Agenda packet, regular meeting — Rancho Cucamonga City Council, October 1, 2025 (part 2 of 2)

Page 2 ends

2 2
1 6
retiring. While the Human Resources Department is working to hire a successor for this role, with the departure of this individual, the City will be losing 30 years of institutional knowledge as well as the necessary knowledge of Workday payroll functions.

To address these challenges and to help support the transition of learning and knowledge to the new Payroll Supervisor and supporting Human Resources staff, City staff believes that amending our contract with our current Workday consultants is necessary. As Workday experts, they have a level of expertise to support both the functional and technical components of Workday more effectively, provide knowledge transfer to City staff, and increase the number of resource hours allocated to the project for ongoing implementation and maintenance tasks. As a result, City staff recommends that the City Council approve an amendment to the existing professional services agreement with REMY Corporation. The proposed amendment would add $150,000 to the professional services agreement. This amount is utilized based on time and material to support Workday needs.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There are no additional appropriations as a result of this action, as the City Council has approved appropriations for contingencies for the Workday implementation project.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

The workday functional and technical consulting and staff augmentation supports the Workday implementation project, which ensures the City Council's vision of intentionally embracing and anticipating the future and creating equitable opportunities to prosper.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 – Professional Services Agreement and Amendment No. 001 Attachment 2 – Amendment No. 002

Page 119 ends

E
Cucamonga11U 18
IER15

AGREEMENT FOR

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this Ist day of November 2023, by and behveen the City of Rancho Cucamonga, a municipal corporation (" City") and REMY Corporation, a Colorado Corporation Consultant").

RECITALS
A. City hasheretoforeissuedits requestfor proposalsto performthefollowing professionalservices: Workday EnterpriseResourceSystemfunctional and technical expert to augment the and provide Human Capital Management expertise. (" the Project").

B. Consultanthasprovidedasubjectmatterexpertto performtheprofessional services described in Recital " A", above, necessaryto complete the Project.

C. City desiresto engageConsultantto completetheProjectin themannerset forthandmore fully describedherein.

D. Consultantrepresentsthat it is fully qualified and licensedunderthelaws of theStateof Californiato performtheservicescontemplatedby this Agreementin agood andprofessionalmanner.

AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE,in considerationof performanceby thepartiesof themutual promises,covenants,andconditionshereincontained,thepartiesheretoagreeasfollows:

1. Consultant' s Services.
1, 1 Scope and Level- of Services. Subject to the temis and conditions setforth in this Agreement, City herebyengagesConsultantto performall technicaland professional services described in Recitals" A" and" B" above, including, but not limited to Workday Enterprise ResourceSystem Expertise. As set forth in the" Scope of Work", attached hereto as Exhibit" A", and incorporated by reference herein. The nature, scope, andlevelof theservicesrequiredto beperformedby Consultantaresetforth in theScope of Work and are referred to herein as " the Services." In the event of any inconsistencies between the Scope of Work and this Agreement, the tents and provisions of this Agreement shall control.

1. 2 Revisions to Scorns of Wo L Upon requestof the City, the Consultantwill promptlymeetwithCitystafftodiscussanyrevisionstotheProjectdesired by the City. Consultant agreesthat the Scope of Work may be amended basedupon said meetings, and, by amendmentto this Agreement, the partiesmay agreeon a revisionor revisions to Consultant' s compensation basedthereon. A revision pursuant to this Section PSA+ rhh ft*- Iwwl Uab1Ao-lrtsvanet( Alm- Design) Pop l L „ Rid 11111". 020
ATTACHMENT 1

Page 120 ends

that does not increase the total cost payable to Consultant by more than ten percent( l o) ofthetotalcompensationspecifiedinSection3,maybeapprovedinwritingbyCityIsCity Manager without amendment.
13 Timefor Performarigg. Consultantshallperformall servicesunder thisAgreementinatimely,regularbasisconsistentwithindustrystandardsforprofessional skillandcare, andinaccordancewithanyscheduleofperformancesetforthintheScope of Work, or as set forth in a" Schedule of Performance", if such Schedule is attachedhereto as Exhibit" A".

1. 4 StandardofQare. AsamaterialinducementtoCitytoenterintothis Agreement,Consultantherebyrepresentsthatithastheexperiencenecessarytoundertake the services to be provided. Inlightof suchstatusandexperience, Consultanthereby covenantsthatit shallfollowthecustomaryprofessionalstandardsin performingtheServices.

1.5 EmiliaritywithServicea. ByexecutingthisAgreement,Consultant representsthat, to the extentrequiredby thestandardof practice, Consultant (a) has investigated and considered the scope of services to be performed, ( b) has carefully consideredhow the servicesshouldbe performed, and (c) understandsthe facilities, difficultiesandrestrictionsattendingperformanceof theservicesunderthisAgreement.

ConsultantrepresentsthatConsultant, totheextentrequiredbythestandardofpractice, hasinvestigatedanyareasofwork, asapplicable, andisreasonablyacquaintedwiththe conditionstherein. ShouldConsultantdiscoveranylatentor unknownconditions, which willmateriallyaffecttheperformanceofservices, Consultantshallimmediatelyinform CityofsuchfactandshallnotproceedexceptatConsultant'sriskuntilwritteninstructions arereceivedfrom theCity Representative.

2. TermofAgreement. ThetermofthisAgreementshallnotexceedone(1) yearandshallbecomeeffectiveasofthedateofthemutualexecutionbywayofboth parties signature( the" Effective Date"). Noworkshallbeconducted;serviceorgoodswi11 notbeprovideduntilthisAgreementhasbeenexecutedandaboverequirementshavebeen fulfilled.

OptionstorenewarecontingentupontheCityManager'sapproval, subjecttopricingreview, andin accordancewith all TermsandConditionsstatedhereinunlessotherwise providedin writing by theCity.

3. Compensation.

3. 1 ComRensmion. City shall compensateConsultantas set forth in ExhibitA, provided, however, thatfull, totalandcompleteamountpayabletoConsultant willbeS165.00perhourofworkontheproject. TheamountpaidtotheConsultantshall notexceedS90,000(ninetythousanddollars),includingalloutofpocketexpenses, unless additionalcompensationisapprovedbytheCityCouncil.TheCityshallnotwithholdany federal, stateorothertaxes, orotherdeductions. However, Cityshallwithholdnotmore PSd rr1A PtOftularwl LOW110•leumnn Mon• Dea rr1 Parea Rerind 11 12/2M

Page 121 ends

thantenpercent(10°f0)of anyinvoiceamountpendingreceiptofanydeliverablesreflected in suchinvoice. Underno circumstanceshallConsultantbeentitledto compensationfor services not yet satisfactorily performed.

Thepartiesfurtheragreethatcompensationmaybeadjustedin accordance with Section1.2 to reflectsubsequentchangesto theScopeof Services. City shall compensateConsultant for any authorized extra services asset forth in Exhibit A.

4. Method of Payment.

4. 1 Invoices. ConsultantshallsubmittoCitymonthlyinvoicesforthe Servicesperformedpursuantto this Agreement. The invoicesshalldescribein detailthe Servicesrenderedduringtheperiodandshallseparatelydescribeanyauthorizedextra services. Any invoiceclaimingcompensationfor extraservicesshall includeappropriate documentationofpriorauthorizationofsuchservices. All invoicesshallberemittedtothe City of Rancho Cucamonga, California.

4. 2 CityshallreviewsuchinvoicesandnotifyConsultantin writing within ten( 10)businessdaysof anydisputedamounts.

4. 3
Cityshallpayall undisputedportionsof theinvoicewithinthirty 30)calendardaysafterreceiptoftheinvoiceuptothenot-to-exceedamountssetforthin Section 3.
4A All records, invoices, timecards, cost control sheetsand other recordsmaintainedby Consultantrelating to serviceshereundershall be availablefor reviewandauditby theCity.

5. Representatives.

5. 1 City Representative. For the purposesof this Agreement, the contractadministratorand City' s representativeshall be Jenifer Phillips, or suchother person as designated in writing by the City(" City Representative'l. It shallbeConsultant's responsibilitytoassurethattheCityRepresentativeiskeptinformedof theprogressof the performanceoftheservices,andConsultantshallreferanydecisionsthatmustbemadeby CitytotheCityRepresentative. Unlessotherwisespecifiedherein, anyapprovalofCity requiredhereundershallmeantheapprovalof theCityRepresentative.

5. 2 Consultant Re-im3entative. For the purposes of this Agreement, EricBraeschof REMYCorporationis herebydesignatedas theprincipaland representative of Consultant authorized to act in its behalf* ith respect to the services specifiedherein and make all decisionsin connectiontherewithCConsultant's Representative"). Itisexpresslyunderstoodthattheexperience,knowledge,capabilityand reputationoftheConsultant'sRepresentativewereasubstantialinducementforCityto enterintothisAgreement. Therefore,theConsultant'sRepresentativeshallberesponsible duringthetermofthisAgreementfordirectingallactivitiesofConsultantanddevoting sufficienttime to personallysupervisetheserviceshereunder. Consultantmaynotchange theResponsiblePrincipalwithoutthepriorwrittenapprovalof City.

M WA PmaJkuknd Wbllla- lanrome( Nm- Dalpi P „
r An fled I l bylW- V

Page 122 ends

6. Consultant' s Personnel.

6. 1 All Servicesshallbeperformedby ConsultantorunderConsultant's directsupervision,andall personnelshallpossessthequalifications,permits,andlicenses requiredbyStateandlocallawtoperformsuchServices, including, withoutlimitation, a City businesslicenseasrequiredby theCity's Municipal Code.

6. 2 Consultantshall be solelyresponsiblefor the satisfactorywork performanceof all personnelengagedin performingtheServicesandcompliancewiththe standard of care set forth in Section 1.4.

6. 3 Consultantshall beresponsiblefor paymentof all employees' and subcontractors' wagesandbenefitsandshallcomplywith all requirementspertainingto employer' s liability, workers' compensation, unemployment insurance, and Social Security. By its execution of this Agreement, Consultantcertifies that it is aware of the provisionsof Section3700oftheCaliforniaLaborCodethatrequireeveryemployertobe insuredagainstliability for Worker's Compensationor to undertakeself-insurancein accordancewith theprovisionsof thatCodeandagreesto complywith suchprovisions beforecommencingtheperformanceof theServices.

6. 4 Consultantshallindemnify, defendandholdharmlessCityandits electedofficials, officers and employees, servants, designatedvolunteers, and agents servingasindependentcontractorsin theroleof cityoragencyofficials, fromanyandall liability, damages, claims, costsandexpensesof anynatureto theextentarisingfrom Consultant's violationsof personnelpracticesand/or anyviolationof theCaliforniaLabor Code. Cityshallhavetherighttooffsetagainsttheamountof anyfeesduetoConsultant under this Agreement any amount due to City from Consultant as a result of Consultant' s failureto promptlypayto Cityanyreimbursementor indemnificationarisingunderthis Section 6.

7. Ownership of Work Product.

7. 1 Ownership. All documents, ideas, concepts, electronic files, drawings, photographsandanyandallotherwritings, includingdraftsthereof, prepared, createdorprovidedbyConsultantinthecourseofperformingtheServices, includingany andallintellectualandproprietaryrightsarisingfromthecreationof thesame(collectively, Work: Product"), areconsideredto be "worksmadefor hire" for thebenefitof theCity.

Uponpaymentbeingmade, andprovidedConsultantis notin breachof thisAgreement, all WorkProductshallbeandremainthepropertyof Citywithoutrestrictionorlimitation upon its use or dissemination by City. Basic survey notes, sketches,charts, computations andsimilar datapreparedor obtainedby Consultantunderthis Agreementshall, upon request,bemadeavailabletoCity. Noneof theWorkProductshallbethesubjectof any commonlaworstatutorycopyrightorcopyrightapplicationbyConsultant. In theeventof the return of any of the Work Product to Consultant or its representative, Consultant shall be responsible for its safe return to City. Under no circumstances shall Consultant fail to deliveranydraftor final designs, plans, drawings, reportsor specificationsto City upon written demand by City for their delivery, notwithstanding any disputes between PSA idth Profenkma! Llob9h)- lnsamna Jftn- Datgnl Page 4 Lase Rnited 11 1212020

Page 123 ends

ConsultantandCityconcerningpayment, performanceof thecontract, orotherwise. This covenantshallsurvivetheterminationofthisAgreement. City'sreuseof theWorkProduct foranypurposeotherthantheProject,shallbeatCity'ssolerisk.

7. 2. Assignment of Intg1jectual PropeM Intgmss: Upon execution of thisAgreementandtotheextentnototherwiseconveyedtoCitybySection7.1,above,the Consultantshallbe deemedto grantandassignto City, andshallrequireall of its subcontractorsto assignto City, all ownershiprights, andall commonlawandstatutory copyrights,trademarks,andotherintellectualandproprietarypropertyrightsrelatingtothe WorkProductandtheProjectitself, andConsultantshalldisclaimandretainnorights whatsoeverastoanyoftheWorkProduct, tothemaximumextentpermittedbylaw. City shallbeentitledto utilizetheWorkProductforanyandall purposes, includingbutnot limitedtoconstructing, using, maintaining, altering, addingto, restoring, rebuildingand publicizingtheProjector anyaspectof theProject.

7. 3 Tift to 1 t llectu e . Consultant warrants and represents thatit hassecuredallnecessarylicenses,consentsorapprovalstouseanyinstrumentality, thingorcomponentasto whichanyintellectualpropertyrightexists, includingcomputer software, usedin therenderingof theServicesandtheproductionof theWorkProduct and/ormaterialsproducedunderthisAgreement,andthatCityhasfull legaltitletoandthe righttoreproduceanyoftheWorkProduct. Consultantshalldefend, indemnifyandhold City, and its elected officials, officers, employees, servants, attorneys, designated volunteers, andagentsservingasindependentcontractorsin theroleof city officials, harmlessfromanyloss,claimorliabilityinanywayrelatedtoaclaimthatCity'suseis violatingfederal,stateor locallaws,oranycontractualprovisions,relatingtotradenames, licenses,franchises,patentsorothermeansofprotectingintellectualpropertyrightsand/or interestsinproductsorinventions. Consultantshallbearallcostsarisingfromtheuseof patented, copyrighted, trade secret or trademarked documents, materials, software, equipment, devicesor processesusedor incorporatedin the Servicesand materials producedunderthisAgreement. in theeventCity'suseofanyof theWorkProductisheld toconstituteaninfringementandanyusethereofis enjoined, Consultant, at itsexpense, shall:( a)secureforCitytherighttocontinueusingtheWorkProductbysuspensionofany injunctionorbyprocuringalicenseorlicensesforCity; or(b) modifytheWorkProduct so that it becomes non- infringing. This covenant shall survive the termination of this Agreement.

S. Status its Independent Contractor. Consultant is, and shall at all times remainastoCity, a whollyindependentcontractor. Consultantshallhavenopowerto incuranydebt,obligation,orliabilityonbehalfofCityorotherwiseactasanagentofCity.

NeitherCitynoranyofitsagentsshallhavecontrolovertheconductofConsultantorany of Consultant'semployees,exceptassetforthin thisAgreement. Consultantshallnot,at anytime, or in anymanner,representthat it or anyof its officers,agentsor employeesare inanymanneremployeesofCity. Consultantshallpayallrequiredtaxesonamountspaid toConsultantunderthisAgreement,andtodefend,indemnifyandholdCityharmlessfrom anyandalltaxes,assessments,penalties,andinterestassertedagainstCitybyreasonofthe independent contractor relationship created by this Agreement. Consultant shall fully PSA n A Professional Lrabitio./ nsm mce mon• Ompi) Pub^Lair R w& J I fit_ 2020

Page 124 ends

complywith the workers' compensationlaw regardingConsultantand Consultant's employees.

9. Confidentiality. Consultantmayhaveaccessto financial, accounting, statistical, and personnel data of individuals and City employees. Consultant covenants thatall data, documents, discussion, or otherinformationdevelopedor receivedby Consultantorprovidedfor performanceof thisAgreementareconfidentialandshallnot be disclosed by Consultant without prior written authorization by City. City shall grant suchauthorizationif applicablelawrequiresdisclosure. All City datashallbereturnedto City uponthe terminationof this Agreement. Consultant's covenantunderthis section shallsurvivetheterminationof thisAgreement. Thisprovisionshallnot applyto informationinwhateverformthatisinthepublicdomain,norshallit restricttheConsultant fromgivingnoticesrequiredbylaworcomplyingwithanordertoprovideinformationor datawhensuchanorderis issuedby a court, administrativeagencyor otherlegitimate authority, or if disclosureisotherwisepermittedby lawandreasonablynecessaryforthe Consultantto defenditself from anylegalactionor claim.

10. Conflict of Interest.

10. 1 Consultantcovenantsthatit presentlyhasnointerestandshallnot acquireanyinterest, director indirect, whichmaybeaffectedby theServices, or which would conflict in any manner with the performance of the Services. Consultant further covenantsthat,in performanceof thisAgreement,nopersonhavinganysuchinterestshall be employed by it. Furthermore, Consultantshallavoidtheappearanceof havingany interest, which would conflict in any mannerwith the performanceof the Services.

Consultantshallnot acceptanyemploymentor representationduringtheternsof this Agreement which is or may likely make Consultant" financially interested" ( as provided in California Government Code §§ 1090and87100) in anydecisionmadebyCityonany matterinconnectionwithwhichConsultanthasbeenretained. Consultantoritsemployees mayberequiredtodisclosefinancialintereststhatmayforeseeablybemateriallyaffected by theworkperformedunderthisAgreementpursuantto CaliforniaGovernmentCode § 87100etseqandregulationspromulgatedbytheFairPoliticalPracticesCommission.

10. 2 Consultant further represents that it has not employed or retained anypersonorentity,otherthanabonafide employeeworkingexclusivelyforConsultant, tosolicit or obtainthis Agreement. Consultanthasnot paidor agreedto payanypersonor entity, otherthana bonafide employeeworkingexclusivelyfor Consultant, any fee, commission, gift, percentage, or any other consideration contingent upon the execution of thisAgreement. Uponanybreachor violationof thiswarranty, Cityshallhavetheright, atitssoleandabsolutediscretion,toterminatethisAgreementwithoutfurtherliability,or todeductfromanysumspayable.toConsultanthereunderthefullamountorvalueofany suchfee,commission,percentageor gift.

10. 3 Consultanthasnoknowledgethatanyofficeror employeeof City hasanyinterest, whethercontractual,noncontractual, financial, proprietary, orotherwise, in thistransactionorinthebusinessof Consultant,andthatif anysuchinterestcomesto theknowledgeof Consultantat any time during the term of this Agreement, Consultant P& I with NO"- DWIS" I Pop 6
UW R%* M 1111122020

Page 125 ends

shallimmediatelymatteacomplete,writtendisclosureofsuchinteresttoCity,evenif such interestwouldnotbedeemedaprohibited "conflictof interest"underapplicablelawsas describedin subsection 14.1.

11. Indemnification.

11. 1 ProfessignalServices. Inconnectionwithitsprofessionalservices, theConsultantshalldefend, holdharmlessandindemnifyCity, anditselectedofficials, officers,employees,servants,volunteers,andagentsservingasindependentcontractorsin the role of city or agency officials, ( collectively," Indemnitees"), with respectto anyand all damages, liabilities, losses, reasonable defense costs or expenses ( collectively, Claims"),
includingbutnotlimitedtoliabilityfordeathorinjurytoanypersonandinjury to any property, to the extent the sameout of, pertainto, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willfulmisconductof theConsultantoranyof itsofficers, employees, subcontractors,Consultants,oragentsintheperformanceof itsprofessionalservicesunder this Agreement. Consultantshallreimburseall reasonabledefensecostsandexpenses, includingactualattorney's feesandexperts' costsincurredin connectionwithsuch defense.

11. 2 Other Indemnities. In connectionwith all Claimsnotcoveredby Section11.1, theConsultantshalldefend, holdharmlessandindemnifytheIndemnitees withrespecttoanyandallClaimsincludingbutnotlimitedtoClaimsrelatingtodeathor injurytoanypersonandinjurytoanyproperty,whichariseoutof, pertainto, orrelateto thenon-professionalacts, omissions, activitiesoroperationsof Consultantoranyof its officers, employees, subcontractors, Consultants, or agentsin the performanceof this Agreement. Consultantshall defendIndemniteesin any actionor actionsfiled in connectionwithanysuchClaimswithcounselofCity'schoice,andshallpayallcostsand expenses, includingactualattorney's feesandexperts' costsincurredin connectionwith such defense.

11. 3
elverofRights. lndemnitccsdonot,andshallnot, waiveany
rightsthattheymaypossessagainstConsultantbecauseof theacceptancebyCity, orthe depositwithCity, of anyinsurancepolicyor certificaterequiredpursuantto this Agreement.

11. 4 Waiver Exceptas otherwiseexpressly
providedinthisAgreement, Consultant, onbehalfofitselfandallpartiesclaimingunder orthroughit, herebywaivesallrightsofsubrogationagainsttheIndemnitees,whileacting withinthescopeoftheirduties, fromallclaims, lossesandliabilitiesarisingoutofor incidenttoactivitiesoroperationsperformedbyoronbehalfoftheConsultant.

11. 5 Survival. The provisions of this Section 11 shall survive the terminationof theAgreementandarein additionto anyotherrightsor remedieswhich Indemniteesmayhaveunderthelaw. Paymentisnotrequiredasaconditionprecedentto anIndemnitee'srighttorecoverunderthisindemnityprovision,andanentryofjudgment againstConsultantshallbeconclusivein favorof theIndemnitee's righttorecoverunder this indemnity provision.

P5. 1 Mlrh b" Wame IAves- Design)
PopLas M* ed 11<12MV

Page 126 ends

12. Insurance,
I2. 1 Liability Insurance. Consultantshall procureandmaintainin full forceandeffectfor thedurationof this Agreement,insuranceagainstclaimsfor injuriesto personsor damagesto propertywhich may arisefrom or in connectionwith the performanceof the serviceshereunderby Consultant, and/or its agents, representatives, employees and subcontractors,

12. 2 MinimumScopeof Insurance. UnlessotherwiseapprovedbyCity, coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1) InsuranceServicesOffice CommercialGeneralLiability coverage( occurrence fornt CG 0001).
2) Insurance ServicesOffice form number CA 0001 (Ed. 1/87) coveringAutomobileLiability, code1 (anyauto).
3) Worker's Compensationinsuranceasrequiredby theState of California,andEmployer's Liability Insurance.
4) ProfessionalLiability insurancein a formapprovedby the City, havinganextendedreportingperiodof not lessthan
three (3) years; or ProfessionalLiability insuranceshall be maintainedfor aperiodof three(3)yearsaftercompletionof
theServiceswhichshall, duringtheentirethree (3) year
period, provideprotectionagainstclaimsof professional
negligencearising out of Consultant's performanceof the Services and otherwise complying with all applicable
provisions of this Section 13. Either policy shall be endorsedto includecontractualliability to the extent
insurable.

12. 3 Limits of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain limits no less than:
1) CommercialGeneralLiability: S2,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personalinjury andpropertydamage.

CommercialGeneralLiability Insurancewith a general
aggregatelimit shall apply separatelyto this Agreementor the general limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. 2) Automobile Liability: $ 2,000,000 per accidentfor bodily injury andpropertydamage.
3) Employer's Liability: 51,000,000 per accidentand in the aggregate for bodily injury or disease and Workers'
CompensationInsurancein theamountrequiredby law.

PV with Pr* ulanaf Lwbgio, huumwe( Alan- Deslsni P pv a Lau R" Wd 11' 12 200

Page 127 ends

4) ProfessionalLiability: S1,000,000perclaim/aggregate.

12. 4 Deductiblesand Self-InsuredRetentions. Any deductiblesor self- insuredretentionsmustbedeclaredto andapprovedby theCity. 12, 5 Qf, L insurance Provisions.
1) The commercialgeneralliability and automobileliability policiesareto containthefollowing provisionsona separate additionally insured endorsement naming the City, its
officers, officials, employees, designated volunteers and agentsservingasindependentcontractorsin therole of city or agency officials, are to be covered as additional insureds asrespects: liabilityarisingoutof activitiesperformedbyor onbehalfof Consultant;productsandcompletedoperations
of Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by
Consultant; and/or automobiles owned, leased, hired or
borrowed by Consultant. The covcragr, shAll _contain no mt_tations on the scope of protection of kdgd_ to City. its officers. , q f cials. employees. designated vQlllnteers or agents ervi ent contractors
or ap& ncy officigis which also limitation2-aRplicable
to the named insured.
2) For any claims related to this Agreement, Consultant' s insurancecoverageshallbeprimaryinsuranceas respects
City, its officers, officials, employees,designatedvolunteers andagentsservingasindependentcontractorsin theroleof
city or agency officials. Any insuranceor self-insurance maintained by City, their officers, officials, employees, designatedvolunteersor agentsserving as independent
contractorsin the role of city or agencyofficials shall be excess of Consultant' s insurance and shall not contribute with it.
3) Consultant'sinsuranceshallapplyseparatelytoeachinsured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respectto thelimits of theinsurer's liability.
4) Each insurancepolicy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled except after30daysprior writtennoticeby first classmail hasbeen given to City ( ten ( 10) days prior written notice for non- payment of premium). Consultantshall provide thirty (30) days written notice to City prior to implementation of a reduction of limits or material change of insurance coverage as specified herein.

PSA vUh P_*_ i_ I Llohiluy JkV_ cr W& I_ OieOVO Faro
Lwl Revised 11, 122Q2A

Page 128 ends

5) Each insurance policy, required by this clause shall expressly waive the insurer' s right of subrogation against City and its elected officials, officers, employees, servants, attorneys, designatedvolunteers, and agents serving as independentcontractorsin the role of city or agency
officials.
6) Beissuedbyaninsurancecompanyapprovedin writingby City, which is admittedand licensedto do businessin the State of California and which is rated A: VII or better according to the most recent A.M. Best Co. Rating
Guide.
7) Specifythatanyfailureto complywith reportingor other provisions of the required policy, including breachesof warranty,shallnotaffectthecoveragerequiredtobeprovided. 8) Specifythatanyandall costsof adjustingand/or defending any claim againstany insured, including court costs and attorneys'fees,shallbepaidin additionto andshallnotdeplete any policy limits.
9) Other required insurance, endorsements, or exclusions as requiredbytheCityin anyrequestforproposalsapplicableto
this Agreement.

12. 6 Evidenceofco-yerAite,.Priorto commencingperformanceunderthis Agreement, the Consultant shall furnish the City with certificates and original endorsements, or copiesof eachrequiredpolicy, effectingandevidencingtheinsurance coverage required by this Agreement. The endorsementsshall be signedby a person authorizedbytheinsurer(s) tobindcoverageonitsbehalf. All endorsementsorpolicies shallbereceivedandapprovedbytheCitybeforeConsultantcommencesperformance. If performanceofthisAgreementshallextendbeyondoneyear,ConsultantshallprovideCity withtherequiredpoliciesorendorsementsevidencingrenewaloftherequiredpoliciesof insuranceprior to theexpirationof anyrequiredpoliciesof insurance.

13. Cooperation.. In theeventanyclaimor actionis broughtagainstCity relating to Consultant's performanceor services rendered under this Agreement, ConsultantshallrenderanyreasonableassistanceandcooperationthatCitymightrequire.

City shall compensate Consultant for any litigation support services in an amount to be agreeduponby theparties.

14. Termination. City shallhavetheright to terminatethisAgreementat any time for any or no reason on not less than ten ( 10) days prior written notice to Consultant. IntheeventCityexercisesitsrighttoterminatethisAgreement,Cityshallpay Consultant for any services satisfactorily rendered prior to the cffective date of the PSd xelh PraJfruMwl 1Jabdiij- Itrsrrmwee JXo r- Designp Page In Lwe Revised I1^! 2, 20- V

Page 129 ends

termination, provided Consultant is not then in breachof this Agreement. Consultant shall havenootherclaimagainstCity by reasonof suchtermination, includinganyclaimfor compensation. City may terminatefor causefollowing a defaultremaininguncuredmore thanfive(5)businessdaysafterserviceofa noticetocureonthebreachingparty.

ConsultantmayterminatethisAgreementforcauseupongivingtheCityten(10)business days prior written notice for any of the following: (1) uncuredbreachby theCity of any materialtermof thisAgreement,includingbutnotlimited to PaymentTerms;(2)material changesin the conditions tinder which this Agreement was enteredinto, coupled with the failureof thepartiesto teachaccordonthefeesandchargesforanyAdditionalServices required because of such changes.

15. Notices. Any notices, bills, invoices, orreportsauthorizedor requiredby thisAgreementshallbein writingandshallbedeemedreceivedon(a)thedayofdelivery if deliveredby handor overnightcourierserviceduringConsultant's andCity's regular businesshours;or( b) onthethird businessdayfollowing depositin theUnitedStatesmail, postageprepaid,to theaddressessetforth in thissection,or to suchotheraddressesasthe partiesmay, from timeto time, designatein writing pursuantto theprovisionsof( his section.

All notices shall be addressed as follows:

If to City: 3enifer Phillips, Human Resources Director
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga CA 91730
If to Consultant: Eric Braesch, Workday Practice Director REMY Corporation
16101511Street
Denver, Colorado 80202

16. Non- Discrimination and Equal Employment Opportunity. In the performanceof thisAgreement, Consultantshallnotdiscriminateagainstanyemployee, subcontractor, or applicant for employment because of race, color, creed, religion, sex, maritalstatus, nationalorigin, ancestry, age, physicalor mentalhandicap, medical condition, or sexual orientation. Consultant will take affirmative action to ensure that subcontractorsand applicantsare employed, and that employeesare treatedduring employment, without regard to their race,color, creed, religion, sex,marital status,national origin,ancestry,age,physicalor mentalhandicap,medicalcondition,orsexualorientation.

17. Assignment and Subcontracting. Consultantshall not assignor transfer anyinterestin this Agreementor subcontractthe performanceof anyof Consultant's obligationshereunderwithoutCity'spriorwrittenconsent. Exceptasprovidedherein,any attemptby Consultanttosoassign,transfer,or subcontractanyrights,duties,or obligations arising hereundershall be null, void and of no effect.

M Wyk Profess' ! Vabllrq Inwrange( Nan- Dui )
rase ReWsed 1142/ 2020

Page 130 ends

18 Compliance With Laws. Consultant shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, codes and regulations in force at tite time Consultant performs the Services.

19. Non-Waiver orTerms, RightsandRemedies. Waiverbyeitherpartyof any one or more of the conditionsof performanceunderthis Agreementshall not be a waiverof anyotherconditionof performanceunderthisAgreement. In no eventshallthe makingby Cityof anypaymentto Consultantconstituteor beconstruedasa waiverby City of any breachof covenant, or anydefaultwhichmaythenexiston the partof Consultant, andthe makingof anysuchpaymentby City shall in no way impairor prejudice any right or remedy available to City with regard to such breach or default.

20. Attorney' s Fees. In the eventthat either party to this Agreementshall commenceanylegalactionor proceedingto enforceor interprettheprovisionsof this Agreement, theprevailingpartyin suchactionor proceedingshallbeentitledto recoverits costsof suit,includingreasonableattorney's feesandcostsof experts.

21. Exhibits; Precedence. All documents referenced as exhibits in this Agreement are hereby incorporated in this Agreement. In the event of any material discrepancybetweentheexpressprovisionsof thisAgreementandtheprovisionsof any documentincorporatedhereinbyreference,theprovisionsofthisAgreementshallprevail.

22. Applicable Law and Venue. Thevalidity, interpretation,andperformance of this Agreementshall be controlledby and construedunderthe laws of the Stateof California.Venuefor any actionrelatingto thisAgreementshallbein theSanBernardino CountySuperiorCourt.

23. Construction. In the event of any assertedambiguity in, or dispute regardingtheinterpretationof anymatterherein,theinterpretationof thisAgreementshall notberesolvedbyanyrulesofinterpretationprovidingforinterpretationagainsttheparty who causesthe uncertainty to exist or against the party who drafted the Agreement or who draftedthatportionof theAgreement.

24. Entire Agreement. ThisAgreementconsistsof thisdocument, andany other documents, attachments and/or exhibits referenced herein and attached hereto, each of which is incorporated herein by such reference, and the same representsthe entire and integratedagreementbetweenConsultantandCity. ThisAgreementsupersedesallprior oralorwrittennegotiations, representationsor agreemenls. ThisAgreementmaynotbe amended, noranyprovisionorbreachhereofwaived, exceptin awritingsignedbythe parties which expressly refers to this Agreement.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, theparties,throughtheir respectiveauthorized representatives,have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above.

PSd wA A fanalLkshillo- Inzww r Maps-Desip) Par, 0Lot& yLwd 11k1.4A20

Page 131 ends

Con;
azmc
Name: RE Y Corporation City cho Cu a onga
y.B Z 2 3
F``
nn
Date Name Date
1 Titlerde............
a ... ,,.. .

City of Rancho Cucamonga
By: a 3 By, u.

Name Dat N tu Date
t
Title Title
two signatures required if corporation)
Approval Buyerif, Purchasing
Alternate, Risk Management Coordinator
PSA wish ftfaskmt Uabilsly In nw[ New. Ded& V plav IJLast Rebed 11.4. 7= 0

Page 132 ends

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES
Consult as the HCM Core Workstream Lead.

Consultto conductParallelTestingfor HCMCore.

TestandimplementalignedfunctionalitybetweenHCMworkstreams.

EvaluateInterdependencesacrosskeyfunctionaltouchpointsbetweenWorkdaymodules.

PartnerwiththeCity'sExecutiveProjectTeamtobuildautprocessesandoptimizeWorkdaytoitsfullest extent.

RecommendandimplementbestpracticetoensureefficienciesacrossWorkday.

Managecross-functional projiectsto ensurea greatemployeeexperienceandoperationalexcellence.

Consultandadvise-comprehensivereviewof HCMbusinessprocesses.

Consultandadvise-comprehensivereviewof HCMbasedSecurityRoles.

ConsultandadviseHCMstaffofBestPracticesandResourcesPostgo-live.

P34 with Pr®fe LlcbilkyIft" rc( A` . d n)
hors° IA'
nred 1142- ' A

Page 133 ends

AMENDMENTNO. 001
to
ProfessionalServicesAgreement (CO #2023-185)
between
REMYCorporation (hereinafterÐConsultantÑ)
and
Cityof RanchoCucamonga (hereinaftertheÐCityÑ)
This AmendmentNo. 001will serveto amendtheProfessionalServicesAgreement (hereinafter ÐAgreementÑ), CO# 2023-185, to incorporatethefollowing:

To amendthecompensationto add $305,000 (threehundredfive thousanddollars) to the professionalservicesagreementamountingto atotalcompensationof $395,000 (threehundred ninty-fivethousanddollars).

All otherTermsandConditionsof theoriginalAgreementCO#2023-185, will remainin full effect.

IN WITNESSWHEREOF, theparties, throughtheirrespectiveauthorizedrepresentatives, haveexecutedthisAmendmentbywayof signaturebybothpartiesandonthedateindicatedbelow. Please returntwo (2) originalsignedcopiesto theCitynolaterthanFebruary14, 2024. TheCity will process bothcopiesforsignatureandprovidetheConsultantwithone (1) fully executedcopyof theAmendment.

City of RanchoCucamongaREMYCorporation
By: _________________________________ By: ______________________________ Name DateName Date
TitleTitle
By: ______________________________ By: _________________________________ Name Date Name Date
Title Title
twosignaturesrequiredif corporation)
LastRevised: 11/27/2018 Page1 of 1

Page 134 ends

AMENDMENT NO. 002
to
Professional Services Agreement (CO #2023-185)
between
REMY Corporation (hereinafter "Consultant")
and
City of Rancho Cucamonga (hereinafter the "City")
This Amendment No. 002 will serve to amend the Professional Services Agreement (hereinafter "Agreement"), CO# 2023-185, to incorporate the following:

To amend the compensation to add $150,000 (one hundred fifty thousand dollars) to the professional services agreement amounting to a total compensation of $545,000 (five hundred forty-five thousand dollars).

All other Terms and Conditions of the original Agreement CO#2023-185, will remain in full effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties, through their respective authorized representatives, have executed this Amendment by way of signature by both parties and on the date indicated below. Please return two (2) original signed copies to the City no later than October 1, 2025. The City will process both copies for signature and provide the Consultant with one (1) fully executed copy of the Amendment.

REMY Corporation City of Rancho Cucamonga
By: ______________________________ By: ______________________________ Name Date Name Date Title: ______________________________ Title: ______________________________ By: ______________________________ By: ______________________________ Name Date Name Date Title: _____________________________ Title: _____________________________ ATTACHMENT 2

Page 135 ends

DATE: October 1, 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 James Lo, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT: Consideration to Accept Public Improvements located on the Northwest Corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue per Improvement Agreement, Related to Case No. DRC2014-01130, as Complete, File a Notice of Completion, and Authorize Release of Bonds. (CITY) RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Approve and accept the public improvements required for the development of DRC2014- 01130 and authorize the City Engineer to file the appropriate Notice of Completion; and

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

3. Authorize the City Engineer to approve the release of the Maintenance Bond one (1) year following the filing of the Notice of Completion if the improvements remain free from defects in material and workmanship.

BACKGROUND:

DRC2014-01130 was approved by the Planning Commission on May 11, 2016 for the construction of a 193-unit, multi-family residential development with 3,246 square feet of commercial/live work space on 8.8 acres of land within the Community Commercial (CC) Zoning District, located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue. An improvement agreement and securities were approved by the City Council on January 19, 2022 in order to ensure construction of the required public improvements.

ANALYSIS:

All public improvements required of this development have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

Prior to construction of the public improvements the developer, Core Rancho, LLC, submitted the following securities to ensure satisfactory completion of the improvements:

Faithful Performance Bond $709,600
Labor and Material Bond $709,600

Page 136 ends

Page 2 ends

3 0
4 8
City staff conducted a final inspection of the public improvements in July of 2025 and confirmed all work was completed to City Standards.

With the completion of the improvements, the Faithful Performance and Labor and Material bonds are no longer required. The City will retain 10% of the Labor and Material Bond as the Maintenance Bond to secure maintenance of the improvements through the one (1) year warranty period (one (1) year from final inspection). The public improvements will be re-inspected in approximately nine (9) months to ensure they remain in good order prior to release of the maintenance bond.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

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

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map

Page 137 ends

ATTACHMENT 1
6 1
6 6
DRC2014-01130
Vicinity Map

NOT TO SCALE
Project Site

Page 138 ends

DATE: October 1, 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
Romeo M. David, Associate Engineer
SUBJECT: Consideration to Accept as Complete, File the Notice of Completion and Authorize Release of Retention and Bonds for the Day Creek Channel Bike Trail Improvements Project. This Project is Exempt from the Requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Per Government Code Section 15301 - Existing Facilities. (CITY) RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Accept the Day Creek Channel Bike Trail Improvement Project, Contract No. 2024-093 (Project), as complete;

2. Approve the final contract amount of $803,925;

3. Authorize the release of the Faithfull Performance Bond 35 days after recordation of Notice of Completion and accept a Maintenance Bond;

4. Authorize the release of the Labor and Materials Bond in the amount of $714,619; six (6) months after the recordation of the Notice of Completion if no claims have been received;

5. Authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and release the Project retention payment, 35 days after recordation of Notice of Completion; and

6. Authorize the City Engineer to approve the release of the Maintenance Bond one (1) year following the filing of the Notice of Completion if the improvements remain free from defects in material and workmanship.

BACKGROUND:

On May 1, 2024, the City Council awarded a construction contract to US Builders and Consultants, Inc. in the amount of $714,619, plus a 15% contingency in the amount of $107,193 to address unforeseen construction related incidents. A copy of the May 1, 2024 staff report is on the fie with the City Clerk.

The scope of work consisted of applying slurry seal to the existing flood control maintenance road

Page 139 ends

Page 2 ends

3 0
4 6
along with construction of improvements to develop the trail such as curb ramps, sidewalk, retaining curbs, retaining walls, fencing and gates, a new traffic signal system, and signing and striping. A vicinity map illustrating the limits of the Project is included as Attachment 1.

The Project is primarily in San Bernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) right-of-way therefore the Common use Agreement (City Contract No. 09-087, SBCFCD Contract No.10-53 A6 ) between the City and SBCFCD was amended in October 2023, to include maintenance of the Day Creek Channel Bike Trail.

The City was awarded grant funds totaling $510,250 from the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) through the Transportation Development Act, Article 3 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Program (TDA Article 3) to complete the Project.

ANALYSIS:

The Project has been completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. A total of nine (9) change orders were issued during construction, resulting in a net increase of $108,327 to the contract amount. A detailed description of each contract change order is on file with the City’s Engineering Services Department.

The final balancing statement resulted in a net decrease in the amount of $19,024 due to a decrease in the final placed quantities of asphalt pavement, PCC curb ramp area and the removal of SCE conduit construction from the Project scope. The balancing statement conforms the final contract quantities to the actual quantities placed or constructed during the contract.

At the end of the one-year maintenance period, if the improvements remain free from defects in materials and workmanship, the City Clerk will release the maintenance bond upon approval by the City Engineer.

Environmental:

The construction completed under the above-reference contract was determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Government Code Section 15301(c) “Existing Facilities” subsection (c), Class 1 – Existing Facilities.

FISCAL IMPACT:

A total of $955,935 was allocated for the construction phase of the Project. After the initial contract award, an additional $60,000 was allocated to cover the increased cost of construction management and inspection fees due to an extended project schedule resulting from third-party delays. Therefore, a total of $1,015,935 was allocated for the construction phase of the Project.

The total funds for this Project were identified under Capital Improvement Project Account No.'s and in the amounts listed below:

Account No. Funding Source Description Amount
F214 CC303 SC7004
PID2014-214
Ped Grant/Art3
(Fund 214) Day Creek Trail Project $469,685
F105 CC208 SC7004
PID2014-105
AB2766 Air Quality
Improvement
(Fund 105)
Day Creek Trail Project $298,350
F177 CC303 SC7004
PID2014-177
Measure I
(Fund 177)
Day Creek Trail Project $79,610

Page 140 ends

Page 3 ends

3 0
4 6
F177 CC303 SC7004
PID2014-176
Measure I
(Fund 176)
Day Creek Trail Project $65,560
F1198 CC303 SC7004
PID2014-198
Infrastructure
(Fund 198)
Day Creek Trail Project $102,730
Total Funding $1,015,935
The final project cost is $986,230 as shown below:

Expenditure Category Amount
Construction Contract $803,925
Construction Inspection Services $112,250
Construction Materials Services $24,540
Procurement of City Supplied Materials $43,935
Bid Noticing Advertisement $1,580
Total Construction Costs $986,230
Construction support costs, including inspection and materials testing were approximately 14% of the final contract amount. Construction management services were performed in-house.

A total of $29,705 remains in the budget and will be returned to the AB2766 Air Quality Improvement (Fund 105) and Infrastructure Fund (Fund 198) to be used for applicable expenses or future capital improvement projects as appropriate.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

This project meets our City Council core values by promoting and enhancing a safe and healthy community for all, and by providing continuous improvement through the construction of high- quality public improvements.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map

Page 141 ends

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 142 ends

DATE: October 1, 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 Jasmine Lopez, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT: Consideration to Approve the Improvement Agreement for DRC2022- 00275 Located at the Southeast Corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Cultural Center Drive; Accept Faithful Performance Bond and Labor & Materials Bond; and Ordering the Annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 2. This Project has been Determined by Staff to Remain Consistent With the Scope and Intensity of Development Permitted Under the Adopted Master Plan Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 21166 and Sections15162 and 15168. (RESOLUTION NO. 2025-076) (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council:

1. Approve the Improvement Agreement for the related public improvements and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign said Agreement;

2. Accept security in the form of bonds for completion of the related public improvements and;

3. Adopt the attached Resolution ordering the annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 2.

BACKGROUND:

On November 15, 2023, the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission approved Case No.

DRC2022-00275 a request to construct a 385-unit multifamily development on roughly 6.38 acres at the southeast corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Cultural Center Drive within the existing mixed-use master-planned area known as Victoria Gardens.

Case No. DRC2022-00275 was approved with a condition that certain public improvements be constructed to city standard, including street improvements, driveway approach, fiber optic conduit installation, and ADA curb ramp improvements.

ANALYSIS:

The developer, Victoria Gardens Investor, LLC, is submitting an Improvement Agreement, the Faithful Performance bond, and Labor & Materials bond in the following amounts:

Faithful Performance Bond $57,800 Bond No. 800005960
Labor and Material Bond $57,800 Bond No. 800005960

Page 143 ends

Page 2 ends

3 0
4 9
Approval of this item by the Council would approve the Improvement Agreements, accept the securities for the construction of certain public improvements, and adopt the attached Resolution ordering the annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 2. Copies of the Improvement Agreement are on file in the City Clerk’s office.

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS:

Pursuant to Section 21166 and Sections 15162 and 15168 of the California Environmental Act (CEQA) and the City’s local CEQA Guidelines, the Planning Department staff determined that the proposed development remains consistent with the scope and intensity of development permitted under the adopted Master Plan. The project does not introduce new or significantly different environmental impacts beyond those previously evaluated in the 2002 Certified EIR and the 2009 Certified SEIR. As such, the proposed project is adequately addressed by the environmental review and mitigation measures outlined in the 2002 EIR, the 2009 SEIR, and the 2018 Addendum.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The proposed annexations would supply additional annual revenue into Victoria Neighborhood Parks and Landscape Maintenance District in the following amount:

Victoria Neighborhood Parks and Landscape Maintenance District No. 2: $161,861.70 COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

This item addresses the City Council’s vision to build on our success as a world class community, to create an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant city, rich in opportunity for all to thrive through the construction of high-quality public improvements.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
Attachment 2 - Resolution Ordering Annexation LMD No. 2

Page 144 ends

ATTACHMENT 1

Case No. DRC2022-00275
Vicinity Map

NOT TO SCALE

Legend:

Project Site

Page 145 ends

Resolution No. 2025-XXX – Page 1 of 6
ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE

ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 (VICTORIA NEIGHBORHOOD
PARKS) FOR DRC2022-00275
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has previously formed a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the “Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972”, being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California (the “Act”, said special maintenance district known and designated as Victoria Neighborhood Parks and Landscape Maintenance District (LMD 2) (the “District”); and WHEREAS, the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 2 of the Act authorize the annexation of additional territory to the District; and
WHEREAS, such provisions also provide that the requirement for the preparation of resolutions, and assessment engineer’s report, notices of public hearing and the right of majority protest may be waived in writing with the written consent of all of the owners of property within the territory to be annexed; and
WHEREAS, notwithstanding that such provisions of the Act related to the annexation of territory to the District, Article XIII D of the Constitution of the State of California (“Article XIII D”) establishes certain procedural requirements for the authorization to levy assessments which apply to the levy of annual assessments for the District on the territory proposed to be annexed to such District; and
WHEREAS, the owners of certain property described in Exhibit A attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, have requested that such property (collectively, the “Territory”) be annexed to the District in order to provide for the levy of annual assessments to finance the maintenance of certain improvements described in Exhibit B hereto (the “Improvements”); and
WHEREAS, all of the owners of the Territory have filed with the City Clerk duly executed forms entitled “Consent And Waiver To Annexation Of Certain Real Property To A Maintenance District And Approval Of The Levy Of Assessments On Such Real Property” (the “Consent and Waiver”); and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the Act to the annexation of the Territory to the District and have expressly consented to the annexation of the Territory to the District; and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the Act and/or Article XIII D applicable to the authorization to levy the proposed annual assessment against the Territory set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and have declared support for, consent to and approval of the authorization to levy such proposed annual assessment set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto; and

Page 146 ends

Resolution No. 2025-XXX – Page 2 of 6
6 1
6 8
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also expressly agreed for themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns that:
(1) The proportionate special benefit derived by each parcel in the Territory from the District Improvements has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the maintenance and operation expenses of the Improvements; (2) The proposed annual assessment does not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit from the Improvements conferred on each parcel in the Territory.
(3) Only the special benefits derived or to be derived by each parcel in the Territory from the Improvements have been included in the proposed annual assessment.

WHEREAS, at this time the City Council desires to order the annexation of the Territory to the District and to authorize the levy of annual assessments against the Territory in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit C hereto.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1: That the above recitals are true and correct.

SECTION 2: The City Council hereby finds and determines that:
a. The annual assessments proposed to be levied on each parcel in the Territory do not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on each such parcel from the Improvements. b. The proportional special benefit derived by each parcel in the Territory from the Improvements has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the cost of the maintenance of the Improvement. c. Only special benefits will be assessed on the Territory by the levy of the proposed annual assessments.

SECTION 3: This legislative body hereby orders the annexation the Territory to the District, approves the financing of the maintenance of the Improvements from the proceeds of annual assessments to be levied against the Territory and approves and orders the levy of annual assessments against the Territory in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit C.

SECTION 4: All future proceedings of the District, including the levy of all assessments, shall be applicable of the Territory.

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

Exhibit A
Identification of the Owner and Description of the Property to be Annexed

Page 147 ends

Resolution No. 2025-XXX – Page 5 of 6
6 1
6 8
The Owner of the Property is:

VICTORIA GARDENS INVESTOR LLC
The legal description of the Property is:

PARCEL MAP 15641 PARCELS 22 AND 23 AND THAT PTN PARCEL 1 PARCEL MAP 7966 LYING W OF PARCEL C AND N OF PARCEL F PARCEL MAP 15716-1 AND S OF CULTURAL CENTER EX ANY PTN LYING WITHIN PARCEL MAP 15716-1 Assessor’s Parcels Numbers of the Property:
1090-531-02-0000
Exhibit B
Description of the District Improvements
Fiscal Year 2025/26
Victoria Neighborhood Parks and Landscape Maintenance District (LMD 2):

Victoria Neighborhood Parks and Landscape Maintenance District (LMD 2) (the “Maintenance District”) represents landscape sites throughout the Victoria Planned Community.

The sites maintained by the district consist of parkways, median islands, street trees, paseos, community trails and parks. Parks within LMD No. 2 include Ellena Park, Kenyon Park, Victoria Arbors Park, Victoria Groves Park, Vintage Park, and Windrows Park.

Proposed additions to the Improvements for Project DRC2022-00275:

None.

Exhibit C
Proposed Annual Assessment
Fiscal Year 2025/26
Landscape Maintenance District No. 2 (Victoria Planned Community):

The Maximum Assessment rate per Equivalent Benefit Unit (EBU) is $54.60 for the fiscal year 2025/26. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for Victoria Neighborhood Parks and Landscape Maintenance District (LMD 2) for DRC2022-00275:

Parcel Land Use Category
Total Benefit
Points
Parcel
Factor
Maximum
Allowable
Assessment
Single-Family Residential 11.00 Parcel $589.22
Condominium Residential 8.10 Unit 433.62

Page 148 ends

Resolution No. 2025-XXX – Page 7 of 6
6 1
6 8
Multi-Family Residential 7.70 Unit 411.96
Commercial/Industrial 52.00 Acre 2,785.44
Public Service Parcels-Church/Fire
Station/School 3.00 Acre 160.70
Undeveloped 2.20 Acre 117.33
Common
Area/Roads/Easements/Utility 0.00 Parcel 0.00
The proposed annual assessment for the property described in Exhibit A is as follows:
385 Units x 7.70 Total Benefit Points x $54.60 Maximum Assessment per Benefit Unit = $161,861.70 Annual Assessment
*Commencing with fiscal year 2014/15, the maximum allowable assessment amount may be increased by the lesser of 3.0% or the percentage change in the year ending February preceding the start of the Fiscal Year of the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U), for the Riverside – San Bernardino – Ontario Consumer Price Index area.

Page 149 ends

DATE: October 1, 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 Jasmine Lopez, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT: Consideration to Order the Annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 Related to Case No. BPR2025-00023 (Project), Located at 9325 Lomita Drive. This Project has been Determined by Staff to be Permitted by Right Under State Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) Law. (RESOLUTION NO. 2025-078) (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council adopt the attached resolution ordering the annexation of the land at 9325 Lomita Drive into Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 for Case No. BPR2025- 00023.

BACKGROUND:

On April 22, 2025, Case No. BPR2025-00023 (Project) was accepted to begin review for the proposed construction of an 831 square foot additional dwelling unit, 499 square foot junior additional dwelling unit, and an addition of 1,106 square feet to the existing home located at 9325 Lomita Drive. Per the City’s Municipal Code, it is required that the applicant sign the Consent and Waiver Form to annex the subject property into the appropriate Landscape Maintenance District.

ANALYSIS:

The owner, Johnson Chen, has submitted the required Consent and Waiver to Annexation form to be annexed into Landscape Maintenance District No. 1. A copy of the form is on file with the City Clerk’s office.

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS:

Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s adopted CEQA Guidelines, staff has determined that the proposed project is not subject to discretionary development review and is permitted by right under State Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) law.

Nonetheless, the project qualifies for a Class 1 Categorical Exemption under Section 15301 of the State CEQA Guidelines - Existing Facilities. This exemption applies to projects involving negligible or no expansion of use and allows for additions of up to 50 percent of the existing floor area or 2,500 square feet, whichever is greater.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The proposed annexations would supply additional annual revenue into Landscape Maintenance District in the following amount:

Landscape Maintenance District No. 1: $92.21

Page 150 ends

Page 2 ends

3 0
5 1
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

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

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
Attachment 2 - Resolution Ordering Annexation LMD No. 1

Page 151 ends

ATTACHMENT 1

Case No. BPR2025-00023
Vicinity Map

NOT TO SCALE

Project Site

Page 152 ends

Resolution No. 2025-XXX – Page 1 of 6
ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE

ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (GENERAL CITY) FOR
PROJECT CASE NO. BPR2025-00023
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has previously formed a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the “Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972”, being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California (the “Act”, said special maintenance district known and designated as Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (General City) (the “District”); and WHEREAS, the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 2 of the Act authorize the annexation of additional territory to the District; and
WHEREAS, such provisions also provide that the requirement for the preparation of resolutions, and assessment engineer’s report, notices of public hearing and the right of majority protest may be waived in writing with the written consent of all of the owners of property within the territory to be annexed; and
WHEREAS, notwithstanding that such provisions of the Act related to the annexation of territory to the District, Article XIII D of the Constitution of the State of California (“Article XIII D”) establishes certain procedural requirements for the authorization to levy assessments which apply to the levy of annual assessments for the District on the territory proposed to be annexed to such District; and
WHEREAS, the owners of certain property described in Exhibit A attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, have requested that such property (collectively, the “Territory”) be annexed to the District in order to provide for the levy of annual assessments to finance the maintenance of certain improvements described in Exhibit B hereto (the “Improvements”); and
WHEREAS, all of the owners of the Territory have filed with the City Clerk duly executed forms entitled “Consent And Waiver To Annexation Of Certain Real Property To A Maintenance District And Approval Of The Levy Of Assessments On Such Real Property” (the “Consent and Waiver”); and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the Act to the annexation of the Territory to the District and have expressly consented to the annexation of the Territory to the District; and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the Act and/or Article XIII D applicable to the authorization to levy the proposed annual assessment against the Territory set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and have declared support for, consent to and approval of the authorization to levy such proposed annual assessment set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto; and

Page 153 ends

Resolution No. 2025-XXX – Page 2 of 6
6 1
7 2
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also expressly agreed for themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns that:
(1) The proportionate special benefit derived by each parcel in the Territory from the District Improvements has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the maintenance and operation expenses of the Improvements; (2) The proposed annual assessment does not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit from the Improvements conferred on each parcel in the Territory.
(3) Only the special benefits derived or to be derived by each parcel in the Territory from the Improvements have been included in the proposed annual assessment.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1: That the above recitals are true and correct.

SECTION 2: The City Council hereby finds and determines that:
a. The annual assessments proposed to be levied on each parcel in the Territory do not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on each such parcel from the
Improvements.
b. The proportional special benefit derived by each parcel in the Territory from the Improvements has been determined in
relationship to the entirety of the cost of the maintenance of the Improvement.
c. Only special benefits will be assessed on the Territory by the levy of the proposed annual assessments.

SECTION 4: All future proceedings of the District, including the levy of all assessments, shall be applicable of the Territory.

Page 154 ends

Resolution No. 2025-XXX – Page 3 of 6
6 1
7 2
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this ________ day of ______________ 2025.

Page 155 ends

Resolution No. 2025-XXX – Page 4 of 6
6 1
7 2
Exhibit A
Identification of the Owner and Description of the Property to be Annexed The Owner of the Property is:

CHEN, JOHNSON
The legal description of the Property is:

PARCEL MAP 3519 PARCEL 1
Assessor’s Parcels Numbers of the Property:
0202-082-35-0000

Page 156 ends

Resolution No. 2025-XXX – Page 5 of 6
6 1
7 2
Exhibit B
Description of the District Improvements
Fiscal Year 2025/26
Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (General City):

Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (General City) (the “Maintenance District”) represents various landscaped areas, parks and community trails located at various sites throughout the City. These sites consist of several non-contiguous areas throughout the City. As such, the parcels within this District do not represent a distinct district area as do the other LMD’s within the City. Typically, new parcels within this District have been annexed upon development.

The various sites maintained by the District consist of parkways, median islands, paseos, street trees, entry monuments, community trails and parks. The parks consist of Bear Gulch Park, East and West Beryl Park, Old Town Park, Church Street Park, Golden Oaks Park, Hermosa Park, and the undeveloped Don Tiburcio Tapia Park.

Proposed additions to the Improvements for Project Case No. BPR2025-00023:

NONE

Page 157 ends

Resolution No. 2025-XXX – Page 6 of 6
6 1
7 2
Exhibit C
Proposed Annual Assessment
Fiscal Year 2025/26
Landscape Maintenance District No.1 (General City):

The rate per Equivalent Benefit Unit (EBU) is $92.21 for the fiscal year 2025/26. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (General City) for BPR2025-00023:

Land Use Basis
EBU*
Factor
Rate per
EBU*
Single Family Residential Parcel 1.00 $92.21
Multi-Family Residential Unit 0.50 92.21
Non-Residential Acre 2.00 92.21
The proposed annual assessment for the property described in Exhibit A is as follows:

1.00 Parcel x 1.00 EBU Factor x $92.21 Rate per EBU = $92.21 Annual Assessment

Page 158 ends

DATE: October 1, 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 Jasmine Lopez, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT: Consideration to Order the Annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 Related to Case No. DRC2023-00418 (Project), Located at 10142 24th Street. (RESOLUTION NO. 2025-077) (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council adopt the attached resolution ordering the annexation of the land at 10142 24 th Street into Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 for Case No. DRC2023- 00418.

BACKGROUND:

On August 8, 2024, Case No. DRC2023-00418 (Project) was approved by the Planning Department for the proposed construction of a 2,116-square-foot, two-story single-family residence with an attached 385-square-foot garage on a 7,500-square-foot undeveloped lot located at 10142 24 th Street. Per the City’s Municipal Code, it is required that the applicant sign the Consent and Waiver Form to annex the subject property into the appropriate Landscape and Maintenance Districts.

ANALYSIS:

The owner, Jesus Pinzon, has submitted the required Consent and Waiver to Annexation form to be annexed into Landscape Maintenance District No. 1. A copy of the form is on file with the City Clerk’s office.

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS:

Pursuant to the California Environmental Act (CEQA) and the City’s local CEQA Guidelines, the Planning Department staff determined that the Project qualifies as a Class 3 Exemption under State CEQA Guidelines. Section 15303 – New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. A Notice of Exemption was filed with the San Bernardino County Clerk of the Board of Supervisors on September 30, 2024.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The proposed annexations would supply additional annual revenue into Landscape Maintenance District in the following amount:

Landscape Maintenance District No. 1: $92.21

Page 159 ends

Page 2 ends

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

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

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map
Attachment 2 - Resolution Ordering Annexation LMD No. 1

Page 160 ends

ATTACHMENT 1

Case No. DRC2023-00418
Vicinity Map

NOT TO SCALE

Project Site

Page 161 ends

Resolution No. 2025-XXX – Page 1 of 6
ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE

ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (GENERAL CITY) FOR
PROJECT CASE NO. DRC2023-00418
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has previously formed a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the “Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972”, being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California (the “Act”, said special maintenance district known and designated as Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (General City) (the “District”); and WHEREAS, the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 2 of the Act authorize the annexation of additional territory to the District; and
WHEREAS, such provisions also provide that the requirement for the preparation of resolutions, and assessment engineer’s report, notices of public hearing and the right of majority protest may be waived in writing with the written consent of all of the owners of property within the territory to be annexed; and
WHEREAS, notwithstanding that such provisions of the Act related to the annexation of territory to the District, Article XIII D of the Constitution of the State of California (“Article XIII D”) establishes certain procedural requirements for the authorization to levy assessments which apply to the levy of annual assessments for the District on the territory proposed to be annexed to such District; and
WHEREAS, the owners of certain property described in Exhibit A attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, have requested that such property (collectively, the “Territory”) be annexed to the District in order to provide for the levy of annual assessments to finance the maintenance of certain improvements described in Exhibit B hereto (the “Improvements”); and
WHEREAS, all of the owners of the Territory have filed with the City Clerk duly executed forms entitled “Consent And Waiver To Annexation Of Certain Real Property To A Maintenance District And Approval Of The Levy Of Assessments On Such Real Property” (the “Consent and Waiver”); and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the Act to the annexation of the Territory to the District and have expressly consented to the annexation of the Territory to the District; and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the Act and/or Article XIII D applicable to the authorization to levy the proposed annual assessment against the Territory set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and have declared support for, consent to and approval of the authorization to levy such proposed annual assessment set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto; and

Page 162 ends

Resolution No. 2025-XXX – Page 2 of 6
6 1
7 0
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also expressly agreed for themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns that:
(1) The proportionate special benefit derived by each parcel in the Territory from the District Improvements has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the maintenance and operation expenses of the Improvements; (2) The proposed annual assessment does not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit from the Improvements conferred on each parcel in the Territory.
(3) Only the special benefits derived or to be derived by each parcel in the Territory from the Improvements have been included in the proposed annual assessment.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1: That the above recitals are true and correct.

SECTION 2: The City Council hereby finds and determines that:
a. The annual assessments proposed to be levied on each parcel in the Territory do not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on each such parcel from the
Improvements.
b. The proportional special benefit derived by each parcel in the Territory from the Improvements has been determined in
relationship to the entirety of the cost of the maintenance of the Improvement.
c. Only special benefits will be assessed on the Territory by the levy of the proposed annual assessments.

SECTION 4: All future proceedings of the District, including the levy of all assessments, shall be applicable of the Territory.

Page 163 ends

Resolution No. 2025-XXX – Page 3 of 6
6 1
7 0
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this ________ day of ______________ 2025.

Page 164 ends

Resolution No. 2025-XXX – Page 4 of 6
6 1
7 0
Exhibit A
Identification of the Owner and Description of the Property to be Annexed The Owner of the Property is:

JELIMAK FAMILY ASSETS LLC
The legal description of the Property is:

NORTH CUCAMONGA TOWNS1TE LOT 16 BLK 6O
Assessor’s Parcels Numbers of the Property:
0209-102-25-0000

Page 165 ends

Resolution No. 2025-XXX – Page 5 of 6
6 1
7 0
Exhibit B
Description of the District Improvements
Fiscal Year 2025/26
Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (General City):

Proposed additions to the Improvements for Project Case No. DRC2023-00418:

NONE

Page 166 ends

Resolution No. 2025-XXX – Page 6 of 6
6 1
7 0
Exhibit C
Proposed Annual Assessment
Fiscal Year 2025/26
Landscape Maintenance District No.1 (General City):

Page 167 ends

DATE: October 1, 2025
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jennifer Nakamura, CNU-A, Planning Director Sophia Serafin, AICP, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: Preliminary Review Hearing to Consider Proposed General Plan Amendments and Zoning Map Amendments to Redesignate 3 Acres of Land at the Red Hill Country Club from a General Plan Land Use Designation of General Open Space and Facilities to Traditional Neighborhood and Rezone the Land from Parks (P) to Low (L) Residential along the Ninth Hole of the Golf Course and Calle Casino for the Purpose of Single-Family Residential Development and Redesignate 3 Acres of Land from a General Plan Land Use Designation of General Open Space and Facilities to Suburban Neighborhood - Low and Rezone the Land from Parks (P) to Medium (M) Residential for the Purpose of Multi-Family Development in the Existing Lower Parking Lot and Tennis Courts of the Country Club along Red Hill Country Club Drive. (CITY) RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council consider the following:

1. That the City Council consider the policy implications of a proposed General Plan Map Amendments and Zoning Map Amendments for the purpose of redesignating an Open Space and Facilities General Plan land use designation to Traditional Neighborhood and Suburban Neighborhood - Low and rezoning the Parks (P) zone to Low (L) Residential and Medium (M) Residential at two specific project site areas within the Red Hill Country Club, located along Calle Casino and Red Hill Country Club Drive, respectively.

2. That the City Council provide comments so that the applicant can consider whether to proceed with the applications, recognizing that the Council’s direction is not an approval, a guarantee of future approval, nor a guarantee of future recommendation of approval from staff.

BACKGROUND:

Policy
In August 2021, the City Council adopted a policy on providing early Council feedback on applicant-initiated General Plan amendments, Specific Plans, Master Plans, and Development Code amendments, which are considered legislative actions that vest considerable discretion in the City Council. The Current request is for a General Plan Map Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment. This early feedback from Council is to be provided via an administrative hearing.

Page 168 ends

Page 2 ends

3 0
2 5
The policy is attached to this staff report for reference as Attachment 1.

In summary, the intent of this policy is that after receiving early Council feedback, the applicant can decide whether to pursue the legislative amendments, and any other entitlements necessary for their project prior to investing significant costs and resources into a project, with the Council’s preliminary policy considerations in mind.

Intent
The purpose of a General Plan Map Amendment is to change the General Plan land use designation for any parcel(s), provided it can be found that the amendment is in the public interest and that the General Plan, as amended, will remain internally consistent. For General Plan Amendments requested by a private property owner, the applicant will have to demonstrate that there is a substantial public benefit to be derived from such amendment and how the proposed amendment furthers the goals of the General Plan.

The purpose of a Zoning Map Amendment is to rezone or change the zoning designation on the zoning map for any parcel(s), provided it can be found that the Zoning Map Amendment is consistent with the General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs.

Site Context and Proposal
The Red Hill Country Club was first constructed in 1922 while the site was under the jurisdiction of San Bernardino County. When the City of Rancho Cucamonga incorporated in 1977, the Red Hill Country Club fell under the jurisdiction of the City. As early as the 1981 General Plan, the Red Hill Country Club has been classified under and open space land use designation. This land use designation has remained for the site, with the 2021 General Plan maintaining the designation with the General Open Space and Facilities designation. The Red Hill Country Club overall consists of five parcels totaling approximately 132 acres of land with frontages mainly along Red Hill Country Club Drive and Calle Casino.

The applicant, Red Hill Country Club, is proposing to convert the General Plan land use designation and the zoning designation of two, three acre parcels within the existing Country Club in order to set aside land for residential development. One area would be for single-family development of 13 lots while the other area would be for multi-family development of 42 units.

The single-family development area is an unimproved area along the ninth hole of the golf course and Calle Casino that contains foliage. The applicant proposes a General Plan land use designation of Traditional Neighborhood at this area, which allows a maximum residential density of eight units per acre. The zoning designation is proposed to be Low (L) Residential, which allows a maximum density of six units per acre. The multi-family development area is located where the existing lower parking lot and tennis court area are along Red Hill Country Club Drive. This area is currently improved with a parking lot, tennis courts, and landscaping. This area is proposed to receive a General Plan land use designation of Suburban Neighborhood - Low, which allows for a maximum density of 14 units per acre. The proposed zoning designation would be Medium (M) Residential, which permits a residential density between 8 and 14 units per acre.

Page 169 ends

Page 3 ends

3 0
2 5
Figure 1- Subject Areas
A reconfiguration of the existing golf course would be required in order to accommodate the single-family development area. This would consist of changes to the current locations of the fourth and ninth holes as well as the addition of a new water feature on the fourth hole. The overall play length and course challenge would be maintained. Subsequent improvements would also occur as a result of the residential development, including paving a new parking lot and pickleball courts near the existing clubhouse, constructing a new code compliant swimming pool, and constructing a multi-use amenity building to house a snack bar, restrooms, locker rooms, and a fitness studio. Replacement and modernization will also occur to the maintenance facility as well as the club’s irrigation system and controls in order to maximize water efficiency.

Page 170 ends

Page 4 ends

3 0
2 5
Figure 2 – Proposed Site Changes
The purpose of the request to redesignate and rezone portions of land at the Red Hill Country Club for residential use serves to improve the financial footing of the Country Club such that they are able to reinvest in the aforementioned facilities and upgrades that will support the Club’s long range planning goals, expand the recreational offerings, and enhance the member experience.

Investing in residential development on the site provides a financial means to achieve these goals.

The Country Club currently contains a General Plan land use designation of General Open Space and Facilities, which is not intended for residential development as it serves to support lands utilized for recreational, educational, public utility, and flood control uses and systems. The designation does allow for minimal residential development, permitting one unit per ten acres, but this density would not be sufficient for the Country Club to achieve their intended goals. The Country Club also contains a zoning designation of Parks (P), which does not specify a permitted density and therefore defaults to the General Plan land use designation. Both single-family and multi-family uses are not permitted within the zone either. As such, the Red Hill Country would not be capable of developing residential units at the intended density given the existing designation and zoning of the site.

ANALYSIS:

Some of the policy considerations that the Council may contemplate as part of their initial feedback on the subject property may include neighborhood impacts, impact development, and whether the use is appropriate for the site. Below is a summary of the proposed legislative changes with an analysis by staff.

Summary and Analysis of Proposed Legislative Changes

1. A General Plan Map Amendment to redesignate the Country Club’s area along the ninth hole and Calle Casino from a General Plan land use designation of Open Space and

Page 171 ends

Page 5 ends

3 0
2 5
Facilities to Traditional Neighborhood and a Zoning Map Amendment to convert the zoning from Parks (P) to Low (L) Residential in order to allow for the development of 13 single-family lots with minimum lot sizes of 7,200 square feet.

2. A General Plan Map Amendment to redesignate the Country Club’s existing lower parking lot and tennis court area along Red Hill Country Club Drive from a General Plan land use designation of Open Space and Facilities to Suburban Neighborhood - Low and a Zoning Map Amendment to convert the zoning from Parks (P) to Medium (M) Residential in order to allow for the development of 42 multi-family residential units.

As the two proposed requests are substantially similar, there are advantages that apply to both requests. The following are the pros:

1. Housing - The opportunity to develop more housing units will be created, allowing the City to make further progress in achieving its share of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) as listed in General Plan Goal and Policy H-1.1. Redesignating the areas to allow for housing will also increase the property taxes as the site can be reevaluated after improvements are performed and housing is developed. A portion of the property tax goes toward the City, allowing for an increase in revenues generated. A portion of the residences, if not all, will be developed as desirable, for-sale units within the City as well. The types of units developed between to two areas will also differ, offering an assortment of housing types and price points that support General Plan Goal H-1.

2. The Red Hill Country Club predates the formation of the City and has a long standing presence in the community and local business network. These actions would allow for the Country Club to improve their financial footing and generate capital that will be reinvested in facilities to support the long range planning goals of the club, expand their recreational offerings, and enhance the member experience such that they can continue to remain a viable business within the community. These actions support General Plan Goal LC3.10, which encourages development that will support and/or enhance the operations of existing businesses. Maintaining the success of the Country Club benefits the City economically as it maintains higher property taxes collected on residences located in the vicinity of the club, generates tax revenue for the City through property taxes and business taxes applied to the club itself, and allows for the Country Club to perform improvements that have the potential to increase the valuation of the property and the subsequent property tax assessment.

The two requests also similarly have disadvantages that apply to both requests. The following are the cons:

1. Redesignating the subject portions of the Country Club for housing purposes will result in a loss of a portion of the existing golf course property and open space. Although the Red Hill Country Club is a membership and fee based, a loss of available open space will occur as the course and recreational spaces will have to be reduced in size in order to accommodate the potential housing developments. Redesignating land that has been historically utilized as open space for residential use will likely diminish any future opportunities to revert the area back to open space. As such, redesignating the minimal land that the City has available for open space will be further reduced. General Plan Goal RC-6.4 calls for the protection of the City’s healthy trees in order for them to provide shade, carbon sequestration, and purify the air. Goal RC-6.15 similarly calls for heat island reductions through vegetative cover and planting as well as substantial tree canopy

Page 172 ends

Page 6 ends

3 0
2 5
coverage, which the golf course currently provides. The proposed actions would contravene the implementation of these goals, even if only minimally.

2. Although the Country Club, specifically the golf course, has not been previously evaluated or determined to qualify as a historic resource, there is probable evidence that the site has the potential to be designated as a historical site due to its more than 100 year history, notable designers of the course, and impact it has had in the community and larger region.

If the proposed areas were to be redesignated and rezoned to allow for residential development, portions of the layout of the golf course would have to be restructured in such a way that may impact the potential historic designation. Ultimately, the potential historic designation could be affected by these actions. General Plan Goal RC-4.4 encourages the preservation of historic resources, buildings, and landscapes, a goal that may be compromised as a result of the proposed map amendments.

3. Community members who purchased homes in the surrounding neighborhood of the Country Club, specifically the residences that contain views directly onto the golf course, may react negatively to the request as it affects their visibility. While maintaining views in not an enforceable action, the Red Hill Country Club’s longstanding presence in the Red Hill community has established the club as an important identity of the neighborhood.

Alterations to this identity have the potential to be received negatively and generate pushback from residents throughout the entitlement process. General Plan Policy LC-4.1 calls for the preservation and enhancement of the character of existing residential neighborhoods, to which the proposed actions may conflict with.

4. While the proposal will allow for additional, needed housing to be developed, it is not likely that any of the units will be offered at an affordable rate. General Plan Goal H-2 calls for a City where housing opportunities meet the needs of all socioeconomic segments of the community, specifically through the development of affordable housing. Given the context of the existing neighborhood and the applicant’s proposal, it is likely that both the single- family and multi-family units will be for-sale at market rate. As such, the redesignation and rezoning of these two areas within the Country Club will not contribute towards the goal of developing affordable housing options.

Additional Considerations
Additional considerations to consider for the portion of the golf course along the ninth hole and Calle Casino that the applicant proposes to redesignate to Traditional Neighborhood and rezone to Low (L) Residential to allow for the development of 13 single-family residences as the current configuration proposes a layout containing a cul-de-sac. General Plan Goal LC-4.12 discourages conventional suburban neighborhood design, including discontinuous cul-de-sac street patterns.

To achieve this goal through objective development standards as required in the Housing Accountability Act, the Development Code prohibits the development of new cul-de-sac streets.

The applicant proposes the cul-de-sac due to the unique site constraints on the property which they state prevents the development from extending connectivity westwards from Calle Casino and Camino Sur across Red Hill Country Club. As a result, the applicant has found the cul-de- sac layout to be the most practical and context-sensitive solution. Since cul-de-sacs cannot be permitted under current regulations, an additional legislative approval would have to be pursued, such as a code amendment or master plan.

For the lower parking lot and tennis court portion of the Country Club that is proposed for redesignation to Suburban Neighborhood - Low and rezoning to Medium (M) Residential to allow for 42 muti-family units, additional considerations should be made regarding alignment with the

Page 173 ends

Page 7 ends

3 0
2 5
adjacent property designations. The condominium development directly to the east of the subject area contains a General Plan land use designation of Traditional Neighborhood and a zoning designation of Medium (M) Residential. The Traditional Neighborhood land use designation permits a maximum density of eight units per acre. The existing development contains an actual density of eight units per acre, which is compliant with the General Plan land use designation of Traditional Neighborhood. Given that the Country Club is planning for a similar type of residential development, consistency with adjacent designations should generally be followed. If the Suburban Neighborhood - Low General Plan land use designation were to be applied at this location, a maximum density of 14 units per acre would be permitted. Not only would this not align with the adjacent designation, but the density would no longer act as a gradual transition to the lower density, single-family neighborhood to the north and northeast, as required in General Plan Policy LC - 4.11 , which requires new neighborhoods provide appropriate transitions in scale, building type and density between different General Plan designations, Place Types and Community Planning Areas. To meet this policy, density would need to be lower than the adjacent condominium development of 8 dwelling units per acre and greater than the adjacent open space which does not allow residential development.

One final consideration for the council should be the public comments of previous development projects in the Red Hill neighborhood. This historic neighborhood predates city incorporation with limited new development. Each of the developments brought in the last 5-10 years have brought forth public comment regarding traffic in the neighborhood and impacts to existing owners. There is still one existing entitlement yet to be built at the corner of Foothill and Grove that will add 308 multi-family units. While a formal review of any traffic impacts and mitigations required would be considered as part of any entitlement review, the perception of increased traffic issues by residents of the Red Hill neighborhood with each new development remains. While there is limited land left for residential development in Red Hill, redesignating open space for residential will likely continue to press upon the existing infrastructure and while it may or may not become a significant impact from traffic or environmental thresholds, it will likely be perceived by the public as such.

In conclusion, after the administrative hearing, the applicant can determine if they would like to proceed through the standard development review process. If the City Council’s input is not positive, staff shall use this feedback to problem solve with the applicant and make recommendations to the developer for project revisions to address input provided or 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 the revised or alternative proposal may be a better solution.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact at this time as the subject recommendation only involves policy discussions related to General Plan and Zoning Amendments.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

Considering the potential application prior to the applicant formally submitting an application as part of the early action policy achieves the Council value of working together cooperatively and respectfully with each other, staff, and all stakeholders. As the applicant is still early in the development process, this discussion with the City Council represents a good faith effort to vet potential major project concerns and questions prior to the developers investing significant costs and resources into formally proposing development at these sites.

Page 174 ends

Page 8 ends

3 0
2 5
ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 – Council Policy on Legislative Planning Applications Attachment 2 – Request Letter

Page 175 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 176 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 177 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 178 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 179 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 180 ends

Page 335 ends

Page 181 ends

Page 336 ends

Page 182 ends

Page 1 ends

SENT VIA EMAIL TO: [email protected]
August 28, 2025
Jennifer Nakamura
Planning Director

CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Subject: Red Hill Country Club – Land Development Discussion Dear Jennifer,
Thank you for the opportunity to meet and discuss Red Hill Country Club’s interest in pursuing a thoughtful and limited development of underutilized portions of its property over the past months. I am writing to you as both a member of the Club’s Board of Directors and as a land development professional who is assisting the Club in evaluating the feasibility and planning of this initiative.

This effort is driven by the Club’s desire to improve its financial footing and reinvest in facilities that will support its long-range planning goals, expand recreational offerings, and enhance the member experience at our 104-year-old institution.

Specifically, the Club is exploring the potential development of two distinct 3-acre areas:
• The first parcel consists of the Club’s lower-level parking area. We are seeking a zoning designation of M – Medium Residential to allow up to 14 dwelling units per acre. • The second parcel lies along the ninth hole, paralleling Calle Casino. Here, we propose a zoning designation of L – Low Residential, and the development of up to 13 single-family lots, each with a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet.

With respect to the second parcel consisting of up to 13 single-family lots, we recognize the City’s and community stakeholders’ emphasis on creating connected neighborhoods with grid-patterned street layouts and a limited use of cul-de-sacs. However, given the unique constraints of our property—particularly the inability to extend connectivity westward from Calle Casino and Camino Sur across Red Hill Country Club—a small cul-de-sac configuration is the most practical and context-sensitive solution. This approach allows for the maximum use of excess land without disrupting the surrounding environment.

Attachment 2

Page 183 ends

Page 2 ends

Proceeds from the proposed development would be used to reinvest in key Club infrastructure, including:
• New parking and pickleball courts near the existing clubhouse. • A new, code compliant pool with modern, energy efficient systems. • A multi-use amenity building to house a snack bar, restrooms, locker rooms, and a fitness studio. • Upgrades to the Club’s maintenance facility, which is in urgent need of replacement and modernization.
• Modernize the Club’s irrigation system and controls to maximize water efficiency.

To accommodate these enhancements, the fourth and ninth golf holes would be reconfigured. These changes would preserve the play length and challenge of the course while introducing a new fourth hole featuring a signature water feature that would greatly enhance the aesthetic and appeal of the golf experience.

As discussed in our prior meetings, I have attached a conceptual master plan that reflects the Club’s long- term vision once these improvements are completed.

On behalf of Red Hill Country Club, we sincerely appreciate your willingness to bring this initiative forward for preliminary staff and City Council discussion. We respectfully request the City’s consideration of a General Plan Amendment to redesignate approximately 6 acres of our 132-acre property from Open Space to Traditional Neighborhood and Suburban Neighborhood Low, along with corresponding zoning amendments from Parks to Low Residential and Medium Residential.

Thank you again for your time and thoughtful consideration.

Please let me know if there is any additional information I can provide in support of this request. We look forward to working with the City and continuing this conversation.

Best Regards,

Mark Bertone
President, Madole & Associates, Inc.

Board Member, Red Hill Country Club

Cc: Todd Meginness, Interim General Manager, Red Hill Country Club Board of Directors, Red Hill Country Club

Page 184 ends

DATE: October 1, 2025
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Peter Castro, Deputy City Manager - Administrative Services SUBJECT: Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No. 1047, to be Read by Title Only and Waive Further Reading, Amending Section 2.16.030 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Pertaining to Salaries for Mayor and Members of the City Council. (ORDINANCE NO. 1047) (CITY) RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council introduce for first reading Ordinance No. 1047, to be read by title only and waive further reading, pertaining to salaries for Mayor and Members of the City Council.

BACKGROUND:

The California Government Code provides that a City Council may enact an ordinance providing that each member of the city council shall receive a salary, and that a directly elected Mayor of a general law city may be provided with additional compensation. Those salaries can be adjusted by ordinance in an amount not to exceed 5% for each full calendar year from the operative date of the last adjustment. Any adjustment in Council salaries takes effect following the next regularly scheduled City Council election. Two (2) full calendar years have elapsed since the effective date of the last Council salary adjustment which set the salary at $1,562 per month for Council members and $1,731 per month for the Mayor, effective as of December 2024.

ANALYSIS:

Adoption of Ordinance No. 1047 would provide 5% increases to the Mayor and City Council’s salary. The California Government Code permits increases the compensation to adjust for inflation in order to help keep city councils more diverse by allowing people from across different income levels to serve the public and support their families. The following chart summarizes the 5% change in salaries resulting from this action:

Current Monthly Salary Adjusted Monthly Salary
(Effective December 2026)
City Council $1,562 $1,640
Mayor $1,731 $1,818
FISCAL IMPACT:

The proposed salary adjustments will result in an additional cost of approximately $4,800 per year.

Page 185 ends

Page 2 ends

3 0
5 4
COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

This item is in keeping with the City Council’s core value of intentionally embracing and anticipating our future.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 – Ordinance No. 1047

Page 186 ends

3 9
1 8
ORDINANCE NO. 1047

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,
AMENDING SECTION 2.16.030 OF THE RANCHO

CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO

SALARIES FOR MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE

CITY COUNCIL
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows:

A. RECITALS

1. California Government Code Section 36516 provides, in pertinent part, as follows:
"(a) A City Council may enact an ordinance providing that each member of the City Council shall receive a salary."

2. Government Code subsection 36516(c) allows Council salaries to be increased by ordinance in an amount not to exceed 5% for each full calendar year from the operative date of the last Council salary adjustment.

3. Two full calendar years have elapsed since the effective date of the last Council salary adjustment which set the salary at $1,562 per month, effective as of December 2024. However, this Council intends to modify Council salaries; total compensation increases anticipated in the coming fiscal year, but not to exceed the limit of 5% for each calendar year for each of the past two full calendar years. ·

4. Government Code Section 36516.1 provides authority for a directly elected Mayor of a general law city to be provided with additional compensation.

B. ORDINANCE

IT IS HEREBY ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Subsection A of Section 2.16.030 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended to read, in words and figures, as follows:
"2.16.030 Salary amount and waiver.
"A. Each member of the City Council other than the Mayor shall receive as salary the sum of one thousand six hundred fourty ($1,640) per month. The Mayor shall receive the sum of one thousand eight hundred eighteen dollars ($1,818) per month. The salary shall be paid at the same time and in the same manner as salaries are paid to other officers and employees of the City.

Ordinance No. 1047 - Page 1 of 3 ATTACHMENT 1

Page 187 ends

Ordinance No. 1047 - Page 2 of 3
3 9
1 8
Section 2. The salary increases provided for in this Ordinance shall become available to the members of this Council during December 2026.

Section 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause it to be published in accordance with applicable law.

Page 188 ends

Ordinance No. 1047 - Page 3 of 3
3 9
1 8
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this xx th day of October, 2025. _____________________________
L. Dennis Michael, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
_ Kim Sevy, City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) ss

CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA )
I, Kim Sevy, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced- at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the 1nd day of October 2025, and was passed at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the 15th day of October 2025.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED
Executed this XXth day of October 2025, at Rancho Cucamonga, California. ___________________________________
_ Kim Sevy, City Clerk

Page 189 ends

Rancho Cucamonga City CouncilOctober 1, 2025

Rancho Cucamonga City Council
October 1, 2025