, Table LU 4.
4 Base year from US Census OnTheMap Application and excludes local government w orkers. Total at buildout based on increasing total w orkers proportional to increase in projected building square footage from General Plan. Allocation to land uses at buildout based on current proportions.

Occupant Densities
All fees in this report are calculated based on dwelling units or building square feet. Occupant density assumptions ensure a reasonable relationship between the size of a development project, the increase in service population associated with the project, and the amount of the fee.

Occupant densities (residents per dwelling unit or workers per building square foot) are the most appropriate characteristics to use for most impact fees. The fee imposed should be based on the land use type that most closely represents the probable occupant density of the development.

City of Cudahy Development Impact Fee Study
11 The average occupant density factors used in this report are shown in Table 2.2. The residential density factors are based on data for Cudahy from the 2018 U.S. Census’ American Community Survey, the most recent data available.

The nonresidential occupancy factors are based on occupancy factors found in the Employment Density Study Summary Report, prepared for the Southern California Association of Governments by The Natelson Company. Though not specific to Cudahy, the Natelson study covered employment density over a wide array of land use and development types, making it reasonable to apply these factors to other areas. The specific factors used in this report are specific to Los Angeles County.

Table 2.2: Occupant Density
Residential
Single Family 4.40 Residents Per Dwelling Unit
Multifamily 3.90 Residents Per Dwelling Unit
Nonresidential
Commercial 2.00 Employees per 1,000 square feet
Office 2.37 Employees per 1,000 square feet
Industrial 1.12 Employees per 1,000 square feet
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2018 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Tables B25024 and B25033; The Natelson Company, Inc., Employment Density Study Summary Report, prepared for the Southern California Association of Governments, October 31, 2001, Los Angeles County data; Willdan Financial Services. Page 145 of 603 12 3. Traffic Facilities
This chapter summarizes an analysis of the need for transportation improvements, including intersection improvements, sidewalks, and roadway, to accommodate new development. The chapter documents a reasonable relationship between new development and the impact fee for funding of these facilities.

Trip Demand
The need for transportation facilities is based on the trip demand placed on the system by development. A reasonable measure of demand is the number of PM peak hour vehicle trips, adjusted for the type of trip. Vehicle trip generation rates are a reasonable measure of demand on the City’s system of street improvements across all modes because alternate modes (transit, bicycle, pedestrian) often substitute for vehicle trips.

The two types of trips adjustments made to trip generation rates to calculate trip demand are described below:
▪ Pass-by trips are deducted from the trip generation rate. Pass-by trips are intermediates stops between an origin and a final destination that require no diversion from the route, such as stopping to get gas on the way to work. ▪ The trip generation rate is adjusted by the average length of trips for a specific land use category compared to the average length of all trips on the street system.

These adjustments allow for a holistic quantification of trip demand that takes trip purpose and length into account for fee calculation purposes.

Table 5.1 shows the calculation of trip demand factors by land use category based on the adjustments described above. Data is based on extensive and detailed trip surveys conducted in the San Diego region by the San Diego Association of Governments. It is reasonable to assume that traffic generation patterns are similar between the San Diego region and the Los Angeles region. The surveys provide one of the most comprehensive databases available of trip generation rates, pass-by trips factors, and average trip length for a wide range of land uses. It should be noted that the projections of current and future trip generation in this report are based on data specific to the City of Cudahy.

City of Cudahy Development Impact Fee Study
13 Table 3.1: Trip Rate Adjustment Factors
Primary
Trips1
Diverted
Trips1
Total
Excluding
Pass-by1
Average
Trip
Length2
Adjustment
Factor3ITE Category
PM Peak
Hour
Trips4
Trip
Demand
Factor5
A B C = A + B D E = C x D F G = E x F
Residential
Single Family 86% 11% 97% 7.9 1.11 Single Family Housing (210) 1.00 1.11 Multifamily 86% 11% 97% 7.9 1.11 Apartment (220) 0.67 0.74 Nonresidential - per Employee
Commercial 47% 31% 78% 3.6 0.41 Shopping Center (820) 1.89 0.77 Office 77% 19% 96% 8.8 1.22 General Office (710) 0.45 0.55 Industrial 79% 19% 98% 9.0 1.28 General Light Industrial (110) 0.68 0.87 Nonresidential - per 1,000 Sq. Ft.

Commercial 47% 31% 78% 3.6 0.41 Shopping Center (820) 4.21 1.73 Office 77% 19% 96% 8.8 1.22 General Office (710) 1.42 1.73 Industrial 79% 19% 98% 9.0 1.28 General Light Industrial (110) 0.83 1.06 4 Trips per dw elling unit or per 1,000 building square feet. 5 The trip demand factor is the product of the trip adjustment factor and the trip rate.

Sources: San Diego Association of Governments, Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region, April 2002; Institute of Traffic Engineers, Trip Generation, 10th Edition; Willdan Financial Services. 1 Percent of total trips. Primary trips are trips w ith no midw ay stops, or "links". Diverted trips are linked trips w hose distance adds at least one mile to the primary trip. Pass-by trips are links that do not add more than one mile to the total trip. Based on SANDAG data. 2 In miles. Based on SANDAG data.
3 The trip adjustment factor equals the percent of non-pass-by trips multiplied by the average trip length and divided by the systemw ide average trip length of 6.9 miles.