City Council / Local Redevelopment Authority / Public Financing Authority
January 27, 2026

Any documents that are not privileged or part of a Closed Session provided to a majority of the City Council/LRA Board after distribution of the agenda packet, regarding any item on this agenda, will be made available for public inspection at the City Clerk’s Office 6707 Third St., Suite A, Riverbank. Page 1 of 5
AGEND
TUESDAY, JANUARY 27, 2026 – 6:00 P.M.
(THE AGENDA PACKET IS ONLINE AT HTTP://WWW.RIVERBANK.ORG/AGENDACENTER)

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. FLAG SALUTE

3. INVOCATION

4. ROLL CALL

5. AGENDA CHANGES

6. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Any Council/Authority Member or Staff who has a direct Conflict of Interest on any scheduled agenda item to be considered is to declare their conflict at this time.

7. PRESENTATIONS (Informational only)- NO ITEMS SCHEDULED.

8. PUBLIC COMMENTS (No action can be taken)
At this time, members of the public may comment on any item not appearing on the agenda, and within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council/LRA Board.

Individual comments will be limited to a maximum of 3 minutes (or as stated by the presiding Officer) and time cannot be yielded to another person. Under State Law, matters presented during the public comment period cannot be discussed or acted upon.

Refer to the last page of this agenda for the Public Comment Procedures via ZOOM.

IN PERSON COMMENTS

PLEASE FILL OUT A COMMENT CARD AND RETURN TO THE CITY CLERK

9. CONSENT CALENDAR (No Obligation to Read Aloud)
All items listed on the Consent Calendar are to be acted upon by a single action of the City Council/LRA Board unless requested by an individual Council/Authority Member or member of the public for special consideration. Otherwise, the recommendation of staff will be accepted and acted upon by motion of the City Council/LRA Board.

CITY OF RIVERBANK
Regular City Council and
Local Redevelopment Authority
Board Meetings
Council Chambers
6707 Third Street, Suite B
Riverbank, CA 95367

CITY COUNCIL / LRA BOARD
Mayor/Chair
Rachel Hernandez
Council/Authority Members
District 1 - Luis Uribe
District 2 – Cindy Fosi
Vice Mayor District 3 – John Pimentel
District 4 – Stacy Call
City Council and LRA Board Meetings Agenda January 27, 2026 Next City Council Resolution: 2026-004 Next Ordinance: 2026-001 Next Local Redevelopment Authority Board Resolution 2026-001 Any documents that are not privileged or part of a Closed Session provided to a majority of the City Council/LRA Board after distribution of the agenda packet, regarding any item on this agenda, will be made available for public inspection at the City Clerk’s Office 6707 Third St., Suite A, Riverbank. Page 2 of 5
Item 9.1 Waive Readings. All Readings of ordinances and resolutions, except by title, are waived.

Item 9.2 Approval of the City Council and Local Redevelopment Authority Board Minutes for January 13, 2026.

Item 9.3 Resolution Approving the Award of a Pest Control Services Agreement to Clark Pest Control
Item 9.4 Resolution to Approve and Adopt 2026 City of Riverbank Measure L Expenditure Plan Project List
Item 9.5 Second Reading by Title Only and Introduction of a Proposed Ordinance Amending Chapters 150 (BUILDING REGULATIONS) and 157 (WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION) of Title XV: LAND USAGE, by Amending and Adopting by Reference the 2025 Edition of the California Building Standards Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Parts 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11 & 12, Including Identified Appendices).
10 . PUBLIC HEARING
The Public Notice for Item 10.1 was published on 01/14/2026 in the Riverbank Newspaper.

Item 10.1 A Resolution to Adopt the New Fee Schedule of Park Amenities, Rentals, Recreation Programs, and Events for the City of Riverbank- It is recommended that the City Council consider adopting a Resolution to approve the fees for Park Amenities, Rentals, Recreation Programs, and Events for the City of Riverbank offered with associated fees that are highlighted in Exhibit A.

11. NEW BUSINESS
Item 11.1 Presentation by Chief Ridenour on Current Staffing Allocations and Five-Year Plan for Riverbank Police Services and to Consider a Resolution Authorizing the Reallocation of One Community Resource Deputy Position to a Patrol Deputy Position.- It is recommended that the City Council receive a presentation from Chief Ridenour on the current staffing allocation for Riverbank Police Services and the proposed five-year staffing plan. The Council is asked to consider a Resolution reallocating the already approved Community Resource Deputy position to a Patrol Deputy.

Alternatively, the Council may provide feedback and direction on reallocation and staffing requests, or request that staff research other options.

Item 11.2 Adoption of a Groundwater Use Management Program in the Modesto Groundwater Subbasin- It is recommended that the City Council consider adopting a resolution authorizing collaboration with the Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers Groundwater Basin Association (STRGBA) Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA), its member agencies, consultants, City Council and LRA Board Meetings Agenda January 27, 2026 Next City Council Resolution: 2026-004 Next Ordinance: 2026-001 Next Local Redevelopment Authority Board Resolution 2026-001 Any documents that are not privileged or part of a Closed Session provided to a majority of the City Council/LRA Board after distribution of the agenda packet, regarding any item on this agenda, will be made available for public inspection at the City Clerk’s Office 6707 Third St., Suite A, Riverbank. Page 3 of 5
stakeholders and the County of Tuolumne GSA to take such actions as may be reasonably necessary to (1) approve and implement the Groundwater Use Management Program (GWUMP or Program) for the Modesto Subbasin to ensure long-term groundwater sustainability, and (2) develop action plans which ensure the demand management actions identified in the GWUMP are under implementation beginning January 31, 2027.

Adoption of the GWUMP fulfills commitments made in prior Council actions and advances compliance with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA).

Item 11.3 Adoption of a Well Mitigation Plan in the Modesto Groundwater Subbasin- It is recommended that the City Council consider adopting a resolution authorizing collaboration with the Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers Groundwater Basin Association (STRGBA) Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA), its member agencies, stakeholders and the County of Tuolumne GSA to take such actions as may be necessary to approve and implement the Well Mitigation Plan developed for the Modesto Groundwater Subbasin. Adoption of the Well Mitigation Plan by the STRGBA GSA fulfills commitments made in prior Council actions and advances compliance with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA).

Item 11.4 Resolution Approving a Consultant Services Agreement with JPW Communications, Inc. for the Preparation of a Community Engagement Strategy and Communications Plan.- It is recommended that the City Council consider approving a Consultant Services Agreement with JPW Communications, Inc. for the preparation of a Community Engagement Strategy and Communications Plan for the City of Riverbank.

12. COMMENTS/REPORTS
A brief report on notable attendance of a meeting or conference or other notable topics of City business shall be made. The Brown Act does not allow for discussion or action of items by the City Council/LRA Board during this time.

Item 12.1 Staff
Item 12.2 Council/Authority Member
Item 12.3 Mayor/Chair

13. CLOSED SESSION- NO ITEMS SCHEDULED.

The public will have a limit of 3 minutes to comment on Closed Session item(s) as set forth on the agenda prior to the City Council/LRA Board recessing to Closed Session

14. ADJOURNMENT
The Next Regular City Council Meeting will be on: Tuesday, February 10, 2026 City Council and LRA Board Meetings Agenda January 27, 2026 Next City Council Resolution: 2026-004 Next Ordinance: 2026-001 Next Local Redevelopment Authority Board Resolution 2026-001 Any documents that are not privileged or part of a Closed Session provided to a majority of the City Council/LRA Board after distribution of the agenda packet, regarding any item on this agenda, will be made available for public inspection at the City Clerk’s Office 6707 Third St., Suite A, Riverbank. Page 4 of 5

ADA COMPLIANCE STATEMENT
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Governor’s Executive Order N-29-20, the City will make every effort to make reasonable modifications or accommodations from individuals with disabilities. Contact the Administration Dept. at (209) 863-7122 or the City Clerk at [email protected] at least (48) hours prior to the meeting to enable the City to make reasonable arrangements for accessibility.

NOTICE REGARDING NON-ENGLISH SPEAKERS
Pursuant to California Constitution Article III, Section IV, establishing English as the official language for the State of California, and in accordance with California Code of Civil Procedures Section 185, which requires proceedings before any State Court to be in English, notice is hereby given that all proceedings before the City of Riverbank City Council/LRA Board shall be in English and anyone wishing to address the Council is required to have a translator present who will take an oath to make an accurate translation from any language not English into the English language.

How to Use Live Spanish Translation/ Como Usar Traducción en Español En Vivo STEP 1/PASO 1 STEP 2/ PASO 2 STEP 3/ PASO 3

Scan QR Code Choose Spanish language Read Captions on Device Escanea el código Escoja el idioma Español Use headset for Audio Lea subtítulos en su aparato
Use auriculares para audio
https://attend.wordly.ai/join/LHDA-5715

AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
I hereby certify under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing agenda was posted at the meeting location, on the North City Hall public exterior bulletin board, South City Hall public exterior Bulletin, Riverbank Community Center exterior bulletin, and the City’s website 72 hours prior to the meeting in accordance to the California Ralph M. Brown Act.

Posted this 22nd Day of January 2026 /s/Gabriela Hernandez, CMC, City Clerk

PUBLIC “LIVE” VIEWING
• Government Channel: Charter– 2 -NOT AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME • YouTube Live – City of Riverbank
• Via ZOOM Platform (See instructions below)

SUBMITTING PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR THE RECORD

Written comments must be received before 5:00 p.m. on the date of the meeting in order for them to be distributed to the Council prior to consideration of the matter. Written comments will not be read aloud at the meeting, but will be reported as received for the record. If you do not receive an acknowledgement of receipt within an hour of submission or by 5:00 pm, please call the City Clerk’s Office at (209) 863-7198 or the Administration Dept. at (209) 863-7122.

ACCEPTABLE METHODS OF SUBMITTING COMMENTS BEFORE THE 5:00 PM DEADLINE ● Via Mail Service: Mail comments to City of Riverbank, Attn. City Clerk, 6707 Third Street, Suite A, Riverbank, CA 95367. (Call 209-863-7198 / 209-863-7122 to ensure they were received.)
● Via Email: Mail to [email protected] (Note: This technology is not a guaranteed method.)
• Indicate Agenda Item # in the subject line. (Call 209-863-7198 /209-863-7122 to ensure receipt)
● Oral Comments In-Person: The Mayor will ask the public if anyone wishes to comment, at that time you may approach the podium.
● Oral Comments Via Zoom: The Mayor will announce when public comments may be made for a limit of 3 minutes on the agenda item being considered, at which time you will:
(please make sure the volume on your video device or any nearby device is turned down.) o Using a computer – click on the “raise hand” feature in the webinar controls. This will alert staff that you wish to speak, and you will be unmuted.
o Using a Phone – press *9 to “raise the hand”. This will alert staff that you wish to speak, and you will be unmuted.

Teleconference Phone Number (This system is a backup for ZOOM technical difficulties only when providing oral comments.) If there are technical difficulties or disconnection with ZOOM while making oral comments, please immediately call the teleconference phone number (209) 863-7151 so that Council may receive your comments. Council will be waiting for your call. Thank you

JOIN THE MEETING VIA ZOOM PLATFORM
Join by this link: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89443415826 Join by accessing website: https://zoom.us/join , enter Webinar ID: 894 4341 5826 Join by telephone:1 669 444 9171 OR 1 669 900 9128, plus Webinar ID: 894 4341 5826 Learn about using ZOOM - Visit https://zoom.us/j/94943925973?status=success for a free account or to download the app.

TELECONFERENCE/VIRUAL PLATFORM PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

COMMENT PROCEDURES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD IN

CONFORMANCE WITH THE BROWN ACT

Item 9.1– CC/LRA-01/27/2026

RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL / LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.1
SECTION 9: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: January 27, 2026
Subject: Waiver of Readings
From: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
Submitted by: Gabriela Hernandez, City Clerk/LRA Secretary

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council / LRA Board approve the waiver of readings of any proposed ordinances and resolutions for consideration, except by title.

SUMMARY
In lieu of reading the entire text of a proposed ordinance or resolution that is introduced for consideration for adoption and approval, by majority vote, the City Council/LRA Board may waive the reading of the text and introduce the ordinance or resolution by title only for the record.

The full text of the proposed ordinances and resolutions, and any related documents that are part of the agenda packet, are available for review by the public on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s office at City Hall (North) upon distribution to a majority of the City Council/LRA Board; typically 72 hours prior to the scheduled date and time of the meeting.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact to this item.

ATTACHMENTS
There are no attachments to this report.

Item 9.2 – CC/LRA -01/27/2026

RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL / LOCAL REDEVELPOMENT AUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.2
SECTION 9: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: January 27, 2026
Subject: Approval of the City Council and Local Redevelopment Authority Board Minutes for January 13, 2026.

From: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
Submitted by: Gabriela Hernandez, City Clerk/LRA Secretary

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council/ Local Redevelopment Authority Board approve the City Council/LRA Meeting Minutes of January 13, 2026.

SUMMARY
The Draft Minutes of the City Council and the Local Redevelopment Authority Board meeting have been prepared for review and approval.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact to this item.

ATTACHMENTS

1. City Council/LRA Meeting Minutes for January 13, 2026.

Exhibit A- Adopted_2026 List of Appointments for Intergovernmental Boards & Committees

CC / LRA Minutes – 01/13/2026
0 MINUTES
TUESDAY, JANUARY 13, 2026 – 6:00 P.M.
(THE AGENDA PACKET IS ONLINE AT HTTP://WWW.RIVERBANK.ORG/AGENDACENTER)

1. CALL TO ORDER -Mayor / Chair Hernandez called the meeting to order at 6:00pm

2. FLAG SALUTE –Vice Mayor Fosi led the pledge of allegiance.

3. INVOCATION – Reverend Randy Richardson provided the Invocation.

4. ROLL CALL – City Clerk Hernandez conducted Roll Call.

Members of the City Council / Local Redevelopment Authority Board present:

Council Member / Authority Member District 1 Luis Uribe Council Member/ Authority Member District 3 John Pimentel Council Member / Authority Member District 4 Stacy Call Vice Mayor / Vice Chair District 2 Cindy Fosi
Mayor / Chair Rachel Hernandez

5. AGENDA CHANGES
No Agenda Changes.

6. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Any Council/Authority Member or Staff who has a direct Conflict of Interest on any scheduled agenda item to be considered is to declare their conflict at this time.

Councilmember Uribe declared he had a conflict of interest with Item 12.5.

CITY COUNCIL / LRA BOARD
Mayor/Chair
Rachel Hernandez
Council/Authority Members:

District 1-Luis Uribe
District 2-Cindy Fosi
Vice Mayor -District 3-John Pimentel
District 4-Stacy Call

CITY OF RIVERBANK
Regular City Council and
Local Redevelopment Authority
Board Meetings
Council Chambers
6707 Third Street, Suite B
Riverbank, CA 95367
ATTACHMENT 1

CC / LRA Minutes – 01/13/2026

7. PRESENTATIONS (Informational only)
Item 7.1 Recognition-Cardozo Middle School Girls Basketball Team- It is recommended that the City Council present a Certificate of Recognition to the Cardozo Middle School Girls Basketball Team, Athletic Director Gary Granger, Coach Bargas, Assistant Nick Golding, and Mrs. Azevedo - Principal for their championship achievement.

Mayor Hernandez presented a Certificate of Recognition to the Cardozo Middle School Girls Basketball team and coaching staff for their championship achievement.

Item 7.2 Riverbank Representative Update by Stanislaus Consolidated Fire Protection District Board Director Charles E. Neal and Chief Clint BrayIt is recommended that the City Council receive an update by Director Charles E. Neal and Chief Clint Bray with Stanislaus Consolidated Fire Protection District.

Charles Neal, Stanislaus Consolidated Fire Protection District Board Director and Chief Clint Bray gave an update on the status of SCFPD Business.

Item 7.3 Presentation- Parks and Recreation Financial Sustainability Study- It is recommended that the City Council receive a presentation in regards to the Parks and Recreation Sustainability Study that has been completed from 110%, Inc and the Parks and Recreation Department.

Farell Buller, with 110% Inc., gave a PowerPoint presentation on the Financial Sustainability study that was completed for the Parks & Recreation Department.

8. PUBLIC COMMENTS (No action can be taken)
At this time, members of the public may comment on any item not appearing on the agenda, and within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council/LRA Board. Individual comments will be limited to a maximum of 3 minutes (or as stated by the presiding Officer) and time cannot be yielded to another person. Under State Law, matters presented during the public comment period cannot be discussed or acted upon.

Mayor Hernandez opened the Public Comment Period at 6:35 P.M.

Sherry Fenn, Riverbank resident to express her concern regarding utility rate increase.

Tim Reed, Riverbank resident to express his concern regarding utility rate increase.

Diego Hernandez, Riverbank resident to express his concern regarding funds being spent from the 106 funds.

CC / LRA Minutes – 01/13/2026
Michael Christie, Riverbank resident spoke about public safety relating to recent breakins in the area. Mentioned the Polar Plunge hosted by Parks and Recreation department.

Josh, Riverbank resident suggested that Council hold off on spending more monies on Waste Water Treatment Plant.

Olivia Arambula, Riverbank Chamber of Commerce to share upcoming community events.

Rich Holmer, Stanislaus County resident would like to see an electric car charging station with in the City. Extend an invite for upcoming Riverbank Historical Society event.

Mayor Hernandez closed the Public Comment Period at 6:56 P.M.

9. CONSENT CALENDAR (No Obligation to Read Aloud)
All items listed on the Consent Calendar are to be acted upon by a single action of the City Council/LRA Board unless requested by an individual Council/Authority Member or member of the public for special consideration. Otherwise, the recommendation of staff will be accepted and acted upon by motion of the City Council/LRA Board.

Item 9.1 Waive Readings. All Readings of ordinances and resolutions, except by title, are waived.

Item 9.2 Approval of the City Council and Local Redevelopment Authority Board Minutes for December 9, 2025.

Item 9.3 Acceptance of the Silverock Road Overlay Project between Patterson Road and Oakdale Road and Authorization to File a Notice of Completion Item 9.4 Resolution 2026-001 to Amend the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee Bylaws to Include Attendance and Absence Policy.

There being no public comments, Mayor Hernandez brought the item back to City Council.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Uribe / Fosi 5/0) to approve Consent Calendar as presented.

Motion carried by unanimous City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Uribe, Pimentel, Call, Fosi and Mayor Hernandez
NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None

10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS

CC / LRA Minutes – 01/13/2026
Item 10.1 A Resolution to Approve a Contract Change Order for Value Engineering for the Regional Recycled Water Project – Phase I for KSN, Inc. and Authorize a Budget Appropriation in the amount of $194,310.00 from the Sewer Fund 106- It is recommended that the City Council award the contract change order for the Value Engineering phase of design for the Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project – Phase I to KSN, Inc. to authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with said firm in the amount of $194,310.00 and authorize a budget appropriation from Sewer Fund 106 for said contract.

Director of Public Works, Bridgewater gave a comprehensive staff report and PowerPoint Presentation on the contract change order for the Value Engineering phase design for the Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project- Phase I with KSN.

City Council discussed item with staff.

Rich Holmer, Stanislaus County resident to express his opposition regarding Item 10.1.

Michael Christie, Riverbank resident to express his opposition regarding Item 10.1.

Diego Hernandez, Riverbank resident to express his opposition regarding Item 10.1.

Jami Aggers, Stanislaus County resident to express her opposition regarding Item 10.1.

Evelyn Halbert, Riverbank resident to seek clarification regarding Item 10.1.

There being no further public comment Mayor Hernandez brought the item back to city council.

MOTION: By motion moved and seconded (Fosi/Hernadez 2/3) to not approve the item at this time. Motion Failed
Motion failed by City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Fosi, Mayor Hernandez
NAYS: Uribe, Pimentel, Call / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Uribe / Call 4/1) to approve Resolution 2026-002 approving the Contract Change Order for the Value Engineering for the Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project-Phase I with KSN in the amount of $84,440.00 Option A.

Motion carried by City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Uribe, Pimentel, Call, and Mayor Hernandez
NAYS: Fosi / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None

CC / LRA Minutes – 01/13/2026
Item 10.2 A Resolution to Approve a Contract Change Order for Value Engineering for the Regional Recycled Water Project – Phase I for Brown and Caldwell, and Authorize a Budget Appropriation in the amount of $138,475.00 from the Sewer Fund 106- It is recommended that the City Council award the contract change order for the Value Engineering phase of design for the Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project – Phase I to Brown and Caldwell, authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with said firm in the amount of $138,475.00 and authorize a budget appropriation from Sewer Fund 106 for said contract.

Director of Public Works, Bridgewater gave a comprehensive staff report and PowerPoint Presentation on the contract change order for the Value Engineering phase design for the Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project- Phase I with Brown and Caldwell.

City Council discussed item with staff.

Diego Hernandez, Riverbank resident to express opposition to Item 10.2.

There being no further public comment Mayor Hernandez brought the item back to city council.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Hernandez / Fosi 5/0) to deny the Contract Change Order for the Value Engineering for the Riverbank Regional Recycled Water Project-Phase I with Brown and Caldwell for $138,475.00 from the Sewer Fund 106.

Motion carried by unanimous City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Uribe, Pimentel, Call, Fosi, and Mayor Hernandez
NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None

11. PUBLIC HEARING
The Public Notice for Item 11.1 was published on 12/17/2025 in the Riverbank Newspaper.

Item 11.1 First Reading by Title Only and Introduction of a Proposed Ordinance Amending Chapters 150 (BUILDING REGULATIONS) and 157 (WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION) of Title XV: LAND USAGE, by amending and adopting by reference the 2025 Edition of the California Building Standards Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Parts 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11 & 12, including identified appendices). It is recommended that the City Council introduce and pass to a second reading an Ordinance amending Chapters 150 (Building Regulations) and 157 (Water Efficient Landscape and Irrigation) of Title XV (Land Usage) of the Riverbank Municipal Code to adopt by reference the 2025 Edition of the California Building Standards Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Parts 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, and 12, including

CC / LRA Minutes – 01/13/2026
identified appendices), and authorize the City Building Official to administer and implement the adopted codes, including the determination of permit valuation in accordance with the California Building Code.

Director of Community Development Mann gave a comprehensive staff report and PowerPoint presentation on the first reading of the proposed ordinance amending the Building Standards Code.

City Council discussed item with staff.

Mayor Hernandez opened the public hearing at 7:59 P.M.

Mayor Hernandez Closed the public hearing at 8:00 P.M.

There being no further public comment Mayor Hernandez brought the item back to city council.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Uribe / Fosi 5/0) to approve the first reading of the proposed ordinance amending and adopting by reference the 2025 California Building Standards Code.

Motion carried by unanimous City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Uribe, Pimentel, Call, Fosi and Mayor Hernandez
NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None

12. NEW BUSINESS
Item 12.1 Resolution Approving the Adoption of the Pension Stabilization Trust Participation and Member Agreements with Benefit Trust Company, Inc. (BTC) and the Chairman of the Board of Authority- Staff recommends that the City Council approve a resolution adopting the Pension Stabilization Trust Participation Agreement with Benefit Trust Company, Inc. ("BTC") and a Member Agreement for the Retirement Board of Authority for the purpose of pre-funding pension liability obligations under GASB 68.

Assistant City Manager, Alcantor gave a comprehensive report and PowerPoint presentation on the Pension Stabilization Trust Participation and Member Agreements with Benefit Trust Company Inc.

City Council discussed item with staff.

There being no further public comment Mayor Hernandez brought the item back to city council.

CC / LRA Minutes – 01/13/2026
ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Fosi / Uribe 5/0) to approve Resolution 2026-003 adopting a Pension Stabilization Trust Participation and Member Agreements with Benefit Trust Company, Inc. (BTC) and the Chairman of the Board of Authority.

Motion carried by unanimous City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Uribe, Pimentel, Call, Fosi and Mayor Hernandez
NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None
Item 12.2 Nomination and Appointment of the Vice Mayor to Serve for the Year 2026- It is recommended that Mayor Hernandez nominate a Councilmember to serve as Vice Mayor for the year 2026 and, by roll call vote, the City Council shall approve the Appointment for a one-year term.

Mayor Hernandez nominated Councilmember Pimentel to serve as the Vice Mayor for the 2026 Year.

There being no further public comment Mayor Hernandez brought the item back to city council.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Uribe / Call 5/0) to approve Councilmember Pimentel as the Vice Mayor for the 2026 Year.

Motion carried by unanimous City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Uribe, Fosi, Call, Pimentel, and Mayor Hernandez
NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None
Item 12.3 Adjustments to the 2026 City Council Meeting Schedule- It is recommended that the City Council by roll call vote: 1.) Cancel the meetings of May 26th, July 14th, August 11th, November 24th, and December 22nd, for a modified summer schedule and to minimize conflicts with Holiday Activities.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Call / Pimentel 5/0) to approve the adjustments to City Council Meeting schedule. Canceling the meetings of March 24th, July 14th, August 11th, November 24th, December 22, 2026.

Motion carried by unanimous City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Uribe, Fosi, Call, Pimentel, and Mayor Hernandez
NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None

CC / LRA Minutes – 01/13/2026
Item 12.4 Annual Consideration of City Council Appointments to Intergovernmental Boards and Committees and Appointments to Internal City Committees for the Year 2026- It is recommended that City Council: 1.) Review the appointment lists; and 2.) Volunteer or nominate a member of the Council to serve as the representative; and 3.) By roll call vote, ratify the appointments for the year 2026.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Fosi / Uribe 5/0) to approve the Appointments to the Internal City Committees and Intergovernmental Boards. (As Attached-Exhibit A)
Motion carried by unanimous City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Uribe, Fosi, Call, Pimentel, and Mayor Hernandez
NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None
Item 12.5 City Flag Design Contest Review and Selection of Top Three- It is recommended that the City Council select the top three designs to move forward for a public vote.

Councilmember Uribe recused himself from the dais at 8:48 P.M.

Olivia Arambula, Riverbank resident to provide her suggestions regarding Item 12.5.

Michael Christie, Riverbank resident to provide his suggestions regarding Item 12.5.

Edward Jones, Riverbank resident to provide his suggestions regarding Item 12.5.

ACTION: By motion moved and seconded (Call / Fosi 4/0) to extend the Flag Contest an additional 60 days.

Motion carried by unanimous City Council and LRA Board roll call vote:

AYES: Uribe, Fosi, Call, Pimentel, and Mayor Hernandez
NAYS: None / ABSENT: None / ABSTAINED: None
Councilmember Uribe returned to the dais at 9:14 P.M.

Brief Recess at 9:14 P.M.

Reconvened from Recess at 9:21 P.M.

Item 12.6 VOLT Institute Resident Scholarship Program Guidelines- It is recommended that the City Council provide feedback on the guidelines to establish a VOLT Institute Resident Scholarship Program as offered by Opportunity Stanislaus.

CC / LRA Minutes – 01/13/2026
DIRECTION: Direction was provided to staff.

13. COUNCIL REFERRALS
Item 13.1 Tot Time Program-It is recommended that the City Council receive a verbal presentation from Councilmember District 1 Luis Uribe, regarding closure of the Tot Time Program.

Councilmember Uribe gave a comprehensive staff report on Tot Time Program options.

No consensus reached to move forward with item being scheduled on a future agenda.

14. COMMENTS/REPORTS
A brief report on notable attendance of a meeting or conference or other notable topics of City business shall be made.

The Brown Act does not allow for discussion or action of items by the City Council/LRA Board during this time.

Item 14.1 Staff
City Manager:
• The only comment we have for tonight is that city offices are closed this Friday, based on our 9/80 work schedule. And then they're closed on Monday for the Martin Luther King Junior holiday.

Item 14.2 Council/Authority Member
Vice Mayor Pimentel:
• First of all, thank you, Mayor and Council, for electing me. I really appreciate an opportunity like this, having lived here all my life you know, Riverbank is in my heart.
• I'm not sure how far back you go, but on the 13th, we had our Christmas parade.

What I was impressed about was the large turnout this year. I’ve seen a lot of families and people just wanting to be out there in fellowship. And I think that was a great opportunity to get to know your neighbor.
• I attended the Latino mixer at the DoubleTree. Thank you, Olivia, for giving Riverbank a shout out at the event. It was very organized and it was a great night.
• The Polar Plunge, I joined the Mayor and I jumped in twice and it was a good turnout as well. And I was representing the book exchange in Riverbank. It's very important that we keep this going, the little book clubs. Thank you to all that donated books in December, I appreciate that.
• On January 9th, we had our first Sister City meeting for 2026. Thank you again to Timeless Real Estate for letting us use your location. And also, we want to welcome Bianca she was mentioned earlier as well. And Max he became the Vice President. And there's some exciting things coming up in 2026 with Sister City.

CC / LRA Minutes – 01/13/2026
• I will be attending the Riverbank Chamber of Commerce Installation Awards dinner coming up soon.
• And if you want to know more about Riverbank, follow me and we're in for the ride.

Councilmember Uribe:
• First, I'm looking forward to 2026 working with all of Council, working with all of Staff and everybody. And I hope we have an even better year than we did in 2025.
• The only thing I will highlight today is just going to echo what Olivia had mentioned Installation Dinner. So, the Riverbank Chamber is doing their Installation Dinner Awards for Citizen of the year, Business of the year, Youth of the year. It's happening down the street right here at Antigua. It's at 6:00 pm. I mean, you guys are about to sell out on tickets, so please get your tickets as soon as possible. Reach out to Olivia. Doors open 5:30pm and see you guys there should be a fun time.

Councilmember Fosi:
• Welcome back Happy new Year. I will say I was in Ohio and it's much warmer here and I love seeing the sun, so I'm glad to be home. • Historical Society is having their Installation Dinner and General Meeting at Perko’s on Friday, February 6th from 6:00pm to 8:00pm.
• The Women's Club will have their first meeting this year on January 20th at Scout Hall at 6:30pm. I hope to see you there.

Councilmember Call:
• I first wanted to provide the Sierra House December day use facility stats 143 showers were had in 146 meals served in the month of December 91 of them were men and 62 were women. These numbers do represent a duplicated count between January 1st and December 31st of last year, we admitted 63 new individuals to the day use facility, admitted means they completed an intake form and received services from the day use facility at least once. • Then I just wanted to touch on the Polar Plunge. I the first year I did it, I did it for efforts towards Foster Love 209 and we were very successful with that. And this year we chose Children's Crisis Center of Stanislaus County, which is near and dear to my heart. So, we were able to raise $1,775 and it sounds like I got another $500 commitment tonight. So, I actually went to the Children's Crisis Center house to deliver the funds. And I'm touching on this because it's a County effort and it impacts all of the children within our County. But Lieutenant Conda actually took me to the house that I attended as a child, and it was the most emotional experience I've ever seen. They served 32 children. Currently during the day, they have five overnight children. So, these homes house these children overnight to keep them safe from whatever situation they're in. So, I don't think

CC / LRA Minutes – 01/13/2026
they're listening, but I just want to thank Children's Crisis Center for all that they do for our youth in the County.

Item 14.3 Mayor/Chair
Mayor Hernandez:
• Did we mention the Library grand opening? Their opening this Saturday they have been temporarily housed at the Teen Center while they have been renovating. Just down the street from the Library. So, this Saturday at 10:00am they are going to do a grand opening, which is pretty exciting and an opportunity to reengage our community to visit the Library.
• The Riverbank Youth Council is selling tickets for Applebee's this Saturday.

Please contact me or any other youth that for tickets.

15. CLOSED SESSION
The public will have a limit of 3 minutes to comment on Closed Session item(s) as set forth on the agenda prior to the City Council/LRA Board recessing to Closed Session
Item 15.1 LIABILITY CLAIMS
(Pursuant to Govt. Code § 54961)
Agency Claimed Against: City of Riverbank
Claimant: Anthony Campos Martinez, A Minor, by and through, Alma Campos.

Item 15.2 CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIORS
(Pursuant to Govt. Code § 54956.8)
Property: 3313 Santa Fe St. (APN: 132-009-056)
Agency Negotiator: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
Property Negotiator: Lana Clayton
Under Negotiation: Price, terms of payment, or both
There being no public comment, Mayor Hernandez motion to closed Session 9:53 P.M.

Reconvened from Closed Session at 10:14 P.M.

16. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION
Item 16.1 Report from Closed Session Item 15.1

LIABILITY CLAIMS
(Pursuant to Govt. Code § 54961)
Agency Claimed Against: City of Riverbank
Claimant: Anthony Campos Martinez, A Minor, by and through, Alma Campos.

CC / LRA Minutes – 01/13/2026
ACTION:: Claim was rejected by a Vote of 5/0.

Item 16.2 Report from Closed Session Item 15.2

CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATIORS
(Pursuant to Govt. Code § 54956.8)
Property: 3313 Santa Fe St. (APN: 132-009-056)
Agency Negotiator: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
Property Negotiator: Lana Clayton
Under Negotiation: Price, terms of payment, or both
DIRECTION: Direction was provided to Staff.

17. ADJOURNMENT OF THE REGULAR MEETING
There being no further business, Mayor / Chair Hernandez adjourned the regular meeting at 10:14 P.M. to the next regular scheduled City Council / LRA Meeting of January 27, 2026.

ATTEST: (Adopted 01/27/2026) APPROVED:

Gabriela Hernandez, CMC Rachel Hernandez
City Clerk / LRA Recorder Mayor/ Chair
2026 List of Appointments
(Ratified on January 13, 2026)

BOARD / COMMITTEE COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE
(2026 - Appointments)

LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES

CENTRAL VALLEY DIVISION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Meets: March 12, June 11, September 10, December 10,
September 24 & 25 (Annual Conference)
Location: It rotates among the Northern and
Southern central valley cities, TBD.
(Annual breakfast meeting of the year takes place at the League’s Annual Conference in September)
The Central Valley Division (CVD) is led by an executive committee made up of local government officials who provide overall guidance and direction for CVD activities. These activities provide a variety of avenues for individuals to take the opportunity to exchange ideas and information and share the advantages of cooperative advocacy.

CM Stacy Call
(Primary)
CM Luis Uribe
(Alternate)
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
Special City Selection Committee
Meets: At least once annually and as needed
Location: Northern Region Office, 4800
Enterprise Way, Modesto
This Committee’s purpose is to appoint (5) Council Members to the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s Governing Board.

CM Luis Uribe
(Primary)
Vice Mayor John Pimentel
(Alternate)
STANCOG – POLICY BOARD
Meets: The 3rd Wednesday of each month; 6:pm
Location: 1111 I Street, Suite 308, Modesto
To work together with local cities to enhance communication, cooperation and comprehensive planning in dealing with regional transportation issues.

Mayor Rachel Hernandez
(Primary)
CM Stacy Call
(Alternate)

STANISLAUS HOMELESS ALLIANCE BOARD
(RESOLUTION NO. 2019-032)
Meets: 1st Wednesday of Each Month at 5:30 pm
Location: Tenth Street Place, Board Chambers,
1010 10th Street (Basement), Modesto
The Alliance Is a Collaborative Board formed to align Homeless Service, Planning, & Funding among Stakeholders in Stanislaus County. The Board consists of several Community Leaders of Governmental and Nongovernmental Entities. A Primary Voting Member Is appointed by the City Council annually. An Alternate Member may be an elected official or an executive-level administrative official in each government entity.

CM Cindy Fosi
(Primary)
Vice Mayor John Pimentel
(Alternate)

EXHIBIT A
2026 List of Appointments
(Ratified on January 13, 2026)

BOARD / COMMITTEE COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE
(2026 - Appointments)

STANISLAUS OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES

DISASTER COUNCIL
Meets: April 30th & October 29th
Location 1010 10th Street Place, Modesto Board of Supervisors Basement
To make recommendations to local governing agencies on matters pertinent to development of mitigation, disaster preparedness, response & recovery plans, and programs for any potential local emergency.

Vice Mayor Cindy Fosi
(Primary)
Councilmember Stacy Call
(Alternate)
(*Note: The appointed
Councilmember serves a 2-year
term ending 12/2026)
Project Resolve (PR)
Meets: Every other month starting at 8am. The first half hour is networking over breakfast with a 90-minute meeting starting at 8:30am.
(1st Wednesday of the following months in 2026: February, April, June, August, October, December)
Location: Residence Inn, 2902 Healthcare Way, Modesto
A network resolved to build and sustain trust and strong relationships between law enforcement and community
through our ongoing connection, learning, and testing of ideas.

CM Stacy Call
(Primary)
Mayor Rachel Hernandez
(Alternate)
Oakdale Ad Hoc Animal Shelter Subcommittee
Meets: As Necessary
Location: City of Oakdale
The Oakdale Police Department oversees animal services, its members help us improve services to our community and our four-legged friends.

CM Cindy Fosi
(Primary)
Markie Wallace
(Alternate- Riverbank Resident)
2026 List of Appointments
(Ratified on January 13, 2026)

CITY / LRA COMMITTEES COUNCIL / LRA LIAISON
(2025 – Appointments)

BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE (BAC)
Meets: As needed
Location: City Hall Council Chambers or City Hall South Conference Room
This (6) resident member advisory committee, including
(1) non-voting Council representative and a Council
alternate, reviews and discusses the City’s operating
budget and makes recommendations on projects,
programs, and policies to the City Council.

CM Cindy Fosi
(Primary)
CM Luis Uribe
(Alternate)

SISTER CITY
Meets: As needed
Location: TBD based on availability
Formed for the purposes of establishing, maintaining,
coordinating, and managing international relationships in cultural, educational, and economic areas, and promoting international friendship and goodwill. Riverbank’s two
Sister Cities are Tamazula de Gordiano, Jalisco, Mexico and Fuyang, China.

CM Luis Uribe
(Co-Primary)
Vice Mayor John Pimentel
(Co-Primary)

YOUTH COUNCIL
Meets: 1st & 3rd Monday of each Month at 5:00pm
(From August – May)
Location : City Hall Council Chambers
In June 2025, City Council established a Youth Council to provide high school students with opportunities to engage in local government, develop leadership skills, and
represent the voice of youth in the community. Youth
Council members will commit their time to attend
meetings, participate in city-sponsored events, and
contribute to the betterment of the Riverbank community.

Mayor Rachel Hernandez
(Primary)
CM Stacy Call
(Alternate)

Item 9.3 – CC/LRA – 01/27/2026

RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL / LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.3
SECTION 9: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: January 27, 2026
Subject: Resolution Approving the Award of a Pest Control Services Agreement to Clark Pest Control
From: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
Submitted by: Michael Patton, Parks and Recreation Director

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approves the award and contract of the Pest Control Services Contract for City of Riverbank Buildings and Parks to Clark Pest Control in the amount of $9,284.00 annually for three years.

SUMMARY
The Parks and Recreation Department issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for pest control services for city-owned facilities and park buildings. The current arrangement for pest control services terminated after December 2025. The City of Riverbank issued a RFP on September 25, 2025 and closed on November 6, 2025. The city received only one response and the cost of the services far exceeded the previous annual payment.

The city council provided direction to republish the RFP to gather additional proposals.

On December 6th, 2025, the department reissued the RFP. The RFP closed on January 12, 2026. The city received 4 proposals from local companies. After evaluating the proposals based on the criteria outlined in the RFP, which included experience and qualifications, cost, technical approach, and proposal quality, the department ranked Clark Pest Control as the highest ranked proposal.

BACKGROUND
In 2018, the City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for pest control services for Cityowned facilities. Multiple proposals were received, and the most cost-effective bid came from Nortek Pest Control at $3,984.00 annually. The City entered into an agreement with Nortek with the understanding that another RFP would be conducted after three years.

However, the RFP process was never repeated, and Nortek continued providing services at the same annual rate without a new contract.

Item 9.3 – CC/LRA – 01/27/2026
In 2025, while reviewing vendor agreements, staff discovered that the City no longer had a current, fully executed agreement with Nortek. Nortek also confirmed that no valid contract existed between the two parties. To secure an updated agreement and obtain current pricing—given that the existing rate dated back to 2018—staff began preparing a new RFP for pest control services.

The RFP was published on September 25, 2025, with proposals due November 6, 2025.

Staff contacted five local pest control companies, inviting them to review the RFP and submit proposals. A pre-bid meeting was held on October 24, 2025, during which only one company, Dewey Services, Inc., attended and expressed interest.

When the proposal deadline arrived, the City received zero submissions. Staff contacted Dewey Services, Inc. to understand why they chose not to submit a proposal. The company explained that the RFP required prevailing wage, and the additional administrative and labor costs made the project financially unfeasible. Staff then consulted the City Attorney, who confirmed that pest control services are not subject to prevailing wage requirements. Staff also asked whether the RFP needed to be reissued to remove that requirement. The City Attorney advised that because a full RFP process had already been completed, the City could proceed with obtaining a proposal directly.

Staff relayed this clarification to Dewey Services, Inc., and the company subsequently submitted a proposal. Their proposal included an annual cost of $10,590.00, representing an increase of $6,606.00 compared to the City’s current annual cost of $3,984.00 for similar services.

On December 9, 2025, the Director of Parks and Recreation presented the City Council the Dewey Pest Control Services proposal with the options to accept the proposal or to reissue the RFP. The City Council provided the guidance to reissue the RFP. Parks and Recreation staff reissued the RFP on December 12, 2025. Staff contacted 9 different pest control companies in the area with the RFP in hopes to garner more submissions. The RFP deadline was scheduled for January 12, 2026.

The City had received four proposals from Dewey Pest Control, Clark Pest Control, Galatians Pest Control, and Allpro Pest Control. Staff reviewed the proposals based on criteria provided in the RFP which was:

1. Experience and Qualifications (30%),

2. Cost (30%),

3. Technical Approach (30%), and

4. Proposal Quality (10%)
After rating the proposals based on the criteria, the following are the scores:

1. Clark Pest Control: 8.8,

2. Allpro Pest Control: 8.6,

3. Galatians Pest Control: 6.6,

4. Dewey Pest Control: 6.2.

Item 9.3 – CC/LRA – 01/27/2026
Based on the evaluation criteria, staff is prepared to recommend Clark Pest Control for the award of the pest control contract. Clark Pest Control received the highest rating due to their previous experience working for municipalities, submission of all requested documents, and strong outline of ability to provide the services requested.

STRATEGIC PLAN
A goal of the 2025–2030 City Strategic Plan is to prioritize financial stability, including the strategy to evaluate all contracts and partnerships for cost-effectiveness. Awarding this pest control contract supports that strategy by reviewing and updating the City’s current agreements. While the recommended proposal is not the lowest annual cost, staff determined it offers the most comprehensive services, allowing for easier oversight and ensuring work is completed on time and to a high standard.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The recommended proposal has an annual cost of $9,284.00, compared to the City’s current pest control cost of $3,984.00, resulting in an increase of $5,300.00. Of this amount, $1,741.80 will be funded through the water and sewer enterprise accounts for facilities that support those operations. The remaining $3,558.20 will be funded annually by the General Fund.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

2. Pest Control Services Agreement

3. Bid and Evaluation Sheets

4. Proposals from Clark Pest Control, Dewey Pest Control, Galatians Pest Control, and Allpro Pest Control.

CC/LRA – 01/27/2026
CC Resolution 2026-

CITY OF RIVERBANK
RESOLUTION 2026-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK

APPROVING THE AWARD OF A PEST CONTROL SERVICES AGREEMENT TO

CLARK PEST CONTROL

THE CITY OF RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL (HEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE “CITY COUNCIL”) DOES HEREBY RESOLVE THAT:

WHEREAS, the City of Riverbank requires ongoing pest control services for Cityowned facilities and park buildings to ensure safe, clean, and well-maintained public spaces; and
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Department issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for pest control services, which was reissued on December 12, 2025, and closed on January 12, 2026, resulting in four qualified proposals; and WHEREAS, proposals were evaluated based on the criteria established in the RFP, including experience and qualifications, cost, technical approach, and proposal quality; and
WHEREAS, after evaluation, Clark Pest Control received the highest overall ranking due to its municipal experience, comprehensive proposal, and demonstrated ability to provide high-quality services; and
WHEREAS, the annual cost of the contract with Clark Pest Control is $9,284.00 over three years.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK HEREBY:

1. Approves the award of the Pest Control Services Agreement for City of Riverbank buildings and parks to Clark Pest Control in the annual amount of $9,284.00; and

2. Authorizes the City Manager to execute the agreement and any related documents necessary to implement this Resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Riverbank at a regular meeting held on the 27th day of January, 2026; motioned by Councilmember __________, seconded by Councilmember __________, and upon roll call was carried by the following City Council vote of ______:

ATTACHMENT 1

CC/LRA – 01/27/2026
CC Resolution 2026-
AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
________________________________ __________________________ Gabriela Hernandez, CMC Rachel Hernandez
City Clerk Mayor
Attachment: Pest Control Services Agreement
ATTACHMENT 2

City of Riverbank Pest Control Bid Sheet
Facilities Dewey Pest Control Clark Pest Control Galatians Pest Control Allpro Pest Control Total $11,160.00 $9,284.00 $8,590.00 $7,050.00
Sports Complex $750.00 $504.00 $600.00 $450.00
Castleberg Park $750.00 $540.00 $600.00 $450.00
Community Pool $540.00 $392.00 $340.00 $300.00
Community Center $750.00 $708.00 $750.00 $450.00
City Hall South $750.00 $690.00 $900.00 $450.00
City Hall North $750.00 $720.00 $510.00 $450.00
Scout Hall $750.00 $540.00 $510.00 $450.00
Sheriffs Office Building $750.00 $660.00 $600.00 $450.00 Historical Society Museum $810.00 $540.00 $600.00 $450.00 Teen Center $750.00 $690.00 $600.00 $450.00
Parks Trailer $810.00 $690.00 $510.00 $450.00
Public Works Corp. Yard $810.00 $540.00 $510.00 $450.00 Public Works Admin Office $810.00 $540.00 $510.00 $450.00 Wastewater Treatment Plant $810.00 $840.00 $600.00 $450.00 Sierra House $570.00 $690.00 $450.00 $900.00
City of Riverbank Pest Control Requested Docs
Proposers
Application Form
(Attachment A)
Bid Form
(Attachement B)
City of Riverbank
Business License Proof of Insurance Proof of Licenses
Addendum #1
Acknowledgement Additional Information
Dewey Pest Control X X X X X
Clark Pest Control X X X X X X
Galatians Pest Control X X X X
Allpro Pest Control X X X X X
City of Riverbank Pest Control Evaluation- Scale 1-10
Proposer
Experience &
Qualifications (30%) Cost Proposal (30%) Technical Approach (30%) Proposal Quality (10%) Total 26 36
26 34
Proposer
Experience &
Qualifications (30%) Cost Proposal (30%) Technical Approach (30%) Proposal Quality (10%) Total

6.2 8.8

6.6 8.6
Dewey Pest Control 8 4 6 8
Clark Pest Control 10 6 10 10
Galatians Pest Control 6 8 6 6
Allpro Pest Control 8 10 8 8
Dewey Pest Control 2.4 1.2 1.8 0.8
Clark Pest Control 3 1.8 3 1
Galatians Pest Control 1.8 2.4 1.8 0.6
Allpro Pest Control 2.4 3 2.4 0.8
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 4

Item 9.4 – CC/LRA – 01/272026

RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL / LOCAL REDEVELOPMENTAUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.4
SECTION 9: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: January 27, 2026
Subject: Resolution to Approve and Adopt 2026 City of Riverbank Measure L Expenditure Plan Project List
From: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
Submitted By: Kathleen Cleek, Capital Projects/Regulatory Compliance Manager

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the 2026 City of Riverbank Measure L Expenditure Plan Project List for local streets and roads, traffic management, and bike and pedestrian improvement projects.

SUMMARY
On November 8, 2016 the Stanislaus County voters approved a ½ cent sales tax measure to fund local and regional transportation projects and programs. The tax is expected to generate approximately $39 million dollars a year over a 25-year period for Stanislaus County.

The City of Riverbank entered into a Master Funding Agreement with the Stanislaus Council of Governments (StanCOG) and within that agreement the City agrees to provide StanCOG with a detailed project list for local streets and roads, traffic management and bicycle/pedestrian projects that are scheduled to be constructed with Measure L Funding. The projects identified on the Expenditure Plan Project List detail a comprehensive list of infrastructure improvements that the City has identified as priority projects.

The City receives annually approximately $960,000 for local streets and roads, $98,400 for bicycle & pedestrian projects and $110,000 for traffic management projects. The last update to the list was approved by the City Council at the May 27, 2025 meeting. Staff has added three new projects under Local Streets and

Item 9.4 – CC/LRA – 01/272026
Roads, and one project under Bike & Pedestrian to the 2025 Measure L Expenditure Plan.

Local Streets & Roads projects are as follows:

Townsend Avenue Overlay & ADA Improvements Project – Preliminary Engineering is complete. Engineer’s Estimate totals $436,612, Surface Transportation Block Grant Funds $351,000 and requesting Measure L Funds totaling $85,612. Construction Summer 2026.

Micro Slurry various roads and streets – Requesting Measure L Funds totaling $20,000 for engineering and $500,000 for construction. Construction Spring 2026.

Sidewalk along Roselle Avenue over MID Canal Project – Engineer’s Estimate & Construction Inspections total $499,668, Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Funds $399,850 and requesting Measure L Funds totaling $99,818. Construction Spring 2026.

Stanislaus Street Overlay between Sixth Street and Eight Street Project – Requesting $45,000 for engineering and $500,000 for construction. Construction Spring 2027.

Riverside Drive Overlay between Third Street & Fourth Street Project – Engineering is complete. Requesting Measure L Funds totaling $300,000 for construction. Construction Summer 2027.

Traffic Management projects are as follows:

Signal @ Snediger & Patterson – Requesting $127,000 for engineering and traffic study.

Bicycle/Pedestrian projects are as follow:

Palmer Avenue Sidewalk Project – Patterson Road to Sierra Street – Engineering is complete. Requesting Measure L Funds totaling $225,000 for construction.

Construction Summer 2026.

Roselle Avenue Sidewalk Project – Monschien to Compass Foods - Engineer’s Estimate totals $404,000. Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality Funds $358,000 and requesting Measure L Funds totaling $46,000. Construction Spring 2027.

FISCAL IMPACT THROUGH THE SPRING OF 2026:

Measure L – Streets & Roads $1,550,430
Measure L – Traffic Management $127,000
Measure L – Bicycle/Pedestrian $271,000

Item 9.4 – CC/LRA – 01/272026

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

2. 2026 City of Riverbank Expenditure Plan Revised Project List

CC/LRA-01/27/2026
CC Resolution 2026-

CITY OF RIVERBANK
RESOLUTION 2026-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE 2026 CITY OF RIVERBANK MEASURE L

EXPENDITURE PLAN PROJECT LIST

THE CITY OF RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL (HEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE “CITY COUNCIL”) DOES HEREBY RESOLVE THAT:

WHEREAS, The Riverbank City Council has reviewed the 2026 City of Riverbank Measure L Expenditure Plan Project List presented by staff; and WHEREAS, the ½ cent sales tax measure approved by the voters to fund local and regional transportation projects and programs is expected to generate approximately $960,000 for the City of Riverbank’s local streets and roads; and WHEREAS, the ½ cent sales tax measure approved by the voters to fund local and regional transportation projects and programs is expected to generate approximately $110,000 for the City of Riverbank’s traffic management projects; and WHEREAS, the ½ cent sales tax measure approved by the voters to fund local and regional transportation projects and programs is expected to generate approximately $98,400 for the City of Riverbank’s bicycle/pedestrian projects; and WHEREAS, each project on the 2026 City of Riverbank Measure L Expenditure Plan Project List attached, will require City Council review and approval prior to construction; and
WHEREAS, each year a comprehensive review of the proposed Measure L Project List will be conducted and any changes presented to Council.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVBED that the City Council of the City of Riverbank hereby approves the City of Riverbank’s 2026 City of Riverbank Measure L Expenditure Plan Project List.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Riverbank at a regular meeting held on the 27th day of January, 2026; motioned by Councilmember , seconded by Councilmember , and upon roll call was carried by the following City Council vote of :

AYES:

ATTACHMENT 1

CC/LRA-01/27/2026
CC Resolution 2026-
NAYS:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

APPROVED:
__________________________
Rachel Hernandez
ATTEST:
_________________________
Gabriela Hernandez,CMC
City Clerk Mayor
Attachment: Exhibit A – 2026 City of Riverbank Measure L Expenditure Plan Project List
Type Projects Description Shared Cost
Measure L
Funds
Planned
Start
Planned
Completion
Local Streets and Roads (50%)
Overlay (CON) Townsend Avenue - Terminal to Eighth Street Townsend Avenue -
Terminal to Eighth Street Construction
Matching
Funds
$85,612 FY 2026 FY 2026
Pedestrian & Road Improvements (CON) Roselle Avenue Sidewalk over MID Canal Roselle Avenue Sidewalk over MID Canal Construction $99,818 FY 2026 FY 2026 Overlay (PE) Stanislaus Street - Sixth Street to Eighth Street Stanislaus Street -
Sixth Street to Eighth Street
Preliminary
Engineering $45,000 FY 2026 FY 2026
Overlay (CON) Stanislaus Street - Sixth Street to Eighth Street Stanislaus Street -
Sixth Street to Eighth Street Construction $500,000 FY 2027 FY 2027 Micro Slurry Micro Slurry various Roads and Streets Micro Slurry various Roads and Streets Preliminary
Engineering/
Construction $520,000 FY 2026 FY 2026
Overlay (CON) Riverside Drive between 3rd & 4th Riverside Drive between 3rd & 4th Construction $300,000 FY 2027 FY 2027 Traffic Management (10%)
Signal Project Signal @ Snedigar & Patterson (PE) Signal @ Snedigar & Patterson (PE) Preliminary
Engineering $127,000 FY 2026 FY 2026
Bike/Ped (5%)
Sidewalk Project
Palmer Avenue Sidewalks - Patterson to Sierra
Street
Palmer Avenue Sidewalks -
Patterson Road to Sierra Street Construction $225,000 FY 2026 FY 2026 Sidewalk Project
Roselle Ave Sidewalk between Monschien to
Compass Foods
Roselle Ave Sidewalk -
Monschien to Compass Foods Construction
Matching
Funds
$46,000 FY 2027 FY 2027
2026 City of Riverbank Measure L Expenditure Plan Project List Revised - 1-27-2026 ATTACHMENT 2

Item 9.5- CC/LRA 01/27/2026

RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL/ LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.5
SECTION 9: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: January 27, 2026
Subject: Second Reading by Title Only of a Proposed Ordinance Amending Chapters 150 (BUILDING REGULATIONS) and 157
(WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION) of Title XV:

LAND USAGE, by Amending and Adopting by Reference the
2025 Edition of the California Building Standards Code
(California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Parts 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11 & 12, Including Identified Appendices).

From: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
Submitted by: Joshua E. Mann, Director of Community Development

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council do a second reading and consider adopting an Ordinance amending Chapters 150 (Building Regulations) and 157 (Water Efficient Landscape and Irrigation) of Title XV (Land Usage) of the Riverbank Municipal Code to adopt by reference the 2025 Edition of the California Building Standards Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Parts 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, and 12, including identified appendices), and authorize the City Building Official to administer and implement the adopted codes, including the determination of permit valuation in accordance with the California Building Code.

SUMMARY
The State of California mandates that local jurisdictions adopt and commence enforcement of the latest California Building Standards Code within six months of adoption by the State. The 2025 California Building Standards Code becomes effective January 1, 2026. In order to remain compliant with State law, the City of Riverbank must adopt and enforce the updated codes.

The proposed ordinance updates the City’s building and water-efficient landscape regulations to reflect the most current State standards and confirms the administrative authority of the City Building Official to implement the codes, including determining permit valuation consistent with State law.

Item 9.5- CC/LRA 01/27/2026

BACKGROUND
The California Building Standards Code is updated on a three-year cycle under the authority of the California Building Standards Commission and is codified as Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations. The Building Standards Code establishes minimum requirements to safeguard public health, safety, and welfare through uniform building regulations that reflect current construction practices, materials, engineering standards, energy efficiency, accessibility, and sustainability requirements.

The City of Riverbank has historically adopted each new edition of the California Building Standards Code to ensure consistency with State law and to provide clear, enforceable standards for development within the City.

Notable Code Updates
The 2025 California Building Standards Code continues to advance State policy goals related to safety, energy efficiency, and sustainability. Key updates include, but are not limited to:
• Enhanced energy efficiency standards, including expanded use of electric heatpump technology for space and water heating. • Continued requirements for solar photovoltaic systems and energy storage for certain residential, multifamily, and nonresidential buildings. • Updated ventilation and indoor air quality standards. • Expanded electric-ready and electric vehicle charging infrastructure requirements. • Updates affecting specialized uses such as commercial greenhouses, controlled environment agriculture, and emerging building technologies.

Administrative Authority – Permit Valuation
During preparation of the 2025 California Building Standards Code adoption, staff conducted a routine review of the City’s building regulations and administrative practices.

As part of that review, staff noted that the permit valuation table currently in use has not been formally updated in several years and that clarification regarding valuation authority would be appropriate to ensure consistency with State law and current industry standards.

The California Building Code (CBC) Section 109.3 provides that “the determination of value or valuation under any of the provisions of this code shall be made by the Building Official.” Consistent with this authority, this code update clarifies that the City Building Official/Chief Building Official is responsible for determining permit valuation for fee calculation purposes and may utilize and periodically update recognized valuation data, such as Building Valuation Data published by the International Code Council, as necessary to ensure permit valuations remain accurate, fair, and consistent over time.

This clarification does not establish new fees, increase fee rates, or modify the City’s adopted permit fee schedule. Permit fees remain subject to City Council approval by

Item 9.5- CC/LRA 01/27/2026
resolution. This clarification is administrative in nature and is intended solely to align the City’s practices with the California Building Code and standard practices used by jurisdictions throughout the State.

City Council Action – First Reading and Introduction of the Ordinance On January 13, 2026, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing and considered the first reading of an ordinance amending Chapters 150 and 157 of Title XV of the Riverbank Municipal Code to adopt by reference the 2025 California Building Standards Code. Following a staff presentation, Council discussion, and with no public comments received, the Council unanimously approved the first reading and introduction of the ordinance (Motion: Uribe / Fosi, Vote: 5-0). The ordinance is now presented for second reading and adoption.

ENVIRONMENTAL
The proposed ordinance is exempt from analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the Common Sense Exemption (CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3)), as the adoption of updated building codes does not have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact associated with adoption of the 2025 California Building Standards Code beyond the cost of required code publications and staff training. Permit fee revenue is not affected by this action, as permit fees are established separately by City Council resolution.

ATTACHMENT

1. Ordinance 2026-XXX

CC-LRA 01/13/2026 & 01/27/2026
CC Ordinance 2026-xxx

CITY OF RIVERBANK
ORDINANCE 2026-XXX

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK AMENDING TITLE XV: LAND USAGE; CHAPTER 150: BUILDING REGULATIONS; SECTIONS 150.01 THROUGH 150.16, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 2025

EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS CODE (CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, TITLE 24, PARTS 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11 AND 12, INCLUDING IDENTIFIED APPENDICES), AND AMENDING TITLE XV: LAND USAGE; CHAPTER 157: WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION; SECTION 157.01: PURPOSE AND INTENT
WHEREAS, California Building Standards Code is published in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations and is adopted and updated by the California Building Standards Commission; and
WHEREAS, Title 24 is republished on a triennial basis to reflect advances in construction technology, materials, safety standards, energy efficiency, and sustainability; and
WHEREAS, the State of California mandates that local jurisdictions adopt and enforce the most recently adopted California Building Standards Code; and WHEREAS, the 2025 Edition of the California Building Standards Code has been adopted by the California Building Standards Commission and becomes effective on the date established by the State of California; and
WHEREAS, the City of Riverbank finds that adoption of the 2025 California Building Standards Code is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare of its resident; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to amend its Municipal Code to adopt the 2025 California Building Standards Code by reference and to ensure its administrative provisions are implemented consistent with State law.

NOW, THEREFORE, The City Council of the City of Riverbank does hereby ordain as follows:

SECTION 1. Title XV: Land Usage, Chapter 150: Building Regulations, Sections 150.01 through 150.16 of the Riverbank Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows:

ATTACHMENT 1

CC-LRA 01/13/2026 & 01/27/2026
CC Ordinance 2026-xxx
CHAPTER 150: BUILDING REGULATIONS
Section
General Provisions
150.01 Purpose and authority
150.02 Mandatory duty of care
150.03 Severability
150.04 Savings clause
Adoption of Standard Codes
150.05 Administrative Code
150.06 Building Code
150.07 Residential Code
150.08 Green Building Standards Code
150.09 Plumbing Code
150.10 Electrical Code
150.11 Fire Code
150.12 Mechanical Code
150.13 Energy Code
150.14 Existing Building Code
150.15 Historical Building Code
150.16 Solar/photovoltaic power systems

GENERAL PROVISIONS
§ 150.01 PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY.

The purpose of this chapter is to adopt by reference the 2025 Edition of the California Building Standards Code, Title 24 - Part 1; Part 2, Volume I & II; Part 2.5; Part 3; Part 4; Part 5; Part 6; Part 8; Part 9; Part 10; Part 11; and Part 12 of the California Code of Regulations subject to the definitions, clarifications, and the amendments set forth in this chapter. The purpose of this chapter is also to provide minimum requirements and standards for the protection of public safety, health, property, and welfare of the City of Riverbank. This chapter is adopted under the authority of Government Code subsection 50022.2 and Health and Safety Code Section 18941.5.

CC-LRA 01/13/2026 & 01/27/2026
CC Ordinance 2026-xxx
§ 150.02 MANDATORY DUTY OF CARE.

This chapter is not intended to and shall not be construed or given effect in a manner that imposes upon the city or any officer or employee thereof a mandatory duty of care towards persons and property within or without the city, so as to provide a basis of civil liability for damages, except as otherwise imposed by law.
§ 150.03 SEVERABILITY.

If any provision of §§ 150.01 through 150.16 and 157.01 or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this chapter are severable. This City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this chapter irrespective of the invalidity of any particular portion thereof and intends that the invalid portions should be severed and the balance of the ordinance be enforced.
§ 150.04 SAVINGS CLAUSE.

The provisions of §§ 150.01 through 150.16 and 157.01 shall not affect or impair an act done or right vested or approved or any proceeding, suit or prosecution had or commenced in any cause before such repeal shall take affect; but every such act done, or right vested or accrued, or proceeding, suit or prosecution shall remain in full force and affect to all intents and purposes as if such ordinance or part thereof so repealed had remained in force. No offense committed and no liability, penalty or forfeiture, either civilly or criminally incurred prior to the time when any such ordinance or part thereof shall be repealed or altered by this Code shall be discharged or affected by such repeal or alteration; but prosecutions and suits for such offenses, liabilities, penalties or forfeitures shall be instituted and proceeded with in all respects as if such prior ordinance or part thereof had not been repealed or altered.

ADOPTION OF STANDARD CODES
§ 150.05 ADMINISTRATIVE CODE.

In order to regulate the erection, construction, enlargement, alteration, repair, removal, demolition, conversion, occupancy, equipment, wiring, plumbing, use, height, area, and maintenance of all buildings and structures within the City of Riverbank, the 2025 Edition of the California Administrative Code, published by the International Code Council (ICC), as adopted by the Building Standards Commission of the State of California and codified in the California Building Standards Code at Title 24, Part 1, of the California Code of Regulations, except as specifically repealed or amended by ordinance of the City of Riverbank, is hereby adopted and made a part of this chapter as though set forth in full herein. A true and correct copy of the 2025 California Administrative Code as adopted by this section shall be on file in the office of the City Building Official for examination and use by the public.
§ 150.06 BUILDING CODE.

CC-LRA 01/13/2026 & 01/27/2026
CC Ordinance 2026-xxx
In order to regulate the erection, construction, enlargement, alteration, repair, moving, removal, demolition, conversion, occupancy, equipment, wiring, plumbing, use, height, area, and maintenance of all buildings and structures within the City of Riverbank, the 2025 Edition of the California Building Code, Title 24, Part 2, Volumes 1 and 2, published by the International Code Council (ICC), administrative sections, Chapter 29, Appendices A, C, and I; and amendments, as adopted by the Building Standards Commission of the State of California and codified at Title 24, Part 2 in the California Code of Regulations, except as specifically repealed or amended by ordinance of the City of Riverbank, is hereby adopted and made part of this chapter as though set forth in full herein. A true and correct copy of the 2025 California Building Code as adopted by this section shall be on file in the office of the City Building Official for inspection by the public. § 150.07 RESIDENTIAL CODE.

The purpose of this Code is to establish minimum requirements to safeguard the public health, safety, and general welfare through structural strength, means of egress facilities, stability, access to persons with disabilities, sanitation, adequate lighting, ventilation, energy conservation, and safety to life and property from fire and other hazards attributed to the built environment, and to provide safety to firefighters and emergency responders during emergency operations. The provisions of this Code shall apply to the construction, alteration, enlargement, replacement, repair, equipment, use, occupancy, location, maintenance, removal, and demolition of every detached one and two single family dwellings, townhouse not more than three stories above grade plane in height with a separate means of egress and structures accessory thereto within the City of Riverbank.

Therefore, the 2025 California Residential Code, Title 24, Part 2.5, published by the International Code Council (ICC), in the California Code of Regulations, except as specifically repealed or amended by ordinance of the City of Riverbank, is hereby adopted and made part of this chapter as though set forth in full herein. A true and correct copy of the 2025 California Residential Code as adopted by this section shall be on file in the office of the City Building Official for inspection by the public. § 150.08 GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE.
(A) In order to improve public health, safety, and general welfare by enhancing the design and construction of buildings through the use of building concepts having a reduced negative impact or positive environmental impact, and encouraging sustainable construction practices within the City of Riverbank, the 2025 Edition of the California Green Building Standards Code, Title 24, Part 11 (also known as the CALGreen Code), published by the International Code Council (ICC), in the California Code of Regulations, except as specifically repealed or amended by ordinance of the City of Riverbank, is hereby adopted and made part of this chapter as though set forth in full herein. The provisions of this code shall apply to the planning, design, use, and occupancy of every newly constructed building or structure, unless otherwise indicated in this code, throughout the City of Riverbank. A true and correct copy of the 2025 California Green Building Standards Code as adopted by this section shall be on file in the office of the City Building Official for inspection and use by the public.

CC-LRA 01/13/2026 & 01/27/2026
CC Ordinance 2026-xxx
(B) This section shall be known as the Green Building Regulations of the City of Riverbank and regulates the construction of new buildings within this jurisdiction, except work located primarily in a public way, public utility towers and poles, mechanical equipment not specifically regulated in the California Green Building Code, and hydraulic flood control structures. The Green Building Regulations shall also apply to city owned buildings.
(C) Where in any specific case, different sections of the Green Building Regulations specify different materials, methods of construction, or other requirements, the most restrictive shall govern. Where there is a conflict between a general requirement and a specific requirement, the specific requirement shall apply. § 150.09 PLUMBING CODE.

In order to provide minimum requirements and standards for the protection of the public health, safety, and general welfare and to regulate the erection, installation, alteration, addition, repair, relocation, replacement, maintenance, and use of any plumbing system within the City of Riverbank, the 2025 Edition of the California Plumbing Code, Title 24, Part 5 and all appendix chapters, published by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials (IAPMO), as adopted by the Building Standards Commission of the State of California and codified in the California Building standards Code at Title 24, Part 5 of the California Code of Regulations, except as specifically repealed or amended by ordinance of the City of Riverbank, is hereby adopted and made a part of this chapter as though set forth in full herein. A true and correct copy of the 2025 California Plumbing Code as adopted by this section shall be on file in the office of the City Building Official for inspection and use by the public.
§ 150.10 ELECTRICAL CODE.

In order to provide minimum standards for the proper regulation of the installation of electrical systems within the City of Riverbank, the 2025 Edition of the California Electrical Code, Title 24, Part 3, and all appendix chapters, published by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), as adopted by the Building Standards Commission of the State of California and codified in the California Building Standards Code at Title 24, Part 3, of the California Code of Regulations, except as specifically repealed or amended by ordinance of the City of Riverbank, is hereby adopted and made a part of the chapter as though set forth in full herein. A true and correct copy of the 2025 California Electrical Code shall be in the office of the City Building Official for inspection and use by the public. § 150.11 FIRE CODE.

In order to provide minimum standards to safeguard life, limb, health, property, and public welfare from fire and explosive hazards arising from the storage, handling, and use of hazardous substances, materials and devices, and from conditions hazardous to life or property in the occupancy of buildings and premises in the City of Riverbank, the 2025 California Fire Code, Title 24, Part 9, including Appendix Chapter 4, Appendices A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, and J, published by the International Code Council (ICC), in the California Code of Regulations, as adopted by the Stanislaus Consolidated Fire Protection District, except as specifically repealed or amended by ordinance of the City of Riverbank, is

CC-LRA 01/13/2026 & 01/27/2026
CC Ordinance 2026-xxx
hereby adopted and made part of this chapter as though set forth in full herein. A true and correct copy of the 2025 California Fire Code as adopted by this section shall be on file in office of the Building Official for inspection by the public. § 150.12 MECHANICAL CODE.
(A) In order to provide minimum standards to safeguard life, limb, health, property, and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design, construction, installation, quality of materials, location, operation, maintenance, and use of heating, ventilating, cooling, refrigeration systems, and other heat-producing appliances and systems within the City of Riverbank, the 2025 Edition of the California Mechanical Code, Title 24, Part 4, and all appendix chapters, published by the International Association of Mechanical and Plumbing Officials (IAPMO), as adopted by the Building Standards Commission of the State of California and codified in the California Building Standards Code at Title 24, Part 4 of the California Code of Regulations, except as specifically repealed or amended by ordinance of the City of Riverbank, is hereby adopted and made a part of this chapter as though set forth in full herein. A true and correct copy of the 2025 California Mechanical Code as adopted by this section shall be on file in the office of the City Building Official for inspection and use by the public.
(B) Heating, cooling, and swimming pool equipment shall not be located within the required five-foot side or rear yard setback as defined by the City of Riverbank Zoning Ordinance for residential zonings.
§ 150.13 ENERGY CODE.

In order to provide minimum standards to safeguard life, limb, health, property, and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design, construction, installation, quality of materials, location, operation, maintenance and use of manufactured devices that have been certified by their manufacturer to meet or exceed minimum specifications or efficiencies by the California Energy Commission within the City of Riverbank, the 2025 Edition of the California Energy Code, Title 24, Part 6, and all appendix chapters, published by the International Code Council, as adopted by the Building Standards Commission of the State of California and codified in the California Building Standards Code at Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations, except as specifically repealed or amended by ordinance of the City of Riverbank, is hereby adopted and made a part of this chapter as though set forth in full herein. A true and correct copy of the 2025 California Energy Code as adopted by this section shall be on file in the office of the City Building Official for inspection and use by the public. § 150.14 EXISTING BUILDING CODE.

In order to provide minimum standards to safeguard life, limb, health, property, and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design, construction, installation, quality of materials, location, operation, maintenance, and use of existing buildings while reducing the risk of death or injury that may result from the effects of earthquakes on existing unreinforced masonry bearing wall buildings within the City of Riverbank, the 2025 California Existing Building Code, Title 24, Part 10, published by the International Code Council (ICC), in the California Code of Regulations, except as specifically repealed or

CC-LRA 01/13/2026 & 01/27/2026
CC Ordinance 2026-xxx
amended by ordinance of the City of Riverbank, is hereby adopted and made part of this chapter as though set forth in full herein. A true and correct copy of the 2025 California Existing Building Code as adopted by this section shall be on file in the office the of City Building Official for inspection by the public.
§ 150.15 HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE.

In order to provide minimum standards to safeguard life, limb, health, property, and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design, construction, installation, quality of materials, location, operation, maintenance and use of historical buildings to provide solutions for the preservation of qualified historical buildings or properties, to promote sustainability, to provide access for persons with disabilities, to provide a cost-effective approach to preservation, and to provide for the reasonable safety of the occupants or users within the City of Riverbank, the 2025 California Historical Building Code, Title 24, Part 8, published by the International Code Council (ICC), in the California Code of Regulations, except as specifically repealed or amended by ordinance of the City of Riverbank, is hereby adopted and made part of this chapter as though set forth in full herein. A true and correct copy of the 2025 California Historical Building Code as adopted by this section shall be on file in the office of the City Building Official for inspection by the public.

SOLAR/PHOTOVOLTAIC POWER SYSTEMS
§ 150.16 SOLAR/PHOTOVOLTAIC POWER SYSTEMS.
(A) Where installed. Solar Photovoltaic Power Systems shall comply with the requirements of the 2025 California Residential Code, 2025 California Electrical Code, 2025 California Building Code, 2025 California Fire Code and California State Fire Marshal Solar Photovoltaic Installation Guidelines (the “Solar Photovoltaic Installation Guideline,” published April 22, 2008).
(B) The city may impose fees related to Solar/Photovoltaic Power Systems and from time to time amend said fees by resolution.
(C) Small Residential Rooftop Solar Energy System review process. (1) The following words and phrases as used in this section are defined as follows:

ELECTRONIC SUBMITTAL. The utilization of one or more of the following:

1. E-mail;

2. The internet;

3. Facsimile.

SMALL RESIDENTIAL ROOFTOP SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM. Includes all of the following:

CC-LRA 01/13/2026 & 01/27/2026
CC Ordinance 2026-xxx

1. A solar energy system that is no larger than ten kilowatts alternating current nameplate rating or 30 kilowatts thermal.

2. A solar energy system that conforms to all applicable state fire, structural, electrical, and other building codes as adopted or amended by the city and paragraph (iii) of subdivision (c) of Section 714 of the Civil Code, as such section or subdivision may be amended, renumbered, or redesignated from time to time.

3. A solar energy system that is installed on a single or duplex family dwelling.

4. A solar panel or module array that does not exceed the maximum legal building height as defined by the authority having jurisdiction.

SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM. Has the same meaning set forth in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 801.5 of the Civil Code, as such section or subdivision may be amended, renumbered, or redesignated from time to time. (2) Section 65850.5 of the California Government Code provides that in developing an expedited permitting process, the city, county, or city and county shall adopt a checklist of all requirements with which small rooftop solar energy systems shall comply to be eligible for expedited review. The building official is hereby authorized and directed to develop and adopt such checklist.
(3) The checklist shall be published on the city’s internet website. The applicant may submit the permit application and associated documentation to the city’s building division by personal or electronic submittal together with any required permit processing and inspection fees. In the case of electronic submittal, the electronic signature of the applicant on all forms, applications and other documentation may be used in lieu of a wet signature.
(4) Prior to submitting an application, the applicant shall:
(a) Verify to the city’s reasonable satisfaction through the use of standard engineering evaluation techniques that the support structure for the small residential rooftop solar energy system is stable and adequate to transfer all wind, seismic, and dead and live loads associated with the system to the building foundation; and (b) At the applicant’s cost, verify to the city’s reasonable satisfaction using standard electrical inspection techniques that the existing electrical system including existing line, load, ground and bonding wiring as well as main panel and subpanel sizes are adequately sized, based on the existing electrical system’s current use, to carry all new photovoltaic electrical loads.
(5) For a small residential rooftop solar energy system eligible for expedited review, only one inspection shall be required, which shall be done in a timely manner and may include a consolidated inspection by the Building Inspector and Fire Department designee. If a small residential rooftop solar energy system fails inspection, a subsequent inspection is authorized; however, the subsequent inspection need not conform to the requirements of this subsection.

CC-LRA 01/13/2026 & 01/27/2026
CC Ordinance 2026-xxx
(6) An application that satisfies the information requirements in the checklist, as determined by the building official, shall be deemed complete. Upon receipt of an incomplete application, the building official shall issue a written correction notice detailing all deficiencies in the application and any additional information required to be eligible for expedited permit issuance.
(7) Upon confirmation by the building official of the application and supporting documentation being complete and meeting the requirements of the checklist, the building official shall administratively approve the application and issue all required permits or authorizations within one to three working days in which the permit application is submitted. Such approval does not authorize an applicant to connect the small residential rooftop energy system to the local utility provider’s electricity grid. The applicant is responsible for obtaining such approval or permission from the local utility provider.

SECTION 2. Title XV: Land Usage, Chapter 157: Water Efficient Landscape and Irrigation, Section 157.01 of the Riverbank City Code is amended to read as follows:
§ 157.01 Purpose and Intent.

The purpose and intent of this chapter is to establish landscaping regulations that are intended to:
(A) Enhance the aesthetic appearance of development in all areas of the city by providing development standards relating to quality, quantity and functional aspects of landscaping and landscape screening.
(B) Increase compatibility between residential and abutting commercial and industrial uses.
(C) Reduce the heat and glare generated by development. (D) Establish a water conservation plan to reduce water consumption in the landscape environment using conservation principles important to the State of California and the City of Riverbank.
(E) Protect public health, safety, and welfare by minimizing the impact of all forms of physical and visual pollution, controlling soil erosion, screening incompatible land uses, preserving the integrity of neighborhoods, and enhancing pedestrian and vehicular traffic and safety.
(F) Comply with the California Department of Water Resources Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance as contained in Title 23, Division 2, Chapter 2.7 of the California Code of Regulations and the California Green Building Standards of 2025 and/or these standards as amended from time to time.

SECTION 3. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after its final passage and adoption, provided it is published in a newspaper of general circulation at least fifteen (15) days prior to its effective date.

SECTION 4. If any section, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance is, for any reason, held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent

CC-LRA 01/13/2026 & 01/27/2026
CC Ordinance 2026-xxx
jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof.

SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after it passage by the City Council, and following the affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the City Council. Within 15 days of its adoption, a summary of the ordinance shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Riverbank, State of California, which summary shall include the names of those Council Members voting for and against the ordinance. A certified copy of the full text of such adopted ordinance or amendment shall be on file in the office of the City Clerk.

SECTION 6. The foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Riverbank held on January 13, 2026. Said ordinance was given a second reading at a regular meeting of said Council on _____________, 2026, and Councilmember __________, seconded by Councilmember _________, moved the adoption of said ordinance and upon roll call was carried by the following:

AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
_________________________ _________________________
Gabriela Hernandez, CMC Rachel Hernandez
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________
Tom Hallinan
City Attorney

Item 10.1– CC/LRA – 01/27/2026

RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL / LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.1
SECTION 10: PUBLIC HEARING
Meeting Date: January 27, 2026
Subject: A Resolution to Adopt the New Fee Schedule for Park Amenities, Rentals, Recreation Programs, and Events
From: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
Submitted by: Michael Patton, Parks and Recreation Director

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council consider adopting a Resolution to approve the fees for Park Amenities, Rentals, Recreation Programs, and Events for the City of Riverbank offered with associated fees that are highlighted in Exhibit A.

SUMMARY
The Parks and Recreation Department is proposing an amendment of fees for park amenities, rentals, recreation programs, and events. The adjustment in fees is designed to meet local demands, improve department cost recovery by increasing revenues and decreasing expenditures, and to modernize fee structures.

Fees impacted by this proposal are Jacob Myers Park, camps, programs, aquatics, special events, community center, Scout Hall, Cardozo Middle School Gymnasium, Zerillo Park tennis courts, and Castleberg Park ball fields.

BACKGROUND
In 2024, the Parks and Recreation Department contracted with 110%, Inc., a consultant that specializes in performing financial sustainability strategies for parks and recreation departments nationwide, to perform a study on the department’s financial resilience. This study included analyzing the department’s revenues and expenditures over a complete fiscal year, current structures of charging and collecting fees, and providing recommendations on how to improve the department’s cost recovery goals.

With results from the study, the Parks and Recreation Department has reviewed the current fees and compared them to the cost recovery goals outlined in the financial

Item 10.1– CC/LRA – 01/27/2026
sustainability study. The proposed adjustments reflect ideas to increase department revenues, reduce expenditures, maximize efficiency, and simplify the offerings.

The proposed fees were created with staff and presented to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee (PRAC). The PRAC reviewed the fees and provided a recommendation to the City Council to approve the proposed fees by a 4-0 vote.

STRATEGIC PLAN
A goal in the 2025-2030 City Strategic Plan is to prioritize financial stability. A strategy that is outlined in this goal is to ‘review and update the city fee schedule…’. Updating the fee schedule for parks and recreation adheres to the strategic plan to ensure financial responsibility is a priority.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
With approval of this proposal, the Parks and Recreation Department anticipates impacts to both City revenues and expenditures. The proposed changes would modernize the Department’s fee structure and generate additional revenue through programs, events, and facility rentals. The proposal also updates how certain fees are applied. For example, shifting from a flat daily rental rate to an hourly rate will better align fees with actual facility use, reduce exposure to uncontrolled variable costs, and ensure users are charged more equitably based on the time and resources consumed.

Overall, the intent of the proposal is to improve cost recovery, maximize revenue where appropriate, and promote fairness and efficiency across the Department’s programs and services.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution 2026-

2. Proposed Fee Schedule of Park Amenities, Rentals, Recreation Programs, and Events

CC/LRA – 01/27/2026
CC Resolution 2026-

CITY OF RIVERBANK
RESOLUTION 2026-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK TO ADOPT

THE NEW FEE SCHEDULE FOR PARK AMENITIES, RENTALS, RECREATION

PROGRAMS, AND EVENTS

THE CITY OF RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL (HEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE “CITY COUNCIL”) DOES HEREBY RESOLVE THAT:

WHEREAS, the City of Riverbank Parks and Recreation Department provides a wide variety of parks, facilities, programs, and community events that enhance the quality of life for residents and visitors; and
WHEREAS, the City has a responsibility to ensure that fees for parks, recreation programs, facility rentals, and special events are fair, equitable, and reflective of the cost to provide those services; and
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Department has conducted a financial sustainability and cost recovery analysis of its programs, facilities, and services to evaluate current fee structures, operating costs, and revenue performance; and WHEREAS, the results of that analysis indicate that many existing fees are outdated and do not adequately reflect the true cost of providing services, maintaining facilities, or delivering high-quality programs; and
WHEREAS, the proposed updated fee schedule is intended to modernize the Department’s pricing structure, improve cost recovery, and support the long-term financial sustainability of parks, programs, and facilities while maintaining equitable access for the community; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adopt a revised Parks and Recreation Fee Schedule to ensure fiscal responsibility, transparency, and the continued ability of the City to provide quality parks, recreation programs, and events to the community.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Riverbank hereby approves and establishes the New Park Amenities, Rentals, Recreation Programs, and Events Fee Schedule as outlined in Exhibit A to be effective January 27, 2026.

ATTACHMENT 1

CC/LRA – 01/27/2026
CC Resolution 2026-
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Riverbank at a regular meeting held on the 27th day of January, 2026; motioned by Councilmember __________ seconded by Councilmember _____________, and upon roll call was carried by the following vote of _.

AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
________________________ ________________________
Gabriela Hernandez,CMC Rachel Hernandez
City Clerk Mayor
Attachment: Fee Schedule of Park Amenities, Rentals, Recreation Programs, and Events

CITY OF RIVERBANK
Fee Schedule for Park Amenities, Rentals, Recreation Programs, and Events PARKS – DESCRIPTIONS
Park Rental (all parks with gazebos): Current Fee New Fee Resident $110.00 $110.00
Nonresident $135.00 $135.00
Deposit - $100.00
Park Rental (Jacob Myers Park): Oak Grove, Rotary Area Current Fee New Fee Resident $110.00 $110.00
Nonresident $150.00 $150.00
Deposit - $100.00
Park Rental (Jacob Myers Park): Burney Pavilion Current Fee New Fee Resident $150.00 $150.00
Nonresident $250.00 $300.00
Electricity (Jacob Myers/Pavilion) $25.00 $25.00
Deposit - $100.00
Jacob Myers Park Current Fee New Fee
Parking Fee (April- September, Fri, Sat, Sun, & Holidays) Resident $7.00 $7.00
Nonresident $10.00 $12.00
Dog Park/ Trail Users
- $0.00 for 1 hour
Park Pass
Wedding Gazebo $500.00 $500.00
Jacob Myers Park Military and First Responder Discount
Resident - $5.00
Nonresident - $10.00
Jacob Myers Park Season Pass
Resident $35.00 $35.00
Nonresident $50.00 $60.00
McRitchie Campground
Day Use - $200.00
Nonprofit Organizations $50.00 $50.00
Deposit $100.00 $100.00
Miscellaneous Current Fee New Fee
Bounce House Permit $25.00 $25.00
Special Event Permit - $35.00
Facility Rental/ Special Event Permit Application Late Fee - $50.00 Jacob Myers Park Rules Citation
- $100.00 per
Citation
ATTACHMENT 2

RECREATION PROGRAMS– DESCRIPTIONS
Camps Current Fee New Fee
All Day Summer Camps
Resident $125.00 Resident
(2ND Child) $115 $125.00
Nonresident $135 nonresident
(2nd Child) $125
$137.50
Mini Camps (ages 3 to 5)
Resident $45.00 $45.00
Nonresident $45.00 $49.50
Camp Time Extension $25.00 $50.00
Classes Current Fee New Fee
Zumba Gold $3.00 drop in $3.00 drop in
Archery $30.00 for 6
week session
Individual Drop
in $25/per day
$25.00 per
Registered Class
$30.00 per DropIn
Zumba $5.00 drop in $5.00 drop in
New Programs & Classes -
Min.: $0.00; Max.:
$100.00
Aquatics Current Fee New Fee
Recreational Swim $3.00 $3.00 per Person
Lap Swim $3.00 $5.00
Swim Lessons (Resident) $70.00/session $75.00
Swim Lessons (Non-resident) $75.00/session $82.50
Sharks & Mermaids Adaptive Swim Lessons
Resident $100.00 $125.00
Nonresident $100.00 $137.50
Private Swim Lessons
Resident $250.00 $250.00
Nonresident $250.00 $275.00
Swim Team
Resident $135.00
2 nd child $125 $150.00
Nonresident $135.00
2 nd child $125 $165.00
Lifeguarding, First Aid for Public Safety Personnel
- $250.00

Pool Parties (Resident – with 1-60 guests) $150.00/hr. $150.00/hr.

Pool Parties (Nonresident – with 1-60 guests) $170.00/hour $170.00/hour Pool Parties (Resident – with 61-90 guests) $170.00/hour $170.00/hour Pool Parties (Nonresident – with 61-90 guests) $190.00/hour $190.00/hour Pool Parties (Resident – with 91-120 guests) $190.00/hour $190.00/hour Pool Parties (Nonresident – with 91-120 guests) $200.00/hour $210.00/ hour Pool Pass (per individual) $30.00 $30.00
Pool Pass (Family of 4) $100.00
$20 each added
person
$100.00
$20 each added
person
New Pool Special Event/ Program/ Class
-
Min.: $0.00; Max.:
$100.00
Special Events Current Fee New Fee
Halloween Haunted Hayride $12.00 $15.00
Children (ages 3-12) $6.00 $10.00
Christmas Parade Entry Fee $25.00 $25.00
Christmas Craft Fair Booth Fee $50.00 $50.00
Día de los Muertos Booth Fee
10x10 Craft Booth $50.00 $55.00
10x10 Food Booth $50.00 $65.00
Food Truck $50.00 $150.00
Día de los Muertos Altar fee $25.00 $25.00
Cheese and Wine Vendor Fee: 10x10 Retail Space $75.00 $85.00 Cheese and Wine Vendor Fee: 10x20 Retail Space $150.00 $170.00 Cheese and Wine Vendor Fee: 10x30 Retail Space $225.00 $255.00 Cheese and Wine Vendor Fee: 10x10 Food Space $125.00 $130.00 Cheese and Wine Vendor Fee: 10x20 Food Space $250.00 $260.00 Cheese and Wine Vendor Fee: 10x30 Food Space $375.00 $390.00 Cheese and Wine Sponsorships
- Min.: $.01; Max:
$100,000.00
Cheese and Wine Programs
- Min.: $0.00; Max.:
$100.00
Cheese and Wine Merchandise
- Min: $0.01; Max.:
$100.00
Polar Bear Plunge Ticket - $5.00
My Little One and Me Ticket - $45.00
Additional Ticket for My Little One and Me - $15.00
Food Truck Friday Vendor Fee
10x10 Booth - $45.00

Truck - $65.00
Floating Pumpkin Patch Ticket - $10.00
FACILITY RENTALS – DESCRIPTIONS
Community Center CURRENT FEE NEW FEE
Resident Rental $1,700.00 $150.00 per Hour
Nonresident Rental $2,000.00 $200.00 per Hour
Deposit $500.00 $500.00
Service Group (Includes set up/take down) $600.00 -
Memorial Service (3 hours maximum) $400.00 -
Stage $200.00 $200.00
Sound system $100.00 $100.00
Microphone - $50.00
Podium - $25.00
Onsite Security - $38.00 per Hour
Scout Hall Current Fee New Fee
Resident $350.00 $75.00 per Hour
Nonresident $400.00 $100.00 per Hour
Deposit - $250.00
Onsite Security - $38.00 per Hour
Teen Center
Resident $100.00 $100.00 per HourNon-resident $125.00 $125.00 per Hour Deposit - $100.00
Gym Rental Current Fee New Fee
Rental Fee
Public Use $50.00 per day $15.00 per Hour
Private Use $200.00 per day $100.00 per Hour
Deposit $250.00 $250.00
Scoreboard $50.00 $50.00
Sports Complex Current Fee New Fee
Field Use Per Field (East/West) $25 hour $25.00 per hour Deposit $250.00 $300.00
Staff $20.00/hour $22.00 per Hour
Lights Per Field $30.00/hour $35.00 per Hour
Scoreboard Rental $50.00/day $50.00 per Day
Snack Bar Rental $200.00/day $200.00 per Day
Castleberg Park – Ball Diamonds Current Fee New Fee
Field Use $30.00 per hour
$30.00 per hour
per field
Deposit - $200.00

Lights (2 hour minimum) -
$35.00 per Hour
per Field
Park Aide/Site Monitor $20.00 $22.00 per Hour
Field Drag Fee (No Chalk) - $75.00 per Field
Concession Stand - $200.00 per Day
Zerillo Park Tennis Courts Current Fee New Fee
Key to Courts - $5.00
Court Rental -
$10.00 per Hour
per Court

Item 11.1– CC/LRA-01/27/2026

RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL / LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM NO. 11.1
SECTION 11: NEW BUSINESS
Meeting Date: January 27, 2026
Subject: Presentation by Chief Ridenour on Current Staffing Allocations and Five-Year Plan for Riverbank Police Services and to Consider a Resolution Authorizing the Reallocation of One Community Resource Deputy Position to a Patrol Deputy
Position
From: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
Submitted by: Ed Ridenour, Police Chief

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council receive a presentation from Chief Ridenour on the current staffing allocation for Riverbank Police Services and the proposed five-year staffing plan.

The Council is asked to consider a Resolution reallocating the already approved Community Resource Deputy position to a Patrol Deputy.

Alternatively, the Council may provide feedback and direction on reallocation and staffing requests, or request that staff research other options.

SUMMARY:

Riverbank Police Services remains committed to safety and partnership with our residents. Our dedicated team exemplifies Community-Oriented Policing, focusing on community engagement, quality of life, and maintaining prompt response times as Riverbank continues to grow.

Currently, we have 23 allocated sworn personnel (22 staffed, 1 pending), serving approximately 26,090 residents. This results in a ratio of 0.88 deputies per 1,000 residents when fully staffed. Our sworn staff are supported by four non-sworn employees:
one community services officer, one records supervisor, and two records clerks.

Item 11.1– CC/LRA-01/27/2026

STRATEGIC PLAN
This item is directly associated with the 2025-2030 Strategic Plan Goal to “Support Public Safety”.

COMMUNITY RESOURCE DEPUTY RE-ALLOCATION
Our first recommendation is to reallocate the already approved second Community Resource Deputy to Patrol Operations.

At the beginning of 2024, with the Council’s support, we requested a second Community Resource Deputy position, recognizing a 2- to 3-year wait due to the hiring and training process. At that time legal restrictions from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals limited our ability to enforce illegal camping and trespass laws, prompting us to focus on providing resources to the unhoused community. Public spaces became overrun, and our Community Resource Deputy was overwhelmed with complaints.

In June 2024, the US Supreme Court overturned the earlier ruling, restoring our ability to enforce trespass violations in public spaces. This decision has allowed all deputies to help keep public spaces accessible and allowed the Community Resource Deputy to focus on other quality-of-life issues. As a result, the second requested Community Resource Deputy would now be better utilized as a Patrol Deputy to ensure adequate coverage and response times.

Currently, Riverbank has 10 patrol deputies split across two squads (the first half of the week and the second half), providing 24/7 coverage. Each squad consists of two (2) day shift deputies (7am-7pm), one (1) swing shift deputy (3pm-3am), and two (2) graveyard deputies (7pm-7am). Additional support is provided by Traffic Deputies, Detectives, the Community Resource Deputy, and the School Resource Deputy during weekday business hours.

Outside of Monday-Friday, 8am-5pm, coverage drops to two deputies, as the swing shift position is often unfilled due to staffing demands elsewhere, resulting in 156 days of swing shift vacancy in 2024 and 158 days in 2025. Our average response time is 3.6 minutes, rising to 5.7 minutes after hours, when staffing is lowest, resulting in a 60% increase.

Over the past five years, our total calls for service have increased by nearly 20%. From 2020 to 2023, we averaged approximately 10,500 calls per year. In 2024, calls for service rose significantly to 12,258, and this upward trend continued into 2025, with a current total of 12,685 (a 3.5% increase from 2024).

Organized retail theft remains a significant challenge across our state, and Riverbank is no exception. In 2024, we recorded 277 retail theft incidents, resulting in a reported total loss of $122,689. The situation worsened in 2025, with incidents rising to 302 and total reported losses reaching $193,637. These crimes have placed additional demands on

Item 11.1– CC/LRA-01/27/2026
our department, including responding to theft calls, conducting extra patrols, and carrying out organized retail theft operations.

To improve coverage, it is recommended that the already approved second Community Resource Deputy be reallocated to patrol, specifically on the swing shift, to ensure at least three, and sometimes four, deputies are available during peak times. This adjustment supports our commitment to prompt response for 911 and non-emergency calls, which is increasingly important as Riverbank grows in housing, traffic, and retail activity.

ADDITIONAL PATROL DEPUTY REQUEST – FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION A future recommendation is to request an additional patrol deputy now, while being mindful of the 2-3-year wait time for recruitment and training. This item will be discussed during the preparation of the annual budget.

With only one swing shift position per squad currently, adding another would allow both squads to have two swing-shift deputies, ensuring greater coverage during peak hours.

If this new deputy is approved and once filled, Riverbank Police Services will have 24 sworn staff serving approximately 26,090 residents, for a ratio of 0.92 deputies per 1,000 residents. The generally accepted benchmark for a city of our size is 1 sworn deputy per 1,000 residents, which would require 26 sworn positions.

FIVE-YEAR STAFFING PLAN
To address these staffing needs and to plan for the city’s continued growth, a 5-year staffing plan has been developed:
2026 – (Earliest fulfillment 2028)
• One Deputy: Patrol Deputy, Swing Shift
2027– (Earliest fulfillment 2029)
• One Deputy: Second Community Resource Deputy
2028– (Earliest fulfillment 2030)
• One Deputy: Traffic Deputy
2029– (Earliest fulfillment 2031)
• One Deputy: Detective
2030– (Earliest fulfillment 2032)
• One Deputy: Detective
This plan provides a roadmap for reaching appropriate staffing levels and maintaining high standards of public safety as Riverbank continues to grow.

Item 11.1– CC/LRA-01/27/2026

FINANCIAL IMPACT
Recommendation 1 is to reallocate the already approved second Community Resource Deputy to Patrol—specifically to swing shift. There is no new financial impact on this decision as it has already been previously approved by City Council.

Future Recommendation is to request an additional Patrol Deputy to staff a second swing shift position on the opposite patrol squad, with the understanding that the hiring and training process will require a 2-3 year wait before fulfillment. This addition would result in an annual increase of $160,000 to the Sheriff’s contract for police services.

This discussion will be held during the annual budget preparation.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Riverbank Police Services Staffing and Organizational Chart

2. Riverbank Police Services Calls for Service Response Time Analysis

3. Riverbank Police Services Year End Statistical Report

4. Resolution 2026-XXXX

JEFF DIRKSE SHERIFF - CORONER

RIVERBANK POLICE SERVICES
23 Total Sworn Positions. Ratio of .92 sworn per 1,000 residents (.88 with current vacancy).

BUILDING TRUST, REDUCING CRIME, AND PROMOTING SAFETY
Chief of Police
Administrative
Sergeant
Detectives x 3
Traffic Deputies x 3
Community Deputies x 2 (1 vacancy)
School Resource Officer x 1
Patrol Sergeant
A Squad
Patrol Deputies (12 hr.)
Dayshift x 2
Swing Shift x 1
Graveyard x 2
Patrol Sergeant
B Squad
Patrol Deputies (12hr.)
Dayshift x 2
Swing Shift x 1
Graveyard x 2
ATTACHMENT 1
1 of 3
Purpose
To analyze 2025 response times and call volume intensity for the Riverbank (RPS), comparing standard business hours against nights and weekends.

Analysis of Response Times and Staffing Alignment
The data for 2025 indicates that response times are consistently faster during Business Hours (Monday–Friday, 08:00–16:59) compared to Non-Business Hours (all other times, including weekday nights and the full 48 hours of Saturday and Sunday). • Faster Response During Business Hours: The overall average response time for non-SIA activity during Business Hours was 3.6 minutes, compared to 5.7 minutes during Non-Business Hours.

Date of Report: December 11, 2025
Date Range Searched: January 1, 2025 - December 10, 2025 Location: All non–self-initiated activity (SIA) calls for service (CFS) within the Riverbank Police Services jurisdiction.

Data Source: Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Office Integrated Criminal Justice Information System (ICJIS)
STANISLAUS COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE

THREAT ASSESSMENT CENTER
Riverbank Calls for Service Response Time Analysis (2025) Jeff Dirkse Sheriff Coroner
ATTACHMENT 2
2 of 3
Months Business Hours (min) Non-Business Hours (min)
2025-01 4.56 6.04
2025-02 3.79 6.49
2025-03 5.15 7.78
2025-04 3.4 5.74
2025-05 3.16 5.45
2025-06 2.14 5.7
2025-07 2.51 4.86
2025-08 3.38 4.71
2025-09 4.24 6.57
2025-10 3.7 5.08
2025-11 3.99 5.33
2025-12* 3.65 4.63
* Partial as of December 11, 2025
Red = higher wait Blue = lower wait.
• Workload Intensity: While the total number of calls was higher during Non-Business Hours (5,907 vs. 5,440), this is a function of the longer time window (123 hours/week vs. 45 hours/week). When normalized for time, Business Hours workload intensity was approximately 2.33 calls per hour, more than double the 0.92 calls per hour seen during Non-Business times.

Total call counts are generally comparable during Non-Business hours. The non-business category covers 73% of the total hours in a week.
3 of 3
Workload Intensity (Calls Per Hour)
Adjusting for the duration of each period shows that officers face a higher "calls per hour" rate during business hours.

Disclaimer & Methodology
Note on Time Periods
Business hours are defined as Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. All other times, including weekday nights and the full 48 hours of Saturday and Sunday, are grouped as nonbusiness hours. Non-business hours cover about 73% of the week (123 hours), while business hours cover about 27% (45 hours).

Data and Methods
This analysis uses 2025 calls for service for the Riverbank. Response times and counts are aggregated by month and by two-time categories (business vs non-business).

The response times shown are simple averages for each month and time period, not adjusted for call type, priority, or outliers, so unusual incidents can shift monthly averages. December 2025 reflects incomplete data for the year.

The results are descriptive and do not by themselves prove causation; they are intended to support planning and staffing discussions.
*****FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY*****
The items contained are only the information known at the time of the entry and may not accurately reflect the details of the incident described. 1 of 3
Sheriff Coroner
STANISLAUS COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE

CRIME ANALYST UNIT
YEAR END REPORT – RIVERBANK POLICE SERVICE Jeff Dirkse
The following report contains information representing Riverbank Police Services Calls for Service for a ten-year period between 2016 – 2025 derived from the Sheriff’s Office ICJIS database. Calls for Service data is compiled using Final Call Type classifications. Average response times are calculated using documented Dispatch Time and On Scene Time. It should also be noted that arrest information consists of arrestees of 18+ years of age.

CALLS FOR SERVICE: 2016 – 2025
CALLS FOR SERVICE 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 TOTAL 13,596 14,607 14,320 13,497 10,988 10,828 10,525 10,639 12,258 12,685 UCR Part 1 737 664 582 560 402 443 463 488 455 405
Violent Crime 62 55 37 32 24 33 42 28 38 23
Homicide 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Forcible Rape 5 4 2 5 1 4 1 4 4 2
Robbery 24 29 12 8 6 10 19 7 13 8
Aggravated Assault 33 22 23 19 17 19 21 17 21 12
Property Crime 675 609 545 528 378 403 421 460 417 382
Burglary 169 142 128 118 75 65 77 87 52 57
Larceny Theft 406 401 336 339 266 281 298 335 322 290
Motor Vehicle Theft 98 62 80 68 36 57 41 37 41 34
Arson 2 4 1 3 1 7 5 1 2 1
UCR Part 2 4,413 3,826 4,121 3,808 2,911 2,294 2,448 2,422 2,383 2,639 DUI 50 35 34 47 45 44 70 68 50 41
Shooting 6 10 8 8 3 5 3 4 4 3
Firearm / Weapon 1 4 3 1 4 3 1 0 1 3
Drug Violation 54 83 107 76 77 46 52 20 26 35
Other Assault 459 422 454 370 355 347 319 320 333 379
Sex Offense 23 20 16 21 20 17 20 19 14 16
Family / Children 630 474 565 483 491 407 386 437 431 407 Forgery / Counterfeit 33 14 19 14 10 9 7 6 6 6
Embzl / Fraud / Extort 40 24 23 15 19 29 30 27 28 23
Identity Theft 60 63 38 21 32 53 50 26 31 22
Vandalism 176 140 118 76 89 98 86 83 80 104
Disturbing the Peace 728 604 660 664 534 497 499 551 516 725 Obstructing the Justice 51 32 46 35 49 21 52 35 34 47
All Other Offenses 90 128 96 122 112 109 120 130 140 147 Suspicious Activity 1,117 946 1,063 919 691 547 571 526 511 560 Alarm 895 827 871 936 380 175 182 170 178 121
Mental Health Crisis 119 117 114 77 78 71 60 68 42 29
Warrant Served 140 199 156 154 91 114 110 75 89 76
Traffic 1,217 1,361 1,360 1,232 928 923 809 1,025 1,341 1,367 Investigative Activity 949 1,010 1,178 1,342 1,076 1,399 1,533 1,341 1,587 1,908 Extra Patrol Request 127 140 199 139 448 197 105 660 532 380 Assisting Other Agency 164 172 183 167 152 155 168 206 196 215 Miscellaneous 2,163 2,316 2,223 2,329 1,942 2,265 1,964 1,759 2,040 1,976 Pursuit 1 0 3 4 2 6 11 7 5 7
ATTACHMENT 3
*****FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY*****
The items contained are only the information known at the time of the entry and may not accurately reflect the details of the incident described. 2 of 3

SELF-INITIATED ACTIVITIES (SIA)
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Community Oriented Policing 1 8 2 22 20 54 42 115 332 482 Area Check 209 160 129 123 139 112 102 130 93 109
Bar Check 0 11 3 5 2 2 4 1 2 2
Bike Stop 166 456 342 363 137 38 100 77 164 166
Pedestrian Stop 225 388 405 22 197 77 80 83 63 124
Traffic Stops 2,965 3,779 3,320 2,922 2,463 2,565 2526 2,182 2,934 2,590 TOTAL 3,566 4,802 4,201 3,655 2,958 2,848 2,854 2,588 3,588 3,473 1400
2025 CALLS FOR SERVICE TOTALS BY MONTH
1,235
1200 1,094 1,112 1,113 1,088 1 040 1,041
1000 967 1,006
901 909 967
800
600
400
200
0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Part 2
31%
SIA
41%
Property
5%
Violent
0%
Misc.
23%
ARRESTS BY YEAR: 2016 - 2025
600
500
400
549 536
473 459 479 508
406
332 301 327
300
200
100
0 124 147
72 97 125
79 63 42 45 55
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Total Arrests UCR Part 1
CALLS FOR SERVICE TOTALS: 2016 - 2025
16,000
14,000
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0 14,607 13,596 14,320 13,497
12,258 12,685
10,988 10,828 10,525 10,639
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
*****FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY*****
The items contained are only the information known at the time of the entry and may not accurately reflect the details of the incident described. 3 of 3
AVERAGE RESPONSE TIMES (in minutes)
CRIME TYPE 2024 2025
Aggravated Assault 7.30 3.24
Alarm Calls 5.28 5.73
All Other Offenses 4.67 7.52
Area Check 10.01 5.56
Arson 5.89 7.85
Assist Other Agency 7.17 7.75
Burglary 11.61 5.83
Disturbing the Peace 7.05 5.92
Drug Abuse Violations 2.35 1.99
DUI 3.00 1.98
Embzl / Fraud/ Extort 6.09 6.61
Family Offenses 5.68 6.44
Firearms / Weapons -- 1.07
Forcible Rape 25.58 0.08
Forgery / Counterfeit 2.33 5.30
Identity Theft 9.73 9.05
Investigative Activity 2.94 1.42
Larceny – Theft 8.93 8.22
Mentally Disturbed 6.20 6.46
Miscellaneous 6.46 6.88
Motor Vehicle Theft 12.89 18.28
Obstruct 5.52 5.55
Other Assaults 6.27 5.91
Robbery 3.61 3.47
Sex Offense 14.57 12.90
Shooting 4.64 4.29
Suspicious Activity 5.31 4.15
Traffic 3.04 2.70
Vandalism 13.86 9.17
Warrant 0.90 1.21
Overall average response time to Calls for Service in 2024 was approximately 3.45 minutes.

Overall average response time to Calls for Service in 2025 was approximately 3.91 minutes.

PROPERTY CRIME TRENDS: 2016 - 2025
675 609 545 528
378 403 421 460 417 382
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
VIOLENT CRIME TRENDS: 2016 - 2025
62 55
37 32 24
33 42 38
28 23
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

CC/LRA – 01/27/2026
CC Resolution 2026-

CITY OF RIVERBANK
RESOLUTION 2026-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK,

AUTHORIZING THE REALLOCATION OF ONE COMMUNITY RESOURCE DEPUTY

POSITION TO A PATROL DEPUTY POSITION

THE CITY OF RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL (HEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE “CITY COUNCIL”) DOES HEREBY RESOLVE THAT:

WHEREAS, the City of Riverbank contracts with the Stanislaus County Sheriff to provide law enforcement services to the community; and
WHEREAS, in March 2024 the City approved Resolution 2024-014 which authorized the City Manager to request an additional Community Resource Deputy (CRD) position to focus on community engagement, outreach, and community-oriented policing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes the need to prioritize public safety and ensure adequate patrol coverage to maintain timely response and proactive enforcement; and
WHEREAS, recent trends indicate an increase in calls for service, response times, and criminal activity, including organized retail theft and other priority incidents, which require enhanced patrol presence; and
WHEREAS, reallocating the CRD position to a Patrol Deputy position will allow for greater flexibility in deployment, improved response times, and enhanced visibility throughout the community; and
WHEREAS, this reallocation will not increase the overall contract cost but will adjust the staffing configuration to better meet the City’s current operational needs.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Riverbank hereby approves the reallocation of one (1) Community Resource Deputy position to one (1) Patrol Deputy position within the Stanislaus County Sheriff contract for law enforcement services.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Riverbank at a regular meeting held on the 27th day of January, 2026; motioned by Councilmember , ATTACHMENT 4

CC/LRA – 01/27/2026
CC Resolution 2026-
seconded by Councilmember , and upon roll call was carried by the following City Council vote of :

AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
________________________________ __________________________ Gabriela Hernandez,CMC Rachel Hernandez
City Clerk Mayor

Item 11.2 – CC/LRA – 01/27/2026

RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL/ LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM NO. 11.2
SECTION 11: NEW BUSINESS
Meeting Date: January 27, 2026
Subject: Adoption of a Groundwater Use Management Program in the Modesto Groundwater Subbasin
From: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
Submitted by: Cody Bridgewater, Public Works / LRA Director

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council consider adopting a resolution authorizing collaboration with the Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers Groundwater Basin Association (STRGBA) Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA), its member agencies, consultants, stakeholders and the County of Tuolumne GSA to take such actions as may be reasonably necessary to (1) approve and implement the Groundwater Use Management Program (GWUMP or Program) for the Modesto Subbasin to ensure long-term groundwater sustainability, and (2) develop action plans which ensure the demand management actions identified in the GWUMP are under implementation beginning January 31, 2027. Adoption of the GWUMP fulfills commitments made in prior Council actions and advances compliance with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA).

BACKGROUND
On February 16, 2017, the STRGBA GSA was formed. Member agencies include the City of Modesto, Modesto Irrigation District, City of Oakdale, Oakdale Irrigation District, City of Riverbank, City of Waterford, and Stanislaus County. The GSA collaboratively manages groundwater in the Modesto Subbasin pursuant to SGMA requirements.

The STRGBA GSA partnered with the County of Tuolumne GSA to develop a single, coordinated Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the Modesto Subbasin. The final GSP was submitted to the Department of Water Resources (DWR) on January 31, 2022.

On January 18, 2024, the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) issued an Incomplete Determination letter to the Modesto Groundwater Subbasin (Subbasin) for their 2022 Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP or Plan). In that letter, DWR stated that the Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) “…should revise the GSP to include a reasonable means to arrest groundwater level declines and stop the overdraft that is continuing to occur in the Subbasin. Specifically, the GSAs should describe feasible,

Item 11.2 – CC/LRA – 01/27/2026
effective proposed projects and management actions that are commensurate with the level of understanding of groundwater conditions in the Subbasin and provide sufficient details for DWR staff to be able to clearly evaluate how the Plan’s projects and management actions will ensure achieving the sustainability goal in the Subbasin. In responding to this Corrective Action, in the Revised July 2024 GSP which was approved by DWR on February 27, 2025, the Stanislaus & Tuolumne Rivers Groundwater Basin Association (STRGBA) GSA and the County of Tuolumne GSA (Tuolumne GSA) committed to preparing management actions consisting of a Pumping Management Framework (including a groundwater allocation and pumping management program) and a Dry Well Mitigation Program. This GWUMP has now been prepared, incorporating a pumping management framework and demand reduction strategies.

The City previously recognized the need for both projects and demand management actions to achieve groundwater sustainability by 2042. The City adopted a Resolution 2024-067 committing to develop and implement demand management actions by 2026– 2027. As previously noted, this commitment was ultimately also made by the STRGBA GSA and Tuolumne GSA through resolution and incorporated into the 2024 Amended GSP that was approved by DWR. While it is still the goal of the STRGBA GSA to first implement supply projects to reach basin sustainability, this GWUMP is a management action intended to respond to direction provided by DWR and outlines the demand management actions that will be taken as long as supply actions are not effective in meeting overall basin sustainability goals.

The STRGBA GSA has developed the GWUMP through collaboration among member agencies and stakeholder input received during three public workshops. The GWUMP establishes a framework to allocate the sustainable yield of the Modesto Subbasin among management areas. The GWUMP also allows each management area steward to take actions to allocate the management area’s portion of the sustainable yield and to take actions to meet the allocation. Tools, adaptive measures, and an implementation schedule are outlined in the GWUMP that management area stewards may refine as conditions evolve.

The GWUMP acknowledges potential uncertainties—such as hydrologic variability, precipitation, snowpack, and water supply—and identifies demand-management actions to ensure the subbasin remains on track to achieve SGMA sustainability goals. The plan is intended to adapt to improving or worsening groundwater conditions.

Each GSA partner is being asked to adopt the attached resolution. Through the resolution, City of Riverbank:
• Recognizes the need to implement demand management actions to maintain sustainable groundwater conditions by 2042.
• Acknowledges that groundwater conditions beyond the City's control may result from actions by other entities within the GSA.
• Commits to collaborating with STRGBA member agencies and the County of Tuolumne GSA to carry out the GWUMP.
• Supports the development of action plans, in the applicable management area(s), ensuring implementation of demand management by January 31, 2027.

Item 11.2 – CC/LRA – 01/27/2026
• Acknowledges that the implementation of this plan should ensure the inclusion of management tactics and strategies that are equitable to all participating agencies within the GSA’s authority, especially when developing action plans.

Staff has reviewed the GWUMP and recommends Council adoption of the attached resolution. The draft GWUMP is anticipated to be approved by the STRGBA GSA in January 2026.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
Implementation of the GWUMP may require various funding mechanisms in the future, which could include:
• Proposition 218–compliant processes
• GSA fees and assessments
• Landowner groundwater pumping fees and penalties
• Agency funds
• State/Federal grant funding
Costs associated with GWUMP implementation may vary depending on required actions, future demand-management programs, and funding availability. Some costs may require approval through Proposition 218 proceedings.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution 2026-

2. Final Draft GWUMP

CC/LRA – 01/27/2026
CC Resolution 2026-

CITY OF RIVEBANK
RESOLUTION 2026-XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK, CALIFORNIA

ADOPTING A GROUNDWATER USE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM IN THE MODESTO

GROUNDWATER SUBBASIN

THE CITY OF RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL (HEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE “CITY COUNCIL”) DOES HEREBY RESOLVE THAT:

WHEREAS, the Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers Groundwater Basin Association (STRGBA) Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA), consisting of the City of Modesto, Modesto Irrigation District, City of Oakdale, Oakdale Irrigation District, City of Riverbank, City of Waterford and County of Stanislaus was formed on February 16, 2017, for the purpose of sustainably managing groundwater in the Modesto Subbasin, within its jurisdictional boundaries, pursuant to the requirements of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA); and
WHEREAS, the STRGBA GSA coordinated with the County of Tuolumne GSA to develop a single, coordinated groundwater sustainability plan (GSP) for the Modesto Subbasin which was approved by both the STRGBA GSA and County of Tuolumne GSA; and
WHEREAS, the final Modesto Subbasin GSP was submitted to the Department of Water Resources (DWR) on January 31, 2022; and
WHEREAS, a revised 2024 GSP Amendment for the Modesto Subbasin was developed by the STRGBA GSA and County of Tuolumne GSA in response to an Incomplete Determination by DWR; and
WHEREAS, the 2024 Amended GSP for the Modesto Subbasin was approved by DWR on February 27, 2025; and
WHEREAS, the City of Riverbank acknowledges that during the 20-year GSP implementation period it will be necessary to implement projects and management actions to achieve and maintain sustainable groundwater conditions in the Modesto Subbasin on or before 2042; and
WHEREAS, the City of Riverbank acknowledges that successful implementation of planned GSP projects to achieve their intended recharge benefits during the 20-year GSP implementation period (prior to 2042) is dependent in part on uncertainties related ATTACHMENT 1

CC/LRA – 01/27/2026
CC Resolution 2026-
to hydrologic conditions, including precipitation and snowpack, and available water supply during that time period; and
WHEREAS, the City of Riverbank acknowledges that implementation of demand management actions will be necessary to offset these uncertainties related to project implementation and project benefits to ensure that sustainable groundwater conditions are achieved in the subbasin by or before 2042; and
WHEREAS, the City of Riverbank acknowledges that the implementation of this plan should ensure the inclusion of management tactics and strategies that are equitable to all participating agencies within the GSA’s authority; and WHEREAS, on June 25, 2024, the City of Riverbank adopted Resolution 2024- 067 committing to the development of demand management actions by January 31, 2026, with implementation of those demand management actions by January 31, 2027; and WHEREAS, Resolution 2024-067 was incorporated into the 2024 Amended GSP for the Modesto Subbasin, which was submitted and approved by DWR; and WHEREAS, the STRGBA GSA has developed a Groundwater Use Management Program (GWUMP), as set forth in Exhibit “A” to this resolution, through collaboration of the STRGBA GSA and its member agencies with input from stakeholders through 3 public workshops; and
WHEREAS, the GWUMP provides the framework to allocate the sustainable yield of the Modesto Subbasin by management area. The GWUMP also allows each management area steward to take actions to allocate the management area’s portion of the sustainable yield and to take actions to meet the allocation. The GWUMP is an adaptive plan that provides tools for the management area steward(s) to respond and take various actions and an implementation schedule that may be further refined in the future; and
WHEREAS, the City of Riverbank acknowledges that the GWUMP is a framework to implement necessary demand management actions, and groundwater supply and allocations, which may be revisited as groundwater conditions improve or decline within the Modesto Subbasin; and
WHEREAS, the City of Riverbank acknowledges that it does not have control over groundwater conditions or well failures resulting from actions outside the authority of the GSA; and
WHEREAS, the City of Riverbank commits to the implementation of this GWUMP in collaboration with the STRGBA GSA, its member agencies, and the County of Tuolumne GSA; and
WHEREAS, funding sources for implementation of the GWUMP and any associated action plans may be subject to the Proposition 218 process and may include

CC/LRA – 01/27/2026
CC Resolution 2026-
GSA fees and assessments, landowner groundwater pumping fees and penalties, agency funds, and grant funding.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Riverbank finds as follows:

1. The City of Riverbank authorizes collaboration with the STRGBA GSA, its member agencies, consultants, stakeholders and the County of Tuolumne GSA to take such actions as may be reasonably necessary to:
a. Approve and implement the GWUMP for the Modesto Subbasin to ensure long-term groundwater sustainability.
b. Develop action plans which ensure the demand management actions identified in the GWUMP are under implementation beginning January 31, 2027.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Riverbank at a regular meeting held on the 27th day of January, 2026; motioned by Councilmember , seconded by Councilmember , and upon roll call was carried by the following City Council vote of :

AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
________________________________ __________________________ Gabriela Hernandez,CMC Rachel Hernandez
City Clerk Mayor
Attachment: Exhibit A – Modesto Subbasin Groundwater Use Management Plan Modesto
Subbasin
Groundwater Use
Management
Program

FINAL DRAFT
0012848.00

STRGBA GSA
January 6, 2026
woodardcurran.com
801 T Street
Sacramento, CA 95811
800.426.4262
ATTACHMENT 2
STRGBA GSA (0012848.00) i Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Final Draft Groundwater Use Management Program January 6, 2026

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE NO.

1. PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND......................................................................................................1-1

1.1 Purpose ...............................................................................................................................................................1-1

1.2 Background .......................................................................................................................................................1-1

1.2.1 Modesto Subbasin .............................................................................................................................1-1

1.2.2 Determination Letter and Commitments ..................................................................................1-3

2. GROUNDWATER ALLOCATION FRAMEWORK .............................................................................2-1

2.1 Groundwater Allocation Framework .......................................................................................................2-1

2.1.1 Sustainable Yield.................................................................................................................................2-2

2.1.2 Special Considerations......................................................................................................................2-2

2.1.2.1 Developed Water Supply Users.....................................................................................2-3

2.1.2.2 De Minimis Water Users ...................................................................................................2-4

2.1.2.3 Municipal Water Users......................................................................................................2-4

2.1.3 Allocation Framework Methodology ..........................................................................................2-5

3. IMPLEMENTATION .........................................................................................................................3-9

3.1 Adaptive Management Strategies.........................................................................................................3-12

4. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE ......................................................................................................4-1 TABLES
Table 1: Modesto Subbasin Stewards
Table 2: Developed Supply in the Modesto Subbasin
Table 3: Baseline Modesto Subbasin Groundwater Allocations Table 4: Collaborative Management of Groundwater Allocations Table 5: NDE Management Area Reduction Schedule

FIGURES
Figure 1: Modesto Subbasin Management Areas
Figure 2: GWUMP Response Levels
Figure 3: Management Area Action Plan Development Process Figure 4: Action Plan Content
Figure 5: GWUMP Implementation Schedule
STRGBA GSA (0012848.00) 1-1 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Final Draft Groundwater Use Management Program December 16, 2025

1. PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND

1.1 Purpose
On January 18, 2024, the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) issued an Incomplete Determination letter to the Modesto Groundwater Subbasin (Subbasin) for their 2022 Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP or Plan). In that letter, DWR stated that the Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) “…should revise the GSP to include a reasonable means to arrest groundwater level declines and stop the overdraft that is continuing to occur in the Subbasin. Specifically, the GSAs should describe feasible, effective proposed projects and management actions that are commensurate with the level of understanding of groundwater conditions in the Subbasin and provide sufficient details for DWR staff to be able to clearly evaluate how the Plan’s projects and management actions will ensure achieving the sustainability goal in the Subbasin.” In responding to this Corrective Action, in the Revised July 2024 GSP, the Stanislaus & Tuolumne Rivers Groundwater Basin Association (STRGBA) GSA and the County of Tuolumne GSA (Tuolumne GSA) committed to preparing management actions consisting of a Pumping Management Framework (including a groundwater allocation and pumping management program, groundwater extraction and surface water reporting program, groundwater extraction fee and groundwater pumping credit market and trading program), Demand Reduction Strategies (consisting of voluntary conservation and/or land use fallowing and conservation practices), and a Dry Well Mitigation Program. In response, this Groundwater Use Management Program (GWUMP or Program) was prepared, incorporating a pumping management framework and demand reduction strategies. A Dry Well Mitigation Program was prepared as a separate, stand-alone program.

While it is still the goal of the Subbasin GSAs to first implement supply projects to reach basin sustainability, this GWUMP is a management action intended to respond to direction provided by DWR and outlines the demand management actions that will be taken as long as supply actions are not effective in meeting overall basin sustainability goals. Nothing in this framework is intended to be a determination of water rights and is not evidence for or against any claim of a water right that can be used in any adjudication of water rights1.

1.2 Background

1.2.1 Modesto Subbasin
The Modesto Groundwater Subbasin (5-22.02) is a high-priority basin covering approximately 245,253 acres in the northern San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin. The Subbasin is bounded by the Stanislaus River on the north, the Tuolumne River on the south, the San Joaquin River on the west, and the crystalline basement rocks of the Sierra Nevada Foothills on the east. The Modesto Subbasin relies on two primary sources of water supply – surface water from the Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers and groundwater pumped from the principal aquifers described in the GSP. About 64 percent of the Modesto Subbasin is agricultural, with major crop types including almonds and other deciduous trees, corn, grains, pasture, vines, citrus and truck crops. Urban areas cover about 13 percent of the Subbasin. Remaining lands consist of non-agriculture, non-irrigated agriculture, undeveloped areas, and surface water (23 percent). Most of the undeveloped land 1 Consistent with California Water Code Section 10720.5 the Sustainable Groundwater Management act may not determine or alter surface water rights or groundwater rights under the common law. This GWUMP is meant to provide an equitable allocation of yield to each management area.

STRGBA GSA (0012848.00) 1-2 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Final Draft Groundwater Use Management Program December 16, 2025 is in the eastern portion of the Subbasin. A significant expansion of irrigated agriculture occurred in the Subbasin during the GSP study period. In 1996, irrigated agriculture covered approximately 46 percent of the Subbasin (approximately 111,946 acres). Over the next 20 years, irrigated agriculture expanded by about 40 percent, and by 2017 had added another 45,965 acres (totaling 157,911 acres, approximately 64 percent of the Subbasin). The increase in irrigated agriculture primarily resulted from a conversion of pasture and previously non-irrigated and undeveloped areas to deciduous/almond orchards. Much of this expansion occurred in the eastern portion of the Subbasin – outside of Modesto Irrigation District (MID) and Oakdale Irrigation District (OID) service areas – where groundwater is the primary source of water supply.

The GSP delineates four separate Management Areas (MAs) to reflect areas of similar water supplies, streamlining coordination of water management and prioritizing areas for GSP project implementation.

These management areas include the Modesto Management Area, Oakdale Management Area, NonDistrict East (NDE) Management Area, and Non-District West (NDW) Management Area as shown on Figure

1. FIGURE 1: MODESTO SUBBASIN MANAGEMENT AREAS
The Non-District West Management Area contains lands along the western rim of the Subbasin, where both groundwater and surface water are available for beneficial uses. The Non-District East Management Area includes lands outside of MID and OID service areas in the eastern portion of the Subbasin where groundwater is the primary water supply. The Modesto and Oakdale Management Areas coincide with the service area boundaries of their respective irrigation districts. MID manages Tuolumne River water and groundwater conjunctively, and OID manages Stanislaus River water and groundwater conjunctively. The STRGBA GSA (0012848.00) 1-3 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Final Draft Groundwater Use Management Program December 16, 2025 Non-District East and Non-District West Management Areas cover remaining lands outside of MID and OID jurisdiction, where Stanislaus County is the lead member agency.

1.2.2 Determination Letter and Commitments
The Revised 2024 Modesto Subbasin GSP was approved by DWR in 2025 and is currently being implemented by the STRGBA GSA and the Tuolumne GSA. The goal of the GSP is to achieve sustainability by 2042 in compliance with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA).

As described in the Revised 2024 GSP, long-term declines in groundwater levels have occurred in the NDE Management Area and currently are impacting groundwater levels in the Oakdale Management Area. As a result, 2027 Interim Milestones (IMs) below the Minimum Threshold (MT) have been developed for representative monitoring wells in those management areas. The anticipated decline between adoption of the initial GSP in 2022 and 2027 (the first interim milestone) depends on future unknown hydrologic conditions. Since drought conditions began in Water Year (WY) 2013, dry hydrologic conditions have persisted in the Subbasin with five out of seven water years between WY 2014 and WY 2020 having been categorized as below normal, dry, or critically dry. Water level declines associated with the last seven years may continue if hydrologic conditions do not improve, and/or if the aquifer response to GSP project implementation is delayed or overestimated. To evaluate and prevent undesirable results, 2027 IMs have been developed for monitoring sites based on groundwater level declines observed over the last seven years. Based on modeling completed in support of the GSP, by 2032, projects and management actions are expected to support water level recovery; therefore, the 2032 IMs were set as the MT. If needed, the IMs for 2037 have been defined as the halfway point between the MT and the Measurable Objective (MO).

In general, there are two principal ways to reach the Subbasin IMs and ultimately achieve basin wide sustainability as the GSP is implemented:

1. Increase supply; or

2. Decrease demand; or
Reducing groundwater demand can be done through a variety of strategies, including changes to cropping patterns, land fallowing, land repurposing, and conservation in response to numeric groundwater allocations, which would be less than those currently extracted. Strategies to increase supply have been identified by the GSA and are included as projects in Chapter 8 of the Revised 2024 Subbasin GSP. These projects are proposed to either recharge groundwater with surface water or provide surface water to meet groundwater demand so that groundwater pumping is reduced without changing the land use or total water demand (in-lieu recharge). To date, the GSP has focused on implementing projects to address overdraft. However, the schedule of implementation, source, and timing of the funding, design, and construction of the supply projects poses uncertainties in terms of realizing the benefits in the expected timeline. Recognizing these uncertainties, the GSAs acknowledge that more timely reductions in groundwater use will be required to meet the planned IMs. For this reason, this GWUMP has been developed as a backstop to prevent significant and unreasonable impacts related to groundwater level decline.

The GWUMP, as outlined herein, is the first step in demand management. The GSAs may adjust the GWUMP as projects are implemented and further develop additional aspects of the overall Program as it is implemented and evolves.

STRGBA GSA (0012848.00) 2-1 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Final Draft Groundwater Use Management Program January 6, 2026

2. GROUNDWATER ALLOCATION FRAMEWORK
GSAs have the authority to develop and implement management actions within their GSPs that are based on local conditions, priorities, and management objectives. Under the California Water Code, a GSA has the authority to regulate, limit, or suspend groundwater extractions from individual wells or other facilities within a groundwater basin.
1 As a result, this Groundwater Allocation Framework has been developed to equitably distribute the sustainable yield amongst the Management Areas (Allocation Framework) to achieve groundwater sustainability consistent with SGMA. Any demand reductions actions must be approved by the applicable GSA(s) and would be implemented by Management Area Stewards if authorized and directed by the GSA(s).

This Allocation Framework is intended to be an adaptive program, modified over time to reflect changing hydrologic conditions and implementation of water supply projects. Nothing in this framework is intended to be a determination of water rights, and is not evidence for or against a water right that can be used in any adjudication of water rights2.

2.1 Groundwater Allocation Framework
The STRGBA GSA developed a groundwater allocation framework based on the estimated sustainable yield of the Subbasin as documented in the GSP and considering developed supply and local groundwater use.

The goal of the framework is to equitably distribute the sustainable yield to each Management Area throughout the Subbasin and allow the Management Area Stewards to decide how to implement components of the framework in their respective management areas as needed to operate within those allocations. Only de minimis extractions occur in the Tuolumne GSA which are exempt from receiving allocations (see Section 2.1.2.2).

As used herein, the Management Area Steward is defined as the STRGBA GSA member agency/agencies from each Subbasin management area. The Modesto Subbasin Stewards in the STRGBA GSA area are shown below in Table 1.

Overall, the process of developing the Allocation Framework included establishing the sustainable yield, accounting for special considerations of allocatable groundwater, determining the volume of developed water, allocating the sustainable yield of native groundwater, and establishing measures for management area stewardship by the STRGBA GSA member agencies.
1 CWC § 10726.4(a)(2)
2 Consistent with California Water Code Section 10720.5 the Sustainable Groundwater Management act may not determine or alter surface water rights or groundwater rights under the common law. This GWUMP is meant to provide an equitable allocation of yield to each management area.

STRGBA GSA (0012848.00) 2-2 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Final Draft Groundwater Use Management Program January 6, 2026 TABLE 1: MODESTO SUBBASIN STEWARDS
Management Area Stewards
Modesto Management Area
Modesto Irrigation District
City of Modesto
City of Waterford
Oakdale Management Area
Oakdale Irrigation District
City of Oakdale
Non-District West Management Area
Stanislaus County
City of Riverbank
Non-District East Management Area Stanislaus County
Tuolumne County GSA

2.1.1 Sustainable Yield
Sustainable yield is defined under SGMA as “the maximum quantity of water, calculated over a base period representative of long-term conditions in the basin and including any temporary surplus, that can be withdrawn annually from a groundwater supply without causing an undesirable result.”1 The sustainable yield for the Modesto Subbasin was calculated to be 267,000 acre-feet per year (AFY). Sustainable yield for the Subbasin was calculated using a C2VSimTM numerical modeling scenario in which the long-term (50- year) sustainable management criteria are maintained. The development of sustainable yield incorporates the reduction of groundwater demand from net groundwater extractors, which forms the basis for the Allocation Framework. Additional information on the methodology utilized to determine the sustainable yield is presented in Section 5.3 of the Revised 2024 GSP.2 While the sustainable yield provides the basis for the volume of allocatable water within the Subbasin, special considerations for certain entities were considered and incorporated into the Allocation Framework (see Section 2.1.2). The amount of water allocatable to applicable entities is termed “native sustainable yield”, which is discussed further in Section 2.1.3.

2.1.2 Special Considerations
Special considerations for the Allocation Framework were evaluated by the STRGBA GSA and included legal considerations and local management objectives. The following entities were determined to have limited requirements under the Allocation Framework:
1 CWC §10721(w))
2 Modesto Subbasin GSP, Revised July 2024, Section 5.3, pp. 303-310 STRGBA GSA (0012848.00) 2-3 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Final Draft Groundwater Use Management Program January 6, 2026 • Federal & Tribal Lands (not present)
• Adjudicated Areas (not present)
• Developed Water Supplies
• De Minimis Water Users
• Municipal Water Use
Federal lands, tribal lands, and adjudicated areas are not present within the Subbasin. As a result, developed water, supplies for de minimis water users, and municipal water use were the only entities with special considerations or limitations under the Allocation Framework. Additional information on developed water supplies, de minimis water users, and municipal water users are discussed further herein.

2.1.2.1 Developed Water Supply Users
Developed supplies are water that is intentionally sourced, imported and made available for use through human-made systems. California law recognizes imported water that is added to and withdrawn from an underground basin and credits this ‘developed water’ to the importer bringing the water into the basin.

California law also recognizes that a party who imports water into a basin or develops new supplies may retain rights to that water, including the right to recapture that water. As such, Developed Supply is controlled by the entity that developed the imported water supply.

Developed supply systems in the Modesto Subbasin include:
• Imported Water: Surface water brought into the basin from external sources, such as through canals, pipelines, or water transfers.
• Recycled Water: Wastewater or other non-traditional water sources that are treated to meet specific quality standards for reuse.
• Artificial Recharge Projects: Groundwater replenishment efforts using intentionally captured and injected water.

Recovery of imported and recycled water includes seepage resulting from storage, conveyance and/or land application. Recovery of water from artificial recharge projects correlates to the volume of water recharged by the project.

During the development of the Allocation Framework, estimates of developed supplies were refined into seepage from canals, reservoirs, drainage, and deep percolation of applied surface waters. Quantified values of developed water were sourced from MID’s and OID’s 2020 Agricultural Water Management Plans, the City of Modesto’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan, and are summarized below in Table 2.

STRGBA GSA (0012848.00) 2-4 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Final Draft Groundwater Use Management Program January 6, 2026 TABLE 2: DEVELOPED SUPPLY IN THE MODESTO SUBBASIN
Developed Supply (AF) MID1 OID2
Deep Perc of Applied Surface Water 51,5003 14,8003
Canal and Reservoir Seepage 39,400 13,100
Drainage Seepage -- 3,700
M&I Seepage 4,700 --
Total 95,600 31,600
Notes:
1 Includes 2018 as a representative water year
2 Average value covering water years 2006-2019
3 estimated based on the fraction of applied surface water MID generates approximately 95,600 AFY of recharge from their developed supply, and OID generates approximately 31,600 AFY of recharge from their developed supply. These estimations were incorporated into the Allocation Framework and the Management Areas’ demand reduction targets, which are discussed further in Section 2.2.2 and Section 2.2.3. These values were estimated using the most recent data available and will be refined as the GWUMP is periodically re-evaluated.

2.1.2.2 De Minimis Water Users
De minimis extractors are classified as water users that extract two (2) acre-feet (AF) or less of groundwater per year.
1 De minimis water use totals approximately 13,800 AFY within the Subbasin. During the development of the Allocation Framework, it was determined that de minimis extractors should be exempt from receiving allocations and reducing their groundwater use. Of note, with only de minimis extractions in the Tuolumne GSA area, implementation of the GWUMP will not restrict or alter existing groundwater pumping activities there unless and until that were to change in the future.

2.1.2.3 Municipal Water Users
Municipal water use refers to the provision of water for residential, commercial, and public services within a city. Municipal water users within the Subbasin include the City of Modesto, City of Oakdale, City of Riverbank, and the City of Waterford. These entities account for approximately 35,000 AFY of groundwater use. During development of the Allocation Framework, the STRGBA GSA designated municipal water users as a special case and limited their future groundwater use to their historical groundwater use. This decision was supported by several local and state requirements for implementing water use efficiency programs.

These requirements include:
1 CWC § 10721(e)
STRGBA GSA (0012848.00) 2-5 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Final Draft Groundwater Use Management Program January 6, 2026 • Making Conservation as a California Way of Life – a State regulation that establishes efficiency goals and Urban Water Use Objectives (UWUOs) for urban water suppliers to reduce municipal demands. The regulation requires urban water suppliers to determine their water use objectives and demonstrate compliance annually.1
• Growth Obligations – Municipalities have State mandated housing and population growth targets that drive water demand.
• Public Service Constraints – Cities are non-profit entities that typically operate with limited flexibility in pricing for the purchase of water supplies. • Supply Limitations – Groundwater supplies are limited and meeting future demand will require surface water development, recharge projects, additional conservation, or purchased allocation credits.

Under this Allocation Framework, groundwater allocations are set at current groundwater use quantities per annum for municipalities, and the municipalities will be required to conserve water or provide other water supplies to supply future growth. If additional lands are annexed into municipal water provider’s service areas, those lands will be removed from the overlying allocation of the sustainable yield in future updates of the GWUMP, and the special case allocation to municipal water users will remain unchanged.

2.1.3 Allocation Framework Methodology
Multiple approaches to Subbasin groundwater allocation were considered by the STRGBA GSA to determine the best method for reducing groundwater demand to achieve the Subbasin’s sustainability goals. The approaches included allocations based on consumptive use (amount of water used and not returned to the Subbasin), pumping (total volume extracted), and other metrics such as crop type, economic value, or negotiated agreements. Ultimately, pumping, or the total volume of groundwater extracted by user, was selected as the basis for the Allocation Framework as it was both directly measurable and could easily be estimated by other means in cases where metering data were not available.

A proportional allocation by the overlying area, excluding those urban and domestic areas where the service area was provided a special consideration, was selected as the approach for distributing allocatable yield by management area within the Subbasin. This method was selected as it facilitates resource pooling in management areas that are more reliant on groundwater, eliminates the ‘double allocation’ of water to municipal and de minimis areas, and promotes equity across all overlying users, despite their intended use.

Following the selection of the Allocation Framework’s basis and distribution method, estimations of allocations for the Subbasin and each Management Area (as defined in the Revised 2024 GSP) were made.

As previously discussed, allocations are calculated by distributing the allocatable yield (i.e., non-special considerations) across the Subbasin’s overlying area, where:
1 23 CCR, § 966
STRGBA GSA (0012848.00) 2-6 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Final Draft Groundwater Use Management Program January 6, 2026 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 = 𝑆𝑆 − 𝐷𝐷 − 𝑀𝑀 − 𝐷𝐷
AY = Allocatable Yield
SY = Sustainable Yield
D = De minimis Users
M = Municipal Users
DS = Developed Supply
The allocatable yield calculated for the Modesto Subbasin was determined to be 95,700 AFY.

Overlying Allocation: The Subbasin-wide overlying allocation of 95,700 AFY was subsequently distributed amongst the Management Areas using a proportional allocation methodology based on each zone’s overlying land area minus the area covered by urban and domestic land uses (referred to herein as Overlying, Non-Urban Area). This equitable distribution approach ensures that water allocations correspond directly to the spatial extent of overlying land use within each Management Area without ‘double allocating’ water to urban and domestic land areas. The proportional distribution method calculates each Management Area's share by dividing its overlying non-urban acreage by the total subbasin overlying acreage, then multiplying this percentage by the total overlying allocation. An illustrative calculation demonstrating how individual Management Area overlying allocations are determined is presented below.

𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 = (𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑆𝑆)(
𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀
𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝑆𝑆
)
OVRMA = Overlying Allocation of the Management Area
OVRS = Overlying Allocation of the Subbasin
AreaMA = Overlying Non-Urban Area of the Management Area Areas = Total Area of the Subbasin
Table 3, below, summarizes the ‘baseline’ allocations for the individual management areas as calculated using the above methodology.

STRGBA GSA (0012848.00) 2-7 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Final Draft Groundwater Use Management Program January 6, 2026 TABLE 3: BASELINE MODESTO SUBBASIN GROUNDWATER ALLOCATIONS Subbasin
TOTAL Modesto MA Oakdale MA
NDW
MA
NDE
MA
Developed Supply1 127,200 95,600 31,600 0 0
Special Cases1 48,800 33,700 8,900 6,200 0
Overlying Use1 91,000 33,600 22,000 5,300 30,100
Total Allocation1 267,000 162,900 62,500 11,500 30,100
Total Historical
Pumping1 317,600 173,000 39,800 15,100 89,700
Reduction Required1 50,600 10,100 -22,700 3,600 59,600
Total Allocation
(Percent of Historical) 84% 94% 157% 76% 34%
1 Volumes are presented in acre-feet.

NDW – Non-District West
NDE – Non-District East
The initial allocation estimations (“Baseline Allocations”) indicate an average annual reduction of Total Historical Pumping by approximately 16% is needed. However, allocations applied to certain management areas, such as the Oakdale Management Area, were greater because of OID’s development and use of surface water and thus appear in Table 3 as negative required reductions. To collaborate and assist in easing reductions in other Management Areas, and to allow supply projects to be constructed, OID has agreed to redistribute the portion of its developed supply that is not anticipated to be used by OID in the near term to other Management Areas on a temporary basis, not to exceed five years (2027-2031), at no cost to the beneficiaries. The reallocation option, referred to herein as ‘Collaborative Management, is presented below in Table 4. It is important to note that any potential ‘reallocation’ of the native sustainable yield would have to be agreed upon by the STRGBA GSA. However, reallocation of developed supply is controlled by the entity that developed the imported water supply. Any such redistribution of OID’s developed water is not a forfeiture of the right or claim of right in the future. Furthermore, by reallocating developed supply to another party under this Framework, the potential pumping reduction in other management areas is reduced from what it may have to be in the future. OID specifically hereby disclaims that by approving this Plan it waives any of its water rights and/or the rights of its landowners; but rather, affirms that it puts all water to which it or its landowners have a right to full beneficial use.

STRGBA GSA (0012848.00) 2-8 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Final Draft Groundwater Use Management Program January 6, 2026 TABLE 4: COLLABORATIVE MANAGEMENT OF GROUNDWATER ALLOCATIONS Subbasin
TOTAL
Modesto
Management
Area
Oakdale
Management
Area
NDW
Management
Area
NDE
Management
Area
Base Allocation1 267,000 162,900 62,500 11,500 30,100
Historical Pumping1 317,600 173,000 39,800 15,100 89,700 Developed Water1 - 0 -22,700 0 0
Redistribution of
Developed Water1 0 10,100 -22,700 1,900 10,700
Allocation with
Redistribution of
Developed Water1
267,000 173,000 39,800 13,400 40,800
Reduction Required1,2 50,600 0 0 1,700 48,900
Allocation with
Redistribution2
(Percent of Historical)
84% 100% 100% 89% 45%
1 Volumes are presented in acre-feet.
2Assumes long-term use of Redistributed Developed Water.

NDW – Non-District West
NDE – Non-District East
Long-term redistribution of developed water would result in smaller reduction targets for the Modesto, Non-District West, and Non-District East Management Areas - 6%, 13%, and 12%, respectively. However, OID has only agreed to allow temporary utilization of their developed water for the first five years of implementation (2027-2031).

The STRGBA GSA prepared an implementation schedule for meeting the allocation targets while allowing groundwater users the opportunity to adapt to reductions in groundwater use. The implementation schedules for the Management Areas are presented in Section 4. Distribution of these allocations to groundwater users will be completed by Management Area “Stewards”, as discussed in Section 2.1.4.

However, it is important to keep in mind that this framework is one of the Subbasin’s first steps towards achieving groundwater sustainability, and this Program will continue to be reviewed and adjusted as needed in future updates.

STRGBA GSA (0012848.00) 3-9 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Final Draft Groundwater Use Management Program January 6, 2026

3. IMPLEMENTATION
Member agencies of the STRGBA GSA determined that the GWUMP would be best implemented locally in the individual Management Areas within the Subbasin. As previously noted, with only having de minimis extractors, groundwater pumping activities in the Tuolumne GSA area will not change with implementation of the GWUMP. The Management Areas are defined in the Revised 2024 GSP as areas of similar water supplies and similar ongoing water management activities.1 As discussed in Section 2 and shown in Figure 1, four management areas are present within the Modesto Subbasin: Modesto Management Area, Oakdale Management Area, Non-District West Management Area, and Non-District East Management Area. These management areas and their Stewards (agencies with jurisdiction) are shown in Table 1.

Following the adoption of this GWUMP, the Management Area Stewards will distribute allocations as credits to groundwater users no later than January 31, 2027, per the Revised 2024 Modesto Subbasin GSP. The total allocations, per Management Area, in the first five years of implementation will be consistent with the “Collaborative Management” allocation volumes presented in Table 4. Management Area Stewards will monitor and evaluate groundwater use and the assigned allocations on a regular basis to ensure groundwater users are operating within their assigned allocations. The STRGBA GSA will also continue to independently assess groundwater use in each management area as part of its annual reporting process and procedures.

The intent of localized management by the Management Area Steward is to achieve sustainable management criteria, such as interim milestones and measurable objectives, as established in the GSP and prevent the occurrence of undesirable results, but to do so in a fashion that is achievable within the characteristics of each individual area. Should groundwater data and parameters, such as groundwater levels, indicate that a particular management area is not achieving their sustainable management objectives, Management Area Stewards will develop a Management Area Action Plan for STRGBA GSA approval as a corrective course of action and may, at their discretion, escalate the allocation implementation schedule to comply with these sustainable management criteria if needed. Non-compliance with these criteria may trigger other additional management strategies. Figure 2 outlines the methodology the Management Area Stewards will follow in implementing the GWUMP. For the purposes of this GWUMP, non-compliance is defined as two (2) consecutive years of not meeting the GWUMP-mandated allocations and/or not having a GSA-approved Action Plan implemented within two (2) years. 1 Modesto Subbasin GSP, Revised July 2024, Section 6.2.3, p. 317 STRGBA GSA (0012848.00) 3-10 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Final Draft Groundwater Use Management Program January 6, 2026 FIGURE 2: GWUMP RESPONSE LEVELS
If, based on the Subbasin’s monitoring program and annual analysis, it is determined that a Management Area Action Plan is required, the following steps will be implemented in developing that plan (Figure 3).

Should a Management Area move into Response Level 3 as a result of non-compliance, the STRGBA GSA would follow the State’s probationary emergency protocols/measures to meter groundwater extractions and assess fees while the STRGBA GSA drafts and executes a GSA Action Plan for the Management Area(s) and returns the Management Area(s) to the planned path towards sustainability.

STRGBA GSA (0012848.00) 3-11 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Final Draft Groundwater Use Management Program January 6, 2026 FIGURE 3: MANAGEMENT AREA ACTION PLAN DEVELOPMENT PROCESS The content of the Action Plan will vary depending on the Management Area, hydrologic condition, situation and other parameters, but in general, Actions Plans will include the following content (Figure 4).

FIGURE 4: ACTION PLAN CONTENT
Section 3.1 provides a list of potential adaptive management strategies that the Management Area Stewards may choose to implement to ensure the Subbasin progresses towards sustainability. In the event the Management Area Stewards are unable to progress towards sustainability (i.e., failure to achieve interim milestones or continuously exceeding minimum thresholds), the STRGBA GSA will implement additional measures to prevent the occurrence of undesirable results.

STRGBA GSA (0012848.00) 3-12 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Final Draft Groundwater Use Management Program January 6, 2026 While the GWUMP will be reassessed no less than once every five years (see Section 4 for further discussion), the condition of the Subbasin will be evaluated annually as part of the SGMA-mandated annual report process. If identified as part of that reporting process and as needed, the Management Area Stewards may opt to modify their Action Plan with STRGBA GSA approval between GWUMP assessments to proactively address any negative trends identified at that time. However, any planned regulation, limitation or suspensions of groundwater extractions from individual wells or other facilities by Management Area Stewards will require prior approval by the STRGBA GSA.

3.1 Adaptive Management Strategies
While the groundwater allocation framework discussed above in Section 2 is intended to move the Subbasin towards sustainability, it is recognized that Subbasin hydrogeology and future hydrologic conditions will impact the success of the program. As the GWUMP is envisioned, the Management Area Stewards will be responsible for monitoring progress towards achieving the Interim Milestones set forth in the Revised 2024 GSP, and for implementing adaptive management strategies and responses as needed to achieve the desired results.

Adaptive management is a key component of the GWUMP. A program that is flexible and developed to adapt to changing conditions will be the most effective. The unknown factors in meeting the demand management goals may include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Hydrology of the next five years: The benefits (recharge) accrued from planned projects vary based on the availability of surface and storm water over the next few years. Projects that rely on excess surface water to be implemented may not produce the same level of benefits in drought years. • Implementation schedule of planned projects: It is unknown what legal, financial, or environmental hurdles could delay the implementation of the identified projects. These delays could be specific to a GSA, management area, or the Subbasin as a whole.
• Estimation of Project Contributions: Not all projects may be able, once implemented, to produce the anticipated benefits estimated during the planning process, even without project delays. • Model Uncertainty: Through future monitoring, the GSAs will be able to assess model uncertainty and improve model estimations as new data becomes available.

To aid the Management Area Stewards with adaptively managing their areas, the following is a list of some potential strategies that may be employed to help reduce groundwater use and support achieving the Subbasin Interim Milestones and ultimately groundwater basin sustainability. This list is not intended to be all inclusive.
• Implementation of voluntary or mandatory conservation measures including, but not limited to:
o Land repurposing to enhance groundwater recharge
o Land repurposing for habitat restoration (recreational use, GDE benefit, etc.) o Land repurposing for clean energy incentives (i.e., solar power fields) o Replacing higher value/water using crops with lower value/water using crops or replanting or repurposing with crops/agriculture requiring lower water demands o Fallowing – total or partial crop removal, rotational fallowing, dry farming STRGBA GSA (0012848.00) 3-13 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Final Draft Groundwater Use Management Program January 6, 2026 • Acceleration of the allocation reduction schedule
• Implementation of groundwater extraction fees
• Increased groundwater use reporting requirements to quarterly or monthly • Prioritization of implementation of Supplemental Projects (Group 3) • Incentivization of surface water deliveries/in-lieu recharge • Implementation of targeted pumping reductions or restrictions • Reduction of allocations beyond base allocation limits • Restriction of pumping in areas where MTs have been exceeded • Required flowmeter installation on extraction wells
• Invasive species removal
• Urban retrofitting and/or irrigation improvements to reduce water loss and use It will be at the Management Area Stewards discretion and responsibility to effectively use some or all of these and potentially other measures to achieve the targeted groundwater use extractions and reach Interim Milestones, and it will be the responsibility of the STRGBA GSA to ensure there is consistency amongst the Management Areas with respect to implementation and application of adaptive management measures.

STRGBA GSA (0012848.00) 4-1 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Final Draft Groundwater Use Management Program January 6, 2026

4. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
As previously described, in response to Recommended Corrective Action #2 of DWR’s 2025 Determination letter, the STRGBA GSA and Tuolumne GSA committed to developing this GWUMP by no later than January 31, 2026, and will implement the program beginning no later than January 31, 2027. To meet this schedule and achieve the Interim Milestones established in the Revised 2024 GSP, the GWUMP will be the primary tool to guide the Subbasin towards sustainability as additional projects and management actions are implemented to offset continued groundwater use.

This Program is the first step towards achieving long-term sustainability. It is designed to effectively manage groundwater use while allowing growers the flexibility to adapt to new policies and frameworks within the Subbasin. Ultimately, however, groundwater management will be driven by observed groundwater level data relative to the Minimum Thresholds and Interim Milestones established in the Revised 2024 GSP and will be supported through adaptive management. The timeline for achieving Interim Milestones, as set forth in the Revised 2024 GSP, is as follows:
2027 - Arrest overdraft and groundwater level decline
2032 - Raise groundwater levels to Minimum Thresholds
2037 - Raise groundwater levels to halfway between Minimum Thresholds and Measurable Objectives
2042 - Raise groundwater level to Measurable Objectives It is important to recognize that the allocations presented in this GWUMP are based on the best available data at this time. The STRGBA GSA will continue to gather data and refine the allocations presented herein in future updates to the GWUMP. However, even with the temporary redistribution of the OID developed water supply in the first five years of program implementation and considering historical groundwater level trends, the NDE Management Area will begin the GWUMP Phase 1 implementation period in the Phase 2 Response Level and therefore will require preparation of a Management Area Action Plan by November 1, 2026 for STRGBA GSA approval to initiate reductions in groundwater use. Only having de minimis extractors, the Tuolumne GSA area will be exempt from any reductions in groundwater use.

Following implementation of this GWUMP and the NDE Action Plan on January 31, 2027, reductions in groundwater extractions will ‘ramp up’ in five-year increments as necessary to arrest overdraft and raise groundwater levels to the Measurable Objectives identified in the GSP. Table 5, below, is the implementation schedule for the NDE Management Area.

STRGBA GSA (0012848.00) 4-2 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Final Draft Groundwater Use Management Program January 6, 2026 TABLE 5: NDE MANAGEMENT AREA REDUCTION SCHEDULE
Year Percent Reduction of
Target Allocation
Required Reduction (AcreFeet)
2027-2030
34% of 47,600 (Total
Reduction Required less
10,400 AF of Redistributed
Developed Water
16,000
2030-2035 67% 39,000
2035-2040 100% 58,000
The Modesto Management Area currently exceeds its base allocation. However, after accounting for the redistribution of developed water, the management area is in balance. Additionally, groundwater levels remain relatively stable in most monitoring wells within the MID and City of Modesto service areas. The management area requires continued assessment of data and groundwater/surface water operations to prevent future overdraft, but no Action Plan is necessary at this time.

Although some reduction in groundwater pumping is indicated for the Non-District West Management Area in the first five-year implementation period, observed groundwater levels in most of the monitoring wells in the western upper and lower principal aquifers in the Management Area are currently at or above the measurable objective. Additionally, there are no indications of any long-term water level declines in the Non-District West Management Area, therefore, no Action Plan is required in the Non-District West Management Area at this time.

Even though OID’s development and use of surface water results in a surplus of developed supply, groundwater levels in the eastern portion of the Oakdale Management Area continue to decline due to the influence of overdraft in the Non-District East Management Area. No reductions or Action Plan are required for the eastern portion of the Oakdale Management Area at this time.

Per SGMA, every five years, the Subbasin GSP is re-evaluated and a Periodic Evaluation is prepared for submission to DWR. Evaluation of, and any necessary revisions to, the GWUMP will occur prior to and in parallel with each GSP review and Periodic Evaluation. Additionally, other related management actions and tools, such as the development of a groundwater banking and trading program, may be developed by the STRGBA GSA in the future to further support sustainable management of the Subbasin. Figure 5, below, is the planned implementation and review schedule for the GWUMP.

STRGBA GSA (0012848.00) 4-3 Woodard & Curran, Inc.

Final Draft Groundwater Use Management Program December 16, 2025 FIGURE 5: GWUMP IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
woodardcurran.com

Item 11.3 – CC/LRA – 01/27/2026

RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL/ LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM NO. 11.3
SECTION 11: NEW BUSINESS
Meeting Date: January 27, 2026
Subject: Resolution Adopting the Well Mitigation Plan in the Modesto Groundwater Subbasin
From: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
Submitted by: Cody Bridgewater, Public Works / LRA Director

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council consider adopting a resolution authorizing collaboration with the Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers Groundwater Basin Association (STRGBA) Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA), its member agencies, stakeholders and the County of Tuolumne GSA to take such actions as may be necessary to approve and implement the Well Mitigation Plan developed for the Modesto Groundwater Subbasin. Adoption of the Well Mitigation Plan by the STRGBA GSA fulfills commitments made in prior Council actions and advances compliance with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA).

BACKGROUND
On February 16, 2017, the STRGBA GSA was formed. Member agencies include the City of Modesto, Modesto Irrigation District, City of Oakdale, Oakdale Irrigation District, City of Riverbank, City of Waterford, and Stanislaus County. The GSA collaboratively manages groundwater in the Modesto Subbasin along with County of Tuolumne GSA pursuant to SGMA requirements.

The STRGBA GSA partnered with the County of Tuolumne GSA to develop a single, coordinated Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the Modesto Subbasin. The final GSP was submitted to the Department of Water Resources (DWR) on January 31, 2022.

Following DWR’s Incomplete Determination, the GSAs prepared a 2024 GSP Amendment, which DWR approved on February 27, 2025 but added the need to revise the GSP to include a Program to provide mitigation for drinking water wells that have experienced adverse impacts due to declining regional groundwater levels associated with groundwater pumping.

The focus of this Program is on mitigation for drinking water wells that have experienced adverse impacts due to declining groundwater levels resulting from basin management

Item 11.3 – CC/LRA – 01/27/2026
actions. All applications brought under this Program must have had well impacts that occurred after January 31, 2022, and were caused by STRGBA GSA basin management activities. Applications for impacts that occurred between January 31, 2022, and the adoption of this Program by the STRGBA GSA must be submitted within six months. The limitations period for applications submitted after the adoption of this Program will be the limitations process and period provided by the California Government Tort Claims Act (Government Code Section 810 and following). Drinking water wells are defined here as any well used to supply potable water to a household, including domestic wells that supply water for potable, minor irrigation, and other domestic purposes. It may also include state small water systems that have between 5 and 14 connections.

The Revised GSP analysis also considered potential impacts to water quality and land subsidence. The analysis indicated that groundwater levels declining below the MTs during the implementation period would not likely have an impact on groundwater quality or on land subsidence. Consequently, this Program focuses on the direct impacts of drinking water wells going dry. In general, a well is considered to be going dry when water can no longer be pumped in sufficient quantity to meet domestic water demands because groundwater levels have fallen too low for the well to produce the required groundwater quantities.

Staff has reviewed the draft Well Mitigation Plan and recommends Council adoption of the attached resolution. The draft Well Mitigation Plan is anticipated to be approved by the STRGBA GSA in January 2026 and implemented immediately thereafter.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The Program is initially being funded by the STRGBA GSA as part of their respective annual budgets and apportioned between the STRGBA GSA using the existing annual budget allocation methodology (equally amongst each of the 7 member agencies). To initiate implementation of the Program, the STRGBA GSA has established a baseline Well Mitigation Fund amounting to three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000). The STRGBA GSA has agreed to fund the Program on an annual basis as may be required to address the needs of the Program until groundwater sustainability is achieved. The STRGBA GSA member agencies will meet and confer in good faith to determine the appropriate funding mechanism, replenishment amount, and STRGBA GSA member allocation methodology prior to Fund replenishment.

Actual cost to the City of Riverbank is unknown as it depends on how many wells need mitigation.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution 2026-

2. Final Draft Well Mitigation Plan

CC/LRA – 01/27/2026
CC Resolution 2026-

CITY OF RIVEBANK
RESOLUTION 2026-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK, CALIFORNIA

RESOLUTION ADOPTING A WELL MITIGATION PLAN IN THE MODESTO

GROUNDWATER SUBBASIN

THE CITY OF RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL (HEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE “CITY COUNCIL”) DOES HEREBY RESOLVE THAT:

WHEREAS, the Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers Groundwater Basin Association (STRGBA) Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA), consisting of the City of Modesto, Modesto Irrigation District, City of Oakdale, Oakdale Irrigation District, City of Riverbank, City of Waterford and County of Stanislaus was formed on February 16, 2017, for the purpose of sustainably managing groundwater in the Modesto Subbasin, within its jurisdictional boundaries, pursuant to the requirements of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA);
WHEREAS, the STRGBA GSA coordinated with the County of Tuolumne GSA to develop a single, coordinated groundwater sustainability plan (GSP) for the Modesto Subbasin which was approved by both the STRGBA GSA and County of Tuolumne GSA, and
WHEREAS, the final Modesto Subbasin GSP was submitted to the Department of Water Resources (DWR) on January 31, 2022, and
WHEREAS, a revised 2024 GSP Amendment for the Modesto Subbasin was developed by the STRGBA GSA and County of Tuolumne GSA in response to an Incomplete Determination by DWR, and
WHEREAS, the 2024 Amended GSP for the Modesto Subbasin was ultimately approved by DWR on February 27, 2025, and
WHEREAS, 2027 Interim Milestones (IMs) were established in the Modesto Subbasin GSP to acknowledge the continued groundwater level decline anticipated to occur temporarily during the initial years of GSP implementation, and WHEREAS, the City of Riverbank acknowledges that during the 20-year GSP implementation period, in particular within the initial IM timeline, it is possible for wells to be negatively impacted by continued groundwater level decline, and WHEREAS, on June 25, 2024, the City of Riverbank adopted Resolution 2024- 067 committing to the development and implementation of a Well Mitigation Plan by January 31, 2026, and
ATTACHMENT 1

CC/LRA – 01/27/2026
CC Resolution 2026-
WHEREAS, Resolution 2024-067 was incorporated into the 2024 Amended GSP for the Modesto Subbasin, which was submitted and approved by DWR, and WHEREAS, the STRGBA GSA has developed a Well Mitigation Plan, as set forth in Exhibit “A,” through the collaboration of the STRGBA GSA and its member agencies with input from stakeholders through 3 public workshops, and WHEREAS, the STRGBA GSA has established a baseline funding source of $300,000 from the member agencies to begin implementing the Well Mitigation Plan, and WHEREAS, the Well Mitigation Plan provides the framework for the following elements:
(a) an application process and well mitigation program parameters for landowners of impacted wells; and
(b) establishment of a Well Mitigation Program Committee and Technical Review Committee to oversee the claim process; and
(c) STRGBA GSA will contract with Self-Help Enterprises for coordination of emergency water supplies, well assessment, and well replacement, and WHEREAS, the City of Riverbank acknowledges that it does not have control over groundwater conditions or well failures resulting from actions outside the authority of the GSA, and
WHEREAS, the City of Riverbank commits to the implementing this Well Mitigation Plan in collaboration with the STRGBA GSA, its member agencies and the County of Tuolumne GSA, and
WHEREAS, the STRGBA GSA will provide annual funding for implementation of the Well Mitigation Plan, and the member agencies will meet and confer in good faith, as needed, to determine the appropriate funding mechanisms.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Riverbank finds as follows:

1. The City of Riverbank authorizes collaboration with the STRGBA GSA, its member agencies, consultants, stakeholders and the County of Tuolumne GSA to take such actions as may be reasonably necessary to:
a. Approve and implement the Well Mitigation Plan for the Modesto Subbasin GSP.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Riverbank at a regular meeting held on the 27th day of January, 2026; motioned by Councilmember , seconded by Councilmember , and upon roll call was carried by the following City Council vote of :

CC/LRA – 01/27/2026
CC Resolution 2026-
AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
________________________________ __________________________ Gabriela Hernandez, CMC Rachel Hernandez
City Clerk Mayor
Attachments: Exhibit A – Modesto Subbasin Well Mitigation Plan Stanislaus & Tuolumne Rivers
Groundwater Basin Association
Groundwater Sustainability Agency
Draft
Modesto Subbasin
Well Mitigation Plan
November 5, 2025 Draft
GSA Adoption Anticipated January 28, 2026
ATTACHMENT 2
ii
Draft Well Mitigation Plan
Modesto Subbasin Todd Groundwater

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction.................................................................................................................................1 Background..............................................................................................................................1 Purpose ...................................................................................................................................2 Program Management..................................................................................................................3 Partnerships with Existing Programs..........................................................................................3 Program Development Committee ............................................................................................4 Technical Review Committee ....................................................................................................4 Program Process..........................................................................................................................5 Eligibility ..................................................................................................................................5 Application Process..................................................................................................................6 Process for Establishing STRGBA GSA-Related Well Impacts......................................................9 Process for Implementing Mitigation Measures..........................................................................9 Emergency Water Supply.......................................................................................................9 Interim Solution ..................................................................................................................10 Long-term Solutions............................................................................................................10 Plan Outreach............................................................................................................................10 Funding and Anticipated Costs...................................................................................................11 iii
Draft Well Mitigation Plan
Modesto Subbasin Todd Groundwater

ACRONYMS
CV-SALTS Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability DWR California Department of Water Resources
GSA Groundwater Sustainability Agency
GSP Groundwater Sustainability Plan
NGOs non-governmental organizations
PMAs Projects and Management Actions
SAFER Safe and Affordable Funding for Equity and Resilience SHE Self-Help Enterprises
SGMA Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
STRGBA GSA Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers Groundwater Basin Association Groundwater Sustainability Agency
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TAC Technical Advisory Committee
WY Water Year (October 1 through September 30)
VWC Valley Water Collaborative
1 Draft Well Mitigation Plan
Modesto Subbasin Todd Groundwater
Introduction
Background
In September 2014, the Governor of California signed legislation creating the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) “to provide local groundwater sustainability agencies with the authority and technical and financial assistance necessary to sustainably manage groundwater” (Water Code, § 10720.1(d)). Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) were provided the authority to adopt rules, regulations, ordinances, and resolutions for the sustainable management of a groundwater basin and to conduct and carry out activities necessary to achieve and maintain sustainable conditions.

The Modesto Subbasin (5-22.02) (Subbasin), a high-priority basin as defined by the Department of Water Resources (DWR), is subject to SGMA and is being managed in compliance with SGMA.

Groundwater management within the Stanislaus County footprint of the Modesto Subbasin is being coordinated and overseen by the Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers Groundwater Basin Association Groundwater Sustainability Agency (STRGBA GSA), consisting of the following member agencies: the City of Modesto, Modesto Irrigation District, City of Oakdale, Oakdale Irrigation District, City of Riverbank, City of Waterford and County of Stanislaus. The STRGBA GSA is governed by a Committee (GSA Committee) made up of one designated staff member from each of the seven member agencies. The STRGBA GSA was formed on February 16, 2017, for the purpose of sustainably managing groundwater in the Modesto Subbasin, within its jurisdictional boundaries and pursuant to the requirements of SGMA. The STRGBA GSA coordinated with the County of Tuolumne GSA to develop a single, coordinated groundwater sustainability plan (GSP) for the Modesto Subbasin, which was submitted to DWR on January 31, 2022.

In January 2024, DWR determined the GSP to be incomplete and identified two deficiencies.

The County of Tuolumne and STRGBA GSAs submitted a revised GSP to DWR on July 12, 2024 (Revised GSP). The Revised GSP, which was approved by DWR on February 27, 2025, is responsive to DWR-defined Corrective Actions and incorporates additional details, analyses, projects, and management actions. The STRGBA GSA also committed to development and implementation of a Well Mitigation Program (Program) no later than January 31, 2026. This Well Mitigation Plan (Plan) provides the framework for the Program to address Management Action 7 described in the Revised GSP.

Initial conception of the Program is described in the Revised GSP. This description addresses domestic wells drilled in the Subbasin and the Sustainable Management Criteria (SMC), including Minimum Thresholds, which define undesirable results based on those wells affected by groundwater level declines. An analysis of the number of wells that could potentially go dry with additional groundwater level declines is described in Revised GSP Section 6.3.3.1. A 2 Draft Well Mitigation Plan
Modesto Subbasin Todd Groundwater
description of the conceptual Program is provided in Revised GSP Section 8.1.3. In addition, Appendix C of the Revised GSP presents the Resolution Adopting a Revised Groundwater Sustainability Plan and Documenting the Commitment to Develop and Implement a Well Mitigation Program and Demand Management Actions in the Modesto Groundwater Subbasin.

The projects and management actions in the Revised GSP are intended to achieve sustainability and to reduce the potential for more wells to go dry. Modeling of the Projects and Management Actions (PMAs) in the Revised GSP demonstrates the feasibility of achieving sustainability by 2042. However, the STRGBA GSA recognizes that the GSP objectives in arresting groundwater level declines quickly could be hindered by significant drought cycles or other factors.

Purpose
The purpose of the Program is to provide mitigation for drinking water wells that have experienced adverse impacts due to declining regional groundwater levels associated with groundwater pumping during the GSP implementation period, since January 31, 2022. As described in the Modesto Subbasin Revised GSP (Section 6.3.3.1), an analysis was conducted that included all 4,563 water supply wells (municipal, industrial, domestic and agricultural) with available construction information in the Modesto Subbasin. This analysis showed potential impacts to water supply wells due to groundwater levels declining below established Minimum Thresholds (MTs). Potential impacts are expected to be limited to an interim period before planned Projects and Management Actions are fully implemented.

The focus of this Program is on mitigation for drinking water wells that have experienced adverse impacts due to declining groundwater levels resulting from basin management actions during the GSP implementation period (defined as ending in 2042 by SGMA legislation).

Drinking water wells are defined here as any well used to supply potable water to a household, including domestic wells that supply water for potable, minor irrigation, and other domestic purposes. It may also include state small water systems with between 5 and 14 connections.

The Revised GSP analysis also considered potential impacts to water quality and land subsidence. The analysis indicated that groundwater levels declining below the MTs during the implementation period would not likely have an impact on groundwater quality or on land subsidence. Consequently, this Program focuses on the direct impacts of drinking water wells going dry. In general, a well is considered to be going dry when water can no longer be pumped in sufficient quantity to meet domestic water demands because groundwater levels have fallen too low for the well to produce the required groundwater quantities. While the well is going dry, this typically results in diminished well yield or unreliable productivity. Once groundwater levels have fallen below the pump intake, the well is considered dry and does not produce any water.

In some cases, it may be possible to lower the pump to restore sufficient yield, but in other cases, the well must be deepened or a new, deeper well must be constructed. 3 Draft Well Mitigation Plan
Modesto Subbasin Todd Groundwater
The purpose of this document is to describe a detailed process for mitigating impacts on drinking water wells adversely affected by declining groundwater levels during the GSP implementation period.

Program Management
This document establishes a framework for the mitigation of drinking water wells demonstrated to have been adversely affected by declining groundwater levels resulting from basin management activities during the SGMA implementation period. It has been developed in consideration of recommendations found in the following two public documents: Framework for a Drinking Water Well Impact Mitigation Program (Self-Help Enterprises, et al.) and Considerations for Identifying and Addressing Drinking Water Well Impacts (CA Department of Water Resources).

Partnerships with Existing Programs
There are local non-governmental programs that offer support for those affected by impaired access to drinking water within the Modesto Subbasin and across the San Joaquin Valley. During implementation of the Program, additional agencies or non-governmental organizations (NGOs) may be identified for potential collaboration that have interest in or authority over drinking water. The Valley Water Collaborative (VWC), for example, was formed to address nitrate groundwater contamination in private domestic wells used for drinking water in the Modesto and Turlock Subbasins. VWC provides well testing and replacement water or water treatment systems for nitrate contamination to all qualifying applicants, regardless of income level.

Self-Help Enterprises (SHE) is another NGO that offers emergency drinking water supplies, longterm mitigation support, and well stewardship educational resources for those who qualify under their program in Stanislaus County. SHE is a non-profit in the San Joaquin Valley that can provide water quality testing and emergency water service (including bottled water, outdoor tank and hauled water support) for eligible landowners (see https://www.selfhelpenterprises.org). When first contacted for assistance with a dry well, SHE establishes basic eligibility (e.g., well / land ownership); the eligible applicants must then submit an application to SHE with information on the well, property, and household, including income.

SHE provides emergency response (e.g., bottled water) within 24 hours and conducts an onsite well assessment. If a well replacement is warranted, the process includes completion of a grant agreement between SHE and the well owner. SHE provides a well modification/replacement grant for qualifying landowners who make 80% or less of the mean household income and are willing to not sell their property for a 5-year period after well replacement. Currently, the SHE grants (funded by the SWRCB) can amount to nearly $60,000.

The STRGBA GSA has coordinated this Program with SHE to minimize overlapping efforts. The STRGBA GSA will enter into an agreement to reimburse SHE for costs associated with program 4 Draft Well Mitigation Plan
Modesto Subbasin Todd Groundwater
administration (including bilingual communications and well stewardship educational services), emergency and interim drinking water supplies, and long-term mitigation measures for all drinking water well applications that qualify for Modesto Subbasin mitigation. SHE serves as the contract mediator and lender for the applicants to make arrangements with contractors such as well drillers, pump companies, and plumbers to perform the long-term mitigation.

Program Development Committee
The STRGBA GSA has established a Well Mitigation Program Committee (WMP Committee) and will continue to appoint Committee members at its discretion. This WMP Committee will include representatives from STRGBA GSA member agencies. This WMP Committee will further develop and refine this Plan and recommend approval by the STRGBA GSA when modifications are needed. Upon approval of this Program by the STRGBA GSA, the WMP Committee will implement the Program as defined in the Plan.

Consistent with the stated purpose of this Program, the WMP Committee will have the responsibility for development and implementation of the Program, including but not limited to the following:
• Recommendations to the STRGBA GSA to engage in public outreach. • Recommendations to the STRGBA GSA to collaborate and contract with nongovernmental organizations to assist with outreach and/or well mitigation services. • Coordination with County Office of Emergency Services to provide well mitigation services.
• Development and oversight of the process for affected well owners to apply for mitigation.
• Development and oversight of the procedures for application review, decision, and appeal including decisions to provide complete or partial mitigation or to reject an application.
• Establishment of a Well Mitigation Technical Review Committee (TR Committee) to review each application for eligibility and potential mitigation. • Development and oversight of the process for well owner agreements for mitigation. • Keeping the STRGBA GSA informed of Program implementation and any claims that are received.

Technical Review Committee
The WMP Committee will establish a Technical Review Committee for each claim under this Program. The TR Committee will consist of the following members:
• A STRGBA GSA member agency representative where the well is located or a County representative if the well is within a non-district area or outside City limits. • A registered Environmental Health Specialist from the Stanislaus County Environmental Health Department or Environmental Resources Department. 5 Draft Well Mitigation Plan
Modesto Subbasin Todd Groundwater
• At the WMP Committee and/or STRGBA GSA’s discretion and designation, a qualified technical representative (e.g., Professional Geologist or Engineer) that is not part of the STRGBA GSA member agency where the well is located.

The TR Committee will document the eligibility and submit a recommendation regarding STRGBA GSA mitigation to the WMP Committee.

Program Process
Eligibility
The Program is intended to address impacts to drinking water wells from declining groundwater levels associated with groundwater pumping during the GSP implementation period. Drinking water wells are defined as any well used to supply potable water to a household, including domestic wells that supply water for potable, landscape irrigation and other domestic purposes to several homes or parcels. It may also include state small water systems with between 5 and 14 connections. Mitigation for other types of supply wells (e.g., agricultural irrigation, industrial or stock wells) or for non-domestic uses may be considered under this Program by the STRGBA GSA on a case-by-case basis.

At this time, emergency drinking water supplies can be requested in Stanislaus County (and elsewhere in the San Joaquin Valley) via online request or telephone call to an NGO, such as VWC or SHE, which establishes basic information (e.g., well location) and eligibility to receive emergency bottled water under those programs and then requires additional information in an application.

This Program is being coordinated with non-governmental programs, such as SHE, in order to avoid duplication of efforts. As noted above, this Program has been developed to address well impacts due to declining groundwater levels associated with groundwater pumping during the GSP implementation period. To be eligible for mitigation assistance from the STRGBA GSA’s Program, the WMP Committee will require that an application from the well owner be submitted to SHE. SHE will then review the application to determine whether the well impacts (including failure or diminished well yields such that reasonable demands can no longer be met) occurred on or after January 31, 2022, and are attributable to sustainable groundwater management under the Subbasin GSP. January 31, 2022, is the date that the GSP was adopted by the STRGBA GSA and submitted to DWR.

The County of Tuolumne and STRGBA GSAs manage groundwater levels in the Modesto Subbasin in accordance with the GSP, including as it may be amended or revised in the future.

Wells eligible for the Program are those that have experienced adverse impacts due to declining groundwater levels as a result of basin management under the Subbasin GSP. 6 Draft Well Mitigation Plan
Modesto Subbasin Todd Groundwater
At its discretion, the WMP Committee may also review an application and recommend that the Well Mitigation Technical Advisory Committee address other aquifer problems affecting a well, such as water quality problems caused by STRGBA GSA basin management actions that occurred after January 31, 2022. Water quality problems that are not the result of STRGBA GSA basin management actions will not be eligible for mitigation under this Program.

Application Process
The Program application will be available on the SHE website. A link to the application will also be posted on the STRGBA GSA website (STRGBA.org). If requested, designated STRGBA GSA and/or SHE staff will assist applicants with filing the application.

The Program Application Process involves the following steps that begin with completion and submittal of an application by the well owner.

Completion and Submittal of Application. The well owner will fill out an application form and submit it to SHE. The application will request available information from the well owner that includes, but may not be limited to, the following:
• Well owner and contact information
• Well location and age
• Well construction information such as location and access, total well depth, screen interval depths, annular seal depth, and pump type and depth • Inspection reports from a licensed well driller or pump and well contractor identifying the cause of the well failure
• Any other evidence in applicant’s possession that the well failure was caused by STRGBA GSA basin management actions occurring after January 31, 2022 (e.g., depth to water measurements from nearby wells, etc.)
Applicants are encouraged to provide evidence, such as a well assessment report from a licensed well driller identifying the cause of the well failure, other certification from a qualified professional, and all other evidence in applicant’s possession to demonstrate that the failure was caused by STRGBA GSA basin management actions. Applicants must allow onsite inspection of their well facilities as necessary by staff of SHE, the TR Committee and the WMP Committee to be eligible for assistance. A right-of-entry agreement granting SHE access to the property is required to be completed.

The WMP Committee is authorized to summarily reject any application if the well failure can be remedied by implementing mechanical or construction solutions that are not related to Subbasin management (such as replacing failed electrical or mechanical pump components with no need to re-drill the well). This Program does not apply to a well installed after January 31, 2022, if the well was installed with a screened interval depth shallower than minimum threshold levels as designated in the Modesto Subbasin GSP. 7 Draft Well Mitigation Plan
Modesto Subbasin Todd Groundwater
Limitations Period. All applications brought under this Program must have had well impacts that occurred after January 31, 2022, and were caused by STRGBA GSA basin management activities.

Applications for impacts that occurred between January 31, 2022, and the adoption of this Program must be submitted within six months of the date of adoption of this Program. The limitations period for applications submitted after the adoption of this policy will be the limitations process and period provided by the California Government Tort Claims Act (Government Code Section 810 and following).

Assessment of Eligibility. SHE will initially review the applications and if an application is potentially eligible for the STRGBA GSA’s Program, SHE will forward the application to the WMP Committee. The TR Committee, assigned by the WMP Committee, will then be responsible for reviewing applications (including attachments) to assess the applicant’s eligibility to receive mitigation under the Program. Participation in the STRGBA GSA’s Program will not be limited or otherwise dictated by the well owner’s income. The TR Committee will have the authority to conduct an independent investigation of the evidence (at their discretion and at the STRGBA GSA’s expense), including, but not limited to, engaging hydrogeologists and well drillers, well inspection and testing, research of county well records, and requesting records from the applicant.

The TR Committee will provide written documentation to the WMP Committee of its determination regarding the applicant’s eligibility for mitigation and a recommendation of whether to mitigate and how to mitigate. Upon concurrence with the TR Committee’s recommendation, the WMP Committee will forward this decision to SHE. Otherwise, should the WMP Committee decide that further review and discussion is warranted, the TR Committee’s determination and recommendation will be forwarded to the STRGBA GSA for final direction to SHE. In either case, SHE will communicate the final decision to the well owner.

The WMP Committee may decide to provide complete or partial mitigation for a particular application based on the TR Committee’s determination of whether the well failure was related to the STRGBA GSA’s groundwater management as opposed to other contributing factors, such as the construction of the well.

An applicant may appeal a decision of the WMP Committee by submitting a written appeal by email to the STRGBA GSA at [email protected] within 30 days of the decision. The appeal shall contain a copy of the original application, the decision, and a statement of the basis for the appeal. The STRGBA GSA Chair will include the appeal on the agenda for the next STRGBA GSA meeting and provide written notice and the agenda to the appellant. The STRGBA GSA will act on the appeal and issue a written decision. The decision of the STRGBA GSA will be final.

Well Owner Agreement. After application, eligibility, and mitigation development (coordinated with SHE), any mitigation must be accompanied by an agreement between the well owner and SHE. The agreement will include but is not limited to the following:
8 Draft Well Mitigation Plan
Modesto Subbasin Todd Groundwater
• Priority. The Program will be operated on a first-come, first-serve basis as of the date a completed and submitted application is received by SHE. • Well access agreement (consistent with SHE agreement). • Mitigation Award. To the extent sufficient funding exists, the maximum mitigation award provided under the Program will be $40,000. In no case, is the maximum mitigation award guaranteed and the STRGBA GSA retains exclusive control over the determination of the maximum mitigation award. The STRGBA GSA will be responsible for the maximum mitigation award or the actual cost of the mitigation, whichever is less. The well owner may seek additional and/or alternate funding beyond the mitigation provided by the Program. Eligible mitigation in excess of $40,000 will be reviewed by the TR Committee on a case-by-case basis with review of the following criteria:
a. Receipt and review of multiple bids with comparable construction means and methods yielding an estimated mitigation cost exceeding $40,000. b. System consolidation yielding new domestic water service to two or more domestic water users.
c. Construction means and methods review, including, but not limited to required depth and required casing diameter.
d. Occurrence of additional associated costs (e.g., pump replacement). • Grant term. SHE requires a 5-year grant term during which the well owner must (1) maintain continuous residence on the well site property (if owner occupied), and (2) not transfer the title of the property within 5 years, otherwise the grant would need to be repaid.
• Preferred Contractors. The STRGBA GSA intends that all analysis, inspection, and eligible mitigation be completed by competent and qualified contractors. SHE maintains a list of approved contractors for program participants to select from and requires the following from each contractor: a contractor application, W-9 Form, C57 contractor license for drillers, proof of workers compensation insurance, proof of general liability insurance, and Federal contractor suspension and debarment check.
• Recordation of Mitigation Award. Eligible mitigation provided under the Program for diminished yield (dry well) issues will only occur once per drinking water well and will run with the land. This Agreement will be recorded with the applicable county and will bind the well owner and/or their heirs and assigns. Recordation will not occur until mitigation is complete.
• Post-mitigation Responsibility. Once the mitigation work is completed, the well owner will be responsible for operation, maintenance, and repair of the water well. • Continuing Education. Through execution of the agreement with SHE, the well owner will acknowledge and confirm having successfully completed education on well maintenance (e.g., SHE’s education program).
• Monitoring. The well owner will agree to allow the STRGBA GSA, at the STRGBA GSA’s sole discretion, to access and monitor groundwater levels in the new or modified well. 9 Draft Well Mitigation Plan
Modesto Subbasin Todd Groundwater
The well owner will agree to the public use of groundwater level data that may be collected for the purposes of complying with SGMA or as deemed appropriate by the STRGBA GSA.
• Indemnification of the STRGBA GSA consistent with then applicable agreement. • Easement or land use permissions consistent with then applicable agreement. No mitigation, except for interim and emergency solutions, will commence until the well owner has executed an agreement with SHE.

Process for Establishing STRGBA GSA-Related Well Impacts The TR Committee will review the application provided by SHE via the WMP Committee and, with the authority to conduct an independent investigation, will provide a recommendation about the condition of the well and the cause(s) of the well failure. The TR Committee will consider other contributing factors, such as the condition and use of the well, or the condition of pumping equipment, in determining the degree to which an applicant is eligible for mitigation. The TR Committee will make a recommended determination of the cause of well failure and whether or not an application is eligible for mitigation, which the WMP Committee may adopt in its decision. The WMP Committee will consider the recommendation of the TR Committee and may also consider other contributing factors. Upon concurrence with the TR Committee’s recommendation, the WMP Committee will forward this decision to SHE.

Otherwise, should the WMP Committee decide that further review and discussion is warranted, the TR Committee’s determination and recommendation will be forwarded to the STRGBA GSA for final direction to SHE. In either case, SHE will communicate the final decision to the well owner. If appealed to the STRGBA GSA, the STRGBA GSA will take all relevant factors into consideration in making a final decision.

Process for Implementing Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures may include emergency water supply, interim solutions, and long-term solutions. Emergency water supplies will be provided by SHE after receiving an eligible request and application. To continue emergency water supply or to access interim or long-term solutions funded by the STRGBA GSA, the landowner must provide authorization to allow for well access.

Emergency Water Supply
SHE will ensure that an emergency water supply is provided to all applicants who have submitted a complete application with a reasonable complaint for damages. An emergency water supply consists of bottled water intended to meet drinking water and cooking needs while the application is reviewed and processed. If the application is approved, SHE will ensure that an interim emergency water supply will continue at the STRGBA GSA’s expense until the mitigation is complete.
10 Draft Well Mitigation Plan
Modesto Subbasin Todd Groundwater
Interim Solution
Interim solutions may include ongoing deliveries of bottled drinking water and/or temporary provision and filling of a water tank (hauled water) to meet drinking water, hygiene, and cooking needs while the application is reviewed and processed. Every effort will be made to process applications in a timely manner and to provide adequate domestic water supply to applicants while applications are verified, site-specific mitigation eligibility and requirements are determined, and mitigation is implemented and completed. If the application is found to be ineligible under this plan, the WMP Committee and/or SHE may refer the application to another agency or program for additional assistance, if possible.

Long-term Solutions
Following review and initial approval of the application, the most appropriate long-term mitigation measure will be selected. Long-term mitigation measures may include setting the well pump at a deeper depth, replacing the well pump, deepening the well, or replacing the well (including destruction of the existing well). As an alternative to well replacement, a mitigation measure could involve connection to a nearby municipal or public water system. The TR Committee will make a recommendation for long-term mitigation. Upon concurrence with the TR Committee’s recommendation, the WMP Committee will forward this decision to SHE.

Otherwise, should the WMP Committee decide that further review and discussion is warranted, the TR Committee’s recommendation will be forwarded to the STRGBA GSA for final direction to SHE. In either case, SHE will communicate the final decision to the well owner. If appealed to the STRGBA GSA, the STRGBA GSA will take all relevant factors into consideration in making a final decision.

Plan Outreach
Plan Outreach will be coordinated with SHE or other consultant and the STRGBA GSA. The WMP Committee will recommend staff or representatives for the STRGBA GSA’s approval to engage in public outreach that will inform well owners and residents of their opportunity to request assistance under this Program, and how to apply for assistance.

Outreach during Program development may include, but is not limited to:
• Discussion of the Plan at public STRGBA GSA meetings and at workshops. • Establishment of Program-specific information on the STRGBA GSA website (English and Spanish) https://www.strgba.org/. This will include a link to the SHE website.

Outreach during Program implementation will be coordinated with SHE and include information about when and how to submit an application, and the subsequent assessment process. It will include the following:
11 Draft Well Mitigation Plan
Modesto Subbasin Todd Groundwater
• Maintenance of the Program-specific information on the STRGBA GSA website. • Regular update and discussion at public STRGBA GSA meetings. • Regular reporting in Annual Reports of mitigation efforts and accomplishments.

Funding and Anticipated Costs
A Well Mitigation Fund (Fund) has been established to finance program implementation. The purpose of the Fund is twofold: to support implementation of the Program as described above, and to provide funding for well mitigation in response to eligible applications at the discretion of the STRGBA GSA as described below.

Initial Funding. The Program is initially being funded by the STRGBA GSA as part of their respective annual budgets and apportioned between the STRGBA GSA using the existing annual budget allocation methodology.

Baseline Fund. To initiate implementation of the Program, the STRGBA GSA has established a baseline Well Mitigation Fund amounting to three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000).

Annual Funding. The STRGBA GSA has agreed to fund the Program on an annual basis as may be required to address the needs of the Program until groundwater sustainability is achieved. The STRGBA GSA member agencies will meet and confer in good faith to determine the appropriate funding mechanism, replenishment amount, and STRGBA GSA member allocation methodology prior to Fund replenishment. Funding for the Program will be recommended by the WMP Committee and approved by the STRGBA GSA.

According to DWR’s Dry Well Reporting System, 15 domestic wells were reported dry or failed since the GSP was adopted (13 in 2022, 2 in 2023, and 0 in 2024). However, it is unclear whether these dry or failed wells were due to GSA management of groundwater levels. As such, it is not possible to estimate the number of future eligible claims and annual costs.

It is anticipated that the Program funding will come from one, or a combination, of the following sources established by the Parties:
• STRGBA GSA funds
• One or more STRGBA GSA member agencies
• Funds generated through implementation of projects and management actions (e.g., fines and/or penalties)
• County/state/federal funding, as available
• Other sources, as identified.

Accounting. Annual funding will be placed in STRGBA GSA’s account. 12 Draft Well Mitigation Plan
Modesto Subbasin Todd Groundwater
Funding Cycle. The budget cycle of the Program will be on a calendar year basis.

Funding and Implementation Review. Not less than once per year, the STRGBA GSA will convene a joint meeting of WMP Committee to review Program implementation progress in that year and plan for Program implementation in the subsequent year.

In-Kind Services. Each STRGBA GSA member agency is likely to provide in-kind services and subsequently incur in-kind costs as part of continued Program development and management.

These costs will be the responsibility of each STRGBA GSA member agency unless otherwise agreed to in writing.

Supplemental Funding.

SHE provides a well modification/replacement grant for qualifying landowners who make 80% or less of the mean household income and are willing to not sell their property for a 5-year period after well replacement. Currently, the SHE grants (funded by the SWRCB) can amount to nearly $60,000. If an applicant does not qualify for mitigation through STRGBA GSA’s Program, then the applicant may be eligible for mitigation by SHE.

Item 11.4– CC/LRA – 01/27/2028

RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL / LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
AGENDA ITEM NO. 11.4
SECTION 11: NEW BUSINESS
Meeting Date: January 27, 2026
Subject: Resolution Approving a Consultant Services Agreement with JPW Communications, Inc. for the Preparation of a Community Engagement Strategy and Communications Plan
From: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council consider approving a Consultant Services Agreement with JPW Communications, Inc. for the preparation of a Community Engagement Strategy and Communications Plan for the City of Riverbank.

SUMMARY
On October 27, 2026 the City issued a Request for Proposals (attached) for the preparation of a Community Engagement Strategy and Communications Plan (“Plan”) for the City. A total of four proposals were received by the deadline of December 11, 2025.

An internal committee consisting of Mayor Hernandez, Councilmember Call, City Manager, City Clerk, Sr. Management Analyst, and our social media consultant Jane Media Services, evaluated the proposals and interviewed the top two candidates. The contract has been offered to JPW Communications, Inc.

STRATEGIC PLAN
This item is directly associated with the 2025-2030 Strategic Plan Goal of “Improve Public Communications” which has an objective of “develop a formal communications plan to include social media policies, translation services, and public access to information.”

BACKGROUND
During the 2025 Strategic Planning Session held by the City Council, a goal was established to Improve Public Communications. In an effort to achieve this goal an objective was approved to “develop a formal communications plan to include social media policies, translation services, and public access to information.” After some research of how other cities have developed these type of communication-related policies, it was

Item 11.4– CC/LRA – 01/27/2028
determined that the preparation of a Community Engagement Strategy and Communications Plan would fit the needs of the City.

The Plan is envisioned as a comprehensive document to guide communications and engagement for the City. The Plan will focus on the successful, consistent, effective, and collaborative approach to engaging City Council, City employees, residents, visitors, and stakeholders. This includes clearly defining the messages, priorities, strategies, and tools the City will deploy.

The Plan aligns with the strategic priorities of the Riverbank City Council, particularly Goal 2, Improve Public Communication. As such, the goal of the Plan is two-fold, one is to improve community and stakeholder engagement with a set of tools and priorities to offer access to information and amplify meaningful participation in and a broad understanding of City services, initiatives and resources, and second is to create guidance and establish best practices for the City Council and City Staff on external communication with our community.

As part of this Plan, a set of measurable communications and engagement outcomes will be put in place to refine the focus of City communications. As this document is both responsive and proactive, the Plan will lay out a framework for City staff and stakeholders to regularly review and adapt to the evolving needs of the City with a pulse on shifting trends in the world of civic engagement and communication.

The Scope of Work will include the following:

1. Task 1 – Input Gathering: to include a Communication Audit, one-on-one interviews with City Council, Department Directors and Managers, and stakeholders. Disseminate a survey to internal and external stakeholders to identify communication priorities and hurdles, and to gain insight into how various stakeholders receive and digest forms of information.

2. Task 2 – Plan Development: to include developing communication goals and objectives, including a multi-lingual component. Development of an internal communications plan to aid city staff and council in being ambassadors in the community and ensure effective internal communications; provide guidance on proper and consistent messaging and outreach for when departments and Council engage with the public (including social media); define roles and responsibilities; identify tactics to reach target audiences; draft a media relations plan.

3. Task 3 – Training: hold training course for City Council and staff. Training will include roles & responsibilities for each attendee, how to utilize the plan, priorities and best practices, templates, measurement, and evaluation, and media relations on-camera training.

REQUEST FOR PROPSAL PROCESS
The Request for Proposal (attached) was issued on October 27, 2025 with a deadline of December 11, 2025. The City received four proposals from the following firms:

Item 11.4– CC/LRA – 01/27/2028

1. SAE Communications

2. Tripepi Smith & Associates

3. Brailsford & Dunlavey, Inc.

4. JPW Communications, Inc.

An internal committee consisting of Mayor Hernandez, Councilmember Call, City Manager, City Clerk, Sr. Management Analyst, and our social media consultant Jane Media Services, evaluated the proposals and interviewed the top two candidates.

Evaluations were based on the quality of the Proposal Submission, Qualifications, methodology for the Project and Implementation Plan, and Pricing. The top two candidates interviewed were Tripepi Smith & Associates and JPW Communications. Of the two firms, the Committee selected JPW Communications as the firm that would best serve the City’s needs.

JPW Communications, Inc. was founded in 2015 by Jenny Windle who spent two decades in local government leading award-winning communication programs for cities and the Port of San Diego. Recent clients include the County of Merced, City of Glendora, City of Encinitas, City of Tustin, and the City of San Marcos.

The estimated timeline for completion of this Plan is approximately 18 weeks from award.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
Total cost of the contract is $115,820 with two optional services to assist with the collection of data in the form of surveys from stakeholders and to offer translation support at in-person meetings with community based organizations and/or town halls if needed.

These amounts are not requested at this time but will be evaluated by the City Manager as to the benefit to the contract. A current budget allocation of $115,820 from the General Fund to the City Council Professional Services budget is requested.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

2. Consultant Services Agreement

3. JPW Communications, Inc. Proposal

4. Request for Proposals

CC/LRA – 01/27/2026
CC Resolution 2026-

CITY OF RIVERBANK
RESOLUTION 2026-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF RIVERBANK, CALIFORNIA

APPROVING A CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH JPW
COMMUNICATIONS, INC. FOR THE PREPARATION OF A COMMUNITY

ENGAGEMENT STRATEGY AND COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

THE CITY OF RIVERBANK CITY COUNCIL (HEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE “CITY COUNCIL”) DOES HEREBY RESOLVE THAT:

WHEREAS, the Riverbank City Council established a Strategic Plan Goal to Improve Public Communications; and
WHEREAS, a Strategic Plan Objective was established to develop a formal communication plan to include social media policies, translation services, and public access to information; and
WHEREAS, in this digital era developing a community engagement strategy and communications plan is imperative to building trust, fostering connection, and ensuring our community members are heard, including those who speak different languages; and WHEREAS, some City of Riverbank departments have their own communication channels, platforms, and stakeholders and it is crucial to collectively engage with the community in a collaborative tone and with the same engagement strategies, branding guidelines, and communication policies; and
WHEREAS, JPW Communications, Inc. possesses the expertise to provide communications assessments and audits, develop communication goals, objectives, strategies and tactics, develop policies and plans, and offer support and provide training to City Council and City Staff.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Riverbank does hereby:

1. Authorize the City Manager to enter into a Consultant Services Agreement with JPW Communications, Inc. to complete a Community Engagement Strategy and Communications Plan, and

2. Authorize the allocation of $115,820 from the General Fund Reserves to the City Council Professional Services Account for said contract.

3. Authorize the City Manager to allocate additional funds for optional services based on the needs of the city in an amount not to exceed $8,000.

ATTACHMENT 1

CC/LRA – 01/27/2026
CC Resolution 2026-
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Riverbank at a regular meeting held on the 27th day of January, 2026; motioned by Councilmember __________, seconded by Councilmember __________, and upon roll call was carried by the following City Council vote of ______:

AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
________________________________ __________________________ Gabriela Hernandez, CMC Rachel Hernandez
City Clerk Mayor
Attachment: Consultant Services Agreement

CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank and JPW Communications, Inc.

CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into this 27th day of January 2026, (the “Effective Date”) by and between the City of Riverbank, a California municipal corporation (“City”), and JPW Communications, Inc., an S Corporation (“Consultant”). City and Consultant may herein be referred to individually as a “Party” and collectively as the “Parties”. There are no other parties to this Agreement.

RECITALS
A. City has issued a Request for Proposals (“RFP”) for consultant services for the preparation of a Community Engagement Strategy and Communications Plan (the “Project”).

B. Consultant has submitted a proposal to City that includes a scope of proposed consultant services, attached hereto and described more fully in Exhibit A (“Services”).

C. Consultant represents that it is qualified, willing and able to provide the Services to City, and that it will perform Services related to the Project according to the rate schedule attached hereto and described more fully in Exhibit B (the “Rates”).

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and covenants set forth below, the Parties agree as follows:

AGREEMENT

1. Consulting Services. Consultant agrees, during the term of this Agreement, to perform the Services for City in connection with the Project. Any request for services in addition to the Services described in Exhibit A will be considered a request for additional consulting services and not compensated unless the Parties otherwise agree in writing. No subcontract shall be awarded or an outside consultant engaged by Consultant unless prior written approval is obtained from City.

2. Compensation. City shall pay Consultant according to the fee schedule set forth in the Rates, as full remuneration for the performance of the Services. Consultant agrees to maintain a log of time spent in connection with performing the Services. On a monthly basis, Consultant shall provide City, in reasonable and understandable detail, a description of the services rendered pursuant to the Services and in accordance with the Rates. If the work is satisfactorily completed, City shall pay such invoice within thirty (30) days of its receipt. If City disputes any portion of any invoice, City shall pay the undisputed portion within the time stated above, and at the same time advise Consultant in writing of the disputed portion.

3. Reimbursement. City shall pay Consultant for reimbursable expenses related to travel, lodging, conference calls, reproduction and other costs incurred related to Consultant’s performance of the Services. Such reimbursable costs shall be invoiced and billed to the City on a monthly basis.

ATTACHMENT 2

CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank and JPW Communications, Inc.

4. Confidential Information. Consultant understands and agrees that, in the performance of Services under this Agreement or in the contemplation thereof, Consultant may have access to private or confidential information that may be owned or controlled by City and that such information may contain proprietary or confidential details, the disclosure of which to third parties may be damaging to City (“Confidential Information”).

Consultant shall not, either during or after the Term, disclose to any third party any Confidential Information without the prior written consent of City. If City gives Consultant written authorization to make any such disclosure, Consultant shall do so only within the limits and to the extent of that authorization. Such authorization does not guarantee that the City will grant any further disclosure of Confidential Information. Consultant may be directed or advised by the City Attorney on various matters relating to the performance of the Services on the Project or on other matters pertaining to the Project, and in such event, Consultant agrees that it will treat all communications between itself, its employees and its subcontractors as being communications which are within the attorney-client privilege.

5. Term. This Agreement shall become effective on the Effective Date and will continue in effect until the Services provided herein have been completed, unless terminated earlier as provided in Section 6 or 7 below (the “Term”).

6. Termination. City may terminate this Agreement prior to the expiration of the Term (“Termination”), without cause or reason, by notifying Consultant in writing of City’s desire to terminate this Agreement (the “Termination Notice”). Upon receipt of a Termination Notice, Consultant shall immediately cease performing the Services. Consultant will be entitled to compensation, as of the date Consultant receives the Termination Notice, only for Services actually performed. Consultant may terminate this Agreement prior to the expiration of the Term with or without cause upon 30 days written notice to the City.

7. Termination for Cause. Notwithstanding Section 6 above, this Agreement may be terminated by City for cause based on the loss or suspension of any licenses, permits or registrations required for the continued provision of the Services, or Consultant’s malfeasance.

Termination of the Agreement for cause as set forth in this Section shall relieve City from compensating Consultant.

8. Performance by Key Employee. Consultant has represented to City that Meagan Platt will be the person primarily responsible for the performance of the Services and all communications related to the Services. City has entered into this Agreement in reliance on that representation by Consultant.

9. Property of City. The following will be considered and will remain the property of City:

A. Documents. All reports, drawings, graphics, working papers and Confidential Information furnished by City in connection with the Services (“Documents”).

CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank and JPW Communications, Inc.

Nothing herein shall be interpreted as prohibiting or limiting City’s right to assign all or some of City’s interests in the Documents.

B. Data. All data collected by Consultant and produced in connection with the Services including, but not limited to, drawings, plans, specifications, models, flow diagrams, visual aids, calculations, and other materials (“Data”). Nothing herein shall be interpreted as prohibiting or limiting City’s right to assign all or some of City’s interests in the Data.

C. Delivery of Documents and Data. Consultant agrees, at its expense and in a timely manner, to return to City all Documents and Data upon the conclusion of the Term or in the event of Termination.

10. Duties of City. In order to permit Consultant to render the services required hereunder, City shall, at its expense and in a timely manner:

A. Provide such information as Consultant may reasonably require to undertake or perform the Services;

B. Promptly review any and all documents and materials submitted to City by Consultant in order to avoid unreasonable delays in Consultant’s performance of the Services; and C. Promptly notify Consultant of any fault or defect in the performance of Consultant’s services hereunder.

11. Representations of Consultant. City relies upon the following representations by Consultant in entering into this Agreement:

A. Qualifications. Consultant represents that it is qualified to perform the Services and that it possesses the necessary licenses, permits and registrations required to perform the Services or will obtain such licenses or permits prior to the time such licenses or permits are required. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant shall, at Consultant’s sole cost and expense, keep in effect or obtain at all times during the Term of this Agreement, any licenses, permits, and registrations that are legally required for Consultant to practice Consultant's profession at the time the Services are rendered.

B. Consultant Performance. Consultant represents and warrants that all Services under this Agreement shall be performed in a professional manner and shall conform to the customs and standards of practice observed on similar, successfully completed projects by specialists in the Services to be provided. Consultant shall adhere to accepted professional standards as set forth by relevant professional associations and shall perform all Services required under this Agreement in a manner consistent with generally accepted professional customs, procedures and standards for such Services. All work or products completed by Consultant shall be completed using the best practices available for the profession and shall be free from any defects. Consultant agrees that, if a Service is not so performed, in addition to all of its obligations under this Agreement and at law, Consultant shall re-perform or replace unsatisfactory Service at no additional expense to City.

CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank and JPW Communications, Inc.

12. Compliance with Laws and Standards. Consultant shall insure compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, regulations and permits, including but not limited to federal, state, and county safety and health regulations. Consultant shall perform all work according to generally accepted standards within the industry. Consultant shall comply with all ordinances, laws, orders, rules, and regulations, including the administrative policies and guidelines of Client pertaining to the work.

13. Independent Contractor; Subcontracting. Consultant will employ, at its own expense, all personnel reasonably necessary to perform the Services. All acts of Consultant, its agents, officers, employees and all others acting on behalf of Consultant relating to this Agreement will be performed as independent contractors. Consultant, its agents and employees will represent and conduct themselves as independent contractors and not as employees of City. Consultant has no authority to bind or incur any obligation on behalf of City. Except as City may specify in writing, Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement to bind City to any obligation whatsoever. Consultant is prohibited from subcontracting this Agreement or any part of it unless such subcontracting is expressly approved by City in writing.

14. Insurance. Consultant and all of Consultant’s contractors and subcontractors shall obtain and maintain insurance of the types and in the amounts described in this paragraph and its subparagraphs with carriers reasonably satisfactory to City.

A. General Liability Insurance. Consultant shall maintain occurrence version commercial general liability insurance or an equivalent form with a limit of not less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) per claim and Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) for each occurrence.

B. Workers’ Compensation Insurance. Consultant shall carry workers’ compensation insurance as required by the State of California under the Labor Code. Consultant shall also carry employer’s liability insurance in the amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) per accident, with a One Million Dollar ($1,000,000.00) policy limit for bodily injury by disease, and a One Million Dollar ($1,000,000.00) limit for each employee’s bodily injury by disease.

C. Errors and Omissions Liability. Consultant shall carry errors and omissions liability insurance in the amount of no less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence or greater if appropriate for the Consultant's profession. Architects and engineers coverage is to be endorsed to include contractual liability. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions with respect to the City, elected and appointed councils, commissions, directors, officers, employees, agents, and representatives (“City’s Agents”); or the Consultant shall provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to the City guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claims administration and defense expenses.

CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank and JPW Communications, Inc.

D. Other Insurance Requirements. Within five (5) days of the Effective Date, Consultant shall provide City with certificates of insurance for all of the policies required under this Agreement (“Certificates”), excluding the required worker’s compensation insurance.

Such Certificates shall be kept current for the Term of the Agreement and Consultant shall be responsible for providing updated copies and notifying City if a policy is cancelled, suspended, reduced, or voided. With the exception of the worker’s compensation insurance, all of the insurance policies required in this Agreement shall: (a) provide that the policy will not be cancelled, allowed to expire, or materially reduced in coverage without at least thirty (30) days’ prior written notice to City of such cancellation, expiration, or reduction and each policy shall be endorsed to state such; (b) name City, and City’s Agents as additional insureds with respect to liability arising out of Services, work or operations performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied, or used by the Consultant, or automobiles owned, leased, or hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City; (c) be primary with respect to any insurance or self-insurance programs covering City or City’s Agents and any insurance or self-insurance maintained by City or City’s Agents shall be in excess of Consultant’s insurance and shall not contribute to it; (d) contain standard separation of insured provisions; and (e) state that any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policy including breaches of warranties shall not affect the coverage provided to the City.

15. Indemnification. Consultant hereby agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City, its agents, officers, employees and volunteers, against all liability, obligations, claims, loss, and expense (a) caused or created by Consultant, its subcontractors, or the agents or employees of either, whether negligent or not, pertaining to or related to acts or omissions of Consultant in connection with the Services, or (b) arising out of injuries suffered or allegedly suffered by employees of Consultant or its subcontractors (i) in the course of their employment, (ii) in the performance of work hereunder, or (iii) upon premises owned or controlled by City.

Consultant’s obligation to defend, indemnify and hold City and its agents, officers, employees and volunteers harmless is not terminated by any requirement in this Agreement for Consultant to procure and maintain a policy of insurance.

16. Consequential Damages. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, in no event shall City be liable, regardless of whether any claim is based on contract or tort, for any special, consequential, indirect or incidental damages, including, but not limited to, lost profits or revenue, arising out of or in connection with this Agreement or the Services performed in connection with this Agreement.

17. Litigation. In the event that either Party brings an action under this Agreement for the breach or enforcement hereof, or must incur any collection expenses for any amounts due hereunder the prevailing Party in such action shall be entitled to its costs including reasonable attorney’s fees, whether or not such action is prosecuted to judgment.

18. Notices. Any notice or communication required hereunder between City or Consultant must be in writing, and may be given either personally, by registered or certified mail (return receipt requested), or by Federal Express, UPS or other similar couriers providing overnight

CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank and JPW Communications, Inc.

delivery. If personally delivered, a notice shall be deemed to have been given when delivered to the Party to whom it is addressed. Notices given by registered or certified mail shall be deemed to have been given and received on the first to occur of (a) actual receipt by any of the addressees designated below as the party to whom notices are to be sent, (b) on the date delivered as shown on a receipt issued by the courier, or (c) five (5) days after a registered or certified letter containing such notice, properly addressed, with postage prepaid, is deposited in the United States mail. If given by Federal Express or similar courier, a notice or communication shall be deemed to have been given and received on the date delivered as shown on a receipt issued by the courier. Any Party hereto may at any time, by giving ten (10) days written notice to the other Party hereto, designate any other address in substitution of the address to which such notice or communication shall be given. Such notices or communications shall be given to the Parties at the addresses in this paragraph set forth below:

If to City: City of Riverbank
6707 Third Street
Riverbank, CA 95367
Attn: City Clerk
With courtesy copies to: City of Riverbank
6707 Third Street
Riverbank, CA 95367
Attn: City Manager
And to: White Brenner LLP
1608 T Street
Sacramento, California 95811
Attention: Douglas L. White, Esq.

If to Consultant: JPW Communications, Inc.
2710 Loker Ave. W., Suite 300
Carlsbad, CA 92010
Attention: Jenny Windle

19. General Provisions.

A. Modification. No alteration, modification, or termination of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and executed by all Parties.

B. Waiver. The waiver by any Party of a breach of any provision hereof shall be in writing and shall not operate or be construed as a waiver of any other or subsequent breach hereof unless specifically stated in writing.

CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank and JPW Communications, Inc.

C. Assignment. No Party shall assign, transfer, or otherwise dispose of this Agreement in whole or in part to any individual, firm, or corporation without the prior written consent of the other Party. Subject to the forgoing provisions, this Agreement shall be binding upon, and inure to the benefit of, the respective successors and assigns of the Parties.

D. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the state of California.

E. Venue. Venue for all legal proceedings shall be in the Superior Court of California for the County of Stanislaus.

F. Partial Invalidity. If any provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless continue in full force without being impaired or invalidated in any way.

G. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original and all of which shall be deemed a single agreement.

H. Severability. If any term, covenant, or condition of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the remainder of this Agreement shall remain in effect.

I. Audit. City shall have access at all reasonable times to all reports, contract records, contract documents, contract files, and personnel necessary to audit and verify Consultant’s charges to City under this Agreement.

J. Entire Agreement. This Agreement sets forth the entire understanding between the Parties as to the subject matter of this Agreement and merges all prior discussions, negotiations, proposal letters or other promises, whether oral or in writing.

K. Headings Not Controlling. Headings used in this Agreement are for reference purposes only and shall not be considered in construing this Agreement.

L. Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence in this Agreement for each covenant and term of a condition herein.

CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
City of Riverbank and JPW Communications, Inc.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement as of the last day and date below written.

CITY:

CITY OF RIVERBANK, a California
municipal corporation
By:

Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
Date:

CONSULTANT:

JPW Communications Inc., an S Corporation
By:

Jenny Windle, President and CEO
Date:

Approved as to Form:

Tom Hallinan, City Attorney

EXHIBIT A
Services
Task 1:

Gathering input
Our work begins with understanding what
makes Riverbank unique—its people, priorities
and communication realities. This phase is
designed to uncover the insights your team
needs to build a plan that is not only strategic,
but truly useful in daily practice.

We start with a collaborative kickoff meeting
to define success, clarify priorities and align
on deliverables. From there, we conduct a
comprehensive audit of all City communications
(digital, print, broadcast and internal) to identify
strengths, gaps and opportunities that directly
inform the plan.

Through a discovery session and SWOT analysis
with Riverbank’s leadership, we surface key
issues, trends and perspectives that will shape
the strategy. One-on-one interviews with City
Council, department directors, communications
liaisons and community champions provide
deeper insight into how information flows
today and where engagement can improve.

Combined with targeted stakeholder surveys,
this ensures we gather input from voices across
the community.

A core value of our process is inclusive and
multicultural outreach. Riverbank’s multilingual
needs and diverse audiences require
communication that is culturally responsive,
translated where appropriate and grounded
in community partnerships. Led by Susanne
Bankhead, one of only three Certified Public
Participation Professionals (CP3) in California,
our approach brings unmatched expertise in
equitable engagement.

By the end of this phase, Riverbank will
have a clear, research-driven picture of
its communication environment, one that
becomes the foundation for a plan built on
accuracy, alignment and local insight.

ACTION ITEMS AND DELIVERABLES:
• Kick-off meeting with City project team to
align on goals, deliverables and schedule
• In-person discovery session and SWOT
analysis with leadership team
• One-on-one interviews with City Council,
department leaders, communications
liaisons and community champions
• Comprehensive audit of existing materials,
policies and practices
• Review staff capacity, systems and crisis
communications resources
• Development and distribution of internal
and external stakeholder surveys (with
multilingual options)
• Multicultural outreach activities including
translated materials, culturally relevant
engagement and partnerships with
community organizations
• Identification and mapping of key audiences
and stakeholder groups
• Summary report of communication gaps,
opportunities and insights
• Milestone: Findings presented to the City
project team for feedback and alignment
Task 2:

Plan
development
Our plan development process is
designed to deliver a communications
and engagement framework that is clear,
actionable and sustainable for Riverbank.

Every recommendation is directly tied to the
insights gathered in Task 1 to ensure the plan
reflects the realities of how your organization
communicates today.

We develop a holistic strategy that aligns
messaging, tactics and engagement efforts
across all channels. This ensures the public
receives consistent, timely and accessible
information, and that staff and City Council
can share key messages with confidence.

Recommendations will include community
outreach strategies, media relations tools,
digital approaches, and guidance for crisis and
emergency communication.

A core component of this plan is strengthening
internal alignment. We will build an internal
communications framework that clarifies
roles and responsibilities, supports staff
and Council as ambassadors and helps
departments coordinate messaging effectively.

Special attention will be given to multilingual
communication to ensure all residents have
access to the information they need.

To support implementation, we will create
the structures and tools Riverbank needs to
operationalize the plan. This includes a public
information organizational chart, a responsibility
matrix and a priority implementation roadmap
that outlines key tasks, timelines, staff
ownership and available tools. The result is
a strategic, future-ready plan that equips
Riverbank to communicate with greater clarity,
consistency and impact.

ACTION ITEMS AND DELIVERABLES:
• Comprehensive external communications
plan that outlines goals, objectives,
strategies and tactics, including
multicultural considerations, glossary and
systems for measurement/refinement
• Define target audiences and personas,
or archetypes, to tailor messaging to
motivators, preferences and traits
• Creation of media relations plan and
internal communications plan to support
staff/Council as ambassadors
• Draft messaging matrix aligned to define
audiences and communications channels
with guidance on inclusive language
• Strategies for social media response and
engagement best practices
• Updated roles and responsibilities flowchart
and public information organizational chart
• Drafting of sample templates, social media
policy and crisis communications plan
• Development of a comprehensive
activation plan outlining year-over-year
actions with priority implementation matrix
and rollout activities
• Milestone: Completion of draft Community
Engagement Strategy and Communications
Plan, presented to the City project team for
review and feedback
Task 3:

Training
In this phase, we bring the plan to life. Our
training will give Riverbank staff and City
Council the confidence, clarity and tools needed
to communicate effectively from day one of
implementation.

We begin with hands-on sessions that
introduce the new messaging framework,
templates and outreach tools. These sessions
build shared ownership of the plan and ensure
every participant understands how to apply the
strategy in real scenarios. Staff will leave with
the practical skills needed to strengthen daily
communication, improve transparency and
engage the community with consistency.

As an extension of the activation work from
Task 2, every component of the training is
tailored to your needs. We work closely with
City leadership to prioritize actions, assign
roles and ensure trainings align with your
organizational structure. Our goal is to make
this phase motivating, relevant and immediately
useful.

Because JPW offers full-service design and
video capabilities, we will also provide oncamera media training to help staff and Council speak confidently in high-visibility moments,
including media inquiries and community
presentations. All scheduling will comply with
Brown Act requirements.

Should Riverbank wish to extend support
beyond this scope, JPW is prepared to provide
implementation assistance as a next phase.

ACTION ITEMS AND DELIVERABLES:
• In-person trainings for staff and council to
improve adoption and use of messaging,
templates and resources
• In-person on-camera media training to build
staff confidence handling media inquiries
• Milestone: Delivery of a training course to
accompany roll out of adopted plan
31 JPW’s
Fingerprint
Framework
At JPW Communications, we know every
community is unique. That’s why we use
our Fingerprint Framework—a signature,
research-driven process that blends the best
of the International Association for Public
Participation (IAP2) and the Public Relations
Society of America’s (PRSA) gold-standard
approaches. This combination ensures a
proven, repeatable process that delivers
authentic, actionable, and lasting results for
every client.

Task 4:

Deliverables +
Plan Evaluation
Estimate
Our final deliverables will equip Riverbank with
a complete, ready-to-use communications
and engagement system. Each component
of the plan will be documented clearly with
all messaging tools, strategies, templates
and protocols organized so staff can easily
reference and apply them.

Measurement is essential to ensuring the
plan continues to evolve with the community.

We will embed key performance indicators
(KPIs) and evaluation tools throughout the
document so that the City can track progress,
adjust strategies and celebrate success over
time. After the plan is adopted by Council, we
recommend developing the cost estimate for
evaluation support (Task 2, Item 10) to ensure
long-term monitoring and refinement.

Task 4 also includes all noted reports and
presentations, including an executive summary
and Council-facing materials that communicate
the plan’s purpose, priorities and intended
impact with clarity.

Together, these deliverables give Riverbank
a strategic, measurable and futureready foundation for communication and engagement—one that grows with your
organization and your community.

ACTION ITEMS AND DELIVERABLES:
• Preparation of an executive summary
report to summarize all work from all tasks
• Presentation materials for the final plan
evaluation workshops
• Finalization of key performance indicators
(KPIs) for all communications and
engagement activities
• Creation of evaluation plan and estimate
• Milestone: Delivery of final presentation
to council, templates and tracking
recommendations
32 Project schedule
TASK 1: GATHERING INPUT ESTIMATED TIMELINE
Host 60-minute kick-off meeting with project team (virtual) Host 2-hour discovery/SWOT analysis with leadership team (in-person) Conduct audit of materials, policies and practices
Review staff capacity and systems
Host virtual 30-minute 1:1 interviews with Council, department heads, community liaisons and community champions (assumes up to 12)
Develop and distribute stakeholder surveys (internal and external) Identify and map external stakeholders
Summary report of communication gaps, opportunities and insights Milestone: Findings presented to the City project team
Week 1
Week 2 or 3 (depending on scheduling)
Weeks 1-2
Weeks 2-5
Weeks 3-6
Weeks 6-7
Weeks 7-8
Week 8
TASK 2: PLAN DEVELOPMENT
Develop comprehensive plan that outlines goals, objectives, strategies and tactics, including multicultural considerations, glossary and systems for refinement Create media plan
Create internal communications plan
Draft messaging matrix
Provide guidance on inclusive language
Develop strategies for social media and engagement best practices Update roles and responsibilities flowchart
Create sample templates, social media policy and crisis communications plan Develop activation plan with year-over-year actions and priority matrix Milestone: Completion of draft Community Engagement Strategy and Communications Plan
* Cost estimate for plan evaluation included in Task 4
Weeks 9-12
Weeks 9-12
Weeks 10-12
Weeks 10-12
Weeks 10-12
Weeks 10-12
Weeks 12-13
Weeks 12-13
Weeks 12-15
Project schedule
The following schedule outlines a proposed timeline of work activities. Actual timeline will be subject to meeting availability and scheduling. Our project approach is flexible and designed to respond to client needs, milestones and sense of urgency.

TASK 3: TRAINING ESTIMATED TIMELINE
In-person trainings for staff and council to improve adoption and use of messaging, templates and resources, including on-camera media training to build staff confidence handling media inquiries
Milestone: Delivery of a training course to accompany roll out of adopted plan Week 16
TASK 4: DELIVERABLES + PLAN EVALUATION ESTIMATE
Prepare executive summary report to summarize all work from all tasks Design presentation materials for the final plan evaluation workshops Finalize key performance indicators (KPIs) for all communications and engagement activities
Creation of plan evaulation estimate
Present final plan to Council
Milestone: Delivery of final presentation to council, templates and tracking recommendations
Weeks 16-18
Weeks 16-18
Weeks 16-18
Weeks 16-18
Week 18
Project schedule (cont.)

EXHIBIT B
Rate Schedule
TASK 1: GATHERING INPUT ESTIMATED HOURS/

CLASSIFICATION

ESTIMATED
COST
• Host 60-minute kick-off meeting with project team (virtual) • Host 2-hour discovery/SWOT analysis with leadership team (in-person) • Conduct audit of materials, policies and practices
• Review staff capacity and systems
• Host virtual 30-minute 1:1 interviews with councilmembers, department heads, community liaisons and community champions (assumes up to 12) • Develop and distribute stakeholder surveys (internal and external) • Identify and map external stakeholders
• Summary report of communication gaps, opportunities and insights President: 37 hours
Senior vice president: 21
hours
Senior manager: 54 hours
Art director: 6 hours
Specialist: 33 hours
Coordinator: 39 hours
$41,765
(includes travel)
TASK 2: PLAN DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED HOURS/

CLASSIFICATION

ESTIMATED
COST
• Develop comprehensive plan that outlines goals, objectives, strategies and tactics, including multicultural considerations, glossary and systems for refinement
• Create media plan
• Create internal communications plan
• Draft messaging matrix
• Provide guidance on inclusive language
• Develop strategies for social media and engagement best practices • Update roles and responsibiltlies flowchart
• Create sample templates, social media policy, crisis communications plan • Develop activation plan with year-over-year actions and priority matrix President: 31 hours
Senior vice president: 31
hours
Senior manager: 56 hours
Art director: 26 hours
Specialist: 40 hours
Coordinator: 40 hours
$41,195
Cost estimate
The following budget is an informed estimate based on JPW’s experience delivering similar scopes of work and our understanding of Riverbank’s needs. We offer it as a starting point and are fully flexible in refining the approach, level of effort and costs based on your priorities and feedback.

TASK 3: TRAINING ESTIMATED HOURS/

CLASSIFICATION

ESTIMATED
COST
• In-person trainings for staff and council to improve adoption and use of messaging, templates and resources, including on-camera media training to build staff confidence handling media inquiries
President: 24 hours
Senior manager: 26 hours
Art director: 18 hours
Multimedia designer/
videographer: 18 hours
Specialist: 12 hours
Coordinator: 12 hours
$24,680
(includes travel)
TASK 4: DELIVERABLES + PLAN EVALUATION ESTIMATE ESTIMATED HOURS/

CLASSIFICATION

ESTIMATED
COST
• Preparation of an executive summary report to summarize all work from all tasks
• Presentation materials for the final plan evaluation workshops • Refinement of key performance indicators (KPIs) for all communications and engagement activities
• Development of a cost estimate for periodic plan evaluation and optional evaluation workshops
• Present final plan to council
President: 8 hours
Senior manager: 18 hours
Art director: 12 hours
$8,180
SUBTOTAL 562 total hours $115,820
Cost estimate

OPTIONAL SERVICES ESTIMATED HOURS/

CLASSIFICATION

ESTIMATED
COST
• Survey response support services in collaboration with Centiment, JPW’s trusted survey partner
• Translation support services
n/a $4,000
$4,000
Cost estimate (optional services)
To complement Riverbank’s scope of work, JPW also recommends the following optional services to collect comprehensive survey responses. JPW is also able to offer multilingual translation support services if needed.

City of Riverbank
Community Engagement Strategy and Communications Plan
December 11, 2025
ATTACHMENT 3
2 TABLE OF

CONTENTS
3 Cover letter
5 Company qualifications
18 Related experience and references
26 Scope of services
32 Project schedule
35 Cost proposal
3 City of Riverbank
Attn: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
6707 Third Street, Suite A
Riverbank, CA 95367
Dear Ms. Garcia,
On behalf of JPW Communications, I am pleased to submit our proposal for the City of Riverbank’s Community Engagement Strategy and Communications Plan. We appreciate the opportunity to partner with the City as you work to strengthen communication, enhance transparency and build deeper, more accessible engagement with residents, businesses and stakeholders. Your goals of improving public communication, unifying messaging across departments and expanding multilingual access are at the center of our approach.

This plan will be designed to directly support those priorities by giving Riverbank a clear set of strategies, tools and processes that make communication easier for staff, more consistent for the community and more effective at building trust. With Senior Vice President Susanne Bankhead, one of only three certified Public Participation Professionals in California, leading this work, Riverbank will receive best-in-class expertise in inclusive engagement and public participation.

Our team is committed to delivering an actionable, responsive plan shaped around Riverbank’s unique needs. We will help the City remove barriers to participation, clarify internal roles, strengthen alignment among City Council and staff and support meaningful dialogue across a growing and diverse community. The result will be a practical, future-ready framework that allows every department to communicate clearly and confidently while supporting long-term trust and understanding.

Please direct correspondence regarding this proposal to me at 760-683-8395 x700 or [email protected]. I certify that I am empowered to bind the company contractually, and if selected, we will comply with all licensing requirements for the City of Riverbank and the State of California.

Thank you for considering our proposal. We look forward to the opportunity to support Riverbank’s strategic communications and engagement goals.

Sincerely,
Jenny Windle, President and CEO
JPW Communications, Inc. (S Corporation)
2710 Loker Ave. W., Suite 300
Carlsbad, CA 92010
Nice to meet you.

COVER LETTER
4 Alone we can do so little; together,
we can do so much.
“
— Helen Keller
Partnership starts here.

Riverbank’s priorities are clear: stronger
communication, deeper engagement
and a more connected community. We
can help you build the systems, tools
and messaging to make those outcomes
possible and sustainable.

With JPW, you gain a partner who
understands local government from the
inside out and knows how to turn strategic
goals into community-wide impact.

Together, we can create a communications
framework that elevates transparency,
supports staff and strengthens trust
across Riverbank.
5 Company
qualifications
6 ABOUT US
Allow us to introduce ourselves. JPW was born from the need for a communications firm that offers the rare combination of exceptional service, creative ideas and strategic solutions that can only come from firsthand service in the public sector. We serve government enthusiastically and exclusively, and that means that we understand the challenges you face, why they matter, and how to solve them.

OUR HISTORY
JPW was founded in 2015 by long-time government
communicator Jenny Windle, and we are a team of experts who provide award-winning services for government agencies.

Together, we bring 100 years of collective experience working inside and alongside cities, counties, states and special districts.

We do this because we believe that public agencies deserve the very best in communication services.

THE JPW EXPERIENCE
We balance big ideas with practical applications designed just for government, and the result is strategic communication that actually works.

OUR VISION
We imagine a world where communities and local government understand each other and work together for the greater good.

A staff born from
government, for
government

DESCRIPTION OF ORGANIZATION
6 OUR CERTIFICATIONS
We are a proudly woman-owned organization and certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) and Small/Micro Business Enterprise.

VIDEO: MEET JENNY
Learn why she
created JPW and why
it matters to you.
7 Our team of 11 has helped cities across California craft community engagement strategies and communication plans that deepen trust, inspire action and ultimately provide City staff and council members with the framework, tools and training needed to connect with their communities. From social media strategies to early engagement on specific plans, we’ve done it all, and look forward to helping Riverbank communicate well and with purpose.

Our expertise
Why we’re different
Co-ownership of outcomes
JPW’s communication plans and engagement strategies work because they’re shaped by real-world experience and grounded in community-specific data. We often say that we’re not the “save-as” people because we approach each community as wholly unique and worthy of greatness. We believe public agencies deserve exceptional communication support; without it, understanding, appreciation and trust between government and the public are difficult to build.

Although we now work on the consulting side of the table, we continue to carry a strong ethos of public service and consider ourselves true partners and extensions of our clients’ teams.

We know that developing a plan like this is an investment of public funds, and we also believe that plans should never just sit on a shelf.

We promise to co-own the outcomes and success of this plan with you and create a process that unearths insights that will strengthen relationships between you and your community, long after the plan is implemented.

EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS
8 Full service,
and at your
service
Team JPW has the strategists, certified
community engagement experts and project
managers that the City of Riverbank needs to
communicate the value of your services and
engage the community you serve. We are also
proud to reiterate that Susanne Bankhead,
our senior vice president and partner, is one
of only three certified public participation
professionals in California. Coupled with our inhouse design team that includes videography and photography offerings, we are truly a full
service agency.

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS COMMUNITY OUTREACH
Planning and research
Crisis management
Target audience segmentation
Message and persona development
SWOT analysis
Competitive landscape analysis
Community surveys, focus groups/interviews
Communications, materials
and branding audit
Outreach process design
Community engagement strategies
Public meeting design and implementation
Meeting facilitation
Construction marketing and outreach
Surveys, stakeholder interviews
focus groups
Multicultural outreach
Pop-up outreach events

MARKETING & CAMPAIGNS MEDIA
Campaign research, planning
and implementation
Branding and graphic design
Behavior change campaigns
Persona creation
Paid media ad planning
Social media campaigns
Video production and photography
Media and public relations
Social media campaigns
Social media planning
Social media graphic design
Public relations
Press release writing
Media relations
Media lists
Media pitching
Copywriting

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION CREATIVE
Outreach strategy planning
Public meeting design and implementation
Meeting facilitation
Prop 218 outreach
Construction marketing and outreach
Survey development; stakeholder interviews;
focus groups

NEPA, CEQA
Graphic design
Branding and rebranding
Logo design
Videography
Photography
Social media design
Newsletter template design
Style guides
Interactive digital toolkits
9 Our team
One of JPW’s biggest differentiators is
our people. We are a specially curated
group of government communicators
who deeply understand the nuances of
working in the public space. We have
hand-selected the following team to
work with the City of Riverbank based
on their direct experience and acumen.

Our team is designed to scale as
needed.

PROJECT TEAM
Jenny Windle
Founder and CEO
Susanne Bankhead
Partner and Sr. Vice President
Meagan Platt
Sr. Manager*
Molly Schellenger
Art Director
Kit Caldwell
Multimedia Designer/Videographer
Natalia Speedon
Specialist
Lauren Boyer
Coordinator
*Project manager offering
day-to-day support
10 We never know where the process “
will take us.

Jenny Windle is the founder and CEO of JPW
Communications, a California-based agency
redefining how local governments connect
with their communities. Since launching JPW
in 2015, Jenny has transformed the firm from
a one-woman startup into one of the state’s
most trusted and creative public outreach
partners known for blending strategic rigor
with human-centered storytelling.

Before founding JPW, Jenny spent nearly two
decades inside local government, leading
award-winning communications programs
for three California cities and the Port of San
Diego. That experience shaped her belief that
public agencies deserve the same caliber of
creativity and strategy as the private sector,
and that continues to anchor JPW’s mission.

Now in its tenth year, JPW is building toward
a bold vision: to become California’s premier
government communications company. Under
Jenny’s leadership, the team continues to
elevate public sector storytelling, proving that
government communications can be both
inspired and impactful.

EDUCATION
Cal State University, Northridge
Master’s in Public Administration
Western Washington University
Bachelor’s of Arts in Communications
California State University, Fresno
Certificate in Economic Development

JENNY WINDLE

FOUNDER AND CEO
Project
experience

BRANDING
California Association of Public
Information Officials (CAPIO), City
of Glendora, City of Lake Forest, City
of San Marcos, Government Training
Agency, M2C, Inc., Western Water

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
City of Carlsbad, City of Riverside,
City of San Diego, City of Vista,
County of Merced, Innovate78, North
Valley THRIVE

MARKETING CAMPAIGNS
County of Marion, County of San Luis
Obispo, San Marcos Unified School
District

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION/

COMMUNITY OUTREACH
Cardiff School District, City of
Carlsbad, City of Tustin, Olivenhain
Municipal Water Department, Port
of San Diego, Sacramento Sewer
District, San Diego County Water
Authority, Sweetwater Authority

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS
City of Glendora, City of San
Marcos, County of Merced, County
of San Diego, Long Beach Water
Department, Rancho California Water
Agency, Sweetwater Authority,
Western Water
11 You know the hype man at concerts? That’s “
Susanne at a public meeting.

Susanne brings more than 20 years of
experience leading community outreach,
public participation and communications
for some of California’s most complex
public projects. As one of only three IAP2
Certified Public Participation Professionals
(CP3) in the state, she is a trusted expert in
designing meaningful engagement that builds
credibility, strengthens relationships and
supports informed decision-making.

With leadership experience in public and
private sectors, she has a rare 360-degree
understanding of how agencies, consultants
and communities connect. At JPW, Susanne
leads the community outreach and public
participation practice, known for simplifying
technical topics, building trust and delivering
measurable, defensible results.

A former college athlete, Susanne brings
that same energy to her leadership at JPW.

She is committed to continuous learning,
uses practical tools to help teams collaborate
effectively and actively mentors staff to support
a healthy, high-performing culture.

Before joining JPW, she served as community
relations manager for the City of Carlsbad and
worked for two public affairs firms supporting
government, building, real estate and
development clients.

EDUCATION
Cal State University, Long Beach
Masters in Kinesiology
Arkansas State University
Bachelor of Arts in Kinesiology
International Association of Public Participation
Certified Public Participation Professional (CP3)

SUSANNE BANKHEAD

SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT
Project
experience

BRANDING/CREATIVE
Calleguas Municipal Water
District, City of Encinitas, City of San
Luis Obispo, City of Tustin, San Diego
County Water Authority

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION/COMMUNITY

ENGAGEMENT
City of Carlsbad, City of Encinitas,
City of Escondido, City of Tustin, City
of San Diego, City of San Luis Obispo,
City of San Marcos, North County
Transit District, Port of San Diego,
Sacramento Sewer District, San Diego
County Water Authority, Sweetwater
Authority, Western Water, West Valley
Water District

MARKETING CAMPAIGNS
City of Encinitas, City of San Luis
Obispo, City of San Marcos, City
of Santa Ana, Western Water,
Sacramento Sewer District

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS
Association of Women in Water,
Energy & Environment (AWWEE), City
of Belmont, City of Long Beach (Water
Department), City of San Marcos,
County of San Diego, Sweetwater
Authority, Western Water
12 Stories express the most complicated ideas “
in the most digestible ways.

Meagan is a skilled communications and
marketing professional with experience
spanning the public, nonprofit and private
sectors. Before joining JPW Communications,
Meagan worked for three years at one of the
largest independently owned public affairs
firms in Washington, DC. She led public
relations and strategic communications
campaigns that drove policy change at the
federal level.

Earlier in her career, she also honed her
communications and marketing skills through
roles at a legal nonprofit and engineering
consulting firm. She launched her career with
an internship in the United States Senate,
an experience that sparked her lasting
commitment to public service.

At JPW, Meagan brings a strategic lens to
her work, supporting clients in their efforts
to communicate effectively with their
communities.

EDUCATION
University of Missouri. Columbia
Bachelor of Arts in Journalism
Emphasis in Strategic Communications
Magna Cum Laude

MEAGAN PLATT

SENIOR MANAGER
Project
experience

BRANDING
County of Merced, North Valley
THRIVE

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
City of Carlsbad, City of Encinitas,
Couny of Merced, North Valley
THRIVE

MARKETING CAMPAIGNS
City of Carlsbad, Couny of Merced,
Port of Redwood City, Santa Ana
Watershed Project Authority

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION/

COMMUNITY OUTREACH
City of San Luis Obispo, West Valley
Water District
13 Here to make ideas behave “
beautifully.

Molly is an art director working in brand,
campaign and environmental design. She is
passionate about projects that craft stories
around identity and engage communities in
creative ways.

Prior to joining JPW Communications, Molly
worked as a graphic designer for the City
of San Marcos elevating their brand and
creating collateral for a variety of print, digital
and online projects. She also designed for a
variety of private and public sector clients
including 826 Valencia, UC Davis, and the
cities of Long Beach, Agoura Hills and
Eastvale.

Molly brings a keen sense for creating impactful
designs that capture the audience’s attention
and promotes positive change

EDUCATION
University of California, Davis
Bachelor of Arts in Visual Communication & Design
Minor in Professional Writing

MOLLY SCHELLENGER

ART DIRECTOR
Project
experience

BRANDING
Calleguas Municipal Water District,
City of Escondido, City of Glendora,
City of Lake Forest, Port of
Redwood City

CREATIVE
Calleguas Municipal Water District,
City of Encinitas, City of Escondido,
City of Glendora, City of Lake Forest,
City of Laguna Niguel, City of Long
Beach, City of San Marcos, City of
San Luis Obispo, San Marcos Unified
School District, North County Transit
District, Port of Redwood City, Port of
San Diego, Western Water
MEDIA
City of Carlsbad, City of San Marcos,
City of San Luis Obispo, City of Tustin,
Innovate78, Moulton Niguel Water
District, Port of Redwood City, Santa
Ana Watershed Project Authority
14 She blends design, video and photography “
to be a creative force on any project.

Kit is a multimedia designer with a versatile
background in video production, graphic
design, web development and photography.

She is self-motivated and driven, striving
to push design boundaries for the public
sector. She finds joy in transforming complex
ideas into visuals that inform and inspire
communities.

At JPW Communications, Kit draws on her
experience as a videographer at BAM The
Agency and an omni-channel digital designer
at Veda Data Solutions (now H1) to craft
cohesive, story-driven multimedia designs.

Kit’s ability to create complementary designs
for all types of media allows her clients’
messages to really shine.

EDUCATION
Ball State University
Bachelor of Arts in Video and Audio Production

KIT CALDWELL

MULTIMEDIA DESIGNER

PHOTOGRAPHER/VIDEOGRAPHER
Project
experience

BRANDING
County of Merced

CREATIVE
City of Encinitas, City of Fountain
Valley, City of San Diego, City of
San Marcos, City of Tustin, County
of Merced, North County Transit
District, North Valley THRIVE, Rancho
California Water District, Santa Ana
Valley Project Authority, San Diego
County Water Authority, Sweetwater
Authority, West Valley Water District
MEDIA
City of Fountain Valley, City of San
Marcos, City of San Diego, County
of Merced, North County Transit
District, Santa Ana Watershed
Project Authority, Sweetwater
Authority
15 A life is not important except in the impact “
it has on others.

Natalia is a rising star in the field of marketing
and public relations with experience in
the non-profit and private sectors. She is
passionate about projects that connect
communities in creative, engaging and
inspiring ways.

Prior to joining JPW Communications, Natalia
worked as a volunteer coordinator and brand
ambassador for MainStreet Oceanside,
an organization dedicated to the vision of
making MainStreet Oceanside a pedestrianfriendly community with unique and exciting attractions, including daytime and evening
activities for residents and visitors.

Natalia is always eager to make an impact in the
lives of individuals, and her work represents her
ability to inspire residents to become members
of their community and adopt the culture of the
place where they live.

EDUCATION
Saint Mary’s College
Bachelor of Arts in Communications Studies
Minor in Sociology

NATALIA SPEEDON

SPECIALIST
Project
experience

BRANDING
City of Chino, City of Glendora and
Jurupa Community Services District

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
City of Long Beach, City of San
Marcos, Innovate78, North Valley
THRIVE

MARKETING CAMPAIGNS
Calleguas Municipal Water District,
Innovate78, Port of Redwood City,
San Marcos Unified School District,
Santa Ana Watershed Project
Authority, Western Water

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION/

COMMUNITY OUTREACH
City of Encinitas, City of Escondido,
City of San Diego (Public Utilities
Department), City of San Luis Obispo,
City of San Marcos, Port of San Diego

STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS
City of Chula Vista, City of Encinitas,
City of Glendora, City of Long Beach,
City of San Diego, City of San Marcos,
North Valley THRIVE
16 We tell ourselves stories “
in order to live.

Lauren has an affinity for storytelling and
Engaging audiences in a meaningful way.

She’s naturally curious, loves learning new
things, and is an effective communicator.

Prior to her time at JPW, Lauren worked for
iHeart San Diego as a promotions assistant
for their affiliated radio stations. In this role,
she helped plan and execute events for the
stations and their sales clients. She also
strengthened her storytelling skills through
her research and production of “goodness”
community impact stories for KOGO News.

JPW clients get the benefit of both her writing
and project management skills, and she has
yet to meet a deadline or task that cannot be
wrangled well.

EDUCATION
California Polytechnic State University
San Luis Obispo
Bachelor of Science in Journalism
Minor in Science and Risk Communication

LAUREN BOYER

COORDINATOR
Project
experience

BRANDING
Jurupa Community Services District

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
City of Long Beach, City of Palmdale

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION/COMMUNITY

OUTREACH
City of San Luis Obispo, City of Tustin,
Port of San Diego
17 References

CITY OF ENCINITAS
Jennifer Campbell | City Manager | [email protected] | 760-633-2612 Client since 2018
Services provided: economic development campaign, community outreach, public participation, strategic communications plan, ongoing communications support

CITY OF GLENDORA
Adam Raymond | City Manager | [email protected] | 626-914-8201 Client since 2023
Services provided: communications audit, department communications plan, citywide brand and ongoing communications support

CITY OF SAN MARCOS
Michelle Bender | City Manager | [email protected] | 760-744-1050 Client since 2016
Services provided: community engagement, public participation, strategic communications plan, community rebrand and launch, ongoing communications support (serve as city PIO)

CITY OF TUSTIN
Nicole Bernard | Assistant City Manager | [email protected] | 714-573-3010 Client since 2019
Services provided: community engagement, public participation planning and implementation, media relations, strategic communications plan, community rebrand and launch

COUNTY OF MERCED
Erick Serrato | Director of Workforce Investment | [email protected] | 209-724-2000 Client since 2024
Services provided: strategic communications plan, workforce development board branding, ongoing communications support
18 Related experience
18 19
Related
experience and
references
Cities today face increasing expectations for
clear, consistent and accessible communication.

Residents want timely information,
opportunities to engage and messaging that
reflects their diverse needs.

For public agencies balancing many priorities,
maintaining that level of clarity across
departments can be challenging.

Our work with cities and counties across
California shows that effective communication
systems require intentional strategy, shared
processes and tools that make it easier for
staff and leadership to speak with one unified
voice. When those elements are in place,
communication strengthens trust and supports
more meaningful participation.

The agencies listed here represent
organizations we have successfully supported
in connecting more effectively with the
communities they serve.

CITY OF ENCINITAS
Jennifer Campbell, City Manager
[email protected] | 760-633-2612

CITY OF GLENDORA
Adam Raymond, City Manager
[email protected] | 626-914-8201

CITY OF TUSTIN
Nicole Bernard, Assistant City Manager
[email protected] | 714-573-3010

CITY OF SAN MARCOS
Michelle Bender, City Manager
[email protected] | 760-744-1050

COUNTY OF MERCED
Erick Serrato, Director of Workforce Investment
[email protected] | 209-724-2000
20 Our work in the region
JPW works with clients across California, including the North San Joaquin Valley. We are currently helping the counties of Merced, San Joaquin and Stanislaus develop strategic messaging, engage their communities and advance a comprehensive tricounty vision for the region’s economic development future. Separately, we developed a comprehensive marketing and media strategy for the County of Merced’s Workforce Development Board that complements a new brand we developed.

Our experience developing strategic communication and outreach strategies for agencies from the City of San Marcos to the County of San Diego, married with our regional know-how, means that we can activate work on your project without ramp-up or delay.

While just a partial list, these logos showcase the breadth of clients who trust us to complete scopes of work just like yours. We’ll now share a few case studies to underscore this point that span plan development for counties, cities, departments, specific plans and CIP projects. 21 CASE STUDY THE OPPORTUNITY
San Marcos was rapidly growing and
needed to unify its messaging, outreach
and branding. With inconsistent visuals
and communications, the City sought a
comprehensive plan to reflect its identity,
support economic development, and guide
everything from public engagement and
recruitments to wayfinding signage.

THE APPROACH
JPW developed a strategic
communications plan that brought all
City messaging and branding under
one cohesive vision. Through research,
stakeholder engagement and creative
development, JPW launched the “Discover
Life’s Possibilities” brand, rolled out
new wayfinding signage, and later led
campaigns such as “Re:Discover San
Marcos” to spotlight local businesses.

THE REWARD
As the City’s ongoing PIO, JPW continues
to manage communications, media
relations and campaign strategy, ensuring
the plan informs every aspect of City
outreach. San Marcos now enjoys a unified,
award-winning brand and proactive
communications that have increased
engagement, strengthened economic
development, and built lasting community
pride. The strategic plan remains the
foundation for it all.

City of
San
Marcos
22 CASE STUDY THE OPPORTUNITY
The City of Tustin is reimagining Tustin
Legacy, a 1,500-acre redevelopment on
the former Marine Corps Air Station. With
more than 500 acres still to be developed,
the City needed to reconnect with the
community and ensure the project reflects
current values and priorities. Given the
site’s history and scale, Tustin needed a
transparent, trust-building approach to
engage residents around the future of this
landmark area and its iconic Navy hangars.

THE APPROACH
JPW Communications designed an
inclusive outreach strategy rooted
in listening and collaboration. Efforts
included a community workshop with 150
participants, three pop-up events, 20+
stakeholder interviews, an online survey
with 266 responses, and a dedicated
phone and email line generating 49
inquiries (94% positive or neutra)l. Aided
by the IAP2 Spectrum, JPW guided
discussions about the hangars’ future to
align decisions with community input.

THE APPROACH
More than 324 community touchpoints
demonstrate strong public interest and
renewed optimism for Tustin Legacy.

Residents show up, share ideas and help
shape a collective vision for the site’s
future. City leaders now have a clear
engagement framework, a record of public
participation, and growing trust from the
community. Upcoming activities, including
hangar tours, a citywide survey and open
house, will continue momentum.

City of
Tustin
23 CASE STUDY THE OPPORTUNITY
The County of San Diego Communications
Office (CCO) sought a strategic approach
to improve community engagement
amid leadership changes, evolving public
expectations and heightened concerns
about misinformation and distrust. Staff
were often unaware of available services,
and communications were fragmented
due to inconsistent processes and a lack
of shared guidelines. JPW was engaged to
lead research and planning to align internal
priorities and streamline processes.

THE APPROACH
JPW reviewed best practices, audited
materials and roles, and conducted
leadership interviews, discovery sessions
and an all-hands retreat. Findings
informed a long-term strategy with six
key recommendations and an action plan.

Immediate steps included reorganizing
the CCO team into “pods,” conducting
trainings to launch the new strategy, and
developing a countywide communications
and engagement policy with key
stakeholder engagement.

THE REWARD
The research and strategy was wellreceived by CCO leadership and team. The pod structure was embraced by the team
and created stronger alignment with the
County’s objectives. Full implementation
of the long-term strategy is on-going
after temporarily delays, due to several
high-profile media issues related to
a supervisor’s sudden resignation,
subsequent special election, and the
selection of the chief administrative officer.

County of
San Diego
24 CASE STUDY THE OPPORTUNITY
Merced County Workforce Development
Board (MCWDB) plays a pivotal role in
connecting job seekers, employers and
community partners across Merced
County. Recognizing the need to
modernize its communications, unify its
brand, and increase engagement with
both businesses and job seekers, JPW
developed a comprehensive strategic
communications and branding initiative.

THE APPROACH
JPW conducted in-depth research,
including focus groups, community-wide
survey and stakeholder interviews, to
understand the needs and perceptions of
the community. JPW’s research revealed
the need to unify its brand, improve
communications, and boost engagement
with both job seekers and employers.

THE RESULTS
We developed a strategic
communications plan with clear
messaging, proactive media outreach,
and detailed content calendar. We also
crafted a tiered media plan, ensuring
maximum reach within different budget
scenarios. To address brand consistency,
we unified all communications under
a new brand name, “Prospero,” with
implementation support and roll out plan
to facilitate staff adoption.

County of
Merced
25 CASE STUDY

THE OPPORTUNITY
Encinitas needed to reimagine its El
Camino Real Corridor, the City’s most
vibrant commercial corridor and a major
thoroughfare. The vision was to transform
El Camino Real into a more connected,
walkable area, supporting a mix of uses
including retail, office and neighborhoodfriendly housing in the right locations.

THE APPROACH
JPW developed a community-focused
participation strategy after reviewing
internal decisions and defining the public’s
role. Messaging and outreach materials
focused on the “why” behind the project
and how residents could participate.

JPW launched public-facing tools,
including videos, survey and stakeholder
engagement to gather meaningful input
and build early momentum for the project.

THE RESULTS
JPW created a clear project identity,
key messages, outreach materials, and
two videos to introduce the Specific
Plan and invite participation. The team
also launched a community survey,
coordinated stakeholder outreach and
supported public-facing communications.

The effort generated strong engagement,
nearly 500 people joined the interest list,
almost 700 completed the survey, giving
the City a solid foundation. of community
input to guide the corridor’s future.

City of
Encinitas
26 Scope of services
26 2727
Fingerprint
Framework
At JPW Communications, we know every
community is unique. That’s why we use
our Fingerprint Framework, a signature,
research-driven process that blends the best
of the International Association for Public
Participation (IAP2) and the Public Relations
Society of America’s (PRSA) gold-standard
approaches. This combination ensures a
proven, repeatable process that delivers
authentic, actionable and lasting results for
every client.

We are confident that this approach will
allow us to utilize the engagement strategy
development to inform well-rounded,
customized recommendations for all other
items in your scope of work, providing
Riverbank with an efficient, cohesive outreach
and marketing program.

Situational
analysis
The City of Riverbank is experiencing
significant growth and demographic change,
with a diverse, multilingual population and
a strong desire for equitable, inclusive and
representative communication. The City’s
current communications and engagement
practices are at a critical point: there is a need
to unify messaging across departments, bridge
the digital divide, and ensure all residents and
stakeholders have meaningful opportunities to
participate in civic life. This planning exercise
is designed to assess current gaps, leverage
Riverbank’s unique strengths and chart a path
forward that is rooted in local insight and best
practices.
2828
Task 1:

Gathering input
Our work begins with understanding what
makes Riverbank unique—its people, priorities
and communication realities. This phase is
designed to uncover the insights your team
needs to build a plan that is not only strategic,
but truly useful in daily practice.

We start with a collaborative kickoff meeting
to define success, clarify priorities and align
on deliverables. From there, we conduct a
comprehensive audit of all City communications
(digital, print, broadcast and internal) to identify
strengths, gaps and opportunities that directly
inform the plan.

Through a discovery session and SWOT analysis
with Riverbank’s leadership, we surface key
issues, trends and perspectives that will shape
the strategy. One-on-one interviews with City
Council, department directors, communications
liaisons and community champions provide
deeper insight into how information flows
today and where engagement can improve.

Combined with targeted stakeholder surveys,
this ensures we gather input from voices across
the community.

A core value of our process is inclusive and
multicultural outreach. Riverbank’s multilingual
needs and diverse audiences require
communication that is culturally responsive,
translated where appropriate and grounded
in community partnerships. Led by Susanne
Bankhead, one of only three Certified Public
Participation Professionals (CP3) in California,
our approach brings unmatched expertise in
equitable engagement.

By the end of this phase, Riverbank will
have a clear, research-driven picture of
its communication environment, one that
becomes the foundation for a plan built on
accuracy, alignment and local insight.

ACTION ITEMS AND DELIVERABLES:
• Kick-off meeting with City project team to
align on goals, deliverables and schedule
• In-person discovery session and SWOT
analysis with leadership team
• One-on-one interviews with City Council,
department leaders, communications
liaisons and community champions
• Comprehensive audit of existing materials,
policies and practices
• Review staff capacity, systems and crisis
communications resources
• Development and distribution of internal
and external stakeholder surveys (with
multilingual options)
• Multicultural outreach activities including
translated materials, culturally relevant
engagement and partnerships with
community organizations
• Identification and mapping of key audiences
and stakeholder groups
• Summary report of communication gaps,
opportunities and insights
• Milestone: Findings presented to the City
project team for feedback and alignment
2929
Task 2:

Plan
development
Our plan development process is
designed to deliver a communications
and engagement framework that is clear,
actionable and sustainable for Riverbank.

Every recommendation is directly tied to the
insights gathered in Task 1 to ensure the plan
reflects the realities of how your organization
communicates today.

We develop a holistic strategy that aligns
messaging, tactics and engagement efforts
across all channels. This ensures the public
receives consistent, timely and accessible
information, and that staff and City Council
can share key messages with confidence.

Recommendations will include community
outreach strategies, media relations tools,
digital approaches, and guidance for crisis and
emergency communication.

A core component of this plan is strengthening
internal alignment. We will build an internal
communications framework that clarifies
roles and responsibilities, supports staff
and Council as ambassadors and helps
departments coordinate messaging effectively.

Special attention will be given to multilingual
communication to ensure all residents have
access to the information they need.

To support implementation, we will create
the structures and tools Riverbank needs to
operationalize the plan. This includes a public
information organizational chart, a responsibility
matrix and a priority implementation roadmap
that outlines key tasks, timelines, staff
ownership and available tools. The result is
a strategic, future-ready plan that equips
Riverbank to communicate with greater clarity,
consistency and impact.

ACTION ITEMS AND DELIVERABLES:
• Comprehensive external communications
plan that outlines goals, objectives,
strategies and tactics, including
multicultural considerations, glossary and
systems for measurement/refinement
• Define target audiences and personas,
or archetypes, to tailor messaging to
motivators, preferences and traits
• Creation of media relations plan and
internal communications plan to support
staff/Council as ambassadors
• Draft messaging matrix aligned to define
audiences and communications channels
with guidance on inclusive language
• Strategies for social media response and
engagement best practices
• Updated roles and responsibilities flowchart
and public information organizational chart
• Drafting of sample templates, social media
policy and crisis communications plan
• Development of a comprehensive
activation plan outlining year-over-year
actions with priority implementation matrix
and rollout activities
• Milestone: Completion of draft Community
Engagement Strategy and Communications
Plan, presented to the City project team for
review and feedback
3030
Task 3:

Training
In this phase, we bring the plan to life. Our
training will give Riverbank staff and City
Council the confidence, clarity and tools needed
to communicate effectively from day one of
implementation.

We begin with hands-on sessions that
introduce the new messaging framework,
templates and outreach tools. These sessions
build shared ownership of the plan and ensure
every participant understands how to apply the
strategy in real scenarios. Staff will leave with
the practical skills needed to strengthen daily
communication, improve transparency and
engage the community with consistency.

As an extension of the activation work from
Task 2, every component of the training is
tailored to your needs. We work closely with
City leadership to prioritize actions, assign
roles and ensure trainings align with your
organizational structure. Our goal is to make
this phase motivating, relevant and immediately
useful.

Because JPW offers full-service design and
video capabilities, we will also provide oncamera media training to help staff and Council speak confidently in high-visibility moments,
including media inquiries and community
presentations. All scheduling will comply with
Brown Act requirements.

Should Riverbank wish to extend support
beyond this scope, JPW is prepared to provide
implementation assistance as a next phase.

ACTION ITEMS AND DELIVERABLES:
• In-person trainings for staff and council to
improve adoption and use of messaging,
templates and resources
• In-person on-camera media training to build
staff confidence handling media inquiries
• Milestone: Delivery of a training course to
accompany roll out of adopted plan
31 JPW’s
Fingerprint
Framework
At JPW Communications, we know every
community is unique. That’s why we use
our Fingerprint Framework—a signature,
research-driven process that blends the best
of the International Association for Public
Participation (IAP2) and the Public Relations
Society of America’s (PRSA) gold-standard
approaches. This combination ensures a
proven, repeatable process that delivers
authentic, actionable, and lasting results for
every client.
31 Task 4:

Deliverables +
Plan Evaluation
Estimate
Our final deliverables will equip Riverbank with
a complete, ready-to-use communications
and engagement system. Each component
of the plan will be documented clearly with
all messaging tools, strategies, templates
and protocols organized so staff can easily
reference and apply them.

Measurement is essential to ensuring the
plan continues to evolve with the community.

We will embed key performance indicators
(KPIs) and evaluation tools throughout the
document so that the City can track progress,
adjust strategies and celebrate success over
time. After the plan is adopted by Council, we
recommend developing the cost estimate for
evaluation support (Task 2, Item 10) to ensure
long-term monitoring and refinement.

Task 4 also includes all noted reports and
presentations, including an executive summary
and Council-facing materials that communicate
the plan’s purpose, priorities and intended
impact with clarity.

Together, these deliverables give Riverbank
a strategic, measurable and futureready foundation for communication and engagement—one that grows with your
organization and your community.

ACTION ITEMS AND DELIVERABLES:
• Preparation of an executive summary
report to summarize all work from all tasks
• Presentation materials for the final plan
evaluation workshops
• Finalization of key performance indicators
(KPIs) for all communications and
engagement activities
• Creation of evaluation plan and estimate
• Milestone: Delivery of final presentation
to council, templates and tracking
recommendations
32 Project schedule
32 33
TASK 1: GATHERING INPUT ESTIMATED TIMELINE
Host 60-minute kick-off meeting with project team (virtual) Host 2-hour discovery/SWOT analysis with leadership team (in-person) Conduct audit of materials, policies and practices
Review staff capacity and systems
Host virtual 30-minute 1:1 interviews with Council, department heads, community liaisons and community champions (assumes up to 12)
Develop and distribute stakeholder surveys (internal and external) Identify and map external stakeholders
Summary report of communication gaps, opportunities and insights Milestone: Findings presented to the City project team
Week 1
Week 2 or 3 (depending on scheduling)
Weeks 1-2
Weeks 2-5
Weeks 3-6
Weeks 6-7
Weeks 7-8
Week 8
TASK 2: PLAN DEVELOPMENT
Develop comprehensive plan that outlines goals, objectives, strategies and tactics, including multicultural considerations, glossary and systems for refinement Create media plan
Create internal communications plan
Draft messaging matrix
Provide guidance on inclusive language
Develop strategies for social media and engagement best practices Update roles and responsibilities flowchart
Create sample templates, social media policy and crisis communications plan Develop activation plan with year-over-year actions and priority matrix Milestone: Completion of draft Community Engagement Strategy and Communications Plan
* Cost estimate for plan evaluation included in Task 4
Weeks 9-12
Weeks 9-12
Weeks 10-12
Weeks 10-12
Weeks 10-12
Weeks 10-12
Weeks 12-13
Weeks 12-13
Weeks 12-15
Project schedule
The following schedule outlines a proposed timeline of work activities. Actual timeline will be subject to meeting availability and scheduling. Our project approach is flexible and designed to respond to client needs, milestones and sense of urgency. 34 TASK 3: TRAINING ESTIMATED TIMELINE
In-person trainings for staff and council to improve adoption and use of messaging, templates and resources, including on-camera media training to build staff confidence handling media inquiries
Milestone: Delivery of a training course to accompany roll out of adopted plan Week 16
TASK 4: DELIVERABLES + PLAN EVALUATION ESTIMATE
Prepare executive summary report to summarize all work from all tasks Design presentation materials for the final plan evaluation workshops Finalize key performance indicators (KPIs) for all communications and engagement activities
Creation of plan evaulation estimate
Present final plan to Council
Milestone: Delivery of final presentation to council, templates and tracking recommendations
Weeks 16-18
Weeks 16-18
Weeks 16-18
Weeks 16-18
Week 18
Project schedule (cont.)
35 Cost proposal
35 36
TASK 1: GATHERING INPUT ESTIMATED HOURS/

CLASSIFICATION

ESTIMATED
COST
• Host 60-minute kick-off meeting with project team (virtual) • Host 2-hour discovery/SWOT analysis with leadership team (in-person) • Conduct audit of materials, policies and practices
• Review staff capacity and systems
• Host virtual 30-minute 1:1 interviews with councilmembers, department heads, community liaisons and community champions (assumes up to 12) • Develop and distribute stakeholder surveys (internal and external) • Identify and map external stakeholders
• Summary report of communication gaps, opportunities and insights President: 37 hours
Senior vice president: 21
hours
Senior manager: 54 hours
Art director: 6 hours
Specialist: 33 hours
Coordinator: 39 hours
$41,765
(includes travel)
TASK 2: PLAN DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED HOURS/

CLASSIFICATION

ESTIMATED
COST
• Develop comprehensive plan that outlines goals, objectives, strategies and tactics, including multicultural considerations, glossary and systems for refinement
• Create media plan
• Create internal communications plan
• Draft messaging matrix
• Provide guidance on inclusive language
• Develop strategies for social media and engagement best practices • Update roles and responsibiltlies flowchart
• Create sample templates, social media policy, crisis communications plan • Develop activation plan with year-over-year actions and priority matrix President: 31 hours
Senior vice president: 31
hours
Senior manager: 56 hours
Art director: 26 hours
Specialist: 40 hours
Coordinator: 40 hours
$41,195
Cost estimate
The following budget is an informed estimate based on JPW’s experience delivering similar scopes of work and our understanding of Riverbank’s needs. We offer it as a starting point and are fully flexible in refining the approach, level of effort and costs based on your priorities and feedback. 37 TASK 3: TRAINING ESTIMATED HOURS/

CLASSIFICATION

ESTIMATED
COST
• In-person trainings for staff and council to improve adoption and use of messaging, templates and resources, including on-camera media training to build staff confidence handling media inquiries
President: 24 hours
Senior manager: 26 hours
Art director: 18 hours
Multimedia designer/
videographer: 18 hours
Specialist: 12 hours
Coordinator: 12 hours
$24,680
(includes travel)
TASK 4: DELIVERABLES + PLAN EVALUATION ESTIMATE ESTIMATED HOURS/

CLASSIFICATION

ESTIMATED
COST
• Preparation of an executive summary report to summarize all work from all tasks
• Presentation materials for the final plan evaluation workshops • Refinement of key performance indicators (KPIs) for all communications and engagement activities
• Development of a cost estimate for periodic plan evaluation and optional evaluation workshops
• Present final plan to council
President: 8 hours
Senior manager: 18 hours
Art director: 12 hours
$8,180
SUBTOTAL 562 total hours $115,820
Cost estimate
38 OPTIONAL SERVICES ESTIMATED HOURS/

CLASSIFICATION

ESTIMATED
COST
• Survey response support services in collaboration with Centiment, JPW’s trusted survey partner
• Translation support services
n/a $4,000
$4,000
Cost estimate (optional services)
To complement Riverbank’s scope of work, JPW also recommends the following optional services to collect comprehensive survey responses. JPW is also able to offer multilingual translation support services if needed.
39 POSITION RATE/HOUR
President $310
Senior Vice President $285
Vice President $260
Senior Director $225
Director $210
Senior Manager $190
Manager $175
Senior Specialist $160
Specialist $140
Coordinator $110
Administrative Assistant $105
2026 Rate sheet
Our rates
As a small business, JPW Communications provides fully burdened billing rates for each staff classification. These rates are inclusive of all direct labor, indirect costs, general and administrative expenses, and other overhead, in accordance with industry best practices for professional services firms. This approach allows us to maintain the privacy of individual employee salaries and compensation, which are considered confidential and proprietary information.

Approach for preparing estimates
JPW bills on a time and materials basis in 15-minute increments in accordance with its annual rate sheet, unless otherwise agreed to during contracting.

Rate adjustments
JPW adjusts its rates each year at the lesser of CPI or 5 percent. Notices regarding rates adjustments are sent preceding the adjustment.

Direct costs
Client agrees to reimburse JPW monthly for extraordinary out-of-pocket costs. All travel costs will be billed at net. A customary 20% markup will be added to all other goods and services that are procured on behalf of the client.

MARKETING, COMMUNICATION, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES

POSITION RATE/HOUR
Creative Director $210
Art Director $190
Senior Multimedia Designer $175
Multimedia Designer $160
Photographer/Videographer $160
Production Artist $105

CREATIVE SERVICES
40 Thank you!
City of Riverbank
Request for Proposal (RFP)
for
Community Engagement Strategy
and
Communications Plan
All Proposals must be submitted to:

City of Riverbank
Attention: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
6707 Third Street, Suite A
Riverbank, CA 95367
Deadline for Proposal Submittal:

Thursday, December 11, 2025
5:00 p.m. PST
ATTACHMENT 4
2 | P a g e
I. INTRODUCTION
The City of Riverbank is seeking the services of a qualified professional or firm to assist in the creation of a Community Engagement Strategy and Communications Plan (Plan). The Plan is envisioned as a comprehensive document to guide communications and engagement for the City of Riverbank. The Plan shall focus on the successful, consistent, eƯective, and collaborative approach to engaging City Council, City employees, residents, visitors, and stakeholders. This includes clearly defining the messages, priorities, strategies, and tools the City will deploy.

The Plan aligns with the strategic priorities of the Riverbank City Council, particularly Goal 2, Improve Public Communication. As such, the goal of the Plan is two-fold, one is to improve community and stakeholder engagement with a set of tools and priorities to oƯer access to information and amplify meaningful participation in and a broad understanding of City services, initiatives and resources, and second is to create guidance and establish best practices for the City Council and City StaƯ on external communication with our community.

As part of this Plan, a set of measurable communications and engagement outcomes will be put in place to refine the focus of City communications. As this document is both responsive and proactive, the Plan will lay out a framework for City staƯ and stakeholders to regularly review and adapt to the evolving needs of the City with a pulse on shifting trends in the world of civic engagement and communication.

II. CITY OVERVIEW
The City of Riverbank is located in the Central San Joaquin Valley along the Stanislaus River. The City’s crown jewel is Jacob Myers Park which oƯers its citizens an unsurpassed quality of life. Residents enjoy the many recreational activities provided by the river, quality parks, and mild climate. Riverbank is a general-law city with a Council-Manager form of Government. The City Council is comprised of a Mayor elected at large, and four council members each representing one of the four districts within the city. The City Council, the City Manager, and our operating departments are focused on the City's mission to provide high quality, professional services and a safe family-oriented community for our diverse residents to thrive.
3 | P a g e
Incorporated in 1922, the City serves a population of over 25,000. City departments and services include, Administration (including the City Manager’s OƯice, City Clerk, Human Resources and Information Technology), Community Development (which includes Planning, Building, and Neighborhood Improvement), Development Services (who oversees regulatory compliance, and capital projects), Finance, Public Works (including streets, sewer collection, water, and wastewater), and Parks & Recreation. Law enforcement services are provided via a contract with the Stanislaus County SheriƯ’s Department and Fire services are provided through the Stanislaus Consolidated Fire Protection District.

The City is experiencing significant growth with new housing and commercial developments with the most recent commercial development including Costco, Tractor Supply, amongst other major U.S. retailers.

III. SCOPE OF WORK
The City anticipates a project scope that includes key elements as outlined below; however, consultants should develop a proposal they believe will most eƯectively meet the City’s objectives of assessing current communications gaps and developing a strategy for improved engagement to achieve the City Council’s goals to create a:
“community engagement strategy to enhance public dialogue and trust between the organization and the community and develop a comprehensive communications plan that includes a multi-lingual component.” The selected Consultant is encouraged to include recommendations of additional services they believe would be beneficial to the City above and beyond the tasks represented herein. Each recommendation shall include a full scope of work, timeline, key deliverables, and cost for implementation.  Task 1: Input Gathering
Consultant will review the City of Riverbank’s existing communications materials (print, online, and broadcast), market research, media coverage, internal communications, and other feedback to understand the community’s perception 4 | P a g e
of the City and to identify strengths/opportunities and weaknesses/barriers to achieving strategic communications goals. Key elements of Plan creation should include, but are not limited to:

1. KickoƯ meeting:

Meet with the City’s project team (in-person and/or virtual) to discuss existing eƯorts, project goals and deliverables (i.e., what the City is currently doing), develop a work plan and schedules, milestones, budget, and other items.

Work with the project team to identify current aspirations and define success.

2. Complete a City-wide communications audit and analysis:

Consultant will review and analyze the City’s existing policies and practices, capabilities (staƯ capacity, and resources and management systems), incomplete crisis communications plan, as well as examine communications resources with an emphasis on understanding current priorities, limitations, and resource allocation given competing tasks and emerging issues.

3. Input Gathering:
a. Conduct a series of one-on-one interviews (virtual and/or in-person) with City Council, Department Directors and Managers, communications liaisons, and community champions to identify the communications priorities and hurdles for each department.
b. Develop and disseminate (with assistance from City staƯ if applicable), internal and external stakeholder surveys to gain insight into the City’s key audiences, reception to and digestion of various forms of information, and engagement capacity, and desire.
c. Identify key audiences through audit and analysis and develop a strategic stakeholder map and matrix.

4. Summary of Communication Gaps and Key Opportunities:

Provide a summary of what was learned in Tasks 1.1 and 1.2, including branding and communication gaps, and a summary of Task 1.3 interviews that will inform future communications and strategy.
5 | P a g e
 Task 2: Plan Development
Relying on qualitative and quantitative research, and input and interviews from Task I, Consultant will work with the City project team to develop a comprehensive Community Engagement Strategy and Communications Plan with a clear vision for the future, key messages, and specific tasks to achieve goals designed to address where and how the City can best serve residents, businesses, visitors, and stakeholders to create an informed public; generate strategic possibilities to meet the goals stated in the previous sentence; identify barriers; identify helpful best practices and communications standards; and identify systems and resources needed to support the City’s eƯorts.

Critical elements of the Plan should include, but are not limited to:

1. Develop communication goals and objectives, strategies and tactics including a multi-lingual component.

Based on Task 1, Consultant will create communication goals and objectives, strategies and tactics that incorporate a multi-lingual component, including variances for permanent, multilingual City staƯ and non-City staƯ support.

Consultant will define target audiences and specific practices for enhanced communication eƯorts. Furthermore, Consultant will identify and define the successful outcome and result that will be achieved with Plan implementation.

2. Internal Communications Plan
Aid City staƯ and City Council in their role as ambassadors in the community; establish tools and materials to ensure eƯective internal communication; provide clear guidance on proper and consistent messaging and outreach when departments engage with the public; evaluate importance of internal communications from a resource standpoint; and assess ways to unify the workforce and tap into the resource stated in the previous clause.

3. External audiences/messaging framework
Improve visibility, transparency, knowledge, and engagement; develop a framework that identifies specific audience segments along with high-level 6 | P a g e
message themes, communications objectives, and communications channels for each group; particular attention should be paid to developing language that speaks to equity and inclusion.

Develop strategies for City Council and City StaƯ to assess when and how to appropriately respond to concerns raised on social media, balancing transparency, timeliness, and organizational values.

4. City Role and Responsibilities Flowchart
Consultant will define roles and responsibilities for City Council Members, Department Directors, future Public Information OƯicers, staƯ, and stakeholders, and will review and update a responsibility flowchart. As part of this section, Consultant shall develop a public information organizational chart including anticipated work product assigned to each position including future program elements and the required staƯ time, skill set and capacity to launch specific initiatives and strategies.

5. Communications Priority Implementation Chart
Consultant will create a communications priority implementation chart that defines key priorities and those responsible for completing major tasks for each recommendation, expectations among various staƯ members, communications tools and engagement strategies available for various types of communications.

6. External Communications Strategies
Consultant will identify tactics that reach target audiences; develop and prioritize comprehensive communications strategies to reach a broad and diverse audience; include specific recommendations for messaging across the following key areas:
a. Electronic communications (web, social media, email, text) b. Media Relations (print, broadcast)
c. Paid media (print, online, broadcast, outdoor, etc.) d. Public Engagement (community events, educational programs, grassroots outreach, etc.)
7 | P a g e
e. Partner relations (working with school districts, regional aƯiliates, NGO’s, CBO’s, special districts, etc.)
f. Identify opportunities for presentations/speaking engagements throughout the region and the state; conferences and community groups where the City can have a stronger presence.

7. Media Relations Plan
Consultant will draft a media relations plan that helps the City to be seen by the media as a go-to credible, reliable source on a variety of topic areas; create strategies for developing and managing relationships with local and regional media to further gain coverage and build understanding of the City’s work in the community; provide insights on understanding optimal timing and number of media outreach activities annually as well as best methods and key themes; identify key City communications staƯ members as primary point of contact for media.

8. Draft and Finalize the Plan
Compile all elements into a draft Plan; following City of Riverbank review, make necessary changes and submit the final plan for approval; facilitate meetings/workshops with project team to discuss and finalize plan; work with project team to present Plan to the City Council and other applicable audiences.

In addition to the above, elements of a completed plan will include:
a. Sample communications product templates (e.g. City newsletters, press releases, etc.)
b. Social Media Policy
c. Completed Strategic Crisis Communications Plan
d. Glossary of terms and definitions
e. System for ongoing measurement and evaluation

9. Implementation Plan
Draft an implementation plan with year-over-year components, templates that allow communications staƯ to identify annual goals, projected results, 8 | P a g e
and key evaluation criteria, and a timeline to achieve success in the implementation of the Plan. The implementation plan may also include a la carte actions and strategies that may be executed during any phase of the fiveyear plan.

For the year one implementation, create a matrix identifying priority action items that consider financial resources for the first year, outlining the type of work, objectives, timing, lead responsibility and cost/level of eƯort for each action.

10. Provide a cost estimate for Plan Evaluation.

As an optional task, the City may elect to bring the Consultant back to conduct periodic implementation evaluation workshop(s) with key stakeholders; develop priorities for the following period; and provide recommendations on new and evolved communications tools.
 Task 3: Training
The selected Consultant will host a training course for City Council and staƯ that will accompany the roll out of the adopted Plan. The training should be a comprehensive look into key roles and responsibilities for each attendee, how to utilize the Plan, priorities and best practices, template use, and measurement and evaluation.

As a secondary element to the training, a media relations exercise including an on-camera element will also be oƯered to attendees.

Training should be developed in a manner that prevents violation of the Brown Act and keeps City Council Members separate from city staƯ, if applicable or recommended.
 Task 4: Deliverables
The selected Consultant shall be responsible for providing all reports, documents, and supporting materials to the City for future use. In addition to the Community Engagement Strategy and Communications Plan, training element, 9 | P a g e
implementation plan, and plan evaluation workshop estimate, the final deliverable will include:

1. An executive summary not to exceed three (3) pages and appendices (which may be compiled in a separate document) that contains the complete work product from all tasks.

2. The Consultant shall be prepared to create a PowerPoint presentation and conduct presentation(s) to the City’s executive management team, and/or City Council in support of the document’s approval.

The City places priority on the timely performance of these services. Once the contract is awarded for this project, the City expects the project to begin within four (4) weeks of the contract award.

Further Considerations:

The Consultant should consider the following when creating the scope of work for this project and the final Plan:

1. There is not a preexisting Plan to reference.

2. The City’s location in the Central San Joaquin Valley and multilingual population.

3. The City’s interested and engaged residents and businesses.

4. The desire for equitable, inclusive, and representative communication and dialog on City issues.

5. The varying preferences of residents and businesses for diƯerent communication channels and issues of a digital divide.

6. The desire to provide multiple opportunities to residents and businesses to engage with City oƯicials and staƯ, including through volunteerism.

7. The need for the City to have unified and consistent messaging and practices across City Council and city departments while allowing specific departments to continue their existing communication and engagement practices.

8. The communication and engagement practices that are legally required of a City.

9. The significant number of digital communication tools that are now available and their appropriateness for use by City staƯ.

10. The City’s government cable channel, Channel 2, serves as a mode of communication by broadcasting public meetings and service announcements and serves as an original content creator.
10 | P a g e

11. The desire to which residents and businesses have opportunities to provide input to the development of the communications and engagement plan.

IV. CALENDAR OF EVENTS
The following RFP Calendar of Events represents the City of Riverbank’s best estimate of the schedule that shall be followed. The City reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to adjust this schedule as it deems necessary. Notification of any adjustment to the RFP Calendar of Events shall be provided to all Proposers in the form of an addendum.

Event Date
Issue Date of RFP October 27, 2025
Deadline for Proposer Questions November 14, 2025
Submittal Deadline December 11, 2025
Review Period of Proposals & Interviews Week of December 15 Consultant Contract Award January 13, 2025
V. CONTACTS
Any questions regarding this RFP should be directed via e-mail to the RFP Coordinator below:

Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
[email protected]
VI. RFP AMENDMENT AND CANCELLATION
The City reserves the unilateral right to amend this RFP in writing at any time. The City also reserves the right to cancel or reissue the RFP at its sole discretion. If an amendment is issued, notification shall be posted on the City’s website www.riverbank.org.
11 | P a g e
VII. EVALUATION CRITERIA
The City will evaluate the proposals in several critical areas listed below:

Scoring Criteria Possible Points
Proposal Submission
□ Quality of the Proposal
□ Conformance with RFP Guidelines
□ Alignment with the Areas of Focus
15 Qualifications
□ Expertise in the fields necessary to execute the
proposal
□ Recent relevant experience of team members
□ Professional qualifications and education of team
members capacity (list # of projects in progress)
and impacts on this project
□ Verifiable record of past successes
□ References
35 Project and Implementation Plan
□ Methodology for data collection, analysis, and
reporting
□ Approach for demands from diverse stakeholders
□ Project Management Plan (work breakdown
structure, phases, tasks, timeline)
30 Pricing
□ Please provide your best proposal. Any Proposals
missing the pricing section will be disqualified.
20 Total Points for Written Proposal 100
The City shall make an award recommendation to the respondent whose proposal represents the best overall value solely determined by the City. The City’s determination shall not be subject to appeal.

VIII. RFP PROCESS AND SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
All proposal materials must be placed in a sealed package (envelope, box, etc.) clearly marked with the proposal name and the firm’s name. It is the responsibility of the firm to ensure that proposals are received by the City by the due date and 12 | P a g e
time stated on the cover of this RFP. The firm is responsible for delivery of their proposal by the deadline notwithstanding any claims of error or failure to perform by a mail, courier or package delivery service. No proposals or proposal modifications may be submitted orally, electronically, or via telephone, facsimile or electronic mail (email).

Five (5) original and one (1) digital copy in PDF format of the proposal are required and must be submitted and received no later than 5:00 PM (PST) on Thursday, December 11, 2025 to the address below. The original must be clearly marked and contain original signatures. Proposals will not be accepted after this deadline.

Faxed or e-mailed proposals will not be accepted.

City of Riverbank
Attn: Marisela H. Garcia, City Manager
6707 Third Street, Suite A
Riverbank, CA 95367
IX. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS
Proposals should include:

1. Cover Letter
The cover letter will include the company name, address, and telephone number of the authorized person to be used as the contact. The letter will indicate whether the proposer is an individual, partnership, or corporation. It must be signed by the individual, partner, or an oƯicer or agent authorized to bind the firm. A corporation submitting a proposal may be required to furnish a certificate as to its corporate existence and satisfactory evidence as to the oƯicers authorized to execute the contract on behalf of the corporation.

If selected, the firm shall be requested to be properly licensed to do business in the City of Riverbank and the State of California.

2. Company Qualifications
a. A brief description of the organization (limited to one page) b. Experience and qualifications of staƯ
13 | P a g e
c. List the staƯ assigned to the project, title, responsibilities as it would relate to this engagement.
d. Include resumes of each staƯ assigned.
e. A list of five (5) references. Please include names, positions, and telephone numbers for the individuals identified in the qualifications.

3. Related Experience and References
a. Provide a brief summary of your experience developing community engagement strategies, communications plans, oƯering training in media relations, and presenting to legislative bodies.
b. Provide a list of at least five professional references and their contact information.

4. Scope of Services
a. Describe how your firm proposes to meet the Scope of Work and any additional services.
b. An outline of action items and deliverables for each element listed in the Scope of Work.

5. Project Schedule
a. Provide a timeline that shows the planned starting time and duration of each task in your scope of work.

6. Cost Proposal
a. The Cost Estimate must include a breakdown of:
i. Person-hours per classification for each task/sub-task ii. Billing rates per classification for each task/sub-task iii. Direct labor costs
iv. Indirect costs
v. General and administrative costs
vi. Other direct costs such as equipment and materials
vii. Subcontractor costs
X. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS

1. Collusion
By submitting a response to the RFP, each Proposer represents and warrants that its response is genuine and not made in the interest of, or on behalf of, 14 | P a g e
any person not named therein; that the Proposer has not directly induced or solicited any other person to submit a sham response or any other person to refrain from submitting a response; and that the Proposer has not in any manner sought collusion to secure any improper advantage over any other person submitting a response.

2. Gratuities
No person will oƯer, give, or agree to give, any City employee or its representatives any gratuity, discount, or oƯer of employment in connection with the award of contract by the City.

3. Required Review and Waiver of Protests
Proposers should carefully review this RFP and all attachments, including but not limited to the Consultant Services Agreement, for comments, questions, defects, objections, or any other matter requiring clarification or correction (collectively called “comments”). Comments concerning RFP objections must be made in writing and received by the City no later than the "Deadline for Proposer Questions" detailed in the Calendar of Events. This will allow issuance of any necessary amendments and help prevent the opening of defective Information upon which contract award could not be made.

Protests based on any objection will be considered waived and invalid if these faults have not been brought to the attention of the City, in writing, by the Deadline for Proposer Questions.

4. Nondiscrimination
No person will be excluded from participation in, be denied benefits of, be discriminated against in the admission or access to, or be discriminated against in treatment or employment in the City’s contracted programs or activities on the grounds of disability, age, race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or any other classification protected by federal or California State Constitutional or statutory law; nor will they be excluded from participation in, be denied benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination in the performance of contracts with the City or in the employment practices of the City’s contractors. Accordingly, all Proposers entering into contracts with the City will, upon request, be required to show proof of such nondiscrimination and to post in conspicuous places, available to all employees and applicants, notices of nondiscrimination.
15 | P a g e

5. Proposal Preparation Costs
The Proposer is responsible for any and all costs associated with the preparation, submittal, and presentation of any proposal.

6. Proposal Errors
Proposers are liable for all errors or omissions contained in their proposals.

Proposers will not be allowed to alter proposal documents after the deadline for submitting a proposal. The City, at its discretion, has the right to accept or reject a proposal in part or whole due to errors and/or omissions of the response.

7. Incorrect Proposal Information
If the City determines that a Proposer has provided, for consideration in the evaluation process or contract negotiations, incorrect information which the Proposer knew or should have known was materially incorrect, that proposal may be determined non-responsive, and the proposal may be rejected at the sole discretion of City.

8. Consequence of Submission of Proposal
The submission of a proposal shall not be deemed an agreement between the Proposer and the City. The proposal is a contractual oƯer by the Proposer to perform services in accord with the proposal. Specifically, the following provisions apply:
 The City shall not be obligated to respond to any proposal submitted nor be bound in any manner by the submission of a proposal.  Acceptance of a proposal by the City obligates the proposer to enter into an agreement with the City using the Consultant Services Agreement template attached hereto.
 The agreement shall not be binding or valid against the City unless and until it is executed by the City and the selected Proposer.

The proposals received shall become the exclusive property of the City. At such time a recommendation of award to the Riverbank City Council, all proposals submitted in response to this RFP shall become a matter of public record and shall be regarded as public records, with the exception of those elements in each proposal which are trade secrets as that term is defined in Government Code Section 7924.510(f) and which are so marked as “TRADE SECRET,” “CONFIDENTIAL” or “PROPRIETARY” (collectively, “privileged 16 | P a g e
information”). The City will promptly notify a Proposer that a request seeks disclosure of privileged information. Except as otherwise required by law, the City may, but is not required to, take any aƯirmative action to seek exemption of the disclosure of said privileged information, if any such exemption is applicable. Independent of any City action, it shall be the sole responsibility of any Proposer to take any and all necessary action(s) to protect said Proposer’s privileged information, including but not limited to, seeking a protective court order. Additionally, proposals that indiscriminately identify all or most of the proposal as exempt from disclosure without justification may be found technically unacceptable. The City shall not in any way be liable or responsible to any Proposer or other person for any disclosure of any such records or portions thereof, whether the disclosure is deemed to be required by law, by an order of a court, or occurs through inadvertence, mistake, or negligence on the part of the City or its oƯicers, agents or employees.

9. Assignment and Subcontracting
The selected Proposer who executes the contract with the City may not subcontract, transfer, or assign any portion of the contract without prior, written approval from the City. Each subcontractor must be approved in writing by the City. The substitution of one subcontractor for another may be made only at the discretion of the City and with prior, written approval from the City.

Notwithstanding the use of approved subcontractors, the Proposer, if awarded a contract under this RFP, will be the prime contractor and will be responsible for all work performed and will be responsible for all costs to subcontractors for services provided by the Proposer. The Proposer is prohibited from performing any work associated with this RFP or using contractors for any service associated with this RFP outside the United States of America.

10. Proposal of Additional Services
If a Proposer indicates an oƯer of services in addition to those required by and described in this RFP, these additional services may be added to the contract before contract signing at the sole discretion of the City. 17 | P a g e

11. Lack of Funding
The City may need to amend the terms of this contract in the event that budgetary funding is reduced or discontinued. The Contractor shall receive written notification of either condition as soon as practically possible, but no later than thirty (30) days prior to reduction or termination.

12. Terms of Payment
Payment for monthly services shall be paid on a “Net 30” basis, in accordance with the Agreement terms.

13. Laws and Venue Governing Contract
The contract shall be governed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The parties will stipulate that the contract will be entered into in the County of Stanislaus, in the State of California. The parties will stipulate that venue for any dispute arising out of the contract shall be with the Superior Court for the County of Stanislaus, California.

14. Rights of the City of Riverbank
The City reserves the right to:
a. Make the selection based on its sole discretion;
b. Reject any and all proposal;
c. Issue subsequent Requests for Proposals;
d. Postpone opening proposals, if necessary, for any reason; e. Remedy errors in the Request for Proposal process;
f. Approve or disapprove the use of particular subcontractors; g. Negotiate with any, all, or none of the Proposers;
h. Select other than the lowest oƯer;
i. Waive defects or irregularities in any and all proposal; j. Enter into an agreement with another Proposer in the event the originally selected Proposer defaults or fails to execute an agreement with the City.

XI. CONTRACT TEMPLATE