Agenda packet — Oroville City Council, August 6, 2024 (part 2 of 2)

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: FRED MAYO, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
RE: 655 CAL OAK ROAD - NEW CORP YARD PELIMINARY DESIGN OF

ADMINISTRATION BUIDING AND PROPOSED BUDGET
DATE: AUGUST 6, 2024

SUMMARY
The City Council shall receive a brief update on the status of the preliminary design concepts for the new corporation yard located at 655 Cal Oak Road.

DISCUSSION
Derec Flowers of Trover Construction Management, Project Manager for the 655 Cal Oak Road corporation yard project, will present preliminary design concepts for the new administration building on the site. Presentation will include an overview of the project including design concepts, RFP timelines and anticipated construction costs.

RECOMMENDATION
Accept for information or provide direction to staff.

ATTACHMENTS
Preliminary drawings of the Administration building and warehouse; and Preliminary Budget.
190
Item 12.
191
Item 12.
192
Item 12.
193
Item 12.
194
Item 12.
403'-0" 195 Item 12.
196
Item 12.
197
Item 12.
198
Item 12.
199
Item 12.
200
Item 12.
201
Item 12.
202
Item 12.
203
Item 12.
204
Item 12.
205
Item 12.
206
Item 12.
207
Item 12.
208
Item 12.
209
Item 12.

Description Total Cost Comments
Direct Construction Cost
Addition to Office Building $ 1,107,000.00 Approx. 1845 SF at $600/SF Office Interior/ADA Upgrades $ 150,000.00 Budget number Bathroom in Wearhouse $ 175,000.00 Budget number
Warehouse Partition $ 40,000.00 Budget number
Roll Up Bays $ 50,000.00 Sectional door on track
Fencing/Gates $ 35,250.00 6' Chain link with 2 gates
Re-Roof Existing Building $ 53,823.00 $1,100 per square, 30 year comp $ -
$ -
Total Direct Construction Costs $ 1,611,073.00
Indirect Costs
Architecture/Engineering $ 70,000.00 Budget number
Project Mgmt. $ 65,000.00 Budget number
Testing $ 2,000.00
Contingency 10% of Direct Costs $ 161,107.30
Total Indirect Costs $ 298,107.30
Total Project Budget
$ 1,909,180.30
City of Oroville Corp Yard Budget
210
Item 12.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: BRIAN RING, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
RE: AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF CHICO ON USE OF RULE 20A CREDITS

FROM BUTTE COUNTY
DATE: AUGUST 6, 2024

SUMMARY
The Council may consider an agreement with the City of Chico which allows the City of Chico to receive Rule 20A credits from Butte County (approximately $5,743,000), with the understanding that if the City of Oroville does not receive an additional amount of reallocated Rule 20A credits to fully fund the City’s Myers Street Underground Utility District project, the City of Chico would provide the difference needed, not to exceed $2,871,000 (fifty percent of the County’s credits), with an in-lieu cash contribution for the construction of the Myers Street project, upon approval of the project from Pacific Gas and Electric.

DISCUSSION
Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) established a funding program in 1968 (Rule 20A Utility Undergrounding Program), Program, in response to the California Public Utilities Commission’s mandate for utility funded underground conversion programs to help communities convert existing overhead utilities to underground.

The City of Oroville (City) established an underground utility district (Myers Street Underground Utility District) in 2011, with the goal of undergrounding existing utility services in this district which are currently provided via overhead distribution services on Meyers Street from Oro Dam Boulevard to Wyandotte Avenue. The City received Rule 20a Credits from PG&E to assist with the cost of undergrounding this infrastructure. The current amount of credits that the City has are $1,460,596. Estimated cost of this project is in the neighborhood of $6,500,000.

PG&E is in the process of eliminating this program and will be re-allocating credits from jurisdictions that will not be able to use their credits. The City has expressed the desire to receive additional credits through this reallocation process, to help fill the funding gap of the Meyers Street project.

Butte County (County) has approximately $5,743,000 in credits available. These credits may be transferred to other jurisdictions within the County. Both the City of Chico and the City of Oroville have eligible projects and have expressed a desire for these credits. The County has expressed a willingness to transfer these credits.
211
Item 13.

Page 2 ends

Given the shovel readiness of the City of Chico’s projects and the potential for the City of Oroville to received additional reallocated credits, both parties have worked towards an agreement to initially transfer all of the County’s credits (approximately $5,743,000) to the City of Chico, with the understanding that if the City of Oroville does not receive sufficient reallocated credits to fully fund the Myers Street Underground Utility District project, the City of Chico would provide the difference needed, not to exceed $2,871,000 (one half of the County’s credits), with an in-lieu cash contribution to be used for the construction of the Meyers Street project.

The city also has a prior design for streetscape improvements on Myers between Ontario Avenue and Wyandotte Avenue. When the Rule 20A funds become available, the city intends to combine both projects into a significant improvement project for Southside.

FISCAL IMPACT
None at this time. Commits the City of Chico to paying an in-lieu payment to the City of Oroville in the amount of up to approximately $2,871,000 (50% of the County’s credits), depending on how many reallocated Rule 20A credits that are received by the City of Oroville.

RECOMMENDATION
Approve agreement and authorize the Mayor to sign.

ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 7831
Resolution No. 7834
A-3517 Agreement with City of Chico
212
Item 13.

CITY OF OROVILLE
RESOLUTION NO. 7834

A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL ESTABLISHING AN UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT ALONG MYERS STREET FROM ABOUT 100

FEET SOUTH OF ORO DAM BOULEVARD TO WYANDOTTE AVENUE AND FINDING

AND DETERMINING THAT PUBLIC NECESSITY, HEALTH, SAFETY, OR WELFARE

REQUIRE REMOVAL OF POLES, OVERHEAD WIRES, AND ASSOCIATED

OVERHEAD STRUCTURES, AND ORDERING REMOVAL OF SAME
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 7831, titled " A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE

CITY COUNCIL CALLING A PUBLIC MEETING TO DETERMINE WHETHER PUBLIC

NECESSITY, HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE REQUIRE THE FORMATION OF AN

UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT ON MYERS STREET FROM ORO DAM BOULEVARD TO WYANDOTTE AVENUE ( PG& E RULE 20A PROJECT), a public hearing was called for December 20, 2011 at the hour of 7: 00 p. m., in the Oroville City Council Chambers, Oroville, California, to declare and determine a certain area of the City as an underground utility district to be known as the Myers Street Underground Utility District UUD) for conduits, wires, cables and associated appurtenances, for the purpose of supplying electric, telephone, telegraph, cable television and other similar associated service by means of electrical materials or devices; and WHEREAS, the same day, hour, and place mentioned above were fixed as the time and place for a public hearing to ascertain whether the public necessity, health, safety, or welfare required the removal of poles, overhead wires, and associated overhead structures, and the underground installation of wires and facilities for supplying electric, communication, or similar or associated service, within that certain area of the City generally described as follows:

Myers Street from about 100 feet south of Oro Dam Boulevard to Wyandotte Avenue ( Myers Street UUD); and
WHEREAS, notice of such hearing was given to all affected property owners as shown on the last equalized assessment roll and to all affected utilities, in the manner and for the time required by law; and
WHEREAS, such hearing was duly held, and all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the Oroville City Council determined after hearing on the subject that the underground utility district herein created is in the general public interest for the following reasons:

1. The undergrounding to be accomplished will avoid or eliminate an unusually heavy concentration of overhead distribution facilities; 213
Item 13.

2. The streets, roads or rights of way in the District are extensively used by the general public and carry a heavy volume of pedestrian or vehicular traffic; and

3. The said streets, roads or rights of way adjoin or pass through a civic area.

AND WHEREAS, the County of Butte is also participating in the Project and has formed an Underground Utility District for parcels within Butte County along Myers Street from Wyandotte Avenue to Lincoln Boulevard.

NOW THEREFORE, be it hereby resolved by the as follows:

1. That pursuant to Chapter 25B of the Oroville Municipal Code that a certain area within the City, as more specifically described in Exhibit " A," entitled " CITY OF

OROVILLE MYERS STREET UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT FROM ORO DAM BOULEVARD TO WYANDOTTE AVENUE and depicted in Exhibit " B," entitled MYERS STREET UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT — CITY OF OROVILLE PARCELS — WYANDOTTE AVENUE TO ORO DAM BOULEVARD," attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, is declared and determined to be an underground utility district for conduit, wires, and associated appurtenances for the purpose of supplying electric, communication, and other similar or associated services by means of electrical materials or devices.

2. That the public necessity, health, safety, or welfare require the removal of all poles, overhead wires, and associated overhead structures and the underground installation of wires and facilities for supplying electric, communication, or similar or associated service, for all properties within the Myers Street UUD as more specifically described in Exhibit " A," and delineated in Exhibit " B," attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein.

3. That the City Council does hereby fix October 30, 2016 as the " pole out date" on or before which the utility companies, cable television services, and other affected services complete the required underground substructure within Myers Street UUD

4. That the Oroville City Council does hereby fix April 30, 2016 as the date on or before which affected property owners within the Myers Street UUD be ready to receive underground service, and does hereby order the removal of all poles, overhead wires, and associated overhead structures and the underground installation of wires and facilities for supplying electric, communication, or similar or associated service within the Myers Street UUD on or before October 30, 2016.

5. That the utility which undertakes underground installation of its facilities shall use the underground conversion allocations computed pursuant to the decisions of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California for the purpose of providing to each premises requiring it within the Myers Street UUD, individual electric service trenching and conductor ( as well as backfill, paving and conduit, if required). Each other serving utility will provide service trenching and conductor in accordance with 214
Item 13.
its tariffs on file with the California Public Utilities Commission or as required by its Franchise Agreement with the County. Each property owner within the Myers Street UUD shall be responsible for the installation and maintenance of the conduit and termination box located on, under, or within any structure on the premises served, except that the utility which undertakes underground electric installation shall use said underground conversion allocation pursuant to the decisions of the California Public Utilities Commission for the purpose of providing to each of the premises requiring it within the Myers Street UUD, the conversion of electric service panels to accept underground service.

6. The Mayor is hereby authorized and direct to execute the following agreements with PG& E for the Myers Street UUD, which are attached to this Resolution as Exhibits C", " D" and " E":
a. Agreement to Perform Tariff Related Work - Rule 20A General Conditions b. Addendum to Agreement to Perform Tariff Related Work— Rule 20A General Conditions c. Agreement to Perform Tariff Related Work - Electrical Panel Service Conversion d. Letter of Streetlight Agreement

7. That the City Clerk is hereby instructed to notify all affected utilities and all persons owning real property along Myers Street from Oro Dam Boulevard to Wyandotte Avenue being within the Myers Street UUD of the necessity that, if they or any person occupying such property desire to continue to receive electric, communication, or other similar or associated service, they or such occupant shall, by the date fixed in this resolution, provide all necessary facility changes on their premises so as to receive such service from the lines of the supplying utility or utilities at a new location, subject to applicable rules, regulations and tariffs of the respective utility or utilities in file with the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California. Such notification shall be made by mailing a copy of this resolution together with a copy of said Chapter 25B of the Oroville Municipal Code to affected property owners as such are shown on the last equalized assessment roll and to the affected utilities.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Oroville City Council at a regular meeting on December 20, 2011, by the following vote:

AYES: Council Members Andoe, Berry, Bunker, Pittman, Simpson, Vice Mayor Wilcox, Mayor Dahlmeier
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
p, // 15i /
Lind. L. Dahlmeier, Mayor
215
Item 13.

APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

Scott Huber, City Attorney G. Harold. D,/ ffey, y C erk 216
Item 13.

EXHIBIT A

CITY OF OROVILLE

MYERS STREET UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT FROM ORO DAM

BOULEVARD TO WYANDOTTE AVENUE
All that certain real property situated in the City of Oroville, State of California, more particularly described as follows:

Myers Street Right- of-Way lines from the southwest corner of Assessors Parcel Number ( APN) 035- 050- 104 and the northwest corner of APN 013- 201- 020 to the easterly prolongation of the southerly Right-of-Way line of Wyandotte Avenue;
Together with those certain parcels of land abutting the Right- of-Way lines of Myers Street, said parcels being assigned APN' s listed below. 013- 200- 005 013- 201- 011 035- 061- 003
013- 200- 006 013- 201- 012 035- 062- 003
013- 200- 007 013- 201- 020 035- 062- 005
013- 200- 015 013- 210- 002 035- 062- 006
013- 200- 020 013- 211- 002 035- 062- 007
013- 200- 021 013- 211- 003 035- 062- 008
013- 200- 023 013- 211- 005 035- 062- 009
013- 200- 024 013- 211- 006 035- 063- 012
013- 200- 025 013- 211- 014 035- 063- 013
013- 200- 029 013- 211- 015 035- 063- 014
013- 200- 030 013- 211- 016 035- 064- 001
013- 200- 031 013- 211- 017 035- 064- 003
013- 200- 032 013- 221- 003 035- 064- 013
013- 200- 033 013- 222- 005 035- 065- 002
013- 200- 035 013- 222- 006 035- 065- 003
013- 200- 036 013- 223- 011 035- 065- 004
013- 201- 005 013- 223- 012 035- 065- 006
013- 201- 006 013- 223- 013 035- 065- 008
013- 201- 007 013- 223- 014 035- 065- 009
013- 201- 008 013- 223- 017 035- 320- 001
013- 201- 009 035- 061- 008 035- 320- 003
013- 201- 010 035- 061- 002 035- 320- 004
217
Item 13.
i
LEGEND

UG UTILITY DISTRICT BOUNDARY DISTRICT
r
A = CITY OF OROVILLE PARCELS IN

NUMBER APN

UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT
1 013- 200- 033- 000
BUTTE COUNTY JURISDICTION S\>
10 • "
2 013- 200- 005- 000
3 013- 200- 006- 000
APN = ASSESSOR' S PARCEL NUMBER 4 013- 200- 007- 000
5 013- 200- 036- 000
6 013- 200- 030- 000
7 013- 200- 032- 000
8 013- 200- 031- 000
9 013- 200- 020- 000
O
10 013- 200- 029- 000
11 013- 00- 021000
1\ 12 013- 200- 023- 000
j 13 013- 200- 035- 000
OQO 14 013- 211- 017- 000
15 013- 211- 016- 000
U 16 013- 211- 002- 000
17 013- 211- 003- 000
30I 18 013- 211- 014- 000
19 013- 211- 015- 000
29 Z
20 013- 211- 005- 000
j////
v
21 013- 211- 006- 000
22 013- 201- 011- 000 j 23 013- 201- 010- 000
m/ 24 013- 201- 009- 000
25 013- 201- 012- 000
j ,/ 6
26 013- 201- 008- 000
27 013- 201007000
j////. //////// i
2s 013- 201- 020- 000
j24%
29 013- 201- 006- 000
j 24 3030 013- 201- 005- 000
el- AVE.
4 f..,
MESA
V)
20 Z
O
73 r • 6 / 70 Z/
tz o
m/. /
0 1 6
r 3
iii /
Wilk
SEE SHEET 2 OF 2)
I
N!
NORTH
A
r 1
ONTARIO N. T. S. AVE.

MYERS STREET UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT
e,

CITY OF OROVILLE PARCELS
WYANDOTTE AVENUE TO OROVILLE DAM BLVD.
c.

Y<
11/ 28/ 2011 EXHIBIT B ( SHEET 1 OF 2) 00...«,
218
Item 13.

SE SHEET 1 OF 2
o
N
j j j/ j% 111 MZ0 , 66/
70 m 7/ ONTARIO AVE.

CO , /// 0
D 35 O i 65j

I - I DISTRICT
I z , 39 PARCEL n 50
M m _ mm

NUMBER APN
X m n
r/
31 013- 200- 025- 000
D - I
j 32 013- 200- 024- 000
pp < O
m
35 035- 062- 007- 000
42 37 38r ji. j• 64
34 035- 062-
6- 000
M C
Z - j / r' j
36 035- 062- 005- 000 ri Z
37 035- 062- 003- 000
D
1 O m PEARL S T. 53 '' m 38 035- 062- 009- 000
i3
39 035- 062- 008- 000
035- 061- 008- 000
O
i/ 55 / 41 035- 061- 003- 000
O 43'/" 45 f 46 // j //
fSSS
y
42 035- 061- 012- 000
56 43 035 063- 012- 000
44 035- 063- 013- 000 O Z 44 D
4748 j j 45 035- 063- 014- 000
Q r
j
j 61 M 46 035- 064- 001- 000
m l/////, j/ r/// j. / G 47 035- 064- 013- 000 Z l
7 , 48 035- 064- 003- 000
iv O p r
n ?/ 60 49 013- 221- 003- 000
035- 065- 004- 000
58 51 035- 065- 006- 000
OF c
59 52
53 035- 320- 001- 000
035- 320- 003- 000
m t7 54 035- 320- 004- 000
m r
55 035- 065- 009- 000
AVE. 56 035- 065- 008- 000
o
r =t WYA N D O TTE 57 035- 065- 002- 000
58 035- 065- 003- 000
59 013- 223- 017- 000
60 013- 223- 011- 000
0i t. 61 013- 223- 012- 000
62 013- 223- 013- 000

CD V) Y
63 013- 223- 014- 000
r LEGEND 64 013- 222- 005- 000
73 , 65 013- 222- 006- 000 wO

UG UTILITY DISTRICT BOUNDARY
66 013- 210- 002- 000
0 -
I111 CITY OF OROVILLE PARCELS IN

UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT
S,tY OF 0
N. T. S.

G
14 k c
0 BUTTE COUNTY JURISDICTION
A
c
r

APN ASSESSOR' S PARCEL NUMBER
DT'
z
a, n
i M
219
Item 13.

Pacific Gas and E IEXH IBIT
Program Liaison, Lizette Burtis
Agreement to Perform PROJECT MGR.

Tariff Scheduled Related Work, PM #
Rule 20A General Conditions
PROJECT NAME: Miers Street Oroville R20A
LOCATION: Miers Street CALIFORNIA
City: Oroville
City/ Gc4t cRtif of 9rgvillg Applicant) has requested PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY, a California corporation ( PG& E) to perform the tariff scheduled related work as located and described herein.

General Conditions:

PG& E will, at its expense, replace its existing overhead electric facilities with underground electric facilities as outlined in the Rule 20 Tariff. To ensure the success of this program, the Applicant agrees to support the Rule 20A Program as follows:

Responsibilities of the Applicant:

1. Consult with PG& E to confirm the requirements and location of the project.

2. Provide a resolution and boundary map as required in Electric Rule 20.

3. Provide a list of all recorded property owners, APN#, phone number and address.

4. Provide a list of the most recent tenant ( for rental properties).

5. Provide Base Map ( in AutoCAD) showing the following: boundary, roads, future road improvements, sidewalks, curbs, property lines, buildings, existing water and sewer, easements, and any other known utilities or obstacles.

6. Secure all required rights- of-way and easements, which must be satisfactory to and approved by PG& E.

7. Own and manage all contaminated soils. ( Rule 20A funding cannot be used for environmental rem ediation costs)

8. Own and manage all cultural resource findings. ( Rule 20A funding cannot be used for managing cultural resource findings).

9. Provide recent pot holing/ core samplings and soils/ paving information from projects that were recently completed.

10. Provide acceptable construction yard for materials and equipment storage.

11. Pay for paving and restoration costs beyond the standard excavations and restorations necessary for the construction of the project. Joint trench participants will replace paving, landscaping, sidewalk, etc. that is removed during construction. ( Rule 20A funding cannot be used for additional restoration costs).

12. Waive paving moratorium requirements, or pay for additional costs above PG& E' s responsibility for restoration.

13. Stake and survey for any associated future grade changes.

14. Should applicant require additional traffic control beyond that which PG& E provides ( per California Joint Utility Traffic Control Committee), Applicant will pay for the additional costs.

15. Should Applicant require a traffic control plan, Applicant will prepare or pay to prepare such a plan.

16. Pay for streetlight costs per Street Light Agreement.

17. Remove Applicant owned streetlights attached to utility poles and located within the underground district at Applicant cost. .

18. Issue and waive cost of encroachment permit.

19. Waive work hour restrictions for construction, including holiday and/ or special construction limitations.

20. Waive all permit fees and other incidental project specific costs, including but not limited to: parking charges; rental cost of city or county properties; and lost revenues.

Responsibilities of PG& E:

1. Provide consultation to Applicant to establish resolution and boundary map.

2. If designated as the design/ trench lead, prepare the Intents, Composite and Form B ( costs will be shared by all joint trench participants).

3. Provide electric design to the design/ trench lead agency, if lead is other than PG& E.

4. Identify all locations that require an easement.

5. Prepare easement documents for signature.

6. Upon request of the Applicant, Rule 20A allocation may be used for the installation of no more than 100 feet of each customer' s underground electric service lateral.

7. Upon request of the Applicant, the Rule 20A allocation may be used for the conversion of electric service panels to accept underground service, up to $ 1, 500 per service entrance ( excluding permit fees). Alternatively, if the Applicant requests that PG& E manage the panel conversion work, perform such conversions by agreement( Form 79- 1113, Agreement to Perform Tariff Schedule Related Work, Rule 20A). 1 Form 79- 1127( Rev 12/ 10)
Service Planning
Advice No. XXXX- E 220
Item 13.
lir! Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Si Program Liaison, Lizette Burtis
Agreement to Perform PROJECT MGR.

Tariff Scheduled Related Work, PM #
Rule 20A General Conditions

8. Provide inspection services for the installation of PG& E facilities.

9. Remove poles, or portions of poles, from the underground district as required by the Joint Pole Utility Agreement.

10. Provide proper notification to all affected customers when electrical outages are necessary to complete project conversion to the new underground system.

We have read the above information and understand and agree with the provisions and responsibilities as described above/.

Executed this "^ w 1 day of_ Ct bt/ 20 I_ l
r
City/ 0 '_ _I it PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY
Itif Ap it y
By: 1I. , -- - — - 1 // By:

L\Aa,4Vt\f/K Sindy Mikkelsen
1 Pr101/ 11/4 ior Type Name) Print or Type Name)
Program
Ay
Manager
T '
FTitle:
1' Mailing Address: 1 tat'el _
City/ County of:__ QTvV_lte,„
2 Form 79- 1127( Rev 12/ 10)
Service Planning
Advice No XXXX- E
221
Item 13.

EXHIBIT

ADDENDUM TO
Agreement to Perform Tariff Schedule Related Work,
Rule 20A General Conditions
This addendum is to supplement the " Agreement to Perform Tariff Schedule Related Work, Rule 20A General Conditions" between Pacific Gas and Electric Company PG& E) and the City of Oroville ( City).

Article 14 Should applicant require additional traffic control beyond that which PG& E provides ( per California Joint Utility Traffic Control Committee), Applicant will pay for the additional costs.

The City understands that the minimum traffic control criterion is the standard established in the Work Area Traffic Control Handbook, commonly known as the WATCH manual or equivalent.

Article 15 Should Applicant require a traffic control plan, Applicant will prepare or pay to prepare such a plan.

The City shall not require a traffic control plan to be prepared. However, PG& E or its contractors shall be required to obtain an Encroachment Permit ( fee waived as per Article 18) and indicate a work schedule and method of traffic control meeting the conditions specified under Article 14. Additionally, for the convenience of the motorist, PG& E shall refrain from consecutive road intersection closures.

Article 18 Issue and waive cost of encroachment permit.

Article 20 Waive all permit fees and other incidental project specific costs, including but not limited to: parking charges; rental cost of city or county property; and lost revenues.

The City is a strong advocate of effective communication. The City understands that the requirement for Encroachment Permit is NOT waved by these Articles. However, the City shall waive all encroachment permit fees. PG& E shall notify the City of work schedule and cooperate with the City on work inspection.

Article 19 Waive work hour restrictions for construction, including holiday and/or special construction limitations.

It is mutually understood during a face to face meeting between PG& E, County of Butte and the City that no work shall be done on Saturday and Sunday. It is also mutually understood that no night work shall be performed. Night work is defined as any work performed after 6: 00 pm. However, the City will consider request for weekends work and night work if requested by PG& E or its contractors.

I PA DAHLMEIER, Mayor SINDY MIKKELSEN, Program Manager
City of Oroville PG& E
222
Item 13.

EXHIBiT
Gas and Electric Company
Agreement to Perform 0 APPLICANT( Original) MLX#
Tariff Scheduled Related Work, CI DIVISION( Original) PM# Rule 20A Electric Panel Service Conversions Q ACCTG. SERVICES PROJECT MGR, Program Liaison, Lizette Burtis City/ Qcq(rxpp of Oroville Applicant) has requested PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY, a California corporation( PG& E) to perform the tariff scheduled related work as located and described herein.

Electric Panel Service Conversion Program:

In order to expedite the completion of Rule 20A Projects, PG& E has offered to manage the electric service conversions, and pay for this work from the Applicant' s allocation funds. The underground electric feed that replaces the existing overhead service will be installed in the most economical manner possible, as determined by PG& E. To ensure the success of this program, the Applicant agrees to support the Electric Panel Service Conversion Program as follows:

Responsibilities of the Applicant:

1. Provide accurate list of owner, parcel#, address, phone number.

2. Mail informational letters to all residents describing the program and their responsibilities. a. PG& E will provide templates for these letters.

3. Obtain Right of Entry agreements from property owners prior to scheduling construction. a. PG& E will provide the document for each property owner to complete and sign.

4. Provide a liaison for residents and property owners to contact with questions.

5. Waive permit fees.

6. Waive Inspection fees.

7. Facilitate a preliminary job walk with the liaison, building inspector and others. a. Review PG& E' s intended placement of new equipment required for conversions. b. Clarify the inspection and permit requirements and timing, if necessary.

8. Provide information enabling the field crews to determine the location of property lines.

9. Disclose all special circumstances
a. For example: historic buildings, hazardous materials, environmental issues, burial grounds and other items that may affect the overhead- to- underground conversion.

10. Communicate with the property owners if additional work beyond the conversion will be required. a. PG& E will pay for the work required to replace the existing overhead electric feed with a new underground feed only. The cost of any additional work required to bring the property up to current codes will be borne by others property owner or Applicant).
b. The Applicant will communicate to the property owner all items that must be brought up to code in a timely manner, and all code issues will be managed by the Applicant.

11. Disclose work hours and days.

12. Agree prior to construction regarding the required notifications to residents and property owners. 13, Failure to complete the above requirements may result in construction delays.

PROJECT NAME: Myers Street Oroville R20A
LOCATION: Myers Street CALIFORNIA
City: Oroville
i
Executed this 1 A I day of ee,M, 20 1 1
City/ C V l ` PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY
P
By: 1,(
4 A-47/(/\ By:

Uy\ Md '-'i
tt1EVX Sindy Mikkelsen
Print or Type Name) Print or Type Name)
bProgram Manager
TiVit\ r y
Title:

Mailing Address: 1 L f
City/ Ceuaty- af-:— OV®\1t I I
J
Form 79- 1113( Rev 1/ 10)
Service Planning
Advice No. 3602- E
223
Item 13.

Pacific EXHIBIT
Project Manager:

PM #:

Letter of Streetlight Agreement
Dear valued customer,
As we approach the beginning of your Rule 20A project, one issue that you will need to address is your choice of the available streetlight options. The streetlights located within the Rule 20A project are currently PG& E or community owned) and on Rate Schedule LS1, LS2, LS3, streetlights OL1 outdoor lighting, TC1 traffic signals).

Rule 20A funding covers the costs of converting existing PG& E owned streetlight services on a one- for- one basis, but does not provide for the upgrading of facilities. Therefore, if the existing streetlights are on wood poles, the Rule 20A funding will cover the cost of providing an underground service and riser up the existing wood pole to the existing streetlight and the topping of the wood pole just above the streetlight.

You have the option under Rate Schedule LS1 ( PG& E owned streetlights); to install newgalvanized steel streetlights that meet PG& E' s standards or have PG& E install these new streetlights for you at your cost, in place of leaving the existing wood pole mounted streetlights.

If you choose to have PG& E install these new streetlights standards the costs which you will be responsible for will include the installation and purchase of the new streetlight, replacement of any necessary landscaping, pavement and/ or concrete and ITCC tax at a current rate of 34%. If you choose to install new streetlights that do not meet PG& E' s standards, you may do so but PG& E will no longer own and maintain them.

If the existing streetlights are customer owned ( rate schedule LS2 or LS3), you as the streetlight owner will be responsible for the cost to underground the streetlights. A portion of your streetlight undergrounding cost will include a share of the joint trenching costs ( based on the conduit occupancy of the joint trench) and streetlight conduit installation costs should you choose to participate in the joint trench. When estimating begins we will provide you with an estimate of the approximate cost of this portion of your streetlight conversion costs for your budgeting purposes. You will also be responsible for any connection and removal costs associated with your customer owned streetlights. All of the provisions of customer owned streetlights also apply to traffic signals ( rate schedule TC1) and outdoor lighting ( rate schedule OL1).

Please note that the existing streetlights and supporting overhead electrical system cannot be removed prior to the new streetlights being installed and energized. If you are the streetlight owner or they are PG& E owned and you choose to perform the streetlight work yourself, then the new streetlights should be installed and ready to be energized prior to the completion of trenching. Streetlight standard leads times can be three to four months, so please coordinate your work to ensure the streetlights do not delay removal of the overhead system.

Revision Date: 7/ 5/ 2011 1
224
Item 13.
riPacificae and
Electric Compete
Please check the boxes below that represent how your community would like to proceed regarding streetlights.

Streetlights will remain on existing wood poles.

Install new galvanized steel streetlight poles at our expense.

We choose to purchase and install our own new streetlights poles.

We choose to participate in the joint trench installing our own streetlight conduit.

We choose to participate in the joint trench, but would like PG& E to install our streetlight conduit.

We choose not to participate in the joint trench, and instead will do our own trenching for streetlights.

The current streetlights are in conflict with our road improvements and we would like PG& E to replace them on a one- for- one basis.

NOTE: LS1 = Owned & maintained by PG& E; LS2 = Customer owned & maintained or PG& E maintained; LS3 = Customer owned metered; OL1= Outdoor lighting private property; TC1 = Government owned metered traffic signals or signal lighting systems.

I request PG& E to proceed with the design of this project based on the above marked choices and understand I will have a chance to review the estimate prior to agreeing on any associated cost. If applicable, contracts will be executed based on the above decisions and associated cost.

City/ - Oroville PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY
By: JrI i/
By:
1A r Ni \ , Ae)Y Sindy Mikkelsen
Print or Type Name) Print or Type Name)
o( Program Manager
Title: Title:

Mailing Address: rl ROOPpnle16 '
City/ Ccuaty- ef.- 0\00VMe
Date: U_ClAtA/2W2.0 L \
Project Description:

Revision Date: 7/ 5/ 2011 2
225
Item 13.

Article 14 Should applicant require additional traffic control beyond that which PG& E provides (per California Joint Utility Traffic Control Committee), Applicant will pay for the additional costs.

The City understands that the minimum traffic control criterion is the standard established in the Work Area Traffic Control Handbook, commonly known as the WATCH manual or equivalent.

Article 15 Should Applicant require a traffic control plan, Applicant will prepare or pay to prepare such a plan.

Article 18 Issue and waive cost of encroachment permit.

Article 20 Waive all permit fees and other incidental project specific costs, including but not limited to: parking charges; rental cost of city or county property; and lost revenues.

Article 19 Waive work hour restrictions for construction, including holiday and/or special construction limitations.

If dr L/ 2
LI DA DAHLMEIER, Mayor SINDY MIKK• 4 N, rogram Manager
City of Oroville PG& E 8 ,//
226
Item 13.

CITY OF OROVILLE
RESOLUTION NO. 7831

A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING

TO DETERMINE WHETHER PUBLIC NECESSITY, HEALTH, SAFETY, OR

WELFARE REQUIRE THE FORMATION OF AN UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT

ON MYERS STREET FROM ORO DAM BOULEVARD TO WYANDOTTE AVENUE PG& E RULE 20A PROJECT)
WHEREAS, Chapter 25B of the Oroville Municipal Code establishes a procedure for the creation of underground utility districts and requires as the initial step in such procedures the holding of a public hearing to ascertain whether public necessity, health, safety, and welfare require the removal of poles, overhead wires and facilities for supplying electric, communications, or similar or associated utility services in any such district; and
WHEREAS, it has been recommended that such an underground utility district, hereafter called the Myers Street Underground Utility District be formed on Myers Street from Oro Dam Boulevard to Wyandotte Avenue.

NOW THEREFORE, be it hereby resolved by the Oroville City Council as follows:

1. Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Oroville City Council on December 20, 2011, at the hour of 7: 00 PM in the Oroville City Council Chambers to ascertain whether public necessity, health, safety or welfare require the removal of poles, overhead wires and facilities for supplying electric, communications, or similar or associated utility services in the District described above.

2. At such hearing, all persons interested shall be given an opportunity to be heard.

Said hearing may be continued from time to time as may be determined by the City Council.

3. The City Clerk shall notify all affected property owners as shown on the last equalized assessment roll, and participating utility companies, of the time and place of such hearing by mailing a copy of this resolution to such property owners and utilities concerned at least ten ( 10) days prior to the date.

4. The area proposed to be included in the District is shown upon that certain map entitled PROPOSED UNDERGROUND DISTRICTS - MYERS STREET FROM ORO DAM BOULEVARD TO LINCOLN BOULEVARD, which is on file in the offices of the City Clerk of the City of Oroville.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Oroville City Council at a regular meeting on December 6, 2011, by the following vote:
227
Item 13.

AYES: Council Members Andoe, Berry, Bunker, Pittman, Simpson, Vice Mayor Wilcox, Mayor Dahlmeier
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
i
i Vii 6/
i da L. Dahlmeier, Mayor
APPRO - 9 0 FORM: ATTEST:
r- Ir
Scott E. Huber, City Attorney G. Ha oic Duffeyr. =-Cit --- Ferk228 Item 13.
ak---: vat .1
NNYAgt in
ikesiiii4 lair ° 0. 0, AP: P#4P, :
4 ill
i p<„10. 10 _ „,,, alIIhi, At544**.
1 Plorr: . V
lif
4,0i
lePlotifi°#.1001141Mitte
Xi a
00 0
Mair..7,0: finigno=
irk• II
Oji --
yw IMIt i
1 U ,... .. w * , EgiFigu?.1.
41 Cx i`i +'*• _ Ii -•
iiP ,.

I Ill :-:-:-
III 1t1'-=" I US
111 1111 : I 1111 ill!: : circ of OROVILL
II tie TO IX 13 35 -.1-
a
Mali
i ' frit./
mu 11111. 11 1111111 ICOUNTY OF BU
aRRISSX11 C A1. 11 E111111 1110110 smig08 =
PR ISM 1111111 ; = 11111 1. 1111111 11. 1111. pop RE, _ 1! 111 : ! 111111 1111111 leo pie •
N. T. S. 1 i1 s p = ,
Elm IIIIIIIII111 11 11111
1111111111 ® E 1E _
X1111 di
PROPOSED 11` 11 i
111111 11111x01 awlIl- 1 ®® ®® =
CNDNTM VIM' 111111 11111111 111
UNDERGROUNDr,:
i til 111. 1 L_..

DISTRICT mon fi 1 11111111
IIIIIIIIIIr. 1111 MEfir Ol 1 111111 11111111 11611/ 11 1011111 1- 1111 Ullllll Illllll 1111 : r 1111 1111111 / 111/ 111 IFil iT1( 11 I III 11 11111111111llll / 111, 1 r1 1111111 11111/ 111 11101111 mowIl Hit I il null in111111 1 1/ 110111 . 1
11111111111111 Illli. p
11111111111t'- 11111 a X
11110 mum: = 11' imam
1 IIImit1 ,
111 o
ri11111 11// 1111 .. G 1 1mit
III 1111 111111 1 11111) Nam ITTIli+ 1111111 111101

1. 1•• 1111
111
it.. .111
111 y
at I" ,',
l
TS
PpRTMENT
PROPOSED UNDERGROUND DISTRICTS i `
MYERS ¶
OFJRECT_
PE ST. BUTTE COUNTY RULE 20A .°
11-1", 6.

LOCATION MAP 1
pVellC WOR,
F6
229
Item 13.

LEGEND

UG UTILITY DISTRICT BOUNDARY DISTRICT
PARCEL
A = CITY OF OROVILLE PARCELS IN NUMBER APN
UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT O . 1 013- 200- 033- 000
BUTTE COUNTY JURISDICTION Q, v
2 013- 200- 005- 000 S:3\ 3 013- 200- 006- 000
APN = ASSESSOR' S PARCEL NUMBER 4 013- 200- 007- 000
5 013- 200- 036- 000
6 013- 200- 030- 000
7 013- 200- 032- 000
8 013- 200- 031- 000
P
n 9 013- 200- 020- 000
O \``
1 0 013- 200- 029- 000
11 013- 200- 021- 000
12 013- 200- 023- 000
VV 13 013- 200- 035- 000
O
O 14 013- 211- 016- 000
15 013- 211- 016- 000
16 013- 211- 002- 000
17 013- 211- 003- 000
S' 19 013- 211- 015- 000
19 013- 211- 015- 000
20 013- 211- 005- 000
21 013- 211- 011- 000
22 013- 201- 011- 000
fs% tètfft 23 013- 201- 010- 000
24 013- 201- 009- 000
26 013- 201- 018- 000
27 013- 201- 007- 000
27 013- 201- 020- 000
A28 013- 201- 020- 000
29 013- 201- 006- 000
jj24% 30 013- 201- 005- 000
7*/
MESA AVE.
4 7TI
f)
mz 73
n
m
70 19 m z
j6 / U7 , a 70
7, 18 m
frl
iii.
1(0 ////.///
jim j ji.. D
PI
SEE SHEET 2 OF 2)
i
4-,'N.

N:'17,7-- 0
PI
ONTARIO N. T. S.

AVE.

MYERS STREET UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT
o
Q . o
CITY OF OROVILLE PARCELS a rt
WYANDOTTE AVENUE TO OROVILLE DAM BLVD.
fo,.....,,..°
11/ 28/ 2011 EXHIBIT B ( SHEET 1 OF 2)
230
Item 13.

SE SHEET 1 OF 2 i)
NJ
co v/ fr ' , i1 M
Iii,
m 40 34 ONTARIO AVE. D XI j9/

Z V) CO
p D 35 j5j
0 33
z 36 j

DISTRICT
I n 7
5O 4
PARCEL

NUMBER APN
Ill m — m
f 31 013- 200- 025- 000
X m i
32 013- 200- 024- 000 d , 013- 200- 015- 000 D - 64 42 i 34 035- 062- 006- 000 41 38%
36 035- 062- 007- 000
m ,, Q 36 035- 062- 005- 000 fir ii Z Z
37 035- 062- 003- 000
jj 54 38 035- 062- 009- 000
133 39 035- 062- 008- 000
m O m PEARL ST. j
63 40 035- 061- 008- 000
Oxi ji ® 41 035- 061- 002- 000
v7,, 42 035- 061- 012- 000
035 063- 012- 000
rI
035- 063- 013- 000
j/A035-063- 014- 000 C
j 61 j46 035_ 064- 001_ 000
r 47 035 064- 013 000
70-
OC I
j / .
48 035- 064- 003- 000
Z O 49 013- 221- 003- 000
N O Q
i U) 60 50 035- 065- 004- 000
Z j
51 035- 065- 006- 000
58 52 035- 320- 001- 000
OF 70C 59 53 035- 320- 003- 000
m r
n
54 035- 320- 004- 000
55 035- 065- 009- 000
M
m r

WYANDOTTE
AVE. 56 035- 065- 008- 000
N 57 035- 065- 002- 000
r _< 58 035- 065- 003- 000
D ( 59 013- 223- 017- 000
60 013- 223- 011- 000
p
n i Y
61 013- 223- 012- 000
62 013- 223- 013- 000
63 013- 223- 014- 000
CO 64 013- 222- 005- 000
r —
i
F^ LEGEND 656 013- 222- 006- 000
J
66 013- 210- 002- 000
0 UG UTILITY DISTRICT BOUNDARY
i

CITY OF OROVILLE PARCELS IN

UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT
N. T. S.

GS
Y OF
04 BUTTE COUNTY JURISDICTION
AST.
i\ 1
APN = ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER
D
A. Vl
231
Item 13.

AGREEMENT 3517

BETWEEN THE CITY OF OROVILLE AND THE CITY OF CHICO FOR USE OF THE COUNTY OF BUTTE RULE 20A WORK CREDIT DONATION

RECITALS
WHEREAS, the City of Oroville, herein referred to as “OROVILLE,” established Underground Utility District No. 30C – Myers Street from Wyandotte Avenue to Lincoln Boulevard, to require the removal of poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures, and to require the undergrounding of wires and facilities for supplying electric, communication, or other similar or associated service within that certain area, and WHEREAS, the City of Chico, herein referred to as “CHICO,” established Underground Utility District No. 17- Esplanade from Eaton Road to Nord Highway, to require the removal of poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures, and to require the undergrounding of wires and facilities for supplying electric, communication, or other similar or associated service within that certain area, and
WHEREAS, the cost to complete an Underground Utility District is funded by an agency’s accumulation of California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Rule 20A work credits, herein referred to as “credits,” in accordance with CPUC Rulemaking 17-05-010 Decision 21-06-013, and
WHEREAS, OROVILLE currently has an insufficient credit balance to complete Underground Utility District No. 30C, and
WHEREAS, CHICO currently has an insufficient credit balance to complete Underground Utility District No. 17, and
WHEREAS, agencies with insufficient credit balances may receive additional credits through intra-county donations and/or reallocated credits from inactive agencies statewide, as provided by CPUC Rulemaking 17-05-010 Decision 21-06-013, and WHEREAS, the County of Butte, herein referred to as “BUTTE” (not a party to this agreement), has a credit balance of approximately $5,743,000 as of July 31, 2023, and WHEREAS, BUTTE will make an intra-county credit donation upon execution of this agreement between OROVILLE and CHICO, and
232
Item 13.

NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual promises and agreements by and between the parties hereto, the parties hereto agree as follows:

1. OROVILLE and CHICO agree that CHICO will receive the full intra-county credit donation by BUTTE for approximately $5,743,000 to construct Underground Utility District No. 17., and OROVILLE will take necessary steps (if applicable) to receive reallocated credits to construct Underground Utility District No. 30C.

2. OROVILLE and CHICO agree that if OROVILLE does not receive sufficient reallocated credits to fully fund its project (approximately $5M is needed based upon most current cost estimate), the City of Chico would provide the difference needed, not to exceed $2,871,000 (50% of the County’s credits), with an in-lieu cash contribution (half the total credits donated to CHICO by BUTTE) for the construction of Underground Utility District No. 30C, upon approval from Pacific Gas and Electric of the of the City’s project.

City of Chico
__________________________ __________________________
City Manager Date

APPROVED AS TO FORM
__________________________ __________________________
City Attorney Date
City of Oroville
_________________________ __________________________
David Pittman, Mayor Date

APPROVED AS TO FORM
_________________________ __________________________
City Attorney Date
233
Item 13.

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: PATRICK PIATT, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
RE: THE GREAT FEATHER RIVER MOSAIC MURAL PROJECT

SPONSORSHIP PROGRAM
DATE: AUGUST 6, 2024

SUMMARY
The City of Oroville will work with the Rainforest Art Project team to develop a program where organizations and community members may make a contribution to the public arts fund program by sponsoring murals in the Great Feather River Mosaic Mural Project on Table Mountain Boulevard.

DISCUSSION
In November 2022 the City entered into a three-year agreement with the Rainforest Art Project for the Great Feather River Mosaic Mural along Table Mountain Blvd. This project is the largest mosaic project of its kind at over six-hundred feet long, featuring sixty murals on the brick retaining wall on the west side of Table Mountain Boulevard between Grand Avenue and the fish hatchery. Currently the project is in its second year and the Rainforest Art Project team has been working with schools, volunteers and community leaders to create the mosaic pieces.

Staff will advertise the sponsorship options on social media platforms, and mailers to businesses and organizations in the city. Donations can range from $200 to $1,000. In return for each donation, a tile with a QR code linked to a website will provide exposure for the contributing entity or person.

FISCAL IMPACT
None.

RECOMMENDATION
Allow staff to proceed with development of a sponsorship program for the Great Feather River Mosaic Mural Art Project.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Social Media Post/Mailer Example.
234
Item 14.
235
Item 14.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: RUTH DUNCAN, ASSISTANT CITY ADMINISTRATOR,

ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
RE: RESOLUTION FOR CAL OES FORM 130 DESIGNATION OF
APPLICANT’S AGENT
DATE: AUGUST 6, 2024

SUMMARY
The Council may consider authorizing the City Administrator (or Acting, or Interim, or Assistant City Administrator) to execute the remaining applications and forms to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the State of California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) relating to the Thompson Fire incident, by resolution of the City Council.

DISCUSSION
This form is a required document for our current FEMA claim to CalOES related to the Thompson Fire. During this incident, the City incurred reimbursable costs and is seeking reimbursement from FEMA and CalOES.

FISCAL IMPACT
Seeking reimbursement for expenses.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No. 9297- A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY

ADMINISTRATOR (ACTING, OR INTERIM, OR ASSISTANT CITY ADMINISTRATOR) TO EXECUTE ANY REMAINING FORMS TO FEMA AND CAL-OES.

ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. 9297
Cal OES form 130
236
Item 15.
'(6,*1$7,212)$33/,&$17
6$*(175(62/87,21 )25NON-STATE AGENCIES

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE OF THE
(Governing Body) (Name of Applicant)

THAT , OR
(Title of Authorized Agent)
, OR
(Title of Authorized Agent)
(Title of Authorized Agent)
is hereby authorized to execute for and on behalf of the , (Name of Applicant) a public entity established under the laws of the State of California, this application and to file it with the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services for the purpose of obtaining federal financial assistance for any existing or future grant program, including, but not limited to any of the following: )HGHUDOO\GHFODUHG 'LVDVWHU '5
)LUH 0LWLJDWLRQ$VVLVWDQFH*UDQW
)0$*

&DOLIRUQLD6WDWH2QO\'LVDVWHU
&'$$
,PPHGLDWH6HUYLFHV3URJUDP
,63
+D]DUG
0LWLJDWLRQ*UDQW 3URJUDP
+0*3
%XLOGLQJ5HVLOLHQW ,QIUDVWUXFWXUH DQG
&RPPXQLWLHV
%5,&
/HJLVODWLYH 3UH'LVDVWHU 0LWLJDWLRQ3URJUDP
/3'0
under Public Law 93-288 as amended by the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1988, and/or state financial assistance under the California Disaster Assistance Act. )ORRG 0LWLJDWLRQ$VVLVWDQFH 3URJUDP )0$
, under Section 1366 of the National
Flood Insurance Act of 1968. 1DWLRQDO (DUWKTXDNH+D]DUGV5HGXFWLRQ3URJUDP 1(+53
42 U.S. Code 7704 (b)
((2) (A) (ix) and 42 U.S. Code 7704 (b) (2) (B) National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, and also The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018, Div. F, Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2018, Pub. L. No. 115-141 &DOLIRUQLD (DUO\(DUWKTXDNH :DUQLQJ
&((:
under CA Gov Code – Gov, Title 2,
Div. 1, Chapter 7, Article 5, Sections 8587.8, 8587.11, 8587.12 That the , a public entity established under the
(Name of Applicant)
laws of the State of California, hereby authorizes its agent(s) to provide to the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services for all matters pertaining to such state disaster assistance the assurances and agreements required.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES

DESIGNATION OF APPLICANT'S AGENT RESOLUTION

NON-STATE AGENCIES
OES-FPD-130 (Rev. 10-2022)

RECOVERY DIRECTORATE

FINANCIAL PROCESSING DIVISION
Cal OES ID No: _____________
5HY10- Page 1 of 4 2(6FPD-130
CDAA 2024
Oroville City Council City of Oroville
City Administrator
Assistant City Administrator
City of Oroville
City of Oroville
237
Item 15.
3OHDVH FKHFN WKH DSSURSULDWH ER[EHORZ
This is a universal resolution and is effective for all open and future disasters/grants declared up to three (3) years following the date of approval.

This is a disaster/grant specific resolution and is effective for only disaster/grant number(s): Passed and approved this __day of , 20 (Name and Title of Governing Body Representative)
(Name and Title of Governing Body Representative)
(Name and Title of Governing Body Representative)
&(57,),&$7,21
I, , duly appointed and of
(Name) (Title)
, do hereby certify that the above is a true and
(Name of Applicant)
correct copy of a resolution passed and approved by the (Governing Body)
of the on the day of , 20 . (Name of Applicant)
(Signature) (Title)

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES

DESIGNATION OF APPLICANT'S AGENT RESOLUTION

NON-STATE AGENCIES
OES-FPD-130 (Rev. 10-2022)

RECOVERY DIRECTORATE

FINANCIAL PROCESSING DIVISION
5HY10- Page 2 of 4 2(6FPD130
6th August 24
David Pittman, Mayor
Eric Smith, Vice Mayor
Kayla Reaster Assistant City Clerk
City of Oroville
Oroville City Council
City of Oroville 6th August 24
Assistant City Clerk
238
Item 15.

CITY OF OROVILLE
RESOLUTION NO. 9297

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR (ACTING OR INTERIM, OR ASSISTANT CITY ADMINISTRATOR) TO EXECUTE ANY REMAING FORMS TO FEMA AND CAL-OES.

BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Oroville City Council as follows:

1. The City Administrator (or Acting, or Interim, or Assistant City Administrator) is hereby authorized and directed to execute any remaining forms to FEMA and Cal-OES.

2. The City Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Oroville City Council at a regular meeting held on August 6, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

David Pittman, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

Scott E. Huber, City Attorney Kayla Reaster, Assistant City Clerk 239
Item 15.

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: RUTH DUNCAN, ASSISTANT CITY ADMINISTRATOR-ADMINISTRATIVE

SERVICES
RE: ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR THE CITY’S COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2006-1 (WESTSIDE PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES) AND DISTRICT NO. 2006-2 (PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES) FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024/25
DATE: AUGUST 6, 2024

SUMMARY
The City Council will consider the annual special tax relating to the City’s Community Facilities Districts (“CFD’s”).

DISCUSSION
In October 2006, the City completed the formation of two CFD’s designed to establish a special tax for subdivision projects in the Thermalito area. CFD No. 2006-1 was formed to fund the design and construction of a fire and police facility to be located at the Oroville Airport. CFD No. 2006-2 was formed to provide ongoing funding to maintain and staff these facilities in perpetuity. Both CFD’s are funded through the collection of a special tax attached to the property tax bill issued by the Butte County Tax Collector’s Office. Currently, four subdivisions are included in these CFD’s. The rate and method of apportionment provides for the collection of certain tax amounts for both final mapped property without building permits issued (final mapped property) and final mapped property that have had a building permit issued (developed property).

Per Senate Bill 165, an annual Report for each CFD must be filed with the City Council. The annual report shall contain all of the following:
 The amount of funds collected and expended.
 The status of any project required or authorized to be funded as identified in subdivision (a) of Section 50075.1 or Section 53410.

The annual Reports fulfill these minimum requirements and will be submitted at a later date.

No other action is required by the City Council.
240
Item 16.

The City Council will consider the following items for the CFD’s that will:

1. Establish the annual special tax for Fiscal Year 2024/25 for the two CFD’s.

2. Direct the Butte County Auditor-Controller’s Office to attach the special tax to the property tax bill of those final mapped and developed parcels within the two CFD’s.

FISCAL IMPACT
Funds are collected on the Butte County tax roll and placed into a “Special Fund” account for specified expenses within the two CFD’s.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Adopt Resolution No. **** - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ESTABLISHING THE ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2006- 1, WESTSIDE PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES, FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024/25

2. Adopt Resolution No. **** - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ESTABLISHING THE ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2006- 2, PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES, FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024/25

3. Authorize the Mayor to sign the Proposition 218 Certificates for inclusion on the 2024/25 Butte County Tax Roll.

ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. ****
Resolution No. ****
Proposition 218 or Compliance Certification of Special Tax Levy 241
Item 16.

CITY OF OROVILLE
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ESTABLISHING THE ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2006-1, WESTSIDE PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITIES, FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024/25
WHEREAS, the Oroville City Council (hereafter referred to as the “legislative body”), has initiated proceedings, held a public hearing, conducted an election and received a favorable vote from the qualified electors relating to the levy of a special tax in a special tax district, all as authorized pursuant to the terms and provisions of the “Mello Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982”, being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the California Government Code. Said special tax district is known and designated as Community Facilities District No. 2006-1, Westside Public Safety Facilities (hereafter referred to as “CFD No. 2006-1”) and, WHEREAS, the legislative body, by ordinance and as authorized by Section 53340 of the California Government Code, has authorized the levy of a special tax to pay the costs and expenses related to CFD No. 2006-1 and this legislative body desires to establish the specific special tax rate to be collected for the upcoming fiscal year.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE LEGISLATIVE BODY AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1 That the above recitals are true and correct.

Section 2 The specific special tax rate to be collected for CFD No. 2006-1 for the upcoming fiscal year (2024/25) is hereby determined and established in the table below. A listing of individual parcels, showing the corresponding special tax rate, is attached hereto as “Exhibit A”.

TYPE RATE
Developed Property $600.00 per Developed Property
Final Mapped Property $300.00 per Final Mapped Property Section 3 That the special tax rate as set forth above does not exceed the amount as previously authorized by ordinance of this legislative body and is not in excess of that as previously approved by the qualified electors of CFD No. 2006-1, and is in compliance with Proposition 218, Section XIII D of the Constitution of the State of California.

Section 4 That the proceeds of the special tax shall be used to pay, in whole or in part, the costs of the following:
242
Item 16.

A. Preliminary and Incidental Expense and Appurtenant Work and Improvements – the authorized facilities shall be deemed to include the costs and expenses of mobilization, clearing, grubbing, protective fencing and erosion control, excavation, dewatering, lime treatment, drainage ditches, rock outfalls, curb, gutter and sidewalks, base and finishing pavement, striping, traffic signals, street lights, landscaping, irrigation, soundwalls, retaining walls, barricades and related appurtenant work and facilities, together with the costs and expenses of engineering design, environmental analysis, utility relocation, permits for work in jurisdictional waters, right-of-way acquisition, plan review, project management, construction related surety bonds or like security instruments, construction staking and management, inspection and any like fees and costs incidental to such acquisition, construction and installation.

B. Fire station and related firefighting and suppression equipment, furniture and furnishings.

C. Police substation and related furniture, furnishings and equipment.

The proceeds of the special tax shall be used as set forth above and shall not be used for any other purpose.

Section 5 The special tax shall be collected in the same manner as ordinary ad valorem property taxes are collected and shall be subject to the same penalties and same procedure and sale in cases of delinquency for ad valorem taxes, and the Tax Collector is hereby authorized to deduct reasonable administrative costs incurred in collecting said special taxes.

Section 6 All monies collected shall be paid into a fund for CFD No. 2006-1, including any reserve fund amounts.

Section 7 The County Auditor is hereby directed to enter in the next County assessment roll on which taxes will become due, opposite each lot or parcel of land effected in a space marked “public services” or “special tax” or by any other suitable designation, the installment of the special tax and the exact rate of the special tax as stated above.

Section 8 The County Auditor shall then, at the close of the tax collection period, promptly render to the City of Oroville, a detailed report showing the amount(s) of such special tax installments, interest, penalties and percentages so collected and from what property collected, and also provide a statement of any percentages retained for the expense of making such collection.
243
Item 16.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Oroville City Council at a regular meeting held on August 6, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSTENT:

David Pittman, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

Scott Huber, City Attorney Kayla Reaster, Assistant City Clerk 244
Item 16.

EXHIBIT A – 2024/25 SPECIAL TAX ROLL
Tract Name APN Lot Special Tax
Calle Vista 2 030-490-074-000 1 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-075-000 2 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-076-000 3 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-077-000 4 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-078-000 5 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-079-000 6 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-080-000 7 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-081-000 8 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-082-000 9 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-083-000 10 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-084-000 11 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-085-000 12 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-086-000 13 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-087-000 14 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-088-000 15 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-089-000 16 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-090-000 17 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-091-000 18 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-092-000 19 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-093-000 20 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-094-000 21 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-095-000 22 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-096-000 23 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-097-000 24 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-098-000 25 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-099-000 26 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-100-000 27 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-101-000 28 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-102-000 29 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-103-000 30 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-104-000 31 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-105-000 32 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-106-000 33 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-107-000 34 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-108-000 35 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-109-000 36 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-110-000 37 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-111-000 38 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-112-000 39 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-113-000 40 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-114-000 41 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-115-000 42 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-116-000 43 600.00
Calle Vista 2 030-490-117-000 44 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-001-000 92 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-002-000 91 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-003-000 90 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-004-000 89 600.00
245
Item 16.

Tract Name APN Lot Special Tax
Vista Del Oro 030-580-005-000 88 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-006-000 87 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-007-000 86 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-008-000 85 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-009-000 80 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-010-000 81 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-011-000 82 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-012-000 83 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-013-000 84 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-014-000 74 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-015-000 75 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-016-000 76 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-017-000 77 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-018-000 78 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-019-000 79 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-020-000 68 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-021-000 69 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-022-000 70 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-023-000 71 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-024-000 72 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-025-000 73 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-026-000 61 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-027-000 62 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-028-000 63 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-029-000 64 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-050-000 65 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-051-000 66 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-032-000 67 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-033-000 54 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-034-000 55 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-035-000 56 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-052-000 57 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-053-000 58 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-054-000 59 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-039-000 60 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-040-000 33 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-041-000 34 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-042-000 35 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-043-000 36 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-044-000 37 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-045-000 38 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-580-046-000 39 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-001-000
1 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-002-000
2 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-003-000
3 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-004-000
4 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-005-000
5 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-049-000
6 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-050-000
7 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-051-000
8 600.00
246
Item 16.

Tract Name APN Lot Special Tax
Vista Del Oro 030-590-052-000 9 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-010-000 10 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-011-000 11 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-012-000 12 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-013-000 13 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-014-000 14 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-015-000 15 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-016-000 16 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-017-000 17 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-018-000 18 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-019-000 19 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-020-000 20 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-021-000 21 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-022-000 22 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-023-000 23 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-024-000 24 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-025-000 25 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-026-000 26 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-027-000 27 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-028-000 28 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-029-000 29 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-030-000 30 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-031-000 31 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-032-000 32 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-033-000 33 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-034-000 34 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-035-000 35 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-036-000 36 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-037-000 37 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-038-000 38 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-039-000 39 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-040-000 40 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-041-000 41 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-042-000 42 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-043-000 43 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-044-000 44 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-045-000 45 600.00
Vista Del Oro 030-590-046-000 46 600.00
Totals: 136 $81,600.00
247
Item 16.

CITY OF OROVILLE
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ESTABLISHING THE ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2006-2, PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES, FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024/25
WHEREAS, the Oroville City Council (hereafter referred to as the “legislative body”), has initiated proceedings, held a public hearing, conducted an election and received a favorable vote from the qualified electors relating to the levy of a special tax in a special tax district, all as authorized pursuant to the terms and provisions of the “Mello Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982”, being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the California Government Code. Said special tax district is known and designated as Community Facilities District No. 2006-2, Public Safety Services (hereafter referred to as “CFD No. 2006-2”) and, WHEREAS, the legislative body, by ordinance and as authorized by Section 53340 of the California Government Code, has authorized the levy of a special tax to pay the costs and expenses related to CFD No. 2006-2 and this legislative body desires to establish the specific special tax rate to be collected for the upcoming fiscal year.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE LEGISLATIVE BODY AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1 That the above recitals are true and correct.

Section 2 The specific special tax rate to be collected for CFD No. 2006-2 for the upcoming fiscal year (2024/25) is hereby determined and established in the table below. A listing of individual parcels, showing the corresponding special tax rate, is attached hereto as “Exhibit A”.

TYPE RATE
Developed Property $600.00 per Developed Property
Final Mapped Property $300.00 per Final Mapped Property Section 3 That the special tax rate as set forth above does not exceed the amount as previously authorized by ordinance of this legislative body and is not in excess of that as previously approved by the qualified electors of CFD No. 2006-2, and is in compliance with Proposition 218, Section XIII D of the Constitution of the State of California.

Section 4 That the proceeds of the special tax shall be used to pay, in whole or in part, the costs of the following:

A. Fire protection and suppression.

B. Police protection.
248
Item 16.

The proceeds of the special tax shall be used as set forth above and shall not be used for any other purpose.

Section 6 All monies collected shall be paid into a fund for CFD No. 2006-2, including any reserve fund amounts.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Oroville City Council at a regular meeting held on August 6, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSTENT:

David Pittman, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

Scott Huber, City Attorney Kayla Reaster, Assistant City Clerk 250
Item 16.

ATTACHMENT #2
ASSESSMENT TITLE: ____________________________________________________ TAXCODE: 94001 PLEASE ONLY CHECK ONE:

Is This a Compliance Certification_______________ OR A Proposition 218 Certification ___X___________?

PROPOSITION 218 OR COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS STATEMENT 2024-2025
The Agency/District of City of Oroville certifies the following:

I have read and am familiar with the requirements of Article XIIIC and XIIID of the State Constitution as revised by Proposition 218, including the articles cited below, and believe that all of the taxes, assessments, levies and fees accompanying the 2024-2025 submission to the County-Auditor for inclusion on the Secured Property Tax roll are in compliance with the law.

Article XIII C. Sec. 2 (c) “Any general tax imposed, extended, or increased, without voter approval, by any local government on or after January 1, 1997, and prior to the effective date of this article, shall continue to be imposed only if approved by a majority vote of the voters voting in an election on the issue of the imposition, which election shall be held within two years of the effective date of this article and in compliance with subdivision (b).”
Article XIII D. Sec. 5 “…this article shall become effective the day after the election unless otherwise provided. Beginning July 1, 1997, all existing, new, or increased assessments shall comply with this article.”
Article XIII E. Sec. 6 (d) “Beginning July 1, 1997, all fees or charges shall comply with this section.” The Agency/District agrees that it shall be solely liable and responsible, and will defend and hold harmless the County of Butte, the Board of Supervisors, the Auditor-Controller, the Tax Collector, its officers and employees, from litigation over whether the requirements of Proposition 218 were met with respect to such levy (levies).

If any judgment is entered against any indemnified party as a result of not meeting the requirements of Proposition 218 for such special tax(es), fee(s) or assessment(s), the Agency/District agrees that County may offset the amount of any judgment paid by an indemnified party from any moneys collected by County on Agency/District’s behalf, including property taxes, special taxes, fees, or assessments. In addition, the Agency/District shall be solely liable and responsible and will defend and hold the County and the County Auditor harmless from any and all legal fees or other costs incurred related to such a claim.

By: ________City of Oroville_________________________________________________________ 254
Item 16.

ATTACHMENT #2
ASSESSMENT TITLE: ____________________________________________________ TAXCODE: 94000 PLEASE ONLY CHECK ONE:

Is This a Compliance Certification_______________ OR A Proposition 218 Certification ___X___________?

PROPOSITION 218 OR COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS STATEMENT 2024-2025
The Agency/District of City of Oroville certifies the following:

By: ________City of Oroville_________________________________________________________ 255
Item 16.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: RUTH DUNCAN, ASSISTANT CITY ADMINISTRATORADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES RE: ANNUAL SANITARY SEWER SERVICE TO BE LEVIED ON THE 2024- 25 TAX ROLL
DATE: AUGUST 6, 2024

SUMMARY
The Council may consider a Resolution certifying that the Sewer Service charges to be levied on the 2024-25 tax roll are in compliance with Proposition 218.

DISCUSSION
For the 2024-25 fiscal year, the sewer rate is increasing for both the City and Sewerage Commission Oroville Region (SCOR). There is a planned increase in the monthly wastewater treatment charges for Sewerage Commission – Oroville Region (SCOR) for a total of $24.49 per month. There is a planned increase in the monthly wastewater collection charges for the City of Oroville for a total of $26.06 per month. The total monthly wastewater charges will be $50.55 per month.

The City and SCOR monthly sewer service rates for the next five years is summarized below.

Service
Provider Service Current
July 1,
2024
July 1,
2025
July 1,
2026
July 1,
2027
July 1,
2028
SCOR
Wastewater
Treatment

23.85 24.49

25.71 27.00

28.35 29.77
City of Oroville
Wastewater
Collection

23.56 26.06

27.88 29.83

31.92 34.15
Total

47.41 50.55

53.59 56.83

60.27 63.92
Both the City’s and SCOR’s sewer charges are collected through placement on the Butte County property tax bills by the City.

FISCAL IMPACT
Revenue obtained from the sewer collection and treatment charges fund the City’s and SCOR’s operations, planned maintenance and capital improvement projects. 256
Item 17.

Page 2 ends

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No. XXXX - A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL

CERTIFYING TO THE COUNTY OF BUTTE THE VALIDITY OF THE LEGAL PROCESS USED

TO PLACE DIRECT CHARGES (SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS) ON THE SECURED TAX ROLL AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE PROPOSITION 218 CERTIFICATION OF TAX BILL LEVY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024–25 SEWER SERVICE CHARGES

ATTACHMENTS
Resolution No. XXXX
Prop 218 or Compliance Certification and Hold Harmless Statement SCOR increase notice and resolution
257
Item 17.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 CITY OF OROVILLE
RESOLUTION NO. xxxx

A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFYING TO THE COUNTY

OF BUTTE THE VALIDITY OF THE LEGAL PROCESS USED TO PLACE DIRECT

CHARGES (SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS) ON THE SECURED TAX ROLL AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE PROPOSITION 218 CERTIFICATION

OR COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS STATEMENT OF TAX

BILL LEVY
WHEREAS, the notices and election for special assessment fees for the purpose of the collection of sewer service charges to be included on the regular County property tax bill for property owners of the City of Oroville was completed on July 16, 2024; and WHEREAS, the City of Oroville (City) is placing the special assessments on the Butte County secured property tax roll for collection; and WHEREAS, the City has complied with all laws pertaining to the levy of the special assessments, including compliance certification, to be collected per Health and Safety Code section 5470, et seq; and
WHEREAS, the assessment is being levied without regard to property valuation of the properties involved; and
WHEREAS, the City agrees that it shall be solely liable and responsible, and will defend and hold the County of Butte harmless from any liability as a result of claims or claims for refunds and related interest due filed by taxpayers against any assessments, fees, charges or taxes placed on the roll for the City by the County; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Oroville City Council that the list submitted with parcel numbers and amounts are certified as being correct, the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign any documents required and directed to give the list to the Butte County Auditor on behalf of the City for placement on the secured tax roll for collection:

1. Prop 218 or Compliance Certification and Hold Harmless Statement

2. Property Tax Data Bill Form

3. Authority to Approve Direct Assessment Charges

4. Parcel Listing
258
Item 17.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Oroville City Council at a regular meeting held on Aug 6, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

David Pittman, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
______________________
Scott E. Huber, City Attorney Kayla Reaster, Assistant City Clerk 259
Item 17.

ASSESSMENT TITLE: Sewer Tax Roll TAXCODE: 77001
PLEASE ONLY CHECK ONE:

Is This a Compliance Certification X

PROPOSITION 218 OR COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS STATEMENT 2024-2025
The City of Oroville certifies the following:

Article XIII C. Sec. 2 (c) “Any general tax imposed, extended, or increased, without voter approval, by any local government on or after January 1, 1995, and prior to the effective date of this article, shall continue to be imposed only if approved by a majority vote of the voters voting in an election on the issue of the imposition, which election shall be held within two years of the effective date of this article and in compliance with subdivision (b).”
Article XIII D. Sec. 5 “…this article shall become effective the day after the election unless otherwise provided. Beginning July 1, 1997, all existing, new, or increased assessments shall comply with this article.”
Article XIII E. Sec. 6 (d) “Beginning July 1, 1997, all fees or charges shall comply with this section.” The Agency/District agrees that it shall be solely liable and responsible, and will defend and hold harmless the County of Butte, the Board of Supervisors, the Auditor-Controller, the Tax Collector, its officers and employees, from litigation over whether the requirements of Proposition 218 were met with respect to such levy (levies).

By: _______________________________________________________________________________ Mayor, David Pittman
260
Item 17.

Page 1 ends

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: PATRICK PIATT, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR

WES ERVIN, PRINCIPAL PLANNER
RE: GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT REVISION AND ADOPTION

OF AN INTERIM TRANSPORTATION THRESHOLD
DATE: AUGUST 6, 2024

SUMMARY
The City Council will consider a General Plan amendment that meets the requirements of Senate Bill 743, which requires Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) to be the new analytical emphasis for improving air quality.

DISCUSSION
High Level Summary
To simplify a complicated technical topic, Staff recommends that the Council approve:

1. A minor amendment to Policy P2.1 of the General Plan to bring the city into compliance with Senate Bill 743, and

2. Establishing formal thresholds of significance under CEQA for projects creating new traffic impacts. The practical application is that if a larger new project is not already properly zoned and its traffic impacts exceed the threshold, it may trigger an environmental review under CEQA. The thresholds are almost identical to thresholds the County adopted previously.

Background
The proposed General Plan Update (proposed project), would modify the existing 2030 General Plan which was adopted by City Council June 2, 2009, modified by the City on March 31, 2015, and serves as the City of Oroville (City’s) guiding policy document that describes the vision for the future of the City (City of Oroville General Plan, Page 2-1).

On September 27, 2013, Governor Jerry Brown signed California Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) into law which changed the environmental emphasis from vehicle level of service (LOS) to vehicle miles travelled (VMT). A reduction in VMT is intended to further a state goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and improving air quality by reducing the emissions associated with the length and number of vehicle trips. Eliminating LOS as an environmental threshold makes congestion management a public policy issue rather than an environmental issue. 261
Item 18.

Page 2 ends

The State Office of Planning and Research (OPR) has published guidelines with recommendations on how VMT might be reduced. Most of the recommendations are more applicable to urban or built areas where land uses are closer together, mixed use is economically viable, and transit is more accessible. Many of the recommendations are unlikely to apply to a rural City like Oroville.

OPR recognizes that rural areas should be treated differently based on their land use and transportation context but uses a definition of rural that would exclude the city. The interim threshold drafted for consideration by the Council corrects this oversight and explains why the City should be considered rural.

This threshold is considered interim as modifications will occur over time, and State initiatives may change how the City will need to consider VMT for development projects. As adoption of SB 743 eliminated LOS as a threshold, the attached interim threshold adopts VMT as a threshold custom tailored to the unique needs of Oroville.

Butte County Association of Governments Guidance Document In 2021, the Butte County Association of Governments (BCAG) published the BCAG SB 743 Implementation guidance document that evaluated region wide VMT:
“…to help BCAG member agencies understand the specific questions that need to be addressed when making these determinations and to provide research, analysis, and other evidence to support their final SB 743 implementation decisions. BCAG chose to lead this effort to help reduce the SB 743 implementation costs that would have otherwise been incurred by each member agency pursuing independent implementation efforts. BCAG provides this documentation as a resource for its member agencies and does not make any specific recommendations regarding SB 743 implementation.” Per the guidance document each member agency is required to make its own SB 743 implementation decisions and can rely on information in the report to the extent it is relevant.

For purposes of the City’s interim VMT threshold, we relied on information from the report and additional analysis prepared by Fehr and Peers who provided technical input into the report.

General Plan
The General Plan includes Policy P2.1 that reads:

P2.1 Maintain a Level of Service (LOS) D or better as defined in the most current edition of the Highway Capacity Manual or subsequent revisions for roadways and intersections, except as specified below:

While passage of SB 743 eliminated LOS as a threshold for CEQA it still allows the use of LOS in other planning efforts. Staff recommends keeping the policy in the General Plan but modifying it to make LOS a goal rather than a mandate. The Council should keep its ability to approve or modify projects that would affect roadway or intersection LOS. As such, staff is recommending that policy P2.1 be amended to read as follows.
262
Item 18.

Page 3 ends

P2.1 Strive to maintain a Level of Service (LOS) D or better as defined in the most current edition of the Highway Capacity Manual or subsequent revisions for roadways and intersections, except as specified below:

The change would give the Council the ability to approve projects that might both affect LOS per the policy but are still important to the community. The list of roadways associated with the policy remains unchanged. Note that Caltrans will likely require some version of LOS analysis for larger projects as LOS is used in evaluating safety of state facilities.

The existing Circulation Element also contains policy P2.5 that reads:

P2.5 Reduce the total vehicle miles traveled through designation of land uses that support multi-modal travel and provision of more direct routes to high activity locations.

This policy is adequate for the adoption of interim VMT thresholds.

Climate Action Plan
The City’s Community Climate Action Plan (CAP) was adopted in 2015 and sets a “… target to reduce GHG emissions from community activities to 11% below 2010 levels by 2020”—a goal referred to in this Climate Action Plan (CAP) as the 2020 emissions reduction target. This target is consistent with larger statewide initiatives adopted through Assembly Bill 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act. This CAP describes the City’s plan for achieving its emissions reduction goal. The CAP also outlines a plan that will better prepare the City to address and adapt to potential economic, environmental, and social effects of climate change. The CAP has programmed a slight reduction in GHG related to more mixed-use and concentrated development with a focus on improving the pedestrian network. Other reductions are from voluntary community trip reduction programs and the use of electrically powered construction and landscaping equipment. The increase in residential and commercial density represents a 501-1,000 MTCO2e decrease in GHG but is noted in the CAP as difficult to quantify. While difficult to quantify, it is obvious that a combination of higher densities and mixed land use connected to a pedestrian network provides options for transportation that will reduce GHG.

CEQA
The revisions to the Circulation Element are subject to CEQA review, and staff and Placeworks, our consultant on this project, have determined that an Addendum to the General Plan EIR is the appropriate CEQA document. It is attached for review and adoption by the City Council.

No public review or public circulation of this document is required.

Regarding Thresholds of Significance, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15064.7. states that each public agency is encouraged to develop and publish thresholds of significance that the agency uses in the determination of the significance of environmental effects. Thresholds of significance to be adopted for general use as part of the lead agency’s environmental review process must be adopted by ordinance, resolution, rule, or regulation, developed through a public review process, and be supported by substantial evidence. Lead agencies may also use thresholds on a case-by-case basis as provided in Section 15064(b)(2).
263
Item 18.

Page 4 ends

Nothing in the CEQA Guidelines states that the adoption of thresholds is subject to environmental review. This is further supported by case law as discussed in the attached Threshold document:

Recommended VMT Standards/Thresholds of Significance
The following thresholds of significance would be applied to all discretionary projects that are neither unable to be screened from VMT analysis nor are considered de minimis. Examples and discussion for each threshold are included in italics following the threshold statement.

TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:

A. Disrupt transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities or interfere with planned facilities or cause a physical change inconsistent with bicycle and pedestrian policies contained in the City of Oroville General Plan and Oroville Bicycle Plan.

For a project to result in a significant impact the physical design would be such that it interfered with city or transit agency standards for one or more nonmotorized improvements. For example, not connecting to or providing for a future trail or not including sidewalks and connection(s) to adjacent uses where appropriate, not including bus turnout or stopping areas. This impact could be significant if a roadway connection isn’t made that would expand or maintain the transit network or if frontage improvements did not include a bus turnout or similar improvements consistent with city plans.

B. Generate home-based work VMT per employee at a rate that is greater than the citywide average under future general plan conditions.

C. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., large trucks, farm equipment)?
This is a design consideration and will be evaluated with each project for compliance with City standards.

D. Result in inadequate emergency access.
264
Item 18.

Page 5 ends

This is a design consideration and will be evaluated with each project for compliance with City standards. As noted in the screening criteria, the addition of an emergency access route or connection is screened out of requiring a VMT analysis.

FISCAL IMPACT
None.

PUBLIC NOTICE
The Planning Commission hearing for this amendment was publicly noticed in the local newspaper on July 27, 2024.

FISCAL IMPACT
None. The Housing element Update was funded using CDBG Program Income funds

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the following actions:

1. Conduct a Public Hearing on the proposed General Plan amendment.

2. Adopt Resolution No 9300: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Oroville amending the Circulation Element of the General Plan.

3. Adopt the attached Resolution No 9301: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Oroville Adopting an Interim Transportation Threshold for the Purposes of Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)..

ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft Interim Transportation Threshold

2. Draft Addendum to the General Plan EIR

3. Draft Resolution No 9300 Circulation Element

4. Draft Resolution No. 9301 Interim Transportation Threshold 265
Item 18.

Resolution 9300

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OROVILLE AMENDING

THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE OROVILLE GENERAL PLAN
WHEREAS, the passage of SB 743 eliminated LOS as a threshold for CEQA but allows the use of LOS in other planning efforts; and
WHEREAS, Policy P2.1 of the Circulation Element would limit the ability of the Council to approve projects that would affect roadway or intersection LOS; and WHEREAS, the limitation would come not from CEQA that would allow a statement of overriding considerations, but from the need to remain consistent with the General Plan that has no provisions to approve a project with an absolute statement; and
WHEREAS, the City of Oroville is updating Policy P2.1 of the Circulation Element to allow the flexibility to approve projects that might both affect LOS per the policy but still important to the community; and
WHEREAS, the list of roadways associated with the Policy P2.1 remains unchanged; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Oroville City Council hereby takes the following actions and makes the following findings:

I. Policy P2.1 of the Circulation Element is amended to read, “Strive to maintain Maintain a Level of Service (LOS) D or better as defined in the most current edition of the Highway Capacity Manual or subsequent revisions for roadways and intersections, except as specified below:” PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Oroville City Council of this 6th day of August 2024, by the following
vote:

AYES:

NOES:
266
Item 18.

ABSENT:

NOT VOTING:

APPROVED AS TO
FORM:

Scott E. Huber, City Attorney
David Pittman, Mayor
ATTEST:

Kayla Reaster Acting City Clerk
267
Item 18.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OROVILLE ADOPTING AN

INTERIM TRANSPORTION THRESHOLD OF SIGNIFICANCE UNDER THE CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) FOR VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT) RESOLUTION 9301
WHEREAS, on September 27, 2013, Governor Jerry Brown signed California Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) into law which changed the environmental emphasis from vehicle level of service (LOS) to vehicle miles travelled (VMT); and
WHEREAS, the State Office of Planning and Research (OPR) has published guidelines with recommendations on how VMT might be reduced, many of the recommendations are unlikely to apply to a rural city such as Oroville; and, WHEREAS, OPR recognizes that rural areas should be treated differently based on their land use and transportation context but uses a definition of rural that would exclude the City of Oroville; and
WHEREAS, the interim threshold drafted for consideration corrects this oversight and explains why the City of Oroville should be considered rural; and WHEREAS, this threshold is considered interim as modifications will occur over time, and state initiatives may change how the City will need to consider VMT from development projects; and
WHEREAS, the City of Oroville Planning Commission reviewed and considered the information in the administrative record, staff report, and all oral and written testimony presented to the Planning Commission and recommended approval of the Interim Transportation Threshold to the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Oroville City Council has reviewed and considered the information in the administrative record, staff report, and all oral and written testimony presented to the City Council; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Oroville City Council hereby takes the following actions and makes the following findings:

I. Notice of the City Council hearing on the Interim Transportation Threshold was given as required by law and the actions were conducted in accordance with CEQA, and the State CEQA Guidelines.

II. All individuals, groups and agencies desiring to comment were given adequate opportunity to submit oral and written comments on the Interim Vehicles Miles 268
Item 18.

Travelled threshold.

Ill. The City Council was presented with all the information described in the recitals and has considered this information in adopting this resolution.

IV. The proposed Adoption of the Interim Transportation Threshold is in the public interest, and protects the health, safety, and welfare of the City.

V. Adopts the Interim Transportation Threshold as set forth under Exhibit A.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Oroville City Council of this 6th day of August 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

NOT VOTING:

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Scott E. Huber, City Attorney
David Pittman, Mayor
ATTEST:

Kayla Reaster, Acting City Clerk
269
Item 18.

December 2023 | General Plan EIR Addendum

ADDENDUM TO THE GENERAL PLAN EIR
SCH No. 2008022024

FOR THE
OROVILLE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE 2030
City of Oroville
Prepared for:

City of Oroville
Wes Ervin
Principal Planner
1735 Montgomery Street
Oroville, California 95965
Prepared by:

PlaceWorks
Mark Teague, AICP
101 Parkshore Drive, Suite 202
Folsom, California 95630
858.776.5574
[email protected]
www.placeworks.com
270
Item 18.
271
Item 18.

A D D E N D U M T O T H E G E N E R A L P L A N E I R F O R T H E C I T Y O F O R O V I L L E G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E 2 03 0

C I T Y O F O R O V I L L E
Table of Contents
December 2023 Page i
Section Page

1. ADDENDUM TO THE ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN EIR............................................................... 1

1.1 BACKGROUND.................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 GENERAL PLAN EIR FINDINGS................................................................................................................. 2

1.3 PROJECT SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................................... 3

1.4 PURPOSE OF AN EIR ADDENDUM........................................................................................................... 5

2. CEQA ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................................ 8

2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS..................................................................................................................... 8

2.2 FINDINGS ............................................................................................................................................................. 8

2.3 REFERENCES..................................................................................................................................................... 11 Table Page
TABLE 1-1 BASELINE (2020) VMT SUMMARY............................................................................................................... 4 TABLE 1-2 HIGH-LEVEL CEQA CHANGES................................................................................................................... 7 272
Item 18.

Page ii PlaceWorks
This page is intentionally left blank.
273
Item 18.

December 2023 Page 1

1. Addendum to the Adopted General Plan EIR

1.1 BACKGROUND
The proposed General Plan Update (proposed project), would modify the existing 2030 General Plan which was adopted by City Council June 2nd , 2009, modified by the City on March 31st, 2015, and serves as the City of Oroville (City’s) guiding policy document that describes the vision for the future of the City (City of Oroville, 2015a).

1.1.1 Oroville General Plan 2030
The Oroville 2030 General Plan is the foundation development policy document of the City of Oroville. It defines the framework by which the physical, economic, and human resources of the city are to be managed and used over time. The General Plan provides the City of Oroville with directions on how to fulfill future growth with a vision surrounding community interests. The General Plan acts to clarify and articulate the intentions of the City with respect to the rights and expectations of the public, property owners, and prospective investors and business interests. The General Plan informs the City’s citizens of the goals, objectives, policies, and standards for development of the City and the responsibilities of all sectors in meeting these.

The Oroville 2030 General Plan provides the fundamental basis for the City’s land use, development, and conservation policy, and represents the basic community values, ideals and aspirations that will govern the City through 2030. This General Plan addresses all aspects of development, including land use; community character; housing; economic development; circulation and transportation; open space, natural resources, and conservation; public facilities and services; safety; and noise.

The Oroville 2030 General Plan serves as the foundation document for all subsequent development standards and regulations, some of which are found in the municipal code such as Title 16 Subdivisions and Title 17 Zoning, and others in adopted engineering standards for construction. Nothing in the proposed project would change the standards for physical development or the provisions of the General Plan EIR, municipal code, and associated development regulations that are designed to reduce or avoid environmental impacts.

1.1.2 Certification of the General Plan EIR and Supplemental EIR The General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR), certified on June 2nd, 2009, (State Clearinghouse Number 2008022024), evaluates the potential environmental impacts resulting from future development anticipated by the Oroville General Plan (City of Oroville, 2009).

On January 30th, 2015, the City of Oroville prepared a draft SEIR which evaluated the Oroville Sustainability Updates. This included the 2030 General Plan Updates, Municipal Code Updates, Design Guidelines Update, CAP, and Balanced Mode Circulation Plan. The 2030 General Plan Updates included changes to the land use map and designations, related updates to the expected 2030 development levels, revisions to the Circulation 274
Item 18.

A D D E N D U M T O T H E G E N E R A L P L A N E I R F O R T H E C I T Y O F O R O V I L L E G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E 2030

C I T Y O F O R O V I L L E

1. Addendum to the Certified General Plan EIR

Page 2 ends

and Transportation Element to reflect the land use map changes and to support complete streets and walkability, addition of a new Economic Development Element, updates to reflect State statutes, and various policy revisions that address the City’s park standards, access to local and healthy food, and other topics. The SEIR was certified by the City Council on March 31, 2015 (State Clearinghouse Number 2014052001) (City of Oroville, 2015b).

1.1.3 California Senate Bill 743
On September 27, 2013, Governor Jerry Brown signed California Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) into law which changed the environmental emphasis from vehicle level of service (LOS) to vehicle miles travelled (VMT). The LOS rating system rating system was used previously as a means of determining projected traffic impacts of proposed developments on nearby intersections, streets, and highways. VMT measures the distance a motorized vehicle will travel to a destination, divided by the number of passengers (i.e., per capita). As defined under SB 743, VMT is the new standard for assessing the effects of growth and development in California on the transportation system. A reduction in VMT is intended to further a state goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and improving air quality by reducing the emissions associated with the length and number of vehicle trips. Eliminating LOS as an environmental threshold makes congestion management a public policy issue rather than an environmental issue.

The existing General Plan establishes policies about meeting a specific LOS, which was the standard approach to assessing transportation environmental impacts based on automobile delay. With the adoption of SB 743 LOS is no longer considered an environmental impact, though the city can keep LOS as a goal for the development of the community. Instead, the new metric is to ensure a reduction in vehicle miles travelled (VMT) as a means of reducing air quality and greenhouse gas impacts. The proposed project recognizes the shift from LOS to VMT and keeps the LOS standard as a goal rather than an absolute. This allows the city to plan for roadways as appropriate but does not require adherence to an adopted LOS standard.

Environmental Documentation
This document serves as the environmental documentation for the City’s proposed General Plan Update. This addendum to the City of Oroville’s General Plan EIR (State Clearinghouse Number 2008022024) demonstrates that the analysis in that EIR adequately addresses the potential physical impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project, and the proposed project would not trigger any of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for further environmental review.

1.2 GENERAL PLAN EIR FINDINGS
The General Plan EIR addresses potential impacts related to aesthetics, air quality and greenhouse gas emissions, biological resources, cultural resources, geology, soils, and mineral resources, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use, noise, population and housing, public services and recreation, transportation and circulation, and utilities, and infrastructure (City of Oroville, 2009).

In addition, the city has a development code and engineering standards that address the physical impacts of development on the environment. None of the regulatory processes are being amended by this project; therefore, they will continue to apply to all subsequent development. 275
Item 18.

A D D E N D U M T O T H E G E N E R A L P L A N E I R F O R T H E C I T Y O F O R O V I L L E G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E 2030

C I T Y O F O R O V I L L E

1. Addendum to the Certified General Plan EIR
December 2023 Page 3
The General Plan EIR determined that implementation of the City’s General Plan would result in significant and unavoidable impacts to the following environmental topics (City of Oroville, 2009):
 Air Quality: The Draft EIR determined that construction of development allowed by the General Plan would result in a significant and unavoidable air quality impact.  Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The Draft EIR determined that even with implementation of General Plan policies to reduce GHGs, GHG emissions would result in a significant and unavoidable GHG impact.  Hydrology and Water Quality: The Draft EIR found a significant and unavoidable impact related to exposure of people and structures to risks from flooding as a result of dam failure. Although the dam could withstand a 6.5 magnitude earthquake, which is the largest credible event projected for the region, development allowed by the 2030 General Plan would be within the dam inundation area, causing a significant impact.
 Hydrology and Water Quality: The Draft EIR found a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact due to the population and development increase within an area that is subject to dam inundation and seiche hazards.
 Noise: The Draft EIR predicted traffic noise levels in 2030 for the General Plan would contribute to cumulative noise impacts, resulting in a significant and unavoidable impact.  Population and Housing: The Draft EIR for the General Plan found that the increase in residential units within the Project Area would be considered “substantial population growth,” and found the impact to be significant and unavoidable.
 Transportation and Circulation: The Draft EIR for the General Plan found that increased traffic from the General Plan would exacerbate existing deficiencies along Highways 70, 99, and 162, resulting in a significant and unavoidable impact.

1.3 PROJECT SUMMARY
CEQA requires the City to evaluate the environmental impacts associated with direct and reasonably foreseeable indirect physical changes to the environment. The proposed project would ensure the City follows current State regulations and would address the Circulation Element’s focus from LOS to VMT. The goals, policies, and actions in the existing General Plan would guide development and conservation in the City of Oroville through 2030. However, due to changes to CEQA, the General Plan no longer recognizes LOS and therefore must change the environmental emphasis from LOS to VMT. The remainder of the General Plan will also be revised in discussing LOS and reflect changes to local and regional priorities and ensure compliance with State law. Table 1-1, Baseline (2020) VMT Summary shows the proposed project’s results of the BCAG RTP/SCS Travel Demand Model for the region and City for VMT. As shown in Table 1-1, the City’s homebased VMT per resident is higher than the region, while the home based VMT per employee is slightly less. 276
Item 18.

A D D E N D U M T O T H E G E N E R A L P L A N E I R F O R T H E C I T Y O F O R O V I L L E G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E 2030

C I T Y O F O R O V I L L E

1. Addendum to the Certified General Plan EIR

Page 4 ends

Table 1-1 Baseline (2020) VMT Summary
VMT Metric BCAG Region City of Oroville
Total VMT Generated by land uses within
geographic area
7,532,100 1,235,400
Home-based VMT per resident 14.9 17.7
Home-based work VMT per employee 6.7 6.2
Total Network VMT 4,710,000 453,400
While passage of SB 743 eliminated LOS as a threshold for CEQA but allows the use of LOS in other planning efforts, this would limit the ability of the City to approve projects that would affect roadway or intersection LOS. The limitation would come not from CEQA that would allow a statement of overriding considerations, but from the need to remain consistent with the Oroville General Plan that has no provisions to approve a project in conflict with an absolute statement. As such, a proposed change to the General Plan policy that directly addresses LOS would give the City the ability to approve projects that might both affect LOS per the policy, but are still important to the community.

In addition to the proposed change to the General Plan policy, the proposed project would modify two of the four existing thresholds of significance in the transportation environmental factor. Specifically, the proposed project would revise threshold “a” and “b” which would be applied to any discretionary projects. The modified transportation thresholds would consist of the following:

Would the Project:
a. Disrupt transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities or interfere with planned facilities or cause a physical change inconsistent with bicycle and pedestrian policies contained in the City of Oroville General Plan and Oroville Bicycle Plan.
b. Generates home-based work VMT per employee at a rate that is greater than the citywide average under future General Plan conditions.

By modifying these two thresholds, the City would be able to stay consistent with the changes made as a result of SB 743 and the newly proposed General Plan policy regarding LOS. 277
Item 18.

A D D E N D U M T O T H E G E N E R A L P L A N E I R F O R T H E C I T Y O F O R O V I L L E G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E 2030

C I T Y O F O R O V I L L E

1. Addendum to the Adopted General Plan EIR
December 2023 Page 5

1.4 PURPOSE OF AN EIR ADDENDUM
According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(a), an addendum shall be prepared if some changes or additions to a previously certified EIR are necessary, but none of the conditions enumerated in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a)(1) – (3) calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. As stated in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 (Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations):

When an EIR has been certified or negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
(a) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration.
(b) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR.
(c) Mitigation Programs or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation Program or alternative; or (d) Mitigation Programs or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation Program or alternative.

1.4.1 Rationale for Preparing an EIR Addendum
As described in Section 1.1.2, the General Plan EIR was certified in 2009. Since, there have been CEQA changes in regard to analyzing environmental topics. This addendum serves to analyze the changes and determine whether the proposed project would result in significant changes that were not analyzed or considered in the existing General Plan. Table 1-2, High-Level CEQA Changes, summarizes the high-level CEQA changes that have occurred since certification of the General Plan EIR and provides an analysis of these changes in the context of the proposed project.
278
Item 18.

A D D E N D U M T O T H E G E N E R A L P L A N E I R F O R T H E C I T Y O F O R O V I L L E G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E 2030

C I T Y O F O R O V I L L E

1. Addendum to the Certified General Plan EIR

Page 6 ends

As stated in CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 (Addendum to an EIR):
(a) The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. (b) An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred. (c) An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the final EIR or adopted negative declaration.
(d) The decision-making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or adopted negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project. (e) A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency’s findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence.

A copy of this addendum, and all supporting documentation, may be reviewed or obtained at 1735 Montgomery Street, City of Oroville, California 95965.
279
Item 18.

A D D E N D U M T O T H E G E N E R A L P L A N E I R F O R T H E C I T Y O F O R O V I L L E G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E 2030

C I T Y O F O R O V I L L E

1. Addendum to the Adopted General Plan EIR
December 2023 Page 7
Table 1-2 High-Level CEQA Changes
Topic Date Overview Analysis
Transportation
SB 743 2013  Amended CEQA Guidelines to change how lead agencies evaluate transportation impacts under CEQA, with the goal of better measuring the actual transportation-related environmental impacts of any given project.  Evaluated by examining whether the project is likely to cause automobile delay at intersections and congestion on nearby individual highway segments, and whether this delay will exceed a certain amount (LOS analysis).  Starting on July 1, 2020, agencies analyzing the transportation impacts of new projects must now look at a metric known as VMT instead of LOS.

VMT measures how much actual auto travel (additional miles driven) a proposed project would create on California roads. If the project adds excessive car travel onto our roads, the project may cause a significant transportation impact.
 The General Plan EIR analyzes the General Plan through the outdated (LOS analysis) to measure transportation impacts.  The analysis provided adequately addresses the potential physical impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project since General Plan EIR originally used (level of service) as a threshold which was later mad ineligible as a threshold, thus VMT is now used as a threshold that is custom to the unique needs of Oroville.
 Nothing in the CEQA Guidelines states that adopting a threshold is subject to environmental review; see the California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality
Management District (2015) 62 Cal.4th 369 court decision. 280
Item 18.

December 2023 Page 8

2. CEQA Analysis

2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The City of Oroville’s General Plan contains policies related to land use, transportation and circulation, open space, safety, noise, housing, community design, economic development, and public facilities and services. The General Plan is largely designed to be self-mitigating by incorporating policies and implementation programs that address and mitigate environmental impacts related to implementing the General Plan, such as zoning codes and design standards. As previously described in Section 1.2 of this addendum, the City of Oroville’s General Plan EIR addresses potential impacts related to aesthetics, air quality and greenhouse gas emissions, biological resources, cultural resources, geology, soils, and mineral resources, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use, noise, population and housing, public services and recreation, transportation and circulation, and utilities, and infrastructure (City of Oroville, 2009).

In addition, Table 1-2, High-Level CEQA Changes, provides a high-level overview of CEQA changes that have occurred since certification of the City’s General Plan EIR and provides an analysis of these changes in regard to the proposed project. Since the changes in Table 1-2 would not significantly affect the proposed project or the impacts analyzed in the General Plan EIR, the impacts determined in the General Plan EIR would still apply to the proposed project. The adoption of the VMT threshold is not subject to environmental review as the transition from LOS to VMT would not create any significant environmental changes. As such, the proposed project would be no more substantial than analyzed in the General Plan EIR.

2.2 FINDINGS
The discussion in this addendum confirms that the proposed project has been evaluated for significant impacts pursuant to CEQA. The discussion is meaningfully different than a determination that a project is “exempt” from CEQA review because the proposed General Plan Update is not exempt. Rather, the determination here is that the General Plan Update does not require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental impacts or substantial increases to the severity of previously identified significant environmental impacts. The General Plan is a policy document, and its adoption would not produce environmental impacts since no actual development is proposed. Future development projects facilitated by the General Plan Update would generally be subject to project-level environmental review.

Therefore, the General Plan EIR provides a sufficient and adequate analysis of the environmental impacts of the proposed General Plan.

There are no substantial changes in the circumstances or new information that was not known and could not have been known at the time of the adoption of the General Plan EIR. The proposed project consists entirely of land uses permitted by the project sites’ existing General Plan land use designation and zoning and represents no change from the impacts that were assumed and analyzed by the General Plan EIR. 281
Item 18.

A D D E N D U M T O T H E G E N E R A L P L A N E I R F O R T H E C I T Y O F O R O V I L L E G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E 2030

C I T Y O F O R O V I L L E

2. CEQA Analysis
December 2023 Page 9
As a result, and for the reasons explained in this addendum, the project would not cause any new significant environmental impacts or substantially increase the severity of significant environmental impacts disclosed in the General Plan EIR. Thus, the proposed project does not trigger any of the conditions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 allowing the preparation of a subsequent EIR, and the appropriate environmental document as authorized by CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(b) is an addendum. This EIR addendum has been prepared accordingly.

The following identifies the standards set forth in Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines as they relate to the proposed project.

1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which would require major revisions of the EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and 2. No substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

Table 1-2 High-Level CEQA Changes, highlights and evaluates the high-level CEQA changes that have occurred since the certification of the General Plan EIR. However, since the proposed project would not result in major physical changes from the transition from LOS to VMT, these CEQA changes would not result in significant changes as the adoption of a new threshold is not subject to environmental review. No physical changes are proposed; the new threshold can be used to calculate physical effects that later can be used to create new policies to reduce VMT.

3. No new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was certified shows:
a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR.

Table 1-2 High-Level CEQA Changes, provides analysis of these changes in the context of the proposed project. Although there are environmental topics not analyzed at the time of the General Plan EIR, the proposed change from LOS to VMT as a CEQA threshold would not introduce any new significant and unavoidable effects, as the adoption of a new VMT threshold is not subject to environmental review.

Therefore, there would be no new environmental impacts. b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR.

The proposed project would have the same significant impacts as those disclosed in the certified General Plan EIR. The proposed change from LOS to VMT would not substantially alter the existing EIR, as the change to VMT would not be subject to environmental review. The previous EIR did not have any new significant impacts relating to transportation. Therefore, impacts determined in the General Plan EIR would be adequate for the proposed project.
282
Item 18.

A D D E N D U M T O T H E G E N E R A L P L A N E I R F O R T H E C I T Y O F O R O V I L L E G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E 2 0 3 0

C I T Y O F O R O V I L L E

2. CEQA Analysis

Page 10 ends

c. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.

The proposed project would not result in physical changes to the environment that were not disclosed in the General Plan EIR. The proposed project would not create new impacts or the need for additional mitigation measures. The policies identified in the proposed project would reduce physical environmental effects associated with future development. The update to the General Plan would not result in significant environmental impacts or increase the severity of any environmental impacts previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR; therefore, there is no need for new mitigation measures or alternatives. d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.

The proposed project would have the same significant impacts as the previously certified General Plan EIR, and all associated policies and mitigation measures identified in the General Plan EIR to reduce physical environmental effects would apply to all future development and have the same mitigating effect.

There would be no new significant impacts resulting from adoption of the General Plan Update; therefore, there would be no new mitigation measures or alternatives required for the proposed project. 283
Item 18.

A D D E N D U M T O T H E G E N E R A L P L A N E I R F O R T H E C I T Y O F O R O V I L L E G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E 2030

C I T Y O F O R O V I L L E

2. CEQA Analysis
December 2023 Page 11

2.3 REFERENCES
City of Oroville. 2015a, March 31. City of Oroville General Plan 2030. https://www.cityoforoville.org/services/planning-development-services-department/planningdivision/planning-documents ______. 2015b. City of Oroville Sustainability Updates Draft Supplemental EIR. https://www.cityoforoville.org/home/showpublisheddocument/12202/635955765376170000 ______. 2009. City of Oroville General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report. https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2008022024/3
284
Item 18.

1 City of Oroville
California Environmental Quality Act
Interim Transportation Threshold
Overview
On September 27, 2013, Governor Jerry Brown signed California Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) into law. The goal of this legislation was to reform transportation impact analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) from an emphasis on automobile delay, measured as level of service (LOS), to meeting the state’s goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and traffic-related air pollution, promoting the development of a multimodal transportation system, and providing clean, efficient access to destinations.

The effect of this legislation was to remove level of service (LOS) as a means of determining a significant environmental impact when conducting environmental analysis under CEQA (PRC § 21099(b)(2)).

Prior to implementation of SB 743, lead agencies used a reduction in LOS to determine transportationrelated environmental impacts under CEQA and to require mitigation. LOS measures vehicular delay, or the additional driving time encountered by drivers during the most congested times of travel. SB 743 prohibits the use of LOS to measure impacts under CEQA and requires agencies to adopt alternative measures of such impacts. Local agencies may continue to use LOS analysis for other programs unrelated to CEQA.

In December 2018, the California state Office of Planning and Research (OPR) prepared the report Technical Advisory on Evaluating Impacts in CEQA that includes Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) threshold recommendations that vary based on whether a project is located within a metropolitan planning organization (MPO)1. For projects within an MPO, OPR recommends the use of urban quantitative thresholds. In rural counties, the Technical Advisory recognizes rural areas should be treated differently based on their land use and transportation context. However, the recommendations fail to recognize that rural areas within MPO boundaries function identically to rural areas in parts of the state that are not covered by an MPO. This distinction is important because OPR recommends that rural areas outside of an MPO political boundary be treated differently when it comes to VMT thresholds, leaving the choice of threshold up to the lead agency. The City of Oroville is within the Butte County Association of Governments (BCAG) which is one of the 18 designated MPOs in the state.

On December 18, 2019, California’s Third District Court of Appeal published an opinion in Citizens for Positive Growth & Preservation v. City of Sacramento, which involved a challenge to the City of Sacramento’s adoption of its General Plan based on LOS instead of VMT for transportation impact identification. In reaching its decision in that case, the Court of Appeal applied Public Resource Code section 21099(b)(2) and stated, “existing law is that ’automobile delay, as described solely by level of service, or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment under CEQA, except for roadway capacity projects.’” The Court therefore concluded that the General Plan’s policies that included LOS standards could not be used as a threshold to determine

1 Federal law requires that any urbanized area with a population of at least 50,000 be guided and maintained by a regional entity known as a metropolitan planning organization (MPO). SB 375 details specific roles for California MPOs, expanding their role in regional planning.
285
Item 18.

2 whether the project would have a significant environmental impact under CEQA. This paper presents the evidence for alternative CEQA threshold options for the City of Oroville.

BCAG
BCAG adopted the 2020 Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy for Butte County (RTP/SCS), which specifies policies, projects and programs necessary over a 20+ year period to maintain, manage and improve the region’s transportation system. The 2020 RTP/SCS covers the 20-year period between 2020 and 2040. The RTP/SCS includes an Air Quality Conformity Analysis and Determination as well as a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report. The regional transportation plan (RTP) contains policies that support a safe and efficient roadway system that accommodates the demand for the movement of people and goods in the county2. The SCS complies with Senate Bill 375 The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008, by demonstrating the integration of land use, housing, and transportation to reduce passenger vehicle (cars & light trucks) greenhouse gas emissions (GHG). The intent of the SCS is to meet the GHG emission reduction targets set by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) for the years 2020 and 2035.

City of Oroville
In California, transportation makes up 36.8% of emissions for the state and it was the largest source of GHG emissions in 2020. Of that, 25.5% of emissions are from passenger vehicles and 8.8% are heavy-duty vehicles. In Oroville between 2017 to 2021, the mean travel time to commute to work was 20.2 minutes and just over 3% of the workforce in Oroville has a commute that is over 90 minutes. This means that many of our residents either work locally or commute to Chico for employment. While local trips are excellent for a reduction in VMT, the hilly topography and need for bridges provide a circulation challenge for bicycle and pedestrian networks. Also, because of the topography, roads are often ‘just wide enough’ and expanding them for additional amenities such as trails or paths can be prohibitively expensive.

Transit
Table 1 shows the existing Butte Regional Transit (BRT) and approximate frequency (headways) associated with each route. The timing of the headways is important as various land use designs and intensities are possible if a project can be within an area served by “high quality transit corridor” which is defined as having a 15 minute or less headway during peak commute hours (PRC § 21155(b)). The state also defines a major stop as a station that has either a ferry terminal or rail station that is served by bus or rail transit with 15 minute or less headway during peak commute hours (PRC § 21064.3). The expectation is that residents on or near either a high-quality transit corridor or major transit stop will use the public transit system thereby reducing vehicle miles travelled. As shown in Table 1, the City of Oroville does not have either a high-quality transit corridor or a major transit stop.

The public transportation system in Oroville includes the B-Line service, operated by the BCAG, which provides intercity/regional and local fixed-route connectivity. The B-Line’s Oroville Transit Center is located on Spencer Avenue3. Six B-line routes (Route 20, Route 24, Route 25, Route 26, Route 27, and Route 30)

2 Butte County Association of Governments (December 2020) 2020 Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy for Butte County, p. ES-2
3 Transit & Non-Motorized Plan | Existing Conditions Report 286
Item 18.

3 serve within the City of Oroville4and are described in Table 1. Additionally, Butte Regional Transit offers paratransit service through B-Line paratransit, including on-demand shared ride services.

Oroville has one Greyhound Bus station located at 410 Oro Dam Boulevard E. The station is open 24 hours Monday through Sunday and their most popular bus trip destinations are Sacramento, Reno, and Sparks5.

The Oroville Amtrak offers an unstaffed, curbside bus stop at the park-and-ride lot on Highway 70 and Grand Avenue6.

Table 1: Existing Butte Regional Transit Service Schedule Summary Route
Weekday Saturday
Freq.
(min)
Span
Freq.
(min)
Span
20 – Chico / Oroville 1 40 – 120 5:50 AM – 8:00 PM 120 - 140 7:50 AM – 6:00 PM 24 - Thermalito 60 6:34 AM – 7:30 PM NA NA
25 – Oro Dam 60 6:12 AM – 6:50 PM NA NA
26 – Olive Highway 60 6:33 AM – 6:21 PM NA NA
27 – South Oroville 60 7:10 AM – 6:50 PM NA NA
30 – Oroville / Biggs 195-240 7:45 AM – 4:50 PM 180-240 8:47 AM – 5:00 PM Source: Butte Regional Transit, 2023

4 Butte Regional Transit
5 Greyhound Oroville
6 Amtrak Oroville
287
Item 18.

4 Bicycle Facilities
The following types of bicycle facilities exist within the City of Oroville. These facilities do not constitute a complete network but one that is still developing as funding and development opportunities present themselves.

Class I “Bike Paths”

Brad Freeman Trail, Oroville
Class I facilities, commonly referred to as Bikeways or Bike Paths, are facilities separated from automobile
traffic for the exclusive use of bicyclists. Class I
facilities can be designed to accommodate other
modes of transportation, including pedestrians and
equestrians, in which case they are referred to as
shared or multi-use paths.

Locations in Oroville:
 Bike path along south side of Feather River (Brad
Freeman Trail) connecting Riverbend Park and SR
70 Class II “Bike Lanes”

Foothill Boulevard, Oroville
Class II facilities, commonly referred to as Bike Lanes, are dedicated facilities for bicyclists immediately
adjacent to automobile traffic. Class II facilities are identified with striping, pavement markings and
signage.

Locations in Oroville*:
 Orange Avenue (between Montgomery Street and Oro Dam
Boulevard);
 Foothill Boulevard (between Pinedale Avenue and Olive Highway);
 Grand Avenue (between 2nd Street and Table Mountain
Boulevard);
 and Nelson Avenue (between County Center Drive and
Table Mountain Boulevard).

Class III “Bike Routes”
Class III facilities, commonly referred to as Bike Routes, are on‐street routes where bicyclists and automobiles share the road. They are identified with pavement markings and signage and are typically assigned to low‐volume and/or low‐speed streets.

A Class III bike route exists on Washington Avenue (Orange Avenue to Oroville Dam Boulevard).

Source: Balanced Mode Circulation Plan
*According to the2015 Balanced Mode Circulation Plan, these four locations qualify as Class II facilities. However, the current street view shows signage and pavement marking inconsistencies.

288
Item 18.

5 Pedestrian Facilities
Existing pedestrian facilities in the City of Oroville consist of sidewalks, crossings, trees, and landscaping (for shading) and other amenities. Many streets within the city have sidewalks on both sides; however, gaps or abrupt termination of sidewalks occur in various parts of the city. Additionally, there are rolled-edge curbs in some sections of the city. Rolled-edge curbs allow drivers to park on sidewalks, which can obstruct pedestrians.

Crossing major roads poses a challenge to pedestrians. Most major roads in the City are wide, with significant amounts of traffic, and do not provide crosswalks at all intersection locations. There are often two-way stop signs along major roads, forcing pedestrians, including seniors and children, to negotiate with drivers, cross wide intersections, and/or make a long detour to use a better crossing.

The streetscape environment varies greatly between neighborhoods within Oroville. Some neighborhoods have road-separated sidewalks, with landscaped parking strips between the curb and the sidewalk. These parking strips often contain street trees that provide shade for pedestrians. However, some of the streets have solid curbs and sidewalks, with no parking strip to provide a buffer between pedestrians and vehicle traffic. In some areas, street trees offer shading for pedestrians and landscaped parking strips separate vehicles from pedestrians on sidewalks.

Pedestrian amenities, such as benches, pedestrian-scaled lighting, and transparent store frontage, provide a comfortable and enjoyable environment for people to walk. Some of these features exist in downtown Oroville but are absent in other areas of the City.

OPR VMT Reduction Measures
The OPR Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA relies on largely urban methods of reducing VMT contained in the 2010 California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) report Quantifying Greenhous Gas Mitigation Measures, and notes that reduction of VMT in rural areas may need to be evaluated on a “case-by-case basis.”
7 The CAPCOA document recommended measures that include increasing population density, encouraging housing near urban cores or employment, and an increase in transit accessibility. Examples of mitigation measures are shown in Table 2. As noted in the Table many of the recommendations do not apply in Oroville while others are already part of our development procedures.

7 California Office of Planning and Research (December 2018), Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, p. 19.
289
Item 18.

6 Table 2: Consideration of Example VMT Reduction Measures from OPR Technical Advisory Possible VMT Reduction Measure Applicability to the City of Oroville Improve or increase access to transit. Connecting sidewalks and trails to transit stops is a requirement of project approval.

Increase access to common goods and services, such
as groceries, schools, and daycare.

The City can encourage, but not require businesses to
locate in the City.

Incorporate affordable housing into the project. The City encourages but cannot require that affordable housing be constructed.

Incorporate neighborhood electric vehicle network. The hills and rivers make it difficult to create a continues NEV network, however as the state will require EVs by
2035, this issue has been addressed.

Orient the project toward transit, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities.

This is already a requirement of the City.

Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit
service.

BCAG governs Transit and the City has plans for improving networks.

Provide traffic calming. This is project specific and already a requirement.

Provide bicycle parking. Required by the California Building Code based on land use.

Limit or eliminate parking supply. Impractical given the lack of transit.

Unbundle parking costs. Impractical given the lack of transit.

Provide parking cash-out programs. Impractical given the lack of transit.

Implement roadway pricing. This is a form of toll road and impractical given the lack of alternative transportation.

Implement or provide access to a commute reduction
program.

Park and ride is already available in the City and
encouraged.

Provide car-sharing, bike sharing, and ride-sharing
programs.

The City encourages these types of businesses, however
none currently exist.

Provide transit passes. Impractical given the lack of transit.

Shifting single occupancy vehicle trips to carpooling
or vanpooling, for example providing ride- matching
services.

The City has insufficient personnel to run a program like this, however a private business or non-profit would be welcome.

Providing telework options. High speed internet is available in most of the City by private vendor. There is no restriction on telework by the City.

Providing incentives or subsidies that increase the use of modes other than single-occupancy vehicle.

The City has insufficient personnel to run a program like this, however a private business or non-profit would be welcome.

Providing on-site amenities at places of work, such as
priority parking for carpools and vanpools, secure
bike parking, and showers and locker rooms.

This is project dependent and could be mitigation
considered at the time of application.

Providing employee transportation coordinators at
employment sites.

The City has insufficient personnel to run a program like this, however a private business or non-profit would be welcome.

Providing a guaranteed ride home service to users of
non-auto modes.

The City has insufficient personnel to run a program like this, however a private business or non-profit would be welcome.
290
Item 18.

7 VMT Threshold Approach
BCAG prepared an implementation guide for member agencies to understand questions that needed to be addressed when implementing the vehicle miles traveled thresholds. The document includes research, analysis, and other evidence to support their final SB 743 implementation decisions. BCAG chose to lead this effort to help reduce SB 743 implementation costs that would have otherwise been incurred by each member agency pursuing independent implementation efforts. BCAG provides this documentation as a resource for its member agencies and does not make any specific recommendations regarding SB 743 implementation. Each member agency will be required to make its own SB 743 implementation decisions and may rely on this information to the extent it is relevant.

The BCAG Implementation Report discusses the following three options for establishing a threshold for VMT8:

1. CEQA Guidelines. Section 15064.3 can be interpreted as establishing a threshold where ‘any’ increase in VMT above baseline conditions would constitute a significant VMT impact. This threshold is recommended in the OPR Technical Advisory for retail land use projects. Caltrans also supports this threshold for roadway capacity projects stating, “Within MPO areas…, a project that results in an increase in VMT when comparing the future build alternative to the future no-build alternative (i.e., the VMT is higher under the future build scenario) will generally be considered significant…”

2. OPR Technical Advisory. The OPR Advisory contains VMT threshold recommendations that vary by type of project and type of land use as follows:
a. Residential projects – A proposed project exceeding a level of 15 percent below existing (baseline) VMT per capita may indicate a significant transportation impact. Existing VMT per capita may be measured as regional VMT per capita or as city VMT per capita. b. Office projects – A proposed project exceeding a level of 15 percent below existing (baseline) regional VMT per employee may indicate a significant transportation impact.

3. Non-Interference. This option would focus on not interfering with the state’s ability to meet VMT/GHG reduction goals. This threshold recognizes that VMT reduction is tied to state GHG reduction goals and would allow the county to assess VMT impacts of projects based on whether they would interfere or prevent the state from taking actions necessary to reduce VMT consistent with state goals. The state has the authority to implement a wide variety of actions that could effectively reduce VMT such as higher gas taxes, a new VMT tax, new tolls, etc. Local projects that do not interfere with this authority could reflect that outcome as part of their VMT impact analysis using this threshold.

The recommended approach is a mix of the three options presented in the BCAG report.

8 Ibid, p. 40.
291
Item 18.

8 Discussion
For large projects that would trigger an environmental impact report (EIR), it is reasonable for the City to request a VMT analysis as part of the EIR. This would also allow the City to make a statement of overriding considerations if the mitigation strategy associated with the project could not meet the VMT target.

Projects that are smaller and fit within the OPR screening criteria would be excused from having to prepare a VMT analysis as there is a presumption that the project reduces VMT. Examples might include an increase in residential density where housing is already designated, smaller housing projects that generate 110 or fewer trips per day, small local-serving commercial, etc. Medium sized projects will likely need to demonstrate via analysis that their VMT will not increase beyond the threshold. While the cost of a VMT analysis is much lower than that of a traditional traffic impact study, if the impact on VMT is above the threshold it may trigger an EIR. As the threshold, and availability of mitigation will change over time, the City will need to continue to monitor the size of projects and the impact on VMT.

Generally, connecting to a sidewalk and trail network, increasing the efficient use of land, and placing services near homes will reduce VMT. This approach furthers existing goals in the Oroville General Plan and represents good land use planning. Because state goals and targets change, the City will need to review and update the interim VMT threshold periodically.

Methodology for Establishing Threshold
In 2014 the California Air Resources Board (CARB) stated that “Achieving California’s long-term criteria pollutant and GHG emissions goals requires four strategies to be employed: (1) improve vehicle efficiency and develop zero emission technologies, (2) reduce the carbon content of fuels and provide market support to get these lower-carbon fuels into the marketplace, (3) plan and build communities to reduce vehicular GHG emissions and provide more transportation options, and (4) improve the efficiency and throughput of existing transportation systems.”9 The first two criteria are under the sole purview of the State of California with little potential for the City to influence. The state mandates vehicle efficiencies and negotiates directly with manufacturers and licenses the vehicles for use in California. While the City encourages recharging stations and flexibility fueling locations (CNG, Hydrogen) through strategy LUT-6 of the 2015 Oroville Climate Action Plan (CAP) and enforcement of the California Green Building Code (CBC) through strategy BE-1, the structural change in vehicle efficiency is a state responsibility.

Table 3 shows the results of the BCAG RTP/SCS Travel Demand Model for the region and City for VMT. As shown in the table, the City’s home-based VMT per resident is higher than the region, while the home based VMT per employee is slightly less.

9 California Air Resources Board (May 2014) First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan, p. 46. 292
Item 18.

9 Table 3: Baseline (2020) VMT Summary
VMT Metric BCAG Region City of Oroville
Total Network VMT 4,710,000 453,400
Total VMT Generated by land uses within
geographic area
7,532,100 1,235,400
Home-based VMT per resident 14.9 17.7
Home-based work VMT per employee 6.7 6.2
Source: BCAG RTP/SCS Travel Demand Model (modified version 1.3) The City also has land use strategies from CAP that include LUT-1 Residential and Commercial density and LUT-2 Mixed-Use Development that are intended to ensure that compatible uses are built close to each other, and that the intensity of development makes efficient use of land. Figure LU-6, 2030 General Plan Land Use Designations, designates where development occurs, as well as the density and intensity of each land use.

Similarly, since the early 1990s, CARB has regulated the composition of vehicle fuels sold in the state through the California Reformulated Gasoline Regulations. In September 2020, Governor Newsom approved Executive Order N-79-20, that states:
“It shall be a goal of the State that 100 percent of in-state sales of new passenger cars and trucks will be zero-emission by 2035. It shall be a further goal of the State that 100 percent of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles in the State be zero-emission by 2045 for all operations where feasible and by 2035 for drayage trucks. It shall be further a goal of the State to transition to 100 percent zero-emission off-road vehicles and equipment by 2035 where feasible.” This area of reduction is also clearly the sole authority of the state. The change in fuel types is included in the air quality and greenhouse gas modeling conducted for projects.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) in its 2018 progress report notes that “California cannot meet its climate goals without curbing growth in single-occupancy vehicle activity.” In other words, vehicle efficiency and better fuels are necessary, but insufficient, to address the GHG emissions from the transportation system. Land use patterns and transportation options also will need to change to support reductions in vehicle travel/VMT.

Screening
This document provides a two-step screening process that will apply to all development requests. Step 1 involves a screening process where qualifying projects will be relieved of having to perform VMT impact analysis because evidence supports a presumption that VMT impact will be less than significant. The determination will be made during the Pre-Application Review or during consultation with the Planning Department prior to making an application. Note that these screening determinations are not absolute, and the City may determine that a project specific VMT analysis must be prepared to support a project. For projects that are not exempt from VMT analysis, Step 2 will be required where the project will be evaluated 293
Item 18.

10 against whether it would generate VMT per capita at a higher rate than the baseline average for the BCAG Region.

Based on the OPR Technical Advisory, and the discussion in this memorandum, the following projects are considered to have a de minimis effect on VMT and after review of the project the City may determine that a project specific VMT Analysis is unnecessary:

De Minimis Development projects:
 Any project that generates or attracts 110 or fewer trips per day. Depending on project location, this may correspond to the following “approximate” development potentials:
o 10-15 single family housing units
o 16-20 multi-family, condominiums, or townhouse housing units o 10,000 sq. ft. of office
o 15-20,000 sq. ft. of light industrial
o 63,000 sq. ft. of warehousing
 Projects statutorily or categorically exempt from CEQA.  Locally serving retail and other commercial uses 50,000 square feet or less. Examples of local serving include, but are not limited to schools, civic buildings, medical buildings, cleaners, offices, and other land uses intended to serve the local community and to improve the convenience of obtaining services locally.
 Zone Changes to Increase Residential Density. For land that is already planned for residential development, the increase in density will provide for a more efficient use of land and a more compact urban form. Ideally the area with increased density would be near trails, bike paths, transit, and services to provide mobility options that do not require use of a personal automobile.

Transportation projects:

The City can make mobility system improvements independent of, or concurrent with, development projects. The following improvements are shown in the OPR Technical Advisory as not considered to increase VMT and would therefore not be required to complete a VMT analysis.  Rehabilitation, maintenance, replacement, safety, and repair projects designed to improve the condition of existing transportation assets and that do not add additional motor vehicle capacity.  Roadside safety devices or hardware installation such as median barriers and guardrails  Addition of an auxiliary lane of less than one mile in length designed to improve roadway safety  Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic lanes that are not for through traffic, such as left, right, and U-turn pockets, two-way left turn lanes, or emergency breakdown lanes that are not used as through lanes.
 Addition of roadway capacity on local or collector streets provided the project also substantially improves conditions for pedestrians, cyclists, and, if applicable, transit  Conversion of existing general-purpose lanes (including ramps) to managed lanes or transit lanes, or changing lane management in a manner that would not substantially increase vehicle travel  Addition of a new lane that is permanently restricted to use only by transit vehicles 294
Item 18.

11  Reduction in number of through lanes
 Grade separation to separate vehicles from rail, transit, pedestrians or bicycles, or to replace a lane in order to separate preferential vehicles (e.g., HOV, HOT, or trucks) from general vehicles  Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic control devices, including Transit Signal Priority (TSP) features
 Installation of traffic metering systems, detection systems, cameras, changeable message signs and other electronics designed to optimize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow  Timing of signals to optimize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow  Installation of roundabouts or traffic circles
 Installation or reconfiguration of traffic calming devices  Initiation of new transit service
 Conversion of streets from one-way to two-way operation with no net increase in number of traffic lanes
 Removal or relocation of off-street or on-street parking spaces  Adoption or modification of on-street parking or loading restrictions (including meters, time limits, accessible spaces, and preferential/reserved parking permit programs)  Addition of traffic and pedestrian wayfinding signage  Rehabilitation and maintenance projects that do not add motor vehicle capacity  Addition of new or enhanced bike or pedestrian facilities on existing streets/highways or within existing public rights-of-way
 Addition of Class I bike paths, trails, multi-use paths, or other off-road facilities that serve nonmotorized travel  Installation of publicly available alternative fuel/charging infrastructure Based on the unique characteristics of the City and the potential for new roadways to assist in evacuation in the County, the following projects are considered to have a de minimis effect on VMT and the City may determine that a project specific VMT Analysis is unnecessary:
 Addition of secondary access roads and emergency access to serve existing development provided that the roadways are all at existing LOS C or better and are projected to remain at LOS C in the future condition.

It is an unfortunate truth that the region has been ravaged by natural disasters. The ability to evacuate areas ahead of wildfire or flood is essential. In some areas a single roadway in or out can hinder evacuation. For this screening threshold the addition of secondary access to roadways that are both operating at or better than an LOS C, and projected to continue to operate at LOS C, would not result in an increase in VMT. As there is no existing congestion on the roadway, and no congestion is forecast, the addition of a road access only increases access and emergency ingress/egress options for the residents and responders. This is in line with the OPR bullet above that states “Addition of roadway capacity on local or collector streets provided the project also substantially improves conditions for pedestrians, cyclists, and, if applicable, transit.” In this context the additional capacity is in the form of an access option in case of an emergency.
295
Item 18.

12 Threshold of Significance
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is intended to inform government decisionmakers and the public about the potential environmental effects of proposed activities and to prevent significant, avoidable environmental damage. The CEQA defines Thresholds of Significance as:
15064.7 (a)
(a) A threshold of significance is an identifiable quantitative, qualitative or performance level of a particular environmental effect, non-compliance with which means the effect will normally be determined to be significant by the agency and compliance with which means the effect normally will be determined to be less than significant.

The environmental analysis relies on thresholds of significance to determine whether a projected impact is considered significant. The CEQA Guidelines state:
(b) Each public agency is encouraged to develop and publish thresholds of significance that the agency uses in the determination of the significance of environmental effects. Thresholds of significance to be adopted for general use as part of the lead agency’s environmental review process must be adopted by ordinance, resolution, rule, or regulation, and developed through a public review process and be supported by substantial evidence. Lead agencies may also use thresholds on a case-by-case basis as provided in Section 15064(b)(2).

Nothing in the CEQA Guidelines states that adopting a threshold is subject to environmental review.

This is further supported by the California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (2015) 62 Cal.4th 369 court decision. Initially, the litigation concerned whether BAAQMD’s adoption of thresholds was a “project” subject to CEQA review. The trial court found that it was and issued a writ of mandate invalidating the thresholds for failure to comply with CEQA. The First District Court of Appeal reversed, finding that the thresholds were not subject to CEQA review for two reasons. First, the CEQA Guidelines establish the required procedure for enacting generally applicable thresholds of significance, and prior CEQA review is not part of that process. Second, the thresholds were not a “project” because the “environmental change” alleged by the California Building Industry Association (CBIA) was speculative and not reasonably foreseeable. The Supreme Court did not grant review over this issue and thus the Court of Appeal’s holding that the act of adopting thresholds is not a project under CEQA stands.

The following thresholds of significance will be applied to all discretionary projects that are unable to be screened from VMT analysis or considered de minimis. Examples and discussion for each threshold is included in italics following the threshold statement.

TRANSPORTATION. Would the project:
a) Disrupt transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities or interfere with planned facilities or cause a physical change inconsistent with bicycle and pedestrian policies contained in the City of Oroville General Plan and Oroville Bicycle Plan.

For a project to result in a significant impact the physical design would be such that it interfered with city or transit agency standards for one or more non-motorized improvements. For example, not 296
Item 18.

13 connecting to or providing for a future trail or not including sidewalks and connection(s) to adjacent uses where appropriate, not including bus turnout or stopping areas. This impact could be significant if a roadway connection isn’t made that would expand or maintain the transit network or if frontage improvements did not include a bus turnout or similar improvements consistent with city plans. b) Generate home-based work VMT per employee at a rate that is greater than the citywide average under future general plan conditions.

A project would cause a significant VMT impact if it generated VMT per capita above the unincorporated county baseline average. Baseline VMT estimates can be obtained from the latest version of the BCAG RTP/SCS model (currently Modified Version 1.1 -3.17.21) or other VMT data sources, a mobile device data vendor that offers SB 743 compliant VMT estimates based on current year estimates. For residential land uses, home-based VMT per capita can be used while work-related land uses can use home-based work VMT per employee.
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., large trucks, farm equipment)? This is a design consideration and will be evaluated with each project for compliance with City standards.
d) Result in inadequate emergency access.

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: RUTH DUNCAN, ASSISTANT CITY ADMINISTRATOR-ADMINISTRATIVE

SERVICES
RE: ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE CITY’S CONSOLIDATED BENEFIT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, ZONES 1, 2, 4, 6-8
DATE: AUGUST 6, 2024

SUMMARY
The Council will hold a public hearing and consider approving the Annual Assessment Report and declare its intention to levy and collect assessments for the Oroville Consolidated Benefit Assessment District for Fiscal Year 2024/25.

DISCUSSION
As a condition of approval for each subdivision identified below, the developer was required to establish or annex into a benefit assessment district. Each subdivision represents a Zone within the larger district. Each Zone is financially responsible for the maintenance of the storm water infrastructure (manholes, drain pipes, etc.), including storm water retention facilities within the specific subdivision. The particular Zones within the City’s Consolidated Benefit Assessment District (“CBAD”) are identified below:

Pursuant to the Benefit Assessment Act of 1982, which authorizes the formation and annual assessment of such districts, an Annual Assessment Report was prepared and filed with the City Clerk prior to the July 19, 2024 City Council meeting. The purpose of the report is to document the annual costs involved in the operation, maintenance and servicing of all improvements, adjust the annual assessments to incorporate any surplus or deficit from the 298
Item 19.
previous year and to determine the actual annual assessment for each assessable parcel within the CBAD.

The City Council will consider the following items for the CBAD:

1. Open and conduct a public hearing to receive public comment regarding the CBAD and/or the assessments for Fiscal Year 2024/25.

2. After any public comment, close the public hearing.

FISCAL IMPACT
Assessments are collected for the City of Oroville by the Butte County Tax Collector to reimburse the City for the costs of operating, maintaining, and servicing the storm water infrastructure within the CBAD.

RECOMMENDATION
Collect no assessment this year, providing assessment holiday, due to low expenditures and sufficient Zone reserves to cover those costs.

ATTACHMENTS
2024/25 Assessment Summary from the CBAD Annual Assessment Report.

NOTE: In order to reduce copying costs, only the Executive Summary of the Annual Assessment Report is attached to this staff report. The complete Annual Assessment Report for the CBAD is available for review in the City Clerk’s office. 299
Item 19.

CBAD 2024/25 ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
Zone Name
Total
Assessable
Unit
Total
Assessable
Cost
Maximum
Assessment
Rate per Unit
Proposed
Assessment
Rate per Unit
Zone 1 – Linkside Place, Phase 1 65 $0.00 $439.16 $0.00 Zone 2 – Foothill Estates 25 $0.00 $510.83 $0.00
Zone 3 – Mission Olive Ranch 19 $0.00 $445.11 $0.00
Zone 4 – Vista Del Oro 92 $0.00 $358.51 $0.00
Zone 5 – Calle Vista Estates, Unit 2 44 $0.00 $265.27 $0.00 Zone 6 – Martin Ranch 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Zone 7 – Jake Richter 8 $0.00 $379.63 $0.00
Zone 8 – Acacia Estates 20 $0.00 $264.84 $0.00
Zone 9 – Ruddy Creek 97 $0.00 $128.28 $0.00
TOTALS: 370 $0.00
300
Item 19.

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: RUTH DUNCAN, ASSISTANT CITY ADMINISTRATOR-ADMINISTRATIVE

SERVICES
RE: ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE CITY’S CONSOLIDATED BENEFIT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, ZONES 3, 5, 9
DATE: AUGUST 6, 2024

Pursuant to the Benefit Assessment Act of 1982, which authorizes the formation and annual assessment of such districts, an Annual Assessment Report was prepared and filed with the City Clerk prior to the July 19, 2024 City Council meeting. The purpose of the report is to document the annual costs involved in the operation, maintenance and servicing of all improvements, adjust the annual assessments to incorporate any surplus or deficit from the 301
Item 20.
previous year and to determine the actual annual assessment for each assessable parcel within the CBAD.

The City Council will consider the following items for the CBAD:

1. Open and conduct a public hearing to receive public comment regarding the CBAD and/or the assessments for Fiscal Year 2024/25.

2. After any public comment, close the public hearing.

RECOMMENDATION
Collect no assessment this year, providing assessment holiday, due to low expenditures and sufficient Zone reserves to cover those costs

ATTACHMENTS
2024/25 Assessment Summary from the CBAD Annual Assessment Report.

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: RUTH DUNCAN, ASSISTANT CITY ADMINISTRATOR-ADMINISTRATIVE

SERVICES
RE: ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE CITY’S CONSOLIDATED

LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT
DISTRICTS, ZONES 1, 4, 6, 11, 13, 16, 18
DATE: AUGUST 6, 2024

SUMMARY
The Council will hold a public hearing and consider approving the Annual Assessment Report and declare its intention to levy and collect assessments for the Oroville Consolidated Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District for Fiscal Year 2024/25.

DISCUSSION
As a condition of approval for each subdivision identified below, the developer was required to establish or annex into a landscape and lighting maintenance assessment district. Each subdivision represents a Zone within the larger district. Each Zone is financially responsible for the maintenance of the landscaped areas dedicated to the City and for the cost of maintaining the City owned street lights within the individual subdivisions. The particular Zones within the City’s Consolidated Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District (“CLLMAD”) are identified below:

ZONE ZONE
Zone 1 – Grandview Estates Zone 10 – Foothill Estates
Zone 2 – The Buttes Zone 11 – Mission Olive Ranch
Zone 3 – Deer Creek Estates, Phase 1 Zone 12 – Vista Del Oro Zone 4 – Calle Vista 1 Zone 13 – Calle Vista 2
Zone 5 – Cherokee Estates, Phase 1 Zone 14 – Martin Ranch Zone 6 – Sherwood Zone 15 – Jake Richter Estates
Zone 7 – Grayhawk Zone 16 – Acacia Estates
Zone 8 – Cherokee Estates, Phase 2 Zone 17 – Feather River Bluffs Zone 9 – Linkside Zone 18 – Ruddy Creek
304
Item 21.

Pursuant to the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972, which authorizes the formation and annual assessment of such districts, an Annual Assessment Report was prepared and filed with the City Clerk prior to the July 16, 2024 City Council meeting. The purpose of the report is to document the annual costs involved in the operation, maintenance and servicing of all improvements, adjust the annual assessments, to incorporate any surplus or deficit from the previous year and to determine the actual annual assessment for each assessable parcel within the CLLMAD.

The City Council will consider the following items for the CLLMAD:

1. Open and conduct a public hearing to receive public comment regarding the CLLMAD and/or the assessments for Fiscal Year 2024/25.

2. After any public comment, close the public hearing.

FISCAL IMPACT
Assessments are collected for the City of Oroville by the Butte County Tax Collector to reimburse the City for the costs of operating, maintaining and servicing the landscape and lighting improvements within the CLLMAD.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Affirm resolution #9290 Adopted by Council on July 16, 2024, affirming the annual assessment report and declaring intent to levy and collect assessments for the Oroville Consolidated Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District for Fiscal Year 2024/25; and

2. Adopt Resolution No. XXXX - RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL

CERTIFYING TO THE COUNTY OF BUTTE THE VALIDITY OF THE LEGAL PROCESS

USED TO PLACE DIRECT CHARGES ON THE SECURED TAX ROLL AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE PROPOSITION 218 CERTIFICATION OF TAX BILL LEVY.

ATTACHMENTS
2024/25 Assessment Summary from the CLLMAD Annual Assessment Report.

Resolution #9290
Proposition 218 Certification
NOTE: In order to reduce copying costs, only the Executive Summary of the Annual Assessment Report is attached to this staff report. The complete Annual Assessment Report for the CLLMAD is available for review in the City Clerk’s office. 305
Item 21.

CLLMAD FISCAL YEAR 2024-25 ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
Zone Name
Total
Assessable
Parcels/Units
Total
Assessment
Maximum
Assessment Rate
per Unit
Proposed
Assessment Rate
per Unit
Zone 1 – Grandview Estates 21 $2,867.76 $201.54 $136.56 Zone 2 – The Buttes 58 $7,131.68 $122.96 $122.96
Zone 3 – Deer Creek Estates, Phase 1 72 $2,168.64 $30.12 $30.12 Zone 4 – Calle Vista Estates, Phase 1 70 $5,327.00 $76.11 $76.10 Zone 5 – Cherokee Estates, Phase 1 12 $948.96 $79.08 $79.08 Zone 6 – Sherwood Estates, 1 & 2 49 $2,058.00 $42.00 $42.00 Zone 7 – Grayhawk 30 $5,928.60 $197.63 $197.62
Zone 8 – Cherokee Estates, Phase 2 20 $3,800.40 $556.14 $190.02 Zone 9 – Linkside Place, Phase 1 65 $4,225.00 $578.69 $65.00 Zone 10 – Foothill Estates 25 $2,750.00 $857.18 $110.00 Zone 11 – Mission Olive Ranch 19 $7,715.90 $643.14 $406.10 Zone 12 – Vista Del Oro 92 $2,760.00 $252.52 $30.00
Zone 13 – Calle Vista Estates, Unit 2 44 $4,847.04 $351.58 $110.16 Zone 14 – Martin Ranch 0
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Zone 15 – Jake Richter 8
$3,004.32 $375.54 $375.54
Zone 16 – Feather River Bluffs 121 $0.00 $64.06 $0.00
Zone 17 – Acacia Estates 20 $0.00 $121.14 $0.00
Zone 18 – Ruddy Creek 97 $0.00 $161.69 $0.00
TOTALS: 823 $55,533.30
306
Item 21.
307
Item 21.
308
Item 21.
309
Item 21.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 CITY OF OROVILLE
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFYING TO THE COUNTY OF

BUTTE THE VALIDITY OF THE LEGAL PROCESS USED TO PLACE DIRECT CHARGES ON

THE SECURED TAX ROLL AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE PROPOSITION 218 CERTIFICATION OF TAX BILL LEVY
WHEREAS, the notices and hearing for special taxes and assessments to be included on the regular County property tax bill for property owners of the City of Oroville was completed on August 6, 2024; and
WHEREAS, the City of Oroville (City) is placing the special taxes and assessments on the Butte County secured property tax roll for collection; and WHEREAS, the City has complied with all laws pertaining to the levy of the special taxes, including Proposition 218, to be collected per Streets and Highway Code section 22501, et seq; and
WHEREAS, the special taxes and assessments are being levied without regard to property valuation of the properties involved; and
WHEREAS, the City agrees that it shall be solely liable and responsible, and will defend and hold the County of Butte harmless from any liability as a result of claims or claims for refunds and related interest due filed by taxpayers against any special taxes, assessment, fees or charges placed on the roll for the City by the County; and NOW THERFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Oroville City Council that the list submitted with parcel numbers and amounts are certified as being correct, the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign any documents required and directed to give the list to the Butte County Auditor on behalf of the City for placement on the secured tax roll for collection:

1. Prop 218 or Compliance Certification and Hold Harmless Statement

2. Property Tax Data Bill Form

3. Authority to Approve Direct Assessment Charges

4. Parcel Listing
310
Item 21.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Oroville City Council at a regular meeting held on August 6, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

David Pittmann, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

Scott Huber, City Attorney Kayla Reaster, Assistant City Clerk 311
Item 21.

ASSESSMENT TITLE: ____________________________________________________ TAXCODE:

PLEASE ONLY CHECK ONE:

Is This a Compliance Certification________X_______ OR A Proposition 218 Certification _____________?

PROPOSITION 218 OR COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS STATEMENT 2024-2025
The Agency/District of City of Oroville certifies the following:

By: ________City of Oroville_________________________________________________________ 312
Item 21.

CITY OF OROVILLE

STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR PITTMAN AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: RUTH DUNCAN, ASSISTANT CITY ADMINISTRATOR-ADMINISTRATIVE

SERVICES
RE: ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE CITY’S CONSOLIDATED

LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT
DISTRICTS, ZONES 2, 3, 5, 7, 10, 12, 14, 15, 17
DATE: AUGUST 6, 2024

SUMMARY
The Council will hold a public hearing and consider approving the Annual Assessment Report and declare its intention to levy and collect assessments for the Oroville Consolidated Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Assessment District for Fiscal Year 2024/25.

The City Council will consider the following items for the CLLMAD:

1. Open and conduct a public hearing to receive public comment regarding the CLLMAD and/or the assessments for Fiscal Year 2024/25.

2. After any public comment, close the public hearing.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Affirm resolution #9291 adopted by Council on July 16, 2024, affirming the annual assessment report and declaring intent to levy and collect assessments for the Oroville Consolidated Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District for Fiscal Year 2024/25; and

2. Adopt Resolution No. XXXX - RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL

CERTIFYING TO THE COUNTY OF BUTTE THE VALIDITY OF THE LEGAL PROCESS

USED TO PLACE DIRECT CHARGES ON THE SECURED TAX ROLL AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE PROPOSITION 218 CERTIFICATION OF TAX BILL LEVY.

ATTACHMENTS
2024/25 Assessment Summary from the CLLMAD Annual Assessment Report.

Resolution #9291
Proposition 218 Certification
NOTE: In order to reduce copying costs, only the Executive Summary of the Annual Assessment Report is attached to this staff report. The complete Annual Assessment Report for the CLLMAD is available for review in the City Clerk’s office. 314
Item 22.

CLLMAD FISCAL YEAR 2024-25 ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
Zone Name
Total
Assessable
Parcels/Units
Total
Assessment
Maximum
Assessment Rate
per Unit
Proposed
Assessment Rate
per Unit
Zone 1 – Grandview Estates 21 $2,867.76 $201.54 $136.56 Zone 2 – The Buttes 58 $7,131.68 $122.96 $122.96
Zone 3 – Deer Creek Estates, Phase 1 72 $2,168.64 $30.12 $30.12 Zone 4 – Calle Vista Estates, Phase 1 70 $5,327.00 $76.11 $76.10 Zone 5 – Cherokee Estates, Phase 1 12 $948.96 $79.08 $79.08 Zone 6 – Sherwood Estates, 1 & 2 49 $2,058.00 $42.00 $42.00 Zone 7 – Grayhawk 30 $5,928.60 $197.63 $197.62
Zone 8 – Cherokee Estates, Phase 2 20 $3,800.40 $556.14 $190.02 Zone 9 – Linkside Place, Phase 1 65 $4,225.00 $578.69 $65.00 Zone 10 – Foothill Estates 25 $2,750.00 $857.18 $110.00 Zone 11 – Mission Olive Ranch 19 $7,715.90 $643.14 $406.10 Zone 12 – Vista Del Oro 92 $2,760.00 $252.52 $30.00
Zone 13 – Calle Vista Estates, Unit 2 44 $4,847.04 $351.58 $110.16 Zone 14 – Martin Ranch 0
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Zone 15 – Jake Richter 8
$3,004.32 $375.54 $375.54
Zone 16 – Feather River Bluffs 121 $0.00 $64.06 $0.00
Zone 17 – Acacia Estates 20 $0.00 $121.14 $0.00
Zone 18 – Ruddy Creek 97 $0.00 $161.69 $0.00
TOTALS: 823 $55,533.30
315
Item 22.
316
Item 22.
317
Item 22.
318
Item 22.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 CITY OF OROVILLE
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE OROVILLE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFYING TO THE COUNTY OF

BUTTE THE VALIDITY OF THE LEGAL PROCESS USED TO PLACE DIRECT CHARGES ON

1. Prop 218 or Compliance Certification and Hold Harmless Statement

2. Property Tax Data Bill Form

3. Authority to Approve Direct Assessment Charges

4. Parcel Listing
319
Item 22.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Oroville City Council at a regular meeting held on August 6, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

David Pittmann, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

Scott Huber, City Attorney Kayla Reaster, Assistant City Clerk 320
Item 22.

ASSESSMENT TITLE: ____________________________________________________ TAXCODE:

PLEASE ONLY CHECK ONE:

Is This a Compliance Certification________X_______ OR A Proposition 218 Certification _____________?

PROPOSITION 218 OR COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS STATEMENT 2024-2025
The Agency/District of City of Oroville certifies the following:

By: ________City of Oroville_________________________________________________________ 321
Item 22.
322
Item i.
323
Item i.

Oroville City CouncilAugust 6, 2024

Oroville City Council
August 6, 2024