Agenda packet, regular meeting — Rancho Cucamonga City Council, August 20, 2025 (part 4 of 6)

Ver. 25.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: RCMU

RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL UTILITIES
Page RCMU-3
Office of
Record Retention No. Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

I=Import
M=Mfr
S=Scan
Destroy
Paper
after
Imaged &
QC'd?
If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for City-Wide Standards Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder.

HOLDS: Litigation, complaints, claims, public records act requests, audits and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion).

City Clerk RCMU-010 Easements
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
(copies); GC §34090.7
Engineering
Services /
RCMU
RCMU-011 Electricity Drawings / As-Builts /
Record Drawings P P
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference
(Engineering has originals); GC
§34090.7
Engineering
Services /
RCMU
RCMU-012
Equipment Records (Manuals,
Tests, Inspections, Studies,
Reports)
Disposal of
Equipment +
2 years
Disposal of
Equipment +
2 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; CCP
§337 et. Seq., GC §34090
Engineering
Services /
RCMU
RCMU-013 Facility Histories / Infrastructure
Design P P
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; GC
§34090
Lead Dept. RCMU-014
Generator Operation Logs &
Inspections - Fixed / Stationary
Generators
3 years 3 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
AQMD Rule 1470; GC §34090
Lead Dept. RCMU-015
Generator Operation Logs &
Inspections - Portable /
Emergency Generators
5 years 5 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
AQMD Rule 1470; Form
400–E–13a instructions; GC
§34090
Engineering
Services /
RCMU
RCMU-016 Joint Pole Agreements, History,
Maintenance (Card Files) P P
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; GC
§34090
Engineering
Services /
RCMU
RCMU-017 Joint Pole Invoices / Accounts
Receivable 5 years 5 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference (meets
municipal government auditing
requirements); GC §34090
Engineering
Services /
RCMU
RCMU-018 Load Records 10 years 10 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; GC
§34090
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. ©1995-2017 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 379 ends

Ver. 25.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: RCMU

RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL UTILITIES
Page RCMU-4
Office of
Record Retention No. Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

HOLDS: Litigation, complaints, claims, public records act requests, audits and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion).

Engineering
Services /
RCMU
RCMU-019 Payments / Credit Card Receipts -
RCMU 5 years 5 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department preference (meets
auditing standards); GC §34090
Engineering
Services /
RCMU
RCMU-020 Power Operations Reports /
Outage Reports 10 years 10 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; GC
§34090
Engineering
Services /
RCMU
RCMU-021 Power Outage Report Database
Indefinite -
Minimum 5
years
Indefinite -
Minimum 5
years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Data is interrelated; GC §34090
Engineering
Services /
RCMU
RCMU-022 Power Trading / Power Scheduling
(Check Out Worksheets)
Completion +
3 years 2 years Completion +
5 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference
(auditing standards are 5
years); GC §34090
Engineering
Services /
RCMU
RCMU-023 Power Trading / Power Scheduling
(Confirmations, Invoices) 3 years 4 years 5 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; GC
§34090
Engineering
Services /
RCMU
RCMU-024 Power Trading / Power Scheduling
(Pathing Sheets) 3 years 4 years 5 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; GC
§34090
Engineering
Services /
RCMU & Gas
RCMU-025
Regulatory Agency Audits: CEC,

CFTC, CPUC, EPA, FERC, NERC,
NPDES, WECC, etc.
10 years 10 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; GC
§34090
Engineering
Services /
RCMU & Gas
RCMU-026
Regulatory Agency Compliance
Reports & Confirmations: ,

CPUC, EPA, FERC, NERC,
NPDES, WECC, etc.
10 years 10 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; GC
§34090
Engineering
Services /
RCMU & Gas
RCMU-027
Regulatory Agency
Correspondence: , CPUC, EPA,

FERC, NERC, NPDES, WECC,
etc..

Minimum 10
years
Minimum 10
years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

Page 380 ends

Ver. 25.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: RCMU

RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL UTILITIES
Page RCMU-5
Office of
Record Retention No. Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

HOLDS: Litigation, complaints, claims, public records act requests, audits and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion).

Engineering
Services /
RCMU & Gas
RCMU-028
Regulatory Agency Inspections: ,

CPUC, EPA, FERC, NERC,
NPDES, WECC, etc.
10 years 10 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; GC
§34090
Engineering
Services /
RCMU & Gas
RCMU-029
Regulatory Agency Licenses: ,

CPUC, EPA, FERC, NERC,
NPDES, WECC, etc.

P P
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; GC
§34090
Engineering
Services /
RCMU
RCMU-030
SCADA Database (Electricity)
(Supervisory Control and Data
Acquisition)
Indefinite -
Minimum 5
years
Indefinite -
Minimum 5
years
Yes
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Data is interrelated; Databases
where sewer records may be
stored are required for 5 years;
SWRCB Order 2022-0103-
DWQ; GC §§34090, 12168.7
Engineering
Services /
RCMU
RCMU-031 SCADA Printouts / Reports / Log
Books
When No
Longer
Required
When No
Longer
Required
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Data is interrelated; Databases
where sewer records may be
stored are required for 5 years;
SWRCB Order 2022-0103-
DWQ; Preliminary drafts - if not
drafts, then 2 years; GC
§§34090,12168.7
Engineering
Services /
RCMU
RCMU-032 Solar Power Production Operating
Data Logs / Diaries 10 years 10 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; GC
§34090
Lead Dept. RCMU-033 Underground Service Alerts
(USA's) 3 years 3 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference
(required for 3 years); GC
§§4216.2(d) & 4216.3(d), 34090
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. ©1995-2017 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 381 ends

Ver. 25.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: RCMU

RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL UTILITIES
Page RCMU-6
Office of
Record Retention No. Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

HOLDS: Litigation, complaints, claims, public records act requests, audits and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion).

Division
Providing
Service /
Work
RCMU-034
Work Orders / Service Requests

CMMS DATABASE
(Computerized Maintenance
Management System)
Indefinite -
Minimum 5
years
Indefinite -
Minimum 5
years

Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Data is interrelated; Databases
where sewer records may be
stored are required for 5 years;
SWRCB Order 2022-0103-
DWQ; CCP §§338 et seq., 340
et seq., 342, GC §34090
Division
Providing
Service /
Work
RCMU-035
Work Orders / Service Requests -
All Information Entered in CMMS
Database
(Paper drafts)
When No
Longer
Required
When No
Longer
Required

Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Preliminary drafts (the database
is the original); GC §34090
Division
Providing
Service /
Work
RCMU-036
Work Orders / Service Requests -
NOT entered in CMMS Database
(or partial information entered into
CMMS Database)
(Division providing service retains
originals; Division requesting
service is considered a copy)
5 years 5 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
City Preference; May contain
sewer records, which are
required for 5 years; SWRCB
Order 2022-0103-DWQ; CCP
§§338 et seq., 340 et seq., 342;
CCP §§338 et seq., 340 et seq.,
342, GC §34090
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA. ©1995-2017 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 382 ends

Resolution No. FD 2025-020 - Page 1 of 3
RESOLUTION NO. FD 2025-020

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO

CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, ADOPTING REVISED

RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULES, AUTHORIZING DESTRUCTION OF

CERTAIN CITY RECORDS , AND RESCINDING PREVIOUS RECORDS

RETENTION SCHEDULES
WHEREAS, the objective of a records management program and retention schedule is to control costs, increase space availability, streamline information and consistent record keeping systems, and improve productivity by providing records and information in a timely manner to individuals requiring them; and
WHEREAS, California Health & Safety Code Section 13868 and Government Code Section 60200 provide that the legislative body of a fire protection district may authorize at any time the destruction or disposition of any duplicate record, paper, or document, the orig inal or a permanent photographic record of which is in the files of any officer or department of the district; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 60201 provides that District records which have served their purpose, which are not expressly required by law to be filed and preserved, and which will not adversely affect any interest of the district or public may be destroyed;
WHEREAS, the District has a procedure to maintain a list of the types of records destroyed or disposed of that reasonably identifies the information contained in the records in each category; WHEREAS, the City Attorney has reviewed and approves the Records Retention Schedule as evidenced by his signature on this Resolution, in accordance with the provisions of California Government Code Section 60201; and
WHEREAS, the District previously adopted Resolution No . 2024-007 adopting records retention schedules.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT DOES FIND AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The facts set forth in the Recitals, above in this resolution, are true and correct.

Section 2. Resolution No. FD2024-007 and all previous resolutions adopting District records retention schedules are hereby rescinded and replaced with the Fire District Records Retention Schedules adopted herein.

Section 3 . The Board of Directors hereby adopts as its District Records Retention Schedules, the District Records Retention Schedules set forth in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. The Board of Directors hereby finds that the destruction or disposition of records in Exhibit A that have exceeded the retention periods set forth therein, and are no longer required for any District purpose, will not adversely affect any interest of the District or the public.

ATTACHMENT 2

Page 383 ends

Resolution No. FD 2025-020 - Page 2 of 3

Section 4. The records of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, as set forth in the Fire District Records Retention Schedules, Exhibit A, and that are no longer required for any District purpose, are hereby authorized to be destroyed as provided by California Health & Safety Code Section 13868, and Government Code Section 60200, et seq., and in accordance with the provisions of said Schedule and District policies and procedures, without further action by the District’s Board of Directors.

Section 5. Minor updates are hereby authorized to be made to the Records Retention Schedules, without any further action by the District’s Board of Directors , that do not alter the retention period or delete records specified in the schedule, with the consent of the City Clerk Services Director, City Attorney and City Manager. Minor updates are defined as improvement in Records Descriptions, changes in Office of Record / Inactive timeframes (but not the Total Retention Period), whether to Image a record, and the Justification.

Section 5. The term “records” as used herein shall include records, documents, instructions, books, microforms, electronic files, magnetic tape, optical media, instruments, writings, and/or paper regardless of media, as defined by the California Public Records Act and as those terms are used in Health & Safety Code Section 13868 and Government Code Section 60200, et seq.

Section 6. The Clerk of the Board of Directors shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.

Section 7 . This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and adoption.

Page 384 ends

Resolution No. FD 2025-020 - Page 3 of 3

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of August 2025.

_____________________________
L. Dennis Michael, President

ATTEST:

_
Kim Sevy, Clerk

I, Kim Sevy, SECRETARY of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, at a Regular Meeting of said Board held on the 20th day of August 2025.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

Executed this 21st day of August 2025, at Rancho Cucamonga, California.

Kim Sevy, Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Nicholas R. Ghirelli, City Attorney
Richards, Watson & Gershon

Page 385 ends

HOW TO USE RETENTION SCHEDULES
©1995-2025 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. (909) 337-3516 - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission

A legend explaining the information presented in the retention schedule; please read this for an explanation of every column.

The specified retention period applies regardless of the media of the record: If a record is stored on paper and electronic format (a computer file on a hard drive ), all electronic and paper records should be destroyed (or deleted / erased ) after the specified period of time has elapsed and authorization to destroy has been obtained.

Copies or duplicates of records should never be retained longer than the prescribed period for the official (original) record, and drafts and copies should be destroyed as soon as they are no longer required.

The term “records” shall include all records as defined by the California Public Records Act.

STRUCTURE: CITY-WIDE, DEPARTMENTS & DIVISIONS

The City-wide retention schedule includes those records all departments have in common (e-mails, letters, memorandums, purchase orders, etc.). These records are NOT repeated in the Department retention schedule, unless that department is the Office of Record.

Each department has a separate retention schedule that describes the records that are unique to their department, or for which they are the Office of Record. The department retention schedules may be organized by Division within that Department. If a record is not listed in your department retention schedule, refer to the City-wide retention schedule, or look in the index to the schedules (provided after approval.)

BENEFITS

This retention schedule has been developed by Diane R. Gladwell, MMC, an expert in Municipal Government records, and will provide the City with the following benefits:

• Reduce administrative expenses, expedite procedures
• Free office space and computer storage space
• Reduce the cost of records storage – paper and electronic • Eliminate duplication of effort within the City
• Find records faster
• Determine what media should be used to store records

AUTHORIZATION TO DESTROY RECORDS (Paper or Electronic Records):

Destruction or deletion of an official (original) record that has exceeded its retention period must be authorized prior to destruction or deletion.

• If there is a minimum retention (“Minimum 2 years"), the destruction / deletion must be authorized before it is destroyed, as it is an official (original) record.

Copies, drafts, notes and non-records do NOT require authorization, and can be destroyed “When No Longer Required.”

• If there is NOT a minimum retention ("When No Longer Required"), it does NOT need to be authorized prior to destruction, as it is a preliminary draft, copy, or the Content is NOT Substantive.

On every page of the schedules (near the top, just under the column headings) are important instructions, including instructions regarding holds on destroying records. “Litigation, complaints, claims, public records act requests, audits and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or resolution).”

Page 386 ends

RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE LEGEND
©1995 – 2025 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. (909) 337-3516 - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission

OFR (Office of Record): The department that keeps the Official (original or “record copy”) record for its retention period, then authorizes destruction.

Usually, it is the department that originates the record. The official (original) record may be the paper / hard copy version of the record; however the electronic record may be the official (original) record. See the “Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC’d” below for the Legal Requirements for the electronic record to be the official (original) record.

Records Description: The record series (a group of like records).

Non-Record: Documents, studies, books and pamphlets produced by outside agencies, preliminary drafts not retained in the ordinary course of business.

Retention/Disposition: Active (guideline): How long the file remains in the immediate office area Inactive (guideline): How long the file is in off-site storage, stored electronically in accordance with law (see below) Total Retention: The total number of years the record is retained

For file folders containing documents with different retention timeframes, use the document with the longest retention time.

P = Permanent
Indefinite = No fixed or specified retention period; used for databases, because the data fields are interrelated and certain data may require minimum retention.

Vital? = Those records that are needed for basic operations in the event of a disaster .

Media Options (guideline) terms used in State law: Mag = Electronic Computer Magnetic Media (Hard drives, Networks, USB Drives, Cloud, etc.) Mfr = Microforms (aperture cards, microfilm, microfiche, or jackets) Ppr = Paper
OD = Optical Disk or other Unalterable Media which does not allow changes

Scan / Import (guideline): “S” indicates the record should be scanned into the document imaging system; “I” indicates the record should be electronically imported into the document imaging system; “M” indicates the record was microfilmed

Destroy Paper after Imaged & QC’d (quality checked) / Trustworthy Electronic Record: “Yes” means the electronic record may serve as the OFFICIAL record (and the paper version may be destroyed, or the record may be electronically generated and never exist in paper format ) IF (these are the legal requirements for the electronic record to serve as the official (original) record) the electronic record is also placed on Unalterable Media, Immutable Cloud Media, Optical Disk (OD), DVD-R, CD-R, Blue-ray-R, or WORM, or microfilmed) which is stored in a safe & separate location.

Employees are required to Quality Check (“QC’d”) both the images and the indexes, and ensure the electronic record contains all significant details from the original and be an adequate substitute for the original document for all purposes ; other legal mandates may apply.

Legend for legal citations (§: Section) B&P: Business & Professions Code (CA) CBC: California Building Code CC: Civil Code (CA) CCP: Code of Civil Procedure (CA) CCR: California Code of Regulations (CA) CFC: California Fire Code CFR: Code of Federal Regulations (US) EC: Elections Code (CA) EVC: Evidence Code (CA) FA: Food & Agriculture Code FC: Family Code (CA) FTB: Franchise Tax Board (CA) GC: Government Code (CA) H&S: Health & Safety Code (CA) HUD: Housing & Urban Develop. (US) LC: Labor Code (CA) Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen..: Attorney General Opinions (CA) PC: Penal Code (CA) PRC Public Resources Code R&T: Revenue & Taxation Code (CA) UFC: Uniform Fire Code USC: United States Code (US) VC: Vehicle Code (CA) W&I: Welfare & Institutions Code (CA)

Page 387 ends

Ver. 16.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: CITY-WIDE STANDARDS (Used by ALL Departments)
Page CW-1
Office of
Record Retention No. Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

I=Import
M=Mfr
S=Scan
Destroy
Paper
after
Imaged &
QC'd?
Retentions apply to the department that is NOT the Office of Record (OFR), or the "Lead Department". If you are the OFR, refer to your department retention schedule.

Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder.

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, audits, public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion).

CITY-WIDE (Used by ALL Departments)
Human
Resources /
Risk
Management
CW-001
Accident, Incident, Injury
reports: PUBLIC &
EMPLOYEES, with associated
MSDS, if a chemical was
involved
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Copies retained for reference;
GC §§34090.7, 60200
Finance CW-002
Accounts Payable, Invoices,
Petty Cash, Warrant Requests,
etc.

ALL backup is forwarded to
Finance
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Yes: Before
Payment
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
All originals go to Finance
(these are copies); GC
§§34090.7, 60200
Lead Dept. CW-002.1 Administrative Hearings 2 years 2 years Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After
QC & OD GC §§34090
Lead Dept. CW-003
Affidavits of Publications /
Public Hearing Notices / Legal
Advertising / Affidavits of
Posting
2 years 2 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Brown Act challenges must be
filed within 30 or 90 days of
action; Statute of Limitations
on Municipal Government
actions is 3 - 6 months; GC
§§34090, 54960.1(c)(1)
City Clerk CW-004 Agenda Packets / Staff
Reports: City Council
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After
QC &OD GC §§34090.7, 60200
City Clerk CW-005 Agreements & Contracts ALL

ORIGINALS
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes: After

QC & OD
Upon
Completio
n
Ensure the City Clerk receives
all original agreements; GC
§§34090.7, 60200
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA ©1995-2017 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 388 ends

Ver. 16.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: CITY-WIDE STANDARDS (Used by ALL Departments)
Page CW-2
Office of
Record Retention No. Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder.

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, audits, public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion).

Lead Dept.
(Managing the
Agreement /
Contract)
CW-006
Agreements & Contracts:

ADMINISTRATIVE FILES
(with Grant Funding)
(Correspondence, Insurance
Certificates, Project
Administration, Project
Schedules, Certified Payrolls,
Invoices, Logs, RFP, etc.)
Completion
10 years or
After
Funding
Agency
Audit, if
required,
whichever is
longer
Completion +
10 years or
After Funding
Agency Audit,
if required,
whichever is
longer
Yes: Before
Completion
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes: After

QC & OD
Upon
Completio
n
Some Grants require audits;
Grants covered by a
Consolidated Action Plan are
required for 5 years; Uniform
Admin. Requirements for
Grants to Local Governments
is 3 years from expenditure
report or final payment of
grantee or subgrantee; 2 CFR
200.334; 24 CFR 91.105(h),

92.505, 570.490, & 570.502(a),
29 CFR 97.42; OMB Circular
A-110 & A-133; GC §§34090,
60201 et seq.; GC §8546.7
Lead Dept.
(Managing the
Agreement /
Contract)
CW-007
Agreements & Contracts:

ADMINISTRATIVE FILES
(Correspondence, Project
Administration, Project
Schedules, Certified Payrolls,
Invoices, Logs, RFP, etc.)
Completion 10 years Completion +
10 years
Yes: Before
Completion
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes: After

QC & OD
Upon
Completio
n
Covers E&O Statute of
Limitations (insurance
certificates are filed with
agreement); Published Audit
Standards=4-7 years; Statute
of Limitations: Contracts &
Spec's=4 years, Wrongful
Death=comp. + 5 years,
Developers=comp. + 10 years;
CCP §337 et. seq., GC
§34090, 60201
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA ©1995-2017 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 389 ends

Ver. 16.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: CITY-WIDE STANDARDS (Used by ALL Departments)
Page CW-3
Office of
Record Retention No. Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder.

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, audits, public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion).

Lead Dept.
(Managing the
Agreement /
Contract)
CW-008
Agreements & Contracts:

UNSUCCESSFUL BIDS,

UNSUCCESSFUL
PROPOSALS or RESPONSES
to RFPs (Request for
Proposals) and/or RFQs
(Request for Qualifications)
that don't result in a contract
2 years 2 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After
QC & OD GC §§34090, 60201 et seq.

Finance CW-009 Audits / Audit Reports / Annual
Financial Reports
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required

Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After
QC & OD Copies; GC §§34090.7, 60200
CW-010 Bids: See Agreements &
Contracts
Staffing Dept. CW-011
Department Staff Meetings
(all Records, including
Minutes and Recordings,
Department Awards)
2 years 2 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
GC §§34090 et seq., 60201 et
seq.

CW-012
Boards, Commissions, &
Committees: External
Organizations
(e.g. County Board of
Supervisors)
When No
Longer
Required
When No
Longer
Required

Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After
QC & OD Non-records
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA ©1995-2017 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 390 ends

Ver. 16.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: CITY-WIDE STANDARDS (Used by ALL Departments)
Page CW-4
Office of
Record Retention No. Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder.

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, audits, public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion).

Staffing Dept. CW-013
Boards, Commissions, &
Committees: Residents
Advisory Bodies Formed by

CITY COUNCIL

AGENDAS, AGENDA

PACKETS
Minimum 2
years
Minimum 2
years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Brown Act challenges must be
filed within 30 or 90 days of
action; GC §§34090,
54960.1(c)(1)
Staffing Dept. CW-014
Boards, Commissions, &
Committees: Residents
Advisory Bodies Formed by

CITY COUNCIL
AUDIO RECORDINGS of
Meetings / Audio Tapes
2 years 2 years Mag
OD
Department preference; State
law only requires for 30 days;
GC §54953.5(b)
Staffing Dept. CW-015
Boards, Commissions, &
Committees: Residents
Advisory Bodies Formed by

CITY COUNCIL
VIDEO RECORDINGS of
Meetings / Audio Tapes
Minimum 3
years
Minimum 3
years Mag
OD
Department Preference; Video
recording of meetings are only
required for 90 days if audio or
another record is made; GC
§§34090.7, 34090
Staffing Dept. CW-016
Boards, Commissions, &
Committees: Residents
Advisory Bodies Formed by

CITY COUNCIL

MINUTES & BYLAWS
P P
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes: After

QC & OD
No
GC §§34090, 60201 et seq.

Finance CW-017 Budgets - Finals
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Yes:

Current
Fiscal Year
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes: After
QC & OD 5
years
Final must be filed with County
Auditor; GC §§34090.7, 60200,
40802, 53901
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA ©1995-2017 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 391 ends

Ver. 16.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: CITY-WIDE STANDARDS (Used by ALL Departments)
Page CW-5
Office of
Record Retention No. Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder.

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, audits, public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion).

Finance CW-018
Cash Receipts Detail / Backup
/ Accounts Receivable Detail /
Refund Detail
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After
QC & OD GC §§34090.7, 60200
Lead
(Requesting)
Dept.

CW-019 City Attorney Opinions Minimum 2
years
Minimum 2
years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
City preference; GC §§34090,
60201 et seq.

Human
Resources /
Risk
Management
CW-020 Claims
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
(Final
Disposition)
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
(Final
Disposition)
Yes: Before
Final
Disposition
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes: After

QC & OD
Final
Disposition
GC §§34090.7, 34090.6
Lead
(Responding)
Dept.

CW-021 Complaints / Concerns from
Citizens
Minimum 2
years
Minimum 2
years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
City preference; Statute of
Limitations for personal
property, fraud, etc. is 3 years;
Claims must be filed within 6
months; CCP §340 et seq.,
342, GC §§ 911.2, 34090,
60201 et seq.

Human
Resources CW-022 Complaints Against Employees
Send to
Human
Resources
Send to
Human
Resources

Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After
QC & OD GC §§34090.7, 60200
CW-023 Contracts: See Agreements
Lead Dept. CW-024 Copies or duplicates of any
record
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required

Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After
QC & OD GC §§34090.7, 60200
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA ©1995-2017 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 392 ends

Ver. 16.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: CITY-WIDE STANDARDS (Used by ALL Departments)
Page CW-6
Office of
Record Retention No. Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder.

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, audits, public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion).

Dept. that
Authors
Document
or
Receives the
City's Original
Document
CW-025
Correspondence - ROUTINE
(IF CONTENT relates in a
SUBSTANTIVE way to the
conduct of the public's
business)
(e.g. Administrative Files,
Chronological Files e-mail /
email with SUBSTANTIVE
content, General Files, Letters,
Memorandums, Miscellaneous
Reports, Press Releases,
Public Records Requests,
Reading Files, Working Files ,
etc.)
2 years 2 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Only if content relates in a
substantive way to the conduct
of the public's business; City of
San Jose v. Superior Court
(2017) 2 Cal.5th 608; GC
§§34090, 60201
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA ©1995-2017 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 393 ends

Ver. 16.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: CITY-WIDE STANDARDS (Used by ALL Departments)
Page CW-7
Office of
Record Retention No. Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder.

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, audits, public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion).

Dept. that
Authors
Document
or
Receives the
City's Original
Document
CW-026
Correspondence -

TRANSITORY /

PRELIMINARY DRAFTS,
Interagency and Intraagency
Memoranda NOT retained in
the ordinary course of business
Content NOT Substantive, or
NOT made or retained for the
purpose of preserving the
informational content for future
reference
(e.g. calendars, checklists, e-
mail / email or social media
posting, flyers, invitations,
instant messaging, inventories,
logs, mailing lists, meeting
room registrations, speaker
cards, staff videoconference
chats, notes and recordings,
supply inventories, telephone
messages, text messages,
transmittal letters, thank yous,
requests from other cities,
undeliverable envelopes /
returned mail, visitors logs,
voice mails, webpages, etc.)
When No
Longer
Required
When No
Longer
Required
Mag,
Ppr
Electronic and paper records
are categorized, filed and
retained based upon the
CONTENT of the record.

Records where either the
Content relates in a
SUBSTANTIVE way to the
conduct of the public's
business, or ARE made or
retained for the purpose of
preserving the informational
content for future reference
are SAVED by placing them
in an electronic or paper
(project) file folder and
retained for the applicable
retention period. If not
mentioned here, consult the
City Attorney to determine if a
record is considered transitory
/ preliminary draft. GC
§§34090, 64 Ops. Cal. Atty.

Gen. 317 (1981));City of San
Jose v. Superior Court (2017)
2 Cal.5th 608
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA ©1995-2017 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 394 ends

Ver. 16.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: CITY-WIDE STANDARDS (Used by ALL Departments)
Page CW-8
Office of
Record Retention No. Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder.

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, audits, public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion).

City Clerk CW-027
Deeds, Easements, Final
Orders of Condemnations,
Liens, Recorded Documents,
Rights of Ways (All)
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required

Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Send all originals to the City
Clerk; GC §§34090.7, 60200
Lead Dept. CW-028
Deposit Accounts / Trust
Accounts / Refundable
Deposits
Close + 5
years
Close + 5
years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Department preference; meets
auditing standards; GC
§§34090, 60201 et seq.

Lead Dept. CW-029 DMV Pull Notices
2 years After
Superseded or
Separated
2 years After
Superseded
or Separated
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Transitory or source records
not retained in the ordinary
course of business; CHP
audits every 2 years; Bureau of
National Affairs recommends 2
years for all supplementary
Personnel records; GC
§§34090, 60201 et seq.

Lead Dept. CW-030 Drafts & Notes: Drafts that are
revised (retain final version)
When No
Longer
Required
When No
Longer
Required

Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
As long as the drafts and notes
are not retained in the "Regular
Course of Business". Consult
the City Attorney to determine
if a record is considered a
draft. GC §§34090
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA ©1995-2017 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 395 ends

Ver. 16.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: CITY-WIDE STANDARDS (Used by ALL Departments)
Page CW-9
Office of
Record Retention No. Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder.

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, audits, public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion).

Lead Dept. CW-031
GIS Database / Data / Layers
(both City-wide and
Specialized)
When No
Longer
Required
When No
Longer
Required
Yes
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
The Lead Department should
print out historical documents
(or save source data) prior to
replacing the data, if they
require the data or output for
historical purposes;
Department Preference
(Preliminary documents); GC
§§34090, 60201 et seq. et seq.

Lead Dept.
(Managing the
Grant)
CW-032 Grants (UNSUCCESSFUL
Applications, Correspondence) 2 years 2 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After
QC & OD GC §§34090, 60201 et seq.

Lead Dept.
(Managing the
Grant)
CW-033
Grants / CDBG / Reimbursable
Claims / FEMA Claims / OES
Claims (SUCCESSFUL
Reports, other records required
to pass the funding agency's
audit, if required)
Applications (successful), grant
agreement, program rules,
regulations & procedures,
reports to grant funding
agencies, correspondence,
audit records, completion
records
2 years
After
Funding
Agency
Audit, if
Required -
Minimum 5
years
After Funding
Agency Audit,
if required -
Minimum 5
years

Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Meets auditing standards;
Grants covered by a
Consolidated Action Plan are
required for 5 years; Uniform
Admin. Requirements for
Grants to Local Governments
is 3 years from expenditure
report or final payment of
grantee or subgrantee; 2 CFR
200.334; 24 CFR 91.105(h),

92.505, 570.490, & 570.502(a),
29 CFR 97.42; OMB Circular A-
110 & A-133; GC §§34090,
60201 et seq.; GC §8546.7
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA ©1995-2017 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 396 ends

Ver. 16.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: CITY-WIDE STANDARDS (Used by ALL Departments)
Page CW-10
Office of
Record Retention No. Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder.

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, audits, public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion).

Human
Resources CW-034 Grievances and Informal
Complaints (Employees)
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Yes: Before
Disposition
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Send all grievances to Human
Resources; All State and
Federal laws require retention
until final disposition of formal
complaint; State requires 2
years after action is taken; GC
§§12946, 12960, 34090
Lead Dept. CW-035
Litigation Files / Lawsuits /
Court Case Files
Send Final Settlement
Agreements to the City Clerk
Final
Resolution + 5
years
Final
Resolution + 5
years
Yes: Until
Settlement
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Department preference; CCP
§§ 337 et seq.; GC §§ 911.2,
34090, 34090.6
Lead Dept. CW-036 Leave Slips / Time Off
Requests
When No
Longer
Required
When No
Longer
Required

Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Preliminary drafts not retained
in the Regular Course of
Business GC §§34090, 60201
et seq.

Lead Dept. CW-037
Material Safety Data Sheet
(MSDS) / Safety Data Sheet
(SDS) Chemical Use Report
Form (or records of the
chemical / substance / agent,
where & when it was used)
While
Chemical In
Use
30 years 30 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes - After

QC & OD
Previous MSDS may be
obtained from a service; MSDS
may be destroyed as long as a
record of the chemical /
substance / agent, where &
when it was used is maintained
for 30 years; Applies to
qualified employers; Claims
can be made for 30 years for
toxic substance exposures; 8
CCR 3204(d)(1)(B)(2 and 3),
29 CFR 1910.1020(d)(1)(I), GC
§§34090, 60201 et seq.

RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA ©1995-2017 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 397 ends

Ver. 16.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: CITY-WIDE STANDARDS (Used by ALL Departments)
Page CW-11
Office of
Record Retention No. Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder.

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, audits, public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion).

City Clerk CW-038 Minutes - City Council
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Yes (all)
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes: After

QC & OD
No
Originals maintained by City
Clerk Permanently; GC
§§34090.7, 60200
City Clerk CW-039 Municipal Code (these are
copies)
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Yes:

Current
Original
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes: After

QC & OD
No
Return any whole unused
codes to the City Clerk;
Originals maintained by City
Clerk Permanently; GC
§§34090, 60201 et seq.

Lead Dept. CW-040 Newspaper Clippings
When No
Longer
Required
When No
Longer
Required

Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Non-records - may be obtained
from the newspaper company;
GC §§34090, 60201 et seq.

Staffing Dept. CW-041
Notices: Public Hearing
Notices and Proofs of
Publications
2 years 2 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Statute of Limitations on
Municipal Government actions
is 3 - 6 months; GC §§34090,
60201 et seq.

City Clerk CW-042 Ordinances - City Council
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Yes (all)
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes: After

QC & OD
No
Originals maintained by City
Clerk Permanently; GC
§§34090, 60201 et seq.

Human
Resources /
Risk
Management
CW-043 OSHA Inspections or Citations
Send to
Human
Resources
Send to
Human
Resources
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After
QC & OD GC §§34090.7, 60200
Human
Resources CW-044 Personnel Files (Department-
level Files)
Do Not Retain
in
Departments
Do Not Retain
in
Departments
Before
Separation
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Ensure records kept in
Department files comply with
City policy (all originals are
sent to Human Resources);
GC §§34090.7, 60200
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA ©1995-2017 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 398 ends

Ver. 16.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: CITY-WIDE STANDARDS (Used by ALL Departments)
Page CW-12
Office of
Record Retention No. Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder.

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, audits, public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion).

Lead Dept. CW-045 Personnel Files (Supervisor's
Notes)
Shred After
Incorporation
into
Performance
Evaluation or
Documented
Discipline
Shred After
Incorporation
into
Performance
Evaluation or
Documented
Discipline
Before
Annual
Evaluation
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Notes maintained in a separate
folder to be incorporated into
performance evaluation, or to
document progressive
discipline; GC §§34090 et seq.,
60201 et seq.

Lead Dept. CW-046 Unused Photographs
When No
Longer
Required
When No
Longer
Required

Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Preliminary Drafts; (retention is
placed on the record the
photograph is used in -
Brochure, Report, etc.);
destroy unnecessary
photographs. GC §§34090
Lead Dept. CW-047 Public Relations / Press
Releases 2 years 2 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After
QC & OD GC §§34090, 60201 et seq.

Lead Dept. CW-048 Purchase Orders / Requisitions 2 years 3 years 5 years Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After
QC &OD
Department preference; GC
§§34090, 60201 et seq.

Lead Dept.
(Who Ordered
the Appraisal)
CW-049
Real Estate Appraisal Reports:

Property NOT purchased,
Loans not funded, etc.
2 years 2 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Not accessible to the public;
GC §§34090, 60201 7928.705
Lead Dept.
(Who Ordered
the Appraisal)
CW-050
Real Estate Appraisal Reports:

Purchased Property, Funded
Loans
2 years Minimum 3
years
Minimum 5
years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After
QC &OD
Not accessible to the public
until purchase has been
completed; meets municipal
government auditing
standards; GC §§34090,
60201 7928.705
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA ©1995-2017 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 399 ends

Ver. 16.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: CITY-WIDE STANDARDS (Used by ALL Departments)
Page CW-13
Office of
Record Retention No. Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder.

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, audits, public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion).

City Clerk CW-051
Records Destruction Lists /
Certificate of Records
Destruction
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After
QC & OD GC §§34090.7, 60200
CW-052
Reference Materials: Policies,
Procedures, Handbooks,
Brochures, Flyers, Manuals,
Plans (if not provided in the
schedule.) Standard Operating
Procedures (SOPs), Studies or
Reports (if not provided in the
schedule.) Newsletters, etc.:

Produced by OUTSIDE
ORGANIZATIONS (League of
California Cities, Chamber of
Commerce, etc.)
When No
Longer
Required
When No
Longer
Required

Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After
QC & OD Non-Records
Lead Dept. CW-053
Reference Materials: Policies,
Procedures, Handbooks,
Brochures, Flyers, Manuals,
Plans (if not provided in the
schedule.) Standard Operating
Procedures (SOPs), Studies or
Reports (if not provided in the
schedule.) Newsletters, etc.:

Produced by YOUR
Department
Minimum 2
years
Minimum 2
years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Department preference; GC
§34090
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA ©1995-2017 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 400 ends

Ver. 16.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: CITY-WIDE STANDARDS (Used by ALL Departments)
Page CW-14
Office of
Record Retention No. Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder.

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, audits, public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion).

Lead Dept. CW-054
Reference Materials: Policies,
Procedures, Handbooks,
Brochures, Flyers, Manuals,
Plans (if not provided in the
schedule.) Standard Operating
Procedures (SOPs), Studies or
Reports (if not provided in the
schedule.) Newsletters, etc.:

Produced by OTHER
Departments
When
Superseded
When
Superseded
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After
QC & OD Copies; GC §§34090.7, 60200
CW-055 Reference or Working Files:

See Correspondence
Lead Dept. CW-056
Reports and Studies
(Historically significant - e.g.,
Zoning Studies)
10 years P P
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes: After

QC & OD
10 years
Administratively and
Historically significant,
therefore retained
permanently; GC §§34090,
60201 et seq.

Lead Dept. CW-057
Reports and Studies (other
than Historically significant
reports - e.g. Annual Reports)
10 years 10 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Department preference;
Information is outdated after 10
years; GC §34090
City Clerk CW-058 Resolutions - City Council
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Yes (all)
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes: After

QC & OD
No
Originals maintained by City
Clerk Permanently; GC
§§34090.7, 60200
Lead Dept. CW-059 Special Projects / Subject Files
/ Issue Files
Minimum 2
years
Minimum 2
years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Department Preference; GC
§§34090, 60201 et seq. et seq.

Page 401 ends

Ver. 16.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: CITY-WIDE STANDARDS (Used by ALL Departments)
Page CW-15
Office of
Record Retention No. Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder.

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, audits, public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion).

Lead Dept. CW-060
Surveys / Questionnaires (that
the City issues)
If a summary of the data is
compiled, the survey forms are
considered a draft or transitory
record, and can be destroyed
as drafts (When No Longer
Required)
2 years 2 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After
QC & OD GC §§34090, 60201 et seq.

Finance /
Payroll CW-061
Time Cards / Time Sheets
(Finance keeps the originals
with employee signatures)
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After
QC & OD GC §§34090.7, 60200 et seq.

Lead Dept. CW-062 Time Off Requests / Leave
Slips / Time Off Requests
2 years
When No
Longer
Required
2 years
When No
Longer
Required

Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Salaried employees do not
have timecards; Preliminary
drafts (the time card is the final
record); GC §§34090, 60201 et
seq.

Page 402 ends

Ver. 16.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: CITY-WIDE STANDARDS (Used by ALL Departments)
Page CW-16
Office of
Record Retention No. Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder.

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, audits, public records act requests, and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention resumes after settlement or completion).

Lead Dept. CW-063
Training Presented by City
Staff - ALL COURSE

RECORDS
(Attendance Rosters or sign-in
sheets, Outlines and Materials;
includes Ethics, Harassment
Prevention, Workplace
Violence & Safety Training &
Tailgates)
2 years 5 years 7 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes: After

QC & OD
When
Inactive
Department preference; Ethics,
Harassment & Workplace
Violence Training is 5 years;
Calif. Labor Division is required
to keep their OSHA records 7
years; EEOC/FLSA/ADEA
(Age) requires 3 years for
promotion, demotion, transfer,
selection, or discharge; State
Law requires 4 years for
personnel actions; 8 CCR
§3203 et seq., 29 CFR
1627.3(b)(ii1), LC §6429(c);
GC §§12946, 12960, 34090,
53235.2(b), 53237.2(b); LC
§6401.9(f),
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA ©1995-2017 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc. - all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission from GGS (909) 337-3516 Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 403 ends

Ver 20.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE - FIRE
(Community Affairs, Community Risk, Emerg. Mgt., Emerg Response, EMS, Fire Marshal, Station Ops / Suppression) Page FR-1
Office of
Record
Records
Series # Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

I=Import
M=Mfr
S=Scan
Destroy
Paper
after
Imaged &
QC'd
If the record is not listed here, refer to the Retention for City-Wide Standards Retentions begin when the act is completed, and imply a full file folder (e.g. last document + 2 years), since destruction is normally performed by file folder.

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, public records act requests, audits and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention begins after settlement).

FIRE / ADMINISTRATION
Human
Resources FR-001 Career File: Equipment
Assignments (Turnouts, etc.)
Shred Upon
Separation
or Transfer
Shred Upon
Separation
or Transfer
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
City / District Preference (copies);
GC § 60200
Finance FR-002 Billings - Fire Alarm Permits, Fire
Inspections, Fire Permits
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Finance keeps originals; GC §
§60201 60201
City Clerk FR-003
Fire District Board Agendas, Audio
or Video Recordings, Minutes,
Resolutions, Notices
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
City Clerk keeps originals; GC §
§60201 60201
Fire /
Admin. FR-004 ISO Insurance Ratings 15 years 15 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I Yes: After

QC & OD
Department Preference (rated
every 10 years); GC §60201
Fire /
Admin. FR-005 Monthly Statistical Reports / Run
Statistics
When No
Longer
Required
When No
Longer
Required
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Considered a preliminary draft /
copy (the Fire database is the
original); GC §60201 et seq.

City Clerk FR-006 Mutual Aid Agreements, Joint
Power Authorities
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Originals Maintained by City Clerk
or County Clerk of the Board
Permanently; GC §60201.7
Fire /
Admin. FR-007
Programs and Projects (e.g.

Explorer, CPR Program, Fire
Service Day, etc.)
Minimum 2
years
Minimum 2
years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; GC §
60201 et seq.

Fire /
Admin. FR-008 Requests for Fire Incident Reports
and Fire Investigation Reports 2 years 2 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
GC §60201
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DIST. ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc (909) 337-3516 all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 404 ends

Ver 20.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE - FIRE
(Community Affairs, Community Risk, Emerg. Mgt., Emerg Response, EMS, Fire Marshal, Station Ops / Suppression) Page FR-2
Office of
Record
Records
Series # Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, public records act requests, audits and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention begins after settlement).

Fire /
Admin. FR-009 Ride-A-Long Waivers 2 years 2 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
GC §60201
Fire /
Admin. FR-010 Standard Operating Procedures /
Policy & Procedure Manual
Superseded
+ 2 years
Superseded
+ 2 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department preference; GC
§60201
Fire /
Admin. FR-011 Subpoenas (Personal Appearance -
Fire Personnel) 2 years 2 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
GC §60201
Fire /
Admin. FR-012 Telestaff Database
Indefinite -
Minimum 7
years
Indefinite -
Minimum 7
years
Yes
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Data is interrelated; Meets
municipal government auditing
standards; May include Employee
Reimbursement; GC
§60201(d)(12)
Fire /
Admin. FR-013
Training Course Records / EMS
Continuing Education Training
(Attendance Rosters, Outlines and
Materials)
Indefinite -
Minimum 5
years
Indefinite -
Minimum 5
years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
When
Inactive
Department preference; Ethics
Training is 5 years; Calif. Labor
Division is required to keep their
OSHA records 7 years;
EEOC/FLSA/ADEA (Age) requires
3 years for promotion, demotion,
transfer, selection, or discharge;
State Law requires 2 -3 years for
personnel actions; 8 CCR §3203
et seq., 29 CFR 1627.3(b)(1), LC
§6429(c); GC §§12946, 60201,
53235.2(b), 53237.2(b)
Fire /
Admin. FR-014 Training Database / Log (Target
Solutions / Vector Solutions)
Indefinite -
Minimum 5
years
Indefinite -
Minimum 5
years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Data is interrelated; GC §60201 et
seq.

RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DIST. ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc (909) 337-3516 all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 405 ends

Ver 20.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE - FIRE
(Community Affairs, Community Risk, Emerg. Mgt., Emerg Response, EMS, Fire Marshal, Station Ops / Suppression) Page FR-3
Office of
Record
Records
Series # Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, public records act requests, audits and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention begins after settlement).

Fire /
Admin. FR-015
Underground Storage Tanks - ALL -
City or Privately owned)
Location, Soil Remediation,
Monitoring Well Records
10 years P P
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD 1
year
Department Preference (required
for the life of the tank); 23 CCR
2712(b), H&S §25284.2(i); GC
§60201 et. seq.

Page 406 ends

Ver 20.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE - FIRE
(Community Affairs, Community Risk, Emerg. Mgt., Emerg Response, EMS, Fire Marshal, Station Ops / Suppression) Page FR-4
Office of
Record
Records
Series # Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, public records act requests, audits and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention begins after settlement).

FIRE / COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
Fire /
Community
Affairs
FR-016 Community Outreach Minimum 2
years
Minimum 2
years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; GC
§60201
Fire /
Community
Affairs
FR-017 Public Information / Education
(when produced internally)
Minimum 2
years
Minimum 2
years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; GC
§60201
Lead Dept. FR-018 Volunteer Applications &
Agreements - Unsuccessful 3 years 3 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Consistent with employee
personnel files (Courts treat
volunteers as employees);
EEOC/FLSA/ADEA (Age) requires
3 years for promotion, demotion,
transfer, selection, or discharge;
29 CFR 1602.31 & 1627.3(b)(1), 8
CCR §3204(d)(1) et seq., GC
§§12960, 60201
Lead Dept. FR-019
Volunteer Applications &
Agreements (includes emergency
contact information) - Successful
Applicants
Inactive /
Separation +
3 years
Inactive /
Separation +
3 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD 1
year
Courts treat volunteers as
employees; EEOC/FLSA/ADEA
(Age) requires 3 years for
promotion, demotion, transfer,
selection, or discharge; State Law
requires 2 -3 years; 29 CFR
1602.31 & 1627.3(b)(1), 8 CCR
§3204(d)(1) et seq., GC §§12960,
60201; 29 USC 1113
Fire /
Community
Affairs
FR-020
Volunteer Historical Lists /
Extractions from Volunteer
Database
Minimum 10
years
Minimum 10
years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; GC
§60201
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DIST. ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc (909) 337-3516 all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 407 ends

Ver 20.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE - FIRE
(Community Affairs, Community Risk, Emerg. Mgt., Emerg Response, EMS, Fire Marshal, Station Ops / Suppression) Page FR-5
Office of
Record
Records
Series # Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, public records act requests, audits and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention begins after settlement).

FIRE / COMMUNITY RISK
Fire /
Community
Risk
FR-021
Fire Construction Documents
(Submittals, Approved Plans,
Drawings, Applications, Alternate
Means & Methods, and Similar
Documents Necessary for Ongoing
Fire Code Compliance
Not Less
Than 180
days from
the date of
completion
of the
permitted
work
Life of the
Structure or
Activity, or
Minimum 5
years,
Whichever is
Longer
Life of the
Structure or
Activity, or
Minimum 5
years,
Whichever is
Longer
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
CFC § 104.7 105.4 et seq. , 104.6
et seq.; H&S §19850
Fire /
Community
Risk Fire
Marshal &
Fire
Prevention
FR-022
Fire Inspections - Business
Inspection Files / Occupancy
Inspections (Approvals,
Inspections, Fires, Modification /
Alternative Methods or Materials)
Life of the
Structure or
Activity, or
Minimum 5
years,
Whichever is
Longer
Life of the
Structure or
Activity, or
Minimum 5
years,
Whichever is
Longer
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Required for the Life of the
Structure or Activity, or Minimum 5
years CFC §§ 104.7 – 104.7.4
104.6 – 104.6.4
Fire /
Community
Risk Fire
Marshal &
Fire
Prevention
FR-023 Fire Inspections - Citations /
Notice of Violations
Life of the
Structure or
Activity, or
Minimum 5
years,
Whichever is
Longer
Minimum 2
years
Life of the
Structure or
Activity, or
Minimum 5
years,
Whichever is
Longer
Minimum 2
years
Yes:

Before
Event
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; CFC §§
104.7; GC § 60201 et seq.

Fire /
Community
Risk
FR-024
Approved Fire Suppression, Fire
Sprinkler, Fire Alarm, Private Fire
Underground, and High-Piled
Combustible Storage Plans.

P P
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department preference (Building
keeps original); CFC 104.7 104.6
et seq.; GC §§60200, H&S §19850
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DIST. ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc (909) 337-3516 all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 408 ends

Ver 20.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE - FIRE
(Community Affairs, Community Risk, Emerg. Mgt., Emerg Response, EMS, Fire Marshal, Station Ops / Suppression) Page FR-6
Office of
Record
Records
Series # Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, public records act requests, audits and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention begins after settlement).

Fire /
Community
Risk
FR-025 Juvenile Fire Setter Program 15 years 15 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; GC
§60201 et seq.

Building FR-026 New Construction Plan Review
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Copies -
When No
Longer
Required
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Building keeps originals; GC
§§34090.7, 60201
Fire /
Community
Risk
FR-027 Public Information / Education
(when produced internally)
Minimum 2
years
Minimum 2
years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; GC
§60201
Fire /
Community
Risk
FR-028 Weed Abatement / Vegetation
Abatement / Brush Clearance
Minimum 2
years
Minimum 2
years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; GC
§60201

FIRE / EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
Fire /
Emergency
Manage.

FR-029 Community & Business Emergency
Response Training
Minimum 2
years
Minimum 2
years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; GC
§60201
Fire /
Emergency
Manage.

FR-029.5
Drone (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle)
Recordings that are NOT evidence
/ Does NOT record regular and
ongoing operations
When No
Longer
Required
When No
Longer
Required
Mag
Does NOT record regular and
ongoing operations; For recordings
that are evidence, see Fire
Investigations (FR-042 or FR-043);
GC §§60201, 53160
Fire /
Emergency
Manage.

FR-030
Emergency Management Programs
(Ready RC, Mitigation,
Preparedness, etc.)
Minimum 2
years
Minimum 2
years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; GC
§60201
Fire /
Emergency
Manage.

FR-031
Emergency Response & Recovery
/ FEMA / OES Reimbursement
Claims / Strike Team
Reimbursements
10 years 10 years Yes (all)
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
No
Department Preference; GC
§60201
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DIST. ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc (909) 337-3516 all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 409 ends

Ver 20.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE - FIRE
(Community Affairs, Community Risk, Emerg. Mgt., Emerg Response, EMS, Fire Marshal, Station Ops / Suppression) Page FR-7
Office of
Record
Records
Series # Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, public records act requests, audits and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention begins after settlement).

Fire /
Emergency
Manage.

FR-032 EOC Activations, After Incident
Reports
Minimum 2
years
Minimum 2
years Yes (all)
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
No
Department Preference; GC
§60201

FIRE / EMERGENCY RESPONSE / EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
Fire /
Emergency
Response /
EMS
FR-033
Controlled Substance Logs,
Inventories / Medic Monthly
Inventory Logs
3 years 3 years Yes
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference - required
for 3 2 years after inventory or
transaction; 21 CFR §1304.04,
1310.04; 22 CCR 70263 and
71233; FA §32003(e), B&P 4081;
GC §60201
Fire /
Emergency
Response /
EMS
FR-034 Emergency Medical PCR
Database
Indefinite -
Minimum 20
years
Indefinite -
Minimum 20
years
Yes
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Data is interrelated; Minors until 1
year after age 18, but not less than
7 years; 10 years (see Patient
Care Reports) GC §60201
Fire /
Emergency
Response /
EMS
FR-035
EMS Complaints / CQI (Continuous
Quality Improvement) / Quality
Assurance
Final
Disposition +
3 years
Final
Disposition +
3 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Statute of Limitations for health
providers is 3 years; CCP §340.5,
GC §60201 et seq.

Fire /
Emergency
Response /
EMS
FR-036
HIPAA Policies and Procedures
(Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act)
Superseded
+ 6 years
Superseded
+ 6 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD 1
year
45 24 CFR 164.530(j)
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DIST. ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc (909) 337-3516 all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 410 ends

Ver 20.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE - FIRE
(Community Affairs, Community Risk, Emerg. Mgt., Emerg Response, EMS, Fire Marshal, Station Ops / Suppression) Page FR-8
Office of
Record
Records
Series # Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, public records act requests, audits and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention begins after settlement).

Fire /
Emergency
Response /
EMS
FR-037 Paramedic Continuing Education
Rosters and Certificates
Separation +
4 years
Separation +
4 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
When
Inactive
Department preference; 4 years is
required by DPH; Paramedic
Continuing Education is required
for 4 years by DPH; 8 CCR
§3204(d)(1) et seq., 8 CCR §3203
et seq., 22 CCR 100395. 29 CFR
1627.3(b)(ii), LC §6429(c); GC
§§12946, 12960, 60201
Fire /
Emergency
Response /
EMS
FR-038
Patient Care Reports / PCRs /
Paramedic Release Forms (EMS
transportation) / Consent Form with
Assignment of Benefits: ADULTS
(Includes e-PCR Database /
Electronic Patient Care Report
Database)
10 7 years 10 7 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD 1
year
Department Preference; adults
required for 10 7 years; minors
until 1 year after age 18, but not
less than 10 7 years; 10 years is
recommended by AHIMA for
"healthcare providers"; Statute of
Limitations for health providers is 3
years; CCP §340.5, GC §60201;
H&S §§1797.98e 123145; 42 CFR
482.24(b); 9 CCR 9444, 22 CCR
70751(c) & 71551(c); 22 CCR
70751(c), 71551(c), 73543(a),
74731(a), 75055(a), 75343(a),
77143(a), W&I 14124.1; CMS Pub.
100-4, Chapter 1, Section 110.3
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DIST. ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc (909) 337-3516 all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 411 ends

Ver 20.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE - FIRE
(Community Affairs, Community Risk, Emerg. Mgt., Emerg Response, EMS, Fire Marshal, Station Ops / Suppression) Page FR-9
Office of
Record
Records
Series # Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, public records act requests, audits and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention begins after settlement).

Fire /
Emergency
Response /
EMS
FR-039
Patient Care Reports / PCRs /
Paramedic Release Forms (EMS
transportation) / Consent Form with
Assignment of Benefits:

JUVENILES (Includes e-PCR
Database / Electronic Patient Care
Report Database)
Age of
Majority,
Minimum 10
7 years,
whichever is
longer
Age of
Majority,
Minimum 10
7 years,
whichever is
longer
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

FIRE / EMERGENCY RESPONSE / FIRE MARSHAL
Fire /
Emergency
Response /
Fire Marshal
FR-040 Alarm Installation Waiver Forms:

Smoke and Carbon Monoxide P P
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department preference; CFC
§§104.7 – 104.7.4 104.6 –
104.6.4; GC §60201 et seq.

Fire /
Emergency
Response /
Fire Marshal
FR-041 Fire Incident RMS Database
Indefinite -
Life of the
Structure or
Activity, or
Minimum 5
years,
Whichever is
Longer
Indefinite -
Life of the
Structure or
Activity, or
Minimum 5
years,
Whichever is
Longer
Yes
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Data is interrelated; California Fire
Code requires 5 years or Life of
the Structure or Activity for
Approvals, Inspections, Fires,
Modification / Alternative Methods
or Materials; CFC §§ 104.7 –
104.7.4 104.6 – 104.6.4; GC
§34090
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DIST. ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc (909) 337-3516 all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 412 ends

Ver 20.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE - FIRE
(Community Affairs, Community Risk, Emerg. Mgt., Emerg Response, EMS, Fire Marshal, Station Ops / Suppression) Page FR-10
Office of
Record
Records
Series # Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, public records act requests, audits and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention begins after settlement).

Fire /
Emergency
Response /
Fire Marshal
FR-042 Fire Investigations - Arson &
Capital Crimes Only P P
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department preference (Capital
Crimes have no statute of
limitations); GC §60201 et seq.

Fire /
Emergency
Response /
Fire Marshal
FR-043 Fire Investigations - OTHER Than
Arson & Capital Crimes
Minimum 5
years
Minimum 5
years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department preference; GC
§60201 et seq.

Fire /
Emergency
Response /
Fire Marshal
FR-044
Approved Fire Suppression , Fire
Sprinkler, Fire Alarm, Private Fire
Underground, and High-Piled
Combustible Storage Plans
P P
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department preference (Building
keeps original); CFC 104.7 104.6
et seq.; GC §§60200, H&S §19850
Fire /
Emergency
Response /
Fire Marshal
FR-045 Fireflow Testing (CVWD does
testing)
Life of the
Structure
Life of the
Structure or
Activity
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department preference; GC
§60201
Fire /
Emergency
Response /
Fire Marshal
FR-046 Hazardous Waste Manifests /
Certificates of Disposal 5 years P P
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference (City has
"cradle to grave" liability); 40 CFR
262.40, 8 CCR 3204(d)(1)(A), 22
CCR 66262.40
Fire /
Emergency
Response /
Fire Marshal
FR-047 Response Planning
When No
Longer
Required
When No
Longer
Required
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Preliminary drafts; GC §60201
Fire /
Emergency
Response /
Fire Marshal
FR-048
Special Event Permits / Fire Code
Permits / Operating Permits /
Explosives Permits / Fireworks
Permits / Burn Permits (assembly
permits, candle permits, tent
permits, open flame, etc.)
Minimum 5
2 years
Minimum 5
2 years
Yes:

Before
Event
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department preference; GC
§60201 CFC §§ 104.7 – 104.7.4
104.6 – 104.6.4
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DIST. ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc (909) 337-3516 all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 413 ends

Ver 20.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE - FIRE
(Community Affairs, Community Risk, Emerg. Mgt., Emerg Response, EMS, Fire Marshal, Station Ops / Suppression) Page FR-11
Office of
Record
Records
Series # Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, public records act requests, audits and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention begins after settlement).

FIRE / STATION OPERATIONS / SUPPRESSION
Lead Dept. FR-049 AQMD Permits (Generators, etc.) 5 years 5 years Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
40 CFR 70.6; GC §60201
Fire /
Station
Operations /
Suppressio
n Ops
FR-050 Daily Evaluations / Rookie Tests 2 years 2 years Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
When
Inactive
GC §60201
Fire /
Station
Operations /
Suppressio
n Ops
FR-051
Daily Vehicle Inspections / Daily
Equipment Checks / Safety
Equipment Inspections
Minimum 2
years
Minimum 2
years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
GC §60201
Fire /
Station
Operations /
Suppressio
n Ops
FR-052
Fire Vehicle, Apparatus, &
Equipment History Files, Ladders,
etc.

Certifications, Maintenance,
Registrations, Safety Certifications,
etc.

Disposal of
Vehicle,
Apparatus,
or
Equipment +
2 years
Disposal of
Vehicle,
Apparatus,
or
Equipment +
2 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department Preference; If a motor
carrier, required for 18 months
after vehicle is sold; CHP requires
life of vehicle; OSHA requires 1
year; 8 CCR § 3203(b)(1); 49 CFR
396.21(b)(1); 49 CFR 396.3(c);
CCP §337 et. Seq., GC §60201
Lead Dept. FR-053
Generator Operation Logs &
Inspections - Fixed / Stationary
Generators
3 years 3 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
AQMD Rule 1470; GC §60201
Lead Dept. FR-054
Generator Operation Logs &
Inspections - Portable /
Emergency Generators
5 years 5 years
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
AQMD Rule 1470; Form
400–E–13a instructions; GC
§60201
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DIST. ©1995-2019 Gladwell Governmental Services, Inc (909) 337-3516 all rights reserved Do not duplicate or distribute without prior written permission Revision Adopted: 6/5/2024

Page 414 ends

Ver 20.0 RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE - FIRE
(Community Affairs, Community Risk, Emerg. Mgt., Emerg Response, EMS, Fire Marshal, Station Ops / Suppression) Page FR-12
Office of
Record
Records
Series # Records Description Retention / Disposition Comments / Reference (OFR) Active
(in office)
Inactive
(Records
Center)
Total
Retention Vital? Media
Options
Image:

HOLDS: Litigation, claims, complaints, public records act requests, audits and/or investigations suspend normal retention periods (retention begins after settlement).

Fire /
Station
Operations /
Suppressio
n Ops
FR-055 Pre-plan Sheets When
Superseded
When
Superseded
Yes:

Before
Event
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Preliminary drafts; GC §60201 et
seq.

Fire /
Station
Operations /
Suppressio
n Ops
FR-056 Station Log Books / Red Books /
Log Books
Minimum 2
years
Minimum 2
years
Yes:

Before
Event
Mag,
Mfr, OD,
Ppr
S / I
Yes:

After QC
& OD
Department preference; GC
§60201 et seq.

Page 415 ends

DATE: August 20, 2025
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 Marlena C. Perez, Principal Engineer
Sarine Hazarshahian, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT: Consideration of a Resolution Adopting the Measure I Five-Year Capital Projects Needs Analysis Covering Fiscal Years 2026/27 Through 2030/31. (RESOLUTION NO. 2025-069) (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the Measure I Five- Year Capital Project Needs Analysis covering Fiscal Years 2026/27 through 2030/31.

BACKGROUND:

Measure 1 2010-2040 Strategic Plan (Plan), the county-wide transportation sales tax program approved by voters, requires each local jurisdiction receiving revenue from the Valley Major Street and Freeway Interchange Programs to annually adopt and update a Five-Year Capital Project Needs Analysis (CPNA) which outlines the specific projects upon which Measure I Valley Major Street and Freeway Interchange Program funds will be expended.

ANALYSIS:

Staff has prepared the Five-Year CPNA for consideration by the City Council for adoption. Upon adoption, the CPNA will be kept on file with the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) for informational purposes. The CPNA consists of a list of eligible capital improvement projects, along with their anticipated costs that have been or are expected to be constructed during the upcoming five (5) years. Upon completion of a project in the Plan, the City may seek reimbursement for the Measure I share of the project costs based on the availability of funds allocated to the City. Funds are allocated to the City by the SBCTA Board of Directors on an annual basis and roll-over if not fully expended. The CPNA includes two (2) widening projects and traffic signal improvements at seven (7) locations.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Approval of this item will meet SBCTA Five-Year CPNA requirements allowing the City to seek reimbursement of eligible expenses in line with SBCTA policy.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

This item addresses the City Council' s vision for the City by ensuring the construction of high- quality public improvement that promote a world class community.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 - CPNA Resolution

Page 416 ends

Resolution No. 25-0XX – Page 1 of 1
RESOLUTION 25-XXX
A

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE

MEASURE I FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL PROJECT NEEDS ANALYSIS
FOR FISCAL YEARS 2026/2027 THROUGH 2030/2031
W
HEREAS, San Bernardino County voters approved passage of Measure I in November 2004, authorizing the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority to impose a one-half of one percent retail transactions and use tax applicable in the incorporated and unincorporated territory of the County of San Bernardino; and
W
HEREAS, revenue from the tax can only be used for transportation improvement and traffic management programs authorized in the Expenditure Plans set forth in Ordinance No. 04- 01 of the Authority; and
W
HEREAS, the Strategic Plan requires each local jurisdiction applying for revenue from certain Measure I Programs to annually adopt and update a Five-Year Capital Project Needs Analysis; and
NO

W, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, HEREBY RESOLVES to adopt the Measure I Five-Year Capital Project Needs Analysis for Fiscal Years 2026/2027 through 2030/2031, attached to this resolution as Exhibit A, is hereby adopted.

P
ASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this Xth day of Month, 2025.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 417 ends

Nexus Project Cost 10,567,000$
Dev. Loan? No
5-Year Advance? No
Public Share: 71.3%
Dev. Share: 28.70%
Project Information Phase Funding PRIOR* FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FUTURE PA&ED
Total Cost: $165,000.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ 117,650.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $ 47,350.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ -
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - PS&E
Total Cost: $740,541.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ 528,007.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $ 212,534.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ROW
Total Cost: $62,355.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ 44,451.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $ 17,657.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - MI LOCAL ST $ 247.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - CONST
Total Cost: $3,518,918.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ 2,508,990.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $ 999,610.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - MI LOCAL ST $ 10,318.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - *Prior should identify any expenses incurred in prior years that have not yet been reimbursed by SBCTA including anticipated FY 2023/2024 expenses.

Capital Project Needs Analysis
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Valley Arterial Sub-Program
Wilson Avenue from East Avenue
to Wardman Bullock - Widen from
0 to 4 Lanes
Current Total Project Cost
Estimate:
$7,434,218.00
Total Measure I Request:
$3,199,098.00
(Summation of Measure I)
Comments:
2027-2031 CPNA_07-08-2025 - Proj 1

Page 418 ends

Nexus Project Cost 554,000$
Dev. Loan? No
5-Year Advance? No
Public Share: 71.3%
Dev. Share: 28.70%
Project Information Phase Funding PRIOR* FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FUTURE PA&ED
Total Cost: $0.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ -
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - PS&E
Total Cost: $16,640.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ 11,864.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $ 471.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - MI LOCAL ST $ 4,305.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ROW
Total Cost: $0.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - CONST
Total Cost: $395,701.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ 282,135.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - MI LOCAL ST $ 113,566.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Comments:
*Prior should identify any expenses incurred in prior years that have not yet been reimbursed by SBCTA including anticipated FY 2023/2024 expenses.

Total Measure I Request:
$293,999.00
(Summation of Measure I)
$412,341.00
Capital Project Needs Analysis
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Valley Arterial Sub-Program
Widen Victoria Avenue from
Etiwanda High School to I-15
Current Total Project Cost
Estimate:
2027-2031 CPNA_07-08-2025 - Proj 2

Page 419 ends

Nexus Project Cost 481,000$
Dev. Loan? No
5-Year Advance? No
Public Share: 71.3%
Dev. Share: 28.70%
Project Information Phase Funding PRIOR* FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FUTURE PA&ED
Total Cost: $0.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ -
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - PS&E
Total Cost: $13,750.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ 9,804.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $ 3,946.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ROW
Total Cost: $0.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - CONST
Total Cost: $724,987.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ 516,916.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $ 208,071.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Comments:
*Prior should identify any expenses incurred in prior years that have not yet been reimbursed by SBCTA including anticipated FY 2023/2024 expenses.

Total Measure I Request:
$526,720.00
(Summation of Measure I)
$738,737.00
Capital Project Needs Analysis
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Valley Arterial Sub-Program
Construct a Traffic Signal at the
Intersection of Rochester Avenue
and Jersey Boulevard
Current Total Project Cost
Estimate:
2027-2031 CPNA_07-08-2025 - Proj 3

Page 420 ends

Total Measure I Request:
$526,720.00
(Summation of Measure I)
$738,737.00
Capital Project Needs Analysis
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Valley Arterial Sub-Program
Construct a Traffic Signal at the
Intersection of Milliken Avenue
and 5th Street
Current Total Project Cost
Estimate:
2027-2031 CPNA_07-08-2025 - Proj 4

Page 421 ends

Total Measure I Request:
$526,720.00
(Summation of Measure I)
$738,737.00
Capital Project Needs Analysis
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Valley Arterial Sub-Program
Construct a Traffic Signal at the
Intersection of East Avenue and
Miller
Current Total Project Cost
Estimate:
2027-2031 CPNA_07-08-2025 - Proj 5

Page 422 ends

Nexus Project Cost 539,000$
Dev. Loan? No
5-Year Advance? No
Public Share: 71.3%
Dev. Share: 28.70%
Project Information Phase Funding PRIOR* FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FUTURE PA&ED
Total Cost: $0.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ -
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - PS&E
Total Cost: $12,271.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ 8,749.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $ 3,522.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ROW
Total Cost: $0.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - CONST
Total Cost: $588,026.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ 419,263.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $ 168,763.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Comments:
*Prior should identify any expenses incurred in prior years that have not yet been reimbursed by SBCTA including anticipated FY 2023/2024 expenses.

Total Measure I Request:
$428,012.00
(Summation of Measure I)
$600,297.00
Capital Project Needs Analysis
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Valley Arterial Sub-Program
Construct a Traffic Signal at the
Intersection of Carnelian Street
and Banyan Street
Current Total Project Cost
Estimate:
2027-2031 CPNA_07-08-2025 - Proj 6

Page 423 ends

Nexus Project Cost 539,000$
Dev. Loan? No
5-Year Advance? No
Public Share: 71.3%
Dev. Share: 28.70%
Project Information Phase Funding PRIOR* FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FUTURE PA&ED
Total Cost: $0.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ -
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - PS&E
Total Cost: $7,920.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ 5,647.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $ 2,273.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ROW
Total Cost: $0.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - CONST
Total Cost: $588,026.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ 419,263.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $ 168,763.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Comments:
*Prior should identify any expenses incurred in prior years that have not yet been reimbursed by SBCTA including anticipated FY 2023/2024 expenses.

Total Measure I Request:
$424,910.00
(Summation of Measure I)
$595,946.00
Capital Project Needs Analysis
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Valley Arterial Sub-Program
Construct a Traffic Signal at the
Intersection of 6th Street and
Utica Avenue
Current Total Project Cost
Estimate:
2027-2031 CPNA_07-08-2025 - Proj 7

Page 424 ends

Total Measure I Request:
$526,720.00
(Summation of Measure I)
$738,737.00
Capital Project Needs Analysis
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Valley Arterial Sub-Program
Construct a Traffic Signal at the
Intersection of 6th Street and
Rochester Avenue
Current Total Project Cost
Estimate:
2027-2031 CPNA_07-08-2025 - Proj 8

Page 425 ends

Nexus Project Cost 617,000$
Dev. Loan? No
5-Year Advance? No
Public Share: 71.3%
Dev. Share: 28.70%
Project Information Phase Funding PRIOR* FY 26/27 FY 27/28 FY 28/29 FY 29/30 FY 30/31 FUTURE PA&ED
Total Cost: $0.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ -
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - PS&E
Total Cost: $45,891.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ 32,720.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $ 13,171.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - ROW
Total Cost: $0.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - CONST
Total Cost: $1,036,819.00
Fund Type: MSI Arterial $ 739,253.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - DEV FEE $ 297,566.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - - Select Fund - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Other: ______ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Comments:
*Prior should identify any expenses incurred in prior years that have not yet been reimbursed by SBCTA including anticipated FY 2023/2024 expenses.

Total Measure I Request:
$771,973.00
(Summation of Measure I)
$1,081,710.00
Capital Project Needs Analysis
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Valley Arterial Sub-Program
Construct a Traffic Signal at the
Intersection of 6th Street and
Hellman Avenue
Current Total Project Cost
Estimate:
2027-2031 CPNA_07-08-2025 - Proj 9

Page 426 ends

DATE: August 20, 2025
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 Marlena C. Perez, Principal Engineer
Sarine Hazarshahian, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT: Consideration of a Resolution Adopting the Measure I Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan Covering Fiscal Years 2025/26 Through 2029/30. (RESOLUTION NO. 2025-070) (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the Local Measure I Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan Expenditure Strategy as requested by the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) to provide a public record of the intended use of Local Measure I funds.

BACKGROUND:

Measure I, the county-wide transportation sales tax program, requires that each local jurisdiction receiving revenues from the program annually adopt a Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan (Plan) which outlines the specific projects and anticipated costs for which Measure I funds will be used.

In addition to adopting the Plan, the City is required by SBCTA Policy No. 40003 to annually acknowledge the requirement to meet the minimum General Fund Maintenance of Effort (MOE) level approved by both the City Council and SBCTA Board in February and March 2016 respectively. The required MOE level for Fiscal Year 2025/26 is $2,225,757.

ANALYSIS:

Staff has prepared the Plan (Attachment 1 – Exhibit A) for consideration by the City Council. Upon adoption of the resolution, the plan will be kept on file with SBCTA for informational purposes.

The Plan includes pavement rehabilitation, traffic signal and striping improvements, and concrete repairs and improvements in Fiscal Year 2025/26 and aligns with the adopted Fiscal Year 2025/26 Budget. In addition to the Plan, the City is required to adopt the attached Measure I Capital Improvement Plan Expenditure Strategy (Attachment 1 – Exhibit B). This strategy is a narrative policy statement estimating the types of projects Local Measure I Funds are to be used for and the percentage of funds allocated for each type of project.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Approval of this item will meet the SBTCA Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan, MOE, and Expenditure Strategy requirements allowing the City to continue receiving Measure I funding.

Page 427 ends

Page 2 ends

2 9
5 4
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

This item addresses the City Council’s vision for the City by ensuring continued funding for the construction of high quality public improvements that promote a world class community.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 - Resolution No. 2025-070

Page 428 ends

RE
SOLUTION NO. 2025-XXX
A RE

SOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING THE

MEASURE I FIVE- YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
FOR FY2025/2026 THROUGH FY2029/2030
W
HEREAS, San Bernardino County voters approved passage of Measure I in November 2004, authorizing the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority to impose a one- half of one percent retail transactions and use tax applicable in the incorporated and unincorporated territory of the County of San Bernardino; and W
HEREAS, revenue from the tax can only be used for transportation improvement and traffic management programs authorized in the Expenditure Plans set forth in Ordinance No. 04-01 of the Authority; and
W
HEREAS, the Strategic Plan requires each local jurisdiction applying for revenue from the Local Street Program to annually adopt and update a Five- Year Capital Improvement Plan; and
W
HEREAS, California Public Utilities Code 190300 and Ordinance No. 04- 01 require each local jurisdiction to maintain General Fund expenditures for transportation- related construction and maintenance activities at the required Maintenance of Effort base year level in each fiscal year of the adopted Five- Year Capital Improvement Plan, which for the City of Rancho Cucamonga is $2,225,757.

W, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA HERBY RESOLVES, that the Measure I Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan, attached to this resolution as Exhibit A, and the Measure I Capital Improvement Plan Expenditure Strategy – Fiscal Year 2025/26 thru 202 9/30 (Exhibit B) are hereby adopted.

P
ASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 20th day of August 2025.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 429 ends

Resolution Number:

Resolution Approval Date:

Contact Person/Title:

Phone:

Email:
6/30/25 Carryover Balance $8,501,006.91
FY2025/26 Est. Revenue FY2026/27 Est. Revenue FY2027/28 Est. Revenue FY2028/29 Est. Revenue FY2029/30 Est. Revenue Total Est. Rev. $4,518,295 $4,643,903 $4,773,928 $4,909,020 $5,049,902 $23,895,048 Projects:

Citywide Concrete Repair No No 0.0% 0.0% $4,882,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $500,000 Major Traffic Signal Repairs No No 0.0% 0.0% $187,000 $193,545 $200,319 $207,330 $214,587 $222,097 $1,037,878 Signal Contract Services - Maintenance Citywide No No 0.0% 0.0% $1,023,000 $1,058,805 $1,095,863 $1,134,218 $1,173,916 $1,215,003 $5,677,806 Striping Contract Service - Maintenance Citywide No No 0.0% 0.0% $750,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $750,000 Local Street Rehabilitation - Citywide No No 0.0% 0.0% $23,205,000 $1,517,500 $2,345,000 $2,462,500 $2,580,000 $2,697,500 $11,602,500 Jasper Street Curb Ramp Improvement Yes Yes 0.0% 0.0% $279,500 $0 $279,500 $0 $0 $0 $279,500 Banyan Street and East Avenue Improvement Project No No 0.0% 0.0% $2,323,350 $0 $2,223,350 $0 $0 $0 $2,223,350 Banyan Street Bicycle and Pedestrian Enhancements Project Yes Yes 0.0% 0.0% $3,020,000 $0 $154,880 $1,971,200 $0 $0 $2,126,080 Pecan Avenue Street Pavement Rehabilitation Project No No 0.0% 0.0% $1,774,886 $1,774,886 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,774,886 Local Roadway Safety Plan Improvements Program No Yes 0.0% 0.0% $3,721,700 $56,000 $93,000 $150,000 $300,000 $0 $599,000

0.0% 0.0% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

0.0% 0.0% $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$4,850,736 $6,641,912 $6,175,249 $4,518,503 $4,384,600 $26,571,000 Total Programming is currently 82% Total Estimated Programming: $26,571,000 Is Project in
City's
Non-motorized
Transportation
Plan?
(Yes/No)
Does Project
have an ATP
Component?
(Yes/No)
Is the Project on the City's
Nexus Study List?
(Public/DIF Share %)
Estimated Total
Project Cost
[email protected]
Projects Total:

Rancho Cucamonga
Current
Estimate
Current
Estimate TotalCurrent
Estimate
Current
Estimate
Current
Estimate
(Must not exceed 150% of Carryover
Balance + Total Estimated Revenue)
Jurisdiction:2025-xxx
8/20/2025
Marlena Perez
(909) 774-4058
Measure I Local Pass-through Program

FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
Fiscal Years 2025/2026 thru 2029/2030

Page 1 of 1 ends

Exhibit A

Page 430 ends

CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA

MEASURE I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

EXPENDITURE STRATEGY
Fiscal Year 2025/2026 thru 2029/2030

Each jurisdiction shall adopt a Measure I Capital Improvement Plan Expenditure Strategy as part of the annual Capital Improvement Plan adoption. The Expenditure Strategy is not intended to be a narrative description of the projects listed in the Capital Improvement Plan. Instead, the Expenditure Strategy should provide the policy approach adopted by the Council for the expenditure of Measure I funds. The jurisdictional Expenditure Strategy provides an opportunity to document circumstances or analyses which are not otherwise apparent when reviewing the Measure I Capital Improvement Plan.

You must include the strategy as part of the annual Capital Improvement Plan adopted by your governing body.

The Measure I Capital Improvement Plan Expenditure Strategy for the expenditure of Measure I funds will use the City’s General Plan Circulation Element as its basis.

The City currently has an estimated carryover balance of approximately $ 8.5 million in the Measure I Local Street fund and anticipates approximately $4.5 million in new revenue for Fiscal Year 2025/26. In this next fiscal year, the City is planning to use approximately $4.9 million on local street capital projects and programs as follows:

Type of Improvement Estimated Cost FY
2025/26
Percentage
Maintenance, Rehabilitation, and Repair
of Existing Roadways
$3.3 million 67%
Traffic Signal Improvements, Pavement
Striping, and Maintenance
$1.5 million 31%
Concrete Services (ADA, Repairs and
Sidewalks)
$100,000 2%

Over the Five-Year Plan it is anticipated that the Measure I funds will be allocated in the following manner:

Type of Improvement Estimated Cost
FY 2025/26 – 2029/30
Percentage
Maintenance, Rehabilitation, and Repair
of Existing Roadways
$15.6 million 59%
Traffic Signal Improvements, Pavement
Striping, and Maintenance
$10.2 million 38%
Concrete Services (ADA, Repairs and
Sidewalks)
$800,000 3%

Exhibit B

Page 431 ends

DATE: August 20, 2025
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jevin Kaye, Finance Director
Rick Flinchum, Deputy Director of Finance
Kelly Guerra, Special Districts Analyst
SUBJECT: Consideration to Approve and Adopt a Resolution Certifying the Results of an Election and Adding Annexation No. 2025-11 to Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. (RESOLUTION NO. 2025-068) (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:

The City staff recommends the City Council to approve and adopt the Resolution Certifying the Results of an Election and Adding Annexation No. 2025-11 to Community Facilities District No. 2022-01.

BACKGROUND:

The City Council approved Resolution No. 2022-063 (the “Resolution Authorizing Future Annexation”) authorizing the future annexation of territory to Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) (the “CFD 2022-01”) to provide maintenance and services to streetlights, traffic signals, and appurtenant facilities for new development.

The City conditions property owners to annex such properties into the existing CFD 2022-01 to fund street light service and maintenance. In July 2025, the Property Owner signed an Annexation Proceeding Deposit Agreement to initiate the annexation process.

ANALYSIS:

In August 2025, the Property Owner submitted their Consent and Waivers and Official Ballot, to the City Clerk’s Office Election Official. The Election Official has canvassed the ballot and completed their statement of votes cast (See Exhibit “A” of the Resolution). The Property Owner cast their vote unanimously in favor of the special tax levy for CFD 2022-01.

Adoption of this Resolution constitutes the City Council’s formal action certifying the election results and adding the Annexation Territory to CFD 2022-01 and directs the recordation of an amendment to the existing Notice of Special Tax Lien. By recordation of this amendment, prospective purchasers of the property within the Annexation Territory will have notice of the special tax obligation affecting such property.

A map showing the property is included in the Resolution.

Page 432 ends

Page 2 ends

2 9
8 8
FISCAL IMPACT:

CFD 2022-01 was formed to be financially self-sufficient, meaning the revenues generated by the District offset the costs of providing services and can be adjusted annually based on changes in the overall operating costs of streetlights.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

This item addresses the City Council’s core value of intentionally embracing and anticipating our future by ensuring that new development is fiscally sustainable.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 – Resolution Certifying the Results of an Election and Adding Annexation 2025-11

Page 433 ends

Resolution 2025-068 - Page 1 of 3
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-068

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE

RESULTS OF AN ELECTION AND ADDING TERRITORY
TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2022-01
(STREET LIGHTING SERVICES) OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ANNEXATION NO. 2025-11
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California (the “City Council”) has previously formed Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) of the City of Rancho Cucamonga (“CFD No. 2022-01”) pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (the “Act”), as amended, for the purpose of financing certain municipal maintenance services; and WHEREAS, acting pursuant to the Act, the City Council also authorized by the adoption of Resolution No. 2022-063 (the “Resolution Authorizing Future Annexation”) the annexation in the future of territory to CFD No. 2022-01, such territory designated as Future Annexation Area, Community Facilities District No. 2022-01 (the “Future Annexation Area”); and
WHEREAS, at this time the unanimous consent to the annexation of certain territory located within the Future Annexation Area to CFD No. 2022-01 has been received from the property owner of such territory, and such territory has been designated as ANNEXATION NO. 2025-11 (the "Territory"); and
WHEREAS, less than twelve (12) registered voters have resided within the Territory for each of the ninety (90) days preceding the election date established for the Territory, therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified elector of the Territory shall be the "landowner," as such term is defined in Government Code Section 53317(f), of such Territory and such landowner who is the owner of record as of the applicable election date, or the authorized representative thereof, shall have one vote for each acre or portion of an acre of the parcel of land that landowner owns within such Territory; and WHEREAS, the time limit specified by the Act for conducting an election to submit the levy of the special taxes on the Territory to the qualified elector thereof and the requirements for impartial analysis and ballot arguments have been waived with the unanimous consent of the qualified elector of the Territory; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has caused a ballot to be distributed to the qualified elector of the Territory, has received and canvassed such ballot and made a report to the City Council regarding the results of such canvass, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit “A” hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and

Page 434 ends

Resolution 2025-068 - Page 2 of 3
6 0
3 1
WHEREAS, at this time the measure voted upon and such measure did receive the favorable vote of the qualified elector of the Territory, and the City Council desires to declare the results of the election; and
WHEREAS, a map showing the Territory and designated as Annexation Map No. 2025-11 (the "Annexation Map"), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit “B” hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, has been submitted to this legislative body.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, acting as the legislative body of Community Facilities District No. 2022-01, as follows:

Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct.

Section 2. Findings. This legislative body does hereby further determine as follows:

A. The unanimous consent as described in the recitals hereto to the annexation of the Territory to CFD No. 2022-01 has been given by the owner of the Territory and such consent shall be kept on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga.

B. Less than twelve (12) registered voters have resided within the Territory for each of the ninety (90) days preceding the election date established for the each of the parcels located within the Territory, therefore, pursuant to the Act the qualified elector for the Territory shall be the "landowner" of the Territory as such term is defined in Government Code Section 53317(f).

C. The qualified elector of the Territory has voted in favor of the levy of special taxes on the Territory upon its annexation to CFD No. 2022-01.

Section 3. Territory. The boundaries and parcels of property within the Territory and on which special taxes will be levied in order to pay for the costs and expenses of authorized municipal maintenance services are shown on the Annexation Map as submitted to and hereby approved by this legislative body.

Section 4. Declaration of Annexation. This legislative body does hereby determine and declare that the Territory, and each parcel therein, is now added to and becomes a part of CFD No. 2022-01. The City Council, acting as the legislative body of CFD No. 2022-01, is hereby empowered to levy the authorized special tax within the Territory.

Section 5. Notice. Immediately upon adoption of this Resolution, notice shall be given as follows:

Page 435 ends

Resolution 2025-068 - Page 3 of 3
6 0
3 1
A. A copy of the Annexation Map as approved shall be filed in the Office of the County Recorder no later than fifteen (15) days after the date of adoption of this Resolution.

B. An Amendment to the Notice of Special Tax Lien (Notice of Annexation) shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder no later than fifteen (15) days after the date of adoption of this Resolution.

Section 6. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective upon its adoption.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this ________ day of ______________ 2025.

Page 436 ends

A - 1
EXHIBIT “A”

CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION OFFICIAL

AND STATEMENT OF VOTES CAST

Page 437 ends

B - 1
EXHIBIT “B”

ANNEXATION MAP

Page 438 ends

DATE:August 20, 2025
TO:President and Members of the Board of Directors
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Mike McCliman, Fire Chief
Jevin Kaye, Finance Director
Darci Vogel, Fire Business Manager
Kelly Guerra, Special Districts Analyst
SUBJECT: Consideration of Approval to Adopt an Annexation Map Showing Assessor Parcel Number 0225-191-32, Proposed to be Annexed Into Community Facilities District No. 88-1; Approval to Adopt a Resolution of Intention to Annex Territory Referred to as Annexation No. 88-25-1 into Community Facilities District No. 88-1; and Set a Time and Place for a Public Hearing Related to the Annexation. (RESOLUTION NO. FD 2025- 021) (RESOLUTION NO. FD 2025-022) (FIRE)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the Fire Board of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District:

1. Adopt a Resolution adopting “Annexation Map No. 88-25-1” showing Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 0225-191-32 (13341 Banyan Street), proposed to be annexed in Community Facilities District No. 88-1; and

2. Adopt a Resolution of Intention to Annex Territory referred to as “Annexation No. 88-25- 1” into Community Facilities District No. 88-1 to specify the services to be financed, to set and specify the rate and method of apportionment of the special taxes proposed to be levied within the territory proposed to be annexed, and

3. Set a time and place for a public hearing regarding Annexation No. 88-25-1.

BACKGROUND:

The property owner of APN 0225-191-32 (13341 Banyan Street), located within the Fire Protection District (the "Territory"), is conditioned by the City and Fire Protection District to annex “Annexation No. 88-25-1” into the existing Community Facilities District (CFD) No. 88-1 to satisfy fire protection service mitigation impacts.

ANALYSIS:

In order to initiate formal annexation proceedings, the Fire Board is being asked to adopt a resolution approving Annexation Map No. 88-25-1 of the territory proposed to be annexed and a Resolution of Intention to Authorize the Annexation of Annexation No. 88-25-1.

Resolution No. FD 2025-021 will adopt “Annexation Map No. 88-25-1” showing the property

Page 439 ends

Page 2 ends

2 9
8 7
proposed to be annexed into CFD No. 88-1 (Attachment 1). The territory is inclusive of the entire development project proposed by the Property Owner.

Resolution No. FD 2025-022 declares the Fire Board intention to authorize the annexation of territory “Annexation No. 88-25-1” to CFD No. 88-1 (Attachment 2). The Resolution of Intention generally sets forth: (a) the District's intention to annex the Territory to the District shown in Exhibit “A”; (b) a description of the services and facilities which will, in part, be financed through the levy of the special tax on the Territory if annexed shown in Exhibit “B”; (c) the rate and method of apportionment of the proposed special tax shown in Exhibit “C”; (d) the date, time and location of the public hearing set for September 17, 2025, (e) election requirements.

Special Counsel for the District has worked with staff to establish the annexation process, timelines and draft resolutions. The resolutions are considered to be routine and non- controversial, as the property owners are in support of the annexation procedure. On September 17, 2025, there will be a public hearing for public input/concerns on this matter.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The special tax revenues that are collected from CFD No. 88-1 are used to pay for public facilities and services in the District area. Costs related to the administering of the District are the responsibility of the property owners within the District. Annexation of the property ensures the property owner covers the cost of increased demand for fire services resulting from new development within the Territory.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:

This item brings together portions of the Council’s vision and core value by providing a sustainable City and promoting a safe and healthy community for all. Annexation of the property into CFD 88-1 ensures the delivery of vital fire and life safety services to all residents while satisfying fire protection service mitigation impacts.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 – Resolution No. FD 2025-021, Adopting Annexation No. 88-25-1 Map Attachment 2 – Resolution No. FD 2025-022, Intention to Authorize Annexation No. 88-25-1 Attachment 3 – Notice of Public Hearing for Fire Secretary for Annexation No. 88-25-1

Page 440 ends

Resolution No. FD 2025-XXX - Page 1 of 1
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. FD 2025-XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO

CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA,

CALIFORNIA, ACTING AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 88-1, ADOPTING AN ANNEXATION MAP (ANNEXATION NO. 88-25-1) SHOWING PROPERTY PROPOSED TO BE ANNEXED TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 88-1
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (the “Board of Directors”), desires to initiate proceedings to annex territory to an existing Community Facilities District pursuant to the terms and provisions of the “Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982”, being Chapter

2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California , and specifically Article

3.5 thereof. The existing Community Facilities District has been designated as Community Facilities District No. 88-1 (the “District”); and,
WHEREAS, there has been submitted a map entitled “Annexation Map No. 88-25-1 to Community Facilities District No. 88-1, Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, County of San Bernardino, State Of California” (the “Annexation Map”) showing the territory proposed to be annexed to the District (the “Territory”).

NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District does hereby resolve as follows:

Section 1: The above recitals are all true and correct.

Section 2: The Annexation Map showing the Territory proposed to be annexed to the District and to be subject to the levy of a special tax is hereby approved and adopted.

Section 3: A certificate shall be endorsed on the original and on at least one (1) copy of the Annexation Map, evidencing the date and adoption of this Resolution, and within fifteen (15) days after the adoption of the Resolution fixing the time and place of the hearing on the intention to annex or extent of the annexation to the District, a copy of such map shall be filed with the correct and proper endorsements thereon with the County Recorder, all in the manner and form provided for in Section 3111 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of , 2025.

Page 441 ends

Resolution No. FD 2025-XXX Page 1 of 11
ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION NO. FD 2025-XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RANCHO

CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, RANCHO CUCAMONGA,

CALIFORNIA, ACTING AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 88-1, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO AUTHORIZE THE ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY (ANNEXATION NO.
88-25-1) TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 88-1
WHEREAS, the Board Of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, California, (“Board of Directors”), formed a Community Facilities District pursuant to the terms and provisions of the “Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982”, being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California (the “Act”). The Community Facilities District has been designated as Community Facilities District No. 88-1 (the “District”); and, WHEREAS, the Board of Directors desires to initiate proceedings to consider the annexation of certain real property to the District (the “Territory”); and WHEREAS, a map entitled “Annexation Map No. 88-25-1 to Community Facilities District No. 88- 1 Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, County of San Bernardino, State of California” (the “Annexation Map”) showing the Territory proposed to be annexed to the District has been submitted, the map has been previously approved and a copy of the map shall be kept on file with the transcript of these proceedings; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors now desires to proceed to adopt the Resolution of Intention to annex the Territory to the District, to describe the territory included within the District and the Territory proposed to be annexed thereto, to specify the facilities and services to be financed from the proceeds of the levy of special taxes within the Territory, to set and specify the special taxes that would be levied within the Territory to finance such facilities and services, and to set a time and place for a public hearing relating to the annexation of the Territory to the District.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District does hereby resolve as follows:

1. Recitals. The above recitals are all true and correct.

2. Legal Authority. These proceedings for annexation are initiated by this Board of Directors pursuant to the authorization of the Act.

3. Intention to Annex; Description of the Territory and the District. The Board of Directors hereby determines that the public convenience and necessity requires that the Territory be added to the District and this Board of Directors declares its intention to annex the Territory to the District.

A description of the Territory is as follows:

All that property within the Territory proposed to be annexed to the District, as such property is shown on the Annexation Map as previously approved by the Board of Directors, a copy of which is on file in the Office of the Secretary and shall remain open for public inspection.

A general description of the Territory included in the District is hereinafter described as follows:

All that property and territory as originally included within the District and as subsequently annexed to the District, as such properties were shown on original maps of the District and the territories

Page 442 ends

Resolution No. FD 2025-XXX Page 2 of 11
subsequently annexed to the District, all as approved by this Board of Directors and designated by the name of the District, reference is made to the attached and incorporated Exhibit “A” (the “Annexation Map”). Copies of such maps are on file in the Office of the Secretary and have also been filed in the Office of the County Recorder.

4. Services and Facilities Authorized to be Financed by the District. The services that are authorized to be financed by the District from the proceeds of special taxes levied within the existing District are generally described in Exhibit “B” (the “Services and Facilities”) attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and all costs associated the District, administration of the District, the determination of the amount of special taxes to be levied, the costs of collection any special taxes, and costs otherwise incurred in order to carry out the authorized purposes of the District. If and to the extent feasible the Services and Facilities shall be provided in common within the existing District and the Territory.

5. Special Taxes. It is the further intention of this Board of Directors body that, except where funds are otherwise available, a special tax sufficient to pay for the Services and Facilities and related incidental expenses authorized by the Act, secured by recordation of a continuing lien against all non- exempt real property in the Territory, will be levied annually within the boundaries of such Territory. For further particulars as to the rate and method of apportionment of the proposed special tax, reference is made to Exhibit “C” (the “Special Tax Formula”), which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and which sets forth in sufficient detail the method of apportionment of such special tax to allow each landowner or resident within the proposed Territory to clearly estimate the maximum amount that such person will have to pay.

The special tax proposed to be levied within the Territory shall be equal to the special tax levied to pay for the Services and Facilities in the existing District, except that a higher or lower special tax may be levied within the Territory to the extent that the actual cost of providing the Services and Facilities in the Territory is higher or lower than the cost of providing those Services and Facilities in the existing District. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the special tax may not be levied at a rate which is higher than the maximum special tax authorized to be levied pursuant to the special tax formula.

The special taxes herein authorized shall be collected in the same manner as ad valorem property taxes and shall be subject to the same penalties, procedure, sale and lien priority in any case of delinquency, as applicable for ad valorem taxes; however, as applicable, this legislative body may, by resolution, establish and adopt an alternate or supplemental procedure as necessary. Any special taxes that may not be collected on the County tax roll shall be collected through a direct billing procedure by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, acting for and on behalf of the District.

Upon recordation of a Notice of Special Tax Lien pursuant to Section 3114.5 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, a continuing lien to secure each levy of the special tax shall attach to all non-exempt real property in the Territory and this lien shall continue in force and effect until the special tax obligation is prepaid and permanently satisfied and the lien canceled in accordance with law or until collection of the tax by the legislative body ceases.

The maximum special tax rate authorized to be levied within the District shall not be increased as a result of the annexation of the Territory to the District.

6. Public Hearing. NOTICE IS GIVEN THAT ON THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025, AT THE HOUR OF 7:00 O'CLOCK P.M., IN THE REGULAR MEETING PLACE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, BEING THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91730, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD WHERE THIS BOARD OF

DIRECTORS WILL CONSIDER THE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE ANNEXATION OF THE TERRITORY

TO THE DISTRICT, THE PROPOSED RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF THE SPECIAL

TAX TO BE LEVIED WITHIN THE TERRITORY AND ALL OTHER MATTERS AS SET FORTH IN THIS

Page 443 ends

Resolution No. FD 2025-XXX Page 3 of 11
RESOLUTION OF INTENTION. THAT AT THE ABOVE-MENTIONED TIME AND PLACE FOR PUBLIC

HEARING ANY PERSONS INTERESTED, INCLUDING TAXPAYERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS,

MAY APPEAR AND BE HEARD, AND THAT THE TESTIMONY OF ALL INTERESTED PERSONS FOR

OR AGAINST THE ANNEXATION OF THE TERRITORY OR THE LEVYING OF SPECIAL TAXES WITHIN THE TERRITORY WILL BE HEARD AND CONSIDERED.

ANY PROTESTS MAY BE MADE ORALLY OR IN WRITING. HOWEVER, ANY PROTESTS

PERTAINING TO THE REGULARITY OR SUFFICIENCY OF THE PROCEEDINGS SHALL BE IN

WRITING AND SHALL CLEARLY SET FORTH THE IRREGULARITIES OR DEFECTS TO WHICH OBJECTION IS MADE. ALL WRITTEN PROTESTS SHALL BE FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK PRIOR TO THE TIME FIXED FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. WRITTEN PROTESTS MAY BE WITHDRAWN AT ANY TIME BEFORE THE CONCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.

7. Majority Protest. If a written majority protest against the proposed annexation of the Territory to the District is filed, and such protests are not withdrawn so as to reduce the protests to less than a majority, no further proceedings shall be undertaken for a period of one year from the date of the decision by the Board of Directors on the issues discussed at the public hearing.

8. Election. If following the public hearing described in the Section above, the Board of Directors determines to proceed with the annexation of the Territory to the District, a proposition shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the Territory. The vote shall be by registered voters within the Territory; however, if there are less than 12 registered voters, the vote shall be by landowners, with each landowner having one vote per acre or portion thereof within the Territory.

9. Notice. Notice of the time and place of the public hearing shall be given by the City Clerk by causing the publication of a Notice of Public Hearing in a legally designated newspaper of general circulation, said publication pursuant to Section 6061 of the Government Code, with said publication to be completed at least seven (7) days prior to the date set for the public hearing.

A copy of this Resolution shall be transmitted to the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as required by the Act.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of 2025.

Page 444 ends

Resolution No. FD 2025-XXX Page 4 of 11
EXHIBIT “A”
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 88-1

ANNEXATION MAP

Page 445 ends

Resolution No. FD 2025-XXX Page 5 of 11
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 88-1

BOUNDARY MAP

Page 446 ends

Resolution No. FD 2025-XXX Page 6 of 11
EXHIBIT “B”
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 88-1

DESCRIPTION OF THE SERVICES AND FACILITIES
The Services.

It is the intention of the Board of Directors to finance certain types of fire services (the “Services”) that are in addition to those currently provided in or required for the Territory and are necessary to meet the increased demand for such fire services resulting from new development within the Territory and will not be replacing services already available to the Territory. A general description of the Services to be financed is as follows:

The performance of functions, operations, maintenance, and repair activities in order to provide fire protection and suppression services to the Territory.

The Facilities.

It is the intention of this Board of Directors to finance the purchase, construction, expansion, improvement, or rehabilitation of certain types of fire facilities (the “Facilities”) that are in addition to those currently provided to serve the Territory and are necessary to meet the increased demand for such fire services resulting from new development within the Territory and will not be replacing facilities already available to serve the Territory. A general description of the types of the Facilities to be financed is as follows:

Fire protection and suppression facilities and equipment, rescue equipment, with a useful life of five (5) years or more, including collection and accumulation of funds to pay for anticipated facilities cost shortfalls and reserves for repair and replacement to the extent that such facilities are necessary to meet the increased demand for such facilities resulting from new development within the Territory.

Page 447 ends

Resolution No. FD 2025-XXX Page 7 of 11
EXHIBIT “C”

FOOTHILL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 88-1

RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
The rate and method of apportionment of the special tax authorized to be levied within Community Facilities District No. 88-1 (the “CFD No. 88-1 Rate and Method”) as originally established for and as applied to the taxable properties within such community facilities district is as follows:

“The Resolution of Intention refers to this Exhibit for an explanation of the rate and method of apportionment of the Special Tax so as to allow each landowner or resident within the proposed Community Facilities District to estimate the maximum annual amount that would be required for payment for such landowner’s or resident’s property.

PROPERTY CATEGORIES
There are three categories of property subject to special taxation, which are identified as follows:

1. DEVELOPED PROPERTY All property identified as a single Tax Assessor’s parcel for which property a building permit has been issued as of May 31 of any year.

2. APPROVED PROPERTY All property which of as May 31 of any year is subject to an approved Development Agreement with either the City of Rancho Cucamonga or the County of San Bernardino, an approved
Annexation Agreement with the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or a recorded Final Subdivision Map or Final Parcel Map, but for which no building permit has been issued.

3. VACANT PROPERTY All other property, excluding property which, as of the date of the election to authorize the levy of the Special Tax, is: (i) owned by public entity; (ii) owned by a regulated public utility and being utilized for transmission or distribution purposes; or (iii) zoned as open space.

Page 448 ends

Resolution No. FD 2025-XXX Page 8 of 11

TAXING CLASSIFICATIONS AND

MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX RATES
The taxing classifications for the above Property Categories and the maximum authorized Special Tax rates for fiscal year 1988-1989 are as follows:

TAXING CLASSIFICATION MAXIMUM TAX RATE

1. DEVELOPED PROPERTY
A. Residential Class I
(More than 3,590 square feet of
dwelling unit living area) *
$292 per year
B. Residential Class II
(3,077 – 3,589 square feet of
dwelling unit living area) *
$225 per year
C. Residential Class III
(2,564 – 3,076 square feet of
dwelling unit living area) *
$180 per year
D. Residential Class IV
(2,308 – 2,563 square feet of
dwelling unit living area) *
$157 per year
E. Residential Class V
(2,051 – 2,307 square feet of
dwelling unit living area) *
$135 per year
F. Residential Class VI
(1,795 – 2,050 square feet of
dwelling unit living area) *
$124 per year
G. Residential Class VII
(less – 1,795 square feet of
dwelling unit living area) *
$112 per year
H. Commercial or Industrial Property
$449 per acre per year or $0.04
per SF or building area,
whichever is greater **

2. APPROVED PROPERTY $200 per lot or parcel

3. VACANT PROPERTY $10 per acre ***

Page 449 ends

Resolution No. FD 2025-XXX Page 9 of 11
* The square footage of dwelling unit living area shall mean the square footage of internal living space, exclusive of garages and other structures not used as living space, as shown on the building permit(s) issued for the dwelling unit.
** The square footage of a commercial or industrial building area shall mean the gross square footage for the building as reflected in the building plans upon which any building permits for the building were issued.
*** The acreage of a Vacant Property shall be the gross acreage exclusive of any acreage dedicated or offered for dedication to a public agency.

ESCALATION OF MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX RATES
The maximum annual Special Tax rates applicable to all Developed Property shall be subject to escalation each July 1 commencing July 1, 1989, by the change factor calculated annually by the State of California Department of Finance for the purpose of increasing appropriations limits of State and local governments. In the event that the Department of Finance or its successor ceases to calculate the annual change factor, such Special Tax rates shall be subject to annual escalation not to exceed the increase in the Consumer Price Index as published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the Los Angeles Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area for the preceding twelve (12) month reporting period.

The maximum Special Tax rates applicable to all Approved Property and Vacant Property shall not be subject to escalation.

METHOD OF APPROTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
The Special Tax shall be levied annually on all taxable property within one of the above identified Property Categories so long as Special Tax revenues are necessary to pay authorized expenses of the Community Facilities District, which may include, without limitation, payment of debt service on any bonded indebtedness of the Community Facilities District; replenishment of any required reserve fund for any such future public improvements, services or debt service; direct payment for public improvements; or payment of the operational and maintenance expenses of providing fire suppression and protection services to properties within the Community Facilities District.

The annual levy of the Special Taxes shall be apportioned as follows:

STEP 1: Fifty percent (50%) of the estimated ad valorem property tax revenue to be collected from properties within the Community Facilities District in the subject fiscal year which are allocable to the Foothill Fire Protection District shall be allocated to pay the estimated expenses of the Community Facilities District for the subject fiscal year. The remainder of the estimated expenses shall be referred to as the Net CFD Expenses.

STEP 2: That equal percentage of the maximum authorized Special Tax rate applicable to all Developed Property Taxing Classifications necessary to generate Special Tax revenues equal to the Net CFD Expenses shall be levied on all Developed Property.

STEP 3: If additional Special Tax revenues are still necessary to generate the Net CFD Expenses, that percentage of the maximum authorized Special Tax rate applicable to all Approved Property necessary to generate the additional Special Tax revenues to equal Net CFD Expenses shall be levied on Approved Property.

Page 450 ends

Resolution No. FD 2025-XXX Page 10 of 11
STEP 4: If additional Special Tax revenues are still necessary to generate the Net CFD Expenses, that percentage of all the maximum authorized Special Tax rate applicable to all Vacant Property necessary to generate the additional Special Tax revenues to equal Net CFD Expenses shall be levied on all Vacant Property.

STEP 5: If additional Special Tax revenues are still necessary to generate the Net CFD Expenses, the Community Facilities District shall:

A. Compare (i) the Special Tax rate which would be levied on each Developed Property pursuant to STEP 2 above with (ii) the product resulting from multiplying the square footage of the Developed Property times the Base Maximum Special Tax. The Base Maximum Special Tax means an amount equal to $0.0025 per square foot subject to escalation at the same rate and at the same time applicable to the maximum Special Tax rates for Developer Property.

B. If the product described in (ii) above exceeds the Special Tax rate described in (i) above for any Developed Property, the Community Facilities District shall increase the Special Tax rate levied on each such Developed Property in equal percentages up to the rate not to exceed the product described in (ii) above necessary to generate the additional Special Tax revenues to equal Net CFD Expenses.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the minimum Special Tax which shall be levied on all taxable properties within the Community Facilities District each Fiscal Year shall be:

DEVELOPED PROPERTY: $1.00 per dwelling unit for residential uses $1.00 per acre for commercial/industrial uses
APPROVED PROPERTY: $1.00 per lot or parcel
VACANT PROPERTY: $1.00 per acre
The ad valorem property tax contribution identified in Step 1 shall be reduced in any Fiscal Year by the amount by which the sum of such contribution and the minimum Special Taxes would exceed the estimated expenses of the Community Facilities District for such Fiscal Year * * *
The “Report” of the Special Tax Consultant, to be approved as a part of the record upon the conclusion of the public hearing pertaining to the formation of the Community Facilities District, shall set forth supplementary details pertaining to the Rate and Method of Apportionment of the Special Tax and shall provide controlling guidance in the interpretation and implementation of this Rate and Method of Apportionment.”

Page 451 ends

Resolution No. FD 2025-XXX Page 11 of 11
* * *
Application of the CFD No. 88-1 Rate and Method to Annexation No. 88-25-1 The maximum special tax authorized to be levied for Fiscal Year 2025/26 within that area annexed to Community Facilities District No. 88-1, known and designated as Annexation No. 88-25-1 is as follows:

MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX RATES
FISCAL YEAR 2025/26

TAXING CLASSIFICATION MAXIMUM TAX RATE

1. DEVELOPED PROPERTY
A. Residential Class I
(More than 3,590 square feet of
dwelling unit living area)
B. Residential Class II
(3,077 - 3,589 square feet of
dwelling unit living area)
C. Residential Class III
(2,564 - 3,076 square feet of
dwelling unit living area)
D. Residential Class IV
(2,308 - 2,563 square feet of
dwelling unit living area)
E. Residential Class V
(2,051 - 2,307 square feet of
dwelling unit living area)
F. Residential Class VI
(1,795 - 2,050 square feet of
dwelling unit living area)
G. Residential Class VII
(less - 1,795 square feet of
dwelling unit living area)
$3,020.97 per acre per year or
$0.24421 per square foot or
building, whichever is greater

2. APPROVED PROPERTY $200 per lot or parcel

3. VACANT PROPERTY $10 per acre
$751.37 per year
H. Commercial or Industrial Property
$1,962.78 per year
$1,505.04 per year
$1,201.04 per year
$1,052.70 per year
$900.85 per year
$832.06 per year
The maximum special tax rates set forth above are subject to escalation pursuant to the CFD No. 88-1 Rate and Method commencing July 1, 1989.

Page 452 ends

NOTICE OF PUBLIC

HEARING

ANNEXATION TO EXISTING

COMMUNITY FACILITIES

DISTRICT

RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 88-1
ANNEXATION NO. 88- 25-1
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board Of Directors (the "Legislative Body") of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (the "Fire Protection District") is desirous to annex territory to an existing Community Facilities District pursuant to the provisions of the "Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, the existing Community Facilities District having been designated as Community Facilities District No. 88-1, and the territory proposed to be annexed to be designated as Community Facilities District No. 88-1, Annexation No. 88-25-1 (the "Annexation Area").

DESCRIPTION OF ANNEXATION AREA
The Annexation Area shall consist of all of that area of land which is included within the boundaries as shown on a map designated as Annexation No. 88-25-1 for the above referenced Community Facilities District.

DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES AND FACILITIES
The proposed services to be provided to serve the Annexation Area are generally described as follows:

The performance of functions, operations and maintenance and repair activities in order to provide fire protection and suppression services .

Such services shall be shared between the existing Community Facilities District and the Annexation Area.

A general description of the types of the Facilities to be financed by the Annexation is as follows:

PUBLIC HEARING

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN SCHEDULED FOR THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025, AT THE HOUR OF 7 O'CLOCK P.M., IN THE REGULAR

MEETING PLACE OF THE LEGISLATIVE BODY, BEING THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, LOCATED AT 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91730. AT SUCH TIME THE LEGISLATIVE BODY WILL HEAR

ALL EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY BY ALL INTERESTED PERSONS, PROPERTY OWNERS, VOTERS AND TAXPAYERS, RELATING GENERALLY TO THE FOLLOWING:

Page 453 ends

A. Authorization to annex the Annexation Area to the existing Community Facilities District; B. Authorization to levy special taxes in the Annexation Area.

ALL PERSONS INTERESTED, INCLUDING PROPERTY OWNERS AND REGISTERED

VOTERS, MAY APPEAR AND PRESENT EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY RELATING TO THE

ANNEXATION OF ANNEXATION AREA TO THE EXISTING COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT. ANY PROTEST PERTAINING TO THE REGULARITY OF THE PROCEEDINGS TO

ANNEX THE ANNEXATION AREA TO THE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT MUST BE IN

WRITING, AND SHALL BE FILED WITH THE SECRETARY OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA

FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AT THE ADDRESS SET FORTH ABOVE ON OR BEFORE THE TIME SET FOR THE HEARING. IF A MAJORITY PROTEST IS TIMELY FILED AGAINST

THE ANNEXATION OF THE ANNEXATION AREA, THE LEGISLATIVE BODY SHALL ABANDON THE PROCEEDINGS OR MODIFY THE PROCEEDINGS. IF SAID MAJORITY

PROTEST IS LIMITED TO CERTAIN SERVICES OR SPECIAL TAX, THOSE SERVICES OR THAT TAX SHALL BE ELIMINATED BY THE LEGISLATIVE BODY.

SPECIAL TAX
The services and facilities shall be financed through the levy of special taxes on all property within the existing Community Facilities District, as well as the Annexation Area. A copy of the rate and method of apportionment of the special tax is on file in the Office of the Fire Chief and is available for inspection during normal office hours.

ELECTION
Following the conclusion of the public hearing, the Board will conduct a special election on September 17, 2025, where the annexation proposition shall be submitted to the qualified electors, being the property owners, with each owner having one (1) vote per acre or portion thereof of land owned within the proposed annexed territory.

INQUIRIES
For any questions relating to the proceedings or any particulars, please contact the following designated person:

MIKE MCCLIMAN, FIRE CHIEF

RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 91730
For further particulars, reference is made to the Resolution of Intention to Annex Territory to an Existing Community Facilities District and the original Report of the Tax Consultant, as said documents have been approved and are on file with the transcript of these proceedings and open for public inspection.

Publish: Date
Kim Sevy, Secretary
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District,
Acting on behalf of Community Facilities
District No. 88-1

Page 454 ends

DATE: August 20, 2025
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Michael Parmer, Engagement and Special Programs Director Hope Velarde, Management Analyst II
SUBJECT: Consideration of a Resolution in Support of the Inland Empire Job Corps and Urging Continued Federal Funding for the Job Corps Program. (RESOLUTION NO. 2025-071) (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council consider and adopt Resolution No. 2025-071, supporting the Inland Empire Job Corps and urging continued federal funding for the Job Corps program.

BACKGROUND:

The Inland Empire Job Corps, located in San Bernardino, California, is a federally funded program that provides young adults with free education and vocational training. This program is part of a nationwide initiative to help underserved and economically disadvantaged youth gain meaningful employment through career and technical education.

For decades, the Job Corps has served as a pipeline for a skilled and work-ready labor force, significantly contributing to the region’s economic development and community resilience. Many Rancho Cucamonga residents have directly benefited from this program, securing stable employment and improving their quality of life.

ANALYSIS:

Recent federal budget developments have raised concerns about the future of Job Corps centers nationwide, including the Inland Empire location. The potential loss of this vital resource would have far-reaching consequences – undermining youth and young adult employment opportunities, weakening workforce readiness, and negatively impacting the region’s economic development and long-term prosperity.

This resolution formally communicates the City’s position in support of the Inland Empire Job Corps and its continued federal funding. Pending adoption, the resolution will be shared with the Governor of California, members of the California State Legislature, and the California Congressional Delegation. By articulating the City’s position to key decision-makers at both the state and federal level, this resolution seeks to influence policy discussions, reinforce the program’s importance, and encourage legislative and budgetary actions that preserve and strengthen the Job Corps’ role in workforce development.

Page 455 ends

Page 2 ends

2 9
6 6
FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no direct fiscal impact associated with the adoption of the resolution in support of the Job Corps Program.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

This item aligns with City Council’s values of providing and nurturing a high quality of life for all and creating equitable opportunity to prosper by supporting a program that empowers underserved young adults through career training, fosters workforce development, and strengthens the region’s economic resilience.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 – Resolution No. 2025-071

Page 456 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 2025-XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, EXPRESSING

SUPPORT FOR THE INLAND EMPIRE JOB CORPS AND

URGING CONTINUED FEDERAL FUNDING FOR THE JOB

CORPS PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the Inland Empire Job Corps, located in San Bernardino, California, provides vital career and technical education to young adults, equipping them with skills necessary for gainful employment; and
WHEREAS, the Center has been instrumental in fostering a skilled workforce that contributes significantly to the local economy and community development; and WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga recognizes the importance of the Job Corps program in offering life-changing opportunities to underserved and economically disadvantaged youth across diverse communities; and
WHEREAS, recent federal actions have placed the continued operation of the Inland Empire Job Corps in jeopardy, threatening the livelihoods of its students and staff, as well as the economic stability of the region; and
WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga Council acknowledges the positive impact of the Inland Empire Job Corps on the community and the potential adverse effects that its closure would entail; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA hereby expresses its strong support for the continued operation and federal funding of the Inland Empire Job Corps and urges the Governor of California, the California State Legislature, and the California Congressional Delegation to advocate for the preservation and funding of the Job Corps program, recognizing its critical role in workforce development and community enrichment. A copy of this resolution shall be transmitted to the Governor of California, the members of the California State Legislature, and the California Congressional Delegation to convey the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s position on this matter.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ___ day of ____ 2025.

Page 457 ends

ORDINANCE NO. 1044

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO

CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, REVISING BIDDING LIMITS ON

PUBLIC PROJECTS, AMENDING LABOR CODE COMPLIANCE
REQUIREMENTS, AND AMENDING TITLE 3 OF THE RANCHO

CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council waive full reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1044.

BACKGROUND:

The introduction and first reading of the above-entitled Ordinance was conducted at the Regular City Council meeting on July 16, 2025.

Votes at first reading: AYES: Michael, Kennedy, Hutchison, Scott, Stickler ANALYSIS:

Please refer to the July 16, 2025, City Council staff report.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Please refer to the July 16, 2025, City Council staff report.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

Please refer to the July 16, 2025, City Council staff report.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 – Ordinance No. 1044

Page 458 ends

Ordinance No. XXX Page 1 of 4
ORDINANCE NO. 1044
A

N ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA REVISING BIDDING

LIMITS ON PUBLIC PROJECTS, AMENDING LABOR CODE
COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS, AND AMENDING TITLE 3 OF

THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE
The C
ity Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows:

A. RE
CITALS

1. The City has adopted a central purchasing system, which is codified in Chapter

3.08 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code (“Municipal Code”) and that contains among others, provisions regarding contracts for professional services and public works.

2. It is in the public interest to amend Chapter 3.08 of the Municipal Code regardi ng c
ontracts for services and public works to allow the City the greatest flexibility allowed under state law.

3. Maintenance and certain other kinds of services obtained by the City require compliance with provisions of the Labor Code, including payment of prevailing wages. Certain revisions to the City’s purchasing procedures are necessary to ensure Labor Code compliance by providers of such services.

4. The Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act, Public Contract Code §22000, et seq. ("UPCCAA") bidding procedures, including bid amount thresholds, for public works contracting have been adopted by the City. Those amounts are revised by the Legislature from time to time. The City Council has determined that in order provide the City with the greatest flexibility in public works contracting, it is necessary revise the City’s purchasing procedures t o
r
eflect recent and future revisions to the UPCCAA.

5. A
ll legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

B. O

RDINANCE
S
ection 1. The City Council finds that the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.

Section 2. Subsection B.3 of Section 3.08.070 of Chapter 3.08 of Title 3 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
“3. C
ontracts for maintenance services, “public works” as defined in Labor Code § 1720, and public projects, as defined in Public Contract Code § 22002, that exceed $1000, as such amount may be amended from time to time, normally require the payment of prevailing wages and compliance with Labor Code §§ 1720 through 1861.” ATTACHMENT 1

Page 459 ends

Ordinance No. XXX Page 2 of 4

Section 3. Section 3.08.110 of Chapter 3.08 of Title 3 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
“3.08.110. - Bidding for public projects.

A. Public projects, as defined by the Public Contract Code § 22002 shall be bid, advertised, and awarded in accordance with the California Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act (“UPCCAA”), as it may be amended from time to time.

B. Contracts for public projects shall be awarded pursuant to the bidding limitations established by the UPCCAA:

1. Public projects at or below the amount set forth in Public Contract Code § 22032(a) may be performed by City employees by force account, by negotiated contract, or by purchase order.

2. Public projects at or below the amount set forth in Public Contract Code § 22032(b) may be let to contract by informal bidding procedures as set forth in this section.

3. Public projects exceeding the amount set forth in Public Contract Code § 22032(c) shall, except as otherwise provided by law, be let to contract by formal bidding procedures.

C. Public projects shall not be split or separated into smaller work orders for the purpose of evading the requirements of the UPCCAA.

D. Contractors List. The City shall comply with the requirements of Public Contract Code § 22034.

E. Informal Bidding. Public projects eligible for informal bidding under the UPCCAA may be let to contract as follows:

1. A notice inviting informal bids shall be circulated using one or both of the following alternatives:
a. Notices inviting informal bids may be mailed, faxes, or emailed to all contractors for the category of work to be bid, as shown on the list developed in accordance with paragraph D of this section.
b. Notices inviting informal bids may be mailed to all
construction trade journals as specified by the California Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Commission in accordance with § 22036 of the Public Contract Code. Additional contractors and/or construction trade journals may be notified at the discretion of the City; provided however, if the product or service is proprietary in nature such that it can be obtained only from a cert ain contractor or contractors, the notice inviting informal bids may be sent exclusively to such contractor or contractors.

2. The City Manager or his or her designee is authorized to award contracts at or below the dollar limitation applicable to informal bidding.

3. If all bids received through the informal bidding process exceed the amount set in Public Contract Code § 22032(b), the City Council may, by adoption of a resolution by a four -fifths vote, award the contract, at or below the amount set forth in Public Contract Code § 22034(d), if it determines the cost estimate was reasonable.

Page 460 ends

Ordinance No. XXX Page 3 of 4

F. Formal bidding. Bidding on all public projects subject to formal bidding, shall done in accordance with the procedures set forth in Public Contract Code § 22037, et seq.”

Section 5. The City Council declares that, should any provision, section, paragraph, sentence, or word of this Ordinance be rendered or declared invalid by any final court action in a court of competent jurisdiction, or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences, and words of this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect.

Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify as to the adoption of this Ordinance.

Page 461 ends

Ordinance No. XXX Page 4 of 4

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this XXst day of Month 20xx.

Page 462 ends

DATE:August 20, 2025
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jennifer Nakamura, CNU-A, Planning Director Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Preliminary Review Hearing to Consider a Proposed Master Plan for a

14.5-Acre Mixed-Use Development, Including Reductions in the Non- Residential Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and Design and Site Planning Flexibility from the Form-Based Code for a Site Located in the Center 2 (CE-2) Zone at the Northeast Corner of Haven Avenue and Fourth Street. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council consider the following:

1. Policy implications of a proposed legislative Master Plan request for a 14.5-acre site at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and 4th Street, which proposes, generally, a reduction to non-residential floor area ratio (FAR), building design standards, and site planning standards.

2. Staff also requests that the City Council provide preliminary comments on the proposed Master Plan to assist the applicant in determining whether to proceed with preparing a formal submittal. Any comments provided by the Council are non-binding and do not constitute project approval, imply future approval, or signal a commitment from staff to support the project in the future.

BACKGROUND:

In August 2021, the City Council adopted a policy to provide early feedback on applicant-initiated legislative requests, such as General Plan amendments, Specific Plans, Master Plans, and Development Code amendments, which are considered discretionary actions by the City Council.

The current request is for a Master Plan. Per Council policy, early input is to be provided through an administrative hearing. A copy of this policy is included as Attachment 1.

The intent of the policy is to allow applicants to gauge Council interest and policy direction before investing significant resources in the development of a legislative request and related entitlements. This early input helps ensure alignment with the City’s goals and priorities from the outset.

Following the adoption of the City’s updated General Plan on December 15, 2021, the City Council approved a comprehensive update to the Development Code, including the creation of a Form-

Page 463 ends

Page 2 ends

2 9
3 8
Based Code (FBC). The FBC establishes place-based, objective development standards consistent with recent state housing laws. While intended to provide clarity and predictability, these standards may not account for unique site constraints such as irregular lot shapes, topography, or access issues.

The Master Plan process provides a framework for the coordinated, comprehensive planning of a subarea of the City and may be pursued to accomplish one or more of the following objectives:
• Protect a unique environmental, historical, architectural, or other significant site feature that cannot be adequately protected through the application of an existing zone; • Allow the development of an exceptional project design that cannot be achieved under current zoning or due to the constraints of existing development standards; • Further the implementation of specific goals and policies of the City as provided in the General Plan;
• Look beyond the boundaries of a particular property to proactively address broader issues such as circulation, drainage, and neighborhood compatibility; or • Provide flexibility for developments that require alternatives to conventional zoning regulations in order to address special or unique site characteristics or community needs.

The applicant, Sares Regis Group, is considering a future development at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and 4th Street and is requesting initiation of the Master Plan process, pursuant to Section 17.22.020.B.1 of the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code. The potential project includes a 14.5-acre mixed-use project designed to serve as a gateway and catalyst for future development.

ANALYSIS:

Project Site Context
The project site is located at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and 4th Street, near the City’s southern boundary. As one of Rancho Cucamonga’s most prominent intersections and a key regional entry point, this location has long been envisioned as a southern gateway to the City. Its strategic setting—offering high visibility and nearby freeway access—presents a unique opportunity to strengthen the City’s identity through landmark urban development.

The site is designated City Center in the General Plan and is located within an identified activity node, emphasizing its importance as a hub for community, commercial, and transit-oriented activity. It is zoned Center 2 (CE2) under the City’s Form-Based Code (Article VIII), which encourages high-intensity, mixed-use development with active frontages, strong pedestrian connectivity, and thoughtful transitions in building scale.

Additionally, the site is subject to a Corridor Frontage Overlay along Haven Avenue and 4th Street, which imposes specific frontage and form requirements aimed at promoting an attractive, walkable, and active street scene along these key corridors. This frontage type emphasizes active ground-floor uses, transparency, and minimal setbacks—principles that play a critical role in shaping the public realm and must be balanced against the project’s proposed deviations.

Page 464 ends

Page 3 ends

2 9
3 8
Project Overview
As noted, the applicant, Sares Regis Group (SRG), is requesting initiation of the Master Plan process, pursuant to Section 17.22.020.B.1 of the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code, for a potential future 14.5-acre mixed-use project. The prospective proposal includes:
A five-story, 610-unit for rent units wrapped around a multi-story parking structure, including 6,000 square feet of live-work units along Haven Avenue; 13,500 square feet of restaurant space across three single-story buildings at the corner of Haven Avenue and 4th Street;
A five-story, 160-key hotel with integrated dining and conference facilities along 4 th Street.

The preliminary plan features a network of pedestrian-oriented open spaces, including a 20-foot- wide landscaped paseo connecting internal areas to 4th Street. At the prominent corner of Haven and 4th, the project proposes a redesigned gateway element that includes enhanced landscaping, public art, lighting, and City signage, emphasizing the site’s significance as a civic entry point.

Together, the uses and design aim to activate the site day and night while providing much-needed housing and hospitality offerings in a key urban location.

Figure 1 – Project Area

Page 465 ends

Page 4 ends

2 9
3 8
Figure 2 - Conceptual Site Plan

Page 466 ends

Page 5 ends

2 9
3 8
Figure 3 – Conceptual Rendering
Summary of the Proposed Legislative Changes
Some of the policy considerations that the Council might consider as part of their initial feedback on the subject project may include neighborhood impacts, economic development, and whether the use is appropriate for the site. The following section evaluates the applicant’s requests for site-specific standards within the site area. These requests aim to balance the project’s unique design and operational needs with the City’s broader vision for high-quality, walkable mixed-use development.

To support a focused policy discussion, the applicant’s originally proposed list of 15 requested deviations have been grouped into three categories for ease of reference: Non-residential Floor Area Ratio (FAR), which addresses overall use intensity and mix; Building Design Standards, which relates to frontage treatments and ground-floor activation; and Site Planning Standards, which involve block configuration, circulation, and open space layout. The pros and cons that follow highlight key policy considerations for the City Council in determining whether the proposed legislative changes appropriately support public benefits while remaining consistent with the City’s planning goals.

Given the project’s highly visible location, staff has included a fourth category—Gateway Vision for Haven Avenue and 4th Street—in the policy discussion. This consideration reflects the site’s strategic role as a key entry point into the City Center area and the importance of ensuring that the project supports the City’s broader goals for design quality, identity, and sense of place along this corridor.

1. Reduction in Non-Residential Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
Code Requirement: The CE2 zone requires a non-residential Floor Area Ratio (FAR) between

1.0 and 2.0, as outlined in Article VIII of the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code. This requirement is intended to foster a mixed-use environment by ensuring that each development

Page 467 ends

Page 6 ends

2 9
3 8
contributes meaningfully to both housing and employment, commercial services, and public activation. For a 14.5-acre site, this standard equates to a minimum of 631,620 square feet of non-residential development.

Project Request: The applicant proposes a total of approximately 107,000 square feet of non- residential development across the site, including a hotel, three commercial buildings, and live/work units. This results in a total site FAR of approximately 0.17—significantly below the required minimum.

Pros: The proposed mix of uses places a strong emphasis on a cohesive development anchored by a hotel and restaurant uses at a highly visible corner, which may foster a sense of identity and activity despite the lower square footage. The project also delivers a substantial number of residential units, which supports local and regional housing goals in alignment with the City’s General Plan and Housing Element. Strategically locating commercial uses at the intersection of Haven Avenue and 4th Street could create an activated node that complements surrounding development. The hotel use may enhance economic development outcomes through transient occupancy taxes and job creation, which are not fully captured in FAR metrics but still advance citywide fiscal and land use objectives.

Cons: The proposed FAR is well below the minimum required and may be inconsistent with the intended scale and mix envisioned for the CE2 zone. By significantly reducing the amount of non- residential square footage, the project risks limiting long-term employment opportunities, commercial vibrancy, and activity-generating uses that are central to the Form-Based Code and General Plan vision.

2. Design Modifications
Code Requirement: The Rancho Cucamonga Development Code, along with the Corridor Frontage Overlay applied to both Haven Avenue and 4th Street, emphasizes street-activating design principles. These include requirements for active ground-floor uses, continuous building frontages, minimal setbacks, and direct entryways to buildings. Specifically, the Code prohibits residential and live-work units at ground level adjacent to the public right-of-way, in order to preserve the vibrancy and commercial character of street frontages.

Project Request: The applicant is requesting multiple deviations from these requirements, primarily related to the five-story apartment building fronting Haven Avenue. These include permitting ground-level residential and live-work units along the street, reducing the required percentage of built frontage, and allowing courtyards to serve as the primary entrance points to buildings rather than direct entries from the sidewalk. Additionally, the project requests exceptions to standards for vertical articulation (i.e., breaks in building mass exceeding 400 feet), modifications to allowable façade and entry types, and reductions in the minimum height for residential floor entries to improve accessibility and design flexibility.

These requests are accompanied by the proposed placement of one-story commercial pad buildings at the 4th and Haven corner, which departs from the Form-Based Code’s intent for prominent, continuous building massing at key intersections to establish a unified and active urban edge. While this proposed layout creates opportunities for public plazas and visual openness, it may not achieve the strong architectural statement and urban enclosure envisioned for this highly visible civic gateway.

Page 468 ends

Page 7 ends

2 9
3 8
Pros: Allowing ground-floor residential and live-work units may support an active streetscape outside of typical business hours and enhance safety through increased presence. Courtyards and outdoor spaces could offer informal gathering areas and improve the pedestrian experience.

Flexibility in entry placement and frontage design may better accommodate accessibility and layout needs, while alternative approaches to façade articulation—such as varied materials and massing—can maintain visual interest and urban character without strict adherence to dimensional standards. These adjustments provide design flexibility while still supporting core planning objectives.

Cons: Permitting residential and live-work units at the ground level on street frontages may reduce the level of commercial activity and limit the long-term potential for active retail uses, which is a primary goal of the CE-2 zone and the Corridor Overlay. A reduced percentage of built frontage and deviations from façade length articulation requirements may undermine the intended fine- grain urban fabric envisioned in the Form-Based Code, especially along long block frontages. The configuration of the commercial pad buildings—while offering open space—also interrupts the strong, continuous massing expected at key intersections, particularly in areas identified as civic gateways. Allowing reduced elevation for residential entries from the standard 30-inch height may compromise privacy and weaken a key urban design principle intended to provide separation between private residences and active public sidewalks.

3. Site Plan and Block Configuration
Code Requirement: The Form-Based Code requires a minimum of three different building types on sites over six acres to promote architectural variety and avoid a monotonous built environment.

It also includes standards for build-to-lines, setbacks, paseo orientation, and park placement, all aimed at fostering pedestrian-scale development, active streetscapes, and walkable connections.

Project Request: The applicant proposes only two building types, which do not fully align with the defined typologies in the Code. Requests also include flexibility from build-to-line and setback standards for the hotel and commercial buildings to allow for plazas and outdoor dining areas.

The project proposes surface parking within the required 50-foot setback for the hotel drop-off area and seeks to reduce parking stall dimensions from 10x20 feet to 9x18 feet to support higher residential density.

In terms of open space and circulation, the required mid-block pocket park is proposed to be relocated to the prominent Haven/4th corner as a civic gateway. The paseo, intended by the FBC to span between public streets, is proposed to connect the internal residential area to the commercial uses and 4th Street only, breaking the desired through-block connection pattern.

Pros: The requested flexibility allows the applicant to tailor the site plan to the specific needs of the project while still supporting many of the Code’s urban design goals. Larger setbacks for hotel and restaurant areas create opportunities for outdoor dining, better pedestrian comfort, and a more gracious streetscape. Locating the pocket park at a prominent corner could help establish a visual identity for the project and act as a landmark gateway for both the development and the broader community. The modified paseo layout still promotes walkability within the site and links residential and commercial components. Reducing parking stall sizes aligns with trends in urban development that prioritize density and walkability over traditional suburban parking standards.

Cons: Limiting the number of building types and increasing block sizes could lead to a lack of visual variety and reduce the urban character envisioned in the CE-2 zone. Deviating from build-

Page 469 ends

Page 8 ends

2 9
3 8
to-line standards and allowing parking within the required setback may weaken the pedestrian orientation of the project, particularly at the hotel drop-off area where surface parking would dominate the frontage. The relocation of the pocket park to a corner—while visually prominent— may reduce its usability for interior residents and shift it away from its intended role as a central green space. The General Plan and Form-Based Code have long envisioned a significant building mass at this corner as a gateway to the City. The revised paseo configuration may fall short of the intended street-to-street connectivity, and smaller parking stalls could pose operational challenges, particularly for larger vehicles. While each deviation may have a practical justification, their cumulative effect could diminish the fine-grain, walkable urbanism the Code is designed to achieve.

4. Gateway Vision for Haven Avenue and 4 th Street
In addition to be an activity node in the General Plan, the Council has maintained a vision for the gateway entrance to the city from the south along Haven Avenue. Development was expected to provide presence closer to the corner. The project on the northwest corner of Haven and 4 th, developed in the early 2000’s includes two multi story office buildings with prominent visual interest at the corner. They are set back, and there is a vacant 1-acre pad at the corner that was designed for a future restaurant that is currently undeveloped. In the proposed master plan, the residential building and the hotel are located further away from the corner, with the lower elevation pad buildings providing that first visual for the project as you travel north on Haven Ave. The hotel and residential buildings proposed will likely be taller than the buildings to the west, but the corner will not have as strong a vertical element.

Economic Development Strategy 3.3 desires to attract restaurants to the City that are destination driven. While the proposed restaurants at the corner will meet the siting needs of any future users, the currently proposed configuration of 3 restaurants with an average footprint of 4,500 square feet is unlikely to attract the type of restaurants the city is seeking. Our Economic Development team has had numerous conversations with many high-end restaurant groups and nearly all our existing restaurant spaces are too small; many are seeking a minimum of 10,000 square feet and in some cases, upwards of 15,000 to 18,000 square feet. Most, if not all, are searching for surface parking lots, as opposed to structured parking. Higher end restaurants with corner visibility are anticipated to be in high demand with their proximity to existing professional offices, hotel visitors, Cucamonga Station and the HART District, the Toyota Center, Ontario Airport and Interstate 10 larger restaurant buildings will attract the desired restaurant uses and the scale will further enhance the corner of the site and a key entrance into the city from the south. In addition, larger building will increase the presence of the project at the corner.

A final consideration for the Council is the long-term nature of Master Plans and the uncertainty surrounding their implementation. While Master Plans are intended to guide coordinated development over time, the entitlement does not guarantee construction, nor does it ensure that all phases will be completed in a timely manner. Some projects move forward quickly, while others remain partially unbuilt for many years. For example, the now-retired Town Center Master Plan at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue was largely developed by 2005, but a key seven-acre parcel remained vacant for decades. If the Master Plan had still been in effect, that site would have been subject to outdated standards no longer aligned with the City's current General Plan. Granting a long-term legislative entitlement can inadvertently lock in development parameters that may no longer reflect evolving community needs or policy direction by the time construction occurs.

Page 470 ends

Page 9 ends

2 9
3 8
Next Steps
This discussion provides the City Council with an opportunity to offer early policy guidance on the proposed Master Plan before the applicant proceeds with formal entitlement applications. Based on the feedback received, the applicant may revise the plan to better align with the City's vision and policy direction. If the applicant decides to move forward through the development review process and submit a formal application, staff will continue to work with the applicant and return at a future date with a formal Master Plan application and any associated development requests for Planning Commission and City Council consideration.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact associated with this request. The item is presented solely for the early policy input and does not represent or guarantee future project approval.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:

The applicant’s request for a Master Plan, considered prior to the formal submission, directly supports the City Council's Core Value of "Working together cooperatively and respectfully with each other, staff, and all stakeholders." By engaging in this early stage of the process, the City demonstrates its commitment to fostering collaboration, encouraging innovation, and promoting thoughtful long-range planning. This proactive approach to evaluating a unique development opportunity enables the City to address potential challenges and opportunities effectively, ensuring alignment with community values. The Master Plan process provides a structured framework that balances flexibility with high standards for design quality, consistency, and sustainability, ultimately advancing the City's long-term vision for a vibrant, integrated community.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 - City Council Policy on Master Plan Applications

Page 471 ends

DATE: August 18, 2021
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Matt Burris, Deputy City Manager of Community Development SUBJECT: City Policy Pertaining to Early Feedback on General Plan Amendments, Planned Community, Master Plan and Specific Plan Amendments, and Development Code Amendments. (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council receive, file and adopt the attached policy on providing early Council feedback on General Plan amendments, Specific Plan, Planned Community or Master Plan Amendments, or Development Code Amendments.

BACKGROUND:

The General Plan and Development Code are the primary documents that regulate the physical development of the city. Additionally, in many areas of the city, Specific Plans, Planned Communities, and master plans serve to regulate land use in place of the Development Code or as a bridge between the General Plan and the Development Code. These documents regulate land uses, infrastructure, and the mitigation of impacts. Under the Development Code, only the City Council, Planning Commission, Planning Director, or a property owner may initiate applications for these legislative amendments. In many cases, property owners (or their agents) who apply for projects that may require multiple entitlements spend several years and thousands of dollars designing a proposed project before ever knowing whether the City Council has any interest in considering the necessary legislative change for the project.

ANALYSIS:

While the City typically receives limited applications for legislative changes such as General Plan amendments, there are currently several such applications undergoing review by the Planning Department. These types of legislative approvals can only be granted by the City Council and have separate and distinct policy implications apart from the merits of a project. In order, however, for an application to be considered by the City Council (under present policy and process), that application must first undergo review and analysis by City staff, potential consideration by the Design Review Committee, environmental analysis under CEQA, and consideration by the Planning Commission. This process can easily take up to 18+ months and require an applicant to spend thousands of dollars for design and studies, all before they have any understanding whether the City Council has an interest in approving such a legislative change, which may be necessary before any other entitlements needed for a project may be approved. In practice, staff is finding that this approach causes a greater degree of uncertainty for the applicant and further complicates the development review process for city staff, particularly in situations with competing interests.

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 472 ends

Page 2 ends

9 1
7 There is another alternative; some cities allow for an applicant to seek preliminary feedback from the city council in connection with the merits of a General Plan amendment or other legislative changes. After the Council provides its feedback on the proposed legislative amendment, the applicant can decide whether to pursue the legislative amendment, and the other entitlements for the applicant’s proposed project, with the Council’s preliminary policy considerations in mind. This opportunity provides the applicant with more information about whether the proposed project is likely to be successful after the application has been processed by staff. Rancho Cucamonga’s past practice, dating back to the 1980’s, was to request initial authorization by the City Council prior to beginning any amendments to the development code or any Specific Plan, Planned Community or Master Plan that included more than one parcel or project (i.e., Town Square Master Plan). The City abandoned this policy in 2012 intending to streamline the development review process. While it may streamline the process, the new practice also causes a greater degree of uncertainty and further complicates development review, in some cases actually complicating the process.

Under the new process, a detailed description of the applicant’s project shall not be required.

Staff will work with the City Attorney to analyze the provided information, provide a list of pros and cons, and a staff recommendation to the City Council on only the legislative change for their consideration. The staff report shall include specific language indicating the pre-application review is not an approval nor a guarantee of approval, that staff and the Planning Commission may recommend against, and the City Council may ultimately vote against or not support the project at the project hearings once additional details and analysis become available in the future.

While the City Council would not vote on the project at the time of this administrative hearing, each Councilmember may provide comments addressing positive or negative aspects of the amendment, potential issues that should be evaluated by staff, and suggested changes that could make the amendment more acceptable, if any. The City Council’s comments should focus on the policy implications of the General Plan amendment rather than the project itself. The City Council will not vote on any aspect of the amendment or project, as the intent of the preliminary review process is informational only.

Staff will take the feedback provided by the City Council into consideration to help inform further staff analysis, possible conditions or modifications to the project, the recommendation to the Planning Commission, and ultimately the recommendation to the City Council. Staff shall provide a letter to the applicant following the administrative hearing memorializing the input and results of the hearing. The Applicant may then take that information into account in deciding whether to move forward in the process. After the administrative hearing, the application will move through the standard development review process for review by the Design Review Committee, the Planning Commission, and the City Council per our current process.

This policy shall only apply to private property owners and shall not apply to any City initiated legislative changes. Staff reports on legislative changes shall be prepared and presented only by the Planning Director, the Deputy City Manager of Community and Economic Development, the City Attorney, and the City Manager. The staff report may discuss the proposed project in general terms, but the staff recommendation will only address the General Plan amendment.

It is important to note that an initial City Council direction on a legislative change is not an approval and does not guarantee an approval. It would not involve any consideration of a particular project.

Put more simply, it would only give the Council an opportunity to consider the policy implications

Page 331 ends

Page 473 ends

Page 3 ends

9 1
7 of changing the General Plan, Specific Plan, Master Plan, Community Plan, or Development Code, as the case may be. Some of the policy considerations that the Council might consider as part of this initial feedback may include neighborhood impacts, economic development, and whether the use is appropriate for the site. This change creates an opportunity to provide staff and applicants with such feedback before thousands of hours, dollars, and years are spent processing an application. As such, staff recommends re-establishing the City’s prior policy to bring requests for all General Plan amendments, Specific Plan amendments, and Development Code changes requested by owners of real property or their authorized representatives to the City Council for an initial round of feedback. An applicant would still be required to conduct the same CEQA analysis and go through the same development and environmental review if it decides to pursue its applications further. This policy will not apply to any current applications that have been deemed complete.

FISCAL IMPACT:

No fiscal impact.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / GOAL(S) ADDRESSED:

This policy helps realize the City Council’s vision for creating a world class community and the City Council value of “Equitable prosperity for all” by helping to identify and remove barriers within the City’s Development Review process.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 - Legislative Changes Review Policy

Page 332 ends

Page 474 ends

ATTACHMENT 1
DATE:August 18, 2021
TO:Anne McIntosh, Planning Director
FROM:Matthew Burris, Deputy City Manager of Community Development SUBJECT: Legislative Changes and Amendments Policy
PURPOSE: To re-establish a policy for initiating General Plan amendments, Specific Plan amendments, and Development Code amendments requested by builders and developers.

BACKGROUND: The General Plan and Development Code are the primary documents that regulate the physical development of the city. Additionally, in many areas of the city, Specific Plans serve to regulate land use in place of the Development Code. These documents regulate land uses, infrastructure, and the mitigation of impacts. The City’s past practice, dating back to the 1980s, was to request authorization by the City Council to initiate any amendments to the development code or any Specific Plan, Planned Community, or Master Plan that includes more than one parcel or project (i.e., Town Square Master Plan). This policy allowed for discussion of the pros and cons of such requests and consideration for larger policy implications. The City abandoned this practice in 2012 with the intent of streamlining the development review process. However, currently, staff is finding that this approach causes a greater degree of uncertainty and further complicates development review. It results in applicants spending many years and thousands of dollars designing a proposed project before ever knowing whether the City Council may even desire considering such legislative changes.

POLICY: An application for a legislative change, such as a General Plan amendment, that is initiated by a private property owner shall be recommended for an administrative hearing before the City Council as the first step in the Development Review process. The Planning Director shall schedule a preliminary review hearing before the City Council once the applicant has provided enough information about the proposed amendment and related project to permit the Planning Director to prepare a staff report for the hearing. This information shall include, but is not limited to, a statement explaining the applicant’s reason for requesting the General Plan amendment, the proposed change in land use designations on the parcel(s), the project’s proposed uses and density, and any other project parameters associated with the amendment that are deemed necessary by the Planning Director. A detailed description of the applicant’s project shall not be required. Staff will work with the City Attorney to analyze the provided information, provide a list of pros and cons, and a staff recommendation to the City Council on only the legislative change for their consideration.

The staff report shall include specific language indicating the pre-application review is not an approval nor a guarantee of approval, that staff and the Planning Commission may recommend against, and the City Council may ultimately vote against or not support the project at the project hearings once additional details and analysis become available in the

Page 333 ends

Page 475 ends

Page 2 ends

1 5
9 5
future.

If an applicant does not want to go to City Council for the preliminary review and insists on a full hearing on the project merits, they shall sign an At Risk Waiver acknowledging they had the opportunity to go to the City Council on the legislative change but chose to decline. That document will become part of the entitlement package and administrative record.

After the administrative hearing, alternatively, after signing an At Risk Waiver, the application will move through the standard development review process for review by the Design Review Committee, the Planning Commission, and the City Council per our current process. If the City Council’s input is not positive, staff shall use the City Council’s feedback to problem solve with the applicant and work on a redesigned or different project. In such case, the Applicant shall be welcome to an additional review with the City Council to determine if a revised or alternative proposal might be a better solution.

This policy shall only apply to private property owners and shall not apply to any City initiated legislative changes.

Staff reports on legislative changes shall be prepared and presented only by the Planning Director, the Deputy City Manager of Community and Economic Development, the City Attorney, and the City Manager. The staff report may discuss the proposed project in general terms, but the staff recommendation will only address the General Plan amendment.

The City shall not charge a fee for the administrative hearing and will expedite scheduling a hearing date. The Planning Department shall provide the applicant at least ten (10) days written notice of the hearing date and time.

Page 334 ends

Page 476 ends

Page 335 ends

Page 477 ends

Page 336 ends

Page 478 ends

DATE:August 20, 2025
TO:Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY:Jennifer Nakamura, CNU-A, Planning Director Bond Mendez, CPD, Associate Planner
SUBJECT:Public Hearing for Consideration of a Master Plan, Tentative Tract Map, Design Review and Minor Exception – True Life Companies - Site Plan and Architectural Review of a Mixed-Use Project Comprised of 50 Multi-Family Units Including 10 Live/Work Units, and a Tentative Tract Map for Condominium Purposes Located on Approximately 2.3 Acres of Land Within the Neighborhood General 3 (NG3) Zone, Located on the Southwest Corner of Base Line Road and Amethyst Avenue; APN: 0208-432-16. This Item is Exempt from the Requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Under CEQA Section 15332 (SUBTT20708, Design Review DRC2024-00108, Master Plan DRC2024-00109, Minor Exception DRC2025-00055). (RESOLUTION NOS. 2025-065 AND 2025-066) (CITY) RECOMMENDATION:

Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approves the proposed Master Plan, Design Review, Tentative Tract Map, and Minor Exception to develop 50 multi-family units, including 10 live/work units, and a tentative tract map for condominium purposes; and Staff recommends that the City Council adopt and authorize the recording of the attached resolution ordering the summary vacation of non-vehicular access rights.

BACKGROUND:

The project site is a 2.3-acre lot located at the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Amethyst Avenue. The lot is currently developed with a single-family home and ancillary structures which are proposed to be demolished. The site slopes from north to south with dimensions of approximately 240 feet (east to west) and 486 feet (north to south). The site is surrounded by existing single-family residential development to the west and south, senior care living to the east, and commercial uses to the north across Base Line Road. The street frontage is currently improved with sidewalk, landscaped parkway, curb and gutter, and an existing bike lane.

The City Council held a preliminary review hearing on July 19, 2023, for the consideration of a proposed Master Plan development for a mixed-use project that would include site-specific development standards including a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) lower than the standard under the Development Code, see attached Attachment 6. The project does not meet the required non- residential FAR of 0.4-0.6 for the Neighborhood General 3 (NG3) zone. This standard would require the project area, at 2.3 acres, to provide between approximately 40,000 to 60,000 square feet of nonresidential floor area. Instead, the developer had proposed a possible alternative of 10 live/work units which cumulatively total approximately 3,000 square feet of non-residential floor area, which when factored against the site size of the 2.3-acre site equals an approximate 0.03 FAR. In this case, the applicant cited the 0.4-0.6 FAR requirement for non-residential floor area

Page 479 ends

Page 2 of 12 ends

2 9
6 2
as burdensome considering the small size of the lot. The recommendation was to move forward with the Master Plan development including the reduced FAR design. Upon review of the formal submittal of the development application, the applicant has also included deviations from the Development Code including zoning and building type standards, building entrance and façade standards, and a Minor Exception request for reduced upper story setbacks.

The Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 23, 2025, to consider the project. The commission received written comments and testimony from the public at the hearing. For specific details, the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting are included as Attachment 3. The Planning Commission voted 3-0-2 recommending approval of the project to the City Council.

Figure 1: Project Location
Land Uses
The existing Land Use, General Plan, and Zoning Designations for, the project site and the surrounding properties are as follows:

Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Single-Family Neighborhood Corridor Neighborhood General 3 (NG3) North Commercial Traditional Town Center Center 1 (CE1) South Single-Family Suburban Neighborhood Very Low Low (L) Residential East Residential
Care Facility Neighborhood Corridor Neighborhood General 3 (NG3) West Single-Family Suburban Neighborhood Very Low Low (L) Residential ANALYSIS:

General Plan and Zoning Designations
The project site is within the Neighborhood Corridor general plan land use designation which allows for and encourages infill development with a mix of land uses. The project is within the N

Page 480 ends

Page 3 of 12 ends

2 9
6 2
Neighborhood General 3 (NG3) zone which allows for mixed-use development subject to the design standards specific to the NG3 zone including but not limited to building types, building and entrance façade, and public open space. This project proposes infill development with a mix of land uses, building types, entrances and facades, and public open space, consistent with the general plan and zoning designations.

Further, the project site is also located within the Alta Loma Town Center Focus Area (Focus Area 6). The Alta Loma Town Center is intended to be a highly active and attractive community activity center reflective of traditional development patterns wherein activity centers and streets are improved to create more human-scale, comfortable and walkable community gathering places.

Connectivity and walkability improvements within this area are envisioned so that residents from surrounding neighborhoods may walk, bike or ride a horse to existing and future commercial amenities. Accordingly, the project proposes a mixed-use human-scale development that promotes pedestrian connectivity to the existing surrounding single-family neighborhood and residential care facility, and from the commercial uses located north of Base Line Road. The project site is also within walking distance, approximately 400 feet, to the Pacific Electric Trail, and the street contains an existing bike lane along Base Line Road.

Architecture, Building Plotting, and Site Layout
The project proposes five 10-unit buildings, and each building is three stories maximum with the last unit of each building on the west end dropped down to two-stories. The proposed buildings are designed in a rowhouse configuration and do not exceed the maximum 40 feet in height and are of a size and scale that does not overwhelm the adjacent public streets. The building massing includes wall façade offsets, projection, and roof plane articulation, creating visual interest to each building elevation. The building that sits closest to Base Line Road is designed with 10 live/work units to include ground-floor commercial space for an active street frontage of the project site.

These units include entrances to the individual residential floor space above the commercial space. The remaining 40 townhouse units are designed exclusively as residential units. The units closest to Base Line Road face the public street which provides direct visibility to the public way, providing an extra level of security (i.e., eyes on the street).

Figure 2: Site Layout
N

Page 481 ends

Page 4 of 12 ends

2 9
6 2
The applicant has chosen a contemporary architectural theme. Design elements include tile roofs, cementitious board and batten, cementitious lap siding, stucco siding, vinyl windows, and metal sectional garage doors, with contrasting trim colors and door finishes to reinforce the specific architectural style. The materials are carried to each elevation to emphasize the chosen architectural theme and building articulation.

Figure 3: Live/Work Building Frontage along Base Line Road Figure 4: Residential Rowhouse Building
All streets within the interior of the project will be private and maintained by a homeowner’s association, however, they will be open to the public. Access into the project will be provided by street connections from Base Line Road at the north end of the project and Ruby Avenue from the south end of the project. All access will be non-obstructed vehicular and pedestrian access points. The project will not include access gates but will be designed as a connected neighborhood, consistent with the General Plan and Alta Loma Town Center Focus Area.

Page 482 ends

Page 5 of 12 ends

2 9
6 2
Figure 5: Live/Work building along Base Line Road.

Figure 6: Live/Work building along Base Line Road.

Page 483 ends

Page 6 of 12 ends

2 9
6 2
Figure 7: Landscape Plan
Compliance with Development Standards
The project is within a form-based zone, Neighborhood General 3 (NG3), and is required to meet compliance with the zone and building standards, building entrance and facades, public open space, and land use standards. The applicant has chosen to develop the site with the Rowhouse Building type including the live/work units and the shopfront façade for the building that fronts Base Line Road, and a porch front with the remaining four townhouse buildings. The project includes a paseo for the required public open space and as previously mentioned, the project includes both multi-family structures and mixed-use structures specifically with the live/work land use to meet the non-residential requirement for the NG3 zone. The project is compliant with most required development standards in the NG3 zone, including but not limited to parking, open space, landscaping and recreational space. The applicant is requesting some deviations as presented below.

Minor Exception
The applicant has applied for a minor exception for a reduced upper story setback requirement.

Pursuant to 17.130.030.K.2 (Massing Adjacent to Lower-Density Residential), when abutting a single-family residential zone, the third and fourth stories must be stepped back a minimum 30 feet from the property line or a minimum eight feet from the ground floor side or rear facade, whichever is greater. The project proposes five 3-story buildings with 10 units in each building, resulting in 5 units at the west end of the project at the required minimum 10-foot setback. The applicant has reduced the height of all five end units to two-stories. Each building complies with the minimum required 10-foot setback from the western interior property line except the third story of each building is required to be setback 30 feet from the property line. The applicant is requesting a 10% reduction, up to 3 feet, which would result in a 27-foot setback. The reduced setback would only apply to a portion of the unit and not the full dimension of the west facing façade of the third story. The units have been designed to where the reduced setback allows for the interior staircase to reach the 3 rd floor and the staircase landing at the 3 rd floor, and for a bedroom walk-in closet. The minor exception would only apply to the residential rowhouse

Page 484 ends

Page 7 of 12 ends

2 9
6 2
buildings as the live/work building is in compliance with the third story setback.

Figure 8: Townhouse Building, North Elevation

Page 485 ends

Page 8 of 12 ends

2 9
6 2
Figure 9: Floor plan illustrating reduced third floor setback Master Plan
As previously discussed, this project site is within a form-based code which requires specific zone and building standards, building entrance and facades, public open space, and land use standards. The applicant has applied for a master plan to establish site-specific development standards pursuant to Development Code Section 17.22.020 (Master Plan).

Page 486 ends

Page 9 of 12 ends

2 9
6 2
Proposed Master Plan Development Standards
Required Proposed
Floor Area Ratio (min-max) 0.4 - 0.6 0.03 FAR
Ground Floor Nonresidential
Use Height (min) 12 Feet 10 Feet
Primary Building Depth (max) 50 Feet 55’-6”
Transparency, Ground Floor
(Min/Max) 70% / 90% 45%
In summary, the project includes a request for a master plan to request site-specific development standards for nonresidential floor area (FAR), ground floor non-residential use height, primary building depth, and ground floor transparency to be approved by the City Council. The purpose of a master plan is to allow for the coordinated comprehensive planning of a subarea of the city to accomplish specific objectives including to allow the development of an exceptional project design that cannot be built under an existing zone or due to constraints of existing development standards.

In addition to these referenced Development Code regulations, the City has also established a policy on master plans and other legislative actions. Pursuant to the Development Code and the City’s master plan policy, staff notes that the City Council held a policy discussion on July 19, 2023 wherein the Council specifically discussed policy implications for allowing deficient non- residential floor area standards for parcels which meet certain criteria, specifically for lots which are less than 3-acres and which are not located within a frontage overlay along a primary corridor.

During their discussion, the Council generally expressed support for allowing deficient non- residential FAR in such circumstances, on a case-by-case basis. Staff notes that the project site meets these same narrow criteria as previously discussed by City Council as the site is less than 3-acres (2.3 acres) and is not located within a frontage overlay. Therefore, in this case, staff supports the applicant’s requested reduction in non-residential FAR. Staff’s determination is supported by the fact that while the project is deficient in meeting the code required 0.4 to 0.6 non-residential FAR, the project proposes to still provide a cumulative 3,065 square feet of non- residential space. In addition to the reduced FAR, the applicant is proposing a reduced ground floor retail height from 12 feet to 10 feet, and a reduced ground floor transparency to 45% total.

These deviations apply to the live/work building that fronts Base Line Road and were discovered during the formal review process after Council had rendered their opinion on the reduced FAR.

For the residential rowhouse buildings, the requested deviation proposed is to increase the building depth from 50 feet maximum to 55’-6” maximum for an enhanced design including wall and façade articulation and projections.

Further, staff notes that the project site is surrounded by a mix of existing residential, commercial, retail, and office land uses that are readily accessible to future project residents and commercial tenants. Due to these circumstances, and despite not providing code-compliant nonresidential floor area, ground floor residential use height, primary building depth, and ground floor transparency, the project would implement the City’s vision in the NG3 zone by introducing a medium density (22 du/ac) mixed-use development along a pedestrian and bicycle priority corridor.

Inclusive of the request to approve a master plan, the project does not conflict with the General Plan or the land use designation of the project site as the Neighborhood Corridor land use designation encourages infill development with a mix of land uses. The proposed residential and commercial land uses will complement and be compatible with the surrounding area's character,

Page 487 ends

Page 10 of 12 ends

2 9
6 2
which consists of a mix of residential, retail, office, and commercial land uses.

Further, pursuant to Development Code Section 17.22.020.A.3, project development would also help implement and further several goals and policies of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, including the ability to provide complete places (LC1.1), ensuring the quality of public space (LC-

1.3), and the provision of compatible development (LC-1.11). The additional housing units will also assist the City in reaching its State housing Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) outlined in the Housing Element.

Tentative Tract Map
The tentative tract map is requested for 50 condominium lots resulting in each unit on its own lot.

The project site will remain as one parcel. As a condition of approval, the applicant is required to file a final map which is to be recorded with the County of San Bernardino Recorder’s Office prior to the issuance of building permits. As part of their preparation for the new subdivision map submittal, the owner has submitted to the Engineering Department a quitclaim deed for Lot C of Tract Map 6939 (Attachment 7), which is intended to resolve lingering title and parcel configuration issues. In addition, the owner will be recording a Certificate of Compliance to formally acknowledge and correct the lot's legal status in accordance with applicable subdivision regulations. These actions are being undertaken to ensure that the site is properly configured and compliant prior to the filing of their new subdivision map for their proposed project.

A non-vehicular access easement was also discovered during entitlement along Lot C which will be required to be summarily vacated for the development to utilize their proposed southern entryway for public use. Per Section 8333(c) of the California Streets and Highways Code, it authorizes the City to summarily vacate (by Resolution with no public hearing) a public service easement that has been superseded by relocation or determined to be excess, and there are no other public utilities located within the easement. The adoption of the attached resolution will authorize the summary vacation of the non-vehicular access rights in accordance with the provisions of the California Streets and Highways Code and will further authorize the City Clerk to record the resolution with the County Recorder’s Office. This action is necessary to clear title and remove restrictions that would otherwise conflict with the proposed site layout and access improvements anticipated as part of future development.

If the City Council does not approve the proposed project, it may still choose to approve the summary vacation of the non-vehicular access if the Council in its sole discretion finds that the requirements for summary vacation have been met.

Correspondence
This item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular legal advertisement in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to 165 property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site on August 5, 2025. To date, Staff has received one email reiterating concerns presented to the Planning Commission and is included as Attachment 8.

Environmental Analysis
The Planning Department staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The project qualifies as a Class 32 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 - In-Fill Development Projects for the following reasons: (1) the project is consistent with the applicable General Plan designations and all applicable General Plan policies as well as with the applicable zoning designation and regulations, (2) the proposed development occurs within the City limits on a project site of no

Page 488 ends

Page 11 of 12 ends

2 9
6 2
more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses, (3) the project site has no value as a habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species, (4) approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality, and (5) the site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

The General Plan Land Use and Zoning designation for the project site are Neighborhood Corridor and Neighborhood General 3, respectively, which permits the development of a mixed-use development of the proposed size and configuration. The project complies with the majority of City’s development standards and design guidelines other than those outlined in the Master Plan and Minor Exception sections of this report. The project site is located within the City limits on a site less than 5 acres and is surrounded by existing residential and commercial development and City infrastructure. The following are the four environmental factors that need to be analyzed in order to determine that the project, respectively, qualifies for the Class 32 Exemption. a) Traffic: The Trip Generation Analysis and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Analysis (Ganddini Group, March 2025) was prepared for the project which determined that the number of trips generated by the project would not create a significant impact. The proposed mixed-use project is anticipated to generate 322 total daily trips including 23 AM peak hour trips and 27 PM peak hour trips occurring on a typical weekday. Therefore, the proposed Project is not expected to generate 50 or more trips during the AM or PM peak hour and does not require a detailed LOS analysis. Additionally, the proposed project satisfies the City-established vehicle miles traveled (VMT) screening criteria for projects located in a low VMT area. Therefore, preparation of a transportation impact study with VMT analysis is not warranted, and the project may be presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact. Furthermore, a New Roadway Connection Analysis (Fehr & Peers, May 2025) determined that based on the travel patterns for the existing surrounding single- family neighborhood, a greater number of trips would occur along the Ruby Avenue Street connection through the project site from the adjacent residents than those of the project site (Attachment 5).
b) Noise: A Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis was prepared for the project (Ganddini Group, March 2025). The analysis determined that the construction and operational noise and vibration levels would not exceed the City’s noise thresholds is expected to result in less than significant impacts.
c) Air Quality: Based on the Air Quality Assessment (Ganddini Group, April 2025), emissions generated during construction and operation of the Project would not result in in the generation of criteria air pollutants that would exceed South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD’s) significance thresholds. It was also determined that the GHG emissions will comply with the consistency measures outlined in the City’s CAP checklist.

Overall, all air quality and GHG impacts are considered less than significant. d) Water Quality: The project will include a Grading Plan, Best Management Practices (BMPs) outlined in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), and a Landscape Plan that will be prepared and reviewed for consistency with the City’s adopted standard measures and regulatory compliance measures. The water quality analysis determined that the project would not result in any significant impacts associated with hydrology and water quality. (Adkan Engineers, March 2024).

FISCAL IMPACT:

The project site currently is assessed with an annual property tax. A percentage of this annual tax

Page 489 ends

Page 12 of 12 ends

2 9
6 2
is shared with the City. The proposed lot subdivision will increase the value of the project site when developed with townhomes and the City’s annual share of the property tax will increase accordingly. The project proponent also will be responsible for paying one-time impact fees.

These fees are intended to address the increased demand for City services due to the proposed project. The following types of services that these impact fees would support include the following:
library services, transportation infrastructure, drainage infrastructure, animal services, police, parks, and community and recreation services.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

The project supports the Council’s core values of building and preserving a family-oriented atmosphere and intentionally embracing and anticipating our future through thoughtful development of mixed-use neighborhoods with a variety of designs and services to meet our current and future resident’s needs.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 – Project Location
Attachment 2 – Project Plans
Attachment 3 – Planning Commission Minutes dated July 23, 2025 Attachment 4 – CEQA Section 15332 Exemption
Attachment 5 – New Roadway Connection Analysis
Attachment 6 – City Council Minutes dated July 19, 2023, and Master Plan Policy Attachment 7 – Tract Map 6939
Attachment 8 – Public Correspondence
Attachment 9 – PC Resolution 2025-021
Attachment 10 – Resolution 2025-065 with Conditions of Approval Attachment 11 – Summary Vacation of Non-Vehicular Access Rights Resolution 2025-066

Page 490 ends

Aerial Map
ATTACHMENT 1

Page 491 ends

ATTACHMENT 2
Due to file size, this attachment can be accessed through the following link:

Project-Plans

Page 492 ends

HPC/PC Draft Minutes – July 23, 2025

Page 1 of 12 ends

Historic Preservation Commission and
Planning Commission
Agenda
July 23, 2025
Draft Minutes
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
7:00 p.m.

The r
egular joint meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission was held on July 23, 2025. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Morales at 7:00 p.m.

A. R
oll Call
Pl
anning Commission present: Chairman Morales, Vice Chairman Boling, Commissioner Dopp.

Absent: Commissioner Daniels and Commissioner Diaz.

Sta
ff Present: Katherine Read, Assistant City Attorney; Jennifer Nakamura, Planning Director; Jason Welday, Engineering Director; Sean McPherson, Principal Planner; Justin Garcia, Deputy Director of Engineering; Shane Adams, Deputy Fire Marshal; Sophia Serafin, Assistant Planner; Claudia Vargas, Associate Planner; Bond Mendez, Associate Planner; Miguel Sotomayor, Principal Engineer; Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant.

B. P
ublic Communications
Chair
man Morales opened the public communications.

Hear
ing no comments from the public, Chairman Morales closed the public communications.

C. C
onsent Calendar
C1. C
onsideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of May 28, 2025.

Mot
ion: Moved by Commissioner Dopp; seconded by Vice Chairman Boling. Motion carried 3- 0-2 approved the minutes. Absent: Commissioner Daniels and Commissioner Diaz.

D. P
ublic Hearings
D1. ENVI
RONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, TENTATIVE MAP, & DESIGN REVIEW –
HAMILTON LAND DEVELOPMENT – A request to subdivide 1.02 acres of land into 19 numbered lots and 1 lettered lot including site plan and design review of 19 single- family, detached residential units with 1 unit restricted for Very Low Income affordable housing in accordance with State Density Bonus Law for a site located between 19th Street and Hamilton Street in the Medium (M) Residential zone at 10295 19th Street; APN: 1076- 121-17. The project qualifies as a Class 32 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 – Infill Development Projects. (Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20761 and Design Review DRC2024-00249).

ATTACHMENT 3

Page 493 ends

HPC/PC Draft Minutes – July 23, 2025

Page 2 of 12 ends

Assistant Planner Serafin provided a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). She noted that the Conditions of Approval were revised to include additional clarifying language. A redline version was placed on the dais.

Planning Director Nakamura shared that a letter was received this afternoon by Alta Loma School District expressing concerns about school safety . The letter had been distributed to Commissioners via email and was also placed on the dais for their review. She indicated that the Conditions of Approval related to Engineering Condition #5 will help provide further study on any potential impacts.

Commissioner Dopp mentioned that there is already a lot of traffic on 19th and now this is adding another ingress/egress out of that area. He asked Engineering what kind of thought was put in place to handle that extra turn off of 19th, given that Mayberry is exactly to the north of that parcel.

Engineering Director Welday responded that the final plans for the project will be required to evaluate any changes to the striping in order to ensure conflicts are avoided to that left turn and there are no issues between Mayberry driveway street interaction.

Vice Chairman Boling stated that there will be additional traffic studies required in order to ascertain what traffic mitigation measures might be needed along 19th Street.

Engineering Director Welday responded that a design exercise will be conducted to ensure the design accommodates those considerations.

Vice Chairman Boling stated that no decision has been made yet because that analysis has not been completed.

Engineering Director Welday responded that they have looked at it as part of the development review and they are comfortable they can fit in the turn lanes that may be needed to make it work.

Vice Chairman Boling asked if it is determined that there would be a conflict, would there be a possibility of having a right-in/right-out for the Hamilton project.

Engineering Director Welday answered that they do not currently have it conditioned that way but that would be an option they would look at.

Chairman Morales asked Planning Director Nakamura for a brief summary of the State Density Bonus Law and how it impacts the city.

Planning Director Nakamura provided an overview of the State Density Bonus Law and how it impacts the city’s limitations in the development review process.

Chairman Morales opened the public hearing.

Applicant Hamilton provided a brief PowerPoint presentation with key points on the project. 19- units, 4 Bonus units and 1 unit is very low-income affordable. (copy on file).

Commissioner Dopp stated that for the record, the commissioners are generally not opposed to housing projects or creating more affordable units. He shared that the commissioners attended a conference recently, and they discussed urban strategies and how to create more synergic communities and addressed the affordability crisis. He asked how affordable will this project be for the average family, since having one unit does not really make it an affordable project.

Page 494 ends

Rancho Cucamonga City CouncilAugust 20, 2025

Rancho Cucamonga City Council
August 20, 2025