Agenda packet — Redlands City Council, April 21, 2026 (part 1 of 2)

CITY OF REDLANDS

CITY COUNCIL

A G E N D A
April 21, 2026

MARIO SAUCEDO
Mayor
District 3

MARC SHAW
Mayor Pro Tempore
District 4

PAUL BARICH
Council Member
District 5

EDDIE TEJEDA
Council Member
District 2

DENISE DAVIS
Council Member
District 1

JEANNE DONALDSON
City Clerk

PHILLIP DOOLITTLE
City Treasurer
CHARLES M. DUGGAN JR.

City Manager
YVETTE M. ABICH GARCIA
City Attorney
5:00 p.m. Open Public Meeting, Public Comment (Closed Session) 6:00 p.m. Open Session (Public Meeting)
* * *
City Council Chambers
Civic Center, 35 Cajon Street, Redlands, California

A G E N D A
The following information comprises the agenda for the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Redlands at the times noted below in the City Council Chambers, Civic Center, 35 Cajon Street, Redlands, California, on:

Tuesday, April 21, 2026
To join via Zoom on a computer, laptop, or smart device Please visit www.zoom.us, click on Join a Meeting
Enter the Meeting ID 896 2789 8341, then run the Zoom launcher To join via Zoom with audio only (cell phone or landline) Dial 1-877-853-5247
Enter the Meeting ID 896 2789 8341
Should the City lose connectivity on Zoom, we will halt the meeting until it can be restored. To check on the status of remote connectivity in the event of an outage, go to the City's website at www.cityofredlands.org or to the City's Facebook page at @CityofRedlands or the Instagram page at @CityofRedlands_CityHall.

In the event the City cannot reestablish Zoom connectivity in a reasonable amount of time, the Mayor will adjourn the meeting to a future date.

PLEASE NOTE: Anyone desiring to speak on an agendized item at this meeting may do so during the consideration of that time. Due to time constraints and the number of persons who may wish to give oral testimony, public comments will be limited to three (3) minutes.

To provide comment while participating from Council Chambers:

Although it is not required, speakers are encouraged to submit a "Speaker Sign Up Sheet" before the meeting is convened. Forms are available in the Office of the City Clerk or in Council Chambers.

After the meeting has convened, you may place the speaker form in the basket at the table along the north wall of the Chambers. Please do not disturb the City Clerk while the meeting is in progress.

To provide comment through Zoom (on a computer, laptop, or smart device) Click the "Raise Hand" button and the moderator will unmute you when it is your turn to speak To provide comment via audio only (cell phone or landline) Dial *9 to "Raise Hand". The moderator will identify you by your area code and last 3 numbers of your telephone number when it is your turn to speak.

PLEASE SILENCE CELL PHONES, PAGERS AND OTHER ELECTRONIC

COMMUNICATION DEVICES UPON ENTERING THE CHAMBERS
5:00 PM
A. Call City Council Meeting to Order
Remote Participation Disclosure
B. Public Comment
(Any person wishing to provide public comment on a closed session matter may do so at this time.) C. Recess City Council Meeting to a Closed Session

1. Conference with legal counsel: Existing Litigation - Government Code §54956.9(d)(1) (City Attorney Garcia)
One Case:
a. California Department of Housing and Community Development v. Shangri-la Industries, LLC, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. 24STCV00629

2. Conference with real property negotiators - Government Code §54956.8 (Assistant City Manager Christopher Boatman)
Property: APN 0292-063-38-0000
Agency Negotiators: Charles M. Duggan, City Manager; Christopher Boatman, Assistant City Manager Negotiating Party: Seth Davis; Managing Director, Arixa Capital Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of payment for possible purchase of property.

D. Reconvene City Council Meeting at 6:00 p.m.

E. Invocation by Council Member Barich - Pledge of Allegiance (In keeping with long-standing traditions of legislative invocations, this City Council meeting may include a brief invocation. Such invocations are not intended to proselytize or advance any one, or to disparage any other, faith or belief. Neither the City nor the City Council endorses any particular religious belief or form of invocation.) F. Closed Session Report
(No reportable action taken in closed session unless otherwise announced by the City Attorney at this time.) G. Presentations

1. Presentation of the Arbor Day Proclamation to Erik Reeves, FCS Field Services Superintendent (Mayor Saucedo)

2. Presentation of the National Library Week Proclamation presented to Don McCue, Library Director, Dr.

Rosa Gomez, Library Vice President, Les Kong, President Friends of the Library, Diane Shimota, Adult Literacy Coordinator, Ciara Lightner, Library Specialist, and Kristina Naftzger, Librarian (Mayor Saucedo)
H. Public Comment - City Council
I. Consent Calendar
(The following routine items have been recommended for approval and will be acted upon simultaneously unless separate discussion and/or action is requested by a Councilmember or a member of the audience.)

1. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting of April 7, 2026 (City Clerk Donaldson)

2. Authorize issuance of a proclamation declaring April 24, 2026, as Arbor Day in the City of Redlands (Mayor Saucedo)

3. Authorize issuance of a proclamation declaring the week of April 19-25, 2026, as National Library Week (Mayor Saucedo)

4. Approve recommendations for appointments to the Human Relations Commission (Mayor Saucedo, Mayor Pro Tem Shaw, and Council Member Barich)

5. Approve recommendations for appointments to the Citrus Preservation Commission (Mayor Saucedo)

6. Adopt Resolution No. 8774 for a new water service connection to the City of Redlands water distribution system at 2789 Mill Creek Road (APN: 0302-152-06-0000) in the unincorporated community of Mentone and adopt Resolution No. 8775 relating to Pre-Annexation Agreement No. 26-01 (Development Services Director Reilly)

7. Receive and file the 2025 Annual Progress Reports for the General Plan and the 2021-2029 Housing Element
(Development Services Director Reilly)

8. Adopt Resolution No. 8777 Approving the City of Redlands’ Participation in the National Opioids Six Remnant Defendants Settlement; Authorizing the City to Receive Direct Settlement Proceeds; and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute All Related Settlement Documents (Fire Chief Sessler)

9. Approve the First Amendment to the Agreement with Alliant Insurance Services, Inc. as Broker of Record for Property and Casualty Insurance Services to extend the term for one additional year and increase the total compensation to an amount not to exceed to $133,514 (Assistant City Manager McConnell)

10. Adopt Resolution No. 8779 Temporarily Suspending Enforcement of Redlands Municipal Code Sections

5.04.390 and 5.04.420 for the Limited Purpose of Aligning Certain Business License Renewals with a Calendar-Year Renewal Cycle
(Management Services/ Finance Director Garcia)

11. Approve the Memorandum of Understanding for General Law and Traffic Enforcement Services for the Metrolink System within the City of Redlands
(Police Chief Tolber)

12. Approve the use of City resources and the request for in-kind support in the amount of $7,650.00 related to the Stand-Up-To-Stigma event hosted on May 17, 2026, by the Loma Linda University Behavioral Medicine Center; approve temporary street closures related to the event; and determine that the event is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15311(c) of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act
(Facilities and Community Services Director Crocker)

13. Approve the request for in-kind support in the amount of $17,012.52 related to the 27th Annual Redlands Fire Fighter Car Show event hosted by the Professional Fire Fighters Association on May 24, 2026; approve temporary street closures along East State Street and Citrus Avenue; authorize the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages at the event; and determine that the event is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15311(c) of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act
(Facilities and Community Services Director Crocker)
J. Communications

1. Consideration of a Letter Supporting San Bernardino County Transportation Authority's decision to oppose Assembly Bill 1678 related to the Gold Line
(Mayor Saucedo)

2. Recognition of the City of Redlands Wastewater Treatment Plant as Plant of the Year by the Santa Ana River Basin Section of the California Water Environment Association (Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director Heredia)
K. New Business

1. Consideration of the License Agreement with Redlands Historical Museum Association and determine that approval of the license agreement with the Redlands Historical Museum Association is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State’s guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act
(Assistant City Manager Boatman)

2. Consideration of Resolution No. 8735 Adopting the Arts and Culture Master Plan and determine that approval of the Resolution is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15301 of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (Facilities and Community Services Director Crocker)

3. Consideration of Resolution No. 8778 providing notice of intent to increase water and wastewater rates, direct staff to issue the required Proposition 218 notice establishing a public hearing date and location, and determine that consideration of the proposed rate increases are exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act
(Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director Heredia)

4. Consideration of the sole source purchase of the Dispatch Console Radio upgrade to Command Central AXS in the amount of $370,436.22 and authorization of an additional appropriation in the same amount (Police Chief Tolber)

5. Consideration of a Sole Source Purchase Order Modification with Ray Gaskin Service in the amount of $185,000, to a total amount not to exceed $385,000, for the procurement of original equipment manufacturer (OEM) parts for Solid Waste Division fleet vehicles (Facilities and Community Services Director Crocker)

6. Consideration of the First Amendment to an agreement with Kalmikov Enterprises, Inc., dba Fire Apparatus Solutions, to increase total compensation by $93,600 to a total amount not to exceed $1,012,800; and a First Amendment to an agreement with Wastebuilt Environmental Solutions, LLC., to increase total compensation by $390,000 to an amount not to exceed $990,000, for fleet maintenance, parts and repairs (Facilities and Community Services Director Crocker)

7. Consideration of a Cooperative Purchase of two Ford F-750 flatbed trucks from PB Loader Corporation for an amount not to exceed $368,361.98
(Facilities and Community Services Director Crocker)

8. Consideration of Resolution No. 8780 amending and restating Resolution No. 8220 to revise the City’s InKind Support Policy for Special Events and determine that adopting Resolution No. 8780 is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines (Assistant City Manager Boatman)
L. Individual Council Member Announcements and/or Reports on Activities (No collective discussion or action.)
M. Adjournment
The next regular meeting of the City Council will be held on May 5, 2026.

If you challenge any proposed development entitlement listed on this agenda in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at or prior to this public meeting.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact Goutam Dobey, of the Municipal Utilities and Engineering Department at (909) 798-7584 ext 2. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.
(28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II)
Any writings or documents distributed to a majority of the City Council regarding an open session agenda item less than 72 hours before this meeting are available for public inspection at the City Clerk's Office or at the dais of the City Clerk once the open session begins.

Staff reports or other written documentation relating to items referred to on the agenda are available at the A. K. Smiley Public Library, 125 West Vine Street, Redlands, California, and on the City's Website referenced below.

Regular meetings are televised live on Redlands TV Channel 3 (Spectrum) and Channel 35 (Frontier) and re-broadcast at 7:00 P.M. The following Wednesday, Friday and Sunday; and at 9:00 A.M. Thursday, Saturday, and Monday. Meetings are also streamed live and archived for later viewing on demand on the City's website at www.cityofredlands.org. Agendas, staff reports and minutes of the City Council of the City of Redlands are available online at: www.cityofredlands.org Date Posted: April 17, 2026
City Council AGENDA ITEM NO. I1.

DATE: April 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Approval of minutes of the regular meeting of April 7, 2026 (City Clerk Donaldson) MOTION:

I move to approve the regular meeting minutes of April 7, 2026.

Attachments
City Council-04-07-2026-minutesDraft.pdf

MINUTES
Regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Redlands held in the Council Chambers, Civic Center, 35 Cajon Street, on Tuesday, April 7, 2026 at 5:00 P.M.

Present: Mario Saucedo, Mayor
Marc Shaw, Mayor Pro Tempore
Paul Barich, Council Member
Eddie Tejeda, Council Member
Denise Davis, Council Member
Staff:

Charles M. Duggan, Jr., City Manager; Yvette M. Abich Garcia, City Attorney; Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk; Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager; Carl Baker, Public Information Officer; Danielle Garcia, Management Services/Finance Director; Rich Sessler, Fire Chief; Rachel Tolber, Police Chief; Tabitha Crocker, Facilities and Community Services Director; Robert Meteau, HR/Risk Management Director; Sean Reilly, Development Services Director; Monica Heredia,Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director
A. Call City Council Meeting to Order
Mayor Saucedo called the meeting to order and explained that comments could be presented in-person, via Zoom, via cell phone or landline. He offered the public an opportunity to provide comment on any item on the agenda for the closed session.

B. Public Comment
Bargaining Unit Negotiations - Teamster's Business Agent Andrew Coleman emphasized the importance of the City Council engaging in good faith negotiations to establish a cooperative negotiation process. He added that failure to do so can undermine trust and the Teamsters' intention is to resolve conflict, not create it.

MUED Organizational Structure - Stephen Rogers requested the City establish the proper organizational structure under the City Engineer position, citing the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) should be reverted back to post-2016 MOU language requiring the City Engineer position to be held concurrently by the MUED Department Head. In his opinion, the current practice has elevated unqualified staff.

C. Recess City Council Meeting to a Closed Session

1. Conference with labor negotiator - Government Code §54957.6 D. Reconvene City Council Meeting at 6:00 p.m.

The meeting reconvened at 6:04 P.M.

E. Invocation by Council Member Davis - Pledge of Allegiance by eAcademy Elementary School Council Member Davis offered the Invocation and conducted the Pledge of Allegiance to the American flag.

F. Closed Session Report
City Attorney Garcia announced that no reportable action was taken during the closed session.

G. Presentations

1. Redlands Pet Adoption
Animal Services Supervisor Joe Alcarez and Animal Control Officer Lauren Daniels showed off "Bautista", a fiveyear-old male Akita mix, who is available for adoption, along with forty-seven other dogs and one cat at the Redlands Animal Shelter. Mr. Alcarez provided the Shelter statistics for March 2026, which included 18 adopted dogs, 8 adopted cats, and 7 dogs returned to their owner.

2. Presentation of the Dolores Huerta Day Proclamation
Mayor Saucedo honored Dolores Huerta and read from the Proclamation declaring April 10, 2026 as Dolores Huerta Day.

3. Presentation of the National Crime Victims' Rights Week Proclamation presented to Rose Madsen, Families & Friends of Murder Victims
Mayor Saucedo presented the National Crime Victims' Rights Week Proclamation to Gail Howard.

4. Presentation of the Earth Day Proclamation, presented to Linda Hamilton, Executive Director of ANCA, and Christy Cooper, Owner of Feel Good Market
Mayor Saucedo presented the Earth Day Proclamation to Linda Hamilton, Executive Director of ANCA.

5. Presentation of the National Autism Acceptance Month Proclamation presented to Val Noble, CEO of Unite 2 Live With Autism
Mayor Saucedo presented the Proclamation.

6. Presentation of the Child Abuse Prevention Month Proclamation presented to Jeany Glasgow, Director of Children and Family Services
Mayor Saucedo presented the Child Abuse Prevention Month Proclamation to Juan Solis, Father Involvement Coordinator of Children's Network.

7. Presentation of the National Donate Life Month Proclamation presented to Kat Mantz, OneLegacy Ambassador Mayor Saucedo presented the Proclamation.

Welcome
City Manager Duggan introduced Monica Heredia as the new Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director. She is a licensed Professional Engineer in California and brings extensive experience in public works and engineering.

Additionally, Mr. Duggan extended a warm welcome to Sean Reilly, who has been appointed as the new Director of Development Services. Sean has been a dedicated member of the Redlands team since 2014 and most recently served as Principal Planner. The City is fortunate to have both of these skilled and talented individuals.

H. Public Comment - City Council
Bargaining Unit Negotiations - Teamster's Business Agent Andrew Coleman reiterated the importance of the City Council engaging in good faith discussions to establish a cooperative negotiation process, with the aim to achieve mutually beneficial outcomes for all parties.

Signs - Dennis Bell pointed out that numerous signs scattered throughout town are advertising the Bicycle Classic and Earth Day, however, they have been placed in the public right-of-way, which is in violation of the Municipal Code.

High Five for City Staff - Jonathan Shidler complimented City staff, stating that the city team has consistently demonstrated exceptional professionalism and a positive attitude in fulfilling their daily duties. He hoped the rain would pause this weekend to ensure the success of the Bicycle Classic.

Wild Burro Attacks - Dorre Yamashiro thanked Mayor Saucedo and Council Member Barich for taking the time to attend the town hall meeting related to the recent burro attacks. She requested the City facilitate a joint task force between all the jurisdictions with wild burros to work together to increase overall safety and to catch the dangerous perpetrator.

Furthermore, she asked the City to support Donkeyland in a meaningful way. The reward to catch the perpetrator is now at $99,000.

Technical Difficulties - Bruce Laycook pointed out that the City now has a new website and new agenda management platform. However, he mentioned encountering difficulties while navigating these systems. He noted there was room for improvement, and in his opinion, the systems were not designed intuitively.

Open Government - Stephen Rogers highlighted significant changes that have occurred due to "at will" employment. He saw this as problematic for engineering staff who have a critical responsibility to safeguard public health and safety. He was pleased to hear the Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director Monica Heredia, is a licensed Professional Engineer in California.

I. Consent Calendar

1. Approve minutes of the regular meeting of March 17, 2026 On motion of Council Member Eddie Tejeda, seconded by Council Member Denise Davis, the City Council unanimously approved, by roll call vote, the minutes of the regular meeting of March 17, 2026.

Vote: 5-0 Passed

2. Authorize issuance of a proclamation declaring April 10, 2026, as Dolores Huerta Day On motion of Council Member Eddie Tejeda, seconded by Council Member Denise Davis, the City Council unanimously authorized, by roll call vote, the issuance of a proclamation declaring April 10, 2026, as Dolores Huerta Day.

Vote: 5-0 Passed

3. Authorize issuance of a proclamation declaring the week of April 19-25, 2026 National Crime Victims' Rights Week On motion of Council Member Eddie Tejeda, seconded by Council Member Denise Davis, the City Council unanimously approved, by roll call vote, the issuance of a proclamation declaring the week of April 19-25, 2026 National Crime Victims' Rights Week.

Vote: 5-0 Passed

4. Authorize issuance of a proclamation declaring April 22, 2026 as Earth Day On motion of Council Member Eddie Tejeda, seconded by Council Member Denise Davis, the City Council unanimously approved, by roll call vote, the issuance of a proclamation declaring April 22, 2026 as Earth Day.

Vote: 5-0 Passed

5. Authorize issuance of a proclamation declaring the month of April 2026 National Autism Acceptance Month On motion of Council Member Eddie Tejeda, seconded by Council Member Denise Davis, the City Council unanimously approved, by roll call vote, the issuance of a proclamation declaring the month of April 2026 National Autism Acceptance Month.

Vote: 5-0 Passed

6. Authorize issuance of a proclamation declaring the month of April 2026 as Child Abuse Prevention Month On motion of Council Member Eddie Tejeda, seconded by Council Member Denise Davis, the City Council unanimously approved, by roll call vote, the issuance of a proclamation declaring the month of April 2026 as Child Abuse Prevention Month.

Vote: 5-0 Passed

7. Authorize issuance of a proclamation declaring the month of April 2026 National Donate Life Month On motion of Council Member Eddie Tejeda, seconded by Council Member Denise Davis, the City Council unanimously approved, by roll call vote, the issuance of a proclamation declaring the month of April 2026 National Donate Life Month.

Vote: 5-0 Passed

8. Direct Staff to Review the City of Redlands Conflict of Interest Code On motion of Council Member Eddie Tejeda, seconded by Council Member Denise Davis, the City Council unanimously directed staff, by roll call vote, to review the City of Redlands Conflict of Interest Code, in accordance with Section 87306.5 of the California Government Code.

Vote: 5-0 Passed

9. Approve the three-year Professional Services Agreement with Policy Confluence, Inc. for the Annual Benchmark Community Survey for an amount not to exceed $73,650
On motion of Council Member Eddie Tejeda, seconded by Council Member Denise Davis, the City Council unanimously approved, by roll call vote, a three-year Professional Services Agreement with Policy Confluence, Inc., for the Annual Community Benchmark Survey for an amount not to exceed $73,650.

Vote: 5-0 Passed

10. Approve the agreement between the City of Redlands and Church of Religious Science of Redlands in replacement of Steps 4 Life Community Services for transitional housing services in an amount not to exceed $30,000 On motion of Council Member Eddie Tejeda, seconded by Council Member Denise Davis, the City Council unanimously approved, by roll call vote, the agreement between the City of Redlands and Church of Religious Science of Redlands as a replacement for Steps 4 Life Community Services for transitional housing services in an amount not to exceed $30,000, utilizing previously obligated American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF), under the City’s authorized “Services for Unhoused Persons” ARPA program.

Vote: 5-0 Passed

11. Approve the Professional Services Agreement with Architectural Resources Group, Inc. for preparation of a citywide Historical Reconnaissance Survey and subsequent Intensive-Level Historic Resource Surveys in an amount not to exceed $166,050.00; and determination that approval of the agreement is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State’s guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act On motion of Council Member Tejeda, seconded by Council Member Denise Davis, the City Council unanimously approved, by roll call vote, the Professional Services Agreement between the City of Redlands and Architectural Resources Group; and determined that the Agreement is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in accordance with Section 15061(b)(3) of the States CEQA Guidelines.

Vote: 5-0 Passed

12. Adopt Ordinance No. 3001 amending Title 18 (Zoning Regulations) of the Redlands Municipal Code by revising the zoning map (Zone Change No. 482) to change the zoning designation of 8.5 gross acres located on the north side of west Lugonia Avenue, east of Tennessee Street (APN: 0167-171-16-0000, 0167-171-11-0000, and 0167-171-12-0000) to General Commercial (C-3) District
On motion of Council Member Eddie Tejeda, seconded by Council Member Denise Davis, the City Council unanimously adopted, by roll call vote, Ordinance No. 3001, amending Title 18 (Zoning Regulations) of the Redlands Municipal Code by revising the zoning map (Zone Change No. 482).

Vote: 5-0 Passed
J. Public Hearings

1. Consideration of a request to approve: Amendment No. 8 to Concept Plan 1 and Planned Development No. 6 for a 983,000-square-foot, multistory medical center expansion project (general hospital and medical offices); certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the project; and adoption of CEQA Findings, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program. The project site is located at 1301 California Street (APN: 0167-441-07-0000). Proposed Use: Hospital and Medical Offices. Applicant: Kaiser Foundation Hospitals Mayor Saucedo declared the meeting open as a public hearing and called on Senior Planner Kevin Beery, who presented the request representing the master entitlement for a phased, multi-story expansion of the health care facility in accordance with the Concept Plan No. 1 zoning framework. The proposed actions include a text amendment to Concept Plan No. 1 to clarify the entitlement procedures for Development Plan review and approval (consistent with the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan); and approval of a Development Plan (Planned Development No. 6), which would establish a comprehensive site plan and infrastructure program governing the future phased development of the medical center. Approval would authorize site development over four phases. The subject property encompasses approximately 36.5 acres located at 1301 California Street within the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan area and is partially developed with a medical office building. On February 24, 2026, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing and, following deliberation, unanimously recommended that the City Council certify and adopt the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the project, approve the Amendment to Concept Plan No. 1, and approve Planned Development No. 6.

Representing the Applicant, Deborah Wong announced this project has been in the planning phase for several years and she was delighted to see this come to fruition. Council Members raised questions related to timing of the project's completion and Fire Chief Sessler confirmed that the Fire Department possessed the necessary capabilities to access and safeguard the seven-story hospital building in the event of a fire.

As public comment, Evan Sanford, Executive Director of the Redlands Chamber of Commerce, identified their full support of the project which, in their opinion, represented a thoughtful, long-term investment in healthcare infrastructure that will benefit Redlands residents and the surrounding region for decades to come. Bruce Laycook expressed his support of the project, as well, but he did wonder if a stop light should be added at the ambulance access point on Lugonia Avenue. Traffic Engineer Paul Herrmann, of Fehr & Peers, explained that a traffic signal will be installed on California Street at the primary entrance to the site. However, according to the traffic study, there is no requirement for a signal on Lugonia. One written comment was received from the Redlands Chamber of Commerce, indicating their full support of the project.

With no further comments, Mayor Saucedo closed the public hearing. Development Services Director Sean Reilly clarified that a full EIR was prepared for this project. Council Member Davis added that the Inland Empire is recognized as one of the most medically under-served area in California and the nation. Mayor Saucedo acknowledged the Planning Commission for their thorough review and recommendation.

On motion of Council Member Paul Barich, seconded by Council Member Eddie Tejeda, the City Council unanimously adopted, by roll call vote, Resolution No. 8763 to certify the Final Program Environmental Impact Report and adopted associated Findings of Fact, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations; adopted Resolution No. 8764 to approve Amendment No. 8 to Concept Plan No. 1; and approved Resolution No. 8765 to approve Planned Development No. 6.

Vote: 5-0 Passed
K. New Business

1. Consideration of Resolution No. 8766 authorizing the City's participation the San Bernardino Regional Housing Trust Fund Joint Powers Agreement (JPA)
Homeless Solutions Manager David Rabindranath summarized Resolution No. 8766 authorizing the City's participation in the Joint Powers Authority (JPA) for establishing the San Bernardino Regional Housing Trust (SBRHT). This initiative aims to address housing challenges in California by focusing on affordable housing production, preservation, and rehabilitation. The San Bernardino Council of Governments has tasked the San Bernardino County Transit Authority (SBCTA) with leading the Trust. SBCTA is responsible for regional planning and transportation for over 2.1 million residents in San Bernardino County. The SBRHT Strategic Plan outlines the housing needs and potential funding sources, recommending a housing trust structured as a JPA with local jurisdictions. The Trust's goal is to provide a regional approach to housing needs, focusing on raising and leveraging funds for affordable housing creation. As public comment, Bruce Laycook said this was a great idea, and he fully supported the Council's efforts to explore strategies for generating the maximum number of affordable housing units while minimizing costs.

On motion of Council Member Paul Barich, seconded by Council Member Denise Davis, the City Council unanimously adopted, by roll call vote, Resolution No. 8766 authorizing the City’s participation in the JPA for the establishment of the San Bernardino Regional Housing Trust (SBRHT).

Vote: 5-0 Passed

2. Consideration of Resolution No. 8768 approving Agreements for the Redlands Police Department Safety Hall Project (Phase 1) for a total amount not to exceed $3,494,000; an additional appropriation in the amount of $3,494,000 to the Safety/City Hall Replacement Fund; and determine that approval is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act Facilities and Community Services Management Analyst Tricia Munoz noted that the City is progressing with the Redlands Police Department Safety Hall Project (Phase 1). The project is located at 1625 W. Redlands Blvd. and was acquired in 2022. In September 2023, contracts were awarded to Holt Architects, Inc. for design services and Tilden-Coil Constructors, Inc. for Master Construction Management Services. A Request for Bid was issued for demolition, abatement, and earthwork services, resulting in 14 bids for demolition and abatement and 12 for earthwork. Tilden-Coil and City staff evaluated the bids and recommended awarding Construction Agreements to Greenleaf Engineering for demolition and abatement and Doja, Inc. for earthwork, with a budget not exceeding $3,494,000, including a $230,000 contingency allowance.

As public comment, Antonis Christodoulou, Congressional Candidate for District 33, raised concerns about the availability of funding for law enforcement, while resources for students seemed lacking. Bruce Laycook questioned the absence of a CEQA review for the abatement of such an old building. Assistant City Manager Boatman clarified that the results from soils testing did not indicate any issues that triggered further action.

On motion of Council Member Paul Barich, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Marc Shaw, the City Council unanimously determined, by roll call vote, that approval of Resolution No. 8768 is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act; approved Resolution No. 8768; and approved an additional appropriation in the amount of $3,494,000.

Vote: 5-0 Passed

3. Consideration of a Professional Services Agreement with Geocon West, Inc., for Special Inspection Services for the City's new Police Department Safety Hall Facility; an additional appropriation in the amount of $764,000 from the General Fund Reserve for Future Facilities; and determination that approval of the agreement is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines FCS Management Analyst Tricia Munoz reviewed the need for special inspection and materials testing services which are required to ensure the RPD Safety Hall project is constructed in full compliance with California Building Code standards and the approved structural and life-safety design documents. The facility includes essential services functions, secure areas, and structural components that require enhanced quality assurance, including concrete placement, reinforcing steel, welding, fireproofing, soils/compaction, and mechanical and electrical systems. She announced the groundbreaking event for the project is scheduled for April 21, 2026.

On motion of Mayor Pro Tem Shaw, seconded by Council Member Paul Barich, the City Council unanimously determined, by roll call vote, that approval of a Professional Services Agreement with Geocon West, Inc., for Special Inspection Services for the City's new Police Department Safety Hall Facility is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines; approved the Professional Services Agreement with Geocon West, Inc., for Special Inspection Services for the City's new Police Department Safety Hall Facility; and approved an additional appropriation in the amount of $764,000 from the General Fund Reserve for Future Facilities.

Vote: 5-0 Passed

4. Consideration of a First Amendment to the Agreement with Western A/V, for the provision of Council Chambers AudioVideo System to increase the total agreement from $533,315.95 to an amount not to exceed $581,838.37 Assistant City Manager Boatman introduced a First Amendment to the Agreement with Western A/V, for the provision of Council Chambers Audio-Video System to increase the total agreement from $533,315.95 to an amount not to exceed $581,838.37. Following completion and detailed review of the finalized construction and system integration plans, staff identified additional material quantities and system refinements necessary to ensure full functionality, compatibility with the agenda management system, and long-term operational reliability of the Chambers' technology infrastructure. As public comment, Bruce Laycook recommended the vendor provide detailed design schematics which will be essential to managing the system.

On motion of Mayor Pro Tem Marc Shaw, seconded by Council Member Denise Davis, the City Council unanimously approved, by roll call vote, the First Amendment to the Agreement with Western A/V for the provision of Council Chambers Audio-Video System to increase the total agreement amount from $533,315.95 to an amount not to exceed $581,838.37.

Vote: 5-0 Passed

5. Consideration of Approval of a Parking License Agreement with Town Square Development Group, LLC, for public parking at the Redlands Mall Property (Approximately $349,008 Annually) Economic Development Coordinator Ross Wittman discussed a Parking License Agreement between the City and Town Square Development Group, LLC, regarding public parking at the Redlands Mall Property. Though the mall closed in 2010, its parking lot remains a crucial parking resource for Downtown Redlands. The new owners, Town Square, plan to begin demolition in early 2026 and are concerned about public access during redevelopment. The City and Town Square understand the importance of maintaining parking access for businesses and visitors. The agreement allows the City to use 520 parking spaces on the property through April 7, 2029, ensuring continued public parking during redevelopment.

As public comment, Dennis Bell thought the City exhibited a lack of foresight when they sold the parking spaces to the former owner of the mall, and he remarked that it appears the City is now repurchasing those spaces. He questioned whether the City's priorities are aligned with the community's most pressing needs. Evan Sanford, Executive Director of the Redlands Chamber of Commerce, appreciated that the City has prioritized this parking license agreement and secured the necessary funding to effectively meet the parking requirements of the downtown community.

On motion of Mayor Pro Tem Marc Shaw, seconded by Council Member Paul Barich, the City Council unanimously approved, by roll call vote, the Parking License Agreement with Town Square Development Group, LLC, for the use of the Redlands Mall parking lot for public parking. (Approximately $349,008 Annually) Vote: 5-0 Passed

6. Consideration of a First Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Eurofins Eaton Analytical, now Eurofins Drinking Water and Wastewater West, LLC to increase the compensation amount by $80,000 for the First Extended Term, increasing the total compensation to a not to exceed amount of $440,000, and authorize an additional appropriation in the amount of $40,000 from the Water Fund and $40,000 from the Wastewater Fund Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director Heredia detailed a First Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Eurofins Eaton Analytical, now Eurofins Drinking Water and Wastewater West, LLC, to increase the compensation amount by $80,000 for the first extended term. During the first extended term of the Agreement, the allocated funds were fully expended due to increased monitoring requirements resulting from a shortage of experienced staff and intermittent failures of analytical instruments.

On motion of Council Member Paul Barich, seconded by Mayor Mario Saucedo, the City Council unanimously approved, by roll call vote, a First Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Eurofins Eaton Analytical, now Eurofins Drinking Water and Wastewater West, LLC, to increase the compensation amount by $80,000 for the first extended term, and authorized an additional appropriation in the amount of $40,000 from the Water Fund and $40,000 from the Wastewater Fund.

Vote: 5-0 Passed

7. Consideration of a Public Works Construction Contract with R&J Construction, LLC., for the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) Hillside Stabilization and Stairway Improvements Project for an amount not to exceed $449,236, and determination that the Project is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15304 of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director Heredia reviewed a Public Works Construction Contract with R&J Construction, LLC., for the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) Hillside Stabilization and Stairway Improvements Project for an amount not to exceed $449,236. The proposed improvements consist of constructing retaining walls of varying heights, a v-ditch, v-drains, a u-ditch, grated inlets, a concrete block slough wall and a reinforced concrete stairway. Landscaping and irrigation improvements will also be incorporated to improve slope stability, control erosion, and integrate the improvements into the surrounding environment. This project will provide long-term slope stability, protect nearby infrastructure, and improve access for wastewater personnel. The improvements are consistent with industry standards and will reduce future maintenance while enhancing the overall functionality and aesthetics of the WWTP site.

On motion of Council Member Paul Barich, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Shaw, the City Council unanimously determined, by roll call vote, that approval of a Public Works Construction Contract with R&J Construction, LLC., for the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) Hillside Stabilization and Stairway Improvements Project is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15304 of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act; approved the WWTP Hillside Stabilization and Stairway Improvements Project plans and specifications; and awarded a Public Works Construction Contract to R&J Construction, LLC., for an amount not-toexceed $449,236.

Vote: 5-0 Passed

8. Consideration of the First Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Hicks & Hartwick, Inc. to increase the Extended Term compensation to $197,000, increasing the total compensation to a not to exceed amount of $297,000, and authorize an additional appropriation of $97,000 from the Streets General Fund The Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director, Heredia, discussed an amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Hicks & Hartwick, Inc. This amendment increases the compensation for the extended term to $197,000, making the total compensation not exceed $297,000. Hicks & Hartwick, Inc. has surpassed performance expectations, leading to additional tasks that were not initially planned. The amendment supports engineering design services for the 7th & 9th Street Parking Lot Project. These tasks are within the approved scope of the original Agreement, and no other terms or conditions are being revised.

On motion of Mayor Pro Tem Marc Shaw, seconded by Council Member Eddie Tejeda, the City Council unanimously approved, by roll call vote, the First Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Hicks & Hartwick, Inc.; and authorized an additional appropriation of $97,000 from the Streets General Fund.

Vote: 5-0 Passed

9. Consideration of approval of the sole source purchase of the Dispatch Console Radio upgrade to Command Central AXS in the amount of $370,436.22 and authorization of an additional appropriation in the same amount Staff requested this item be pulled from the agenda. The matter will be rescheduled for Council's consideration on April 21, 2026.

10. Consideration of an intergovernmental purchase of networking equipment for the State Street City Hall building in the amount of $277,448 from GovConnection
Information Technology Manager Eric Owens explained the need for an intergovernmental purchase of networking equipment for the State Street City Hall building in the amount of $277,448 from GovConnection. As the City prepares to relocate staff and operations to the State Street City Hall building, new network infrastructure is required to support essential technology services. The proposed purchase includes network switches, wireless access points, uninterruptible power supplies (UPS), and patch cables. As public comment, Bruce Laycook said this was a technically complex proposal, and he recommended the City keep and maintain a detailed schematic design of the networking equipment.

On motion of Council Member Eddie Tejeda, seconded by Council Member Denise Davis, the City Council unanimously approved, by roll call vote, the purchase of network equipment for the State Street City Hall building from GovConnection in the amount of $277,448.

Vote: 5-0 Passed
L. Individual Council Member Announcements and/or Reports on Activities

1. Individual Council Member Report on Activities for March 2026 from Mayor Pro Tem Shaw Mayor Saucedo was present at a ribbon cutting ceremony for a new business, "Sunrise", attended the Inland Empire Cal League of Cities in Yucaipa, the League of California Cities Policy Committee meeting, participated in the Common Vision Coalition's Walk n Roll Event, and spoke at a Vietnam Veteran dinner event. He also attended the Food Task Force Coalition meeting, the Liberty Lane ribbon cutting ceremony, the Chamber of Commerce Rise and Shine, the Community Park Easter Sunrise Service on Vine Street, the SBCTA meeting where Congressman Pete Aguilar provided funding for the Redlands and Highland pedestrian connector, and met with representatives from Kaiser Permanente.

Mayor Pro Tem Shaw submitted his report of activities for the month of March 2026, as available online and attached to the staff report.

Council Member Barich attended the Liberty Lane ribbon cutting ceremony, a town hall meeting in Riverside regarding the wild burro attacks, and an Open House event welcoming Arivia's Animal House as a new veterinary clinic located at Brookside and San Mateo.

Council Member Tejeda met with one bargaining unit representative and with Police Chief Tolber and Fire Chief Sessler.

Council Member Davis hosted the March Youth Council at Fire Station No. 1, attended the Building a Generation 30th Anniversary celebration at the Burrage Mansion, and the event recognizing Omnitrans 50th Anniversary.

M. Adjournment
There being no further action required the meeting adjourned at 7:59 P.M. The next regular meeting of the City of Redlands City Council will be held on April 21, 2026.

City Council AGENDA ITEM NO. I2.

DATE: April 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Authorize issuance of a proclamation declaring April 24, 2026, as Arbor Day in the City of Redlands (Mayor Saucedo )
MOTION:

I move to authorize the issuance of a proclamation declaring April 24, 2026, as Arbor Day in the City of Redlands.

Attachments
Arbor Day Proclamation 2026.pdf
WHEREAS, in 1872 J. Sterling Morton proposed to the Nebraska Board of Agriculture that a special day be set aside for the planting of trees; and
WHEREAS, this holiday, called Arbor Day, was first observed with the planting of more than a million trees in Nebraska; and
WHEREAS, 2026 marks the 154th anniversary of the holiday which is now observed throughout the nation and the world; and
WHEREAS, trees can reduce the erosion of our precious topsoil by wind and water, cut heating and cooling costs, moderate the temperature, clean the air, produce oxygen and provide habitat for wildlife; and
WHEREAS, trees are a renewable resource giving us paper, wood for our homes, fuel for our fires and countless other wood products; and
WHEREAS, trees in Redlands increase property values, enhance the economic vitality of business areas, and beautify our community. Trees, wherever they are planted, are a source of joy and spiritual renewal; and
WHEREAS, the City of Redlands enjoys a rich heritage and dedication to the continued health and preservation of the City’s urban forest;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED, that the City Council of the City of Redlands declares April 24, 2026, as Arbor Day and encourages all residents to support efforts to protect our trees and woodlands; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Redlands encourage all residents to plant trees to gladden the heart and promote the well-being of this and future generations.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we hereunto affix our signatures and Official Seal of the City of Redlands on this 21st day of April, 2026.

Mario Saucedo, Mayor
Attest:

Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
City Council AGENDA ITEM NO. I3.

DATE: April 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Authorize issuance of a proclamation declaring the week of April 19-25, 2026, as National Library Week (Mayor Saucedo )
MOTION:

If the City Council determines that staff's recommendation is appropriate, the following motion is provided:

I move to authorize issuance of a proclamation declaring the week of April 19-25, 2026 National Library Week.

Attachments
National Library Week 2026.pdf

City Council AGENDA ITEM NO. I4.

DATE: April 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Approve recommendations for appointments to the Human Relations Commission (Mayor Saucedo )
MOTION:

If the City Council determines that staff's recommendation is appropriate, the following motions are provided:

1. I move to appoint Vanessa Annaguey Aranda to serve a four-year term on the Human Relations Commission for District 3 ending April 21, 2030.

2. I move to appoint Louisa Amis to serve a four-year term on the Human Relations Commission for District 4 ending April 21, 2030.

3. I move to appoint Erin Stepien to serve a four-year term on the Human Relations Commission for District 5 ending April 21, 2030.

RECOMMENDATION:

In accordance with the Redlands Municipal Code Section 2.66.020, nominations to this Commission for five (5) members shall each be selected from one (1) council district, and be appointed by the Council Member of that corresponding district. Two commission members appointed by the city council shall be from the sophomore or junior class of a Redlands high school or college student.

Recommendation: By:

Vanessa Annaguey Aranda
- District 3 Mayor Saucedo
Louisa Amis - District 4 Mayor Pro Tem Shaw
Erin Stepien - District 5
Council Member
Barich
DISCUSSION:

Three vacant seats exist on the Human Relations Commission due to term expiration of Vanessa Annaguey Aranda, Roy George, and Julie Houston on April 19, 2026. Ordinance No. 2995 reduced membership from nine (9) members to seven (7) and reorganized five (5) of its members by district (one member per district) and two (2) student members adding a college student.

A public notice requesting interested residents from districts 3,4, and 5 to submit an application for the Human Relations Commission was issued on February 18, 2026. In addition, the public notice was concurrently aired on Redlands TV and posted at the community bulletin board at the A. K. Smiley Public Library. The local newspapers also received distribution of the public notice. The City received three applications from residents in district 3, one application from residents in district 4, and four applications from residents in district 5 who are interested in serving on this commission.

The Human Relations Commission consists of seven members as follows:

Germaine Miles (D1)
Kenneth Ford (D2)
Vacant (D3)
Vacant (D4)
Vacant (D5)
Emma Bernstein (student)
Daniela Ramirez-Ponce (college student)
ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may choose not to support the recommendations and direct staff to seek further applications for consideration.

SUBMITTED BY:

Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
REVIEWED BY:

Charles M. Duggan Jr., City Manager
PREPARED BY:

Amy Edwards, Sr. Administrative Assistant
Attachments
Human Relations Notice 2.18.26.pdf
Human Relations Applications - District 3_Redacted.pdf
Human Relations Application - District 4 _Redacted.pdf
Human Relations Applications - District 5_Redacted.pdf

City Council AGENDA ITEM NO. I5.

DATE: April 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Approve recommendations for appointments to the Citrus Preservation Commission (Mayor Saucedo )
MOTION:

If the City Council determines that staff's recommendation is appropriate, the following motions are provided:

I move to appoint Donald Craw, Zachariah Smith, and Stuart Miller to each serve a four-year term on the Citrus Preservation Commission ending April 16, 2030.

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended by Mayor Saucedo that the City Council consider the appointments of Donald Craw, Zachariah Smith, and Stuart Miller to each serve a four year term on the Citrus Preservation Commission. Pursuant to the Redlands Municipal Code, appointments to this commission are made by the Mayor and approved by the City Council.

DISCUSSION:

Three vacant seats exist on the Citrus Preservation Commission due to the term expiration of Commissioners John Smith, Thomas Lanza, and Janet Ward on April 16, 2026.

A public notice requesting interested Redlands residents and surrounding communities to submit applications for the Citrus Preservation Commission was issued on February 18, 2026. In addition, the public notice was concurrently aired on Redlands TV and posted at the community bulletin board at the A. K. Smiley Public Library.

The local newspapers also received distribution of the public notice. The City received five applications from residents interested in serving on the commission.

The Citrus Preservation Commission consists of five members as follows:

Heather Ross
Vacant
Michael Day
Vacant
Vacant
ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may choose not to support the recommendations and direct staff to seek further applications for consideration.

SUBMITTED BY:

Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
REVIEWED BY:

Charles M. Duggan Jr., City Manager
PREPARED BY:

Amy Edwards, Sr. Administrative Assistant
Attachments
Citrus Notice 2.18.26.pdf
Citrus Preservation Applications - 2026.pdf

As a third-generation Redlands resident with deep family roots in citrus farming, I have a lifelong connection to the agricultural history that helped shape our community’s identity.

My family’s involvement in citrus production has given me a personal appreciation for the economic, cultural, and aesthetic importance of preserving Redlands’ citrus heritage. I am motivated to serve to help ensure that as our city continues to evolve, we maintain and ēĺĲĺŘ ťēô ēĖŜťĺŘĖèÍī ŜĖČĲĖƱèÍĲèô ĺċ èĖťŘŪŜ ſĖťēĖĲ ťēĺŪČēťċŪl, responsible planning.

Professionally, I bring over 15 years of municipal leadership experience in community services, parks and recreation administration, facilities operations, and capital improvement delivery. I currently serve as Assistant Director of Community Services for the City of Beaumont, where I oversee multiple divisions, manage complex budgets, guide capital improvement initiatives, and work closely with executive leadership and elected ĺƯĖèĖÍīŜ ťĺ ĖıŕīôıôĲť ŕĺīĖèƅ ÍĲî ŜťŘÍťôČĖè ŕŘĖĺŘĖťĖôŜ ťēÍť ŜôŘŽô Í ČŘĺſĖĲČ èĺııunity.

Prior to my current role, I served more than three years with the City of Redlands in the Facilities and Community Services Department, including in a senior leadership capacity.

In that role, I provided executive-level oversight of multiple service areas, including the

ĖťƅЍŜ
ĖťŘŪŜ "ĖŽĖŜĖĺĲϟ I ſĺŘħôî èĺīīÍæĺŘÍťĖŽôīƅ ſĖťē ŜťÍƯϠ ôīôèťôî ĺƯĖèĖÍīŜϠ ÍĲî èĺııŪĲĖťƅ stakeholders to support the operational stewardship of City-owned groves and to ensure that citrus operations remained aligned with broader communiťƅ ŕŘĖĺŘĖťĖôŜ ÍĲî ŜĺŪĲî ƱŜèÍī management. During my tenure, I also helped manage the acquisition of the England Grove, supporting coordination, due diligence, and long-term planning considerations associated with expanding and preserving the City’s agricultural assets.

My experience in Redlands required balancing operational oversight with policy direction, historic preservation values, and long-range planning goals. I regularly engaged with City leadership and the community on matters involving public agricultural lands, resource ŜťôſÍŘîŜēĖŕϠ ÍĲî ıÍĖĲťÍĖĲĖĲČ ťēô īôČÍèƅ ĺċ èĖťŘŪŜ ÍŜ Í îôƱĲĖĲČ ċôÍťŪŘô ĺċ ôîīÍĲîŜϟ ēĖŜ leadership perspective — combined with my personal, multi-generational connection to local citrus farming — allows me to approach service with both practical experience and a deep respect for the city’s heritage.
3FBTPOT GPS EFTJSJOH UP TFSWF o SFMFWBOU FYQFSJFODF BOE RVBMJGJDBUJPOT

City Council AGENDA ITEM NO. I6.

DATE: April 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution No. 8774 for a new water service connection to the City of Redlands water distribution system at 2789 Mill Creek Road (APN: 0302-152-06-0000) in the unincorporated community of Mentone and adopt Resolution No. 8775 relating to Pre-Annexation Agreement No. 26-01 (Development Services Director Reilly)
MOTION:

If the City Council determines that staff's recommendation is appropriate, the following motion is provided:

I move to adopt Resolution No. 8774 and Resolution No. 8775.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 8774 for a new connection to the City of Redlands water distribution system at 2789 Mill Creek Road in the unincorporated community of Mentone, Outside Service Case (OSC) No. 26-01, and determine that the adoption of Resolution No. 8774 is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Sections 15303(a) and 15319(b) of CEQA guidelines.

Upon City Council adoption of Resolution No. 8774, staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 8775 to approve Pre-Annexation No. 26-01 for the provision of water service to a 0.25 acre parcel located at 2789 Mill Creek Road in the unincorporated community of Mentone, and determine that adoption of Resolution No. 8775 is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Sections 15319 and 15303 of CEQA guidelines.

DISCUSSION:

Staff recently received a water connection application from Jose F. Sosa Sosa for the property located at 2789 Mill Creek Road (APN: 0302-152-06-0000), in the unincorporated community of Mentone, which is a parcel located approximately 0.68 miles east of the Redlands city limits in the Mentone area. The applicant is proposing to connect to the City's domestic water system to obtain water for a proposed single-family residence. It is currently a vacant lot. If a connection is approved, the property will install an appropriately sized water meter for domestic usage.

The specific area of this property does not yet have sewer service available. However, the applicant is not proposing a connection to the City of Redlands sewer system as doing so would require construction of approximately 11,500’ of sewer main in order to reach the existing 8” diameter sewer main in Mentone Boulevard at Crafton Avenue. The nearest sewer main is approximately 2.2 miles westerly of this particular property. Determination of whether an Onsite Waste Treatment System (OWTS) or sewer main extension will be required is under the purview of the County of San Bernardino.

The Redlands Municipal Code (RMC) requires the Municipal Utilities and Engineering Department (MUED) Director and Development Services Department (DSD) Director to present completed applications for utility connections outside the city limits to the City Council for a determination if the public health, safety and welfare, and the best interests of the citizens of Redlands is served by the application, and to provide direction to staff regarding the preparation of a Pre-Annexation Agreement.

The following items were reviewed and deemed complete by the MUED and DSD Directors:

Application for availability for an Outside Service Contract (OSC) water connection; Application for environmental review and a Pre-Annexation Agreement.

OSC 26-01 is for a water service connection for a proposed single residence. The number of service connections for small projects outside of the City is limited to twenty-five (25) per year per Measure "U." Currently, 25 residential unit water connections are still available for small projects in 2026.

Pursuant to the Redlands Municipal Code (RMC), the City Council may consider the following factors in making its determination that the public health, safety and welfare, and the best interests of the citizens of Redlands are served by the application:

The relationship of the property and its proposed use to the City’s General Plan and zoning ordinances; The relationship of the property and its proposed use to the City’s Water Master Plan, the City’s Water Capital Improvement Programs, the City’s Sewer Master Plan, and the City’s Sewer Capital Infrastructure program; The proximity of the property to the City’s boundaries and existing utility infrastructure; The proposed potential for new revenue sources for the City to pay for City services provided to the project as a result of annexation and development of the property; and, The standards proposed for development of the property.

Approval of OSC 26-01 allows the applicant to physically connect to the water system, which serves the public health, safety, and welfare, and the best interests of the citizens of Redlands.

Consistency with the General Plan:

The subject property is located in the Low Medium Density Residential land use designation of the General Plan, which supports residential uses such as single-family homes. The property is approximately 0.25 acres and is currently undeveloped. The proposed use of this parcel as a single-family residence is consistent with the City of Redlands General Plan. In the event that the property is annexed into the City, the property would most appropriately be zoned Single-Family Residential (R-1) under the City’s zoning code.

Adjacent to the parcel there is an 8” water main in Mill Creek Road.

The site is located in the County of San Bernardino and the County would be the approval authority for any construction on this parcel due to the site's location outside of the Redlands city limits. See Attachments A and B.

The County does not provide domestic water or sewer service to the site. The City of Redlands has the ability to provide both water and sewer services to unincorporated areas surrounding the City.

ALTERNATIVES:

City Council may deny the staff recommendation if Council determines OSC 26-01 does not serve the public health, safety, and welfare, and the best interests of the citizens of Redlands, or is inconsistent with the General Plan.

Additionally, the City Council can continue the item and request more information on any specific concerns.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Not applicable.

SUBMITTED BY:

Don Young, One Stop Permit Center Manager
RECOMMENDED BY:

Charles M. Duggan Jr., City Manager
REVIEWED BY:

Yvette M. Abich Garcia, City Attorney
Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
Danielle Garcia, Management Services/Finance Director
Ray Casey, Interim Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director PREPARED BY:

Don Young, One Stop Permit Center Manager

FISCAL IMPACT
Fiscal Year: 26/27
Revenue Generating: Yes
Amount: $
Budgeted Y/N:

Account No.:

Additional Appropriation Required: No
Discussion:

The property owner will pay all fees required per Measure "U" prior to installation of the water meter.

Attachments
Attachment_A_-_Location_Map.pdf
Attachment_B_-_Aerial_Photograph.pdf
Attachment_C_-_Resolution_No_8774.pdf
Attachment_D_-_Resolution_No_8775.pdf
Attachment_E-1Pre-annexation_Agreement.pdf
Attachment_E-2_-_Exhibit_A_to_Agreement_Site_Plan.pdf
Attachment_E-3_-_Exhibit_B_to_Agreement_Grant_Deed.pdf
2789 Mill Creek Road
APN 030215206

MILL CREEK RD
Title
OneStop.mxd
0 490 980
Feet
Scale
This map was produced by the City of Redlands,
Geographic Information System.

The City of Redlands assumes no warranty or
legal responsibility for the information contained
on this map.

The data used to generate this map is dynamic
in nature, therefore the information shown may
or may not be the most current.

April 14, 2026
.

ATTACHMENT A

LOCATION MAP
OSC 26-01
2789 MILL CREEK RD
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! ! !!
! ! ! ! !
! ! !! ! ! ! ! !
! !
! !!
! !! !! !
! ! ! !!
!
!
!
!
!
! ! !! !
2789 Mill Creek Road
APN 030215206
12" Water
24" Water MILL CREEK RD
J
U
L
AI N
D
R

VALALLA LN
Title
OneStop.mxd
0 160 320
Feet
Scale
This map was produced by the City of Redlands,
Geographic Information System.

The City of Redlands assumes no warranty or
legal responsibility for the information contained
on this map.

The data used to generate this map is dynamic
in nature, therefore the information shown may
or may not be the most current.

April 14, 2026
.

ATTACHMENT B

AERIAL PHOTGRAPH
OSC 26-01
2789 MILL CREEK RD
1 I:\cmo\Resolutions\Resolution No. 8774.bm.04.08.2026.docx RESOLUTION NO. 8774

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
REDLANDS DETERMINING OUTSIDE CITY CASE NO. 26-01 IS

CONSISTENT WITH THE REDLANDS GENERAL PLAN AND THE

PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE AND BEST INTERESTS OF

THE CITIZENS OF REDLANDS ARE SERVED BY THE CONTINUED
PROCESSING OF OUTSIDE CITY CASE NO. 26-01
WHEREAS, Jose F. Sosa Sosa has filed an application for an Outside City Case No. 26-01 with the City of Redlands for a water connection for a proposed single-family residence on a vacant parcel located at 2789 Mill Creek Road in the unincorporated community of Mentone (APN: 0302-152-06-0000); and WHEREAS, Jose F. Sosa Sosa has concurrently applied for a pre-annexation agreement with the Development Services Department.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF REDLANDS AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The City Council hereby determines that approval of this Resolution is exempt from review under California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15303(a) and 15319(b) as CEQA exempts the conversion of small structures and the annexation of lots for exempt facilities.

Section 2. The City Council hereby determines that Outside City Case No. 26-01 is consistent with the City of Redlands General Plan and the public health, safety, welfare and best interests of the citizens of Redlands are served by the City’s continued processing of the application; and
Section 3. The City Council hereby directs staff to prepare a pre-annexation agreement for 2789 Mill Creek Road in the unincorporated community of Mentone (APN: 0302-152-06-0000).

ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this 21st day of April, 2026. ______________________________
Mario Saucedo, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
2 I:\cmo\Resolutions\Resolution No. 8774.bm.04.08.2026.docx I, Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk of the City of Redlands, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 21st day of April, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
1 I:\cmo\Resolutions\Resolution No. 8775.bm.04.08.2026.doc RESOLUTION NO. 8775

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS APPROVING PRE-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT NO. 26-01, RELATED TO

OUTSIDE CITY UTILITY CONNECTIONS FOR WATER SERVICE FOR A LOT LOCATED AT 2789 MILL CREEK ROAD (APN: 0302-152-06-0000),

WITHIN THE UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITY OF MENTONE WITHIN
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY.

WHEREAS, Jose F. Sosa Sosa have filed an application for Outside City Case No. 26-01 and Pre-Annexation No. 26-01 with the City for an outside City utility connection for a 0.25 acre parcel located at 2789 Mill Creek Road (APN: 0302-152-06-0000) in the unincorporated community of Mentone within San Bernardino County; and
WHEREAS, on April 21st, 2026, the City Council found that Outside City Case No. 26- 01 was consistent with the City’s General Plan and determined the public health, safety, welfare of the residents of Redlands would be served by the City’s continued processing of the Outside City Case application, determined that the City of Redlands was acting as a Responsible Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act, and directed staff to prepare a Pre-Annexation Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the subject property’s land use designation in the 2035 General Plan is Low Medium Density Residential and the proposed project is consistent with the 2035 General Plan land use designation; and
WHEREAS, the proposal is not subject to environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15301(a) for existing facilities and Section 15319 pertaining to annexations of existing facilities and lots for exempt facilities.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The City Council of the City of Redlands hereby determines that the proposed Pre-Annexation Agreement is not subject to environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) and Section 15319 (Annexations of Existing Facilities and Lots for Exempt Facilities).

Section 2. The City Council hereby approves Pre-Annexation No. 24-02 (Exhibit A) for the provision of water service to enable development of a water service connection for a proposed single-family residence on the lot located at 2789 Mill Creek Road (APN: 0302-152- 06-0000) in the unincorporated community of San Bernardino County. 2 I:\cmo\Resolutions\Resolution No. 8775.bm.04.08.2026.doc ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this 21st day of April, 2026. ______________________________
Mario Saucedo, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
3 I:\cmo\Resolutions\Resolution No. 8775.bm.04.08.2026.doc I, Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk of the City of Redlands, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 21st day of April, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
4 I:\cmo\Resolutions\Resolution No. 8775.bm.04.08.2026.doc

EXHIBIT A
Pre-Annexation Agreement
1 I:\cmo\Agreements\Pre-annexation Agreement.bm.04.08.2026.FY2526-153.docx

RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

CITY CLERK'S OFFICE

CITY OF REDLANDS
P.O. BOX 3005
REDLANDS, CA 92373

(THIS SPACE FOR RECORDER'S USE ONLY)

AGREEMENT FOR ANNEXATION AND PROVISION

FOR CITY UTILITY SERVICES
This Agreement for Annexation and Provision of City Utility Services (“Agreement”) is made and entered into this 21st day of April, 2026, by and between the City of Redlands, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California (“City”) and Jose F. Sosa Sosa, a married man as his sole and separate property, (“Property Owner”). City and Property Owner are sometimes individually referred to herein as a “Party” and, together, as the “Parties.”

RECITALS
WHEREAS, to provide for orderly planning, City (1) has the authority pursuant to Government Code sections 65300 and 65301 to include within its General Plan property outside its boundaries which is in City's sphere of influence or, which in City's judgment, bears a relation to its strategic planning, and (2) also has the authority pursuant to Government Code section 65859 to pre-zone property within its sphere of influence for the purpose of determining the zoning designation that will apply to such property in the event of a subsequent annexation of the property to City; and
WHEREAS, California case law, including but not limited to, Dateline Builders, Inc. v.

City of Santa Rosa (1983) 146 Cal. App. 3d, 520 and County of Del Norte v. City of Crescent City (1999) which state in relevant part that it is not against the law or public policy for a city or county to use utilities as a tool to manage growth, provides that a city has no obligation, and may use its sole discretion, to extend utility services outside its corporate boundaries; and WHEREAS, Property Owner owns a parcel of land generally located at 2789 Mill Creek Road and identified as county of San Bernardino Assessor’s Parcel Number 0302-152-06-0000 (“Property”) in the unincorporated area of the county of San Bernardino within the City’s sphere of influence, as described in Exhibit “A” titled “Site Plan” and Exhibit “B” titled “Grant Deed” has made a request and application to City to receive water service for property located in the unincorporated area of the county of San Bernardino, and has provided evidence satisfactory to City that Property Owner is the fee owner of the Property; and 2 I:\cmo\Agreements\Pre-annexation Agreement.bm.04.08.2026.FY2526-153.docx WHEREAS, Government Code section 56133 authorizes the City to provide new or extended utility services by contract outside its jurisdictional boundaries if it first receives written approval from the Local Agency Formation Commission for San Bernardino County (“LAFCO”), and provides that LAFCO may authorize City to provide such services within City's sphere of influence in anticipation of a later change of organization; and WHEREAS, City's General Plan and Chapter 13.60 of the Redlands Municipal Code establish policies and procedures for the approval of City utility services to properties located within the City's sphere of influence and require, among other things, the owner of the property to be served to enter into an agreement, and record the same in the official records of the county of San Bernardino, requiring the property owner to annex the property to City upon certain conditions; and
WHEREAS, City has prepared a General Plan for the unincorporated area in which the Property is located to provide for the orderly planning of such area, and has determined that the proposed development of the Property is consistent with the goals and policies of City's General Plan; and
WHEREAS, it is the policy and goal of City to discourage and not facilitate development in City's sphere of influence which is unwilling and/or fails to comply with City's General Plan and City's development standards by refusing to extend utility services in such instances; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 13.60 of the Redlands Municipal Code and in consideration for City's agreement to extend utility services outside its jurisdictional boundaries to the Property, Property Owner has entered into this Agreement to provide assurances to City that connection to City’s domestic water system will occur in accordance with the Redlands General Plan and the development standards of the Redlands Municipal Code, and that the Property shall be annexed to City in accordance with this Agreement's terms, provisions and conditions;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the City and Property Owner agree as follows:

AGREEMENT

1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are true and correct.

2. Provision of Utility Services. City agrees to provide domestic water service to the Property consistent with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, provided that the connection complies with all rules and regulations of City governing the extension and provision of utility services to properties located outside City’s boundaries at the time a request by Property Owner for application for a water connection is approved by City's Municipal Utilities and Engineering Department. Nothing herein represents a commitment by City to provide such service unless and until Property Owner complies with all such rules and regulations. As a condition of approval of an application for water connection, and prior to receiving any service, Property Owner agrees to 3 I:\cmo\Agreements\Pre-annexation Agreement.bm.04.08.2026.FY2526-153.docx pay the full cost of such service as established by City for the extension of utility services to the Property.

3. Agreement to Develop by City Standards. In consideration of City’s agreement to provide City water service to the Property, Property Owner shall develop the Property in accordance with the Redlands General Plan and any applicable development standards of the Redlands Municipal Code.

4. Agreement to Annex. In consideration of City's agreement to provide City water service to the Property, Property Owner hereby irrevocably consents to annexation of the Property to City and agrees it shall take any and all reasonable and necessary actions, and fully and in good faith cooperate with City, to cause the annexation of the Property to City. Property Owner and City agree that in the event City initiates an annexation of the Property, City shall be responsible for the costs of such annexation. In all other instances where the annexation of the Property is proposed to City, Property Owner shall be responsible for such costs.

5. Payment of Fees. As a condition of receiving domestic water service from City, Property Owner shall pay to City all then-established applicable development impact fees, water acquisition fees, and user fees specifically for such domestic water service.

6. Taxes and Assessments. Property Owner hereby consents to the imposition of, and agrees that Property Owner shall pay, all taxes and assessments imposed and/or levied by City which may be applicable to the Property at the time the Property is annexed to City.

7. Recordation. By entering into this Agreement, Property Owner and City acknowledge and agree that, among other things, it is the express intention of the Parties that any and all successors in interest, assigns, heirs and executors of Property Owner shall have actual and constructive notice of Property Owner's obligations under, and the benefits and burdens of, this Agreement. Therefore, this Agreement and any amendments hereof, shall be recorded in the official records of the county of San Bernardino. Property Owner further agrees that City shall, at the sole cost of Property Owner, have the right to cause the recordation of this Agreement.

8. Breach/Failure to Annex. In the event Property Owner fails to comply with its obligations under this Agreement or takes any action to protest, challenge, contravene or otherwise breach any of its obligations or representations under this Agreement, City shall have the right to, without any liability whatsoever, cease the provision of City utility services to the Property. This right shall be in addition to any other legal or equitable relief available to City.

9. Not a Partnership. The Parties specifically acknowledge that Property Owner’s development of the Property is a private project, that neither Party is acting as the agent of the other in any respect hereunder, and that each Party is an independent contracting entity with respect to the terms, covenants and conditions contained in this Agreement. No partnership, joint-venture or other association of any kind is formed by this Agreement. The only relationship between City and Property Owner is that of a governmental entity regulating the development of private property and the owner of such property.
4 I:\cmo\Agreements\Pre-annexation Agreement.bm.04.08.2026.FY2526-153.docx

10. Indemnity and Cost of Litigation.

A. Property Owner agrees to and shall hold City, and its elected and appointed officials, officers, agents, and employees free and harmless from any and all liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injury, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise from the operations, errors, or omissions of Property Owner or those of its contractors, subcontractors, agents, employees or any other persons acting on Property Owner's behalf which relate to development of the Property. Property Owner agrees to and shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless City, its elected officials, officers, agents, employees and representatives from all actions for damages caused or alleged to have been caused by reason of Property Owner’s acts, errors or omissions in connection with the development of the Property. This hold harmless agreement applies to all damages and claims for damages suffered or alleged to have been suffered by reason of Property Owner’s or its representatives’ acts, errors or omissions regardless of whether or not City supplied, prepared or approved plans or specifications relating to the development of the Property and regardless of whether or not any insurance policies of Property Owner relating to such development are applicable.

B. Property Owner shall defend, at its expense, including attorneys' fees, indemnify and hold harmless City, and its elected and appointed officials, officers, agents and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against any of them to attack, set aside, void or annual the approval of this Agreement or the approval of any permit or entitlement granted in furtherance of this Agreement. City may, in its sole discretion, participate in the defense of any such claim, action or proceeding.

11. Liquidated Damages. In the event that the property is not annexed to City in accordance with the terms of the Agreement, the then existing owner of the Property shall pay each year to City, as liquidated damages, a sum equal to the property taxes and any sales taxes the City would have received had the Property been annexed. Failure to make such liquidated damages payments shall be good cause for City to cease service to the Property.

12. Section Headings. All section headings and sub-headings are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect any construction or interpretation of this Agreement.

13. Governing Law. This Agreement and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.

14. Attorneys' Fees. In the event any action is commenced to enforce or interpret the terms or conditions of this Agreement the prevailing Party shall, in addition to any costs and other relief, be entitled to the recovery of its reasonable attorneys' fees, including fees for a Party’s use of in-house counsel.

15. Binding Effect. The burdens of this Agreement bind and the benefits of this Agreement inure to the assigns and successors in interest of the Parties.

16. Authority to Execute. The person or persons executing this Agreement warrant and represent that they have the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the legal, fee title 5 I:\cmo\Agreements\Pre-annexation Agreement.bm.04.08.2026.FY2526-153.docx owner of the Property.

17. Waiver and Release. Property Owner hereby waives and releases any and all claims it may have against City, and its elected and appointed officials, officers, employees and agents with respect to any City actions or omissions relating to the development of the Property, and the Parties’ entry into, and execution of, this Agreement. Property Owner makes such waiver and release with full knowledge of Civil Code Section 1542, and hereby waives any and all rights thereunder to the extent of this waiver and release, of such Section 1542 is applicable. Civil Code Section 1542 provides as follows:
"A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release, which if known by him or her must have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor."

18. Construction. The Parties agree that each Party and its counsel have reviewed this Agreement and that any rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting Party shall not apply in the interpretation of this Agreement. The Parties further agree that this Agreement represents a voluntary "arms-length" transaction agreed to by and between the Parties and that each Party has had the opportunity to consult with legal counsel regarding the terms, conditions and effect of this Agreement.

19. Entire Agreement. This Agreement sets forth and contains the entire understanding and agreement of the Parties as to the matters contained herein, and there are no oral or written representations, understandings or ancillary covenants or agreements which are not contained or expressly referenced herein, and no testimony or evidence of any such representations, understandings or covenants shall be admissible in any preceding of any kind or nature to interpret or determine the terms or conditions of this Agreement.

CITY OF REDLANDS PROPERTY OWNER
By: ___________________________ By: _____________________________ Mario Saucedo, Mayor Jose F. Sosa Sosa, Owner
By: _____________________________
ATTEST:

By: ___________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
6 I:\cmo\Agreements\Pre-annexation Agreement.bm.04.08.2026.FY2526-153.docx EXHIBIT “A”

SITE PLAN
7 I:\cmo\Agreements\Pre-annexation Agreement.bm.04.08.2026.FY2526-153.docx EXHIBIT “B”

GRANT DEED

City Council AGENDA ITEM NO. I7.

DATE: April 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Receive and file the 2025 Annual Progress Reports for the General Plan and the 2021-2029 Housing Element (Development Services Director Reilly)
MOTION:

If the City Council determines that staff's recommendation is appropriate, the following motion is provided:

I move that the City Council receive and file the 2025 Annual Progress Reports for the General Plan and the 2021- 2029 Housing Element.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council receive and file the 2025 Annual Progress Reports for the General Plan and the 2021-2029 Housing Element.

DISCUSSION:

California Government Code Section 65400 requires local jurisdictions to provide an Annual Progress Report to the California Department of Housing & Community Development (HCD) and to the Governor's Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation by April 1 of each year. Staff has completed the 2025 Annual Progress Reports and has submitted each to the State as required. The reporting period covers the implementation status of the City's 2035 General Plan programs as well as the 2021-2029 Housing Element programs for the prior calendar year (2025).

General Plan Implementation
The 2035 General Plan and the related Climate Action Plan were adopted in December 2017. The Climate Action Plan included a goal to evaluate progress on its implementation after approximately five years, and the Planning Division hired the firm that authored the original plan (Dyett & Bhatia) to prepare a comprehensive update to the Climate Action Plan beginning in 2024. The City Council adopted the updated “Climate Action Plan 2050” on July 1, 2025.

The General Plan progress report to be submitted to HCD is provided as Attachment A.

Housing Element Implementation
The certified 2021-2029 Housing Element was previously adopted in October 2022, and substantial progress has been made with Housing Element programs. Numerous items and tasks have previously been completed, such as:
adoption of the Transit Villages Specific Plan; opening the Home Key housing center; providing additional equal housing opportunity information and resources on the City's webpages; providing additional information and assistance online for potential housing development projects; providing additional information and resources online for building Accessory Dwelling Units; adopting ordinances enacting an Inclusionary Housing program and in-lieu fees for those housing development projects that may be eligible to pay in-lieu fees; and other tasks.

On June 17, 2025, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2983 that rezoned a total of 26 parcels for the purpose of providing sufficient land area with appropriate zoning to accommodate the City's dwelling unit allocation in accordance with the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). This ordinance completed a significant work program item listed in the Housing Element as well as a high priority task for the California Department of Housing & Community Development.

On July 15, 2025, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2985 that updated several housing regulations and related zoning code amendments. The ordinance completed a total of twelve work program items listed in the Housing Element, including: updating housing definitions to align with State law; created development standards for single-room occupancy residences and agricultural worker housing; and other related updates to the City’s housing regulations.

Housing Element Progress Report
The Annual Progress Report (Attachment B) includes information on the City’s progress in meeting its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) target for the planning period of October 15, 2021, through October 15, 2029.

The Southern California Association of Governments allocated a total of 3,516 new housing units to the City of Redlands as its fair share of the total number of units needed to meet the forecasted population growth in the Southern California region. The unit allocation was distributed across five household income categories, based on Area Median Income (AMI), and is summarized in the table below.

Table 1: Summary of RHNA Housing Units, by Income Category.

Income Category RHNA Units for 2021 - 2029 Building Permits Issued, 2021 - 2025
Extremely Low * n/a 166
Very Low (30% to 50% AMI) 967 22
Low (50% to 80% AMI) 615 167
Moderate (80% to 120%
AMI)
652 23
Above Moderate (over
120% AMI)
1,282 798
TOTAL UNITS: 3,516 1,176
* Note: Table B in the Annual Progress Report combines Extremely Low units with Very Low in the formula calculation.

Thus far in the 2021-2029 housing cycle (years 2021 through 2025), the City has issued a total of 1,176 permits, or

33.4% of the total RHNA goal, for new housing units.

Format of Annual Progress Report: HCD requires that standardized Annual Progress Report forms (Excel format) be completed and submitted by local jurisdictions. The following is a summary of the City’s completed forms for 2025 (see Attachment B). Please note that due to the Excel spreadsheet template provided by HCD, some of the summary table data may be spread over several pages (the Excel file is also available upon request for clearer legibility).

Table A includes new housing units by income level for which a housing application has been submitted and deemed complete during calendar year 2025.

A total of 289 dwelling units are reported in this category, all of which were within the Above Moderate income level (market rate).

Table A2 includes net new housing units by income level that have received an entitlement, a building permit, or a certificate of occupancy during the calendar year.

The City issued building permits for 113 new housing units, of which 112 units are intended for AboveModerate income households (including Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior ADUs at market-rate rents), and a permit for one Low-income unit.

The City issued certificates of occupancy for 202 housing units.

Table B summarizes prior permitting activity (for prior years) plus permitting activity for the 2025 calendar year.

Since 2021, a total of 1,176 units have been reported, consisting of the following household income levels:
798 Above Moderate income units, 23 Moderate income units, 167 Low-income units, 22 Very Low-income units, and 166 Extremely Low-income units. Note that Table B indicates 188 Very Low-income units due to the HCD Excel spreadsheet template combining Extremely Low-income units with Very Low-income units in the formula calculation.

Table C includes sites identified or rezoned to accommodate: any shortfall of housing sites from the previous planning period; to meet a shortfall of sites noted in the Housing Element; or to provide additional sites required by law to avoid no net loss under Government Section 65863.

There were no additional sites or properties (not already listed in the current Housing Element).

Table D is the report on the City's progress implementing the various tasks and programs listed in the 2021-2029 Housing Element.

Numerous items and programs have already been completed, such as: adopted the Transit Villages Specific Plan; adopted an Inclusionary Housing ordinance and in-lieu fee; providing additional equal housing opportunity information and resources on the City's webpages; providing additional information and assistance for potential housing development projects; maintaining operation of the Home Key housing center; providing additional information and resources for constructing Accessory Dwelling Units; and several other tasks.

Completed the RHNA Rezoning project: The City adopted Ordinance No. 2983 to amend the zoning designations for 26 parcels, including adoption and certification of the related Environmental Impact Report.

On July 15, 2025, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2985 updating the Zoning Regulations (Title 18 of the Redlands Municipal Code) including: housing definitions to align with State law; lists of permitted and conditionally permitted uses within various zoning districts; adopted new development standards for low barrier navigation centers; created new development standards for farmworker and agricultural worker housing; created new development standards for single-room occupancy residences; and adopted development standards for urban lot splits and two-unit developments within residential zones. Various other text amendments to the zoning regulations were also included, and a total of twelve work program items were completed with the adoption of Ordinance No. 2985.

The City hired an architectural firm to prepare ADU standard plans that will be available on the City's website (to accelerate ADU production). This work remains in progress and is expected to be completed in the coming months.

Table E includes commercial development bonuses approved by the City during the 2025 calendar year.

No commercial development bonuses or units reported.

Table F includes units rehabilitated, preserved, and acquired for alternative adequate sites during the 2025 calendar year. Table F2 includes Above- Moderate income units that have been converted to Moderate income units.

No units reported in either table.

Table G includes locally owned land included in the Housing Element housing sites inventory that have been sold, leased, or otherwise disposed of during the 2025 calendar year.

The City did not sell any land included in the housing sites inventory.

Table H includes all locally owned or controlled land declared as Surplus Sites pursuant to Government Code section 54221 or identified as Excess pursuant to Government Code section 50569.

The City declared the property located at 21 N. Church Street as surplus on October 21, 2025. The City has not carried any former Redevelopment Agency land since June 2019.

Table J includes student housing developments for low-income students for which was a density bonus was granted.

The City did not have any applications for such projects in 2025.

Table K identifies if the City has adopted a tenant preference policy.

The jurisdiction does not have a local tenant preference policy.

Table L is for the State’s Local Early Action Planning (LEAP) grant program reporting table.

The City has no current LEAP grant contracts.

ALTERNATIVES:

Not applicable.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

The City's housing plans and work programs are consistent with Priority A (Quality of Life), Strategic Objective No. 2 (Economic Vitality), which includes the following two goals:

Implement policies and programs to expand the City's affordable housing opportunities.

Encourage redevelopment efforts in the transit corridor (i.e., University Village and mall site).

SUBMITTED BY:

Sean Reilly, Director
RECOMMENDED BY:

Charles M. Duggan Jr., City Manager
REVIEWED BY:

Yvette M. Abich Garcia, City Attorney
Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
Christopher Boatman, Assistant City Manager
Danielle Garcia, Management Services/Finance Director
PREPARED BY:

Brian Foote, City Planner

FISCAL IMPACT
Fiscal Year: 25-26
Revenue Generating: N/A
Amount: $
Budgeted Y/N:

Account No.:

Additional Appropriation Required: No
Discussion:

There is no fiscal impact associated with the preparation of the 2025 Annual Progress Reports.

Attachments
Attachment_A_Redlands_General_Plan_APR_2025.pdf
Attachment_B-1_Redlands_Housing_Element_APR_2025.pdf
Attachment_B-2_Table_A2_-_Annual_Building_Permit_Activity_Report.pdf

Summary

City Council AGENDA ITEM NO. I8.

DATE: April 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution No. 8777 Approving the City of Redlands’ Participation in the National Opioids Six Remnant Defendants Settlement; Authorizing the City to Receive Direct Settlement Proceeds; and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute All Related Settlement Documents (Fire Chief Sessler)
MOTION:

If the City Council determines that staff's recommendation is appropriate, the following motion is provided:

I move to adopt Resolution No. 8777 to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute all documents necessary to implement the City of Redlands' participation in the new National Opioids Six Remnant Defendants Settlement.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council adopt Resolution No. 8777 to authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute all documents necessary to implement the City of Redlands' participation in the new National Opioids Six Remnant Defendants Settlement.

BACKGROUND:

As the City Council may be aware through public reporting, substantial litigation has occurred at both the national and state levels in response to the opioid epidemic. Thousands of lawsuits have been filed nationwide by states, counties, cities, and tribal governments seeking to recover damages associated with the crisis.

In California, nearly 80 counties and cities have initiated legal action, including the County of San Bernardino, which filed its case in July 2018 and is participating in the Multi-District Litigation (MDL) in federal court in Ohio.

These cases generally allege that opioid manufacturers, distributors, and pharmacies engaged in unlawful practices that contributed to the opioid epidemic.

In 2021, nationwide settlement agreements were reached with the three largest pharmaceutical distributors— McKesson, Cardinal Health, and AmerisourceBergen—as well as with Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and its parent company, Johnson & Johnson. On December 7, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 8285, approving the City’s participation in these settlements. Subsequently, on April 5, 2022, the City Council approved an agreement with the County of San Bernardino to reallocate the City’s share of settlement funds to support countywide opioid remediation efforts.

In late 2022, additional settlements were reached with other manufacturers and pharmacies, including Allergan, CVS, Teva, Walgreens, and Walmart. As part of these agreements, local jurisdictions were given the opportunity to participate in exchange for releasing claims against the settling defendants. The City received an initial payment of $192,720.22, which has been designated to fund a Substance Use Navigator (SUN) position within the Fire Department. This position is intended to enhance access to treatment and services for individuals experiencing opioid use disorder.

On September 17, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 8631 authorizing participation in the settlement agreement with a new national opioid settlement that was reached with Kroger Co. Since the State of California elected to participate, to remain eligible for initial funding, jurisdictions were required to opt in by August 12, 2024.

DISCUSSION:

A new national opioid settlement was reached with six regional distributors and dispensers, collectively referred to as the Six Remnant Defendants. The six regional distributors and dispenser defendants include: Associated Pharmacies, Inc. (and American Associated Pharmacies); J M Smith Corporation; Louisiana Wholesale Drug Co., Morris and Dickson Co.; North Carolina Mutual Wholesale Drug Company, Inc.; and United Natural Foods, Inc. (including its subsidiaries SuperValu and Advantage Logistics). The proposed settlement provides for a combined payment of approximately $97.6 million to support opioid abatement efforts. Unlike prior settlements, funds will be distributed directly to eligible participating local entities, with no allocation to state governments.

Participating entities are required to opt in by May 4, 2026, by executing a Participation and Release Form. Upon execution, participating entities agree to release any claims against the settling defendants. If effectuated, the settlement would result in a one-time payment to each participating entity, with funds restricted to approved opioid remediation uses. Allocation amounts are determined using a national pro-rata methodology based on established distribution models.

Opting into the new National Opioids Six Remnant Defendants Settlement provides the City of Redlands with a direct financial benefit to support local opioid abatement efforts. Participation ensures the City receives a one-time settlement payment that can be used to continue to support the Fire Department's Substance Use Navigator (SUN) program initiatives aimed at preventing and treating opioid use disorder.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may choose not to adopt Resolution No. 8777, thereby discontinuing the City’s participation in the National Opioids Six Remnant Defendants Settlement.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Priority B - Health & Safety
SUBMITTED BY:

Rich Sessler, Fire Chief
RECOMMENDED BY:

Charles M. Duggan Jr., City Manager
REVIEWED BY:

Yvette M. Abich Garcia, City Attorney
Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
Danielle Garcia, Management Services/Finance Director
PREPARED BY:

Bruni Reyes, Management Analyst

FISCAL IMPACT
Discussion:

There is no fiscal impact associated with approval of this resolution.

Attachments
Remnant-Defendant-Settlement-Agreement-Execution-Copy1824765671-1.pdf Resolution_No_8777.pdf
Subject to FRE 408 and All Other Applicable Settlement Privileges Execution Copy

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION
IN RE: NATIONAL PRESCRIPTION

OPIATE LITIGATION
This Document Relates to:

ALL SUBDIVISION ACTIONS
MDL 2804
Case No. 1:17-md-2804

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

AMONG PARTICIPATING

SUBDIVISIONS AND REMNANT

DEFENDANTS
i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Definitions............................................................................................................................1 II. Representations and Warranties.........................................................................................10 III. Settlement Fund .................................................................................................................11 IV. Implementing the Agreement ............................................................................................16 V. Conditions of Settlement; Effect of Disapproval, Cancellation, orTermination...............19 VI. Notice and Claims Administrator ......................................................................................21 VII. Use and Allocation of Opioid Remediation Fund..............................................................23 VIII. Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses...........................................................................................25 IX. Releases and Dismissal......................................................................................................25 X. Miscellaneous Provisions...................................................................................................30 Exhibit A – List of Actions
Exhibit B – Documents Describing Alleged Harms
Exhibit C – List of Litigating Subdivisions
Exhibit D – List of Opioid Remediation Uses
Exhibit E – Plan of Allocation
Exhibit F – List of Remnant Defendants’ Joint Ventures, Subsidiaries, Affiliates, and Predecessor Entities
Exhibit G – Subdivision Settlement Participation Form
Exhibit H – Agreement on Attorneys' Fees, Costs, and Expenses 1 This Settlement Agreement, including all exhibits or related agreements attached hereto or referenced herein (collectively, the “Agreement”), is dated February 23, 2026, by and between the Remnant Defendants and the Participating Subdivisions (as those terms are defined below).

Upon satisfaction of the conditions set forth in Section IV.C. and Section IV.D., this Agreement will be binding on all Participating Subdivisions and Remnant Defendants. This Agreement will then be filed as part of a request for a Consent Judgment with the Court pursuant to the terms set forth in Section IV.E. This Agreement is intended by the Settling Parties to fully, finally, and forever resolve, discharge, and settle the Released Claims (as that term is defined herein), upon and subject to the terms and conditions herein.

I. Definitions
As used in this Agreement, the following terms have the meanings specified below:

A. “Action(s)” means a lawsuit purportedly brought by or on behalf of any Litigating Subdivision against one or more Remnant Defendants coordinated under or parallel to MDL No. 2804, In re: National Prescription Opiate Litigation, No. 1:17-md-2804-DAP (N.D. Ohio) (hereinafter “MDL No. 2804”), in any court, including but not limited to, the actions listed in Exhibit A.

B. “Agreement” means this agreement, as set forth above. For the avoidance of doubt, this Agreement is inclusive of all exhibits or related agreements attached hereto or referenced herein.

C. “Alleged Harms” means the alleged past, present, and future financial, societal, and public nuisance harms and related expenditures arising out of the alleged misuse and abuse of Products, non-exclusive examples of which are described in the documents listed on Exhibit B, that have allegedly arisen as a result of the physical and bodily injuries sustained by individuals suffering from opioid-related addiction, abuse, death, and other related diseases and disorders, and that have allegedly been caused by the Released Entities.

D. “Allocated Amount” means the portion of Opioid Remediation Funds that a Subdivision will receive pursuant to the Plan of Allocation if it becomes a Participating Subdivision.

E. “Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses” means payment to plaintiffs’ counsel of attorneys’ fees and reimbursable costs and charges (including expert and consulting fees) and includes the common benefit obligations due under the MDL Court’s common benefit-related orders. Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses shall be paid from the Settlement Funds pursuant to the provisions of Section VI.B.1.c. and Section VIII. of this Agreement.

F. “Claim(s)” means any past, present or future cause of action, claim for relief, cross-claim or counterclaim, theory of liability, demand, derivative claim, request, assessment, charge, covenant, damage, debt, lien, loss, penalty, judgment, right, obligation, dispute, suit, contract, controversy, agreement, parens patriae claim, promise, performance, warranty, omission, or grievance of any nature whatsoever, 2 whether legal, equitable, statutory, regulatory or administrative, whether arising under federal, state or local common law, statute, regulation, guidance, ordinance or principles of equity, whether filed or unfiled, whether asserted or unasserted, whether known or unknown, whether accrued or unaccrued, whether foreseen, unforeseen or unforeseeable, whether discovered or undiscovered, whether suspected or unsuspected, whether fixed or contingent, and whether existing or hereafter arising, in all such cases, including, but not limited to, any request for declaratory, injunctive, or equitable relief, compensatory, punitive, or statutory damages, absolute liability, strict liability, restitution, abatement, subrogation, contribution, indemnity, apportionment, disgorgement, reimbursement, attorney fees, expert fees, consultant fees, fines, penalties, expenses, costs or any other legal, equitable, civil, administrative, or regulatory remedy whatsoever.

G. “Claim-Over” means a Claim asserted by a Non-Released Entity against a Released Entity on the basis of contribution, indemnity, or other claim-over on any theory relating to a Non-Party Covered Conduct Claim asserted by a Releasor.

H. “Compensatory Restitution Amount” means the aggregate amount paid by the Remnant Defendants hereunder other than amounts paid as attorneys’ fees and costs or identified pursuant to Section VII.A.2. as being used to pay attorney’s fees, investigation costs or litigation costs. For purposes of Section VI. and Section X.V., each Remnant Defendant’s portion of the Compensatory Restitution Amount shall be the portion of the Opioid Remediation Fund equal to the portion of the Pooled Settlement Amount that the Remnant Defendant contributed.

I. “Consent Judgment” means the judgment that the Settling Parties will mutually agree to and submit to the MDL Court for entry pursuant to Section IV.E.

J. “Covered Conduct” means any actual or alleged act, failure to act, negligence, statement, error, omission, breach of any duty, conduct, event, transaction, agreement, misstatement, misleading statement or other activity of any kind whatsoever, occurring at any time up to and including the Effective Date (and any past, present, or future consequence of any such act, failure to act, negligence, statement, error, omission, breach of duty, conduct, event, transaction, agreement, misstatement, misleading statement or other activity, occurring at any time up to and including the Effective Date) arising from or relating to (1) compounding, counseling and documentation relating to any Product or class of Products; (2) the discovery, development, manufacture, packaging, repackaging, marketing, promotion, advertising, labeling, recall, withdrawal, distribution, delivery, monitoring, reporting, supply, sale, prescribing, dispensing, physical security, warehousing, use or abuse of, or operating procedures relating to, any Product, or any system, plan, policy or advocacy relating to any Product or class of Products, including, but not limited to, any unbranded promotion, marketing, programs, or campaigns relating to any Product or class of Products; (3) the characteristics, properties, risks, or benefits of any Product; (4) the reporting, disclosure, nonreporting or nondisclosure to federal, state or other regulators of orders placed by 3 or with any Released Entity; or (5) diversion control programs or suspicious order monitoring.

K. “Designated Subdivision” means the Subdivision designated in writing by Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel to undertake the acts and obligations provided for in Section X.V.

L. “Effective Date” means the date that the Consent Judgment entered by the MDL Court pursuant to Section IV.E. becomes a Final Judgment.

M. “Final Judgment” means the Consent Judgment when it has become final and non-appealable. The Consent Judgment shall be deemed to be the Final Judgment on (a) the day following the expiration of the deadline for appealing the entry by the MDL Court of the Consent Judgment (or for appealing any ruling on a timely motion for reconsideration of such Consent Judgment, whichever is later), if no such appeal is filed; or (b) if an appeal of the Consent Judgment is filed (i) the date upon which all appellate courts with jurisdiction (including the United States Supreme Court by petition for certiorari) affirm such Consent Judgment, or deny any such appeal or petition for certiorari, such that no further appeal is possible, or (ii) if no appeal is filed from the appellate court decision obtained pursuant to clause (i), the day following the expiration of the deadline for filing a petition for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court. Any appeal or other proceeding pertaining solely to any order adopting or approving a Plan of Allocation and/or to any order issued with respect to an application for Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses consistent with this Agreement shall not in any way delay or preclude the Consent Judgment from becoming Final, provided that any such appeal or proceeding has no impact on any other aspect of the Settlement or this Agreement.

N. “Later Litigating Subdivision” means any Subdivision, regardless of its population, in any state, that first files a lawsuit bringing a Released Claim against a Released Entity after the Preliminary Agreement Date.

O. “Litigating Subdivision” means (1) any (a) General Purpose Government (including, but not limited to, a municipality, county, county subdivision, city, town, township, parish, village, borough, gore, or any other entities that provide municipal-type government), School District, or Special District within a State; and (b) any other subdivision or subdivision official or sub-entity of or located within a State (whether political, geographical or otherwise, whether functioning or non-functioning, regardless of population overlap, and including, but not limited to, Nonfunctioning Governmental Units and public institutions); 1 (2) that
1 “General Purpose Government,” “School District,” and “Special District” shall correspond to the “five basic types of local governments” recognized by the U.S. Census Bureau and match the 2017 list of Governmental Units. The three (3) General Purpose Governments are county, municipal, and township governments; the two (2) special purpose governments are School Districts and Special Districts. “Fire District,” “Health District,” “Hospital District,” and “Library District” shall correspond to categories of Special Districts recognized by the U.S. Census Bureau. References to a State’s Subdivisions or to a Subdivision “in,” “of,” or “within” a State include Subdivisions 4 has brought any lawsuit, including but not limited to lawsuits filed in state court or federal court including those centralized in MDL 2804 or MDL 2996, prior to the Preliminary Agreement Date; in a direct, parens patriae, or any other capacity; against any defendant; that alleges or seeks to recover for harms allegedly caused by Covered Conduct. Exhibit C is an agreed list of all Litigating Subdivisions. Exhibit C will be updated (including with any corrections) periodically, and a final version of Exhibit C will be attached hereto as of the Reference Date.

P. “MDL Court” means the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio Eastern Division, Case No. 1:17-md-2804, Judge Dan Aaron Polster, or his duly-appointed successor.

Q. “Non-Litigating Subdivision” means a Subdivision that is not a Litigating Subdivision.

R. “Non-Participating Subdivision” means any Subdivision that is not a Participating Subdivision.

S. “Non-Party Covered Conduct Claim” means a Claim against any Non-Released Entity involving, arising out of, or related to Covered Conduct (or conduct that would be Covered Conduct if engaged in by a Released Entity).

T. “Non-Party Settlement” means a settlement by any Releasor that settles any NonParty Covered Conduct Claim and includes a release of any Non-Released Entity.

U. “Non-Released Entity” means an entity that is not a Released Entity.

V. “Notice” means the notice advising Subdivisions of their rights with respect to this Settlement Agreement in accordance with Section IV.B.

W. “Notice and Administrative Costs” means the reasonable sum of money to be paid out of the Settlement Funds for Notice and related administrative costs, including escrow fees, Taxes, or Tax Expenses. For purposes of calculating a Remnant Defendant’s portion of the Settlement Fund or Opioid Remediation Fund under Section VI. and Section X.V., the Notice and Administrative Costs will be deemed to be divided and paid equally by the Remnant Defendants except as provided in Section I.YY. and Section I.AA.

X. “Notice and Claims Administrator” means the notice and claims administrator(s) to be selected by Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel with the consent of the Remnant Defendants.
located within the State even if they are not formally or legally a sub-entity of the State; provided, however, that a “Health District” that includes any of the following words or phrases in its name shall not be considered a Subdivision: mosquito, pest, insect, spray, vector, animal, air quality, air pollution, clean air, coastal water, tuberculosis, and sanitary.
5 Y. “Opioid Remediation” means care, treatment, and other programs and expenditures (including reimbursement for past such programs or expenditures except where this Agreement restricts the use of funds solely to future Opioid Remediation) designed to (1) address the misuse and abuse of Products, (2) treat or mitigate opioid use or related disorders, or (3) mitigate other alleged effects of the opioid abuse crisis, including on those injured as a result of the opioid abuse crisis. Exhibit D provides a non-exhaustive list of expenditures that qualify as being paid for Opioid Remediation.2
Z. “Opioid Remediation Fund” means the component of the Settlement Funds described in Section VI.C.

AA. “Opioid Remediation Funds” means the Settlement Funds, less the payments set forth in Section VI.B.1.

BB. “Participating Subdivision” means a Subdivision that meets the requirements for becoming a Participating Subdivision under Section IV.C.

CC. “Participation Report” means the list of Subdivisions that returned a fully executed Subdivision Settlement Participation Form by the Subdivision Settlement Participation Form Submission Deadline created by the Notice and Claims Administrator.

DD. “Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel” means the MDL 2804 Co-Lead Counsel, Liaison Counsel, and members of the MDL Court-appointed Settlement Negotiating Committee.

EE. “Plan of Allocation” means the plan or formula of allocation of the Opioid Remediation Fund set forth in Exhibit E that a Subdivision will receive pursuant to Section VI.C. if it becomes a Participating Subdivision. For the avoidance of doubt and notwithstanding any other provision in this Agreement, no NonParticipating Subdivision will receive any amount from the Settlement Fund, regardless of whether such Subdivision is included on Exhibit E.

FF. “Pooled Settlement Amount” means $97,625,000.00.

GG. “Preliminary Agreement Date” means the date this Agreement is fully executed and fully executed copies of this Agreement have been delivered to counsel for all Remnant Defendants and Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel.

HH. “Product” means any chemical substance, whether used for medicinal or nonmedicinal purposes, and whether natural, synthetic, or semi-synthetic, or any finished pharmaceutical product made from or with such substance, that is: (1) an opioid or opiate, as well as any product containing any such substance; (2) a benzodiazepine, carisoprodol, or gabapentin; or (3) a combination or “cocktail” of 2 Opioid Remediation includes amounts paid to satisfy any future demand by another governmental entity to make a required reimbursement in connection with the past care and treatment of a person related to the Alleged Harms. 6 chemical substances prescribed, sold, bought, or dispensed to be used together that includes opioids or opiates. “Product” shall include, but is not limited to, any substance consisting of or containing buprenorphine, codeine, fentanyl, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, meperidine, methadone, morphine, oxycodone, oxymorphone, tapentadol, tramadol, opium, heroin, carfentanil, diazepam, estazolam, quazepam, alprazolam, clonazepam, oxazepam, flurazepam, triazolam, temazepam, midazolam, carisoprodol, gabapentin, or any variant of these substances or any similar substance.

II. “Reference Date” means the date by which each Remnant Defendant must inform the Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel of its determination whether the condition in Section IV.D.1. has been satisfied. The Reference Date shall be thirty (30) days after counsel for Remnant Defendants receive the Participation Report, unless it is extended by written agreement of the Remnant Defendants and Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel.

JJ. “Related Agreements” means the related but individual agreements between each Remnant Defendant and Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel, on behalf of all Participating Subdivisions, setting forth each Remnant Defendant’s share of the Pooled Settlement Amount.

KK. “Released Claims” means any and all Claims, including Unknown Claims, that directly or indirectly are based on, arise out of, or in any way relate to or concern Covered Conduct occurring prior to the Effective Date. Without limiting the foregoing, Released Claims include any Claims that have been, are, or could be asserted against one or more Released Entities by any Participating Subdivision or Releasor in any federal, state, or local action or proceeding (whether judicial, arbitral, or administrative) directly or indirectly based on, arising out of, or relating to, in whole or in part, Covered Conduct (whether or not such Releasor has brought such action or proceeding). Released Claims also include all Claims against Released Entities asserted in any proceeding to be dismissed pursuant to this Agreement, whether or not such claims relate to Covered Conduct. The Settling Parties intend that this term be interpreted broadly. For the avoidance of doubt, Released Claims do not include Claims of private individuals. It is the intent of the Parties that Claims by private individuals be treated in accordance with applicable law. Released Claims is also used herein to describe claims brought by a non-party Subdivision that would have been Released Claims if they had been brought by a Releasor against a Released Entity.

LL. “Released Entities” means, with respect to Released Claims, the Remnant Defendants and:

1. all past and present subsidiaries, divisions, predecessors, successors, and assigns (in each case, whether direct or indirect) of each Remnant Defendant;
7 2. all past and present subsidiaries and divisions (in each case, whether direct or indirect) of any entity described in subsection (1);

3. the respective past and present officers, directors, members, trustees, and employees of any of the foregoing (each for actions that occurred during and related to their work for, affiliation or employment with, any of the Remnant Defendants or the foregoing entities);

4. all past and present joint ventures (whether direct or indirect) of each Remnant Defendant or its subsidiaries, including in any Remnant Defendant’s or its subsidiary’s capacity as a participating member in such joint venture;

5. all direct or indirect parents and shareholders of the Remnant Defendants (solely in their capacity as parents or shareholders of the applicable Remnant Defendant with respect to Covered Conduct); and

6. any insurer of any Remnant Defendant or any person or entity otherwise described in subsections (1)-(5) (solely in its role as insurer of such person or entity and subject to the last sentence of Section IX.B.2.).

An illustrative list of joint ventures, subsidiaries and affiliates and predecessor entities for each Remnant Defendant is set forth in Exhibit F. Any person or entity described in subsections (3)-(6) shall be a Released Entity solely in the capacity described in such clauses and shall not be a Released Entity with respect to its conduct in any other capacity. With respect to joint ventures (including predecessor entities), only entities listed on Exhibit F are Released Entities.

Current or former Defendants in In re: National Prescription Opiate Litigation, No. 1: 17-md-2804 (N.D. Ohio) (“MDL”) or in other pending litigation asserting a Claim for Covered Conduct not identified in Exhibit F are not considered Released Entities, provided, however, that any Remnant Defendant entities that fall within clauses (1)-(5) above against whom Released Claims are brought in the MDL on or after the Preliminary Agreement Date shall be considered Released Entities even if not listed on Exhibit F. For the avoidance of doubt, any entity acquired, or joint venture entered into, by a Remnant Defendant after the Effective Date is not a Released Entity.

MM. “Releasors” means, with respect to Released Claims, (1) each Participating Subdivision and, (2) without limitation and to the maximum extent of the power of each Participating Subdivision to release Claims, (a) the Participating Subdivision’s departments, agencies, divisions, boards, commissions, subdivisions, districts, instrumentalities of any kind and attorneys, and any person in his or her official capacity, whether elected or appointed to serve any of the foregoing, and any agency, person, or other entity claiming by or through any of the foregoing, and (b) any person or entity acting in a parens patriae, sovereign, quasi-sovereign, private attorney general, qui tam, taxpayer, or other capacity seeking relief on behalf of or generally applicable to the general public with 8 respect to a Participating Subdivision, whether or not any of them participate in this Agreement. The inclusion of a specific reference to a type of entity in this definition shall not be construed as meaning that the entity is not a Participating Subdivision. In addition to being a Releasor as provided herein, a Participating Subdivision shall also provide the Subdivision Settlement Participation Form referenced in Section IV.C. providing for a release to the fullest extent of the Participating Subdivision’s authority.

NN. “Remnant Defendants” means Associated Pharmacies, Inc., American Associated Pharmacies, J M Smith Corporation, Louisiana Wholesale Drug Company, Inc., Morris & Dickson Co., North Carolina Mutual Wholesale Drug Company, Inc., United Natural Foods, Inc. (including without limitation its direct and indirect subsidiaries SuperValu, Inc., Advantage Logistics Southwest, Inc., Advantage Logistics USA West, L.L.C., Advantage Logistics USA East, L.L.C., and UNFI Distribution Company, LLC) collectively, and all their past and present subsidiaries (excluding, in the case of United Natural Foods, Inc., New Albertsons, Inc. (a former subsidiary of SuperValu, Inc.)), divisions, predecessors, successors, and assigns (in each case, whether direct or indirect). Each individually is a “Remnant Defendant.” For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in this Agreement releases or is intended to release Albertsons Companies, Inc. or any of its subsidiaries.

OO. “Settlement” means the settlement of the Released Claims between the Settling Parties on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.

PP. “Settlement Fund” means the interest-bearing account to be established and controlled by the Settlement Fund Administrator as set forth in Section III.

QQ. “Settlement Funds” means the Pooled Settlement Amount plus any interest that may accrue on the Pooled Settlement Amount from the date the Remnant Defendants pay the Pooled Settlement Amount in the Settlement Fund or any portion thereof.

RR. “Settlement Fund Administrator” means the agent to be selected as set forth in Section III.D.

SS. “Settlement Participation Form Submission Deadline” means sixty (60) days after the Preliminary Agreement Date, unless it is extended by written agreement of the Remnant Defendants and Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel.

TT. “Settling Parties” means, collectively, the Participating Subdivisions and Remnant Defendants.

UU. “State” means any state of the United States of America including their respective agencies, departments, and instrumentalities.

VV. “State-Subdivision Agreement” means an agreement that a State reaches with the Subdivisions in that State regarding the allocation, distribution, and/or use of 9 funds allocated to its Subdivisions under this Agreement. Preexisting agreements addressing funds other than those allocated pursuant to this Agreement shall qualify if adopted pursuant to the terms of a national opioid settlement or by statute.

WW. “Subdivisions” means (1) all formal and legally recognized sub-entities and subentity officials (acting in an official capacity on behalf of a sub-entity) of a State that have a population of 30,000 or more (as recognized in the most recent U.S.

Census), (2) all Litigating Subdivisions, and, for the avoidance of doubt, (3) all plaintiffs listed on Exhibit A. For the avoidance of doubt, “Subdivisions” includes sub-entities and sub-entity officials that meet the above criteria, and that provide general governance for a defined area, including a county, parish, city, town, village, or similar entity. Unless otherwise specified, “Subdivisions” includes all functional counties and parishes and other functional levels of subentities of a State that provide general governance for a defined area, as well as all Special Districts and historic, non-functioning sub-entities that are also Litigating Subdivisions.

XX. “Subdivision Settlement Participation Form” means the document or online form, in the form attached as Exhibit G to this Agreement, that Participating Subdivisions must execute and return to the Claims Administrator to participate in the Settlement and receive a payment pursuant to this Agreement and the Plan of Allocation, and which shall (1) make such Participating Subdivisions signatories to this Agreement, (2) include a full and complete release of any and all of such Subdivision’s claims, and (3) require the prompt dismissal with prejudice of any Released Claims that have been filed by any such Participating Subdivisions.

YY. “Taxes” means taxes (including any estimated taxes, interest, or penalties) arising with respect to the income earned by the Settlement Fund, including, without limitation, any taxes or tax detriments that may be imposed upon the Remnant Defendants, their counsel, or any Released Entity with respect to any income earned by the Settlement Fund for any period during which the Settlement Fund does not qualify as a qualified settlement fund for federal or state income tax purposes. For purposes of calculating a Remnant Defendant’s portion of the Settlement Fund or Opioid Remediation Fund under Section VI. and Section X.V., Taxes will be deemed to be divided and paid by the Remnant Defendants in proportion to the amounts they contributed to the Pooled Settlement Amount.

ZZ. “Tax Expense” means all expenses and costs incurred in connection with the operation and implementation of Section III., including, without limitation, expenses of tax attorneys and/or accountants (including the Settlement Fund Administrator) and mailing and distribution costs and expenses relating to filing (or failing to file) the returns described in Section III.E. For purposes of calculating a Remnant Defendant’s portion of the Settlement Fund or Opioid Remediation Fund under Section VI. and Section X.V., the Tax Expense will be deemed to be divided and paid equally by all Remnant Defendants. 10 AAA. “Termination Refund” means the amount of the Settlement Funds to be returned to a Remnant Defendant that elects to terminate this Agreement pursuant to Section V.C. The Termination Refund shall be the portion of the Settlement Fund equal to the portion of the Pooled Settlement Amount contributed by the Remnant Defendant, plus all interest and/or earnings thereon, less its portion of any Notice and Administrative Costs, including any Taxes or Tax Expenses, that have been paid, incurred, or are due and owing as of the date the notice of termination is given.

BBB. “Unknown Claims” means any Released Claim that a Participating Subdivision or Releasor does not know or suspect to exist in their favor at the time of the release of the Released Entities that, if known by them, might have affected their settlement with and release of the Released Entities.

II. Representations and Warranties
A. Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel’s Representations and Warranties. Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel represents and warrants to the Remnant Defendants as follows:

1. Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel believes the Settlement is fair, reasonable, adequate, and beneficial to the Subdivisions and that participation in the Settlement would be in their best interests.

2. Because Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel believes that the Settlement is in the best interests of the Subdivisions, Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel will use their best reasonable efforts to encourage and assist the Subdivisions to participate in this Settlement.

B. Participating Subdivisions’ Representations and Warranties. By electing to become a party to this Agreement, each Participating Subdivision represents and warrants to the Remnant Defendants as follows:

1. each Participating Subdivision has received legal advice from its attorneys regarding the advisability of entering into this Agreement and the legal consequences of this Agreement;

2. each Participating Subdivision is not relying on any statement, representation, omission, inducement, or promise by Remnant Defendants, except those expressly stated in this Agreement;

3. each Participating Subdivision has, with the assistance of its attorneys, investigated the law and facts pertaining to the Released Claims and the Settlement;

4. each Participating Subdivision has carefully read, and knows and understands, the full contents of this Agreement and is voluntarily entering into this Agreement after having consulted with its attorneys; 11 5. each Participating Subdivision has all necessary authority to enter into this Agreement and release all Released Claims on behalf of itself and all other entities that are Releasors by virtue of their relationship or association with it;

6. each Participating Subdivision has authorized the execution and performance of its Participation Agreement, and has authorized the person signing this Agreement on its behalf to do so;

7. upon execution of its respective Participation Agreement, each Participating Subdivision accepts, agrees to, and ratifies the terms of this Agreement; and

8. no portion of any relief under this Agreement to which any of the Participating Subdivisions may be entitled has been assigned, transferred, or conveyed by or for any of the Participating Subdivisions to any other person or entity.

C. Remnant Defendants’ Representations and Warranties. Remnant Defendants represent and warrant to Participating Subdivisions as follows:

1. each of the Remnant Defendants has received legal advice from its attorneys regarding the advisability of entering into this Agreement and the legal consequences of this Agreement;

2. none of the Remnant Defendants is relying on any statement, representation, omission, inducement, or promise by Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel or any Subdivision, except those expressly stated in this Agreement;

3. each of the Remnant Defendants, with the assistance of its attorneys, has investigated the law and facts pertaining to the Released Claims and the Settlement;

4. each of the Remnant Defendants has carefully read, and knows and understands, the full contents of this Agreement and is voluntarily entering into this Agreement after having consulted with its attorneys; and

5. each of the Remnant Defendants has all necessary authority to enter into this Agreement, has authorized the execution and performance of this Agreement, and has authorized the person signing this Agreement on its behalf to do so.

III. Settlement Fund
A. Settlement Payment. The Remnant Defendants shall pay into the Settlement Fund the Pooled Settlement Amount in consideration of the covenants, agreements, and releases 12 set forth in this Agreement. The Pooled Settlement Amount shall be allocated and used only as specified in Section VII.

1. Payments of the Pooled Settlement Amount to the Settlement Fund will be allocated among the Remnant Defendants in accordance with each Remnant Defendant’s agreed portion as separately negotiated and agreed to by each Remnant Defendant with Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel in the Related Agreements. A Remnant Defendant’s sole responsibility for payments under this Agreement and any related agreements (including without limitation the Fee Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit H) shall be to pay its respective portion of the Pooled Settlement Amount. The obligations of the Remnant Defendants in this Agreement are several and not joint. No Remnant Defendant shall be responsible for any portion of another Remnant Defendant’s share.

2. The Remnant Defendants shall pay into the Settlement Fund by wire transfer their respective portion of the Pooled Settlement Amount within forty-five (45) days of the later of (1) receipt of a fully executed copy of this Settlement Agreement, or (2) the Remnant Defendants’ receipt of the information and instructions required to effectuate the wire transfer.

3. The Settlement Funds will be held in escrow in the Settlement Fund until the Effective Date. If the Effective Date does not occur as to one or more Remnant Defendants, the Settlement Fund Administrator will return to each Remnant Defendant for which the Effective Date did not occur, its portion of the Pooled Settlement Amount with accrued interest less that Remnant Defendant’s portion of (1) any Notice and Administrative Costs incurred, and (2) any Taxes and Tax Expense due or becoming due.

4. Upon the occurrence of the Effective Date, the Pooled Settlement Amount shall not be subject to reduction and no funds may be returned to any Remnant Defendant, except as otherwise provided in this Agreement.

B. Nature of Payment. Each of the Remnant Defendants and Participating Subdivisions acknowledges and agrees that notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, including but not limited to, the scope of the Released Claims:

1. It has entered into this Agreement to avoid the delay, expense, inconvenience, and uncertainty of further litigation;

2. (a) The Participating Subdivisions sought compensatory restitution (within the meaning of 26 U.S.C. § 162(f)(2)(A)) as damages for the Alleged Harms allegedly suffered by the Participating Subdivisions; (b) the Compensatory Restitution Amount is no greater than the amount, in the aggregate, of the Alleged Harms allegedly suffered by the Participating Subdivisions; and (c) the portion of the Compensatory Restitution Amount received by each Participating Subdivision is no greater than the amount 13 of the Alleged Harms allegedly suffered by such Participating Subdivision;

3. The payment of the Compensatory Restitution Amount by the Remnant Defendants constitutes, and is paid for, compensatory restitution (within the meaning of 26 U.S.C. § 162(f)(2)(A)) for alleged damage or harm (as compensation for alleged damage or harm arising out of and/or because of alleged bodily injury) allegedly caused by the Remnant Defendants;

4. The Compensatory Restitution Amount is being paid as compensatory restitution (within the meaning of 26 U.S.C. § 162(f)(2)(A)) in order to restore, in whole or in part, the Participating Subdivisions to the same position or condition that they would be in had the Participating Subdivisions not suffered the Alleged Harms; and

5. For the avoidance of doubt: (a) no portion of the Compensatory Restitution Amount represents reimbursement to any Participating Subdivision or other person or entity for the costs of any investigation or litigation, (b) the entire Compensatory Restitution Amount is properly characterized as described in Section III.B., and (c) no portion of the Compensatory Restitution Amount constitutes disgorgement or is properly characterized as the payment of statutory or other fines, penalties, multiple or treble damages, punitive damages, or other punitive assessments.

C. No Other Payments. Other than payment under Section III.A. of this Agreement, the Remnant Defendants shall have no obligations to make any further or additional payment of any sort or kind in connection with this Agreement or the Settlement.

D. The Settlement Fund and Administrator.

1. Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel shall arrange for the Settlement Fund to be established at Huntington Bank, with Law Office of Joseph C. Tann, PLLC and Winbridge Partners, LLC serving as the Settlement Fund Administrator subject to an escrow agreement mutually acceptable to Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel and Remnant Defendants, and such escrow to be administered under the MDL Court’s continuing supervision and control. The Settlement Fund Administrator will act as an independent and neutral third party in the performance of its functions including administering and disbursing funds from the Settlement Fund and the Opioid Remediation Fund. To the extent that there is any ambiguity or inconsistency when this Agreement and the escrow agreement are read together, the terms of this Agreement shall control.

2. The Settlement Fund Administrator shall invest the Pooled Settlement Amount deposited pursuant to Section III.A. in U.S. agency or treasury securities or other instruments backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government or an agency thereof, or fully insured by the U.S. 14 government or an agency thereof and shall reinvest the proceeds of these instruments as they mature in similar instruments at their then-current market rates; provided, however, that the Settlement Fund Administrator will not invest in any instruments that a “qualified settlement fund,” within the meaning of Treas. Reg. § 1.468B-1, et seq., is not permitted to invest in, pursuant to the Treasury regulations, or any modification in Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) guidelines, whether set forth in IRS rulings, other IRS pronouncements or otherwise. All risks related to the investment of the Settlement Funds shall be borne by the Settlement Fund, and any losses in the Settlement Fund shall be borne by the Settlement Fund and shall not be recoverable from the Remnant Defendants. The Remnant Defendants shall have no responsibility for, interest in, or liability whatsoever with respect to the investment decisions or the actions of the Settlement Fund Administrator or any transactions executed by the Settlement Fund Administrator related to the investment of the Settlement Funds.

3. The Settlement Fund Administrator shall not, and Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel shall not instruct the Settlement Fund Administrator to, disburse the Settlement Funds, except as provided in this Agreement or by order of the MDL Court. For the avoidance of doubt, the Settlement Fund Administrator is authorized, and Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel is authorized to instruct the Settlement Fund Administrator, to execute such transactions as are consistent with the terms of this Agreement or as directed by the MDL Court, including but not limited to execute transactions prior to the Effective Date to enable payment of Notice and Administrative Costs as incurred.

4. All funds held in the Settlement Fund shall be deemed and considered to be in custodia legis of the MDL Court, and shall remain subject to the jurisdiction of the MDL Court, until such time as such funds are distributed pursuant to this Agreement and/or further order(s) of the MDL Court.

E. Taxes.

1. The Settlement Fund shall be, and shall be treated by the Settling Parties and the Settlement Fund Administrator as being at all times, a “qualified settlement fund” within the meaning of Treas. Reg. § 1.468B-1 (and corresponding or similar provisions of state, local, or foreign law, as applicable), and the MDL Court shall have continuing jurisdiction over the Settlement Fund, pursuant to Treas. Reg. § 1.468B-1(c)(1), and over the Settlement Fund Administrator as its administrator. The Settlement Fund Administrator shall not take any action or tax position inconsistent with such treatment. In addition, the Settlement Fund Administrator shall timely make such elections as necessary or advisable and do all things necessary to carry out the provisions of this Section III., and shall, in any 15 event, make any available “relation-back election” (as defined in Treas.

Reg. § 1.468B-1(j)(2) (and corresponding or similar elections under state, local, or foreign law, as applicable)), back to the earliest permitted date.

Such elections shall be made in compliance with the procedures and requirements contained in such regulations. It shall be the responsibility of the Settlement Fund Administrator to timely and properly prepare and deliver the necessary documentation for signature by all necessary parties, and thereafter to cause the appropriate filing to occur. The Settling Parties agree to take any other reasonable actions as shall be necessary to ensure that the Settlement Fund qualifies as a qualified settlement fund for federal and state income tax purposes including but not limited to requesting the MDL Court to formally (i) approve the Settlement Fund as a “qualified settlement fund” within the meaning of Treas. Reg. § 1.468B-1, and (ii) confirm its continuing jurisdiction over the Settlement Fund and the Opioid Remediation Fund. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, the Settlement Fund Administrator shall not on behalf of or in connection with the Settlement Fund request a private letter ruling, technical advice memorandum or any other ruling or guidance from the Internal Revenue Service or any other taxing authority on any matter without consulting with and obtaining the prior written consent of each Remnant Defendant.

2. For the purpose of § 468B of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and Treas. Reg. § 1.468B-2(k)(3) (and any corresponding or similar provisions of state, local or foreign law, as applicable), the qualified settlement fund “administrator” shall be the Law Office of Joseph C. Tann, PLLC and Winbridge Partners, LLC. Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel shall cooperate with and cause the Settlement Fund Administrator to, and the Settlement Fund Administrator shall satisfy the administrative requirements imposed by Treas. Reg. § 1.468B-2 (and any similar provisions of state, local or foreign law, as applicable) by, for example: (i) obtaining employer identification numbers and providing the same in an IRS Form W-9 to the Remnant Defendants; (ii) satisfying any information reporting or withholding requirements imposed with respect to the Settlement Fund, including with respect to any distributions from the Settlement Fund; (iii) timely and properly filing or causing to be filed all informational and other tax returns or filings necessary or advisable with respect to the Settlement Fund (including, without limitation, the returns described in Treas. Reg. § 1.468B-2(k)) and paying any taxes reported thereon; (iv) sending copies of all such tax returns and filings to the Remnant Defendants; and (v) providing instructions for the release of sufficient funds from the Settlement Fund to pay all Taxes owed by the Settlement Fund in accordance with Section III. and Treas. Reg. § 1.468B2 and any applicable state, local or other tax laws. Such returns, as well as the relation-back election described in Section III.E.1., shall be consistent with the provisions of this Section III.E.2. and in all events shall reflect that all Taxes as defined in Section I.YY. on the income earned by the 16 Settlement Fund shall be paid out of the Settlement Funds as provided in Section III.E.3. Each Released Entity shall provide to the administrator and the IRS the statement described in Treas. Reg. § 1.468B-3(e)(2) no later than February 15th of the year following each calendar year in which such Released Entity made its transfer to the Settlement Fund. The Released Entities shall have no responsibility or liability for the Settlement Fund’s tax returns or other filings.

3. The following shall be paid out of the Settlement Funds: (i) all Taxes (including any estimated taxes, interest, or penalties) arising with respect to the income earned by the Settlement Fund, including, without limitation, any taxes or tax detriments that may be imposed upon the Remnant Defendants, their counsel, or any Released Entity with respect to any income earned by the Settlement Fund for any period during which the Settlement Fund does not qualify as a qualified settlement fund for federal or state income tax purposes(collectively, “Taxes”), and (ii) all Tax Expenses. In all events, neither the Remnant Defendants nor any other Released Entity nor their counsel shall have any liability or responsibility for any Taxes or Tax Expenses. With funds from the Settlement Fund, the Settlement Fund Administrator shall indemnify and hold harmless the Remnant Defendants and any other Released Entity and their counsel for all Taxes and Tax Expenses (including, without limitation, Taxes payable by reason of any such indemnification). Further, all Taxes and Tax Expenses shall be treated as, and considered to be, a cost of administration of the Settlement Fund and shall timely be paid by the Settlement Fund Administrator out of the Settlement Funds without prior order from the MDL Court. The Settlement Fund Administrator shall be obligated (notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary) to withhold from any funds necessary to pay such amounts, including the establishment of adequate reserves for any Taxes and Tax Expenses (as well as any amounts that may be required to be withheld under Treas. Reg. § 1.468B-2(1)(2)) (and any corresponding or similar provisions of state, local or foreign law, as applicable). Neither the Remnant Defendants nor any Released Entity nor their counsel is responsible therefor, nor shall they have any liability therefor. The Settling Parties agree to cooperate with the Settlement Fund Administrator, each other, their tax attorneys, and their accountants to the extent reasonably necessary to carry out the provisions of this Section III.E.3. and with respect to any tax claim, dispute, investigation, audit, examination, contest, litigation, or other proceeding relating to this Agreement.

IV. Implementing the Agreement
A. Stay. Following the Preliminary Agreement Date, Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel and Remnant Defendants shall promptly jointly inform the MDL Court and jointly undertake reasonable best efforts to stay the Actions as to the Remnant Defendants. 17 B. Notice to the Subdivisions. No later than seven (7) calendar days after the Preliminary Agreement Date, the Notice and Claims Administrator shall send individual written Notice of the opportunity to participate in this Agreement and the requirements of participation to all Subdivisions. The form and manner of Notice agreed upon by the Parties shall be provided by the Notice and Claims Administrator to the Subdivisions. The notice shall include a Subdivision Settlement Participation Form and shall provide prominent notice of the Subdivision Settlement Participation Form Submission Deadline. Nothing contained herein shall preclude Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel from providing further notice to or otherwise contacting any Subdivision about becoming a Participating Subdivision, including beginning any of the activities described in this paragraph prior to the Preliminary Agreement Date.

C. Participation by Subdivisions.

1. A Subdivision may become a Participating Subdivision by returning an executed Subdivision Settlement Participation Form to the Notice and Claims Administrator specifying (1) that the Subdivision agrees to the terms of this Agreement, (2) that the Subdivision releases all Released Claims against all Released Entities, (3) that the Subdivision agrees to use monies it receives from the Opioid Remediation Fund, if any, pursuant to the applicable requirements of Section VII., provided, however, that NonLitigating Subdivisions may only use monies originating from the Opioid Remediation Fund for purposes that qualify as Opioid Remediation, and (4) the Subdivision submits to the jurisdiction of the MDL Court for purposes limited to the MDL Court’s role under this Agreement. The required Subdivision Settlement Participation Form is attached as Exhibit G.

2. The eligibility of entities that submit Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms to participate in the Settlement as Participating Subdivisions will be subject to confirmation by the Notice and Claims Administrator.

3. Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms shall be deemed valid only for the entity named in the request.

4. Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms shall be deemed timely if received by the Notice and Claims Administrator no later than the Subdivision Settlement Participation Form Submission Deadline, or otherwise as agreed in writing by Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel and the Remnant Defendants.

5. A Subdivision that has not submitted a Settlement Participation Form, and is thus a Non-Participating Subdivision, shall not directly receive any portion of the Opioid Remediation Funds. The Remnant Defendants reserve all of their legal rights and defenses with respect to NonParticipating Subdivisions. 18 6. Within ten (10) calendar days of the Subdivision Settlement Participation Form Submission Deadline, as extended by written agreement, the Notice and Claims Administrator shall deliver to Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel and Remnant Defendants the Participation Report.

7. Within fifteen (15) calendar days of delivering the Participation Report, the Notice and Claims Administrator shall deliver to Remnant Defendants copies of all Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms.

D. Notice by Remnant Defendants.

1. After receiving the Participation Report, each Remnant Defendant will individually determine on or before the Reference Date whether there is sufficient Subdivision participation and sufficient resolution or dismissal of the Claims of the Litigating Subdivisions to proceed with this Agreement. The determination shall be in the sole discretion of the Remnant Defendant and may be based on any criteria or factors deemed relevant by the Remnant Defendant.

2. On or before the Reference Date, each Remnant Defendant shall inform Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel of its determination pursuant to Section IV.D.1. If one or more Remnant Defendants determine to proceed, those Parties will proceed to file the motion for a Consent Judgment and the obligations in the Subdivision Settlement Participation Form will become effective and binding as of the Effective Date. If one or more Remnant Defendants determine not to proceed, those Remnant Defendants shall serve notice of their decision to terminate this Agreement as to them only in accordance with Section V.C.

E. Entry of Consent Judgment.

1. Within fourteen (14) days after the Reference Date (or the next business day thereafter), the Settling Parties shall submit an appropriate motion to the MDL Court reporting upon the Settlement as specified herein, including the Participation Report, and jointly requesting that the MDL Court:
a. enter a final consent judgment dismissing the Actions coordinated under MDL No. 2804 with prejudice as to the Remnant Defendants and, except as provided for in this Agreement, without costs or attorneys’ fees;
b. direct Participating Subdivisions to dismiss the other Actions not coordinated under MDL No. 2804 with prejudice as to the Remnant Defendants and, except as provided for in this
Agreement, without costs or attorneys’ fees;
19 c. discharge and release the Released Entities from all Released Claims;
d. permanently bar and enjoin the institution and prosecution by Participating Subdivisions of any other action against the Released Entities in any forum asserting any claims related in any way to the Released Claims;
e. reserve and continue exclusive jurisdiction over the Settlement, including the Settlement Fund, Opioid Remediation Fund, the Settlement Fund Administrator, the Notice and Claims
Administrator, and all future proceedings concerning the administration, consummation, and enforcement of this
Agreement;
f. determine pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) that there is no just reason for delay and direct entry of a final judgment as to the Participating Subdivisions and the Remnant Defendants; and
g. confirm such other and further provisions consistent with the terms of this Agreement to which the Settling Parties expressly consent in writing.

2. In connection with the filing of the motion for a Consent Judgment, Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel will also request that the MDL Court approve the proposed Plan of Allocation, as altered by subsequent agreement, if any, pursuant to Section VII.B.3, and apply the MDL Court’s prior common benefit Orders to the Settlement Funds.

3. Participating Subdivisions shall be subject to and bound by the provisions of this Agreement, the releases contained herein, and the Final Judgment.

V. Conditions of Settlement; Effect of Disapproval, Cancellation, orTermination A. Occurrence of Effective Date.

1. Upon the Effective Date, any and all remaining interest or right of the Remnant Defendants that have elected to proceed with the Settlement, in orto the Settlement Funds, if any, shall be absolutely and forever extinguished except as provided by this Agreement, and the Settlement Funds (less any Notice and Administrative Costs, Taxes, Tax Expenses, or Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses paid) shall be transferred from the Settlement Fund to the Opioid Remediation Fund, and from the Settlement Fund Administrator to the Notice and Claims Administrator as successor Settlement Fund Administrator, within ten (10) business days of the Notice and Claims Administrator notifying Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel 20 it is ready to distribute the Opioid Remediation Funds, which must be after the Effective Date.

2. Upon the Effective Date, the Participating Subdivisions shall dismiss the Actions with prejudice as to the Released Entities, including all Actions listed on Exhibit A, as provided for in the Consent Judgment.

B. Failure of Effective Date to Occur. In the event that the Effective Date does not occur for any reason as to one or more Remnant Defendants, including for the reasons set forth in Sections IV.C., then this Agreement shall be cancelled and terminated as to those Remnant Defendants for which the Effective Date does not occur only, unless the affected Settling Parties mutually agree in writing to proceed with this Agreement.

C. Termination.

1. Prior to the Effective Date, this Agreement may be terminated by a Remnant Defendant as to it (but not as to any other Remnant Defendant) by serving on Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel and counsel for the other Remnant Defendants a written notice of termination within ten (10) calendar days (or such longer time as may be agreed between Remnant Defendants and Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel) after any of the following occurrences:
a. the Remnant Defendant provides written notice of its election not to proceed under Section IV.D.2.;
b. a Consent Judgment approving this Agreement without
modification of any of this Agreement’s terms has not been entered by the MDL Court on or before one hundred eighty (180) calendar days after the Preliminary Agreement Date;
c. this Agreement or the Consent Judgment has been disapproved by the MDL Court (or, in the event of an appeal from or review of a decision of the MDL Court to approve this Agreement and the Consent Judgment, by the court hearing such appeal or conducting such review), and the time to appeal from such disapproval has expired, or, in the event of an appeal from such disapproval, the appeal has been dismissed or the disapproval has been affirmed by the court of last resort to which such appeal has been taken and such dismissal or disapproval has become no longer subject to further appeal (including, without limitation, review by the United States Supreme Court); or
d. the Effective Date does not otherwise occur within one hundred eighty (180) calendar days after the Preliminary Agreement Date.

2. If this Agreement is terminated by one or more Remnant Defendants pursuant to Section V.C.1.:
21 a. Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel must notify the Settlement Fund Administrator and/or the Notice and Claims Administrator of those Remnant Defendants’ decision to terminate this Agreement within seven (7) days of receiving written notice of such termination and instructions from those Remnant Defendants required to effectuate the wire transfer for the Termination Refund;
b. the Settlement Fund Administrator and/or the Notice and Claims Administrator shall transfer the Termination Refund to those Remnant Defendants within seven (7) days of receiving written notice from Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel; and
c. upon receipt of the Termination Refund, this Agreement and all of its terms (except Section X.L. and any other non-admissibility provisions, which shall continue in full force and effect) shall be canceled and terminated, and this Agreement and all orders issued pursuant to this Agreement shall become null and void and of no effect as between the Participating Subdivisions and the terminating Remnant Defendants only. The Participating
Subdivisions and those Remnant Defendants shall be returned to the status quo that existed in the Actions immediately prior to their entry into this Settlement Agreement (subject to appropriate extensions of deadlines to enable the Actions to proceed), and the Participating Subdivisions and the terminating Remnant
Defendants shall retain all of their respective rights and defenses as of immediately prior to their entry into this Settlement Agreement.

The Participating Subdivisions and those Remnant Defendants shall then proceed in all respects as if this Agreement and any related orders had not been executed.

VI. Notice and Claims Administrator
A. Selection of Notice and Claims Administrator. Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel shall nominate, subject to the consent of the Remnant Defendants, an entity to serve as Notice and Claims Administrator that meets the following requirements:

1. The Notice and Claims Administrator will be bound by an agreement mutually acceptable to Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel and Remnant Defendants.

2. The Notice and Claims Administrator will act as an independent and neutral third party in the performance of its functions including administering and disbursing funds from the Settlement Fund and the Opioid Remediation Fund.
22 3. The Notice and Claims Administrator may not be an entity that has acted as counsel for, or otherwise represented, a party in claims relating to Products.

4. The Notice and Claims Administrator shall have the authority to perform all actions consistent with the terms of this Agreement that the Notice and Claims Administrator deems to be reasonably necessary to effectuate the notice. Subject to the Parties’ approval, the Notice and Claims Administrator may retain any entity that the Notice and Claims Administrator deems to be reasonably necessary to provide assistance in effectuating Notice to the Participating Subdivisions.

5. The Notice and Claims Administrator’s role generally shall include, consistent with the terms of this Agreement, administration of the proposed Settlement, including receiving, preserving, reviewing, analyzing, and approving Participation Forms, including all supporting documentation, as well as distributing and overseeing distribution of the Opioid Remediation Fund according to the Plan of Allocation.

6. Any successor to the initial Notice and Claims Administrator shall be subject to the consent of all Settling Parties, shall fulfill the same functions from and after the date of succession, and shall be bound by the determinations made by the predecessor(s) to date.

7. The Notice and Claims Administrator shall have no authority to alter in any way the Settling Parties’ or Participating Subdivisions’ rights and obligations under this Agreement.

8. The Remnant Defendants and Released Entities shall have no involvement with or responsibility for supervising the Notice and Claims Administrator and are not subject to the authority of the Notice and Claims Administrator.

9. All fees, costs, and expenses incurred in the administration and/or work by the Notice and Claims Administrator, including fees, costs, and expenses of the Notice and Claims Administrator, as well as the costs of distributing the Notice, shall be paid from the Settlement Funds. Remnant Defendants shall have no obligation to pay any such fees, costs, and expenses other than the Pooled Settlement Amount.

B. Distribution of Settlement Fund.

1. The Notice and Claims Administrator shall administer the claims submitted by Participating Subdivisions and shall oversee distribution of the Settlement Funds, including distribution of amounts in the Opioid Remediation Fund to Participating Subdivisions pursuant to the Plan of Allocation. Subject to the terms of this Agreement and any order(s) of the 23 MDL Court, as may be necessary or as circumstances may require, the Settlement Funds shall be applied as follows:
a. to pay Taxes and Tax Expenses on the Settlement Funds (but not on any individual distributions to Participating Subdivisions made pursuant to the Plan of Allocation);
b. to pay Notice and Administrative Costs (including escrow fees and costs);
c. to pay the Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses, as set forth in and pursuant to the provisions of Section VII. of this Agreement; and d. to distribute the balance, which constitutes the “Opioid Remediation Funds,” to Participating Subdivisions as allowed by this Agreement and the Plan of Allocation.

2. No amount may be disbursed from the Settlement Fund until the Effective Date, except that: (a) Notice and Administrative Costs (including escrow fees and costs) may be paid from the Settlement Fund as they become due, and (b) Taxes and Tax Expenses on the Settlement Funds may be paid from the Settlement Fund as they become due.

C. Distribution of Opioid Remediation Fund. Upon the Effective Date and thereafter, and in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, the Plan of Allocation, and any further order(s) of the MDL Court, the Opioid Remediation Funds shall be distributed to Participating Subdivisions as provided by Section VI.B.1.d.

VII. Use and Allocation of Opioid Remediation Fund.

A. Use of Opioid Remediation Funds.

1. It is the intent of the Parties that the payments disbursed from the Opioid Remediation Fund to Participating Subdivisions be for Opioid Remediation as set forth in Exhibit D: List of Opioid Remediation Uses, all of which are compensatory and remedial in nature consistent with the restitution characterization under 26 U.S.C. § 162(f)(2)(A). In no event may less than ninety-five percent (95%) of the Opioid Remediation Funds be spent on Opioid Remediation.

2. While disfavored by the Parties, a Participating Subdivision set forth on Exhibit C may use monies from the Opioid Remediation Fund (that have not been restricted by this Agreement solely to future Opioid Remediation) for purposes that do not qualify as Opioid Remediation. If, at any time, a Participating Subdivision set forth on Exhibit C uses any monies from the Opioid Remediation Fund for a purpose that does not qualify as Opioid Remediation, such Participating Subdivision set forth on Exhibit C shall identify such amounts and report to the Notice and 24 Claims Administrator and the Remnant Defendants how such funds were used, including if used to pay attorneys’ fees, investigation costs, litigation costs, or costs related to the operation and enforcement of this Agreement, respectively. It is the intent of the Parties that the reporting under this Section VII.A.2. shall be available to the public. For the avoidance of doubt, (a) any amounts not identified under this Section VII.A.2. as used to pay attorneys’ fees, investigation costs, or litigation costs shall be included in the Compensatory Restitution Amount for purposes of Section III.B., and (b) Participating Subdivisions not listed on Exhibit C may only use monies from the Opioid Remediation Fund for purposes that qualify as Opioid Remediation.

B. Allocation of Opioid Remediation Fund. The allocation of the Opioid Remediation Fund allows for different approaches to be taken in different states, such as through a State-Subdivision Agreement. The Notice and Claims Administrator will, for each Participating Subdivision, apply the terms of this Agreement and any relevant State-Subdivision Agreement or voluntary redistribution of funds as set out below before disbursing the funds.

1. A State-Subdivision Agreement may govern the operation and use of amounts allocated to the Participating Subdivisions of a particular State so long as the terms do not conflict with Section VII.A. and the funds are held in a segregated account until distributed for their intended purposes.

2. In the absence of an applicable State-Subdivision Agreement, the Opioid Remediation Fund will be used solely for future Opioid Remediation and the Opioid Remediation Funds will be distributed for their intended purposes by the Notice and Claims Administrator to Participating Subdivisions included on Exhibit E pursuant to the Plan of Allocation.

Section VII.B.3. shall govern amounts that would otherwise be distributed to Non-Participating Subdivisions listed in Exhibit E. For the avoidance of doubt and notwithstanding any other provision in this Agreement, no Non-Participating Subdivision will receive any amount from the Opioid Remediation Fund, regardless of whether such Subdivision is included on Exhibit E. Also, no State will receive any amount from the Opioid Remediation Fund.

3. Any portion of the Opioid Remediation Fund allocated pursuant to Section VII.B. and the Plan of Allocation to a Subdivision that is a NonParticipating Subdivision will be re-allocated among Participating Subdivisions as later agreed between Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel and Remnant Defendants. For avoidance of doubt, any amount allocated to a Participating Subdivision under this Section VII.B.3. must be used as provided by Section VII.A.

C. No Liability for Distribution of Settlement Fund or Opioid Remediation Fund. Neither the Released Entities nor their counsel shall have any responsibility for, or liability whatsoever with respect to, the distribution of the Settlement Fund or Opioid 25 Remediation Fund; administering the Plan of Allocation; the Settlement Fund’s or Opioid Remediation Fund’s qualification as a “qualified settlement fund”; the payment or withholding of Taxes or Tax Expenses; the distribution of Settlement Funds or Opioid Remediation Funds; or any losses incurred in connection with any such matters. The Releasors hereby fully, finally, and forever release, relinquish, and discharge the Released Entities and their counsel from any and all such liability. No entity shall have any claim against Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel, the Notice and Claims Administrator, or any Released Entity based on the distributions made in accordance with this Agreement, the Plan of Allocation, or further orders of the MDL Court.

D. Balance Remaining in Settlement Fund or Opioid Remediation Fund. If there is any balance remaining in the Settlement Fund or Opioid Remediation Fund (whether by reason of tax refunds, uncashed checks, or otherwise), such balance shall be deemed as Opioid Remediation Funds and distributed in accordance with the Plan of Allocation and Section VII., and shall be used and expended solely for the purpose set forth in Exhibit D, or further order of the MDL Court (but not to the Remnant Defendants).

VIII. Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses
The Agreement on Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses is set forth in Exhibit H and incorporated herein by reference. The Released Entities shall have no responsibility for or liability whatsoever with respect to any payment for Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses or to any other entity or person that may assert a claim for any attorneys’ fee, expense, or costs, except as set forth in the Agreement on Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses in Exhibit H.

IX. Releases and Dismissal
A. No Future Actions Following Release. As of the Effective Date, the Released Entities are fully, finally, and forever released and discharged from all of the Releasors’ Released Claims. Each Releasor hereby absolutely, unconditionally, and irrevocably covenants not to bring, file, or claim, or to cause, assist in bringing or permit to be brought, filed, or claimed, or to otherwise seek to establish liability for any Released Claims against any Released Entity in any forum whatsoever, whether on its own behalf, or as part of any putative, purported, or certified class. The releases provided for in this Agreement are intended by the Settling Parties to be broad and shall be interpreted so as to give the Released Entities the broadest possible bar against any liability relating in any way to Released Claims. This Agreement shall be a complete bar to any Released Claim. Other than as set forth herein, this Agreement does not include any provisions for injunctive relief. Participating Subdivisions shall look solely to the Settlement Funds for settlement and satisfaction against the Released Entities of all claims that are released hereunder. The MDL Court shall have continuing and exclusive jurisdiction to enforce the terms and provisions of this Agreement and any and all of its Orders made in connection with Settlement approval, notice, administration, and implementation.

B. Claim-Over and Non-Party Settlement.

1. It is the intent of the Parties that:
26 a. Released Entities should not seek contribution or indemnification (other than pursuant to an insurance or other third-party contract), from other parties for their payment obligations under this Agreement; b. The payments made under this Agreement shall be the sole payments made by the Released Entities to the Releasors involving, arising out of, or related to Covered Conduct (or conduct that would be Covered Conduct if engaged in by a Released Entity);
c. Claims by Releasors against non-Parties should not result in additional payments by Released Entities, whether through contribution, indemnification or any other means; and
d. this Agreement meets the Uniform Contribution Among
Tortfeasors Act and any similar state law or doctrine that reduces or discharges a released party’s liability to pay other parties.

The provisions of this Section IX.B. are intended to be implemented consistent with these principles. This Agreement and the releases and dismissals provided for herein are made in good faith.

2. No Released Entity shall seek to recover for amounts paid under this Agreement based on indemnification, contribution, or any other theory from a manufacturer, pharmacy, hospital, pharmacy benefit manager, health insurer, third-party vendor, trade association, distributor, or health care practitioner; provided that a Released Entity shall be relieved of this prohibition with respect to any entity that asserts a Claim-Over against it.

For the avoidance of doubt, nothing herein shall prohibit a Released Entity from recovering amounts owed pursuant to insurance or other third-party contracts.

3. To the extent that, on or after the Effective Date, any Releasor enters into a Non-Party Settlement, including in any bankruptcy case or through any plan of reorganization (whether individually or as a class of creditors), the Releasor will seek to include (or in the case of a Non-Party Settlement made in connection with a bankruptcy case, will cause the debtor to include), unless prohibited from doing so under applicable law, in the Non-Party Settlement a prohibition on contribution or indemnity of any kind substantially equivalent to that required from Remnant Defendants in Section IX.B.2. or a release from such Non-Released Entity in favor of the Released Entities (in a form equivalent to the releases contained in this Agreement) of any Claim-Over. The obligation to obtain the prohibition and/or release required by this subsection is a material term of this Agreement.

4. In the event that any Releasor obtains a judgment against a Non-Released Entity that does not contain a prohibition like that described in Section 27 IX.B.2., or any Releasor files a Non-Party Covered Conduct Claim against a Non-Released Entity in bankruptcy or a Releasor is prevented for any reason from obtaining a prohibition/release in a Non-Party Settlement as provided in Section IX.B.2., and such Non-Released Entity asserts a Claim-Over against a Released Entity, the Released Entity shall be relieved of the prohibition in Section IX.B.2. with respect to that NonReleased Entity and that Releasor and the Remnant Defendants shall take the following actions to ensure that the Released Entities do not pay more with respect to the Covered Conduct to Releasors or to Non-Released Entities than the amounts owed under this Agreement by the Remnant Defendants:
a. The Remnant Defendants shall notify that Releasor of the ClaimOver within sixty (60) days of the assertion of the Claim-Over or within sixty (60) days of the Effective Date, whichever is later. b. The Remnant Defendants and that Releasor shall meet and confer concerning the means to hold the Released Entities harmless from the Claim-Over and ensure that the Released Entities are not required to pay more with respect to the Released Claims than the amounts owed by Remnant Defendants under this Agreement. c. That Releasor and the Remnant Defendants shall take steps sufficient and permissible under applicable law to hold the Released Entities harmless from the Claim-Over and ensure the Released Entities are not required to pay more with respect to the Covered Conduct than the amounts owed by Remnant Defendants under this Agreement. Such steps may include, where permissible:
(i) The Releasor supporting a motion to dismiss or such other appropriate motion as may be filed by the Released Entities in response to any Claim filed in litigation or arbitration; (ii) Reduction of that Releasors’ Claim and any judgment it has obtained or may obtain against such Non-Released Entity by whatever amount or percentage is necessary to
extinguish such Claim-Over under applicable law, up to the amount that releasor has obtained, may obtain, or has
authority to control from such Non-Released Entity;
(iii) Placement into escrow of funds paid by the Non-Released Entities such that those funds are available to satisfy the Claim-Over;
(iv) Return of monies paid by Remnant Defendants to that Releasor under this Agreement to permit satisfaction of a 28 judgment against or settlement with the Non-Released Entity to satisfy the Claim-Over;
(v) Payment of monies to Remnant Defendants by that
Releasor to ensure they are held harmless from such ClaimOver, up to the amount that Releasor has obtained, may obtain, or has authority to control from such Non-Released Entity;
(vi) Credit to the Remnant Defendants under this Agreement to reduce the overall amounts to be paid under this Agreement such that they are held harmless from the Claim-Over; and (vii) Such other actions as that Releasor and the Remnant Defendants may devise to hold the Released Entities
harmless from the Claim-Over.
d. The actions of that Releasor and Remnant Defendants taken pursuant to paragraph (c) must in combination, ensure Remnant Defendants are not required to pay more with respect to Covered Conduct than the amounts owed by Remnant Defendants under this Agreement.

5. To the extent that the Claim-Over is based on a contractual indemnity, the obligations under Section IX.B.3. shall extend solely to a Non-Party Covered Conduct Claim against a pharmacy, distributor, clinic, hospital or other purchaser or dispenser of Products, a manufacturer that sold Products, a consultant, and/or a pharmacy benefit manager or other thirdparty payor. Each Remnant Defendant shall notify the Participating Subdivisions, to the extent permitted by applicable law, in the event that any of these types of Non-Released Entity assert a Claim-Over arising out of contractual indemnity against it.

C. Litigation Bar. The Settling Parties contemplate and agree that this Agreement may be pleaded as a bar to a lawsuit, and an injunction may be obtained, preventing any action from being initiated or maintained in any case sought to be prosecuted on behalf of any Releasors with respect to the Released Claims.

D. General Release. The Releasors acknowledge that, by executing this Agreement, and for the consideration received hereunder, it is their intention to release, and they are releasing, all Released Claims, even Unknown Claims. In connection with the releases provided for in this Agreement, each Releasor expressly, knowingly, and voluntarily waives, releases, and forever discharges any and all provisions, rights, and benefits conferred by any law of any state or territory of the United States or other jurisdiction, or principle of common law, which is similar, comparable, or equivalent to Section 1542 of the California Civil Code, which reads:

A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS

THAT THE CREDITOR OR RELEASING PARTY DOES NOT
29 KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS OR HER FAVOR AT

THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE AND THAT, IF

KNOWN BY HIM OR HER, WOULD HAVE MATERIALLY

AFFECTED HIS OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR
OR RELEASED PARTY.

Releasors likewise expressly, knowingly, and voluntarily waive any rights under Section 20-7-11 of the South Dakota Codified Laws, which provides:

A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS

WHICH THE CREDITOR DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT

TO EXIST IN HIS FAVOR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING

THE RELEASE, WHICH IF KNOWN BY HIM MUST HAVE

MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS SETTLEMENT WITH THE
DEBTOR.

The Releasors acknowledge that they have been advised by Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel of the contents and effects of California Civil Code § 1542, and hereby expressly waive and release with respect to the Released Claims any and all provisions, rights, and benefits conferred by California Civil Code § 1542 or by any equivalent, similar, or comparable law or principle of law in any jurisdiction, including, but not limited to Section 20-7-11 of the South Dakota Codified Laws. A Releasor may hereafter discover facts other than or different from those which it knows, believes, or assumes to be true with respect to the Released Claims, but each Releasor hereby expressly waives, and fully, finally, and forever settles, releases, and discharges, upon the Effective Date, any and all Released Claims that may exist as of such date but which Releasors do not know or suspect to exist, whether through ignorance, oversight, error, negligence or through no fault whatsoever, and which, if known, would materially affect the Releasors’ decision to enter into or participate in this Agreement.

E. Assigned Interest Waiver. To the extent that any Releasor has any direct or indirect interest in any rights of a third party that is a debtor under the Bankruptcy Code as a result of a claim arising out of Covered Conduct by way of assignment or otherwise, including as a result of being the beneficiary of a trust or other distribution entity, to assert claims against a Remnant Defendant (whether derivatively or otherwise), under any legal or equitable theory, including for indemnification, contribution, or subrogation, such Releasor waives the right to assert any such claim, or to receive a distribution or any benefit on account of such claim and such claim, distribution, or benefit shall be deemed assigned to such Remnant Defendant.

F. Res Judicata. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to reduce the scope of the res judicata or claim preclusive effect that the Settlement gives rise to under applicable law.

G. Effectiveness. The releases set forth in this Agreement shall not be impacted in any way by any dispute that exists, has existed, or may later exist between or among the Releasors. Nor shall such releases be impacted in any way by any current or future law, regulation, ordinance, or court or agency order limiting, seizing, or controlling the distribution or use of the Settlement Funds or any portion thereof, by the enactment of future laws or the reinterpretation of existing law, or by any seizure of the Settlement Funds or any portion thereof. 30 H. Cooperation. The Settling Parties agree to use their best efforts and to cooperate to cause this Agreement and the Consent Judgment to become effective, to obtain all necessary approvals, consents and authorizations, if any, and to execute all documents and to take such other action as may be appropriate in connection herewith. Consistent with the foregoing, the Settling Parties agree that they will not directly or indirectly assist or encourage any challenge to this Agreement or the Consent Judgment by any other person, and will support the integrity and enforcement of the terms of this Agreement and the Consent Judgment. Upon the Effective Date, Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel will also reasonably cooperate with the Remnant Defendants to secure the prompt dismissal of any and all Released Claims in the Actions and in any laterfiled litigation implicated by the releases, covenants not to sue, and/or claim bars set forth herein.

I. Liens. Each Participating Subdivision agrees to be responsible for any liens, interests, actions, or claims asserted by any third party, in a derivative manner, for or against the portion of Opioid Remediation Funds allocated to that Participating Subdivision, including, without limitation, any derivative actions or claims asserted by any financial institutions, lenders, insurers, agents, representatives, successors, predecessors, assigns, attorneys, bankruptcy trustees, and any and all other entities that may claim through them in a derivative manner.

J. Claims Excluded from Release. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the releases provided herein shall not release claims of governmental entities that do not participate in the Settlement; claims arising solely from conduct by the Remnant Defendants that occurs after the Effective Date; claims against the Remnant Defendants other than the Released Claims; or claims alleging a breach of this Agreement or seeking to enforce this Agreement.

X. Miscellaneous Provisions
A. Population of Subdivisions. The population figures for Subdivisions shall be the published U.S. Census Bureau’s population estimates for July 1, 2019, released May 2020.

These population figures shall remain unchanged during the term of this Agreement.

B. No Admission of Liability or Wrongdoing. The Parties agree to settle the Released Claims and to execute this Agreement solely to compromise and settle protracted, complicated, and expensive litigation. The Remnant Defendants do not admit liability or wrongdoing. Neither this Agreement nor the Consent Judgment shall be considered, construed or represented to be (1) an admission, concession or evidence of liability or wrongdoing or (2) a waiver or any limitation of any defense otherwise available to the Remnant Defendants.

C. Voluntary Settlement. Each Settling Party warrants and represents that it negotiated the terms of this Agreement in good faith, without any degree or duress or compulsion, and after consultation with competent legal counsel. The Settling Parties agree that throughout the course of the litigation of the Action, the Settling Parties and their counsel vigorously prosecuted their claims and/or defenses consistent with the applicable rules of procedure.

D. Authorization to Enter Settlement Agreement. The undersigned representatives of Remnant Defendants represent they are fully authorized to enter into and execute this Agreement on behalf of Remnant Defendants. Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel represent that they 31 are, pursuant to MDL Court appointment, expressly authorized to take all action required or permitted to be taken pursuant to this Agreement to effectuate its terms and enter into and execute this Agreement and any modifications or amendments to this Agreement, on behalf of the Participating Subdivisions, that they deem appropriate.

E. Integrated Agreement. Except for any amendments, alterations, or modifications provided for under Section X.G., this Agreement, including its exhibits and any other attachments, and the Related Agreements, embodies the entire agreement and understanding between and among the Settling Parties relating to the subject matter hereof and supersedes (1) all prior agreements and understandings relating to such subject matter, whether written or oral, and (2) all purportedly contemporaneous oral agreements and understandings relating to such subject matter. It is understood by the Settling Parties that, except for the matters expressly represented herein, the facts or law with respect to which this Agreement is entered into may turn out to be other than or different from the facts now known to each party or believed by such party to be true. Each Settling Party therefore expressly assumes the risk of the facts or law turning out to be so different, and agrees that this Agreement shall be in all respects effective and not subject to termination by reason of any such different facts or law.

F. Exhibits. The exhibits to this Agreement are as follows all of which are incorporated by reference, provided that the descriptions of the exhibits below are for reference only and do not alter any other term of this Agreement:

Exhibit A – List of Actions. Lists lawsuits brought in state or federal court by or on behalf of Litigating Subdivisions against Remnant Defendants, coordinated under or parallel to MDL No. 2804.

Exhibit B – Documents Describing Alleged Harms. References non-exclusive examples of alleged past, present, and future financial, societal, and public nuisance harms and related expenditures.

Exhibit C – List of Litigating Subdivisions. Lists of all Litigating Subdivisions.

Exhibit D – List of Opioid Remediation Uses. Provides a non-exhaustive list of expenditures that qualify as being paid for Opioid Remediation. It includes core strategies and approved uses for settlement funds, such as naloxone distribution, medication-assisted treatment, prevention programs, and more.

Exhibit E – Plan of Allocation. The plan or formula for allocation of the Opioid Remediation Fund among Participating Subdivisions.

Exhibit F – List of Remnant Defendants’ Joint Ventures, Subsidiaries, Affiliates, and Predecessor Entities. Lists joint ventures, subsidiaries, affiliates, and predecessor entities of the Remnant Defendants.

Exhibit G – Subdivision Settlement Participation Form. Form that Participating Subdivisions must execute and return to participate in the settlement and receive payment.
32 Exhibit H – Agreement on Attorneys' Fees, Costs, and Expenses. Details the agreement regarding the allocation and payment of attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses from the settlement funds, including the structure of the Attorney Fee Fund, Common Benefit Fund, and Contingency Fee Fund.

G. Amendment. The terms and provisions of this Agreement may not be altered, amended, or modified except in writing signed by all Settling Parties.

H. Execution in Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts and by different signatories on separate counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall together be one and the same agreement. One or more counterparts of this Agreement may be delivered by facsimile or electronic transmission with the intent that it or they shall constitute an original counterpart hereof. One or more counterparts of this Agreement may be signed by electronic signature. Counsel for the Settling Parties to this Agreement shall exchange among themselves original or scanned counterparts and a complete, assembled executed counterpart shall be filed with the MDL Court.

I. Construction. None of the Settling Parties shall be considered to be the drafter of this Agreement or of any of its provisions for the purpose of any statute, case law, or rule of interpretation or construction that would or might cause any provision to be construed against the drafter of this Agreement. The headings of the provisions of this Agreement are not binding and are for reference only and do not limit, expand, or otherwise affect the contents or meaning of this Agreement.

J. Each Party to Bear Its Own Costs and Fees. Except as otherwise provided herein, each Settling Party shall bear its own attorneys’ fees and other litigation expenses and costs.

K. Federal Rule of Evidence 408. The Settling Parties agree that this Agreement, its terms and the negotiations surrounding this Agreement shall be governed by Federal Rule of Evidence 408 and shall not be admissible or offered or received into evidence in any suit, action, or other proceeding, except as provided in this Agreement, upon the written agreement of the Settling Parties hereto, pursuant to an order of a court of competent jurisdiction, or as shall be necessary to give effect to, or to declare or enforce the rights of the Settling Parties with respect to, any provision of this Agreement.

L. Use of Agreement as Evidence. Neither this Agreement nor the Settlement, nor any act performed, statement made, or document executed pursuant to or in furtherance of this Agreement or the Settlement: (a) is, may be deemed to be, or may be used as an admission or evidence of the validity of any Released Claims, any allegation made in any Action, or any wrongdoing or liability of Remnant Defendants; or (b) is, may be deemed to be, or may be used as an admission or evidence of any liability, fault, or omission of the Released Entities in any civil, criminal, or administrative proceeding in any court, administrative agency, or other tribunal. Neither this Agreement nor the Settlement, nor any act performed, statement made, or document executed pursuant to or in furtherance of this Agreement or the Settlement shall be admissible in any proceeding for any purpose except to enforce the terms of the Settlement, and except that the Released Parties may file this Agreement and/or the Consent Judgment in any 33 action for any purpose, including, but not limited to, in order to support a defense or counterclaim based on principles of res judicata, collateral estoppel, release, good faith settlement, judgment bar or reduction, or any other theory of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, or similar defense or counterclaim. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement or otherwise, Remnant Defendants may file or use this Agreement and related materials in any action: (i) involving a determination regarding insurance coverage; (ii) involving a determination of the taxable income or tax liability of any Remnant Defendants; (iii) to support a claim for contribution and/or indemnification; or (iv) to support any argument or defense by a Remnant Defendant that the Pooled Settlement Amount provides a measure of compensation for asserted harms or otherwise satisfies the relief sought.

M. Preservation of Records. For five years following the Effective Date, (i) the Notice and Claims Administrator shall be required to keep, maintain, preserve, and otherwise refrain from altering, modifying, spoiling, deleting, removing, or destroying all records and data submitted in connection with any Participation Form; and (ii) each Participating Subdivision shall keep, maintain, preserve, and otherwise refrain from altering, modifying, spoiling, deleting, removing, or destroying all records and data supporting its Participation Form.

N. Binding Effect. This Agreement shall be binding upon, and inure to the benefit of, the successors and assigns of the Settling Parties.

O. Notices. All notices from or between the Settling Parties shall be in writing. Each such notice shall be given by: (a) email; (b) hand delivery; (c) registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage pre-paid; or (d) FedEx or similar overnight courier, to their representatives at the addresses set forth below or such other addresses as Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel or the Remnant Defendants may designate, from time to time, by giving notice to all Settling Parties in the manner described in this paragraph.

If directed to Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel, or Participating Subdivisions, address notice to:

Peter H. Weinberger

SPANGENBERG SHIBLEY & LIBER
1001 Lakeside Avenue East, Suite 1700
Cleveland, OH 44114
(216) 696-3232
[email protected]
Jayne Conroy

SIMMONS HANLY CONROY
112 Madison Avenue, 7th Floor
New York, NY 10016
(212) 784-6400
[email protected]
34 Joseph F. Rice

MOTLEY RICE
28 Bridgeside Blvd.

Mt. Pleasant, SC 29464
(843) 216-9000
[email protected]
Paul T. Farrell, Jr., Esq.

FARRELL & FULLER
270 Munoz Rivera Ave., Suite 201
San Juan, PR 00918
(304) 654-8281
[email protected]
If directed to the Remnant Defendants, address notice to:

United Natural Foods, Inc.

Kim J. Myrdahl
Deputy General Counsel, Senior Vice President & Chief Compliance Officer United Natural Foods, Inc.

Legal Department
PO Box 990
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440
[email protected]
With a copy (which shall not constitute notice) to:

Joseph M. Vanek
Greg Shinall
Trevor K. Scheetz
Sperling Kenny Nachwalter, LLC
321 N. Clark St., 25th Floor
Chicago, Illinois 60654
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
J M Smith Corporation
Robert M. Barrett
General Counsel
J M Smith Corporation
9098 Fairforest Road
Spartanburg, SC 29301
[email protected]
35 With a copy (which shall not constitute notice) to:

John J. Haggerty
Fox Rothschild LLC
Stone Manor Corporate Ctr.
2800 Kelly Road, Suite 200
Warrington, PA 18975
[email protected]
Louisiana Wholesale Drug Company, Inc.

Chad Gielen
President
Louisiana Wholesale Drug Co., Inc.
2085 I-49 S. Service Rd.

Sunset, LA 70584
With a copy (which shall not constitute notice) to:

Neil G. Vincent
Allen & Gooch, ALC
2000 Kaliste Saloom Road, Ste. 400
Lafayette, Louisiana 70508
[email protected]
Morris & Dickson Co., L.L.C.

Jim Walden
Walden Macht Haran & Williams LLP
250 Vesey Street, 27th Floor
New York, NY 10281
[email protected]
Russell Dickson
General Counsel
Morris & Dickson Co., L.L.C.

PO Box 51367
Shreveport, LA 71135
[email protected]
North Carolina Mutual Wholesale Drug Company, Inc.

Clint Syvinski, Co-CEO
Katie Zechman, Co-CEO
North Carolina Mutual Wholesale Drug Co.
36 816 Ellis Rd.

Durham, NC 27703
[email protected]
[email protected]
With a copy (which shall not constitute notice) to:

Chris Graebe
Morningstar Law Group
434 Fayetteville St., Suite 2200
Raleigh, NC 27601
[email protected]
Associated Pharmacies, Inc.; American Associated Pharmacies Clint King
President
Associated Pharmacies, Inc.
211 Lonnie E. Crawford Blvd.

Scottsboro, AL 35769
[email protected]
With a copy (which shall not constitute notice) to:

Carl S. Burkhalter
S. Reeves Jordan
Maynard Nexsen P.C.
1901 Sixth Ave. N., Suite 1700
Birmingham, AL 35203
[email protected]
[email protected]
Any Settling Party may change or add the contact information of the persons designated to receive notice on its behalf by notice given (effective upon the giving of such notice) as provided in this Section X.O.

P. Consent to Jurisdiction. The Remnant Defendants, the Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel, and Participating Subdivisions (including all Releasors) hereby irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the MDL Court only for the specific purpose of any suit, action, proceeding, or dispute arising out of or relating to the enforcement of this Agreement or the applicability of this Agreement. Solely for purposes of such suit, action, or proceeding, to the fullest extent that they may effectively do so under applicable law, the Remnant Defendants, the Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel, and the Participating Subdivisions and the Participating Subdivisions’ Counsel irrevocably waive and agree not to assert, by way of motion, as a defense or otherwise, any claim or objection that they are not subject to the jurisdiction of the MDL Court or that the MDL Court is in any way an improper venue or an inconvenient forum.

Nothing herein shall be construed as a submission to jurisdiction for any purpose other than any 37 suit, action, proceeding, or dispute arising out of or relating to enforcement of this Agreement or the applicability of this Agreement. For the avoidance of doubt, nothing herein shall be construed as a submission to jurisdiction in any action involving a determination regarding insurance coverage.

Q. Resolution of Disputes; Retention of Exclusive Jurisdiction. Any disputes between or among the Remnant Defendants and any Participating Subdivision concerning matters contained in this Agreement, including the Plan of Allocation, shall, if they cannot be resolved by negotiation and agreement, be submitted to the MDL Court. The MDL Court shall retain exclusive jurisdiction over the implementation and enforcement of the Settlement.

R. Choice of Law. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with, and governed by, the applicable provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Evidence, and the internal, substantive laws of the State of Ohio without giving effect to that State’s choice of law principles.

S. No Waiver. No delay or omission by any Settling Party in exercising any rights under this Agreement will operate as a waiver of that or any other right. The waiver of any rights conferred hereunder shall be effective only if made by written instrument executed by the waiving Party or Parties. The waiver by any Party of any breach of this Agreement shall not be deemed to be or construed as a waiver of any other breach, whether prior, subsequent, or contemporaneous, nor shall such waiver be deemed to be or construed as a waiver by any other Party.

T. Preservation of Privilege. Nothing contained in this Agreement or any Consent Judgment, and no act required to be performed pursuant to this Agreement or any Consent Judgment, is intended to constitute, cause, or effect any waiver (in whole or in part) of any attorney-client privilege, work product protection, or common interest/joint defense privilege, and each Party and Participating Subdivision agrees that it shall not make or cause to be made in any forum any assertion to the contrary.

U. Duty Not to Encourage Non-Participation. Plaintiffs’ Settlement Counsel agrees not to in any way encourage, promote, or solicit any Subdivision, or their counsel, to decline to participate in this Settlement, or seek any relief inconsistent with this Settlement.

V. Tax Cooperation and Reporting.

1. Upon request by any Remnant Defendant, the Participating Subdivisions agree to perform such further acts and to execute and deliver such further documents as may be reasonably necessary for the Remnant Defendant to establish the statements set forth in Section III.B. to the satisfaction of their tax advisors, their independent financial auditors, the Internal Revenue Service, or any other governmental authority, including as contemplated by Treasury Regulations Section 1.162-21(b)(3)(ii) and any subsequently proposed or finalized relevant regulations or administrative guidance.
38 2. Without limiting the generality of Section X.V.1., each Participating Subdivision shall cooperate in good faith with any Remnant Defendant with respect to any tax claim, dispute, investigation, audit, examination, contest, litigation, or other proceeding relating to this Agreement. The Settling Parties agree to cooperate in good faith to provide documentation and perform such further acts, reporting, or allocation to achieve maximum deductibility under the terms of this Agreement.

3. The Designated Subdivision, as defined in Section I.K., on behalf of all Participating Subdivisions, shall designate one of its officers or employees to act as the “appropriate official” within the meaning of Treasury Regulations Section 1.6050X-1(f)(1)(ii)(B) (the “Appropriate Official”).

The Designated Subdivision shall direct and ensure that the Appropriate Official timely (a) files (i) at the time this Agreement becomes binding on the Settling Parties, an IRS Form 1098-F with respect to each of the Remnant Defendants and (ii) any legally required returns or amended returns with any applicable governmental authority, or any returns requested by the respective Remnant Defendant, and (b) provides to each of the Remnant Defendants a copy of (i) the IRS Form 1098-F filed with respect to such Remnant Defendant and (ii) any legally required written statement pursuant to any applicable law and any other document referred to in clause (a)(ii) above. Any such form, return, or statement shall be prepared and filed in a manner fully consistent with Section III.B.

4. The Participating Subdivisions agree that any return, amended return, or written statement filed or provided pursuant to Section X.V.3., and any similar document, shall be prepared and filed in a manner consistent with reporting each Remnant Defendant’s portion of the Pooled Settlement Amount as the “Total amount to be paid” pursuant to this Agreement in Box 1 of IRS Form 1098-F and each Remnant Defendant’s portion of the Compensatory Restitution Amount as “Restitution/remediation amount” in Box 2 of IRS Form 1098-F. If the Designated Subdivision or Appropriate Official shall be required to file any return, amended return, or written statement contemplated by this Section X.V. other than an IRS Form 1098-F, the Designated Subdivision shall direct and ensure that the Appropriate Official provides to each Remnant Defendant a draft of such return, amended return, or written statement in respect of such Remnant Defendant no later than sixty (60) calendar days prior to the due date thereof and shall accept and reflect any reasonable comments of such Remnant Defendant on the return, amended return, or written statement in respect of such Remnant Defendant.

5. For the avoidance of doubt, neither the Remnant Defendants nor the Participating Subdivisions make any warranty or representation to any Participating Subdivision or Releasor as to the tax consequences of any aspect of the Settlement or this Agreement.
39 W. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, no portion of this Agreement shall provide any rights to, or be enforceable by, any person or entity that is not a Released Entity. No Participating Subdivision may assign or otherwise convey any right to enforce any provision of this Agreement.

X. Confidentiality. The terms of this Agreement shall remain confidential until Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms are submitted to Subdivisions pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, or the proposed order to establish qualified settlement funds is submitted to the MDL Court, whichever occurs first; provided that, prior to then the Settling Parties may disclose the terms of this Settlement to accountants, lenders, auditors, legal counsel, tax advisors, insurers, or consultants; or as part of any security or other disclosure required by law (as determined by a Settling Party and its counsel); or in response to a request by any governmental, judicial, or regulatory authority or otherwise required by applicable law or court order; and Participating Subdivisions may disclose the terms ofthe Settlement to any entity that has applied to serve as Notice and Claims Administrator, or Settlement Fund Administrator, who shall abide by the terms of this paragraph. Any formal press release by a Settling Party regarding this Settlement prior to entry of the Final Judgment shall be shared in advance with the other Settling Party, with a reasonable opportunity for comments and suggested changes. ***
[Signature Page to Settlement Agreement]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Settling Parties hereto, through their fully authorized representatives, have executed this Agreement as of the date set opposite their names.

PLAINTIFFS’ SETTLEMENT COUNSEL
Date: ________________________ By:________________________________ Printed Name: _______________________
Title: ______________________________
[Signature Page to Settlement Agreement]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Settling Parties hereto, through their fully authorized representatives, have executed this Agreement as of the date set opposite their names.

MORRIS & DICKSON CO., L.L.C.

Date: ________________________ By:________________________________ Printed Name: _______________________
Title: ______________________________
[Signature Page to Settlement Agreement]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Settling Parties hereto, through their fully authorized representatives, have executed this Agreement as of the date set opposite their names.

UNITED NATURAL FOODS, INC.

LOUISIANA WHOLESALE DRUG
COMPANY, INC.

J M SMITH CORPORATION
Date: ________________________ By:________________________________ Printed Name: _______________________
Title: ______________________________
[Signature Page to Settlement Agreement]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Settling Parties hereto, through their fully authorized representatives, have executed this Agreement as of the date set opposite their names.

ASSOCIATED PHARMACIES, INC.

Date: ________________________ By:________________________________ Printed Name: _______________________
Title: ______________________________

AMERICAN ASSOCIATED

PHARMACIES
Date: ________________________ By:________________________________ Printed Name: _______________________
Title: ______________________________
[Signature Page to Settlement Agreement]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Settling Parties hereto, through their fully authorized representatives, have executed this Agreement as of the date set opposite their names.

NORTH CAROLINA MUTUAL
WHOLESALE DRUG COMPANY, INC.

Date: ________________________ By:________________________________ Printed Name: _______________________
Title: ______________________________
1 I:\cmo\Resolutions\Resolution No. 8777.bm.04.14.2026.docx RESOLUTION NO. 8777

AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF REDLANDS PARTICIPATION IN THE SETTLEMENT WITH

THE REMNANT DEFENDANTS AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES RELATED TO THE

MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION AGAINST DISTRIBUTORS AND DISPENSERS

CONTRIBUTING TO THE OPIOID EPIDEMIC AND AUTHORITY TO RECEIVE DIRECT PAYMENT OF SETTLEMENT FUNDS; AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE ALL RELATED DOCUMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH THE SETTLEMENT WHEREAS, the United States is facing an ongoing public health crisis of opioid abuse addiction, overdose, and death, forcing the State of California and California counties and cities to spend billions of dollars each year to address the direct consequences of this crisis; and, WHEREAS, pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio is a multidistrict litigation (“MDL”) being pursued by numerous public entity plaintiffs against the manufacturers and distributors of various opioids based on the allegation that the defendant’s unlawful conduct caused the opioid epidemic resulting in settlements; and, WHEREAS the City Council previously authorized the City’s participation in settlement agreements to resolve claims against the following defendants in the litigation: 1) Three large opioid distributors (McKesson Corporation, Cardinal Health, Inc., and AmerisourceBergen Corporation) (2021); 2) Opioid manufacturer Janssen Pharmaceuticals (2021); 3) Five additional entities (Teva, Allergan, CVS, Walgreens, and Walmart) (2023); 4) The Kroger Company (2024); 5) Purdue Pharma L.P., certain of its affiliates and the Sackler family (2025); and 6) Opioid manufacturers Alvogen, Amneal, Apotex, Hikma, Indivior, Mylan, Sun, and Zydus (2025).

WHEREAS, on or about February 2026, a new settlement was reached between the plaintiffs in the MDL and Distributors/Dispensaries (Associated Pharmacies, Inc. and American Associated Pharmacies, J M Smith Corporation, Louisiana Wholesale Drug Company, Inc., Morris and Dickson Co., North Carolina Mutual Wholesale Drug Company, Inc., and United Natural Foods, Inc. and its subsidiaries SuperValu and Advantage Logistics) collectively referred to as the “Remnant Defendants,” resulting in a master settlement agreement covering all defendants (collectively referred to as the “Remnant Defendants Settlement Agreement”); and WHEREAS, the proposed Remnant Defendants Settlement Agreement, once finalized, will result in these defendants paying a combined $97,625,000 in cash for purposes of abating the opioid epidemic, for which the City would receive a one-time payment based on allocation agreements that are contingent on factors, including the number of public entities that elect to participate in the settlements; and
WHEREAS, this Resolution seeks authorization to participate in the Remnant Defendants Settlement Agreement and authority for the City’s direct receipt of the settlement funds; and WHEREAS, with prior opioid settlement monies utilized by the Redlands Fire Department, the funds received from the Remnant Defendants Settlement Agreement can only be used for approved abatement uses, such as opioid abuse treatment services, services for opioid-addicted individuals who are pregnant, and opioid treatment for incarcerated people, etc.; and WHEREAS, the deadline to participate in the Remnant Defendants Settlement is May 4, 2026.
2 I:\cmo\Resolutions\Resolution No. 8777.bm.04.14.2026.docx NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Redlands as follows:

Section 1. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated by reference in this Resolution.

Section 2. The City shall receive direct payments of the settlement proceeds. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute any and all documents consistent with and in furtherance of the City Council’s participation in the Remnant Defendants Settlement Agreement.

ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED THIS 21st day of April, 2026. ____________________________
Mario Saucedo, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
3 I:\cmo\Resolutions\Resolution No. 8777.bm.04.14.2026.docx I, Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk, City of Redlands, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 21st day of April, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
_____________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
City Council AGENDA ITEM NO. I9.

DATE: April 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Approve the First Amendment to the Agreement with Alliant Insurance Services, Inc. as Broker of Record for Property and Casualty Insurance Services to extend the term for one additional year and increase the total compensation to an amount not to exceed to $133,514 (Assistant City Manager McConnell)
MOTION:

If the City Council determines that staff's recommendation is appropriate, the following motion is provided:

I move to approve the First Amendment to the Agreement with Alliant Specialty Insurance Services, Inc. as Broker of Record for property and casualty insurance services to extend the term of the agreement for one additional year and increase the total compensation to an amount not-to-exceed to $133,514.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council approve the First Amendment to the Agreement with Alliant Specialty Insurance Services, Inc. as Broker of Record for property and casualty insurance services to extend the term of the agreement for one additional year and increase the total compensation to an amount not-to-exceed to $133,514.

DISCUSSION:

Alliant Specialty Insurance Services, Inc. ("Alliant") has provided the City of Redlands with property and casualty broker services for the past six (6) years, and has demonstrated a deep understanding of the City's risk profile, operations, and insurance needs. As the City's current Broker of Record, Alliant works in conjunction with the Human Resources Department to negotiate and secure coverage in the insurance marketplace for several critical policies such as Crime, Excess General Liability, Excess Workers' Compensation, Property, and others. Due to Alliant's existing knowledge of City operations, their continued service ensures efficiency in renewals, claim advocacy, and market competitiveness. Based on this and the continuity of service necessary to maintain uninterrupted coverage, staff recommends the City Council approve the First Amendment to the Agreement with Alliant Insurance Services, Inc. to extend the term of the agreement for one additional year and increase the total compensation to an amount not-to-exceed to $133,514.

ALTERNATIVES:

City Council may elect not to approve the agreement and sole source purchase; however, this will adversely affect the operation of the Human Resources/Risk Management department.

SUBMITTED BY:

Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
RECOMMENDED BY:

Charles M. Duggan Jr., City Manager
REVIEWED BY:

Yvette M. Abich Garcia, City Attorney
Christopher Boatman, Assistant City Manager
Danielle Garcia, Management Services/Finance Director
PREPARED BY:

Latasha Hopkins, Temp Employee

FISCAL IMPACT
Fiscal Year: 26-27
Amount: $ 67,418
Budgeted Y/N: Y
Discussion:

The cost for insurance brokerage services with Alliant Specialty Insurance Services for the extended one-year term is $67,418. Funding will be included in the FY27-28 budget.

Attachments
Alliant_Insurance_Service_Agreement_fully_executed.pdf
First_Amendment_Agreement_w_Alliant.pdf

1 I:\cmo\Agreements\1st Amendment Agreement w Alliant.bm.04.09.2026.FY2526-154.docx

FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT TO PERFORM PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This first amendment (“First Amendment”) to the agreement for the provision of property and casualty broker services (“Agreement”), dated 15th day of July, 2025 by and between the City of Redlands, a municipal corporation and a general law city (“City”), and Alliant Specialty Insurance Services, Inc., a California corporation (“Consultant”), is made and entered into this 21st day of April, 2026.

RECITALS
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City and Consultant to amend their existing Agreement to extend the term of the Agreement for one additional year in an amount not-to-exceed $67,418; and NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration in the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged City and Consultant agree as follows:

AGREEMENT
Section 1. Subsection 4.1 of the Agreement, entitled “Article 5 Performance of Services,” is hereby amended to read as follows:
“4.1 The term of this Agreement shall be for a period of one (1) year commencing from the Effective date of this Agreement and expiring on July 14, 2027.” Section 2. Subsection 5.1 of the Agreement, entitled “Article 5 Payments to Consultant,” is hereby amended to read as follows:
“The compensation for Consultant’s performance of the Services shall not exceed the amount of One Hundred Thirty-Three Thousand Five Hundred Fourteen Dollars ($133,514) for the Services provided during the Term of the agreement. City shall pay Consultant on a time and materials basis up to the not-to-exceed amount in accordance with the rates specified in Exhibit “B,” titled “Fee Proposal,” which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.” Section 3. All other provisions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged by this First Amendment and in effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this First Amendment, to be effective as of April 21, 2026.

CITY OF REDLANDS ALLIANT SPECIALTY INSURANCE SERVICES,
INC.
________________________________ By: ________________________________ Mario Saucedo, Mayor Conor Boughey, Senior Vice President ATTEST:
__________________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
City Council AGENDA ITEM NO. I10.

DATE: April 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution No. 8779 Temporarily Suspending Enforcement of Redlands Municipal Code Sections 5.04.390 and 5.04.420 for the Limited Purpose of Aligning Certain Business License Renewals with a Calendar-Year Renewal Cycle (Management Services/Finance Director Garcia) MOTION:

If the City Council determines that staff's recommendation is appropriate, the following motion is provided:

I move to adopt Resolution No. 8779 temporarily suspending enforcement of Redlands Municipal Code Sections

5.04.390 and 5.04.420 for the limited purpose of aligning certain business license renewals with a calendar-year renewal cycle and facilitating a one-time prorated transition.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 8779 temporarily suspending enforcement of Sections 5.04.390 and 5.04.420 of the Redlands Municipal Code to allow a one-time proration of business license fees for certain businesses currently renewing in June, in order to transition those licenses to a calendar-year renewal cycle while minimizing financial burden.

DISCUSSION:

Section 5.04.390 of the Redlands Municipal Code establishes that annual business licenses operate on a calendaryear basis, with fees due on January 1 of each year. However, certain businesses within the City currently maintain a June renewal date as a result of prior provisions of the Code.

Section 5.04.420 of the Redlands Municipal Code provides that business license tax fees shall not be prorated, requiring the full annual fee regardless of whether the license is issued for a full or partial year. As a result, the City is currently unable to prorate license fees to transition these businesses to the standard calendar-year renewal cycle.

The proposed Resolution temporarily suspends enforcement of these provisions for the limited purpose of facilitating a one-time transition to a calendar-year renewal cycle. This approach is intended to minimize financial burden on affected businesses by avoiding duplicative or overlapping fee obligations that would otherwise result from a mid-year transition.

Under the proposed transition:

Affected businesses with a current renewal date in June 2026 will complete their scheduled renewal at that time.

The license issued in June 2026 will be prorated for a six-month period covering July 1, 2026 through December 31, 2026.

Beginning January 1, 2027, these businesses will renew annually on a January through December calendaryear basis, consistent with the Municipal Code.

This one-time proration is intended to prevent businesses from incurring unintended costs during the transition period and to ensure an equitable alignment with the City’s standard renewal cycle. The Resolution also provides flexibility for past due renewals to be brought into compliance with the new calendar-year cycle without imposing unintended or excessive financial burden. The temporary suspension will expire upon completion of the transition.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may make alternative suggestions to modify the transition approach, or decline to adopt the Resolution, which would require businesses to continue renewing on their existing schedule.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Not Applicable
SUBMITTED BY:

Danielle Garcia, Management Services Director
RECOMMENDED BY:

Charles M. Duggan Jr., City Manager
REVIEWED BY:

Yvette M. Abich Garcia, City Attorney
Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
Christopher Boatman, Assistant City Manager
Danielle Garcia, Management Services/Finance Director
PREPARED BY:

Ashley Deem-Sepulveda, Administrative Analyst

FISCAL IMPACT
Fiscal Year: 2026-2027
Revenue Generating: Yes or No
Amount: $
Budgeted Y/N: N/A
Account No.:

Additional Appropriation Required: No
Discussion:

Proration may result in a one-time adjustment to business license revenue in Fiscal Year 2026–2027 due to the sixmonth license period issued in June 2026. However, this adjustment is administrative in nature and does not represent a long-term loss of revenue. Beginning January 1, 2027, all affected businesses will renew on a full annual calendar-year basis. Aligning license renewals will also improve administrative efficiency for staff and simplify the renewal process for businesses.

Attachments
Resolution_No_8779.pdf
1 I:\cmo\Resolutions\Resolution No. 8779.bm.04.06.2026.docx RESOLUTION NO. 8779

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS

TEMPORARILY SUSPENDING ENFORCEMENT OF REDLANDS
MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 5.04.390 AND 5.04.420, FOR THE LIMITED

PURPOSE OF ALIGNING CERTAIN BUSINESS LICENSE RENEWALS
WITH A CALENDAR-YEAR RENEWAL CYCLE.

WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2979 amended Redlands Municipal Code Chapter 5.04 to establish a January through December renewal period for annual business licenses, replacing the previous July through June renewal cycle.

WHEREAS, Section 5.04.390 of the Redlands Municipal Code provides that annual business license fees shall become due and payable on January 1 of each year and defines the annual license period as the calendar year of January through December, unless otherwise provided; and WHEREAS, Section 5.04.420 of the Redlands Municipal Code provides that license tax fees shall not be prorated and that such fee shall apply for the prescribed time or any fractional part thereof; and
WHEREAS, certain businesses within the city currently maintain a business license renewal period of July-June pursuant to prior provisions of the Redlands Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to align the renewal dates for these affected businesses with the calendar year renewal period of January-December established in Redlands Municipal Code Section 5.04.390; and
WHEREAS, transitioning these businesses from a July-June license period to a JanuaryDecember calendar year renewal cycle without temporary proration would require affected businesses to pay overlapping or duplicative license fees, resulting in an unintended financial burden; and WHEREAS, strict enforcement of Redlands Municipal Code Section 5.04.420, which prohibits proration of license fees would prevent the City from implementing a temporary proration necessary to transition affected businesses to the January-December calendar-year renewal cycle in a fair and equitable manner; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that a temporary suspension of Redlands Municipal Code Section 5.040.390 and 5.04.420 that apply only to businesses with an annual renewal period of July-June, is necessary to facilitate this transition while minimizing financial impacts to affected businesses.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The enforcement of Section 5.04.390 of the Redlands Municipal Code is hereby temporarily suspended for businesses that as of the effective date of this Resolution, maintain an annual business license renewal period of July-June. 2 I:\cmo\Resolutions\Resolution No. 8779.bm.04.06.2026.docx Section 2. The enforcement of Section 5.04.420 of the Redlands Municipal Code, which prohibits the proration of business license tax fees, is hereby temporarily suspended for businesses that as of the effective date of this Resolution maintain an annual business renewal period of JulyJune.

Section 3. Businesses with an annual business license renewal period of July-June shall be subject to the following:

A. Businesses subject to this Resolution shall complete their regularly scheduled renewal in June 2026; however, such renewal shall be issued for a six-month period expiring December 31, 2026.

B. The City shall allow a one-time proration of business license tax fees for the period of July 1, 2026 through December 31, 2026 for the purpose of aligning affected licenses with a January through December renewal cycle.

C. Beginning January 1, 2027, and thereafter, all affected businesses shall renew their business licenses annually on a calendar year basis in full compliance with Section

5.04.390 of the Redlands Municipal Code.

D. Businesses that do not pay their prorated business license during the renewal period for July 1, 2026 through December 31, 2026, shall be deemed past due and said amount shall be included in the 2027 business license renewal invoice.

Section 4. The temporary suspension of Redlands Municipal Code Sections 5.04.390 and

5.04.420 applicable to businesses with an annual business renewal period of July-June shall automatically expire on December 31, 2026.

Section 5. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.

ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this 21st day of April, 2026. ________________________
Mario Saucedo, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
3 I:\cmo\Resolutions\Resolution No. 8779.bm.04.06.2026.docx I, Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk of the City of Redlands, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 21st day of April, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
City Council AGENDA ITEM NO. I11.

DATE: April 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Approve the Memorandum of Understanding for General Law and Traffic Enforcement Services for the Metrolink System within the City of Redlands (Police Chief Tolber) MOTION:

If the City Council determines that staff's recommendation is appropriate, the following motion is provided:

I move to approve the Memorandum of Understanding between the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department and the City of Redlands Police Department for General Law and Traffic Enforcement Services for the Metrolink System within the City of Redlands.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Memorandum of Understanding between the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department and the City of Redlands Police Department for General Law and Traffic Enforcement Services for the Metrolink System within the City of Redlands.

DISCUSSION:

The San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department (SBCSD) has entered into a contractual agreement with the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) to provide security services for Metrolink passengers and property. As part of that agreement, SCRRA requires that the SBCSD establish Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) with each local law enforcement agency whose jurisdiction includes Metrolink routes. The proposed MOU between the City of Redlands, on behalf of the Redlands Police Department (RPD), and the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department fulfills this requirement.

Within the City of Redlands boundaries, Metrolink operations involve trains, platforms, rail facilities, right‑of‑way, and associated infrastructure. The MOU formalizes each agency’s responsibilities related to general law enforcement and traffic enforcement in and around these areas. Under the agreement, RPD will maintain primary responsibility for law and traffic enforcement within the city, while coordinating with SBCSD personnel assigned under the SCRRA contract. This cooperative framework is intended to enhance passenger safety, property protection, and interagency collaboration.

Approval of this MOU ensures compliance with SCRRA’s regional security framework and supports coordinated law enforcement services for the Metrolink system operating within the City of Redlands.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may choose not to approve the Memorandum of Understanding and provide alternative direction to staff.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

N/A.

SUBMITTED BY:

Rachel Tolber, Police Chief
RECOMMENDED BY:

Charles M. Duggan Jr., City Manager
REVIEWED BY:

Yvette M. Abich Garcia, City Attorney
Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
Danielle Garcia, Management Services/Finance Director
PREPARED BY:

Jimmy Nguyen, Management Analyst

FISCAL IMPACT
Fiscal Year: 2026
Revenue Generating: No
Amount: N/A
Budgeted Y/N: N
Account No.: N/A
Additional Appropriation Required: No
Attachments
Redlands_LTR_Signature_Request_MOU-Metrolink.pdf
MOU_RPD_Metrolink_-_Outside_Agencies.pdf
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT
655 East Third Street • San Bernardino, California 92415-0061 Post Office Box 569 • San Bernardino, California 92402-0569 SHANNON D. DICUS, SHERIFF-CORONER
December 18, 2025
Rachel Tobler, Chief of Police
Redlands Police Department
1270 W. Park Avenue
Redlands, CA 92373
RE: MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING-GENERAL LAW AND TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT FOR METROLINK

SYSTEM WITHIN THE CITY OF REDLANDS
Dear Chief Rachel Tolber,
Attached to this letter is a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between San Bernardino County Sheriff/Coroner/Public Administrator (Sheriff) and the Redlands Police Department. The Sheriff entered into a contractual agreement with the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) to provide security for passengers and property. That agreement requires MOUs to be established between the Sheriff and the local law enforcement agencies through which SCRRA’s Metrolink train routes traverse. The MOU establishes the responsibilities of each agency related to general law and traffic enforcement in or around SCRRA’s Metrolink trains, platforms, right-of-way, rail tracks, and facilities within the City of Redlands boundaries. The MOU will be in effect for five years from the date of full execution, or until amended in writing by the two agencies.

Please review and return two signed originals (blue ink) to the following address:

San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department
Attn.: Lili Flores, Bureau of Administration, Contracts Unit 655 E. Third Street
San Bernardino, CA 92415-0061
One fully executed original will be returned to you for your records. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Lili Flores at (909) 387-0384 or [email protected].

Sincerely,
SHANNON D. DICUS, SHERIFF-CORONER
Jose L. Torres, Sheriff’s Administrative Manager
Bureau of Administration
SDD/JLT/jlt
attachment

Page 1 of 4 ends

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
between the
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT
and

THE CITY OF REDLANDS ON BEHALF OF

THE REDLANDS POLICE DEPARTMENT
This Memorandum of Understanding is by and between the San Bernardino County Sheriff/Coroner/Public Administrator (Sheriff) and the City of Redlands on behalf of the Redlands Police Department (RPD).

The Sheriff is responsible for general law and traffic enforcement within the unincorporated areas of San Bernardino County. The Sheriff is responsible for the security of passengers and property of the Metrolink Commuter Rail System within San Bernardino County, and its responsibilities are based upon contractual agreements with the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), operator of the Metrolink Commuter Rail System.

In furtherance of these obligations, the Sheriff and the RPD, agree to the following. As used in sections "A" and "B," "law enforcement responsibilities" include directly responding to incidents, investigation, follow-up, and preparation of legal documents and case filings:

A. The Sheriff agrees to accept law enforcement responsibility within its jurisdictional and contractual boundaries during SCRRA operational hours for:

1. All crimes or incidents occurring or originating on board the Metrolink trains.

2. All thefts of rail property from Metrolink trains, platforms, and facilities.

3. All reports of vandalism to the Metrolink trains, platforms, and facilities.

4. All crimes occurring on the rights-of-way, including rail track, grade crossings, and, in accordance with San Bernardino County Charter, Title 2, Division 8, Chapter 9, §28.0901-28.0905, encampment management/removal.

5. All transit related crimes and or incidents at Metrolink stations, platforms and facilities or associated crimes and incidents impacting safe transit operations.

6. Timely response to all Metrolink train accidents along the right-of-way and at MOU RPD Metrolink - Outside Agencies.bm.04.06.2026.FY2526-150

Page 2 of 4 ends

grade crossings, ensuring the RPD investigation is adequately supported.

7. With due cause, temporarily detaining persons of interest when requested by the RPD until a member of the RPD can respond to assume control of the investigation
And to:

8. Provide, via a designated liaison, when requested, statistical data relative to Metrolink passenger stations, rights-of-way, and facilities in the Sheriff’s jurisdiction, including statistical analyses, trends, and other law enforcementenhancing information.

B. If Sheriff is unavailable or it is outside the operational hours, the RPD agrees to accept law enforcement responsibility within its jurisdictional boundaries for:

1. All crimes or incidents occurring or originating on Metrolink trains.

2. All thefts of rail property from Metrolink trains, platforms or facilities.

3. All reports of vandalism to the Metrolink trains, platforms or facilities.

4. All crimes occurring on the rights-of-way, including rail track, grade crossings, and, in accordance with applicable city ordinances, encampment management/removal.

5. All crimes and/or incidents occurring at Metrolink stations, platforms and facilities, including transit-related violations.

6. With due cause, temporarily detaining persons of interest when requested by the Sheriff until the Sheriff can respond to assume control of the investigation.

And to:

7. Remain the primary investigating law enforcement agency responsible for all Metrolink train accidents along the right of way and at grade crossings.

8. Provide a liaison to interact with the Sheriff's liaison. A system will be established by which the Sheriff's liaison can access, generally monthly, all reports and statistical data collected by the RPD pertaining to criminal activity and incidents occurring on Metrolink station platforms or facilities, the adjacent parking areas (if available), grade crossings, and rail rights-of-way within RPD’s jurisdiction. Utilizing this system, the Sheriff's liaison and the RPD’s liaison will jointly endeavor to reduce criminal and public safety hazards within their respective jurisdictions.

C. Joint Responsibilities:

MOU RPD Metrolink - Outside Agencies.bm.04.06.2026.FY2526-150

Page 3 of 4 ends

Members of the Sheriff and the SCRRA may respond to assist the RPD whenever an accident or incident directly or indirectly involves the Metrolink Commuter Rail System or may impact public safety and/or the safe continued operations of train service. The objective is to render assistance in handling the incident as expeditiously as possible to resume or continue public roadway access and train operations for the benefit of the riding public.

Until such time the Sheriff no longer has contractually obligated law enforcement responsibilities regarding the Metrolink Commuter Rail System within the City of Redlands, the Sheriff and the RPD will work cooperatively within the City of Redlands to ensure the law enforcement demands of the Metrolink Commuter Rail System are adequately met.

Both agencies are obliged to examine and identify any condition for which jurisdictional responsibility is not clearly delineated in this memorandum. Such issues shall be resolved promptly by dialogue involving both agencies.

D. Mutual Indemnification:

Neither party hereto shall be liable for any damages proximately resulting from the negligent or wrongful acts or omissions of the other party's employees or agents in the performance of this agreement; and each party shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the other party from any such damages or liability. If the parties are determined to be comparatively at fault for any claim, action, loss or damage which results from their respective obligations under this agreement, the parties shall indemnify the other to the extent of their comparative fault.

E. The Sheriff and the RPD agree:

1. To review the provisions of this memorandum a minimum of once every two years.

2. That this memorandum remains in force for a period of five years from the date of full execution, or until a proposal for an amendment to this memorandum has been jointly resolved by the signers or their successors, whichever occurs first.

MOU RPD Metrolink - Outside Agencies.bm.04.06.2026.FY2526-150

Page 4 of 4 ends

Nothing in this memorandum is to be construed as conflicting with existing laws, regulations, and prescribed responsibilities applicable to the respective parties hereto.

By: Date:

Rachel Tolber, Chief of Police
City of Redlands Police Department
By: Date:

Charles M. Duggan Jr., City Manager
City of Redlands
Attest: Date:

Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
City of Redlands
By: Date:

Shannon D. Dicus, Sheriff - Coroner
San Bernardino County Sheriff/Coroner/Public Administrator MOU RPD Metrolink - Outside Agencies.bm.04.06.2026.FY2526-150 City Council AGENDA ITEM NO. I12.

DATE: April 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Approve the use of City resources and the request for in-kind support in the amount of $7,650.00 related to the Stand-Up-To-Stigma event hosted on May 17, 2026, by the Loma Linda University Behavioral Medicine Center; approve temporary street closures related to the event; and determine that the event is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15311(c) of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (Facilities and Community Services Department Director Crocker) MOTION:

If the City Council determines that staff’s recommendations are appropriate, the following motions are provided:

1. I move that the City Council determine that the authorization for the items associated with the event is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15311(c) of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act;

2. I move to authorize and approve the expenditure of City resources and in-kind support in the amount of $7,650.00; and

3. I move to authorize and approve the temporary street closures for the Stand-Up-to-Stigma 5k event to be held Sunday, May 17, 2026.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council determine that authorization for the items associated with Stand-Up-toStigma 5K event, scheduled for Sunday, May 17, 2026, are exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15311(c) of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Staff further recommends that the City Council direct staff accordingly regarding the temporary street closures and the request for in-kind support in the amount of $7,650.00.

DISCUSSION:

The Facilities and Community Services Department manages the administration and issuance of permits for special events held in public areas of the City. Upon the issuance of a special event permit, the event may take place contingent on the event organizer paying the required fees. The City recognizes the value of partnering with non-profit agencies and organizations to provide services beneficial to the community. In an effort to support programs that provide a community benefit, the City Council will, from time to time, consider the authorization of inkind support including the use of City equipment, staff, and facilities for special events.

Loma Linda University Medical Center, Inc., DBA Loma Linda University Behavioral Medicine Center is requesting in-kind support in the amount of $7,650.00 for departmental resources, including Facilities and Community Services (FCS) and Police personnel. The Center is a registered non-profit organization based in the City of Loma Linda. The event is held in an effort to bring awareness to mental health, reduce stigma and provide mental health resources to the community. The event this year is scheduled for Sunday, May 17, 2026 from 7:00 am to 11:00 am.

This will be the seventh year holding the event and it is expected to draw over 900 participants for the 5k.

This event will require the closure of Iowa Street between Barton Rd and W. Park Avenue. The street closure and detour will be in place between 5:00 am and 12:00 pm. The City previously approved an in-kind support in the amount of $1,800.00 for last year's event.

The event is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act’s guidelines pursuant to Section 15311(c). Section 15311(c), Accessory Structures Class 11 facilities, consists of the construction or replacement of minor structure accessory to existing commercial, industrial, or institutional facilities, including placement of seasonal or temporary use items such as mobile food units, portable restrooms or similar items in generally the same locations from time to time in publicly owned parks or other facilities designed for public use.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may elect to deny the request for in-kind support, deny the request for temporary street closure and direct staff accordingly.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Priority A - Quality of Life, Beautification, Arts and Culture.

SUBMITTED BY:

Tabitha Crocker, Facilities & Community Services Director RECOMMENDED BY:

Charles M. Duggan Jr., City Manager
REVIEWED BY:

Yvette M. Abich Garcia, City Attorney
Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
Christopher Boatman, Assistant City Manager
Danielle Garcia, Management Services/Finance Director
PREPARED BY:

Jaclyn Ramirez, Admin Assistant

FISCAL IMPACT
Fiscal Year: 2025/2026
Revenue Generating: No
Amount: $7,650.00
Budgeted Y/N: N
Account No.:

Additional Appropriation Required: No
Discussion:

Please see the "Fiscal Impact" attachment for reference.

Attachments
A_Special_Event_Application_-_Stand-Up-To-Stigma.pdf
B_In-Kind_Request_-_Stand-Up-To-Stigma.pdf
C_Street_Closure_-_Stand-Up-To-Stigma.pdf
D_Event_Route_Map_-_Stand-Up-To-Stigma.pdf
E_Event_Layout_-_Stand-Up-To-Stigma.pdf
F_Verification_of_Non-Profit_-_Stand-Up-To-Stigma.pdf
G_Fiscal_Impact_-_Stand-Up-To-Stigma.pdf

In anticipation of the City Council's consideration of this request, staff has compiled the following table outlining costs related to fees established by Resolution of the City Council and departmental charges pertaining to personnel and equipment resources necessary for the support of the event. The departmental charges are costs outside of normal City operations that would not be incurred by the City if the special event was not taking place.

Departmental Charges
(Personnel & Equipment)
2025-2026
Amount Type 2024-2025Amount
Police Personnel1 $3.930.00 Hard Cost $0.00
Fire Personnel1 $0.00 Hard Cost $0.00
Facilities & Community Services Personnel1 $1,800.00 Hard Cost $1,800.00 Personnel & Equipment Subtotal $5,730.00 $1,800.00
Fees Established by City Council
Resolution
Park Reservation $0.00 Soft Cost $0.00
FCS Equipment $1,920.00 Soft Cost $0.00
Fire Equipment $0.00 Soft Cost $0.00
Fees Subtotal $1,920.00 $0.00
Total Departmental Charges and Fees $7,650.00 $1,800.00 $5,730.00
$1,920.00
$7,650.00
Hard Cost
Soft Cost
Total
$1,800.00
$0.00
$1,800.00 1
Personnel costs are calculated conservatively assuming the highest staff cost scenario. Actual costs may vary on the day of the event based on the actual staff present. Actual costs will be confirmed following the event and will be included in a reconciliation report presented to the City Council.

The following table summarizes the total estimated costs associated with the use of City resources and waiver of fees approved for events scheduled during Fiscal Year 2025-26 to date:

TABLE 2: FY 2025-26 Fee Waivers to date
Hard Costs Soft Costs Deposits
Refunded
Waiver
Amount
Net
Amount
$332,856.19 $37,641.85 $0.00 $370,498.04 $370,498.04
City Council AGENDA ITEM NO. I13.

DATE: April 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Approve the request for in-kind support in the amount of $17,012.52 related to the 27th Annual Redlands Fire Fighter Car Show event hosted by the Professional Fire Fighters Association on May 24, 2026; approve temporary street closures along East State Street and Citrus Avenue; authorize the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages at the event; and determine that the event is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15311(c) of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (Facilities and Community Services Department Director Crocker)
MOTION:

If the City Council determines that staff's recommendation is appropriate, the following motions are provided:

1. I move that the City Council determine that the approval of the event is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15311(c) of the State's Guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act; and

2. I move to approve the request for in-kind support in the amount of $17,012.52; and

3. I move to approve temporary street closures related to the event along East State Street and Citrus Avenue; and

4. I move to authorize the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages at the 27th Annual Redlands Fire Fighter Car Show event hosted by the Redlands Community Foundation in support of the Professional Fire Fighters Association on Sunday, May 24, 2026
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council determine that approval of the actions associated with the 27th Annual Redlands Fire Fighter Car Show is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15311(c) of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Staff further recommends that the City Council approve the request of an in-kind support in the amount of $17,012.52 related to the 27th Annual Redlands Fire Fighter Car Show event hosted by the Professional Fire Fighters Association on May 24, 2026 and approve temporary street closures along East State Street and Citrus Avenue and authorize the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages at the event.

DISCUSSION:

The Facilities and Community Services Department manages the administration and issuance of permits for special events held in public areas of the City. Upon the issuance of a special event permit, the event may take place contingent on the event organizer paying the required fees. The City recognizes the value of partnering with non-profit agencies and organizations to provide beneficial services to the community. In an effort to support programs that provide community benefit, the City Council will, from time to time, consider the authorization of inkind support, including the use of City equipment, staff, and facilities for special events.

The Redlands Professional Firefighters (RPFA) is a registered non-profit organization based in the City of Redlands. This will be the 27th year of the event, and RPFA intends to provide a family-friendly event featuring live music, vendors, beer garden, food, and a car show that will provide awards for best show cars. The event will be held on Sunday, May 24, 2026, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. RPFA anticipates approximately 2,500 attendees.

RPFA is requesting in-kind support in the amount of $17,012.52 for departmental resources, including Police, Fire, and Facilities and Community Services (FCS) personnel. Previously, the City Council approved $16,507.00 in inkind support for last year’s 26th Annual Redlands Fire Fighter Car Show event, hosted on Sunday, May 25, 2025.

In addition, RPFA is requesting the temporary closure of East State Street between Orange Street and Redlands Boulevard; 5th Street between Redlands Boulevard and Citrus Avenue; 6th Street between the alleyway north of East State Street and Citrus Avenue; 7th and 8th Streets between the alleyway north of East State Street and the alleyway south of East State Street; 9th Street between Redlands Boulevard and the alleyway south of East State Street, Orange Street between Citrus Avenue and Redlands Boulevard, and Citrus Avenue between Orange Street and 5th Street. Access to both the lower and upper levels of the Citrus Avenue parking structure will remain open.

City Council approval is also necessary to authorize the consumption and sale of alcohol for this event due to its proposed beer garden located at Ed Hales Park. Staff's approval authority is limited to only enclosed public areas in public parks as defined by Resolution No. 7559, and therefore, the approval of this request is outside of staff's purview.

The event is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act’s guidelines pursuant to Section 15311(c). Section 15311(c), accessory structures Class 11 facilities, consists of the construction or replacement of a minor accessory structure next to existing commercial, industrial, or institutional facilities, including placement of seasonal or temporary use items such as mobile food units, portable restrooms, or similar items in generally the same locations from time to time in publicly owned parks or other facilities designed for public use.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may elect to deny the request for in-kind support, deny the request for temporary street closures, and/or deny the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages, and direct staff accordingly.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Priority A: Quality of Life, Beautification, Arts and Culture.

SUBMITTED BY:

Tabitha Crocker, Facilities & Community Services Director RECOMMENDED BY:

Charles M. Duggan Jr., City Manager
REVIEWED BY:

Yvette M. Abich Garcia, City Attorney
Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
Christopher Boatman, Assistant City Manager
Danielle Garcia, Management Services/Finance Director
PREPARED BY:

Jaclyn Ramirez, Admin Assistant

FISCAL IMPACT
Fiscal Year: 2025/2026
Revenue Generating: No
Amount: $17,012.52
Budgeted Y/N: N
Account No.:

Additional Appropriation Required: No
Discussion: Please see the "Fiscal Impact" attachment for reference.

Attachments
A_Special_Event_Application_-_FFCS.pdf
B_In-Kind_Request_-_FFCS.pdf
C_Street_Closure_-_FFCS.pdf
D_Street_Closure_Map_-_FFCS.pdf
E_ABC_Application_-_FFCS.pdf
F_Verification_of_non-profit_-_FFCS.pdf
G_Fiscal_Impact_2-_FFCS.pdf

Firefighters Car Show Street Closure- 2026

Departmental Charges
(Personnel & Equipment)
2025-2026
Amount Type 2024-2025Amount
Police Personnel1 $6,082.00 Hard Cost $5,913.00
Fire Personnel1 $0.00 Hard Cost $0.00
Facilities & Community Services Personnel1 $6,300.00 Hard Cost $6,300.00 Personnel & Equipment Subtotal $12,382.00 $12,213.00
Fees Established by City Council
Resolution
Park Reservation $94.00 Soft Cost $94.00
FCS Equipment $4,295.00 Soft Cost $3,600.00
Fire Equipment $241.52 Soft Cost $600.00
Fees Subtotal $4,630.52 $4,294.00
Total Departmental Charges and Fees $17,012.52 $16,507.00 $12,382.00
$4,630.52
$17,012.52
Hard Cost
Soft Cost
Total
$12,213.00
$4,294.00
$16,507.00
1 Personnel costs are calculated conservatively assuming the highest staff cost scenario. Actual costs may vary on the day of the event based on the actual staff present. Actual costs will be confirmed following the event and will be included in a reconciliation report presented to the City Council.

The following table summarizes the total estimated costs associated with the use of City resources and waiver of fees approved for events scheduled during Fiscal Year 2025-26 to date:

TABLE 2: FY 2025-26 Fee Waivers to date
Hard Costs Soft Costs Deposits
Refunded
Waiver
Amount
Net
Amount
$332,856.19 $37,641.85 $0.00 $370,498.04 $370,498.04
City Council AGENDA ITEM NO. J1.

DATE: April 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Consideration of a Letter Supporting San Bernardino County Transportation Authority's decision to oppose Assembly Bill 1678 related to the Gold Line (Mayor Saucedo) MOTION:

If the City Council desires to oppose Assembly Bill 1678, the following motion is provided:

I move to authorize the Mayor to sign a letter supporting San Bernardino County Transportation Authority's decision to oppose Assembly Bill 1678, related to the Gold Line
RECOMMENDATION:

Mayor Saucedo recommends the City Council support San Bernardino County Transportation Authority's decision to oppose Assembly Bill 1678, related to the Gold Line
DISCUSSION:

Assembly Bill 1678 (AB 1678), introduced by John Harabedian, proposes the creation of a new construction authority to advance the extension of the Metro A Line (formerly known as the Gold Line) from the City of Claremont in Los Angeles County to the City of Montclair in San Bernardino County.

The San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) Board of Directors recently considered this legislation and voted unanimously to oppose AB 1678. According to SBCTA, the bill would override prior Board direction to pursue enhanced Metrolink service frequency between the Pomona North station and the Rancho Cucamonga station.

In addition, AB 1678 would transfer project authority to a newly created entity, thereby removing decision-making and approval authority from SBCTA for the proposed extension to Montclair. SBCTA has also expressed concerns that the legislation could place agency assets and financial resources at risk on an ongoing basis.

SBCTA has requested that member and partner agencies consider submitting letters of opposition to AB 1678. The attached letter reflects the concerns raised by SBCTA and communicates the City of Redlands’ position in opposition to the proposed legislation.

The proposed action would authorize the Mayor to sign and submit a letter opposing AB 1678.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may elect not to authorize the submission of a letter of opposition and provide alternative direction to staff.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

N/A
SUBMITTED BY:

Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
REVIEWED BY:

Charles M. Duggan Jr., City Manager
Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
PREPARED BY:

Whitney Mesna, Management Analyst

FISCAL IMPACT
Fiscal Year: N/A
Revenue Generating: N/A
Amount: N/A
Budgeted Y/N: N/A
Account No.: N/A
Additional Appropriation Required: N/A
Discussion:

There is no direct fiscal impact associated with the authorization of this letter.

Attachments
Letter_of_Opposition-_AB1678.pdf
City of

REDLANDS
300 E. State Street, Suite 690, Redlands, CA 92373
909-798-7510
[email protected]
April 21, 2026
The Honorable Lori D. Wilson
Chair, Assembly Committee on Transportation
California State Assembly
1020 N Street, Suite 112
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: AB 1678 (Harabedian) – OPPOSE
Dear Chair Wilson,
On behalf of City of Redlands, I am writing to express our opposition to Assembly Bill (AB) 1678 by Assemblymember John Harabedian.

AB 1678 would remove the existing Metro Foothill Gold Line Construction Authority’s responsibility for extending the A Line (formerly the Gold Line) beyond Claremont and create a new authority – the Claremontclair Authority (CMA) – to deliver the extension from Claremont to Montclair. While the City of Redlands supports expanding high-quality transit service in our region, this bill raises significant legal, financial, and governance concerns and sets a troubling precedent for the State to mandate that local agencies build, fund, and operate specific projects regardless of locally adopted priorities or funding capacity.

Most concerning, AB 1678 exposes local agencies to substantial risk while limiting their authority. The bill would require the transfer of assets at the discretion of the CMA without adequate protection for local agency interests, including right-of-way protections and risk mitigation. It also grants the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) – but not affected local agencies – the authority to review significant project changes, effectively excluding local jurisdictions from meaningful oversight of a project within their own communities.

Additionally, the bill creates significant and ongoing financial exposure. Local agencies could be precluded from negotiating operations and maintenance agreements until after construction begins, effectively pre-committing them to fund operations without defined terms. This structure risks obligating local jurisdictions to cover ongoing operating costs without meaningful oversight or cost control.

These concerns are particularly significant given the history of the project, which has experienced ongoing cost escalation, repeated delays, and uncertainty regarding delivery. In

MARC SHAW
Mayor Pro Tempore

PAUL BARICH
Council Member

EDDIE TEJEDA
Council Member

DENISE DAVIS
Council Member

MARIO SAUCEDO
Mayor
response, local and regional agencies have begun advancing alternative transit strategies that better reflect current conditions, prioritize fiscal responsibility, and deliver more reliable mobility outcomes.

AB 1678 would override these locally adopted policy directions, undermining the authority of local elected officials to determine which transportation projects are advanced and funded in their communities. It raises broader concerns regarding accountability and the responsible stewardship of limited transportation resources.

For these reasons, the City of Redlands respectfully opposes AB 1678. The bill exposes local taxpayers to significant financial risk, weakens local control, and sets a precedent that could have far-reaching implications for other regions across the state.

We remain committed to working collaboratively on transportation solutions that are fiscally responsible, locally supported, and deliver meaningful mobility improvements for the communities we serve.

If you have any questions, please contact Mario Saucedo, Mayor at msaucedo@cityofredlands.

Sincerely,
Mario Saucedo
Mayor
City of Redlands
Cc: San Bernardino County Legislative Delegation
Assembly Transportation Committee
City Council AGENDA ITEM NO. J2.

DATE: April 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Recognition of the City of Redlands Wastewater Treatment Plant as Plant of the Year by the Santa Ana River Basin Section of the California Water Environment Association (Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director Heredia)
DISCUSSION:

The California Water Environment Association (CWEA) selected the City of Redlands Wastewater Treatment Plant in the medium-sized Plant of the Year Award category. This award recognizes accomplishments in compliance, innovative practices, cost-effectiveness, and superior plant performance within the Santa Ana River Basin Section (SARBS). The City of Redlands received 1st place for medium-sized plants out of eight (8) wastewater treatment plants in the local section (SARBS) and 4th place within the State of California. Staff at the wastewater treatment plant worked hard to achieve this award, and they should be proud to receive this recognition.

SUBMITTED BY:

Monica Heredia, Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director REVIEWED BY:

Charles M. Duggan, Jr., City Manager
Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
Carl Baker, Public Information Officer
Attachments
SARBS_Gold_Award_Letter.pdf
Dear Joseph and City of Redlands,
I am delighted to inform you that after reviewing the nomination you submitted for the Plant of the Year Medium category, City of Redlands has been selected as the recipient of the Santa Ana River Basin Section (SARBS) Plant of the Year Medium GOLD Award.

We want to recognize your achievement and we would love to present the award to you in person at our highly anticipated SARBS Annual Awards Banquet which will take place on Saturday, March 14, 2026, at the Green River Golf Club at 5215 Green River Rd, Corona CA. Your presence at the awards ceremony will not only add to the significance of the event but also provide an opportunity for your peers and colleagues to applaud your remarkable accomplishment.

As the winner of the GOLD award, we are extending you a FREE ticket to the Awards Banquet. To claim your FREE registration, please email us ([email protected]) for ONE registration. Additional tickets can be purchased through the link below for your agency and attendees who are welcomed to be present to celebrate your accomplishment.

Please RSVP by registering on the CWEA website at: https://bit.ly/SARBS2026AnnualAwardsBanquet Deadline for registration is February 20, 2026, or until seats are full.

Once again, congratulations on this well-deserved recognition. We look forward to celebrating your success at the awards ceremony.

If you have any questions or need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me at [email protected] (909)912-4099.

Best regards,
Shawn Spromberg
SARBS Award Chair / SARBS Past President
City Council AGENDA ITEM NO. K1.

DATE: April 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Consideration of the License Agreement with Redlands Historical Museum Association and determine that approval of the license agreement with the Redlands Historical Museum Association is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State’s guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (Assistant City Manager Boatman)
MOTION:

If the City Council determines that staff’s recommendation is appropriate, the following motions are provided:

1. I move that the City Council determine that approval of the License Agreement with the Redlands Historical Museum Association is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State's CEQA Guidelines.

2. I move that the City Council approve the License Agreement between the City of Redlands and the Redlands Historical Museum Association.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council determine that approval of the License Agreement with the Redlands Historical Museum Association is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State's CEQA Guidelines, and approve the License Agreement between the City of Redlands and the Redlands Historical Museum Association.

DISCUSSION:

At its June 17, 2025 meeting, the City Council approved a transfer agreement with the Redlands Historical Museum Association (RHMA) for the conveyance of the Museum of Redlands property located at 1 North Center Street to the City. Escrow closed on August 4, 2025, and the City formally assumed ownership of the property. As part of the transfer agreement, the parties contemplated a subsequent license agreement to define RHMA’s ongoing role in supporting operations at the Museum.

The attached License Agreement implements that component of the transfer agreement by establishing the framework under which RHMA may conduct certain activities at the Museum. Specifically, the agreement provides RHMA with an exclusive right to operate the museum store and a non-exclusive right to utilize the event pavilion and associated outdoor areas for programming, fundraising, and third-party rentals. Under the License Agreement, the City retains ownership and overall operational control of the Museum, while RHMA serves in a supporting role focused on programming and revenue-generating activities that directly benefit the facility.

With respect to the museum store, RHMA is granted the exclusive right to operate the store within the Museum.

The store will be stocked and managed at RHMA’s sole cost and expense, and all net revenues must be reinvested into the Museum consistent with prior agreements. Store operations are required to align with Museum hours and will be coordinated with Library staff. The agreement allows the store to be operated by RHMA volunteers or a Cityapproved contractor, providing flexibility while maintaining City oversight. The Library Director retains authority to address merchandise or operations that may impact public health, safety, or welfare.

For the event pavilion and related outdoor areas, RHMA is granted a non-exclusive right to utilize the space for fundraising events and to coordinate third-party rentals. All events must be scheduled through a centralized booking process and approved by the Library Director to ensure consistency with Museum operations and City policies. The City retains the ability to use the pavilion for City-sponsored programming and to ensure that public access and operational priorities are maintained. RHMA is responsible for all costs associated with its events, including setup, cleanup, insurance, and required permits.

The agreement establishes clear operational parameters for events, including requirements related to capacity, security, parking, noise, and compliance with municipal code and permitting requirements. Larger events are subject to additional planning and approval requirements. Alcohol service may be permitted on a case-by-case basis subject to City approval and applicable regulations. These provisions are intended to activate the facility while ensuring compatibility with surrounding uses and City standards.

The License Agreement also includes provisions related to insurance, indemnification, maintenance responsibilities, and performance expectations. RHMA is required to operate in a commercially reasonable manner to support the financial sustainability of the Museum, including generating revenue through the store and event programming. The agreement includes termination provisions and performance safeguards to ensure that the City can address operational issues if they arise and maintain the long-term viability of the Museum as a public facility.

The Museum of Redlands represents a long-standing community initiative that originated with RHMA in the late 1990s. Over time, the City has supported the project through policy direction and financial contributions, including a $1 million grant (2022), a $1 million loan (2024, largely repaid), and a $2 million advance tied to State reimbursement, of which $1.8 million has been received to date. With construction substantially complete and the facility now under City ownership, the License Agreement represents the final step in formalizing the operational partnership between the City and RHMA.

The proposed action is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State's CEQA Guidelines, commonly referred to as the “common sense” exemption, which applies where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity may have a significant effect on the environment. Approval of the License Agreement does not authorize any new construction, expansion of use, or physical changes to the property, but instead establishes operational terms for the use of an existing facility. As such, the action will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. Accordingly, the activity is not subject to CEQA.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may decline to approve the License Agreement or provide direction to staff to renegotiate specific terms.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

The Museum of Redlands supports Strategic Priority A (Quality of Life) by preserving local history and providing educational, cultural, and community programming opportunities.

SUBMITTED BY:

Chris Boatman, Assistant City Manager
RECOMMENDED BY:

Charles M. Duggan Jr., City Manager
REVIEWED BY:

Yvette M. Abich Garcia, City Attorney
Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
Danielle Garcia, Management Services/Finance Director
PREPARED BY:

Chris Boatman, Assistant City Manager

FISCAL IMPACT
Fiscal Year: 2026
Revenue Generating: No
Amount: NA
Budgeted Y/N: NA
Account No.:

Additional Appropriation Required: No
Discussion:

Approval of the License Agreement does not have a direct fiscal impact. The agreement allows RHMA to generate revenue through museum-related activities, which must be reinvested in support of museum operations consistent with prior agreements.

Attachments
RHMA_License_Agreement.pdf

LICENSE AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN

THE CITY OF REDLANDS AND THE

REDLANDS HISTORICAL MUSEUM ASSOCIATION
This License Agreement (“License”) is made and entered in this 21st day of April, 2026 (“Effective Date”), by and between the City of Redlands, a municipal corporation and general law city (“City”), and the Redlands Historical Museum Association, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation (“Licensee” or “RHMA”). City and Licensee are sometimes individually referred to herein as a “Party” and, together, as the “Parties.”

RECITALS
WHEREAS, Licensee transferred to City property located at 1 North Center Street, Redlands, CA 92373, including a 24,000 square foot building and other improvements, including a store and event pavilion (the “Property”) to be operated as the Museum of Redlands as particularly described in Exhibit “A,” titled “Museum Site Plan;” and WHEREAS, the Parties are committed to promoting public understanding of and support for the Museum; and
WHEREAS, Licensee desires to have use of certain areas of the Museum to further its mission and to financially support Museum operations; and WHEREAS, City and Licensee desire to enter into this License to set forth the terms and conditions under which the City will permit use of portions of the Property to Licensee; and WHEREAS, City and Licensee desire to cooperate to further the above-stated purpose in a way compatible with the City’s operations of the Museum in service of the public interest.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the City and Licensee agree as follows:

AGREEMENT
Section 1. Premises. City hereby grants to Licensee a license to use the store area and event pavilion located at the Museum (“Premises”) as more particularly described in Exhibits “B,” and “C,” titled “Store Area Plan” and “Event Pavilion Plan,” respectively, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. The Premises shall be used in connection with the activities described herein. This License is exclusive with respect to the store area, and nonexclusive with respect to the event pavilion. City shall continue to control the Property, including, without limitation, the right to issue additional permits and licenses so long as they do not conflict with this license.

Section 2. Acknowledgment of License and Disclaimer of Tenancy.

1. Licensee acknowledges and agrees that City is the owner of Premises and that nothing in this License grants to Licensee any rights, title, or interest in the Premises, except for the revocable, exclusive right to use and operate the store area and the RHMA License Agreement.bm.04.16.26.FY2526-155
1 revocable, non-exclusive right to use the event pavilion as provided in this License.

Licensee is not a tenant or lessee of City and holds no rights of tenancy or leasehold in relation to the Premises.

2. In consideration of City’s grant of this License, Licensee specifically and expressly waives, releases, and relinquishes any and all rights to assert any claim of right, privilege, or interest in the Premises other than the revocable rights expressly granted by this License.

3. Licensee further acknowledges and agrees that without the representations and agreements set forth herein, City would not enter into this License.

Section 3. Term. The term of this License shall commence on the Effective Date and continue for a period of twenty (20) years, unless terminated earlier as provided herein.

Section 4. License Fee. The use of the Premises by Licensee shall be at no cost to Licensee.

The Parties acknowledge that the use and operation of the store area and event pavilion under this License will be performed by Licensee at no cost to the City. All net revenues from the operation of the store and event pavilion shall be utilized as set forth herein and the Real Estate Transfer Agreement approved on June 17, 2025. In order to maintain this License, Licensee shall provide a net financial benefit to City of at least $5,000 per calendar year. Licensee shall provide to City, within thirty (30) days following the end of each calendar year, a written financial report in a form reasonably acceptable to City summarizing the net financial benefit provided to the Property, along with supporting documentation upon request to verify compliance with the minimum annual requirement.

Section 5. Use of Premises.

A. Store Area

1. Licensee is permitted exclusive use and operation of the store area and non-exclusive use of the front desk, surrounding lobby area, and Will J. Reid Library described in Exhibit “B” attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. Licensee’s use of the store area shall be for the sole purpose of selling merchandise for the sole benefit of the Museum.

2. The store area shall be operated only by RHMA volunteers or a City contractor, which costs shall be paid by Licensee under a separate funding agreement with City.

3. Library Director may object and cause the removal of merchandise within store area if it is determined that such merchandise is detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of the public or City. Pre-packaged food and/or non-alcoholic beverages may be sold in the store area with prior written approval of the Library Director and with a valid San Bernardino County Health Permit.

4. Licensee shall stock the store area with merchandise at its sole cost and expense.

Licensee shall be solely responsible for securing the merchandise from theft, damage or vandalism. The City shall not be liable for any stolen or damaged merchandise. In RHMA License Agreement.bm.04.16.26.FY2526-155
2 the event of termination of the License, Licensee shall retain ownership of any unsold merchandise.

5. The hours of operation for the store area shall align with Museum operating hours. The store area shall not be operated outside of Museum operating hours, unless Licensee obtains a permit for a special event in the Museum, and in that case, the store area may be operated during the special event with the approval of the Library Director.

6. A City employee must be present during the operating hours of the store area.

B. Event Pavilion

1. Licensee is permitted non-exclusive use of the event pavilion area. Licensee is permitted to use the adjacent outdoor areas (loggia), Rochford Family Building interior restrooms, kitchen, green room, and southwest vehicular ramp, ancillary to its use of the event pavilion as described in Exhibit C.

2. Licensee shall operate the event pavilion, performing specific tasks, including but not limited to: addressing booking inquiries, booking events for RHMA, and third party events, the completion of rental applications, insurance, collection of rental fees for third party renters, and ensuring compliance with all City requirements for facility rentals consistent with City policies, regulations and ordinances.

3. Licensee shall not be required to pay a rental fee to the City for use of the event pavilion. However, the net revenue from Licensee’s use of the event pavilion shall be paid to City as directed by the City. Licensee’s events shall be subject to this Section B and consistent with City policies, regulations and ordinances, including insurance.

4. Licensee may also schedule events by third parties, including payment of rental fees and consistent with all City requirements for facility rentals and consistent with City policies, regulations and ordinances, including insurance.

5. City and RHMA shall maintain a central booking calendar. All events scheduled in the event pavilion must be approved by the Library Director prior to booking the event, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.

6. The event pavilion shall be operated only by City staff, RHMA volunteers or City contractor(s) which costs shall be paid by Licensee under a separate funding agreement with City.

7. Licensee shall be responsible for staging and breakdown of rental events including post-event cleaning. All costs associated with holding RHMA events at the event pavilion shall be at the sole cost of Licensee. No city staff shall be used for rental events.

8. A City employee must be present during all events in the event pavilion and Licensee shall be responsible for associated overtime costs, if any.

RHMA License Agreement.bm.04.16.26.FY2526-155
3 9. Noise levels for indoor and outdoor events shall not exceed those applicable limits pursuant to the Redlands Municipal Code.

10. Event pavilion capacity shall not exceed the maximum occupancy requirements as determined by the Redlands Fire Marshal.

11. Events shall not conflict with Museum operations and shall be coordinated with the Library Director at least thirty (30) days in advance.

12. An event which includes 200 attendees or greater shall be considered a “Large Event.” Large Events shall be subject to the following additional conditions:
a) An event plan shall be submitted for events of 200 or more attendees. Such plan shall include, but not be limited to, a description of any plans for offsite parking and security, and any other information requested by City. b) The event plan shall be submitted no later than 60 days in advance of the event, and a decision shall be rendered by City within 30 days of submittal of application approving or denying the event in the event pavilion.
c) In no case shall an event located within the event pavilion exceed the maximum occupancy allowed in the event pavilion as determined by the Redlands Fire Marshal.

13. Licensee shall obtain any applicable local, county, and state permits for its events and shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, and its officers, officials, employees and agents for failure to obtain any required permits or to operate the event pavilion contrary to federal, state, county and local regulations and laws.

14. Licensee is prohibited from using the following in the event pavilion or adjacent outdoor areas: open flames or candles (battery-operated alternatives are allowed), and pyrotechnics. Space heaters are permitted upon approval by the Redlands Fire Marshal.

15. Licensee may serve alcohol at an approved event in the event pavilion with the prior written approval of the Library Director and in accordance with City rules, insurance requirements and applicable ABC regulations.

16. City shall utilize the event pavilion for City/Library-sponsored events. Licensee shall coordinate use of the event pavilion to ensure that RHMA-events do not conflict with City events.

Section 6. RHMA Volunteers. Licensee may assign City-approved volunteers or City contractor(s), which costs shall be paid by Licensee under a separate funding agreement with City to the Premises to assist Licensee in operating the store area and the event pavilion under the following conditions:

RHMA License Agreement.bm.04.16.26.FY2526-155
4 A. Licensee shall supervise and control all volunteers or contractors while on the Premises. Under no circumstances shall Licensee or its volunteers or contractors direct or interfere with the work performed by city employees in the Museum.

B. Licensee’s volunteers or contractors shall only be assigned to the store area and the event pavilion and no other area in the Museum.

C. Licensee shall confer with the Library Director to establish reporting mechanisms for incidents involving its volunteers. Communication protocols shall be developed to address issues or updates regarding volunteers.

D. City shall approve all volunteers and contractors assigned to the Premises, and require background checks for all Licensee’s volunteers and contractors assigned to work on the Premises in accordance with City policy.

E. Conflicts between Licensee’s volunteers/contractors and city employees shall be resolved by the City Manager or his/her designee, which decision shall be final.

Section 7. Maintenance of Premises. Licensee shall maintain the Premises in a clean and orderly state. Any damage caused by Licensee’s use of the Premises shall be repaired at Licensee’s expense. The City shall retain the right to inspect the Premises and provide written notice of any required repairs or maintenance. Failure to act within fifteen (15) days of such notice shall result in the City performing the necessary work at Licensee’s expense.

Section 8. Indemnity. Licensee shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless City, and its elected officials, officers, employees and agents, from and against any and all claims, causes of action, damages and liability resulting from Licensee’s negligent acts or omissions, and willful misconduct of Licensee, and its contractors, volunteers, employees, guests, agents and invitees arising from Licensee’s occupation and use of the Premises or while on the Property, and the improvements or equipment thereon, during the term of this License. City shall indemnify and hold harmless Licensee from and against any and all claims, causes of action, damages and liability resulting solely from City’s negligent acts or omissions and willful misconduct and those of its employees and agents during the term of this License. This section shall survive any termination of this License.

Section 9. Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance. Licensee shall maintain at its own cost for the term of this License, public liability and property damage insurance in the amount of two million dollars ($2,000,000) per occurrence and four million dollars ($4,000,000) in the aggregate, issued by an insurance company acceptable to City. Licensee shall provide City with a certificate of insurance and endorsements showing City as an additional insured on the policy prior to Licensee’s use and occupancy of the Premises. Such insurance shall be primary with respect to City and non-contributory to any insurance or self- insurance maintained by City.

The policy shall require that, before amending or canceling the policy, the issuing insurance company shall give City at least thirty (30) days prior written notice. City and Licensee RHMA License Agreement.bm.04.16.26.FY2526-155
5 acknowledge and agree that the insurance required of Licensee is subject to annual review by City and subject to increases in the amount and scope of coverage, as reasonably determined by City.

Licensee shall procure and maintain Worker’s Compensation Insurance, if applicable, in such amount as will fully comply with the laws of the State of California, and which shall indemnify, insure and provide legal defense for both Licensee and City against any loss, claim, or damage arising from injuries or occupational diseases happening to any worker employed by Licensee in, at or about the Premises.

Section 10. Assignment Prohibited. Licensee shall not encumber, assign, sublease, or otherwise transfer this License, or any right or interest therein, without City Council approval.

Any attempt to do so shall be null and void. Any encumbrance, assignment, sublease, or transfer of this License shall constitute a breach of this License and may, at the sole discretion of City, result in the immediate termination of this License.

Section 11. Attorneys’ Fees. In the event any action is commenced to enforce or interpret the terms or conditions of this License, the prevailing Party shall, in addition to any costs and other relief, be entitled to the recovery of its reasonable attorneys’ fees, including fees for use of inhouse counsel by a Party.

Section 12. Notices. Any notice or other communication required, or which may be given, pursuant to this License, shall be in writing. Any such notice shall be deemed delivered (i) on the day of delivery in person; (ii) five (5) days after deposit in first class registered mail, with return receipt requested; (iii) on the actual delivery date if deposited with an overnight courier; or (iv) on the date sent by facsimile or electronic email transmission (including PDF), if confirmed with a copy sent contemporaneously by first class, certified, registered or express mail; in each case properly posted and fully prepaid to the appropriate address set forth below, or such other address as a party may provide notice of in accordance with this section:

CITY: LICENSEE:

City Clerk Redlands Historical Museum Association
City of Redlands Attn: President
35 Cajon Street P.O. Box 470
PO Box 3005 (mailing) Redlands, CA 92373
Redlands, CA 92373 [email protected]
[email protected] 909-798-7632
909-798-7531
Section 13. Termination.

A. City shall have the right to terminate this License for cause in accordance with this Section 13 and subject to the default and cure provisions of Section 14. For purposes of this Agreement, “cause” shall be defined as the following:

RHMA License Agreement.bm.04.16.26.FY2526-155
6 (i) Licensee allows, promotes, causes, tolerates or facilitates any activity, conduct or circumstance that occurs on or at the Premises, whether caused by Licensee, its volunteers or invitees or Licensee’s use of the Premises, that:
(a) Violates any provision of the Redlands Municipal Code or Ordinance or that violates state or federal law;
(b) Creates an unsafe or unhealthy condition or environment for occupants of the Property or surrounding landowners or the public as determined by the City;
(c) Produces excessive noise, noxious odors, smoke, or bright lights that unreasonably interfere with neighboring residents’ quality of life as determined by the City;
(d) Creates or facilitates improper parking/overburdens parking in the neighboring area, or other negative impacts to the surrounding neighboring properties or public spaces;
(e) Causes more than three (3) calls for service in a calendar month from the Redlands Police Department and/or Redlands Fire Department; (f) Creates a public or private “nuisance” as that term is defined in California Civil Code Section 3479 and as amended.
(g) Is detrimental or harmful to the public or surrounding landowners as determined by the City.
(ii) Failing to use all net revenues earned from use of the Premises pursuant to this License for the benefit of the Property in accordance with the terms of the Real Estate Transfer Agreement approved on June 17, 2025.
(iii) Failing to comply with the audit provisions contained in the Real Estate Transfer Agreement approved on June 17, 2025.
(iv) Failing to use reasonable efforts to utilize the Premises continuously and in a commercially reasonable manner in order to maximize the potential financial benefit to the Property.
(v) Failure to maintain an adequate number of volunteers or failure to fund a City contractor to operate the store area and/or event pavilion to the satisfaction of the City.
(vi) Licensee fails to comply with any of the other terms of this Licensee.

B. City has the right to terminate this License without complying with the default and cure provision of Section 14 in the following circumstances:
(i) The City Council takes action to temporarily close the Property or the Premises for events beyond the City's reasonable control including but not limited to: acts of nature or of the public enemy; war; acts or orders of the State or Federal government; fires; floods; tidal waves; epidemics; quarantine restrictions; earthquakes; unusually severe weather; strikes, layoffs, or other substantial interruption of work because of labor disputes. Should the Property or Premises remain closed longer than one hundred eighty (180) days, the City may terminate RHMA License Agreement.bm.04.16.26.FY2526-155
7 this License without liability by providing thirty (30) days prior written notice to Licensee.
(ii) The City Council takes action to temporarily close the Property or the Premises due to a federal, state or local declaration of emergency. Should the Property or Premises remain closed longer than one hundred eighty (180) days, the City may terminate this License without liability by providing thirty (30) days’ prior written notice to Licensee.
(iii) The City Council declares a fiscal emergency or otherwise does not appropriate or otherwise budget available funds to open and operate the Property or the Premises in any fiscal year, City may terminate this License by providing thirty (30) days’ prior written notice to Licensee.
(iv) The Property is transferred by the City either by sale, exchange, lease, assignment or any other form of transfer by the City of the Property. This License shall terminate immediately upon the effective date of such transfer of the Property. (v) The Property or the Premises are determined to be uninhabitable by the Redlands Building Official or Redlands Fire Marshal. City may terminate this License by providing five (5) days’ prior written notice to Licensee. (vi) Either party becomes insolvent or commences proceedings in bankruptcy court or enters receivership or liquidation. City may terminate this License by providing thirty (30) days’ prior written notice to Licensee.
(vii) The City commences proceedings to disincorporate or if proceedings are commenced to dissolve Licensee’s nonprofit corporate status. City may terminate this License by providing thirty (30) days’ prior written notice to Licensee.

C. Licensee may terminate this License at any time upon providing six (6) months’ prior written notice to the City.

Section 14. Default and Cure by Licensee.

A. In the event City asserts that this License is subject to termination in accordance with Section 13.A, City shall provide Licensee with forty-five (45) days prior written notice of any intention to terminate this License and Licensee shall have the opportunity to cure any breach within said forty-five (45) day period to the satisfaction of the City. In the event that the breach is cured, then the License shall not be subject to termination.

B. Failure of Licensee to cure any breach of this License to the satisfaction of the City and within the time period set forth in the written notice of breach may result in termination for cause by City. City shall have no liability for any claims or damages resulting to Licensee as a result of any exercise by City of its right to terminate this License.

RHMA License Agreement.bm.04.16.26.FY2526-155
8 Section 15. Anti-Discrimination. During the performance of this License, Licensee shall not unlawfully discriminate against any person because of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, reproductive health decision-making, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or military and veteran status pursuant to State and Federal law.

Section 16. Entire Agreement. This License constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. Any prior verbal or written representations or agreements respecting the Premises not expressly set forth herein are null and void.

Section 17. Amendment; Waiver. No term or provision of this License may be amended, altered, modified, or waived orally or by course of conduct, but only by an instrument in writing signed by a duly authorized officer or representative of each Party. No waiver by either Party of any provision of this License, or waiver of any breach of this License, shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other provision of this License, or of any subsequent breach by either Party of the same or any other provision of this License. The City Manager shall resolve any conflicts between the parties regarding interpretation of this License which decision shall be final.

Section 18. Governing Law; Venue. This License is to be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without regard to the principles of conflicts of laws. Any action by a party to this Agreement to enforce or interpret the terms hereof shall be maintained in the courts in San Bernardino County. Prior to the filing of any action, the parties shall attempt an informal resolution of the dispute by either meeting and conferring to discuss a resolution to the dispute or by initiating a mediation with each party paying half of such costs.

Section 19. Relationship. The Parties intend by this License to establish the relationship of licensor and licensee only and do not intend to create a partnership, joint venture, joint enterprise, or any business relationship other than that of licensor and licensee.

Section 20. Authority. Licensee hereby represents and warrants to City that it is (a) a duly organized and validly existing nonprofit public benefit corporation, formed and in good standing under the laws of the State of California; (b) has the power and authority and the legal right to conduct the business in which it is currently engaged; and (c) has all requisite power and authority and the legal right to consummate the transactions contemplated in this License.

Licensee hereby further represents and warrants that this License has been duly authorized, and when executed by the signatory or signatories listed below, shall constitute a valid agreement binding on Licensee in accordance with the terms hereof.

Section. 21. Counterparts. This License Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which is an original but all of which together constitute but one and the same instrument.

Section 22. Severability. If any particular provision of this License is held invalid or unenforceable for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, this License shall otherwise remain in full force and effect and shall be construed in all respects as if such invalid or unenforceable provision was omitted.

RHMA License Agreement.bm.04.16.26.FY2526-155
9 Executed on the 21st day of April, 2026, at Redlands, California

CITY OF REDLANDS REDLANDS HISTORICAL MUSEUM

ASSOCIATION
________________________________ ________________________________ Mario Saucedo, Mayor Charlotte Burgess, President
ATTEST:
________________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
RHMA License Agreement.bm.04.16.26.FY2526-155
10 EXHIBIT A

MUSEUM SITE PLAN
RHMA License Agreement.bm.04.16.26.FY2526-155
11 EXHIBIT B

STORE AREA PLAN
Lobby area shall be
available for RHMA use
during non-public hours
RHMA License Agreement.bm.04.16.26.FY2526-155
12 EXHIBIT C

EVENT PAVILION PLAN
RHMA License Agreement.bm.04.16.26.FY2526-155
13 City
Council AGENDA ITEM NO. K2.

DATE: April 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT:

Consideration of Resolution No. 8735 Adopting the Arts and Culture Master Plan and determine that approval of the Resolution is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15301 of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (Facilities and Community Services Department Director Crocker)
MOTION(S):

If the City Council determines that staff’s recommendation is appropriate, the following motions are provided:

1. I move that the City Council find that adoption of the Arts and Culture Master Plan is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines; and

2. I move that the City Council approve Resolution No. 8735 adopting the Arts and Culture Master Plan.

COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
At their special meeting on August 11, 2025, the Cultural Arts Commission unanimously recommended the City Council approve the Arts and Culture Master Plan, with the following changes:

The plan should call for a developer impact fee for public art; and The plan should call for a full-time position for the arts, either city or contracted staff.

Staff has reviewed and incorporated the Cultural Arts Commission’s recommendations into the Arts and Culture Master Plan to the extent feasible within the framework of a long-range planning document. Specifically, the Plan identifies potential funding mechanisms, including art in private development, which may take the form of a development impact fee, percent-for-art program, or other incentive-based approaches, as outlined in the Funding Options section of the Plan. Additionally, the Plan contemplates enhancing organizational capacity through the potential establishment of dedicated arts staffing, either through a City position or contracted services, as reflected in multiple strategies related to program administration and implementation.

It is important to note that the Arts and Culture Master Plan is intended to serve as a guiding and non-binding policy document. While it outlines potential strategies and tools, including those recommended by the Commission, any future implementation actions, such as adoption of a development impact fee, creation of new staff positions, or allocation of funding would require separate City Council direction and approval, through future policy actions, budget processes, or ordinance adoption.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council find that adoption of the Arts and Culture Master Plan is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. Staff further recommends that the City Council approve Resolution No. 8735 adopting the Arts and Culture Master Plan.

DISCUSSION:

The Cultural Arts Commission (Commission) promotes public interest in the arts, recommends new art programs and funding for those programs, and recommends to the City Council policies to encourage, develop, and support the Arts in Redlands. The Commission also advises the City Council on the administration of the City's Art in Public Places program.

In May 2022, City Council received and filed the Arts Economic Impact Study completed for the City of Redlands by the Americans for the Arts. The study prepared for the City of Redlands incorporates the Arts & Economic Prosperity 5 National Study (AEP5 Study), published in 2017. It is the most comprehensive economic impact study of the nonprofit arts and culture industry ever conducted. The AEP5 Study documented the economic contributions of the arts in 341 communities and regions across the country, representing all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

The economic impact on the City of Redlands from nonprofit arts and culture organizations and their audiences was found to support 416 full-time equivalent jobs, with over $609,000 in revenue generated for local government and over $3,390,000 in event-related expenditures annually. After review of the Arts Economic Impact Study, the Commission recommended that the City Council direct staff to procure the services of a consultant to develop an Arts and Culture Master Plan (Plan), as the Plan is a necessary tool to ensure that art is promoted and utilized in a cohesive and intentional manner throughout the community.

On December 6, 2022, the City Council directed staff to advertise a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the development of the Plan. As such, the City advertised a Request for Proposals for the development of an Arts and Culture Master Plan on April 27, 2023. Forty-two vendors were solicited, and eight responsive bids were received on June 15, 2023. A selection committee reviewed and ranked each organization based on their demonstrated competence and professional qualifications deemed necessary for the satisfactory performance of the services required in accordance with the City's procurement policy.

Cultural Planning Group (CPG) was selected as the most highly qualified firm, based on the response to the scope of work provided in the RFP. Since then, CPG has conducted two public outreach sessions, provided presentations to the Cultural Arts Commission, and has produced a draft master plan. Staff internally reviewed and provided initial feedback on the plan and CPG has adjusted the language within the draft.

At the meeting, CPG will be providing an overview of the developed Master Plan to City Council, and approval of Resolution No. 8735 will adopt the Master Plan. This will be the first arts and culture master plan adopted by the City that will be a guiding document for the arts in the community.

The proposed project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act’s guidelines pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3). Section 15061(b)(3) applies to those activities where it is seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment. Staff has determined that the development of an Arts and Culture Master Plan will not result in a physical change in the environment.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may choose not to approve Resolution No. 8735 adopting the Arts and Culture Master Plan and direct staff accordingly.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Supports Priority A - Quality of Life; Strategic Objective 1. Beautification, Arts and Culture SUBMITTED BY:

Tabitha Crocker, Facilities & Community Services Director RECOMMENDED BY:

Charles M. Duggan Jr., City Manager
REVIEWED BY:

Yvette M. Abich Garcia, City Attorney
Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
Christopher Boatman, Assistant City Manager
Danielle Garcia, Management Services/Finance Director
PREPARED BY:

Joe Bierma, Management Analyst

FISCAL IMPACT
Fiscal Year: 2024-2026
Revenue Generating: No
Amount:

Budgeted Y/N:

Account No.:

Additional Appropriation Required: No
Discussion:

Adoption of the Arts and Culture Master Plan will have no direct impact on the City's budget.

Attachments
Resolution_No_8735.pdf
B_Exhibit_A-_Arts_and_Culture_Master_Plan.pdf
C_Appendix_City_of_Redlands_Public_Art_Inventory.pdf
1 I:\cmo\Resolutions\Resolution No. 8735.bm.04.06.2026.docx I:\cmo\Resolutions\Resolution No. 8735.bm.04.06.2026.docx RESOLUTION NO. 8735

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS

APPROVING THE ADOPTION OF THE ARTS AND CULTURE MASTER
PLAN
WHEREAS, The City has not adopted an arts and culture master plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to adopt a plan so that City has a guiding document for arts and culture in the community; and
WHEREAS, the Cultural Arts Commission, at its August 11, 2025 special meeting, recommended the City Council adopt the proposed Arts and Culture Master Plan; and WHEREAS, the Cultural Arts Commission wholeheartedly support this resolution.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The City Council hereby adopts the Arts and Culture Master Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by this reference.

ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this 21st day of April, 2026. ________________________
Mario Saucedo, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
2 I:\cmo\Resolutions\Resolution No. 8735.bm.04.06.2026.docx I:\cmo\Resolutions\Resolution No. 8735.bm.04.06.2026.docx I, Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk of the City of Redlands, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 21st day of April, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
3 I:\cmo\Resolutions\Resolution No. 8735.bm.04.06.2026.docx I:\cmo\Resolutions\Resolution No. 8735.bm.04.06.2026.docx Exhibit A
Arts and Culture Master Plan
(Attached)
Rooted
Rising &
Redlands Arts and Culture
Master Plan
January 2026
2 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan Table of Contents
Acknowledgements............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Executive Summary ..............................................................................................................................................................................................................4 Introduction............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 6 Existing Conditions................................................................................................................................................................................................................7 Redlands Cultural Context.................................................................................................................................................................................................7 Arts and Cultural Assets......................................................................................................................................................................................................7 Current Governance and Support Structures..........................................................................................................................................................15 Challenges and Opportunities........................................................................................................................................................................................15 Planning Process...................................................................................................................................................................................................................18 Findings ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................19 Vision........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................22 Goals and Strategies ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................23 Goal 1: Develop a Comprehensive Public Art Program. ......................................................................................................................................24 Goal 2: Enhance Cultural Infrastructure and Creative Spaces.........................................................................................................................25 Goal 3: Strengthen Community Connections Through Arts and Culture....................................................................................................26 Goal 4: Strengthen Cultural Sector Capacity and Sustainability. ....................................................................................................................26 Goal 5: Integrate Arts and Culture into Economic Development....................................................................................................................26 Goal 6: Expand Arts Education and Lifelong Learning Opportunities. ......................................................................................................... 27 Goal 7: Preserve and Celebrate Redlands’ Cultural Heritage........................................................................................................................... 27 Funding Options ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................28 Implementation ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................29 Cover Photo: Jillian Sanders, Bridget Bilbo, Sofia Diaz, Pulp Press, Mural honoring the LGBTQ community, E. Vine Street at S. 5th Street, Redlands. Photo: Joe Bierma 3 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan Acknowledgements
City Council
Mario Saucedo, Mayor, District 3
Marc Shaw, Mayor Pro Tem, District 4
Denise Davis, District 1
Eddie Tejeda, District 2
Paul Barich, District 5
Cultural Arts Commission
Daniel Gohman, Chair
Edie Punt
Dennis Christensen
Brian Ball
Rick Cummings
Dan Rodriguez
Staff / Facilities and Community Services
Tabitha Crocker, Director
Chandra Thomas, Senior Manager
Tricia Swope, Manager
Joe Bierma, Administrative Analyst
Salomon Abdel-Aziz, Management Analyst
Consultants
Cultural Planning Group
David Plettner-Saunders, Partner
Linda Flynn, Ph.D., Partner
Kearns & West
Taylor Funderburk, Senior Associate
Arts Connection / The Arts Council of San Bernardino County Alejandro Gutierrez Chavez, Executive Director
Ulises Rodriguez, Associate Director
Willis Salomon, Programs Director
4 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan Key Findings and Community Priorities
The planning process revealed strong community support
for arts and culture, with 85% of residents viewing creative opportunities as essential to their families and 84%
believing arts and culture make Redlands more desirable.

However, significant challenges emerged:

Geographic Equity: Cultural assets are concentrated in
downtown and southern areas, with significantly fewer
organizations and public artworks in north Redlands,
creating disparity in access to cultural opportunities.

Representation and Inclusion: While Redlands has a
diverse population, only 45% of residents feel their culture is well-represented in arts programming. This disparity executive summary
Vision and Overview
The City of Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan
presents a transformative ten-year vision for integrating arts and culture more deeply into the fabric of the
community. Through extensive community engagement
involving nearly 1,000 people—including a survey of over 500 residents, workshops with 350+ participants, and
stakeholder interviews—this plan reflects the collective voice of Redlands residents who view arts and culture as essential to community vitality, economic prosperity, and quality of life.

Cultural Assets and Economic Impact
Redlands possesses remarkable cultural assets that form the foundation for future growth. The iconic Redlands
Bowl, operating as the nation’s oldest continuously running free summer music festival since 1915, exemplifies the
community’s long-standing commitment to accessible
arts programming. The city is home to approximately
32 nonprofit arts organizations and a diverse public art collection of 69 works including murals, sculptures, and installations.

The creative economy in Redlands generates substantial
economic impact, with approximately 2,379 creative jobs producing $103 million in annual earnings. The nonprofit arts and culture sector alone contributed $14.2 million to the local economy in 2022, supporting 416 full-time jobs and generating $609,000 in local government revenue—
demonstrating significant return on cultural investment. is particularly pronounced among people of color, with
only 11% feeling well-represented compared to 64% of
Caucasian respondents.

Awareness Barriers: Despite an active arts scene, 62% of residents cite lack of awareness as the primary barrier to participation, indicating need for improved marketing and communications.

Infrastructure Needs: Community members identified
significant needs for affordable artist studios, exhibition spaces, performance venues, and a dedicated community
arts center.

Community priorities identified through engagement include arts and cultural events and festivals, creative activities for all ages, downtown arts district development, a vibrant music scene, and expanded public art throughout the city.

Community Vision:

The arts thrive in every corner of the Redlands community - bridging neighborhoods, generations, and cultures. Our distinctive heritage is celebrated and reimagined through the arts and creativity, enhancing our quality of life, strengthening our economy, and fostering a connected community where everyone has opportunities to create and experience the arts in their own way. 5 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan Goal 7:

Preserve and Celebrate Redlands’ Cultural Heritage -
Document and share diverse community stories, honor
indigenous history and presence, support living cultural traditions, and celebrate the city’s citrus heritage and architectural legacy.

Implementation and Funding
The plan acknowledges that full implementation will
require additional resources while recognizing that
some initiatives can begin with existing capacity. Current funding mechanisms are insufficient for comprehensive
implementation, necessitating diversified revenue sources including:
• Art requirements or incentives for private development • Transient Occupancy Tax allocation
• Enhanced General Fund allocations
• Establishment of a Redlands Arts Foundation for
private fundraising
• Grant funding from state, federal, and private sources The plan emphasizes that supporting arts with multiple
funding sources reduces reliance on any single revenue
stream and promotes sustainability when individual
revenues fluctuate.

Moving Forward
This Arts and Culture Master Plan serves as a flexible
guide and toolkit for pursuing an increasingly vibrant
cultural life in Redlands over the next decade. Success will depend on continued community engagement, strategic
partnerships between public and private sectors, and
sustained commitment to equity and inclusion in all cultural programming. The plan positions Redlands to build upon
its rich cultural heritage while embracing new artistic expressions that reflect the full diversity of its community.

By implementing these strategies, Redlands can strengthen its position as a cultural destination within the Inland Empire while ensuring that all residents—regardless of
neighborhood, background, or economic status—have
meaningful opportunities to participate in and benefit from the city’s thriving arts and culture ecosystem.

Seven Strategic Goals
The plan establishes seven interconnected goals to achieve the community vision:

Goal 1:

Develop a Comprehensive Public Art Program - Expand
and professionalize the public art program with sustainable funding, equitable distribution, community engagement,
and integration into infrastructure projects.

Goal 2:

Enhance Cultural Infrastructure and Creative Spaces -
Address space needs through creative reuse of buildings, support for new cultural facilities, development of
affordable artist spaces, and establishment of cultural districts.

Goal 3:

Strengthen Community Connections Through Arts and
Culture - Use arts programming to bridge neighborhoods, celebrate diversity, connect generations, and enhance
public safety.

Goal 4:

Strengthen Cultural Sector Capacity and Sustainability
- Build city government capacity for arts leadership,
establish grant programs for artists and organizations, and create coordinated marketing strategies.

Goal 5:

Integrate Arts and Culture into Economic Development -
Embrace cultural tourism, support the nighttime economy through live music venues, and use arts to enhance
business districts and downtown vitality.

Goal 6:

Expand Arts Education and Lifelong Learning
Opportunities - Partner with schools to strengthen arts education, create youth programming, and develop cultural enrichment for adults and seniors.
6 Rooted & Rising • City of Redlands Arts + Culture Plan Introduction
The City of Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan
presents a vision for integrating arts and culture
more deeply into the fabric of the city, building upon
Redlands’ rich heritage while moving forward in the city’s development.

Redlands has long been distinguished by its historic
assets, from the iconic Redlands Bowl — the nation’s
oldest continuously running summer music festival with
free admission — to the historic downtown, architectural treasures, and creative community.

Created through extensive community engagement
involving nearly 1,000 people — including interviews, focus groups, public workshops, and surveys gathering over
500 responses — this plan reflects the collective voice and vision of Redlands residents. It recognizes that arts and culture are not luxuries but essential components of community vitality, economic prosperity, and quality of life.

The plan is designed to be flexible and adaptable,
acknowledging that implementation will occur
incrementally as resources become available and priorities evolve. Some initiatives can be accomplished with existing resources, while others will require new investments and partnerships.

Lance Jost, Culmination in Singularity.

Cul-de-sac of Research Drive, Redlands. Photo: Joe Bierma 7 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan existing conditions
Redlands Cultural Context
Redlands is a city with a distinctive identity rooted in its rich history and ongoing commitment to cultural
vitality. Since its founding in 1881, Redlands has cultivated a reputation as a community that values its heritage.

With a population of approximately 72,556 residents,
Redlands is characterized by its small-town feeling, historic architecture, and strong community identity rooted in its citrus industry heritage.

The city’s physical landscape is characterized by historic architecture, tree-lined streets, and the iconic citrus groves that helped establish Redlands as an agricultural center.

These visual elements contribute to the city’s sense of place and provide an engaging backdrop for arts and
cultural activities. Spanning 36.43 square miles, Redlands’ built environment includes eight designated historic
districts, 14 properties on the National Register of Historic Places, and numerous culturally significant sites that tell the story of its development.

The demographic makeup of Redlands reflects California’s diversity and offers rich opportunities for cross-cultural expression and exchange. The population is distributed
fairly evenly across generations, with Baby Boomers (23%), Generation X (22%), Millennials (28%), and Generation
Z (28%) all substantially represented. This generational balance provides both challenges and opportunities for
arts programming that should meet diverse needs and
interests. More than half of residents (55%) identify as People of Color, with Hispanic residents comprising 39% of the population.

Redlands educational attainment is higher than the state and national averages, with 48% of adults holding at least a bachelor’s degree and 22% possessing graduate degrees.

This educated population forms a robust audience for arts and cultural offerings while also contributing to the creative workforce. It also reflects the city’s economic character, with a significant professional class (70.8% of workers) and major employers including universities, hospitals, and the GIS company Esri.

Arts and Cultural Assets
Redlands possesses a remarkable array of cultural assets that span physical infrastructure, organizations, events, people, and traditions that collectively contribute to the city’s cultural identity.

Cultural and Historical Venues
The iconic Redlands Bowl, opened in 1915 as the Redlands City Amphitheater, stands as a testament to the
community’s long-standing commitment to the performing
arts. As the nation’s oldest continuously operating, free summer music festival, the Redlands Bowl embodies
the ideal that the arts should be accessible to everyone regardless of economic means—a value that continues to
resonate in Redlands today.

Other significant venues include Prospect Park and its
Carriage House (home to the Redlands Theater Festival), the A.K. Smiley Public Library (dating from 1898), and the new Museum of Redlands. These institutions preserve the city’s heritage while providing spaces for contemporary cultural expression and community gathering. The San
Bernardino County Museum is the largest cultural and
natural history museum in the region, with a vision to build a home for local and regional artists to showcase their work and the long-term goal of establishing a residency program.

In Redlands, creativity flows
like morning light through old
olive tree leaves — illuminating
every corner of our community.
8 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan The creative economy in Redlands extends beyond
nonprofit organizations to include a substantial creative workforce. According to Creative West Creative Vitality Suite, in 2023 the Creative Vitality Index of Redlands is

1.24, significantly higher than the national average of 1.0.

The city supports approximately 2,379 creative jobs, with photographers, software developers, and graphic designers being the most prevalent creative occupations.

The economic impact of this creative activity is substantial.

Creative industries in Redlands generate approximately
$103 million in earnings annually, with architectural services, mobile food services, and artists/writers/performers
contributing the highest earnings. According to Americans for the Arts “Arts and Economic Prosperity 5” (2022), the nonprofit arts and culture sector alone contributed an
estimated $14.2 million to the local economy, supporting 416 full-time jobs and generating $609,000 in local government revenue—a significant return on the city’s investment in cultural infrastructure.

The University of Redlands further enriches the cultural landscape, offering performances, exhibitions, and
educational opportunities that connect the campus with the broader community. Historic downtown Redlands serves as a cultural and commercial hub, with its distinctive architecture creating an attractive setting for cultural activities.

Arts Organizations and Creative Industries
Approximately 32 nonprofit arts and cultural organizations call Redlands home, offering programming in theater, music, visual arts, youth arts, dance, and crafts. While about onethird of these organizations operate with budgets exceeding $100,000, many smaller groups rely on dedicated volunteers to sustain their activities. Organizations span a broad range of artistic disciplines, including performing arts, visual arts, history, cultural heritage, museums, film, literary, craft and design. The great majority are located in and near downtown, with few organizations in the north areas of the city.
9 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan 10 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan 11 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan Public Art Collection
Redlands has developed a diverse collection of public
art that enhances public spaces and reflects community
identity. The collection includes 69 works of public art:
34 murals, 19 sculptures, 10 bus benches, the Umbrella
Alley, and additional works. These works represent historic Redlands scenes, abstracts, wildlife and nature, agriculture/ citrus, historical figures, and other subject matter. About one-third are city-owned and others privately owned or
owned by an outside agency. Almost half of the artworks are located downtown, about one-quarter in parks and
public spaces and one-quarter in commercial settings. As with the nonprofit arts and cultural organizations, relatively few public artworks are located in the north areas of the city.

Many of the works are also documented with photographs, found in the Appendix.

Our heritage isn’t just
preserved in museums — it lives,
breathes, and evolves through
every artist’s hands.
12 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan 13 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan Public Art in Redlands
No Artwork Artist
1 The Casa Loma Hotel Original artist unknown, restored in 1996 by Vernon Dornbach 2 California Condor Artist unknown
3 Culmination in Singularity Lance Jost
4 Fruitful Pause Gerry Berg, sculptor. Roger L. Grulke, designer 5 Grace Stewart Mullen Memorial Artist unknown
6 George S. Hinckley Memorial Artist unknown
7 Interiorem Pulchritudinem John Gilbert Luebtow
8 Isis Roslyn Mazzilli
9 Ishi Dohroh Artist unknown
10 President William McKinley Memorial Artist unknown
11 Mother and Child Joseph L. Castle III
12 Reflections Saim Caglayan
13 The Peloton Takes the Classic Curve Kathleen King
14 Semi-Quaver Paul Lindhard
15 Redlands 9-11 Memorial Lawrence Noble
16 Smiley Brothers Memorial Artist unknown
17 Watchorn Memorial Linda Pew
18 Widows and Orphans Memorial Linda Hundevadt Pew
19 Spaceman Mural Christopher Robert Becktel and Alfredo Perez Salmeron 20 Geometric Mural Christopher Robert Becktel and Alfredo Perez Salmeron 21 Unity Mural Christopher Robert Becktel and Alfredo Perez Salmeron 22 Sunfair Benjamin Allanoff
23 Citrus Parking Structure Mural Christine Curry
24 Western Star Soap Advert Artist unknown, restored by Larry Dierdorff in 1985 and 2015 25 Mermaid Queen German Family Soap Advert Artist unknown, restored by Larry Dierdorff in 1985 and 2015 26 Orange Trees Mural Larry Dierdorff
27 Grapevines Mural Larry Dierdorff
28 Inland Empire Area Map Original artist unknown, restored by Larry Dierdorff 29 Citrus Groves Jeff Owens
30 Love Mural Artist unknown
31 Child with Umbrella, Dog, and Orange Mural Larry Dierdorff 32 July 4th in Redlands Larry Dierdorff
33 Hate Burger Mural Christine Coates
14 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan 34 Redlands Orange Mural Geoff Gouveia
35 Stag Skull Mural Artist unknown
36 Werewolf Mural Artist unknown
37 Mural on Pacific Premier Bank Christine Coates
38 Chapel Pespective and LaFourcade Community Garden Rudy Estanque 39 Redlands Jewelers Murals Christine Coates
40 Redlands Theatre Festival Mural Artist unknown
41 A Run Thru Redlands Mural Karen Wilmot, restored by Larry Dierdorff 42 V Shaped Sculpture Christos Hardt, designer
43 Orange Blossom Trail Mural - Redlands History Ekaterina Orlovie 44 Redlands’ Sister Cities Murals Artist unknown
45 Orange Street Alley Park Umbrellas No artist
46 Sister Cities Clock Tower Dan Romero
47 LGBTQ Mural Pulp Press, Jillian Sander, Bridget Bilbo, Sofia Diaz 48 Omnitrans Bus Bench Murals Multiple artists
49 Omnitrans Bus Bench Murals Multiple artists
50 Omnitrans Bus Bench Murals Multiple artists
51 Omnitrans Bus Bench Murals Multiple artists
52 Omnitrans Bus Bench Murals Multiple artists
53 Omnitrans Bus Bench Murals Multiple artists
54 Omnitrans Bus Bench Murals Multiple artists
55 Redlands Bowl Mural Larry Dierdorff
56 Redlands Bicycle Classic Mural Larry Dierdorff
57 University of Redlands Memorial Chapel Mural Larry Dierdorff 58 Orange Growers Mural Larry Dierdorff
59 Kimberly Crest Mural Larry Dierdorff
60 Sylvan Park Bandstand Mural Larry Dierdorff
61 Redlands Heritage Millard Sheets, Denis O’Connor, and Sheets Studio artists 62 Welcome to Redlands Mural Artist unknown
63 A.K. Smiley Library Mural Artist unknown
64 Memorial Chapel Mural Artist unknown
65 Asistencia Bell Tower Mural Artist unknown
66 Limestone Columns Artist unknown
67 Omnitrans Bus Bench Murals Multiple artists
68 Omnitrans Bus Bench Murals Multiple artists
69 Omnitrans Bus Bench Murals Multiple artists
15 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan appointed by the Mayor with City Council approval. These commissioners serve four-year terms and are tasked with promoting public interest in the arts, recommending new arts programs and funding sources, advising on policies for arts development, and administering the City’s “Art in Public Places” program.

Public Art Program
In 2009, the Redlands City Council established a formal Public Art Program through a resolution that outlined the program’s structure, funding mechanisms, and procedural guidelines. The program includes an “Art in Public Places” initiative overseen by the Cultural Arts Commission, which makes recommendations to the City Council regarding the acquisition, installation, and maintenance of public artworks.

Alignment with City Plans
The importance of arts and culture is recognized in the City’s broader planning documents. The General Plan
2035, adopted in 2017, includes arts and culture as key elements of Redlands’ distinctive identity. The plan
articulates specific policies to promote arts organizations, arts-related programming in festivals and events, and artsrelated educational outreach. It also recognizes the role of arts and culture in economic development, particularly through tourism.

Similarly, the Strategic Plan FY22-28 identifies arts
and culture as essential components of quality of life
in Redlands. Strategic objectives include enhancing
community events to better reflect Redlands’ residents, creating a strategic vision for the arts within the
community, ensuring the Redlands Bowl remains a vibrant cultural centerpiece, and enhancing the Art in Public
Places Program. The plan also addresses equity and
inclusion, emphasizing the importance of ensuring all
residents have access to city services and facilities.

Challenges and Opportunities
Despite its cultural assets and supportive structures,
Redlands faces several challenges in fully realizing its potential as a cultural hub. These challenges, however, present
opportunities for strategic intervention and development.

Community Arts Participation
Redlands residents demonstrate strong appreciation for
arts and cultural activities, with 85% of survey respondents viewing arts and creative opportunities as essential to their families. A significant majority (84%) believe arts and culture make Redlands a more desirable place to live, affirming the value of cultural investments for community wellbeing and quality of life.

Participation patterns reveal an engaged community, with 60% of residents participating in arts and cultural activities either frequently or occasionally. The most popular personal creative activities include visual arts (59%), literary arts (56%), music (49%), and crafts (45%). For attendance at events, performing arts (48%), visual arts fairs/festivals (41%), and music/arts events at small or non-traditional venues (36%) attract the highest participation (note that amounts do not total 100% because respondents could select more than one option – “check all that apply”).

Current Governance and Support Structures
The City of Redlands has established formal structures
to support arts and cultural development. reflecting an institutional commitment to arts and culture.

Cultural Arts Commission
Established in the Redlands Municipal Code, the Cultural Arts Commission consists of seven volunteer members
From north to south, mountain
view to citrus grove, art will flow
through every neighborhood like
roots growing in rich soil.
16 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan Resource Limitations
Like many cities, Redlands faces limitations in dedicated funding, staffing, and space for arts organizations
and artists. Because most nonprofit arts and cultural
organizations have small budgets, many cultural initiatives rely heavily on volunteer efforts and minimal resources.

Limitations on current city arts staff positions further constrain the capacity for program development and
implementation.

These resource limitations present opportunities for
creative partnerships, diversified funding streams, and alternative space utilization. Potential strategies include developing public-private partnerships for arts funding, establishing a percent-for-art program for private
development, repurposing vacant or underutilized spaces for creative use, and leveraging the economic impact of the arts to justify increased public investment.

Facility Needs
Community engagement has identified significant needs for affordable artist studios, exhibition spaces, performance Geographic Equity in the Arts
A challenge identified through community engagement is
the geographic disparity in cultural assets in different areas of Redlands. As noted above in Arts and Cultural Assets, there are significantly fewer nonprofit arts and cultural organizations and public artworks in north areas of the city: 6 of 32 nonprofits are located north of the freeway and 11 of 69 public artworks. Survey data and stakeholder input indicate that the northside of Redlands is ready for more arts investment and arts programming. Community members have expressed a desire for stronger linkages between
neighborhoods to ensure all parts of the community are
connected and have access to arts and cultural opportunities.

This challenge presents an opportunity to use arts and
culture as vehicles for community connection, developing programming that intentionally bridges different areas of the city and brings residents together across geographic boundaries. Strategic placement of public art, development of cultural venues in underserved areas, and creation of citywide cultural events that engage all neighborhoods
could help address this division.

Redlands Bowl, 7 Bridges. Photo: Bruce Herwig.
17 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan This challenge presents opportunities for developing
coordinated marketing strategies, leveraging digital
platforms for information sharing, and creating centralized resources for arts information. Strengthening networks
among arts organizations, businesses, and city departments could facilitate more effective promotion and increase
awareness of cultural offerings.

Diversity and Inclusion
While Redlands has a diverse population, only 45%
of survey respondents feel that their culture is well
represented in the arts and cultural events in the city. This perception is particularly pronounced among respondents identifying with races or ethnicities other than European/ White, with only 11% feeling well represented compared to 64% of European/White respondents.

This challenge presents opportunities for more inclusive programming, diverse artist selection, and cultural
celebrations that reflect the full spectrum of Redlands’ communities. Engaging underrepresented communities in
cultural planning and program development could ensure
that arts and cultural offerings resonate with all residents. venues, and a dedicated community arts center. Some
existing city-owned cultural facilities require updating and upgrading to meet contemporary needs for technical
capacity and audience amenities. The City recently
completed improvements to the Redlands Bowl, which is a positive step. Additionally, the lack of indoor performance spaces limits year-round programming and constrains the development of a robust music scene.

These facility needs present opportunities for adaptive reuse of existing buildings, integration of arts spaces into new developments, and strategic facility planning. One
specific opportunity is to adaptively reuse a city-owned property as a community arts center. Also, partners such as the University of Redlands would like greater community use of their performing arts spaces.

Coordination and Promotion
Lack of awareness has been identified as the primary
barrier to arts participation, with 62% of survey
respondents citing it as a factor that prevents them from attending cultural activities. This suggests a need for better promotion, marketing, and centralized information about arts and cultural activities in Redlands.
“I want my neighbors from every culture to feel celebrated here, to see their traditions honored within our heritage.”
The Artlands exhibit opening. Photo courtesy of The Artlands. 18 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan • Qualitative Community Engagement - In-depth
conversations and interactive sessions with residents,
artists, cultural organizations, and community leaders
• Quantitative Research - Data collection and analysis to understand the cultural landscape, creative economy, and community needs
• Supplementary Research - Review of existing plans,
best practices, and case studies to inform strategy
development.

Through this triangulated approach, consistent themes
emerged across multiple sources, strengthening the validity of the findings and ensuring that recommendations address community needs and aspirations.

Community and Stakeholder Engagement
• Interviews with city leadership including the Mayor, City Council members, and department heads
• Discussion groups with arts organizations, businesses, and individual artists
• Community listening sessions
• Community Workshop engaging over 325 participants alone • Meetings with the Cultural Arts Commission
• Consultations with other stakeholders including the
Chamber of Commerce
Community Survey
A comprehensive survey that gathered 507 responses
between October 2024 and February 2025, available in
both English and Spanish.

Background Research and Document Review
Analysis of existing city plans including the General Plan 2035, Strategic Plan FY22-28, Downtown Mall Area Plan,
and other relevant documents to ensure alignment with
the city’s overall vision.

Analysis and Synthesis
All input and data were analyzed to identify patterns, priorities, and areas of opportunity to inform the plan’s development.

Planning Process
The City of Redlands undertook a comprehensive planning process to develop the Arts and Culture Master Plan,
spanning from September 2024 to early 2025. The cultural planning process utilized a mixed-methods approach
that combined rigorous data collection with extensive
community engagement. This methodology ensured that
the plan was informed by both quantitative evidence
and the experiences, aspirations, and creative visions of Redland’s residents.

The research design was built on three complementary
pillars:

Black Lives Matter mural installed on north side
of building located at 16 E. Redlands Boulevard.

Photo: theartlands, Instagram
19 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan Economic and Community Development Potential
Stakeholders widely recognized the potential for arts and culture to drive economic development in Redlands. The
Arts and Economic Prosperity Study estimated that the
nonprofit arts and culture sector generated approximately $14.2 million in economic impact in 2022, supporting 416 full-time equivalent jobs and contributing significantly to the local tax base.

Beyond direct economic impacts, stakeholders
identified cultural tourism, downtown revitalization,
and enhancement of the night-time economy as key
opportunities. The Chamber of Commerce specifically
noted the potential for arts and cultural activities to attract visitors and increase spending at local businesses.

City leadership expressed interest in developing cultural districts, particularly in downtown and along Colton
Avenue, as catalysts for economic development and
community vitality. These districts could serve as anchors for creative activity, tourism, and business development.

Findings
The planning process for Redlands’ Arts and Culture
Master Plan revealed a community with a deep
appreciation for arts and culture, a strong creative
foundation, and a desire for growth and enhanced
coordination of cultural assets. Through the engagement insights a picture emerged of a city with rich cultural traditions seeking to preserve its heritage while embracing the future and new artistic expressions.

A Community That Values Arts and Culture
Redlands residents demonstrated strong support for arts and cultural activities, with 85% of survey respondents viewing creative opportunities as essential to their families.

This appreciation crosses demographic boundaries, though engagement levels vary across the community. The city’s historic commitment to the arts is evident in beloved
institutions like the Redlands Bowl, which has provided free concerts since 1924, and the community’s support
for numerous arts organizations and events. Nearly 70%
support increased local government funding for arts and cultural growth, indicating a willingness to invest in these community assets.

The results from the cultural plan survey align with the parks and recreation survey, with most residents (78%) rating the provision of high-quality parks and cultural programs as “very important” to the community’s quality of life.

Like the Redlands Bowl’s century
of free concerts, true culture
belongs to everyone.” Musician Phanny Dantom performing at an Artlands event.

Photo: phannydantommusic, Instagram.
20 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan varied dramatically by demographic group. Among
respondents identifying as European/White only, 64% felt well-represented, compared to just 11% of respondents
identifying with other groups.

These findings underscore the need for more culturally
relevant programming. Community members expressed
desire for celebrations that honor the contributions of Hispanic, Black, Asian, and indigenous communities to
Redlands’ history and contemporary culture. As one listening session participant stated, “Our city’s cultural offerings should reflect the beautiful diversity of our community.” Awareness Barriers
Despite Redlands’ active arts scene, many residents remain unaware of available opportunities. Sixty-two percent
(62%) of survey respondents cited lack of awareness as the primary barrier to participation in cultural activities. This finding suggests that current communication channels are not effectively reaching all segments of the population.

One focus group participant noted, “There are lots of
activities and many are interesting, but it……is hard to find out about them.” This sentiment was echoed across various engagement forums, with participants suggesting more
coordinated marketing efforts, centralized information
sources, and targeted outreach to underrepresented
communities.

Physical and economic accessibility also emerged as
concerns. Some residents mentioned that program timing, location, and cost created barriers to participation, with 31% citing inconvenient schedules or locations and 22%
mentioning cost as prohibitive factors.

Space Needs for Creation and Presentation
The engagement process revealed significant need for
additional cultural spaces in Redlands. Artists consistently expressed the need for affordable studio space, exhibition venues, and performance facilities. Organizations similarly noted challenges in finding appropriate, affordable spaces for programs and events.

Public Art Aspirations
Survey respondents and engagement participants
expressed strong interest in expanding Redlands’ public art program. When asked what public art should accomplish,
respondents prioritized:
• Enlivening and beautifying public spaces (73%)
• Improving quality of life and well-being for residents (56%) • Representing diverse perspectives and experiences (53%) Community members expressed desire for public art that
reflects Redlands’ diversity, history, natural environment, and creative spirit. They envisioned murals, sculptures, functional art (like benches and bike racks), and interactive installations throughout the city, with attention to equitable distribution across all neighborhoods.

The success of recent projects like the Umbrella Alley was frequently cited as evidence of public art’s potential to transform spaces and create community gathering places.

As one stakeholder noted, “These colorful installations have become spots that draw people downtown and
create a sense of place.”
Addressing Geographic Disparities
A theme emerging from the engagement process was
the perception of geographic and cultural disparity
involving north Redlands. This difference manifests in
the distribution of cultural amenities, programming,
and investment. Stakeholders and Council members
emphasized the need to bridge this gap through strategic placement of public art, cultural facilities, and programming that intentionally connects these areas of the city. This sentiment was echoed in focus groups with artists who
noted that cultural programming needs to be more
accessible to residents in all neighborhoods, particularly those historically underserved.

Survey data revealed significant disparities in how different communities feel represented in Redlands’ cultural life.

While 45% of overall respondents felt their culture was well-represented in arts and cultural events, the figures 21 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan Residents’ Overall Priorities
When asked about priorities for a cultural plan,
respondents emphasized arts and cultural city events and festivals, creative activities for all ages, downtown arts and cultural district development, a vibrant music scene, and public art throughout the city as top priorities.

Community Workshop Findings
Participants were asked to share what they loved about
arts and culture in Redlands, what they wanted to see in the future, and what they wanted to change. The following themes highlight responses in conversations:
• Maintain and add public art installations, such as
Umbrella Alley
• Maintain and add more murals to beautify the city
• Create a dedicated Arts Center with classes and open
studios to offer creative breaks and safe space for the community
• Create an all-ages venue to make art accessible to all • Support and invest in additional arts events, festivals, and ways to connect the community
• Maintain and improve the Redlands Bowl, local music
venues, and performing arts venues
• Invest in opportunities to support local musicians and artists
• Consider offering artistic grant opportunities to fund local Redlands artists
Coin Jar Polling Activity: What are your
Arts & Culture priorities?
Each participant was given four coins to select from seven arts and culture categories. The coin jar polling activity involved a total of 1,140 coins, which represents the funding priorities indicated by the 285 participants in this activity.

The following four categories received the highest number of coins (priority designation) across all available options:

1. Vibrant live music scene

2. Arts events and festivals to connect the community

3. More arts and creative activities in the city for all ages

4. Public art and murals throughout the City
The community identified several potential opportunities for addressing these needs, including:
• Repurposing a city-owned property as a community arts center
• Developing a makers or artists co-working space
• Better utilizing the Redlands Bowl and other city-owned theaters during off-seasons
• Incorporating arts spaces into the redevelopment of the Redlands Mall site
These opportunities align with the city’s broader goals for downtown revitalization, adaptive reuse of historic properties, and creating vibrant community gathering
places.

Organizational Capacity and Coordination Needs
The engagement process revealed both strengths and
challenges in Redlands’ cultural organizational ecosystem.

While the community boasts numerous passionate arts
organizations and advocates, many operate with limited
resources and capacity. Stakeholders noted the need for better coordination, resource sharing, and collaborative marketing efforts.

The Cultural Arts Commission identified several priorities for strengthening the city’s role in supporting arts and culture:
• Establishing dedicated staff position(s) for arts and cultural programming
• Developing sustainable funding sources
• Creating grant programs for artists and organizations • Improving the public art program
• Enhancing coordination among cultural organizations
These findings point to a need for thoughtful infrastructure development to support the growth and sustainability of Redlands’ cultural sector.
22 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan Vision
The arts thrive in every corner of the Redlands community - bridging neighborhoods, generations, and cultures. Our distinctive heritage is celebrated and reimagined through the arts and creativity, enhancing our quality of life, strengthening our economy, and fostering a connected community where everyone has opportunities to create and experience the arts in their own way.

Smiley Public Library. Photo: Eddie Corral.
23 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan Goals and Strategies
The Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan is a ten-year framework to achieve the community’s vision for arts and culture. It is a cultural plan for all forms of arts and culture, as well as a plan to build on the city’s long involvement with public art. While it is a plan for city action, it is also a community plan that anticipates partnerships and
coordination with the creative community, developers,
businesses, schools, and many more.

The plan has seven goals reflecting the community’s
desires, needs, and priorities. Each goal is accompanied by strategies and actions that provide detail on how to fulfill the objective. As with any master plan, there will be changed circumstances during implementation. New
opportunities and challenges will arise. So, this plan is best seen as a flexible guide and toolkit to pursue the ultimate vision of an ever-increasingly vibrant and shared cultural life in Redlands.

Goal 1:

Develop a Comprehensive Public
Art Program.

Goal 2:

Enhance Cultural Infrastructure
and Creative Spaces.

Goal 3:

Strengthen Community Connections
Through Arts and Culture.

Goal 4:

Strengthen Cultural Sector
Capacity and Sustainability.

Goal 5:

Integrate Arts and Culture
into Economic Development.

Goal 6:

Expand Arts Education and Lifelong
Learning Opportunities.

Goal 7:

Preserve and Celebrate
Redlands’ Cultural Heritage.
24 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan • Establish selection panels including arts
professionals, community representatives, and
subject matter experts.
• Create mentorship opportunities pairing
established artists with emerging local talent.

1.2 Develop sustainable funding for public art.

1.2.1 Consider optional funding mechanisms for City
public art projects.
• Allocate voluntary amounts for public artworks
within capital improvement projects. Consider the
national best practice amount of 1%-2% of capital
budgets as a reference point.
• In the long-term, consider adopting a percent-forart ordinance.

1.2.2 Develop a private development art program.
• Create incentives for developers to include
public art in projects (density bonuses, expedited
permitting).
• Establish a requirement that new developments
over a certain size include public art or contribute
to a public art fund.
• Develop clear guidelines for developers regarding
selection, placement, and maintenance.
• Provide technical assistance to developers
implementing public art projects.

1.2.3 Create a dedicated public art maintenance fund.
• Allocate 10% of all public art funding for future
maintenance and conservation.
• Develop a maintenance schedule and inspection
protocol for all works in the collection.
• Create detailed documentation for each artwork
including artist’s intentions and maintenance
requirements and house on a public art program
platform.

1.2.4 Diversify funding sources.
• Pursue grants from state and national arts
organizations.
• Establish a public art donation program with clear
acceptance criteria (cross reference: Funding
Options, Redlands Arts Foundation).

GOAL 1: DEVELOP A COMPREHENSIVE
PUBLIC ART PROGRAM.

Strategies:

1.1 Develop and evolve the current public art program
based on best practices

1.1.1 Create curatorial frameworks for public art.
• Develop cohesive themes that reflect Redlands’
identity (citrus heritage, cultural diversity, natural
environment).
• Balance historical/heritage themes with
contemporary artistic expressions.
• Create opportunities for art that involves the
community.

1.1.2 Establish a diverse portfolio approach to public art. • Balance permanent installations with temporary
art, interactive art, and rotating exhibits to create
dynamic experiences.
• Include various media including sculpture, murals,
digital art, lighting installations, performance art,
and sound installations.

1.1.3 Ensure equitable distribution of public art.
• Create a geographic equity plan to identify arts
deserts and distributes public art throughout the
City of Redlands.
• Develop a specific North Redlands public art
initiative.

1.1.4 Integrate art into infrastructure projects.
• Identify upcoming capital improvement projects
suitable for artistic enhancement and ensure
public art is planned at the onset of the project.
• Involve relevant city departments early in planning
processes for public art projects.
• Create artistic wayfinding systems that help
navigation while enhancing the streetscape.

1.1.5 Enhance artistic quality through improved
selection processes.
• Develop robust artist selection guidelines with
clear criteria for artistic excellence.
25 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan Consider [outsourcing] public art contract
position to supplement staff’s management of the
program.

GOAL 2: ENHANCE CULTURAL
INFRASTRUCTURE AND CREATIVE SPACES.

Strategies:

2.1 Develop, support, and incentivize the availability of cultural facilities and creative spaces to meet identified community needs.

2.1.1 Identify opportunities for creative reuse of vacant/ underutilized spaces for arts activities.

2.1.2 Integrate arts spaces into community centers and
parks.

2.1.3 Support, facilitate, and incentivize development of new and renovated/reused cultural facilities.

2.1.4 Support, facilitate, and incentivize development
of affordable studio, rehearsal, performance, and
exhibition spaces for artists.

2.1.5 Support, facilitate, and incentivize maker spaces and collaborative work environments for creative
entrepreneurs.

2.1.6 Evaluate the feasibility of establishing a community arts center.

2.1.7 Enhance existing cultural venues like the Redlands Bowl.

2.1.8 Improve accessibility of cultural facilities for
people of all abilities.

2.2 Support development of one or more cultural
districts in Redlands.

2.2.1 Explore development of a cultural district in
downtown Redlands

2.2.2 Explore development of a cultural district along
Colton Avenue.
• Create public-private partnerships with local
businesses, universities and foundations.

1.3 Build community engagement and education around
public art

1.3.1 Create robust community engagement processes.
• Develop protocols for meaningful community
input on public art projects.
• Establish community advisory committees for
major installations in neighborhoods.
• Ensure multilingual and culturally appropriate
engagement methods.

1.3.2 Document and promote the public art collection.
• Develop interpretive materials including plaques,
brochures, and digital content.
• Create a public art map and mobile app for selfguided exploration. • Establish a regular program of public art events.

1.4 Strengthen administration and oversight of the
public art program.

1.4.1 Clarify roles and responsibilities.
• Define the role of the Cultural Arts Commission in
the public art program.
• Create comprehensive public art program policies
and guidelines.

1.4.2 Improve documentation and policies.
• Create a comprehensive public art policy manual.
• Develop standardized contracts for artists.
• Establish clear guidelines for copyright and
reproduction rights.
• Create protocols for responding to controversy or
community concerns.

1.4.3 Enhance staff capacity.
• Provide professional development for staff
managing the public art program.
• Supplement staff resources by outsourcing public
art tasks to a contracted expert or organization.
• If resources become available, consider creation
of a dedicated arts administrator position.
26 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan

4.1.2 Supplement staff resources by outsourcing arts
administration tasks to a contracted expert or
organization. If resources become available,
consider creation of a dedicated arts administrator
position. Provide professional development (see
also 1.4.3).

4.1.3 Review and update the role, qualifications, and
other elements of the Cultural Arts Commission
to best support implementation of this plan.

4.2 Build the capacity of the Redlands’ arts and culture sector.

4.2.1 Establish a grant program for artists and arts
organizations

4.2.2 Create professional development programs for
artists and arts organizations.

4.2.3 Foster collaboration among arts organizations,
businesses, and city departments.

4.2.4 Support volunteer engagement in the arts.

Develop a coordinated marketing and
promotional strategy for arts and culture.

GOAL 5: INTEGRATE ARTS AND CULTURE
INTO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

Strategies:

5.1 Embrace cultural tourism as an economic
development strategy.

5.1.1 Market Redlands as a cultural destination within
the Inland Empire region.

5.1.2 Develop and package arts and cultural
experiences as part of the city’s tourism marketing.

5.1.3 Develop an arts and cultural events calendar and
attractions/venues list integrated into tourism
marketing.

5.1.4 Deploy the arts and culture calendar and list as
a marketing tool for residents and the immediate
region.

GOAL 3: STRENGTHEN COMMUNITY
CONNECTIONS THROUGH ARTS AND CULTURE.

Strategies:

3.1 Use arts and culture to build community connections and celebrate local communities.

3.1.1 Integrate arts into community-wide events and
festivals.

3.1.2 Establish neighborhood-based arts programming
in underserved areas.

3.1.3 Develop arts events and programs that specifically connect different communities in Redlands.

3.1.4 Support culturally diverse programming that
reflects the city’s demographic makeup.

3.1.5 Create opportunities for intergenerational arts
participation.

3.1.6 Develop participatory arts projects that encourage community interaction.

3.2 Use arts programming to enhance public safety.

3.2.1 Support arts and heritage programs within the Fire and Police Departments.

3.2.2 Integrate public art into fire and police buildings to beautify and enhance public safety.

3.2.3 Identify opportunities to deploy public art as a
public safety enhancement in public spaces.

GOAL 4: STRENGTHEN CULTURAL SECTOR
CAPACITY AND SUSTAINABILITY.

Strategies:

4.1 Build the capacity of city government to lead
Redlands’ arts and cultural development.

4.1.1 Establish sustainable funding mechanisms for arts and culture (see Funding Options).
27 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan

6.2 Support lifelong learning in arts and culture.

6.2.1 Develop cultural enrichment programs for adults
and seniors.

6.2.2 Partner with University of Redlands and other
educational institutions.

GOAL 7: PRESERVE AND CELEBRATE
REDLANDS’ CULTURAL HERITAGE.

Strategies:

7.1 Support interpretation and celebration of local
history through the arts.

7.1.1 Develop programs highlighting Redlands’ citrus
heritage and architectural legacy.

7.1.2 Support programs that share Redlands’ history and heritage, such as the Museum of Redlands, A.K.

Smiley Library Heritage Room, and others.

7.1.3 Use digital media to make local history accessible to broader audiences.

7.2 Share and celebrate Redlands’ cultures through
the arts.

7.2.1 Document and share stories of diverse community
members through creative media.

7.2.2 Create opportunities to honor indigenous history
and culture.

7.2.3 Support living cultural traditions through festivals, demonstrations, and workshops.

5.2 Utilize arts and culture as an economic development tool.

5.2.1 Include creative sector development in economic
planning efforts.

5.2.2 Support live music venues and performances to
enhance the nighttime economy.

5.2.3 Use arts and design to enhance business districts and improve downtown vitality, building on the
success of Umbrella Alley and other downtown
art projects.

5.2.4 Connect artists to business development
resources and entrepreneurship training.

5.2.5 Develop partnerships with local businesses to
support arts and culture.

GOAL 6: EXPAND ARTS EDUCATION AND
LIFELONG LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES.

Strategies:

6.1 Support arts education for children and youth.

6.1.1 Partner with schools to strengthen arts education programs.

6.1.2 Create after-school and summer arts programs for
youth.

6.1.3 Support programs for at-risk youth that engage
them in creative activities.

6.1.4 Create mobile arts education programming to
reach all neighborhoods.

6.1.5 Develop intergenerational arts learning programs.

6.1.6 Establish mentorship programs connecting
established and emerging artists.
28 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan The requirement could be in the form of a Development
Impact Fee (DIF), building on Redlands’ current DIF
schedule, or a percent-for-art obligation based on the
permit value of the project, a common approach in
California. As an alternative to an art requirement, the city can adopt developer incentives to include art in
projects, such as a density or height bonus, flexible parking requirements, or other benefit. The city can also encourage and facilitate developers to include arts spaces within their projects to satisfy requirements or incentives.

Transient Occupancy Tax Allocation: The city can allocate a portion of TOT revenues to arts uses.

General Fund Allocation: The city already allocates
general funds to arts uses on an ad hoc basis. These
allocations can be increased to fund specific priorities of this plan. For example, the city can voluntarily allocate a portion of selected capital improvement project budgets for public art (see 1.2 Develop Sustainable Funding for Public Art). If city funding becomes available, it can
consider adopting a percent for art ordinance.

Redlands Arts Foundation: The city can form or encourage the formation of a nonprofit “friends of” organization
whose mission is to raise private funds from the community to support arts and cultural priorities identified in this plan.

The foundation can also be a platform for corporate and business sponsorships of arts projects and events.

Grants: The city can seek grant funding from the California Arts Council, National endowment for the Arts, and other state and federal sources. In addition, the recommended Redlands Arts Foundation can be a vehicle for grant
funding from private foundations and individuals.

Funding Options
Cultural plans naturally raise community expectations
of new resources and questions of how to pay for
implementation. In fact, fully implementing the
Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan will require
additional resources of funding and staff. However, some recommendations can be accomplished with current
resources, and it is anticipated that new resources can be allocated as they become available and needed.

Redlands currently lacks dedicated sustainable funding
for arts and culture. While the city has some mechanisms in place (such as a Public Art Fund and in-kind support for cultural events), these are insufficient to fully implement a comprehensive ten-year cultural plan. The economic
impact of nonprofit arts and culture in Redlands – $14.2 million in earnings and 416 jobs, generating $609,000 in local government revenues (see Arts Organizations and
Creative Industries, page 6) – demonstrates the sector’s return on investment and potential for growth with
increased investment.

The funding objective is not merely new resources for the arts, it is also diversified revenues to engender greater sustainability and community impact. Supporting the arts with more than one or two sources reduces reliance on a single source and promotes continuity when revenues in
one category decline.

The following are funding options for the City and
potential partners.

Potential Revenue Sources for
Redlands Arts and Culture
Art in Private Development: The city can enact an art
requirement for private real estate development, with
certain thresholds and exclusions. Art can be required
on site, integrated into the project, or the value of the art requirement can be paid into an in-lieu fund for use elsewhere and/or more flexibly for other arts purposes.

Like tending an orchard, building
cultural community requires
patience, investment, and shared
commitment to growth.
29 Rooted & Rising • Redlands Arts and Culture Master Plan • Working through the Cultural Arts Commission, conduct an annual call to arts and cultural nonprofits and artists for project concepts in Redlands consistent with the
assessment. Select and fund priority project proposals. • Create a private development art fee, whether through a percent for art requirement, a development impact fee,
or voluntary incentives, to provide resources to enhance artworks, arts programs, installations, and other arts
initiatives throughout the city.
• Allocate staff time to research and apply for grants, donations, sponsorships and other support for
implementation of this plan.
implementation
Implementation will be guided by staff working together with the Cultural Arts Commission to identify annual
priorities and workplans. This allows for the Commission, as the voice of the community, and staff, grounded in the realities and opportunities of city priorities and budgets, to form the most ambitious and achievable objectives for a given year.

The following are potential starting points for the first two years, representing a melding of Commission, staff and
consultants’ ideas. They are achievable and can generate visible success across many of the community’s priorities.

Starting Points for Years 1 & 2
• Conduct an assessment across public parks, city facilities and other public places to identify opportunities in
Redlands for arts and cultural programs, events, public artworks, and activities in alignment with the cultural plan. Through an RFP process, engage an organization or consultant with strong local knowledge to conduct the
assessment and to provide a framework for selection.

Charles Benjamin Russell at Aroi Mak Mak Restaurant.

Photo courtesy The Artlands.

City of Redlands
Public Art Inventory
Resolution No. 6818
October 2024
Compiled by:

Joseph Bierma, MPA
FCS Administrative Analyst
The Casa Loma Hotel
Original artist unknown, restored 1996 by Vernon Dornbach Paint on canvas
Depicts the historic Casa Loma Hotel
Originally displayed in the offices of the Downtown Redlands Business Association. Currently on display at the City of Redlands Council Chambers at 35 Cajon Street, Suite 4
Original acquisition date and method unknown
California Condor
Original artist unknown
Steel sculpture
Depicts a California Condor perched on a tree branch
Currently on display at the San Bernardino County Museum at 2024 Orange Tree Lane
Outside agency
Culmination in Singularity
Lance Jost
Steel sculpture
Currently on display in the center of the Research Drive cul-de-sac Original install 1991, Private

Fruitful Pause
Roger L. Grulke, A.I.A, Designer
Gerry Berg, Sculptor
Bronze and steel sculpture
Depicts a grove worker, with orange picking bag, reaching for an orange hanging from a branch
Currently on display at 811 Tri City Center Drive
Purchased and installed by Tri-City Center, LTD. Dedicated September 18, 1987, Private

Grace Stewart Mullen
Artist unknown
Bronze bust, Granite base
Depicts Grace Stewart Mullen, Founder, Redlands Community Music Association
Currently on display in the Redlands Bowl at Grant Street & Glenwood Drive Date and method of acquisition unknown

George S. Hinckley Memorial
Poured concrete fountain
Non-working fountain with relief of a deer fawn laying down in leaves Currently on display in Smiley Park at 30 Cajon Street
Date and acquisition method unknown

Interiorem Pulchritudinum
John Gilbert Luebtow
Steel I-beam with glass center section
Purchased as part of Mayor’s Art Initiative
Currently on display in City Hall parking lot at 35 Cajon Street June 14, 2018, original acquisition by purchase and sales agreement Isis
Roslyn Mazzilli
Steel bars painted yellow with white tips
Currently on display at 1980 Orange Tree Lane
Created 1988, Private

Ishi Dohroh
Artist unknown
Stone sculpture
Depicts a Japanese stone lantern
Currently on display in Smiley Park at 30 Cajon Street
Original date and method of acquisition unknown

William McKinley
Artist unknown
Bronze bust, granite base
Monument to former US President William McKinley
Original date unknown, moved to current location in 1906 Currently on display in Smiley Park at 125 West Vine Street Unveiled on May 7, 1903

Mother and Child
Joseph L. Castle III, sculptor
Bronze sculpture on concrete base
Abstractly depicts a child being cradled by its mother
Currently on display in Smiley Park at 125 West Vine Street Donated in 1994 by Friends of A.K. Smiley Public Library

Reflections
Saim Caglayan, sculptor
White Carrara marble slabs, vertically arranged, with black marble trim strips Installed as part of the development of La Farge Plaza
Currently on display at 310 West State Street
Installed in 1988, acquired 2024 by donation
The Peloton Takes the Classic Curve
Kathleen King
Steel sculpture
Depicts a group of cyclists riding around a corner
Originally designed for a business park in Rancho Cucamonga, the piece was repurposed for the course of the Redlands Bicycle Classic Currently on display in Simonds Parkway across from 1716 Garden Street Created in 2018

Semi-Quaver
Paul Lindhard, sculptor
Steel and granite sculpture
Depicts a semiquaver musical note with a steel flag and stem and a granite notehead
The sculpture is an acknowledgement of the Wyatt Opera House, which once occupied the site
Currently on display at 6 West Colton Avenue
Purchased and dedicated by La Mancha Development Company in 1989, private

Redlands 9-11 Memorial
Lawrence Noble, sculptor
Bronze sculpture on concrete base
Depicts the Statue of Liberty releasing 3 doves
The sculpture was erected as a memorial to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks
Currently on display in Smiley Park located at 30 Cajon Street Erected September 11, 2002
Purchased for $40,000

Smiley Brothers Memorial
Artist unknown
Bronze sculpture on granite base
Depicts Albert K. and Alfred H. Smiley
Commissioned to commemorate Patron Saints Day in Redlands Currently on display in front of A.K. Smiley Library at 125 West Vine Street Dedicated on March 17, 1991
Method of acquisition unknown

Watchorn Memorial
Linda Pew, sculptor
Bronze relief on granite pedestal
Depicts Robert, Emory, and Alma Watchorn
Currently on display in front of the Lincoln Shrine at 125 West Vine Street Created in 2008
Date and method of acquisition unknown

Widows and Orphans Memorial
Linda Hundevadt Pew, sculptor
Depicts a mother and child, head-to-head, holding a folded flag World War II veteran Wallace Sanchez originally engaged Ms. Pew to create the sculpture, and the City of Redlands assisted with the cost Currently on display in Jennie Davis Park at New York Street & Redlands Boulevard
Dedicated May 1, 2008, acquisition method unknown
Spaceman Mural
Christopher Robert Becktel and Alfredo Perez Salmeron
Paint on sports surface
Depicts an astronaut holding the Earth like a basketball Part of Music Changing Lives and Stronger Together Now’s Spread Paint Not Hate program
Currently on display in Israel Beal Park on Riverview Drive between Furlow Drive and Colorado Street
Installed on June 2, 2021
City paid $9,609.78 for materials
Geometric Mural
Christopher Robert Becktel and Alfredo Perez Salmeron
Paint on sports surface
Depicts multicolored geometric shapes
Part of Music Changing Lives and Stronger Together Now’s Spread Paint Not Hate program
Currently on display in Texonia Park at 1321 Texas Street Installed on June 2, 2021
City paid $9,609.78 for materials
Unity Mural
Paint on sports surface
Depicts a music record with “unity” written in the center. Sheet music is coming out of the record. The space between the 3-point line and the key contains depictions of waves on the southern half and flames on the northern half of the court
Part of Music Changing Lives and Stronger Together Now’s Spread Paint Not Hate program
Currently on display in Texonia Park at 1321 Texas Street Installed on June 2, 2021
City paid $9,609.78 for materials

Sunfair
Benjamin Allanoff, sculptor
Steel sculpture on steel base
Depicts a steel circle inside a steel square
Part of the City’s Art on Loan program
Currently on display at the entrance to Community Park at 1521 North Church Street
Installed 2024, acquisition by loan agreement
City paid $3,000 for the loan of the piece

Citrus Parking Structure Mural
Christine Curry
Paint on concrete block
Depicts a park scene on the northeast corner. Depicts a classic truck in front of orange groves on the northern side
On display on City owned parking structure located on East Citrus Avenue between South 5th Street and South 6th Street
Installed 2003, acquisition by independent contractor agreement with artist

Western Star Soap Advert
Original date unknown, restored by Larry Dierdorff 1985 and 2015 Paint on brick and mortar
Depicts an advertisement for Western Star Soap
Located on the west façade of the building located at 109 East State Street Acquisition by Façade and Access Easement Agreement with David & Nancy Jacobson Revocable Trust 4/3/2008
Mermaid Queen German Family Soap Advert
Original date unknown, restored by Larry Dierdorff 1985 and 2015 Paint on brick and mortar
Depicts an advertisement for Mermaid Queen German Family Soap Located on the west façade of the building located at 109 East State Street Acquisition by Façade and Access Easement Agreement with David & Nancy Jacobson Revocable Trust 4/3/2008

Orange Trees Mural
Larry Dierdorff
Paint on concrete forms
Depicts orange trees
Currently on display on the west side of the building located at 17 South 5th Street
Installed in 2014, Private

Grapevines Mural
Larry Dierdorff
Paint on brick and mortar
Depicts grapevines and local mountains
Currently on display on the west side of the building located at 404 East State Street
Purchased by Bill & Janice Lemann with thanks to Suzanne and Jake Doll, 2022, Private

Inland Empire Area Map
Original artist unknown, restored by Larry Dierdorff
Paint on stucco
Depicts a road map of the Inland Empire area
Currently on display on the side of the building located at 215 East Redlands Boulevard
Restoration funded by Redlands Sunrise Rotary, date unknown, Private

Citrus Grove
Jeff Owens
Paint on stucco
Depicts a landscape of orange groves, palm trees, and local mountains Currently on display on the side of the building located at 202 East State Street
Funded by Dole Corporation, Redlands Federal Bank, and Mr. and Mrs. James Glaze, Sr., dedicated June 1989, Private
Love
Artist unknown
Paint on stucco
Depicts the word “love” in cursive with a stylized heart at the end Currently on display on the east side of the building located at 27 East State Street
Original date unknown, Private

Child with Umbrella, Dog, and Orange
Larry Dierdorff
Paint on concrete block
Depicts a young child, standing in the rain, holding an umbrella over herself and a dog while reaching for an orange which is on the ground Currently on display on the southeast side of the building located at 672 East Redlands Boulevard
Funded by Dan Fisher and Tish Morse, with thanks to the Mubarkeh family, 2021, Private

July 4th in Redlands
Larry Dierdorff
Paint on stucco
Depicts Uncle Sam raising his right hand over a landscape of orange trees and local mountains, his left hand is holding a bunch of oranges. The upper left corner shows a squadron of airplanes with the word “fireworks” in a banner spanning the same corner
Currently on display on the east side of the building located at 129 East State Street
Funded by the Redlands 4th of July Committee, Inc., dedicated July 4th, 1990, Private
Hate Burger Mural
ccpainter.com
Paint on concrete block
Depicts a bare skull with mouth open trying to eat floating hamburgers and French fries. A lizard sits atop the skull
Currently on display on the northwest side of the building located at 31 East Citrus Avenue
Original install date unknown, Private

Redlands Orange Mural
Geoff Gouveia
Paint on concrete block
Depicts a stylized orange in center, with figures of people standing beside it Currently on display on the south side of the building located at 22 East State Street
Original date unknown, Private

Stag Skull Mural
Artist unknown
Paint on concrete block
Depicts a stag skull on a floral background
Currently on display on the south side of the building located at 22 East State Street
Original date unknown, Private
Werewolf Mural
Artist unknown
Paint on stucco
Depicts a stylized werewolf howling
Currently on display on the south side of the building located at 24 East State Street
Original date unknown, Private
Mural on Pacific Premier Bank
ccpainter.com
Paint on concrete block
Depicts a market scene with a classic truck parked and people conversing with each other
Currently on display on the north side of the building located at 201 East State Street
Install 2007, Private

Chapel Perspective & LaFourcade Community Garden
Both by Rudy Estanque
Paint on stucco
Chapel depicts the University of Redlands Memorial Chapel at sunset. The viewpoint is facing east. LaFourcade depicts the historical community garden located outside the administration building of the University of Redlands.

Currently on display on the east side of the building located at 128 East State Street
Funded by Downtown Redlands Business Association, University of Redlands’ Office of Community Service Learning, Capital Source Bank, 2009, Private

Redlands Jewelers Murals
ccpainter.com
Paint on brick
The north façade depicts a late 1800’s or early 1900’s street scene showing a couple peering into the windows of a shop. The east façade depicts a jeweler showing a necklace to the viewer
Both pieces currently on display on the north and east sides of the building located at 31 East Citrus Avenue
Original installation date unknown, Private
Redlands Theatre Festival Mural
Artist unknown
Paint on stucco
Depicts an outdoor amphitheater with a theatre building in the center Currently on display on the east side of the building located at 129 East State Street
Original install date unknown, Private

A Run Thru Redlands Mural
Karen Wilmot, restored by Larry Dierdorff
Paint on stucco
Depicts Victorian and Queen Anne style homes
Currently on display on the west side of the building located at 214 East Redlands Boulevard
Original install c. 1980, restored 2014 funded by Redlands Kiwanis Club, Private
“V” Shaped Sculpture
Christos Hardt, designer
Steel sculpture on concrete base
Depicts a stylized “V” in a circle
Installed as a condition of approval for the surrounding residential development
Currently on display at the northwest corner of Alabama Street & Orange Avenue
Purchased and installed by Venue at Orange, LLC, 2024
Orange Blossom Trail Mural – Redlands History
Artist unknown
Paint on concrete block
Depicts oranges, a mission style building, the “R” on the local mountains, the Redlands Bowl amphitheater, the Moorish revival style A.K. Smiley Library, and a Hispanic mother and child
Currently on display on the Orange Blossom Trail on the east side of its intersection with North Dearborn Street
Commissioned by Redlands Sunrise Rotary, 2023
Redlands’ Sister Cities Murals
Artist unknown
Paint on concrete block
Depicts a Chinese temple next to a pond for Linli China, a cathedral for San Miguel de Allende Mexico, and a bridge and pagoda for Hino Japan Currently on display on the Orange Blossom Trail on the west side of its intersection with North Dearborn Street
Original install date unknown, funded by the Redlands Sister Cities Association

Orange Street Alley Park Umbrellas
No artist
Nylon umbrellas suspended on wire and held by u-bolts
The Orange Street Alley umbrellas were originally suggested by former city manager Enrique Martinez
Currently on display above the alleyway located at 50 Orange Street Paid for and installed by City of Redlands

Sister Cities Clock Tower
Dan & Dina Romero, sculptor
Steel arch structure with inset clocks and a ball on track function set midcenter Depicts arches with clocks set to the local time for Linli China, Hino Japan, and San Miguel de Allende Mexico. Set in the center of the piece is a metal track on which cue balls roll down and are then lifted via an ascending chain mechanism
Currently on display in Ed Hales Park located at North 5th Street and East State Street
Funded by Tim and Carol Rochford and Redlands Sister City Association. City paid $66,000
2019

LGBTQ Mural
Pulp Press, Jillian Sanders, Bridget Bilbo, Sofia Diaz
Mural depicts LGBTQ figures in different colors
Paint on asphalt
Currently on display within the crosswalk between the buildings located at 101 Cajon Street and 29 South 5th Street
Installed 2021. Paid for by City of Redlands

Omnitrans Bus Bench Murals
Multiple artists
Paint on concrete benches
Murals depict abstract objects as well as floral motifs Currently on display at multiple bus stops in Redlands
Outside agency

Kimberly Crest Mural
Larry Dierdorff
Mural depicts the Kimberly Crest mansion from the Italian garden Paint on stucco
Currently on display on the west side of the building located at 200 East Citrus Avenue
Painted 2003

Memorial Chapel Mural
Larry Dierdorff
Mural depicts Memorial Chapel at the University of Redlands at night, with lights in the colonnade and fireworks exploding in the sky above Paint on stucco
Currently on display on the west side of the building located at 200 East Citrus Avenue
Painted 2002

Redlands Bicycle Classic Mural
Mural depicts three cyclists racing each other
Paint on stucco
Currently on display on the west side of the building located at 200 East Citrus Avenue
Painted 2001

Redlands Bowl Mural
Larry Dierdorff
Mural depicts the Redlands Bowl with an orchestra in the clam shell and fireworks exploding above the venue
Paint on stucco
Painted 1998 for Redlands’ diamond jubilee

Orange Growers Mural
Larry Dierdorff
Mural depicts orange pickers picking oranges and loading them into satchels and boxes
Paint on stucco
Currently on display on the west side of the building located at 200 East Citrus Avenue
Painted 2002

Sylvan Park Bandstand Mural
Larry Dierdorff
Mural depicts an orchestra in the gazebo bandstand at Sylvan Park for a 4th of July celebration. A conductor is also in frame
Paint on stucco
Currently on display on the west side of the building located at 200 East Citrus Avenue
Painted 2005

Redlands Heritage
Millard Sheets, Denis O’Connor, and Sheets Studio artists Mosaic depicts three vignettes of early Redlands pioneers. Vignette one depicts a White woman in Victorian dress in front of the Morey mansion.

Vignette two depicts Hispanic grove workers picking oranges. Vignette three depicts a White woman in Victorian dress with two young children standing in front of the University’s Memorial Chapel
Mixed media, ceramic and glass mosaic with gold leaf
Currently on display on the south side of the building located at 4 West Redlands Boulevard
Installed in 1980
Welcome to Redlands Mural
Artist unknown
Mural depicts the San Bernardino mountains in the background. The foreground depicts a bunch of oranges at upper left corner, a hummingbird feeding on honeysuckle at right and local foothills at bottom Ceramic tile
Currently on display on the west side of the parking garage located at 101 West Stuart Avenue
Installed in 2024
A.K. Smiley Library Mural
Artist unknown
Mural depicts the east façade of the A.K. Smiley public library showing the Moorish revival colonnade and tower
Ceramic tile
Currently on display on the north side of the parking garage located at 101 West Stuart Avenue
Installed in 2024

Memorial Chapel Mural
Artist unknown
Mural depicts the Memorial Chapel at the University of Redlands. The San Bernardino mountains are in the background
Ceramic tile
Currently on display on the north side of the parking garage located at 101 West Stuart Avenue
Installed in 2024

Asistencia Bell Tower Mural
Artist unknown
Mural depicts the bell tower of the Asistencia in the foreground. The background depicts the local mountains
Ceramic tile
Currently on display on the north side of the parking garage located at 101 West Stuart Avenue
Installed in 2024

Limestone Columns Installation
Artist unknown
The artwork consists of 11 natural finish limestone columns arranged in a random pattern. There are two groupings on either side of the north/south oriented sidewalk
Natural limestone columns
Currently on display on the southeast corner of the parcel addressed as 349 North Eureka Street
Installed in 2022
City Council AGENDA ITEM NO. K3.

DATE: April 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Consideration of Resolution No. 8778 providing notice of intent to increase water and wastewater rates, direct staff to issue the required Proposition 218 notice establishing a public hearing date and location, and determine that consideration of the proposed rate increases are exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act (Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director Heredia) MOTION:

If the City Council determines that staff's recommendation is appropriate, the following motions are provided:

1. I move that the City Council determine that approval of the proposed water and wastewater rate increases is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State’s CEQA Guidelines; and

2. I move that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 8778 providing notice of intent to increase water and wastewater rates; and

3. I move that City Council direct staff to issue the required Proposition 218 notice for a public hearing.

RECOMMENDATION:

The Utility Advisory Committee and staff recommend the following water and wastewater rate increases:

Water -
A two-and-a-half percent (2.5%) rate increase effective January 1, 2027, in FY 26/27 A two-and-a-half percent (2.5%) rate increase effective July 1, 2027, in FY 27/28 A two-and-a-half percent (2.5%) rate increase effective July 1, 2028, in FY 28/29 Wastewater -
A seven percent (7%) rate increase effective January 1, 2027, in FY 26/27 A seven percent (7%) rate increase effective July 1, 2027, in FY 27/28 A seven percent (7%) rate increase effective July 1, 2028, in FY 28/29 Staff further recommends that the City Council determine that adoption of Resolution No. 8778 is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act; adopt Resolution No. 8778 providing notice of intent to increase water and wastewater rates; and direct staff to issue the Proposition 218 notice establishing the date and location for a public hearing.

DISCUSSION:

Chapter 2.70 of the Redlands Municipal Code establishes a framework for a citizen committee, the Utility Advisory Committee (UAC), to help develop fair and equitable rates to cover costs of services for the City's water and wastewater utilities. The seven (7) member UAC was appointed by City Council on January 20, 2026, and worked with MUED staff and the City's Utility Rate Consultant, Raftelis, to develop rate recommendations that provide adequate revenue to recover costs for services, are equitable to all customer classes, comply with state and federal laws, and are easily explained to customers. The UAC serves in an advisory capacity to the City Council.

The rate recommendation process began by introducing the UAC to the Municipal Utilities and Engineering Department (MUED) financial structure, water and wastewater utilities operations, and the associated 6-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The UAC reviewed historic and projected operating, maintenance, and CIP costs necessary to provide high-quality services for Redlands' utility customers. Raftelis presented a financial analysis including multi-year revenue projections, target reserve balances, and annual labor and material cost escalations. Several rate scenarios were modeled and considered by the UAC, who ultimately recommends the following rate adjustments:

Potable Water:

2.5% increase effective January 1, 2027, in FY 26/27

2.5% increase effective July 1, 2027, in FY 27/28

2.5% increase effective July 1, 2028, in FY 28/29
Non-Potable Water:
0% increase effective January 1, 2027, in FY 26/27
0% increase effective July 1, 2027, in FY 27/28
0% increase effective July 1, 2028, in FY 28/29
Wastewater:
7% increase effective January 1, 2027, FY 26/27
7% increase effective July 1, 2027, in FY 27/28
7% increase effective July 1, 2028, in FY 28/29
These increases will be applied to customer classifications proportionally based on the demands placed on each utility, and will generate the additional revenue necessary to continue providing water and wastewater utility services for all Redlands customers. Resolution No. 8778 provides notice of intent to increase water and wastewater rates.

If City Council determines these recommendations are appropriate, staff will issue a Public Hearing Proposition 218 notice, which will include a copy of Resolution No. 8778 that describes protest procedures. The following schedule is anticipated:

Resolution of Intent April 21, 2026
Proposition 218 Notices Mailed May 1, 2026
Ordinance Introduction - Public Hearing July 7, 2026
Ordinance Adoption July 21, 2026
Rate Implementation January 1, 2027
Approval of water and wastewater utility rate increases is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act, since it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may deny the staff recommendation and provide alternate direction.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

N/A
SUBMITTED BY:

Monica Heredia, Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director RECOMMENDED BY:

Charles M. Duggan Jr., City Manager
REVIEWED BY:

Yvette M. Abich Garcia, City Attorney
Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
Danielle Garcia, Management Services/Finance Director
PREPARED BY:

Goutam Dobey, City Engineer

FISCAL IMPACT
Fiscal Year: FY 26/27
Revenue Generating: Yes
Additional Appropriation Required: No
Discussion:

Adoption of the recommended Water and Wastewater rates will generate revenues necessary to offset operating, maintenance, and capital improvement costs for each utility.

Attachments
1 I:\cmo\Resolutions\Resolution No. 8778.bm.04.16.2026.docx RESOLUTION NO. 8778

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS

DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ADJUST WATER AND WASTEWATER
RATES; SETTING THE TIME AND PLACE FOR A PROPOSITION 218 MAJORITY PROTEST PUBLIC HEARING; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY

MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO PROVIDE THE RELATED NOTICE IN

COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATE-MANDATED TIMING REQUIREMENTS
WHEREAS, the City of Redlands has identified ongoing operational and capital needs associated with the City’s water and wastewater utility systems; and WHEREAS, in order to fund the identified water and wastewater system operational and capital costs, it will be necessary to adjust the City’s current water and wastewater rates; and WHEREAS, the City of Redlands engaged Raftelis, a firm with expertise in the analysis of costs relating to utilities, to conduct a rate study of the City’s water and wastewater utilities; and WHEREAS, the City Council received the report prepared by Raftelis at the April 21, 2026 City Council meeting and heard from staff on this matter; and WHEREAS, on November 5, 1996, California voters approved Proposition 218, requiring specific procedures be followed with regard to “property-related” fee increases, including the need to provide written notice at least 45 days in advance of a public hearing; and WHEREAS, on July 24, 2006, the California Supreme Court confirmed that charges for water and wastewater (sewer) are subject to Proposition 218 procedures (Bighorn-Desert View Water Agency v. Verjil (2006) 39 Cal. 4th 205); and
WHEREAS, on April 20, 2015, the California Court of Appeal ruled that water rate surcharges and by analogy, wastewater surcharges may be charged as long as they are based upon the actual cost of service to the ratepayers receiving the surcharge (Capistrano Taxpayers Association, Inc. v. City of San Juan Capistrano (2015) 235 Cal. App. 4th 1493); and WHEREAS, the City Council believes it is in the public interest and desires to proceed through the requisite processes pursuant to the provisions of Proposition 218 in order to consider adjustments to the City of Redlands’ fees, rates, and charges related to its water and wastewater systems.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Redlands as follows:

Section 1. A Proposition 218 Public Hearing is hereby set and will be held before the City Council on July 7, 2026, in order for the City Council to consider adjustments to the City’s water and wastewater utility fees, rates, and/or charges; and
2 I:\cmo\Resolutions\Resolution No. 8778.bm.04.16.2026.docx Section 2. The City Manager, or designee, is hereby authorized and directed to cause a notice of Public Hearing that provides details related to adjustments to the specific water and wastewaterfees, Rates, and/or charges being proposed to be mailed no later than May 1, 2026, in a manner that complies with applicable laws, including without limitation, the State-mandated 45-day required notice under Proposition 218.

Section 3. At the Public Hearing, the City Council shall consider objections and protests, if any, to the proposed rate adjustments, and Resolution No. 7128 shall govern the submission and tabulation of written protests with respect to the proposed rate adjustments.

ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this 21st day of April, 2026.

Mario Saucedo, Mayor
ATTEST:

Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
3 I:\cmo\Resolutions\Resolution No. 8778.bm.04.16.2026.docx I, Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk of the City of Redlands, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 21st day of April, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

CITY OF REDLANDS
Water, Wastewater, and
Non-Potable Water
Financial Plan and Rate Study
FINAL REPORT / APRIL 16, 2026

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
227 W. Trade Street, Suite 1400, Charlotte, NC 28202
www.raftelis.com
April 16, 2026
Monica Heredia, PE
Director of Municipal Utilities and Engineering Department City of Redlands
35 Cajon Street
Redlands, CA 92373
Subject: Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Financial Plan and Rate Study Report Dear Ms. Heredia:

Raftelis is pleased to provide this Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Financial Plan Study Report (Report) for the City of Redlands (City). This report presents the analyses, rationales, and methodologies utilized in the study to determine utility rates that align with the requirements of Proposition 218. The study was developed with feedback and input from City staff.

The study involved a comprehensive review of the City’s current water, wastewater, and non-potable water cost requirements to determine rates that meet the City’s objectives. The main objectives that informed the study include:
• Adequately recovering all costs to ensure the financial sufficiency of the City’s utilities • Determining feasible capital financing plans for all three utilities • Developing long-term financial plans for all three utilities • Calculating cost of service-based rates for all three utilities • Minimizing customer impacts from rate adjustments
We are confident that the proposed rates developed during this study are fair and equitable for the City’s customers and are in alignment with the requirements of Proposition 218. We appreciate the input provided by City staff, which helped guide the final recommendations of the financial plan and resulting rates. It was a pleasure working with you and your team, and we wish to express our gratitude for the support you and other City staff provided during the study.

Sincerely,

Sudhir Pardiwala Jeremy Tamargo
Executive Vice President Manager

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 5 Contents

1. Executive Summary ................................................................... 11

1.1. Study Background ......................................................................................................11

1.2. Current Rates ..............................................................................................................11

1.3. Process and Approach ...............................................................................................14

1.4. Legal Framework.........................................................................................................15

1.5. Results and Recommendations.................................................................................15

1.5.1. Water Utility................................................................................................................... 15

1.5.2. Wastewater Utility ......................................................................................................... 16

1.5.3. Non-Potable Water Utility .............................................................................................. 16

1.6. Proposed Rates...........................................................................................................16

1.7. Combined Customer Impacts ....................................................................................19

1.8. Regional Rate Survey .................................................................................................20

2. Key Assumptions ....................................................................... 22

2.1. Customer Account Growth.........................................................................................22

2.2. Revenue Inflation Factors ..........................................................................................22

2.3. Expense Inflation Factors...........................................................................................23

3. Water – Financial Plan................................................................ 24

3.1. Projected Revenues....................................................................................................24

3.2. Projected O&M Expenses...........................................................................................25

3.3. Debt Service ................................................................................................................26

3.4. Capital Projects...........................................................................................................26

3.5. Proposed Financial Plan.............................................................................................28

4. Water – Cost-of-Service Analysis and Rates.............................. 32

4.1. Process and Approach ...............................................................................................32

4.2. Revenue Requirement ................................................................................................32

4.3. Allocation of Functionalized Net Revenue Requirements to Cost Components...33

4.3.1. Peaking Factors ............................................................................................................ 33

4.4. Operating and Capital Cost Allocation......................................................................35

4.5. Allocation of Fire Protection Costs – Public vs. Private..........................................38

4.6. Final Cost Allocation of Revenue Requirement .......................................................39 City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 6

4.7. Unit Cost Components ...............................................................................................40

4.8. Distribution of Cost Components to Customer Classes .........................................43

4.9. Rate Calculation..........................................................................................................45

4.9.1. Proposed Bi-Monthly Fixed Charges ............................................................................. 45

4.9.2. Proposed Bi-Monthly Fire Service Charges................................................................... 45

4.9.3. Proposed Water Usage Rates....................................................................................... 46

5. Wastewater – Financial Plan...................................................... 51

5.1. Customer Accounts and Usage .................................................................................51

5.2. Current Rates ..............................................................................................................51

5.3. Calculated Rate Revenues at Current Rates.............................................................53

5.4. Projected Revenues at Current Rates .......................................................................54

5.5. Projected O&M Expenses...........................................................................................54

5.6. Debt Service ................................................................................................................55

5.7. Capital Projects...........................................................................................................55

5.8. Proposed Financial Plan.............................................................................................56

6. Wastewater – Cost of Service Analysis and Rates.................... 60

6.1. Process and Approach ...............................................................................................60

6.2. Revenue Requirement ................................................................................................60

6.3. Plant Mass Balance.....................................................................................................61

6.4. Operating and Capital Cost Allocation......................................................................65

6.5. Unit Cost Components ...............................................................................................67

6.6. Revenue Requirement Allocation..............................................................................69

6.7. Rate Calculation..........................................................................................................70

6.8. Proposed Rates...........................................................................................................72

7. Non-Potable Water – Financial Plan........................................... 74

7.1. Projected Revenues....................................................................................................74

7.2. Projected O&M Expenses...........................................................................................75

7.3. Debt Service ................................................................................................................75

7.4. Capital Projects...........................................................................................................75 Proposed Financial Plan.....................................................................................................76

7.5. Proposed Rates...........................................................................................................76

8. Water Rates for Largest Users .................................................. 77 City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 7 Tables
Table 1-1: Current Bi-Monthly Water Service Charges ($/meter size) .................................................... 11 Table 1-2: Current Water Usage Rates ($/ccf of water).......................................................................... 12 Table 1-3: Current Bi-Monthly Residential Wastewater Service Charges ($/dwelling unit) ..................... 12 Table 1-4: Current Non-Residential Wastewater Rates ($/ccf of water).................................................. 13 Table 1-5: Current Bi-Monthly Schools Wastewater Service Charge ($/100 students) ........................... 13 Table 1-6: Current Bi-Monthly Non-Potable Water Service Charges ($/meter size)................................ 13 Table 1-7: Current Non-Potable Water Usage Rates ($/ccf of water) ..................................................... 14 Table 1-8: Proposed Bi-Monthly Water Service Charges ($/meter size)................................................. 17 Table 1-9: Proposed Water Usage Rates ($/ccf of water) ...................................................................... 17 Table 1-10: Proposed Bi-Monthly Residential and Schools Wastewater Service Charges ..................... 18 Table 1-11: Proposed Non-Residential Wastewater Usage Rates ($/ccf of water) ................................. 18 Table 1-12: Proposed Bi-Monthly Non-Potable Water Service Charges ($/meter size) .......................... 19 Table 1-13: Proposed Non-Potable Water Usage Rates ($/ccf of water)................................................ 19 Table 1-14: Proposed Single Family Customer Bi-Monthly Impacts (3/4” meter, 40 ccf) ........................ 20 Table 2-1: Customer Account Growth Projections.................................................................................. 22 Table 2-2: Revenue Inflation Factors ..................................................................................................... 22 Table 2-3: Expense Inflation Factors...................................................................................................... 23 Table 3-1: Projected Water Revenues ................................................................................................... 25 Table 3-2: Projected Water O&M Expenses........................................................................................... 26 Table 3-3: Existing Water Debt Service.................................................................................................. 26 Table 3-4: Inflated Water Capital Projects.............................................................................................. 27 Table 3-5: Proposed Water Capital Financing Plan................................................................................ 28 Table 3-6: Proposed Water Revenue Adjustments................................................................................. 28 Table 3-7: Projected Water Financial Plan (Proposed Revenue Adjustments) ....................................... 29 Table 4-1: Water Revenue Requirement Calculation ............................................................................. 33 Table 4-2: System Peaking .................................................................................................................... 34 Table 4-3: Average and Peaking Cost Causation Factors...................................................................... 35 Table 4-4: Water Operating Cost Allocation ........................................................................................... 36 Table 4-5: Water Asset Allocation .......................................................................................................... 37 Table 4-6: Fire Analysis ......................................................................................................................... 38 Table 4-7: Revenue Requirement by Cost Component .......................................................................... 39 Table 4-8: FY 2027 Projected Water Usage by Class ............................................................................ 40 Table 4-9: Derivation of Equivalent Meters............................................................................................. 40 Table 4-10: Derivation of Equivalent Fire Lines...................................................................................... 41 City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 8 Table 4-11: Calculation of Peak Capacity .............................................................................................. 42 Table 4-12: Cost Causation Component Unit Cost Calculation .............................................................. 42 Table 4-13: Derivation of Costs to Serve Each Class............................................................................. 44 Table 4-14: Proposed Bi-Monthly Service Charge (FY 2027)................................................................. 45 Table 4-15: Proposed Bi-Monthly Fire Service Charge (FY 2027).......................................................... 46 Table 4-16: Peaking Unit Cost Calculation............................................................................................. 46 Table 4-17: Potable Water Supply Cost ................................................................................................. 47 Table 4-18: Supply Component Calculation ........................................................................................... 48 Table 4-19: Proposed Water Usage Rates (FY 2027)............................................................................ 49 Table 4-20: Proposed Bi-Monthly Service Charges................................................................................ 50 Table 4-21: Proposed Water Usage Rates............................................................................................. 50 Table 5-1: Projected Wastewater Customer Accounts and Usage ......................................................... 52 Table 5-2: Current Bi-Monthly Wastewater Service Charges and Usage Rates ..................................... 52 Table 5-3: Calculated Wastewater Rate Revenues at Current Rates ..................................................... 53 Table 5-4: Projected Wastewater Revenues at Current Rates ............................................................... 54 Table 5-5: Projected Wastewater O&M Expenses.................................................................................. 54 Table 5-6: Proposed Wastewater Debt Service...................................................................................... 55 Table 5-7: Inflated Wastewater Capital Projects..................................................................................... 55 Table 5-8: Proposed Wastewater Capital Financial Plan……………………………………………………….. 56 Table 5-9: Proposed Wastewater Capital Financing Plan....................................................................... 56 Table 5-10: Proposed Wastewater Revenue Adjustments ..................................................................... 56 Table 5-11: Projected Wastewater Financial Plan (Proposed Revenue Adjustments)............................ 57 Table 6-1: Wastewater Revenue Requirement Calculation .................................................................... 61 Table 6-2: Schools Wastewater Flow Estimate ...................................................................................... 62 Table 6-3: Wastewater Plan Balance Calculation................................................................................... 63 Table 6-4: Residential Proportion of Wastewater Flow........................................................................... 64 Table 6-5: Estimated Residential Wastewater Loadings......................................................................... 64 Table 6-6: Wastewater Operating Cost Allocation.................................................................................. 66 Table 6-7: Wastewater Capital Allocation............................................................................................... 67 Table 6-8: Wastewater Service Units by Cost Components ................................................................... 68 Table 6-9: Wastewater Cost of Service and Unit Costs.......................................................................... 69 Table 6-10: Allocation of Wastewater Revenue Requirement to Customer Classes............................... 70 Table 6-11: Wastewater Bi-Monthly Rate Calculation ............................................................................ 71 Table 6-12: Wastewater Bi-Monthly Rate Comparison........................................................................... 72 Table 6-13: Proposed Bi-Monthly Wastewater Service Charges ............................................................ 72 Table 6-14: Proposed Non-Residential Wastewater Rates..................................................................... 73 Table 7-1: Projected Non-Potable Water Revenues............................................................................... 74 City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 9 Table 7-2: Projected Non-Potable Water O&M Expenses ...................................................................... 75 Table 7-3: Proposed Non-Potable Water Revenue Adjustments ............................................................ 76 Table 7-4: Proposed Bi-Monthly Non-Potable Water Service Charges ($/meter size) ............................ 76 Table 7-5: Proposed Non-Potable Water Usage Rates ($/ccf of water).................................................. 76 Figures
Figure 1-1: Regional Single Family Customer Bi-Monthly Sewer Bill Comparison.................................. 21 Figure 1-2: Regional Single Family Customer Bi-Monthly Water Bill Comparison .................................. 21 Figure 3-1: Proposed Water Capital Financing Plan............................................................................... 30 Figure 3-2: Projected Water Financial Plan (Proposed Revenue Adjustments)...................................... 30 Figure 3-3: Projected Water Fund Balances (Proposed Revenue Adjustments)..................................... 31 Figure 5-1: Proposed Wastewater Capital Financing Plan ..................................................................... 58 Figure 5-2: Projected Wastewater Financial Plan (Proposed Revenue Adjustments)............................. 58 Figure 5-3: Projected Wastewater Fund Balances (Proposed Revenue Adjustments) ........................... 59 City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 10

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 11

1. Executive Summary

1.1. Study Background
In 2025, the City of Redlands (City) contracted Raftelis to conduct a Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study, which included developing long-term financial plans and cost-of-service rates.

This report presents the three financial plans and resulting rates for the water, wastewater, and non-potable water utilities for a three-year period to ensure fairness and equity for its customers and the financial stability of the three enterprises.

This Executive Summary outlines the proposed financial plans and resulting rates and contains a description of the rate study process, methodology, and recommendations for the City’s rates. The main objectives that informed the Study include:
• Adequately recovering all costs to ensure the financial sufficiency of the City’s utilities • Determining feasible capital financing plans for all three utilities • Developing long-term financial plans for all three utilities • Calculating cost of service-based rates for the three utilities • Minimizing customer impacts from changes to the rate structures

1.2. Current Rates
The City’s current water rates were implemented on July 1, 2025, and include a bi-monthly service charge based on meter size for water service, fire protection service, and tiered water usage rates per hundred cubic feet (ccf) of water by customer class. Table 1-1 shows current bi-monthly service charges and fire protection charges, and Table 1-2 shows the water usage rates by customer class, each unit is one ccf.

Table 1-1: Current Bi-Monthly Water Service Charges ($/meter size) A B C
Line Meter Size Water Service
Charge
Fire Protection
Water Service
Charge
1 5/8" $33.60
2 3/4" $44.90
3 1" $66.81
4 1 1/2" $119.96
5 2" $177.10 $12.05
6 3" $305.97 $21.63
7 4" $472.05 $38.14
8 6" $870.64 $97.39
9 8" $1,282.51 $199.61
10 10" $3,036.30 $353.35
11 12" $3,992.91 $566.44
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 12 Table 1-2: Current Water Usage Rates ($/ccf of water)
A B
Line Customer Class
Water
Usage
Rate
1 Building Water Usage
2 Tier 1 first 16 units $1.61
3 Tier 2 17-27 units $1.90
4 Tier 3 over 27 units $2.85
5 6 Non-Building Water Usage
7 Tier 1 first 27 units $1.81
8 Tier 2 over 27 units $2.85
9 10 Other Water Usage
11 B Contract $100.46
12 Recycled $110.00
13 14 Fire Protection/Fire Hydrant Water Usage
15 All Units $2.85
The current wastewater rates were implemented on July 1, 2025, and include a bi-monthly service charge for residential customers and schools and non-residential wastewater usage rates per ccf of water usage. Table 1-3 shows the current bi-monthly residential service charges, Table 1-4 shows the non-residential wastewater usage rates for all non-residential customer classes, and Table 1-5 shows the bi-monthly schools service charge by school type based on average daily attendance (ADA).

Table 1-3: Current Bi-Monthly Residential Wastewater Service Charges ($/dwelling unit) A B
Line Residential Customer Class Wastewater
Service Rate
1 Single Family $72.65
2 Multiple Family $57.64
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 13 Table 1-4: Current Non-Residential Wastewater Rates ($/ccf of water) A B
Line Non-Residential Customer Class Wastewater
Rate per ccf
1 Low Strength I $3.11
2 Low Strength II $3.76
3 Low Strength III $4.39
4 Medium Strength I $5.04
5 Medium Strength II $5.68
6 Medium Strength III $6.33
7 High Strength I $6.98
8 High Strength II $7.62
9 Large Volume User $4.39
10 Minimum Charge ($) $57.64
11 12 Septage Charge ($/gal) $0.11
Table 1-5: Current Bi-Monthly Schools Wastewater Service Charge ($/100 students) A B
Line Schools Customer Class Wastewater
Service Rate
1 Elementary $157.43
2 Secondary & High $262.38
The current non-potable water rates include a bi-monthly service charge and a usage rate per ccf of nonpotable water usage.

Table 1-6 and Table 1-7 show the bi-monthly non-potable water service charges and non-potable water usage rates, respectively.

Table 1-6: Current Bi-Monthly Non-Potable Water Service Charges ($/meter size) A B
Line Meter Size
Non-Potable
Water Service
Charge
1 3/4" $13.81
2 1" $20.65
3 1 1/2" $37.29
4 2" $55.16
5 3" $95.50
6 4" $147.45
7 6" $272.16
8 8" $401.04
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 14 Table 1-7: Current Non-Potable Water Usage Rates ($/ccf of water) A B
Line Non-Potable Customer Class
Non-Potable
Water Usage Rate
per ccf
1 Non-Potable Water $0.99
2 Conversion Customer $0.64

1.3. Process and Approach
The City’s rate-setting process involves participation and feedback from City staff and the Utilities Advisory Committee (UAC). During the study, Raftelis met with City staff to discuss and understand the challenges the City’s three utilities face and to provide guidance to finalize the rate recommendations, which are detailed in this report.

During meetings with staff and UAC, Raftelis presented the various assumptions, inputs, and scenario analyses that were utilized to determine the water, wastewater, and non-potable water financial plans. City staff discussed the upcoming capital project requirements, which are some of the main drivers for the revenue adjustments in the final recommendations presented in this report. Raftelis designed and presented the financial plan and rate models to analyze various scenarios, such as those related to debt issuances, revenue adjustments, and capital funding.

The proposed financial plans detailed in this report followed industry standard practices for long-term financial planning and utilized commonly accepted assumptions in the absence of specified assumptions from the City, such as general inflation based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI). Raftelis worked closely with City staff to project future revenues and expenses to reinforce sound fiscal management practices.

The cost-of-service analysis utilized to develop the water rates followed the guidelines for allocating costs outlined in the American Water Works Association’s (AWWA) “Principles of Water Rates, Fees, and Charges: Manual of Water Supply Practices M1, 6th edition” (M1 Manual). Wastewater rates followed the guidelines for allocating costs outlined in the Water Environment Federation (WEF) Manual of Practice No. 27, Financing and Charges for Wastewater (2018). The cost-of-service analysis and rate design process consists of seven major steps, as outlined below:

1. Determine the revenue requirement from rates to meet operation, capital expenditures, debt financing, and reserves.

2. Functionalize operations and maintenance (O&M) expenses and capital assets into functional categories such as supply, distribution, treatment, laboratory, collection, engineering, etc.

3. Allocate each functional category into cost components such as supply, base delivery, peaking, meter and customer service for water, and wastewater flow and strength, which includes biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and total suspended solids (TSS) for wastewater.

4. Develop customer class characteristics and units of service by cost component.

5. Calculate the unit cost component rates by dividing the total cost in each component by the total units of service for that component. For example, wastewater service units include flow which is measured in ccf and BOD and TSS which are measured in pounds (lbs) per year.

6. Calculate the cost for each customer class by multiplying the unit cost by the units of service for each customer class.

7. Design rates to meet the City’s objectives.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 15 The financial plans for the three utilities include the three-year Study period from fiscal year (FY) 2027 1 to
FY 2029. The proposed rates were developed for implementation on January 1, 2027 (middle of FY 2027) and in July of every year thereafter (July 1, 2027, through July 1, 2028).

1.4. Legal Framework
California Constitution Article XIII D, Section 6, commonly referred to as Proposition 218, was enacted in 1996 to ensure that rates and fees are reasonable and proportionate to the cost of providing service. The principal requirements for the fairness of the fees, as they relate to public water and wastewater service are as follows:

1. A property-related charge (such as water and wastewater rates) imposed by a public agency on a parcel shall not exceed the costs required to provide the property-related service.

2. Revenues derived by the charge shall not be used for any purpose other than that for which the charge was imposed.

3. The amount of the charge imposed upon any parcel shall not exceed the proportional cost of service attributable to the parcel.

4. No charge may be imposed for a service unless that service is actually used or immediately available to the owner of the property.

5. A written notice of the proposed charge shall be mailed to the record owner of each parcel at least 45 days prior to the public hearing, when the agency considers all written protests against the charge.

Proposition 218 requires that rates cannot be “arbitrary and capricious,” meaning that the rate-setting methodology must be sound and there must be a nexus between the costs and the rates charged. Raftelis follows industrystandard rate-setting methodologies to perform cost-of-service analyses for the water utility based on the M1 Manual and for the wastewater utility based on WEF’s Manual No. 27.

1.5. Results and Recommendations
Raftelis worked closely with City staff to define the final results and recommendations of the water, wastewater, and non-potable water rate Study. The recommendations presented in this report will ensure the financial sufficiency and stability of the City’s three utilities to fund all necessary operating costs, capital costs, and to maintain sufficient cash reserves. To minimize customer impacts due to changes in rate structure, which is a key objective that informed the Study approach, Raftelis recommends that the City maintain the same rate structure for the water, wastewater, and non-potable water systems.

1.5.1. Water Utility
• The water O&M expenses are expected to increase, on average, by approximately 2.8 percent each year of the Study based on the City’s FY 2026 budget and inflationary assumptions. • The City plans to spend approximately $51.5 million on capital projects from FY 2027 to FY 2029. • Raftelis recommends 2.5 percent revenue adjustments per year in FY 2027 through FY 2029 to fund its capital project spending and to maintain sufficient cash reserves. 1 FY 2027 is the period from July 1, 2026, to June 30, 2027.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 16

1.5.2. Wastewater Utility
• The wastewater O&M expenses are expected to increase, on average, by approximately 2.8 percent each year of the Study based on the City’s FY 2026 budget and inflationary assumptions. • The City plans to spend $55.1 million in capital projects from FY 2027 to FY 2029, the majority of which is to refurbish and modify the City’s current wastewater treatment plant. • The City has obtained the State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan of $45 million to fund part of the wastewater treatment plant project costs.
• Raftelis recommends 7 percent revenue adjustments per year in FY 2027 through FY 2029 to fund capital projects and debt service and to meet debt coverage requirements.

1.5.3. Non-Potable Water Utility
• The non-potable O&M expenses are expected to increase, on average, by approximately 3.1 percent each year of the Study based on the City’s FY 2026 budget and inflationary assumptions. • The City does not currently have planned capital projects for the non-potable water utility from FY 2027 to FY 2029.
• Raftelis recommends no revenue adjustments for FY 2027 through FY 2029 as the utility has sufficient cash reserves to fund capital project costs and operating expenses.

1.6. Proposed Rates
Table 1-8 and Table 1-9 show the proposed bi-monthly water service charges and water usage rates for the City’s water utility, respectively, based on the above recommendations. The proposed water rates for FY 2027 are determined by the cost-of-service analysis, and rates for the following years are increased from those rates based on the proposed revenue adjustments.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 17 Table 1-8: Proposed Bi-Monthly Water Service Charges ($/meter size)

A B C D E
Bi-Monthly Water Service
Charges Current Rates January 2027 July 2027 July 2028
Water Service
5/8" $33.60 $34.09 $34.95 $35.83
3/4" $44.90 $45.54 $46.68 $47.85
1" $66.81 $67.76 $69.46 $71.20
1 1/2" $119.96 $121.64 $124.69 $127.81
2" $177.10 $179.56 $184.05 $188.66
3" $305.97 $310.22 $317.98 $325.93
4" $472.05 $478.60 $490.57 $502.84
6" $870.64 $882.70 $904.77 $927.39
8" $1,282.51 $1,300.27 $1,332.78 $1,366.10
10" $3,036.30 $3,078.32 $3,155.28 $3,234.17
12" $3,992.91 $4,048.16 $4,149.37 $4,253.11
Fire Protection Service
2" $12.05 $12.05 $12.36 $12.67
3" $21.63 $21.39 $21.93 $22.48
4" $38.14 $37.51 $38.45 $39.42
6" $97.39 $95.34 $97.73 $100.18
8" $199.61 $195.09 $199.97 $204.97
10" $353.35 $345.14 $353.77 $362.62
12" $566.44 $553.09 $566.92 $581.10
Fire Hydrant Service
All Meters $305.97 $313.62 $321.47 $329.51
Table 1-9: Proposed Water Usage Rates ($/ccf of water)

A B C D E F
Water Usage Rates Bi-Monthly
Tiers
Current
Rates January 2027 July 2027 July 2028
Building Water Usage
Tier 1 16 $1.61 $1.59 $1.63 $1.68
Tier 2 27 $1.90 $1.95 $2.00 $2.05
Tier 3 Over 27 $2.85 $3.00 $3.08 $3.16
Non-Building Water Usage
Tier 1 27 $1.81 $1.87 $1.92 $1.97
Tier 2 Over 27 $2.85 $2.66 $2.73 $2.80
Fire Protection Water Usage
All Units $2.85 $2.93 $3.01 $3.09
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 18 Table 1-10 and Table 1-11 show the proposed bi-monthly residential and schools wastewater service charges and non-residential water usage rates for the wastewater utility, respectively. The proposed wastewater rates are based on the cost-of-service analysis.

Table 1-10: Proposed Bi-Monthly Residential and Schools Wastewater Service Charges

A B C D E
Bi-Monthly Wastewater
Service Charges Current Rates January 2027 July 2027 July 2028 Residential ($/dwelling unit)
Single Family $72.65 $78.15 $83.63 $89.49
Multiple Family $57.64 $62.01 $66.36 $71.01
Schools ($/100 students)
Elementary $157.43 $165.62 $177.22 $189.63
Secondary & High $262.38 $276.04 $295.37 $316.05
Table 1-11: Proposed Non-Residential Wastewater Usage Rates ($/ccf of water)

A B C D E
Wastewater Usage Rates Current Rates January 2027 July 2027 July 2028 Non-Residential Usage ($/ccf)
Low Strength I $3.11 $3.31 $3.55 $3.80
Low Strength II $3.76 $3.93 $4.21 $4.51
Low Strength III $4.39 $4.56 $4.88 $5.23
Medium Strength I $5.04 $5.18 $5.55 $5.94
Medium Strength II $5.68 $5.81 $6.22 $6.66
Medium Strength III $6.33 $6.43 $6.89 $7.38
High Strength I $6.98 $7.06 $7.56 $8.09
High Strength II $7.62 $7.69 $8.23 $8.81
Large Volume User $4.39 $4.56 $4.88 $5.23
Minimum Charge ($) $57.64 $62.01 $66.36 $71.01
Septage Charge ($/gal) $0.11 $0.11 $0.12 $0.13
Table 1-12 and Table 1-13 show the bi-monthly non-potable water service charges and non-potable water usage rates, respectively. Raftelis recommends no revenue adjustments for the study period. The proposed rates for FY 2027 are based on the cost of service analysis and remain the same through FY 2029.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 19 Table 1-12: Proposed Bi-Monthly Non-Potable Water Service Charges ($/meter size)

A B C D E
Line Bi-Monthly Non-Potable
Water Service Charges
Current
Rates
January
2027 July 2027 July 2028
1 Non-Potable Water Service
2 3/4" $13.81 $13.81 $13.81 $13.81
3 1" $20.65 $20.65 $20.65 $20.65
4 1 1/2" $37.29 $37.29 $37.29 $37.29
5 2" $55.16 $55.16 $55.16 $55.16
6 3" $95.50 $95.50 $95.50 $95.50
7 4" $147.45 $147.45 $147.45 $147.45
8 6" $272.16 $272.16 $272.16 $272.16
9 8" $401.04 $401.04 $401.04 $401.04
Table 1-13: Proposed Non-Potable Water Usage Rates ($/ccf of water)

A B C D E
Line Non-Potable Water Usage
Rates
Current
Rates
January
2027 July 2027 July 2028
1 Non-Potable Water Usage
2 Non-Potable Water $0.99 $0.99 $0.99 $0.99
3 Conversion Customer $0.64 $0.64 $0.64 $0.64

1.7. Combined Customer Impacts
Table 1-14 outlines the proposed customer bi-monthly impacts for a Single Family customer with a ¾” meter using 40 ccf of water each billing period. The customer impacts show the water, wastewater, non-potable water, and combined bill impacts. A typical Single Family customer will have water and wastewater service, and the total impact for this typical customer is $8.32 per bi-monthly billing period in the first year (Column B, last row).

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 20 Table 1-14: Proposed Single Family Customer Bi-Monthly Impacts (3/4” meter, 40 ccf)

A B C D
Bi-Monthly Impacts Proposed
January 2027
Proposed
July 2027
Proposed
July 2028
Current Water Bill $128.61 $128.61 $128.61
Proposed Water Bill $131.43 $134.80 $138.36
Difference ($) $2.82 $6.19 $9.75
Current Wastewater Bill $72.65 $72.65 $72.65
Proposed Wastewater Bill $78.15 $83.63 $89.49
Difference ($) $5.50 $10.98 $16.84
Current Non-Potable Water Bill $53.41 $53.41 $53.41
Proposed Non-Potable Water Bill $53.41 $53.41 $53.41
Difference ($) $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Current Water and Wastewater Bill $201.26 $201.26 $201.26 Proposed Water and Wastewater
Bill $209.58 $218.43 $227.85
Difference ($) $8.32 $17.17 $26.59
Current Combined Bill $254.67 $254.67 $254.67
Proposed Combined Bill $262.99 $271.84 $281.26
Difference ($) $8.32 $17.17 $26.59

1.8. Regional Rate Survey
Figure 1-1 shows the bi-monthly sewer bill comparison for a Single Family Dwelling Unit customer. The graph shows the City’s proposed wastewater charge to be implemented in January of 2027.

Figure 1-2 shows the bi-monthly water bill comparison for a Single Family Dwelling Unit customer using a 3/4” meter and 40 ccf of water use per bi-monthly billing period. The graph shows the City’s proposed water rates to be implemented in January of 2027.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 21 Figure 1-1: Regional Single Family Customer Bi-Monthly Sewer Bill Comparison Figure 1-2: Regional Single Family Customer Bi-Monthly Water Bill Comparison $0
$20
$40
$60
$80
$100
$120
$140
$160
Bi-Monthly Sewer Charges for SFR
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
Yucaipa Valley Water
District
City of San
Bernardino
City of Colton City of Rialto City of Redlands
(Current)
City of Redlands
(Proposed)
City of Loma Linda
Bi-Monthly Water Charges for SFR
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 22

2. Key Assumptions
The key assumptions outlined in this section of the report represent the global assumptions utilized in the Study to project the number of customer accounts, revenues, and expenses for future years. City staff provided data on customer accounts, usage, and actual revenues and expenses for FY 2025 and budgeted revenues and expenses for FY 2026. The remaining years of the Study, from FY 2027 to FY 2029, were projected based on this information and the key assumptions shown in this section.

2.1. Customer Account Growth
Table 2-1 shows the customer account growth projections for each customer class based on input from City staff. The values from the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) were maintained for this rate study cycle. These conservative growth values were used as a prudent fiscal practice to ensure that adequate revenues are collected to fund the City’s utilities.

Table 2-1: Customer Account Growth Projections

A B C D E
Line Customer Account
Growth FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029
1 Single Family 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5%
2 Multiple Family 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5%
3 Commercial 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5%
4 Municipal 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5%
5 Non-Building 0.6% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5%
6 Fire Service 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5%
7 School 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5%
8 Non-Potable 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5%

2.2. Revenue Inflation Factors
Table 2-2 shows the revenue inflation factors utilized to project future revenues and calculate investment income. Projections assume no increase in miscellaneous and non-rate revenues throughout the study period.

The reserve interest rate is used to calculate the investment income based on projected fund balances and is based on conservative estimates.

Table 2-2: Revenue Inflation Factors

A B C D E
Line Revenue Inflation
Factors FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029
1 Non-Rate Revenues 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
2 Reserve Interest Rate 4.0% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5%
1 City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 23

2.3. Expense Inflation Factors
Table 2-3 shows the expense inflation factors, which are used to project future operating and capital project expenses for the study period. These factors were determined with input from City staff and reference industry standard escalations and commonly used price indices. The general inflation factor is based on the long-term change in the CPI. Water supply, utilities, power, and chemical costs are based on industry averages. Capital was provided in already-inflated dollars.

Table 2-3: Expense Inflation Factors

A B C D E
Line Expense Inflation
Factors FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029
1 General 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%
2 Salary/Benefits 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%
3 Water Supply 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0%
4 Utilities/Power 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0%
5 Chemicals 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0%
6 Supplies/Materials 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0%
7 Capital 0% 0% 0% 0%
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 24

3. Water – Financial Plan
This section of the report details the water enterprise’s long-term financial plan, based on the projected revenues, expenses, debt service, and capital project costs. Raftelis modeled the financial plan without revenue adjustments (status quo) and with proposed revenue adjustments to ensure the financial sustainability and solvency of the water utility. The results of the water financial plan are the proposed rates for three years based on the proposed revenue adjustments.

3.1. Projected Revenues
City staff provided the actual FY 2025 revenues and budgeted FY 2026 and FY 2027 revenues for the water utility, which were used to project revenues for the remainder of the study period. Table 3-1 shows the projected water revenues for each of the water funds.

The water rate revenues (Lines 1-4) are calculated for future years based on the weighted customer account growth assumptions for each customer class (Table 2-1). The City expects modest increases in water rate revenues for all years of the study based on the growth assumptions. The investment income (Lines 13, 21) is calculated using the reserve interest rate (Table 2-2 , Line 2) and we see a reduction in interest based on the conservative assumption of the interest rate and a reduction in the reserve balance. The remaining revenues are inflated using the non-rate revenue inflation factor (Table 2-2, Line 1).

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 25 Table 3-1: Projected Water Revenues
Line A B C D E
No. Projected Revenues FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029
1 Water Service (501)
2 Water Usage $28,231,718 $28,372,877 $28,514,741 $28,657,315 3 Fire Hydrant Water Usage $100,000 $100,500 $101,003 $101,508 4 Fire Protection Water Usage $450,000 $452,250 $454,511 $456,784 5 Irrigation Water Usage $3,100,000 $3,115,500 $3,131,078 $3,146,733 6 Cost Recover/Reimb Expenditure $15,000 $15,075 $15,150 $15,226 7 Plan Check $0 $0 $0 $0
8 Fire Flow Testing $1,500 $1,508 $1,515 $1,523
9 "B" Contract Water Usage $60,000 $60,300 $60,602 $60,905 10 Water Meter Install $30,000 $30,150 $30,301 $30,452
11 Transfers in from Other Funds $637,000 $640,185 $643,386 $646,603 12 Frontage Charge $20,000 $20,100 $20,201 $20,302
13 Investment Income $2,018,746 $1,477,396 $1,172,291 $1,318,224 14 Returned Check Charge $0 $0 $0 $0
15 Rental Income $100,000 $100,500 $101,003 $101,508
16 Miscellaneous Receipts $250,000 $251,250 $252,506 $253,769 17 Total - Water Service (501) $35,013,964 $34,637,590 $34,498,286 $34,810,849 18 Water CIP (509)
19 Capital Improv Chrg Non-Res $400,000 $402,000 $404,010 $406,030 20 Capital Improv Chrg Resident $250,000 $251,250 $252,506 $253,769 21 Investment Income $0 $0 $0 $0
22 Total - Water CIP (509) $650,000 $653,250 $656,516 $659,799 23 Total - Revenues $35,663,964 $35,290,840 $35,154,802 $35,470,648

3.2. Projected O&M Expenses
City staff provided the actual FY 2025 and budgeted FY 2026 O&M expenses for the water utility. Table 3-2 shows the projected O&M expenses for the study period, inflated for FY 2027 and beyond using the expense inflation factors (Table 2-3).

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 26 Table 3-2: Projected Water O&M Expenses

A B C D E
Line Projected O&M Expenses FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 1 Water Service (501)
2 Salaries and Benefits $9,697,424 $9,988,346 $10,287,997 $10,596,637 3 Services - Power $2,568,963 $2,646,032 $2,725,413 $2,807,175 4 Services $12,135,086 $12,476,754 $12,828,518 $13,190,677 5 Supplies - Purchased Water $294,770 $300,665 $306,678 $312,812 6 Supplies - Treatment $651,500 $664,530 $677,821 $691,377 7 Supplies $3,073,733 $3,135,208 $3,197,912 $3,261,870
8 Total - Water Service (501) $28,421,475 $29,211,535 $30,024,338 $30,860,548

3.3. Debt Service
The City currently has two existing debt issues for the water utility. Table 3-3 shows the annual principal and interest payments for the existing debts.

Table 3-3: Existing Water Debt Service

A B C D E
Line Existing Debt Service FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 1 Safe Drinking Water (Tate)
2 Principal $372,727 $189,641 $0 $0
3 Interest $10,992 $2,219 $0 $0
4 Total - Safe Drinking Water (Tate) $383,719 $191,859 $0 $0 5 6 Hinkley SRF Loan
7 Principal $525,439 $538,666 $552,226 $566,127
8 Interest $127,678 $114,450 $100,890 $86,989
9 Total - Hinkley SRF Loan $653,116 $653,116 $653,116 $653,116 10 11 Total - Existing Debt Service $1,036,835 $844,976 $653,116 $653,116 The City plans to debt finance the Sunset Reservoir project with a $26 million bond. The projected debt service for that bond is $1,526,480 per year starting in FY 2029.

3.4. Capital Projects
City staff provided the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for the water utility for the study period.

Table 3-4 shows the CIP costs for the study period, which per the City are already inflated.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 27 Table 3-4: Inflated Water Capital Projects

A B C D E
Line Capital Projects (Inflated) FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 1 Replacement
2 Joint Utility Lab (Design, Bidding & Construction Support) $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $0 3 Joint Utility Lab Phases (Construction) $1,800,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $0 4 CIP Waterline Replacements (Construction) $4,500,000 $4,500,000 $4,500,000 $4,500,000 *5 Highline Replacement $0 $0 $0 $0
*6 AWIA Security Fencing (HWTP, TWTP, HAWC, Maguet 2, E.L. 6) $0 $0 $0 $0 *7 Fixed Generator - 5th Ave., Country Club, Texas St., Agate (Equipment) $0 $0 $0 $0 8 Fixed Generator - 5th Ave., Country Club, Texas St., Agate (Construction) $3,500,000 $0 $0 $0 *9 Hinckley WTP Sludge Press (Equipment Purchase) $0 $0 $0 $0 10 Hinckley WTP Sludge Press (Construction) $0 $3,815,000 $0 $0 11 Hinckley WTP Parking Improvements (Design) $225,000 $0 $0 $0 12 Hinckley WTP Parking Improvements (Construction) $0 $750,000 $0 $0 13 Well 38 & 39 Wellhead Treatment System (Construction) $0 $9,000,000 $0 $0 14 Drill New Well (Construction) $0 $3,000,000 $0 $0
15 Sunset Reservoir (Design) $1,305,910 $0 $0 $0
16 Sunset Reservoir (Construction) $0 $0 $0 $10,000,000 17 Tate Transmission Line Replacement (Phase 1) $0 $0 $0 $8,000,000 **18 Tate Transmission Line Replacement (Phase 2) $0 $0 $0 $0 **19 Tate WTP Upgrades (Design) $0 $0 $0 $0
**20 Tate WTP Upgrades (Construction) $0 $0 $0 $0
21 Total - Replacement $11,530,910 $22,765,000 $6,200,000 $22,500,000 * Completed
** Future projects beyond FY 2029
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 28 Table 3-5 shows the proposed capital financing plan for the water utility. The City plans to fully fund its water CIP for all years of the study (Line 1) through rates, reserves and debt. The inflated project costs (Line 3) are the total project costs (Table 3-4, Line 21).

Table 3-5: Proposed Water Capital Financing Plan

A B C D E
Line Capital Financing Plan FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 1 CIP to Spend 100% 100% 100% 100%
2 3 Inflated Project Costs $11,530,910 $22,765,000 $6,200,000 $22,500,000 4 5 Bond Proceeds $0 $0 $0 $26,000,000
6 Balance $0 $0 $0 $26,000,000
7 8 Capital Financing
9 Rate Funded $11,530,910 $22,765,000 $6,200,000 $12,500,000 10 Bond Funded $0 $0 $0 $10,000,000
11 12 Total - Capital Financing $11,530,910 $22,765,000 $6,200,000 $22,500,000

3.5. Proposed Financial Plan
Table 3-6 shows the proposed revenue adjustments for the study period, which will allow the City to fund all necessary operating expenses with debt financing of major capital costs.

Table 3-6: Proposed Water Revenue Adjustments
A B C
Line Fiscal Year Revenue
Adjustment Month Effective
1 FY 2027 2.5% January
2 FY 2028 2.5% July
3 FY 2029 2.5% July
Table 3-7 shows the projected water financial plan with the proposed revenue adjustments from FY 2027 through FY 2029. The net cash flow (Line 22) is negative for all years (except for FY 2029, which includes debt proceeds) as the water utility draws down cash reserves to fund capital projects. The ending cash balance (Line 27) is drawn down; however, it remains positive throughout the study period and exceeds the required target. It should be noted that revenue adjustments are required to ensure the ability to meet expenses in future years based on the City’s projected capital improvement program.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 29 Table 3-7: Projected Water Financial Plan (Proposed Revenue Adjustments)

A B C D E
Line Water Financial Plan FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 1 Revenues
2 Rate Revenues $31,881,718 $32,041,127 $32,201,333 $32,362,339 3 Revenue Adjustments $0 $400,514 $1,630,192 $2,488,360 4 Investment Income $2,018,746 $1,477,396 $1,172,291 $1,318,224 5 Other Revenues $1,763,500 $1,772,318 $1,781,179 $1,790,085 6 Debt Proceeds $ $0 $0 $26,000,000
7 Total - Revenues $35,663,964 $35,691,354 $36,784,995 $63,959,009 8 9 O&M Expenses
10 Salaries and Benefits $9,697,424 $9,988,346 $10,287,997 $10,596,637 11 Services - Power $2,568,963 $2,646,032 $2,725,413 $2,807,175 12 Services $12,135,086 $12,476,754 $12,828,518 $13,190,677 13 Supplies - Purchased Water $294,770 $300,665 $306,678 $312,812 14 Supplies - Treatment $651,500 $664,530 $677,821 $691,377 14 Supplies $3,073,733 $3,135,208 $3,197,912 $3,261,870 15 Total - O&M Expenses $28,421,475 $29,211,535 $30,024,338 $30,860,548 16 Debt and Capital
18 Existing Debt Service $1,036,835 $844,976 $653,116 $653,116 17 Proposed Debt Service $0 $0 $0 $1,526,480
18 Rate Funded Capital Projects $11,530,910 $22,765,000 $6,200,000 $12,500,000 19 Debt Funded Capital Projects $0 $0 $0 $10,000,000
20 DIF Funded Capital Projects $0 $0 $0 $0
21 Total - Debt and Capital $12,567,745 $23,609,976 $6,853,116 $24,679,596 22 Net Cash Flow ($5,325,255) ($17,130,156) ($92,459) $8,418,865 23 Net Operating Revenue $7,242,490 $6,479,820 $6,760,657 $7,098,461 24 Calculated Debt Coverage 6.99 7.67 10.35 3.26
25 Required Debt Coverage 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25
26 Beginning Balances $56,297,272 $50,972,017 $33,841,861 $33,749,402 27 Ending Balances $50,972,017 $33,841,861 $33,749,402 $42,168,267 28 Reserve Target $19,604,551 $19,195,884 $16,546,085 $16,755,137 City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 30 Figure 3-1 shows the proposed water capital financing plan in graphical format, based on the capital financial plan shown in Table 3-5.

Figure 3-1: Proposed Water Capital Financing Plan
Figure 3-2 shows the proposed financial plan in graphical format with the revenue adjustments in Table 3-6.

The proposed revenues shown as the dark teal line, along with the drawdown of the reserves (green bars), allow the City to fund its operating and capital costs for the study period.

Figure 3-2: Projected Water Financial Plan (Proposed Revenue Adjustments) City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 31 The City’s current policy is to target operating reserves at 25% of the operating expenses and the capital reserve at 100% of the 5-yr rolling average rate funded CIP. Figure 3-3 shows the projected water fund balances with the proposed revenue adjustments in Table 3-6. The City’s restricted reserves are for the source acquisition fund and are represented by the gray bars. The unrestricted reserves or cash balance is comprised of operating and capital reserves. The blue bars represent the unrestricted cash balance available to finance operating expenses and capital projects. While the unrestricted reserves are being drawn down through the study period, the ending balance remains at or above target through FY 2029.

Figure 3-3: Projected Water Fund Balances (Proposed Revenue Adjustments) $0
$10
$20
$30
$40
$50
$60
FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029
Millions
Water - Ending Balances
Cash Balance Reserve Target
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 32

4. Water – Cost-of-Service Analysis
and Rates
This section of the report details the cost-of-service analysis and rate calculation process to determine the proposed water rates. The goal of this process is to determine the cost of providing water service to each of the City’s water customer classes and to ensure equity and fairness among the various classes.

4.1. Process and Approach
The cost-of-service analysis utilized to develop the water rates followed the guidelines for allocating costs outlined in the AWWA M1 manual. The cost-of-service analysis and rate design process consists of seven major steps, as outlined below:

1. Determine the revenue requirement, equal to the revenue to be recovered from rates

2. Functionalize O&M expenses and capital assets into functional categories such as supply, pumping, transmission & distribution, customer service & billing, etc.

3. Allocate each functional category into cost components such as supply, meters, customer service, conservation, base delivery, etc.

4. Develop customer class characteristics and units of service by cost component

5. Calculate the cost component unit rates by dividing the total cost in each cost component by the total units of service for that component. For example, base delivery costs are divided by the annual water demand and customer billing costs are divided by the annual number of bills.

6. Calculate the cost for each customer class by multiplying the unit cost by the units of service for each customer class.

7. Design rates to meet the City’s objectives.

4.2. Revenue Requirement
The first step of the cost-of-service analysis is to determine the revenue requirement for the test year, or ratemaking year. The test year of this study is FY 2027. Table 4-1shows the revenue requirement calculations for the water utility. The revenue requirements (Lines 2-4) are equal to the O&M expense and debt and capital costs for FY 2027 (Table 3-7, Column C ). The revenues from other sources (Lines 8-12), also known as nonrate revenues or revenue offsets, are equal to all non-rate revenues (Table 3-7, Column C). The adjustment for cash from/(to) reserves (Line 14) is equal to the negative value of net cash flow (Table 3-7, Column C), which excludes the source acquisition fund revenue. Line 15 reflects that revenue adjustments occur partway through the first year.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 33 Table 4-1: Water Revenue Requirement Calculation

A B C D
Line Revenue Requirement Calculation Operating Capital Total 1 Revenue Requirements
2 O&M Expenses $29,211,535 $0 $29,211,535
3 Capital $0 $22,765,000 $22,765,000
4 Debt $844,976 $844,976
5 Total - Revenue Requirements $29,211,535 $23,609,976 $52,821,510 6 Revenue from Other Sources
7 Investment Income (501 & 508) $486,443 $0 $486,443
8 Investment Income (503) $0 $990,953 $990,953
9 Water Service (501) $1,058,768 $0 $1,058,768
10 Water Capital Improvement (509) $0 $653,250 $653,250 11 B Contract Water Revenue $60,300 $0 $60,300
12 Total - Revenue from Other Sources $1,605,511 $1,644,203 $3,249,713 13 Less Adjustments
14 Cash from Reserves $0 $17,130,156 $17,130,156
15 Midyear Increase ($400,514) $0 ($400,514)
16 Subtotal - Adjustments $0 $17,130,156 $16,729,642
17 Revenue to be Recovered from Rates $28,006,538 $4,835,617 $32,842,155

4.3. Allocation of Functionalized Net Revenue
Requirements to Cost Components
After functionalizing the net revenue requirements, the next step is to allocate the functionalized net revenue requirements to the following cost components.
• Base–fixed costs associated with providing service under average demand conditions • Peaking (Max Day and Peak Hour) – costs associated with meeting demand in excess of average use • Customer Service– the costs associated with meter reading, billing, and customer service • Equivalent Meters– costs associated with meter capacity, maintenance, and replacement

4.3.1. Peaking Factors
Water demand varies from parcel to parcel. Water systems have to be designed to meet the highest levels of demand placed on the system. Components of the water system are therefore oversized compared to the requirement for average demands. For example, reservoirs are designed to meet maximum day requirements, and distribution lines are designed to meet instantaneous peak demands or peak hour demands. Therefore, peaking plays a significant part in the costs of operating and constructing a water system. Demonstrating that rates are proportional to the demands and associated costs that customer classes place on the utility system is critical to ensure that rates align with the intent of Proposition 218. The capital and operating costs of the system must then be allocated to customer classes in proportion to the demands they place on the system. For costs recovered through a water utility’s fixed meter charge, costs are allocated either over all accounts or by meter size, depending on the type of expense. Variable costs are allocated among customer classes based on the demands they place on the water system and the cost of water supplies.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 34 One of the major factors in cost allocation is allocation of peaking costs. To do so, we must identify systemwide peaking factors. The maximum day demand is the maximum amount of water used in a single day in a year. The maximum hour demand is the maximum usage in an hour on the maximum usage day. Different facilities, such as distribution and storage facilities and infrastructure, and the capital and O&M costs associated with those facilities, are designed to meet the peak demands placed on the system by customers.

Therefore, extra capacity costs include the O&M and capital costs associated with meeting peak customer demand in excess of average rate of use, or base use, requirements. This method is consistent with AWWA Manual M1 and is widely used in the water industry for cost-of-service analyses. Importantly, it ensures that average and below-average users pay rates that reflect the level of capital investment necessary to serve them.

The system-wide factors for maximum day and maximum hour were provided in Section 4.1 of the City’s 2022 Water Master Plan. Maximum day and maximum hour factors are shown in Table 4-2 relative to the base factor. Base, or average daily demand, is represented by the factor of 1.00.

Table 4-2: System Peaking
A B
Line Allocation Factor System Peaking
Factor
1 Base 1.00
2 Max Day 1.70
3 Max Hour 2.75
The system-wide peaking factors from Table 4-2 are used to derive the cost causation component allocation base, maximum day, and maximum hour percentages shown in Columns of Table 4-3. The numbers and calculations outlined in the following sections are rounded and may not be equal to the exact amounts shown.

Line 1 “Base” represents the average day demand throughout the year and is, therefore assigned a factor of

1.00. » Base = 1.00 / 1.00 = 100%
Line 2 “Max Day” is the ratio of maximum day demand relative to base demand, or 1.7. The percentage allocated to maximum day is the incremental responsibility above base demand. » Base = 1.00 / 1.70 = 59%
» Max Day = (1.70 – 1.00) / 1.70 = 41%
Similarly, Line 3, “Max Hour” is the ratio of maximum hour demand, on the maximum day, relative to base demand. The max hour factor is 2.75
» Base = 1.00 / 2.75 = 36%
» Max Day = (1.70 – 1.00) / 2.75 = 26%
» Max Hour = (2.75 – 1.70) / 2.75 = 38%
These peak factors indicate how much additional capacity is required to meet demand above average daily use. As demand, and therefore capacity, increases, so must the sizing of facilities and pipelines, which incur greater costs to construct, maintain, and replace. To understand the interpretation of the percentages shown in columns C through E, “Base” is the average daily demand during the year. These allocation bases are used to spread the functionalized costs for reservoir, transmission, treatment, and distribution functions to the cost causation components.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 35 Table 4-3: Average and Peaking Cost Causation Factors

A B C D E F
Line Allocation Factor System Peaking
Factor Base Max Day Max Hour Total
1 Base 1.00 100% 0% 0% 100%
2 Max Day 1.70 59% 41% 0% 100%
3 Max Hour 2.75 36% 26% 38% 100%
4 Average Max Day/Max Hour 48% 33% 19% 100%

4.4. Operating and Capital Cost Allocation
The next step in the cost-of-service analysis is to determine the operating and capital cost allocations by cost causation component. The cost causation components for water include Base, Max Day, Max Hour, Meters, Customer, Fire Protection, Conservation and General.

Table 4-4 shows the water operating cost allocation. The allocation basis for each function is listed in Column B. For the purpose of allocating operating costs, City staff provided the O&M expense budget estimates by function (Column A, Lines 14-25). This is representative of the distribution of operating costs shown in Table 3-2. Functions include General and Administration, Engineering, Production & Operations, Production Maintenance, Water Treatment, Water Quality, Water Distribution, Water Conservation Program, B Contract (Reimbursable and City). The operating costs are allocated to each cost component based on the percentage allocation (Lines 1-12) for each component. The final O&M expense allocation (Line 27) is determined by multiplying each cost component's percentage allocation by total operating costs.

Adjustments for fire and meters were made to max day and max hour. Reservoirs and distribution lines are designed for max day plus fire flow and max hour plus fire flow, respectively. For purposes of allocating costs to fire flow for expenses related to these two assets, we need to modify the allocation factors shown above in Table 4-3 to include fire flow. For the large number of fire hydrants and private fire lines in the City, we have used the ISO standards to allocate 15% of the costs to fire and an additional 5% to meter for max day, and 15% to meters for distribution-related max hour costs. This ensures that larger meters, which would need more fire capacity, are paying their fair share of fire hydrant costs.

Table 4-5 shows the water capital cost allocation. To minimize fluctuations in the capital cost allocation as capital projects change from year-to-year, capital costs are allocated on the basis of capital assets. For the purpose of allocating capital costs, City staff provided the water capital assets listed by function (Column A, Lines 16-29). This is representative of the distribution of capital costs shown in Table 3-5. Functions include Source of Supply, Wells, Pumping, Treatment, Transmission, Distribution, Storage, Meters, Fire Protection, Customer Billing, Land, Building Improvements, Rolling Stock (Vehicles), and General Plant. The capital asset costs are allocated into each cost component based on the percentage allocation (Lines 1-14) for each component. The final capital expense allocation (Line 31) is determined by taking the weighted proportion of total capital asset costs by cost component.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 36 Table 4-4: Water Operating Cost Allocation

A B C D E F G H I J K
Line O&M Allocation Allocation Basis Base Max Day Max Hour Meters Customer Fire Protection Conservation General Total 1 Water Admin & General General 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 0% 0% 90% 100% 2 Water Engineering Max Hour Fire 25% 18% 27% 15% 0% 15% 0% 0% 100% 3 Water Production & Operations - General Max Day 59% 41% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 4 Water Production Maintenance Max Day 59% 41% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 5 Water Treatment - HTWTP Max Day 59% 41% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 6 Water Treatment - HHWTP Max Day 59% 41% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 7 Water Quality - General Base 95% 0% 0% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 8 Water Distribution - General Max Hour Fire 25% 18% 27% 15% 0% 15% 0% 0% 100% 9 Water Conservation Program Conservation 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 100% 10 B' Contract (Reimbursable) Base 95% 0% 0% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 11 B' Contract (City) Base 95% 0% 0% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 12 South Mountain Water (Reimbursable) Base 95% 0% 0% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 13 14 Water Admin & General General $0 $0 $0 $0 $926,202 $0 $0 $8,335,822 $9,262,025 15 Water Engineering Max Hour Fire $333,527 $234,370 $349,753 $196,639 $0 $196,639 $0 $0 $1,310,929 16 Water Production & Operations - General Max Day $3,324,898 $2,336,415 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,661,313 17 Water Production Maintenance Max Day $2,047,073 $1,438,484 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,485,557 18 Water Treatment - HTWTP Max Day $543,659 $382,031 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $925,690 19 Water Treatment - HHWTP Max Day $750,848 $527,623 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,278,471 20 Water Quality - General Base $504,585 $0 $0 $26,557 $0 $0 $0 $0 $531,142 21 Water Distribution - General Max Hour Fire $1,559,500 $1,095,865 $1,635,368 $919,443 $0 $919,443 $0 $0 $6,129,619 22 Water Conservation Program Conservation $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $498,725 $0 $498,725 23 B' Contract (Reimbursable) Base $103,121 $0 $0 $5,427 $0 $0 $0 $0 $108,548 24 B' Contract (City) Base $13,667 $0 $0 $719 $0 $0 $0 $0 $14,387 25 South Mountain Water (Reimbursable) Base $4,872 $0 $0 $256 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,129 26 Total O&M Expenses $9,185,751 $6,014,788 $1,985,121 $1,149,043 $926,202 $1,116,082 $498,725 $8,335,822 $29,211,535 27 O&M Allocation 31% 21% 7% 4% 3% 4% 2% 29% 100%
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 37 Table 4-5: Water Asset Allocation

A B C D E F G H I J
Line Assets Allocation Allocation Basis Base Max Day Max Hour Meters Customer Fire
Protection General Total
1 Source of Supply Base 95% 0% 0% 5% 0% 0% 0% 100%
2 Wells Max Day 59% 41% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%
3 Pumping Max Day 59% 41% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%
4 Treatment Max Day 59% 41% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%
5 Transmission Max Day Fire 47% 33% 0% 5% 0% 15% 0% 100% 6 Distribution Max Hour Fire 25% 18% 27% 15% 0% 15% 0% 100% 7 Storage Max Day Fire 47% 33% 0% 5% 0% 15% 0% 100%
8 Meters Meters 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 100%
9 Fire Protection Fire Service 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 100% 10 Customer Billing Billing & Customer Service 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 11 Land Max Day Fire 47% 33% 0% 5% 0% 15% 0% 100%
12 Building and Improvements General 0% 0% 0% 0% 11% 0% 89% 100% 13 Rolling Stock (Vehicles) Base 95% 0% 0% 5% 0% 0% 0% 100% 14 General Plant Max Day 59% 41% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%
15 16 Source of Supply Base $9,387,387 $0 $0 $494,073 $0 $0 $0 $9,881,460 17 Wells Max Day $1,504,123 $1,056,951 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,561,074 18 Pumping Max Day $329,162 $231,303 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $560,466 19 Treatment Max Day $42,208 $29,660 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $71,867 20 Transmission Max Day Fire $29,223,535 $20,535,457 $0 $3,109,937 $0 $9,329,811 $0 $62,198,740 21 Distribution Max Hour Fire $2,240,016 $1,574,065 $2,348,990 $1,320,658 $0 $1,320,658 $0 $8,804,388 22 Storage Max Day Fire $2,815,532 $1,978,482 $0 $299,626 $0 $898,878 $0 $5,992,518 23 Meters Meters $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
24 Fire Protection Fire Service $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 25 Customer Billing Billing & Customer Service $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 26 Land Max Day Fire $3,307,469 $2,324,167 $0 $351,977 $0 $1,055,932 $0 $7,039,545 27 Building and Improvements General $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,562,036 $0 $12,638,289 $14,200,325 28 Rolling Stock (Vehicles) Base $383,718 $0 $0 $20,196 $0 $0 $0 $403,913 29 General Plant Max Day $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
30 Total Assets $49,233,150 $27,730,086 $2,348,990 $5,596,467 $1,562,036 $12,605,279 $12,638,289 $111,714,296 31 Asset Allocation 44% 25% 2% 5% 1% 11% 11% 100%

4.5. Allocation of Fire Protection Costs – Public vs. Private Water systems provide two types of fire protection: public fire protection for firefighting, which is generally visible as hydrants on a street, and private fire protection which provides fire flow to buildings and other structure sprinkler systems for fire suppression within private improvements.

To determine the share of total fire costs attributable to each, Raftelis performed an analysis of the public hydrants and private fire lines.

Table 4-6 shows the basis for allocating costs between public and private fire service. Each fire connection size has a fire flow demand factor similar to a hydraulic capacity factor of a water meter. The diameter of the connection is raised to the 2.63 power to determine the fire flow demand factor 2 .

The number of connections of a specific size is multiplied by the fire flow demand factor to derive total equivalent fire connections. Total fire costs are allocated based on the percentage share of total equivalent fire connections between public and private. The analysis estimates that 75 percent of fire costs relate to public fire and will be included and recovered on the monthly fixed charges. The remaining 25 percent is attributable to private fire service and will be recovered through private fire service charges.

Table 4-6: Fire Analysis

A B C D
Line
Fire Line/Hydrant
Size
Fire Ratio
Number of
Lines/Hydrants
Equivalent
Demand
1 Private Fire Line Size
2 2" 6.19 10 64
3 3" 17.98 0 0
4 4" 38.32 155 5,933
5 6" 111.31 153 17,002
6 8" 237.21 185 43,871
7 10" 426.58 129 54,961
8 12" 689.04 0 0
9 Total Fire Lines 632 121,831
10 25%
11 Public Fire Hydrant Size
12 6" 111.31 3,236 360,202
13 75%
2 Hazen-Williams equation via AWWA M1 Manual

4.6. Final Cost Allocation of Revenue Requirement
The total revenue recoverable from each cost causation component through water rates is shown in Table 4-7 using the revenue requirement from Table 4-1 the O&M and Capital allocations in Table 4-4 and Table 4-5, and the fire cost analysis in Table 4-6. Since public fire protection costs are a function of system capacity, they are reallocated to the Meter component. Interest earnings, shown separately, will be used to offset some rates.

Five percent of Base costs and 31 percent of Peaking costs (Max Day plus Max Hour) are allocated to the meter charge to cover the fixed costs and preserve the utility’s current fixed revenue recovery of 31 percent.

Table 4-7: Revenue Requirement by Cost Component

A B C D E F G H I J K
Line Cost Allocation Base Max Day Max Hour Meters Customer Fire Protection Conservation General Offset Total
1 Operating Revenue
Requirement $9,185,751 $6,014,788 $1,985,121 $1,149,043 $926,202 $1,116,082 $498,725 $8,335,822 $0 $29,211,535 2 Capital Revenue Requirement $2,131,085 $1,200,313 $101,677 $242,246 $61,467 $545,627 $0 $553,202 $0 $4,835,617 3 Revenue Offset -$682,626 $0 $0 -$35,928 $0 $0 $0 $0 -$486,443 -$1,204,997 4 Total Cost of Service $10,634,210 $7,215,100 $2,086,798 $1,355,361 $987,669 $1,661,709 $498,725 $8,889,024 -$486,443 $32,842,155 5 Allocation of General Cost $4,030,707 $2,734,755 $790,963 $513,725 $0 $629,841 $189,033 -$8,889,024 $0 $0 6 Allocation to Public Fire $0 $0 $0 $1,712,374 $0 -$1,712,374 $0 $0 $0 $0 7 Allocation of Base to Meter -$733,246 $0 $0 $733,246 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 8 Allocation of Peak to Meter $0 -$3,084,455 -$892,106 $3,976,561 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 9 Total Adjusted Cost of
Service $13,931,671 $6,865,400 $1,985,656 $8,291,267 $987,669 $579,176 $687,758 $0 -$486,443 $32,842,155 City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 40

4.7. Unit Cost Components
Unit costs for each component must be calculated, which starts by assessing the total water demand (or equivalent service units) for each cost component. Projected water use (base units of service) for FY 2027 is shown in Table 4-8. Daily use is calculated as annual use is divided by 365 days. Demand is detailed by rate class. Values are rounded to the nearest ccf and may not be equal to the exact values shown.

Table 4-8: FY 2027 Projected Water Usage by Class
A B C
Line Customer Class Annual Use
(ccf)
Average Daily Use
(ccf/day)
1 Building Water Usage
2 Tier 1 3,250,414 8,905
3 Tier 2 285,707 783
4 Tier 3 4,716,622 12,922
5 Non-Building Water
Usage
6 Tier 1 77,000 211
7 Tier 2 1,131,591 3,100
8 Total 9,461,335 25,921
Table 4-9 shows the total equivalent meters and annual number of bills. Table 4-10 shows the total equivalent fire line connections. These totals are used as the denominator in developing unit costs for the rate components of the monthly fixed service charges and private fire service charges.

Table 4-9: Derivation of Equivalent Meters

A B C D E
Line Meter
Size
Meter
Count
Hydraulic
Capacity
Factor
Equivalent
Meters
Annual Bimonthly Bills
1 5/8" 181 1.00 181 1,085
2 3/4" 8,375 1.43 11,935 50,251
3 1" 12,113 2.25 27,254 72,676
4 1 1/2" 787 4.25 3,343 4,720
5 2" 783 6.40 5,014 4,701
6 3" 79 11.25 888 474
7 4" 55 17.50 964 330
8 6" 28 32.50 912 168
9 8" 14 48.00 648 81
10 10" 0 114.00 0 0
11 12" 1 150.00 156 6
12 Total 22,415 51,294 134,492
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 41 Table 4-10: Derivation of Equivalent Fire Lines

A B C D E
Line Fire Line
Size
Fire Line
Count
Demand
Factor
Equivalent Fire
Lines
Annual Bimonthly Bills
1 2" 10 6.19 64 62
2 3" 0 17.98 0 0
3 4" 155 38.32 5,933 929
4 6" 153 111.31 17,002 916
5 8" 185 237.21 43,871 1,110
6 10" 129 426.58 54,961 773
7 12" 0 689.04 0 0
8 Total 632 121,831 3,790
Table 4-11 shows the total and extra capacity calculation by class and tier for maximum day and maximum hour demand. The class and tier specific maximum day peaking factors were calculated by dividing the maximum billing period usage by the average billing period usage in FY 2025 for the City’s customers. The class and tier specific maximum hour peaking factors were calculated by multiplying the maximum day peaking factors by the ratio of the system-wide maximum hour to maximum day peaking factors shown in Table 4-3.

Utilizing the final cost of service from Table 4-11 as the numerator and Table 4-8, Table 4-9, Table 4-10, and Table 4-11, as the denominators allows us to derive the unit costs of service in Table 4-12. . The total cost of service is divided by the respective units of service to calculate the unit cost of each cost component.

Meter costs are divided by the total meter equivalencies from Table 4-9 multiplied by 6 bi-monthly bills to determine a cost per equivalent meter and annual customer costs are divided by the estimated number of annual monthly bills, also from Table 4-9. Fire protection costs are divided by total fire line equivalencies from Table 4-10 to determine a cost per equivalent inch of fire line. Base delivery costs are divided by total annual water demand from Table 4-8 to determine a cost per unit of water usage. Similarly, Conservation costs are divided by annual Tier 3 water demand and Offset savings are divided by Building Tier 1 usage as those are the units from Table 4-8 over which those costs and savings, respectively, are being recovered. The unit costs are used to distribute the cost components to the meter classes and commodity classes and tiers.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 42 Table 4-11: Calculation of Peak Capacity

A B C D E F G H I
Max Day Max Hour
Line
Customer
Class
Annual
Use (ccf)
Average Daily
Use (ccf/day)
Capacity
Factor
Total Capacity
(ccf/day)
Extra Capacity
(ccf/day)
Capacity
Factor
Total Capacity
(ccf/day)
Extra Capacity
(ccf/day)
1 Building Water
Usage
2 Tier 1 3,250,414 8,905 1.33 11,812 2,907 2.14 19,086 7,275 3 Tier 2 285,707 783 1.48 1,162 379 2.40 1,877 715
4 Tier 3 4,716,622 12,922 2.41 31,081 18,158 3.89 50,222 19,142 5 Non-Building
Water Usage
6 Tier 1 77,000 211 1.55 326 115 2.50 527 201
7 Tier 2 1,131,591 3,100 2.26 7,000 3,900 3.65 11,311 4,311 Table 4-12: Cost Causation Component Unit Cost Calculation

A B C D E F G H I
Line
Cost of
Service
Base Max Day Max Hour Meters Customer
Fire
Protection
Conservation Offset
1 Cost of Service $13,931,671 $6,865,400 $1,985,656 $8,291,267 $987,669 $579,176 $687,758 ($486,443) 2 Units of
Service 9,461,335 25,458 31,643 307,767 138,283 730,987 4,716,622 3,250,414 3 Unit of
Measure ccf ccf/day ccf/day
equiv.
meter/yr bills/yr equiv. line/yr ccf
4 Unit Cost $1.47 $269.67 $62.75 $26.94 $7.14 $0.79 $0.15 ($0.15) City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 43

4.8. Distribution of Cost Components to Customer
Classes
The final step in a cost-of-service analysis is to distribute the cost components to the customer classes using the unit costs derived in Table 4-12. This is the end goal of a cost-of-service analysis and yields the cost to serve each class. Table 4-13 shows the derivation of the costs to serve each class. The supply, base, max day, max hour, conservation, and offset cost components are collected through the commodity charges ($/ccf).

Fire protection, meters, and customer cost components are collected through the City’s bi-monthly fixed service charge ($/2 months) and private fire service charge ($/2 months). The interest revenue, which is a non-rate revenue and over which the City Council has discretion, is applied as an offset to the Tier 1 rate for building usage to provide affordability for low-volume customers. All building users will benefit from the lower rate in Tier 1.

To derive the cost to serve each class, the unit costs from Table 4-12 are multiplied by the respective units of service for each class (Table 4-8, Table 4-9, Table 4-10, and Table 4-11). With the cost to serve each user class calculated, we can proceed to derive rates to collect the cost to serve each commodity class, tier, and meter size.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 44 Table 4-13: Derivation of Costs to Serve Each Class

A B C D E F G H I
Line
Customer
Class Base Max Day Max Hour Meters Customer
Fire
Protection Conservation Offset
1 Building
Water Usage $8,291,267 $960,596
2 Tier 1 $4,786,185 $783,813 $456,485 ($486,443)
3 Tier 2 $420,699 $102,140 $44,889
4 Tier 3 $6,945,155 $4,896,793 $1,201,160 $687,758
5 Non-Building
Water Usage
6 Tier 1 $113,382 $31,042 $12,602
7 Tier 2 $1,666,251 $1,051,612 $270,520
8 Fire
Protection $0 $0 $0 $27,073 $579,176
9 Total Cost of
Service $13,931,671 $6,865,400 $1,985,656 $8,291,267 $987,669 $579,176 $687,758 ($486,443) City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 45

4.9. Rate Calculation

4.9.1. Proposed Bi-Monthly Fixed Charges
Table 4-14 shows the bi-monthly service charge calculation, which consists of the Meter and Customer cost components. The Meter cost component is derived based on total equivalent meters. Therefore, the meter unit cost (Table 4-12, Column E, Line 4) is multiplied by the capacity ratio for each meter size (Column B) to appropriately reflect the share of cost by meter size (Column C). The Customer cost does not vary with meter size, and therefore the Customer unit cost (Table 4-12, Column F, Line 4) is applied uniformly across all meter sizes (Column D). These components added together determine the proposed bi-monthly service charge (Column E).

Table 4-14: Proposed Bi-Monthly Service Charge (FY 2027)

A B C D E F
Line Bi-Monthly
Service Charge
Capacity
Ratio Meter Customer Proposed Charge Current Charge
1 5/8" 1.00 $26.94 $7.14 $34.09 $33.60
2 3/4" 1.43 $38.39 $7.14 $45.54 $44.90
3 1" 2.25 $60.62 $7.14 $67.76 $66.81
4 1 1/2" 4.25 $114.50 $7.14 $121.64 $119.96
5 2" 6.40 $172.42 $7.14 $179.56 $177.10
6 3" 11.25 $303.08 $7.14 $310.22 $305.97
7 4" 17.50 $471.45 $7.14 $478.60 $472.05
8 6" 32.50 $875.55 $7.14 $882.70 $870.64
9 8" 48.00 $1,293.12 $7.14 $1,300.27 $1,282.51
10 10" 114.00 $3,071.17 $7.14 $3,078.32 $3,036.30
11 12" 150.00 $4,041.01 $7.14 $4,048.16 $3,992.91

4.9.2. Proposed Bi-Monthly Fire Service Charges
Table 4-15 shows the bi-monthly service charge calculation, which consists of the Private Fire and Customer cost components. The Private Fire unit cost (Table 4-12, Column G, Line 4) is multiplied by the fire ratio for each fire line diameter (Column B) to appropriately reflect the share of cost by fire line (Column C). A connection’s share of the Customer cost does not vary with fire line size, and therefore the Customer unit cost (Table 4-12, Column F, Line 4) is applied uniformly across all meter sizes (Column D). These components added together arrive at the proposed bi-monthly fire service charge (Column E).

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 46 Table 4-15: Proposed Bi-Monthly Fire Service Charge (FY 2027)

A B C D E F
Line Bi-Monthly Fire Service
Charge
Capacity
Ratio Fire Customer Proposed Charge
Current
Charge
1 2" 6.19 $4.90 $7.14 $12.05 $12.05
2 3" 17.98 $14.25 $7.14 $21.39 $21.63
3 4" 38.32 $30.36 $7.14 $37.51 $38.14
4 6" 111.31 $88.19 $7.14 $95.34 $97.39
5 8" 237.21 $187.94 $7.14 $195.09 $199.61
6 10" 426.58 $337.99 $7.14 $345.14 $353.35
7 12" 689.04 $545.94 $7.14 $553.09 $566.44

4.9.3. Proposed Water Usage Rates
The City’s water usage rates consist of five components: Base, Peaking, Supply, Conservation, and Offset.

The following subsections will present the calculations for each of the components.

4.9.3.1. Base Component
The Base component is applied uniformly across all units of water and is equal to the Base unit cost (Table 4-12, Column B, Line 4).

4.9.3.2. Peaking Component
Table 4-16 shows the Peaking unit cost calculation for each customer class and tier. Peaking costs (Column C) are the sum of Max Day and Max Hour costs for each class and tier (Table 4-13, Columns C and D).

Peaking costs are divided by annual use (Column B) to determine the Peaking unit cost for each class and tier (Column D).

Table 4-16: Peaking Unit Cost Calculation

A B C D
Line Customer Class Annual Use
(ccf)
Peaking
Costs
Unit
Cost
1 Building Water Usage
2 Tier 1 3,250,414 $1,240,298 $0.38
3 Tier 2 285,707 $147,029 $0.51
4 Tier 3 4,716,622 $6,097,952 $1.29
5 Non-Building Water
Usage
6 Tier 1 77,000 $43,644 $0.57
7 Tier 2 1,131,591 $1,322,132 $1.17

4.9.3.3. Supply Component
Table 4-17 shows the calculation of the unit cost for each source of water (Line 6). The percentage from each source (Line 2) is determined by the proportion of volume purchased from each source in Line 1. These proportions are used to determine the proportion of demand from each source (Line 3). The direct water purchase costs (provided by City staff) on Line 4 are divided by the estimated potable demand (Line 3) to City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 47 calculate the unit costs in Line 6. Table 4-18 shows the supply component unit cost calculation for each customer class and tier. The lowest cost water source is used for Tier 1, if that source does not meet the demand, then water from the next lowest source is used and so on. Once the Tier 1 demand is met then Tier 2 is allocated the remaining lowest cost water and so on. The uses for each class and tier from each source (Columns E through H) are multiplied by their respective unit costs (Table 4-17, Line 6) to calculate the total supply cost for each class and tier in Column J. The total costs (Column J) are divided by the total use (Column I) to calculate the supply unit cost for each class and tier (Column K).

Table 4-17: Potable Water Supply Cost

A B C D E F
Line Potable Water Supply
Cost
MC
Surface
SAR Surface
(BV) Groundwater SWP Water Total
1 Volume (AF) 5,700 5,466 10,767 1,342 23,275
2 % from Source 24% 23% 46% 6% 100%
3 Estimated Potable
Demand 2,317,185 2,221,738 4,376,777 545,634 9,461,335
4 Direct Water Purchase
Costs $148,209 $431,779 $1,453,551 $200,000 $2,233,539
5 % of Water Purchase Costs 7% 19% 65% 9% 100%
6 Unit Cost ($/ccf) $0.06 $0.19 $0.33 $0.37 $0.24
The tiers were designed to provide low-cost water from the lowest cost source, which is the Mill Creek (MC) surface water. Since the wildfires of 2024, this source does not provide all the water used in Tier 1 anymore.

However, the turbidity levels of Mill Creek surface water are returning to normal, and the City expects to return to typical historical use of this water source. Therefore, the City has decided to retain that tier definition to provide indoor water use. The second tier basically provides water from the Santa Ana River (SAR) and provide the average water use for irrigation. Tier 3 then uses any remaining water from SAR, groundwater and State Water Project Water.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 48 Table 4-18: Supply Component Calculation

A B C D E F G H I J K
Line Customer Class
Tier
Definitions
Annual Use
(ccf)
% of
Annual Use
MC
Surface
SAR
Surface
(BV)
Groundw
ater
SWP
Water
Total Use
(ccf)
Total Cost
Supply
Unit Cost
1 Building Water
Usage
2 Tier 1 16 3,250,414 34% 2,021,188 1,229,226 0 0 3,250,414 368,169 $0.11 3 Tier 2 27 285,707 3% 0 285,707 0 0 285,707 55,525 $0.19 4 Tier 3 Over 27 4,716,622 50% 0 423,000 3,817,688 475,935 4,716,622 1,524,533 $0.32 5 Non-Building
Water Usage
6 Tier 1 27 77,000 1% 77,000 0 0 0 77,000 4,925 $0.06
7 Tier 2 Over 27 1,131,591 12% 218,997 283,805 559,090 69,699 1,131,591 280,387 $0.25 8 Total Potable
Use 9,461,335 100% 2,317,185 2,221,738 4,376,777 545,634 9,461,335 2,233,539 City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 49

4.9.3.4. Conservation Component
The Conservation component is applied to Building Tier 3 use and is equal to the Conservation unit cost (Table 4-12, Column H, Line 4) for that class and tier only.

4.9.3.5. Offset Component
The Offset component is applied to Building Tier 1 use and is equal to the Offset unit cost (Table 4-12, Column I, Line 4) for that class and tier only. The offset helps to provide affordability in Tier 1 and benefits all building customers.

4.9.3.6. Water Usage Rates
Table 4-19 shows the calculation of proposed water usage rates (Column H) for each customer class and tier based on the five rate components (Columns C through G) described previously.

Table 4-19: Proposed Water Usage Rates (FY 2027)

A B C D E F G H
Line Customer
Class
Bi-monthly
Tiers, ccf Supply Base Delivery Peaking Conservation Offset Proposed Rate 1 Building Water Usage
2 Tier 1 16 $0.11 $1.24 $0.38 $0.00 ($0.15) $1.59
3 Tier 2 27 $0.19 $1.24 $0.51 $0.00 $0.00 $1.95
4 Tier 3 Over 27 $0.32 $1.24 $1.29 $0.15 $0.00 $3.00
5 Non-Building Water Usage
6 Tier 1 27 $0.06 $1.24 $0.57 $0.00 $0.00 $1.87
7 Tier 2 Over 27 $0.25 $1.24 $1.17 $0.00 $0.00 $2.66

4.9.3.7. Proposed Rate Schedule
Table 4-20 and Table 4-21 show the proposed bi-monthly water service charges, private fire service charges, and water usage rates, respectively. The proposed water rates after the FY 2027 test year are increased across the board by the revenue adjustments in Table 3-6.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 50 Table 4-20: Proposed Bi-Monthly Service Charges

A B C D E
Line Bi-Monthly Water Service
Charges
Current
Rates
January
2027 July 2027 July 2028
1 Water Service
2 5/8" $33.60 $34.09 $34.95 $35.83
3 3/4" $44.90 $45.54 $46.68 $47.85
4 1" $66.81 $67.76 $69.46 $71.20
5 1 1/2" $119.96 $121.64 $124.69 $127.81
6 2" $177.10 $179.56 $184.05 $188.66
7 3" $305.97 $310.22 $317.98 $325.93
8 4" $472.05 $478.60 $490.57 $502.84
9 6" $870.64 $882.70 $904.77 $927.39
10 8" $1,282.51 $1,300.27 $1,332.78 $1,366.10
11 10" $3,036.30 $3,078.32 $3,155.28 $3,234.17
12 12" $3,992.91 $4,048.16 $4,149.37 $4,253.11
13 14 Fire Protection Service
15 2" $12.05 $12.05 $12.36 $12.67
16 3" $21.63 $21.39 $21.93 $22.48
17 4" $38.14 $37.51 $38.45 $39.42
18 6" $97.39 $95.34 $97.73 $100.18
19 8" $199.61 $195.09 $199.97 $204.97
20 10" $353.35 $345.14 $353.77 $362.62
21 12" $566.44 $553.09 $566.92 $581.10
22 23 Fire Hydrant Construction
Service Charge
24 All Meters $305.97 $313.62 $321.47 $329.51
Table 4-21: Proposed Water Usage Rates

A B C D E F
Line Water Usage Rates
BiMonthly
Tiers
Current
Rates
January
2027 July 2027 July 2028
1 Building Water Usage
2 Tier 1 16 $1.61 $1.59 $1.63 $1.68
3 Tier 2 27 $1.90 $1.95 $2.00 $2.05
4 Tier 3 Over 27 $2.85 $3.00 $3.08 $3.16
5 6 Non-Building Water Usage
7 Tier 1 27 $1.81 $1.87 $1.92 $1.97
8 Tier 2 Over 27 $2.85 $2.66 $2.73 $2.80
9 10 Fire Protection Water Usage
11 All Units $2.85 $2.93 $3.01 $3.09
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 51

5. Wastewater – Financial Plan
This section of the report details the wastewater enterprise’s long-term financial plan, based on the projected revenues, expenses, debt service, and capital project costs. Raftelis modeled the financial plan without revenue adjustments (status quo) and with proposed revenue adjustments to ensure the financial sustainability and solvency of the wastewater utility. The result of the wastewater financial plan is the total revenue requirement utilized as the basis for the cost-of-service analysis and resulting rates in the next section of the report.

5.1. Customer Accounts and Usage
Table 5-1 shows the projected wastewater customer accounts and water usage for the study period. City staff provided wastewater customer accounts and usage data for FY 2024, which are then projected based on the customer account growth rates from Table 2-1. Typical types of users that fall within the non-residential classes include:
» Low Strength I – Car Wash
» Low Strength II – Office Building
» Low Strength III – Hotel (rooms only, no restaurant)
» Medium Strength I – Laundromat (linen & general)
» Medium Strength II – Mini-Mall
» Medium Strength III – Hotel (with restaurant)
» High Strength I – Laundry (industrial)
» High Strength II - Bakery

5.2. Current Rates
The City’s current wastewater rates include bi-monthly wastewater service charges for residential customers by type of dwelling unit, a non-residential wastewater usage rate based on ccf of water usage per customer class, and for schools by 100 students. Table 5-2 shows the current wastewater rates effective July 1, 2025.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 52 Table 5-1: Projected Wastewater Customer Accounts and Usage

A B C D E
Line Wastewater Customer Data FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 1 Residential (dwelling units)
2 Single Family 16,844 16,937 17,030 17,123
3 Multiple Family 10,127 10,183 10,239 10,295
4 Total - Residential 26,971 27,119 27,268 27,418
5 6 Non-Residential (ccf)
7 Low Strength I 44,333 44,576 44,821 45,067
8 Low Strength II 415,541 417,821 420,114 422,419
9 Low Strength III 90,314 90,810 91,308 91,809
10 Medium Strength I 26,341 26,486 26,631 26,777
11 Medium Strength II 38,299 38,509 38,721 38,933
12 Medium Strength III 19,797 19,906 20,015 20,125
13 High Strength I 10,329 10,386 10,443 10,500
14 High Strength II 137,263 138,016 138,774 139,535
15 Large Volume User 33,481 33,664 33,849 34,035
16 Total - Non-Residential 815,699 820,175 824,675 829,200 17 18 Schools (students)
19 Elementary 4,875 4,901 4,928 4,955
20 Secondary & High 8,234 8,279 8,325 8,371
21 Total - Schools 13,109 13,181 13,253 13,326
Table 5-2: Current Bi-Monthly Wastewater Service Charges and Usage Rates A B
Line Current Wastewater Rates FY 2026
1 Bi-Monthly Residential Rate ($/dwelling unit)
2 Single Family $72.65
3 Multiple Family $57.64
4 5 Non-Residential Rate ($/ccf water)
6 Low Strength I $3.11
7 Low Strength II $3.76
8 Low Strength III $4.39
9 Medium Strength I $5.04
10 Medium Strength II $5.68
11 Medium Strength III $6.33
12 High Strength I $6.98
13 High Strength II $7.62
14 Large Volume User $4.39
15 16 Bi-Monthly Schools Rate ($/100 students)
17 Elementary $157.43
18 Secondary & High $262.38
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 53

5.3. Calculated Rate Revenues at Current Rates
Table 5-3 shows the calculated wastewater rate revenues by customer class. To calculate rate revenues, the current wastewater rates (Table 5-2) are multiplied by the customer account and usage data (Table 5-1) for all years of the study.

Residential rate revenues (Lines 2-3) = Residential wastewater service charge x Residential dwelling units x 6 billing periods
Non-residential rate revenues (Lines 7-15) = Non-residential wastewater usage rate x Non-residential water usage in ccf Schools rate revenues (Lines 19-20) = Schools wastewater service charge x (Number of students / 100 students) x 6 billing periods
Table 5-3: Calculated Wastewater Rate Revenues at Current Rates

A B C D E
Line Calculated Rate Revenues FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 1 Residential (dwelling units)
2 Single Family $7,342,382 $7,382,681 $7,423,200 $7,463,942 3 Multiple Family $3,502,352 $3,521,567 $3,540,886 $3,560,312 4 Total - Residential $10,844,734 $10,904,247 $10,964,086 $11,024,254 5 6 Non-Residential (ccf)
7 Low Strength I $137,875 $138,632 $139,393 $140,158
8 Low Strength II $1,562,435 $1,571,008 $1,579,628 $1,588,296 9 Low Strength III $396,480 $398,655 $400,843 $403,042
10 Medium Strength I $132,761 $133,490 $134,222 $134,958 11 Medium Strength II $217,539 $218,732 $219,932 $221,139 12 Medium Strength III $125,318 $126,005 $126,697 $127,392 13 High Strength I $72,096 $72,492 $72,890 $73,290
14 High Strength II $1,045,945 $1,051,684 $1,057,454 $1,063,257 15 Large Volume User $146,980 $147,786 $148,597 $149,412 16 Total - Non-Residential $3,837,428 $3,858,484 $3,879,656 $3,900,944 17 18 Schools (students)
19 Elementary $46,044 $46,297 $46,551 $46,806
20 Secondary & High $129,631 $130,342 $131,057 $131,776 21 Total - Schools $175,674 $176,638 $177,608 $178,582
22 23 Total - Non-Residential and
Schools $4,013,103 $4,035,123 $4,057,263 $4,079,526
24 Total Revenue at Current Rates $14,857,837 $14,939,370 $15,021,350 $15,103,780 City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 54

5.4. Projected Revenues at Current Rates
Table 5-4 shows the all projected wastewater revenues for the study period. City staff provided actual revenues for FY 2025 and budgeted revenues for FY 2026. The wastewater rate revenues (Lines 3-4) from FY 2027 and beyond are from the rate revenue calculations (Table 5-3, Lines 4 and 23). Investment income (Line 8) is calculated using the reserve interest rate (Table 2-2, Line 2). All other revenues are inflated for future years based on the non-rate revenue inflation factor (Table 2-2, Line 1).

Table 5-4: Projected Wastewater Revenues at Current Rates

A B C D E
Line Projected Revenues FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 1 Wastewater Service (521)
2 Cost Recover/Reimb Expenditure $1,500 $1,508 $1,515 $1,523 3 Sewer Residential $10,844,734 $10,904,247 $10,964,086 $11,024,254 4 Sewer Non-Residential $4,013,103 $4,035,123 $4,057,263 $4,079,526 5 Recycled Water Usage $375,000 $376,875 $378,759 $380,653 6 Septage Charge $55,000 $55,275 $55,551 $55,829
7 Frontage Charge $30,000 $30,150 $30,301 $30,452
8 Investment Income $565,512 $446,861 $355,289 $329,257 9 Total - Wastewater Service (521) $15,884,849 $15,850,038 $15,842,766 $15,901,494

5.5. Projected O&M Expenses
Table 5-5 shows the projected wastewater O&M expenses for the study period. City staff provided the actual O&M expenses for FY 2025 and budgeted O&M expenses for FY 2026, which are escalated for future years of the study based on the expense inflation factors (Table 2-3).

Table 5-5: Projected Wastewater O&M Expenses

A B C D E
Line Projected O&M Expenses FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 1 Wastewater Service (521)
2 Salaries and Benefits $5,245,925 $5,352,199 $5,461,661 $5,574,407 3 Services - Power $1,250,000 $1,287,500 $1,326,125 $1,365,909 4 Services $6,467,494 $6,654,692 $6,847,506 $7,046,104
5 Supplies - Treatment $1,252,500 $1,315,125 $1,380,881 $1,449,925 6 Supplies $1,231,672 $1,268,622 $1,306,681 $1,345,881
7 Total - Wastewater Service
(521) $15,447,591 $15,878,138 $16,322,854 $16,782,226
8 Total - O&M Expenses $15,447,591 $15,878,138 $16,322,854 $16,782,226 City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 55

5.6. Debt Service
The City currently has no existing debt issue for the wastewater utility. To fund the wastewater capital program, the City has obtained an SRF loan of $ 45 million. The SRF loan is a 30-year term at 2.1% interest.

The proposed loan proceeds would be used to fund most of the wastewater treatment plant rehabilitation capital costs. The proposed annual debt service is shown in Table 5-6. Because the SRF loan payments start after completion of the project it is funding, repayment will start in FY 2029.

Table 5-6: Proposed Wastewater Debt Service

A B C D E
Line Proposed Debt Service FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 1 Proposed SRF Loan $0 $45,000,000 $0 $0
2 Loan Proceeds $0 $45,000,000 $0 $0
3 4 Annual Debt Service $1,927,962
5 Total - Proposed Debt
Service $0 $0 $0 $1,927,962

5.7. Capital Projects
City staff provided the CIP for the wastewater utility for the study period. Table 5-7 shows the CIP costs for the study period, which were provided by the client in inflated dollars. The CIP provided consists of projects totaling $55.1 million for the three years FY 2027 through FY 2029. Projects are funded through a combination of wastewater rate revenues, cash reserves, DIF revenues, and debt proceeds.

Table 5-7: Inflated Wastewater Capital Projects

A B C D E
Line Capital Projects (Inflated) FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 1 Replacement
2 CIP Sewerline Replacement $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 3 Citywide Sewer Manhole Rehabilitation $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 4 Alabama Septage Pond Remediation $0 $650,000 $50,000 $50,000 5 WWTP Drying bed leachate remediation $0 $0 $500,000 $0 6 Joint Utility Lab (Design, Bidding &
Construction Support) $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $0
7 Joint Utility Lab Phases (Construction) $1,800,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $0 8 WWTP Rehabilitation - Phase 2 (Construction) $1,000,000 $45,000,000 $0 $0 9 Total - Replacement $4,500,000 $48,850,000 $3,750,000 $1,550,000 10 11 Expansion
12 Pipeline Upsizing - Cajon St (Cypress to Fern) $0 $0 $0 $827,000 13 Pipeline Upsizing - Cajon St @ Citrus Avenue $0 $0 $0 $141,000 14 Total - Expansion $0 $0 $0 $968,000
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 56 Table 5-8 shows the proposed wastewater capital financing plan based on the CIP Table 5-7. The City plans to fully fund its wastewater CIP for all years of the study (Line 1). The debt proceeds (Line 11) are from the proposed Debt issues (Table 5-6, Line 2).

Table 5-8: Proposed Wastewater Capital Financing Plan

A B C D E
Line Capital Financing Plan FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 1 CIP to Spend 100% 100% 100% 100%
2 3 Inflated Project Costs $4,500,000 $48,850,000 $3,750,000 $1,550,000 4 5 Capital Financing
6 Rate Funded $4,500,000 $3,850,000 $3,750,000 $1,550,000 7 Bond Funded $0 $0 $0 $0
8 Loan Funded $0 $45,000,000 $0 $0

5.8. Proposed Financial Plan
Table 5-9 shows the proposed revenue adjustments necessary to maintain the financial sufficiency of the City’s wastewater utility. The revenue adjustments will be effective starting January 2027 and in July each year thereafter.

Table 5-9: Proposed Wastewater Revenue Adjustments
A B C
Line Fiscal Year Revenue
Adjustment Month Effective
1 FY 2027 7.0% January 2027
2 FY 2028 7.0% July 2027
3 FY 2029 7.0% July 2028
Table 5-10 shows the projected wastewater financial plan with the proposed revenue adjustments (Table 5-9).

The net cash flow (Line 25) is negative in some years of the study period but will reduce the wastewater cash balances significantly less than under the status quo scenario. With the proposed revenue adjustments and debt issuance, the wastewater utility will meet its debt coverage ratio requirements (Line 29) and have positive ending balances (Line 32).

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 57 Table 5-10: Projected Wastewater Financial Plan (Proposed Revenue Adjustments)

A B C D E
Line Wastewater Financial Plan FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 1 Revenues
2 Rate Revenues $14,912,837 $14,994,645 $15,076,901 $15,159,609 3 Revenue Adjustments $0 $524,813 $2,184,643 $3,411,564 4 Investment Income $416,893 $314,286 $220,760 $207,562 5 Sale of Surplus Property $375,000 $375,000 $375,000 $375,000 6 Other Revenues $1,261,500 $1,387,808 $1,274,147 $1,280,517 7 Total - Revenues $16,966,230 $17,596,551 $19,131,451 $20,434,252 8 9 O&M Expenses
10 Salaries and Benefits $5,245,925 $5,352,199 $5,461,661 $5,574,407 11 Services - Power $1,250,000 $1,287,500 $1,326,125 $1,365,909 12 Services $6,467,494 $6,654,692 $6,847,506 $7,046,104 14 Supplies - Treatment $1,252,500 $1,315,125 $1,380,881 $1,449,925 15 Supplies $1,231,672 $1,268,622 $1,306,681 $1,345,881 16 Total - O&M Expenses $15,447,591 $15,878,138 $16,322,854 $16,782,226 17 18 Debt and Capital
19 Existing Debt Service $0 $0 $0 $0
20 Proposed Debt Service $0 $0 $0 $1,927,962
21 Rate Funded Capital Projects $4,500,000 $3,850,000 $3,750,000 $1,550,000 22 DIF Funded Capital Projects $0 $0 $0 $968,000
23 Total - Debt and Capital $4,500,000 $3,850,000 $3,750,000 $4,445,962 24 25 Net Cash Flow ($2,981,361) ($2,251,587) ($941,403) ($793,936) 26 Net Operating Revenue $1,518,639 $1,598,413 $2,808,597 $3,652,026 27 28 Calculated Debt Coverage #N/A #N/A #N/A 1.76
29 Required Debt Coverage 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25
30 31 Beginning Balances $15,844,918 $12,863,557 $10,611,971 $9,670,567 32 Ending Balances $12,863,557 $10,611,971 $9,670,567 $8,876,631 City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 58 Figure 5-1 shows the proposed wastewater capital financing plan in graphical format, based on the capital financial plan shown in Table 5-8. The dark teal bars represent the portion of replacement CIP funded by rates and the turquoise bars represent the portion of replacement CIP funded by bond proceeds. Most of the capital projects in FY 2027 are funded from SRF Loan proceeds.

Figure 5-1: Proposed Wastewater Capital Financing Plan
Figure 5-2 shows the projected wastewater financial plan with the proposed revenue adjustments. Although the net cash flow is still negative in some years of the study, shown by the green bars under the stacked grey, yellow, and teal bars, the additional revenue will allow the wastewater utility to meet its debt coverage requirements and fund its operating and capital costs for the Study period.

Figure 5-2: Projected Wastewater Financial Plan (Proposed Revenue Adjustments) City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 59 Figure 5-3 shows the projected wastewater fund balances with the proposed revenue adjustments. The cash balances are positive for all years of the Study. These balances are drawn down to fund the City’s capital projects in FY 2027, FY 2028, and FY 2029.

Figure 5-3: Projected Wastewater Fund Balances (Proposed Revenue Adjustments) $0
$2
$4
$6
$8
$10
$12
$14
$16
$18
$20
FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029
Millions
Wastewater - Ending Balances
Cash Balance Reserve Target
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 60

6. Wastewater – Cost of Service
Analysis and Rates
This section of the report details the cost-of-service analysis and rate calculation process to determine the proposed wastewater rates. The goal of this process is to determine the cost of providing wastewater service to each of the City’s wastewater customer classes and to ensure equity and fairness among the various classes.

6.1. Process and Approach
The cost-of-service analysis utilized to develop the wastewater rates followed the guidelines for allocating costs outlined in the WEF Manual No. 27. The cost-of-service analysis and rate design process consists of eight major steps, as outlined below:

1. Determine the revenue requirement, equal to the revenue to be recovered from rates.

2. Conduct a treatment plant mass balance analysis to estimate the flows and strength characteristics of each customer class.

3. Functionalize O&M expenses and capital assets into functional categories such as treatment, laboratory, collection, engineering, etc.

4. Allocate each functional category into cost components such as wastewater flow and strength, which includes BOD and TSS.

5. Develop customer class characteristics and units of service by cost component.

6. Calculate the cost component unit rates by dividing the total cost in each cost component by the total units of service for that component. For example, wastewater flow is measured in ccf and BOD and TSS are measured in lbs per year.

7. Calculate the cost for each customer class by multiplying the unit cost by the units of service for each customer class.

8. Design rates to meet City’s objectives.

6.2. Revenue Requirement
The first step of the cost-of-service analysis is to determine the revenue requirement for the test year, or ratemaking year. The test year of this study is FY 2027. Table 6-1 shows the revenue requirement calculation for the wastewater utility.

The revenue requirements (Lines 2-3) are equal to the O&M expenses and debt and capital costs for FY 2027 (Table 5-10, Column C, Lines 16 and 23). The revenues from other sources (Lines 7-10), also known as nonrate revenues or revenue offsets, are equal to all non-rate revenues (Table 5-10, Column C, Lines 4-6). The adjustment for cash from/(to) reserves (Line 15) is equal to the negative value of net cash flow (Table 5-10, Column C, Line 25).

The revenue to be recovered from rates (Line 18) is divided between operating (Column B) and capital (Column C) based on the function of each line item. For example, debt and capital costs (Line 3) are allocated to capital, while O&M expenses (Line 2) are allocated to operating. Note that the total revenue requirement (Column D, Line 18) is equal to rate revenues for a full year of the revenue adjustment for FY 2027.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 61 Table 6-1: Wastewater Revenue Requirement Calculation

A B C D
Line Revenue Requirement (FY 2027) Operating Capital Total 1 Revenue Requirements
2 O&M Expenses $15,878,138 $0 $15,878,138
3 Debt and Capital $0 $3,850,000 $3,850,000
4 Total - Revenue Requirements $15,878,138 $3,850,000 $19,728,138 5 6 Revenue from Other Sources
7 Investment Income $0 $314,286 $314,286
8 Recycled Water $375,000 $0 $375,000
9 Wastewater Service (521) $463,808 $0 $463,808
10 Transfer from (to) Capital
Improvement Fund (529) $0 $924,000 $924,000
11 Total - Revenue from Other Sources $838,808 $1,238,286 $2,077,094 12 13 Less Adjustments
14 Cash from Reserves $0 $2,251,587 $2,251,587
15 Midyear Increase ($524,813) $0 ($524,813)
16 Subtotal - Less Adjustments ($524,813) $2,251,587 $1,726,774 17 18 Revenue to be Recovered from Rates $15,564,143 $360,127 $15,924,270

6.3. Plant Mass Balance
The second step of the cost-of-service analysis is to conduct a plant mass balance analysis. The plant mass balance analysis is used to estimate and validate the wastewater loadings (flow and strength) generated by each customer class. While wastewater discharged into sewers is not metered, the total amount of flow and strength entering the treatment plant is a known quantity. The quantity entering into the wastewater treatment plant is called total plant influent.

From the total plant influent, a portion is subtracted for inflows and infiltration (I&I). Non-residential customer flows can be estimated based on their water usage and using City-accepted return factors. From there, residential customer loadings can be calculated by subtracting I&I and estimated non-residential loadings from total plant influent to determine the reasonableness of residential loadings.

Table 6-2 shows the wastewater flow estimates for elementary and secondary schools. The estimated wastewater flow per student (Line 1) in gallons per capita per day (gpcd) is based on industry standards, with some conservation factored in for secondary schools. This is multiplied by the projected number of students for FY 2025 (Table 5-1, Column C, Lines 19-20). The annual flow in gallons (Line 3) is converted to ccf (Line 4) to determine the total wastewater flow in ccf for elementary and secondary schools.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 62 Table 6-2: Schools Wastewater Flow Estimate
A B C
Line Schools Elementary Secondary
1 Per Student Flow (gcpd) 5 8
2 Students 4,901 8,279
3 Annual Flow (gal) 8,050,355 22,665,011
4 Annual Flow (ccf) 10,763 30,301
Table 6-3 shows the plant balance analysis for all customer classes. There is no change to the customer classes, which are grouped by the strength of their wastewater flow. The left-most columns (Columns B to D) represent the same values as the right-most columns (Columns F to H) in converted units. Flow is measured in million gallons per day (MGD) and converted to ccf per year. BOD and TSS are measured in milligrams per liter (mg/L) and converted to lbs per year.

City staff provided total plant influent (Line 1) and estimated approximately seven percent (7%) of total influent to be from I&I (Line 2). Customers are grouped based on their strength and estimated strength - BOD and TSS in mg/L (Columns C and D, Lines 6-17) - are based on industry standards. The non-residential return factors, which represent the wastewater generated from water use (Column E) are estimated for the City’s characteristics. The wastewater flows for non-residential customers (Column F, Lines 6-14) are calculated by multiplying the non-residential water usage (Table 5-1, Column C, Lines 7-15) by the return factors. The estimated wastewater flows for schools (Column D, Lines 16-17) were calculated in Table 6-2.

Septage loadings (Line 20) represent a small portion of total plant loadings; flow is derived from data provided by City staff, and strength is based on industry standards.

The net residential loadings (Line 22) are determined by subtracting non-residential loadings (Lines 6-17), septage (Line 20), and I&I (Line 2) from total plant influent (Line 1).

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 63 Table 6-3: Wastewater Plant Balance Calculation

A B C D E F G H
Line Plant Balance Flow (MGD) BOD (mg/L) TSS (mg/L) Return Factor Flow (ccf) BOD (lbs/yr) TSS (lbs/yr)
1 Total Plant Influent 5.86 309 312 2,859,492 5,515,643 5,569,193 2 Less: I&I 0.41 100 100 200,164 124,950 124,950
3 Net Plant Influent 5.45 325 328 2,659,328 5,390,693 5,444,243 4 5 Non-Residential
6 Low Strength I 0.08 50 50 84% 37,444 11,687 11,687
7 Low Strength II 0.72 150 150 84% 350,970 328,632 328,632 8 Low Strength III 0.16 250 250 84% 76,280 119,042 119,042 9 Medium Strength I 0.05 350 350 84% 22,248 48,609 48,609 10 Medium Strength II 0.07 450 450 84% 32,348 90,867 90,867 11 Medium Strength III 0.03 550 550 84% 16,721 57,408 57,408 12 High Strength I 0.02 650 650 84% 8,724 35,398 35,398 13 High Strength II 0.24 750 750 84% 115,934 542,775 542,775 14 Large Volume User 0.06 250 250 84% 28,278 44,130 44,130 15 16 Elementary School 0.02 130 130 100% 10,763 8,734 8,734 17 Secondary & High School 0.06 130 130 100% 30,301 24,589 24,589 18 Subtotal Non-Residential Flow 1.50 288 288 730,010 1,311,871 1,311,871 19 20 Septage 0.001 5,400 12,000 488 16,449 36,553
21 22 Net Residential Flow 3.95 337 340 1,928,829 4,062,373 4,095,819 City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 64 The plant mass balance analysis in Table 6-3 results in total estimated residential loadings. Table 6-4 shows the number of total single family and multiple family dwelling units. To allocate the total flow and strength between single and multiple family customers, the dwelling units (Table 5-1, Column D, Lines 2-3) are multiplied by the dwelling unit (DU) ratio (Column C) to determine the adjusted units (Column D). The dwelling unit ratio represents the amount of wastewater flow compared to the average flow from a single family customer. The ratio for multiple family dwelling units is lower than that of single family because multiple family units tend to have a smaller household size based on American Community Survey (ACS) housing density data. The proportion of adjusted units (Column E), or equivalent dwelling units (EDU), is used to allocate the estimated residential loadings between single and multiple families.

Table 6-4: Residential Proportion of Wastewater Flow

A B C D E
Line Residential Customer
Classes
Dwelling
Units DU Ratio Adjusted Units
Proportion of
Total Units
1 Single Family 16,937 1.00 16,937 67.7%
2 Multiple Family 10,183 0.79 8,079 32.3%
3 Total - Residential 27,119 25,016 100.0%
Table 6-5 shows the estimated residential wastewater loadings, allocated using the EDU ratios (Table 6-4, Column E). The total residential flow (Line 3) is equal to that calculated in the plant mass balance analysis (Table 6-3, Columns F to H, Line 22). To validate the results of the plant mass balance analysis, the total estimated residential flow is divided by the total population estimate, equal to approximately 70,130 people, to determine that each resident in the City uses approximately 56 gpcd. The residential wastewater strength, in mg/l, shown in Table 6-3, Line 22, is also reasonable given the reduced wastewater flow. This is a reasonable estimate based on industry standard wastewater flow and strength estimates.

Table 6-5: Estimated Residential Wastewater Loadings

A B C D
Line Residential Customer
Classes Flow (ccf) BOD (lbs/yr) TSS (lbs/yr)
1 Single Family 1,305,878 2,750,354 2,772,998
2 Multiple Family 622,951 1,312,019 1,322,821
3 Total - Residential 1,928,829 4,062,373 4,095,819
The estimated flow from a single family dwelling unit is approximately 158 gpd. The wastewater strength is higher because of lower wastewater flow due to conservation. This is now common for residential flow and strength. The estimated flow is calculated as follows:
1,305,878 ccf per year / 16,937 units x 748 gallons per ccf / 365 days per year = 158 gpd City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 65

6.4. Operating and Capital Cost Allocation
The next step in the cost-of-service analysis is to determine the operating and capital cost allocations by cost component. The cost components in this Study include flow, BOD, TSS, and general.

Table 6-6 shows the wastewater operating cost allocation. The flow cost component represents costs associated with wastewater flow, such as collection. The BOD and TSS cost components represent costs associated with wastewater strength, such as treatment and laboratory analyses. General costs, such as administration or engineering costs, do not have a specific function.

For the purpose of allocating operating costs, City staff provided the O&M expense budget estimates by function (Column F, Lines 13-21). This is representative of the distribution of operating costs shown in Table 5-5. Functions include administration, engineering, treatment and operations, treatment plant maintenance, quality control, industrial waste monitoring, collection, and laboratory. The operating costs are allocated to each cost component based on the percentage allocation (Lines 2-10) for each component. The final O&M expense allocation (Line 23) is determined by taking the weighted proportion of total operating costs by cost component based on the percentage allocations.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 66 Table 6-6: Wastewater Operating Cost Allocation

A B C D E F
Line O&M Expense Allocation Flow BOD TSS General Total
1 Percentage Allocation
2 Wastewater Admin & General 100% 100%
3 Wastewater Engineering 100% 100%
4 Wastewater Treatment and Operations 50% 25% 25% 100%
5 Wastewater Treatment Plant
Maintenance 50% 25% 25% 100%
6 Wastewater Quality Control 50% 50% 100%
7 Wastewater Industrial Waste
Monitoring 95% 2.5% 2.5% 100%
8 Wastewater Collection System -
General 100% 100%
9 WW Joint Laboratory - Water 50% 50% 100%
10 WW Joint Laboratory - Solid Waste 50% 50% 100%
11 12 Dollar Allocation
13 Wastewater Admin & General $0 $0 $0 $3,809,968 $3,809,968 14 Wastewater Engineering $0 $0 $0 $831,036 $831,036
15 Wastewater Treatment and Operations $2,686,067 $1,343,034 $1,343,034 $0 $5,372,135 16 Wastewater Treatment Plant
Maintenance $684,383 $342,192 $342,192 $0 $1,368,766
17 Wastewater Quality Control $0 $408,646 $408,646 $0 $817,291 18 Wastewater Industrial Waste
Monitoring $1,000,947 $26,341 $26,341 $0 $1,053,628
19 Wastewater Collection System -
General $2,252,964 $0 $0 $0 $2,252,964
20 WW Joint Laboratory - Water $0 $181,233 $181,233 $0 $362,465 21 WW Joint Laboratory - Solid Waste $0 $4,942 $4,942 $0 $9,9885 22 Total - O&M Expenses $6,624,361 $2,306,386 $2,306,386 $4,641,004 $15,878,138 23 O&M Expense Allocation 41.7% 14.5% 14.5% 29.2% 100.0% Table 6-7 shows the wastewater capital cost allocation. To minimize fluctuations in the capital cost allocation as capital projects change from year to year, capital costs are allocated on the basis of capital assets. For the purpose of allocating capital costs, City staff provided the wastewater capital assets listed by function (Column F, Lines 10-15). Functions include land, wastewater facilities, construction in progress, machinery and equipment, collection system, and vehicles. The capital asset costs are allocated into each cost component based on the percentage allocation (Lines 2-7) for each component. The final capital expense allocation (Line 17) is determined by taking the weighted proportion of total capital asset costs by cost component.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 67 Table 6-7: Wastewater Capital Costs Allocation

A B C D E F
Line Capital Expense Allocation Flow BOD TSS General Total 1 Percentage Allocation
2 Land (For WWTP and Perc Ponds) 30% 40% 30% 100%
3 Wastewater Facilities/Plant 45% 30% 25% 100%
4 Construction in Progress 100% 100%
5 Machinery and Equipment 45% 30% 25% 100%
6 Collection System 100% 100%
7 Vehicles 100% 100%
8 9 Dollar Allocation
10 Land (For WWTP and Perc Ponds) $1,331,650 $1,775,533 $1,331,650 $0 $4,438,832 11 Wastewater Facilities/Plant $4,776,426 $3,184,284 $2,653,570 $0 $10,614,280 12 Construction in Progress $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
13 Machinery and Equipment $74,556 $49,704 $41,420 $0 $165,680 14 Collection System $18,220,858 $0 $0 $0 $18,220,858
15 Vehicles $186,819 $0 $0 $0 $186,819
16 Total - Capital Assets $24,590,309 $5,009,521 $4,026,640 $0 $33,626,469 17 Capital Expense Allocation 73% 15% 12% 0% 100%

6.5. Unit Cost Components
Table 6-8 shows the wastewater service units by cost component, which are from the plant mass balance analysis (Table 6-3).

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 68 Table 6-8: Wastewater Service Units by Cost Component

A B C D
Line Customer Class WW Flow (ccf) BOD (lbs/yr) TSS (lbs/yr) 1 Residential
2 Single Family Residence 1,305,878 2,750,354 2,772,998 3 Multi-Family Residence 622,951 1,312,019 1,322,821
4 Total - Residential 1,928,829 4,062,373 4,095,819
5 6 Non-Residential
7 Low Strength I 37,444 11,687 11,687
8 Low Strength II 350,970 328,632 328,632
9 Low Strength III 76,280 119,042 119,042
10 Medium Strength I 22,248 48,609 48,609
11 Medium Strength II 32,348 90,867 90,867
12 Medium Strength III 16,721 57,408 57,408
13 High Strength I 8,724 35,398 35,398
14 High Strength II 115,934 542,775 542,775
15 Large Volume User 28,278 44,130 44,130
16 Total - Non-Residential 688,947 1,278,548 1,278,548
17 18 Schools
19 Elementary School 10,763 8,734 8,734
20 Secondary & High School 30,301 24,589 24,589
21 Total - Schools 41,063 33,323 33,323
22 23 Septage 488 16,449 36,553
24 25 Total 2,659,328 5,390,693 5,444,243
Table 6-9 shows the calculation of unit costs by cost component. The operating revenue requirement (Table 6-1, Column B, Line 19) is allocated based on the O&M expense allocation (Table 6-6, Line 23) for each cost component. Similarly, the capital revenue requirement (Table 6-1, Column C, Line 19) is allocated based on the capital asset allocation (Table 6-7, Line 17). Then, the general costs (Column E, Line 3) are reallocated to the flow, BOD, and TSS cost components proportionately to the remaining costs of service. The adjusted cost of service for each cost component (Line 5) is divided by the units of service (Line 7) derived from Table 6-8, resulting in the unit cost component.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 69 Table 6-9: Wastewater Cost of Service and Unit Costs

A B C D E F
Lin
e
Cost of Service
Allocation WW Flow BOD TSS General Total
1 Operating Cost $6,493,363 $2,260,777 $2,260,777 $4,549,226 $15,564,143 2 Capital Cost $263,353 $53,650 $43,124 $0 $360,127
3 Total Cost of Service $6,756,716 $2,314,427 $2,303,901 $4,549,226 $15,924,270 4 Allocation of General
Costs $2,702,216 $925,610 $921,400 ($4,549,226) $0
5 Adjusted Cost of Service $9,458,932 $3,240,037 $3,225,301 $0 $15,924,270 6 7 Units of Service 2,659,328 5,390,693 5,444,243
8 ccf lbs/yr lbs/yr
9 10 Unit Cost $3.56 $0.60 $0.59
11 ccf lbs/yr lbs/yr

6.6. Revenue Requirement Allocation
The final step in the cost-of-service analysis is to allocate the revenue requirement to each customer class based on their share of burden in the wastewater system. Table 6-10 shows the revenue requirement allocated to each customer class based on the cost components, which is calculated by multiplying the unit costs of each cost component (Table 6-9, Line 10 ) by the units of service for each customer class (Table 6-8). Note that the total cost of service (Column E, Line 25) is equal to the total revenue required from rates (Table 6-1, Column D, Line 18). The calculations in the table may not be equal to the precise number shown due to rounding within the tables.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 70 Table 6-10: Allocation of Wastewater Revenue Requirement to Customer Classes

A B C D E
Line Customer Class Flow BOD TSS Total
1 Residential
2 Single Family Residence $4,644,863 $1,653,081 $1,642,791 $7,940,735 3 Multi-Family Residence $2,215,768 $788,579 $783,671 $3,788,018 4 Total - Residential $6,860,632 $2,441,660 $2,426,462 $11,728,754 5 6 Non-Residential
7 Low Strength I $133,184 $7,024 $6,924 $147,132
8 Low Strength II $1,248,361 $197,522 $194,690 $1,640,572 9 Low Strength III $271,320 $71,549 $70,523 $413,393
10 Medium Strength I $79,135 $29,216 $28,797 $137,147
11 Medium Strength II $115,057 $54,615 $53,832 $223,504 12 Medium Strength III $59,475 $34,505 $34,010 $127,990 13 High Strength I $31,030 $21,276 $20,971 $73,276
14 High Strength II $412,363 $326,231 $321,553 $1,060,147 15 Large Volume User $100,582 $26,524 $26,144 $153,250
16 Total - Non-Residential $2,450,507 $768,462 $757,443 $3,976,412 17 18 Schools
19 Elementary School $38,281 $5,249 $5,174 $48,705
20 Secondary & High School $107,777 $14,779 $14,567 $137,123 21 Total - Schools $146,058 $20,029 $19,741 $185,828
22 23 Septage $1,736 $9,886 $21,655 $33,277
24 25 Total $9,458,932 $3,240,037 $3,225,301 $15,924,270

6.7. Rate Calculation
Table 6-11 shows the rate calculation for the City’s proposed wastewater rates for the FY 2027 test year.

Bi-monthly residential service charge = Residential cost of service / dwelling units / 6 billing periods Non-residential wastewater rate = Non-residential cost of service / ccf of water usage Bi-monthly schools service charge = Schools cost of service / students x 100 students / 6 billing periods The City’s wastewater utility incurs additional costs (Line 22) to serve septage customers above and beyond the allocated cost of service. These additional costs are equal to the total burdened labor cost for administrative work related to collecting septage. Note that the revenues from septage charges were estimated in the projected wastewater revenues (Table 5-4, Line 6). The additional costs are calculated as follows:
$30 per hour x 0.25 hours x 2 for overhead costs = $15 per load City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 71 Table 6-11: Wastewater Bi-Monthly Rate Calculation

A B C D
Line Customer Class Cost of Service FY 2027 Units Proposed BiMonthly Rate 1 Residential dwelling units per dwelling unit
2 Single Family Residence $7,940,735 16,937 $78.15
3 Multi-Family Residence $3,788,018 10,183 $62.01
4 5 Non-Residential ccf of water per ccf
6 Low Strength I $147,132 44,576 $3.31
7 Low Strength II $1,640,572 417,821 $3.93
8 Low Strength III $413,393 90,810 $4.56
9 Medium Strength I $137,147 26,486 $5.18
10 Medium Strength II $223,504 38,509 $5.81
11 Medium Strength III $127,990 19,906 $6.43
12 High Strength I $73,276 10,386 $7.06
13 High Strength II $1,060,147 138,016 $7.69
14 Large Volume User $153,250 33,664 $4.56
15 16 Schools students per 100 students
17 Elementary School $48,705 4,901 $165.62
18 Secondary & High School $137,123 8,279 $276.04
19 20 Septage gallons per gallon
21 Cost of Service $33,242 329,455 $0.11
22 Additional Costs $2,471 329,455 $0.01
23 Total Septage $35,713 329,455 $0.11
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 72 Table 6-12 shows the bi-monthly rate comparison between the proposed rates calculated in Table 6-11 and the City’s current wastewater rates.

Table 6-12: Wastewater Bi-Monthly Rate Comparison

A B C D
Line Customer Class Proposed BiMonthly Rate
Current BiMonthly Rate Difference ($)
1 Residential per dwelling unit
2 Single Family Residence $78.15 $72.65 $5.50
3 Multi-Family Residence $62.01 $57.64 $4.37
4 5 Non-Residential per ccf
6 Low Strength I $3.31 $3.11 $0.20
7 Low Strength II $3.93 $3.76 $0.17
8 Low Strength III $4.56 $4.39 $0.17
9 Medium Strength I $5.18 $5.04 $0.14
10 Medium Strength II $5.81 $5.68 $0.13
11 Medium Strength III $6.43 $6.33 $0.10
12 High Strength I $7.06 $6.98 $0.08
13 High Strength II $7.69 $7.62 $0.07
14 Large Volume User $4.56 $4.39 $0.17
15 16 Schools per 100 students
17 Elementary School $165.62 $157.43 $8.19
18 Secondary & High School $276.04 $262.38 $13.66
19 20 Septage per gallon
21 Septage Charge * $0.11 $0.11 $0.00
* minimum septage charge is $15

6.8. Proposed Rates
Table 6-13 and Table 6-14 show the proposed bi-monthly wastewater service charges and the non-residential wastewater rates, respectively. The proposed wastewater rates for January 2027 are from Table 6-11. The proposed wastewater rates in the following years are increased across the board by the revenue adjustments in Table 5-9.

Table 6-13: Proposed Bi-Monthly Wastewater Service Charges

A B C D E
Line Bi-Monthly Wastewater
Service Charges
Current
Rates
January
2027 July 2027 July 2028
1 Residential ($/dwelling unit)
2 Single Family $72.65 $78.15 $83.63 $89.49
3 Multiple Family $57.64 $62.01 $66.36 $71.01
4 5 Schools ($/100 students)
6 Elementary $157.43 $165.62 $177.22 $189.63
7 Secondary & High $262.38 $276.04 $295.37 $316.05
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 73 Table 6-14: Proposed Non-Residential Wastewater Rates

A B C D E
Line Wastewater Usage Rates Current
Rates January
2027 July 2027 July 2028
1 Non-Residential Usage ($/ccf)
2 Low Strength I $3.11 $3.31 $3.55 $3.80
3 Low Strength II $3.76 $3.93 $4.21 $4.51
4 Low Strength III $4.39 $4.56 $4.88 $5.23
5 Medium Strength I $5.04 $5.18 $5.55 $5.94
6 Medium Strength II $5.68 $5.81 $6.22 $6.66
7 Medium Strength III $6.33 $6.43 $6.89 $7.38
8 High Strength I $6.98 $7.06 $7.56 $8.09
9 High Strength II $7.62 $7.69 $8.23 $8.81
10 Large Volume User $4.39 $4.56 $4.88 $5.23
11 Minimum Charge ($) $57.64 $62.01 $66.36 $71.01
12 13 Septage Charge ($/gal) $0.11 $0.11 $0.12 $0.13
14 Minimum Septage Charge $15.00 $16.50 $18.15
City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 74

7. Non-Potable Water – Financial
Plan
This section of the report details the non-potable enterprise’s long-term financial plan, based on the projected revenues, expenses, debt service, and capital project costs. Raftelis modeled the financial plan without revenue adjustments (status quo) and with proposed revenue adjustments to ensure the financial sustainability and solvency of the non-potable water utility.

7.1. Projected Revenues
City staff provided the actual FY 2025 revenues and budgeted FY 2026 revenues for the non-potable water utility, which were used to project revenues for the remainder of the Study period. Table 7-1 shows the projected water revenues for each of the non-potable water funds.

The non-potable water rate revenues (Lines 2-3) are inflated for future years based on the weighted customer account growth assumptions for each customer class (Table 2-1). The City expects modest increases in nonpotable water rate revenues for all years of the Study. The investment incomes (Lines 4 and 9) are calculated using the reserve interest rate (Table 2-2, Line 2). The remaining revenues are inflated using the non-rate revenue inflation factor (Table 2-2, Line 1).

Table 7-1: Projected Non-Potable Water Revenues

A B C D E
Line Projected Revenues FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 1 Non-Potable Water Service (531)
2 Non-Potable Water Usage $325,000 $326,625 $328,258 $329,899 3 Non-Potable Water Service Chrg $250,000 $251,250 $252,506 $253,769 4 Investment Income $139,197 $149,953 $140,610 $149,282 5 Total - Non-Potable Water Service
(531) $714,197 $727,828 $721,374 $732,951
6 7
Non-Potable Capital Improvement
(549)
8 Capital Improv Chrg Non-Res $125,000 $128,750 $132,613 $136,591 9 Investment Income $52,230 $37,549 $28,583 $18,995
10 Total - Non-Potable Capital
Improvement (549) $125,000 $128,750 $132,613 $136,591
11 12 Total - Revenues $839,197 $856,578 $853,987 $869,541 City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 75

7.2. Projected O&M Expenses
City staff provided the non-potable water O&M actual expenses for FY 2025 and budgeted O&M expenses for FY 2026. Table 7-2 shows the projected O&M expenses for the study period, inflated for FY 2027 and beyond using the expense inflation factors (Table 2-3).

Table 7-2: Projected Non-Potable Water O&M Expenses

A B C D E
Line Projected O&M Expenses FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 1 Non-Potable Water Service (531)
2 Salaries and Benefits $103,312 $106,411 $109,603 $112,891 3 Services - Power $22,271 $23,384 $24,553 $25,781
4 Services $265,180 $273,135 $281,329 $289,769
5 Supplies $175,270 $180,529 $185,944 $191,523
6 Total - Non-Potable Water Service
(531) $566,033 $583,459 $601,430 $619,964
7 8 Non-Potable Projects (543)
9 Salaries and Benefits $0 $0 $0 $0
10 Services - Power $0 $0 $0 $0
11 Services $0 $0 $0 $0
12 Supplies $0 $0 $0 $0
13 Total - Non-Potable Projects (543) $0 $0 $0 $0
14 15 Total - O&M Expenses $566,033 $583,459 $601,430 $619,964

7.3. Debt Service
The City does not have any existing debt for the non-potable water utility and does not plan to incur new debt to fund capital projects for the study period.

7.4. Capital Projects
The City currently does not have any capital improvement projects planned for the study period.

City of Redlands / Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Rate Study 76 Proposed Financial Plan
Table 7-3 shows the proposed non-potable water revenue adjustments over the study period. Currently, Raftelis does not recommend any revenue adjustments.

Table 7-3: Proposed Non-Potable Water Revenue Adjustments A B C
Line Fiscal Year Revenue
Adjustment
Month
Effective
1 FY 2027 0.0% January
2 FY 2028 0.0% July
3 FY 2029 0.0% July

7.5. Proposed Rates
Since there are no revenue adjustments proposed for the non-potable system, the current non-potable water rates will remain in effect as shown in Table 7-4 and
Table 7-5.

Table 7-4: Proposed Bi-Monthly Non-Potable Water Service Charges ($/meter size)

A B C D E
Line Bi-Monthly Non-Potable
Water Service Charges
Current
Rates
January
2027 July 2027 July 2028
1 Non-Potable Water Service
2 3/4" $13.81 $13.81 $13.81 $13.81
3 1" $20.65 $20.65 $20.65 $20.65
4 1 1/2" $37.29 $37.29 $37.29 $37.29
5 2" $55.16 $55.16 $55.16 $55.16
6 3" $95.50 $95.50 $95.50 $95.50
7 4" $147.45 $147.45 $147.45 $147.45
8 6" $272.16 $272.16 $272.16 $272.16
9 8" $401.04 $401.04 $401.04 $401.04
Table 7-5: Proposed Non-Potable Water Usage Rates ($/ccf of water)

8. Water Rates for Largest Users
Recent regulatory changes detailed in AB 755 passed in 2023 and codified in Water Code, §§ 390 & 390.1 require us to identify the costs to serve the largest 10 percent of the users in the City. Proposition 218 requires rates that allocate costs of service proportionately, not special rates for the top 10% of consumers regardless of other factors.

The City currently has approximately 22,415 accounts; the top 10% of users represent 2,241 accounts and

54.6% of total water use. These large users are primarily non-residential accounts. The City sells water from local sources and has adequate supplies from various sources so that it does not need to purchase water. The lowest cost water is shared in proportion by both classes of customers. The 10% largest users use most of their water in Tier 3 and pay for the more expensive water sources. Based on the preceding factors, it is our professional judgment that the rate tiers proposed in Table 4-21 are the most efficient and fairest way to allocate the City’s costs among those who create those costs.

CITY OF REDLANDS
APRIL 2026

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING PROPOSED ADOPTION OF WATER AND

WASTEWATER UTILITY RATE INCREASES
The City Council of the City of Redlands is currently considering an increase to its water and wastewater utility rates.

You are receiving this notice because you are a City water and/or wastewater utility customer, or an owner of property receiving water and/or wastewater utility services from the City. This notice describes the proposed rate increases and explains how you may participate in a public hearing and the rate-setting process.

On July 7, 2026, at 6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, pursuant to Article XIIID of the California Constitution (Proposition 218), a public hearing on the proposed water and wastewater rate increases will be held by the City Council in the Council Chambers, located at 35 Cajon Street, Redlands, CA 92373. The purpose of the hearing is to consider verbal and written testimony, and any written protests relating to the proposed increases to water and wastewater rates.

REDLANDS RATE SETTING BACKGROUND
Water and wastewater rates were last increased in July 2025. Periodic rate increases are necessary to (i) ensure that each water and wastewater service customer bears a fair and proportionate share of the costs of providing services (consistent with Proposition 218 legal requirements); (ii) recoup the rising cost of providing services, including operation and maintenance costs, debt service and capital program needs; and (iii) meet financial, regulatory, and service obligations. Water and wastewater system costs include energy, fuel, and chemical costs; distribution and collection costs; treatment and disposal costs; administrative and customer service account costs, and costs related to facilities replacement, rehabilitation, and upgrades. The City has made significant improvements to its utility infrastructure to ensure continued functionality and reliability, and to meet State and Federal regulatory agency requirements. The City recently expended more than $20,000,000, and will expend an additional $45,000,000 to upgrade its Wastewater Treatment Plant during the next five years. Additionally, antiquated pipelines have been and will continue to be replaced to avoid leaks, overflows, and related potential regulatory penalties. The City recently completed water utility and wastewater utility master plans that identify necessary capital improvements for the efficient and effective operation of the City’s water and wastewater utility infrastructure.

These plans serve as a guide for the efficient and timely replacement, rehabilitation, and/or maintenance of water and wastewater infrastructure.

The proposed increases are
scheduled to go into effect on
January 1, 2027; July 1, 2027,
and July 1, 2028
Redlands Wastewater Treatment Plant as it
stands today.

The table shows the current
and the proposed wastewater
rates which, if approved, will
become effective on January
1, 2027, July 1, 2027, and
July 1, 2028. While modest
rate increases are proposed
to reflect the increased costs
to the City of providing
service and meeting financial
obligations, the basic
wastewater rate structure for
all customer classes remains
unchanged.

PROPOSED BI-MONTHLY SEWER SERVICE CHARGES

CUSTOMER CLASS CURRENT

RATE PROPOSED RATE
January 1,
2027
July 1,
2027
July 1,
2028
Residential
Single Family Dwelling Unit $72.65 $78.15 $83.63 $89.49 Multi-Family Dwelling Unit $57.64 $62.01 $66.36 $71.01

NON-RESIDENTIAL BASED ON WATER USE IN CCF
Low Strength I $3.11 $3.31 $3.55 $3.80
Low Strength II $3.76 $3.93 $4.21 $4.51
Low Strength III $4.39 $4.56 $4.88 $5.23
Medium Strength I $5.04 $5.18 $5.55 $5.94
Medium Strength II $5.68 $5.81 $6.22 $6.66
Medium Strength III $6.33 $6.43 $6.89 $7.38
High Strength I $6.98 $7.06 $7.56 $8.09
High Strength II $7.62 $7.69 $8.23 $8.81
Large Volume User $4.39 $4.56 $4.88 $5.23
Minimum Charge $57.64 $62.01 $66.36 $71.01
Schools ($/100 students)
Elementary School $157.43 $165.62 $177.22 $189.63
Secondary & High School $262.38 $276.04 $295.37 $316.05 Septage ($/gal) $0.11 $0.11 $0.12 $0.13
Minimum Septage Charge $15.00 $16.50 $18.15

CITY OF REDLANDS
APRIL 2026

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING PROPOSED ADOPTION OF WATER AND

WASTEWATER UTILITY RATE INCREASES
The table shows the current
and the proposed water
service rate which, if approved,
will become effective on
January 1, 2027, July 1, 2027,
and July 1, 2028. The Water
Service rate is a fixed charge
that does not fluctuate with
increasing and/or decreasing
water usage. While modest
rate increases are proposed to
reflect the increased costs to
the City of providing service
and meeting financial
obligations, the basic water
service rate structures for all
customer classes remains
unchanged.

PROPOSED BI-MONTHLY WATER SERVICE CHARGES

WATER SERVICE CURRENT

RATE PROPOSED RATE
January 1,
2027
July 1,
2027
July 1,
2028
5/8” $33.60 $34.09 $34.95 $35.83
3/4” $44.90 $45.54 $46.68 $47.85
1” $66.81 $67.76 $69.46 $71.20
1 1/2” $119.96 $121.64 $124.69 $127.81
2” $177.10 $179.56 $184.05 $188.66
3” $305.97 $310.22 $317.98 $325.93
4” $472.05 $478.60 $490.57 $502.84
6” $870.64 $882.70 $904.77 $927.39
8” $1,282.51 $1,300.27 $1,332.78 $1,366.10
10” $3,036.30 $3,078.32 $3,155.28 $3,234.17
12” $3,992.91 $4,048.16 $4,149.37 $4,253.11

FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE
2” $12.05 $12.05 $12.36 $12.67
3” $21.63 $21.39 $21.93 $22.48
4” $38.14 $37.51 $38.45 $39.42
6” $97.39 $95.34 $97.73 $100.18
8” $199.61 $195.09 $199.97 $204.97
10” $353.35 $345.14 $353.77 $362.62
12” $566.44 $553.09 $566.92 $581.10
FIRE HYDRANT SERVICE $305.97 $313.62 $321.47 $329.51
The table shows the current
and the proposed water usage
rate which, if approved, will
become effective on January 1,
2027, July 1, 2027, and July 1,
2028. The Water Usage rate
varies with increasing and/or
decreasing water usage. While
modest rate increases are
proposed to reflect the
increased costs to the City of
providing service and meeting
financial obligations, the basic
water usage rate structures for
all customer classes remains
unchanged. Water use is
measured in one hundred
cubic feet increments (CCF).

One (1) CCF equals 748
gallons.

PROPOSED BI-MONTHLY WATER USAGE CHARGES

BUILDING WATER USAGE

CURRENT

RATE PROPOSED RATE
January 1,
2027
July 1,
2027
July 1,
2028
TIER I (≤ 16 ccf) $1.61 $1.59 $1.63 $1.68
TIER II (17 ccf - 27 ccf) $1.90 $1.95 $2.00 $2.05
TIER III (> 27 ccf) $2.85 $3.00 $3.08 $3.16

NON-BUILDING WATER
USAGE
TIER I (≤ 27 ccf) $1.81 $1.87 $1.92 $1.97
TIER II (> 27 ccf) $2.85 $2.66 $2.73 $2.80

FIRE PROTECTION WATER
ALL UNITS $2.85 $2.93 $3.01 $3.09
HOW DO I PROTEST THE RATE CHANGES?
If you wish to oppose the proposed water and wastewater rate increases, you must submit a written protest pursuant to the Resolution No. 7128 which establishes a policy for the submission and tabulation of protests with respect to the public hearings for utility rate adjustments. The written protest must contain the printed name and original wet signature of the property owner or customer, and must include the street address, or the county of San Bernardino Assessor’s parcel number of the property served.

During the public hearing, the City Council will consider all public testimony and all written protests. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the City Council will decide whether to adopt the proposed rate increases. Only one written protest per identified parcel or property will be counted for determining whether a majority protest exists. If valid written protests are received from a majority of the affected property owners, the City Council will not approve the proposed rate increases. Your written protest must be received (not postmarked) by the City Clerk prior to the close of the public hearing on July 7, 2026. Protests should be addressed and mailed to: City Clerk, Redlands City Hall, 35 Cajon Street, Suite 4, Redlands, CA 92373. Written protests may also be presented in-person to the City Clerk prior to the July 7, 2026, meeting. Written protests may also be submitted during the public hearing. Protests may not be submitted via email or by other electronic means.

Additional information regarding the proposed water and wastewater rate increases is presented in the City of Redlands 2026 Water, Wastewater, and Non-Potable Water Financial Plan & Rate Study which is available for review during business hours at the City Clerk’s Office or you may review the report on the City’s website at www.cityofredlands.org. For questions or additional information regarding the proposed rate increases, you may also contact the City’s Municipal Utilities and Engineering Department at (909) 798-7698.

Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies – Written Objection How do I preserve my ability to judicially challenge the Proposed Rates? Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 53759.1 and 53759.2, a person or entity will be prohibited from bringing a judicial action or proceeding alleging that the proposed rates do not comply with Proposition 218 unless that person or entity has submitted a written Objection to the proposed rates. This is known as an Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies requirement and is separate from the Proposition 218 majority Protest process described above.

To exhaust your administrative remedies, your written Objection must meet the following criteria:
• State that the correspondence is an Objection.
• Include the name and signature of the record property owner or account holder who is submitting the Objection. • Identify the property by street address or other identifying information. • Include the specific grounds for alleging noncompliance of the proposed rates with Proposition 218 in sufficient detail to allow the City to determine whether any adjustments to the proposed rates are necessary. A statement that the proposed rate adjustments are too high, or that the proposed rates violate Proposition 218 without an explanation as to why, will be insufficient for purposes of exhausting administrative remedies.

Written Objections may be mailed or personally delivered to the City Clerk at a Submittal Location listed below and must be received by the City Clerk by 4 p.m., Monday, June 16, 2026. Note that this deadline for submitting a written Objection is three weeks before the Public Hearing, whereas written Protests may be submitted until the Hearing is closed. Failure to timely submit a written Objection to the proposed rate adjustments in accordance with the requirements above, bars any right to challenge the rate adjustments through a legal proceeding. Finally, please note that any legal proceeding to challenge a new, increased, or extended water or sewer charge is subject to a 120-day statute of limitations pursuant to California Government Code section 53759.

The City will review each written Objection and respond in writing to all timely written submittals. The written basis supporting the proposed rate adjustments can be found on the City’s website at www.cityofredlands.org.

SUBMITTAL LOCATIONS
Mail: City Clerk, ATTN: Utility Rates Protest or Objection, City of Redlands, 35 Cajon Street, Ste 4, Redlands, CA 92373 In Person: Redlands City Hall, City Clerk’s office, 35 Cajon Street, Suite 4, Redlands, CA 92373 Questions? Submit questions and comments via email to Goutam Dobey, [email protected], or call (909) 798-7584 x2.

City of Redlands
Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department
P.O. Box 3005
Redlands, CA 92373

MAIL MERGE

XXXX XXXXXX XX
XXXXXXXXX, XX. XXXXX
APN: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
In accordance with Chapter 2.70 of the Redlands Municipal Code, every two years the City Council appoints seven utility customers of the City to be members of its Utilities Advisory Committee (UAC). Members of the UAC provide oversight and guidance for the process to assist the City’s financial consultant and staff in establishing water, wastewater and non-potable water rates, charges and revenue requirements. The UAC provides recommendations to the City Council to ensure that water, wastewater, and non-potable water rates and charges (1) recover costs reasonably borne in providing water, wastewater and non-potable water services; (2) are equitable to all customer classes; (3) are in compliance with all state and federal laws; and (4) are easily explained to customers. The UAC was formed by the City Council on January 20, 2026, and the UAC provided its recommendations for City Council consideration on April 21, 2026.

PRESORT STD
U.S. POSTAGE PAID

SAN BERNARDINO, CA
PERMIT 1123

UTILITIES ADVISORY

COMMITTEE
(UAC)

WASTEWATER, POTABLE WATER
& NON-POTABLE WATER

RATE RECOMMENDATIONS

UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
• Appointed by City Council January 20, 2026
• Series of meetings in March 2026
• Operational Status from Staff
• Financial and Rate Review from Consultant Raftelis

COMMITTEE MEMBERS
• John E. James - Chair
• Dan Jimenez - Vice Chair
• Richard Corneille
• Damion Northcutt
• Aholibama “Oly” Ojeda
• Edwina Thomas
• Paul Toor

MISSION STATEMENT/GOALS
• The Utilities Advisory Committee will recommend to the City Council rate adjustments for potable water,
wastewater and non-potable water utilities.
• The Committee will:
• Examine different approaches to establishing potable
water, wastewater and non-potable water rates
• Promote understanding and appreciation for
different points of view, and
• Build consensus that will ensure a balanced approach
to divergent interests in the community concerning
utility rates.

FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
• Reviewed Overall Financial Needs to Maintain
Safe, Reliable Systems and Service to Residents
• All operations were analyzed in the following financial areas:
• Operation and Maintenance (O&M) costs
• Capital Improvement Projects (Capital Investment)
• Revenue Projections at Current Rates
• Reserve Balances
• Reserve Balance Target
• Required Revenue Adjustments to Maintain Reserves
• Keep High Credit Rating

WASTEWATER
• Wastewater Operations and Maintenance Costs
• Collection System –
• Primarily Gravity Flow Pipe System
• Inspection And Periodic Clean Out
• Treatment Plant – Continuous Flow From
the City at Large Must be Treated and
Discharged on a continuous Basis
• Electricity
• Chemicals
• Replacement Parts
Revenue
Adjustments 7.0% 7.0% 7.0%
Bi-Monthly Rates Current Jan 2027 July 2027 July 2028
Residential ($/dwelling unit)
Single Family $72.65 $78.15 $83.63 $89.49
Multiple Family $57.64 $62.01 $66.36 $71.01
Non-Residential ($/ccf)
Low Strength I $3.11 $3.31 $3.55 $3.80
Low Strength II $3.76 $3.93 $4.21 $4.51
Low Strength III $4.39 $4.56 $4.88 $5.23
Medium Strength I $5.04 $5.18 $5.55 $5.94
Medium Strength II $5.68 $5.81 $6.22 $6.66
Medium Strength III $6.33 $6.43 $6.89 $7.38
High Strength I $6.98 $7.06 $7.56 $8.09
High Strength II $7.62 $7.69 $8.23 $8.81
Large Volume User $4.39 $4.56 $4.88 $5.23
Minimum Charge ($) $57.64 $62.01 $66.36 $71.01
Schools ($/100 ADA)
Elementary $157.43 $165.62 $177.22 $189.63
Secondary & High $262.38 $276.04 $295.37 $316.05
Septage Charge ($/gal) $0.11 $0.11 $0.12 $0.13

2.5 Year UAC
Recommendations

RECOMMENDED WASTEWATER RATES

2.5 Year UAC
Recommendations
Rate Model Forecast
Looking Forward 5 Years
WASTEWATER – ENDING BALANCES

POTABLE WATER
• Water Operations and Maintenance Costs
• Water Treatment
• Surface Water - Chemicals
• Water Wells
• Electric Pumping Costs
• Chemicals
• Reservoirs
• Maintenance and Chemicals
• Pipe Delivery System
• Leak Repair
• Capital Improvement Projects per Master Plan
• Yearly Pipe Replacement
• Wellhead Treatment
• Sunset Reservoir Will need debt funding of $26M
• Other Infrastructure Investments and Betterments

PROPOSED POTABLE WATER RATES
Revenue
Adjustments 2.5% 2.5% 2.5%
Bi-Monthly Rates Current Jan 2027 July 2027 July 2028
Water Service Charge
5/8" $33.60 $34.09 $34.95 $35.83
3/4" $44.90 $45.54 $46.68 $47.85
1" $66.81 $67.76 $69.46 $71.20
1 1/2" $119.96 $121.64 $124.69 $127.81
2" $177.10 $179.56 $184.05 $188.66
3" $305.97 $310.22 $317.98 $325.93
4" $472.05 $478.60 $490.57 $502.84
6" $870.64 $882.70 $904.77 $927.39
8" $1,282.51 $1,300.27 $1,332.78 $1,366.10
10" $3,036.30 $3,078.32 $3,155.28 $3,234.17
12" $3,992.91 $4,048.16 $4,149.37 $4,253.11
Water Usage Rate ($/ccf)
Building Water Usage
Tier 1 $1.61 $1.59 $1.63 $1.68
Tier 2 $1.90 $1.95 $2.00 $2.05
Tier 3 $2.85 $3.00 $3.08 $3.16

2.5 Year UAC
Recommendations
Rate Model Forecast
Looking Forward 5 Years
POTABLE WATER – ENDING BALANCES

2.5 Year UAC
Recommendations
Rate Model Forecast
Looking Forward 5 Years

RECOMMENDED NON-POTABLE
WATER RATES*
Revenue Adjustments 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Bi-Monthly Rates Current Jan 2027 July 2027 July 2028
Non-Potable Water Service Charge ($/meter size)
3/4" $13.81 $13.81 $13.81 $13.81
1" $20.65 $20.65 $20.65 $20.65
1 1/2" $37.29 $37.29 $37.29 $37.29
2" $55.16 $55.16 $55.16 $55.16
3" $95.50 $95.50 $95.50 $95.50
4" $147.45 $147.45 $147.45 $147.45
6" $272.16 $272.16 $272.16 $272.16
8" $401.04 $401.04 $401.04 $401.04
Non-Potable Water Usage Rate ($/ccf)
Non-Potable Water $0.99 $0.99 $0.99 $0.99
Conversion Customer $0.64 $0.64 $0.64 $0.64
*Only applies to non-potable
water customers

2.5 Year UAC
Recommendations
Rate Model Forecast
Looking Forward 5 Years

2.5 Year UAC
Recommendations
Rate Model Forecast
Looking Forward 5 Years
NON-POTABLE WATER – ENDING BALANCES

RATE ADJUSTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

SUMMARY
• Wastewater
• 7% a year for each of next 2.5 years
• Issuance of $45MM in debt to fund WWTP Improvements
• Will retain reserve balances at recommended target level • Potable Water
• 2.5% a year for each of next 2.5 years
• Issue $26MM in debt for Sunset Reservoir
• Will retain Capital Investment needed for continued reliable water delivery service
• Will retain reserve balances at recommended target level • Non-Potable Water
• 0% a year for each of next 2.5 years
• Retains reserve balances to allow for future expansion of non-potable system
The End
Thank you
Questions ?

Additional Slides to Address Possible Quesitons

1.– Headworks

2.--Primary Clarifiers

3.--Primary Sludge Pump Station
4 - Peak Storage Ponds and Pump Station
5 - Aeration Basins and Blower Building
6 -Secondary Clarifiers and Effluent Pump
Station

7. -MBR Facility

8.- Recycled Water Pump Station

9.- RAS/WAS Pump Station
10- DAFTs
11 - Primary and Secondary Digesters
12- Dewatering Facility
13- Solar
14- Cogeneration Facility
15 - Flare

WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
• MBR filters have been replaced
• Consultant recommended a 2 phase approach
• 1
st Phase to replace MBR train - Done
• 2
nd Phase to rehabilitate remaining WWTP
• Costs/Funding
• Phase 2 from rate adjustments and issuance
of debt – State Revolving Fund (SRF)
• Phase 2 cost - $45MM SRF
Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP)
PHASE 2-WWTP UPGRADE PROJECT
• PROCESS, MECHANICAL, STRUCTURAL, CIVIL, &
ELECTRICAL DESIGN:
• PRIMARY PROCESS; HEADWORKS, CLARIFIERS,

SLUDGE PUMPS, & PEAK PONDS
• SECONDARY/TERTIARY PROCESS; AERATION

BASINS, BLOWER BUILDING & BLOWERS, RAS PUMPS,

EFFLUENTS PUMP STATION, MBR FACILITY
• SOLIDS HANDLING FACILITY; THICKENING,

DIGESTER, DEWATERING
• ELECTRICAL; FIVE (5) POWER CENTERS, & A SECOND

EMERGENCY GENERATOR
Examples of Equipment in
Critial Need of Replacement/Upgrade
RESOLUTION NO. 7128

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS

ESTABLISHING A POLICY FOR THE SUBMISSION AND TABULATION OF PROTESTS WITH

RESPECT TO PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR PROPOSED UTILITY RATE ADJUSTMENTS WHEREAS, Article XIIID, section 6 of the Califomia Constitution requires the City to consider written protests to certain proposed increases to utility rates; and WHEREAS, the California Constitution does not offer specific guidance as to who is allowed to submit protests, how written protests are submitted, or how the city is to tabulate the protests;
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council ofthe City of Redlands as follows:

Section 1. When notice of a public hearing with respect to a utility or other rate adjustments has been given by the City pursuant to Article XIIID, Section 6 of the California Constitution, the following guidelines shall apply:

A. Submission of Protests

1. Any property owner or utility customer may submit a written protest to the City Clerk, either by mail or delivery to the City Clerk's Office, 35 Cajon Street, Suite #4, Redlands, CA 92373 or by submitting the protest at the public hearing.

Protests must be received by the end of the public hearing.

2. Each protest must state that it is a protest (or indicate opposition to the proposed rates). Ifthe City has given notices for the public hearings regarding rates for both sewer and water service, and those hearings are to be held on the same date, then the protest may indicate whether it is made (i) with respect only to water rates, (ii) with respect only to sewer rates, or (iii) with respect to both water and sewer rates. If no limitation is indicated. the City will interpret the protest as covering all rates to be considered on the hearing date. Email or facsimile protests cannot be accepted. Although oral comments at the public hearing will not qualify as a formal protest unless accompanied by a written protest, the City Council welcomes input from the community during the public hearing on proposed fees.

3. A protest by a property owner that is a trust must be signed by the Trustee and identified as such with the signature (i.e_ John Smith. Trustee for Smith Family trust). Protests by property owners that are corporations, partnerships, or similar entitles must be signed by a person authorized to execute documents on behalf of the property owner.

4. If a parcel served by the City is owned by more than a single record owner, or more than one name appears on the City's records as the customer for the property, or the customer is not the record owner, each owner or customer may I:\cclerk\Resolutions\Res 7100-7200\7128 Guidelines Submission Tabulation Protests.doc submit a protest, but only one protest will be counted per parcel and any one protest submitted in accordance with these rules will be sufficient to count as a protest for that property.

5. In order to be valid, a protest must bear date. designation of parcel address or parcel number, printed name. and original signature of the record owner or customer of record with respect to the property identified on the protest. The customer of record is the name of the person whose name is printed on the utility bills for the parcel. Except as set forth in paragraph 3 above, protests not bearing the original signature of a record owner or customer of record shall not be counted. Protests which have been altered by someone other than the person who signed them shall not be counted.

6. Any person who submits a protest may withdraw it by submitting to the City Clerk a dated. written request that the protest be withdrawn. The withdrawal of a protest shall contain sufficient information to identify the affected parcel and the name of the record owner or record customer who submitted both the protest and the request that it be withdrawn.

7. A fee protest proceeding is not an election.

8. To ensure transparency and accountability in the fee protest tabulation, protests shall constitute disclosable public records from and after the close of the public hearing.

B. Tabulation ofProtests

1. The City Clerk shall determine the validity of all protests. The City Clerk shall not accept as valid any protest if the City Clerk determines that any of the following conditions exist:
a. The protest does not identify a property that will be subject to proposed fees.
b. The protest does not bear an original signature of a record owner or identified as trustee of the parcel identified on the protest or of a record customer of that parcel.
c. The protest does not state its opposition to the proposed fees or is illegible. d. The protest has been altered in any way by someone other than the person who is signed to it.
e. The protest was not received by the City Clerk before close of the public hearing on the proposed fees.
f. A request to withdraw the protest was received by the City Clerk prior to the close of the public hearing on the proposed fees.

2. The City Clerk's decision that a protest is not valid shall constitute a final action ofthe City and shall not be subjected to any internal appeal.

I:\cclerk\Resolutions\Res 7100-7200\7128 Guidelines Submission Tabulation Protests.doc 2

3. A majority protest exists (50% plus one) if written protests are timely submitted and not withdrawn by the record owners. trustee. or customers with respect to, a majority of the properties subject to the proposed fee. If both water and sewer rates are being considered, a separate determination will be made for with respect to each ofthese two types of fees.

4. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the City Clerk shall count all protests received, including those received during the public hearing, and shall report the results to the City Council upon completion. If review of the protests received demonstrates that the number received is manifestly less than one-half of the parcels served by the City with respect to the fee which is the subject of the protest, then the City Clerk may advise the City Council of the absence of a majority protest without determining the validity of all protests.

5. If, at the conclusion of the public hearing, the City Clerk determines that the City Clerk will require additional time to count the protests, the City Clerk shall so advise the City Council, which may adjourn the meeting to allow the count to be completed on another day or days. If so, the City Council shall declare the time and place of the count, which shall be conducted in a place where interested members of the public may observe the counting, and the City Council shall declare the time at which its meeting shall be resumed to receive an act in the report ofthe City Clerk.

Section 2. The City Council hereby directs City staff to include the requirements described in Section 1.A of this Resolution, which govern the submission of written protests, within all notices of protest hearings that are mailed to property owners and customers of City utility services.

ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this 6* day of March, 2012.

Peté Aguilar, Mayor
ATTEST:

Sam Irwin ity'Clerk
I celerk R emlutions\Res 7100-7200\7128 Guidelines Submission Tabulation Protests.doc 3 I, Sam Irwin, City Clerk of the City of Redlands, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 6* day of March 2012. by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Harrison, Bean, Gardner; Mayor Aguilar NOES: Councilmember Foster
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
Sam Irwin, City Clerk
I:\cclerk\Resolutions\Res 7100-7200\7128 Guidelines Submission Tabulation Protests.doc 4 City Council AGENDA ITEM NO. K4.

DATE: April 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Consideration of the sole source purchase of the Dispatch Console Radio upgrade to Command Central AXS in the amount of $370,436.22 and authorization of an additional appropriation in the same amount (Police Chief Tolber)
MOTION:

If the City Council determines that staff's recommendation is appropriate, the following motion is provided:
"I move to approve the Dispatch Console Radio upgrade to Command Central AXS with the County of San Bernardino in the amount of $370,436.22, and authorize an additional appropriation of the same amount." RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council approve a sole source purchase of the Dispatch Console Radio upgrade to Command Central AXS with the County of San Bernardino in the amount of $370,436.22 and authorize an additional appropriation of the same amount.

DISCUSSION:

The Redlands Police Department Communications Center utilizes a Motorola dispatch console radio system that is integral to daily public safety operations managed by the County of San Bernardino (County). This system provides primary radio communication between dispatch personnel and police officers in the field. It also enables crosscommunication and interoperability with other law enforcement agencies including fire, public services, The University of Redlands and Redlands Unified School District. This ensures coordinated response and shared situational awareness during routine operations and critical incidents.

Motorola Solutions is transitioning its legacy dispatch console platforms to the newer Command Central AXS console model. As part of this transition, long-term manufacturer support, software updates, and future system enhancements for older console models are being phased out. Continuing to operate on an aging console platform increases the risk of limited technical support, reduced compatibility with evolving County managed 800 MHz infrastructure and potential operational disruptions.

The proposed dispatch console upgrade replacement will upgrade the existing system to the new Command Central AXS console including installation services. This upgrade is necessary to:

Maintain manufacturers supported hardware and software
Ensure continued compatibility with the County of San Bernardino’s radio infrastructure Reduce the risk of service interruptions during critical incidents Provide long-term system stability and life cycle support Maintain operational efficiency for emergency services personnel Given that the dispatch radio consoles serve as the primary communication link between officers in the field and the Communications Center, maintaining a supported and reliable system is essential to officer safety, coordinated emergency response, and uninterrupted public safety operations.

Currently, the Redlands Police Department (RPD) has seven dispatch consoles. Each console costs $52,919.46 to upgrade, for a total of $370,436.22. The City has the option to pay this amount either as a one-time upfront payment or through annual payments over nine years, with the total cost remaining $370,436.22. Therefore, the RPD recommends that the City Council approve the sole-source purchase from the County of San Bernardino in the amount of $370,436.22 to ensure continued operational reliability.

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may choose not to approve the sole source purchase of the dispatch console radio upgrade replacement. However, continuing to operate on an aging console platform increases the risk of limited technical support, reduced compatibility with the evolving County-managed 800 MHz infrastructure, and potential operational disruptions.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Not applicable.

SUBMITTED BY:

Rachel Tolber, Chief of Police
RECOMMENDED BY:

Charles M. Duggan Jr., City Manager
REVIEWED BY:

Yvette M. Abich Garcia, City Attorney
Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
Danielle Garcia, Management Services/Finance Director
PREPARED BY:

Jimmy Nguyen, Management Analyst

FISCAL IMPACT
Fiscal Year: 2026/27
Revenue Generating: No
Amount: $370,436.22
Budgeted Y/N: No
Account No: 101201-6907
Additional Appropriation Required: Yes
Discussion:

The County of San Bernardino has provided two payment options: 1) annual payments of $41,159.58 over a nineyear period, beginning July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2035, or, 2) a one-time upfront payment in Fiscal Year 2026/2027 in the amount of $370,436.22. Staff recommends a one-time lump sum payment. This approach avoids the creation of a long-term financial obligation and preserves future budget flexibility. Additionally, a single payment simplifies the transaction and reflects the City’s commitment to maintaining efficient and reliable public safety infrastructure. The additional appropriation will be offset through the use of unassigned fund balance in the General Fund.

Attachments
Additional_Appropriation.pdf
County_Radios_Sole-single_Source_Request_Form.pdf
PSC_New_Dispatch_Rate_-_Quote.pdf
Upcoming_Rate_Adjustments_for_2026-27.pdf
DATE OF REQUEST:

An additional appropriation is hereby requested as follows:

Department:

JUSTIFICATION:

Requested By:

Recommended By Finance Director: Recommended:

Yes No Signed
Comments: Approved by City Council:

Date:

Signed:

City Clerk
REVENUE APPROPRIATION INCREASE (if applicable)
EXPENDITURE APPROPRIATION INCREASE (if applicable)
$ -
$ -
TRANSACTION NO:

ACCOUNTING PERIOD:

Account Description Orgkey Object Code Job Ledger (If
applicable) Amount
Job Ledger (If
applicable) Account Description Orgkey Object Code Amount Department Head
City Manager

CITY OF REDLANDS

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION

FINANCE USE ONLY

Page 1 of 1 ends

Redlands City CouncilApril 21, 2026

Redlands City Council
April 21, 2026