Agenda packet — Livermore City Council, February 14, 2022

CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2022
VIRTUAL REGULAR MEETING –
7:00 PM
TELECONFERENCE:

MEETING PARTICIPATION INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND AT THE END OF THE AGENDA
CITY OF LIVERMORE YOUTUBE CHANNEL:
https://www.youtube.com/c/CityofLivermoreCalifornia
ZOOM WEBINAR:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85240378357
Zoom dial in phone number:
1 669 900 6833
Meeting ID: 852 4037 8357
Bob Woerner, Mayor
Regina Bonanno, Vice Mayor
Robert W Carling, Council Member
Brittni Kiick, Council Member
Trish Munro, Council Member
Livermore City Council Agenda
February 14, 2022

1 1.

CLOSED SESSION - NONE

2. CALL TO ORDER

3. PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS

3.1 Confirmation of Advisory Body Appointments to the Beautification Committee, Human Services Commission, and Livermore Area Youth Advisory Commission.

Recommendation:

The City Council Subcommittee on Advisory Bodies recommends the City Council confirm the advisory body appointments for the Beautification Committee, Human Services Commission, and the Livermore Area Youth Advisory Commission. The City Clerk is directed to schedule individual meetings with all new members to administer the oath of office.

Staff Report

4. CITIZENS FORUM

In conformance with the Brown Act, no City Council action can occur on items presented during Citizens Forum.

Please log into Zoom to provide verbal public comment during the City Council Meeting.

Comments are limited to a maximum of 3 minutes per person, per item. The Mayor may reduce the amount of time based on the number of persons wishing to speak.

Citizens Forum will conclude after 30 minutes; however, if there are additional speakers, Citizens Forum will reconvene before the meeting adjourns.

5. CONSENT CALENDAR

Consent Calendar items are considered routine and are acted upon by the City Council with a single action. Members of the audience wishing to provide public input must use the raise hand feature.

5.1 Approval of draft minutes - January 18, 2022 Closed Session Special Meeting, January 20, 2022 City Council-Planning Commission Joint Meeting, January 24, 2022 Regular Meeting, February 7, 2022 Closed Session Special Meeting.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council approve the draft minutes.

ROLL CALL

Council Member Robert W. Carling
Council Member Brittni Kiick
Council Member Trish Munro
Vice Mayor Regina Bonanno
Mayor Bob Woerner

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Livermore City Council Agenda
February 14, 2022

2 Staff Report

Attachments:

1. Draft 2022-01-18 - Special Meeting Minutes

2. Draft 2022-01-20 - Joint CC-PC Workshop Meeting Minutes

3. Draft 2022-01-24 - Regular Meeting Minutes

4. Draft 2022-02-07 - Special Meeting Minutes

5.2 Resolution authorizing execution of an agreement with Jacobs Engineering Group Inc., for the Water Resources Division’s Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) Server Replacement Project in an amount not-to-exceed $267,012 and authorizing the City Manager to approve equipment procurement in an amount not-to-exceed $330,000

Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution:

1 .

Authorizing the execution of an agreement with Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. (Jacobs), in an amount not-to-exceed $267,012 for Professional Services for the Water Resources Division’s Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) Server Replacement Project, and
2 .

Authorizing the City Manager to approve all the equipment procurement for this project in an amount of not-to-exceed $330,000.

Staff Report

Attachments:

1. Resolution

2. Exhibit A - Agreement

5.3 Resolution authorizing execution of an agreement with Kier & Wright to provide design, environment, and construction support in an amount not-to-exceed $392,289, for the Collier Canyon Creek Silt Basin, Project No. 201727, DR 4344-0132-040.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with Kier & Wright in the not-to-exceed amount of $392,289 to provide design, environmental, and construction support services for the Collier Canyon Creek Silt Basin, Project No. 201727, DR 4344-0132-040.

Staff Report

Attachments:

1. Resolution

2. Exhibit A - Agreement

5.4 Resolution of a continued local emergency and reauthorizing remote teleconference meetings for City of Livermore's legislative bodies in accordance with Assembly Bill 361

Recommendation:

Staff recommends City Council adopt a resolution of a continued local emergency and reauthorizing remote teleconference meetings for City of Livermore's legislative bodies in

Livermore City Council Agenda
February 14, 2022

3 accordance with Assembly Bill 361.

Staff Report

Attachments:

1. Resolution

6. PUBLIC HEARINGS

6.1 7:05 P.M. - Third Public Hearing to receive an update on redistricting efforts to date, receive public input on the composition of City Council voting district draft maps prepared by the City's demographer, and provide direction to the City's demographer for revisions of the draft maps to be considered at the fourth public hearing

Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council:
1 .

Receive an update regarding the redistricting efforts to date; 2 .

Conduct the third public hearing to receive input on the composition of voting district draft maps; and
3 .

Provide direction to the City's demographer for revisions of the draft maps to be considered at the fourth public hearing.

Staff Report

Attachments:

1. Presentation

2. Communities of Interest DistrictR Submissions

3. Communities of Interest Tool Submissions

4. Draft Plans

5. Demographics

6. Draft Plan Review

7. Survey Responses

6.2 Hearing to
introduce an ordinance
amending and restating Chapters 13.26 and 13.27 of the
Livermore Municipal Code pertaining to water conservation measures.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council introduce an ordinance amending and restating Chapters 13.26 and 13.27 of the Livermore Municipal Code pertaining to water conservation.

Staff Report

Attachments:

1. Staff Report for WSCP Adoption on June 14, 2021

2. 2021 Adopted Water Shortage Contingency Plan

3. Ordinance

4. Exhibit A - Amended and
Restated
Chapters 13.26 Water
Conservation and

13.27 Mandatory Drought Conservation Measures

7. MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION

Livermore City Council Agenda
February 14, 2022

4 7.1
Oral report from the Director of Emergency Services regarding the COVID-19 emergency, its impacts, and the governmental operations in response to that emergency, as well as discussion and direction regarding the City’s emergency operations in response to that emergency.

Recommendation:

An oral report will be given at the meeting.

Staff Report

7.2 Final report on the Livermore Police Department traffic stop and arrest data project as part of the Equity and Inclusion Subcommittee

Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council receive the attached report from Rob Tillyer, Ph.D. and Michael R. Smith, J.D., Ph.D, both researchers and professors at the University of Texas at San Antonio – Department of Criminology & Criminal Justice regarding their research into patterns of racial and/or ethnic disparity during traffic stops and arrests conducted by the Livermore Police Department between January 1, 2019 and April 30, 2021.

Staff Report

Attachments:

1. LPD Stop and Arrest Report FINAL

8. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS AND MATTERS INITIATED BY CITY

MANAGER, CITY ATTORNEY, STAFF, AND COUNCIL MEMBERS

9. ADJOURNMENT

To a Regular City Council meeting on February 28, 2022, at 7:00 p.m., held virtually using Zoom.

10. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS

10.1 Supplemental materials received prior to the meeting.

Staff Report

Attachments:

1. Supplemental Materials

HOW TO PARTICIPATE IN YOUR CITY COUNCIL MEETING

You can participate in the meeting in a number of ways:

Citizens Forum
is an opportunity for the public to speak regarding items not listed on the agenda.

Speakers are limited to a maximum of 3 minutes per person. To submit a comment using Zoom, you may use the 'raise hand' feature. You should be aware that the City Council is prohibited by State law from taking action on any items that are not listed on the agenda. However, if your item requires action, the City Council may place it on a future agenda or direct staff to work with you and/or report to the City Council on the issue.

Livermore City Council Agenda
February 14, 2022

5 Public Hearings
- The topic of the hearing is typically summarized by staff, followed by questions from the City Council and a presentation by the applicant. The Mayor will then open the hearing to the public and offer an opportunity for public comments. You may use the 'raise hand' feature in Zoom and take 3 minutes to make your comments.

Other Agenda Items
are also open for public input including Consent Calendar or Matters for Consideration items. These comments are also subject to the 3 minute limit.

Special Meetings, Workshops
- The public will have the opportunity to address the City Council regarding the item that is the subject of the special meeting or workshop. Public comments are limited to a maximum of 3 minutes per person.

Platforms to Participate in Virtual Meetings:

Submission of Comments Prior to the Meeting:

Email Comments
may be submitted by the public to the City Clerk’s Office (
[email protected]
). Items received no later than 12:00 pm on the day of the meeting will be provided to the City Council and available on the City website prior to the meeting. These items will NOT be read into the record.
eComments
may be submitted by the public using the eComment link
here
. Comments may be up to
1000 characters in length and will be accepted up until 4PM the day of the meeting. These items will NOT be read into the record and are viewable by the the City Council and the public upon submittal.

Submission of Comments During the Meeting:

The City will be using YouTube and TV29 as two tools to provide the public access to view City Council meetings. No public comment will be accepted via YouTube.

TV29:

tv29live.org

YouTube:

h
ttp://youtube.com/c/CityofLivermoreCalifornia
Zoom Webinar:

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85240378357
Zoom dial in phone number:

1 669 900 6833
Meeting ID: 852 4037 8357
If you would like to deliver written materials to the City Council as part of their electronic comments Livermore City Council Agenda
February 14, 2022

6 Attachments:
during a meeting, the speaker must identify that intent in his or her comment submitted and immediately email the materials to the City Clerk at
[email protected]
.

The
City Council Agenda and Agenda Reports
are prepared by City staff and are available for public review on Tuesday evening, six days prior to the City Council meeting in the Civic Center Library, 1188 South Livermore Avenue, Livermore, and at the City Clerk’s Office, 1052 South Livermore Avenue, Livermore. The Agenda is also available on the City’s website, http://cityoflivermore.net/agenda
.

Under Government Code §54957.5, any
supplemental material
distributed to the members of the City
Council after the posting of this agenda will be available for public review in the City Clerk’s Office, 1052 South Livermore Avenue, Livermore, and included in the agenda packet available on the City’s web site at
http://cityoflivermore.net/agenda
.

PURSUANT TO TITLE II OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (CODIFIED AT 42 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 12101 AND 28 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 35), AND SECTION 504 OF THE REHABILITATION ACT OF 1973, THE CITY OF LIVERMORE DOES NOT

DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, NATIONAL ORIGIN, ANCESTRY,

SEX, DISABILITY, AGE OR SEXUAL ORIENTATION IN THE PROVISION OF ANY SERVICES, PROGRAMS, OR ACTIVITIES. TO ARRANGE AN ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE

IN THIS PUBLIC MEETING, PLEASE CONTACT THE ADA COORDINATOR AT [email protected]
OR CALL (925) 960-4170 (VOICE) OR (925) 960-
4104 (TDD) AT LEAST THREE (3) BUSINESS DAYS IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING.

Interpretation Instructions

1. Interpretation Instructions
Livermore City Council Agenda
February 14, 2022

7 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 3.1

DATE:

February 14, 2022
TO:

Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:

Donald Hester, Acting Administrative Services Director
SUBJECT:

Confirmation of Advisory Body Appointments to the Beautification Committee, Human Services Commission, and Livermore Area Youth Advisory Commission.

RECOMMENDED ACTION

SUMMARY
On February 2, 2022, the City Council Subcommittee on Advisory Bodies interviewed applicants for vacancies on the Beautification Committee, Human Services Commission, and the Livermore Area Youth Advisory Commission and have submitted their recommendation for City Council consideration and appointment.

DISCUSSION
On February 2, 2022 the City Council Subcommittee on Advisory Bodies interviewed applicants for vacancies on the Beautification Committee, Historic Preservation Commission, Human Services Commission, and the Livermore Area Youth Advisory Commission and recommends confirmation of the following appointments:

Beautification Committee - 1 Vacancy
Unexpired term ending June 1, 2023

Sucharitha Rallapalli

Human Services Commission - 2 Vacancies
1 Unexpired term ending November 1, 2022 and one additional regular term ending November 1, 2026

8 Kathleen La Point-Collup

1 Unexpired term ending November 1, 2023

Ajay Arora

Livermore Area Youth Advisory Commission (LAYAC) - 1 Adult Vacancy Unexpired term ending September 1, 2023

Neha Sabharwal

Upon the City Council’s confirmation of the appointments by motion, the City Clerk will arrange to administer the oath of office to new appointees prior to participating in their first advisory body meeting.

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS

No material fiscal or administrative impacts result from confirmation of these appointments.

ATTACHMENTS

Prepared by: Debbie Elam
Deputy City Clerk

Approved by:
____________________________________
Marc Roberts
City Manager
Fiscal Review by:
____________________________________
Bhavna Chaudhary
City Treasurer/Finance Manager

9 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 5.1

DATE:

February 14, 2022
TO:

Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:

Marie Weber, Acting Administrative Services Director
SUBJECT:

Approval of draft minutes - January 18, 2022 Closed Session Special Meeting, January 20, 2022 City Council-Planning Commission Joint Meeting, January 24, 2022 Regular Meeting, February 7, 2022 Closed Session Special Meeting.

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Staff recommends the City Council approve the draft minutes.

SUMMARY

DISCUSSION

ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft 2022-01-18 - Special Meeting Minutes

2. Draft 2022-01-20 - Joint CC-PC Workshop Meeting Minutes

3. Draft 2022-01-24 - Regular Meeting Minutes

4. Draft 2022-02-07 - Special Meeting Minutes

Prepared by: Marie Weber
City Clerk

10 Approved by:
____________________________________
Marc Roberts
City Manager
Fiscal Review by:
____________________________________
Bhavna Chaudhary
City Treasurer/Finance Manager

11 JANUARY 18, 2022 Minutes CM/74/435

DRAFT MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 18, 2022
________________________________________________________________

SPECIAL MEETING

1. CALL TO ORDER – The Closed Session of the City Council was called to order by Mayor Bob Woerner at 5:00pm, held via teleconference using Zoom and YouTube.

2. ROLL CALL – Present: Mayor Bob Woerner, Vice Mayor Regina Bonanno, and Council Members, Robert W. Carling, Brittni Kiick and Trish Munro.

3. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION

OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
REGARDING CLOSED SESSION ITEMS.

Mayor Woerner opened the public comment period.

There were no speakers and the public comment period was closed.

3.1 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE EMPLOYMENT: Public employee recruitment pursuant to Government Code section 54957(b). Title of position to be filled: City Manager.

3.2 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: Public Employee Performance Evaluation to set goals for annual review pursuant to Government Code section 54957(b). Title of position: City Attorney.

City Attorney Jason Alcala said there was no reportable action.

8. ADJOURNMENT – at 6:45pm to a Joint Special Meeting Workshop of the City Council and Planning Commission on January 20, 2022 at 5:00 pm held virtually via Zoom.

APPROVED:

BOB WOERNER, MAYOR
ATTEST:

MARIE WEBER, CITY CLERK
ATTACHMENT 1
12 JANUARY 20, 2022 Minutes CM/74/435

DRAFT MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 20, 2022
________________________________________________________________

CITY COUNCIL-PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT WORKSHOP MEETING

1. CALL TO ORDER – The joint workshop meeting of the City Council- Planning Commission was called to order by Mayor Bob Woerner at 5:00pm, held via teleconference using Zoom and YouTube.

2. ROLL CALL – Present: Mayor Bob Woerner, Vice Mayor Regina Bonanno, and Council Members, Robert W. Carling, Brittni Kiick and Trish Munro. Chair Steven Dunbar, Vice Chair Daniel Leary, and Commissioners Jacob Anderson, Evan Branning, and John Stein.

3. SPECIAL MEETING WORKSHOP ITEM

3.1 Presentation on the Livermore Housing Element Update.

Recommendation: Staff recommended the Planning Commission and City Council receive a presentation regarding the Livermore Housing Element Update and provide feedback.

Associate Planner Tricia Pontau presented the staff report.

Mayor Woerner invited public comment.

Donna Cabanne provided a comment.

Alan Burnham provided a comment.

There were no more comments and Mayor Woerner closed the public comment.

CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSIONERS RECEIVED THE
PRESENTATION AND PROVIDED THE FOLLOWING DIRECTION:

1. COMBINE THE HOUSING ELEMENT SCHEDULE AND GENERAL

PLAN TIMELINE ON THE WEBSITE

2. CONSIDER THE APPLICABILITY OF SB10 LEGISLATION

3. DO NOT GO OUTSIDE THE URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY

8. ADJOURNMENT – at 6:09pm to a Regular City Council meeting on January 24, 2022 at 7:00 p.m. and a Planning Commission meeting on February 1, 2022 at 7:00 p.m. both held virtually using Zoom.

ATTACHMENT 2
13 CM/74/436 Minutes JANUARY 20, 2022
APPROVED:

BOB WOERNER, MAYOR
ATTEST:

MARIE WEBER, CITY CLERK
14 JANUARY 24, 2022 Minutes CM/74/435

DRAFT MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 24, 2022
________________________________________________________________

REGULAR MEETING

1. CLOSED SESSION - NONE

2. CALL TO ORDER – The meeting of the City Council was called to order by Mayor Bob Woerner at 7:00 pm, held via teleconference using Zoom and YouTube.

ROLL CALL – Present: Mayor Bob Woerner, Vice Mayor Regina Bonanno and Council Members Robert W. Carling, Brittni Kiick and Trish Munro

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Woerner reordered the agenda to hear Item 6.1 first.

6.1 7:05 P.M. - Second Public Hearing to receive an update on redistricting efforts, receive public input on the composition of City Council voting districts and communities of interest before maps are drafted, and provide initial direction to the City's demographer on the draft maps to be considered at the third public hearing
Recommendation: Staff recommended that the City Council:

1. Receive a report from staff, the City's consultant Tripepi, Smith & Associates, Inc., and Wagaman Strategies demographer on the redistricting process;

2. Conduct the second of two public hearings to receive input on the composition of voting districts before maps are drafted; and

3. Provide initial direction to the City's demographer on the composition of draft maps.

City Clerk Marie Weber presented the staff report.

Mayor Woerner opened the public hearing.

Karl Wente provided a comment.

There were no more speakers and the hearing was closed.

THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO FOCUS FUTURE PUBLIC
OUTREACH ON COMMUNITY OF INTEREST SUBMISSIONS. THE COUNCIL ATTACHMENT 3
15 CM/74/436 Minutes JANUARY 24, 2022

ALSO PROVIDED INITIAL DIRECTION TO THE CITY'S DEMOGRAPHER ON

THE COMPOSITION OF DRAFT MAPS WHICH INCLUDED THE FOLLOWING ITEMS:

1. NOT USING RACE AS A PREDOMINATE FACTOR

2. KEEP IDENTIFIED COMMUNITIES TOGETHER, SUCH AS AVOIDING MOVING DISTRICT 2 EAST INTO DISTRICT 1

3. EXPLORE PLANS THAT LOWER THE CURRENT DEVIATION

4. TRACK AND CONSIDER RESIDENTS WHO MAY BE SUBJECT TO

DEFERRAL

3. PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS

3.1 Proclamation proclaiming January 24 - 28, 2022 as Data Privacy Week presented to City of Livermore Cybersecurity Manager Donald Hester.

Recommendation: Staff recommended City Council proclaim January 24 - 28, 2022 as Data Privacy Week.

4. CITIZENS FORUM
Mayor Woerner opened the public comment period.

Lori Souza provided a comment
Alan Marling provided a comment.

There were no more speakers and the public comment period was closed.

5. CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Woerner opened the public comment period.

There were no speakers and the public comment period was closed.

ON THE MOTION OF CM CARLING, SECONDED BY CM MUNRO, AND
CARRIED ON A 5-0 VOTE, THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE CONSENT CALENDAR.

5.1 Approval of draft minutes - December 16, 2021 Closed Session Special Meeting and January 10, 2022 Regular Meeting.

Recommendation: Staff recommended the City Council approve the draft minutes.

5.2 Resolution 2022-009 authorizing execution of an agreement with Kier & Wright Civil Engineers and Surveyors, Inc. to provide surveying, mapping, design, and construction engineering support for various City Projects in an amount not-to-exceed $331,525
16 JANUARY 24, 2022 Minutes CM/74/437
Recommendation: Staff recommended the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with Kier & Wright Civil Engineers and Surveyors, Inc. to provide surveying, mapping, design, and construction engineering support for various City Projects in an amount not-to- exceed $331,525.

5.3 Resolution 2022-010 authorizing execution of a purchase order with Pape Machinery for one replacement backhoe loader tractor in the not-to-exceed amount of $179,813
Recommendation: Staff recommended the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing execution of a Purchase Order with Pape Machinery for one replacement backhoe loader tractor in the not-to-exceed amount of $179,813.

5.4 Resolution 2022-011 ratifying the execution of the Federal Aviation Administration American Rescue Plan Act Grant Agreement to fund the Airport Enterprise Fund due to the COVID-19 Pandemic, in the amount of $59,000 Recommendation: Staff recommended City Council adopt a resolution ratifying the Director of Emergency Services execution of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) American Rescue Plan Act Grant (ARPA) Agreement No. 3-06-0123-034-2022, to fund the Airport Enterprise Fund due to the COVID-19 Pandemic in the amount of $59,000.

5.5 Resolution 2022-012 authorizing staff to submit an application to apply for and receive funds from the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) to assist with the implementation of SB 1383, which targets a reduction in the disposal of organic waste and designating the City Manager as the Signature Authority.

Recommendation: Staff recommended the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing staff to submit an application to apply for and receive funds from the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) and designating the City Manager as the Signature Authority.

5.6 Resolution 2022-013 in support of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission’s Bay Adapt: Regional Strategy for a Rising Bay.

Recommendation: Mayor Woerner recommended the City Council adopt a Resolution in support of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission’s Bay Adapt: Regional Strategy for a Rising Bay.

6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
ITEM 6.1 WAS MOVED TO THE BEGINNING OF THE AGENDA.

7. MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION
17 CM/74/438 Minutes JANUARY 24, 2022

7.1 Oral report from the Director of Emergency Services regarding the COVID-19 emergency, its impacts, and the governmental operations in response to that emergency, as well as discussion and direction regarding the City’s emergency operations in response to that emergency.

Recommendation: An oral report was given at the meeting.

Director of Emergency Services Marc Roberts presented the staff report.

Mayor Woerner opened the public comment period.

There were no speakers and the public comment period was closed.

THE CITY COUNCIL RECEIVED THE REPORT AND DIRECTED STAFF TO

RETURN WITH INFORMATION REGARDING HOW UNHOUSED RESIDENTS COULD GET FREE COVID-19 TESTS.

8. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS AND MATTERS INITIATED BY CITY

MANAGER, CITY ATTORNEY, STAFF AND COUNCIL MEMBERS

THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PROVIDED A SUMMARY OF

RECENTLY ATTENDED EVENTS AND MEETINGS IN ADDITION TO THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET.

8. ADJOURNMENT – at 8:37 pm to a Regular City Council meeting on February 14, 2022 at 7:00 p.m., held virtually using Zoom.

APPROVED:

BOB WOERNER, MAYOR
ATTEST:

MARIE WEBER, CITY CLERK
18 FEBRUARY 7, 2022 Minutes CM/74/435

DRAFT MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL
FEBRUARY 7, 2022
________________________________________________________________

CLOSED SESSION

1. CALL TO ORDER – The Closed Session of the City Council was called to order by Mayor Bob Woerner at 5:02pm, held via teleconference using Zoom and YouTube.

2. ROLL CALL – Present: Mayor Bob Woerner, Vice Mayor Regina Bonanno, and Council Members, Robert W. Carling, Brittni Kiick and Trish Munro.

OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
REGARDING CLOSED SESSION ITEMS.

Mayor Woerner opened the public comment period.

There were no speakers and the hearing was closed.

1. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION

3.1 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE EMPLOYMENT: Public employee recruitment pursuant to Government Code section 54957(b).

Title of position to be filled: City Manager.

3.2 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: Public Employee Performance Evaluation to set goals for annual review pursuant to Government Code section 54957(b). Title of position: City Attorney.

REPORT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Jason Alcala said there was no reportable action.

8. ADJOURNMENT – at 6:19pm to a Regular City Council Meeting on February 14, 2022, at 7:00 p.m. held virtually using Zoom.

APPROVED:

BOB WOERNER, MAYOR
ATTEST:

MARIE WEBER, CITY CLERK
ATTACHMENT 4
19 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 5.2

DATE:

February 14, 2022
TO:

Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:

Scott Lanphier, Public Works Director
SUBJECT:

Resolution authorizing execution of an agreement with Jacobs Engineering Group Inc., for the Water Resources Division’s Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) Server Replacement Project in an amount not-to-exceed $267,012 and authorizing the City Manager to approve equipment procurement in an amount not-to-exceed $330,000

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution:

1 .

Authorizing the City Manager to approve all the equipment procurement for this project in an amount of not-to-exceed $330,000.

SUMMARY
The Water Resources Division (WRD) retained Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. (Jacobs) to develop a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) Master Plan. The Master Plan identified seven system improvement projects over four years. The first project is to replace the SCADA servers, also referred to as Operations Technology (OT). This project will replace obsolete server hardware and software to establish a reliable platform for all SCADA applications and all subsequent SCADA Master Plan projects. This project will also upgrade the existing Human-Machine Interface (HMI), also known as operator-equipment interface, application to the current version while implementing foundational aspects of the SCADA Master Plan.

DISCUSSION
In August 2020, the City retained Jacobs to develop a SCADA Master Plan that consists of a system improvement plan and two sets of improvement standards. The selection of the consultant was based on the WRD staff review of the summary of qualifications submitted in 2019. Jacobs delivered the improvement plan in April 2021. During project development, the team took into consideration industry 20 trends with the greatest potential to achieve the stakeholder goals. In addition, the project team established prioritization and schedule criteria. Major component replacements are prioritized based on life-cycle obsolescence and criticality to the SCADA system, as follows: servers, networks, Water Reclamation Plant Programmable Logic Controls (PLC), and remote site (e.g., pump stations) PLC.

The implementation plan identified seven projects over four years with the first project replacing the SCADA servers. This project replaces obsolete server hardware and software to establish a reliable platform for all SCADA applications and all subsequent SCADA Master Plan projects. This project upgrades the existing HMI application to the current version while implementing foundational aspects of the SCADA Master Plan.

Jacobs’s service covers the system design, configuration, installation, testing, and commissioning.

Jacobs provides this full-package service to many other agencies. This service is different from what the City often does for a multidisciplinary capital improvement project, which is usually divided between a designer and a contractor. In this case, the project is mainly instrumentation and control. Through the Master Plan project, Jacobs has come to well understand the City’s system and staff are impressed by their knowledge, vision, and management skills. As a result, Jacobs will handle the project more efficiently, with less required lead time, than a new consultant would require.

Staff will work on equipment procurement identified by Jacobs during the design phase. The estimated equipment cost is $330,000.

The proposed approach to replacing the SCADA servers and upgrading the HMI application includes four tasks:

Task 1: SCADA Server Design
The SCADA server hardware design includes:

A cost/benefit analysis of server alternatives to host all virtual machines (VM) required by SCADA.

Core ethernet switches to connect between the VM servers, storage, and the existing network.

A firewall to provide secure communication with remote sites and enable alarm notifications to mobile devices.

A backup and recovery system, using a secondary server.

A list of HMI to be in the control room and throughout the plant, as needed.

Task 2: SCADA Server Replacement
The SCADA Server replacement will start with a replacement plan that includes server configuration of VM, cyber security hardening, factory testing, hardware deployment, communication cutover, testing, training, and documentation. This task then executes server configuration, factory testing, hardware installation, cutover, field testing, training, and documentation as planned in conjunction with WRD OT and Operations staff.

Task 3: Transition Plan
The project team will develop a transition plan for migrating all WRD PLCs to the new SCADA server platform. Transition planning will be based on the SCADA Master Plan projects following the completion of the SCADA Server Replacement and consider Livermore CIP project schedules. Typical planning topics include sequencing and phasing.

21 Task 4: Project Management
Jacobs’s management team provides the technical resources necessary to complete the job, prepares the project schedule and work plan, monitors the project budget and schedule, conducts project meetings and over-the-shoulder reviews, implements the QA/QC process, and communicates regularly with the City project team.

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS

This project has been budgeted under Capital Improvement Project No. 202129 (WRP SCADA Server and Network Update). The funding sources and timeline are shown below. By the end of June 2022, the estimated expenditures in FY 2021-22 for this contract are $206,000. The remainder of the contract amount will all be spent during the next fiscal year.

FY 2021-22
FY 2022-23
Total
Budget
Jacobs
Agreement
Equipment
Procurement
239 (Water Resources
Replacement)
$153,000
$300,000
$453,000
$197,000
$ 246,000
241 (Sewer Connection Fees)
$ 53,000
$110,000
$163,000
$ 70,000
$ 84,000
Total
$206,000
$410,000
$616,000
$267,000
$ 330,000

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

2. Exhibit A - Agreement

Prepared by: Yanming Zhang
Water Resources Technical Programs
Manager

Approved by:
____________________________________
Marc Roberts
City Manager
Fiscal Review by:
____________________________________
Bhavna Chaudhary
City Treasurer/Finance Manager

22 RESOLUTION NO. ________

IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH JACOBS ENGINEERING GROUP INC.

IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $267,012
Water Resources Division (WRD) staff identified Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. as the most qualified consultant for the Water Resources Division’s Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) Server Replacement Project. The selection process was based on the previous work quality, and scope and fee negotiation. The WRD will work with the IT Division on equipment procurement.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Livermore:

1. Adopt a resolution authorizing the execution of an agreement with Jacobs Engineering Group Inc., attached hereto as Exhibit A, in the amount of $267,012 for professional services for the Water Resources Division’s Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) Server Replacement Project.

2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to approve equipment procurement for this project in an amount not to exceed $330,000.

3. The City Manager is hereby authorized to take whatever actions are necessary and appropriate to carry out the purpose and intent of this Resolution.

On motion of Council Member , seconded by
Council Member , the foregoing resolution was passed
and adopted on February 14, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Tara M. Mazzanti
Marie Weber Tara M. Mazzanti
City Clerk Assistant City Attorney
Exhibit A – Agreement with Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. 23 Professional Services Agreement Page 1
Rev. 09.2021

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of , 2022, by and between the City of Livermore (“City”), a municipal corporation, and Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. (“Consultant”), a Delaware corporation licensed and registered to do business in California.

RE
CITALS
C
ity requires professional servic es to replace the Water Resources Division's obsolete supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) server hardware and software, establish a reliable platform for all SCADA applications , and upgrades the existing human-machine interface application to the current version.

C
onsultant warrants it possesses the distinct professional skills, qualifications, experience, and resources necessary to timely perform the services described i n this Agreement. Consultant acknowledges City has relied upon these warranties to retain Consultant.

REEMENT
NO
W, THEREFORE, City and Consultant hereby agree that the aforementioned recitals are true and correct and further agree as follows:

1. Retention as Consultant. City hereby retains Consultant, and Consultant hereby accepts such engagement, to perform the services described in Section 3 below subject to the terms and conditions in this Agreement.

2. Relationship of Parties – Independent Contractors . The relationship of the parties shall be that of independent contractors. Consultant and its employees are not City office rs or employees. Consultant is responsible for the supervision and management of its employees, including any workers co mpensation insurance, withholding taxes, unemployment insurance, and any other employer obligations associated with the delivery of the services contemplated by this Agreement.

3. Description of Services. Consultant shall provide the following professional services as more particularly set forth in Exhibit "A" (collectively “the Services”):

Repl
ace the Water Resources Division's obsolete supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) server hardware and software, establish a reliable platform for all SCADA applications, and upgrades the existing human- machine interface application to the current version

4. Consultant’s Responsibilities. Consultant shall:
(
a) Diligently perform the Services in a manner commensurate with industry, professional, and community standards;
2021-683 JKS/TMM

EXHIBIT A
24 Professional Services Agreement Page 2
Rev. 09.2021
(b) Provide the resources necessary to complete the Services in a timely manner;

(d) Obtain and keep in effect all necessary licenses , permits, qualifications, insurance, and approvals legally and professionally required for Consultant to practice its profession and to provide the Services;

(e) Comply with all laws in effect that are related to Consultant and the Services;

(f) Coordinate the Services with Yanming Zhang, Water Resources Technical Programs Manager (“Project Manager”), or such other person designated as the Project Manager by City;

(g) Be available to the Project Manager, and other parties referred to Consultant by the Project Manager, to answer questions or inquiries related to the Services;

(h) Only invoice City for the Services rendered. Consultant’s invoice shall be in writing and describe the Services performed for the payment requested. Consultant shall not submit an invoice to City more frequently than once a calendar month;

(i) Keep and maintain invoices and records related to the Services in an organized manner. At a minimum, the records must be kept for at least 3 years from the date of final payment to Consultant and must include time sheets, work progress reports, and other documentation to adequately explain all the Services invoiced for payment.

Consultant shall make the i nvoices and records immediately available to City upon delivery of a written request to examine, audit, or copy them at City’s place of business during normal business hours. Consultant shall give City 30 calendar-days’ written notice prior to destroying the invoices and records and allow City an opportunity to take possession. If City wants them, Consultant and City shall coordinate their delivery to City in the most efficient manner possible;

(j) P repare and submit a written report to the Project Manager, within 3 business-days of the Project Manager’s written request, that i dentifies the Services completed and in progress, the charges incurred to date, and the anticipated cost to complete the remaining Services;

(k) Consultant shall correct, at its own expense, all errors in the S ervices.

Should Consultant fail to make such corre ction in a timely manner, City may make the correction and charge the cost thereof to Consultant;

(l) If applicable, Consultant shall ensure that all work for compensation is provided in compliance with the requirements of the California Labor Code including but not limited to hours of labor, nondiscrimination, payroll records, apprentices, worker’s compensation and prevailing wages. If applicable, Consultant shall comply with all 2021-683 JKS/TMM

EXHIBIT A
25 Professional Services Agreement Page 3
Rev. 09.2021
prevailing wage laws, such as sections 1773, 1773.8, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the California Labor Code and any other applicable wage and hour law. If any violation of prevailing wage law associated with this Agreement is deemed to have occurred by any court or administrative authority, Consultant shall forfeit to the City, as a penalty, the sum of fifty dollars ($50.00) for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the applicable prevailing rates for any work done to accomplish the purposes of this Agreement; and,

(m) Consultant’s services provided pursuant to this Agreement shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (A DA) of 1990, and all amendments thereto, as well as all applicable regulations and guidelines issued pursuant to the ADA.

5. Compensation and Payment.

(a) The total compensation payable by City to Consultant for the Services SHALL NOT EXCEED the sum of $ 267,012 ( "not-to-exceed amount"). City shall compensate Consultant for the Services rendered at the hourly rates, task amounts or travel expenses set forth in Exhibit “A” up to the not -to-exceed amount. Except as provided in the body of this Agreement, the hourly rates, task amounts or travel expenses are intended to be Consultant’s only compensation for the Services and is inclusive of all costs of labor, licensing, permitting, overhead and administrative costs, and any-and-all other costs, expenses, and charges incurred by Consultant, its agents, and employees to provide the Services.

(b) City shall pay Consultant no later than 30 days after City receives a written invoice from Consultant and verifies the Services were performed for the payment requested.

6. Term. The term of this Agreement commences on January 25, 20 22, and terminates upon the completion of the Services or December 31, 2023, whichever occurs first.

7. Termination by City . City may terminate any portion or all of the Services by giving Consultant at least 30 calendar-days written notice. Upon receipt of a termination notice, Consultant shall immediately stop all work in progress on the S ervices except where necessary to preserve the benefit of the work, and then assemble the work on the Services for delivery to City on the termination date. All compensation for Services performed prior to the termination date shall be payable to Consultant in accordance with Section 5.

8. Ownership of Documents. All drawings, designs, data, photographs, reports and other items prepared or obtained by Consultant in the performance of the Services are City’s property and Consultant shall deliver them to City upon demand.

9. Copyright and Right of Use. All items created by Consultant for City under this Agreement are works made for hire, and Consultant shall give City the copyright and all intellectual property rights to all items developed, prepared, and delivered as part of the Services. Consultant agrees that all aspects of the Services and items created thereby will be original works of creation and will not use, in whole or in part, any work created by 2021-683 JKS/TMM

EXHIBIT A
26 Professional Services Agreement Page 4
Rev. 09.2021
any other party, except when expressly disc losed by Consultant to City and Consultant obtains a license to such items for the benefit of City. All licenses must be perpetual, world-wide, non-exclusive, and royalty free sufficient in scope to permit City’s full use and enjoyment of its ownership rights in the items created by the Services.

10. Confidentiality. Consultant shall not disclose any confidential or proprietary information received from City to anyone except Consultant’s employees who require access to the information to perform the S ervices. This obligation shall survive termination and remain in full force and effect until the information, and any copies thereof, are destroyed or returned to City.

11. Defense, Indemnity, and Hold Harmless. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall hold harmless, indemnify, and defend with counsel selected by the City or otherwise acceptable to the City, the City and its elected and appointed officials, officers, directors, employees, agents and designated volunteers from and against any and all liability, loss, damage, claims, expenses, and costs (including without limitation, attorney’s fees and costs and fees of litigation) (collectively, “Liability”) of every nature arising out of or in connection with Consultant’s performance of the services contemplated by this Agreement, or in connection with Consultant’s failure to comply with any of its obligations contained in this Agreement, except for such Liability caused by the sole active negligence or willful misconduct of City. Consultant’s obligations to hold harmless, indemnify, and defend shall not be excused because of Consultant’s inability to evaluate Liability or because Consultant evaluates Liability and determines that Consultant is not liable to the claimant. These obligations are independent of, and shall not in any way be limited by, the minimum insurance obligations contained in this Agreement. These obligations shall survive the completion or termination of this Agreement. Consultant must respond within 30 days to the tender of any claim for defense and indemnity by the City.

(a) Modification for Construction Contracts. To the extent this Agreement is a “construction contract” covered by California Civil Code section 2782, then Consultant’s duty to indemnify shall not apply in a manner prohibited by California Civil Code section 2782.

(b) Modification for Design Professional Services. To the extent this Agreement is for “design professional services” defined in California Civil Code section 2782.8, then Consultant’s duties to defend and indemnify shall only apply to the extent provided for in California Civil Code s ection 2782.8(a), unless section 2782.8(a) is not applicable for one of the reasons set forth in 2782.8(e).

12. Insurance. Consultant shall procure and maintain insurance during the term of this Agreement in the amounts and under the terms set forth in Exhibit “B” against claims that may arise from or in connection with this Agreement and performance of the Services.

Upon reasonable written notice, Consultant shall comply with any changes in the amounts and terms of insurance as may be required from time-to-time by City’s Risk Manager.

13. Acceptance of Final Payment. Consultant’s acceptance of final pay ment will release City from any and all claims and liabilities for compensation under this Agreement. 2021-683 JKS/TMM

EXHIBIT A
27 Professional Services Agreement Page 5
Rev. 09.2021

14. Acceptance of Work. City’s acceptance of, or payment to Consultant for, the Services does not release Consultant from its responsibility for the accuracy , completeness, or competency of the Services, nor do the actions constitute an assumption of Consultant’s responsibility or liability by City for any defect or error in the Services.

15. Conflict of Interest. Consultant represents that no City employee or official has a financial interest in Consultant. Consultant shall not offer, encourage, or accept any financial interest in any part of Consultant's business by or from a City employee or official during the term of this Agreement or as a result of being awarded this Agreement. If any of the Services are paid by reimbursement from an agreement between City and a private party, Consultant represents that it has not performed any work for that private party during the 12-month period prior to the execution of this Agreement , and that it shall not negotiate, offer or accept any contract for services from that party during the term of this Agreement.

16. Economic Disclosure. Consultant shall comply with City’s local conflict of interest code and the Political Reform Act, and prepare and file an economic disclosure statement if the S ervices involve making, or participation in making, decisions which may have a material effect on the Consultants’ financial interest. While it is Consultant’s sole responsibility to evaluate its conflicts of interest, the Consultant nevertheless agrees to prepare and file an economic disclosure statement if requested by City.

17. Non-Exclusive Agreement. This is a non- exclusive agreement. City reserves the right to provide, and to retain other consultants to provide, services that are the same or similar to the Services described in this Agreement.

18. No Assignment. Consultant shall not assign or subcontract any of the Services without City’s prior written consent. For the purposes of this section, a change of fifty - percent or more in the ownership or control of Consultant constitutes an assignment.

19. Remedies. All remedies permitted or available under this Agreement, or at law or in equity, are cumulative and alternative, and the invocation of a right or remedy will not be construed to waive or elect a remedy with respect to any other available right or remedy. As a condition precedent to commencing legal action involving a claim or dispute against City arising from this Agreement, the Consultant must present a written claim to City in accordance with Chapter 3.42 of the Livermore Municipal Code.

20. Construction of Language . T he terms and conditions in t his Agreement have been arrived at through negotiation and each party had a full and fair opportunity to review and revise this Agreement with legal counsel. Any ambiguity in this Agreement will not be resolved against either party as the drafting party. In the event of an inconsistency or conflict between the language in the body of the Agreement and an attachment hereto, the language in the body of the Agreement controls.

21. Entire Agreement; Modification . T his Agreement supersedes all other agreements, whether oral or written, between the parties with respect to the Services.

Any modification to this Agreement must be in writing and signed by both parties. In the 2021-683 JKS/TMM

EXHIBIT A
28 Professional Services Agreement Page 6
Rev. 09.2021
event the original of this Agreement is lost or destroyed, an archi val copy maintained by City can be used in place of the original for all purposes with the same effect as if it was the original.

22. Notice. Notices under this Agreement must be delivered to the addresses below by deposit in the United States mail or by overnight delivery service, with postage prepaid and delivery confirmation:

TO CITY: Attention: Water Resources Division Manager
City of Livermore
101 W. Jack London Blvd.

Livermore, California 94551

TO CONSULTANT: Attention: Mia Lindsey
Jacobs Engineering Group
4 Embarcadero Center, Suites 3800
San Francisco, CA 94111

23. Waiver. Failure to insist upon the strict performance of any term or conditions in this Agreement, no matter how long the failure continues, is not a waiver of the term or condition and does not bar the right to subsequently demand strict performance. To be effective, a waiver must be in writing and signed by the non-breaching party.

24. Severability. If a court of competent jurisdiction determines a provision in this Agreement is invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will nevertheless continue in full force and effect without being impaired in any way.

25. Survival. The terms, conditions, and obligations in Sections 8, 9, 10, and 11 shall survive the completion or termination of this Agreement.

26. Electronic Signatures. By signing this document, you are agreeing that you have reviewed this disclosure information and consent to transact business using electronic communications, to receive notices and disclosures electronically, and to utilize electronic signatures in lieu of using paper documents. You are not required to receive notices and disclosures or sign documents electronically. If you prefer not to do so, you may request to receive paper copies and withdraw your consent at any time.

27. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed and delivered in one or more counterparts, each of which will be deemed to be an original copy of this Agreement, and all of which, when taken together, will be deemed to constitute one and the same agreement. The facsimile, email, or other electronically delivered signatures of the Parties shall be deemed to constitute original signatures, and facsimile or electronic copies hereof shall be deemed to constitute duplicate originals and shall be valid and effective for all purposes.

*********************************************************************************************

Signatures and Attachment List on the Next Page
2021-683 JKS/TMM

EXHIBIT A
29 EXHIBIT A
30 SCADA Server Replacement Project Proposal

COL - SCADA Server Replacement SOW Rev5 (final revised) ii Contents

1. Project Understanding .................................................................................................. 1

2. Description of Services ................................................................................................. 2

2.1 Approach ..................................................................................................................................... 2

2.2 Task Descriptions ..................................................................................................................... 4

2.3 Deliverables ................................................................................................................................ 6

2.5 General Assumptions .............................................................................................................. 8

2.6 Project Schedule ....................................................................................................................... 8

3. SCADA Server Replacement Jacobs Team ............................................................... 9

4. Fee Proposal ................................................................................................................. 10

2021-683 JKS/TMM

EXHIBIT A
31 SCADA Server Replacement Project Proposal

Page 1 of 10 ends

COL - SCADA Server Replacement SOW Rev5 (final revised)

1. Project Understanding
The City of Livermore Public Works Department Water Resources Division (Livermore, WRD) receives treated water from Zone 7 Water Agency, and is responsible for water distribution, wastewater collection, wastewater treatment, and stormwater management. WRD uses a supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system to monitor and control the WRD Water Reclamation Plant, four wastewater lift stations, three stormwater lift stations, and the water distribution system (including five pump stations and three reservoir sites). The SCADA system and the data it collects are critical to supporting operations and regulatory reporting functions.

In August 2020, WRD contracted with Jacobs to develop a SCADA Master Plan that included an implementation plan. Jacobs delivered the final implementation plan on April 30, 2021. The implementation plan identified seven projects over four years to upgrade and replace the WRD SCADA system. The first project is to replace the SCADA servers, also referred to as Operations Technology (OT).

This project replaces obsolete server hardware and software to establish a reliable platform for all SCADA applications and all subsequent SCADA Master Plan projects. This project upgrades the existing HMI application to the current version while implementing foundational aspects of the SCADA Master Plan. 2021-683 JKS/TMM

EXHIBIT A
32 SCADA Server Replacement Project Proposal

Page 2 of 10 ends

COL - SCADA Server Replacement SOW Rev5 (final revised)

2. Description of Services

2.1 Approach
The proposed approach to replacing the SCADA servers and upgrading the HMI application (FactoryTalk®) includes four tasks:
(1) Task 1 focuses on the SCADA Server Architecture Design. (2) Task 2 focuses on the SCADA Replacement planning, design, procurement, development, factory testing, installation, and commissioning.
(3) Task 3 focuses on the Transition Plan to migrate all PLCs to the new SCADA platform. (4) Task 4 focuses on successfully delivering the project.

Task 1: SCADA Server Design
The SCADA server hardware design includes:
• a cost/benefit analysis of server alternatives to host all virtual machines (VM) required by SCADA. • core ethernet switches (10GB minimum) to connect between the VM servers, storage, and the existing network.
• a firewall to provide secure communication with remote sites and enable alarm notifications to mobile devices.
• a backup and recovery system, using a secondary server. • a list of thick/thin clients to be in the control room and throughout the plant as needed.

The SCADA server design will provide capacity to host all virtual machines needed for the SCADA system, using Microsoft Server 2019 or latest Rockwell Automation approved operating system. Jacobs will collaborate with WRD OT staff to set up and maintain SCADA VMs. VMs to be included in the design are listed below:

Management VMs
DC01: Domain Controller 1
DC02: Domain Controller 2
RDS01: Remote Desktop Server (5 clients)
RDS02: Remote Desktop Server (5 clients)
RDS03: Remote Desktop Server (5 clients)
BUP01: Backup Server
SCADA VMs
HMI01: Primary HMI Server and Alarm Server
HMI02: Secondary HMI Server and Alarm Server
DATA01: Data Server (Polls PLCs) Historian Live Data Collector DATA02: Data Server (Polls PLCs) Historian Live Data Collector FTD01: FactoryTalk Directory (PhoneBook of Rockwell Computers) ENG01: Asset Center Server with Full MS SQL License
ENG02: FactoryTalk View Studio and Studio5000 (RSLogix) HIST01: Tier 1 Historian (collects all Historical data for use by the SCADA system) HIST02 Tier 2 Historian (in a format accepted by the connector such as MYSQL to generate Lab and Operations report, temporarily located in the SCADA server) 2021-683 JKS/TMM

EXHIBIT A
33 SCADA Server Replacement Project Proposal

Page 3 of 10 ends

COL - SCADA Server Replacement SOW Rev5 (final revised) Task 2: SCADA Server Replacement
The SCADA Server replacement will start with a replacement plan that includes server configuration (up to 15 VMs), cyber security hardening, and factory testing. Server configuration and factory testing will take place at Jacobs’ control lab in Redding, CA.

The SCADA Server replacement will conclude with hardware deployment (up to 15 thin clients), communication cutover, testing, training, and documentation. This task executes hardware installation at the WRP, cutover, field testing, training, and documentation in conjunction with OT and Operations staff.

Task 3: Transition Plan
The Transition Plan will build on the projects described in the Master Plan, including the network upgrade and upgrading or replacing up to 16 PLCs at the WRP and up to 15 PLCs at the remote sites. The transition plan will describe a sequence of upgrades and replacements over a transition period of up to 3 years.

Task 4: Project Management
As project manager, Jason Hise will work closely with you while managing our team. He will provide the technical resources necessary to complete the job, prepare the project schedule and work plan, monitor the project budget and schedule, conduct project meetings and over -the-shoulder reviews, implement the QA/QC process, and communicate regularly with the Livermore team. For the workshops he leads and facilitates, Jason will provide timely detailed meeting notes with action items, corrective actions to be followed, and work-around plans to maintain schedule and budget. He will provide schedule updates at monthly project management team meetings and works with Jacobs’s project controls team to set up the project accounting and invoice structures required for billing purposes.

2021-683 JKS/TMM

EXHIBIT A
34 SCADA Server Replacement Project Proposal

Page 4 of 10 ends

COL - SCADA Server Replacement SOW Rev5 (final revised)

2.2 Task Descriptions

2.2.1 Task 1 - SCADA Server Design
Kickoff Meeting and Site Investigation
Jacobs will request a detailed inventory of computer and network equipment including interconnectivity of all components to develop a detailed server network diagram. Jacobs will review these documents and develop a draft server network diagram prior to the kickoff meeting. A kickoff (1 hour) meeting will be held to review the objectives of the project with all Livermore stakeholders, followed by a site investigation that includes access to computers, computer performance monitoring, current available storage, and network switch configurations accompanied by appropriate WRD staff.

Server/Client Architecture Development:

Jacobs will facilitate Workshop #1 with WRD OT staff to develop a new server/client architecture for the SCADA system. Topics will include hyperconvergence, hypervisor options, data center network switches , bridge PLC (interface for remote sites), backup and recovery, cybersecurity (firewalls and endpoint protection), thin client applications, and cost-benefits of all major components (hardware and software).

The design assumes physical redundancy (2 server locations) so that the new backup and recovery system shall allow for an entire building or server node to go down with no loss of data and minimal interruption to operator functionality. Jacobs will document the workshop results in a draft technical memorandum (TM) (90% design) that describes WRD’s SCADA server/client architecture and includes a draft cost- benefit analysis of architecture options.

SCADA Server Design:

Jacobs will facilitate Workshop #2 with WRD OT staff to design the new SCADA servers based on the results of Workshop #1. The design will apply to both the primary and secondary SCADA servers, and identify long-term maintenance costs and resources. The design will include UPS power requirements and sizing for all new data center equipment. Jacobs will document the workshop results in a final TM (Final Design) summarizing the cost-benefit analysis and recommendations, and a final Bill of Materials (BOM) that includes procurement information, including purchase orders, for all equipment and software. WRD will initiate procurement procedures upon approval of the final TM (100% design). The analysis will identify all sole source equipment or software.

2.2.2 Task 2 - SCADA Server Replacement
Subtask 2.1 – SCADA Server Development:

Jacobs will facilitate Workshop #3 with WRD OT staff to develop a detailed plan for configuration, factory testing, installation, cutover, and training. Configuration topics will include the domain controller, backup server, endpoint protection, networks, and Rockwell software. Security policies and procedures will be reviewed and followed. Jacobs will document the workshop results in a draft TM that includes factory testing procedures, hardware installation sequences, a detailed cutover schedule, resource responsibilities, validation and fallback procedures, integration with existing network, training and documentation requirements, and decommissioning. Jacobs will incorporate feedback for a final TM.

Based on receipt of all equipment and software at the Jacobs control system lab (located in Redding, CA), Jacobs will perform the following tasks:
1) Configure the SCADA server equipment and software in accordance with the Configuration Plans determined in the SCADA Server Replacement Plan.
2) Perform and document all factory testing procedures in conjunction with WRD OT staff. 2021-683 JKS/TMM

EXHIBIT A
35 SCADA Server Replacement Project Proposal

Page 5 of 10 ends

COL - SCADA Server Replacement SOW Rev5 (final revised) 3) Document the completion of the server equipment and software configuration in a Factory Testing Acceptance Report.

Subtask 2.2 – SCADA Server Commissioning:

Jacobs will facilitate Workshop #4 with WRD OT staff as a kickoff to executing the cutover schedule. Based on the replacement plan in the final TM, workshop participants will identify last-minute considerations that may impact the cutover. Jacobs will coordinate with WRD OT and Operations staff to initiate the cutover schedule. Jacobs will document the results of Workshop #4 in a cutover schedule that identifies daily activities and responsibilities to complete the SCADA server replacement. Jacobs will execute the cutover schedule in conjunction with WRD OT and Operations staff, including installation, cutover, field testing, commissioning, and decommissioning. The following existing SCADA/Reporting functionalities will be preserved and upgraded:
• Data collection and access
• Trending
• Backup and restore
• Domain and network configuration
• Reporting
• Alarm notification
Jacobs will document the successful cutover of the server equipment and software in a System Acceptance Report.

Following successful cutover of the SCADA servers, Jacobs will prepare a draft O&M manual and presentation materials for a training session with WRD OT staff. Jacobs will train WRD OT staff on a holistic overview of the new SCADA servers, consisting of its configuration, running applications, and cyber security protection measures. Training will include incident response procedures for WRD OT staff to respond appropriately to security events that threaten stable operation of the SCADA system.

Based on feedback on the training session, Jacobs will submit a final O&M manual. For final acceptance, Jacobs will provide as-built documentation of the SCADA servers, consisting of the server network diagrams, SCADA server design drawings, and final configurations.

2.2.3 Task 3 – Transition Plan
Jacobs will facilitate Workshop #5 with WRD Operations and OT team members to develop the transition plan for migrating all WRD PLCs to the new SCADA server platform . Transition planning will be based on the SCADA Master Plan projects following the completion of the SCADA Server Replacement and consider WRD CIP project schedules. Typical planning topics include sequencing and phasing. Upon completion of the workshop, Jacobs will document the workshop results in a draft TM that describes the transition plan.

Jacobs will incorporate WRD feedback to produce a final transition plan. 2021-683 JKS/TMM

EXHIBIT A
36 SCADA Server Replacement Project Proposal

Page 6 of 10 ends

COL - SCADA Server Replacement SOW Rev5 (final revised)

2.2.4 Task 4 - Project Management
Project Management
Jacobs will furnish project management services necessary to properly manage, lead, and control the project work. Jacobs will furnish project management services for the project, as follows:
▪ Progress Monitoring—Monitor budget, work progress, and schedule for each task. Manage scope changes and act to resolve impacts on budgets as soon as scope changes have been identified. ▪ Administration—Maintain project records, manage and process project communications, and coordinate Project administrative matters.
▪ Staff Management—Supervise activities of staff assigned to the project. Coordinate and schedule appropriate staffing to meet project requirements.
▪ Health and Safety—Jacobs will provide project specific field safety instructions for use by team members when performing field investigations at WRD sites.

Monthly Reporting
Jacobs will prepare monthly progress reports. The reports will include at a minimum, the following:
▪ Progress within the last month, by task and subtask
▪ Problems encountered or anticipated
▪ Items scheduled for work in the next month
▪ Monthly project billings showing labor hours by staff member and by task Quality Assurance
Quality assurance (QA) is the administrative and procedural activities implemented in our quality system to guarantee high level of quality in the development, production, and delivery of our engineering projects and services at each phase of the project. Quality control (QC) is the observation of techniques and activities used to make sure the requirements of our quality procedures and program are met. It is our system for verifying and maintaining the desired level of quality through careful planning, continued review and “inspection,” and implementation of corrective action, as required. QC makes sure the results of what we’ve done are what you expected.

Jason Hise will work closely with Quality Manager Michael Johnson to implement our rigorous internal QC and QA process for the Master Plan. Michael will develop a tailored Quality Plan for this project and provide training on the quality process. The Quality Plan outlines the responsibility of the originator and the reviewer for plans, specifications, reports, calculations, quantities, and cost estimates. When all deliverables conform to the procedural guidelines, formats, and content expectations, review delays are minimized. Michael reviews the documentation prepared for each step of the process and ensures that reviews are conducted thoroughly.

2.3 Deliverables
Task 1 – SCADA Server Design
▪ Kickoff Meeting Presentation & Meeting Notes
▪ Detailed Existing Server Network Diagram
▪ Listing of OT Equipment with IP Addresses and Settings ▪ Architecture Workshop #1 Presentation & Meeting Notes ▪ Draft Server/Client Architecture Drawings
▪ Draft Bill of Materials (A series of P.O. and shipping instructions) ▪ Draft Cost Benefit Analysis with Recommendations
▪ 90% Design TM, Class 3 Cost Estimate and Schedule
▪ Server Design Workshop #2 Presentation & Meeting Notes ▪ Draft Server Design Drawings
2021-683 JKS/TMM

EXHIBIT A
37 SCADA Server Replacement Project Proposal

Page 7 of 10 ends

COL - SCADA Server Replacement SOW Rev5 (final revised) ▪ Final BOM
▪ Final Cost Benefit Analysis with Recommendations
▪ 100% Design TM, Class 2 Cost Estimate and Schedule
Task 2 – SCADA Server Replacement
▪ Replacement Planning Workshop #3 Presentation & Meeting Notes ▪ Draft and Final SCADA Server Replacement Plan including:
- Configuration Plans
- Factory Testing Performance Standard including each VM - Factory Testing Procedures
- Draft Cutover Schedule
- Field Testing and Commissioning Performance Standard including each VM - Field Testing and Commissioning Procedures
- Training and Documentation Requirements
- Decommissioning Plans
▪ Configured Server Equipment (SCADA servers, thin clients) ▪ Configured Server Software (Historian, Alarm software, domain control, backup and recovery packages)
▪ Factory Testing Acceptance Report
▪ Cutover Scheduling Workshop #4 Presentation & Meeting Notes ▪ Final Cutover Schedule
▪ System Acceptance Report
▪ Training Documentation including:
- Draft O&M Manual
- Training Presentation
- Hands-on Training Procedures
- Final O&M Manual
▪ As-built Documentation including:
- Server Network Diagram
- Server Design Drawings
- Final Configurations
Task 3 – Transition Plan
▪ Transition Planning Workshop #5 Presentation & Meeting Notes ▪ Draft and Final SCADA System Transition Plan
Task 4 – Project Management
▪ Monthly Invoices and Progress Reports
▪ Project Schedule
▪ Field Safety Instructions

2.4 Roles and Responsibilities
The following are roles and responsibilities specific to the cutover sequence. ▪ Jacobs’s role and responsibilities: Jacobs will be responsible for cutting over monitoring and control of each PLC, validating the cutover, communicating with the lead operation personnel, and maintaining a fallback position throughout the cutover. Before any cutover activity is initiated Jacobs will request the cutover permission from the lead operations and receive confirmation that operation is ready for the action before acting. Jacobs will follow any instructions from the WRD’s lead operations staff including failing back to the old SCADA system. Jacobs will provide project deliverables in MSWord, Excel, PDF, or Visio formats.
▪ WRD’s role and responsibility: The WRD will be responsible for maintaining monitoring and control of the wastewater treatment plant. The lead operator will be informed of all requested cutover activities 2021-683 JKS/TMM

EXHIBIT A
38 SCADA Server Replacement Project Proposal

Page 8 of 10 ends

COL - SCADA Server Replacement SOW Rev5 (final revised) before they happen and grant permission for all cutover activity step by step. The lead operator will instruct Jacobs to perform control actions if needed during the cutover. The o perator at anytime may request operations on the old system provided the cutover cannot be validated after testing.

The services described below are assumed to be provided by WRD:
▪ Actively participate in team conference calls and face-to-face/virtual meetings ▪ Schedule appropriate WRD personnel to participate in workshops ▪ Provide one set of adjudicated comments to draft documents and drawings in a timely manner (typically 2 weeks)

2.5 General Assumptions
▪ The SCADA Server replacement will use a thin-client architecture with servers running in a virtual environment. All virtual machines will be based on Microsoft Server 2019 or latest Rockwell Automation approved operating system and replace current obsolete operating systems, such as MS Windows XP, MS Windows 7, and older versions of MS Server. ▪ The SCADA Server replacement project includes installation and configuration of core switches in the SCADA server appliances and security configuration of the domain controllers. Network design services and security measures outside the data center are not included in this scope. Network design services may be performed under a separate task order that includes design, configuration, installation and testing of the DMZ server, network switches, cabl ing, and network security measures. ▪ HMI Programming will be limited to minor changes to accommodate the application migration to the new server/client architecture. Reprogramming PLCs and HMI applications , including legacy alarm management, to the new software standards identified in the SCADA Master Plan is not included in this scope.
▪ Due to global chip shortages, chip-based hardware products are experiencing price increases and extended delivery schedules. Although some contingency for material cost incre ases is included in this proposal, Jacobs cannot guarantee hardware and software pricing at the time of procurement. ▪ WRD will procure all SCADA server hardware and Rockwell software for delivery to Jacobs’ control system lab in Redding, CA and ship the Factory Tested hardware and software to the WRP in Livermore, CA.
▪ Jacobs will evaluate the existing electrical service for a new UPS. No design or construction costs for electrical service upgrades are included in this proposal. ▪ All meetings are assumed to be in-person unless otherwise directed by WRD staff. ▪ All deliverable documents will be provided in native electronic format (Word, Excel, Visio, etc.) . ▪ All training and training documentation are limited to the equipment procured in this project. ▪ Labor and material fees are developed from the labor and material detailed cost estimates in the SCADA Master Plan.

2.6 Project Schedule
The scope of engineering services and activities associated with this SCADA Server Replacement will be completed in accordance with the following approximate Project target dates:

Activity Target Start Target Finish
Task 1 – SCADA Server Design January 1, 2022 April 30, 2022 Task 2.1 – SCADA Server Development May 1, 2022 August 31, 2022 Task 2.2 – SCADA Server Commissioning September 1, 2022 December 31, 2022 Task 3 – Transition Plan November 15, 2022 December 31, 2022 Task 4 – Project Management January 1, 2022 December 31, 2022 2021-683 JKS/TMM

EXHIBIT A
39 SCADA Server Replacement Project Proposal

Page 9 of 10 ends

COL - SCADA Server Replacement SOW Rev5 (final revised)

3. SCADA Server Replacement Jacobs Team
The proposed Jacobs team members are either a continuation of team members from the SCADA System Master Plan or selected from Jacobs Operational Technology group. The classification rate schedule provided in the SOQ submitted in January 2019 shows a 3% annual escalation for hourly billing rates from 2019 through 2021.

Jacobs Key Team Members
Staff Member Classification Project Role
Michael Johnson Principal Technologist Quality Manager
Jason Hise Senior Technologist Project Manager
Iouri Ossokine Project Engineer Lead Project Engineer
Jacobs Engineering Group
Classification Rate Schedule for City of Livermore
Hourly Billing Rates
Classification 2021 2022 2023
Principal Technologist*/Principal Project Manager $268 $277 $286 Senior Technologist*/Senior Project Manager $250 $258 $266 Engineer Specialist*/Project Manager $235 $243 $251
Project Engineer* $209 $216 $223
Associate Engineer* $190 $196 $202
Staff Engineer 2* $166 $171 $177
Staff Engineer 1* $141 $146 $151
Engineering/CAD Tech 3 $126 $130 $134
Engineering/CAD Tech 2 $104 $108 $112
Engineering/CAD Tech 1 $95 $98 $101
Office/Administrative/Clerical $91 $94 $97
*Includes engineering, software development, consulting, planner, and scientist disciplines Notes:

1. A 10% mark-up will be applied to all direct costs and expenses (materials, transportation, meals and lodging, mail, subcontracts, outside services, etc.)

2. A 3% escalation rate is applied annually to all hourly billing rates.

3. Rates are effective from January 1 through December 31 each calendar year.

2021-683 JKS/TMM

EXHIBIT A
40 SCADA Server Replacement Project Proposal

Page 10 of 10 ends

COL - SCADA Server Replacement SOW Rev5 (final revised)

4. Fee Proposal
The fee proposal shown below is based on contract terms and conditions in the standard City of Livermore Professional Services Agreement.

TASK NAME TOTAL
HOURS
LABOR
FEE
TASK 1 – SCADA SERVER DESIGN 262 $ 52,060
TASK 2 – SCADA SERVER REPLACEMENT 720 $ 145,496
TASK 3 – TRANSITION PLAN 86 $ 18,630
TASK 4 - PROJECT MANAGEMENT 276 $ 50,826
FEE PROPOSAL TOTAL 1,344 $ 267,012

2021-683 JKS/TMM

EXHIBIT A
41 Revised 10/29/21 B16 – 2M E&O (rev Jacobs)

Page 1 ends

EXHIBIT B

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

Minimum Scope and Limits of Insurance
Consultant/Contractor shall maintain limits no less than:

1. Commercial General Liability, including operations, products, and completed operations, as applicable:
$2,000,000 per occurrence/$4,000,000 aggregate for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. If Commercial General Liability or other form of insurance with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.

2. Automobile Liability:
$1 ,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.

3. Workers’ Compensation and Employer's Liability:

Statutory limits as required by the State of California including $1,000,000 Employers’ Liability per accident, per employee for bodily injury or disease. A waiver of subrogation is required for Workers’ Compensation insurance. If Consultant/Contractor is a sole proprietor, then they must sign “Contractor Release of Liability.”

4. Professional Liability/Errors and Omissions:
$2,000,000 per claim. Consultant/Contractor warrants that any retroactive date under this policy shall precede the effective date of this contract and, either continuous coverage will be maintained, or an extended discovery period will be exercised for a period of two years beginning at the time work under this contract is completed.

Deductibles and Self-Insured Retention
All self-insured retentions (SIR) must be disclosed to Risk Management for approval and shall not reduce the limits of liability. Policies containing any self-insured retention (SIR) provision shall provide, or be endorsed to provide, that the SIR may be satisfied by either the named insured or the City of Livermore.

Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of no less than A:

VII and accepted to do business in the State of California, unless otherwise acceptable to the City of Livermore.

Other Insurance Provisions
The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:

1. The City of Livermore, its officers, officials, employees, and designated volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the 2021-683 JKS/TMM

EXHIBIT A
42 Revised 10/29/21 B16 – 2M E&O (rev Jacobs)

Page 2 ends

Consultant/Contractor; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant/Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City of Livermore, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers.

2. The limits of insurance required in this agreement may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. The additional insured coverage under the Consultant’s/Contractor’s policy shall be primary and non-contributory and will not seek contribution from the City’s insurance or self-insurance and shall be at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10 04 13. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non-contributory basis for the benefit of the City of Livermore before the City’s own insurance or self-insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured.

3. Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policy, including breaches of warranties, shall not affect coverage provided to the City of Livermore, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers.

4. The Consultant’s/Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.

5. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled by either party before expiration of the policy unless notice is delivered in accordance with policy provisions.

6. Certificate Holder section of the insurance certificate should read: City of Livermore, 1052 S. Livermore Avenue, Livermore, CA 94550

Verification of Coverage
Consultant/Contractor shall furnish certificates of insurance and endorsement(s) effecting coverage to the City of Livermore for approval. The endorsements shall be on forms acceptable to the City of Livermore. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City of Livermore before work commences.

2021-683 JKS/TMM

EXHIBIT A
43 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 5.3

DATE:

February 14, 2022
TO:

Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:

Paul Spence, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:

Resolution authorizing execution of an agreement with Kier & Wright to provide design, environment, and construction support in an amount not-to-exceed $392,289, for the Collier Canyon Creek Silt Basin, Project No. 201727, DR 4344-0132-040.

RECOMMENDED ACTION

SUMMARY
The project is located on Collier Canyon Road near Las Positas Community College. The February 2017 storm event, which included high volume fast-moving stormwater containing debris and silt clogged culverts and filled a mitigation basin, causing water and sediment to overflow and flood Collier Canyon Road, damaging private properties and the City’s riparian mitigation area downstream of the culvert. The purpose of the project is to reduce future flood hazards by improving the conveyance capacity of the culvert pipes under Collier Canyon Road.

Kier & Wright was selected to provide engineering services for the project through a request for proposal process. They have performed similar services for the City in the past and proved both responsive and satisfactory.

DISCUSSION
In June 2018, the City submitted a Section 404-Hazard Mitigation Grant (HMG) application to Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for the Canyon Creek Silt Basin, Project No. 201727. The HMG application was approved in 2019, and the authorization to move forward with the project was received on November 12, 2021.

The project is located on Collier Canyon Road near Las Positas Community College. The site is opposite 44 a residential development to the west and open space and rolling hills to the east. Collier Canyon Creek collects drainage from the hills and conveys the water to the City’s culvert on Collier Canyon Road.

Downstream of the culvert is the City’s mitigation basin.

In February 2017, heavy rainfall created a high volume of fast-moving stormwater in Collier Creek containing debris and silt, which clogged the downstream culverts and filled a City mitigation basin, causing water and sediment to overflow onto Collier Canyon Road. The flooding resulted in damage to private property and to the City’s riparian mitigation area. The site is identified as a high priority project in the Tri-Valley Hazard Mitigation Plan (TVHMP) for mitigation of future flood damage.

The Collier Canyon Creek sediment capture project includes the installation of a weir structure at the existing culvert headwall, floodwalls along the shoulder of Collier Canyon Road, and an emergency overflow storm drain line above the existing culvert pipes and ancillary improvements, which will improve conveyance capacity of the culvert pipes by minimizing sediment and debris from entering the culverts pipes.

Kier & Wright was selected to provide professional services for the project through a request for proposal process. They have performed similar services to the City in the past and proved both responsive and satisfactory.

CEQA
The proposed action is not a project as defined by 14 California Code of Regulations 15378 (State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines) and therefore CEQA is not applicable.

CEQA review and determination will be completed for the project in the design phase. The project is federally funded and FEMA, as the lead agency, will complete the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review and determination.

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS

The Collier Canyon Creek Silt Basin, Project No. 201727, is included in the FY 2021-23 Capital Improvement Plan with a total budget allocation of $500,000. In FY 2021-22, $140,000 of FEMA Storm Reimbursement (Fund 222), and $150,000 of Special Gas Tax (Fund 651) is budgeted. In FY 2022-23, $60,000 of FEMA Storm Reimbursement (Fund 222), and $150,000 of Special Gas Tax (Fund 651) is budgeted. FEMA requires a 25% local match, which can be satisfied by the allocation in Special Gas Tax (Fund 651).

The agreement for Kier & Wright is for an amount not-to-exceed $392,289, and the expenditures would be distributed as $220,000 in FY 2021-22 and $172,289 in FY 2022-23.

Total estimated expenditures in FY 2021-22 to initiate the design and environmental phase are approximately $285,000 (consultant and staff time). There is approximately $289,000 available budget in FY 2021-22. The estimated expenditures in FY 2022-23 to complete design and environmental phase are approximately $210,000 (consultant and staff time). There is $210,000 in available budget in FY 2022-23 . Therefore, no additional appropriations are required at this time.

The budget to advance the project into construction phase will be requested at the time of construction contract award in 2024.
45 ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

2. Exhibit A - Agreement

Prepared by: Mallika Ramachandran
Assistant City Engineer

Approved by:
____________________________________
Marc Roberts
City Manager
Fiscal Review by:
____________________________________
Bhavna Chaudhary
City Treasurer/Finance Manager

46 RESOLUTION NO. ________

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN ENGINEERING SERVICES

AGREEMENT WITH KIER & WRIGHT FOR THE COLLIER CANYON CREEK SILT BASIN, PROJECT NO. 201727, DR 4344-0132-040 IN THE NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $392,289
The Engineering Division requires a consultant to provide design, environmental, and construction support services for the Collier Canyon Creek Silt Basin, Project No. 201727, DR 4344-0132-040. The Collier Canyon Creek sediment capture project will reduce future flood hazards by improving the conveyance capacity of the culvert pipes under Collier Canyon Road. Contract services include civil engineering design and preparing plans, specifications and estimates, surveying, hydraulics and hydrology studies, geotechnical engineering, structural design, utilities engineering, traffic engineering, environmental studies and regulatory permitting, construction bid, construction support services, and other auxiliary services required for the project.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Livermore authorizes the City Manager to sign, on the behalf of City of Livermore, an engineering services agreement with Kier & Wright in the not-to-exceed amount of $392,289 for the Collier Canyon Creek Silt Basin, Project No. 201727, DR 4344-0132- 040.

On motion of Council Member , seconded by
Council Member , the foregoing resolution was passed
and adopted on February 14, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Tara M. Mazzanti
Marie Weber Tara M. Mazzanti
City Clerk Assistant City Attorney
Exhibit A – Agreement with Kier & Wright
47 EXHIBIT A
48 EXHIBIT A
49 EXHIBIT A
50 EXHIBIT A
51 EXHIBIT A
52 EXHIBIT A
53 EXHIBIT A
54 EXHIBIT A
55 EXHIBIT A
56 EXHIBIT A
57 EXHIBIT A
58 EXHIBIT A
59 EXHIBIT A
60 EXHIBIT A
61

Page 6 of 20 ends

2022-019 TMM/JKS
above grade;
 Floodwall-2’, a 213-foot-long earthen berm (or optionally concrete wall) that extends up to 4 feet above
grade and that occurs at the top of a 3:1 slope.
 Weir-1”, a 25 foot by 10 foot structure that connects a 36” overflow pipe to an existing basin headwall structure;
 Catch Basin-1’, a concrete structure that serves as a junction for the 36” overflow pipe to connect to twin 72” storm drainpipes.
 Trash Racks
 Other structural components for the project
Deliverables:
 Structural Technical Report
Task 2.6 Right of Way (ROW) Concurrence Review (Optional) This task
will only be used if requested by the City. K+W Surveying will review engineering design and determine any ROW Impacts for the project. If requested as extra work, K+W will prepare plats and legal descriptions to obtain temporary construction easements for the project. This work will typically start during 60% design. If necessary ARWS will assist with appraisals and offer package.

Task 2.7 Review and Refine 30% Design and Estimates
Review and Utilize 30% Design and Update Estimates. The K+W team shall review 30% plans and incorporate
the CAD design (provided by the City) and the new topographic survey to set up the base sheets.

The consultant team will review the existing 30% as a baseline to proceed for 60% design.

The K+W team will meet with City and other stakeholders to discuss any concerns or conflicts after reviewing the 30% plans. The consultant team shall document conflicts and resolutions in the meeting minutes. The meeting minutes shall be distributed to all parties.

Deliverables:
 Updat
ed 30% Plan Engineer’s Estimate
 Base Sheets for 60% Design
 Meeting Minutes on Review of 30% Plans
TASK 3 Environmental Documents and Technical Studies
WRA will provide environmental studies and documentation required to support design improvements to the Collier Canyon Creek Silt Basin in Livermore, California. The scope includes work to process California Environmental Quality Act documentation at an anticipated level of a Categorical Exemption, anticipated permitting with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, with optional services for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWCQB) permitting, pending determination of need for those permits based on final project design. The scope of services accounts for documentation already processed by FEMA as part of the NEPA process as of January 5, 2022.

The work products and services will include:
 Biological resources constraints memorandum
 Project description for CEQA and NEPA
 Categorical Exemption for CEQA

EXHIBIT A
62 EXHIBIT A
63 EXHIBIT A
64 EXHIBIT A
65 EXHIBIT A
66 EXHIBIT A
67 EXHIBIT A
68 EXHIBIT A
69 EXHIBIT A
70 EXHIBIT A
71 EXHIBIT A
72 EXHIBIT A
73 EXHIBIT A
74 EXHIBIT A
75 EXHIBIT A
76 EXHIBIT A
77 EXHIBIT A
78 EXHIBIT A
79 EXHIBIT A
80 EXHIBIT A
81 EXHIBIT A
82 EXHIBIT A
83 EXHIBIT A
84 EXHIBIT A
85 EXHIBIT A
86 EXHIBIT A
87 EXHIBIT A
88 EXHIBIT A
89 EXHIBIT A
90 EXHIBIT A
91 EXHIBIT A
92 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 5.4

DATE:

February 14, 2022
TO:

Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:

Christine Martin, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT:

Resolution of a continued local emergency and reauthorizing remote teleconference meetings for City of Livermore's legislative bodies in accordance with Assembly Bill 361

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Staff recommends City Council adopt a resolution of a continued local emergency and reauthorizing remote teleconference meetings for City of Livermore's legislative bodies in accordance with Assembly Bill 361.

SUMMARY
On March 16, 2020, the City Council adopted a resolution ratifying the Proclamation of the Director of Emergency Services concerning the existence of a local emergency (Resolution No. 2020-033). On June 8, July 27, September 14, November 9, December 14, 2020, February 8, March 22, May 10, June 28, July 26, September 13, October 25, November 22, December 13, 2021, and January 10, 2022 the City Council adopted resolutions of Continued Local Emergency. California Government Code section 8630 directs the City Council to review the need for continuing the local emergency at least once every 60 days.

On September 16, 2021, the Governor signed Assembly Bill 361 (“AB 361”) into law, allowing the City’s legislative bodies to continue to meet via teleconference during proclaimed states of emergency under modified Brown Act requirements when a state of emergency is declared by the Governor pursuant to Government Code section 8625, proclaiming the existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the state caused by conditions as described in Government Code section 8558. AB 361 further requires that state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, or, the legislative body meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health and safety of attendees. AB 361 requires reauthorization every 30 days.

DISCUSSION
An outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS- CoV-2) began in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China in December 2019, and has now spread throughout the 93 world.

On March 1, 2020, the Health Officer of Alameda County declared a public health emergency throughout the County of Alameda.

On March 4, 2020, the Governor of California proclaimed a state of emergency exists in California after making determinations that:

1 .

The conditions caused by COVID-19 are likely to require the combined forces of a mutual aid region or regions to appropriately respond; and,
2 .

Local authority is inadequate to cope with the threat posed by COVID-19.

On March 12, 2020, the Alameda County Department of Public Health confirmed evidence of community-acquired transmission.

On March 13, 2020, the President of the United States of America declared a National state of emergency in response to the spread of COVID-19 within the United States of America.

On March 13, 2020, the City Manager declared a Local Emergency. The declaration was based upon the Alameda County Department of Health confirming evidence of community-acquired transmission within Alameda County and the President of the United States declaring a National state of emergency.

On March 16, 2020, the City Council adopted a resolution ratifying the declaration of local emergency (Resolution No. 2020-033).

On June 8, July 27, September 14, November 9, December 14, 2020, February 8, March 22, May 10, June 28, July 26, September 13, October 25, November 22, December 13, 2021, and January 10, 2022, the City Council adopted resolutions of continued local emergency (Resolution Nos. 2020-78, 2020-133, 2020-166, 2020-207, 2020-235, 2021-018, 2021-037, 2021-063, 2021-112, 2021-140, 2021-155, 2021- 179, 2021-195, 2021-217, and 2022-006, respectively).

The state and Alameda County continue to monitor COVID-19 case rates and hospitalizations, as well as variants such as Delta and Omicron, and the County has reinstated face covering requirements in indoor settings due to a significant increase in case rates. Additionally, local provisions granted under the emergency proclamation such as outdoor dining and eligibility for funding reimbursement remain in effect as the City continues to recover. Therefore, the emergency conditions identified by the proclamation of local emergency still exist.

Staff recommends the City Council continue the proclamation of emergency services ratified on March 16, 2020 and continued June 8, July 27, September 14, November 9, December 14, 2020, February 8, March 22, May 10, June 28, July 26, September 13, October 25, November 22, December 13, 2021, and January 10, 2022, and continue to authorize teleconference meetings of the City's legislative bodies in accordance with AB 361.

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS

The continuance of a Local Emergency allows the City to access federal, state and county resources, including potential financial reimbursements.
94 ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

Prepared by: Christine Martin
Assistant City Manager

Approved by:
____________________________________
Marc Roberts
City Manager
Fiscal Review by:
____________________________________
Bhavna Chaudhary
City Treasurer/Finance Manager

95 RESOLUTION NO. _______

IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA

A RESOLUTION OF CONTINUED LOCAL EMERGENCY AND

REAUTHORIZING REMOTE TELECONFERENCE MEETINGS FOR THE
CITY OF LIVERMORE’S LEGISLATIVE BODIES IN ACCORDANCE
WITH ASSEMBLY BILL 361
On March 4, 2020, the Governor of the State of California (the “Governor”) proclaimed a statewide state of emergency due to COVID-19.

On March 1 and 5, 2020, the Alameda County Health Officer (the “Health Officer”) declared a Local Health Emergency due to COVID-19.

On March 16, 2020, the City Council adopted a resolution, Ratifying the Proclamation of the Director of Emergency Services Concerning the Existence of a Local Emergency (Resolution No. 2020-033). The local emergency proclamation concerned conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property, which have arisen within the city of Livermore due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

All meetings of the City of Livermore’s legislative bodies are open and public, as required by the Brown Act (Cal. Gov. Code sections 54950 et seq.), so that any member of the public may attend, participate, and watch the City’s legislative bodies conduct their business.

The City Council has regularly adopted resolutions determining the need for continuing the local emergency pursuant to California Government Code section 8630 (Resolution Nos. 2020-078, 2020-133, 2020-166, 2020-207, 2020-235, 2021-018, 2021- 037, 2021-063, 2021-112, 2021-140, 2021-155, 2021-179, 2021-195, 2021-217, and 2022-006).

On January 10, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution 2022-006 reaffirming that a local emergency still exists, and that in-person meetings of the City’s legislative bodies would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees and authorized the City’s legislative bodies to continue to meet via teleconferencing under modified Brown Act requirements.

The public health officers for the State of California and the County of Alameda continue to monitor transmission, case rates, and hospitalizations of COVID-19 and associated variants (including Delta and Omicron) and continue to require face coverings in certain indoor settings and recommend vaccination, boosters, and social distancing.

Due to these conditions, City staff reported that the emergency conditions identified by the previous emergency proclamation still exist today. Staff also recommended the City Council continue to authorize teleconference meetings of the City’s legislative bodies.
96 RESOLUTION NO. _______
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Livermore that it has reviewed the March 13, 2020 proclamation of local emergency ratified on March 16, 2020, by Resolution No. 2020-033, and hereby finds that conditions warrant continued maintenance of that proclamation of local emergency due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Livermore that:

1. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Resolution by this reference.

2. The City Council has reviewed the March 13, 2020 proclamation of local emergency that the City Council ratified on March 16, 2020 (Resolution No. 2020-033), and finds that conditions warrant continued maintenance of that proclamation of local emergency due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

3. The City Council has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency and has determined that the state of emergency continues to impact the ability of members of the City's legislative bodies to meet safely in person. In-person meetings of the City's legislative bodies would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees. The City continues to impose measures to promote social distancing in City- owned and operated facilities.

4. The staff and legislative bodies of the City of Livermore are hereby reauthorized and directed to take all actions necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of this Resolution including, conducting open and public meetings in accordance with Government Code section 54953 (e) and other applicable provisions of the Brown Act.

5. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption and shall be effective until the earlier of March 16, 2022, or such time the City Council makes subsequent findings in accordance with Government Code section 54953 (e)(3) to extend the time during which the legislative bodies of the City of Livermore may continue to teleconference without compliance with Government Code section 54953(b)(3).

6. If any section, subsection, clause, or phrase in this Resolution is for any reason held invalid, the validity of the remainder of this Resolution shall not be affected thereby. The City Council would have passed this Resolution and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phrases thereof be held invalid.

On motion of Council Member , seconded by
Council Member , the foregoing resolution was passed
and adopted on February 14, 2022, by the following vote:
97 RESOLUTION NO. _______
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Jason R. Alcala
Marie Weber Jason R. Alcala
City Clerk City Attorney
98 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 6.1

DATE:

February 14, 2022
TO:

Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:

Donald Hester, Acting Administrative Services Director
SUBJECT:
7:05 P.M. - Third Public Hearing to receive an update on redistricting efforts to date, receive public input on the composition of City Council voting district draft maps prepared by the City's demographer, and provide direction to the City's demographer for revisions of the draft maps to be considered at the fourth public hearing

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Staff recommends that the City Council:
1 .

Receive an update regarding the redistricting efforts to date; 2 .

Conduct the third public hearing to receive input on the composition of voting district draft maps; and
3 .

Provide direction to the City's demographer for revisions of the draft maps to be considered at the fourth public hearing.

SUMMARY
The California Elections code requires that every ten years cities with by-district election systems use new census data to review and, if needed, redraw district lines to reflect how local populations have changed. This process ensures all districts have nearly equal population (10% or less of overall deviation). Council Member Districts 3 and 4 were included on the ballot for the first time during the November 3, 2020 election and Districts 1 and 2 will transition during the November 8, 2022 election.

During this meeting the Livermore City Council will complete the third of four required public hearings.

The entire redistricting process must be complete by April 17, 2022.

DISCUSSION
Background

Each city with district-based elections is required to update the district boundaries every ten years following receipt of updated population data from each federal decennial census. The City of Livermore has district-based elections for four Council Members and therefore is required to update the district boundaries prior to the November 8, 2022 Election. Although the City only recently established the 99 district boundaries on November 26, 2018, the boundaries were drawn in compliance with the 2010 census and 2020 census data must now be taken into consideration.

On October 11, 2021, the City Council held its first Public Hearing prior to maps being drawn. At that time, the City's demographer Wagaman Strategies, provided information on the 2020 census data, the redistricting process, and legal requirements included in the FAIR MAPS Act. The City's outreach consultant Tripepi Smith provided an outline of the community outreach plan and received direction from the City Council. The Council also provided an opportunity for members of the public to provide input.

On October 18, 2021, the City Council held its first special meeting workshop where the City's demographer, Wagaman Strategies, provided information and guidance on how to use DistrictR, the City's map drawing tool. In addition, Wagaman Strategies provided an overview of the excel and paper map options available to the public.

On January 24, 2022, the City Council held its second public hearing prior to maps being presented.

During the public hearing the Council received an update on community outreach efforts to date from Tripepi Smith, reviewed the redistricting requirements with Wagaman Strategies, and held a public hearing to solicit public input. The City Council directed staff to focus future public outreach on Community of Interest submissions. In addition, the Council provided initial direction to the City's demographer on the composition of draft maps which included the following items:
1 .

Not using race as a predominate factor
2 .

Keep identified communities together, such as avoiding moving District 2 east into District 1 3 .

Explore plans that lower the current deviation
4 .

Track and consider residents who may be subject to deferral

Language Requirements for Redistricting

On June 11, 2021, the Secretary of State provided guidance for Cities regarding language requirements related to Elections Code Section 21608. Per the Secretary of State, the City of Livermore is not required to provide qualifying materials or live translation (interpretation) services in any additional languages.

However, the City is committed to transparency and engagement and therefore Spanish interpretation services will automatically be available at all public hearings. Map materials have also been translated and social media posts are available in both English and Spanish. Any member of the public requesting accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), is asked to notify the ADA Coordinator at [email protected] or call (925) 960-4170 at least 3 business days in advance of the meeting.

Publication and Noticing Requirements for Public Hearings

Per Elections Code Section 21608(c) and 21608(g)(3), the City is required to "publish" the hearing date, time, and location 5 days in advance of the meeting on the internet (a website calendar satisfies this requirement). The City regularly publishes public hearing notices on the city website and in The Valley Times.

To increase public participation and good faith efforts from the City, the following notices have been published in addition to election code requirements:

Posted redistricting information weekly on Facebook, Twitter, and Nextdoor in English and 100
Spanish, with milestone posts boosted to increase reach.

Posted a notice of public hearing on the dedicated redistricting website and subscribers who signed up to receive redistricting updates were notified via email.

Published a related press release inviting public participation for scheduled public hearings.

Hearing dates and times are posted at all Livermore libraries, the Chamber of Commerce, and in the Downtown kiosks.

Mapping Tools and Participation Kits

California's new "Fair Maps Act" has significantly changed the criteria for mapping compared to the rules when Livermore first went through the transition from at-large to by-district elections. The City's demography consultant, Wagaman Strategies, has provided the mapping tools needed to empower residents to review draft maps and to develop and submit their own map proposals. The Public Participation Kit (paper kits) are available at City Hall and the Chamber of Commerce for residents that prefer to use a paper map or don't have access to internet. The Special Meeting Workshop video from October 18, 2021 showing how to use the DistrictR software is also available on the redistricting website at
drawlivermore.org
.

Additional Community Outreach Efforts

The City of Livermore hired professional redistricting consultants Wagaman Strategies and Tripepi Smith to assist with managing the City's redistricting process and ensure overall compliance with data analysis, map creation, website administration, public outreach and timeline and noticing requirements. To date, Tripepi Smith and City staff have completed the following:

Weekly social media posts in English and Spanish
Calls to engage 60+ community organizations including the school district, local churches, senior living facilities, and non-profit organizations
Letters sent to all advisory body members encouraging their participation English and Spanish flyers published in Peachjar through the Livermore Valley Joint Unified School District reaching 13,000+ email recipients with 426 views.

Map and community of interest paper kits have been made available at the Chamber of Commerce for residents to pick up
Deployment of redistricting kiosks at all Livermore Libraries where residents can submit an electronic map or pick up a paper mapping kit
City booths at the January 9th and 16th Livermore Downtown Sunday Farmer's Market to share information, provide map kits, and answer questions. Staff counted 80+ interactions at each Farmer's Market and found that when asked, approximately 49% of residents were happy with the existing district lines, 50% were uncertain, and 1% were unhappy.

Webpage banner published on Las Positas College homepage directing viewers to the City's dedicated redistricting website
Email sent to City contacts and social media posts directly requesting the submission of Community of Interest maps
Social Media survey which yielded 21 results that showed 47.5% of respondents are happy with the current map, 43% are uncertain, and 9.5% want changes to the current district lines (Attachment 6)

Next Steps

101
At this public hearing, Wagaman Strategies will present draft versions of district boundary maps for the City Council to review and provide direction (Attachment 4). Draft maps will be published to the districting website (
drawlivermore.org
) at least seven days in advance of the third and fourth publics hearing. At the fourth public hearing on March 14, 2022, the City Council will be asked to take public testimony and select a final map. This final map will establish new district boundaries for Council Members, which will go into effect for the November 8, 2022 General Municipal Election.

Based on the analysis of the final Census data, and having received 17 district maps from members of the public (as of January 31, 2022), the City Council has the following options tonight:
1 .

Consider a map presented by a member of the public; or
2 .

Consider a draft map presented by Wagaman Strategies (green, blue, purple, or red); or 3 .

Direct Wagaman Strategies to draft a new or revised map based on feedback from the City Council

After completion of the third public hearing, City staff will continue their community outreach efforts to gather any new or clarifying information on communities of interest and to solicit feedback from the community on draft maps (particularly any maps focused on by City Council during the third hearing).

The fourth public hearing will be held March 14, 2022, at which time the City Council will be asked for any additional revisions and to select a final map.

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS

For the 2021-22 redistricting process, funding has already been appropriately budgeted within the City Clerk's Division under the General Fund and includes consulting services from both community outreach and demographic firms. The City elected to retain the services of Tripepi Smith to assist with public outreach and the cost shall not exceed $48,000. The cost of providing demographic services by Wagaman Strategies shall not exceed $49,000. Legal Counsel is being provided by the Livermore City Attorney's Office. Staff estimates that current funds will be sufficient to complete the redistricting process.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Presentation

2. Communities of Interest DistrictR Submissions

3. Communities of Interest Tool Submissions

4. Draft Plans

5. Demographics

6. Draft Plan Review

7. Survey Responses

Prepared by: Marie Weber
City Clerk

102
Approved by:
____________________________________
Marc Roberts
City Manager
Fiscal Review by:
____________________________________
Bhavna Chaudhary
City Treasurer/Finance Manager

103
1 1
ATTACHMENT 1
104
2 Actions Requested
Conduct public hearing to receive input on draft and
public plans
Provide direction to demographer on potential revisions 2 ATTACHMENT 1
105
3 Timeline
3 Hearing Purpose Date
1 • Education
• Public input
October 11
2 • Public input
• Initial direction
January 24
3 • Review plans (public & draft)
• Provide additional direction
February 14
4 • Review or further revise plans
• Select final plan
March 14
ATTACHMENT 1
106
4 Criteria
In order of priority:
• Equal Population
• Federal Law
• Contiguous
• Neighborhoods & communities of interest
• Understandable boundaries
• Compactness
4 ATTACHMENT 1
107
5 Things to Remember
Strive for population
equality. Be prepared to
justify deviations
Focus on traditional
criteria. Draw contiguous
districts that respect
communities, while using
understandable boundaries,
and are compact when
possible
Do not use race as the
predominant factor. Only
as one of many factors and
cannot subordinate other
redistricting criteria
55 ATTACHMENT 1
108
6 Plans
6 Draft Plans
• Plan Green (Current)
• Plan Blue
• Plan Purple
• Plan Red
Publ
ic Plans
• 17 Plans
6 ATTACHMENT 1
109
7 Resources
7 Webpage
• https://drawlivermore.org/
• Will be maintained for ten years
E
mail
• [email protected]
7 ATTACHMENT 1
110
1/28/22, 1:22 PM Districtr
https://districtr.org/edit/104305?event=livermore 1/2

Areas of Interest

S E L E C T

N A M E
Springtown / Vasco Area
Describe this community
These details are updated automatically
Important Places
+ New
Drawing Data Layers Evaluation

Springtown / Vasco Area

About redistricting
About the data
Save plan
Districtr homepage
New plan
Print / PDF
Export Districtr-JSON
Export COI plan as SHP
Export COI plan as GeoJSON
Export assignment as CSV (these units)
About import/export options
104305
ATTACHMENT 2
111
1/28/22, 1:22 PM Districtr
https://districtr.org/edit/104305?event=livermore 2/2
Communities of Interest
Springtown / Vasco Area
ATTACHMENT 2
112
1/28/22, 1:21 PM Districtr
https://districtr.org/edit/104633?event=livermore 1/2

Areas of Interest

S E L E C T

N A M E
South Downtown
These details are updated automatically
 Important Places
Livermore's oldest section (Streets
with numbers and alphabet) has
downtown business area and
residential area with wider streets.

In the residential area single and
multi units coexist. In general lots
are bigger and deeper, and each
house has its own character Last 20
Drawing Data Layers Evaluation

South Downtown
About redistricting
About the data
Save plan
Districtr homepage
New plan
Print / PDF
Export Districtr-JSON
Export COI plan as SHP
Export COI plan as GeoJSON
Export assignment as CSV (these units)
About import/export options
104633
ATTACHMENT 2
113
1/28/22, 1:21 PM Districtr
https://districtr.org/edit/104633?event=livermore 2/2
Communities of Interest
South Downtown
Livermore's oldest section (Streets with numbers and alphabet) has downtown business area and residential area with wider streets. In the residential area single and multi units coexist. In general lots are bigger and deeper, and each house has its own character. Last 20 years older residents slowly moved out, and professionals are buying and modernizing the old houses.

Important Places
Carnegie Park
Summer Farmers Market
Safeway shopping center
Safeway, Ace (Former Orchard Hardware Supply), and CVS (Former Longs) serve the neighborhood. Starbucks has the regular customers.

Vine Cinema
Funky little movie theater where independent films oen be shown.

ATTACHMENT 2
114
1/31/22, 2:57 PM Districtr
https://districtr.org/edit/107347?event=livermore 1/3

Areas of Interest

S E L E C T

N A M E
North Downtown
These details are updated
automatically
Important Places
+ New
North Downtown (Tree name and
I to P St) are older section of
Livermore, and include lowest
vaccination rate Census Tracts.

Although Livermore's
Hispanic/Latino population live
throughout the city, Hispanic
targeted businesses concentrate
Drawing Data Layers Evaluation

North Downtown

About redistricting
About the data
Save plan
Districtr homepage
New plan
Print / PDF
Export Districtr-JSON
Export COI plan as SHP
Export COI plan as GeoJSON
Export assignment as CSV (these units)
About import/export options
107347
ATTACHMENT 2
115
1/31/22, 2:57 PM Districtr
https://districtr.org/edit/107347?event=livermore 2/3
Communities of Interest
North Downtown
North Downtown (Tree name and I to P St) are older section of Livermore, and include lowest vaccination rate Census Tracts. Although Livermore's Hispanic/Latino population live throughout the city, Hispanic targeted businesses concentrate in the neighborhood. It has 26.5% Hispanic and

4.2% Black voting age population (much higher if children are included), and should be kept together in a district.

Important Places
Contreras Market
Hispanic Market
Olivina Plaza Shopping Center
Many businesses cater to Hispanic/Latino population. El Castillo Taqueria, Del Rancho Supermarket, St Bart's Food Pantry
Tri-Valley Haven Food Pantry
Hidalgo Market
Hispanic grocery
ATTACHMENT 2
116
1/31/22, 2:57 PM Districtr
https://districtr.org/edit/107347?event=livermore 3/3
Grocery Outlet
99 Cents Only Store
Rincon Library
Junction K-8 School
Marilyn Ave Elementary School
ATTACHMENT 2
117
ATTACHMENT 3
118
Name: __Yolanda Fintschenko Email:
___

Email to [email protected] or drop off or mail to 1052 S. Livermore Ave; Livermore, CA 94550 by January 31st for consideration in the draft maps.

ATTACHMENT 3
119
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for
incarcerated populations
+ 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special
Tabulation
* Calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02
#
Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Total Deviation Total Latino * Asian* Black* NH-
White
1 22 ,837 +3.8% 16,240 17.7% 10.6% 3.3% 67.8%
2 21,020 -4.5% 14,742 15.9% 12.8% 3.3% 66.5%
3 22,292 +1.3% 15,089 12.0% 14.9% 3.2% 68.0%
4 21,857 -0.7% 15,883 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0%
T otal 88,006 8.3% 61,954 14.6% 11.7% 2.6% 69.6%
Ideal 22,002
Plan Green (Current)
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 4
120
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for
incarcerated populations
+ 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special
Tabulation
* Calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02
#
Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Total Deviation Total Latino * Asian* Black* NH-
White
1 21,849 -0.7% 15,591 17.0% 10.7% 3.4% 68.4%
2 22,008 0.0% 15,391 16.7% 12.7% 3.1% 66.0%
3 22,292 +1.3% 15,089 12.0% 14.9% 3.2% 68.0%
4 21,857 -0.7% 15,883 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0%
T otal 8 8,006 2.0% 61,954 14.6% 11.7% 2.6% 69.6%
Ideal 22,002
Plan Blue
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 4
121
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for
incarcerated populations
+ 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special
Tabulation
* Calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02
#
Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Total Deviation Total Latino * Asian* Black* NH-
White
1 21,814 -0.9% 15,292 18.2% 10.9% 3.5% 66.8%
2 22,307 +1.4% 15,433 16.5% 13.2% 3.2% 65.1%
3 21,987 -0.1% 15,307 11.0% 14.1% 3.2% 70.5%
4 21,898 -0.5% 15,922 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0%
T otal 8 8,006 2.2% 61,954 14.6% 11.7% 2.6% 69.6%
Ideal 22,002
Plan Purple
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 4
122
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for
incarcerated populations
+ 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special
Tabulation
* Calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02
#
Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Total Deviation Total Latino * Asian* Black* NH-
White
1 22,253 +1.1% 15,245 20.2% 11.3% 3.9% 63.0%
2 21,304 -3.2% 14,746 15.0% 15.9% 3.1% 64.8%
3 22,551 +2.5% 16,041 10.8% 11.1% 2.9% 74.2%
4 21,898 -0.5% 15,922 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0%
T otal 8 8,006 5.7% 61,954 14.6% 11.7% 2.6% 69.6%
Ideal 22,002
Plan Red
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 4
123
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for
incarcerated populations
+ 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special
Tabulation
* Calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02
#
Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Total Deviation Total Latino * Asian* Black* NH-
White
1 21,151 -3.9% 14,584 16.9% 13.6% 4.7% 62.6%
2 22,826 +3.7% 15,796 14.5% 13.7% 3.3% 67.3%
3 22,022 +0.1% 15,584 14.4% 11.0% 2.0% 72.3%
4 21,898 -0.5% 15,922 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0%
T otal 8 8,006 7.6% 61,954 14.6% 11.7% 2.6% 69.6%
Ideal 22,002
Plan 66295
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 4
124
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for
incarcerated populations
+ 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special
Tabulation
* Calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02
#
Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Total Deviation Total Latino * Asian* Black* NH-
White
1 22,002 0.0% 15,142 19.5% 11.3% 3.7% 64.2%
2 22,060 +0.3% 15,280 15.3% 15.2% 3.3% 64.6%
3 22,036 +0.2% 15,608 11.1% 11.6% 2.8% 73.4%
4 21,908 -0.4% 15,924 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 75.9%
T otal 8 8,006 0.7% 61,954 14.6% 11.7% 2.6% 69.6%
Ideal 22,002
Plan 86302
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 4
125
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for
incarcerated populations
+ 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special
Tabulation
* Calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02
#
Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Total Deviation Total Latino * Asian* Black* NH-
White
1 21,687 -1.4% 14,819 20.4% 11.6% 3.9% 62.7%
2 21,304 -3.2% 14,746 15.0% 15.9% 3.1% 64.8%
3 23,117 +5.1% 16,467 10.8% 10.9% 2.8% 74.2%
4 21,898 -0.5% 15,922 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0%
T otal 8 8,006 8.2% 61,954 14.6% 11.7% 2.6% 69.6%
Ideal 22,002
Plan 87742
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 4
126
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for
incarcerated populations
+ 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special
Tabulation
* Calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02
#
Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Total Deviation Total Latino * Asian* Black* NH-
White
1 21,022 -4.5% 14,295 20.1% 11.5% 3.9% 63.2%
2 21,304 -3.2% 14,746 15.0% 15.9% 3.1% 64.8%
3 23,117 +5.1% 16,467 10.8% 10.9% 2.8% 74.2%
4 22,563 +2.5% 16,446 13.1% 9.0% 1.0% 75.1%
T otal 8 8,006 9.5% 61,954 14.6% 11.7% 2.6% 69.6%
Ideal 22,002
Plan 90002
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 4
127
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for
incarcerated populations
+ 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special
Tabulation
* Calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02
#
Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Total Deviation Total Latino * Asian* Black* NH-
White
1 21,022 -4.5% 14,295 20.1% 11.5% 3.9% 63.2%
2 21,304 -3.2% 14,746 15.0% 15.9% 3.1% 64.8%
3 23,117 +5.1% 16,467 10.8% 10.9% 2.8% 74.2%
4 22,563 +2.5% 16,446 13.1% 9.0% 1.0% 75.1%
T otal 8 8,006 9.5% 61,954 14.6% 11.7% 2.6% 69.6%
Ideal 22,002
Plan 91889
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 4
128
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for
incarcerated populations
+ 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special
Tabulation
* Calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02
#
Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Total Deviation Total Latino * Asian* Black* NH-
White
1 22,265 +1.2% 16,207 18.0% 7.7% 2.4% 70.4%
2 24,146 +9.7% 16,802 15.0% 14.0% 3.0% 67.0%
3 22,278 +1.3% 14,562 15.1% 15.2% 3.8% 64.6%
4 19,317 -12.2% 14,383 9.7% 10.1% 1.3% 77.0%
T otal 8 8,006 21.9% 61,954 14.6% 11.7% 2.6% 69.6%
Ideal 22,002
Plan 98226
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 4
129
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for
incarcerated populations
+ 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special
Tabulation
* Calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02
#
Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Total Deviation Total Latino * Asian* Black* NH-
White
1 21,051 -4.3% 14,322 20.1% 11.5% 4.0% 63.1%
2 21,291 -3.2% 14,719 15.0% 15.9% 3.0% 64.8%
3 22,715 +3.2% 16,175 11.0% 11.0% 2.9% 73.9%
4 22,949 +4.3% 16,738 12.9% 8.9% 1.0% 75.4%
T otal 8 8,006 8.6% 61,954 14.6% 11.7% 2.6% 69.6%
Ideal 22,002
Plan 99995
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 4
130
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for
incarcerated populations
+ 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special
Tabulation
* Calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02
#
Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Total Deviation Total Latino * Asian* Black* NH-
White
1 21,423 -2.6% 14,315 19.9% 13.2% 3.8% 61.8%
2 22,673 +3.0% 15,590 14.7% 14.9% 4.0% 65.0%
3 20,396 -7.3% 14,810 10.8% 10.5% 1.8% 75.9%
4 23,514 +6.9% 17,239 13.3% 8.7% 1.2% 75.0%
T otal 8 8,006 14.2% 61,954 14.6% 11.7% 2.6% 69.6%
Ideal 22,002
Plan 100105
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 4
131
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for
incarcerated populations
+ 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special
Tabulation
* Calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02
#
Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Total Deviation Total Latino * Asian* Black* NH-
White
1 22,006 0.0% 14,956 20.2% 12.7% 3.7% 62.2%
2 22,074 +0.3% 15,436 14.7% 14.8% 3.3% 65.9%
3 22,028 +0.1% 15,640 11.1% 10.7% 2.9% 74.1%
4 21,898 -0.5% 15,922 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0%
T otal 8 8,006 0.8% 61,954 14.6% 11.7% 2.6% 69.6%
Ideal 22,002
Plan 100643
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 4
132
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for
incarcerated populations
+ 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special
Tabulation
* Calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02
#
Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Total Deviation Total Latino * Asian* Black* NH-
White
1 21,659 -1.6% 15,783 20.5% 10.9% 4.4% 62.6%
2 22,248 +1.1% 15,214 11.0% 15.4% 2.1% 70.1%
3 22,201 +0.9% 15,035 14.0% 12.0% 3.2% 69.9%
4 21,898 -0.5% 15,922 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0%
T otal 8 8,006 2.7% 61,954 14.6% 11.7% 2.6% 69.6%
Ideal 22,002
Plan 100710
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 4
133
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for
incarcerated populations
+ 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special
Tabulation
* Calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02
#
Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Total Deviation Total Latino * Asian* Black* NH-
White
1 21,976 -0.1% 15,000 20.4% 11.7% 3.9% 62.3%
2 21,911 -0.4% 15,129 14.1% 15.0% 3.0% 66.2%
3 22,162 +0.7% 15,863 11.5% 11.5% 2.9% 73.5%
4 21,898 -0.5% 15,922 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0%
T otal 8 8,006 1.2% 61,954 14.6% 11.7% 2.6% 69.6%
Ideal 22,002
Plan 104317
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 4
134
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for
incarcerated populations
+ 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special
Tabulation
* Calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02
#
Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Total Deviation Total Latino * Asian* Black* NH-
White
1 21,758 -1.1% 14,787 20.3% 12.6% 3.7% 62.2%
2 21,233 -3.5% 14,778 15.1% 14.9% 3.3% 65.3%
3 23,158 +5.3% 16,506 10.9% 10.9% 2.8% 74.2%
4 21,857 -0.7% 15,883 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0%
T otal 8 8,006 8.7% 61,954 14.6% 11.7% 2.6% 69.6%
Ideal 22,002
Plan 104852
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 4
135
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for
incarcerated populations
+ 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special
Tabulation
* Calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02
#
Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Total Deviation Total Latino * Asian* Black* NH-
White
1 21,664 -1.5% 14,653 20.1% 12.6% 3.6% 62.5%
2 21,928 -0.3% 15,347 14.8% 14.9% 3.3% 65.7%
3 21,836 -0.8% 15,532 11.1% 11.0% 2.9% 73.9%
4 21,628 -1.7% 15,704 12.5% 8.5% 0.9% 76.4%
T otal 8 8,006 1.4% 61,954 14.6% 11.7% 2.6% 69.6%
Ideal 22,002
Plan 106313
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 4
136
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for
incarcerated populations
+ 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special
Tabulation
* Calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02
#
Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Total Deviation Total Latino * Asian* Black* NH-
White
1 21,871 -0.6% 15,268 18.9% 11.2% 4.0% 65.1%
2 22,009 0.0% 15,372 13.7% 14.4% 2.2% 68.2%
3 22,135 +0.6% 15,334 13.1% 12.6% 3.5% 69.2%
4 21,857 -0.7% 15,883 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0%
T otal 8 8,006 1.3% 61,954 14.6% 11.7% 2.6% 69.6%
Ideal 22,002
Plan 107170
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 4
137
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for
incarcerated populations
+ 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special
Tabulation
* Calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02
#
Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Total Deviation Total Latino * Asian* Black* NH-
White
1 23,619 +7.3% 16,384 19.1% 11.3% 4.2% 64.1%
2 16,899 -23.2% 11,505 15.3% 16.0% 2.3% 65.1%
3 23,531 +6.9% 16,404 11.4% 12.4% 3.1% 71.8%
4 23,957 +8.9% 17,661 12.8% 8.8% 1.0% 75.8%
T otal 8 8,006 32.1% 61,954 14.6% 11.7% 2.6% 69.6%
Ideal 22,002
Plan 107274
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 4
138
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for
incarcerated populations
+ 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special
Tabulation
* Calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02
#
Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Total Deviation Total Latino * Asian* Black* NH-
White
1 21,696 -1.4% 14,748 20.4% 11.6% 4.0% 62.5%
2 22,060 +0.3% 15,364 14.5% 15.8% 3.0% 65.7%
3 22,352 +1.6% 15,920 11.2% 10.9% 2.9% 73.8%
4 21,898 -0.5% 15,922 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0%
T otal 8 8,006 3.0% 61,954 14.6% 11.7% 2.6% 69.6%
Ideal 22,002
Plan 107385
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 4
139
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for
incarcerated populations
+ 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special
Tabulation
* Calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02
#
Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Total Deviation Total Latino * Asian* Black* NH-
White
1 21,788 -1.0% 15,278 18.2% 10.9% 3.5% 66.9%
2 22,046 +0.2% 15,241 16.7% 12.8% 3.2% 65.2%
3 22,315 +1.4% 15,552 11.0% 14.5% 3.2% 70.2%
4 21,857 -0.7% 15,883 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0%
T otal 8 8,006 2.4% 61,954 14.6% 11.7% 2.6% 69.6%
Ideal 22,002
Plan Gnecco
Prepared by
ATTACHMENT 4
140
Name # Total Deviation % Dev Latino Asian Black NH
White
Total Latino Asian Black NH
White
Total Latino Asian Black NH
White
Green* 1 22,837 835 3.8% 26.0% 16.1% 2.3% 51.5% 18,229 23.0% 15.4% 2.2% 55.5% 16,240 17.7% 10.6% 3.3% 67.8% Green* 2 21,020 -982 -4.5% 21.4% 19.3% 2.6% 52.4% 16,245 19.2% 18.8% 2.6% 55.5% 14,742 15.9% 12.8% 3.3% 66.5% Green* 3 22,292 290 1.3% 24.0% 16.6% 2.9% 52.5% 17,234 21.1% 16.3% 2.7% 56.3% 15,089 12.0% 14.9% 3.2% 68.0% Green* 4 21,857 -145 -0.7% 14.8% 15.9% 1.3% 64.0% 16,760 13.1% 14.8% 1.3% 67.0% 15,883 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0% Blue 1 21,849 -153 -0.7% 25.9% 16.2% 2.4% 51.7% 17,455 22.8% 15.5% 2.2% 55.7% 15,591 17.0% 10.7% 3.4% 68.4% Blue 2 22,008 6 0.0% 21.7% 19.1% 2.6% 52.2% 17,019 19.6% 18.5% 2.6% 55.3% 15,391 16.7% 12.7% 3.1% 66.0% Blue 3 22,292 290 1.3% 24.0% 16.6% 2.9% 52.5% 17,234 21.1% 16.3% 2.7% 56.3% 15,089 12.0% 14.9% 3.2% 68.0% Blue 4 21,857 -145 -0.7% 14.8% 15.9% 1.3% 64.0% 16,760 13.1% 14.8% 1.3% 67.0% 15,883 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0% Purple 1 21,814 -188 -0.9% 26.6% 16.5% 2.4% 50.3% 17,381 23.5% 15.9% 2.3% 54.4% 15,292 18.2% 10.9% 3.5% 66.8% Purple 2 22,307 305 1.4% 23.7% 19.0% 2.6% 50.5% 17,145 21.2% 18.6% 2.6% 53.8% 15,433 16.5% 13.2% 3.2% 65.1% Purple 3 21,987 -15 -0.1% 21.2% 16.4% 2.9% 55.5% 17,147 18.8% 15.8% 2.7% 59.1% 15,307 11.0% 14.1% 3.2% 70.5% Purple 4 21,898 -104 -0.5% 14.8% 15.9% 1.3% 64.0% 16,795 13.1% 14.8% 1.3% 67.0% 15,922 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0% Red 1 22,253 251 1.1% 30.2% 16.9% 2.4% 46.5% 17,571 26.7% 16.5% 2.4% 50.8% 15,245 20.2% 11.3% 3.9% 63.0% Red 2 21,304 -698 -3.2% 20.1% 21.8% 2.6% 51.1% 16,383 18.1% 21.2% 2.6% 54.2% 14,746 15.0% 15.9% 3.1% 64.8% Red 3 22,551 549 2.5% 21.1% 13.5% 2.8% 58.5% 17,719 18.6% 13.0% 2.6% 62.1% 16,041 10.8% 11.1% 2.9% 74.2% Red 4 21,898 -104 -0.5% 14.8% 15.9% 1.3% 64.0% 16,795 13.1% 14.8% 1.3% 67.0% 15,922 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0% Livermore Redistricting: February 14, 2022
D
raft and Public Plans*
Plan Population V oting Age Population Citizen Voting Age Population ATTACHMENT 5
141
Name # Total Deviation % Dev Latino Asian Black NH
White
Total Latino Asian Black NH
White
Total Latino Asian Black NH
White
Livermore Redistricting: February 14, 2022
D
raft and Public Plans*
Plan Population V oting Age Population Citizen Voting Age Population 66295 1 21,151 -851 -3.9% 25.1% 18.7% 2.4% 49.7% 16,698 22.1% 18.4% 2.3% 53.4% 14,584 16.9% 13.6% 4.7% 62.6% 66295 2 22,826 824 3.7% 19.7% 21.0% 2.6% 52.7% 17,418 18.1% 20.1% 2.5% 55.7% 15,796 14.5% 13.7% 3.3% 67.3% 66295 3 22,022 20 0.1% 26.8% 12.2% 2.8% 54.0% 17,490 23.4% 12.0% 2.6% 58.1% 15,584 14.4% 11.0% 2.0% 72.3% 66295 4 21,898 -104 -0.5% 14.8% 15.9% 1.3% 64.0% 16,795 13.1% 14.8% 1.3% 67.0% 15,922 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0% 86302 1 22,002 0 0.0% 29.2% 16.7% 2.2% 47.8% 17,411 25.8% 16.3% 2.2% 52.0% 15,142 19.5% 11.3% 3.7% 64.2% 86302 2 22,060 58 0.3% 21.2% 21.3% 2.7% 50.5% 16,992 19.1% 20.7% 2.7% 53.7% 15,280 15.3% 15.2% 3.3% 64.6% 86302 3 22,036 34 0.2% 21.2% 13.9% 2.9% 58.0% 17,268 18.6% 13.5% 2.7% 61.5% 15,608 11.1% 11.6% 2.8% 73.4% 86302 4 21,908 -94 -0.4% 14.8% 15.9% 1.3% 64.0% 16,797 13.1% 14.8% 1.3% 67.0% 15,924 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 75.9% 87742 1 21,687 -315 -1.4% 30.3% 17.2% 2.4% 46.2% 17,132 26.8% 16.8% 2.4% 50.5% 14,819 20.4% 11.6% 3.9% 62.7% 87742 2 21,304 -698 -3.2% 20.1% 21.8% 2.6% 51.1% 16,383 18.1% 21.2% 2.6% 54.2% 14,746 15.0% 15.9% 3.1% 64.8% 87742 3 23,117 1,115 5.1% 21.2% 13.3% 2.8% 58.5% 18,158 18.7% 12.8% 2.6% 62.1% 16,467 10.8% 10.9% 2.8% 74.2% 87742 4 21,898 -104 -0.5% 14.8% 15.9% 1.3% 64.0% 16,795 13.1% 14.8% 1.3% 67.0% 15,922 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0% 90002 1 21,022 -980 -4.5% 30.1% 17.2% 2.3% 46.4% 16,598 26.6% 16.8% 2.3% 50.6% 14,295 20.1% 11.5% 3.9% 63.2% 90002 2 21,304 -698 -3.2% 20.1% 21.8% 2.6% 51.1% 16,383 18.1% 21.2% 2.6% 54.2% 14,746 15.0% 15.9% 3.1% 64.8% 90002 3 23,117 1,115 5.1% 21.2% 13.3% 2.8% 58.5% 18,158 18.7% 12.8% 2.6% 62.1% 16,467 10.8% 10.9% 2.8% 74.2% 90002 4 22,563 561 2.5% 15.5% 15.9% 1.4% 63.3% 17,329 13.7% 14.8% 1.4% 66.3% 16,446 13.1% 9.0% 1.0% 75.1% 91889 1 21,022 -980 -4.5% 30.1% 17.2% 2.3% 46.4% 16,598 26.6% 16.8% 2.3% 50.6% 14,295 20.1% 11.5% 3.9% 63.2% 91889 2 21,304 -698 -3.2% 20.1% 21.8% 2.6% 51.1% 16,383 18.1% 21.2% 2.6% 54.2% 14,746 15.0% 15.9% 3.1% 64.8% 91889 3 23,117 1,115 5.1% 21.2% 13.3% 2.8% 58.5% 18,158 18.7% 12.8% 2.6% 62.1% 16,467 10.8% 10.9% 2.8% 74.2% 91889 4 22,563 561 2.5% 15.5% 15.9% 1.4% 63.3% 17,329 13.7% 14.8% 1.4% 66.3% 16,446 13.1% 9.0% 1.0% 75.1% 98226 1 22,265 263 1.2% 23.6% 14.0% 1.7% 56.8% 17,266 21.1% 13.2% 1.7% 60.4% 16,207 18.0% 7.7% 2.4% 70.4% 98226 2 24,146 2,144 9.7% 21.2% 19.7% 2.8% 51.9% 18,454 19.2% 19.0% 2.7% 55.1% 16,802 15.0% 14.0% 3.0% 67.0% 98226 3 22,278 276 1.3% 26.2% 18.4% 2.9% 48.5% 17,578 22.9% 18.4% 2.9% 52.2% 14,562 15.1% 15.2% 3.8% 64.6% 98226 4 19,317 -2,685 -12.2% 14.4% 15.2% 1.7% 64.7% 15,170 12.8% 14.1% 1.5% 67.7% 14,383 9.7% 10.1% 1.3% 77.0% 99995 1 21,051 -951 -4.3% 30.1% 17.2% 2.3% 46.4% 16,626 26.6% 16.8% 2.3% 50.6% 14,322 20.1% 11.5% 4.0% 63.1% 99995 2 21,291 -711 -3.2% 20.1% 21.8% 2.6% 51.1% 16,365 18.1% 21.2% 2.6% 54.2% 14,719 15.0% 15.9% 3.0% 64.8% 99995 3 22,715 713 3.2% 21.4% 13.3% 2.9% 58.3% 17,841 18.8% 12.9% 2.6% 61.9% 16,175 11.0% 11.0% 2.9% 73.9% 99995 4 22,949 947 4.3% 15.4% 15.8% 1.4% 63.5% 17,636 13.6% 14.8% 1.4% 66.5% 16,738 12.9% 8.9% 1.0% 75.4% 100105 1 21,423 -579 -2.6% 30.2% 17.7% 2.4% 45.6% 16,766 27.0% 17.4% 2.3% 49.5% 14,315 19.9% 13.2% 3.8% 61.8% 100105 2 22,673 671 3.0% 19.9% 21.5% 2.9% 51.5% 17,339 18.2% 20.8% 2.8% 54.5% 15,590 14.7% 14.9% 4.0% 65.0% 100105 3 20,396 -1,606 -7.3% 20.5% 12.4% 2.5% 60.2% 16,142 17.8% 11.9% 2.3% 64.0% 14,810 10.8% 10.5% 1.8% 75.9% 100105 4 23,514 1,512 6.9% 16.2% 15.8% 1.5% 62.6% 18,221 14.3% 14.9% 1.5% 65.7% 17,239 13.3% 8.7% 1.2% 75.0% ATTACHMENT 5142
Name # Total Deviation % Dev Latino Asian Black NH
White
Total Latino Asian Black NH
White
Total Latino Asian Black NH
White
Livermore Redistricting: February 14, 2022
D
raft and Public Plans*
Plan Population V oting Age Population Citizen Voting Age Population 100643 1 22,006 4 0.0% 30.1% 17.4% 2.3% 46.3% 17,365 26.6% 17.1% 2.3% 50.4% 14,956 20.2% 12.7% 3.7% 62.2% 100643 2 22,074 72 0.3% 19.8% 21.4% 2.8% 51.7% 16,997 17.9% 20.6% 2.8% 54.8% 15,436 14.7% 14.8% 3.3% 65.9% 100643 3 22,028 26 0.1% 21.6% 13.1% 2.7% 58.4% 17,311 18.9% 12.7% 2.5% 62.1% 15,640 11.1% 10.7% 2.9% 74.1% 100643 4 21,898 -104 -0.5% 14.8% 15.9% 1.3% 64.0% 16,795 13.1% 14.8% 1.3% 67.0% 15,922 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0% 100710 1 21,659 -343 -1.6% 24.2% 17.9% 2.3% 51.5% 17,243 21.4% 17.4% 2.2% 55.4% 15,783 20.5% 10.9% 4.4% 62.6% 100710 2 22,248 246 1.1% 18.4% 21.2% 2.6% 53.6% 17,049 16.8% 20.3% 2.4% 56.7% 15,214 11.0% 15.4% 2.1% 70.1% 100710 3 22,201 199 0.9% 28.9% 12.8% 3.0% 51.2% 17,381 25.3% 12.8% 2.9% 55.2% 15,035 14.0% 12.0% 3.2% 69.9% 100710 4 21,898 -104 -0.5% 14.8% 15.9% 1.3% 64.0% 16,795 13.1% 14.8% 1.3% 67.0% 15,922 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0% 104317 1 21,976 -26 -0.1% 30.6% 17.2% 2.4% 46.0% 17,353 27.0% 16.8% 2.4% 50.2% 15,000 20.4% 11.7% 3.9% 62.3% 104317 2 21,911 -91 -0.4% 18.6% 21.8% 2.7% 52.7% 16,785 16.9% 21.0% 2.6% 55.7% 15,129 14.1% 15.0% 3.0% 66.2% 104317 3 22,162 160 0.7% 22.4% 13.0% 2.7% 57.6% 17,490 19.5% 12.7% 2.5% 61.3% 15,863 11.5% 11.5% 2.9% 73.5% 104317 4 21,898 -104 -0.5% 14.8% 15.9% 1.3% 64.0% 16,795 13.1% 14.8% 1.3% 67.0% 15,922 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0% 104852 1 21,758 -244 -1.1% 30.3% 17.3% 2.3% 46.2% 17,162 26.7% 17.1% 2.3% 50.4% 14,787 20.3% 12.6% 3.7% 62.2% 104852 2 21,233 -769 -3.5% 20.1% 21.7% 2.7% 51.2% 16,353 18.2% 20.9% 2.7% 54.3% 14,778 15.1% 14.9% 3.3% 65.3% 104852 3 23,158 1,156 5.3% 21.3% 13.3% 2.8% 58.5% 18,193 18.7% 12.8% 2.6% 62.1% 16,506 10.9% 10.9% 2.8% 74.2% 104852 4 21,857 -145 -0.7% 14.8% 15.9% 1.3% 64.0% 16,760 13.1% 14.8% 1.3% 67.0% 15,883 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0% 106313 1 21,664 -338 -1.5% 30.0% 17.4% 2.3% 46.5% 17,049 26.5% 17.2% 2.2% 50.5% 14,653 20.1% 12.6% 3.6% 62.5% 106313 2 21,928 -74 -0.3% 19.8% 21.5% 2.8% 51.6% 16,894 18.0% 20.7% 2.8% 54.6% 15,347 14.8% 14.9% 3.3% 65.7% 106313 3 21,836 -166 -0.8% 21.6% 13.2% 2.7% 58.4% 17,132 18.9% 12.7% 2.5% 62.1% 15,532 11.1% 11.0% 2.9% 73.9% 106313 4 21,628 -374 -1.7% 14.7% 15.7% 1.3% 64.2% 16,627 13.0% 14.6% 1.3% 67.2% 15,704 12.5% 8.5% 0.9% 76.4% 107170 1 21,871 -131 -0.6% 27.6% 17.0% 2.3% 49.0% 17,410 24.4% 16.4% 2.3% 53.0% 15,268 18.9% 11.2% 4.0% 65.1% 107170 2 22,009 7 0.0% 18.5% 21.5% 2.5% 53.4% 16,826 17.0% 20.6% 2.4% 56.4% 15,372 13.7% 14.4% 2.2% 68.2% 107170 3 22,135 133 0.6% 25.4% 13.4% 3.0% 54.1% 17,363 22.0% 13.5% 2.8% 58.0% 15,334 13.1% 12.6% 3.5% 69.2% Gnecco 4 21,857 -145 -0.7% 14.8% 15.9% 1.3% 64.0% 16,760 13.1% 14.8% 1.3% 67.0% 15,883 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0% 107274 1 23,619 1,617 7.3% 27.6% 16.9% 2.3% 49.1% 18,762 24.4% 16.5% 2.3% 53.2% 16,384 19.1% 11.3% 4.2% 64.1% 107274 2 16,899 -5,103 -23.2% 20.2% 23.0% 2.9% 49.6% 12,819 18.5% 22.2% 2.8% 52.6% 11,505 15.3% 16.0% 2.3% 65.1% 107274 3 23,531 1,529 6.9% 22.9% 14.2% 2.8% 56.0% 18,418 20.0% 14.0% 2.6% 59.6% 16,404 11.4% 12.4% 3.1% 71.8% 107274 4 23,957 1,955 8.9% 15.4% 15.4% 1.4% 63.9% 18,469 13.6% 14.3% 1.4% 67.0% 17,661 12.8% 8.8% 1.0% 75.8% 107385 1 21,696 -306 -1.4% 30.6% 17.1% 2.4% 46.0% 17,101 27.0% 16.8% 2.4% 50.2% 14,748 20.4% 11.6% 4.0% 62.5% 107385 2 22,060 58 0.3% 19.4% 21.6% 2.7% 51.9% 16,975 17.6% 20.9% 2.7% 54.9% 15,364 14.5% 15.8% 3.0% 65.7% 107385 3 22,352 350 1.6% 21.7% 13.2% 2.7% 58.2% 17,597 19.0% 12.8% 2.5% 61.9% 15,920 11.2% 10.9% 2.9% 73.8% 107385 4 21,898 -104 -0.5% 14.8% 15.9% 1.3% 64.0% 16,795 13.1% 14.8% 1.3% 67.0% 15,922 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0% ATTACHMENT 5143
Name # Total Deviation % Dev Latino Asian Black NH
White
Total Latino Asian Black NH
White
Total Latino Asian Black NH
White
Livermore Redistricting: February 14, 2022
D
raft and Public Plans*
Plan Population V oting Age Population Citizen Voting Age Population Gnecco 1 21,788 -214 -1.0% 26.6% 16.5% 2.4% 50.4% 17,361 23.5% 15.9% 2.3% 54.4% 15,278 18.2% 10.9% 3.5% 66.9% Gnecco 2 22,046 44 0.2% 23.9% 18.8% 2.6% 50.5% 16,948 21.4% 18.4% 2.6% 53.8% 15,241 16.7% 12.8% 3.2% 65.2% Gnecco 3 22,315 313 1.4% 21.1% 16.5% 2.9% 55.4% 17,399 18.7% 16.0% 2.7% 59.0% 15,552 11.0% 14.5% 3.2% 70.2% Gnecco 4 21,857 -145 -0.7% 14.8% 15.9% 1.3% 64.0% 16,760 13.1% 14.8% 1.3% 67.0% 15,883 12.6% 8.8% 0.9% 76.0% * Plan Green follows current district boundaries
* Population and Voting Age Population from 2020 Census Redistricting data. Adjusted for incarcerated populations. * Citizen Voting Age Population from adjusted 2015-2019 American Community Survey Special Tabulation. * Racial/Ethnic data calculated pursuant to OMB BULLETIN NO. 00-02.

ATTACHMENT 5 144
Plan Deviation <10% All blocks assigned Districts Contiguous Green
Blue
Purple
Red
66295 No
86302 No No
87742 No
90002 No
91889 No
98226 No No
99995 No
100105 No No
100643
100710 No
104317 No
104852
106313 No No
107170 No
107274 No No
107385
Gnecco
Livermore Redistricting: February 14, 2022
Draft and Public Plans*
* Plans with deviations greater than 10%, unassigned blocks, or non-contiguous districts would require amendment before adoption.
* Plan Green follows current district boundaries.

ATTACHMENT 6
145
Plan # Deferred
Green 0
Blue 0
Purple 1,049
Red 3,323
66295 9,307
86302 2,319
87742 3,686
90002 4,351
91889 4,351
98226 16,262
99995 4,351
100105 7,026
100643 3,686
100710 8,437
104317 5,288
104852 3,686
106313 3,499
107170 6,919
107274 5,911
107385 4,025
Gnecco 1,049
Livermore Redistricting: February 14,
Draft and Public Plans*
* Individuals are "deferred" if they are moved from a district voting in 2022 to one voting in 2024.
* For Livermore individuals moved from Districts 1 or 2 into District 3 or 4 would be deferred.
* Deferral not calculated for individuals not assigned to a district.
* Plan Green follows current district boundaries.

ATTACHMENT 6
146
City of Livermore Redistricting
1 / 2

45.00% 9

10.00% 2

45.00% 9
Q1 Are you satisfied with the current City Council electoral district map depicted below?
Answered: 20 Skipped: 0
TOTAL 20
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Y es
No
Uncertain

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Uncertain
ATTACHMENT 7
147
City of Livermore Redistricting
2 / 2
Q2 If you have a suggestion for how the district lines should be drawn, please visit drawlivermore.org/draw-a-map to submit your own map and/or community of interest. You may also provide a comment in the field below.

Answered: 1 Skipped: 19
ATTACHMENT 7
148
City of Livermore Redistricting
13 / 20
Q1
Are you satisfied with the current City Council electoral district map depicted below?
No
Q2
If you have a suggestion for how the district lines should be drawn, please visit drawlivermore.org/draw-a-map to submit your own map and/or community of interest. You may also provide a comment in the field below.

District 3 should not extend so far east but should be included with parts of District 1 #13#13

COMPLETECOMPLETE
Collector:Collector: Web Link 1 Web Link 1 (Web Link)(Web Link) Started:Started: Wednesday, January 26, 2022 6:24:58 AMWednesday, January 26, 2022 6:24:58 AM Last Modified:Last Modified: Wednesday, January 26, 2022 6:27:37 AMWednesday, January 26, 2022 6:27:37 AM Time Spent:Time Spent: 00:02:3900:02:39
IP Address:IP Address: 99.73.163.6299.73.163.62

Page 1 ends

Page 2 ends

ATTACHMENT 7
149
Redistribución de distritos de la ciudad de Livermore
1 / 2
100.00% 1

0.00% 0

0.00% 0
Q1 ¿Está satisfecho con el mapa actual de distritos electorales del Concejo Municipal que se muestra a continuación?
Answered: 1 Skipped: 0
TOTAL 1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Sí
No
Incierto

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Sí
No
Incierto
ATTACHMENT 7
150

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 6.2

DATE:

February 14, 2022
TO:

Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:

Scott Lanphier, Public Works Director
SUBJECT:

Hearing to
introduce an ordinance
amending and restating Chapters 13.26 and 13.27
of the Livermore Municipal Code pertaining to water conservation measures.

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Staff recommends that the City Council introduce an ordinance amending and restating Chapters 13.26 and 13.27 of the Livermore Municipal Code pertaining to water conservation.

SUMMARY
On June 14, 2021, the City Council adopted an updated Water Shortage Contingency Plan in conformance with state regulations. This updated plan includes two additional shortage stages and minor shifts of some demand management measures. In order to align the City's Municipal Code with the Plan, an update to the Code is required.

DISCUSSION
On June 14, 2021, the City Council adopted an updated Water Shortage Contingency Plan (Plan) in conformance with Section 10632 of the California Water Code. The purpose of this Plan is to identify ways that the City can reduce water demand during periods of supply shortages (such as a drought).

The previous plan included demand management measures (also known as conservation measures) split into four stages of water shortage. In 2018, the state adopted new regulations which required water purveyors to plan for six stages of water shortages ranging from a 10% reduction to an over 50% reduction in water supply. The updated Plan includes the required six stages, along with demand management measures for each of these stages, many of which are similar to the previous plan.

The proposed ordinance would amend and restate Chapters 13.26 and 13.27 of the Livermore Municipal Code which delineate the legal authority for the City to enforce the selected demand management measures. The proposed ordinance will realign the City's enforcement authority to match the most recent Plan. In addition, this ordinance also clarifies some language with the intent of making it clearer and more easily understood. Staff continue to take an education-first approach to enforcement of these rules 151
during the current drought.

Fiscal and Administrative Impacts

Staff does not anticipate any new fiscal or administrative impacts due to the adoption of this ordinance as similar rules and procedures already exist in the Livermore Municipal Code.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Staff Report for WSCP Adoption on June 14, 2021

2. 2021 Adopted Water Shortage Contingency Plan

3. Ordinance

4. Exhibit A - Amended and
Restated
Chapters 13.26 Water
Conservation and

13.27 Mandatory Drought Conservation Measures

Prepared by: Anthony Smith
Management Analyst II

Approved by:
____________________________________
Marc Roberts
City Manager
Fiscal Review by:
____________________________________
Bhavna Chaudhary
City Treasurer/Finance Manager

152
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT ITEM NO. 5.3
DATE: June 14, 2021
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Scott Lanphier, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Hearing to approve the City's 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan REC

OMMENDED ACTION
At the conclusi
on of the public hearing, it is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution:

1. Adopting and approving the 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan.

2. Authorize transmittal to the California Department of Water Resources.

3. Authorize the City Manager to take appropriate and necessary actions to carry out the purpose and intent of this Resolution and to incorporate any necessary amendments as stipulated by the State Department of Water Resources.

SUMMARY
Staff updated the Livermore’s Municipal Water (LMW) Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) per requirements of the Urban Water Management Act, Section 10632. The WSCP includes the following major components:

1. Water supply reliability analysis over a 5-year period from 2021 to 2025.

2. A new six-stage categorization of water shortage levels and corresponding demand reduction measures to cover more than 50% of supply shortage.

3. Financial consequences of actions during shortages.

Overall, the LMW 2020 WSCP demonstrates that Livermore has a reliable water system over the next five years. In addition, the LMW can implement a variety of measures during water shortage stages to reduce water demands. Revenue loss due to water shortage will be recovered through water conservation rates. Following adoption by the City Council, the 2020 WSCP will be submitted to the California Department of Water Resources prior to the July 1, 2021 deadline and will be made available to the public.

DISCUSSION
1376
ATTACHMENT 1153
The City of Livermore retained Kenney/Jenks Consultants, Inc. to update the Livermore’s Municipal Water (LMW) Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) per requirements of the Urban Water Management Act, Section 10632 of the California Water Code. The purpose of this WSCP is to provide guidance if triggering events (reduced supply, increased demand, or an emergency declaration) occur and identify corresponding actions to be taken during the various stages of a water shortage. The plan includes a description of stages which are intended to be fair to all water customers and users while having the least impact on business, employment, and quality of life for residents. The City first adopted a WSCP in 1991 and updated the plan in 1996, 2005, and 2010. A summary of the major topics in the current update are presented below.

Water Supply Reliability Analysis (Chapter 2)
As stated in the LMW’s 2020 UWMP, the water supply reliability analysis considers “normal”, “single- dry”, and “five-year drought”. The analysis in the UWMP documents that LMW has sufficient supply to meet normal and dry-year demands. An area of overlap between the UWMP and WSCP is a new requirement to prepare a Drought Risk Assessment (DRA).

The DRA requires suppliers to assess water supply reliability over a five-year period from 2021 to 2025 that examines water supplies, water uses, and the resulting water supply reliability under a reasonable prediction for five consecutive dry years. It is expected that Zone 7 will be able to meet all treated water requests during this scenario. Therefore, no WSCP actions are anticipated to be implemented. However, in the case of a shortfall in supply, the use reduction and supply augmentation measures described in Chapter 5 of the WSCP are available for implementation.

Annual Water Supply and Demand Assessment Procedures (Chapter 3) New provisions in Water Code Section 10632.1. require that an urban water supplier such as LMW, conduct an annual water supply and demand assessment (“Annual Assessment”), on or before July 1 of each year, to be submitted to the Department of Water Resources (DWR).

LMW Operations staff presents the five-year treated water request to Zone 7 in the July timeframe each year. Around January, Zone 7 provides a preliminary treated water request response that determines if this allocation can accommodate the needs of its retailers. If it is determined that Zone 7 cannot provide the requested volume of water for LMW, LMW will determine the percentage difference in demand versus supply and will enact a shortage stage. This can be in conjunction with any demand reductions required by the State of California and/or Zone 7. In April of each year, Zone 7 finalizes the available water supply to each of its users for the coming year based on State Water Project allocations and other factors. This final determination informs LMW if it is in a shortage scenario, and the results will be reported by LMW to the DWR by July 1st of each year.

Six Standard Water Shortage Stages (Chapter 4)
The primary factor that causes a water shortage is a drought, where the annual supply projection cannot meet the annual demand projection. The 2010 WSCP defines four stages of water shortage, which covers up to 35% of supply shortage and demand reduction measures. The 2020 WSCP requires the LMW to develop a new six-stage system of water shortage levels. The six standard water shortage levels correspond to progressively increasing estimated shortage conditions (up to 10-, 20-, 30-, 40-, 50- percent, and greater than 50% shortage compared to the normal reliability condition).

Other events, besides drought, that could trigger a water shortage event include an earthquake, water system failures, fire, contamination, regional power outage, state restrictions or other causes. The City 1377
ATTACHMENT 1154
has developed a comprehensive Emergency Response Plan (ERP) that addresses a variety of potential emergency situations directly affecting the LMW.

Water Shortage Response Actions by Shortage Stage (Chapter 5) When a shortage level is triggered based on the Annual Assessment, shortage response actions are also triggered with the associated shortage level. Each stage shall remain in effect until conditions indicate a more or less restrictive stage is necessary. The City will use a variety of methods through different stages to achieve more than 50% reduction in water demands. One of the most important and earliest strategies will be an expanded public education and outreach campaign. Other demand reduction measures are listed as follows.

Limit landscape irrigation to specific days and times.

Require automatic shut-off hoses.

Improve customer usage data review and alerts.

Implement drought conservation rates structures.

Prohibit use of potable water for construction and dust control.

Require covers for pools and spas.

Require commercial kitchens to use pre-rinse spray valves.

Restrict or prohibit runoff from landscape irrigation.

Prohibit use of potable water for washing hard surfaces.

Prohibit vehicle washing except at facilities using recycled or recirculating water.

Require swimming pools to be leak proof.

Prohibit turf or lawn irrigation.

Restrict water use for decorative water features, such as fountains.

Require restaurants serve water only upon request.

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS
The stages of action to be undertaken by the urban water supplier in response to water supply shortage have impacts on the LMW’s water revenues and expenses. While expenses will be reduced through lower wholesale water purchases from Zone 7, the decline in expenses does not fully offset the loss in revenue from reduced sales. This is due, in part, to the fact that monthly water rates and charges do not fully recover all of the fixed costs on meter service charges, and instead allocate some fixed charges to the water rate component of the bill. This practice slightly inflates the consumption-based portion of the customer bill to encourage conservation during normal conditions. However, the downside of this practice is that net revenue can decline during water shortages or other periods of reduced water sales.

The impact to net water system revenues will vary with each stage of action and the corresponding level of water shortage and expected conservation. To offset the impacts of water shortages, the LMW has developed conservation rates that may be enacted in response to water shortages. Conservation rates are updated and adopted by the Livermore City Council each time normal water rates and service charges are adjusted. By having previously adopted conservation rates, the LMW can avoid the delays associated with Proposition 218 notification and ballot procedures prior to implementing conservation rates in response to a water shortage. These pre-approved rates were essential in maintaining revenues during the 2014/2015 drought and placed the LMW in an excellent financial position compared to retailers without pre-approved rates in place.

Conservation rates correspond to each stage identified in the WSCP and are calculated to recover the 1378
ATTACHMENT 1155
necessary revenue based on the reduced volume of water expected to be sold and purchased in each stage. For example, Stage 2 conservation rates are designed to recover the revenue lost from a 20% reduction in water sales while taking into account the reduced cost of purchasing 20% less water. The LMW’s next cost-of-service study will evaluate these rates in preparation of future drought events and to align conservation rates with the six shortage stages.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

2. Exhibit A - 2020 WSCP
Prepar
ed by: Yanming Zhang
Water Resources Technical Programs
Manager
Approved by:
____________________________________
Marc Roberts
City Manager
Fiscal Review by:
____________________________________
Douglas Alessio
Administrative Services Director
1379
ATTACHMENT 1156
275 Battery Street, Suite 550
San Francisco, California 94111
415-243-2150
20 20 Water Shortage
Contingency Plan
18 June 2021
Prepared for
Livermore Municipal Water
101 W. Jack London Blvd.

Livermore, CA 94551
K/
J Project No. 2068015.00
ATTACHMENT 2
157

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page i
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Table of Contents
List of Tables .............................................................................................................................. iii List of Figures............................................................................................................................. iii List of Appendices ...................................................................................................................... iii Introduction ................................................................................. 1 Water Supply Reliability Analysis ................................................ 2

2.1 Overview .............................................................................................. 2

2.2 Water Supplies ..................................................................................... 2

2.3 Supply Reliability .................................................................................. 3

2.4 Demand Projections ............................................................................. 4

2.5 Drought Risk Assessment .................................................................... 5 Annual Water Supply and Demand Assessment
Procedures ................................................................................... 7

3.1 Timeline and Methodology for Conducting the Annual
Assessment ......................................................................................... 7

3.2 Current Predicted Shortages Based on Annual Water Supply and Demand Assessment .................................................................... 8 Six Standard Water Shortage Stages .......................................... 9

4.1 Water Shortage Event .......................................................................... 9

4.2 Definition of Drought ............................................................................ 9

4.3 Natural Disaster or Failure of Water System Facilities .......................... 9

4.4 Existing Water Shortage Levels ......................................................... 10

4.5 Proposed Water Shortage Levels ....................................................... 11

4.6 Actions to Prepare for Catastrophic Interruption ................................. 12 Emergency Response Plan ..................................................... 12 Water Shortage Response Actions (by Shortage Stage) ........... 15

5.1 Shortage Response Actions ............................................................... 16

5.2 Demand Reduction Actions ................................................................ 16 Customer Demand Reduction ................................................. 18

5.3 Supply Augmentation Actions............................................................. 19

5.4 Operational Changes ......................................................................... 20

5.5 Additional Mandatory Prohibitions ...................................................... 20

5.6 Effectiveness of Shortage Response Actions (by Water Shortage Stage) ................................................................................. 20 Public Information ................................................................... 20 Enforcement ............................................................................ 21 ATTACHMENT 2
158
Table of Contents (cont’d)
Restrictions on Non-Essential Water Uses .............................. 22 Drought Surcharge Rates ........................................................ 22 Communication Protocols ......................................................... 24 Penalties, Charges, Other Enforcement of Prohibitions............ 26

7.1 Excessive Use Penalties .................................................................... 26 Legal Authorities ....................................................................... 27 Financial Consequences of Actions during Shortages .............. 28

9.1 Financial Consequences of Limiting Excessive Water Use ................ 28 Monitoring and Reporting .......................................................... 30

10.1 Metering ............................................................................................. 30

10.2 Monitoring .......................................................................................... 30 Refinement Procedures ............................................................. 32 Special Water Feature Distinction............................................. 33 Plan Adoption Resolution or Ordinance .................................... 34 References 35

ATTACHMENT 2
159
Table of Contents (cont'd)
Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page iii \\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx List of Tables
Table 2-1 Zone 7 Normal Year Supply Projections (Volumes are in AF)..................................... 3 Table 2-2 Zone 7 Reliability on the Delta Watershed .................................................................. 3 Table 2-3 Zone 7 Water Use Efficiency Projections .................................................................... 4 Table 2-4 Five-Year Drought Risk Assessment (DWR Table 7-5) .............................................. 5 Table 3-1 Calendar and Methodology for Performing Annual Assessment ................................. 8 Table 4-1 Water Shortage Reductions DWR Table 8-1 ............................................................ 12 Table 5-1 Water Shortage Stages and Triggers/Demand Reduction Goals .............................. 15 Table 5-2 Demand Reduction Actions DWR Table 8-2 ............................................................. 16 Table 5-3 Supply Augmentation and Other Actions DWR Table 8-3 ......................................... 19 Table 5-4 Drought Program Management Variables Effect on Residential Water-Use ............. 21 Table 6-1 Communication Protocols ......................................................................................... 24 List of Figures
Figure 4-1 Shortage Stage Crosswalk ...................................................................................... 11 List of Appendices
A Annual Assessment Template
B Rate Ordinance
C Adoption Resolution

ATTACHMENT 2
160

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 1
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Introduction
This plan documents the City of Livermore’s Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) per requirements of the Urban Water Management Act, Section 10632 of the California Water Code.

Livermore Municipal Water (LMW) purchases all treated potable water from Zone 7 Water Agency.

The purpose of this WSCP is to provide guidance if triggering events occur — whether from reduced supply, increased demand, or an emergency declaration — and identify corresponding actions to be taken during the various shortage levels or stages of a water shortage. The plan includes a description of shortage levels or stages which are intended to be fair to all water customers and users while having the least impact on business, employment, and quality of life for residents.

ATTACHMENT 2
161

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 2
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Water Supply Reliability Analysis

2.1 Overview
Water Code Section 10632(a) requires that every urban water supplier prepare and adopt a Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) as part of its Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). While the WSCP is a stand-alone document it is updated and adopted in concert with the UWMP. Contents of the WSCP are informed by the analysis of water supply reliability conducted pursuant to Water Code Section 10635 (contained in the UWMP). The reliability analysis of the UWMP considered “normal”, “single-dry”, and “5-year drought”. The analysis in the UWMP documents reflects that LMW has sufficient supply to meet normal and dry-year demands. An area of overlap between the UWMP and WSCP is a new requirement to prepare a Drought Risk Assessment (DRA) (Section 7.8 of the 2020 UWMP) to account for the significant duration of recent California droughts and the predictions about hydrological variability attributable to climate change. The DRA is detailed in Section 2.5.

2.2 Water Supplies
As noted earlier, LMW purchases all its potable water supplies from the Zone 7 Water Agency and has no other source of supply. Thus, the water supply assessment and reliability analysis focuses on historical supply from Zone 7 and demands from LMW. While LMW relies on Zone 7 as its primary water source, the Zone 7 system consists of a variety of different sources. A summary of Zone 7 supplies includes:
 Imported Surface Water
o State Water Project
o Byron Bethany Irrigation District
 Local Surface Water Runoff
o Arroyo Las Positas
o Arroyo Mocho
 Local Storage
o Lake Del Valle
o Chain of Lakes
 Non-Local Storage
o Semitropic Water Storage District
o Cawelo Water District

Therefore, Zone 7 is able to balance its supply between a variety of different sources to adapt to shortages or limitations in any one source due to legal, environmental, regulatory, or climatic factors. Traditionally, Zone 7 has been able to supply all the water demands from Livermore even during historical drought conditions. Table 2-1 below provides the Zone 7 supply projections over the planning horizon of this document.

ATTACHMENT 2
162

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 3
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Table 2-1 Zone 7 Normal Year Supply Projections (Volumes are in AF) 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
SWP Table A 47,000 46,000 45,000 43,500 43,500
SWP Carryover 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000
Arroyo Valle 5,500 5,500 5,500 5,500 5,500
Main Basin 9,200 9,200 9,200 9,200 9,200
SWP/Other Transfer 5,000 5,000 - - -
BARDP or Potable Reuse - 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000
Sites Reservoir Project - 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000
Total 76,700 90,700 84,700 83,200 83,200
Notes:

The values contained in this table/figure are planning level estimates and there is an uncertainty associated with each of these values

Zone 7 projects that the water agency will have surplus treated water during normal, 1-year drought, and 5-year drought water conditions. See the Zone 7 UWMP located at (insert web link) for more information.

2.3 Supply Reliability
Zone 7 has provided water system reliability data and supply projections for Water Years 2010 through 2045. Zone 7, through the application of water use efficiency (WUE), supply exchanges, and alternate water sources projects a reduction in reliance on water from the Delta Watershed.

The averaged projected reduction in watershed reliance in Years 2020 through 2045 is approximately 23%, see Table 2-2 below. This projected reliability reduction does not include the projected reduction in use from water use efficiency over that time period. Additions to supply include exchanges with local contributors, local supplies via Arroyo Del Valle and groundwater wells, and groundwater banking programs.

Table 2-2 Zone 7 Reliability on the Delta Watershed
Percent Change in
Supplies from the Delta
Watershed
(As a Percent of Demand
w/out WUE)
Baseline
(2010) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
2045
(Optional)
Percent of Water Supplies
from the Delta Watershed 85% 59% 48% 73% 70% 61% 58% 58% Change in Percent of Water
Supplies from the Delta
Watershed
-26% -37% -12% -15% -24% -27% -27%
Notes:

The values contained in this table/figure are planning level estimates and there is an uncertainty associated with each of these values.”

ATTACHMENT 2
163

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 4
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx In addition to diversifying water supply, Zone 7 has estimated reductions in water use due to water use efficiency measures. Projected water use efficiency figures (Water Years 2020 through 2045) showed an approximate reduction of 22% in water use when implemented.

These reduction percentages can be met through implementation of WSCP shortage actions discussed further in Section 5 below. See Table 2-3 for projected water use reductions assumed by Zone 7.

Table 2-3 Zone 7 Water Use Efficiency Projections
Total Service Area Water
Demands
(Acre-Feet)
Baseline
(2010) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
2045
(Optional)
Service Area Water Demands
with Water Use Efficiency
Accounted For

66,200

47,900

57,000

70,300

71,700

73,000

74,500

74,500
Reported Water Use Efficiency
or Estimated Water Use
Efficiency Since Baseline

25,634

17,254

15,137

19,279

21,209

22,031

22,031
Service Area Water Demands
without Water Use Efficiency
Accounted For

66,200

73,534

74,254

85,437

90,979

94,209

96,531

96,531
Percent reduction in demand
from Water Use Efficiency 35% 23% 18% 21% 23% 23% 23%
Note: Data per Zone 7 updated Delta Reliance Tables provided 2/22/2021 The values contained in this table/figure are planning level estimates and there is an uncertainty associated with each of these values.

In addition to Zone 7’s expected reduced reliance on the Delta, Livermore has also utilized water use efficiency measures and recycled water to limit its reliance on Delta water supplies.

Appendix B of the 2020 UWMP includes DWR Tables C-1 through C-4 outlining the reduction in reliance on the Delta. Projected water use efficiency and recycled water use equates to an expected 40% reduction in Delta reliance by the year 2045.

2.4 Demand Projections
LMW Operations staff work closely with Zone 7 each year to provide up to date treated water request estimates for the next 5 years. These estimates are based on historical water use, per capita water use trends, and expected changes in land use areas and development within the service area. Water Year 2020 saw a large increase in per capita water use in comparison to previous years which can likely be attributed to increased residential water use due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Water use projections developed for Water Years 2021 through 2025 show a decrease in per capita use closer to the baseline values seen in 2017-2019 and then a linear increase to align with Zone 7 demand projections in 2025. The treated water request estimates prepared by LMW Operations may differ slightly from UWMP long-range demand projections because they are based on the historic actual water demand from the prior year. See Section 4 of the Livermore 2020 UWMP for more detailed information concerning projected demands.

ATTACHMENT 2
164

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 5
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx

2.5 Drought Risk Assessment
The DRA requires suppliers to assess water supply reliability over a 5-year period from 2021 to 2025 that examines water supplies, water uses, and the resulting water supply reliability under a reasonable prediction for five (5) consecutive dry years.

The gross water use values for 2021 -2025 presented in Table 2-4 are estimates based on Zone 7’s projected water use for its entire service area. The percentage of LMW’s demand during normal year conditions was utilized to project water uses from Zone 7’s 2020 UWMP Table 7-5 values for the LMW service area. As noted earlier, the gross water use values may slightly differ from UWMP long-range demand projection because of a difference in methods. LMW treated water request estimates often fall below Zone 7 demand projections for the service area allowing for some conservatism in planning values for Zone 7 supplies. LMW’s total water supplies were projected based on the total available supply to the entirety of Zone 7’s service area adjusted for percentage of water demand from LMW.

Error! Reference source not found. provides a summary of the expected supply and demand scenarios for a 5-year drought condition from 2021-2025. It is expected that Zone 7 will be able to meet all treated water requests during this scenario. Therefore, no Water Shortage Contingency Plan actions are anticipated to be implemented. However, in the case of a shortfall in supply, the use reduction and supply augmentation measures described in Section 5 of this WSCP are available for implementation.

Table 2-4 Five-Year Drought Risk Assessment (DWR Table 7-5) 2021 (Volumes are in Million-Gallon) Total
Gross Water Use 2,135
Total Supplies 2,135
Surplus/Shortfall w/o WSCP Action 0
Planned WSCP Actions (use reduction and supply augmentation) WSCP - supply augmentation benefit 0
WSCP - use reduction savings benefit 0
Revised Surplus/(shortfall) 0
Resulting % Use Reduction from WSCP action 0
2022 Total
Gross Water Use [Use Worksheet] 1,994
Total Supplies [Supply Worksheet] 1,994
Surplus/Shortfall w/o WSCP Action 0
Planned WSCP Actions (use reduction and supply augmentation) WSCP - supply augmentation benefit 0
WSCP - use reduction savings benefit 0
Revised Surplus/(shortfall) 0
Resulting % Use Reduction from WSCP action 0
2023 Total
Gross Water Use [Use Worksheet] 2,007
Total Supplies [Supply Worksheet] 2,007
Surplus/Shortfall w/o WSCP Action 0
ATTACHMENT 2
165

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 6
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Planned WSCP Actions (use reduction and supply augmentation) WSCP - supply augmentation benefit
WSCP - use reduction savings benefit
Revised Surplus/(shortfall) 0
Resulting % Use Reduction from WSCP action 0
2024 Total
Gross Water Use [Use Worksheet] 2,020
Total Supplies [Supply Worksheet] 2,020
Surplus/Shortfall w/o WSCP Action 0
Planned WSCP Actions (use reduction and supply augmentation) WSCP - supply augmentation benefit
WSCP - use reduction savings benefit
Revised Surplus/(shortfall) 0
Resulting % Use Reduction from WSCP action 0
2025 Total
Gross Water Use [Use Worksheet] 2,040
Total Supplies [Supply Worksheet] 2,040
Surplus/Shortfall w/o WSCP Action 0
Planned WSCP Actions (use reduction and supply augmentation) WSCP - supply augmentation benefit
WSCP - use reduction savings benefit
Revised Surplus/(shortfall) 0
Resulting % Use Reduction from WSCP action 0
Notes:

The values contained in this table/figure are planning level estimates and there is an uncertainty associated with each of these values.

ATTACHMENT 2
166

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 7
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Annual Water Supply and Demand Assessment
Procedures
California Water Code Division 1, Section 350, states:

“The governing body of a distributor of a public water supply, whether publicly or privately owned and including a mutual water company, shall declare a water shortage emergency condition to prevail within the area served by such distributor whenever it finds and determines that the ordinary demands and requirements of water consumers cannot be satisfied without depleting the water supply of the distributor to the extent that there would be insufficient water for human consumption, sanitation, and fire protection.”

These Annual Assessment procedures described herein are one tool to be used to determine if a water shortage is to be declared.

New provisions in Water Code Section 10632.1. require that an urban water supplier such as LMW, conduct an annual water supply and demand assessment (“Annual Assessment”), on or before July 1 of each year, to be submitted to DWR. An urban water supplier that relies on imported water from the State Water Project (SWP) or the Bureau of Reclamation shall submit its Annual Assessment within 14 days of receiving its final allocations, or by July 1 of each year, whichever is later. The requirement to perform the Annual Assessment begins in July 2022.

3.1 Timeline and Methodology for Conducting the Annual
Assessment
As described in Section 2.4, LMW Operations staff develops a 5-year treated water request schedule using the current year’s water consumption as a baseline. LMW Operations staff estimates a monthly water usage for the next 5 years based on current usage trends and expected new water connections from development within the service area. Projected conservation values are calculated at 10% of average use values for reporting purposes to Zone

7. LMW treated water requests are also compared to Zone 7’s projections to ensure values are similar amongst the agencies. LMW Operations staff presents the 5-year treated water request to Zone 7 in the July timeframe each year (see Table 3-1 below for an approximate timeline). In about January, Zone 7 provides a preliminary treated water request approval by analyzing the initial SWP allocation and determines if this allocation can accommodate the needs of its retailers.

If it is determined that Zone 7 cannot provide the requested volume of water for LMW, LMW will determine the percentage difference in demand versus supply and will enact a shortage level described in Chapter 4. This can be in conjunction with any demand reductions required by the State of California and/or Zone 7.

In April of each year Zone 7 finalizes the available water supply to each of its users for the coming year based on SWP allocations and other factors. This final determination informs LMW if it is in a shortage scenario and the results will be reported by LMW to the DWR by July 1st of each year.

ATTACHMENT 2
167

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 8
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Table 3-1 provides targets for performing the Annual Assessment. By starting to plan in June of the previous year, Livermore Municipal Water will get a snapshot of conditions and can start lining up the resources to mitigate supply and start outreach to customers to manage demand.

Major actions are proposed in January, when an initial shortage level is triggered. A final annual assessment is proposed in the May-June current year timeframe.

Table 3-1 Calendar and Methodology for Performing Annual Assessment

A sample template for synthesizing the information is provided in Appendix A.

3.2 Current Predicted Shortages Based on Annual Water Supply and Demand Assessment
While the first Annual Assessment is not required to be submitted to DWR until July 1, 2022, Suppliers are encouraged to use the procedures documented in its WSCP to prepare and include the outcome of an Annual Assessment for 2021, and to present the results in their UWMP as an example.

Further, although the Annual Assessment must be submitted to DWR on or before July 1 of every year, an early Annual Assessment allows Suppliers and customers to identify uncertainties and prepare financially and logistically for any anticipated water supply constraints in the coming months. Therefore, Suppliers are encouraged to develop procedures, including decision-making processes, that facilitate early analysis and adoption.

LWM does not predict a water supply shortage for the current water year (2021). Anticipated demands are within the planning values presented by Zone 7. Zone 7 has traditionally been able to meet all anticipated demands even during dry conditions. No shortage levels or response actions directly associated with specific shortage levels are anticipated for the current water year.

Target
Date Action
June Zone 7 requests 5-year water demand projection
July LMW Distribution Operations Manager submits demands and conservation demands
January
Zone 7 responds to demand projections with available supply and preliminary approval letter
LMW determines if supply is less than demand triggering a shortage event (Shortage Level 1-6)
February LMW issues a shortage stage resolution triggering shortage response actions if necessary
April Zone 7 issues final supply report
February -July
Continue public outreach, if necessary
Monitor customer response to water shortage messaging and other response actions, if necessary
Report final annual assessment to DWR
ATTACHMENT 2
168

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 9
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Six Standard Water Shortage Stages

4.1 Water Shortage Event
A water shortage event can be anything from a single occurrence as short as twenty-four hours to a multi-year weather condition. If water shortage event triggers identified in Table 5-1 are met the City will consider enacting voluntary and/or mandatory restrictions and other drought response actions as listed in Table 5-2 targeted primarily at reducing outdoor watering activities. Any such restrictions would be enacted with an adopted resolution passed by the Livermore City Council.

Other events, besides drought, that could trigger a water shortage event include an earthquake, water system failures, fire, contamination, regional power outage, state restrictions or other causes.

4.2 Definition of Drought
The following definition was written by the California Department of Water Resources:

Defining when drought occurs is a function of drought impacts to water users. Drought can best be thought of as a condition of water shortage for a particular user in a particular location. Hydrologic conditions constituting a drought for water users in one location may not constitute a drought for water users in a different part of California or for users with a different water supply. Individual water suppliers may use criteria such as rainfall/runoff, amount of water in storage, or expected supply from a water wholesaler to define their water supply conditions.

Drought is a gradual phenomenon. Although persistent drought may be characterized as an emergency, it differs from typical emergency events. Most natural disasters, such as floods or forest fires, occur relatively rapidly and afford little time for preparing for disaster response.

Droughts occur slowly, over a period of time. There is no universal definition of when a drought begins or ends. Impacts of drought are typically felt first by those most reliant on annual rainfall – ranchers engaged in dryland grazing, rural residents relying on wells in low- yield rock formations, or small water systems lacking a reliable water source. Criteria used to identify statewide drought conditions do not address these localized impacts. Drought impacts increase with the length of a drought, as carry-over supplies in reservoirs are depleted and water levels in groundwater basins decline.

Source: http://www.water.ca.gov/waterconditions/background.cfm

4.3 Natural Disaster or Failure of Water System Facilities In the event of a natural disaster such as an earthquake, fire, toxic spill or flood, or should a catastrophic failure occur at any of Livermore System's facilities, the City can enact restrictions as described in Table 5-2 of this WSCP. Such restrictions would be based on the varying circumstances as determined necessary and appropriate by the City Council to respond to the ATTACHMENT 2
169

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 10
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx emergency conditions, or by the City Manager in the event the City Council cannot act in a timely manner.

4.4 Existing Water Shortage Levels
The below definitions represent the shortage stages originally described in the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan that are consistent with the current Livermore Municipal Code. A cross-reference between the existing four Livermore shortage stage definitions to the new six shortage levels required by DWR is provided in the crosswalk table in Figure 4-1 in Section 4.5.

Normal Supply
Inclusion of “Normal Supply” in the Plan is an important level. The Water Conservation Bill of 2009 requires urban water suppliers to reduce per-capita water consumption by 20 percent by 2020. Implementing conservation during “Normal Supply” periods will play an important role in reaching the required twenty percent reduction in per-capita consumption.

 Definition: Water supplies are adequate to meet all the water demands of customers.  Message: We can deliver all the water our customers need, recognizing that customers should practice wise water use at all times.
 Type: Voluntary.
 Expected Reduction: None targeted
 Conservation: Basic water conservation measures and public information promoting wise water use and Best Management Practices when using water for residential, commercial or irrigation uses.

Livermore Stage 1- Minimal Reduction
 Definition: There is sufficient uncertainty concerning water supplies for this year or in the next few years that it would be prudent to conserve local water supplies so that these supplies may be used to meet water demands in the future.  Message: We think we can deliver all the water our customers want but request their help to conserve water to be sure local and imported supplies are adequate to meet future years’ water demands – please conserve.
 Type: Voluntary.
 Expected Reduction: Up to 20%

Livermore Stage 2- Moderate Reduction
 Definition: There are definable events that lead to a reasonable conclusion that in the current and/or upcoming water years, water supplies may not be adequate to meet all customer water demands.
 Message: We may not be able to deliver all the water our customers want, and we need customers’ help to conserve water.
 Type: Voluntary or Mandatory.
 Expected Reduction: up to 20%

ATTACHMENT 2
170

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 11
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Livermore Stage 3- Severe Reduction
 Definition: There are definable events that lead to a firm conclusion that in the current water year, water supplies will not be adequate to meet customers’ water demands.  Message: We cannot deliver all the water our customers need, and we are requiring our customers to use less water.
 Type: Mandatory.
 Expected Reduction: up to 35%

Livermore Stage 4- Critical Reduction
 Definition: A Stage 3 shortage has been in effect and the reduction goal is not being met or new definable events require increasing the reduction goal.  Message: We cannot deliver all the water our customers need, and we have not been able to achieve targeted reductions, so we now have to enforce the use of less water.  Type: Mandatory.
 Expected Reduction: >=35 %

4.5 Proposed Water Shortage Levels
The shortage levels are shown in the crosswalk below describing the cross-reference from LMW’s four stages of shortage to the six stages of shortage as required in the DWR’s 2020 guidance documents.

Figure 4-1 Shortage Stage Crosswalk
ATTACHMENT 2
171

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 12
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx The shortage stages for the 2020 WSCP are shown in DWR Table 8-1 below. The mapped stage language from the 2015 WSCP with the proposed stages is reflected in Table 5-1. These mapped stages will help transition LMW’s shortage actions in DWR Tables 8-2 and 8-3 to the proposed 2020 stages.

Table 4-1 Water Shortage Reductions DWR Table 8-1
New
Shortage
Level
Complete Both
Percent
Shortage Range1
Numerical value as
a percent
Existing Shortage Response Actions
(Narrative description)
Add additional rows as needed
1 Up to 10% Stage 1: Voluntary Minimal Reductions up to 20% 2 Up to 20% Stage 2: Mandatory Moderate Reductions up to 20% 3 Up to 30% Stage 3: Severe Reductions up to 35%
4 Up to 40% Stage 3: Severe Reductions up to 35%/
Stage 4: Critical Reductions more than 35%
5 Up to 50% Stage 4: Critical Reductions more than 35% 6 >50% Stage 4: Critical Reductions more than 35%
1 One stage in the Water Shortage Contingency Plan must address a water shortage of 50%.

4.6 Actions to Prepare for Catastrophic Interruption
Emergency Response Plan
This section describes actions taken by the City to prepare for and to be implemented during a catastrophic interruption of water supplies. Potential catastrophic supply interruptions include but are not limited to a regional power outage, earthquake, or other disaster causing a water supply outage such as a failure of the San Joaquin Delta levee system.

The City has developed a comprehensive Emergency Response Plan (ERP) that addresses a variety of potential emergency situations directly affecting the City’s municipal water system. The goals of the ERP are to:

 Rapidly restore water service after an emergency;
 Ensure adequate water supply for fire suppression;
 Minimize water system damage;
 Minimize impacts and loss to customers;
 Minimize negative impacts on public health and employee safety;  Provide emergency public information concerning customer service.

The ERP establishes “Action Plans” for different emergency conditions which outline the steps City staff will take to respond to, evaluate, and mitigate the emergency. Action Plans were developed for a variety of water supply interruptions including power outages; earthquakes; flooding; and terrorist events. In addition to Action Plans, the City’s Emergency Response Plan includes an inventory of emergency supplies, mutual aid contacts, and lists of potential vendors of emergency supplies.

ATTACHMENT 2
172

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 13
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx The LMW Emergency Response Plan was developed to comply with Section 1433(b) of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) as amended by the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002.

Due to the sensitive nature of the information contained in the Emergency Response Plan, the plan includes an Access Control section that limits distribution of the plan to “individuals directly involved in LMW emergency planning and response activities”. Therefore, excerpts from the LMW Emergency Response Plan are not included with this UWMP.

Below is a brief summary of some of the steps staff will implement in response to specific water supply interruptions:

Regional Power Outage – Four of the City’s municipal water system’s five pump stations have emergency generators in the event of regional or local power outage situations. The water telemetry center at the Livermore Water Reclamation Plant also has plans to implement emergency backup power during extended outages. Backup pump station power will allow City staff to maintain water service as long as Zone 7 has available water supplies.

Water Supply Outage – After notification by Zone 7 of a regional water supply outage, City staff will immediately put one of the emergency plans into action. If the South Bay Aqueduct (part of State Water Project) were damaged, it is possible that a limited amount of water would be available in the Patterson Pass Treatment Plant forebay and additional water could be taken from Lake Del Valle. If a Zone 7 pipeline were damaged, water could be networked around the Tri-Valley and around the leak through retailer interties. If a City municipal water system pipeline were damaged or leaking, the leak or damaged section could be isolated and an alternate supply path created through the supply network.

During short-term supply outages, City staff would implement similar procedures described above for power outages. For prolonged, regional outages, City staff would consider the need and feasibility of implementing progressively more aggressive strategies to extend local reservoir supplies. These might include restricting all uses except emergency firefighting, with staff distributing drinking water and portable toilets throughout the service area to meet sanitation and drinking needs. These types of measures would only be considered in the most extreme and prolonged emergency conditions.

Seismic – As part of LMW’s Water Distribution System Risk and Resilience Assessment (RRA), The City of Livermore evaluated seismic risk to water facilities and identified mitigation measures to lessen the risk. This plan meets the requirements of the federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 as well as the requirements of Water Code Section 10644. A copy of the 2020 LWD Water Distribution System RRA will be submitted to DWR with the adopted Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP).

From the LMW 2020 Water Distribution System RRA, Livermore is between the Calaveras and Greenville faults. Per the United States Geologic Survey’s (USGS’s) 2007 projections, Livermore has approximately 10-20 percent chance of sustaining a rupture with a magnitude of M≥6.7 over 30 years. From another figure in the same report, that corresponds to a 0.1-1% [0.44% for Calaveras Fault] 5-year probability of the event. The Livermore area has a chance of an earthquake with M≥6.7 of approximately 7.4% over 30 years, or an annual likelihood per year of 0.0025.

ATTACHMENT 2
173

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 14
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx In order to minimize the impact of peak ground acceleration (PGA) of 0.4-1.1g during a seismic event, the LMW has a countermeasure to replace larger rigid pipes (>= 12 inches in diameter) with flexible pipes. The pipe replacement will be carried out through the City’s long-term water system renewal and replacement program. Replacing aging rigid pipes (e.g. cast-iron pipes and asbestos-cement pipes) will bring the following benefits:
 Decreases the susceptibility of the system to breaks and leaks with ground movement:

Increases robustness of the system.
 Reduces susceptibility to other threats like corrosion: Increases flexibility of system to a range of threats.
 When flexible pipelines are in place, the trunk system will ensure the system is brought back online as quickly as possible: Increases the responsiveness to this threat.  Once service is restored, flexible pipes are less likely to fail from longer-term stress brought about by minor ground movement: Recovery is enhanced.

All LMW’s pump stations that are in use have at least been retrofitted since 1997, bringing them up to current codes and construction for resilience around the Bay Area faults. If the PGA of the pumping equipment exceeds that of the structure, the disabled structure could continue to function, though the structure would require replacement.

All water tanks owned by LMW are made of steel which is a flexible material compared to concreate. Three out of four water tanks were constructed after 2002, showing compliance with current seismic code. The risk calculation shows that the events that would be sufficient to rupture the tanks were large and had a low chance of occurrence. The tanks are positioned so that even a severe rupture would destroy the tank but would be very unlikely to endanger life.

The Doolan Tank is about 1,800 feet from a nearby commercial/industrial area. There is adequate landscape to significantly dampen the impact of flows from the tank. One tank at the Altamont tank site was constructed in 1985. The LMW will review the initial design of the Altamont tank for seismic code compliance and conduct retrofit if necessary.

ATTACHMENT 2
174

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 15
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Water Shortage Response Actions (by
Shortage Stage)
The LMW has adapted the four-stage plan, as outlined in Chapter 13.26 Water Conservation and Chapter 13.27 Mandatory Drought Conservation Measures of Division 1 (Water) of Title 13 (Public Services) of the Livermore Municipal Code. During the 2020 WSCP, the LMW has developed a six-stage (or shortage level) contingency plan to reduce demand up to more than 50 percent during a severe or extended water shortage event. Livermore has both voluntary and mandatory stages. References to stages from this point forward are to the six shortage levels required by DWR, unless specifically identified.

Table 5-1 Water Shortage Stages and Triggers/Demand Reduction Goals Stage Trigger

New Demand
Reduction Goal
Existing Demand
Reduction Goal
Minimal
Stage 1

Annual Supply
Projection is 10% below
Demand Projection

10% Voluntary

Livermore Stage 1:

Up to 20% Voluntary1
Moderate
Stage 2

Annual Supply Projection
is between 10% and 19%
below Demand Projection

Up to 20% Voluntary
or Mandatory

Livermore Stage 1:

Up to 20% Voluntary
or Livermore Stage 2
up to 20%
Mandatory1
Severe
Stage 3

Annual Supply Projection
is between 20% and 29%
below Demand Projection

30% Mandatory

Livermore Stage 3:
up to 35% Mandatory
Livermore Stage 4:
>=35% Mandatory1

Stage 4

Annual Supply Projection
is between 30% and 39%
below Demand Projection

40% Mandatory

Critical
Stage 5

Annual Supply Projection
is between 40% and 49%
below Demand Projection

50% Mandatory

Livermore Stage 4:
>=35 Mandatory1

Stage 6

Annual Supply Projection
is below 50% of Demand
Projection

> 50% Mandatory

1 % Reduction from 2015 Livermore UWMP
ATTACHMENT 2
175

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 16
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx

5.1 Shortage Response Actions
The water shortage conditions in Table 5-1 are based on the Annual Assessment. Other circumstances may also be considered, including but not limited to the time of year, weather forecasts, river flow forecast, rainfall, temperature, past experience and economic feasibility, the volume of water available from Zone 7, and quality of the water produced from each source.

While each shortage level triggers specific shortage response actions, LMW continues to implement water savings strategies year-round to achieve a baseline demand reduction to assist with desired demand reduction for Zone 7 water agencies. These actions include but are not limited to:
 Monthly meter readings – LMW staff identify higher than average water usage and provide information and outreach to customers for reducing their water bills  Baseline public outreach – LMW provides bill stuffers, social media, and web site information pertaining to local drought conditions and local water use restrictions

5.2 Demand Reduction Actions
When a shortage level is triggered based on the Annual Assessment, shortage response actions are also triggered with the associated shortage level. Table 5-2 describes the response actions and the estimated reduction in demand associated with each action. During the recent 2014-2017 drought, public information messaging which was occurring regionally and statewide was sufficient to achieve the savings mandated by the Governor’s Executive Order.

Table 5-2 Demand Reduction Actions DWR Table 8-2
DRAFT Submittal Table 8-2: Demand Reduction Actions
Shortage

Level
Demand Reduction
Actions.

How much is this
going to reduce the
shortage gap? Include
volume units used.

Additional Explanation
or Reference
(optional)
Penalty, Charge, or
Other
Enforcement?
Add additional rows as needed
1 Landscape - Limit
landscape irrigation to
specific times
2% 6 PM to 9 AM No
1 Other - Require automatic
shut off hoses <1% No
1a Expand Public Information
Campaign 32% No
1b Improve Customer Billing 2% Enhanced data review
and alert No
1 Implement or Modify
Drought Rate Structure or
Surcharge
10% Livermore Stage 1/1
Ratesd No
2c
Landscape - Limit
landscape irrigation to
specific days
10% Nonconsecutive days No
ATTACHMENT 2
176

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 17
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx 2 Implement or Modify
Drought Rate Structure or
Surcharge
10% Livermore Stage 2/2
Ratesd No
3 Pools and Spas - Require
covers for pools and spas <1% No
3 Other - Prohibit use of
potable water for
construction and dust
control
<1% No
3 Implement or Modify
Drought Rate Structure or
Surcharge
10% Livermore Stage 3/3
Ratesd No
4 CII - Commercial kitchens
required to use pre-rinse
spray valves
<1% Required to use low
flow rinse nozzles Yes
4c
Landscape - Limit
landscape irrigation to
specific days
10% Hand water Saturday
or Sunday only Yes
4 Landscape - Restrict or
prohibit runoff from
landscape irrigation
<1% Yes
4 Other - Prohibit use of
potable water for washing
hard surfaces
<1% Prohibit street
washing or flooding Yes
4 Other - Prohibit vehicle
washing except at facilities
using recycled or
recirculating water
2%
Only wash vehicles at
recycled water wash
facilities
Yes
4 Other water feature or
swimming pool restriction <1% Must be leak proof Yes
4 Implement or Modify
Drought Rate Structure or
Surcharge
15% Livermore Stage 3/4
Ratesd Yes
5 Landscape - Prohibit
certain types of landscape
irrigation
2% Prohibit turf or lawn
irrigation Yes
5 Water Features - Restrict
water use for decorative
water features, such as
fountains
<1% Prohibit potable water
use Yes
5 CII - Restaurants may only
serve water upon request <1% Yes
5 Implement or Modify
Drought Rate Structure or
Surcharge
15% Livermore Stage 4/5
Ratesd Yes
ATTACHMENT 2
177

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 18
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx 6 Implement or Modify
Drought Rate Structure or
Surcharge
15% Livermore Stage 4/6
Ratesd Yes
NOTES: All response actions are cumulative i.e. action described in prior stages are also applicable in subsequent stages (e.g. actions described in Shortage Level 1 are also applicable in Shortage Levels 2-6). Drought rates are not additive.
a2014/2015 drought saw a 32% reduction in water use only from an expanded outreach campaign to customers bLivermore's billing software allows them to increase the frequency of account usage reviews to weekly or daily if needed. Outreach is initiated when an account is flagged for high usage. cA Statewide Analysis of Outdoor Water Savings Potential March 2018 Texas Living Waters Project dThe first water rates at different stages are for fiscal years through 2021- 22. The second water rates are for fiscal years 2022-23 and onward.

Livermore’s billing software currently analyzes customer water usage and bills customers on a monthly basis. This software has the ability to track water usage for customers on a weekly and daily basis if needed during drought conditions. LMW can use this tool to increase frequency of account water usage reviews and to initiate outreach to customers when a higher than normal usage is determined. Billing customers will remain on a monthly basis but this intermediate means of communication will help curtail water waste in between billing periods.

Customer Demand Reduction
Most of the shortage response actions taken by LMW in the near future will be focused on reducing demand as LMW cannot easily develop supplemental water supply. Each Stage of water shortage has accompanying water reduction measures.

The City will use a variety of methods to achieve up to more than 50% reduction in water demands in the event of serious supply shortages. One of the most important and earliest strategies will be an expanded public education and outreach campaign during the initial stages of any water shortage.

In addition, the City has conservation rates that correspond to each of the four Livermore Stages identified in the WSCP. The use of Conservation Rates recovers necessary revenue based on the reduced volume of water during water shortages and has the added benefit of 5% to 10% reduced consumption of water as Conservation Rates increase. For residential users, implementation of Shortage Stage Conservation Rates increases across all rate tiers to send an economic message to conserve water. Livermore Stage 4 Conservation Rates encourage water users to minimize water use by increasing the water rates for an average of 1.9 times of Normal Supply rates.

Each stage shall remain in effect until conditions indicate a more or less restrictive stage is necessary and action is taken by the City Council based on supply criteria in Table 5-1. The City Council may enact any stage and need not proceed in order through the stages.

1. Enacting water use restrictions:

Shortage Levels 1-6 of the WSCP shall be enacted by the Livermore City Council declaring an emergency water restriction. Water supply conditions and goals for each restriction stage are outlined in Table 5-1.

ATTACHMENT 2
178

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 19
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx

2. Modifying and ending water use restrictions:

For each month that customer water use restrictions are in effect at Shortage Level 4, 5, or 6 under this WSCP, the City Manager shall report to the City Council on the status of the shortage and water use changes in the Livermore Water system, including a recommendation to maintain, change or end the water use restrictions. A water shortage event can be terminated by the City Council upon determination that “normal year” supplies have been secured by rainfall, basin replenishment, or a new supply. A water shortage event involving sudden, unforeseen emergencies can be terminated by the City Manager or their designee upon a determination that the emergency no longer exists. As soon as practicably possible or at the next scheduled Council meeting, the City Manager or their designee shall share this termination decision with the City Council.

3. Water Rate Structure:

Water rates will return to the rate structure prior to the water shortage event upon the termination of the event.

5.3 Supply Augmentation Actions
LMW does not contract for additional water sources other than purchasing water directly from Zone 7. Supply augmentation actions in Table 5-3 below represent additional methods to achieve lower demand within the service area to reduce overall demand on Zone 7’s water supplies.

Table 5-3 Supply Augmentation and Other Actions DWR Table 8-3 Shortage Level
Supply Augmentation
Methods and Other Actions
by Water Supplier
How much is this going to
reduce the shortage gap?
Volume type or percentage
Additional Explanation
or Reference
(optional)
Add additional rows as needed
1a Expand Public Information
Campaign 32% Voluntary cutbacks
requested
1b Improve Customer Billing 2%
1 Implement or Modify Drought
Rate Structure 10%
Implement Livermore
Stage 1/1c Conservation
Rates
2 Implement or Modify Drought
Rate Structure 10%
Implement Livermore
Stage 2/2c Conservation
Rates
3 Implement or Modify Drought
Rate Structure 10%
Implement Livermore
Stage 3/3c Conservation
Rates
4 Implement or Modify Drought
Rate Structure 15%
Implement Livermore
Stage 4/4c Conservation
Rates
5 Implement or Modify Drought
Rate Structure 15%
Implement Livermore
Stage 4/5c Conservation
Rates
ATTACHMENT 2
179

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 20
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx 6 Implement or Modify Drought
Rate Structure 15%
Implement Livermore
Stage 4/6c Conservation
Rates
NOTES: All response actions are cumulative (i.e. actions described in Shortage Level 1 are also applicable in Shortage Levels 2-6). Drought rates are not additive.
a2014/2015 drought saw a 32% reduction in water use only from an expanded outreach campaign to customers bLivermore's billing software allows them to increase the frequency of account usage reviews to weekly or daily if needed. Outreach is initiated when an account is flagged for high usage. cThe first water rates at different stages are for fiscal years through 2021-22. The second water rates are for fiscal years 2022-23 and onward.

5.4 Operational Changes
LMW shall comply with the restrictions similar to those implemented for the public to the extent possible. The following actions can be used by LMW as additional measures to limit operational water use within the agency.

 Limit use of potable water to irrigate newly planted street, park and/or golf course trees, street medians, and general irrigation on all LMW properties. No new plantings shall be installed by the City during Livermore Stage 3 or higher Water Shortage Events, unless necessary for erosion control.
 In Livermore Stage 3 or higher, mandatory restrictions, ornamental fountains, and waterfalls shall not be replenished unless water recirculates.  The use of potable water for municipal activities such as street cleaning and sewer main flushing will be suspended at the Livermore Stage 4 level. Recycled water will be used for these needs in Livermore Stage 4 water shortage events, with the exception of water used for sewer line flushing during emergency sanitary sewer blockages or overflows.

5.5 Additional Mandatory Prohibitions
The WSCP includes a variety of voluntary and mandatory management practices to conserve water. The majority of the mandatory conservation practices are triggered at the Livermore Stage 2 level; corresponding to an expected reduction of 20% below normal use as shown above in Table 5-1.

5.6 Effectiveness of Shortage Response Actions (by Water Shortage Stage)
Public Information
Without exception, experience has shown that a well-informed public is generally more willing to heed requests to voluntarily conserve or alter water use patterns and will be more likely to comply if mandatory water use restrictions become necessary. DWR (2008) estimates that public information campaigns have alone reduced demand in the range of 5 to 20 percent, depending on the time, money, and effort spent. Public information supports voluntary and mandatory measures by educating and convincing the public that a critical water shortage exists and provides information on how water is used and how they can help. The DWR Drought ATTACHMENT 2
180

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 21
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Guidebook highlights that when the public perceives the drought to be severe, they changed behaviors (such as flushing the toilet less often).

The information provided to the public should include a description of the conditions that will trigger implementation of shortage stages as well as a description of what the plan entails (restrictions, enforcement provisions, etc.). It is also advisable to provide practical “consumer” information that will help water users comply with the plan. For example, information about restrictions on lawn watering might be accompanied with information about proper lawn watering practices.

During the 2014/2015 drought, Livermore Municipal Water customers reduced demand by about 32%, with reductions as high as 42% in many months. City customers achieved this level of reduction based on outreach efforts and warning notices alone, and staff was not forced to issue fines or penalties to achieve compliance.

Enforcement
A study examining the effectiveness of drought management programs in reducing residential water-use (Virginia Polytechnic Institute 2006) showed considerable variation in the effectiveness of drought management programs and highlighted the importance of public information and enforcement. Results, shown in Table 5-4, indicate that overall reductions in residential water-use ranged from 0-7 percent for voluntary restrictions and from 0-22 percent for mandatory restrictions. The observed differences were statistically attributed to information efforts for voluntary restrictions and both information and enforcement efforts for mandatory restrictions.

Table 5-4 Drought Program Management Variables Effect on Residential Water-Use Classification
Estimated
change in
Water-Use
Statistically
Different than no
effect?
Voluntary Restrictions
Little or no information disseminated -2% No
Moderate level of information -2% No
Aggressive information dissemination -7% Yes
Mandatory Restrictions
Low information and low enforcement -5% No
Moderate information and low enforcement -6% Yes
Aggressive information and low enforcement -12% Yes
Low information and moderate enforcement -4% No
Moderate information and enforcement -9% Yes
Aggressive information and moderate
enforcement -15% Yes
Moderate information and aggressive
enforcement -20% Yes
ATTACHMENT 2
181

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 22
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Aggressive information and enforcement -22% Yes

Source: Virginia Polytechnic Institute 2006

The analysis highlights the key role that public outreach and information plays in the success of drought response actions. Voluntary restriction programs with little to moderate levels of information dissemination had no appreciable effect on water-use. Voluntary restriction programs with active promotional efforts, however, reduced water-use by an estimated 7 percent from what would have otherwise occurred without any restriction program. Thus for voluntary restrictions, only the most intense programs had even a moderate level of success in reducing water-use.

Mandatory restriction programs without a significant enforcement component broadly mirrored the outcomes achieved by the voluntary programs. Programs with mandatory restrictions that invested minimal effort in information dissemination did not appreciably reduce residential water-use. Programs with no active enforcement efforts but with moderate to high levels of informational dissemination achieved 6 and 12 percent reductions in water-use, respectively.

These estimated reductions are similar to those achieved by voluntary programs with aggressive informational campaigns.

The experience LMW had implementing its WSCP and successfully reaching its reduction goals supports the importance of a strong public information program locally, regionally, and statewide. Delivering accurate and timely information to water users, news media and local governments with updates on conditions, restrictions, and helpful contact information is key.

Restrictions on Non-Essential Water Uses
LMW’s Water Shortage Response Actions focuses on public outreach to curtail water waste and non-essential water use. Outdoor water use, including washing sidewalks and watering ornamental landscapes is targeted. These uses are typically considered to be discretionary or nonessential, are highly visible, and therefore relatively easy to monitor, and often are a substantial component of water demand, particularly during the summer months when drought conditions are likely most severe.

Given the significance and visibility of lawn watering as the predominant component of seasonal use, best management practices in WSCP typically prescribe time-of-use and other restrictions on lawn watering as described in Section 5.2. This often involves placing water users on a schedule which allows for staggered lawn watering days, as well as restrictions on the times during the day when lawns can be watered.

The American Waterworks Association estimates that voluntary outdoor water use limits can result in a water savings of up to 10 percent and mandatory outdoor water limits can achieve up to a 40 percent reduction in outdoor water use (AWWA 2008).

Drought Surcharge Rates
LMW does not issue drought surcharges, although a conservation rate structure is available as a tool. Zone 7 maintains a drought contingency fund, which is a rate stabilization fund that can ATTACHMENT 2
182

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 23
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx be utilized during declared drought events to minimize impacts on water rates as a result of drought conditions. If Zone 7 implements an additional drought surcharge the City would also pass this cost on to ratepayers.

ATTACHMENT 2
183

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 24
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Communication Protocols
Table 6-1 below briefly describes communication protocols and outreach programs already in practice by Zone 7 and Livermore Municipal Water in coordination with Tri-Valley water retailers.

These programs along with public information campaigns such as shared website, development and distribution of social media, radio advertisements, and newspaper outreach materials, and providing recycled water to residentis for watering landscape have successfully reduced water consumption during past drought events.

Table 6-1 Communication Protocols
Program/Outreach Description Details Date
Public Information
Outreach
Livermore provides general
outreach on water conservation
Examples include booths at local
events, local festivals, WRP tours, paid
advertising, brochures, websites,
notices, etc.
2014
Tri-Valley Water
Conservation Group
Monthly meetings to coordinate
regional outreach efforts
Includes periodic advertising, water
conservation info, media campaigns,
website resources, PSAs, etc.
1980's
High Efficiency
Washing Machine
Rebate Program
Rebate program for installation
of high-efficiency washing
machines
Targeted for single-family residences 2008
Utility Billing Software
Billing software tracks
volumetric usage by water
meter type
Recently updated with a customer
portal where customers can setup
notification of high water
consumption. Notifies utility billing
staff for outreach purposes.
2010
Monthly Billings
Provides data on monthly water
consumption compared to
previous year
Billing stuffers are provided outlining
water savings techniques 1991
Recycled Water
Service Area
Requires recycled water for
outdoor landscape irrigation
Recycled Water Master Plan Feasibility
Study completed in 2013 to expand
recycled water use
2003
Water-wise
Gardening Program
Web based program helps
visitors design a water efficient
landscape
Assists users in designing landscapes,
selecting water wise plants, and water
saving tips
2005
School Education
Program
Education program offered to
schools in the City's municipal
water service area
Educational materials and course
outlines developed in accordance with
California curriculum standards
2002
Water-Efficient
Landscaping Lawn
Conversion Rebate
Rebate for replacing lawns with
drought-tolerant landscaping
and capping sprinkler systems/
converting them to drip
irrigation.

Rebate available to all customer types. 2016
ATTACHMENT 2
184

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 25
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Weather-Based
Irrigation Controller
Rebate
Rebate for replacing irrigation
controller with a WaterSense
weather-based irrigation
controller.

Rebate available to all customer types. 2016
Water Supply
Education Program
Website and presentations help
residents understand their
water supply
Assists participants with understanding
where their water comes from and the
challenges that put supply at risk
2015
ATTACHMENT 2
185

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 26
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Penalties, Charges, Other Enforcement of
Prohibitions

7.1 Excessive Use Penalties
If customer outreach and education are not sufficient, LMW can utilize several financial disincentives or penalties to discourage excessive use, both during normal water conditions and during shortage events.

The primary financial “penalty” for excessive use is the ascending tier water rates used by LMW, with increasing rates for higher levels of use. Ascending tier rates are in-place during normal and water shortage conditions. In addition, LMW also utilizes conservation rates that have an ascending rate structure to further discourage excessive use.

LMW also has the authority to implement a penalty for excessive use by individual customers.

LMW staff can develop conservation usage targets based on average per-capita consumption or a percentage of historic consumption in response to specific shortage events. These usage targets will be used to evaluate customers for potential excessive use penalties. If customers use more than the allotted usage targets for three consecutive billing periods, the City may increase the water rates to the highest conservation tier for a period of three months.

Customers will be provided with the ability to appeal excessive use penalties if they feel their use allocation was inappropriate due to factors such as:

 A higher than average number of people in residential units;  Medical needs that demand water-consuming devices or uses;  Water consumed in products or activities that cannot be reduced.

Customers will also have an opportunity to appeal excessive use penalties based on economic hardship or other factors. Excessive use penalties can be implemented at the Livermore Stage 4 level and above.

In addition to additional charges for excessive use through ascending tier rates and penalties for excessive use, LMW may also issue penalties for violating mandatory prohibitions. LMW staff will be able to issue administrative citations to customers violating mandatory prohibitions starting at the Livermore Stage 4 conservation level and above.

ATTACHMENT 2
186

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 27
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Legal Authorities
The Livermore City Council may enact any stage of the Water Shortage Contingency Plan by adopting a resolution in response to local or regional water supply conditions. The Plan may be enacted based on a number of conditions, including:

 A formal water supply shortage notification by the Zone 7 Water Agency;  A collective recommendation of the Tri-Valley Water Retailers Group;  An actual or potential local water supply restriction or emergency affecting the LMW system;
 A proclamation from the City of Livermore of a local water supply emergency

The Livermore City Council may also enact Livermore Stage 1 or Stage 2 water restrictions and conservation rates as necessary to meet the local requirements or state requirements such as the Water Conservation Bill of 2009, which requires a reduction in baseline per capita water usage of 20% by 2020.

The Conservation Stages will normally be implemented in a progressive manner; however, it may be necessary for the City to skip Stages in the use reduction plan in response to catastrophic supply reductions. In general, conservation/use reduction levels will be set according to the anticipated reduction in available water supplies. The City of Livermore will inform the public of implementation of any water shortage stage and expected water shortages during drought conditions. Information will be disseminated via platforms discussed in Chapter 6: Communication Protocols as well as at City Council meetings when resolutions are adopted.

Actions required by each Stage of the WSCP are cumulative; therefore, if Stage 2 of the Plan is implemented, all the reduction measures in both Stage 1 and Stage 2 shall be implemented.

The priorities for use of available water during shortages, based on Chapter 3 of the California Water Code, are as follows:

1. Health & Safety – interior residential (drinking & sanitation) and fire fighting

2. Commercial, Industrial & Governmental – maintain jobs and economic base

3. Annual Crops – protect jobs

4. Existing Landscaping – especially trees and shrubs

5. New Demands – projects without permits when shortage is declared ATTACHMENT 2
187

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 28
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Financial Consequences of Actions during
Shortages
The stages of action to be undertaken by the urban water supplier in response to water supply shortage have impacts on the LMW’s water revenues and expenses. While expenses will be reduced through lower wholesale water purchases from Zone 7, the decline in expenses does not fully offset the loss in revenue from reduced sales. This is due, in part, to the fact that monthly water rates and charges do not fully recover all of the fixed costs on meter service charges, and instead allocate some fixed charges to the water rate component of the bill. This practice slightly inflates the consumption-based portion of the customer bill to encourage conservation during normal conditions. However, the downside of this practice is that net revenue can decline during water shortages or other periods of reduced water sales.

The impact to net water system revenues will vary with each stage of action and the corresponding level of water shortage and expected conservation. To offset the impacts of water shortages, LMW has developed conservation rates that may be enacted in response to water shortages. Conservation rates are updated and adopted by the Livermore City Council each time normal water rates and service charges are adjusted. By having previously adopted conservation rates, LMW can avoid the delays associated with Proposition 218 notification and ballot procedures prior to implementing conservation rates in response to a water shortage.

These pre-approved rates were essential in maintaining revenues during the 2014/2015 drought and placed LMW in an excellent financial position compared to retailers without pre-approved rates in place. See Section 8 of Livermore’s 2020 UWMP for more information concerning conservation water rates.

Conservation rates correspond to each Stage identified in the WSCP and are calculated to recover the necessary revenue based on the reduced volume of water expected to be sold and purchased in each Stage. Currently, Livermore maps the original four stage water rates to the update six shortage levels or stages as part of this WSCP utilizing the crosswalk described in an earlier section. LMW will prepare a cost-of-service study to evaluate these rates in preparation of future drought events and to align conservation rates with the six shortage stages.

9.1 Financial Consequences of Limiting Excessive Water Use Per the California Water Code Section 365 et al., retail water suppliers are required to prohibit or discourage excessive water use as described in Section 7.1. Reporting this is not a required part of the UWMP; however, Water Code Section 10632(a)(8)(C) requires the financial consequences of these actions be reported as part of the UWMP.

Water Code Section 367 states that there are three types of drought emergencies:
 Declared statewide drought emergency
 When a supplier implements its mandatory reductions per their WSCP  A declared local drought emergency
This topic is also addressed here in the WSCP because of the relationship between drought emergencies and implementation of the WSCP.

ATTACHMENT 2
188

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 29
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx

Water Code Section 366 states that a retail water supplier must prohibit excessive use through one of two strategies:

 Rate structure: A rate structure that includes block tiers, water budgets, or rate surcharges over and above base rates for excessive water use by a residential water customer.
 An excessive water use ordinance: An ordinance that includes a procedure to identify and address excessive water use by metered single-family residential customers and customers in multiunit housing complexes in which each unit is individually metered or submetered and may include a process to issue written warnings to a customer and perform a site audit of customer water usage prior to deeming the customer in violation.

In addition to penalties for excessive use described in Section 7.1, LMW also has the option to implement conservation rates that discourage excessive water use. Should a drought emergency occur, LMW would already have the necessary processes in place to discourage excessive use. As discouraging excessive use is already a part of LMW’s actions and because of the conservation rates, the financial consequences of prohibiting excessive use would be minimal.

Additionally, LMW currently monitors customer water usage through its billing software. The billing software currently flags high water usage and contacts water users when usage is above average for a typical meter. This allows LMW to track water losses as well as inform customers when usage is encroaching on meeting a conservation rate threshold. LMW uses conservation rates as a method of water consumption reduction and as a method for financial recuperation from lost water sales during drought periods.

ATTACHMENT 2
189

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 30
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Monitoring and Reporting

10.1 Metering
All water connections are fully metered. Water service in the City’s municipal water service area is not allowed without a water meter. This requirement is further strengthened by water wholesaler rules that also do not allow service connections without a meter. All customer sectors are billed by volume of use at tiered rates. Original tiers had a declining cost structure with higher use. In 1991, the City implemented inverted tiered rates for all accounts as a means of encouraging water use efficiency. The inverted tiered rates can be found in Resolution 2017- 098 in Appendix B.

Meter replacement and/or recalibration are evaluated regularly via billing software. Unusual consumption is flagged and checked for accuracy. Meters that are stuck or do not meet accuracy specifications are immediately replaced. Billing accounts with meter failures are assessed an estimated consumption rate that reflects their average usage during the period.

Meters that are 3-inches and larger are proactively tested annually and recalibrated, repaired or replaced as needed. Additionally, meters are replaced within the system based on their service length with the oldest meters receiving replacement priority as funding allows.

10.2 Monitoring
In normal water supply conditions, purchase and sales data is checked monthly by water staff.

These totals are reported to the Water Resources Manager or the Public Works Director as requested. The totals are also logged into the annual report to the Department of Water Resources.

Shortage Level 1, Shortage Level 2, and Shortage Level 3 Water Shortage:

During Shortage Levels 1-3 water shortage, weekly turnout readings are reported to the Water Distribution Operations Manager. The Operations Manager compares the weekly purchase records to the weekly target to verify that the reduction goal is being met. Weekly reports are forwarded to the Water Resources Division Manager and the Public Works Director. Monthly summary reports are also sent to the Public Works Director. If reduction goals are not met, the Operations Manager will propose additional activities or conservation measures and advise the Water Resources Division Manager. The Division Manager will notify the Public Works Director that additional corrective actions or use-reduction measures will be implemented.

Shortage Level 4, Shortage Level 5, and Shortage Level 6 Water Shortage:

During Shortage Levels 4-6 water shortage, the procedure listed above will be followed, with the addition of a daily water purchase report being submitted to the Water Resources Division Manager.

Emergency Shortage:

During an Emergency Shortage, a major focus will be on monitoring LMW storage tanks to ensure adequate fire protection and emergency storage. Water staff will review tank levels via ATTACHMENT 2
190

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 31
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx the Supervisor Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system on an hourly or continuous basis to ensure tank levels are maintained at safe levels for as long as possible. Also, meter readings of the volume of water purchased by LMW can be reported to the Water Distribution Operations Supervisor, Water Resources Division Manager or Public Works Director hourly, if needed.

ATTACHMENT 2
191

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 32
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Refinement Procedures
Each year the WSCP will be revisited for completion of the Annual Assessment. This procedure will allow LMW to refine the treated water request estimation procedures to more closely align with the next year’s projected water use. Coordination with Zone 7 will assist in providing a consistently updated document that closely monitors water supply availability.

Adoption of this document will also allow for the WSCP to be updated each year as the service area continues to change in terms of population, land use, climate factors, and other factors.

During the final Annual Assessment report in June/July, any adjustments to the previous year’s WSCP will be discussed and documented for future use within the WSCP.

ATTACHMENT 2
192

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 33
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Special Water Feature Distinction
LMW defines special water features for the purposes of this plan. Features that are supplied by public water from LMW include but are not limited to pools, spas, water fountains, decorative features, and others. DWR defines special water features as those other than pools and spas that could use non-potable water such as recycled water. In LMW, natural water features that do not require public potable water for recreational use such as ponds, lakes, waterfalls, and others do not fall within the special water feature distinction and therefore are not subject to water shortage stage response actions. The intent of this definition is to provide guidance for shortage response actions directed at special water features and to not provide restrictions towards natural water features within the service area.

ATTACHMENT 2
193

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 34
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Plan Adoption Resolution or Ordinance
Upon adoption of the WSCP, the document will be made available to all customers online via the official City of Livermore website. The resolution adopting the WSCP by the City of Livermore found in Appendix C shall serve as a record of the WSCP as a separate stand-alone document.

ATTACHMENT 2
194

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Page 35
\\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx References
Livermore Municipal Code Division 1 (Water) of Title 13 (Public Services) Chapter 13.26 Water Conservation and Chapter 13.27 Mandatory Drought Conservation Measures

The Effectiveness of Drought Management Programs in Reducing Residential Water-Use in Virginia. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. 2006.

Urban Water Management Plan. Zone 7 Water Agency. 2020.

Urban Water Management Plan. Livermore Municipal Water. 2015.

Water Conservation by the Yard: A Statewide Analysis of Outdoor Water Savings Potential.

Texas Living Waters Project. March 2018.

Urban Water Management Plan. Zone 7 Water Agency. 2020.

ATTACHMENT 2
195

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Appendix A \\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Appendix A: Annual Assessment Template
ATTACHMENT 2
196
Livermore Municipal Water
Annual Water Supply and Demand Assessment
2020 Water Year
NOTE: ADJUST DATES AS NEEDED

Section 1. Water Demand Assessment
As described in the Water Shortage Contingency Plan, Livermore Operations staff develops a 5-year treated water request schedule using the current year’s water consumption as a baseline. Livermore Operations staff estimates a monthly water usage for the next 5 years based on current usage trends and expected new water connections from development within the service area. Projected conservation values are calculated at 10% of average use values for reporting purposes to Zone 7. LMW treated water requests are also compared to Zone 7’s projections to ensure values are similar amongst the agencies. Livermore Operations staff presents the 5-year treated water request to Zone 7, and Zone 7 provides a preliminary treated water request response by analyzing the initial SWP allocation and determining if this allocation can accommodate the needs of its retailers.

CONTRACTOR: City of Livermore
DEMAND TYPE: Without Conservation
NOTES: Monthly Schedule Amounts will be rounded to the nearest 10 AF

CONTRACTOR REQUEST
YEAR

UNITS YEAR JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC TOTAL MAX DAY (MGD)
LIVERMORE ACTUAL AF 2019
LIVERMORE 2019 AF 2020
LIVERMORE 2019 AF 2021
LIVERMORE 2019 AF 2022
LIVERMORE 2019 AF 2023
LIVERMORE 2019 AF 2024

LIVERMORE 2020 AF 2021
LIVERMORE 2020 AF 2022
LIVERMORE 2020 AF 2023
LIVERMORE 2020 AF 2024
LIVERMORE 2020 AF 2025

SUBMITTED BY:_________________________
TITLE:_________________________
DATE:_________________________
ATTACHMENT 2
197

Section 2. Water Supply Assessment
Livermore Municipal Water relies 100 percent on Zone 7 water supplies. Thus, the water supply assessment will focus on supply from Zone 7 for the current year and projected supply for the next five (5) years.

NOTE: REPLACE WITH LETTER RECEIVED FROM ZONE 7

Water Distribution Operations Manager
City of Livermore
101 W. Jack London Blvd.

Livermore, CA 94550

[Submitted Electronically]

RE: Preliminary Approval of <2021> Treated Water Request

Dear Mr/Ms. XXXX:

Thank you for submitting a Preliminary Delivery Schedule for years <2021-2025>. Zone 7 hereby acknowledges your request for <Treated Water Request> acre-feet of treated water in calendar year <2021>. As of <December 1, 2020>, the initial State Water Project (SWP) Allocation is 10%. However, there are several months left of the rain season and this amount may change. In the event that the <2021> SWP allocation remains unchanged, a 10% voluntary conservation based on your delivery request is recommended at this time.

With regard to deliveries, Zone 7 is prepared to meet all your projected <2021> demands under current conditions. Enclosed you will find tables showing <2019 – 2020> actual deliveries and 2021 projections. Please review these and let me know if you have any comments.

We will keep you apprised of our water supply outlook as the season unfolds. As before, we plan to finalize the Annual Zone 7 Sustainability Report in April when the water supply conditions are more certain. Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions, please contact me at (925) 454-5068 or via email at [email protected].

Sincerely,

Sal Segura
Associate Civil Engineer
ATTACHMENT 2
198

Section 3. Water Supply Reliability Assessment
Livermore Municipal Water anticipates <Shortage Level xx/no shortage> restrictions within its service area are/are not necessary at this time per analysis in Table 3-1.

Table 3-1: Supply and Demand Comparison
Unit Demand Supply Supply/Deficit
2020 AF
2021 AF
2022 AF
2023 AF
2024 AF
2025 AF

Section 4. Triggered Actions
<Shortage Level xx> triggered the following actions according to Livermore’s 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP):

 <Stage x> of Demand Reduction Actions
 <Stage x> of Consumption Reduction Method
 <Stage x> of Penalties, Charges, other Enforcement of Prohibitions  Others (e.g. Operational Changes, Supply Augmentation Actions)

Section 5. Communication Actions
Livermore will follow the communication protocols to give the notice of the assessment results to its customers and within its service area.

No actions are triggered since there is no anticipated water supply deficit.

CERTIFICATION
The Annual Water Supply and Demand Assessment for <20xx> was prepared and certified by:

Signature:

Printed Name: ___________

Title: Water Resources Division Manager

Date:

Signature:

Printed Name: ____________

Title: City Manager

Date:

ATTACHMENT 2
199

ATTACHMENT 2
200

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Appendix B \\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Appendix B: Rate Ordinance
ATTACHMENT 2
201

IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA

A RESOLUTION AMENDING WATER RATES AND CHARGES FOR
FISCAL YEARS 2017 - 18 THROUGH 2021 - 22
The City of Livermore operates the municipal water system as an Enterprise fund, with customer rates and charges providing full funding for all water storage and distribution system costs, including capital improvement projects to renew and replace water system facilities and the cost of purchasing water from the Zone 7 Water Agency.

Water rates and charges must be adjusted to provide funding to meet normal inflationary increases in the costs of goods and services used by the water utility and to provide adequate renewal / replacement funding.

Council action is also necessary to continue to pass through all costs related to the wholesale purchase of water from the Zone 7 Water Agency and to pass through any increases in Zone 7 costs beginning in January 2018 and for the next five years upon notice to customers as required by law.

The Water Resources Division staff has completed a Comprehensive Water and Wastewater Cost of Service Study in conjunction with Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. which identifies the revenue necessary to fund expected expenses of the Livermore Municipal Water Enterprise.

Notices of a public hearing for increasing water rates for Fiscal Years 2018 -19 through 2021 - 22 were mailed to all property owners within the Livermore Municipal Water service area on May 12, 2017 as required by the provisions of Proposition 218.

A public hearing on proposed increases and adjustments to water rates was held by the City Council on June 26, 2017.

The City Council determined that a majority protest to the increases to water rates did not exist at the conclusion of the public hearing.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Livermore as follows:

Section 1. Deposits, Meter Testing Fees Service Reconnection Fees Water Rates and Charges. Pursuant to Chapters 13. 08, 13. 16, and 13. 20 of the Livermore Municipal Code, the City Council establishes the following deposits, meter testing fees, service reconnection fees, water rates and charges for meters and water furnished by the City of Livermore.

RESOLUTION NO. 2017 - 098
ATTACHMENT 2
202

DEPOSITS
The amount of deposit required for water service for an applicant who is not the owner of the premises shall be as follows:

If the application is for residential service:
5/ 8" meter 100. 00
1"
p
100. 00
If the application is for service other than residential:
5/ 8" or 3/ 4" meter 100. 00
1" or 1- 1/ 2" meter 100. 00
2" or 3" meter 200. 00
4" or larger 400. 00
The amount of deposit required for the meter provided by the City in furnishing water for construction work shall be as follows:
5/ 8", 3/ 4", and 1" meter 250. 00
3" and larger 1, 400. 00

METER TESTING FEES
The meter testing fee shall be $ 100.00 for meters up to 2 inches in size and 200. 00 for meters larger than 2 inches.

RECONNECTION FEES
The service reconnection fee shall be $ 60. 00 for first- time restoration and $ 80.00 for any subsequent restoration in a 12-month period for all restorations occurring during normal business hours of 8: 00 A. M. to 5: 00 P. M., Monday through Friday. The reconnection fee shall be $ 100. 00 if the water meter is removed during normal business hours. The reconnection fee will be $ 250. 00 if the reconnection occurs outside of normal business hours.
2 RESOLUTION NO. 2017- 098
ATTACHMENT 2
203

WATER RATES FOR SERVICE WITHIN THE CORPORATE

LIMITS OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE
Quantity Rate
For all water delivered per water meter per month:

Normal Supply - Voluntary Conservation
Residential — Single Family
August 1, 2017 July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Per 100 City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution Rate Tier Cu ft Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost Per 100 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet
Tier I 0- 7 1. 00 1. 07 1. 13 1. 19 $ 1. 25
Tier II Over 7 $ 1. 40 1. 48 1. 57 1. 66 $ 1. 74 Residential — Multi Family
August 1, 2017 July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Per 100 City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution Rate Tier Cu ft Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost Per 100 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet
Tier I 0- 7 1. 00 1. 07 1. 13 1. 19 $ 1. 25
Tier II Over 7 $ 1. 40 1. 48 1. 57 1. 66 $ 1. 74 Commercial, Institutional & Public Agency
August 1, 2017 July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Rate Tier City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution Per 100 Cu ft Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost Per 100 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet
Uniform 1. 08 1. 15 1. 22 1. 29 $ 1. 35
Irrigation
August 1, 2017 July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Rate Tier City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution Per 100 Cu ft Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost Per 100 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet
Uniform 1. 40 t48 1. 57 1. 66 $ 1. 74
Recycled
August 1, 2017 July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Rate Tier City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution Per 100 Cu ft Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost Per 100 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet
Uniform 2. 64 2. 81 2. 97 3. 14 $ 3. 30
3 RESOLUTION NO. 2017- 098
ATTACHMENT 2 204
Stage I - Voluntary 10% Water Conservation
Residential — Single Family
August 1, 2017 July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Per 100 City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution Rate Tier Cu ft Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost Per 100 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet
Tier I 0- 7 1. 16 1. 21 1. 26 1. 32 $ 1. 38
Tier II Over 7 $ 1. 62 1. 69 1. 76 1. 84 $ 1. 92 Residential — Multi Family
August 1, 2017 July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Per 100 City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution Rate Tier Cu ft Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost Per 100 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet
Tier I 0- 7 1. 16 1. 21 1. 26 1. 32 $ 1. 38
i Tier II Over 7 $ 1. 62 1. 69 , $ 1. 76 , $ 1. 84 $ 1. 92 Commercial, Institutional, & Public Agency
August 1, 2017 July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Rate Tier City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution Per 100 Cu ft Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost Per 100 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet
Uniform 1. 26 1. 32 1. 38 1. 44 $ 1. 50
Irrigation
August 1, 2017 I
July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021
Rate Tier City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution Per 100 Cu ft Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost Per 100 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet
Uniform 1. 62 1. 69 1. 76 1. 84 $ 1. 92
Recycled — " Normal" recycled water rates remain in effect in all stages of conservation. 4 • RESOLUTION NO. 2017- 098
ATTACHMENT 2 205
Stage II — Voluntary/ Mandatory 20% Water Conservation
Residential — Single Family
August 1, 2017 July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019 1 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Per 100 City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution Rate Tier Cu ft Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost Per 100 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet
Tier I 0- 7 1. 29 1. 35 1. 41 1. 47 $ 1. 53
Tier II Over 7 $ 1. 81 1. 89 1. 97 2. 05 $ 2. 14 Residential — Multi Family
August 1, 2017 July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Per 100 City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution Rate Tier Cu ft Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost Per 100 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet
Tier I 0- 7 1. 29 1. 35 1. 41 1. 47 $ 1. 53
Tier II Over 7 $ 1. 81 1. 89 1. 97 2. 05 $ 2. 14 Commercial, Institutional & Public Agency
August 1, 2017 July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Rate Tier City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution Per 100 Cu ft Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost Per 100 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet
Uniform 1. 39 1. 45 1. 51 1. 58 $ 1. 65
Irrigation
August 1, 2017 July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Rate Tier City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution Per 100 Cu ft Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost Per 100 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet
Uniform 1. 81 1. 89 1. 97 2. 05 $ 2. 14
Recycled — " Normal" recycled water rates remain in effect in all stages of conservation.

Stage III - Mandatory 35% Water Conservation
Residential — Single Family
August 1, 2017 July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Per 100 City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution Rate Tier Cu ft Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost Per 100 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet
Tier I 0- 7 1. 56 1. 63 1. 70 1. 77 $ 1. 85
Tier II Over 7 $ 2. 19 2. 28 2. 38 2. 48 $ 2. 58 5 RESOLUTION NO. 2017- 098
ATTACHMENT 2 206
Residential — Multi Family
August 1, 2017 July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Per 100 City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution Rate Tier Cu ft Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost Per 100 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet
Tier I 0- 7 1. 56 1. 63 1. 70 1. 77 $ 1. 85
Tier II Over 7 $ 2. 19 2. 28 2. 38 2. 48 $ 2. 58 Commercial, Institutional, & Public Agency
August 1, 2017 July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Rate Tier City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution Per 100 Cu ft Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost Per 100 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet
Uniform 1. 69 1. 76 1. 84 1. 92 $ 2. 00
Irrigation
August 1, 2017 July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Rate Tier City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution Per 100 Cu ft Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost Per 100 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet
Uniform 2. 19 2. 28 2. 38 2. 48 $ 2. 58
Recycled — " Normal" recycled water rates remain in effect in all stages of conservation.

Stage IV - Mandatory 50% Water Conservation
Residential — Single Family
August 1, 2017 July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Per 100 City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution Rate Tier Cu ft Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost Per 100 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet
Tier I 0- 7 2. 00 2. 08 2. 17 2. 26 $ 2. 36
Tier II Over 7 $ 2. 81 2. 93 3. 05 3. 18 $ 3. 31 Residential — Multi Family
August 1, 2017 July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Per 100 City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution Rate Tier Cu ft Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost Per 100 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet
Tier I 0- 7 2. 00 2. 08 2. 17 2. 26 $ 2. 36
Tier II Over 7 $ 2. 81 2. 93 3. 05 3. 18 $ 3. 31 6 RESOLUTION NO. 2017- 098
ATTACHMENT 2 207
Commercial, Institutional, & Public Agency
August 1, 2017 July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Rate Tier City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution Per 100 Cu ft Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost Per 100 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet
Uniform 2. 17 2. 26 2. 36 2. 46 $ 2. 56
Irrigation
August 1, 2017 July 1, 2018 July 1, 2019 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Rate Tier City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution City Distribution Per 100 Cu ft Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost per 100 Cost Per 100 Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet Cubic Feet
Uniform 2. 81 2. 93 3. 05 3. 18 $ 3. 31
Recycled - " Normal" recycled water rates remain in effect in all stages of conservation.

Meter Service Charges: Per Meter, Per Month
Meter Size
Effective Effective Effective Effective Effective
August 1, July 1, July 1, 2019 July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 2017 2018
Meter Service
Charges:
5/ 8 Inch - D 18. 28 19. 43 20. 57 21. 71 22. 85
3/ 4 inch - D 21. 05 24. 37 25. 90 27. 42 30. 46
1 inch w/ fire 18. 28 19. 43 20. 57 21. 71 22. 85
1 inch - D 36. 53 38. 82 41. 10 43. 38 45. 66
1 '/ z inch D 66. 95 71. 13 75. 32 79. 50 83. 68
1 1/ 2inch T 79. 12 84. 06 89. 01 93. 95 98. 89
2 inch - D 103. 45 109. 92 118. 38 122. 85 129. 31
2 inch - T 121. 70 129. 31 138. 91 144. 52 152. 12
3 inch - T 270. 74 287. 66 304. 58 321. 50 338. 42
4 inch - T 462. 36 491. 26 520. 16 549. 06 577. 95
6 inch - T 979. 44 1, 040. 65 $ 1, 101. 87 1, 163. 08 1, 224. 29 8 inch - T 1, 709. 44 $ 1, 816. 28 $ 1, 923. 12 2, 029. 96 2, 136. 79 10 inch - T 2, 561. 08 $ 2, 721. 15 $ 2, 861. 22 3, 041. 29 3, 201. 35 Fire- Line Meter
Service 2. 26 2. 40 2. 54 2. 68 2. 82
Charges: 3. 39 3. 60 3. 81 4. 02 4. 23
1 inch 4. 51 4. 79 5. 07 5. 35 5. 63
1 1/ 2 inch 6. 76 7. 18 7. 60 8. 02 8. 44
2 inch 9. 00 9. 57 10. 13 10. 69 11. 25
3 inch 13. 49 14. 34 15. 18 16. 02 16. 86
4 inch 17. 99 19. 11 20. 24 21. 36 22. 48
6 inch 22. 47 23. 87 25. 28 26. 68 28. 08
8 inch
10 inch
7 RESOLUTION NO. 2017- 098
ATTACHMENT 2
208
1Displacement Meters are indicated by" D" and Turbine Meters indicated by" T". All 1 inch with fire meters are Displacement Private fire protection service charges are applicable to all water service furnished for privately owned fire protection systems.

Section 2. Definitions. The following definitions and policies shall apply to the water rate increases:
a) Quantity Rate — Quantity rates are charged per unit volume of water delivered as determined by metering. The total quantity rate will be broken down into a Wholesale Water Cost, based on the rate charged by the Zone 7 Water Agency, and a City Distribution Cost based on the City' s operations, maintenance and replacement costs. b) Wholesale Water Cost — A combination of fixed charges and/ or variable rates based on the City' s purchased water costs from the Zone 7 Water Agency. All costs resulting from wholesale water purchases from Zone 7 will continue to be passed through to Livermore Municipal Water customers between January 2018 and January 2022.

Livermore City Council resolves to pass- through without further Council action, any increase in Zone 7 Water Agency rates for the next five years by adjusting the Wholesale Water Cost upon notice to customers required by law. c) City Distribution Cost — A quantity rate based on the City's operations, maintenance, and replacement costs. The City Distribution Costs will be adjusted by Council resolution and adjustments will take effect on July 1st of each year unless otherwise specified.
d) Meter Service Charge — The service or demand charge is a base rate per month representing the fixed costs of providing water service and is charged in addition to the quantity rate.
e) Private Fire Protection Service — The private fire protection service rate is the amount charged per month for each fire protection service lateral connected to the water system. Water is only delivered through the fire protection system for routine maintenance or fire emergencies. A bypass meter is read at regular intervals to verify that water is not being used through unauthorized connections to the fire system.

Section 3. In accordance with the City' s current Water Shortage Contingency Plan, the Normal Supply — Voluntary Conservation" water rates are implemented.

Section 4. This resolution is effective August 1, 2017.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Livermore resolves that commencing August 1, 2017, July 1, 2018, July 1, 2019, July 1, 2020, and July 1, 2021, the Water Rates and Meter Service Charges be amended as described. 8 RESOLUTION NO. 2017- 098
ATTACHMENT 2 209
On motion of Council Member Carling, seconded by Council Member Woerner, the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted on June 26, 2017, by the following vote:

AYES: Council Members Carling, Coomber, Woerner, Vice Mayor Spedowfski NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Marchand
ABSTAIN: None
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ast4usanNeer • - - Jason Alcala
City Clerk City Attorney
Date: June 27-, 2017/
9 RESOLUTION NO. 2017- 098
ATTACHMENT 2 210

Livermore 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan Appendix C \\sfo2\projects\pw-proj\2020\2068015.00_livermore_2020_uwmp\09-reports\5_reports\final\20w0_wscp-final_06182021.docx Appendix C: Adoption Resolution

ATTACHMENT 2
211
DocuSign Envelope ID: 1FB594E6- 3B3F- 4860- A231- 127E3F771246

IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA

A RESOLUTION APPROVING
THE 2020 WATER SHORTAGE CONTINGENCY PLAN

FOR THE LIVERMORE MUNICIPAL WATER SYSTEM
Water Code Section 10632 requires that every urban water supplier prepare, update, and adopt a Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) as part of its Urban Water Management Plan ( UWMP). The WSCP is a document that provides a water supplier with an action plan for a drought or catastrophic water supply shortage.

A draft 2020 WSCP for the Livermore Municipal Water System has been prepared to meet all the requirements of the Urban Water Management Act ( Act) and has been made available to the public for review and comment prior to today as required by the Act. Following the requirements of the Act, a public hearing concerning the 2020 WSCP was noticed for today, has been held, and public comments about it have been taken.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Livermore, that

1. That the 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan has been approved and adopted and is attached as Exhibit A and is incorporated by this reference.

2. Authorizes transmittal to the California Department of Water Resources.

3. Authorizes the City Manager to take appropriate and necessary actions to carry out the purpose and intent of this Resolution and to incorporate any necessary amendments as stipulated by the State Department of Water Resources.

On motion of Council Member Bonanno, seconded by Council Member Kiick, the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted on June 14, 2021, by the following vote:

AYES: Council Members Bonanno, Carling, Kiick, Vice Mayor Munro, and Mayor Woerner
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
ATTEST:

DocuSigned by:

AkWG () C v
Ma Weber
City Clerk
Date: June 14, 2021
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

NWW/
1 Tara MazzdAti
Assistant City Attorney
Exhibit A — 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan
1 RESOLUTION NO. 2021- 091
ATTACHMENT 2 212

IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND RESTATING TITLE 13, CHAPTER 13.26 WATER CONSERVATION, AND CHAPTER 13.27 MANDATORY DROUGHT

CONSERVATION MEASURES TO PROHIBIT WASTEFUL WATER PRACTICES On June 14, 2021, the Livermore City Council adopted a new Water Shortage Contingency Plan (“the Plan”) in line with the California Urban Water Management Planning Act, California Water Code section 10610, et seq. (“the Act”).

The recent update to the Plan necessitates an update to Chapters 13.26 and

13.27 of the Livermore Municipal Code to bring the voluntary and mandatory water use restrictions in line with the updated Plan.

On October 19, 2021, the Governor signed a Proclamation of State of Emergency proclaiming that a state of emergency exists in the State due to the current drought and extended the drought state of emergency statewide as a result of severe drought conditions.

To better support Tri-Valley-wide conservation targets, amendments to the City’s conservation ordinance mandating that water conservation practices are required uniformly throughout the City and not just in areas served by Livermore Municipal Water, will help curb excessive water use during droughts.

For customers of the California Water Service Company, water rates, conservation levels, and water system operations would remain within the purview of the California Water Service Company and the California Public Utilities Commission.

The City desires to amend Chapters 13.26 and 13.27 of the Code to include new limited-duration water use restrictions, realign shortage tiers, and simplify enforcement mechanisms.

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

Section 1. Amendment. Chapters 13.26 Water Conservation and 13.27 Mandatory Drought Conservation Measures in the Livermore Municipal Code are hereby amended and restated as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto. In Exhibit A, the deletions are shown using a strikethrough, and the added language is shown with an underline, but the stricken language and underlines themselves shall not be codified in the Municipal Code, which publication shall only reflect the final language.

Section 2. Environmental. The passage of this ordinance is not a project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and is exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) (common sense exemption), in that CEQA only 213
applies to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, is not subject to the provisions requiring environmental review. Additionally, actions by regulatory agencies as authorized by state law or ordinance to ensure maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of the environment are exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15308 as projects which have been determined to not have a significant effect on the environment.

Section 3. Severability. If any part of this ordinance is declared invalid by a court, such invalidity shall not affect any of the remaining parts.

Section 4. Publication. This ordinance shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation of the City of Livermore within fifteen days after its adoption.

Section 5. Effective date. This Ordinance shall take effect 30 days after its adoption.

The foregoing ordinance was introduced at the meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore held on February 14, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

The ordinance was adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council held on , 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Mayor, City of Livermore
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Tara M. Mazzanti
Marie Weber Tara M. Mazzanti
City Clerk Assistant City Attorney
Exhibit A – Amended and Restated Chapters 13.26 Water Conservation and 13.27 Mandatory Drought Conservation Measures
214
Chapter 13.26

WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES FOR CITY CUSTOMERS
Sections:

13.26.010 Authority.

13.26.020 Findings – Purpose.

13.26.030 Definitions.

13.26.040 Application.

13.26.050 Water shortage contingency plan.

13.26.060 Water shortage contingency plan activation.

13.26.070 Voluntary conservation measures.Conservation measures – Stage 1 water shortage.

13.26.080 Conservation measures – Stage 1 water shortage.Water emergency.

13.26.090 Conservation measures – Stage 2 water shortage.Use allocations.

13.26.100 Conservation measures – Stage 3 water shortage.Conservation rates.

13.26.110 Conservation measures – Stage 4 water shortage.Exemptions.

13.26.120 Water emergency.Enforcement and penalties.

13.26.130 Use allocations.Additional penalties.

13.26.140 Demand management measures.

13.26.150 Conservation rates.

13.26.160 Exemptions.

13.26.170 Enforcement and penalties.

13.26.180 Additional penalties.

13.26.010 Authority.

In January 2008, the Governor of the state of California declared a drought and requested a voluntary 20 percent reduction in water use by all consumers in the state. Also, the Water Conservation Bill of 2009 was enacted in November 2009, requiring urban water suppliers to reduce water demands a minimum of 20 percent by 2020. California Water Code Section 10608.20 requires urban water suppliers such as the City of Livermore to reduce per capita water consumption by 20 percent by 2020, and to develop water use targets based on 80 percent of historic demands. One of the primary means of achieving the required reduction in water usage will be through the implementation of water conservation measures and demand management measures.

In addition to long-term use reduction goals, the provisions of this chapter will also be used to reduce water demands during water shortage events. California Water Code Section 10632(a) requires urban water

EXHIBIT A
215
suppliers to develop a water shortage contingency plan which indicates the actions the City will take in response to supply shortages in the Livermore municipal water system service area. California Water Code Section 10632(a)(5) allows water suppliers to use any type of consumption reduction methods in its water shortage contingency analysis that would reduce water use and, are appropriate for its area, and have the ability to achieve a water use reduction consistent with up to a 50 percent reduction in water supply.

13.26.020 Findings – Purpose.

The City Council finds that it is in the public interest of the City’s water customers, the City, and the sState to enact water conservation measures and to address the 20 percent reduction in per capita water use required by the Water Conservation Bill of 2009 and to establish voluntary and mandatory water conservation practices to address water supply shortages and required demand reductions.

The purpose of this chapter is to establish voluntary and mandatory water conservation measures, best management practices, and use penalties to encourage wise water use prevent wasteful water practices and to minimize the effect of shortages on the City’s customers. This is accomplished through provisions that will significantly reduce thewater consumption of water over an extended period of time, thereby extending the availability of water for the City’s customers while reducing the hardship to the greatest extent possible on or to the City and on or to the general public.

13.26.030 Definitions.

For the purposes of this chapter, the following definitions shall apply:
“Advisory notice” shall mean a written notice informing a Livermore municipal water customer that they are in violation of one or more provisions of this chapter and that additional violations may result in fines or termination of service.
“City” shall mean the City of Livermore, Alameda County, California. “City water service area” shall mean the City of Livermore municipal water service area, excluding which excludes the portions of the City of Livermore that are served by California Water Service Company (Cal Water).
“Commercial nursery” shall mean the use of land, buildings, or structures for the growing and/or storing of flowers, trees, edible crops, shrubs, and similar vegetation for the purpose of transplanting, stock, or grafting, and includes the retail sale or wholesale distribution of such items directly from the premises/lot.

EXHIBIT A
216
“Conservation measures” shall mean activities or procedures to be used by residential, and commercial, irrigation, and institutional water customers to reduce their potable water consumption. “Conservation water rates” shall mean a water rates adopted and enacted by the City Council to be used during water shortage events to both encourage conservation and to recover the appropriate amount of revenue to fund the City municipal water system operations from a reduced volume of water sold. Conservation rates are therefore higher than normal water rates charged during periods of adequate water supply. Conservation rates are broken down into several “tiers” or levels which correspond to different tiers, levels or stages of water supply reduction.
“Demand management measure” shall mean practices, procedures and methods to reduce water demands, including but not limited to behavior change, installing high-efficiency water fixtures, and financial incentives or penalties to encourage wise water use and discourage water waste. “Effective date” shall mean the date the ordinance adopting this chapter becomes effective. “Essential water use” shall mean water used strictly for firefighting, health and safety purposes, water needed to sustain human and animal life, and water necessary to satisfy federal, state, and/or local public health, safety, or environmental protection requirements.
“Hand-watering” shall mean the irrigation of landscaping or vegetation using a hand-held hose equipped with a positive shut-off nozzle to supply water directly to the area to be irrigated. “Hand-watering from container” shall mean the irrigation of landscaping or vegetation using a watering can, bucket or container to pour water directly on the area to be irrigated. “Impervious surface” shall mean a constructed or modified surface that cannot effectively infiltrate rainfall. Thise term includes, but is not limited to, sidewalks, driveways, gutters and roadways a surface composed in whole or in part of asphalt, concrete, compacted gravel, or other nonporous or semiporous substance or substances. “Nonessential water use” shall mean the application or usage of water for functions or additional activities which do not have any health or safety impacts, are not required by regulation, and are not part of the core function or business process at a site. This would include but not be limited to uses such as the watering of planters and landscape at a car wash, the washing of cars on display at a car dealer, and other activities that a reasonable person would conclude will reduce extra use of water, while not affecting a given enterprise in a fundamental way.

EXHIBIT A
217
“Positive shut-off nozzle” shall mean a device attached to the end of a hose that must be manually squeezed, pressed or otherwise held in place to allow water to flow out of the hose and which automatically shuts off the flow of water when continuous manual pressure is released. “Urban water management plan” shall mean a plan required by California Water Code Section 10621(a) for urban water suppliers to review available water supplies and water demands over a 20 year planning horizon to confirm the adequacy of water supplies.
“Water shortage contingency plan” shall mean a plan developed by the City pursuant to required by California Water Code Section 10632(a) which outlines the steps the City will take to reduce water demands in response to water supply shortages. The plan establishes different stages or levels of water supply shortage corresponding to the expected amount of water supply reduction. “Water shortage event” shall mean anything from a single occurrence as short as twenty-four hours to a multi- year weather condition. Droughts, earthquakes, water system failures, fire, contamination, regional power outages, state restrictions, and other causes can trigger the stages or levels of water supply shortage in the City’s water shortage contingency plan.
“Water waste” shall mean uses of potable water which are prohibited or limited, going beyond the purpose of necessary or intended use, including area runoff, and which could reasonably be prevented.

13.26.040 Application.

This chapter shall apply within the Livermore municipal City water system service area and to all users connected to the Livermore municipal water distribution system. The provisions in this chapter do not apply to essential water uses. Compliance with the provisions of this chapter shall be a condition of continued water service. However, users connected to the Livermore municipal water distribution system that have already implemented equivalent conservation measures or have achieved extremely low levels of per capita water consumption through other means, as determined by the Public Works Director or his/her designee, will not be required to implement additional conservation measures or to further reduce consumption during normal water supply conditions.

13.26.050 Water shortage contingency plan.

The Livermore City Council shall adopt a water shortage contingency plan for the operation of the Livermore mMunicipal wWater utility as required under California Water Code Section 10632(a). The water shortage contingency plan shall be adopted by Council resolution and shall be reviewed and updated periodically as

EXHIBIT A
218
needed, however no less than every five years in years ending in fivesix and zeroone as required by California Water Code Section 10621(a).

The water shortage contingency plan shall specify stages of action corresponding to different levels of water supply shortage and identify voluntary or mandatory water conservation measures to be used by Livermore municipal water customers and as articulated in LMC 13.26.0708 and in 13.27.040 through 13.26.11013.27.080. This chapter and chapter 13.27 provides the legal authority to implement the water conservation measures and best management practices included in the water shortage contingency plan.

13.26.060 Water shortage contingency plan activation.

The water shortage contingency plan will be activated by Livermore City Council resolution following the plan guidelines. Council resolutions to activate the water shortage contingency plan shall establish the stage of action necessary to address the supply shortage as well as estimate the expected duration of the water shortage. When activating the water shortage contingency plan, Council may also enact conservation rates as specified in LMC 13.26.10013.26.150.

13.26.070 Voluntary conservation measures.

Water customers are requested to voluntarily limit the amount of water used to the amount absolutely necessary for health, business, and irrigation, by undertaking the following water conservation measures:

A. Lawn watering and landscape irrigation, including construction meter irrigation, is permitted only between the hours of 6:00 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time (PDT), or 5:00 p.m. Pacific Standard Time (PST), and 9:00 a.m. the following day. Watering is permitted at any hour if a hand-held nozzle is used, a hand-held container is used, or a drip irrigation system is used.

B. Washing of autos, trucks, trailers, boats, airplanes, and other types of mobile equipment may be done at any hour with a bucket and a hose equipped with a positive shut-off nozzle for quick rinses. Washing is permitted at a commercial car wash, or by a mobile car wash or on-site car wash using high-pressure washing equipment.

No wastewater from vehicle washing may enter the storm drain system.

C. The overfilling of swimming pools, spas, ponds, and artificial lakes is prohibited.

D. Irrigation of golf courses, parks, school grounds and recreation fields is permitted only between the hours of 6:00 p.m. PDT (5:00 p.m. PST) and 8:00 a.m. the following day. Tees and greens may be watered at any time.

EXHIBIT A
219
E. The use of water from fire hydrants shall be limited to fire fighting and related activities, approved metered uses or other activities necessary to maintain the health, safety and welfare of the public.

F. Construction operations receiving water from a construction meter or water truck shall not use water unnecessarily for any purposes other than those required by regulatory agencies. The City has the right to inspect all construction sites using water from a city construction meter for the efficient use of water.

G. Restaurants shall not serve water to their customers except when specifically requested.

13.26.070080 Conservation measures – Stage 1 water shortage.

The following voluntary restrictions shall be applicable during a Stage 1 activation of the water shortage contingency plan:

A. Sprinkler irrigation, including construction meter irrigation, is permitted only after 6:00 p.m. and before 9:00 a.m. Watering is permitted at any hour if a hose with a positive shut-off nozzle, a hand-held container, or a drip irrigation system is used.

B. Washing motor vehicles by hand is permitted only with the use of a hose fitted with a positive shut-off nozzle.

A. All of the prohibitions and restrictions set forth in LMC 13.26.070 shall be in effect.

B. Swimming pools, spas and fountains must be leak-proof. Any leak shall be repaired in a timely manner after notification by the City, but in no case after notification in excess of 72 hours for the first violation and then every 72 hours thereafter for the second and third violations.

C. There shall be no hose washing of sidewalks, walkways, driveways, parking areas, patios, porches or verandas, except that flammable or similarly dangerous materials may be washed from such areas by direct hose flushing for the benefit of public health and safety. A bucket and broom may be used to wash paved surfaces if necessary.

D. No potable water may be used for compacting or dust control purposes in construction activities where there is a reasonably available source of recycled or other nonpotable water approved by the California Department of Public Health and appropriate for such use. This condition must be identified and specified on construction drawings submitted to the City for review.

EXHIBIT A
220
E. No person shall cause or allow water to run off or leak from landscaped areas to adjoining streets, sidewalks, or other paved areas due to incorrectly directed or maintained sprinklers or excessive watering.

13.26.090 Conservation measures – Stage 2 water shortage.

The following mandatory restrictions shall be applicable during a Stage 2 activation of the water shortage contingency plan:

A. All of the prohibitions and restrictions set forth in LMC 13.26.070 and 13.26.080 shall be in effect and shall be mandatory prohibitions.

B. Lawn watering and landscape irrigation, including construction meter irrigation, shall be reduced to no more often than three times per week on an odd-even schedule; properties with odd street address numbers are only allowed to water on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and properties with even street address numbers are only allowed to water on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays, with no watering permitted on Sundays. On each day that lawn watering and landscape irrigation is permitted to occur, it may take place only after 6:00 p.m. and during the subsequent 15 hours, until 9:00 a.m. the next day.

C. Swimming pools and spas shall be covered when not in use.

D. Washing of autos, trucks, trailers, boats, airplanes, and other types of mobile equipment may be done at any hour, but no more frequently than once per month with a bucket and a hose equipped with a positive shut-off nozzle for quick rinses. Washing is permitted at a commercial car wash, or by a mobile car wash or on-site car wash using high-pressure washing equipment. No wastewater from vehicle washing may enter the storm drain system.

E. Restaurant kitchens shall be equipped with low-flow rinse nozzles.

13.26.100 Conservation measures – Stage 3 water shortage.

The following mandatory restrictions shall be applicable during a Stage 3 activation of the water shortage contingency plan:

A. All of the prohibitions and restrictions set forth in LMC 13.26.070, 13.26.080 and 13.26.090 shall be in effect and shall be mandatory prohibitions.

B. All water customers other than commercial nurseries, golf courses, and other water dependent industries shall be limited in the use of outdoor watering for any shrubbery, trees, lawns, grass, ground covers, plants,

EXHIBIT A
221
vines, gardens, vegetables, flowers, or any other landscaped or vegetated areas to hand-watering using a hose with a positive shut-off nozzle on Saturday and Sunday only.

C. No person shall empty and refill a swimming pool except to prevent or repair structural damage or to comply with public health regulations.

D. Potable water shall not be used for street washing or flushing, except to meet public health and safety requirements.

E. Washing of autos, trucks, trailers, boats, airplanes, and other types of mobile equipment is permitted only at commercial car wash facilities that recycle all or part of the water.

F. No potable water may be used for compaction or dust control purposes for construction activities.

13.26.110 Conservation measures – Stage 4 water shortage.

The following mandatory restrictions shall be applicable during a Stage 4 activation of the water shortage contingency plan:

A. All of the prohibitions and restrictions set forth in LMC 13.26.070, 13.26.080, 13.26.090 and 13.26.100 shall be in effect and shall be mandatory prohibitions.

B. The irrigation of turf or lawn using potable water is prohibited. All water customers other than commercial nurseries, golf courses, and other water dependent industries shall be limited in the use of outdoor watering for any shrubbery, trees, plants, vines, gardens, vegetables, flowers, or any other non-turf landscaped or vegetated areas to hand-watering from a container of less than five-gallon capacity on Saturday and Sunday only.

C. Cleaning of Structures. No person shall use water through a hose, including pressure-washing, to clean the exterior of any building or structure.

D. Fountains, Decorative Basins, Ponds, Lakes, Waterways. No person shall use water to operate or maintain levels in decorative fountains, basins, ponds, lakes, and waterways.

E. Public Health and Safety. These regulations shall not be construed to limit water use which is immediately necessary to protect public health and/or safety.

13.26.080120 Water emergency.

EXHIBIT A
222
In the event thatWhen a water emergency is declared pursuant to the City’s water shortage contingency plan, the City Manager or his/hertheir designee may implement additional, mandatory conservation measures, restrictions, or best management practices as may be necessary to reduce water demands to match the available supply or to extend the length of time that current supplies will last.

13.26.090130 Use allocations.

A. During water shortage eventsperiods of mandatory water conservation measures, the Public Works Director or his/hertheir designee shall establish water use allocations for different customer classes. Water use allocations shall be based on a combination of average historical usage, per-capita water use targets, and/or other activity-specific water usage data. Water use allocations will be calculated to achieve a reduction in demand necessary to match the amount of supply available or to maximize the length of time that existing supplies will last. The Public Works Director or his/hertheir designee shall, to the extent possible, establish use allocations at levels that achieve the required demand reduction while minimizing the impacts to users. that have already implemented conservation measures or have by other means achieved extremely low per capita water consumption.

B. In the event thatWhen use allocations are established, all customers shall reduce their consumption to meet the allocation within 30 days of notice by the City.

13.26.140 Demand management measures.

The City shall comply with the demand management measures for urban water conservation provided by the Urban Water Management Planning Act, California Water Code Section 10610 et seq., as that Act exists and as it may be amended.

13.26.100150 Conservation rates.

A. The Livermore City Council shall establish water rates and charges pursuant to LMC 13.20.030 to provide funding for the operation, maintenance and renewal and replacement needs of the cCity municipal water system. In addition to normal water rates and charges, the Livermore City Council shall also adopt water conservation rates to be used in the event of declared water shortages and implementation of the water shortage contingency plan described in LMC 13.26.050. Conservation water rates shall be calculated to recover the necessary revenue to continue to fund budgeted water system expenditures based on anthe expected reduction in water use at each stage of the water shortage contingency plan.

B. Conservation water rates will be implemented by Council resolution at the time of a declared water shortage event and will remain in effect until a subsequent Council resolution returning to normal water rates.

EXHIBIT A
223
C. Conservation water rates may also be implemented by Council resolution to address shortfalls in water system revenues caused by reduced water sales, or as a method to encourage water conservation in the absence of a declared shortage event.

13.26.110160 Exemptions.

A. Any customer in the City water service area who believes that the application of the provisions of this chapter results in unfair treatment or causes undue hardship or the customer’s circumstance applies to any of the circumstances contained in 13.26.110(C) may seek an adjustment in the customer’s use allocation.

B. Such customer in the City water service area shall request the adjustment in writing and shall state with specificity the reasons why the adjustment is warranted.

C. The Public Works Director and the Administrative Services Director shall consider all requests for exemptions and make a recommendation on the request to the City Manager. In formulating a recommendationdeciding, the Public Works Director and Administrative Services Director shall review particular consideration to consider the following:

1. If Tthe reduction in water use would cause conditions threatening to threaten health, sanitation, fire protection, or the safety of the customer, the customer’s dependents or the general public.

2. If theThe reduction would cause unfair economic hardship including, but not limited to, loss of employment, loss of production, or loss of jobs. or be unfair or result in the unnecessary loss of a business.

3. Medical requirements of the customer.

4. Household size of the customer.

5. Other reasons to be judged on individual merit.

13.26.120170 Enforcement and penalties.

A. Any violation of this chapter is a misdemeanor. Upon conviction thereof, such person shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than 30 days, or by fine not exceeding $1,000, or both. In addition to any other remedies which the City may have for the enforcement of this chapter, service of water shall be discontinued or appropriately limited to any customer who willfully uses water in violation of any provision of this chapter.

EXHIBIT A
224
B. If a customer exceeds the allotted usage developed under LMC 13.26.09013.26.130 for three consecutive billing periods, the City may increase the billing rate for all water used by that customer to the highest tier conservation rate for a period of three months. At the end of three months, if the customer’s use still exceeds the allotted amount, the City may continue to charge the customer at the highest conservation rate for an additional three months or until the customer’s usage drops to below the allocation.

13.26.130180 Additional penalties.

In addition to the penalties provided by LMC 13.26.12013.26.170, violation of this chapter may result in the imposition of surcharges and/or termination of water service as set forth below:

A. First Violation. Advisory notice accompanied by a copy of this chapter and a cCity conservation information packet delivered to customer by United States mail.

B. Second Violation (within Oone Yyear of the first violation). One- hundred- dollar surcharge.

C. Third Violation (within Oone Yyear of the Ffirst Vviolation). Three- hundred- dollar surcharge.

D. Fourth Violation (within Oone Yyear of the Ffirst Vviolation). Five- hundred- dollar surcharge and termination of water service for such period as the City Council Manager determines to be appropriate under the circumstances, following a hearing regarding said issue. Written notice of the hearing shall be mailed to the customer at least 10 days before the hearing.

E. Any surcharge hereunder shall be in addition to the basic or conservation water rates and other charges of the City for the account. Receipt of payment must be made to the City’s finance directorCity within five business days of the violation. If payment is not received within five business days, the water meter will be locked off and service disconnected until payment is received. In addition to any surcharge, a customer violating this chapterhapter shall be responsible for payment of the City’s charges for disconnecting and/or reconnecting service per the City’s rate resolution then in effect. Nonpayment shall be subject to the same remedies as nonpayment of basic water rates.

F. The Public Works Director shall designate specified employees to act as enforcement officers, who shall have the authority to enforce the provisions of this chapter and to issue administrative citations for violations of this chapter pursuant to Chapter 1.20 LMC.

EXHIBIT A
225
G. In addition to the above, the City Manager or his or her designee is empowered to enact other penalties and restrictive measures including but not limited to the placement of a flow restricting device upon the water service, locking off of a water meter, removal of a water meter, and/or shutting off of a mainline.

EXHIBIT A
226
Chapter 13.27

MANDATORY DROUGHT CONSERVATION MEASURES
Sections:

13.27.010 Purpose.

13.27.020 Application.

13.27.025 Definitions.

13.27.030 General prohibition.

13.27.040 Prohibited wasteful water practices – Stage 2 water shortage.

13.27.050 Prohibited wasteful water practices – Stage 3 water shortage.

13.27.060 Prohibited wasteful water practices – Stage 4 water shortage.

13.27.070 Hardship waiver.Prohibited wasteful water practices – Stage 5 water shortage.

13.27.080 Penalties.Prohibited wasteful water practices – Stage 6 water shortage.

13.27.090 Hardship waiver.

13.27.100 Penalties.

13.27.010 Purpose.

The purpose of this chapter is to establish mandatory drought conservation measures to prohibit wasting potable water during periods of severe water shortage. This is accomplished through provisions intended to reduce the wasting of potable water over an extended period of time, thereby extending the availability of potable water supply for residents and businesses throughout Livermore. Within areas of the City where water service is provided by any other water provider, the provisions of this chapter as to the prohibited uses and waste shall be applicable.

13.27.020 Application.

A. To the extent authorized by law, this chapter shall apply to all water users in the City including water users outside the City water service area. For the purposes of this chapter, a “water user” means any person drawing water delivered to a business or residence in the City via a water system operated by a water retailer, as well as the individual in whose name the account with the water retailer is held.

B. For water users that are also customers of the City of Livermore’s municipal water system, the provisions in this chapter are in addition to the conservation measures set forth in LMC Chapter 13.26. LMC, and the The requirements provisions in this chapter shall control in the event there is a conflict between the regulations.

EXHIBIT A
227
C. The provisions requirements in this chapter do not apply to water uses necessary to protect public health, safety, and welfare, for essential health care, or for government services such as police, fire, and other similar emergency services.

13.27.025 Definitions
The definitions contained in LMC 13.26.030 shall also apply to this chapter.

13.27.030 General prohibition.

No water user shall make, cause, use, or permit the use of potable water in the City in a manner contrary to any provision of this chapter. Each water user violating the requirements provisions in this chapter shall be guilty of a separate offense for each day during which such violation occurred, continued, or was permitted.

13.27.040 Prohibited wasteful water practices – Stage 2 water shortage.

If the City adopts a resolution for a Stage 2 activation of its water shortage contingency plan for customers in the Livermore municipal water system area in accordance with LMC 13.26.090, the wasting of potable water throughout the City shall be prohibited for all water users, and the following restrictions shall apply to all water users:

A. Lawn watering and lLandscape irrigation, including construction meter irrigation, shall be reduced to no more often than three times per week on an odd-even schedule; properties with odd street address numbers are only allowed to water on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, and properties with even street address numbers are only allowed to water on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays, with no watering permitted on Sundays for all addresses. On each day that lawn watering and landscape irrigation is permitted to occur, it may take place only after 6:00 p.m. and during the subsequent 15 hours, until 9:00 a.m. the next day.

B. Washing motor vehicles by hand is permitted only with the use of a hose fitted with a positive shut-off nozzle.

B. Irrigation of golf courses, parks, school grounds, and recreation fields with potable water is permitted only between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. the following day. Tees and greens may be watered at any time.

C. No person shall cause or allow water to run off or leak from landscaped areas to adjoining streets, sidewalks, or other paved areas due to incorrectly directed or maintained sprinklers or excessive watering.

EXHIBIT A
228
D. Washing of autos, trucks, trailers, boats, airplanes, and other types of mobile equipment may be done at any hour, but no more frequently than once per month with a bucket and a hose equipped with a positive shut-off nozzle for quick rinses. Washing is permitted at a commercial car wash, or by a mobile car wash or on-site car wash using high-pressure washing equipment. No wastewater from vehicle washing may enter the storm drain system.

E. There shall be no hose washing of sidewalks, walkways, driveways, parking areas, patios, porches, or verandas, except that flammable or similarly dangerous materials may be washed from such areas by direct hose flushing for the benefit of public health and safety. A bucket and broom may be used to wash paved surfaces if necessary.

F. The overfilling of swimming pools, spas, ponds, and artificial lakes is prohibited.

G. Swimming pools and spas shall be covered when not in use.

H. Swimming pools, spas, and fountains must be leak-proof. Any leak shall be repaired in a timely manner after notification by the City, but in no case after notification in excess of 72 hours for the first violation and then every 72 hours thereafter for the second and third violations.

I. No potable water may be used for compacting or dust control purposes in construction activities where there is a reasonably available source of recycled or other nonpotable water approved by the California Department of Public Health and appropriate for such use. This condition must be identified and specified on construction drawings submitted to the City for review.

J. Restaurant kitchens shall be equipped with low-flow rinse nozzles.

K. Restaurants shall not serve water to their customers unless specifically requested.

13.27.050 Prohibited wasteful water practices – Stage 3 water shortage.

If the City adopts a resolution for a Stage 3 activation of its water shortage contingency plan for customers in the Livermore municipal water system area in accordance with LMC 13.26.100, the wasting of potable water throughout the City shall be prohibited for all water users, and all the restrictions for a Stage 2 activation included in LMC 13.27.040 shall apply to all water users with the following modifications or additions:

A. All swimming pools and spas shall be covered when not in use.

B. No potable water shall be used for compaction or dust control purposes for construction activities.

EXHIBIT A
229
A. All residents and businesses other than commercial nurseries, golf courses, and other water dependent industries shall be limited in the use of outdoor watering using potable water for any shrubbery, trees, lawns, grass, groundcovers, plants, vines, gardens, vegetables, flowers, or any other landscaped or vegetated areas to hand-watering using a hose with a positive shut-off nozzle on Saturday and Sunday only.

B. No person shall empty and refill a swimming pool except to prevent or repair structural damage or to comply with public health regulations.

C. Potable water shall not be used for street washing or flushing, except to meet public health and safety requirements.

D. Washing of autos, trucks, trailers, boats, airplanes, and other types of mobile equipment is permitted only at commercial car wash facilities that recycle all or part of the water.

E. No potable water may be used for compaction or dust control purposes for construction activities.

13.27.060 Prohibited wasteful water practices – Stage 4 water shortage.

If the City adopts a resolution for a Stage 4 activation of its water shortage contingency plan for customers in the Livermore municipal water system area in accordance with LMC 13.26.110, the wasting of potable water throughout the City shall be prohibited for all water users, and all the restrictions for a Stage 2 activation included in LMC 13.27.040 and a Stage 3 activation included in LMC 13.27.050 shall apply to all water users with the following modifications or additions:

A. The irrigation of turf or lawn using potable water is prohibited. All water customersusers other than excluding commercial nurseries, golf courses, and other water- dependent industries, shall be limited in the use of outdoor watering for any shrubbery, trees, plants, vines, gardens, vegetables, flowers, or any other non-turf landscaped or vegetated areas to hand-watering from a container of less than five-gallon capacity on Saturdays and Sundays only.

B. Potable water shall not be used for street washing or flushing, except to meet public health and safety requirements.

C. Washing of autos, trucks, trailers, boats, airplanes, and other types of mobile equipment is permitted only at commercial car wash facilities that use recycled or recirculating water.

D. Food service kitchens must be equipped with low-flow rinse nozzles.

EXHIBIT A
230
E. Swimming pools, spas, and fountains must be leak-proof. Any leak shall be repaired within 72 hours of notification by City.

F. Potable water shall not be used to wash off impervious surfaces unless required for public health and safety.

G. Irrigation water shall not be allowed to run off such that water flows to adjacent properties, non-irrigated areas, or impervious surfaces.

B. Cleaning of Structures. No person shall use water through a hose, including pressure-washing, to clean the exterior of any building or structure.

C. Fountains, Decorative Basins, Ponds, Lakes, Waterways. No person shall use water to operate or maintain levels in decorative fountains, basins, ponds, lakes, and waterways.

13.27.070 Prohibited wasteful water practices – Stage 5 water shortage.

If the City adopts a resolution for a Stage 5 activation of its water shortage contingency plan for customers in the Livermore municipal water system area, the wasting of potable water throughout the City shall be prohibited for all water users, and all the restrictions for a Stage 2 activation included in LMC 13.27.040, a Stage 3 activation included in LMC 13.27.050, and a Stage 4 activation included in LMC 13.27.060 shall apply to all water users with the following modifications or additions:

A. The irrigation of turf/lawn using potable water is prohibited.

B. All water users, excluding commercial nurseries, shall be limited to hand-watering non-turf landscaped areas with a container of less than five-gallon capacity on Saturdays and Sundays only.

C. Potable water shall not be used to operate or maintain water levels in decorative fountains, basins, ponds, lakes, or waterways.

D. Food service establishments shall only serve water to customers upon request.

13.27.080 Prohibited wasteful water practices – Stage 6 water shortage.

If the City adopts a resolution for a Stage 6 activation of its water shortage contingency plan for customers in the Livermore municipal water system area in accordance with LMC 13.26.110, the wasting of potable water throughout the City shall be prohibited for all water users, and all the restrictions for a Stage 2 activation

EXHIBIT A
231
included in LMC 13.27.040, a Stage 3 activation included in LMC 13.27.050, a Stage 4 activation included in LMC 13.27.060, and a Stage 5 activation included in LMC 13.27.070 shall continue to apply to all water users.

13.27.090070 Hardship waiver.

If, due to unique circumstances, the application of a specific provision in this chapter would result in undue hardship to a water user, or to property upon which water is used, that is disproportionate to the impacts to water users generally or to similar property or classes of water users, then the person may apply for a waiver to the requirements as provided in this section.

A. Written Finding. A hardship waiver may be granted or conditionally granted only upon a written finding of fact demonstrating an undue hardship to the water user or to property upon which water is used, that is disproportionate to the impacts to water users generally or to similar property or classes of water use due to specific and unique circumstances of the user or the user’s property.

1. Application. Application for a waiver must be on a form prescribed by the City and accompanied by a nonrefundable processing fee in an amount set by City Council resolution.

2. Supporting Documentation. The application should include photographs, maps, drawings, and other information, including a written statement of the applicant.

3. Required Findings for Waiver. An application for a waiver will be denied unless the City finds, based on the information provided in the application, supporting documents, or such additional information as may be requested, and on water use information for the property as shown by water use records, all of the following:
a. That a waiver does not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other water users;
b. That because of special circumstances applicable to the property or its use, the strict application of this chapter would have a disproportionate impact on the property or use that exceeds the impacts to residents and businesses generally; and
c. That the authorizing of such waiver will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent properties, and will not materially affect the ability of the City to effectuate the purpose of this chapter and will not be detrimental to the public interest.

EXHIBIT A
232

4. Approval Authority. The Public Works Director must act upon any completed application no later than 14 days after submittal and may approve, conditionally approve, or deny the waiver. The applicant requesting the waiver must be promptly notified in writing of any action taken. Unless specified otherwise at the time a waiver is approved, the waiver will apply to the subject property during the period of the mandatory water supply shortage condition.

13.27.080100 Penalties.

Any person violating or causing the violation of any of the provisions of this chapter shall be guilty of an infraction, unless otherwise specifically stated. Penalties for infractions shall be as set forth in Government Code Section 36900.

Notwithstanding the above, any violation occurring after a third infraction citation has been issued during any 12-month period shall be considered a misdemeanor. Penalties for misdemeanors shall be as set forth in Penal Code Section 19.

Nothing in this chapter shall be deemed to prevent the City Council from ordering the commencement of a civil proceeding to abate a public nuisance pursuant to the applicable law or from pursuing any other remedy available under applicable law.

A. Violations of this chapter may result in the issuance of an administrative citation with maximum fines pursuant to LMC Chapter 1.20.

B. Nothing in this chapter shall be deemed to prevent the City from ordering the commencement of a civil proceeding to abate a public nuisance pursuant to the applicable law or from pursuing any other remedy available under applicable law and pursuant to Title 1 of the LMC.

C. The Community Development Director shall designate specified employees to act as enforcement officers, who shall have the authority to enforce the provisions of this chapter and to issue administrative citations for violations of this chapter pursuant to LMC Chapter 1.20.

EXHIBIT A
233

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 7.1

DATE:

February 14, 2022
TO:

Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:

Marc Roberts, City Manager
SUBJECT:

Oral report from the Director of Emergency Services regarding the COVID-19 emergency, its impacts, and the governmental operations in response to that emergency, as well as discussion and direction regarding the City’s emergency operations in response to that emergency.

RECOMMENDED ACTION

An oral report will be given at the meeting.

SUMMARY

DISCUSSION

ATTACHMENTS

Prepared by: Christine Martin
Assistant City Manager

Approved by:
____________________________________
Marc Roberts
City Manager
Fiscal Review by:
____________________________________
Bhavna Chaudhary
City Treasurer/Finance Manager

234

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 7.2

DATE:

February 14, 2022
TO:

Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:

Jeramy Young, Police Chief
SUBJECT:

Final report on the Livermore Police Department traffic stop and arrest data project as part of the Equity and Inclusion Subcommittee

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Staff recommends the City Council receive the attached report from Rob Tillyer, Ph.D. and Michael R.

Smith, J.D., Ph.D, both researchers and professors at the University of Texas at San Antonio – Department of Criminology & Criminal Justice regarding their research into patterns of racial and/or ethnic disparity during traffic stops and arrests conducted by the Livermore Police Department between January 1, 2019 and April 30, 2021.

SUMMARY
On July 27, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2020-132 ratifying and confirming the Equity and Inclusion Subcommittee and its framework, and instructed staff to seek input from a diverse group of people in the community to provide information to help the Subcommittee refine its scope, and to define objectives and measures of success.

Subgroup B – Policing and Human Services identified a mission: Reimagine and better coordinate public safety and human services for better outcomes. Two sub-subgroups were formed to review the Livermore Police Department’s use of force policy and to review the Livermore Police Department’s traffic stop and arrest data. A consultant was retained that specializes in benchmarking and analyzing police traffic stop and arrest data. The consultant, Rob Tillyer, Ph.D., utilized his assistant Dr. Michael R.

Smith to assist with this project. Both Dr. Tillyer and Dr. Smith are researchers and professors at the University of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA) – Department of Criminology & Criminal Justice.

On December 31, 2021, Dr. Tillyer and Dr. Smith submitted their final report titled, “Traffic Stop and Arrest Analysis.”

DISCUSSION
Following the tragic and senseless murder of George Floyd last year in Minneapolis, the City Council and 235
community members expressed a desire to examine the Livermore Police Department's use of force policies and City policies and practices for incidences of structural discrimination and racism. Based on a number of initial conversations with community members, Council directed that the scope of the discussion be broadened to include items that were repeatedly raised such as housing, transportation, youth and community culture. In response, the City Council authorized the formation of an ad hoc Equity and Inclusion Subcommittee, including direction for a diverse working group comprised of members of the Livermore community to provide information to help the Subcommittee. Ultimately, the Subcommittee sunset June 21, 2021, and at their meeting on July 26, 2021, Council accepted the ten recommendations of the Subcommittee. One of the recommendations was to complete the stop and arrest data project addressed in this agenda item.

The roughly 48 working group members self-selected into four subgroups: 1) Subgroup A- Community Culture and Representation, 2) Subgroup B- Policing and Human Services, 3) Subgroup C- Reaching and Inspiring Younger Generations, and 4) Subgroup D- Housing, Workplace, Economic, and Transportation Environments.

Subgroup B identified a mission: Reimagine and better coordinate public safety and human services for better outcomes. Two sub-subgroups were formed to review the Livermore Police Department’s use of force policy and to review the Livermore Police Department’s traffic stop and arrest data. A consultant was retained that specializes in benchmarking and analyzing police traffic stop and arrest data. The consultant, Rob Tillyer, Ph.D., and his assistant are researchers and professors at the University of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA) – Department of Criminology & Criminal Justice.

The contract with the City of Livermore and UTSA included the following: Consulting with Subcommittee members to increase awareness of traffic stop data analysis complexities, including benchmarking; review and assess current traffic stop data collection protocols; analyze recent traffic stop data to identify the racial/ethnic composition of those encounters and compare against appropriate benchmarks; and analyze recent Livermore Police Department arrest data to identify factors associated with arrests.

The final report contains an executive summary of the project and findings; background on the project, officer decision-making related to traffic stops and arrests; an explanation of the two benchmarks used to analyze the data; methodology of the data, the findings of the traffic stop and arrest data; and a summary and conclusion section.

Drs. Tillyer and Smith will present to City Council an in-depth explanation of their research into this project and how they determined their findings. In summary, the key findings are:

The benchmarks used did not reveal a pattern of racial/ethnic disparity in traffic stops experienced by non-White drivers in Livermore.

The Veil of Darkness (VOD) benchmark analysis found no statistically significant differences in the rates at which non-White drivers were stopped in Livermore during the day compared to at night.

The Traffic Crash benchmark analysis found slightly elevated risks for stops of White, Black, and “Other” race drivers (at-fault benchmark only) and a slightly elevated risk for stops of Black drivers relative to White drivers (not-at-fault benchmark only).

Taken together, the two benchmark analyses do not show a consistent pattern of disparity in stops based on driver race or ethnicity.

The results of the arrest analyses do not reveal a pattern of racial disparity in police outcomes that disadvantages non-White civilians in Livermore.

236
Lastly, Drs. Tillyer and Smith concluded there were no clearly identifiable or concerning patterns of racial/ethnic disparities found in the 24,944 encounters that took place in Livermore over a 26-month period during 2019-2021.

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS

Total report preparation cost is $45,000 which will be funded by the General Fund. There is sufficient budget for the current fiscal year under the General Fund, so no additional appropriations are required at this time.

ATTACHMENTS

1. LPD Stop and Arrest Report FINAL

Prepared by: John Reynolds
Police Lieutenant

Approved by:
____________________________________
Marc Roberts
City Manager
Fiscal Review by:
____________________________________
Bhavna Chaudhary
City Treasurer/Finance Manager

237
Traffic Stop and Arrest Analysis
Final Report
February 2021
Rob Tillyer, Ph.D.

Michael R. Smith, J.D., Ph.D.

University of Texas at San Antonio
This research report was supported through a n agreement between the City of Livermore, CA. and the University of Texas at San Antonio. The findings and recommendations presented within this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official positions or opinions of the City of Livermore, CA. or the Livermore Police Department. The authors wish to thank Chief Young, Lt. Reynolds, and members of the Livermore Police Department who provided data and assisted with the project . Please direct all correspondence regarding this report to: Dr. Rob Tillyer, Department of Criminology & Criminal Justice, the University of Texas at San Antonio, [email protected].

ATTACHMENT 1
238

i
Table of Contents
I. PROJECT BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................................1 II. OFFICER DECISION-MAKING ............................................................................................................................1 TRAFFIC STOPS ..................................................................................................................................................................1 Benchmarking ..............................................................................................................................................................2 Veil of Darkness Benchmark...................................................................................................................................................... 4 Crash Data as a Benchmark ........................................................................................................................................................ 5 ARRESTS............................................................................................................................................................................6 III. METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................................................................8 TRAFFIC STOPS ..................................................................................................................................................................8 ARRESTS............................................................................................................................................................................9 DATA ...............................................................................................................................................................................10 IV. FINDINGS ................................................................................................................................................................13 TRAFFIC STOPS ................................................................................................................................................................13 ARRESTS..........................................................................................................................................................................16 V. SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS ...........................................................................................................................20 VI. REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................................22

Tables & Figures
TABLE 1: DATA ....................................................................................................................................................................11 TABLE 2: VARIABLES & MISSING DATA ..............................................................................................................................12 TABLE 3: CIVILIAN RACE/ETHNICITY IN TRAFFIC STOPS .....................................................................................................13 TABLE 4: CIVILIAN RACE/ETHNICITY IN DAYTIME VS. NIGHTTIME .....................................................................................14 TABLE 5: CIVILIAN RACE/ETHNICITY IN CRASHES ..............................................................................................................15 TABLE 6: DISPROPORTIONALITY INDICES & RATIOS............................................................................................................16 TABLE 7: DESCRIPTIVES .......................................................................................................................................................17 TABLE 8: ARREST MULTIVARIATE MODELS ........................................................................................................................19

ATTACHMENT 1
239

ii
Executive Summary
A research team of criminologists from the University of Texas at San Antonio was contracted to analyze recent stops by the Livermore Police Department (LPD) for patterns of racial and/or ethnic disparity. The analysis addressed two areas of possible disparity: (1) disparities in traffic stops and (2) disparities in arrests.
• Methodology: Examination of 24,944 encounters between LPD officers and civilians between January 1, 2019 and April 30, 2021.
• Traffic Stop Analyses: Use of two benchmarks to operate as proxies for driving and traffic law violating populations in Livermore to compare against the racial/ethnic composition of drivers stopped by the LPD
o Benchmark #1: A ”veil of darkness” (VOD) analysis examined differences in stop rates of non-White and White drivers during the daytime compared to the nighttime. o Benchmark #2: Data containing the racial composition of not -at-fault and at-fault drivers involved in two-vehicle crashes.
• Arrest Analyses: A multivariate model examined whether civilian race/ethnicity predicted the likelihood of an arrest by the LPD after controlling for other relevant factors. • Key Findings
o The results from the two benchmark analyses did not reveal a pattern of racial/ethnic disparity in traffic stops experienced by non -White drivers in Livermore.
o The VOD analysis found no statistically significant differences in the rates at which non-White drivers were stopped in Livermore during the day compared to at night. o The traffic crash benchmark analysis found slightly elevated risks for st ops of White, Black, and “Other” race drive rs (at-fault benchmark only) and a slightly elevated risk for stops of Black drivers relative to White drivers (not -at-fault benchmark only).
o Taken together, the two benchmark analyses do not show a consistent pattern of disparity in stops based on driver race or ethnicity.
o The results of the arrest analyses do not reveal a pattern of racial disparity in police outcomes that disadvantages non-White civilians in the City of Livermore.

In sum, no clearly identifiable or concerning pattern of racial/ethnic disparity was found in the 24,944 encounters that took place in Livermore over a 26-month period during 2019-21.

ATTACHMENT 1
240

1 I. Project Background
Researchers at the University of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA) began conversations with the City of Livermore, California and the Livermore Police Department (LPD) in late 2020 to discuss a potential research collaboration. Drs. Rob Tillyer and Michael Smith (UTSA) developed a Scope of Work that was negotiated with Chief Young (LPD) to assist with research questions requiring data analysis and assessment. These discussions culminated in a signed contract to engage with the City on the following matters:

1. Consult with selected City Council and community members to increase awareness of traffic stop data analysis complexities, including benchmarking

2. Review and assess current traffic stop data collection protocols; provide recommendations as needed

3. Analyze recent traffic stop data to identify the racial/ethnic composition of those encounters and compare against appropriate benchmarks

4. Analyze recent LPD arrest data to identify factors associated with arrest

This report addresses Tasks #3 & 4 – assess traffic stops to summarize the racial/ethnic composition of those encounters in relation to appropriate benchmarks and analyze recent LPD data to identify factors associated with arrest. Data required to complete these tasks was provided to the research te am during the Summer and Fall of 2021. Data cleaning, variable creation, data analysis, and report writing was undertaken throughout this time period.

This report contains several sections that summarize:
• The scientific knowledge and best practices in traffic stop and arrest data analyses (Section II)
• The methodology applied to the LPD data (Section III) • The primary findings from the analyses of these data (Section IV) • The meaning of these findings for the LPD and the City of Livermore, CA. • Recommendations on next steps (Section V)

II. Officer Decision-Making
Given the focus of this report on traffic stops and arrests, it is important to locate the current analyses within the broader landscape of current best practices and empirical evidence on these two decision points.

Traffic Stops
Law enforcement agencies, communities and their residents, and academics (among others) have expressed continuing interest in the traffic stop practices of the police over the past thirty years. A ATTACHMENT 1
241

2 key concern is that minority groups may receive greater attention from the police and experience elevated or disparate rates of stops and post-stop outcomes such as tickets, searches or arrests. In short, there is a concern that persons of color are targeted for enhanced contact by police and more punitive outcomes.

From a scientific perspective, the initial step i n understanding the nature of this concern is to empirically evaluate the prevalence of disproportionate contact with non -White groups. If this is established, then the related question of ‘why’ this pa ttern of behavior occurs can be addressed.

The primary challenge in analyzing the racial/ethnic composition of traffic stops initiated by the police centers on the identification of an appropriate comparison population or benchmark against which to compare the behavior of the police department.

Several scholars have written extensively on the study and evaluation of traffic stops (e.g., Alpert et al., 2004; Fridell, 2004; Ridgeway, 2007 ; Smith et al., 2021), and the issues can be distilled as follows. The assessment of law enforcement agency traffic stop behavior begins with the calculation of the racial/ethnic composition of traffic stops as represented by a simple rate of stops for each racial/ethnic group. Critically, the goal is to analyze police -civilian contacts that are officer-initiated and not the result of a call for service from the public. If the concern is that officers may be disproportionately stopping non-White drivers, then it is appropriate to assess their independent decision-making to make a traffic stop rather than stops made as the result of a call for service or other community-based request. As a result, using administrative data collected by the police, the total number of officer-initiated traffic stops for each racial/ethnic group is divided by the total number of officer-initiated stops to produce a rate of traffic stops for each racial/ethnic group. Drivers are frequently categorized into White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, and Other groups with the latter representing a broad category that includes Native Americans, Middle Easterners, or other minority groups.

Once stop percentages are calculated for each group, they must be compared to some independent measure of what is to be expected if no bias in officer decision-making existed. Knowing that 20% of a police department’s traffic stops involved Black civilians is meaningless unless we also know what percentage of Black drivers are available or at risk of being stopped on the roadways. Thus, an estimated population of those at risk for being stopped must be identified to compare against the stop rates experienced by non-White drivers. In short, in order to understand whether or not there are racial/ethnic disparities in traffic stops, the analyst must identify and apply an appropriate benchmark against which to compare the rate of stops experienced by non-White drivers (see Alpert et al., 2004; Fridell, 2004; Ridgeway, 2007 for further discussion).

Benchmarking
A recently published, peer-reviewed article (Smith et al., 2021) summarizes the current academic ATTACHMENT 1
242

3 efforts to identify an appropriate benchmark and offers the strengths and weaknesses of the most common approaches to addressing this issue. As the authors note, “In order to investigate the existence or magnitude of racial and ethnic disparities in stops of citizens undertaken by the police, it is not sufficient to simply examine the percentage of stops that target minorities. Instead, researchers must determine the extent to which differ ent racial and ethnic groups would be represented in stops if no racial bias was present and then compare the percentage of minority citizens who were stopped to this hypothetical benchmark” (p. 515). While identifying an appropriate benchmark is critical to the assessment of traffic stops, it is without doubt the most challenging and controversial aspect of the effort (Alpert et al., 2004; Ridgeway & MacDonald, 2010; Tillyer et al., 2010) . Benchmark strengths and weaknesses are rooted in their ability to accurately offer a proxy for the driving population at risk of being stopped. Importantly, some benchmarks have greater logical and empirical validity than others and represent preferred options for an assessment of possible disparities in the decisions officers make to initiate traffic stops (see Smith et al., 2021 for a more complete discussion).

The most readily accessible benchmark for stops is the Census count of the racial/ethnic composition of the local population. This benchmark is easy to access a nd presents some initial appeal; however, its utility and appropriateness quickly become problematic once its underlying assumptions are considered. The key challenge to this benchmark, and why it has been rejected by contemporary scholars as a scientifically appropriate benchmark, is rooted in the assumption that each resident or group within a local jurisdiction possesses an equal level of risk for being stopped by the police. This is simply an untenable assumption. Individuals and groups of civilians vary in their likelihood of contact (i.e., risk) based on a number of factors , including their own driving behavior (i.e., if they drive, how they drive, when they drive, what they drive, etc.). Related, the use of this benchmark assumes that only the residen tial population that lives in a particular area drives in that area. This is an unreasonable assumption as the routine activities of drivers often involve crossing jurisdictional boundaries, such that residents from neighboring cities, counties or even states often cross into the jurisdiction of interest and vice versa. This undermines the accuracy of the residential Census population as a proper representation of the driving population at risk for being stopped by the police in a given city. These two factors (i.e., driving behavior of residents and the cross-jurisdictional travel of non-resident drivers), in addition to others, render this an inappropriate benchmark (for further discussion, please see Alpert et al., 2004; Novak, 2004; Ridgeway & MacDonald, 2010; Tillyer et al., 2010).

Other benchmarking options include the use of red -light cameras to capture the racial/ethnic composition of the driving /violating population or the direct observation of the driving and/or violating populations through the systematic social observation of drivers (see Alpert et al., 2004; Meehan & Ponder, 2002) . A separate technique assesses the traffic stop behavior of officers compared to other officers working similar shifts, assignments, and areas. Each of these techniques ATTACHMENT 1
243

4 offer some legitimacy as proxies for risk, but also possess some weaknesses, and their use is often predicated on data availability.

Veil of Darkness Benchmark
Two benchmarks are particularly relevant to this project and offer the most appropriate approach to assess the LPD traffic stop data: (i) the ‘veil of darkness’ methodology and (ii) the use of traffic crash data. The ‘veil of darkness’ (VOD) was developed by Grogger & Rid geway (2006) and is relatively easy and straightforward to apply. This approach makes use of natural changes in lighting based on daylight savings time to allow a comparison of the racial /ethnic composition of vehicle stops made during daylight hours to th e racial/ethnic composition of stops made at night during the same hours of the day. Using the sunrise and sunset times published by the Naval Observatory, traffic stops are coded as ‘daytime’ or ‘nighttime’ depending on the time of the year.

For example, a traffic stop initiated at 7PM in January would be classified as a ‘nighttime’ stop, while a traffic stop undertaken at 7PM in July would be a ‘daytime’ stop. Ultimately, this approach focuses on traffic stops that occur in the ‘inter-twilight’ period, which is defined as the period of time between the earliest sunset (4:48 pm) and the latest sunset (8:33 pm) across the different months of the year (times reflect sunset in Livermore, CA. during the study period).

The use of the ‘inter-twilight’ period allows a comparison of the racial/ethnic composition of stops during times when daylight could reasonably allow the identification of driver race/ethnicity to the same period of time when darkness would limit the detection of driver race/ethnicity . The underlying logic of the comparison is that the driving patterns of racial/ethnic groups are likely to be similar across the same hours of the day, but make use of daylight savings and seasonal variation in nighttime hours that limit officers’ ability to identify driver race/ethnicity prior to a stop. Thus, if officers’ decisions to initiate traffic stops were influenced by bias (overt or implicit), then a different racial/ethnic pattern of stops would be evident in the daylight hours c ompared to nighttime hours (Smith, et al., 2021). Under conditions of bias, daytime stops would reflect a higher proportion of minority drivers when race is more easily identifiable than nighttime stops when skin tone and other features of drivers are more difficult to see.

This approach has been widely replicated in the literature (Chanin, Welsh, Nurge, & Henry, 2016; Pierson et al., 2019; Ritter & Bael, 2009; COPS, 2016; Ross et al., 2016; Smith et al., 2021 ; Taniguchi et al., 2016; Worden et al., 2012) as it is does not require external data for a benchmark (beyond information supplied from police stop databases themselves). For example, Pierson and colleagues (2019) used the VOD to assess traffic stops initiated by multiple agencies across 21 states and 29 cities. Results indicated that Black drivers were stopped more often during the day and less frequently at night compared to White drivers. Kalinowski and colleagues (2017) also used the VOD methodology to assess stop data from the Massachusetts State Police, Boston, and other Massachusetts municipal agencies with at least 100 speeding stops and an African-American ATTACHMENT 1
244

5 population of 10 percent or higher. They reported that the odds of a Black driver being stopped during daylight hours were 35 to 48 percent higher than for White drivers, depending upon variations in the models . Moreover, they reported Black drivers seemed to adjust their driving behavior (i.e., speeding) downward during the daytime when they would be most visible to the police. As noted by Smith et al (2021), the adjustment in driving behavior of some groups during the daytime identifies a potential weakness in this benchmark that “ may overestimate the population of minority traffic violators at night and underestimate minority traffic violators during the day, thus leading to a type II error and a finding of no discrimination in the treatment of minorities in stops by the police” (p. 517).

Crash Data as a Benchmark
The second benchmark used in the analysis of LPD traffic stops uses vehicle crash data. These data offer information on at-fault and not-at-fault drivers involved in vehicle crashes on roadways in Livermore. This approach was pioneered by Alpert and colleagues (2004) and provides an estimate of driving population by using the known race/ethnicity of drivers involved in crashes investigated by the police (also see Lovrich et al., 2007; Withrow & Williams, 2015) .

Conceptually, these data provide a proxy for the racial/ethnic composition of the driving population, while also accounti ng for driving frequency and potential exposure to police surveillance (Smith et al., 2021). This is particularly true for not -at-fault drivers who represent a ‘random’ cross-section of drivers on the roadways that may be at risk for police contact , but also for at-fault drivers who may represent an estimate of traffic violators most likely to draw attention from the police.

In California, these data are readily accessible and can be selected for specific time periods and locales. Some researchers have ra ised a concern that no t-at-fault driver benchmarks may not represent an unbiased estimate of the driving population (Ridgeway & MacDonald, 2010), while others (Withrow & Williams, 2015) suggest that at-fault drivers may represent an improved proxy for risky driving and therefore those most at-risk of being stopped. The current analysis uses both types of crash benchmarks to ensure a comprehensive analysis of the LPD traffic stop data.

Previous research using this benchmark largely confirms that non -White dr ivers experience elevated rates of contact relative to White drivers (Alpert, Dunham, & Smith, 2007; Engel, Frank, Tillyer & Klahm, 2006; Farrell et al., 2004; Rojek, Rosenfeld, & Decker, 2004; Smith et al., 2021; Smith & Petrocelli, 2001).

In sum, early benchmarking studies frequently used Census data as a comparison against the rate of traffic stops of non -White populations, but this approach has been soundly rejected as the science of traffic stop benchmarking has improved. Current best practices in traffic stop analyses rely on the VOD and crash-based benchmarks to provide better proxies for the driving and traffic law violating populations and as comparisons for police traffic stop data. Given the availability of ATTACHMENT 1
245

6 the requisite data needed to employ these benchmarks, they were selected as appropriate options for an analysis of the LPD traffic stop data.

Arrests
The other officer decision of interest to the LPD concerned possible racial or ethnic disparities in arrests arising from traffic stops (or other police-civilian encounters initiated by officers). Arrest has a long history of study within the policing literature, and generally such analyses do not suffer from the same data limitations as the stop decision itself. As outlined previously, traffic stop data often require an external data source for comparison (i.e., a benchmark), while in the case of traffic stop outcomes, the universe of encounters in which an arrest could occur is known. While some have argued that selection bias in the decision to make a stop in the first place puts minority drivers at greater risk for arrest (Bronner, 2020), police agencies currently do not collect information on when a traffic stop could have been legally initiated but was not. With this theoretical limitation in mind, examining traffic stop arrest outcomes takes into account all traffic stop encounters, including those in which an arrest could have occurred but did not.1 As a result, the analytic tools available to identify racial/ethnic disparities in arrest are suitable for revealing patterns of disparity in how drivers of different races and/or ethnicities experience arrest outcomes following traffic stops or other encounters with the police.

Often the goal of an arrest analysis is to identify whether the race/ethnicity of the civilian involved in the police-civilian encounter is a significant factor in whether or not the incident results in an arrest. Because the goal is to understand officer decision-making in relation to civilian race/ethnicity, it is important to consider the reason for the arrest and the degree of discretion the officer had in making it. For example, some arrests include a high level of discretion by the officer (e.g., arrests based on probable cause developed on the scene) while others (arrests based on a pre- existing warrant or the discovery of contraband following a search) involve little or no discretion.

High discretion arrests should be analyzed separately from low discretion arrests as the goal is to understand whether officers are engaging in bias -based behavior of their own volition . Thus, arrests first should be categorized as high or low discretion and then each group should be analyzed separately. Disparities in high discretion arrests may be indicative of biased decision -making, while disparities in low discretionary arrests address a different question: Do such arrests disproportionately impact non-White civilians?

Critical to any arrest analysis is the ability to measure all relevant other factors that may be

1 In the case of Livermore, the UTSA research team found no consistent pattern of racial or ethnic disparity in who was stopped by the LPD. Thus, any theoretical impact of stop selection bias on post -stop arrest outcomes was moot since no significant disparities were found in the traffic stops themselves , which made up the great majority of LPD encounters resulting in an arrest . See Section IV below for the results of the traffic stop benchmarking and arrest analyses.

ATTACHMENT 1
246

7 associated with or influence the likelihood of an arrest. These factors can be grouped into several broad categories , including characteristics of the encounter, civilian characteristics, officer characteristics, and contextual factors. The relationship between civilian race/ethnicity and arrest is often of central concern, but it is important to assess this relationship while also considering the impact of other variables. For example, situational characteristics such as time of day or number of bystanders may be important . Likewise, civilian gender or age also may be related to the likelihood of an arrest. In addition, previous studies have demonstrated the importance of civilian demeanor as a predictor of whether or not an arrest is likely to occur ( Kochel et al., 2011 ). The characteristics of the officer or the environmental context of the encounter (i.e., crime rate) may also be influential in understanding the nature of arrests. In sum, the goal is to evaluate the likelihood of an arrest by considering as many potentially relevant factors as possible in order to most accurately identify the contribution, if any, that civilian race/ethnicity has on the likelihood of arrest. The most common method to accomplish this goal is to estimate multivariate models that allow the relationship between each variable , including race/ethnicity, and arrest to be independently assessed while holding the others constant (see the next section for a specific description of this analytic approach).

Previous research on the relationship between civilian demographics and arrest (within traffic stops, in particular ) has produced a mix ed set of results. Several studies document an elevated likelihood of arrest for non -White groups (e.g., Alpert et al., 2006; Smith & Petrocelli, 2001; Withrow, 2004), while others demonstrate no effect (Alpert Group, 2004; Engel, Frank, Tillyer, & Klahm, 2006; Tillyer & Engel, 2013). In a recent assessment of traffic stop outcomes in San Jose, CA., no relationship was reported between civilian race/ethnicity and warrantless arrests or those conducted due to a warrant (Smith et al., 2016).

Similarly, recent literature on the relationship between civilian sex and age and arrest also reveals some mixed findings. Male drivers consistently experience arrest at a higher rate than female drivers (Alpert et al., 2006; Alpert Group, 2004; Engel et al., 2005, 2006; Engel, Tillyer, Cherkauskas, et al., 2007; Gumbhir, 2004; M. Smith & Petrocelli, 2001 ; Tillyer & Engel, 2013), whereas, civilian age has demonstrated an inconsistent relationship with arres t with some studies finding that older drivers were more likely to be arrested (Engel et al., 2005) and other studies reporting that older drivers were less likely to be arrested (Alpert et al., 2006; Engel et al., 2006; Gumbhir, 2004; M. Smith & Petrocelli, 2001; Tillyer & Engel, 2013).

ATTACHMENT 1
247

8 III. Methodology
Consistent with the research goals agreed upon with the LPD, t his project analyzed LPD traffic stop data to identify possible racial or ethnic disparities among those stopped by the police. Second, these data were examined to identify any racial/ethnic disparities among those arrested by the LPD following a traffic stop. To accomplish these two goals, the following methodologies were used.

Traffic Stops
An assessment of the racial/ethnic composition of traffic stops initiated by LPD officers involved several steps. Initially, all available information on the traffic stops was summarized in a series of descriptive tables. For example, the percentage of stops involving a male civilian or White civilian was calculated to provide a summary of the traffic stop characteristics. Next, we conducted benchmarking analyses that compared the percentage of traffic stops involving each of the racial/ethnic groups to th ose groups’ expected risk of being stopped. As outlined in Section II above, two benchmarking techniques were utilized - a veil of darkness analysis and a comparison of stops to crash data.

The veil of darkness analysis calculates the percentage of traffic stops made of each racial/ethnic group during the daytime and nighttime and compares them to identify any difference. A higher rate of daytime stops involving non-White drivers compared to their percentages of nighttime stops suggests a potential difference in the decision -making process to initiate a traffic stop involving these groups. Differences in rates of daytime and nighttime stops for each group were subjected to statistical testing at the group and individual level. An ANOVA test was conducted to assess whether there were differences in the rates between daytime and nighttime stops across all groups that represented a statistical pattern. Individual t -tests were also con ducted within each group to compare, for example, whether the daytime rate of stops involving Black drivers differed from the nighttime rate of Black stops. For both analyses, a statistically significant result from these tests would provide empirical evidence of a pattern of disparity whereas a non-significant result would support a conclusion that no substantive difference exists between the groups.

The second benchmark analysis used uniform traffic crash report (CHP 555) data from the State of California for Livermore to provide an estimate of risk for being stopped. These crash data include the race/ethnicity of the drivers involved in traffic collisions and were downloaded from Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SW ITRS) for two -vehicle crashes that occurred within the City of Livermore between January 1, 2019 and April 30, 2021. In the analyses reported below, traffic crash data were compared to police stop data with not-at-fault drivers serving as an estimate of the driving population in the city and at -fault drivers serving as an estimate of those who violate the traffic laws. A statistically significant higher percentage of stops involving specific racial/ethnic groups in the LPD stop data compared to the crash da ta benchmarks would indicate ATTACHMENT 1
248

9 disproportionate stops by LPD officers based on the expected risk for stops among those groups of drivers (Alpert et al., 2004; Tillyer et al., 2010; Withrow & Williams, 2015; COPS Smith et al., 2021).

For all benchmarks (i.e., daytime vs. nighttime; traffic stops vs. at -fault crashes; traffic stops vs. not-at-fault crashes), disproportionality indices (DI) were calculated. The DI is a within -group assessment that compares the stop rates for each racial/ethnic group in the traffic stop data to the ‘expected’ rates of stop for each group based on the selected benchmark. A value of 1.0 indicates alignment between the actual stop rate and the benchmark, while a value above 1.0 indicates that the racial/ethnic group experienced a higher than anticipated stop rate compared to the benchmark.

The DI is used to compare the actual rate of stops to the expected rate of stops (based on the benchmarks) within racial/ethnic groups. To further compare stops of non-White drivers to White drivers, a disproportionality ratio (DR) was calculated by dividing the DI rate for the racial/group of interest (e.g., Black) by the White DI rate. The resulting DR value is interpreted as the likelihood of a Black (or any other racial/ethnic group) driver being stopped in comparison to chances of a White driver being stopped. For example, if the disproportionality ratio is 3.0, this indicates that the group of interest is three times as likely to be stopped in comparison to the White group (Smith et al., 2021).

Arrests
The analysis of arrests involved two primary statistics: descriptive and inferential. Descriptive statistics provide a summary of the variables across all cases to allow an assessment of how frequently each variable presents itself within the data. This is most frequently accomplished by calculating a percentage of cases in which this characteristic appears within all records. For example, all records are assessed to identify the number which conclude with an arrest and this information can be used to produce a percentage of encounters involving an arrest.

The second analytic tool used for examining arrests involve d the estimation of multivariate regression models. Multivariate models offer the ability to identify the specific effects of each independent variable on the dependent variable by controlling for all other independent variables (Hanushek & Jackson, 1977; Weisburd & Britt, 2004). This approach considers all variables simultaneously to assess which of the encounter c haracteristics are related to the likelihood of an arrest. This type of modeling is particularly useful in identifying whether a relationship between civilian race/ethnicity and an arrest exists while considering all other potential factors. Importantly, this technique is only as robust as the information that is available, and any variables that may influence an arrest but are not available for inclusion in the model weaken its explanatory power.

For example, citizen behavior or demeanor may influence the arrest decision but was not available in the data. With these limitations in mind, the LPD data contained sufficient variables to allow for a meaningful analysis of the arrest decision.

ATTACHMENT 1
249

10 Data
This study analyzed LPD traffic stops generated between January 1, 2019 and April 30, 2021. A total of 24,944 records (i.e., cases) were received from the LPD and considered for analyses.

The initial analytic step involved an assessment of available fields and cases to determine the completeness of each record. Based on conversations with the LPD, the ‘Incident Number’ represented a unique number that signified a police -civilian encounter t hat may be eligible for analysis. De-identified officer data also were supplied to the research team and were merged into the stop data so that each record contained information on the primary officer involved in the traffic stop. Information on 120 officers was supplied to the research team.2 A third data source provided by the LPD included records for violent and selected property crimes that occurred within the various LPD beats during the study period. Information on size of the residential population was also added to allow for creation of a violent and property crime rate. Of note, the internal organizational structure of the LPD was modified during the study period from three beats (i.e., A, B, and C) to four beats (i.e., 1-4). This had implications for the multivariate analyses of arrests and is discussed in more detail below.

Table 1 describes the initial data available for analysis. Of the 24,944 original records, 24,846 cases contained a unique ‘Incident Number’, and 98 records contained a duplicate ‘Incident Number’. An additional 35 records were non -officer-initiated contacts. After removal of the se records, 24,811 cases remained and were assessed for missing information in preparation for the analyses of arrests.

With respect to the benchmarking analyses, 1,922 non -traffic stops and 76 cases missing information on ‘type’ were removed. This resulted in 22,813 records that were assessed for missing data prior to conducting the benchmark analyses.

2 The merging process (officers to st ops) produced a 98.4% matching rate with 24,548 traffic stop records supplemented with officer characteristics.

ATTACHMENT 1
250

11 Table 1: Data
Records/Cases
Original Data 24,944
Duplicate Records 98
Non-Officer-Initiated Contacts 35
Sub-Total for Arrest Analysis 24,811
Non-Traffic Stops (i.e., Ped. Stops, Unlicensed, License Suspended, Other) 1,922 Missing ‘Type’ 76
Sub-Total for Traffic Stops 22,813

The next step was to analyze the variables for potential missing information that would preclude that record from further analysis. Table 2 outlines the available variables and groups them into situational, civilian, officer, and contextual categories. Eac h variable is described in terms of its measurement and then information on missing records (overall number of records and percentage) is provided along with the total number of records available for analysis. This assessment was conducted independently for the data used for the traffic stop analysis and then replicated for the data involved in the arrest analysis.

Overall, there was a very small percentage of missing data across all fields. The missing data rates for civilian characteristics (i.e., race/ethnicity, gender, and age) were below 1% , which is an unusually impressive level of completeness compared to many police administrative data sets .

Missing data rates below 10% are acceptable with 5% or less missing preferred. The low missing rate of less than 1% of civilian characteristics demonstrates the commitment of LPD officers to collecting all required information as part of the RIPA process. In addition, less than 2% of all cases were missing an organizational unit iden tifier (i.e., beat) and less than 1% were missing officer characteristics (i.e., race/ethnicity, gender, age, years of experience, or assignment). Of note, a violent crime rate was calculated for each beat by counting the number of homicides, aggravated assaults, robberies, and sexual assaults reported within each organizational unit and then standardizing this by the residential population in those beats. The result is a violent crime rate that reflects the number of violent crimes per 1,000 population. A similar process was used to create a property crime rate at the beat level based on burglaries, thefts, and vehicle thefts.

Importantly, the LPD changed its beat borders in February 2020, and population estimates were only available for the police -civilian encounters occurring since that date. As a result, there is a high missing rate for this variable. This does not reflect any incomplete information recorded by the LPD; rather, it is a product of not being able to access the population figures for the beats prior to the change in boundaries.

ATTACHMENT 1
251

12 Table 2: Variables & Missing Data
Variables Measurement Traffic Stops
(N=22,813)
Arrests
(N=24,811)
Missing Final Missing Final
N % N N % N
Situational Variables
Date & Time Year, Month, Day of
Week 0 0.0% 22,813 0 0.0% 24,811
Type of Contact Type, Source 0 0.0% 22,813 76 0.3% 24,735 Organizational Unit Beat 407 1.8% 22,406 415 1.7% 24,396 Civilian Variables
Race/Ethnicity
White, Black,
Hispanic, Asian,
Other
76 0.3% 22,737 88 0.4% 24,723
Gender Male, Female 0 0.0% 22,813 0 0.0% 24,811
Age 15-24, 25-32, 33-39,
40-48, 49-99 39 0.2% 22,774 48 0.2% 24,763
Officer Variables
Race/Ethnicity
White, Black,
Hispanic, Asian,
Other
175 0.8% 22,638 216 0.9% 24,595
Gender Male, Female 175 0.8% 22,638 216 0.9% 24,595
Age 21-55 175 0.8% 22,638 216 0.9% 24,595
Years of
Experience 0-28 175 0.8% 22,638 216 0.9% 24,595
Assignment Various Categories 175 0.8% 22,638 216 0.9% 24,595 Contextual Variables
Violent Crime Rate Violent Crime per
1,000 population N/A N/A N/A 15,268 61.5% 9,543
Property Crime
Rate
Property Crime per
1,000 population N/A N/A N/A 15,268 61.5% 9,543

ATTACHMENT 1
252

13 IV. Findings
Traffic Stops
Traffic stops initiated by LPD officers during the study period were examined to identify the ir racial/ethnic composition. White drivers were the most common group contacted by LPD officers with 44.2% of all stops involving that group. Hispanic drivers were the next mo st common and comprised slightly more than one quarter of all stops (28.1%). The remainder of the stops involved drivers of Other races/ethnicities (12.1%), Black drivers (10.3%), and Asian drivers (5.2%). The distribution of stops by race/ethnicity is summarized in Table 3.

Table 3: Civilian Race/Ethnicity in Traffic Stops
Total Cases: 22,737 Percentage
White 44.2%
Black 10.3%
Hispanic 28.1%
Asian 5.2%
Other 12.1%

The first assessment of the traffic stops was a veil of darkness analyses. As described previously, the veil of darkness requires the identification of traffic stops that occurred during the inter-twilight period or the period in Livermore between when the sun set the earliest (16:48) and latest (20:33) during the year . All stops occurring during the inter -twilight period were identified as either a daytime or nighttime stop depending on when during the year the stop was initiated and whether the stop to ok place before or after sunset on the day the stop was made. These stops were then summarized by the drivers’ racial/ethnic composition.

Again, the veil of darkness analysis measures variance in the daytime stop rates of non-White drivers compared to the nighttime stop rates for these groups. Any difference in the within group rates between daytime and nighttime stop rates suggests evidence of a disparity. Two important points are critical when considering disparity. First, a simple difference in the sto p rates must be assessed to determine statistical significance or whether the difference is large enough that it is unlikely due to chance. If an observed disparity is statistically significant, this does not necessarily prove bias or discrimination , which typically requires additional evidence that stops were motivated by a discriminatory purpose (United States v. Armstrong , 1996; Ballou v. McElvain , 2021). Such a determination is beyond the scope of this report and the data available to the research team. Instead, the veil of darkness analysis allows an assessment of patterns of disparity and areas of department action that may need further review or attention from LPD leadership.

Table 4 summarizes the rates of stops for each group during the daytime an d nighttime and also ATTACHMENT 1
253

14 reports on the two analytic tests estimated to identify any statistical difference s between the experience of these groups depending on the time of day. Overall, slightly more stops occurred during daylight hours (N=1,552) compared to nighttime hours (N=1,148). During both daytime and nighttime, White drivers were the majority group stopped by LPD officers (i.e., 44.5% and

43.8%) with Hispanic drivers being the second most common group involved in traffic stops (i.e.,

30.0% and 29.4%).

An overall assessment of the across-group rates using an ANOVA resulted in a non -statistically significant result. Additional within-group analyses using t-tests also demonstrated no statistically significant results. The daytime stop rates of two minority groups – Hispanic (30.0% of daytime stops) and “Other” (11.5% of daytime stops) drivers – slightly exceeded their nighttime stop rates (29.4% and 10.0% of nighttime stops, respectiv ely), but these differences were not statistically significant. The daytime stop rate of Whites also slightly exceeded this group’s nighttime stop rate, but this difference also was non-significant. Finally, the daytime stop rate of Black drivers (9.7%) was actually lower than this group’s nighttime stop rate ( 11.4%), which is not consistent with a pattern of disparate enforcement , and a similar pattern was observed for Asian drivers (4.3% of daytime stops vs. 5.4% of nighttime stops).

In sum, the veil of darkness analyses demonstrated no statistically significance difference in rates of traffic stops for the various racial/ethnic groups in stops during the daytime compared to the nighttime. While there were some minor differences in the rates of stops during the study period, these variations do not reflect a statistically significant pattern of racial/ethnic disparities in LPD stop practices.

Table 4: Civilian Race/Ethnicity in Daytime vs. Nighttime Total Cases: 2,715 Daytime
(N=1,552)
Nighttime
(N=1,148)
White 44.5% 43.8%
Black 9.7% 11.4%
Hispanic 30.0% 29.4%
Asian 4.3% 5.4%
Other 11.5% 10.0%
Results were non-significant based on an ANOVA analysis; individual t-tests were also non-significant.

Civilian race/ethnicity was missing on 15 cases (0.6%).

The second assessment of traffic stops involved a statistical analysis of all traffic stops compared to the vehicle crash data. Using the SWITRS database on crashes, data were extracted for the City of Livermore between January 1, 2019 and April 30, 2021. During this period, 4,736 individual drivers were involved in crashes. Of those, 4,436 records were identified as either at -fault or not- at-fault; however, an additional 441 records were missing race/ethnicity. After removal of these ATTACHMENT 1
254

15 data due to missing information, 3,995 records provided required information for analysis ( 1,775 at-fault drivers and 2,220 not -at-fault drivers). Table 5 reports on the percentage of at -fault and not-at-fault drivers based on their racial/ethnic group.

Table 5: Civilian Race/Ethnicity in Crashes
Total Cases: 3,995
At-Fault
Crashes
(N=1,775)
Not-At-Fault
Crashes
(N=2,220)
White 40.7% 41.1%
Black 9.4% 8.4%
Hispanic 33.7% 28.6%
Asian 5.4% 8.1%
Other 10.9% 13.9%
Driver’s race/ethnicity was missing in 441 (.9%) of the 4,436 crashes

These crash data rates were then used as a benchmark to compare against LPD traffic stops by racial/ethnic group. Table 6 provides a summary of the rates of traffic stops, at -fault crashes, and not-at-fault crashes for each racial group. Thereafter, disproportionality indices (DI) and ratios (DR) are reported for each benchmark. A DI above 1.0 indicates that the group of interest experienced a higher rate of stops compared to the rate of stops for that group using the benchmark.

For example, White drivers p ossessed a DI of 1.1 when using the at -fault and not -at-fault benchmarks suggesting that their rate of stops was slightly above what was expected based on their representation in each benchmark. Black drivers also showed a slightly elevated DI rate when using the at -fault (1.1) and not -at-fault (1.2) benchmarks. The comparisons for the remaining racial/ethnic groups were either at or below 1.0 (with the exception of Other drivers when using the at-fault benchmark) suggesting no pattern of differential stops of these groups.

The DR statistic extends the analyses by comparing the DI rate for the group of interest (i.e., Black, Hispanic, Asian, and Other drivers) to the DI rate for White drivers. In short, this assessment compares the experience of groups of primary interest to that of White drivers. Similar to the DI, a rate above 1.0 indicates that the group of interest experienced rate of stops at an elevated rate compared to White drivers. The only comparison that demonstrated a slightly elevated rate of stops was for Black drivers compared to White drivers when using the not -at-fault benchmark. In that case, Black drivers were 1.1 times more likely to be stopped compared to White drivers when using the not -at-fault benchmark as a proxy for risk of sto p, which indicates a slightly elevated disparity in stops relative to Whites. However, the DI for Black at -fault drivers was not elevated compared to Whites.

ATTACHMENT 1
255

16 Table 6: Disproportionality Indices & Ratios

Traffic
Stops
(N=22,737)
At-Fault
Crashes
(N=1,775)
Not-At-Fault
Crashes
(N=2,220)
At-
Fault
DI
Not-At-
Fault
DI
At-
Fault
DR
Not-At-
Fault-
DR
White 44.2% 40.7% 41.1% 1.1 1.1 -- --
Black 10.3% 9.4% 8.4% 1.1 1.2 1.0 1.1
Hispanic 28.0% 33.7% 28.6% 0.8 1.0 0.8 0.9
Asian 5.2% 5.4% 8.1% 1.0 0.6 0.9 0.6
Other 12.1% 10.9% 13.9% 1.1 0.9 1.0 0.8

Arrests
Arrests arising from activities initiated by officers (as opposed to calls for service) were analyzed for patterns of racial disparity using multivariate modeling. Most arrests arose from traffic stops (91.9%), but pedestrian stops ( 7.0%) and other miscellaneous types of encounters (0.8%) also contributed to the 445 arrests that took place during the 24,065 LPD officer-initiated encounters with civilians analyzed from January 1, 2019 through April 30, 2021 (Table 7).3

Arrests occurred in 1.8% of all encounters during the study period. Importantly, no information was recorded about the reason for the arrest or the type of arrest that was undertaken. As described in Section II, high discretion arrests ideally would be analyzed separately from low discretion arrests. However, due to the data collection protocols used b y the LPD during the study period, this was not possible.

In addition to the arrest outcomes, additional variables were available to help inform the multivariate disparity analysis. These variables also are summarized below in Table 7. The majority of co ntacts occurred in 2019 (5 4.0%), during a weekday (82.4%), and during daylight hours (62.1%). The racial/composition of civilians involved in these encounters was predominately White (45.6%), with slightly more than a quarter of all civilians identified as Hispanic (28.1%).

Black civilians comprised 10.0% of all contacts, Asian civilians were involved in 4.9% of all incidents, and persons of Other races/ethnicities comprised the remaining 11.5% of all encounters.

Male civilians were involved in 71.2% of all encounters, and 20.3% of these incidents involved a civilian under the age of 24.

Officers initiating these contacts were predominately White (89. 0%), with a small representation of Black (0.7%), Hispanic (6.6%), Asian (0.5%), or Other (3.2%) officers. Male officers initiated the encounters in 92.7% of the cases, and officers were, on average, 38 years of age with 11 years

3 70 records did not indicate the ‘type’ of stop (0.3%).

ATTACHMENT 1
256

17 of experience. Slightly more 60% of the contacts were initiated by an officer assigned to Patrol.

Finally, these contacts occurred in beats with an average violent crime rate of 2.7 per 1,000 population and an average property crime rate of 23.9 per 1,000 population.4 Table 7: Descriptives
N=24,065 Percent Percent/
Average
Arrest 1.8%
Encounter Variables Officer Variables
Year 2019 54.0% Race/Ethnicity
Year 2020 34.0% White 89.0%
Year 2021 12.1% Black 0.7%
Weekend 17.6% Hispanic 6.6%
Daytime 62.1% Asian 0.5%
Civilian Variables Other 3.2%
Race/Ethnicity Male 92.7%
White 45.6% Age 37.65
Black 10.0% Years of Experience 11.26
Hispanic 28.1% Patrol Officer 61.0%
Asian 4.9% Contextual Variables
Other 11.5% Violent Crime Rate 2.72
Male 71.2% Property Crime Rate 23.93
Under 24 Years of Age 20.3%
Violent and property crime rate are based organization beats in effect since Feb 2020.

Two models were estimated using the data provided by the LPD (see Table 8). Model 1 uses all available records to analyze the impact of encounter, civilian, and offic er variables on the likelihood of arrest. Model 2 includes all these variables but also considers beat-level crime rates as predictors. In these models, three key pieces of information are provided . First, statistical coefficients are provided that indicate the direction of the relationship between the variable shown and the arrest outcome. A positive value indicates an increased likelihood of arrest associated with this variable; conversely, a negative value means that the chances of an arrest are reduced when this variable is present . Statistical significance is denoted with asterisks, which indicate that the variable influenced the arrest outcome to a degree unlikely due to chance. The number of asterisks indicates the level of confidence in that relationship. For example, a single asterisk represents a 95% degree of confidence that the relationship was not due to chance. Two asterisks represent a

4 The violent crime and property crime rates were only able to be calculated for encounters occurring since Feb 2020 due to a lack of data on population size in the beats pre-Feb 2020.

ATTACHMENT 1
257

18 confidence interval of 99% and so on. The magnitude or impact of stat istically significant coefficients is shown with an odds ratio, which provides an interpretable number to indicate how much more likely an arrest is to occur when that variable is present in the encounter. An odds ratio of 2.0, for example, would indicate that the odds of arrest were two times higher when that variable was present during the police-civilian encounter.

The results from Model 1 reveal several statistically significant variables. Of primary interest, the race/ethnicity of the civilian was re lated to the likelihood of an arrest across several racial and ethnic groups. In this analysis, White civilians serve as the referent group to which minority groups should be compared. Black civilians were statistically indistinguishable from White civili ans in terms of arrest likelihood, while Hispanic, Asian, and Other civilians all had lower odds of an arrest compared to Whit es. Similarly, males were 1.9 1 times more likely to be arrested than females who served as the referent gender, while civilians under the age of 24 experienced a lower likelihood of arrest.

Other important predictors of an arrest included time of the day. Arrests were 1.7 8 times more likely to occur during daylight hours compared to nighttime hours. Also, two officer characteristics were associated with the likelihood of an arrest. Officers with less experience and those assigned to patrol were more likely to conclude an encounter with an arrest. Of note, the race/ethnicity and sex of the officer were not related to the likelihood of an arrest.

Model 2 included the same variable s as Model 1 but also included beat -level crime rates for encounters that took place after February 2020. Results were largely consistent with Model 1 with two exceptions. First, the time of day become stat istically non -significant and was no longer related to the likelihood of an arrest , and s econd, encounters occurring within beats with higher violent crime rates were more likely to result in an arrest.

ATTACHMENT 1
258

19 Table 8: Arrest Multivariate Models
Arrest Model 1
N=24,065
Arrest Model 2
N=9,425
Coeff. Odds Ratio Coeff. Odds Ratio
Intercept -4.114*** -- -5.451*** --
Encounter Variables
Year 2019 .248 -- -- --
Year 2020 .014 -- .066 --
Weekend .111 -- .040 --
Daytime .576*** 1.78 -.122 --
Civilian Variables
Black -.040 -- -.422 --
Hispanic -.301** 0.74 -.046 --
Asian -2.293*** 0.10 -2.171* 0.11
Other -1.443*** 0.24 -1.120* 0.33
Male .648*** 1.91 .611* 1.84
Under 24 Years of Age -.715*** 0.49 -.794** 0.45
Officer Variables
Black -.261 -- -- --
Hispanic .167 -- -.158 --
Other -.267 -- -.009 --
Male -.147 -- -.111 --
Years of Experience -.082*** 0.92 -.050* 0.95
Patrol Officer .436** 1.55 1.06** 2.86
Contextual Variables
Violent Crime Rate -- -- .440** 1.55
Property Crime Rate -- -- -.017 --
Model R2 (Nagelkerke) .086 .113
*p ≤ .05, **p ≤ .01, ***p ≤ .001
Reference Groups: Year 2021, White Drivers, White Officers Black officers were not included in Model 2 as they only accounted for 19 cases and generated unstable standard errors which make statistical modeling inappropriate.

ATTACHMENT 1
259

20 V. Summary & Conclusions
A research team of criminologists from the University of Texas at San Antonio analyzed 24,944 encounters between LPD officers and civilians that took place between January 1, 2019 and April 30, 2021 for patterns of racial and ethnic disparity. The analysis addressed two areas of possible disparity: (1) disparities in traffic stops and (2) disparities in arrests. The traffic stop analysis made use of two benchmarking techniques that have been well-accepted in the peer reviewed literature.

A ”veil of darkness” (VOD) analysis examined differences in stop rates of non-White and White drivers during the daytime compared to the nighttime. A higher rate of non-White stops during daylight hours when race and ethnicity are more visible to officers prior to the stop is suggestive of possible racial bias (Grogger & Ridgeway, 2006). In addition, data obtained from a State of California-maintained database (SWITRS) containing the racial composition of not -at-fault and at-fault drivers involved in two-vehicle crashes was used as a proxy for the driving and traffic law violating populations in Livermore and was compared against the racial/ethnic composition of drivers stopped by the LPD during the period of study ( see Alpert, Smith, & Dunham, 2004).

These two benchmarking analyses allowed for an assessment of whether LPD officers stopped non-White drivers at rates that exceeded the risk for a stop expected for these groups and if so, how that increased risk compared to stops experienced by White drivers. In the same vein, a multivariate analysis of arrests examined whether civilian race/ethnicity predicted the likelihood of an arrest by the LPD after controlling for other relevant factors available in the data or from external sources (e.g., beat-level crime rates).

The VOD analysis found no statistically significant differences in the rates at which non-White drivers were stopped in Livermore during the day compared to at night. This finding suggests that the race/ethnicity of the driver did not influence the decision by L PD officers to initiate traffic stops. The traffic crash benchmark analysis found slightly elevated risks for stops of White, Black, and “Other” race drives (at -fault benchmark only) and a slightly elevated risk for stops of Black drivers relative to White drivers (not-at-fault benchmark only). Together, the results from these two benchmark analyses do not suggest a pattern of racial/ethnic disparity in traffic stops experienced by non-White drivers in Livermore.

The multivariate arrest analysis found a decreased risk for arrest among non-White civilians in Livermore compared to White civilians when other relevant factors (day of week, time of day, officer race/ethnicity/gender, area crime rates) were held constant . The results of the arrest analyses also do not reveal a pattern of racial disparity in police outcomes that disadvantages non-White civilians in the City of Livermore.

Compared to most other traffic and arrest disparity studies reported in the litera ture, no clearly identifiable or concerning pattern of racial/ethnic disparity was found in the 24,944 police - ATTACHMENT 1
260

21 civilian encounters that took place in Livermore over a 26 -month period during 2019 -21.

This is an unusual and encouraging result and suggests the LPD and city leadership are committed to providing fair and constitutional policing to the community of Livermore. They should be commended for these findings.

With these encouraging results in mind, the UTSA research team recommends regular audits of the LPD’s RIPA data to assess its completeness and validity and to ensure that officers remain in compliance with the letter and spirit of the law. In addition, the team recommends an annual analysis of the RIPA data to identify any racial/ethnic disparities of concern embedded within the detailed information that RIPA now mandates be collected. For example, a fulsome analysis of citations and searches will be possible once sufficient cases are accumulated in the data , which may reveal areas that require add itional training or monitoring. Subsequent arrest and search analyses can make use of RIPA’s improved level of detail to separate out high and low discretion searches and arrests and examine potential disparities in outcomes that fall on the higher end of the discretion continuum. Racial and ethnic disparities in the use of force are of national concern and the LPD may consider working with an experienced research team to ensure that it is collecting the appropriate information on use of force cases and an alyzing the resulting data to its full potential.

ATTACHMENT 1
261

22 VI. References
Alpert Group. (2004). Miami-Dade Police Department Racial Profiling Study. Available at:
http://www.policeforum.org/library/racially-biasedpolicing/supplemental- resources/Alpert_MDPDRacialProfilingStudy%5B1%5D.pdf.

Alpert, G. P., Smith, M. R., & Dunham, R. (2004). Toward a better benchmark: Assessing the Utility of not-at-fault traffic crash data in racial profiling research. Justice Research and Policy, 6(1), 43–69.

Alpert, G. P., Becker, E., Gustafson, M. A., Meister, A. P., Smith, M. R., & Strombom, B. A. (2006). Pedestrian and Motor Vehicle Post-stop Data Analysis Report. Available at:
http://www.analysisgroup.com/AnalysisGroup/uploadedFiles/Publishing/Articles/LAPD_ Data_Analysis_Report_07-5-06.pdf.

Alpert, G. P., Dunham, R., & Smith, M. R. (2007). Investigating racial profiling by the Miami- Dade police department: A multimethod approach. Criminology & Public Policy, 6(1), 25–

56. Ballou v. McElevain, No. 3:19-cv-05002-RBL (9th Cir. Sept. 28, 2021)

Bronner, L. (2020, June 25). Why statistics don’t capture the full extent of the systematic bias in policing. FiveThirtyEight. Available at: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-statistics- dont-capture-the-full-extent-of-the-systemic-bias-in-policing/.

Channin, J., Welsh, M., Nurge, D., & Henry, S. (2016). Traffic Enforcement in San Diego, California: An Analysis of SDPD Vehicle Stops in 2014 and 2015 . San Diego, CA: San Diego State University. Available at:
https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/sdpdvehiclestopsfinal.pdf

COPS. (2016). Collaborative Reform Initiative: An Assessment of the San Francisco Police Department. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Available at: https://riczai-inc.com/Publications/cops-w0817-pub.pdf

Engel, R. S., Frank, J., Tillyer, R., & Klahm, C.F. (2006). Cleveland Division of Police Traffic Stop Data Study: Final Report. Cincinnati, OH: University of Cincinnati.

Submitted to the Cleveland Division of Police, Cleveland, OH.

Engel, R. S., Calnon, J. M., Tillyer, R., Johnson, R., Liu, L., & Wang, X. (2005). Project on ATTACHMENT 1
262

23 Police-citizen Contacts: Year 2 Final Report (May 2003 -April 2004) . Cincinnati, OH:

University of Cincinnati. Submitted to the Commissioner of the Pennsylvania State Police, Harrisburg, PA.

Engel, R. S., Tillyer, R., Cherkauskas, J. C., & Frank, J. (2007). Traffic Stop Data Analysis Study: Year 1 Final Report. Cincinnati, OH: University of Cincinnati. Submitted to the Arizona Department of Public Safety, Phoenix, AZ.

Farrell, A., McDevitt, J., Bailey, L., Andresen, C., & Pierce, I. (2004). Massachusetts Racial and Gender Profiling Final Report. Boston, MA: Institute on Race and Justice, Northeastern University.

Fridell, L. (2004). By the Number: A Guide for Analyzing Race Data from Vehicle Stops.

Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum.

Grogger, J., & Ridgeway, G. (2006). Testing for racial profiling in traffic stops from behind a veil of darkness. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 101(475), 878–887.

Gumbhir, V. K. (2004). Final Report on the Eugene Police Department’s Vehicle Stop Data (2002-2003), Condensed Report. University of Oregon, Submitted to the Eugene Police Department, Eugene, OR.

Hanushek, E. A., & Jackson, J. (1977). Statistical Methods for Social Scientists. New York, NY: Academic Press.

Kalinowski, J., Ross, S. L., Ross, M. B. (2017). Endogenous Driving Behavior in Veil of Darkness Tests for Racial Profiling. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago. Available at:
https://econresearch.uchicago.edu/sites/econresearch.uchicago.edu/files/Kalinowski_Ross _Ross_2017_driving-veil-darkness_0.pdf

Kochel, T.R., Wilson, D.B., & Mastrofski, (2011) Effect of suspect race on officers’ arrest decisions. Criminology, 49(2), 473-512.

Lovrich, N. P., Gaffney, M. J., Mosher, C. C., Pratt, T. C., & Pickerill, M. J. (2007). Results of the Monitoring of WSP Traffic Stops for Biased Policing. Pullman, WA: Division of Governmental Studies and Services, Washington State University.

Meehan, A. J., & Ponder, M. C. (2002). How roadway composition matters in analyzing police data on racial profiling. Police Quarterly, 5, 306-333.

ATTACHMENT 1
263

24 Novak, K. J. (2004). Disparity and racial profiling in traffic enforcement. Police Quarterly, 7, 65−96.

Pierson, E., Simoiu, C., Overgoor, J., Corbett-Davies, S., Jenson, D., Shoemaker, A., & Goel, S. (2019). A Large-scale Analysis of Racial Disparities in Police Stops across the United States. Stanford Computational Policy Lab. Available at:
https://openpolicing.stanford.edu/publications/.

Ridgeway, G. (2007). Analysis of Racial Disparities in the New York Police Department’s Stop, Question, and Frisk Practices. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

Ridgeway, G., & MacDonald, J. (2010). Methods for assessing racially biased policing. In S. K.

Rice, & M. D. White (Eds.), Race, Ethnicity, and Policing: New and Essential Readings (pp. 180–204). New York: NYU Press.

Ridgeway, G., & MacDonald, J. M. (2009). Doubly robust internal benchmarking and false discovery rates for detecting racial bias in police stops. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 104: 661-668.

Ritter, J. A., & Bael, D. (2009). Detecting Racial profiling in Minneapolis Traffic Stops: A New Approach. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota. Available at:
http://www.cura.umn.edu/publications/catalog/reporter-39-1-2-1

Rojek, J., Rosenfeld, R., & Decker, S. (2004). The influence of driver's race on traffic stops in Missouri. Police Quarterly, 7: 126−147.

Ross, M. B., Fazzalaro, J., Barone, K., & Kalinowski, J. (2016). State of Connecticut Traffic Stop Data Analysis and Findings, 2014 –15. Racial Profiling Prohibition Project.

Connecticut State Legislature. New Britain, CT: Central Connecticut State University.

Available at:
https://www.ccsu.edu/imrp/Publicatons/Files/May%202016%20Connecticut%20Racial% 20Profiling%20Report.pdf

Smith, M.R., Tillyer, R., Lloyd., C. & Petrocelli, M (2021) Benchmarking disparities in police stops: A comparative application of 2 nd and 3rd generation techniques. Justice Quarterly, 38(3): 513-536.

Smith, M. R., & Petrocelli, M. (2001). Racial profiling? A multivariate analysis of police traffic ATTACHMENT 1
264

25 stop data. Police Quarterly, 4: 4−27.

Taniguchi, T., Hendrix, J., Aagaard, B., Strom, K., Levin-Rector, A., & Zimmer, S. (2016). A Test of Racial Disproportionality in Traffic Stops Conducted by the Raleigh Police Department. Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International. Available at:
https://www.rti.org/sites/default/files/resources/rti-publication-file-5d8618d6-1723-45ad- 96f8-33c08ed5ebd3.pdf

Tillyer, R., Engel, R. S., & Cherkauskas, J. C. (2010). Best practices in vehicle stop data collection and analysis. Policing, 33: 69-92.

Tillyer, R. & Engel, R.S. (2013) The impact of drivers’ race, gender, and age during traffic stops:

Assessing interact ion terms and the social conditioning model. Crime & Delinquency , 59(3): 369-395.

United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456 (1996).

Weisburd, D., & Britt, C. (2004). Statistics in Criminal Justice (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA.:

Thomson and Wadsworth.

Withrow, B. L. (2004). Race-based policing: A descriptive analysis of the Wichita stop study.

Police Practice and Research, 5: 223−240.

Withrow, B. L., & Williams, H. (2015). Proposing a benchmark based on vehicle collision data In racial profiling research. Justice Review, 40: 449–469.

Withrow, B. L., McLean, S. J., & Wheeler, A. P. (2012). Testing for racial Profiling with the veil-of-darkness method. Police Quarterly, 15(1): 92–111.

ATTACHMENT 1
265

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 10.1

DATE:

February 14, 2022
TO:

Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:

Marie Weber, Acting Administrative Services Director
SUBJECT:

Supplemental materials received prior to the meeting.

RECOMMENDED ACTION

SUMMARY
These materials were posted online and made available to the public at the same time that they were distributed to the City Council.

6.1 Third Public Hearing to receive an update on redistricting efforts to date, receive public input on the composition of City Council voting district draft maps prepared by the City's demographer, and provide direction to the City's demographer for revisions of the draft maps to be considered at the fourth public hearing

Materials: Public Comments Received

Material: PowerPoint Presentation

7.2 Final report on the Livermore Police Department traffic stop and arrest data project as part of the Equity and Inclusion Subcommittee

Material: PowerPoint Presentation

8.0 Council Committee Reports and Matters Initiated by City Manager, City Attorney, Staff, Council Members.

Material: Council Members' Reports.

DISCUSSION

ATTACHMENTS

266

1. Supplemental Materials

Prepared by: Debbie Elam
Deputy City Clerk

Approved by:
____________________________________
Marc Roberts
City Manager
Fiscal Review by:
____________________________________
Bhavna Chaudhary
City Treasurer/Finance Manager

267
From: Yolanda Fintschenko
To: redistricting
Subject: my redistricting map
Date: Friday, January 28, 2022 3:18:22 PM
Attachments: Livermore-COI-print-packet-v1b-YF.docx
Thank you for reaching out to the community for this information. Best, Yolanda Item 6.1
Public Comment Received
268
1) Name your Community: _________________________Girls Names Streets___________________________________________________

2) Draw your Community on the Map:

3) Describe your Community (Specific boundaries. What makes it a community? Why should it be kept together?):

_________Our boundaries are Patterson Pass Between Vasco and Loyola south to Tesla road to just north of Patterson Pass. What makes us a community is shared common resources like Arroyo Seco Elementary school and park bus stops, the Livermore Community Center and park, that elementary school, Bruno Canziani park, access to the trail that goes to Tesla and beyond, the vineyard proximity, and the access to mass transit (ACE train), and proximity to the two national labs. _We should be kept together because we are similarly affected by traffic, crime, school and park access, mass transit access, and what happens to the labs and the warehouse area across from the labs on Vasco north of East Avenue. ____________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

4) Tell us about Yourself (optional):

Name: __Yolanda Fintschenko_____________________________ Email: ___ Item 6.1
Public Comment Received
269
/LYHUPRUH&LW\5HGLVWULFWLQJ
.\RNR7DND\DPD
7RZKRPLWPD\FRQFHUQ
,VXEPLWWHGPDSV
793DQG
,ISRVVLEOH,ZRXOGOLNHWRZLWKGUDZ ,GUHZWKHPEHIRUHZRUNLQJRQP\RZQ &RPPXQLW\RI,QWHUHVW6RXWK'RZQWRZQ
)LUVW,KRSH\RXDUHUHFHLYLQJPRUH&RPPXQLW\RI,QWHUHVW´ &2,
WKDQWKRVHSRVWHGRQWKHZHEVLWH
$³FRPPXQLW\RILQWHUHVW´LVGHILQHGDVDSRSXODWLRQWKDWVKDUHVFRPPRQVRFLDORUHFRQRPLFLQWHUHVWVWKDW VKRXOGEHLQFOXGHGZLWKLQDVLQJOHGLVWULFWIRUSXUSRVHVRILWVHIIHFWLYHDQGIDLUUHSUHVHQWDWLRQ&RPPXQLWLHVRI LQWHUHVWGRQRWLQFOXGHUHODWLRQVKLSVZLWKSROLWLFDOSDUWLHVLQFXPEHQWVRUSROLWLFDOFDQGLGDWHV ,WLVUHVLGHQWV
YRLFHDQGRQO\ZD\WROHDUQKRZUHVLGHQWVVHHWKHLUQHLJKERUKRRGV<RXFDQEDODQFHWKHSRSXODWLRQDQG VHHLIGLVWULFWVDUHFRQWLJXRXVEXW\RXZLOOQHYHUNQRZHYHU\FRUQHURIFLW\DQGKRZUHVLGHQWVLGHQWLI\WKHPVHOYHVLQWKHLU QHLJKERUKRRGVXQOHVVZHKDYH&2,V
,EHOLHYHVXFFHVVRIUHGLVWULFWLQJRXWUHDFKFDQEHHYDOXDWHGE\KRZPDQ\&2,VZHUHVXEPLWWHG,NQRZLWLVGLIILFXOWIRU, RUJDQL]HGFRXQW\RXWUHDFKODVW\HDUDQGWKHFRXQW\UHFHLYHGOHVVWKDQ&2,PDSVDQGZHKDGRYHURUJDQL]DWLRQV DQGPDQ\YROXQWHHUVZRUNLQJRQRXWUHDFKZLWKWKHFRXQW\VWDII ,ZDVVXUSULVHGWRKHDUWKHGHDGOLQHLV-DQDWSPDQG WKHUHZDVQRKHDULQJIRU&2,
WKHRQOLQHWRROVGLG
QRWDVNZKRVXEPLWWHGDQGZK\WKHOLQHVZHUHGUDZQ7KHQDPHVGRQRWQHHGWREHSXEOLVKHGEXWLWLVLPSRUWDQWWRNQRZ ZKRLVSDUWLFLSDWLQJ
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
5HVSHFW(PSRZHU,QFOXGH2UJDQL]H
Item 6.1
Public Comment Recevied
270

30 7ULSHSL6PLWK $VVRFLDWHV0DLO/LYHUPRUH&LW\5HGLVWULFWLQJ KWWSV
PDLOJRRJOHFRPPDLOX"LN EIG YLHZ SW VHDUFK DOO SHUPPVJLG PVJI$ VLPSO PVJI$

.\RNR7DND\DPD
&RPPXQLW\2UJDQL]HU
VKHKHU

$ODPHGD&RXQW\&RDOLWLRQIRU)DLU5HGLVWULFWLQJ)DFHERRN,QVWDJUDP 0RPV$JDLQVW9DSLQJ
$OO2Q7KH/LQH2)$(DVW%D\&HQWUDO)DFHERRN#2)$B(%&
/LYHUPRUH,QGLYLVLEOH)%3DJH)%*URXS#OLYHUPRUHLQGLY Item 6.1
Public Comment Recevied
271
1 Debbie Elam
From: Alan Burnham
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2022 6:23 PM
To: Cityclerk - Livermore
Subject: New Map
Exercise Caution: This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Please replace my previous message with this message. I have clarified a few issues. Thank you.

Alan
Dear City Clerk,
I could not find a place to connect my new map to my reasons for creating it, so I am sending that information directly to you.

After seeing other maps and hearing the discussion thereof, I realized that the largest defect of the existing maps is that the north Livermore downtown neighborhood is split between districts 1, 2, and

3. School Districts are an important influence on forming communities of interest, at least from my experience when our children were growing up. I suspect that Junction Avenue school, for example, is not in the same district of most of its attendees. In addition, the railroad tracks in east Livermore are a more rational dividing line between Districts 2 and 3 than First Street and I580. The tracks are just as much of a barrier to walking and biking as a freeway. I live in District 3 and have more friends in and a much stronger affiliation with the South Livermore downtown neighborhood. I walk through it frequently on my way to downtown, and I often chat with neighbors. It is in the Livermore High school district with my neighborhood, and we gained friends through our children's friends. Also, the South Item 6.1
Public Comment Received
272
2 Livermore neighborhood seems to have little in common with the various north Livermore neighborhoods, particularly different schools. By making a few swaps of territory, I was able to get the north Livermore downtown neighborhood in the same district. Finally, the two districts with the smallest populations are the ones more likely to increase in population due to development, so the variance will decrease with time, not increase.

Alan Burnham

Item 6.1
Public Comment Received
273

Item 6.1
Public Comment Received
274

Item 6.1
Public Comment Received
275

Item 6.1
Public Comment Received
276

Item 6.1
Public Comment Received
277
February 13, 2022
To: Livermore City Council
From: Alan Burnham
Over the past month, I created several potential zoning maps, two of which were formally submitted. I focused on our community of interest and achieving an acceptable population variance. Five specific considerations were (a) don’t start from scratch and disenfranchise too many voters (b) those of us close to East Avenue School are connected more to the south downtown neighborhood than is North Livermore, given that we walk through it frequently going downtown, (c) the railroad tracks provide a more appropriate boundary than First Street between districts 2 and 3 given the limited traversal by walking and bicycling, (d) the current district map inappropriately divides the north downtown community along Livermore Ave, and (e) Districts 1 and 2 are where most future growth will occur, so if anything should have lower population in districts drawn now.

Per Council discussion, my second submitted version (104852) placed more emphasis on Communities of Interest than equivalent populations. My District 3 had the largest population, but I thought it was appropriate to maintain community connections. The demographer’s Red Plan is similar 104852, except the 1-3 boundary is moved from to Fourth street to reduce the population variance. I think it is not the best alternative to put all of downtown in District 1.

Alternatives to that move are (a) to move the District 4-3 boundary from Robertson Park and the creek to College Avenue or (b) to move the condos NW of LHS to District 3 along with moving the line in my plan westward to put the homes east of Junction School in District 2. The former is consistent with a Community of Interest map submitted by a South Livermore Downtown resident, Item 6.1
Public Comment Received
278

and the latter is along the lines of another Community of Interest map submitted from the North Livermore downtown neighborhood. Note that the line here is not long Junction Ave as in many plans and more similar to my plan 104852.

I offer a modification of my plan that I suspect will reduce the variance to below that of the current districts and allow the variance to decrease with time as North Livermore grows.

Item 6.1
Public Comment Received
279
An expanded view of the condos and a few houses moved to District 2 follows.

An alternative boundary along Junction Avenue is shown by the blue dashed line. Which district Junction school itself is in probably makes no practical difference. More important is what community of interest the apartment dwellers bounded by Portola, Livermore Ave, and Junction Ave might associate with. Having those dwellings in District 2 makes it more contiguous and reduces the variance between Districts 1 and 2. Unfortunately, the map drawing program is no longer available on the City website, so I cannot do a quantitative analysis.

I conclude that there is no such thing as a perfect boundary. The Railroad tracks east of downtown and Stanley Boulevard west of town are about as good as it gets. The best intersections among the Districts in the downtown area are more debatable, but having all or most districts cover part of the downtown is highly desirable in my view in order to encourage overall Livermore cohesiveness.

Item 6.1
Public Comment Received
280
110962
Item 6.1
Public Comment Received
281
Item 6.1
Public Comment Received
282

$0 'LVWULFWU
KWWSV
GLVWULFWURUJ&2,
ʯ
-
.*!
)/ - ./

*0/#
$1 -(*-
# . /
$'.
- 0+
/

0/*(
/$

''4

#$.
*((0)$/4$.+ *+' 2#*.

#$'- )
// )*-
// ) /#
/2* ' ( )/
-4.
#**'.
¦

.
#**'($' .
#**'
)#$"#
.
#**'*)/#$..$ *!/*2)

0. /# +
-&.
)/#
$& +
/#

)(
)42 - ( (
-.
/*)
+*$)/*-
)*/# -*!/# .2$(
-
2$)"
/

4 -. 1
'0
/$*)
ʼ
*0/#
$1 -(*-
ʼ

0 &40+ -(
-& /

*0/- $./-$
/$)"

*0//#
/

1 +'
)
$./-$
/-#*( +
"
2+'
)
-$)/²
3+*-/$./-$
/-¦

3+*-/
+'
)
.
3+*-/
+'
)
. *

3+*-/
..$")( )/
.¬/# . 0)$/.

*0/$(+*-/² 3+*-/*+/$*).
108607
Item 6.1
Public Comment Received
283

$0 'LVWULFWU
KWWSV
GLVWULFWURUJ&2,
*((0)$/$ .*!
)/ - ./
*0/#
$1 -(*-
#$.
*((0)$/4$.+ *+' 2#*.
#$'- )
// )*-
// ) /# /2* ' ( )/
-4.
#**'.
¦
.
#**'($' .
#**'
)#$"#.
#**'*)/#$..$
*!/*2) 0. /# +
-&.
)/#
$& +
/#
)(
)42 - ( (
-.
/*) +*$)/*-
)*/# -*!/# .2$(
'0
.' )

) 0-. -4$.
)*/# -
+*+0'
-"
/# -$)"+'

(+*-/
)/'

0 &40+ -(
-& /
-
)

$"#
#**'
($/#' ( )/
-4
) )#
''$'
#**'
4

(*- -*1
-&

$& +
/#
Item 6.1
Public Comment Received
284

$0 'LVWULFWU
KWWSV
GLVWULFWURUJ&2,
' )

) 0-. -4

$1 -(*-
'' 42$(| ))$.'0

0). /' ( )/
-4
#**'

3
-
-&

*'(
-&

&$''$
(.
-&
'
.0-
.'
)
-&

* $
# ''
¦

#**'

$& +
/#
0). /2$('0

Item 6.1
Public Comment Received
285

30 'LVWULFWU
KWWSV
GLVWULFWURUJHGLW"HYHQW OLYHUPRUH
-*
-40/' /
)/.)'4/*-
$)
*)
$
-
-4

0)
/$*)
¦

#**'

-$'4)1 ' ( )/
-4
#**'
Item 6.1
Public Comment Received
286
110505
Item 6.1
Public Comment Received
287
Item 6.1
Public Comment Received
288
1 Report from the Director of Emergency Services
regarding the COVID-19 emergency
February 14, 2022
Presented by Christine Martin, Assistant City Manager
• TESTING:

County 7-day percentage positive tests for February 12 was 5.3% Dow
n from January 21 when it was 17.1%
• HOSPITALIZATION S:

County
7-day average of new COVID admissions and confirmed
diagnoses
on February 12 was 65
Down from January 21 when it was 115
• C ASES:

Livermore 7-day
average of daily new cases per 100k
•
February 5: ~58; January 21: ~168
County 7-day average of daily new cases per 100k
• February 5: ~53; January 21: ~174
Updates Since We Last Met
1 2
Item 7.1
PowerPoint Presentation
289
2 February 13 Vaccine Clinic at the Sunday
Farmers Market
• Administered 103 doses of Pfizer 12+
• Administered 67 doses of
Pfizer
Pediatric
•
Alameda County Vaccine Incentive
Program:
56 gift cards to youth ages 5-
17 who received 1st or 2nd dose
Updates Since We Last Met
• Mask Mandate
• Alameda County aligns with State of California to lift universal mask
requirements for vaccinated people for
most
indoors public settings beginning February 16.
• Unvaccinated people over the age of two must continue to
mask in all indoor public settings.
•
Indoor masking still required for everyone, regardless of vaccination status,
in public transportation; health care
settings; congregate
settings such as correctional
facilities
and homeless shelters; long-term care
facilities; and
in K-12 schools and childcare settings.
• Masks strongly recommended to be worn in indoor
settings as an ef
fective tool to prevent the spread of the
vir
us.

Updates Since We Last Met
3 4
Item 7.1
PowerPoint Presentation
290
3 Local Testing Sites
• Mobile Testing Bus at Robert Livermore
Community
Center parking lot off Loyola Way
• Started Jan. 28 and operates 7am-7pm every
Friday
• Total tests 254
• Total positive tests 94
•
Total negative 168
• Alameda County free community testing site at Axis Community Health (5925 W. Las Positas Blvd.,
Pleasanton)
• Stanford Health Care – ValleyCare Community Testing (1111 E. Stanley Blvd., Livermore)
•
Las Positas College Parking Lot P operated by CityHealth Urgent Care (3000 Campus Hill Dr
., Livermore)
Vaccination Data
Pop. At Least
One Dose
Fully
Vaccinated
Fully Vaccinated
with Booster
Dose
Livermore 88,961 83.1% 77.0% 56.8%
Alameda
County 1,648,969 88.7% 82.2% 59.2%
Note: sourced from the County’s COVID data site https://covid-19.acgov.org/data • Standing Clinics:
• Stanford Health Care – ValleyCare (1133 E. Stanley Blvd.) • Local pharmacies (CVS, Walgreens, Safeway, Rite Aid, etc.) 5 6
Item 7.1
PowerPoint Presentation
291
4 Alameda County Cases by Vaccination Status
Note: sourced from the County’s COVID data site https://covid-19.acgov.org/data 7-Day Rolling Avg of Daily New COVID-19 Cases
per 100,000 Population
1/5/2022 to 2/5/2022
Note: sourced from the County’s Data Sharing Initiative https://data.acgov.org/ Alameda County Livermore
7 8
Item 7.1
PowerPoint Presentation
292
5 Total Daily Hospitalizations Countywide
Note: sourced from the County’s COVID data site https://covid-19.acgov.org/data Questions?
9 10
Item 7.1
PowerPoint Presentation
293
&2#.*,.#,)&"#
#-!.0*#+0

.!$$&"0,-.,'#"0
&+!)#-,.0

"

"
!

1.>A->E

%>;61/@'/;<1D-95:1/;:@-/@?C5@4@41<A.85/0A>5:3@>-225/?@;<?@;.1@@1> A:01>?@-:0@41>-/5-8 1@4:5//;9<;?5@5;:;2@41?11:/;A:@1>?-:0@415> ;A@/;91?
185B1>-.81?

5?/A??.1?@<>-/@5/1?5:0-@--:-8E?5?;2<;85/1/5B585-:1:/;A:@1>?G

&1B51C-:0-??1??/A>>1:@@>-225/?@;<0-@-/;881/@5;:<>;@;/;8?<>;B501 >1/;991:0-@5;:?-?:11010G

:-8EF1>1/1:@@>-225/?@;<0-@-@;501:@52E@41>-/5-8 1@4:5//;9<;?5@5;:;2 @4;?11:/;A:@1>?-:0/;9<->1-3-5:?@-<<>;<>5-@1.1:/49->7? :-8EF1>1/1:@!%0-@-@;501:@52E2-/@;>?-??;/5-@10C5@4->>1?@ Item 7.2
PowerPoint Presentation
294

%->@
:-8EF1>1/1:@@>-225/?@;<0-@-@;501:@52E@41>-/5-8 1@4:5//;9<;?5@5;: ;2@4;?11:/;A:@1>?-:0/;9<->1-3-5:?@-<<>;<>5-@1.1:/49->7? +14-B1:;5:2;>9-@5;:;:?5@A-@5;:?5:C45/4-:;225/1>/;A804-B1?@;<<10 -/5B585-:.A@@41:050:;@(4A?@4171E/4-881:315?@;501:@52E-/;9<->5?;: >121>>10@;-?-.1:/49->7
1E/;:?501>-@5;:+4-@5?@41>5?7;2.15:3?@;<<102;>-?<1/525//5B585-: 3>;A<
3;;0.1:/49->7>1281/@??@;<<5:3>5?7-??A95:3:;.5-?.E-?75:3@41 2;88;C5:3=A1?@5;:?+41>1@41E0>5B1+41:@41E0>5B1 ;C;2@1:@41E
0>5B1+4-@@41E0>5B1
;C@41E0>5B1+4;@41E->1

(C;.1:/49->7?C1>1A?10-?<>;D51?2;>0>5B5:3-:0@>-225/8-CB5;8-@5:3 <;<A8-@5;:?51>5?7;2.15:3?@;<<105:!5B1>9;>1

HB158;20->7:1??H*$-:-8E?5?1D-95:1005221>1:/1?5:?@;<>-@1? ;2:;:+45@1-:0+45@10>5B1>?0A>5:3@410-E@591/;9<->10@;@41 :534@@591

(>-225//>-?40-@-
- #;@-@2-A8@0>5B1>??1>B5:3-?-:1?@59-@1;2@410>5B5:3<;<A8-@5;: . @2-A8@0>5B1>??1>B5:3-?-:1?@59-@1;2@4;?1C4;B5;8-@1@41 @>-225/8-C?
Item 7.2
PowerPoint Presentation
295

+4E:;@A?11:?A?<;<A8-@5;:-?-.1:/49->7
(4171E<>;.8195?@412-A8@E-??A9<@5;:@4-@@41>1?501:@5-8<;<A8-@5;: <;??1??1?-:1=A-881B18;2>5?72;>.15:3?@;<<10.E@41<;85/1

5B585-:?B->E5:@415>8571854;;0;2/;:@-/@51>5?7.-?10;:-:A9.1> ;22-/@;>?5:/8A05:3@415>;C:0>5B5:3.14-B5;>5152@41E0>5B14;C @41E0>5B1C41:@41E0>5B1C4-@@41E0>5B11@/

(45?.1:/49->7-??A91?@4-@;:8E@41>1?501:@5-8<;<A8-@5;:@4-@85B1?5: -<->@5/A8->->1-0>5B1?5:@4-@->1-
(41?1@C;2-/@;>?510>5B5:3.14-B5;>;2>1?501:@?-:0@41/>;?? 6A>5?05/@5;:-8@>-B18;2:;:>1?501:@0>5B1>?5:-005@5;:@;;@41>?>1:01>@45? -:5:-<<>;<>5-@1.1:/49->7
(41A?1;21:?A?0-@--?-8135@59-@1?/51:@525/.1:/49->74-?.11:>161/@10 .E/;:@19<;>->E?/4;8->?-:01D<1>@?

%->@

:-8EF1>1/1:@!%0-@-@;501:@52E2-/@;>?-??;/5-@10C5@4->>1?@ %;85/1/5B585-:1:/;A:@1>?5:5@5-@10.E;225/1>?51@>-225/-:0<101?@>5-: ?@;<?C1>1A?105:@45?-:-8E?5?
1?/>5<@5B1?@-@5?@5/?01?/>5.1@411:/;A:@1>?

:21>1:@5-8?@-@5?@5/?01@1>95:1C41@41>-<->@5/A8->/5B585-:3>;A<5?9;>1;> 81??85718E@;>1/15B1-?<1/525/;A@/;91C4581/;:?501>5:3-88;@41>>181B-:@ /4->-/@1>5?@5/?
%>1B5;A?>1?1->/4?A331?@??;911B501:/12;>:;:+45@13>;A<?@;.1 ->>1?@10-@45341>>-@1?C4581;@41>?@A051?<>;B501:;1B501:/1;2- >18-@5;:?45<
"-81/5B585-:?->1/;:?5?@1:@8E2;A:0@;.1->>1?@10-@45341>>-@1? Item 7.2
PowerPoint Presentation
296

!%-/@5B5@E.1@C11:-:A->E

-:0<>58

C-?-:-8EF10
%->@

!%@>-225/?@;<?C1>1-:-8EF10
o'@;<?1:/49->7
#$*-:0@@1?@?2;>?@-@5?@5/-8?53:525/-:/1
o'@;<?1:/49->7
5?<>;<;>@5;:-85@E&-@5;?&/;9<->1?@;<<5:3
>-@1?.1@C11:+45@1-:0:;:+45@13>;A<?
o>-@1-.;B1

5:05/-@1?@4-@@413>;A<;25:@1>1?@1D<1>51:/10>-@1 ;2?@;<?-@-:181B-@10>-@1/;9<->10@;+45@10>5B1>?
%->@

<;85/1/5B585-:1:/;A:@1>?C1>1-:-8EF10
o"A8@5B->5-@19;018?C1>11?@59-@10@;501:@52E2-/@;>?511:/;A:@1> /5B585-:;225/1>-:0/;:@1D@A-8B->5-.81?-??;/5-@10C5@4@418571854;;0;2 -:->>1?@
o&1?A8@?501:@52EB->5-.81?@4-@1:4-:/1;>>10A/1@418571854;;0;2-: ->>1?@C4581?59A8@-:1;A?8E/;:?501>5:3-88;@41>2-/@;>?

0,-/
#+"%*!.(
*
#
,()

"#,
%

$
#+)
'#

+#
'
,"*
*
#
,()

.,#&

#!",,#&

"#,

%

$

#+)
'#

+#
'
,"*

Item 7.2
PowerPoint Presentation
297

0,-/
#+"%*!.(
*
#
,()

,
-%,
*
+"+

(,,

-%,
*
+"+

"#,

%

$

#+)
'#

+#
'

,"*

*
#
,()

,
-%,*
+"+

(,,
-%,*
+"+

,
-%,

(,,

-%,

"#,

%

$

#+)
'#

+#
'

,"*

*
#
,()

,
-%,
*
+"+

(,,

-%,
*
+"+

,
-%,

(,,

-%,

"#,

%

$

#+)
'#

+#
'

,"*

..#/0

!
!

"
!

+
% (

/-$'

#

-#($
$-/
#$-

&

%
$,*
($

,$
(
-# +

&

( +

+,)!"

!#

-#($
$-/
#$-

&

%

$,*
($

,$
(

-# +

&

"

+,)!.* +$ (

-+)&!!$
+

!$!"

$)& (-+$'
-

+)* +-/+$'
-

Item 7.2
PowerPoint Presentation
298

..#/0
";018

#;?@-@5?@5/-805221>1:/1.1@C11:+45@1
-:08-/7/5B585-:?

5?<-:5/?5-:-:0$@41>3>;A<?
C1>1-8881??85718E@;.1->>1?@10
/;9<->10@;+45@1/5B585-:?

-/@;>?@4-@
:/>1-?10@41!571854;;0;2
>>1?@
"-81/5B585-:?
5B585-:?A:01>@41-31;2

$225/1>?C5@481??1D<1>51:/1
$225/1>?-??53:10@;%-@>;8

:/501:@?0A>5:30-E@591
";018

!->318E@41?-91>1?A8@?-?";018

C5@4@4>111D/1<@5;:?

#;05221>1:/1.1@C11:

5?<-:5/-:0+45@1/5B585-:?

#;05221>1:/1.1@C11:
0-E@591-:0:534@@591
5:/501:@?

>1-?C5@445341>81B18?;2
B5;81:@/>5911D<1>51:/10
45341>->>1?@>-@1?

1E
5:05:3?
(41>1?A8@?2>;9@41@C;.1:/49->7-:-8E?1?050:;@>1B1-8-<-@@1>:;2 >-/5-8 1@4:5/05?<->5@E5:@>-225/?@;<?1D<1>51:/10.E:;:+45@10>5B1>? o(41*$-:-8E?5?2;A:0:;?@-@5?@5/-88E?53:525/-:@05221>1:/1?5:@41 >-@1?-@C45/4:;:+45@10>5B1>?C1>1?@;<<105:!5B1>9;>10A>5:3@41 0-E/;9<->10@;-@:534@
o(41@>-225//>-?4.1:/49->7-:-8E?5?2;A:0?8534@8E181B-@10>5?7?2;> ?@;<?;2+45@1-:08-/70>5B1>?A?5:3.;@4@E<1;2/>-?40-@--:0- ?8534@8E181B-@10>5?72;>?@;<?;28-/70>5B1>?>18-@5B1@;+45@10>5B1>? :;@-@2-A8@.1:/49->7;:8E
(-71:@;31@41>@41@C;.1:/49->7-:-8E?1?0;:;@?4;C-/;:?5?@1:@<-@@1>: ;205?<->5@E5:?@;<?.-?10;:0>5B1>>-/1;>1@4:5/5@E :;@41>C;>0?@41
!%1:3-3105:@>-225/?@;<?@4-@8->318E;//A>>105:01<1:01:@2>;9@41 5:28A1:/1;2/5B585-:>-/1 1@4:5/5@E
Item 7.2
PowerPoint Presentation
299

1E
5:05:3?
(41>1?A8@?;2@41->>1?@-:-8E?1?0;:;@>1B1-8-<-@@1>:;2>-/5-805?<->5@E5: <;85/1;A@/;91?@4-@05?-0B-:@-31?:;:+45@1/5B585-:?5:@415@E;2 !5B1>9;>1

:?A9:;/81->8E501:@525-.81;>/;:/1>:5:3<-@@1>:;2>-/5-8 1@4:5/05?<->5@E C-?2;A:05:@411:/;A:@1>?@4-@@;;7<8-/15:!5B1>9;>1;B1>- 9;:@4
<1>5;00A>5:3

1#/0&,+/
,**#+0/
(4125:05:3?-:0>1/;991:0-@5;:?<>1?1:@10C5@45:@45?>1<;>@->1@4;?1;2@41-A@4;>? -:00;:;@:1/1??->58E>1281/@@41;225/5-8<;?5@5;:?;>;<5:5;:?;2@415@E;2!5B1>9;>1 ;>@41!5B1>9;>1%;85/11<->@91:@(41-A@4;>?C5?4@;@4-:74512,;A:3!@ &1E:;80?-:0919.1>?;2@41!5B1>9;>1%;85/11<->@91:@C4;<>;B50100-@--:0 -??5?@10C5@4@41<>;61/@

A>@41>=A1?@5;:?/-:.105>1/@10@;>&;.(588E1>>;.@588E1>A@?-10A 1<->@91:@;2>595:;8;3E>595:-8A?@5/1
):5B1>?5@E;2(1D-?-@'-::@;:5;)('
Item 7.2
PowerPoint Presentation
300
Council Member
Committee
Meeting Date Committee Agenda Link Meeting Type
Mayor Woerner 1/25/2022 FIRE JPA Board Meeting
Mayor Woerner 1/26/2022 Livermore Chamber of Commerce N/A Board Meeting Mayor Woerner 1/27/2022 Alameda County Transporation Committee https://www.alamedactc.org/get‐
involved/upcoming‐meetings/ Committee Meeting
Mayor Woerner 1/28/2022 East Bay Regional Communications System Authority http://www.ebrcsa.org/meetings.page Board Meeting Mayor Woerner 2/2/2022 Alameda County Health Care Servcies Agency Elected Officials COVID Update Mayor Woerner 2/3/2022 General Plan Vision Statement Subcommittee Mayor Woerner 2/7/2022 FIRE JPA
Board Meeting w/ Supervisors
MIley and Haubert
Mayor Woerner 2/9/2022 Tri Valley San Joaquin Regional Rail Authority https://www.valleylinkrail.com/valleylink‐project Board Meeting Mayor Woerner 2/9/2022 Alameda County Mayors Homeless Working Group Meeting Mayor Woerner 2/9/2022 Alameda County Mayors Conference https://www.alamedacountymayorsconference.org/
agenda‐information/ Conference Meeting
Mayor Woerner 2/14/2022 Alameda County Transporation Committee https://www.alamedactc.org/get‐
involved/upcoming‐meetings/ Committee Meeting
Item 8.0
Council Members' Reports
301
Council Member
Committee
Meeting
Date Committee Agenda Link Meeting Type Committee Report: Summary Vice Mayor Bonanno 2/1/2022 LLNL/CoL Working Group Working Group held quarterly LLNL and CoL senior leaders address topics and
share updates of mutual interest.

Vice Mayor Bonanno 2/7/2022 Livermore ‐Amador Valley Transit Authority https://www.wheelsbus.com/wp‐
content/uploads/2021/06/BOD‐020722_Files‐for‐
Website.pdf Board Meeting
Board approved LAVTA staff to proceed with
the development of the Zero‐Emission Bus
(ZEB)
Vice Mayor Bonanno Chamber of Commerce Swearing‐in of 2022 Board Item 8.0
Council Members' Reports
302
Council Member
Committee
Meeting Date Committee Meeting Type
Council Member Carling 1/26/2022 Stop Waste board meeting Council Member Carling 1/27/2022 League of California Cities East Bay Division Council Member Carling 2/10/2022 Stop Waste recycling board Item 8.0
Council Members' Reports
303
Council Member
Committee
Meeting
Date Committee Agenda Link Meeting Type Committee Report: Summary Council Member Munro 1/27/2022 League of California Cities East Bay Division Division Meeting Looked at the 2022 Action Agenda which includes
advocating for Supply and affordability of housing,
Investing in infrastructure, Homeless prevention and
mitigation, Ways to manage climate change impacts:
preparedness, resiliency, recovery.

Presentation on the challenges and results of redistricting.

Council Member Munro 2/2/2022
East Bay Community Choice Energy Joint Powers
Authority
https://ebce.org/meetings/marketing‐
regulatory‐legislative‐subcommittee‐
meeting‐2‐2‐22/
Marketing, Regulatory and
Legislative Subcommittee
Meeting
Council Member Munro 2/2/2022 Livermore Cultural Arts Council Board Meeting Strategic Planning Committee Report and Approval of
new Mission/Vision Statement
Presentation on Engaging our Youth through Internships
by Anu Suresh, Fremont Cultural Arts Council
Council Member Munro 2/10/2022 Tri‐Valley Cities Council Legislative Reports by Andres Ramirez of Townsend Public Affairs, including a report on the Mayors' DC advocacy
trip, and Sam Caygill of League of California Cities.

Presentation by Rick Shumway on the Tri‐Valley's need for a Level III trauma center.

Council Member Munro 2/11/2022
LOCC: Housing, Community, and Economic
Development Committee Policy Committee
Members from across the state introduced themselves
and gave priorities. These were summarized as:

1.Ongoing ﬁnancial support for housing, simplifying
process for funding, ensuring adequate infrastructure,
ensuring appropriate use of CEQA or other means to
throw up roadblocks.
304
City of Livermore
Zoom Interpretation Instructions

Simultaneous English/Spanish and Spanish/English interpretation will be provided during the public hearing item 6.1 titled “7:05 P.M. - Third Public Hearing to receive an update on redistricting efforts to date, receive public input on the composition of City Council voting district draft maps prepared by the City's demographer, and provide direction to the City's demographer for revisions of the draft maps to be considered at the fourth public hearing.” Please select the language you want to follow the public hearing in from the interpretation menu at the bottom of your Zoom screen.

● LOCATE THE INTERPRETATION ICON – it is the globe-shaped icon on the bottom right of your screen
● SELECT either English or Spanish
● SELECT Mute Original Audio

To provide Public Comment, click the “raise hand” button on Zoom and you will be called upon to speak. If you are joining us by phone, you can raise your hand by dialing *9. Once you’re called on to speak, you will be unmuted at that time so you can share your comments.

All participants, in both the English and Spanish Zoom channels, will have the opportunity to provide Public Comment. Meeting participants in the Spanish Zoom channel may ask their question in Spanish to the Spanish-speaking interpreter who will then relay the question to the English channel.

Habrá interpretación simultánea de inglés/español y español/inglés durante el punto 6.1 de la audiencia pública titulada “7:05 P.M. - Tercera Audiencia Pública para recibir una actualización sobre los esfuerzos de redistribución de distritos hasta la fecha, recibir comentarios del público sobre la composición de los mapas preliminares de los distritos electorales del Concejo Municipal preparados por el demógrafo de la Ciudad, y brindar orientación al demógrafo de la Ciudad para que las revisiones de los mapas preliminares se consideren en la cuarta audiencia pública.” Seleccione el idioma en el que prefiere seguir la audiencia pública en el menú de interpretación en la parte inferior de su pantalla de Zoom.

● LOCALICE EL ÍCONO DE INTERPRETACIÓN – es el icono con forma de globo terráqueo que se encuentra en la parte inferior derecha de su pantalla ● SELECCIONE English (inglés) o Spanish (español)
● SELECCIONE "mute original audio" para silenciar el audio original

Para proporcionar comentarios públicos, haga clic en el botón “levanta la mano” en Zoom y se le pedirá que hable. Si se unirá a nosotros por teléfono, puede levantar la mano marcando *9. Una vez que se le llame para hablar, encenderán tu micrófono para que pueda compartir sus comentarios.

Todos los participantes, tanto en los canales de Zoom en inglés como en español, tendrán la oportunidad de proporcionar comentarios públicos. Los participantes de la reunión en el canal de español pueden hacer su pregunta en español al intérprete, quien luego transmitirá la pregunta al canal en inglés.

305

Livermore City CouncilFebruary 14, 2022

Livermore City Council
February 14, 2022