Agenda packet, regular meeting, first session — Nevada City City Council, September 13, 2023 (part 2 of 2)

Table of Contents
Table of Contents ..................................................................................................................................1 Public Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section Requirements...............................................................2 Acoustical Terminology..........................................................................................................................3 Fundamentals of Noise..........................................................................................................................5 Background on Criteria for Acceptable Noise Exposure.........................................................................7 Overview of Existing & Future Noise Environments in Nevada City........................................................9 Community Noise Survey ....................................................................................................................11 Nevada County Airport ........................................................................................................................14 Roadways ...........................................................................................................................................14 General Business and Light Industrial Uses.........................................................................................19 Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning (HVAC) Systems..................................................................21 Shooting Range...................................................................................................................................21 Outdoor Music Events at Pioneer Park ................................................................................................21 Schools, Playgrounds, and Daycare Centers.......................................................................................24 Construction ........................................................................................................................................24 References..........................................................................................................................................26 Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Background Report & Technical Appendices Nevada City General Plan Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section

Page 2 ends

Public Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section Requirements The Noise Element requirements contained in California Government Code Section 65302(f) are summarized as follows:
• A Noise Element shall identify and appraise noise problems in the community. The Noise Element shall recognize the guidelines established by the Office of Noise Control in the State Department of Health Services and shall analyze and quantify, to the extent practicable, as determined by the legislative body, current and projected noise levels for all major sources of noise within the City.
• Noise contours shall be shown for major noise sources and stated in terms of the day/night average level (DNL) or other appropriate noise descriptors. The noise contours shall be prepared on the basis of noise monitoring or following generally accepted noise modeling techniques for the various sources identified above.
• The noise contours shall be used as a guide for establishing a pattern of land uses in the land use element that minimizes the exposure of community residents to excessive noise.

The Noise Element shall include policies, implementation measures and possible solutions that address existing and foreseeable noise problems, if any.

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Background Report & Technical Appendices Nevada City General Plan Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section

Page 3 ends

Acoustical Terminology
Ambient Noise The distinctive acoustical characteristics of a given area consisting of all noise sources audible at that location. In many cases, the term ambient is used to describe an existing or pre-project condition such as the setting in an environmental noise study.

Attenuation The reduction of noise.

A-Weighting A frequency-response adjustment of a sound level meter that conditions the output signal to approximate human response. All noise level measurements and noise standards associated with this Health and Safety / Noise Element are provided in terms of A-weighted sound levels.

Capacity
Enhancing
A roadway project which would increase roadway capacity. Examples include new roadway construction projects or widening projects. Projects which only re- stripe or otherwise alter roadway configuration without increasing capacity are not included in this definition.

CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level. Defined as the 24-hour average noise level with noise occurring during evening hours (7 - 10 p.m.) weighted by a factor of three and nighttime hours weighted by a factor of 10 prior to averaging.

Decibel or dB Fundamental unit of sound, defined as ten times the logarithm of the ratio of the sound pressure squared over the reference pressure squared.

Fixed Noise
Source
Fixed noise sources refer to sources of noise occurring on private property which are not regulated at the local level. They may be fixed in a certain position or mobile on the private property, but do not include mobile vehicles on public roadways or aircraft operations. For example, the City of Nevada City cannot regulate how much noise a car on a public roadway can generate, as such levels are regulated at the state level.

However, the City can regulate the level of noise that is generated on private property as it affects other properties. Traffic on public roadways, and aircraft in flight cannot be regulated at the local level.

Frequency The measure of the rapidity of alterations of a periodic acoustic signal, expressed in cycles per second or Hertz.

Infill Project A project which is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map designations, zoning, and community plan for the property in which at least 50% of the project site is bounded by similar uses and a project which would not expand the perimeter of the development area.

DNL or DNL Day/Night Average Sound Level. Similar to CNEL but with no evening weighting.

Leq Equivalent or energy-averaged sound level.

L50 Median noise level, or level exceeded 50% of time.

Lmax The highest root-mean-square (RMS) sound level measured over a given period of time.

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Background Report & Technical Appendices Nevada City General Plan Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section

Page 4 ends

Loudness A subjective term for the sensation of the magnitude of sound.

Noise Unwanted sound.

Noise Reducing
Pavement
Pavement types for which local studies have identified noise-reducing benefits.

Sensitive Outdoor
Areas
The primary outdoor activity area associated with any given land use at which noise-sensitivity exists and the location at which the City’s exterior noise level standards are applied. Additional definitions of sensitive areas of various residential uses follow.

Sensitive Areas of
Single-Family
Residential uses
Normally considered to be backyards or distinct rear patio/deck areas. Front yard spaces may be identified as the sensitive exterior area if there are no other clearly identifiable private outdoor activity areas proposed as part of the residential property. Elevated balconies, front courtyards, front decks, side yards, etc., are not commonly considered to be sensitive outdoor activity areas. Where the location of outdoor activity areas for large lot residential properties cannot be determined, the City’s exterior noise level standards shall be applied within 50 feet of the rear of the residence.

Sensitive Areas of
Multi-family
Residential Uses
Common outdoor recreation areas, such as pools, tot-lots, tennis courts, etc., of multi-family uses are considered to be the sensitive outdoor area. Individual patios and balconies of multi-family developments are not considered to be sensitive outdoor areas.

Sensitive Areas of
Residential
Component of
Mixed-Use
Developments
Mixed-use developments will commonly consist of residential units on elevated floors above office or commercial uses. As a result, such uses may not include a clearly delineated sensitive outdoor area, in which case satisfaction with the City’s interior noise level standards will be considered adequate. The exterior noise standards for the residential component of mixed-use developments shall not be applied to patios or balconies facing the noise source (i.e. street).

Sensitive Areas of
Non-Residential
Uses
The noise-sensitive area of non-residential uses should be evaluated on a case by case basis. For example, the exterior areas surrounding hospitals, schools, and office buildings are not commonly considered to be noise-sensitive, whereas the interior spaces of such uses are noise-sensitive. The noise standards contained in Tables 1 and 2 should only be applied to locations within a proposed use where noise sensitivity can be demonstrated.

Short-Term
Vacation Rentals
(STVRs)
A detached residence, condominium, apartment, or other habitable structure which is available for rental on a short-term basis. A short-term basis is defined as a continuous rental period of less than one month.

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Background Report & Technical Appendices Nevada City General Plan Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section

Page 5 ends

Fundamentals of Noise
Noise is often described as unwanted sound. Sound is defined as any pressure variation in air that the human ear can detect. If the pressure variations occur frequently enough (at least 20 times per second), they can be heard and hence are called sound. The number of pressure variations per second is called the frequency of sound, and is expressed as cycles per second, called Hertz (Hz).

Measuring sound directly in terms of pressure would require a very large and awkward range of numbers.

To avoid this, the decibel scale was devised. The decibel scale uses the hearing threshold (20 micropascals), as a point of reference, defined as 0 dB. Other sound pressures are then compared to the reference pressure, and the logarithm is taken to keep the numbers in a practical range. The decibel scale allows a million-fold increase in pressure to be expressed as 120 dB. Another useful aspect of the decibel scale is that changes in levels (dB) correspond closely to human perception of relative loudness.

Figure 1 shows examples of noise levels for several common noise sources and environments.

The perceived loudness of sounds is dependent upon many factors, including sound pressure level and frequency content. However, within the usual range of environmental noise levels, perception of loudness is relatively predictable, and can be approximated by weighing the frequency response of a sound level meter by means of the standardized A-weighing network. There is a strong correlation between A-weighted sound levels (expressed as dBA) and community response to noise. For this reason, the A-weighted sound level has become the standard tool of environmental noise assessment.

Community noise is commonly described in terms of the “ambient” noise level, which is defined as the all-encompassing noise level associated with a given noise environment. A common statistical tool to measure the ambient noise level is the average, or equivalent, sound level (Leq), which corresponds to a steady-state A-weighted sound level containing the same total energy as a time-varying signal over a given time period (usually one hour). The Leq is the foundation of the composite noise descriptor, DNL, and shows very good correlation with community response to noise.

The Day-Night Average Level (DNL) is based upon the average noise level over a 24-hour day, with a +10 decibel weighing applied to noise occurring during nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) hours. The nighttime penalty is based upon the assumption that people react to nighttime noise exposures as though they were twice as loud as daytime exposures. Because DNL represents a 24-hour average, it tends to disguise short-term variations in the noise environment.

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Background Report & Technical Appendices Nevada City General Plan Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section

Page 6 ends

Noise in the community has often been cited as being a health problem, not in terms of actual physiological damages such as hearing impairment, but in terms of inhibiting general well-being and contributing to undue stress and annoyance. The health effects of noise in the community arise from interference with human activities such as sleep, speech, recreation and tasks demanding concentration or coordination. When community noise interferes with human activities or contributes to stress, public annoyance with the noise source increases, the acceptability of the environment for people decreases.

This decrease in acceptability and the threat to public well-being are the bases for land use planning policies preventing exposures to excessive community noise levels.

Figure 1
Common Noise Sources and Associated Noise Levels
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Background Report & Technical Appendices Nevada City General Plan Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section

Page 7 ends

To control noise from fixed sources which have developed from processes other than zoning or land use planning, many jurisdictions have adopted community noise control ordinances. Such ordinances are intended to abate noise nuisances and to control noise from existing sources. They may also be used as performance standards to judge the creation of a potential nuisance, or potential encroachment of sensitive uses upon noise-producing facilities. Community noise control ordinances are generally designed to resolve noise problems on a short-term basis (usually by means of hourly noise level criteria), rather than on the basis of 24-hour or annual cumulative noise exposures.

In addition to the A-weighted noise level, other factors should be considered in establishing criteria for noise sensitive land uses. For example, sounds with noticeable tonal content such as whistles, horns, droning or high-pitched sounds may be more annoying than the A-weighted sound level alone suggests.

Many noise standards apply a penalty, or correction, of 5 dBA to such sounds. The effects of unusual tonal content are generally more of a concern at nighttime, when residents may notice the sound in contrast to low levels of background noise.

Because many rural residential areas experience very low noise levels, residents may express concern about the loss of "peace and quiet" due to the introduction of a sound which was not audible previously.

In very quiet environments, the introduction of virtually any change in local activities will cause an increase in noise levels. A change in noise level and the loss of "peace and quiet" is the inevitable result of land use or activity changes in such areas. Audibility of a new noise source and/or increases in noise levels within recognized acceptable limits are not usually considered to be significant noise impacts, but these concerns should be addressed and considered in the planning and environmental review processes.

Background on Criteria for Acceptable Noise Exposure
The State Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Public Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section Guidelines include recommended exterior and interior noise level standards for local jurisdictions to identify and prevent the creation of incompatible land uses due to noise. The OPR guidelines contain a land use compatibility table which describes the compatibility of different land uses with a range of environmental noise levels in terms of DNL. A noise environment of 60 dB DNL or less is considered to be normally acceptable for residential uses according to those guidelines.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also offers guidelines for community noise exposure in the publication “Information on the Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety”. These guidelines consider occupational noise exposure as well as noise exposure in the home. The “Levels Document” recognizes an exterior noise level of 55 dB DNL as a goal to protect the public from hearing loss, activity interference, sleep disturbance and annoyance. The EPA notes, however, that this level is not a regulatory goal, but is a level defined by a negotiated scientific consensus without concern for economic and technological feasibility or the needs and desires of any particular community. The EPA and other Federal agencies have suggested land use compatibility guidelines which indicate that residential noise exposures of 55 to 65 dB DNL are acceptable.

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Background Report & Technical Appendices Nevada City General Plan Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section

Page 8 ends

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has also prepared a Model Community Noise Control Ordinance, using Leq as the means of defining allowable residential noise level limits. The EPA model contains no specific recommendations for local noise level standards, but reports a range of Leq values as adopted by various local jurisdictions. The mean daytime residential noise standard reported by the EPA is 57 dBA (Leq); the mean nighttime residential noise standard is 52 dBA (Leq). Other state laws and regulations regarding noise control are directed towards aircraft, motor vehicles and noise in general.

The California Vehicle Code sets noise emission standards for new vehicles including autos, trucks, motorcycles and off-road vehicles. Performance standards also apply to all vehicles operated on public streets and roadways. Section 216 of the Streets and Highways Code regulates traffic noise received at schools near freeways.

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Background Report & Technical Appendices Nevada City General Plan Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section

Page 9 ends

Overview of Existing & Future Noise Environments in Nevada City This document presents background information on the existing and projected future noise environments in Nevada City, California. The existing City Limits and General Plan Study Area are shown on Figure

2. The ambient noise environment in the Nevada City is defined by several noise sources. The most prevalent source of near continuous noise in the City is traffic on Highways 20 and 49. Intermittent noise sources consist primarily of local traffic on City streets, commercial activities on Broad Street, and typical neighborhood noise sources. Activities at parks and schools also affect the noise environment within Nevada City, but to a much more localized extent. Noise sources associated with construction and property maintenance also contributed to the noise environment, typically on an intermittent and fairly temporary basis.

As Nevada City grows, coupled with overall growth in the region, traffic volumes on local highways and city streets will increase, resulting in higher traffic noise environments. Similarly, growth in tourismrelated activities, and increased commercial activities in the City will all contribute to higher ambient noise levels over time.

The goals and policies of the Nevada City General Plan Public Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section were developed with these noise environments in mind. This document presents background information on the various types of noise sources affecting the existing and future noise environments within Nevada City. This information will be used by the City to assess the potential for noise impacts related to future development within the City and to require acoustical analyses for new projects as determined appropriate.

The following sections discuss the various noise environments within Nevada City.

Legend
Current City Limits
Nevada City General Plan Study Area
Scale (Feet) 0 1250 2500
Nevada City Noise Element
Nevada City, California Study Area
Figure2
Community Noise Survey
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
To quantify existing noise levels at areas in Nevada City, a community noise survey was performed.

The community noise survey consisted of seven (7) 24-hour continuous noise measurement locations from Friday, April 1 through Monday, April 4, 2022. The locations of the community noise measurement sites are shown in Figure 3.

Larson-Davis Laboratories (LDL) Model 820 precision integrating sound levels meter were used to complete the noise level measurement survey. The meters were calibrated before use with an LDL Model CAL200 acoustical calibrator to ensure the accuracy of the measurements. The equipment used meets all pertinent specifications of the American National Standards Institute for Type 1 sound level meters (ANSI S1.4). Photographs of the noise survey locations are provided in Appendix A.

As indicated in Table 1, noise levels measured at Sites 2, 3 and 7 were highest due to their proximity to Highways 20 and 49. Site 1 was located within the Broad Street commercial area and exhibited elevated noise levels as a result. The lowest measured ambient conditions within the City occurred at Site 5, which was located on Providence Mine Road, south of Deer Creek School. Overall, the community noise survey results indicate that the noise environment is elevated in close proximity to the local highways and commercial core, and fairly low at areas removed from those noise sources.

The results of the 24-hour continuous measurements are summarized in Table 1 and shown graphically in Appendix B. The results of the community noise surveys were used to develop the noise criteria for new land uses proposed within the Nevada City General Plan. Those criteria are provided in Tables 1 and 2 in the Noise Element Goals and Policies document.

Background Report & Technical Appendices Nevada City General Plan Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section

Page 11 ends

LT-7
LT-3
LT-4
LT-2 LT-1
LT-6
LT-5
Legend
Nevada City Limits (Approximate)
Long-term Noise Measurement Locations
Scale (Feet)
0 750 1500
Nevada City Noise Element
Nevada City, California
Long-term Community Noise
Measurement Locations
Figure 3
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Background Report & Technical Appendices Nevada City General Plan Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section

Page 13 ends

Table 1
Long-term Community Noise Survey Results Nevada City, CA.

Day [dB] Night [dB]
Site Date Leq Lmax Leq Lmax DNL [dB]
Friday, April 1, 2022 63 87 57 92 69
Saturday, April 2, 2022 63 100 55 102 69
LT-1 Sunday, April 3, 2022 61 91 52 80 63
Monday, April 4, 2022 61 85 51 84 63
Average 62 91 54 90 66
Friday, April 1, 2022 75 104 65 85 76
Saturday, April 2, 2022 74 92 65 85 75
LT-2 Sunday, April 3, 2022 74 94 63 88 74
Monday, April 4, 2022 75 97 64 86 76
Average 74 97 64 86 75
Friday, April 1, 2022 68 95 58 85 69
Saturday, April 2, 2022 68 105 57 83 68
LT-3 Sunday, April 3, 2022 66 91 56 78 67
Monday, April 4, 2022 68 90 57 79 68
Average 67 95 57 81 68
Friday, April 1, 2022 59 91 48 86 60
Saturday, April 2, 2022 58 90 47 77 59
LT-4 Sunday, April 3, 2022 58 92 46 80 58
Monday, April 4, 2022 58 90 44 81 59
Average 58 91 46 81 59
Friday, April 1, 2022 42 64 36 57 45
Saturday, April 2, 2022 39 62 35 66 44
LT-5 Sunday, April 3, 2022 39 67 38 67 43
Monday, April 4, 2022 44 69 32 61 44
Average 31 49 35 63 44
Friday, April 1, 2022 46 70 40 56 48
Saturday, April 2, 2022 47 81 39 66 49
LT-6 Sunday, April 3, 2022 45 68 39 57 47
Monday, April 4, 2022 47 77 38 55 48
Average 46 74 39 58 48
Friday, April 1, 2022 68 90 60 86 69
Saturday, April 2, 2022 67 90 59 83 68
LT-7 Sunday, April 3, 2022 67 89 57 82 68
Monday, April 4, 2022 67 93 58 84 68
Average 67 90 58 84 68
Source: Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc (2022)
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Background Report & Technical Appendices Nevada City General Plan Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section

Page 14 ends

Nevada County Airport
The Nevada County Airport is located approximately 1 mile south of the General Plan Study Area boundary, as shown in Figure 4. The airport consists of one runway of approximately 4,500 feet.

Operations at the airport consist primarily of single and twin-engine general aviation propeller driven aircraft, general aviation jet aircraft, and Cal Fire aircraft. Occasionally, there are events at the airport such as the Nevada County Airfest twice a year.

Figure 4 shows the airport’s 55 dB CNEL contours from the Nevada County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. As indicated in Figure 4, the airport’s 55 dB CNEL contours do not extend into the current City limits or into the General Plan Study Area. As a result, Nevada City is not considered to be appreciably affected by noise related to aircraft operations at the Nevada County Airport even though audible overflights of the City do periodically occur.

Roadways
Highway 20 and Highway 49 are the main sources of traffic noise within the General Plan Study Area.

The Federal Highway Administration Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD- 77-108) was used to predict existing and future traffic noise levels for these roadways. The model is based upon the CALVENO noise emission factors for automobiles, medium trucks, and heavy trucks.

Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes for existing (2020) conditions were obtained from published Caltrans traffic data. Future (2045) conditions were conservatively estimated by doubling the existing ADT volumes. The predicted day/night average level (DNL) at a representative distance of 100 feet and the distances from the centerline of the major roadways to the 60, 65 and 70 dB DNL contours are summarized in Tables 2 and 3 for existing and future conditions, respectively. To predict existing or future traffic noise levels at distances other than 100 feet from the roadway centerlines, the offsets provided in Table 4 can be utilized. Figure 5 illustrates the future traffic noise contours within the General Plan Study Area. The complete FHWA model results for the roadways are presented in Appendix C.

It is recognized that vehicle speeds, truck percentages, day/night distributions and topographic shielding vary on the roadways within Nevada City. As a result, it is not feasible to precisely predict existing and future traffic noise levels at the General Plan level. However, because the Table 1 and 2 data is considered to represent reasonable worst-case conditions, it is useful in performing screening analyses to determine if more detailed noise analyses are warranted.

At such time as existing and future traffic volumes for the major local roadways within the City are available, this background report will be updated to include the noise generation of those roadways.

Legend
Nevada City Limits (Approximate)
Nevada City General Plan Study Area (Approximate)
Airport 55dB CNEL Noise Contour
Scale (Mile)
Nevada City Noise Element
Nevada City, California
Airport Noise Contours
0 0.5 1.0 Figure 4
0 750 1500 3000 4500
feet
Nevada City Noise Element
Figure 5
Future Traffic Noise Contours
75 Legend
60 80 DNL, dBA
>= 80
75 - 80
70 - 75
65 - 70
60 - 65
General Plan
Study Area
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Background Report & Technical Appendices Nevada City General Plan Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section

Page 17 ends

Table 2
Existing (2020) Traffic Noise Levels and Distances to Traffic Noise Contours Nevada City, CA.

DNL at 100’
[dB]
Distance to DNL Contours [feet]
Segment Roadway Segment Description 70 dB 65 dB 60 dB
1 Highway 20 Banner Ridge to Gold Flat Road 72 146 315 678 2 Highway 20 Gold Flat Road to Sacramento St 72 131 283 609 3 Highway 20 Sacramento St to Broad St 70 95 204 440
4 Highway 20 Broad St to Coyote St 68 75 162 348
5 Highway 20 Coyote St to Highway 49 East Jct. 68 73 158 341 6 Highway 20 East of Highway 49 East Jct. 64 42 91 196
7 Highway 49 West of North Highway 20 Jct. 65 48 103 221 Source: Federal Highway Administration Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) with traffic counts from Caltrans.

Table 3
Future (2045) Traffic Noise Levels and Distances to Traffic Noise Contours Nevada City, CA.

DNL at 100’
[dB]
Distance to DNL Contours [feet]
Segment Roadway Segment Description 70 dB 65 dB 60 dB
1 Highway 20 Banner Ridge to Gold Flat Road 75 232 500 1076 2 Highway 20 Gold Flat Road to Sacramento St 75 208 449 967 3 Highway 20 Sacramento St to Broad St 73 151 324 699
4 Highway 20 Broad St to Coyote St 71 119 257 553
5 Highway 20 Coyote St to Highway 49 East Jct. 71 116 251 541 6 Highway 20 East of Highway 49 East Jct. 67 67 144 311 7 Highway 49 West of North Highway 20 Jct. 68 76 163 351 Source: Federal Highway Administration Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) with traffic counts from Caltrans.

As noted above, the Table 2 and 3 data are provided in terms of DNL at a reference distance of 100 feet from the roadway centerline. If the distance from the sensitive receptor location to the roadway centerline is different than 100 feet, then the offsets provided in Table 4 can be used to adjust the predicted traffic noise levels to reflect the appropriate distance.

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Background Report & Technical Appendices Nevada City General Plan Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section

Page 18 ends

Table 4
Offsets to the Predicted Table 1 & 2 DNL Values to Adjust for Varying Distances Distance [feet] Offset [dB] Distance [feet] Offset [dB] 50 +5 510 -11
60 +3 520 -11
70 +2 530 -11
80 +1 540 -11
90 +1 550 -11
100 0 560 -11
110 -1 570 -11
120 -1 580 -11
130 -2 590 -12
140 -2 600 -12
150 -3 610 -12
160 -3 620 -12
170 -3 630 -12
180 -4 640 -12
190 -4 650 -12
200 -5 660 -12
210 -5 670 -12
220 -5 680 -12
230 -5 690 -13
240 -6 700 -13
250 -6 710 -13
260 -6 720 -13
270 -6 730 -13
280 -7 740 -13
290 -7 750 -13
300 -7 760 -13
310 -7 770 -13
320 -8 780 -13
330 -8 790 -13
340 -8 800 -14
350 -8 810 -14
360 -8 820 -14
370 -9 830 -14
380 -9 840 -14
390 -9 850 -14
400 -9 860 -14
410 -9 870 -14
420 -9 880 -14
430 -10 890 -14
440 -10 900 -14
450 -10 910 -14
460 -10 920 -14
470 -10 930 -15
480 -10 940 -15
490 -10 950 -15
500 -10 960 -15
Source: Offset = 15*Log10(100/Distance)
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Background Report & Technical Appendices Nevada City General Plan Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section

Page 19 ends

General Business and Light Industrial Uses
Existing or planned commercial/industrial operations may result in noise impacts when they are proposed near noise sensitive land uses, or when noise-sensitive land uses are proposed near commercial or industrial noise sources. Commercial and Light Industrial noise sources are commonly associated with tire shops (pneumatic wrenches, compressors, tire breakers), auto repair facilities (air chisels, paint sprayers), powder-coating facilities, metal shops, woodshops, shopping centers, drive-up windows, car washes, loading docks, etc.

Noise generation within an industrial or commercial facility has the potential to exceed locally acceptable standards at nearby noise-sensitive land uses. Typical commercial and industrial noise sources within Nevada City include, but are not limited to, the following:

A. The Lower Grass Valley Road area located in Light Industrial zoning. This area includes various facilities including a tire shop, heavy equipment contractor, and repair shops.

B. The Gold Flat Road/New Mohawk Road area located in Light Industrial zoning. This area includes an automotive repair facility.

C. Seven Hills Business Park located in Light Industrial zoning. This area is located on Searls Avenue and Argall Way. It consists of several small businesses including tire and automotive repair facilities.

D. Railroad Avenue area south of Sacramento Street and west of Highway 20. This includes a gas station and an automotive service facility.

E. Hollow Way/Golf Flat Road are located in Local Business zoning. It includes a car wash and automotive service facility.

F. The large Light Industrial zone on Providence Mine Road that is widely undeveloped but includes truck loading docks.

Figure 6 indicates the general locations of the commercial/industrial areas described above. The noise emissions of these types of uses are dependent on many factors, and are therefore, difficult to quantify precisely. Nonetheless, noise generated by these uses contribute to the ambient noise environment in the immediate vicinity of these uses, and should be considered where either new noise-sensitive uses are proposed nearby or where similar uses are proposed in existing residential or other noise-sensitive areas.

D
F
C
G
E
B
A
Legend
Nevada City Limits (Approx.) General Plan
Study Area (Approx.)
D Railroad Ave
E Hollow Way
Nevada City Noise Element
Nevada City, California
A Lower Grass Valley Rd
B Gold Flat Rd/New Mohawk Rd
C Seven Hills Business Park
F Providence Mine Rd
F Gun Club Scale (Feet)
0 2000 4000
Fixed Noise Source Locations
Figure 6
Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Background Report & Technical Appendices Nevada City General Plan Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section

Page 21 ends

Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning (HVAC) Systems HVAC noise sources include fans, pumps, cooling towers, compressors, condensers, and boilers.

HVAC equipment is associated with virtually every type of inhabited structure, including residential, commercial, and industrial uses. Large HVAC components are often housed in mechanical equipment rooms, which reduce the transmitted noise. However, HVAC equipment must sometimes be located outdoors to provide adequate ventilation or heat exchange. Noise generated by HVAC equipment contributes to the ambient noise environment in the immediate vicinity of the HVAC equipment, and should be considered where either new noise-sensitive uses are proposed nearby or where HVAC equipment is proposed in existing residential or other noise- sensitive areas.

Shooting Range
The Nevada County Sportsmen’s Club is located on Banner Mountain Trail outside the current City limits but within the General Plan area. This is an outdoor facility open to the public and provides target practice with rifles and pistols, archery, and trap shooting. The noise produced by this facility ranges widely due to the number of shots and type of gun being used. According to the Nevada County General Plan Final EIR, Volume 1, the Nevada County Department of Planning measured maximum noise levels of 86-96 dB on Rocker Way, 60-72 dB on Caledonia Way, and 60-69 dB on Melanie Court. The noise generation of this shooting range should be considered if new noisesensitive uses are proposed in the vicinity of this facility. The shooting range location is identified on Figure 6 as “G”.

Outdoor Music Events at Pioneer Park
Concerts are periodically held within the Pioneer Park subject to a permit issued by the City. The Nevada City Parks & Recreation Facility Rental Policies are attached as Appendix D. The policy states that the “Bandshell” area is designated for amplified sound.

Many local residents in the Pioneer Park vicinity have expressed concerns related to noise generated during amplified music events held at the park. Other comments were received from event sponsors interested in maintaining the ability to host events in the park with amplified speech or music. Given the proximity of nearby residences to the park it would be infeasible to reduce the output of the sound amplification systems to levels which would be satisfactory to all nearby residences without affecting the event experience to which event attendees have become accustomed. As a result, policy pertaining to amplified music events will require balancing the requirements of the event promoters/hosts with the noise-sensitivity of the surrounding residents.

To assess how sound propagates from the bandshell area into the neighboring community a concert simulation was conducted at the park site on March 16, 2022. The simulation consisted of playing amplified music at high sound levels through four (4) Yamaha DXR-12, 1,200-watt concert speakers with built-in amplifiers and a Yamaha DXS15, 1,200-watt subwoofer with built in amplifier, using an MP3 player as the music source. Three (3) speakers and a subwoofer were directed away from the stage and one (1) speaker was used as a stage floor monitor (directed toward the stage).

Appendix E shows photographs of the event simulation speaker array.

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Background Report & Technical Appendices Nevada City General Plan Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section

Page 22 ends

While sound was played through the sound system to a reference level of approximately 84-88 dB at 100 feet from the speakers, noise level measurements were conducted at nine (9) locations in the vicinity of the park. The measurement locations are shown on Figure 7. The simulation measurement results are presented in Table 5.

Table 5
Pioneer Park Concert Simulation Results
Site
Dist. to
Speakers
[feet] Description
Ref. Leq
[dB]1
Site Leq
[dB]
Ref. Lmax
[dB]1
Site Lmax
[dB] Notes
A 260 At facility between Tennis
Courts and Ball Field
86 75 96 80
1 140 Behind the stage (west of
park) at the nearest
residential front lawn
84 76 96 80
2 460 South park boundary – near
an elevated residential front
lawn
87 56 97 60 45 dB
ambient; echo
3 650 West park boundary –
residential front lawn with
view of stage
88 69 97 75 Music is clear
4 550 North park boundary –
elevated residential front lawn
with view of stage
86 68 96 75 Music is clear
5 850 Residence on Upper Park
Avenue
86 54 96 61 Audible music
6 2,300 At Forest View Cemetery, 200’
from Red Dog Road
86 55 96 65 55-60 dB
traffic
7 1,600 On Park Ave Ext. 45’ from Park
Avenue Ext.
86 51 96 56 56-63 dB
traffic
8 850 Residence on Silva Avenue 86 50 95 61 54 dB ducks Notes

1. Reference sound measured at 100 feet from speaker array.

2. Values in red indicates a noise level of greater than 75 dB; yellow indicates 71 to 75 dB; green indicates 66 to 70 dB; blue indicates 61 to 65 dB; and black indicates 60 dB or less.

The concert simulation indicates that future noise mitigation would be required near residences at Site 1 and possibly at residences near Sites 3 and 4. Because this park is owned by the City, with events held at this location requiring permits from the City, noise generated during concert events held at this location would be subject to the City’s Parks & Recreation Facility Rental Policies shown in Appendix D.
6 5
4 3
A
1 2
8 Legend
Pioneer Park Boundary (Approximate)
Short-term Noise Measurement Locations
Pioneer Park Bandshell Location Scale (Feet)
0 250 500
Nevada City Noise Element
Nevada City, California
Amplified Music Event Simulation Noise
Measurement Locations
Figure 7
7 Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Background Report & Technical Appendices Nevada City General Plan Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section

Page 24 ends

Schools, Playgrounds, and Daycare Centers
Children playing on school playgrounds, at neighborhood parks and in daycare centers are often considered potentially significant noise sources which could adversely affect adjacent noisesensitive land uses. Typical noise levels associated with groups of approximately 50 children playing at a distance of 50 feet generally range from 55 to 60 dB Leq, with maximum noise levels ranging from 70 to 75 dB.

Given the proximity of most schools, parks and daycare centers to residential uses, the potential for exceedance of the City’s Noise Element standards exists, depending on the orientation and proximity of the play areas to the nearest residences, the number of children using the play areas at a given time, and the types of activities the children are engaged in.

Practical noise mitigation measures could be utilized to reduce the potential for adverse noise impact associated with children playing at these types of uses. Such measures could include requiring minimum setbacks between play areas and residential property lines, requiring noise barriers at the perimeter of the play areas, and by limiting the number of children using the play areas at a given time. Nonetheless, because sounds consisting of speech have been shown to be more annoying that broad-band noise, and because children often take great pride in being loud, the potential for annoyance associated with these may not practically be eliminated.

Construction
During the construction phases of projects, noise from construction activities adds to the noise environment in the immediate project vicinity. Activities involved in typical construction would generate maximum noise levels, as indicated in Table 6, ranging from 76 to 90 dBA at a distance of 50 feet.

Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Background Report & Technical Appendices Nevada City General Plan Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section

Page 25 ends

Table 6
Construction Equipment Reference Noise Levels
Equipment Description Maximum Noise Level at 50 feet [dBA] Air compressor 80
Backhoe 80
Ballast equalizer 82
Ballast tamper 83
Compactor 82
Concrete mixer 85
Concrete pump 82
Concrete vibrator 76
Crane, mobile 83
Dozer 85
Generator 82
Grader 85
Impact wrench 85
Loader 80
Paver 85
Pneumatic tool 85
Pump 77
Saw 76
Scarifier 83
Scraper 85
Shovel 82
Spike driver 77
Tie cutter 84
Tie handler 80
Tie inserter 85
Truck 84
Source: Federal Transit Administration Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, Table 7-1 (2018) Bollard Acoustical Consultants, Inc. (BAC)
Background Report & Technical Appendices Nevada City General Plan Safety Element/Noise Exposure Section

Page 26 ends

References

1. General Plan Guidelines. State of California Office of Planning and Research (OPR). https://opr.ca.gov/docs/OPR_Appendix_D_final.pdf

2. United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Model Community Noise Control Ordinance, using Leq as the means of defining allowable residential noise level limits. https://www.nonoise.org/library/epamodel/epamodel.pdf

3. California Vehicle Code.
https://california.public.law/codes/ca_sts_and_high_code_section_216

4. Federal Highway Administration Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77- 108).

5. State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Annual Traffic Counts. https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/census/traffic-volumes

6. FTA. 2018 (September) Federal Transit Administration Publication. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual.
https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/researchinnovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no0123_0.pdf Legend Nevada City Noise Element
A Site LT-1
B Site LT-2
C Site LT-3
D Site LT-4
Noise Measurement Microphone Nevada City, California
Photographs of Community Noise Survey
Locations
Appendix A
A B
C D
Sound Level, dBA
110
100
90 80
70 60
50 40
30 Appendix B-1
Nevada City Noise Element - Nevada City, California Friday, April 1, 2022 - Monday, April 4, 2022
Site LT-1
Friday, April 1, 2022 Saturday, April 2, 2022
110
100
90 80
70 60
50 40
30 Ldn, dB = 69 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Ldn, dB = 69 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Sunday, April 3, 2022 Monday, April 4, 2022
110 110
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70
60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
Ldn, dB = 63 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Ldn, dB = 63 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Sound Level, dBA Sound Level, dBA 12 AM 12 AM 4 AM 4 AM
8 AM 8 AM
12 PM 12 PM
4 PM 4 PM8 PM 8 PM
11 PM 11 PM
Sound Level, dBA
12 AM 12 AM
4 AM 4 AM
8 AM 8 AM
12 PM 12 PM
4 PM 4 PM8 PM 8 PM
11 PM 11 PM
Sound Level, dBA
110
100
90 80
70 60
50 40
30 Appendix B-2
Nevada City Noise Element - Nevada City, California Friday, April 1, 2022 - Monday, April 4, 2022
Site LT-2
Friday, April 1, 2022 Saturday, April 2, 2022
110
100
90 80
70 60
50 40
30 Ldn, dB = 76 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Ldn, dB = 75 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Sunday, April 3, 2022 Monday, April 4, 2022
110 110
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70
60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
Ldn, dB = 74 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Ldn, dB = 76 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Sound Level, dBA Sound Level, dBA 12 AM 12 AM 4 AM 4 AM
8 AM 8 AM
12 PM 12 PM
4 PM 4 PM8 PM 8 PM
11 PM 11 PM
Sound Level, dBA
12 AM 12 AM
4 AM 4 AM
8 AM 8 AM
12 PM 12 PM
4 PM 4 PM8 PM 8 PM
11 PM 11 PM
Sound Level, dBA
110
100
90 80
70 60
50 40
30 Appendix B-3
Nevada City Noise Element - Nevada City, California Friday, April 1, 2022 - Monday, April 4, 2022
Site LT-3
Friday, April 1, 2022 Saturday, April 2, 2022
110
100
90 80
70 60
50 40
30 Ldn, dB = 69 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Ldn, dB = 68 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Sunday, April 3, 2022 Monday, April 4, 2022
110 110
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70
60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
Ldn, dB = 67 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Ldn, dB = 68 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Sound Level, dBA Sound Level, dBA 12 AM 12 AM 4 AM 4 AM
8 AM 8 AM
12 PM 12 PM
4 PM 4 PM8 PM 8 PM
11 PM 11 PM
Sound Level, dBA
12 AM 12 AM
4 AM 4 AM
8 AM 8 AM
12 PM 12 PM
4 PM 4 PM8 PM 8 PM
11 PM 11 PM
Sound Level, dBA
110
100
90 80
70 60
50 40
30 Appendix B-4
Nevada City Noise Element - Nevada City, California Friday, April 1, 2022 - Monday, April 4, 2022
Site LT-4
Friday, April 1, 2022 Saturday, April 2, 2022
110
100
90 80
70 60
50 40
30 Ldn, dB = 60 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Ldn, dB = 59 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Sunday, April 3, 2022 Monday, April 4, 2022
110 110
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70
60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
Ldn, dB = 58 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Ldn, dB = 59 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Sound Level, dBA Sound Level, dBA 12 AM 12 AM 4 AM 4 AM
8 AM 8 AM
12 PM 12 PM
4 PM 4 PM8 PM 8 PM
11 PM 11 PM
Sound Level, dBA
12 AM 12 AM
4 AM 4 AM
8 AM 8 AM
12 PM 12 PM
4 PM 4 PM8 PM 8 PM
11 PM 11 PM
Sound Level, dBA
110
100
90 80
70 60
50 40
30 Appendix B-5
Nevada City Noise Element - Nevada City, California Friday, April 1, 2022 - Monday, April 4, 2022
Site LT-5
Friday, April 1, 2022 Saturday, April 2, 2022
110
100
90 80
70 60
50 40
30 Ldn, dB = 45 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Ldn, dB = 44 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Sunday, April 3, 2022 Monday, April 4, 2022
110 110
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70
60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
Ldn, dB = 44 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Ldn, dB = 44 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Sound Level, dBA Sound Level, dBA 12 AM 12 AM 4 AM 4 AM8 AM 8 AM
12 PM
12 PM
4 PM
4 PM
8 PM
8 PM
11 PM
11 PM
Sound Level, dBA
12 AM 12 AM
4 AM 4 AM
8 AM 8 AM
12 PM 12 PM
4 PM 4 PM8 PM 8 PM
11 PM 11 PM
Sound Level, dBA
110
100
90 80
70 60
50 40
30 Appendix B-6
Nevada City Noise Element - Nevada City, California Friday, April 1, 2022 - Monday, April 4, 2022
Site LT-6
Friday, April 1, 2022 Saturday, April 2, 2022
110
100
90 80
70 60
50 40
30 Ldn, dB = 48 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Ldn, dB = 49 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Sunday, April 3, 2022 Monday, April 4, 2022
110 110
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70
60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
Ldn, dB = 47 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Ldn, dB = 48 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Sound Level, dBA Sound Level, dBA 12 AM 12 AM 4 AM 4 AM
8 AM 8 AM
12 PM 12 PM
4 PM 4 PM8 PM 8 PM
11 PM 11 PM
Sound Level, dBA
12 AM 12 AM
4 AM 4 AM
8 AM 8 AM
12 PM 12 PM
4 PM 4 PM8 PM 8 PM
11 PM 11 PM
Sound Level, dBA
110
100
90 80
70 60
50 40
30 Appendix B-7
Nevada City Noise Element - Nevada City, California Friday, April 1, 2022 - Monday, April 4, 2022
Site LT-7
Friday, April 1, 2022 Saturday, April 2, 2022
110
100
90 80
70 60
50 40
30 Ldn, dB = 69 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Ldn, dB = 68 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Sunday, April 3, 2022 Monday, April 4, 2022
110 110
100 100
90 90
80 80
70 70
60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
Ldn, dB = 68 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Ldn, dB = 68 Average (Leq) Maximum (Lmax) Sound Level, dBA Sound Level, dBA 12 AM 12 AM 4 AM 4 AM
8 AM 8 AM
12 PM 12 PM
4 PM 4 PM8 PM 8 PM
11 PM 11 PM
Sound Level, dBA
12 AM 12 AM
4 AM 4 AM
8 AM 8 AM
12 PM 12 PM
4 PM 4 PM8 PM 8 PM
11 PM 11 PM
Appendix C-1
FHWA-RD-77-108 Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model Data Input Sheet
Project #: 2021-172
Description: Existing (2020) Ldn/CNEL:

Ldn
Hard/Soft: Soft
Segment Roadway Name Segment Description ADT Day % Eve % Night % % Med.

Trucks
% Hvy.

Trucks Speed Distance
Offset
(dB)
1 Highway 20 Banner Ridge to Gold Flat Road 26,500 80 20 3.0 3.0 65 100 2 Highway 20 Gold Flat Road to Sacramento St 23,400 80 20 2.8 2.5 65 100 3 Highway 20 Sacramento St to Broad St 21,300 80 20 2.8 2.5 55 100 4 Highway 20 Broad St to Coyote St 15,000 80 20 2.8 2.5 55 100 5 Highway 20 Coyote St to Highway 49 East Jct. 14,500 80 20 2.8 2.5 55 100 6 Highway 20 East of Highway 49 East Jct. 4,750 80 20 4.7 5.8 55 100 7 Highway 49 West of North Highway 20 Jct. 11,000 80 20 1.0 1.6 50 100 Appendix C-2
FHWA-RD-77-108 Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model Data Input Sheet
Project #: 2021-172
Description: Future (2045)
Ldn/CNEL: Ldn Hard/Soft:

Soft
Segment Roadway Name Segment Description ADT Day % Eve % Night % % Med.

Trucks
% Hvy.

Trucks Speed Distance
Offset
(dB)
1 Highway 20 Banner Ridge to Gold Flat Road 53,000 80 20 3.0 3.0 65 100 2 Highway 20 Gold Flat Road to Sacramento St 46,800 80 20 2.8 2.5 65 100 3 Highway 20 Sacramento St to Broad St 42,600 80 20 2.8 2.5 55 100 4 Highway 20 Broad St to Coyote St 30,000 80 20 2.8 2.5 55 100 5 Highway 20 Coyote St to Highway 49 East Jct. 29,000 80 20 2.8 2.5 55 100 6 Highway 20 East of Highway 49 East Jct. 9,500 80 20 4.7 5.8 55 100 7 Highway 49 West of North Highway 20 Jct. 22,000 80 20 1.0 1.6 50 100 1 Appendix D-1
Nevada City Parks & Recreation Facility
Rental Policies
Contact Information:

For questions or information:

Phone #: 530-265-2496 x129, www.nevadacityca.gov
Facility Addresses (Do NOT mail anything to these addresses.):

Pioneer Park – Bandshell: 421 Nimrod St, Nevada City, CA 95959 Pioneer Park – Picnic Areas: 425 Nimrod St., Nevada City, CA 95959 Pioneer Park – Seaman’s Lodge: 427 Nimrod St, Nevada City, CA 95959 Firehouse #2: 422 Broad St, Nevada City, CA 95959
Robinson Plaza and Calanan Park: Union St, Nevada City, CA 95959 Before Using a Facility:

The following items are required prior to having access to the facility you are renting. If items are not turned in by the required due dates, your event will be cancelled. Details about each checklist item below are included in the Policies. Refer to the Facility Rental Fee Schedule to confirm fees. □ Non-Refundable Deposit to reserve rental date: Due within 2 weeks of requesting your date. □ Completed Contract: Due 40 days prior to event date. It is recommended to turn it in sooner, so all questions and concerns can be addressed.
□ Rental Fees & Refundable Security Deposit: Due 30 days prior to event date. □ Certificate of Insurance: Due 30 days prior to event date. □ Large events at the Bandshell or outdoor areas may require a pre-event meeting. This meeting with City staff must take place at least 60 days prior to the event date. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss special needs & set-up information, confirm fees, and discuss event details.
□ ABC Alcohol Permit (if selling alcohol): Copy of the Permit is due to the Recreation Department prior to being allowed access to the facility.
□ Events that are running past 9:00pm must notify neighbors at least 30 days prior to your event date.

In Addition:
• The Contact Person (Day of), named on the contract, must be at least 21 years of age and monitor the facility throughout the entire rental.
• If alcohol will be sold at the event, the Renter is responsible for acquiring a Daily License from ABC (www.abc.ca.gov or call 916-419-1319). You must get a signature from the Recreation Dept. and the Police Dept. Plan ahead to give time to acquire the appropriate signatures. The Police Dept. charges a fee for processing alcohol permit requests. A copy of the permit must be provided to the Recreation Dept.
• If you would like to drop off supplies the day before your event or pick-up supplies the day after your event, those dates and times must be included on your Rental Contract and Proof of Insurance. Additional fees apply.

Appendix D-2
2 Payments
• Cash and Check payments should be made payable to: City of Nevada City and delivered to City Hall, Attn. Parks & Recreation; 317 Broad St., Nevada City, CA 95959. Write “Parks & Rec” on the memo line. When coming into City Hall, it is the Renters responsibility to know what fees are due as Parks & Recreation staff are not always available and City Hall staff do not have access to this information.
• Recreation staff will email an invoice to the Renter for the non-refundable deposit and all other fees. Payments can be made online. A 3% convenience fee will be added to your total for online payments.
• The Non-refundable Deposit is due within 2 weeks of reserving your event date. This will be credited towards your rental fee. If a rental is allowed within 30 days or less of the rental date, the rental fee will include the Non-refundable Deposit. • Rental fees are due at least 30 days prior to the rental date. • The Refundable Security Deposit is due at least 30 days prior to the rental date. If the Rental Policies are followed and the facility is cleaned as directed, the Refundable Security Deposit will be refunded to the Renter within 30 days of the event or 30 days after the facility key(s) are returned. This refund will be in the form of a check that will be mailed to the name and address provided on the Facility Rental Contract.
• Refunds for cancellations will only be granted up to 30 days prior to the event date, minus the Non-refundable Deposit.
• If forecasted foul weather (rain, smoke, lightening, etc), scheduled power outages or changes in COVID-19 guidelines cause a cancellation of the event, Renters may request a 50% refund of their Rental Fee or transfer fees to another date. There are no refunds or date transfers if foul weather or a power outage interrupt your rental. If another date is not available or a date is not available that works for the Renter, the Renter will receive a 50% refund. • All Rental Contracts that involve ongoing or repeated events for more than a single occasion will be invoiced quarterly and charged a late fee for each month that fees are late. • If rental fees are waived by City Council, renters are still required to complete a Rental Contract, provide proof of insurance, pay the Refundable Security Deposit and follow all Facility Rental Policies.
• Refer to the Facility Rental Fee Schedule for all fees.

Insurance
Proof of insurance is required from all Renters. A current and valid certificate of General Liability Insurance must be provided, in the amount of $1,000,000 and an endorsement (CG2026 or equivalent) naming the City of Nevada City 317 Broad St. Nevada City, CA 95959 (not the facility) as additional insured. Proof of Insurance must be provided at least 30 days prior to the rental date. A sample copy of the required insurance is available on the City’s website.

If you are renting the Bandshell or another outdoor area at Pioneer Park and your event will have more than 400 attendees/participants, a $2,000,000 limit is required.

During Use of the Facility:
• The Renter is responsible for alcohol consumption by event guests. If alcohol is being sold, the Renter is responsible for enforcing and following all ABC regulations. No alcohol is allowed in Firehouse #2.
• No rice, birdseed or confetti can be used inside or around the facility. • No tape of any kind is to be used on floors and walls inside Seaman’s Lodge or Firehouse #2.

Painters tape or Gaff tape can be used at all other facilities.

Appendix D-3
3 • No tacks, nails or staples are to be put in the walls at any time. • If guidelines are not being followed police or facility management have the authority to shut down the event. There are NO refunds on Rental Fees or the Security Deposit if an event is shut down.
• If Renters do not comply with all Facility Policies, the Security Deposit will be retained and the Renter may be banned from renting City facilities in the future. • Smoking is not allowed inside City facilities, anywhere in Pioneer Park or in Robinson Plaza or Calanan Park per Municipal Code section 8.24.010. Renters are responsible for enforcement of this rule. Posting of signs is encouraged for large events. • Any event charging admission or asking for donations must be a licensed non-profit in good standing with the CA Secretary of State.
• The procedure for monitoring noise levels is provided in Section 8.20 of the City’s Municipal Code.
• Any music, loud voices & other noise must be terminated by the appropriate time for the facility that you are renting. Exceptions must be approved in advance, by City Council. ✓ Bandshell: 10:00pm; An exception will be made for movies in the park, as it is understood that it needs to be dark before a movie can start. Movies with a running time longer than

2.25 hours will not be approved.
✓ Seaman’s Lodge: 11:00pm
✓ Picnic Areas or other outdoor spaces at Pioneer Park: 9:00pm ✓ Firehouse #2: 10:00pm
✓ Robinson Plaza & Calanan Park: 11:00pm
Public Events, Amplified Music or Large Events
• Events that are requesting an exemption from any policies must be approved in advance by City Council.
• Events that are open to the public, are only allowed at Pioneer Park on Friday’s, Saturday’s, Sunday’s and Holidays.
• The procedure for monitoring noise levels is provided in Section 8.20 of the City’s Municipal Code. The City reserves the right to modify the limits should it be determined the limit applicable to amplified sound is either too restrictive or too lenient. A City Liaison may be on site during the sound check time and during the event to monitor sound levels and will inform event planners if changes need to be made. The sound meter used by this City employee will be the deciding factor for any adjustments to sound.
• Events with amplified music may play recorded music for ½ hour prior to their event. No music, live or recorded, can be played after the 4 hour limit or past the designated end time.

Sound check times must take place during the “Set-up time” included on the Rental Contract. • Events open to the public, having amplified music or expecting more than 200 people are encouraged to have security on site during the event. Security personnel should be independent certified personnel. The City reserves the right to require security personnel. • Events open to the public, having amplified music/sound or expecting more than 200 people are required to provide to the City a flyer/marketing materials and a link to any related websites.

Electronic copies of the flyer are acceptable.
• Events open to the public should share parking information provided on page 10. • If guidelines are not being followed police or facility management have the authority to shut down the event. There are NO refunds on Rental Fees or Security Deposit if an event is shut down. Renters who have their event shut down will not be allowed to rent in the future. • Renters must provide a map showing the layout/set-up of your event.

Appendix D-4
4 • Renters may be required to have a pre-event meeting with City Staff at least 60 days prior to your event date.
• Events running past 9:00pm, must notify neighbors at least 30 days prior to your event date.

Flyers or some form of notification to the neighbors is required. See page 9 for a map of the neighbors that should be included.
• Portable Toilets are required for events with 400 people or more. # of people # of portable toilets required
400 people 2
600 people 4
800 people 6
1,000 people 8
• Events with 400 people or more may be required to provide a 2-yard dumpster or haul off their own garbage.

Other:
• Outdoor facilities at Pioneer Park are only rented May-October of each year, weather allowing. • The City does not carry a music license. Any renters playing copy righted music must have their own license to play that music for public events. • Keys to the facility must be picked up at City Hall during business hours. An email will be sent letting the Renter know when the keys are ready to pick up. Keys must be returned to City Hall the first business day following the event, unless approved for later drop off. Keys can also be returned to the drop box that is located outside the front doors of City hall. There is a $100 fee for each lost key.
• Renters may only access the facility during the dates and times listed on their Contract. • All pets must be on leashes. Pets are not allowed inside City facilities unless they are a service animal or part of a training class at that facility. • Items lost or left behind are not the responsibility of the City of Nevada City. • Renters must provide their own supplies & equipment (i.e.: presentation, audiovisual, extension cords, etc.)
• In the event that the Rental Contract provides for ongoing or repeated events using the facility for more than a single occasion, either party may terminate the Rental Contract at any time by giving two weeks advance written notice. Processing fees may apply. If Renter is in violation of Rental Policies, the City reserves the right to cancel at any time. • There may be other events taking place at Pioneer Park on the same day or time as your event. You can find out about some of these events by checking the City’s online reservation calendar: http://www.nevadacityca.gov/facilityview.aspx?fid=43&catid=564, NC Little League website:
http://nevadacitybaseball.com/Org/Home.aspx?d=uSrmLaewjHFDP7ndqSIS%2bw%3d%3d, or calling the swimming pool during the summer season (530-265-8223).

Before leaving the Facility:
• Cleaning Checklist items must be completed (see facility specific pages). • The premises shall be cleaned and vacated by the appropriate time for the facility that you are renting:
✓ Bandshell: Midnight
✓ Seaman’s Lodge: Midnight
✓ Picnic Areas or other outdoor spaces at Pioneer Park: 11:00pm ✓ Firehouse #2: 11:00pm
✓ Robinson Plaza & Calanan Park: 11:00pm
Appendix D-5
5 • Renters that do not follow Facility Rental Policies will forfeit their Refundable Security Deposit.

Renters may also be charged an additional $30 per hour for City staff cleaning time or the cost to replace missing items.
• These are community facilities. Fees are kept low by expecting each person and group who uses the facilities to be good stewards and clean up after their use. Keep in mind that the way you leave the facility is how the next renter or the public is going to find it. If you have any questions about where to find cleaning supplies, please ask in advance of your use.

Appendix D-6
6 Bandshell Additional Rental Information
• There should be no vehicles on the lawn at Pioneer Park. Renters will be charged $50 per broken sprinkler head and will lose their Security Deposit if the lawn is damaged. • Event activities may not block tennis court parking lot unless approved in advance. • Renters will be given a key to the gate located next to the tennis courts. This access road is to be used for loading and unloading only. Renters and their participants should not park inside the gate. The service road (entrance from the tennis courts) must remain clear during set-up and during the event for emergency vehicle access.
• Do not leave the lock unlatched. A missing lock will cost $100 of your Security Deposit. • 6 garbage cans & 6 recycle containers with bags are included with rental. • 4 handicap parking barricades are included with rental. • 10 construction barricades are included with the rental • A map showing the field area that is included with a Bandshell rental is on page 7. And a diagram of the electrical outlets is on page 8.

CLEANING CHECKLIST FOR RENTERS
➢ Sweep or pick up any debris & garbage inside the Bandshell, on the stage and around the facility, including the field area included with your rental. ➢ Return all items inside the Bandshell to the location where you found them (barricades, garbage cans, recycle bins, etc)
➢ Empty and clean the refrigerator.
➢ Turn off power to outside outlets & lights. Instructions are posted inside the Bandshell. ➢ Take full garbage & recycle bags to the dumpster next to Seaman’s Lodge. If garbage or recycling dumpsters are full, renters must remove the bags from the park. Leaving bags, boxes, etc next to dumpsters will result in the loss of your Refundable Security Deposit.

ADDITIONAL CLEANING CHECKLIST FOR GROUPS LARGER THAN 200 PEOPLE ➢ Portable Toiltes and rented dumpsters must be picked up by 10:00am on the first business day following your event or at a time approved by City staff. ➢ Barricades must be returned to the City Corporation Yard on the first business day following your event or at a time approved by City staff.
➢ All personal items must be removed from the Bandshell by the clean-up end time listed on your Facility Rental Contract.
➢ Areas beyond the Bandshell that may have been used by participants at your event should be checked for messes that you can clean before leaving the park.

Appendix D-7
7 Appendix D-8
8 Appendix D-9
9 Neighbors along the highlighted streets must receive notification of events open to the public that are running past 9:00pm. This notification must take place at least 30 days prior to your event date.

Appendix D-10
10 Appendix D-11
11 Firehouse #2 Additional Rental Information
• Firehouse #2 is only available for meetings and classes. This is not an event venue. • Tables and chairs are provided.
• No alcohol is allowed in Firehouse #2.

Facility Details
• Room Capacity is 34
• Room size: approximately 33’ long x 12’ wide
• There are 7 outlets located around the room
• This upstairs room is not ADA accessible.
• Bathroom access is outdoors.

CLEANING CHECKLIST FOR RENTERS
➢ Put all garbage in can. Additional bags are provided if needed. ➢ Put all tables and chairs back in the formation that you found them ➢ Wipe up any spills on tables, chairs and floors.
➢ Turn off all lights and the heat/AC. The outdoor light may be left on for safety. ➢ Close and lock all windows & doors.

Appendix D-12
12 Picnic Area Additional Rental Information
• Renters will be given a key to the gate at Picnic-Left & Picnic-Right Areas. (No keys are required for use of the Upper Picnic Area or Tennis Court Picnic Area.) In Picnic-Left this is for loading & unloading purposes only. Renters & participants should park in designated parking lots. In Picnic-Right there are approximately 5 parking spaces near the horseshoe pits. • Do not leave the gate lock unlatched. A lost lock will cost $100 of your Security Deposit. • Power and water are available at Picnic-Left & Picnic-Right. • Renters may request use of Bocce Ball or Petanque equipment with their rental. • Access to electricity in the picnic areas is available on page 14.

Facility Information:

Picnic Tables
• Picnic-Left & Right: there are approximately 12 picnic tables in each area • Upper Picnic Area: typically there are 5 tables in this area • Tennis/ADA Area: 3 tables

CLEANING CHECKLIST FOR RENTERS
➢ Pick up all garbage in and around the Picnic Area and place it in garbage cans. ➢ All garbage bags must be in the garbage cans.
➢ Recycling & garbage dumpsters are located next to Seaman’s Lodge if garbage will not fit in cans provided. If garbage or recycling dumpsters are full, renters must remove the bags from the park. Leaving bags, boxes, etc next to dumpsters or on the ground next to garbage cans will result in the loss of your Security Deposit. .

Appendix D-13
13 Appendix D-14
14 Robinson Plaza & Calanan Park Additional Rental
Information
• Robinson Plaza and Calanan Park should not be reserved for events where more than 100 participants are expected to attend. If more than the designated number of attendees is expected, additional space should be requested. Additional fees may apply or the event may be denied.
• Food vendors may have carts and booths in the Plaza & Park. All vendors must comply with Environmental Health and Business License policies.
• No walkways should be obstructed at Calanan Park.
• There are no loading zones for Robinson Plaza or Calanan Park. All parking laws must be obeyed.
• If these areas are being used in conjunction with a Special Event/Street Closure, the use of these areas might be managed by the Special Event Application process, but the general guidelines for care that are included in these Policies would be adhered to.

CLEANING CHECKLIST FOR RENTERS
➢ Pick up all garbage from the ground.
➢ Garbage and recycling that does not fit in receptacles at the Plaza & Park must be removed from the site.
➢ No garbage bags may be left on the ground next to the City garbage cans.

Appendix D-15
15 Seaman’s Lodge Additional Rental Information
• The building has heat and AC. Instructions for turning on the heat/AC are located on the wall next to the thermostat.
• If participants are outside, voices should be low and considerate of neighboring homes. • Instructions for turning on the stove/oven are posted on the kitchen wall.

Facility Information
Room Capacities 257
assembly
120 dining
Items Available for Renter Use
• 6ft & 8ft, Rectangle Tables
• Metal Folding Chairs
• Podium
• Microwave
• Rolling Cart
• Screen

CLEANING CHECKLIST FOR RENTERS GENERAL CLEANING CHECKLIST ➢ Put all chairs and tables back to their appropriate spaces. ➢ Wipe up any spills on tables, chairs and floors.
➢ Sweep floors. If there are any spills, wipe them up with a cloth. ➢ Mop floors using water only, no cleaners or chemicals. ➢ Remove all decorations, string, etc. that were used to hang decorations. ➢ Empty trash & recycling containers and place in the dumpster outside.* ➢ Cardboard should be broken down flat and placed in the dumpster outside.* ➢ Turn off all lights and fans.
➢ Close and lock ALL windows and doors.
➢ Close all outside shutters.

KITCHEN CLEANING CHECKLIST
➢ Remove all food from the refrigerator and oven. This includes bags of ice. Wipe up any spills inside the refrigerator and freezer.
➢ Wipe off stove burners & the tray under stove burners ➢ Wipe out oven – remove any food scraps or spills
➢ Clean counter tops and sinks
➢ Clean any spills on cabinets or walls
➢ Turn off gas to stove & oven (Directions are posted in the kitchen.) ➢ Sweep & mop floor
➢ Empty garbage.* If items miss the bag and spill into the garbage can, wipe out garbage can. * All garbage and recycling must be removed from the facility and placed in the appropriate dumpster. If either dumpster is full the renter must dispose of the garbage and/or recycling on their own. Garbage & recycling may not be left on the ground next to the dumpster.

Legend
A Reference Meter Facing Pioneer Park Bandshell
B Pioneer Park Bandshell
C Site 2
Nevada City Noise Element
Nevada City, California
Photographs of Event Noise Simulation
Survey Locations
Appendix E-1
C
B
A
A B C
Legend
A Site 4
B Site 6
C Site 8
Nevada City Noise Element
Nevada City, California
Photographs of Event Noise Simulation Survey Locations
Appendix E-2
Nevada City 1
Safety Element Update
March 2023
Appendix D-Critical Facilities and Essential Services
(See Definition of Critical Facility at end of this list) (See attached map that cross references these facilities) Critical Facilities - Nevada City and General Plan Area Critical
Facility
Category
/Facility
Type
Name Address /
Location
Flood Zone Fire Hazard
Severity Zone
Dam Inundation -
Extremely High
(EH) and High
(H)
Critical
Facility
Count
Essential Services Facilities
Bridge Nevada Street
Bridge at Deer
Creek
Nevada Street
at Deer Creek
Zone A
(elevated
structure)
Very High EH - Scotts Flat, H
- Deer Creek
Diversion
1 Bridge Broad Street
Bridge 2 at
Deer Creek
Broad Street at
Deer Creek
Zone A
(elevated
structure)
Very High EH - Scotts Flat, H
- Deer Creek
Diversion
1 Bridge Broad Street
Bridge 1 at State
Route 20
Broad Street at
State Route 20
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High EH - Scotts Flat, H
- Deer Creek
Diversion
1 Bridge South Pine
Street Bridge
South Pine
Street at Deer
Creek
Zone A
(elevated
structure)
Very High EH - Scotts Flat, H
- Deer Creek
Diversion
1 Bridge Caltrans
Washington
Street Bridge
Washington
Street at State
Route 20
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High EH - Scotts Flat 1
Bridge Gold Flat
Bridge
Gold Flat
Road at State
Route 20
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Church and
Possible
Weather
Shelter
First
Community
Church
300 Main
Street
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High EH - Scotts Flat 1
Emergency
Radio Station
KVMR 120 Bridge
Street
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Emergency
Services
Facilities
Nevada County
Emergency
Services Yard
10014 N.

Bloomfield
Rd., Nevada
City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Evacuation
Center and
Possible
Weather
Shelter
Elks Lodge 518 State
Highway 49,
Nevada City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Evacuation
Center and
Possible
Veterans of
Foreign War
415 N. Pine
St., Nevada
City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Nevada City 2
Safety Element Update
March 2023
Critical
Facility
Category
/Facility
Type
Name Address /
Location
Flood Zone Fire Hazard
Severity Zone
Dam Inundation -
Extremely High
(EH) and High
(H)
Critical
Facility
Count
Weather
Shelter
Evacuation
Center and
Possible
Weather
Shelter
Miners Foundry 325 Spring
Street
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High EH - Scotts Flat 1
Fire Nevada City
Station 54
201
Providence
Mine Rd
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Fire Nevada County
Consolidated
Station 84
10135 Coyote
St
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Fire CDF Station 20
- Nevada City
10242 Ridge
Rd
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Fire and other
Government
Services
U.S. Forest
Service
613 Coyote
Street
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Government
Building
Nevada City
Hall and Police
Department
317 Broad
Street
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High EH - Scotts Flat 1
Government
Building
Seamans Lodge
Pioneer Park
425 Nimrod
Street, Nevada
City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High EH - Scotts Flat 1
Government
Building
Warehouse
Facility
10020 E.

Broad St,
Nevada City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Government
Building
DA Office 201
Commercial
Street, Nevada
City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High EH - Scotts Flat 1
Government
Building
Probation 109 1/2 Pine
Street, Nevada
City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High EH - Scotts Flat 1
Government
Building
Public
Defender
224 Main St.,
Nevada City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High EH - Scotts Flat 1
Government
Building
Historical
Library
211 North
Pine St.,
Nevada City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High EH - Scotts Flat 1
Government
Building
Nevada County
Superior
Courthouse
201 Church
Street
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High EH - Scotts Flat 1
Nevada City 3
Safety Element Update
March 2023
Critical
Facility
Category
/Facility
Type
Name Address /
Location
Flood Zone Fire Hazard
Severity Zone
Dam Inundation -
Extremely High
(EH) and High
(H)
Critical
Facility
Count
Government
Building and
Weather
Shelter
Madelyn
Helling Library
980 Helling
Way, Nevada
City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Government
Facility
Nevada City
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
650 Jordan St Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High EH - Scotts Flat 1
Government
Facility
Caltrans
Maintenance
Station
10057 Gold
Flat Road
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Government
Facility
Nevada City
Water
Treatment Plant
11297 Banner
Mountain Trail
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Police Services Nevada County
Sheriff's
Department
15076
Highway 49,
Nevada City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Police, other
Govt Services,
Weather
Shelter
Nevada County
Govt Center;
Sheriff's Office,
other County
Services (OES)
950 Maidu
Ave., Nevada
City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Essential Services Facilities Total 30
At Risk Populations
Church and
Possible
Weather
Shelter
Holy Trinity
Episcopal
201 Nevada
Street
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High EH - Scotts Flat 1
Church and
Possible
Weather
Shelter
St. Canise
Catholic
317
Washington
Street
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Church and
Possible
Weather
Shelter
Latter Day
Saints
615 Hollow
Way
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Church and
Possible
Weather
Shelter
Sierra
Presbyterian
175 Ridge
Road, Nevada
City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
County
Building
Leased for
Non-Gov.

Other
Institutional
Operations
15434
Highway 49,
Nevada City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Nevada City 4
Safety Element Update
March 2023
Critical
Facility
Category
/Facility
Type
Name Address /
Location
Flood Zone Fire Hazard
Severity Zone
Dam Inundation -
Extremely High
(EH) and High
(H)
Critical
Facility
Count
Evacuation
Center and
Possible
Weather
Shelter
United
Methodist
Church
433 Broad
Street
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Government
Building
Progress House 145 Bost Ave,
Nevada City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Government
Building
Wayne Brown
Correctional
Facility
925 Maidu
Ave., Nevada
City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Government
Building
Odyssey House 995 Helling
Way, Nevada
City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Possible
Evacuation
Center
Sierra Academy
of
Expeditionary
Learning School
505 Main
Street, Nevada
City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
School Terence K.

McAteer Family
Resource
Center
400 Hoover
Lane, Nevada
City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
School and
Possible
Evacuation
Center
Deer Creek
Elementary
School
805 Lindley
Avenue,
Nevada City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
School and
Possible
Evacuation
Center
Seven Hills
Intermediate
School
700 Hoover
Lane, Nevada
City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
School and
Possible
Evacuation
Center
Twin Ridges
Home Study
Charter
111 New
Mohawk Road
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
School and
Possible
Evacuation
Center
Earle Jamieson
Educational
Options
112 Nevada
City Highway,
Nevada City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
School and
Possible
Evacuation
Center
Nevada City
Home Study
Charter School
750 Hoover
Lane, Nevada
City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
School and
Possible
Evacuation
Center
Forest Charter
School
470 Searls
Avenue,
Nevada City
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Nevada City 5
Safety Element Update
March 2023
Critical
Facility
Category
/Facility
Type
Name Address /
Location
Flood Zone Fire Hazard
Severity Zone
Dam Inundation -
Extremely High
(EH) and High
(H)
Critical
Facility
Count
At Risk Populations Total 17
Hazardous Materials Facilities
Government
Facility
Nevada City
Water
Treatment Plant
11297 Banner
Mountain Trail
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Oil Bulk Plant Robinson
Enterprises
293 Lower
Grass Valley
Road
Zone X
(Unshaded)
Very High – 1
Hazardous Materials Facilities Total 2
Grand Total 49
Source: City of Nevada City GIS
* The U.S. Forest Service Facility may be relocating to 15434 CA 49, Nevada City 95959 **The Wastewater Treatment Plant is identified both as an essential services facility and a hazardous materials facility.

Definition of Critical Facility
A critical facility is classified by the following categories: (1) Essential Services Facilities: (2) At-risk Populations Facilities, (3) Hazardous Materials Facilities. ➢ Essential Services Facilities include, without limitation, public safety, emergency response, emergency medical, designated emergency shelters, communications, public utility plant facilities and equipment, and government operations. Sub-Categories:
✓ Public Safety - Police stations, fire and rescue stations, emergency operations centers ✓ Emergency Response - Emergency vehicle and equipment storage and essential governmental work centers for continuity of government operations.
✓ Emergency Medical - Hospitals, emergency care, urgent care, ambulance services. ✓ Designated Emergency Shelters and Weather Shelters.
✓ Communications - Main hubs for telephone, main broadcasting equipment for television systems, radio and other emergency warning systems.
✓ Public Utility Plant Facilities - including equipment for treatment, generation, storage, pumping and distribution (hubs for water, wastewater, power and gas). ✓ Essential Government Operations - Public records, courts, jails, building permitting and inspection services, government administration and management, maintenance and equipment centers, and public health.
✓ Transportation Lifeline Systems - Airports, helipads, and critical highways, roads, bridges and other transportation infrastructure (Note: Critical highways, roads, etc. will be determined during any hazard-specific evacuation planning and are not identified in this plan).

Nevada City 6
Safety Element Update
March 2023
➢ At Risk Population Facilities include, without limitation, pre-schools, public and private primary and secondary schools, before and after school care centers with 12 or more students, daycare centers with 12 or more children, group homes, and assisted living residential or congregate care facilities with 12 or more residents, churches that have capacity of 12 or more people. Some At Risk Population Facilities may become Essential Service Facilities if they are used for essential services, such as an evacuation center or weather shelter.
➢ Hazardous Materials Facilities include, without limitation, any facility that could, if adversely impacted, release of hazardous material(s) in sufficient amounts during a hazard event that would create harm to people, the environment and property.

Nevada City
7 Safety Element Update
March 2023
1 Appendix E-Public Outreach Program
Public Participation (Additional information to be completed after final planning commission and City Council approval of document)
Public input was received through workshops conducted on July 29, September 2, 2022, and June 29, 2023, with Planning Commission and City Council to gain input. A public presentation to the City’s Fire Safety Committee was held on September 15, 2021, which included a number of Firewise Neighborhood groups. Subsequently, public hearings were conducted by the Planning Commission on August 31, 2023 and with the City Council on September 13, 2023. Notices were both emailed and sent through the U.S. Postal Service to public agencies, as referenced in Appendix A of this document. Notices were also published in The Union newspaper. To expand public outreach and understand public preferences, a public safety survey was conducted, via on-line between August 1 and November 1, 2021. The survey and results have been included in this Appendix. Most of the responses of the survey supported the City’s efforts to address public safety needs and many of the programs.

Letters were sent to interested public agencies to obtain input regarding public safety concerns. To comply with Senate Bill (SB) 18, the City consulted the Native American Heritage Commission and various Native American Tribes on the City’s list.

The draft Safety Element was made available at City Hall and was posted on the City’s website for review and comments and public agencies were notified and requested input on the document. The following summarizes all written public input received and responded to by the City/Staff Consultant Team:
2 Nevada City Safety Element
Public Outreach Program
Responses to Public Comments
Comment Response
September 10, 2021,email to City Manager, Joan
Phillipe from Sam Git chel, the Greater Champion
Firewise Neighborhood to City Manager, Joan
Phillipe:

Hi Joan,
Happy Friday and weekend. Please forward this to the
appropriate person.

A Greater Champion neighbor, Carol Cox, pointed out
an omission from the map that is part of the
flyer/invitation to participate in the safety element
survey. Her comments, below, are self-explanatory.

The document is attached -- I renamed the original PDF
file for my own filing system but the content is
unchanged.

Thanks,
Sam
Hi Sam and Frances,
As a former professor of geography I need to make this
one note regarding the Safety Elem.pdf map attached in
your last email.

For safety planning, the map should be updated for
accuracy to include all city property north of old
September 15, 2021, email response from City Manager, Joan Phillipe to Sam Gitchel, the Greater Champion Firewise
Neighborhood:

Hello Sam,
I forwarded your email to our planning staff and consultant working on the Safety Element. A lot of review has been done in regard to Carol’s comments with comments forwarded to me this morning. The survey includes a map taken from the Nevada County GIS Portal to describe the city boundaries as illustrative. Attached is a more complete map of the city’s jurisdictional boundaries and General Plan boundaries, which is more complete. Also attached is a map that shows the various firewise communities in relation to the city that should also be helpful. Please feel free to send this map to Carol Cox noting that the city plans to address safety issues in the Safety Element on a neighborhood scale, not restricted to just city jurisdictional boundaries. If you or Carol have any further questions, you can feel free to contact our safety element consultant, Gary Price, directly at 530-272-6434 or at
[email protected].

I hope this helps to clarify the concerns expressed by Carol.

Best regards,
Joan
3 Comment Response
Downieville Highway. For example my property (parcel
05-100-30) does touch city property . . . so my neighbors on American Hill Road to the east would also be
impacted. Any property below us in the Deer Creek
drainage, whether city or BLM, has implications for the safety and fire planning of residents.

This is offered in response to your request for opinions about safety priorities and practices. Planning should
rely on accurate tools such as maps.

Thank you for all you are doing for all of us.

Best regards,
Carol J. Cox
June 29, 2023 email to City Planner, Lisa
McCandless from Theo Fitanides:

Hi Lisa,
Below is what I wrote for public comment. If the
councilmembers, commissioners, and consultants have
to read it, please apologize a little for some of my
meanderings.

One clarification I have is that during the meeting, I said an ordinance "similar to earthquake retrofits, which
began in LA," would be beneficial. I think that it was
heard as LA has a building retrofit ordinance for
wildfire. I do not know of such ordinance.

August 2, 2023, email response from Gary Price, City Contract Planner, at the request of Lisa McCandless, City’s Interim City Planner:

Hi Theo:

Your comments are noted.

The City Fire Chief has collaborated with the staff/consultant team to produce the CAPSE and has determined that it meets the City’s needs.

The CAPSE has also been revised to address CALFIRE
comments/recommendations per review (see link below):
https://nevadacityca.municipalone.com/pview.aspx?id=20947&catID=0 July 3, 2023, comments below). California Board of Forestry reviewed the revised CAPSE and were acceptable with the document (see July 14, 2023, comments). Many of the programs have been strengthened to 4 Comment Response
Thank you for the work on this, and enough time before
adoption for there to be meaningful changes. A few
comments follow:

Page 32 ends

structures as "also fuel" really undercuts the key issue with wildfire in our area - structures are perhaps the
most vulnerable and important fuels to consider for our community's survival. Please consider upping the
priority. More often, the impacts from wildfire have
been urban conflagrations, often spread solely by
structural fires. I lost some faith in the veracity of the rest of the safety element when this was not recognized in the draft language.

Density of vegetation needs to include density of
structures. Although this is not generally considered
alterable, it is an important component of the risk
assessment. The historic district, and some
neighborhoods, have old buildings made of the driest
vegetation (lumber and plywood) which are densely
clustered. These two factors were the strongest
determinant in structure loss during the Camp Fire, been seen in Greenville during the Dixie Fire and others.

Page 34 ends

importance of structures and that mitigation is building hardening and defensible space. The first paragraph,
however, implies that proximity to flammable vegetation is the key factor (implicitly contradicted somewhat in
the second paragraph) - this is based on the mapping
element showing vegetation proximity and not proximity
to all fuels (buildings). Non-ember/wind driven wildfire is mostly suppressible in our location (great airbase, high address structure fires, building renovation, defensible space, and home hardening as suggested in your comments.

Some noteworthy changes are as follows:

Page 10 ends

Preparedness Action and Extreme Climate Event Mobility and Adaptation Plans.

Page 70 ends

address emergency service response.

Program FP-1 revised to capacity to provide emergency services and to include retrofit and home hardening provisions. New land use regulations added to address fire safety requirements in Zoning Code.

New fire protection plan requirements added for new development.

Policy FP-17 revised to address long-term maintenance of existing development.

Policy FP-22 revised to include home hardening requirements.

New references to specific California Code of Regulations throughout.

Additional changes may be made to further address these comments that are more restrictive than noted in the document. For example, should the City wish to pursue mapping and analysis of the number of structures that are extremely vulnerable to ember ignitions as suggested an additional program could be created.

Please feel welcome to contact me or Lisa if you have any questions or wish to provide further comments. We anticipate the Planning Commission review of the CAPSE during a special meeting on August 31, 2023, and as the City continues to seek public comments. 5 Comment Response
economic and population priorities, etc.) and we can see that with so many successful containments in recent
history. But the ember/wind driven wildfires (including slope/wind effects, which we always have with the steep deer creek canyon) are the non-suppressible ones. The
River fire was not stopped by suppression, only
mitigated with flanking drops to keep it out of Alta
Sierra. The fire fizzled out in the large area of
agricultural land of Chicago Park, and Rollins Reservoir, as the weather was calming. The large fuel breaks
allowed few spot fires to ignite and be extinguished. The Jones fire did exactly what it wanted until the wind died down. It was even boxed in with foscheck before they
had to divert aircraft away, and then the winds picked
up. I don't know the conditions during the 49er fire, but it did jump to their contingency line at my then home.

My point is that defensible space is so helpful but won't save the town, especially the treasured historic district heart of our community. I'd like to see an analysis of the number of structures that are extremely vulnerable to
ember ignitions, within the dense urban setting, which
would put the entire town at risk of an urban
conflagration. Think of the structures we see peppered
around the city outskirts and center which have shake
siding, rotten siding in ember accumulation pockets,
combustible deck furniture, single pane windows, open
gaps in garages, friable fence bottoms against dry grass (less than 4" ;), outbuildings with all sorts of issues, etc.

During a significant wildfire challenge, we have
increasingly seen resources diverted to evacuations, and little or no resources for smoke chasing, structure prep, and engine crew suppression. Let alone if the visibility is 6 Comment Response
such that smoke chasing is even feasible, or the weather is such that a captain would even commit resources into a dead end road with the possibility of being cut off. All the work on defensible space, and individual home
hardening, can be for naught when we eventually get
challenged by a wildfire during adverse weather
conditions with long range spotting and short range
ember showers.

And getting back to my point, we need more than
encouragement to harden structures. We need an
ordinance and/or alteration of the building code to make it serious. Especially if it causes a community buzz. It is highly defensible as a necessary element of community
safety. We are not in a situation where one's home is
soleley a risk for themselves. This is shared risk within the dense structural environment.

Which gets me to my point, for real! This document is
specifically not creating any projects. Thus, it is the best - perhaps only, at this political moment - place to include the observation that an ordinance or change in building code would be very effective in hastening and
broadening structure hardening. It should not be
controversial that these steps would increase public
safety. And no action is required. Without this inclusion among "engineering, enforcement, education,
emergency response, and economic incentive," this
section of the document rings hollow to me as an
apolitical exercise. We don't currently require retroactive engineering, there is no mandate to enforce any
structural alteration other than vent screens on buildings.

The building code almost specifically only engages with 7 Comment Response
those property owners with more resources who can do
significant renovations. Those buildings which are
owned by less resourced owners are likely more often
those more vulnerable to ignition. Additionally, the
written ordinance or building code is a great tool to
support and drive education and enhance the speed of
developing economic incentives.

This is not asking our consultant to develop, plan, lobby for, or take any other action than to include this common tool for municipal enhancement into this list of helpful tools.

Page 37 ends

mention ignition of buildings from vegetation fires (this is definitional because of the WUI fire category) but
does happen to include mention of the building code
(that function mainly for situations that are not pertinent to our risk of urban conflagrations during wildfire events - new construction and significant remodels, of which
there are relatively few). Why is this omitted in the WUI section? It is obviously helpful. Furthermore, since the only mention of specific building protection measures
occur here, the document gives a false sense of security from fire protection measures for internally ignited
structure fires. Internal sprinklers will hardly make a difference during an urban conflagration - that isn't their design.

Policy FP-14, hints at the building code update, but does not mention the most significant and impactful aspect - it doesn't help for existing structures.
8 Comment Response
Program FP-1, e., is unclear: "Update building [is there a missing ''s" or follow-up word here?] to meet or exceed building hardening requirements in Chapter 7A of the
California Building Code or other applicable codes,
based on local studies or conditions identified in the
local fire hazard and risk assessment." Is this meant to indicate existing building retrofits? If so, hooray! We have a chance at survival.

Program FP-1, h. - Is there an appropriate place in
zoning requirements for regulation of unhardened
outbuildings?

Page 41 ends

section is out of date and needs revision.

August 2, 2023, email response from Gary Price’s
email from Theo Fitanides:

Thank you very much for your diligent response. It was
very easy for me to see the improvements you and staff
and CALFIRE have made.

Be well,
Theo
July 3, 2023, email from Fire Captain, Donnie
Privette, CALFire, involved significant work with
staff/consultant team to revise CAPSE per State Fire
laws:

We have arrived! It is time for you to Formally Submit
your draft Safety Element and Existing Conditions
Report to the Board of Forestry (BOF).
9 Comment Response
You will need to send an email to Edith Hannigan
[email protected] requesting for a Formal
Review of Nevada City Draft Safety Element.

Please CC Me (Donnie Privett), Chief Vargas
([email protected]), and anyone you need to in
your department.

Attach the following three documents for Formal
Review either as an attachment or Link as the documents are large (all links worked great for me)
- Nevada City Draft Safety Element (SE). This should be the completed version. This is the one used for Formal
Review by the Board of Forestry.
- Appendix A Safety Element Update.
- Appendix B 2017 Nevada County Local Hazard
Mitigation Plan-Annex B-Nevada City.
- Appendix D-Critical Facilities and Essential Services. - Appendix F-Terms and Definitions
Once Edith receives your request, she will give us
permission to conduct a Formal Review of your SE. I
will then complete a Formal Review utilizing the above
documents along with the SE Review Document making
sure the roadmaps, the Draft SE, and the ECR are all still accurate. I then submit it to Chief Vargas to review. He will then pass it up the chain of command back to the
BOF.

Please let me know if you have any further questions.
10 Comment Response
July 14, 2023, California Board of Forestry reviewed
CAPSE during their regular meeting.

In accordance with California Government Code 65302
the Board of Forestry accepted the CAPSE document
with no recommended changes.

See attached meeting agenda.

August 21, 2023, letter from Gary Arnold, Branch
Chief, Local Development Review, Equity and
System Planning, Division of Planning, Local
Assistance and Sustainability California Department
of Transportation, District 3 (see attached letter)
In summary main points of letter are as follows:
1) The pre-planning tool that is mentioned on page 31
cannot be found.
2) Overall, the data regarding climate vulnerability is in agreement Caltrans District 3 Climate Change
Vulnerability Assessment.
3) General discussion regarding evacuation routes in
CAPSE and need to develop an expanded evacuation
capacity analysis.
4) The city still falls into a low-income category that may require some review of disadvantaged populations.

Staff/Consultant Team Responses are numerically cross referenced to comments:
1) The Pre-Planning Tool link referenced on Page 27 of the document (previously Page 31) does work:
https://www.nevadacountyca.gov/2792/Preparedness-Toolkit 2) Concurrence with comment.
3) As noted in the CAPSE Assembly Bill AB 747 requires that the Safety Element be reviewed and updated to identify evacuation routes and their capacity, safety, and viability under a range of emergency scenarios. CAPSE Programs EP-3 and EP-4 address this with a collaborative strategy to work with Nevada County in developing a evacuation capacity analysis in compliance with AB 747 and then updating the City’s Circulation Element to address evacuation capacity needs. The Nevada County OES is working on an evacuation capacity study that will address this for the City.
4) Several sections of the CAPSE address disadvantaged populations, including a separate section on vulnerable communities and environmental justice (see Pages 90-91). CAPSE Policy OC-11 prioritizes the needs of at-risk, vulnerable, and disadvantaged populations during emergency response and disaster recovery efforts, including increasing awareness of defensible space requirements and promoting understanding of evacuation routes.
11 Comment Response
August 26, 2023, email from City of Nevada Planning
Commissioner Rodney Brown.
1) In conjunction with the standards update, update the City tree removal process to simplify process for
property owners to reduce fuels on their properties.

Identified Program:

PROGRAM FP-2: Update landscaping standards, such
as Chapter 17-80, Zoning Code Performance Standard,
to incorporate fire-resistant planting material prohibiting flammable landscaping plantings or materials storage in the structure ignition zone (e.g., within 0–5 feet of the structure). Include in this amendment landscaping
standards to address vegetation maturity in the required number of initial plantings and vegetation
Plocation/spacing requirements to address long-term
defensible space and wildfire protection for the life of the landscaping.
2) In addition, continue to monitor culverts for
degradation and deficiencies, and upgrade drainage
system capacity as appropriate in conjunction with street improvements.

PROGRAM FP-1: In accordance with the California Fire Hazard Reduction Around Buildings and Structures Regulations (Title 14, CCR, division 1.5, chapter 7, subchapter 3, article 3 (commencing with section 1299.01) and to address fire safety risks, update the approach to reviewing new development and land use entitlements and to the extent feasible, retrofit development, and include the amendments/updates to regulations/requirements and require a Fire Protection Plan when applicable. This Program shall also ensure that new development be located where fire and emergency services have sufficient capacity to meet project needs or require that they be upgraded to provide necessary capacity as part of the proposed development activities to ensure new development has adequate fire protection and shall include the following provisions:

Updated Regulations for New Development and Land Use Entitlements:
a. Provision of public and private standards for road and driveway design, to ensure the ability of emergency service providers to respond to structural and wildland fires and calls for medical and law enforcement emergency assistance. Designs shall provide for secondary road access necessary for fire safety or emergency access;
b. Ensure that each property outside of a developed water system shall maintain water storage to provide wildfire and structure protection on the property;
c. Ensure that sign and address standards for new development as well as retrofit, which will provide for easy identification of roads, streets, driveways and buildings by emergency service providers; and 12 Comment Response
Deer Creek and Little Deer Creek that are most exposed
to post-wildfire debris flows. This may include review of the implications this scenario would have on stormwater runoff during larger storm events. This review could
result in a set of recommended set of pre-disaster
mitigation measures to be implemented to help mitigate
impacts from post-wildfire debris flow events.

Mitigation measures could include:
• rapid reforestation and stabilization of wildfire-affected areas susceptible to debris flow runoff to stabilize soils; • communication and coordination with residents and
businesses located within potential impact areas from
post-wildfire debris flow events; and
• development of analysis techniques to predict debris
flow events based on rainfall and moisture conditions.
3) Amend spelling of Deer Creek throughout document.
4) Recommend adding improved air quality and improve
public health in the following policies OC-13 through 16 regarding “Reduced Carbon Footprint.
5) Recommend adding improved air quality and improve
public health in the following policies OC-13 through 16 regarding “Reduced Carbon Footprint.
6) "Promotion" is very vague and non-specific. Add the
following.

As part of OC-15 or as a separate policy, add, "Seek
funding for and implement the Nevada County Active
Transportation Plan, which identifies new and improved
walking, biking, and trail facilities within the City,
d. Create measures/standards for defensible space to reduce hazards associated with the structural and wildland intermix, including:

1. Fuel modification and vegetation management procedures adjacent to structures and fuel breaks where appropriate;

2. Vegetation management adjacent to roads and driveways to provide safe travel for residents, and firefighting, medical and police personnel; and

3. Building setbacks.
e. Update building to meet or exceed building hardening requirements in Chapter 7A of the California Building Code or other applicable codes, based on local studies or conditions identified in the local fire hazard and risk assessment.
f. Create a planning process for review of new subdivisions, such as tentative maps and parcel maps, that requires that specific findings be made by the City for these types of land use entitlements that are located within a State Responsible Area or a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone.
g. Create a planning process to determine what new and significant remodel project are subject to preparing fire protection plans that incorporate project-specific risk reduction measures, subject to the determination and approval of the local agency.
h. Revise Zoning Code to Prohibit land uses that could exacerbate the risk of ignitions, such as outdoor storage of hazardous or highly flammable materials, outdoor welding, or temporary fireworks sales. i. Revise Zoning Code and/or process for simplifying the tree removal process to help reduce fuels on properties.
2) Revised CAPSE includes amendments for Program FH-4 to address monitoring culverts for degradation and deficiencies and improve system capacity as follows:

PROGRAM FH-4: The City will work with other stakeholders, such as Nevada County, Nevada Irrigation District, and Sierra Fund, to identify 13 Comment Response
improving options and increasing safety for these modes of travel while improving quality of life."
Similarly, add, "The City shall work with Caltrans and
NCTC to implement the improvements for walking and
biking accessibility and safety along State Routes 20 and 49 within the City as identified in the Caltrans District 3 Active Transportation Plan."
Identified Program
POLICY OC-15: The City shall continue to promote
alternative transportation modes, such as walking and
bicycle trails.
key impact areas on Deer Creek and Little Deer Creek that are most exposed to post-wildfire debris flows and continue monitoring culverts for degradation and deficiencies and evaluate needs to improve capacity of the drainage system. This may include review of the implications this scenario would have on stormwater runoff during larger storm events.

This review could result in a set of recommended set of pre-disaster mitigation measures to be implemented to help mitigate impacts from post-wildfire debris flow events. Mitigation measures could include:
• rapid reforestation and stabilization of wildfire-affected areas susceptible to debris flow runoff to stabilize soils;
• communication and coordination with residents and businesses located within potential impact areas from post-wildfire debris flow events; and
• development of analysis techniques to predict debris flow events based on rainfall and moisture conditions.
3) Corrections made in Revised CAPSE and Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration.
4) Revised CAPSE includes new Section Heading: Reduced Carbon Footprint and Improved Air Quality. Safety Element addresses public safety, not public health. Suggest the possibility of creating a Public Health Element of the General Plan that would address public health matters that could include, but not be limited to air quality, tobacco use, healthy food, pandemics.
5) See response 4 above.
6) The Nevada County Active Transportation Plan (NCAT) is a countywide plan primarily involving circulation issues. These references to 14 Comment Response
NCAT would best be located in the City’s General Plan Circulation Element. However, recognizing that the NCAT does, to some extent address public safety hazards, such as automobile conflicts with bicycles, for example, there is some cross over to public safety. Many agencies are involved in implementing the NCAT so this is a collaborative plan. Recognizing that the City has very limited resources to implement this plan and that this plan is a collaborative depending on multiple agencies to fund the plan, the CAPSE has been revised to include revised Policy OC 10 and new Policy OC-17 and Program OC16 as follows:

Revised Policy:

POLICY OC-10: Help support efforts to educate the public about the health impacts of poor air quality, including particulate pollution and ozone from wildfire smoke, vehicle emissions, and other sources through education and outreach and local pollutant monitoring, focusing on protection of vulnerable populations including youth and seniors.

New Policy and Program:

POLICY OC-17: The City shall collaborate with others in developing and implementing programs that reduce the reliance on automobiles, such as the Nevada County Active Transportation Plan (NCAT). The NCAT identifies new and improved walking, biking, and trail facilities within the City, and options for improvements and increasing safety for such facilities and these modes of travel.

PROGRAM OC-16: The City shall collaborate with others, including Caltrans, Nevada County, and the Nevada County Transportation 15 Comment Response
Commission to seek funding and implement the Nevada County Active Transportation Plan.

Consequently, due to limited resources and the City’s opportunity to use this one-time grant for the project, the City needs to complete the CAPSE now instead of waiting for the Nevada County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, (LHMP) to be updated. The LHMP expires on September 19, 2023. It is unknown when the LHMP will be completed and ready for adoption, but Nevada County has indicated that it could be sometime in 2024. California Government Code Section 65302(g)(4) requires that the safety element (CAPSE) be upon the next revision of the LHMP. After the LHMP is updated and adopted, the CAPSE will then need to be updated again.
2) Noted. Two sections of the document are devoted to climate change and environmental justice and there are a number of related policies and 16 Comment Response
mitigation). This document should be finalized and
recirculated for public comment for at least 3 months so people can read it and the CAPSE and provide more
informed comments.
6) Comments: Caltrans comments were not discussed
but have some good points for real actions. Why were
the Caltrans policies dismissed?
7) It feels like this thing is just checking the box, but doesn’t quite check it.
programs have been included. Appendix A of the CAPSE consists of a climate vulnerability study.
3) Much of the information in the CAPSE is taken from more recent sources where there are no conflicts with the LHMP. Much of the information in the CAPSE has been taken from the 2017 LHMP; the LHMP (although may be perceived to be outdated) needs to be consistent and incorporated by reference into the CAPSE. (CG Section 65302). As noted in the current Housing Element, which references more recent population estimates, population has not significantly changed from 2015 to the extent that it would change analysis or policies/programs in the CAPSE. As noted in 1 above, the CAPSE will need to undergo a further update once the LHMP is updated. This will be a further opportunity to look at more current data, including population, to adjust where found warranted.
4) The noise exposure section of the CAPSE consists of the City’s Noise Element of the General Plan. It is a policy document that describes current and projected noise in the community and incorporates policies and programs to address noise. The CAPSE describes the current noise regulations and offers recommendations to change them to address newer noise standards. Noise regulations don’t need to be consistent with the CAPSE, but the CAPSE suggests many changes to the noise regulations. Ideally, once recommended amendments are made to the noise regulations and programs, then they become consistent with the CAPSE. This same approach applies to other aspects of the CAPSE where the CAPSE recommends amendments to a number of codes and programs to bring them up to current State and Federal standards and/or to improve them for other reasons.
5) The CAPSE is a policy document that is self-mitigating, meaning policies and programs are designed to minimize environmental impacts that result in not needing the Draft Initial Study Negative Declaration (ISND) to have any mitigation measures. The ISND was circulated for 17 Comment Response
public review between July 22, 2023, and August 31, 2023. This circulation included distribution to the California Clearinghouse and local agencies and consideration was given to comments received from this distribution. The ISND is only required be recirculate when it has been substantially revised; generally if new significant impacts are discovered that were not previously addressed or if mitigation measures have been significantly altered or added (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15072 and 15073.5). The City, as lead agency for this project, will need to determine that the Initial Study is adequate and will not require substantial revision. The final ISND is issued when the City Council adopts the CAPSE.
6) The ISND continues to be an evolving document that includes responses to agency and public comments. The City did receive comments from Caltrans and has responded to them in the most recent ISND. See previous responses to comments in this table. 7) Noted.
18 19
20 21
22 23
Technical Steering Committee
A technical steering committee was assembled to help drive the Public Safety Element Update with a number of meetings held to start and finish the project. The Committee was composed of various staff and public interests (see attached roster).

Statutory Agency Review:

The Draft Safety Element was circulated for comment to a number of public agencies. As mandated by State law, the document was also circulated for consultation to California Geological Survey of the Department of Conservation between March 5 and April 25, 2023, to determine if all known seismic and other geologic hazards are (Gov. Code § 65302.5)(a). The City submitted a second email to the Department of Conservation on April 29, 2023, to confirm that they did not provide any comments and, therefore, the draft document is in compliance with this section of State law.

Also, since the City has areas that are identified as “Very High Fire Hazard Severity” by the state, the element was reviewed and approved by the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection for review before adoption, and the Board may recommend changes regarding uses of land, policies, or strategies for reducing fire (Gov. Code § 65302.5)(b)).

Community Survey:

A public survey was conducted to obtain input from the community on safety issues. The survey consisted on posting the survey on the City’s Website between August 1 and November 1, 2021, Results from collecting public opinions and input as part of Nevada City’s Safety Element efforts. Digital survey was created to collect public participation through online channels (website, online survey, social media, email). To increase access, the survey was set up an online using Google Form Survey available 24 hours a day 7 days a week from any digital device. The survey was also posted on the City’s website. Flyers were circulated throughout the City to outreach to the community. The following summarizes the results of the survey.

Survey Observations
 Fire, drought, and power failure related issues drive the highest safety concerns.  Respondents feel the least prepared for Geological and Mining Related Hazards.  YubaNet has the highest percent of daily usage of communication channels.  Smoke Detectors, Flashlights, Property Maintenance, and a Disaster Go Bag are how most respondents are preparing for a safety hazard event. 37 Unique Responses
24 If you represent an organization or have a special interest in safety, please specify below. 19 responses

1. I am on the committee of the Deer Creek South Side Fire Wise Community

2. City Employee

3. I have worked on neighborhood fire safety issues since 1995, first as a County resident and now, since 2014 as a Nevada City resident. I am very concerned about Nevada City's task of a fire prevention/management plan and haphazard approach to working on fire issues.

4. Nevada City Police Dept.

5. I live adjacent to Nevada City

6. I'm involved with Greater Champion Firewise, Deer Creek Canyon Steering Committee (shaded fuel break project) and NC Fire Safety Advisory Committee but my responses will reflect my own opinions only.

7. ME

8. I live right outside the boundaries of NC off Old Downieville Highway.

9. Live just above Deer Creek where there is heavy overnight use of the riparian zone

10. I live in Deer Creek Canyon near Nevada City limits

11. Nevada city council member and chair of the fire advisory committee

12. I live on Cedro Road, off of Old Downieville. we are in a high fire risk area

13. Fire Safety Committee of Nevada City

14. Very concerned re fire prevention/vegetation management/evacuation

15. Peter Van Zant Nevada City Planning Committee

16. Fire Safe Council

17. Miners Foundry Cultural Center. The Foundry sits on the edge of the Deer Creek canyon. We have concerns about fire and flooding of our building from run off down bridge and underground water intrusion. We are also concerned about the evacuation plans for a whole town in the event of fire.

18. Miners Foundry Cultural Center
25 3. How concerned are you about the following safety hazards in Nevada City? Not Concerned Concerned Extremely Concerned N/A
Wildfire,
including smoke
and tree mortality
0 4 36 0
Utility/Power
Failures
4 16 16
26 Drought and
Water Shortages
0 13 23 0
Earthquake 23 11 1 1
Flooding and
Storm Water
15 18 1 2
Geologic
hazards, such as
landslides, sink
holes, and
subsidence
21 10 3 2
Hazardous
Materials, such
as mining, heavy
metals, transport
through the city
11 15 8 2
Severe Weather,
such as extreme
heat, cold, wind,
and lightning
6 13 17

4. How prepared are you and your family for these safety hazard situations? Not Prepared Prepared Extremely Prepared N/A
Wildfire,
including smoke
and tree mortality
2 25 9 0
Utility/Power
Failures
5 26 5 0
27 Drought and
Water Shortages
18 18 0 0
Earthquake 19 10 1 6
Flooding and
Storm Water
17 14 0 5
Geologic
hazards, such as
landslides, sink
holes, and
subsidence
28 4 0 4
Hazardous
Materials, such as
mining, heavy
metals, transport
through the city
28 5 0 3
Severe Weather,
such as extreme
heat, cold, wind,
and lightning
11 21 3 1

5. What is the most effective ways for you to receive information about safety risks? Never Use Use Monthly Use Weekly Use Daily Not sure what this is (N/A)
CCC Warning
System
3 6 0 2 24
Television 20 3 4 9 0
Radio 8 10 7 11 0
NextDoor 14 5 7 6 4
28 Facebook 17 6 8 5 0
Twitter 28 3 3 2 0
YubaNet 2 5 8 21 0
Zone Haven 9 8 6 3 10
Nixle 13 0 0 0 23
Ready Nevada
County/Code
Red
4 15 9 8 0
29 8. What can the local government (city, county, fire districts) do to help improve your knowledge and understanding of the risks associated with safety hazards? 35 responses

1. Better training guidelines for kids

2. Dedicate one entity to broadcast reliable updates at least every half hour in case of wildfire or other emergency. Every 10 minutes would be even better! Right now, it seems like we obtain a little bit of information in one place, some other information in another place. One reliable source saying the same thing on radio and internet would be helpful.

3. Address how to alert the elderly and those who do not have a computer or smartphone.

4. Address areas like Bloomfield Road where cell phone can be poor, and alerts do not always come through in a timely manner.

5. Overgrowth of trees on Bloomfield Road would make it a dangerous egress route in case of fire.

6. I am supposed to I know my alternate routes. However, they are not posted on the streets, which is where they need to be in an emergency. Some alternate routes may be on private property and posting them may be a liability issue? Maybe figure out a way to exempt the city/county from that when it comes to emergency evacuations.

7. I would love to see a way to incentivize fire safety for individual households instead of penalizing. I have spent a lot of time and money for a new roof, tree work, etc. I wish this would lower my insurance bill, and it would be lovely if it was a tax deduction!
30 8. What about the many people in this county who are living on the edge financially? Yes, there are green waste drop off locations, if they own a truck or can pay someone to pick up for them. Some people just do not have the money.

9. I realize that some of these things may already have been addressed and I am just unaware.

10. This is in no way intended to be criticism. I am thrilled with the progress being made with our county emergency services, and I am indebted many times over to our sheriff's department and our fire fighters.

11. Communication and education

12. Have and provide up to date information during an actual emergency

13. designate and identify on the ground the various evacuation routes noting that a recommendation of which is prefrerred will be on all local media at the time of the event

14. Solid, easy to follow website info / check list

15. Fuels reduction on City property

16. Regarding wildfire risk, Nevada City's vegetation abatement ordinance is currently being revised. 1) Writing the ordinance so that an average person who isn't a lawyer can interpret it would help increase the public's knowledge and understanding. 2) When a draft ordinance is available, it would be an opportunity to engage with the public about vegetation management and the city's enforcement program.

17. I appreciate the mailed literature

18. Our greatest risk comes from Purdon Crossing and the illegal fires down there. Nothing is being done to mitigate this. The city needs to recognize the fire is going to come from outside the city limits and press the county to better prepare properties within 1.5 miles of Nevada city to be better prepared (property clearance). You are only going to be as good as your weakest link and that is the non-occupied properties within the city limits and within a 1.5 mile radius of the city limits. Fire danger goes well beyond the city limits and the city's sphere of influence.

19. More communication via cell phone alerts with detailed information. Even if not in the immediate area. For example, the Bennett Fire should have had communications to Nevada City residents . . . as transportation corridors were impacted.

20. nothing

21. Ensure that weeds are removed from city streets and properties, ( bring on the goats if necessary )……..ensure that PGE check and straighten their electrical poles , and constantly monitor transient camp locations -make sure they are offered shelter in the county, since so many of them smoke and build fires for warmth and cooking——-all these aside from warning systems - and education.

22. consolidate information currently smeared across multiple websites

23. better communication and working on a vegetation ordinance that fits our city

24. Coordinate with media to promote effect immediate updates for local disaster events

25. I am very aware of the risks of living adjacent to former Grass Valley Group wooded, poorly managed forest with partyers and homeless camps using fire for heat and cooking.

26. Regular updates on local media.

27. We get it. Not sure our neighbors do
31 28. A user-friendly website with links to resources, including county/city resources similar to the chipping program that was previously available, etc. This may be already available, but I'm not aware of it. Along those lines, increased outreach on social media, in the union, on Yuba net, etc. would be helpful.

29. Possibly a simple flyer.

30. None

31. Continue with information on issues as changes occur

32. Send mailers with the latest information, perhaps with our water bills.

33. Keep me informed via email and the newsletter. Also, create a newsletter that can be emailed to those you have email addresses for as well.

34. Become more proactive about forcing businesses to maintain their property and remove fuels, as well as more support for transients who may intentionally or inadvertently set fires.

35. More education and resources
32 33
Nevada City Safety Element Update 2021-22
Technical Steering Team:

Nevada City Staff:

Lisa McCandless
City Project Manager
Interim City Planner
Sean Grayson
City Manager
Joan Phillipe
City Manager (interim)
Bryan McAlister
City Engineer
Sam Goodspeed
Nevada City Fire Chief
Mark Buttron
City of Grass Valley Fire Chief
Police Chief
Dan Foss
Stakeholders:

Paul Cummings
Director, Nevada County Office of Emergency Services
Alex Keeble-Toll
Senior Administrative Analyst
Nevada County Office of Emergency Services
Lieutenant Sean Scales
Emergency Operations Coordinator
Office Of Emergency Services
Nevada County Sheriff's Office
34 Mike Woodman
Director, Nevada County Transportation Commission
Steve T Monaghan
Information Office
Carrie Monohan
Program Director
Sierra Fund
Shane Vargas
Battalion Chief
State Fire Marshal

CALFIRE
Consultant Team:

Project Manager
Gary Price
[email protected]
(530) 218-1059
Climate Assessment and Peer Reviewer
Eric Vaughan, Climate Assessment Assistance
Data Support Team
Jeanine Foster
Chris Morrison
Foster and Morrison
Noise Consultant
Paul Bollard
Bollard and Associates
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 1
Appendix F-Terms and Definitions
(also to be added to the General Plan Background Report) General Terminology
100-Year Flood: A flood that has a 1 percent likelihood of occurring in any given year. 100-Year Floodplain: The areas that have a 1-in-100 chance of flooding in any given year using criteria consistent with, or development by, the Federal Emergency Management Agency. 200-Year Floodplain: The areas that have a 1-in-200 chance of flooding in any given year using criteria consistent with, or development by, the Department of Water Resources. 500-Year Floodplain: The areas that have a 1-in-100 chance of flooding in any given year using criteria consistent with, or development by, the Department of Water Resources.

Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone: A regulatory zone, delineated by the State Geologist, within which site-specific geologic studies are required to identify and avoid fault rupture hazards prior to subdivision of land and/or construction of most structures for human occupancy.

At Risk Population Facility: Public facilities that include, without limitation, public safety, emergency response, emergency medical, designated emergency shelters, communications, public utility plant facilities and equipment, and government operations. Sub-Categories:
• Public Safety - Police stations, fire and rescue stations, emergency operations centers • Emergency Response - Emergency vehicle and equipment storage and essential governmental work centers for continuity of government operations. • Emergency Medical - Hospitals, emergency care, urgent care, ambulance services. • Designated Emergency Shelters.
• Communications - Main hubs for telephone, main broadcasting equipment for television systems, radio and other emergency warning systems.
• Public Utility Plant Facilities - including equipment for treatment, generation, storage, pumping and distribution (hubs for water, wastewater, power and gas). • Essential Government Operations - Public records, courts, jails, building permitting and inspection services, government administration and management, maintenance and equipment centers, and public health.
• Transportation Lifeline Systems - Airports, helipads, and critical highways, roads, bridges and other transportation infrastructure (Note: Critical highways, roads, etc. will be determined during any hazard-specific evacuation planning and are not identified in this plan).

Climate: The weather conditions prevailing in Nevada City and the Western Nevada County area over a long period.
2 Climate Adaptation: Adjustment or preparation of natural or human systems to a new or changing environment that moderates harm or exploits beneficial opportunities.

Climate Mitigation (Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions): A human intervention to reduce the human impact on the climate system; it includes strategies to reduce greenhouse gas sources and emissions and enhancing greenhouse gas sinks.

Critical Facility: Facilities that either (1) provide emergency services or (2) house or serve many people who would be injured or killed in case of disaster damage to the facility. Examples include hospitals, fire stations, police and emergency services facilities, utility facilities, and communications facilities.

Evacuation Center: A facility that provides a safe place to stay for those who have been ordered to evacuate their homes prior to an emergency event.

Extreme Weather Event: In most cases, extreme weather events are defined as lying in the outermost (“most unusual”) ten percent of a place’s history. Analyses are available at the national and regional levels.

Fault: A fracture or zone of closely associated fractures along which rocks on one side have been displaced with respect to those on the other side. A fault zone is a zone of related faults which commonly are braided, but which may be branching. A fault trace is the line formed by the intersection of a fault and the earth’s surface.

Active Fault: A fault that has exhibited surface displacement within Holocene time (approximately the past 11,000 years). Potentially Active Fault: A fault that shows evidence of surface displacement during Quaternary time (the last 2 million years).

Flooding: A rise in the level of a water body or the rapid accumulation of runoff, including related mudslides and land subsidence, that results in the temporary inundation of land that is usually dry. Riverine flooding, coastal flooding, mud flows, lake flooding, alluvial fan flooding, flash flooding, levee failures, tsunamis, and fluvial stream flooding are among the many forms that flooding takes.

General Plan: A plan made up of text describing goals and objectives, principles, standards, and programs, as well as a set of maps and diagrams that constituent a vision of Nevada City’s future community development.

Ground Failure: Mudslide, landslide, liquefaction or soil compaction. Hazardous Building: A building that may be hazardous to life in the event of an earthquake because of partial or complete collapse. Hazardous buildings may include: (1) Those constructed prior to the adoption and enforcement of local codes requiring earthquake resistant building design. (2) Those constructed of unreinforced masonry. (3) Those which exhibit any of the following characteristics:
• exterior parapets or ornamentation which may fall on passersby 3 • exterior walls that are not anchored to the floors, roof, or foundation sheeting on roofs or floors incapable of withstanding lateral loads
• large openings in walls that may cause damage from torsional forces • lack of an effective system to resist lateral forces
• non-ductile concrete frame construction
Climate Mitigation (Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions): A human intervention to reduce the human impact on the climate system; it includes strategies to reduce greenhouse gas sources and emissions and enhancing greenhouse gas sinks.

Greenhouse Gases (GHG): gases that trap heat in the atmosphere.

Hardening Structures: An action to reduce the vulnerability of homes and structures to embers and heat that accompany most wildfires, including use of proper construction techniques and choice of building materials.

Hazard: A dangerous phenomenon, substance, human activity or condition that may cause loss of life, injury or other health impacts, property damage, loss of livelihoods and services, social and economic disruption, or environmental damage.

Hazardous Material: An injurious substance, including pesticides, herbicides, toxic metals and chemicals, liquefied natural gas, explosives, volatile chemicals, and nuclear fuels.

Hazardous Material Spills or Releases: A spill or release in which there is a significant amount of a hazardous material released or one in which the release of the substance cannot be controlled. 4 Hazard Mitigation: Sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and their property from hazards and their effects.

Landslide: A general term for a falling, sliding, or flowing mass of soil, rocks, water, and debris.

Includes mudslides, debris flows, and debris torrents.

LAFCO: The Nevada County Local Agency Formation Commission is a appointed government agency that administers the formations of local governments, such as cities, special districts, and others under the provisions of the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (Division 3 (commencing with Section 56000) of Title 5 of the Government Code).

Landslide: A general term for a falling, sliding, or flowing mass of soil, rocks, water, and debris.

Includes mudslides, debris flows, and debris torrents.

Liquefaction: A process by which water-saturated granular soils transform from a solid to a liquid state during strong ground shaking.

Maladaptation: Any changes in natural or human systems that inadvertently increase vulnerability to climatic stimuli; an adaptation that does not succeed in reducing vulnerability but increases it instead.

Natural Infrastructure: The preservation or restoration of ecological systems, or utilization of engineered systems that use ecological processes, to increase resiliency to climate change, manage other environmental hazards, or both. This may include, but is not limited to, floodplain and wetlands restoration or preservation, combining levees with restored natural systems to reduce flood risk, and urban tree planting to mitigate high heat days.

Noise Terminology: See Noise Terminology below.

Peakload Water Supply: The supply of water available to meet both domestic water and firefighting needs during the particular season and time of day when domestic water demand on a water system is at its peak. Resiliency: The capacity to withstand or to recover quickly from hazards.

Safety: The condition of being protected from or unlikely to cause danger, risk, or injury. Safety can also refer to the control of recognized hazards in order to achieve an acceptable level of risk.

Seiche: An earthquake-induced wave in a lake, reservoir, or harbor.

Seismic Hazard Zone: A regulatory zone, delineated by the State Geologist, within which sitespecific geologic, soils, and foundation engineering studies are required to identify and avoid earthquake-caused ground-failure hazards, or selected other earthquake hazards, prior to subdivision of land and for construction of most structures for human occupancy. Storm surge:

An abnormal rise of water generated by a storm, over and above the predicted astronomical tides 5 Seismically Induced Surface Rupture: A break in the ground’s surface and associated deformation resulting from the movement of a fault.

Sphere of Influence: The probable physical boundary and service area of a local agency, such as the City of Nevada City. Territory must be within a city or district’s sphere of influence to be considered for annexation to that city or district.

Subsidence: The gradual, local settling or sinking of the earth’s surface with little or no horizontal motion (subsidence is usually the result of gas, oil, or water extraction, hydrocompaction, or peat oxidation, and not the result of a landslide or slope failure).

Tsunami: A wave, commonly called a tidal wave, caused by an underwater seismic disturbance, such as sudden faulting, landslide, or volcanic activity. Wildland Fire: A fire occurring in a suburban or rural area that contains uncultivated lands, timber, range, watershed, brush, or grasslands. This includes areas where there is a mingling of developed and undeveloped land.

Vulnerability: The degree to which natural, built, and human systems are susceptible to harm from exposure to stresses associated with environmental and social change and from the absence of a capacity to adapt.

Weather Shelter: Means a facility designed to provide persons with temporary protection from storms, heat or freezing events, and other emergency situations.

Wildland Fire: A fire occurring in a suburban or rural area that contains uncultivated lands, timber, range, watershed, brush, or grasslands. This includes areas where there is a mingling of developed and undeveloped lands.

Wildland-Urban Interface Zone: The zone of transition between unoccupied land and human development. It is the line, area, or zone where structures and other human development meet or intermingle with undeveloped wildland or vegetative fuels.

Noise Terminology
Ambient Noise: The distinctive acoustical characteristics of a given area consisting of all noise sources audible at that location. In many cases, the term ambient is used to describe an existing or pre-project condition such as the setting in an environmental noise study.

Attenuation: The reduction of noise.

A-Weighting: A frequency-response adjustment of a sound level meter that conditions the output signal to approximate human response. All noise level measurements and noise standards associated with this Health and Safety / Noise Element are provided in terms of Aweighted sound levels.

Capacity Enhancing: A roadway project which would increase roadway capacity. Examples include new roadway construction projects or widening projects. Projects which only re-stripe 6 or otherwise alter roadway configuration without increasing capacity are not included in this definition.

CNEL: Community Noise Equivalent Level. Defined as the 24-hour average noise level with noise occurring during evening hours (7 - 10 p.m.) weighted by a factor of three and nighttime hours weighted by a factor of 10 prior to averaging.

Decibel or Db: Fundamental unit of sound, defined as ten times the logarithm of the ratio of the sound pressure squared over the reference pressure squared.

Fixed Noise Source: Fixed noise sources refer to sources of noise occurring on private property which are not regulated at the local level. They may be fixed in a certain position or mobile on the private property, but do not include mobile vehicles on public roadways or aircraft operations. For example, the City of Nevada City cannot regulate how much noise a car on a public roadway can generate, as such levels are regulated at the state level. However, the City can regulate the level of noise that is generated on private property as it affects other properties.

Traffic on public roadways, and aircraft in flight cannot be regulated at the local level.

Frequency: The measure of the rapidity of alterations of a periodic acoustic signal, expressed in cycles per second or Hertz.

Infill Project: A project which is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map designations, zoning, and community plan for the property in which at least 50% of the project site is bounded by similar uses and a project which would not expand the perimeter of the development area.

DNL or DNL Day/Night Average Sound Level: Similar to CNEL but with no evening weighting.

Leq: Equivalent or energy-averaged sound level.

L50: Median noise level, or level exceeded 50% of time.

Lmax: The highest root-mean-square (RMS) sound level measured over a given period of time.

Loudness: A subjective term for the sensation of the magnitude of sound.

Noise: Unwanted sound.

Noise Reducing Pavement: Pavement types for which local studies have identified noise-reducing benefits.

Sensitive Outdoor Areas: The primary outdoor activity area associated with any given land use at which noise-sensitivity exists and the location at which the City’s exterior noise level standards are applied. Additional definitions of sensitive areas of various residential uses follow.

Sensitive Areas of Single-Family Residential uses: Normally considered to be backyards or distinct rear patio/deck areas. Front yard spaces may be identified as the sensitive exterior area if there 7 are no other clearly identifiable private outdoor activity areas proposed as part of the residential property. Elevated balconies, front courtyards, front decks, side yards, etc., are not commonly considered to be sensitive outdoor activity areas. Where the location of outdoor activity areas for large lot residential properties cannot be determined, the City’s exterior noise level standards shall be applied within 50 feet of the rear of the residence.

Sensitive Areas of Multi-family Residential Uses: Common outdoor recreation areas, such as pools, tot-lots, tennis courts, etc., of multi-family uses are considered to be the sensitive outdoor area. Individual patios and balconies of multi-family developments are not considered to be sensitive outdoor areas.

Sensitive Areas of Residential Component of Mixed-Use Developments: Mixed-use developments will commonly consist of residential units on elevated floors above office or commercial uses. As a result, such uses may not include a clearly delineated sensitive outdoor area, in which case satisfaction with the City’s interior noise level standards will be considered adequate. The exterior noise standards for the residential component of mixed-use developments shall not be applied to patios or balconies facing the noise source (i.e. street).

Sensitive Areas of Non-Residential Uses: The noise-sensitive area of non-residential uses should be evaluated on a case by case basis. For example, the exterior areas surrounding hospitals, schools, and office buildings are not commonly considered to be noise-sensitive, whereas the interior spaces of such uses are noise-sensitive. The noise standards contained in Tables 1 and 2 should only be applied to locations within a proposed use where noise sensitivity can be demonstrated.

Short-Term Vacation Rentals (STVRs): A detached residence, condominium, apartment, or other habitable structure which is available for rental on a short-term basis. A short-term basis is defined as a continuous rental period of less than one month.

State Responsible Area Fire Regulations. Several sections, policies, and programs in the CAPSE reference Sections 1273 and 1274 of the California Code of Regulations – Title 24, Division 1.5, Chapter 7, Articles 2 and 3. These are State-wide regulations used for the purpose of establishing minimum wildfire protection standards in conjunction with building, construction and development in State Responsible Areas (SRAs). The future design and construction of structures, subdivisions and developments in State Responsibility Area (SRA) shall provide for basic emergency access and perimeter wildfire protection measures as specified in the following articles. These measures shall provide for emergency access; signing and building numbering; private water supply reserves for emergency fire use; and vegetation modification. The fire protection standards which follow shall specify the minimums for such measures. These regulations are typically updated annually. The most recent version of these regulations can be found at:
8 https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/Index?transitionType=Default&contex tData=%28sc.Default%29Acronyms
Table 1 includes all acronyms used in the Safety Element Update.

Table 1 Acronyms
Acronym Meaning
AB Assembly Bill
AF Acre-feet
AFN Access and Functional Needs
AFY Acre-feet per Year
Cal OES California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CalVTP California Vegetation Treatment Program
CalTrans California Department of Transportation
CC Climate Change
CGS California Geological Survey of the Department of Conservation CHP California Highway Patrol
DMA Disaster Mitigation Act
CAPSE City of Nevada City Climate Adaptation and Public Safety Element DNL Day/Night Level
DSAV Defensible Space Advisory Visits
DSOD California Division of Safety of Dams
DTSC California Department of Toxic Substances Control
EAP Emergency Action Plan
EOC Emergency Operations Center
EOP Emergency Operations Plan
EP Emergency Preparedness Evacuation
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
FH Flood Hazard
FWC Firewise Communities
GH Geologic Hazard
GHG Greenhouse Gas
9 Acronym Meaning
GVFD Grass Valley Fire Department
HFRA Healthy Forest Restoration Act
HM Hazardous Materials and Mining Hazard
ICS Incident Command System
JOA Joint Operational Area
LAFCO Local Agency Formation Commission
LHMP Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
MGD Million Gallons Per Day
NCCFPD Nevada County Consolidated Fire Protection District NCFSC Nevada County Fire Safe Council
NCTC Nevada County Transportation Commission
NE Noise Exposure
NFPA National Fire Protection Association
NID Nevada Irrigation District
OC Other Considerations
OES Office of Emergency Services
OPR Governor's Office of Planning and Research
PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric Company
PSPS Public Safety Power Shutoff
ROE Right of Entry
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SB Senate Bill
SF Public Safety Services and Facilities
SOI Sphere of Influence
SR State Route
SRA State Responsibility Area
SW Severe Weather
WUI Wildland-Urban Interface
1 Appendix G-References
California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, Fire Hazard Planning Technical Advisory Public Review Draft – November 2020, Available:
https://opr.ca.gov/docs/20220817-Fire_Hazard_Planning_TA.pdf Fire Safe Council of Nevada County, Inc. Community Wildfire Protection Plan 2 Nevada County, California, April 2016, Available:
https://static.s123-cdn-static-d.com/uploads/2149934/normal_5fbd6d4a57909.pdf Foster and Morrison, Nevada County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, August 2017, Available:
https://www.nevadacountyca.gov/1238/Emergency-Plans
LAFCo, 2015b, Wastewater Services Western Nevada County – Final Second Round Municipal Service Review Nevada Local Agency Formation Commission, April 23, 2015. Available:
https://www.mynevadacounty.com/DocumentCenter/View/14257/2015-West-County-WastewaterServices-MSR-PDF Accessed: April 24, 2019.

LAFCo 2015c, Western Nevada County Treated and Raw Water Services Second Round Municipal Service Review. Available: https://www.mynevadacounty.com/DocumentCenter/View/14258/2015-WestCounty-Water-Services-MSR-PDF Accessed: April 24, 2019.

LAFCo, 2018 – Local Agency Formation Commission of Nevada County – Bylaws. Available:
https://www.mynevadacounty.com/DocumentCenter/View/24486/Bylaws-Amended-2018- Nevada Irrigation District, 2015. Nevada Irrigation District 2015 Urban Water Management Plan.

Available:https://nidwater.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/NID2015DRAFT_UWMP_040416-DS.pdf Nevada City, 2014 – Nevada City Housing Element. Available: Accessed: April 23, 2019.

Nevada City, 2017. City of Nevada City 2017 Annexation Plan and Strategy. Available:
https://www.nevadacityca.gov/files/documents/2017AnnexationPlan1324073847091317PM.pdf.

Nevada City, 2018 – Nevada City Title 15 - Buildings and Construction. Available:
https://library.municode.com/ca/nevada_city/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT15BUCO_CH15.04 BUST
Nevada City, 2019- Title 18 Environment Chapter 18.01 Tree Preservation. Available:
https://library.municode.com/ca/nevada_city/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT18EN_CH18.01TR PR_18.01.036ADPRTR Accessed: August 13, 2019.

Nevada City, 2019 – Water Quality Report - Nevada City WTP 2910002. Available:
https://www.nevadacityca.gov/files/documents/CCR-20181329053126020419PM.pdf Nevada County, Nevada County Emergency Operations Plan, June 28, 2011, Available:
https://www.nevadacountyca.gov/1238/Emergency-Plans
Nevada County, Contingency Plan for Excessive Heat Emergencies, July 2017, Available:
https://www.nevadacountyca.gov/1238/Emergency-Plans
2 Nevada County General Plan, 2010 – Circulation Safety and Noise Elements. Available :
https://www.mynevadacounty.com/DocumentCenter/View/12576/Chapter-4-Circulation-2010-PDF Nevada County, 2016. Nevada County General Plan – Volume 1: Goals, Objectives, Policies, and Implementation Measures – Section 2: Community Development. Available:
https://www.mynevadacounty.com/DocumentCenter/View/12573/Chapter-1-Land-Use-2016-PDF Nevada County, 2019a. Nevada County Code – Article 2 Zoning District. Available:
http://qcode.us/codes/nevadacounty/view.php?topic=3-ii-2&frames=on :

Nevada County, 2019c – Sewer System Management Plan SSMP – 2012, Nevada County Sanitation District No. 1. Available: https://www.mynevadacounty.com/DocumentCenter/View/16806/SewerSystem-Management-Plan-PDF Nevada County, 2019d. Ready Nevada County – 2019 Wildfire Preparedness Action Plan. Available:
https://www.mynevadacounty.com/2707/ReadyNevadaCounty
Nevada County Transportation Commission, 2019. Welcome to NCTC. Available:
http://www.nctc.ca.gov/index.html
Nevada Irrigation District, 2019. Annual Water Quality Report – Reporting Year 2018. Available:
https://nidwater.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/NID-WQR-2018.pdf Nevada Yuba-Placer Unit (NEU) Fire Management Plan – 2022. Available:
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/d13dygtr/2022-nevada-yuba-placer-sierra-sutter-unit-fire-plan.pdf Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District, 2018 - NSAQMD Ozone Plan. Available:
http://myairdistrict.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/NSAQMD-Final-Draft-SIP-180921.pdf.

Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District, 2009. Guidelines for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts of Land Use Projects. Available:
https://www.mynevadacounty.com/DocumentCenter/View/15131/NSAQMD-Attachment-Land-UseGuidelines-PDF.

READY Nevada County Wildfire Evacuation Preparedness Action and Extreme Climate Event Mobility and Adaptation Plans-2023. Available:
https://www.nctc.ca.gov/Projects/Ready-Nevada-County/index.html Rincon Consultants, Inc, Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment, September, 2022, available as Appendix A of this CAPSE
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), 2019- Industrial Stormwater Program. Industrial Storm Water Permitting. Available: State Water Resources Control Board. Accessed: April 8, 2019.

State Water Resources Control Board, 2014-2016 303(d) list. Available:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/tmdl/impaired_waters_list/#intrpt2014_2 016.
3 SWRCB, 2018 – The Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region – Fifth Edition, May 2018. Available:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water_issues/basin_plans/sacsjr_201805.pdf

1 CITY OF NEVADA CITY
FROM AUGUST 31, 2023

PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING

CORRECTIONS AND REVISIONS TO THE DRAFT

CLIMATE ADAPTATION AND PUBLIC SAFET

ELEMENT (ERRATA)
Prepared on September 1, 2023
This document contains changes to the text and tables of the Draft Zoning Code document that was released for public circulation on August 25, 2023. The changes are presented in the order in which they appear in the Draft document and are identified by Draft Polices and Programs references. The Policies and Programs were the only changes made to the document as a result on Planning Commission comments and recommendation made during their special meeting of August 31, 2023, as reflected in this ERRATA. The policies and programs that have been revised are generally replaced in their entirety by the revisions identified below. The text deletions are shown in strikeout (strikeout) and the additions are show in underline (underline). 2 POLICY FP-5: Continue making available educational materials and website postings regarding environmental regulations, guidelines, and protection measures that property owners should be aware of and are responsible for when planning and undertaking fuels management activities and home fire protection and hardening improvements. These educational materials and website postings shall be available to members of the public on the City’s website and at the public counter at City Hall.

POLICY FP-8: Continue to engage with Firewise USA, Fire Safe Councils, and other networking organizations to improve local and regional coordination when addressing wildfire risks. Improve local and regional coordination and identify specific means of communication to reach all citizens in case of urban fire or wildfire and continue to engage with Firewise USA, Fire Safe Councils, and other networking organizations.

Updated Regulations for New Development and Land Use Entitlements:
a. Provision of public and private standards for road and driveway design, to ensure the ability of emergency service providers to respond to structural and wildland fires and calls for medical and law enforcement emergency assistance. Designs shall provide for secondary road access necessary for fire safety or emergency access;
b. Ensure that each property outside of a developed water system shall maintain water storage to provide wildfire and structure protection on the property; c. Ensure that sign and address standards for new development as well as retrofit, which will provide for easy identification of roads, streets, driveways and buildings by emergency service providers; and
d. Create measures/standards for defensible space to reduce hazards associated with the structural and wildland intermix, including:

1. Fuel modification and vegetation management procedures adjacent to structures and fuel breaks where appropriate;

2. Vegetation management adjacent to roads and driveways to provide safe travel for residents, and firefighting, medical and police personnel; and

3. Building setbacks.
e. Update building to meet or exceed building hardening requirements in Chapter 7A of the California Building Code or other applicable codes, based on local studies or conditions identified in the local fire hazard and risk assessment.
3 f. Create a planning process for review of new subdivisions, such as tentative maps and parcel maps, that requires that specific findings be made by the City for these types of land use entitlements that are located within a State Responsible Area or a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone.
g. Create a planning process to determine what new and significant remodel project are subject to preparing fire protection plans that incorporate project-specific risk reduction measures, subject to the determination and approval of the local agency. h. Revise Zoning Code to Prohibit land uses that could exacerbate the risk of ignitions, such as outdoor storage of hazardous or highly flammable materials, outdoor welding, or temporary fireworks sales.
i. Revise Zoning Code and/or process for simplifying the tree removal process to help reduce fuels on properties.

Fire Protection Plan Requirements:

1. Risk Analysis

2. Identification of Areas Lacking Service

3. Fire Response Capabilities

4. Fire Safety Requirements – Defensible Space, Infrastructure, and Building Ignition Resistance

5. Mitigation Measures and Design Considerations for Non-Conforming Fuel Modification

6. Wildfire Education Maintenance and Limitations

7. Evacuation Plan
Agency/Department: Nevada County Consolidated Fire District in collaboration with CAL FIRE, the Nevada County Office of Emergency Services, City Engineering, Fire, and Planning Departments.

Funding Source: General Fund
Time Frame: 2024
POLICY FH-10: The City shall collaborate with other key stakeholders, such as Nevada County, Nevada Irrigation District, and Sierra Fund, to identify key impact areas on DearDeer Creek and Little Deer Creek that are most exposed to post-wildfire debris flows.

PROGRAM FH-4: The City will work with other stakeholders, such as Nevada County, Nevada Irrigation District, and Sierra Fund, to identify key impact areas on Dear Creek and Little Deer Creek that are most exposed to post-wildfire debris flows and continue monitoring culverts for degradation and deficiencies and evaluate needs to improve capacity of the drainage system.

This may include review of the implications this scenario would have on stormwater runoff during larger storm events. This review could result in a set of recommended set of pre-disaster mitigation measures to be implemented to help mitigate impacts from post-wildfire debris flow events. Mitigation measures could include:
4 • rapid reforestation and stabilization of wildfire-affected areas susceptible to debris flow runoff to stabilize soils;
• communication and coordination with residents and businesses located within potential impact areas from post-wildfire debris flow events; and • development of analysis techniques to predict debris flow events based on rainfall and moisture conditions.

Agency/Department: Fire and Engineering Departments
Funding Source: General Fund
Time Frame: 2026
POLICY OC-10: Help support efforts to educate the public about the health impacts of poor air quality, including particulate pollution and ozone from wildfire smoke, vehicle emissions, and other sources through education and outreach and local pollutant monitoring, focusing on protection of vulnerable populations including youth and seniors.

Reduced Carbon Footprint and Improved Air Quality:

POLICIES
POLICY OC-13: The City shall encourage the use of electrical vehicles and equipment when practical as a preference in its procurement process.

PROGRAM OC-16: The City shall collaborate with others, including Caltrans, Nevada County, and the Nevada County Transportation Commission to seek funding and implement the Nevada County Active Transportation Plan.

Agency/Department: All City Department
Funding Source: Grants and General Fund
Time Frame: Ongoing
Table 4.9-2. Preferred Growth Areas in FEMA 100-Year Flood Plain City of Nevada City
City Hall · 317 Broad Street · Nevada City, California 95959 · (530) 265-2496 TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Lisa McCandless, Interim City Planner
Gary Price, Contract Planner
HEARING DATE: August 31, 2023
RE: General Plan Amendment GPA 2023-01; 2023 Public Safety Element Update (Climate Adaptation and Public Safety Element - CAPSE)
ATTACHMENTS:

A. RESOLUTION PC 2023-01; recommending that the City Council adopt the 2023 Public Safety Element Update; now referred to as the Climate Adaptation and Public Safety Element (CAPSE and related Exhibit A-CAPSE Document)
B. Public Comments and Responses for CAPSE
C. Initial Study Negative Declaration for CAPSE
ACTION REQUESTED: Conduct public hearing, consider public and staff comments and approve Resolution PC 2023-01 determining that the Initial Study Negative Declaration is adequate and recommending adoption of General Plan Amendment GPA 2023-01to City Council.

BACKGROUND:/DISCUSSION The Safety and Noise Elements are two of several required elements that comprise a general plan; a broad, long-range policy document that guides future development and conservation of the City. The current Public Safety Element, last adopted in 1986, includes how the City addresses public safety issues, including noise exposure. This update to the Public Safety Element addresses existing and future conditions regarding safety, noise, and climate adaptation within the City. The goal of the CAPSE is to reduce the potential short and long-term risk of death, injuries, property damage, and economic and social dislocation resulting from fires, floods, droughts, earthquakes, landslides, climate change, noise, and other hazards. State law requires jurisdictions to provide timely updates to their Safety Elements. Due to more recent changes in state law regarding general plans, this update has evolved to a complete replacement of the previous document to include a climate vulnerability assessment, noise evaluations, and a detailed analysis on public safety concerns. Policies and programs in the CAPSE are oriented around the following:
• Collaborations with Partner Agencies
• Updating certain regulations, such as Zoning, Noise, Flood, Roads • Enhancement of existing City safety programs
• Updating certain sections of the General Plan (Circulation Element to address evacuations) A key to the successful implementation of the CAPSE will be the City’s efforts to work with partner agencies to support safety needs, such as Nevada City Consolidated Fire District, Grass Valley Fire Department, CalFire, NID, and Nevada County. Many policies and programs in the CAPSE are oriented around collaborative efforts to address safety issues with the understanding that the City has 2 limited resources and is somewhat dependent on these partner agencies to create successful public safety programs.

The City began a process to develop the CAPSE as a General Plan update to the Public Safety Element in 2021. The process began with a public workshop on July 29, 2021, followed by a public survey that ended in September of 2021. The results of the 2021 workshop and survey helped guide the development of the CAPSE process to date. More recently, the City Council and Planning Commission held a joint public workshop on this subject on June 29, 2023. This meeting provided opportunities for the Council, Commission, and the public to provide feedback on the CAPSE before formal review and adoption. This meeting included a presentation and discussion of the CAPSE by the consultant team of Gary Price of Price Consulting Services (project manager), Eric Vaughan of Rincon Consultants (Climate Change and Adaptation section author) and Paul Bollard of Bollard Acoustical Consultants (Noise section author). Draft notes to this meeting, along with other comments from the public on the CAPSE are provided in the Public Participation Program section of the document (Attachment B of this staff report). Since this last meeting, the CAPSE underwent further revisions to address recommendations from public agency review by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. The CAPSE is now ready to be approved by the City. As an amendment to the General Plan, the CAPSE requires the Planning Commission to make a recommendation of adoption to the City Council.

Draft Document Link and Format: The CAPSE is an attachment to this staff report can be accessed at the following link:
https://www.nevadacityca.gov/pview.aspx?id=20947
Hard copies of the document are also available for public review during business hours at the City’s public counter.

The format of the CAPSE includes sections that will require additional information to fill in, such as insertion of the resolution by the Planning Commission and adoption resolution of the City Council, and expansion of Appendix A, Public Participation, to allow the document to evolve over this and future review by the City Council.

Consistency with Other Elements of the General Plan: In accordance with the State’s General Plan Guidelines, the City maintains seven mandatory elements, including Section II-Land Use and Economic Development (Land Use Element), Section III-City Resources (Conservation Element and Open Space Element), Section IV—Housing and Neighborhood Conservation (Housing Element), Section V-Circulation (Circulation Element) and Section VI-Public Safety (Safety Element and Noise Element). Section 2.4 of the CAPSE includes a complete discussion of the relationship between this document and the General Plan. In accordance with California Government Code Section 65300.5 the CAPSE is found to be consistent with all elements of the General Plan.

Compliance with State Fire Codes. The City is located in a State Responsible Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone and as such the Safety Element must be updated when the Housing Element is updated (In accordance with California Government Code Sections 65302 and 65302.5). The City’s Housing Element was last updated in 2019. The Safety Element update must include information about wildfire hazards and feasible implementation measures for the protection of the community from the risk of wildfire. Having had extensive input and review of the CAPSE from the California Board of Forestry 3 and Fire Protection (CALFIRE), the document is in compliance with State fire safety requirements. (see Public Participation Section below).

Relationship with the Nevada County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan: The Nevada County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP), developed and maintained in accordance with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, is a collaborative plan for Nevada County and all incorporated areas within. The LHMP is an area wide plan for addressing hazards. In order to be eligible for FEMA mitigation project funding, local governments must adopt a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, and continue to review and revise that plan every five years. The Nevada County LHMP, adopted in 2017, is incorporated by reference into the CAPSE, and expires September 19, 2023. Nevada County is currently in the process of updating the LHMP, but it is not expected to be completed until sometime in 2024. Once the updated LHMP is finalized the City will need to evaluate the plan in relation to the CAPSE and consider making updates to the CAPSE to ensure consistency with the content of the LHMP (likely sometime in 2024).

Environmental Review: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act requirements, an environmental assessment has been done for this General Plan update and no impacts under CEQA were identified. Since no impacts are anticipated by adoption of the CAPSE no mitigation is proposed and an Initial Study Negative Declaration (ISND) was prepared and submitted to the California Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse (see Attachment C). The draft Initial Study was circulated for public review between July 26, 2023 and August 26, 2023. The Planning Commission should review the environmental document for adequacy. The Planning Commission resolution recommending approval of the CAPSE to the City Council includes a finding that the ISND is adequate and that the project will not result in any significant environmental impacts. As required by the CEQA guidelines, a determination/finding of negative declaration needs to be made prior to approving the CAPSE.

Public Participation: Attachment B of this report consists of a table of public comments received and City responses. Appendix E of the CAPSE document includes a summary of the public outreach efforts made by the City to gain public input into this update process. This includes a record of all public meetings held, a public survey taken, and all written public comments received as of the date this report was prepared and circulated.

Substantiative comments that have been received are summarized herein.

CALFIRE: The staff/consultant team worked directly with CALFIRE staff to comply with California Government Code 65302 to assure the CAPSE addresses public safety requirements for the City that is located within areas classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. As a result of this review, many of the CAPSE programs were strengthened to address structure fires, building renovation, defensible space, and home hardening. On July 25, 2023 at their regular July board meeting, the California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection reviewed the revised CAPSE and had no further recommendations.

CALTRANS: August 22, 2023, letter indicates that data regarding climate vulnerability is in agreement Caltrans District 3 Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment. Caltrans comments indicated some general discussion regarding evacuation routes in CAPSE and the need to develop an expanded evacuation capacity analysis. Comments also indicated that the city still falls into a low-income category that may require some review of disadvantaged populations. In response, CAPSE Programs EP-3 and EP-4 address evacuation route capacity concerns with a collaborative strategy to work with Nevada County in developing an evacuation capacity analysis and recommends an update of the City’s Circulation Element. Several sections of the CAPSE address disadvantaged populations including a 4 separate section on vulnerable communities and environmental justice (see Pages 90-91). CAPSE Policy OC-11 prioritizes the needs of at-risk, vulnerable, and disadvantaged populations during emergency response and disaster recovery efforts, including increasing awareness of defensible space requirements within the City and promoting understanding of evacuation routes.

Theo Fetanides: Written comments, via email, were received from Theo Fitanides, who voiced comments at the June 29, joint City Council/Planning Commission public workshop. His last email dated August 2, 2023, suggests that he was satisfied with the changes made to the document as a result of CALFIRE changes.

On-Line Survey: An on-line survey was conducted between August 1 and November 1, 2021, on public safety matters, most of the responses of the survey supported the City’s efforts to address public safety needs and many of the programs. Some additional comments that came through the survey include:
• Fire, drought, and power failure related issues drive the highest safety concerns. • Respondents feel the least prepared for Geological and Mining Related Hazards. • YubaNet has the highest percent of daily usage of communication channels. • Smoke detectors, flashlights, property maintenance, and a disaster go bag are how most respondents are preparing for a safety hazard event.

Sound-Test Meeting with Public: A sound test at Pioneer Park with public invited was conducted on March 16, 2022, by the staff/consultant team with Paul Bollard, Noise Consultant. Several comments were received from neighbors of Pioneer Park expressing concerns of music and entertainment events held that impact the neighborhood.

Joint Meetings with the City Council and Planning Commission: Public input was received through workshops conducted on July 29, 2021, September 2, 2022, and June 29, 2023. At the joint Planning Commission/City Council meeting of June 29, 2023, several items were addressed including concerns regarding climate change impacts, increased risk of wildfires, potential fires in the downtown, evacuation routes, and the need to improve public awareness to improve fire prevention. Noise concerns were also discussed with a concern regarding noise from back-up generators and the need to update the City’s noise ordinance.

Legal Review: City Attorney Pucci has reviewed this item and finds that the Draft CAPSE recommended actions comply with the law.

Actions/Timing of the Planning Commission: The Commission shall conduct the required public hearing, consider any further comments from the public, and adopt the Planning Commission resolution. The Commission is welcome to offer comments on the document, but any substantive revisions to the document, such as amendments to programs that might conflict with CALFIRE changes to the document could result in further re-evaluation by the State and potentially result in delays to adoption. Delays to adoption of the document could impact the City’s opportunity to obtain funding from the State for conducting the CAPSE. Grant funding support for this project expires late September 2023.
5 RECOMMENDED MOTIONS:
1) Make a Motion to recommend that the City Council find the ISND environmental document adequate and processed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the 2023 Climate Adaptation and Public Safety Element.
2) Make a Motion to approve the attached RESOLUTION PC 2023-01 recommending that the City Council adopt General Plan Amendment GPA 2023-01, 2023 Climate Adaptation and Public Safety Element.

FINAL
Initial Study
Proposed Negative Declaration
for the
Climate Adaptation and Public Safety Element
September 2023
City of Nevada City
Planning Department
317 Broad Street
Nevada City, CA 95959
This page is left intentionally blank.

September 2023 Page 1 of 60

INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT – CLIMATE ADAPTATION AND

PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT (CAPSE)

GENERAL PROVISIONS

INTRODUCTION
This Initial Study/Negative Declaration (IS/ND) has been prepared by Price Consulting Services on behalf of the City of Nevada City (lead agency) pursuant to all relevant sections of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This IS/ND is intended to inform the City of Nevada City (City) decision-makers, responsible agencies, and the general public of the environmental consequences of the proposed update to the City’s General Plan Public Safety Element now referenced as the Climate Adaptation and Public Safety Element (CAPSE). This IS/ND is intended to provide the CEQA-required environmental documentation for all City approvals required to adopt the CAPSE. Appendix A of this document includes the CAPSE which includes basic information to support this IS/ND.

The CAPSE contains goals, policies, and programs that are consistent with the land use designations established by the General Plan Land Use Element (1998) and consistent with the policies and programs related to recreation, open space, and natural resources management in the Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan (1998). The CAPSE is a policy document and does not approve or facilitate any specific development nor does it grant development entitlements. The CAPSE establishes an updated policy framework upon which to base future City decisions.

This IS/ND includes all contents required by Section 15063(d) of the CEQA Guidelines, including a project description, an identification of the project’s environmental setting and environmental effects, and an examination of whether the project would be consistent with existing zoning, plans, and other applicable land use controls.

September 2023 Page 2 of 60

PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
Project title: Safety Element General Plan Amendment 2023-01 Lead agency name: City of Nevada City Address: 317 Broad Street Nevada City, CA 95959
Contact person: Lisa McCandless Phone number: (530) 265-2496 x.130 Email: Lisa [email protected]
Project sponsor’s name: Same as Lead Agency Address: Same as Lead Agency Project location: City Wide
General Plan designation: N/A
Zoning: N/A
Description of project: Update to the City’s General Plan Public Safety Element; now called the Climate Adaptation and Public Safety Element (CAPSE). It includes refinements to the goals, policies and programs concerning public safety (see Appendix A). As a major component to the General Plan, the CAPSE identifies, and provides programs to address potential and existing hazards in and around the city such as seismic, geological, flood, fire, hazardous materials, weather, noise, and other hazards. This new document, which relates to the City’s General Plan Economic Development, Resources, Housing and Circulation Elements, also includes sections on noise exposure and climate change and incorporates policies and programs from the Nevada County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Other portions of the CAPSE include the Climate Vulnerability Assessment and the Noise Element/Exposure Background Report; both as appendices of the CAPSE.

Surrounding land uses and setting: The City sits approximately 60 miles northeast of Sacramento and 84 miles west of Reno in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains.

At approximately 2,500 feet in elevation above sea level, it is surrounded by forest covered hills and is protected by ridge tops and surrounded by forest. The Safety Element covers the City’s approximate 4,200-acre General Plan Area including its 2,700-acre incorporated boundaries (see Map 1).

Attachments:

Appendix A – Climate Adaptation and Public Safety Element September 2023 Page 3 of 60
Map 1. Vicinity, Location and Study Area
September 2023 Page 4 of 60
Other public agencies whose approval is required: Each city and county must provide a draft of its safety element or amendment of its safety element for review (prior to adoption) to the California Geological Survey of the Department of Conservation to determine if all known seismic and other geologic hazards are addressed (California Government Code § 65302.5(a)). A city or county that contains a state fire responsibility area or a very high fire hazard severity zone must provide a draft of its safety element or amendment of its safety element to the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection for review before adoption, and the Board may recommend changes regarding uses of land, policies or strategies for reducing fire risk (California Government Code § 65302.5(b)).

California Geological Survey of the Department of Conservation: Submitted electronically the first staff draft of the document to this agency at [email protected] on March 5, 2023.

Requested comments within the 45-day response timeline by April 20, 2023.

State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection: City is coordinating review with this agency and submitted the first staff draft of the document to this agency on March 5, 2023, for preliminary review.

Prior to adopting the CAPSE, the City must refer the proposed action to the following entities, as locally relevant (California Government Code § 65352):
• Any city or county, within or abutting the area covered by the proposal, and any special district which may be significantly affected by the proposed action, as determined by the planning agency.
• Any elementary, high school, or unified school district within the area covered by the proposed action.
• The local agency formation commission.
• Any areawide planning agency whose operations may be significantly affected by the proposed action, as determined by the planning agency.
• Any federal agency if its operations or lands within its jurisdiction may be significantly affected by the proposed action, as determined by the planning agency. • Any public water system with 3,000 or more service connections that serves water to customers within the area covered by the proposal.
• The Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District for a proposed action within the boundaries of the district.

In accordance with California Government Code § 65352, the City has notified or will notify the appropriate locally relevant entities prior to adopting the CAPSE.

NATIVE AMERICAN CONSULTATION
Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21080.3.1? Yes No
September 2023 Page 5 of 60
If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.? Yes No
If yes, ensure that consultation and heritage resource confidentiality follow Public Resources Code §§ 21080.3.1 and 21080.3.2 and California Government Code § 65352.4.

Note: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process (see Public Resources Code § 21080.3.2.).

Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code § 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code § 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality.

FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PUBLIC REVIEW
The Preliminary Draft Initial Study for this project was circulated for public review between July 22, 2023 and August 31, 2023. This circulation involved distribution to the California State Clearinghous. Below are all the written comments received during this circulation.

Some parts of the Preliminary Draft Initial Study were revised (minor clarifications were made) to respond to these comments. The City, as lead agency for this project, has determined that the Initial Study does not need to be recirculated and has been determined that this Final Initial Study adequately addresses concerns referenced in the public comments. Therefore, this document is formalized as the Final Initial Study and the City may issue a Mitigated Negative Declaration based on concurrence of adequacy.

September 2023 Page 6 of 60
Responses to Public Comments
Comment Response
September 10, 2021,email to
City Manager, Joan Phillipe
from Sam Git chel, the Greater
Champion Firewise
Neighborhood to City Manager,
Joan Phillipe:

Hi Joan,
Happy Friday and weekend.

Please forward this to the
appropriate person.

A Greater Champion neighbor,
Carol Cox, pointed out an
omission from the map that is part
of the flyer/invitation to
participate in the safety element
survey. Her comments, below, are
self-explanatory.

The document is attached -- I
renamed the original PDF file for
my own filing system but the
content is unchanged.

Thanks,
Sam
Hi Sam and Frances,
As a former professor of
geography I need to make this
one note regarding the Safety
Elem.pdf map attached in your
last email.

For safety planning, the map
should be updated for accuracy to
include all city property north of
old Downieville Highway. For
example my property (parcel 05-
100-30) does touch city property .
. . so my neighbors on American
Hill Road to the east would also
be impacted. Any property below
September 15, 2021, email response from City Manager, Joan Phillipe to Sam Gitchel, the Greater Champion Firewise
Neighborhood:

Please feel free to send this map to Carol Cox noting that the city plans to address safety issues in the Safety Element on a neighborhood scale, not restricted to just city jurisdictional boundaries. If you or Carol have any further questions, you can feel free to contact our safety element consultant, Gary Price, directly at 530-272-6434 or at
[email protected].

I hope this helps to clarify the concerns expressed by Carol.

Best regards,
Joan
September 2023 Page 7 of 60
Comment Response
us in the Deer Creek drainage,
whether city or BLM, has
implications for the safety and
fire planning of residents.

This is offered in response to your
request for opinions about safety
priorities and practices. Planning
should rely on accurate tools such
as maps.

Thank you for all you are doing
for all of us.

Best regards,
Carol J. Cox
June 29, 2023 email to City
Planner, Lisa McCandless from
Theo Fitanides:

Hi Lisa,
Below is what I wrote for public
comment. If the councilmembers,
commissioners, and consultants
have to read it, please apologize a
little for some of my
meanderings.

One clarification I have is that
during the meeting, I said an
ordinance "similar to earthquake
retrofits, which began in LA,"
would be beneficial. I think that it
was heard as LA has a building
retrofit ordinance for wildfire. I
do not know of such ordinance.

Thank you for the work on this,
and enough time before adoption
for there to be meaningful
changes. A few comments follow:

Page 32 ends

- the listing of structures as "also
fuel" really undercuts the key
issue with wildfire in our area -
structures are perhaps the most
August 2, 2023, email response from Gary Price, City Contract Planner, at the request of Lisa McCandless, City’s Interim City Planner:

Hi Theo:

Your comments are noted.

The City Fire Chief has collaborated with the staff/consultant team to produce the CAPSE and has determined that it meets the City’s needs.

The CAPSE has also been revised to address CALFIRE
comments/recommendations per review (see link below):
https://nevadacityca.municipalone.com/pview.aspx?id=20947&catID=0 July 3, 2023, comments below). California Board of Forestry reviewed the revised CAPSE and were acceptable with the document (see July 14, 2023, comments). Many of the programs have been strengthened to address structure fires, building renovation, defensible space, and home hardening as suggested in your comments.

Some noteworthy changes are as follows:

Page 10 ends

Preparedness Action and Extreme Climate Event Mobility and Adaptation Plans.

Page 70 ends

address emergency service response.

New fire protection plan requirements added for new development.

September 2023 Page 8 of 60
Comment Response
vulnerable and important fuels to
consider for our community's
survival. Please consider upping
the priority. More often, the
impacts from wildfire have been
urban conflagrations, often spread
solely by structural fires. I lost
some faith in the veracity of the
rest of the safety element when
this was not recognized in the
draft language.

Density of vegetation needs to
include density of structures.

Although this is not generally
considered alterable, it is an
important component of the risk
assessment. The historic district,
and some neighborhoods, have
old buildings made of the driest
vegetation (lumber and plywood)
which are densely clustered.

These two factors were the
strongest determinant in structure
loss during the Camp Fire, been
seen in Greenville during the
Dixie Fire and others.

Page 34 ends

for the mention of the importance
of structures and that mitigation is
building hardening and defensible
space. The first paragraph,
however, implies that proximity
to flammable vegetation is the
key factor (implicitly contradicted
somewhat in the second
paragraph) - this is based on the
mapping element showing
vegetation proximity and not
proximity to all fuels (buildings).

Non-ember/wind driven wildfire
is mostly suppressible in our
location (great airbase, high
economic and population
priorities, etc.) and we can see
that with so many successful
Policy FP-17 revised to address long-term maintenance of existing development.

Policy FP-22 revised to include home hardening requirements.

New references to specific California Code of Regulations throughout.

September 2023 Page
9 of 60
Comment Response
containments in recent history.

But the ember/wind driven
wildfires (including slope/wind
effects, which we always have
with the steep deer creek canyon)
are the non-suppressible ones.

The River fire was not stopped by
suppression, only mitigated with
flanking drops to keep it out of
Alta Sierra. The fire fizzled out in
the large area of agricultural land
of Chicago Park, and Rollins
Reservoir, as the weather was
calming. The large fuel breaks
allowed few spot fires to ignite
and be extinguished. The Jones
fire did exactly what it wanted
until the wind died down. It was
even boxed in with foscheck
before they had to divert aircraft
away, and then the winds picked
up. I don't know the conditions
during the 49er fire, but it did
jump to their contingency line at
my then home.

Think of the structures we see
peppered around the city outskirts
and center which have shake
siding, rotten siding in ember
accumulation pockets,
combustible deck furniture, single
pane windows, open gaps in
garages, friable fence bottoms
against dry grass (less than 4" ;),
outbuildings with all sorts of
September 2023 Page 10 of
60 Comment Response
issues, etc. During a significant
wildfire challenge, we have
increasingly seen resources
diverted to evacuations, and little
or no resources for smoke
chasing, structure prep, and
engine crew suppression. Let
alone if the visibility is such that
smoke chasing is even feasible, or
the weather is such that a captain
would even commit resources
into a dead end road with the
possibility of being cut off. All
the work on defensible space, and
individual home hardening, can
be for naught when we eventually
get challenged by a wildfire
during adverse weather conditions
with long range spotting and short
range ember showers.

And getting back to my point, we
need more than encouragement to
harden structures. We need an
ordinance and/or alteration of the
building code to make it serious.

Especially if it causes a
community buzz. It is highly
defensible as a necessary element
of community safety. We are not
in a situation where one's home is
soleley a risk for themselves. This
is shared risk within the dense
structural environment.

Without this inclusion among
"engineering, enforcement,
education, emergency response,
and economic incentive," this
section of the document rings
hollow to me as an apolitical
exercise. We don't currently
require retroactive engineering,
there is no mandate to enforce
any structural alteration other
than vent screens on buildings.

The building code almost
specifically only engages with
those property owners with more
resources who can do significant
renovations. Those buildings
which are owned by less
resourced owners are likely more
often those more vulnerable to
ignition. Additionally, the written
ordinance or building code is a
great tool to support and drive
education and enhance the speed
of developing economic
incentives.

This is not asking our consultant
to develop, plan, lobby for, or
take any other action than to
include this common tool for
municipal enhancement into this
list of helpful tools.

Page 37 ends

section does not mention ignition
of buildings from vegetation fires
(this is definitional because of the
WUI fire category) but does
happen to include mention of the
building code (that function
mainly for situations that are not
pertinent to our risk of urban
conflagrations during wildfire
events - new construction and
significant remodels, of which
there are relatively few). Why is
September 2023 Page 12 of
60 Comment Response
this omitted in the WUI section?
It is obviously helpful.

Furthermore, since the only
mention of specific building
protection measures occur here,
the document gives a false sense
of security from fire protection
measures for internally ignited
structure fires. Internal sprinklers
will hardly make a difference
during an urban conflagration -
that isn't their design.

Policy FP-14, hints at the building
code update, but does not mention
the most significant and impactful
aspect - it doesn't help for existing
structures.

Program FP-1, e., is unclear:
"Update building [is there a
missing ''s" or follow-up word
here?] to meet or exceed building
hardening requirements in
Chapter 7A of the California
Building Code or other applicable
codes, based on local studies or
conditions identified in the local
fire hazard and risk assessment."
Is this meant to indicate existing
building retrofits? If so, hooray!
We have a chance at survival.

Program FP-1, h. - Is there an
appropriate place in zoning
requirements for regulation of
unhardened outbuildings?

Page 41 ends

Property, Wildfire - this section is
out of date and needs revision.

August 2, 2023, email response
from Gary Price’s email from
Theo Fitanides:

Thank you very much for your
diligent response. It was very
easy for me to see the
September 2023 Page 13 of
60 Comment Response
improvements you and staff and
CALFIRE have made.

Be well,
Theo
July 3, 2023, email from Fire
Captain, Donnie Privette,
CALFire, involved significant
work with staff/consultant team
to revise CAPSE per State Fire laws:

We have arrived! It is time for
you to Formally Submit your
draft Safety Element and Existing
Conditions Report to the Board of
Forestry (BOF).

You will need to send an email to
Edith Hannigan
[email protected]
requesting for a Formal Review
of Nevada City Draft Safety
Element.

Please CC Me (Donnie Privett),
Chief Vargas
([email protected]), and
anyone you need to in your
department.

September 2023 Page 14 of 60
Comment Response
- Appendix D-Critical Facilities
and Essential Services.
- Appendix F-Terms and
Definitions
Once Edith receives your request,
she will give us permission to
conduct a Formal Review of your
SE. I will then complete a Formal
Review utilizing the above
documents along with the SE
Review Document making sure
the roadmaps, the Draft SE, and
the ECR are all still accurate. I
then submit it to Chief Vargas to
review. He will then pass it up the
chain of command back to the
BOF.

Please let me know if you have
any further questions.

July 14, 2023, California Board
of Forestry reviewed CAPSE
during their regular meeting.

In accordance with California
Government Code 65302 the
Board of Forestry accepted the
CAPSE document with no
recommended changes.

See attached meeting agenda.

Staff/Consultant Team Responses are numerically cross referenced to comments:
1) The Pre-Planning Tool link referenced on Page 27 of the document (previously Page 31) does work:
https://www.nevadacountyca.gov/2792/Preparedness-Toolkit 2) Concurrence with comment.
3) As noted in the CAPSE Assembly Bill AB 747 requires that the Safety Element be reviewed and updated to identify evacuation routes and their capacity, safety, and viability under a range of emergency scenarios. CAPSE Programs EP-3 and EP-4 address this with a collaborative strategy to work with Nevada County in developing a evacuation capacity analysis in compliance with AB 747 and then updating the City’s Circulation Element to address evacuation capacity September 2023 Page 15 of 60
Comment Response
2) Overall, the data regarding
climate vulnerability is in
agreement Caltrans District 3
Climate Change Vulnerability
Assessment.
3) General discussion regarding
evacuation routes in CAPSE and
need to develop an expanded
evacuation capacity analysis.
4) The city still falls into a lowincome category that may require some review of disadvantaged
populations.
needs. The Nevada County OES is working on an evacuation capacity study that will address this for the City.
4) Several sections of the CAPSE address disadvantaged populations, including a separate section on vulnerable communities and environmental justice (see Pages 90-91). CAPSE Policy OC-11 prioritizes the needs of at-risk, vulnerable, and disadvantaged populations during emergency response and disaster recovery efforts, including increasing awareness of defensible space requirements and promoting understanding of evacuation routes.

August 26, 2023, email from
City of Nevada Planning
Commissioner Rodney Brown.
1) In conjunction with the
standards update, update the City
tree removal process to simplify
process for property owners to
reduce fuels on their properties.

Identified Program:

PROGRAM FP-2: Update
landscaping standards, such as
Chapter 17-80, Zoning Code
Performance Standard, to
incorporate fire-resistant planting
material prohibiting flammable
landscaping plantings or materials
storage in the structure ignition
zone (e.g., within 0–5 feet of the
structure). Include in this
amendment landscaping standards
to address vegetation maturity in
the required number of initial
plantings and vegetation
Plocation/spacing requirements to
address long-term defensible
space and wildfire protection for
the life of the landscaping.
2) In addition, continue to
monitor culverts for degradation
and deficiencies, and upgrade
Staff/Consultant Team Responses are numerically cross referenced to comments:
1) Revised CAPSE includes an addition to Program FP-1 to simplify tree removal process as follows (see i below):

In addition, continue to monitor
culverts for degradation and
deficiencies, and upgrade
drainage system capacity as
appropriate in conjunction with
street improvements
[acknowledge good ongoing
efforts described by Bryan]
Identified Program
PROGRAM FH-4: The City will
work with other stakeholders,
such as Nevada County, Nevada
Irrigation District, and Sierra
Fund, to identify key impact areas
on Deer Creek and Little Deer
Creek that are most exposed to
post-wildfire debris flows. This
may include review of the
implications this scenario would
have on stormwater runoff during
larger storm events. This review
could result in a set of
recommended set of pre-disaster
mitigation measures to be
implemented to help mitigate
impacts from post-wildfire debris
flow events. Mitigation measures
could include:
• rapid reforestation and
stabilization of wildfire-affected
areas susceptible to debris flow
runoff to stabilize soils;
• communication and
coordination with residents and
businesses located within
potential impact areas from postwildfire debris flow events; and • development of analysis
techniques to predict debris flow
c. Ensure that sign and address standards for new development as well as retrofit, which will provide for easy identification of roads, streets, driveways and buildings by emergency service providers; and d. Create measures/standards for defensible space to reduce hazards associated with the structural and wildland intermix, including:

1. Fuel modification and vegetation management procedures adjacent to structures and fuel breaks where appropriate;

2. Vegetation management adjacent to roads and driveways to provide safe travel for residents, and firefighting, medical and police personnel; and

PROGRAM FH-4: The City will work with other stakeholders, such as Nevada County, Nevada Irrigation District, and Sierra Fund, to identify key impact areas on Deer Creek and Little Deer Creek that are most exposed to post-wildfire debris flows and continue monitoring culverts for degradation and deficiencies and evaluate needs to improve capacity of the drainage system. This may include review of the implications this scenario would have on stormwater runoff during larger storm events. This review could result in a set of recommended set of pre-disaster mitigation measures to be implemented to help mitigate impacts from post-wildfire debris flow events. Mitigation measures could include:

September 2023 Page 17 of 60
Comment Response
events based on rainfall and
moisture conditions.
3) Amend spelling of Deer Creek
throughout document.
4) Recommend adding improved
air quality and improve public
health in the following policies
OC-13 through 16 regarding
“Reduced Carbon Footprint.
5) Recommend adding improved
air quality and improve public
health in the following policies
OC-13 through 16 regarding
“Reduced Carbon Footprint.
6) "Promotion" is very vague and
non-specific. Add the following.

As part of OC-15 or as a separate
policy, add, "Seek funding for
and implement the Nevada
County Active Transportation
Plan, which identifies new and
improved walking, biking, and
trail facilities within the City,
improving options and increasing
safety for these modes of travel
while improving quality of life."
Similarly, add, "The City shall
work with Caltrans and NCTC to
implement the improvements for
walking and biking accessibility
and safety along State Routes 20
and 49 within the City as
identified in the Caltrans District
3 Active Transportation Plan."
Identified Program
POLICY OC-15: The City shall
continue to promote alternative
transportation modes, such as
walking and bicycle trails.
• rapid reforestation and stabilization of wildfire-affected areas susceptible to debris flow runoff to stabilize soils;
• communication and coordination with residents and businesses located within potential impact areas from post-wildfire debris flow events; and
• development of analysis techniques to predict debris flow events based on rainfall and moisture conditions.
3) Corrections made in Revised CAPSE and Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration.
4) Revised CAPSE includes new Section Heading: Reduced Carbon Footprint and Improved Air Quality. Safety Element addresses public safety, not public health. Suggest the possibility of creating a Public Health Element of the General Plan that would address public health matters that could include, but not be limited to air quality, tobacco use, healthy food, pandemics.
5) See response 4 above.
6) The Nevada County Active Transportation Plan (NCAT) is a countywide plan primarily involving circulation issues. These references to NCAT would best be located in the City’s General Plan Circulation Element. However, recognizing that the NCAT does, to some extent address public safety hazards, such as automobile conflicts with bicycles, for example, there is some cross over to public safety. Many agencies are involved in implementing the NCAT so this is a collaborative plan. Recognizing that the City has very limited resources to implement this plan and that this plan is a collaborative depending on multiple agencies to fund the plan, the CAPSE has been revised to include revised Policy OC 10 and new Policy OC-17 and Program OC16 as follows:

Revised Policy:

New Policy and Program:

POLICY OC-17: The City shall collaborate with others in developing and implementing programs that reduce the reliance on automobiles, such as the Nevada County Active Transportation Plan (NCAT). The September 2023 Page 18 of 60
Comment Response
NCAT identifies new and improved walking, biking, and trail facilities within the City, and options for improvements and increasing safety for such facilities and these modes of travel.

Agency/Department: All City Department
Funding Source: Grants and General Fund
Time Frame: Ongoing
August 29, 2023, email from
Mark Tutte which includes the
following specific comments:
1) Timing: I believe Nevada
County (and the City?) are getting
ready to start a new LHMP
update. The CAPSE should be
coordinated with this effort and
not “included by reference”. How
do you incorporate a future plan?
2) Climate Change and
Environmental Justice: More
focus should be made to these
areas instead of 1 paragraph each
discussing the state laws. Real
actions need to be identified to
address wildfire, storm events,
flooding, etc.
3) Data: It is 2023. Why are we
using ACS projections from
2015? We have had a full census
since then.
4) Inconsistent regulations: The
noise and other development
requirements in the CAPSE are
different than the requirements in
the municipal code. These
updates should also be
coordinated to give clearer
Staff/Consultant Team Responses are numerically cross referenced to comments:
1) Since the City is located in a State Responsible Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, the Safety Element is mandated to be updated when the Housing Element is updated (GG Sections 65302 and 65302.5). The Housing Element was last updated in 2019. The City began a process to develop the CAPSE in 2021 when the City had access and was approved a State grant to pay for the CAPSE. Major funding to support completing the CAPSE expires at the end of September 2023. Consequently, due to limited resources and the City’s opportunity to use this one-time grant for the project, the City needs to complete the CAPSE now instead of waiting for the Nevada County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, (LHMP) to be updated. The LHMP expires on September 19, 2023. It is unknown when the LHMP will be completed and ready for adoption, but Nevada County has indicated that it could be sometime in 2024. California Government Code Section 65302(g)(4) requires that the safety element (CAPSE) be upon the next revision of the LHMP. After the LHMP is updated and adopted, the CAPSE will then need to be updated again.
2) Noted. Two sections of the document are devoted to climate change and environmental justice and there are a number of related policies and programs have been included. Appendix A of the CAPSE consists of a climate vulnerability study.
3) Much of the information in the CAPSE is taken from more recent sources where there are no conflicts with the LHMP. Much of the information in the CAPSE has been taken from the 2017 LHMP; the LHMP (although may be perceived to be outdated) needs to be consistent and incorporated by reference into the CAPSE. (CG Section 65302). As noted in the current Housing Element, which references September 2023 Page 19 of 60
Comment Response
direction to the business and
development community working
in the city.
5) IS/ND: The document on the
website is still a draft and has
some comments still (and also has
references to mitigation). This
document should be finalized and
recirculated for public comment
for at least 3 months so people
can read it and the CAPSE and
provide more informed
comments.
6) Comments: Caltrans comments
were not discussed but have some
good points for real actions. Why
were the Caltrans policies
dismissed?
7) It feels like this thing is just
checking the box, but doesn’t
quite check it.
more recent population estimates, population has not significantly changed from 2015 to the extent that it would change analysis or policies/programs in the CAPSE. As noted in 1 above, the CAPSE will need to undergo a further update once the LHMP is updated. This will be a further opportunity to look at more current data, including population, to adjust where found warranted.
4) The noise exposure section of the CAPSE consists of the City’s Noise Element of the General Plan. It is a policy document that describes current and projected noise in the community and incorporates policies and programs to address noise. The CAPSE describes the current noise regulations and offers recommendations to change them to address newer noise standards. Noise regulations don’t need to be consistent with the CAPSE, but the CAPSE suggests many changes to the noise regulations. Ideally, once recommended amendments are made to the noise regulations and programs, then they become consistent with the CAPSE. This same approach applies to other aspects of the CAPSE where the CAPSE recommends
amendments to a number of codes and programs to bring them up to current State and Federal standards and/or to improve them for other reasons.
5) The CAPSE is a policy document that is self-mitigating, meaning policies and programs are designed to minimize environmental impacts that result in not needing the Draft Initial Study Negative Declaration (ISND) to have any mitigation measures. The ISND was circulated for public review between July 22, 2023, and August 31, 2023. This circulation included distribution to the California Clearinghouse and local agencies and consideration was given to comments received from this distribution. The ISND is only required be recirculate when it has been substantially revised; generally if new significant impacts are discovered that were not previously addressed or if mitigation measures have been significantly altered or added (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15072 and 15073.5). The City, as lead agency for this project, will need to determine that the Initial Study is adequate and will not require substantial revision. The final ISND is issued when the City Council adopts the CAPSE.
6) The ISND continues to be an evolving document that includes responses to agency and public comments. The City did receive comments from Caltrans and has responded to them in the most recent ISND. See previous responses to comments in this table. 7) Noted.

September 2023 Page 20 of 60
September 2023 Page 21 of 60
September 2023 Page 22 of 60
September 2023 Page 23 of 60
September 2023 Page 24 of 60

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project. Please see the checklist beginning on Page 9 for additional information.

Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry
Air Quality Biological Resources
Cultural Resources Energy
Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources
Noise Population/Housing
Public Services Recreation
Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities/Service Systems Wildfire
Mandatory Findings of Significance

DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation (choose one):

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

September 2023 Page 25 of 60
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

Lisa McCandless, City Planner Sept. 13, 2023
Print Name Signature Date
September 2023 Page 26 of 65

CEQA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
This checklist identifies physical, biological, social and economic factors that might be affected by the proposed project. In many cases, background studies performed in connection with the projects indicate no impact. A NO IMPACT answer in the last column reflects this determination.

Where there is a need for clarifying discussion, the discussion is included either following the applicable section of the checklist or is within the body of the environmental document itself. The words “significant” and “significance” used throughout the following checklist are related to CEQA, not NEPA, impacts. The questions in this form are intended to encourage the thoughtful assessment of impacts and do not represent thresholds of significance.

AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public Resources Code § 21099, would the project:

Question CEQA
Determination
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista that is visible from a City scenic corridor?
No Impact
b) Substantially damage scenic resources that are visible from a City scenic corridor, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
No Impact
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from a publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
No Impact
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
No Impact
Discussion
The City of Nevada City is a small town surrounded by forested land to the north, east and west, and some urban uses (City of Grass Valley) to the south. Implementation of the CAPSE would not result in significant urban and suburban growth. This is a policy document with programs that would not result in aesthetic changes or changes to the environment. The project, as a policy document, will not, in and of itself, result in aesthetic impacts to scenic vistas, scenic resources, or visual character, and will not create sources of substantial light or glare which adversely affects views. All future development that may occur with implementation of this updated General Plan element will require project-specific environmental impact assessment.

September 2023 Page 27 of 65

AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES
Would the project:

Question CEQA
Determination
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
No Impact
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
No Impact
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code § 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code § 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code § 51104(g))?
No Impact
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
No Impact
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact
Discussion
Based on data from the California Department of Conservation, the City does not contain Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, nor does it contain land under a Williamson Act contract. There are no timber resources or forest land designated as having statewide significance within the city limits. However, much of the area surrounding the city is vacant forest land. The CAPSE will not, in and of itself, result in impacts to forest or timberland.

The Plan does reference fuel breaks, and the need to reduce vegetation strategically to reduce wildfire hazards. However, all future projects, including new development in the study area that may result in impacts to these resources will require project-specific environmental evaluation in order to determine that any potential impacts are less than significant.

Project Impacts
a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
As described previously, the City is almost entirely composed of urban land and does not contain Prime, Unique, or Farmland of Statewide Importance according to the California Department of Conservation. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, no impacts would occur related to conversion of Prime, Unique, or Farmland of Statewide importance to non-agricultural use.

September 2023 Page 28 of 65
b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
As described previously, the City does not contain land under a Williamson Act contract. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, no impacts would occur related to conflicts with existing zoning for agricultural use or Williamson Act contract. c) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code § 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code § 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by California Government Code § 51104(g))?
This section of the state code defines forest land as land that can support 10% native tree cover of any species under natural conditions (including hardwoods), and that allows for management of one or more forest resources including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits. The CAPSE does not propose any rezoning of property that would result in removal of timberland. There may be some forest land within the project study area but the CAPSE does not propose any specific areas for forest land removal. There are some programs that reference the potential need for fire breaks and strategic removal of vegetation to reduce fire hazards. Consequently, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, no impacts would occur related to conflicts with existing zoning for forest land or timberland.
d) Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to nonforest use? No impacts would occur related to the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to nonforest use. e) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
The CAPSE includes goals, policies, and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards. It also does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, no impacts would occur related to other changes in the existing environment that could result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use or the conversion of forest land to non-forest use.

Impact Conclusions
No impacts have been identified and no mitigation measures are required.

AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.

September 2023 Page 29 of 65
Would the project:

Question CEQA
Determination
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? No Impact b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
No Impact
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? No Impact d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
No Impact
Discussion
The CAPSE Area is located in the western foothills of Nevada County which is in the Mountain Counties Air Basin (Basin). The Basin is in the northeastern region of the State of California. The Basin is bounded to the east by the Sierra Nevada Mountain Range, to the west by the Coastal Mountain Range and to the south by the Tehachapi Mountains. Air quality attainment status is determined from air monitoring in the adjacent city of Grass Valley. Grass Valley and Nevada County is in nonattainment for applicable state and federal ozone standards, in nonattainment for state PM10 standards and unclassified for federal PM10 standards, and unclassified/attainment for state and federal PM2.5 standards. Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District (NSAQMD) is the local agency responsible for adopting and enforcing air quality regulations. The NSAQMD is comprised of three contiguous, mountainous, rural counties in northeastern California (Nevada, Sierra, and Plumas counties). Through its permitting powers, the NSAQMD enforces limitations for emission of criteria and toxic air contaminants for stationary sources. Other NSAQMD responsibilities include monitoring air quality, preparation of clean air plans and responding to citizen air quality complaints. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) regulates mobile air quality and of particular concern for the study area is Ozone levels which are more directly impacted by vehicular emissions and meteorologic conditions. CARB prepared a draft Ozone Attainment Plan for Western Nevada County in February 2023, which indicates that the prevalence of wildfires during the summer ozone season significantly impacted the air quality in Western Nevada County. High ozone concentrations were observed on days when air quality was affected by forest fires, particularly in 2018, 2020 and 2021. Given the limited number of emissions sources under the regulatory authority of Northern Sierra AQMD, and the overwhelming impact of transportation on local ozone concentrations, options for additional emission reduction measures in Western Nevada County are scarce. The District relies on emission reductions from upwind areas and mobile source control measures at the State. Although this CAPSE is limited to public safety policies and programs, some, particularly those that are intended to reduce wildfires may help reduce the impact of smoke and therefore reduce ozone incidents.

Project Impacts
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
The NSAQMD does not currently have an air quality plan. However, it does have standard threshold regulations that apply to different types of development projects that evaluate by September 2023 Page 30 of 65
air pollutant categories levels of significance. The CAPSE includes goals, policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards, none of which are expected to conflict with or obstruct programs of the NSAQMD. The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. Therefore, no impacts related to a conflicting with or obstructing implementation of the NSAQMD air quality plans would occur. b) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
The General Plan area is located in the Mountain Counties Air Basis and is considered a non-attainment for criteria pollutants applicable state and federal ozone standards, state PM10 standards and unclassified for federal PM10 standards, and unclassified/attainment for state and federal PM2.5 standards. The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. Therefore, the project would not result in a cumulative net increase in criteria pollutants. c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Sensitive receptors include schools and schoolyards, parks and playgrounds, daycare facilities, nursing homes, hospitals, residential areas, and people who are particularly sensitive to air pollutants, such as children, the elderly, and people with illnesses. Several policies and a programs in the CAPSE addresses smoke exposure to sensitive receptors as noted below.

The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements and thus does not include any physical construction or changes that would expose sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations. Therefore, no impacts related to exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations would occur.
d) Would the project result in other emissions (such as objectionable odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements and thus does not include any physical construction or changes that would result in other emissions, such as objectionable odors. Therefore, no impacts related to other emissions, such as objectionable odors, affecting a substantial number of people would occur.

Impact Conclusions
No impacts have been identified and no mitigation measures are required.

September 2023 Page 31 of 65

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Question CEQA
Determination
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, or NOAA Fisheries?
No Impact
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? No Impact
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
No Impact
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
No Impact
Discussion
The project area includes the City’s jurisdictional boundaries of approximately 1,470 incorporated acres (2018 Nevada County GIS data) and the remaining General Plan Area of approximately 2,700 acres (see Map 1 of Project Area). The project area is located within a basin on the western slope of the Sierra Nevada, and it has a unique topography with hills and valleys, watercourses, and defined seasons to which a variety of plant and wildlife species have adapted. The City is primarily developed with a mix of commercial, residential and some limited industrial uses. Areas beyond the City boundaries, within the General Plan Area, are generally surrounded by rural residential development and undeveloped forests.

Any future safety improvement projects that are brought forward to the City within the project area would be required to comply with the General Plan Conservation Element which addresses open space preservation and mentioned seer Creek and Little Deer Creek. The Resources Element notes that the existing open space is a distinctive characteristic of the City and one of the goals of the City is to preserve a strong sense of entry and distinctness created by the surrounding green and wooded hills and an effort should be made to preserve the surrounding forest.

September 2023 Page 32 of 65
Regarding the protection of riparian corridors are the policies related to flooding and drainage.

These policies are as follows:
• In cooperation with the county, enforce a required building setback from all drainageways. • Include assessment of drainage impact of proposed projects as part of the environmental review process
The Zoning Code includes requirements for building in proximity to a stream or watercourse such as building no closer than one hundred feet from a perennial stream nor closer than twenty-five feet from a seasonal creek. Also, any potential impact from development of a riparian area must be approved by the California Fish and Wildlife Service. The Zoning Code also provides for tree preservation criteria.

Project Impacts
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? The Resources Element and Zoning Code contains policies and regulations to protect special status, sensitive, and candidate species within the City. The CAPSE includes goals, policies, and programs, to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards and would not alter the Resources Element. The CAPSE does not propose policies or implementation actions that would conflict with the policies and programs in the Resources Element regarding the protection of biological resources. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant any development entitlements that could result in impacts to biological resources. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to substantial adverse effects on candidate, sensitive, or special status species would occur.

However, there are a few policies and programs in the CAPSE that could potentially reduce impacts to sensitive or special status species as noted below. b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
The Resources Element contains policies to protect riparian habitat and other sensitive natural communities within the project area. The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards and would not alter the Resources Element. The CAPSE does not propose policies or actions that would conflict with the policies and programs in the Resources Element regarding the protection of biological resources. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to substantial adverse effects on riparian habitat or sensitive natural communities would occur. c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? September 2023 Page 33 of 65
The Resources Element and Zoning Code contain policies and regulations to protect wetlands within the City. The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards and would not alter the Resources Element.

The CAPSE does not propose policies or implementation actions that would conflict with the policies and programs in the Resources Element regarding the protection of biological resources. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to substantial adverse effects on state or federally protected wetlands would occur. However, there are a few policies and programs in the CAPSE that could potentially reduce impacts to protected wetlands as noted below.
d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? The Resources Element and Zoning Code include policies and regulations to protect fish and wildlife species and their habitats within the project area. The CAPSE has policies and programs intended to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards and would not alter the Resources Element. The CAPSE does not propose policies or programs that are contrary to the Resources Element regarding the protection of biological resources.

In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to substantial adverse effects on migratory wildlife corridors and nursery sites would occur. However, there are a few policies and programs in the CAPSE that could potentially reduce impacts to migratory fish or wildlife species as noted below.
e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? The Resources Element and Zoning Code contain policies and regulations to protect biological resources within the project area. The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards and would not alter the Resources Element or the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance. The CAPSE does not propose policies or implementation actions that would conflict with the policies In the Resources Element or the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance regarding the protection of biological resources. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to substantial adverse effects on biological resources, including tree preservation policies or ordinances would occur.
f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
There are no Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs), Natural Community Conservation Plans (NCCPs), or other approved local, regional, or state HCPs that apply to the proposed project. Nevada County is not currently covered under any existing HCPs or NCCPs. Thus, there would be no direct or indirect impacts.

September 2023 Page 34 of 65
Impact Conclusions
No impacts have been identified and no mitigation measures are required.

CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Question CEQA
Determination
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to California Government Code §15064.5? No Impact
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to California Government Code §15064.5?
No Impact
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
No Impact
Discussion
A cultural resource is the physical or observable traces of past human activity including, prehistoric habitation and activities, historic-era sites and materials, and places used for traditional Native American observances or places with special cultural significance. Cultural resources, along with prehistoric and historic human remains and associated grave goods, must be considered under various federal, state, and local regulations, including CEQA and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966.

For the purposes of CEQA, “historical resources” generally refer to cultural resources that have been determined to be significant, either by eligibility for listing in State or local registers of historical resources, or by determination of a lead agency (see definitions below). Historical resources can also include areas determined to be important to Native Americans that qualify as tribal cultural resources as defined in Public Resources Code § 21074 (sites, landscapes, historical, or archeological resources). Paleontological resources are also considered within this section.

The County contains many prehistoric sites including native villages, multi-task camps, sites with task-specific features such as bedrock mortar milling features, as well as sites that special use sites including hunting blinds, petroglyphs, and quarries. More modern historic areas within Nevada County, including the project area, are typically related to mining, water management, logging, transportation, emigrant travel, ranching and agriculture, and grazing. Cultural resources that are considered culturally sensitive, including architectural resources, within the County are generally located less than one-quarter mile from a source of water (i.e., streams, lakes and rivers), between 400 and 3,000 feet above mean sea level (amsl) and on the west side of the Sierra Nevada Mountains.

September 2023 Page 35 of 65
Project Impacts
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to California Government Code § 15064.5? The Resources Element and Zoning Code contains policies and regulations to protect and preserve historic resources within the City. Goals relating to historic preservation include the following:

Goals
• The City aims to continue its efforts to preserve and enhance the architectural diversity of historic buildings in the central area, to maintain the remarkable collection of cityowned historic buildings and to encourage private efforts of historic preservation and restoration.
• Whereas many other Mother Load towns are surrounded by modern subdivisions and commercial development, the Nevada City Basin remains nearly pristine. The city seeks a means to preserve its sense of a historic town surrounded by open forest. • As a city grows and new buildings are added outside the historic district, it is the City’s aim to encourage design, which is appropriate to our own age, but which is unassertive, allowing the dominance of the City’s primary, nineteenth-century historic period.

The General Plan also provides more specific guidance in the form of Objectives and Policies. These are as follows:

Objectives
• Maintain the dominance of the City’s primary, nineteenth-century historic period. • Allow new development which is complementary to the form and scale of its content. • Ensure continued concentration of public and cultural activities which reinforce the historic core as the “heart” of Nevada City.

Policies
• Encourage private efforts at historic rehabilitation and restoration. • Seek innovative means to maintain and improve city-owned historic buildings.

The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards and would not alter the Open Space and Conservation Element. The CAPSE does not propose policies or implementation actions that would conflict with the policies and programs in the Resources Element or Zoning Code regarding the protection of historical resources. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to substantial adverse effects on historic resources would occur.

September 2023 Page 36 of 65
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to California Government Code §15064.5?
The Resources Element contains policies to protect and preserve archaeological resources within the City. The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards and would not alter the Resources Element. The CAPSE does not propose policies or implementation actions that would conflict with the policies and programs in the Resources Element regarding the protection of archaeological resources.

Impact Conclusions
No impacts have been identified and no mitigation measures are required.

ENERGY
Would the project:

Question CEQA
Determination
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
No Impact
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
No Impact
Discussion
Electric and natural gas facilities are provided in Nevada County, including the City and project area, by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). There are 5 PG&E substations within the County. Four of these substations have distribution voltages of 12kV and one substation has a distribution voltage of 21kV. Three of the substations are served via 60kV transmission lines and two substations are served via 115kV transmission lines. The transmission lines are networked and generation for these transmission lines comes from generators located throughout the state.

September 2023 Page 37 of 65
Project Impacts
a) Would the project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
The CAPSE would not directly result in an impact to energy resources. The increased energy use build-out of the General Plan (project) area as contemplated by the Land Use and Economic Development Element will foreseeably be reduced by imposition of energysaving requirements on specific projects as required by already adopted State and local policies and regulations. Future development proposals would be subject to project-specific environmental review to ensure that the project would be compliant with local and regional standards and procedures for minimizing short-term and long-term impacts related to wasteful, inefficient or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. As proposed, all future development projects would be required to obtain appropriate Building Permits and would be required to meet all current building standards including but not limited to the California Building Code, California Electrical Code, California Energy Code (Title 24).

Therefore, the indirect energy consumption impacts of the General Plan will be reduced to less than significant through conformance with applicable regulations and existing energy reduction measures.

The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards. The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. Therefore, no impacts related to the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project construction or operation would occur.
b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
As noted in subsection a) above, the CAPSE would not result in conflicts with State or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency. The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards and does not propose any changes to plans or policies for energy efficiency or renewable energy. The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. Therefore, no impacts related to a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency would occur.

Impact Conclusions
No impacts have been identified and no mitigation measures are required.

September 2023 Page 38 of 65

GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:

Question CEQA
Determination
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.

No Impact
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? No Impact
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? No Impact iv) Landslides? No Impact
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? No Impact c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? No Impact
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
No Impact
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
No Impact
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
No Impact
Discussion
Nevada County is within the Sierra Nevada Mountains, a geologic block approximately 400 miles long and 80 miles wide which extends in a north-south band along the eastern portion of California. The terrain of Nevada County is distinctly characterized by two features of the Sierra Nevada Mountains. The western third of the County is comprised of rolling foothills which form a transition between the low-lying Sacramento Valley to the west and the mountains to the east.

The eastern two-thirds of the County is comprised of the steep terrain and exposed granite of the Sierra Nevada Mountains itself.

The project area is located in a geologically complex and diverse area that has the potential for earthquake-induced hazards. Earthquakes are produced in Nevada County and throughout the September 2023 Page 39 of 65
state from sudden movements along faults, described in detail below, generating ground motion when the accumulated stress within the rocks is released as waves of seismic energy.

According to the California Department of Conservation fault activity map, there are no faults under Nevada City. The nearest fault is the Grass Valley Fault approximately 3 miles to the west.

The Grass Valley Fault is a pre-quaternary fault that has not had recognized movement in the last 1,600,000 years. The nearest faults with more recent activity include the Giant Gap Fault approximately 10 miles to the east the Swan Ravine Fault approximately 16 miles to the west, and the Cleveland Fault within the most recent movement approximately 20 miles to the northwest near Oroville.

Project Impacts
a) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? The City does not contain any known active earthquake faults nor Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones. Nonetheless, the CAPSE includes policies and programs to reduce adverse effects involving earthquakes, such as enforcing seismic regulations regarding new development and retrofit of existing buildings. The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. Therefore, no impacts related to the exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving a known earthquake fault would occur.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? Ground shaking, rather than fault surface rupture, is the cause of most damage during earthquakes. The City does not contain any known active earthquake faults. Nonetheless, the CAPSE includes policies and programs to reduce adverse effects involving earthquakes, such as enforcing seismic regulations regarding new development and retrofitting of existing buildings. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking would occur.
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? There are no known areas in the City or project area with liquefaction susceptibility. iv) Landslides? None of the project area has been evaluated for landslides. However, there are some areas that contain clay deposits that can be susceptible to land sliding hazards. Nevada County also has a history of mining including hydraulic mining which used jets of water to break down gold-laden gravel banks and wash the materials through gold separating devices. Any area adjacent to a hydraulically mined area may be subject to landslide activity. Uphill instability is increased by removal of the toe of the slope and a landslide can be triggered by seismic activity, heavy rainfall, overloading, grading activities, etc. There are provisions in the Building Code that require geotechnical review and soil mitigation in the event clay soils are found prior to development. Policy GH-2 of the CAPSE requires geologic hazard investigations/reports to review new development that may be located within areas that are known (areas determined to be seismically active by the State Department of September 2023 Page 40 of 65
Conservation) or potentially have geologic concerns, such as steep slopes and/or areas of unstable soil. See related policies and programs below. b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Soils in the project area generally have either no hazard of erosion or a moderate hazard of erosion. The CAPSE includes policies and programs to reduce soil erosion by requiring erosion control standards as conditions of approval. The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to soil erosion or the loss of topsoil would occur. See related policies and programs below. c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? As described under Project Impacts ii, iii and iv above, the CAPSE includes policies and programs that would reduce impacts related to landslides, subsidence, and other adverse geologic conditions by requiring site feasibility studies, geotechnical evaluations, and the implementation of grading Best Management Practices and other geological considerations as conditions of project approvals. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to on- or offsite landslides, subsidence, or other adverse geologic conditions would occur. See related policies and programs below.
d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Expansive soils can undergo substantial volume change (i.e., shrink and swell) as a result of variations in moisture content, which can result from rainfall, landscape irrigation, utility leakage, roof drainage, and/or perched groundwater. Expansive soils are typically very finegrained and have a high to very high percentage of clay. If expansive soils underlay future project sites and they are not properly treated, subsequent expansion and contraction could lead to differential and cyclical movements and cause damage and/or distress to structures and equipment. It is not known if expansive soils underlay potential development areas, and this is considered a potentially significant impact. Some locations within the project area may have isolated units of expansive soil. As described under Impacts ii, iii, and iv, the CAPSE includes policies and programs that would reduce impacts related to expansive soils by requiring site feasibility studies, geotechnical evaluations, and the implementation of grading Best Management Practices and other geological considerations as conditions of project approval. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to expansive soils would occur. See related policies and programs below.
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
None of the actions proposed in the CAPSE would result in additional septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or September 2023 Page 41 of 65
facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would occur. f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
The City has some sensitivity level for paleontological resources. The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards.

Impact Conclusions
No impacts have been identified and no mitigation measures are required.

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:

Question CEQA
Determination
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
No Impact
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
No Impact
Discussion
Certain gases in the earth’s atmosphere, classified GHGs, play a critical role in determining the earth’s surface temperature. Solar radiation enters the earth’s atmosphere from space. A portion of the radiation is absorbed by the earth’s surface and a smaller portion of this radiation is reflected toward space. This absorbed radiation is then emitted from the earth as low-frequency infrared radiation. The frequencies at which bodies emit radiation are proportional to temperature.

Because the earth has a much lower temperature than the sun, it emits lower-frequency radiation.

Most solar radiation passes through GHGs; however, infrared radiation is absorbed by these gases. As a result, radiation that otherwise would have escaped back into space is instead “trapped,” resulting in a warming of the atmosphere. This phenomenon, known as the greenhouse effect, is responsible for maintaining a habitable climate on earth.

Fossil fuel combustion, especially for the generation of electricity and powering of motor vehicles, has led to substantial increases in CO2 emissions (and thus substantial increases in atmospheric concentrations). There is international scientific consensus that human-caused increases in GHGs have contributed and would continue to contribute to global warming. Potential global warming impacts in California may include but are not limited to loss in snowpack, sea-level rise, more extreme heat days per year, more high ozone days, more large forest fires, and more drought years. Secondary effects are likely to include the displacement of thousands of coastal businesses and residences, impacts on agriculture, changes in disease vectors, and changes in September 2023 Page 42 of 65
habitat and biodiversity. The State enacting Assembly Bill (AB) 32 determining that global warming will cause detrimental effects to some of the state’s largest industries, including agriculture, winemaking, tourism, skiing, commercial and recreational fishing, forestry, and the adequacy of electrical power generation.

Project Impacts
a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Global climate change is, by definition, a cumulative impact of GHG emissions. Because the proposed project consists of an update to the General Plan Public Safety Element (CAPSE). There is no specific project so there is no project-level analysis. The baseline against which to compare potential impacts of the project includes the natural and anthropogenic drivers of global climate change. However, since one of the CAPSE’s primary objectives is to address climate change from a policy standpoint, a number of policies and programs have been developed to reduce GHG emissions as compared to doing nothing. The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. Therefore, no impacts related to conflicts with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases would occur.
b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards, none of which conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. Therefore, no impacts related to conflicts with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases would occur.

Impact Conclusions
No impacts have been identified and no mitigation measures are required.

HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:

Question CEQA
Determination
a) a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? No Impact
b) b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
No Impact
September 2023 Page 43 of 65
Question CEQA
Determination
c) c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
No Impact
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code § 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? No Impact
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
No Impact
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
No Impact
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? No Impact
Discussion
The CAPSE addresses hazards, including a separate section on hazardous materials and review of hazards potential exposure to people or structures, such as wildland fires and discusses emergency response planning and evacuations. A number of policies and programs have been incorporated into the CAPSE to avoid or mitigate potential hazards.

Project Impacts
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? The CAPSE contains policies and programs intended to reduce the risks associated with hazardous materials and hazards. Section G of the document focuses on transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials. A number of policies and programs in the CAPSE addressing this topic including Policy HM-2 which states that the City shall comply with the Nevada County Hazardous Materials Area Plan which provides direction and establishes the policies, responsibilities, and procedures required to protect the health and safety of the City. County’s citizens, the environment and public and private property from the effects of hazardous materials emergency incidents. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to significant hazards to the public or environment would occur from the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. The CAPSE includes policies and programs to potentially reduce hazards from transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials as noted below. b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
September 2023 Page 44 of 65
The CAPSE policies and programs are intended to reduce the risks association with hazardous materials and hazards. For example, Policy HM-4 promotes prompt clean-up and/or remediation of sites contaminated by mine wastes or other hazardous materials. The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to significant hazards to the public or environment from the accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment would occur. The CAPSE includes policies and programs to potentially reduce hazards from upset and accident conditions involving release of hazardous materials as noted below. c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
Several schools are located within one mile of the Robinson Petroleum bulk storage facility, located at 198 Lower Grass Valley Road: (1) Deer Creek School, 405 Hoover Lane; (2) 7 Hills Middle School, 405 Hoover Lane; and (3) Earl Jamieson Educational Options at 112 Nevada City Highway.

If schools are public, the City has very limited ability to restrict expansions or new schools since they are typically State institutions that are not subject to local regulations. Also, the City has no authority to restrict residential day care schools due to State regulations.

However, CAPSE policies and programs are intended to reduce the potential of hazardous emissions. The CAPSE identifies critical facilities, including schools in the City in relation to various hazards, such as fire, flooding, and hazardous material sites to avoid or mitigate hazardous material handling or emissions nears these facilities. The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements.

As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to the emission of hazardous materials within one-quarter mile of a school would occur. The CAPSE includes policies and programs to potentially reduce emission of hazardous materials as noted below.
d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code § 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? A review of the DTSC EnviroStor database indicates two active voluntary cleanup sites in Nevada City: 1) at the end of Bridge Street, involving soil clean up; and 2) at 101 Providence Mine Road, where the Grove residential subdivision project is being developed also involving soil remediation. The CAPSE also identifies several previous mine locations and the potential for these to become hazardous. There are a number of policies to in the CAPSE to reduce these hazards, such as Policy HM-3 promoting prompt clean-up and/or remediation of sites contaminated by mine wastes or other hazardous materials and Policy HM-4 regarding coordination with the Nevada County Environmental Health Department in the review of all projects that require the use, storage, or transport of hazardous materials and waste to ensure necessary measures are taken to protect public health and safety.

September 2023 Page 45 of 65
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
The closest airport, Nevada County Airport, is located approximately nine miles southeast of the City and the project area. Although air traffic occurs over the City, it is not impacted by the airport’s approaches/departures that is cause for significant hazard to the City. The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. Therefore, no impact would occur. f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
The CAPSE contains policies and programs intended to support the existing Emergency Operation Plan and would not create any interference or impacts related to implementation of an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan would occur. g) Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? The CAPSE has a several sections discussing wildland fires, such as Emergency Preparedness and Evacuation, Fire Hazards and Protection and related policies and programs to provide improved safety measures. Additionally, the CAPSE references current data associated with each wildland fire hazard and incorporates the LHMP which addresses wildland fire risk by providing incentives to minimize hazards. Furthermore, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to wildland fires would occur.

Impact Conclusions
No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation measures are required.

HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:

Question CEQA
Determination
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? No Impact
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
No Impact
September 2023 Page 46 of 65
Question CEQA
Determination
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; No Impact ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite;
No Impact
iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
No Impact
iv) impede or redirect flood flows? No Impact
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
No Impact
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
No Impact
Discussion
The General Plan area is located in two main watersheds with the vast majority being in the southerly portion of the Yuba River Watershed. These watersheds span four counties: Nevada, Placer, Sutter and Yuba. Two rivers travel through Nevada City; Deer Creek and Little Deer Creek; both being influenced by these main watersheds. Several other tributaries to and from these rivers also flow through the project area.

The Deer Creek Watershed traces the southerly boundary of the Yuba River Watershed. Nevada City is at the approximate mid-point of this watershed and is approximately 12 miles west of the eastern watershed boundary near SR-20 and approximately 15 miles west of the watershed boundary near the Nevada County line. The watershed includes the area from Scotts Flat in the eastern reaches and Lake Wildwood in the western half. Deer Creek Watershed has been impacted from past uses including mining, development, water diversions, and agriculture.

Little Deer Creek Watershed encompasses much of the project area and is a tributary to Deer Creek. Other waters within the project area that are tributary to Deer Creek include Gold Run Creek, Oregon Ravine, Woodpecker Ravine, Woods Ravine, Rogers Williams Ravine, and Manzanita Ravine. All these watercourses flow or combine to flow through the downtown of Nevada City.

Project Impacts
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality? Water quality, waste discharges, and water quality are managed by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The project area is characterized by hilly with steep September 2023 Page 47 of 65
to gently sloping terrain, perennial and intermittent streams in a forested environment. The CAPSE would not result in any direct impacts to water quality or result in the direct violation of a water quality standard or waste discharge requirements. The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural. The CAPSE does not propose policies or implementation actions that would conflict with the policies and programs in the City Resources Element or other sections of the General Plan concerning the protection of water quality. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to water quality standards, waste discharge requirements, or the degradation of surface or groundwater quality would occur.
b) Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
Future development of the General Plan (project) area would be subject to the City or County review when development plans are submitted, and/or application(s) filed. Projects that consist of areas greater than one acre and would be required to obtain a Construction General Permit. The Construction General Permit requires implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan (SWPPP), which would include Best Management Practices (BMP)s designed to reduce potential impacts from water degradation and storm water runoff. Construction BMPs may include, but are not limited to, stabilization of construction entrances, straw wattles on embankments, and sediment filters on existing inlets. The SWPPP must be kept on-site, updated as needed while construction progresses, and would contain a summary of the structural and non-structural BMPs to be implemented during both construction and post-construction periods.

All future development within the General Plan area is subject to City or County review including CEQA analysis. As part of the CEQA analysis, the potential for impacts to hydrology and water quality would be considered, and as discussed above, proper permitting and water quality protection measures would be incorporated as conditions of project approval or as project-specific mitigation. Preparation, implementation, and participation with both a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit and the Construction General Permit, including the SWPPP and BMPs, would reduce potential impacts to water quality to acceptable levels. As a result, impacts associated to water quality in this regard and wastewater discharge requirements would be less than significant.

The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects on groundwater supplies. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to groundwater supplies or groundwater recharge would occur.
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. City Municipal Code Chapter

17.80.120 contains regulations regarding the prohibition of development within riparian and adjacent to stream zones. The City prohibits building closer than 100 feet from a September 2023 Page 48 of 65
perennial stream and closer than 25 feet from seasonal water (unless a variance is granted). In addition, sections 401 and 404 prohibit the release of dredge or fill materials into waters of the U.S. These measures are intended to minimize erosion or siltation on or off-site.

The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards and does not approve or facilitate any specific development nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site would occur. ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site. The CAPSE would not alter precipitation amounts or intensities, nor is it anticipated to require any additional water to be imported to serve the future project sites. Some additional run-off would occur from new impervious surfaces if construction occurs; however, the overall increased surface area would be minimal and the potential for on-site or off-site run-off would be minimal. Also, as noted in subsection i) above, construction on these sites; however, would be within a rural landscape, increased run-off would be minimal, and would be required to comply with all applicable RWQCB and City requirements related to water runoff and control.

City Municipal Code Chapter 13.20.101 Statutory Authorization would apply to future development projects that could occur in the General Plan (project) area if they are within flood zones. In part, the purposes of this chapter are to protect human life and health; minimize damage and reduce the effects on uses in flood zones. More specifically, section 13.20.050 sets forth provisions for flood hazard reduction including anchoring, use of construction materials resistant to flooding, and a requirement that in a zone A, the lowest floor be elevated at least one foot above the base flood elevation. Other requirements such as structure design and certification by a registered professional engineer or architect are required.

The CAPSE includes policies and programs to ensure that new development is located and designed to minimize the generation of and exposure to flood hazards (e.g., Implementation Actions 4.C.1 Promote Flood Safety and 4.C.7 Green Infrastructure). In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to substantial flooding on- or off-site would occur.
iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or as discussed in subsections i) and ii) above, impacts from future development projects, depending on the location, size, and nature would be required to obtain a Construction General Permit. The Construction General permit requires implementation of a SWPPP, which would include BMPs to minimize drainage impacts caused by storm water runoff and protect downstream receiving waters. Preparation and implementation of all required NPDES permits, including implementation of SWPPPs and associated BMPs, would reduce the potential for excess storm water drainage.

The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards and does not approve or facilitate any specific September 2023 Page 49 of 65
development nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to increased stormwater runoff would occur.
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows? As discussed in subsections i) and ii) above, impacts from future development projects, depending on the location, size, and nature would be required to obtain a Construction General Permit. The Construction General permit requires implementation of a SWPPP, which would include BMPs to minimize the erosion caused by storm water runoff and protect downstream receiving waters.

Preparation and implementation of all required NPDES permits, including implementation of SWPPPs and associated BMPs, would reduce the potential for storm water flows from carrying potential contaminants off-site during construction.

The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards and does not approve or facilitate any specific development nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to increased.
d) In flood hazard, tsunami or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
The CAPSE includes policies and programs to ensure that new development is located and designed to minimize the generation of flood hazards, The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to the risk of release of pollutants due to project site inundation would occur. e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards, none of which approve physical changes to the environment or conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in a physical change to the environment and no impacts related to conflicting with or obstructing implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan would occur.

Impact Conclusions
No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation measures are required.

September 2023 Page 50 of 65

LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:

Question CEQA
Determination
a) Physically divide an established community? No Impact b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
No Impact
Discussion
Nevada City was founded in 1850 and incorporated on April 19, 1856. Nevada City started as a gold-mining community one hundred and fifty (150) years ago and is now characterized as a modern city but still with modest cottages and Victorian houses and classic brick buildings. The City is located within a basin on the western slope of the Sierra Nevada and has unique topography with hills and valleys and aesthetic and scenic qualities. The town is located in a natural “bowl” giving the impression that the historic mining town is compact as it is surrounded by hills and trees.

Nevada City is generally surrounded by rural residential development and undeveloped coniferous forest. These areas extend from the city boundary in all directions and are included in the General Plan project area. These unincorporated lands, outside the City’s jurisdictional boundaries, are primarily designated and developed for residential uses.

The General Plan contains a Land Use and Economic Development Element (Chapter II), which establishes objectives and policies related to land use planning and community development in the City. As part of the CAPSE, there are no amendments being proposed to the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The CAPSE identifies land use and development as being a critical factor in preparation for future emergencies.

Project Impacts
a) Would the project physically divide an established community? The Land Use Element establishes specific goals, objectives and policies related to land use planning and community development in the City. The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards and revisions to provide consistency with the Land Use Element. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to division of an established community would occur. b) Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards, none of which conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation September 2023 Page 51 of 65
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to conflicts with a land use plan, policy, or regulation would occur.

Impact Conclusions
No impacts have been identified and no mitigation measures are required.

MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Question CEQA
Determination
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? No Impact
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
No Impact
Discussion
A mineral resource is land on which known deposits of commercially viable mineral or aggregate deposits exist. The designation is applied to sites determined by the State Division of Mines and Geology as being a resource of regional significance and is intended to help maintain any quarrying operations and protect them from encroachment of incompatible uses.

No mineral resources are identified to exist by the City’s General Plan or located within any “Critical Mineral Resource Overlay” area, on or near the General Plan Area. Additionally, the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a City’s General Plan, specific plan or other land use plan. No impact has been identified.

Project Impacts
a) Result in the loss of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
The CAPSE would not affect mineral resources. No impact. b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No mineral resource recovery sites are delineated within the Nevada City General Plan or any other land use or specific plan. No impact.

September 2023 Page 52 of 65
NOISE
Would the project result in:

Question CEQA
Determination
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
No Impact
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
No Impact
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact
Discussion
Noise impacts require evaluation through CEQA. The previous Noise Element section of the General Plan Public Safety Element was adopted in 1986. The CAPSE includes an update of the General Plan Noise Element which evaluates current and future noise levels from increased growth in the region, primarily due to increased traffic levels, but also includes noise from increased stationary activities, such as increased commercial activities. Appendix C of the CAPSE consists of a background report on noise that supports a noise analysis and policies and programs in the CAPSE.

To quantify existing noise levels at areas within Nevada City, a community noise survey was performed at seven locations from Friday, April 1 through Monday, April 4, 2022. Then, noise contours were developed showing existing noise levels (to 2045) based on projected development anticipated in the General Plan area and from regional growth anticipated in Nevada County’s General Plan area.

Project Impacts
a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
The CAPSE is consistent with the current City noise regulations but provides an enhanced understanding of noise issues in the community and also provides improved noise standards that can be used to improve noise regulatory enforcement. The CAPSE also provides additional policies and programs to address noise from new activity and development in the City. For example, Policy NE-5 has more specific criteria to base noise analysis requirements. Table 4, Noise Standards for New Uses Affected by Traffic Noise and Table 5, Noise Standards for Locally Regulated (non-transportation), provide standards to evaluate and restrict new activities near residential uses which should help mitigate future noise impacts on the community. Policy NE-25 consists of a formal methodology to apply September 2023 Page 53 of 65
to noise studies while Policy NE-28 offers design options for mitigation of noise impacts.

Program NE-1 proposes updating the City’s noise regulations to improve consistency between the CAPSE and implementation of noise requirements.

The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development designs or proposals, nor does it grant any development entitlements that could result in noise impacts. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes or introduce any new sources of noise and no impacts related to a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels would occur.
b) Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
The CAPSE Update does not approve or facilitate any specific development designs or proposals, nor does it grant any development entitlements that could result in groundborne vibration. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes or introduce any new sources of vibration and no impacts related to the generation of excessive groundborne vibration or noise levels would occur. c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
The Nevada County Airport is located approximately 1 mile south of the General Plan area.

The airport’s 55 dB CNEL contours does not extend into the current City limits or into the General Plan area. As a result, the General Plan area is not considered to be appreciably affected by noise related to aircraft operations at the Nevada County Airport even though audible overflights of the City do periodically occur. No impact.

Impact Conclusions
No impacts have been identified and no mitigation measures are required.

POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:

Question CEQA
Determination
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? No Impact
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact
Discussion
In 2019 pursuant to State law, the City adopted an updated Housing Element (Housing Element 2019-27), which explained City housing goals and how the City intends to meet them.

September 2023 Page 54 of 65
Project Impacts
a) Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? The General Plan Housing Element (2019-27) establishes policies, programs and quantified objectives to address housing needs within the City. The CAPSE includes goals, policies, and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards and would not alter the Housing Element. The CAPSE does not propose policies or implementation actions that would conflict with the policies, programs, and quantified objectives of the Housing Element regarding population growth. The CAPSE does not include construction or operational components (such as employment opportunities) that could directly or indirectly induce population growth. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements.

As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to substantial unplanned population growth would occur. b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The Housing Element establishes policies, programs, and quantified objectives to address housing needs within the City. The CAPSE includes goals, policies, and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards and would not alter the Housing Element. The CAPSE does not propose policies or implementation actions that would conflict with the policies, programs, and quantified objectives of the Housing Element regarding the displacement of people or housing. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements or require or facilitate the demolition of housing or other structures that could displace people. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to the displacement of existing people or housing would occur.

Mitigation
No impacts have been identified and no mitigation measures are required.

PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the following public services:

Question CEQA
Determination
a) Fire protection? No Impact
b) Police protection? No Impact
c) Schools? No Impact
September 2023 Page 55 of 65
Question CEQA
Determination
d) Parks? No Impact
e) Other public facilities? No Impact
Discussion
Nevada City is a full-service City that provides fire, police, public works, planning, water, wastewater, and parks and recreation services. These services are described in more detail in the CAPSE.

Project Impacts
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
i) Fire protection
ii) Police protection
iii) Schools
iv) Parks
v) Other public facilities
The CAPSE contains policies and programs intended to support and improve fire and police protection capability and other resources within the City and within the General Plan area.

The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. Additionally, the CAPSE would not directly or indirectly result in an increased resident population, necessitating the need for new or physically altered facilities or manpower. As a result, adoption and implementation of the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to the provision of new or altered governmental or public facilities would occur.

Mitigation
No impacts have been identified and no mitigation measures are required.

September 2023 Page 56 of 65

RECREATION
Question CEQA
Determination
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? No Impact
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
No Impact
Discussion
The City maintains several public parks and recreation services in the city that serves folks both within the General Plan (project area) and surrounding communities.

Project Impacts
(a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
General Plan Resources Element contains background information on recreation and parks that include maintaining a certain number (or size) of parks based on population growth.

Chapter 3.36 of the Municipal Code, Facilities and Equipment Fee, include requirements for new development to pay for such new recreational facilities to mitigate impacts to a level of non-significance. The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. Nor does the adoption or implementation of the CAPSE result in direct or indirect population growth that could increase demand for parks or other recreational facilities. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to the increased use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities would occur. (b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
The General Plan Resources Element contains background information on recreation and parks that include maintaining a certain amount of parks based on population growth.

Chapter 3.36 of the Municipal Code, Facilities and Equipment Fee, includes requirements for new development to pay for such new recreational facilities to mitigate impacts to a level of non-significance. The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. Nor does the adoption or implementation of the CAPSE result in direct or indirect population growth that could increase demand for parks or other recreational facilities. As a result, no impacts related to the construction or expansion of recreational facilities would occur.

Impact Conclusions
No impacts have been identified and no mitigation measures are required.

September 2023 Page 57 of 65

TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:

Question CEQA
Determination
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
No Impact
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3(b)?
No Impact
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
No Impact
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? No Impact
Discussion
The CAPSE provides a comprehensive discussion of the City’s transportation system.

Project Impacts
a) Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? The General Plan Circulation Element refers to the Nevada County Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) for addressing future circulation needs. contains policies and programs related to the City’s circulation system. The RTP relates to other circulation plans that enhance the City’s circulation system, such as the Bicycle Master Plan, the Transit Plan, and the Western Nevada County Non-Motorized Recreation Trails Master plan The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards and would not alter the Circulation Element. Program EP-4 recommends updating the City’s Circulation Element to address more local circulation needs. The CAPSE does not propose any actions that would directly result in development of a specific site or specific infrastructure, nor would it change any land uses or zoning. The CAPSE does not propose policies or programs that would conflict with the Circulation Element regarding the City’s circulation system. Additionally, the CAPSE would not conflict with any of the regional transportation objectives identified in the RTP or other circulation plans from Nevada County Transportation Commission. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to conflicts with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities would occur. b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3(b)? The CEQA guidelines underwent revisions that took effect July 1, 2020. As part of the revision, transportation impacts are now evaluated using vehicle miles traveled (VMT) September 2023 Page 58 of 65
instead of the traditional Level LOS. VMT is a measure of the actual miles that an individual in their vehicle travel as opposed to LOS which measures the relative flow of vehicles as determined by potential delays and the time it requires to travel from one point to the next.

As part of the CEQA update, Jurisdiction were given until the July 1, 2020, date to implement new thresholds of significance based on the guidance to use VMT and specifically thresholds guidelines are shown in CEQA § 15064.3 Determining the Significance of Transportation Impacts. The City has not adopted a thresholds or standards of significance that include an analysis of VMT. However, VMT can be analyzed quantitatively and the City can use the State’s guidelines to determine an appropriate threshold of significance.

The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts would occur related to a conflict with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3(b).
c) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards. Some of the policies and programs involve improving access to and from areas and increases in defensible space that could impact geometric design features of existing and proposed roadways. However, none of these are intended to create substantial circulation hazards. The CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes nor any directly related to street design, and no impacts would occur related to a substantial increase in hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses.
d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? The CAPSE includes policies and programs to improve emergency access. Section 2 of the document is completely devoted to reviewing and improving emergency access routes for evacuation purposes. The Program EP-4 recommends updating the Circulation Element to address improved evacuation capacity. In addition, the CAPSE contains policies and programs to improve emergency preparedness and identify evacuation routes. Adoption and implementation of the CAPSE would have a beneficial impact on traffic and circulation during an emergency. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to inadequate emergency access would occur.

Impact Conclusions
No impacts have been identified and no mitigation measures are required.

TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code § 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:

September 2023 Page 59 of 65
Question CEQA
Determination
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code § 5020.1(k); or
No Impact
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in Public Resources Code § 5024.1(c). In applying the criteria set forth Public Resource Code § 5024.1(c), the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

No Impact
Discussion
The County and the General Plan areas lie within the ethnographic territory of the Nisenan. The Nisenan occupied the upper drainages and the adjacent ridges of the Yuba, the north, middle and south forks of the American, and at least the upper north side of the Cosumnes River. The territory is conventionally believed to extend to the crest of the Sierra to the east and the Sacramento River to the west.

SB 18 requires local governments (city and county) to consult with Native American tribes before making certain planning decisions and to provide notice to tribes at certain key points in the planning process. The intent is to “provide California Native American tribes an opportunity to participate in local land use decisions at an early planning stage, for the purpose of protecting, or mitigating impacts to, cultural places.” AB 52 similarly requires the City, through to engage in early consultation with California Native American Tribes on all projects subject to CEQA evaluation.

Tribal Cultural Resources, which include sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred place, objects, or archeological resources with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe that is listed or eligible for listing in the national, California or local registers. AB 52 requires lead agencies to consider whether a project may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource and to consider a tribe’s cultural values when determining the appropriate environmental assessment, impacts and mitigation. AB 52 can draw upon SB 18’s guidelines and can be completed in tandem.

The City requested opportunity to consult with four Native American tribes identified by the NAHC as having affiliation with the City, including Nisenan tribes, was conducted on August 23, 2021.

No responses were received from this outreach effort.

Project Impacts
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code § 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code § 5020.1(k) or:

September 2023 Page 60 of 65
The General Plan Resources contains findings and policies to protect and preserve historic resources within the City. The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards and would not update or alter the Resources Element. The CAPSE does not propose policies or programs that would conflict with the policies and programs in the Resources Element regarding the protection of historical resources. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to tribal cultural resources listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or local register of historical resources would occur from adoption or implementation of the CAPSE. b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in Public Resources Code § 5024.1(c)?
In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code § 5024.1, the City must consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Assembly Bill 52 and Senate Bill 18 requires the City to consult with California Native American tribes before making certain planning decisions and to provide notice to tribes at certain key points in the planning process. Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21080.3.1, no California Native American tribe has requested an AB 52 consultation. Additionally, in accordance with California Government Code § 65352.3 (SB 18) California Native American tribes have been notified of the proposed CAPSE and been given the opportunity to initiate consultation with the City. The CAPSE was routed to six California Native American tribes on June 2, 2020. As of December 1, 2020, no responses had been received from any of the six Native American tribes contacted.

The City requested opportunity to consult with four Native American tribes identified by the NAHC as having affiliation with the City, including Nisenan tribes, was conducted on August 23, 2021. No responses were received from this outreach effort.

While the City and its vicinity are known to have been inhabited by Native American groups and/or individuals, the CAPSE does not propose any updates to the Open Space and Conservation Element, which contains objectives, policies, and programs to protect and preserve archaeological resources within the City. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to tribal cultural resources would occur.

Impact Conclusions
No impacts have been identified and no mitigation measures are required.

September 2023 Page 61 of 65

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:

Question CEQA
Determination
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? No Impact
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
No Impact
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
No Impact
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
No Impact
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
No Impact
Discussion
The City provides water and wastewater services to areas primarily located within the City’s current jurisdictional boundaries. Also, the Nevada Irrigation District provides water services to areas within the City and within areas within the General Plan area outside of the City’s jurisdictional boundaries. The City’s drainage system is also maintained by the City. Details of these services are described in more detail in the CAPSE.

Project Impacts
a) Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards. Related policies and programs are listed below. However, adoption of the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE Update would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to the relocation or construction of new or expanded utility infrastructure would occur.

September 2023 Page 62 of 65
b) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards. Related policies and programs are listed below. However, adoption of the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to the relocation or construction of new or expanded utility infrastructure would occur.
c) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? The CAPSE includes policies and programs to minimize risks from the effects of natural and non-natural hazards and does not approve or facilitate any specific development nor does it grant development entitlements. Nor does the adoption or implementation of the CAPSE result in direct or indirect population growth that could increase wastewater generation. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to wastewater treatment capacity would occur.

WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:

Question CEQA
Determination
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
No Impact
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? No Impact
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
No Impact
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
No Impact
Background
The General Plan area is characterized by some urbanized areas but contains a substantial amount of rural development interspersed within a forest environment. Due to the nature of the vegetation and most of the General Plan area and the entire City limits is categorized as a Very September 2023 Page 63 of 65
High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) by CALFIRE. More details are provided in the CAPSE.

More details including specific mapping are shown in the CAPSE.

Project Impacts
a) Would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
The CAPSE provides more current information on evacuation routes and identifies additional risks associated with evacuation planning for the overall protection of the community and to reduce the risk of property loss and damage during wildfires A number of policies identify constraints to evacuation and emergency access and several programs have been developed to improve these features. The CAPSE does not modify or change designated emergency evacuation routes designed in the Emergency Operations Plan or Circulation Element. The CAPSE would not conflict with or change any evacuation plans and does not approve or facilitate any specific development nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes that would impair an emergency response or evacuation plan and no impact would occur.
b) Would the project, due to slope, prevailing winds and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks and, thereby, expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? The CAPSE identifies wildfire as a hazard and the document supports practices that would reduce risks and the severity of wildfires. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes that would exacerbate wildfire risks and no impacts related to wildfire risks would occur. c) Would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
The CAPSE Update identifies wildfire as a hazard and the document supports practices that would reduce risks and the severity of wildfires. It includes policies and programs which would allow future development to include open space as a fuel break/fire break to promote fire safety while also evaluating project applications during application review and implemented through adoption as conditions of approval. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements.

As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure would occur. d) Would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability or drainage changes?
The CAPSE identifies wildfire as a hazard and the document supports practices that would reduce risks and the severity of wildfires. It includes a number of policies and programs to reduce the risks associated with flooding, runoff and post-fire slope instability. In addition, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant September 2023 Page 64 of 65
development entitlements. Future development projects would be reviewed prior to implementation to ensure fire hazard safety during project construction and implementation.

Construction would be required to adhere to building and fire codes to ensure safety during construction and operation and not exacerbate or create risk toward humans or structures.

As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts related to the exposure of people of structures to significant risks from post-fire impacts would occur.

Impact Conclusions
No impacts have been identified and no mitigation measures are required.

MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Question CEQA
Determination
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
No Impact
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? No Impact
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? No Impact
Discussion
As discussed in this Initial Study, the CAPSE does not approve or facilitate any specific development, nor does it grant development entitlements. As a result, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes or impacts related to biological resources, cultural resources, air quality, water quality, noise, or any other CEQA sections.

Under Section 15065(a)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, a lead agency shall find that a project may have a significant effect on the environment where there is substantial evidence that the project has potential environmental effects “that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable.” As defined in CEQA Guidelines § 15065(a)(3), cumulatively considerable means “that the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.” As discussed throughout this Initial Study, the CAPSE would not result in any physical environmental changes and no impacts have been identified for any of the environmental resource topics. As such, the CAPSE would not contribute to cumulative impacts to any of the environmental resource topic areas. Therefore, adoption of the CAPSE would not result in environmental effects that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable.

September 2023 Page 65 of 65
This page is left intentionally blank.

September 2023
Appendix A

CLIMATE ADAPTATION AND PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT

CITY OF NEVADA CITY

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT

MEETING OF: September 13, 2023 Agenda Item No. 06
Subject: Conduct a Public Hearing in Consideration of
Ordinance 2023-09: An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Nevada City Adding Chapter 2.38 (“Public Arts
Commission”) to Title 2 (“Administration and Personnel”) of the City of Nevada City Municipal Code, Relating to the Establishment of a Public Arts Commission
From: Sean Grayson, City Manager
Date: September 6, 2023
Reviewed & Approved:

City Manager:

City Attorney:

Recommended Action: Hold first reading, waive reading of Ordinance in its entirety, read by title only, and schedule for second reading and adoption September 27, 2023.

ISSUE STATEMENT AND DISCUSSION:

One of the strategic initiatives within the City’s 2022-2027 Strategic Plan is Vibrancy: Arts, Culture, & Distinction. Goal #2 of that strategic initiative is, “Develop a public art process including an enabling ordinance”. At the July 27, 2023, regular City Council meeting, the City Council adopted Ordinance 2023- 06 to add a section to the municipal code relating to public art requirements. Goal #6 of the vibrancy strategic initiative is, “Evaluate the timing, formation, and mission of a Nevada City Arts Commission”. At the July 27, 2023, City Council meeting, the Council provided direction to ensure the delivery of a Public Arts Commission. At the August 9, 2023, City Council meeting, the City Council provided direction on the format and content of an ordinance establishing a Public Arts Commission.

The proposed ordinance establishes the Public Arts Commission and fixes membership of the commission at seven (7) members who reside in Nevada County, are appointed by the city council and serve at the council's pleasure, and do not hold any paid office or employment in the city government. Four members shall represent external stakeholder groups including:
• One (1) representative of a local historical society or similar group. • One (1) representative of a local arts council or similar group. • One (1) representative of a local chamber of commerce or similar group. • One (1) representative of the Nisenan Tribe.

Three members shall be at-large representatives, including:
• One (1) youth commissioner at least 16 years of age and not older than 18 years of age at the time of appointment.
• Two (2) artists in residence or those persons who have demonstrated a strong commitment to the arts through individual patronage, education, or professional experience or knowledge of a particular arts and culture field.

Commissioners serve at the will and pleasure of the City Council serving a four-year term. The commission will have a chair and vice-chair appointed by the members. Commission meeting will be public and subject to the Ralph M. Brown Act and otherwise follow the City Council rules and regulations for meeting procedures. The functions of the commission are:
• Serve as the Art Review Authority as defined by the city’s Public Art Requirements. • Advise the city council and city manager on all matters affecting arts in the city. • Advise and assist private property owners who desire such advice and assistance regarding the selection and installation of artwork to be located on their private property in the public view. • Upon request, to advise the city council and other commissions, or committees regarding any matter affecting the beauty and culture of the city.
• Liaise with internal and external stakeholders to facilitate communication and cooperation among the various groups involved arts and culture with the city, county and region. • Conduct hearings on items related to art upon referral from the city council or city manager.

Process and Timeline
If the ordinance is approved at the September 13, 2023, meeting and adopted at the September 27, 2023, meeting, it will go into effect on October 27, 2023. Staff will announce the vacancies following the procedures within the City Council Policy Manual allowing the City Council to solicit applications for the Commission in November of 2023 and seek to appoint commissioners at the December 14, 2023, regular City Council meeting with the first commission meeting scheduled in January of 2024.

FINANCIAL AND/OR POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

None.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:

This action is consistent with the strategic initiative of Vibrancy: Arts, Culture, & Distinction. Specifically, this action addresses, in part, Goal #6 of the vibrancy strategic initiative, “Evaluate the timing, formation, and mission of a Nevada City Arts Commission”.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS:

Not applicable.

LEGAL REVIEW:

City Attorney Pucci has reviewed this item and finds that the recommended action complies with the law.

ATTACHMENTS:

Ordinance 2023-09
ORDINANCE NO. 2023-09

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEVADA CITY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ADDING CHAPTER 2.38 (“PUBLIC ARTS COMMISSION”) TO TITLE 2 (“ADMINISTRATION AND PERSONNEL”) OF THE CITY OF NEVADA

CITY MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO THE ESTBLISHMENT OF A PUBLIC

ARTS COMMISSION
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that:
• Public art is a critical element in providing for a diverse and culturally rich environment for Nevada City residents and visitors; and
• Public art fosters economic development and activity and promotes cultural tourism by enlivening the public areas of buildings and expressing the vitality and heritage of the community; and
• The adoption of an ordinance establishing a Public Arts Commission allows an additional layer of engagement between the City and the community for the purposes of public arts support and advocacy; and
• A well-conceived work of art can increase the value of a development project; and • Public art may enhance the revitalization efforts within the 7-Hills District and other portions of the City as the overall image, beauty, and livability of the community are enhanced; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to establish and maintain a Public Arts Commission in the City of Nevada City as outlined in an ordinance adopted for that purpose; and WHEREAS, the City of Nevada City, California, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) (Cal. Pub. Res. Code §§21000 and following) and State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR §§15000 and following) has determined that this ordinance is not a project under CEQA pursuant to Title 14, Section 15378 (b)(5) of the California Code of Regulations;

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

SECTION 1. The above recitals are true and incorporated into this ordinance.

SECTION 2. Chapter 2.38 is hereby added to the Nevada City Municipal Code, to read as follows:

Chapter 2.38 PUBLIC ARTS COMMISSION

2.38.010 Creation—Establishment.

The public arts commission is established as set out in this chapter and shall be governed by the rules and regulations set out in this chapter.

2.38.020 Membership.

The public arts commission shall consist of seven (7) members who reside in Nevada County, are appointed by the city council and serve at the council's pleasure, and do not hold any paid office or employment in the city government.

Four members shall represent external stakeholder groups including:

A. One (1) representative of a local historical society or similar group.

B. One (1) representative of a local arts council or similar group.

C. One (1) representative of a local chamber of commerce or similar group.

D. One (1) representative of the Nisenan Tribe.

E. Three members shall be at-large representatives, including:

F. One (1) youth commissioner at least 16 years of age and not older than 18 years of age at the time of appointment.

G. Two (2) artists in residence or those persons who have demonstrated a strong commitment to the arts through individual patronage, education, or professional experience or knowledge of a particular arts and culture field.

2.38.030 Term of office.

A. Public arts commissioners serve at the will and pleasure of the city council.

B. Members of the public arts commission shall serve four-year terms and until their successor is appointed.

C. Public arts commissioners’ term of office may be modified by majority vote of a quorum of the city council.

2.38.040 Removal from office.

Any public arts commissioner may be removed by a majority vote of the entire council.

2.38.050 Filling of vacancies.

In the event that a public arts commissioner resigns, is removed or otherwise ceases to act as a public arts commissioner, that vacancy shall be filled in a manner as established by the city council standards and procedures or otherwise adopted by resolution of the city council.

2.38.060 Organization.

The commission shall elect a chairperson and vice-chairperson from among the appointed members.
3 2.38.070 Meetings.

A. All meetings of the commission shall be held in compliance with the Ralph M. Brown Act.

B. The public arts commission shall schedule at least one regular meeting in each month based upon the annual calendar of meetings for the city or such other time as approved by the city council.

C. A quorum shall be a majority of the commission. No action of the commission shall be valid without the affirmative vote of at least a quorum of members.

D. All meetings of the commission shall be conducted in accordance with the Rosenberg’s Rules of Order or as otherwise provided for by city ordinance or the city council's rules and regulations.

E. The commission shall keep a record, which shall be available for public inspection, of all of its meetings, proceedings, and other actions.

F. Special meetings of the commission may be called by the chair or upon the request of the city council acting through either the mayor or the city manager. Notice of a special meeting shall be given in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act.

2.38.090 Functions.

The public arts commission shall have the following functions:

A. Serve as the Art Review Authority as defined by the city’s Public Art Requirements, Chapter 17.118 of this code.

B. Advise the city council and city manager on all matters affecting arts in the city.

C. Advise and assist private property owners who desire such advice and assistance regarding the selection and installation of artwork to be located on their private property in the public view.

D. Upon request, to advise the city council and other commissions, or committees regarding any matter affecting the beauty and culture of the city.

E. Liaise with internal and external stakeholders to facilitate communication and cooperation among the various groups involved arts and culture with the city, county and region.

F. Conduct hearings on items related to art upon referral from the city council or city manager.

SECTION 3. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION. The project has been reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines, and 4 the City’s environmental procedures, and has been found to be not a project under Section 15378 (b)(5) of the CEQA Guidelines.

SECTION 4. INCONSISTENCIES. Any provision of the Nevada City Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and/or further, is hereby repealed or modified to the extent necessary to affect the provisions of this ordinance.

SECTION 5. SEVERABILITY. If any provision or clause of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or clauses or applications of this ordinance which can be implemented without the invalid provision, clause or application; and to this end, the provisions of this ordinance are declared to be severable.

SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect commencing thirty (30) days after its final adoption and a summary hereof shall be published once within fifteen (15) days in The Union, a newspaper of general circulation printed and published in the County of Nevada and circulated in the City of Nevada City and hereby designated for that purpose by the City Council.

SECTION 7. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance and shall cause the same to be published in the manner and form provided by law in The Union, a newspaper of general circulation printed and published in the City of Nevada City, State of California, which said newspaper is hereby designated for that purpose.

Introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 13th day of September 2023, by the following roll call vote:

MOTION:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

Passed and approved at the regular meeting of the City Council on the 27th day of September 2023, by the following roll call vote:

MOTION:

AYES:

NOES:
5 ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:
__________________________
Daniela Fernández, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________
Niel Locke, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________
Dean J. Pucci, City Attorney

CITY OF NEVADA CITY

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT

MEETING OF: September 13, 2023 Agenda Item No. 07
Subject: Consideration of a Plaque Request from the Nevada County Landmarks Commission for the Carter Drummond
Family Homesite
From: Sean Grayson, City Manager
Date: September 6, 2023
Reviewed & Approved:

City Manager:

City Attorney:

Recommended Action: Approve the application and authorize the City Manager to sign it.

ISSUE STATEMENT AND DISCUSSION:

The Nevada County Historical Landmarks Commission has requested that the City consider being the host (landowner) of a plaque for a Historical Landmark Registration Application recognizing the Jennie and Dennis Drummond Carter Homesite. The application was scheduled before the Vibrancy Strategic Initiative Committee on September 7, 2023, as the meeting was cancelled this item is coming before the City Council without a recommendation from the committee. The proposed plaque location would be the City owned triangle of right-of-way at the intersection of Drummond Street and American Hill Road. The plaque would be attached to an existing or relocated granite bolder on the site. The attached application includes a History and Description of the Proposed Landmark, the Historically Significant Aspects of the Property, the Contributions of Jennie Carter, and the Contributions of Dennis Drummond Carter. Also attached are a map and location for the plaque. Existing City Council policy requires the City Council to approve plaque language when place on City property. The proposed plaque language (attached) is as follows:

CARTER FAMILY HOMESITE
Jennie Correll Carter and Dennis Drummond Carter, prominent Black pioneers, married in Nevada City in 1866. From 1867 to 1873 they lived across Drummond Street from this plaque. Dennis Carter had bought the property years earlier and Drummond Street is believed to have been named after his mother's family. The couple later moved to what is now Grove Street. Dennis Carter was an accomplished musician, music teacher and civil rights advocate. Jennie Carter was an accomplished writer and journalist who was the local correspondent for The Elevator, a San Francisco newspaper serving the Black community in northern California. Jennie Carter died in 1881 and is buried in Pine Grove Cemetery. Dennis Carter died in 1894 and is likely buried in the adjacent unmarked grave.

Landmark registered by Nevada County
, 2023: NEV 23-?
Plaque dedicated 2023 by the
Nevada County Historical Landmarks Commission
If the City Council approves the request, the item requires approval by the Nevada County Board of Supervisors upon presentation from the Nevada County Historical Landmarks Commission.

FINANCIAL AND/OR POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

None.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:

This action is consistent with the strategic initiative of Vibrancy: Arts, Culture, and Distinction. The action specifically addresses goal #4, “Engage the arts community and all stakeholders in identifying the unique vibrancy of Nevada City and how to maintain and expand it.” ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS:

Not applicable.

LEGAL REVIEW:

City Attorney Pucci has reviewed this item and finds that the recommended action complies with the law.

ATTACHMENTS:
 Landmarks Application
 Map and Location
 Plaque Language
2022 rev. 1
Form-Landmarks Application 8-13-23.docx
8/14/23 9:34 AM
County of Nevada
State of California
Nevada County Historical Landmarks Commission
Application for Registration of Historical Landmark
Name of proposed landmark: Jennie and Dennis Drummond Carter Homesite
Location: We are proposing that the plaque be placed on a triangular shaped Cityowned piece of property (a public right of way) at the intersection of Drummond Street and American Hill Road in Nevada City
Name of applicant: Nevada County Historical Society, President Daniel R. Ketcham Address: 161 Nevada City Highway, Nevada City, CA 95949 Home or work phone: (530) 477-8056
Cell phone: (530) 320-5116
Name and address of owner upon whose property proposed landmark is located, if owner is not applicant: Nevada City
I consent to this application and authorize the placing of a plaque or marker on site. __________________________________ ___________________
Owner’s signature Date
Brief history and description of proposed landmark:

The proposed site is across the street from the now subdivided parcel on which Mary Jane (Jennie) Correll Carter and Dennis Drummond Carter, also known as D.D., lived in the 1860s and 1870s. The Carters were Nevada City’s most accomplished Black residents during the last half of the 19th century.1
Both were prominent in the Black civil
rights movement. By profession Jennie was a journalist, Dennis a musician. Their contributions to Nevada City’s history and to Black history in California more generally, are summarized on pages 3-6.
2022 rev. 2
Dennis Carter had been in residence on the site as early as November 1860.2 By 1869
the Carter property was identified in the Nevada City Assessment record as Block 42, Lot 1. On the 1869 H.S. Bradley map the Carter parcel fronted on what was later named Drummond Street but was then not yet named on the map.3 Today Block 42,
Lot 1 in the Nevada County records is comprised of house numbers 302, 310, 318, and 324 Drummond Street.

We have reviewed numerous printed sources and consulted with Bill Falconi, Vince Seck, Cathy Wilcox-Barnes, and Amy Kesler-Wolfson, but were unable to document an official record for the naming of Drummond Street. It is likely that Dennis Carter named the street after his mother’s maiden name (also his middle name), and/or his birthplace, Drummondtown, Accomack County, Virginia.4
In her published essays in the San Francisco weekly newspaper The Elevator, Jennie Carter often used the dateline Mud Hill, a tongue-in-cheek take on the state of Nevada City’s many hills during the rainy season. She described their homesite in an essay published on January 7, 1868, as surrounded “by peach trees with a brown cottage with six rooms. The first room is furnished with a melodeon and contra basso; the second with a trumbone (sic) and cornet; the third with a violincello (sic) and a bugle; the fourth with a guitar and two canaries; the fifth with a violin and dog; the sixth with an old fiddle and cat…”5

When Jennie Carter’s editor Philip Alexander Bell visited Nevada City in April 1873, he offered this description of their home: “My friend D.D. Carter…conveyed me to Mud Hill. The name is not at all applicable, for it is but a light elevation from the city proper, and the snug cottage is surrounded by graveled walks, and trees, flower vines and shrubbery.”6
For Jennie Carter’s readers the “Mud Hill” of her essays served as a proxy for Nevada City and the West more generally. The setting gave her readers an up close and personal look into life in a late 19th century frontier town and introduced to them the otherwise often invisible Black residents who lived there and contributed to the community’s complexity and vibrancy.

A Nevada County Landmarks Commission plaque at the site of their Lost Hill home would recognize the importance of the place where Jennie and Dennis began their lives together and where they achieved their greatest political, journalistic, and musical accomplishments.

Historically significant aspects or properties of proposed landmark:

Dennis Carter arrived in California from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in 1851. Jennie Correll initially arrived in California from Wisconsin in 1852 with her first husband Landis J. Correll. The Corrells returned to the Midwest in 1855 but were back in 2022 rev. 3
California by1862.7 In the summer of 1865 Landis Correll left California for Illinois, and the couple were divorced shortly thereafter.

Jennie and Dennis Carter were married in Nevada City on August 29, 1866, by Reverend William H. Offer of the African Methodist Episcopal Church.8 By all accounts the Carters had a loving marriage strengthened by their shared commitment to civil rights and a passion for music and books. Jennie and Dennis Carter lived in Nevada City until their deaths in 1881 and 1894 respectively.

The Carters accomplishments are widely recognized today. Each has a biography published by The Oxford African American Studies Center.9 Dennis Carter is featured in several Black histories of the West and is the only Black person to have a biographical sketch in Thompson & West’s History of Nevada County published in 1880.

Jennie Carter’s writings have been collected in Eric Gardner’s book Jennie Carter: A Black Journalist in the Early West and her work highlighted in his Unexpected Places:

Relocating Nineteenth-Century African American Literature. 10 She is also featured in other print and online sources, including an entry in Wikipedia.11 Contributions of Jennie Carter
Prior to her arrival in California Jennie Carter’s early life is not well documented. Her essays tell us that she was born in New York in about 1830 and lived in the South as a child where she witnessed the horrors of slavery firsthand. She writes of having seen children sold away from their mothers and as an adult having aided an escaped slave and her child along the Underground Railroad.12
In June of 1867, under the name Mrs. Ann J. Trask, Jennie Carter wrote to the previously mentioned Philip Bell, editor and publisher of the weekly San Francisco paper The Elevator, suggesting that he include a story designed for children in each issue of his paper. She volunteered to write the column. On July 5th Bell published her first story about the death of a beloved dog Nino. By the publication of her column of August 16, 1867, Jennie Carter had already expanded the topics of her writing, observing that she had started out writing for children but “wound up writing for everybody.”13
From June 1867 through December of 1874,Jennie Carter chronicled local, regional, and national events for The Elevator and other publications. She wrote on a wide range of topics: slavery, domestic life, politics, race, suffrage, temperance, and education.

Jennie Carter did not shy away from controversial topics. She spoke out against the anti-Chinese biases of her contemporaries, white and Black, siding firmly with the Chinese immigrants who many in California were trying to keep out.14 Nor did she shy away from criticizing members of her own race who engaged in colorism, or those who 2022 rev. 4
she believed had slacked off from their commitment to civil rights activism after the Civil War.

Jennie Carter was unrelenting in her criticism of California’s racially biased white politicians. On February 11,1870, she expressed her opinion about the California Legislature’s failure to ratify the Fifteenth Amendment, which fortunately did not require California’s support to reach the threshold for ratification. Jennie wrote: “California can sit and weep that she cannot stay the tide of progress, and fifty years hence in history, won’t the present Legislature and Governor of the State appear to our people like longeared horses.”15 Much of Jennie Carter’s writings dealt with what may seem to be routine domestic matters. But as Eric Gardner points out, a nuanced reading reveals that “Carter’s domestic sense was imbued with a doubled meaning of that term that she shared [with] many 19th century women--the work of making a home was directly tied to the work of making a community and a nation.”16 Indeed, as Gardner observes, “Jennie’s work remarkably complicates assumptions about blacks’ access to the middle class in the late 19th century West even as it adds to and confirms a rich tradition of post gold rush West Coast journalism.”17
Jennie Carter was especially supportive of her husband’s commitment to Masonry and wrote and delivered a poem entitled The Mission of Masonry at a convention in San Francisco on August 11, 1868.18 She also traveled to other cities such as Marysville, Sacramento, Oroville, and Carson City, Nevada, to report on the state of their Black communities, and to attend festivals that celebrated civil rights successes.

Contributions of Dennis Drummond Carter
Dennis Carter was born in about 1814 in Drummondtown, Accomack, County, Virginia, of Black and Native American ancestry. Dennis’s father died when Carter was a young boy. Fearing that her son could be enslaved should something happen to her, his mother moved with him to Philadelphia in about 1825.19 There Dennis studied music with Francis (Frank) Johnson (1792-1844) who was one of the few successful early Black composers and musicians in Antebellum America.

Dennis Carter toured with Johnson's band during the 1830s through the late 1840s, reportedly joining Johnson's 1837 trip to Great Britain where they performed before the young Queen Victoria.20 He served as treasurer with the band until the death of Johnson in 1844, and again upon its reorganization under Joseph Anderson. Carter’s fraternal and social activities in Philadelphia included the Prince Hall Freemasons, the Rush Library and Debating Society, and the Philomathean Literary and Musical Association, of which he was elected president. 21
2022 rev. 5
In the 1847 census, Dennis Carter is reported as renting a home on Parker Street and is listed as a musician and laborer. The enumerator added in the Remarks column:
“This man is industrious being a musician and laborer.”22 Upon arriving in Nevada County, Dennis Carter mined, farmed, and practiced music.

He soon became active in the Black civil rights movement and was appointed as one of the three delegates from Nevada County to the First Colored Citizens Convention in Sacramento held on November 20, 1855, of which he was one of the vice presidents.

He was also elected a delegate to the Convection of 1857, but business prevented him from attending.23
Over the next two decades Dennis Carter was a civil rights leader who pushed for the abolition of slavery, access to public accommodations, the right to testify in court against whites, and the right to vote. Ahead of the passage of the Fifteenth Amendment he canvassed the county to identify seventy potential voters who would be ready to register upon the Amendment’s ratification.24 He was among the first group of Black men to register to vote and was still registered at age seventy-eight, two years before his death.25 Following the passage of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments, Carter focused on equal access to education for Black children. He attended an important education convention in Sacramento in November 1873 to demand a revision of California’s school laws.26 Dennis Carter was equally engaged in other aspects of community life locally and regionally. He likely founded the Mt. Moriah Lodge of the Prince Hall Freemasons in Nevada City and was twice elected Most Worshipful Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of California.27 He was also associated with The Grand United Order of Oddfellows, the Nevada Light Guard, and ran-although unsuccessfully-for constable in 1873.

One of Dennis Carter’s most important contributions to Nevada County and the region was his music. Over the decades he taught music and led several Nevada City bands that played under various names such as the Nevada Colored Brass Band and Nevada City Military Band. His band played for mixed-race audiences at social events such as dances, parades, school picnics, military reunions, and at concerts with visiting white classical musicians. For the community at large his band provided the soundtrack for traditional patriotic celebrations such as the 4th of July as well as for more somber occasions such as the memorials following the assassination of Abraham Lincoln.

For the Black community, Dennis Carter’s band (which Jennie referred to as our band) had an especially important role in celebrating local civil rights advances such as school fundraising programs, as well as for national celebrations such as the annual commemorative festivals of the Emancipation Proclamation and the ratification of the Fifteenth Amendment. 28
Dennis Carter’s band was also in high demand to perform at events throughout the region such as in Sacramento, Marysville, and San Francisco. 2022 rev. 6
We hope that you will agree that the Carters’ contributions to Nevada City’s history, and to Black history in California more generally, deserve to be remembered by our community. A Nevada County Landmarks Commission plaque located near the Lost Hill site of their first home on Drummond Street in Nevada City would be a fitting way to remember this extraordinary couple. Thank you for your consideration.

How will the landmark be protected and maintained? By Nevada City.

Bibliography. Cite or attach available books, records, articles or other materials pertaining to the proposed landmark.

Books and articles: See Notes. Documentation provided as requested.

Historical or civil records: (e.g., ownership, assessments etc.) § Nevada City Assessment Records 1869-1894, available at Searls Historical Library
§ H.S. Bradley, Map of Nevada City, 1869.

Other: (e.g. photographs, prints or drawings. Please list and attach separately

August 14, 2023
_______________________________ ______________________
Applicant’s signature Date
========================================================= This completed form and all related documents shall be sent to the:

Nevada County Historical Landmarks Commission
Attention: Chairman
P. O. Box 1014, Nevada City, Cal. 95959
Attachments and related documents may be submitted in electronic format.

An application must be considered solely on its historic or architectural merits and not for commercial gain, political benefits, or other non-historical reasons.

An individual Commissioner can advise and counsel an applicant, but all applications must be considered by the full Commission, meeting in regular session.

Notes
2022 rev. 7
1 Although Jennie may have used that nickname throughout her life, it is only at the time of her marriage to Dennis Carter that that it comes into common use. See Daily Alta California, September 4, 1866, 4, the Nevada Transcript, August 31, 1866, and the Daily Alta California, September 4, 1866, 4. 2 The Nevada Democrat of November 17, 1860, 3, reported that his structure had been flattened in a gale.
3 H.S. Bradley, Map of Nevada City, 1869. 4 Pacific Appeal, August 15, 1863, 2-3. 5 The Elevator, January 7, 1868, 2. 6 The Elevator, April 26, 1873, 2. 7 See William S. Byrne, Directory of Grass Valley Township for 1865. San Francisco: Charles F. Robins & Co., 1865, 24. Landis was the Elder at the Disciples of Christ Church located on South Church Street in Grass Valley near the corner of Neal Street. The Corrells lived on School Street, one block over from the church. In March 1865 the ladies of the Grass Valley Christian Commission elected Jennie as their Vice President, Morning Union, March 14, 1865, 3. 8 The marriage license is at the Doris Foley Library (Nevada City) and a copy at the Searls Historical Library (Nevada City), DR 6 C-28. The couple later became members of Holy Trinity Episcopal Church on Nevada Street. Dennis was baptized there on March 19, 1876. Jennie was a member of the Guild and was buried from the church. Baptismal Record and Guild Register at Trinity Episcopal Church at 201 Nevada St, Nevada City, CA. Viewed January 6, 2020. 9 See: https://oxfordaasc.com (requires a subscription) 10 Eric Gardner, Jennie Carter, and in Unexpected Places: Relocating Nineteenth-Century African American Literature. Jackson: University of Mississippi Press, 2011. 11 See for example, Mitch Kechun, Festivals of Freedom: Memory and Meaning in American Emancipation Celebrations, 1808-1915. Boston: University of Massachusetts Press, 2003; and Lapham’s Quarterly, “Old Ladies Are Garrulous, and I Am No Exception: How to Keep Summer in Your Heart at Any Age by Jennie Carter,” June 17, 2022, at https://www.laphamsquarterly.org/roundtable/old-ladiesare-garrulous-and-i-am-no- and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennie_Carter. 12 The Elevator, May 17, 1873, 3, and December 3, 1889, 2. 13 The Elevator, August 16, 1867, 3. 14 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jennie_Carter&oldid=1141567736, accessed June 23, 2023.
15 The Elevator, February 11, 1870, 2-3. 16 Gardner, Jennie Carter, xvi. 17 https://www.blackprintculture.com/jennie-carter.html, accessed Jun e 23, 2023. 18 The Elevator, August 14, 1868, 2 and August 21, 1868, 2. 19 Eric Gardner, https://doi.org/10.1093/acref/9780195301731.013.35509., accessed June 23, 2023. 20 Wells, Henry Laurenz. History of Nevada County, California. Thompson & West, Oakland, Cal., 1880, 214.
21 “Colored Men of California,” Pacific Appeal, August 15, 1863, 2-3. 22 Ancestry.com. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S., African American Census, 1847[database on-line].

Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2013. He is living with an unnamed seamstress and an unnamed bootmaker apprentice. 23 The other delegates were Daniel Mahoney and George A. Duvall. Grass Valley Telegraph, November 20, 1855, 3 and “Colored Men of California,” Pacific Appeal, August 15, 1863, 2-3. 24 The Elevator, November 12, 1869, 2. 25 His last voter registration was in 1892, two years before his death. Ancestry.com. California, U.S., Voter Registers, 1866-1898 [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2011. 26 San Francisco Examiner, November 26, 1873, 3. 27 At the Seventeenth Annual Masonic Oration on June 24, 1872, in San Francisco D.D. Carter was then listed as a “Past Grand Master.” Elevator, June 15, 1872, 3. 2022 rev. 8
28 For example, on August 1, 1866, Carter’s Nevada Colored Brass Band played at a fundraiser at Hamilton Hall for the benefit of the Grass Valley “colored school.” Morning Union, August 3, 1866, 2.

CARTER FAMILY HOMESITE
Landmark registered by Nevada County
, 2023: NEV 23-?
Plaque dedicated 2023 by the
Nevada County Historical Landmarks Commission
Jennie Correll Carter and Dennis Drummond Carter, prominent Black pioneers, married in Nevada City in 1866. From 1867 to 1873 they lived across Drummond Street from this plaque. Dennis Carter had bought the property years earlier and Drummond Street is believed to have been named after his mother's family. The couple later moved to what is now Grove Street. Dennis Carter was an accomplished musician, music teacher and civil rights advocate. Jennie Carter was an accomplished writer and journalist who was the local correspondent for The Elevator, a San Francisco newspaper serving the Black community in northern California. Jennie Carter died in 1881 and is buried in Pine Grove Cemetery. Dennis Carter died in 1894 and is likely buried in the adjacent unmarked grave.

CITY OF NEVADA CITY

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT

MEETING OF: September 13, 2023 Agenda Item No. 08
Subject: Consideration of Adoption of Resolution 2023-41: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Nevada City, California, Updating the City Council Standards and
Procedures Manual for Public Requests to Consider Consent Items for Discussion and for Disruptive Behavior at Meetings Procedures.

From: Sean Grayson, City Manager
Date: September 1, 2023
Reviewed & Approved:

City Manager:

City Attorney:

Recommended Action: Adopt the resolution.

ISSUE STATEMENT AND DISCUSSION:

Nevada City’s “City Council Standards and Procedures” Manual (2022) (“Manual”) provides guidance to the City Council, Planning Commission, Public Arts Commission, and Committees on process for effective public meetings.

The City Council wishes to consider a Manual amendment which would address the consent agenda and the public. The requested amendment would: add language describing the consent agenda, set out ways to separately consider consent agenda items at a meeting, and provide for public comment on the consent agenda. Staff proposes that the City Council’s goal be accomplished by adding Section 7.8 to the Manual, to read as follows:

7.8 Consent Agenda. All items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine in nature and will be approved by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items. Councilmembers or the City Manager may remove items from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion and action by City Council. Members of the public may request to remove items from the Consent Agenda, during Consent Agenda public comment, for separate discussion and action by the City Council, but action is required by the City Council to do so by motion, second and roll call vote. Unless the City Council removes an item from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion, public comments are invited as to the consent calendar as a whole and limited to three minutes per person (or lesser time if the Mayor determines it necessary due to the number of persons who may wish to speak on the Consent Calendar). Any item removed for separate discussion and action will be taken up following the motion to approve the Consent Agenda.

Recently, the State of California has enacted Senate Bill 1100, which amends the Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code §54957.95) to provide for actions that may be taken at City Council meetings to address disruptive behavior. Staff proposes that the City Council update its Manual to follow the provisions of Senate Bill 1100. This can be achieved by amending Sections 10.3 and 10.5 of the Manual to read as follows:

10.3 Public. Members of the public attending City Council meetings shall observe the same rules of order and decorum applicable to the City Council. These Standards and Procedures shall apply to all City Council Meetings. In addition to rules stated elsewhere in this Manual, members of the public:
(a) Shall limit comment time to that listed on the agenda; (b) May criticize City policies, procedures, programs and/or services or the acts or omissions of Council Members in carrying out their responsibilities as public officials, but shall refrain from disruptive behavior;
(c) Shall speak only from the podium when recognized by the Mayor, and shall address comments to the Mayor and not to staff or members of the audience; (d) Shall not approach individual Council Members while a meeting is in progress; (e) May provide written materials (10 copies recommended) to the Council during a meeting by giving the materials directly to the City Clerk.

10.5 Removal. The Mayor or presiding member of the Council has the authority to remove, or designate a person to remove, an individual for disrupting the Council meeting.

Before taking this action, the Mayor/presiding member shall warn the individual that their behavior is disruptive and that failure to cease this behavior may result in their removal. If the behavior does not promptly cease, the individual may be removed.

Disruptive behavior is any action that actually disrupts, disturbs, impedes, or renders infeasible the orderly conduct of the meeting.

No warning is required to precede removal if an individual engages in behavior that is a true threat of force. A true threat of force has sufficient indicia of intent and seriousness so that a reasonable observer would perceive it to be an actual threat to use force by the person who makes the threat.

All of the proposed changes are reflected in the attached updated City Council Standards and Procedures Manual. Adoption of Resolution 2023-41 would adopt the updated manual and make the changes effective immediately upon adoption.

FINANCIAL AND/OR POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

None with this action.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:

This action is consistent with the embedded strategic initiative of Engagement: Community engagement and communications with stakeholders.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS:

Not applicable.

LEGAL REVIEW:

City Attorney Pucci has reviewed this item and finds that the recommended action complies with the law.

ATTACHMENTS:
 Resolution 2023-41
 Updated City Council Policy and Procedures Manual
1 RESOLUTION NO. 2023-41

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEVADA CITY, CALIFORNIA,

UPDATING THE CITY COUNCIL STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES MANUAL FOR PUBLIC

REQUESTS TO CONSIDER CONSENT ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION AND FOR DISRUPTIVE

BEHAVIOR AT MEETINGS PROCEDURES
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a Standards and Procedures Manual (“Manual”) March 9, 2022; and
WHEREAS, among other things the Manual provides for smooth running of City Council meetings; and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to provide in the Manual for administration of its consent agenda, including participation by members of the public in the consent agenda at meetings; and WHEREAS, in 2022 the State Legislature enacted Senate Bill 1100, codified at California Government Code §54957.95, to provide for actions that cities may take to address disruptive behavior at Council meetings; and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to provide in the Manual for language that follows Senate Bill 1100.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Nevada City that the City of Nevada City City Council Standards and Procedures (Updated March 9, 2022) are hereby amended as follows:

1. Add Section 7.8, to read as follows:

2. Amend Sections 10.3 and 10.5, to read as follows:

10.3 Public. Members of the public attending City Council meetings shall observe the same rules of order and decorum applicable to the City Council. These Standards and Procedures shall apply to all City Council Meetings. In addition to rules stated elsewhere in this Manual, members of the public:
(a) Shall limit comment time to that listed on the agenda; (b) May criticize City policies, procedures, programs and/or services or the acts or omissions of Council Members in carrying out their responsibilities as public officials, but shall refrain from disruptive behavior;
2 (c) Shall speak only from the podium when recognized by the Mayor, and shall address comments to the Mayor and not to staff or members of the audience; (d) Shall not approach individual Council Members while a meeting is in progress; (e) May provide written materials (10 copies recommended) to the Council during a meeting by giving the materials directly to the City Clerk.

10.5 Removal. The Mayor or presiding member of the Council has the authority to remove, or designate a person to remove, an individual for disrupting the Council meeting.

Disruptive behavior is any action that actually disrupts, disturbs, impedes, or renders infeasible the orderly conduct of the meeting.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regularly scheduled meeting of the City Council held on this 13th day of September 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
___________________________________
Daniela Fernández, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Niel Locke, City Clerk

CITY OF NEVADA CITY

CITY COUNCIL STANDARDS AND

PROCEDURES
Updated September 13, 2023
2 | P a g e

COUNCIL STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 1: GENERAL

1.1 Purpose

1.2 Values

1.3 Overview of Council Responsibilities

1.4 Overview of City Manager Responsibilities

1.5 Review

1.6 Ralph M. Brown Act
SECTION 2: MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR SELECTION PROCESS

2.1 Reorganization

2.2 Appointment of Vacancy
SECTION 3: ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

3.1 Attendance

3.2 Regional Boards

3.3 Distribution of Information

3.4 Reimbursement

3.5 Ethics, Sexual Harassment and Anti-Bullying Training

3.6 City Mission and City Seal

3.7 Use of Social Media and Email
SECTION 4: COUNCIL RELATIONSHIP WITH STAFF

4.1 City Manager

4.2 Agenda Item Questions

4.3 Interaction of City Council with Staff

4.4 Individual Council Member’s Requests
SECTION 5: PROCEDURES FOR APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS/COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES

5.1 Definitions

5.2 Recruitment Process

5.3 Requirement for Appointment

5.4 Council Notification

5.5 Incumbents

5.6 Application

5.7 Appointment Procedure for Planning Commission Members

5.8 Appointment Procedure for Board and Committee Members Appointed by the Full Council

5.9 Attendance

5.10 Standards and Procedures and Conflicts of Interest

5.11 Conflicts with Federal, State or Local Law
SECTION 6: MEETINGS

6.1 Open to Public

6.2 Broadcasting of City Council Meetings

6.3 Regular Meetings
3 | P a g e
SECTION 6: MEETINGS (continued)

6.4 Cancelling Meetings

6.5 Special Meetings

6.6 Closed Sessions

6.7 Quorum

6.8 Minutes

6.9 Adjourned Meetings
SECTION 7: AGENDA CONTENTS

7.1 Mayor’s Responsibility

7.2 Description of Matters

7.3 Availability to the Public

7.4 Limitation to Act Only on Items on the Agenda

7.5 “Timing” of Agenda

7.6 Change in Order of Business

7.7 Agenda Request Policy

7.8 Consent Agenda
SECTION 8: PROCEDURES FOR THE CONDUCT OF PUBLIC MEETINGS

8.1 Role of Mayor

8.2 Rules of Order

8.3 Public Comment

8.4 Motions

8.5 Reconsideration

8.6 Discussion

8.7 Council Member Respect

8.8 Announcements.

SECTION 9: CLOSED SESSIONS

9.1 Purpose

9.2 Rule of Confidentiality

9.3 Breach of Rule of Confidentiality

9.4 Agenda

9.5 Permissible Topics

9.6 Rules of Decorum

9.7 Public Disclosure After Final Action
SECTION 10: DECORUM

10.1 Council Members

10.2 City Employees

10.3 Public

10.4 Noise in the Chambers

10.5 Removal

10.6 Dangerous Instruments

10.7 Prosecution
4 | P a g e
SECTION 11: ENFORCEMENT OF DECORUM
SECTION 12: VIOLATIONS OF PROCEDURES
APPENDIX A: ROSENBERG’S RULES OF ORDER (SIMPLE PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURES FOR THE 21st CENTURY)
5 | P a g e

CITY OF NEVADA CITY

CITY COUNCIL STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES
SECTION 1. GENERAL

1.1 Purpose. The purpose of these Standards and Procedures is to promote communication, understanding, fairness, and trust among the members of the City Council and staff concerning their roles, responsibilities, and expectations for management of the business of the City of Nevada City.

1.2 Values. Respect for each Council Member’s interpersonal style will be a standard of operation. Courtesy and respect for individual points of view will be practiced at all times. All Council Members shall respect each other’s right to disagree. All Council Members shall practice a high degree of decorum and courtesy. When addressing the public in any way, all Council Members shall make certain their opinions are expressed solely as their own, and do not in any way necessarily reflect the opinions of any other Council Member or the City.

1.3 Overview of Council responsibilities. The City of Nevada City is a General Law city of the State of California operating under the Council/Manager form of government and the City Manager’s duties shall define how the City Council and City Manager interact and perform their respective duties and responsibilities. The City Council has the following duties and responsibilities:
(a) Appointment of the City Manager and City Attorney. The City Council shall appoint the City Manager and the City Attorney. There should be an annual review for the City Manager and the City Attorney.
(b) Establishment of boards and appointment of members. The Council may appoint establish Boards, Commissions, and Committees, and by majority vote make appointments of members of all Boards, Commissions, and Committees. (c) Legislative decisions. The Council is the legislative body; its members are the community’s decision makers. Power is centralized in the elected City Council collectively and not in individual members of the Council. The City Council approves the budget and determines the public services. It focuses on the community’s goals, major projects and such long term considerations as community growth, financing and strategic planning. The City Council hires a professional City Manager to carry out administrative responsibilities and supervises the City Manager’s performance.

1.4 Overview of City Manager responsibilities. The City Manager is hired to serve the City Council and the community and to bring the benefits of education, training and experience in administering the City’s projects, programs, and public services on behalf of the City Council. The City Manager has the following among his or her duties:
6 | P a g e
(a) Preparation of a Recommended Budget.
(b) Recruitment, Hiring, and Supervision of Personnel, Contractors, and Consultants. (c) Implementation of the Council’s policies and programs and public services in an effective and efficient manner, providing professional advice on policy matters, intergovernmental affairs, economic development and environmental issues.

The City Manager follows the direction of the entire City Council and not individual members of the Council or the public and serves at the sole discretion of the Council. (See Nevada City Municipal Code Chapter 2.08.)

1.5 Review. The City Council shall conduct a review of this document biennially, or whenever a new Council Member has been seated or Council deems necessary, to assist Council Members in being more productive in management of the business of the City. A new Council will consider the document within three months of its first regular meeting.

1.6 Ralph M. Brown Act. All conduct of the City Council, Commissions, Committees and Subcommittees shall be in full compliance with the Ralph M. Brown Act.

SECTION 2. MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR SELECTION PROCESS

2.1 Reorganization. In July of each year, the office of the Mayor and Vice Mayor (also known as Mayor Pro Tem)shall rotate based on the policy set forth in Nevada City Resolution Nos. 2007- 34 and 2012-23, as follows:
(a) The Mayor shall be the senior member who has not previously served in that capacity and the term of office shall be one year, without succession, beginning at the first regularly scheduled City Council meeting each July or the first meeting following certification of a City Council election.
(b) The Mayor Pro Tem shall be the next senior member who has not previously served as Mayor and the term of office shall run concurrent with that of the Mayor as described above.
(c) When two or more members have equal seniority and have not yet served as Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem, the order of succession shall be determined by the number of votes each member received at the time of their election. (d) The Mayor Pro Tem shall automatically succeed the Mayor each year, excepting that the Mayor Pro Tem may decline such succession. If the Mayor Pro Tem declines the position of Mayor, such office shall be extended to the next senior member in order, or by majority vote of the Council if all other members have served at least on year as Mayor.
7 | P a g e
(e) Once all seated members have served as Mayor, succession shall be based on a majority vote of the Council, recognizing that the term of office for each position shall be one year.

Members of the City Council who first took their seats on the Council more than twenty-three (23) months prior to the meeting at which the Mayor is being selected are eligible for Mayorship.

2.2 Appointment of Vacancy. In the event of a vacancy on the City Council, the Council may fill the vacancy either by appointment or special election as set forth in Government Code section 36512.

SECTION 3. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

3.1 Attendance. City Council Members acknowledge that attendance at lawful meetings of the City Council is part of their official duty. Council Members shall make a good faith effort to attend all such meetings unless unable. Council Members will notify the City Manager or the Deputy City Clerk, and, if possible, the Mayor as a courtesy, if they will be absent from a meeting.

Failure to attend regular City Council meetings for sixty (60) consecutive days from the last regular meeting can result in your seat becoming vacant and filled accordingly. (Gov’t Code § 36513.)

3.2 Regional Boards. The role of the Council on regional boards will vary depending on the nature of the appointment. Representing the interests of Nevada City is appropriate on some boards; this is generally the case when other local governments have their own representation.

The positions taken by the appointed representatives are to be in alignment with the positions that the Council has taken on issues that directly impact the City of Nevada City. If an issue should arise, that is specific to Nevada City and the Council has not taken a position, the issue should be discussed by the Council prior to taking a formal position at a regional board meeting, to assure that it is in alignment with a majority of the Council’s position.

Council representatives to such various boards shall keep the Council informed of ongoing business through brief oral or written reports to the Council during properly posted Council meetings.

Council Members shall make a good faith effort to attend all regional meetings that require a quorum of the appointed members to convene a meeting. Attendance should not be less than 75% of all scheduled meetings. If a Council Member is unable to attend, he/she should notify his/her alternate as far in advance of the meeting as possible so as to allow the alternate to attend.

3.3 Distribution of Information. It is essential that every member of the City Council have the same information from which to form decisions and actions. Any information distributed to one Council Member shall also be distributed to all Council Members.

3.4 Reimbursement. Every effort shall be made to limit the need to reimburse Council Members for expenses. City Council Members may be reimbursed for personal expenses for travel to and lodging at conferences or meetings related to their role as a Council Member in 8 | P a g e
accordance with the current Travel and Meeting Reimbursement Policy adopted by the City Council. Any request for reimbursement of expenses shall be accompanied by an expense form and receipts to document the expenditure. These documents are public records subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act. (See Nevada City Resolution 2014-12 and attached Travel and Meeting Reimbursement Policy.)
Brief reports must be given on any outside meeting attended at the expense of the City at the next regular Council meeting. Reimbursement is conditioned on the submission of this report to the legislative body.

3.5 Ethics, Sexual Harassment and Anti-Bullying Training. Any member of the City Council and commissions, or advisory committees formed by the City Council, shall receive at least two hours of ethics training in general ethics principles and ethics laws (as mandated by AB 1234), two hours of sexual harassment prevention training (as mandated by AB 1825) and two hours of abusive conduct prevention training (as mandated by AB 2053) all relevant to his/her public service every two years. New members must receive this training within their first year of service and file a certificate of completion with the Deputy City Clerk. Members shall attend training sessions that are offered locally in the immediate vicinity of Nevada County or by completing online a state-approved public service ethics education program.

An individual who serves on multiple legislative bodies need only receive two hours of each of these trainings every two years to satisfy this requirement for all applicable public service positions. The City will use and recognize training coursesthat have been reviewed and approved by the Fair Political Practices Commission and the California Secretary of State.

The Deputy City Clerk is required to keep ethics training records for five years to document and prove that these continuing education requirements have been satisfied. These documents are public records subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act.

3.6 City Mission and City Seal. The Mission of the City of Nevada City is a strategic document that reflects the values of our residents. The City Seal is an important symbol of the City of Nevada City. No change to the City Mission and/or City Seal shall be made without Council approval.

Pursuant to Government Code 40811, the City Clerk is the custodian of the City Seal. Individual councilmembers should not issue correspondence on City Letterhead or use the City Seal without authorization from the City Council or City Manager.

3.7 Use of Social Media and Email. See City of Nevada City’s general social media and email policies.

SECTION 4. COUNCIL RELATIONSHIP WITH STAFF

4.1 City Manager. City Council Members are always free to go to the City Manager to discuss City business. Issues concerning the performance of a Department or any employee must be directed to the City Manager. Direction to City employees, other than the City Manager or City Attorney, is the prerogative of the City Manager. In passing along critical information, the City Manager will be responsible for contacting all Council Members. The City Manager may delegate this responsibility to Department Heads. (See Nevada City Municipal Code Chapter 2.08.030.) 9 | P a g e

4.2 Agenda Item Questions. If a Council Member has a question on a subject, the Council Member is encouraged to contact the City Manager prior to any meeting at which the subject may be discussed. This does not restrict Council Members from asking questions during a Council meeting.

4.3 Interaction of City Council with Staff. The Council shall treat staff with respect and shall not abuse staff, nor embarrass staff in public. The City Council Members are to work through the City Manager on all issues, concerns and questions. This is to allow the senior professional staff, with the proper education, training, experience and knowledge of issues, laws and City Council’s policies to coordinate a full and complete response and reduce error or misunderstanding by staff members not necessarily knowledgeable on all issues. This can provide a better overall response, allow any new issues to properly be considered and avoid unintended redirection of staff efforts. Council Members may ask Department Heads for information. This informal system of direct communication is not to be abused. City Council Members shall not meet with groups of management employees for the purpose of discussing terms of employment or establishing employee policy.

4.4 Individual Council Member’s Requests. Council Members shall make their reasonable requests for information to the City Manager. The amount of total staff time to be allotted to any reasonable request shall be determined by the City Manager at his/her discretion.

SECTION 5. PROCEDURES FOR APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS/COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES

5.1 Definitions.
(a) Task Force: A temporary grouping of individuals and resources for the accomplishment of a specific objective.
(b) Committee: A group of people officially delegated to perform a function, such as investigating, considering reporting, or acting on a matter. (c) Ad Hoc: Committees established for a specific purpose. Formed for or concerned with one specific purpose (e.g. ad hoc parking committee); for the particular end or case at hand without consideration of wider application; formed or used for specific or immediate problems or needs; often improvised or impromptu; contrived purely for the purpose in hand rather than carefully planned in advance. (d) Commission: A group of people officially authorized to perform certain duties or functions with certain powers or authority granted; the act of granting certain powers or the authority to carry out a particular task or duty; the rank and powers so conferred.

5.2 Recruitment Process.
(a) On or before December 31st of each year, the Deputy City Clerk shall prepare and post a list of all Council-appointed board, commission and committee terms that expire during the next calendar year in compliance with the state law (Government Code Sections 54970 et. seq.).
10 | P a g e
(b) The Deputy City Clerk shall annually advertise on the City’s website for applicants wishing to be considered for appointment to boards, commissions and committees. (c) All persons seeking appointment to a City board, commission or committee shall complete and submit an application form to the Deputy City Clerk as set forth in Section

5.6. Applications shall be kept on file for two years in the Deputy City Clerk’s office and vacancies may be considered from applications on file, as well as new applications. (d) Appointments made by the Council, except to the planning commission (see 5.7), are official only after the Council has submitted a completed application and appointment form to the Deputy City Clerk, the Deputy City Clerk has determined that the individual is eligible to serve and the Deputy City Clerk has provided proper notification to the appointed board, commission or committee member, and chair of the board, commission or committee. The Council may announce an appointment at a City Council meeting; however, such an announcement is not required for the appointment to become effective.
(e) If an unscheduled board or commission vacancy occurs during the term of the appointing Council Member and the Council Member so requests, the following steps should be taken to publicize vacancies on boards, commissions and committees:

1. Public announcement of the vacancy at a Council meeting.

2. A recruitment period of at least ten (10) days.

3. A vacancy notice posted at City Hall, Redbud Library, and on the City’s website for at least 20 days.

4. Announcements in the local media, such as press releases, online news outlets and free weekly sales papers.

5. Distribution to appropriate professional and community organizations and all groups that have requested notification.

5.3 Requirement for Appointment.
(a) All persons appointed to City boards, commissions and committees shall be residents of the City of Nevada City at the time of their appointment and shall remain so throughout their term of appointment. Should any person so appointed move from the City during their term of office, such office shall be forfeited. The Council shall, upon forfeiture, make a new appointment to fill the unexpired term.
(b) All persons appointed to City boards, commissions and committees should complete and submit an application form to the Deputy City Clerk as set forth in Section 5.6. (c) Except as provided by state or local statute, the appointee shall not be a current City employee or currently appointed to another City board, committee or commission.

5.4 Council Notification. By September 1 of each year, the Deputy City Clerk will notify the Council of expiring terms for members of those City boards, commissions, and committees appointed by the full Council.
11 | P a g e

5.5 Incumbents.
(a) At the end of the first term, the incumbent board, commission or committee member may, at the discretion of the Council or appointing Council Member, be reappointed for an additional term without the need to apply or interview for re-appointment. In lieu of an application, the board, commission or committee member shall submit to the Deputy City Clerk a letter of interest in re-appointment 30 days prior to the expiration of the member’s first term.
(b) Any incumbent interested in re-appointment who has served two or more terms must apply for re-appointment as set forth in Section 5.6.

5.6 Application. Except as set forth in Section 5.5, all persons considered for appointment or re-appointment shall complete an application form. This application form must be received by the Deputy City Clerk by the required deadline.

5.7 Appointment Procedure for Planning Commission Members. This portion of the policy sets forth the procedure for appointments of Planning Commission Members consistent with Chapter 2.36 of the Nevada City Municipal Code.
(a) The Commission shall consist of five (5) members and each member of the City Council shall have the right to appoint one (1) Planning Commissioner. Planning Commissioners must be residents of Nevada City.
(b) Planning Commissioners serve at the will and pleasure of the City Council and shall take an oath of office at a regular City Council meeting before assuming office. (c) The normal term of each Planning Commissioner shall begin upon appointment and end no more than ninety (90) days after the appointing Council Member leaves office. In the event that a new Council Member takes, office earlier than ninety (90) days after the appointing Council Member leaves office, the new Council Member may appoint a new Planning Commissioner before the end of the ninety (90) day period above mentioned (said appointment shall be pursuant to Section 2.36.020 of the Nevada City Municipal Code). In the event that a new Council Member has not been seated within ninety (90) days of the appointing Council Member leaving office, the City Council may appoint a person to act as a temporary Planning Commissioner until a new Council Member is seated and appoints a Planning Commissioner.
(d) Any planning commissioner may be removed by a majority vote of the total voting members of the Council.
(e) In the event that a Planning Commissioner resigns, is removed or otherwise ceases to act as a Planning Commissioner, that vacancy shall be filled by the Council Member who originally appointed that Planning Commissioner.
12 | P a g e

5.8 Appointment Procedure for Board and Committee Members Appointed by the Full Council. This portion of the policy sets forth the procedure for appointments made by the full Council for boards and committees appointed by the full Council. (a) The council or a duly established ad hoc committee shall conduct interviews of all nominated candidates prior to appointment.
(b) If an unscheduled board or committee vacancy occurs prior to the expiration of the member’s term, the vacancy shall be noticed in compliance with the state law (Government Code Sections 54970- 54974).
(c) All persons appointed by the full Council to boards and committees serve at the pleasure of the Council and shall serve for the term indicated or until a successor has been appointed.
(d) Members of boards and committees appointed by the full Council shall be interviewed at a duly noticed open Council meeting and shall be selected by motion and majority vote of the Council.

5.9 Attendance.
(a) Board, commission and committee members are expected to regularly attend and participate on their respective boards, committees and commissions. (b) A board, commission or committee member whose attendance is less than seventy five (75%) of the required meetings over a period of a year may be subject to removal by the Council Member who appointed the person or the full Council if appointed by the Council. (c) The Council may grant an approved leave of absence for a board, commission or committee member for such reasons as the Council determines appropriate. During the approved leave of absence, the Council Member who appointed the person, or full Council, depending on how the person was appointed, may appoint a temporary person to fill the position.

5.10 Standards and Procedures and Conflicts of Interest. (a) Board, committee and commission members shall be expected to adhere to the Council Standards and Procedures.
(b) Board, committee and commission members shall comply with all state and local laws with respect to ethics and conflicts of interests to the extent that such laws apply to their position, including state and local requirements to timely file Statements of Economic Disclosure if the member is designated as a filer by state law or by the City’s Conflict of Interest Code. Boards, committees and commissions are generally subject to the Brown Act except for certain narrow circumstances outlined in Government Code 54952(b). The City Attorney should be consulted whenever there is a question on the transparency rules applicable to a particular board, committee or commission. 13 | P a g e
(c) Members of City boards, commissions or committees may not use their board, commission or committee position title for political endorsements.

5.11 Conflicts with Federal, State or Local Law. In case of a conflict between this section of the Standards and Procedure policy with federal, state or local law, such federal, state or local law shall be the controlling factor.

SECTION 6. MEETINGS

6.1 Open to Public. All meetings of the City Council whether regular, special, or study sessions, shall be open to the public, unless a closed session is held as authorized by law. All meetings shall be noticed as required to allow action to be taken by the Council.

6.2 Broadcasting of City Council Meetings. All regular Council meetings shall be scheduled in the Council Chambers to allow for web streaming and simulcast on the Public Education Government Access Channel, unless alternative arrangements to hold meetings in another location are made in compliance with the Brown Act

6.3 Regular Meetings. The City Council shall convene its regular City Council meetings at 6:30 p.m. on the second and fourth Wednesday of each month. The City Council may, as the Council deems necessary, cancel regular meetings provided that the City Council shall hold a regular meeting at least once each month pursuant to Government Code Section 56803. The regular 6:30 p.m. starting time of a council meeting can be varied by the City Manager with the concurrence of the Mayor.

6.4 Cancelling Meetings. Any meeting of the City Council may be cancelled in advance by majority vote of the Council. The Mayor may cancel a meeting in the case of an emergency or when a majority of members have confirmed their unavailability to attend a meeting. The City Council may, as the Council deems necessary, cancel no more than four (2) Regular Meetings per calendar year (outside of the months of November and December which only have one meeting per month annually), by majority vote, provided, however, that the City Council shall hold a Regular Meeting at least once each month pursuant to Government Code Section 36805.

6.5 Special Meetings. A special meeting may be called at any time by a majority of the City Council or the City Manager in accordance with the Brown Act. Written notice of any such meeting must specify the purpose of the meeting. Notice of the meeting must be given in accordance with law. Public comments at special meetings shall be limited to only those items described on the special meeting notice/agenda.

The City Council may hold study sessions or joint meetings with other boards, commissions, committees, or agencies as deemed necessary to resolve City business. These meetings will be coordinated by the City Manager. Study sessions are scheduled to provide Council Members the opportunity to better understand a particular item. While Council may legally take action at any noticed meeting, generally no formal action is taken at study sessions. If action is to be taken at a study session, then the agenda will state that action may be taken. 14 | P a g e

6.6 Closed Sessions. The City Council may hold closed sessions at any time authorized by law (and in consultation with the City Manager and/or the City Attorney), to consider or hear any matter, which is authorized by law. The City Manager or any three Council Members may call closed session meetings at any time.

6.7 Quorum. Three (3) members of the City Council shall constitute a quorum and shall be sufficient to transact business. If fewer than, three Council Members appear at a regular meeting, the Mayor, Vice Mayor in the absence of the Mayor, any Council Member in the absence of the Mayor and Vice Mayor, or in the absence of all Council Members, the City Manager or Deputy City Clerk, shall adjourn the meeting to a stated day and hour.

Business of the City Council may be conducted with a minimum of three members being present; however, pursuant to the California Government Code, matters requiring the expenditure of City funds and all resolutions and non-urgency ordinances must receive three affirmative votes for approval.

6.8 Minutes. The Deputy City Clerk shall prepare action minutes of all public meetings of the City Council. Copies shall be distributed to each Council Member as part of the regular meeting agenda packet.

6.9 Adjourned Meetings. The City Council may adjourn any regular, adjourned regular, special, or closed session meeting to a time and place specified in the order of adjournment and permitted by law.

SECTION 7. AGENDA CONTENTS

7.1 Mayor’s Responsibility. The Mayor is responsible for running a timely and orderly meeting. If the Mayor is unavailable to run a Council meeting, the Vice Mayor shall run the meeting. If the Mayor and the Vice Mayor are both unavailable to run a Council meeting, the Mayor shall designate another councilmember to run the meeting. If the Mayor is unavailable to make this designation, the Vice Mayor shall do so.

7.2 Description of Matters. All items of business to be discussed at a meeting of the City Council shall be briefly described on the agenda. The description should set forth the proposed action to be considered so that members of the public will know the nature of the action under review and consideration. As stated in Section 4.2, if a Council Member has a question on a subject, the Council Member should contact the City Manager prior to any meeting at which the subject may be discussed.

7.3 Availability to the Public. The agenda for any regular, special, or study session meeting, shall be made available to the public as required by law.

7.4 Limitation to Act Only on Items on the Agenda. No action shall be taken by the City Council on any item not on the posted agenda, subject only to the exceptions listed below:
(a) Upon a majority determination that an “emergency situation” (as defined by State Law) exists; or
15 | P a g e
(b) Upon determination by a 4/5 vote of the full City Council, or a unanimous vote if less than a full Council, that there is a need to take immediate action and that the need to take the action came to the attention of the City Council subsequent to posting of the agenda.

7.5 "Timing" of Agenda. Staff and/or the Mayor may "time" the agenda as a way for the Council to maintain a sense of how much time can be committed to any one item without going past an established ending time for the meeting.

7.6 Change in Order of Business. The City Manager, Mayor, or the majority of the Council, may decide to take matters listed on the agenda out of the prescribed order. Council Members shall be given the opportunity to ask questions about Consent Items for clarification without having them removed.

7.7 Agenda Request Policy. Requests for placement of items on the agenda by the public can be requested to the City Council during Public Comments for Items not on the Agenda. Any member of the Council may request that an item be placed on a future agenda by indicating their desire to do so under that portion of the City Council agenda designated, “Council Member Requested Items, Committee Reports and Future Agenda Items” Additionally, the City Manager may place items on the agenda. For requested items by the public and/or the City Council the majority of Council must agree on the addition of that item to a future agenda.

SECTION 8. PROCEDURES FOR THE CONDUCT OF PUBLIC MEETINGS

8.1 Role of Mayor.
(a) The Mayor shall be responsible for maintaining the order and decorum of meetings.

It shall be the duty and responsibility of the Mayor to ensure that the rules of operation and decorum contained herein are observed. The Mayor shall maintain control of communication between Council Members and among Council, staff and public. The Mayor shall intervene when a Council Member, staff or other meeting participant is being verbally or otherwise attacked by a member of the public.
16 | P a g e
(b) Communication with Council Members:

1. Council Members shall request the floor from the Mayor before speaking.

2. When one member of the Council has the floor and is speaking, other Council Members shall not interrupt or otherwise disturb the speaker. (c) Communication with members of the public addressing the Council on agendized items

1. The Mayor shall open the floor for public comment as appropriate.

2. Council Members may question a person addressing the Council at the conclusion of the person’s comments or upon expiration of the person’s time to speak.

3. Any staff member with an item on the agenda will be available to the City Council to answer questions arising during discussions between Council Members and among Council Members and members of the public.

4. Members of the public shall direct their questions and comments to the Council.

8.2 Rules of Order. The City Council shall refer to Rosenberg’s Rules of Order, as a guide for the conduct of meetings, with the following modifications:
(a) A motion is not required prior to a general discussion on an agenda item. A pre-motion discussion allows the members to share their thoughts on the agendized item so that a motion can more easily be made that takes into account what appears to be the majority position. (b) All motions require a second.
(c) A motion may be amended at the request of the maker and the consent of the person who seconded the motion. Such a procedure is often used to accommodate concerns expressed by other members.
(d) A motion to amend may still be used.

The Mayor has the discretion to impose reasonable rules at any particular meeting based upon facts and circumstances found at any particular meeting. These latter rules will be followed unless objected to by a majority of the City Council Members present.

8.3 Public Comment.
(b) The limit for speakers will be up to 3 minutes, depending on the number of speakers.

Speakers are not allowed to delegate their time to another speaker without permission from the 17 | P a g e
Mayor. The Mayor may limit the time to be spent on an item and may continue the item, with the approval of the majority of the Council, to a future meeting at his/her discretion. (c) Upon addressing the Council, each speaker is requested, but not required, to first state his/her name, whom they represent and/or city of residence. (d) After the speaker has completed their remarks, the Mayor may direct the City Manager or City Attorney to briefly address the issues brought forth by the speaker. Council Members shall be respectful of the speakers and shall not enter into a debate with any member of the public nor discuss amongst themselves.
(e) All Council Members shall listen to all public discussion as part of the Council’s community responsibility. Individual Council Members should remain open-minded to informational comments made by the public.
(f) The Mayor has the right to ask a member of the public to step down if over the allotted time or if the speaker’s comments are not within the city’s jurisdiction.

8.4 Motions. It will be the practice of the City Council for the Mayor to provide Council Members an opportunity to ask questions of staff, comment on, and discuss any agendized item in order to help form a consensus before a motion is offered. After such discussion, the Mayor or any Council Member may make a motion. Before the motion can be considered or discussed, it must be seconded. Once a motion has been properly made and seconded, the Mayor shall open the matter to full discussion offering the first opportunity to speak to the moving party, and thereafter, to any Council Member recognized by the Mayor. Customarily, the Mayor will take the floor after all other Council Members have been given the opportunity to speak.

If a motion clearly contains divisible parts, any Council Member may request the Mayor or moving party divide the motion into separate motions to provide Council Members an opportunity for more specific consideration.

Tie Votes: Tie votes shall be lost motions. When all Council Members are present, a tie vote on whether to grant an appeal from official action shall be considered a denial of such appeal, unless the Council takes other action to further consider the matter. If a tie vote results at a time when fewer than all members of the Council, who may legally participate in the matter are present, the matter shall be automatically continued to the agenda of the next regular meeting of the Council, unless otherwise ordered by the Council.

8.5 Reconsideration.
(a) Request for reconsideration.

1. Request by a member of the public.

Notwithstanding Rosenberg’s Rules of Order, a request for reconsideration may be made by a member of the public to the City Council at the next regular meeting of the City Council or at any intervening special meeting of the City Council.
18 | P a g e

2. Request by a member of the City Council.

Only a member of the City Council who voted on the prevailing side may request reconsideration. The request may be made at the same meeting or at the next regular meeting of the City Council or at any intervening special meeting of the City Council.

3. The member of the public or City Council Member making the request should state orally or in writing the reason for the request, without dwelling on the specific details or setting forth various arguments.
(b) Motion to reconsider any Council action.

1. Reconsideration at the same meeting.

A motion to reconsider an action taken by the City Council may be made at the same meeting at which the action was taken (including an adjourned or continued meeting). A motion to reconsider an action taken by the City Council may be made only by a Council Member who voted on the prevailing side but may be seconded by any Council Member and is debatable. The motion must be approved by a majority of the entire City Council.

2. Reconsideration at a subsequent meeting.

If an intent to request a motion for reconsideration is communicated to the City Council prior to the deadline for posting the City Council meeting agenda, then the request for reconsideration may be agendized if support for said action exists in accordance with the Council Standards Section 10.8. Otherwise, no City Council discussion or action on a possible reconsideration may occur unless the item is appropriately added to the agenda pursuant to Government Code section 54954.2(b), which addresses adding items that are not listed on a posted agenda (urgency agenda item). At the time such motion for reconsideration is heard, testimony shall be limited to the facts giving rise to the motion.
(c) Effect of approval of motion.

Upon approval of a motion to reconsider, and at such time as the matter is heard, the City Council shall only consider any new evidence or facts not presented previously with regard to the item or a claim of error in applying the facts.

If the motion to reconsider is made and approved at the same meeting at which the initial action was taken and all interested persons (including applicants, owners, supporters and opponents) are still present, the matter may be reconsidered at that meeting or at the next regular meeting or intervening special meeting (subject to the discretion of the maker of the motion) and no further public notice is required.

If the motion to reconsider is made and approved at the same meeting at which the initial action was taken but all interested persons are not still present, or if the motion is made and 19 | P a g e
approved at the next regular meeting or intervening special meeting, the item shall be scheduled for consideration at the earliest feasible City Council meeting and shall be re-noticed in accordance with the Government Code, the City Municipal Code and the Council Standards and Procedures. The Clerk shall provide notice to all interested parties as soon as possible when a matter becomes the subject of a motion to reconsider.

8.6 Discussion.
(a) The discussion and deliberations at meetings of the City Council are to secure the mature judgment of Council Members on proposals submitted for decision. This purpose is best served by the exchange of thought through discussion and debate.

To the extent possible, Council Members should disclose any ex parte communication prior to discussion on an item. Ex parte communications are those made in private between an interested party and an official in a decision-making process.

Discussion and deliberation are regulated by these rules in order to assure every member a reasonable and equal opportunity to be heard.
(b) Obtaining the floor for discussion.

After the Council has commented on an issue, and a motion has been stated to the Council and seconded, any member of the Council has a right to discuss it after obtaining the floor. The member obtains the floor by seeking recognition from the Mayor. A member who has been recognized should make their comments clear, brief and concise. (c) Speaking more than once.

To encourage the full participation of all members of the Council, no member or members shall be permitted to monopolize the discussion of the question. If a Council Member has already spoken, other Council Members wishing to speak shall then be recognized. No Council Member shall be allowed to speak a second time until after all other Council Members have had an opportunity to speak.
(d) Relevancy of discussion.

All discussion must be relevant to the issue before the City Council. A Council Member is given the floor only for the purpose of discussing the pending question; discussion which departs is out of order. Council Members shall avoid repetition and strive to move the discussion along.

A motion, its nature, or consequences, may be attacked vigorously. It is never permissible to attack the motives, character, or personality of a member either directly or by innuendo or implication. It is the duty of the Mayor to instantly rule out of order any Council Member who engages in personal attacks. It is the motion, not its proposer that is subject to debate.

Arguments, for or against a measure, should be stated as concisely as possible. It is the responsibility of each Council Member to maintain an open mind on all issues during discussion and deliberation.
20 | P a g e
It is not necessary for all City Council Members to speak or give their viewpoints if another Council Member has already addressed their concerns. Although issues with potential to be litigated or otherwise appealed should have comments by each Council Member on the record. (e) Mayor’s duties during discussion.

The Mayor has the responsibility of controlling and expediting the discussion. A Council Member who has been recognized to speak on a question has a right to the undivided attention of the Council.

It is the duty of the Mayor to keep the subject clearly before the members, to rule out irrelevant discussion, and to restate the question whenever necessary.

8.7 Council Member Respect. At all times, Council Members in the minority on an issue shall respect the decision and authority of the majority.

8.8 Announcements. Council reports at the end of Council meetings shall be limited to announcing Mayor/Council related activities in which Council Members are involved, City and City-sponsored activities and items which directly affect the City. Community groups may announce their activities during Public Comments at the beginning of Council meetings. Council Members should refrain from making personal comments, stating personal activities, or items that do not impact their role as a Council Member.

SECTION 9. CLOSED SESSIONS

9.1 Purpose. It is the policy of the City Council to conduct its business in public to the greatest extent possible. However, state law recognizes that, in certain circumstances, public discussion could potentially jeopardize the public interest, compromise the City’s position, and could cost the taxpayers of Nevada City financially. Therefore, closed sessions shall be held from time to time as allowed by law. The procedures for the conduct of these meetings shall be the same as for public meetings, except that the public will be excluded.

Prior to convening the closed session meeting, the Mayor shall publicly announce the closed session items and ask for public input regarding any items on the closed session agenda.

Council Members are to keep all information obtained during closed session in complete confidence. All written materials provided to councilmembers during closed session shall be returned to the City Manager at the conclusion of each closed session.

If the City Council in closed session has provided direction to City staff on proposed terms and conditions for any type of negotiations, whether it be related to property acquisitions or disposal, a proposed or pending claim or litigation, or employee negotiations, all contact with the other party will be through the designated City person(s) representing the City in the handling of the matter. A Council Member, not so designated by the Council, will not under any circumstances have any contact or discussion with the other party or its representative concerning the matter 21 | P a g e
which was discussed in the closed session, and will not communicate any discussions conducted in closed session to such party.

9.2 Rule of Confidentiality. The City Council recognizes that breaches in confidentiality can severely prejudice the City’s position in litigation, labor relations and real estate negotiations.

Further, breaches of confidentiality can create a climate of distrust among Council Members and can harm the Council’s ability to communicate openly in closed sessions, thereby impairing the Council’s ability to perform its official duties.

The City Council further recognizes that confidentiality of discussions and documents are at the core of a closed session. Confidentiality is essential if the closed session is to serve its purpose.

Therefore, the City Council will adhere to a strict policy of confidentiality for closed sessions.

9.3 Breach of Rule of Confidentiality. No person who attends a closed session may disclose any statements, discussions, or documents used in a closed session except where specifically authorized by State law. Any authorized disclosure shall be in strict compliance with these rules and the Ralph M. Brown Act. Violation of this rule shall be considered a breach of this rule of confidentiality.

9.4 Agenda. The City Council agenda will contain a brief general description of the items to be discussed at the closed session, as required by law.

9.5 Permissible Topics. All closed sessions will be held in strict compliance with the Ralph M.

Brown Act. The City Attorney, or his/her designee, will advise in advance on topics that may be discussed in a closed session.

9.6 Rules of Decorum.
(a) The same high standard of respect and decorum as apply to public meetings shall apply to closed sessions. There shall be courtesy, respect and tolerance for all viewpoints and for the right of Council Members to disagree. Council Members shall strive to make each other feel comfortable and safe to express their points of view. All Council Members have the right to insist upon strict adherence to this rule.
(b) Prior to a vote, the Mayor shall ensure that the motion is clearly stated and clearly understood by all Council Members.
(c) The Mayor shall keep the discussion moving forward so that debate and a vote can occur in the time allotted for the closed session. The Mayor will determine the order of debate in a fair manner

9.7 Public Disclosure After Final Action.
(a) The Ralph M. Brown Act requires that, as a body, the City Council make certain public disclosure of closed session decisions when those actions have become final. Accordingly, the City Council shall publicly report any final action taken in closed session, and the vote, including abstentions, at a publicly noticed meeting as follows:
22 | P a g e
• Real Estate negotiations: After the agreement is final and accepted by the other party; • Litigation: After approval to defend or appeal a lawsuit or to initiate a lawsuit; • Settlement: After final settlement of litigation or claims; • Employees: Action taken to appoint or dismiss a Council-appointed employee; • Labor relations: After the Memorandum of Understanding is final and has been accepted by both parties.
(b) The report may be oral or written. The report will state only the action taken and the vote. Unless authorized by the majority of the City Council, the report will not state the debate or discussion that occurred. Except for the action taken and the vote, all closed session discussions will remain confidential.

SECTION 10. DECORUM

10.1 Council Members. Members of the City Council value and recognize the importance of the trust invested in them by the public to accomplish the business of the City. Council Members shall accord the utmost courtesy to each other, City employees, and the public appearing before the City Council.

10.2 City Employees. Members of the City staff shall observe the same rules of order and decorum applicable to the City Council. City staff shall act at all times in a business and professional manner towards Council Members and members of the public.

10.4 Noise in the Chambers. Noise emanating from the audience, whether expressing opposition or support within the Council Chambers or lobby area, which disrupts City Council 23 | P a g e
meetings, shall not be permitted. All cell phones and other electronic devices shall be muted while in the chambers. Refusal is grounds for removal.

10.5 Removal. The Mayor or presiding member of the Council has the authority to remove, or designate a person to remove, an individual for disrupting the Council meeting. Before taking this action, the Mayor/presiding member shall warn the individual that their behavior is disruptive and that failure to cease this behavior may result in their removal. If the behavior does not promptly cease, the individual may be removed.

Disruptive behavior is any action that actually disrupts, disturbs, impedes, or renders infeasible the orderly conduct of the meeting.

10.6 Dangerous Instruments. No person may enter the chambers of a legislative body as defined in Section 54852 of the Government Code of the State of California or any place were such legislative body is in session, with any firearm, weapon, or explosive device of any nature.

The provisions of this section shall not apply to authorized peace officers or to those persons authorized by the Penal Code of the State to carry such weapons.

10.7 Prosecution. Aggravated cases shall be prosecuted on appropriate complaint to the City Prosecutor.

SECTION 11. ENFORCEMENT OF DECORUM
In extreme cases, such as when a meeting is willfully interrupted by a group or groups of persons so as to render the orderly conduct of such meeting unfeasible and order cannot be restored by the removal of individuals as provided for in this Policy, the Mayor/Presiding Officer may order the meeting room cleared and continue in session. Only matters appearing on the agenda may be considered in such a session. Duly accredited representatives of the press or other news media, except those participating in the disturbance, shall be allowed to attend any session held pursuant to this Section. Nothing in this Section shall prohibit the City Council from establishing a procedure for readmitting an individual or individuals not responsible for willfully disturbing the orderly conduct of the meeting.

SECTION 12. VIOLATIONS OF PROCEDURES
Nothing in these Standards and Procedures shall invalidate a properly noticed and acted upon action of the City Council in accordance with State Law.

This document shall remain in effect until modified by the City Council.

ADOPTED AT A REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 13, 2023

CITY OF NEVADA CITY

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT

MEETING OF: September 13, 2023 Agenda Item No. 09
Subject: Consideration of Adoption of Resolution 2023-43:

Electing to be Subject to the Public Employees’ Medical and Hospital Care Act at an Unequal Amount for Employees and Annuitants (CalPERS all Employees) and Consideration of Adoption of Resolution 2023-44: Electing to be Subject to the Public Employees’ Medical and Hospital Care Act at an
Unequal Amount for Employees and Annuitants (Non PERS
Elected Officials).

From: Stephen Erlandson, Interim Assistant City Manager Date: September 1, 2023
Reviewed & Approved:

City Manager: STG

City Attorney:

Recommended Action: Adopt the resolutions.

ISSUE STATEMENT AND DISCUSSION:

Medical plan redesign was a main provision in the adopted successor Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) with the Nevada City Police Officers’ Association, Nevada City Management and Supervisory Employees, and Nevada City Miscellaneous Employees adopted by the City Council on June 22, 2022.

Changing from the existing brokered options to CalPERS for medical insurance will allow for 1) A broader range of plans offered to employees, 2) Medicare Plan options, 3) plans available based upon the employee’s resident address (effectively increasing the number of affordable plans for employees), and 4) an economy of scale in price negotiations via CalPERS as opposed to no control within the existing brokered plans.

CalPERS/PEMHCA Requirements: CalPERS requires a Board resolution for the City to elect to be subject to the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act (PEMHCA) and to fix the monthly employer health contribution for employees and retirees in accordance with Government Code Section 22892 while in CalPERS. Key provisions of PEMHCA include:
1) all eligible employees and retirees must receive a contribution toward insurance from the employer of at least a certain amount published annually by CalPERS; 2) employers are prohibited from offering a non-PEMHCA plan except for limited exceptions; and 3) to opt out of the CalPERS Health Benefits Program for the following calendar year a resolution must be filed with CalPERS within 60 days of CalPERS' announcement of the rates for the next calendar year; the decision to leave CalPERS precludes rejoining for five years. If the City elected to leave the CalPERS Health Benefits Program, these PEMHCA provisions would no longer apply.

PEMHCA requires the City to contribute a minimum amount toward insurance for eligible employees. The amount, published by CalPERS, is $151 per month for 2023 and $157 per month for 2024 and increases each year. CalPERS allows employers to contribute as little as $1 per month the first year, increased annually until the contributions are equal (approximately 20 years), for retirees and their spouses/registered domestic partners who elected a joint annuitant option at the time of retirement, regardless of vesting. The City's actual contribution for employees and retirees will be made in accordance with the terms of the MOUs, which exceed the PEMHCA minimum.

CalPERS Medical Benefit Summary: CalPERS offers a greater number of health plan choices than the City currently offers and mandates that employers cannot restrict employees and retirees from enrolling in any of the health plans. The City has designated three of the plans as "core" plans - those that most closely align with the benefits and costs of the City’s current Blue Shield medical plans - for purposes of determining the City’s contribution toward the cost of medical premiums.

Premium costs in excess of the MOU established limits will be paid for by employees through pre-tax payroll withholding and by retirees through post-tax pension withholding. Employees may elect to opt out of the CalPERS health plans. This will make the health insurance credit available to employees who choose to opt out of City coverage, but will still provide a net savings to the City through the elimination of the monthly premium payment.

Information was sent to active employees and City Council members about the transition to the CalPERS Health Benefits Program on September 5, 2023. Adoption of Resolution 2023-43 and Resolution 2023-44 will transition the City to the CalPERS Health Benefits Program effective January 1, 2024.

FINANCIAL AND/OR POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

The transition to the CalPERS Health Benefits Program for employees and City Councilmembers will yield the overall benefit cost reductions anticipated with the 2022 MOUs based on the City’s three core plans.

Based on the City’s current Blue Shield medical plans, actual monthly City contribution costs are $47,626.

Transitioning to the CalPERS Health Benefits Program would result in monthly City contribution costs ranging from a low of $39,498 to a high of $62,358 depending on the mix of the expanded insurance plans selected by eligible enrollees.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:

This action is consistent with the embedded strategic initiative of Engagement: Community engagement and communications with stakeholders.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS:

Not applicable.

LEGAL REVIEW:

City Attorney Pucci has reviewed this item and finds that the recommended action complies with the law.

ATTACHMENTS:
 Resolution 2023-43
 Resolution 2023-44
Health Resolution Template Packet
Contract vs. Resolution
The CalPERS Health Program is governed by the Public Employees Medical and Hospital Care Act (PEMHCA), and the California Code of Regulations (CCR), of the California Public Employees Retirement Law (PERL). PEMHCA contains all the rules and regulations that a contracting agency must adhere to. We define PEMHCA as the actual health contract, and the resolution as the method by which an agency elects to become subject to PEMHCA.

Resolution Type (Enclosed)
New Resolution Purpose
Format:

All, Equal
X All, Unequal
By Group, Equal
By Group, Unequal
An agency must file a new resolution to elect to be subject to PEMHCA, establish participation for the whole agency or by recognized employee group(s), and designate the monthly employer health contribution. If an agency submits a signed and adopted resolution to CalPERS on or before the 10th of any month, coverage can be effective on the first of the following month.

Instructions
• The enclosed resolution should be completed by filling in the editable fields with the information requested in the field tab. Contracting agencies may not add, edit, or remove language in the enclosed resolution, other than the editable fields. CalPERS may reject resolutions that are submitted with additional changes.
• The certification shown following the resolution is to be completed by those individuals authorized to sign for the contracting agency in legal actions and is to include the name of the governing body (i.e. Board of Directors, Board of Trustees, etc.), and the location and the date of signing. • This resolution serves as a legally binding document, and we require the original resolution, certified copy with original signatures, or a copy of the resolution with the agency’s raised seal.

Please complete and include the enclosed cover sheet when mailing the resolution.

Questions or Additional Information
The Health Resolutions & Compliance Unit is responsible for authoring and maintaining this document.

The unit can be contacted directly at [email protected].

CalPERS Health Resolution (New), Revised April 2021
Please staple on top of your health resolution(s) or cover letter.

This will ensure that the CalPERS mailroom expedites delivery to our office.

Mail packet to either:

Overnight Mail Service Regular Mail
California Public Employees’ Retirement System
Health Resolutions & Compliance Services, HAMD
400 Q Street
Sacramento, CA 95811
California Public Employees’ Retirement System
Health Resolutions & Compliance Services, HAMD
PO BOX 942714
Sacramento, CA 94229-2714
HEALTH

RESOLUTION
CalPERS ID # 4993886171
Agency Name City of Nevada City
Desired Effective Date January 1, 2024
CalPERS Health Resolution (New), Revised April 2021
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-43
ELECTING TO BE SUBJECT TO THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES’ MEDICAL AND HOSPITAL CARE ACT

AT AN UNEQUAL AMOUNT FOR EMPLOYEES AND ANNUITANTS
(CalPERS All Employees)
WHEREAS, (1) A contracting agency meeting the eligibility requirements set forth in Government Code Section 22920, may obtain health benefit plan(s), as defined under Government Code Section 22777, by submitting a resolution to the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (the “Board”), and upon approval of such resolution by the Board, become subject to the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act (the “Act”); and WHEREAS, (2) City of Nevada City is a contracting agency eligible to be subject to the Act under Government Code Section 22920; and
WHEREAS, (3) Government Code Section 22892(a) provides that a contracting agency subject to the Act shall fix the amount of the employer contribution by resolution; and WHEREAS, (4) Government Code Section 22892(b) provides that the employer contribution shall be an equal amount for both employees and annuitants, but may not be less than the amount prescribed by Section 22892(b) of the Act; and WHEREAS, (5) Government Code Section 22892(c) provides that, notwithstanding Section 22892(b), a contracting agency may establish a lesser monthly employer contribution for annuitants than for employees, provided that the monthly employer contribution for annuitants is annually increased to equal an amount not less than the number of years the contracting agency has been subject to this subdivision multiplied by five percent of the current monthly employer contribution for employees, until the time that the employer contribution for annuitants equals the employer contribution paid for employees; and WHEREAS, (6) City of Nevada City desires to obtain for its employees and annuitants the benefit of the Act and to accept the liabilities and obligations of an employer under the Act; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, (a) City of Nevada City elects to be subject to the provisions of the Act; and be it further
RESOLVED, (b) That the employer contribution for each employee shall be the amount necessary to pay the full cost of his/her enrollment, including the enrollment of family members, in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of the PEMHCA Minimum per month, plus administrative fees and Contingency Reserve Fund assessments; and be it further
RESOLVED, (c) That the initial employer contribution for each annuitant shall be the amount necessary to pay the full cost of his/her enrollment, including the enrollment of family members, in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of $1.00 per month, CalPERS Health Resolution (New), Revised April 2021
plus administrative fees and Contingency Reserve Fund assessments; and be it further
RESOLVED, (d) That the monthly employer contribution for annuitants is annually increased to equal an amount not less than the number of years the contracting agency has been subject to this subdivision multiplied by five percent of the current monthly employer contribution for employees, until the time that the employer contribution for annuitants equals the employer contribution paid for employees; and be it further
RESOLVED, (e) That this annual adjustment to the minimum monthly employer contribution for annuitants shall not exceed one hundred dollars ($100.00); and be it further RESOLVED, (f) City of Nevada City has fully complied with any and all applicable provisions of Government Code Section 7507 in electing the benefits set forth above; and be it further
RESOLVED, (h) That the participation of the employees and annuitants of City of Nevada City shall be subject to determination of its status as an “agency or instrumentality of the state or political subdivision of a State” that is eligible to participate in a governmental plan within the meaning of Section 414(d) of the Internal Revenue Code, upon publication of final Regulations pursuant to such Section. If it is determined that City of Nevada City would not qualify as an agency or instrumentality of the state or political subdivision of a State under such final Regulations, CalPERS may be obligated, and reserves the right to terminate the health coverage of all participants of the employer; and be it further
RESOLVED, (i) That the executive body appoint and direct, and it does hereby appoint and direct, Sean Grayson, City Manager to file with the Board a verified copy of this resolution, and to perform on behalf of City of Nevada City all functions required of it under the Act; and be it further
RESOLVED, (j) That coverage under the Act be effective on January 1, 2024.

Adopted at a regular meeting of the City of Nevada City City Council at 317 Broad Street, Nevada City, CA 95959, this 13th day of September, 2023.

Signed: _________________________________
Daniela Fernandez, Mayor
Attest: _________________________________
Gabrielle Christakes, Deputy City Clerk
CalPERS Health Resolution (New), Revised April 2021
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-44
ELECTING TO BE SUBJECT TO THE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES’ MEDICAL AND HOSPITAL CARE ACT

AT AN UNEQUAL AMOUNT FOR EMPLOYEES AND ANNUITANTS
(Non PERS Elected Officials)
WHEREAS, (1) A contracting agency meeting the eligibility requirements set forth in Government Code Section 22920, may obtain health benefit plan(s), as defined under Government Code Section 22777, by submitting a resolution to the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (the “Board”), and upon approval of such resolution by the Board, become subject to the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act (the “Act”); and WHEREAS, (2) City of Nevada City is a contracting agency eligible to be subject to the Act under Government Code Section 22920; and
WHEREAS, (3) Government Code Section 22892(a) provides that a contracting agency subject to the Act shall fix the amount of the employer contribution by resolution; and WHEREAS, (4) Government Code Section 22892(b) provides that the employer contribution shall be an equal amount for both employees and annuitants, but may not be less than the amount prescribed by Section 22892(b) of the Act; and WHEREAS, (5) Government Code Section 22892(c) provides that, notwithstanding Section 22892(b), a contracting agency may establish a lesser monthly employer contribution for annuitants than for employees, provided that the monthly employer contribution for annuitants is annually increased to equal an amount not less than the number of years the contracting agency has been subject to this subdivision multiplied by five percent of the current monthly employer contribution for employees, until the time that the employer contribution for annuitants equals the employer contribution paid for employees; and WHEREAS, (6) City of Nevada City desires to obtain for its employees and annuitants the benefit of the Act and to accept the liabilities and obligations of an employer under the Act; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, (a) City of Nevada City elects to be subject to the provisions of the Act; and be it further
RESOLVED, (b) That the employer contribution for each employee shall be the amount necessary to pay the full cost of his/her enrollment, including the enrollment of family members, in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of the PEMHCA Minimum per month, plus administrative fees and Contingency Reserve Fund assessments; and be it further
RESOLVED, (c) That the initial employer contribution for each annuitant shall be the amount necessary to pay the full cost of his/her enrollment, including the enrollment of family members, in a health benefits plan up to a maximum of $1.00 per month, CalPERS Health Resolution (New), Revised April 2021
plus administrative fees and Contingency Reserve Fund assessments; and be it further
RESOLVED, (d) That the monthly employer contribution for annuitants is annually increased to equal an amount not less than the number of years the contracting agency has been subject to this subdivision multiplied by five percent of the current monthly employer contribution for employees, until the time that the employer contribution for annuitants equals the employer contribution paid for employees; and be it further
RESOLVED, (e) That this annual adjustment to the minimum monthly employer contribution for annuitants shall not exceed one hundred dollars ($100.00); and be it further RESOLVED, (f) City of Nevada City has fully complied with any and all applicable provisions of Government Code Section 7507 in electing the benefits set forth above; and be it further
RESOLVED, (h) That the participation of the employees and annuitants of City of Nevada City shall be subject to determination of its status as an “agency or instrumentality of the state or political subdivision of a State” that is eligible to participate in a governmental plan within the meaning of Section 414(d) of the Internal Revenue Code, upon publication of final Regulations pursuant to such Section. If it is determined that City of Nevada City would not qualify as an agency or instrumentality of the state or political subdivision of a State under such final Regulations, CalPERS may be obligated, and reserves the right to terminate the health coverage of all participants of the employer; and be it further
RESOLVED, (i) That the executive body appoint and direct, and it does hereby appoint and direct, Sean Grayson, City Manager to file with the Board a verified copy of this resolution, and to perform on behalf of City of Nevada City all functions required of it under the Act; and be it further
RESOLVED, (j) That coverage under the Act be effective on January 1, 2024.

Adopted at a regular meeting of the City of Nevada City City Council at 317 Broad Street, Nevada City, CA 95959, this 13th day of September, 2023.

Signed: _________________________________
Daniela Fernandez, Mayor
Attest: _________________________________
Gabrielle Christakes, Deputy City Clerk
Updated 7/31/2023 Statewide Premiums, Attachment 3, Page 1 of 2 July Board of Administration Offsite
Proposed Statewide 2024 Premiums Per Subscriber Per Month (PSPM) One Risk Pool Three-Year Phase In with PPO Benefit Design Changes 2023 2024
Basic Plans Single 2-Party Family Single 2-Party Family Percent Change Anthem Blue Cross Select HMO $903.85 $1,807.70 $2,350.01 $925.57 $1,851.14 $2,406.48 2.40% Anthem Blue Cross Traditional HMO 1,116.65 2,233.30 2,903.29 1,197.94 2,395.88 3,114.64 7.28% Blue Shield Access+ HMO and EPO 842.61 1,685.22 2,190.79 892.49 1,784.98 2,320.47 5.92% Blue Shield Trio HMO 760.71 1,521.42 1,977.85 810.24 1,620.48 2,106.62 6.51% Health Net Salud y Más 631.89 1,263.78 1,642.91 656.96 1,313.92 1,708.10 3.97% Kaiser Permanente 852.68 1,705.36 2,216.97 964.15 1,928.30 2,506.79 13.07% Kaiser Permanente Out of State 1,155.43 2,310.86 3,004.12 1,312.45 2,624.90 3,412.37 13.59% Sharp Performance Plus 764.96 1,529.92 1,988.90 833.24 1,666.48 2,166.42 8.93% UnitedHealthcare SignatureValue Alliance 841.72 1,683.44 2,188.47 882.98 1,765.96 2,295.75 4.90% UnitedHealthcare SignatureValue Harmony 722.28 1,444.56 1,877.93 763.70 1,527.40 1,985.62 5.73% Western Health Advantage HMO 760.17 1,520.34 1,976.44 807.23 1,614.46 2,098.80 6.19% Basic HMO Weighted Average 10.50%
Anthem EPO Del Norte $1,083.89 $2,167.78 $2,818.11 $1,215.87 $2,431.74 $3,161.26 12.18% PERS Gold 766.11 1,532.22 1,991.89 859.31 1,718.62 2,234.21 12.17% PERS Platinum 1,083.89 2,167.78 2,818.11 1,215.87 2,431.74 3,161.26 12.18% Basic PPO Weighted Average 12.17%
Total Basic Percent Change 10.95%
2023 2024
Medicare Plans Single 2-Party Family Single 2-Party Family Percent Change Anthem Medicare Preferred PPO $413.59 $827.18 $1,240.77 $405.83 $811.66 $1,217.49 (1.88%) Blue Shield Medicare PPO 361.90 723.80 1,085.70 392.68 785.36 1,178.04 8.51% Kaiser Permanente Senior Advantage 283.25 566.50 849.75 324.79 649.58 974.37 14.67% Kaiser Permanente Senior Advantage Summit 336.29 672.58 1,008.87 386.55 773.10 1,159.65 14.95% Kaiser Permanente Senior Advantage Out of State 274.03 548.06 822.09 318.43 636.86 955.29 16.20% Kaiser Permanente Senior Advantage Summit Out of State N/A N/A N/A 380.21 760.42 1,140.63 N/A Sharp Direct Advantage HMO 249.79 499.58 749.37 256.53 513.06 769.59 2.70% UnitedHealthcare Group Medicare Advantage PPO 299.68 599.36 899.04 341.72 683.44 1,025.16 14.03% UnitedHealthcare Group Medicare Advantage Edge PPO 357.70 715.40 1,073.10 366.01 732.02 1,098.03 2.32% Western Health Advantage MyCare Select HMO 331.11 662.22 993.33 268.62 537.24 805.86 (18.87%) Medicare Advantage Weighted Average 13.17%
PERS Gold $392.71 $785.42 $1,178.13 $406.60 $813.20 $1,219.80 3.54% PERS Platinum 420.02 840.04 1,260.06 448.15 896.30 1,344.45 6.70% Medicare Supplement Weighted Average 6.62%
Total Medicare Percentage Change 9.55%
2024
Combination Plans Subscriber in M &
1 Dependent in B
Subscriber in M &
2+ Dependents in B
Subscriber in M,
1 Dependent in B &
1 Dependent in M
Subscriber in B &
1 Dependent in M
Subscriber in B &
2+ Dependents in M
Subscriber in B,
1 Dependent in B &
1 Dependent in M
Anthem Blue Cross Select and Medicare Supplement $1,331.40 $1,886.74 $1,367.00 $1,331.40 $1,737.23 $1,886.74 Anthem Blue Cross Traditional and Medicare Supplement 1,603.77 2,322.53 1,530.42 1,603.77 2,009.60 2,322.53 Blue Shield Access+ and Medicare 1,285.17 1,820.66 1,320.85 1,285.17 1,677.85 1,820.66 Blue Shield Trio and Medicare 1,202.92 1,689.06 1,271.50 1,202.92 1,595.60 1,689.06 Kaiser Permanente and Senior Advantage 1,288.94 1,867.43 1,228.07 1,288.94 1,613.73 1,867.43 Kaiser Permanente and Senior Advantage Summit 1,350.70 1,929.19 1,351.59 1,350.70 1,737.25 1,929.19 Kaiser Permanente and Senior Advantage Out of State 1,630.88 2,418.35 1,424.33 1,630.88 1,949.31 2,418.35 Kaiser Permanente and Senior Advantage Summit Out of State 1,692.66 2,480.13 1,547.89 1,692.66 2,072.87 2,480.13 PERS Gold and Medicare Supplement 1,265.91 1,781.50 1,328.79 1,265.91 1,672.51 1,781.50 PERS Platinum and Medicare Supplement 1,664.02 2,393.54 1,625.82 1,664.02 2,112.17 2,393.54 Sharp Direct Advantage 1,089.77 1,589.71 1,013.00 1,089.77 1,346.30 1,589.71 UnitedHealthcare Alliance and Medicare Advantage 1,224.70 1,754.49 1,213.23 1,224.70 1,566.42 1,754.49 UnitedHealthcare Alliance and Medicare Advantage Edge 1,248.99 1,778.78 1,261.81 1,248.99 1,615.00 1,778.78 UnitedHealthcare Harmony and Medicare Advantage 1,105.42 1,563.64 1,141.66 1,105.42 1,447.14 1,563.64 UnitedHealthcare Harmony and Medicare Advantage Edge 1,129.71 1,587.93 1,190.24 1,129.71 1,495.72 1,587.93 Western Health Advantage and Medicare Advantage 1,075.85 1,560.19 1,021.58 1,075.85 1,344.47 1,560.19 Updated 7/31/2023 Regional Premiums, Attachment 3, Page 2 of 2 July Board of Administration Offsite
One Risk Pool Three-Year Phase In with PPO Benefit Design Changes 2023 2024
Basic Plans Single 2-Party Family Single 2-Party Family Anthem Blue Cross Select HMO $1,128.83 $2,257.66 $2,934.96 $1,138.86 $2,277.72 $2,961.04 0.89% Anthem Blue Cross Traditional HMO 1,210.71 2,421.42 3,147.85 1,339.70 2,679.40 3,483.22 10.65% Anthem EPO Del Norte 1,200.12 2,400.24 3,120.31 1,314.27 2,628.54 3,417.10 9.51% Blue Shield Access+ HMO and EPO 1,035.21 2,070.42 2,691.55 1,076.84 2,153.68 2,799.78 4.02% Blue Shield Trio HMO 888.94 1,777.88 2,311.24 946.84 1,893.68 2,461.78 6.51% Kaiser Permanente 913.74 1,827.48 2,375.72 1,021.41 2,042.82 2,655.67 11.78% PERS Gold 825.61 1,651.22 2,146.59 914.82 1,829.64 2,378.53 10.81% PERS Platinum 1,200.12 2,400.24 3,120.31 1,314.27 2,628.54 3,417.10 9.51% UnitedHealthcare SignatureValue Alliance 1,044.07 2,088.14 2,714.58 1,091.13 2,182.26 2,836.94 4.51% UnitedHealthcare SignatureValue Harmony N/A N/A N/A 937.39 1,874.78 2,437.21 N/A Western Health Advantage HMO 760.17 1,520.34 1,976.44 807.23 1,614.46 2,098.80 6.19% Anthem Blue Cross Select HMO $765.37 $1,530.74 $1,989.96 $807.71 $1,615.42 $2,100.05 5.53% Anthem Blue Cross Traditional HMO 935.12 1,870.24 2,431.31 1,034.38 2,068.76 2,689.39 10.61% Blue Shield Access+ HMO and EPO 842.61 1,685.22 2,190.79 869.14 1,738.28 2,259.76 3.15% Blue Shield Trio HMO 760.71 1,521.42 1,977.85 810.24 1,620.48 2,106.62 6.51% Health Net Salud y Más 698.91 1,397.82 1,817.17 684.77 1,369.54 1,780.40 (2.02%) Kaiser Permanente 756.21 1,512.42 1,966.15 904.95 1,809.90 2,352.87 19.67% PERS Gold 695.93 1,391.86 1,809.42 799.44 1,598.88 2,078.54 14.87% PERS Platinum 1,014.80 2,029.60 2,638.48 1,151.50 2,303.00 2,993.90 13.47% Sharp Performance Plus 764.96 1,529.92 1,988.90 833.24 1,666.48 2,166.42 8.93% UnitedHealthcare SignatureValue Alliance 793.63 1,587.26 2,063.44 837.88 1,675.76 2,178.49 5.58% UnitedHealthcare SignatureValue Harmony 781.58 1,563.16 2,032.11 792.65 1,585.30 2,060.89 1.42% Anthem Blue Cross Select HMO $737.91 $1,475.82 $1,918.57 $841.13 $1,682.26 $2,186.94 13.99% Anthem Blue Cross Traditional HMO 942.73 1,885.46 2,451.10 1,012.67 2,025.34 2,632.94 7.42% Blue Shield Access+ HMO 738.29 1,476.58 1,919.55 756.65 1,513.30 1,967.29 2.49% Blue Shield Trio HMO 661.49 1,322.98 1,719.87 704.69 1,409.38 1,832.19 6.53% Health Net Salud y Más 606.34 1,212.68 1,576.48 630.13 1,260.26 1,638.34 3.92% Kaiser Permanente 754.64 1,509.28 1,962.06 865.41 1,730.82 2,250.07 14.68% PERS Gold 680.37 1,360.74 1,768.96 785.28 1,570.56 2,041.73 15.42% PERS Platinum 992.59 1,985.18 2,580.73 1,131.47 2,262.94 2,941.82 13.99% UnitedHealthcare SignatureValue Alliance 790.46 1,580.92 2,055.20 826.44 1,652.88 2,148.74 4.55% UnitedHealthcare SignatureValue Harmony 713.55 1,427.10 1,855.23 734.76 1,469.52 1,910.38 2.97% Kaiser Permanente Out of State $1,155.43 $2,310.86 $3,004.12 $1,312.45 $2,624.90 $3,412.37 13.59% PERS Platinum 1,003.90 2,007.80 2,610.14 1,146.86 2,293.72 2,981.84 14.24% Proposed Regional 2024 Premiums Per Subscriber Per Month (PSPM) Basic Premiums - Region 3
Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino
Basic Premiums - Out of State
Percent Change
Basic Premiums - Region 1
Alameda, Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, Colusa, Contra Costa, Del Norte, El Dorado, Glenn, Humboldt, Lake, Lassen, Marin, Mariposa, Mendocino, Merced, Modoc, Mono, Monterey, Napa, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sacramento, San Benito, San Francisco, San Joaquin, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Shasta, Sierra, Siskiyou, Solano, Sonoma, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Trinity, Tuolumne, Yolo and Yuba Basic Premiums - Region 2
Fresno, Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Kings, Madera, Orange, San Diego, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Tulare and Ventura 2023 | Health Benefit Summary
Helping you make an informed decision about your health plan About This Publication
The 2023 Health Benefit Summary provides only a general overview of certain benefits. It does not include details of all covered expenses or exclusions and limitations. Please refer to each health plan’s Evidence of Coverage (EOC)
booklet for the exact terms and conditions of coverage.

Health plans mail EOCs to new members at the beginning
of the year, and to existing members upon request. In case of a conflict between this summary and your health plan’s EOC, the EOC establishes the benefits that will be provided.

The 2023 Health Benefit Summary provides valuable
information to help you make an informed choice about
your health plan and health care providers. This publication compares covered services, copayments, and benefits for each CalPERS health plan. It also provides information
about plan availability by county and a chart summarizing important differences among health plan types.

You can use this information to determine which health
plan offers the services you need at the cost that works for you.

The 2023 health plan premiums are available at the CalPERS website at www.calpers.ca.gov. Check with your employer to find out how much they contribute toward your premium.

We recommend that you only use this publication in
conjunction with the current year’s health premium rate schedule and EOCs. To obtain a copy of the health premium rate schedule for any health plan, please go to the CalPERS website at www.calpers.ca.gov or contact CalPERS at
888 CalPERS (or 888–225–7377).

Other Health Publications
This publication is one of many resources CalPERS offers to help you choose and use your health plan. Others include:
• Health Program Guide: Describes Basic and Medicare
health plan eligibility, enrollment, and choices
• Medicare Enrollment Guide: Provides information about how Medicare works with your CalPERS health benefits
You can obtain the above publications and other
information about your CalPERS health benefits through
myCalPERS at my.calpers.ca.gov or by calling CalPERS
at 888 CalPERS (or 888–225–7377).

About CalPERS
CalPERS is the largest purchaser of public
employee health benefits in California, and the
second largest public purchaser in the nation
after the federal government. Our program
provides benefits for 1.5 million public
employees, retirees, and their families.

Depending on where you reside or work,
CalPERS offers active employees and retirees
one or more types of health plans, which
may include:
• Health Maintenance Organization (HMO)
• Preferred Provider Organization (PPO)
• Exclusive Provider Organization (EPO)
(for members in certain California counties)
The CalPERS Board of Administration annually determines health plan availability, covered benefits, health premiums, and copayments.

Whether you are working or retired, your
employer or former employer makes monthly
contributions toward your health premiums.

The amount of this contribution varies. Your
cost may depend on your employer or former
employer’s contribution to your premium, the
length of your employment, and the health plan
you choose. For monthly contribution amounts,
active employees should contact their employer,
State retirees should contact CalPERS, and
contracting agency retirees should contact
their former employer.
2023 Health Benefit Summary | 1
Contents
Considering Your Health Plan Choices . . . . . . .2
Understanding How CalPERS Health Plans Work . . . 3
CalPERS Health Plan Choices . . . . . . . . . . 4
Choosing Your Doctor and Hospital . . . . . . . . 5
Enrolling in a Health Plan Using Your Residential
or Work ZIP Code 5
Health Plan Availability
Basic Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Medicare Plans 8
Tools to Help You Choose Your Health Plan . . . . 10
Accessing Health Plan Information
with myCalPERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
myCalPERS Health Plan Comparison Feature 10
Comparing Your Options: Search Health Plans . . . 11
Comparing Your Options: Health Plan
Choice Worksheet . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Health Plan Choice Worksheet . . . . . . . . . 12
CalPERS Health Plan Member Survey Results . . . . 13
Additional Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Health Plan Directory . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Obtaining Health Care Quality Information . . . . 15
CalPERS Health Plan Benefit Comparison
Basic Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Medicare Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2 | 2023 Health Benefit Summary
Considering Your Health Plan Choices
Selecting a health plan for you and your family is one
of the most important decisions you will make. This decision involves balancing the cost of each plan, along with other features, such as access to doctors and hospitals, pharmacy services, and special programs for managing
specific medical conditions. Choosing the right plan
ensures that you receive the health benefits and services that matter to you.

If you are a new CalPERS member or you are considering changing your health plan during Open Enrollment, you will need to make two related decisions:
• Which health plan is best for you and your family?
• Which doctors and hospitals do you want to provide
your care?
The combination of health plan and providers that is
right for you depends on a variety of factors, such as
whether you prefer a Health Maintenance Organization
(HMO) or Preferred Provider Organization (PPO); your
premium and out-of-pocket costs; and whether you want
to have access to specific doctors and hospitals.

We realize that comparing health plan benefits,
features, and costs can be complicated. This section
provides information that can simplify your decisionmaking process. As you begin that process, the following are some questions you should ask:
• Do you prefer to receive your health care from an
HMO or PPO? Your preference will impact the plans
available to you, your access to health care providers, and how much you pay for certain services. See the
chart on the next page for a summary of the differences among plan types.1
• What are the costs (premiums, copayments, deductibles, and coinsurance)? Beginning on page 16 of this publication, you will find information about benefits, copayments, and covered services. Visit the CalPERS website at www.calpers.ca.gov to find out what
the premiums are for the various plans.
• Does the plan provide access to the doctors and hospitals you want? Contact health plans directly for this information. See the “Health Plan Directory” on page 14 of this publication for health plan contact information. 1 Note that in a few counties where access to HMOs is limited, a third option, Exclusive Provider Organization (EPO), is available. An EPO provides benefits similar to an HMO with some PPO features. 2023 Health Benefit Summary | 3
Understanding How CalPERS Health Plans Work
The following chart will help you understand some important differences among health plan types.

Features HMO PPO EPO
Accessing
health care
providers
Contracts with providers
(doctors, medical groups,
hospitals, labs, pharmacies, etc.)
to provide you services
at a fixed price
Gives you access to a network of
health care providers (doctors,
hospitals, labs, pharmacies, etc.)
known as preferred providers
Gives you access to the EPO
network of health care
providers (doctors, hospitals,
labs, pharmacies, etc.)
Selecting a
primary care
physician
(PCP)
Most HMOs require you to
select a PCP who will work
with you to manage your
health care needs 1
All PPO plan members will have
an assigned PCP; however you can
choose not to go through your PCP2
All EPO plan members
will have an assigned PCP;
however you can choose
not to go through your PCP
Seeing a
specialist
Requires advance approval
from the medical group or
health plan for some services,
such as treatment by a specialist
or certain types of tests
Allows you access to many types
of services without receiving a
referral or advance approval
Allows you access to many
types of services without
receiving a referral or
advance approval
Obtaining care Generally requires you to obtain
care from providers who are a
part of the plan network
Requires you to pay the total
cost of services if you obtain
care outside the HMO’s
provider network without a
referral from the health plan
(except for emergency and
urgent care services)
Encourages you to seek services
from preferred providers to ensure
your coinsurance and copayments
are counted toward your calendar
year out-of-pocket maximums 3
Allows you the option of seeing
non-preferred providers, but
requires you to pay a higher
percentage of the bill 4
Requires you to obtain care
from providers who are a part
of the plan network
Requires you to pay the total
cost of services if you obtain
care outside the EPO’s
provider network without a
referral from the health plan
(except for emergency and
urgent care services)
Paying for
services
Requires you to make a small
copayment for most services
Limits the amount preferred providers can charge you for services Considers the PPO plan payment
plus any deductibles and
copayments you make as payment
in full for services rendered by a
preferred provider
Requires you to make a
small copayment for
most services
1 Your PCP may be part of a medical group that has contracted with the health plan to perform some functions, including treatment authorization, referrals to specialists, and initial grievance processing.
2 Members enrolled in the PERS Gold plan may access a lower copayment if they select a personal doctor. 3 Once you meet your annual deductible and maximum coinsurance, the plan pays 100% of medical services/claims from Preferred Providers for the remainder of the calendar year; however, you will continue to be responsible for copayments for physician office visits, pharmacy, and other services, up to the annual out-of-pocket maximum.
4 Non-preferred providers have not contracted with the health plan; therefore, you will be responsible for paying any applicable member deductibles or coinsurance, plus any amount in excess of the allowed amount. 4 | 2023 Health Benefit Summary
CalPERS Health Plan Choices
Depending on where you reside or work, your Basic and Medicare health plan options may include the following:

Contacting a Health Plan
If you have a specific question about a plan’s
coverage, benefits, or participating providers,
please contact the plan directly. See the
“Health Plan Directory” on page 14 for health
plan contact information.

Basic EPO & HMO
Health Plans
Basic PPO
Health Plans
Supplement to
Medicare PPO &
HMO Health Plans
Medicare Managed
Care Plans (Medicare
Advantage)
Out-of-State
Plan Choices
Anthem Blue Cross EPO
Anthem Blue Cross
Select HMO
Anthem Blue Cross
Traditional HMO
Blue Shield Access+ HMO
Blue Shield Access+ EPO
Blue Shield Trio HMO
California Correctional
Peace Officers Association
(CCPOA) Medical Plan1
Health Net Salud y Más
Health Net SmartCare
Kaiser Permanente
Sharp Performance Plus
UnitedHealthcare
SignatureValue Alliance
UnitedHealthcare
SignatureValue Harmony
Western Health Advantage
California Association
of Highway Patrolmen
(CAHP) Health Plan1
PERS Gold
PERS Platinum
Peace Officers
Research Association
of California (PORAC)
Police and Fire
Health Plan1
CAHP Health Plan1
PERS Gold
PERS Platinum
PORAC Police and
Fire Health Plan1
Anthem Medicare
Preferred (PPO)
Blue Shield
Medicare (PPO)
CCPOA Medical Plan
Medicare (PPO)
Kaiser Permanente
Senior Advantage
Kaiser Permanente
Senior Advantage
Summit
Sharp Direct
Advantage (HMO)
UnitedHealthcare
Group Medicare
Advantage (PPO)
UnitedHealthcare
Group Medicare
Advantage Edge (PPO)
Western Health
Advantage
MyCare Select (HMO)
Blue Shield
Medicare (PPO)
Kaiser Permanente
(HMO)2
Kasier Permanente
Senior Advantage2
PERS Platinum (PPO)
PORAC Police and
Fire Health Plan (PPO)1
UnitedHealthcare
Group Medicare
Advantage (PPO)
UnitedHealthcare
Group Medicare
Advantage Edge (PPO)
1 You must belong to the specific employee association and pay applicable dues to enroll in an Association Plan (CCPOA, CAHP or PORAC)
2 Plan only available in certain states. Benefits out-of-state may differ from those in California.
2023 Health Benefit Summary | 5
Choosing Your Doctor and Hospital
Some of our health plans are available only in certain
counties and/or ZIP Codes. As you consider your health
plan choices, you should determine which health plans are available in the ZIP Code in which you are enrolling.

In general, if you are an active employee or a working
CalPERS retiree, you may enroll in a health plan using
either your residential or work ZIP Code.

If you are a retired CalPERS member, you may select
any health plan in your residential ZIP Code area. You
cannot use the address of the CalPERS-covered employer
from which you retired to establish ZIP Code eligibility.

To enroll in a Medicare Advantage plan, you must use
your residential address. In addition, Medicare Part D
Employer Group Waiver plans require you to provide a
physical address.

If you have a combination of Basic and Medicare
members on your health plan, you must choose a health
plan that has both Basic and Medicare plan options available within your residential ZIP Code area.

If you use your residential ZIP Code, all enrolled dependents must reside in the health plan’s service area. When you use your work ZIP Code, all enrolled dependents must receive all covered services (except emergency and urgent care) within the health plan’s service area, even if they do not reside in that area.

To determine if the health plan you are considering
provides services where you reside or work, see the “Health Plan Availability by County” chart on the following page.

You can also use the Health Plan search by ZIP Code, which is available on the CalPERS website at www.calpers.ca.gov, to find out which plans are available in your area. If you have questions about plan availability or coverage, or wish to obtain a copy of the Evidence of Coverage, contact the health plans using the “Health Plan Directory” on page 14.

Once you choose a health plan, you should select a
primary care physician. Except in the case of an emergency, the doctors you can use — and the medical groups and hospitals you will have access to — will depend on
your choice of health plan.

Many people find their doctor by asking neighbors or
co-workers for a doctor’s name. Others receive referrals from doctors they already know. Still others simply select a physician from their health plan who happens to be
nearby. You can also use the Search Health Plans tool
(described on page 11), which is available by logging into your myCalPERS account at my.calpers.ca.gov. Before you choose a health plan, you should call the health plan's member services to inquire about physician availability.

When choosing an HMO plan, you should confirm that the
doctor is taking new patients in the plan you select.

If you need to be hospitalized, your health plan or
medical group will have certain hospitals that you are able to use. If you prefer a particular hospital, you should make sure the health plan you select contracts with that hospital.

See page 15 for a list of resources that can help you evaluate and select a doctor and hospital.

Enrolling in a Health Plan Using Your Residential or Work ZIP Code 6 | 2023 Health Benefit Summary
Health Plan Availability by County: Basic Plans
Some health plans are available only in certain counties and/or ZIP Codes. Use the chart below to determine if the health plan you are considering provides services where you reside or work. Contact the plan before enrolling to make sure they cover your ZIP Code and that their provider network is accepting new patients in your area. You may also use our online service, the Health Plan Search
by ZIP Code, available at www.calpers.ca.gov.

All counties subject to regulatory approval.

County
Anthem Blue Cross
EPO
Anthem Blue Cross
Select HMO
Anthem Blue Cross
Traditional HMO
Blue Shield
Access+ HMO
Blue Shield
Access+ EPO
Blue Shield Trio HMO
CAHPCCPOA Medical Plan
Health Net
Salud y Más
Health Net SmartCare
Kaiser PermanentePERS Gold &PERS PlatinumPORAC
Sharp Performance
Plus
UnitedHealthcare
SignatureValue
Alliance
UnitedHealthcare
SignatureValue
Harmony
Western Health
Advantage HMO
Alameda ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ■
Alpine ● ● ● ●
Amador ● ● ● ●
Butte ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Calaveras ● ● ● ●
Colusa ● ● ● ● ●
Contra Costa ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ■
Del Norte ● ● ● ●
El Dorado ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Fresno ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Glenn ● ● ● ● ●
Humboldt ● ● ● ● ● ●
Imperial ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Inyo ● ● ● ●
Kern ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Kings ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Lake ● ● ● ●
Lassen ● ● ● ●
Los Angeles ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Madera ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Marin ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ■ ●
Mariposa ● ● ● ● ● ●
Mendocino ● ● ● ● ●
Merced ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ■
Modoc ● ● ● ●
Mono ● ● ● ●
Monterey ● ●1 ● ● ●
Napa ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Nevada ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Orange ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
1 Pending regulatory approval.
2023 Health Benefit Summary | 7
County
Anthem Blue Cross
EPO
Anthem Blue Cross
Select HMO
Anthem Blue Cross
Traditional HMO
Blue Shield
Access+ HMO
Blue Shield
Access+ EPO
Blue Shield Trio HMO
CAHPCCPOA Medical Plan
Health Net
Salud y Más
Health Net SmartCare
Kaiser PermanentePERS Gold &PERS PlatinumPORAC
Sharp Performance
Plus
UnitedHealthcare
SignatureValue
Alliance
UnitedHealthcare
SignatureValue
Harmony
Western Health
Advantage HMO
Placer ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Plumas ● ● ● ●
Riverside ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Sacramento ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
San Benito ● ● ● ●
San Bernardino ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
San Diego ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
San Francisco ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ■
San Joaquin ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ■
San Luis Obispo ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
San Mateo ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ■
Santa Barbara ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Santa Clara ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ■
Santa Cruz ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ■
Shasta ● ● ● ●
Sierra ● ● ● ●
Siskiyou ● ● ● ●
Solano ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ■ ●
Sonoma ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ■ ●
Stanislaus ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ■
Sutter ● ● ● ●
Tehama ● ● ● ●
Trinity ● ● ● ●
Tulare ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Tuolumne ● ● ● ●
Ventura ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Yolo ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Yuba ● ● ● ●
Out-of-State ● ▲ ●
8 | 2023 Health Benefit Summary
Health Plan Availability by County: Medicare Plans
Some health plans are available only in certain counties and/or ZIP Codes. Use the chart below to determine if the health plan you are considering provides services where you reside or work. Contact the plan before enrolling to make sure they cover your ZIP Code and that their provider network is accepting new patients in your area. You may also use our online service, the Health Plan Search
by ZIP Code, available at www.calpers.ca.gov.

All counties subject to regulatory approval.

County
Anthem Medicare
Preferred PPOBlue Shield
Medicare PPO
CAHP Medicare
Supplement
CCPOA Medical Plan
Medicare (PPO)
Kaiser Permanente
Senior Advantage
Kaiser Permanente
Senior Advantage Summit
PERS Gold Medicare
Supplement
PERS Platinum
Medicare Supplement
PORAC Medicare
SupplementSharp Direct
Advantage HMO
UnitedHealthcare
Group Medicare
Advantage PPO
UnitedHealthcare
Group Medicare
Advantage Edge PPO
Western Health
Advantage MyCare
Select HMO
Alameda ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Alpine ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Amador ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Butte ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Calaveras ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Colusa ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Contra Costa ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Del Norte ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
El Dorado ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Fresno ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Glenn ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Humboldt ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Imperial ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Inyo ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Kern ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Kings ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Lake ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Lassen ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Los Angeles ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Madera ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Marin ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Mariposa ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Mendocino ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Merced ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Modoc ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Mono ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Monterey ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Napa ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Nevada ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Orange ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
2023 Health Benefit Summary | 9
County
Anthem Medicare
Preferred PPOBlue Shield
Medicare PPO
CAHP Medicare
Supplement
CCPOA Medical Plan
Medicare (PPO)
Kaiser Permanente
Senior Advantage
Kaiser Permanente
Senior Advantage Summit
PERS Gold Medicare
Supplement
PERS Platinum
Medicare Supplement
PORAC Medicare
SupplementSharp Direct
Advantage HMO
UnitedHealthcare
Group Medicare
Advantage PPO
UnitedHealthcare
Group Medicare
Advantage Edge PPO
Western Health
Advantage MyCare
Select HMO
Placer ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Plumas ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Riverside ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Sacramento ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
San Benito ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
San
Bernardino ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
San Diego ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
San Francisco ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
San Joaquin ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
San Luis
Obispo ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
San Mateo ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Santa Barbara ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Santa Clara ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Santa Cruz ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Shasta ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Sierra ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Siskiyou ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Solano ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Sonoma ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Stanislaus ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Sutter ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Tehama ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Trinity ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Tulare ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Tuolumne ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Ventura ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Yolo ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Yuba ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Out-of-State ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
10 | 2023 Health Benefit Summary
Tools to Help You Choose Your Health Plan
This section provides a variety of information that can help you evaluate your health plan choices. Included here are details about using your myCalPERS account, the Search
Health Plans tool, and the Health Plan Choice Worksheet.

Accessing Health Plan Information with myCalPERS
You can use myCalPERS at my.calpers.ca.gov, our secure, personalized website, to get one-stop access to all of your current health plan information, including details about which family members are enrolled. You can also use it to search for other health plans that are available in your area, compare health plans, access CalPERS Health Program
forms, and find additional information about CalPERS
health plans. If you are a retiree, CalPERS is your Health Benefits Officer. Retirees may change their health plan during Open Enrollment by calling CalPERS toll free
at 888 CalPERS (or 888–225–7377) or by using your
myCalPERS account.
myCalPERS Health Plan Comparison Feature
Health Plan Resources
Choosing a health plan that’s right for you is unique for every person or family. myCalPERS includes additional
resources to help you choose a health plan. These resources provide access to more detailed health benefit information that can help you when selecting what is most important to you in determining the plan that best fits your needs.

Evaluate Plan Features
Available health plans for you will be displayed based on the physical or mailing health eligibility ZIP Code in our system.

Create a customized plan search where you’ll be able
to review:
• Monthly premiums for each plan available to you
• Side-by-side comparisons of covered benefits,
deductibles, and copayments for up to three plans
at one time.

Your myCalPERS Account
Log in to your myCalPERS account at my.calpers.ca.gov
and select the “Health” tab and then select “Search Health Plans” to see what’s available to you. To speak with
someone at CalPERS about your health plan choices,
call 888 CalPERS (or 888–225–7377).
2023 Health Benefit Summary | 11
Get customized assistance selecting the health
plan that is right for you and your family by logging
into your myCalPERS account at my.calpers.ca.gov,
selecting the “Health” tab and then selecting
“Search Health Plans.”
Comparing Your Options: Health Plan Choice Worksheet
An alternative tool we provide to help you choose the best plan for yourself and your family is the Health Plan Choice Worksheet, which you can find on page 12 of this
publication. This worksheet can be used to compare factors such as cost, availability, benefits, and quality of care measures. Simply follow the steps listed in the left column of the Worksheet. Several questions can be answered with a simple “yes” or “no,” while others will require you to insert information or call the health plan. Some of the information can be found on the CalPERS website at www.calpers.ca.gov.

If you need assistance completing the form, contact
CalPERS at 888 CalPERS (or 888–225–7377).

Comparing Your Options: Search Health Plans
Access your myCalPERS account for a convenient way to
evaluate your health plan options and make a decision
about which plan is best for you and your family. With this easy-to-use health plan comparison tool, you can weigh
plan benefits and costs, and view how the plans compare.

You can access your account 24/7 to help you make
health plan decisions at any time. You can use it to:
• Review health plan options during Open Enrollment.
• Evaluate your health plan options and estimate costs. • Review a health plan option when your employer first
begins offering the CalPERS Health Benefits Program.
• Search doctors and specialists to see which plans they participate in.
• Review health plan options due to changes in your
marital status or enrollment area.
• Explore health plan options because you are planning
for retirement or have become Medicare eligible.

Be sure to tell us what you think about your myCalPERS
plan search experience by completing a survey at the end of your research.
12 | 2023 Health Benefit Summary
Plan name and phone numbers:

Select the type of plan: (circle choice) HMO PPO EPO Assoc.

Plan1 HMO PPO EPO Assoc.Plan1
Step 1 — Cost
Calculate your monthly cost.

Enter the monthly premium (see current year’s rate
schedule). Premium amounts will vary based on
1-party/2-party/family and Basic/Medicare.
- - -
Enter your employer’s contribution.

For contribution amounts, active members should
contact their employer; retired members should
contact CalPERS.
- -
Calculate your cost.

Subtract your employer’s contribution from the monthly
premium. If the total is $0 or less, your cost is $0.
-
Step 2 — Availability
Search available plans online.

Use our online service, the Health Plan Search by Zip
Code, at www.calpers.ca.gov to find out if the plan is
available in your residential or work ZIP Code. You may also call the plan’s customer service center.
- -
Call the doctor’s office.

Confirm that they contract with the plan and are
accepting new patients. Ask what specialists are
available and the hospitals with which they are affiliated. - -
Step 3 — Comparisons
How does the plan rate in quality of care measures?
See page 15 to find out. - -
Compare the benefits.

See pages 16–31. CalPERS plans offer a standard
package of benefits, but there are some differences:
acupuncture, chiropractic, etc.
- -
Step 4 — Other
Other considerations:

Does the plan offer health education? Do you or your
family have special medical needs? What services
are available when you travel? Are the provider
locations convenient?
- -
What changes are you planning in the upcoming year
(e.g., retirement, transfer, move, etc.)? - -
Other information - -
Compare and select a plan.
1 You must belong to the specific employee association and pay applicable dues to enroll in the Association Plans.

Health Plan Choice Worksheet
2023 Health Benefit Summary | 13
Association Plans (CCPOA, CAHP, and PORAC) are available only to members who belong to the applicable association.

In 2022, PERS Choice and PERSCare transitioned to
PERS Platinum and PERS Select transitioned to PERS Gold.

CalPERS Health Plan Member Survey Results
CalPERS conducts an annual Health Plan Member
Survey to assess members’ satisfaction with their health plans during the previous 12-month period. We use
a modified version of the Consumer Assessment of
Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Survey, a
standard tool for measuring health plans. CalPERS evaluates the survey results to compare satisfaction ratings across health plans and over time. The results below reflect health plan satisfaction during the 2021 plan year.

Member ratings offer another tool to help you choose
a plan that is right for you. Please note that your experience may differ. The health plan ratings are based on the
experience of the individuals who participated in the survey.

Member Rating of Health Plans
Members were asked to rate their health plan on a
10-point scale with 10 being the best health plan possible.

The following charts show the average rating by plan
respondents in eligible Basic and Medicare health plans.

The CalPERS Health Benefits Program Annual
Report displays other valuable information about
the Health Program. To view the report, visit
CalPERS online at www.calpers.ca.gov.

Medicare Plan Ratings
Anthem Blue Cross Medicare Preferred
CAHP Medicare Supplement 9.4
Kaiser Permanente Senior Advantage 8.8
PERS Choice Medicare Supplement 8.9
PERSCare Medicare Supplement 9.2
PORAC Medicare Supplement 9.0
UnitedHealthcare Group MA 9.2

8.6 PERS Select Medicare Supplement 8.9
Overall Average Medicare Rating 9.0
Basic Plan Ratings
Anthem Blue Cross Traditional
Blue Shield Access+
Blue Shield Trio
CAHP
CCPOA
Health Net Salud y Más
Health Net SmartCare
Kaiser Permanente
PORAC
Sharp Performance Plus
UnitedHealthcare Alliance
Western Health Advantage
PERSCare 8.2

8.2 8.4

8.6 8.2

7.9 PERS Select 6.2

8.0 8.6

8.1 8.6

8.0 Anthem Blue Cross Select 8.0

7.8 7.7
PERS Choice 7.6
Overall Average Basic Rating 7.9
14 | 2023 Health Benefit Summary
Health Plan Directory
Anthem Blue Cross2 HMO & EPO
(855) 839-4524
www.anthem.com/ca/calpers
Anthem Medicare Preferred2 PPO
(855) 251-8825
www.anthem.com/ca/calpers
Blue Shield of California
Active Member Services
(800) 334-5847
Medicare Member Services
(888) 802-4599
www.blueshieldca.com/calpers
California Association of
Highway Patrolmen (CAHP)
(800) 734-2247
www.thecahp.org
California Correctional Peace
Officers Association (CCPOA)
Active Member Services
(800) 257-6213
Medicare Member Services
(800) 776-4466
www.ccpoabtf.org
Health Net of California1
(888) 926-4921
www.healthnet.com/calpers
Kaiser Permanente
(800) 464-4000
www.kp.org/calpers
OptumRx
Pharmacy Benefit Manager
Active Member Services
(855) 505-8110
Medicare Member Services
(855) 505-8106
www.optumrx.com/calpers
PERS Gold2 and PERS Platinum2
Administered by Anthem Blue Cross
(877) 737-7776
www.anthem.com/ca/calpers
Supplement to Medicare
(877) 737-7776
Peace Officers Research
Association of California (PORAC)
(800) 655-6397
http://ibtofporac.org
Sharp Health Plan 1
Active Member Services
(855) 955-5004
Retiree Member Services
(833) 346-4322
sharphealthplan.com/CalPERS
UnitedHealthcare
Active Member Services
(877) 359-3714
www.uhc.com/calpers
Retiree Member Services
(888) 867-5581
www.UHCRetiree.com/calpers
Western Health Advantage2
Active Member Services
(888) 942-7377
Medicare Member Services
(888) 942-7377
www.westernhealth.com/calpers
1 Pharmacy benefits administered by
OptumRx for the Basic plan only.
2 Pharmacy benefits administered
by OptumRx for both Basic and
Medicare plans.

Additional Resources
As a health care consumer, you have access to many
resources, services, and tools that can help you find the right health plan, doctor, medical group, and hospital
for yourself and your family.

Following is contact information for the health plans.

Contact your health plan with questions about: ID cards; verification of provider participation; service area
boundaries (covered ZIP Codes); benefits, deductibles,
limitations, exclusions; and Evidence of Coverage booklets. 2023 Health Benefit Summary | 15
Obtaining Health Care Quality Information
Hospitals
Cal Hospital Compare
www.calhospitalcompare.org
Cal Hospital Compare makes it easy to find and compare
the quality of hospitals in California.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
www.medicare.gov/hospitalcompare
Hospital Compare has information about the quality of
care at over 4,000 Medicare-certified hospitals across
the country.

The Leapfrog Group
www.leapfroggroup.org
This is a coalition of health purchasers who have
found that hospitals meeting certain standards have
better care results.

Doctors and Medical Groups
Medical Board of California
www.mbc.ca.gov
This is the California State agency that licenses medical doctors, investigates complaints, disciplines those who violate the law, conducts physician evaluations, and
facilitates rehabilitation where appropriate.

Have you done a checkup on your doctor’s license?
The Medical Board of California encourages consumers
to check up on their doctor’s license. Such a checkup is simple and helps you make an informed choice when
choosing a doctor. To determine a doctor’s status, go to the Medical Board’s website at www.mbc.ca.gov or if you do not have a computer, call (800) 633-2322 and Medical Board staff will look up the doctor for you.

Office of the Patient Advocate
www.opa.ca.gov
This website includes a State of California-sponsored
“Report Card” that contains additional clinical and
member experience data on HMOs, PPOs and medical
groups in California.

Following is a list of resources you can use to evaluate and select a doctor and hospital.

Benefit Comparison Charts
The benefit comparison charts on pages 16–31
summarize the benefit information for each
health plan. For more details, see each plan’s
Evidence of Coverage (EOC) booklet.
16 | 2023 Health Benefit Summary
For more details about the benefits provided by a specific plan, refer to that plan’s Evidence of Coverage (EOC) booklet.

For more details about the benefits provided by a specific plan, refer to that plan’s Evidence of Coverage (EOC) booklet.

All benefits subject to regulatory approval.

CalPERS Health Plan Benefit Comparison—
Basic Plans
EPO & HMO Basic Plans

BENEFITS
PERS Gold PERS Platinum CAHP
(Association Plan)
PORAC
(Association Plan)
PPO Non-PPO PPO Non-PPO PPO Non-PPO PPO Non-PPO
Calendar Year Deductible
N/A N/A Individual $1,000 1,3 $500 3 N/A $300 $600
N/A N/A Family $2,000 1,3 $1,000 3 N/A $900 $1,800
Maximum Calendar Year Copay or Coinsurance (excluding pharmacy) $1,500
(copay)
$1,500
(copay) Individual $3,000(coinsurance) Unlimited $2,000 (coinsurance) Unlimited $3,000
(coinsurance) Unlimited $2,000 Unlimited
$3,000
(copay)
$4,500
(copay) Family $6,000 (coinsurance) Unlimited $4,000
(coinsurance) Unlimited $6,000
(coinsurance) Unlimited $4,000 Unlimited
Hospital (including Mental Health and Substance Abuse)
N/A N/A Deductible
(per admission) N/A $250 N/A N/A
No Charge $100/
admission Inpatient 20% 2 40% 4 10% 40% 4 10% Varies 20% 20% 4 No Charge $50 Outpatient Facility/
Surgery Services 20% 40% 4 10% 40% 4 10% 40% 4 20% 20% 4 1 Incentives available to reduce individual deductible (max. $500) or family deductible (max. $1,000) include: getting a biometric screening ($100 credit); receiving a flu shot ($100 credit); getting a non-smoking certification ($100 credit); getting a virtual second opinion ($100 credit); and getting a condition care certification ($100 credit). 2 Coinsurance waived for deliveries if enrolled in Future Moms Program. 3 Deductible is transferable between PERS Gold and PERS Platinum. 4 Of the allowable amount as defined in the EOC.
18 | 2023 Health Benefit Summary
For more details about the benefits provided by a specific plan, refer to that plan’s Evidence of Coverage (EOC) booklet.

All benefits subject to regulatory approval.

CalPERS Health Plan Benefit Comparison—Basic Plans, Continued EPO & HMO Basic Plans

BENEFITS
PERS Gold PERS Platinum CAHP
(Association Plan)
PORAC
(Association Plan)
PPO Non-PPO PPO Non-PPO PPO Non-PPO PPO Non-PPO
Emergency Services
N/A N/A Emergency Room
Deductible
$50
(applies to hospital
emergency room facility
charge only)
$50
(applies to hospital
emergency room
charges only)
$50
(copay reduced to $25
if admitted on an
inpatient basis)
N/A
$50 $75 Emergency
20%
(applies to other services
such as physician, x-ray,
lab, etc.)
10%
(applies to other services
such as physician, x-ray,
lab, etc.)
10%
(applies to other services
such as physician, x-ray,
lab, etc.)
20%
$50 $75 Non-Emergency
20% 40% 10% 40% $50+10% $50+40% 50%
(for non-emergency
services provided by
hospital emergency room)
(payment for physician
charges only; emergency
room facility charge is
not covered)
(payment for physician
charges only; emergency
room facility charge is
not covered)
(copay reduced to $25
if admitted on an
inpatient basis)
Physician Services (including Mental Health and Substance Abuse) $15 $15 Office Visits (copay for
each service provided) $35 1 40% 3 $20 2 40% 3 $20 40% 3 $10/$35 2 20% 3 No Charge No Charge Inpatient Visits 20% 40% 3 10% 40% 3 10% 40% 3 20% 20% 3 $15 $15 Outpatient Visits $35 40% 3 $20 40% 3 10% 40% 3 20% 20% 3 $15 $15 Urgent Care Visits $35 40% 3 $35 40% 3 $20 40% 3 $35 20% 3 No Charge No Charge Preventive Services No Charge 40% 3 No Charge 40% 3 No
Charge 40% 3 No Charge
No Charge No Charge Surgery/Anesthesia 20% 40% 3 10% 40% 3 10% 40% 3 20% 20% 3 Diagnostic X-Ray/Lab
No Charge No Charge 20% 40% 3 10% 40% 3 10% 40% 3 20% 20% 3 1 Reduced to $10 when seen by primary physician
2 $35 for specialist visit
3 Of the allowable amount as defined in the EOC
20 | 2023 Health Benefit Summary
For more details about the benefits provided by a specific plan, refer to that plan’s Evidence of Coverage (EOC) booklet.

All benefits subject to regulatory approval.

CalPERS Health Plan Benefit Comparison—Basic Plans, Continued EPO & HMO Basic Plans

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Retail Pharmacy
(30-day supply) Tier 1: $5
Tier 2: $20
Tier 3: $50
Generic/Tier 11: $5
Preferred Brand/
Tier 21: $20
Non-Preferred/
Tier 31
: $50
Tier 41: $30
Tier 1: $5
Tier 2: $20
Tier 3: $50
Generic: $5
Brand: $20
Tier 1: $5
Tier 2: $20
Tier 3: $50
Tier 1: $5
Tier 2: $20
Tier 3: $50
Tier 1: $5
Tier 2: $20
Tier 3: $50
Retail Preferred
Pharmacy Maintenance
Medications
(90-day supply)
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Generic/Tier 11: $10
Preferred Brand/
Tier 21: $40
Non-Preferred/
Tier 31
: $100
Tier 41: $60
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
N/A
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Mail Order Pharmacy
Program (not to exceed 90-
day supply for maintenance
drugs)
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Generic/Tier 11: $10
Preferred Brand/
Tier 21: $40
Non-Preferred/
Tier 31: $100
Tier 41
: $60
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Generic: $10
Brand: $40
(31-100 day
supply)
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Mail order maximum
copayment per person per
calendar year $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 N/A $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 Durable Medical Equipment
No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge 1 Tier Formulary is for BSC Trio HMO only
Tier 1 refers to medications classified as ‘Generic’; Tier 2 refers to medications classified as “Preferred Brand”; and Tier 3 refers to medications classified as “Non-Preferred Brand”. 2023 Health Benefit Summary | 21
Continued on next page
PPO Basic Plans
Western
Health
Advantage
HMO
CCPOA
(Association
Plan)

BENEFITS
PERS Gold PERS Platinum CAHP
(Association Plan)
PORAC
(Association Plan)
PPO Non-PPO PPO Non-PPO PPO Non-PPO PPO Non-PPO
Prescription Drugs
N/A
Tier 2, 3,
and 4: $50
(not to exceed
$150/family)
Deductible

N/A N/A N/A N/A
Tier 1: $5
Tier 2: $20
Tier 3: $50
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $25
Tier 3 and 4:
$50
Retail Pharmacy
(30-day supply) Tier 1: $5
Tier 2: $20
Tier 3: $50
Tier 1: $5
Tier 2: $20
Tier 3: $50
Generic: $5
Formulary: $20
Non-Formulary: $50
Generic: $10
Brand Formulary: $25
Non-Formulary: $45
Compound: $45
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Tier 1: $30
Tier 2: $75
Tier 3 and 4:
$150
Retail Preferred
Pharmacy
Maintenance
Medications
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Generic: $10
Formulary: $40
Non-Formulary:
$100
N/A
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Tier 1: $30
Tier 2: $75
Tier 3 and 4:
$100
Mail Order Pharmacy
Program (not to exceed
90-day supply for
maintenance drugs)
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Generic: $10
Formulary: $40
Non-Formulary:
$100
Generic: $20
Brand
Formulary:
$40
Non-Formulary:
$75
N/A
$1,000 N/A
Mail order maximum
copayment per person
per calendar year $1,000 $1,000 N/A N/A
Durable Medical Equipment
No Charge No Charge
20% 40% 1 10% 40% 1
10% 40% 1 20% 20% 1
(pre-certification required
for specific equipment)
(pre-certification required
for the purchase of
equipment priced at $1,000
or more)
1 Of the allowable amount as defined in the EOC
22 | 2023 Health Benefit Summary
For more details about the benefits provided by a specific plan, refer to that plan’s Evidence of Coverage (EOC) booklet.

All benefits subject to regulatory approval.

CalPERS Health Plan Benefit Comparison—Basic Plans, Continued EPO & HMO Basic Plans

BENEFITS
Anthem
Blue Cross
Blue Shield Health Net Kaiser
Permanente
Sharp
Performance
Plus
UnitedHealthcare
SignatureValue
Alliance
UnitedHealthcare
SignatureValue
Harmony EPO
Select HMO
Traditional HMO
Access+ HMO &
Access+ EPO
Trio HMO
Salud y Más &
SmartCare
Infertility Testing/Treatment
50% of Covered
Charges
50% of Covered
Charges
50% of Covered
Charges
50% of
Covered
Charges
50% of
Covered
Charges
50% of Covered
Charges
50% of Covered
Charges
Occupational / Physical / Speech Therapy
Inpatient (hospital or skilled
nursing facility)
No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge Outpatient (office and
home visits)
$15 $15 $15 $15 $15 $15 $15
Diabetes Services
Glucose monitors Coverage varies No Charge Coverage varies No Charge Coverage varies Coverage varies Coverage varies
Self-management
training $15 $15 $15 $15 $15 $15 $15
Acupuncture
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined
20 visits per
calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined
20 visits per
calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined
20 visits per
calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined
20 visits per
calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined
20 visits per
calendar year)
Chiropractic
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined
20 visits per
calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined
20 visits per
calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined
20 visits per
calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined
20 visits per
calendar year)
2023 Health Benefit Summary | 23
Continued on next page
PPO Basic Plans
Western
Health
Advantage
HMO
CCPOA
(Association
Plan)

BENEFITS
PERS Gold PERS Platinum CAHP
(Association Plan)
PORAC
(Association Plan)
PPO Non-PPO PPO Non-PPO PPO Non-PPO PPO Non-PPO
Infertility Testing/Treatment
50% of
Covered
Charges
50% of
Allowed
Charges
50% 50% Not Covered 50% 50% 2
Occupational / Physical / Speech Therapy
No Charge No Charge Inpatient (hospital or
skilled nursing facility) No Charge No Charge 10% 40%
20%
(no copay for
in-patient PT/
OT by a PAR
provider)
20% 2
$15 No Charge
Outpatient (office and
home visits) 20%
40%;
Occupational
therapy: 20%
10%
40%;
Occupational
therapy: 10%
10% 40% $15/visit (all other
services
20%)3
20% 2
(pre-certification required
for more than 24 visits)
(pre-certification required
for more than 24 visits)
(pre-certification required
for more than 24 visits)
Diabetes Services
Coverage
varies
Coverage
varies Glucose monitors Coverage Varies Coverage Varies Coverage Varies Coverage Varies $15 $15 Self-management
training $20 1 40% 2 $20 1 40% 2 $20 60% 2 $20 60% 2
Acupuncture
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined
20 visits per
calendar year)
N/A
$15/visit 40% 2 $15/visit 40% 2 10% 40% 2
$15 copay
(all other
services
20%)3
20% 2
(acupuncture/chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
(acupuncture/chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
(acupuncture/chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
Chiropractic
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined
20 visits per
calendar year)
$15 exam
(up to 20
visits per
calendar year)
chiropractic
appliances
benefit: $50
$15/visit 40% 2 $15/visit 40% 2 10% 40% 2
$15/visit
(combined
20 visits per
calendar year)
20% 2 (acupuncture/chiropractic;
combined 20 visits per
calendar year)
(acupuncture/chiropractic;
combined 20 visits per
calendar year)
(acupuncture/chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
1 $35 for specialist visit
2 Of the allowable amount as defined in the EOC
3 Combined 20 visits per calendar year. Speech therapy is not included in the 20 visit per calendar year combination; see EOC for Speech Therapy benefit.

CalPERS Health Plans Benefit Comparison — Basic Plans, Continued 24 | 2023 Health Benefit Summary
For more details about the benefits provided by a specific plan, refer to that plan’s Evidence of Coverage (EOC) booklet.

CalPERS Health Plan Benefit Comparison—
Medicare Plans
For more details about the benefits provided by a specific plan, refer to that plan’s Evidence of Coverage (EOC) booklet.

All benefits subject to regulatory approval.

Medicare Plans

BENEFITS
Kaiser Permanente
Senior Advantage
(HMO)
Kaiser Permanente
Senior Advantage
Summit (HMO)
Anthem Medicare
Preferred (PPO)
Blue Shield
Medicare (PPO)
Sharp Direct
Advantage (HMO)
UnitedHealthcare
Group Medicare
Advantage (PPO)
Calendar Year Deductible
Individual N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Family N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Maximum Calendar Year Copay or Coinsurance (excluding pharmacy) Individual $1,500
(copay)
$1,500
(copay)
$1,500
(copay/coinsurance)
$1,500
(copay)
$1,500
(copay/coinsurance)
$1,500
(copay)
Family N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Hospital (including Mental Health and Substance Abuse)
Inpatient No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge Outpatient Facility/
Surgery Services $10 No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge Skilled Nursing Facility (up to 100 days/benefit period) No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge Home Health Services
No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge Hospice
No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge Emergency Services (waived if admitted or hospitalized as an outpatient) $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50
Ambulance Services
No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge 2023 Health Benefit Summary | 25
Continued on next page
Medicare Plans
UnitedHealthcare
Group Medicare
Advantage Edge
(PPO)
Western Health
Advantage
MyCare Select
(HMO)
CCPOA
Medical Plan
Medicare
(PPO) BENEFITS
PERS Gold PERS Platinum CAHP
Medicare
Supplement
(Association
Plan)
PORAC
(Association
Plan) PPO NonPPO
PPO NonPPO
Calendar Year Deductible
N/A N/A N/A Individual N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A Family N/A N/A N/A N/A
Maximum Calendar Year Copay or Coinsurance (excluding pharmacy) $0
(copay)
$1,500
(copay/
coinsurance)
$1,500
(copay) Individual N/A
$3,0001,2
(coinsurance)

N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A Family N/A N/A N/A N/A
Hospital (including Mental Health and Substance Abuse)
No Charge No Charge $100/
admission Inpatient No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge Outpatient Facility/
Surgery Services No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge Skilled Nursing Facility (up to 100 days/benefit period) No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge Home Health Services
No Charge No Charge $15/visit No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge Hospice
No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge Emergency Services (waived if admitted or hospitalized as an outpatient) No Charge $50 No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge Ambulance Services
No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge 1 See EOC for additional details
2 For Benefits Beyond Medicare
3 Of the allowed amount
26 | 2023 Health Benefit Summary
CalPERS Health Plans Benefit Comparison — Medicare Plans, Continued For more details about the benefits provided by a specific plan, refer to that plan’s Evidence of Coverage (EOC) booklet.

All benefits subject to regulatory approval.

CalPERS Health Plan Benefit Comparison—Medicare Plans, Continued Medicare Plans

All benefits subject to regulatory approval.

CalPERS Health Plan Benefit Comparison—Medicare Plans, Continued Medicare Plans

BENEFITS
Kaiser Permanente
Senior Advantage
(HMO)
Kaiser Permanente
Senior Advantage
Summit (HMO)
Anthem Medicare
Preferred (PPO)
Blue Shield
Medicare (PPO)
Sharp Direct
Advantage (HMO)
UnitedHealthcare
Group Medicare
Advantage (PPO)
Prescription Drugs
Deductible N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Retail Pharmacy
(30-day supply) Generic: $5
Preferred: $20
Generic: $5
Preferred: $20
Tier 1: $5
Tier 2: $20
Tier 3: $50
Tier 1: $5
Tier 2: $20
Tier 3: $50
Tier 4: $20
Preferred Generic: $5
Generic: $5
Preferred Brand: $20
Non-Preferred: $50
Specialty: $20
Select Care: $0
Generic: $5
Preferred: $20
Specialty: $20
Non-Preferred: $50
Retail Preferred
Pharmacy Long-Term
Prescription Medications

N/A N/A
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Tier 4: N/A
Preferred Generic: $15
Generic: $15
Preferred Brand: $60
Non-Preferred: $150
Specialty: N/A
Select Care: $0
Generic: $10
Preferred: $40
Specialty: $40
Non-Preferred: $100
Mail Order
Pharmacy Program
(not to exceed 90-day supply)
Generic: $10
Preferred: $40
(31-100 day supply)
Generic: $10
Preferred: $40
(31-100 day supply)
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Tier 4: N/A
Preferred Generic: $10
Generic: $10
Preferred Brand: $40
Non-Preferred: $100
Specialty: N/A
Select Care: $0
Generic: $10
Preferred: $40
Specialty: $40
Non-Preferred: $100
Mail order maximum
copayment per person
per calendar year N/A N/A $1,000 $1,000 N/A $1,000
Occupational / Physical / Speech Therapy
Inpatient (hospital or skilled
nursing facility) No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge Outpatient
(office and home visits) $10 No Charge $10 No Charge No Charge $10 Diabetes Services
Glucose monitors No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge 2023 Health Benefit Summary | 29
Continued on next page
Medicare Plans
UnitedHealthcare
Group Medicare
Advantage Edge
(PPO)
Western Health
Advantage
MyCare Select
(HMO)
CCPOA
Medical Plan
Medicare
(PPO) BENEFITS
PERS Gold PERS Platinum CAHP
Medicare
Supplement
(Association
Plan)
PORAC
(Association
Plan) PPO NonPPO
PPO NonPPO
Prescription Drugs
N/A N/A N/A Deductible N/A N/A N/A $100
Tier 1: $5
Tier 2: $20
Tier 3: $50
Tier 1: $5
Tier 2: $20
Tier 3: $50
Tier 1: $5
Tier 2: $20
Tier 3: $35
Tier 4: $50
Retail Pharmacy
(30-day supply) Tier 1: $5
Tier 2: $20
Tier 3: $50
Tier 1: $5
Tier 2: $20
Tier 3: $50
Generic: $5
Formulary:
$20
NonFormulary:
$50
Generic: $10
Preferred:
$25
NonPreferred:
$45
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Generic: $10
Preferred: $40
Tier 3: $100
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $70
Tier 4: N/A
Retail Preferred
Pharmacy
Maintenance
Medication
(90-day supply)
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Generic: $5
Formulary:
$20
NonFormulary:
$50
N/A
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $70
Tier 4: N/A
Mail Order
Pharmacy Program
(not to exceed 90-day
supply for maintenance
drugs)
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Tier 1: $10
Tier 2: $40
Tier 3: $100
Generic: $10
Formulary:
$40
NonFormulary:
$100
Generic: $20
Preferred:
$40
NonPreferred:
$75
$1,000 $1,000 N/A
Mail order maximum
copayment per
person per
calendar year
$1,000 $1,000 N/A N/A
Occupational / Physical / Speech Therapy
No Charge No Charge No Charge Inpatient (hospital or
skilled nursing facility) No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge Outpatient (office and
home visits) No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge
Diabetes Services
No Charge No Charge No Charge Glucose monitors No Charge No Charge No Charge $25 1 Of the allowed amount
2 See EOC for additional details
30 | 2023 Health Benefit Summary
CalPERS Health Plans Benefit Comparison — Medicare Plans, Continued For more details about the benefits provided by a specific plan, refer to that plan’s Evidence of Coverage (EOC) booklet.

All benefits subject to regulatory approval.

CalPERS Health Plan Benefit Comparison—Medicare Plans, Continued Medicare Plans

BENEFITS
Kaiser Permanente
Senior Advantage
(HMO)
Kaiser Permanente
Senior Advantage
Summit (HMO)
Anthem Medicare
Preferred (PPO)
Blue Shield
Medicare (PPO)
Sharp Direct
Advantage (HMO)
UnitedHealthcare
Group Medicare
Advantage (PPO)
Hearing Services
Routine Hearing Exam $10 No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge Physician Services $10 No Charge $10 $10 $10 $10
Hearing Aids $1,000 max/
36 months
$1,000 max/
36 months
$1,000 max/
36 months
$1,000 max/
36 months
$1,000 max/
36 months
$1,000 max/
36 months
Vision Care
Vision Exam $10 No Charge $10 $10 $10 $10
Eyeglasses (following
cataract surgery)
No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge Contact Lenses
(following cataract
surgery)
No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge No Charge Benefits Beyond Medicare (Services covered beyond Medicare coverage) Acupuncture
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
$10/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
Chiropractic
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
$10/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
2023 Health Benefit Summary | 31
Continued on next page
Medicare Plans
UnitedHealthcare
Group Medicare
Advantage Edge
(PPO)
Western Health
Advantage
MyCare Select
(HMO)
CCPOA
Medical Plan
Medicare
(PPO) BENEFITS
PERS Gold PERS Platinum CAHP
Medicare
Supplement
(Association
Plan)
PORAC
(Association
Plan) PPO NonPPO
PPO NonPPO
Hearing Services
No Charge No Charge No Charge Routine Hearing Exam No Charge No Charge No Charge 20% No Charge No Charge $10 Physician Services No Charge No Charge No Charge 20% $2,000
allowance every
24 months
$1,000 max/
36 months
$500 max/
12 months Hearing Aids
20%
($1,000 max/36
months)
20%
($2,000 max/24
months)
10%
($1,000 max/
36 months)
20%
($900 max/
36 months)
Vision Care
No Charge No Charge $10 Vision Exam One exam per
calendar year
One exam per
calendar year N/A 20%
No Charge No Charge No Charge
Eyeglasses One set of
frames during a
24-month period;
$30 maximum
allowance
One set of
frames during a
24-month period;
$30 maximum
allowance
N/A
20%
($40 maximum
allowance)
No Charge No Charge No Charge
Contact Lenses
$100 maximum
allowance
$100 maximum
allowance No Charge
20%
($40 maximum
allowance)
Benefits Beyond Medicare (Services covered beyond Medicare coverage) $15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined
20 visits per
calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined
20 visits per
calendar year)
Acupuncture
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
20% 20%
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined
20 visits per
calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined
20 visits per
calendar year)
Chiropractic
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
$15/visit
(acupuncture/
chiropractic;
combined 20 visits
per calendar year)
20% 20%
32 | 2023 Health Benefit Summary
Notes
2023 Health Benefit Summary | 33
Notes
CalPERS Health Benefits Program
P.O. Box 942715
Sacramento, CA 94229-2715
888 CalPERS (or 888-225-7377)
www.calpers.ca.gov
HBD–110
Produced by CalPERS
Communications and Stakeholder Relations
Office of Public Affairs
September 2022.09.1

From: Miriam Morris
To: Public Comment
Subject: Public Comment, unagendized: Calanan Park as a Commercial-free zone Date: Sunday, September 10, 2023 3:50:37 PM
CAUTION: This email is from an external sender. If you are not expecting this email or don't recognize the sender, consider deleting.

Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. If you have more questions search for Cybersecurity Awareness on the County InfoNet.

Dear Council,
Calanan Park was created as a Memorial Park in the 1920s, when the horror of the first World War was fresh in everyone’s minds. It was envisioned by the women who worked hard to create it, as a place of peace and beauty. I have labored over these past 11 years to realize their vision.

In order to protect the park as a place for respite, to enjoy nature, to sit in the shade, I request the City designate the entire park as a commercial-free zone.

Several days a week lately, and less frequently in the past year, Mishka takes over a large portion of the park as his junk jewelry shop. He stashes items in the plants, crushing them. He breaks into the electric outlet. He has even stored display furniture in the bushes, smashing plants in his way.

This operation greatly detracts from the beauty and function of the park as a resting place. Instead it looks like a flea market.

Please help keep the park as a natural peaceful oasis as the originators intended by designating it a place where items cannot be sold.

Thank you for your consideration.

Miriam Morris
Nevada City

Nevada City City CouncilSeptember 13, 2023

Nevada City City Council
September 13, 2023