La Palma City Council
August 5, 2025

Water Systems Engineering, Inc. 785.242.6166 http://www.h2osystems.com 23292.w.pw.p-b.LaPalma.CityYardWell Page 8 of 13
Bacterial Assessments continued:

Microscopic Evaluation:

WH-1: Very low visible bacterial activity and biomass.

WH-2: Very low visible bacterial activity and biomass.

ND - Not Detected City Yard Well Detection
NA - Not Applicable WH-1 WH-2 Limits
08:23 14:47
pH Value 8.03 8.02 NA
Total Dissolved Solids 303 304 1.0 mg/l
Conductivity (µS/cm) 421 422 NA
ORP (mV) + 218.5 + 215.3 NA
Chlorine (as Cl) ND ND 0.02 mg/l
Iron (resuspended) 0.11 0.09 0.02 mg/l
Plate Count (CFU/ml) 0 0 NA
ATP (cells per ml) initial 30,000 30,000 NA
ATP (cells per ml) 24 hr 26,000 26,000 NA
Anaerobic Growth (%) <10 <10 NA
Sulfate Reducing Bacteria Negative Negative NA
Fe/Mn Oxidizing Bacteria Negative Negative NA
Total Coliform Negative Negative NA
E. coli Coliform Negative Negative NA
Bacterial Identification No ID Possible No ID Possible NA

Water Systems Engineering, Inc. 785.242.6166 http://www.h2osystems.com 23292.w.pw.p-b.LaPalma.CityYardWell Page 9 of 13
Observations:

Samples were submitted for the City of La Palma, CA, City Yard Well for analysis due to a decline in production and an increase in arsenic. Upon arrival in the laboratory, the initial testing noted a slightly alkaline pH value in all twelve samples. The Oxidation Reduction Potential (ORP) measurement for the samples were elevated and indicate an oxidative environment is present. With ORP levels at this point it is sufficient to expect oxidation of metals such as iron and manganese. In general, the ORP values were consistent across all sampled depths.

Total alkalinity was within the expected range for the region in the primary sample pair (270’ and 650’). The alkalinity contribution in the samples was solely from bicarbonate (HCO3- ) ions, as
carbonate and hydroxide ions were not identified. Hardness within the sample set was predominantly carbonate based and largely comprised of calcium.

Total dissolved solids (TDS) levels, calculated as a function of electrical conductivity, were measured in expected concentrations in all the samples falling between 291 and 305 mg/l.

Conductivity levels followed a similar trend with little fluctuation between the depths.

The Langelier Saturation Index (LSI) calculation predicts calcium scale formation and the likelihood for chemical corrosion. The LSI value for the 270’ and 650’ samples were positive.

Positive values reflect a saturated condition with the potential for calcium scale formation. While positive LSI values typically indicate a reduced potential for corrosion, does not account for the potential of microbial influenced corrosion (MIC), mechanical corrosion, or influences of stray current.

Dissolved iron, suspended iron and iron total were not detected in the 270’ or 650’ samples.

Resuspended iron, a test that accounts for dissolved and suspended iron as well as iron that has been mobilized or concentrated by microbial activity, was found in minimal amounts in all twelve samples. The highest concentration of resuspended iron was noted in the WH-1 sample at 0.11 mg/l, which falls below the fouling threshold of 1.0 mg/l. Manganese, an ion that behaves very similar to iron, was detected in minor concentrations in the 270’ and 650’ samples, yet below the concentration of 0.1 mg/l associated with manganese related fouling.

Microscopic evaluation of the samples reported very little to no visible biological activity present with no reports of significant biomass or larger microorganisms. Biological analysis included a heterotrophic plate count (HPC) as a measure of microbial activity and growth, and adenosine triphosphate (ATP) analysis, a means of quantifying the total population present. HPC values were elevated in the 270’, 300’, 510’, 530’ and 1080’ samples, with the 510’ level exceeding the upper threshold of the test. Typically, biological related fouling can occur as HPC values exceed 300 colony forming units (cfu). Initial ATP results fell within a normal range of an active potable well system. A second evaluation conducted following a 24-hour period under ideal environmental conditions reported various changes within the samples but still fell in the expected range. As a point of reference, an active potable well typically exhibits an ATP range of 10,000 to 70,000 cells per milliliter (cpm), with values in excess of 100,000 cpm a concern for biofouling.

Anaerobic growth, reported as a percentage of the total population, was limited at less than 10% in all the samples. Typically, as anaerobic levels increase, biofouling becomes more dynamic with increases in the occurrence of dense biomass and nuisance bacteria. Testing for sulfate reducing bacteria (SRB), a nuisance anaerobe associated with H2S generation, was negative in all samples. Sulfate-related bacteria can impact wells from an aesthetic standpoint with taste and odor, and structurally as hydrogen sulfide (H2S) generation can impact pH levels, influencing the corrosion potential.

Water Systems Engineering, Inc. 785.242.6166 http://www.h2osystems.com 23292.w.pw.p-b.LaPalma.CityYardWell Page 10 of 13
Testing for the presence of iron and manganese-oxidizing bacteria was negative in all City Yard Well samples. No iron oxide entrained biomass was observed during microscopic evaluation.

Total coliform testing as well as E.coli related coliform testing was negative in all of the City Yard Well samples.

Identification of the dominant bacteria within the samples included several species of slimeforming bacteria and numerous soil related bacterium. Background on the identified species is provided below, in alphabetical order.

Acidovorax delafieldii is an aerobic, gram negative, soil bacterium. The bacteria’s presence in the sample is likely a relation to the area of recharge for the well and aquifer, reflecting interaction with the upper soil horizons.

Acinetobacter delafieldii is a gram negative soil bacteria. Acinetobacter delafieldii is found in natural environments like plant material and water, and can be found in healthcare facilities. While Acinetobacter species can be part of the normal flora of humans, they can also cause infections and are considered opportunistic pathogens.

Clavibacter michiganensis is an aerobic, gram-positive bacterium. Mostly known for their damaging effects to plants and crops, these bacteria are commonly found in soil environments throughout North America and Europe.

Cupriavidus gilardii is a small, rod-shaped, gram negative bacterium that has been isolated from a number of ecological niches, including plants and soils. C. gilardii are considered a rare form of opportunistic pathogen, responsible for infection in immuno-compromised individuals who have direct contact with and significant exposure to, the bacteria.

Microbacterium maritypicum are a very small, rod-shaped, saprophytic, gram-positive, thermotolerant aerobic bacteria found in soils and dairy products.

Micrococcus luteus is a gram positive spherical, saprotrophic bacterium that forms bright yellow colonies on the growth plate. An obligate aerobe, M. luteus is found in soil, dust, water and air, and as part of the normal flora of the mammalian skin. M. luteus is considered an opportunistic pathogen for immunity compromised individuals. also colonizes Pseudomonas aeruginosa is a common bacterium found in soil, water, skin flora, and most man-made environments throughout the world. It thrives not only in normal atmospheres, but also in hypoxic atmospheres, and has thus colonized many natural and artificial environments.

Pseudomonas aeruginosa is considered an opportunistic pathogen, causing infections, such as septicemia, in immuno-compromised patients who come into contact with large accumulations of the bacteria.

Pseudomonas stutzeri is a gram-negative, rod-shaped soil bacterium that is highly motile. As a member of the genus Pseudomonas, it is a prolific slime former; however, it’s known to produce a particularly dense, almost leathery form of biomass. It is also considered a denitrifying bacterium.

Rathayibacter tritici is a gram positive soil bacterium. It is a plant pathogen and causes spike blight in wheat.

Stenotrophomonas maltophilia is an aerobic, non-fermenting, gram-negative bacterium. It is considered naturally occurring and has been identified in various aquatic environments,

Water Systems Engineering, Inc. 785.242.6166 http://www.h2osystems.com 23292.w.pw.p-b.LaPalma.CityYardWell Page 11 of 13
however, remains a relatively uncommon bacteria. These bacteria are small, but can develop larger colonies due to their biofilm development capabilities (similar to pseudomonas). Despite its’ low pathogenicity, Stenotrophomonas maltophilia is now recognized as an opportunistic pathogen that can generate infections, including urinary and respiratory infections, in immunocompromised patients who come into contact with large accumulations of the bacteria.

Interpretations and Recommendations:

Submitted operational data indicates that the well is experiencing an approximate 35% loss of production in comparison to the original rate. It was further reported that periodically, a rotten egg odor is noticeable and water quality testing notes and increase in arsenic.

Rotten egg odors are typically a reflection of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) generated by sulfate reducing bacteria (SRB). Testing for SRB presence was negative within the samples and anaerobic growth was limited. SRB activity is typically isolated in the lower extensions of wells in areas with restricted or very limited flow. In deeper well settings, such as the City Yard Well at 1200-ft, it is not uncommon for small populations of SRB’s to develop when the well is idled.

Once active pumping is resumed, the population and the migratory H2S is flushed from the well.

The extended separation distance from the pump intake at 250-ft and the lower extension of the well (approximately 950-ft) may be contributing to the periodic development of SRB activity.

Mobilization or concentration of various ions and compounds, like arsenic, can occur within the well, but is largely driven from aquifer conditions. In the 270’ and 650’samples, concentrations of the evaluated parameters were largely similar with limited variability. When microbial activity has played a role in the concentration or mobilization of arsenic, it typically is observable in larger population size and the presence of iron oxidizing species. In the case of the submitted samples, the resident microbial population falls within a normal range for an active potable well and no iron oxidizing bacteria were identified.

With regards to the loss of production, the test data indicates that mineral scale development is the likely culprit. While the well contains an active microbial population, the levels do not appear excessive. Biofouling within the well is limited to the presence of slime forming bacteria and their influence on the accumulation of mineral scale precipitant. It is possible that a level of more advanced microbial activity is occurring the lowest extension of the well, however, the 1130’ sample did not indicate that it is significant.

As part of planned maintenance activities, a combined chemical and mechanical cleaning of the well is recommended, to be followed by disinfection and a return to active operation. Prior to finalizing treatment recommendations, a video survey of the well is strongly advised. In addition to assessing the structural condition of the well and identifying the extent of fouling, the video survey will allow for measurement of any fill present in the lower extension of the well.

Depending upon the results of video survey, begin with mechanical pre-treatment of the well.

Brush the well casing and screened portion in an effort to knock loose scale and biomass accumulations. Use of a stiff nylon brush is recommended to disrupt accumulations yet reduce physical damage to the well and potential development of additional reactive surfaces. Due to the three diameters present, a different sized brush will be necessary for each zone.

Once the entire well has been brushed, remove the disrupted material and pre-existing fill from the bottom of the well. Bail or airlift in an effort to purge the disrupted material from the well.

Evacuate the material until visible turbidity has lessened and the conductivity has returned to a near-normal background level (approximately 450 µS/cm). Record the achievable well depth to confirm removal of the material from the bottom of the well.

Water Systems Engineering, Inc. 785.242.6166 http://www.h2osystems.com 23292.w.pw.p-b.LaPalma.CityYardWell Page 12 of 13
Once mechanical pretreatment and subsequent evacuation is complete, a combined chemical and mechanical cleaning process should then be enacted.

Prepare a chemical solution comprised of 7% Johnson Screen’s NW-120 phosphoric acid, 2% NW-310 biodispersant, and potable water for introduction into the well. Phosphoric acid is recommended as it is a strong mineral acid that is far less aggressive towards stainless and low carbon steel. The treatment concentrations required for the well are presented in percent weight/volume percentages and should be based upon a total treatment volume (TTV) equivalent to 1.5-times the standing well volume (SWV).

Blend the chemicals on the surface. For blending of the acid treatment solution, mix the chemicals in this order: water, acid, biodispersant. Mix lightly. Introduce evenly into the well via tremie pipe. Surge the introduced chemicals using a surge block which appropriately compliments the inner diameter of the well based on the area being surged. Surge the entire well column periodically over a 24-hour period, focusing a larger percentage of this time on the screened portion. During treatment, periodically monitor the activity of the chemical solution, maintaining a pH below 3 during the treatment process.

Once surging is complete, thoroughly airlift or pump the well until the pH has returned to normal (6.5 or greater), the conductivity has returned to near-normal background level (approximately 450 µS/cm), visible turbidity is zero, and clear water is being evacuated. Begin evacuation from the lowest extension of the well moving upwards as conditions improve. Collect and neutralize the evacuated material above ground and dispose of according to state and local regulations – do not neutralize the solution downhole.

Once evacuation is complete, a disinfection of the well will be necessary. Final chlorination should utilize a target concentration of 300-ppm in a treatment volume equivalent to 3 times the standing well volume. This larger volume is utilized to flood the borehole with the disinfection solution in order to increase the effectiveness of treatment as well as the effective treatment area. Use of the NW-420 Chlor-Safe, a chlorinated isocyanurate, is recommended as a chlorine alternative that goes readily into solution and does not degrade during exposure. For a 300-ppm target concentration, 5-lbs of NW-420 is required per 1,000 gallons of water.

If sodium hypochlorite is utilized, utilize a chlorine enhancer to maximize development of hypochlorous acid during treatment. Based on the total alkalinity levels, a 300-ppm chlorine solution will require 1.5 gallons of NW-410 per 1,000 gallons of water to accurately buffer the solution.

The disinfection solution should be blended above ground and introduced into the well by a tremie pipe. In preparing the chlorine treatment above ground, mix the chemicals in this order:
water, chlorine enhancer, check the pH (not below 5.5), add chlorine. Mix lightly. Efforts should be made to evenly disperse the disinfection solution evenly throughout the well and screened zones. Once the solution is placed into the well, it should be lightly agitated with a single disc surge block or similar tool to supply agitation and dispersion throughout the well column and screened zone. During disinfection, if the chlorine residual drops below 100 ppm, add additional chlorine in to raise it to that level.

Allow the chlorine solution to remain downhole overnight. Following this period, begin evacuation of the well from the bottom, working upwards, until a minor residual (~ 50 ppm) is present and all debris has been evacuated from the well. At this time, the permanent pump and column pipe can be placed back into the well and utilized to purge the remaining chlorine solution from the well.

Water Systems Engineering, Inc. 785.242.6166 http://www.h2osystems.com 23292.w.pw.p-b.LaPalma.CityYardWell Page 13 of 13
Evacuated material should be collected above ground in a storage tank, neutralizing rapidly with sodium bisulfate or sodium thiosulfate, and dispose of according to local and state regulations.

Please Note: Chlorine consumption may occur as a result of iron levels, bacterial count, ORP values, and pH adjustment downhole. Field monitoring during all phases of the recommended treatment procedures is advised.

Due to the telescoping nature of the well there is a wide discrepancy in treatment volumes. If an “as-built” or completion record is available for review, we would be happy to assist in calculating the necessary treatment chemicals.

If you have any questions regarding the analyses or the information presented, please contact our office.

Michael Schnieders, PG, PH-GW
Hydrogeologist

85 7.9 APPENDIX I: BESST 2022 PROFILE REPORT

1 Dynamic Flow and Chemistry Profiling
Report for the La Palma City Yard Well
Date(s) of Profile: 12/12/22-12/14/22
Date of Publication: February 15
th, 2023
Reviewed By: Miles Koehler (Senior Hydrogeologist) and Noah Heller (President, MSc. PG. 5792)

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Figures 3
1 Introduction 4
2 Background Information 4

2.1 Study Area 4

2.2 Well Construction 5

2.3 Geology and Geophysics 7
3 Methodology 9

3.1 Dynamic Flow Profile 9

3.1.1 Calculations for Flow Contribution 10

3.2 Dynamic Chemistry Profile 12

3.2.1 Flow-Weighted Concentration Derivations from Laboratory Results 13 4 Results 14

4.1 La Palma City Yard Well Dynamic Flow 14

4.1.1 Dynamic Flow Figures 15

4.2 City Yard Well Chemical Mass Balance 19

4.2.1 Zonal Chemical Contribution Figures 20

4.3 Sources of Error and Uncertainties 23

4.3.1 Mass Balance Bias 23
5 Discussion, Conclusions and Recommendations 24

5.1 Summary 24

5.2 Microbial Influences 25

5.3 Arsenic Sources and Occurrence 25

5.4 RECOMMENDATIONS 28
6 References 31
7 Appendices 32

7.1 Appendix A: Wellsite Photos 32

7.2 Appendix B: Dynamic Flow Profile Data 34

7.3 Appendix C: Laboratory Chemistry Results 35

7.4 Appendix D: City Yard Well Mass Balance Results 36

7.5 Appendix E: Well Completion Report 37

7.6 Appendix F: Lithology Classification 38

3 TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Map of City Yard Well in La Palma, CA...........................................................................................5 Figure 2: A) Original Well Construction – City Yard Well B) Liner Installation..............................................6 Figure 3. The City Yard Well construction diagram with the lithology, geophysical log information, and field executed tracer injection and groundwater sampling points. .............................................................8 Figure 4. List of water sample analytes.......................................................................................................13 Figure 5. City Yard Well borehole velocity by depth...................................................................................15 Figure 6. City Yard Well cumulative borehole flow rate by depth..............................................................15 Figure 7. City Yard Well zonal flow contribution by depth.........................................................................16 Figure 8. City Yard Well percent zonal flow contribution by depth............................................................16 Figure 9. City Yard Well average zonal flow density by depth....................................................................17 Figure 10. City Yard Well zonal flow density versus lithology and geophysics...........................................18 Figure 11. City Yard Well mass-balanced arsenic and zonal flow contribution by depth...........................20 Figure 12. City Yard Well mass-balanced iron and zonal flow contributions by depth..............................20 Figure 13: City Yard Well mass-balanced manganese and zonal flow contributions by depth..................21 Figure 14: City Yard Well mass-balanced TDS and zonal flow contributions by depth. .............................21 Figure 15. City Yard Well flow and chemistry comparison in relation to well construction, lithology, and geophysics...................................................................................................................................................22 Figure 16: Comparison of average annual wellhead arsenic concentrations with average annual pumping rates and pumping water level from 2018 through 2022. .........................................................................24 Figure 17: Still image from BESST video survey showing compromised rubber packer disc. The disc likely became disconnected from its structural support during installation of the dual packer well modification system.........................................................................................................................................................26 Figure 18: Spread of sulfur reducing bacteria during pumping..................................................................27 Figure 19: Hypothetical biocatalytic cycle to explain increased arsenic concentrations over time...........28 Figure 20. City Yard Well comparison between 2013 and 2022 profiling results in relation to well construction, lithology, and geophysics......................................................................................................30

TABLE OF TABLES
Table 1. Definitions of variables used in dynamic profile calculations.......................................................11 Table 2. List of water sample analytes........................................................................................................13

4 1 INTRODUCTION
This report details the dynamic flow and depth-dependent chemistry profile conducted by BESST, Inc. (BESST) at the City Yard Well (Meadowlark Well) located in La Palma, CA, including field methods, data analysis, final results, conclusions, and recommendations.

The main objective of the dynamic, steady-state, profiling investigation at the City Yard Well was to determine why arsenic concentrations have been slowly increasing since approximately two years ago.

To assess this problem, a detailed static video profile and dynamic, steady state flow and chemistry profile were conducted with the specific analytes of interest being arsenic, iron, manganese. Zonal contributions of total dissolved solids were also delineated for flow calibration. The results of this survey will help to determine the subsurface conditions in relation to zonal groundwater flow and water quality in the City Yard well and will serve as a guide regarding potential well modifications or rehabilitation, if needed.

Prior to the start of on-site field work, a flow and water chemistry sampling plan was prepared based on the construction and surrounding geology of the well. A total of 24 flow measurements and 9 depthdependent water quality samples were collected under steady-state flow conditions. Dynamic flow measurements were collected using BESST’s proprietary, upgraded version of the USGS tracer flowmeter, and downhole groundwater samples were collected using BESST’s HydroBooster sampling pump. Two wellhead samples, one before and one after the downhole sampling, were collected from the discharge line downstream from the wellhead and analyzed for the same analytes as the downhole samples. The wellhead samples represented blended composites of the well’s overall water quality. Groundwater samples were analyzed by Weck Laboratories Inc., located in Industry, CA. 2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION
This background information section details the study area of the well site, history of well construction and its attributes, and the geology and geophysics surrounding the well in the subsurface.

2.1 STUDY AREA
The La Palma’s City Yard Well is located at 33.840306° north and 118.048063° west on the property located at 8415 Meadowlark Lane, La Palma, CA (Figure 1). Photographs of the well site from the field effort can be found in Appendix A: Wellsite Photos.

5 Figure 1. Map of City Yard Well in La Palma, CA.

2.2 WELL CONSTRUCTION
Constructed in 1984, the original construction of the City Yard Well consists of a telescopic well design of 20-inch internal diameter (I.D.) blank casing to a depth of 290-feet, and a 14-inch casing from 290 to 1,435 feet below ground surface (Ft. BGS). Prior to well installation, a 36-inch diameter borehole was drilled from the ground surface to 73 Ft. BGS where a 30-inch I.D. conductor casing was installed and its annulus spacing filled with cement grout. Afterward a telescopic pilot bore was drilled starting with a 28-inch diameter hole from 0 to 392 Ft. BGS, reducing to a 26-inch. diameter hole from 392 to 1005 Ft. BGS and concluding with an 18 In. diameter hole from 1005 to 1516 Ft. BGS.

The well installation included a 20 in. I.D. blank well casing extending from ground surface to 290 Ft. BGS with a reduction to 14-inch I.D. well casing from 290 Ft. BGS to the total well depth of 1435 Ft. BGS (Figure 2A). The 14-inch well casing alternates from 14 In. I.D. mild steel louvered casing with 3/32-inch slot openings to 14 In. I.D. mild steel blank casing; totaling to 9 screen sections for a complete well screen length of 680-feet. In the annulus of the 14 In. well casing and borehole, a graded gravel pack was placed using a tremie pipe and bentonite clay seals were selectively placed along the transit of the gravel pack to hydraulically separate each aquifer exposed to the perforations of the well screen. The gravel pack was later consolidated using air lift pumping and swabbing.

6 Figure 2: A) Original Well Construction – City Yard Well B) Liner Installation Following well installation, the City Yard Well was developed by swabbing and bailing using cable tool equipment, and surge pumping using a deep well turbine pump. The swabbing and bailing was conducted for a total of 40 hours while the development pumping totaled 98 hours.

Later, in 2007, the General Pump company installed a well liner to a total depth of 1206 Ft. BGS (Figure 2B). The liner consists of 16 In. diameter steel casing from ground surface to 280 Ft. BGS, that transitions to a 16 In. to 12 In. concentric mild steel reducer to unite a 13.25 outer-diameter (O.D.) 2-foot stainless steel (SS) coupling to allow the connection to a 12 In. SS wire-wrap well screen. The 12 In. wire-wrap well screen is continuous from 283 Ft. BGS to 783 Ft. BGS with a 12 In. to 10 In. concentric SS reducer at the bottom to unite with 420-feet more of continuous SS wire-wrap screen. Then in 2013, BESST performed a dynamic flow and chemistry profile with attention to contaminants including arsenic, chloride, iron, manganese, sulfate, and TDS.

In 2016, informed by the 2013 dynamic profile, BESST in conjunction with General Pump, conducted a well modification of the City Yard Well. In addition, a new line-shaft turbine pump was installed after modification to a total depth of 229 Ft. BGS. The 2013 dynamic profile revealed most of the elevated contaminants were from the middle screen sections (540 to 1020 Ft. BGS). Therefore, the executed modification was an 8-inch diameter and 670-foot-long insert pipe outfitted with two mechanical rubber ring packers at 1041 Ft. BGS and 534 Ft. BGS to prevent water contribution from the middle screen sections. The insert pipe was perforated with vertical slots from 1047 to 1203 Ft. BGS and allowed water capture from 290 to 534 Ft. BGS and from 1047 to 1203 Ft. BGS.

Currently, in 2022, the City Yard Well contains three water conditioning practices including a chlorine line for inhibiting bacteria development, a phosphate line used as a brown water-corrosion inhibitor, and a sand separator. Based on verbal communication with the City of La Palma, the current state of the well has been seeing gradual increase in arsenic levels and sand content.

A B

7 The following well diagram (Figure 3) combines the 1984 well construction report and drillers log, the 2007 well liner report, and the 2016 Feasibility Installation Report and Pump as-built diagram. See Appendix F: Lithology Classification for more information on the lithology scheme used thought the report.

2.3 GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS
The borehole stratigraphy surrounding the City Yard Well comprises an interbedded lithology of gravel, silts, sands, and clays. The electric geophysical logs conducted for the City Yard Well were spontaneous potential (S.P.), resistivity (10-inch normal), and point resistivity. The geophysical resistivity signatures with depth show two distinct waveforms at 534 Ft. BGS and 1041 Ft. BGS, indicative of changing hydrogeologic conditions. The waveform changes are apparent in the point- and normal- resistivity where the normal at 534 Ft. BGS shows a ‘smoothed’ U-shape, and the point resistivity shows an abrupt change from smoothed curvature to ‘chatter’ sharp curvature with a deflection to the right (Figure 3). Also, at 1041 Ft. BGS, the normal resistivity shows a virtually flat line, and the point resistivity curve deflects to the right with increasing chatter (Figure 3). The mechanical packers are essentially aligned with these changes which are co-located with fine-grained units including clay and silt with sand.

8 Figure 3. The City Yard Well construction diagram with the lithology, geophysical log information, and field executed tracer injection and groundwater sampling points.

9 3 METHODOLOGY

3.1 DYNAMIC FLOW PROFILE
Prior to on-site field work, a tracer injection and sampling plan (ISP) was prepared based on the well construction specifications and surrounding subsurface conditions (Figure 3). The plan was then implemented by our hydrogeological field team in gathering flow data, collecting groundwater samples, and periodically recording drawdown levels and the pumping rate to ensure that steady-state conditions were satisfied. During the profile, the pumping water level (PWL) was measured to be approximately 145 Ft. BGS.

The dynamic flow profile was conducted December 12, 2022, at an average pumping rate of 1209 gallons per minute (GPM) monitored using the onsite flowmeter. Groundwater levels and flowmeter measurements were recorded after each dye injection, and after sampling at each depth. The tracer used was rhodamine red FWT 50, which has been safely used for decades and is approved by the National Sanitation Foundation (NSF 60) for use in potable drinking water systems.

The dynamic flow injection method consisted of deploying high-pressure nylon tubing 1 In. PVC Sch 80 access pipe. The tubing was fully loaded with the rhodamine tracer prior to testing, and during the flow profile was continuously refilled by means of an electronically controlled hydraulic reloading system. The tracer was released at each depth on command by a surface-based timer control unit which had been programmed to control the volume and duration of each injection.

All injection and sampling depths were recorded with a mechanical counter through which the tubing was fed during deployment into the well. After the tubing reach each injection depth, the injection button was depressed, releasing approximately 140 mL of tracer into the well through an injection nozzle outfitted with multiple sideways injection ports; the injection pressure spreads the tracer sideways throughout the cross-sectional plane of the well, a patented process known as “Sideways Injection” (patent number 10,677,626). Following each injection, the tracer was pulled towards the pump intake, and the time travel time of the tracer’s return to a fluorometer was used to calculate in-well flow velocities. The inflow for each zonal interval was then calculated from sequentially paired velocity measurements. “Sideways Injection” is essential to obtaining accurate velocity measurements. The process consists of releasing the tracer sideways and simultaneously through multiple circumferentially spaced holes embedded in the tracer injection nozzle, such that the tracer comprises the entire cross-sectional flow area inside the well at any given injection depth. Since tooling centralization for flowmeter surveys is required (Smolen, 1996; Maliva, 2016) and tooling cannot easily be centralized when the pump is inside the well, the “Sideways Injection” method compensates for the lack of centralization of any type of flowmeter tooling by instantly spreading the tracer sideways throughout the cross-sectional plane of the pipe. A complete measurement of pipe flow is therefore achieved including the boundary, transitional and axial pipe flow.

Downhole flow velocities were calculated as the change in feet between the injection points divided by the change in tracer return times to the surface fluorometer. The data was then used to calculate

10 cumulative flow at each tracer injection depth. The algebraic difference between sequential cumulative flows equals the zonal flow contribution entering the well between the injection points. This calculation was performed iteratively throughout the well profile to estimate the flow contribution within each interval (in GPM and in percent of the total flow). The calculated flow data under both pumping rates are tabulated in Appendix B: Dynamic Flow Profile Data.

3.1.1 Calculations for Flow Contribution
Calculations were based upon the well dimensions provided by the City of La Palma and field survey results. Up to three measurements were collected at each discrete depth to determine an average cumulative flow.

Below (Table 1) is a list of definitions used in the dynamic flow and chemistry calculation tables:

11 Table 1. Definitions of variables used in dynamic profile calculations A Well cross-sectional area (Ft2)
C Constant conversion factor (Ft3/min) to GPM
Cave Average analyte chemistry for all depth intervals to the ith degree, Cc Laboratory-measured cumulative concentration (mass/volume) Ci Zonal chemical concentration within interval i (mass/volume) Ctot Composite sample collected at the wellhead tap (mass/volume) 𝑑 Injection/sample depth (Ft. BGS)
𝑑
𝑟 Dye tracer return (detection) depth (Ft. BGS)
𝑑
𝑇 Dye tracer pulse injection depth (Ft. BGS)
𝑖 Investigated depth interval between two injection or sample depths (Ft. BGS) mi Mass flux within interval i (mass/time)
n Number of investigated depths for each depth-dependent sample and injection ∆𝑄𝑖 Zonal flow contribution within interval i (GPM)
𝑄𝑖 Average cumulative borehole flow rate within interval i (GPM) 𝑄
𝑐 Cumulative well discharge (GPM)
rcas Well casing inner radius (Ft.)
RSTDEV Relative standard deviation
𝑡 Time (minutes)
𝑡𝑛
𝑟 Dye tracer return (detection) time at injection number n (min) 𝑡𝑛
𝑇 Tracer pulse injection time at injection number n (min) 𝑡𝑛
𝑃 Peak travel time from injection depth d to the ground surface from injection number n (min)
𝑣𝑖 Average borehole velocity within interval i (Ft./minute)

12 Travel Time (Minutes)

1. 𝑡𝑛
𝑃 = (𝑡1
𝑟 − 𝑡1𝑇
), (𝑡2
𝑟 − 𝑡2𝑇
), (𝑡3
𝑟 − 𝑡3𝑇
), … , (𝑡𝑛
𝑟 − 𝑡𝑛𝑇
)
Velocity (Ft./min):

2. 𝑣𝑖 =
(𝑑1−𝑑2)
(𝑡2
𝑃−𝑡1𝑃)
,
(𝑑2−𝑑3)
(𝑡3
𝑃−𝑡2𝑃)
,
(𝑑3−𝑑4)
(𝑡4
𝑃−𝑡3𝑃)
, … ,
(𝑑𝑛−𝑑𝑛+1)
(𝑡𝑛+1
𝑃 −𝑡𝑛𝑃)
For depths below the pump intake, dn, dn+1, …, are calculated down and away from the intake.

Cumulative Flow (GPM):

3. 𝑄𝑖 = 𝑣𝑖 ∗ 𝐴 ∗ 𝐶
Zonal Flow Contribution (GPM):

4. ∆𝑄𝑖,𝑖+1 = 𝑄𝑖 − 𝑄𝑖+1

3.2 DYNAMIC CHEMISTRY PROFILE
The chemistry profile was performed with the HydroBooster, a high-pressure gas-drive sampling pump consisting of two conjoined nylon tubes connected to a proprietary valve assembly. The HydroBooster was developed by BESST under a research and development contract from the USGS in 2002 and was used to collect all downhole groundwater samples during the survey. The pump employs a gas-drive purging and sampling process that is differentiated from an air-lift system in that when using the HydroBooster system, no gas is introduced into the sample stream during sample collection. In contrast to air lifting, a gas-drive pump allows the gas to forcefully push onto the back end of the water column inside the gas-in tubing line, so that, when the pump is under pressure, the water column is driven through a U-turn inside the pump and up to the ground surface. The groundwater contained in both tubing lines is lifted and exits the sample return line at the surface. Groundwater exiting the sample return line flows in a smooth, continuous stream until all the water volume from both lines is evacuated from the system. The gas pressure is bled off by switching a three-way valve at the surface that allows both the gas-in and sample return lines to recharge with groundwater from the sample collection depth under hydrostatic pressure.

At each downhole sample depth, the HydroBooster was purged two to three times before sampling.

During the purge cycle, all groundwater inside the gas-in and sample return lines of the tubing were cleared in a single pump stroke. The first purge cycle cleared the water from the previous sampling depth carried to the new sampling depth. The second purge cycle cleared the water from the new sampling depth, effectively rinsing the tubing internally with groundwater from the new depth. Following the two purges of the sampling tubing, a third and final purge cycle was used for sample collection at the surface.

The chemistry survey involved collecting 9 depth-dependent samples. Sampling depths were based on the construction of the well, geologic information, borehole geophysics, and preliminary downhole flow estimates. Two wellhead samples, representing blended composites of each contributing flow interval, were collected from the discharge tap of the well: the first one before downhole sampling started, and the second after completion of downhole sampling. Once collected, groundwater samples were sent to

13 the Weck laboratory for analysis. The laboratory results for each tested analyte are presented in a table in Appendix C: Laboratory Chemistry Results.

Table 2. List of water sample analytes
Reported Analyte
Mass
Balanced
Average Wellhead
Concentration
Arsenic Yes 11.3 ug/L
Iron Yes 111 ug/L
Manganese Yes 45 ug/L
Total Dissolved Solids Yes 280 mg/L

3.2.1 Flow-Weighted Concentration Derivations from Laboratory Results Estimates of analyte concentrations within the formation materials surrounding the well screen, were derived from the laboratory chemistry results for each of the depth-dependent groundwater samples.

The standard mass balancing procedure used to derive these estimates is called flow-weighting. The flowweighting calculation assumes constant mixing inside the well as groundwater moves towards the pump intake. Estimates of the average zonal chemical contributions from the surrounding subsurface environment were calculated from the cumulatively blended contributions inside the well between any two vertically paired, consecutive water samples. The flow-weighting calculation takes the difference in products (cumulative flow × cumulative chemistry) between any two depths and divides this difference by the zonal flow contribution from the same interval. After the mass balance results were calculated for each interval, the sum of these results was then compared to the average of the actual wellhead concentration as measured in the wellhead samples on a percent agreement basis. The flow-weighting equations used in the analysis of the City Yard Well are presented below.

Zonal Chemical Contribution Concentrations:

5. ∆𝐶𝑛,𝑛+1 =
(𝑄1∗𝐶1)−(𝑄2∗𝐶2)
(∆𝑄1,2)
,
(𝑄2∗𝐶2)−(𝑄3∗𝐶3)
(∆𝑄2,3)
,
(𝑄3∗𝐶3)−(𝑄4∗𝐶4)
(∆𝑄3,4)
,
(𝑄𝑛∗𝐶𝑛)−(𝑄𝑛+1∗𝐶𝑛+1)
(∆𝑄𝑛,𝑛+1)
Theoretical Average Analyte Chemistry:

6. 𝐶𝑎𝑣𝑒 =
(∆𝑄1,2∗∆𝐶1,2)+(∆𝑄2,3∗∆𝐶2,3)+(∆𝑄3,4∗∆𝐶3,4)+⋯+(∆𝑄𝑖,𝑖+1∗∆𝐶𝑖,𝑖+1) 𝑄𝑡𝑜𝑡

7. 𝑚𝑖 = ∆𝑄𝑖 ∗ ∆𝐶𝑖

14 4 RESULTS

4.1 LA PALMA CITY YARD WELL DYNAMIC FLOW
The dynamic flow results of the City Yard Well are illustrated in Figure 4 through Figure 9. The overall flow profile of the City Yard Well exhibits a full hydraulic engagement of the available well screen, with all investigated depth intervals producing greater than 20 gallons per minute (GPM) or more flow contribution. The greatest water contribution comes from the depth interval of 510 to 534 Ft. BGS at 284 GPM or 23.5% of total flow. Moreover, the flow density profile shows a 1 GPM or greater contribution per foot of screen for the entire well, demonstrating full engagement.

Notably, the peak flow contributions generally align with elevated resistivity signatures and lithological units composed of coarse-grained units with depth. For instance, from 300 to 350 Ft. BGS, the flow data shows a bimodal distribution (double-peak) with the resistivity showing a double peak curvature, which all align with a lithology comprised of two coarse-grained units composed of sands. Similarly, in the 8” slotted pipe, from 1041 to 1080 Ft. BGS, we observe a peak flow contribution of 142 GPM, which aligns with a coarse-grained unit composed of sands and the greatest resistivity peak for the slotted pipe depth interval.

15 4.1.1 Dynamic Flow Figures
Figure 4. City Yard Well borehole velocity by depth. Figure 5. City Yard Well cumulative borehole flow rate by depth.

3 8
8 4
5 5
38 3

8 .

58. 38.
.
.
3 (pump Blank
3 3 3
3 33
33 3 Blank
3 3 5
3 5 4
4 48 Blank
48 485
485 4 5
4 5 5
5 534
534 4 Blank, insert
4 8
8 3
3 3 insert ( ll
Ft. in
epth Interval (Ft. BGS
verage elocity
Total Flow GP
8 insert

liner

33 85

444
444
3 4

5.8 4 .
.
5 5
(pump Blank
3 3 3
3 33
33 3 Blank
3 3 5
3 5 4
4 48 Blank
48 485
485 4 5
4 5 5
5 534
534 4 Blank, insert
4 8
8 3
3 3 insert ( ll
GP
epth Interval (Ft. BGS
Cumula ve Flow
Total Flow GP
8 insert
Note:
*Zonal flow rate linearly interpolated from adjacent average flow density.
**Zonal flow rate inferred as the zonal flow measured in the adjacent blank casing.

16 Figure 6. City Yard Well zonal flow contribution by depth. Figure 7. City Yard Well percent zonal flow contribution by depth. .

5. 4.

88. .
.
.3
.
5 .4

33. 84
.
4 8 .

3. 5 .5

53. 4 .
.
5 5 5 3 35
(pump Blank
3 3 3
3 33
33 3 Blank
3 3 5
3 5 4
4 48 Blank
48 485
485 4 5
4 5 5
5 534
534 4 Blank, insert
4 8
8 3
3 3 insert ( ll
GP
epth Interval (Ft. BGS
onal Flow Contri u on
Total Flow GP
8 insert
.
. 5
. 4
.34
.
.
.
.
.5
.8
. 8

3.5 .
.
.85
. 5

4. 4.4

3.5 3
(pump Blank
3 3 3
3 33
33 3 Blank
3 3 5
3 5 4
4 48 Blank
48 485
485 4 5
4 5 5
5 534
534 4 Blank, insert
4 8
8 3
3 3 insert ( ll
GP
epth Interval (Ft. BGS
onal Percent Flow Contri u on
Total Flow GP
8 insert
Note:
*Zonal flow rate linearly interpolated from adjacent average flow density.
**Zonal flow rate inferred as the zonal flow measured in the adjacent blank casing.

17 Figure 8. City Yard Well average zonal flow density by depth. .
.5
. 3

8.8 .

8.5 .8
.

3. . 4
. 4
.8
.

4. 8.
.44
.5
.
.4
.
4 (pump Blank
3 3 3
3 33
33 3 Blank
3 3 5
3 5 4
4 48 Blank
48 485
485 4 5
4 5 5
5 534
534 4 Blank, insert
4 8
8 3
3 3 insert ( ll
GP Ft. Screen
epth Interval (Ft. BGS
verage onal Flow ensity
Total Flow GP
8 insert
Note:
*Zonal flow rate linearly interpolated from adjacent average flow density.
**Zonal flow rate inferred as the zonal flow measured in the adjacent blank casing.

18 Figure 9. City Yard Well zonal flow density versus lithology and geophysics

19 4.2 CITY YARD WELL CHEMICAL MASS BALANCE
The depth-dependent chemistry results for the City Yard Well are illustrated in Figure 10 through Figure

14. The analytes of main concern in the City Yard Well profiling were arsenic, manganese, iron and TDS.

At the wellhead, arsenic was the only analyte above the maximum contaminant level (MCL) of 10 ug/L at

11.3 ug/L. But marginally below the 50 ug/L MCL, manganese produced an average wellhead concentration of 45 ug/L.

The downhole water quality survey results showed that the ” liner, above the top packer, produced elevated arsenic and manganese concentrations, with most of the investigated depth intervals at or above their MCL of ug L and 5 ug L, respectively. Conversely, the 8” slotted insert pipe produced massbalanced concentrations below the respective MCL for all analytes. In addition, the mass-balanced iron concentrations for all depth intervals were below the 300 ug/L secondary MCL (SMCL), with the greatest concentration from 320 to 330 Ft. BGS producing 154 ug/L. This elevated iron concentration is two times greater than the highest laboratory concentration and potentially a mass-balance bias discussed in the Sources of Error and Uncertainty section.

The rising levels of arsenic and manganese in the upper section of the well can be attributed to various environmental factors and are further discussed in the conclusions section.

Note:
< value less than the detection limit.
~ negative mass balance results.
! value 2x the highest laboratory
concentration.

20 4.2.1 Zonal Chemical Contribution Figures
Figure 10. City Yard Well mass-balanced arsenic and zonal flow contribution by depth.

Figure 11. City Yard Well mass-balanced iron and zonal flow contributions by depth. .

4 .

.
5 5
.

5. .8
.
. .

5.8 4
5 .
84 .

.

88. 4.

5. .
3 3
(pump Blank
3 3 3
3 33
33 3 Blank
3 4
4 48 Blank
48 5
5 534
534 Blank, Insert
8 8 3
3 3 Blank, Insert (Fill epth Interval (Ft. BGS

Total Flow ate GP
ell ead verage

Total rsenic ug L onal Flow Contri u on GP

.
5 5.
54 .
5 .

55 .
3 3
. .

5.8 4
5 .
84 .

.

88. 4.

5. .
3 5 5
(pump Blank
3 3 3
3 33
33 3 Blank
3 4
4 48 Blank
48 5
5 534
534 Blank, Insert
8 8 3
3 3 Blank, Insert (Fill epth Interval (Ft. BGS

Total Flow ate GP
ell ead verage ug L
CL 3 ug L
Total Iron ug l onal Flow Contri u on GP

21 Figure 12: City Yard Well mass-balanced manganese and zonal flow contributions by depth.

Figure 13: City Yard Well mass-balanced TDS and zonal flow contributions by depth. .
4 3

.
43 .
48 4
.
3 3
4 . .

5.8 4
5 .
84 .

.

88. 4.

5. .
3 5 5
(pump Blank
3 3 3
3 33
33 3 Blank
3 4
4 48 Blank
48 5
5 534
534 Blank, Insert
8 8 3
3 3 Blank, Insert (Fill
epth Interval (Ft. BGS

Total Flow ate GP
ell ead verage 45 ug L

Total anganese ug L ona l Flow Contri u on GP

.
8 8
8 .
8 .
8 .
8 5

. .

5.8 4
5 .
84 .

.

88. 4.

5. .
3 3 4
(pump Blank
3 3 3
3 33
33 3 Blank
3 4
4 48 Blank
48 5
5 534
534 Blank, Insert
8 8 3
3 3 Blank, Insert (Fill epth Interval (Ft. BGS

Total Flow mg L
ell ead verage 8 mg L
S CL 5 mg L
Total i s s olved Solids mg L onal Flow Contri u on GP

22 Figure 14. City Yard Well flow and chemistry comparison in relation to well construction, lithology, and geophysics.

23 4.3 SOURCES OF ERROR AND UNCERTAINTIES

4.3.1 Mass Balance Bias
Mass balance bias typically occurs when substantial changes in chemistry concentration are associated with relatively low flow contributions, though it can sometimes occur with high-yield zones. The resulting chemical or elemental concentration estimate is typically unrealistic to the overall trend of the profile.

Still, it can be used as a semi-quantitative gauge to estimate important variations within the trend.

Therefore, the overall and localized concentration trend is used to make reasonable assumptions about the concentration within the uncertain interval. When this occurs, the uncertain value for those intervals is flagged with an exclamation point (!). This is the case for arsenic, iron, and manganese at one interval within the profile.

24 5 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 SUMMARY
The tracer flowmeter profile showed that approximately 63% of total production is located above the upper packer, in the screened section from 290 to 534 ft. BGS. The two zones of highest production are located directly above the upper packer, showing about 23% to 24% of total production and directly below the bottom packer where zonal flow is estimated to be between 11% to 12% of total production.

Arsenic concentrations are higher above the upper packer (compared to below the lower packer), ranging from 11 ug/L to 24 ug/L and ranging from 5 to 9 ug/L below the lower packer. By way of comparison to the dynamic flow and chemistry profile performed in 2013, and before the straddle packer system was installed, arsenic concentrations above the upper packer depth were compliant, ranging from 0.4 to 6.37 ug/L. And, below the lower packer were approximately the same as the 2013 survey.

Manganese concentrations in the December 2022 survey on the other hand show an inverse relationship to arsenic for the upper zone, where manganese concentrations decreased from its levels in 2013 to the most recent results in December 2022. This is also true for the deeper zone below the lower packer depth. For example, in 2013, manganese concentrations ranged from 63 to 193 ug/L in the upper zone. In December 2022, the same zone ranged from 40 to 130 ug/L. In 2013, the deeper zone showed manganese concentrations ranging from 66 to 72 ug/L and from 23 to 36 ug/L in December 2022.

Iron was significantly lower in 2022 as compared to 2013 for the same intervals as described above.

These notable changes in zonal concentrations for arsenic, manganese, and iron between the 2013 and 2022 surveys may be the result of a number of variables operating synchronously. To this point, we consider the trends in the annual average pumping rates, pumping water levels and changes in arsenic concentrations over a five-year period, from 2018 through 2022 (Figure 15).

Figure 15: Comparison of average annual wellhead arsenic concentrations with average annual pumping rates and pumping water level from 2018 through 2022.

25 We can see that while arsenic concentrations slowly rise, the pumping rates and pumping water levels slowly decline.

5.2 MICROBIAL INFLUENCES
Another point to consider is the hydrogen sulfide odor intermittently released from the well during operation. The H2S odor is a key indicator for the presence of sulfur reducing bacteria within the formations surrounding the well and are possibly associated with significantly increased soluble arsenic concentrations within the upper screened section of the well; from 290 to 534 ft. BGS. As such, biocatalytic reactions can be complex and require a brief discussion. For example, Sathe (2021) identified two microbial species, including Lysinibacillus sphaericus, Acinetobacter nosocomialis, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Bacillus licheniformis that showed a capability to enhance dissolved arsenate [As(V)] concentrations within alluvial groundwater aquifers. His collective study of two representative alluvial regionssuggested that the redox aquifer condition wasfavorable for the reductive dissolution mechanism of iron along with arsenate-reducing microorganisms, which turned out to be the main cause for heterogeneous distribution of dissolved arsenic. Paul (2015) investigated the biotransformation and release of arsenic in groundwater by indigenous bacteria. The study showed that inhabitant bacteria catalyze arsenic transformation and facilitate its release through a cascade of reactions including mineral bioweathering. Under the right redox (and microbial) conditions the surface properties of arsenic bearing minerals can be modified and partitioned into solution from the solid phase (Cavalca et al., 2013). Some redox features of arsenic contamination are reducing environments, arid oxidized environments with elevated pH, and/or oxidizing weathering of sulfide minerals (Podgorski, 2017). In reduced groundwater environments (such as the section of the well between the two mechanical packers) arsenite (III) is commonly prevalent, whereas arsenate (V) is widespread in oxidized groundwater environments (Baloch, 2022). For alluvial aquifers such as the materials surrounding the City Yard Well, it is understood that the reductive dissolution of iron hydroxides may be one of the primary mechanisms for releasing arsenic into groundwater, with the participation of microbes, playing an important role in arsenic transport and alteration (Ahmed, 2004; Shankar, 2014; Baloch, 2022).

5.3 ARSENIC SOURCES AND OCCURRENCE
The slow rebound of arsenic contamination within the City Yard Well following well modification in 2016 is likely due to one or more factors. We posit the loss of specific capacity over time stemming from incipient, gradational clogging of the annular gravel pack. As clogging progresses and specific capacity is increasingly lost the suction force from the pump intake migrates downward. In an effort to satisfy demand. Clogging agents form within the gravel pack and likely consist of sediment infill, biofilms and secondary mineralization from depressurization of the aquifer during pumping. A strong hydrogen sulfide odor at the wellhead is indicative of metabolic activity by sulfide or sulfate reducing bacteria with both dead and living cells accumulating in the form of biofilms. As the biofilms harden and fill in the gravel pack voids combined with sediment infill and secondary mineralization the gravel pack clogs, the formational environment becomes less hydraulically active and increasingly suitable for long term microbial residence.

If sufficient food sources and metabolic minerals exist, such as organic matter, sulfur, iron and arsenic, then microbial colonies can grow larger over time until a resident life-cycle equilibrium is reached. One

26 of the byproducts from this process is the release of dissolved arsenic which is then mobilized upwards by the suction force of the pump.

Another factor to consider is based on evidence from a recent static video survey (performed by BESST just prior to the dynamic profile) where one of the mechanical packer discs from the upper packer appears to have separated from the support pipe of the engineered suction (Figure 16). Our interpretation is that in the process of installing the straddle packer assembly, a portion of the rubber packer was torn away from its fasteners. We believe that the disc was inadvertently compressed against the inside of the well screen and the drag force during placement detached the rubber disc. This would likely reduce the seal’s effectiveness in isolating arsenic from the hydrologic zones isolated between the two mechanical packers during pumping.

Figure 16: Still image from BESST video survey showing compromised rubber packer disc. The disc likely became disconnected from its structural support during installation of the dual packer well modification system.

Our working hypothesis also includes the idea that the zone between the upper and lower mechanical packers has been relatively isolated and stagnant since the installation of the assembly in 2016. During this time, sulfur reducing bacterial have benefitted from a quiet environment conducive to feeding, metabolizing and reproducing to form larger colonies that have resulted in greater arsenic solubility and which has possibly spread to and cross contaminated other sections of the well during pumping and concurrent clogging.

From these data, we infer that arsenic reducing bacteria are spreading more favorably in the direction of flow towards the pump intake and colonizing these shallower zones. As these microbes invade the shallower zones, more arsenic is released through their metabolic activity. Moreover, as the well clogs, the resident environment in the upper well screen becomes more protected and increasingly conducive to more soluble arsenic transformation through microbial activity. It is possible that this process becomes a self-perpetuating feed-back loop as the well becomes increasingly clogged. The zone between the packers becomes the quiet incubator for producing new microbial colonies that spread upwards to the shallower receptor sites. The fact that both iron and manganese concentrations are lower in 2022 compared to 2013 may be the result of being outcompeted by the more prevalent sulfur reducing microbes as they invade their environment (Figure 17).

27 Figure 17: Spread of sulfur reducing bacteria during pumping.

28 Figure 18: Hypothetical biocatalytic cycle to explain increased arsenic concentrations over time.

5.4 RECOMMENDATIONS
Although we believe that the best course of action considering the evidence is to rehabilitate the well following the steps outlined below, we are obligated to say that there is no guarantee that this approach will work. However, we believe that it will be cost effective and in the best interest of the City to perform the rehab approach through at least Step 7 below. If successful, then we propose moving through Steps 8 and 9 as described below.

A. REHABILITATION

1. Remove the well modification insert from the well.

2. Install a test pump and perform a depth dependent flow and sampling survey under dynamic steady state conditions for sulfur (sulfides and sulfates) reducing bacteria along the entire well screen. Samples should also be collected for total organic carbon (TOC), ATP (living cell activity) and for iron reducing bacteria as well. The concentrations of these bacterial strains will be flow weighted through a mass balance analysis to determine concentration levels and distribution in the surrounding formations.

3. The depth dependent samples should be analyzed by a reputable laboratory such as Water Systems Engineering in Kansas City, MO. Such laboratory can utilize these data to formulate rehabilitation solutions that can be used to eliminate the bacteria.

4. Prior to biochemical (and chemical) treatment, the well should be rehabilitated by more conventional means to prepare the well and gravel pack. This will include swabbing, surging, pumping and airlifting as well as consideration of acoustic methods such as Bore Blast, Air Burst, or HydroPulse.

5. Following mechanical and acoustic rehab, a dual swab biochemical (and chemical) injection system needs to be employed such that the remedial solution can be targeted into the gravel

3. New Zonal
Microbial
Colonization

4. Biocatalytic
Transformation of
Arsenic from
Insoluable to
Soluable Phase

5. Increase in Sulfur
Reducting Backteria
and Arsenic
Outcompetes IronBased Bacteria

6. Arsenic
Concentrations
Increase in Shallow
Zone While Iron and
Manganese
Decrease

1. Sulfur Reducing
Bacteria - Microbial
Incubation
(between straddle
packers)

2. Upward Vertical
Microbial Spread
During Pumping
Repeating Biocatalytic
Arsenic Cycle
Hypothesis

29 pack and formation under pressure. Trolling these biocides with a hose through the well screen will likely not suffice in eradicating the problem and potentially lead to increased rehab costs.

6. Reinstall a test pump and retest the well prior to installing the well modification system and perform a baseline dynamic steady state flow and chemistry survey of the well. Compare these results to the 2013 and 2022 survey results. It is possible, the City will have to pump a significant amount of water to waste during these tests and needs to make sure that is has an NPDES permit to do so.

7. If the well profile shows significant improvement in specific capacity and pumping rate, as well as a return to 2013 wellhead conditions or better, then proceed to the reinstallation of the well modification system. But, before doing so, proceed to Step 8 below.

8. Repair or replace both the upper and lower mechanical packers making sure that the rubber used for the packers is NSF 61 approved and is accompanied by an NSF 61 certificate by the manufacturer. To this point, we believe that the fastening system used to affix the packers to the support pipe is inadequate and a more robust fastening approach needs to be devised.

9. The City needs to implement a routine well rehabilitation program for the City Yard Well. This would require that the insert be removed from the well following 3 years of operation.

B. TREATMENT: If the well profile does not show significant improvement as per Step 7 above, then treatment would be the best solution.

C. NEW WELL: This option would be implemented only if the City disfavors treatment over the long run due to the high O&M costs associated with the treatment solution.

30 Figure 19. City Yard Well comparison between 2013 and 2022 profiling results in relation to well construction, lithology, and geophysics.

31 6 REFERENCES
Ahmed, K., Bhattacharya, P., Hasan, M., Ahkter, S., Alam, S., Bhuyian, M., . . . Sracek, O. (2003). Arsenic enrichment in groundwater of the alluvial aquifers in Bangladesh: an overview . El Sevier, 181- 200.

Baloch, M. Y., Zhang, W., Zhang, D., Abdullah Al Shoumik, B., Iqbal, J., Li, S., . . . Parkash, A. (2022).

Evolution Mechanism of Arsenic Enrichment in Groundwater and Associated Health Risks in Southern Punjab, Pakistan. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.

Cavalca, L., Corsini, A., Zaccheo, P., Andreoni, V., & Muyzer, G. (2013). Microbial transformations of arsenic: perspectives for biological removal of arsenic from water. Future Microbiology, 753- 768.

Paul, Dhiraj, Sufia K. Kazy, Tirtha Das Banerjee, Ashok K. Gupta, Taraknath Pal, Pinaki Sar (2015). Arsenic biotransformation and release by bacteria indigenous to arsenic contaminated groundwater.

Bioresource Technology, Volume 188, July 2015, Pages 14-23 Sathe, Sandip S., Lalit Goswami b, Chandan Mahanta aSathe (2021). Arsenic reduction and mobilization cycle via microbial activities prevailing in the Holocene aquifers of Brahmaputra flood plain.

Groundwater for Sustainable Development, Volume 13, May 2021, 100578 Shankar, S., Shanker, U., & Shikha. (2014). Arsenic contamination of groundwater: a review of sources, prevelance, health risks, and strategies for mitigation. . Scientific World Journal .

Maliva, R. G., 2016. Aquifer Characterization Techniques. 617 pp. Springer Int. Publishing.

Smolen, James J., 1996. Cased Hole and Production Log Evaluation, 269-293 pp, PenWell Publishing Company.

32 7 Appendices

7.1 APPENDIX A: WELLSITE PHOTOS

33

34 7.2 APPENDIX B: DYNAMIC FLOW PROFILE DATA

35 7.3 APPENDIX C: LABORATORY CHEMISTRY RESULTS

36 7.4 APPENDIX D: CITY YARD WELL MASS BALANCE RESULTS

37 7.5 APPENDIX E: WELL COMPLETION REPORT

38 7.6 APPENDIX F: LITHOLOGY CLASSIFICATION
The lithology classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS)

124

7.10 APPENDIX J: BESST POST WELL MODIFICATION TREND ANALYSIS

1 City of La Palma Meadowlark Well
Final Summary Well Modification Report:

Successful Treatment Avoidance of Arsenic, Manganese and Iron Through Hydraulic Manipulation
Prepared July 1st, 2019
Prepared By
Noah Heller, MS PG (CA 5702)
BESST, Inc.
50 Tiburon Street, Suite 7
San Rafael, CA 94901
www.besstinc.com
415.453.2501

2 TO: Mr. Carlo Nafarrate
Water / Maintenance Supervisor
City of La Palma, CA
7821 Walker Street
La Palma, CA 90623
714.690.3312
[email protected]
Introduction
In November of 2013, the City of La Palma (the City) had requested BESST, Inc. (BESST) of San Rafael, CA to perform a dynamic steady state zonal flow and chemistry profile of the Meadowlark Well located within the City’s utility yard. The primary focus of the dynamic survey was to delineate zonal arsenic distribution and to determine if the data could be used to hydraulic manipulate the well in order to avoid arsenic treatment. The estimated capital improvement cost savings at the time were approximately $2.5MM. Zonal distribution of manganese and iron was of secondary concern and a treatment facility was already in place at the time of the survey. If the results of the study could also be used to minimize or eliminate treatment then additional cost savings would be achieved beyond the primary focus of the study.

The results of the November 2013 investigation by BESST were performed using a novel technology developed by the US Geological Survey, called the Tracer Pulse Flowmeter and Depth Dependent Sampler. The technology consists of miniaturized flow-metering technology using an NSF 60 approved tracer called rhodamine red FWT 50. The technology was deployed into the Meadowlark well without removal of the City’s existing pump, saving an estimated $10K to $15K in pump removal and reinstallation costs. This enabled the investigation to be performed at the desired production rate of the well in order to test the well at its typical pumping rate and to collect data under actual conditions.

The “Depth Dependent Sampler” was developed by BESST under a research and development contract and its miniaturized configuration also allowed the down-hole groundwater sampling survey to be performed without removal of the existing pump. Together, the data from these diagnostic tools provided detailed zonal distribution profile for arsenic, manganese and iron. Its important to note that a prior study had been performed using a conventional spinner log and jar sampling technology but lacked the zonal detail provided by the USGS technology. By way of comparison, the USGS technology delineated 28 zones whereas the spinner log technology identified 3 to 4 zones. The absence of detail from the spinner log study was unable to provide a clear down-hole road map on how to reduce the wellhead concentration sufficiently below the both US EPA and the State of California Maximum Concentration Limit (MCL) of 10 ug/L. However, the detail from the USGS technology provided a high resolution picture of arsenic, manganese and iron distribution from which a well modification plan was developed to avoid arsenic treatment.

3 Results from the February 2014 dynamic investigation showed that non-compliant, zonal concentrations of arsenic were distributed throughout the middle section of the well screen. Both the top and bottom sections of the well screen, comprising approximately 50% of the total well screen length showed high quality water with formational arsenic concentrations well below the regulatory MCL.

On the basis of these results, the City requested BESST to provide a predictive estimate of discharge concentration outcomes for arsenic if the central zone (from 540’ to 1,020’) of elevated arsenic were blocked from production. Accounting for some uncertainties, BESST performed the analysis and predicted that approximately 5% to 7% of total production would be lost, reducing production from 1,860 GPM to approximately 1,730 as well as a reduction in arsenic from 13 ug/L to approximately 7 ug/L.

Well Modification Summary
During September 2016, the City of La Palma installed a well modification system constructed by General Pump of San Dimas, California and placed into the well in accordance to recommendations made by BESST. Prior to the installation, BESST prepared a work plan, detailing the specific steps to Figure 1: Arsenic distribution from November 2013 dynamic steady state profile of the Meadowlark Well using BESST’s USGS profiling technology.

4 modify the well as well as the recommended setting for the packer placement (540’ and 1,120’ below ground surface). General Pump provided a novel double packer design that was included in the work plan and which consisted of a free-standing dual packer structure. The purpose of the freestanding structure was to allow maximum production from the upper section of well screen providing high quality water. The bottom section of the well modification system consisted of a stainless-steel engineered suction with perforations coinciding with the high quality water in the bottom section of the well screen.

Together, it was predicted that groundwater from the top and bottom well screen sections would be combined to yield sufficient production and compliant water quality.

Following installation of the well mod insert, the City was directed by BESST to collect trend time-line samples from the well’s discharge every three days and over a period of at least 4 weeks. The prescribed initial pumping rate was 1,000 GPM in order focus on cleaning out the upper section of the well screen since the well had been shut down for 5 months. The pumping rate was incrementally increased from 1,000 GPM to 1,775 GPM over a period of 2 years, and the lower section of the well hydraulically engaged and combined with the upper section of the well.

Figure 2: Well modification insert deployed into Meadowlark well in September 2016.

5 Results
From October 2016 through end of February 2019, Arsenic concentrations have dropped from 13 ug/L to an average of just below 7 ug/L. Within the last two quarters, arsenic well head concentrations fluctuate from 5.2 ug/L to 7.1 ug/L. Also of note, is that there have been no well head exceedances for arsenic, manganese or iron since April of 2017.

Figure 3: Arsenic well head concentrations over time for the City of La Palma Meadowlark Well.

6 Manganese and iron have dropped below the US EPA and State secondary MCL (SMCL) threshold limits of 50 ug/L and 300 ug/L respectively. Since the 4th quarter of 2018 the average well head concentration for manganese was approximately 38 ug/L and all iron concentrations have been below the laboratory reporting limit.

Figure 4: Manganese Well head concentrations over time for the City of La Palma Meadowlark Well.

7 Conclusions
The data for arsenic and manganese continues to show a slightly decreasing average well head concentration over time. At this point in time, our working hypothesis is that arsenic, manganese and iron are being removed from the two targeted production zones, above 540’ and below 1,020’ below ground surface, respectively, through oxidative pumping. This means that as a fresh, continuous supply of oxygenated groundwater moves through the targeted zones, under the influence of pumping, the metals are oxidized and become more soluble. As a result, the dissolved metals are more easily transferred into solution and removed by the pumping action of the well. Over time, the metal content could continue to decrease even further.

132

7.11 APPENDIX K: BESST 2013 PROFILE REPORT

Profiled: 11/19-20/2013
Preliminary Report Provided: 2/17/2014
Prepared by: Kimberly Miles
Reviewed by: Noah Heller
50 Tiburon Street Suite 7
San Rafael , CA 94901
Toll Free.866.298.8701
Phone.415.453.2501
Fax.415.453.2509
Dynamic Survey City of La Palma City Yard Well
Preliminary Report

2 Contents
Topic
Introduction and Well Information -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dynamic Flow Profile
-Cumulative Discharge (GPM) Graph ---------------------------------------------------------------- -Zonal Flow Contribution (GPM) Graph------------------------------------------------------------- -Percent Flow Contribution Graph-------------------------------------------------------------------- Chemistry Profile
- Zonal Chloride Concentration----------------------------------------------------------------------- -Zonal Sulfate Concentration-------------------------------------------------------------------------- -Zonal TDS Concentration------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -Zonal Arsenic Concentration------------------------------------------------------------------------- -Zonal Iron Concentration------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -Zonal Manganese Concentration-------------------------------------------------------------------- -Zonal Dissolved Manganese Concentration------------------------------------------------------ -Lab Result Summary Table---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -Mass Balanced Analyte Summary Table----------------------------------------------------------- Conclusions
-Discussion------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -Suggestions----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page #
-------------------------------3
-------------------------------4
-------------------------------5
-------------------------------6
-------------------------------7
-------------------------------8
-------------------------------9
-----------------------------10
-----------------------------11
-----------------------------12
-----------------------------13
-----------------------------14
-----------------------------15
-----------------------------16
-----------------------------17
Preliminary Flow and Chemistry Report City Yard Well
1,860 GPM Page 266 of 401
3 City Yard
Well Information
and Lithology Log
Well Information
• Old (outside) well casing diameter: 20” -> 14”
• Outside screened Intervals (ft. bgs): (290-330),
(390-410), (480-570), (620-720), (780-830), (880-
970), (1000-1020), (1070-1190)
• New well casing diameter: 16” -> 12” -> 10”
– New well casing is constructed with all stainless steel wire wrap. • New pump column diameter (in): 10“ (16” casing)
• Cross sectional area of new well casing:
– From 0’-282’: 1.40 ft2
– From 282’-786’: 0.79 ft2
– From 786’-1206’ : 0.55 ft2
• Reported new well bottom: 1190 ft. bgs
• Pump Intake Depth: 230 ft bgs
• Pumping water level: 143 ft bgs
• Flow rate: 1860 USG min-1
Sand / Silt / Clay
Key
Silt
Sand
Clay
Lithologic Log (1950) Pump Column 10”
100
300
500
700
900
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,100
1,200
1,300
1,400
1,500
Gravel Fill
Intake 230’
TD 1190’
Sand + Steel Cap
20 “ Original
Casing
16” Steel Casing
0’-282’
Screen
290’-330’
Screen
390’-410’
Screen
480’-570’
Screen
620’-720’
Screen
780’-830’
Screen
880’-970’
Screen
1000’-1020’
Screen
1070’-1190’
TD 1435’
Screen
1210’-1340’
Reduction 12”-10”
Preliminary Flow and Chemistry Report City Yard Well
1,860 GPM
Figure 1

Pump Column 10”
100
300
500
700
900
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,100
1,200
1,300
1,400
1,500
1860
1641
1579
1579
1579
1526
1486
1454
1352
1129
1129
1129
846
813
642
621
613
610
565
375
327
321
297
199
134
101
93 59
0 500 1000 1500 2000
282-310
310-330
390-400
400-410
480-500
500-520
520-540
540-570
620-640
640-660
660-680
680-700
700-720
740-776
810-830
880-900
900-920
920-940
940-960
960-970
1000-1010
1010-1020
1070-1090
1090-1110
1110-1130
1130-1140
1140-1160
1160-1180
Cumulative Discharge (GPM)
4 Dynamic Flow Profile
1860 gpm 11/19/13
Dye
Injection Tubing
Sand / Silt / Clay
Key
Silt
Sand
Clay
Gravel Fill
Wire Wrap
Screen
Preliminary Flow and Chemistry Report City Yard Well
1,860 GPM
Figure 2

Pump Column 10”
100
300
500
700
900
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,100
1,200
1,300
1,400
1,500
5 Dynamic Flow Profile
1860 gpm 11/19/13
Dye
Injection Tubing
Sand / Silt / Clay
Key
Silt
Sand
Clay
Gravel Fill
Wire Wrap
Screen
218.60

61.98 0.00

0.00 53.36

40.16 31.89
101.58
223.15

0.00 0.00
283.38

32.82 171.45

20.33 8.63

3.17 44.86
189.69

48.19 5.65

24.56 97.74

64.38 33.61

7.96 34.05

58.82 0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00 300.00
282-310
310-330
390-400
400-410
480-500
500-520
520-540
540-570
620-640
640-660
660-680
680-700
700-720
740-776
810-830
880-900
900-920
920-940
940-960
960-970
1000-1010
1010-1020
1070-1090
1090-1110
1110-1130
1130-1140
1140-1160
1160-1180
Zonal Flow Contribution (GPM)
Preliminary Flow and Chemistry Report City Yard Well
1,860 GPM
Figure 3

6 Dynamic Flow Profile
1860 gpm 11/19/13
Pump Column 10”
100
300
500
700
900
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,100
1,200
1,300
1,400
1,500
Dye
Injection Tubing
Sand / Silt / Clay
Key
Silt
Sand
Clay
Gravel Fill
Wire Wrap
Screen

11.75%

3.33%

0.00%

0.00%

2.87%

2.16%

1.71%

5.46%

12.00%

0.00%

0.00%

15.24%

1.76%

9.22%

1.09%

0.46%

0.17%

2.41%

10.20%

2.59%

0.30%

1.32%

5.25%

3.46%

1.81%

0.43%

1.83%

3.16%

0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00% 14.00% 16.00% 282-310
310-330
390-400
400-410
480-500
500-520
520-540
540-570
620-640
640-660
660-680
680-700
700-720
740-776
810-830
880-900
900-920
920-940
940-960
960-970
1000-1010
1010-1020
1070-1090
1090-1110
1110-1130
1130-1140
1140-1160
1160-1180
Percent Flow Contribution
Preliminary Flow and Chemistry Report City Yard Well
1,860 GPM
Figure 4

7 Figure 5: Zonal chlorate concentration. Concentrations over the EPA MCL are highlighted in red.

Pump Column 10”
100
300
500
700
900
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,100
1,200
1,300
1,400
1,500
Sand / Silt / Clay
Key
Silt
Sand
Clay
Gravel Fill
Wire Wrap
Screen
Preliminary Flow and Chemistry Report City Yard Well
1,860 GPM
Chemistry Profile
1860 gpm 11/20/13
Average Chloride Well Head Concentration: 15 mg/L

15.00 0.00

3.41 29.31

15.00 15.00

0.00 16.00

16.00 67.64

15.00 15.00

15.00 15.00

15.00 15.08

0.00 6.74

5.46 12.00

15.24 1.76

9.22 1.09

0.63 15.20

1.62 8.72

2.23 4.99

0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00
290-330
390-410
480-540
540-570
620-660
660-700
700-720
770-810
810-830
880-920
920-970
1000-1020
1070-1100
1100-1140
1140-1190
Well Zonal Production %
Chloride Concentration mg/l
MCL 500. mg/l

15.00 0.00

3.41 29.31

15.00 15.00

0.00 16.00

16.00 67.64

15.00 15.00

15.00 15.00

15.00 280.58

0.00 125.40
101.58
223.15
283.38

32.82 171.45

20.33 11.80
282.74

30.20 162.12

41.57 92.87

0.00 100.00 200.00 300.00
290-330
390-410
480-540
540-570
620-660
660-700
700-720
770-810
810-830
880-920
920-970
1000-1020
1070-1100
1100-1140
1140-1190
Zonal Production GPM
Chloride Concentration mg/l
MCL 500. mg/l

8 Figure 6: Zonal sulfate (SO4) concentration. Concentrations over the EPA MCL are highlighted in red.

Pump Column 10”
100
300
500
700
900
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,100
1,200
1,300
1,400
1,500
Sand / Silt / Clay
Key
Silt
Sand
Clay
Gravel Fill
Wire Wrap
Screen
Preliminary Flow and Chemistry Report City Yard Well
1,860 GPM

43.00 0.00

43.00 29.69

44.00 44.00

68.77 43.00

43.00 43.00

43.00 43.00

43.00 45.23

42.00 15.08

0.00 6.74

5.46 12.00

15.24 1.76

9.22 1.09

0.63 15.20

1.62 8.72

2.23 4.99

0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00
290-330
390-410
480-540
540-570
620-660
660-700
700-720
770-810
810-830
880-920
920-970
1000-1020
1070-1100
1100-1140
1140-1190
Well Zonal Production %
Sulfate Concentration mg/l
MCL 500. mg/l

43.00 0.00

43.00 29.69

44.00 44.00

68.77 43.00

43.00 43.00

43.00 43.00

43.00 45.23

42.00 280.58

0.00 125.40
101.58
223.15
283.38

32.82 171.45

20.33 11.80
282.74

30.20 162.12

41.57 92.87

0.00 100.00 200.00 300.00
290-330
390-410
480-540
540-570
620-660
660-700
700-720
770-810
810-830
880-920
920-970
1000-1020
1070-1100
1100-1140
1140-1190
Zonal Production GPM
Sulfate Concentration mg/l
MCL 500. mg/L
Chemistry Profile
1860 gpm 11/20/13
Average Sulfate Well Head Concentration: 43 mg/L

9 Figure 7: Zonal TDS concentration. Concentrations over the EPA MCL are highlighted in red.

Pump Column 10”
100
300
500
700
900
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,100
1,200
1,300
1,400
1,500
Sand / Silt / Clay
Key
Silt
Sand
Clay
Gravel Fill
Wire Wrap
Screen
Preliminary Flow and Chemistry Report City Yard Well
1,860 GPM
270.00

0.00 395.95
136.86
178.79
389.55
517.73
222.57
270.00
270.00
281.56
260.00
251.71
292.34
260.00

15.08 0.00

6.74 5.46

12.00 15.24

1.76 9.22

1.09 0.63

15.20 1.62

8.72 2.23

4.99 0.00 200.00 400.00 600.00
290-330
390-410
480-540
540-570
620-660
660-700
700-720
770-810
810-830
880-920
920-970
1000-1020
1070-1100
1100-1140
1140-1190
Well Zonal Production %
TDS Concentration mg/l
MCL 1000. mg/l
270.00

0.00 395.95
136.86
178.79
389.55
517.73
222.57
270.00
270.00
281.56
260.00
251.71
292.34
260.00
280.58

0.00 125.40
101.58
223.15
283.38

32.82 171.45

20.33 11.80
282.74

30.20 162.12

41.57 92.87

0.00 200.00 400.00 600.00
290-330
390-410
480-540
540-570
620-660
660-700
700-720
770-810
810-830
880-920
920-970
1000-1020
1070-1100
1100-1140
1140-1190
Zonal Production GPM
TDS Concentration mg/l
MCL 1000. mg/l
Chemistry Profile
1860 gpm 11/20/13
Average TDS Well Head Concentration: 270 mg/L

10 Figure 8: Zonal arsenic concentration. Concentrations over the EPA MCL are highlighted in red.

Pump Column 10”
100
300
500
700
900
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,100
1,200
1,300
1,400
1,500
Sand / Silt / Clay
Key
Silt
Sand
Clay
Gravel Fill
Wire Wrap
Screen
Preliminary Flow and Chemistry Report City Yard Well
1,860 GPM

6.37 0.00

0.41 26.31

12.00 12.00

66.50 9.05

37.50 29.75

9.05 11.35

7.02 9.62

9.30 15.08

0.00 6.74

5.46 12.00

15.24 1.76

9.22 1.09

0.63 15.20

1.62 8.72

2.23 4.99

0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00
290-330
390-410
480-540
540-570
620-660
660-700
700-720
770-810
810-830
880-920
920-970
1000-1020
1070-1100
1100-1140
1140-1190
Well Zonal Production % (Green)
Arsenic Concentration µg/l (Blue)
MCL 10. µg/l

6.37 0.00

0.41 26.31

12.00 12.00

66.50 9.05

37.50 29.75

9.05 11.35

7.02 9.62

9.30 280.58

0.00 125.40
101.58
223.15
283.38

32.82 171.45

20.33 11.80
282.74

30.20 162.12

41.57 92.87

0.00 100.00 200.00 300.00
290-330
390-410
480-540
540-570
620-660
660-700
700-720
770-810
810-830
880-920
920-970
1000-1020
1070-1100
1100-1140
1140-1190
Zonal Production GPM (Green)
Arsenic Concentration µg/l (Blue)
MCL 10 µg/l
Chemistry Profile
1860 gpm 11/20/13
Average Arsenic Well Head Concentration: 12.5 µg/L

11 Figure 9: Zonal total iron concentration. Concentrations over the EPA MCL are highlighted in red.

Pump Column 10”
100
300
500
700
900
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,100
1,200
1,300
1,400
1,500
Sand / Silt / Clay
Key
Silt
Sand
Clay
Gravel Fill
Wire Wrap
Screen
Preliminary Flow and Chemistry Report City Yard Well
1,860 GPM
206.29

0.00 24.05
549.43
120.00
120.00
120.00

82.57 0.00
666.36
140.00
238.18
113.41
172.34
140.00

15.08 0.00

6.74 5.46

12.00 15.24

1.76 9.22

1.09 0.63

15.20 1.62

8.72 2.23

4.99 0.00 200.00 400.00 600.00 800.00
290-330
390-410
480-540
540-570
620-660
660-700
700-720
770-810
810-830
880-920
920-970
1000-1020
1070-1100
1100-1140
1140-1190
Well Zonal Production %
Iron Concentration ug/l
MCL 300 ug/l
206.29

0.00 24.05
549.43
120.00
120.00
120.00

82.57 0.00
666.36
140.00
238.18
113.41
172.34
140.00
280.58

0.00 125.40
101.58
223.15
283.38

32.82 171.45

20.33 11.80
282.74

30.20 162.12

41.57 92.87

0.00 200.00 400.00 600.00 800.00
290-330
390-410
480-540
540-570
620-660
660-700
700-720
770-810
810-830
880-920
920-970
1000-1020
1070-1100
1100-1140
1140-1190
Zonal Production GPM
Iron Concentration ug/l
MCL 300 ug/l
Chemistry Profile
1860 gpm 11/20/13
Average Iron Well Head Concentration: 145 µg/L

12 Figure 10: Zonal total manganese concentration. Concentrations over the EPA MCL are highlighted in red.

Pump Column 10”
100
300
500
700
900
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,100
1,200
1,300
1,400
1,500
Sand / Silt / Clay
Key
Silt
Sand
Clay
Gravel Fill
Wire Wrap
Screen
Preliminary Flow and Chemistry Report City Yard Well
1,860 GPM

76.26 0.00

10.03 192.83

69.06 63.00

38.23 49.03

0.00 279.55

67.84 99.45

66.17 72.47

66.00 15.08

0.00 6.74

5.46 12.00

15.24 1.76

9.22 1.09

0.63 15.20

1.62 8.72

2.23 4.99

0.00 100.00 200.00 300.00
290-330
390-410
480-540
540-570
620-660
660-700
700-720
770-810
810-830
880-920
920-970
1000-1020
1070-1100
1100-1140
1140-1190
Well Zonal Production %
Manganese Concentration ug/l
MCL 50. ug/l

76.26 0.00

10.03 192.83

69.06 63.00

38.23 49.03

0.00 279.55

67.84 99.45

66.17 72.47

66.00 280.58

0.00 125.40
101.58
223.15
283.38

32.82 171.45

20.33 11.80
282.74

30.20 162.12

41.57 92.87

0.00 100.00 200.00 300.00
290-330
390-410
480-540
540-570
620-660
660-700
700-720
770-810
810-830
880-920
920-970
1000-1020
1070-1100
1100-1140
1140-1190
Zonal Production GPM
Manganese Concentration ug/l
MCL 50 ug/l
Chemistry Profile
1860 gpm 11/20/13
Average Manganese Well Head Concentration: 64 µg/L

13 Figure 11: Zonal dissolved manganese concentration. Concentrations over the EPA MCL are highlighted in red.

Pump Column 10”
100
300
500
700
900
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,100
1,200
1,300
1,400
1,500
Sand / Silt / Clay
Key
Silt
Sand
Clay
Gravel Fill
Wire Wrap
Screen
Preliminary Flow and Chemistry Report City Yard Well
1,860 GPM

77.26 0.00

77.59 91.63

57.94 66.99

0.00 66.00

0.00 17.36

72.31 77.82

68.66 69.47

63.00 15.08

0.00 6.74

5.46 12.00

15.24 1.76

9.22 1.09

0.63 15.20

1.62 8.72

2.23 4.99

0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00
290-330
390-410
480-540
540-570
620-660
660-700
700-720
770-810
810-830
880-920
920-970
1000-1020
1070-1100
1100-1140
1140-1190
Well Zonal Production %
Dissolved Manganese
Concentration ug/l

77.26 0.00

77.59 91.63

57.94 66.99

0.00 66.00

0.00 17.36

72.31 77.82

68.66 69.47

63.00 280.58

0.00 125.40
101.58
223.15
283.38

32.82 171.45

20.33 11.80
282.74

30.20 162.12

41.57 92.87

0.00 100.00 200.00 300.00
290-330
390-410
480-540
540-570
620-660
660-700
700-720
770-810
810-830
880-920
920-970
1000-1020
1070-1100
1100-1140
1140-1190
Zonal Production GPM
Dissolved Manganese Concentration
ug/l
Chemistry Profile
1860 gpm 11/20/13
Average Dissolved Manganese Well Head Concentration: 65 µg/L

14 Lab Results Summary Table
Table 1: Analyte concentrations calculated by Clinical Laboratory of San Bernardino, Inc.

Preliminary Flow and Chemistry Report City Yard Well
1,860 GPM
Sample
Depth Chloride Sulfate Sulfide TDS Arsenic Iron Dissolved Iron Manganese Dissolved Manganese MCL 500
mg/L 500 mg/L BLANK 1000 mg/L 10 ug/L 300 ug/L BLANK 50 ug/L BLANK Rep. Limit 1 mg/L 0.5 mg/L 0.1 mg/L 5 mg/L 2 ug/L 100 ug/L 100 ug/L 20 ug/L 20 ug/L WH #1 15 43 ND 270 12 150 ND 65 66
WH #2 15 43 ND 270 13 140 ND 63 64
252 15 43 ND 280 12 140 ND 68 66
360 15 43 ND 270 13 150 ND 73 65
450 15 44 ND 280 12 120 ND 64 63
540 16 44 ND 300 12 120 ND 63 64
600 15 44 ND 270 12 120 ND 63 63
660 15 43 ND 260 9.8 120 ND 64 66
700 15 43 ND 270 10 130 ND 68 66
740 16 43 ND 270 9.1 150 ND 73 69
810 16 43 ND 270 8.7 140 ND 69 70
850 16 43 ND 260 8.4 140 ND 70 68
920 15 43 ND 260 8.1 130 ND 67 67
985 15 43 ND 270 9.4 150 ND 68 65
1040 15 42 ND 260 9.3 140 ND 66 63
1100 15 42 ND 260 10 170 ND 67 65
1140 15 41 ND 260 9.5 230 ND 70 70

Sample
Depth
Depth
Interval
Incremental
Flow
Percent
Flow Chloride Sulfate TDS Arsenic Iron Manganese Dissolved Manganese Ft BGS Ft BGS GPM %
Production mg/L mg/L mg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L
MCL - - - 500 500 1000 10 300 50 BLANK
WH #1 - - - 15 43 270 12 150 65 66
WH #2 - - - 15 43 270 13 140 63 64
252 290-330 281 15% 15 43 270 6 206 76 77
360 390-410 0 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
450 480-540 125 7% 3 43 396 0 24 10 78
540 540-570 102 5% 29 30 137 26 549 193 92
600 620-660 223 12% 15 44 179 12 120 69 58
660 660-700 283 15% 15 44 390 12 120 63 67
700 700-720 33 2% 0 69 518 67 120 38 0
740 770-810 171 9% 16 43 223 9 83 49 66
810 810-830 20 1% 16 43 270 37 0 0 0
850 880-920 12 1% 68 43 270 30 666 280 17
920 920-970 283 15% 15 43 282 9 140 68 72
985 1000-1020 30 2% 15 43 260 11 238 99 78
1040 1070-1100 162 9% 15 43 252 7 113 66 69
1100 1100-1140 42 2% 15 45 292 10 172 72 69
1140 1140-1190 93 5% 15 42 260 9 140 66 63
15 Mass Balanced Summary Table
Table 2: Zonal analyte concentration as determined by BESST Inc. by mass balance.

Preliminary Flow and Chemistry Report City Yard Well
1,860 GPM Page 279 of 401
16 Summary
BESST performed a dynamic flow and water chemistry profile on City of La Palma, City Yard Well on November 19th through the 21st, 2013. The dynamic flow profile was performed using the USGS Tracer Pulse Dynamic Flow Profile method to measure flow contribution along eight screen sections (Figures 2 through 4). Available well information is summarized in the Introduction (page 3).

Well Construction:

The City Yard well was originally built with a 20 inch. ID blank casing from 0 to 285 feet, and 14 inch ID mild steel casing from 285 to 1435 ft. There are 10 original well screen sections in the City Yard Well, comprising 670 feet of mild steel louvered casing. A new, stainless steel inner liner was installed in 2007. The new lining is 1200 ft long, with heavy blank steel from 0 feet to 284 feet and 316SS Johnson wire wrap screen from 284 feet to 1200 feet. The wire wrap section of the liner is comprised of 500 feet of 12 inch screen and 420 feet of 10 inch screen. The remaining lower section of the well, and the space between the original casing was filled with silica gravel specifically designed for the screen slot opening of the liner and the original gravel pack.

The city yard well draws water from the old screened sections into the new well liner, through the gravel pack. Even though the bottom of the liner was fitted with a dielectric coupling and 10 inch stainlesssteel cap, it is possible that water is pulled from screen sections below the new liner.

The well is screened within beds comprised primarily of set sand, clay, or mixed sand and gravel. The lithologic units in which the well screen sections are located are primarily separated by clay bearing units which may serve as aquitards. The eight well screen sections that encompass the new liner contributed significantly to the total flow, for the entire length of the liner. Besst inc. estimates that there is high flow potential below the liner as well.

The flow contributionsfrom each well screen section are summarized in slides 5 and 6.

Chemistry:

BESST conducted dynamic water quality sampling using the HydroBooster sampling method on November 20th, 2011, collecting 18 water samples.

Sample results are shown by analyte in slides 7 through 13 and summarized in slides 14 and 15. Each graph shows the dynamic chemical contribution of the analyte vs. the sampling depth interval (ft.bgs.), as well as zonal contribution and percent flow along the same sampling intervals. Below the pump, water is flowing into the well casing thru the screen sections and inner gravel fill into the new liner. Water then moves upward in the well towards the pump intake. In tables 1 thru 15, the zonal concentration is a calculated value that has been “mass balanced” using the measured concentration and the flow contribution for each depth interval. The actual laboratory result for each analyte is shown on page 14 and includes the reported values and significant digits for analytes that fall below laboratory detection limit.

Some overall patterns in the water quality distribution are as follows:
• The well head samples of two (2) analytes, Magnesium and Arsenic are above the reported MCL. •The well head samples of six (6) analytes, chlorite, sulfate, TDS, iron, dissolved iron are well below the reported MCL. • Zonal arsenic concentration has an asymmetric distribution characterized by higher concentrations (9 ppb to 67 ppb) from 252 ft to 850 ft and lower concentrations(7 ppb to 11 ppb) below 850 ft.

Preliminary Flow and Chemistry Report City Yard Well
1,860 USG*min-1

17 Discussion
Preliminary Flow and Chemistry Report City Yard Well
1,860 USG*min-1
The above figure defines the two essential water quality problems with the Meadowlark Well. One is the arsenic problem and the other the manganese problem. The outlined area in the two sections of the figure show that the greatest concentration of mass is co-located for arsenic and manganese. The total production within the co-located high mass zone is about (45%). The balance of production above and below the high mass zone is less contaminated. In the case of arsenic, hydraulic manipulation of the well that draws more water from the bottom (and possibly top) and no or less water from the high mass zone would bring down the concentration to below MCLs. Figure 12 on the next page models a “what if” scenario where the high mass zone is blocked from production and only draws water from the lower arsenic and manganese contribution zones. Arsenic would drop to about 7 ug/l and manganese would roughly stay the same at about 63 ug/l. This is a worst case scenario with respect to production by assuming that there would not be any make up production from the bottom and upper sections of the well. The projected worst case loss from this well modification scenario would be about 45% of total production (55% remaining). Given the distance of the pump intake from the bottom section of the well, there is a decent chance that the better quality water section is being under utilized from a production stand point. This is a common result that we have seen in multiple projects – the losses being made up from repositioning of the pump intake to the desired production zones (via an engineered suction).

What makes this a more complex problem is that the inner well screen is of wire wrap construction making it somewhat difficult to seal off the high mass zone using an inflatable packer or swedge. Moreover, the data tells us that the inner well design does not take advantage of the improving water quality with depth surrounding the Meadowlark well. In a perfect world, the inner well screen section would have extended down to the bottom of the well so that the best section of the surrounding formation could be fully utilized for production and water quality. This is not the case.

18 Suggestions
Preliminary Flow and Chemistry Report City Yard Well
1,860 USG*min-1
So, given that the inner well screen is not fully extended into the “sweet spot” pay zone of the well for higher water quality allocation, and given that wire wrapped well screen is difficult to internally seal, then as a practical matter where do we go from here? In our opinion there are one of two options to contemplate. Option 1 would be to use an engineered suction with a double (straddle) mechanical packer. There would be a section of perforated suction pipe above the top mechanical packer and a section of perforated suction pipe below the bottom mechanical packer. No perforations would be present in the section of pipe between the two mechanical packers.

Mechanical packers are not inflatable and do not provide a water tight seal. They look more like a swab and are considered more as “mixing inhibitors” or flow inhibitors and help to reduce a large percentage of the hydraulic allocation from the zoned-off interval. This solution does not risk damaging the wire wrapped screen from over inflation of an inflatable packer or over pressuring a swedge against the screen.

The second option (Option 2) would be to remove the inner well screen and install a internal well screen that extends into the better quality zone of the well – but does not have perforations through the high mass section of the well. Intuition tells us that this would be a more expensive approach. Therefore, it might be prudent to try the mechanical packer solution first (Option 1) before resorting to a more expensive fix. However, the straddle mechanical packer solution does not fix the manganese problem. On the other hand, given the decreasing concentration with depth of both arsenic and manganese, a redesigned and installed inner screen the extend to the bottom of the well may also fix the manganese problem as well.

Sample
Interval
Calculated
Zonal Flow
Modified
Zonal Flow
Calculated As
Concentration
Modified As
Concentration
Calculated Mn
Concentration
Modified Mn
Concentration
ft BGS GPM GPM ug/L ug/L ug/L ug/L
290-330 281 281 6 6 76 76
390-410 0 0 0 0 0 0
480-540 125 125 0 0 10 10
540-570 102 0 26 0 193 0
620-660 223 0 12 0 69 0
660-700 283 0 12 0 63 0
700-720 33 0 67 0 38 0
770-810 171 0 9 0 49 0
810-830 20 0 37 0 0 0
880-920 12 0 30 0 280 0
920-970 283 283 9 9 68 68
1000-1020 30 30 11 11 99 99
1070-1100 162 162 7 7 66 66
1100-1140 42 42 10 10 72 72
1140-1190 93 93 9 9 66 66
Worst
Case
Production
Loss
Worst Case
Remaining
Flow
Wellhead
Average
Before
Wellhead
Average After
Wellhead
Average
Before
Wellhead
Average After

45.40% 54.60% 12.5 7.0 64 64
Feasibility Test: Another the way to look at this problem is to start with the straddle mechanical packer first and demonstrate proof of concept in reducing the arsenic concentration. The manganese will likely stay the same. The feasibility test would not only be used to prove that the arsenic concentration can be reduced but that make up production can be provided from the lower section of the well. If indeed this is the case, then a trade off analysis could be conducted. This way, analyzing the cost benefit of and removing the inner screen will show whether manganese concentrations could be reduced, in addition to the benefit of make up production versus only mitigating arsenic and treating for manganese.

RECORDED AT THE REQUEST OF
AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:

CITY CLERK

CITY OF LA PALMA
7822 WALKER STREET
LA PALMA, CA 90623-1771
EXEMPT FROM RECORDER’S FEES

PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 27383

NOTICE OF COMPLETION
AND

ACCEPTANCE OF WORK
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:

1. The undersigned is an owner of an interest or estate in the hereinafter described real property, the nature of which interest or estate is public property.

2. The City of La Palma, 7822 Walker Street, La Palma, California 90623, as owner of the property hereinafter described caused improvement to be made, to wit:

Work includes the City Yard Pump and Well Rehabilitation Phase I Project No. 25- WTR-01 in the City of La Palma.

3. The name and address of the contractor for the work of improvement as a whole is:

BESST, Inc
50 Tiburon Street, Suite 7
San Rafael, CA 94901

4. The notice is given for (check one):
❑ Completion of the work improvement as a whole
❑ Completion of a contract for a particular portion of the work of improvement (per CA Civ. Code § 8186
The contract for the doing of which was heretofore entered into on the 5 th day of
November, 2024, which contract was made with BESST, Inc. as Contractor; that the work was actually accepted on the 5
th day of August, 2025 by the City Council
of the City of La Palma; that title to said property is vested in the City of La Palma; that the surety for said Contractor is LIBERTY MUTUAL SURETY, that the property hereinbefore referred to and on which said improvement was made is described as follows:

City Yard Pump and Well Rehabilitation Phase I Project No 25-WTR-01

CITY OF LA PALMA EXEMPT FROM RECORDER’S FEES

PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 27383
I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Date: August ____, 2025. ________________________________________ Place: La Palma, CA Belinda Deines
Community Development & Public Works Director
City of La Palma

STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) SS

COUNTY OF ORANGE )

CITY OF LA PALMA )

VERIFICATION
I, BELINDA DEINES, state; I am the Community Development & Public Works Director of the City of La Palma identified in the foregoing Notice of Completion. I have read said Notice of Completion and know that contents thereof; the same is true of my own knowledge.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on August ___, 2025 at _______________________________________.

By ________________________________________
Belinda Deines
Community Development & Public Works Director
City of La Palma

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
State of California
County of ___________________________________
On ____________ before me, ________________________________________ Personally appeared ________________________________________________ Who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory
evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are
subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed
the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies),
and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the
instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf
of which the person(s) acted, executed the
instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the
laws of the State of California that the foregoing
paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Place Notary Seal Above Signature _________________________________ Signature of Notary Public
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

Agenda Item No. 7 August 5, 2025 | 1
City of La Palma
Agenda Item No. 7
MEETING DATE: August 5, 2025
TO: City Council
FROM: Interim City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Joseph Cisneros, Deputy City Manager
AGENDA TITLE: Update to Statement of Investment Policy
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

It is recommended that the City Council adopt a Resolution updating the Statement of Investment Policy.

BACKGROUND:

The City previously adopted a “Statement of Investment Policy” to guide the investment of idle cash funds. The policy was last updated by the City Council/Successor Agency in January 2022. PFM has recommended minor edits to align the policy with recent updates to the Government Code.

FISCAL IMPACT:

This action does not have a specific fiscal impact.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Proposed Resolution Amending the “Statement of Investment Policy,” with Exhibit A

RESOLUTION NO. 2025-___

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LA PALMA AMENDING THE “STATEMENT OF
INVESTMENT POLICY”
WHEREAS, the City of La Palma has funds not required to satisfy immediate financial obligations; and
WHEREAS, the subject funds should be wisely and prudently invested in approved investment instruments; and
WHEREAS, the City’s “Statement of Investment Policy” (the Policy) has been amended; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 53646(a)(2) states that any change to the Policy shall be considered by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City’s legal counsel has determined that the existing and amended Policy adequately complies with California Government Code Section 53600, et seq., government investment requirements.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of La Palma does hereby adopt the amended “Statement of Investment Policy.”
APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of La Palma at a regular meeting held on the 5th day of August 2025.
__________________________
Mark Waldman
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Norma Alley, CMC
City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) SS.

CITY OF LA PALMA )

I, NORMA ALLEY, City Clerk of the City of La Palma, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the City Council of said City at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 5th day of August 2025, and that it was so adopted by called vote as follows:

YES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
_______________________________
Norma Alley, CMC
City Clerk

CITY OF LA PALMA

STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICY
UPDATED JANUARY AUGUST 20225
I. PURPOSE
II. OBJECTIVE
III. SCOPE
IV. STANDARDS OF CARE

1. PRUDENCE

2. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY

3. ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
V. INTERNAL CONTROL
VI. SUITABLE AND AUTHORIZED INVESTMENT
VII. AUTHORIZED FINANCIAL DEALERS AND INSTITUTION
VIII. CUSTODY AND DELIVERY OF SECURITIE
IX. REPORTING METHOD
X. POLICY CONSTRAINTS

1. CITY CONSTRAINTS

2. LEGAL CONSTRAINT
XI. POLICY REVIEW

CITY OF LA PALMA

STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICY
UPDATED AUGUST 2025JANUARY 2022
I. PURPOSE
This Statement of Investment Policy is intended to provide a guideline for the prudent investment of temporary idle cash and restricted monies and to outline a policy for maximizing the efficiency of the cash management system. The cash management system of the City of La Palma is designed to accurately monitor and forecast expenditures and revenues, thus insuring the investment of monies to the fullest extent possible.

II. OBJECTIVE
Pursuant to Government Code Section 53600.5, the primary investment objective is to safeguard the principal of the funds under City control (safety). The secondary objective is to meet the liquidity needs of the City (liquidity). The third objective is to achieve a return on funds under the City’s control (yield). Attempts to obtain highest interest yields possible are a statement of fact as long as investments meet the criteria required for safety and liquidity.

III. SCOPE
This Investment Policy applies to activities of the City with regard to investing the financial assets of all funds under the City’s control, including the following: General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, Assessment Funds, Internal Service Funds, Capital Projects Funds, Debt Service Funds, Reserve Funds, Trust and Agency Funds, and any other Funds that may be created from time to time with the exception of deferred compensation assets (pension and other post employment benefits) held in a trust and the proceeds of bond issues.

IV. STANDARDS OF CARE

1. PRUDENCE
The standard of prudence to be used by investment officials shall be the “prudent investor” standard as set forth in Section 53600.3 of the California Government Code, which states in part that, “When investing, reinvesting, purchasing, acquiring, exchanging, selling, and managing public funds, a trustee shall act with care, skill, prudence, and diligence under the circumstances then prevailing, that a prudent person acting in a like capacity and familiarity with those matters would use in the conduct of funds of a like character and with like aims, to safeguard the principal and maintain the liquidity needs of the Agency.” The prudent investor standard shall be applied in the context of managing the overall portfolio.

2. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY

The authority to manage and operate the investment program is granted to the Treasurer (or his/her designee) pursuant to Section 53607 of the California Government Code. Individuals who may execute investment transactions are those persons who are authorized by resolution to deposit, invest, make payment of, or transfer public funds. No other person may execute an investment transaction. (Throughout this policy, it shall be understood that wherever duties of the “Treasurer” are mentioned, such reference extends to the Treasurer’s designee.)
The City may delegate investment authority to an investment advisor. The advisor will follow the Investment Policy and such other written instructions as are provided.

3. ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activity that could conflict with proper execution of the investment program, or which could impair their ability to make impartial investment decisions. Employees and investment officials shall disclose to the Treasurer any material financial interests in financial institutions that conduct business within their jurisdiction, and they shall further disclose any large personal financial/investment positions that could be related to the performance of the City’s portfolio.

V. INTERNAL CONTROLS
The Treasurer is responsible for establishing and maintaining an internal control structure designed to ensure that the assets of the entity are protected from loss, theft, or misuse.

The Treasurer shall establish the investment functions so that specific responsibility for the performance of duties and segregation of duties are assigned with a clear line of authority and responsibility. The functions of authorizing, recording transactions, and performing reconciliation’s are handled by separate persons to reduce the risk that a person is in a position to conceal errors or fraud in the normal course of duty.

The current segregation of duties is as follows:

While no internal control system, however elaborate, can guarantee absolute assurance that the City’s assets are safeguarded, it is the intent of the City’s internal control system to provide reasonable assurance that management of the investment function meets the City’s objectives. These internal controls shall be reviewed annually by the independent auditor.

VI. SUITABLE AND AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS
The California Government Code (Sections 16429.1, 53601, 53630, and 53684) allows the City to invest in the following instruments:

Investment Type
Maximum
Maturity
Authorized Limit
(%)
Rating or Other Code
Requirements
Local Agency Bonds 5 years None None
U. S. Treasury Obligations 5 years None None
State of California Obligations 5 years None None
Other 49 State Obligations 5 years None None
CA Local Agency Obligations 5 years None None
U. S. Agencies
Bankers’ Acceptances(a)
5 years
180 days
None
40%
None
None

Investment Type
Maximum
Maturity
Authorized Limit
(%)
Rating or Other Code
Requirements
Commercial Paper (b) 270 days 25% Highest letter and
number rating by
NRSRO
Negotiable Certificates of
Deposit
5 years 30% None
Repurchase Agreements 1 year None None
Reverse Repurchase
Agreements and Securities
Lending Agreements(c)(d)
92 days 20% of base None
Medium-Term Notes(e) 5 years 30% “A” Rating Category
Mutual Funds(f)(g) N/A 20% Multiple
Money Market Mutual
Funds(h)
N/A 20% AAA by two NRSROs or
Advisor Requirements
Collateralized Bank Deposits 5 years None None
Asset-Backed Securities(i) 5 years 20% “AA” Issue Rating Category
Supranationals (IBRD, IADB,
IFC)
5 years 30% “AA” Rating Category
Joint Powers Authority
Pool/Local Government
Investment Pools (LGIPs)(j)
N/A None Advisor Requirements
Local Agency Investment Fund
(LAIF)
N/A None None
County Pooled Investment
Funds
N/A None None

Investment Type
Maximum
Maturity
Authorized Limit
(%)
Rating or Other Code
Requirements
Time Deposits (non-negotiable
CDs)
5 years None Bank must have a
branch in CA and have
a minimum CRA rating
of satisfactory. Must be
FDIC insured or meet
State proscribed
collateral
requirements.
(a)No more than 30% of surplus funds may be invested in Bankers’ Acceptances of any one commercial bank. (b) Commercial paper issuers must be organized and operating with the U. S. and have assets in excess of $500 million. Additionally, there is a 10% issuer limit for commercial paper and medium-term notes from any single issuer.No more than 10 percent of the outstanding commercial paper of any single corporate issuer may be purchased by the local agency. (c) May exceed the 92-day term if the agreement includes a written codicil guaranteeing a minimum earning or spread for the entire period between the sale of a security using a reverse repurchase agreement or securities lending agreement and the final maturity dates of the same security.
(d) Reverse repurchase agreements must be made with primary dealers of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York or with a nationally or state chartered bank that has a significant relationship with the local agency and the securities used for the agreement must have been held by the issuer for at least 30 days.
(e) “Medium-term notes” are defined in Government Code Section 53601 as “all corporate and depository institution debt securities with a maximum remaining maturity of five years or less, issued by corporations organized and operating with the U.S. or by depository institutions licensed by the U.S. or any state and operating within the U.S.” (f) No more than 10% of an agency’s surplus funds may be invested in any one mutual fund. (g) A mutual fund must receive the highest ranking by not less than two nationally recognized rating agencies or the fund must retain an investment advisor who is registered with the SEC (or exempt from registration), has assets under management in excess of $500 million, and has at least five years experience investing in instruments authorized by Government Code Sections 53601 and 53635. (h) A money market mutual fund must receive the highest ranking by not less than two nationally recognized statistical rating organizations (NRSROs) or retain an investment advisor registered with the SEC or exempt from registration and who has not less than five years experience investing in money market instruments with assets under management in excess of $500 million. (i) Issuer must have an “A” rating or better for the issuer’s debt as provided by a nationally recognized rating agency. However, if issued by the U.S. treasury or governmental agency the requirements don't apply. (j) A joint powers authority pool must retain an investment advisor who is registered with the SEC (or exempt) from registration), has assets under management in excess of $500 million, and has at least five years experience investing in instruments authorized by Government Code Section 53601, subdivisions (a) to (q).

The City of La Palma is limiting its purchase of investments to the following vehicles. Where this Policy specifies a percentage limitation for a particular security type or issuer, that percentage is applicable at the time the security is purchased. No more than 5% of the City’s portfolio shall be invested in any one issuer regardless of sector except for the U.S. Treasury, Federal Agencies, supranationals, and pools (including LAIF, LGIPs, and money market funds). Credit criteria listed in this section refers to the credit rating at the time the security

is purchased. If an investment’s credit rating falls below the minimum rating required at the time of purchase, the City’s investment advisor (if any) and Treasurer will review the rating agency action and decide whether to sell or hold the investment. • LAIF (Local Agency Investment Fund) – a special fund in the State Treasury which local agencies may use to deposit funds for investment. There is no minimum investment period and the minimum transaction is $5,000, in multiples of $1,000 above that, with a maximum balance permitted by the State Treasurer. However, any investment with LAIF must comply with other self-imposed restrictions as specified in this Investment Policy. The City is restricted to a maximum of fifteen transactions per month. It offers high liquidity because deposits can be converted to cash in twenty-four hours and no interest is lost. All interest is distributed to those agencies participating on a proportionate share basis determined by the amounts deposited and the length of time they are deposited. Interest is paid quarterly. The State retains an amount for reasonable costs of making the investments, not to exceed one-half of one percent of the earnings.
• Non-negotiable deposits in a state or national bank, savings association or federal association, federal or state credit union in the State of California. In accordance with California Government Code Section 53635.2, to be eligible to receive City deposits, a financial institution shall have received an overall rating of not less than "satisfactory" in its most recent evaluation by the appropriate federal financial supervisory agency of its record of meeting the credit needs of California's communities. Certificates of deposit are required to be collateralized as specified under Government Code Section 53630 et seq. The City, at its discretion, may waive the collateralization requirements for any portion that is covered by Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) insurance. The City shall have a signed agreement with any depository accepting City funds per Government Code Section 53649. No deposits shall be made at any time in certificates of deposit issued by a state or federal credit union if a member of the City Council or the Treasurer serves on the board of directors or any committee appointed by the board of directors of the credit union. In accordance with Government Code Section 53638, any deposit shall not exceed that total shareholder’s equity of any depository bank, nor shall the deposit exceed the total net worth of any institution. Eligible non-negotiable CDs shall have a maximum maturity of 2 years. No more than 25% of the City’s portfolio may be invested in non-negotiable CDs.
• U. S. Treasury bills, notes, bonds, or certificates of indebtedness, for which the full faith and credit of the United States are pledged for the payment of principal and interest.

• Federal agency or United States government-sponsored enterprise obligations, participations, or other instruments, including those issued by or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by federal agencies or United States government-sponsored enterprises.
• Registered state warrants or treasury notes or bonds of this state, including bonds payable solely out of the revenues from a revenue-producing property owned, controlled, or operated by the state or by a department, board, agency, or authority of the state. Obligations eligible for investment under this subdivision with maturities in excess of one year must be rated in a rating category "A" or its equivalent or better by a nationally recognized statistical rating organization (NRSRO). Obligations eligible for investment under this subdivision with maturities under one year must be rated in a rating category of “A-1,” its equivalent, or better by a NRSRO. • Registered treasury notes or bonds of any of the other 49 states in addition to California, including bonds payable solely out of the revenues from a revenueproducing property owned, controlled, or operated by a state or by a department, board, agency, or authority of any of the other 49 states, in addition to California.

Obligations eligible for investment under this subdivision must be rated in a rating category of "A" or its equivalent or better by a NRSRO. Obligations eligible for investment under this subdivision with maturities under one year must be rated in a rating category of “A-1,” its equivalent, or better by a NRSRO. • Bonds, notes, warrants, or other evidences of indebtedness of a local agency within this state, including bonds payable solely out of the revenues from a revenueproducing property owned, controlled, or operated by the local agency, or by a department, board, agency, or authority of the local agency. Obligations eligible for investment under this subdivision must be rated in a rating category of "A" or its equivalent or better by a NRSRO. Obligations eligible for investment under this subdivision with maturities under one year must be rated in a rating category of “A-1,” its equivalent, or better by a NRSRO.
• Bankers' acceptances otherwise known as bills of exchange or time drafts that are drawn on and accepted by a commercial bank. Purchases of bankers' acceptances shall not exceed 180 days' maturity or 25% of the City's portfolio that may be invested pursuant to this section. Eligible bankers’ acceptances must be rated in the highest letter and number rating as provided for by a NRSRO.
• Commercial paper of “prime” quality of the highest ranking or of the highest letter and number rating as provided for by a NRSRO. The entity that issues the commercial

paper shall meet all of the following conditions in either paragraph (1) or paragraph (2):
1) The entity meets the following criteria: Is organized and operating in the United States as a general corporation. Has total assets in excess of five hundred million dollars ($500,000,000). Has debt other than commercial paper, if any, that is rated in a rating category of “A” or higher, or the equivalent, by a NRSRO. 2) The entity meets the following criteria: Is organized within the United States as a special purpose corporation, trust, or limited liability company. Has program wide credit enhancements including, but not limited to, over collateralization, letters of credit, or surety bond. Has commercial paper that is rated in a rating category of “A-1” or higher, or the equivalent, by a NRSRO.

Purchases of eligible commercial paper may not exceed 25% of the market value of the City’s portfolio or have a term to maturity which exceeds 270 days. • Negotiable certificates of deposit issued by a nationally or state-chartered bank, a savings association or a federal association (as defined by Section 5102 of the Financial Code), a state or federal credit union, or by a federally- or state-licensed branch of a foreign bank. Eligible negotiable CDs with maturities in excess of one year must be rated in a rating category of “A” or its equivalent or better by a NRSRO. Eligible negotiable CDs with maturities under one year must be rated in a rating category of “A-1,” its equivalent, or better by a NRSRO. No more than 30% of the City’s portfolio may be invested in negotiable CDs.
• Medium-term corporate notes, defined as all corporate and depository institution debt securities with a maximum remaining maturity of 5 years or less, issued by corporations organized and operating within the United States or by depository institutions licensed by the United States or any state and operating within the United States. Medium-term corporate notes shall be rated in a rating category “A” or its equivalent or better by a NRSRO. No more than 30% of the City’s portfolio may be invested in corporate notes.
• Asset-Backed Security (ABS). Any mortgage pass-through security, collateralized mortgage obligation, mortgage-backed or other pay-through bond, equipment leaseback certificate, consumer receivable pass-through certificate, or consumer receivable-backed bond of a maximum remaining maturity of five years or less.

Eligible securities must be rated, by a nationally recognized rating service, in a rating category of “AA”, its equivalent, or higher as provided by a NRSRO. No more than 20% of the City's portfolio may be invested in this type of security. Credit, maturity, and sector limits don't apply to those issued by U.S. treasury or federal agencies.

• Supranational. United States dollar denominated senior unsecured unsubordinated obligations issued or unconditionally guaranteed by the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), International Finance Corporation (IFC), or Inter-AmericanDevelopment Bank (IADB), with a maximum remaining maturity of five years or less, and eligible for purchase and sale within the United States. Investments under this subdivision shall be rated in a rating category of “AA”, its equivalent, or higher by a NRSRO. No more than 30% of the City’s portfolio may be invested in this security type.
• Shares of beneficial interest issued by diversified management companies that are money market funds registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. Sec. 80a- 1, et seq.). To be eligible for investment pursuant to this subdivision these companies shall either: have an investment advisor registered or exempt from registration with the Securities and Exchange Commission with not less than 5 years experience managing money market mutual funds and with assets under management in excess of $500,000,000, or attain the highest ranking letter or numerical rating provided by not less than two of the three largest NRSROs. No more than 20% of the City’s portfolio may be invested in money market funds.
• Shares of beneficial interest issued by a joint powers authority, Local Government Investment Pools (LGIPs), organized pursuant to Section 6509.7 that invests in the securities and obligations authorized in subdivisions (a) to (q), inclusive. Each share shall represent an equal proportional interest in the underlying pool of securities owned by the joint powers authority. To be eligible under this section, the joint powers authority issuing the shares shall have retained an investment adviser that meets all of the following criteria:
1) The adviser is registered or exempt from registration with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
2) The adviser has not less than five years of experience investing in the securities and obligations authorized in subdivisions (a) to (q), inclusive. 3) The adviser has assets under management in excess of five hundred million dollars ($500,000,000).
• Passbook Savings Account. The City may invest in savings accounts for temporary holdings of funds.
• Checking Accounts. The City may maintain checking accounts or “demand deposits” to deposit or withdraw cash at any time without prior notice or penalty.

• Other investments that are, or may be deemed legal investments by the California Government Code and which are approved by the City Council.

VII. AUTHORIZED FINANCIAL DEALERS AND INSTITUTIONS
The Treasurer will maintain a list of financial institutions authorized to provide investment services. In addition, a list will also be maintained for approved or security broker/dealers selected by credit worthiness that are authorized to provide investment services to the City. The purchase by the City of any investment other than those purchased directly from the issuer, will be purchased either from an institution licensed by the State as a brokerdealer, as defined in Section 25004 of the Corporations Code, which is a member of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), or a member of a federally regulated securities exchange, a national or state chartered bank, a federal or state association (as defined by Section 5102 of the Financial Code), or a brokerage firm designated as a Primary Government Dealer by the Federal Reserve Bank.

If the City has an investment advisor, the investment advisor may use its own list of authorized broker/dealers to conduct transactions on behalf of the City.

VIII. CUSTODY AND DELIVERY OF SECURITIES
All security transactions entered into by the City shall be conducted on a delivery- versuspayment (DVP) basis. Securities will be held by a third-party bank custodian designated by the Treasurer and evidenced by safekeeping receipts.

IX. REPORTING METHODS
The Treasurer shall prepare a quarterly investment report as permitted by Section 53646 of the California Government Code, which provides a clear picture of the status of the current investment portfolio. The report should be provided to the City Manager and legislative body within 45 days following the end of the quarter covered by the report. The report should include the following:
a. Type of investment
b. Institution or issuer
c. Date of maturity
d. Amount of deposit or cost of security
e. Current market value of securities and source of market value f. State that there are sufficient funds to meet the next 6 months’ obligations or provide an explanation as to why sufficient monies shall or may not be available

g. State that investments are in compliance with the City’s investment policy or manner in which the portfolio is not in compliance
X. POLICY CONSTRAINTS

1. CITY CONSTRAINTS
The City of La Palma operates its pooled idle cash investments under the Prudent Investor Standard. The Treasurer will evaluate local banks and savings institutions and may invest idle cash funds with such institutions when the criteria for prudent investment previously stated are met. The City operates its investment pool according to State and self-imposed constraints. It does not buy stocks; it does not speculate; it does not deal in futures or options. It does not purchase or sell securities on margins or invest in derivative type investments such as inverse floaters, range notes or interest only strips derived from a pool of mortgages as prohibited under Section 53601.6 of the California Government Code. Any investment extending beyond a five-year period requires prior City Council approval at least 90 days in advance.

2. LEGAL CONSTRAINTS
Surplus funds must be deposited in State or national banks, State or Federal savings associations or State or Federal credit unions within the State of California. The deposits cannot exceed the amount of the bank’s or savings and loan’s paid-up capital and surplus.

The bank or savings and loan must secure public funds deposits with eligible securities having a market value of 100% of the total amount of the deposits. State law also allows as an eligible security, first trust deeds having a value of 150% of the total amount of the deposits.
a) The Treasurer may waive, at his or her discretion, security for that portion of a deposit which is insured pursuant to federal law. Currently, the first $250,000 of a deposit is federally insured.

XI. POLICY REVIEW
As required by Section 53646 of the California Government Code, any change in this policy shall be considered by the City Council at a public meeting. Additionally, this policy may be reviewed at a public meeting of the City Council to ensure its consistency with the overall objectives or preservation of principal, liquidity, and return, and its relevance to current law, financial and economic trends.

Agenda Item No. 8 August 5, 2025 | 1
City of La Palma
Agenda Item No. 8
MEETING DATE: August 5, 2025
TO: City Council
FROM: Interim City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Joseph Cisneros, Deputy City Manager
AGENDA TITLE: Fourth Quarter Cash and Investment Report, Fiscal Year 2024-2025 RECOMMENDED ACTION:

It is recommended that the City Council receive and file the Cash and Investment Report for the fourth quarter of Fiscal Year 2024-25.

SUMMARY:

In accordance with the City’s Statement of Investment Policy, a quarterly report is prepared to provide the status of the investment portfolio. The cash and investments of all funds are pooled, and no assets are held by fiscal agents. Guided by state law and the City’s Investment Policy, the primary investment objective is to safeguard the principal of the invested funds. The secondary objective is to meet the liquidity needs of the entities, and the third objective is to achieve a return on the invested funds.

Although all investments contain an element of risk, the pooled investments are designed to limit risk exposure and provide liquidity while still generating investment income.

A combination of demand deposit accounts and the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) is used to provide sufficient liquidity to meet the City’s short-term operating requirements. Funds that are unlikely to be spent in the near future are kept in a portfolio that is actively managed by an investment advisor in accordance with the Investment Policy.

Information on the investment portfolio as of June 30, 2025, is as follows:

Short-term Operating Requirements
• Monies held in demand deposit accounts and cash on hand total $6,560,846. • Monies held by Corpay total $162,205.
• Monies held in the Local Agency Investment Fund total $17,006,581. o Market value totals $17,026,960.
o LAIF fund effective yield for each month during the quarter:
▪ 4.281%, month 1
▪ 4.272%, month 2
▪ 4.269%, month 3
o LAIF fund average life is 248 days.

Agenda Item No. 8 August 5, 2025 | 2
Managed Portfolio
• Book value totals $27,495,347
• Market value totals $27,769,666 per US Bank (custodian) and $27,767,221 per PFM (investment manager).
o $11,976,001 US Treasury Bond/Note (43.14%)
o $116,025 Municipal Bond/Note (0.42%)
o $3,236,157 Federal Agency Commercial (11.65%)
o $6,823,138 Corporate Note (24.57%)
o $203,534 Certificates of Deposit (0.73%)
o $5,363,104 Asset-Backed Security (19.31%)
o $49,262 Money Market (0.18%)
• Yield to maturity (based on cost) is 4.44%.
• Yield to maturity (based on market value) is 4.05%.
• Weighted average maturity is 853 days.
• All investments mature within five years of the quarter-end.

Interest Rate Yield
The following table presents U.S. Treasury yields as of June 30, 2025, and for all quarters back to June 30, 2023. The Federal Reserve Board has dual goals of promoting maximum employment while keeping prices stable for the American people. After making no change to interest rates since July 2023, the Federal Reserve lowered interest rates by one-quarter percentage point at each of its September, November, and December 2024 meetings. Since December 2024, the Federal Reserve has made no additional changes to interest rates because the long-term objective is to maintain the strength of the economy and the labor market while enabling inflation to move down to 2%.

Treasury Yield Curve Rates
Quarter End Date 6 Month 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 5 Year 10 Year June 30, 2023 5.47% 5.40% 4.87% 4.49% 4.13% 3.81%
September 30, 2023 5.53% 5.46% 5.03% 4.80% 4.60% 4.59%
December 31, 2023 5.26% 4.79% 4.23% 4.01% 3.84% 3.88%
March 31, 2024 5.38% 5.03% 4.59% 4.40% 4.21% 4.20%
June 30, 2024 5.33% 5.09% 4.71% 4.52% 4.33% 4.36%
September 30, 2024 4.38% 3.98% 3.66% 3.58% 3.58% 3.81%
December 31, 2024 4.24% 4.16% 4.25% 4.27% 4.38% 4.58%
March 31, 2025 4.23% 4.03% 3.89% 3.89% 3.96% 4.23%
June 30, 2025 4.29% 3.96% 3.72% 3.68% 3.79% 4.24%
This table can be used to compare the LAIF and managed portfolio yields against the U.S. Treasury yields.

Agenda Item No. 8 August 5, 2025 | 3
• At the quarter end, the LAIF fund’s effective yield (4.269%) was higher than Treasury yield rates for all maturities between one and ten years and was lower than the Treasury yield rate for maturities of six months.
• At the quarter end, the managed portfolio’s yield based on cost (4.44%) was higher than Treasury yield rates for all maturities of ten years and less, while the managed portfolio’s yield based on market (4.05%) was higher for maturities between one and five years but lower for maturities of 6 months and ten years.

Managed Portfolio Market Value
Until investments are sold, any difference between market and book value is an unrealized gain or loss. During the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2024-25, the City’s investment managers sold certain investments before their maturity date and realized net gains totaling $39,526.

During fiscal year 2024-25, the market value was above the book value at the end of each quarter, resulting in an unrealized gain at each quarter-end. Market values have an inverse relationship with interest rates, so as interest rates decrease, market values increase. The following chart shows the comparison of the managed portfolio’s book value versus market value over the past two years:

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact associated with the receipt of this report.

Quarter End Date Book Value Market Value per Custodian
(US Bank)
Unrealized
Gain/(Loss)
June 30, 2023 $25,853,547 $25,070,092 ($783,455)
September 30, 2023 $25,892,819 $25,254,108 ($638,711)
December 31, 2023 $25,942,487 $25,871,881 ($70,606)
March 31, 2024 $26,101,690 $25,988,635 ($113,055)
June 30, 2024 $26,290,427 $26,191,407 ($99,020)
September 30, 2024 $26,582,928 $26,960,813 $377,885
December 31, 2024 $26,858,340 $26,954,217 $95,877
March 31, 2025 $27,172,009 $27,402,860 $230,851
June 30, 2025 $27,495,347 $27,769,666 $274,319
ATTACHMENTS:

1. Cash and Investment Report – June 30, 2025

2. Cash and Investment Portfolio Book Value by Type Chart – June 30, 2025

3. PFM Funds, Managed Account Detail of Securities Held – June 30, 2025

ATTACHMENT 1

CITY OF LA PALMA
Cash and Investment Report
June 30, 2025
Source of
Purchase Maturity Interest Face Book Market Market
Investment Type Issuer Date Date Rate Value Value Value Valuation Pooled Deposits and Investments*
Local Agency Investment Fund State NA NA 4.400% $ 17,006,581 $ 17,006,581 $ 17,026,960 LAIF Various eligible securities PFM Fund Manager (various issuers) NA various 4.440% 27,673,010 27,495,347 27,769,666 US Bank Deposit accounts NA NA NA NA 6,553,421 6,553,421 6,553,421 NA Cash on hand NA NA NA NA 7,425 7,425 7,425 NA
Funds with Corpay NA NA NA NA 162,205 162,205 162,205 NA Total Pooled Deposits and Investments $ 51,402,642 $ 51,224,979 $ 51,519,677 * The City and Successor Agency pool all cash and investments and neither has monies held by a fiscal agent. Amounts from the pool are available to each entity on demand.

Michael Egan, Interim City Manager
I certify that this investment portfolio is in conformity with the January 2022 Statement of Investment Policy of the City of La Palma as stated in City Council Resolution No. 2022-02. The Investment Program provides sufficient liquidity to meet the next six months' estimated expenditures.

ATTACHMENT 2
Local Agency
Investment Fund
$17,006,581
33%
PFM Investments
$27,495,347
54%
Funds with Corpay
$162,205
0%
Cash & Deposits
$6,560,846
13%
Cash and Investment Portfolio
Book Value by Type
June 30, 2025

ATTACHMENT 2
Local Agency
Investment Fund
$17,006,581
33%
PFM Investments
$27,495,347
54%
Funds with Corpay
$162,205
0%
Cash & Deposits
$6,560,846
13%
Cash and Investment Portfolio
Book Value by Type
June 30, 2025

CITY OF LA PALMA

ACCOUNT STATEMENT
For the Month Ending
June 30, 2025
Customer Service
PO Box 11813
Harrisburg, PA 17108-1813
Contents
Cover/Disclosures
Summary Statement
Individual Accounts

CITY OF LA PALMA
MR. CONAL MCNAMARA
7822 WALKER STREET
LA PALMA, CA 90623
Client Management Team
Accounts included in Statement
995341 OPERATING PORTFOLIO
Online Access www.pfmam.com Customer Service 1-800-338-3383 Important Messages
PFM AM will be closed on 07/04/2025 for Independence Day.

Robert Montoya
Institutional Sales & Relationship Manager
633 W 5th Street, Suite/Floor 2560
Los Angeles, CA 90071
262-725-1090
[email protected]

For the Month Ending June 30, 2025
Account Statement
Important Disclosures
Important Disclosures
365 and dividing the result by 7. The yields quoted should not be considered a representation of the yield of the fund in the future, since the yield is not fixed.

Average maturity represents the average maturity of all securities and investments of a portfolio, determined by multiplying the par or principal value of each security or investment by its maturity (days or years), summing the products, and dividing the sum by the total principal value of the portfolio. The stated maturity date of mortgage backed or callable securities are used in this statement. However the actual maturity of these securities could vary depending on the level or prepayments on the underlying mortgages or whether a callable security has or is still able to be called.

Monthly distribution yield represents the net change in the value of one share (normally $1.00 per share) resulting from all dividends declared during the month by a fund expressed as a percentage of the value of one share at the beginning of the month. This resulting net change is then annualized by multiplying it by 365 and dividing it by the number of calendar days in the month.

YTM at Cost The yield to maturity at cost is the expected rate of return, based on the original cost, the annual interest receipts, maturity value and the time period from purchase date to maturity, stated as a percentage, on an annualized basis.

YTM at Market The yield to maturity at market is the rate of return, based on the current market value, the annual interest receipts, maturity value and the time period remaining until maturity, stated as a percentage, on an annualized basis.

Managed Account A portfolio of investments managed discretely by PFMAM according to the client’s specific investment policy and requirements. The investments are directly owned by the client and held by the client’s custodian.

Unsettled Trade A trade which has been executed however the final consummation of the security transaction and payment has not yet taken place.

Please review the detail pages of this statement carefully. If you think your statement is wrong, missing account information, or if you need more information about a transaction, please contact PFMAM within 60 days of receipt. If you have other concerns or questions regarding your account, or to request an updated copy of PFMAM's current disclosure statement, please contact a member of your client management team at PFMAM Service Operations at the address below.

PFM Asset Management
Attn: Service Operations
213 Market Street
Harrisburg, PA 17101

NOT FDIC INSURED NO BANK GUARANTEE MAY LOSE VALUE
This statement is for general information purposes only and is not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations. PFM Asset Management ("PFMAM") is a division of U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc. ("USBAM"), a SEC-registered investment adviser. USBAM is direct subsidiary of U.S. Bank National Association ("U.S. Bank") and an indirect subsidiary of U.S. Bancorp. U.S. Bank is not responsible for and does not guarantee the products, services or performance of PFMAM. PFMAM maintains a written disclosure statement of our background and business experience. If you would like to receive a copy of our current disclosure statement, please contact Service Operations at the address below.

Proxy Voting PFMAM does not normally receive proxies to vote on behalf of its clients.

However, it does on occasion receive consent requests. In the event a consent request is received the portfolio manager contacts the client and then proceeds according to their instructions. PFMAM’s Proxy Voting Policy is available upon request by contacting Service Operations at the address below.

Questions About an Account PFMAM’s monthly statement is intended to detail our investment advisory activity as well as the activity of any accounts held by clients in pools that are managed by PFMAM. The custodian bank maintains the control of assets and executes (i.e., settles) all investment transactions. The custodian statement is the official record of security and cash holdings and transactions. PFMAM recognizes that clients may use these reports to facilitate record keeping and that the custodian bank statement and the PFMAM statement should be reconciled and differences resolved.

Many custodians use a settlement date basis which may result in the need to reconcile due to a timing difference.

Account Control PFMAM does not have the authority to withdraw funds from or deposit funds to the custodian outside the scope of services provided by PFMAM. Our clients retain responsibility for their internal accounting policies; implementing and enforcing internal controls and generating ledger entries or otherwise recording transactions.

Market Value Generally, PFMAM’s market prices are derived from closing bid prices as of the last business day of the month as supplied by ICE Data Services. There may be differences in the values shown for investments due to accrued but uncollected income and the use of differing valuation sources and methods. Non-negotiable FDIC-insured bank certificates of deposit are priced at par. Although PFMAM believes the prices to be reliable, the values of the securities may not represent the prices at which the securities could have been bought or sold. Explanation of the valuation methods for a registered investment company or local government investment program is contained in the appropriate fund offering documentation or information statement.

Amortized Cost The original cost of the principal of the security is adjusted for the amount of the periodic reduction of any discount or premium from the purchase date until the date of the report. Discount or premium with respect to short term securities (those with less than one year to maturity at time of issuance) is amortized on a straightline basis. Such discount or premium with respect to longer term securities is amortized using the constant yield basis.

Tax Reporting Cost data and realized gains / losses are provided for informational purposes only. Please review for accuracy and consult your tax advisor to determine the tax consequences of your security transactions. PFMAM does not report such information to the IRS or other taxing authorities and is not responsible for the accuracy of such information that may be required to be reported to federal, state or other taxing authorities.

Financial Situation In order to better serve you, PFMAM should be promptly notified of any material change in your investment objective or financial situation.

Callable Securities Securities subject to redemption prior to maturity may be redeemed in whole or in part before maturity, which could affect the yield represented.

Portfolio The securities in this portfolio, including shares of mutual funds, are not guaranteed or otherwise protected by PFMAM, the FDIC (except for certain non-negotiable certificates of deposit) or any government agency. Investment in securities involves risks, including the possible loss of the amount invested. Actual settlement values, accrued interest, and amortized cost amounts may vary for securities subject to an adjustable interest rate or subject to principal paydowns. Any changes to the values shown may be reflected within the next monthly statement’s beginning values.

Rating Information provided for ratings is based upon a good faith inquiry of selected sources, but its accuracy and completeness cannot be guaranteed.

Shares of some local government investment programs and TERM funds are distributed by representatives of USBAM's affiliate, U.S. Bancorp Investments, Inc. which is registered with the SEC as a broker/dealer and is a member of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) and the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (“MSRB”). You may reach the FINRA by calling the FINRA Hotline at 1-800-289-9999 or at the FINRA website address
https://www.finra.org/investors/investor-contacts. A brochure describing the FINRA Regulation Public Disclosure Program is also available from FINRA upon request.

Key Terms and Definitions
Dividends on local government investment program funds consist of interest earned, plus any discount ratably amortized to the date of maturity, plus all realized gains and losses on the sale of securities prior to maturity, less ratable amortization of any premium and all accrued expenses to the fund. Dividends are accrued daily and may be paid either monthly or quarterly. The monthly earnings on this statement represent the estimated dividend accrued for the month for any program that distributes earnings on a quarterly basis. There is no guarantee that the estimated amount will be paid on the actual distribution date.

Current Yield is the net change, exclusive of capital changes and income other than investment income, in the value of a hypothetical fund account with a balance of one share over the seven-day base period including the statement date, expressed as a percentage of the value of one share (normally $1.00 per share) at the beginning of the seven-day period. This resulting net change in account value is then annualized by multiplying it by

Account Statement - Transaction Summary For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341
Opening Market Value
Purchases
Redemptions
Change in Value
Closing Market Value
27,539,561.70
1,875,580.84
(1,788,462.53)
91,279.46
$27,717,959.47
PFMAM Managed Account
Unsettled Trades 0.00
Cash Dividends and Income 104,330.44
June 30, 2025 May 31, 2025
Asset Summary
PFMAM Managed Account 27,717,959.47 27,539,561.70
Total $27,717,959.47 $27,539,561.70
Asset Allocation
100.00%
PFMAM Managed
Account
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 1 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Summary Statement For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dividend
Closing Market Value
Redemptions
Purchases
Opening Market Value
Closing Market Value
Change in Current Value
Unsettled Trades
Principal Acquisitions
Principal Dispositions
Maturities/Calls
Opening Market Value
Closing Market Value
Opening Market Value
Account Total
Total Cash Basis Earnings
Plus Net Realized Gains/Losses
Less Purchased Interest Related to Interest/Coupons
Interest/Dividends/Coupons Received
Earnings Reconciliation (Cash Basis) - Managed Account
Dividends
Less Beginning Accrued Interest
Less Beginning Amortized Value of Securities
Less Cost of New Purchases
Plus Coupons/Dividends Received
Plus Proceeds of Maturities/Calls/Principal Payments
Plus Proceeds from Sales
Ending Accrued Interest
Ending Amortized Value of Securities
Earnings Reconciliation (Accrual Basis)
Reconciling Transactions
Net Cash Contribution
Security Purchases
Principal Payments
Coupon/Interest/Dividend Income
Sale Proceeds
Maturities/Calls
Cash Transactions Summary- Managed Account
$0.00

0.00 0.00
$0.00

0.00 $27,539,561.70
(187,665.04)
(1,600,797.49)
1,875,580.84

0.00 91,279.46
$27,717,959.47
$27,539,561.70
$27,717,959.47
95,628.51
(1,732.63)
10,434.56
$104,330.44
20,000.00
1,610,979.39
85,446.61
167,665.04
(1,877,313.47)
(2,871.10)

0.00 Managed Account Total
27,511,770.67 27,511,770.67
225,589.51
1,610,979.39
187,665.04
85,446.61
(1,877,313.47)
(27,411,078.98)
(223,543.50)

0.00 225,589.51
1,610,979.39
187,665.04
85,446.61
(1,877,313.47)
(27,411,078.98)
(223,543.50)

0.00 Total Accrual Basis Earnings $109,515.27 $109,515.27 Transaction Summary - Money Market Transaction Summary - Managed Account _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ Cash Balance
Closing Cash Balance $49,262.46
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 2 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Portfolio Summary and Statistics For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Account Summary
Description Par Value Market Value Percent
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note 11,900,000.00 11,976,000.57 43.20 Municipal Bond / Note 115,000.00 116,025.46 0.42
Federal Agency Commercial
Mortgage-Backed Security
3,296,302.77 3,236,157.14 11.68
Corporate Note 6,780,000.00 6,823,138.47 24.62
Certificate of Deposit 200,000.00 203,533.60 0.73
Asset-Backed Security 5,332,445.03 5,363,104.23 19.35
Managed Account Sub-Total 27,623,747.79 27,717,959.47 100.00% Accrued Interest 225,589.51
Total Portfolio 27,623,747.79 27,943,548.98
Unsettled Trades 0.00 0.00
Sector Allocation

19.35%
ABS

0.73%
Cert of Deposit

24.62%
Corporate Note

11.68%
Federal Agency
Commercial
Mortgage-Backed
Security

0.42%
Muni Bond / Note

43.20%
US TSY Bond / Note
0 - 6 Months 6 - 12 Months 1 - 2 Years 2 - 3 Years 3 - 4 Years 4 - 5 Years Over 5 Years

0.44%

3.29%

37.15%

42.30%

6.20%

10.62%

0.00%
Maturity Distribution Characteristics
Yield to Maturity at Cost
Yield to Maturity at Market
Weighted Average Days to Maturity 853

4.44%

4.05%
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 3 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Issuer Summary For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Credit Quality (S&P Ratings)

5.18%
A

9.39%
A+

6.34%
A0.66%
AA

55.38%
AA+

2.00%
AA14.03%
AAA

1.14%
BBB+

5.88%
NR
Issuer Summary
Issuer of Holdings Percent
Market Value
Accenture PLC 34,891.19 0.13
Adobe Inc 203,252.24 0.73
Advanced Micro Devices Inc 100,732.50 0.36
Air Products and Chemicals Inc 140,690.76 0.51
Ally Auto Receivables Trust 245,870.63 0.89
Amazon.com Inc 137,706.80 0.50
American Express Co 662,364.27 2.39
Analog Devices Inc 150,662.10 0.54
Apple Inc 137,268.46 0.50
BA Credit Card Trust 196,562.42 0.71
Bank of America Corp 233,186.19 0.84
Bank of New York Mellon Corp 60,310.20 0.22
BlackRock Inc 131,585.22 0.47
BMW Vehicle Lease Trust 231,607.14 0.84
BP PLC 142,550.80 0.51
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co 40,506.64 0.15
Capital One Financial Corp 289,622.10 1.04
CarMax Inc 133,473.67 0.48
Caterpillar Inc 170,592.53 0.62
Charles Schwab Corp 205,584.12 0.74
Chevron Corp 176,360.45 0.64
Cintas Corp 85,190.49 0.31
Cisco Systems Inc 212,593.11 0.77
Citigroup Inc 421,934.36 1.52
Cooperatieve Rabobank UA 671,527.17 2.42
Cummins Inc 15,066.71 0.05
Deere & Co 111,358.94 0.40
Eli Lilly & Co 131,043.51 0.47
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 2,920,821.29 10.54
Federal National Mortgage Association 315,335.85 1.14
Fifth Third Auto Trust 162,479.10 0.59
Ford Credit Auto Owner Trust 189,068.39 0.68
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 4 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Issuer Summary For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Issuer of Holdings Percent
Market Value
GM Financial Consumer Automobile Receiv 375,610.63 1.36 Goldman Sachs Group Inc 151,196.65 0.55
Groupe BPCE 203,533.60 0.73
Harley-Davidson Inc 59,801.48 0.22
Hershey Co 55,694.60 0.20
Home Depot Inc 193,576.78 0.70
Honda Auto Receivables Owner Trust 377,617.27 1.36
Honda Motor Co Ltd 201,332.02 0.73
Honeywell International Inc 131,352.65 0.47
Hormel Foods Corp 111,107.38 0.40
Hyundai Auto Receivables Trust 407,853.76 1.47
Johnson & Johnson 40,671.16 0.15
JPMorgan Chase & Co 552,436.92 1.99
Los Angeles Unified School District/CA 116,025.46 0.42
Mastercard Inc 131,210.25 0.47
Mercedes-Benz Auto Receivables Trust 230,979.00 0.83
Morgan Stanley 76,078.65 0.27
National Rural Utilities Cooperative Fi 161,933.37 0.58 Nissan Auto Receivables Owner Trust 418,333.39 1.51
PACCAR Inc 106,037.51 0.38
PepsiCo Inc 202,458.80 0.73
PNC Financial Services Group Inc 15,022.01 0.05
State Street Corp 156,493.16 0.56
Target Corp 35,207.34 0.13
Texas Instruments Inc 116,036.15 0.42
Toyota Auto Receivables Owner Trust 512,679.19 1.85
Toyota Motor Corp 166,866.45 0.60
Truist Financial Corp 165,306.93 0.60
Unilever PLC 100,434.80 0.36
United States Treasury 11,976,000.57 43.22
UnitedHealth Group Inc 196,135.68 0.71
Verizon Master Trust 150,643.35 0.54
Volkswagen Auto Loan Enhanced Trust 196,627.96 0.71
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 5 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Issuer Summary For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Issuer of Holdings Percent
Market Value
Walmart Inc 45,185.62 0.16
Wells Fargo & Co 393,108.08 1.42
WF Card Issuance Trust 125,571.50 0.45
Total $27,717,959.47 100.00%
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 6 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Par
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 09/15/2023 4.625% 09/15/2026
91282CHY0 50,000.00 AA+ Aa1 10/03/23 10/05/23 49,648.44 4.88 678.67 49,850.10 50,402.35

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 10/16/2023 4.625% 10/15/2026
91282CJC6 825,000.00 AA+ Aa1 11/07/23 11/10/23 823,098.64 4.71 8,027.41 824,132.35 832,347.45

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 10/31/2024 4.125% 10/31/2026
91282CLS8 250,000.00 AA+ Aa1 11/01/24 11/04/24 249,833.98 4.16 1,737.43 249,887.57 250,683.50

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 11/15/2023 4.625% 11/15/2026
91282CJK8 375,000.00 AA+ Aa1 12/06/23 12/08/23 377,973.63 4.33 2,215.10 376,435.74 378,618.00

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 12/15/2023 4.375% 12/15/2026
91282CJP7 550,000.00 AA+ Aa1 01/04/24 01/08/24 553,480.47 4.14 1,051.91 551,779.51 554,060.65

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 01/16/2024 4.000% 01/15/2027
91282CJT9 725,000.00 AA+ Aa1 02/01/24 02/06/24 725,538.09 3.97 13,378.45 725,290.40 726,699.40

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 02/15/2024 4.125% 02/15/2027
91282CKA8 125,000.00 AA+ Aa1 02/13/24 02/16/24 124,072.27 4.39 1,937.15 124,482.74 125,590.88

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 02/15/2024 4.125% 02/15/2027
91282CKA8 750,000.00 AA+ Aa1 03/07/24 03/11/24 746,396.48 4.30 11,622.93 747,949.18 753,545.25

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 03/15/2024 4.250% 03/15/2027
91282CKE0 325,000.00 AA+ Aa1 04/10/24 04/12/24 320,543.95 4.76 4,053.67 322,326.98 327,450.18

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 04/15/2024 4.500% 04/15/2027
91282CKJ9 300,000.00 AA+ Aa1 05/08/24 05/10/24 298,675.78 4.66 2,840.16 299,171.28 303,714.90

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 05/15/2024 4.500% 05/15/2027
91282CKR1 100,000.00 AA+ Aa1 06/25/24 06/26/24 99,972.66 4.51 574.73 99,981.89 101,312.50

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 05/15/2024 4.500% 05/15/2027
91282CKR1 700,000.00 AA+ Aa1 06/06/24 06/10/24 699,726.56 4.51 4,023.10 699,822.30 709,187.50

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 06/17/2024 4.625% 06/15/2027
91282CKV2 150,000.00 AA+ Aa1 06/27/24 06/28/24 150,521.48 4.50 303.28 150,351.77 152,478.45

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 06/17/2024 4.625% 06/15/2027
91282CKV2 275,000.00 AA+ Aa1 07/10/24 07/11/24 276,654.30 4.40 556.01 276,128.61 279,543.83 PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 7 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Par
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 06/17/2024 4.625% 06/15/2027
91282CKV2 300,000.00 AA+ Aa1 07/08/24 07/09/24 301,828.13 4.40 606.56 301,244.60 304,956.90

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 06/17/2024 4.625% 06/15/2027
91282CKV2 375,000.00 AA+ Aa1 07/01/24 07/05/24 375,424.80 4.58 758.20 375,288.68 381,196.13

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 07/15/2024 4.375% 07/15/2027
91282CKZ3 150,000.00 AA+ Aa1 08/08/24 08/09/24 152,009.77 3.89 3,027.45 151,421.55 151,851.60

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 08/15/2024 3.750% 08/15/2027
91282CLG4 475,000.00 AA+ Aa1 09/05/24 09/06/24 476,781.25 3.61 6,691.99 476,306.21 475,167.20

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 08/15/2024 3.750% 08/15/2027
91282CLG4 800,000.00 AA+ Aa1 09/04/24 09/05/24 802,562.50 3.63 11,270.72 801,876.84 800,281.60

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 09/16/2024 3.375% 09/15/2027
91282CLL3 475,000.00 AA+ Aa1 10/01/24 10/04/24 473,088.87 3.52 4,704.82 473,551.68 471,660.27

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 09/16/2024 3.375% 09/15/2027
91282CLL3 500,000.00 AA+ Aa1 10/02/24 10/04/24 497,656.25 3.54 4,952.45 498,223.50 496,484.50

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 10/15/2024 3.875% 10/15/2027
91282CLQ2 50,000.00 AA+ Aa1 10/31/24 11/04/24 49,654.30 4.13 407.62 49,727.86 50,167.95

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 11/15/2024 4.125% 11/15/2027
91282CLX7 150,000.00 AA+ Aa1 12/05/24 12/06/24 150,023.44 4.12 790.25 150,019.13 151,371.15

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 11/15/2024 4.125% 11/15/2027
91282CLX7 300,000.00 AA+ Aa1 12/02/24 12/04/24 300,058.59 4.12 1,580.50 300,048.33 302,742.30

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 11/15/2024 4.125% 11/15/2027
91282CLX7 300,000.00 AA+ Aa1 12/03/24 12/05/24 300,164.06 4.10 1,580.50 300,134.27 302,742.30

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 12/16/2024 4.000% 12/15/2027
91282CMB4 525,000.00 AA+ Aa1 01/02/25 01/06/25 520,898.44 4.28 918.03 521,538.67 528,670.80

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 01/15/2025 4.250% 01/15/2028
91282CMF5 525,000.00 AA+ Aa1 02/03/25 02/06/25 524,282.23 4.30 10,293.34 524,375.11 531,705.83

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 02/18/2025 4.250% 02/15/2028
91282CMN8 200,000.00 AA+ Aa1 03/03/25 03/05/25 201,593.75 3.96 3,193.37 201,426.34 202,671.80 PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 8 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Par
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 03/17/2025 3.875% 03/15/2028
91282CMS7 425,000.00 AA+ Aa1 04/09/25 04/11/25 423,671.88 3.99 4,833.22 423,766.95 426,992.40

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 05/15/2025 3.750% 05/15/2028
91282CND9 150,000.00 AA+ Aa1 05/12/25 05/15/25 149,068.36 3.97 718.41 149,106.32 150,199.20

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 05/15/2025 3.750% 05/15/2028
91282CND9 200,000.00 AA+ Aa1 06/06/25 06/10/25 199,140.63 3.91 957.88 199,157.05 200,265.60

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 05/15/2025 3.750% 05/15/2028
91282CND9 350,000.00 AA+ Aa1 06/05/25 06/09/25 348,632.81 3.89 1,676.29 348,660.17 350,464.80

US TREASURY N/B
DTD 06/16/2025 3.875% 06/15/2028
91282CNH0 150,000.00 AA+ Aa1 06/11/25 06/16/25 149,443.36 4.01 254.10 149,450.73 150,773.40 Security Type Sub-Total 11,900,000.00 11,892,120.15 4.16 112,215.70 11,892,914.41 11,976,000.57 Municipal Bond / Note

LOS ANGELES UNIF SD-B
DTD 05/13/2025 4.382% 07/01/2027
544647KX7 115,000.00 NR Aa2 04/24/25 05/13/25 115,000.00 4.38 671.91 115,000.00 116,025.46 Security Type Sub-Total 115,000.00 115,000.00 4.38 671.91 115,000.00 116,025.46 Federal Agency Commercial Mortgage-Backed Security
FHMS K051 A2
DTD 12/01/2015 3.308% 09/01/2025
3137BM7C4 96,099.41 AA+ Aa1 08/05/22 08/10/22 95,401.19 3.55 264.91 96,047.27 95,680.03 FHMS K054 A2
DTD 04/01/2016 2.745% 01/01/2026
3137BNGT5 112,223.03 AA+ Aa1 03/01/23 03/06/23 105,682.53 4.90 256.71 110,938.85 111,019.66 FNA 2016-M3 A2
DTD 03/01/2016 2.702% 02/01/2026
3136ARTE8 121,242.72 AA+ Aa1 10/06/22 10/12/22 114,384.92 4.51 273.00 119,919.78 119,702.45 FHMS K736 A2
DTD 09/01/2019 2.282% 07/01/2026
3137FNWX4 111,559.65 AA+ Aa1 10/05/23 10/11/23 103,510.80 5.05 212.15 108,481.20 109,393.49 FHMS K057 A2
DTD 09/01/2016 2.570% 07/01/2026
3137BRQJ7 118,798.83 AA+ Aa1 03/02/23 03/07/23 110,473.62 4.81 254.43 116,174.13 116,786.85 PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 9 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Par
Federal Agency Commercial Mortgage-Backed Security
FHMS K057 A2
DTD 09/01/2016 2.570% 07/01/2026
3137BRQJ7 118,798.83 AA+ Aa1 05/18/23 05/23/23 112,960.98 4.22 254.43 116,835.84 116,786.85 FHMS K058 A2
DTD 11/01/2016 2.653% 08/01/2026
3137BSP72 175,000.00 AA+ Aa1 04/12/23 04/17/23 167,036.13 4.10 386.90 172,270.66 171,760.40 FHMS K059 A2
DTD 11/01/2016 3.120% 09/01/2026
3137BSRE5 125,000.00 AA+ Aa1 11/15/23 11/20/23 118,393.55 5.11 325.00 121,997.62 123,252.00 FHMS K061 A2
DTD 01/01/2017 3.347% 11/01/2026
3137BTUM1 81,844.09 AA+ Aa1 05/19/23 05/24/23 79,324.83 4.29 228.28 80,837.19 80,876.86 FHMS K063 A2
DTD 03/01/2017 3.430% 01/01/2027
3137BVZ82 190,000.00 AA+ Aa1 10/17/23 10/20/23 179,134.38 5.33 543.08 184,784.50 187,726.27 FNA 2024-M6 A2
DTD 11/01/2024 3.005% 07/01/2027
3136BTGM9 200,000.00 AA+ Aa1 12/12/24 12/17/24 193,000.00 4.32 500.75 194,374.65 195,633.40 FHMS K067 A2
DTD 09/01/2017 3.194% 07/01/2027
3137FAWS3 205,000.00 AA+ Aa1 06/04/25 06/09/25 200,659.77 4.23 545.64 200,778.35 201,336.65 FHMS K068 A2
DTD 10/01/2017 3.244% 08/01/2027
3137FBBX3 125,000.00 AA+ Aa1 06/17/24 06/21/24 119,248.05 4.80 337.92 121,003.63 122,828.13 FHMS K069 A2
DTD 11/01/2017 3.187% 09/01/2027
3137FBU79 93,229.76 AA+ Aa1 06/17/24 06/21/24 88,721.23 4.78 247.60 90,059.76 91,492.80 FHMS K739 A2
DTD 11/01/2020 1.336% 09/01/2027
3137F64P9 222,506.46 AA+ Aa1 10/30/24 11/04/24 205,427.35 4.14 247.72 209,115.74 211,017.12 FHMS K074 A2
DTD 03/01/2018 3.600% 01/01/2028
3137F4D41 135,000.00 AA+ Aa1 02/27/25 03/04/25 132,104.88 4.39 405.00 132,410.60 133,450.88 FHMS K075 A2
DTD 04/01/2018 3.650% 02/01/2028
3137F4X72 120,000.00 AA+ Aa1 05/21/25 05/27/25 117,735.94 4.40 365.00 117,745.02 118,728.48 FHMS K075 A2
DTD 04/01/2018 3.650% 02/01/2028
3137F4X72 140,000.00 AA+ Aa1 03/05/25 03/10/25 137,555.47 4.28 425.83 137,794.96 138,516.56 FHMS K076 A2
DTD 05/01/2018 3.900% 04/01/2028
3137FEZU7 225,000.00 AA+ Aa1 03/04/25 03/07/25 222,521.48 4.27 731.25 222,756.42 223,978.28 PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 10 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Par
Federal Agency Commercial Mortgage-Backed Security
FHMS K077 A2
DTD 06/01/2018 3.850% 05/01/2028
3137FG6X8 140,000.00 AA+ Aa1 06/06/25 06/11/25 138,036.72 4.35 449.17 138,071.35 139,185.90 FHMS K743 A2
DTD 06/01/2021 1.770% 05/01/2028
3137H14B9 200,000.00 AA+ Aa1 05/22/25 05/28/25 185,992.19 4.32 295.00 186,029.62 187,776.40 FHMS K079 A2
DTD 08/01/2018 3.926% 06/01/2028
3137FGZT5 240,000.00 AA+ Aa1 04/16/25 04/22/25 237,609.38 4.26 785.20 237,744.26 239,227.68 Security Type Sub-Total 3,296,302.77 3,164,915.39 4.45 8,334.97 3,216,171.40 3,236,157.14 Corporate Note

NATIONAL RURAL UTIL COOP
DTD 10/31/2022 5.450% 10/30/2025
63743HFF4 25,000.00 A- A2 10/20/22 10/31/22 24,966.50 5.50 230.87 24,996.31 25,075.20

COOPERAT RABOBANK UA/NY
DTD 01/09/2024 4.850% 01/09/2026
21688ABA9 390,000.00 A+ Aa2 01/02/24 01/09/24 389,851.80 4.87 9,037.17 389,960.08 390,749.97

NATIONAL RURAL UTIL COOP (CALLABLE)
DTD 02/09/2023 4.450% 03/13/2026
63743HFH0 20,000.00 A- A2 02/02/23 02/09/23 19,985.80 4.47 267.00 19,996.79 20,009.34

WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
DTD 04/22/2016 3.000% 04/22/2026
949746RW3 100,000.00 BBB+ A1 03/28/23 03/30/23 94,080.00 5.11 575.00 98,436.73 98,928.60

CHARLES SCHWAB CORP (CALLABLE)
DTD 05/13/2021 1.150% 05/13/2026
808513BR5 100,000.00 A- A2 08/01/24 08/02/24 93,667.00 4.91 153.33 96,850.84 97,263.60

CATERPILLAR FINL SERVICE
DTD 05/15/2023 4.350% 05/15/2026
14913UAA8 75,000.00 A A2 05/08/23 05/15/23 74,964.75 4.37 416.88 74,989.75 75,037.35

AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE
DTD 07/07/2023 5.250% 07/07/2026
02665WEK3 55,000.00 A- A3 07/05/23 07/07/23 54,932.35 5.29 1,395.63 54,977.07 55,448.31

TRUIST FINANCIAL CORP (CALLABLE)
DTD 07/28/2022 4.260% 07/28/2026
89788MAH5 80,000.00 A- Baa1 07/25/22 07/28/22 80,000.00 4.26 1,448.40 80,000.00 79,963.36

TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP
DTD 08/09/2024 4.550% 08/07/2026
89236TMJ1 30,000.00 A+ A1 08/06/24 08/09/24 29,981.40 4.58 546.00 29,989.57 30,102.27

HOME DEPOT INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 12/04/2023 4.950% 09/30/2026
437076CV2 55,000.00 A A2 11/27/23 12/04/23 54,879.55 5.04 688.19 54,944.82 55,541.20 PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 11 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Par
Corporate Note

TRUIST FINANCIAL CORP (CALLABLE)
DTD 10/28/2022 5.900% 10/28/2026
89788MAJ1 85,000.00 A- Baa1 10/26/22 10/28/22 85,000.00 5.90 877.63 85,000.00 85,343.57

STATE STREET CORP (CALLABLE)
DTD 11/04/2022 5.751% 11/04/2026
857477BX0 25,000.00 A Aa3 11/01/22 11/04/22 25,000.00 5.75 227.64 25,000.00 25,110.38

AMERICAN EXPRESS CO (CALLABLE)
DTD 11/04/2021 1.650% 11/04/2026
025816CM9 100,000.00 A- A2 06/18/24 06/20/24 92,036.00 5.26 261.25 95,377.92 96,723.00

NATIONAL RURAL UTIL COOP (CALLABLE)
DTD 11/02/2023 5.600% 11/13/2026
63743HFK3 40,000.00 A- A2 10/30/23 11/02/23 39,986.00 5.61 298.67 39,993.41 40,670.80

TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP
DTD 11/20/2023 5.400% 11/20/2026
89236TLD5 100,000.00 A+ A1 11/15/23 11/20/23 99,910.00 5.43 615.00 99,956.67 101,623.10

PACCAR FINANCIAL CORP
DTD 11/25/2024 4.500% 11/25/2026
69371RT55 35,000.00 A+ A1 11/18/24 11/25/24 34,970.25 4.54 157.50 34,978.93 35,235.24

WELLS FARGO BANK NA (CALLABLE)
DTD 12/11/2023 5.254% 12/11/2026
94988J6F9 290,000.00 A+ Aa2 12/04/23 12/11/23 290,000.00 5.25 846.48 290,000.00 294,179.48

CATERPILLAR FINL SERVICE
DTD 01/08/2024 4.500% 01/08/2027
14913UAE0 95,000.00 A A2 01/02/24 01/08/24 94,897.40 4.54 2,054.38 94,946.33 95,555.18

PNC FINANCIAL SERVICES (CALLABLE)
DTD 01/24/2023 4.758% 01/26/2027
693475BL8 15,000.00 A- A3 01/19/23 01/24/23 15,000.00 4.76 307.29 15,000.00 15,022.01

TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 02/08/2024 4.600% 02/08/2027
882508CE2 115,000.00 A+ Aa3 02/05/24 02/08/24 114,926.40 4.62 2,101.31 114,959.61 116,036.15

ELI LILLY & CO (CALLABLE)
DTD 02/09/2024 4.500% 02/09/2027
532457CJ5 130,000.00 A+ Aa3 02/07/24 02/09/24 129,931.10 4.52 2,307.50 129,962.18 131,043.51

BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB CO (CALLABLE)
DTD 02/22/2024 4.900% 02/22/2027
110122EE4 40,000.00 A A2 02/14/24 02/22/24 39,956.80 4.94 702.33 39,975.64 40,506.64

CISCO SYSTEMS INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 02/26/2024 4.800% 02/26/2027
17275RBQ4 160,000.00 AA- A1 02/21/24 02/26/24 159,792.00 4.85 2,666.67 159,882.01 161,939.36

CHEVRON USA INC
DTD 02/26/2025 4.405% 02/26/2027
166756AZ9 175,000.00 AA- Aa2 02/24/25 02/26/25 175,000.00 4.41 2,676.65 175,000.00 176,360.45 PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 12 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Par
Corporate Note

CHARLES SCHWAB CORP (CALLABLE)
DTD 03/02/2017 3.200% 03/02/2027
808513AQ8 110,000.00 A- A2 04/23/25 04/24/25 107,500.80 4.49 1,163.56 107,742.57 108,320.52

JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP
DTD 03/07/2024 4.850% 03/05/2027
24422EXM6 110,000.00 A A1 03/04/24 03/07/24 109,897.70 4.88 1,719.06 109,941.02 111,358.94

AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE
DTD 03/13/2024 4.900% 03/12/2027
02665WFD8 80,000.00 A- A3 03/11/24 03/13/24 79,956.00 4.92 1,186.89 79,974.40 80,702.88

STATE STREET CORP (CALLABLE)
DTD 03/18/2024 4.993% 03/18/2027
857477CL5 70,000.00 A Aa3 03/13/24 03/18/24 70,000.00 4.99 999.99 70,000.00 71,005.20

HORMEL FOODS CORP (CALLABLE)
DTD 03/08/2024 4.800% 03/30/2027
440452AK6 55,000.00 A- A1 03/05/24 03/08/24 54,946.65 4.84 667.33 54,973.25 55,553.69

HORMEL FOODS CORP (CALLABLE)
DTD 03/08/2024 4.800% 03/30/2027
440452AK6 55,000.00 A- A1 03/05/24 03/08/24 54,946.65 4.84 667.33 54,973.25 55,553.69

ADOBE INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 04/04/2024 4.850% 04/04/2027
00724PAE9 80,000.00 A+ A1 04/01/24 04/04/24 79,960.00 4.87 937.67 79,975.90 81,152.96

UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 03/21/2024 4.600% 04/15/2027
91324PEY4 195,000.00 A+ A2 03/19/24 03/21/24 193,640.85 4.85 1,893.67 194,183.76 196,135.68

WALMART INC
DTD 04/28/2025 4.100% 04/28/2027
931142FL2 45,000.00 AA Aa2 04/23/25 04/28/25 44,994.15 4.11 322.88 44,994.68 45,185.62

NATIONAL RURAL UTIL COOP (CALLABLE)
DTD 05/10/2024 5.100% 05/06/2027
63743HFR8 75,000.00 A- A2 05/07/24 05/10/24 74,953.50 5.12 584.38 74,970.50 76,178.03

GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA (CALLABLE)
DTD 05/21/2024 5.414% 05/21/2027
38151LAG5 80,000.00 A+ A1 05/15/24 05/21/24 80,000.00 5.41 481.24 80,000.00 80,656.32

HOME DEPOT INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 06/25/2024 4.875% 06/25/2027
437076DB5 40,000.00 A A2 06/17/24 06/25/24 39,867.60 5.00 32.50 39,910.36 40,623.28

BLACKROCK FUNDING INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 07/26/2024 4.600% 07/26/2027
09290DAH4 130,000.00 AA- Aa3 07/17/24 07/26/24 129,996.10 4.60 2,574.72 129,997.46 131,585.22

HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL (CALLABLE)
DTD 08/01/2024 4.650% 07/30/2027
438516CX2 130,000.00 A A2 07/29/24 08/01/24 129,996.10 4.65 2,535.54 129,997.45 131,352.65 PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 13 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Par
Corporate Note

PACCAR FINANCIAL CORP
DTD 08/06/2024 4.450% 08/06/2027
69371RT30 70,000.00 A+ A1 08/01/24 08/06/24 69,906.90 4.50 1,254.65 69,933.77 70,802.27

UNILEVER CAPITAL CORP (CALLABLE)
DTD 08/12/2024 4.250% 08/12/2027
904764BU0 100,000.00 A+ A1 08/08/24 08/12/24 99,869.00 4.30 1,640.97 99,906.03 100,434.80 AMAZON.COM INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 06/06/2018 3.150% 08/22/2027
023135BC9 140,000.00 AA A1 04/09/25 04/10/25 136,409.00 4.30 1,580.25 136,735.25 137,706.80

HOME DEPOT INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 09/14/2017 2.800% 09/14/2027
437076BT8 100,000.00 A A2 04/24/25 04/25/25 96,766.00 4.24 832.22 97,003.89 97,412.30

ACCENTURE CAPITAL INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 10/04/2024 3.900% 10/04/2027
00440KAA1 35,000.00 AA- Aa3 10/01/24 10/04/24 34,954.85 3.95 329.88 34,965.56 34,891.19

TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP
DTD 10/10/2024 4.350% 10/08/2027
89236TMS1 35,000.00 A+ A1 10/07/24 10/10/24 34,986.35 4.36 351.02 34,989.53 35,141.08

AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE
DTD 10/23/2024 4.450% 10/22/2027
02665WFT3 65,000.00 A- A3 10/21/24 10/23/24 64,955.15 4.47 554.40 64,965.04 65,180.83

JPMORGAN CHASE & CO (CALLABLE)
DTD 10/23/2023 6.070% 10/22/2027
46647PDW3 120,000.00 A A1 10/16/23 10/23/23 120,000.00 6.07 1,396.10 120,000.00 122,595.60

APPLE INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 11/13/2017 3.000% 11/13/2027
037833DK3 140,000.00 AA+ Aaa 04/09/25 04/10/25 135,685.20 4.27 560.00 136,042.16 137,268.46

BP CAP MARKETS AMERICA (CALLABLE)
DTD 05/17/2024 5.017% 11/17/2027
10373QBY5 140,000.00 A- A1 05/15/24 05/17/24 140,000.00 5.02 858.46 140,000.00 142,550.80

MASTERCARD INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 09/05/2024 4.100% 01/15/2028
57636QBA1 60,000.00 A+ Aa3 09/03/24 09/05/24 59,967.00 4.12 1,134.33 59,974.79 60,253.56

ADOBE INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 01/17/2025 4.750% 01/17/2028
00724PAH2 120,000.00 A+ A1 01/14/25 01/17/25 119,936.40 4.77 2,596.67 119,945.70 122,099.28

COOPERAT RABOBANK UA/NY
DTD 01/21/2025 4.883% 01/21/2028
21688ABK7 275,000.00 A+ Aa2 01/13/25 01/21/25 275,000.00 4.88 5,968.11 275,000.00 280,777.20

PEPSICO INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 02/07/2025 4.450% 02/07/2028
713448GA0 200,000.00 A+ A1 02/05/25 02/07/25 199,916.00 4.47 3,560.00 199,926.66 202,458.80 PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 14 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Par
Corporate Note

CISCO SYSTEMS INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 02/24/2025 4.550% 02/24/2028
17275RBW1 50,000.00 AA- A1 02/19/25 02/24/25 49,946.00 4.59 802.57 49,952.05 50,653.75

HERSHEY COMPANY (CALLABLE)
DTD 02/24/2025 4.550% 02/24/2028
427866BK3 55,000.00 A A1 02/19/25 02/24/25 54,962.05 4.57 882.83 54,966.37 55,694.60

JOHNSON & JOHNSON (CALLABLE)
DTD 02/20/2025 4.550% 03/01/2028
478160DH4 40,000.00 AAA Aaa 02/18/25 02/20/25 39,976.80 4.57 662.28 39,979.44 40,671.16

MASTERCARD INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 02/27/2025 4.550% 03/15/2028
57636QBF0 70,000.00 A+ Aa3 02/18/25 02/27/25 69,946.80 4.58 1,097.06 69,952.62 70,956.69

ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES (CALLABLE)
DTD 03/24/2025 4.319% 03/24/2028
007903BJ5 100,000.00 A A2 03/10/25 03/24/25 100,000.00 4.32 1,163.73 100,000.00 100,732.50

JPMORGAN CHASE & CO (CALLABLE)
DTD 04/22/2024 5.571% 04/22/2028
46647PEE2 100,000.00 A A1 04/15/24 04/22/24 100,000.00 5.57 1,067.78 100,000.00 102,065.40

GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 04/23/2025 4.937% 04/23/2028
38141GC77 70,000.00 BBB+ A2 04/15/25 04/23/25 70,000.00 4.94 652.78 70,000.00 70,540.33

STATE STREET CORP (CALLABLE)
DTD 04/24/2025 4.543% 04/24/2028
857477DA8 60,000.00 A Aa3 04/22/25 04/24/25 60,000.00 4.54 507.30 60,000.00 60,377.58 CINTAS CORPORATION NO. 2 (CALLABLE)
DTD 05/02/2025 4.200% 05/01/2028
17252MAR1 85,000.00 A- A3 04/28/25 05/02/25 84,891.20 4.25 585.08 84,896.91 85,190.49

CITIGROUP INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 05/07/2025 4.643% 05/07/2028
172967PZ8 145,000.00 BBB+ A3 05/01/25 05/07/25 145,000.00 4.64 1,009.85 145,000.00 145,374.83

CUMMINS INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 05/09/2025 4.250% 05/09/2028
231021AY2 15,000.00 A A2 05/06/25 05/09/25 14,989.50 4.28 92.08 14,989.98 15,066.71

BANK OF NY MELLON CORP (CALLABLE)
DTD 06/10/2025 4.441% 06/09/2028
06406RCH8 60,000.00 A Aa3 06/03/25 06/10/25 60,000.00 4.44 155.44 60,000.00 60,310.20

AIR PRODUCTS & CHEMICALS (CALLABLE)
DTD 06/11/2025 4.300% 06/11/2028
009158BN5 140,000.00 A A2 06/09/25 06/11/25 139,906.20 4.32 334.44 139,908.05 140,690.76

TARGET CORP (CALLABLE)
DTD 06/10/2025 4.350% 06/15/2028
87612EBU9 35,000.00 A A2 06/05/25 06/10/25 34,999.65 4.35 88.81 34,999.71 35,207.34 PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 15 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Par
Corporate Note

ANALOG DEVICES INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 06/16/2025 4.250% 06/15/2028
032654BD6 150,000.00 A- A2 06/12/25 06/16/25 149,838.00 4.29 265.63 149,840.48 150,662.10

AMERICAN EXPRESS CO (CALLABLE)
DTD 07/26/2024 5.043% 07/26/2028
025816DV8 20,000.00 A- A2 07/22/24 07/26/24 20,000.00 5.04 434.26 20,000.00 20,272.94

BANK OF AMERICA CORP (CALLABLE)
DTD 01/24/2025 4.979% 01/24/2029
06051GMK2 230,000.00 A- A1 01/17/25 01/24/25 230,000.00 4.98 4,994.21 230,000.00 233,186.19

MORGAN STANLEY (CALLABLE)
DTD 04/17/2025 4.994% 04/12/2029
61747YFY6 75,000.00 A- A1 04/14/25 04/17/25 75,000.00 4.99 769.91 75,000.00 76,078.65

AMERICAN EXPRESS CO (CALLABLE)
DTD 04/25/2025 4.731% 04/25/2029
025816ED7 40,000.00 A- A2 04/22/25 04/25/25 40,063.20 4.69 346.94 40,059.60 40,444.68

AMERICAN EXPRESS CO (CALLABLE)
DTD 04/25/2025 4.731% 04/25/2029
025816ED7 50,000.00 A- A2 04/21/25 04/25/25 50,000.00 4.73 433.68 50,000.00 50,555.85 Security Type Sub-Total 6,780,000.00 6,742,242.45 4.78 85,589.25 6,755,742.85 6,823,138.47 Certificate of Deposit

NATIXIS NY BRANCH
DTD 09/20/2023 5.610% 09/18/2026
63873QP65 200,000.00 A+ A1 09/18/23 09/20/23 200,000.00 5.61 8,913.67 200,000.00 203,533.60 Security Type Sub-Total 200,000.00 200,000.00 5.61 8,913.67 200,000.00 203,533.60 Asset-Backed Security
BMWOT 2022-A A3
DTD 05/18/2022 3.210% 08/25/2026
05602RAD3 6,108.91 AAA Aaa 05/10/22 05/18/22 6,108.59 3.21 3.27 6,108.82 6,097.81 COPAR 2021-1 A3
DTD 10/27/2021 0.770% 09/15/2026
14044CAC6 898.29 AAA Aaa 10/19/21 10/27/21 898.28 0.77 0.31 898.29 896.85 GMCAR 2021-4 A3
DTD 10/21/2021 0.680% 09/16/2026
362554AC1 151.23 AAA Aaa 10/13/21 10/21/21 151.23 0.68 0.04 151.23 150.99 ALLYA 2022-1 A3
DTD 05/18/2022 3.310% 11/15/2026
02008JAC0 16,546.21 AAA Aaa 05/10/22 05/18/22 16,543.01 3.31 24.34 16,545.23 16,522.86 PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 16 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Par
Asset-Backed Security
GMCAR 2022-1 A3
DTD 01/19/2022 1.260% 11/16/2026
380146AC4 1,693.44 AAA NR 01/11/22 01/19/22 1,693.29 1.26 0.89 1,693.39 1,691.03 HART 2022-B A3
DTD 07/20/2022 3.720% 11/16/2026
44918MAD2 14,318.37 AAA NR 07/12/22 07/20/22 14,318.36 3.72 23.67 14,318.37 14,300.69 HDMOT 2022-A A3
DTD 04/20/2022 3.060% 02/15/2027
41284YAD8 9,577.83 AAA Aaa 04/12/22 04/20/22 9,576.24 3.06 13.03 9,577.29 9,565.47 CARMX 2022-2 A3
DTD 04/28/2022 3.490% 02/16/2027
14317HAC5 17,665.95 AAA Aaa 04/21/22 04/28/22 17,663.27 3.49 27.40 17,665.04 17,625.05 TAOT 2022-C A3
DTD 08/16/2022 3.760% 04/15/2027
89231CAD9 20,209.33 AAA NR 08/08/22 08/16/22 20,205.95 3.76 33.77 20,208.03 20,148.32 COPAR 2022-1 A3
DTD 05/04/2022 3.170% 04/15/2027
14043QAC6 20,733.20 AAA NR 04/26/22 05/04/22 20,728.67 3.17 29.21 20,731.56 20,641.35 HART 2023-A A3
DTD 04/12/2023 4.580% 04/15/2027
448979AD6 41,553.96 AAA NR 04/04/23 04/12/23 41,549.90 4.58 84.59 41,552.15 41,562.06 CARMX 2022-3 A3
DTD 07/20/2022 3.970% 04/15/2027
14318MAD1 46,120.05 AAA NR 07/12/22 07/20/22 46,118.97 3.97 81.38 46,119.64 46,018.31 GMCAR 2022-3 A3
DTD 07/13/2022 3.640% 04/16/2027
36265WAD5 21,657.21 NR Aaa 07/06/22 07/13/22 21,657.06 3.64 32.85 21,657.15 21,615.39 COPAR 2022-2 A3
DTD 08/10/2022 3.660% 05/17/2027
14043GAD6 28,939.05 AAA Aaa 08/02/22 08/10/22 28,936.98 3.66 47.07 28,938.23 28,843.26 ALLYA 2022-2 A3
DTD 10/12/2022 4.760% 05/17/2027
02008MAC3 72,089.58 AAA Aaa 10/04/22 10/12/22 72,088.68 4.76 152.51 72,089.21 72,115.17 CARMX 2022-4 A3
DTD 10/31/2022 5.340% 08/16/2027
14318UAD3 69,609.23 AAA NR 10/26/22 10/31/22 69,592.91 5.35 165.21 69,601.99 69,830.31 MBART 2022-1 A3
DTD 11/22/2022 5.210% 08/16/2027
58768PAC8 81,513.11 AAA Aaa 11/15/22 11/22/22 81,496.98 5.21 188.75 81,505.87 81,763.27 GMCAR 2022-4 A3
DTD 10/12/2022 4.820% 08/16/2027
36265QAD8 95,091.86 AAA NR 10/04/22 10/12/22 95,076.27 4.82 190.98 95,085.02 95,192.84 PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 17 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Par
Asset-Backed Security
TAOT 2023-A A3
DTD 01/30/2023 4.630% 09/15/2027
891940AC2 50,190.61 AAA NR 01/24/23 01/30/23 50,190.59 4.63 103.28 50,190.60 50,211.79 MBART 2023-1 A3
DTD 01/25/2023 4.510% 11/15/2027
58770AAC7 27,646.30 AAA NR 01/18/23 01/25/23 27,642.99 4.51 55.42 27,644.67 27,644.81 NAROT 2023-A A3
DTD 04/26/2023 4.910% 11/15/2027
65480WAD3 109,796.81 NR Aaa 04/18/23 04/26/23 109,777.40 4.91 239.60 109,786.70 110,022.44 HDMOT 2023-A A3
DTD 02/23/2023 5.050% 12/15/2027
41285JAD0 50,135.09 NR Aaa 02/13/23 02/23/23 50,130.04 5.05 112.53 50,132.51 50,236.01 TAOT 2023-B A3
DTD 05/23/2023 4.710% 02/15/2028
891941AD8 84,466.83 NR Aaa 05/16/23 05/23/23 84,462.11 4.71 176.82 84,464.21 84,618.45 BMWOT 2023-A A3
DTD 07/18/2023 5.470% 02/25/2028
05592XAD2 33,858.78 AAA NR 07/11/23 07/18/23 33,852.78 5.47 30.87 33,855.33 34,059.16 FORDO 2023-B A3
DTD 06/26/2023 5.230% 05/15/2028
344930AD4 68,873.16 AAA NR 06/21/23 06/26/23 68,872.23 5.23 160.09 68,872.61 69,247.55 ALLYA 2023-1 A3
DTD 07/19/2023 5.460% 05/15/2028
02007WAC2 76,775.89 NR Aaa 07/11/23 07/19/23 76,762.80 5.48 186.31 76,768.09 77,313.24 BMWLT 2025-1 A3
DTD 06/10/2025 4.430% 06/26/2028
096912AD2 55,000.00 AAA NR 06/03/25 06/10/25 54,998.79 4.43 142.13 54,998.93 55,308.61 FITAT 2023-1 A3
DTD 08/23/2023 5.530% 08/15/2028
31680EAD3 161,224.77 AAA Aaa 08/15/23 08/23/23 161,214.78 5.53 396.25 161,218.50 162,479.10 CHAIT 2023-A1 A
DTD 09/15/2023 5.160% 09/15/2028
161571HT4 100,000.00 AAA NR 09/07/23 09/15/23 99,972.28 5.17 229.33 99,981.43 101,148.50 BACCT 2023-A2 A2
DTD 12/14/2023 4.980% 11/15/2028
05522RDH8 70,000.00 NR Aaa 12/07/23 12/14/23 69,990.60 4.98 154.93 69,993.49 70,734.79 NAROT 2024-A A3
DTD 05/22/2024 5.280% 12/15/2028
65479UAD0 200,000.00 NR Aaa 05/14/24 05/22/24 199,981.32 5.28 469.33 199,985.50 202,268.40 CHAIT 2024-A1 A
DTD 01/31/2024 4.600% 01/16/2029
161571HV9 225,000.00 AAA NR 01/24/24 01/31/24 224,965.73 4.60 460.00 224,975.04 226,627.42 PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 18 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Par
Asset-Backed Security
TAOT 2024-C A3
DTD 07/30/2024 4.880% 03/15/2029
89237QAD2 80,000.00 AAA NR 07/23/24 07/30/24 79,999.95 4.88 173.51 80,000.00 80,752.08 HART 2024-B A3
DTD 07/24/2024 4.840% 03/15/2029
44934QAD3 90,000.00 AAA NR 07/16/24 07/24/24 89,986.42 4.84 193.60 89,989.03 90,909.54 HAROT 2024-3 A3
DTD 08/21/2024 4.570% 03/21/2029
43813YAC6 120,000.00 NR Aaa 08/09/24 08/21/24 119,981.15 4.57 152.33 119,984.42 120,642.96 GMCAR 2024-3 A3
DTD 07/10/2024 5.130% 04/16/2029
38013KAD2 100,000.00 AAA Aaa 07/02/24 07/10/24 99,984.61 5.13 213.75 99,987.62 101,013.40 HART 2024-C A3
DTD 10/16/2024 4.410% 05/15/2029
448976AD2 90,000.00 AAA NR 10/08/24 10/16/24 89,993.41 4.41 176.40 89,994.56 90,443.97 TAOT 2024-D A3
DTD 10/17/2024 4.400% 06/15/2029
89239TAD4 50,000.00 AAA Aaa 10/10/24 10/17/24 49,997.21 4.40 97.78 49,997.64 50,206.10 FORDO 2024-C A3
DTD 09/20/2024 4.070% 07/15/2029
34532UAD1 120,000.00 AAA NR 09/17/24 09/20/24 119,999.18 4.07 217.07 119,999.55 119,820.84 ALLYA 2024-2 A3
DTD 09/27/2024 4.140% 07/16/2029
02007NAC2 80,000.00 AAA NR 09/24/24 09/27/24 79,991.73 4.14 147.20 79,993.16 79,919.36 VALET 2024-1 A3
DTD 11/26/2024 4.630% 07/20/2029
92868RAD0 70,000.00 AAA Aaa 11/19/24 11/26/24 69,993.41 4.63 99.03 69,994.32 70,714.21 TAOT 2025-A A3
DTD 01/29/2025 4.640% 08/15/2029
89240JAD3 125,000.00 NR Aaa 01/22/25 01/29/25 124,994.99 4.64 257.78 124,995.79 126,139.75 GMCAR 2024-4 A3
DTD 10/16/2024 4.400% 08/16/2029
38014AAD3 70,000.00 AAA Aaa 10/08/24 10/16/24 69,986.52 4.40 128.33 69,988.40 70,194.81 VALET 2025-1 A3
DTD 03/25/2025 4.500% 08/20/2029
92868MAD1 125,000.00 NR Aaa 03/18/25 03/25/25 124,995.75 4.50 171.88 124,996.23 125,913.75 COMET 2024-A1 A
DTD 09/24/2024 3.920% 09/15/2029
14041NGE5 240,000.00 AAA NR 09/17/24 09/24/24 239,953.15 3.92 418.13 239,960.05 239,240.64 HAROT 2025-1 A3
DTD 02/11/2025 4.570% 09/21/2029
43814VAC1 195,000.00 AAA NR 02/04/25 02/11/25 194,993.99 4.57 247.54 194,994.77 196,862.83 PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 19 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Par
Asset-Backed Security
BMWOT 2025-A A3
DTD 02/12/2025 4.560% 09/25/2029
096924AD7 135,000.00 AAA Aaa 02/04/25 02/12/25 134,986.70 4.56 102.60 134,988.07 136,141.56 HAROT 2025-2 A3
DTD 05/08/2025 4.150% 10/15/2029
437921AD1 60,000.00 NR Aaa 04/29/25 05/08/25 59,993.30 4.15 110.67 59,993.65 60,111.48 WFCIT 2024-A2 A
DTD 10/24/2024 4.290% 10/15/2029
92970QAE5 125,000.00 AAA Aaa 10/17/24 10/24/24 124,981.43 4.29 238.33 124,983.87 125,571.50 HART 2025-A A3
DTD 03/12/2025 4.320% 10/15/2029
44935CAD3 170,000.00 AAA NR 03/04/25 03/12/25 169,974.92 4.32 326.40 169,976.75 170,637.50 TAOT 2025-B A3
DTD 04/30/2025 4.340% 11/15/2029
89231HAD8 100,000.00 AAA NR 04/24/25 04/30/25 99,994.27 4.34 192.89 99,994.83 100,602.70 AMXCA 2025-1 A
DTD 02/11/2025 4.560% 12/15/2029
02582JKM1 260,000.00 AAA NR 02/04/25 02/11/25 259,942.25 4.57 526.93 259,946.63 263,233.88 GMCAR 2025-1 A3
DTD 01/15/2025 4.620% 12/17/2029
362955AD8 85,000.00 NR Aaa 01/09/25 01/15/25 84,993.68 4.62 174.53 84,994.53 85,752.17 NAROT 2025-A A3
DTD 05/27/2025 4.490% 12/17/2029
65481GAD7 105,000.00 NR Aaa 05/20/25 05/27/25 104,979.84 4.49 209.53 104,980.51 106,042.55 MBART 2025-1 A3
DTD 01/23/2025 4.780% 12/17/2029
58773DAD6 120,000.00 NR Aaa 01/14/25 01/23/25 119,974.48 4.78 254.93 119,976.90 121,570.92 VZMT 2025-3 A1A
DTD 03/31/2025 4.510% 03/20/2030
92348KDY6 150,000.00 NR Aaa 03/25/25 03/31/25 149,993.55 4.51 206.71 149,994.27 150,643.35 AMXCA 2025-2 A
DTD 05/13/2025 4.280% 04/15/2030
02582JKP4 190,000.00 AAA NR 05/06/25 05/13/25 189,996.56 4.28 361.42 189,996.71 191,133.92 BACCT 2025-A1 A
DTD 06/12/2025 4.310% 05/15/2030
05522RDK1 125,000.00 AAA NR 06/05/25 06/12/25 124,999.52 4.31 284.34 125,000.00 125,827.63 CCCIT 2025-A1 A
DTD 06/26/2025 4.300% 06/21/2030
17305EHA6 275,000.00 AAA Aaa 06/18/25 06/26/25 274,925.39 4.31 164.24 274,925.63 276,559.53 Security Type Sub-Total 5,332,445.03 5,331,806.44 4.59 9,864.01 5,331,942.01 5,363,104.23 PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 20 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Detail of Securities Held For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Rating Rating Date Date Cost at Cost Interest Cost Value Security Type/Description S&P Moody's Trade Settle Original YTM Accrued Amortized Market Par
Managed Account Sub-Total 27,623,747.79 27,446,084.43 4.44 225,589.51 27,511,770.67 27,717,959.47 $27,623,747.79 $27,446,084.43 4.44% $225,589.51 $27,511,770.67 $27,717,959.47 $27,943,548.98
$225,589.51
Total Investments
Accrued Interest
Securities Sub-Total
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 21 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost at Mkt Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Duration
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
US TREASURY N/B 91282CHY0 50,000.00 BMO 100.80 50,402.35 753.91 552.25 DTD 09/15/2023 4.625% 09/15/2026

1.15 3.95
US TREASURY N/B 91282CJC6 825,000.00 MorganSt 100.89 832,347.45 9,248.81 8,215.10 DTD 10/16/2023 4.625% 10/15/2026

1.23 3.92
US TREASURY N/B 91282CLS8 250,000.00 MorganSt 100.27 250,683.50 849.52 795.93 DTD 10/31/2024 4.125% 10/31/2026

1.28 3.93
US TREASURY N/B 91282CJK8 375,000.00 BMO 100.96 378,618.00 644.37 2,182.26 DTD 11/15/2023 4.625% 11/15/2026

1.32 3.91
US TREASURY N/B 91282CJP7 550,000.00 MorganSt 100.74 554,060.65 580.18 2,281.14 DTD 12/15/2023 4.375% 12/15/2026

1.40 3.87
US TREASURY N/B 91282CJT9 725,000.00 MorganSt 100.23 726,699.40 1,161.31 1,409.00 DTD 01/16/2024 4.000% 01/15/2027

1.45 3.85
US TREASURY N/B 91282CKA8 125,000.00 RBC Capi 100.47 125,590.88 1,518.61 1,108.14 DTD 02/15/2024 4.125% 02/15/2027

1.54 3.84
US TREASURY N/B 91282CKA8 750,000.00 MorganSt 100.47 753,545.25 7,148.77 5,596.07 DTD 02/15/2024 4.125% 02/15/2027

1.54 3.84
US TREASURY N/B 91282CKE0 325,000.00 Nomura 100.75 327,450.18 6,906.23 5,123.20 DTD 03/15/2024 4.250% 03/15/2027

1.61 3.80
US TREASURY N/B 91282CKJ9 300,000.00 MorganSt 101.24 303,714.90 5,039.12 4,543.62 DTD 04/15/2024 4.500% 04/15/2027

1.69 3.80
US TREASURY N/B 91282CKR1 100,000.00 WellsFar 101.31 101,312.50 1,339.84 1,330.61 DTD 05/15/2024 4.500% 05/15/2027

1.77 3.79
US TREASURY N/B 91282CKR1 700,000.00 Nomura 101.31 709,187.50 9,460.94 9,365.20 DTD 05/15/2024 4.500% 05/15/2027

1.77 3.79
US TREASURY N/B 91282CKV2 150,000.00 MorganSt 101.65 152,478.45 1,956.97 2,126.68 DTD 06/17/2024 4.625% 06/15/2027

1.85 3.76
US TREASURY N/B 91282CKV2 275,000.00 JPMorgan 101.65 279,543.83 2,889.53 3,415.22 DTD 06/17/2024 4.625% 06/15/2027

1.85 3.76
US TREASURY N/B 91282CKV2 300,000.00 MorganSt 101.65 304,956.90 3,128.77 3,712.30 DTD 06/17/2024 4.625% 06/15/2027

1.85 3.76
US TREASURY N/B 91282CKV2 375,000.00 BOFAML 101.65 381,196.13 5,771.33 5,907.45 DTD 06/17/2024 4.625% 06/15/2027

1.85 3.76
US TREASURY N/B 91282CKZ3 150,000.00 JPMorgan 101.23 151,851.60 (158.17) 430.05 DTD 07/15/2024 4.375% 07/15/2027

1.90 3.76
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 22 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost at Mkt Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Duration
U.S. Treasury Bond / Note
US TREASURY N/B 91282CLG4 475,000.00 WellsFar 100.04 475,167.20 (1,614.05) (1,139.01) DTD 08/15/2024 3.750% 08/15/2027

1.99 3.75
US TREASURY N/B 91282CLG4 800,000.00 CABRERA 100.04 800,281.60 (2,280.90) (1,595.24) DTD 08/15/2024 3.750% 08/15/2027

1.99 3.75
US TREASURY N/B 91282CLL3 475,000.00 MorganSt 99.30 471,660.27 (1,428.60) (1,891.41) DTD 09/16/2024 3.375% 09/15/2027

2.08 3.73
US TREASURY N/B 91282CLL3 500,000.00 JPMorgan 99.30 496,484.50 (1,171.75) (1,739.00) DTD 09/16/2024 3.375% 09/15/2027

2.08 3.73
US TREASURY N/B 91282CLQ2 50,000.00 MorganSt 100.34 50,167.95 513.65 440.09 DTD 10/15/2024 3.875% 10/15/2027

2.15 3.74
US TREASURY N/B 91282CLX7 150,000.00 JPMorgan 100.91 151,371.15 1,347.71 1,352.02 DTD 11/15/2024 4.125% 11/15/2027

2.23 3.74
US TREASURY N/B 91282CLX7 300,000.00 JPMorgan 100.91 302,742.30 2,683.71 2,693.97 DTD 11/15/2024 4.125% 11/15/2027

2.23 3.74
US TREASURY N/B 91282CLX7 300,000.00 MorganSt 100.91 302,742.30 2,578.24 2,608.03 DTD 11/15/2024 4.125% 11/15/2027

2.23 3.74
US TREASURY N/B 91282CMB4 525,000.00 Nomura 100.70 528,670.80 7,772.36 7,132.13 DTD 12/16/2024 4.000% 12/15/2027

2.31 3.72
US TREASURY N/B 91282CMF5 525,000.00 JPMorgan 101.28 531,705.83 7,423.60 7,330.72 DTD 01/15/2025 4.250% 01/15/2028

2.34 3.74
US TREASURY N/B 91282CMN8 200,000.00 MorganSt 101.34 202,671.80 1,078.05 1,245.46 DTD 02/18/2025 4.250% 02/15/2028

2.43 3.74
US TREASURY N/B 91282CMS7 425,000.00 JPMorgan 100.47 426,992.40 3,320.52 3,225.45 DTD 03/17/2025 3.875% 03/15/2028

2.52 3.71
US TREASURY N/B 91282CND9 150,000.00 JPMorgan 100.13 150,199.20 1,130.84 1,092.88 DTD 05/15/2025 3.750% 05/15/2028

2.68 3.72
US TREASURY N/B 91282CND9 200,000.00 JPMorgan 100.13 200,265.60 1,124.97 1,108.55 DTD 05/15/2025 3.750% 05/15/2028

2.68 3.72
US TREASURY N/B 91282CND9 350,000.00 JPMorgan 100.13 350,464.80 1,831.99 1,804.63 DTD 05/15/2025 3.750% 05/15/2028

2.68 3.72
US TREASURY N/B 91282CNH0 150,000.00 BMO 100.52 150,773.40 1,330.04 1,322.67 DTD 06/16/2025 3.875% 06/15/2028

2.76 3.71
Security Type Sub-Total 11,900,000.00 11,976,000.57 83,880.42 83,086.16 1.89 3.79 PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 23 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost at Mkt Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Duration
Municipal Bond / Note
LOS ANGELES UNIF SD-B 544647KX7 115,000.00 RaymondJ 100.89 116,025.46 1,025.46 1,025.46 DTD 05/13/2025 4.382% 07/01/2027

1.89 3.97
Security Type Sub-Total 115,000.00 116,025.46 1,025.46 1,025.46 1.89 3.97 Federal Agency Commercial Mortgage-Backed Security
FHMS K051 A2 3137BM7C4 96,099.41 WellsFar 99.56 95,680.03 278.84 (367.24) DTD 12/01/2015 3.308% 09/01/2025

0.20 4.58
FHMS K054 A2 3137BNGT5 112,223.03 CantorFi 98.93 111,019.66 5,337.13 80.81 DTD 04/01/2016 2.745% 01/01/2026

0.51 4.52
FNA 2016-M3 A2 3136ARTE8 121,242.72 MorganSt 98.73 119,702.45 5,317.53 (217.33) DTD 03/01/2016 2.702% 02/01/2026

0.58 4.60
FHMS K736 A2 3137FNWX4 111,559.65 INTL_FC 98.06 109,393.49 5,882.69 912.29 DTD 09/01/2019 2.282% 07/01/2026

0.91 4.26
FHMS K057 A2 3137BRQJ7 118,798.83 CantorFi 98.31 116,786.85 6,313.23 612.72 DTD 09/01/2016 2.570% 07/01/2026

0.92 4.30
FHMS K057 A2 3137BRQJ7 118,798.83 JPMorgan 98.31 116,786.85 3,825.87 (48.99) DTD 09/01/2016 2.570% 07/01/2026

0.92 4.30
FHMS K058 A2 3137BSP72 175,000.00 CantorFi 98.15 171,760.40 4,724.27 (510.26) DTD 11/01/2016 2.653% 08/01/2026

1.07 4.25
FHMS K059 A2 3137BSRE5 125,000.00 MorganSt 98.60 123,252.00 4,858.45 1,254.38 DTD 11/01/2016 3.120% 09/01/2026

1.10 4.24
FHMS K061 A2 3137BTUM1 81,844.09 Citigrou 98.82 80,876.86 1,552.03 39.67 DTD 01/01/2017 3.347% 11/01/2026

1.26 4.16
FHMS K063 A2 3137BVZ82 190,000.00 TD Secur 98.80 187,726.27 8,591.89 2,941.77 DTD 03/01/2017 3.430% 01/01/2027

1.37 4.16
FNA 2024-M6 A2 3136BTGM9 200,000.00 WellsFar 97.82 195,633.40 2,633.40 1,258.75 DTD 11/01/2024 3.005% 07/01/2027

1.76 4.14
FHMS K067 A2 3137FAWS3 205,000.00 JPMorgan 98.21 201,336.65 676.88 558.30 DTD 09/01/2017 3.194% 07/01/2027

1.91 4.06
FHMS K068 A2 3137FBBX3 125,000.00 WellsFar 98.26 122,828.13 3,580.08 1,824.50 DTD 10/01/2017 3.244% 08/01/2027

1.98 4.06
FHMS K069 A2 3137FBU79 93,229.76 BOFAML 98.14 91,492.80 2,771.57 1,433.04 DTD 11/01/2017 3.187% 09/01/2027

2.06 4.04
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 24 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost at Mkt Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Duration
Federal Agency Commercial Mortgage-Backed Security
FHMS K739 A2 3137F64P9 222,506.46 IFP 94.84 211,017.12 5,589.77 1,901.38 DTD 11/01/2020 1.336% 09/01/2027

1.91 4.07
FHMS K074 A2 3137F4D41 135,000.00 WellsFar 98.85 133,450.88 1,346.00 1,040.28 DTD 03/01/2018 3.600% 01/01/2028

2.34 4.04
FHMS K075 A2 3137F4X72 120,000.00 Citigrou 98.94 118,728.48 992.54 983.46 DTD 04/01/2018 3.650% 02/01/2028

2.46 4.03
FHMS K075 A2 3137F4X72 140,000.00 MIZU 98.94 138,516.56 961.09 721.60 DTD 04/01/2018 3.650% 02/01/2028

2.46 4.03
FHMS K076 A2 3137FEZU7 225,000.00 BMO 99.55 223,978.28 1,456.80 1,221.86 DTD 05/01/2018 3.900% 04/01/2028

2.54 4.03
FHMS K077 A2 3137FG6X8 140,000.00 MorganSt 99.42 139,185.90 1,149.18 1,114.55 DTD 06/01/2018 3.850% 05/01/2028

2.62 4.03
FHMS K743 A2 3137H14B9 200,000.00 WellsFar 93.89 187,776.40 1,784.21 1,746.78 DTD 06/01/2021 1.770% 05/01/2028

2.72 4.06
FHMS K079 A2 3137FGZT5 240,000.00 WellsFar 99.68 239,227.68 1,618.30 1,483.42 DTD 08/01/2018 3.926% 06/01/2028

2.75 4.01
Security Type Sub-Total 3,296,302.77 3,236,157.14 71,241.75 19,985.74 1.78 4.16 Corporate Note
NATIONAL RURAL UTIL COOP 63743HFF4 25,000.00 PNCBank 100.30 25,075.20 108.70 78.89 DTD 10/31/2022 5.450% 10/30/2025

0.33 4.65
COOPERAT RABOBANK UA/NY 21688ABA9 390,000.00 JPMorgan 100.19 390,749.97 898.17 789.89 DTD 01/09/2024 4.850% 01/09/2026

0.50 4.48
NATIONAL RURAL UTIL COOP (CALLABLE) 63743HFH0 20,000.00 Scotiaca 02/13/26 100.05 20,009.34 23.54 12.55 DTD 02/09/2023 4.450% 03/13/2026

0.62 4.54
WELLS FARGO & COMPANY 949746RW3 100,000.00 WellsFar 98.93 98,928.60 4,848.60 491.87 DTD 04/22/2016 3.000% 04/22/2026

0.78 4.39
CHARLES SCHWAB CORP (CALLABLE) 808513BR5 100,000.00 Citigrou 04/13/26 97.26 97,263.60 3,596.60 412.76 DTD 05/13/2021 1.150% 05/13/2026

0.84 4.41
CATERPILLAR FINL SERVICE 14913UAA8 75,000.00 SGSA 100.05 75,037.35 72.60 47.60 DTD 05/15/2023 4.350% 05/15/2026

0.84 4.27
AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE 02665WEK3 55,000.00 MIZU 100.82 55,448.31 515.96 471.24 DTD 07/07/2023 5.250% 07/07/2026

0.96 4.40
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 25 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost at Mkt Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Duration
Corporate Note
TRUIST FINANCIAL CORP (CALLABLE) 89788MAH5 80,000.00 Suntrust 07/28/25 99.95 79,963.36 (36.64) (36.64) DTD 07/28/2022 4.260% 07/28/2026

0.07 5.80
TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP 89236TMJ1 30,000.00 MIZU 100.34 30,102.27 120.87 112.70 DTD 08/09/2024 4.550% 08/07/2026

1.05 4.26
HOME DEPOT INC (CALLABLE) 437076CV2 55,000.00 JPMorgan 08/30/26 100.98 55,541.20 661.65 596.38 DTD 12/04/2023 4.950% 09/30/2026

1.12 4.20
TRUIST FINANCIAL CORP (CALLABLE) 89788MAJ1 85,000.00 Suntrust 10/28/25 100.40 85,343.57 343.57 343.57 DTD 10/28/2022 5.900% 10/28/2026

0.32 5.69
STATE STREET CORP (CALLABLE) 857477BX0 25,000.00 Deutsche 11/04/25 100.44 25,110.38 110.38 110.38 DTD 11/04/2022 5.751% 11/04/2026

0.34 5.39
AMERICAN EXPRESS CO (CALLABLE) 025816CM9 100,000.00 Suntrust 10/04/26 96.72 96,723.00 4,687.00 1,345.08 DTD 11/04/2021 1.650% 11/04/2026

1.30 4.25
NATIONAL RURAL UTIL COOP (CALLABLE) 63743HFK3 40,000.00 MIZU 10/13/26 101.68 40,670.80 684.80 677.39 DTD 11/02/2023 5.600% 11/13/2026

1.23 4.35
TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP 89236TLD5 100,000.00 BNPPSA 101.62 101,623.10 1,713.10 1,666.43 DTD 11/20/2023 5.400% 11/20/2026

1.32 4.23
PACCAR FINANCIAL CORP 69371RT55 35,000.00 MUFG 100.67 35,235.24 264.99 256.31 DTD 11/25/2024 4.500% 11/25/2026

1.34 4.03
WELLS FARGO BANK NA (CALLABLE) 94988J6F9 290,000.00 WellsFar 11/09/26 101.44 294,179.48 4,179.48 4,179.48 DTD 12/11/2023 5.254% 12/11/2026

1.31 4.26
CATERPILLAR FINL SERVICE 14913UAE0 95,000.00 JPMorgan 100.58 95,555.18 657.78 608.85 DTD 01/08/2024 4.500% 01/08/2027

1.43 4.10
PNC FINANCIAL SERVICES (CALLABLE) 693475BL8 15,000.00 PNCBank 01/26/26 100.15 15,022.01 22.01 22.01 DTD 01/24/2023 4.758% 01/26/2027

0.55 3.13
TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INC (CALLABLE) 882508CE2 115,000.00 BOFAML 01/08/27 100.90 116,036.15 1,109.75 1,076.54 DTD 02/08/2024 4.600% 02/08/2027

1.45 4.06
ELI LILLY & CO (CALLABLE) 532457CJ5 130,000.00 Deutsche 01/09/27 100.80 131,043.51 1,112.41 1,081.33 DTD 02/09/2024 4.500% 02/09/2027

1.46 4.03
BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB CO (CALLABLE) 110122EE4 40,000.00 Citigrou 01/22/27 101.27 40,506.64 549.84 531.00 DTD 02/22/2024 4.900% 02/22/2027

1.48 4.11
CISCO SYSTEMS INC (CALLABLE) 17275RBQ4 160,000.00 Deutsche 01/26/27 101.21 161,939.36 2,147.36 2,057.35 DTD 02/26/2024 4.800% 02/26/2027

1.49 4.07
CHEVRON USA INC 166756AZ9 175,000.00 BOFAML 100.78 176,360.45 1,360.45 1,360.45 DTD 02/26/2025 4.405% 02/26/2027

1.56 3.94
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 26 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost at Mkt Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Duration
Corporate Note
CHARLES SCHWAB CORP (CALLABLE) 808513AQ8 110,000.00 Barclays 12/02/26 98.47 108,320.52 819.72 577.95 DTD 03/02/2017 3.200% 03/02/2027

1.51 4.21
JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP 24422EXM6 110,000.00 Barclays 101.24 111,358.94 1,461.24 1,417.92 DTD 03/07/2024 4.850% 03/05/2027

1.57 4.12
AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE 02665WFD8 80,000.00 TD Secur 100.88 80,702.88 746.88 728.48 DTD 03/13/2024 4.900% 03/12/2027

1.59 4.38
STATE STREET CORP (CALLABLE) 857477CL5 70,000.00 MorganSt 02/18/27 101.44 71,005.20 1,005.20 1,005.20 DTD 03/18/2024 4.993% 03/18/2027

1.55 4.14
HORMEL FOODS CORP (CALLABLE) 440452AK6 55,000.00 WellsFar 02/28/27 101.01 55,553.69 607.04 580.44 DTD 03/08/2024 4.800% 03/30/2027

1.58 4.23
HORMEL FOODS CORP (CALLABLE) 440452AK6 55,000.00 WellsFar 02/28/27 101.01 55,553.69 607.04 580.44 DTD 03/08/2024 4.800% 03/30/2027

1.58 4.23
ADOBE INC (CALLABLE) 00724PAE9 80,000.00 BOFAML 03/04/27 101.44 81,152.96 1,192.96 1,177.06 DTD 04/04/2024 4.850% 04/04/2027

1.59 4.05
UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC (CALLABLE) 91324PEY4 195,000.00 BOFAML 03/15/27 100.58 196,135.68 2,494.83 1,951.92 DTD 03/21/2024 4.600% 04/15/2027

1.63 4.29
WALMART INC 931142FL2 45,000.00 WellsFar 100.41 45,185.62 191.47 190.94 DTD 04/28/2025 4.100% 04/28/2027

1.73 3.88
NATIONAL RURAL UTIL COOP (CALLABLE) 63743HFR8 75,000.00 RBC Capi 04/27/26 101.57 76,178.03 1,224.53 1,207.53 DTD 05/10/2024 5.100% 05/06/2027

1.68 4.26
GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA (CALLABLE) 38151LAG5 80,000.00 GoldmanS 05/21/26 100.82 80,656.32 656.32 656.32 DTD 05/21/2024 5.414% 05/21/2027

0.86 4.86
HOME DEPOT INC (CALLABLE) 437076DB5 40,000.00 MorganSt 05/25/27 101.56 40,623.28 755.68 712.92 DTD 06/25/2024 4.875% 06/25/2027

1.82 4.11
BLACKROCK FUNDING INC (CALLABLE) 09290DAH4 130,000.00 BOFAML 06/26/27 101.22 131,585.22 1,589.12 1,587.76 DTD 07/26/2024 4.600% 07/26/2027

1.87 4.04
HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL (CALLABLE) 438516CX2 130,000.00 Deutsche 06/30/27 101.04 131,352.65 1,356.55 1,355.20 DTD 08/01/2024 4.650% 07/30/2027

1.88 4.17
PACCAR FINANCIAL CORP 69371RT30 70,000.00 MUFG 101.15 70,802.27 895.37 868.50 DTD 08/06/2024 4.450% 08/06/2027

1.95 3.92
UNILEVER CAPITAL CORP (CALLABLE) 904764BU0 100,000.00 JPMorgan 07/12/27 100.43 100,434.80 565.80 528.77 DTD 08/12/2024 4.250% 08/12/2027

1.93 4.15
AMAZON.COM INC (CALLABLE) 023135BC9 140,000.00 MAXE 05/22/27 98.36 137,706.80 1,297.80 971.55 DTD 06/06/2018 3.150% 08/22/2027

1.94 3.98
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 27 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost at Mkt Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Duration
Corporate Note
HOME DEPOT INC (CALLABLE) 437076BT8 100,000.00 FTNF 06/14/27 97.41 97,412.30 646.30 408.41 DTD 09/14/2017 2.800% 09/14/2027

2.04 4.06
ACCENTURE CAPITAL INC (CALLABLE) 00440KAA1 35,000.00 JPMorgan 09/04/27 99.69 34,891.19 (63.66) (74.37) DTD 10/04/2024 3.900% 10/04/2027

2.08 4.07
TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP 89236TMS1 35,000.00 Citigrou 100.40 35,141.08 154.73 151.55 DTD 10/10/2024 4.350% 10/08/2027

2.12 4.19
AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE 02665WFT3 65,000.00 JPMorgan 100.28 65,180.83 225.68 215.79 DTD 10/23/2024 4.450% 10/22/2027

2.15 4.36
JPMORGAN CHASE & CO (CALLABLE) 46647PDW3 120,000.00 JPMorgan 10/22/26 102.16 122,595.60 2,595.60 2,595.60 DTD 10/23/2023 6.070% 10/22/2027

1.24 4.96
APPLE INC (CALLABLE) 037833DK3 140,000.00 JPMorgan 08/13/27 98.05 137,268.46 1,583.26 1,226.30 DTD 11/13/2017 3.000% 11/13/2027

2.17 3.91
BP CAP MARKETS AMERICA (CALLABLE) 10373QBY5 140,000.00 Deutsche 10/17/27 101.82 142,550.80 2,550.80 2,550.80 DTD 05/17/2024 5.017% 11/17/2027

2.16 4.24
MASTERCARD INC (CALLABLE) 57636QBA1 60,000.00 BOFAML 12/15/27 100.42 60,253.56 286.56 278.77 DTD 09/05/2024 4.100% 01/15/2028

2.30 3.96
ADOBE INC (CALLABLE) 00724PAH2 120,000.00 JPMorgan 12/17/27 101.75 122,099.28 2,162.88 2,153.58 DTD 01/17/2025 4.750% 01/17/2028

2.28 4.06
COOPERAT RABOBANK UA/NY 21688ABK7 275,000.00 BOFAML 102.10 280,777.20 5,777.20 5,777.20 DTD 01/21/2025 4.883% 01/21/2028

2.34 4.07
PEPSICO INC (CALLABLE) 713448GA0 200,000.00 MorganSt 01/07/28 101.23 202,458.80 2,542.80 2,532.14 DTD 02/07/2025 4.450% 02/07/2028

2.35 3.98
CISCO SYSTEMS INC (CALLABLE) 17275RBW1 50,000.00 GoldmanS 01/24/28 101.31 50,653.75 707.75 701.70 DTD 02/24/2025 4.550% 02/24/2028

2.39 4.06
HERSHEY COMPANY (CALLABLE) 427866BK3 55,000.00 RBC Capi 01/24/28 101.26 55,694.60 732.55 728.23 DTD 02/24/2025 4.550% 02/24/2028

2.39 4.10
JOHNSON & JOHNSON (CALLABLE) 478160DH4 40,000.00 JPMorgan 02/01/28 101.68 40,671.16 694.36 691.72 DTD 02/20/2025 4.550% 03/01/2028

2.41 3.88
MASTERCARD INC (CALLABLE) 57636QBF0 70,000.00 Deutsche 02/15/28 101.37 70,956.69 1,009.89 1,004.07 DTD 02/27/2025 4.550% 03/15/2028

2.44 4.06
ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES (CALLABLE) 007903BJ5 100,000.00 JPMorgan 02/24/28 100.73 100,732.50 732.50 732.50 DTD 03/24/2025 4.319% 03/24/2028

2.48 4.07
JPMORGAN CHASE & CO (CALLABLE) 46647PEE2 100,000.00 JPMorgan 04/22/27 102.07 102,065.40 2,065.40 2,065.40 DTD 04/22/2024 5.571% 04/22/2028

1.70 4.73
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 28 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost at Mkt Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Duration
Corporate Note
GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC (CALLABLE) 38141GC77 70,000.00 GoldmanS 04/23/27 100.77 70,540.33 540.33 540.33 DTD 04/23/2025 4.937% 04/23/2028

1.70 4.92
STATE STREET CORP (CALLABLE) 857477DA8 60,000.00 MorganSt 04/24/27 100.63 60,377.58 377.58 377.58 DTD 04/24/2025 4.543% 04/24/2028

1.71 4.61
CINTAS CORPORATION NO. 2 (CALLABLE) 17252MAR1 85,000.00 MUFG 04/01/28 100.22 85,190.49 299.29 293.58 DTD 05/02/2025 4.200% 05/01/2028

2.59 4.14
CITIGROUP INC (CALLABLE) 172967PZ8 145,000.00 Citigrou 05/07/27 100.26 145,374.83 374.83 374.83 DTD 05/07/2025 4.643% 05/07/2028

1.74 4.88
CUMMINS INC (CALLABLE) 231021AY2 15,000.00 JPMorgan 04/09/28 100.44 15,066.71 77.21 76.73 DTD 05/09/2025 4.250% 05/09/2028

2.61 4.10
BANK OF NY MELLON CORP (CALLABLE) 06406RCH8 60,000.00 MorganSt 06/09/27 100.52 60,310.20 310.20 310.20 DTD 06/10/2025 4.441% 06/09/2028

1.85 4.48
AIR PRODUCTS & CHEMICALS (CALLABLE) 009158BN5 140,000.00 JPMorgan 05/11/28 100.49 140,690.76 784.56 782.71 DTD 06/11/2025 4.300% 06/11/2028

2.69 4.14
TARGET CORP (CALLABLE) 87612EBU9 35,000.00 GoldmanS 05/15/28 100.59 35,207.34 207.69 207.63 DTD 06/10/2025 4.350% 06/15/2028

2.70 4.14
ANALOG DEVICES INC (CALLABLE) 032654BD6 150,000.00 BOFAML 05/15/28 100.44 150,662.10 824.10 821.62 DTD 06/16/2025 4.250% 06/15/2028

2.71 4.10
AMERICAN EXPRESS CO (CALLABLE) 025816DV8 20,000.00 MorganSt 07/26/27 101.36 20,272.94 272.94 272.94 DTD 07/26/2024 5.043% 07/26/2028

1.92 4.67
BANK OF AMERICA CORP (CALLABLE) 06051GMK2 230,000.00 BOFAML 01/24/28 101.39 233,186.19 3,186.19 3,186.19 DTD 01/24/2025 4.979% 01/24/2029

2.34 4.64
MORGAN STANLEY (CALLABLE) 61747YFY6 75,000.00 MorganSt 04/12/28 101.44 76,078.65 1,078.65 1,078.65 DTD 04/17/2025 4.994% 04/12/2029

2.55 4.78
AMERICAN EXPRESS CO (CALLABLE) 025816ED7 40,000.00 RBS 04/25/28 101.11 40,444.68 381.48 385.08 DTD 04/25/2025 4.731% 04/25/2029

2.59 4.66
AMERICAN EXPRESS CO (CALLABLE) 025816ED7 50,000.00 MorganSt 04/25/28 101.11 50,555.85 555.85 555.85 DTD 04/25/2025 4.731% 04/25/2029

2.59 4.66
Security Type Sub-Total 6,780,000.00 6,823,138.47 80,896.02 67,395.62 1.70 4.29 Certificate of Deposit
NATIXIS NY BRANCH 63873QP65 200,000.00 WellsFar 101.77 203,533.60 3,533.60 3,533.60 DTD 09/20/2023 5.610% 09/18/2026

1.14 4.13
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 29 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost at Mkt Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Duration
Security Type Sub-Total 200,000.00 203,533.60 3,533.60 3,533.60 1.14 4.13 Asset-Backed Security
BMWOT 2022-A A3 05602RAD3 6,108.91 RBC Capi 99.82 6,097.81 (10.78) (11.01) DTD 05/18/2022 3.210% 08/25/2026

0.14 4.52
COPAR 2021-1 A3 14044CAC6 898.29 JPMorgan 99.84 896.85 (1.43) (1.44) DTD 10/27/2021 0.770% 09/15/2026

0.04 4.80
GMCAR 2021-4 A3 362554AC1 151.23 JPMorgan 99.84 150.99 (0.24) (0.24) DTD 10/21/2021 0.680% 09/16/2026

0.04 4.38
ALLYA 2022-1 A3 02008JAC0 16,546.21 Barclays 99.86 16,522.86 (20.15) (22.37) DTD 05/18/2022 3.310% 11/15/2026

0.12 4.43
GMCAR 2022-1 A3 380146AC4 1,693.44 BNPPSA 99.86 1,691.03 (2.26) (2.36) DTD 01/19/2022 1.260% 11/16/2026

0.04 4.59
HART 2022-B A3 44918MAD2 14,318.37 Barclays 99.88 14,300.69 (17.67) (17.68) DTD 07/20/2022 3.720% 11/16/2026

0.16 4.47
HDMOT 2022-A A3 41284YAD8 9,577.83 WellsFar 99.87 9,565.47 (10.77) (11.82) DTD 04/20/2022 3.060% 02/15/2027

0.09 4.53
CARMX 2022-2 A3 14317HAC5 17,665.95 BOFAML 99.77 17,625.05 (38.22) (39.99) DTD 04/28/2022 3.490% 02/16/2027

0.21 4.62
TAOT 2022-C A3 89231CAD9 20,209.33 Citigrou 99.70 20,148.32 (57.63) (59.71) DTD 08/16/2022 3.760% 04/15/2027

0.37 4.64
COPAR 2022-1 A3 14043QAC6 20,733.20 WellsFar 99.56 20,641.35 (87.32) (90.21) DTD 05/04/2022 3.170% 04/15/2027

0.32 4.59
HART 2023-A A3 448979AD6 41,553.96 BOFAML 100.02 41,562.06 12.16 9.91 DTD 04/12/2023 4.580% 04/15/2027

0.37 4.57
CARMX 2022-3 A3 14318MAD1 46,120.05 RBC Capi 99.78 46,018.31 (100.66) (101.33) DTD 07/20/2022 3.970% 04/15/2027

0.33 4.68
GMCAR 2022-3 A3 36265WAD5 21,657.21 BOFAML 99.81 21,615.39 (41.67) (41.76) DTD 07/13/2022 3.640% 04/16/2027

0.23 4.52
COPAR 2022-2 A3 14043GAD6 28,939.05 JPMorgan 99.67 28,843.26 (93.72) (94.97) DTD 08/10/2022 3.660% 05/17/2027

0.39 4.54
ALLYA 2022-2 A3 02008MAC3 72,089.58 JPMorgan 100.04 72,115.17 26.49 25.96 DTD 10/12/2022 4.760% 05/17/2027

0.31 4.69
CARMX 2022-4 A3 14318UAD3 69,609.23 Barclays 100.32 69,830.31 237.40 228.32 DTD 10/31/2022 5.340% 08/16/2027

0.45 4.68
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 30 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost at Mkt Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Duration
Asset-Backed Security
MBART 2022-1 A3 58768PAC8 81,513.11 SMBC 100.31 81,763.27 266.29 257.40 DTD 11/22/2022 5.210% 08/16/2027

0.45 4.56
GMCAR 2022-4 A3 36265QAD8 95,091.86 RBC Capi 100.11 95,192.84 116.57 107.82 DTD 10/12/2022 4.820% 08/16/2027

0.36 4.57
TAOT 2023-A A3 891940AC2 50,190.61 BOFAML 100.04 50,211.79 21.20 21.19 DTD 01/30/2023 4.630% 09/15/2027

0.54 4.58
MBART 2023-1 A3 58770AAC7 27,646.30 SUMITR 99.99 27,644.81 1.82 0.14 DTD 01/25/2023 4.510% 11/15/2027

0.53 4.55
NAROT 2023-A A3 65480WAD3 109,796.81 MIZU 100.21 110,022.44 245.04 235.74 DTD 04/26/2023 4.910% 11/15/2027

0.53 4.52
HDMOT 2023-A A3 41285JAD0 50,135.09 JPMorgan 100.20 50,236.01 105.97 103.50 DTD 02/23/2023 5.050% 12/15/2027

0.49 4.74
TAOT 2023-B A3 891941AD8 84,466.83 RBC Capi 100.18 84,618.45 156.34 154.24 DTD 05/23/2023 4.710% 02/15/2028

0.70 4.47
BMWOT 2023-A A3 05592XAD2 33,858.78 TD Secur 100.59 34,059.16 206.38 203.83 DTD 07/18/2023 5.470% 02/25/2028

0.64 4.59
FORDO 2023-B A3 344930AD4 68,873.16 Citigrou 100.54 69,247.55 375.32 374.94 DTD 06/26/2023 5.230% 05/15/2028

0.73 4.53
ALLYA 2023-1 A3 02007WAC2 76,775.89 BOFAML 100.70 77,313.24 550.44 545.15 DTD 07/19/2023 5.460% 05/15/2028

0.71 4.53
BMWLT 2025-1 A3 096912AD2 55,000.00 MUFG 100.56 55,308.61 309.82 309.68 DTD 06/10/2025 4.430% 06/26/2028

1.80 4.18
FITAT 2023-1 A3 31680EAD3 161,224.77 JPMorgan 100.78 162,479.10 1,264.32 1,260.60 DTD 08/23/2023 5.530% 08/15/2028

0.77 4.58
CHAIT 2023-A1 A 161571HT4 100,000.00 JPMorgan 101.15 101,148.50 1,176.22 1,167.07 DTD 09/15/2023 5.160% 09/15/2028

1.15 4.23
BACCT 2023-A2 A2 05522RDH8 70,000.00 BOFAML 101.05 70,734.79 744.19 741.30 DTD 12/14/2023 4.980% 11/15/2028

1.30 4.25
NAROT 2024-A A3 65479UAD0 200,000.00 MIZU 101.13 202,268.40 2,287.08 2,282.90 DTD 05/22/2024 5.280% 12/15/2028

1.02 4.25
CHAIT 2024-A1 A 161571HV9 225,000.00 JPMorgan 100.72 226,627.42 1,661.69 1,652.38 DTD 01/31/2024 4.600% 01/16/2029

1.46 4.16
TAOT 2024-C A3 89237QAD2 80,000.00 MUFG 100.94 80,752.08 752.13 752.08 DTD 07/30/2024 4.880% 03/15/2029

1.30 4.19
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 31 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost at Mkt Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Duration
Asset-Backed Security
HART 2024-B A3 44934QAD3 90,000.00 Citigrou 101.01 90,909.54 923.12 920.51 DTD 07/24/2024 4.840% 03/15/2029

1.41 4.19
HAROT 2024-3 A3 43813YAC6 120,000.00 JPMorgan 100.54 120,642.96 661.81 658.54 DTD 08/21/2024 4.570% 03/21/2029

1.34 4.23
GMCAR 2024-3 A3 38013KAD2 100,000.00 RBC Capi 101.01 101,013.40 1,028.79 1,025.78 DTD 07/10/2024 5.130% 04/16/2029

1.13 4.31
HART 2024-C A3 448976AD2 90,000.00 Barclays 100.49 90,443.97 450.56 449.41 DTD 10/16/2024 4.410% 05/15/2029

1.59 4.16
TAOT 2024-D A3 89239TAD4 50,000.00 MIZU 100.41 50,206.10 208.89 208.46 DTD 10/17/2024 4.400% 06/15/2029

1.44 4.15
FORDO 2024-C A3 34532UAD1 120,000.00 Citigrou 99.85 119,820.84 (178.34) (178.71) DTD 09/20/2024 4.070% 07/15/2029

1.64 4.21
ALLYA 2024-2 A3 02007NAC2 80,000.00 BOFAML 99.90 79,919.36 (72.37) (73.80) DTD 09/27/2024 4.140% 07/16/2029

0.98 4.29
VALET 2024-1 A3 92868RAD0 70,000.00 WellsFar 101.02 70,714.21 720.80 719.89 DTD 11/26/2024 4.630% 07/20/2029

1.88 4.15
TAOT 2025-A A3 89240JAD3 125,000.00 TD Secur 100.91 126,139.75 1,144.76 1,143.96 DTD 01/29/2025 4.640% 08/15/2029

1.66 4.13
GMCAR 2024-4 A3 38014AAD3 70,000.00 MIZU 100.28 70,194.81 208.29 206.41 DTD 10/16/2024 4.400% 08/16/2029

1.36 4.25
VALET 2025-1 A3 92868MAD1 125,000.00 Barclays 100.73 125,913.75 918.00 917.52 DTD 03/25/2025 4.500% 08/20/2029

2.00 4.19
COMET 2024-A1 A 14041NGE5 240,000.00 BOFAML 99.68 239,240.64 (712.51) (719.41) DTD 09/24/2024 3.920% 09/15/2029

2.07 4.12
HAROT 2025-1 A3 43814VAC1 195,000.00 MUFG 100.96 196,862.83 1,868.84 1,868.06 DTD 02/11/2025 4.570% 09/21/2029

1.89 4.12
BMWOT 2025-A A3 096924AD7 135,000.00 WellsFar 100.85 136,141.56 1,154.86 1,153.49 DTD 02/12/2025 4.560% 09/25/2029

1.81 4.15
HAROT 2025-2 A3 437921AD1 60,000.00 JPMorgan 100.19 60,111.48 118.18 117.83 DTD 05/08/2025 4.150% 10/15/2029

2.15 4.12
WFCIT 2024-A2 A 92970QAE5 125,000.00 WellsFar 100.46 125,571.50 590.07 587.63 DTD 10/24/2024 4.290% 10/15/2029

2.14 4.13
HART 2025-A A3 44935CAD3 170,000.00 Barclays 100.38 170,637.50 662.58 660.75 DTD 03/12/2025 4.320% 10/15/2029

1.90 4.20
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 32 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Fair Market Value & Analytics For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Dated Date/Coupon/Maturity CUSIP Par Broker Date Price Value On Cost Amort Cost at Mkt Security Type/Description Next Call Market Market Unreal G/L Unreal G/L Effective YTM Duration
Asset-Backed Security
TAOT 2025-B A3 89231HAD8 100,000.00 Barclays 100.60 100,602.70 608.43 607.87 DTD 04/30/2025 4.340% 11/15/2029

2.19 4.12
AMXCA 2025-1 A 02582JKM1 260,000.00 WellsFar 101.24 263,233.88 3,291.63 3,287.25 DTD 02/11/2025 4.560% 12/15/2029

2.28 4.08
GMCAR 2025-1 A3 362955AD8 85,000.00 CRAG 100.88 85,752.17 758.49 757.64 DTD 01/15/2025 4.620% 12/17/2029

1.87 4.21
NAROT 2025-A A3 65481GAD7 105,000.00 BNP Sec 100.99 106,042.55 1,062.71 1,062.04 DTD 05/27/2025 4.490% 12/17/2029

2.20 4.10
MBART 2025-1 A3 58773DAD6 120,000.00 SGAS 101.31 121,570.92 1,596.44 1,594.02 DTD 01/23/2025 4.780% 12/17/2029

1.68 4.09
VZMT 2025-3 A1A 92348KDY6 150,000.00 BOFAML 100.43 150,643.35 649.80 649.08 DTD 03/31/2025 4.510% 03/20/2030

2.13 4.40
AMXCA 2025-2 A 02582JKP4 190,000.00 RBC Capi 100.60 191,133.92 1,137.36 1,137.21 DTD 05/13/2025 4.280% 04/15/2030

2.58 4.13
BACCT 2025-A1 A 05522RDK1 125,000.00 BOFAML 100.66 125,827.63 828.11 827.63 DTD 06/12/2025 4.310% 05/15/2030

2.65 4.12
CCCIT 2025-A1 A 17305EHA6 275,000.00 Citigrou 100.57 276,559.53 1,634.14 1,633.90 DTD 06/26/2025 4.300% 06/21/2030

2.77 4.12
Security Type Sub-Total 5,332,445.03 5,363,104.23 31,297.79 31,162.22 1.55 4.26 Managed Account Sub-Total 27,623,747.79 27,717,959.47 271,875.04 206,188.80 1.76 4.05 Total Investments $27,943,548.98
$225,589.51
$27,717,959.47
Accrued Interest
Securities Sub-Total $27,623,747.79 $271,875.04 $206,188.80 1.76 4.05% PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 33 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Transaction Type
Trade Settle Security Description CUSIP Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method
BUY
06/10/25 BANK OF NY MELLON CORP
(CALLABLE)
DTD 06/10/2025 4.441% 06/09/2028
06/03/25 06406RCH8 60,000.00 (60,000.00) 0.00 (60,000.00) 06/10/25 BMWLT 2025-1 A3
DTD 06/10/2025 4.430% 06/26/2028
06/03/25 096912AD2 55,000.00 (54,998.79) 0.00 (54,998.79) 06/09/25 FHMS K067 A2
DTD 09/01/2017 3.194% 07/01/2027
06/04/25 3137FAWS3 205,000.00 (200,659.77) (145.50) (200,805.27) 06/09/25 US TREASURY N/B
DTD 05/15/2025 3.750% 05/15/2028
06/05/25 91282CND9 350,000.00 (348,632.81) (891.64) (349,524.45) 06/10/25 TARGET CORP (CALLABLE)
DTD 06/10/2025 4.350% 06/15/2028
06/05/25 87612EBU9 35,000.00 (34,999.65) 0.00 (34,999.65) 06/12/25 BACCT 2025-A1 A
DTD 06/12/2025 4.310% 05/15/2030
06/05/25 05522RDK1 125,000.00 (124,999.52) 0.00 (124,999.52) 06/10/25 US TREASURY N/B
DTD 05/15/2025 3.750% 05/15/2028
06/06/25 91282CND9 200,000.00 (199,140.63) (529.89) (199,670.52) 06/11/25 FHMS K077 A2
DTD 06/01/2018 3.850% 05/01/2028
06/06/25 3137FG6X8 140,000.00 (138,036.72) (149.72) (138,186.44) 06/11/25 AIR PRODUCTS & CHEMICALS
(CALLABLE)
DTD 06/11/2025 4.300% 06/11/2028
06/09/25 009158BN5 140,000.00 (139,906.20) 0.00 (139,906.20) 06/16/25 US TREASURY N/B
DTD 06/16/2025 3.875% 06/15/2028
06/11/25 91282CNH0 150,000.00 (149,443.36) (15.88) (149,459.24) 06/16/25 ANALOG DEVICES INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 06/16/2025 4.250% 06/15/2028
06/12/25 032654BD6 150,000.00 (149,838.00) 0.00 (149,838.00) 06/26/25 CCCIT 2025-A1 A
DTD 06/26/2025 4.300% 06/21/2030
06/18/25 17305EHA6 275,000.00 (274,925.39) 0.00 (274,925.39) Transaction Type Sub-Total 1,885,000.00 (1,875,580.84) (1,732.63) (1,877,313.47)

INTEREST
06/25/25 FNA 2024-M6 A2
DTD 11/01/2024 3.005% 07/01/2027
06/01/25 3136BTGM9 0.00 500.75 500.75
06/25/25 FHMS K054 A2
DTD 04/01/2016 2.745% 01/01/2026
06/01/25 3137BNGT5 0.00 262.08 262.08
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 34 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Transaction Type
Trade Settle Security Description CUSIP Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method

INTEREST
06/25/25 FHMS K074 A2
DTD 03/01/2018 3.600% 01/01/2028
06/01/25 3137F4D41 0.00 405.00 405.00
06/25/25 FHMS K057 A2
DTD 09/01/2016 2.570% 07/01/2026
06/01/25 3137BRQJ7 0.00 533.78 533.78
06/25/25 FHMS K059 A2
DTD 11/01/2016 3.120% 09/01/2026
06/01/25 3137BSRE5 0.00 325.00 325.00
06/25/25 FHMS K063 A2
DTD 03/01/2017 3.430% 01/01/2027
06/01/25 3137BVZ82 0.00 543.08 543.08
06/25/25 FHMS K079 A2
DTD 08/01/2018 3.926% 06/01/2028
06/01/25 3137FGZT5 0.00 785.20 785.20
06/25/25 FHMS K736 A2
DTD 09/01/2019 2.282% 07/01/2026
06/01/25 3137FNWX4 0.00 212.48 212.48
06/25/25 FHMS K061 A2
DTD 01/01/2017 3.347% 11/01/2026
06/01/25 3137BTUM1 0.00 228.74 228.74
06/25/25 FHMS K075 A2
DTD 04/01/2018 3.650% 02/01/2028
06/01/25 3137F4X72 0.00 790.83 790.83
06/25/25 FHMS K069 A2
DTD 11/01/2017 3.187% 09/01/2027
06/01/25 3137FBU79 0.00 248.01 248.01
06/25/25 FHMS K051 A2
DTD 12/01/2015 3.308% 09/01/2025
06/01/25 3137BM7C4 0.00 299.25 299.25
06/25/25 FHMS K058 A2
DTD 11/01/2016 2.653% 08/01/2026
06/01/25 3137BSP72 0.00 386.90 386.90
06/25/25 FNA 2016-M3 A2
DTD 03/01/2016 2.702% 02/01/2026
06/01/25 3136ARTE8 0.00 273.44 273.44
06/25/25 FHMS K739 A2
DTD 11/01/2020 1.336% 09/01/2027
06/01/25 3137F64P9 0.00 247.98 247.98
06/25/25 FHMS K076 A2
DTD 05/01/2018 3.900% 04/01/2028
06/01/25 3137FEZU7 0.00 731.25 731.25
06/25/25 FHMS K743 A2
DTD 06/01/2021 1.770% 05/01/2028
06/01/25 3137H14B9 0.00 295.00 295.00
06/25/25 FHMS K068 A2
DTD 10/01/2017 3.244% 08/01/2027
06/01/25 3137FBBX3 0.00 337.92 337.92
06/02/25 MONEY MARKET FUND
DTD 01/01/2010 0.000% --
06/02/25 MONEY0002 0.00 395.95 395.95
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 35 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Transaction Type
Trade Settle Security Description CUSIP Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method

INTEREST
06/08/25 JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP
DTD 06/08/2023 4.750% 06/08/2026
06/08/25 24422EWX3 0.00 1,543.75 1,543.75
06/11/25 WELLS FARGO BANK NA (CALLABLE)
DTD 12/11/2023 5.254% 12/11/2026
06/11/25 94988J6F9 0.00 7,618.30 7,618.30
06/15/25 NATIONAL RURAL UTIL COOP
DTD 05/04/2022 3.450% 06/15/2025
06/15/25 63743HFE7 0.00 345.00 345.00
06/15/25 ALLYA 2022-2 A3
DTD 10/12/2022 4.760% 05/17/2027
06/15/25 02008MAC3 0.00 326.79 326.79
06/15/25 TAOT 2023-A A3
DTD 01/30/2023 4.630% 09/15/2027
06/15/25 891940AC2 0.00 209.79 209.79
06/15/25 TAOT 2024-C A3
DTD 07/30/2024 4.880% 03/15/2029
06/15/25 89237QAD2 0.00 325.33 325.33
06/15/25 CARMX 2022-2 A3
DTD 04/28/2022 3.490% 02/16/2027
06/15/25 14317HAC5 0.00 62.13 62.13
06/15/25 HAROT 2025-2 A3
DTD 05/08/2025 4.150% 10/15/2029
06/15/25 437921AD1 0.00 255.92 255.92
06/15/25 TAOT 2022-C A3
DTD 08/16/2022 3.760% 04/15/2027
06/15/25 89231CAD9 0.00 70.79 70.79
06/15/25 COPAR 2021-1 A3
DTD 10/27/2021 0.770% 09/15/2026
06/15/25 14044CAC6 0.00 1.98 1.98
06/15/25 TAOT 2025-A A3
DTD 01/29/2025 4.640% 08/15/2029
06/15/25 89240JAD3 0.00 483.33 483.33
06/15/25 US TREASURY N/B
DTD 12/16/2024 4.000% 12/15/2027
06/15/25 91282CMB4 0.00 10,500.00 10,500.00
06/15/25 WFCIT 2024-A2 A
DTD 10/24/2024 4.290% 10/15/2029
06/15/25 92970QAE5 0.00 446.88 446.88
06/15/25 COPAR 2022-2 A3
DTD 08/10/2022 3.660% 05/17/2027
06/15/25 14043GAD6 0.00 98.72 98.72
06/15/25 MBART 2023-1 A3
DTD 01/25/2023 4.510% 11/15/2027
06/15/25 58770AAC7 0.00 113.55 113.55
06/15/25 COPAR 2022-1 A3
DTD 05/04/2022 3.170% 04/15/2027
06/15/25 14043QAC6 0.00 62.86 62.86
06/15/25 ALLYA 2024-2 A3
DTD 09/27/2024 4.140% 07/16/2029
06/15/25 02007NAC2 0.00 276.00 276.00
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 36 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Transaction Type
Trade Settle Security Description CUSIP Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method

INTEREST
06/15/25 ALLYA 2022-1 A3
DTD 05/18/2022 3.310% 11/15/2026
06/15/25 02008JAC0 0.00 61.54 61.54
06/15/25 ALLYA 2023-1 A3
DTD 07/19/2023 5.460% 05/15/2028
06/15/25 02007WAC2 0.00 372.15 372.15
06/15/25 MBART 2025-1 A3
DTD 01/23/2025 4.780% 12/17/2029
06/15/25 58773DAD6 0.00 478.00 478.00
06/15/25 AMXCA 2025-2 A
DTD 05/13/2025 4.280% 04/15/2030
06/15/25 02582JKP4 0.00 722.84 722.84
06/15/25 TAOT 2024-D A3
DTD 10/17/2024 4.400% 06/15/2029
06/15/25 89239TAD4 0.00 183.33 183.33
06/15/25 BACCT 2023-A2 A2
DTD 12/14/2023 4.980% 11/15/2028
06/15/25 05522RDH8 0.00 290.50 290.50
06/15/25 CARMX 2022-3 A3
DTD 07/20/2022 3.970% 04/15/2027
06/15/25 14318MAD1 0.00 172.70 172.70
06/15/25 NAROT 2024-A A3
DTD 05/22/2024 5.280% 12/15/2028
06/15/25 65479UAD0 0.00 880.00 880.00
06/15/25 WOART 2021-D A3
DTD 11/03/2021 0.810% 10/15/2026
06/15/25 98163KAC6 0.00 0.40 0.40
06/15/25 HART 2022-B A3
DTD 07/20/2022 3.720% 11/16/2026
06/15/25 44918MAD2 0.00 56.82 56.82
06/15/25 CARMX 2022-4 A3
DTD 10/31/2022 5.340% 08/16/2027
06/15/25 14318UAD3 0.00 341.62 341.62
06/15/25 AMXCA 2025-1 A
DTD 02/11/2025 4.560% 12/15/2029
06/15/25 02582JKM1 0.00 988.00 988.00
06/15/25 FORDO 2024-C A3
DTD 09/20/2024 4.070% 07/15/2029
06/15/25 34532UAD1 0.00 407.00 407.00
06/15/25 FITAT 2023-1 A3
DTD 08/23/2023 5.530% 08/15/2028
06/15/25 31680EAD3 0.00 791.32 791.32
06/15/25 US TREASURY N/B
DTD 12/15/2023 4.375% 12/15/2026
06/15/25 91282CJP7 0.00 12,031.25 12,031.25
06/15/25 HART 2024-C A3
DTD 10/16/2024 4.410% 05/15/2029
06/15/25 448976AD2 0.00 330.75 330.75
06/15/25 HDMOT 2023-A A3
DTD 02/23/2023 5.050% 12/15/2027
06/15/25 41285JAD0 0.00 231.87 231.87
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 37 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Transaction Type
Trade Settle Security Description CUSIP Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method

INTEREST
06/15/25 COMET 2024-A1 A
DTD 09/24/2024 3.920% 09/15/2029
06/15/25 14041NGE5 0.00 784.00 784.00
06/15/25 US TREASURY N/B
DTD 06/17/2024 4.625% 06/15/2027
06/15/25 91282CKV2 0.00 25,437.50 25,437.50
06/15/25 GMCAR 2025-1 A3
DTD 01/15/2025 4.620% 12/17/2029
06/15/25 362955AD8 0.00 327.25 327.25
06/15/25 NAROT 2023-A A3
DTD 04/26/2023 4.910% 11/15/2027
06/15/25 65480WAD3 0.00 488.41 488.41
06/15/25 HDMOT 2022-A A3
DTD 04/20/2022 3.060% 02/15/2027
06/15/25 41284YAD8 0.00 37.27 37.27
06/15/25 CHAIT 2023-A1 A
DTD 09/15/2023 5.160% 09/15/2028
06/15/25 161571HT4 0.00 430.00 430.00
06/15/25 HART 2024-B A3
DTD 07/24/2024 4.840% 03/15/2029
06/15/25 44934QAD3 0.00 363.00 363.00
06/15/25 NAROT 2025-A A3
DTD 05/27/2025 4.490% 12/17/2029
06/15/25 65481GAD7 0.00 235.73 235.73
06/15/25 MBART 2022-1 A3
DTD 11/22/2022 5.210% 08/16/2027
06/15/25 58768PAC8 0.00 392.19 392.19
06/15/25 HART 2025-A A3
DTD 03/12/2025 4.320% 10/15/2029
06/15/25 44935CAD3 0.00 612.00 612.00
06/15/25 TAOT 2025-B A3
DTD 04/30/2025 4.340% 11/15/2029
06/15/25 89231HAD8 0.00 361.67 361.67
06/15/25 TAOT 2023-B A3
DTD 05/23/2023 4.710% 02/15/2028
06/15/25 891941AD8 0.00 353.71 353.71
06/15/25 CHAIT 2024-A1 A
DTD 01/31/2024 4.600% 01/16/2029
06/15/25 161571HV9 0.00 862.50 862.50
06/15/25 HART 2023-A A3
DTD 04/12/2023 4.580% 04/15/2027
06/15/25 448979AD6 0.00 179.32 179.32
06/15/25 FORDO 2023-B A3
DTD 06/26/2023 5.230% 05/15/2028
06/15/25 344930AD4 0.00 322.19 322.19
06/16/25 GMCAR 2022-1 A3
DTD 01/19/2022 1.260% 11/16/2026
06/16/25 380146AC4 0.00 3.89 3.89
06/16/25 GMCAR 2021-4 A3
DTD 10/21/2021 0.680% 09/16/2026
06/16/25 362554AC1 0.00 1.17 1.17
PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 38 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Transaction Type
Trade Settle Security Description CUSIP Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method

INTEREST
06/16/25 GMCAR 2024-4 A3
DTD 10/16/2024 4.400% 08/16/2029
06/16/25 38014AAD3 0.00 256.67 256.67
06/16/25 GMCAR 2024-3 A3
DTD 07/10/2024 5.130% 04/16/2029
06/16/25 38013KAD2 0.00 427.50 427.50
06/16/25 GMCAR 2022-4 A3
DTD 10/12/2022 4.820% 08/16/2027
06/16/25 36265QAD8 0.00 428.51 428.51
06/16/25 GMCAR 2022-3 A3
DTD 07/13/2022 3.640% 04/16/2027
06/16/25 36265WAD5 0.00 78.12 78.12
06/20/25 VALET 2024-1 A3
DTD 11/26/2024 4.630% 07/20/2029
06/20/25 92868RAD0 0.00 270.08 270.08
06/20/25 VALET 2025-1 A3
DTD 03/25/2025 4.500% 08/20/2029
06/20/25 92868MAD1 0.00 468.75 468.75
06/20/25 VZMT 2025-3 A1A
DTD 03/31/2025 4.510% 03/20/2030
06/20/25 92348KDY6 0.00 563.75 563.75
06/21/25 HAROT 2024-3 A3
DTD 08/21/2024 4.570% 03/21/2029
06/21/25 43813YAC6 0.00 457.00 457.00
06/21/25 HAROT 2025-1 A3
DTD 02/11/2025 4.570% 09/21/2029
06/21/25 43814VAC1 0.00 742.63 742.63
06/25/25 BMWOT 2025-A A3
DTD 02/12/2025 4.560% 09/25/2029
06/25/25 096924AD7 0.00 513.00 513.00
06/25/25 BMWOT 2023-A A3
DTD 07/18/2023 5.470% 02/25/2028
06/25/25 05592XAD2 0.00 166.97 166.97
06/25/25 BMWOT 2022-A A3
DTD 05/18/2022 3.210% 08/25/2026
06/25/25 05602RAD3 0.00 22.98 22.98
06/25/25 HOME DEPOT INC (CALLABLE)
DTD 06/25/2024 4.875% 06/25/2027
06/25/25 437076DB5 0.00 975.00 975.00
Transaction Type Sub-Total 0.00 85,446.61 85,446.61

MATURITY
06/15/25 NATIONAL RURAL UTIL COOP
DTD 05/04/2022 3.450% 06/15/2025
06/15/25 63743HFE7 20,000.00 20,000.00 0.00 20,000.00 5.40 0.00 Transaction Type Sub-Total 20,000.00 20,000.00 0.00 20,000.00 5.40 0.00 PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 39 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Transaction Type
Trade Settle Security Description CUSIP Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method

PAYDOWNS
06/25/25 FHMS K054 A2
DTD 04/01/2016 2.745% 01/01/2026
06/01/25 3137BNGT5 2,348.30 2,348.30 0.00 2,348.30 136.86 30.82 06/25/25 FHMS K051 A2
DTD 12/01/2015 3.308% 09/01/2025
06/01/25 3137BM7C4 12,455.71 12,455.71 0.00 12,455.71 90.50 9.17 06/25/25 FHMS K739 A2
DTD 11/01/2020 1.336% 09/01/2027
06/01/25 3137F64P9 231.05 231.05 0.00 231.05 17.74 14.40 06/25/25 FHMS K057 A2
DTD 09/01/2016 2.570% 07/01/2026
06/01/25 3137BRQJ7 5,817.91 5,817.91 0.00 5,817.91 407.70 138.58 06/25/25 FHMS K736 A2
DTD 09/01/2019 2.282% 07/01/2026
06/01/25 3137FNWX4 173.16 173.16 0.00 173.16 12.49 5.15 06/25/25 FHMS K061 A2
DTD 01/01/2017 3.347% 11/01/2026
06/01/25 3137BTUM1 167.10 167.10 0.00 167.10 5.14 2.18
06/25/25 FHMS K069 A2
DTD 11/01/2017 3.187% 09/01/2027
06/01/25 3137FBU79 154.97 154.97 0.00 154.97 7.50 5.46
06/25/25 FNA 2016-M3 A2
DTD 03/01/2016 2.702% 02/01/2026
06/01/25 3136ARTE8 194.47 194.47 0.00 194.47 11.00 2.40 06/25/25 FHMS K057 A2
DTD 09/01/2016 2.570% 07/01/2026
06/01/25 3137BRQJ7 5,817.91 5,817.91 0.00 5,817.91 285.89 103.64 06/15/25 COPAR 2022-2 A3
DTD 08/10/2022 3.660% 05/17/2027
06/15/25 14043GAD6 3,427.11 3,427.11 0.00 3,427.11 0.24 0.09 06/15/25 WOART 2021-D A3
DTD 11/03/2021 0.810% 10/15/2026
06/15/25 98163KAC6 596.36 596.36 0.00 596.36 0.08 0.02
06/15/25 NAROT 2023-A A3
DTD 04/26/2023 4.910% 11/15/2027
06/15/25 65480WAD3 9,570.35 9,570.35 0.00 9,570.35 1.69 0.90 06/15/25 TAOT 2023-B A3
DTD 05/23/2023 4.710% 02/15/2028
06/15/25 891941AD8 5,650.04 5,650.04 0.00 5,650.04 0.32 0.18 06/15/25 FORDO 2023-B A3
DTD 06/26/2023 5.230% 05/15/2028
06/15/25 344930AD4 5,052.31 5,052.31 0.00 5,052.31 0.07 0.04 06/15/25 CARMX 2022-2 A3
DTD 04/28/2022 3.490% 02/16/2027
06/15/25 14317HAC5 3,697.67 3,697.67 0.00 3,697.67 0.56 0.20 06/15/25 COPAR 2021-1 A3
DTD 10/27/2021 0.770% 09/15/2026
06/15/25 14044CAC6 2,187.97 2,187.97 0.00 2,187.97 0.04 0.01 06/15/25 HART 2023-A A3
DTD 04/12/2023 4.580% 04/15/2027
06/15/25 448979AD6 5,429.30 5,429.30 0.00 5,429.30 0.53 0.24 PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 40 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Transaction Type
Trade Settle Security Description CUSIP Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method

PAYDOWNS
06/15/25 TAOT 2022-C A3
DTD 08/16/2022 3.760% 04/15/2027
06/15/25 89231CAD9 2,383.63 2,383.63 0.00 2,383.63 0.40 0.16 06/15/25 FITAT 2023-1 A3
DTD 08/23/2023 5.530% 08/15/2028
06/15/25 31680EAD3 10,490.66 10,490.66 0.00 10,490.66 0.65 0.41 06/15/25 HDMOT 2022-A A3
DTD 04/20/2022 3.060% 02/15/2027
06/15/25 41284YAD8 5,038.56 5,038.56 0.00 5,038.56 0.84 0.29 06/15/25 MBART 2023-1 A3
DTD 01/25/2023 4.510% 11/15/2027
06/15/25 58770AAC7 2,566.73 2,566.73 0.00 2,566.73 0.30 0.15 06/15/25 COPAR 2022-1 A3
DTD 05/04/2022 3.170% 04/15/2027
06/15/25 14043QAC6 3,062.47 3,062.47 0.00 3,062.47 0.67 0.25 06/15/25 ALLYA 2022-2 A3
DTD 10/12/2022 4.760% 05/17/2027
06/15/25 02008MAC3 10,294.26 10,294.26 0.00 10,294.26 0.12 0.05 06/15/25 HDMOT 2023-A A3
DTD 02/23/2023 5.050% 12/15/2027
06/15/25 41285JAD0 4,962.36 4,962.36 0.00 4,962.36 0.50 0.26 06/15/25 CARMX 2022-4 A3
DTD 10/31/2022 5.340% 08/16/2027
06/15/25 14318UAD3 7,160.37 7,160.37 0.00 7,160.37 1.68 0.76 06/15/25 TAOT 2023-A A3
DTD 01/30/2023 4.630% 09/15/2027
06/15/25 891940AC2 4,181.95 4,181.95 0.00 4,181.95 0.00 0.00 06/15/25 HART 2022-B A3
DTD 07/20/2022 3.720% 11/16/2026
06/15/25 44918MAD2 4,011.37 4,011.37 0.00 4,011.37 0.00 0.00 06/15/25 MBART 2022-1 A3
DTD 11/22/2022 5.210% 08/16/2027
06/15/25 58768PAC8 8,819.63 8,819.63 0.00 8,819.63 1.74 0.80 06/15/25 CARMX 2022-3 A3
DTD 07/20/2022 3.970% 04/15/2027
06/15/25 14318MAD1 6,081.10 6,081.10 0.00 6,081.10 0.14 0.05 06/15/25 ALLYA 2023-1 A3
DTD 07/19/2023 5.460% 05/15/2028
06/15/25 02007WAC2 5,014.92 5,014.92 0.00 5,014.92 0.86 0.52 06/15/25 ALLYA 2022-1 A3
DTD 05/18/2022 3.310% 11/15/2026
06/15/25 02008JAC0 5,763.67 5,763.67 0.00 5,763.67 1.12 0.36 06/16/25 GMCAR 2022-1 A3
DTD 01/19/2022 1.260% 11/16/2026
06/16/25 380146AC4 2,011.03 2,011.03 0.00 2,011.03 0.18 0.06 06/16/25 GMCAR 2022-3 A3
DTD 07/13/2022 3.640% 04/16/2027
06/16/25 36265WAD5 4,097.70 4,097.70 0.00 4,097.70 0.03 0.01 06/16/25 GMCAR 2022-4 A3
DTD 10/12/2022 4.820% 08/16/2027
06/16/25 36265QAD8 11,590.92 11,590.92 0.00 11,590.92 1.90 0.85 PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 41 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Transaction Type
Trade Settle Security Description CUSIP Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method

PAYDOWNS
06/16/25 GMCAR 2021-4 A3
DTD 10/21/2021 0.680% 09/16/2026
06/16/25 362554AC1 1,911.40 1,911.40 0.00 1,911.40 0.05 0.02 06/25/25 BMWOT 2023-A A3
DTD 07/18/2023 5.470% 02/25/2028
06/25/25 05592XAD2 2,770.53 2,770.53 0.00 2,770.53 0.49 0.29 06/25/25 BMWOT 2022-A A3
DTD 05/18/2022 3.210% 08/25/2026
06/25/25 05602RAD3 2,480.09 2,480.09 0.00 2,480.09 0.13 0.04 Transaction Type Sub-Total 167,665.04 167,665.04 0.00 167,665.04 990.15 318.81 SELL
06/03/25 NAROT 2022-B A3
DTD 09/28/2022 4.460% 05/17/2027
06/02/25 65480JAC4 60,057.75 60,027.25 133.93 60,161.18 (18.07) (25.26) FIFO 06/03/25 BACCT 2023-A1 A1
DTD 06/16/2023 4.790% 05/15/2028
06/02/25 05522RDG0 70,000.00 70,243.36 167.65 70,411.01 259.21 252.88 FIFO 06/03/25 AMXCA 2023-1 A
DTD 06/14/2023 4.870% 05/15/2028
06/02/25 02582JJZ4 100,000.00 100,417.97 243.50 100,661.47 426.84 423.29 FIFO 06/03/25 GMCAR 2023-2 A3
DTD 04/12/2023 4.470% 02/16/2028
06/02/25 362583AD8 53,954.21 53,931.03 113.89 54,044.92 (21.70) (22.35) FIFO 06/06/25 AUST & NZ BANKING GRP NY
DTD 03/18/2024 5.000% 03/18/2026
06/05/25 05253JB26 270,000.00 271,433.70 2,925.00 274,358.70 1,433.70 1,433.70 FIFO 06/09/25 NORDEA BANK ABP NEW YORK
DTD 11/03/2022 5.530% 11/03/2025
06/05/25 65558UYF3 250,000.00 251,081.58 1,382.50 252,464.08 1,081.58 1,081.58 FIFO 06/10/25 US TREASURY N/B
DTD 09/15/2023 4.625% 09/15/2026
06/06/25 91282CHY0 200,000.00 201,359.38 2,186.82 203,546.20 2,765.63 1,986.49 FIFO 06/11/25 US TREASURY N/B
DTD 03/15/2024 4.250% 03/15/2027
06/06/25 91282CKE0 125,000.00 125,410.16 1,270.38 126,680.54 1,303.71 957.36 FIFO 06/11/25 US TREASURY N/B
DTD 11/15/2024 4.125% 11/15/2027
06/09/25 91282CLX7 125,000.00 125,395.51 378.31 125,773.82 371.10 374.93 FIFO 06/13/25 JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP
DTD 06/08/2023 4.750% 06/08/2026
06/12/25 24422EWX3 65,000.00 65,310.05 42.88 65,352.93 347.75 322.44 FIFO 06/16/25 US TREASURY N/B
DTD 10/15/2024 3.875% 10/15/2027
06/12/25 91282CLQ2 50,000.00 49,984.38 328.21 50,312.59 330.08 261.18 FIFO 06/24/25 US TREASURY N/B
DTD 11/15/2024 4.125% 11/15/2027
06/18/25 91282CLX7 200,000.00 201,070.31 896.74 201,967.05 1,031.25 1,037.84 FIFO PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 42 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Managed Account Security Transactions & Interest For the Month Ending June 30, 2025 CITY OF LA PALMA - OPERATING PORTFOLIO - 995341 - (14205145) Transaction Type
Trade Settle Security Description CUSIP Par Proceeds
Principal Accrued
Interest Total Cost
Realized G/L Realized G/L Sale
Amort Cost Method
SELL
06/24/25 US TREASURY N/B
DTD 11/15/2024 4.125% 11/15/2027
06/18/25 91282CLX7 25,000.00 25,132.81 112.09 25,244.90 127.93 128.75 FIFO Transaction Type Sub-Total 1,594,011.96 1,600,797.49 10,181.90 1,610,979.39 9,439.01 8,212.83 Managed Account Sub-Total (87,118.31) 93,895.88 6,777.57 10,434.56 8,531.64 Total Security Transactions ($87,118.31) $93,895.88 $6,777.57 $10,434.56 $8,531.64 PFM Asset Management, a division of Account 995341 Page 43 U.S. Bancorp Asset Management, Inc.

Agenda Item No. 9 August 5, 2025 | 1
City of La Palma
Agenda Item No. 9
MEETING DATE: August 5, 2025
TO: City Council
FROM: Interim City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Jesse Amend, Police Captain
AGENDA TITLE: First Reading and Introduction of an Ordinance on the Use of Electric Mobility Devices
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

It is recommended that the City Council take the following action:

1. Waive full reading, read by title only, and introduce for first reading an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of La Palma, adopting an Electric Mobility Devices ordinance; and

2. Schedule the second reading and adoption of the Ordinance at the September 2, 2025, regular meeting of the City Council.

SUMMARY:

The use of electric bicycles (E-bikes) has increased as our communities look to new and novel ways to commute and to reduce our reliance on automobiles. E-bikes are a cost-effective alternative.

However, they bring higher risks of accidents and injuries when compared to conventional bicycles.

The public deserves education and safety regulations to mitigate this concern.

The City is in receipt of the 2023–2024 Orange County Grand Jury report titled, E-bikes: Friend or Foe. In the report, the Grand Jury emphasizes, “There is an urgent need to have consistent ordinances for the regulation and enforcement of safe E-bike use in all cities,” and further notes, “The public deserves education and safety regulations to mitigate this concern.” The Grand Jury report highlights three key findings:
• F1. The majority of Orange County’s 34 cities do not have ordinances or policies in place, which makes it difficult to address the safe operation and regulation of E-bikes leading to confusion.
• F2. Due to the increasing incidence of E-bike injuries and deaths, there is a need for consistent and accurate tracking by law enforcement and first responders, which does not exist now.

Agenda Item No. 9 August 5, 2025 | 2
• F3. Training and education on E-bike use and safety varies from city to city, causing confusion among bike riders.

Upon reviewing the Orange County Grand Jury’s findings and recommendations, the City responded to the Orange County Grand Jury with the following:
• “City staff will research and review existing E-bike policies from Orange County cities, and, if deemed appropriate, draft a policy to be prepared for presentation to the City by June 30, 2025.”
• “Rather than initially creating a stand-alone solution, the City will review its existing forms used by the La Palma Police Department and revise as appropriate by March 31, 2025.” • “The City will research and develop outreach and education programs by June 30, 2025” After the City responded to the Orange County Grand Jury, the Police Department has since:
• Brought forth the proposed Electric Mobility Devices Ordinance to provide clearly established regulation for the use of E-bikes within the city that are easy to understand and follow. • Implemented more consistent and accurate tracking of E-bike-related accidents, injuries, and fatalities using the existing Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) and Records Management System (RMS). The Police Department continues to explore additional methods to enhance this tracking through current systems.
• Incorporated E-bike training and education on use and safety utilizing the Police Department’s Police Interaction with Youth (PIY) program. Additional methods of Electric Mobility Devices education are being developed for future implementation.

For clarification, the term E-bike and similar powered transportation devices are also referred to as Electric Mobility Devices. Electric Mobility Devices include: Electric bicycle (E-bike), electric personal assistive mobility device, electrically motorized board, motorized scooter, and pocket bike.

The main points in the proposed Electric Mobility Devices Ordinance include:
• No Operating or Riding Electric Mobility Devices on Sidewalks and Public Facilities. No person shall operate or ride an electric mobility device: (i) upon any sidewalk; (ii), in any public drainage facility, culvert, ditch, or channel; (iii) outside of any roadway or other paved public area; (iv) in or upon any public athletic field, athletic/sports court, or gymnasium in the City; or (v) over any equestrian trail, or hiking or recreational trail.

Agenda Item No. 9 August 5, 2025 | 3
• The operator of an electric mobility device shall exercise all due care and shall reduce the speed of the device, obey all traffic laws, traffic control devices, and take all other actions relating to the operation of the device under the California Vehicle Code as necessary to protect the safety of the operator, passengers, and any persons or other vehicles or devices in the vicinity. In no case shall an operator operate an electric mobility device faster than 28 miles per hour in any public area.

The Police Department has observed a noticeable rise in the use of Electric Mobility Devices throughout the City, accompanied by an increase in traffic collisions involving these devices— particularly E-bikes. Since 2023, at least eleven traffic collisions involving Electric Mobility Devices have been reported, with the majority involving E-bikes. Additionally, since 2022, the Department has responded to approximately 40 calls for service related to the use or operation of Electric Mobility Devices.

The proposed ordinance regulating Electric Mobility Devices is a necessary step to enhance public safety, reduce the risk of collisions, and ensure their responsible use within the community.

Establishing clear regulations will promote the safe shared use of roadways and pathways, protect pedestrians and cyclists, and align the City’s enforcement efforts with those of neighboring jurisdictions to ensure consistency and clarity across the region.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The proposed ordinance is expected to have a minimal fiscal impact, limited primarily to the purchase and installation of regulatory signage. The estimated cost is approximately $2,000, which can be accommodated within the Adopted Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget (Account No. 035-900-8040-00000).

ATTACHMENTS:

1. OC Grand Jury Report

2. La Palma Response to OC Grand Jury Report

3. Electric Mobility Devices Ordinance Draft

E-bikes Friend or Foe
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page ii
Table of Contents
SUMMARY...................................................................................................................... 1 BACKGROUND.............................................................................................................. 1 REASON FOR THE STUDY........................................................................................... 3 METHOD OF STUDY...................................................................................................... 3 INVESTIGATION AND ANALYSIS................................................................................. 4 Orange County Transportation Authority................................................................ 4 Orange County Sheriff’s Department....................................................................... 4 Cities Survey .............................................................................................................. 4 COMMENDATIONS...................................................................................................... 12 FINDINGS..................................................................................................................... 12 RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................................. 13 RESPONSES................................................................................................................ 13 REQUIRED RESPONSES......................................................................................... 14 REFERENCES.............................................................................................................. 18 GLOSSARY.................................................................................................................. 20 APPENDICES............................................................................................................... 21 APPENDIX 1.............................................................................................................. 21 Current County of Orange E-Bike Laws - Unincorporated Areas .................... 21 APPENDIX 2.............................................................................................................. 22 California Vehicle Code Section 312.5 as of December 23, 2023 ..................... 22 APPENDIX 3.............................................................................................................. 23 California Assembly Bills..................................................................................... 23 APPENDIX 4.............................................................................................................. 24 County of Orange Ordinance No. 18-002............................................................ 24

E-bikes Friend or Foe
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 1

SUMMARY
The use of electric bicycles (E-bikes) has increased as our communities look to new and novel ways to commute and to reduce our reliance on automobiles. E-bikes are a cost-effective alternative. However, they bring higher risks of accidents and injuries when compared to conventional bicycles. The public deserves education and safety regulations to mitigate this concern.

The 2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury (OCGJ) investigation into E-bike regulation, education, and safety focused on what, if any, pertinent regulations have been adopted by Orange County cities. The OCGJ investigation revealed that outside of the California Vehicle Code, the 34 cities, 13 of which are contract cities with the Orange County Sheriff’s Department (OCSD), vary significantly in their regulation, safety (accidents, fatalities, etc.), enforcement, and education on E-bikes. The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) oversees E-bike safety, education, and public outreach for all unincorporated areas. OCTA holds quarterly meetings with all 34 cities in the county to discuss transportation issues including E-bike regulation, safety, education, and enforcement.

There is an urgent need to have consistent ordinances for the regulation and enforcement of safe E-bike use in all cities, school districts, parks, and unincorporated areas. Currently, there are significant differences in policy across cities. The recent surge in E-bike usage calls for immediate action to strengthen city oversight of this issue. This report will highlight the differences between cities’ approaches and make recommendations to attain realistic and practical policies for their respective jurisdictions.

BACKGROUND
The modern E-bike was introduced in the 1990s as a pedal assist bike with a batterypowered motor. The OCGJ focused on the 3 classes of E-bikes (see table below).

In most cases, it is hard to tell the difference between a Class 1, 2, or 3 E-bike, as there may be no apparent distinction to the naked eye. It is important that Orange County residents understand the different classes of E-bikes, how fast they can go, and any applicable restrictions or regulations that govern their use. This is particularly pertinent as automobile and bus commuters must now share the road with E-bike riders.

E-bikes Friend or Foe
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 2
The ease of use, relatively low price, and convenience of E-bikes have led to their proliferation throughout Orange County. It is estimated that the sales of E-bikes rose by 145% during 2020-to-2021 (World Economic Forum March 12, 2021).

However, along with the proliferation of E-bikes have come inevitable issues regarding their use, including:
• riding on sidewalks
• riding against traffic
• speeding
• bike vs pedestrian collisions
• bike vs motorized vehicle conflicts
• the ability to make unauthorized modifications to the electric motors which allows the E-bikes to exceed their maximum intended speed
There are also issues regarding E-bike rider injuries in accidents, which can be more serious than injuries of riders in bicycle accidents (US Consumer Product Safety Commission October 17, 2023). According to the OCGJ survey sent to city mayors, many do not track or have awareness of the incidence and prevalence of E-bike injuries and fatalities in their respective cities.

E-bikes Friend or Foe
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 3
The OCGJ sent a survey to all Orange County cities to learn each city’s policies, availability of safety education, and enforcement of E-bikes. The responses from the cities that answered indicate a wide variety of differences - with some cities having robust training, enforcement measures, and methods of socializing E-bike use in their communities.

The OCGJ recognizes that there cannot be a “one size fits all” approach to the regulation of E-bikes, as all cities in Orange County are unique and have different needs. For example, a large beachside city will have its own unique policies as compared to smaller inland cities. The rapidly expanding use of E-bikes compels cities to ensure a safe environment for riders of E-bikes and all citizens of Orange County.

REASON FOR THE STUDY
As E-bike sales have increased by almost 145% worldwide (World Economic Forum Mar. 12, 2021) over the past 2 years, the regulation of their use does not seem to have kept up. Accidents and incidents with E-bikes are on the rise, as are complaints from citizens of Orange County about E-bike riders (Voice of OC Sept. 2023). Accordingly, the OCGJ determined that an investigation into E-bikes was needed to bring public awareness to the safe use of E-bikes and the importance of having city-relevant “rules of the road” in place.

This report seeks to press Orange County cities to actively seek common-sense rules for E-bikes to ensure their safe operation among conventional bicycles, pedestrians, and vehicles.

METHOD OF STUDY
Information from this investigation was collected and verified through multiple sources and statements made during interviews and includes extensive research of current online and print articles regarding E-bikes in Orange County. The OCGJ conducted the following activities:
• In-person interviews of representatives from:
o A major retail bike shop that sells both E-bikes and standard bicycles o The Orange County Transportation Authority
o The Orange County Sheriff’s Department
o The Central Newport Beach Community Association
• In-person attendance and online viewing of several city council meetings • In-person attendance at a training session hosted by a local city • Review of proposed State legislation that failed, passed, or is in committee

E-bikes Friend or Foe
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 4
• Direct observance of E-bike riders, where they are riding, use of protective gear, passengers, dangerous maneuvers, etc.
• An online survey was distributed to the mayors of 34 cities in Orange County.

Unincorporated areas/divisions were not included in this survey. Mayors and/or representatives from 22 cities responded to this survey

INVESTIGATION AND ANALYSIS
Through interviews and surveys, the OCGJ determined that there is wide variation of rules on E-bikes and limited information regarding the reporting of E-bike incidents, accidents, injuries, and basic rules of the road for E-bikes.

Several news outlets (newspapers, magazines, television, online forums) have published stories about E-bikes. While many acknowledge the benefits of E-bikes, they also detail significant issues for cities to address.

Speeding, unsafe, or reckless operation, riders under 18 years of age not wearing helmets and toddlers riding on the back or front without proper child safety seats present common E-bike regulation and enforcement challenges for law enforcement.

Orange County Transportation Authority
OCTA has published on their website a comprehensive list of regulations listed by city regarding bicycles and E-bikes. As with the OCGJ survey, there are several different rules for E-bike riders dependent on what city they are riding in due to the differences in cities such as availability of bike lanes and the speed at which E-bikes are permitted to travel.

Orange County Sheriff’s Department
OCSD enforces the California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 312.5 regarding electric bicycles. In addition, the Sheriff’s Department works closely with OCTA to provide E-bike outreach and education to the residents of Orange County. The OCSD Training Bulletin 23-01, issued January 4, 2023, provides the current E-bike enforcement criteria for Sheriff’s Deputies.

Cities Survey
OCGJ sent a list of survey questions to all city mayors in Orange County regarding policies in their cities with respect to E-bikes. Of the 34 surveys sent, 22 were completed and returned to the Grand Jury. A sampling of the survey results follows:

E-bikes Friend or Foe
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 5
• Do you track injuries/deaths from E-bike accidents, injuries, fatalities? Tracking of E-bike injuries, deaths, property damage and battery fires, 11 of the 22 cities answered that they tracked these items on E-bikes.

The entity responsible for tracking these items varied within each city among law enforcement organizations, city government offices, and local hospitals. There is no standard way to compile and publish accident/incident information on E-bikes.

To properly track trends in E-bike operation, a robust incident and accident tracking mechanism must be in place. Items that need to be tracked include but are not limited to class of E-bike involved, estimated speed of the E-bike, direction of travel, age of the rider, whether helmets were used, and any injuries sustained. In the process of accident reporting, most police agencies do not distinguish whether the bicycle involved was a conventional bike or an E-bike.
• In your city, who, if anyone, is authorized to enforce infractions? Please select all that apply:

E-bikes Friend or Foe
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 6
Of the 22 cities that completed the survey, 100% indicated that some form of law enforcement was the agency authorized to enforce/cite infractions for E-bike riders.

Police Departments, OCSD, or Park Rangers were the organizations authorized for E-bike enforcement.
• In your city, are E-bikes allowed:
10 cities indicated that E-bikes were authorized on sidewalks, 4 cities answered unknown, and the remaining cities answered that E-bikes were prohibited from sidewalks.
21 cities indicated that E-bikes were authorized in bike lanes with one city responding as unknown.
13 cities indicated that E-bikes are allowed on park trails, 5 cities indicated that E-bikes were prohibited from using park trails, and 4 cities indicated that park trail policy for E-bikes was unknown.
16 cities indicated that E-bikes were authorized in vehicle lanes and 6 cities answered unknown.
5 cities answered no, 8 cities answered unknown, and 9 cities indicated that E-bikes were allowed on highways.

Riding on sidewalks was found to be a contentious issue. One city cited California Assembly Bill 825 (which would have barred local agencies from prohibiting bike use on sidewalks but has since been vetoed) as a reason not to prohibit E-bikes on sidewalks.

When there is no defined bike lane, E-bike riders will ride on sidewalks as a matter of safety. E-bikes, depending on the class, can go up to 28 miles per hour, which is typically faster than a conventional bicycle and much faster than a walking pedestrian.

E-bikes Friend or Foe
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 7
Although most current laws give the bicyclist and pedestrians the right of way, the reaction time for an E-bike rider going over 10 miles per hour on the sidewalk generally does not give the rider adequate opportunity to avoid pedestrians walking on the sidewalk or cars coming out of driveways.
• Does your city have posted speed limits for E-bikes?
100% of the cities that answered the OCGJ survey indicated that they do not post speed limits for E-bikes. No reasons were cited as to why they are not posted for E-bikes even though their top speed can be as high as 28 miles per hour or faster if the rider disables speed restrictive devices thus allowing the E-bike to almost double its speed.

There are obvious issues involving where to place speed limit signs for E-bikes. They are allowed to travel in bike lanes, on sidewalks, and in some jurisdictions even allowed to ride in opposition to traffic.
• In your city, are E-bikes expected to travel in the same direction or opposite direction from street traffic?

E-bikes Friend or Foe
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 8
Some cities have authorized E-bikes to ride against the flow of traffic. As stated in the OCTA website (in a section entitled “Wrong Way Riding”), riding against traffic is inherently dangerous due to:
➢ Oncoming cars approach at a much higher speed
➢ Drivers cannot see E-bike riders when turning left
➢ E-bike rider is unable to make right turns
➢ Traffic signals cannot be seen
• Is safety training offered by the city for E-bike riders? Safety education and/or training for E-bike riders is available only sporadically and is, in most cases, optional. As noted in the survey, only 8 cities indicated that safety training was offered. The Orange County Register published a story (OC Register Jan 3, 2024) about a San Juan Capistrano resident who has taken on educating new E-bike riders as a result of her son being injured on an E-bike. An OCGJ visit to a local retailer of E-bikes found there was no formal training for E-bike purchasers or riders, and the only information to purchasers of E-bikes was a pamphlet. The Huntington Beach Police Department has a safety class every other month which focuses on E-bike safety.

OCTA holds safety “bike rodeos” for E-bike riders. These are a few examples of the education available for E-bike riders, but none is mandatory prior to purchasing or riding an E-bike. Therefore, grass-roots efforts are another important step in promoting education and safety.

The OCGJ interviewed a member of the Central Newport Beach Community Association as to their concerns about education, safety, and enforcement regarding E-bikes. The Association has been active in monitoring E-bike use, specifically on the Balboa peninsula. Its focus has been on a perceived lack of enforcement of existing ordinances and the CVC on streets and the beach boardwalk. Along with education and safety training, the Association prefers active enforcement using radar guns, tickets, and increased law enforcement presence.

E-bikes Friend or Foe
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 9
• Do the schools/school districts in your city offer safety information and/or certification for student E-bike users on campus?
There are 28 school districts spread across the 34 cities of Orange County. Cities were asked whether schools in their jurisdictions offer safety information to student E-bike riders. Of the 22 cities that responded to the survey, 7 answered yes and 2 answered no. The concerning number that leaps to the eye is that 13 survey respondents stated that they were unaware of their school district’s participation in E-bike regulation. At the time of this report, the 5 districts (per district website) that currently require safety training and registration are:
➢ Capistrano Unified
➢ Los Alamitos Unified
➢ Huntington Beach Union
➢ Irvine Unified
➢ Ocean View
• Are there any other persons/groups that might be able to provide meaningful or relevant information regarding E-bikes to the Grand Jury? At least 6 cities referred this question to the OCSD. 6 others referred this question to their own police department. Interestingly, at least 6 suggested that their jurisdictional park rangers (if these are in place in their city) would be able to answer the question.

E-bikes Friend or Foe
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 10
• Is there outreach by the city being conducted to inform your community of any regulations and safety training?
Of the 34 cities in Orange County, 22 responded to this question: 10 cities said “yes,” 10 cities said “no,” and 2 cities indicated “unknown.”
An example of outreach is the City of Irvine’s Police Department. The outreach has several elements which includes High Visibility Enforcement (HVE) operations to issue administrative citations to juveniles violating vehicle codes on E-bikes. It also hosts E-bike safety courses, E-bike rodeos, and community presentations on E-bike safety.

There are also plans for Public Safety in collaboration with the Irvine Unified School District to implement a parking permit program which will require students riding E-bikes to school to attend workshops on E-bike safety before being issued a parking permit to park their E-bike on campus.
• Does your city regulate the use of E-bikes?

E-bikes Friend or Foe
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 11
There were 15 cities who responded that they do not regulate E-bikes or their usage.

The OCGJ felt that this statistic, on its own, warranted further investigation and, possibly, further action by such cities.

GENERAL COMMENTS FROM SURVEY RESPONDENTS
“I personally promote safe e-bike texts on local Facebook groups... about 16,000 members. I promote e-bike safety every council meeting.” “State and local legislation is lagging far behind e-bike technology and there is a lot of confusion amongst e-bike users and police regarding what is lawful and what is unlawful when it comes to e-bikes.”
“Thank you for looking into this. I am a relatively new mayor and although I consider eBikes an issue, we have so many other issues that are taking priority. I would like to see e-Bikes banned from all trails that were previously used for bicycles and pedestrians only. They function more like scooters than bicycles.”
“E-bikes and bike safety, in general, are very big topics in the community right now and our Police Department is currently doing A LOT to address these items. Besides conducting weekly High Visibility Enforcement (HVE) operations, IPD’s traffic staff oftentimes issue administrative citations to juveniles who commit vehicle code violations on their bicycles, including E-bikes and E-scooters. In fact, approximately 50% of our administrative citations are issued to E-bike and E-scooter operators. Rather than paying a fine similar to conventional traffic citations, our administrative citations require the juvenile to attend a 2-hour long bike safety course with a parent or guardian on the weekend at City Hall.”

E-bikes Friend or Foe
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 12
“Our city will soon be meeting with reps from OCSD in reference to providing additional educational tools for e-bike riders. I have made contact with our local elected officials in reference to securing funds for e-bike enforcement and education.” “The issue with E-bike safety is an active project in our traffic safety unit. Currently we are looking at any municipal codes which will assist with safety for e-bike riders and motorists.”

COMMENDATIONS
The following agencies contributed to the OCGJ’s investigation into the use of E-bikes in Orange County:
• Orange County Transportation Authority has taken a leadership role in outreach and education to all 34 Orange County cities
• Orange County Sheriff’s Department has been very proactive in keeping up with the everchanging rules of the road for E-bikes
• Central Newport Beach Community Association provided important data and various studies on E-bike usage in Newport Beach

FINDINGS
In accordance with California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, the 2023-2024 Grand Jury requires (or, as noted requests) responses from each agency affected by the findings presented in this section. The responses are to be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. Based on its investigation titled “E-bikes- Friend or Foe,” the 2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury has arrived at three principal findings, as follows:

F1. The majority of Orange County’s 34 cities do not have ordinances or policies in place, which makes it difficult to address the safe operation and regulation of E-bikes leading to confusion.

F2. Due to the increasing incidence of E-bike injuries and deaths, there is a need for consistent and accurate tracking by law enforcement and first responders, which does not exist now.

F3. Training and education on E-bike use and safety varies from city to city causing confusion amongst bike riders.

E-bikes Friend or Foe
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 13

RECOMMENDATIONS
In accordance with California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, the 2023-2024 Grand Jury requires responses from each agency affected by the recommendations presented in this section. The responses are to be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court.

Based on its investigation described herein, the 2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury makes the following recommendations:

R1. Each Orange County city should have specific policies that define the rules of the road for use of E-bikes in their communities by December 1, 2024.

R2. Each Orange County city should have a mechanism in place to report accidents, injuries and deaths involving E-bikes by December 1, 2024.

R3. Each Orange County city should research and develop outreach and education programs regarding the safe operation of E-bikes for their residents by December 1, 2024.

RESPONSES
California Penal Code Section 933 requires the governing body of any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official shall comment on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected official’s control within 60 days to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors.

Furthermore, California Penal Code Section 933.05 specifies the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made as follows:
(a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following:
(1) The respondent agrees with the finding.
(2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore.

E-bikes Friend or Foe
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 14
(b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions:
(1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action.
(2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation, therefore.
(c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision-making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department.

REQUIRED RESPONSES
Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with Penal Code Section 933.05 are required from:

Findings – 90 Day Response Required
City Councils of:

Aliso Viejo F1, F2, F3
Anaheim F1, F2, F3
Brea F1, F2, F3

E-bikes Friend or Foe
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 15
Buena Park F1, F2, F3
Costa Mesa F1, F2, F3
Cypress F1, F2, F3
Dana Point F1, F2, F3
Fountain Valley F1, F2, F3
Fullerton F1, F2, F3
Garden Grove F1, F2, F3
Huntington Beach F1, F2, F3
Irvine F1, F2, F3
La Habra F1, F2, F3
La Palma F1, F2, F3
Laguna Beach F1, F2, F3
Laguna Hills F1, F2, F3
Laguna Niguel F1, F2, F3
Laguna Woods F1, F2, F3
Lake Forest F1, F2, F3
Los Alamitos F1, F2, F3
Mission Viejo F1, F2, F3
Newport Beach F1, F2, F3
Orange F1, F2, F3
Placentia F1, F2, F3
Rancho Santa Margarita F1, F2, F3
San Clemente F1, F2, F3

E-bikes Friend or Foe
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 16
San Juan Capistrano F1, F2, F3
Santa Ana F1, F2, F3
Seal Beach F1, F2, F3
Stanton F1, F2, F3
Tustin F1, F2, F3
Villa Park F1, F2, F3
Westminster F1, F2, F3
Yorba Linda F1, F2, F3
Recommendations – 90 Day Response Required
City Councils of:

Aliso Viejo R1, R2, R3
Anaheim R1, R2, R3
Brea R1, R2, R3
Buena Park R1, R2, R3
Costa Mesa R1, R2, R3
Cypress R1, R2, R3
Dana Point R1, R2, R3
Fountain Valley R1, R2, R3
Fullerton R1, R2, R3
Garden Grove R1, R2, R3
Huntington Beach R1, R2, R3
Irvine R1, R2, R3
La Habra R1, R2, R3

E-bikes Friend or Foe
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 17
La Palma R1, R2, R3
Laguna Beach R1, R2, R3
Laguna Hills R1, R2, R3
Laguna Niguel R1, R2, R3
Laguna Woods R1, R2, R3
Lake Forest R1, R2, R3
Los Alamitos R1, R2, R3
Mission Viejo R1, R2, R3
Newport Beach R1, R2, R3
Orange R1, R2, R3
Placentia R1, R2, R3
Rancho Santa Margarita R1, R2, R3
San Clemente R1, R2, R3
San Juan Capistrano R1, R2, R3
Santa Ana R1, R2, R3
Seal Beach R1, R2, R3
Stanton R1, R2, R3
Tustin R1, R2, R3
Villa Park R1, R2, R3
Westminster R1, R2, R3
Yorba Linda R1, R2, R3

E-bikes Friend or Foe
2023-2024 Orange County Grand Jury Page 18

REFERENCES
2 On Your Side: “Orange County Sees Spike in E-bike Accidents” KCAL NEWS, Nov 3, 2021
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=ebike+injurys+in+orange+county+CA&docid=60 3525694912734209&mid=D1537F514A8F881DE2A9D1537F514A8F881DE2A9&view= detail&FORM=VIRE
Biesiada, Noah , “Orange County Cities Struggle to Handle Electronic Bike Regulations” Voice of OC , Dec 20, 2022 https://voiceofoc.org/2022/12/orange-county-cities-struggleto-handle-electric-bike-regulations/ Biesiada, Noah, “Orange County Cities Crack Down on E-bikes with Stricter Regulations” Voice of OC, Sep 28, 2023 https//Orange County Cities Crack Down on EBikes With Stricter Regulations (voiceofoc.org) Connelly, Laylan, “E-bike Lady educates new riders before hitting streets on electric bikes” Orange County Register, Jan 3, 2024, https//E-bike lady’ educates new riders before hitting streets on electric bikes – Orange County Register (ocregister.com) DMV Motorcycle Handbook, Two Wheel Vehicle Operation, Electric Bicycles https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/handbook/motorcycle-handbook/two-wheel-vehicleoperation/ “E-Scooter and E-bike-Injuries Soar-2022 Injuries Increased nearly 21%” Consumer Product Safety Commission, Oct 17, 2023
E-Scooter and E-Bike Injuries Soar: 2022 Injuries Increased Nearly 21% | CPSC.gov Fleming, Shawn “Electric Bike Sales grew by 145% in the US Last Year” World Economic Forum, Mar 12, 2021
Sales of electric bicycles are up all over the world | World Economic Forum (weforum.org)
Fry, Hannah, “On Orange County Beaches, proliferation of e-bikes brings battle to the boardwalk” Los Angeles Times, Jan 16, 2023
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-01-16/mayhem-on-the-boardwalk-orangecounty-cities-tackle-e-bikes-with-varying-results Irvine Watchdog, ”Irvine Transportation Commission to propose E-bike safety ordinance” May 14,2023 https://irvinewatchdog.org/city-hall/transportationcommission/irvine-transportation-commission-to-propose-e-bike-safety-ordinance/ Kelly, Charles M., “Council approves introduction of e-bike ordinance City of Seal Beach” Sun News, May 10, 2023, https://www.sunnews.org/council-approvesintroduction-of-e-bike-ordinance/