Agenda packet — Rancho Cucamonga City Council, September 19, 2023

CITY COUNCIL VISION STATEMENT
“Our Vision is to create an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant city, rich in opportunity for all to thrive by building on our foundation and success as a world class community.”

Page 1 ends

Mayor
L. Dennis Michael

Mayor Pro Tem
Lynne B. Kennedy

Members of the City
Council:

Ryan A. Hutchison
Kristine D. Scott
Ashley Stickler

CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA

ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
AGENDA
September 19, 2023
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730

FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD – CITY COUNCIL
HOUSING SUCCESSOR AGENCY- SUCCESSOR AGENCY –

PUBLIC FINANCE AUTHORITY

CLOSED SESSION

REGULAR MEETINGS

TAPIA CONFERENCE ROOM

COUNCIL CHAMBERS
4:30 P.M.
7:00 P.M.

The City Council meets regularly on the first and third Wednesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers located at 10500 Civic Center Drive. It is the Intent to conclude the meeting by 10:00 p.m. unless extended by the concurrence of the City Council. Agendas, minutes, and recordings of meetings can be found at https://www.cityofrc.us/your-government/city-council-agendas or by contacting the City Clerk's Office at 909-774- 2023. Live Broadcast available on Channel 3 (RCTV-3). For City Council Rules of Decorum refer to Resolution No. 2023-086.

Any documents distributed to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda after distribution of the agenda packet will be made available in the City Clerk Services Department during normal business hours at City Hall located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730. In addition, such documents will be posted on the City’s website at https://www.cityofrc.us/your-government/city-council-agendas.

CLOSED SESSION – 4:30 P.M.

TAPIA CONFERENCE ROOM

ROLL CALL: Mayor Michael
Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy
Council Members Hutchison, Scott and Stickler

A. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)

B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S)

C. CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTS

Page 2 ends

D. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSION

D1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL ANTICIPATED LITIGATION: INITIATION OF LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (4) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9: (1 CASE) (CITY)

D2. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8408 ROCHESTER AVENUE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730 (RANCHO CUCAMONGA EPICENTER STADIUM); AGENCY NEGOTIATORS: JOHN GILLISON AND ELISA COX, REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA; NEGOTIATING PARTY: RANCHO BASEBALL LLC; REGARDING PRICE AND TERMS OF PAYMENT. (CITY)

D3. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(D)(1) SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY V. CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION ORANGE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CASE NO. 30-2023- 01328239-CU-MC-CXC. (CITY)

D4. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL; EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(A); CRANEVEYOR CORP. V. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA; U.S.

DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, CASE NO. 5:21-CV-01656-SP; NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS CASE NO. No. 22-55435. (CITY)

D5. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH(1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: PEPE'S INC. V. CITY OF RANCHO

CUCAMONGA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, CASE NO. 5:20CV02506JGBSP (CITY)

D6. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12467 BASE LINE ROAD IDENTIFIED AS PARCEL NUMBERS 1090-331-03-0000, 1090-331-04-0000, 1089-581-04-0000; NEGOTIATING PARTIES

JOHN GILLISON, CITY MANAGER REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND JOSEPH FILIPPI, JOSEPH FILIPPI WINERY AND VINEYARDS; REGARDING PRICE AND TERMS. – (CITY)

D7. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (1) OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9; NAME OF CASE: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA V. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, SBSC CASE NO.:

CIVSB2201969. (CITY)

D8. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8 FOR PROPERTY IDENTIFIED AS PARCEL NUMBERS 1089 593 01 0000 COMMONLY KNOWN AS ADDRESS 7150 ETIWANDA, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730; NEGOTIATING

PARTIES MATT BURRIS, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY

DEVELOPMENT, REPRESENTING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AND JIM BANKS REPRESENTING ETIWANDA HISTORIC SOCIETY, REGARDING PRICE AND TERMS. (CITY)

D9. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957 (TITLE: CITY MANAGER)

E. RECESS

Page 3 ends

ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M.

COUNCIL CHAMBERS

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

ROLL CALL: Mayor Michael
Mayor Pro Tem Kennedy
Council Members Hutchison, Scott and Stickler

A. AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA

B. ANNOUNCEMENT / PRESENTATIONS

C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
This is the time and place for the general public to address the Fire Protection District, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, Public Financing Authority Board, and City Council on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits us from addressing any issue not on the Agenda.

Testimony may be received and referred to staff or scheduled for a future meeting.

Comments are to be limited to three (3) minutes per individual. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Fire Board, Agencies, Successor Agency, Authority Board, or City Council not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, disorderly or boisterous conduct that disturbs, disrupts, or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of the meeting. For more information, refer to the City Council Rules of Decorum and Order (Resolution No. 2023-086) located in the back of the Council Chambers.

The public communications period will not exceed one hour prior to the commencement of the business portion of the agenda. During this one hour period, all those who wish to speak on a topic contained in the business portion of the agenda will be given priority, and no further speaker cards for these business items (with the exception of public hearing items) will be accepted once the business portion of the agenda commences. Any other public communications which have not concluded during this one hour period may resume after the regular business portion of the agenda has been completed.

Page 4 ends

CONSENT CALENDARS:

The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and noncontroversial. They will be acted upon without discussion unless an item is removed by Council Member for discussion.

Members of the City Council also sit as the Fire Board, Housing Successor Agency, Successor Agency, and Public Finance Authority and may act on the consent calendar for those bodies as part of a single motion with the City Council consent calendar.

D. CONSENT CALENDAR

D1. Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Bi-Weekly Payroll in the Total Amount of $2,104,794.84 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to Southern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $3,020,885.05 Dated August 28, 2023, Through September 10, 2023. (CITY/FIRE

D2. Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers for Checks Issued to Southern California Gas Company in the Total Amount of $2,825.08 Dated August 28, 2023, Through September 10, 2023. (CITY/FIRE)

D3. Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of August 31, 2023 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. (CITY/FIRE)

D4. Consideration of the Purchase of Seven (7) Ford E-Transit Vans, One (1) Ford F-150 Truck, and One (1) 2-Ton Dump Truck from National Auto Fleet Group via the Sourcewell Contract in an Amount Not to Exceed $735,000. (CITY)

D5. Consideration of the Purchase of Electrical Supplies in an Amount Not to Exceed $200,000 from Walters Wholesale Electric and Consolidated Electrical Distributors. (CITY/FIRE)

D6. Consideration to approve a three (3) year Professional Services Agreement with Active Network, LLC., at a 1.56% to 4.42% Service Fee per Transaction for Web-based Program Registration, Facility Reservation, and Membership Management Services. (CITY)

D7. Consideration of Amendment No. 5 to Contract No. CO 18-066 with AquaBio Environmental Technologies for Preventive Maintenance and Repair Services for Red Hill Lake and Floating Island in an Amount Not to Exceed $25,830 during FY 2023/24. (CITY)

D8. Consideration to Accept Public Improvements on the Southwest Corner of Arrow Route and Hickory Avenue per Improvement Agreement, Related to Design Review DRC2018-00946, as Complete, File a Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY)

D9. Consideration of Resolution Authorizing the Attestation of Veracity for the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility 2022 Power Source Disclosure Annual Report and Power Content Label. (RESOLUTION NO. 2023-104) (CITY)

D10. Consideration to Receive and File the Summary of the Public Safety Response to 2022 Holiday Lights Display and Consideration of a Resolution Temporarily Closing Portions of Thoroughbred and Jennet Streets, West Sapphire Street and East of Turquoise Avenue, and a Portion of Turquoise Avenue Between Jennet and Thoroughbred Streets, to Pedestrian Traffic During the Area’s 2023 Holiday Light Display. (RESOLUTION NO. 2023-105) (CITY)

Page 5 ends

D11. Consideration to Accept and Allocate Grant Revenue in the Amount of $2,500 Awarded by the California State Library for Zip Books Services. (CITY)

D12. Consideration to Authorize an Expenditure for Professional Land Survey Services by Towill Pursuant to Professional Services Agreement No. CO19-144 for the Preparation of Tentative and Final Subdivision Maps for Central Park in the Amount of $117,765 Plus a 10% Contingency; the Director of Engineering Services to Amend the Agreement to Increase the Annual Compensation for Fiscal Year 2023/24 to $280,000; and an Appropriation in the amount of $130,000 from the Park Development Fund (Fund 120). (CITY)

E. CONSENT CALENDAR ORDINANCE(S) - SECOND READING/ADOPTION

F. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ITEM(S)

G. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ITEM(S) - CITY/FIRE DISTRICT

H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORT(S)

H1. Presentation on the Fleet Utilization Study and Electric Vehicle (EV) Conversion Plan for the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. (CITY/FIRE)

I. COUNCIL BUSINESS

I1. COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS

(Comments to be limited to three minutes per Council Member.)

I2. INTERAGENCY UPDATES

(Update by the City Council to the community on the meetings that were attended.)

J. CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS

K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING

L. ADJOURNMENT

CERTIFICATION
I, Linda A. Troyan, MMC, City Clerk Services Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify under penalty of perjury that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on at least seventy-two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California and on the City's website.

LINDA A. TROYAN, MMC

CITY CLERK SERVICES DIRECTOR

If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's office at (909) 477-2700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired.

DATE:September 19, 2023
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
President and Members of the Boards of Directors
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Tamara L. Oatman, Finance Director
Veronica Lopez, Accounts Payable Supervisor
SUBJECT: Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Bi-Weekly Payroll in the Total Amount of $2,104,794.84 and City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers (Excluding Checks Issued to Southern California Gas Company) in the Total Amount of $3,020,885.05 Dated August 28, 2023, Through September 10, 2023. (CITY/FIRE
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends City Council/Board of Directors of the Fire Protection District approve payment of demands as presented. Bi-weekly payroll is $1,284,438.33 and $820,356.51 for the City and the Fire District, respectively. Weekly check register amounts are $2,445,372.88 and $575,512.17 for the City and the Fire District, respectively.

BACKGROUND:

N/A

ANALYSIS:

N/A

FISCAL IMPACT:

Adequate budgeted funds are available for the payment of demands per the attached listing.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:

N/A

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 - Weekly Check Register

Agenda Check Register

RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.

AND

CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
8/28/2023 through 9/10/2023
Check No.

Check Date
Vendor Name
City Fire Amount
AP
00016406
08/30/2023

ARNOLD FIELDS PAINTING
19,850.00 0.00 19,850.00
AP
00016407
08/30/2023

BERNELL HYDRAULICS INC
675.56 0.00 675.56
AP
00016408
08/30/2023

CRAFCO INC
766.48 0.00 766.48
AP
00016409
08/30/2023

DATA TICKET INC
6,670.40 0.00 6,670.40
AP
00016410
08/30/2023
ESRI
2,800.00 0.00 2,800.00
AP
00016411
08/30/2023

FEHR & PEERS
6,590.00 0.00 6,590.00
AP
00016412
08/30/2023

HAMPTON LIVING
522.00 0.00 522.00
AP
00016413
08/30/2023

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL INC
6,400.00 0.00 6,400.00
AP
00016414
08/30/2023

RICHARDS WATSON & GERSHON
35,424.63 0.00 35,424.63
AP
00016415
09/06/2023

AMAZON WEB SERVICES INC
3,952.42 0.00 3,952.42
***
AP
00016416
09/06/2023

AMG & ASSOCIATES INC
36,179.08 383,038.76 419,217.84
AP
00016417
09/06/2023

ANDERSON'S PLAYSCHOOL
6,570.00 0.00 6,570.00
AP
00016418
09/06/2023

CALIF GOVERNMENT VEBA / RANCHO CUCAMONGA
26,983.52 0.00 26,983.52
AP
00016419
09/06/2023

DELTA DENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY
905.10 0.00 905.10
AP
00016420
09/06/2023

DELTA DENTAL OF CALIFORNIA
44,226.85 0.00 44,226.85
AP
00016421
09/06/2023

DIAMOND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
376.65 0.00 376.65
***
AP
00016422
09/06/2023
ESRI
138,610.00 31,390.00 170,000.00
AP
00016423
09/06/2023

FEHR & PEERS
2,320.50 0.00 2,320.50
AP
00016424
09/06/2023

MIDWEST TAPE LLC
3,105.54 0.00 3,105.54
AP
00016425
09/06/2023
RCCEA
1,441.00 0.00 1,441.00
AP
00016426
09/06/2023
RCPFA
13,543.01 0.00 13,543.01
***
AP
00016427
09/06/2023

ZONES IT SOLUTIONS INC
41,734.30 3,455.70 45,190.00
AP
00439522
08/30/2023

ABLE BUILDING MAINTENANCE
6,745.00 0.00 6,745.00
AP
00439523
08/30/2023

ADAPT CONSULTING INC
1,771.26 0.00 1,771.26
AP
00439524
08/30/2023

ADOBE ANIMAL HOSPITAL
600.00 0.00 600.00
AP
00439525
08/30/2023

ADVANCED CHEMICAL TRANSPORT INC
468.72 0.00 468.72
AP
00439526
08/30/2023

ADVANTAGE SEALING SYSTEMS INC
4,931.50 0.00 4,931.50
AP
00439527
08/30/2023
AFLAC
3,409.82 0.00 3,409.82
AP
00439528
08/30/2023

AIR & HOSE SOURCE INC

28.55 0.00 28.55
AP
00439529
08/30/2023

AIRGAS USA LLC
379.54 0.00 379.54
AP
00439530
08/30/2023

ALTA LAGUNA MOBILE HOME PARK - CA LLC
400.00 0.00 400.00
AP
00439531
08/30/2023

ALTA VISTA MOBILE HOME PARK
292.58 0.00 292.58
AP
00439532
08/30/2023

ALVAREZ, MARIA ELENA
702.00 0.00 702.00
AP
00439533
08/30/2023

AROCHO, ALMA
1,485.00 0.00 1,485.00
AP
00439534
08/30/2023

ASSOCIATION OF CHILDREN'S MUSEUMS
425.00 0.00 425.00
AP
00439535
08/30/2023

BIBLIOTHECA LLC
5,261.37 0.00 5,261.37
AP
00439536
08/30/2023

BISEK, DAWN TRICHE

86.40 0.00 86.40
AP
00439537
08/30/2023

BOB STALL CHEVROLET
35,992.15 0.00 35,992.15
AP
00439538
08/30/2023

BOOT BARN INC
5,397.70 0.00 5,397.70
AP
00439539
08/30/2023

BOURLAND, CAROL JEAN
480.00 0.00 480.00
AP
00439540
08/30/2023

C P GENERATOR INC

11.85 0.00 11.85
***
AP
00439545
08/30/2023

C V W D
115,247.69 1,625.82 116,873.51
AP
00439546
08/30/2023

CALIFORNIA PATIO COVERS INC
422.62 0.00 422.62
AP
00439547
08/30/2023
CalPERS LONG-TERM CARE PROGRAM
221.35 0.00 221.35
AP
00439548
08/30/2023

CAMPOS, CARINA
343.22 0.00 343.22
***
AP
00439549
08/30/2023

CARQUEST AUTO PARTS
1,063.24 40.63 1,103.87
AP
00439550
08/30/2023

CARTY, DIANE
900.00 0.00 900.00
07:22:02
09/11/2023
Current Date:

VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez
Page:
1 Time:

CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout User:

Report:

Agenda Check Register

RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.

AND

CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
8/28/2023 through 9/10/2023
Check No.

Check Date
Vendor Name
City Fire Amount
AP
00439551
08/30/2023

CASA VOLANTE ESTATES
600.00 0.00 600.00
AP
00439552
08/30/2023

CHAMPION AWARDS & SPECIALTIES

21.55 0.00 21.55
AP
00439553
08/30/2023

CHAPARRAL HEIGHTS MOBILE HOME PARK
300.00 0.00 300.00
***
AP
00439554
08/30/2023

CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS
4,303.14 6,168.94 10,472.08
AP
00439555
08/30/2023

CINTAS CORPORATION
1,574.89 0.00 1,574.89
AP
00439556
08/30/2023

CITRUS MOTORS ONTARIO INC
1,668.83 0.00 1,668.83
AP
00439557
08/30/2023

CLARK, KAREN
1,008.00 0.00 1,008.00
AP
00439558
08/30/2023

COLLINS & COLLINS LLP
30,679.00 0.00 30,679.00
AP
00439559
08/30/2023

COSTAR REALTY INFORMATION INC
1,746.00 0.00 1,746.00
AP
00439560
08/30/2023

COUNSELING TEAM INTERNATIONAL, THE

0.00 1,472.50 1,472.50
AP
00439561
08/30/2023

COVETRUS NORTH AMERICA
167.37 0.00 167.37
AP
00439562
08/30/2023

CREATIVE BRAIN LEARNING LLC
224.00 0.00 224.00
AP
00439563
08/30/2023

D & D GOLF CARS INC
600.96 0.00 600.96
AP
00439564
08/30/2023

DAISYECO INC
109.73 0.00 109.73
AP
00439565
08/30/2023

DANCE TERRIFIC
2,436.00 0.00 2,436.00
AP
00439566
08/30/2023

DANIELS TIRE SERVICE
2,312.61 0.00 2,312.61
AP
00439567
08/30/2023

DATA ARC LLC
7,584.10 0.00 7,584.10
AP
00439568
08/30/2023

DENG, QINGFENG
180.00 0.00 180.00
AP
00439569
08/30/2023

ENVIRONMENT PLANNING DVMT SOLUTIONS
24,863.00 0.00 24,863.00
AP
00439570
08/30/2023

EXPRESS BRAKE SUPPLY INC
172.83 0.00 172.83
AP
00439571
08/30/2023

FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP

11.85 0.00 11.85
AP
00439572
08/30/2023

FISCHER, ELIZABETH

12.00 0.00 12.00
***
AP
00439573
08/30/2023

FUEL SERV
996.87 262.50 1,259.37
AP
00439574
08/30/2023

FUN SERVICE
1,700.00 0.00 1,700.00
AP
00439575
08/30/2023

GOLDEN OAKS VET HOSPITAL
800.00 0.00 800.00
AP
00439576
08/30/2023

GOLDSTAR ASPHALT PRODUCTS
909.41 0.00 909.41
AP
00439577
08/30/2023

GRAINGER
910.96 0.00 910.96
AP
00439578
08/30/2023

GRAPHICS FACTORY PRINTING INC
400.84 0.00 400.84
AP
00439579
08/30/2023

GROVES ON FOOTHILL, THE
200.00 0.00 200.00
AP
00439580
08/30/2023

H & M HENNES & MAURITZ LP
3,701.99 0.00 3,701.99
AP
00439581
08/30/2023

HDL COREN & CONE
695.00 0.00 695.00
AP
00439582
08/30/2023

HILL'S PET NUTRITION SALES INC
864.83 0.00 864.83
AP
00439583
08/30/2023

HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC
3,649.48 0.00 3,649.48
AP
00439584
08/30/2023

HOMETOWN AMERICA - RAMONA VILLA MHP
300.00 0.00 300.00
AP
00439585
08/30/2023

HOPE THROUGH HOUSING FOUNDATION
2,500.00 0.00 2,500.00
AP
00439586
08/30/2023

HOSE-MAN INC
386.29 0.00 386.29
AP
00439587
08/30/2023

HOSE-MAN INC

38.45 0.00 38.45
AP
00439588
08/30/2023

HUBBERT, JAMES
273.00 0.00 273.00
AP
00439589
08/30/2023

HUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY
371.00 0.00 371.00
AP
00439590
08/30/2023

IDEXX DISTRIBUTION INC
483.85 0.00 483.85
AP
00439591
08/30/2023

INLAND OVERHEAD DOOR COMPANY
955.00 0.00 955.00
AP
00439592
08/30/2023

INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN
401.36 0.00 401.36
AP
00439593
08/30/2023

INLAND VALLEY DANCE ACADEMY
768.00 0.00 768.00
AP
00439594
08/30/2023

INTERSTATE ALL BATTERY CENTER
661.77 0.00 661.77
AP
00439595
08/30/2023

JOHNNY ALLEN TENNIS ACADEMY
2,797.20 0.00 2,797.20
AP
00439596
08/30/2023

KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN INC
254,109.27 0.00 254,109.27
AP
00439597
08/30/2023

KEITH, JORRY
450.00 0.00 450.00
07:22:02
09/11/2023
Current Date:

VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez
Page:
2 Time:

CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout User:

Report:

Agenda Check Register

RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.

AND

CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
8/28/2023 through 9/10/2023
Check No.

Check Date
Vendor Name
City Fire Amount
AP
00439598
08/30/2023

KINGDOM CALIBRATIONS INC

0.00 140.00 140.00
AP
00439599
08/30/2023

KWALL LLC
20,350.00 0.00 20,350.00
AP
00439600
08/30/2023

LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE
14,303.50 0.00 14,303.50
AP
00439601
08/30/2023

LITTLE, MARC
864.00 0.00 864.00
AP
00439602
08/30/2023

LOPEZ, ANTHONY
749.66 0.00 749.66
AP
00439603
08/30/2023

MADDUX JR, JOHN C
6,500.00 0.00 6,500.00
AP
00439604
08/30/2023

MARANAN, MATT

47.48 0.00 47.48
AP
00439605
08/30/2023

MAXWELL, ANTHONY

36.00 0.00 36.00
AP
00439606
08/30/2023

MDG ASSOCIATES INC
43,886.09 0.00 43,886.09
AP
00439607
08/30/2023

MERRIMAC PETROLEUM INC
4,246.96 0.00 4,246.96
AP
00439608
08/30/2023

MESA ENERGY SYSTEMS INC
1,570.00 0.00 1,570.00
AP
00439609
08/30/2023

MIDWEST VETERINARY SUPPLY INC
617.18 0.00 617.18
AP
00439610
08/30/2023

MINUTEMAN PRESS
1,313.98 0.00 1,313.98
AP
00439611
08/30/2023

MOE, JOHN
396.00 0.00 396.00
AP
00439612
08/30/2023

MUSIC LAND
654.50 0.00 654.50
AP
00439613
08/30/2023

MUSIC TREE
726.00 0.00 726.00
AP
00439614
08/30/2023

MWI ANIMAL HEALTH
564.85 0.00 564.85
AP
00439615
08/30/2023

NAPA AUTO PARTS
139.41 0.00 139.41
AP
00439616
08/30/2023

NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP
12,823.60 0.00 12,823.60
AP
00439617
08/30/2023
NV5 INC
23,586.66 0.00 23,586.66
AP
00439618
08/30/2023

ODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS LLC
2,019.15 0.00 2,019.15
AP
00439619
08/30/2023

PARKER, DAVID A
15,000.00 0.00 15,000.00
AP
00439620
08/30/2023
PARMA
300.00 0.00 300.00
AP
00439621
08/30/2023

PEPE'S TOWING SERVICE
125.00 0.00 125.00
AP
00439622
08/30/2023

PILONIETA, MANUEL E
115.20 0.00 115.20
AP
00439623
08/30/2023

PRECISION AERIAL SERVICES INC
631.57 0.00 631.57
AP
00439624
08/30/2023

PSA PRINT GROUP

96.20 0.00 96.20
AP
00439625
08/30/2023
PUBLICINPUT.COM
35,974.00 0.00 35,974.00
AP
00439626
08/30/2023

QUINN, RHONDA
460.80 0.00 460.80
AP
00439627
08/30/2023

RANCHO CUCAMONGA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
4,982.00 0.00 4,982.00
AP
00439628
08/30/2023

RANCHO SMOG CENTER

99.90 0.00 99.90
AP
00439629
08/30/2023

RECYCLE AWAY LLC
1,469.30 0.00 1,469.30
AP
00439630
08/30/2023

RED WING BUSINESS ADVANTAGE ACCOUNT
926.13 0.00 926.13
AP
00439631
08/30/2023

SAFELITE FULFILLMENT INC
790.80 0.00 790.80
AP
00439632
08/30/2023

SAMPLE, NANCY L
307.20 0.00 307.20
AP
00439633
08/30/2023

SAN BERNARDINO CO AUDITOR CONT
15,329.92 0.00 15,329.92
AP
00439634
08/30/2023

SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT
716.48 0.00 716.48
AP
00439635
08/30/2023

SANDERS, KRAMER

44.15 0.00 44.15
AP
00439636
08/30/2023

SCOTT MCLEOD PLUMBING INC
5,628.50 0.00 5,628.50
AP
00439637
08/30/2023

SDI PRESENCE LLC
26,085.00 0.00 26,085.00
AP
00439638
08/30/2023

SHEAKLEY PENSION ADMINISTRATION
363.30 0.00 363.30
AP
00439639
08/30/2023

SHEAKLEY PENSION ADMINISTRATION

0.00 188.00 188.00
AP
00439640
08/30/2023

SHOETERIA INC
703.38 0.00 703.38
AP
00439641
08/30/2023

SHRED PROS

65.00 0.00 65.00
AP
00439642
08/30/2023

SIGURDSON, JADE MICHAEL ANNE
720.00 0.00 720.00
AP
00439644
08/30/2023

SONSRAY MACHINERY LLC
4,596.85 0.00 4,596.85
***
AP
00439648
08/30/2023

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
6,023.37 187.69 6,211.06
07:22:02
09/11/2023
Current Date:

VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez
Page:
3 Time:

CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout User:

Report:

Agenda Check Register

RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.

AND

CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
8/28/2023 through 9/10/2023
Check No.

Check Date
Vendor Name
City Fire Amount
AP
00439649
08/30/2023

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON

48.51 0.00 48.51
AP
00439650
08/30/2023

STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY
2,921.10 0.00 2,921.10
***
AP
00439651
08/30/2023

STANLEY PEST CONTROL
2,150.00 810.00 2,960.00
AP
00439652
08/30/2023

SYCAMORE VILLA MOBILE HOME PARK
300.00 0.00 300.00
AP
00439653
08/30/2023

THOMSON REUTERS - WEST
380.00 0.00 380.00
AP
00439654
08/30/2023

TYUS, IDA
1,320.00 0.00 1,320.00
AP
00439655
08/30/2023

UNITED SITE SERVICES OF CA INC
245.80 0.00 245.80
AP
00439656
08/30/2023

UNIVERSITY ENTERPRISES CORPORATION
6,250.00 0.00 6,250.00
AP
00439657
08/30/2023
UPS
119.08 0.00 119.08
AP
00439658
08/30/2023

US POSTAL SERVICE
310.00 0.00 310.00
AP
00439659
08/30/2023

VALLEY POWER SYSTEMS INC

0.00 10.87 10.87
AP
00439660
08/30/2023

VAN SCOYOC ASSOCIATES INC
4,000.00 0.00 4,000.00
AP
00439661
08/30/2023

VCA CENTRAL ANIMAL HOSPITAL
486.49 0.00 486.49
AP
00439662
08/30/2023

VELOCITY TRUCK CENTERS

0.00 112.89 112.89
AP
00439663
08/30/2023

VICTOR MEDICAL COMPANY
269.57 0.00 269.57
AP
00439664
08/30/2023

VICTORIA ANIMAL HOSPITAL
600.00 0.00 600.00
AP
00439665
08/30/2023

WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO

0.00 362.52 362.52
AP
00439666
08/30/2023

WESTLAND GROUP INC
22,018.75 0.00 22,018.75
AP
00439667
08/30/2023

WINZER CORPORATION

0.00 298.77 298.77
AP
00439668
08/30/2023

CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

50.00 0.00 50.00
AP
00439669
08/30/2023

CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

50.00 0.00 50.00
AP
00439670
08/31/2023

RANCHO CUCAMONGA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
1,394.16 0.00 1,394.16
AP
00439671
09/06/2023
909 JUMPERS & PARTY RENTALS
550.00 0.00 550.00
AP
00439672
09/06/2023

ADVANCED CHEMICAL TRANSPORT INC
2,316.00 0.00 2,316.00
AP
00439673
09/06/2023

ALLIED UNIVERSAL SECURITY SERVICES
12,985.06 0.00 12,985.06
AP
00439674
09/06/2023

ALTA RANCHO PET & BIRD HOSPITAL
200.00 0.00 200.00
AP
00439675
09/06/2023

AP TRITON LLC

0.00 25,949.00 25,949.00
AP
00439676
09/06/2023

AUTOLIFT SERVICES INC

0.00 5,303.02 5,303.02
AP
00439677
09/06/2023

BAKER & TAYLOR LLC
1,726.88 0.00 1,726.88
AP
00439678
09/06/2023

BARBARA'S ANSWERING SERVICE
552.00 0.00 552.00
AP
00439679
09/06/2023

BERN MARIE'S PROMOTIONAL PRODUCTS
1,966.49 0.00 1,966.49
AP
00439680
09/06/2023

BEST OUTDOOR POWER INLAND LLC
146.52 0.00 146.52
AP
00439681
09/06/2023

BOYD, PRESTON

72.00 0.00 72.00
AP
00439682
09/06/2023

BRAND BUILDERS LLC
9,092.50 0.00 9,092.50
AP
00439683
09/06/2023

BRIGHTVIEW LANDSCAPE SERVICES INC
20,511.00 0.00 20,511.00
AP
00439684
09/06/2023

C P GENERATOR INC
105.60 0.00 105.60
AP
00439685
09/06/2023

C V W D
200.05 0.00 200.05
***
AP
00439686
09/06/2023

C V W D
145.69 339.92 485.61
AP
00439687
09/06/2023

C V W D

79.38 0.00 79.38
***
AP
00439694
09/06/2023

C V W D
132,366.51 509.33 132,875.84
AP
00439695
09/06/2023

CALIFORNIA, STATE OF

50.00 0.00 50.00
AP
00439696
09/06/2023

CALIFORNIA, STATE OF
200.00 0.00 200.00
AP
00439697
09/06/2023
CalPERS LONG-TERM CARE PROGRAM
221.35 0.00 221.35
AP
00439698
09/06/2023

CARB/PERP
1,100.00 0.00 1,100.00
AP
00439699
09/06/2023

CARQUEST AUTO PARTS
857.25 0.00 857.25
AP
00439700
09/06/2023

CCS ORANGE COUNTY JANITORIAL INC
78,387.33 0.00 78,387.33
AP
00439701
09/06/2023

CHAMPION FIRE SYSTEMS INC
300.00 0.00 300.00
07:22:02
09/11/2023
Current Date:

VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez
Page:
4 Time:

CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout User:

Report:

Agenda Check Register

RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.

AND

CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
8/28/2023 through 9/10/2023
Check No.

Check Date
Vendor Name
City Fire Amount
AP
00439702
09/06/2023

CINTAS CORPORATION

0.00 733.28 733.28
***
AP
00439703
09/06/2023

CITIZENS BUSINESS BANK
1,904.17 20,159.93 22,064.10
AP
00439704
09/06/2023

CITY RENTALS
464.28 0.00 464.28
AP
00439705
09/06/2023

CLAREMONT COURIER
583.00 0.00 583.00
AP
00439706
09/06/2023

CLEMENT, RICHARD
500.00 0.00 500.00
AP
00439707
09/06/2023
CODE 3 RESCUE

0.00 6,000.00 6,000.00
AP
00439708
09/06/2023

CONTINENTAL GIRBAU WEST LLC
1,150.55 0.00 1,150.55
AP
00439709
09/06/2023

COVETRUS NORTH AMERICA

18.91 0.00 18.91
AP
00439710
09/06/2023

CRIME SCENE STERI-CLEAN LLC
640.00 0.00 640.00
AP
00439711
09/06/2023

CROSSTOWN ELECTRICAL & DATA INC
137,394.58 0.00 137,394.58
AP
00439712
09/06/2023

CUMMINS SALES & SERVICE

0.00 547.70 547.70
AP
00439713
09/06/2023

DAN GUERRA & ASSOCIATES
6,600.00 0.00 6,600.00
AP
00439714
09/06/2023

DEPENDABLE COMPANY INC

45.00 0.00 45.00
AP
00439715
09/06/2023

DICUS SHERIFF-CORONER, SHANNON D
232.90 0.00 232.90
AP
00439716
09/06/2023

DOLLARHIDE, GINGER
453.60 0.00 453.60
AP
00439717
09/06/2023

EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS

0.00 743.67 743.67
AP
00439718
09/06/2023

FACTORY MOTOR PARTS

0.00 1,611.85 1,611.85
AP
00439719
09/06/2023

FIALLOS, WILSON
1,088.00 0.00 1,088.00
AP
00439720
09/06/2023

FIRE APPARATUS SOLUTIONS

0.00 1,149.01 1,149.01
AP
00439721
09/06/2023

FRANKLIN TRUCK PARTS INC

0.00 319.20 319.20
***
AP
00439722
09/06/2023

FRONTIER COMM
2,368.39 591.98 2,960.37
***
AP
00439723
09/06/2023

FUEL SERV
1,420.00 3,910.00 5,330.00
AP
00439724
09/06/2023

G/M BUSINESS INTERIORS
273.85 0.00 273.85
AP
00439725
09/06/2023

GARDNER, KENNY
250.00 0.00 250.00
***
AP
00439726
09/06/2023

GRAINGER
575.01 52.34 627.35
AP
00439727
09/06/2023

GRAINGER
139.33 0.00 139.33
AP
00439728
09/06/2023

GRAPHICS FACTORY PRINTING INC
829.68 0.00 829.68
AP
00439729
09/06/2023

GUPTA, SAPNA
24,070.00 0.00 24,070.00
AP
00439730
09/06/2023

HILL'S PET NUTRITION SALES INC
1,921.29 0.00 1,921.29
AP
00439731
09/06/2023

HINDERLITER DE LLAMAS & ASSOCIATES
12,703.45 0.00 12,703.45
AP
00439732
09/06/2023

HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC
1,219.62 0.00 1,219.62
AP
00439733
09/06/2023

HOSE-MAN INC
216.17 0.00 216.17
AP
00439734
09/06/2023

HUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY
683.00 0.00 683.00
AP
00439735
09/06/2023

IDEXX DISTRIBUTION INC
464.19 0.00 464.19
AP
00439736
09/06/2023

INLAND LIBRARY SYSTEM
1,919.00 0.00 1,919.00
AP
00439737
09/06/2023

INLAND PACIFIC BALLET
7,359.00 0.00 7,359.00
AP
00439738
09/06/2023

INTERSTATE ALL BATTERY CENTER
2,172.91 0.00 2,172.91
AP
00439739
09/06/2023

KEITH, JORRY
669.00 0.00 669.00
AP
00439740
09/06/2023

KINDRED CORPORATION, THE

51.72 0.00 51.72
AP
00439741
09/06/2023

KINETIC LIGHTING INC
2,067.74 0.00 2,067.74
AP
00439742
09/06/2023

LIVE OAK DOG OBEDIENCE
204.00 0.00 204.00
***
AP
00439743
09/06/2023

MARIPOSA LANDSCAPES INC
301,434.87 2,900.50 304,335.37
AP
00439744
09/06/2023

MCFADDEN-DALE HARDWARE
913.76 0.00 913.76
***
AP
00439745
09/06/2023

MERRIMAC PETROLEUM INC
71,243.83 36,010.37 107,254.20
AP
00439746
09/06/2023

MESA ENERGY SYSTEMS INC
2,580.00 0.00 2,580.00
AP
00439747
09/06/2023

MIG INC
9,053.75 0.00 9,053.75
AP
00439748
09/06/2023

MUSIC LAND
385.00 0.00 385.00
07:22:02
09/11/2023
Current Date:

VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez
Page:
5 Time:

CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout User:

Report:

Agenda Check Register

RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.

AND

CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
8/28/2023 through 9/10/2023
Check No.

Check Date
Vendor Name
City Fire Amount
AP
00439749
09/06/2023

MUTUAL PROPANE

0.00 1,243.65 1,243.65
AP
00439750
09/06/2023

MWI ANIMAL HEALTH
265.11 0.00 265.11
***
AP
00439751
09/06/2023

NAPA AUTO PARTS
711.65 2,072.97 2,784.62
AP
00439752
09/06/2023

NEWSBANK INC
9,584.00 0.00 9,584.00
AP
00439753
09/06/2023

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CENTERS OF CA

0.00 303.22 303.22
***
AP
00439754
09/06/2023

ODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS LLC
3,943.32 139.26 4,082.58
AP
00439755
09/06/2023

ONTARIO SPAY & NEUTER INC
1,265.00 0.00 1,265.00
AP
00439756
09/06/2023

ORR, RILEY

73.00 0.00 73.00
AP
00439757
09/06/2023

OTT, SHARON
1,164.00 0.00 1,164.00
AP
00439758
09/06/2023

PH&S PRODUCTS LLC

0.00 7,960.00 7,960.00
AP
00439759
09/06/2023

PLATTEN, RAYMOND
100.00 0.00 100.00
AP
00439760
09/06/2023

PRE-PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC

53.36 0.00 53.36
AP
00439761
09/06/2023

PSA PRINT GROUP

48.10 0.00 48.10
AP
00439762
09/06/2023

RANCHO SMOG CENTER
149.85 0.00 149.85
AP
00439763
09/06/2023

RANCHO WEST ANIMAL HOSPITAL
200.00 0.00 200.00
AP
00439764
09/06/2023

RBM LOCK & KEY SERVICE
609.00 0.00 609.00
AP
00439765
09/06/2023

RDO EQUIPMENT COMPANY
1,839.66 0.00 1,839.66
AP
00439766
09/06/2023

REMMI CONSTRUCTION INC
28,065.60 0.00 28,065.60
AP
00439767
09/06/2023

ROOMS COVER N SOLAR
334.92 0.00 334.92
AP
00439768
09/06/2023

SAFECHECKS
701.92 0.00 701.92
AP
00439769
09/06/2023

SAN ANTONIO REGIONAL HOSPITAL

0.00 1,722.00 1,722.00
AP
00439770
09/06/2023

SAN BERNARDINO CNTY FIRE PROTECTION DIST

0.00 6,683.00 6,683.00
AP
00439771
09/06/2023

SAN BERNARDINO CNTY FIRE PROTECTION DIST
67,874.90 0.00 67,874.90
AP
00439772
09/06/2023

SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT
2,652.48 0.00 2,652.48
AP
00439773
09/06/2023
SBPEA
2,585.05 0.00 2,585.05
AP
00439774
09/06/2023

SCANLAN, PAULENE

29.56 0.00 29.56
AP
00439775
09/06/2023

SCOTT MCLEOD PLUMBING INC
1,709.00 0.00 1,709.00
AP
00439776
09/06/2023
SCRRA
3,560.00 0.00 3,560.00
AP
00439777
09/06/2023

SHRED PROS
180.00 0.00 180.00
***
AP
00439780
09/06/2023

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
21,246.25 3,166.93 24,413.18
***
AP
00439781
09/06/2023

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
1,829.90 4,269.77 6,099.67
AP
00439782
09/06/2023

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
821.66 0.00 821.66
AP
00439783
09/06/2023

SOVIC CREATIVE
1,140.00 0.00 1,140.00
AP
00439784
09/06/2023

SPECTRUM GAS PRODUCTS

0.00 3,246.50 3,246.50
AP
00439785
09/06/2023

SPRINGSHARE LLC
1,391.00 0.00 1,391.00
AP
00439786
09/06/2023

SUNRUN INSTALLATION SERVICES INC
1,225.18 0.00 1,225.18
AP
00439787
09/06/2023

TER-PETROSYAN, ARMENAK
498.01 0.00 498.01
***
AP
00439788
09/06/2023

TIREHUB LLC
683.76 753.29 1,437.05
AP
00439789
09/06/2023

TORO TOWING
150.00 0.00 150.00
AP
00439790
09/06/2023
U.S. BANK PARS ACCT #6746022500
19,234.73 0.00 19,234.73
AP
00439791
09/06/2023
U.S. BANK PARS ACCT #6746022500
1,144.38 0.00 1,144.38
AP
00439792
09/06/2023
UPS

30.00 0.00 30.00
AP
00439793
09/06/2023

VERIZON WIRELESS - LA

0.00 5,807.64 5,807.64
AP
00439794
09/06/2023

VICTOR MEDICAL COMPANY
2,388.68 0.00 2,388.68
AP
00439795
09/06/2023

VICTORIA ANIMAL HOSPITAL
400.00 0.00 400.00
AP
00439796
09/06/2023

VOLTAIRE ENGINEERING INC
143,640.63 0.00 143,640.63
AP
00439797
09/06/2023

VULCAN MATERIALS COMPANY
313.62 0.00 313.62
07:22:02
09/11/2023
Current Date:

VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez
Page:
6 Time:

CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout User:

Report:

Agenda Check Register

RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
Excluding So Calif Gas Company.

AND

CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
8/28/2023 through 9/10/2023
Check No.

Check Date
Vendor Name
City Fire Amount
AP
00439798
09/06/2023

WALTERS WHOLESALE ELECTRIC CO
666.02 0.00 666.02
AP
00439799
09/06/2023

WANG, LIN

5.00 0.00 5.00
AP
00439800
09/06/2023

WARREN, LIA

53.00 0.00 53.00
***
AP
00439801
09/06/2023

WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY
8,857.36 1,747.25 10,604.61
AP
00439802
09/06/2023

WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC
277.50 0.00 277.50
AP
00439803
09/06/2023

WT CONSTRUCTION SERVICES INC
432.00 0.00 432.00
AP
00439804
09/06/2023

WU, YOUNG
169.74 0.00 169.74
AP
00439805
09/06/2023

XU, JOSEPH
500.00 0.00 500.00
AP
00439806
09/06/2023

ZEP SALES AND SERVICE
1,703.26 0.00 1,703.26
$2,445,372.88
$3,020,885.05
$575,512.17
Note:

Grand Total:

Total Fire:

Total City:
*** Check Number includes both City and Fire District expenditures 07:22:02
09/11/2023
Current Date:

VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez
Page:
7 Time:

CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout User:

Report:

DATE:September 19, 2023
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
President and Members of the Boards of Directors
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Tamara L. Oatman, Finance Director
Veronica Lopez, Accounts Payable Supervisor
SUBJECT: Consideration to Approve City and Fire District Weekly Check Registers for Checks Issued to Southern California Gas Company in the Total Amount of $2,825.08 Dated August 28, 2023, Through September 10, 2023. (CITY/FIRE)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends City Council/Board of Directors of the Fire Protection District approve payment of demands as presented. Weekly check register amounts are $2,536.30 and $288.78 for the City and the Fire District, respectively.

BACKGROUND:

N/A

ANALYSIS:

N/A

FISCAL IMPACT:

Adequate budgeted funds are available for the payment of demands per the attached listing.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:

N/A

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 - Weekly Check Register

Agenda Check Register

RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
So Calif Gas Company Only.

AND

CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
8/28/2023 through 9/10/2023
Check No.

Check Date
Vendor Name
City Fire Amount
***
AP
00439643
08/30/2023

SOCAL GAS
919.31 288.78 1,208.09
AP
00439778
09/06/2023

SOCAL GAS
1,616.99 0.00 1,616.99
$2,536.30
$2,825.08
$288.78
Note:

Grand Total:

Total Fire:

Total City:
*** Check Number includes both City and Fire District expenditures 07:48:06
09/11/2023
Current Date:

VLOPEZ - Veronica Lopez
Page:
1 Time:

CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_CONSOLIDATED - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout User:

Report:

DATE:September 19, 2023
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
President and Members of the Board of Directors
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Elisa Cox, Assistant City Manager/Administrative Services Director Tamara L. Oatman, Finance Director
Jason A. Shields, Management Analyst II

SUBJECT: Consideration to Receive and File Current Investment Schedules as of August 31, 2023 for the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. (CITY/FIRE)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council/Board of Directors of the Fire Protection District receive and file the attached current investment schedules for the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City) and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (District) as of August 31, 2023.

BACKGROUND:

The attached investment schedules as of August 31, 2023 reflect cash and investments managed by the Finance Department/Revenue Management Division and are in conformity with the requirements of California Government Code Section 53601 and the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District’s adopted Investment Policies as approved on June 22, 2023.

ANALYSIS:

The City’s and District’s Treasurers are each required to submit a quarterly investment report to the City Council and the Fire Board, respectively, in accordance with California Government Code Section 53646. The quarterly investment report is required to be submitted within 30 days following the end of the quarter covered by the report. However, the City and District Treasurers have each elected to provide this report on a monthly basis.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:

The monthly investment schedule supports the City Council’s core value of providing and nurturing a high quality of life for all by demonstrating the active, prudent fiscal management of the City’s investment portfolio to ensure that financial resources are available to support the various services the city provides to all Rancho Cucamonga stakeholders.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 - Investment Schedule (City)
Attachment 2 - Investment Schedule (Fire)

DATE:September 19, 2023
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Matt Burris, Acting Public Works Services Director Ruth Cain, Procurement Manager
Richard Favela, Streets, Storm Drains, and Fleet Superintendent Albert Lopez, Fleet Supervisor
Lindsay McElwain, Management Analyst I
SUBJECT: Consideration of the Purchase of Seven (7) Ford E-Transit Vans, One (1) Ford F-150 Truck, and One (1) 2-Ton Dump Truck from National Auto Fleet Group via the Sourcewell Contract in an Amount Not to Exceed $735,000. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council approve the purchase of seven (7) Ford E-Transit Vans, one (1) Ford F-150 truck, and one (1) 2-ton Dump Truck from National Auto Fleet Group via the Sourcewell contract in an amount not to exceed $735,000 to be funded from the equipment/vehicle replacement fund.

BACKGROUND:

The Public Works Services Department (PWSD) has identified several vehicles for replacement in FY 2023/2024 because they have exceeded their life expectancy by years of service and mileage and repair costs for the vehicles are higher than the vehicle market values. PWSD proposes seven (7) trucks to be replaced with Ford E-Transit Vans, to reduce the City’s greenhouse gas emissions, abide by California Air Resources Board vehicle procurement mandates effective Model Year 2024, and to attain City Council Climate Action goals. The vehicles identified for replacement with Ford E-Transit vans are used by the Irrigation Team, Park Facilities staff, Park Supervisors, and Facilities staff. Replacing these trucks with vans will additionally protect equipment and supplies from inclement weather and reduce theft. These vehicles were approved for replacement with Ford E-Transit Vans in the FY 2023/2024 Budget.

The Ford F-150 Truck will be utilized by the Animal Control Officers at the Animal Center as an overnight, on-call vehicle or for as needed small animal transports outside of Rancho Cucamonga. The 2-ton Dump Truck will replace an aged dump truck used by the Asphalt Crew to load base and materials when making asphalt repairs throughout the City.

Staff identified a Sourcewell contract with National Auto Fleet Group for the procurement of Ford E-Transit Vans, a Ford F-150 truck, and the 2-ton Dump Truck. Sourcewell is a purchasing platform for public agencies that pre-screens vendors and gives member organizations a cooperative purchase advantage. By procuring these vehicles through an already competitively

Page 2 ends

1 9
9 0
bid and awarded Sourcewell contract, the City will reduce staff time that would have been spent on the bid process resulting in higher efficiency and cost savings.

ANALYSIS:

Sourcewell offers a cooperative purchasing model that streamlines the procurement process for cities by eliminating the requirement for individual bidding and negotiation. Such collaboration guarantees that cities receive quality products through competitively bid Sourcewell contracts, which not only saves time but enables expedited electrification efforts by capitalizing on the emerging electric vehicle market.

If approved, PWSD will procure nine (9) vehicles through the National Auto Fleet Group contract via Sourcewell to retire and replace seven (7) aged, high use internal combustion engine trucks with EV vans, to replace one (1) aged 2-ton Dump Truck, and procure one (1) new Ford F-150 Truck for the Animal Center’s Animal Control Officers.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The FY 2023/2024 Budget for equipment/vehicle replacement (1712001-5604) is $735,000. This amount includes funding for the purchase of the nine (9) vehicles proposed to be procured from Sourcewell.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

This item addresses the City Council’s core values of providing and nurturing a high quality of life for all, intentionally embracing and anticipating our future, and relentless pursuit of improvement.

ATTACHMENTS:

None.

DATE:September 19, 2023
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
President and Members of the Boards of Directors
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Matt Burris, Deputy City Manager/ Acting Public Works Services Director Mike McCliman, Fire Chief
Neil Plummer, Acting Deputy Public Works Director
Ruth Cain, CPPB, Procurement Manager
Andy Miller, Facilities Supervisor
Andrea Bauer, Management Analyst I
SUBJECT: Consideration of the Purchase of Electrical Supplies in an Amount Not to Exceed $200,000 from Walters Wholesale Electric and Consolidated Electrical Distributors. (CITY/FIRE)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council and Board of Directors award the purchase of electrical supplies on an as-needed basis from Walters Wholesale Electric of Rancho Cucamonga and Consolidated Electrical Distributors of Ontario, in accordance with Request for Bids (RFB) #23/24- 104, in an amount not to exceed $200,000 for Fiscal Year 2023/2024.

BACKGROUND:

Quality electrical parts and supplies are essential in maintaining safe and functional City and Fire facilities. These components are utilized in parking lots, internal and external building lighting systems, sport lights, and electrical distribution systems. It is critical to use quality electrical materials to sustain the City’s operations and ensure the longevity of all City and Fire facilities.

Electrical parts and supplies such as lamps, ballasts, circuit breakers, and wire are required to perform repairs necessary to ensure that the City and Fire facilities are well maintained and safe for the community.

ANALYSIS:

The Public Works Services Department provided the Procurement Division with specifications for review and to determine the best method of procurement for electrical supplies from the top two qualified lowest most responsive vendors. The Procurement Division prepared and posted a formal Request for Bid (RFB) #23/24-104 for the purchase of “Electrical Supplies on an as Needed Basis” to the City’s automated procurement system. There were five hundred seventeen (517) notified vendors, twenty-one (21) prospective bidders downloaded or reviewed the solicitation documentation, and four (4) responses received. Walters Wholesale Electric and Consolidated Electrical Distributors were the lowest qualified responsive vendors.

All applicable bid documentation is on file in the City’s electronic bidding system and can be

Page 2 ends

2 0
2 4
accessed through the City’s web page.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The proposed purchase of electrical parts is within the various operations and maintenance budget line items in the approved FY 2023/2024 budget.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:

This item addresses the City Council core values of promoting and enhancing a safe and healthy community for all in ensuring City and Fire District facilities are properly maintained.

ATTACHMENTS:

None.

DATE:September 19, 2023
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jennifer Hunt Gracia, Community Services Director Chandra Thomas, Management Analyst III
SUBJECT: Consideration to approve a three (3) year Professional Services Agreement with Active Network, LLC., at a 1.56% to 4.42% Service Fee per Transaction for Web-based Program Registration, Facility Reservation, and Membership Management Services. (CITY) RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council approve the execution of a three (3) year Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Active Network, LLC. (Active Net) at a 1.56% to 4.42% service fee per transaction for web-based Program Registration, Facility Reservation, Membership Services, and Corresponding Auxiliary Technological Support Services.

BACKGROUND:

Since 2015, Active Net has provided web-based registration services to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The Community Services Department, Library Services, and Fire Protection District utilize Active Net's web-based program registration, facility reservation, and membership management program.

Active Net utilizes the Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) model to provide these services. Active Net owns and maintains the database and server infrastructure, eliminating the City’s need for costly software IT infrastructure and reducing and/or eliminating user licenses, servers, and separate maintenance agreements while ensuring the community has secure access to web-based services. Furthermore, Active Net is required to meet PCI level 1 compliance, the highest level of security for credit card transactions required by all major credit cards; therefore, Active Net is responsible for the risk and validation requirements when a credit card is entered into the system.

Active Net’s web-based system uses a transaction pricing model to support software and infrastructure updates by applying a nominal fee to all financial transactions. This fee ranges from

1.56% to 4.42% and is passed on to the user and retained by Active Net to cover system upgrades. The City previously elected to establish an average 4% transaction fee for all customers registering for fee-based programs. This fee was established in Resolution Number 19-092 and is reviewed annually.

ANALYSIS:

Active Net is recognized as an industry leader in providing web-based software for program registration, facility reservations, and membership management. The City remains very satisfied with the services provided. Active Net's knowledge of the City's current requirements, modules,

Page 2 ends

2 0
2 0
business processes, workflows, and configurations is advantageous for continued seamless operations. The City has worked diligently to ensure Active Net services are compatible with current and planned network security and finance functions, including Workday.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Renewing this contract has no fiscal impacts, as the current 4% transaction service fee rate does not change. Therefore, the budget approved by the City Council is sufficient at this time.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

This project supports the City Council’s values of providing and nurturing a high quality of life for all, intentionally embracing and anticipating our future, and the relentless pursuit of improvement.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 – Professional Services Agreement
Attachment 2 – Single Source Memo
Attachment 3 – Single Source Justification Form

The Community Services Department is submitting a Single/Sole Source Justification Form; this memo is for the purpose of clarifying the reasons for selecting a specific vendor for the registration, facility reservation, membership and point of sale services. The City of Rancho Cucamonga and Active Net, LLC, have a well-established relationship having been the approved single source vendor for 8+ years. The Community Service Department currently utilizes Active Network, a vendor hosted web-based software for the management of recreation activities, facility reservations and point of sale services. Library Services and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District also utilize ActiveNet on a limited basis. Active Network, LLC, is recognized as an industry leader in providing the described services. The City remains very satisfied with the services provided. The Active Network's knowledge of the City's current requirements, modules, business processes, workflows and configurations are advantageous for continued seamless operations. The City has worked diligently to ensure Active Network service are compatible withcurrent and planned network security and finance functions, including Workday. Furthermore, transitioning to an alternative vendor for like services would result in a prolonged process and substantial additional expenses, including staff training. The City has invested significantly in equipment associated with the operation of the Active Network services at ten (10) workstations (with point of sale), receipt printers, card readers, signature pads, scanners, camera, and card printers, all of which may have tobe replaced with a new system. It is for these reasons that the Community Services Department recommends the option to procure Active Network, LLC, as the single source provider of registration, facility reservation, membership and point of sale services for the operations the of Community Services, Library Services, and Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.Page 1 of 1 DATE:August 24, 2023TO:Ruth Cain, Procurement ManagerFROM:Chandra Thomas, Management Analyst IIIBY:Ryan Samples, Community Services SupervisorSUBJECT:SINGLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION Active Network, LLCMEMORANDUMCommunity Services Department

09/07/2023X
DATE:September 19, 2023
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Matt Burris, Deputy City Manager/ Acting Public Works Services Director Jeff Benson, Parks and Landscape Superintendent
Paul Fisher, Management Analyst III
SUBJECT: Consideration of Amendment No. 5 to Contract No. CO 18-066 with AquaBio Environmental Technologies for Preventive Maintenance and Repair Services for Red Hill Lake and Floating Island in an Amount Not to Exceed $25,830 during FY 2023/24. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council:

1. Approve Amendment No. 5 to contract CO 18-066 with AquaBio Environmental Technologies (AquaBio) extending the term of the contract to June 30, 2024, with an option to extend the term an additional year through June 30, 2025.

2. Authorize an expenditure in an amount not to exceed $25,830 for FY 2023/24.

3. Authorize the City Manager exercise the option to renew the contract for an additional year through June 30, 2025, in an amount not to exceed $28,420 for FY 2024/25, contingent upon approval of the FY 2024/25 budget.

BACKGROUND:

The maintenance of Red Hill Lake is a critical function in managing the health and safety of this publicly accessible water feature. AquaBio has been the provider for the City in maintaining the lake’s water biology. Over the years, the City has worked with AquaBio to manage the health, biology, and maintenance of Red Hill Lake, including its refurbishment in 2014, remediation activities in 2017, and most recently for preventative maintenance and repair services from FY 2018 through FY 2023.

The City’s original contract with AquaBio (CO 18-066), dated June 4, 2018, is for preventive maintenance and repair services for the Red Hill lake and floating island. The scope of work includes a monthly maintenance schedule, standard water quality base sampling to assess current health of the lake, and the capture and removal of invasive turtle species. The term of the original contract was one year, with the option to renew in one-year increments for a maximum of four additional years through June 30, 2023.

The FY 2023/24 budget includes funding for the design and construction of the Red Hill Lake Modernization project which will include a new filtration and water treatment system and incorporate other aesthetic design elements. In the interim, it is necessary to continue the services

Page 2 ends

2 0
2 5
being provided by AquaBio.

ANALYSIS:

AquaBio has expressed their desire to continue providing service to the City and submitted their proposal for Red Hill Lake Maintenance during FY 2023/24. It is anticipated that construction of the Red Hill Lake Modernization Project will not commence until the beginning of FY 2024/25 necessitating the continuance of these services for at least the duration of the current fiscal year.

Staff recommends the City Council approve Amendment No. 5 to contract no. CO 18-066 extending the term of the contract to June 30, 2024, with an option to renew by mutual consent of both parties for an additional year through June 30, 2025, in an amount not to exceed $25,830 for FY 2023/24 and $28,420 for FY 2024/25, contingent upon approval of the FY 2024/25 budget.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The adopted FY 2023/24 budget includes $25,830 for Red Hill Lake Maintenance and Repair Services in account 1848321-5300.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

This item addresses the City Council’s Core Values of promoting and enhancing a safe and healthy community for all while providing and maintaining high quality outdoor spaces.

ATTACHMENTS:

None
DATE:September 19, 2023
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer James Lo, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT: Consideration to Accept Public Improvements on the Southwest Corner of Arrow Route and Hickory Avenue per Improvement Agreement, Related to Design Review DRC2018-00946, as Complete, File a Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Approve and accept the public improvements and their design, required for the development of Design Review DRC2018-00946 and authorize the City Engineer to file the appropriate Notice of Completion;

2. Release Faithful Performance Bond and accept a Maintenance Bond for the associated public improvements; and

3. Authorize the City Engineer to approve release of the Maintenance Bond one year following the filing of the Notice of Completion if the improvements remain free from defects in material and workmanship.

BACKGROUND:

Design Review DRC2018-00594 was approved by the Planning Commission on October 23, 2019, for the construction of a 33,067 square foot warehouse on a 1.67-acre parcel located on the southwest corner of Arrow Route and Hickory Avenue, in the General Industrial (GI) District.

An improvement agreement and securities for Design Review DRC2018-00946 were approved by the City Council on November 16, 2022, to ensure construction of the required public improvements.

ANALYSIS:

All public improvements required of this development have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The public improvement will be re-inspected in approximately nine months to ensure they remain in good order prior to release of the maintenance bond.

Prior to construction of the public improvement the developer, 88 Arrow Route, LLC, submitted the Faithful Performance Bond (No. 4446741) and Labor and Material Bond (No. 4446741) to ensure satisfactory completion of the improvements. With completion of the improvements, the City will retain 10% of the Labor and Material Bond as the Maintenance Bond (No. 4446741) for the warranty period of one year from the final inspection.

Page 2 ends

2 0
2 6
FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

This item address the City Council’s vision for the City by ensuring the maintenance of high-quality public improvements that promote a world class community.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 – Vicinity Map
ATTACHMENT 1
Case No. DRC2018-00946
Vicinity Map

NOT TO SCALE

DATE:September 19, 2023
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer Trina Valdez, Utilities Operations Supervisor
SUBJECT: Consideration of Resolution Authorizing the Attestation of Veracity for the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility 2022 Power Source Disclosure Annual Report and Power Content Label. (RESOLUTION NO. 2023-104) (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing the attestation of veracity for the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility (RCMU) 2022 Power Source Disclosure Annual Report and Power Content Label.

BACKGROUND:

In 1997, the California Legislature adopted Senate Bill 1305, Article 5, amended by Assembly Bill 162 (2009), requiring retail suppliers of electricity to disclose sources of energy being used to the California Energy Commission (CEC) and to consumers in the form of the Power Source Disclosure Annual Report and Annual Power Content Label.

The legislation also requires that the information used to calculate the Power Content Label for each calendar year be independently audited. In lieu of an independent audit and verification, an authorized agent of the City may submit to the CEC, under penalty of perjury, an attestation confirming the accuracy of the report. The CEC requires that the submission of the attestation be approved by the City Council at a public meeting.

ANALYSIS:

RCMU submitted the 2022 Power Source Disclosure Annual Report and Power Content Label to the CEC on May 24, 2023, including the staff attestation, and provided the required information to its customers by posting the 2022 Power Content Label on the City’s website (https://www.CityofRC.us/RCMU). Approval of the attached resolution satisfies the statutory requirement for approval by the City Council.

In 2022, RCMU’s total power procurements and generation for retail sales came from three sources: 29.9% of power was renewable procurements (solar), 4.4% was large hydroelectric and

65.7% was unspecified power. Unspecified power refers to electricity that has been purchased through open market transactions and is not traceable to a specific generation source.

As RCMU continues to move forward in increasing its procurement of renewable energy, RCMU will seek renewable energy opportunities both regionally and locally. This power source diversity

Page 2 ends

1 9
9 5
will allow RCMU to be more reliable and resilient by supporting local renewable generation projects, as well as supporting goals addressed in the City‘s Climate Action Plan, including the reduction in Greenhouse Gas emissions and the transition of the power grid to renewable sources.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

This item addresses the City Council’s vision by ensuring compliance with State regulations and building on our success as a world class and sustainable community.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 - Power Source Disclosure Report and Power Content Label Attachment 2 - Resolution
Version: April 2023

CONTACT INFORMATION
2022 POWER SOURCE DISCLOSURE ANNUAL REPORT
For the Year Ending December 31, 2022

RETAIL SUPPLIER NAME
City of Rancho Cucamonga

ELECTRICITY PORTFOLIO NAME
Retail suppliers are required to use the posted template and are not allowed to make edits to this format. Please complete all requested information.

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
NAME Fred Lyn
TITLE Deputy Director of Engineering - Utilities
MAILING ADDRESS 10500 Civic Center Drive
CITY, STATE, ZIP Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
PHONE (909) 774-4035
EMAIL [email protected]
If you have questions, contact Power Source Disclosure (PSD) staff at [email protected] or (916) 639-0573.

NOTE: Information submitted in this report is not automatically held confidential. If your company wishes the information submitted to be considered confidential an authorized representative must submit an application for confidential designation (CEC-13), which can be found on the California Energy Commissions's website at https://www.energy.ca.gov/about/divisions-and-offices/chief-counsels-office.

WEBSITE URL FOR

PCL POSTING
https://www.cityofrc.us/rcmu
Submit the Annual Report and signed Attestation in PDF format with the Excel version of the Annual Report to [email protected]. Remember to complete the Retail Supplier Name, Electricity Portfolio Name, and contact information above, and submit separate reports and attestations for each additional portfolio if multiple were offered in the previous year.

ATTACHMENT 1
Version: April 2023
105,583
36,212
69,371
-
-
-
36,212
29,691

0.2812

DIRECTLY DELIVERED RENEWABLES
Facility Name Fuel Type
State or
Province WREGIS ID RPS ID N/A EIA ID
Gross MWh
Procured
MWh
Resold
Net MWh
Procured
Adjusted Net MWh
Procured
GHG Emissions
Factor (in MT
CO2e/MWh)
GHG Emissions (in
MT CO2e) N/A
Antelope Expansion 3B Solar CA W 11436 64096A 62674 13,454 13,454 13,454 - - RE Astoria 2 Solar CA W 4931 62691A 59977 16,526 16,526 16,526 - - City of Rancho Cucamonga - City Hall Solar CA W 4859 63210A P222 106 106 106 - - City of Rancho Cucamonga - Animal Center SheltSolar CA W5017 63221A P 223 328 328 328 - - City of Rancho Cucamonga - Epicenter Solar CA W 5425 63220A P224 1,049 1,049 1,049 - - City of Rancho Cucamonga - Fire Station 173 Solar CA W 12547 64972A P378 108 108 108 #N/A - - #N/A
- - #N/A
- - #N/A
- - #N/A

FIRMED-AND-SHAPED IMPORTS
Facility Name Fuel Type
State or
Province WREGIS ID RPS ID
EIA ID of
REC
Source
EIA ID of
Substitute
Power
Gross MWh
Procured MWh Resold
Net MWh
Procured
Adjusted Net MWh
Procured
GHG Emissions
Factor (in MT
CO2e/MWh)
GHG Emissions
(in MT CO2e)
Eligible for
Grandfathered
Emissions?
- - #N/A
- - #N/A
- - #N/A
- - #N/A
- - #N/A

SPECIFIED NON-RENEWABLE PROCUREMENTS
Facility Name Fuel Type
State or
Province N/A N/A N/A EIA ID
Gross MWh
Procured MWh Resold
Net MWh
Procured
Adjusted Net MWh
Procured
GHG Emissions
Factor (in MT
CO2e/MWh)
GHG Emissions
(in MT CO2e) N/A
Boulder Canyon Project Large hydro NV 466 4, 641 4,641 4,641 - - - - #N/A
- - #N/A
- - #N/A
- - #N/A
- - #N/A
- - #N/A
- - #N/A
- - #N/A

PROCUREMENTS FROM ASSET-CONTROLLING SUPPLIERS
Facility Name Fuel Type N/A N/A N/A N/A EIA ID
Gross MWh
Procured MWh Resold
Net MWh
Procured
Adjusted Net MWh
Procured
GHG Emissions
Factor (in MT
CO2e/MWh)
GHG Emissions
(in MT CO2e) N/A
- # N/A
- #N/A
- #N/A
- #N/A
END USES OTHER THAN RETAIL SALES MWh
GHG Emissions Intensity (in MT CO2e/MWh)
Net Specified Natural Gas
Net Specified Coal & Other Fossil Fuels
Net Specified Nuclear, Large Hydro, Renewables, and ACS Power GHG Emissions (excludes grandfathered emissions)
Retail Sales (MWh)
Net Specified Procurement (MWh)
Unspecified Power (MWh)
Procurement to be adjusted
2022 POWER SOURCE DISCLOSURE ANNUAL REPORT
SCHEDULE 1: PROCUREMENTS AND RETAIL SALES
For the Year Ending December 31, 2022
City of Rancho Cucamonga
(ELECTRICITY PORTFOLIO NAME)
Instructions: Enter information about power procurements underlying this electricity portfolio for which your company is filing the Annual Report.

Insert additional rows as needed. All fields in white should be filled out. Fields in grey auto-populate as needed and should not be filled out. For EIA IDs for unspecified power or specified system mixes from asset-controlling suppliers, enter "Unspecified Power", "BPA", or "Tacoma Power" as applicable. For specified procurements of ACS power, use the ACS Procurement Calculator to calculate the resource breakdown comprising the ACS system mix. Procurements of unspecified power must not be entered as line items below; unspecified power will be calculated automatically in cell N9. Unbundled RECs must not be entered on Schedule 1; these products must be entered on Schedule 2. At the bottom portion of the schedule, provide the other electricity end-uses that are not retail sales including, but not limited to transmission and distribution losses or municipal street lighting. Amounts should be in megawatt-hours.

Version: April 2023
Adjusted Net
Procured (MWh)
Percent of Total
Retail Sales
Renewable Procurements 31,571 29.9% Biomass & Biowaste - 0.0%
Geothermal - 0.0%
Eligible Hydroelectric - 0.0% Solar 31,571 29.9%
Wind - 0.0%
Coal - 0.0%
Large Hydroelectric 4,641 4.4% Natural gas - 0.0%
Nuclear - 0.0%
Other - 0.0%
Unspecified Power 69,371 65.7%
Total 105,583 100.0%
105,583
620

0.0%
Total Retail Sales (MWh)
GHG Emissions Intensity (converted to lbs CO2e/MWh)
Percentage of Retail Sales Covered by Retired Unbundled RECs
2022 POWER SOURCE DISCLOSURE ANNUAL REPORT
SCHEDULE 3: POWER CONTENT LABEL DATA
For the Year Ending December 31, 2022
City of Rancho Cucamonga
(ELECTRICITY PORTFOLIO NAME)
Instructions: No data input is needed on this schedule. Retail suppliers should use these auto-populated calculations to fill out their Power Content Labels.

Version: April 2023

2022 POWER SOURCE DISCLOSURE ANNUAL REPORT

ATTESTATION FORM
For the Year Ending December 31, 2022
City of Rancho Cucamonga
(ELECTRICITY PORTFOLIO NAME)
I, Fred Lyn, Deputy Director of Engineering - Utilities, declare under penalty of perjury, that the statements contained in this report including Schedules 1 and 3 are true and correct and that I, as an authorized agent of City of Rancho Cucamonga, have authority to submit this report on the company's behalf. I further declare that the megawatt-hours claimed as specified purchases as shown in these Schedules were, to the best of my knowledge, sold once and only once to retail customers.

Name: Fr
ed Lyn
Representing (Retail Supplier): City of Rancho Cucamonga Signature:

Dated: 5/24/2023
Executed at: Rancho Cucamonga

Resolution No. 23-XXX – Page 1 of 1
ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION NO. 23-XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO

CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE ATTESTATION OF
VERACITY FOR THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL UTILITY 2022

POWER SOURCE DISCLOSURE ANNUAL REPORT AND POWER

CONTENT LABEL
WHEREAS, the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility (RCMU) is a publicly-owned utility in the state of California and is therefore subject to Senate Bill 1305, as amended by Assembly Bill 162, requiring retail suppliers of electricity to disclose sources of energy being used to the California Energy Commission (CEC) and to consumers in the form of the Power Source Disclosure Annual Report and the Annual Power Content Label; and
WHEREAS, the 2022 Power Source Disclosure Annual Report and Annual Power Content Label has been submitted to the CEC, and the Annual Power Content Label has been posted on the City’s website for customers to review; and
WHEREAS, the 2022 Power Source Disclosure Annual Report includes an attestation from an authorized agent of the City, under penalty of perjury, confirming the accuracy of the information provided.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, HEREBY

RESOLVES,
Section 1.: The City Council hereby certifies the 2022 Power Source Disclosure Program Report and Annual Power Content Label.

Section 2.: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.

Section 3.: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 19th day of September 2023.

DATE:September 19, 2023
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Elisa C. Cox, Assistant City Manager
Michael Parmer, Assistant to the City Manager
SUBJECT: Consideration to Receive and File the Summary of the Public Safety Response to 2022 Holiday Lights Display and Consideration of a Resolution Temporarily Closing Portions of Thoroughbred and Jennet Streets, West Sapphire Street and East of Turquoise Avenue, and a Portion of Turquoise Avenue Between Jennet and Thoroughbred Streets, to Pedestrian Traffic During the Area’s 2023 Holiday Light Display. (RESOLUTION NO. 2023-105) (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2023-105, temporarily closing portions of Thoroughbred and Jennet Streets, west of Sapphire Street and east of Turquoise Avenue, and a portion of Turquoise Avenue between Jennet and Thoroughbred Streets, to pedestrian traffic during the area’s Holiday Light Display for the 2023 holiday season.

BACKGROUND:

For more than 20 years, the residents of Thoroughbred and Jennet Streets have created a visual display of lights during the weeks leading up to Christmas. With the advent of social media, the light displays now attract visitors from all over Southern California. Over the last 10 years, the Holiday Lights Display, and the overwhelming crowds it attracts, created substantial public safety concerns as well as significant impacts on the quality of life for area residents who are not part of the Holiday Lights Display.

Although the City provides police and traffic support to manage the crowds and minimize impacts on adjacent neighborhoods, the City has always made it clear that it is not an official City- sponsored event. The large crowds create significant public safety and community concerns.

Multiple departments are impacted; the Police, Engineering Services, and Public Works Services Departments along with the City Manager’s Office collaborate each year to provide a high level of specialty services to mitigate these impacts and elevate the safety of the residents and visitors, which is quite costly. Plans are reviewed internally and with the community each year in an effort to adapt to the ever-growing event.

The Holiday Lights Display, and the overwhelming crowds it attracts, has created substantial public safety concerns as well as significant impacts on the quality of life for area residents who are not part of the Holiday Lights Display. Key findings from past years include:

Page 2 ends

2 0
3 3
 Thoroughbred and Jennet Streets and Turquoise Avenue are narrow, two-lane residential streets with no sidewalks and are not intended to handle substantial amounts of vehicular or pedestrian traffic.
 Traffic counts demonstrate a startling number of pedestrians and vehicles which creates a dangerous situation for pedestrians and motorists.
 Pedestrians, including children, are routinely observed traversing back and forth across the street in between vehicles. At the same time, drivers are distracted by the holiday displays.  Residents in the surrounding neighborhoods experience significant inconveniences from the large volume of visitors such as illegal parking, blocking driveways, litter and human excrement in their yards, vandalism, trespassing, noise and the extreme delays in ingress and egress into their residential neighborhoods.

In response to these critical public safety concerns, and with Rancho Cucamonga Police Department’s (“RCPD”) recommendation, the City in 2017 transitioned the Holiday Light Display into a Drive-Thru Only experience by limiting pedestrian traffic during certain peak times due to unsafe conditions that have been observed in the past.

ANALYSIS:

Since 2017, RCPD has successfully implemented the Drive-Thru Only Ordinance. The Drive-Thru Only Ordinance, which restricts pedestrian access, was implemented for the entire holiday season last year, from December 2-24 to minimize large crowds. RCPD and City staff have continued to receive positive comments regarding the Drive-Thru Only Ordinance and how it has improved conditions in the areas surrounding Thoroughbred and Jennet Streets.

In comparing vehicular traffic between the 2021 and 2022 holiday season, traffic increased 13.1% for the Holiday Light corridor; Hillside Road increased 9%, Carnelian Street increased 5%, and Sapphire Street remained unchanged (but was still 11% above 2020 levels). This is a reversal of a downward trend that was previously being experienced since the transition to Drive-Thru Only and the third consecutive year traffic increased.

During the months leading up to the holiday season, RCPD and the City’s CAN Team executed an aggressive communications strategy to educate the public for the upcoming holiday season.

Efforts include information mailings, video announcements and social media posts. Electronic message board signage was strategically placed in the area announcing the pedestrian restrictions. The City’s Holiday Lights webpage received 56,652 unique views. This was below December 2020 (77,009 unique views), but well above December 2019 (33,400 unique views).

Total social media impressions for December 2021 were 30,256.

RCPD also worked with DoIT (the City’s Department of Innovation and Technology) to again deploy the online event registration portal, allowing residents within the affected area to register their parties/get-togethers so that their guests can be allowed through the City-staffed check-in areas. During the 2023 holiday season, residents within the affected area registered 212 parties/get-togethers. This was approximately the same as last year’s 206 parties/get-togethers.

The average party size was approximately six guests.

Page 3 ends

2 0
3 3
Overall, approximately half of the people who showed up to the staffed checkpoint site on foot were turned away as they were not there to visit a resident in the restricted area or on a registered resident’s list. Additionally, there were frequent nightly stops from RCPD, often occurring at the City staffed checkpoint, to address a multitude of issues including violations from adults and children not wearing seatbelts, failure to yield or stop at designated barriers, various vehicle infractions, suspected intoxications, children running into the roadway, among others.

Additionally, there were several incidents with illegal golf carts on roadways shuttling people to houses located within the restricted area. Queues of vehicles regularly exceeded two (2) to three (3) hours or more on any given date in multiple directions.

For 2023, Staff is again recommending that residents who wish to host parties or events, may do so, but will need to register the party or gathering through the portal. Residents can identify guests in advanced using the portal and their guests will need to check-in and verify their name has been registered. For residents who do not wish to register their guests, they will still be able to hold parties or family gatherings; however, guests will need to be verified by the homeowner upon arrival at the check-point. Upon verification, guests will be permitted to enter the holiday light display area by foot. Guests will only be allowed to go directly to, and from, the house where the party is located.

The Drive-Thru Only Ordinance has proven to be an effective strategy in reducing the unsafe conditions and the negative impacts on the surrounding area residents. As visitation to the holiday lights event continues to increase, it is as important as ever to maintain established City procedure to reduce or minimize adverse interactions between pedestrians and vehicles. In light of the increased visitation, it is recommended to continue to implement the Drive Thru Ordinance and minimize days where vehicles and pedestrians can mix in an unregulated fashion. For the 2023 holiday season, it is recommended the Drive Thru Ordinance be implemented from December 4 to December 24, 2023. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution establishing Drive-Thru Only on the dates identified above for the 2023 holiday season.

FISCAL IMPACT:

RCPD incurred a total of $150,000 in personnel costs in order to staff the Holiday Light Display for the 2022 holiday season. For the 2023 holiday season, RCPD has budgeted $175,000 in personnel costs and $3,600 in operations and maintenance for a total budgeted amount of $178,600.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

The City’s response to the Holiday Light Display is consistent with the City Council’s goal of promoting a safe community.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 - Resolution No. 2023-105
1 4
0 5
5 RESOLUTION NO. 2023-105

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO

CUCAMONGA TEMPORARILY CLOSING PORTIONS OF

THOROUGHBRED AND JENNET STREETS, WEST OF SAPPHIRE

STREET AND EAST OF TURQUOISE AVENUE, AND A PORTION OF

TURQUOISE AVENUE BETWEEN JENNET AND THOROUGHBRED
STREETS, TO PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC DURING THE AREA’S HOLIDAY

LIGHT DISPLAY, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF
A. Recitals

1. The elaborate display of holiday lights and decorations by residents of Thoroughbred and Jennet Streets, west of Sapphire Street and east of Turquoise Avenue, and Turquoise Avenue between Thoroughbred and Jennet Streets, during the month of December (the “Holiday Light Display”) is an example of the community’s holiday spirit, hard work, and creativity, which has grown over the last thirty years into one of the largest holiday light displays in Southern California, drawing viewers from across the region.

2. In recent years, however, the popularity of the Holiday Light Display has led to a surge in vehicular and pedestrian traffic, particularly on and around portions of Thoroughbred and Jennet Streets, and Turquoise Avenue, resulting in a variety of negative impacts that threaten the health, safety, and welfare of members of the public.

3. At the regularly scheduled City Council meeting on September 19, 2023, the City Council received evidence concerning the negative impacts and dangerous conditions created by the Holiday Light Display prior to the adoption of this Resolution.

4. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

B. Resolution
NOW THEREFORE, the Rancho Cucamonga City Council does hereby find, determine, conclude, and resolve as follows:

1. Based on evidence presented to the City Council at the above-referenced meeting on September 19, 2023, the City Council finds as follows:
a. All facts set forth in Part A, Recitals, of this Resolution are true and correct.
b. Thoroughbred and Jennet Streets, and Turquoise Avenue are narrow, two-lane, residential streets with no sidewalks, which are not intended to handle substantial amounts of vehicular or pedestrian traffic. c. An estimated 5,000 to 10,000 vehicles travel through these streets each day during the busiest periods of the Holiday Light Display, in addition to pedestrians who park in neighboring communities and walk into the area. 2 4
0 5
5 d. Traffic during the Holiday Light Display has increased to where the average wait time to enter can reach approximately two hours, followed by an additional hour and a half to travel through the streets. On busy evenings, traffic can back up to the 210 Freeway, approximately one mile away.
e. Large trucks, hot rods, and tour buses, which are normally uncommon on Thoroughbred and Jennet Streets, and Turquoise Avenue, have been increasingly common in the area during the Holiday Lights Display, which creates additional dangers for pedestrians because they tend to take up larger portions of the road and require additional skill and attention to safely maneuver. f. The exceedingly high number of vehicles and presence of larger- than-normal vehicles in the area results in noise and air pollution to pedestrians and surrounding residents.
g. Traffic and safety problems are exacerbated by the large volume of pedestrians in the street, causing vehicles to slow, stop, or idle to avoid collisions. At any one time, as many as 5,000 pedestrians are in the roadway. h. Due to the absence of sidewalks on Thoroughbred and Jennet Streets, and Turquoise Avenue, pedestrians mainly travel in the roadway, which creates a danger both to pedestrians and those traveling in vehicles. i. Pedestrians have been routinely observed traversing back and forth across the street to view the holiday displays. At the same time, drivers are distracted by the holiday displays. With drivers and pedestrians both distracted, the potential for an accident involving a pedestrian substantially increases. j. The Holiday Light Display attracts many families with young children to the area. In some instances, children have been observed wandering unsupervised.

Children are therefore at increased risk of being hit by a vehicle while walking in the street. k. Pedestrians frequently visit the Holiday Light Display expecting to find public restrooms. As no public restrooms are located nearby, pedestrians have been identified using nearby horse trails and dark residential areas to urinate, defecate, and discard hazardous waste.
l. The Chief of Police and Fire Chief have determined that, due to increased vehicle and pedestrian traffic during the Holiday Light Display and limited street capacity, emergency personnel might not be able to safely and timely respond to potential emergencies in the surrounding community.
m. The negative impacts and dangerous conditions created by the Holiday Light Display would be mitigated if the affected portions of Thoroughbred and Jennet Streets, and Turquoise Avenue were temporarily closed to pedestrian traffic during the Holiday Light Display. In the absence of pedestrians, vehicular traffic flow would improve, and emergency vehicles would have improved access because they could pass 3 4
0 5
5 on either side of the one-way vehicular traffic. Furthermore, potential accidents involving vehicles and pedestrians would be reduced.
n. Vehicle Code Section 21101(e) authorizes the City, to act by resolution, to temporarily close a portion of any street for celebrations, parades, local special events, and other purposes when, in the opinion of the City Council, the closing is necessary for the safety and protection of persons who are to use that portion of the street during the temporary closing.
o. The Holiday Light Display, although not City sponsored, constitutes a local special event for the purposes of Vehicle Code Section 21101(e).

2. Based on the facts set forth in the preceding Section 1 of this Resolution and all available information, the City Council hereby finds that the temporary closure of portions of Thoroughbred and Jennet Streets, and Turquoise Avenue to pedestrian traffic, except for residents of the homes within the affected area and their guests, during the Holiday Light Display is necessary for the safety and protection of persons who are to use the streets during the Holiday Light Display.

3. Based on the finding made in the preceding Section 2 of this Resolution and pursuant to California Vehicle Code Section 21101(e), the City Council hereby closes those portions of Thoroughbred and Jennet Streets west of Sapphire Street and east of Turquoise Avenue and Turquoise Avenue between Jennet and Thoroughbred Streets (as identified on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference) to all pedestrian traffic except for residents of the homes on the affected streets and their guests from 5:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. from December 4 to December 24, 2023.

4. The Chief of Police, in consultation with the City Engineer or designee, shall erect, or cause to be erected and maintained, sufficient temporary signs, barriers, and other temporary traffic control devices, to preclude pedestrians from traversing those portions of Thoroughbred and Jennet Streets as shown on Exhibit A, except to residents, during the closure period.

5. The Chief of Police, City Engineer, and City Manager may adjust closure days and hours based on traffic, weather, COVID-19, or other conditions which impact public safety.

6. The City Manager is further authorized to establish procedures to verify exceptions for residents of the homes on the affected streets and their guests from 5:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. from December 4 to December 24, 2023.

7. This resolution is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(c), existing facilities.

Thoroughbred and Jennet streets and Turquoise Avenue are existing streets and the proposed temporary closure of those streets during the Holiday Light Display constitutes a minor change in their operation. The temporary street closure will only affect a portion of Thoroughbred and Jennet streets between Sapphire Street and Turquoise Avenue and Turquoise Avenue between Jennet and Thoroughbred streets during a select number of 4 4
0 5
5 days and for a limited period of time between 5:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. Residents of the affected portions of the streets will continue to have access to their homes at all times and the streets will continue to be accessible by car. Due to the significant vehicular and pedestrian traffic impacts during the Holiday Light Display, the temporary closure is anticipated to reduce an existing significant traffic and safety impact in a portion of the City.

8. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this ____ day of __________ 2023.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:
_______________________________
L. Dennis Michael
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Janice C. Reynolds
City Clerk
I, Janice C. Reynolds, City Clerk, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a Regular Meeting of said Council held on September 19, 2023.

Executed this day September 19, 2023 at Rancho Cucamonga, California. _______________________________
Janice C. Reynolds
City Clerk
5 4
0 5
5 DATE:September 19, 2023
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Wess Garcia, Acting Library Director
SUBJECT: Consideration to Accept and Allocate Grant Revenue in the Amount of $2,500 Awarded by the California State Library for Zip Books Services. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council approve and allocate $2,500 awarded by the California State Library to directly support Zip Books Services through the purchase of additional materials.

BACKGROUND:

Zip Books Services supports multiple goals of the Library Services Department including providing cardholders with unique and popular titles in a timely manner, increasing opportunities for patron- driven acquisitions and meeting the community's demand for diverse and inclusive collections.

ANALYSIS:

Approval of these grant funds will help pay for the acquisition of additional library collection materials and cover the related direct-to-patron shipping expenses.

FISCAL IMPACT:

This grant provides additional funds from the California State Library to supplement the Library's materials budget and will be added as additional revenue to the FY 2023-2024 Budget. This grant does not require any additional City matching funding. Funds from this grant will be placed into Library revenue account 1291000-4740 and appropriated into Library expenditure accounts in the following manner:
1291602-5200/0-3787 Operations & Maintenance $2,500
1291602-5300/0-3787 Contract Services $150
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

Providing superior Library Services to Rancho Cucamonga residents contributes to a high quality of life for all.

ATTACHMENTS:

None.

DATE:September 19, 2023
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer SUBJECT: Consideration to Authorize an Expenditure for Professional Land Survey Services by Towill Pursuant to Professional Services Agreement No.

CO19-144 for the Preparation of Tentative and Final Subdivision Maps for Central Park in the Amount of $117,765 Plus a 10% Contingency; the Director of Engineering Services to Amend the Agreement to Increase the Annual Compensation for Fiscal Year 2023/24 to $280,000; and an Appropriation in the amount of $130,000 from the Park Development Fund (Fund 120). (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council:
1) Authorize the expenditure for Professional Land Survey Services to be provided by Towill pursuant to Professional Services Agreement NO. CO19-144 for the preparation of tentative and final subdivision maps for Central Park in the amount of $117,765; 2) Authorize the Director of Engineering Services to approve the expenditure of a 10% contingency in an amount not to exceed $11,780;
3) Authorize the Director of Engineering Services to amend CO19-144 to increase the annual compensation for Fiscal Year 2023/24 to $280,000; and
4) Authorize the appropriation of funds in the amount of $130,000 from the Park Development Fund (Fund 120) to Account No. 1120301-5300 (Contract Services).

BACKGROUND:

Located on the northwest corner of Base Line Road and Milliken Avenue, Central Park site has been envisioned by the community and intended by the City Council to become a multi- dimensional park providing a broad range of active and passive recreational amenities for over 30 years. The easterly portion of the park (approximately 30 acres) is currently developed with the joint Community Center and Senior Center along with Freedom Courtyard, picnic shelters, a playground, walking trails and open grass areas. The parking areas contain solar canopies and EV chargers. This portion of the park was developed in the late 1990’s and early 2000’s using a combination of local and State funds. It receives significant use by the community.

In order to finalize the vision for the remaining park space, the City Council began the process of

Page 2 ends

2 0
3 5
updating the Central Park Master Plan (Master Plan) in 2017 through an extensive community engagement process. After numerous community meetings, online engagement and an interactive process with residents, the updated master plan was adopted in 2020. The Master Plan identified smaller, buildable sections ranging in size from 3 to 10 acres, which were more fiscally feasible for grant funding and the use of local resources, to develop on a consistent timetable. The first of those amenities, the Central Park Dog Park is currently finishing construction on a 4.4-acre site at the west end of the park. This project, which was partially funded by the State, includes multiple dog play areas for dogs of all sizes, shaded rest areas, canine agility equipment, walking paths, a parking area and a new signalized entrance to the west side of the park.

The Central Park site currently consists of 10 individual lots totaling slightly more than 100 acres.

Since these lots were originally subdivided to accommodate the sale of the land they are generally rectangular and do not align with the planning areas outlined in the master plan. The planning areas include both active and passive recreational elements, an amphitheater, a viticulture heritage section, water play/swim area, walking trails and parking areas along with a new loop road for vehicular circulation internally from east to west. Some of the planning areas were designed to be developed as possible public-private partnerships with organizations or entities that have prior expertise in one or more of the various recreational or cultural amenities that were designed into the Master Plan. These public-private partnerships require the ability to clearly define the boundaries of amenity sites for possible leasing purposes that further the completion as designed of the Master Plan. To this end, staff obtained a proposal from Towill, a professional surveying firm currently under contract with the City for on-call survey services to prepare necessary maps and related documents to re-subdivide the park site to better align with the master plan’s planning areas.

ANALYSIS:

The proposal received from Towill includes the boundary establishment, professional survey, and map preparation services needed to provide tentative and final parcel maps for the site. Staff will utilize these maps along with the Master Plan to process the subdivision for consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council as outlined in the City’s subdivision ordinance. It is anticipated that the re-subdivision will result in approximately 10 lots of varying size that will more closely align with the master plan and group similar planning areas together allowing the City to plan, fund and develop future phases of the park and pursue high quality public-private partnerships that implement the various recreational and cultural amenities designed into the Master Plan by the community. Work outlined in Towill’s proposal will begin immediately and staff anticipates finalizing the re-subdivision in the second quarter of 2024.

While these professional services are authorized under the on-call agreement with Towill, as with all of the City’s on-call agreements for professional services, CO19-144 includes a term (Section

3.1) authorizing the maximum anticipated expenditures for each fiscal year in the amount of $150,000. In order to avoid nearly depleting the annual authorization for this year, an amendment to increase the amount authorized for Fiscal Year 2023/24 from $150,000 to $280,000 to include this larger expenditure will be required.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The total anticipated cost for this expenditure, including a 10% contingency to cover any additional service needs that may arise during the project, is $129,545. Expenditures for this project have not been included in the Fiscal Year 2023/24 Budget, therefore an appropriation in the amount of $130,000 from the Park Development Fund (Fund 120) to Account No. 1120303-5300 (Contract Services) is required to fund these services.

Page 3 ends

2 0
3 5
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

This item furthers the City Council’s vision to create an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant city, rich in opportunity for all to thrive by intentionally embracing and anticipating our future so that we might provide and nurture a high quality of life for all in our community.

ATTACHMENTS:

None
DATE:September 19, 2023
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
President and Members of the Boards of Directors
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Matt Burris, Acting Public Works Services Director Lindsay McElwain, Management Analyst I
SUBJECT: Presentation on the Fleet Utilization Study and Electric Vehicle (EV) Conversion Plan for the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. (CITY/FIRE)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council and Fire Board of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District receive a presentation from Lindsay McElwain of the Public Works Services Department (PWSD) on the University of Southern California Master of Public Administration Online Program Graduate Student Capstone Project presented to the City and RCFPD on fleet utilization and EV conversion.

BACKGROUND:

Earlier this year, PWSD staff met with the Sustainability team to start planning for the EV conversion of the City’s fleet to achieve Climate Action Plan (CAP) targets. Recognizing the significance of comprehensive planning, the team decided a Fleet Utilization Study was necessary first, to lay the foundation for right sizing the fleet and identifying vehicles for EV conversion.

During this discussion, the idea of partnering with graduate students from the University of Southern California (USC) MPAOL for a capstone project was proposed, underscoring the intent to harness fresh perspectives and scholarly insights to address this critical challenge.

The collaborative initiative between PWSD and USC's Master of Public Administration Online Program (MPAOL) students began on May 10, 2023, with the goal to identify the practical needs of the City and RCFPD’s non-suppression vehicle fleet while abiding by state mandates for EV procurement and conversion and achieving City CAP goals for greenhouse gas reduction. The resulting capstone project reflects the students' dedication to robust research and tangible outcomes within an expedited timeframe. The project culminated on August 10, 2023, when the students presented their findings to City and RCFPD staff and provided their comprehensive report spanning 153 pages with recommendations for fleet management best practices and EV conversion for long-term sustainability.

ANALYSIS:

Driven by state mandates and a commitment to realizing the Climate Action Plan goals set by the City Council, PWSD and RCFPD have already made significant progress toward achieving EV conversion. The FY2023/2024 Budget included the acquisition of nine (9) EVs to replace aging internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles in the City’s Fleet, as well as the procurement of three

Page 2 ends

2 0
2 9
(3) EV trucks in RCFPD’s non-suppression vehicle fleet.

The USC MPAOL student project’s data-driven analysis is crucial for long-term informed vehicle replacement planning. By evaluating factors like vehicle age, maintenance cost, and mission criticality, PWSD aims to right-size the City’s fleet and prepare for future EV conversion implementation.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact associated with this presentation to the City Council. There was no cost for partnering with USC MPAOL students. Funding for fleet conversion will be requested as part of the annual budget process and regular vehicle replacement plans.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:

This item addresses the City Council’s core values of embracing and anticipating our future, working together cooperatively and respectfully with each other staff, and all stakeholders, and relentless pursuit of improvement.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 – Driving Toward a Sustainable Future PPT Presentation Slides Attachment 2 – Driving Towards a Sustainable Future - Final Report Prepared for the City of Rancho Cucamonga & Rancho Cucamonga Fire District
Driving Toward a
Sustainable Future
Presented By
Lindsay McElwain
A Presentation on the Report Prepared for the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District in Partnership with the University of Southern California (USC) Master of Public Administration Online Program Capstone Students
Roadmap to now...

Early February 2023
PW Director
mentions need for
Fleet Utilization
Study. Propose USC
Capstone Team to
complete
March 2023
Email USC Program
Coordinator.

Confirm Capstone
Project for Summer
Semester students.

May 10, 2023
Semester Begin
May 31, 2023
Initial Student/Client
Meeting with PW
and RCFPD staff
July 1, 2023
Receive student
Prospectus with
research questions
and project
direction.

August 1, 2023
Student team submits
research report to
Staff with Fleet
Utilization data
analysis, vehicles
identified for EV
conversion, and
recommendations for
long-term fleet
sustainability.

August 10, 2023
MPA Student
Presentation of
Findings to Staff
Fleet Utilization
Fire
City
Each vehicle was evaluated by:
• Utilization using annual mileage
• Retirement eligibility (age,
mileage)
• Cost efficiency
• Fuel efficiency
• Mission Criticality*
24 of 171 City Fleet vehicles
were identified as eligible for
or nearing eligibility for
retirement based on this data.
65 City Fleet vehicles were
identified as eligible for
electrification at an estimated
cost of $400,000 annually
over 10 years.

City
Fleet Utilization
Fire
Fleet Utilization
1 of 24 non-suppression
vehicles was identified as
high-cost and high-fuel
consumption.
20 Fire District vehicles were
identified eligible for
electrification at an estimated
cost of $157,000 annually
over 7 years.

CHALLENGES
• Ongoing Supply Chain
issues
• Unavailability of Heavy-
Duty EVs
• Range insufficiency
anxiety
• Insufficient
infrastructure
• Staff buy-in

INFRASTRUCTURE
• Early infrastructure
planning
• Insufficient
infrastructure
• Redundancy
• Local Utility Partnership

PROCUREMENT
• Cooperative purchasing
• Sourcewell
• Public-Private
Partnerships
• Types of Vehicles
• Total Cost of Ownership
• Leasing
• EV-First Policies

FUNDING
• Grants
• Tax Credits
• Incentives/Rebates
• Funding Guidelines
• Resources (Clean
Cities & Funding
Finder)
Best practice research uncovers cost-effective and sustainable methods to ensure that EV conversion is aligned with tactics and policies utilized by other public organizations.

Best Practice Research

RECOMMENDATION WHENWHY
Update the Fleet
Management
System
Telematics systems help
manage fleets and track
relevant vehicle data.

FY 2024/2025
Manufacturing delays,
high demand for EV
procurement in CA
Immediately
Use Alternative
Procurement
Methods when
appropriate
Recommendations were generated from data
collection, research, findings, and analysis and were
intended to guide decision-making when considering
options to overcome EV conversion challenges.

Recommendations
Prioritizing
Charging
Infrastructure
Answers “chicken or the
egg” question (”chargers
or vehicles”)
Long-term

RECOMMENDATION WHENWHY
Update the Fleet
Management
System
Telematics systems help
manage fleets and track
relevant vehicle data.

FY 2024/2025
Enhanced efficiency
Improved data accuracy
Future compatiblity
Add a few details describing the
related activitiesManufacturing delays,
high demand for EV
procurement in CA
Immediately
Use Alternative
Procurement
Methods when
appropriate

RECOMMENDATION WHENWHY
Benefits to RC
1 2
4 5
3ACHIEVE CAP GOALS
Reduce GHG emissions
and convert fleet on CAP
goal timeline

COST-SAVINGS
Opportunities to optimize
fleet utilization and
improve procurement
practices

EFFICIENCY

IMPROVEMENTS
Better fleet management
and improved services

IMPROVED PUBLIC HEALTH
Reduced air pollution
leads to better respiratory
health for residents

STATE COMPLIANCE
City actions align with State
mandates, maintaining
positive relationships and
City reputation
Next Steps

VEHICLE

REPLACEMENTS

PROCUREMENT

METHODS

CHARGING

INFRASTRUCTURE
Strategically identify
vehicles to downsize,
create specific vehicle
replacement timeline,
and incorporate into
future FY budget
requests
Continue to identify
vehicle vendors with
cooperative purchase
agreements and identify
vehicles for single-source
procurement with
justification
Continue exploring
funding opportunities
through SCE while
concurrently budget for
internal construction for
accelerated deployment
of charging stations
Thank you
1 2
Table of Contents
Table of Contents 2
List of Acronyms 5
Executive Summary 5
Issue Statement with Organizational Context 7
Purpose and Methodology 11
Chart: Internal Document Inventory 12
Chart: Assumptions 14
Findings and Analysis: 15
Survey Research 15
Introduction 15
Figure 1: Types of Vehicles 15
Table 1. Frequency of Fueling Based on Vehicle Type 16
Figure 3: Vehicle Driving Limit 17
Vehicle Charging Frequency 19
Table 2. Frequencies of charging and vehicle counts 19
Passengers Transported Per Trip 20
Figure 4: Passenger Count Per Vehicle 20
Semi-Structured Interviews 21
Introduction 21
Interview Codebook 22
Results 22
Figure 5: Interview Codebook Themes 24
Literature Review 24
Procurement 25
Fleet Conversion 26
Funding 27
Implementation Challenges 27
Fleet Utilization Study for RC’s Fleet 28
Table 3. RC Fleet Profile at a Glance 28
Figure 6: Types of Vehicles in RC Fleet 29
Figure 7: RC Vehicle Age Distribution 29
Table 4. RC Data 30
Table 5. Data Categories 32
Table 7. Utilization 33
Table 8. Retirement Eligibility 33
Table 7. Calculations Maintenance/Repair Costs Per Mile 33 Table 9. Calculations Fuel Costs Per Mile 34
Table 10. Calculations Costs Per Mile 34
Figure 8: Comparison of Costs Per Mile 35
3 Figure 9: Cost Per Mile Comparisons Without Outliers 36 Figure 10: Comparison Groups Excluding Outliers 36
Table 11. Cost Efficiency 37
Table 12. Calculations Annual Fuel Consumption 37
Table 13. Fuel Efficiency 38
Results: Fleet Utilization Study for RC’s Fleet 39
Table 14. Retirement Eligible 39
Table 13. Nearing Retirement 39
Table 14. Low Utilization 40
Table 15. High-Cost Vehicles 41
Table 16. High Fuel Consumption Vehicles 42
Table 17. Vehicles Meeting Several Criteria for Early Electrification 44 Figure 11. Screenshot Image: Initial Data Inputs 45
Figure 12. Screenshot Image: Available State Incentives Applied 46 Figure 13. Screenshot Image: VINs Dropped 46
Table 18. Fuel prices 47
Figure 14. Screenshot Image: Charging Mix Setting Selection Screen 47 Table 19. NPV Calculations 48
Figure 16. DRVE Report Chart #2 50
Table 20. CPM 50
Table 21. Vehicle Class Passenger Vehicles (Light-Duty) 51 Table 22. Candidates for Early Electrification and Likelihood of Cost Savings 52 Discussion: Fleet Utilization Study for Fire’s Fleet 54 Table 23. Fire Fleet Profile at a Glance. 54
Figure 17: Fire Department Vehicle Age Distribution 55
Table 24. Fire Fleet Data 55
Table 25. Data Categories 57
Table 26. Calculations Annual Mileage 57
Table 27. Utilization 58
Table 27. Calculations Maintenance/Repair Costs Per Mile 58 Table 28. Calculations Fuel Costs Per Mile 58
Table 29. Calculations Costs Per Mile 59
Figure 18: Costs Per Mile Comparisons 59
Table 30. Calculations Annual Fuel Consumption 60
Table 31. Calculations Fuel Consumption Per Mile 60
Figure 19: Fuel Consumption Comparison 60
Results: Fleet Utilization Study for Fire’s Fleet 61
Table 32. Fuel Prices 62
Figure 20: Charging Strategy 63
Table 33: NPV Calculations 63
Figure 21. DRVE Report Fire Chart #1 65
4 Figure 22. DRVE Report Fire Chart #2 65
Table 34. Cost Per Mile 65
Table 35. ICE Replacement Options 66
Table 36. Candidates for Early Electrification and Likelihood of Cost Savings 67 Conclusions and Recommendations 70
RQ 1: Recommendations for an ideal EV fleet size and composition 70 Figure 23: CAM Analysis for Fleet Management Systems 72 RQ 2: Recommendations for transitioning to an EV fleet 73 Cooperative Procurement: 73
Purchasing EVs at Retail MSRP: 73
Purchasing Used EVs: 74
Purchasing EVs Out-of-State: 74
Vehicle Leasing: 74
Figure 24: EV Procurement Recommendations 75
RQ 3: Recommendations for implementing the electrification plan 76 Future Research 77
References 80
Appendices 91
Appendix A: Interview Contact List 91
Appendix B: Interview Protocol 92
Appendix C: Fleet Utilization Survey 94
Appendix D: Research Design Matrix 99
Appendix E: Sourcewell Contracts for Telematics Systems and Charging Infrastructure 102 Appendix F: Vehicle Utilization 106
Appendix G: Cost Efficiency 113
Appendix H: Fuel Efficiency 120
Appendix I: Interview Codebook 127
Appendix J: Funding Sources 139
Appendix K: Codebook for Literature Review 139

5 List of Acronyms

Battery Electric Vehicle BEV
California Air Resources Board CARB
Compressed Natural Gas CNG
Criteria Alternatives Matrix CAM
City of Rancho Cucamonga RC
Climate Action Plan CAP
Electric Vehicle EV
Electrification Coalition EC
Greenhouse Gas GHG
Government Services Administration GSA
Hybrid Electric Vehicle HEV
Internal Combustion Engine ICE
Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle PHEV
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District RCFPD
Research Question RQ
Request for Proposal RFP
Sport Utility Vehicle SUV
Southern California Edison SCE
Total Costs of Ownership TCO
Zero-emission Electric Vehicle ZEV

Executive Summary

In recent years, several cities across the U.S. have begun transitioning their gasoline vehicle fleets to electric vehicles (EVs) and other alternative fuels. The motivation behind the shift is multifaceted. However, the primary goals are to address environmental concerns and lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that account for rising temperatures, climate change, and altered weather patterns (EPA, 2023; U.N., n.d.). Located in San Bernardino County, California, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will implement a vehicle fleet conversion plan that addresses similar goals. In 2021, the city developed a Climate Action Plan (CAP) guided by California state regulations and emission reduction objectives. Adopting a zero-emission EV fleet is instrumental in addressing on-road transportation emissions, which account for 51% of total GHG emissions (City of Rancho Cucamonga, 2021). The CAP outlines that Rancho Cucamonga aims to electrify 100% of its fleet by 2040. The city must also meet California Air Resource Board (CARB) regulations required for all local governments throughout the state.

Current CARB requirements assert that beginning January 2024, 50% of all vehicles purchased 6 by municipalities must be zero-emission electric vehicles (ZEVs), and 100% of purchases starting January 2027 (CARB, 2023).

The project objectives are to find Rancho Cucamonga's most appropriate and efficient fleet size, develop a plan to successfully navigate the EV marketplace to solely replace the needed vehicles, and identify best practices for vehicle procurement. Unfortunately, several concerns have emerged. Rancho Cucamonga faces many challenges, including rescinded orders due to limited EV inventories and supply chain shortages (Irfan, 2023). Furthermore, the clients disclosed their financial limitations that require new funding sources to alleviate the financial burden of mass fleet replacement. This project will help the city overcome these obstacles to meet its CAP goals, comply with state regulations, and ensure its community members continue receiving essential services and resources.

The following research questions guide the overall direction of this project:

RQ 1. What is an ideal fleet size and composition of EVs that would meet the needs of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, given the fiscal and temporal constraints faced by the municipality?

RQ 2. What are the best practices for transitioning to an EV fleet that would meet the needs of the City of Rancho Cucamonga?

RQ 3. What is the most effective way to implement the electrification plan?

Our research methods that answer these questions incorporate diverse methodologies, including open-source research, best practice research, document/report reviews, survey research, and semi-structured interviews. Having a varied set of research methods is imperative for identifying themes, triangulating data, minimizing potential limitations, and increasing the reliability of results.

Our report findings offer much insight and perspective to the City of Rancho Cucamonga because they contribute to potential solutions specific to the city and its fleet electrification process. For example, the fleet utilization study identified 24 retirement-eligible vehicles on the city's feet. The survey research highlighted fleet utilization details and revealed that city employees prefer gasoline vehicles over EVs. Finally, the semi-structured interview codebook identified eight comprehensive themes, many identical or similar to the best practice research in the literature review.

Our team's recommendations are structured to address each original research question.

The goal of each recommendation is to guide the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Fire Protection District in their decision-making to promote a successful EV conversion plan.

The recommendations are as follows:

The current fleet management system and vehicle data tracking must be updated and more efficient. Rancho Cucamonga and the RCFPD must implement a new fleet management system with telematics software. Doing so will help track essential data, guide EV replacement strategies, right-size both vehicle fleets, improve cost savings, and promote organizational 7 efficiency. RC has several options, including Agile Fleet, Samsara Networks, Verizon Connect, and AUTOsist.

Procuring EVs is an identified challenge. To overcome this obstacle, our team recommends five alternative procurement methods: Engaging in cooperative procurement, purchasing EVs at retail MSRP, purchasing used EVs, purchasing out-of-state, and leasing vehicles.

Developing the necessary charging infrastructure is essential and should be prioritized.

Partnering with utility providers like Southern California Edison can help build and fund the infrastructure that the fleets need. RC can also partner with ChargePoint or EVgo to install charging stations and other equipment.

A successful EV implementation plan demands a phased conversion strategy because mass conversion is time-consuming. Updated fleet software can identify the oldest and costliest vehicles to replace. More importantly, a realistic conversion plan is more reliable and less likely to receive pushback from city officials.

Finally, a city-wide EV conversion plan is often a controversial change. The survey results show that many employees were hesitant about the direction of the city’s EV fleet plans.

Slowly incorporating more EV education and
increasing organizational exposure to EVs can help maximize employee buy-in.

Issue Statement with Organizational Context

Climate change is an urgent issue that requires immediate attention (Perry, 2015).

Vehicles in California contribute about 27% of the state's total air pollution. They are the state's primary source of greenhouse gas emissions, causing health problems, including cancer and asthma, and contributing to climate change (Ma et al., 2012). According to Ewing et al. (2005), vehicles emit around 23 pounds of carbon dioxide and other global-warming gasses for every gallon of gas. Ewing et al. (2005) state that some of that comes from the production and delivery process of fuel, but the great bulk of it comes directly out of the car's tailpipes (p. 73).

California has set climate goals and enacted laws requiring local authorities to address climate vulnerabilities and adopt policies to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. The rulemaking includes the approval by the state's Air Resource Board that 100% of new light-and medium- duty vehicles sold in California be zero-emission vehicles by 2035 (Mazmanian et al., 2020).

The board said California adopted this standard because electric cars and trucks use electricity instead of fuel, producing fewer emissions than their gas-powered counterparts. The electricity comes from renewable energy sources, which means electric cars produce zero emissions to drive.

This zero-emissions vehicle standard has caused city leaders in Rancho Cucamonga to exert effort to adopt policies to transition their vehicle fleet to electric. The City of Rancho Cucamonga is currently devising a comprehensive plan to achieve the complete electrification of its fleet, demonstrating a deliberate approach towards this objective.

The City of Rancho Cucamonga is in San Bernardino County, California, and lies about 40 miles from Los Angeles. Rancho Cucamonga is California's 28th most populous city, with a 8 population of nearly 177,000 as of 2020 (Medina, 2020). The city is progressive and has bold strategies to achieve deep emissions reductions and sustainability goals. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has formulated an Electric Vehicle Readiness Plan to increase the adoption of electric vehicles in the city (Gillison et al., 2021). The plan outlines a strategy to establish a comprehensive EV charging network that can meet the current and future needs of the community (Gillison et al., 2021). This plan aims to provide a clear roadmap for the city to achieve its goals of promoting sustainable transportation and reducing carbon emissions (Gillison et al., 2021).

This report addresses several key issues that RC identified as part of its efforts to transition to an all-electric fleet. These issues include the procurement of electric vehicles, the need for new infrastructure to support these vehicles, and the cost considerations associated with this transition. Supply chain delays impact the EV project. Global supply chain disruptions and significant initial expenses impede acquiring EVs for municipalities. Disruptions and shortages characterize the current state of the global supply chain, which have had an impact on the availability of these vehicles for procurement; including the semiconductor industry that is currently facing challenges such as shortages, which have led to limited inventory and extended lead times (Doherty, 2023; Helper & Soltas, 2021; Paoli & Gul, 2022). Raw material supply constraints and production delays have also contributed to these issues. Therefore, procuring the desired number of EVs within the required time poses challenges for municipalities.

Rancho Cucamonga and the fire district expressed the need for support in their fleet procurement procedures due to the inefficiencies resulting in delays in acquiring new vehicles and enhancing their existing fleet. The primary concern is the inefficiency of these methods; therefore, to effectively address this issue, we explored the best practices for fleet procurement (Nina et al., 2020). Implementing best practices through research would allow the city to improve its fleet management, reduce expenses, and make strides toward achieving its sustainability goals. In addition, it is essential to understand how fleet management works in organizations to figure out what they might do to help build a sustainable transportation system (Boutueil, 2016). This understanding is a vital part of coming up with helpful policy suggestions.

Rancho Cucamonga said the city's procurement process is slow and can be complicated.

The city follows a complex series of steps as part of an approved competitive bidding process, which can delay project implementation. For example, vendors have canceled orders for electric vehicles successfully procured through the bureaucratic process. After that, the city had to initiate a new procurement process by soliciting fresh bids and recommencing the evaluation process. The city's procurement process's challenges impede their ability to achieve conversion targets. Korosec (2003) argues that when governments are facing multiple challenges, everything from supply chain disruptions to economic uncertainties, it is critical that leaders reassess their procurement operations to ensure they are agile enough to manage change and meet their competitive objectives.

Fleet procurement may be more efficient and cost-effective by utilizing the following methods: performance-based contracts, competitive bidding, and leasing alternatives to highlight the need for transparent processes, performance-based contracts, and cost- effectiveness in the purchase of fleets of vehicles (Plotnick & Peirce, 2021; Rodrigues, 2017; Rudolph & Werland, 2019; Torcellini, 2019). The current procurement methods and the absence of incentives or grants to reduce purchase costs are obstacles to the efficient acquisition of new vehicles and retrofitting of existing ones (Hirst & Brown, 1990; Nina et al., 2020; Sarkar 9 & Singh, 2010; Stasko & Gao, 2012; Swisher, 1996). A phased replacement strategy is necessary and complicates the process (Stasko & Gao, 2012). This results in suboptimal fleet management and limited progress toward achieving sustainability goals. Schrettle et al. (2014) argue that the emergence of sustainability as a critical issue has far-reaching consequences for an organization's strategic decision-making process. This is because addressing sustainability requires a fundamental reevaluation of existing management practices. Managers should assess their organization's present market situation, competencies, and potential future changes to create a successful strategy (Schrettle et al., 2014). In addition, fleet managers ought to consider alternative procurement methods.

Municipalities face similar obstacles when transitioning their fleets to electric power, including financial limitations. The high initial expenses associated with acquiring EVs can discourage the adoption of electrification, as local governments may need more financial resources to make such purchases or may be able to redirect funds without compromising other essential service areas (Boulanger et al., 2011). For example, the higher purchase price of electric vehicles in comparison to conventional vehicles poses a challenge for municipalities looking to invest in large-scale fleet electrification, as it requires significant financial resources (Boulanger et al., 2011; Sugihara & Hardman, 2022). In addition, municipalities face challenges securing the required capital due to budgetary limitations or a shortage of accessible grants and incentives (Boulanger et al., 2011; Pardo-Bosch et al., 2021). As a result, the need for appropriate funding sources specifically designed to support sustainable transportation initiatives may pose a challenge to adopting electric fleets.

Allocating funds toward EV purchases can also be complicated by the need to balance competing priorities. For instance, when making decisions about resource allocation, local governments need to weigh the benefits of investing in sustainable transportation against other essential areas such as public safety, education, and infrastructure (Haddadian et al., 2015).

Overall, the limited availability of funds and the presence of multiple demands can pose a challenge in determining the priority of investments in electric fleets.

Carpenter (2021) conducted a study investigating the relationship between local government capacity and compliance with a specific mandate from the State of Washington to adopt electronic vehicles in municipal fleets. The study aimed to determine the extent to which local government capacity can account for the observed differences in compliance levels among local governments (Carpenter, 2021). The research suggests that fiscal capacity is the most significant factor in the association while acknowledging that other factors, such as planning for electric vehicle adoption, also play a role (Carpenter, 2021).

The need for charging infrastructure can pose various challenges for local governments that seek to transition their fleets to electric vehicles. According to Doherty (2023), the scarcity of charging stations can cause range anxiety among drivers who may worry about running out of battery power while carrying out their daily activities. Also, recharging fleet vehicles for extended periods may decrease productivity and harm service delivery (Doherty, 2023; Mastoi et al., 2022). These concerns can negatively impact the trust and belief in electric vehicles, which could discourage fleet managers from adopting them.

Converting specific vehicles in a municipal fleet to electric power may also pose challenges due to specific operational requirements and limitations, including specific requirements based on their intended use, like vehicles that cannot be taken out of service during the day to recharge (Electric Vehicles for Fleets, 2022). Some vehicles in a municipal fleet, like emergency response vehicles, utility trucks, or specialized equipment, have distinct 10 operational requirements that increase the complexity of converting them to electric power (Electric Vehicles for (Fleets, 2022; Pierce et al., 2023). The operational requirements of these vehicles necessitate uninterrupted usage, making it impractical to take them out of service for extended periods to recharge (Pierce et al., 2023). Early-generation electric vehicles face challenges in maintaining operational readiness due to their limited range and extended charging time (Electric Vehicles for Fleets, 2022). The weight and size of batteries required to operate larger vehicles can impact their payload capacity and overall performance (Electric Vehicles for (Fleets, 2022; Pierce et al., 2023). This may restrict their suitability for specific tasks.

Municipalities can address the limitations of electric vehicles through various means such as hybridization, plug-in hybrids, fast charging infrastructure, battery swap solutions, and V2G technology (Andwari at al., 2017; Thakre et al., 2020; Yong et al., 2015). The evaluation of operational requirements for these vehicles is of utmost importance. It is necessary to consider alternative solutions that can balance operational readiness and the advantages of electrification. Implementing alternative strategies allows organizations to proactively secure vehicles or collaborate with other fleet managers to consolidate demand, enhancing their combined procurement capabilities.

Our study aims to right-size the client's fleet to meet operational requirements, conversion goals, and state regulatory requirements. The proposal makes suggestions for EVs to replace the client's current fleet. Efficiently and sustainably achieving the client's goals requires addressing procurement and budgetary challenges. This includes exploring potential tax incentives and grants available to municipalities to lower upfront costs. The proposed conversion plan will help the client overcome implementation challenges and promote a more environmentally friendly and financially efficient fleet management strategy.

Purpose and Methodology

We gathered information through best practices research, open source research, document reviews, semi-structured interviews, and a fleet utilization survey. We evaluated all the information to conclude patterns and themes, which informed recommendations for the proper sizing and electrification of RC's vehicle fleet.

Data sources included academic and industry journals, websites, blogs, and presentations. Our research's primary focus areas were best practices for procurement and fleet electrification and management. We aimed to answer the following research questions: "What are the best practices for transitioning to an EV fleet that would meet the needs of the City of RC?" and "What is the most effective way to implement the electrification plan?" Other cities with electrified fleets have tested and evaluated approaches to fleet conversion; their documented efforts have inspired a body of research and practice (Myers et al., 2004). Ideas and solutions can be drawn from this body of knowledge to shape RC's strategic framework for electrification (Myers et al., 2004).

The research was coded in Zotero, a reference management software. Codes are statements that summarize findings and their significance (Day, 2021; DeCuir-Gunby et al., 2011; Ehrhardt, 2020; Turner, 2023; Stake, 2003). In Zotero, we coded each research entry based on the contents of the research. Codes were compared and grouped based on their 11 similarities. These groupings were analyzed to identify themes emerging in the research (Day, 2021; DeCuir-Gunby et al., 2011; Ehrhardt, 2020; Turner, 2023; Stake, 2003). For example, themes included specific approaches to procurement, such as "cooperative procurement" employed by local governments to overcome global supply chain disruptions stalling their electrification efforts (Climate et al., 2018; Walker, 2020). In other words, themes represent best practices related to the electrification of municipal fleets. A codebook was created that includes codes and code definitions used for our qualitative research (Day, 2021; DeCuir-Gunby et al., 2011; Ehrhardt, 2020; Turner, 2023; Stake, 2003). Using a constant comparison method, we continuously categorized data, refined categories, and integrated categories to determine broader emerging themes, i.e., evidence-based electrification practices (Boeije, 2002; Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Turner, 2023; Oktay, 2012).

RC staff, subject matter experts, and key city officials with cities that have electrified their fleets were interviewed using questions reviewed and approved by faculty at the University of Southern California (USC). See Appendix A: Interview Contact List. The team created an interview protocol (Appendix B: Interview Protocol) and rehearsed delivering interview questions to enhance the consistency of our study. Interviews were recorded for later review when permitted by the interviewees. Responses were recorded in an interview record form and later coded; codes, descriptions, and themes were incorporated into the codebook.

Interview subjects were identified through open-source research and by other interviewees.

Our research focused on best practices; we identified successful strategies, methods, or approaches employed by cities to electrify their fleets (Bardach, 1994; Myers et al., 2004). We explored other municipalities' approaches to fleet conversion, such as the cases of San Francisco, South Pasadena, Riverside, Long Beach, and Los Angeles. While the research provided invaluable insights, limitations were associated with the data collected through various sources. Some of the critical limitations included: subjectivity and bias, contextual differences, limited sample size, and a lack of comprehensive data, i.e., limited in scope, timeframe, or depth (Bardach, 1994; Myers et al., 2004).

To mitigate these limitations, we critically evaluated the sources of best practices. To this end, government documents, reliable news sources, and peer-reviewed articles were the primary sources of information (Bardach, 1994; Myers et al., 2004). Additionally, we created an interview protocol, rehearsed interviews, and recorded interviews for later review and transcription. Lastly, we created a codebook to help us identify, categorize, and analyze themes and concepts. The codebook provides clear definitions and descriptions of codes, along with examples or illustrative quotes (Day, 2021; DeCuir-Gunby et al., 2011; Ehrhardt, 2020; Turner, 2023; Stake, 2003). Codes were organized into broader themes. The codebook facilitated consistency in coding, helped maintain uniformity across multiple researchers and interviewers, and ensured reliability (Day, 2021; DeCuir-Gunby et al., 2011; Ehrhardt, 2020; Turner, 2023; Stake, 2003). Overall, the codebook enhanced our research's rigor, reliability, and validity (Day, 2021; DeCuir-Gunby et al., 2011; Ehrhardt, 2020; Turner, 2023; Stake, 2003).

Data was extracted from internal documents such as vehicle inventories, fuel, and maintenance records, approved budgets, RC's Climate Action Plan, and procurement manual.

Data points included but were not limited to fleet utilization, e.g., historical mileage, maintenance and repair costs, fuel costs, and age relative to lifespan (General Services Administration, 2017).

12 Chart: Internal Document Inventory
Document Title Data Points
Life to Date Cost (RC) ● Total maintenance and repair costs for vehicles Mileage (RC) ● Current odometer readings for vehicles
Vehicle and Equipment 2022 Master (RC) ● Makes and models for all vehicles ● Years for all vehicles
● VIN’s
● Locations
● Assignment e.g. “Pool”
Fuelmaster Transaction Listings (June 2021-June
2023)
● Odometer readings (self-reported) at the time
of fueling
● Fuel quantities for every transaction (number of
gallons of gasoline)
Preliminary Budget for FY 22/23 (RC) ● Budget for EV purchases in 22/23 Non-Suppression Vehicle Costs and Mileage Report
(Fire)
● Makes and models for non-suppression
vehicles
● Years for all these vehicles
● VIN’s
Annual data (2019-2023):
● Odometer readings
● Mileage
● Maintenance Costs (excluding 2022 and 2023)
● Fuel consumption (number of gallons of
gasoline)

We emailed a fleet utilization survey (Appendix C: Fleet Utilization Survey) to city and fire department staff, specifically employees assigned vehicles and fleet managers. We used the data collected from the survey responses to understand each vehicle's purpose, related requirements, and fleet needs going forward (General et al., 2017; Kempton & Letendre, 1997; Logan et al., 2021; Van Maanen, 1978). The survey questions and instruments were reviewed and tested by team members and faculty at the University of Southern California and RC staff.

Through a fleet utilization study, we evaluated the usage and efficiency of RC's vehicle fleet. The study identified opportunities for optimization and electrification to answer the research question (Jin & Kite-Powell, 2000): "What is an ideal fleet size and composition of EVs that would meet the needs of the City of Rancho Cucamonga given the fiscal and temporal constraints faced by the municipality?" The data collected on vehicle utilization, such as mileage, were analyzed to identify underutilized and overutilized vehicles to inform recommendations for right-sizing the fleet (McDonnell & Cardona, 2023). Maintenance and repair records were analyzed to evaluate the health and reliability of the existing fleet (McDonnell & Cardona, 2023). Finally, fuel consumption data was analyzed to identify opportunities for reducing fuel costs and carbon emissions (Liimatainen, 2011). Also, by examining costs per mile (maintenance, fuel, and repair) for each vehicle in the fleet, the study revealed cost variations across different vehicles in the fleet. These trends were used to make 13 data-driven recommendations for right-sizing their fleet, reducing costs, and effectively planning for electrification (Brendel et al., 2018; Gahlaut & Shapiro, 2023; Liimatainen, 2011).

The accuracy of the vehicle utilization study depends on the accuracy of the data used.

Incomplete, outdated data containing errors can lead to misleading conclusions (Gahlaut & Shapiro, 2023; Van Velzen et al., 2019). Inconsistencies can also introduce errors and make comparing and interpreting results challenging. We identified outlier data and verified the accuracy of the data with city and fire staff. If the data needed to be more accurate, we requested up-to-date information from RC and the fire department.

Furthermore, we made assumptions to facilitate our analysis. For example, we assumed the vehicles are driven the exact miles yearly. Therefore, the average annual mileage was calculated by dividing vehicles' total miles by their age in years. Another assumption was that all vehicles use regular gasoline or diesel, and the fuel price is the current average price in the County of San Bernardino (AAA, n.d.). Assumptions introduce limitations regarding accuracy and reliability (Van Velzen et al., 2019).

Chart: Assumptions
Assumption Effected Calculations
Vehicles are driven the same number of miles every
year
Annual mileage (for RC’s fleet)
Vehicles use regular gasoline or diesel Fuel costs for all vehicles Price per gallon of fuel is the current average price of fuel in the County of San Bernardino
Fuel costs for all vehicles
In some cases, odometer readings in the fuel
transaction reports are more accurate than readings in
the mileage reports
Annual mileage (for RC’s fleet)
Miles until retirement (for RC’s fleet)
Maintenance costs per mile (for RC’s fleet)

To mitigate the limitations mentioned above and enhance the validity and reliability of the study, we: 1) acknowledged assumptions made and their possible impact on the study’s results and 2) narrowed the scope of our analysis based on the available data. Finally, we used multiple data sources to confirm findings, referred to as triangulation: internal documents, surveys, interviews, academic journals, white papers, and case studies (Carter et al., 2014).

EV data was compared to existing fleet data to identify the economic viability of various fleet composition scenarios. We used the DRVE tool to compare ownership costs for the current fleet and electrified vehicles (Electrification Coalition, 2021). We customized entries such as the cost of gasoline, diesel, and energy in the tool. We generated reports that ranked the conversion of vehicles in the fleet according to potential cost savings (Electrification Coalition, 2021). Reports recommended EV replacements that are the make/model equivalents of existing vehicles in the fleet (Electrification Coalition, 2021).

Finally, we organized the fleet management system recommendations into a chart or matrix for visual comparison (Agnes, 2000). Employing an analysis technique called Criteria 14 Alternatives Matrix (CAM) Analysis, we evaluated various options for telematics implementation against criteria such as ease of procurement, cost, features, and software acceptance or usage by other cities and organizations.

Findings and Analysis:

Survey Research
Introduction
The survey consisted of twelve questions. The survey encompassed two sections, namely demographic inquiries and Fleet Utilization inquiries. Demographic inquiries include the identification of the interviewee, their occupational domain, the make and model of their automobile, as well as the classification of the vehicle in terms of fuel type, such as gasoline, hybrid, or other. The survey questions regarding Fleet Utilization inquired about the vehicle's intended use, the frequency of refueling or recharging, whether the vehicle was shared among multiple users, and the necessity and specific requirements of the vehicle. The data was re- coded to analyze the distribution of Heavy Duty and Light Duty vehicles (Figure 1 below).

Before distribution, USC faculty members and employees from Rancho Cucamonga thoroughly reviewed the survey questionnaire. The survey primarily focused on data about light-duty vehicles.

Figure 1: Types of Vehicles

We delved further into the question, "What duties do you perform with the vehicle? Describe how these responsibilities contribute to the agency's purpose" to understand how the

15 vehicles were used for work. Figure 2 below depicts the various activities for which vehicles are utilized by the city and fire department. Given that a significant proportion of the participants in the study were affiliated with the Public Works Department, it was observed that 30.8% of the vehicles utilized were primarily for staff transportation. Twenty-one point-five percent of the vehicles were used for inspecting streets, traffic signals, construction sites, and similar infrastructure. The vehicles travel across the city throughout the day.

Figure 2: Vehicle Purposes

As another component of our analysis, we estimated and cataloged in Table 1 the frequency with which vehicles of various fuel types needed to be refueled or charged.

Table 1. Frequency of Fueling Based on Vehicle Type
Vehicle Type Frequency of filling
EV Daily
Gas Vehicle Monthly, Weekly, Daily
Diesel Vehicle Weekly
Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV) Monthly, Weekly
CNG Daily, Weekly
Gas Hybrid Weekly, monthly

16 Furthermore, we analyzed the distribution of vehicles utilized within and beyond the city limits. The findings are visually represented in Figure 3. Of the total 65 vehicles, 29 are exclusively employed within the city limits. In addition to off-road terrains, unpaved roads, highways, and emergency response, various other modes of transportation are employed within urban areas.

Figure 3: Vehicle Driving Limit

The survey data was analyzed based on all the answers to each question rather than a whole record at once. We drew vehicle utilization patterns in the city and the fire department to understand employee usage, charging patterns, and purpose. The purpose of each vehicle is listed below.

Mails - The purpose of vehicles used for mail services is to facilitate the transportation and delivery of mail items. These vehicles are designed to efficiently collect and distribute mail from post offices or to various destinations such as offices, residential areas, or other mail distribution points (Homeland Security, 2012). The primary goal is to ensure timely and accurate mail delivery, providing an essential service for communication and correspondence. Library vehicles transfer materials, supplies, and other resources between branches, offices, and distribution centers. These vehicles keep books, documents, and other library goods in stock. Transporting supplies and materials improve library operations and user accessibility.

Haul Vehicles - Haul vehicles, in the context of electrical equipment, transport heavy or oversized electrical components, machinery, or equipment (U.S. Department of Transportation, 2014).

These vehicles are vital in delivering electrical infrastructure materials, such as cables, or generators, to construction sites, power stations, or maintenance locations (Zhang et al., 2018).

The primary purpose is to support installing, maintaining, or expanding electrical systems and ensure an uninterrupted electricity supply.

17 Staff Transportation - Staff vehicles serve the essential function of ensuring dependable and adequate transportation for employees. These vehicles provide transportation for staff members, making their daily commute more convenient and ensuring they arrive at work on time. Staff vehicles help improve employee satisfaction, promote punctuality, and enhance productivity by offering a convenient and comfortable mode of transportation (U.S. Department of Transportation Administration, 2021).

Mechanical Assistance - Vehicles used for mechanical assistance are deployed to support vehicles that have broken down or encountered mechanical issues. These assistance vehicles are equipped with tools, equipment, and trained personnel to diagnose and repair vehicle malfunctions on-site or provide towing services when necessary. The purpose is to ensure prompt and effective resolution of vehicle breakdowns, minimi ze disruptions, and maintain the operational readiness of the fleet.

On-call Mechanic Response - On-call mechanic response vehicles provide immediate assistance and maintenance services for vehicles requiring urgent repairs or attention. These vehicles have the necessary tools, diagnostic equipment, and a skilled mechanic who can quickly respond to breakdowns or emergencies. The goal is to minimize downtime, rapidly address mechanical issues, and restore the affected vehicles to operational condition (Section 2: Driving Safely, 2020).

Emergencies - Vehicles used for emergencies, mainly by fire departments and animal services, are dedicated to responding to critical situations. Fire department vehicles, such as fire trucks, are designed to transport firefig hters, equipment, and water to combat fires and provide rescue services effectively. Animal service vehicles are utilized to transport animals in need of rescue, relocation, or medical care during emergencies. The primary objective is to ensure the safety and well-being of individuals and animals during emergencies.

Inspections - Inspection vehicles are utilized for conducting inspections and assessments of properties, landscapes, construction sites, or other designated areas (Blanc, n.d.). These vehicles are equipped with tools, equipment, and personnel specialized in inspections, such as building inspectors, land surveyors, or environmental inspectors. The purpose is to conduct systematic inspections, evaluate compliance with regulations, identify potenti al issues or hazards, and maintain the inspected areas' quality, safety, or regulatory compliance (Blanc, n.d.).

Clean and Renew - Vehicles used for clean and renew purposes, such as storm drain, debris, and graffiti abatement, focus on maintaining the co mmunity's cleanliness and aesthetics (Tavares, 2021). These vehicles have tools, equipment, and supplies for cleaning storm drains, collecting and disposing of debris, or removing graffiti. The purpose is to enhance the overall appearance, cleanliness, and functionality of public spaces, improving the quality of life for residents and visitors (Tavares, 2021).

Safety Guardian - Vehicles serving as safety guardians in traffic sign maintenance play a crucial role in ensuring the safety and efficiency of road signage (U.S. Department of Transportation, 2018). These vehicles are responsible for installing, maintaining, and repairing traffic signs, road markings, and related infrastructure (U.S. Department of Transportation, 2018). They maintain 18 clear and visible signage, enhance road safety, and provide accurate guidance for motorists and pedestrians (Spears, 2019).

Vehicle Charging Frequency

According to city employees, the current EVs need to be charged daily. One of the city's employees has expressed skepticism about whether EVs can provide continuous driving throughout the day without requiring multiple charging stops. The charging frequency and vehicle counts with each are listed in Table 2, which is organized according to the various types of vehicles.

Table 2. Frequencies of charging and vehicle counts
Frequency of Charging No of Vehicles
Daily 15
Weekly 29
Monthly 12
Other 9
Total 65

Passengers Transported Per Trip

To analyze the given data on the number of people transported per trip regularly, we examined the distribution of passengers across different categories by asking the following question: How many people will be transported per trip on a regular basis? By analyzing this data, we observed the distribution of passengers per trip on a regular basis. It provided insights into the typical passenger composition and helped understand the varying needs of different group sizes. This information is valuable for optimizing service offerings, vehicle capacity, and resource allocation to ensure efficient and satisfactory transportation experiences for passengers.

According to the data (Figure 4), 59.6% of the trips involve only one passenger. This indicates that the majority of trips primarily serve individual commuters. The data shows that 47.7% of the trips involve two people being transported together. This suggests that most of the trips consist of pairs of individuals traveling together, such as couples or colleagues. Furthermore,

1.5% of the trips involve a range of two to four people. This category encompasses trips with varying group sizes within that range.
19 Figure 4: Passenger Count Per Vehicle

We re-coded the results of our survey question, “How many People will be transported per trip on a regular basis” to understand the maximum number of people transported through each vehicle, and we identified that 32 of the 65 vehicles are only used to transport single passengers, and 29 are used for transporting 2 passengers at maximum. Only one vehicle carries a maximum of 5 passengers, leaving a scope for us to consider the pooling options for efficiency.

Semi-Structured Interviews
Introduction
We contacted 16 people and conducted 11 semi-structured interviews, including eight (8) with cities leading in electrifying their fleets from light sedans to heavy-duty vehicles and implementing policies and plans to make their municipalities more sustainable. We interviewed city executives from South Pasadena, Los Angeles, Long Beach, and San Francisco, which provided good examples of cities advancing EVs. Over half of all the United States electric vehicles are registered in California. California has committed to having 5.3 million EVs by 2030 through incentives, rebates, and an extensive charging station network (Sperling, 2018).

We also interviewed an administrator at Sourcewell, a purchasing platform for public agencies.

Sourcewell helps government agencies efficiently secure EVs. They do this by pre-screening vendors and offering an alternative to the Request for Proposal (RFP) process. Sourcewell vets RFP vendors, develop pre-negotiated pricing, and gives member organizations a cooperative purchasing advantage.

20 We also interviewed two (2) national non-profits focused on decarbonization and accelerating clean transportation. We spoke with a member of the Electrification Coalition (EC), which promotes policies and actions to facilitate the adoption of EVs. In addition, we interviewed a department head at the Center for Sustainable Energy, whose primary responsibilities include designing, implementing, and promoting large-scale incentive programs for EVs, chargers, and energy storage. Before conducting the interviews, we extensively researched converting gas-powered cars to EVs. Furthermore, we worked closely with the City of Rancho Cucamonga to develop a keen understanding of their fleet conversion process. It was necessary to develop relevant and meaningful semi-structured questions. We included open- ended questions to allow the flexibility in the interview to go off-script and provide new ways of seeing and understanding the topic. The interviews allowed interviewees to express their views on their terms.

The interviews were typically conducted over the phone, through Zoom, and one interviewee elected to have the questions emailed. We took notes to record the respondents' answers, and conducting the interviews virtually did not hinder communication, rapport, and dialogue with the interviewees. The interviews' transcripts were subsequently reviewed for analysis. The interviewer qualitatively coded the data generated from the semi-structured interviews. This coding process helped to organize, structure, and interpret the collected information into meaningful themes. Coding enabled us to approach our findings with both reflection and rigor.

Interview Codebook

Data analysis for interviews requires a coordinated strategy to organize responses in a way that promotes “sense-making” and evaluation. Data coding is one method that helps convert raw data into themes and broad concepts. After completing each interview and revisiting the recordings and transcriptions, our team assigned codes to the descriptive information of each interview and compiled it into a codebook. Codebooks are essential for analyzing qualitative research from interviews because they simplify and organize the data to present information as meaningful elements (DeCuir-Gunby et al., 2011). Additionally, coding allows for finding connections between concepts and establishing whether the data supports or contradicts theories observed in other research literature and research methods.

The Interview Codebook (Appendix G: Interview Codebook) structure includes three (3) components – Code, Description, and Illustrative Example. The Code is a tag of a few words or a phrase that labels and classifies the data. The Description provides a deeper explanation and understanding of each code. Finally, the Illustrative Example is a quote or carefully selected information from the interviews that best illustrate each code.

21 The codebook contains 60 codes total, each spread throughout the nine interviews. After reviewing the codebook, we identified eight overarching themes - Each code is associated with one of the eight (8) themes:

1. Organizational Context

2. Procurement

3. Collaboration

4. Policy

5. Funding

6. Infrastructure

7. Electrification of Vehicles/Heavy-Duty EVs

8. Finance

Results

Organizational Context - Organizational context refers to specific characteristics of an organization. The context itself can include a variety of scenarios, including organizational goals, missions and values, the approach or strategy to a project, policy implementation tactics, project prioritization, organizational behaviors, and other contexts that affect decision-making.

Several of the codes for this theme argue that a successful fleet conversion requires organizations to have well-established plans that can implement change effectively. Several interviewees mentioned the importance of fleet management systems, budgets, and prioritizing internal behaviors that can support transformational change like EV fleet conversion.

Additionally, organizational context codes relevant to Rancho Cucamonga discuss the challenges of a smaller-sized city in a large state like California, where EV conversion and procurement are prominent.

Procurement - The procurement theme refers to the processes of obtaining electric vehicles.

Like Rancho Cucamonga, many interviewees also brought up challenges with EV procurement, citing supply chain issues, limited availability, and increased demand as reasons for their failed attempts or delays. However, several codes also discuss new ideas and alternative procurement methods that offer exciting opportunities for overcoming procurement challenges.

Collaboration - The collaboration theme includes codes that discuss unity, partnerships, and cooperation with other organizations, entities, and agencies to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of a project. The interviews showed that, often, collaboration is required to overcome obstacles that seem insurmountable. Several codes reference public-private partnerships, networks, and coalitions that can promote an organization’s progress.

22 Policy - The policy theme includes codes referencing state or federal regulations or governance and its interaction with fleet electrification for municipalities. It also includes codes about policy adoption at the organizational or local level. Interviewees discussed prioritizing EV policies and why EV conversion is important or worthwhile. The interviewees also cited the benefits of sustainability and climate control, which justify state/federal policy practices.

Funding - EV fleet conversion is expensive. The funding theme includes project financing opportunities like grants, incentives, tax credits, and other funding sources. EV funding can be divided into two categories: 1. Funding for the electric vehicles themselves, and 2. Funding for infrastructure and long-term sustainability of EVs, including charging stations, electric grid capability, secure parking garages, etc.

Infrastructure - EV Infrastructure are “structures, machinery, and equipment necessary and integral to support an EV, including battery charging stations, rapid charging stations, and battery exchange stations (U.S. Department of Energy, 2022). The codes in this theme primarily include examples and smart practices for successfully planning and timing infrastructure development. Interviewees also discuss the challenges to successful infrastructure implementation, like cost and time.

Electrification of Vehicles/Heavy-Duty EVs - This theme includes codes that reference the progress of vehicle electrification throughout the years. EVs have significantly improved in capacity. However, the codes primarily discuss the challenges with electrifying medium- and Heavy-Duty vehicles. Interviewees explain limitations, tow load capacities, range anxiety, etc.

Finance - Finance is how organizations and governments manage money and allocate funds to projects like EV fleet conversions. The codes in the finance theme examine vehicle costs, project investment strategy, cost-benefit ratios, and total cost of ownership for improved decision-making.

23 Figure 5: Interview Codebook Themes

Literature Review
The literature review focused on several key themes: Procurement, Climate Policy and Regulations, Electrification of Vehicles, Best Practices, Fleet Utilization, Funding/Budgeting, Infrastructure, Total Cost of Ownership, and Unintended Consequences. Throughout the research process, we thoroughly reviewed 533 videos, articles, research papers, and city documents. We utilized Zotero to collaborate on our research. After collecting all the necessary documents, we proceeded to create a codebook. This codebook aimed to identify the significant themes that would help us address the research questions and extract the essential information related to the city of RC. Our research got divided into the following categories:
● Implementation Challenges
● Best Practices for Procurement
● Best Practices for Funding
● Best Practices for Fleet Conversion.

The upcoming paragraphs provide a detailed discussion of each category.

24 Procurement

The set of policies and principles that make up best practices for procurement in a local government aimed at ensuring that the process of procuring goods and services is carried out in a way that is efficient, transparent, and as cost-effective as possible (The Office of Federal Procurement Policy, 2021). These practices aim to encourage prudent spending, support local organizations, foster competitiveness, and achieve the most value possible for the city as a whole. Conversion plans for electric vehicles are developing as a significant strategy to encourage the use of electric vehicles as the globe moves toward more environmentally friendly alternatives for transportation (Brown et al., 2010; Sperling, 2013; Wirasingha et al., 2008).

Therefore, in order to guarantee the proper execution of such plans, efficient procurement procedures are a crucial component in the process of purchasing essential resources and services. In order to find the most effective methods of procurement that are particularly suited to EV conversion programs, we examined various scholarly articles and industry reports.

Ethical behavior and environmental responsibility principles are now fully integrated into the best procurement practices (van Weele & van Tubergen, 2017). Benchekroun et al. (2019) assert that there is a growing significance attributed to sustainable procurement. The City of Rancho Cucamonga can adopt a strategic approach to fleet procurement with the assistance of frameworks for strategic sourcing. Cooperative procurement, for example, is a strategic approach that involves the collective efforts of multiple public entities, such as cities or government agencies, to procure goods and services together (Agranoff & McGuire, 2003). By pooling their purchasing power, resources, and expertise, these entities can use economies of scale, negotiate more favorable deals with suppliers, and realize cost savings. In addition, cooperative procurement is a practice that enhances efficiency, streamlines processes and cultivates stronger relationships among the organizations involved.

Sourcewell offers a cooperative purchasing model that streamlines the procurement process for cities by eliminating the requirement for individual bidding and negotiation (An electrifying partnership, 2021). Cities participating can benefit from Sourcewell's extensive knowledge and track record in developing advantageous contracts with reliable suppliers. This collaboration guarantees that the cities receive top-notch products and services for their electric vehicle fleet conversions (An electrifying partnership, 2021). This approach not only helps cities save time and resources but also enables them to expedite their transition to sustainable and electric transportation solutions. The cooperative procurement model offered by Sourcewell is a prime example of the advantages of collaborative purchasing. This model enables cities such as Rancho Cucamonga to capitalize on the emerging EV market and actively contribute towards their sustainability objectives.

When sustainability concerns get incorporated into procurement plans, it helps cultivate a positive company image, decreases risks linked with environmental consequences, and aligns with stakeholders' expectations. Ethical procurement methods include not just the variety of 25 suppliers but also the fair labor standards of employers (Ethics in procurement – simple, but not always easy, 2020). This helps to contribute to a supply chain that is more inclusive and socially conscious. Implementing robust procurement strategies in light of the supply chain difficulties that the city and other organizations have been experiencing may make a significant contribution to ensuring that the process of converting the fleet goes smoothly and that overall success is achieved (Raj et al., 2022).

Fleet Conversion
The effectiveness of implementing an electrification plan relies on several factors, such as specific goals, budget, existing Infrastructure, and available resources (Boulanger et al., 2011). However, numerous studies have revealed the essential steps and strategies that can typically contribute to the success of an electrification plan. Regarding EV conversion plans, it is crucial to prioritize the selection of reputable and reliable suppliers (Johnson, 2022).

Engaging with suppliers specializing in EV conversion kits and components is recommended, as this follows best practices. By collaborating with certified and experienced suppliers, the developers can guarantee access to high-quality parts compatible with electric vehicles (Thomas, 2023; Yang et al., 2022). Collaboration is crucial in ensuring a smooth conversion process and ultimately leads to reliable performance for EVs (Lipu et al., 2021; Thomas, 2023).

In addition, establishing long-term relationships with suppliers promotes trust and enables continuous support for maintenance and future upgrades (Thomas, 2023; Yang et al., 2022).

The converted vehicles' quality and safety is another crucial factor that significantly influences the success of an EV conversion plan. The literature emphasizes the significance of strict quality assurance measures, such as thorough testing and compliance with industry standards and regulations (Apata et al., 2023; Barton & Schütte, 2017; Power, 2005). It is essential for procurement practices to give priority to suppliers who adhere to safety certifications and comply with EV conversion guidelines established by relevant authorities (Leurent & Windisch, 2011). By demonstrating a solid commitment to compliance, the city can ensure that the converted EVs meet all necessary safety standards. This not only boosts the confidence of operators but also reassures end-users. Furthermore, by creating a well-structured phased transition plan, the city can effectively prioritize the replacement of high-mileage and high-maintenance vehicles with EVs (Leurent & Windisch, 2011). This approach will enable a gradual adoption of EVs, considering the availability of funds and prioritizing areas where EVs can result in substantial cost savings.

Funding
Funding is an essential part of achieving the goal of the city of RC. There are many federal grants, tax credits to the suppliers/dealers, incentives, and rebates for infrastructure funding and purchasing EVs. Our research surfaced numerous sources of guidance and tools for helping cities transform their fleet. The following are excerpts from our research on the topic. 26 Volkswagen (VW) Settlement Mitigation Funding "may be used to support the scrapping of older vehicles as defined, the replacement of an existing engine (repowering), or the purchasing of new diesel or alternate fueled (CNG, propane, hybrid) engines and vehicles" (American Cities Climate Challenge, 2023). The state of California provides grants and incentives to establish chargers and support fleet conversion. "Heavy-Duty Low Emission Vehicle Replacement and Repower Grants The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) offers grants for the replacement or repower of eligible class 7 and 8 heavy-duty vehicles with low oxide of nitrogen (NOx) vehicles" (Alternative Fuels Data Center, n.d.). Our research also came across handy tools for finding funding sources; Funding Finder (Funding Finder, 2023) provides an interface to search for several funding sources based on the zip code, technology, and vehicle type. For a list of tools available to find funding refer to Appendix J.

Implementation Challenges
To keep our research holistic, we also identified the patterns of challenges the city can anticipate to ensure a smoother transition to a complete fleet of Electric Vehicles. The city of RC mentioned issues of procurement they had in prior EV purchases. As we dived deeper into the issue, other cities were facing similar challenges due to issues with Supply Chains. Lack of Heavy-Duty vehicles, Range Anxiety, and issues with quick charging are a few other concerning challenges. The unavailability of Infrastructure for fast charging is a noteworthy pattern seen across various cities. A few excerpts from the research, "Global auto supply chains have been snarled by a semiconductor chip shortage. Many auto manufacturers slashed chip orders when car sales dropped dramatically in early 2020 during the COVID-19 lockdown. So, the semiconductor industry shifted production lines to meet the demand for other applications, like laptops, TVs, and video games." (Cox Automotive Mobility, 2022) indicates supply chain problems. "Also, in the US, a massive ramp-up is required. According to a PwC analysis, the EV charging market in the US could — and will need to — grow nearly tenfold to satisfy the charging needs of an estimated 27 million EVs on the road by 2030" (Mildner, 2023), indicates the importance of infrastructure readiness.

Regarding Heavy Duty Vehicles, "The complication right now is the technology is pretty new," and "There are lots of advances, and there are lots of changes, so we are not sure where that is going to go yet" (Raymond et al., 2023) point out the need for evolved technology to support the hauling requirements. Surveys and interviews also indicated speculation w.r.t Heavy Duty Electric Vehicles. Adoption after purchase is significant, and anxiety about the range and charging exists. "Range anxiety is what an EV driver feels when the battery charge is low and the usual sources of electricity are unavailable. It sparks a fear of getting stranded somewhere, which adds time, inconvenience, and stress to a journey. Studies show that driving range and a lack of charging Infrastructure are the primary reasons people do not consider EVs when buying a new vehicle" (J.D.Power, 2020). These issues have been generic across various cities, and if cautiously resolved, the actions will help the city of Rancho Cucamonga easily 27 transition its fleets. For further understanding, refer to Appendix K to retrieve the codebook, which lists our research themes in each category with anecdotes from prominent sources.

Fleet Utilization Study for RC’s Fleet

Table 3. RC Fleet Profile at a Glance
Total Number of Vehicles 171
% of Pool Vehicles 73.7%
% of Non-Pool Vehicles 26.3%
% of Trucks 60.8%
% of Sedans 3.5%
% of Other (SUV, Van, Etc.) 35.7%
Median Age 14
Median Miles 48,789
Number of Vehicles Eligible for
Retirement 12

An analysis of the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s fleet found that the aging fleet predominantly comprises trucks, SUVs, and vans with costlier electric vehicle replacements (Energy5, 2023). Figure 6 below shows the proportion of each type of vehicle in the fleet.

28 Figure 6: Types of Vehicles in RC Fleet

The city retires vehicles once vehicles are 10 years old and/or reach over 100,000 miles.

The median age of the fleet is 14 years old. The median miles of the fleet are 48,789. The fleet is relatively older. 12 vehicles are eligible for retirement: 4 Ford 1-150’s, 4 Ford 350, 1 Escape Hybrid, 1 Ranger, and 2 Ford 250’s. Figure 7 below illustrates that most vehicles in the fleet are over 10 years old.

Figure 7: RC Vehicle Age Distribution

29 In addition to creating a fleet profile, we calculated: vehicles’ ages relative to lifespan, vehicles’ mileage relative to the cap of 100,000 miles, eligibility for retirement, annual mileage, annual fuel consumption, fuel consumption per mile, annual fuel costs, fuel costs per mile, maintenance costs per mile, and costs per mile. The chart below summarizes the data points and formulas for calculations and the limitations of the data and calculations. RC does not track annual mileage and fuel expenses for vehicles in the fleet. As a substitute for actual data, we used the county’s current average fuel costs to calculate annual fuel costs for vehicles. We also estimated annual mileage by dividing their odometer readings by their ages.

Table 4. RC Data
Measurement Data Points Formula Indicator Of Limitations Age relative to
lifespan
• Vehicle age (years)
● Retirement age of 10
years per RC’s policy
10-vehicle age=age relative to
lifespan (years)
Retirement eligibility Not applicable
Mileage relative to
cap
• Odometer readings/total
mileage
● Cap of 100,000 miles
per RC’s policy
100,000-total
mileage=mileage relative to
cap (miles)
Retirement eligibility Odometer readings are
self-reported, potential for
human error when
entering numbers into the
system

Eligible for
retirement
• Age relative to lifespan
● Mileage relative to cap
Eligible for retirement if >10
years and >100,000 miles
Retirement eligibility Odometer readings are
self-reported, potential for
human error when
entering numbers into the
system
Annual mileage • Odometer readings/total
mileage
● Vehicle age (years)
Total mileage/vehicle age
(years)=estimate annual
mileage (miles)
Utilization No real data; assumes
vehicles are driven an
equal number of miles
every year and odometer
readings are self-reported
Annual fuel
consumption
● Fuel quantities for 12-
month periods, June
2021-June 2022 & June
2022-2023 (gallons)
(Sum of fuel quantities for all
transactions June 2021-June
2022 + sum of fuel quantities
for all transactions June 2022-
June 2023)/2 years=average
annual fuel consumption
(gallons)
Utilization

Vehicle performance in
terms of fuel efficiency

Average annual fuel
consumption/estimate annual
mileage=fuel consumption per
mile
Vehicle performance in
terms of fuel efficiency
Not using real data;
estimated annual mileage
and average annual fuel
consumption
30 Measurement Data Points Formula Indicator Of Limitations Age relative to
lifespan
• Vehicle age (years)
● Retirement age of 10
years per RC’s policy
10-vehicle age=age relative to
lifespan (years)
Retirement eligibility Not applicable
Annual fuel costs • Average annual fuel
consumption
● Current average fuel
prices in San Bernardino
County according to
AAA as of 6/29/23
Average annual fuel
consumption x current average
fuel prices=average annual
fuel costs
Cost efficiency Calculated using average
annual fuel consumption
and current average fuel
prices; all averages, not
real data
Fuel costs per mile • Annual fuel costs
● Estimate annual
mileage
Annual fuel costs/estimate
annual mileage=fuel costs per
mile
Cost efficiency

Vehicle performance in
terms of fuel efficiency

All averages/estimates,
not real data
Maintenance/repair
costs per mile
• Lifetime
repair/maintenance costs
● Odometer readings/total
mileage
Lifetime repair and
maintenance costs/total
mileage=maintenance/repair
costs per mile
Cost efficiency

Odometer readings are
self-reported, potential for
human error when
entering numbers into the
system
Costs per mile • Fuel costs per mile
● Maintenance costs per
mile
Fuel costs per mile +
maintenance costs per
mile=costs per mile
Cost efficiency All averages/estimates,
not real data

We can evaluate vehicles based on the following criteria:

○ Utilization using annual mileage (PPIAF, 2006)
○ Retirement eligibility using vehicle age and total mileage ○ Cost efficiency using costs per mile (DDC FPO Solutions, n.d.) ○ Vehicle performance in terms of fuel efficiency using fuel consumption per mile (Motive, 2020)

RC can prioritize converting vehicles in the fleet to electric by sequencing them based on the abovementioned criteria. For instance, RC can prioritize converting vehicles eligible for retirement during the initial stages of implementation. Subsequently, they can focus on converting either underutilized or costly vehicles. Lastly, they can address the conversion of poor-performing vehicles.

The chart below has broken down the information gathered from our fleet utilization study. We aimed to categorize vehicles according to their utilization, retirement eligibility, cost efficiency, and fuel efficiency.

31 Table 5. Data Categories
Utilization High Medium Low
Retirement Eligibility Yes No
Cost Efficiency High Medium Low
Fuel Efficiency High Medium Low

We have calculated the average, median, and standard deviation and identified the entire fleet's minimum and maximum annual mileage. Next, we assigned specific data values to represent "high utilization," "medium utilization," and "low utilization." Vehicles can be classified as high, medium, or low utilization based on their mileage falling within specific data ranges.

Table 6. Calculations Annual Mileage
Average Annual Mileage (miles) 4,032
Median Annual Mileage (miles) 3,510
Minimum Annual Mileage (miles) 308
Maximum Annual Mileage (miles) 25,585
STDEV Annual Mileage 2777.413181

Table 7. Utilization
High Medium Low
≥6,287 miles annually 6,287> and >733 miles annually ≤733 miles annually

Note: high is equal to or greater than 6,287 miles annually, the median plus one standard deviation; medium is less than 6,287 miles and greater than 733 miles, median minus one standard deviation; low is equal to or less than 733 miles, median minus one standard deviation

According to RC's vehicle retirement policy, vehicles should be evaluated for retirement once they have accumulated 100,000 miles or have been in service for 10 years. We have identified vehicles at least 10 years old with odometer readings exceeding 100,000 miles.

Vehicles that met both criteria were deemed eligible for retirement.

32 Table 8. Retirement Eligibility
Yes No
>10 years old AND > 100,000 miles <10 years old AND/OR <100,000

We obtained the lifetime maintenance and repair costs from an internal document that was provided by the RC staff. To calculate the maintenance and repair costs per mile, we took each vehicle's lifetime maintenance and repair costs and divided them by their total mileage. We have also calculated the average, median, and standard deviation for the entire fleet's maintenance/repair costs per mile, as shown in the chart below. Additionally, we have identified the minimum and maximum costs.

Table 7. Calculations Maintenance/Repair Costs Per Mile Average Maintenance Costs Per Mile $0.27
Median Maintenance Costs Per Mile $0.16
Minimum Maintenance Costs Per Mile $0.01
Maximum Maintenance Costs Per Mile $2.24
STDEV Maint. Costs Per Mile 0.3339102714

We have received two (2) fuel transaction reports: 1) June 2021 to June 2022; and 2) June 2022 to 2023. To calculate the total number of gallons of fuel consumed by vehicles during the two 12-month periods, we sorted the data and then summed all individual fuel transactions for each vehicle. We determined vehicles' average annual fuel consumption by dividing the total gallons consumed over two years. To calculate their annual fuel costs in present terms, we multiplied the fuel consumed annually by the average price of gasoline ($4.80) or diesel ($4.83) per gallon in San Bernardino County, according to AAA, as of June 29, 2023. Next, we calculated the fuel costs per mile for all vehicles by dividing their annual fuel costs by their annual mileage. In addition, we have calculated the average, median, and standard deviation for the fuel costs per mile of the entire fleet. We have also identified the minimum and maximum values shown in the chart below.

33 Table 9. Calculations Fuel Costs Per Mile
Average Fuel Costs Per Mile $0.45
Median Fuel Costs Per Mile $0.39
Min Fuel Costs Per Mile $0.00
Max Fuel Costs Per Mile $1.81
STDEV Fuel Costs Per Mile $0.35

To calculate the cost per mile of vehicles, we included fuel and maintenance/repair costs—additionally, we computed statistics for the entire fleet represented below.

Table 10. Calculations Costs Per Mile
Average Costs Per Mile $0.73
Median Costs Per Mile $0.61
Min Costs Per Mile $0.03
Max Costs Per Mile $3.21
STDEV Costs Per Mile 0.4971718877

Figure 8 below illustrates the distribution of data. The presence of outliers, specifically vehicles with costs per mile greater than $1.89, has caused the data to be skewed.

Figure 8: Comparison of Costs Per Mile

34 We assumed that the outliers were high-cost vehicles based on their costs per mile, which were considerably higher than the fleet's median and average costs per mile. Therefore, we excluded the four (4) outliers and redistributed the values in a histogram chart below (Figure 9).

Figure 9: Cost Per Mile Comparisons Without Outliers

To facilitate our analysis, we combined the groups into three (3) categories: high-cost, medium-cost, and low-cost. This consolidation was represented visually using a histogram chart (Figure 10).

35 Figure 10: Comparison Groups Excluding Outliers

There are 89 vehicles that have costs per mile lower than or equal to $0.63, making them classified as low-cost. The cost per mile for 59 falls between $.63 and $1.23, with a median value of $.61 and an average value of $.73. All vehicles, including the four (4) excluded outliers, are considered high cost if their costs per mile are equal to or exceed $1.23.

Table 11. Cost Efficiency
High-Cost Medium-Cost Low-Cost
≥$1.23 $1.23 >and> $0.63 ≤$0.63

Finally, we utilized calculations for annual fuel consumption in order to assess fuel efficiency. This was done by dividing the average annual fuel consumption (measured in gallons) by the annual mileage. The chart below presents statistical information summarizing the fleet.

Table 12. Calculations Annual Fuel Consumption
Average Qts Fuel 21-23 382.888538
Median Qts Fuel 21-23 215.75

36 Min Qts Fuel 21-23 0
Max Qts Fuel 21-23 2411.65
STDEV Qts Fuel 21-23 386.9371709

Table 11. Calculations Fuel Consumption Per Mile
Average Fuel Consumption Per Mile (Gallons) 0.09449923843 Median Fuel Consumption Per Mile (Gallons) 0.08156306529 Min Fuel Consumption Per Mile (Gallons) 0
Max Fuel Consumption Per Mile (Gallons) 0.3763959391
STDEV Fuel Consumption Per Mile 0.07227483471

Table 13. Fuel Efficiency
High Fuel Consumption Medium Fuel Consumption Low Fuel Consumption ≥0.1537 0.1537> and >.0093 ≤.0093

Note: high fuel consumption is greater than or equal to 0.1537 gallons per mile, the median plus one standard deviation. Medium fuel consumption is less than 0.1537 gallons per mile or greater than .0093 gallons per mile, the median minus one standard devi ation. Low fuel consumption is less than or equal to .0093.

Gahlaut and Shapiro (2023) developed a set of criteria that can be used to identify early opportunities for electrification.

37 (Gahlaut & Shapiro, 2023)

We have classified vehicles into three (3) categories based on their utilization, fuel consumption, and costs. We then assessed whether they met the criteria for retirement.

According to Gahlaut and Shapiro (2023), underutilized vehicles, high-cost gas guzzlers, or eligible for retirement present early opportunities for electrification.

Results: Fleet Utilization Study for RC’s Fleet

The following vehicles are eligible for retirement based on their ages, total mileage, and RC’s policy.

Table 14. Retirement Eligible
ID Description Manufacturer Year Type of Vehicle
0568 F-150 Crew Cab FORD 2010 Truck
0604 F-150 XL Ext Cab FORD 2010 Truck
0611 F-350 Stakebed FORD 2010 Truck
0694 Escape, Hybrid FORD 2008 Sedan
1414 Ranger FORD 2008 Truck
1914 F-150 Pick-up FORD 2006 Truck

38 2511 F-350 Stakebed FORD 2007 Truck
2515 F-350 Stakebed FORD 2010 Truck
2522 F-250 Supercab FORD 2003 Truck
2691 F-250 Pick-up FORD 2008 Truck
3618 F-150 Crew Cab FORD 2010 Truck
3617 F-350 Service Bed FORD 2011 Truck

The following vehicles are older than 10 years, and their total mileage is nearing 100,000 (less than 15,000 miles from reaching 100,000 miles). The average annual mileage for the fleet is 4,000 miles, so these vehicles will reach or exceed 100,000 miles in less than 4 years.

Table 13. Nearing Retirement
ID Description Manufacturer Year Type of Vehicle
1606 F-150 4X4 FORD 2006 Truck
2411 Ranger FORD 2008 Truck
2631 F-550 Dump FORD 2003 Truck
0663 Dump, 10-Wheel INTL 2001 Other
2223 Explorer FORD 2006 SUV
0501 F-150 Pick-up FORD 2010 Truck
1557 F-350 Utility FORD 2006 Truck
1800 F-250 FORD 2002 Truck
0597 F-350 Stakebed FORD 2011 Truck
0502 F-150 Pick-up FORD 2010 Truck
39 2222 Explorer FORD 2006 SUV
2616 F-150 Pick-up FORD 2006 Truck

These 24 vehicles that are either eligible for retirement or nearing the end of their lifespans are depreciated assets and, thus, early opportunities for electrification.

The vehicles were sorted based on annual mileage and categorized as high, medium, or low utilization. The following vehicles are underutilized; they are estimated to be driven less than 733 miles annually. Hypothetically, they could be sold or replaced without disruption to service delivery.

Table 14. Low Utilization
ID Description Utilization
0566 E-350 Van Low
0638 E-450 Box Van Low
0637 F-550 Low
0813 F-250 Low
3530 Colorado Low
3233 HONDA CIVIC Low
0832 F-450, Aerial Lift Low
2648 Sweeper, Schwarze Low

The complete list of vehicles categorized by utilization levels can be found in the Appendices. See Appendix: Vehicle Utilization.

Vehicles were sorted based on their costs per mile and categorized as high, medium, or low-cost. The following 23 vehicles are high-cost. Electrifying these vehicles will save costs by reducing fuel and maintenance costs (The Climate Group, 2020; US Department of Energy, 40 n.d.). The complete list of vehicles categorized by cost efficiency can be found in the Appendices. See Appendix: Cost Efficiency.

Table 15. High-Cost Vehicles
ID Description Cost Efficiency
0599 Utility Bed, F-250 High-Cost
0815 F-250 Utility High-Cost
2517 Tower High-Cost
0566 E-350 Van High-Cost
1603 F-550 Graffiti Truck High-Cost
0639 Dump Truck High-Cost
1692 F-450 High-Cost
2621 F-550 Dump High-Cost
0919 F-150 XL Long Bed High-Cost
2508 F-350 Stakebed High-Cost
0573 F-250 Utility High-Cost
1418 F-350 High-Cost
3530 Colorado High-Cost
2523 F-250 Stakebed High-Cost
2624 F-550 Utility Bed High-Cost
41 1625 CNG Dump High-Cost
0663 Dump, 10-Wheel High-Cost
0638 E-450 Box Van High-Cost
2651 Storm Drain Truck High-Cost
2632 CNG Dump High-Cost
1602 F-350 Dually High-Cost
0832 F-450, Aerial Lift High-Cost
0813 F-250 High-Cost

Finally, vehicles were sorted based on fuel consumption per mile and categorized as high, medium, or low fuel consumption. This data does not speak to vehicles’ fuel economy; instead, it compares fuel consumption to other vehicles in the fleet. In other words, the data depicts how they perform compared to other vehicles in the fleet, but not generally, compared to industry standards. The vehicles could have good fuel economy according to industry standards.

The vehicles listed below consume the most fuel per mile. The complete list of categorized vehicles can be found in the Appendices. See Appendix: Fuel Efficiency.

Table 16. High Fuel Consumption Vehicles
ID Description Fuel Efficiency
0815 F-250 Utility High Fuel Consumption
2331 Escape, Hybrid High Fuel Consumption
0567 F-250 Pick-up High Fuel Consumption
1538 F-350 Utility High Fuel Consumption
42 0663 Dump, 10-Wheel High Fuel Consumption
0829 F-350 Utility High Fuel Consumption
0611 F-350 Stakebed High Fuel Consumption
1531 F-350 Stakebed High Fuel Consumption
2621 F-550 Dump High Fuel Consumption
2334 Explorer High Fuel Consumption
0570 F-250 Utility Bed High Fuel Consumption
1602 F-350 Dually High Fuel Consumption
2326 Explorer High Fuel Consumption
0639 Dump Truck High Fuel Consumption
2517 Tower High Fuel Consumption
0605 F-250 Super Cab XL High Fuel Consumption
0825 F-250 Super Cab XL High Fuel Consumption
2503 F-150 Pick-up High Fuel Consumption
2501 Utility Bed, F-250 High Fuel Consumption
2631 F-550 Dump High Fuel Consumption
0695 F-550 High Fuel Consumption
0813 F-250 High Fuel Consumption
43 2702 F-250 High Fuel Consumption
1692 F-450 High Fuel Consumption
0599 Utility Bed, F-250 High Fuel Consumption
3633 F-550 Graffiti Truck High Fuel Consumption
3634 F550 High Fuel Consumption
0919 F-150 XL Long Bed High Fuel Consumption
0573 F-250 Utility High Fuel Consumption
1603 F-550 Graffiti Truck High Fuel Consumption
1418 F-350 High Fuel Consumption
2523 F-250 Stakebed High Fuel Consumption
2624 F-550 Utility Bed High Fuel Consumption
0832 F-450, Aerial Lift High Fuel Consumption

The following chart lists vehicles that meet several criteria for early electrification (low utilization, high cost, and/or high fuel consumption). More specifically, these vehicles are underutilized and high-cost. The F-250 and F-450 also consume more fuel per mile than other vehicles in the fleet based on their estimated annual mileage and 12-month fuel transaction data.

These 5 vehicles are not eligible for retirement or nearing retirement.

44 Table 17. Vehicles Meeting Several Criteria for Early Electrification ID Description Utilizati
on
Cost Efficiency Fuel Efficiency
3530 Colorado Low High-Cost Medium Fuel Consumption
0566 E-350 Van Low High-Cost Medium Fuel Consumption
0638 E-450 Box Van Low High-Cost Medium Fuel Consumption 0813 F-250 Low High-Cost High Fuel Consumption
0832 F-450, Aerial Lift Low High-Cost High Fuel Consumption

For the subsequent analysis phase, we compared the Total Costs of Ownership (TCO) for vehicles in the fleet and EV equivalent replacements. The purchase costs of EVs are often perceived as barriers to electrification (Macharis et al., 2013). Rather than basing procurement decisions on upfront costs alone, purchasing decisions can be based on understanding the total costs of owning and maintaining vehicles (Ellram, 1995; Macharis et al., 2013). Comparing TCOs in the analysis helped assess vehicles' real competitiveness and sequence conversion to maximize financial returns (Atlas Public Policy, 2021; Macharis et al., 2013). For example, according to the TCO literature, light-duty EVs have a cost lower than conventional vehicles of their category (Macharis et al., 2013). The DRVE tool is open-source and can calculate differences between TCOs for EVs and ICEs with few data inputs (Atlas Public Policy, 2021).

This tool was used to conduct a cost-benefit analysis of electrification for every vehicle (Atlas Public Policy, 2021).

We uploaded an Excel containing VIN numbers, expected years of use (10 years according to RC's retirement policy), and vehicles' annual mileage. We did not use the tool's default figures for expected years of use and annual vehicle miles traveled. We used the zip code 91739 to locate the fleet in Rancho Cucamonga. We chose to apply available state incentives to subsidize the purchase of EVs. Applying state incentives affects TCO calculations as the upfront costs of some EV replacements decrease. Receiving incentives or rebates towards the purchase of EVs is not guaranteed.
45 8 VINs were dropped because the system could not identify them. We manually inputted vehicle make and model information for 7 of the 8 vehicles. We could not correct 1 VIN because we received no vehicle description.

Figure 11. Screenshot Image: Initial Data Inputs

46 Figure 12. Screenshot Image: Available State Incentives Applied

Figure 13. Screenshot Image: VINs Dropped

We were able to customize selections in the tool. Given the data we were provided with or could source, we customized the following data entries:

47 Table 18. Fuel prices
Field Input
Gasoline price $4.80 per gallon
Diesel price $4.83 per gallon
Electricity price $0.2218 per kWh
Charging mix 80, 15, 5; see screenshot below
Ownership strategy Purchase (cash)

We used the same values for fuel prices from our earlier analysis. RC staff provided us with the average electricity price based on their recent financial records. RC staff confirmed that vehicles are purchased (cash). Finally, although RC staff aims to charge vehicles where they are domiciled, RC staff shared that employees drive them home, and charging stations have yet to be installed at all city locations. Therefore, we assumed vehicles would be charged 80% of the time where they are domiciled, i.e., Depot/Home Charging, 15% of the time in the community while en route or at employees’ homes, i.e., Public Charging, and 5% of the time at other city locations, i.e., En Route Charging. The tool defines these terms or categories. The charging mix setting affects the overall costs of charging EVs because cities often pay lower commercial rates for electricity.

Figure 14. Screenshot Image: Charging Mix Setting Selection Screen

48 The full DRVE report has been included with the project report submission as a separate attachment. According to the report, 38% of the fleet are light-duty vehicles. Medium-duty vehicles make up 62% percent of the fleet.

The tool calculates TCO using vehicle purchase price, operating and maintenance costs over the vehicle's life. The analysis uses the vehicle's depreciated value at the end of its useful life. It is calculated using each vehicle's purchase price, range, and annual mileage and relies on a formula developed using real-world used vehicle sales data. The analysis includes calculations of the net present value (NPV) of 100 percent electrification compared to 100 percent conventional vehicle use. The following chart, pulled from the DRVE report, compares the NPV of the TCO of all vehicles across the fleet by vehicle class. Over the lifespan of the vehicles, EV alternatives for minivans, pickup trucks, sedans, and SUVs will cost less per mile than their conventional counterparts.

Table 19. NPV Calculations
Row Labels Average Total NPV
Cost ($/Mile)
Average Total NPV Cost
Delivery Truck
Conventional $6.05 $174,490.20
EV Alternative $7.03 $196,512.48
Minivan
Conventional $0.48 $123,798.10
EV Alternative $0.44 $113,192.51
Pickup Truck
Conventional $1.34 $52,249.56
EV Alternative $1.29 $49,298.58
49 Sedan
Conventional $3.07 $35,200.93
EV Alternative $2.87 $33,690.35
SUV
Conventional $1.45 $44,765.32
EV Alternative $1.44 $44,376.86
Vans
Conventional $7.96 $89,737.42
EV Alternative $7.99 $74,061.59
Work Truck
Conventional $4.73 $128,880.01
EV Alternative $6.51 $169,848.14
Grand Total $4.55 $118,590.54

The following charts were copied from the DRVE report. The charts compare the nominal costs per mile per vehicle. Across all vehicle types, EV alternatives for light-duty vehicles cost less than conventional ones because of their lower maintenance and fuel costs.

Electrifying light-duty vehicles in the fleet results in long-term cost savings. By and large, EV alternatives for medium-duty vehicles cost more than conventional ones; however, nominal costs per mile are similar for EV alternatives and conventional vans.

50 Figure 15. DRVE Report Chart #1

51 Figure 16. DRVE Report Chart #2

The following table from the DRVE report shows the average total cost of ownership per mile for each use case.

Table 20. CPM
Original CPM EV Average CPM
Delivery Truck $6.05 $7.03
Minivan $0.48 $0.44
Pickup Truck $1.34 $1.29
Sedan $3.07 $2.87
SUV $1.45 $1.44
Vans $7.96 $7.99
Work Truck $4.73 $6.51
Grand Total $4.13 $4.98

52 The following table lists the most cost effective replacement vehicles compared to their conventional counterparts.

Table 21. Vehicle Class Passenger Vehicles (Light-Duty) Top 5 Passenger Vehicles to Procure
ICE Replacement
Avg Percent
Savings from EVs EV Alternative Vehicles
HONDA Civic 11.42% 2022 Chevrolet Bolt EV
BEV
3 FORD Escape 11.23% 2022 Ford Escape FWD

PHEV PHEV
15 RAM Promaster City 8.57% 2022 Chrysler Pacifica
Hybrid PHEV
1 FORD F-150 6.76% 2022 Ford F-150
Lightning 4WD BEV
17 RAM 1500 6.24% 2022 Ford F-150
Lightning 4WD BEV
1 Grand Total 8.69% 2022 Chevrolet Bolt
EV BEV
37 Vehicle Class
Medium and Heavy-Duty
Top 5 Medium and Heavy-Duty Vehicles to Procure
ICE Replacement
Avg Percent
Savings from EVs EV Alternative Vehicles
53 FORD E-150 40.06% 2023 Ford eTransit -
Passenger Van BEV
5 CHEVROLET Express 31.72% 2023 Ford eTransit -
Passenger Van BEV
3 HONDA Civic 11.42% 2022 Chevrolet Bolt EV
BEV
3 FORD Escape 11.23% 2022 Ford Escape FWD

PHEV PHEV
15 RAM Promaster City 8.57% 2022 Chrysler Pacifica
Hybrid PHEV
1 Grand Total 22.85% 2022 Chevrolet Bolt
EV BEV 27

Of the vehicles evaluated by the tool, electrifying 29 of the vehicles will neither likely nor unlikely reduce costs. Electrifying 65 of the vehicles will likely reduce costs. Electrifying the other 55 vehicles will not likely reduce costs. The complete list of the vehicles and the likelihood of cost savings from electrifying these vehicles can be found in the DRVE report. Of the 29 vehicles that are eligible for retirement, nearing the end of their lifespans, or costlier based on an evaluation and analysis of internal data, the following vehicles can be electrified to reduce costs according to the TCO analysis; EV replacement models were included if they were listed in the previous charts listing the top EVs to procure:

Table 22. Candidates for Early Electrification and Likelihood of Cost Savings ID Description Likelihood of Cost Savings Top EV Replacements to Procure
3530 Colorado Likely NA
0566 E-350 Van Very Likely NA
0638 E-450 Box Van Very Unlikely NA
0813 F-250 Very Unlikely NA
54 0832 F-450, Aerial Lift Very Unlikely NA
0568 F-150 Crew Cab Likely 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning
4WD BEV
0604 F-150 XL Ext Cab Neither Likely Nor Unlikely 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning 4WD BEV
0611 F-350 Stakebed Neither Likely Nor Unlikely NA
0694 Escape, Hybrid Likely 2022 Ford Escape FWD PHEV
1414 Ranger Likely NA
1914 F-150 Pick-up Neither Likely Nor Unlikely 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning 4WD BEV
2511 F-350 Stakebed Neither Likely Nor Unlikely NA
2515 F-350 Stakebed Likely NA
2522 F-250 Supercab Very Unlikely NA
2691 F-250 Pick-up Unlikely NA
3618 F-150 Crew Cab Neither Likely Nor Unlikely 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning 4WD BEV
3617 F-350 Service Bed Neither Likely Nor Unlikely NA
1606 F-150 4X4 Likely 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning
4WD BEV
2411 Ranger Likely NA
2631 F-550 Dump Likely NA
0663 Dump, 10-Wheel Unlikely NA
55 2223 Explorer Likely NA
0501 F-150 Pick-up Neither Likely Nor Unlikely 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning 4WD BEV
1557 F-350 Utility Unlikely NA
1800 F-250 Very Unlikely NA
0597 F-350 Stakebed Unlikely NA
0502 F-150 Pick-up Neither Likely Nor Unlikely 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning 4WD BEV
2222 Explorer Likely NA
2616 F-150 Pick-up Unlikely 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning
4WD BEV

RC could begin by electrifying all 65 vehicles identified in the DRVE report as likely to reduce costs if electrified. RC could electrify vehicles eligible for retirement, nearing the end of their lifespans, or costly if they are likely to reduce costs if electrified (those vehicles listed above, highlighted in green). RC could also use other criteria explained in this section to sequence the electrification of vehicles. For example, certain vehicles have more cost-effective EV alternatives. RC could electrify those vehicles with existing EV equivalents that are cost- effective. This report does not investigate the availability of EV alternatives. Given the implementation timeline, the availability of EV alternatives for fleet vehicles should influence the plan.

Discussion: Fleet Utilization Study for Fire’s Fleet
Table 23. Fire Fleet Profile at a Glance.

Total Number of Vehicles 25
% of Pool Vehicles 12%
% of Non-Pool Vehicles 88%
% of Trucks 20%
% of Sedans 16%
% of Other (SUV, Van, EVs Etc.) 64%
56 Median Age 11
Median Miles 74,787
Number of Vehicles Eligible for Retirement Not Applicable

To be consistent with the analysis conducted for RC, 3 EVs and 1 CNG (lacking data) were not evaluated.

The Fire Department’s non-suppression fleet predominantly comprises SUVs and trucks with costlier electric vehicle replacements (Energy5, 2023). Most vehicles are 10-15 years old, as the histogram below captures. Because the Fire Department does not have a policy for retiring vehicles, i.e., after a certain age or total mileage, we could not conclude whether certain vehicles should be replaced because they are at or near the end of their lifespans.

Figure 17: Fire Department Vehicle Age Distribution

In addition to creating a fleet profile, we calculated: average annual mileage, average annual fuel consumption, fuel consumption per mile, average annual fuel costs, fuel costs per mile, maintenance costs per mile, and costs per mile. The chart below summarizes the data points and formulas for calculations and the limitations of the data and calculations. For example, the Fire Department does not track fuel expenses for vehicles in the fleet. As a substitute for actual data, we used the county’s current average fuel costs to calculate annual fuel costs for vehicles. We also calculated averages for different measures using several years of data to annualize the data. Although we were provided data for 2019 through 2023, some vehicles were purchased more recently and did not have data dating back to 2019, 2020, or 2021. We did not use fuel data for 2023 because we are midway through the year. The fire department did not provide us with maintenance cost data for 2022. In other words, how we calculated averages differs for every vehicle and every category because data was available in some years and not others.

57 Table 24. Fire Fleet Data
Measurement Data Points Formula Indicator Of Limitations Annual mileage
● Annual
mileage data
for 2019-2022
if available
Sum of annual
mileage/the number of
years the data is
available for=average
annual mileage
Utilization
Average annual
mileage; utilization
could differ
annually
Annual fuel
consumption
● Fuel quantities
for 2019-2022
if available
Sum of fuel
quantities/the number
of years the data is
available for=average
fuel consumption
Utilization

Vehicle
performance in
terms of fuel
efficiency

Assumes a
relationship
between quantities
of fuel consumed
and level of
utilization when fuel
consumption may
be more so related
to vehicle
performance
Fuel
consumption per
mile
● Annual
mileage
● Annual fuel
quantities
● Fuel
consumption
per mile for
2019-2022 if
available
Annual fuel
consumption/annual
mileage=annual fuel
consumption per mile

Sum of annual fuel
consumption per
mile/the number of
years the data is
available for=average
fuel consumption per
mile
Vehicle
performance in
terms of fuel
efficiency
Average; not an
indicator of fuel
economy
Annual fuel costs
● Average
annual fuel
consumption
● Current
average fuel
prices in San
Bernardino
County
according to
AAA as of
6/29/23
Average annual fuel
consumption x current
average fuel
prices=average annual
fuel costs
Cost efficiency
Calculated using
average annual fuel
consumption and
current average fuel
prices; all averages,
not real data
Fuel costs per
mile
● Average
annual fuel
costs
● Average
annual
mileage
Annual fuel
costs/average annual
mileage=fuel costs per
mile
Cost efficiency

Vehicle
performance in
terms of fuel
efficiency

All
averages/estimates,
not real data
Maintenance/rep ● Annual Annual maintenance Cost efficiency Only received 58 air costs per mile maintenance
costs
● Annual
mileage
● Maintenance
costs per mile
for 2019-2021
if available
costs/annual
mileage=annual
maintenance costs per
mile

Sum of annual
maintenance costs per
mile/the number of
years the data is
available for=average
maintenance costs per
mile

maintenance/repair
costs for 2019-2021;
does not reflect the
total maintenance
costs over vehicles’
lifespans
Costs per mile
● Fuel costs per
mile
● Maintenance
costs per mile
Fuel costs per mile +
maintenance costs per
mile=costs per mile
Cost efficiency
All
averages/estimates,
not real data

We can evaluate vehicles’:

○ Utilization using average annual mileage (PPIAF, 2006) ○ Cost efficiency using costs per mile (DDC FPO Solutions, n.d.) ○ Vehicle performance in terms of fuel efficiency using fuel consumption per mile (Motive, 2020)

Through the fleet utilization study, we aimed to categorize vehicles based on their utilization, cost efficiency, and fuel efficiency.

Table 25. Data Categories
Utilization High Medium Low
Cost Efficiency High Medium Low
Fuel Efficiency High Medium Low

We calculated the average, median, and standard deviation and identified the entire fleet's minimum and maximum annual mileage. We then assigned a range of data values to "high utilization," "medium utilization," and "low utilization." Vehicles could be categorized as high, medium, or low in terms of utilization based on where their mileage falls within the data ranges.

59 Table 26. Calculations Annual Mileage
Average Annual Mileage (miles) 4,738
Median Annual Mileage (miles) 3,657
Minimum Annual Mileage (miles) 545
Maximum Annual Mileage (miles) 16,070
STDEV Annual Mileage 3446

Table 27. Utilization
High Medium Low
≥8,184 miles annually 8,184> and >1,292 miles annually ≤1,292 miles annually

Note: high is equal to or greater than 8,184 miles annually, the average plus one standard deviation; medium is less than 8,184 miles and greater than 1,292 miles, the average minus one standard deviation; low is equal to or less than 1,292 miles, the average minus one standard deviation

We were given yearly vehicle maintenance costs from 2019 to 2022. We divided annual maintenance costs by annual mileage to calculate annual maintenance costs per vehicle mile.

We then calculated the average annual maintenance costs per mile for vehicles. We also calculated the average, median, and standard deviation and identified the minimum and maximum maintenance/repair costs per mile for the entire fleet, as represented in the below chart.

Table 27. Calculations Maintenance/Repair Costs Per Mile Average Maintenance Costs Per Mile $0.37
Median Maintenance Costs Per Mile $0.17
Minimum Maintenance Costs Per Mile $0.04
Maximum Maintenance Costs Per Mile $3.45
STDEV Maint. Costs Per Mile 0.667179644

We were provided annual fuel consumption data for 2019-2022. We calculated the average number of gallons of fuel consumed by vehicles annually (by dividing the totals by the number of years the data was available). We then multiplied the average number of gallons of fuel consumed annually by the average price of gasoline ($4.80) or diesel ($4.83) per gallon in San Bernardino County according to AAA as of
60 June 29, 2023, to calculate their annual fuel costs in present terms. We then divided their annual fuel costs by their average annual mileage to calculate fuel costs per mile for all vehicles. We also calculated the average, median, and standard deviation and identified the minimum and maximum fuel costs per mile for the entire fleet, as represented in the chart below.

Table 28. Calculations Fuel Costs Per Mile
Average Fuel Costs Per Mile $0.22
Median Fuel Costs Per Mile $0.18
Min Fuel Costs Per Mile $0.11
Max Fuel Costs Per Mile $0.62
STDEV Fuel Costs Per Mile $0.12

We added fuel and maintenance/repair costs per mile to calculate vehicles’ costs per mile. We also calculated statistics for the entire fleet, as shown below.

Table 29. Calculations Costs Per Mile
Average Costs Per Mile $0.59
Median Costs Per Mile $0.37
Min Costs Per Mile $0.15
Max Costs Per Mile $3.79
STDEV Costs Per Mile 0.7199678636

We could not use the standard deviation and average or median costs per mile to determine value ranges for each category of cost efficiency because low-cost vehicles would need to have costs below zero. The histogram below shows that all vehicles’ costs per mile are grouped around the median or average for the fleet. Only 1 vehicle has costs per mile that significantly exceed the rest of the fleet’s costs. We could not draw conclusions about vehicles other than identifying 1 vehicle that is more expensive than the rest of the vehicles.

61 Figure 18: Costs Per Mile Comparisons

Lastly, we used calculations for annual fuel consumption to determine fuel efficiency by dividing annual fuel consumption (number of gallons of fuel consumed on average) by average annual mileage. Statistics for the fleet are summarized below.

Table 30. Calculations Annual Fuel Consumption
Average Qts Fuel 197.4435
Median Qts Fuel 153.475
Min Qts Fuel 31.9
Max Qts Fuel 733.1875
STDEV Qts Fuel 156.988858

Table 31. Calculations Fuel Consumption Per Mile
Median Fuel Consumption Per Mile (Gallons) 0.04
Min Fuel Consumption Per Mile (Gallons) 0.02
Max Fuel Consumption Per Mile (Gallons) 0.13
STDEV Fuel Consumption Per Mile 0.02623952103

Again, we used a histogram chart to develop categories for fuel consumption. Vehicles' fuel consumption per mile is grouped around the fleet's median and average fuel consumption per mile. There are no significant differences between the quantities of fuel consumed every

62 mile by vehicles. However, based on the histogram chart, we identified two outliers meaning 2 vehicles that consumed more fuel per mile than other vehicles in the fleet.

Figure 19: Fuel Consumption Comparison

Results: Fleet Utilization Study for Fire’s Fleet

The vehicles were sorted based on annual mileage and categorized as high, medium, or low utilization. The following vehicle needs to be more utilized; it is estimated to be driven less than 1,292 miles annually: Nissan NV200, 2020, ID #164-20. The following vehicles are utilized more frequently than the other vehicles in the fleet: 1) Nissan NV200, 2020, ID #163- 20; 2) Toyota RAV-4, 2020, ID # 160-20; and 3) Chevy Colorado 4X4, 2018, ID #151-18. The remaining 21 vehicles are driven relatively the same amount during the year.

We could not sort vehicles based on their costs per mile and categorize them as high, medium, or low-cost because the fleet's costs per mile were similar. However, we used a histogram to identify a high-cost vehicle: Ford Ranger 4WD, 2002, ID #075-02. Notably, this vehicle is also over 20 years old. Electrifying this vehicle will save costs by reducing fuel and maintenance costs (The Climate Group, 2020; US Department of Energy, n.d.).

Finally, we could not sort vehicles based on their fuel consumption per mile and categorize them as high, medium, or low fuel consumption. Vehicles consume a similar amount of fuel per mile across the fleet. Furthermore, this data does not speak to vehicles' fuel economy rather, it compares their fuel consumption to other vehicles in the fleet. In other words, the data depicts how they perform compared to other vehicles in the fleet, but not generally, compared to industry standards. The vehicles could have good fuel economy according to industry standards.

Using a histogram chart, however, we identified 2 vehicles that consume significantly more fuel

63 per mile than the rest of the fleet: 1) Ford Ranger 4WD, 2002, ID #075-02, and 2) Ford F350, 2008, ID #104-08.

We could not produce a robust replacement schedule based on the data provided because vehicles' utilization, cost efficiency, and fuel efficiency are similar. Installing a telematics system would enable the Fire Department to track data such as downtime/idle time, which could be used to create a replacement schedule. More specifically, vehicles that are idle for more extended periods could be more easily replaced by EVs because of their required charging time.

For the following analysis phase, we compared the Total Costs of Ownership (TCO) for vehicles in the fleet and EV equivalent replacements. We uploaded an Excel containing VINs and vehicles' annual mileage. We used the DRVE tool's value of 7 years for all vehicles' expected lifespans. We used the zip code 91739 to locate the fleet in Rancho Cucamonga. We chose to apply available state incentives to subsidize the purchase of EVs, e.g., Clean Vehicle Rebate Project and California HVIP. Applying state incentives affects TCO calculations as the upfront costs of some EV replacements decrease. Receiving incentives or rebates towards the purchase of EVs is not guaranteed.

We were able to customize selections in the tool. Given the data we were provided with or could source, we customized the following data entries:

Table 32. Fuel Prices
Field Input
Gasoline price $4.80 per gallon
Diesel price $4.83 per gallon
Electricity price $0.2218 per kWh
Charging mix 10, 10, 80; see screenshot below
Ownership strategy Purchase (cash)

We used the same values for fuel prices from our earlier analysis. RC staff provided us with the average electricity price based on their recent financial records. We used the same electricity price for Fire’s fleet analysis. RC staff confirmed that vehicles are purchased (cash).

We assumed Fire also purchases vehicles in cash. Finally, Fire staff shared that they plan to charge their vehicles at city-owned locations (not necessarily where they are currently domiciled). Therefore, we assumed vehicles would be charged 10% of the time where they are domiciled, i.e., Depot/Home Charging, 10% of the time in the community while en route or at employees’ homes, i.e., Public Charging, and 80% of the time at other city locations, i.e., En 64 Route Charging. The tool defines these terms or categories. The charging mix setting affects the overall costs of charging EVs because cities often pay lower commercial rates for electricity.

Figure 20: Charging Strategy

The full DRVE report has been included with the project report submission as a separate attachment. According to the report, 76% of the fleet is light-duty vehicles. Medium-duty vehicles make up 24% percent of the fleet.

The tool calculates TCO using vehicle purchase price, operating and maintenance costs over the vehicle's life. The analysis uses the vehicle's depreciated value at the end of its useful life. It is calculated using each vehicle's purchase price, range, and annual mileage and relies on a formula developed using real-world used vehicle sales data. The analysis includes calculations of the net present value (NPV) of 100 percent electrification compared to 100 percent conventional vehicle use. The following chart, pulled from the DRVE report, compares the NPV of the TCO of all vehicles across the fleet by vehicle class. Over the lifespan of the vehicles, EV alternatives for vans, pickup trucks, and sedans will cost less per mile than their conventional counterparts. EV alternatives for SUVs will cost relatively the same per mile as their conventional counterparts.

65 Table 33: NPV Calculations
Row Labels Average Total NPV Cost
($/Mile) Average Total NPV Cost
Pickup Truck
Conventional $1.29 $43,785.86
EV Alternative $1.19 $38,653.30
Sedan
Conventional $1.30 $32,386.85
EV Alternative $1.21 $28,979.86
SUV
Conventional $1.25 $34,785.67
EV Alternative $1.25 $34,199.98
Vans
Conventional $5.78 $72,785.00
EV Alternative $2.50 $33,439.65
Work Truck
Conventional $4.16 $93,052.00
EV Alternative $5.73 $127,788.72
Grand Total $2.01 $43,743.84
66 The following charts were copied from the DRVE report. The charts compare the nominal costs per mile per vehicle. EV alternatives for light-duty pick-up trucks and sedans cost less than conventional ones because of their lower maintenance and fuel costs. Electrifying these light-duty vehicles in the fleet results in long-term cost savings. By and large, EV alternatives for medium-duty vehicles cost more than conventional ones; however, nominal costs per mile are less for EV alternatives for vans.

Figure 21. DRVE Report Fire Chart #1

Figure 22. DRVE Report Fire Chart #2

The following chart from the DRVE report shows the average total cost of ownership per mile for each use case.

67 Table 34. Cost Per Mile
Original CPM EV Average CPM
Pickup Truck $1.29 $1.19
Sedan $1.30 $1.21
SUV $1.25 $1.25
Vans $5.78 $2.50
Work Truck $4.16 $5.73
Grand Total $2.22 $1.80

The following charts list the most cost effective replacement vehicles compared to their conventional counterparts.

Table 35. ICE Replacement Options
Vehicle Class
Passenger Vehicles (Light-Duty)
Top 5 Passenger Vehicles to Procure
ICE Replacement Avg Percent
Savings from EVs EV Alternative Vehicles
FORD C-Max 18.22% 2022 Chevrolet Bolt EV
BEV
3 68
CHEVROLET Colorado 16.78% 2022 Ford F-150
Lightning 4WD BEV
1 DODGE Ram 9.47% 2022 Ford F-150
Lightning 4WD BEV
1 TOYOTA RAV4 5.79% 2024 Chevrolet Blazer EV
BEV
2 FORD Escape 5.06% 2022 Ford Escape FWD

PHEV PHEV
6 Grand Total 9.73% 2022 Chevrolet Bolt
EV BEV 13
Vehicles (Medium-Duty)
Top 5 Medium and Heavy-Duty Vehicles to Procure
ICE Replacement Avg Percent
Savings from EVs EV Alternative Vehicles
NISSAN NV200 54.74% 2023 Ford eTransit - Cargo
Van BEV
2 FORD E-350 53.86% 2023 Ford eTransit - Cargo
Van BEV
1 CHEVROLET Express 52.74% 2023 Ford eTransit - Cargo
Van BEV
1 FORD C-Max 18.22% 2022 Chevrolet Bolt EV
BEV
3 CHEVROLET Colorado 16.78% 2022 Ford F-150
Lightning 4WD BEV
1 Grand Total 41.05% 2022 Chevrolet Bolt
EV BEV 8
69 Of the vehicles evaluated by the tool, electrifying 1 of the vehicles will neither likely nor unlikely reduce costs. Electrifying 4 of the vehicles will not likely reduce costs. Electrifying the remaining 20 vehicles will likely reduce costs. The list of the vehicles and the likelihood of cost savings from electrifying these vehicles can be found below. EV replacement models were included if they were listed in the previous charts listing the top EVs to procure:

Table 36. Candidates for Early Electrification and Likelihood of Cost Savings ID Description Likelihood of Cost
Savings Top EV Replacements to Procure
075-02 Ford Ranger 4WD Likely NA
076-02 Dodge 4WD Pickup Likely 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning 4WD BEV 085-00 Chevy Van 3500 Very Likely 2023 Ford eTransit - Cargo Van BEV 096-07
Ford Escape Hybrid Likely 2022 Ford Escape FWD PHEV PHEV 097-06
Ford Crown Victoria Unlikely NA
103-07
Ford E350 Van Very Likely 2023 Ford eTransit - Cargo Van BEV 104-08
Ford F350 Very Unlikely NA
110-08
Ford Escape Hybrid Likely 2022 Ford Escape FWD PHEV PHEV 115-08
Saturn Vue Hybrid Neither Likely Nor Unlikely NA
116-09
Saturn Vue Likely NA
118-09
Saturn Vue Likely NA
121-10
Ford Explorer 4WD Unlikely NA
70 125-12
Ford Escape Hybrid Likely 2022 Ford Escape FWD PHEV PHEV 126-12
Ford Escape Hybrid Likely 2022 Ford Escape FWD PHEV PHEV 127-12
Ford Escape Hybrid Likely 2022 Ford Escape FWD PHEV PHEV 128-12
Ford Escape Hybrid Likely 2022 Ford Escape FWD PHEV PHEV 129-12
Ford F350 4X4 Very Unlikely NA
133-13
Ford C-Max Hybrid Likely 2022 Chevrolet Bolt EV BEV
134-13
Ford C-Max Hybrid Likely 2022 Chevrolet Bolt EV BEV
135-13
Ford C-Max Hybrid Likely 2022 Chevrolet Bolt EV BEV
151-18
Chevy Colorado 4X4 Likely 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning 4WD BEV 160-20 Toyota RAV-4
Likely 2024 Chevrolet Blazer EV BEV
161-20
Toyota RAV-4 Likely 2024 Chevrolet Blazer EV BEV
163-20 Nissan NV200 Van
Very Likely 2023 Ford eTransit - Cargo Van BEV
164-20 Nissan NV200 Van
Very Likely 2023 Ford eTransit - Cargo Van BEV

Given the gaps in the analysis of internally tracked fleet data, we recommend using the potential of cost savings from electrifying to guide and sequence conversion. This report does not investigate the availability of EV alternatives. The availability of EV alternatives for fleet vehicles should influence the plan, given the implementation timeline.

71 Summary of Findings
RQ1:

RQ2:

72 RQ3:

Conclusions and Recommendations

The following recommendations are generated from data collection, research methodology findings, and analysis. The recommendations are structured into three sections reflecting the project’s original research questions. These recommendations are intended to guide the decision-making of the City of Rancho Cucamonga for overcoming the challenges associated with the EV fleet conversion plan.

RQ 1: Recommendations for an ideal EV fleet size and
composition

According to the research, the following criteria should be considered to determine the ideal fleet size and composition of EVs that would meet the needs of the City and Fire Department, given fiscal and temporal constraints:

● Age and total mileage relative to vehicle lifespan
● Idle time/Downtime
● Utilization rate
● Light-, Medium-, or Heavy-Duty vehicle classification ● Total cost of ownership in comparison to the total cost of ownership of an EV equivalent

Based on the Fleet Utilization Analysis and RC’s vehicle retirement policy, there are 24

73 vehicles eligible for retirement or nearing the end of their lifespans. Table 12 and Table 13 identify these vehicles, and the lists could serve as part of a vehicle conversion plan that prioritizes their electrification. Additionally, based on the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) Analysis conducted using the DRVE tool, 65 vehicles in the current fleet could be electrified to reduce fleet operating costs (fuel and maintenance) long-term. The DRVE report includes EV alternative makes and models and quantifies the cost savings. After replacing the older vehicles in the fleet, RC could prioritize the electrification of the remaining vehicles based on the potential for cost savings in the earlier phases of implementation. As mentioned in the report findings, vehicle utilization rates and costs are estimated due to data limitations from current fleet tracking practices. The City of Rancho Cucamonga does not track annual vehicle mileage, fuel costs, or downtime. As the city begins to procure new EVs for the fleet, improving and updating its fleet management system will be critical.

Our team recommends implementing a telematics system for its fleet. Telematics systems help manage fleets and track relevant vehicle data. A well-rounded fleet management system will help track and compile important data, log fuel consumption and idle habits, reduce maintenance costs, increase vehicle lifespan, and improve organizational productivity and efficiency (Gargaro, 2023; Rand McNally, 2023; Hennigan & Bottorff, 2022). Tracking vehicle downtime is essential for EV conversion because it informs whether the utilization schedule permits enough time for charging. It also offers a better understanding of the necessary EV range, which will guide EV make and model selection. Finally, telematics systems can also help support future vehicle conversion and infrastructure decisions with factual data that justify decision-making.

The fire department’s non-suppression vehicles faced similar challenges and limitations.

Unfortunately, based on the data provided, the vehicles could not be differentiated in terms of their utilization and costs. Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District does not have an explicit vehicle retirement policy like the one that the city has. Therefore, we used the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) Analysis to identify early electrification opportunities that can save the Fire Department money. Table 36 identifies current fleet vehicles that can be replaced with EVs to produce (fuel and maintenance) cost savings – this list could be used as a replacement schedule.

As mentioned in the report findings, there are limitations to the Fire Department’s current fleet tracking practices. For example, the RCFPD does not track vehicle downtime or fuel costs, among other things. Therefore, our team also recommends implementing a telematics system to improve their fleet management, vehicle data collection, and overall organizational efficiency.

There are several avenues for local governments to acquire telematics software and fleet management systems. Several companies dedicate themselves to producing software with innovative and supportive features. Additionally, many companies partner together to ease the fleet management acquisition process for municipalities. For example, Sourcewell offers telematic software contracts to municipalities at discounted rates and by simply issuing a purchase order for easier procurement. When selecting a telematics system, finding one that meets the client’s needs is important, as price and software features vary. The following CAM Analysis (Figure 23) compares four alternative solutions to the client’s current management system (status quo). The comparison criteria evaluate the ease of procurement, cost, software features, and acceptance/use by other local government entities and organizations.

74 Figure 23: CAM Analysis for Fleet Management Systems

Agile Fleet, Samsara Networks, Verizon Connect, and AUTOsist comprise the four potential alternatives to the status quo. Although their procurement processes are similar, AUTOsist is the only one that still needs to have a contract with Sourcewell and requires reaching out directly to the company. The costs for each software vary significantly. However, the discount contract rates with Sourcewell range from >1% to 100%. Since price is variable, choosing the most suitable alternative should rely on the software features that work best for the city and the Fire Department. The minimum features should include fleet management solutions that track total vehicle cost, vehicle utilization, fuel usage, and vehicle maintenance. Any additional features like dash cams, key management, facility surveillance, GPS tracking, and roadside assistance are non-priority. Finally, the Acceptance criteria offer insight into which other cities or organizations use each software. The CAM shows that Samsara Networks and Verizon Connect offer their services to bigger cities with larger fleets, like Sacramento, CA, Boston, MA, and San Jose, CA. Smaller cities and private companies mainly use Agile Fleet and AUTOsistSmaller cities and private companies mainly use Agile Fleet and AUTOsist.

Ultimately, the final decision should be based on which software meets the allocated budget and offers the features that the client prioritizes.

RQ 2: Recommendations for transitioning to an EV fleet

EV fleet conversion is a complex task that can generate various organizational challenges. An obstacle that consistently surfaced throughout the research, data collection, and client meetings was EV procurement. This report discussed several factors affecting vehicle procurement, such as supply chain issues, materials shortages, the COVID-19 pandemic, rising gas prices, and an increased demand paired with a limited inventory.

Our recommendations for successfully transitioning to an EV fleet focus on the following alternative EV procurement methods:

1. Cooperative Procurement

2. Purchasing EVs at Retail MSRP

3. Purchasing Used EVs

4. Purchasing EVs Out-of-State

5. Vehicle Leasing

75 Cooperative Procurement:

Cooperative procurement, or cooperative purchasing, is an agreement between two or more organizations that predetermine buying and purchasing requirements in a contract to streamline the procurement process and enhance purchasing power (Rimes, 2021; GEP et al., 2020).

Several organizations engage in cooperative EV procurement contracts with local governments, including Sourcewell, the Climate Mayors Collaborative, and the State of California. The primary benefit of cooperative procurement is that municipalities can sign up with each organization, browse solicitations through various contractors, issue purchase orders, and receive contracts for available EVs. It is essential to mention that EV contracts, bidding processes, and contract availability varies – having a designated staff member to stay on top of available contracts can improve successful procurement orders.

Purchasing EVs at Retail MSRP:

Limited EV inventories and increased EV demand have affected municipalities’ previous contracts with manufacturers and dealers. Before the EV boom, cities could procure several vehicles and place multiple orders (often at discounted prices) to satisfy their needs and requirements (GSA, 2023). As EV availability declined, manufacturers and dealers shifted their strategy to prioritize selling to everyday consumers at markup retail prices (Colato & Ice, 2023; Shepardson, 2023). Purchasing EVs at retail MSRP can improve procurement rates if cities are willing and able to pay retail prices. Establishing a pre-approved budget with the relevant city officials can help streamline this procurement process. Finally, it will be necessary to reconsider this method once EV availability returns to normal.

Purchasing Used EVs:

Purchasing used EVs is another suitable alternative procurement method. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has already acquired used EVs, proving its effectiveness. As EV technology advances, many current EV owners are looking to upgrade their vehicles to newer EVs with more robust battery capacities, longer vehicle ranges, faster charging times, and overall increased performance. The used market offers EVs at more affordable prices and reasonable warranties (Coren, 2023; Irfan, 2023). Although battery lifetime, vehicle range, and warranty details are essential, they may be less of a factor for city-owned cars that will be driven less often and shorter distances.
76 Purchasing EVs Out-of-State:

About 40% of all ZEVs in the U.S. have been sold in California (Dow, 2023). Aggressive GHG emission goals, state and local regulations, fuel cost savings, and rising gas prices have all contributed to California’s high EV demand. Fortunately, EV vehicles can often be procured in other parts of the country, like southeastern states, where the EV demand and uptake are not as high (Tucker, 2023; Irfan, 2023). This procurement method can offer options in a limited market. However, EV purchases out-of-state may come with elevated delivery fees.

Vehicle Leasing:

Although leasing EVs is not the preferred procurement method for government fleets, it still solves the current procurement challenges. Additionally, leasing companies may apply for the $7,500 federal tax credit and reflect it on the leasing agreement – which is an incentive that RC would not otherwise have been able to take advantage of (Voelcker, 2023; Electrification Coalition et al., 2020). The EV leasing procurement method offers several benefits to public fleets and consists of closed- and open-ended leases.

Figure 24: EV Procurement Recommendations

EV procurement can be challenging and include long delays. Additionally, medium- and heavy- duty EV procurement is currently unattainable due to non-existent ZEV options. Nevertheless, it is essential to remember that other reasonable options exist if vehicles need to be replaced and EVs are not attainable. The city and fire department might consider other alternative fuel vehicles like hybrid electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, or natural gas vehicles. If

77 these options are unavailable or less preferred, purchasing the newest gasoline (ICE), vehicle is still more likely to run cleaner and save money on fuel and maintenance costs.

The final recommendation for transitioning to an EV fleet is prioritizing charging infrastructure planning. An intelligent practice for an EV fleet conversion plan is establishing the necessary charging infrastructure before procuring vehicles. Installing charging infrastructure requires significant assessment and is a time-consuming endeavor. Rancho Cucamonga must develop a large project scale to accommodate its incoming EV fleet. Assessing EV charger needs and identifying possible charging station sites will be critical. Partnering with utility providers, like Southern California Edison (SCE), will be necessary to ensure sufficient grid power to charge the fleet. SCE’s Charge Ready Program offers financial incentives, on-site readiness assessment/inspections, and program-funded infrastructure installation.

Finally, it is essential to know that although SCE handles most of the design, line drawings, permits, grid connection, and construction, it will be the city’s responsibility to select and purchase the appropriate charging equipment. Partnering with organizations like ChargePoint or EVgo can help bring the entire charging infrastructure together. These companies can deliver level 2 and 3 charging stations and offer support and maintenance services.

RQ 3: Recommendations for implementing the electrification plan

RC is a dedicated leader in sustainability and innovation. In 2021 the city adopted its first-ever Climate Action Plan to address climate change and improve resiliency for the community by establishing Greenhouse Gas emission reduction by 47% by 2040. A critical effort that supports this goal is expanding electric vehicle charging infrastructure and transitioning from gas- powered vehicles to electric (Gillison et al., 2021).

From our team's research, RC's most effective way to implement the electrification plan is to identify the requirements for the EVs that RC would like to procure, including incorporating a trial period. EV manufacturers can loan out a vehicle for a few months. The trial period can allow for hands-on experience and provide an opportunity to collect data on average energy consumption, actual vehicle range, charging speeds, driver feedback, and on how well EVs can meet RC's operational needs, as well as to help inform future decisions around charging strategies and locating and planning for the charging infrastructure. The pilot period can also allow maintenance personnel to inspect the vehicle to determine whether they can meet maintenance requirements in-house or if it will require outsourcing.

RC will need to work with relevant approval authorities and consider a cooperative purchasing program like Sourcewell for the procurement process for supply chain advantages, best practices, and reduced administrative time and expenses. RC should consider selecting a project 78 manager because the conversion process will require significant coordination and engagement with external stakeholders. The project manager can oversee the process and provide expertise to ensure a successful conversion because even with the clear EV benefits, there are city leaders and community members that will be hesitant to support switching the city's vehicle fleet to electric, and this can cause barriers and inhibit the speed of EV adoption. Our research showed that firmly held beliefs about higher costs, range, and infrastructure were critical barriers to implementation, but this was primarily due to a lack of education, which could be overcome through outreach.

Following an assessment of RC's fleet operations, an opportunity exists to downsize. A replacement ratio of 1 to 1 is only sometimes needed. Downsizing can avoid unnecessary costs and maximize investment. The conversion should begin with replacing aging vehicles with high mileage, which are generally deteriorating, not worth the costs to repair, and no longer usable.

This will avoid opposition in response to replacing newer gas-powered vehicles in the fleet.

Regarding infrastructure, RC will need to determine a strategy around it. The strategy can involve depot charging that allows for custom charging configurations on-site and the necessary ratio of charges to vehicles. Telematics data can provide actionable insight to determine where chargers should be located, how many, and the charging speed.

Once EV models have been identified, as well as a charging strategy, RC should work with the electrical power company to identify the need for any grid upgrades and the roadmap to power delivery. The larger fire district vehicles can impose a more significant load on the electrical grid, and infrastructure upgrades may be required to supply the site with additional power.

RC has to determine its financial strategy and can look to federal and state governments, as well as non-governmental organizations, such as the Southern California Clean Cities Coalition that works with vehicle fleets to save energy, Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Review Committee (MSRC) that provides funding to cities for transportation initiatives to reduce air pollution from cars, and Southern California Edison's Charge Ready program that offers government organizations rebates to install EV charging stations, and others to identify funding, grants, and other financing programs that the city may be eligible for.

RC will need to select its preferred financing or leasing option. Several financing options exist for procuring EVs, including direct purchase, financing, and Enterprise leasing.

The final part of the conversion process is educating staff and training drivers. Drivers need to be trained on safety, plugging in vehicles to charge, and on operating EVs to maximize the range and being aware that EVs make less noise and pedestrians may not hear them 79 approaching. After deploying EVs, monitoring and evaluating their performance, such as charging rate and energy consumption, is also essential in calculating savings over the long run.

Future Research
Our research did not answer aspects of our research questions. We could not right-size RC and Fire's fleets and recommend complete fleet electrification schedules because of the absence of critical actual data.

In the case of RC, we could not accurately determine utilization rates, costs per mile, downtime or idle time, mission criticality, and whether all current features are necessary. RC does not track annual mileage, so we did not have accurate data to determine how often vehicles are driven. In collaboration with RC staff, we removed questions regarding the mission criticality of each vehicle from the survey. Also, most survey questions were optional, which resulted in fewer responses. Finally, we did not receive survey responses corresponding to all vehicles in the fleet.

To create the optimal electrified fleet profile for RC, we need to right-size the fleet, identifying vehicles that can be retired or sold without being replaced and vehicles that EVs can replace with fewer features and upgrades. We would have used information regarding mission criticality, purpose, and features from survey responses to right-size the fleet. Additionally, we would have used utilization rates to inform recommendations for right-sizing the fleet and EV replacement makes and models based on their battery ranges.

Our analysis of Fire's fleet was inconclusive because vehicles are driven relatively the same number of miles annually, vehicles cost relatively the same amount to own and maintain, and Fire needs to track downtime/idle time. Furthermore, we received a few survey responses from Fire staff.

Consequently, we used the TCO analysis completed using the DRVE tool to identify vehicles that can be electrified to reduce RC and Fire's expenses over the lifespan of these vehicles. The DRVE reports list replacement makes and models. The TCO analysis does not consider how vehicles are used, so recommended EV replacements may not meet operational requirements. RC and Fire must conduct further quantitative and qualitative research to understand better what vehicles are needed in their fleets. Once they have created optimal fleet profiles, they can use the DRVE tool to calculate cost savings from electrification and generate a list of EV equivalents. Next, RC and Fire will need to investigate the availability of EVs. The availability of EVs changes daily. There are two websites that can be used to research the availability of EVs: the EV Finder tool and the Energy Department's Vehicle Search tool (Energy et al. & The EV Finder, n.d.). The EV finder tool quickly lists all dealerships with existing inventory based on the following inputs: year, make, model, zip code, and the desired distance from the dealerships. Each search result includes links to local dealerships' websites.

We also interviewed subject matter experts and other cities' staff and conducted open- source research to identify best practices for electrification and implementing a conversion plan.

We identified cooperative procurement as a promising approach to procurement because RC and Fire can issue purchase orders to vendors awarded contracts by these other government entities that have completed the procurement process. RC and Fire must evaluate their local statutes to determine if they can procure from another government entity. Suppose their policies enable them to procure through the State of California or Sourcewell, a government entity. In 80 that case, they must contact them to ensure all the proper documentation has been submitted to the State or Sourcewell. The website for the Statewide Contract is as follows:
https://www.dgs.ca.gov/PD/Resources/Page-Content/Procurement-Division-Resources-List- Folder/Statewide-Contract-Fleet-Vehicles. Sourcewell contact information is included in the appendices.

In terms of implementation, other considerations include 1) funding; 2) infrastructure planning, i.e., installation of charging stations; 3) training and support for staff; and 4) EV maintenance.

The funding landscape is constantly changing. To stay apprised of funding opportunities, one of the interviewees recommended that RC and Fire staff join and participate in a Clean Cities group. We identified two existing funding programs in this report, but one will soon sunset.

We could not determine how many charging stations would be needed to support fully electrified fleets because we needed actual fleet data to study to understand utilization patterns better. For example, vehicles with more downtime can share a charger. We suggested RC and Fire work with their utility provider to survey sites to plan and budget for installation.

Engaging, training, and supporting staff to ensure the adoption of EVs was a recurring theme in our research; however, we were unable to identify training and support resources. We recommend working with one of the local college's Contract Education Departments to customize training; the local college will recruit the instructor and source or develop the materials. The Electrification Coalition is another resource that can provide these resources at no to low cost.

Finally, we spoke with staff of other cities that outsource EV maintenance services. We did not speak with anyone working for a city that built the internal infrastructure to maintain EVs. A cost comparison analysis will be needed to determine the most cost-effective approach for maintaining vehicles: outsourcing, hiring trained staff and purchasing equipment, or retraining existing staff and purchasing equipment. Given the current project's breadth and depth, we could not research and analyze maintenance costs.

81 References

AAA. (n.d.). AAA Gas Prices. Retrieved June 25, 2023, from https://gasprices.aaa.com/?state=CA
Agnes, M. (Ed.). (2000). Webster’s new world college dictionary (4th ed.). Foster City, CA:

IDG Books Worldwide.

Agranoff, R., & McGuire, M. (2003). Collaborative public management: New strategies for local governments. Georgetown University Press.

Alternative Fuels Data Center: California Laws and Incentives. (n.d.). Retrieved July 25, 2023, from https://afdc.energy.gov/laws/all?state=CA
Alternative Fuels Data Center: Vehicle Search. (n.d.). Retrieved July 23, 2023, from https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/search/results/?view_mode=grid&search_field=vehicle&search _dir=desc&per_page=8&current=true&ajax_count=18&fuel_id=41&category_id=27,25,29,9&a ll_manufacturers=y

American Cities Climate Challenge. (2023, May 23). Volkswagen (VW) Settlement Mitigation Funding—American Cities Climate Challenge. https://cityrenewables.org/ffold/volkswagen-vw- settlement-mitigation-funding/

An electrifying partnership. (2021, January 28). An Electrifying Partnership; Sourcewell. https://news.sourcewell-mn.gov/an-electrifying-partnership/ Andwari, A. M., Pesiridis, A., Rajoo, S., Martinez-Botas, R., & Esfahanian, V. (2017). A review of Battery Electric Vehicle technology and readiness levels. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 78, 414-430.

Apata, O., Bokoro, P. N., & Sharma, G. (2023). The Risks and Challenges of Electric Vehicle Integration into Smart Cities. Energies, 16(14), 5274.

Atlas Public Policy. (2021). DRVE User Guide.
https://electrificationcoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/DRVE-User-Guide-1.6-1.pdf Bardach, E. (1994). Comment: The Problem of “Best Practice” Research. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 13(2), 260–268. https://doi.org/10.2307/3325011

Barton, B., & Schütte, P. (2017). Electric vehicle law and policy: a comparative analysis.

Journal of Energy & Natural Resources Law, 35(2), 147-170.

82 Benchekroun, H. T., Benmamoun, Z., & Hachimi, H. (2019, April). How to select suppliers when implementing a sustainable procurement strategy. In 2019 5th International Conference on Optimization and Applications (ICOA) (pp. 1-4). IEEE.

Blanc, F. (n.d.). Inspection reforms: Why, how, and with what results. Oecd.org. https://www.oecd.org/regreform/Inspection%20reforms%20-%20web%20-F.%20Blanc.pdf Boeije, H. (2002). A purposeful approach to the constant comparative method in the analysis of qualitative interviews. Quality and quantity, 36, 391-409.

Boulanger, A. G., Chu, A. C., Maxx, S., & Waltz, D. L. (2011). Vehicle Electrification: Status and Issues. Proceedings of the IEEE, 99(6), 1116–1138.
https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2011.2112750
Boutueil, V. (2016). Fleet management and the adoption of innovations by corporate car fleets:
exploratory approach. Transportation Research Record, 2598(1), 84-91.

Bown, C. P. (2023). Industrial policy for electric vehicle supply chains and the US-EU fight over the Inflation Reduction Act. Peterson Institute for International Economics Working Paper, (23–1).

Brendel, A. B., Lichtenberg, S., Brauer, B., Nastjuk, I., & Kolbe, L. M. (2018). Improving electric vehicle utilization in carsharing: A framework and simulation of an e-carsharing vehicle utilization management system. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 64, 230-245.

Brown, S., Pyke, D., & Steenhof, P. (2010). Electric vehicles: The role and importance of standards in an emerging market. Energy Policy, 38(7), 3797-3806.

California Air Resource Board. (2023). Advanced clean fleets regulation: State and local government agency fleet requirements.
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/barcu/regact/2022/acf22/acffroa1.pdf Carter N, Bryant-Lukosius D, DiCenso A, Blythe J, Neville AJ. The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2014 Sep;41(5):545-7. doi: 10.1188/14.ONF.545-547.

PMID: 25158659.

Carpenter, V. P. (2021). Electric Vehicle Adoption in Washington State Municipalities: Does Local Government Capacity Explain Compliance with State Government Mandates.

Washington State University.

The Climate Group. (2020). EV100 Progress and Insights Report. file:///C:/Users/fbarr/Downloads/ev100_annual_progress_and_insights_report_2020_0.pdf

City of Rancho Cucamonga. (2021). Climate Action Plan 2021. City of Rancho Cucamonga. https://driveevfleets.org/procurement-process/
83 Climate Mayors Collaborative. (2018, August 15). Procurement Process | Drive EV Fleets.

Code of Federal Regulations. (2017). 45 CFR part 46—Prot ection of human subjects. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-45/subtitle-A/subchapter-A/part-46

Colato, J. & Ice, L. (2023). Charging into the future: The transition to electric vehicles. U.S.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. https://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-12/charging-into-the-future- the-transition-to-electric-vehicles.htm

Coren, M. J., (2023) Buy an electric vehicle now or wait? Here’s how to decide. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/04/11/electric- vehicle-buying-guide/

Cox Automotive Mobility. (2022).Supply Chain Challenges Impacting Electric Vehicle Adoption
https://www.coxautoinc.com/mobility/wp-
content/uploads/sites/11/2022/09/EV_Battery_Whitepaper.pdf Day, A. (2021, March 19). Approaches To Coding Your Data In Qualitative Research. https://www.uttyler.edu/research/files/ors_files/aday_coding_your_qualitative_data_03192021. pdf

DDC FPO Solutions. 12 Metrics You Should Be Tracking in Fleet Utilization. (n.d.). https://www.ddcfpo.com/freight-process-insights/12-metrics-you-should-be-tracking-in-fleet- utilization

DeCuir-Gunby, J.T., Marshall, P. L., & McCulloch, A. W. (2011). Developing and Using a Codebook for the Analysis of Interview Data: An Example from a Professional Development Research Project. Field Methods, 23(2), 136–155. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X10388468

Doherty, K. (2023, March 30). EV Fleet Challenges: Top Fleet Electrification Issues. Forward Thinking Systems. https://www.ftsgps.com/resource-center/ev-fleet-challenges/

Dow, J. (2023). CA hits EV target ahead of schedule. It’s not the first place to so do, and won’t be the last. Electrek. https://electrek.co/2023/04/21/ca-hits-ev-target-ahead-of-schedule-its-not- the-first-place-to-do-so-and-wont-be-the-last/
Electric Vehicles: Total Cost of Ownership Tool – Data Tools. (n.d.). IEA. Retrieved June 27, 2023, from https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-tools/electric-vehicles-total-cost-of- ownership-tool
Electric vehicles for fleets. (2022). Energy.gov.
https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_fleets.html

Electric Vehicle Wattage: Sedans vs SUVs. (n.d.). Evcharging Energy5. 84 https://energy5.com/electric-vehicle-wattage-sedans-vs-suvs Electrification Coalition. (2021, March 26). Dashboard for Rapid Vehicle Electrification - DRVE Tool Webinar for Climate Mayors. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KthyHXkAQk Electrification Coalition, Climate Mayors Collaborative, Sourcewell. (2020). Saving money with electric vehicle leasing: A case study of city fleets.
https://electrificationcoalition.org/resource/saving-money-with-ev-leasing/

Ellram, L. (1995). Total Cost of Ownership: An Analysis Approach for Purchasing.

International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 25(8), 4–23. https://doi.org/10.1108/09600039510099928
Ethics in procurement – simple, but not always easy. (2020, August 6). Logisticsbureau.com. https://www.logisticsbureau.com/ethics-in-procurement-simple-but-not-always-easy/ Ewing, R. H., Bartholomew, K., Winkelman, S., Walters, J., & Chen, D. (2005). Growing cooler: The evidence on urban development and climate change. Smart Growth America.

The EV Finder | Find Your New Electric Vehicle. (n.d.). Retrieved July 23, 2023, from https://theevfinder.com/
Fairley, P. (2017). California to Rule on Fate of E.V.s [News]. IEEE Spectrum, 44(11), 10–12.

Funding Finder. (2023). Funding Finder. CALSTART Rebate Finder. https://fundingfindertool.org/
Gahlaut, A., & Shapiro, B. (2023). How Cities and Counties Can Electrify Their Fleets. https://rmi.org/insight/how-cities-and-counties-can-electrify-their-fleets/

Gargaro, D. (2023). What is telematics? Business News Daily. https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/16102-telematics.html General Services Department. (2017). GSA BULLETIN FMR B-43 MOTOR VEHICLE MANAGEMENT. https://www.gsa.gov/cdnstatic/FMR_Bulletin_B-43.pdf General Services Administration. (2018). Vehicle Allocation Methodology and Federal Fleets. https://www.gsa.gov/cdnstatic/Vehicle%20Allocation%20Methodology%20and%20Federal%2 0Fleets.pdf
George Ehrhardt. (2020, July 16). Making Codebooks for qualitative data. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SiwhJnmZX3g

GEP (n.d.). What is cooperative purchasing? https://www.gep.com/knowledge- bank/glossary/what-is-cooperative-purchasing
85 Gillison, J., Allen, D., Shiblak, L., Fellow, C., & Lyn, F. (2021, June). City Staff. Cityofrc.Us. https://www.cityofrc.us/sites/default/files/2021-
09/Electric%20Vehicle%20Readiness%20Plan%20PDF%20%284%29.pdf Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing Company.

Haddadian, G., Khodayar, M., & Shahidehpour, M. (2015). Accelerating the global adoption of electric vehicles: barriers and drivers. The Electricity Journal, 28(10), 53-68.

Helper, S., & Soltas, E. (2021, June 17). Why the pandemic has disrupted supply chains. The White House. https://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/written-materials/2021/06/17/why-the- pandemic-has-disrupted-supply-chains/

Hennigan, L., & Bottorff, C. (2022). 10 benefits of fleet management systems. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/advisor/business/benefits-of-fleet-management/ Hirst, E., & Brown, M. (1990). Closing the efficiency gap: barriers to the efficient use of energy. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 3(4), 267-281.

Homeland Security. (2012, September 27). Best practices for mail screening and handling processes: A guide for the public and private sectors. Cisa.gov. https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/isc-mail-handling-screening-nonfouo-sept- 2012-508.pdf

Irfan, U. (2023). What you should know about buying a used EV. Vox. https://www.vox.com/climate/23762849/electric-vehicle-ev-used-battery-tax-credit-tesla-ford Irfan, U. (2023). Why most car dealers still don’t have any electric vehicles. Vox. https://www.vox.com/technology/23713040/ev-car-dealer-dealership-electric-sales-gm-ford- tesla-rivian

J.D.Power. (2020, November 3). What is Range Anxiety with Electric Vehicles? J.D. Power. https://www.jdpower.com/cars/shopping-guides/what-is-range-anxiety-with-electric-vehicles Jin, D., & Kite-Powell, H. L. (2000). Optimal fleet utilization and replacement. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 36(1), 3-20.

Johnson, P. (2022, September 14). GM explains its electric vehicle strategy to provide ‘EVs for everyone,’ including pickups, SUVs, luxury, and crossovers. Electrek; Electrek.co. https://electrek.co/2022/09/14/gm-explains-electric-vehicle-strategy-provide-evs-for-everyone/ Kempton, W., & Letendre, S. E. (1997). Electric vehicles as a new power source for electric utilities. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2(3), 157-175. 86 Korosec, R. L. (2003). Assessing the feasibility of supply chain management within purchasing and procurement: results from U.S. cities. Public Performance & Management Review, 27(2), 92–109.

Leurent, F., & Windisch, E. (2011). Triggering the development of electric mobility: a review of public policies. European Transport Research Review, 3(4), 221-235.

Liimatainen, H. (2011). Utilization of fuel consumption data in an ecodriving incentive system for heavy-duty vehicle drivers. IEEE Transactions on intelligent transportation systems, 12(4), 1087-1095.

Lipu, M. H., Hannan, M. A., Karim, T. F., Hussain, A., Saad, M. H. M., Ayob, A., ... & Mahlia, T. I. (2021). Intelligent algorithms and control strategies for battery management system in electric vehicles: Progress, challenges and future outlook. Journal of Cleaner Production, 292, 126044.

Logan, K. G., Nelson, J. D., Brand, C., & Hastings, A. (2021). Phasing in electric vehicles:

Does policy focusing on operating emission achieve net zero emissions reduction objectives?.

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 152, 100-114.

Ma, H., Balthasar, F., Tait, N., Riera-Palou, X., & Harrison, A. (2012). A new comparison between the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of battery electric vehicles and internal combustion vehicles. Energy policy, 44, 160-173.

Macharis, C., Lebeau, P., Van Mierlo, J., & Lebeau, K. (2013, November). Electric versus conventional vehicles for logistics: A total cost of ownership. In 2013 World Electric Vehicle Symposium and Exhibition (EVS27) (pp. 1-10). IEEE.

Mastoi, M. S., Zhuang, S., Munir, H. M., Haris, M., Hassan, M., Usman, M., Bukhari, S. S. H., & Ro, J.-S. (2022). An in-depth analysis of electric vehicle charging station infrastructure, policy implications, and future trends. Energy Reports, 8, 11504–11529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2022.09.011
Mazmanian, D. A., Jurewitz, J. L., & Nelson, H. T. (2020). State leadership in U.S. climate change and energy policy: The California experience. The Journal of Environment & Development, 29(1), 51-74.

McConnell, P., & Cardona, F. (2023, January). Vehicle Allocation Method (VAM) Where to start? https://www.gsa.gov/cdnstatic/Correct_Fed_Fleet_2023_VAM_final-508.pdf Medina, J. (2020). Economic Profile and Market Conditions-City of Rancho Cucamonga general plan update.

Mildner, M. (2023). The 3 biggest reasons for range anxiety – Fact or fiction? Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/siemens-smart-infrastructure/2023/02/17/the-3-biggest-reasons- for-range-anxiety--fact-or-fiction/
87 Motive. (2020, February 23). Measure fleet efficiency: metrics and KPIs. Motive. https://gomotive.com/blog/measure-fleet-efficiency/
Myers, S., Smith, H. P., & Martin, L. L. (2004). Conducting Best Practices Research in Public Affairs (PDF). Orlando, FL: Center for Community Partnerships, College of Health & Public Affairs, University of Central Florida.

Nina, N., Hans, Q., Streng, J., & van Dijk, L. (2020). Public procurement as a strategic instrument to meet sustainable policy goals: the experience of Rotterdam. Transportation Research Procedia, 46, 285–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2020.03.192 Oktay, J. S. (2012). Introduction to Grounded Theory and Its Potential for Social Work. In J. S.

Oktay (Ed.), Grounded Theory (p. 0). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199753697.003.0001 Paoli, L., & Gul, T. (2022, January 30). Electric cars fend off supply challenges to more than double global sales. IEA. https://www.iea.org/commentaries/electric-cars-fend-off-supply- challenges-to-more-than-double-global-sales
Pardo-Bosch, F., Pujadas, P., Morton, C., & Cervera, C. (2021). Sustainable deployment of an electric vehicle public charging infrastructure network from a city business model perspective.

Sustainable Cities and Society, 71, 102957.

Perry, J. (2015). Climate change adaptation in the world's best places: A wicked problem needing immediate attention. Landscape and Urban Planning, pp. 133, 1–11.

Pierce Manufacturing, Inc. (2023). Electric fire truck. Piercemfg.com. https://www.piercemfg.com/electric-fire-truck-reference-guide

PPIAF. (2006). Vehicle Utilization. Urban Bus Toolkit.
https://ppiaf.org/sites/ppiaf.org/files/documents/toolkits/UrbanBusToolkit/assets/1/1c/1c9.html Plotnick, S., & Peirce, S. (2021). Creative Procurements to Improve Transit Cost and Effectiveness.

Power, D. (2005). Supply chain management integration and implementation: a literature review. Supply chain management: an International journal, 10(4), 252-263.

Raj, A., Mukherjee, A. A., de Sousa Jabbour, A. B. L., & Srivastava, S. K. (2022). Supply chain management during and post-COVID-19 pandemic: Mitigation strategies and practical lessons learned. Journal of Business Research, 142, 1125–1139.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.01.037

Rand McNally (2023). What is telematics – Benefits of telematics for fleets. https://blog.randmcnally.com/what-is-telematics-benefits-of-telematics-for-fleets

Raymond, Y., Journalist, C. N. V. I., & Contact, F. |. (2023, February 8). Lack of heavy duty 88 electric vehicles stalling transition of interested businesses, municipalities. Vancouver Island. https://vancouverisland.ctvnews.ca/lack-of-heavy-duty-electric-vehicles-stalling-transition-of- interested-businesses-municipalities-1.6265118

Rimes, T. (2021). Keep getting better: Cooperative procurement is evolving to meet government’s changing needs. American City & County.
https://www.americancityandcounty.com/2021/09/30/keep-getting-better-cooperative- procurement-is-evolving-to-meet-governments-changing-needs/ Rees, N. (2022). Sustainability Action Plan for the City of Azusa.

Rodrigues, D. P. (2017). Optimising cost and availability estimates at the bidding stage of performance-based contracting (Doctoral dissertation).

Rudolph, F., & Werland, S. (2019). Public procurement of sustainable urban mobility measures: topic guide. Urban Mobility Observatory.

Sarkar, A., & Singh, J. (2010). Financing energy efficiency in developing countries—lessons learned and remaining challenges. Energy Policy, 38(10), 5560-5571.

Schrettle, S., Hinz, A., Scherrer-Rathje, M., & Friedli, T. (2014). Turning sustainability into action: Explaining firms' sustainability efforts and their impact on firm performance.

International Journal of Production Economics, 147, 73-84.

Section 2: Driving safely. (2020, April 15). California DMV; State of California Department of Motor Vehicles. https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/handbook/commercial-driver- handbook/section-2-driving-safely

Shepardson, D. (2023). U.S. government agencies target purchasing 9,500 EVs in 2023.

Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/us-government-agencies-target- purchasing-9500-evs-2023-2023-07-19/

Spears, A. (2019, December 6). The Purpose of Traffic Signals. Elteccorp.com. https://elteccorp.com/news/other/what-is-the-purpose-of-traffic-signals/ Sperling, D. (2018). Electric vehicles: Approaching the tipping point. Three Revolutions:

Steering Automated, Shared, and Electric Vehicles to a Better Future, pp. 21–54.

Sperling, D. (2013). Future drive: Electric vehicles and sustainable transportation. Island Press.

Stake, R. E. (2003). Case studies (PDF). In N. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry, (pp. 134-163). London: Sage Publications. 89 Stasko, T. H., & Gao, H. O. (2012). Developing green fleet management strategies:

Repair/retrofit/replacement decisions under environmental regulation. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 46(8), 1216-1226.

Sugihara, C., & Hardman, S. (2022). Electrifying California fleets: Investigating light-duty vehicle purchase decisions. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 13, 100532.

Swisher, J. N. (1996). Regulatory and mixed policy options for reducing energy use and carbon emissions. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 1, 23-49.

Tavares, T. (2021, September). District 7: Litter abatement plan summary. Dot.ca.gov. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/district-
7/documents/litter_plan_summary_20210920_forada_su_09212021_1636.pdf Thakre, M. P., Mahadik, Y. V., Yeole, D. S., & Chowdhary, P. K. (2020, December). Fast charging systems for the rapid growth of advanced Electric Vehicles (E.V.s). In 2020 international conference on power, energy, control and transmission systems (ICPECTS) (pp. 1-6). IEEE.

The Office of Federal Procurement policy. (2021, January 16). The White House. https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/management/office-federal-procurement-policy

Thomas, J. (2023, May 17). The ultimate guide to the EV battery supply chain. Innovation News Network. https://www.innovationnewsnetwork.com/the-ultimate-guide-to-the-ev-battery- supply-chain/30592/
Torcellini, P., Shaver, L., Heymer, B., & Pless, S. (2019). Accelerate Performance. Final Technical Report (No. DOE-SLIPSTREAM-7068). Slipstream (Formerly Seventhwave).

Turner, D. (2023, February 6). Constant Comparative Analysis in Qualitative Research. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ji546FKFtmU
United Nations. (n.d.). Causes and effects of climate change. https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/science/causes-effects-climate-change United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2023). Report on the environment:

Greenhouse gases. EPA. https://www.epa.gov/report-environment/greenhouse-gases

Upcounsel. (2020). Cooperative contracts: Everything you need to know. https://www.upcounsel.com/cooperative-contracts

U.S. Department of Energy. (n.d.). Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maintenance and Safety of Electric Vehicles. https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_maintenance.html

90 U.S. Department of Transportation Administrations. (2021, August 23). Transportation.gov. https://www.transportation.gov/administrations

U.S. Department of Transportation. (2014, March 3). Cargo securement rules. Dot.gov. https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/regulations/cargo-securement/cargo-securement-rules

U.S. Department of Transportation. (2018). Maintenance of signs and sign supports: A guide for local highway and street maintenance personnel. Createspace Independent Publishing Platform.

U.S. General Services Administration. (2023). Ways you can sell to government. https://www.gsa.gov/sell-to-government/step-1-learn-about-government-contracting/ways-you- can-sell-to-government#tab--Contract-vehicles
Van Maanen, J. (1978). People processing: Strategies of organizational socialization.

Organizational dynamics, 7(1), 19-36.

Van Velzen, A., Annema, J. A., van de Kaa, G., & van Wee, B. (2019). Proposing a more comprehensive future total cost of ownership estimation framework for electric vehicles.

Energy Policy, 129, 1034-1046.

Van Weele, A., & Van Tubergen, K. (2017). Responsible purchasing: moving from compliance to value creation in supplier relationships. Sustainable supply chains: a research-based textbook on operations and strategy, 257-278.

Voelcker, J. (2023) Leasing an EV is a workaround that could get you that tax credit. Car and.

Driver. https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a44131850/leasing-an-ev-tax-credit/ Walker, J. (2020). Climate Mayors Electric Vehicle Purchasing Collaborative. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58803d48d2b857e5d4a13d7d/t/5fc7b3305060c93fcd871c e1/1606923086219/ACCO-SNEP-TrainingPrimer-Session3-EV.pdf Wirasingha, S. G., Schofield, N., & Emadi, A. (2008, September). Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle developments in the US: Trends, barriers, and economic feasibility. In 2008 IEEE vehicle power and propulsion conference (pp. 1-8). IEEE.

Yang, J., Liu, Y., & Kholaif, M. M. N. H. K. (2022). Trust relationship with suppliers, collaborative action, and manufacturer resilience in the COVID-19 crisis. Behavioral Sciences, 13(1), 33. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13010033
Yong, J. Y., Ramachandaramurthy, V. K., Tan, K. M., & Mithulananthan, N. (2015). A review on the state-of-the-art technologies of electric vehicle, its impacts and prospects. Renewable and sustainable energy reviews, 49, 365-385.

91 Zhang, C., Nizam, R. S., & Tian, L. (2018). BIM-based investigation of total energy consumption in delivering building products. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 38, 370–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2018.08.009
92 Appendices
Appendix A: Interview Contact List
Name of the Subject City Contacted?
Interview
Scheduled?
Arpy Kasparian South Pasadena Yes Yes
Michael Cacciotti South Pasadena Council member Yes Yes Dominica Megerdichian South Pasadena, CM's Office Yes Yes Tony Abdalla South Pasadena, PD Yes Yes
Ted Gerber South Pasadena, Public Works Yes Yes
Steve Sudduth Garden Grove Yes No
Joseph Flores Los Angeles Yes Yes
Neal Denton Santa Fe No No
Dan Berlenbach Long Beach Yes Yes
Philip Saunders Seattle Yes No
Meghan Hahn Riverside Yes No
Camilla Taufic San Francisco Yes Yes
Mike Domin Sourcewell Yes Yes
Jessica Stoll Electrification Coalition Yes Yes
Jonathan Changus Center for Sustainable Energy Yes Yes
Javier Enriquez
South Coast Air Quality Management
District No No
93 Appendix B: Interview Protocol

94 95
Appendix C: Fleet Utilization Survey
Fleet Utilization Survey
Action Required by: July 6, 2023 at 5:00 PM PST.

Purpose: The City of Rancho Cucamonga (“the city”) and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District (RCFD) aim to be carbon -neutral by 2050. The city plans to convert its 225 vehicles which include medium and heavy- duty trucks and compact vehicles to electric over the next 17 years.

The city's Sustainable Community Action Plan is the foundation for the EV Readiness Plan in which a strategy includes converting 100% of its vehicle fleet to zero-emission by 2040.

Background: The city must also fulfill the California Air Resource Board (CARB) local government criteria. Municipalities must buy 50% zero- emission electric vehicles (ZEVs) by January 2024 and 100% by January 2027, according to CARB regulations. The city, RCFD, and the University of Southern California, Sol Price School of Public Policy plan to complete a Fleet Utilization Study and Zero- Emission Conversion Plan by August 2023. The Fleet Utilization Study assesses RC's vehicle fleet utilization and efficiency to identify the best fleet size.

Recommendations from the Fleet Utilization Study could include:
● Vehicles to be retired from service;
● Vehicles to be relocated to a location where they can be utilized more effectively; and ● Vehicles that should be replaced with a more fuel -efficient vehicle type in order to complete the mission.

Before you begin, please note the following:

All surveys must be submitted by close of business, local time on July 6, 2023. It is important to answer all questions on the survey.

For questions regarding this survey, please contact: Genevie Martinez: [email protected]

RESPONDENT INFORMATION (for the individual completing this survey)

Email: ____________________________________________________________ Full Name: ________________________________________________________ Phone Number: ____________________________________________________ 1) Please select the organization and department for which you work. 96 City of Rancho Cucamonga, Public Works Department
City of Rancho Cucamonga, Engineering Department
City of Rancho Cucamonga, Administrative Services
City of Rancho Cucamonga, Community Services
City of Rancho Cucamonga, Building and Safety
City of Rancho Cucamonga, Code Enforcement
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District (RCFD)
Animal Services
Library
Other: _______________________________________

2) Please indicate the person to whom you immediately report.

___________________________________________________________________________

3) Please select the vehicle that you are evaluating in the survey.

Please complete a survey for each vehicle that has been assigned to you or your department.

Vehicle ID, Description, Fuel Type, Manufacture, Year listed.

If the vehicle you are evaluating is not listed, please choose the "NOT LISTED" option and proceed to answer question 4.

4) If the vehicle you are evaluating is not listed in question 3, please provide the following details: Vehicle ID, Description, Fuel Type, Manufacture, Year listed. ___________________________________________________________________________

5) What duties do you perform with the vehicle? Describe how these responsibilities contribute to the agency's purpose.
___________________________________________________________________________

6) What role does the vehicle play in getting the job done? Please detail why this is an absolute necessity for the purpose.

97 ___________________________________________________________________________

7) How many people will be transported per trip on a regular basis? 1 2
3 4
5 Other:__________________________________________________________________

8) How much and what type of cargo will the vehicle haul on a regular basis? ___________________________________________________________________________

9) Please specify the type of vehicle.

Fuel Vehicle
Electric Vehicle (EV)
Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV)
Other:
__________________________________________________________________

10) How frequently does the vehicle(s) need to be fueled or charged? ● Daily
● Weekly
● Monthly
● Job-specific
11) Is there access to alternative fuel (i.e., natural gas, methanol, electricity) within 5 miles or 15 minutes of the vehicle's garaged location and/or normal route? Yes
No
Maybe
12) What type of driving conditions will the vehicle routinely be driven in? Please check all that apply.
98 City
Highway
Off-road
Mostly unpaved
Emergency response
Other:
__________________________________________________________________

13) What special equipment does this vehicle(s) have? Please check all that apply.

Communication and Dispatch Equipment (e.g., two-way radios, mobile data terminals (MDTs), or communication systems).

Safety Equipment (e.g., fire extinguishers, first aid kits, warning triangles, reflective vests, and emergency roadside kits).

Cargo Management Equipment (e.g., cargo barriers, racks, shelving systems, tie-down straps, or temperature-controlled compartments).

Specialized Tools and Equipment (e.g., power tools, ladders, safety harnesses, electrical or plumbing repair tools).

Vehicle-Specific Equipment - Related to Fleet (e.g., specialized equipment for tree trimming or overhead line maintenance).

Vehicle-Specific Equipment - Related to Emergency (e.g., hoses, ladders, nozzles, pumps, breathing apparatus, medical equipment, oxygen tanks, defibrillators).

Other:
__________________________________________________________________

14) Could a different-sized vehicle replace the existing vehicle? Yes
No
Maybe

15) If yes, please explain.
_____________________________________________________________________________

16) Could a vehicle with less features like all-wheel drive (AWD) replace the existing vehicle? Yes
99 No
Maybe

17) If yes, please explain.
_____________________________________________________________________________

18) Could an electric vehicle replace the existing vehicle? Yes
No
Maybe

19) If no, please explain.
_____________________________________________________________________________

100
Appendix D: Research Design Matrix

Issue Discussion: The City of Rancho Cucamonga (RC) aims to meet the fleet conversion goals outlined in their Climate Action Plan (CAP), electrifying 100% of their fleet by 2040. 50% of the vehicles purchased by the city must be zero -emissions starting in 2024 per California Air Resources Board (CARB) regulations. By 2027, 100% of vehicles purchased need to be zero- emissions (California Air Resource Board, 2023) . Procurement and budgetary challenges have impeded the city’s progress towards achieving their CAP goals and complying with the CARB regulations. The city wants a fleet utilization study to right size their fleet. The city also wants to understand the EV marketplace in order to replace existing vehicles. The city wants to know what state, federal, or philanthropic funding is available for fleet conversion. Finally, the city needs an understanding of best practices to expedite purchasing at lower costs. All of these strategies need to be captured in a fleet conversion plan that helps the city to meet their CAP goals and CARB requirements.

Researchable Questions

1. What is an ideal fleet
size and composition of
EVs that would meet
the needs of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga
given the fiscal and
temporal constraints
faced by the
municipality?

2. What are the best
practices for
transitioning to an EV
fleet that would
meet the needs of the
City of RC?

3. What is the most
effective way to
implement the
electrification plan?
101
Research
Approach/
Methods
Open Source Research
● Various sources; topics
include indicators of
high-risk, high-cost,
underutilized vehicles;
other fleet utilization
studies; EV market
data- MSRPs,
manufacturer websites,
Department of Energy,
government docs of
cities for comparison

Document/Report Reviews
● Vehicle inventory &
related
cost/maintenance logs
● Charging infrastructure
map
● Vehicle
rules/requirements

Semi-Structured Interviews
● Client (city staff);
vehicle purpose and
needs, cost trends,
budget constraints
● Possibility of contacting
manufacturers to learn
about EVs for
comparison analysis

Open Source Research
● Various sources; topics
include procurement
e.g. public-private
partnerships,
cooperative
procurement, EV-first
procurement policies;
cost-effective
conversion strategies;
subsidies/funding
availability;
implementation
timelines

Best Practice Research
● Research techniques,
tactics and policies
utilized by other
Governments and
Organizations to
procure EVs

Semi-Structured Interviews
● Client (city staff);
current policies and
processes and their
procurement efforts to
date
● Climate Mayors
Collaborative; best
practices for
procurement

Document/Report Reviews
● RC’s procurement
manual and general
policies
● RC’s Climate Action
Plan
● CARB guidance and
regulations

Open Source Research
● Various sources: topics
include charging
infrastructure needs to
support electrified fleets
(ratio of EVs to
chargers);
training/education for
staff to increase
adoption; other
considerations for
implementation

Best Practice Research

Document/Report Reviews
● Other cities’ conversion
plans

Semi-Structured Interviews
● Client (city staff):
stakeholder buy in,
limitations of
budget/grants/approvals,
charging infrastructure,
staff adoption

Scope
Local governments and
emergency responders in the
U.S. that have electrified their
fleets

Peer and non-peer reviewed
articles about electrification-
related topics; vehicle make and
Local governments and
emergency responders in the
U.S. that have electrified their
fleets; procured vehicles
through cooperative
procurement e.g. Sourcewell,
public-private partnerships,
competitive bidding

Local governments and
emergency responders in the U.S.
that have electrified their fleets

Peer and non-peer reviewed
articles and reports on
implementation i.e. what should
be considered and planned for,
common challenges and possible
102
model options (hydrogen
included), right sizing fleets
(strategies for downsizing)

Government planners,
emergency responders, climate
action coalitions, electrification
experts

Federal government
policies/guidance

Peer and non-peer reviewed
articles about EV procurement,
phased conversion plans, zero-
emissions vehicles, funding for
these projects

Government planners,
emergency responders, climate
action coalitions, electrification
experts

Federal government
policies/guidance

solutions

Government planners, emergency
responders, climate action
coalitions, electrification experts

Federal government
policies/guidance.

Data
Collection
Fleet utilization study (vehicle
inventory, usage patterns,
mileage and maintenance logs,
cost logs)

Interview responses from staff
regarding vehicle purpose and
needs

Interview responses from experts
regarding cost-effective
electrification practices

Literature review (journals,
academic and industry, websites,
blogs, presentations)

Interview responses from
subject matter experts regarding
procurement strategies such as
Sourcewell/Climate Mayors
Collaborative, Center for
Sustainable Energy, and CARB

Literature review (journals,
academic and industry,
websites, blogs, presentations)

Interview responses from city
staff and subject matter experts
on charging infrastructure, staff
training/education, and funding
needs and opportunities

Literature review (journals,
academic and industry, websites,
blogs, presentations)

Analytic
Strategy
Fleet utilization analysis

Total Cost of Ownership analysis
Interview Response Matrix,
coded to identify emergent
themes or best practices

Constant Comparison Analysis,
coded to identify emergent
themes or best practices
Interview Response Matrix,
coded to identify emergent
themes or best practices

Constant Comparison Analysis,
coded to identify emergent
themes or best practices

Matrix/CAM analysis to evaluate
individual plan components:
1)procurement strategies;
2)funding strategies; 3)fleet
composition scenarios

103
Appendix E: Sourcewell Contracts for Telematics Systems and Charging Infrastructure Agile Fleet | 020221-AAC
Fleet management information systems; telematics; motor pool, fleet, and car sharing; self- service fleet kiosks; secure key boxes and key management; online mileage reporting; driver profile, vehicle, risk, parts, and fuel management; and maintenance. https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/020221- aac__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LCSD6GoY$
AngelTrax | 020221-IVS
High-definition mobile video surveillance systems: Vulcan™ Series MDVRs, patented Hybrid Component™ MNVRs, I P 1080p cameras, HD 1080p cameras, live view, live tracking, driver behavior with AI, and patented Virtual Synchronized Mapping™ technology. https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/020221- ivs__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LBjCFb8N$
CalAmp | 020221-CAW
GPS tracking for vehicles and assets; fleet telematic systems; engine diagnostics; video dash camera solutions; Esri Geographic Information System integration; and public works and snow functions.
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/020221- caw__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LE1-mZHx$
Forward Thinking Systems | 020221-FWD
Fleet management solutions, including GPS asset tracking, AI vehicle cameras, commercial navigation, route optimization, IoT sensors and asset tracking, driver coaching app; ELD certified; and a mobile workforce application.
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/020221- fwd__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LC0R7Qpu$
104
Geotab | 020221-GEO
Data-driven GPS fleet tracking solutions, keyless NFC fob, self-install bundle, GO9 telematics device, ProPlus plan, and harness and training.
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/020221- geo__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LJG-lFrV$
GPS Insight | 020221-GPI
Telematics, fleet management information systems, fuel management, and fleet sharing. https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/020221- gpi__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LLhh7SB6$
Lytx | 020221-DCI
Lytx® video event recorders, and fleet tracking and fuel management solutions. https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/020221- dci__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LHg6yadK$
RTA, Inc. | 020221-RTA
Barcode printers and scanners, handheld mobile devices, RTA software as a service (MI), GPS and telematics, in-cab camera systems, RTA inspect (eDVIR system), and consulting and education.
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/020221- rta__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LG9S18gx$
Rubicon | 020221-RUB
RUBICONSmartCity™, a smart city technology suite; fleet management for solid waste, comprehensive route management, exception flagging and photos; telematics for heavy-duty vehicles; and collection of community issues, route optimization, solid waste service verifications, work order management, and disposal tracking. https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/020221- rub__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
105
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LNJuKb74$
Samsara Networks | 020221-SAM
Equipment monitoring, site visibility, apps and driver workflows, fleet management systems, video-based safety, and vehicle telematics.
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/020221- sam__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LJSbyLws$
SkyHawk Telematics | 020221-SKY
Vehicle-specific hardware; winter operations modules; fleet and equipment monitoring and power utility fleet software; sensor and input integration; precise materials management data; subcontractor productivity and in-cab route optimization tools; fleet safety and compliance features; connectivity on all North American cellular networks; hardware installation specialists; and on-site and virtual training program.
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/020221- sky__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LC8kmbbo$
Verizon Connect | 020221-NWF
Fleet services, parts, and equipment; GPS fleet tracking; and fleet management system. https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/020221- nwf__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LM2VK6TQ$
Charging Station contracts:

Blink Charging Co. | 042221-BLK
High-performance AC Level 2 chargers at 80 amp and 19.2 kW, a range of DC fast charging solutions, and network services.
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/042221- blk__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LO_RWxYr$
106
ChargePoint | 042221-CPI
Level 2 and DC fast-charging stations for EVs, network services, maintenance plans, and accessories.
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/042221- cpi__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LHS3Qtao$
EV Connect | 042221-EVC
Solutions and customer service for the set-up, management, and optimization of charging stations, from installation to driver support.
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/042221- evc__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LMzUkY8W$
FLO Services USA, Inc. | 042221-FLO
Smart EV charging equipment, operates a North American charging network, and offers a comprehensive suite of products to meet charging needs. https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/042221- flo__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LL7AOvjB$
FreeWire Technologies | 042221-FRE
Full-integrated charging solutions to deliver energy and meet demand for charging at the grid edge and beyond, including a Boost Charger.
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/042221- fre__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LIoQ0Tub$
Livingston Charge Port | 042221-LIV
End-to-end charging station project solutions, including Level 2 and 3 DCFC smart EV charging station equipment, software, integrations, networking, installation, maintenance, project management and customer support for public, private, or fleet applications. https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/042221- liv__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
107
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LDAeyERK$
Nuvve | 042221-NUV
Vehicle-to-grid (V2G) intelligent energy management software platform, DC heavy-duty fast charging stations, Level 2 AC charging stations, installation and maintenance, electrification process guidance, and flexible financing options.
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/042221- nuv__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LAqztONv$
SemaConnect | 042221-SEM
Level 2 EV charging stations, commercial/shared and fleet applications, 80-amp fleet EV charging stations, smart network, fleet management software, full replacement warranty, cable management system, and load management service.
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/042221- sem__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LIUJmaBF$
Siemens | 042221-SIE
Level 2 VersiCharge EV charging portfolio, Level 3 DC fast chargers, DC heavy-duty fleet and bus charger portfolio, post and wall-mounted solutions, EV management software solutions, Wi-Fi and cell cloud-connected chargers, managed services, make-ready electrical equipment, startup services, installation services, and billing options. https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/042221- sie__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LIvTKmO7$
WAVE | 042221-WVE
Wireless (inductive) chargers power e-buses and medium-duty and heavy-duty EV fleets.

Roadway-embedded pads make charging automated, hands-free, and fast. For depot and in- route use; 250kW and higher.
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sourcewell-mn.gov/cooperative-purchasing/042221- wve__;!!LIr3w8kk_Xxm!sFvDy1V-
dvVZiEFNwWunUNVZ4pFYSyjUuGeG0qhoTevaNJrcMCgN8m3eOjnChIDKYvStLXmB6Ru S6u6GkDz-LEYPgUYv$
108

Appendix F: Vehicle Utilization

Vehicle Utilization
ID Description Utilization
0566 E-350 Van Low
0638 E-450 Box Van Low
0637 F-550 Low
0813 F-250 Low
3530 Colorado Low
3233 HONDA CIVIC Low
0832 F-450, Aerial Lift Low
2648 Sweeper, Schwarze Low
2214 E-150 Passenger Van Medium
2508 F-350 Stakebed Medium
1900 F-450 XL Super Duty Medium
1809 Utility Bed, F-250 Medium
3715 HONDA CIVIC Medium
0419 E-150 Van Medium
109
2507 F-350 Stakebed Medium
2119 SUV Hybrid Medium
2521 F-250 Dump Medium
0130 Van, Passenger Medium
1593 F-350 Medium
2101 Escape, Hybrid Medium
2237 Escape, Hybrid Medium
2333 HONDA CIVIC Medium
2651 Storm Drain Truck Medium
1123 Sedan, CNG Medium
1812 F-350, Utility Medium
0828 F-350 Utlitity Medium
0598 Dodge Ram 1500 Medium
0573 F-250 Utility Medium
1417 Van, Passenger Medium
1625 CNG Dump Medium
1104 Escape, Hybrid Medium
0719 Explorer Medium
110
1920 GMC 2500 Medium
2623 F- 450 Stencil Medium
0594 F-250 Utility Bed Medium
2231 Explorer Medium
1594 Stake Bed, F-350 Medium
2523 F-250 Stakebed Medium
1235 Van, Cargo 2500 Medium
2632 CNG Dump Medium
2208 Explorer Medium
0829 F-350 Utility Medium
1117 Explorer Medium
2624 F-550 Utility Bed Medium
2412 Van, Passenger Medium
0831 F-150 SprCb XL Medium
3524 Colorado Medium
1416 Van Wagon Medium
2331 Escape, Hybrid Medium
1663 Dump, 10 wheel Medium
111
1335 Explorer Medium
1125 F-150 Medium
1804 SUV Hybrid Medium
0660 F-550 Medium
1915 Explorer Medium
2712 Explorer Medium
0569 F-350 Utility Bed Medium
1640 Roll-off Medium
2334 Explorer Medium
0814 F-250 Medium
0693 Escape, Hybrid Medium
1692 F-450 Medium
U901 Escape, Hybrid Medium
10121 Ranger Medium
1124 Escape HEV Medium
2509 Ranger Medium
2510 Ranger Medium
3910 Ranger Medium
112
2326 Explorer Medium
2506 F-250 Crew Cab Medium
1418 F-350 Medium
1803 F-250 Medium
2622 F-550 Stake Bed Medium
2505 F-250 Pick-up Medium
0555 CNG F-250 Pick-up Medium
2621 F-550 Dump Medium
0639 Dump Truck Medium
1911 F-150 Crew Cab Medium
0815 F-250 Utility Medium
1336 Escape, Hybrid Medium
1106 Vue, HEV Medium
2321 Explorer Medium
2519 F-350 Medium
0420 E-450 Van Medium
2525 Utility Bed, F-250 Medium
1565 Utility Truck Medium
113
0539 CNG F250 Pickup Medium
0718 F-150 4x4 p/u Medium
0695 F-550 Medium
2635 Signal Maint. Van Medium
0818 Escape, Hybrid Medium
0917 Escape, Hybrid Medium
1808 Utility Bed, F-250 Medium
1602 F-350 Dually Medium
1585 F-350, Utility Medium
0713 Explorer Medium
2330 Explorer Medium
0825 F-250 Super Cab XL Medium
2601 Explorer Medium
0599 Utility Bed, F-250 Medium
0700 Van, Cargo Medium
1531 F-350 Stakebed Medium
2501 Utility Bed, F-250 Medium
2121 Escape, Hybrid Medium
114
1800 F-250 Medium
2716 Explorer Medium
1956 CNG Roll Off (water) Medium
0919 F-150 XL Long Bed Medium
0580 CNG F250 Pickup Medium
2207 Explorer Medium
0816 F-250 Utility Medium
0570 F-250 Utility Bed Medium
0663 Dump, 10-Wheel Medium
0918 F-150 Super Cab XL Medium
2653 Patch Truck Medium
1806 Escape, Hybrid Medium
0605 F-250 Super Cab XL Medium
0600 CNG F250 Pickup Medium
2592 F-350, Stakebed Medium
3131 GMC 3500 Storm Drain Medium
2503 F-150 Pick-up Medium
2500 Utility Bed, F-250 Medium
115
2631 F-550 Dump Medium
2652 Patch Truck Medium
1538 F-350 Utility Medium
0916 Escape, Hybrid Medium
1603 F-550 Graffiti Truck Medium
2616 F-150 Pick-up Medium
2222 Explorer Medium
2522 F-250 Supercab Medium
2526 F-450 Crew Cab Medium
2518 F-450 Stakebed Medium
1557 F-350 Utility Medium
2223 Explorer Medium
0830 F-150 SprCb XL Medium
0817 SUV Hybrid Medium
2517 Tower Medium
0645 Signal Truck Medium
3504 F-250 Pick-up Medium
1606 F-150 4X4 Medium
116
0609 CNG F250 Pickup Medium
1807 Escape, Hybrid Medium
0567 F-250 Pick-up Medium
3520 Extra Cab Stake Bed Medium
3502 F-250 Pick-up Medium
1914 F-150 Pick-up Medium
0422 Trax SUV Medium
1717 F-150 Crew Cab Medium
3633 F-550 Graffiti Truck High
3512 F-250 Pick-up High
2411 Ranger High
0502 F-150 Pick-up High
0501 F-150 Pick-up High
2691 F-250 Pick-up High
2516 CLAM/CHIPPER High
0597 F-350 Stakebed High
1414 Ranger High
3618 F-150 Crew Cab High
117
2511 F-350 Stakebed High
0694 Escape, Hybrid High
3617 F-350 Service Bed High
2702 F-250 High
3590 Colorado High
0604 F-150 XL Ext Cab High
0611 F-350 Stakebed High
0421 Pick Up High
2515 F-350 Stakebed High
2701 F-250 High
3634 F550 High
0568 F-150 Crew Cab High
1886 Dodge Van High

Appendix G: Cost Efficiency

Cost Efficiency
ID Description Cost Efficiency
1886 Dodge Van Low-Cost
118
2526 F-450 Crew Cab Low-Cost
0580 CNG F250 Pickup Low-Cost
1336 Escape, Hybrid Low-Cost
2121 Escape, Hybrid Low-Cost
0917 Escape, Hybrid Low-Cost
3715 HONDA CIVIC Low-Cost
2712 Explorer Low-Cost
0694 Escape, Hybrid Low-Cost
1416 Van Wagon Low-Cost
1104 Escape, Hybrid Low-Cost
0700 Van, Cargo Low-Cost
10121 Ranger Low-Cost
0539 CNG F250 Pickup Low-Cost
0609 CNG F250 Pickup Low-Cost
1417 Van, Passenger Low-Cost
0555 CNG F-250 Pick-up Low-Cost
0600 CNG F250 Pickup Low-Cost
0693 Escape, Hybrid Low-Cost
119
2333 HONDA CIVIC Low-Cost
0568 F-150 Crew Cab Low-Cost
0916 Escape, Hybrid Low-Cost
0817 SUV Hybrid Low-Cost
0818 Escape, Hybrid Low-Cost
2119 SUV Hybrid Low-Cost
1106 Vue, HEV Low-Cost
2412 Van, Passenger Low-Cost
1915 Explorer Low-Cost
1124 Escape HEV Low-Cost
1803 F-250 Low-Cost
1911 F-150 Crew Cab Low-Cost
2616 F-150 Pick-up Low-Cost
2207 Explorer Low-Cost
2231 Explorer Low-Cost
1806 Escape, Hybrid Low-Cost
2208 Explorer Low-Cost
2601 Explorer Low-Cost
120
3590 Colorado Low-Cost
2223 Explorer Low-Cost
0420 E-450 Van Low-Cost
2635 Signal Maint. Van Low-Cost
1414 Ranger Low-Cost
0419 E-150 Van Low-Cost
3524 Colorado Low-Cost
3910 Ranger Low-Cost
1956 CNG Roll Off (water) Low-Cost
0502 F-150 Pick-up Low-Cost
0831 F-150 SprCb XL Low-Cost
1800 F-250 Low-Cost
1663 Dump, 10 wheel Low-Cost
2321 Explorer Low-Cost
1807 Escape, Hybrid Low-Cost
1123 Sedan, CNG Low-Cost
0569 F-350 Utility Bed Low-Cost
2411 Ranger Low-Cost
121
1125 F-150 Low-Cost
1809 Utility Bed, F-250 Low-Cost
2330 Explorer Low-Cost
1593 F-350 Low-Cost
1606 F-150 4X4 Low-Cost
0598 Dodge Ram 1500 Low-Cost
2222 Explorer Low-Cost
U901 Escape, Hybrid Low-Cost
2101 Escape, Hybrid Low-Cost
1117 Explorer Low-Cost
0501 F-150 Pick-up Low-Cost
0604 F-150 XL Ext Cab Low-Cost
1335 Explorer Low-Cost
2691 F-250 Pick-up Low-Cost
1808 Utility Bed, F-250 Low-Cost
2716 Explorer Low-Cost
1920 GMC 2500 Low-Cost
0637 F-550 Low-Cost
122
0594 F-250 Utility Bed Low-Cost
2525 Utility Bed, F-250 Low-Cost
2509 Ranger Low-Cost
2623 F- 450 Stencil Low-Cost
2653 Patch Truck Low-Cost
0814 F-250 Low-Cost
0918 F-150 Super Cab XL Low-Cost
0718 F-150 4x4 p/u Low-Cost
1594 Stake Bed, F-350 Low-Cost
3504 F-250 Pick-up Low-Cost
3131 GMC 3500 Storm Drain Low-Cost
3617 F-350 Service Bed Low-Cost
3618 F-150 Crew Cab Low-Cost
0130 Van, Passenger Low-Cost
1812 F-350, Utility Low-Cost
2511 F-350 Stakebed Low-Cost
0422 Trax SUV Medium-Cost
0421 Pick Up Medium-Cost
123
1914 F-150 Pick-up Medium-Cost
1804 SUV Hybrid Medium-Cost
1557 F-350 Utility Medium-Cost
1585 F-350, Utility Medium-Cost
3502 F-250 Pick-up Medium-Cost
2214 E-150 Passenger Van Medium-Cost
2516 CLAM/CHIPPER Medium-Cost
0816 F-250 Utility Medium-Cost
2521 F-250 Dump Medium-Cost
2515 F-350 Stakebed Medium-Cost
1717 F-150 Crew Cab Medium-Cost
0713 Explorer Medium-Cost
1565 Utility Truck Medium-Cost
2510 Ranger Medium-Cost
0597 F-350 Stakebed Medium-Cost
3512 F-250 Pick-up Medium-Cost
0660 F-550 Medium-Cost
2505 F-250 Pick-up Medium-Cost
124
0828 F-350 Utlitity Medium-Cost
2507 F-350 Stakebed Medium-Cost
0830 F-150 SprCb XL Medium-Cost
2701 F-250 Medium-Cost
3520 Extra Cab Stake Bed Medium-Cost
3233 HONDA CIVIC Medium-Cost
2519 F-350 Medium-Cost
2622 F-550 Stake Bed Medium-Cost
1235 Van, Cargo 2500 Medium-Cost
2506 F-250 Crew Cab Medium-Cost
2592 F-350, Stakebed Medium-Cost
0645 Signal Truck Medium-Cost
2522 F-250 Supercab Medium-Cost
2500 Utility Bed, F-250 Medium-Cost
2518 F-450 Stakebed Medium-Cost
0719 Explorer Medium-Cost
2331 Escape, Hybrid Medium-Cost
2648 Sweeper, Schwarze Medium-Cost
125
0567 F-250 Pick-up Medium-Cost
2652 Patch Truck Medium-Cost
1538 F-350 Utility Medium-Cost
1531 F-350 Stakebed Medium-Cost
0570 F-250 Utility Bed Medium-Cost
0605 F-250 Super Cab XL Medium-Cost
2501 Utility Bed, F-250 Medium-Cost
2334 Explorer Medium-Cost
0825 F-250 Super Cab XL Medium-Cost
2702 F-250 Medium-Cost
0829 F-350 Utility Medium-Cost
0611 F-350 Stakebed Medium-Cost
1640 Roll-off Medium-Cost
1900 F-450 XL Super Duty Medium-Cost
3633 F-550 Graffiti Truck Medium-Cost
2631 F-550 Dump Medium-Cost
0695 F-550 Medium-Cost
2237 Escape, Hybrid Medium-Cost
126
2326 Explorer Medium-Cost
2503 F-150 Pick-up Medium-Cost
3634 F550 Medium-Cost
0599 Utility Bed, F-250 High-Cost
0815 F-250 Utility High-Cost
2517 Tower High-Cost
0566 E-350 Van High-Cost
1603 F-550 Graffiti Truck High-Cost
0639 Dump Truck High-Cost
1692 F-450 High-Cost
2621 F-550 Dump High-Cost
0919 F-150 XL Long Bed High-Cost
2508 F-350 Stakebed High-Cost
0573 F-250 Utility High-Cost
1418 F-350 High-Cost
3530 Colorado High-Cost
2523 F-250 Stakebed High-Cost
2624 F-550 Utility Bed High-Cost
127
1625 CNG Dump High-Cost
0663 Dump, 10-Wheel High-Cost
0638 E-450 Box Van High-Cost
2651 Storm Drain Truck High-Cost
2632 CNG Dump High-Cost
1602 F-350 Dually High-Cost
0832 F-450, Aerial Lift High-Cost
0813 F-250 High-Cost

Appendix H: Fuel Efficiency

Fuel Efficiency
ID Description Fuel Efficiency
1803 F-250 Low Fuel Consumption
1593 F-350 Low Fuel Consumption
2516 CLAM/CHIPPER Low Fuel Consumption
0580 CNG F250 Pickup Low Fuel Consumption
2526 F-450 Crew Cab Low Fuel Consumption
1886 Dodge Van Low Fuel Consumption
128
3715 HONDA CIVIC Low Fuel Consumption
1956 CNG Roll Off (water) Low Fuel Consumption
1416 Van Wagon Low Fuel Consumption
1336 Escape, Hybrid Low Fuel Consumption
0539 CNG F250 Pickup Low Fuel Consumption
0555 CNG F-250 Pick-up Low Fuel Consumption
1663 Dump, 10 wheel Low Fuel Consumption
0694 Escape, Hybrid Medium Fuel Consumption
1417 Van, Passenger Medium Fuel Consumption
2207 Explorer Medium Fuel Consumption
0419 E-150 Van Medium Fuel Consumption
2121 Escape, Hybrid Medium Fuel Consumption
2412 Van, Passenger Medium Fuel Consumption
0609 CNG F250 Pickup Medium Fuel Consumption
1625 CNG Dump Medium Fuel Consumption
2712 Explorer Medium Fuel Consumption
10121 Ranger Medium Fuel Consumption
2653 Patch Truck Medium Fuel Consumption
129
1104 Escape, Hybrid Medium Fuel Consumption
0600 CNG F250 Pickup Medium Fuel Consumption
0700 Van, Cargo Medium Fuel Consumption
1800 F-250 Medium Fuel Consumption
1106 Vue, HEV Medium Fuel Consumption
0917 Escape, Hybrid Medium Fuel Consumption
0693 Escape, Hybrid Medium Fuel Consumption
2214 E-150 Passenger Van Medium Fuel Consumption
2652 Patch Truck Medium Fuel Consumption
1915 Explorer Medium Fuel Consumption
2333 HONDA CIVIC Medium Fuel Consumption
2623 F- 450 Stencil Medium Fuel Consumption
2119 SUV Hybrid Medium Fuel Consumption
2101 Escape, Hybrid Medium Fuel Consumption
1124 Escape HEV Medium Fuel Consumption
0817 SUV Hybrid Medium Fuel Consumption
2635 Signal Maint. Van Medium Fuel Consumption
2231 Explorer Medium Fuel Consumption
130
1911 F-150 Crew Cab Medium Fuel Consumption
0818 Escape, Hybrid Medium Fuel Consumption
2223 Explorer Medium Fuel Consumption
0916 Escape, Hybrid Medium Fuel Consumption
2616 F-150 Pick-up Medium Fuel Consumption
0568 F-150 Crew Cab Medium Fuel Consumption
2632 CNG Dump Medium Fuel Consumption
1123 Sedan, CNG Medium Fuel Consumption
2321 Explorer Medium Fuel Consumption
1117 Explorer Medium Fuel Consumption
1806 Escape, Hybrid Medium Fuel Consumption
3530 Colorado Medium Fuel Consumption
3910 Ranger Medium Fuel Consumption
2651 Storm Drain Truck Medium Fuel Consumption
0420 E-450 Van Medium Fuel Consumption
2208 Explorer Medium Fuel Consumption
1640 Roll-off Medium Fuel Consumption
2330 Explorer Medium Fuel Consumption
131
1125 F-150 Medium Fuel Consumption
2601 Explorer Medium Fuel Consumption
0502 F-150 Pick-up Medium Fuel Consumption
2648 Sweeper, Schwarze Medium Fuel Consumption
1414 Ranger Medium Fuel Consumption
0831 F-150 SprCb XL Medium Fuel Consumption
2411 Ranger Medium Fuel Consumption
0598 Dodge Ram 1500 Medium Fuel Consumption
0569 F-350 Utility Bed Medium Fuel Consumption
2222 Explorer Medium Fuel Consumption
1606 F-150 4X4 Medium Fuel Consumption
3590 Colorado Medium Fuel Consumption
0130 Van, Passenger Medium Fuel Consumption
3524 Colorado Medium Fuel Consumption
0566 E-350 Van Medium Fuel Consumption
0501 F-150 Pick-up Medium Fuel Consumption
1807 Escape, Hybrid Medium Fuel Consumption
0814 F-250 Medium Fuel Consumption
132
1335 Explorer Medium Fuel Consumption
U901 Escape, Hybrid Medium Fuel Consumption
1809 Utility Bed, F-250 Medium Fuel Consumption
1594 Stake Bed, F-350 Medium Fuel Consumption
0637 F-550 Medium Fuel Consumption
1804 SUV Hybrid Medium Fuel Consumption
2511 F-350 Stakebed Medium Fuel Consumption
1812 F-350, Utility Medium Fuel Consumption
3233 HONDA CIVIC Medium Fuel Consumption
2691 F-250 Pick-up Medium Fuel Consumption
0594 F-250 Utility Bed Medium Fuel Consumption
3131 GMC 3500 Storm Drain Medium Fuel Consumption
1920 GMC 2500 Medium Fuel Consumption
2716 Explorer Medium Fuel Consumption
1808 Utility Bed, F-250 Medium Fuel Consumption
2525 Utility Bed, F-250 Medium Fuel Consumption
2509 Ranger Medium Fuel Consumption
0604 F-150 XL Ext Cab Medium Fuel Consumption
133
3504 F-250 Pick-up Medium Fuel Consumption
3618 F-150 Crew Cab Medium Fuel Consumption
2507 F-350 Stakebed Medium Fuel Consumption
3617 F-350 Service Bed Medium Fuel Consumption
0718 F-150 4x4 p/u Medium Fuel Consumption
0422 Trax SUV Medium Fuel Consumption
2515 F-350 Stakebed Medium Fuel Consumption
0421 Pick Up Medium Fuel Consumption
0918 F-150 Super Cab XL Medium Fuel Consumption
1914 F-150 Pick-up Medium Fuel Consumption
1235 Van, Cargo 2500 Medium Fuel Consumption
0816 F-250 Utility Medium Fuel Consumption
3502 F-250 Pick-up Medium Fuel Consumption
2521 F-250 Dump Medium Fuel Consumption
0638 E-450 Box Van Medium Fuel Consumption
1557 F-350 Utility Medium Fuel Consumption
2592 F-350, Stakebed Medium Fuel Consumption
0828 F-350 Utlitity Medium Fuel Consumption
134
1585 F-350, Utility Medium Fuel Consumption
0597 F-350 Stakebed Medium Fuel Consumption
0713 Explorer Medium Fuel Consumption
1565 Utility Truck Medium Fuel Consumption
1717 F-150 Crew Cab Medium Fuel Consumption
0719 Explorer Medium Fuel Consumption
1900 F-450 XL Super Duty Medium Fuel Consumption
2505 F-250 Pick-up Medium Fuel Consumption
2622 F-550 Stake Bed Medium Fuel Consumption
2518 F-450 Stakebed Medium Fuel Consumption
2510 Ranger Medium Fuel Consumption
0645 Signal Truck Medium Fuel Consumption
2506 F-250 Crew Cab Medium Fuel Consumption
3520 Extra Cab Stake Bed Medium Fuel Consumption
2519 F-350 Medium Fuel Consumption
0660 F-550 Medium Fuel Consumption
0830 F-150 SprCb XL Medium Fuel Consumption
2522 F-250 Supercab Medium Fuel Consumption
135
2508 F-350 Stakebed Medium Fuel Consumption
3512 F-250 Pick-up Medium Fuel Consumption
2701 F-250 Medium Fuel Consumption
2500 Utility Bed, F-250 Medium Fuel Consumption
2237 Escape, Hybrid Medium Fuel Consumption
0815 F-250 Utility High Fuel Consumption
2331 Escape, Hybrid High Fuel Consumption
0567 F-250 Pick-up High Fuel Consumption
1538 F-350 Utility High Fuel Consumption
0663 Dump, 10-Wheel High Fuel Consumption
0829 F-350 Utility High Fuel Consumption
0611 F-350 Stakebed High Fuel Consumption
1531 F-350 Stakebed High Fuel Consumption
2621 F-550 Dump High Fuel Consumption
2334 Explorer High Fuel Consumption
0570 F-250 Utility Bed High Fuel Consumption
1602 F-350 Dually High Fuel Consumption
2326 Explorer High Fuel Consumption
136
0639 Dump Truck High Fuel Consumption
2517 Tower High Fuel Consumption
0605 F-250 Super Cab XL High Fuel Consumption
0825 F-250 Super Cab XL High Fuel Consumption
2503 F-150 Pick-up High Fuel Consumption
2501 Utility Bed, F-250 High Fuel Consumption
2631 F-550 Dump High Fuel Consumption
0695 F-550 High Fuel Consumption
0813 F-250 High Fuel Consumption
2702 F-250 High Fuel Consumption
1692 F-450 High Fuel Consumption
0599 Utility Bed, F-250 High Fuel Consumption
3633 F-550 Graffiti Truck High Fuel Consumption
3634 F550 High Fuel Consumption
0919 F-150 XL Long Bed High Fuel Consumption
0573 F-250 Utility High Fuel Consumption
1603 F-550 Graffiti Truck High Fuel Consumption
1418 F-350 High Fuel Consumption
137
2523 F-250 Stakebed High Fuel Consumption
2624 F-550 Utility Bed High Fuel Consumption
0832 F-450, Aerial Lift High Fuel Consumption

Appendix I: Interview Codebook
Interview #1-Jessica Stoll, Electrification Coalition
Code Description Illustrative Example
1 EV-first policies
Updating procurement
policies to ensure that
the purchase of EVs is
prioritized, particularly
during evaluation
"If your department is going to replace a vehicle, why doesn't an EV make sense? They usually have to get permission from the mayor's office. The City of Charlotte has a good example of a Green Policy."
2 Cooperative
procurement
A procurement method
that involves cities
purchasing EVs through
a collaborative
"By procuring vehicles through the Purchasing Collaborative (Climate Mayors), cities can purchase vehicles at MSRP." "Cities receive email notifications when they can purchase.

Cities purchased 100 Chevy Bolts that were delivered in less than 3 weeks."
3 Tax Credit
Federal or state tax
credits that can be
passed on to cities by
dealerships that apply
the credits at the point
of purchase, lowering
sale prices
"New tax credits should help lower the costs of EVs."
4 Infrastructure
planning
Determining the costs
of installing chargers in
different locations for
the purposes of a cost
comparison analysis and
budget planning
"Work with your utility." "Not one to one." "Know if vehicles are being driven home because employees will need chargers at their homes."
138
5 Behavioral
change
Key driver behind the
adoption of EVs
"Know who is driving the vehicle and who would be
interested in driving EVs."
6 Employee buy-in
Strategies to maximize
the utilization
of/minimize resistance
to EVs by employees
"If it is a siloed effort, it will be hard to implement so engage employees. An example would be email blasts."
7 Work with
utilities
Work with the local
utilities provider to plan
and budget for the
installation of chargers
"Work with utilities early to determine where retrofitting will not be required and to price out charging infrastructure." 8 Total Cost of
Ownership
Cost savings over the
vehicle's lifespan as the
basis for conversion
decisions
"Rank [conversion] based on the likelihood of savings." "Total Cost of Ownership analyses have been key in securing
leadership buy-in because the MSRP's of EVs are much
higher."
Interview #2- Joseph Flores, Los Angeles County Development Authority Code Description Illustrative Example
1 Grant
Grants, a type of
funding source,
available to cities to pay
for EVs, charging
infrastructure, fleet
studies, etc.
"Seek federal grants with available funding from HUD,
infrastructure bill, CDBG, and the DOT.

Evaluate the current cost of combustible engines compared to EVs and determine the short, intermediate, and long-term savings."
2 Insufficient
infrastructure
Absence of or
insufficient charging
infrastructure prevents
cities from supporting
fully electrified fleets
"Copper is expensive, so first improvements may cost more than budgeted. Vehicle and charging station delivery takes time. Gas cars have lower startup prices. Manufacturers rush orders to enter the EV market, causing production faults.

Large Electrical grids with high capacity from SCE. This is a big challenge due to outages and surges when the primary
power grid is stressed by consumption."
3 Policy and
regulatory
environment
Rebates are established
by the Government per
each state.

However, moving
forward with high EV
demand the incentive is
getting difficult to claim.
"Set net zero energy targets in a logic model. Start with minimum fleet expenditures and evaluate the electrification program, dependability, downtime, fuel vs electrical
consumption, and EV vehicle sustainability and parts
availability. Try to predict technology advancements 5-10 years ahead. Avoid trending."
139
4 Public-private
partnership
Cities partner with
rideshare companies,
leveraging their fleets
and/or technology
"We partnered with Enterprise who now handles our fleet repairs instead of our internal shop. Under this contract, we use a gas-powered service fleet and hybrid and electric vehicles for inspectors and programmers. We simplified car management using Enterprise. The contract includes
insurance for accidents, WEX for fuel procurement, full car maintenance, charging stations, and Geotab for vehicle
tracking and driver activity monitoring. Our technicians may service vehicles at approved dealers, jiffy lube outlets, designated body shops, and car wash stations. This private- public collaboration streamlined our operations by
combining various contracts."
5 Incentive or
Rebate
Incentives or rebates,
typically administered
by the local air authority
or the State of
California, that
subsidize EV purchases
and charger installation
"Government incentives can meet demand. Political volatility and who is in control make it risky. California leads the globe in environmental research and projects due to its
population."
6 No heavy duty
vehicles
Heavy duty EVs are not
yet available for lease or
purchase so cities
cannot fully electrify
their fleets if they
include heavy duty
vehicles
"We have not adopted a solution and use gas and diesel
vehicles for service trucks. Other agencies have used Hybrids, NGV, and Hydrogen vehicles for medium-heavy duty use."
7 Phased
conversion
Criteria used by cities to
prioritize (and time)
vehicle replacement
"A modest EV fleet study would examine EV feasibility and benefits. Our agency's operations cover all of L.A. County and benefit from the fuel savings. The agency will evaluate EV performance, efficiency, and value via this experiment. The planning department should review public money
distribution to ensure prudent expenditure and evaluate ROI and value-added. If the pilot program proves the value of EVs, the agency may confidently pursue a full electrification conversion strategy. If the review shows no significant net gain, reassess the strategic plan."
Interview #3- Dan Berlenbach (City of Long Beach, CA)
Code Description Illustrative Example
1 Supply Chain
Issues
Lack of vehicle
availability due to
market disruptions
leads to delays or
inability to procure EVs.
"The supply chain difficulties in the last couple of years have affected everybody...but the smaller fleets have maybe been affected more."
140
2 EV Availability
The likelihood of
electric vehicles being
available and
obtainable.
“If we’re talking about pretty much readily-available electric sedans – Chevy Bolts, Nissan Leafs – those were generally available on the market. Medium-duty and heavy-duty trucks – not so much at all, yet. Then the light-duty trucks are [also] not generally available either, we’ve only been able to get one.”
3 OEM EV
Distribution
Practices
Original Equipment
Manufacturers (OEMs)
like Ford, Chevy, Nissan,
etc. distribute their
vehicles to customers
differently, often based
on established
relationships and
previous interactions.
“As the OEMs have any discretion in who they allocate their limited EVs to, I think they’re coming to Long Beach before they come to Rancho [Cucamonga]. Frankly, because we’re a bigger customer and that’s how the game works. We’re not saying give us theirs, we say what we need, and there’s just not enough to go around, especially in the light-truck
category. But the sedans are harder to come by now too, although they’re not in the same category as the pickups by far.”
4 Alternative
Procurement
Methods
Other strategies for
obtaining EVs.
“There are alternate means – you can lease. Although leasing is not generally the preferred way for government fleets to get their new vehicles, there’s a profit involved there, so generally it’s more expensive to lease. However, leasing companies can use some of the (tax) incentives ($7500
credit) on light-duty EVs and reflect it in the lease rates. So now the scale is a little bit different in terms of lease vs purchase, because with leasing you can get that $7500
credit. We’ve done that, and it might be something that is good for them (Rancho Cucamonga).”
5 Electric Vehicles
as a service
Some businesses offer
EVs as a service –
vehicles, charging,
maintenance, etc.
“It’s a budding industry, but there is an industry starting with electric vehicles as a service. So, you not only lease the vehicle, you lease the charging infrastructure and the whole bit. Especially for a smaller city, where the challenge for staffing and so forth, it might be a realistic option.” 6 Funding Sources
Budgetary resources
available to local
governments for their
EV fleet projects.
“We use AB 32 funding. There’s a program from the state called Energize that offsets charger cost. There is CALeVIP, another offset for charging costs. There’s the Carl Moyer Program, that’s a SoCal AQMD (Air Quality Management
Districts) program. There’s HVIP, for heavy-duty vehicles, they offset vehicle costs because EVs cost more money than ICE (internal combustion engine) vehicles do. Then there’s VW Environmental Trust is another one.”
7 Challenges for
smaller cities
Smaller cities have less
resources available to
them to overcome
challenges.
“It’s hard for a small fleet. Chances are, there’s a handful of mechanics and a fleet supervisor or manager who also does the budget, the specs, and now they're doing an EV program.

It’s tough, I’ve been in a smaller fleet too when you’re wearing all those hats.”
141
8 Strategies for
Overcoming
Procurement
Issues.

Smart practices for
securing a functional
fleet, despite the
obstacles that prohibit
obtaining new EV
vehicles.
“In some cases, we just wait. More proactively, we look at our replacement plan…and if we know [some vehicles] take, on average, 24 months to get and we have trucks due for replacement in 2025, then we say we should order it now it’s going to take two years to get here…so order early is the most proactive strategy there. Another strategy is, if the EV vehicle is not available, [we] order the ICE (internal
combustion engine) version…I can’t make it electric today, but I need to put a new vehicle in the fleet because the old one is falling apart and costing me a ton of money. Even if I put a new ICE vehicle in its place, it’s still ten times cleaner than what I’m replacing…sometimes you take the 80%
solution, it’s the best you can do. You can’t spend all of your time chasing some of those things - if they’re not available, they’re not available.”
9 EV Maintenance
EVs maintenance is
specialized. When
considering
maintenance costs
(especially after
warranties are past)
fleet supervisors should
prioritize efficiency.
“In our business, it doesn’t make sense to do all of your work in house…[especially] when you have a varied fleet with different manufacturers…there’s a break point of where you should do 70-80% of your work in house, and the remainder you should be contracting out. This is best business practice for fleets, because it’s just inefficient to do it internally… We take stuff to the dealer every day, because it’s not efficient to do it here. When it’s not efficient, that means it’s (the vehicle) going to be down longer or it’s going to cost more to do it ourselves.”
Interview #4- Camilla Taufic (San Francisco)
Code Description Illustrative Example
1 Funding
Challenges
Electrifying a vehicle
fleet requires adequate
funding due to high
upfront costs and the
required infrastructure.

Funding a fleet
conversion project can
be challenging.
“There’s a lot of public support and political support for [a zero-emission fleet], it’s just the logistics of actually paying for it are very challenging.
2 EV Supply vs.

Demand
The demand for electric
vehicles has grown over
the past decade. Several
factors, like increased
environmental
concerns, improved EV
range, better cost
savings, and higher gas
prices, are driving the
demand.
“We’re in the state (California) with the most EV legislation and with the highest user uptake of EVs, and so the demand here is very high and supply is limited.”
142
3 Alternative
Procurement
Methods
Other strategies for
obtaining EVs.
“We’ve been seeing that manufacturers don’t want to use our term contracts [anymore]…One of the things that we’ve been doing is that we’ve been buying these vehicles
retail…it’s pretty much just going to the lot and saying ‘can we drive this car off the lot today?’. And so, we’re paying a lot more per vehicle than we ever would have in the past, but it seems to be the only way to get them.”
4 Purchasing Used
EVs
With the EV
procurement challenges
that local governments
have been facing,
purchasing used EVs
offer municipalities an
opportunity to acquire
the vehicles they seek.

However, used EVs
come with their own
challenges.
“Another thing we’re looking into is used EVs. However, this [approach] comes with a couple of challenges, and one is battery lifetime. So we focus a lot on the warranty when we’re looking at used vehicles to see what the warranty on the battery is, to see if it’s expired [or] extendable. We’re also looking at the mileage. What we’ve seen here that’s kind of great is a lot of people in California are now upgrading their EVs for ones with higher range. But our city employees don’t necessarily need 300 miles range when they’re driving around the city. So the Nissan Leafs and the Chevy Bolts from 2018 that only have 90 miles range on them actually would work great for us, and they’re a lot less expensive.”
5 EV Dealers in the
East Coast
Car dealers outside of
California are more
likely to have EVs
available for purchase.
“We’ve been reaching out to municipalities on the East
Coast. The reason for that is that EV uptake on the East Coast have not been nearly as strong. So there seem to be dealers there that are trying really hard to unload their EVs. We haven’t purchased any from the East Coast yet, but I have been speaking to a few dealers there who said with a $1000 delivery fee, we could get some from them more easily. It’s a very expensive delivery fee, but it’s a way to get them.” 6 Funding Sources
Budgetary resources
available to local
governments for their
EV fleet projects.
“We’ve used some of the federal ones. But what we’ve
found, unfortunately, is that often the reporting
requirements are so time consuming and difficult, and it’s not like the federal grants will get us 100 new vehicles. It might be a portion of two, and we’d have to hire someone to respond to all of the grant reporting requirements. So as a cost benefit analysis, we’ve found that using federal or state grants to purchase EVs has not really been useful. What we’ve been considering more are the federal grants for EV infrastructure plan from the Biden-Harris administration...but the challenge there is that every EV charger needs to be publicly accessible, and that’s something that we are not as interested in because our fleet needs to be behind a gate at night.”
143
7 Emergency
Charging
Solutions during
Natural Disasters
Natural disasters, like
earthquakes, are a
threat to the electric
grid. Municipalities
need to be proactive
and consider solutions
to charging an EV fleet
when the power grid is
down - especially for
emergency vehicles.
“There’s a huge hesitation around converting fire trucks or ambulances…if there’s a natural disaster, and you need
[vehicles] available and then the grid goes down and there’s no way of charging them...so we are looking into emergency charging solutions. A big one we’ve looked at is Dannar, they create this electric generator that needs to be charged up, but once it’s charged up it can charge EVs. The other is SparkCharge, they have a portable road EV charger. One of our big concerns is an environmental disaster where we
don’t have access to electricity to charge up vehicles…” 8 Heavy-Duty
Vehicle Solutions
Vehicles that are
heavier than light-duty
vehicles. They are
larger, heavier, and can
tow heavier loads.

Currently, there are no
electric heavy-duty
vehicles on the market.
“We’re looking a lot into hydrogen. I think for the heavy-duty vehicles, that’s going to be the forefront rather than
electric…we’re starting to do research into creating our own hydrogen fueling stations so that the heavy-duty trucks, that will be powered by hydrogen fuel cell, can be fueled...The one thing with a hydrogen fueling station is it will be like a gas station, where you pull up and it takes 2 to 3 minutes to fill up, and then you can leave – whereas EVs, even with a fast charger, you’re looking at about 30 minutes for a full charge. I think that’s the biggest difference. You need a lot more chargers as well, because of the time, so there’s a lot more infrastructure as opposed to hydrogen where [more] cars can fill up in the 30 minutes it takes to charge one EV…” 9 Charging
Infrastructure
"structures, machinery,
and equipment
necessary and integral
to support a EV"
“[Developing our charging infrastructure] has taken years.

Something we’re looking into is instead of continuing to rely on building our own infrastructure, is working with private companies who own EV chargers, like ChargePoint or
EVgo…our drivers can just pull up to a ChargePoint charger, charge and leave, and the city gets billed for it…the benefit there is speed. Eventually we’d like to have our own
infrastructure, but it’s going to take a very long time to do that.”
10 EV Preference
Any personal opinion
about which EV makes
and models are best
compared to other
available options.
"There's no preferred make or model. The city's procurement policy is to take the lowest bid, as long as they meet our specs. We probably have the most of Chevy Bolts..."

Interview #5-Jonathan Changus, Center for Sustainable Energy Code Description Illustrative Example
144
1 Change
management
Implement strategies
for effecting change,
controlling change and
helping people to adapt
to change.
"Look for the path of least resistance. Consider who is driving the vehicles and whether they will be early adopters and can change their routines such as driving the vehicles home every night."
2 Delay
electrification
Criteria for delaying
electrification
"Vehicles typically driven home at night." "Pick-up trucks; more options come 2026." "Vehicles exempted from state
mandates."
3 Prioritize
electrification
Criteria for prioritizing
electrification
"Older vehicles. They are depreciated assets. There were be less resistance when replacing older vehicles, nearing the end of their lifespans, versus newer vehicles." "Consider vehicle availability meaning not what is available or will soon be available rather what EVs can be procured in a few
months like Chevy Bolts."
4 Key personnel
Internal champions
from each department
that will be responsible
for implementing the
plan
"RC needs to identify key personnel in their departments who have the leadership and authority to spearhead
implementation, securing their buy-in first and foremost." 5 Clean Cities
A network of coalitions,
which develop
public/private
partnerships to
promote alternative
fuels and vehicles, fuel
blends, fuel economy,
hybrid vehicles, and idle
reduction
"Staff should join a Clean Cities to stay apprised of funding opportunities. Long Beach Clean Cities is a strong coalition." 145
6 Low Carbon Fuel
Standard
Program
The California Clean
Fuel Reward Program is
administered by
Southern California
Edison in collaboration
with electric utilities
across the state, giving
all Californians the
ability to receive the
reward, regardless of
their electric utility
provider. Funded by
credits generated by
utilities in the Low
Carbon Fuel Standard
(LCFS), the California
Clean Fuel Reward
makes electric vehicles
even more affordable to
a broad group of
customers due to few
eligibility restrictions
and its ability to be
stacked with other
federal, state and local
rewards. The California
Air Resources Board’s
California Clean Fuel
Reward program
provides an instant
price reduction of up to
$750 at the point of sale
or lease for eligible new
plug-in electric vehicles
at participating
retailers.
"Other programs like CVAP are ending. The point-of-sale rebate offered by the California Clean Fuel Reward Program is still being offered."
7 Statewide
Contract Fleet
Vehicles
Provide Fleet Vehicles
at contracted pricing to
the State of California
and local governmental
agencies
"The State of California receives preferential pricing. RC can procure through the State's General Services Department, and I believe these contracts extend to EVs."
https://www.dgs.ca.gov/PD/Resources/Page-
Content/Procurement-Division-Resources-List-
Folder/Statewide-Contract-Fleet-Vehicles
146
8 Infrastructure
planning
Determining where to
install charging stations
and quantities of
charging stations
"Track vehicles to learn routes and install charging stations where it makes sense. Vehicles may need to domiciled in new locations."
9 Total Cost of
Ownership
Cost savings over the
vehicle's lifespan as the
basis for conversion
decisions
"It may cost more up front to electrify. Evaluate the long- term savings from electrifying certain vehicles in the fleet." Interview #6-Mike Domin, Sourcewell
Code Description Illustrative Example
1 Local statutes
Specific provisions
allowing for cooperative
procurement
"To purchase EVs through the State's contract or Sourcewell (EV Purchasing Collaborative), state and local statutes must permit the client to procure through another government entity. The language, 'joint powers,' is often used."
2 Time savings
Time saved from
cooperative
procurement because
the bid process has
already been done
"The client does not need to go out to bid. The bidding process has been completed. Contracts have been awarded.

They know the pricing. They do not get to skip the line, but they do not have to go through a lengthy bidding process." 3 Pre-approved
budget
A budget (with a cap
amount) for EV
purchases that is pre
approved by decision
makers
"Given the current landscape, the client needs to be able to issue purchase orders quickly. They need to seek approval from their decision makers for a blanketed amount that can be spent on EV purchases."
4 EV
manufacturers
Leading manufacturers
of EV fleet vehicles "GM, Ford, and Chevy."
5 Heavy duty
vehicles Class 7-8 vehicles
"Governments and manufacturers collide on the price of
heavy duty vehicles. There is a significant difference between the price of a heavy duty EV and ICE."
147
6 Telematics
Vehicle telematics
combines GPS systems,
onboard vehicle
diagnostics, wireless
telematics devices, and
black box technologies
to record and transmit
vehicle data, such as
speed, location,
maintenance
requirements and
servicing, and cross-
reference this data with
the vehicle’s internal
behavior. This
information can be used
in real-time analysis to
improve overall driver
safety, and reduce costs
and improve
performance for
commercial vehicles.
"The client needs to use telematics to know the range
needed and where to install chargers. There are many
telematics systems so the client needs to know what they're looking for out of a system."
7 Procurement
delays
Delays caused by a wide
range of issues such as
global supply chain
disruptions, allotments
(for government),
procurement processes
"The client can't electrify over night. Los Angeles has been waiting for 100 EVs for a year. The client can install chargers and track fleet data today."
Interview #7- Michael Cacciotti (Councilmember South Pasadena, CA) Code Description Illustrative Example
1 Why transition
Outperforms, safer,
costs less, less to
power, fuel and
maintain. Add to
climate and health
benefits.

Eliminating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions on top of
economic and performance benefits. The decision to
transition was a no brainer.
2 Community
sentiment
People think EVs are
more expensive when
electricity is actually
cheaper. Charging takes
too long. EVs don't have
much range.

It costs much less per mile to drive an EV. Also, require less maintenance. EV charging is much easier, cleaner, and more convenient. EVs have a maximum range of 500 miles and
owners can charge once or twice per week much like going to the gas station once a week. Hold community meetings to educate the public and naysayers.
148
3 Leaders in
Sustainability and
Innovation
Strategic Plan

Interview #8- Arpy Kasparian (City of South Pasadena Environmental Services and Sustainability Manager)
Code Description Illustrative Example
1 Sustainability Sustainability priorities. Safety of people in the city. Environmental stewardship.

Commitment to human rights and lifting communities.
2 Innovation
Innovate new
technology that
addresses pressing
issues of sustainability.

Energy transition and a smarter, more efficient future. 3 Governance Culture of unyielding
integrity Achieving environmental, social, and governance goals.

Interview #9 - Sergeant Tony Abdalla (EV Project Lead at the South Pasadena Police Dept.)
Code Description Illustrative Example
1 Vehicle Cost
2022 Tesla Model Y
(Electric) cost $68,890
vs Ford PPV (Gas)
$44,850; Annual Cost of
Maintenance/Repairs
$846 vs $1653; Annual
Cost of Energy/Fuel
$336 vs $4,355
Over a ten-year period, the projected cost savings is just over $312,000 for 20 EV Police Cars. In the last two years, the two gas-powered police motorcycles have cost more in
maintenance and gas than the 10 EVs assigned to detectives and admin combined.
2 Charging
Infrastructure &
Redundancy
Infrastructure of
sufficient scope and
scale is necessary to
support entire EVs
In partnership with SCE's Charge Ready Program, 34 level 2 chargers were installed in the police department, fire
department, and public employee parking lots. Turn around time 18 months.
3 Vehicle Leasing
Viable, cost-effective
option. Acquire lease
for the residual balance.

Extend the lease for
another 6-7 months to
pay down residual
amount down to zero.

Can use equity in the fleet at the end of lease term to enter into a new lease.
4 Upfitting
Partnered with
Unplugged Performance
for upfitting needs.

Unplugged Performance are the global experts when it
comes to customizing and upfitting Tesla vehicles.

149
Interview Themes:

1. Organizational Context

2. Procurement

3. Collaboration

4. Policy

5. Funding

6. Infrastructure

7. Electrification of Vehicles/Heavy-Duty EVs

8. Finance

Appendix J: Funding Sources

Funding Resources Links
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy https://www.energy.gov/eere/vehicles/funding- opportunities
California State Incentives https://afdc.energy.gov/laws/all?state=CA#State%20Incentiv es
Federal Funds For Local Decarbonization https://cityrenewables.org/ffold/ Metropolitan Washington Council of Govs. Funding
sources
https://www.mwcog.org/about-us/cog-board-and-
priorities/ev-clearinghouse/ev-grants-and-funding/
Federal Funding Guidance https://electrificationcoalition.org/work/federal-ev- policy/federal-funding-guidance-for-cities/
DERA awarded grants https://www.epa.gov/dera/national-dera-awarded-grants Federal Funding Programs Overview USDOT https://www.transportation.gov/rural/ev/toolkit/ev- infrastructure-funding-and-financing/overview
Funding Finder https://fundingfindertool.org/

Appendix K: Codebook for Literature Review

Code Definition Illustrative Example Related References Implementation Challenges
Supply chain issues
Lack of vehicle availability
due to market disruptions
leads to delays or inability
to procure EVs
"Global auto supply chains have
been snarled by a semiconductor
chip shortage. When car sales
dropped dramatically in early
2020 during the COVID-19
lockdown, many auto
manufacturers slashed orders for
chips. So, the semiconductor
industry shifted production lines
https://www.coxautoinc.com/mobilit
y/wp-
content/uploads/sites/11/2022/09/E
V_Battery_Whitepaper.pdf
150
to meet demand for other
applications, like laptops, TVs and
video games."
Insufficient
infrastructure
Absence of or insufficient
charging infrastructure
prevents cities from
supporting fully electrified
fleets
"Also, in the US a massive ramp-
up is required.

According to a PwC analysis, the
EV charging market in the US
could
— and will need to — grow nearly
tenfold to satisfy the charging
needs of
an estimated 27 million EVs on the
road by 2030."
Mildner, M. (n.d.). Siemens Smart
Infrastructure BrandVoice:

The 3 Biggest Reasons For Range
Anxiety – Fact Or Fiction? Forbes.

Retrieved July 7, 2023, from
https://www.forbes.com/sites/sieme
ns-smart-
infrastructure/2023/02/17/the-3-
biggest-reasons-for-range-anxiety--
fact-or-fiction/
No heavy duty vehicles
Heavy duty EVs are not yet
available for lease or
purchase so cities cannot
fully electrify their fleets if
they include heavy duty
vehicles
"The complication right now is the
technology is pretty new"
"There’s lots of advances and
there’s lots of changes, so we’re
not sure where that’s going to go
yet"
Raymond, Y., Journalist, C. N. V. I., &
Contact, F. |. (2023, February 8).

Lack of heavy duty electric vehicles
stalling transition of interested
businesses, municipalities. Vancouver
Island.
https://vancouverisland.ctvnews.ca/l
ack-of-heavy-duty-electric-vehicles-
stalling-transition-of-interested-
businesses-municipalities-1.6265118
Range "anxiety" and
charging time
Refers to the concerns
about the limited range of
EVs. EV range and charge
time are important aspects
of implementation
"Range anxiety is what an electric
vehicle (EV) driver feels when the
battery charge is low,
and the usual sources of electricity
are unavailable.

It sparks a fear of getting stranded
somewhere, which adds time,
inconvenience, and stress to a
journey.

Studies show that driving range
and a lack of charging
infrastructure are
the primary reasons people do not
consider EVs when buying a new
vehicle."
What is Range Anxiety with Electric
Vehicles? (n.d.). J.D. Power. Retrieved
July 7, 2023, from
https://www.jdpower.com/cars/shop
ping-guides/what-is-range-anxiety-
with-electric-vehicles
Policy and regulatory
environment
Rebates are established by
the Government per each
state.

However, moving forward
with high EV demand the
incentive is getting difficult
"Getting a $7,500 tax break for the
purchase of a new electric vehicle
will likely get harder in a few
months
— meaning prospective buyers
who want the financial incentive
Iacurci, G. (2023, January 25). Why
the $7,500 EV tax credit may be
tougher to get starting in March.

CNBC.
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/25/i
nflation-reduction-act-7500-ev-tax-
151
to claim. may wish to speed up their
timeline. "
credit-may-soon-be-tough-to-
get.html
Best Practices-Procurement
Cooperative
procurement
A procurement method
that involves cities
purchasing EVs through a
collaborative
"Participating organizations
combine their needs and
collectively request bids or
negotiate contracts with suppliers
in cooperative procurement. By
unifying their purchasing needs,
companies may get better prices,
terms, and suppliers."
- Gupta, V., Konda, S. R., Kumar,
R., & Panigrahi, B. K. (2017).

Multiaggregator collaborative
electric vehicle charge scheduling
under variable energy purchase
and EV cancelation events. IEEE
Transactions on Industrial
Informatics, 14(7), 2894-2902.

-
https://driveevfleets.org/procureme
nt-process/

-
https://static1.squarespace.com/st
atic/58803d48d2b857e5d4a13d7d
/t/5fc7b3305060c93fcd871ce1/160
6923086219/ACCO-SNEP-
TrainingPrimer-Session3-EV.pdf
EV-first policies
Updating procurement
policies to ensure that the
purchase of EVs is
prioritized, particularly
during evaluation
""
Sourcewell
A third party entity with the
legal authority to procure
EVs on behalf of cities
""
Public-private
partnership
Cities partner with
rideshare companies,
leveraging their fleets
and/or technology
""
Vendors
Manufacturers,
dealerships, etc. that cities
lease or purchase EVs from

Best Practices-Funding
Grant
Grants, a type of funding
source, available to cities to
pay for EVs, charging
infrastructure, fleet studies,
"Funding may be used to support
the scrapping of older vehicles as
defined, the replacement of an
existing engine (repowering), or
Volkswagen (VW) Settlement
Mitigation Funding—American Cities
Climate Challenge. (2023, May 23).
https://cityrenewables.org/ffold/volks
152
etc. the purchasing of new diesel or
alternate fueled (CNG, propane,
hybrid, etc.) engines and vehicles."
wagen-vw-settlement-mitigation-
funding/,
https://cityrenewables.org/ffold/volks
wagen-vw-settlement-mitigation-
funding/
Tax Credit
Federal or state tax credits
that can be passed on to
cities by dealerships that
apply the credits at the
point of purchase, lowering
sale prices
"Sellers of new clean vehicles and
dealers who sell used clean
vehicles must meet reporting
requirements for those vehicles to
be eligible for a credit under IRC
30D and 25E."
Clean Vehicle Credit Seller or Dealer
Requirements | Internal Revenue
Service. (n.d.). Retrieved July 25,
2023, from
https://www.irs.gov/credits-
deductions/clean-vehicle-credit-
seller-or-dealer-requirements
Incentive or Rebate
Incentives or rebates,
typically administered by
the local air authority or
the State of California, that
subsidize EV purchases and
charger installation
"Heavy-Duty Low Emission Vehicle
Replacement and Repower Grants
The South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD)
offers grants for the replacement
or repower of eligible class 7 and 8
heavy-duty vehicles with low
oxide of nitrogen (NOx) vehicles."
Alternative Fuels Data Center:

California Laws and Incentives. (n.d.).

Retrieved July 25, 2023, from
https://afdc.energy.gov/laws/all?stat
e=CA
Funding Guidance
Guidance to find funding
sources to convert the fleet
to EVs
" The guidance
provides information on
expectations for updated Plans,
funding eligibilities, and program
administration
guidance for the historic
investments in Electric Vehicle1
(EV) charging infrastructure made
in the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law"
National Electric Vehicle
Infrastructure. (2023).

National Electric Vehicle
Infrastructure Formula Program
Guidance (Update)
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environm
ent/nevi/formula_prog_guid/90d_ne
vi_formula_program_guidance.pdf.

Infrastructure Funding
Federal Grants are
provided for the city to be
prepared with the
necessary infrastructure
"The BIL establishes a National
Electric Vehicle Infrastructure
Formula Program (“NEVI
Formula”) to provide funding to
States to strategically deploy
electric vehicle (EV) charging
infrastructure and to establish an
interconnected network to
facilitate data collection, access,
and reliability.

"
NEVI. (2022, February 10).Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law—National Electric
Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula
Program Fact Sheet
| Federal Highway Administration.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bipartisan
-infrastructure-
law/nevi_formula_program.cfm
Best Practices-Fleet Conversion (Other)
Maintenance costs Strategies for keeping
maintenance costs for EVs ""
153
low (following the
expiration of warranties);
estimates of maintenance
costs for EVs
Chargers to EVs ratio The recommended ratio of
chargers to EVs ""
-
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/califor
nia-moves-accelerate-100-new-zero-
emission-vehicle-sales-2035
Phased conversion
Criteria used by cities to
prioritize (and time) vehicle
replacement
""
Vehicle
specific/operational
factors
Vehicle-specific fleet
conversion involves
changing the technology or
fuel source of particular
fleet vehicles. It entails
replacing or upgrading
gasoline-powered vehicles
with EVs or hybrids.
"Certain fleet vehicles are
designed to serve specific
purposes. For instance,
emergency response vehicles may
carry medical supplies,
defibrillators, stretchers, or
firefighting equipment. Utility
vehicles may have specialized
equipment for tree trimming or
overhead line maintenance."
- Zhang, S., Wu, Y., Un, P., Fu, L., &
Hao, J. (2016). Modeling real-world
fuel consumption and carbon dioxide
emissions with high resolution for
light-duty passenger vehicles in a
traffic populated city. Energy, 113,
461-471.

- https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-
work/programs/zero-emission-
vehicle-program/about
Fuel and electrical
consumption
Both fuel consumption and
electric consumption are
important metrics for
assessing the efficiency,
cost, and environmental
impact of vehicles and
devices.
"Fuel and electric consumption
monitoring and optimization may
enhance energy efficiency,
minimize environmental impact,
and maximize operational
performance."
- Kambly, K. R., & Bradley, T. H. (2014).

Estimating the HVAC energy
consumption of plug-in electric
vehicles. Journal of Power Sources,
259, 117-124.

- Berry, I. M. (2010). The effects of
driving style and vehicle performance
on the real-world fuel consumption of
US light-duty vehicles (Doctoral
dissertation, Massachusetts Institute
of Technology).

-
https://nap.nationalacademies.org/re
ad/12924/chapter/4

Rancho Cucamonga City CouncilSeptember 19, 2023

Rancho Cucamonga City Council
September 19, 2023