WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 6 assessments, providing information for safe implementation of construction and excavation projects without disruption to essential city services.
EurofinsCalscience
Portion of Work to Be Subcontracted: Laboratory Services Founded in 1986 and located in Orange County, Eurofins Environment Testing Southwest, LLC (Eurofins Calscience), is the largest full-service laboratory on the West Coast offering a comprehensive portfolio of analytical methods for testing air, water, soil, other solids, and tissue. Their facilities total nearly 85,000 sf of laboratory and office space with 175 dedicated professionals. Their services support various industries and project types, including treatment facilities, municipalities, ports and shipyards, and chemical industry.
Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest
Anchor QEA affirms that we have conducted a thorough review of our professional relationships and financial interests to identify any potential conflicts of interest in connection with our proposal for the WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition project.
At this time, we confirm that Anchor QEA and our subconsultants (Cannon, Yeh, HSA, GPRS, and Eurofins Calscience) have no known conflicts of interest that would impair our ability to execute the project with objectivity and impartiality. Should any potential conflicts arise during the project, we commit to promptly disclosing them to the City and working collaboratively to address and resolve any concerns in compliance with all applicable regulations and standards.
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 7 C. PROJECT TEAM DESCRIPTION
Our team is structured so that all major project requirements, from pre-design investigations through construction phase services, will be performed in house. Using our best team approach, we have selected our project team based on their experience in their respective roles with projects similar in nature and complexity to the WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition project. Our team’s combined experience enables us to effectively incorporate planning concepts to balance permitting, design, and construction and deliver a cost-effective and objective-focused project.
Organizational Chart
Our proposed key personnel, indicated in bold in the following organization chart, shall remain available for the entirety of the project.
Lead Contact Person
Name:Margaret Carrillo-Sheridan, PE
Title:Principal-In-Chargeand Senior
Technical Advisor
Email: [email protected]
Phone:315-414-2049
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 8 Staff Summaries
To provide a holistic understanding of our team’s qualifications, we have included brief bios for the following key staff, in addition to resumes for our key staff in Appendix A.
Key Staff
Jerzy Cebula, PE | Project Manager
Jerzy has 27 years of experience in project management and engineering for complex industrial facilities D3 projects.
• Managed several pre-demolition site assessments, facility closure, decommissioning and demolition, and remediation projects in California and other states • Experience includes working at challenging aerospace, manufacturing, oil and gas, municipal, commercial, and manufacturing sites impacted with heavy metals, hydrocarbons, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), explosives, and asbestos Margaret Carrillo-Sheridan, PE | Principal-in-Charge and Senior Technical Advisor Margaret has 35 years of experience performing and consulting on the assessment and remediation of former utility, publicly owned, and industrial manufacturing sites nationwide and in multiple countries.
• Managed assessment and remediation of more than 8 million sf of contaminated industrial, commercial, and power facilities
• Experience includes design of complex D3 and soil/groundwater remediation programs of contaminated sites in residential settings
• Author of best practices guidebook for substation decommissioning prepared for a national utility organization
Michael Whelan, PE | Engineer of Record
Michael has 33 years of experience managing, designing, and providing construction oversight for sediment remediation, restoration, and monitoring projects in California. • Develops cost-effective and implementable approaches to remediation involving waterfront cleanup, construction, and design of nearshore and offshore waste containment facilities and upland landfill caps
• Recognized for his research on the challenges of sediment removal and management, including innovations in dredging and long-term sediment management for water storage and reservoirs
Matthew Gruber, CIH, CSP | Health and Safety
Matthew is an environmental health and safety manager with 13 years of experience in industrial hygiene and health and safety management.
• Expertise in quantifying and characterizing exposure to hazardous substances, identifying and mitigating health and safety hazards, managing occupational health, and developing health and safety programs
• Provides environmental consulting, as an industrial hygiene leader in the pulp and paper industry and as an OSHA industrial hygienist
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 9 Marine Vié | Permitting
Marine is a senior planner with 8 years of experience preparing federal and state regulatory permit application packages and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)/National Environmental Policy Act documentation for restoration and remediation projects in California. • Managed or contributed to more than 25 permitting packages and obtained regulatory approval for a variety of private and public waterfront projects throughout California, including the Port of Stockton, City of Newport Beach, City of Long Beach, and National Park Service
• Lead author for the Lower Newport Bay Confined Aquatic Disposal Construction Project Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and supported CEQA work and approvals for the General Dynamics-NASSCO Program Level Support project
Tyler Nowak, PE| Pre-Demolition/Pre-Design Investigation Tyler has 12 years of experience directing field investigations and preparing schedules, budgets, and cost estimatesfor pre-demolition and pre-design of D3 projects. • Has led multiple pre-demolition field site assessments, decommissioning and demolition, and remediation projects in California and other states • Experience includes working at challenging federal, commercial, and manufacturing sites impacted with heavy metals, PCBs, mercury, industrial chemicals, and asbestos Doug Musser, PG | Design, Cost Estimating, and Contractor Procurement Doug has 32 years of experience leading complex, high-profile environmental investigation and remediation projects, including four Superfund sites. • Led building/structure assessments, decommissioning, demolition design, and engineering services for the remediation of more than 5 million sf of facilities, including WWTPs
• Managed costs, schedules, contractor procurement, and demolition design as Demolition Task Manager for the City of Anacortes WWTP Remediation Alex Bleichner | Construction Management
Alex is an engineer in training and certified Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) pilot with 5 years of progressive experience supporting D3 projects including construction oversight. • Works with on-site senior engineersto provide oversight and monitor compliance with remedial action plans, leads environmental monitoring during D3 activities, and performs weekly waste inspections and inventories
• Served as the lead construction manager for the City of Anacortes Water Treatment Facility Demolition, and one of the primary on-site field interfaces with USEPA for the superstructure demolition of a former lamp and vacuum facility in New Jersey Larry Kraemer, PE| Wastewater Treatment Plant Expertise (Cannon) Larry is a seasoned wastewater treatment plant expert with more than 35 years of experience in design, permitting, and construction oversight for public infrastructure projects. • Led engineering efforts for the Morro Bay Recycled Water Facility, managing permitting, compliance, and design implementation
• Extensive experience in water and wastewater treatment systems, including pipeline design, floodplain modeling, and regulatory coordination
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 10 Derek Romer, PE | Electrical Utility Disconnection and Rerouting (Cannon) Derek is an experienced electrical engineer with more than 20 years of experience in power distribution, SCADA, and control systems, specializing in WWTP electrical infrastructure. • Managed electrical system design, utility disconnection, and rerouting for large-scale wastewater and pump station projects
• Extensive expertise in secondary power distribution, SCADA, and lighting systems to support safe and efficient electrical modifications
Burl Steude, PLS| Land Surveying (Cannon)
Burl is a licensed professional land surveyor with 21 years of experience providing surveying, mapping, and property boundary research for projects in California. • Specializes in 3D laser scanning, boundary analysis, and GIS data integration to support design and construction efforts
• Led survey efforts for the Morro Bay Recycled Water Facility, ensuring accurate mapping and site documentation
Judd King, PE, PG | Geotechnical Engineering (Yeh)
Judd has more than 20 years of experience planning, design, and construction for public works projects, with expertise in foundation support, excavation stability, dewatering, and trenchless installations.
• For the City of Morro Bay, served as geotechnical engineer on the Water Reclamation Facility project and senior geotechnical engineer on the Conveyance Pipelines and Pump Stations project and currently serves as contract manager on the 2023 Storm Damage projects
• Expert in soft ground stabilization, liquefaction mitigation, and mechanically stabilized earth walls, ensuring structural integrity and long-term resilience of wastewater treatment plant sites
Joel Berman, CIH, CSP, CAC, CIAQM, CDPH LI/A | Asbestos Surveying (HSA) Joel is the president of HSA and has 45 years of experience in industrial hygiene, surveying, contamination evaluation and mitigation, and hazardous waste management. • Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH), Certified Safety Professional (CSP) in Comprehensive Practice and Safety Management Specialist, California Certified Asbestos Consultant (CAC), California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Lead Inspector/Assessor (LI/A), and Certified Indoor Air Quality Manager (CIAQM)
• Manages asbestos removal projects throughout California to ensure proper removal techniques are used and client liabilities are avoided
• Has served as an expert witness in various areas of practice, including asbestos, radon, and mercury contamination issues; indoor air quality and microbiological contamination issues; toxic torts; and more
In addition, Cannon has proposed to engage the City’s former (retired) WWTP Manager (Bruce Keogh).
Mr. Keough’s knowledge and experience will be instrumental to understanding the facility conditions at the time of shutdown as well as potential challenges that may be encountered during the investigation or decommissioning/demolition process.
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 11 Resumes
We have included resumes in Appendix A for key staff identified in bold on the organizational chart.
Proposed Project Management Structure
Our project will be led by Jerzy Cebula, PE, who brings 27 years of experience managing projects with scope componentslike this one, including 18 years in California. He will use his expertise in project management to lead staff and tasks, communicate regularly with the City and key stakeholders, coordinate consultant teams, manage deliverables, and ensure the project meets budget and schedule.
Jerzy will be supported by Margaret Carrillo-Sheridan, PE, as principal-in-charge and senior technical advisor, and Michael Whelan, PE as engineer of record. Margaret’s more than three decades of experience leading and consulting on facility conditions assessment, decommissioning, and demolition projects in residential and industrial settings speak to her ability to oversee large teams and complex sites. Michael has 27 years of experience in risk management and sediment dredging in California and is a national expert in sedimentation, contributing his extensive engineering knowledge to this project.
Approach to Project Management
Knowing that the City valuesthe ability to start work
quickly and adapt to changing circumstances, we will
rely on our proven project management procedures to
provide nimble and thorough support on all tasks.
Our staff take a proactive approach to project
management and have found that adhering to our
project management procedures outlined in the box
to the right will enable our team to exceed the City’s
expectations for service, schedule, budget, and quality.
Project Planning Transparency. Before starting a
project of this importance and scale, initial project
planning is an essential phase for identifying critical paths and tasks. The planning phase will begin with
developing a brief Project Communication Plan that
will establish (with input from the City) the “ground
rules” of project-related communications and a plan
for regularly scheduled “pulse” calls to keep the City
updated on the progress of the work.
Our key staff will work collaboratively with the City and key stakeholders to establish organization and
communication protocols and define project goals,
objectives, milestones, deliverables, and schedules. To ensure collaboration and promote transparency, we
Project Management Principles
Provide Consistent Communication and Coordination
• Communicate regularly with the City and project partners about the status of scope, budget, and tasks
• Troubleshoot potential issues with the City and proactively develop strategies to address any issues
Develop and Apply Schedules and Milestones
• Establish a mutual understanding of the scope of work and schedule with the City, including a specific understanding of deliverables and project outcomes, and document them in the scope of work and schedule
• Provide “early warnings” if specific schedule components are off track so that the team can make course corrections before critical deadlines are in jeopardy of being missed Proactively Manage the Budget
• Monitor budgets regularly with the help of Anchor QEA’s sophisticated electronic accounting system, BST11, to
ensure we control costs, identify issues early, and directly communicate solutions
• Thoroughly review the budget at the start of each task Ensure Consistent QA/QC Procedures
• Ensure all client deliverables undergo technical review by a shareholder or senior member of the firm and an editorial review by an in-house technicaleditor
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 12 will maintain a project SharePoint site that will include the project schedule, reference materials, resources, contact list, draft and final documents, and the administrative record.
Subconsultant Management. Jerzy will be the primary point of contact for the City; manage the project team; and oversee our subconsultants(Cannon and Yeh), HSA, GPRS, and Eurofins Calscience. Jerzy will clearly communicate expectations and conduct frequent check-ins with subconsultantsto foster crossteam coordination and quickly identify and address any potential challenges. Although not anticipated, we will inform City staff of any issues before our team proceeds with an effort that is out of scope. If appropriate, an amendment will be executed before additional work is performed, or alternative ways to complete the work will be implemented.
Cost and Schedule Controls. Our detailed project planning enables us to ensure a clear understanding of project objectives and expectations across the project team and to define the project scope, eliminate redundancies, and minimize unforeseen obstacles. By working to identify project complications early, Jerzy will be able to proactively identify solutions to meet critical path deadlines and use resources efficiently.
This commitment to proactive project management ensures project milestones and budgets are reviewed during each project task and projects are completed on time and within budget.
Quality Assurance and Quality Control
Anchor QEA’s Quality Program is a continuous cycle of planning, implementing, reviewing, and improving our work to ensure its quality and meet project objectives. The technical nature of our work and the regulatory compliance needs of many of our work products require that Anchor QEA carefully implement a comprehensive QA/QC program. We initiate QC review at the beginning of each project, rather than waiting to conduct QC at the deliverable stage. The work products are reviewed with the client throughout project progress, including deliverable report outlines, interim submittals, progress updates, and scheduled milestones. Anchor QEA has a dedicated production staff consisting of technical editors, CAD designers, GIS specialists, and graphic designers who work closely with our team to deliver high-quality deliverable products.
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 13 D. QUALIFICATIONS AND REFERENCES
Experience Performing Similar Services
As outlined in Section B, Anchor QEA’s D3 team
has completed assessment, design, and
remediation of more than 20 million sf of
industrial, commercial, residential, and power
generation/transmission facilities. Our clients
include federal, state, and local governments and
municipalities as well as private entities. The
following are examples of projects recently
conducted for public clients that included similar
components such as pre-demolition assessment,
design, permitting, and engineering support
during construction, followed by references and
a chart that summarizes collective experience of
our D3 team.
Water Treatment Plant Remediation
City of Anacortes | Anacortes, Washington
Anchor QEA led the soil remediation and demolition of
buildings, basins, equipment, and piping at an out-ofservice municipal water treatment facility. The work involved a focused facility investigation, feasibility study, and treatability study; demolition design; contractor
procurement;and construction observation. A targeted
investigation was performed to address data gaps from
previous investigations by others. This allowed us to delineate the nature and extent of PCB contamination that contained percent-level PCBs in coatings, equipment, and insulating materials. To develop the feasibility study, Anchor QEA pilot-tested a material (developed by NASA) for the extraction and dechlorination of PCBs from impacted building materials. Following remedy selection, Anchor QEA prepared the remedial design and bid documents for the remediation. We alsodeveloped and implemented a community air monitoring plan that demonstrated the remediation did not release particulates or PCBs at concentrations above action levels beyond the work area limits or into the active water treatment areas. The work was completed in compliance with the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)and Washington State Department of Ecology.
The project was completed on schedule, within budget and no OSHA Reportable safety incidents. “Since we’ve worked with Anchor, we’ve been very happy with the pace that they’ve moved this project along. They do a really great job at giving us timeframes and meeting those timeframes so we’ve made significant progress on the project. I can’t say enough how great and efficient they’ve been to work with.”
—Darcy Sweetnam, City Attorney
Project Dates
2018to 2024
Total Cost
$6.2M
Relevant Services
Demolition design
ESDC
Cost savings analysis
Permitting
Environmental testing and investigation
Quality management
Contractor procurement
Key Staff Participation
Margaret Carrillo-Sheridan, Principal
Engineer; Doug Musser, Demolition Task
Manager; Jerzy Cebula, Technical
Support;Tyler Nowak, Field
Investigation and Sampling; Alex
Bleichner, Field Oversight and
Environmental Monitor
Decommissioning and Demolition: RCRA-Permitted
Hazardous Waste Incinerator
Anchor QEA’s Tyler Nowak performsa confined space inspection of a former hazardous waste rotary kiln incinerator in 2023to provide visual confirmation that residuals were removed prior to demolition.
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 14 Demolition and Remediation for Vo-Toys CERCLA Removal Action General Electric Company | Harrison, New Jersey
Anchor QEA developed and implemented a site
assessment, building reuse analysis, and demolition and remediation program at a former lamp and vacuum tube
manufacturing facility impacted by mercury, PCBs,
asbestos, and chlorinated solvents. Work was performed
under an Administrative Order on Consent with USEPA
Region 2, requiring compliance with federal, state, and local regulations. Components includedthe following:
Assessment and characterization: Building, subsurface structure, and soil investigations using real-time, field-based data management systems to identify impacted materials, evaluate options for building and site reuse, streamline remediation planning, and expedite decision-making during the remedial process.
Design and regulatory approvals: Removal action design, including contractor specifications and drawings, for pre-demolition decontamination to recover elemental mercury from building materials and removal of hazardous waste, regulated equipment, asbestos-containing materials, and PCB-containing wastes; a mercury-specific community air monitoring program to document that remediation did not adversely impact the surrounding residential community; and a waste management plan for off-site transportation and disposal of 32 waste streams. The initial removal action design was approved by USEPA in less than 45 days.
Demolition and remediation execution: Managementof contractor bidding, procurement, and project and construction management, ensuring compliance with stakeholder and regulatory requirements.
Innovative in situ treatment strategies: Design of an in-situ treatment remedy to address residual materials containing liquid elemental mercury under historical foundation structures and active roadways and power lines. This successful treatment avoided relocation of power lines and disruption of traffic and avoided approximately $3 million in remediation costs.
Innovative exsitu treatment strategies: Development ofan ex-situ treatment strategy to de-characterize residual materials that, based on co-mingled PCB and mercury impacts, could not be accepted at any permitted treatment or disposal facility in the United States or Canada. Following treatment, the residual materials were accepted for disposal in a permitted Subtitle C facility.
Urban worksite management: Daily coordination with emergency management officials, local businesses, residents, and regulators to ensure safety and minimize disruptions to the community.
Community air monitoring data collected werepublished weekly during the removal action by USEPA.
Cost estimating: Development ofengineer’s cost estimates for each phase of the demolition and remediation work. The final contractor costs for the above-grade pre-demolition remediation and demolition were within 8% of the engineer’s opinion of probable costs.
Project Achievements
• Completed the project on schedule despite COVID-19 challenges and regulatory constraints • Optimized waste characterization and demolition design, significantly reducing the volume of demolition debris requiring hazardous waste managementand disposal costs (by several million dollars)
• Maintained a safe work environment with best management plans, engineering controls, and air monitoringand had more than 88,000 work hours of safe field work with no OSHA recordable injuries in almost 8 years of investigation and remediation, including extended periods of work in Level C
Project Dates
2016to 2024
Total Cost
$22M
Relevant Services
Pre-Demolition Assessment
ESDC
Community air monitoring and reporting
during construction
Demolition design and specification
development
Engineer’s cost estimates and cost saving
analysis
Contractor procurement
Quality management
Deep foundation testing and
encapsulation
Key Staff Participation
Margaret Carrillo-Sheridan, Engineer of
Record; Doug Musser, Project Manager;
Tyler Nowak, Field Engineer; Alex
Bleichner,Field Representativeand
Environmental Monitor
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 15 Marine Oil Terminal Environmental Site Assessment and
Disposition Options Analysis
City of Pittsburg | Pittsburg, California
Anchor QEA performed Phase I and Phase II
Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs) to assess an idled marine oil terminal under a USEPA Brownfield grant on
behalf of the Cityof Pittsburg. In addition, a disposition options analysis was performed to evaluate potential
options for repurposing the terminal for both public and private uses. Potential options were then ranked using
factors representing physical, environmental, and land-use criteria. In addition, engineering estimates of probable cost were preparedfor each option to support the evaluation.
The Phase II ESA included performing some of the assessment activities by boat and evaluating the former oil transfer pipelines for residual materials as well as asbestos-containing materials. Physical samples of the pier components were sampled to determine the presence of other constituents of concern thatcould impact potential reuse scenarios or impact associated costs. HSA served as Anchor QEA’s asbestos survey subconsultant of the Phase II work.
Project Dates
2022to 2025
Total Cost
$222K
Relevant Services
Cost savings analysis
Environmental testing and investigation
Decommissioning evaluation
Key Staff Participation
Margaret Carrillo-Sheridan, Senior
Technical Lead; Jerzy Cebula, Phase I and
II Assessment Development; Tyler
Nowak, Lead Engineer for Phase II ESA
field activities; Joel Berman, Asbestos
Survey (HSA)
“The Anchor QEA team’s work on our abandoned industrial wharf was efficient and coordinated. Anchor QEA kept up with City-initiated fluctuations in the project scope and timeline as well as grant requirements as our Phase I and II investigations were fundedby a USEPA multipurpose grant. Ultimately, we now have a great foundation of knowledge and alternatives for the next steps of this unique brownfield property—can’t say enough good things about your team!” —Sara Bellafronte, Assistant to the City Manager
Wastewater Bioreactor Renovation Project Management and Construction Management
Momentive | Waterford, New York
Anchor QEA performed overall project management and
construction management to renovate a 3.6-milliongallon wastewater bioreactor tank at an active chemical manufacturing facility. The work included draining,
power washing, grit blasting, structural repair, carbon fiber installation, coating repair, management of
regulated/hazardous wastes, influent/effluent piping
repair, and performance inspections.
Anchor QEA was responsible for coordinating contractors and site logistics while minimizing potential impacts to active site production. The project included coordinating day-to-day activities of contractors in a small footprint immediately adjacent to active production areas. In addition, Anchor QEA coordinated performance inspections; implemented work area perimeter air monitoring; tracked work progress (schedule vs. project spend);and prepared daily, weekly, and monthly status reports to document work activities.
Project Dates
2024to 2024
Total Cost
More than $10M
Relevant Services
ESDC
Key Staff Participation
Margaret Carrillo-Sheridan, Project
Director; Doug Musser, Technical
Advisor; Tyler Nowak, Construction
Manager
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 16 Facility Assessment, Decommissioning and Demolition at Mineral Processing and Chemical Manufacturing Plant
Momentive| Waterford, New York
Anchor QEA was retained to
evaluate, plan, characterize,
design, bid, and manage the
demolition of more than
50chemical production
structures encompassing more
than 20 acres in an active
chemical facility.
As part of the demolition design program, we developed a building characterization program to perform environmental and regulatory sampling. The sampling program focused on delineating regulated materials (including PCB bulk product waste) and maximizing the volume of demolition debris that would be available for beneficial reuse on site or scrap recovery. Anchor QEA also served as the certifying engineer of record for the decommissioning and closure of more than 20 regulated hazardous waste tank, piping, and incinerator systems, including the delineation, demolition, and off-site disposal of building materials classified as PCB bulk product waste in accordance with New York State waste management regulations and federal (TSCA and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act [RCRA]) regulations. We designed, bid, and managed the project in phases to limit disruptions to active facility operations and protect the remaining structures and processes. Work was completed ahead of schedule, within 2% of the original contractor budget, and with zero reportable safety incidents.
Project Dates
2020to 2024
Total Cost
$25M
Relevant Services
Decommissioning strategy
Demolition design and specification
development
Environmental testing and investigation
Cost savings analysis
ESDC
Air monitoring and reporting
Key Staff Participation
Margaret Carrillo-Sheridan, Project
Director; Doug Musser, Technical
Advisor; Tyler Nowak, Construction
Manager
“Margaret, Ican’t thank you enough for all you have done for Momentive to make our demo project successful. It’s not just your years of experience, it’s your ability to quickly read individuals and what they need from your vast level of expertise. You always are open and listen and blend that with a calm approachable question or challenge. While you have been so available to the entire Momentive organization, personally, you’ve taken me to a level that I’ve never imagined, so thank you for that.” —Ricardo Caruso, Senior Manager,Chemical Operations Restructuring Decommissioning/Demolition Before After
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 17 1051 1st Avenue Building Demolition
Washington State Department of Transportation | Seattle, Washington Anchor QEA leddemolition after the building was
deemed unsafe due to cracks in its foundation. The
historical structure sitson top of an archaeological
site, built upon demolition debris from as early as the 1890s. Demolition needed to occur under a tight
timeline to accommodate a major sporting event
projected to have an estimated impact of $50M on
the City. Demolition design involved reviewing existing data, identifying data gaps, and working with consultants to collect additional building material samples forpre-demolition building material characterization. Anchor QEA prepared two sets of technical specifications and estimated costs: one for abatement and removal of materials and another for complete demolition and site restoration.
We alsodesigned a stormwater drainage and collection system for the resulting open space.
Permitting, design, and demolition were completed on scheduleandin time for the All-Star Game.
Project Dates
2019to 2023
Total Cost
$193K
Relevant Services
ESDC
Demolition design and specifications
development
Cost savings analysis
Permitting
Environmental testing and investigation
Quality management
Key Staff Participation
Jerzy Cebula, Demolition Design
“Anchor QEA delivered when I needed them the most. After our old warehouse was red tagged and needed to be demolished quickly, they developed plans for asbestos abatement, demolition, waste management, site restoration, wrote specifications, and applied for all necessary permits. Anchor QEA was thorough and brought all the right people together to get the job done.” —Brian Dobbins, Engineering Manager
Pre-Demolition Assessment and Specifications Development Port of Long Beach | Long Beach, California
Anchor QEA, as a subconsultant to Ausenco
Engineering, assisted the Port with pre-demolition
assessment of the existing Pier G Shiploader No. 2 and
associated infrastructure scheduled for removal and
replacement.
Following completion of the assessment, Anchor QEA
prepared environmental and demolition-related technical specifications, as part of the Shiploader replacement RFP package. The demolition specifications were detailed to require shiploader decommissioning and demolition without interruption of the other ship-loading activities on the same pier. HSA was part of Anchor QEA’s team and performed the asbestos survey as part of the pre-demolition assessment.
In the future, Anchor QEA will assist Ausenco and the Port with the bidding and demolition phases of the project.
Project Dates
2020to 2023
Total Cost
$135K
Relevant Services
Pre-demolition assessment
Asbestos surveying
Demolition design
Bid document preparation
Cost savings analysis
Cost estimating
Key Staff Participation
Margaret Carrillo-Sheridan, Principal
Engineer; Jerzy Cebula, Pre-Demolition
Assessment and Demolition Design; Doug
Musser, Project Manager; Tyler Nowak,
Field Investigation and Sampling; Joel
Berman, Asbestos Survey(HSA)
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 18 Ore Peninsula Redevelopment
Municipality of Skagway | Skagway, Alaska
Anchor QEA replaced an existing concrete cruise dock
and demolishedadjacent ore storage warehouse
complex, shiploader, and fuel storage tanks and transfer piping. We reviewed existing data; identified data gaps; recommended additional sampling to characterize
building materials and residues;conducted a
pre-demolition assessment; prepared engineering cost
opinions for two separate demolition scenarios: one for complete demolition and one for partial demolition of the warehouse complex;and prepared technical specifications. We alsooversaw demolition activities and promotedcompliance with applicable regulations, including segregation, transportation, and disposal of generated waste materials. We summarizedthe demolition and disposal activities in a closure report. Wealso led permitting, provided environmental QA oversight, and led marine mammal monitoring. We worked with USACE to develop the USACE permit application and ensure timely receipt by agencies, includinga biological assessment with National Marine Fisheries Service (under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act)and a request for incidental harassment authorization under the Marine Mammal Protection Act.
Project Dates
2023to 2024
Total Cost
$840K (without marine mammal
monitoring)
Relevant Services
ESDC
Demolition design
Permitting
Environmental testing and investigation
Quality assurance and management
Cost estimating
Key Staff Participation
Jerzy Cebula, Pre-Demolition
Assessment, Design, and Cost Estimating
“The Municipality values the expertise and dedication that Anchor QEA brought to the project. Their contributions, including the development of environmentally focused engineering specifications, a comprehensive pre-demolition assessment of the ore terminal facility, and well-informed cost analyses for multiple demolition scenarios, have been instrumental in advancing this critical project.” —Cody Jennings, Port Director
Oil Field Remediation and Restoration
Chevron Environmental | Guadalupe, California
After 50 years of oil production, the 3,000-acre oil field facilityclosed, and168 miles of pipelines and 240 wells required deconstruction. Characterization studies
determined that diluent plumes existed under 187 acres
of the oil field. Remediation included full excavation of plumes and/or sumps;partial excavation with in-situ
recovery systems; active product recovery;
bioremediation of excavated soils; and other actions, such as in situ remediation, biodegradation in the Land Treatment Unit, and phytoremediation. Cannon providedengineering, surveying, permitting, and compliance services;plans and specifications for grading and drainage for removal of approximately 300,000 cyof hydrocarbon affected material and 30,000 cyof sump material; road construction; layout of 7,000 wall feet of sheet pile; emergency permitting; construction management; and pipeline abandonment. Using in-house GPS equipment, surveyors established a 50-point, second order control network allowing for accurate field measurements used in soil and water investigations, GIS data collection for botanical and biological investigations, and as-built surveys. Cannonmapped pipelines to describe the commodity that ran through the pipeline;pipeline material, size, features (e.g., valve, T, and patch), and elevation;and the existence of botanical covering. A total of 15,000 points were surveyed in only 12 weeks.
Project Dates
1995to 2015
Total Cost
$20M
Relevant Services
Surveying
Demolition design
Permitting
Environmental testing and investigation
Quality assurance and management
Key Staff Participation
Larry Kraemer (Cannon), Burl Steude
(Cannon)
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 19 Blacklake Sewer System Consolidation
Nipomo Community Services District | Nipomo, California Cannon was selected to design and prepare construction
plans and technical specifications for implementing the Blacklake Sewer System Consolidation project. Theproject generally consistsof a new wetwell, emergency storage,
dry-pit pump vault, valve vault, metering vault, shade
structure, SCADA, fencing, access road, pavement, odor
control measures, and appurtenances. Other project
features include a new electrical service, a transformer, and a back-up generator with an automatic switch. The 4-mile force main will be 6inchesin diameter and constructed using conventional open-cut and trenchless technology methods. The existing flows to the BWRF were designed to be uninterrupted during construction until the new sanitary sewer lift station and force main are commissioned and operational. Cannon’s services included project management, preliminary design, and final design including construction estimates, construction plans, and technical specifications. Theyalso assisted with contractor pre-qualification, assisted during the bid phase, provided engineering support services during construction, and aided the District in securing the required permits.
Project Dates
2020 to 2021
Total Cost
$594K
Relevant Services
Surveying
Plans and specifications
ESDC
Contractor pre-qualification
Permitting
Key Staff Participation
Larry Kraemer (Cannon), Burl Steude
(Cannon)
References
We encourage the City to contact the following references to authenticate the work quality, technical strength, and cooperation and responsiveness of our internal staff and subconsultants. These clients can speak to our team’s relevant experience in decommissioning and demolition and the abilities of our project manager to deliver highly technical projects on complex sites with efficiency and transparency.
Consistent with the addendum to the RFP, we have provided references for Anchor QEA. Based on the anticipated role that Cannon will be provided, we have included references for them as well. If the City desires references from any of our other teaming partners, we can provide that information.
Anchor QEA
Reference Project Details and Scope
Sara Bellafronte, Assistant to the City
Manager
City of Pittsburg
925-252-4109
[email protected]
Marine Oil Terminal ESA and Disposition Options Analysis, Pittsburg, California Total Cost: $222K | Dates:2022to 2025 | Key Staff Involved: Margaret Carrillo-Sheridan, JerzyCebula,Tyler Nowak
Conducted Phase I and Phase II ESAs to assess an idled marine oil terminal under a USEPA Brownfield grant on behalf of the City, adisposition optionsanalysis to evaluate potential options for repurposing the terminal for both public and private uses, andsampling to determine the presence of other constituents of concern
Brian Dobbins, PE, Engineering Manager
Washington State Department of
Transportation
206-450-8711
[email protected]
1051 1st Avenue Building Demolition, Washington State Department of Transportation, Seattle, Washington
Total Cost: $193K | Dates:2019to 2023| Key Staff Involved: Jerzy Cebula, Margaret Carrillo-Sheridan Led building demolition, involving reviewing existing data, identifying data gaps, and working with consultants to collect additional building material samples for pre-demolition building
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 20 material characterization, andprepared two sets of technical specifications and estimated costs for abatement and removal and complete demolition
Darcy Sweetnam, City Attorney
City of Anacortes
360-299-1950
[email protected]
WaterTreatment Plant Remediation, Anacortes, Washington Total Cost: $6.2M | Dates:2018to 2024| Key Staff Involved: Margaret Carrillo-Sheridan, Doug Musser, Jerzy Cebula, Tyler Nowak, Alex Bleichner
Led the soil remediation and demolition of buildings, basins, equipment, and piping; conducteda focused facility investigation, feasibility study, and treatability study; led demolition design, contractor procurement,and construction observation; and developed and implemented a community air monitoring plan
Cannon
Reference Project Details and Scope
Kim Tulledge
Chevron Business & Real Estate Services
805-546-6943
[email protected]
Oil Field Remediation and Restoration, Guadalupe, California Total Cost: $20M | Dates: 1995to 2015 | Key Staff Involved: Larry Kraemer, Burl Steude Provided engineering, surveying, permitting and compliance services, including preparation of an implementation plan; preparation of plans and specifications for grading and drainage for removal of approximately 300,000 cyof hydrocarbon affected materialand 30,000 cyof sump material; road construction; layout of approximately 7,000 wall feet of sheet pile; emergency permitting and agencyapprovals; construction management; and pipeline abandonment Pater Sevcik, PE
Director of Engineering and Operations
805.929.1133
[email protected]
Blacklake Sewer System Consolidation
Total Cost: $594K | Dates: 2020 to2021| Key Staff Involved: Larry Kraemer, Burl Steude Designedand preparedconstruction plans and technical specifications for implementing the Blacklake Sewer System Consolidation project. Services included project management, preliminary design, and final design including construction estimates, construction plans, and technical specifications. Also assisted with contractor pre-qualification, assisted during the bid phase, provided engineering support services during construction, and aided the District in securing the required permits.
In Situ Stabilization: Deep Foundations at Vo-Toys Site When residual mercury contamination was detected at the base of formerperimeter wall foundations up to 16 feet below grade and underneath active power lines, Anchor QEA developed an in-situ treatment method that encapsulated the footers and avoided relocation of overhead power lines. The stabilization mix design was developed and tested by Anchor QEA, andresults demonstrated the mix design would prevent future migration or off-gassing of the mercurycontamination. The mix design and approach were accepted by USEPA and New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. Foundations were encapsulated via jet grouting (photo on right) during a 2-week field program and avoided a much more lengthy and disruptive removal program that would have required relocation of active overhead powerlines and extensive shoring to support the adjacent sidewalks and public roadwayduring foundation removals.
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 21 E. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING AND TECHNICAL
APPROACH
Project Understanding
We understand that the City is required to decommission and demolish all plant components of the former WWTP as part of the WRF Program, including the removal of below-grade structures, piping, and utilities.
The City is requesting design services for decommissioning and demolition of the Morro Bay WWTP and associated ESDC.
Based on our review of the documents and our site visit, we understand that at the time of the WWTP shutdown, a flood event occurred that prevented complete removal of biological solids from the digester vessels and that other treatment process equipment was not decommissioned or, where stored energy is present, deactivated.
Technical Approach
Approach
Our proposal strategy was developed based on the
information provided in the RFP and our site visit on
February 25, 2025. During that visit, we noted
multiple site conditions that can pose environmental
concerns during the decommissioning and
demolition process and that may ultimately increase
demolition costs if not appropriately incorporated
into the demolition planning and design.
Building materials with special industrial coatings,
caulking, and surface treatments are often
overlooked (by less experienced personnel/firms)
during a typical building survey. In wastewater
treatment facilities constructed between 1945 and
1970, these specialty building materials often
contained a combination of asbestos and PCBs, which
can pose regulatory challenges when determining
the optimal sequence and approach for abatement
and management of these materials. As detailed in
Section F, Anchor QEA will use a combination of
documentation review, visual observations, and focused sampling to identify these potentially regulated materials and incorporate the resultsinto demolition plans and specifications.
Based on our review of the original construction drawings, we have also noted potentially suspect asbestos-containing and/or PCB-containing materials that were specified as part of the original facility construction as well as suspect lead caulking and cadmium-coated fasteners. During the investigation Determining Extent of PCB Bulk Product Waste
Federal regulations require that PCB bulk product waste (i.e., building materials manufactured with PCBs) be removed and managed for disposal. Understanding the nature and extent of PCB bulk product waste and including its proper removal and disposal as part of the contractor bid specifications provides contractors the necessary information to accurately budget and plan for management of this regulated material.
Building material sampling to delineate PCB migration from caulking material to adjacent concrete substrate
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 22 phase, our project team will attempt to sample these suspect materials or the adjacent areas to determine the extent of environmental cleaning and abatement that may be required prior to demolition.
A key element of our project planning will be to work with Cannon to understand the potential for accumulated gases to have been generated because of the former WWTP shutdown conditions and determining if the vessel atmosphere can be sampled during the investigation phase. This information will be used to determine decommissioning requirements before demolition.
The following is an overview of our proposed methodology for this project, followed by our strategy.
Methodology
When planning a D3 project, we treat each site as an environmental project rather than a standard construction activity without potential liability or risk to our clients or the surrounding community. Our strategy is integrated into our methodology, such that the data obtained during the investigation phase is targeted to provide the information needed to develop the decommissioning and demolition design documents (including contractor performance requirements for all phases of their work). The following is a summary of general methodology to be followed with our teaming partners to complete this project:
• Development of a detailed project schedule for the project lifecycle that meets the City’s objectives, starting with the initial project kickoff meeting through the WWTP demolition. The project schedule will be a living document that is updated regularly and reviewed with the City during check-in meetings. • Identification of regulations and supporting permit applications that may apply to planned demolition activities
• Familiarization with the WWTP features scheduled for
decommissioning and demolition, including a detailed
review of as-built drawings, and, if available, original construction materials specifications to identify suspect materials to support investigation planning as well as
materials that may not be accessible during the
investigation phase (such as in slabs below vessels
requiring confined space entry)
• Familiarization with the geologic conditions and how
those conditions can affect planned below grade
structure removals
• Site reconnaissance, including equipment and vessel
inventory to determine pre-demolition decommissioning
requirements
• Underground utility survey to identify utilities to be rerouted and utilities to be disconnected and removed as detailed in the Coastal Development Permit
• Focused environmental evaluation with targeted
physical structure sampling, including asbestos survey to promote cost-saving recycling of demolition debris along with proper management of waste materials
• Identification of regulations and supporting permit applications that may apply to planned demolition activities
Using As-Built Drawings: Identification
of Potentially Regulated Materials
The 1964 as-built drawings provided with the RFP include references to “fiberboard,” synthetic rubber, and sponge rubber. These references can be synonymous with
construction products that were manufactured with either asbestos and/or PCBs. This information will be used to
structure our investigation strategy.
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 23 • Support of the City in negotiations with the California Coastal Commission to advocate for limited removal of deep foundation materials rather than full removal as required per Special Condition #7 (WWTP Removal and Restoration Plan)
• Preparation of engineer’s opinion of probable cost for the demolition activities and cost difference if selected buildings are retained for future use
• Development of 90% and 100% demolition design specifications to support competitive bidding by demolition contractors
• Support of the City’s bid procurement and contractor selection • Engineering support services during decommissioning and demolition activities Strategy
The following chart shows the strategy for implementing our overall approach. Additional details regarding specific actions proposed to perform our work are presented in Section F.
Section F presents our anticipated scope of work. The sequence of tasks presented herein reflects our overall strategy and allows for efficient implementation of the anticipated work. Tasks with potentially long lead times (such as permitting) have been brought forward into the project sequence. The following table mapsthe required RFQ scope of work elements to the relevant tasks Anchor QEA has planned and associated page number of our proposal where our scope is provided for the specific task/subtask.
Permitting Requirements and Regulatory Approvalsand Potentially Applicable Regulations and Laws
Conceptual Site Model (CSM) WWTP Assessment Work Plan
Assess Data Collection and Analysisand Update CSM
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Contract Documents
Implement Contractor Procurement and WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Develop
Define Project Goals and ObjectivesandPrepare Project Schedule Design
Identify
Plan
Review Existing Site Data
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 24 RFQ Responsiveness Summary Table
City of Morro Bay Scope of Work Task Anchor QEA Task Identification Anchor QEA Proposal Page Task 1: Project Meetings Task 1: Project Planning and Meetings Task 1.1 – Kick Off Meeting Task 1.3 Project KickoffMeeting 25 Task 1.2 – Progress Meetings Task 1.4 ProjectCheck-Inswith City(biweekly) 25 Task 1.3 – External Agency Stakeholder
Meetings
Task 1.5 External Agency Stakeholder
Meetings 25
Task 1.4 – Project Schedule Task 1.6 Project Schedule 25 Task 2: Data Collection and Review
Task 2.1 – Data Collection Task 3.1 – Data Collection and Review 28 Task 2.2 – Data Review Task 3.1 – Data Collection and Review 28 Task 3: Pre-Design Phase
Task 3.1 – Cost Analysis of Retaining
Selected Buildings
Task 7: Supplemental Cost Analysis
Task 7.1 – Cost Analysis of Retaining
Selected Buildings
39 Task 4: Design Phase
Task 4.1 – Project Constraints/Design
Requirements
Task 4.1 Project Constraints/Design
Requirements 33
Task 4.2 – Site Inspections Task 3.2 – Site Reconnaissance/Review of Existing Conditions 28
Task 4.3 – Environmental Testing and
Investigation Task 3.4 – Pre-Demolition Investigation 30 Task 4.4 – Permitting Support Task 2: Permitting and Regulatory Compliance 26 Task 4.5 – Engineers Opinion of Probable Cost Task 4.2 – Engineers Opinion of Probable Cost 34
Task 4.6 – 90% Plans and Specifications Task 4.3 – 90% Plans and Specifications 34 Task 4.7 – 100% Plans and Specifications/Bid
Documents Task 4.4 – 90% Plans and Specifications 36
Task 5: Bid and Award Phase Task 5: Contractor Procurement Task 5.1 – Pre-Bid Conference Task 5.2 – Pre-Bid Conference 36 Task 5.2 – Distribution of Plans Task 5.3 – Distribution of Plans 37 Task 5.3 – Proposal Addenda and Questions Task 5.2 – Pre-Bid Conference 37 Task 5.4 – Bid Review Task 5.4 – Bid Review 37
Task 6: Construction Phase Task 6: Construction Phase
Task 6.1 – Engineering Services During
Construction
Task 6.1 – Engineering Services During
Construction 37
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 25 F. SCOPE OF WORK
1 Project Planning and Meetings
Project planning is the foundation for efficient,
safe, and timely development and
implementation of the WWTP Decommissioning
and Demolition project and, as shown on the
task schedule, is carried through the project.
1.1 Health and Safety Plan
Before initiating any field activities,
Anchor QEA will prepare a site-specific health
and safety plan and supporting job safety
analysis, as needed, to account for the scope
of work outlined in this proposal. A separate job safety analysis will be prepared for all work activities that have the potential to pose a safety hazard to employees or the public.
1.2 Subcontracting
As part of our planning activities, Anchor QEA will establish subcontracts with our subconsultants Cannon, Yeh, HSA, GPRS and Eurofins Calscience.
1.3 Kickoff Meeting
Anchor QEA will prepare for and attend a project kickoff meeting with the project team, including City staff and our subconsultants. The main objective of the meeting will be to introduce key project personnel; summarize existing site conditions and data; review the tentative project scope, schedule, data gaps, and regulatory permits; and coordinate next phases of the project. In addition, permitting strategy and logistics related to the pre-demolition investigation will be discussed.
Following the meeting, Anchor QEA will prepare meeting minutes and distribute those to all attendees.
1.4 Project Progress Meetings
Anchor QEA will prepare for and attend project progress meetings to be held during the design phase of the project. Before each meeting, Anchor QEA will prepare a meeting agenda and distribute it to all participants.
Following each meeting, Anchor QEA will prepare meeting minutes and distribute those to all participants.
1.5 External Agency/Stakeholder Meetings
Anchor QEA will prepare for and attend external agency/stakeholder meetings, as needed, to support progression of the project. Prior to each meeting, Anchor QEA will coordinate with the City to create a list of attendees and prepare a meeting agenda for distribution. Following each meeting, Anchor QEA will prepare meeting minutes and distribute those to all participants.
1.6 Project Schedule
A tentative schedule for the design and contractor procurement phase of the project is included in Section G and serves as the basis for the task schedules included in this section. The project schedule will be further developed during the planning phase of the project, after the kickoff meeting is held. Because level of effort (and therefore duration) of the construction phase is largely dependent on pre-demolition Project Planning 3/27/2025 11/26/2025
Contracting 3/27/2025 4/8/2025
Noticeof Award 3/27/2025
ExecutedContract 4/8/2025
Project Planning 4/15/2025 11/26/2025
HealthandSafetyPlanDevelopment 4/15/2025 5/2/2025
SubconsultantSubcontracting 4/45/2025 5/9/2025
Project KickoffMeeting 5/6/2025
ProjectCheck-Inswith City(biweekly) 4/15/2025 11/26/2025 External Agency/Stakeholder Meetings 4/45/2025 9/12/2025
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 26 assessment findings, a schedule for the construction phase can be developed concurrently with finalizing the design phase of the project.
Deliverables
• Site-specific health and safety plan and supporting job safety analyses will be provided for information • Kickoff meeting agenda and minutes
• Project progress meeting agenda and minutes (16 meetings) • External agency/stakeholder meetings agenda and minutes (three meetings) • Updated project schedule for the design and contractor procurement phases of the project Assumptions
• The kickoff meeting will be conducted in Morro Bay, be up to 4 hours long, and be attended by up to four Anchor QEA personnel, 2 representatives from Cannon and a representative from Yeh. • Project progress meetings will be held on a bi-weekly basis (i.e., every 2 weeks) starting on April 15, 2025, and ending at the end of November 2025, for a total of 16 meetings. The project progress meetings will be replaced by recurring meetings during the construction phase of the project.
Depending on project needs, these meetings may also be attended by our teaming partners. We have assumed that a representative from Cannon and a representative from Yeh will attend at least eight of the project progress meetings.
– Project progress meetings will be conducted via video conferencing, be up to 2 hours long each, and be attended by up to three Anchor QEA personnel.
• We have budgeted for attending one in-person external agency/stakeholder meeting and two meetings via video conferencing. The in-person meeting will be up to 4 hours long, and the video conferencing meetings will be up to 2 hours long each. The meetings will be attended by up to three Anchor QEA personnel.
• We have not included budget for preparation or participation in a public information meeting. If public communications support or public meeting attendance is requested, Anchor QEA will provide a separate budget using the time-and-material rates included in our cost proposal. • All deliverables will be provided in electronic format only. 2 Permitting and Regulatory Compliance
We understand that permitting can
become critical path for a project. By
prioritizing the permitting process early
in the project lifecycle, our goal is to
identify potentially long lead-time
issues that will require prioritization
and/or focused meetings with the City
and regulatory agencies.
To identify which regulations may apply
to a planned decommissioning program, a regulatory review will be performed considering the various levels of government regulations and laws (local, state, and federal). These regulations will be used to inform not only our permitting strategies but also our overall investigation approach to ensure that the data collected meet the project needs in consideration of potential local- and state-specific expectations.
Permitting and Compliance 4/15/2025 9/12/2025
RWQCB Permit 4/15/2025 9/12/2025
City and San Luis Obispo County Permits 4/15/2025 9/12/2025
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 27 During the demolition design process, Anchor QEA’s permitting team will work closely with the design team to develop an approach that is consistent with permit requirements. The team will incorporate best management demolition practices into the permit application materials to offset potential environmental impacts to the extent possible.
Anchor QEA will use the project description developed as part of the Morro Bay Water Reclamation Facility Draft EIR and its addendum, as well as the project description developed as part of CDP No. 3-19-0453 to prepare or assist the project team with preparation of permit applications for submittal to regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over the project. We expect that the following permits or approvals will be required:
• Central Coast RWQCB National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit, assuming the project would involve more than an acre of soil disturbance
• City and San Luis Obispo County (Certified Unified Program Agency and Air Pollution Control District) demolition-related permits and notifications
Prior to developing permit application materials, outreach to appropriate agencies will be conducted to confirm that the above referenced permits are required for this project and that any other permits not listed above are not required. After confirming the necessary permits, our team will prepare three iterations of permit materialsto support obtention of the permits listed above: 1) an administrative draft for the City’s review; 2) a revised administrative draft addressing the City’s comments for a second round of review by the City; and 3) a final version addressing the City’s comments for agency submittal. After the submittal of permit applications, we will continue to coordinate closely with the City and regulatory agencies to facilitate their review of the applications. We will respond or assist with responding to requests from agency staff for additional information, and, if requested, facilitate coordination among agency staff reviewing the permit applications. We will review all permits that will be issued for this project.
In addition, our team will review all applicable existing permit conditions, such as conditions in the existing CDP No. 3-19-0453 and conditions identified in the Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program of the Morro Bay Water Reclamation Facility EIR and incorporate these conditions in the project design documents. Integrating permit conditions into design documents will promote implementation of the required work by a demolition contractor in accordance with applicable permit requirements. As previously discussed, we will support the City in negotiations to leave foundation and subsurface structures at depths greater than 5 feet below grade in place, rather than full removal as currently contemplated by Special Condition #7.
Some permit applications (such as demolition permit) may be completed in draft and handed over to a successful contractor for finalizing and filing with appropriate regulatory agency(ies) and payment.
Deliverables
• Administrative draft permit applications for the City’s review, in electronic format • Revised administrative draft permit applications for the City’s second review, in electronic format • Final permit applications
• Summary list of applicable regulations, which will be included in the WWTP Assessment Work Plan Assumptions
• The following permits are not anticipated and not covered in this scope of work:
– A California Coastal Commission CDP, as CDP No. 3-19-0453 already covers decommissioning the WWTP
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 28 – A Section 404 Clean Water Act Permit from the USACE and RWQCB Section 401 Water Quality Certification, as no placement of fill material within waters of the United Statesis anticipated – San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District Permit • This proposal does not assume preparation of any technical studies such as a biological assessment, cultural resources memorandum, visual simulations/renderings, or geotechnical study. • This proposal does not include any CEQA support.
• No field work or site visits are included in this proposal • Anchor QEA will rely on a project description developed by others for this effort. Should the project description change, additional funds may be required to update permit applications. • Anchor QEA will prepare draft and final versions of the permit application packages. • Anchor QEA will prepare electronic versions of the permit applications. • We have included $20,000 for payment of regulatory fees. Should actual permit-related fees exceed the allocated budget, additional funding will be needed to cover expenses. 3 Data Review, Work Plan and Pre-Demolition Assessment
The objective of this task is to obtain
representative building material data
(including asbestos and lead paint) to
support demolition design and cost
estimating.
3.1 Existing Data Review
Prior to our initial site visit, a desktop
review of available information will be conducted. The objective of the desktop review is to obtain information that can identify potential environmental concerns at the WWTP. Typical environmental concerns may include identification of building materials that may contain LBP, PCBs, or asbestos; likelihood of regulated equipment and universal waste within the facility; potential presence of historic artifacts underneath the WWTP; or potential areas where hazardous or regulated substances may have been released to the environment.
3.2 Site Reconnaissance/Review of Existing Conditions
During the initial site reconnaissance, Anchor QEA and our teaming partners will visually assess the site and structures scheduled for demolition. If available, the project team will interview City personnel knowledgeable of past WWTP operations. Topography, drainage patterns, and aboveground and underground utilities within the WWTP will be visually reviewed. In addition, the following non-intrusive building assessment activities will be performed:
• Visual review of structures to assess overall building conditions (including potential safety issues such as structural concerns, stored energy, or proximity to energized equipment) • Assessment of structures for the presence of surface contamination or other visible releases from historical operations
• Visual review of the buildings to identify process equipment and process-related structures (such as the hung boiler) that may require specific decommissioning procedures • Inventory of regulated and or potentially hazardous materials, such as asbestos, lead, mercury-containing switches, PCBs, oil-containing equipment, batteries, transformers, and capacitors (to identify pre-demolition removal requirements)
• Inventory of containerized chemicals stored within the WWTP Pre-Demolition Assessment 4/15/2025 7/25/2025
Existing Data Review 4/15/2025 5/5/2025
Site Reconnaissance/Review of Existing Conditions 5/6/2025 5/6/2025 InvestigationWorkPlanDevelopment 4/28/2025 5/16/2025
Pre-Demolition Investigation 6/2/2025 7/3/2025
ExistingConditionsandInvestigationSummary Report 5/6/2025 7/25/2025
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 29 • Identification of structures and associated piping that may contain residual biological materials or other liquids that will require draining prior to demolition If available, the project team will interview City personnel knowledgeable of past WWTP operations.
3.3 Investigation Work Plan Development
An investigation work plan will be prepared in memorandum format and will serve to document the proposed pre-demolition investigation activities. The investigation work plan memorandum will include the following:
1. Relevant background information, including a preliminary CSM
2. Permits or regulatory approvals required for intrusive field activities (if any)
3. Objectives of the proposed investigation activities
4. Sampling strategy table presenting the structure ID, building material or equipment to be sampled, sample type, logic, and sample analysis (see example below)
5. Maps (CAD or GIS) presenting the site layout, utility locations, and initial building material sampling locations
6. Project schedule depicting the planned investigation activities
7. Companion documents, including a sampling and analysis plan (to describe sample collection methods and laboratory analyses for each media), quality assurance project plan, and site-specific health and safety plan
A draft work plan will be provided to the City for review and comment, prior to finalizing the document.
Example Sample Strategy Table
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 30
3.4 Pre-Demolition Investigation
The objective of this activity is to obtain
representative building material data
(including the asbestos and lead paint
surveys) to support the demolition plan
development and demolition cost
estimating. Building materials will be
characterized to provide detailed waste
profiling information for each material
type and to develop demolition debris
disposition requirements, including potential recycling or reuse opportunities. Based on our review of the RFP and site visit, we anticipate the pre-design investigation will include the following activities:
Underground Utility Survey
GPRS will conduct an underground utility survey for the site. The survey will be conducted using standard trade methods and equipment, including underground scanning GPR, electromagnetic location equipment, and portable GPS unitsto confirm approximate location, type, depths, and layout of utility/piping runs depicted on historical as-built drawings, and will identify other belowground facilities that may not be shown on the drawings. The survey results will aid in development of demolition and removal design and evaluating the level of effort needed to safely disconnect and remove belowground facilities from the site. Identified utilities will be marked on the surface using paint, pin flags, or other appropriate means. We have assumed that existing utility drawings will be provided by the City in CAD format and information obtained during the utility survey will be added to the existing drawings.
Asbestos Survey
We understand that a limited asbestos survey was conducted for the on-site structures in 2010.
Anchor QEA proposes to conduct a supplemental asbestos survey that complies with pre-demolition asbestos survey requirements contained in National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants regulations, Title 40 of Code of Federal Regulations, Part 61 M, and corresponding California regulations. All aboveground on-site structures will be surveyed by our asbestos teaming partner, HSA. Generated data will be used to design the scope of the abatement and, for the structures scheduled to remain (if any), future maintenance of identified asbestos-containing materials. The asbestossurvey will require destructive investigation (e.g., breaking walls to observe piping/pipe insulation inside wall cavities or collecting roofing material samples). The Anchor QEA team will not be responsible for repairing damages caused by using destructive survey methods. To avoid breaking in-service items(such as electrical cable insulation), some materials may be assumed to contain asbestos at regulated concentrations.
Based on a review of the as-built WWTP drawings, we have budgeted for up to 325 suspect asbestos-containing building material samplesto be collected by HSA. Samples will be submitted to HSA’s accredited analytical laboratory for asbestos analysis by the polarized light microscopy method. Up to 15 of the 325 samples will be further analyzed by a Point Count method to determine whether they contain asbestos at concentrations above 0.1% and less than 1%.
Intrusive Building Materials Sampling
Based on our review of the RFP and site visit, we anticipate the following number and type of samples will be collected and analyzed:
Pre-Demolition Investigation Activities 6/2/2025 7/25/2025 Underground Utility Survey 6/2/2025 7/4/2025
Asbestos Survey 6/2/2025 7/4/2025
Intrusive Building Materials Sampling 6/2/2025 7/34/2025 Subsurface Structure Assessment 6/2/2025 7/43/2025
Regulated Equipment Survey 6/2/2025 7/43/2025
Investigation Summary Report 6/23/2025 7/25/2025
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 31 • Up to 50 samples of suspect PCB-containing materials such as paint, caulks, sealants, adhesives, mastics, insulated electrical wiring or cables, equipment oil or grease, stained equipment or concrete, and adjacent substrate will be collected. Up to 30 “step out samples” of masonry materials adjacent to suspect PCB-containing caulks, sealants, or mastics will be collected and held for analysis. Should certain suspect materials be determined to contain total PCBs at concentrations above 50 parts per million, the associated “step out samples” will also be analyzed, should the suspect materials be confirmed as containing PCBs. Samples will be submitted to our National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP)-accredited laboratory (Eurofins Calscience) for standard Aroclor list analysis by USEPA Method 8082.
• Up to 20 paint chip samples and 10 ceramic tile samples will also be analyzed for total metals using USEPA Method 6010B.
• Up to 20 composited and 20 discrete, non-metallic building material samples will be collected for some or all of the following analyses:
– Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous waste analyses – California (non-RCRA) Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration (STLC) hazardous waste toxicity analysis) using California Waste Extraction Test (WET)
– Total PCBs (target visibly stained concrete) by USEPA Method 8082 – Total California Administrative Manual (CAM) 17 metals, using USEPA Methods 6010B and 7471A – TCLP CAM 17 metals using USEPA Method 1311 followed by Methods 6010B and 7471A – STLC CAM 17 metals using California WET Citrate method followed by Methods 6010B and 7471A – Total petroleum hydrocarbons (gasoline, diesel, and oil fractions) by USEPA Method 8015B The samples will be submitted under chain-of-custody protocol to our NVLAP-accredited laboratory subcontractor Eurofins Calscience for analysis. For budgeting purposes, we have also assumed that up to six additional unspecified samples will also be collected and analyzed.
Subsurface Structure Assessment
This activity will consist of a subsurface structure survey (i.e., a visual review of pits, sumps, manholes, and catch basins) to assess the existing conditions and locations of the subsurface structures at the WWTP and within building footprints. Prior to evaluating each subsurface structure, the cover will be removed, and the air inside the structure will be monitored for volatile organic vapors, oxygen, combustible gases, carbon monoxide, and hydrogen sulfide. Subsurface structures with potential stored energy will not be assessed.
Potentially active electrical manholes or duct banks are not proposed to be accessed unless they are de-energized by the City. Confined space entry is not proposed for this work; therefore, the subsurface structure survey will be performed from the ground surface only to determine the materials of construction and dimensions of each subsurface structure.
The assessment will document the size, orientation, and material of construction for piping entering and exiting each subsurface structure; the presence and depth of accumulated/flowing water; the presence of sheens on the water surface; and the presence and depth of debris/sediment in each subsurface structure.
If residual materials are present in the subsurface structures, up to 10 additional samples will be collected and analyzed for waste characterization analysis.
Regulated Equipment Survey
Anchor QEA will visually observe and document the presence of the following regulated equipment, including process-related equipment and equipment commonly referred to as universal waste:
• Fluorescent, high-intensity-discharge, sodium-halide, and other regulated lamps
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 32 – The estimated number of lamp ballasts will be noted.
• Mercury-containing devices (e.g., thermostats, thermometers, and switches) • Batteries (e.g., in emergency lamps, smoke detectors, and emergency battery banks) • Oil-containing electrical equipment
• Hydraulic fluid-containing equipment (e.g., compressors, lifting mechanisms, and door opening systems) • Refrigerant-containing equipment (e.g., air conditioning units and drinking water fountains) • Equipment containing radioactive materialssuch as smoke detectors manufactured with radioactive material (americium) and enclosed “exit” signs containing radioactive gas (tritium)
3.5 Existing Conditions and Investigation Summary Report Following completion of the field investigations and receipt of analytical data, an Existing Conditions and Investigation Summary Report will be prepared to describe the current conditions; investigation activities and results; hazardous conditions (chemical, biological, or structural); tabulated results; sample location mapping; and representative photographs. The summary report will include a Geologic Conditions Report (prepared by Yeh) as an appendix. The Geologic Conditions Report will address the following:
• Geologic Conditions including soil types and site geology • Groundwater conditions, including information regarding the confined aquifer below the site • Shoring and temporary excavation recommendations, including shoring pressures for cantilever and braced conditions
• General Earthwork including backfill of the excavations • Construction considerations
– Excavation characteristics
– Dewatering
– Vibration and adjacent structures
– Excavations near structures
Based on the results of the pre-demolition assessment, Anchor QEA will develop a Soil Investigation Work Plan (SIWP) to assess subsurface soil conditions. The number, depth, and type of soil samples to be collected will consider the historical site operations, visual observations of releases from the facility equipment (if any), and the presence of regulated materials that could have resulted in a release of constituents of concern to underlying soils through leaching or other mechanisms. The SIWP will be supported by a figure showing proposed investigation locations and by Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for soil investigation activities. The SIWP will include the following two separate sampling events:
• First Sampling Event: The first event will happen during the design phase and will focus on sampling soil that is located adjacent to PCB bulk product waste (such as exterior caulk) and the soils would initially be sampled for PCBs. A subset would also be sampled for waste characterization (for disposal).
The sample results will be presented in a summary memorandum. • Second Sampling Event: Following demolition, subsurface soils will be sampled for full suite of inorganic and organic compounds (similar to Phase II Environmental Site Assessment to support property transfer).
Deliverables
• Investigation Work Plan Memorandum
• Existing Conditions and Investigation Summary Report
• Soil Investigation Work Plan
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 33 Assumptions
• The initial site visit will be up to 4 hours long and attended by up to three Anchor QEA personnel and representatives from Cannon. The site visit will be conducted concurrently with the kickoff meeting. • The kickoff meeting and site visit will be conducted during normal business hours, Monday through Friday between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
• The proposal is based upon access to all site areas.
• The City will provide facility and topographic mapping in CAD format. We have not included costs to survey existing features.
• Due to safety reasons,this scope of work specifically excludes accessing on-site tank interiors or conducting any confined space entries. Only readily accessible portions of the on-site structures will be assessed. • Only accessible subsurface structures/utilitiesless than 5-feet below grade will be evaluated. We have not included costs for soil excavation to access or uncover buried utilities. • We have assumed the City will provide a licensed electrician to disconnect power (as required) to structures that may be connected to live electrical lines and will verify the structure has been deenergized prior to Anchor QEA performing sample collection. • The asbestos survey will be implemented concurrently with the waste characterization sampling and will be completed in up to 8 consecutive workdays. The survey will be limited to the aboveground portion of the on-site structures.
• Regulated equipment survey and intrusive building materials sampling can be completed in 10 consecutive workdays.
• The final number of proposed samples to be collected will be determined as part of the investigation work plan (to be developed). We have included a budgetary value for analytical laboratory costs. The final number of samples proposed to be collected will be presented in the investigation work plan, which will be reviewed with the City before implementation. The City will only be invoiced for the actual number of samples collected and analyzed.
• Samples will be analyzed on a standard turnaround basis (estimated 3 weeks), and data validation will not be required.
• Should additional labor effort (in excess of the estimated number of daysspecified above) be needed to complete any of the surveys and/or additional samples need to be collected (in addition to the number of samples specified above), additional budget may be needed to cover expenses. Anchor QEA will notify the City and obtain authorization from the City prior to exceeding our proposed investigation budget.
• This scope of work specifically excludes any soil sampling. Per the mitigating measure CUL-8 presented in the draft EIR, any soil disturbance activities, including soil sampling, must be observed by a Native American observer. Any potential soil impacts, if encountered or suspected based on the predemolition investigation, will be addressed during implementation of the construction work.
The investigation work plan memorandum, existing conditions, and investigation summary report will be provided as a draft for the City to review. Following receipt of comments, the documents will be revised one time and then finalized.
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 34 4 Design
The demolition design,
consisting of technical
specifications and contract
drawings, serves as the
foundation for the City's ultimate
demolition contract. The
expectations for contractor
performance during the project
will be detailed within these
documents. The technical
specifications will be prepared
following Construction Standards
Institute (CSI) MasterFormat and will incorporate all requirements for decommissioning, demolition, building material disposition, dust control, and schedule requirements.
4.1 Project Constraints/Design Requirements
Anchor QEA will identify project constraints and design requirements and will schedule a meeting with the City and key members of our project team (including Cannon and Yeh) to review these constraints and design requirements. Following the meeting, Anchor QEA will prepare meeting minutes and distribute those to all attendees. Per the RFP, at this time we anticipate that the key constraints and design requirements will include, but may not be limited to, the following:
• Site- and activity-specific requirements (e.g., utilities, fugitive dust, air monitoring, and site restoration) • Site ingress/egress (e.g., construction-related traffic) • Easements(other stakeholders)
• Project phasing (design versus construction phases)
• Permitting (e.g., required permits and their status, regulatory interactions, and responsible parties) • Pre-demolition assessment results/data gaps
• Other logistical considerations
Deliverable
• A list of identified project constraints and design requirements, in electronic format Assumption
• The meeting will be held via video conferencing, will take up to 2 hours, and be attended by up to three Anchor QEA personnel and up to three Cannon personnel and one member from Yeh.
4.2 Soil Sampling – First Event
Based on the results of the pre-demolition investigation and confirmation of the presence of PCB bulk product waste on exterior surfaces, soil samples will be collected to evaluate the potential for PCB migration from the building material to adjacent soils. This information will be used to determine soil remediation requirements to be incorporated into the design. For the purposes of estimating cost, we have assumed the investigation will consist of the following activities:
• Collection of up to 60 shallow soil samples using hand tools and extending to a maximum depth of 12 inches below the ground surface for analysis of total PCBs by USEPA Method 8082A Demolition Design 7/7/2025 9/19/2025
Project Constraints/Design Requirements and Meeting 7/21/2025 8/24/2025 Develop Engineer’sCostOpinion 7/7/2025 9/19/2025
Preliminary Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Construction Cost 7/7/2025 8/15/2025 Final Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Construction Cost 9/9/2025 9/19/2025 DevelopPlans and Specifications 7/7/2025 9/19/2025
90% Plans and Specifications 7/7/2025 8/22/2025
City’s Review and 90% Workshop 8/25/2025 9/8/2025
100% Plans and Specifications 9/9/2025 9/19/2025
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 35 • Preparation of a summary memorandum describing the sampling activities and associated results. The memorandum will be accompanied by a figure showing the sample locations, tabulated results, and a copy of the analytical data reports.
For the purposes of estimating cost, we have assumed that PCBs will not be detected in site soils at concentrations greater than 1 milligram per kilogram and USEPA notification (under the Self-Implementing Rule) will not be required.
Deliverables
• Soil Sample Results Summary Memorandum
Assumptions
• All deliverables will be in electronic format only.
• Per the mitigating measure CUL-8 presented in the draft EIR, any soil disturbance activities, including soil sampling, must be observed by a Native American observer. For cost estimating purposes, we have assumed that the City will provide the Native American observer, and we have not included costs to provide the observer.
4.3 Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Construction Cost
After completion of the pre-demolition assessment, Anchor QEA will prepare a preliminary cost opinion of probable construction cost for the WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition project, including abatement/removal of regulated items, demolition, waste management, and site restoration. The cost opinion will comply with Class 4 estimate class, as specified by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE International), with expected accuracy range of minus 30% to plus 50%.
Following the development of 90% design (described below) and workshop with the City and project team, and concurrently with finalizing the design, Anchor QEA will develop the final cost opinion of probable construction cost for the WWTP decommissioning and demolition. The final cost opinion will be prepared by updating the preliminary probable construction cost opinion and will be aligned with work specified in the final design. The final cost opinion will comply with Class 3 estimate class, as specified by AACE International, with expected accuracy range of minus 20% to plus 30%.
As part of the cost estimating process, Anchor QEA will develop a list of potential cost saving options such as recycling of scrap metal, beneficial re-use of “clean” concrete and asphalt debris, leaving in place deep foundations (if allowed), and salvaging selected equipment. The list will be accompanied by a cost saving analysis with the potential cost savings quantified.
Deliverables
• Preliminary cost opinion
• Final cost opinion
• A list of potential cost saving options and analysis
Assumption
All deliverables will be in electronic format only.
4.4 90% Draft Plans and Specifications
Anchor QEA’s engineering team will prepare a 90% draft plans and specificationsfor decommissioning and demolition of the WWTP. The package will detail the expectations for contractor performance during the
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 36 project. A draft outline of the proposed plans and specifications will be provided to the City for review and discussion during the bi-weekly progress meetings.
We anticipate that the 90% draft plans and specifications will consist of the following main components:
• Invitation to bid
• Instructions to bidders
• General Conditions
• Special (or supplementary) provisions
– Anchor QEA will work with the City’s legal counsel to develop special/supplementary conditions to modify General Conditions as needed to meet project needs. • Performance-based technical specifications
– The specifications will be prepared following CSI MasterFormat and will include Division 0 specifications detailing requirements for compliance with the project’s state and federal funding sources. • Contract drawings
• Bid form
– Project costs will be tentatively separated into bid itemsto facilitate the City’s reimbursement from funding agencies.
• Attachments containing pertinent documents, such as a blank copy of applicable permits the contractor must comply with, a standard City contract to be executed with a successful bidder, required bond forms, etc.
• Supplemental information package containing documents provided for informational purposes only— not part of contract documents.
Following completion of the 90% design, Anchor QEA will coordinate and facilitate a 90% plans and specifications workshop with the City and project team. Prior to the workshop, we will prepare a list of special items requiring additional considerations along with a workshop agenda and distribute the list and agenda to all participants. Following the workshop, Anchor QEA will prepare meeting minutes and distribute those to all attendees. The minutes will include action items and a summary of agreed upon changes to the 90% design, if any.
Deliverables
• 90% draft plans and specifications
• List of special items requiring additional considerations • 90% plans and specifications workshop agenda and meeting minutes Assumptions
• The design will be for demolition and removal of existing on-site structures to 5 feet below the surrounding grade elevation.
• For the purposes of developing a project budget we assumed that Special Condition #7 will be modified and subsurface structures deeper than 5 feet below grade may be left in place, and no shoring or dewatering designs will be included in the draft 90% plans and specifications. Should the removal of subsurface structures deeper than 5 feet below grade, additional budget will be needed to incorporate shoring and dewatering design details by Yeh. • We have assumed that all utilities on the property will be disconnected at the property line, and only utilities less than 5 feet below grade will require removal. The design package will include requirements for cutting and capping the utilities to be abandoned in place.
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 37 • None of the site buildings and surface features (other than asphalt covers) will be retained and no rerouting of electrical systems will be required. • Topographic survey costs are not included. The City will provide a digital file of the site topography that can be used to support preparation of the grading design and contract drawings. • The following bid package components will be provided by the City:
– Invitation to bid template
– General Conditions
– Blank copy of agreement to be executed with a successful bidder – Site-specific requirements, if any
• The 90% draft plans and specifications workshop will be conducted in person, require up to 8 hours, and be attended by up to three Anchor QEA personnel and up to two representatives from Cannon and one representative from Yeh.
• All deliverables will be in electronic format only.
4.5 100% Plans and Specifications/Bid Documents
Anchor QEA will incorporate comments received during the workshop; review the entire bid package one more time to confirm compliance with permitting, funding, and other pertinent items; and finalize the bid package. The final bid package will serve as the foundation for the ultimate demolition contract to be executed by the City with a successful contractor.
Deliverable
• Final bid package, in electronic format
Assumptions
• The City will provide comments on separating bid form items as needed to facilitate the City’s reimbursement from funding agencies.
• We have budgeted for one round of finalizing the bid package. We have assumed minimal comments will be received and that up to 50 hours of our subconsultants’ time, and up to 100 hours of Anchor QEA time will be required to address the City’s comments on the 90% design. Should multiple rounds of revisions be required, additional budget may be needed to cover expenses. 5 Contractor Procurement
Following completion of the demolition
design, Anchor QEA will provide
contractor procurement support to the
City. In developing our procurement
strategy, we assumed the bidding process
must comply with California bid
requirements for public works. If the City is
exempt from these requirements,
additional efficiencies may be realized in
the schedule.
Contractor Procurement 9/22/2025 1/27/2026
DraftBid Package 9/22/2025 10/24/2025
Draft RFPDocuments 9/22/2025 10/3/2025
SubmitRFPto District for Review 10/6/2025 10/17/2025
ReceiveCommentsfromDistrict 10/17/2025
FinalizeBidPackage 10/20/2025 10/24/2025
Bidding and ContractorSelection
Advertise Bids 10/27/2025
Pre-BidConferenceandSiteWalk 11/11/2025
IssueBidAddendum 11/12/2025 12/5/2025
ReceiveBids,Evaluate,andSelectContractor 12/19/2025 1/9/2026 Contractor Award 1/27/2026
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 38
5.1 Draft Bid Package
We anticipate the bid package will include:
• RFP: Invitation to bid, 100% demolition design (including general and special conditions), bid forms, and supplemental information (pre-demolition investigation results) • RFP attachments: Existing conditions and investigation summary report (not part of contract), blank copy of the City’s contractor terms and conditions, CEQA determinations, and copies of applicable permits
5.2 Pre-Bid Conference
Anchor QEA will prepare for and attend a pre-bid conference and site walkthrough, to be held at a project site. Following the pre-bid conference and receipt of written questions from bidders, Anchor QEA will prepare a draft bid addendum providing answers and clarifications to bidders’ questions and requests for clarification (if any). We will provide the addendum to the City for review and comment. Upon receipt of City’s comments, Anchor QEA will finalize the addendum and, if requested, email the final addendum to prospective bidders on the City’s behalf. Written responses, clarifications, and changes presented in the addendum will become part of the bid package.
5.3 Distribution of Plans
At this time, we anticipate that the bid package will be made available to prospective bidders electronically. Should the City request printing hard copies of the bid package (or certain components of the bid package [e.g., contract drawings]) for subsequent distribution to the bidders, Anchor QEA will work with ASAP Reprographics to print hard copies and will distribute those to the bidders.
5.4 Bid Review
Upon receipt of bids, we will review the bids for general conformance with the RFP, including bidder’s qualifications, technical approach, schedule, completeness of required submittals, and price, and will “normalize” the bids so they can be compared to each other. The normalized bid summary will be presented in a tabulated format and provided to the City along with a memorandum summarizing the results of the bid review.
Deliverables
• Draft and final bid addendum
• Normalized bid summary, in tabulated format
• Recommendation of a winning contractor
Assumptions
• The pre-bid conference and site walkthrough will be up to 4 hours long and be attended by two Anchor QEA personnel. At least one of the two people attending the conference will be experienced in industrial facility demolition design and implementation. • Should hard copies of the bid package be required, additional budget will be needed to cover printing expenses.
• We have budgeted for preparing one bid addendum following the pre-bid conference and receipt of written questions/requests for clarification from bidders. Should additional bid-related addenda be required, additional budget may be needed to cover expenses. • We have budgeted for reviewing and “normalizing” up to three bid proposals. • All submittals will be in electronic format only.
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 39 6 Post-Demolition Subsurface Soil Investigation
Under this work task, Anchor QEA will implement the SIWP following facility demolition. The final number of samples to be collected and associated analyses will be based on observations during and following demolition activities, as well as direction received from the City of Morro Bay (e.g., if a certain frequency is dictated by a property transfer agreement). For the purposes of estimating cost, we have assumed the post-demolition soil sampling program will be performed throughout the demolition phase, with samples collected and analyzed following demolition of individual structures.
For the purposes of estimating cost we have assumed that this phase of the investigation will consist of the following activities:
• Collecting up to 20 soil samples from the depth interval of 0 to 6 inches below former structure slabs or foundations (with a maximum depth of 4 feet below grade). • Collecting up to 10 soil samples at a depth of 2 feet below former structure slabs or foundations (with a maximum depth of 4 feet below grade).
• Collecting up to 10 soil samples at a maximum depth of 3 feet former structure slabs or foundations (with a maximum depth of 4 feet below grade).
• Submitting the collected samples for laboratory analysis. Depending on visual or real-time screening data, collected soil samples will be submitted to a CA certified analytical laboratory for some of all of the following analyses:
– VOCs by USEPA Methods 5035 (see Appendix D)/8260B
– SVOCs by USEPA Method 8270D
– Organochlorine pesticides by USEPA Method 8081B
– PCBs by USEPA Method 8082A
– Compendium of Analytical Methods (CAM) – 17 metals by USEPA Method 6010B The actual number of samples and frequency of collection will be determined based on field conditions and the sample quantities and analyses are estimated in our proposal to establish a budget.
The results of the post-demolition sampling activities will be presented in a summary memorandum describing the sampling activities and associated results. The memorandum will be accompanied by a figure showing the sample locations and proposed soil removal areas, tabulated results, and a copy of the analytical data reports.
Deliverables
• Post-Demolition Soil Sample Results Summary Memorandum Assumptions
• All deliverables will be in electronic format only.
• Per the mitigating measure CUL-8 presented in the draft EIR, any soil disturbance activities, including soil sampling, must be observed by a Native American observer. For cost estimating purposes, we have assumed that the City will provide the Native American observer, and we have not included costs to provide the observer.
• The results of the post-demolition sampling program will be used to determine historical site operations have adversely impacted the underlying soils such that remediation is required to meet anticipated future site use criteria. If shallow contaminated soil (less than 4-feet below ground surface) is identified, we have assumed that the demolition contractor will perform the excavation activities
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 40 (and the remedial design document will include specifications for post-demolition soil remediation).
We have not included costs for post-excavation confirmation or documentation samples. 7 Supplemental Cost Analysis
7.1 Cost Analysis of Retaining the Selected Buildings
We will evaluate costsfor retaining versus demolishing the following buildings for potential future use:
• Maintenance building
• Administration building
• Chlorine building
• Collection shed
Per the RFP, the estimated budget for this task is provided separately in our cost proposal.
Deliverable
• Cost analysis for retaining versus demolishing the selected buildings, in electronic format Assumption
• The cost analysis will be conducted after the pre-demolition assessment • We have assumed that existing site utilities are not up to current building code standards and any buildings retained would require new utility connections from the property line. • The cost analysis will comply with Class 4 estimate class, as specified by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE International), with expected accuracy range of minus 30% to plus 50%.
8 Proposed Additional Services During Construction Phase The following additional services are recommended for the City’s consideration during the construction phase. These services have not been included in our cost proposal.
8.1 Full-Time Oversight and Environmental Monitoring During Decommissioning and Demolition Provided during the construction activities on the City’s behalf, this oversight will observe that the work is conducted in accordance with approved plans and contract requirements and will document that the public will not have been exposed to dangerous levels of airborne dust during construction. The additional cost for the full-time oversight would be partially offset by a portion of the costs of work specified in Task 6, as some of the work items specified under Task 6 would be conducted by an on-site representative.
Providing full-time oversight would also result in better project control and weekly in-person attendance of Anchor QEA’s personnel at the reoccurring construction meetings.
8.2 Demolition Closure Report
In addition to the record drawings, this report would include an overall description of completed work, a summary of waste disposal/recycling, copies of waste shipment and disposal/recycling documents, copies of applicable regulatory permits and notifications, additional analytical data that may be generated during the construction phase, and photographic records documenting project progress.
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 41 G. PROJECT SCHEDULE/WORK PLAN
Per the RFP, the City desires to complete the design phase of the project within 120 days from the project award, and this goal could be accomplished provided that all necessary data already exist. However, as shown in the tentative schedule, the pre-demolition assessment and reporting phase will take approximately 2 months to complete. With the pre-demolition assessment included, completion of the design phase is anticipated on September 19, 2025, which is 158 calendar days from the anticipated project award.
In addition to including our schedule here in Microsoft Project format, we have incorporatedthis schedule into our Scope of Work in Section Fto provide a simpler, understandingof the work to be doneand anticipated deadlines per individual task.
WWTP Decommissioning and Demolition Design and Engineering | 42 H. COST PROPOSAL
As required per the RFP, we have included a cost proposal with a detailed outline of the proposed cost to complete the project in a separate sealed envelope labeled “Cost Proposal” and as a separate electronic document.
I. EXCEPTIONS
We have provided our exceptions to the terms and conditions outlined in the Agreement for Consultant Servicesin Appendix C of our proposal.
Appendix A:
Key Staff Resumes
Jerzy Cebula, PE
Project Manager
Jerzy has more than 27 years of experience managing site assessment, facility closure, and remediation projects in the United States, Mexico, and Poland.
This experience includes working at complex sites impacted with heavy metals, hydrocarbons, PCBs, explosives, and asbestos. Jerzy regularly prepares bid packages and cost estimates; oversees demolition design development; coordinates teams and tasks; and assists with contractor selection on complex decommissioning, cleanup, and demolition projects throughout California. He is well versed in federal and California regulations governing various aspects of D3 projects, including those pertaining to closure of aboveground storage tanks, regulated materials, demolition, waste management, and safety.
Education
MS, Environmental Engineering, Syracuse
University, 1997
Licenses/Certifications
Professional Engineer (PE), New York,
No. 080935
California Hazardous Waste Management
and DOT Training
OSHA HAZWOPER 40-hour certified,
Construction 30-hour certified, and
510 certified
Relevant Project Experience
1051 1st Avenue Building Demolition, Washington State Department of Transportation Jerzy oversaw the demolition design of the Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Program, which consists of 30 projects to replace an elevated section of State Route 99 in Seattle that weakened during the 2001 Nisqually earthquake. He led the permitting, demolition design, and stormwater design, on an accelerated schedule, for demolition of the 1051 1st Avenue building. He managed the process for reviewing existing data and identifying data gaps, and he worked with other consultants to collect additional building material samples to complete pre-demolition building material characterization. Jerzy also prepared two sets of technical specifications and estimated costs—one for abatement and removal of regulated materials and another for complete demolition of the building and site restoration.
Ore Peninsula Redevelopment, Municipality of Skagway
Jerzy led preparation of demolition design and technical specifications for a former ore shiploader removal and provided QA concerning proper management of generated waste. He also led pre-demolition assessment of a former ore storage facility complex and prepared engineering opinions for two separate demolition scenarios.
Water Treatment Plant Remediation, City of Anacortes
Jerzy provided technical support during the construction phase of the project, including regulatory permitting, waste management, health and safety, and QA of various submittals.
Pre-Demolition Assessment and Specifications Development, Port of Long Beach To replace a 50-year-old traveling bulk materials shiploader, Jerzy led implementation of the supplemental pre-demolition characterization of the shiploader and preparation of the final report for D3 and engineering services. He also prepared technical specifications for abatement, demolition, and shiploader removal to facilitate its replacement.
Marine Oil Terminal Environmental Site Assessment and Disposition Options Analysis, City of Pittsburg Jerzy led preparation of Phase I and Phase II environmental site assessments and a sampling and analysis plan for the pier to identify environmental conditions that could impact potential facility reuse. The work was performed under a USEPA Brownfield Grant and was the first Phase I environmental site assessment performed for an overwater structure under this program. He also participated in preparation of pier demolition and replacement cost estimates and the final feasibility study document for City of Pittsburg use in their decision-making process.
Soler Farm Demolition Support , Pierce Conservation District Jerzy leads pre-demolition assessment, demolition design, cost estimating, and engineering support during construction of this ongoing project that includes demolition and removal of several structures listed on a historical buildings list. Selected building materials will be salvaged for reuse.
Nuclear Facility Closure Planning Support, Diablo Canyon, Confidential Client As part of a larger facility closure planning effort, Jerzy prepared estimated costs for demolition, removal, and disposal of selected non-radioactive facility infrastructure at a nuclear power plant.
Abatement and Demolition of Mine Smelter Complex, Confidential Client Jerzy managed abatement and demolition of a former copper smelter complex at a closed copper mine site. The project included abatement and demolition of nine buildings and two cooling towers using conventional methods, as well as demolition of a 300-foot smokestack using explosives. Challenges included working near the structurally unstable, crumpling smokestack; soil impacted with heavy metals; and public relations.
Partial Demolition and Closure of Aerospace Facility, Confidential Client Jerzy assisted the client in developing the scope of work for decommissioning, abatement, and partial demolition of the space propulsion facility, and he managed implementation of the project. He led preparation of engineering cost estimates and bid packages, assisted the client in the contractor procurement process, and managed construction on the client’s behalf. The project included decontamination, abatement, and demolition of former test cells and other facility structures and regulatory closure with the regulatory agency.
Port of Los Angeles Fuel Transfer Terminal Closures, Confidential Client Jerzy was responsible for preparation of a comprehensive bid package for terminal demolition to facilitate closure of three existing fuel transfer terminals in the Port. Terminal facilities included 10 large aboveground storage tanks, process piping, site infrastructure, and waterside structures. The project scope included removal and modification of existing aboveground, belowground, and waterside structures; soil excavation and segregation; and management of generated waste materials.
Decommissioning and Removal of Plating Facility, Confidential Client Jerzy led preparation of bid packages; assisted the client in contractor procurement; and managed the construction phase of the project, which included decontamination and removal of several automated and manual plating lines, associated ventilation systems, and a wastewater treatment plant. He assisted the client with regulatory closure of the treatment plant and preparation of a closure report.
Closure of Lube Oil Transfer Facility, Confidential Client Jerzy led preparation of several bid packages for modification of on-site utilities, asbestos abatement, and demolition of a large lube oil facility. The facility included more than 140 large aboveground storage tanks coated with asbestos spray-on insulation, process piping, and other infrastructure. He managed the facility assessment and utility modification work.
Demolition Design, Inactive Refinery, Confidential Client Jerzy leads pre-demolition assessment and demolition design for the inactive refinery located inside an active fuel transfer and storage terminal. The refinery was shut down 20 years ago without proper safe-out and closure, with residual product remaining in the process equipment, vessels, and piping.
Margaret Carrillo-Sheridan, PE
Principal-in-Charge
Margaret has more than 35 years of experience providing environmental remediation consulting services and leads Anchor QEA’s D3 practice. Her expertise includes assessing and remediating former utility/industrial facilities and power generating plants in the United States, Europe, Canada, and Central/South America. She has managed assessment, remediation, and/or demolition of more than 8 million sf of contaminated industrial/commercial/ power facilities globally. Margaret specializes in remediating sites with mercury, PCBs, and chemical waste contamination, successfully completing projects in multiple countries.
Education
MS, Environmental Resources Engineering,
State University of New York College of
Environmental Science and Forestry
(SUNY ESF), 1993
BS, Forest Engineering, SUNY ESF, 1987
Licenses/Certifications
PE, New Jersey, No. 24GE03866700; New
York, No. 082251; Pennsylvania (retired)
OSHA HAZWOPER 40-hour certified
Relevant Project Experience
Water Treatment Plant Remediation, City of Anacortes
Margaret served as the principal engineer for the assessment and remedial planning of a former water treatment facility serviced with PCB-containing paints and coatings. The facility assessment phase focused on the former water treatment plant’s large basin structures, piping networks, and associated buildings planned for decommissioning and demolition.
As part of the decommissioning planning phase, Margaret led the evaluation of multiple scenarios for potential reuse, remediation, and demolition options for the various contaminated building materials. The evaluation process included implementability and evaluation of potential risk posed by the PCB-coated equipment prior to and during demolition, as well as development of engineer’s estimates of probable cost for each of the scenarios considered.
Jensen Bromate Control Upgrades Project Value Management Engineering, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
Margaret served as the decommissioning subject matter expert for a value engineering study of the proposed treatment plant upgrades. The study included constructability, performance assessment, risk and function analyses, alternative solutions development, and cost estimate review.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant Environmental Impact Report, Aspen Environmental Group As a subcontractor to Aspen Environmental (who was tasked with preparing the EIR for San Luis Obispo County), Margaret provided technical support regarding potential demolition methods and environmental impacts related to the full removal alternative of the breakwaters and water intake structures associated with the nuclear power plant.
Former Tow Basin Building, Confidential Client
Margaret led the pre-demolition characterization of a former mini-submarine launch facility and maintenance building.
Following the pre-demolition characterization, Margaret led the development of technical specifications for the decommissioning and demolition of the former Tow Basin building, which was successfully implemented.
Investigation, Decommissioning, and Demolition at Active Chemical Manufacturing Facility, Confidential Client Margaret serves as the principal engineer for the assessment, demolition design, contractor procurement, and construction support for the demolition of several industrial buildings and their associated chemical process lines located on an active manufacturing facility. The facilities demolished to date include multiple process stacks more than 150 feet above ground surface (and containing components classified as PCB bulk product waste), two hazardous waste incinerators, on-site industrial wastewater treatment system components, and obsolete process lines and storage tanks in conformance with the facility’s RCRA permit. Prior to the start of demolition, Margaret worked with facility personnel to develop decommissioning processes that could be implemented by plant personnel, resulting in a more cost-effective demolition program. Margaret also provides ongoing strategic support to the site owner related to compliance with active regulatory permits and regulatory orders issued by various agencies.
Facility Assessment and Environmental Support of 800-MW Power Plant Demolition, AEP/Kentucky Power Margaret served as the principal engineer and technical lead related to the assessment of environmental conditions at a retired power plant slated for demolition by others. Anchor QEA was retained to develop an expedited investigation program to identify potential sources of PCBs within building materials, plant equipment, and infrastructure. Based on the demolition schedule, a fast-track assessment program was developed that included collection and analysis of more than 650 building material samples, inventory of more than 600 equipment items, and performance of an updated asbestos survey. The work included evaluating data generated during the assessment to: 1) identify building materials and residual wastes that required management as a TSCA-regulated waste; 2) provide recommendations for segregation of regulated wastes prior to demolition and maximize reuse and recycling of demolition debris; 3) identify and quantify waste materials requiring off-site disposal; 4) and provide technical support related to complex waste management of unique hazardous waste streams under state and federal waste management laws. Margaret also led Anchor QEA’s environmental construction support team, which provided technical support to the facility owner, including review of contractor plans and submittals, as well as observation and documentation of environmental aspects of the facility pre-demolition, demolition, and waste management activities.
Expert Witness, Confidential Client
Margaret provided expert witness services associated with ongoing litigation related to the demolition of a former transformer manufacturing facility in Wisconsin. She was retained to provide expert opinions and testimony regarding the demolition of the former facility and the potential release and off-site migration of PCB-contaminated dust during demolition activities.
Expert Witness, Confidential Client
Margaret was retained to provide expert witness services associated with litigation related to potential historical releases of PCBs at a former manufacturing facility in Indiana. She provided expert opinions regarding potential sources of PCBs detected in environmental samples collected from on-site and off-site locations following demolition of the facility.
Michael Whelan, PE
Engineer of Record
Michael has 33 years of experience as a geotechnical and environmental engineer. As engineer of record, his work involves ensuring compliance with project requirements, industry standards, and regulatory codes; identifying potential design risks, structural concerns, and environmental impacts of designs; providing technical guidance during construction; and working closely with teams, government agencies, and stakeholders to ensure a smooth project execution. His engineering expertise encompasses the design and management of field exploration programs and laboratory testing of soil and rock for strength and consolidation properties; comparative analysis and design of various foundation types and their performance; design of excavations and their structural support systems; slope stability analyses for landslides, constructed fills, and shoreline features; and seismic analysis of structures, slopes, and earthen structures.
Education
MS, Geotechnical Engineering,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1994
Licenses/Certifications
PE, California, No. 69833
OSHA HAZWOPER 40-hour certified, 8-hour
refresher, and 8-hour supervisor
First aid and CPR training
Relevant Project Experience
Otay River Restoration Site Screening and Pre-Design Assessment, Poseidon Resources Michael led sampling and physical and chemical site characterization efforts in portions of the Otay River Floodplain and salt ponds in South San Diego Bay under consideration as a potential habitat mitigation area. The geotechnical and chemical characterization work was designed and conducted to determine compressibility and fill placement properties of soils planned for excavation, as well as the magnitude, extent, and variability of potential contaminants in the soils.
Additional sampling and testing efforts were conducted to evaluate habitat suitability for areas planned for excavation, filling, and planting.
Campbell Shipyard Sediment Remediation, Design, and Value Engineering, Port of San Diego Michael managed and coordinated the multidisciplinary implementation of this high-profile offshore dredging and capping project undertaken by the Port along the San Diego Bay waterfront. His efforts included planning, engineering design, and construction oversight for this multi-million-dollar remedial effort involving targeted sediment removal and installation of clean capping sand and armor rock, as well as development of a redesigned shoreline revetment and structural retrofits to an existing pier and seawall. Michael was the on-site deputy project engineer during construction.
Colorado Lagoon Ecosystem Restoration and Mitigation Bank, City of Long Beach Michael led the geotechnical engineering and was the engineer of record for this high-profile restoration of a popular lagoon and shoreline park located near the heart of Long Beach. The project combined the removal of chemically impacted sediments with major shoreline regrading to improve habitat function within the lagoon while enhancing public access opportunities. He supported the team’s structural design efforts by leading the geotechnical investigations and development of appropriate engineering parameters for subsurface materials. He also helped lead Anchor QEA’s construction management team during construction work.
Andrée Clark Bird Refuge Water Quality and Habitat Improvement, City of Santa Barbara Michael was the lead geotechnical engineer for restoration of the public Andrée Clark Bird Refuge area. He acted as the lead civil and geotechnical engineer for development of conceptual grading and dredging plans, incorporating topographic and bathymetric data and accounting for habitat restoration goals and anticipated water quality improvements. He has also led geotechnical investigations for areas identified for regrading and provided input on planning-level construction cost estimates for the three alternatives.
Former Tow Basin Building, Confidential Client
Michael led the field sampling program for the pre-demolition characterization of a former mini-submarine launch facility and maintenance building. The program enabled him to ascertain geotechnical and chemical properties of sediment, soil, and sandblast grit and perform a comparative analysis of various design concepts for the site, leading to the successful decommissioning and demolition of the former Tow Basin building.
Matthew Gruber, CIH, CSP
Health and Safety Lead
Matt is an environmental health and safety manager with more than 12 years of experience in industrial hygiene and health and safety management. He has extensive experience quantifying and characterizing exposure to hazardous substances, identifying and mitigating health and safety hazards, managing occupational health, and developing and maintaining health and safety programs. Matt has expertise in environmental consulting, as an industrial hygiene leader in the pulp and paper industry and as an OSHA industrial hygienist.
Education
MS, Industrial Hygiene, Montana
Technological University, 2012
Licenses/Certifications
Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH)
Certified Safety Professional (CSP),
No. 28969
OSHA HAZWOPER 40-hour certified
First aid, CPR, and AED training
Relevant Project Experience
OU-1/OU-2 Remedial Design and Action, Pharmacia LLC/Solutia Inc.
This project focused on environmental sampling for PCB contamination within Snow Creek. Matt’s duties included leading two confined space entries and permit declassification. He led the field crews for entry into the Highway 202 culverts and at the Quintard mall culvert that presented significant unknowns. Matt successfully evaluated the work environments for hazardous atmospheres and reclassified the spaces as non-permit required, which allowed the work crew to work safely without stringent requirements of a permit-required space. All work was completed on time and without any health and safety incidents.
Maritime Campus Project, Port of Tacoma
This project was a two-phase environmental site assessment to evaluate contamination from historical industrial use.
Contaminants of concern included heavy metals (antimony, arsenic, barium, chromium, copper, fluorides, lead, mercury, nickel, and zinc); volatile organic compounds (xylene); total petroleum hydrocarbons (gasoline and diesel range); semivolatile compounds (coal tar pitch volatiles and PAHs); PCB Aroclors; and dioxin/furans. As the corporate health and safety manager, Matt assisted the field teams with all health and safety aspects. His duties included comprehensive review of the site-specific health and safety plan, verification of the exposure assessment (monitoring plan), and determination of appropriate work processes and personal protective equipment. Mathematical exposure modeling was used to provide a site-specific occupational exposure limit based on actual site contamination concentrations, which provided the work crew greater flexibility in completing their work, while also protecting their health and safety.
Pittsfield Site NPDES Permit, General Electric
The project aim was to install flow meters within the storm sewer system as part of the NPDES permit. To install flow meters, staff were going to need to enter 12 separate permit-required confined spaces. Matt led the team in program development and hazard assessment of each location to be entered. He reviewed all project documents related to the confined space work and assisted the field crew in troubleshooting obstacles that arose while conducting the work.
Doug Musser, PG
Design, Cost Estimating, and Contractor Procurement Lead Doug has more than 32 years of experience leading complex, high-profile environmental investigation and remediation projects throughout the United States, as well as Europe, Canada, and South America. He has managed building assessments and decommissioning and demolition design, as well as engineering services related to the remediation of more than 5 million sf of former industrial facilities. Doug’s demolition expertise includes assessment, demolition design, and oversight services for four Superfund sites.
Education
MS, Geology, Rutgers University, 1993
Licenses/Certifications
Professional Geologist (PG), Washington,
No. 0001085
OSHA HAZWOPER 40-hour certified
FAA Part 107 UAS Remote Pilot, No. 3987978
Relevant Project Experience
Water Treatment Plant Remediation, City of Anacortes
Doug served as the demolition task manager for the assessment, design, and demolition monitoring of a former water treatment facility serviced with PCB-containing paints and coatings throughout the facility. The facility assessment phase focused on the former water treatment plant’s large basin structures, piping networks, and associated buildings planned for decommissioning and demolition. As part of the decommissioning planning phase, Doug supported the evaluation of multiple scenarios for potential reuse, remediation, and demolition options for the various contaminated building materials. The evaluation process included implementability and potential risk posed by the PCB-coated equipment prior to and during demolition, as well as development of engineer’s cost estimates for each of the scenarios considered. Doug also prepared competitive bid specifications, supported contractor procurement, managed the demolition contractor oversight and documentation activities during plan implementation, and developed the final closure report. In addition, Doug managed the community air monitoring program during the 9-month period of decommissioning and demolition activities.
Wastewater Bioreactor Renovation Project Management and Construction Management, Momentive Doug served as technical advisor for a wastewater facility bioreactor renovation project. The project included draining, power washing, grit blasting, installing scaffolding, structural repair, installing carbon fiber, influent/effluent piping repair, and performance inspections associated with renovation of a 3.6-million-gallon wastewater bioreactor tank at an active 1,000-acre chemical manufacturing facility. Anchor QEA was responsible for coordinating contractors and site logistics while minimizing potential impacts to active site production. Doug performed QA/QC audits of the construction management and air monitoring teams and reviewed schedule and cost tracking progress.
Pre-Demolition Assessment and Specifications Development, Port of Long Beach Doug served as the project manager for the assessment and decommissioning/demolition design of a bulk ship loader in the Port. The bulk ship loader was being replaced with a new ship loader, and the old ship loader had to be decommissioned in an active port area with a limited available work area and strict schedule window. Doug managed the development of a sampling and analysis plan for the 80-foot-tall ship loader, including ancillary equipment areas and conveyor systems. Based on results of the sampling and analysis, he led the design of the structure decontamination and demolition, as well as development of contractor specifications to address environmental hazards associated with the ship loader.
Paper Mill Wastewater Treatment FacilityDecommissioning and Demolition, International Paper/Georgia-Pacific Doug was the project manager for the decommissioning and demolition of a wastewater treatment facility at a former paper mill on a USEPA CERCLA National Priorities List site. The site included WWTP structures, a river water intake structure, outfall structures, and a 14-million-gallon aeration basin. He directed the pre-demolition assessment program, prepared demolition design/bid documents, prepared permits and a beneficial use plan for masonry demolition material and coordinated the procurement process. Doug managed the decommissioning and demolition oversight and preparation of the final report.
Tyler Nowak, PE
Pre-Demolition/Pre-Design Investigation Lead
Tyler is an engineer with 12 years of experience providing environmental engineering and remediation services for the deactivation and D3 of impacted manufacturing and industrial equipment and associated buildings and structures. He has been responsible for many phases of demolition, environmental investigation, and remediation projects, including developing technical documents (i.e., work plans, investigation reports, designs, specifications, drawings, and contractor procurement packages); providing engineering oversight; directing field investigation and remediation projects; and preparing schedules, budgets, and cost estimates.
Education
BS, Environmental Resources Engineering,
SUNY ESF, 2012
Licenses/Certifications
PE, New York, No. 106032
FAA Part 107 UAS Remote Pilot, No. 5022978
OSHA HAZWOPER 40-hour certified and
8-hour supervisor; Construction 10-hour
certified; and Confined Space, Fall
Protection, and Scaffolding training
New York State (NYS) DOT/IATA Hazardous
Material Shipping and Transportation
Training
NYS Asbestos Supervisor and Inspector
First aid and CPR training
Relevant Project Experience
Wastewater Bioreactor Renovation Project Management and Construction Management, Momentive Tyler was the project manager and construction manager for the repair and refurbishment of a 3.6-million-gallon wastewater bioreactor vessel. He was responsible for coordination and oversight of multiple contractor companies, staff, and inspection personnel performing draining, cleaning, power washing, grit blasting, structural repairs, scaffolding installation, carbon fiber installation, influent/effluent piping repair, performance inspections, re-coating, and re-installation of the vessel prior to startup.
Investigation, Decommissioning, and Demolition at Active Chemical Manufacturing Facility, Confidential Client Tyler was the construction manager and project engineer for demolition activities at an active 1,000-acre chemical manufacturing facility in Upstate New York. He assisted in the building characterization investigation program, demolition design development, contractor procurement, air monitoring, and field oversight activities of more than 50 structures in the active facility. He developed design documents, led building characterization investigation activities, prepared summary reports, and provided oversight and project management of decommissioning and demolition activities.
Pre-Demolition Assessment and Specifications Development, Port of Long Beach Tyler was the on-site lead engineer for the pre-design investigation (PDI) and sampling activities on an active shiploader located within the Port. He was responsible for training personnel, ensuring health and safety procedures were followed, subcontractor coordination and oversight, and client coordination during the on-site work activities. He assisted in developing technical specifications for the project.
Marine Oil Terminal Environmental Site Assessment and Disposition Options Analysis, City of Pittsburg As on-site lead engineer for the PDI and sampling activities, Tyler trained personnel to ensure health and safety procedures were upheld, provided subcontractor coordination and oversight, and conducted client coordination of on-site work activities. He also developed the environmental site assessment report and disposition options analysis.
Water Treatment Plant Remediation, City of Anacortes
Tyler was the on-site lead engineer for the PDI and sampling activities at an active water treatment plant. He was responsible for training personnel, ensuring health and safety procedures were followed, subcontractor coordination and oversight, and client coordination during the on-site work activities. He assisted with the development of the remediation design and technical specifications.
Marine Vié
Permitting Lead
Marine is an environmental planner with experience in permitting a variety of private and public projects. She has managed and worked on numerous CEQA documents and more than 30 permitting packages and has obtained approvals from various governmental agencies. She works to help project proponents comply with any permitting pre- and post-construction reporting requirements. Before joining Anchor QEA, Marine worked in the maritime sector, including at the Port of New Orleans and International Institute for Sustainable Seaports. She wrote a report on provincial and federal environmental laws promoting clean technology enterprises and presented it to a government committee.
Education
LLM (Master of Laws), University of
Montreal, 2016
BA, Political Science and Environment,
McGill University, 2012
Relevant Project Experience
Demolition of Under Ocean Floor Seawater Intake, City of Long Beach Marine assembled USACE and RWQCB permitting documentation and helped the City secure the RWQCB 401 Water Quality Certification and Nationwide permit verification letter. The City’s Water Department completed construction and operation of a temporary demonstration project to determine the feasibility of using a system of subsurface intake and discharge wells for seawater desalination. The purpose of the project is to demolish and remove the temporary demonstration seawater intake and discharge system and return the beach to its pre-project condition.
On-Call Environmental Services, Port of Stockton
Marine has provided CEQA and biological permitting support to the Port for more than 7 years. She has provided deputy management services for several Port CEQA deliverables, including several complex waterfront development and multimodal facility EIRs and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declarations. She writes CEQA technical analyses; prepares Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Programs, board memoranda, and monitoring reports; and develops permit packages and performs agency coordination.
Renewable Diesel Terminal and MOTEMS Marine Terminal, Port of Stockton and BWC Terminals As permitting lead, Marine secured approvals from USACE, RWQCB, CDFW, and the San Joaquin Council of Government and facilitated USACE consultations with NMFS and USFWS in less than 1 year. She also was a senior reviewer for all CEQA checklist topics. While the project is under construction, Marine is coordinating with agencies and BWC to ensure permit compliance with pre-construction, construction, and post-construction requirements.
Pebbly Beach Landing and Launch Ramp Repair and Catalina Harbor Dinghy Dock Pier Emergency Pile Repair, Catalina Island Company
Marine secured CCC, RWQCB, USACE, and local permits for the Pebbly Beach project and emergency permits from the CCC, RWQCB, and USACE for the Catalina Harbor project. The Pebbly Beach Landing and Launch Ramp Repair Project is an in-kind replacement of the structure at Pebbly Beach that was damaged by large southern swells associated with Hurricane Eugene in 2017. The Catalina Harbor Dinghy Dock Pier Emergency Pile Repair Project included installing adjustable post shores and bracings at damaged pile locations to temporarily support the pier.
On-Call Environmental Services, City of Newport Beach
Marine assists in processing individual permit applications; developing permit applications; and obtaining renewed project approval from the CCC, USACE, and RWQCB. The work is in support of the City’s securing of Regional General Permit 54 that provides the City and residential and commercial property owners with a more streamlined mechanism to conduct maintenance dredging within the harbor.
Facility Maintenance Permit, General Dynamics –NASSCO
Marine has helped secure many approvals from the RWQCB, USACE, and CCC on various General Dynamics-NASSCO projects, including for maintenance dredging, Berth 6 emergency repairs, and floating drydock projects.
Alex Bleichner
Engineering Services During Construction Lead
Alex is an engineering professional with more than 5 years of experience with assessment, remediation, and industrial facility decommissioning and demolition projects. He has experience developing technical documents such as work plans, investigation reports, designs, specifications, drawings, and contractor procurement packages; directing field investigation and remediation projects; and preparing schedules, budgets, and cost estimates.
He also has experience in a range of environmental fieldwork programs from routine water monitoring and contaminated building materials sampling to directing field investigations and overseeing engineering. Alex is also proficient in ArcGIS, AutoCAD, field sampling, Python, and R/SAS Studios. He has also provided engineering oversight during construction phases of various multi-year D3 projects in California and the Pacific Northwest.
Education
BS, Environmental Resources Engineering,
SUNY ESF, 2019
Licenses/Certifications
Engineer-In-Training, New York, No. 094430
FAA Part 107 UAS Remote Pilot, No. 4816654
OSHA HAZWOPER 40-hour certified and
8-hour supervisor, Construction 10-hour
certified, Respiratory Training Program
certified, and Confined Space Supervisor
Relevant Project Experience
Water Treatment Plant Remediation, City of Anacortes
As construction manager, Alex oversaw the decommissioning and demolition of a former water treatment facility originally constructed with PCB-containing building materialsthroughout the facility. He oversaw the demolition, proper segregation, and disposal of more than 6,400 tons of PCB waste from multiple decommissioned structures. The work was performed on the same site as the active water treatment plant with active facilities located less than 10 feet from the demolition area. Numerous protective measures were incorporated into the design, and stringent air monitoring was required. Alex was the main on-site field interface with contractors and the client throughout the project.
Demolition and Remediation for Vo-Toys CERCLA Removal Action, General Electric Company As assistant project engineer, Alex participated in an extensive field sampling program to evaluate the nature and extent of mercury contamination in three historical industrial buildings that once served as the first mass production facility for incandescent light bulbs. During the design phase, he prepared technical specifications and contract drawings. During the remedial and demolition phases, he implemented the air monitoring program and interfaced with the on-site USEPA personnel daily. During demolition, Alex performed weekly waste inspections and inventories to document compliance with the remedial action plan. He also drafted weekly progress reports for USEPA to review and publish to the public. During this multi-year project, and with approval of the client and USEPA, Alex transitioned into the on-site construction manager as the subsurface remediation progressed during post-superstructure demolition.
Soler Farm Demolition Support, Pierce County Conservation District Alex provided engineering support for the preparation of abatement, demolition, and waste management specifications for selected on-site structures. The project is ongoing, and future work includes assisting the District in the bidding process, contractor selection, project oversight, and final reporting.
Brownfield Site Remediation, 79 Arverne Development, LLC Alex provided engineering oversight for remedial design implementation, which included removal of historical foundations, soil excavation, in situ treatment of contaminated soil, and installation of a vapor barrier and sub-slab depressurization system. He also oversaw the monitoring well installation and performed initial development and sampling of the wells. Alex developed daily observation reports that were provided to the overseeing regulatory agency.
Bison City Rod & Gun Club Remedial Investigation, National Grid Alex supported the remedial investigation of a former industrial site with historic petroleum contamination. On site, he oversaw and documented an array of site characterization tasks, including field screening via direct-imaging tools, geotechnical borings, and installation of groundwater monitoring wells. Alex analyzed and mapped soil and groundwater data, prepared the site characterization report, and supported the design and cost estimating for the remedial solutions.
Joel Berman, CIH, CAC, CDPH LI/A, LPM, CSP, CIAQM
Asbestos Surveying Lead
Joel is the president of HSA and has 45 years of experience as an industrial hygienist, project designer, director of health and safety services, and project manager. He is an expert at managing removal services on complicated decommissioning, demolition, and cleanup projects. He has provided consulting to HSA’s clientele on various health and safety issues including, but not limited to, asbestos, radon, mercury, indoor air quality, safety evaluation, and program management. His experience includes performing building inspections for bulk asbestos collection projects, training staff in OSHA asbestos awareness and respiratory protection, collecting air samples, and performing indoor air quality assessments in occupied office buildings (including microbiological organisms).
Joel also manages a variety of occupational and environmental projects, including air and soil sampling, mold and moisture evaluations, general industrial hygiene surveys, and reporting. Additionally, he is a well-known and respected expert witness for cases in various areas of practice, including fungal contamination issues, toxic torts, and asbestosin California.
Education
MS, Industrial Hygiene, Montana
Technological University, 2012
Licenses/Certifications
CIH, No. 8606
CAC, California, No. 92- 0838
CDPH, LI/A, No. LRC00003608; Lead Project
Monitor (LPM), No. LRC00003607
CSP, Comprehensive Practice, No. 11595;
Safety Management Specialist,
No. SMS-1000
Associate Safety Professional (ASP), No. A5468
CIAQM, No. 0908021
Relevant Project Experience
Lake Skinner Dam V-Ditch Replacement, Metropolitan Water District As project manager, Joel led efforts to determine if asbestos, lead, or PCB abatement was required of the Lake Skinner Dam V-Ditch prior to the demolition and renovation of the area. During the pre-meeting associated with the project, steel pipes that were coated with a black tar-line substance were observed in the pictures provided by Joel. The black tar-like substance was then included in his sampling scope of work and analyzed for asbestos and PCBs.
Douma House and Old Visitor Center, Metropolitan Water District As project manager, Joel was responsible for determining whether abatement was required prior to the demolition of the Douma House and Old Visitor Center in Hemet, California. In addition, he led paint sampling tasks that were performed for the purpose of contractor notification for OSHA compliance.
Lead-Coated Material Survey of HRL Laboratory Campus, HRL Laboratories Joel was the project manager for surveying the HRL laboratory campus in Malibu. He was responsible for determining locations and conditions of lead-coated materials throughout the campus. In total, 3,017 XRF measurements were collected in support of possible future renovation or demolition, which will require lead and other suspect material impact. 101 Ash Street Asbestos Hazard Assessment, City of San Diego Joel managed the assessment of a 21-story concrete and steel high rise structure in San Diego to determine the presence or absence of asbestos contamination. Built in 1967, the high rise was filled with asbestos-containing spray-on fireproofing. The fireproofing was used on the structural steel, in the overspray above the suspended ceilings, on the columns, and in the elevator shafts. Joel led tenant improvement work involving disturbance of the asbestos-containing material.
Arsenic Industrial Hygiene Air Monitoring and Evaluation, Santa Clarita Valley Water As project manager, Joel led industrial hygiene personal exposure air monitoring for arsenic at the Santa Clarita Valley Water Facility. The work involved collection of direct reading total particulate air sampling to determine total dust concentrations as particulates not otherwise regulated. His work informed Santa Clarita Valley Water of hazardous concentrations during the dried sludge transfer to waste vehicles.
Larry Kraemer, PE
Wastewater Treatment Plant Expertise
Larry oversees Cannon’s engineering design, construction, administrative, and related activities. Recognized as an expert, he applies his extensive knowledge to complex projects and assumes responsibility for the department of public infrastructure at Cannon. With more than 35 years of experience in construction management and civil engineering, he provides a senior level of technical experience and project understanding to our team.
Having worked for the City, Larry brings unique insight to the team and an appreciation for the efforts the City has put forth. Specializing in water resources, he also appreciates the long-term benefits the City and community will realize for years to come.
Education
MS, Civil Engineering - Water Resources,
California State University, Long Beach,
California, 1994
BS, Agricultural Engineering, California
Polytechnic State University, San Luis
Obispo, California, 1986
Licenses/Certifications
CE, California, No. 44813
Relevant Project Experience
Wastewater Treatment Plant Feasibility Study, City of Morro Bay The City of Morro Bay operates a wastewater treatment plant in conjunction with the town of Cayucos. The plant was nearing capacity and facing upcoming regulatory requirements to improve effluent quality prior to ocean discharge. Several years previously, the City had explored the idea of constructing a separate reclamation facility to serve only the City for potential beneficial reuse of the effluent. The City requested that Cannon prepare an updated Feasibility Study to examine current potential benefits and potential “fatal flaws” associated with construction of a standalone wastewater plant in lieu of expansion of the existing plant. Cannon prepared an analysis for both current and future flow rates; examined water quality challenges and identified potential solutions; reviewed current and anticipated regulatory requirements; updated system design requirements; developed a cost estimate and staffing plan; and identified potential funding sources.
Recycle Water Facility, City of Morro Bay
Larry is leading Cannon’s efforts on the City of Morro Bay’s Recycle Water Facility Groundwater Injection, Monitoring, and Extraction project, enhancing the City’s water infrastructure. He oversees design, permitting, and construction, maintaining compliance with state and federal regulations while managing budgets and schedules. Larry directs site investigations and guides the development of the Conceptual Design Report (CDR) and contract documents. He also coordinates Cannon’s multidisciplinary team and will provide engineering support during construction, including oversight of pipeline design and floodplain modeling as needed.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP) ISFSI Area, Pacific Gas & Electric Company Pacific Gas & Electric Company designed and constructed an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) at DCPP. In the event a national repository for used nuclear fuel was not available, this phased project allowed for onsite storage of all used fuel generated by the plant. Cannon was chosen to provide professional engineering services to facilitate the transport of the 180-ton spent nuclear fuel rod casks from the reactor building area to the storage pad in the nearby canyon. Cannon’s scope of work included plans and specifications for road designs, utility and drainage realignments, retaining walls, and construction staking. It also included excavation of approximately 100,000 yards of rock, permitting assistance, coordination with the San Luis Obispo County Building and Safety Division, assistance with the development of short- and long-term strategies to achieve appropriate setback from areas affected by landslides and coastal erosion, and design of a fire water protection system to protect the ISFSI and Used Steam Generator Storage Facility. This project was voted Project of the Year for 2007 by the American Public Works Association (APWA). Larry served as Project Manager for Cannon on the project and provided oversight of the preparation of design documents.
Derek Romer, PE
Electrical Utility Disconnection and Rerouting
Derek has more than 20 years of experience, including electrical and controls system design, in secondary power distribution, lighting, and instrumentation, as well as SCADA for wastewater treatment plants, pump stations, reservoirs, sewage lift stations, and water treatment plants. His expertise comprises project management, field investigations, calculations, preparation of design drawings and specifications for bid packages, review of bid packages and construction shop drawings, and construction management, including troubleshooting during project startup and inspection. Derek is especially recognized for his ability to coordinate with clients and contractors and deliver turnkey, cost-effective projects. His pump station and SCADA designs feature energy efficient systems and promote off-peak power use.
Education
BS, Electrical Engineering, California
Polytechnic State University, 1993
Licenses/Certifications
Electrical Engineer, California, No. E16396
Relevant Project Experience
Blacklake Sewer System Consolidation, Nipomo Community Services District Derek served as electrical engineer for the design of a new 160 gpm sewer lift station, 22,000 LF of new 6-inch sewer force main, and the decommission, demolition, and site restoration of the existing Blacklake water reclamation facility.
The design also included SCADA, pavement surfacing and access road, odor control, electrical design, and surveying.
The schedule allotted 1.5 years for design and 1.5 years for construction support and permitting.
Benicia Wastewater Facilities Arc Flash Analysis, City of Benicia The City of Benicia has a large wastewater treatment plant and several sewage lift stations that could require operators to work on energized electrical equipment. Working on energized equipment exposes personnel to the hazards of an arc flash event resulting in serious injury or even death. In an effort to reduce risk to personnel, the City wanted to conduct an arc flash hazard analysis and selected Cannon to perform this task.
Derek served as project manager and oversaw tasks and teams for researching existing data and documentation, gathering field data, creating electrical models of the sites in power systems software (SKM PowerTools), and analyzing the results. As part of the scope, the City wanted to mitigate the incident energies to levels where the City personnel would not have to wear personal protective equipment (PPE) suits but wear minimal PPE instead. Cannon modeled different scenarios for the City and provided recommendations on equipment to install to reduce the incident energy levels. The results of the analyses of all the sites were presented in a report, and Cannon prepared and installed arc flash hazard labels on the electrical equipment.
Wastewater Treatment Plant, City of McFarland
Facility modifications included migration from the existing Aerated Lagoon system to an Extended Aeration Activated Sludge Plant complete with biological nutrient removal. The projected included both plant replacement and plant expansion from 1.5 mgd to 2.5 mgd. To provide a feasible approach to the $10 million estimated project costs, the City requested the project be phased over seven years. Starting with a new headworks and comprehensive review of the process and hydraulic profile, Cannon has been retained to provide the overall preliminary engineering, design, and construction plans and specifications of major upgrades. Improvements included a new master plan, SCADA systems, clarifiers, blowers, dewatering systems, headworks, and an MCC building. As Electrical Engineer, Derek provides construction phase support services, including submittal review, electrical observations, and the preparation and supervision of startup and testing.
Burl Steude, PLS
Land Surveying
Burl has been providing land surveying services for more than 21 years. He is proficient in the use of Static, Rapid Static, and RTK-GPS and Robotic Total Stations and Leica’s Digital Precise Level using Lieca Geo-Office and Carlson software for collecting, mapping, and staking out data in the field. He is also proficient in performing property boundary research, field reconnaissance for property boundary and right-of-way evidence recovery and analysis, preparation of Record of Survey Maps, and Parcel Maps. Burl performs 3D laser scanning using Lieca HDS6000 and FARO x330 laser scanners.
Licenses/Certifications
Registered Land Surveyor, California,
No. 9103
OSHA HAZWOPER 40-hour certified
First Aid/CPR certified
Chevron Business Partner Safety Orientation
(BPSO)
Smith Driver Systems Training
Relevant Project Experience
Blacklake Sewer System Consolidation, Nipomo Community Services District Burl served as project surveyor for this project consists of the design of a new 160 gpm sewer lift station, 22,000 LF of new 6-inch sewer force main, and the decommission, demolition, and site restoration of the existing Blacklake water reclamation facility. The design also included SCADA, pavement surfacing and access road, odor control, electrical design, and survey. The schedule allotted 1.5 years for design and 1.5-years for construction support and the permitting schedule.
Former Guadalupe Oil Field Deconstruction, Chevron
Burl served as survey project manager for the deconstruction of a former oil field in San Luis Obispo. The project entailed the location and mapping of existing transmission lines on the 3,000-acre property. His work included ongoing project coordination, post-processing, network adjustment and transformation to local system constraints in the maintenance of a control network to facilitate the location of monitoring wells, geophysical, hydrological and biological data used in the environmental reparations at the site. Using GPS technology, Burl served as the party chief responsible for collecting survey data for the creation of a 50-point control network. In 12 weeks, 15,000 locations were surveyed and 168 miles of transmission lines with appurtenant features were mapped for input to the GIS database. Rectified digital orthophotos were prepared as part of these services. Burl also provided construction surveys as part of the site remediation.
Santa Maria Valley Sumps, Santa Maria, Chevron
The production of oil and natural gas was a principal land use in the Santa Maria Valley for much of the 20th century.
As was common practice in the oil fields as wells were drilled, the oil, drilling mud, and groundwater produced from the drilling operations were disposed of by placing the material into a sump. At the conclusion of well activities, the sumps were backfilled with native soil. Many years later, these sumps are being located and remediated in an effort to clean up the land for agricultural, commercial, and residential uses. Cannon was retained by the owner of several such sites in the Santa Maria Valley to provide engineering, surveying, and permitting and compliance services for the remediation of over 300 sumps. Burl was the Party Chief responsible for locating potential sumps (based on orthorectified photos) using GPS—the accuracy of which was within 30 feet, preparing topographic surveys of excavation, calculation of excavation volumes, and as-built drawings.
Judd King, PE, GE
Geotechnical Engineer
Judd is the lead geotechnical engineer and project manager for several water and wastewater treatment projects on the coast of California. He is experienced in the planning, design and construction of water, wastewater and water reuse projects. He is familiar with building code and American Water Works Association (AWWA) standards for the design of public works and water treatment conveyance and storage facilities. Judd also teaches soil mechanics laboratory classes part time in the Civil Engineering Department at Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo. He is experienced with the design of shoring, dewatering, foundation support, excavations adjacent to existing structures, and other geotechnical aspects commonly encountered at wastewater facilities. Judd first worked on geotechnical aspects of the City’s existing WWTP in 2009. He also specializes in soft ground, mitigation of liquefaction, dewatering, reinforced soil slopes, ground improvement, tunneling, rock coring, and local projects ranging from land development to public works and infrastructure. He has over 20 years of experience in the planning, design and construction of public works projects throughout the central coast region.
Education
BS, Civil Engineering, Cal Poly State
University, 2001
Licenses/Certifications
Civil Engineer, California, No. 68257
Geotechnical Engineer, California, No. 2903
Relevant Project Experience
Water Reclamation Facility, City of Morro Bay
Judd served as geotechnical engineer and project manager for a design-build water reclamation facility project that was completed in late 2023. He assisted with siting studies and initial feasibility studies for a new treatment plant and preparation of a preliminary geotechnical and geologic hazards report that considered faulting, sidehill grading, slope stability and seismic hazards. As project manager, he led the preparation of the geotechnical baseline report for the design-build effort to construct the new plant and acted as the lead geotechnical engineer for the owner’s oversight of the construction.
City of Morro Bay 2023 Storm Damage Projects, City of Morro Bay Judd’s is the contract manager for Yeh’s on-call contract with the City to provide emergency response services to address storm damage and ongoing slope instability. Damage from winter storms hasincluded storm drain failures, erosion, landslides and bridge scour. Judd’s input has been used to formulate a temporary action plan to address the conditions. Considerations for longer term measures to address the damage were also provided.
Conveyance Pipelines and Pump Stations, City of Morro Bay Judd was the project manager and senior geotechnical engineer for the design and construction phase of two pump stations and approximately 3 miles of new pipeline that convey raw wastewater to the City’s new water reclamation facility and return pipelines that transport treated water to an existing ocean outfall and eventual indirect potable reuse injection wells. Yeh prepared the preliminary geotechnical report and the geotechnical report for the project that assessed multiple pipeline routes, creek crossings using trenchless technologies, and assessed constructability issues for the new lift station and pipelines. The project entailed excavations in nearly every type of subsurface conditions, including shallow groundwater and loose sand near the City’s existing WWTP to bedrock. Judd supported the City’s construction management team during construction to address dewatering, excavation and other issues related to the trenchless crossings.
Appendix B:
Acknowledgement to
Addendum No. 1
ADDENDUM NO. 1
PROJECT: WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT DECOMMISSIONING AND DEMOLITION
DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES DURING CONSTRUCTION
Project No. MB2024-UT01
Request for Proposals (RFP) Due Date – 03/06/2025
DATE: February 20, 2025
FROM: Austin Della, PE- Senior Civil Engineer
TO: Prospective Firms and Consultants
NOTICE: This addendum forms a part of the RFP and modifies the original delivered Documents issued February 20, 2025, as noted herein. Please confirm receipt of Addendum No. -1- by signing and returning this acknowledgement of receipt with your proposal.
ADDENDUM CONTENTS:
ITEM 1: REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION – QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ITEM 2: UPDATED PROPOSAL SUBMISSION DEADLINE AND SCHEDULE https://www.morrobayca.gov/bids.aspx
Issued by:
___________________________
Cindy Cecil, S.E./P.E.
City Engineer
Receipt of Addendum No -1-, City of Morro Bay, Project No. MB2024-UT01, WASTEWATER TREATMENT
PLANT DECOMMISSIONING AND DEMOLITION DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES DURING CONSTRUCTION, in hereby acknowledged by:
Firm Name: ____________________________
Signatory: __________________________________ Date: ______________________ Signature
__________________________________
Printed Name
__________________________________
Title
Anchor QEA
Margaret Carrillo-Sheridan, PE
March 6, 2025
Principal Engineer
Item No. 1 Per
Addendum No. 1 Dated
02/20/2025, Page 1 of 3
ITEM 1: REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION – QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
1. Question: “Was pre-demolition assessment of the WWTP structures conducted, including asbestos survey and building material and equipment characterization? If so, are the results available for review?”
ANSWER: A Lead and Asbestos Inspection was completed in 2010. A link to that report is located here.
2. Question: “Was soil characterization conducted for the site? If so, are the results available for review?”
ANSWER: A Preliminary Geotechnical Report for the site was completed in 2010. The draft report is attached here.
3. Question: “Have any project-related permits been initiated by the City or City’s consultants? If so – which permits and what is their current status?”
ANSWER: The City’s Coastal Development Permit for the WRF Program includes decommissioning of the WWTP, see Appendix 3 of the RFP. Additionally, for the WRF Program there is a Programmatic Agreement between the EPA and SHPO and a Biological Opinion with USFWS that can be found at this link. The City is in the process submitting an Archeological Identification Efforts and Findings of No Adverse Effect for Construction Phase 4 Letter (WWTP Decommissioning) to the EPA.
4. Question: “Is final EIR (sections 1 through 8) available for review? EIR in Appendix 4 starts from Section 9.”
ANSWER: The Draft Environmental Impact Report, which includes Sections 1 through 8 (as referenced in the Final EIR), can be viewed through the link.
5. Question: “Section IV-I of the RFP states that any exceptions to the City’s standard Agreement should be provided in Exhibit B, but there is no Exhibit B in the sample Agreement. Please clarify.” ANSWER: If the proposer has any exceptions to the contract language in the attached City’s Standard Agreement that are accepted by the City, an exhibit including the exceptions (Exhibit B) will be prepared and attached to the final Standard Agreement between the City and Consultant.
6. Question: “Can a site visit be arranged?”
ANSWER: Yes. Please reach out directly to Austin Della and he will arrange a site visit.
7. Question: “Can we assume that if the joint powers decide to keep the “green approved buildings”, our role will be limited to protecting them in place and providing utility hookups, with no refurbishment, repurposing, or improvements?”
Item No. 1 Per
Addendum No. 1 Dated
02/20/2025, Page 2 of 3
ANSWER: Yes, that is correct. The only expectation would be maintaining the existing utility hookups.
8. Question: “Have any formal environmental assessments been previously completed for the site?” ANSWER: The only formal environmental assessment we are aware of would be the lead and asbestos testing report that is linked in Question 1 of this RFP Addendum.
9. Question: “Would the City consider extending the proposal due date given the one-week turnaround time after the Q&A?”
ANSWER: Yes, the City can extend the RFP deadline by 1 week. The new RFP Due date will be Thursday March 6th, 2025 at 4:00 PM. Other key milestone dates will be pushed out 1 week.
10. Question: “Please clarify the intent of the following statement, “Include a list of at least three (3) references for the firm and any subconsultants, including…” Does the City want three (3) references for the prime and three (3) additional references for each subconsultant on the team, or three (3) total references?” ANSWER: Three (3) references for the prime will be sufficient.
11. Question: “Given that there is additional information being provided via addenda, and are providing us the ability to visit the site, can we have additional time to prepare and respond to the RFP?”
ANSWER: Yes, Please reference Question 10 of this addendum.
12. Question: “For Task 4.4 Permitting Support, Should we anticipate/include paying for permitting fees, or will those be paid directly by the City?”
ANSWER: All permitting fees will be paid for by the Consultant and reimbursed by the City. Costs for permits should be included in the Consultant’s Fee Estimate.
13. Question: “For Task 4.6 90% Plans and Specifications, Can the City indicate or provide the Standard Construction Contract Documents and General Conditions it plans to use for this work, e.g. EJCDC, AIA, or others?”
ANSWER: The City would like the Consultant to provide appropriate Construction Contract Documents and General Conditions for a project of this type, conform them to meet the requirements of the WRF Program’s Funding/Financing Agreements and have them reviewed and approved by City Legal Counsel.
14. Question: “Does the City have as-built drawings indicating the location of the Brackish Reverse Osmosis disposal line, or can the City confirm that this does not cross the plant site and need to be protected?”
Item No. 1 Per
Addendum No. 1 Dated
02/20/2025, Page 3 of 3
ANSWER: The future Brackish Water Reverse Osmosis disposal line does cross the site, see highlighted pipeline in image below.
15. Question: “Similarly, can you provide as built drawings of the recently constructed outfall air relief structure connection?”
ANSWER: See Question 15 response above.
16. Question: “Are the monitoring wells on the WWTP site available to the consultant to determine depth to ground water and for water quality sampling?”
ANSWER: Yes, the monitoring wells onsite can be used to determine depth to groundwater and for water quality sampling.
Item No. 2 Per
Addendum No. 1 Dated
02/20/2025
ITEM 2: UPDATED PROPSAL SUBMISSION DEADLINE AN SCHEDULE The deadline to submit Proposals has been extended by one week from February 27th, 2025 4:00 p.m. to March 6th, 2025 4:00 p.m. PDT. The anticipated schedule for review and selecting the recommended consultant will be adjusted accordingly. Please see the updated proposal submittal and review schedule below, this schedule replaces the schedule included in the original RFP.
01181.0001/813182.1 B-1
EXHIBIT B
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
(Superseding Agreement Boilerplate)
PLEASE SEE THE FOLLOWING PAGES FOR EXCEPTIONS TO THE AGREEMENT FROM THE CONSULTANT.
Appendix C:
Exceptions to Agreement
for Consultant Services
March 6, 2025
covenant, or condition of this Agreement, and in connection therewith: 1) Consultant will defend any action or actions filed or threatened in connection with any such Claims or Liabilities, or at option of lndemnitee(s) will reimburse and pay for all costs and expenses, including legal costs and attorneys' fees, incurred by lndemnitee(s) in connection therewith; and, 2) Consultant will promptly pay any judgement rendered against lndemnitee(s) for any such Claims or Liabilities, and will save and hold lndemnitee(s) harmless therefrom.
Section 7 .9 Attorneys' Fees
If either Party to this Agreement is required to initiate or defend or is made a party to any legal action or proceeding in any way connected with this AgreeR'lent arising from or related to this Agreement, the prevailing party in such action or proceeding, in addition to any other relief which R'lay be granted, whether legal or equitable, shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and related litigation costs, provided that the non-prevailing party was at fault due to negligence, misconduct, or breach of this Agreement. Attorneys' fees shall include attorneys' fees incurred eR in any appeal, and a Party entitled to attorneys' fees shall be entitled to all other reasonable costs for ini,iestigating such action, consultants' fees, tal�ing depositions and discoi,iery and all other necessary costs the court allows 1Nhich are incurred in such litigation. as well as all other reasonable costs associated with the litigation, including but not limited to, investigative costs, consultant fees, depositions, and discovery expenses, as permitted by the court. However, if a party is not found to be negligent or at fault, they shall not be held responsible for attorneys' fees or litigation costs, regardless of the outcome of the action.� These fees and costs shall be enforceable regardless of whether or not such action is prosecuted to judgeR'lent. the action proceeds to final judgment.
Reasons for the Exceptions/Suggested Clarifications
The revised clause clarifies that a party will only be responsible for attorneys' fees and costs if they are at fault due to negligence, misconduct, or breach of the Agreement. This ensures that a party who is not responsible for initiating the dispute or who acted in good faith does not bear undue financial burden. The revision also eliminates ambiguity by specifying that attorneys' fees and costs apply only when the non-prevailing party was at fault and that costs are enforceable regardless of the case's final judgment. This promotes fairness and prevents unjust penalties on parties who were wrongfully drawn into litigation.
anchorqea.com
01181.0001/813182.1 C-1
EXHIBIT C
SCHEDULE OF COMPENSATION
I. Consultant will be compensated for Services provided under this Agreement in accordance with description in Consultant’s Proposal attached hereto.
II. City will compensate Consultant for the Services performed upon submission of a valid invoice, as described in Section 2.2.
III. The total compensation for the Services shall not exceed the Contract Sum, as provided in Section 2.1 of this Agreement.
Updated Proposal Cost - Tasks 1 - 6
June 17,2025
Units Cost Units Cost Units Cost Units Cost Units Cost Units Cost Units Cost Principal - M. Carrillo-Sheridan $290 54 $15,660 20 $5,800 30 $8,700 44 $12,760 8 $2,320 12 $3,480 168 $48,720 Principal - D. Musser $270 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 34 $9,180 8 $2,160 16 $4,320 58 $15,660 Principal - M. Whelan $290 21 $6,090 $0 2 $580 34 $9,860 0 $0 4 $1,160 61 $17,690 Principal - J. Cebula $210 126 $26,460 12 $2,520 202 $42,420 160 $33,600 160 $33,600 40 $8,400 700 $147,000 Sr. Managing Engineer - L. Jefts $258 0 $0 $0 0 $0 - $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Sr. Managing Scientist - J. Jensen $258 0 $0 10 $2,580 0 $0 - $0 0 $0 0 $0 10 $2,580 Managing Engineer - T. Nowak $220 24 $5,280 $0 228 $50,160 44 $9,680 0 $0 20 $4,400 316 $69,520 Managing Scientist - M. Vie $240 48 $11,520 60 $14,400 0 $0 4 $960 0 $0 0 $0 112 $26,880 Managing Scientist - M. Gruber $240 16 $3,840 0 $0 0 $0 - $0 0 $0 120 $28,800 136 $32,640 Staff 3 Engineer - A. Bleichner $162 94 $15,228 0 $0 162 $26,244 224 $36,288 64 $10,368 80 $12,960 624 $101,088 Staff 2 Engineer/Scientist $153 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Staff 1 Engineer/Scientist $142 0 $0 $0 8 $1,136 - $0 0 $0 0 $0 8 $1,136 Sr. CAD Designer $137 18 $2,466 4 $548 94 $12,878 58 $7,946 0 $0 0 $0 174 $23,838 CAD Designer $125 0 $0 12 $1,500 0 $0 - $0 0 $0 0 $0 12 $1,500 Field Technician - C. Fuller $110 0 $0 $0 100 $11,000 24 $2,640 0 $0 0 $0 124 $13,640 Sr. Technical Editor $125 28 $3,500 10 $1,250 12 $1,500 24 $3,000 0 $0 0 $0 74 $9,250 Technical Editor $110 $0 $0 8 $880 - $0 0 $0 0 $0 8 $880 Project Coordinator (Admin.) $115 40 $4,600 0 $0 $0 - $0 0 $0 0 $0 40 $4,600 Labor Subtotal 469 $94,644 128 $28,598 846 $155,498 650 $125,914 240 $48,448 292 $63,520 2,625 $516,622 Expenses (day rate)
Vehicle Rental $150 3 $450 $0 1 $150 2 $300 1 $150 2 $750 9 $1,800 Field Vehicle $200 $0 11 $2,200 5 $1,000 $0 5 $1,000 21 $4,200 Hotel/Per Diem $250 6 $1,500 $0 27 $6,750 10 $2,500 2 $500 10 $2,500 55 $13,750 Expenses (Lump Sum)
Miscellaneous (Permitting Fees, Sampling Supplies) $0 $20,000 0 $1,250 - $200 $0 $450 $21,900 Travel $5,000 $500 0 $2,000 - $1,500 $1,000 $1,500 $11,500 $6,950 $20,500 $12,350 $5,500 $1,650 $6,200 $53,150
Subcontractors (includes 10% markup)
0 $10,780 $0 $0 $0 $10,780
0 $48,288 $0 $0 $0 $48,288
0 $48,740 - $4,290 $0 $45,848 $98,878
$5,027 0 $10,989 $8,732 $0 $0 $24,748
$15,125 0 $25,548 $94,700 $4,235 $0 $139,608
$20,152 $144,345 $107,722 $4,235 $45,848 $322,301
See Notes on page 2
Labor Billing Category (Billed per Hour) Hourly Rate
Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Task 4 Task 5 Task 6
TOTALS
Project Planning and
Meetings
Permitting and
Regulatory Compliance
Contractor
Procurement
Post-Demolition
Soil Sampling
Data Review, Work Plan
and Pre-Demolition
Assessment Design
Subtotal Subcontractors
GPRS
Health Sciences Associates
Eurofins CalSciences
Yeh and Associates
Cannon Engineering
Subtotal Expenses
Rev 1
Updated Proposal Cost - Tasks 1 - 6
June 17,2025
Units Cost Units Cost Units Cost Units Cost Units Cost Units Cost Units Cost Labor Billing Category (Billed per Hour) Hourly Rate Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Task 4 Task 5 Task 6
TOTALS
Project Planning and
Meetings
Permitting and
Regulatory Compliance
Contractor
Procurement
Post-Demolition
Soil Sampling
Data Review, Work Plan
and Pre-Demolition
Assessment Design
Equipment (includes 5% markup)
Cadd Services/ Design - per hour $11 18.0 $189 16.00 $168 94 $987 58 $609 - $0 14 $147 $2,100 Cell Phone Monthly - per month $84 $0 - $ 1 $84 0.25 $21 $0 0.25 $21 $126 Health & Safety Equipment (PPE) - per day $21 $0 $0 24 $504 8 $168 $0 10 $210 $882 Meter MiniRAE PID - per day $53 $0 $0 25 $1,313 4 $210 $0 5 $263 $1,785 Dust Monitor w/ Data Logging Capability - per day $58 $0 $0 20 $1,155 4 $231 $0 5 $289 $1,675 Oil/Water Interface Meter - per day $63 $0 $0 2 $126 - $0 $0 0 $0 $126 Tools - per day $26 $0 $0 20 $525 4 $105 $0 5 $131 $761 Camera Digital Camera - per day $5 $0 $0 18 $95 4 $21 $0 5 $26 $142 Hammer Drill - per day $84 $0 $0 12 $1,008 - $0 $0 0 $0 $1,008 Decontamination Equipment - per day $11 $0 $0 13 $137 4 $42 $0 5 $53 $231 Meter Hydrogen Sulfide Detector Daily - per day $11 $0 - $ 11 $116 - $0 $0 0 $0 $116 $189 $168 $6,048 $1,407 $0 $1,139 $8,951
PROJECT TOTALS $121,935 $49,266 $318,241 $240,543 $54,333 $116,707 $901,025 $ 901,000
Notes
1. The proposed costs for conducting project tasks are summarized below. The total cost for each task represents our interpretation of the information contained in the Request for Proposal. The proposed cost estimate is subject to modification based upon refinements of scope or schedule desired by the City.
2. The costs presented herein are valid for 90 days from the date of the proposal.
3. Hours are estimated based on the anticipated scope of work as detailed in our written proposal dated March 6, 2025 and as modified on May 19, 2025 (see note 7 below)
4. Changes in scope of work will be budgeted on a time and materials basis using the unit rates presented on this table.
5. A. detail subtask break out table follows this cost table. We have provided cost proposals for our subconsultants following the task break out cost table.
6. Proposal task #7 cost is presented as a separate table.
7. Cost proposal modified based on the following assumptions and scope changes:
8. For the initial investigation and design phases, we are offering our Principal/Project ManagerJerzy Cebula to provide services at a reduced rate of $210/hour. With this modification, we have increased his hours while decreasing other team member hours to provide the City the neccesary services to complete the scope of work and reduce overall project costs. Additional services provided beyond the current scope of work will be invoiced at a rate of $270/hour.
9. Based on the potential for unknown conditions or preliminary sample results indicating additional sampling or refinement, as well as the potential for California Coastal Commission to require additional analysis to allow for in-place abandonment of subsurface structures, we recommend a contingency budget (suggested 10% -15%) be considered) when establishing the overall project budget. a. The engineering services during construction task has been removed from this scope. The level of effort and estimated engineering services during construction will be evaluated and scoped following completion of the design. b. Pre-demolition assessment and design level of effort based on assumption that subsurface structures located moe than 5 feet below grade will be left in place and removal not required c. Level of effort for pre-demolition assessment and design assumes that the City of Morro Bay will provide existing utility drawings in CAD format and no additional utility drawings will be required to support the design. d. Topographic and boundary survey to be performed by the City of Morro Bay's surveyor subconsultant, and survey will include establishing current datum and confirming invert elevations for subsurface utiliies to remain. We have not included e. If required, interior scanning of building interiors can be performed by Anchor QEA's subconsultant. We have not included costs for interior building scans. f. Costs for preparig a Soil Investigation Work Plan based on the results of the predemolition assessment have been added to task 3. f. Costs for implementing the Soil Investigation Work Plan have been included in Task 4 (soil sampling based on potential PCB bulk product waste) and Task 6 (post demolition soil sampling).
Total Not to Exceed Cost
Subtotal Equipment
Rev 1
01181.0001/813182.1 D-1
EXHIBIT D
SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
I. Consultant shall perform all services and deliver all work products timely in accordance with the schedule described in Consultant’s Proposal attached in Exhibit A.
Prepared By: __CC__ Dept Review: GK
City Manager Review: _YK_____ City Attorney Review: ___RWS__ Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: June 16, 2025 FROM: Cindy Cecil, SE, CE – City Engineer
SUBJECT: Adoption of Resolution No. 36-25 Directing the Levy of the Annual Assessment for the Cloisters Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Conduct the public hearing and approve the levy of the annual assessment for the Cloisters Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District (LLMAD) by adopting Resolution No. 36-25.
ALTERNATIVE
Not adopt Resolution No. 36-25 and provide alternative, specific directions for staff.
FISCAL IMPACT
By adopting Resolution No. 36-25, $148,944 will be collected through an assessment of all benefiting parcel owners in the Cloisters subdivision for the Cloisters LLMAD for the maintenance of the Cloisters Park and Open Space.
SUMMARY
At the May 13, 2025, City Council meeting, Council adopted Resolution No. 26-25 approving the Engineer’s Report describing the annual maintenance to be completed at the Cloisters Park and Open Space and declaring the City’s intent to levy an annual assessment to finance this maintenance. The assessment, projected at $1,241.20 per assessable lot in the Cloisters subdivision for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025/26, will be collected by the County Assessor’s Office.
The true costs of maintaining Cloisters Park, Open Space, trails, as well as the medians and parkways within the district, far exceed the revenue received in the assessment amount. All maintenance costs in excess of the district’s available revenues will continue to be subsidized by the General Fund per City Council direction on May 24, 2004, which has been subsequently incorporated into annual budget adoption resolutions since as detailed in the May 13, 2025, City Council Staff Report. As part of the assessment process, the City ordered the preparation of an Engineer’s Report, approved May 13, 2025, adopted a resolution of intention to levy an assessment, and set June 24, 2025, as the public hearing date on the proposed levy of assessment. The required noticing was published in the local newspaper per State requirements. The Council must hold a public hearing before considering continuing the levy of the annual assessment.
AGENDA NO: 8.a
MEETING DATE: June 24, 2025
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
Cloisters LLMAD was formed with the development of Tract 1996 in the Fall of 1996, just prior to the passage of Proposition 218. In 2004, a court determined, due to a lawsuit filed by three Cloisters residents, there are many special benefits associated with the Cloisters LLMAD. The Cloisters’ lots directly benefit from the Cloisters open space and close proximity of the public park, bicycle pathway, right of way landscaping, Environmentally Sensitive Habitat restoration areas and coastal access.
There was also created and reserved in favor of each owner in the Cloisters development, easements for view, open space, scenic, passive recreation and coastal access across the entirety of Lots 121, 122 and 123, which shall not be developed with any improvements or structures, unless necessary and proper for the restoration and maintenance of the Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area. That court determined further special benefits include: improved aesthetic appeal of nearby parcels, improved dust control, enhanced adaptation of the urban environment within the natural environment, improved erosion resistance, improved drainage and flood control, enhanced crime deterrence and aid to police protection, increased nighttime safety on roads and highways, improved visibility for pedestrians and motorists, improved ingress and egress to property, reduced vandalism and other criminal acts and damage to improvements or property, improved traffic circulation, reduced nighttime accidents, and special enhancement to property value resulting from the above benefits.
The court also determined the City does not need to, nor is it required to, prepare an annual redetermination of the separation of special and general benefits. The court specially held:
“When the special assessment district was formed the owner of all of the parcels consented to its formation. Moreover, the owner did not object to the amount of the assessment, which the City based upon the cost of the special benefits being conferred on the properties within the assessment district, nor to the specific amount allocated to each parcel as its proportionate share. Because express consent to the amount and allocation of the assessment was given by petitioners' predecessor, and petitioner's purchased their properties with actual or constructive knowledge of the amount of the assessment, it is too late for them now to withdraw the consent and attack the amount of the assessment.”
Up until 2015, this required public hearing was advertised as a “protest hearing,” where those in the assessment district could file protests to the continuation. State law does not require a protest hearing so long as there are no increases in the assessment. Currently, there are no proposed increases to the assessment amount.
Staff continues to recognize the importance of proper maintenance of the Cloisters Park and Open Space, which are outlined in the Engineer’s Report, but occasionally the level of maintenance does not meet the expectations of some residents. Due to funding limitations, resources required for District maintenance are utilized as efficiently as possible. The increase in the cost of goods and services now precludes a fund surplus for carryover to be set aside for capital projects. The fund surplus reserved for capital and larger maintenance projects is detailed in the Engineer’s Report approved by City Council on May 13, 2025. Once the remaining surplus funds are exhausted, the City will propose capital improvements through the normal budget process with the use of General Funds, Measure Q & E Funds, or other sources such as grant funding.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends continuation of the assessment of the property owners within the Cloisters LLMAD to fund the City’s maintenance of the Cloisters Park and Open Space with supplemental funding coming from the general fund.
ATTACHMENT
1. Resolution No. 36-25
RESOLUTION NO. 36-25
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF MORRO BAY, CALIFORNIA
DIRECTING THE LEVY OF THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT
FOR THE CLOISTERS LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING
MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT PURSUANT TO THE
“LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972”
(STREETS AND HIGHWAYS SECTIONS 22500 ET. SEQ.)
THE CITY COUNCIL
City of Morro Bay, California
WHEREAS, on May 13, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 26-25 declaring the Council’s intent to levy an assessment for the annual maintenance of the Cloisters Park and Open Space within the Cloisters Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District (the “District”) and approving the Engineers Report; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing for the levy of the annual assessment of the District was scheduled for June 24, 2024, at or about 5:30 p.m., in a hybrid format with opportunities for public comment both an in-person meeting at the Morro Bay Veterans Memorial Building, 209 Surf Street, Morro Bay, CA 93442 as well as through virtual public participation; and WHEREAS, notices regarding the proposed assessment listing the date, time, and location of the public hearing were published in the local newspaper; and WHEREAS, the City Council did take public testimony from all interested parties as to the levy of the annual assessment for the District on June 24, 2025, at the Morro Bay Veterans Memorial Building, 209 Surf Street, Morro Bay, CA 93442.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Morro Bay:
1. The annual levy for the maintenance of the District, generally located as shown on Exhibit “A” attached hereto, is hereby ordered and the assessment of $148,944 to be equally distributed per assessable parcel for the Fiscal Year 2025/26 is hereby confirmed.
2. Adoption of this Resolution shall constitute the levy of an assessment for the Fiscal Year 2025/26 and the City Clerk shall file the diagram and assessment with the County of San Luis Obispo Auditor.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Morro Bay at a regular meeting thereof held this 24
th day of June 2025 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSED:
_______________________________
CARLA WIXOM, MAYOR
ATTEST:
________________________________
DANA SWANSON, CITY CLERK
Exhibit “A”
CLOISTERS
LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING
MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
DISTRICT BOUNDARY DIAGRAMS
The boundary diagrams for the District have previously been submitted to the City Clerk in the format required under the 1972 Act and, by reference, are hereby made part of this Report. The boundary diagrams are available for inspection at the office of the City Clerk during normal business hours. The following diagram provides an overview of the District.
Prepared By: CC_____ Dept Review: GK
City Manager Review: _YK_____ City Attorney Review: _RWS____ Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: June 16, 2025 FROM: Cindy Cecil, PE – City Engineer
SUBJECT: Adoption of Resolution No. 37-25 Directing the Levy of the Annual Assessment for the North Point Natural Area Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Conduct the public hearing and approve the levy of the annual assessment for the North Point Natural Area Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District (LLMAD) by adopting Resolution No. 37-25.
ALTERNATIVES
Not adopt Resolution No. 37-25 and provide alternative, specific directions for staff.
FISCAL IMPACT
By adopting Resolution No. 37-25, $5,645 will be collected through an assessment of all parcel owners in the North Point subdivision for the maintenance of the North Point LLMAD and Natural Area.
SUMMARY
At the May 13, 2025, City Council meeting, the Council adopted Resolution No. 27-25 approving the Engineer’s Report describing the annual maintenance to be completed at the North Point Natural Area and declaring the City’s intent to levy an annual assessment to partially finance the maintenance covered by the district. The assessment of the North Point subdivision is $5,645 or $564.50 per parcel for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025/26 and will be collected by the County Assessor’s Office.
The approved Engineer’s Report detailed that the costs for maintenance of the North Point Natural Area exceed the revenue received in the assessment amount. Costs not covered by the North Point assessments are covered by the City’s General Fund. As part of the assessment process, the City ordered the preparation of an Engineer’s Report, approved May 13, 2025, adopted a resolution of intention to levy an assessment, and set June 24, 2025 as the public hearing date on the proposed levy of assessment. The required noticing was published in the local newspaper per State requirements. The Council must hold a public hearing before considering continuing the levy of the annual assessment.
AGENDA NO: 8.b
MEETING DATE: June 24, 2025
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends continuation of the annual assessment of the property owners within the North Point Natural Area LLMAD, for maintenance needs, by adopting Resolution No. 37-25.
ATTACHMENT
1. Resolution No. 37-25
RESOLUTION NO. 37-25
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF MORRO BAY, CALIFORNIA
DIRECTING THE LEVY OF THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE NORTH POINT
NATURAL AREA LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT PURSUANT TO THE
“LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972”
(STREETS AND HIGHWAYS SECTIONS 22500 ET. SEQ.)
THE CITY COUNCIL
City of Morro Bay, California
WHEREAS, on May 13, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 27-25 declaring the Council’s intent to levy an assessment for the annual maintenance of the North Point Natural Area Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District (the “District”) and approving the Engineers Report; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing regarding the levy of the annual assessment of the District was scheduled for June 24, 2025 at or about 5:30 p.m., in a hybrid format with opportunities for public comment both an in-person meeting at the Morro Bay Veterans Memorial Building, 209 Surf Street, Morro Bay, CA 93442 as well as through virtual public participation; and WHEREAS, notices regarding the continuation of the proposed assessment listing the date, time and location of the hearing were published in the local newspaper; and WHEREAS, the City Council did take public testimony from all interested parties as to the levy of the annual assessment for the District on June 24, 2025, at the Morro Bay Veterans Memorial Building, 209 Surf Street, Morro Bay, CA 93442.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Morro Bay:
1. The annual levy for the maintenance of the District generally located as shown on Exhibit “A,” attached hereto, is hereby ordered and the assessment of $5,645 to be equally distributed per assessable parcel for the Fiscal Year 2025/26 is hereby confirmed.
2. Adoption of this Resolution shall constitute the levy of an assessment for the Fiscal Year 2024/25 and the City Clerk shall file the diagram and assessment with the County of San Luis Obispo Auditor.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Morro Bay at a regular meeting held this 24
th day of June, 2025 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSED:
______________________________
CARLA WIXOM, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
DANA SWANSON, City Clerk
Prepared By: ________EC ___ Dept Review: ______
City Manager Review: __YK______ City Attorney Review: ______ Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: June 16, 2025 FROM: Yvonne Kimball, City Manager
Emily Conrad, Finance Director
SUBJECT: Resolutions Approving Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-26 Operating and Capital Budgets; New Job Classifications; FY 2025-26 and FY 2026-27 Salary Schedules; FY 2025- 26 and FY 2026-27 Management Salary and Benefits; Investment Policy; and FY 2025-26 GANN Appropriations Limit
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Staff recommends the City Council:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 38-25 adopting the (FY) 2025-26 Operating and Capital Budgets; and
2. Adopt Resolution No. 39-25 approving Utilities Project Manager, Collections and Pretreatment Operator, and Water Resources Compliance Specialist Classifications and Job Descriptions; and
3. Adopt Resolution No. 40-25 approving the FY 2024-25, FY 2025-26, and FY 2026-27 Salary Schedules; and
4. Adopt Resolution No. 41-25 approving the Compensation and Benefits for the Unrepresented Management Designated Employees for 2024-25 through 2026-27; and
5. Adopt Resolution No. 42-25 readopting the City’s Investment Policy; and
6. Adopt Resolution No. 43-25 setting the FY 2025-26 GANN Appropriations Limit at $37,744,894.
FISCAL IMPACT
The total Citywide revenue budget for FY 2025-26 is $48.3 million (net of transfers), a decrease of 8% over prior year, and the citywide expenditure budget for FY 2025-26 is $53.4 million (net of transfers), a 12% decrease over the prior year’s adopted budget. The decrease in revenue is largely attributable to the substantial completion of the water treatment facility construction and lack of mutual aid reimbursement budgeted, which will be recognized at midyear based on actual reimbursement expected. Due to concerted efforts by City staff, expenditure budgets decreased in all major objects except Personnel which increased 3.5%. Supplies, Other Expenses, Services, Capital Outlay, and Debt Service all decreased. Expenditures in excess of revenue will be covered by available fund balance to be used for one-time capital projects.
AGENDA NO: 9.a
MEETING DATE: June 24, 2025
BACKGROUND
On May 20, 2025, the Citizens Finance Advisory Committee (CFAC) reviewed the Proposed Budget, including the Measure Q/E Fund Budget and provided input for Council consideration. The City Council conducted a budget study session on May 28, 2025. During the discussion, the Council reviewed the City’s Operating and Capital Budget and provided feedback.
DISCUSSION
Budget Changes: City Council made no changes to the FY 2025-26 Proposed Budget as presented during the budget study session on May 28, 2025.
Due to the timing of FY 2025-26 Proposed Budget publication deadlines and the City Council approval of the Chamber of Commerce contract for Economic Development services, the proposed budget included an estimated contract amount higher than that ultimately approved by City Council.
The only change to budgeted amounts is the updating of the contract amount to the amount approved by City Council.
$65,000 Decrease to budget for the contract with the Chamber of Commerce from $90,000 to $25,000 in the Economic Development Fund (Non-Major Special Revenue Fund 907) The impact of the decrease of $65,000 can be seen in the total citywide expenditure budget, citywide operating expenditure budget, Fund Balances Summary, Economic Development Fund Summary, and City Manager department budget which includes management of the Economic Development Fund (Non-Major Special Revenue Fund 907). See attached Exhibit 1 to Resolution No. 38-25 (Attachment 1) with references to the digital budget book sections and page numbers for the printed budget book.
Proposed Revised Proposed Increase / (Decrease)
Citywide Expenditure Budget $68,953,480 $68,888,480 $(65,000) Citywide Operating Budget $55,135,527 $55,070,527 $(65,000) Economic Development Fund
Expenditure Budget
$188,640 $123,640 $(65,000)
Economic Development Fund
Projected Ending Fund
Balance at 6/30/2026*
$647,291 $830,210 $182,919
*Change due to refined Estimated Fund Balance at 6/30/2025 plus reduced FY2025-26 expenditures by $65,000
Other non-monetary changes to the Proposed Budget that the Council reviewed on May 28, 2025 that are included in the Revised Proposed version dated June 24, 2025 are detailed below. Introduction Section:
o Updated City Manager Transmittal
o Updated City History and Community Profile
o Corrected Citywide Organization Chart (Harbor Vitality Director title correction) Budget Overview Section:
o Updated Executive Overview
o Updated Priorities & Issues
o Updated Fund Balances Summary
o Typo corrections to fund names and numbers in Transfers tables o Replaced attachment of Measure Q/E Ten-Year Forecast and General Fund-Measure Q/E Combined Ten-Year Forecast to correct years of contribution from six to five years (removed funding in FY 2030-31) for PD Radio Communications Upgrade capital improvement project
o Inserted Ten-Year Forecasts for Harbor Operating Fund, Water Operating Fund, Sewer Operating Fund that were not yet completed at the time of Proposed Budget publication
Departments Section:
o Updated City Manager department page narrative
o Updated Community Development Department revenue narrative to explain the revenue is budgeted correctly but understated in the table due to technical difficulties o Corrected Harbor Department organizational chart
o Corrected Police Department organizational chart and FTE chart o Corrected Public Works organization chart
Capital Improvements Section:
o Added a downloadable memo to the PD Radio Communications Upgrades capital project to provide additional background and description of project The FY 2025-26 operating budget represents a structurally balanced budget with robust reserve levels which will be relied upon in the coming years absent a change in current revenue trends. In the General Fund, ongoing revenues are approximately $20.2 million. Ongoing General Fund expenditures (net of one-time transfers and capital expenditures) are approximately $19.2 million.
This results in a projected operating surplus of $52,264. With fee update studies underway for user fees and development impact fees, actual revenues are expected to be realized beyond what is budgeted, though the increase is difficult to project as it is largely dependent on volume of service provided to the community.
The City’s reserves in FY 2025-26 will protect the City's ability to continue to deliver core services in the event of an emergency, such as a natural disaster or significant fiscal distress. This budget projects that the City will have a total of over $15 million in reserves at the conclusion of the budget year, which equates to approximately 39% of the Citywide operating budget in FY 2025-26 (net of transfers).
Salary Schedule and New Classifications:
The FY 2025-26 Proposed Operating and Capital Budget included the addition of a new Utilities Project Manager position, funded through the Water and Sewer Funds. The job description for this position is provided in attachment 2, and the updated pay schedules are included in attachment 3.
In addition to this new position, staff recommend two cost-neutral classification changes:
1. Utility Operator to Collections and Pretreatment Operator Staff recommends reclassifying an existing Utility Operator to Collections and Pretreatment
Operator to more accurately reflect the incumbent’s current responsibilities. This change does not affect the hourly rate or pay range; it is strictly a title and duty alignment to reflect the specialized nature of the role. (Attachment 3)
2. Lead Utility Operator to Water Resources Compliance Specialist Staff proposes replacing one vacant Lead Utility Operator position with a new Water Resources Compliance Specialist classification. This position is currently vacant and the proposed change aims to improve operational efficiency and better meet the division’s needs.
No changes are proposed to the hourly rate or pay range. (Attachment 3) These revised classifications and job titles are aligned with the work being performed and the operational needs of the Utilities Division.
The addition of these position classifications requires updates to the existing salary schedules and the Compensation and Benefits for Unrepresented Management Designated Employees.
This report includes three resolutions: Resolution No. 39-25 (Attachment 2) to adopt the new job classifications and amended job descriptions, Resolution 40-25 (Attachment 3) to adopt the updated salary schedules, and Resolution 41-25 (Attachment 4) to adopt the updated Compensation and Benefits for the Unrepresented Management Designated Employees.
Fiscal Policies: In preparing this budget, staff took its primary direction from the guidelines established in the City of Morro Bay Fiscal Policies. There are several key fiscal policies that rise to the level of Council review and approval standards and are reviewed regularly by City Council. These policies are referenced and summarized in the City’s Budget document and posted in full on the City’s website. This report includes a resolution (Resolution No. 42-25) for Council to readopt the City’s Investment Policy as is required annually by State law (Attachment 5). There are no updates to the policy as the changes at state level do not impact the existing policy. The updated policy is included in Attachment 5a.
Fiscal policies that City Council has reviewed recently but do not require changes at this time include the following, which were last reviewed and updated with the Council resolutions noted: Fund Balance Reserve Policies (Resolution No. 37-22), Revenue and Expenditure Policy (Resolution Nos. 52-21 and 53-21), Debt Management Policy (Resolution No. 43-18), Short-Term Fiscal Emergency Plan (Resolution No. 97-18), Long-Term Financial Planning Policy (Resolution No. 09-19), Financial Policies Related to Capital Assets (Resolution No. 59-19), and Donations and Grant Management Polices (Resolution No. 61-19). These policies are available in full on the City's website.
GANN Limit: State law requires the adoption of an annual appropriations limit, which restricts the growth of tax-funded programs and services by limiting the appropriation of proceeds of taxes. For FY 2025-26, the City of Morro Bay remains over 51% under its appropriations limit. Proposition 4, known as the Gann Initiative, was approved by the California electorate in 1979. It is intended to restrict the growth of tax-funded programs and services by limiting the appropriation of the proceeds of taxes to the 1978-79 base year limit, as adjusted annually for changes in population and inflation. Proceeds of taxes in excess of the appropriations limit, with some exceptions, must be returned to the taxpayers by refund or reduction in tax rates unless an extension of the limit is approved by a majority popular vote. Proceeds of taxes include tax revenues and investment earnings related to those tax revenues, proceeds from licenses and users/charges to the extent that they exceed the cost to cover those services, and discretionary tax funds used for contingency, emergency, unemployment, reserve and retirement sinking funds, trust, or similar funds.
In June 1990, California voters approved Proposition 111, amending the Gann Initiative to provide local agencies with the option of using either the city or county population change percentage (whichever is greater). Another provision of the amendment states that the Gann limit would be triggered only if tax proceeds exceed the limit for two consecutive fiscal years. Additionally, the proposition requires an annual review of the appropriations limit calculation by a qualified independent auditor in conjunction with the annual financial audit.
The City is calculating this limit using the City of Morro Bay population change and the California Per Capita Personal Income, referred to as the Price Factor (explained in exhibits to Attachment 6).
According to the California Department of Finance, the population of the City of Morro Bay did not change between January 1, 2024, and January 1, 2025. The Per Capita Cost of Living increased by
6.44 percent. Applying these factors results in the following:
2025-26 Population and Per Capita Cost of Living Change Calculation:
Per Capita Cost of Living Change = 6.44 percent
Population Change = 0.00 percent
Per Capita Cost of Living converted to a ratio: (6.44 + 100) divided by 100 = 1.0644 Population converted to a ratio: ( 0.00 + 100)/100 = 1.0 Calculation Factor for FY 2025-26: 1.0644 x 1.0 = 1.0644 Prior year limit $35,461,193
Calculation Factor per DOF guidance x 1.0644
Equals Appropriation Limit = $37,744,894
The FY 2025-26 budget estimate of revenues from the proceeds of taxes is $18,322,126, which is well below the appropriations limit (by $19,422,768 or 51.46%). Thus, the City’s finances are not impacted by the appropriation limit. The calculation of estimated proceeds of taxes for FY 2025-26 is shown in detail in Exhibit 1 of Resolution No. 43-25. The calculation of FY 2025-26 Appropriations Limit is shown in Exhibit 2 of Resolution No. 43-25, along with a historical listing of prior year limits. Exhibit 3 of Resolution No. 43-25 is a copy of the California Department of Finance's change in population estimates between January 1, 2024 and January 1, 2025 and the California Department of Finance's published price factor.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends adopting Resolution No. 38-25, which adopts the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Operating and Capital Budget, including the changes presented as an exhibit to the resolution. Staff also recommends approval of Resolution Nos. 39-25, 40-25, 41-25, 42-25, and 43-25 associated with new job classifications, the FY 2024-25, FY 2025-26, and FY 2026-27 Salary Schedules, approval of Compensation and Benefits for the Unrepresented Management Designated Employees FY 2024- 25 through FY 2026-27, readopted investment policy, and the GANN appropriations limit.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution No. 38-25 Adopting the FY 2025-26 Operating and Capital Budget as amended by changes contained in Exhibit 1.
a. Exhibit 1 – Changes since May 28, 2025 Budget Study Session (Errata)
b. Exhibit 2 – Link to the Final Budget for FY 2025-26
i. Both the Digital Budget Book and the printable PDF version are available on the City’s website at https://www.morrobayca.gov/827/Budget.
2. Resolution No. 39-25 Adopting Utilities Project Manager Job Classification, Collections and Pretreatment Operator Job Classification, and Water Resources Compliance Specialist Job Classification
a. Exhibit 1 – Utilities Project Manager Job Description b. Exhibit 2 – Collections and Pretreatment Operator Job Description c. Exhibit 3 – Water Resources Compliance Specialist Job Description
3. Resolution No. 40-25 Adopting FY2024-25, FY2025-26, and FY2026-27 Salary Schedules a. Exhibit 1 – 2024-25 Salary Schedule
b. Exhibit 2 – 2025-26 Salary Schedule
c. Exhibit 3 – 2026-27 Salary Schedule
4. Resolution No. 41-25 Adopting Compensation and Benefits for the Unrepresented Management Designated Employees for 2024-25 through 2026-27 a. Exhibit 1 – Compensation and Benefits for the Unrepresented Management Designated Employees for 2024-25 through 2026-27
5. Resolution No. 42-25 Readopting the Investment Policy a. Exhibit 1 – 2025 Investment Policy
6. Resolution No. 43-25 Adopting the GANN Appropriations Limit for FY 2025-26 a. Exhibit 1 – 2025-26 Calculation of Estimated Proceeds of Taxes b. Exhibit 2 – 2025-26 Calculation of Appropriations Limit c. Exhibit 3 – 2025-26 California Department of Finance Price Factor and Population Estimates
7. Staff Presentation
RESOLUTION NO. 38-25
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF MORRO BAY, CALIFORNIA,
ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET
T H E C I T Y C O U N C I L
City of Morro Bay, California
WHEREAS, the City of Morro Bay is required to appropriate and expend funds, to conduct the day-to-day business activity of the City; and
WHEREAS, the Morro Bay City Council finds and determines those appropriations and expenditures are necessary for continued efficiency, economy, and effectiveness of the City government operations; and
WHEREAS, the continuing efforts of staff to operate the business of the City, within an approved budget, and to create savings, wherever feasible, are acknowledged by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the Proposed Budget on May 28, 2025 and provided input, and there are no subsequent changes to the proposed budget since the May 28, 2025 Budget Study Sessions; and
WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that Capital Improvement Projects and one-time expenditures of the General Fund Vehicle Replacement funds that were authorized and approved in the current and prior fiscal years, may not be completed by June 30, 2025; and WHEREAS, the total Proposed Citywide revenue budget for FY 2025-26 is $48.3 million and the proposed citywide expenditure budget for FY 2025-26 is $53.4 million (net of transfers); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Morro Bay, California:
1. The Fiscal Year 2025-26 Operating and Capital Budget, attached hereto as Exhibit 2, at https://www.morrobayca.gov/827/Budget, and incorporated herein by reference, including the administrative corrections outlined in Exhibit 1 hereto and any amendments made during the City Council meeting dated June 24, 2025, are adopted and incorporated herein by reference; and
2. Staff is directed to incorporate the administrative corrections outlined in Exhibit 1 hereto and any amendments made during the City Council meeting dated June 24, 2025 and to prepare and publish a final adopted budget document, with approved amendments; and
3. Subject to paragraph 4, below, the City Manager is authorized to transfer appropriations within the adopted budget, including from and to capital projects or capital outlay items, so long as those changes do not significantly and negatively prevent implementation of any City Council direction or policy, and total appropriations are not exceeded; and
4. City Council approval is required to transfer appropriations between funds and may approve amendments to adopted budget by adoption of one or more resolutions; and
5. Notwithstanding paragraph 4 above, the City Council authorizes and directs staff to complete any necessary year-end reconciliation of allocations to and from compensated
absences reserves in accordance with the City of Morro Bay Reserve Policy, established by City Council via Resolution 37-22; and
6. City Council authorizes and directs the carry forward of unspent budget balances for capital projects, and General Fund Vehicle Replacement funds approved in the current and prior fiscal years, but not completed by June 30, 2025, to the Capital Improvement Project budgets, and GF Vehicle Replacement Fund budgets for the FY 2025-26 fiscal year; and
7. City Council approval is required for any proposed increase to the number of CalPERS benefited, budgeted positions, hired; and
8. Per City Council minute order May 24, 2004, any expenditures, in excess of the assessments received for the Cloister Assessment District, will be subsidized by the General Fund, without additional request made to the City Council; and PASSED AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Morro Bay, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 24
th day of June 2025, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSED:
______________________________________
CARLA WIXOM, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
DANA SWANSON, City Clerk
Budget Section Description Fund Department Account Department Original
Proposed
Budget
Increase/
(Decrecase)
Revised
Proposed
Budget
-
-
-
Total Revenues/Transfers In - - -
Total Revenue Change Net of Transfers -
Expenditures/Transfers Out
Budget Section Subsection(s)
PDF Starting
Page # Description Fund Department Account Department
Original
Proposed
Budget
Increase/
(Decrecase)
Revised
Proposed
Budget
Budget Overview Fund Balances
Summary 52
Fund Summaries Citywide Budget
Summary
74 Fund Summaries Citywide Operating
Budget Summary 85
Fund Summaries Economic
Development Fund 164
Departments City Manager's
Office 200
Total Expenditures/Transfers Out 90,000 (65,000) 25,000 Total Expenditure Change Net of Transfers (65,000)
Revenues/Transfers In
Chamber of
Commerce
Contract for
Services
907 - Economic
Dev Fund
7410 -
PG&E
Diablo
Closure
8721 -
Payment to
Other Agency
90,000 (65,000) 25,000 City Manager
Cluster
Exhibit 1. Changes to the Proposed Budget since the May 28, 2025 Budget Study Session
RESOLUTION NO. 39-25
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF MORRO BAY, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING NEW JOB CLASSIFICATIONS
T H E C I T Y C O U N C I L
City of Morro Bay, California
WHEREAS, the Council desires to approve new “Collections and Pretreatment Operator” and “Water Resources Compliance Specialist” job classifications, set compensation ranges for the classifications, and adopt job descriptions for the classifications; and WHEREAS, the City and Service Employees International Union Local 620 (SEIU Local 620) met and conferred regarding the addition of the above-referenced classifications to the City’s Miscellaneous Employees Unit and regarding compensation and job descriptions for these classifications; and
WHEREAS, the Council desires to approve new “Utilities Project Manager” job classification, set compensation range for the classification, and adopt a job description for the unrepresented Management classification.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Morro Bay does hereby attest:
1. The represented full-time classification of “Collections and Pretreatment Operator” is hereby created. The classification will be included within the City’s Miscellaneous Employees Unit, which is represented by the Service Employees International Union, Local 620 (SEIU Local 620). The job description for this new classification, attached hereto, is hereby adopted. The initial hourly compensation for the Collections and Pretreatment Operator classification shall be as follows:
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5
34.51 36.24 38.05 39.94 41.95
2. The represented full-time classification of “Water Resources Compliance Specialist” is hereby created. The classification will be included within the City’s Miscellaneous Employees Unit, which is represented by the Service Employees International Union, Local 620 (SEIU Local 620). The job description for this new classification, attached hereto, is hereby adopted. The initial hourly compensation for the Water Resources Compliance Specialist classification shall be as follows:
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5
41.13 43.19 45.34 47.61 49.99
3. The unrepresented full-time classification of “Utilities Project Manager” is hereby created.
The classification will be included within the City’s Unrepresented Management Employee Group.
The job description for this new classification, attached hereto, is hereby adopted. The initial annual compensation for the Utilities Project Manager classification shall be as follows:
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5
115,544 121,347 127,400 133,765 140,442
///
///
4. This resolution shall be effective as of the date of its adoption PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Morro Bay at a regular meeting thereof held on the 24th day of June 2025 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSED:
______________________________
CARLA WIXOM, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
DANA SWANSON, City Clerk
UTILITIES PROJECT MANAGER
DEFINITION
Under general direction of the City Engineer, plans, coordinates, inspects, and implements capital and maintenance projects; oversees and may conduct reviews for compliance of public works codes and regulations related to utilities for private development projects; consults with technical staff on priorities and schedules; establishes and maintains liaison with consultants, contractors, participants, citizens, developers, and other stakeholders; and performs related work as assigned.
ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Serves as project/construction manager and/or oversees the planning, design, and construction/repair of various utilities capital and maintenance projects, including general construction and tenant improvements, water, and wastewater.
Assists in the development of and updates to the City's utilities related infrastructure programs and assessments.
Develops project budget estimates and schedules; reviews plans, specifications, and estimates for construction.
Hires, manages, and coordinates professional consultant contracts, including development of requests for qualifications (RFQ) and requests for proposal (RFP). Negotiates, recommends for award, and oversees execution of professional service contracts.
Develops bid packages and awards construction contracts; negotiates change orders; takes all appropriate actions and identifies and utilizes all available resources to ensure that construction work is performed on schedule and in accordance with specifications.
Identifies, investigates, and resolves project-related problems to keep all construction activities on track and moving forward.
Inspects construction of utilities projects for adherence by contractors to specifications, drawings, codes, and contractual terms. Develops and maintains paper and electronic files of departmental data, maps, and charts.
Conducts plan checks.
Collaborates with staff from various City departments, outside agencies, and the public on project coordination matters and approvals, as well as in resolving technical issues.
Coordinates with consultants, contractors, finance professionals, operations and maintenance personnel, and administrative personnel in the design development and delivery of the project.
Assigns work to administrative and non-management employees. Applies for grants funding and administers grant funding appropriated on projects; prepares required local, state, and federal reports for various construction projects, and other reports, memos, and correspondence related to contract compliance.
Reviews daily inspection reports; prepares periodic reports on the progress of all contracts; compiles and maintains records on project status and contractor performance; performs inspections in the field on special and more complex inspection assignments; conducts final review of all projects.
Establishes and tracks project objectives, budgets, and schedules consistent with departmental plans and policies.
Prepares and presents reports to City Council, advisory boards, commissions, and committees.
Represents the department at various public meetings; prepares and conveys presentations to build consensus and secure public support; maintains effective community participation on assigned projects. Addresses complaints and questions received from the public. Performs other duties as assigned.
QUALIFICATIONS:
Knowledge of:
Municipal resource planning, infrastructure, and administration; regulations, methods, tools, and equipment used in the improvement, operations and maintenance of water, wastewater, streets, and storm drainage.
Laws, codes, policies, and safety orders applicable to said systems. Principles of utilities construction and project management and administration, including budgeting and project management tools and software.
Consultant and contractor supervision and coordination. General information on water rights.
Funding mechanisms including, but not limited to, grant application procedures and assessment districts.
Principles of construction inspection.
Engineering plans and specifications.
City, state, and federal procurement policies and regulations. Effective written and oral communication techniques.
Ability to:
Communicate effectively both orally and in writing, with employees, consultants, other government agency representatives, City officials, and the general public.
Conduct necessary engineering research and compile comprehensive reports.
Education & Experience:
Bachelor's degree in engineering, construction management, or a closely related field; and
Minimum four years of progressively responsible experience in utilities capital project and construction management, engineering, general contracting.
Licenses and Certificates:
When driving is an essential function of the position, a valid California driver’s license will be required at the time of appointment and must be maintained throughout employment.
The Fine Print
The job description does not constitute an employment agreement between the employer and employee and is subject to change as the employer's needs and job requirements change.
The duties listed above are intended only as illustrations of the various types of work that may be performed. The omission of specific statements of duties does not exclude them from the position if the work is similar, related or a logical assignment to the position.
TOOLS & EQUIPMENT USED
Personal computer, including word processing and other software, mobile radio, telephone, copy and fax machine.
PHYSICAL DEMANDS
The physical demands described here are representative of those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions.
Work is performed mostly in office settings. Some outdoor work is required in the inspection of various land use developments, construction sites, or public works facilities. Hand-eye coordination is necessary to operate computers and various pieces of office equipment.
While performing the duties of this job, the employee is occasionally required to stand; walk; use hands to finger, handle, feel or operate objects, tools, or controls; and reach with hands and arms. The employee is occasionally required to site; climb or balance; stoop, kneel, crouch, or crawl; talk or hear; and smell.
WORK ENVIRONMENT
The work environment characteristics described here are representative of those an employee encounters while performing the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions.
While performing the duties of this job, the employee occasionally works in outside weather conditions.
The employee occasionally works near moving mechanical parts and in high, precarious places and is occasionally exposed to wet and/or humid conditions, fumes or airborne particles, toxic or caustic chemicals, risk of electrical shock, and vibration.
The noise level in the work environment is usually quiet to moderate.
Approved by the Morro Bay City Council on June 24, 2025.
COLLECTIONS AND PRETREATMENT OPERATOR
DEFINITION
Under general supervision, technical and operational tasks are performed related to the City’s wastewater collection system and industrial waste pretreatment program. Duties include operating and maintaining equipment, performing inspections, collecting samples, conducting public education, ensuring compliance with environmental regulations, and assisting with preventive maintenance and repairs.
Ensures compliance with the City’s Pretreatment Industrial Waste Program; takes periodic samples and performs standardized tests pursuant to federal regulations and state and federal water quality requirements. Inspects public and private facilities, public education and outreach, spill reporting, enforcement, and or legal settlement of violations of the Morro Bay Municipal Code, state, and federal environmental regulations; related work as required.
CLASS CHARACTERISTICS
This is a journey-level classification responsible for supporting wastewater collection and industrial waste pretreatment activities. Positions at this level perform tasks independently under established guidelines and are expected to apply knowledge and skills to ensure compliance with federal, state, and local regulations. Responsibilities include conducting inspections, collecting samples, maintaining records, and performing routine maintenance and operational duties.
The utility operations series performs the full range of duties required to ensure that the wastewater treatment and their associated collection and distribution facilities operate effectively and are maintained in a safe and effective working condition. Persons in this position are required to have a working knowledge appropriate to their certification level of the City’s utilities. Responsibilities include performing standardized laboratory testing, operations of equipment, and performing a wide variety of tasks including preventative maintenance and repair of the facilities and systems.
Advancement in this class through the five steps are accomplished by:
Years of experience
Demonstration of knowledge and skill
Advanced licenses, and certifications
ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Assists in the administration of the City’s pretreatment program, which includes industrial waste permitting and enforcement, the Fats, Oils, and Grease (FOG) program, wastewater source control, flow monitoring, and salt and nutrient management efforts.
Conducts site visits to permitted local industries to inspect, observe, and sample discharges to the City’s sewer system and ensures compliance with regulations.
Follows up on pretreatment inspections and audits with necessary documentation, correspondence, and enforcement.
Identifies and reports discharge violations and takes appropriate compliance action against code violators to ensure corrections; issues notices of violation as necessary.
Conducts inspections of food service establishments to confirm compliance with City’s FOG program.
Performs special studies requiring technical expertise in wastewater discharges such as changes to local limits, sewer flow monitoring, chemical mass balance analysis, and the effects of discharge on the sewer and treatment system.
Monitors plant operations equipment and processes to ensure compliance with environmental and public health standards, including monitoring and adjusting to optimize efficiency, making chemical dosage changes, changing pumping rates, and monitoring all equipment.
Operates valves, pumps, and automated controls to regulate the flow of wastewater through the system.
Reviews and analyzes automated information and control system data and revises equipment settings as appropriate; notifies supervisor of unusual situations and makes inspections or corrects system problems as necessary.
Reads, records, and calculates readings of meters and gauges; interprets information into operational characteristics; makes process adjustments per information gathered, samples collected, readings, and records. Collects wastewater, sludge, and other samples from various phases of the treatment process; performs standard chemical and physical tests
on these samples to ensure that the treatment process is operating effectively and that regulatory requirements are being met. Interprets and performs routine laboratory and process tests to optimize treatment plant performance, monitors the results, and recommends potential operational changes to the Lead.
Performs proper usage and handling of chemicals per industry standards.
Performs preventive maintenance on a variety of equipment, such as electric motors, engines, gas, and electric powered pumps, drive units, emergency systems, power generation systems, pressure and flow regulators, and other fixtures and appliances.
Lubricates pumps, motors, chains, conveyors, blowers, sprinklers, rotation distributors, scrapers, filter screens, and other machinery and equipment; removes blockages; replaces worn parts; participates in determining equipment problems and suggesting methods of minimizing such problems in an operational setting.
Performs fabrication of piping and other systems as necessary to maintain operation of treatment plant facilities and equipment. Performs inspection, construction, maintenance, and repair activities of wastewater collection systems; checks, cleans, and repairs systems and treatment plant lines, pits, screens, tanks, and mechanisms; shuts down appropriate parts for repair and returns to service once repair is completed.
Operates a variety of vehicles and heavy equipment; including but not limited to pick-up trucks, Hydro-Vac, trailer-mounted jetter, front end loader, and forklift.
Operates and maintains a variety of hand and power tools and equipment related to work assignments as instructed.
Locates and marks underground utilities in accordance with Underground Service Alert (USA) regulations.
Performs pretreatment inspections and tests of industrial and commercial waste disposal systems to ensure compliance with ordinances and permit requirements.
Performs a variety of general and ground maintenance activities, including mowing, edging and trimming landscaped areas as scheduled, weed abatement, and painting facilities and equipment when needed; assists in maintenance painting of plant machinery, equipment, piping, and other structures; maintains work areas in a clean and orderly condition, including securing equipment at the close of the workday.
Responds to operations, maintenance, and repair emergency situations as required and assists Operators as needed.
Maintains records and logs of daily activities; prepares reports as necessary.
Observes safe work methods and makes appropriate use of related safety equipment as required.
Performs related duties as assigned.
QUALIFICATIONS:
Knowledge of:
Basic principles, practices, tools, and materials as they relate to the operation, cleaning, and preventive maintenance of wastewater treatment plants and wastewater collection systems, and their associated facilities, and equipment.
English usage, spelling, vocabulary, grammar, and punctuation. Operation and preventive maintenance of piping systems, including pipes, valves, and related appurtenances.
Applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulatory codes, ordinances, and procedures.
Basic equipment troubleshooting principles and practices. Basic mechanical, electrical, and hydraulic principles. Use of computers and a variety of computer software programs. Record and log data.
Safe work methods and safety practices pertaining to the work, including the handling and storage of hazardous chemicals.
Appropriate to Certification Level Ability to:
Safely and effectively use and operate hand tools, mechanical equipment, power tools, and light to heavy equipment required for the work.
Perform routine equipment maintenance.
Maintain accurate logs, records, and basic written records of work performed.
Organize work, set priorities, and meet critical time deadlines. Establish, maintain, and foster positive and harmonious working relationships with those contacted in the course of work. Be on standby duty and respond to after-hours emergencies. Operate, maintain, and repair a variety of wastewater treatment plants, and wastewater collection systems.
Recognize and correct or report unusual, inefficient, or dangerous operating conditions.
Read a variety of gauges, charts, and meters, record data accurately, and make appropriate process adjustments.
Safely handle hazardous chemicals.
Interpret and apply the policies, procedures, laws, codes, and regulations pertaining to assigned programs and functions.
Assist in the development and implementation of all safety programs. Set up and operate traffic control areas, including the use of cones, barricades, and flagging.
Locate underground utilities by use of record drawings and electronic locating equipment in accordance with Underground Service Alert (USA) regulations.
Read, interpret, and apply technical information from manuals, drawings, specifications, layouts, blueprints, and schematics. Make accurate mathematical calculations.
Diagnose operating problems and take effective courses of action. Use tact, initiative, prudence, and independent judgment within general policy, procedural, and legal guidelines.
Perform duties of shift supervisor as required by the certification held when you hold the highest certification of employees on shift.
Education & Experience:
Equivalent to the completion of the twelfth (12th) grade. Supplemental specialized training in wastewater treatment plants, wastewater collection systems, and/or maintenance, or related field, and the years of experience relevant to the required state certifications.
Licenses, Certificates, and Minimum Step Requirements:
When driving is an essential function of the position, a valid California driver’s license will be required at the time of appointment and must be maintained throughout employment.
The following list demonstrates the minimum requirements to advance to the next pay step:
Step 2
Possession of a Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator in Training certificate issued by the SWRCB.
Possession of a Collection System Maintenance Grade I Step 3
All Step 2 requirements.
Possession of a valid Class B California driver’s license with appropriate endorsements.
Possession of a Collection System Maintenance Grade 2 Step 4
All Step 3 requirements.
Possession of a Grade I or above Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator certificate issued by the SWRCB.
Step 5
All Step 4 requirements.
Possession of a Grade I Environmental Compliance Inspector certification issued by the California Water Environment Association (CWEA)
The Fine Print
The job description does not constitute an employment agreement between the employer and employee and is subject to change as the employer's needs and job requirements change.
The duties listed above are intended only as illustrations of the various types of work that may be performed. The omission of specific statements of duties does not exclude them from the position if the work is similar, related, or a logical assignment to the position.
TOOLS & EQUIPMENT USED
Motor vehicles, heavy equipment, commercial vehicles, generators, pumps, gauges, common hand and power tools, shovels, wrenches, detection devices, mobile radio, telephone, calculator, and a variety of lab equipment.
PHYSICAL DEMANDS
The physical demands described here are representative of those that an employee must meet to perform the essential functions of this job successfully. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions.
Must possess mobility to work in and around standard wastewater treatment plants, and wastewater collection systems, strength, stamina, and mobility to perform medium to heavy physical work, to work in confined spaces, around machines and to climb and descend ladders, and to operate varied hand and power tools and equipment; vision to read printed materials and a computer screen; color vision to read gauges and identify appurtenances; hearing and speech to communicate in person and over the telephone or radio.
The job involves frequent walking in operational areas to identify problems or hazards. Finger dexterity is needed to access, enter, and retrieve data using a computer keyboard or calculator and to operate the above-mentioned tools and equipment. Positions in this classification require bending, stooping, kneeling, reaching, and climbing to perform work and inspect work sites.
Employees must possess the ability to lift, carry, push, and pull materials and objects up to 50 pounds, and heavier weights with the use of proper equipment.
WORK ENVIRONMENT
Employees work both indoors and in the field and are exposed to loud noise levels, varying temperatures, inclement weather conditions, road hazards, vibration, confined workspace, chemicals, mechanical
and/or electrical hazards, and hazardous physical substances, odors, and fumes. Employees interact with staff and/or public and private representatives in interpreting and enforcing departmental policies and procedures.
WORKING CONDITIONS
Required to be on-call as needed and to work various shifts, including evenings, weekends, holidays, and emergencies. Must maintain a 30-minute distance and 45-minute response time when assigned to oncall duties.
On-call assignments will be based on City needs and state requirements and are a requirement of this position.
Approved by the Morro Bay City Council June 24, 2025.
WATER RESOURCES COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST
DEFINITION
Under the general direction of the Utilities Division Manager, plans, oversees and coordinates, implements, and performs monitoring, testing, and administrative duties to ensure the City’s compliance with applicable federal, state, and local regulatory agency requirements pertaining to water, wastewater, air quality, and industrial waste; performs all other related duties as assigned.
DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS
The Water Resources Compliance Specialist is in the City’s Utilities Division.
This class is distinguished by its responsibilities for coordinating and performing duties related to the Division’s day-to-day compliance with various environmental regulations as they pertain to water, water conservation, wastewater, air quality, and industrial waste. The Water Resources Compliance Specialist oversees and may perform a variety of biological, chemical, and physical tests and analyses in both field and laboratory settings for water, wastewater, and industrial waste. Duties are performed under the supervision and direction of higher-level staff, but performance of duties requires the use of independence, initiative, and discretion within established guidelines. Technical and functional supervision may be exercised over assigned staff.
ESSENTIAL DUTIES & RESPONSIBILITIES
Oversees monitoring the City’s water quality program, including sampling of the municipal water system, for compliance with Division of Drinking Water standards, and prepares required reports. Assists the Utilities Division Manager in the NPDES and other regulatory reporting requirements for the Water Resources Center, Water system, and the Wastewater Collection system.
Assists the Utilities Division Manager in the preparation or oversight of the water resources planning documents, such as the Urban Water Management Plan and the City’s “OneWater” plan.
Conducts public outreach activities.
Develops and implements active and effective water conservation measures.
Oversees the City Cross-Connection Control Program.
Perform water loss audits for the water system.
Provides information to citizens, contractors, engineers, and other governmental agencies at the counter, by telephone and by mail. Prepares staff reports and grant applications.
Oversees and assists in the development of computer models and GIS and other databases of water, wastewater, and air quality Attend City meetings (such as City Council, Planning Commission, and Public Works Advisory Board) to present project-related information and respond to questions.
Performs related duties as required.
QUALIFICATIONS:
Knowledge of:
Management of environmental compliance, regulatory operations, and NPDES permitting.
General water resources engineering and planning.
Water quality control and the related biological/physical principles. Applicable federal, state, and local regulations.
Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations related to Recycled Water Use.
Mathematics and statistics as related to water resources. Program management techniques.
Appropriate data and record keeping methods and principles.
Ability to:
Effectively communicate both orally and in writing to a variety of audiences.
Sit at a desk for long periods of time in front of a computer screen while using standard office supplies and equipment such as keyboard and telephone.
Work out in the field in inclement weather when needed or when responding to emergency situations.
Develop and use database reports to support the Utilities Division.
Operate hand tools needed to perform field studies.
Work in an indoor and outdoor setting with some travel to different sites and locations.
Work extended hours including evenings and weekends.
Walk on uneven terrain to complete surveys and inspections. Work where exposure to environmental factors may pose a risk of minor injury or illness.
Education and Experience:
A bachelor’s degree from an accredited college or university in environmental science, physical or life sciences, natural resources management, environmental engineering, or a closely related field. In lieu of a degree, at least four (4) years of experience performing environmental compliance and regulatory duties may be considered.
Licenses and Certificates:
When driving is an essential function of the position, a valid CALIFORNIA driver’s license will be required at the time of appointment and must be maintained throughout employment.
Certifications and Licenses:
Possession of a valid California Class C Driver’s License. Must obtain a Water Treatment Operator Grade T2 certificate issued by the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) within one year of hire.
Must obtain a Water Audit Validator Certificate within two years of hire. Must obtain one of the following certifications within three years of hire:
o State certification as a Qualified Industrial Stormwater Practitioner (QISP), or
o Grade I Environmental Compliance Inspector certification issued by the California Water Environment Association (CWEA).
All required certifications must be maintained throughout the duration of employment.
The Fine Print
The job description does not constitute an employment agreement between the employer and employee and is subject to change as the employer's needs and job requirements change.
The duties listed above are intended only as illustrations of the various types of work that may be performed.
The omission of specific statements of duties does not exclude them from the position if the work is similar, related or a logical assignment to the position.
TOOLS & EQUIPMENT USED
Personal computer including word processing, spreadsheet, and database; GIS application software; standard water sampling tools; engineering calculator; motor vehicle; telephone; mobile radio.
PHYSICAL DEMANDS
The physical demands described here are representative of those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to
enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions.
Work is performed mostly in office settings. Outdoor work is required in the inspection of various land use developments, construction sites, public works facilities, or water system sampling. Hand-eye coordination is necessary to operate drafting instruments, computers, and various pieces of office equipment. While performing the duties of this job, the employee is occasionally required to stand; walk; use hands to finger, handle, feel, or operate objects, tools, or controls; and reach with hands and arms. The employee is occasionally required to sit, climb or balance, stoop, kneel, crouch or crawl, talk, or hear.
The employee must occasionally lift and/or move up to 50 pounds. Specific vision abilities required by this job include close vision, distance vision, color vision, peripheral vision, depth perception, and the ability to adjust focus.
WORK ENVIRONMENT
The work environment characteristics described here are representative of those an employee encounters while performing the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions.
While performing the duties of this job, the employee occasionally works in outside weather conditions.
The employee occasionally works near moving mechanical parts and in traffic; and is occasionally exposed to wet and/or humid conditions, fumes or airborne particles, toxic or caustic chemicals, risk of electrical shock, and vibration.
The noise level in the work environment is usually moderate.
Approved by the Morro Bay City Council June 24, 2025.
RESOLUTION NO. 40-25
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF MORRO BAY, CALIFORNIA,
SUPERSEDING AND REPLACING RESOLUTION NO. 21-25 AND APPROVING THE UPDATED FISCAL YEAR 2024-25, FISCAL YEAR 2025-26, AND FISCAL YEAR 2026-27
CITY-WIDE PAY SCHEDULES
T H E C I T Y C O U N C I L
City of Morro Bay, California
WHEREAS, Section 36506 of the California Government Code requires that the City Council fix compensation of all appointive officers and employees by resolution or ordinance; and WHEREAS, Morro Bay Municipal Code Title 2, Chapter 2.20, Section 2.20.020 requires that the salaries and compensation of officers and employees of the City shall be as fixed and determined by resolution of the City Council, after due consideration of employees’ bargaining rights, as established by the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, except those fixed in this chapter; and WHEREAS, the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS), has requested that all CalPERS employers list their employee compensation on one pay schedule document, approved and adopted by the governing body, in accordance with California Code of Regulations (CCR), section 570.5, and meeting all of the following requirements thereof:
1. Has been duly approved and adopted by the employer’s governing body in accordance with the requirements of applicable public meetings laws;
2. Identifies the position title for every employee position;
3. Shows the pay rate for each identified position, which may be stated as a single amount or as multiple amounts within a range;
4. Indicates the time base, including, but not limited to, whether the time base is hourly, daily, bi-weekly, monthly, bi-monthly, or annually;
5. Is posted at the office of the employer or immediately accessible and available for public review from the employer during normal business hours or posted on the employer’s internet website;
6. Indicates an effective date and date of any revisions;
7. Is retained by the employer and available for public inspection for not less than five years; and
8. Does not reference another document in lieu of disclosing the pay rate; and WHEREAS, the formal approval of the updated and revised pay schedules requires that they are duly approved and adopted by the City Council by resolution, and the 2 CCR 570.5 regulation requires the adoption of a revised and updated Pay Schedule for Fiscal Year 2024-25, Fiscal Year 2025-26, and Fiscal Year 2026-27, attached as Exhibits A-B and incorporated herein by reference.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Morro Bay does hereby:
///
/// Page 273 of 335
1. Resolution No. 21-25 shall be superseded and replaced by this resolution effective June 24, 2025, and
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Morro Bay at a regular meeting thereof held on the 24th day of June 2025 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RECUSED:
______________________________
CARLA WIXOM, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
DANA SWANSON, City Clerk
CITY OF MORRO BAY
COMBINED PAY SCHEDULE
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25: Effective 06/24/2025
TITLE GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 SEIU LOCAL 620 GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 ACCOUNT CLERK IN-TRAINING MISC 18.96 19.92 20.92 21.96 23.06 39,437 41,434 43,514 45,677 47,965 ACCOUNT CLERK I MISC 22.93 24.08 25.28 26.54 27.87 47,694 50,086 52,582 55,203 57,970 CONSOLIDATED MAINTENANCE WRK I MISC 22.93 24.08 25.28 26.54 27.87 47,694 50,086 52,582 55,203 57,970 OFFICE ASST. III MISC 22.93 24.08 25.28 26.54 27.87 47,694 50,086 52,582 55,203 57,970 OFFICE ASST. IV MISC 24.79 26.03 27.33 28.70 30.14 51,563 54,142 56,846 59,696 62,691 ACCOUNT CLERK II MISC 25.76 27.05 28.39 29.82 31.31 53,581 56,264 59,051 62,026 65,125 CONSOLIDATED MAINTENANCE WRK II MISC 25.76 27.05 28.39 29.82 31.31 53,581 56,264 59,051 62,026 65,125 RECREATION SPECIALIST MISC 25.76 27.05 28.39 29.82 31.31 53,581 56,264 59,051 62,026 65,125 ACCOUNT CLERK III MISC 27.58 28.97 30.42 31.93 33.53 57,366 60,258 63,274 66,414 69,742 CONSOLIDATED MAINTENANCE WRK III MISC 27.58 28.97 30.42 31.93 33.53 57,366 60,258 63,274 66,414 69,742 PERMIT TECHNICIAN MISC 28.08 29.47 30.95 32.50 34.13 58,406 61,298 64,376 67,600 70,990 ADMINISTRATIVE TECHNICIAN MISC 28.08 29.47 30.95 32.50 34.13 58,406 61,298 64,376 67,600 70,990 BUILDING PERMIT TECHNICIAN I MISC 28.08 29.47 30.95 32.50 34.13 58,406 61,298 64,376 67,600 70,990 SUPPORT SERVICES TECHNICIAN MISC 28.08 29.47 30.95 32.50 34.13 58,406 61,298 64,376 67,600 70,990 PROPERTY EVIDENCE CLERK MISC 28.08 29.47 30.95 32.50 34.13 58,406 61,298 64,376 67,600 70,990 COMMUNITY SERVICES OFFICER MISC 28.08 29.47 30.95 32.50 34.13 58,406 61,298 64,376 67,600 70,990 MECHANIC MISC 28.97 30.42 31.94 33.54 35.22 60,258 63,274 66,435 69,763 73,258 RECREATION COORDINATOR MISC 28.97 30.42 31.94 33.54 35.22 60,258 63,274 66,435 69,763 73,258 ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN III MISC 32.81 34.45 36.18 37.99 39.89 68,245 71,656 75,254 79,019 82,971 MAINTENANCE LEADWORKER MISC 32.81 34.45 36.18 37.99 39.89 68,245 71,656 75,254 79,019 82,971 BUILDING PERMIT TECHNICIAN II MISC 32.81 34.45 36.18 37.99 39.89 68,245 71,656 75,254 79,019 82,971 UTILITY OPERATOR MISC 32.87 34.51 36.24 38.04 39.95 68,370 71,781 75,379 79,123 83,096 UTILITY SUPPORT COORDINATOR MISC 32.87 34.51 36.24 38.04 39.95 68,370 71,781 75,379 79,123 83,096 ASSISTANT PLANNER MISC 34.18 36.44 37.67 39.56 41.54 71,094 75,795 78,354 82,285 86,403 BUILDING INSPECTOR MISC 34.34 36.06 37.85 39.75 41.74 71,427 75,005 78,728 82,680 86,819 BUILDING INSPECTOR/CODE ENF OFFICER MISC 34.34 36.06 37.85 39.75 41.74 71,427 75,005 78,728 82,680 86,819 RECREATION SUPERVISOR MISC 34.45 36.18 37.99 39.89 41.88 71,656 75,254 79,019 82,971 87,110 HARBOR PATROL OFFICER MISC 34.53 36.27 38.07 39.98 41.98 71,822 75,442 79,186 83,158 87,318 UTILITY OPERATOR MC (MULTIPLE CERT) MISC 35.16 36.93 38.77 40.71 42.75 73,133 76,814 80,642 84,677 88,920
HOURLY RATES ANNUAL SALARY EQUIVALENT
CITY OF MORRO BAY
COMBINED PAY SCHEDULE
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25: Effective 06/24/2025
TITLE GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6
HOURLY RATES ANNUAL SALARY EQUIVALENT
IT SYSTEMS ANALYST MISC 38.43 40.35 42.37 44.49 46.71 79,934 83,928 88,130 92,539 97,157 ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN IV MISC 38.43 40.35 42.37 44.49 46.71 79,934 83,928 88,130 92,539 97,157 ASSISTANT ENGINEER MISC 38.43 40.35 42.37 44.49 46.71 79,934 83,928 88,130 92,539 97,157 ASSOCIATE PLANNER MISC 38.43 40.35 42.37 44.49 46.71 79,934 83,928 88,130 92,539 97,157 BUILDING INSPECTOR/PLANS EXAMINER MISC 38.43 40.35 42.37 44.49 46.71 79,934 83,928 88,130 92,539 97,157 CONSOLIDATED MAINT FIELD SUPV MISC 38.43 40.35 42.37 44.49 46.71 79,934 83,928 88,130 92,539 97,157 PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTOR MISC 38.43 40.35 42.37 44.49 46.71 79,934 83,928 88,130 92,539 97,157 LEAD UTILITY OPERATOR MISC 39.17 41.13 43.18 45.34 47.61 81,474 85,550 89,814 94,307 99,029 OPERATIONAL TECHNOLOGY SPECIALIST MISC 41.12 43.18 45.33 47.60 49.98 85,530 89,814 94,286 99,008 103,958 HARBOR PATROL SUPERVISOR MISC 42.66 44.79 47.03 49.38 51.86 88,733 93,163 97,822 102,710 107,869 ASSOCIATE ENGINEER MISC 44.19 46.40 48.72 51.16 53.72 91,915 96,512 101,338 106,413 111,738 UTILITY DIVISION SUPERVISOR MISC 44.19 46.40 48.72 51.16 53.72 91,915 96,512 101,338 106,413 111,738 MORRO BAY PEACE OFFICERS' ASSOC. GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 POLICE OFFICER POA 39.53 41.50 43.58 45.76 48.05 50.45 82,222 86,320 90,646 95,181 99,944 104,936 POLICE DETECTIVE POA 41.50 43.58 45.76 48.05 50.45 52.97 86,320 90,646 95,181 99,944 104,936 110,178 POLICE SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER POA 41.50 43.58 45.76 48.05 50.45 52.97 86,320 90,646 95,181 99,944 104,936 110,178 POLICE SENIOR OFFICER POA 41.50 43.58 45.76 48.05 50.45 52.97 86,320 90,646 95,181 99,944 104,936 110,178 POLICE SERGEANT POA 50.67 53.21 55.87 58.67 61.59 64.68 105,394 110,677 116,210 122,034 128,107 134,534 MORRO BAY FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOC. GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 FIREFIGHTER FFA 25.83 27.13 28.48 29.91 31.41 75,217 79,003 82,934 87,098 91,466 FIREFIGHTER/PARAMEDIC FFA 28.41 29.84 31.33 32.90 34.54 82,730 86,894 91,233 95,805 100,580 FIRE ENGINEER FFA 28.24 29.66 31.14 32.69 34.33 82,235 86,370 90,680 95,193 99,969 FIRE ENGINEER/PARAMEDIC FFA 31.07 32.63 34.26 35.96 37.77 90,476 95,019 99,765 104,716 109,986 FIRE CAPTAIN FFA 32.48 34.08 35.79 37.58 39.46 94,582 99,241 104,220 109,433 114,908 FIRE CAPTAIN/PARAMEDIC FFA 35.72 37.50 39.38 41.34 43.42 104,017 109,200 114,675 120,382 126,439 FIRE MARSHAL FFA 38.55 40.47 42.49 44.61 46.85 112,258 117,849 123,731 129,904 136,427 UNREPRESENTED CONFIDENTIAL GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5
CITY OF MORRO BAY
COMBINED PAY SCHEDULE
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25: Effective 06/24/2025
TITLE GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6
HOURLY RATES ANNUAL SALARY EQUIVALENT
HUMAN RESOURCES ANALYST I CONF 31.96 33.56 35.24 36.99 38.84 66,477 69,805 73,299 76,939 80,787 EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT/DEPUTY CLERK CONF 34.34 36.06 37.85 39.75 41.74 71,427 75,005 78,728 82,680 86,819 SENIOR ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN CONF 35.69 37.47 39.35 41.32 43.39 74,235 77,938 81,848 85,946 90,251 FISCAL ANALYST CONF 38.43 40.35 42.37 44.49 46.71 79,934 83,928 88,130 92,539 97,157 HUMAN RESOURCES ANALYST II CONF 38.43 40.35 42.37 44.49 46.71 79,934 83,928 88,130 92,539 97,157 UNREPRESENTED MANAGEMENT GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 MANAGEMENT ANALYST MGMT 39.24 41.20 43.26 45.42 47.69 81,619 85,696 89,981 94,474 99,195 POLICE SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER MGMT 45.89 48.18 50.59 53.12 55.78 95,451 100,214 105,227 110,490 116,022 HARBOR BUSINESS MANAGER MGMT 45.89 48.18 50.59 53.12 55.78 95,451 100,214 105,227 110,490 116,022 MAINTENANCE DIVISION MANAGER MGMT 45.89 48.18 50.59 53.12 55.78 95,451 100,214 105,227 110,490 116,022 ADMINISTRATIVE PROGRAMS MANAGER MGMT 45.89 48.18 50.59 53.12 55.78 95,451 100,214 105,227 110,490 116,022 ASST. TO THE CITY MANAGER/PR MGR MGMT 45.89 48.18 50.59 53.12 55.78 95,451 100,214 105,227 110,490 116,022 SENIOR PLANNER MGMT 45.89 48.18 50.59 53.12 55.78 95,451 100,214 105,227 110,490 116,022 CHIEF BUILDING INSP/PLANS EXAMINER MGMT 47.20 49.56 52.03 54.64 57.37 98,176 103,085 108,222 113,651 119,330 CITY CLERK MGMT 47.20 49.56 52.03 54.64 57.37 98,176 103,085 108,222 113,651 119,330 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGER MGMT 47.20 49.56 52.03 54.64 57.37 98,176 103,085 108,222 113,651 119,330 RECREATION SERVICES MANAGER MGMT 47.20 49.56 52.03 54.64 57.37 98,176 103,085 108,222 113,651 119,330 PLANNING MANAGER MGMT 51.92 54.52 57.24 60.10 63.10 107,994 113,402 119,059 125,008 131,248 HUMAN RESOURCES/RISK MANAGER MGMT 51.92 54.52 57.24 60.10 63.10 107,994 113,402 119,059 125,008 131,248 ACCOUNTING MANAGER MGMT 51.92 54.52 57.24 60.10 63.10 107,994 113,402 119,059 125,008 131,248 SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER MGMT 51.92 54.52 57.24 60.10 63.10 107,994 113,402 119,059 125,008 131,248 CITY ENGINEER MGMT 59.49 62.46 65.58 68.87 72.31 123,739 129,917 136,406 143,250 150,405 UTILITY DIVISION MANAGER MGMT 59.49 62.46 65.58 68.87 72.31 123,739 129,917 136,406 143,250 150,405 DEPUTY CHIEF / FIRE MARSHAL MGMT 63.07 66.23 69.53 73.01 76.66 131,186 137,758 144,622 151,861 159,453 POLICE COMMANDER MGMT 68.70 72.13 75.74 79.52 83.51 142,896 150,030 157,539 165,402 173,701 DEPARTMENT HEADS/EXECUTIVE GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR EXEC 75.63 79.41 83.39 87.56 91.94 157,310 165,173 173,451 182,125 191,235 PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR EXEC 75.63 79.41 83.39 87.56 91.94 157,310 165,173 173,451 182,125 191,235
CITY OF MORRO BAY
COMBINED PAY SCHEDULE
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25: Effective 06/24/2025
TITLE GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6
HOURLY RATES ANNUAL SALARY EQUIVALENT
FINANCE DIRECTOR EXEC 75.63 79.41 83.39 87.56 91.94 157,310 165,173 173,451 182,125 191,235 HARBOR VITALITY DIRECTOR EXEC 75.63 79.41 83.39 87.56 91.94 157,310 165,173 173,451 182,125 191,235 FIRE CHIEF (Sworn) EXEC 77.05 80.90 84.95 89.19 93.65 160,264 168,272 176,696 185,515 194,792 POLICE CHIEF (Sworn) EXEC 77.05 80.90 84.95 89.19 93.65 160,264 168,272 176,696 185,515 194,792 CITY ATTORNEY CA 101.94 104.50 107.10 109.78 112.53 212,035 217,360 222,768 228,342 234,062 CITY MANAGER CM 101.94 104.50 107.10 109.78 112.53 212,035 217,360 222,768 228,342 234,062
CITY OF MORRO BAY
COMBINED PAY SCHEDULE
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26: Effective 07/01/2025
TITLE GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 SEIU LOCAL 620 GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 ACCOUNT CLERK IN-TRAINING MISC 19.91 20.92 21.97 23.06 24.21 41,413 43,514 45,698 47,965 50,357 ACCOUNT CLERK I MISC 24.08 25.28 26.54 27.87 29.26 50,086 52,582 55,203 57,970 60,861 CONSOLIDATED MAINTENANCE WRK I MISC 24.08 25.28 26.54 27.87 29.26 50,086 52,582 55,203 57,970 60,861 OFFICE ASST. III MISC 24.08 25.28 26.54 27.87 29.26 50,086 52,582 55,203 57,970 60,861 OFFICE ASST. IV MISC 26.03 27.33 28.70 30.14 31.65 54,142 56,846 59,696 62,691 65,832 ACCOUNT CLERK II MISC 27.05 28.40 29.81 31.31 32.88 56,264 59,072 62,005 65,125 68,390 CONSOLIDATED MAINTENANCE WRK II MISC 27.05 28.40 29.81 31.31 32.88 56,264 59,072 62,005 65,125 68,390 RECREATION SPECIALIST MISC 27.05 28.40 29.81 31.31 32.88 56,264 59,072 62,005 65,125 68,390 ACCOUNT CLERK III MISC 28.96 30.42 31.94 33.53 35.21 60,237 63,274 66,435 69,742 73,237 CONSOLIDATED MAINTENANCE WRK III MISC 28.96 30.42 31.94 33.53 35.21 60,237 63,274 66,435 69,742 73,237 PERMIT TECHNICIAN MISC 29.48 30.94 32.50 34.13 35.84 61,318 64,355 67,600 70,990 74,547 ADMINISTRATIVE TECHNICIAN MISC 29.48 30.94 32.50 34.13 35.84 61,318 64,355 67,600 70,990 74,547 BUILDING PERMIT TECHNICIAN I MISC 29.48 30.94 32.50 34.13 35.84 61,318 64,355 67,600 70,990 74,547 SUPPORT SERVICES TECHNICIAN MISC 29.48 30.94 32.50 34.13 35.84 61,318 64,355 67,600 70,990 74,547 PROPERTY EVIDENCE CLERK MISC 29.48 30.94 32.50 34.13 35.84 61,318 64,355 67,600 70,990 74,547 COMMUNITY SERVICES OFFICER MISC 29.48 30.94 32.50 34.13 35.84 61,318 64,355 67,600 70,990 74,547 MECHANIC MISC 30.42 31.94 33.54 35.22 36.98 63,274 66,435 69,763 73,258 76,918 RECREATION COORDINATOR MISC 30.42 31.94 33.54 35.22 36.98 63,274 66,435 69,763 73,258 76,918 ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN III MISC 34.45 36.17 37.99 39.89 41.88 71,656 75,234 79,019 82,971 87,110 MAINTENANCE LEADWORKER MISC 34.45 36.17 37.99 39.89 41.88 71,656 75,234 79,019 82,971 87,110 BUILDING PERMIT TECHNICIAN II MISC 34.45 36.17 37.99 39.89 41.88 71,656 75,234 79,019 82,971 87,110 UTILITY OPERATOR MISC 34.51 36.24 38.05 39.94 41.95 71,781 75,379 79,144 83,075 87,256 COLLECTIONS AND PRETREATMENT OPERATOR MISC 34.51 36.24 38.05 39.94 41.95 71,781 75,379 79,144 83,075 87,256 UTILITY SUPPORT COORDINATOR MISC 34.51 36.24 38.05 39.94 41.95 71,781 75,379 79,144 83,075 87,256 ASSISTANT PLANNER MISC 35.89 38.26 39.55 41.54 43.62 74,651 79,581 82,264 86,403 90,730 BUILDING INSPECTOR MISC 36.06 37.86 39.74 41.74 43.83 75,005 78,749 82,659 86,819 91,166 BUILDING INSPECTOR/CODE ENF OFFICER MISC 36.06 37.86 39.74 41.74 43.83 75,005 78,749 82,659 86,819 91,166 RECREATION SUPERVISOR MISC 36.17 37.99 39.89 41.88 43.97 75,234 79,019 82,971 87,110 91,458 HARBOR PATROL OFFICER MISC 36.26 38.08 39.97 41.98 44.08 75,421 79,206 83,138 87,318 91,686 UTILITY OPERATOR MC (MULTIPLE CERT) MISC 36.92 38.78 40.71 42.75 44.89 76,794 80,662 84,677 88,920 93,371 IT SYSTEMS ANALYST MISC 40.35 42.37 44.49 46.71 49.05 83,928 88,130 92,539 97,157 102,024 ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN IV MISC 40.35 42.37 44.49 46.71 49.05 83,928 88,130 92,539 97,157 102,024 ASSISTANT ENGINEER MISC 40.35 42.37 44.49 46.71 49.05 83,928 88,130 92,539 97,157 102,024
HOURLY RATES ANNUAL SALARY EQUIVALENT
CITY OF MORRO BAY
COMBINED PAY SCHEDULE
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26: Effective 07/01/2025
TITLE GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6
HOURLY RATES ANNUAL SALARY EQUIVALENT
ASSOCIATE PLANNER MISC 40.35 42.37 44.49 46.71 49.05 83,928 88,130 92,539 97,157 102,024 BUILDING INSPECTOR/PLANS EXAMINER MISC 40.35 42.37 44.49 46.71 49.05 83,928 88,130 92,539 97,157 102,024 CONSOLIDATED MAINT FIELD SUPV MISC 40.35 42.37 44.49 46.71 49.05 83,928 88,130 92,539 97,157 102,024 PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTOR MISC 40.35 42.37 44.49 46.71 49.05 83,928 88,130 92,539 97,157 102,024 LEAD UTILITY OPERATOR MISC 41.13 43.19 45.34 47.61 49.99 85,550 89,835 94,307 99,029 103,979 WATER RESOURCES COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST MISC 41.13 43.19 45.34 47.61 49.99 85,550 89,835 94,307 99,029 103,979 OPERATIONAL TECHNOLOGY SPECIALIST MISC 43.18 45.34 47.60 49.98 52.48 89,814 94,307 99,008 103,958 109,158 HARBOR PATROL SUPERVISOR MISC 44.79 47.03 49.38 51.85 54.45 93,163 97,822 102,710 107,848 113,256 ASSOCIATE ENGINEER MISC 46.40 48.72 51.16 53.72 56.41 96,512 101,338 106,413 111,738 117,333 UTILITY DIVISION SUPERVISOR MISC 46.40 48.72 51.16 53.72 56.41 96,512 101,338 106,413 111,738 117,333 MORRO BAY PEACE OFFICERS' ASSOC. (Sworn) GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 POLICE OFFICER POA 42.30 44.41 46.63 48.96 51.41 53.98 87,984 92,373 96,990 101,837 106,933 112,278 POLICE DETECTIVE POA 44.41 46.63 48.96 51.41 53.98 56.68 92,373 96,990 101,837 106,933 112,278 117,894 POLICE SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER POA 44.41 46.63 48.96 51.41 53.98 56.68 92,373 96,990 101,837 106,933 112,278 117,894 POLICE SENIOR OFFICER POA 44.41 46.63 48.96 51.41 53.98 56.68 92,373 96,990 101,837 106,933 112,278 117,894 POLICE SERGEANT POA 54.22 56.93 59.78 62.78 65.90 69.21 112,778 118,414 124,342 130,582 137,072 143,957 MORRO BAY FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOC. (Sworn) GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 FIREFIGHTER FFA 27.38 28.76 30.19 31.70 33.29 79,731 83,749 87,913 92,310 96,940 FIREFIGHTER/PARAMEDIC FFA 30.11 31.63 33.21 34.87 36.61 87,680 92,107 96,708 101,541 106,608 FIRE ENGINEER FFA 29.93 31.44 33.01 34.65 36.39 87,156 91,553 96,125 100,901 105,968 FIRE ENGINEER/PARAMEDIC FFA 32.93 34.59 36.32 38.12 40.04 95,892 100,726 105,764 111,005 116,596 FIRE CAPTAIN FFA 34.43 36.12 37.94 39.83 41.83 100,260 105,181 110,481 115,985 121,809 FIRE CAPTAIN/PARAMEDIC FFA 37.86 39.75 41.74 43.82 46.03 110,248 115,752 121,547 127,604 134,039 FIRE MARSHAL FFA 40.86 42.90 45.04 47.29 49.66 118,984 124,925 131,156 137,708 144,610 UNREPRESENTED CONFIDENTIAL GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 HUMAN RESOURCES ANALYST I CONF 33.56 35.24 37.00 38.84 40.78 69,805 73,299 76,960 80,787 84,822 EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT/DEPUTY CLERK CONF 36.06 37.86 39.74 41.74 43.83 75,005 78,749 82,659 86,819 91,166 SENIOR ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN CONF 37.47 39.34 41.32 43.39 45.56 77,938 81,827 85,946 90,251 94,765 FISCAL ANALYST CONF 40.35 42.37 44.49 46.71 49.05 83,928 88,130 92,539 97,157 102,024 HUMAN RESOURCES ANALYST II CONF 40.35 42.37 44.49 46.71 49.05 83,928 88,130 92,539 97,157 102,024
CITY OF MORRO BAY
COMBINED PAY SCHEDULE
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26: Effective 07/01/2025
TITLE GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6
HOURLY RATES ANNUAL SALARY EQUIVALENT
UNREPRESENTED MANAGEMENT GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 MANAGEMENT ANALYST MGMT 41.20 43.26 45.42 47.69 50.07 85,696 89,981 94,474 99,195 104,146 POLICE SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER MGMT 48.18 50.59 53.12 55.78 58.57 100,214 105,227 110,490 116,022 121,826 HARBOR BUSINESS MANAGER MGMT 48.18 50.59 53.12 55.78 58.57 100,214 105,227 110,490 116,022 121,826 MAINTENANCE DIVISION MANAGER MGMT 48.18 50.59 53.12 55.78 58.57 100,214 105,227 110,490 116,022 121,826 ADMINISTRATIVE PROGRAMS MANAGER MGMT 48.18 50.59 53.12 55.78 58.57 100,214 105,227 110,490 116,022 121,826 ASST. TO THE CITY MANAGER/PR MANAGER MGMT 48.18 50.59 53.12 55.78 58.57 100,214 105,227 110,490 116,022 121,826 SENIOR PLANNER MGMT 48.18 50.59 53.12 55.78 58.57 100,214 105,227 110,490 116,022 121,826 CHIEF BUILDING INSP/PLANS EXAMINER MGMT 50.50 53.03 55.67 58.46 61.39 105,040 110,302 115,794 121,597 127,691 CITY CLERK MGMT 50.50 53.03 55.67 58.46 61.39 105,040 110,302 115,794 121,597 127,691 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGER MGMT 50.50 53.03 55.67 58.46 61.39 105,040 110,302 115,794 121,597 127,691 RECREATION SERVICES MANAGER MGMT 50.50 53.03 55.67 58.46 61.39 105,040 110,302 115,794 121,597 127,691 PLANNING MANAGER MGMT 55.55 58.34 61.25 64.31 67.52 115,544 121,347 127,400 133,765 140,442 HUMAN RESOURCES/RISK MANAGER MGMT 55.55 58.34 61.25 64.31 67.52 115,544 121,347 127,400 133,765 140,442 ACCOUNTING MANAGER MGMT 55.55 58.34 61.25 64.31 67.52 115,544 121,347 127,400 133,765 140,442 SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER MGMT 55.55 58.34 61.25 64.31 67.52 115,544 121,347 127,400 133,765 140,442 UTILITIES PROJECT MANAGER MGMT 55.55 58.34 61.25 64.31 67.52 115,544 121,347 127,400 133,765 140,442 CITY ENGINEER MGMT 62.46 65.58 68.86 72.31 75.93 129,917 136,406 143,229 150,405 157,934 UTILITY DIVISION MANAGER MGMT 62.46 65.58 68.86 72.31 75.93 129,917 136,406 143,229 150,405 157,934 DEPUTY CHIEF / FIRE MARSHAL MGMT 66.85 70.20 73.70 77.39 81.26 139,048 146,016 153,296 160,971 169,021 POLICE COMMANDER MGMT 73.51 77.18 81.04 85.09 89.36 152,901 160,534 168,563 176,987 185,869 DEPARTMENT HEADS/EXECUTIVE GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR EXEC 79.41 83.38 87.56 91.94 96.54 165,173 173,430 182,125 191,235 200,803 PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR EXEC 79.41 83.38 87.56 91.94 96.54 165,173 173,430 182,125 191,235 200,803 FINANCE DIRECTOR EXEC 79.41 83.38 87.56 91.94 96.54 165,173 173,430 182,125 191,235 200,803 HARBOR VITALITY DIRECTOR EXEC 79.41 83.38 87.56 91.94 96.54 165,173 173,430 182,125 191,235 200,803 FIRE CHIEF (Sworn) EXEC 80.90 84.95 89.20 93.65 98.33 168,272 176,696 185,536 194,792 204,526 POLICE CHIEF (Sworn) EXEC 80.90 84.95 89.20 93.65 98.33 168,272 176,696 185,536 194,792 204,526 CITY ATTORNEY CA 107.04 109.73 112.46 115.27 118.16 222,643 228,238 233,917 239,762 245,773 CITY MANAGER CM 107.04 109.73 112.46 115.27 118.16 222,643 228,238 233,917 239,762 245,773
CITY OF MORRO BAY
COMBINED PAY SCHEDULE
FISCAL YEAR 2026-27: Effective 07/01/2026
TITLE GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 SEIU LOCAL 620 GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 ACCOUNT CLERK IN-TRAINING MISC 20.91 21.97 23.07 24.21 25.42 43,493 45,698 47,986 50,357 52,874 ACCOUNT CLERK I MISC 25.28 26.54 27.87 29.26 30.72 52,582 55,203 57,970 60,861 63,898 CONSOLIDATED MAINTENANCE WRK I MISC 25.28 26.54 27.87 29.26 30.72 52,582 55,203 57,970 60,861 63,898 OFFICE ASST. III MISC 25.28 26.54 27.87 29.26 30.72 52,582 55,203 57,970 60,861 63,898 OFFICE ASST. IV MISC 27.33 28.70 30.14 31.65 33.23 56,846 59,696 62,691 65,832 69,118 ACCOUNT CLERK II MISC 28.40 29.82 31.30 32.88 34.52 59,072 62,026 65,104 68,390 71,802 CONSOLIDATED MAINTENANCE WRK II MISC 28.40 29.82 31.30 32.88 34.52 59,072 62,026 65,104 68,390 71,802 RECREATION SPECIALIST MISC 28.40 29.82 31.30 32.88 34.52 59,072 62,026 65,104 68,390 71,802 ACCOUNT CLERK III MISC 30.41 31.94 33.54 35.21 36.97 63,253 66,435 69,763 73,237 76,898 CONSOLIDATED MAINTENANCE WRK III MISC 30.41 31.94 33.54 35.21 36.97 63,253 66,435 69,763 73,237 76,898 PERMIT TECHNICIAN MISC 30.95 32.49 34.13 35.84 37.63 64,376 67,579 70,990 74,547 78,270 ADMINISTRATIVE TECHNICIAN MISC 30.95 32.49 34.13 35.84 37.63 64,376 67,579 70,990 74,547 78,270 BUILDING PERMIT TECHNICIAN I MISC 30.95 32.49 34.13 35.84 37.63 64,376 67,579 70,990 74,547 78,270 SUPPORT SERVICES TECHNICIAN MISC 30.95 32.49 34.13 35.84 37.63 64,376 67,579 70,990 74,547 78,270 PROPERTY EVIDENCE CLERK MISC 30.95 32.49 34.13 35.84 37.63 64,376 67,579 70,990 74,547 78,270 COMMUNITY SERVICES OFFICER MISC 30.95 32.49 34.13 35.84 37.63 64,376 67,579 70,990 74,547 78,270 MECHANIC MISC 31.94 33.54 35.22 36.98 38.83 66,435 69,763 73,258 76,918 80,766 RECREATION COORDINATOR MISC 31.94 33.54 35.22 36.98 38.83 66,435 69,763 73,258 76,918 80,766 ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN III MISC 36.17 37.98 39.89 41.88 43.97 75,234 78,998 82,971 87,110 91,458 MAINTENANCE LEADWORKER MISC 36.17 37.98 39.89 41.88 43.97 75,234 78,998 82,971 87,110 91,458 BUILDING PERMIT TECHNICIAN II MISC 36.17 37.98 39.89 41.88 43.97 75,234 78,998 82,971 87,110 91,458 UTILITY OPERATOR MISC 36.24 38.05 39.95 41.94 44.05 75,379 79,144 83,096 87,235 91,624 COLLECTIONS AND PRETREATMENT OPERATOR MISC 36.24 38.05 39.95 41.94 44.05 75,379 79,144 83,096 87,235 91,624 UTILITY SUPPORT COORDINATOR MISC 36.24 38.05 39.95 41.94 44.05 75,379 79,144 83,096 87,235 91,624 ASSISTANT PLANNER MISC 37.68 40.17 41.53 43.62 45.80 78,374 83,554 86,382 90,730 95,264 BUILDING INSPECTOR MISC 37.86 39.75 41.73 43.83 46.02 78,749 82,680 86,798 91,166 95,722 BUILDING INSPECTOR/CODE ENF OFFICER MISC 37.86 39.75 41.73 43.83 46.02 78,749 82,680 86,798 91,166 95,722 RECREATION SUPERVISOR MISC 37.98 39.89 41.88 43.97 46.17 78,998 82,971 87,110 91,458 96,034 HARBOR PATROL OFFICER MISC 38.07 39.98 41.97 44.08 46.28 79,186 83,158 87,298 91,686 96,262 UTILITY OPERATOR MC (MULTIPLE CERT) MISC 38.77 40.72 42.75 44.89 47.13 80,642 84,698 88,920 93,371 98,030 IT SYSTEMS ANALYST MISC 42.37 44.49 46.71 49.05 51.50 88,130 92,539 97,157 102,024 107,120 ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN IV MISC 42.37 44.49 46.71 49.05 51.50 88,130 92,539 97,157 102,024 107,120 ASSISTANT ENGINEER MISC 42.37 44.49 46.71 49.05 51.50 88,130 92,539 97,157 102,024 107,120 ASSOCIATE PLANNER MISC 42.37 44.49 46.71 49.05 51.50 88,130 92,539 97,157 102,024 107,120 BUILDING INSPECTOR/PLANS EXAMINER MISC 42.37 44.49 46.71 49.05 51.50 88,130 92,539 97,157 102,024 107,120 CONSOLIDATED MAINT FIELD SUPV MISC 42.37 44.49 46.71 49.05 51.50 88,130 92,539 97,157 102,024 107,120
HOURLY RATES ANNUAL SALARY EQUIVALENT
CITY OF MORRO BAY
COMBINED PAY SCHEDULE
FISCAL YEAR 2026-27: Effective 07/01/2026
TITLE GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6
HOURLY RATES ANNUAL SALARY EQUIVALENT
PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTOR MISC 42.37 44.49 46.71 49.05 51.50 88,130 92,539 97,157 102,024 107,120 LEAD UTILITY OPERATOR MISC 43.19 45.35 47.61 49.99 52.49 89,835 94,328 99,029 103,979 109,179 WATER RESOURCES COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST MISC 43.19 45.35 47.61 49.99 52.49 89,835 94,328 99,029 103,979 109,179 OPERATIONAL TECHNOLOGY SPECIALIST MISC 45.34 47.61 49.98 52.48 55.10 94,307 99,029 103,958 109,158 114,608 HARBOR PATROL SUPERVISOR MISC 47.03 49.38 51.85 54.44 57.17 97,822 102,710 107,848 113,235 118,914 ASSOCIATE ENGINEER MISC 48.72 51.16 53.72 56.41 59.23 101,338 106,413 111,738 117,333 123,198 UTILITY DIVISION SUPERVISOR MISC 48.72 51.16 53.72 56.41 59.23 101,338 106,413 111,738 117,333 123,198 MORRO BAY PEACE OFFICERS' ASSOC. (Sworn) GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 POLICE OFFICER POA 45.26 47.52 49.89 52.39 55.01 57.76 94,141 98,842 103,771 108,971 114,421 120,141 POLICE DETECTIVE POA 47.52 49.89 52.39 55.01 57.76 60.65 98,842 103,771 108,971 114,421 120,141 126,152 POLICE SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER POA 47.52 49.89 52.39 55.01 57.76 60.65 98,842 103,771 108,971 114,421 120,141 126,152 POLICE SENIOR OFFICER POA 47.52 49.89 52.39 55.01 57.76 60.65 98,842 103,771 108,971 114,421 120,141 126,152 POLICE SERGEANT POA 58.02 60.92 63.96 67.17 70.51 74.05 120,682 126,714 133,037 139,714 146,661 154,024 MORRO BAY FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOC. (Sworn) GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 FIREFIGHTER FFA 29.02 30.49 32.00 33.60 35.29 84,506 88,787 93,184 97,843 102,764 FIREFIGHTER/PARAMEDIC FFA 31.92 33.53 35.20 36.96 38.81 92,951 97,639 102,502 107,628 113,015 FIRE ENGINEER FFA 31.73 33.33 34.99 36.73 38.57 92,398 97,057 101,891 106,958 112,316 FIRE ENGINEER/PARAMEDIC FFA 34.91 36.67 38.50 40.41 42.44 101,658 106,783 112,112 117,674 123,585 FIRE CAPTAIN FFA 36.50 38.29 40.22 42.22 44.34 106,288 111,500 117,121 122,945 129,118 FIRE CAPTAIN/PARAMEDIC FFA 40.13 42.14 44.24 46.45 48.79 116,859 122,712 128,827 135,262 142,076 FIRE MARSHAL FFA 43.31 45.47 47.74 50.13 52.64 126,119 132,409 139,019 145,979 153,288 UNREPRESENTED CONFIDENTIAL GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 HUMAN RESOURCES ANALYST I CONF 35.24 37.00 38.85 40.78 42.82 73,299 76,960 80,808 84,822 89,066 EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT/DEPUTY CLERK CONF 37.86 39.75 41.73 43.83 46.02 78,749 82,680 86,798 91,166 95,722 SENIOR ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN CONF 39.34 41.31 43.39 45.56 47.84 81,827 85,925 90,251 94,765 99,507 FISCAL ANALYST CONF 42.37 44.49 46.71 49.05 51.50 88,130 92,539 97,157 102,024 107,120 HUMAN RESOURCES ANALYST II CONF 42.37 44.49 46.71 49.05 51.50 88,130 92,539 97,157 102,024 107,120 UNREPRESENTED MANAGEMENT GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 MANAGEMENT ANALYST MGMT 43.26 45.42 47.69 50.07 52.57 89,981 94,474 99,195 104,146 109,346 POLICE SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER MGMT 50.59 53.12 55.78 58.57 61.50 105,227 110,490 116,022 121,826 127,920 HARBOR BUSINESS MANAGER MGMT 50.59 53.12 55.78 58.57 61.50 105,227 110,490 116,022 121,826 127,920
CITY OF MORRO BAY
COMBINED PAY SCHEDULE
FISCAL YEAR 2026-27: Effective 07/01/2026
TITLE GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6
HOURLY RATES ANNUAL SALARY EQUIVALENT
MAINTENANCE DIVISION MANAGER MGMT 50.59 53.12 55.78 58.57 61.50 105,227 110,490 116,022 121,826 127,920 ADMINISTRATIVE PROGRAMS MANAGER MGMT 50.59 53.12 55.78 58.57 61.50 105,227 110,490 116,022 121,826 127,920 ASST. TO THE CITY MANAGER/PR MANAGER MGMT 50.59 53.12 55.78 58.57 61.50 105,227 110,490 116,022 121,826 127,920 SENIOR PLANNER MGMT 50.59 53.12 55.78 58.57 61.50 105,227 110,490 116,022 121,826 127,920 CHIEF BUILDING INSP/PLANS EXAMINER MGMT 54.04 56.74 59.57 62.55 65.69 112,403 118,019 123,906 130,104 136,635 CITY CLERK MGMT 54.04 56.74 59.57 62.55 65.69 112,403 118,019 123,906 130,104 136,635 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGER MGMT 54.04 56.74 59.57 62.55 65.69 112,403 118,019 123,906 130,104 136,635 RECREATION SERVICES MANAGER MGMT 54.04 56.74 59.57 62.55 65.69 112,403 118,019 123,906 130,104 136,635 PLANNING MANAGER MGMT 59.44 62.42 65.54 68.81 72.25 123,635 129,834 136,323 143,125 150,280 HUMAN RESOURCES/RISK MANAGER MGMT 59.44 62.42 65.54 68.81 72.25 123,635 129,834 136,323 143,125 150,280 ACCOUNTING MANAGER MGMT 59.44 62.42 65.54 68.81 72.25 123,635 129,834 136,323 143,125 150,280 SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER MGMT 59.44 62.42 65.54 68.81 72.25 123,635 129,834 136,323 143,125 150,280 UTILITIES PROJECT MANAGER MGMT 59.44 62.42 65.54 68.81 72.25 123,635 129,834 136,323 143,125 150,280 CITY ENGINEER MGMT 65.58 68.86 72.30 75.93 79.73 136,406 143,229 150,384 157,934 165,838 UTILITY DIVISION MANAGER MGMT 65.58 68.86 72.30 75.93 79.73 136,406 143,229 150,384 157,934 165,838 DEPUTY CHIEF / FIRE MARSHAL MGMT 70.86 74.41 78.12 82.03 86.14 147,389 154,773 162,490 170,622 179,171 POLICE COMMANDER MGMT 78.66 82.58 86.71 91.05 95.62 163,613 171,766 180,357 189,384 198,890 DEPARTMENT HEADS/EXECUTIVE GROUP STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR EXEC 83.38 87.55 91.94 96.54 101.37 173,430 182,104 191,235 200,803 210,850 PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR EXEC 83.38 87.55 91.94 96.54 101.37 173,430 182,104 191,235 200,803 210,850 FINANCE DIRECTOR EXEC 83.38 87.55 91.94 96.54 101.37 173,430 182,104 191,235 200,803 210,850 HARBOR VITALITY DIRECTOR EXEC 83.38 87.55 91.94 96.54 101.37 173,430 182,104 191,235 200,803 210,850 FIRE CHIEF (Sworn) EXEC 84.95 89.20 93.66 98.33 103.25 176,696 185,536 194,813 204,526 214,760 POLICE CHIEF (Sworn) EXEC 84.95 89.20 93.66 98.33 103.25 176,696 185,536 194,813 204,526 214,760 CITY ATTORNEY CA 112.39 115.22 118.08 121.03 124.07 233,771 239,658 245,606 251,742 258,066 CITY MANAGER CM 112.39 115.22 118.08 121.03 124.07 233,771 239,658 245,606 251,742 258,066
0181.0004/.1
RESOLUTION NO. 41-25
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF MORRO BAY, CALIFORNIA,
AMENDING AND RESTATING THE PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED
COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS FOR THE UNREPRESENTED MANAGEMENT
DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF MORRO BAY
T H E C I T Y C O U N C I L
City of Morro Bay, California
WHEREAS, Section 36506 of the California Government Code requires the City Council to fix the compensation of all appointive officers and employees by resolution or ordinance; and
WHEREAS, Morro Bay Municipal Code Section 2.20.020 also provides the salaries and compensation of officers and employees of the City of Morro Bay (“City”) shall be as fixed and determined by resolution of the City Council, except as specifically fixed in Chapter 2.20 of the Morro Bay Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City has established a system of classification for all positions within the City service with descriptive occupational titles, used to identify and distinguish classifications and/or positions from one another, based on job duties, essential functions, knowledge, skills, abilities, and minimum requirements; and WHEREAS, the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (“MMBA”) (Government Code sections 3500 et seq.)
1 governs labor relations between local government employers and employees and Section 3507.5 thereof permits a public agency to adopt local rules and regulations providing for the designation of the “management” employees of the public agency and restricting such employees from representing any employee organization, which represents other employees of the public agency, on matters within the scope of representation; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Employer-Employee Relations Resolution, Resolution No. 08-17, represents the City’s adoption of local rules and regulations for the administration of employer-employee relations, including, but not limited to, the designation of “management” employees, summarized in brief from that resolution as generally defined as meaning those employees who have significant responsibilities for formulating and administering City policies and programs and the authority to exercise independent judgment to hire, discipline, promote discharge; assign, or transfer other employees or who have the responsibility to use independent judgment to direct such employees, adjust their grievances, or recommend personnel action; and
WHEREAS, the City has designated such “management” employees as more fully identified and listed herein below, and
1 Unless otherwise stated, references to Sections will be to the Government Code.
Resolution No. 41-25
WHEREAS, the “management” employees identified and listed herein are “unrepresented,” meaning that they are not part of any City Council determined appropriate bargaining unit nor represented by any recognized employee organization as defined by the City’s Employer-Employee Relations Resolution and the MMBA; and
WHEREAS, the City Council deems it is in the best interest of the City to adjust the compensation of the unrepresented management employees, whose titles are listed herein, by a Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) salary increase established by City Council for these employees for FY 2024-25, FY 2025-26, and FY 2026-27.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the Morro Bay City Council does hereby adopt this Resolution, amending and restating the previously adopted and amended schedule of compensation and benefits for the City of Morro Bay’s unrepresented management employees and superseding and replacing any prior compensation and benefits resolutions, contracts, agreements or memorandum for such employees, including, but not limited to, Resolution No. 33-17 as follows:
A. CLASSIFICATION/POSITION LIST
The following is a list of authorized management classifications:
Accounting Manager
Administrative Programs Manager
Assistant to the City Manager/Public Relations Manager
City Clerk
City Engineer
Deputy Chief/Fire Marshal
Harbor Business Manager
Human Resources/Risk Manager
Information Technology Manager
Maintenance Division Manager
Management Analyst
Planning Manager
Police Commander
Police Support Services Manager
Recreation Services Manager
Senior Civil Engineer
Senior Planner
Utilities Project Manager
Utility Division Manager
B. NORMAL WORK HOURS
Management employees are expected to work during normal City business hours and may be required to work longer hours (more than an eight-hour day and more than five days per week). However, they are not subject to overtime compensation, as they are considered exempt employees within the definition
Resolution No. 41-25
of the FLSA. The occasional use of alternative work schedules can be implemented upon approval of the City Manager.
C. EXEMPT TIME OFF
As stated in B above, management employees are considered exempt employees. However, the City provides various leave banks for employees’ use, with accrual and use record-keeping being required to properly maintain the leave banks.
Time off of less than two continuous hours in a day does not need to be recorded by exempt employees. Abuses of this exception, such as daily use or random periods within a day, will not be allowed. This exception is also not allowed to be combined with any leaves.
D. ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE
Management employees receive up to seventy-two (72) hours annually in paid administrative leave in a lump sum accrual at the beginning of each fiscal year.
The City Manager or designee, upon recommendation by the management employee’s Department Head, may grant additional administrative leave to the management employee. The administrative leave bank may never accrue more than ninety-six (96) total hours, which may limit the number of hours credited to the employee’s administrative leave bank on July 1st of each year.
New management employees will be provided a pro-rata share of the annual seventy-two-hour administrative leave bank upon employment.
Administrative leave time must be taken off on an hour-for-hour basis equaling employee actual time off, regardless of accumulation rates. Administrative leave is a compensable leave, and any remaining hours in the employee’s bank will be paid out upon separation from City service, at the employee’s current hourly rate of pay.
E. VACATION LEAVE
Management employees accrue vacation, based on the schedule below. The City Manager shall have the authority to decide service years as the they see fit.
Service Years Entitlement in Days
1 thru 2 10
3 thru 4 11
5 thru 6 12
7 thru 8 13
9 thru 10 14
11 thru 12 15
13 thru 14 16
15 thru 16 17
17 thru 18 18