Agenda packet, regular meeting — McFarland City Council, February 19, 2025 (part 3 of 3)

190

7.3.2.4 Disproportionate housing needs with displacement risk Residential displacement may be defined as “the process by which a household is forced to move from its residence or is prevented from moving into a neighborhood that was previously accessible to them because of conditions beyond their control” (UC Berkley Urban Displacement Project). Factors that can trigger residential displacement include redevelopment of previously affordable areas to higher cost units and general increase in housing costs.

Urban Displacement Project’s (UDP) Estimated Displacement Risk (EDR) model for California identifies varying levels of displacement risk for low-income renter households in all census tracts in the state from 2015 to 2019. The EDR uses machine learning and household level data to predict displacement.

To create the EDR, UDP joined data from the following multiple sources:
• Household-level data from Data Axle (formerly Infogroup); • Tract-level data from the 2014 and 2019 5-year American Community Survey; • Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) data from various sources compiled by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD); • Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) Origin-Destination Employment Statistics (LODES) data; and
• The Environmental Protection Agency’s Smart Location Database.

UDP uses a machine learning model to determine the variables that most strongly relate to displacement at the household level. Then it uses model parameters to predict tract-level displacement risk statewide while controlling for the region. UDP models displacement risk as the net migration rate of three separate income categories of renter households:

1. Extremely low-income (ELI), which are households with incomes from 0% to 30% of the Area Median Income (AMI);

2. Very low-income (VLI), which are households with incomes from 30% to 50% of AMI; and

3. Low-income (LI), which are households with incomes from 50% to 80% of AMI.

The model classifies census tracts with predicted net losses within these groups as experiencing any of three levels of displacement labeled as elevated, high, or extreme. The output also includes a category, termed “At Risk of Displacement”, in tracts that might be experiencing displacement.

Regional Trends and Comparisons
Figure C-18 shows estimated levels of displacement risk in McFarland and its region. While the full range of displacement risks exist in the larger cities of Fresno and Bakersfield, there are noticeable pockets of areas across the region that have the classification, “at risk of displacement”. This means the model estimates potential displacement or risk of displacement of the given population in the tracts with this classification.

The City of McFarland notably has the classification of “lower displacement risk”. This means the loss of low-income households in neighborhoods within McFarland is likely to be lower than the gain in lowincome households. However, some of the neighborhoods could have small pockets of displacement within their boundaries.

Page 254 of 386 ends

191
Figure C-27: Levels of Displacement Risk in McFarland & Region, 2019 Sources: State HCD AFFH Data Viewer, 2022.

Page 255 of 386 ends

192
Local Trends and Analysis
There are no development proposals in the 2040 General Plan and its housing section that would cause disproportionate housing needs within the jurisdiction or create the risk of displacing segments of the population. On the contrary, development proposals promote a variety of type and cost of housing in the form of mixed-use, ADU, and medium-income housing. The exception to this observation is difficulty in producing sufficient variety of housing to meet the allocation within every affordability group. The RHNA process determines the allocation within affordability groups at the regional level while considering the needs of the City and the larger region within which McFarland resides.

Trends and Patterns
Figures C-19 and C-20 depict a drastic trend over the previous decade in McFarland toward the really low vacancy rates characteristic of its neighboring cities. Review of the two previous housing elements, the 2008 to 2013 Housing Element and the 2015 to 2023 Housing Element, reveals that McFarland has a progressively good record of accomplishment in meeting its allocated housing needs and most consistently in taking care of the need in the lower income groups. The following paragraphs illustrate.

During the 2008-to-2013 period, the City of McFarland did not satisfy its total share of the RHNA allocation particularly in the above moderate-income category even though the City designated sufficient land to accommodate all housing types. The City produced a total of 442 units (or 55%) of the 805 total RHNA allocated units. The majority of the inadequacy was in the above moderate-income category. Inability to produce 318 above moderate-income units (or 40% of total RHNA allocation) was due to factors outside of the City’s control and included the relatively low median family income and the consequent reluctance from the development community at the time to offer the more expensive homes in the City. Notably, however, the City of McFarland exceeded the low-income housing allocation by 146 units (or extra 92% of allocated need). This is noteworthy since predominantly lowerincome households live in the City.

During the 2015-to-2023 period, the City of McFarland satisfied its total share of the RHNA allocation with excess production in the above moderate-income category. Table C-11 is a reproduction of Table A-3a, which presents the City's progress in meeting the quantified objectives in the 2015 to 2023 Housing Element. The City compensated for its inability to produce above moderate-income housing in the previous cycle by producing additional 166 units (or 210% higher number of units) in that category of housing than its RHNA allocation. As Table C-11 shows, Milestone Housing broke ground in 2022 with expected completion of its 80 assisted housing units in 2023. Together with other units constructed during the 2015-to-2023 planning period, units produced fell primarily in the very low and above moderate-income categories, which would fulfill more than the City’s RHNA allocations for the planning period in those two income categories and in so doing also meet the overall allocation total.

The category showing noticeable shortfall in the fifth cycle is the “moderate-income” category (or middle-income housing) which many jurisdictions in California seem to have a hard time fulfilling. The 2020 General Plan includes policies to enhance production of low-income and moderate-income housing through development of mixed-use areas and accessory dwelling units.

Locally, the highest concentration of renter overpayment is seen West of Highway 99, where 60-80% of households are paying more than 30% of household income towards rent. For homeowners, 40-60% of households are paying more than 30% of household income towards their mortgage. This can be seen in Figures C-30 and C-31. Households who are overcrowded tend to be in areas East of Highway 99 and in the Southern portion of the City. These areas have 15-20% and 10-15% of households that are overcrowded, respectively. This can be seen in Figure C-32.

Page 256 of 386 ends

193
Figure C-28: 2010 Incidence of Housing Vacancy by Census Block in McFarland and its Region

Page 257 of 386 ends

194
Figure C-29: 2020 Incidence of Housing Vacancy by Census Block in McFarland and its Region

Page 258 of 386 ends

195
Figure C-30: Overpayment by Renters (ACS, 2017-2021)
Figure C-31: Overpayment by Homeowners (ACS, 2017-2021)

Page 259 of 386 ends

196
Figure C-32: Overcrowding (ACS, 2017-2021)
Figure C-33: Displacement Risk

Page 260 of 386 ends

197
Table C-11. Progress in Achieving Quantified Objectives (All Incomes) in 2015-2023 Housing Element
Table A-3a
Income
Category
2015-2023
RHNA
(Dwelling
Units)
Completed in
5th Cycle
Under
Construction in
5th Cycle
Accomplished in
5th Cycle
Percent of
RHNA to be
Met
Very Low1 93 13 80 93 0%
Low2 73 55 55 25%
Moderate 66 0 0 100%
Above Moderate 79 245 245 -210%
Total 311 313 80 393 -26%
Source: City of McFarland, Planning Department Data, 2022; 2015 McFarland Housing Element 1 Milestone Housing broke ground in 2022. Expected completion of 80 assisted housing units in 2023; 2 Kendrea Place (at 1020 Kendrea Pl) was completed in 2020; it includes rental and privately owned, 3- to 4-bedrooom single family homes; occupants are Ag-oriented workers whose rents are based on salaries in the Ag sector; rental range from $280 monthly up.

Other Relevant Factors
Closely related to the risk of displacement are the price and availability of the housing stock. The housing vacancy rate depicts the availability, which reflects the relationship between housing supply and demand. For example, if the demand for housing is greater than the available supply, then the vacancy rate would be very low, and the price of housing would most likely increase. A low overall vacancy rate that indicates high demand and short supply of housing may result in overcrowding and ultimately unsafe, unsanitary, or otherwise unsuitable accommodations. When low vacancy results in high prices of homes and rentals, the effect is most severe on lower income households, people on fixed incomes, families with children, and other special-need groups. Housing discrimination could occur when the rental vacancy rate is low. And the risk of displacement could increase most notably to lower income households.

The vacancy rate also indicates whether a community has an adequate housing supply to provide choice and mobility. The US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) indicates that a vacancy rate of 5 percent is enough to provide choice and mobility. The highest vacancy rate in McFarland over the previous two decades was 4 percent in 2010 in the aftermath of the housing market crash of the mid-2000s. Before and after the crash, the vacancy rate was close to 2 percent. The data reveal that the City has been typically below the recommended vacancy rate of 5 percent, which would indicate that McFarland residents have limited housing choice and mobility and could be susceptible to displacement risks that low vacancy rates could trigger. There are, however, no known homeless populations in the City.

Page 261 of 386 ends

198
Conclusion
While there are no development proposals in the 2040 General Plan and its housing section that would cause disproportionate housing needs within the jurisdiction or create the risk of displacing segments of the population, the City has been typically below the recommended vacancy rate of 5 percent, which would indicate that McFarland residents have limited housing choice and mobility and could be susceptible to displacement risks that low vacancy rates could trigger. While such risks may be greater for households in the lower-income segments from price competition, the City has steadfastly kept the production of lower-income housing at par with its allocations over the previous two cycles. And the incidence of homelessness is rare in the City.

7.3.3 Sites Inventory
Appendix B has details on residential land inventory. Preparation of the 2040 McFarland General Plan included a complete land use inventory in 2019, which identified specific sites that were suitable for residential development. The site inventory and analysis helped in determining whether program actions are necessary to designate sites with appropriate zoning, development standards, and infrastructure capacity to accommodate the RHNA-allocated units. Using the inventory of available land, the analysis proceeded to determine (a) the suitability of individual parcels, (b) the appropriate development densities, and (c) the location of previously-approved projects. For the 2023 to 2031 planning horizon, the Kern County Council of Governments approved the Regional Housing Needs Allocations (RHNA) and assigned a total of 244 new housing units to McFarland. To further assess the location of identified units and affirmatively furthering fair housing, Section 7.3.3.1 provides both a qualitative and quantitative assessment on meeting the RHNA. This assessment is presented analyzing the individual census tracts in the City. In addition, this analysis is also helpful to understand the impact of the area of High Segregation and Poverty in the City and strategies to promote housing opportunities beyond meeting the RHNA. The areas for analysis are as follows:
- Census Tract 47.04: Northwestern portion of the City, west of Highway 99 - Census Tract 47.03: Southwestern portion of the City, west of Highway 99 - Census Tract 47.02: All incorporated areas east of Highway 99

7.3.3.1 Location and Affordability of Sites
The City issued a certificate of occupancy for the Sherwood Family Apartments in 2024 and uses this site to meet the RHNA. This site, as seen in Figure C-34, is located in the Southern portion of the City and constitutes 97% of the total lower-income RHNA for the City. Additional location of sites, including maps of specific sites, can be found in Appendix B.

In addition, the 6th-Cycle, 2023 to 2031 Housing Element, narrowed its focus on the location and affordability of new housing development onto the downtown and immediate vicinities as the most accessible and most location-efficient areas for relatively short-term housing development. Table B-4 in Appendix B is an inventory showing vacant parcels with residential development opportunities in the downtown area. Parcels that are vacant and designated for housing development can accommodate 36 additional moderate and above moderate housing units.

For mixed-use development, the Housing Element designates mixed-use development at such strategic locations as the City’s downtown. This offers additional housing opportunities for a range of income groups, including those for lower income residents. The 2040 General Plan identified 56 acres of land across 25 parcels to accommodate mixed-use development in the downtown area for conversion to mixed-use (housing and commercial) development for low, very low, and moderate-income housing.

Page 262 of 386 ends

199
As the inventory in Table B-5 of Appendix B shows, it is particularly notable that two of the parcels that are vacant are relatively large and can accommodate mixed-use, specific plan centers for 223 additional units. Figure B-3 of Appendix B identifies parcels for mixed-use development. The location of sites in the City’s downtown is especially important given the higher rates of overpayment by renters in this neighborhood, as evidenced by Figure C-30.

For accessory dwelling units, residential lots with potential to comfortably develop affordable accessory dwelling units (ADU) have the potential to generate 117 such units in the downtown area.

Table B-6 of Appendix B is an inventory of those lots while Figure B-3 of Appendix B identifies parcels with ADU potential. However, the element assumed 8 ADUs for the planning period to meet the RHNA, with 4 ADUs slated to meet the lower-income RHNA, 3 ADUs to meet the moderate-income RHNA, and 1 ADU to meet the above-moderate income RHNA. Given the higher rates of overcrowding in neighborhoods, such as those East of Highway 99, ADUs represent a strong opportunity to alleviate overcrowding issues persistent in this area.

The analysis points to the conclusion that the number of units possible in the downtown area, the location of sites, and the affordability of units to build can accommodate lower, moderate, and above moderate income RHNA allocations and result in a favorable assessment of fair housing in McFarland.

The sites would not raise issues with integration and segregation within the City nor would they foster racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty due to its predominant Hispanic ethnicity. Rather than reduce areas of opportunity, the sites hold the promise of expanding convenience of access and filling gaps in any disproportionate housing needs of the past including the risk of displacements for lower income households.

Given the City meets its lower-income RHNA through pipeline projects and ADUs, the City believes that future development opportunities for higher-density housing can be added as annexations are processed and incorporated into the City during the planning period, therefore meeting current RHNA obligations while also providing additional residential capacity into the future. These strategies as a whole demonstrate the City’s compliance with affirmatively furthering fair housing and requirements set forth by State Housing Element Law.

The combination of strategies to meet the RHNA and their location can be seen in the table below.

As shown in the following table and as discussed in the analysis throughout the AFFH section, while the City is focusing capacity to meet the RHNA in areas of relatively-higher resource, additional strategies for residential development exist outside of meeting the RHNA. For instance, a proposed annexation on the City’s east side would add additional commercial and residential capacity in Census Tract 47.02 and help balance out recent growth in areas west of Highway 99. However, due to timing constraints for identifying appropriate and adequate sites to meet the RHNA for the 6th Cycle, this strategy was not included for RHNA purposes. This can be seen in Figure C-35.

Page 263 of 386 ends

200
Table C-12: Residential Unit Capacity by Census Tract in McFarland Census
Tract
Existing
Households
RHNA Capacity AFFH Indicators
Integration and Segregation Access to Opportunity Displacement Risk Low Mod. Above
Mod.

Median
Income
Poverty
Rate
Non-White
Population
Disability
Rate
Resource
Designation
Jobs Proximity
Index
CalEnviro Screen
Percentile
Overcrowding
Rate
Renter
Overpayment
Rate
Homeowner
Overpayment Rate
% Renter
Households

47.02 1,059 4 3 1 $33,162 34.90% 96.01% 4.70% High Segregation and Poverty 86-89 85 19.17% 48.00% 43.00% 56.21%

47.03 1,002 0 78 145 $41,700 20.00% 95.40% 2.20% Moderate Resource 90-93 85 14.47% 75.00% 42.00% 32.44%

47.04 1,474 80 128 494 $37,625 29.20% 85.74% 4.10% Moderate Resource 90-93 85 9.59% 65.00% 51.00% 48.90% Source: HCD AFFH Data Viewer 2.0

Page 264 of 386 ends

201
Figure C-34: Sherwood Family Apartments

7.3.3.2 Improvement or Exacerbation of Conditions by Sites The concentration of new housing in and around downtown McFarland and the diversity of housing types proposed in the area are to assure location efficiency in terms of development cost since utilities are already present or within short extensions to the units to be developed. The cost of land would be minimal, if any, for mixed-use and ADUs which together with other location advantages can deliver affordable units of different sizes. Public transit already serves the downtown and is proposed under the Circulation Element of the General Plan to be routed through the central city for increased accessibility to this transportation alternative.The increase in intensity of development together with the mixture of residential and commercial uses in the central city would facilitate the use of nonmotorized modes thereby reducing living costs for residents and indirectly expanding the abilities of those at the margins to afford housing in higher price ranges if they so choose.

The analysis points to the conclusion that instead of exacerbating conditions for each of the fair housing areas, the concentration of housing under the 6th Cycle in the downtown area, can enhance the affordability of units to build, accommodate lower, moderate, and above moderate income RHNA allocations, and result in a favorable assessment of fair housing in McFarland. The central concentration would not raise issues with integration and segregation within the City nor would it foster racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty. Rather than reduce areas of opportunity, the concentration holds the promise of expanding convenience of access and filling gaps in any disproportionate housing needs of the past including the risk of displacements for lower income households.

Page 265 of 386 ends

202

7.3.4 Identification of Contributing Factors
Among the factors that could contribute to high cost, environmental risk, and environmental justice concerns in relation to fair housing issues in a community are: (a) the presence of hazardous waste and (b) toxic release. For the City of McFarland, however, all indications are that these two factors are not major issues although much of the new housing is to go into a largely built-up area.

According to data from the Cal Enviro Screen site, McFarland had little hazardous waste in its central city area as well as its 2022 City limits. Figures C-19 and C-20 depict the conditions in 2010 and 2020 respectively within McFarland and its region.

Similarly, data from the Cal Enviro Screen site indicates that the City had minimal toxic release in its central city area as well as its 2022 City limits. Figures C-21 and C-22 depict the conditions in 2010 and 2020 respectively within McFarland and its region.

Given the analysis, the City identifies additional contributing factors, as follows:

AFH Identified
Fair Housing Issues Contributing Factors Priority Meaningful Actions Housing Instability Higher rates of overpayment
Area with high rates of
overcrowding
High Program-1.3
Program-6.4
Lack of commercial
activity
Predominantly residential
community
Insufficient land zoned for
commercial use
Medium Program-6.8
Program-6.9
As noted in the element, the City is adding additional units beyond the RHNA requirements to help alleviate instances of overpayment and overcrowding. In addition, annexations and the focus for more mixed-use development will add more commercial opportunities to the City which is lacking in this sector. Specific program information can be found in Table 6-4.

Page 266 of 386 ends

203
Figure C-35: Future Annexations (not included in RHNA)

Page 267 of 386 ends

204
Figure C-36: 2010 Incidence of Hazardous Waste by Census Block in McFarland and its Region

Page 268 of 386 ends

205
Figure C-37: 2020 Incidence of Hazardous Waste by Census Block in McFarland and its Region

Page 269 of 386 ends

206
Figure C-38: 2010 Incidence of Toxic Release by Census Block in McFarland and its Region

Page 270 of 386 ends

207
Figure C-39: 2020 Incidence of Toxic Release by Census Block in McFarland and its Region

Page 271 of 386 ends

208

7.3.5 Goals and Actions
Goal 6 of the 6th Cycle Housing Element and associated policies and programs consolidate actions toward affirmatively furthering Fair Housing. Table 6-4 combines the relevant policy statements and initiatives that are not explicitly listed among the housing-specific policies of the Housing Element (sections 6.1 through 6.6). It is noteworthy that the additional fair housing actions (which are not housing-specific) do support the goal of affirmatively furthering fair housing. Refer to Table 6-4 for the comprehensive list of AFFH programs.

7.3.6 Local Data and Knowledge
In addition to information presented in the analysis of fair housing above, additional local data and knowledge is helpful to fully analyze potential impediments to fair housing.

The following summarizes local knowledge in the City:
• The City is primarily a residential neighborhood, with minimal commercial opportunities at present. However, the City is focusing its economic development strategy to include new commercial opportunities as the City continues to grow to provide residents with commercial and recreational opportunities in their own City. For example, the City is seeking to annex land into the City, primarily zoned for commercial and industrial uses to grow the City’s economic base.
• Future annexations into the City provide residential opportunities for new and existing residents, however, were not included in the RHNA calculations due to timing of when these units would be available.
• There are no areas within the City with a concentration of persons with disabilities, group homes or residential care facilities, or locational differences in terms of disabilities. As part of the Capital Improvement Program, the City is implementing accessibility improvements in conjunctions with sidewalk improvements, such as handicap cutouts and ramps. • The Northwestern and Northeastern portions of the City have higher concentrations of children in female-headed households with no spouse present. The McFarland Adult Learning Center and McFarland Healthy Start, respectively, are located in these areas and provide alternative educational opportunities.
• The Northwestern portion of the City has a higher concentration of subsidized housing, however, also is the area with the newest housing stock, suggesting these subsidized housing units are part of newer developments.
• As noted in further detail in the education section, there are no major differences between the schools in the City for elementary schools, and given the small size of the City, there are limited options for Junior High and High Schools. Future growth in the City is anticipated to be geared towards predominantly commercial and industrial uses, not immediately affecting school choice and access unless additional residential is included. • Major industries in and around the City are centered around agriculture, with nearly 45% of residents in the labor force employed in this sector. As noted above, additional commercial (planned or under construction) as well as 1,400 acres of industrially pre-zoned land has the potential to add major employers and industries to the area. This land is located in the Eastern portion of the City, near the Area of High Segregation and Poverty, connecting residents of this area to new economic and employment opportunities.
• As part of the new growth area in the City, it is anticipated that infrastructure improvements could be necessary to support additional development. These improvements will be identified as part of the Specific Plan adoption process.

Page 272 of 386 ends

209
• Given the City’s size, there are transit options within the City and to other parts of the region, including larger employment centers such as Bakersfield. • Home prices in the western portion of the City, where the newer housing stock is concentrated, tend to be higher than those in the eastern portion of the City. • Outside of agricultural land constraints (Williamson Act) and 100-year floodplain that exists east of Highway 99 and has been accounted for in the General Plan, no additional environmental constraints exist to residential development.

Page 273 of 386 ends

210

7.4 Appendix D: Development Fees
This appendix presents a consolidated list of fees, which combines common planning department fees with a master schedule of development fees in McFarland. City Council resolution adopted the 2021 Master Fee Schedule. Requested services not covered by the Master Fee Schedule are to be charged actual costs at full cost recovery and might require a deposit. Where:

Full cost recovery = actual cost + 30% Administrative Overhead Table D-1: Consolidated List of Fees in McFarland
Schedule of User and
Regulatory Fees
Contents

SCHEDULE OF USER AND REGULATORY FEES
Services / Activities / Subject Matter Page
Building Fees
Planning Fees
Land Development Engineering and Encroachment Permit Fees Animal Licensing and Regulation Fees

Page 274 of 386 ends

City of McFarland

SCHEDULE OF USER AND REGULATORY FEES - BUILDING FEES
A. Fees for Commonly Requested Building Permit Types (Fees Shown In This Section (Section A.) Include All Applicable Permit Issuance, Inspection, and Internal Plan Check). If third party plan review is required, additional fees apply. Additional fees may apply for services provided by other City Departments (e.g., Planning Review), Technology Enhancement Fees, and Fees Collected on Behalf of Other Agencies (e.g., State of California).

Activity Description Fee Charge Basis Note
211
1 HVAC Change-Out - Residential $129 per permit
2 HVAC Change-Out - Commercial (per unit) $173 per permit 3 Residential Solar < 10 kW $259 per permit
5 Service Panel Upgrade - Residential $129 per permit
6 Service Panel Upgrade - Commercial $173 per permit
7 Water Heater Change-Out $129 per permit
8 Line Repair - Sewer / Water / Gas $129 per permit
9 Residential Re-Roof
a) Up to 2,000 SF $288 per permit
b) Each Add'l 1,000 SF or fraction thereof $58 per permit 10 Block Wall
a) First 100 LF $173 per permit
b) Each Add'l 50 LF or fraction thereof $58 per permit
11 Commercial Tenant Improvement
a) Non-Structural
i) Up to 500 SF $460 per permit
ii) Each Add'l 250 SF up to 5,000 SF $86 per permit
iii) Each Add'l 250 SF after 5,000 SF $37 per permit
b) Structural
i) Up to 500 SF $690 per permit
ii) Each Add'l 250 SF up to 5,000 SF $108 per permit
iii) Each Add'l 250 SF after 5,000 SF $45 per permit
12 Residential Remodel
a) Non-Structural
i) Up to 500 SF $345 per permit
ii) Each Add'l 100 SF
b) Structural
$43 per permit
i) Up to 500 SF $37 per permit
ii) Each Add'l 100 SF $47 per permit
13 Residential Addition
a) Up to 500 SF $575
b) Each Add'l 100 SF $47
14 Demolition $173 per permit
15 Temporary Power Pole $129 per permit

Page 275 of 386 ends

City of McFarland

Activity Description Fee Charge Basis Note
212
16 Swimming Pool/Spa
a) Swimming Pool / Spa $403 per permit
b) Detached Spa / Water Feature $230 per permit
c) Unit Alteration $345 per permit
d) Equipment Change-out Alone $201 per permit
17 Patio
a) Standard (Wood/Metal Frame)
i) Up to 200 SF $201 per permit
ii) Greater than 200 SF $259 per permit
b) Upgraded (with electrical, stucco, fans, etc.)
i) Up to 200 SF $345 per permit
ii) Greater than 200 SF $403 per permit
18 Window / Sliding Glass Door
a) Retrofit / Repair
i) Up to 5 $173 per permit
ii) Each additional 5 $29 per permit
b) New / Alteration
i) Up to 5 $230 per permit
ii) Each additional 5 $43 per permit
19 Business License Inspection $58
20 Construction and Demolition Materials Management Plan Fee - Application Plan Review & Deposit Administration Fee
$95
21 Third-Party Plan Review (if applicable) 100% pass-through of actual cost

Page 276 of 386 ends

213
City of McFarland

SCHEDULE OF USER AND REGULATORY FEES - BUILDING FEES
Building Permit Fees
Determination of Valuation for Fee-Setting Purposes
● Project valuationsfor new construction shall be based on data published by the International Code Council (ICC) (building valuation data table, typically updated in February and August of each year). ● Project valuationsfortenant improvements,remodels, and additionsshall be determined using 50% of the ICC building valuation data table when available. Project valuations for general construction shall be based on the total value of all construction work, including all finish work, roofing, electrical, plumbing, heating, air conditioning, elevators, fire-extinguishing systems and any other permanent equipment. If, in the opinion of the Building Official, the valuation is underestimated on the application, the permitshall be denied, unless the applicant can show detailed estimates to meet the approval of the Building Official. The Building Official shall set final building permit valuation. The final building permit valuation shall be set at an amount that allows the City to recover its costs of applicant plan check, permit and inspection activities.

Note: For construction projects with permit fees calculated using Section B, C, D, or E, additional fees apply for permit issuance. Additional fees may apply forservices provided by other City Departments(e.g., Planning Review), Technology Enhancement Fees, and Fees Collected on Behalf of Other Agencies (e.g., State of California). Additional fees apply for plan review, when applicable.

B. Permit Fee for New Buildings, Additions, Tenant Improvements, Residential Remodels, and Combined Mechanical, Electrical, and/or Plumbing Permits
Total Valuation Permit Fee
$1 to $4,000 $115.05
$4,001 to $10,000 $115.05 for the first $4,000 plus $28.77 for each add'l $1,000 or fraction thereof, to and including $10,000
$10,001 to $50,000 $287.64 for the first $10,000 plus $10.07 for each add'l $1,000 or fraction thereof, to and including $50,000
$50,001 to $100,000 $690.33 for the first $50,000 plus $9.20 for each add'l $1,000 or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000
$100,001 to $500,000 $1,150.55 for the first $100,000 plus $7.48 for each add'l $1,000 or fraction thereof, to and including $500,000
$500,001 to $1,000,000 $4,141.98 for the first $500,000 plus $2.76 for each add'l $1,000 or fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000
$1,000,001 and up $5,522.64 for the first $1,000,000 plus $2.21 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof over $1,000,000
For permits requiring plumbing, electric, or mechanical review, the following percentages shall be added to the base permit fee Plumbing inspection fees = Base permit fee x .12
Electrical inspection fees = Base permit fee x .12
Mechanical inspection fees = Base permit fee x .12

Page 277 of 386 ends

214
City of McFarland

SCHEDULE OF USER AND REGULATORY FEES - BUILDING FEES
Building Permit Fees
C. Permit Fee for Stand-Alone Mechanical Permit
Total Valuation Permit Fee
Up to $2,000 $57.53
$2,001 to $4,000 $115.05
$4,001 to $10,000 $115.05 for the first $4,000 plus $19.18 for each add'l $1,000 or fraction thereof, to and including $10,000
$10,000 and up $230.11 for the first $10,000 plus $7.67 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof over $10,000
D. Permit Fee for Stand-Alone Plumbing Permit
Total Valuation Permit Fee
Up to $2,000 $57.53
$2,001 to $4,000 $115.05
$4,001 to $10,000 $115.05 for the first $4,000 plus $19.18 for each add'l $1,000 or fraction thereof,to and including $10,000
$10,000 and up $230.11 for the first $10,000 plus $7.67 for each additional $1,000 orfraction thereof over $10,000
E. Permit Fee for Stand-Alone Electrical Permit
Total Valuation Permit Fee
Up to $2,000 $57.53
$2,001 to $4,000 $115.05
$4,001 to $10,000 $115.05 for the first $4,000 plus $19.18 for each add'l $1,000 or fraction thereof, to and including $10,000
$10,000 and up $230.11 for the first $10,000 plus $7.67 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof over $10,000

Page 278 of 386 ends

City of McFarland

SCHEDULE OF USER AND REGULATORY FEES - BUILDING FEES
215
Building Plan Review Fees
1 Plan Check Fees
a) Plan Review Fee, if applicable 75% % of building permit fee [a] b) Energy Review Fee, if applicable 5% % of building permit fee c) Phased Plan Check (when applicable) 1.5x full plan check fee for entire bldg
% of full plan check fee for
entire building
d) Master Plan
i) Master Plan 100% of standard plan
check fee
ii) Production Phase Units /Identical Buildings 25% of standard plan check fee
e) Alternate Materials and Materials Review(per hour) $115 per hour f) Excess Plan Review Fee (3rd and subsequent)(per hour) $115 per hour OR
[b]
g) Alternative Calculation for Plan Review Fee 100% pass through of actual cost
per hour
[a] Includes up to three plan checks. The City will bill hourly for additional plan reviewrequired. [b] For identical buildings built by the same builder on the same lot or in the same tract and for which building permits are issued at the same time.

When applicable, plan check fees shall be paid at the time of application for a building permit.

Fee Description Fee Charge Basis Note

Page 279 of 386 ends

City of McFarland

SCHEDULE OF USER AND REGULATORY FEES - BUILDING FEES
216
Building Fees
F. Other Fees
Fee Description Fee Charge Basis Note
1 Permit Issuance Fee $58 per permit
2 General Plan Maintenance Fee (percent of permit fee) 5% per permit [a] 3 Technology Fee (percent of permit fee) 5% per permit
4 Training Fee (percent of permit fee) 5% per permit
5 Strong Motion Instrumentation (SMI)
a) Residential $0.50 or valuation x .00013
b) Commercial $0.50 or valuation x .00028
6 Building Standards (SB 1473) Fee Calculation(Valuation) a) $1 - $25,000 $1
b) $25,001 - $50,000 $2
c) $50,001 - $75,000 $3
d) $75,001 - $100,000 $4
e) Each Add'l $25,000 or fraction thereof Add $1
7 Certificate of Occupancy
a) Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (per 30 Days) $173 b) Certificate of Occupancy $86
8 Damaged Building Survey (Fire, Flood, Vehicle Damage, Etc.) $345 Copies, Re-Print, Change Of Contractor
9 Printing Scanned / Archived Drawings $8
10 Job Card / Permit Re-Print $38
11 Change Of Contractor $58
Violation Fees
12 Investigation Fee For Work Done Without Permits 2x Permit Fee Other Fees
1 Phased Inspection Fee (per inspection) $58 per inspection 2 After Hours Inspection (per hour) (2-hourminimum) $138 per hour; 2-hr minimum 3 Re-inspection Fee (3rd Time or More)(each) $58 per inspection [b] 4 Missed inspection Fee $58 per inspection
5 Fees for Services Not Listed in this Fee Schedule (per hour) $115 per hour [a] Fee only applies to permits for new construction and additions. [b] Reinspection fee applies after second re-inspection.

Page 280 of 386 ends

City of McFarland

SCHEDULE OF USER AND REGULATORY FEES - PLANNING FEES
217
Activity Description Minimum Fee Initial Deposit Charge Basis Note 1 Annexation and Prezoning $6,500 $9,750 deposit
2 Appeal to Commission or City Council (each) $1,000 $1,000 deposit [a] 3 Conditional Use Permit
a) CUP Minor - within residential and open space zones $520 $520 deposit b) CUP Major - within all other zones $1,560 $4,680 deposit c) CUP Minor - Amendment $520 $520 deposit
d) CUP Major - Amendment $780 $1,560 deposit
4 Continued Public Hearing/Commission Item(applicant
requested)
$500 fixed fee
5 Development Agreement / Amendment / Annual Review $3,900 deposit 6 Environmental Review
a) Categorical Exemption $200 fixed fee
b) Negative Declaration / Initial Study $1,300 $5,460 deposit c) Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study $4,160 $7,410 deposit [b] d) EIR / Amendment / Addendum $5,200 $8,775 deposit [b] 7 Façade Change Review $195 fixed fee
8 General Plan Text/Map Amendment $4,500 $5,200 deposit 9 Home Occupation Permit $65 fixed fee [c]
10 Land Use Contracts
a) Create Preserve / New Contract (e.g., Williamson Act) $1,040 $2,000 deposit b) Cancellation $1,560 $2,000 deposit
c) Non-Renewal $250 fixed fee
11 Large Family Day Care Facility Permit $195 $195 deposit 12 Limited Term Permit $195 $195 deposit
13 Map
a) Tentative Parcel Map $3,120 $3,500 deposit
b) Tentative Tract Map $4,160 $4,500 deposit
c) Final Parcel Map $2,080 $2,500 deposit
d) Final Tract Map $2,600 $3,000 deposit
e) Lot Line Adjustment $1,040 $1,040 deposit
f) Parcel Merger $1,040 $1,040 deposit
g) Parcel Map Waiver $1,040 $2,000 deposit
h) Revised Parcel Map $1,040 $1,500 deposit
i) Revised Tract Map $2,080 $2,500 deposit
j) Extension $520 $520 deposit

Page 281 of 386 ends

City of McFarland

SCHEDULE OF USER AND REGULATORY FEES - PLANNING FEES
218
Activity Description Minimum Fee Initial Deposit Charge Basis Note 14 Massage Operator's Permit $195 $195 deposit
15 Pre-Application Review $520 $520 deposit
16 Precise Development $5,000 deposit
17 Second Dwelling Unit Review $390 $390 deposit
18 Sign Review
a) Staff
$260 $260 deposit
b) Planning Commission / City Council $600 $600 deposit 19 Site Plan Review / Architectural Review / Design Review a) Administrative
$1,040 $2,340 deposit
b) Planning Commission / City Council $3,120 $5,850 deposit 20 Special Event / Temporary Use Permit / Limited Term Permit a) Staff
$130 $130 deposit
b) Planning Commission / City Council $260 $260 deposit 21 Specific Plan / Master Plan / Development Plan
a) New
$9,750 deposit
b) Amendment $3,900 $3,900 deposit
22 Street and Address Assignment / Change $130 fixed fee 23 Substantial Conformance Review / Determinations /
a) Staff
$520 $780 deposit
b) Planning Commission / City Council $1,040 $1,300 deposit 24 Time Extension $520 $1,040 deposit
25 Variance $1,040 $3,120 deposit
26 Zone Change $4,500 $5,200 deposit
27 Zoning Verification Letter
a) Single Family Verification Letter
$100 fixed fee
b) Verification Letter for Other Uses $260 $260 deposit 28 Technology Fee (% of fixed fee or % of minimum fee) 5% fixed fee 29 Training Fee (% of fixed fee or % of minimum fee) 5% fixed fee 30 Zoning Clearance - Planning PlanCheck
a) Alterations/Additions -Residential $65 fixed fee
b) New Construction - Single Family Residential $130 fixed fee c) New Construction - 2-4 Residential Units $195 fixed fee d) New Construction - 5+ Residential Units $520 fixed fee e) New Construction - Non-Residential $260 fixed fee
f) Alterations/Additions - Non-Residential $130 fixed fee

Page 282 of 386 ends

City of McFarland

SCHEDULE OF USER AND REGULATORY FEES - PLANNING FEES
219
Activity Description Minimum Fee Initial Deposit Charge Basis Note Hourly Rate for Deposit Based Billings or Services Not Listed in this Schedule
31 Planning In-House Staff (per hour) $130 per hour
32 Planning Contract Service Provider - Planning (per hour) Actual Cost plus 15% per hour 33 Building In-House Staff (per hour) $115 per hour
34 Building Contract Service Provider - Building (per hour) Actual Cost plus 15% per hour 35 Engineering Contract Service Engineering (per hour) Actual Cost plus 15% per hour 36 Attorney / Other Professional Services Actual Cost plus 15% per hour 37 Peer Review Actual Cost plus 15% per hour
* The City will pass through to the applicant all costs of required mailings, noticing, and amounts payable to other agencies (e.g., County Recorder, Department of Fish and Wildlife).
[a] Depending on the subject of the appeal, specialized expertise may be solicited, at the expense of the applicant, for the purpose of providing input to the City Manager, Planning Commission, other Commission or Board, or City Council. [b] Monitoring program time will be billed against deposit. [c] If public hearing is required, a deposit will be collected and the City will bill hourly forservices.

Full Cost Deposits and Deposit Replenishment
Applicants for full cost (deposit-based) submittals shall pay for all City staff and contract service provider time and materials required to process the application. A full cost reimbursement agreement shall be included with the project application submittal package. Projects outside the scope of this fee schedule will be subject to a full cost reimbursement agreement to be approved by the City Manager and/or City Council. This reimbursement agreement will include the identification of a work program and will include cost estimates for both City staff time and consultant services based on a defined scope of work.

Initial deposits will be collected and held by the City in a deposit account at the time the application is submitted. Project billing amounts will be drawn from the deposit account. A positive account balance shall be maintained at all times during the review process. No work will be performed on a project with a negative fund balance. If the deposit is reduced to below 20% of the initial deposit amount, the applicant will be notified and required to supplement the deposit account with an additional amount no less than 50% of the original deposit.

When more than one full cost application is submitted, the sum total of the initial full cost deposit amount can be reduced by 20%.

Any deposit amounts remaining after final project close out will be returned to applicant (less bond amounts held by the City).

As may be required by the Community Development Department or Public Works Department for project evaluation or environmental review, all payment for consultant work shall be the responsibility of the applicant.

Refund Policy
Application fees are not refundable except as follows:

A. Refund of 100% shall be made if a determination is made by the Community Development Director or Public Works Director that the permit and associated fee are not required by the City's Municipal Code or adopted CityResolution.

B. If an applicant requests to withdraw a fixed fee application prior to project evaluation, refund of 50% of the applicable fee shall be refunded.

C. No refund of application feesshall be made after initial project evaluation has commenced unlessthe City Council approve a fee waiver.

Structure of City Planning Fees
City Planning fees may be either fixed fees or deposit-based with a minimum amount due. When a fee is deposit-based, the City will collect the initial deposit and bill against that deposit. The minimum total amount charged for deposit-based fees shall be the amount shown in the minimum fee column.

Page 283 of 386 ends

220
City of McFarland

SCHEDULE OF USER AND REGULATORY FEES - LAND DEVELOPMENT AND ENCROACHMENT

PERMIT FEES
Activity Description Minimum Fee Initial Deposit Charge Basis Note 1 Improvement - Plan Check & Inspection
a) Up to 20 Lots T&M, plus 15% admin fee 5% of improvement cost deposit [a] b) More than 20 Lots T&M, plus 15% admin fee 3.5% of improvement cost deposit [a] 2 Grading Plan Check
a) Up to Five Acres T&M, plus 15% admin fee $1,500 deposit deposit b) More than Five Acres T&M, plus 15% admin fee $3,000 deposit deposit 3 Map Review See Planning Fees See Planning Fees deposit 4 Certificate of Compliance T&M, plus 15% admin fee $1,000 deposit deposit 5 Special Study Review T&M, plus 15% admin fee $1,500 deposit deposit 6 Encroachment Permit
a) Permit Processing / Application
Intake Fee (applies to all permits)
i) Blanket Permit $200 fixed fee
ii) Non-Blanket Permit $58 fixed fee
b) Minor Encroachment
i) Plan Review, if required $58 fixed fee
ii) Inspection, if required $115 fixed fee
c) Major Encroachment [b]
i) Plan Review $230 fixed fee [b]
ii) Inspection $460 fixed fee [b]
d) Expedited Requests (< 24 hours) 1.5x standard fee fixed fee e) Projects lasting more than 3 days or
excavation of more than 100 LF or 400 SF
/ non-standard projects
i) Plan Review & Inspection T&M, plus 15% admin fee $1,500 deposit T&M ii) City Staff Hourly Billing, if required $115 per hour 7 Oversize Load Permit
a) One Day $16 fixed fee
b) Annual $90 fixed fee
Other Fees
8 Technology Fee (% of fixed fee or % of
minimum fee)
5% fixed fee
9 Training Fee (% of fixed fee or % of
minimum fee)
5% fixed fee
10 Extension of Time $86 fixed fee

Page 284 of 386 ends

221
Activity Description Minimum Fee Initial Deposit Charge Basis No City of McFarland

SCHEDULE OF USER AND REGULATORY FEES - LAND DEVELOPMENT AND

ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FEES
11 Revisions
a) Reviewed/Inspected byOutside
Service Provider
T&M, plus 15% admin fee T&M
b) Reviewed/Inspected by City Staff $115 per hour
12 Excessive Resubmittals
a) Reviewed/Inspected byOutside
Service Provider
T&M, plus 15% admin fee T&M
b) Reviewed/Inspected by City Staff $115 per hour
13 After Hours Inspections(In-House Staff) $144 per hr.; 2- hr
minimum
14 Re-Inspection (3rd time or more) and
missed inspection
$115 each
Hourly Rate for Deposit Based Billings or
Services Not Listed in this Schedule
$110
15 Planning In-House Staff (per hour) $130 per hour
16 Land Dev / Encroachment PermitsInHouse Staff (per hour) 17 Planning Contract Service ProviderPlanning (per hour) 18 Engin'rg/Encroachments Contract
Services (per hour)
$115 per hour
Actual Cost plus 15% per hour
Actual Cost plus 15% per hour
19 Attorney / Other Professional Services Actual Cost plus 15% per hour 20 Peer Review Actual Cost plus 15% per hour
* All fees include up to three plan checks, inspection, and re-inspection. The City will bill hourly for additional plan review and inspections required. [a] Improvement cost based on engineer's estimate.
[b] Major encroachments are for projectsrequiring road closure, detour or significant traffic disruption, including temporary stops, putting City signals on flashing reds, work with flagging required, etc.

Page 285 of 386 ends

222
Activity Description Minimum Fee Initial Deposit Charge Basis No City of McFarland

SCHEDULE OF USER AND REGULATORY FEES - LAND DEVELOPMENT AND

ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FEES
Full Cost Deposits and Deposit Replenishment
Applicants for full cost (deposit-based) submittals shall pay for all City staff and contract service provider time and materials required to process the application. A full cost reimbursement agreement shall be included with the project application submittal package. Projects outside the scope of this fee schedule will be subject to a full cost reimbursement agreement to be approved by the City Manager and/or City Council. This reimbursement agreement will include the identification of a work program and will include cost estimates for both City staff time and consultant services based on a defined scope of work.

When more than one full cost application is submitted, the sum total of the initial full cost deposit amount can be reduced by 20%.

Funds expended for staff time shall not be dependent upon the City’s approval or disapproval of the application request. The deposit account will be held open for 90 days after project approval for City to complete any miscellaneous clean up items and to account for all project related costs. Any deposit amounts remaining after final project close out will be returned to applicant (less bond amounts held by the City).

Refund Policy
Application fees are not refundable except as follows:

B. If an applicant requests to withdraw a fixed fee application prior to project evaluation, refund of 50% of the applicable fee shall be refunded.

C. No refund of application fees shall be made after initial project evaluation has commenced unless the City Council approve a fee waiver.

Structure of City Land Development and Encroachment Permit Fees City Land Development and Encroachment Permit fees may be either fixed fees or deposit-based with a minimum amount due. When a fee is deposit-based, the City will collect the initial deposit and bill against that deposit. The minimum total amount charged for deposit-based fees shall be the amount shown in the minimum fee column.

Page 286 of 386 ends

223
City of McFarland

SCHEDULE OF USER AND REGULATORY FEES - ANIMAL LICENSING AND REGULATION FEES Activity Description Fee Charge Basis Note

DOG LICENSE FEES
1 Spay/Neuter Dogs
a) One Year $20 per animal [a]
b) Three Year $40 per animal [a]
c) Senior Discount $5 off base fee per animal [a]
2 Unaltered Dogs
a) One Year $60 per animal [a]
b) Three Year $120 per animal [a]
c) Senior Discount $5 off base fee per animal [a]
3 Lost Tags/Replacement $5 per tag

PERMIT FEE
4 Dangerous Animal Permit $100 per year

IMPOUND FEES
5 Licensed Dogs
a) 1st Impound $25
b) 2nd Impound $50
c) 3rd Impound $100
d) Female Dog In Season Add $20 to base fee
6 Unlicensed Dogs
a) 1st Impound $40
b) 2nd Impound $60
c) 3rd Impound $100
d) Female Dog In Season Add $20 to base fee
7 Dangerous Animal
a) 1st Impound $100
b) 2nd Impound $150
c) 3rd Impound $200
d) Female Dog In Season Add $20 to base fee

BOARD AND CARE FEES
8 Board and Care
a) < 100lbs $15
b) > 100lbs $25

ADOPTION FEES
9 Adoption Fee
a) < 3 Months $75 per animal
b) 3 Months or More $85 per animal

Page 287 of 386 ends

224
City of McFarland

SCHEDULE OF USER AND REGULATORY FEES - ANIMAL LICENSING AND REGULATION FEES Activity Description Fee Charge Basis Note

OWNER SURRENDER
10 Owner Surrender
a) Healthy Delivery to Shelter/City Hall $25
b) Sick/Injury $50
c) Pick Up/Dead Animal $50
d) Sick/Injury and Pick Up $75

MISCELLANEOUS
11 DHPP Vaccine $10
12 Quarantine (Per Day) $10
13 Other Miscellaneous $35

AFTER HOURS SERVICE
14 After Hours Support $100 1 hr. minimum

ADMINISTRATIVE VIOLATION FEES
15 Failure to License Dog/Wear License Tag $50 6.04.040 A 16 Failure to Vaccinate for Rabies $50 6.04.040 B
17 Impound Enforcement (At Large) $50 6.04.050
18 Leashing and Tethering (Animal Cruelty) $100 6.04.070 19 Failure to Comply with Requirements for Potentially
Dangerous or Vicious Animal
$500 6.04.808
20 Failure to Quarantine/Produce the Animal/Concealing
Information
$100 6.04.090
21 Animal Neglect and Mistreatment $100 6.04.110
22 Improper Vehicle Transportation of Animal $100 6.04.120 23 Improper Care of Animal (Animal Cruelty) $100 6.04.130 24 Improper Sanitation of Animal Waste $50 6.04.140
25 Failure to Comply with Public Nuisance Remedial
Requirement
$100 6.04.150
[a] License fees are waived for: service dog owned by a person with a need for assistance; dog used by any law enforcement personnel; dog owned by any government entity or political subdivision.

Page 288 of 386 ends

225

8.0 References
City of McFarland. (2020). Municipal Code.
https://library.municode.com/ca/mcfarland/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=CD_ORD_TIT1 2STSIPUPL_CH12.04SIDRCO_12.04.050ST
City of McFarland. (2015). 2015-2023 Housing Element
City of McFarland. (2021). Schedule of User and Regulatory Fees City of McFarland. (2020). Water Management Plan
City of McFarland. (2021). Background Report
City of McFarland. (2021). 2040 McFarland General Plan
Kern Council of Governments. (2014). Regional Housing Needs Allocation for 2013-2023 Kern Council of Governments. (2022). Regional Housing Needs Allocation for 2023-2031 Kern Council of Governments. (2014). Regional Housing Data Report United States Census of Agriculture. (2017). 2017 Census Volume 1, Chapter 2: County Level Data, California. Table 7.

County of Kern. (2019). Kern County Agricultural Crop Report State of California Employment Development Department. (2018). 2018-2028 Industry Employment Projections: Bakersfield MSA (Kern County)
State of California, Governor’s Office of Planning Research (OPR). (2022, 2003). General Plan Guidelines. Sacramento, CA. www.opr.ca.gov/
United States Census Bureau. (2019). On-The-Map Tool of the Longitudinal Employer Household Dynamics
Victoria Transport Policy Institute. (2008). Transportation Demand Management. http://www.vtpi.org!tdm!tdm4S.htm
United States Census Bureau. (2010, 2015, 2017, 2019, 2020 5-Year Estimates). American Community Survey. Table S0101; Table S2301; Table S2401; Table B24011; TableB11016; Table S1901; Table DP03; Table DP04; Table B25109; Table B25058; Table B25031; Table B25095; Table B17013; Table B25014; Table B25007; Table B25020; Table B2009; Table B2501; Table B25074; Table S1810; Table S1101; Table S1810; Table B19013; Table DP05; Table B25007 United States Census Bureau. (2000). Decennial Census. DP1 Table SF2; H003 Table SF1; DP3 Table SF3; H014 Table SF3; DP4 Table SF3
United States Census of Agriculture. (2012). Census Volume 1 Chapter 2. County Level Data.

Table 7
Victoria Transport Policy Institute. (2008). Transportation Demand Management. http://www.vtpi.org!tdm!tdm4S.htm

Page 289 of 386 ends

City of McFarland
City Council Meeting

STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. 8.

Section: ADMINISTRATIVE
AGENDA
Meeting Date: February 19,
2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Diego Viramontes, City Manager
Paul Saldaña , Economic Development Manager
SUBJECT: Approval of Resolution No. 2025-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MCFARLAND ADOPTING THE UPDATED MULTIJURISDICTION HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN SUMMARY:

The City of McFarland Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update (MJHMP Update) is an update to the Kern County Local Multi-Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan approved by Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The purpose of hazard mitigation is to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from natural hazards.

The MJHMP Update demonstrates the City’s commitment to reducing risks from hazards and serves as a tool to help decision-makers direct mitigation activities and resources. This MJHMP Update also helps to ensure City of McFarland receive continued eligibility for certain federal disaster assistance: specifically, the FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), PreDisaster Mitigation Program (PDM), and the Flood Mitigation Assistance Program (FMA).

Hazard mitigation planning is the process through which hazards that threaten communities are identified, likely impacts determined, mitigation goals set, and appropriate mitigation strategies determined, prioritized, and implemented.

This MJHMP Update documents hazard mitigation and identifies relevant strategies to decrease vulnerability and increase resiliency. Floods, earthquakes, drought, levee failures, landslides, wildfires, and other severe weather events are among the hazards that can have a significant impact on the City.

The preparation of the MJHMP has undergone a significant analysis and public participation process that has span over an 18 month period.

The MJHMP has been reviewed by Kern County OES, Cal OES and FEMA and is presented for final adoption by the Council.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

The adoption of the plan will qualify the City for grants and programs through FEMA RECOMMENDATION:

City Council approve Resolution 2025-13 adopting the Hazard Mitigation Plan for the City of McFarland.

Page 290 of 386 ends

ATTACHMENTS:

1. City of McFarland Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex

2. Kern County Amend In - City of McFarland 2-10-25

Page 291 of 386 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2025-13

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MCFARLAND ADOPTING

THE UPDATED MULTI-JURISDICTION HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN

WHEREAS, the City of McFarland, a political subdivision of the State of California, is an official participating jurisdiction in the updated Kern Multi-Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan (“MJHMP”); and
WHEREAS, City of McFarland recognizes the updated MJHMP as the official hazard mitigation plan for participating jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, City of McFarland has gathered information and prepared the updated MJHMP in accordance with Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) requirements at 44 CFR § 201.6; and
WHEREAS, volume 1 of the updated MJHMP recognizes the threat that natural hazards pose to people and property Kern County-wide; and
WHEREAS, City of McFarland’s Annex to Volume 1 of the updated MJHMP provides additional information specific to the City of McFarland, with a focus on providing additional details on the planning process, risk assessment, and mitigation strategy for this community; and WHEREAS, City of McFarland has reviewed Volume 1 of the updated MJHMP and its Annex and affirms that the plan actions in Volume 1 and its Annex should reduce the potential for harm to people and property from future hazard occurrences within the community; and WHEREAS, the U. S. Congress passed the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (“Disaster Mitigation Act”) emphasizing the need for pre-disaster mitigation of potential hazards; and WHEREAS, the Disaster Mitigation Act made available mitigation grants to state and local governments; and
WHEREAS, an adopted hazard mitigation plan is required as a condition of future funding for mitigation projects under multiple FEMA pre- and post-disaster mitigation grant programs; and WHEREAS, the City of McFarland fully participated in the FEMA-prescribed mitigation planning process to prepare this updated MJHMP; and
WHEREAS, the residents were afforded opportunities to comment and provide input in the updated MJHMP and the mitigation actions in the Plan; and WHEREAS, the residents were afforded opportunities to comment and provide input in the updated MJHMP and the mitigation actions in the Plan; and WHEREAS, the City of McFarland, as a fully participating jurisdiction of the updated MJHMP,

Page 292 of 386 ends

is an eligible sub-applicant to the State of California under FEMA’s hazard mitigation grant program guidance; and
WHEREAS, the California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES), and the FEMA Region IX officials have reviewed the updated MJHMP, and approved it contingent upon this official adoption by the participating governing body; and
WHEREAS, the City of McFarland desires to comply with the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act and to augment its emergency planning efforts by formally adopting the updated MJHMP; and
WHEREAS, adoption by the governing body for the City of McFarland demonstrates the jurisdiction’s commitment to fulfilling the mitigation goals and objectives outlined in this updated MJHMP; and
WHEREAS, adoption of this plan helps to coordinate the responsible agencies to carry out their responsibilities under the updated MJHMP
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of McFarland that it hereby finds and determines as follows:

1. This City Council finds the facts mentioned above to be true and further finds that this City Council has jurisdiction to consider, approve, and adopt the subject of this Resolution.

2. This City Council does hereby adopt the updated Kern Multi-Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 1 and its Annex, as approved by FEMA and Cal OES, as the official mitigation plan for City of McFarland.

3. This City Council will consider adopting the updated Kern Multi-Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan by reference into the safety element of their general plan to conform with AB 2140.

4. This City Council authorizes the Director of Kern County Emergency Services to submit an approved and signed copy of this adoption resolution to the California Office of Emergency Services and FEMA Region IX officials to enable the plan's final approval in accordance with the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of McFarland on February 19, 2025 by the following vote:

Aye Nae Abstain Absent
Saul Ayon
Ricardo Cano
Amador Ayon
Anita Gonzalez

Page 293 of 386 ends

Maria T. Pérez

CITY OF MCFARLAND
____________________________
Saul Ayon, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Erika De La Cruz, City Clerk
I, _________________________, City Clerk of the City of McFarland, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution is a true and accurate copy of the Resolution passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of McFarland on the date and by the vote indicated herein.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________
Nathan Hodges, City Attorney

Page 294 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
i

CITY OF MCFARLAND
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 295 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
ii

INTENTIONAL BLANK PAGE
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 296 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
iii
Kern County
Multi-Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan
CITY OF MCFARLAND (MF.)
Municipal Participating Jurisdiction Annex
Adoption Record....................................................................................................................................................................................... v Section 1. City of McFarland .............................................................................................................1-1

1.1 Planning Methodology...................................................................................................................................................................1-1

1.1.1 Public Engagement Strategy .............................................................................................................................................1-2

1.2 What’s New........................................................................................................................................................................................1-3

1.2.1 Mitigation Successes ...........................................................................................................................................................1-3

1.3 Risk Assessment............................................................................................................................................................................. 1-5

1.3.1 Hazard Identification & Screening .................................................................................................................................1-5

1.3.2 Hazard Risk Ranking...........................................................................................................................................................1-7

1.3.3 Community Profile ...............................................................................................................................................................1-9

1.3.4 Population & Asset Inventory ........................................................................................................................................ 1-19

1.3.5 Past & Future Development ........................................................................................................................................... 1-24

1.3.6 Vulnerability to Specific Hazards.................................................................................................................................1-26

1.3.7 Identify Hazard Problem Statements .........................................................................................................................1-41

1.3.8 Impacts from Climate Change on Growth and Land Use.................................................................................. 1-46

1.4 Mitigation Strategy ......................................................................................................................................................................1-50

1.4.1 Capabilities Assessment..................................................................................................................................................1-50

1.4.2 Mitigation Action Plan......................................................................................................................................................1-56 List of Figures
Figure 1-1: McFarland Community Garden and Trail (source: CalTrans District 6) ...................................................1-4 Figure 1-2: City of McFarland Risk Assessment Matrix ........................................................................................................1-8 Figure 1-3: Geographic Overview....................................................................................................................................................1-9 Figure 1-4: Monthly Normals for Temperature and Precipitation, 1991-2020 in Delano, California.................. 1-10 Figure 1-5: Estimated Population, 2008 to 2021 ........................................................................................................................1-11 Figure 1-6: Home Ownership Rate (% Total Housing Units) by Block Group............................................................... 1-13 Figure 1-7: Median Household Income by Block Group....................................................................................................... 1-14 Figure 1-8: Poverty Rate by Block Group.................................................................................................................................... 1-14 FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 297 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
iv
Figure 1-9: Race and Ethnicity .......................................................................................................................................................1-16 Figure 1-10: CDC Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) by Census Tract.................................................................................1-19 Figure 1-11: City of McFarland - Critical Facilities................................................................................................................. 1-22 Figure 1-12: City of McFarland - Flood Vulnerability & Exposure Snapshot............................................................... 1-30 Figure 1-13: UCERF3 Fault Probabilities for Kern County................................................................................................... 1-33 Figure 1-14: Earthquake Shaking Potential for Kern County ............................................................................................ 1-35 Figure 1-15: City of McFarland - S. San Andreas Mojave N. Vulnerability & Exposure Snapshot ...................... 1-36 Figure 1-16: U.S. Drought Monitor Categories for Kern County, January 2000 - September 2023 ..................... 1-38 Figure 1-17: City of McFarland - Subsidence Exposure Snapshot................................................................................... 1-39 Figure 1-18. Guidance for Problem Statements .......................................................................................................................1-41 Figure 1-19. Mitigation Action Key .............................................................................................................................................. 1-56 List of Tables
Table 1-1: Planning Committee Members ....................................................................................................................................1-2 Table 1-2 Cancelled Mitigation Actions........................................................................................................................................1-3 Table 1-3 Completed Mitigation Actions......................................................................................................................................1-3 Table 1-4. Hazard Prioritization Crosswalk.................................................................................................................................1-5 Table 1-5: Disaster Declarations in Kern County, 1980 - 2023..............................................................................................1-7 Table 1-6: Renters and Homeowners ...........................................................................................................................................1-13 Table 1-7: Median Income and Poverty Rate ............................................................................................................................1-14 Table 1-8: Households with Seniors and Young Children...................................................................................................1-15 Table 1-9: Spanish-Speaking Households..................................................................................................................................1-17 Table 1-10: Persons with Disabilities and Public Transit Dependence ..........................................................................1-18 Table 1-11: City of McFarland - Critical Facility Counts ......................................................................................................1-20 Table 1-12: City of McFarland - Linear Utilities........................................................................................................................1-21 Table 1-13: City of McFarland - Parcel Counts and Value................................................................................................... 1-23 Table 1-14: City of McFarland Parcel-Based Hazus Input Values.................................................................................... 1-23 Table 1-15: NFIP Status Table as of August 2023 ................................................................................................................... 1-27 Table 1-16: City of McFarland – Flood Hazard Area Summary ........................................................................................ 1-29 Table 1-17: City of McFarland - Flood Loss Estimation for Residential Buildings ....................................................1-31 Table 1-18: Earthquakes in Kern County >4.5 Magnitude since 2000 ............................................................................ 1-32 Table 1-19: City of McFarland - Occupied Housing Units by Building Age..................................................................1-34 Table 1-20: City of McFarland - Frequency of Future Extreme Heat Events under Medium and High Emissions Scenarios ...............................................................................................................................................................................................1-40 Table 1-21: Hazard Problem Statements ....................................................................................................................................1-42 Table 1-22. Planning and Regulatory Capabilities Summary ............................................................................................1-51 Table 1-23. Administrative and technical capabilities summary................................................................................... 1-53 Table 1-24. Financial capabilities summary............................................................................................................................ 1-54 Table 1-25. Education and outreach capabilities summary .............................................................................................. 1-55 Table 1-26. City of McFarland Mitigation Actions................................................................................................................. 1-57 FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 298 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
v
Adoption Record
To comply with DMA 2000, the Kern County Board of Supervisors and participating jurisdictions have officially adopted this Kern County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 1 and Volume 2.

The adoption of the MJHMP in its entirety recognizes the jurisdictions’ commitment to reducing the impacts of natural hazards within the planning area. See below record of adoption for the City of McFarland.

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 299 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
vi

INTENTIONAL BLANK PAGE
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 300 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-1
Section 1. City of McFarland
This Municipal Participating Jurisdiction Annex (Annex) details the hazard mitigation planning elements specific to the City of McFarland, a participating jurisdiction in the Kern County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) 2020 update effort. This Annex is not intended to be a standalone document, but rather appends to and supplements the information contained in the umbrella plan document (henceforth referred to as “Volume 1”). As such, all sections of Volume 1, including the planning process and other procedural requirements, apply to and are satisfied by the City of McFarland. This Annex provides additional information specific to the City of McFarland with a focus on providing additional details for the local planning process, risk assessment, vulnerabilities, and mitigation strategy for this community.

Hazard Mitigation Plan Points of Contact
Primary Contact
Paul Saldana, Community Development Director
City of McFarland
401 W. Kern Avenue
McFarland, CA 93250
Phone: (661) 792-3091 x 1006
Email: [email protected]
Alternate Contact
Brianahi De Leon, Senior Planner
City of McFarland
401 W. Kern Avenue
McFarland, CA 93250
Phone: (661) 792-3091 x 2107
Email: [email protected]

1.1 Planning Methodology
The City of McFarland followed the planning process detailed in Volume 1, Section 3 of the Kern County MJHMP, including participating in the county-wide Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee (HMPC) and Steering Committee, as well as formulating their own internal Planning Team to support local planning and outreach activities. During the 2020 Kern County MJHMP update process, McFarland city staff attended two out of four of the stakeholder group meetings and the city was on track to fulfill all the requirements of a participating jurisdiction. These efforts were paused in late 2020 in favor of updating the city’s local HMP from 2016 as a standalone plan. When the planning process was reinitiated in early 2023, city staff and stakeholders (including representatives from Kern County Office of Emergency Services) collectively made the decision to reintegrate the City of McFarland as an Annex to the original 2020 MJHMP with the goal of strengthening collaboration between McFarland and its neighboring jurisdictions, including Kern County, in the context of regional mitigation projects.

The 2023 update process for this Annex included three additional meetings with internal Planning Team members to discuss hazard information and mitigation priorities specific to McFarland as well as a targeted public outreach campaign to survey perspectives from the local community. Internal Planning Team participants and a description of their respective involvement in the planning process are shown in Table 1-1.

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 301 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-2
Table 1-1: McFarland Planning Team Members
Planning Team Members Title Description of Involvement
City of McFarland
Paul Saldana Community Development Director Steering Committee (2023) Brianahi De Leon City Planner Steering Committee (2023) Kenny Williams City Manager Steering Committee (2023)
Hanna Olsen CivicSpark Fellow Participating stakeholder (2023) Larry Ronk Interim Community Development Director /
Building Official Participating stakeholder (2023)
Pat Jacobson Interim Public Works Director Participating stakeholder (2023) Florentine Ortiz Public Works Director Participating stakeholder (2023) Brian Knox Chief of Police Participating stakeholder (2023) Alexander Lee (Inactive) City Planner Participating stakeholder (2020); attendance at HMPC #1 and #4
Maria Lara, M.A. (Inactive) City Manager Participating stakeholder (2020); attendance at HMPC #1 and #4
McFarland Recreation & Park District
Jeff Nickell District Manager Participating stakeholder (2023) Kern County
Jolene Murillo Assistant Emergency Services Manager Participating stakeholder (2023) Waqar Rustam Environmental Health Specialist Participating stakeholder (2023) PG&E
Nicole Villaruz Local Affairs Manager (Kern County) Participating stakeholder (2023) Faith in the Valley
Daniel Rodela Community Organizer Participating stakeholder (2023) Planning Team responsibilities and participation included attendance at HMPC meetings; participation in interactive group exercises meant to build consensus about risk perceptions and mitigation priorities; and reviewing and commenting on various components of the plan. Additionally, stakeholders designated as Steering Committee members were central to all aspects of plan development and worked closely with the project Consultant Team to coordinate local outreach activities and assist in plan development. Full documentation of these efforts is provided in Appendix B.

1.1.1 Public Engagement Strategy
Public engagement was a central focus of the 2023 planning process for the City of McFarland. To ensure the contents of this plan were aligned with the concerns and priorities of the community, a diverse group of stakeholders was invited to participate in the Planning Team, including city representatives, local agencies and businesses, residents, and non-governmental organizations.

The public also participated in development of this plan through an online survey and public review of the draft Annex to the Kern County MJHMP. Community feedback played a key role in prioritizing future mitigation goals, actions, and implementation steps in this plan. Specific efforts were made to ensure FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 302 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-3
representation among non-English speaking community members by supplementing online outreach efforts (which mostly reached English speakers) with an in-person canvassing event at a local Hispanic foods store, where approximately half of survey respondents opted for Spanish translation.

Additional documentation of the public engagement strategy, as well as a full summary of survey results, are available in Appendix B.

1.2 What’s New
The City of McFarland has been making improvements toward reducing natural hazard risks to life and property since the local HMP was las updated in 2016. Completed mitigation actions from the 2016 plan are highlighted in Table 1-3. The City determined to cancel some actions due to reprioritization, lack of funding, or other listed reasons. Table 1-2 lists those cancelled mitigation actions along with an explanation for why. Other mitigation actions are pending or ongoing and are included in Table 1-26. Out of the sixteen mitigation actions carried over from the last plan, four were cancelled, one was completed and twelve were carried over into the 2023 plan.

Table 1-2 Cancelled Mitigation Actions
Mitigation No. Hazard Type Status Year Title/Description Responsible Party Reason Cancelled ma-GH-MF-10 Earthquake Cancelled 2016 Develop and maintain an earthquake hazard
community education
program
Community
Development,
McFarland Unified
School District
Included in newly
drafted ma-AH-MF-21,
which details an allhazard PE&A program.
ma-FL-MF-7 Flood Cancelled 2016 Maintain a flood risk
database to track community
exposure to flood risk and
conduct verification studies
for residents seeking
explanation of flood risk.

Community
Development
Flood risk and loss
information provided
by NFIP, existing FIS
and future USACE
study, and RAMP
application developed
for this HMP.
ma-SW-MF-14 Severe
Weather
Cancelled 2016 Develop mutual aid
agreements with nearby
public safety agencies.

City Manager,
Police Department
Non-mitigation
focused; better
addressed in EOP.

1.2.1 Mitigation Successes
Table 1-3 displays an important mitigation action from the 2016 plan that was completed by the City of McFarland. This section also describes additional mitigation success stories in more detail.

Table 1-3 Completed Mitigation Actions
Mitigation No. Hazard Type Status Year Primary Agency Title/Description Responsible Party ma-EH-MF-5 Extreme
Heat
Completed 2016 City of
McFarland
Construct back-up power
facilities for communitybased Cooling Centers.

Public Works,
McFarland Unified
School District
Back-Up Generation for McFarland Community Center
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 303 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-4
During extreme heat events, surges in consumer power demand can lead to rolling blackouts, compromising delivery of essential services and posing major health risks to residents left without access to air conditioning or medical devices requiring electricity. Thanks to HMGP grant funding, in 2017 the City of McFarland was able to purchase and install backup generation at its designated Cooling Center, located at the McFarland Community Center. This fulfilled one of the city’s prioritized mitigation actions from its 2016 HMP.

Community Garden Ribbon Cutting
In partnership with the McFarland Recreation and
Parks District and as part of the Caltrans Clean
California Local Grant Program, the City of
McFarland cut the ribbon on a new Community
Garden and Trail in June 2023. Located on the east
side of the city along Industrial Street, the
Community Garden provides mitigation for extreme
heat by increasing the cover of natural surfaces and
vegetation. Additional community benefits of the
garden might include access to fresh produce as well as future opportunities for educational programs with a natural hazard nexus.

City of McFarland Urban Forest Plan
In partnership with the Department of City and Regional Planning at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, an Urban Forest Plan was prepared for the City of McFarland in 2020 with the intention of serving as a guiding document for future urban forest development. It contains principles and suggestions for tree selection, location, and maintenance; as well as an implementation strategy tailored to the needs and capabilities of the community. The Urban Forest Plan paves the way for future extreme heat mitigation actions by the city, which are outlined in the mitigation strategy portion of this Annex.

Comprehensive General Plan Update
Beginning in the fall of 2019, the McFarland Planning Department began the process of comprehensively updating all elements of the city’s General Plan through an extensive public outreach effort to solicit input from community members, elected officials, and city staff. Many thematic elements of the General Plan include programs and policies with a mitigation benefit or explicit mention of natural hazards. The mitigation strategy in this Annex was designed to ensure consistency across all thematic elements of the 2021 City of McFarland General Plan.

The following elements were included in the 2021 General Plan update:
▪ Required: Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Safety, Conservation, Open Space, and Noise ▪ Required in San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District: Air Quality ▪ Required in Disadvantaged Communities: Environmental Justice ▪ Optional: Economic Development, Health, Community Design, Public Facilities, and Sustainable Agriculture
Figure 1-1: McFarland Community Garden and Trail
(source: Caltrans District 6)
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 304 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-5

1.3 Risk Assessment
The intent of this section is to profile the City of McFarland’s hazards and assess the city’s unique vulnerabilities, distinct from those profiled as county-wide hazards in Volume 1. The hazard profiles in Volume 1 discuss overall impacts to the Kern County planning area and describe the respective hazard problems, extents, and magnitudes/severities; previous occurrences of hazard events; and the likelihood of future occurrences. For more information on Risk Assessment Methodologies, see Volume 1 and Appendix A.

1.3.1 Hazard Identification & Screening
Per FEMA guidance, the first step in developing the risk assessment is to identify hazards. Hazard selection is a twofold process. First, the city’s Planning Team considered and screened a broad set of hazards profiled in local, regional, and state-wide hazard planning documents. A crosswalk of these documents was reviewed for McFarland-specific hazards and the screening results are outlined in Section

1.3.1.1. Second, the Planning Team reviewed historical hazard events which have affected the City of McFarland to inform the hazard prioritization process, as outlined in Section 1.3.1.2.

1.3.1.1 Determining the “Universe” of Hazards
The Planning Team reviewed previously prepared hazard mitigation plans by the City of McFarland as well as the plans of regional and state entities to determine the “universe” of natural hazards with the potential to affect the city’s planning area. Table 1-4 provides a crosswalk of hazards identified in the city’s 2016 local HMP and General Plan Safety Element, the 2020 Kern County Multi-Jurisdictional HMP, and the 2018 California State HMP. Through this document review process, 16 different hazards were identified for consideration. The crosswalk provided a framework for the city’s Planning Team to evaluate which hazards posed enough relevance to the city to warrant prioritization in this Annex. For example, wildfire was considered to have no relevance to McFarland, whereas flooding was profiled in every planning document.

Some hazards which received prioritization in the 2020 Kern County MJHMP effort and are detailed in Volume 1 of this plan – specifically, wildfire and dam failure – do not have relevance to the City of McFarland and were omitted from further discussion in the Risk Assessment portion of this Annex.

Table 1-4. Hazard Prioritization Crosswalk
Hazard 2016 McFarland HMP
2016 McFarland Safety
Element
2020 Kern County
MJHMP 2018 California HMP
Agricultural Pests ■
Climate Change ■
Dam Failure ■ ■
Drought ■ ■ ■
Earthquake ■ ■ ■ ■
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 305 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-6
Hazard 2016 McFarland HMP
2016 McFarland Safety
Element
2020 Kern County
MJHMP 2018 California HMP
Extreme Heat ■
Flood ■ ■ ■ ■
HazMat ■ ■
Landslide ■ ■
Levee Failure ■
Human-Caused ■
Pandemic Disease ■
Severe Weather ■ ■ ■
Soil Hazards ■ ■ ■ ■
Terrorism & Tech ■
Wildfire ■ ■

1.3.1.2 Past Major Hazard Events
An important consideration in identifying and prioritizing hazards is past major hazard events, especially those which have triggered federal or state disaster declarations. The Planning Team reviewed and considered past major hazard events in the City of McFarland as part of the hazard screening and identification process.

Most available information on major past hazard events comes from federal or state disaster declarations.

A disaster declaration may be granted when the severity or magnitude of an event surpasses the abilities of a local government to respond and recover. Additional federal or state disaster funding is generally available in response to a disaster declaration. State funding assistance is provided when a local government’s capacity to respond to a disaster is exceeded. Should the disaster be so severe that both the local and state governments’ capacities are exceeded, a federal emergency or disaster declaration may be issued, allowing for the provision of federal assistance.

Kern County has had 33 federal disaster declarations1 since 1980, some of which were statewide. Table 1-5 shows these events, excluding wildfire which occurs within Kern County but does not directly impact the City of McFarland and was not selected as a prioritized hazard in this Annex. The Disaster declaration history shows most extreme weather and flooding events occur during the winter months of January and February. Since 2023 25 out of 33 disaster declarations occurred during the winter.

Hazard events occurring outside city boundaries may nevertheless affect the community, either directly or indirectly. For example, dam failures or wildfires may occur outside the City of McFarland, but either hazard event could affect watersheds that drain into the city, resulting in flooding or longer-term watershed health impacts. Local power supply could also be interrupted due to extraterritorial hazard 1 Officially, 34 disasters have been declared, as California was declared as part of the Hurricane Katrina evacuation; however, no disaster occurred in California.

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 306 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-7
occurrences. These hazards are discussed in Volume 1 of this MJHMP, and secondary impacts can be presumed to apply to the City of McFarland.

Table 1-5: Disaster Declarations in Kern County, 1980 - 2023 Year Incident Description Disaster Number
2023 SEVERE WINTER STORMS, STRAIGHT-LINE WINDS, FLOODING, LANDSLIDES, MUDSLIDES 4699 2023 SEVERE WINTER STORMS, FLOODING, LANDSLIDES, AND MUDSLIDES 3592 2020 COVID-19 PANDEMIC 4482
2020 COVID-19 3428
2019 EARTHQUAKES 3415
2017 SEVERE WINTER STORMS, FLOODING, AND MUDSLIDES 4305 2011 SEVERE WINTER STORMS, FLOODING, AND DEBRIS AND MUD FLOWS 1952 2007 SEVERE FREEZE 1689
2005 SEVERE STORMS, FLOODING, LANDSLIDES, AND MUD AND DEBRIS FLOWS 1585 2005 SEVERE STORMS, FLOODING, DEBRIS FLOWS, AND MUDSLIDES 1577 1999 CA-CITRUS CROP DAMAGE 2/2/99 1267
1998 SEVERE WINTER STORMS AND FLOODING 1203
1995 SEVERE WINTER STORMS, FLOODING LANDSLIDES, MUD FLOW 1046 1995 SEVERE WINTER STORMS, FLOODING, LANDSLIDES, MUD FLOWS 1044 1992 RAIN/SNOW/WIND STORMS, FLOODING, MUDSLIDES 935
1991 SEVERE FREEZE 894
1983 COASTAL STORMS, FLOODS, SLIDES & TORNADOES 677
Source: FEMA OpenData

1.3.2 Hazard Risk Ranking
The Planning Team for the City of McFarland used the same hazard prioritization process as the Kern County HMPC. This process, described in detail in Section 4.3.1 of Volume 1, considers both the probability of occurrence of each hazard as well as the severity of potential impacts to the planning area. The city’s Risk Assessment Matrix in Figure 1-2 displays the results of the hazard risk ranking exercise along the two-dimensional axes of probability and impact.

All hazards affecting the Kern County planning area were profiled in Volume 1 of this MJHMP, including extreme heat as part ofthe severe weather hazard profile; however, extreme heat was profiled as a separate hazard for the City of McFarland in this Annex due to the local population’s severe vulnerability. The purpose of this Annex is to provide additional context and information specific to the City of McFarland for each hazard while Volume 1 contains more general information regarding each hazard. Outside of creating a new hazard profile for extreme heat, no changes in priorities were made since the last HMP was adopted.

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 307 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-8
Figure 1-2: City of McFarland Risk Assessment Matrix
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 308 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-9

1.3.3 Community Profile
The community profile for the City of McFarland sets the stage for the vulnerability assessment.

Knowledge of local geography, demographic characteristics, and economic conditions can help more effectively direct mitigation strategies and actions toward key populations and areas. The Planning Team reviewed the city’s geographic and demographic data as part of the risk prioritization and assessment process.

Figure 1-3: Geographic Overview

1.3.3.1 Geography
The City of McFarland is situated within the San Joaquin Valley in the northern portion of Kern County.

McFarland is surrounded by farmland in unincorporated Kern County. The city is approximately 20 miles north of Bakersfield and three miles south of Delano, and State Route 99 (SR 99) runs north-south through the city. In 2022, the City of McFarland more than doubled the total land area within its borders by annexing over 2,100 acres of unincorporated farmland located south of the previous city limits, on the eastern and western sides of SR-99. The City also annexed an area located west of Garzoli Avenue in the northwest corner of the city, bringing the total area within city limits to approximately six square miles (Figure 1-3).

Throughout this Annex, hazard vulnerability is be discussed in the context of future development, including possible land use changes to recently annexed areas.

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 309 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-10
To the east of McFarland are the Sierra Nevada Foothills, and to the west is the Temblor Mountain Range.

The topography in McFarland is typical of the southern San Joaquin Valley. The city lies in a very flat portion of the Tulare-Buena Vista Basin, with a gradual decrease in elevation from the southeast to northwest. Elevations within the city range from approximately 360 feet above sea level at the southeast corner to approximately 340 feet at the northwest corner.

1.3.3.2 Transportation Routes
State Route 99 (SR 99) runs north-south through the city with access to McFarland at Perkins Avenue, Sherwood Avenue, and Elmo Highway. Although an important major transportation corridor through the Central Valley, SR 99 bisects the city, separating its eastern and western portions and resulting in a barrier to efficient local traffic flow patterns. The City of McFarland operates a Dial-a-Ride bus service in compliance with FTA Title VI requirements. McFarland is also served by the Kern Regional Transit Authority 110 line which runs north-south from Bakersfield to Delano with stops in the cities of Wasco and Shafter.

1.3.3.3 Climate
McFarland experiences a moderate climate, with average seasonal highs around 83 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) and seasonal lows around 47°F. On average, the warmest month is July, and the coolest month is January (Figure 1-4). Annual precipitation totals around 7.5 inches, arriving primarily during the months of October through April. Thirty-year climate normals at the nearest National Weather Service (NWS) meteorological station, located in the neighboring City of Delano, are shown in Figure 1-4. (National Centers for Environmental Information, 2021)
Figure 1-4: Monthly Normals for Temperature and Precipitation, 1991-2020, in Delano, California Source: National Center for Environmental Information

1.3.3.4 Demographics & Vulnerable Populations
This section explores the various demographic and economic characteristics of the City of McFarland to inform hazard mitigation planning efforts. Natural disasters are social phenomena as well as physical and 0 0.2

0.4 0.6

0.8 1

1.2 1.4

1.6 0
20 40
60 80
100
120
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Monthly Precipitation (in.)
Temperature (˚F)
Avg Temp
Max Temp
Min Temp
Total Precip
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 310 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-11
meteorological events, and the City of McFarland’s demographic composition determines how hazard vulnerability is distributed throughout the community, especially for groups with who face greater obstacles to disaster preparedness, response, and recovery. Understanding the unique social and economic fabric of an area can also help to identify the potential social costs resulting from damage to infrastructure, housing, industry, public facilities, essential services, and transportation.

The demographics information contained herein for the City of McFarland has been post-processed based on the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) five-year estimate period from 2016 to 2021 and will not necessarily match the figures presented in other regional demographic studies or plans.

Inherently, the margin of error for this data can be high, especially in more rural areas and for data collected at the block group level, which is made publicly available as spatial data files but not as a part of the Census Bureau’s tabular reporting. The figures referenced in this section are not intended to inform decision-making or administrative activities, but merely to suggest larger trends in the region with relevance to hazard mitigation planning efforts.

The City of McFarland’s estimated population in 2021 was 14,085, according to the ACS five-year estimates, which is 1.6% of the total population in Kern County. A more detailed time series of annual population change since 2008 is shown in Figure 1-5, which is sourced from the U.S. Census Population Estimates Program (PEP). The population grew significantly from 2012 to 2019 in McFarland, by about 3,000 individuals, before an apparent decline of approximately 1,500 in 2020. Caution should be used when interpreting PEP estimates from 2020 due to errors introduced in the Census’ methodology associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.

Figure 1-5: Estimated Population, 2008 to 2021
Source: U.S. Census Population Estimates Program (PEP)
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 311 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-12

1.3.3.4.1 Introduction to Vulnerable Populations
Exploring local demographic data may help to identify groups and geographic areas with specific vulnerabilities to natural hazard events. Certain populations face greater risks following a hazard event due to age, economic status and mobility, physical or mental disability, geographic location, or a combination of factors. Vulnerability in the face of a hazard event is not a fixed characteristic; the same individual may be at greater risk from some hazards but not others. For example, a household without a car may face increased risks during a wildfire or flood event where rapid evacuation is necessary, but the same household may be adequately prepared for an earthquake. Some individuals can reduce their vulnerability through mitigation, whereas others face more fixed vulnerability to disasters. This is especially true for individuals who rely on caregiving networks to navigate daily life, such as children, the elderly, and persons with disabilities. (National Center for Disaster Preparedness, 2020) Inequality in the geographic distribution of environmental risk burden also means that lower-income and marginalized communities are more likely to live in hazard-prone neighborhoods with fewer mitigation resources.

In the context of all-hazards preparedness and response planning, at-risk individuals (often used interchangeably with vulnerable populations) are defined federally as “children, pregnant women, senior citizens, and other individuals who have access or functional needs in the event of a public health emergency.” (42 USC § 2802(b)(4)(B) (2019)) The following sections will explore data from the U.S. Census detailing population-level vulnerability for the City of McFarland as a whole and across the geographic planning area. Planning for vulnerable populations in hazard mitigation can help prioritize limited resources where they will be the most effective.

1.3.3.4.2 Income & Housing
Economic mobility is one of the most important predictors of natural hazard vulnerability. Low-income residents are more likely to occupy housing which is inadequately maintained or otherwise poorly built to withstand extreme events. For example, mobile homes are more susceptible to damage in earthquakes and floods than other types of residences, and older homes are less likely to contain air conditioning or cooling units to cope with high heat events. In urban areas, low-income residents are more likely to occupy homes and apartment buildings with unreinforced masonry, which is particularly susceptible to earthquake damage.

Renters are also more vulnerable to natural hazards, as they are less likely to have personal property insurance and the decision to make major structural improvements typically lies with the property owner.

Federal disaster recovery services can exacerbate inequalities between renters and homeowners; payout amounts are significantly higher for homeowners applying through FEMA’s Individual Assistance (IA) program. From 1999 to 2013, homeowners saw their wealth increase with local hazard damages, whereas renters’ wealth decreased. (Howell & Elliott, 2019)
The City of McFarland had an overall homeownership rate of 45% in 2021, with renter occupancy being the dominant form of tenure (Table 1-6). Figure 1-6 also shows rental occupancy is highest in the residential areas of east McFarland.

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 312 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-13
Table 1-6: Renters and Homeowners
Source: 2016-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Jurisdiction Total Households Owner Occupied / (%) Renter Occupied / (%) Kern County 274,705 111,889 / 41% 162,816 / 59%
McFarland 3,259 1,466 / 45% 1,793 / 55%
Figure 1-6: Home Ownership Rate (% Total Housing Units) by Block Group Source: 2016-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Low-income households and communities face disproportionate financial burdens from the costs associated with disaster preparedness, response, and recovery. Disasters create unexpected expenses which may serve as “tipping points” for families and individuals living on the edge of poverty or homelessness. Those who lack access to transportation may be unable to evacuate ahead of an emergency, and recovery costs may be higher for a household without the resources to conduct hazard mitigation activities ahead of time. (Krause & Reeves, 2017) Renters and low-income residents are also less likely to purchase insurance, meaning that those with the most to lose during a hazard event are also the least prepared to deal with potential losses. Major hurricane events in recent history, such as Harvey, Irma, and Katrina, all demonstrate that low-income and historically marginalized communities face increased vulnerability to hazards and struggle the most to recover. (Id.) The median household income in McFarland in 2021 was $38,651, with nearly a third of its population living in poverty (calculated as a percentage of total population over 15 years of age). By comparison, median income and poverty rates for Kern County were $58,824 and 19.4%, respectively (Table 1-7). The highest poverty rates are observed in the Census block groups spanning the eastern and northern portions of the city, which mostly correlate with McFarland’s primary residential areas (Figure 1-7 and Figure 1-8).

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 313 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-14
Table 1-7: Median Income and Poverty Rate
Source: 2016-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Jurisdiction Median Income Poverty Rate
Kern County $58,824 19.35%
McFarland $38,651 29.32%
Figure 1-7: Median Household Income by Block Group
Source: 2016-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Figure 1-8: Poverty Rate by Block Group
Source: 2016-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 314 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-15

1.3.3.4.3 Age
Age plays a significant role in vulnerability to natural hazards, as both seniors and children are dependent populations who rely on caregiver networks for support and protection. Seniors may have mobility challenges and increased health concerns, necessitating assistance during evacuations and recovery.

Similarly, children have limited ability to protect themselves and depend on caregivers to ensure their safety and well-being during emergencies. Age vulnerability is compounded by low-income status, highlighting the importance of targeted interventions to address the unique needs of these populations.

Approximately 15% of households in McFarland include at least one senior individual (over 65 years of age),

23.2% of whom experience poverty (Table 1-8). Additionally, seniors living alone constitute 3.9% of the total households in McFarland (131 households). Seniors living alone may have more difficulty evacuating during an emergency, especially for individuals with mobility challenges and those who lack internet access and/or internet literacy. Assisted living facilities usually require extra notice and coordination to implement evacuation and are typically identified as “critical facilities” by emergency managers.

Children often depend on family and caregivers to navigate daily life. As such, their resilience during and after a natural disaster is only as strong as the networks of care upon which they rely. Approximately 60% of households include at least one minor under the age of 18 years, 31% of which represent single-caregiver households (Table 1-8). Disasters may have profound and detrimental long-term effects on children, and care should be taken to minimize disruption to social networks and lifelines serving children and families following a disaster event.

Table 1-8: Households with Seniors and Young Children
Source: 2016-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Jurisdiction
Total
Households
(HH)
HH with 65+ / %
HH
HH with 65+ &
Living Alone / %
HH
HH with 65+ &
Poverty / % HH
HH with <18 / %
HH
HH with <18 & 1
Caregiver / % HH
Kern County 299,810 70,895 / 23.6% 15,110 / 5% 9,387 / 3.1% 118,037 / 39.4% 36,239 / 12.1% McFarland 3,394 512 / 15.1% 131 / 3.9% 119 / 3.5% 2,049 / 60.4% 643 / 18.9%

1.3.3.4.4 Race & Ethnicity
Natural disasters compound racial disparities; non-white individuals and communities receive less recovery aid from FEMA than their white counterparts, even where the amount of damage is the same. (Howell & Elliott, 2019) (National Advisory Council, 2020) At the time of this plan’s publication, the recent COVID-19 pandemic is a glaring testament to racial disparities in disaster outcomes, with non-white persons facing morbidity rates from COVID-19 infections anywhere from 70% to 350% higher than white, non-Hispanic persons. (CDC, 2020)
These disparities are evidence of the complicated relationship between disaster recovery and overlapping social vulnerabilities including race, income, language, and health. Black and Hispanic residents are more likely to be low income and renters, conditions which create barriers to navigating FEMA’s IA programs.

Communities with more non-white residents may have lower tax revenue and property values, which FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 315 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-16
means less investment in mitigation and rebuilding efforts before and after an emergency. Finally, a legacy of residential segregation and discriminatory redlining policies can force marginalized groups into areas with greater environmental risk burden, including higher exposure to natural hazards and pollution and lower access to open space. (Los Angeles County Department of Public Health, 2018) Proportionally, McFarland has a much larger Hispanic population than Kern County as a whole; as of 2021, over 90% of the city’s population identifies as Hispanic (Figure 1-9).

Figure 1-9: Race and Ethnicity
Source: 2016-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates *Note: Hispanics may be of any race, so also are included in applicable race categories. This has the effect of influencing total population percentage.to sum greater than 100% over all categories.

1.3.3.4.1 Language
Individuals with no or limited English-speaking ability may be unable to access up-to-date emergency information and have difficulty navigating recovery programs. This is particularly true for McFarland since approximately 49.1% of households (2,636 in total) are Spanish-speaking, with 58.1% of those households (969 in total) speaking no or limited English (Table 1-9).

Local governments can take steps to increase equity in disaster preparedness and recovery outcomes, including through efforts such as the timely translation of preparedness materials and emergency notifications and by partnering with local community groups to target outreach to at-risk populations more effectively.

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 316 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-17
Table 1-9: Spanish-Speaking Households
Source: 2016-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Jurisdiction Total Households (HH) Spanish-Speaking / % HH Spanish-Speaking, limited English / % HH Kern County 299,810 83,720 / 27.9% 22,127 / 7.4%
McFarland 3,394 1,667 / 49.1% 969 / 28.6%

1.3.3.4.2 At-Risk Individuals with Access & Functional Needs Access and functional needs may interfere with the ability for an at-risk individual to access or receive medical care before, during, or after a disaster or emergency event. “Access and functional needs” (AFN) refers to a broad set of cross-cutting access-based or function-based needs, generally distinguished according to the following:
▪ Access-based needs require that resources are accessible to all individuals to maintain health, such as social services, accommodations, information, transportation, and medications. ▪ Function-based needs refer to restrictions or limitations an individual may have that require assistance before, during, and after a disaster or public health emergency.

At-risk individuals may have additional needs that must be considered in planning for, responding to, and recovering from a disaster or emergency. An approach recommended by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for integrating the access and functional needs of at-risk individuals is to consider elements based on the “CMIST” framework:
▪ C = Communication – Individuals with communication needs may have limitations that interfere with the receipt of and response to information, requiring information to be provided in an appropriate and accessible format. This can include individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, have limited or no English proficiency, are blind or have low vision, or have cognitive or physiological disabilities.
▪ M = Maintaining Health – Individuals may require specific services, equipment, medications, or nutrition to reduce negative impacts of a disaster or emergency and maintain activities of daily living, such as breathing, eating, dressing, grooming, transferring, and toileting. ▪ I = Independence – Continuity of access to necessary assistive devices, such as wheelchairs, or other aids, like service animals, is crucial to maintaining independence for individuals who rely on these support tools to function autonomously.
▪ S = Support – Person-centered support may be necessary for individuals who have lost caregiver assistance, have cognitive or behavioral disabilities, or have past trauma experiences which compound the need for social and emotional support following an emergency event. ▪ T = Transportation – Individuals may lack access to personal transportation due to a variety of factors, including economic status, age, physical or mental disability, temporary condition or injury, or legal restriction. This requires coordination with mass transit and accessible transportation service providers to ensure access to support and necessary services. (HHS, 2020)
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 317 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-18
While most individuals with access and functional needs do not have acute medical conditions requiring the support of trained medical professionals, many will require additional assistance to maintain health and minimize preventable negative outcomes. These at-risk individuals may also require more time or personnel to assist during an evacuation. It is estimated that approximately 3.5% of the total population of McFarland lives with some form of a disability, as shown in Table 1-10.

Approximately 252 (7.4%) of households in the city have no access to a vehicle (Table 1-10). While McFarland and Kern County as a whole are largely car-dependent, with less than 1% of the population reliant on public transit, lack of vehicle access indicates that some residents use other modes of transportation to get to work, such as carpooling. In the event of a disaster, families and individuals without personal transportation may face a limited ability to rapidly evacuate an impacted area and barriers to accessing medical or other essential services.

Table 1-10: Persons with Disabilities and Public Transit Dependence Source: 2016-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Jurisdiction
Total Population
(Pop)
Persons with a
Disability / % Pop
Persons Reliant on Public
Transit / % Pop
Total Households
(HH)
Households with no
Vehicle / % HH
Kern County 905,644 98,707 / 10.9% 1,921 / 0.2% 299,810 17,861 / 6% McFarland 14,085 493 / 3.5% 56 / 0.4% 3,394 252 / 7.4%

1.3.3.4.3 Social Vulnerability Index (SVI)
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) attempts to quantify social vulnerability as it pertains to allhazards mitigation planning through the creation of a composite index called the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI). The SVI ranks Census Tracts based on 16 different Census variables to identify at-risk populations. The four main themes the SVI uses to rank communities’ percentile distribution on the basis of social vulnerability to public health emergencies and natural hazard events include socioeconomic status, housing type/transportation, racial and ethnic minority status, and household characteristics.

Census Tracts in the top 10% (i.e., in the 90th percentile of SVI values for each state) are considered to have the highest vulnerability. The City of McFarland contains one Census Tract in the 90th percentile SVI ranking, as shown in Figure 1-10.

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 318 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-19
Figure 1-10: CDC Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) by Census Tract

1.3.4 Population & Asset Inventory
Assessing vulnerabilities exposes the unique characteristics of individual hazards and identifies which populations, areas, and assets within the City of McFarland are vulnerable to specific hazards. The city’s vulnerability assessment considered local knowledge of hazards and impacts, as well as a GIS overlaying method for estimating the total land area, parcels, population, and critical facilities exposed to hazards that have a unique spatial footprint. Using these methods, the City estimated its potential damages and losses.

The data developed for this Annex does not include parcels, populations, or critical facilities located in the recently annexed area as of April 2022, which is mostly undeveloped agricultural land. Future development impacts in the context of McFarland’s annexation are discussed extensively in Section 1.3.5.

1.3.4.1 Population
In order to develop hazard-specific vulnerability assessments, the populations near natural hazard risks are determined to understand the total “at-risk” population. We can understand how geographicallydefined hazards may affect the city by analyzing the extent of a hazard in relation to the distribution of the at-risk population. This Annex uses an area-weighted population model to determine exposure, based on Census block group level data from the 2015 to 2019 ACS five-year estimates, and assumes a total population in McFarland of 15,479 individuals.

Because the population exposure data is derived from ACS population estimates at the Census Tract scale or smaller, population estimates aggregated up to the city level differ from ACS place-level estimates and should not be used as official population counts. Nevertheless, local level ACS data can reveal patterns in FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 319 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-20
the geographic distribution of hazard exposure and provides a sense of the size of the problem, as measured by the approximated proportion of the city’s total population (not definitive counts) exposed to a given hazard. See Section 1.3.3 for more details on the city’s population trends and social vulnerability data.

1.3.4.2 Critical Facilities
A critical facility is a structure, infrastructure, or other improvement that, because of its function, size, service area, or uniqueness, has the potential to cause disruption of vital socioeconomic activities if it is destroyed, damaged, or functionally impaired. As such, critical facilities are of special concern in prioritizing hazard mitigation resources. A critical facilities spatial database was developed to translate information into georeferenced2 points and lifelines that represent physical locations. ▪ Points include critical facilities such as government buildings, police stations, fire stations, hospitals, elder care facilities, child daycare facilities, schools, and transportation and utility structures.
▪ Lifelines include critical facilities related to electrical power, liquid fuel, natural gas, and other crucial utility infrastructure lines as well as transportation routes.

To enhance understanding of local hazard vulnerability and the assets most at risk, the Planning Team sourced a comprehensive inventory of critical facility points and lifelines based on data from the City of McFarland, Kern County, and other public sources. Total point counts and lifeline miles for each critical facility type included in the exposure analysis are shown in Table 1-11, Table 1-12, and Figure 1-11.

Table 1-11: City of McFarland - Critical Facility Point Counts Critical Facility Type (Point) Total Feature Count
Essential Facility 39
Adult Residential Facility 1
Child Care Center 4
High Potential Loss 39
City Hall 1
County Asset 3
Family Child Care Home 8
Fire Station 1
Healthcare Facility 3
Library 1
Police 1
School 8
2 To georeference something means to define its existence in physical space; that is, to establish its location in terms of map projections or coordinate systems. The term is used both when establishing the relation between raster or vector images and coordinates and when determining the spatial location of other geographical features.

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 320 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-21
Special Needs Facility 8
Transportation and Utility 5
Bridge 4
Substation 1
Grand Total 44
Table 1-12: City of McFarland – Critical Facility Lifeline Mileage Critical Facility Type (Lifeline) Total Linear Mileage
Transportation and Lifeline 58.9
NG Pipeline 2.5
Railroad 3.4
Street 52.2
State Highway 3.1
Local Streets 49.1
Transmission Line 0.7
Grand Total 58.9
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 321 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-22
Figure 1-11: City of McFarland - Critical Facilities
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 322 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-23

1.3.4.3 Parcel Values
Parcel exposure refers to the total count and value of parcels within the City of McFarland exposed to a hazard with a specific spatial footprint. In the event of a disaster, the primary cost concern is generally the value of infrastructure or property improvements, rather than the value of the land itself. Parcel information for the City of McFarland, including both the assessed market value and content value derived from the Kern County Assessor’s dataset, are summarized in Table 1-13. Similar to the critical facilities and population inventories developed for this Annex, the parcel inventory does not include the 2022 annexation.

Table 1-13: City of McFarland - Parcel Counts and Value Total Parcel Count Total Market Value ($) Total Content Value ($) Total Value ($) City of McFarland 2,789 $258,710,296 $129,382,648 $388,0092,944

1.3.4.3.1 Structure & Content Value Inventory
FEMA’s loss estimation software, Hazus-MH 4.0, was used to analyze the city’s potential structure losses from flood and earthquake hazards. A Hazus level II assessment was performed leveraging Kern County Assessor’s data in lieu of default Hazus data. Hazus software operates on structure square footage, structure replacement, and content replacement costs to estimate potential losses specific to a modeled flood or earthquake scenario. Table 1-14 provides input value data for occupancy classes derived from the Assessor’s data to match FEMA modeling standards.

Table 1-14: City of McFarland Parcel-Based Hazus Input Values Residential Structure Type Parcel Count Improvement Value Content Value Proportion of Value
(%)
Single Family Home 2,305 $238,612,591 $119,306,295 92.2% Mobile Home 1 $3,976 $1,988 <0.01%
Duplex 369 $16,578,450 $8,289,224 6.4%
Multi-Family Home 59 $3,460,279 $1,730,139 1.3%
Grand Total 2,737 $261,755,325 $129,447,404 100%
Data Source: Kern County, address points. The address point data used for this Hazus analysis exists in a many-to-one relationship to parcels. Address point values were assigned based on an equal distribution of the parcel value in which each address point is contained.

For parcels with no corresponding address point, a point was created. Note: Building values reflect fair market value as provided by the county on the parcel level. Content replacement costs are calculated based on the general occupancy classes (building type) provided by Kern County and translated to Hazus occupancy classes. Each HAZUS occupancy class prescribes a specific content cost multiplier used to calculate the content cost values shown above.

1.3.4.4 RAMP Application
The jurisdiction’s risk assessment was completed in part using the web-based and interactive Risk Assessment Mapping Platform (RAMP), accessed via the project website at www.mitigatehazards.com.

RAMP is a mapping platform built specifically for mitigation planning which allows interactive discovery of robust risk, vulnerability, and exposure data developed especially for Kern County. The user interface displays county and city facilities and buildings overlaid with natural hazard layers to bring interactivity FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 323 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-24
and individual discovery to the GIS analysis performed for the MJHMP. Users interactively filter facilities and buildings by natural hazard zones and/or construction characteristics. See Volume 1 for a detailed description of RAMP. The city’s Planning Team used RAMP in meetings and as needed to understand vulnerabilities to the City of McFarland.

1.3.5 Past & Future Development

1.3.5.1 Development Since 2016 HMP
The City of McFarland is a general law city that crafts its own development regulations and is subject to California State law. Future development is subject to compliance with state and local planning, zoning, subdivision, and architecture laws.

The City of McFarland’s General Plan (GP) establishes long-range development policies. The GP is designed to help the city address issues related to land use, circulation (traffic), infrastructure, housing, open space, conservation, noise, and safety. For example, the Land Use Element of the GP helps guide the city in determining the locations of future development, including annexation based on the city’s defined Sphere of Influence (SOI). One of the central functions of the General Plan is to decrease risks and impacts of natural hazards.

The largest change in development to occur in McFarland since the 2016 HMP is the annexation of over 2,100 acres of previously unincorporated farmland, nearly doubling the city’s total land area and incorporating new areas along the SR 99 corridor. Approved by the Kern County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) in April 2022, these newly incorporated parcels remain in agricultural use, but represent a major opportunity for future development and funding of public services.

1.3.5.2 Future Development
McFarland is required to regularly update its building codes to meet the minimum standards required in the California Building Code, which was last updated in 2022. The California Building Code provides some of the safest construction standards in the world and is meant to reduce risk to building occupants from high wind, seismic activity, landslides, flood, wildfire, and other natural hazards. In addition to California’s minimum development standards, McFarland participates in the NFIP. As such, all new development or substantial improvements located within the regulatory floodplain must meet the minimum flood protection standards set forth by FEMA. See Section 4.3.5 of Volume 1 for more information about past and future development in Kern County.

As the General Plan is updated and incorporates information from this MJHMP and Annex, City of McFarland staff are continually improving hazard information through these hazard mitigation plan updates. With this current update, the improved online mapping of natural hazards available through RAMP will inform those responsible for future development to make better decisions about where and how future development occurs.

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 324 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-25
The city’s Planning Team reviewed McFarland’s General Plan elements under the capability assessments undertaken for this hazard mitigation plan (Section 1.4.1). Deficiencies revealed by these reviews are identified as mitigation actions to decrease risks and move beyond past trends.

The city’s municipal code includes regulations to mitigate the impact of hazards on new and existing development, including floodplain management regulations and strict stormwater requirements for new development and subdivisions.

Should development occur within a hazard area, the municipal code should ensure impacts from a hazard event are mitigated and losses are minimal. If new development does occur in a hazard area, evacuation and emergency planning should take into consideration the anticipated local impacts of the hazard event, including potential interrupted services or the elimination of access.

The anticipated growth in the city resulting from the recent annexation will not cause significant change in vulnerability to the city for identified priority hazards and is likely to bring a minimal benefit in the form of increased tax revenue to fund essential public services and infrastructure improvements.

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 325 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-26

1.3.6 Vulnerability to Specific Hazards
This section expands upon the vulnerability assessment of Section 4.5 in Volume 1 to include information specific to the City of McFarland. For hazards with a unique spatial footprint, such as flood and earthquake, this section will include quantitative estimates of exposure to population, parcels, and critical facilities, as well as damage estimates from simulated hazard scenarios. Methodologies for calculating loss estimates are the same as those described in Section 3.4 of Volume 1. Additional information specific to McFarland that is not captured in Volume 1, such as the local regulatory environment or hazard event history, will be included in this assessment. Most importantly, the mitigation strategy presented in this plan responds to locally-specific concerns and prescribes actions to achieve the greatest reduction of vulnerability, which results in saved lives, reduced injuries, reduced property damage, and better protection for the environment in the event of a natural hazard.

This Annex provides information for the following natural hazard threats specific to McFarland:

Flood
SECTION 1.3.6.1
Earthquake
SECTION 1.3.6.2
Severe Weather
SECTION 1.3.6.3
Drought*
SECTION 1.3.6.4
Extreme Heat
SECTION 0

* Subsidence is included as a
secondary hazard to drought
Extreme heat was included as a sub-hazard of severe weather in Volume 1 of this MJHMP but is discussed as a separate hazard in this Annex due to the severe vulnerability of McFarland’s population. Additionally, some hazards which have been profiled in Volume 1 of the Kern County MJHMP were determined not to have relevancy to McFarland and are therefore excluded from this Annex. These include:
• Dam Failure – No dam inundation zones within the city’s planning area. • Wildfire – Wildfires do not present a major risk locally; no wildfire severity zones are located within the planning area. Secondary air quality impacts are addressed in other hazard profiles. • Slope Failure – Slope failures pose minimal risks to the flat, low-lying areas of Kern County such as the McFarland planning area.
• Soil Stability – Land subsidence related to water overdraft is included as a sub-hazard to drought in this document.

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 326 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-27

1.3.6.1 Flood
For a general description of flood hazards, including floodplain definitions, see Volume 1, Section 4.5.2.

1.3.6.1.1 Regulatory Environment
National Flood Insurance Program
Additional information and background regarding the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) are available in Volume 1, Section 4.5.2.

The City of McFarland entered the NFIP on June 28, 1974, with the initial FIRM became effective on September 29, 1986. The most current effective FIRM and flood insurance study for the McFarland area is effective as of 9/26/2008. According to general provisions of the City’s floodplain management code 15.12, all subsequent amendments and/or revisions to FEMA flood hazard information, is adopted by reference upon update. Compliance is monitored by FEMA regional staff and by the California Department of Water Resources under contract with FEMA. Maintaining compliance under the NFIP is an important component of flood risk reduction. See Table 1-15 for more information on the city’s policies and historical flood insurance claims.

Table 1-15: NFIP Status Table as of August 2023
NFIP Status Participating since 9/29/1986
Policies in Force 73
Single Family 70
2-3 Family 2
All Other Residential 1
Non-Residential 0
Total Premiums $29,522
Insurance in Force $12,038,300
Total Number of Closed Paid Losses 25
$ of Closed Paid Losses $150,075
Number of Substantial Damage Closed Paid Losses 1
Repetitive Loss Properties 0
Severe Repetitive Loss Properties 0
Repetitive Loss Payment by NFIP on Building 0
Repetitive Loss Payment by NFIP on Contents 0
* Note: N/D signifies no data.

See Volume 1, Section 4.5 for more information on the NFIP.

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 327 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-28
Communities participating in the NFIP must, at a minimum, regulate all development in floodplain areas in accordance with NFIP criteria. Prior to issuing a permit for development in a floodplain, the community must determine that the development will meet the following basic criteria:
▪ Development must not increase the flood hazard on other properties; and ▪ New buildings and those undergoing substantial improvements must, at a minimum, be elevated or floodproofed to protect against damage by the base flood (i.e., the 1% annual chance or 100-year flood).

Structures permitted or built before December 31, 1974, when flood insurance rate maps (FIRMs) were first being issued, or before the effective date of the initial FIRM for the community, are considered “pre-FIRM”.

Most pre-FIRM buildings were constructed without taking flood hazards into account. “Post-FIRM” structures, built in 1975 or later, are less vulnerable to flood hazards under NFIP-compliant building codes and floodplain management standards. At this time the city manager is appointed to administer, implement, and enforce is the addressed commitments and requirements of the NFIP.

City of McFarland Storm Drain Master Plan
Completed in 2015, the City of McFarland Storm Drain Master Plan (SDMP) provides comprehensive longrange planning for the implementation and development of drainage facility improvements in the City of McFarland. Only limited data from the previous Kern County Flood Insurance Study (FIS) was available at the time of SDMP publication; specifically, the last FIS for this area does not identify stormwater runoff volumes from the regional flooding hazard. Therefore, the SDMP gives more focus to local flooding volumes in prescribing storm drain improvements, for which more data is available. Overall, the SDMP finds that McFarland’s storm drain infrastructure is largely undersized for even 10% annual chance (i.e., 10-year) local flooding events, not accounting for unknown regional flooding hazards. The SDMP also provides a prioritization framework for conducting system improvements following a downstream to upstream approach.

City of McFarland General Plan
The City of McFarland conducted a comprehensive update to its General Plan from 2021 to 2022, including several thematic elements which provide programs and policies that reduce flood risk either directly or indirectly, including the Safety, Circulation, Land Use, Public Utilities, and Environmental Justice Elements. Because future growth in McFarland is constrained in large part by the presence of floodplains and lack of existing storm drain infrastructure, development through 2040 necessarily accounts for flood risk in detail and flooding is considered throughout most of the General Plan elements.

City of McFarland Municipal Code
Chapter 15.12 of the City of McFarland Municipal Code contains specific provisions designed to promote public health, safety, and welfare, including by minimizing losses due to flood hazards through the establishment of floodplain development permits and standards for protecting development from flood damage and by granting enforcement authority to the city’s floodplain administrator.

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 328 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-29

1.3.6.1.2 Past Events
Historical floods in Kern County are discussed in detail in Volume 1, Section 4.5.2. In the time between Volume 1 adoption and the production of this Annex for the City of McFarland, winter atmospheric storm events in early 2023 caused widespread flooding throughout Kern County and areas of McFarland that warranted not only local evacuations, but also a federal disaster declaration. Flooding along SR 99 followed a south-to-north pattern and prompted evacuation of many residential areas in the city. At the time of Annex publication, NFIP claims information had not been updated from late 2022 prior to the 2023 flood events.

1.3.6.1.3 Location
The City of McFarland includes large flood hazard areas in both the 1% and 0.2% annual chance floodplains (i.e., the 100- and 500-year floodplains), as shown in Figure 1-12. The regulatory floodway within the 100- year floodplain, where the highest floodwater velocities and damage potentials exist, mostly follows a south-to-north path along the eastern side of SR 99 and includes residential areas. Over 60% of the city’s total land area, including the recent 2022 annexation, is located within one of these floodplains.

Additionally, the snapshot exposure summary detailed in Figure 1-12 shows approximately half of the city’s population and parcels are located within a flood hazard area.

Table 1-16: City of McFarland – Flood Hazard Area Summary Total Land Area
(including Annexation)
% Area in 100-YR
Flood Zone
% Area in 500-YR
Flood Zone
% Area in both 100-
and 500-YR Flood
Zone
City of McFarland 4,066 ac. 16.9% 44.9% 61.8%

1.3.6.1.4 Frequency / Probability of Future Occurrences Additional information and background regarding the probability of future flooding occurrences is available in Volume 1, Section 4.5.2. As described in the 2015 Storm Drain Master Plan, much of the city’s storm drain infrastructure and roads are not protected against a 10% annual chance flood event.

1.3.6.1.5 Severity & Extent
Past floods have historically disrupted highway and railroad traffic and communications services and caused damage to or destroyed agricultural lands and critical infrastructure, including roads, bridges, and water and sewage treatment plants. In developed areas, flood problems are intensified by the construction of new homes and other structures, as well as streets, driveways, parking lots, and other impervious surfaces, which decrease the amount of open land available to absorb rainfall and stormwater runoff.

Consequently, new development often increases the volume of stormwater that must be conveyed to and carried away by local waterways. However, the city’s new storm drainage standards largely protect new development and mitigate its impacts on the storm drain system.

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 329 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-30
Figure 1-12: City of McFarland - Flood Vulnerability & Exposure Snapshot FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 330 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-31

1.3.6.1.6 Flood Hazard Vulnerability
This section describes the city’s vulnerabilities to flooding in terms of exposed population, property, and infrastructure. Two methods of analysis were used to assess local flood vulnerability. First, an exposure analysis revealing total population, parcel count and value, and critical infrastructure is available in the Exposure Snapshot summary in Figure 1-12. Second, a Level 2 Hazus protocol was used to estimate potential damages to residential parcels from flooding under the base flood. Additional information regarding vulnerability assessment methodology is available in Volume1., Section 3.4.

Hazus Damage Estimation
This section provides estimations of damages to residential buildings in the city’s 100-year and 500-year floodplains. Damage estimations, as calculated by Hazus, assess losses to structures from flooding by analyzing the depth of floodwater and type of structure. Using historical flood insurance claim data, Hazus estimates the percentage of damage to structures and their contents by applying established damage functions to an asset inventory. For this analysis, all non-vacant parcels with current market values were used instead of default inventory data provided by Hazus. Additional information regarding Hazus methodology is available in Volume 1, Section 3.4.

Table 1-17: City of McFarland - Flood Loss Estimation for Residential Buildings Parcel Type
Building
Damage ($)
Building
Damage
(% of total loss)
Content
Damage ($)
Content
Damage (% of
total loss)
Total Damage
($)
Proportion of
Loss (%)
100-YR Flood Event (1% chance annual probability)
RES1 $2,256,301 76.5% $694,772 23.5% $2,951,073 1%
RES2 $0 -- $0 -- $0 0%
RES3A $426,355 62.2% $259,023 37.8% $685,378 3%
RES3B $128,051 61.7% $79,381 38.3% $207,431 4%
Total $2,810,707 73.1% $1,033,175 26.9% $3,843,882 1%
500-YR Flood Event (0.2% chance annual probability)
RES1 $13,821,669 75.8% $4,414,674 24.2% $18,236,343 5%
RES2 $47 88.0% $6 12.0% $54 1%
RES3A $963,517 63.6% $550,860 36.4% $1,514,376 6%
RES3B $94,854 64.3% $52,729 35.7% $147,583 3%
Total $14,880,088 74.8% $5,018,269 25.2% $19,898,357 5% Note: Total Inventory Values
RES1 - $357,918,886
RES2 - $5,964
RES3A - $24,867,674
RE3B - $5,190,419
Total - $387,982,943
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 331 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-32

1.3.6.2 Earthquake
For a general description of the earthquake hazard, see Volume 1, Section 4.5.4.

1.3.6.2.1 Regulatory Environment
Additional information regarding federal, state, and regional regulations pertaining to the earthquake hazard are listed in Volume 1, Section 4.5.4. The City of McFarland follows Kern County in adopting the latest version of the California Building Code, which contains specific provisions for seismic resistant construction and design for new development. At the time of Annex production, McFarland was operating under the 2022 California Building Code.

1.3.6.2.2 Past Events
Numerous earthquakes have occurred in and near Kern County over the last two decades. In 2019, two earthquakes of 6.4 and 7.1 magnitude (M) affected the Ridgecrest area, ripping several homes off their foundations. No deaths were reported and impacts to McFarland were limited to non-structural damage.

Table 1-18: Earthquakes in Kern County >4.5 Magnitude since 2000 Date Location Magnitude
1/25/2023 20 km NE of Arvin 2.9
9/29/2004 25 km SSW of Bodfish 5.0
4/16/2005 20 km ESE of Maricopa 4.6
9/22/2005 14 km NW of Grapevine 4.7
2/24/2016 6 km SSW of Wasco 4.9
7/4/2019
200 km NE of Los Angeles near
Ridgecrest 6.4
7/5/2019
11 km from 7.4.2019 earthquake (in
San Bernadino County) 7.1
Source: USGS

1.3.6.2.3 Location
Earthquake fault zones are established by the Alquist-Priolo Act of 1972, which requires mapping of surface faults with a potential for future rupture. These zones are established by the State Geologist and indicate an active fault. While numerous faults exist in the region of Kern County with the potential to generate strong earthquakes that could produce damage in McFarland, there are no such mapped surface faults in city limits.

1.3.6.2.4 Frequency / Probability of Future Occurrences Frequency and probability of earthquakes around Kern County are discussed in Volume 1., Section 4.5.4.

The two mapping products utilized for the county-wide earthquake risk assessment are provided in this Annex and include the Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, Version 4 (UCERF3), as well as Earthquake Shaking Potential based on USGS National Seismic Hazard Model. These probabilistic maps FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 332 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-33
were used to determine scenario earthquakes for the vulnerability assessment portion of this Annex, which focuses on damage estimates from a 6.7 M earthquake scenario along the San Andreas Fault system in the southern portion of Kern County. The San Andreas Fault has the highest probability of an earthquake greater than 6.7 M affecting the City of McFarland, with a greater than 10% annual probability.

Figure 1-13: UCERF3 Fault Probabilities for Kern County

1.3.6.2.5 Severity & Extent
Even moderate earthquakes occurring in or near the Kern County region could result in casualties, property and environmental damage, and disruption to essential services in the city. Additional impacts to the emergency services network are discussed in Volume 1, Section 4.5.4.

The severity of damage to residential buildings is largely a function of building age; nearly 40% of McFarland’s housing stock was constructed prior to 1980, indicating that many residential buildings were designed prior to critical “benchmark” years in seismic building codes. The statewide Earthquake Brace Bolt (EBB) grant program is an example of targeted efforts to address vulnerabilities among the aging housing stock.

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 333 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-34
Table 1-19: City of McFarland - Occupied Housing Units by Building Age Date of Construction Occupied Housing Units % Total Occupied Housing Units 2020 or later 0 0.0%
2010 to 2019 346 10.6%
2000 to 2009 737 22.6%
1980 to 1999 939 28.8%
1960 to 1979 631 19.4%
1940 to 1959 479 14.7%
1939 or earlier 127 3.9%
Source: ACS 2016-2021 5-yr Estimates.

1.3.6.2.6 Warning Time
One of the main dangers associated with earthquakes is the lack of warning time for essential services and residents in affected areas. Additional coordination and outreach is needed to ensure that residents in McFarland benefit from the county-wide emergency notification system, ReadyKern, which deployed in 2020.

1.3.6.2.7 Earthquake Hazard Vulnerability
To assess the vulnerability of McFarland to earthquake hazards, the selected model earthquake scenario, a 6.7 M earthquake along the San Andreas (Mojave) Fault in southern Kern County, was overlaid with local population, parcel, and infrastructure inventories to derive exposure summaries. These results are shown in the Exposure Snapshot summary in Figure 1-15. Overall, the scenario earthquake produced only moderate shaking and the entire area was determined to be exempt from exposure, which was only counted for strong to severe shaking. Nevertheless, the San Andreas Fault system can produce stronger earthquakes in this region that could bring greater shaking and higher damages to McFarland. Even moderate shaking is also capable of disrupting essential services and causing non-structural but nonetheless serious damage and injury within homes and businesses.

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 334 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-35
Figure 1-14: Earthquake Shaking Potential for Kern County FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 335 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-36
Figure 1-15: City of McFarland - S. San Andreas Mojave N. Vulnerability & Exposure Snapshot FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 336 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-37

1.3.6.3 Severe Weather
Severe weather hazards in McFarland may include high wind events, thunderstorms, and fog. The full contents of the severe weather hazard profile in Volume 1, Section 4.5.1, also apply to McFarland and were taken into consideration when determining appropriate mitigation strategies for severe weather hazards.

Therefore, no additional information is provided specific to this Annex.

Extreme heat is broken out as a separate hazard in Section 1.3.6.5.

1.3.6.4 Drought
Section 4.5.6 of Volume 1 discusses the drought hazard, including detailed descriptions of past events, location, frequency/probability of future occurrence, severity, and vulnerability. This section will only provide supplemental information specific to McFarland which was not included in Volume 1.

1.3.6.4.1 Secondary Hazard: Subsidence
Subsidence is addressed as a separate hazard profile in Volume 1 under soil stability (Section 4.5.8) but will be discussed here as a secondary hazard to drought.

1.3.6.4.2 Regulatory Environment
Federal and state regulations pertaining to drought are discussed in Volume 1, Section 4.5.6.

Southern San Joaquin Municipal Utility District
The City of McFarland is a municipal water provider located within the service area of the Southern San Joaquin Municipal Utility District (SSJMUD). While McFarland is its own municipal water provider, relying on the naturally recharging local groundwater supply, local on-farm recharge efforts led by SSJMUD accrue to benefit the city in maintaining its municipal well supply. Given the relationship between the city and SSJMUS water supplies, the City makes an effort to collaborate and maintain consistency with the SSJMUD Management Area Plan.

Kern Groundwater Authority Groundwater Sustainability Plan In accordance with the 2015 California Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), which mandates statewide groundwater sustainability by 2040, the City of McFarland joined the Kern Groundwater Authority (KGA) in preparing a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) to manage the groundwater resources of the Kern County subbasin, in which the City of McFarland is located. The most recent version of the GSP includes long-range planning for actions such as following certain agricultural lands to meet the region’s groundwater needs by 2040. The GSP was taken into consideration in the city’s most recent General Plan update.

City of McFarland General Plan
As outlined in the comprehensive 2020 General Plan update, the City of McFarland is preparing for significant growth over the next two decades but is constrained, among other things, by water resources and existing infrastructure. As a primarily agricultural economy, the city’s general plan includes a FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 337 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-38
sustainable agriculture update that balances future growth with its goals to protect valuable agricultural lands and improve sustainability practices to preserve this critical sector in the local economy.

City of McFarland Urban Water Management Plan
The City of McFarland created its first Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) in 2020, which is a comprehensive document that presents an evaluation of water supply and the water supplier’s reliability over a 20-to 25-year horizon. The 2020 UWMP provides an assessment of present and future water supplies and demands within the city’s service area and includes a water reliability assessment, Drought Risk Assessment (DRA), and Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) to help prepare for future water shortages. The City of McFarland worked in collaboration with KGA and SSJMUD to complete the plan.

1.3.6.4.3 Past Events
Past drought events in Kern County are shown in the U.S. Drought Monitor Categories timeline, Figure 1-16.

In early 2023, a multi-year drought was broken during multiple months of atmospheric river flooding affecting the entire U.S. west coast.

Historical subsidence exposure summaries are shown in Figure 1-17. The entirety of McFarland’s population, parcels, and infrastructure are exposed to a low subsidence hazard.

Figure 1-16: U.S. Drought Monitor Categories for Kern County, January 2000 - September 2023 0 20
40 60
80 100
Percent Area in U.S. Drought Monitor Categories - Kern County D0 D1 D2 D3 D4
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 338 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-39
Figure 1-17: City of McFarland - Subsidence Exposure Snapshot FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 339 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-40

1.3.6.5 Extreme Heat
Additional information and background on the extreme heat hazard is provided in the severe weather hazard profile in Volume1, Section 4.5.1. This Annex provides the most recent data from Cal-Adapt for the City of McFarland describing the frequency of extreme heat events, including days and nights above the 98th percentile heat values from a historical baseline period of 1961 to 1990. The 98th percentile heat values for McFarland coincide with daytime temperatures above 105.9˚F and nighttime temperatures above

73.5˚F.

Table 1-20: City of McFarland - Frequency of Future Extreme Heat Events under Medium and High Emissions Scenarios
Historical Emissions Scenario High Emissions Scenario
Historical RCP 4.5 RCP 8.5
Historical
Baseline
(1961 – 1990)
Mid Century
(2035 – 2064)
End Century
(2070 – 2099)
Mid Century
(2035 – 2064)
End Century
(2070 – 2099)
Days above
100˚F 32 days 65 days 79 days 77 days 103 days
Days above
105.9˚F
(98
th Percentile)
3 days 20 days 31 days 29 days 52 days
Nights above

73.5 °F
(98
th Percentile)
2 days 15 days 23 days 23 days 52 days
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 340 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-41

1.3.7 Identify Hazard Problem Statements
As part of the mitigation action identification process, the Kern County HMPC and planning team for each participating jurisdiction identified areas of concern (aka problem statements) for their respective facilities based on the risk assessment and vulnerability analysis using the interactive Risk Assessment Mapping Platform (RAMP), accessed via the project website at www.mitigatehazards.com, and static snapshot maps. Problem statements focus on the impact, victim, or threat that the hazard could create in the jurisdiction, as described in Figure 1-18. Identifying common issues and weaknesses through these problem statements assisted the HMPC and City of McFarland Planning Team in understanding the realm of resources needed for mitigation. McFarland problem statements are listed in Table 1-21.

The goal is to have at least one mitigation action for every hazard problem statement. Projects or actions have been developed to mitigate each problem identified. See Table 1-26 for a full list of the city’s mitigation actions and the corresponding problem statements that they address. Each problem statement is coded with a problem number for cross-referencing between Table 1-21 and Table 1-26.

Figure 1-18. Guidance for Problem Statements
IMPACT
Casualties
Property damage
Business interruption
Financial loss
Environmental contamination
VICTIM
School children in hazard high
areas
Care facilities in high hazard
areas
Vulnerable populations exposed
to hazards
THREAT
Increased fuels due to drought
Hotter, drier climates
More intense storms
Impervious surfaces = greater
runoff
Spread of invasive apecies
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 341 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-42
Table 1-21: Hazard Problem Statements
Problem No. Hazard Type
Area of
Concern
Mitigation
Alternatives
Primary
Agency Problem Description Related MA
ps-AH-MF-36 All Hazard Threat NRP - Natural
Resource
Protection, SP
- Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
Climate change is altering the
frequency and intensity of natural
hazards affecting McFarland
including extreme heat, flooding,
drought, and severe weather.
ma-AH-MF18, ma-AHMF-17, maFL-MF-9, maEH-MF-29
ps-AH-MF-37 All Hazard Victim PRV -
Prevention,
PE&A - Public
Education &
Awareness
City of
McFarland
The community of McFarland
includes many undocumented
residents who do not qualify for many
federal forms of financial assistance
following declared disasters, and face
major economic insecurity following
loss of employment or damage to
residences.
ma-AH-MF18, ma-AHMF-23
ps-AH-MF-38 All Hazard Threat ES -
Emergency
Services
City of
McFarland
Lack of coordination between local
level and County public alert systems
throughout the Kern region can
impede the spread of accurate/real
time emergency information for
residents, businesses, and local
responding agencies during a major
hazard event.
ma-AH-MF21, ma-AHMF-22, maAH-MF-17
ps-AH-MF-35 All Hazard Victim PRV -
Prevention
City of
McFarland
Low-income households face
disproportionately higher utility
burden resulting from water and
energy conservation efforts.
ma-AH-MF23
ps-GH-MF-19 Drought Impact PRV -
Prevention,
NRP - Natural
Resource
Protection, SP
- Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
Subsidence throughout the San
Joaquin Valley causing damage and
increased maintenance costs for
water and linear infrastructure.
ma-DR-MF30
ps-DR-MF-21 Drought Impact PRV -
Prevention,
NRP - Natural
Resource
Protection, SP
- Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
Presence of hydrophobic soils during
extended periods of drought further
reduces retention of precipitation.
ma-EH-MF-4,
ma-DR-MF19, ma-DRMF-21, maDR-MF-1
ps-DR-MF-22 Drought Threat PRV -
Prevention,
PE&A - Public
Education &
Awareness
City of
McFarland
Kern County Subbasin experiences
ongoing overdraft of 324,326 acre-feet
per year, according to the most recent
Groundwater Sustainability Plan.
ma-DR-MF31, ma-DRMF-20, maDR-MF-21,
ma-DR-MF-1
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 342 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-43
Problem No. Hazard Type
Area of
Concern
Mitigation
Alternatives
Primary
Agency Problem Description Related MA
ps-DR-MF-23 Drought Impact PRV -
Prevention,
PE&A - Public
Education &
Awareness
City of
McFarland
Extended drought periods reduce
annual recharge of groundwater
resources across the region.
ma-DR-MF21, ma-DRMF-19
ps-DR-MF-25 Drought Victim NRP - Natural
Resource
Protection, SP
- Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
Increased pumping from wells during
drought can pull shallow,
contaminated groundwater down to
depths commonly tapped for public
drinking-water supply.
ma-DR-MF-2
ps-DR-MF-27 Drought Victim PRV -
Prevention,
PE&A - Public
Education &
Awareness
City of
McFarland
Widespread economic loss during
drought years with impacts to farm
owners, workers, related industries,
and tax revenue.
ma-DR-MF31, ma-FLMF-25, maAH-MF-18,
ma-DR-MF-1
ps-GH-MF-17 Earthquake Threat ES -
Emergency
Services, SP -
Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
Little to no warning time for
earthquake hazards can increase risk
of injury among McFarland residents.
ma-AH-MF22, ma-AHMF-21
ps-GH-MF-18 Earthquake Victim PPRO -
Property
Protection, SP
- Structural
Projects, PE&A
- Public
Education &
Awareness
City of
McFarland
The entirety of McFarland's
population is exposed to moderate to
strong shaking risk under modeled
EQ scenarios.
ma-GH-MF11, ma-GHMF-13, maAH-MF-17,
ma-AH-MF21
ps-GH-MF-20 Earthquake Impact PPRO -
Property
Protection, SP
- Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
Local linear utilities (power lines, gas
and water mains) risk damage both
from earthquake shaking and
subsidence.
ma-EQ-MF32
ps-EQ-MF-35 Earthquake Threat PE&A - Public
Education &
Awareness, SP
- Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
Pre 1970's residential construction
(38% of total housing stock) face
greater risk of damage/collapse under
strong shaking scenarios;
ma-GH-MF11, ma-GHMF-13
ps-EQ-MF-39 Earthquake Impact PPRO -
Property
Protection, SP
- Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
Many of McFarland's city facilities
and infrastructure were designed
prior to modern building codes and
could face greater risk of damage or
collapse under strong seismic
shaking scenarios.
ma-EQ-MF26, ma-GHMF-12, maEQ-MF-27
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 343 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-44
Problem No. Hazard Type
Area of
Concern
Mitigation
Alternatives
Primary
Agency Problem Description Related MA
ps-EH-MF-30 Extreme
Heat
Threat ES -
Emergency
Services, SP -
Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
Climate change is increasing the
duration, frequency, and severity of
extreme heat events, which are likely
to increase the risk of mortality and
morbidity due to heat-related illness
and exacerbation of existing chronic
health conditions.
ma-EH-MF-3,
ma-EH-MF-4,
ma-EH-MF29, ma-AHMF-18
ps-EH-MF-32 Extreme
Heat
Victim PE&A - Public
Education &
Awareness, ES
- Emergency
Services
City of
McFarland
Vulnerable populations such as the
elderly, children, outdoor workers, and
persons with chronic medical
conditions face greater rates of heat
related injury, illness, and death.
ma-AH-MF18, ma-EHMF-29, maEH-MF-3
ps-EH-MF-33 Extreme
Heat
Impact PE&A - Public
Education &
Awareness, SP
- Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
Water consumption increases during
extreme heat events, placing
additional pressure on water supply
during periods of drought.
ma-EH-MF-3,
ma-DR-MF20
ps-EH-MF-34 Extreme
Heat
Impact PE&A - Public
Education &
Awareness, SP
- Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
Additional demand for electricity
during extreme heat events triggering
rolling brownouts throughout the
region.
ma-EH-MF-3,
ma-EH-MF-5,
ma-EH-MF29, ma-AHMF-18
ps-EH-MF-35 Extreme
Heat
Victim PE&A - Public
Education &
Awareness, ES
- Emergency
Services
City of
McFarland
Low-income neighborhoods contain
disproportionately low tree shade and
natural land surface cover,
contributing to higher temperatures
during extreme heat events.
ma-EH-MF-4
ps-FL-MF-6 Flood Threat PPRO -
Property
Protection, SP
- Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
Residential neighborhoods in the
northeastern portion of the City are a
historic loss area.
ma-FL-MF-8,
ma-FL-MF-6,
ma-FL-MF-28
ps-FL-MF-7 Flood Threat PRV -
Prevention,
PPRO -
Property
Protection,
NRP - Natural
Resource
Protection, ES
- Emergency
Services, SP -
Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
Regional flood hazard from Poso
Creek originates beyond City
boundary and the City's control
(Railroad Mainline & State Route 99).
ma-FL-MF-9
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 344 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-45
Problem No. Hazard Type
Area of
Concern
Mitigation
Alternatives
Primary
Agency Problem Description Related MA
ps-FL-MF-8 Flood Threat PPRO -
Property
Protection, ES
- Emergency
Services, SP -
Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
Long periods of winter rains saturate
soils, increasing local flooding
hazards.
ma-FL-MF28, ma-FLMF-8, ma-FLMF-9, ma-FLMF-24
ps-FL-MF-9 Flood Victim PE&A - Public
Education &
Awareness, ES
- Emergency
Services, SP -
Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
Transportation from and access to
residential areas could become
compromised during high water
flooding events. Residents who lack
access to a vehicle may be unable to
leave early in the case of an
evacuation.
ma-FL-MF24, ma-FLMF-6, maSW-MF-15
ps-FL-MF-10 Flood Victim PRV -
Prevention,
PE&A - Public
Education &
Awareness
City of
McFarland
Health issues as a result of flood
water which exacerbate
environmental health risks;
mold/contaminated flood
waters/West Nile Virus/agricultural
waste.
ma-DR-MF-2,
ma-FL-MF-25
ps-FL-MF-11 Flood Threat PPRO -
Property
Protection, SP
- Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
Lack of local aboveground and
underground storm drain/flood
control infrastructure exacerbates
regional flood hazards.
ma-FL-MF25, ma-FLMF-8
ps-FL-MF-12 Flood Impact PRV -
Prevention,
PE&A - Public
Education &
Awareness
City of
McFarland
Many residents who live in or around
the local flood hazard do not carry a
flood insurance policy to cover losses.
ma-FL-MF-6
ps-FL-MF-13 Flood Victim PE&A - Public
Education &
Awareness, ES
- Emergency
Services
City of
McFarland
In case of a major flood event,
residents face risk of long-term
displacement due to flooding with
limited City ability to provide food
and sheltering.
ma-AH-MF18, ma-FLMF-6
ps-FL-MF-15 Flood Impact PPRO -
Property
Protection
City of
McFarland
Four schools are positioned within
500-year / 100-year floodplain areas;
specifically Browning Road STEAM
Academy (100), McFarland preschool
(100, McFarland High (500), and Kern
Avenue Elementary (500)
ma-FL-MF-33
ps-FL-MF-34 Flood Threat ES -
Emergency
Services, SP -
Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
Identified future police station site on
the corner of Davis Ave and Elmo
Hwy is situated within the 500-year
floodplain, and close proximity to the
100-year floodplain.
ma-FL-MF-28
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 345 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-46
Problem No. Hazard Type
Area of
Concern
Mitigation
Alternatives
Primary
Agency Problem Description Related MA
ps-FL-MF-40 Flood Threat PPRO -
Property
Protection, SP
- Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
Climate change is projected to
increase the severity of extreme
weather events, including flooding
from heavy rains.
ma-FL-MF-9,
ma-FL-MF-8,
ma-FL-MF24, ma-AHMF-18, maAH-MF-17
ps-SW-MF-2 Severe
Weather
Impact PPRO -
Property
Protection, ES
- Emergency
Services, SP -
Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
High winds events can result in
broken tree limbs, fallen telephone
lines, and a heavy accumulation of
debris blocking storm drains.
ma-AH-MF17, ma-SWMF-15
ps-SW-MF-3 Severe
Weather
Victim PPRO -
Property
Protection,
PE&A - Public
Education &
Awareness, SP
- Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
Substandard construction and the age
of the housing stock have resulted in
the lack of quality infrastructure
(overhead vs. underground utility
lines, lack of curb and gutter etc.),
exposing low-income households to
greater damage during severe
weather events.
ma-FL-MF-8,
ma-FL-MF-6,
ma-SW-MF34
ps-SW-MF-4 Severe
Weather
Threat PPRO -
Property
Protection, SP
- Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
Aged and degraded road
infrastructure is vulnerable to
damage during severe weather
events, escalating long-term
maintenance costs.
ma-SW-MF34
ps-SW-MF-5 Severe
Weather
Impact PPRO -
Property
Protection, SP
- Structural
Projects
City of
McFarland
Blackouts and damage to grid
infrastructure during
thunderstorm/lightning events can
limit delivery of essential services.
ma-AH-MF18, ma-AHMF-17

1.3.8 Impacts from Climate Change on Growth and Land Use Climate change profoundly affects the City of McFarland's growth and land use, influencing how the city plans and manages critical lifelines, infrastructure, and natural resources. The interaction between population growth, urban expansion, and changing natural hazard risk due to climate change necessitates comprehensive strategies to mitigate risks and support sustainable development. Each expanded subheading below is followed by references to problem statements in Table 1-21.

1.3.8.1 Population Patterns
All Hazards
Underserved Communities: Climate-driven disasters disproportionately impact vulnerable populations, including undocumented residents who lack access to federal assistance programs. Economic insecurity FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 346 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-47
from employment losses and damage to housing is compounded for these groups, creating long-term challenges for recovery and resilience (ps-AH-MF-37).

Increasing Utility Costs: Rising utility costs from water and energy conservation measures affect low-income households, increasing inequities as the city grows and expands its services (ps-AH-MF-35).

Emergency Communication Gaps: The growing population heightens the importance of seamless coordination between local and county alert systems, as real-time communication becomes critical during hazard events (ps-AH-MF-38).

Drought
Agricultural Dependence: McFarland’s economic reliance on agriculture makes its growing population particularly vulnerable to economic losses from prolonged drought. Impacts on farm owners and workers ripple through the community, affecting employment and tax revenues (ps-DR-MF-27).

Water Scarcity: Increased groundwater pumping to meet population demands during drought exacerbates risks of contamination and further depletes the Kern County Subbasin (ps-DR-MF-22, ps-DR-MF-25).

Flooding
Evacuation Challenges: Expanding residential areas in flood-prone zones create risks for populations lacking access to vehicles during flooding events. Effective evacuation planning becomes increasingly important as McFarland grows (ps-FL-MF-9).

Flood Insurance Gaps: Many residents in high-risk areas remain uninsured against flood damage, exposing growing portions of the population to financial hardship after flood events (ps-FL-MF-12).

Extreme Heat
Health Impacts on Vulnerable Groups: Growth in population segments such as elderly residents, children, and outdoor workers increases the city’s overall vulnerability to extreme heat events, which exacerbate health risks and economic burdens (ps-EH-MF-32, ps-EH-MF-35).

Severe Weather
Housing Infrastructure: Population growth and the corresponding need for housing highlight vulnerabilities in substandard or aging housing, which is more susceptible to damage from severe weather events such as high winds and heavy rains (ps-SW-MF-3).

1.3.8.2 Land Use and Future Development
All Hazards
Resilience in Urban Planning: Climate change intensifies the demand for resilient infrastructure in new developments. Aging stormwater systems and flood control measures must be updated to support future growth (ps-AH-MF-36).

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 347 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-48
Drought
Water Resource Management: The Kern County Subbasin’s ongoing overdraft limits water availability for new developments. Growth in housing and commercial sectors must incorporate groundwater sustainability measures, including conservation and recharge projects (ps-DR-MF-22, ps-DR-MF-23).

Subsidence Risks: Land use planning must address subsidence caused by groundwater overdraft, which damages infrastructure and increases costs for maintaining roads, pipelines, and other linear assets (psGH-MF-19).

Flooding
Floodplain Development: As McFarland grows, careful consideration must be given to development in floodplains. Schools and public facilities located in these areas are particularly vulnerable, requiring targeted mitigation efforts to reduce risk (ps-FL-MF-15, ps-FL-MF-34).

Regional Flood Risks: Poso Creek’s flood hazards, originating beyond the city’s boundaries, emphasize the need for regional collaboration to mitigate future risks in new developments (ps-FL-MF-7).

Extreme Heat
Urban Heat Island Effect: New developments in McFarland’s low-income neighborhoods must incorporate tree planting, green roofs, and reflective materials to reduce localized heating and improve community resilience (ps-EH-MF-35).

Resource Demands: Prolonged extreme heat events will increase water and energy demands, making infrastructure upgrades essential to support both existing and future development (ps-EH-MF-33, ps-EHMF-34).

Severe Weather
Utility Infrastructure: Expanding residential and commercial areas will require robust utility systems.

Upgrades to power lines, roads, and stormwater drainage will be critical to withstand damage from high winds and severe weather (ps-SW-MF-2, ps-SW-MF-4).

Stormwater Management: Future development must include advanced stormwater solutions to prevent debris blockages and localized flooding during severe weather events (ps-SW-MF-2).

1.3.8.3 Mitigation Strategiesto Address Climate Change
To address the intersection of climate change, growth, and land use, McFarland must adopt proactive strategies:

Policy Development: Strengthen local regulations to guide sustainable land use, including groundwater conservation and floodplain management.

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 348 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-49
Infrastructure Investment: Modernize critical systems, such as stormwater drainage, groundwater pumping stations, and utility networks, to support future population and development demands.

Community Engagement: Enhance public education and awareness campaigns to prepare residents for evolving climate-related risks.

Regional Collaboration: Partner with neighboring jurisdictions to address transboundary issues like flooding from Poso Creek and subsidence from groundwater overdraft.

By integrating climate considerations into growth and land use planning, McFarland can mitigate risks, protect its population, and support sustainable development.

1.3.8.4 Mitigation Action Support Tool (MAST)
The Kern County MHMP, including this Annex, is a living document. As such, hazard problem statements and mitigation activities will be updated through a web interface application developed specifically for this plan and the participating jurisdictions. This Mitigation Action Support Tool (MAST) is accessible through http://mitigatehazards.com/mcfarland-hmp/.

MAST is a web-based interactive tool that enables multiple users to search, view, enter, and update mitigation actions, ideas or projects, and other information. MAST provides the city and other participating jurisdictions, as well as plan reviewers (Cal OES/FEMA), with access to valuable mitigation information that can be leveraged by future planning or other risk reduction efforts in the city and Kern County.

Participating jurisdictions can update the status of their mitigation projects throughout the planning lifecycle, and this web-based tool will improve participating jurisdictions’ ability to apply for FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) grant programs, including the initial grant application processes through Cal OES.

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 349 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-50

1.4 Mitigation Strategy
The mitigation strategy in this Annex is the city’s guidebook to future hazard mitigation administration, capturing the key outcomes of the hazard mitigation planning process. The mitigation strategy is intended to reduce vulnerabilities outlined in the previous section (a.k.a. problem statements) with prescriptions for policies and physical projects. These mitigation actions should be compatible with existing planning mechanisms and should outline specific roles and resources for implementation success.

1.4.1 Capabilities Assessment
This section examines the planning and regulatory, administrative and technical, financial, and educational and outreach capabilities of the City of McFarland to help identify existing strengths and weaknesses and to augment the vulnerability assessment of identified natural hazards.

The tables in this section explore the city’s planning and regulatory mechanisms; administrative, technical, and financial capabilities; and education and outreach initiatives. The columns in each table represent deeper dives into the following questions:
▪ Is the mechanism or capability existing and currently used? (Column 1, Status) ▪ Has the mechanism or capability already been integrated into hazard mitigation planning efforts? (Column 2, Current Mitigation Use)
▪ Is there a future opportunity for the mechanism or capability to be incorporated, expanded, or improved upon in regard to mitigation planning? (Column 3, Future Opportunity) Based on color coding to quickly identify which mechanisms and capabilities are adequate, need improvement, or could be integrated with hazard mitigation planning efforts. Tables include a legend explaining how each of the three questions is answered according to the color indicated: green, yellow, or orange.

For more information on the regulatory environment surrounding each hazard, see hazard-specific sections of Volume 1. Volume 1, Section 5.3.5 includes an extensive list of federal and state funding opportunities as well.

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 350 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-51

1.4.1.1 Planning & Regulatory Capabilities
Table 1-22. Planning and Regulatory Capabilities Summary HMP Integration
Resource Status Notes / Additional Detail
Current
Mitigation
Use
Future
Opportunity
Planning and Regulatory Capabilities
Construction and Future Development Regulations
Building Codes
Green Green Yellow
See City Code Chapter

15.04.160 - 2022 CA State
Building Code
BCEGS Rating N/A N/A N/A
Public Protection (ISO Class) N/A N/A N/A
Hazard-Related Development Standards
Green Green Green
See Municipal Code Chapter

15.12 for SFHA development
standards; § 8.20.060
Zoning Ordinance Green Yellow Green See Muni Code Title 17.

Hazard-Specific Ordinance
Green Yellow Green
See Municipal Code Chapter

15.12 for SFHA development
standards
Growth Management Ordinance Yellow Orange Green See Muni Code Title 16, subdivisions
Hazard Reduction Programs (Annually Conducted)
Capital Improvements Program (CIP) or Plan
Green Yellow Green
CIP 2023-2024 outlines
strategy for new police
station/EOC, roads, and
water/sewer systems
Erosion/Sediment Control Program
Yellow Green Yellow
See municipal code 15.12.240;
General plan EIR Chapter 5.8,
Geology and Soils
Hazard-Related Public Outreach Program
Yellow Yellow Green
See City of McFarland Local
Hazard Mitigation Plan
available on the city website.

Stormwater Management Program (Annual
Inspections) Orange Orange Green
Seismic Safety Program (Non-structural)
Orange Orange Yellow
No current plans specific to
seismic safety that is nonstructural.

Earthquake Modernization Plan (Building Safety)
Yellow Yellow Yellow
No formal plan but included on
McFarland General Plan &
building safety in ordinance

17.120.090
Hazard Plans
General Plan Safety Element
Green Green Yellow
McFarland adopted updated
plan in 2016, plan includes
HMP integration.

Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP)
Yellow Green Orange
Kern County Fire Dept.
includes 2021 Strategic Fire
Plan, also details included in
HMP.

FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 351 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-52
HMP Integration
Resource Status Notes / Additional Detail
Current
Mitigation
Use
Future
Opportunity
Planning and Regulatory Capabilities
Floodplain Management Plan
Yellow Green Yellow
See municipal code Ch. 15.12,
§§ 15.12.010 —15.12.510 -
Floodplain mgmt. priorities
and implementation strategy
also outlined in LHMP and
Safety Element.

Stormwater Management Plan
Green Green Yellow
See Storm Drain Master Plan,
2015, prepared by RBF
Consulting.

Emergency Operations Plan
Yellow Green Yellow
Kern County Emergency
Operations Plan (2014)
integrated into City Safety
Element
Climate Action Plan
Orange Orange Green
McFarland has no current
climate action plan, although
updates to climate regulations
included in goals listed by
Kern Climate Change Task
Force.

Ground Water Management Planning / Plans
Green Green Green
Sustainable Agriculture
Element of GP (2020); Kern
Groundwater Authority GSP
(2022)
Urban Greening Plan
Green Green Yellow City of McFarland Urban
Forest Plan created in 2020
National Flood Protection Program (NFIP)
Floodplain Management Regulations
Green Green Yellow
See municipal code Chapter

15.12 - Floodplain
management.

Flood Insurance Education and Technical Assist.

Orange Orange Green
Flood Hazard Mapping / Re-Mapping
Green Green Green
See municipal code Chapter

15.12.070 - areas identified by
the FIA; also, Storm Drain
Master Plan
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 352 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-53

1.4.1.2 Administrative & Technical Capabilities
Table 1-23. Administrative and Technical Capabilities Summary HMP Integration
Resource Status Notes / Additional Detail
Current
Mitigation
Use
Future
Opportunity
Administrative and Technical
Community Planning and
Development Services
Community Planner Green Green Orange Brianahi DeLeon
Civil Engineer
Green Green Orange Public Works Director.

Building Code Official (Full time
or Augmented) Green Green Orange Larry Ronk as Building Inspector Floodplain Administrator
Green Green Orange The City Manager is the Floodplain
Administrator - see municipal code 15.12.140.

Fire Marshal Green Green Yellow Kern County Fire Dept.

Dedicated Public Outreach
Personnel Orange Yellow Yellow Shared across roles
GIS Specialist and Capability Orange Orange Yellow Limited GIS capability Emergency Manager Orange Yellow Green City Manager scope Full-Time Building Official Green Green Orange Building Inspector scope Dedicated Grant Manager, Writer,
or Specialist Yellow Green Yellow Shared across roles
Other
Warning Systems/Services
General
Green Green Green ReadyKern; opportunity for expanded GIS capacity and coordination
Flood Green Green Green
Wildfire Green Green Green
Geological Hazards Green Green Green
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 353 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-54

1.4.1.3 Financial Capabilities
Table 1-24. Financial Capabilities Summary
HMP Integration
Resource Status Notes / Additional Detail
Current
Mitigation
Use
Future
Opportunity
Fiscal Capabilities
Financial Resources for Hazard Mitigation
Levy Taxes for Specific Purposes Green Green Green Requires voter approval Utilities Fees Yellow Yellow Yellow Water Department
Benefit assessments Orange Orange Yellow
System Development Fee
Green Green Yellow See 2020 analysis of development
impact feed through 2040
General Obligation Bonds to Incur Debt
Yellow Yellow Yellow Limited ability (see 2023-2024 CIP) Special Tax Bonds to Incur Debt Yellow Yellow Yellow Limited ability (see 2023-2024 CIP) Withheld Spending in Hazard-Prone Areas
Orange Orange Yellow
Majority of city area exposed to
flood and EQ hazard; community
block grants subject to NFIP
regulations
Stormwater Service Fees Yellow Yellow Yellow Storm Drain Fee included in 2023- 2024 CIP
Capital Improvement Project Funding
Green Green Green Included in 2023-2024 CIP
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 354 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-55

1.4.1.4 Education & Outreach Capabilities
Table 1-25. Education and Outreach Capabilities Summary HMP Integration
Resource Status Notes / Additional Detail
Current
Mitigation
Use
Future
Opportunity
Education / Outreach Capabilities
Education/Outreach Resources
Website Dedicated to Hazard Topics
Orange Orange Green
Dedicated Social Media Orange Orange Green
Hazard Info. Avail. at Library/
Planning Desk Yellow Yellow Green
Annual Public Safety Events Green Green Green Coffee with a Cop, Trunk-o-Treat Ability to Field Public Tech.

Assistance Requests Yellow Yellow Green
Public Safety Newsletters or Printed
Outreach Orange Orange Green
Resource Conservation Districts
Green Green Green
Northwest Kern RCD conducts debris
removal along Poso Creek; future
opportunity for collaboration
Other
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 355 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-56

1.4.2 Mitigation Action Plan
Mitigation actions were developed based on consensus
among Planning Team members about the City of
McFarland’s priorities, risk assessment results, current capabilities, and mitigation alternatives. The
mitigation action prioritization method used by all
participating jurisdictions is described in Section 5.5.1 of Volume 1. Table 1-26 lists each of the city’s priority mitigation actions, which are also available in MAST,
with the corresponding county-wide mitigation goal,
responsible party, time frame, potential funding source, implementation steps, and resources needed for
implementation.

Each participating jurisdiction, including the City of
McFarland, developed unique mitigation actions,
targeted at their own unique priorities and
vulnerabilities. Jurisdictions also considered the
ongoing relevancy of mitigation actions from previous
hazard mitigation plans and retained or removed
actions as appropriate in addition to adding new
actions. Mitigation actions were examined for
relevancy and the potential for future implementation,
then evaluated for potential follow-up.

Some mitigation actions developed during the city’s
previous planning efforts were not included in this
Mitigation Action Plan because they were an inherent part of the plan update process or were not detailed enough for implementation. The City of McFarland has made significant changes to its previous mitigation actions based on the updated risk assessment and implementation strategy, including adding more detail and aligning with best practices. While new mitigation actions were created their priorities have not changed since the last plans’ adoption.

Volume 1, Section 5.5.2, of the MJHMP provides a record of county-wide mitigation actions, and Table 1-26 in this Annex lists each mitigation action for the City of McFarland. As a living document, hazard problem statements and mitigation activities will be updated through MAST. A distinct identification number was assigned to each mitigation action for easy reference and management. As demonstrated in Figure 1-19, identification numbers use four sets of alphanumeric characters based on the unique attributes of the subject action, including the type of hazard being mitigated. The level of detail in Table 1-26 meets the regulatory requirements of FEMA and DMA 2000.

Figure 1-19. Mitigation Action Key
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 356 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-57
Table 1-26. City of McFarland Mitigation Action Plan
Mitigation No. Hazard Type
Mitigation
Type Status Year Primary Agency Title/Description
Responsible
Party Estimated Cost Estimated Benefit Time Frame
HMA
Activity Type
Potential Grant
Source Priority
Related
Problem
Statements
ma-AH-MF-17 All Hazard ES -
Emergency
Services
Ongoing 2023 City of
McFarland
Complete the purchase and
outfitting of a dedicated Mobile EOC
unit to increase City operational and
response capacity during natural
disaster events and emergencies.

Police
Department
High - Existing funding will not
cover the cost of the project;
implementation would require new
revenue through an alternative
source (for example, bonds, grants,
and fee increases).

High - Project will provide
an immediate reduction of
risk exposure for life and
property.
1-3 Years Project HMGP / BRIC Extreme ps-AH-MF36, ps-AHMF-38, psGH-MF-18, ps-FL-MF-40,
ps-SW-MF-2,
ps-SW-MF-5
ma-AH-MF-18 All Hazard SP -
Structural
Projects
Pending 2023 City of
McFarland
Seek funding to establish a local
Community Resilience Center (CRC)
to provide shelter and resources
during climate and other
emergencies as well as fund yearround services and ongoing programming that build overall
community resilience.

Community
Development
High - Existing funding will not
cover the cost of the project;
implementation would require new
revenue through an alternative
source (for example, bonds, grants,
and fee increases).

High - Project will provide
an immediate reduction of
risk exposure for life and
property.
3-5 Years Project HMGP / BRIC High ps-AH-MF37, ps-AHMF-36, psDR-MF-27, ps-EH-MF30, ps-EHMF-32, psEH-MF-34,
ps-FL-MF-13,
ps-FL-MF-40,
ps-SW-MF-5
ma-AH-MF-21 All Hazard PE&A - Public
Education &
Awareness
Pending 2023 City of
McFarland
Create a dedicated page on the city
website and across social media
channels to promote hazard-specific
educational materials related to
emergency preparedness, alert
systems, mitigation at home, and
assistance programs.

Community
Development,
IT
Low - The project could be funded
under the existing budget. The
project is part of or can be part of an
ongoing existing program.

Medium - Project will have a
long-term impact on the
reduction of risk exposure
for life and property, or
project will not provide an
immediate reduction in the
risk exposure for property.
1-3 Years 5% Internal Funding Medium ps-AH-MF38, ps-GHMF-17, psGH-MF-18 ma-AH-MF-22 All Hazard ES -
Emergency
Services
Pending 2023 City of
McFarland
Collaborate with Kern County OES /
Fire Department to implement
ReadyKern notifications for hazards
within and surrounding McFarland
city limits.

Community
Development,
Police
Low - The project could be funded
under the existing budget. The
project is part of or can be part of an
ongoing existing program.

High - Project will provide
an immediate reduction of
risk exposure for life and
property.
1-3 Years 5% HMGP / BRIC Extreme ps-AH-MF38, ps-GHMF-17 ma-AH-MF-23 All Hazard PE&A - Public
Education &
Awareness
Pending 2023 City of
McFarland
Partner with local CBO's including
Faith in the Valley and Community
Action Partnership of Kern (CAPK) to
increase low-income households'
access to utility assistance programs
to lessen the disproportionate cost
burden associated with water and
energy conservation measures.

Community
Development
Low - The project could be funded
under the existing budget. The
project is part of or can be part of an
ongoing existing program.

Medium - Project will have a
long-term impact on the
reduction of risk exposure
for life and property, or
project will not provide an
immediate reduction in the
risk exposure for property.

Ongoing 5% HMGP / BRIC Medium ps-AH-MF37, ps-AHMF-35
ma-DR-MF-1 Drought PE&A - Public
Education &
Awareness
Pending 2016 City of
McFarland
Develop and implement a public
education program to promote
residential water conservation and
increase awareness of drought
conditions.

Community
Development
Medium - The project could be
implemented with existing funding
but would require a reapportionment of the budget or a budget amendment, or the cost of
the project would have to be spread
over multiple years.

Page 357 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-58
Mitigation No. Hazard Type
Mitigation
Type Status Year Primary Agency Title/Description
Responsible
Party Estimated Cost Estimated Benefit Time Frame
HMA
Activity Type
Potential Grant
Source Priority
Related
Problem
Statements
ma-DR-MF-2 Drought PRV -
Prevention
Ongoing 2016 City of
McFarland
Complete outfitting of the Garzoli
well for arsenic treatment.

Public Works High - Existing funding will not
cover the cost of the project;
implementation would require new
revenue through an alternative
source (for example, bonds, grants,
and fee increases).

High - Project will provide
an immediate reduction of
risk exposure for life and
property.
1-3 Years Project HMGP / BRIC,
Internal Funding
High ps-DR-MF25, ps-FLMF-10
ma-DR-MF-19 Drought NRP - Natural
Resource
Protection
Pending 2023 City of
McFarland
Replace irrigated landscaping and
turf present on local parks and City
facilities with drought-tolerant /
water-wise vegetation.

Public Works Medium - The project could be
implemented with existing funding
but would require a reapportionment of the budget or a budget amendment, or the cost of
the project would have to be spread
over multiple years.

Medium - Project will have a
long-term impact on the
reduction of risk exposure
for life and property, or
project will not provide an
immediate reduction in the
risk exposure for property.
3-5 Years Project CRNA
Instituational
Turf Replacement
Program
High ps-DR-MF-21,
ps-DR-MF-23
ma-DR-MF-20 Drought SP -
Structural
Projects
Pending 2023 City of
McFarland
Install advanced metering devices
for local residential and commercial
water customers to support water
conservation efforts, enhanced
tracking of City-wide water
consumption, and improved leak
detection.

Public Works High - Existing funding will not
cover the cost of the project;
implementation would require new
revenue through an alternative
source (for example, bonds, grants,
and fee increases).

High - Project will provide
an immediate reduction of
risk exposure for life and
property.
3-5 Years Project HMGP / BRIC,
USBR
WaterSMART
High ps-DR-MF22, ps-EHMF-33
ma-DR-MF-21 Drought NRP - Natural
Resource
Protection
Pending 2023 City of
McFarland
in accordance with the GP Public
Facilities Element Programs PF

1.2.2.3 - 1.2.2.4, identify sites for
designation as groundwater
recharge areas via either stormwater
or treated wastewater.

Community
Development,
Public Works
High - Existing funding will not
cover the cost of the project;
implementation would require new
revenue through an alternative
source (for example, bonds, grants,
and fee increases).

High - Project will provide
an immediate reduction of
risk exposure for life and
property.
3-5 Years Planning HMGP / BRIC High ps-DR-MF-21,
ps-DR-MF22, ps-DRMF-23
ma-DR-MF-30 Drought PPRO -
Property
Protection
Pending 2023 City of
McFarland
Continue to use best available
science to monitor ongoing
subsidence risk throughout the Kern
Sub-Basin and assess existing
wellheads for evidence of
subsidence damage on an annual
basis.

Public Works Low - The project could be funded
under the existing budget. The
project is part of or can be part of an
ongoing existing program.

Medium - Project will have a
long-term impact on the
reduction of risk exposure
for life and property, or
project will not provide an
immediate reduction in the
risk exposure for property.

Annually Planning HMGP / BRIC, N/A Medium ps-GH-MF-19
ma-DR-MF-31 Drought PRV -
Prevention
Ongoing 2023 City of
McFarland
Continue to implement the
recommendations of the 2022 KGA
Umbrella Groundwater
Sustainability Plan and integrate
into local planning mechanisms and
elements.

Medium - Project will have a
long-term impact on the
reduction of risk exposure
for life and property, or
project will not provide an
immediate reduction in the
risk exposure for property.

Ongoing Planning HMGP / BRIC,
Internal Funding,
USBR
WaterSMART
High ps-DR-MF22, ps-DRMF-27
ma-GH-MF-11 Earthquake PE&A - Public
Education &
Awareness
Pending 2016 City of
McFarland
Encourage retrofit of single-family
homes including bolting
foundations, strengthening cripple
walls, and removing or
strengthening masonry chimneys.

Community
Development
Low - The project could be funded
under the existing budget. The
project is part of or can be part of an
ongoing existing program.

Medium - Project will have a
long-term impact on the
reduction of risk exposure
for life and property, or
project will not provide an
immediate reduction in the
risk exposure for property.

Ongoing 5% N/A Medium ps-EQ-MF35, ps-GHMF-18
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 358 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-59
Mitigation No. Hazard Type
Mitigation
Type Status Year Primary Agency Title/Description
Responsible
Party Estimated Cost Estimated Benefit Time Frame
HMA
Activity Type
Potential Grant
Source Priority
Related
Problem
Statements
ma-GH-MF-12 Earthquake PPRO -
Property
Protection
Ongoing 2016 City of
McFarland
Conduct structural retrofit /
hardening of key City-owned critical
facilities and infrastructure from
earthquake hazards.

Community
Development
- Building
Division
High - Existing funding will not
cover the cost of the project;
implementation would require new
revenue through an alternative
source (for example, bonds, grants,
and fee increases).

High - Project will provide
an immediate reduction of
risk exposure for life and
property.
1-5 years Project HMGP / BRIC Extreme ps-EQ-MF-39
ma-GH-MF-13 Earthquake PPRO -
Property
Protection
Pending 2016 City of
McFarland
Inventory high occupancy buildings
and critical facilities (e.g., churches,
clinics, hotels, and other gathering
spaces), and conduct targeted
outreach to connect property owners
with seismic mitigation resources.

Building
Division
Medium - The project could be
implemented with existing funding
but would require a reapportionment of the budget or a budget amendment, or the cost of
the project would have to be spread
over multiple years.

High - Project will provide
an immediate reduction of
risk exposure for life and
property.
5-10 Years Planning HMGP / BRIC,
Internal Funding
Medium ps-EQ-MF35, ps-GHMF-18
ma-EQ-MF-26 Earthquake PPRO -
Property
Protection
Pending 2023 City of
McFarland
Establish a non-structural hazard
evaluation and risk reduction
program for city buildings and
departments housing critical
functions.

High - Project will provide
an immediate reduction of
risk exposure for life and
property.
3-5 Years Planning HMGP / BRIC High ps-EQ-MF-39
ma-EQ-MF-27 Earthquake PPRO -
Property
Protection
Pending 2023 City of
McFarland
Seismic retrofitting and repairing
the Perkins Avenue and Sherwood
Avenue overpasses.

Public Works High - Existing funding will not
cover the cost of the project;
implementation would require new
revenue through an alternative
source (for example, bonds, grants,
and fee increases).

High - Project will provide
an immediate reduction of
risk exposure for life and
property.
5-10 Years Project HMGP / BRIC Extreme ps-EQ-MF-39
ma-EQ-MF-32 Earthquake SP -
Structural
Projects
Pending 2023 City of
McFarland
Upgrade local water system lines to
HDPE materials to provide seismic
resistance.

Public Works High - Existing funding will not
cover the cost of the project;
implementation would require new
revenue through an alternative
source (for example, bonds, grants,
and fee increases).

High - Project will provide
an immediate reduction of
risk exposure for life and
property.
5-10 Years Project HMGP / BRIC Medium ps-GH-MF-20
ma-EH-MF-3 Extreme
Heat
PE&A - Public
Education &
Awareness
Pending 2016 City of
McFarland
Increase public awareness and
education surrounding the signs /
symptoms of heat related illness,
individual risk factors, treatment,
and preventative strategies.

Community
Development
Low - The project could be funded
under the existing budget. The
project is part of or can be part of an
ongoing existing program.

Medium - Project will have a
long-term impact on the
reduction of risk exposure
for life and property, or
project will not provide an
immediate reduction in the
risk exposure for property.
1-5 years 5% N/A High ps-EH-MF30, ps-EHMF-32, psEH-MF-33, ps-EH-MF-34
ma-EH-MF-4 Extreme
Heat
PRV -
Prevention
Ongoing 2016 City of
McFarland
Develop a program to implement the
recommendations of the City's 2020
Urban Greening Plan to increase the
cover of shade trees and natural
surfaces throughout the City and
reduce the urban heat island effect.

High - Project will provide
an immediate reduction of
risk exposure for life and
property.
5-10 Years Project HMGP / BRIC High ps-DR-MF-21,
ps-EH-MF30, ps-EHMF-35
ma-EH-MF-29 Extreme
Heat
ES -
Emergency
Services
Pending 2023 City of
McFarland
Develop policies and procedures for
a City EOC activation during
extreme heat events, including
shelter & care options for heatsensitive populations such as Community
Development,
City Manager
High - Existing funding will not
cover the cost of the project;
implementation would require new
revenue through an alternative
source (for example, bonds, grants,
and fee increases).

High - Project will provide
an immediate reduction of
risk exposure for life and
property.

Ongoing Planning HMGP / BRIC High ps-AH-MF36, ps-EHMF-30, psEH-MF-32, ps-EH-MF-34
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 359 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-60
Mitigation No. Hazard Type
Mitigation
Type Status Year Primary Agency Title/Description
Responsible
Party Estimated Cost Estimated Benefit Time Frame
HMA
Activity Type
Potential Grant
Source Priority
Related
Problem
Statements
seniors, children and outdoor
workers.
ma-FL-MF-6 Flood PE&A - Public
Education &
Awareness
Pending 2016 City of
McFarland
Increase residents' awareness of
local flooding hazards, encourage
purchase of flood insurance and
provide information for home
mitigation strategies.

Community
Development
Low - The project could be funded
under the existing budget. The
project is part of or can be part of an
ongoing existing program.

Medium - Project will have a
long-term impact on the
reduction of risk exposure
for life and property, or
project will not provide an
immediate reduction in the
risk exposure for property.
1-5 years 5% Internal Funding High ps-FL-MF-6,
ps-FL-MF-9,
ps-FL-MF-12,
ps-FL-MF-13,
ps-SW-MF-3
ma-FL-MF-8 Flood SP -
Structural
Projects
Pending 2016 City of
McFarland
Implement local drainage
improvements as prioritized in the
City of McFarland 2015 Drainage
Master Plan, including packages of
projects identified for grant funding.

Public Works High - Existing funding will not
cover the cost of the project;
implementation would require new
revenue through an alternative
source (for example, bonds, grants,
and fee increases).

High - Project will provide
an immediate reduction of
risk exposure for life and
property.
1-5 years Project HMGP / BRIC Extreme ps-FL-MF-6,
ps-FL-MF-8,
ps-FL-MF-11,
ps-FL-MF-40,
ps-SW-MF-3
ma-FL-MF-9 Flood PPRO -
Property
Protection
Ongoing 2016 City of
McFarland
Continue collaboration with USACE
and regional partners in the
preparation of a regional study to
accurately map local flooding
hazards, incorporating the impacts
of climate change on heavy rain
events.

High - Project will provide
an immediate reduction of
risk exposure for life and
property.
5-10 Years Planning HMGP / BRIC Extreme ps-AH-MF36, ps-FLMF-7, ps-FLMF-8, ps-FLMF-40 ma-FL-MF-24 Flood SP -
Structural
Projects
Pending 2023 City of
McFarland
Elevate and retrofit City-maintained
bridges and culverts to allow proper
stormwater and 100-YR flows.

Public Works High - Existing funding will not
cover the cost of the project;
implementation would require new
revenue through an alternative
source (for example, bonds, grants,
and fee increases).

High - Project will provide
an immediate reduction of
risk exposure for life and
property.
5-10 Years Project HMGP / BRIC,
FMA
High ps-FL-MF-9,
ps-FL-MF-8,
ps-FL-MF-40
ma-FL-MF-25 Flood PRV -
Prevention
Pending 2023 City of
McFarland
Strengthen existing
code/ordinances pertaining to the
flood hazard, especially in the
context of future commercial
development in the newly annexed
area south of the City.

High - Project will provide
an immediate reduction of
risk exposure for life and
property.
1-3 Years 5% HMGP / BRIC,
FMA
High ps-DR-MF27, ps-FLMF-10, psFL-MF-11
ma-FL-MF-28 Flood PRV -
Prevention
Pending 2023 City of
McFarland
Identify sites for the creation of new
stormwater basins and facilities to
accommodate population growth
and future development.

Public Works;
Community
Development
High - Existing funding will not
cover the cost of the project;
implementation would require new
revenue through an alternative
source (for example, bonds, grants,
and fee increases).

High - Project will provide
an immediate reduction of
risk exposure for life and
property.
3-5 Years Planning HMGP / BRIC,
FMA
High ps-FL-MF-6,
ps-FL-MF-8,
ps-FL-MF-34
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 360 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-61
Mitigation No. Hazard Type
Mitigation
Type Status Year Primary Agency Title/Description
Responsible
Party Estimated Cost Estimated Benefit Time Frame
HMA
Activity Type
Potential Grant
Source Priority
Related
Problem
Statements
ma-FL-MF-33 Flood SP -
Structural
Projects
Pending 2023 City of
McFarland
Collaborate with the McFarland
Unified School District to evaluate
structural flood mitigation strategies
and grant funding opportunities to
protect existing school facilities in
the 100- and 500-yr floodplain.

Community
Development
Low - The project could be funded
under the existing budget. The
project is part of or can be part of an
ongoing existing program.

Medium - Project will have a
long-term impact on the
reduction of risk exposure
for life and property, or
project will not provide an
immediate reduction in the
risk exposure for property.
1-3 Years Planning HMGP / BRIC,
FMA
Medium ps-FL-MF-15
ma-SW-MF-15 Severe
Weather
PPRO -
Property
Protection
Pending 2016 City of
McFarland
Build capacity and standard
procedures for debris removal from
local roadways and drainage
systems and following major storm
events.

Public Works High - Existing funding will not
cover the cost of the project;
implementation would require new
revenue through an alternative
source (for example, bonds, grants,
and fee increases).

High - Project will provide
an immediate reduction of
risk exposure for life and
property.

Ongoing Planning HMGP / BRIC,
Internal Funding
High ps-FL-MF-9,
ps-SW-MF-2
ma-SW-MF-16 Severe
Weather
PPRO -
Property
Protection
Ongoing 2016 City of
McFarland
Harden critical facilities to the
effects of severe storm events.

Public Works High - Existing funding will not
cover the cost of the project;
implementation would require new
revenue through an alternative
source (for example, bonds, grants,
and fee increases).

High - Project will provide
an immediate reduction of
risk exposure for life and
property.
1-5 years Project HMGP / BRIC Medium
ma-SW-MF-34 Severe
Weather
PPRO -
Property
Protection
Pending 2023 City of
McFarland
Prioritize upgrades to circulation
and road improvements along
evacuation routes, as identified in
the Safety element.

Public Works High - Existing funding will not
cover the cost of the project;
implementation would require new
revenue through an alternative
source (for example, bonds, grants,
and fee increases).

High - Project will provide
an immediate reduction of
risk exposure for life and
property.
1-3 Years Project HMGP / BRIC Extreme ps-SW-MF-4,
ps-SW-MF-3
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 361 of 386 ends

Kern Multi-Jurisdiction 2020 MJHMP Update

COUNTY OF KERN
1-62

INTENTIONAL BLANK PAGE
FEMA Submittal - 1/14/2025

Page 362 of 386 ends

U.S. Department of Homeland Security
FEMA Region 9
1111 Broadway, Suite 1200
Oakland, CA 94607-4052
www.fema.gov
February 10, 2024
Jolene Murillo
Assistant Emergency Services Manager
Kern County Fire Department Office of Emergency Services 2601 Panorama Dr. Building B
Bakersfield, CA 93306
Dear Jolene Murillo:

The County of Kern Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2020 Update has been amended to include the City of McFarland as an official planning participant. The City of McFarland must submit an adoption resolution to FEMA in order to be considered fully approved.

FEMA’s approval of the County of Kern Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2020 Update remains for a period of five years from the original approval date of April 9, 2021 for all approved participants. An updated list of the status of current participating jurisdictions is enclosed with this letter.

Prior to April 9, 2026, Kern County and all participating jurisdictions are required to review and revise the plan to reflect changes in development, progress in local mitigation efforts, and changes in priorities, and resubmit it for approval in order to continue to be eligible for mitigation project grant funding.

The continued approval of this plan ensures Kern County and all participating jurisdictions’ continued eligibility for project grants under FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Assistance programs, including the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities Program, and Flood Mitigation Assistance Program. All requests for funding, however, will be evaluated individually according to the specific eligibility, and other requirements of the particular program under which applications are submitted.

If you have any questions regarding the planning or review processes, please contact the FEMA Region 9 Hazard Mitigation Planning Team at [email protected].

Sincerely,

Alison Kearns
Planning and Implementation Branch Chief
Mitigation Division
FEMA Region 9

Page 363 of 386 ends

Kern County Hazard Mitigation Plan Amendment Notice
February 10, 2025

Page 4 of 4 ends

Enclosure (1)
Kern County Plan Review Tool – City of McFarland, dated February 10, 2024 Status of Participating Jurisdictions, dated February 10, 2024 cc: Robyn Fennig, State Hazard Mitigation Officer, California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services
Victoria LaMar-Haas, Hazard Mitigation Planning Chief, California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services

Page 364 of 386 ends

Kern County Hazard Mitigation Plan Amendment Notice
February 10, 2025

Page 4 of 4 ends

Status of Participating Jurisdictions as of February 10, 2025 Jurisdictions – Adopted and Approved
# Jurisdiction Date of Adoption
1 Kern County 2/11/2021
2 Tehachapi, City of 1/19/2021
3 Wasco, City of 1/19/2021
4 Kern High School District 2/1/2021
5 Lost Hills Union School District 3/8/2021
6 Tehachapi Unified School District 2/9/2021
7 East Niles Community Services District 2/16/2021
8 Mojave Air and Space Port 3/2/2021
9 Stallion Springs Community Services District 1/19/2021 10 Tehachapi Valley Recreation and Park District 3/16/2021 11 Arvin-Edison Water Storage District 1/12/2021
12 Kern County Water Agency 2/25/2021
13 City of Arvin 8/10/2021
14 City of Bakersfield 8/18/2021
15 City of California City 8/24/2021
16 City of Delano 8/2/2021
17 City of Maricopa 8/24/2021
18 City of Ridgecrest 8/4/2021
19 City of Shafter 8/17/2021
20 City of Taft 8/17/2021
21 Bakersfield City School District 8/24/2021
22 Buttonwillow Union School District 8/9/2021
23 Kern Community College District 9/9/2021
24 Mojave Unified School District 9/7/2021
25 Richland School District 9/13/2021
26 Sierra Sands Unified School District 9/16/2021
27 Arvin Community Services District 8/2/2021
28 Bear Valley Community Services District 9/9/2021
29 North of the River Rec. and Park District 9/20/2021
30 Rosamond Community Services District 8/11/2021
31 Shafter Recreation and Park District 8/23/2021
32 Berrenda Mesa Water District 9/2/2021
33 Buttonwillow County Water District 8/23/2021
34 Cawelo Water District 9/9/2021
35 Ford City-Taft Heights Sanitation District 9/14/2021 36 Golden Hills Community Services District 9/16/2021
37 Greenfield County Water District 8/9/2021
38 Kern Delta Water District 8/17/2021
39 Kern Sanitation Authority 9/14/2021
40 Kern-Tulare Water District 8/12/2021

Page 365 of 386 ends

Kern County Hazard Mitigation Plan Amendment Notice
February 10, 2025

Page 4 of 4 ends

41 Lost Hills Water District 9/2/2021
42 North of River Sanitary District No. 1 8/17/2021
43 North of the River Municipal Water District 8/18/2021 44 Semitropic Water Storage District 8/11/2021
45 Tehachapi-Cummings County Water District 9/15/2021
46 West Kern Water District 8/24/2021
47 Wheeler Ridge-Maricopa Water Storage District 8/11/2021 48 Taft City School District 10/13/2021
Jurisdictions – Approvable Pending Adoption
# Jurisdiction
1 City of McFarland

Page 366 of 386 ends

City of McFarland
City Council Meeting

STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. 9.

Section: ADMINISTRATIVE
AGENDA
Meeting Date: February 19,
2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Diego Viramontes, City Manager
Serrena McCuan, Human Resources Director
SUBJECT: Approval of Resolution No. 2025-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MCFARLAND APPROVING ADDENDUM NO. 2 TO THE

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT WITH KENNY WILLIAMS THROUGH JUNE
30TH, 2025.

SUMMARY:

This staff report seeks City Council approval of Addendum No. 2 to the employment agreement with Kenny Williams, extending his role as the City Council Special Projects Manager/Police Oversight Advisor for an additional four-month term. The original agreement, which commenced on March 1, 2024, expires at the end of February 28th, 2025. This extension, provided for in Section 5 of the agreement, will extend the term from March 1st, 2025, through June 30th, 2025, and is necessary to ensure the continued oversight and completion of several ongoing projects.

The terms and conditions of this extension remain consistent with the original agreement, and the required funds have already been included in the FY24-25 budget, so no budget adjustment is required.

Addendum No. 2 Details:
• Extension Term: An additional four months, from March 1st, 2025, through June 30th, 2025.
• Compensation: $150 per hour, up to 80 hours per month, consistent with the initial agreement.
• Total Cost: Not to exceed $72,000 for the four-month extension period, as previously budgeted.
• Responsibilities: Continuation of duties as outlined in the original employment agreement and job description, with a focus on project completion and operational oversight.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

There is no additional financial impact associated with this extension, as the funds necessary for this position were already allocated in the FY24-25 budget. No budget adjustments are required.

Page 367 of 386 ends

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff requests that the City Council approve Addendum No. 1 to the employment agreement with Kenny Williams, extending the term of the agreement for an additional six months from March 1st, 2025, through June 30th, 2025. This extension will allow Mr. Williams to continue his valuable contributions to the City of McFarland.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Addendum No. 2 to Employment Agreement - Special Project Manager 02.25

2. Addendum No. 1 to Employment Agreement - Special Project Manager 02.24

3. Employment Agreement- Kenny Williams Special Project Manager

Page 368 of 386 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2025-15

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MCFARLAND APPROVING ADDENDUM NO. 2 TO THE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT WITH KENNY WILLIAMS

FOR AN ADDITIONAL FOUR MONTHS
WHEREAS the employment agreement allows an extension of the term for an additional four months if mutually agreed upon by the City Council and Kenny Williams; and, WHEREAS the initial term of the agreement is set to expire at the end of February 2025, and both the City Council and Kenny Williams wish to extend the agreement for an additional four months, from March 1st, 2025, through June 30th, 2025; and
WHEREAS, Addendum No. 2 to the employment agreement has been prepared to formalize this extension; and
WHEREAS, the extension of the agreement will ensure continuity in the management and oversight of ongoing projects critical to the City’s operations, including those related to police oversight; and
WHEREAS, the funds required for this extension have been included in the FY24-25 budget, and no budget adjustments are necessary.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of McFarland that it hereby finds and determines as follows:

1. The City Council hereby approves Addendum No. 1 to the employment agreement with Kenny Williams, extending the term for an additional four months, effective March 1st, and continuing through June 30th, 2025.

2. The terms and conditions of the extension shall remain consistent with those set forth in the original employment agreement, including the compensation of $150 per hour, not to exceed 80 hours per month.

3. The City Manager, or their designee, is authorized and directed to take all necessary steps to implement this resolution, including executing any documents or agreements necessary to effectuate the extension of the employment agreement.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of McFarland on February 19, 2025 by the following vote:

Aye Nae Abstain Absent
Saul Ayon
Ricardo Cano
Amador Ayon
Anita Gonzalez

Page 369 of 386 ends

Maria T. Pérez

APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________
Nathan Hodges, City Attorney

Page 370 of 386 ends

Page 1 of 2 ends

ADDENDUM NO. 2
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT – CITY COUNCIL’S SPECIAL PROJECT

MANAGER/POLICE OVERSIGHT ADVISOR
This ADDENDUM NO. 2 to the EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT – CITY
COUNCIL’S SPECIAL PROJECT MANAGER/POLICE OVERSIGHT ADVISOR (“Agreement”), is entered into on the 1st day of March 2025 by and between the CITY OF MCFARLAND, a California municipal corporation (“CITY”), and KENNY WILLIAMS (“Williams”), and forms part of the Employment Agreement between the City and Kenny Williams dated February 28, 2024. This Addendum shall be incorporated into the February 28, 2024, Employment Agreement by this reference.

The initial term of the Agreement was approved, establishing terms of employment. It was subsequently amended once to extend the term, and now, with this addendum, the Agreement is amended for an additional time.

This initial term of the Agreement was set to expire at the end of February 2024.

Section 5 of the Agreement provides that the term of the Agreement shall renew upon the recommendation by the City Council for an additional four (4) months on the effective date of each subsequent four-month anniversary, if mutually agreed by both parties.

The Council hereby recommends, and the Parties hereby mutually agree to extend the Term of the Agreement for an additional four (4) months, from February 28, 2025, to June 30th, 2025.

Except as set forth in this Addendum, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement remain unchanged and shall continue in full force and effect.

This addendum may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which together, shall constitute one and the same document. [Signature Page Follows]

Page 371 of 386 ends

Page 2 of 2 ends

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Addendum has been executed and is effective as dated below.

CITY OF MCFARLAND
By:

EMPLOYEE
Saul Ayon, Mayor Kenny Williams
ATTEST:

By:

Erika De La Cruz, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM
By:

Nathan M. Hodges, City Attorney

Page 372 of 386 ends

Page 373 of 386 ends

Page 374 of 386 ends

Page 375 of 386 ends

Page 376 of 386 ends

Page 377 of 386 ends

Page 378 of 386 ends

Page 379 of 386 ends

Page 380 of 386 ends

Page 381 of 386 ends

Page 382 of 386 ends

Page 383 of 386 ends

Page 384 of 386 ends

City of McFarland
City Council Meeting

STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. 10.

Section: ADMINISTRATIVE
AGENDA
Meeting Date: February 19,
2025
TO: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Diego Viramontes, City Manager
Erika De La Cruz, City Clerk
SUBJECT: UPDATE LIST OF COUNCIL MEMBERS ON SUBCOMMITTEES AND

SPECIAL DISTRICT COMMITTEES
SUMMARY:

Many elected bodies divide into subcommittees to study specific matters impacting their communities. Subcommittees can facilitate the decision-making process on critical items and preform the following functions:
• Clearly define the mission before creating a subcommittee. • Set deadlines for reports.
• Monitor assignments to check on progress.
• Rotate membership periodically.
• Keep nonmembers informed of meetings and action.
• Monitor the amount of staff effort required.
• Review the list of subcommittees annually and delete those that are no longer necessary.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

No Financial Impact
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council review and update members on the Subcommittee List and Special District Committees.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. 4.11.2024 Subcommittee List (1)

Page 385 of 386 ends

SUBCOMMITTEES AND SPECIAL DISTRICT COMMITTEES
REVISED and APPROVED: April 11, 2024

1. Kern Council of Governments (KCOG)
Primary: Saul Ayon - Alternate: Maria Pérez

2. Kern Economic Development Corp. (KEDC)
Primary: Saul Ayon - Alternate: Ricardo Cano

3. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJV) Primary: Amador Ayon - Alternate: Anita Gonzalez

4. Delano Mosquito Abatement District (DMAD)
Ricardo Cano

5. Poso Creek (IRWMP)
Anita Gonzalez

6. Kern Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO)
Primary: Saul Ayon - Alternate: Maria Pérez

7. Public Policy and Finance Committee
Saul Ayon & Anita Gonzalez

8. Public Safety Committee
Saul Ayon & Maria Pérez

9. Quality of Life Committee
Amador Ayon & Ricardo Cano

10. Ad Hoc Committee (not a brown act committee)
Saul Ayon & Maria Pérez

11. Cannabis Committee
Saul Ayon & Maria Pérez

Page 386 of 386 ends

McFarland City CouncilFebruary 19, 2025

McFarland City Council
February 19, 2025