Roseville City Council
October 15, 2025

City Council Chambers, 311 Vernon Street roseville.ca.us The City of Roseville welcomes your participation.

Meeting Schedule: Regular meetings of the City Council are held on the first and third Wednesday of each month at 6:00 p.m.

Two Public Comment Periods for Non-Agenda Items: A total of twenty-five (25) minutes is allotted for public comments. At the beginning and end of the meeting, each speaker has three (3) minutes to address the Mayor/Chair on issues that are not listed on the agenda and are within the City’s jurisdiction. Please submit a yellow speaker card to the City Clerk before the item is heard if you wish to make a comment. You will still have an opportunity to comment if you haven’t filled out a yellow speaker card.

Brown Act: The City Council cannot discuss or act on items not listed on the agenda. Public Comment on Agenda Items: Each speaker has five (5) minutes to address items that are listed on the agenda.

Levine Act Provisions: If you’ve made a campaign contribution totaling more than $500 ($250 prior to January 1, 2025) to City Council Members in the last twelve (12) months, you must disclose it before addressing an item on the agenda. Please visit Levine Act – City of Roseville for updated forms and information.

Audio/Visual Presentations: If making a presentation regarding an agenda item, audio/visual materials must be submitted to the City Clerk for consideration at least 72 hours in advance.

Americans with Disabilities Act: If special assistance is required to participate in a meeting, including the need of auxiliary aids or services, please notify the City Clerk at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting. City Clerk 311 Vernon Street [email protected] 916-774-5263 TDD: 916-774-5220 Security Measures: All meeting attendees must successfully pass through a security metal detector. Any person with a prohibited item will not be allowed entry. Prohibited items include but are not limited to firearms (even with valid CCW), knives, pepper spray/mace, explosives of any kind/any weapons and/or dangerous devices of any kind, illegal drugs, and alcohol.

Viewing Options: The City of Roseville provides three options for viewing meetings:

Krista Bernasconi, Mayor
Karen Alvord, Vice Mayor
Bruce Houdesheldt, Councilmember
Tracy Mendonsa, Councilmember
Pauline Roccucci, Councilmember
Dominick Casey, City Manager
Michelle Sheidenberger, City Attorney
Carmen Avalos, City Clerk
AGENDA
City Council Regular Meeting
October 15, 2025
6:00 PM
City Council Chambers, 311 Vernon Street
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
IV. MEETING PROCEDURES
V. PUBLIC COMMENTS
This is the first opportunity to make a public comment on non-agenda items.

VI. CONSENT CALENDAR

1. Sun Rose Permanent Supportive Housing - First Amended and Restated Regulatory Agreement (ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT - HOUSING)
Summary: Staff recommends approval of an amended and restated regulatory agreement between the City and Advocates for Mentally Ill Housing, Inc. for the Sun Rose Permanent Supportive Housing project (Sun Rose Apartments), which is a State of California Homekey (Homekey) project and includes 82 studio units for households coming directly from homelessness. The amended agreement includes minor revisions to align with updated Homekey program guidelines. No General Fund resources will be used for this project.

CONTACT: Trisha Isom 916-746-1239 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Adopt Resolution No. 25-323 approving a First Amended and Restated Regulatory Agreement, by and between the City of Roseville and Advocates for Mentally Ill Housing, Inc., and authorizing the City Manager to execute it and any other related documents on behalf of the City of Roseville.

2. Grants Advisory Commission - Policy Manual Updates (CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT -

ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER)

Summary: Staff recommends approval of updates to the Citizens' Benefit Fund Policy Manual, which are being recommended by the Grants Advisory Commission. The primary focus of these revisions is to clarify the handling of City Projects, particularly regarding grant funding requests from non-profits for modifications or construction on City-owned property and facilities. The recommended updates to the policy manual have no fiscal impact on the General Fund.

CONTACT: Tobi Thomas 916-746-1368 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Adopt Resolution No. 25-322 approving revisions to the Citizens' Benefit Fund Policy Manual.

3. Shared Services Assessment (RFP 04-032) - Professional Services Agreement (CITY MANAGER

DEPARTMENT - ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER)
Summary: Staff recommends approval of a professional services agreement with Raftelis in the amount of $174,250 to conduct a Shared Services Assessment. Raftelis will perform a comprehensive review of functions that span multiple City departments, which can be delivered through a centralized, decentralized, or hybrid structure, in order to identify potential opportunities to strengthen organizational structure, enhance service delivery, and ensure longterm sustainability. Funding is included in the General Fund budget.

CONTACT: Tobi Thomas 916-746-1368 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Adopt Resolution No. 25-328 approving a Professional Services Agreement, by and between the City of Roseville and Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc., and authorizing the City Manager to execute it on behalf of the City of Roseville.

4. Vernon Street/Atlantic Street Multimodal Safety Improvement Project - Award of Contract and Budget Adjustment (PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - ENGINEERING - CITY PROJECT'S) Summary: Staff recommends approval of a construction agreement with Martin Brothers Construction in the amount of $1,948,279 for the construction of the Vernon Street/Atlantic Street Multimodal Safety Improvement Project, and approval of a budget adjustment to fully fund the construction in the amount of $1,650,000 from the Highway Users Tax Fund. The project will include intersection improvements at Vernon Street/Atlantic Street and Folsom Road to improve traffic circulation and improve accessibility for bicyclists and pedestrians.

Project features include construction of enhanced pedestrian crosswalks, landscaped median, pavement rehabilitation, and lane reductions. Work is expected to begin in late fall 2025 and be completed by summer 2026. This project is also supported by funding previously appropriated from the Local Transportation Fund, a Highway Safety Improvement Program Grant, and the General Fund.

CONTACT: Karen Vences 916-774-5412 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:

a. Adopt Resolution No. 25-321 approving an agreement, by and between the City of Roseville and Martin Brothers Construction, and authorizing the City Manager to execute it on behalf of the City of Roseville; and
b. Adopt Ordinance No. 6999 authorizing certain amendments to the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget and declaring this ordinance to be immediately effective as an appropriation measure.

5. Council Chambers Renovation Project - Budget Adjustment (PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT -

FACILITIES)
Summary: Staff recommends approval of a budget adjustment of $873,457 to consolidate the remaining funds from the Council Chambers Conference Room Design and Construction Project into the Council Chambers Renovation Project, for a revised project total budget of $2,873,457.

Funding for the project is from the Public Facilities Fund and the Cable TV Public, Educational, and Governmental (PEG) Fund. No General Fund resources are being used for the project.

CONTACT: Lori Crittenden 916-774-5707 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Adopt Ordinance No. 7002 authorizing certain amendments to the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget and declaring this ordinance to be immediately effective as an appropriation measure.

6. Creekview Ranch Lift Station Infrastructure Improvements - Dedicating Sewer Easement Across City Property to Placer County (DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT - ENGINEERING

DIVISION)
Summary: Staff recommends approval of a Grant of Easement dedicating a public sewer easement to Placer County as described in its attached exhibits A & B. Placer County has requested that the City dedicate a sewer easement along the westerly boundary of the Dry Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (DCWWTP) where a segment of the Creekview Ranch Lift Station sewer mains encroach into City-owned property. These actions have no fiscal impact to the City's General Fund.

CONTACT: Ed Winston 916-774-5432 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Adopt Resolution No. 25-327 approving a Grant of a Public Sewer Easement, by the City of Roseville to Placer County, authorizing the City Manager to execute it, and authorizing the City Clerk to record it on behalf of the City of Roseville.

7. Sierra Vista Village KT21A-1 - Notice of Completion (DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT -

ENGINEERING DIVISION)
Summary: Staff recommends approval of the Notice of Completion for the Sierra Vista Village KT21A-1. The Engineering Division has made a final inspection of the project and has found the civil improvement work complete in accordance with the improvement plans and City

specifications. This action has no impact to the City's General Fund. Construction costs were paid by the developer.

CONTACT: Ignacio Vizcarra 916-774-5578 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Adopt Resolution No. 25-319 accepting the public work known as Sierra Vista Village KT21A1 Project, approving the "Notice of Completion", and authorizing and directing the City Engineer to execute said notice on behalf of the City of Roseville, therefore, and accepting all dedications offered on the recorded map of the subdivision.

8. Sierra Vista Village KT21A-2 - Notice of Completion (DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT -

ENGINEERING DIVISION)
Summary: Staff recommends approval of the Notice of Completion for the Sierra Vista Village KT21A-2. The Engineering Division has made a final inspection of the project and has found the civil improvement work complete in accordance with the improvement plans and City specifications. This action has no impact to the City's General Fund. Construction costs were paid by the developer.

CONTACT: Ignacio Vizcarra 916-774-5578 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Adopt Resolution No. 25-318 accepting the public work known as Sierra Vista Village KT21A-2 Project, approving the "Notice of Completion", and authorizing and directing the City Engineer to execute said notice on behalf of the City of Roseville, therefore, and accepting all dedications offered on the recorded map of the subdivision.

9. Sierra Vista Village KT21B-2 - Notice of Completion (DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT -

ENGINEERING DIVISION)
Summary: Staff recommends approval of the Notice of Completion for the Sierra Vista Village KT21B-2. The Engineering Division has made a final inspection of the project and has found the civil improvement work complete in accordance with the improvement plans and City specifications. This action has no impact to the City's General Fund. Construction costs were paid by the developer.

CONTACT: Ignacio Vizcarra 916-774-5578 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Adopt Resolution No. 25-316 accepting the public work known as Sierra Vista Village KT21B-2 Project, approving the "Notice of Completion", and authorizing and directing the City Engineer to execute said notice on behalf of the City of Roseville, therefore, and accepting all dedications offered on the recorded map of the subdivision.

10. Sierra Vista Village KT21B-1 - Notice of Completion (DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT -

ENGINEERING DIVISION)
Summary: Staff recommends approval of the Notice of Completion for the Sierra Vista Village KT21B-1. The Engineering Division has made a final inspection of the project and has found the civil improvement work complete in accordance with the improvement plans and City specifications. This action has no impact to the City's General Fund. Construction costs were paid by the developer.

CONTACT: Ignacio Vizcarra 916-774-5578 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Adopt Resolution No 25-317 accepting the public work known as Sierra Vista Village KT21B-1 Project, approving the "Notice of Completion", and authorizing and directing the City Engineer to execute said notice on behalf of the City of Roseville, therefore, and accepting all dedications offered on the recorded map of the subdivision.

11. Barton Road Water Treatment Plant Wash Water Reclamation Basins 1 and 2 Replacement Project (RFP # 08-149) – Award of Design-Assist Construction Agreement and Budget Adjustment (ENVIRONMENTAL UTILITIES DEPARTMENT - TECHNICAL SERVICES) Summary: This item requests approval and award of a Design-Assist Construction Agreement with Myers & Sons Construction, LLC, Inc. for the Barton Road Water Treatment Plant Wash Water Reclamation Basins 1 and 2 Replacement Project in the amount of $10,376,850 and authorization for the City Manager or his designee to approve and pay for contract change orders that could increase the contract amount by no more than 10 percent ($1,037,685). This item also requests approval of construction plans and specifications and a budget adjustment consisting of a $4,000,000 transfer from available funds in the Water Operations Fund to the Water Rehabilitation Fund and an appropriation of $3,717,030 in the Water Rehabilitation Fund to increase the project budget.

CONTACT: Inderpreet Chaggar 916-774-5553 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Approve the project's construction plans and specifications; and b. Adopt Resolution No. 25-325 approving a Design-Assist Construction Agreement, by and between Myers & Sons Construction, LLC, and the City of Roseville, and authorizing the City Manager to execute it on behalf of the City of Roseville; and c. Adopt Ordinance No. 7001 of the Council of the City of Roseville authorizing certain amendments to the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget and declaring this ordinance to be immediately effective as an appropriation measure.

12. Barton Road Water Treatment Plant Wash Water Reclamation Basins 1 and 2 Replacement Project (RFP # 08-162) – Professional Services Agreement (ENVIRONMENTAL UTILITIES

DEPARTMENT - TECHNICAL SERVICES)
Summary: This item requests approval of a professional services agreement for construction management services with West Yost & Associates, Inc. in the amount of $1,009,766 for the Barton Road Water Treatment Plant Wash Water Reclamation Basins 1 and 2 Replacement Project. Funding is available in the project budget in the Water Rehabilitation Fund.

CONTACT: Inderpreet Chaggar 916-774-5553 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Adopt Resolution No. 25-326 approving a Professional Services Agreement, by and between the City of Roseville and West Yost & Associates, Inc., and authorizing the City Manager to execute it on behalf of the City of Roseville.

13. Pleasant Grove Wastewater Treatment Plant Maintenance, Administration, and Shop Building Project – Professional Design Services Agreement Amendment and Budget Adjustment (ENVIRONMENTAL UTILITIES DEPARTMENT - TECHNICAL SERVICES) Summary: This item requests approval of budget adjustment for the Pleasant Grove Wastewater Treatment Plant Maintenance, Administration, and Shop Building Project (Project). The budget adjustment consists of $3,000,000 to be appropriated from available funds in the Water Operations Fund and Waste Services Operations Fund to increase the Project budget. This budget amendment, added to the existing project budget of $1,100,000 previously approved by the South Placer Wastewater Agency (SPWA) will provide a total Project budget of $4,100,000. This item also requests approval to authorize Amendment 1 to the Professional Design Services Agreement with 19six Architects, Inc. to add $43,594 to complete the design services for the Project.

CONTACT: Inderpreet Chaggar 916-774-5553 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Adopt Resolution No. 25-320 approving a First Amendment to Professional Design Services Agreement, by and between the City of Roseville and 19Six Architects, and authorizing the City Manager to execute it on behalf of the City of Roseville; and b. Adopt Ordinance No. 6998 of the Council of the City of Roseville authorizing certain amendments to the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget and declaring this ordinance to be immediately effective as an appropriation measure.

14. Dry Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant Vactor Washout Station Project – Budget Adjustment (ENVIRONMENTAL UTILITIES DEPARTMENT - TECHNICAL SERVICES) Summary: This item requests approval of a $555,000 budget adjustment for construction of the Dry Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant Vactor Washout Station Project. The source of funding

for this agreement is from available funds in the Wastewater Rehabilitation Fund and Water Rehabilitation Fund. The split between the two funds for this request is as follows:

1. Wastewater Rehabilitation Fund: $370,000

2. Water Rehabilitation Fund: $185,000
This budget adjustment will bring the current project budget of $365,000 to a new total project cost of $920,000.

CONTACT: Rana Moore 916-774-5581 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Adopt Ordinance No. 7000 of the Council of the City of Roseville authorizing certain amendments to the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget and declaring this ordinance to be immediately effective as an appropriation measure.

15. 2024 Power Source Disclosure and Power Content Label (ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT - RESOURCE

PLANNING & GENERATION)
Summary: Staff recommends approval of the 2024 Power Source Disclosure Reports and 2024 Power Content Labels. Senate Bill 1305 requires California electricity suppliers to disclose the sources of their power through Power Source Disclosure Reports. These reports are used to create annual Power Content Labels, which must be posted on suppliers’ websites and shared with customers. There is no fiscal impact associated with the approval of the 2024 Power Source Disclosure Reports and 2024 Power Content Labels.

CONTACT: Melissa Seghezzi 916-774-5652 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Adopt Resolution No. 25-324 approving the 2024 Annual Power Source Disclosure Reports and the 2024 Power Content Labels, and attesting to the veracity of the Annual Reports.

16. RPEAK Evaporative Cooling Construction and Installation Services - Contract Purchase Agreement and Budget Adjustment (ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT - ENGINEERING) Summary: Staff recommends City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Contract Purchase Agreement (CPA) with Performance Mechanical Incorporated (PMI) for Evaporative Cooling Systems Construction and Installation services at the Roseville Peaking Plant (RPEAK) in the amount of $716,114, grant the City Manager, or a designee, the authority to authorize change orders up to 10% of the overall contract cost with a total cost not to exceed $787,725 for unforeseen change orders, and approve a budget adjustment in the amount of $2,750,000 for the project from available resources in the Electric Fund.

CONTACT: Michael Zasso 916-746-1665 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:

a. Adopt Resolution No. 25-331 approving a Contract Purchase Agreement, by and between the City of Roseville and Performance Mechanical, Inc. and authorizing the City Manager to execute it on behalf of the City of Roseville; and
b. Adopt Ordinance No. 7003 of the Council of the City of Roseville authorizing certain amendments to the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget and declaring this ordinance to be immediately effective as an appropriation measure.

17. Second Reading - Water Rate Assistance Program - Roseville Municipal Code Amendment (ENVIRONMENTAL UTILITIES DEPARTMENT - WATER)
Summary: Staff recommends the City Council approve an ordinance for second reading adding Section 14.08.215 to Chapter 14.08 of the Roseville Municipal Code.

CONTACT: Noelle Mattock 916-774-5504 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Adopt Ordinance No. 7004 adding Section 14.08.215 to Chapter 14.08 of Title 14 of the Roseville Municipal Code regarding Water Rate Assistance Program.

18. Second Reading - Campaign Finance Disclosure - Roseville Municipal Code Amendment (CITY

CLERK DEPARTMENT)
Summary: Staff recommends the City Council approve an ordinance for second reading amending Section 2.60.040 of Chapter 2.60 of Title 2 of the Roseville Municipal Code regarding Campaign Finance Disclosure to align with the Fair Political Practices Commission's semi-annual filing dates and to establish clear election cycle dates for all future Roseville General Municipal Elections.

CONTACT: Carmen Avalos 916-774-5269 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Adopt Ordinance No. 7005 amending Section 2.60.040 of Chapter 2.60 of Title 2 of the Roseville Municipal Code regarding Campaign Finance Disclosure.

19. Second Reading - Zoning and Subdivision Tolling Provisions - Roseville Municipal Code Amendments (DEVELOPMENT SERVICES - PLANNING)
Summary: Staff recommends City Council approve an ordinance for second reading amending Section 18.06.230 of Chapter 18.06 of Title 18 of the Roseville Municipal Code regarding Time Period of Approvals and adding Section 19.76.140 to Chapter 19.76 of the Roseville Municipal Code to add new Section 19.76.140 regarding Tolling Provisions.

CONTACT: Lauren Hocker 916-774-5272 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:

a. Adopt Ordinance No. 7006 amending Section 18.06.230 of Chapter 18.06 of Title 18 of the Roseville Municipal Code regarding Time Period of Approvals and adding Section 19.76.140 to Chapter 19.76 of the Roseville Municipal Code to add new Section 19.76.140 regarding Tolling Provisions

20. Proclamation - Cybersecurity Awareness Month October 2025 Summary: Proclaim October 2025 as Cybersecurity Awareness Month in Roseville and officially support the National Cybersecurity Awareness Month, ‘Secure our World’, and the National Public Awareness Campaign, ‘Stop. Think. Connect.™’, and call upon all employees, residents and visitors of Roseville to become educated about cybersecurity and put that knowledge into practice to keep our connected community safe from cyber threats.

CONTACT: Blair Hutchison 916-774-5266 [email protected]

21. Out-of-Country Travel — Greater Sacramento Economic Council, Germany Market Visit (ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT)
Summary: Staff recommends approving an out-of-country travel request for the Mayor, Economic Development Director and Electric Utility Chief Operating Officer to attend a regional delegation to Germany to conduct an industry market visit, led by the Greater Sacramento Economic Council (GSEC). This travel is to leverage opportunities from the Robert Bosch Semiconductor LLC’s (Bosch) expansion in Roseville and is intended to build connectivity between Greater Sacramento and Germany to drive additional investment and jobs into our community. The cost of travel, airfare, lodging, and per diem are estimated to be $6,000 per attendee, for a total of $18,000. There are sufficient funds available in the FY2025-26 General Fund and Electric Fund to cover this cost.

CONTACT: Melissa Anguiano 916-774-5284 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Approve an out-of-country travel request for the Mayor, Economic Development Director and Electric Utility Chief Operating Officer to attend a regional delegation to Germany to conduct an industry market visit, led by the Greater Sacramento Economic Council (GSEC).

22. Minutes of Prior Meetings (CITY CLERK DEPARTMENT)
Summary: Staff recommends approval of the minutes of the October 1, 2025 City Council Closed Session Meeting and the October 1, 2025 City Council Meeting.

CONTACT: Melissa Lipp 916-774-5268 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Approve the minutes of the October 1, 2025 City Council Closed Session Meeting and the October 1, 2025 City Council Meeting.

END OF CONSENT CALENDAR

VII. PRESENTATIONS/REPORTS

23. Council Discretionary Funds - Latino Leadership Council (CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT - CITY

MANAGER)
Summary: Staff recommends Council consider providing sponsorship to Latino Leadership Council, Inc. from Council Discretionary Funds. The Latino Leadership Council is requesting $3,000 for the 2nd annual Dia De Los Muertos event on November 1st and November 2nd in Roseville. This event is free to the public, with celebrations on November 1st at Denio’s Farmers Market from 11:00a.m.-3:00p.m. and on November 2nd at Vernon Street Town Square from 1:00p.m.-6:00p.m. Last year, the City Council awarded the Latino Leadership Council $500 for this event. The balance in the Council Discretionary Funds for FY2025-26 is $20,821.

CONTACT: Heather Blanco 916-746-1171 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Consider providing sponsorship to Latino Leadership Council, Inc. from Council Discretionary Funds for $3,000 for the 2nd annual Dia De Los Muertos event on November 1st and November 2nd in Roseville.

24. Renewable Energy Credits Power Purchase Agreement (ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT - RESOURCE

PLANNING & GENERATION)
Summary: Staff recommends approval to execute a 15-year Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) for renewable energy credits with Desert Breeze Solar, LLC. The annual cost of the PPA is approximately $1.5 million. Funding for the PPA will be included in the Electric Department's future budgets in the Electric Fund, and contingent on the City Council's approval.

CONTACT: William Forsythe 916-774-5619 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Adopt Resolution No. 25-332 approving a Power Purchase Agreement, by and between the City of Roseville and Desert Breeze Solar, LLC, and authorizing the City Manager to execute it on behalf of the City of Roseville.

25. Commercial Corridors Incentive Programs Implementation (ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

DEPARTMENT)
Summary: Staff recommends approval of a Commercial Corridors Development Impact Fee Credit Program and a Commercial Corridors Façade and Frontage Improvement Rebate Program to incentivize investment and development along the corridors. Commercial Corridors include Douglas-Harding, Douglas-Sunrise, and Atlantic Street. Funding for the programs will come from remaining resources in the Corridor Planning Project in the General Fund, which has a remaining balance of approximately $1.01 million.

CONTACT: Gina McColl 916-774-5452 [email protected]

The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Adopt Resolution No. 25-333 approving the Commercial Corridors Development Impact Fee Credit Program; and
b. Adopt Resolution No. 25-334 approving the Commercial Corridors Facade and Frontage Improvement Rebate Program.

26. Amoruso Ranch Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities), Improvement Area No. 2 Bond Issuance (FINANCE DEPARTMENT)
Summary: Amoruso Ranch CFD 1 (Public Facilities) was formed in June 2023, and Improvement Area No. 2 was annexed into the district in March 2025 by unanimous consent of the owner. The bonds are being issued at the developer's request for an amount not to exceed $10,500,000. The CFD will generate special taxes that will be paid by property owners, sufficient to cover the costs of debt service, CFD administration, and any authorized pay-as-you-go facilities, as well as provide funding in the future for the maintenance/replacement of constructed facilities. The issuance of these bonds will not impact the City's General Fund.

CONTACT: Jeannine Thrash 916-774-5473 [email protected] The City Council will consider the recommendation to:
a. Adopt Resolution No. 25-330 authorizing the issuance of Special Tax Bonds for and on behalf of Improvement Area No. 2 of the City of Roseville Amoruso Ranch Community Facilities District No. 1 (Public Facilities), approving and directing the execution of a Fiscal Agent Agreement and Bond Purchase Agreement, approving the Form of Preliminary Official Statement, approving sale of such bonds, and approving other related documents and actions.

VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC: Public Hearing Process
City Council, when considering the matter, will take the following actions:

1. Open the Public Hearing

2. Presentation by staff

3. Presentation by applicant or appellant

4. Accept public testimony

5. Appellant or applicant rebuttal period

6. Close the Public Hearing

7. City Council comments and questions

8. City Council action
Any challenges in court about public hearing matters noticed on this agenda may be limited to only those issues, that were raised orally at the public hearing or in written form received by the City on or before the hearing.

Public Hearings listed for continuance will be continued and posting of this agenda will serve as notice of continuation.

27. Public Facilities Fee Update, Nexus Study Adoption, and Roseville Municipal Code Amendment Summary: This item has been continued to the November 19, 2025 City Council Meeting.

CONTACT: Jeannine Thrash 916-774-5473 [email protected] IX. PUBLIC COMMENTS
This is the second opportunity to make a public comment on non-agenda items.

X. STAFF/COUNCIL REPORTS
XI. ADJOURNMENT

City Council
Communication
Meeting Date: 10/15/2025
Item #: VI.1
File #: 0709-03
Item ID: 2025-620
Title: Sun Rose Permanent Supportive Housing - First Amended and Restated Regulatory Agreement
Contact: Trisha Isom 916-746-1239 [email protected]

SUMMARY
Staff recommends approval of an amended and restated regulatory agreement between the City and Advocates for Mentally Ill Housing, Inc. for the Sun Rose Permanent Supportive Housing project (Sun Rose Apartments), which is a State of California Homekey (Homekey) project and includes 82 studio units for households coming directly from homelessness. The amended agreement includes minor revisions to align with updated Homekey program guidelines. No General Fund resources will be used for this project.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution approving an Amended and Restated Regulatory Agreement with Advocates for Mentally Ill Housing, and authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute it.

BACKGROUND
On February 5, 2025, City Council approved a $1.5 million loan of HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) funds, along with the associated loan documents and Regulatory Agreement, to Advocates for Mentally Ill Housing to support the Sun Rose Apartments permanent supportive housing project. This funding assisted in the rehabilitation of a State of California Homekey project, which includes 82 studio units and one manager's unit designated for individuals and households experiencing homelessness.

In addition to the loan, the Roseville Housing Authority committed eight (8) Projected Based Vouchers (PBVs) to the project, which supports its long-term affordability. Of the PBV vouchers, four are allocated to households earning 30% Area Median Income (AMI), while the remaining four are designated for Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) voucher holders. The original Regulatory Agreement requires that all 82 rental units remain affordable to extremely low-income households for a minimum of 55 years. Rents must not exceed the amount affordable to households earning 30% of AMI, as determined annually by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and adjusted by household size.

The amendment, recommended for Council consideration, includes minor revisions to align with updated State of California Homekey program guidelines. Notably, the new guidelines allow up to four (4) VASH PBV households to earn incomes of up to 60% AMI, thereby broadening eligibility and enhancing housing access for local veterans. If approved, this amendment will continue to advance the City's General Plan goals related to affordable housing and further strengthen Roseville's commitment to addressing homelessness and supporting vulnerable populations.

FISCAL IMPACT

No General Fund resources will be used for the implementation of the Amended and Restated Regulatory Agreement for the Sun Rose Apartments project.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply to activities that will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, or is otherwise not considered a project as defined by CEQA Statute §21065 and CEQA State Guidelines §15060(c)(3) and §15378.

Approval of the Amended and Restated Regulatory Agreement for Sun Rose Apartments meets the above criteria and is not subject to CEQA. No additional environmental review is required.

CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLAN/OVERARCHING GOALS

3. Enhance economic vitality
Respectfully Submitted,
Trisha Isom, Housing Manager
Melissa Anguiano, Economic Development Director
ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution 25-323

2. Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated REVIEWERS:

Trisha Isom, Economic Development Department - Housing Created/Initiated - 9/22/2025 Trisha Isom, Economic Development Department - Housing Approved - 9/22/2025 Melissa Anguiano, Economic Development Department Approved - 9/23/2025 Gretchen Hakala, City Attorney Department Approved - 9/26/2025 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Approved - 9/29/2025 Ryan DeVore, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 9/30/2025 Dennis Kauffman, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 9/30/2025 Michelle Sheidenberger, City Attorney Department Approved - 10/1/2025 Dominick Casey, City Manager Department - City Manager Approved - 10/1/2025 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Final Approval - 10/2/2025

RESOLUTION NO. 25-323

APPROVING A FIRST AMENDED AND RESTATED REGULATORY AGREEMENT, BY

AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE AND ADVOCATES FOR MENTALLY ILL HOUSING, INC., AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE IT AND

ANY OTHER RELATED DOCUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE WHEREAS, on February 5, 2025, City Council approved a $1.5 million loan of HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) funds, along with the associated loan documents and Regulatory Agreement, to Advocates for Mentally Ill Housing to support the Sun Rose Apartments permanent supportive housing project; and
WHEREAS, this First Amended and Restated Regulatory Agreement includes minor revisions to align with updated State of California Homekey program guidelines; and WHEREAS, Placer County released a Request for Proposal and chose Advocates for Mentally Ill Housing, Inc. (AMIH) to own and operate Sunrose Apartments; and WHEREAS, a First Amended and Restated Regulatory Agreement has been reviewed by the City Council; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roseville that said First Amended and Restated Regulatory Agreement is approved and that the City Manager, or his designee, is authorized to execute it and any other related documents necessary to fund the Sunrose Apartments permanent supportive housing project on behalf of the City of Roseville.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Roseville this ___ day of ______________, 2025, by the following vote on roll call:

AYES COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS:
______________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
________________________
City Clerk

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025] Free recording in accordance with
California Government Code
Sections 6103 and 27383

RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM
City of Roseville
311 Vernon Street
Roseville, California 95678

CITY OF ROSEVILLE

HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM (HOME)

FIRST AMENDED AND RESTATED REGULATORY AGREEMENT
THIS REGULATORY AGREEMENT (this "Agreement") is made and entered into this _____ day of____________ 20__, by and between Advocates for Mentally Ill Housing, Inc., a California nonprofit public benefit corporation with its principal place of business located at P.O.

Box 5216, Auburn CA95604 (“Borrower”) and the CITY OF ROSEVILLE, a municipal corporation (the “City”) (collectively, the “Parties”).

Recitals
A. Borrower is the owner and holder of a fee estate in the real property located at 110 North Sunrise Avenue, Roseville, California 95661, County of Placer, as more particularly described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein (the “Property”).

B. Borrower is converting the Property to a Project Homekey site by rehabilitating eightythree (83) residential units. Eighty-two (82) units will be as follows: fifty (50) units will be occupied by the chronically homeless population, twenty-seven (27) units will be occupied by persons experiencing homelessness and five (5) units will be occupied by youth experiencing homelessness or at-risk of homelessness (the "Development").

C. The Development will be financed in whole or in part and regulated by a permanent loan from the City in a principal amount not to exceed ONE MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($1,500,000) (the "HOME Loan") from the HOME Investment Partnerships Program ("HOME Program"). The HOME Loan will be provided to Borrower by the City in accordance with California Code of Regulations, Title 25, sections 8200, et seq., and 24 CFR Part 92, the federal regulations governing the HOME Program (together, the "HOME Regulations") and the HOME Standard Agreement. In consideration of the City’s commitment to make the HOME Loan, the Borrower and the City have entered into a Loan Agreement executed concurrently herewith (the “HOME Loan Agreement”). The proceeds of the HOME Loan shall be disbursed, used and governed by the HOME Loan Agreement by and between the Borrower and the City.

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025] The HOME Loan Agreement, including all exhibits and attachments thereto, is incorporated in full by reference into this Agreement.

D. Borrower agrees to abide by all provisions of the HOME Loan Agreement with respect to the Development, and Borrower shall execute a promissory note evidencing its obligation to repay the HOME Loan (the "HOME Note"). The HOME Note shall be secured by a deed of trust in favor of the City dated on or about even date herewith and executed by the Borrower to be recorded against the Property and the parties’ respective interests therein (the "HOME Deed of Trust"). Borrower agrees to be bound by all terms and conditions of the HOME Note and the HOME Deed of Trust. The HOME Note, the HOME Deed of Trust, the HOME Loan Agreement, the HOME Standard Agreement and this Agreement are collectively referred to herein as the "City HOME Loan Documents".

E. Borrower is a duly organized California non-profit public benefit corporation with the power, authority and ability to comply with the City requirements, the HOME Regulations and the City HOME Loan Documents.

F. As further consideration for the HOME Loan for the rehabilitation of the eighty-three (83) residential units, and in furtherance of the purposes of the HOME Program, the Borrower must enter into this Agreement and has consented thereby to be and to have the Development and the Property regulated and restricted by the City as provided herein.

The purpose of this Agreement is to regulate and restrict occupancy, rents, operation, ownership, and management of the Development and the Property to ensure continued affordability in compliance with the requirements of the City and the HOME Program.

The covenants in this Agreement are intended to run with the land and be binding on Borrower and Borrower’s successors-in-interest to the land for the full term of this Agreement. Borrower further agrees to be bound by the City HOME Loan Documents.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereto agree as follows:

1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are a part of this Agreement.

2. Property. The Development will be located on the Property.

3. Definitions. Unless the context requires otherwise, the terms used in this Agreement shall be governed by the definitions set forth in 24 CFR Part 92, and California Code of Regulations, Title 25, sections 8201 and 8301. All references to code sections refer to Title 25 of the California Code of Regulations, unless otherwise noted.

For purposes of this Agreement, the following additional definitions shall apply:
a. "Assisted Unit" means a dwelling unit the construction of which was assisted with proceeds of the HOME Loan. For purposes of this Agreement, eighty-two (82) of the eighty-three (83) residential units in this Development are “Assisted Units” as defined herein.

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025] b. "Eligible Households" means Extremely Low-Income Households as defined in subdivision (j) of section 3 below, as well as up to four (4) households receiving project-based vouchers as part of the Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (“VASH”) whose income is sixty percent (60%) or less of the area median income as determined by HUD.
c. "Fiscal Integrity" means that the total of Operating Income plus funds released pursuant to this Agreement from the operating reserve account is sufficient to (1) pay all current Operating Expenses, (2) pay all current approved debt service, (3) fully fund all reserves pursuant to section 19, and (4) pay other extraordinary costs permitted by this Agreement. The ability to pay any or all of the annual permitted distributions shall not be considered in determining fiscal integrity. d. "HOME Rents" means rents calculated annually by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") and are either the lesser of the Fair Market Rents, as that term is defined and published annually by HUD, or thirty percent (30%) of thirty percent (30%) of area median income (“Extremely low HOME Rents”).
e. "Initial Operating Year" means the first year of operation, or portion thereof, of the newly constructed rental housing Development beginning at the time of initial occupancy of an Assisted Unit and ending on the last day of the fiscal year of the Development.
f. "Operating Expenses" means the amount approved by the City that is necessary to pay for the essential recurring expenses of the Development, such as utilities, maintenance, management, taxes, licenses, and the cost of on-site supportive services coordination, but not including debt service, required reserve account deposits, or other supportive services costs.
g. "Operating Income" means all income generated in connection with operation of the rental housing development including rental income from Assisted and non-Assisted Units, rental income from commercial space, laundry and equipment rental fees, rental subsidy payments, and interest on any accounts other than approved reserve accounts related to the rental housing development. "Operating Income" does not include security and equipment deposits, payments to the Borrower for supportive services (except for funds applied towards the cost of on-site supportive service coordination), or tax benefits received by the Borrower.
h. "Rent" means all charges, other than deposits, paid by the tenant for the use and occupancy of an Assisted Unit and any mandatory charge for direct or supportive tenant services in a rental housing development, including a utility allowance in an amount determined by the City of Roseville.
i. "Residual Receipts" means project funds remaining after payment of expenses as described in items 1 through 5 of section 20 (b) of this Agreement.

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025] j. "Extremely Low-Income Household" means Eligible Households whose income is thirty percent (30%) or less of the area median income as determined by HUD. k. “VASH PBV Units” means up to four (4) households receiving project-based vouchers as part of the Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (“VASH”) whose income is sixty percent (60%) or less of the area median income as determined by HUD.

4. Compliance with Program Requirements.
a. The Borrower agrees that at all times its acts regarding the Development and the use of funds provided herein shall be in conformity with all provisions of the HOME Program including the statutes, the HOME Regulations and such policies and procedures of the City and of HUD pertaining thereto. The Borrower acknowledges that it is familiar with such applicable provisions and has been professionally advised to the extent necessary for the purpose of enabling the Borrower to fully comply with such provisions.
b. The financial assistance provided under the HOME Program is governed by 24 CFR Part 92. With respect to the assistance, Borrower agrees to comply with all requirements and obligations as described in 24 CFR Part 92, as well as all provisions governing the use of HOME funds. Borrower agrees to comply with the directives of the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) as necessary to ensure compliance with the obligations of HCD as set forth in its agreements with HUD regarding the use of HOME funds.

5. Term of Agreement. The term of this Agreement shall commence upon its recordation in the office of the Placer County Recorder, in which county the Property and the Development is located, and shall remain in full force and effect and shall apply to the Property and the Development for fifty-five (55) years after the date Borrower obtains a Certificate of Occupancy from the City of Roseville for the Project, regardless of any prepayment of the HOME Loan or sale, assignment, transfer or conveyance of the Development and/or the Property, unless terminated earlier by the City pursuant to the terms of this Agreement or extended by the mutual consent of the Parties thereto. This Agreement shall remain and continue without regard to the term of any mortgage or the transfer of the Property ownership, other than by foreclosure or deed in lieu of foreclosure.

6. Marketing Plan
a. Borrower shall prepare and implement a Marketing Plan, subject to prior approval by the City, that specifies how the Borrower intends to market the project to prospective tenants in the Project’s market area. The Marketing Plan shall specifically address how the Borrower intends to market the Project to underserved populations in Project market area and the frequency of marketing efforts. The City agrees that the Borrower may utilize the HUD 935.2 Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan for these purposes. b. Borrower agrees to evaluate the effectiveness of the Marketing Plan in reaching

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025] underserved populations on an annual basis and to revise it as necessary to better reach underserved populations that are not being reached. The revised Marketing Plan shall be submitted to the City for approval prior to implementation.

7. Assisted Unit Schedule. Upon occupancy following the completion of construction and for the term of this Agreement, the Borrower shall rent Assisted Units only in accordance with the Schedule of Assisted Units set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
a. Assisted Unit Standards. For the full term of this Agreement, the number, size, type, and amenity level of Assisted Units shall not be fewer than the number nor different from the size, type and amenity level described in Exhibit B.

8. Tenant Selection Standards.
a. All of the Assisted Units must be rented to Eligible Households as defined in Section 3(b) herein.
b. Borrower shall rent vacant Assisted Units in the Development only to eligible households in accordance with a Management Plan approved by the City. Such Management Plan may be periodically altered and such alteration must be submitted to and approved by the City prior to use. The Management Plan shall include:
(1) Reasonable criteria for selection or rejection of tenant applications which shall not discriminate in violation of any federal, state or local law governing discrimination (except to the extent necessary to qualify the tenant as a senior citizen), or any other arbitrary factor.
(2) Prohibition of local residency requirements;
(3) Prohibition of local residency preferences, except where accompanied by an equal preference for employment in the local area and applied to areas not smaller than municipal jurisdictions or recognized communities within unincorporated areas;
(4) Tenant selection procedures that include the following components, and that are available to prospective tenants upon request:
(A) Selection of tenants based on order of application, lottery or other reasonable method approved by the City;
(B) Notification to tenant applicants of eligibility for residency and, based on turnover history for Assisted Units in the Development, the approximate date when an Assisted Unit may be available; (C) Notification of tenant applicants who are found ineligible to occupy an Assisted Unit of their ineligibility and the reason for the ineligibility,

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025] and of their right to appeal this determination;
(D) Maintenance of a waiting list of applicant households eligible to occupy Assisted Units and non-Assisted Units designated for various tenant income levels, which shall be made available to prospective tenants upon request;
(E) Targeting specific special needs populations in accordance with this Agreement and applicable laws; and
(F) Affirmative fair housing marketing procedures as specified in the Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan Compliance Regulations of HUD, 24 CFR Part 200.620(a)-(c), or similar affirmative fair marketing housing plan as approved by the City.
c. Borrower shall rent vacant Assisted Units to households with no less than the number of people specified in the following schedule:

Unit Size Minimum Number of Persons in Household
Studio 1

9. Nondiscrimination. Borrower shall not discriminate against any tenant or prospective tenant on the basis of race, religion, sex, age (except to the extent necessary to qualify the tenant as a senior citizen), disability, marital status, or any other arbitrary factor in violation of any state, federal or local law governing discrimination in rental housing.

Housing which is intended to benefit, and is therefore limited to senior citizens, is permitted only with the prior approval of the selection criteria by the City.

10. Assurance of Compliance with the “Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2022” (VAWA) (S.3623 - 117th Congress (2021-2022) (as amended or reauthorized) Title VI - Safe Homes for Victims of Domestic Violence, Dating Violence, Sexual Assault, and Stalking – Sec. 601-606. See also 81 FR 80803, November 16, 2016 and 24 CFR

92.359.

VAWA provides housing protections for survivors of domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking when it comes to finding and keeping a home, they can feel safe in. VAWA applies for all victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking, regardless of sex, gender identity, or sexual orientation, and which must be applied consistently with all nondiscrimination and fair housing requirements.

VAWA now expands housing protections to HUD programs beyond HUD’s public housing program and HUD’s tenant-based and project-based Section 8 programs.

VAWA now provides enhanced protections and options for victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. During the performance of this Agreement, the HOME Recipient shall ensure that all requirements of VAWA are complied with, including but not limited to:

A. Domestic Violence survivors are not denied assistance as an applicant, or

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025] evicted or have assistance terminated as a tenant, because the applicant or tenant is or has been a victim of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking.

B. It will implement an ‘emergency transfer plan’, which allows for domestic violence survivors to move to another safe and available unit if they fear for their life and safety.

C. It will provide “Protections against denials, terminations, and evictions that directly result from being a victim of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking, if the applicant or tenant otherwise qualifies for admission, assistance, participation, or occupancy.”
D. It will implement a ‘Low-barrier certification process’ where a domestic violence survivor need only to self-certify in order to document the domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking, ensuring third party documentation does not cause a barrier in a survivor expressing their rights and receiving the protections needed to keep themselves safe.

11. Rental Agreement and Occupancy Procedures (the "Lease"). a. All rental or occupancy agreements for Assisted Units shall be for a term of not less than one (1) year, unless by mutual agreement between the tenant and the Borrower.
b. All rental or occupancy agreements are subject to City approval; and shall include:
(1) provisions requiring good cause for termination of tenancy; (2) a provision requiring that the facts constituting the grounds for any eviction be set forth in the notice provided to the tenant pursuant to state law;
(3) notice of grievance procedures for hearing complaints of tenants and appeal of management action; and
(4) a requirement that the tenant annually recertify household income and size.
c. The Borrower shall not terminate the tenancy or refuse to renew the lease of a tenant of an Assisted Unit except for serious or repeated violation of the terms and conditions of the Lease; for violation of applicable federal, state, or local law; for completion of the transitional housing tenancy period; or for other good cause. d. To terminate or refuse to renew tenancy, the Borrower must serve written notice upon the tenant specifying the grounds for the action at least thirty (30) days

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025] before the termination of the tenancy.
e. One or more of the following constitutes "good cause":
(1) failure by the tenant to maintain applicable eligibility requirements under the HOME Program or other eligibility requirements as approved by the City;
(2) material noncompliance by the tenant with the lease, including one or more substantial violations of the lease or habitual minor violations of the lease which:
(a) adversely affect the health and safety of any person or the right of any tenant to the quiet enjoyment of the leased premises and related Project facilities;
(b) substantially interfere with the management, maintenance, or operation of the Development; or
(c) result from the failure or refusal to pay, in a timely fashion, Rent or other permitted charges when due. Failure or refusal to pay in a timely fashion is a minor violation if payment is made during the 3- day notice period;
(3) material failure by the tenant to carry out obligations under federal, state or local law;
(4) subletting by the tenant of all or any portion of the Assisted Unit; or (5) any other action or conduct of the tenant constituting significant problems which can be reasonably resolved only by eviction of the tenant, provided that the Borrower has previously notified the tenant that the conduct or action in question would be considered cause for eviction. Examples of action or conduct in this category include the refusal of a tenant, after written notice, to accept reasonable rules or any reasonable changes in the lease or the refusal to recertify income or household size; or f. The Lease may not contain any of the following provisions:
(1) Agreement by the tenant to be sued, to admit guilt or to a judgment in favor of the Borrower or Borrower's agent in a lawsuit brought in connection with the lease;
(2) Agreement by the tenant that the Borrower may take, hold, or sell personal property of household members without notice to the tenant and a court decision on the rights of the parties. This prohibition, however, does not apply to an agreement by the tenant concerning disposition of personal property remaining in the housing unit after the tenant has

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025] moved out of the unit. The Borrower may dispose of this personal property in accordance with state law;
(3) Agreement by the tenant not to hold the Borrower or Borrower's agents legally responsible for any action or failure to act, whether intentional or negligent;
(4) Agreement of the tenant that the Borrower or Borrower's agent may institute a lawsuit without notice to the tenant;
(5) Agreement by the tenant that the Borrower or Borrower's agent may evict the tenant or household members without instituting a civil court proceeding in which the tenant has the opportunity to present a defense, or before a court decision on the rights of the parties; (6) Agreement by the tenant to waive any right to a trial by jury; (7) Agreement by the tenant to waive tenant's right to appeal, or to otherwise challenge in court, a court decision in connection with the lease; and (8) Agreement by the tenant to pay attorneys' fees or other legal costs even if the tenant wins in a court proceeding by the owner against the tenant.

The tenant, however, may be obligated to pay costs if the tenant loses. g. The Borrower shall establish reasonable rules of conduct and occupancy. Such rules shall be consistent with state law and the HOME Regulations. Said rules shall be in writing and shall be given to each tenant upon occupancy. Any change shall become effective no fewer than thirty (30) days after giving written notice thereof to each household.
h. The Borrower shall adopt an appeal and grievance procedure to resolve grievances filed by tenants and appeals of actions taken by Borrower with respect to tenants' occupancy in the Development, and prospective tenants' applications for occupancy. The Borrower’s appeal and grievance procedure shall be subject to City approval and, at a minimum, shall include the following:
(1) a requirement for delivery to each tenant and applicant of a written copy of the appeal and grievance procedure;
(2) procedures for informal dispute resolution;
(3) a right to a hearing before an impartial body, which shall consist of one or more persons with the power to render a final decision on the appeal or grievance; and
(4) procedures for the conduct of an appeal or grievance hearing and the appointment of an impartial hearing body.

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025]

12. Rents.
a. Period of Affordability.
(1) During the Period of Affordability, one hundred percent (100%) of HOMEassisted units must be occupied by households earning no more than thirty percent (30%) of area median income, except for a maximum of four (4) VASH PBV Units earning no more than sixty percent (60%) of the area median income, at initial occupancy, as established by HUD at rent levels consistent with 24 CFR

92.252, as amended, unless this requirement is superseded by the statutory requirements of other state or federal funding sources. b. For Assisted Units receiving project-based rental assistance, pursuant to 24 CFR Part 92.252(b) (2), rents shall not exceed the amount allowable under the Federal or State project-based rental subsidy program.
c. If the Assisted Units are designated as fixed units pursuant to 24 CFR Part 92.252(j) in Exhibit B, then any household certified as an Eligible Household upon occupancy but whose income increases above the eligibility level must pay as Rent the lesser of the amount payable by the tenant under state or local law or thirty percent (30%) of the household's adjusted monthly income for rent and utilities; except that the Rent may equal the market rent for comparable, unassisted units in the neighborhood.

13. Rent Limitations.

Rents of HOME-assisted units shall not exceed the LOW and HIGH HOME rents allowed under 24 CFR 92.252, as amended, except as noted below. a. In a project with 5 or more HOME-assisted units, a minimum of twenty percent (20%) of all HOME-assisted units shall be occupied by Very Low-Income households with rents not exceeding LOW HOME rents, except as noted in b. below.
b. HOME-assisted units receiving state or federal project-based rental subsidies may exceed HIGH or LOW HOME rents if the household qualifies to reside in the unit based on income and household size and the tenant-based portion of the rent does not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the household’s adjusted income.

The HOME-assisted unit’s maximum rent (tenant contribution and project-based rental subsidy) becomes the rent allowable under the state or federal projectbased subsidy. c. If the HOME-assisted units are designated as “Floating” units in Section 1 above, any household certified as an Eligible Household upon occupancy but whose income increases above the eligibility level must pay rent the lesser of the amount payable by the tenant under state or local law or thirty percent (30%) of the household’s adjusted monthly income for rent and utilities; except that the

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025] rent may not exceed the market rent for comparable, unassisted units in the neighborhood.
d. If the HOME-assisted units are designated as “Fixed” units in Section 1 above, any household certified as an Eligible Household upon occupancy but whose income increases above the eligibility level must pay rent the lesser of the amount payable by the tenant under state or local law or thirty percent (30%) of the household’s adjusted monthly income for rent and utilities; except that the rent may equal the market rent for comparable, unassisted units in the neighborhood.

14. Security Deposits.
a. Security deposits shall be required of tenants only in accordance with state law and this Agreement.
b. Any security deposits collected by the Borrower or Borrower's agent shall be kept separate and apart from all other funds of the Development in a trust account with a depository insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (F.D.I.C.), or other comparable federal deposit insurance program, and shall be held and disbursed in accordance with State law. The balance of such account shall at all times equal or exceed the aggregate of all outstanding obligations under said account, plus accrued interest thereon.

15. Certification of Tenant Income and Household Size.
a. The income and household size of all households occupying Assisted Units shall be certified by the Borrower prior to occupancy and recertified annually thereafter in a manner approved by the City and specified in the Development's Management Plan.
b. If the income of a tenant upon recertification exceeds the upper limit for Extremely Low-Income Households, and there are no other requirements statutorily imposed by another federal or state funding source or tax credit program, that tenant shall not have his or her Lease terminated as a result thereof, but shall be charged rents as provided in section 10. c. Where a tenant occupying a unit designated for occupancy by an Extremely LowIncome household no longer qualifies to reside therein at re-certification, but qualifies as an otherwise eligible household, the rent level appropriate for that income level shall be charged pursuant to Section 12.

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025]

16. Maintenance and Management.
a. Borrower is specifically responsible for all maintenance, repair, and management functions for the Development, including without limitation, selection of tenants, recertification of household income and size, evictions, collection of rents, routine and extraordinary repairs and replacement of capital items. Borrower shall maintain units and common areas in a safe and sanitary manner in accordance with local health, building, and housing codes, HUD housing quality standards pursuant to 24 CFR Section 882.109, and the Management Plan described above.
b. Borrower may, with the prior written approval of the City, contract with a management agent for the performance of the services or duties required in paragraph a, above. However, such an arrangement does not relieve the Borrower of responsibility for proper performance of these duties. Such contract shall contain a provision allowing the Borrower to terminate the contract without penalty upon no more than thirty (30) days' notice. Upon a determination by the City, and notice to the Borrower thereof that the contractor and the Management Plan has failed to operate the Development in accordance with this Agreement, the Borrower shall exercise such right of termination forthwith and shall make immediate arrangements, which shall be subject to City approval, for continuing performance of the requirements of this Agreement.
c. Borrower may operate the Development itself only with prior written approval of the City. Upon a determination by the City, and notice to the Borrower thereof, that the Borrower has failed to operate the Development in accordance with this Agreement, the City may require the Borrower to contract with a management agent to operate the Development, or to make such other arrangements as the City deems necessary to ensure performance of the requirements of this Agreement.

17. Hazard and Liability Insurance.
a. The Borrower shall at all times keep the Development insured against loss by fire, flood (as required pursuant to 24 CFR 92.358), and such other hazards, casualties, liabilities and contingencies, and in such amounts and for such periods as may be approved by City, provided that such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. All insurance policies and renewals thereof shall be issued by a carrier and in a form acceptable to the City. Property insurance policies shall name the City as an additional loss payee and liability insurance policies shall name the City as additionally insured, as approved by the City. All premiums shall be paid by Borrower.
b. Insurance proceeds and condemnation awards for any loss to or taking of the Development, or any portion thereof, shall be applied or utilized by Borrower as provided in the Deed of Trust executed by Borrower and referred to in the Recitals hereof.

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025]

18. Annual Report. The Borrower shall file with the City an annual report no later than sixty (60) days after the end of each fiscal year as established for the Development pursuant to section 19(a) of this Agreement. The report shall contain a certification by the Borrower as to such information as the City may then require including, but not limited to, the following:
a. The fiscal condition of the Development, including a financial statement for the previous fiscal year that includes a balance sheet and a profit and loss statement indicating any surplus or deficit in operating accounts; a detailed itemized listing of income and expenses; the amounts of any fiscal reserves and the total amount of Residual Receipts received. Such financial statement shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements of the City and HUD. The City may require that the financial statement be audited at the Borrower's expense by an independent certified public accountant acceptable to the City or other person designated by the City.
b. The substantial physical defects in the Project, including a description of any major repair or maintenance work undertaken or needed in the previous and current fiscal years. Such statement shall describe what steps the Borrower has taken in order to maintain the Project in a safe and sanitary condition in accordance with applicable housing and building codes.
c. The occupancy of the Development indicating:
(1) the verified income of each current household; and
(2) the current rents charged each household and whether these rents include utilities.
d. General management performance, including tenant relations and other relevant information.
e. A summary of the information received from the recertification of tenants' incomes.
f. Evidence of a currently paid hazard and flood insurance policy, with loss payable to the City as required by Section 16.
g. Evidence of a currently paid liability insurance policy, naming the City as an additional loss payee as required by Section 16.
h. Other information reasonably required by the City and HUD.

19. Document Review and Inspections.
a. Upon not less than forty-eight (48) hours' notice to the Borrower, the City or its designee may, at any time during the term of the HOME Loan, enter and inspect the physical premises and inspect all accounting records pertaining to the

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025] construction or operation of the Development. Upon request by the City, the Borrower shall notify occupants of upcoming inspections of their units in accordance with State law.
b. The City may perform or cause to be performed audits of any and all phases of the Borrower's activities related to the Development. At the City's request, the Borrower shall provide, at its own expense, an audit of the financial condition of the project certified by an independent certified public accountant, but only in the event and at such time as HUD is no longer conducting annual audits and providing copies of audit reports to City.
c. The City may request any other information that it deems necessary to monitor compliance with requirements set forth in this Agreement and the HOME Standard Agreement. Such information shall be promptly provided by the Borrower.
d. Commencing one (1) year after the date of the final Certificate of Occupancy for the Project and annually thereafter, Borrower shall pay to the CITY, not later than March 31 of each year, a tenant monitoring fee equal to forty dollars ($40) for each occupied, rent restricted, apartment unit within the Project. A penalty of ten percent (10%) per month shall be assessed against any fee not paid when due.

20. Annual Operating Budget.
a. The fiscal year for the Development shall commence on January 1st and conclude on December 31st.
b. No later than sixty (60) days prior to the beginning of each subsequent fiscal year of the Development, the Borrower shall submit to the City a proposed annual operating budget on a form provided by the City. The proposed annual operating budget shall set forth the Borrower's estimate of the Development's income, operating expenses and debt service for the upcoming year, reserves, proposed rent adjustments, and a year-to-date operating statement. Annual operating budgets and rent adjustments are subject to approval by the City. c. Annual operating budgets are subject to written approval by the City. Increases of five percent (5%) or less in the total operating budget and increases in specific operating expense categories (i.e. renting expenses, administrative expenses, utility expenses, operations and maintenance expenses, taxes and insurance expenses) of five percent (5%) or less shall be deemed approved by the City.

Borrower shall operate the Development in accordance with the approved annual budget.
d. Annual rent adjustments are subject to written approval by the City. For projects approved by the City using Low HOME rents less a utility allowance, rent increases which do not exceed the upper limits for low HOME rents shall be deemed approved by the City. For projects approved by the City using rents below low HOME rents, rent increases which do not exceed the most recently

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025] published annual average percentage change in the United States City of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index, Residential Rent for All Urban Consumers for the West (CPI) shall be deemed approved by the City. In the event this particular CPI index is no longer published, the City shall select a similar index for this purpose.
e. Borrower shall operate the Development in accordance with the First-Year Operating Budget approved by and on file with the City. Such budget shall show all anticipated income, debt service and expenses for management, operations, reserves and maintenance for the first fiscal year or portion thereof following initial occupancy.

21. Required Reserves.
a. Replacement Reserve. Reserves for replacement shall be in accordance with HOME Program regulations and as required by the Senior Lender. Reserves shall be established and funded by Borrower in the minimum amount of $3,458.33 per month, and maintained continuously. Commencing no later than the end of the second month following the initial occupancy of the Development or such other date as the City shall designate in writing, the Borrower shall establish a segregated interest-bearing replacement reserve account in an F.D.I.C. or other comparable federally-insured financial institution. Funds from the replacement reserve are to be used for defraying the cost of infrequent major repairs, and replacement of building components that are too costly to be absorbed by the Development’s annual operating budget.
(1) Withdrawals shall only be made for capital improvements, such as replacing or repairing structural elements, furniture, fixtures or equipment of the Development which are reasonably required to preserve the Property.
(3) The replacement reserve shall be funded from Operating Income or a combination of Operating Income and development sources as required by California Code of Regulations, Title 25, section 8309. The City may periodically adjust the amount of required deposits to the replacement reserve for the Development based on the results of reserve studies or other reliable indicators of the need for replacement reserve funds over time.
b. Operating Reserve. Commencing no later than the end of the second month following the initial occupancy of the Development, or such other date as the City shall designate in writing, the Borrower shall establish an operating reserve account or subaccount within the project's general operating account in an amount required by California Code of Regulations, Title 25, section 8308.

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025] (1) Funds from the operating reserve shall be used for defraying operating shortfalls arising from unforeseen circumstances beyond the rent-up period.
(2) Borrower shall fully replace any withdrawals from the operating reserve using available cash flow prior to use of any cash flow to pay deferred developer fee, asset management, partnership management or similar fees, or distributions.
(3) Upon occurrence of both of the following events, the City may reduce the required minimum balance: (i) operation at a debt service coverage ratio of 1.15 or greater for five (5) years; and (ii) operation at an Operating Expense coverage ratio of 1.08, where Operating Expense ratio is defined to equal effective gross income, less required replacement reserve deposits and non-contingent debt service, divided by total Operating Expenses, not including the approved cost of supportive services coordination.
(4) Where all development funding sources are legally precluded from using their funds to capitalize the operating reserve as required by California Code of Regulations, Title 25, section 8309, the operating reserve may be funded from Operating Income, provided that cash flow is sufficient to reasonably ensure that the required balance can be accumulated within six years of initial occupancy.

22. Recordkeeping and Reports.
a. Accounting Records. In a manner subject to City approval, Borrower shall maintain on an accrual or modified accrual basis, a general ledger accounting system that is posted monthly and that accurately and fully shows all assets, liabilities, income and expenses of the Development. All records and books relating to this system shall be kept for a period of at least seven years and in such a manner as to ensure that the records are reasonably protected from destruction or tampering. All records shall be subject to City inspection and audit.
c. Other Records and Reports. The management agent designated by Borrower, and as approved by the City, will be responsible for recordkeeping and reports, including those required to comply with Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity requirements. The management agent will establish and maintain a comprehensive system of records, books, accounts in a manner conforming to the directives of the Borrower in order to assist the City in meeting federal and state recordkeeping and reporting requirements. All records, books, and accounts will be subject to examination at reasonable hours by any authorized representative of the City.

23. Use of Income from Operations.

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025] a. The Borrower, or Borrower's management agent, shall promptly deposit all Operating Income in a segregated account established exclusively for the Development with an F.D.I.C. or other comparable federally-insured financial institution.
b. Withdrawals from the account shall be made only in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, and the approved budget, and shall be disbursed, applied, or reserved and set aside for payment when due, in the following priority, to the extent available: (1) salaries, wages, and any other compensation due and payable to the employees or agents of the Borrower employed on site in connection with the maintenance, administration or operation of the Development, along with all withholding taxes, insurance premiums, Social Security payments and other payroll taxes or payments required in connection with such employees; (2) all charges incurred in the operation of the Development in connection with utilities, real estate taxes and assessments, and liability, fire and other hazard insurance; (3) payments of required interest, principal, impounds, fees and charges, if any, on loans other than the HOME Loan which are secured by liens on the Property and which have been approved by the City; (4) all other expenses incurred to cover operating costs, including the fee of the managing agent and any extraordinary expenses, in accordance with the approved annual operating budget of the Development or as otherwise approved in advance by the City; (5) deposits to required operating and replacement reserve accounts, if applicable.
c. The balance of Operating Income remaining after the payments described in section 21(b), above, shall be deemed Residual Receipts to be paid and applied as provided in section 23, below.

24. Non-Assisted Units and Common Areas.
a. Borrower shall establish and implement a rent structure for the non-Assisted residential unit which ensures the fiscal integrity of the Development. Borrower shall estimate all income and expenses attributable to the non-Assisted unit in the annual operating budget described in section 17, above, and shall report all income and expenses attributable to the non-Assisted unit in the Annual Report described in Section 15, above.
b. Borrower shall maintain and repair both Assisted and non-Assisted units equally without regard to their designation as Assisted or non-Assisted. c. Tenant selection practices for non-Assisted units shall comply with state and federal nondiscrimination laws.
d. The exterior walls, windows, lighting, walkways, mailboxes, landscaping, nonresidential space, and other common areas of the Development shall be safe, clean, well maintained, and in good working order.

25. Residual Receipts and Distributions.

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025] a. The provisions of this section shall apply only at such time as HUD no longer regulates the Development in connection with funding or subsidies for the Development.
b. Residual Receipts shall be applied in the following priority order:
(1) First, towards payment of any:
(a) Approved deferred developer fee, pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Title 25, section 8312; and
(b) Asset management, partnership management and similar fees, including fees paid to investors, in an amount not to exceed the sum of:
i. An amount for the current, equal to $30,000 for 2016 and increased at the rate of 3.5% for each subsequent year, plus
ii. Unpaid asset management, partnership management,
and similar fees accrued for a period not to exceed three project fiscal years following the year during which they are earned, up to the difference between the limit for the year and the amount paid for that year.
(2) Second, fifty percent (50%) to the Borrower as distributions (“Distributions”) and fifty percent (50%) to the (City) as payment on the HOME Loan.
(a) If the terms of other public agencies’ financing also require payments from remaining cash flow, the City may agree to share what would otherwise be its fifty percent (50%) share of available cash flow with the public agencies in amounts proportional to the agencies’ respective loan amounts.
(b) To be consistent with the terms of other public agency loans, the City may agree to set the percentage payable to the Borrower at an amount less than fifty percent (50%).
(c) For projects with income from project-based Section 8 or similar project-based rental assistance that is not underwritten by other Development lenders, the City may reduce the Borrower’s share to an amount equivalent to the amount they would receive if one of the other lender’s loan amount was based on an income stream that included the income from the rental assistance.
c. A Borrower may not accumulate Distributions from year to year. A Borrower may deposit all or a portion of permitted Distributions into a Development account for

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025] disbursement in subsequent years. These future disbursements shall not reduce the otherwise permitted Distribution in those subsequent years. Borrower shall receive Distributions only once for each fiscal year.
d. Payment of Distributions, deferred developer fee, asset management fees, partnership management and similar fees shall be permitted only after the Borrower submits a complete annual report and operating budget and the City determines that the report and budget demonstrate compliance with all Program requirements for the applicable year. Circumstances under which no Distributions, deferred developer fee, asset management fees or partnership management and similar fees shall be paid include:
(1) When written notice of default has been issued by any entity with an equitable or beneficial interest in the Development;
(2) When the City determines that the Borrower has failed to comply with the City's written notice of any reasonable requirement for proper maintenance or operation of the Development or use of Development income;
(3) If all currently required debt service and Operating Expenses have not been paid;
(4) If the replacement reserve account, operating reserve account, or any other reserve accounts are not fully funded pursuant to section 19, above. e Distributions attributed to income from the non-Assisted unit shall not be subject to limits pursuant to this section.

26. Restrictions on Sale, Encumbrance, and Other Acts.
a. The Borrower shall not make any sale, encumbrance, hypothecation, assignment, refinancing, pledge, conveyance, or transfer in any other form of the Property or the Development or of any of its interest therein, except with the prior written approval of the City.
b. Other than routine maintenance, the Borrower shall not add to, remodel, remove, reconstruct, or demolish any part of the Development without the prior written approval of the City.
c. The Borrower shall not permit the use of the Development for any purpose other than that permitted by this Agreement without the prior written approval of the City.
d. The Borrower shall not incur any liability or obligation in connection with the Development, other than for current operating, management and maintenance costs and for the indebtedness evidenced by the Note nor incur any liability,

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025] charge, assessment, or obligation whatsoever that is secured in whole or in part by any interest in or lien or encumbrance on the Property or the Development, without the prior written approval of the City. The City may permit refinancing or additional financing secured by the Development only to the extent necessary to maintain or improve the Development's fiscal integrity, improve financial condition, or to maintain affordable rents.
e. The Borrower shall not enter into any contract relating to rehabilitating or managing the Development, except as authorized by the City. f. Borrower shall not enter into any Lease for more than a single rental unit, ground lease of the Development or any interest therein without prior written City approval. The City may require that such lease allow for termination within thirty (30) days upon request by the City.
g. If the Borrower is a partnership, it shall not discharge or replace any general partner or amend, modify or add to its partnership agreement without prior written City approval, except that it may transfer or sell limited partnership interests without such approval.
h. The City may approve a sale, transfer or conveyance, in its sole discretion, provided that all of the following conditions are met:
(1) the existing Borrower is in compliance with this Agreement or the sale, transfer or conveyance will result in the cure of any existing violations of the Agreement;
(2) the successor-in-interest to the Borrower agrees to assume all obligations of the existing Borrower pursuant to this Agreement and the Program, and meets any requirements which may be in existence under the applicable regulations;
(3) the successor-in-interest demonstrates to the City's satisfaction that it can own and operate the Development in full compliance with all Program requirements; and
(4) any terms of the sale, transfer or conveyance shall not threaten the City's security or the successor's ability to comply with all requirements of the HOME Program and this Agreement.
i. If at all, and in its sole discretion, the City may condition any approval for a sale, transfer or conveyance subject to any such terms and conditions as may be necessary to preserve or establish the Fiscal Integrity of the Development and to ensure compliance with HOME Program requirements and this Agreement.

Such conditions may include the deposit of sales proceeds, or a portion thereof, to maintain required reserves or to offset negative cash flow, the recapture of syndication proceeds or other funds such other conditions as may be necessary to ensure compliance with the Program requirements.

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025]

27. Violation of HOME Regulatory Agreement by Borrower. a. In the event of a breach or violation of the provisions of this Agreement, the City may give written notice to the Borrower thereof by certified mail or any express delivery service with a delivery receipt addressed to the Borrower at the address stated in this Agreement. If the breach or violation is not cured to the satisfaction of the City within the time period specified in the notice, which shall not be fewer than thirty (30) days, the City may declare a default and may seek legal remedies including the following:
(1) Collect all rents and income in connection with the operation of the Development and use the same and the reserve funds for the operation and maintenance of the Development.
(2) Take possession of the Development and bring any action necessary to enforce any rights of the Borrower growing out of the operation of the Development, and operate the Development in accordance with the terms of this Agreement until such time as the City, in its sole discretion, shall determine that the Borrower is again in a position to operate the Development in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. (3) Apply to any court, State or federal, for specific performance of this Agreement or for the appointment of a receiver to take over and operate the Development in accordance with the terms of this Agreement or for such other relief as may be appropriate. It is agreed by the Borrower that the injury to the City arising from a default under any of the terms of this Agreement would be irreparable and that the amount of compensation which would provide adequate relief to the City, in light of the purposes of the Program, would be impossible to ascertain.
(4) Accelerate all amounts, including outstanding principal and interest, due under the HOME Loan and demand immediate repayment thereof. Upon a failure to repay such accelerated amount in full, the City may proceed with a foreclosure in accordance with the provisions of the HOME Deed of Trust and State law regarding foreclosures.

However, in the event of a nonmonetary breach which cannot reasonably be cured within the time period set forth in such notice, the HOME Loan may not be accelerated hereunder if within said designated time period Borrower has given written notice to Lender of Borrower's intention to cure said breach, has commenced to cure such breach and has diligently prosecuted and effected such cure which shall be completed no later than sixty (60) days from the date notice of such breach is given. (5) The City may seek such other remedies as may be available under law. b. In the event that the breach or violation involves the rents to tenants or other

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025] charges in excess of those permitted under this Agreement, the City may demand, and seek as an additional remedy, the return of such excess rents or other charge to the affected households.
c. The tenants of the Assisted Units shall be considered to be third-party beneficiaries of this Agreement, and shall have such rights and remedies to enforce the requirements of this Agreement as may be available to third-party beneficiaries under the law.
d. The remedies of the City hereunder are cumulative, and the exercise of one or more of such remedies shall not be deemed an election of remedies and shall not preclude the exercise by the City of any one or more of its other remedies.

28. Foreclosure after Project Completion. The Borrower promises, covenants, warrants and represents that it shall complete the Project. Whether or not the Project is in fact completed shall be solely determined by the City. Should the Project in fact have been completed, then this Agreement shall terminate upon foreclosure or transfer in lieu of foreclosure, except that the Affordability restrictions shall be revived according to the original terms if, (a) during the original term and period of affordability, the owner of record before the foreclosure, or deed in lieu of foreclosure, or any entity that includes the former owner or those with whom the former owner has or had family or business ties, obtains an ownership interest in the Project or the Property, or if (b) the foreclosing entity or transferee in lieu of foreclosure assumes in writing and agrees to be bound by the terms of the HOME Agreement and the Loan Documents, as that term is defined in the HOME Agreement.

29. Superiority of HOME Regulatory Agreement. Except to the extent expressly provided herein, the Borrower covenants that the Borrower has not, and shall not, enter into or execute any other agreement with provisions contrary to the provisions of this Regulatory Agreement, or contrary to the intent of maintaining the affordability of the Property for the entire term of this Agreement.

30. Assignment of City Rights. The City retains the right at its sole discretion to assign all or part of its rights under this Agreement for the purpose of ensuring compliance and enforcement of Borrower's duties and obligations hereunder. In addition, the City may designate an agent to act on its behalf in monitoring compliance and enforcing the provisions hereof.

31. Amendment. This Agreement shall not be altered or amended except in writing, executed between or among all the Parties.

32. Partial Invalidity. If any provision of this Agreement shall be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions hereof shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby.

33. Binding on Successors. This Agreement shall bind, and the benefits thereof shall inure to, the respective Parties hereto, their legal representatives, executors, administrators, successors in the office of interest, and assigns, provided, however, that the Borrower

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025] may not assign this Agreement or any of its obligations hereunder, voluntarily or by operation of law, without the prior written approval of the City.

34. Recording Agreement. This Agreement and all amendments thereto, shall be executed by each of the Parties. This Agreement, or memorandum thereof, shall be recorded against the subject Property in the official records of the County of Placer, in which the Development is situated.

35. Hold Harmless. Borrower and its successor in interest agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City and its respective officials, agents, employees and consultants from any and all claims, losses, liabilities or causes of action (including reasonable attorneys' fees) arising from or in connection with Borrower's management, maintenance or operation of the Development.

36. Waiver. No waiver by the City of any breach of or default under this Agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other or subsequent breach thereto or default hereunder.

37. Captions. The captions used in this Agreement are inserted only as a matter of convenience and for reference and in no way define, limit or describe the scope or the intent of this Agreement.

38. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of California. Any litigation to enforce or interpret the terms of this Agreement shall be brought in Placer County, California.

39. Notice. Written notices and other written communications by and between the Parties hereto shall be addressed as set forth below unless and until a party hereto has, in writing, communicated a different address to the other party hereto.

CITY:

City of Roseville
316 Vernon Street, suite 150
Roseville, CA 95678
Attn: Housing Manager
BORROWER:

Advocates for Mentally Ill Housing Inc.

P.O. Box 5216
Auburn, CA 95604

40. Attorneys' Fees. The prevailing party in any action to enforce this Agreement, including the residents of Assisted Units, shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees as determined by the trier of fact in that forum.

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025]

EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY
The land described herein is situated in the State of California, County of Placer, City of Roseville, described as follows:

PARCEL ONE:

A Portion Of The Southeast Quarter Of Section 1, Township 10 North, Range 6 East, More Particularly Described As Follows:

Beginning At A Bronze Capped Monument In Concrete (Marked Pac. Gas & Elect. Co. Pro. Cor.) In The Southeast Quarter Of Section 1, Township 10 North, Range 6 East, MDB & M, From Which The 6 Inch By 6 Inch Concrete Highway Monument Marking The Easterly Terminus Of The Course In The Boundary Line Of That Certain 18.60 Acre Parcel Of Land Described In The Deed From W.J. Doyle And Wife, To State Of California, Dated July 13, 1949 And Recorded In The Office Of The County Recorder Of Said County Of Placer In Book 555 Of Official Records, At Page 505, Which Course, According To The Description Contained In Said Deed To State Of California, Has A Bearing Of South 71° 26' 50" East And A Length Of 105.95 Feet Bears South 69° 24' 49" East, 233.78 Feet Distant And Running Thence North 0° 28' 20" East, Parallel With And Distant 20 Feet Easterly From (Measured At A Right Angle To) Pacific's Existing Pole And Wire Electric Transmission Line Erected Under And By Virtue Of The Deed From Clara B. Doyle To Pacific, Dated June 24, 1926 And Recorded In The Office Of The County Recorder Of Said County Of Placer In Book 224 Of Official Records, At Page 271, A Distance Of 245.00 Feet To A Bronze Capped Monument In Concrete (Marked Pac. Gas & Elect. Co. Prop. Cor.); Thence North 89° 31' 40" West, 240.00 Feet To A Bronze Capped Monument In Concrete (Marked Pac. Gas & Elect. Co. Prop.

Cor.); Thence South 0° 28' 20" West 218.58 Feet To A Bronze Capped Monument In Concrete (Marked Pac. Gas & Elect. Co. Prop. Cor.) Set At A Point Distant 50 Feet Northerly From (Measured At A Right Angle To) The Northerly Boundary Line Of Said 18.60 Acre Parcel Of Land; Thence Parallel With And Distant 50 Feet Northerly From (Measured At Right Angle To) The Northerly Boundary Line Of Said 18.60 Acre Parcel Of Land, The Following Two Courses And Distances, Namely; South 83° 03' 10" East, 235.07 Feet To A Bronze Capped Monument In Concrete (Marked Pac. Gas & Elect. Co. Pro. Co.); And Thence North 89° 15' 50" East, 6.43 Feet, More Or Less, To The Point Of Beginning.

PARCEL TWO:

A Portion Of Section 1, Township 10 North, Range 6 East, MDB & M.

Said Portion Is All That Part Thereof Lying Within The Following Described Boundaries.

Beginning At The Northwest Corner Of That Certain Parcel Of Land Acquired By Deed Recorded April 5, 1955 In Book 672, At Page 38, Official Records Of Placer County; Thence From Said Point Of Beginning Along The Westerly Prolongation Of The Northerly Line Of Said Parcel North 89° 57' 41" West, 64.58 Feet; Thence Leaving The Westerly Prolongation Of Said Northerly Line South 12° 11' 56" East, 231.33 Feet To A Point Distant 119.28 Feet Northerly, Measured At A Right Angles From The "U" Line At Engineer's Station "U" 27+13.50 Of The Department Of Public Works' 1962 Survey On Road 03-Pla

80.Pm 1.8 (Formerly Road III-Pla-3, 1-Rv); Thence Along A Tangent Curve To The Left With A Radius Of 35 Feet, Through An Angle Of 76° 02' 00", A Distance Of 46.45 Feet; Thence South 88° 13' 56" East, 216.40 Feet; Thence North 1° 11' 14" West, 15.01 Feet To A Point On The Southerly Line Of Said Parcel; Thence Along Said Southerly Line North 83° 29' 11" West, 235.07 Feet To The Southwest Corner Of Said Parcel; Thence Along The Westerly Line Of Parcel North 00° 02' 19 East 218.58 Feet To The Point Of Beginning.

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025] PARCEL THREE:

A Non-Exclusive Easement For The Ingress And Egress On, Over, Under And Across The Following Described Property:

A Portion Of The Southeast 1/4 Of Section 1, Township 10 North, Range 6 East, MDB & M, Described As:

Beginning At A Bronze-Capped Monument Set In Concrete Marked (Pac. Gas & Elect. Co. Prop. Cor.) Which Is The East Terminus Of The Course Described As "South 83° 03' 10" East, 235.07 Feet; Of That Certain Parcel Acquired By Deed Recorded April 5, 1955 In Book 672, At Page 38, Official Records Of Placer County; Thence From Said Point Of Beginning Along The Southerly Line Of Said Parcel North 88° 49' 49" East, 6.54 Feet To The Southeast Corner Of Said Parcel; Thence Along The Easterly Line Of Said Parcel North 00° 02' 19" East, 43.97 Feet; Thence Leaving Said Easterly Line North 88° 49' 09" East, 167.00 Feet ; Thence North 73° 05' 03" East, 118.00 Feet; Thence South 61° 44' 28" East, 85.45 Feet; Thence South 01° 10' 51" East, 40.00 Feet; Thence South 88° 49' 09" West, 81.54 Feet; Thence South 01° 10' 51 East 8.98 Feet; Thence South 88° 49' 09" West, 280 Feet To A Point Distant 80 Feet Northerly, Measured At Right Angles From The "U" Line At Engineer's Station "U" 29+60 Of The Department Of Public Works 1962 Survey On Road 03-Pla-80 P.M. 1.8 (Formerly Road III-Pla-3, 17-Rsv); Thence North 01° 11' 14" West, 15.01 Feet To The Point Of Beginning.

APN: 013-213-001-000

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025]

EXHIBIT B

SCHEDULE OF ASSISTED UNITS AND INITIAL RENT RESTRICTIONS There are to be, at all times, 82 regulated units, 18 of which are assisted with HOME funds, and 8 of which are assisted with Housing Choice Voucher Project Based Vouchers in the Development. The HOME assisted units are designated as “floating.” During the Period of Affordability:
 100% of the regulated units must be rented to persons and families with incomes not in excess of thirty percent (30%) of area median incomes, at initial occupancy, except for the maximum four (4) HOME-Assisted units that will have VASH PBV assistance which may earn up to sixty percent (60%) of the area median income, and unless there are other superseding requirements statutorily imposed by another federal or State funding source (HOME Regulatory Agreement, section 12(b)).
 Area median incomes are set by HUD and adjusted for family size. The below table shows project unit configuration and initial rent restrictions which are adjusted annually by the City of Roseville and Roseville Housing Authority.

Maximum Household Income 30% AMI – Project Based Vouchers Bedroom
size
Number
of units
Gross
Rent
Less
Utility
Allowance
Allowable
Contract
Rent
Studio 8 $1743 $0 $1743

Maximum Household Income 30% AMI – HOME-Assisted Units
Bedroom
size
Number
of units
Gross
Rent
Less
Utility
Allowance
Allowable
Contract
Rent
Studio 18 $1872 $0 $1872

Maximum Household Income 30% AMI – Regular Units
Bedroom
size
Number
of units
Gross
Rent
Less
Utility
Allowance
Allowable
Contract
Rent
Studio 56 $1872 $0 $1872

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025]

EXHIBIT C

SPECIAL CONDITIONS

IN THE EVENT OF ANY INCONSISTENCIES OR CONFLICTS BETWEEN THESE SPECIAL

CONDITIONS AND THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY OF THE OTHER CITY

HOME LOAN DOCUMENTS, THE TERMS OF THESE SPECIAL CONDITIONS SHALL CONTROL.

1. Payments of asset management fees or organizational management fees are subject to City prior written approval through the annual budget approval process and may be paid prior to the determination of Residual Receipts in the City’s sole discretion.

2. Exemption from Property Taxes: Borrower agrees to take all actions necessary to qualify the Development for the maximum exemption from property taxes pursuant to applicable provisions of section 214 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. Such actions may include, but are not limited to the following:
a. Modifying, adding to or deleting from, the articles of the incorporation, by laws or organizational documents of Borrower.

b. Applying for nonprofit, tax-exempt status to the appropriate state or federal agency. c. Providing the certifications and assurances required by section 214 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.
d. Complying with the procedures and requirements imposed by local government agencies as a condition of receiving the property tax exemption.

3. Precedence of City HOME Loan Documents Governing Use of Operating Income: In addition to the other terms of this Agreement, the Borrower hereby agrees and acknowledges that, notwithstanding any internal accounting procedures or provision pertaining to the use of receipts, payments, reserves and distributions contained in its organizational document, the terms of this Agreement and the HOME Program shall control as to the use of the funds provided under any applicable Development Agreement and all operating income from the Development.

4. Term of Agreement:
a. Lien Duration: 55 years
b. HOME Regulatory Agreement Termination Date: Fifty-five (55) years from the estimated initial occupancy date.

Initial Occupancy Date: May 15, 2025

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025]

5. Amortization Schedule

Loan Amount (pv)
$1,500,00
0 Interest Rate (rate) 3.00%

Total # of Periods
(Nper) 55
Function 39271
Fund 2821
Notes

Period
Due
Date
Fiscal
Year Principal Outstanding Interest
Accrued
Interest Balance
$1,500,000
0 1/1/2025 FY25 1,500,000.00 11,250.00 11,250.00 1,511,250.00 1 1/2/2026 FY26 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 56,250.00 1,556,250.00 2 1/2/2027 FY27 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 101,250.00 1,601,250.00 3 1/2/2028 FY28 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 146,250.00 1,646,250.00 4 1/1/2029 FY29 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 191,250.00 1,691,250.00 5 1/2/2030 FY30 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 236,250.00 1,736,250.00 6 1/2/2031 FY31 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 281,250.00 1,781,250.00 7 1/2/2032 FY32 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 326,250.00 1,826,250.00 8 1/1/2033 FY33 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 371,250.00 1,871,250.00 9 1/2/2034 FY34 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 416,250.00 1,916,250.00 10 1/2/2035 FY35 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 461,250.00 1,961,250.00 11 1/2/2036 FY36 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 506,250.00 2,006,250.00 12 1/1/2037 FY37 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 551,250.00 2,051,250.00 13 1/2/2038 FY38 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 596,250.00 2,096,250.00 14 1/2/2039 FY39 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 641,250.00 2,141,250.00 15 1/2/2040 FY40 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 686,250.00 2,186,250.00 16 1/1/2041 FY41 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 731,250.00 2,231,250.00 17 1/2/2042 FY42 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 776,250.00 2,276,250.00 18 1/2/2043 FY43 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 821,250.00 2,321,250.00 19 1/2/2044 FY44 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 866,250.00 2,366,250.00 20 1/1/2045 FY45 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 911,250.00 2,411,250.00 21 1/2/2046 FY46 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 956,250.00 2,456,250.00 22 1/2/2047 FY47 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,001,250.00 2,501,250.00 23 1/2/2048 FY48 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,046,250.00 2,546,250.00 24 1/1/2049 FY49 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,091,250.00 2,591,250.00 25 1/2/2050 FY50 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,136,250.00 2,636,250.00 26 1/2/2051 FY51 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,181,250.00 2,681,250.00 27 1/2/2052 FY52 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,226,250.00 2,726,250.00 28 1/1/2053 FY53 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,271,250.00 2,771,250.00 29 1/2/2054 FY54 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,316,250.00 2,816,250.00

[C:\Users\isomtrisha\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\RW94OWMU\Sun Rose Regulatory Agreement - First Amended and Restated DRAFT 9.8.25 (003).doc; 9/9/2025] 30 1/2/2055 FY55 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,361,250.00 2,861,250.00 31 1/2/2056 FY56 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,406,250.00 2,906,250.00 32 1/1/2057 FY57 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,451,250.00 2,951,250.00 33 1/2/2058 FY58 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,496,250.00 2,996,250.00 34 1/2/2059 FY59 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,541,250.00 3,041,250.00 35 1/2/2060 FY60 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,586,250.00 3,086,250.00 36 1/1/2061 FY61 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,631,250.00 3,131,250.00 37 1/2/2062 FY62 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,676,250.00 3,176,250.00 38 1/2/2063 FY63 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,721,250.00 3,221,250.00 39 1/2/2064 FY64 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,766,250.00 3,266,250.00 40 1/1/2065 FY65 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,811,250.00 3,311,250.00 41 1/2/2066 FY66 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,856,250.00 3,356,250.00 42 1/2/2067 FY67 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,901,250.00 3,401,250.00 43 1/2/2068 FY68 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,946,250.00 3,446,250.00 44 1/1/2069 FY69 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 1,991,250.00 3,491,250.00 45 1/2/2070 FY70 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 2,036,250.00 3,536,250.00 46 1/2/2071 FY71 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 2,081,250.00 3,581,250.00 47 1/2/2072 FY72 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 2,126,250.00 3,626,250.00 48 1/1/2073 FY73 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 2,171,250.00 3,671,250.00 49 1/2/2074 FY74 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 2,216,250.00 3,716,250.00 50 1/2/2075 FY75 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 2,261,250.00 3,761,250.00 51 1/2/2076 FY76 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 2,306,250.00 3,806,250.00 52 1/1/2077 FY77 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 2,351,250.00 3,851,250.00 53 1/2/2078 FY78 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 2,396,250.00 3,896,250.00 54 1/2/2079 FY79 1,500,000.00 45,000.00 2,441,250.00 3,941,250.00 55 1/2/2080 FY80 1,500,000.00 33,750.00 2,475,000.00 3,975,000.00

City Council
Communication
Meeting Date: 10/15/2025
Item #: VI.2
File #: 0103-34-02
Item ID: 2025-447
Title: Grants Advisory Commission - Policy Manual Updates Contact: Tobi Thomas 916-746-1368 [email protected]

SUMMARY
Staff recommends approval of updates to the Citizens' Benefit Fund Policy Manual, which are being recommended by the Grants Advisory Commission. The primary focus of these revisions is to clarify the handling of City Projects, particularly regarding grant funding requests from non-profits for modifications or construction on City-owned property and facilities. The recommended updates to the policy manual have no fiscal impact on the General Fund.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution to approve the Grants Advisory Commission (GAC) recommendations to update to the Citizens' Benefit Fund (CBF) Policy Manual.

BACKGROUND
The Grants Advisory Commission (GAC) held a meeting on August 12, 2025, to discuss revisions to the Citizens' Benefit Fund Policy Manual. The primary focus of these revisions is to clarify the handling of City Projects, particularly regarding grant funding requests from non-profits for modifications or construction on City-owned property and facilities.

The key changes to the manual include:
• The City Projects section now explicitly defines activities directly involving City-owned property or facilities, or where the City is the project lead or requires active staff involvement, as ineligible for grant funding.
• Table of Contents: The list of Appendices was removed from the Table of Contents. • Applicant Workshop: Language updates were made to this section. • Process to Amend or Extend Timeframe of Approved Grants: Appendix lettering was corrected. • Application Review and Process: Language updates were made to this section.

The GAC annually reviews grant funding cycle processes and documents and is recommending updates to the City Council, who has final approval of disbursements of each of the grant funds.

FISCAL IMPACT
The recommended updates to the policy manual have no fiscal impact on the General Fund.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply to activities that will not result in a direct

or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, or is otherwise not considered a project as defined by CEQA Statute §21065 and CEQA State Guidelines §15060(c)(3) and §15378.

Approval of the Grants Advisory Commission Police Manual updates meets the above criteria and is not subject to CEQA. No additional environmental review is required.

CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLAN/OVERARCHING GOALS

5. Support community engagement and advocacy
Respectfully Submitted,
Tobi Thomas, Management Analyst
Dennis Kauffman, Chief Financial Officer/Assistant City Manager ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution 25-322

2. CBF Policy Manual redlines 2025 ver9.10.25
REVIEWERS:

Tobi Thomas, Public Affairs and Communications Department Created/Initiated - 9/10/2025 Megan Scheid, City Clerk Department Approved - 9/10/2025 Dennis Kauffman, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 9/14/2025 Gretchen Hakala, City Attorney Department Approved - 9/26/2025 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Approved - 9/26/2025 Ryan DeVore, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 9/30/2025 Dennis Kauffman, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 9/30/2025 Michelle Sheidenberger, City Attorney Department Approved - 9/30/2025 Dominick Casey, City Manager Department - City Manager Approved - 10/1/2025 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Final Approval - 10/2/2025

RESOLUTION NO. 25-322
APPROVING REVISIONS TO THE CITIZENS’ BENEFIT FUND POLICY MANUAL WHEREAS, the Grants Advisory Commission reviews policies and procedures annually in an effort to improve efficiencies and streamline processes; and WHEREAS, this year, staff recommends the following policy revisions to the Citizens’ Benefit Fund Policy Manual:
• The City Projects section now explicitly defines activities directly involving City-owned property or facilities, or where the City is the project lead or requires active staff involvement, as ineligible for grant funding;
• Table of Contents: The list of Appendices was removed from the Table of Contents;
• Applicant Workshop: Language updates were made to this section; • Process to Amend or Extend Timeframe of Approved Grants: Appendix lettering was corrected; and
• Application Review and Process: Language updates were made to this section.

WHEREAS, City Council has reviewed staff recommendations.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Roseville that said recommendations are hereby approved.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Roseville this ___ day of __________________________, 2025, by the following vote on roll call:

AYES COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS:
______________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
_____________________
City Clerk

City of Roseville
Citizens’ Benefit Fund
Policy Manual
Aadopted by the
Roseville Grants Advisory Commission
Updated:

September 12, 2000
amended
November 12, 2002
December 3, 2003
November 9, 2004
November 8, 2005
November 18, 2008
December 19, 2012
October 8, 2013
February 17, 2016
June 21, 2017
November 18, 2020
October 18, 2023
August 21, 2024
__October 15_____ _, 2025
Formatted: Font: Not Bold

Citizens’ Benefit Fund Policy Manual 1 Amendments August 20242025
Policy Manual
Table of Contents
Purpose ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 2
Chronology of Citizens’ Benefit Fund.……………………………………………………… 3 Adopted Policies of the Grants Advisory Commission & Roseville City Council….. 6 Criteria for Grant Applicants……………………………………………………………… 7 Original Criteria and Application Submittal Requirements……………………….….. 7 Americans with Disabilities Act Compliance…………………………………………. 7 Bids for Capital Items………………..……………………………………………... …. 7 Funding for Religious or Sectarian Activities Prohibited………………………....…. 8 Grant recipients located in Roseville …………………………………………….…… 8 Ownership or Long-term Lease of Property Improved with Grant Funds…………. 8 Compliance with California Prevailing Wage Law – SB 975/AB 2690…………….. 8 Tax Status………………………………………………………………………………... 9
Process-Related Policies…………………………………………………………….……. 10
Annual Review ……………………………………………………………………………
Recipient Reporting ……………………………………………………………………...
10 10
Appeal of Grant Advisory Commission Decision …………………………………….. 10 Funds Expended within One Year …………………………………………………….. 10 Line Item Review.………………………………………………………………………… 10
Applicant Workshop……………………………………………………………………… 11
Process to Amend or Extend Timeframe of Approved Grants……………...………. 11 Site Visits………………………………………………………………………………….. 11
Application Review and Process…………………….…………………………………. 12 Funding Policies……………………………………………………………………….…… 13
City Projects..………………………………………………………………………….….. 13
Categories and Target Maximum Amount……………………………..….…………... 13 Funding Priorities……………………….………………………………………………... 13
Matching Funds Not Required…………………………………………………………... 14 Multiple Applications from One Agency………………………………………………... 14 Multiple Year Grants …………………………………………………………………….. 14
Perpetual Funding ……………………………………………………………………….. 15
Fund Investing & Funding Source………………………………………………………. 15 Grant requests from Schools …………………………………………………………… 15
Appendices………………………………………………………………………………………. 16
A: Ordinance 3388
B: Application Guidelines
C: Application
D: Finance Department Audit Form (Request for Funds and Report of Expenditures) – form retired after 2007/08 funding cycle
E: Grant Agreement
F: Request for Amendment to Grant Application
G: Memorandum from Deputy City Attorney Bob Schmitt to Assistant to the City Manager Julia Burrows dated September 20, 2002 regarding SB 975 and the Citizens’ Benefit Fund
H: Memorandum from Associate City Attorney Michele Sheidenberger dated August 31, 2004 regarding AB 2690 and the Citizens’ Benefit Fund
I: 2013 Historical Assessment of the Roseville Grant Program Formatted Table

Citizens’ Benefit Fund Policy Manual 2 Amendments August 20242025
J: Implementation Strategies for 2019/20 Kone’ Consulting’s Community Needs Assessment (CNA)

Citizens’ Benefit Fund Policy Manual 3 Amendments August 20242025
City of Roseville
Citizens’ Benefit Fund
Policy Manual
Purpose
The purpose of the Citizens’ Benefit Fund Policy Manual is to:
 Document the policy decisions of the Grants Advisory Commission and Roseville City Council regarding the Citizens’ Benefit Fund by year and by topic;  Serve as a reference for new Grants Advisory Commissioners and Roseville City Councilmembers as to program implementation; and
 Answer questions from the public regarding the grants process, including questions from potential grant applicants, and current grant recipients.

Citizens’ Benefit Fund Policy Manual 4 Amendments August 20242025
Chronology of Citizens’ Benefit Fund
Jun 1, 1994 Grants Advisory Commission established by Ordinance 2774.

Hospital Proceeds Fund Established by Ordinance number 2788. Chapter

4.06 is added to the Roseville Municipal Code to establish the Hospital Proceeds Fund.

Jul 12, 1994 City Council approves criteria and first grant application.

Jan 25, 1995 Joint City Council/Grants Advisory Commission Workshop to discuss Grant application process, including estimated timeframe for processing grant applications and restricting grant funds to benefit Roseville residents only for specific project, rather than general funding; no funding for administrative costs, audit procedures following Grant awards; procedures to notice Commission meetings and interviews with applicants.

Sep 10, 1997 Joint City Council/Grants Advisory Commission Workshop to discuss grant consideration process, appeal opportunities, award process, stewardship of funds, application form changes, multiple year funding, auditing, collaboration of organizations, grant requests for capital projects, city projects or from agencies outside the city.

Dec 16, 1998 City Council approves formal process to consider modifications to approved grants and adoption of marketing program for the Citizens’ Benefit Fund.

Aug 18, 1999 Ordinance 3388 adopted by the Roseville City Council amending Chapter

4.06 of the Roseville Municipal Code. Amendments include:

1. Name change from Hospital Proceeds Fund to Citizens’ Benefit Fund to reflect opportunity for donations to the fund from the community rather than limited principal amount from sale of municipal hospital.

2. Amendment to Section 4.04.040, Expenditures of Money, to indicate unappropriated amounts may be carried forward to subsequent fiscal years, or at the discretion of the City, may be added to the principal.

Jul 10, 1999 Joint City Council/Grants Advisory Commission Workshop to discuss policies related to requirement for matching funds, grant funding for leased vs. owned property, perpetual funding, monitoring/annual reports, and Ad Hoc Committee.

Nov 3, 1999 City Council adopts policies related to issues from joint Commission/Council workshop.

Dec 3, 2003 City Council approves Grants Advisory Commission recommendations for funding criteria and process improvements following three workshops by the Commission and the first REACH/Enron funding cycle.

Dec 15, 2004 City Council approved Grants Advisory Commission recommendations for revisions as a result of AB 2690 – repealing the requirement that

Citizens’ Benefit Fund Policy Manual 5 Amendments August 20242025
volunteers be paid prevailing wages and eliminating the mandatory workshop.

December 19, 2012 The City Council approved a financial report on the Citizens’ Benefit Fund (CBF) and a work plan for a comprehensive grants policy review.

May 29, 2014 GIM to the City Council regarding completion of phase 1 in the Comprehensive Grants Review Process – Historical Assessment Report of the Roseville Grants program.

April 20, 2015 Joint City Council/Grants Advisory Commission Workshop to discuss policies relating to administration of the Fund and Fund investment and program options.

December 16, 2015 City Council considered and reaffirmed:

1. Retention of the Citizens’ Benefit Fund (CBF) with the City to be invested and administered by the City.

2. Retention of the Grants Program and Commission with administration by the City.

3. Revision of the Citizens’ Benefit Fund (CBF) Policy Manual and Guidelines, as follows:
a) Accept investment strategy revisions expanding strategy consistent with Government Codes.
b) Reaffirm smoothing strategy to hold back proceeds in excess of $500K and establish new policy for annually utilizing proceeds in excess of $500K for smoothing or special projects or community benefits.
c) Reaffirm the nine (9) funding program categories.
d) Retain limits on school districts and schools, as approved by the Grants Commission.
e) Continue policy that the City Manager, or his designee, approve grants submitted for City requests.
f) Confirm no giving priorities with each funding request to be evaluated on its own merits.
g) Establish a policy for an annual needs assessment for Council to consider and establish priorities for the coming funding cycle.

June 17, 2017 City Council approved revisions to Grants Policy Documents to streamline program procedures relating to administration of Grants program.

Additionally, Grants have been focused and aligned to solely private schools and non-profits entities.

Citizens’ Benefit Fund Policy Manual 6 Amendments August 20242025
November 18, 2020. City Council approved new Implementation Strategies provided by the Grants Advisory Commission based on findings from the Community Needs Assessment by Kone Consulting. Changes include:

1.) Service Categories

2.) Funding priorities

3.) Collaboration

4.) Promoting Outcomes

5.) Measuring Success

6.) Scoring Methodologies
October 18, 2023 City Council approved revisions to clarify policies relating to bid requirements and site visits by the Grants Commissioners.

August 21, 2024 City Council approved revisions to update policies relating to the California Constitutional provision from 1879 barring the use of public funds to directly aid private schools.

October 15 , 2025 Clarify the exclusion of grant funding for “City projects.”

Citizens’ Benefit Fund Policy Manual 7 Amendments August 20242025
Adopted Policies of the Grants Advisory Commission and Roseville City Council 1994-2023
Criteria for Grant Applicants
Original Criteria and Application Submittal Requirements (6/94, 2/16) Americans with Disabilities Act Compliance (1/99)
Bids Required for Capital Expenditures to be Included (1/96, 10/99) revised 10/23 Funding for Religious or Sectarian Activities Prohibited (1/99) Grant recipients located in Roseville (9/97)
Ownership or Long-term Lease of Property Improved by Grant Funds (11/99) Compliance with State of California Prevailing Wage Law – SB 975 (11/02) & AB 2690 (12/04) Tax Status (12/03)
Process-Related Policies
Annual Review (10/13, 6/17)
Recipient Reporting (11/99)
Appeal of Grant Advisory Commission Decision (9/97, 6/17) Funds Expended within One Year (8/97)
Line Item Review (11/99)
Applicant Workshop (9/97)
Process to Amend or Extend Timeframe of Approved Grants (12/98) Site Visits (12/03, clarified 10/23)
Application Review and Process (12/03, 2/16, 6/17)
Funding Policies
Categories and Target Maximum Amount (9/97, 12/03, 2/16, 6/17, 11/20) Priority Areas (11/20)
Matching Funds Not Required (11/99)
Multiple Applications from One Agency (12/03, 6/17)
Multiple Year Grants (9/97, 12/03)
Perpetual Funding (11/99)
Fund Investing and Funding Source (11/05, 2/16)
Funding for Schools (11/08, 6/17, 8/24)
City Projects (9/1997, 10/1999, 2/2016, _____10/_ 2025)

Citizens’ Benefit Fund Policy Manual 8 Amendments August 20242025
Criteria for Grant Applicants
Original Criteria and Application Submittal Requirements Adopted July 1994 Revised February 2016
The original criteria and application form were established by the Grant Evaluation Criteria Subcommittee in 1994. The subcommittee conducted public meetings on May 24, June 14, and June 27 to discuss and revise the guidelines and presented their draft, adopted by the Commission on June 27th to the City Council on July 6, 1994.

The criteria included a points/rating system that was not adopted by the Commission. A majority of the questions in the current application were as originally drafted. New policies that have amended the application over time are discussed in this manual.

In January 2014, the Grants Advisory Commission approved, and made a requirement that all, Grant Applications be submitted via an online web-based program (exception for reasonable accommodations).

Americans with Disabilities Act Compliance Adopted January 1999 The Commission added a question to the application form requesting specific information regarding compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. The City is not allowed to fund programs or services by agencies that do not comply with ADA. Applicants are also required to comply with state disability laws, which in many cases are more stringent than the federal ADA law.

Bids Required for Capital Expenditures Adopted January 1996 Revised October 1999
Revised February 2016
Revised October 2023
In January 1996, the Commission adopted a requirement for applicants to submit bids for ”capital expenditures.”
Capital expenditures for individual items and projects less than $500 do not require documented bids. Capital expenditures for individual items and projects costing $3,999 and under must have at least three (3) telephone or written bids documented/included with the submitted application.

Capital expenditures for individual items and projects costing $4,000 and above must have three (3) written bids included with the submitted application. Bids do not have to be awarded to the lowest bidder; bids should be awarded to the most responsible bidder.

If, in the rare case, the capital expenditure item or project is not conducive to bidding, an explanation in lieu of bid information should be attached to the application, e.g., in some instances, three bids are not available for specialized equipment that may be manufactured by only one or two companies. Additionally, in some cases, bids are only valid for 30 to 60 days or less, while the grant application process runs from approximately December through June for final approval, which may extend beyond the expiration date for the bids. The bids are still to be included in the application, but with notations if less than three (3) bids are included.

Citizens’ Benefit Fund Policy Manual 9 Amendments August 20242025
Bid Requirements Summary: Individual items and projects costing $500 - $3,999 require three (3) documented telephone, online or written cost estimates. Individual items and projects $4,000 or greater require three (3) written cost estimates. Individual items or projects less than $500 do not require an estimate.

Capital expenditure – An expenditure that results in the acquisition of fixed assets or additions to fixed assets that have benefits for more than one (1) year. Examples include: the acquisition of land; existing buildings; land improvements; construction of buildings; additions and remodeling of buildings; initial, additional, and replacement of equipment, furniture and fixtures, machinery, vehicles, and media materials.

Funding for Religious or Sectarian Activities Prohibited Adopted January 1999 In January 1999, the Commission added a question to the application form asking if funding would be used to support any religious or sectarian activities. The City is allowed to fund religious organizations, but the activity, project or program cannot include the promotion a particular religious belief. The City is prohibited from funding religious activities based on laws governing the separation of church and state.
____________________________________________________________________________ Grant Recipients Located in Roseville Adopted September 1997 The Commission and Council specified that grant recipients are to be located in Roseville rather than previous wording stating that grant recipients are to be “local.” In practice, this has been interpreted by the Commission to mean that grant recipients that provide service in Roseville, but may have headquarters or offices in other locations, are eligible for funding.

Ownership or Long-Term Lease for Properties Adopted November 1999 Improved by Grant Funds Revised February 2016
Concerns were raised during the 1999-2000 grant funding cycle regarding the investment in properties by grant applicants who do not own the property. The public funds are therefore making the property of a private citizen more valuable. Grant applicants are required to submit ownership documents and/or copies of lease agreements that reveal how long the property will be leased by the applicant. With long-term leases, the value of any capital improvements will depreciate over time and benefit the grant recipients directly. The Commission recommended and the Council adopted a policy to review the applicants with long-term leases on a case-bycase basis. Staff is to look at the amount of grant funding requested and the use of the funds in particular.

Compliance with California Prevailing Wage Law – SB 975 Adopted November 2002 Revised December 2004
Revised February 2016
The California Labor Code as amended by SB 975 in 2000 affects applicants to the Citizens’ Benefit Fund in two ways: the requirement to pay prevailing wages for public or private works of improvement that receive public funds and the use of volunteer labor.

Citizens’ Benefit Fund Policy Manual 10 Amendments August 20242025
By Interoffice Memorandum from the City Attorney’s Office to the City Manager’s Office dated September 20, 2002, the attorney clearly states applicants must comply with the SB 975. The memo details the policy for the State Prevailing Wage Laws and the Applicability to Volunteer Labor. The memorandum is attached as Appendix G to the Policy Manual.

By Interoffice Memorandum from the City Attorney’s office to the City Manager’s office dated August 31, 2004, the requirement that prevailing wages be paid to volunteers on public works projects was repealed by urgency legislation signed by the Governor.

Under the new law, AB 2690, the requirement to pay prevailing wages does not apply to volunteers, volunteer coordinators, or members of the California Conservation Corps or Community Conservation Corps. Although a volunteer cannot be paid, the volunteer may receive reasonable meals, lodging, transportation, and incidental expenses or nominal nonmonetary awards without losing volunteer status if those benefits and payments are not a substitute form of compensation for work performed. The Memorandum is attached as Appendix H to the Policy Manual.

State Prevailing Wage Laws. Any grant applicant receiving $1,000 or greater in public monies, in this case, Citizens’ Benefit Fund, must pay prevailing wages to all workers employed on public works. Public works actually includes any public or private work of improvement, and is defined as “construction, alteration, demolition, installation, or repair work done under contract and paid for in whole or in part out of public funds.” (Labor Code Section 1720 (a)(1)).

Exceptions to the law include public utility improvements, carpet installation, transportation projects, and certain residential and low-income housing projects. (Labor Code Section 1720(a)).

An applicant or their advisor may request the Director of Industrial Relations to provide an opinion as to the applicability of SB 975 to their project. Previous opinions and current prevailing wages can be found at the state agency’s web-site: www.dir.ca.gov.

Tax Status Adopted December 2003
June 2017
The Grants Advisory Commission is recommending that only agencies with the following tax status be eligible for funding.
▪ 501(C) 3
▪ 501(C) 4
▪ Private schools
Applications from agencies that are not within one of these categories will be ineligible. For example, 501 (C) (6) are not eligible because 1) by definition they exist primarily to serve their members rather than the community at large and 2) they can lobby and take political positions on issues, thus creating potential for conflict of interest.

Citizens’ Benefit Fund Policy Manual 11 Amendments August 20242025
Process-Related Policies
Annual Review Adopted October 2013
Revised February 2016
Revised June 2017
The Grants Staff Liaison will annually review the Grant Application and Guidelines, and make revisions to improve efficiencies. The Grant Application and Guidelines shall reflect, but is not limited to: 1) current funds available; and 2) Council priorities, if identified. ____________________________________________________________________________ Recipient Reporting Adopted November 1999
Revised November 2005, 2008
Revised February 2016
Beginning with the 2009-10 funding cycle, applicants who fail to submit a Final Report for a grant received from the preceding funding year are not eligible to apply during the subsequent funding year, or any future funding cycle until at least one year after the Final Report has been submitted.

Beginning with the 2006-2007 funding cycle, each recipient is required to submit a report describing the expenditures and accomplishments achieved with the grant funds. The report is due within 30 days of the end of the grant period. In addition, the Commission at its discretion may also require a grant recipient to submit a “mid-year” report due six months from the grantee’s initial receipt of funds.

Appeal of Grant Advisory Commission Decision Adopted September 1997 Revised June 2017
There is no appeal of Grant eligibility made by the Grants Staff Liaison or allocation recommendation made by the Commission. Final allocation decisions are made by the City Council.

Funds Expended within One Year Adopted August 1997
Based upon several requests from agencies that funds be carried over to another fiscal year, or be used for additional purposes, the Commission voted to revise all forms stating that funds must be expended during the fiscal year for which the grant was included in the City budget.

The Citizens’ Benefit Fund contract was also amended to state that all funds must be spent with one year.

Line Item Review Adopted November 1999
The City Council reaffirmed a standing practice that individual grant applications may be reviewed by the City Council following the recommendations being forwarded by the Grants Advisory Commission. The City Council reviews the recommendations as part of the annual budget adoption in June of each year. Councilmembers may “pull” individual grant applications for discussion, questions, and separate action.

Citizens’ Benefit Fund Policy Manual 12 Amendments August 20242025
____________________________________________________________________________ Applicant Workshop Adopted September 1997
Revised November 2004
Revised February 2016
The Grants Advisory Commission strongly encourages that a representative from each applying agency attend the applicant workshop, held on the approximately the 2 nd Tuesday of January.

Process to Amend or Extend Timeframe of Adopted December 1998 Approved Grants
In September 1998, the Commission determined that a formal process should be established to clearly define the requirements in the event a change to an approved grant was requested by a grant recipient. Through the work of Policy Subcommittee members, Sylvia Besana, Carol Garcia, and Susan Rohan, guidelines and a standard form were drafted for use by future applicants. Appendix EF includes the Guidelines and Form approved by the City Council on December 16, 1998. As stated in the Guidelines, the City does not encourage amendments to approved grants. Circumstances may warrant flexibility by the Grants Commission and the City Council; however, only if the criteria established by the Policy Subcommittee are met and the amendment process is followed.

Site Visits Adopted December 2003
Revised February 2016
Revised October 2023
The Commission reached consensus to NOT conduct site visits during the application period - beginning when applications become available to applicants until City Council takes action on funding recommendations (approximately, December through June— and to limit visits to other times during the year.

If individual Grants Commissioners visit applicants during the process of reviewing grants, they may receive information in addition to that contained in the written application that is not received by the other Commissioners (in addition to general Brown Act considerations). The City’s criteria specifically states the grant will be awarded based upon the written materials provided to the Commission for its consideration.

For clarity, “site visits” includes visiting the physical location(s) or site(s) of an applicant or anticipated applicant (collectively, “applicant”) of grant funding, as well as attending, participating, or visiting, a location where an applicant(s) is hosting, co-hosting, sponsoring, or otherwise engaged in carrying out an event, program, open house, or activity.

Application Review and Process Adopted December 2003
Modified October 2013

Citizens’ Benefit Fund Policy Manual 13 Amendments August 20242025
Revised February 2016
Revised June 2017
The Grants Commission Staff Liaison shall review and either approve or disqualify each grant application. Staff will make their decisions based upon the materials submitted by the agency and/or organization. Grant applications submitted without required and/or complete documents will be disqualified. Grant applicants do not have the right to appeal disqualifications.

The Grants Advisory Commission will meet in the Council Chambers on the second Tuesday of April, or as otherwise agendized, to review and recommend final funding for each grant application.

Citizens’ Benefit Fund Policy Manual 14 Amendments August 20242025
Funding Policies
City Projects Adopted September 1997
Reaffirmed October 1999
Revised February 2016
Revised June 2025
Due to the limited amount of funding in the community and the high level of local need for qualifying projects, City projects and programs will not longer qualify for funding. “City projects” is inclusive of capital expenditures, alterations, modifications, construction, City public works projects, etc. directly involving City property, land, and facilities; also inclusive of any activity in which the City would be considered a project lead or require active City staff participation to facilitate the project, beyond normal permitting, entitlement, and planning/building processing for applications submitted thereto. (Certain exceptions may exist on specific facts arising out of City property leased to another party and subject to the terms of the lease.) Categories and Target Maximum Amount Adopted September 1997 Revised December 2003
Revised February 2016
Revised June 2017
Revised November 2020

In keeping with the original intent of the sale of the Roseville hospital to “Improve the Quality of Life for the Citizens of Roseville”, Service Categories have been aligned with Social Determinants of Health as interpreted in the Kone Consulting community workshops with the goal of making Roseville a healthier community. The City Council approved updated funding Service Categories as follows:
• Neighborhood and Physical Environment – Improved access to safe and affordable housing for all
• Food – Increased access to healthier food options for lower income communities • Health and Wellness – Improved physical, mental, and behavioral health and wellness • Community and Social Context – Improved access to arts and cultural resources for all and a kinder, more inclusive and connected community • Education – More vocational training and educational opportunities for all ages For a more detailed definition of previously approved CBF Categories, please refer to the 2013 Historical Assessment of the Roseville Grant Program (Appendix I). At its discretion, the Grants Advisory Commission, with action by the City Council, may wish to prioritize the above-stated categories for CBF funding for a given application year.

Formatted: Font: Italic
Formatted: Space After: 0 pt
Formatted: Space After: 0 pt

Citizens’ Benefit Fund Policy Manual 15 Amendments August 20242025
Funding Priorities Adopted November 2020
The target goal is to divide the grants awards among the three areas described below. The Commission will work to fund grant requests to the extent it is reasonable based on funds available, the applications received and the consensus on merit of the proposals in a given year.

The City Council approved the addition of the following funding priorities:

1. Strategic, one-time grants for innovative projects or programs, capital improvements or new initiatives. Examples of these “special” grants may be:
• New Initiatives – Applicant identifies a need, service, or opportunity in the community that could offer an enhanced and improved quality of life or o experience in Roseville.
• Innovative Ideas – Based on models from other areas or agencies and attempting to take a new approach in providing opportunity to enhance or o improve quality of life or experience in Roseville.
• One-time requests – If applicants need special consideration on a single o request basis.

2. Operational/Mission support grants for programs or projects that demonstrate effectiveness addressing a community need. Grant recipient can reapply in future years for this priority area.

3. Smaller requests of up to $10,000 which can go towards either new programs/projects or support existing operations which have demonstrated effectiveness at meeting community needs.
____________________________________________________________________________ Matching Funds Not Required Adopted November 1999
The City Council approved the Grants Advisory Commission recommendation that matching funds not be required of grant applicants. Mandating that matching funds be required would limit the application numbers and the flexibility of the Commission and Council to award grants to worthy applicants. Matching funds will be a component of the evaluation by Commissioners and Council in determining which applicants have demonstrated their commitment to a project, butproject but will not be mandatory.

Multiple Applications from One Agency Affirmed December 2003 Revised November 2004
Revised June 2017
The Commission agreed that the practice of allowing multiple grant applications from a single agency should not be continued. The City Council has directed the Commission to issue fewer larger grants.

Formatted: Indent: Left: 1", Space Before: 0 pt, After: 0 pt, No bullets or numbering
Formatted: Indent: Left: 1", Space Before: 0 pt, After: 0 pt, No bullets or numbering
Formatted: Indent: Left: 1", Space Before: 0 pt, After: 0 pt, No bullets or numbering

Citizens’ Benefit Fund Policy Manual 16 Amendments August 20242025
Multiple Year Grants Adopted September 1997
Reaffirmed November 2020

The Grants Advisory Commission and City Council discussed, but voted against allowing grant applicants to apply for funding beyond one fiscal year. Funding is only available for the fiscal year in which the grant is approved.

The Commission and Council affirmed this policy after discussion in 2020.

Perpetual Funding Adopted November 1999
Reaffirmed December 2003
The City Council approved the Grants Advisory Commission recommendation that no limit be set on the number of years a grant applicant may receive funding. Grant applicants will be judged on their individual merit each year.

The Commission and Council affirmed this policy after discussion in 2003. There are several agencies that receive repetitive funding from the Citizens’ Benefit Fund. In fact, five organizations have received funding in all of the past ten funding cycles, and six organizations have received funding in eight of the last ten funding cycles. The Commission agreed that because the agencies provide worthy services to the community and Commissioners do an independent evaluation each year, there should not be a limit on repetitive funding.

Fund Investing & Funding Source Adopted November 2005
Revised February 2016
Grant Funds shall be invested in accordance with the Government Code §53601, as determined by the City’s Chief Financial Officer or his designee.

Grant Fund proceeds in excess of $500,000 shall be retained for smoothing during lean years and/or special project or community benefits, as approved by the City Council.

The Grants Advisory Commission may award grants from multiple funding sources. In the event that an applicant meets funding criteria for more than one funding source, the Commission has the discretion to make awards from any or all funds for which any individual applicant is eligible.

Grant Requests from Schools Adopted November 2008
Revised June 2017
Revised August 2024

Private School and non-profit Parent-Teacher Clubs, Booster Clubs and non-profit school-based programs are eligible to apply and are limited to one grant request per site.

Funds will not be awarded directly for private schools (a private school is any school not under the exclusive control of the officers of the public schools; public charter schools are generally not private schools), unless it is clear that any benefit to a private school is, at most, merely an “incidental” or “indirect” effect, and the direct benefit is improving the quality of life for the

Citizens’ Benefit Fund Policy Manual 17 Amendments August 20242025
citizens of Roseville. For example, a private school passing through funds to provide food security to its students who are citizens of Roseville has no direct benefit to the private school itself, providing direct benefit, though, to our citizens.

Citizens’ Benefit Fund Policy Manual 18 Amendments August 20242025
Appendices (to be replaced/updated annually by City staff as needed) Related Ordinances - Appendix A
Funding Guidelines for Current Year - Appendix B
Grant Application for Current Year - Appendix C
Sample Grant Agreement - Appendix D
Request for Amendment to CBF Grant - Appendix E
Memorandum re: SB975 and Citizens’ Benefit Fund - Appendix F Memorandum re: AB 2690 and Citizens’ Benefit Fund - Appendix G 2013 Historical Assessment of the Roseville Grant Program – Appendix H Implementation Strategy 2019/20 Kone’ Consulting’s CNA - Appendix I Formatted: Space Before: 0 pt

City Council
Communication
Meeting Date: 10/15/2025
Item #: VI.3
File #: 0203-04
Item ID: 2025-715
Title: Shared Services Assessment (RFP 04-032) - Professional Services Agreement Contact: Tobi Thomas 916-746-1368 [email protected]

SUMMARY
Staff recommends approval of a professional services agreement with Raftelis in the amount of $174,250 to conduct a Shared Services Assessment. Raftelis will perform a comprehensive review of functions that span multiple City departments, which can be delivered through a centralized, decentralized, or hybrid structure, in order to identify potential opportunities to strengthen organizational structure, enhance service delivery, and ensure long-term sustainability. Funding is included in the General Fund budget.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution to approve a professional services agreement with Raftelis for the Shared Services Assessment and authorize the City Manager to execute it on behalf of the City of Roseville.

BACKGROUND
The City is committed to continuous improvement and delivering exceptional service to its residents. The recommended assessment reflects the City's proactive effort to strengthen organizational structure, enhance service delivery, and ensure long-term sustainability. By reviewing shared service functions across departments, this assessment will explore whether a more coordinated model could support the same goals with greater efficiency and improved outcomes.

Shared Services are functions that span multiple City departments and can be delivered through a centralized, decentralized, or hybrid structure. While these functions may currently reside in individual departments, perform similar tasks, and support common goals, they may present opportunities for better alignment, collaboration, professional development and resource efficiency across the City organization.

While the primary goal is operational efficiency, fiscal responsibility is also a critical driver of this assessment. Any recommendations should also identify potential cost savings. If restructuring or consolidation is recommended, it must demonstrate not only improved effectiveness but also measurable financial benefits. This approach supports the City's commitment to good governance, responsible stewardship of public resources, professional development opportunities, and continued investment in high-quality services for the Roseville community.

Staff published a Request for Proposals (#04-032) on June 24, 2025, for professional services to conduct the assessment. On August 14, 2025, three (3) firms submitted proposals to the City Clerk’s office for review and consideration. Based upon review of the proposals, Raftelis ranked the highest based on the evaluation criteria outlined in the RFP.

FISCAL IMPACT

The not-to-exceed amount of the recommended professional services agreement is $174,250 and will be funded by the General Fund.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply to activities that will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, or is otherwise not considered a project as defined by CEQA Statute §21065 and CEQA State Guidelines §15060(c)(3) and §15378.

Approval of a professional services agreement meets the above criteria and is not subject to CEQA. No additional environmental review is required.

CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLAN/OVERARCHING GOALS

2. Remain fiscally responsible in a changing world

6. Deliver exceptional City services
Respectfully Submitted,
Tobi Thomas, Management Analyst
Dennis Kauffman, Chief Financial Officer/Assistant City Manager ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution 25-328

2. Professional Services Agreement
REVIEWERS:

Tobi Thomas, Public Affairs and Communications Department Created/Initiated - 9/29/2025 Heather Blanco, City Manager Department - City Manager Approved - 9/29/2025 Dominick Casey, City Clerk Department Approved - 9/29/2025 Gretchen Hakala, City Attorney Department Approved - 9/29/2025 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Approved - 9/30/2025 Ryan DeVore, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 9/30/2025 Dennis Kauffman, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 9/30/2025 Michelle Sheidenberger, City Attorney Department Approved - 10/1/2025 Dominick Casey, City Manager Department - City Manager Approved - 10/1/2025 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Final Approval - 10/2/2025

RESOLUTION NO. 25-328

APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE AND RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC., AND

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE IT

ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE
WHEREAS, a professional services agreement for a Shared Services Assessment, by and between the City of Roseville and Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc., has been reviewed by the City Council; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roseville that said professional services agreement is hereby approved and that the City Manager is authorized to execute it on behalf of the City of Roseville.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Roseville this ___ day of ______________, 2025, by the following vote on roll call:

AYES COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS:
______________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
________________________
City Clerk

[B:\City Attorney\COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS\raftelis psa for shared services.docx;09/24/2025] EXHIBIT “A”

City of Roseville
Shared Services Assessment
RFP NO. 04-032 / AUGUST 14, 2025

611 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 900, Los Angeles, CA 90017 www.raftelis.com
August 14, 2025
Mr. Dennis Kauffman
Assistant City Manager/Chief Financial Officer
City of Roseville
311 Vernon Street
Roseville, CA 95678
Subject: Proposal for Shared Services Assessment (RFP No. 04-032) Dear Mr. Kauffman:

Raftelis knows the City of Roseville (City). Over the years, we have served as a trusted advisor to the City on a wide range of projects—supporting multiple Citywide and department-specific strategic planning initiatives, conducting financial and cost-of-service studies, and facilitating strategic planning sessions with the City Council. Our work has spanned diverse functions, from water and wastewater strategy to fire department planning, giving us a deep and nuanced understanding of Roseville’s operations, values, and priorities.

This baseline knowledge allows us to begin the Shared Services Assessment with an informed perspective, enabling us to move quickly into the substantive analysis the City is seeking. We understand the importance of evaluating how each targeted service is currently delivered—whether centralized, decentralized, or hybrid—and providing clear, implementable recommendations that will enhance service levels, improve consistency, and strengthen collaboration across departments. Combined with our national expertise in organizational assessment and shared services evaluation, this longstanding partnership uniquely positions us to deliver practical solutions that fit Roseville’s culture, resources, and future goals.

We understand that the City is seeking an objective, comprehensive review of selected service areas to identify the advantages, disadvantages, and operational implications of each. The City’s goal is not to force-fit a particular structure, but to enhance service levels, improve consistency, and strengthen coordination and collaboration across departments. Raftelis offers several distinct advantages for this work:
• A tailored, practical approach: Our methodology is proven but fully customizable to reflect the unique context, operations, and priorities of Roseville. It is designed to build on existing strengths, address identified challenges, and deliver recommendations grounded in fact-based analysis that the City can implement with confidence.
• An experienced and specialized team: Our project team brings both practitioner and consulting experience across every functional area identified in the RFP, ensuring that each service is evaluated by someone who understands it from the inside out.
o Utilities (water, wastewater, stormwater)
o Fleet and facilities management
o Finance and budget

611 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 900, Los Angeles, CA 90017 www.raftelis.com
o Human resources and organizational development
o Information technology and data management
• We prioritize implementation and change management: In addition, we bring nationally recognized expertise in communications and change management—capabilities that will help translate project findings into an actionable plan forward. Our approach not only supports efficiency and cost-effectiveness but also ensures that the quality of service is maintained or improved. • Proven ability to deliver results: We have helped hundreds of cities nationwide evaluate service delivery options, identify cost-effective solutions, and implement changes that achieve lasting operational improvements without compromising service quality.

We are proud of the capabilities we bring and the value we have provided to Roseville over the years. Raftelis will perform the services and adhere to the requirements described in the RFP. We welcome the opportunity to build on this history and to assist the City with this important initiative. I am authorized to represent the firm. If you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,
Jonathan Ingram Nancy Hetrick
Vice President Vice President
P: 513.221.0500 / E: [email protected] P: 408.674.3369 / E: [email protected] F: 828.484.2442

Table of
Contents
TAB A: Firm’s Qualifications.................. 1
TAB B: Experience and References ...... 4
TAB C: Qualifications of Team............. 12
TAB D: Project Understanding............. 18
TAB E: Project Plan............................... 19
TAB F: Cost Proposal ........................... 26
TAB G: Required
Statements/Documents ........................ 27
TAB H: Exceptions ................................ 32
TAB I: Competency of Proposers ........ 32
Appendix: Resumes.............................. 33
Giving back
The Raftelis Charitable Gift Fund seeks to
make a difference on issues that matter to
our clients and employees by helping build
sustainable, inclusive communities locally
and worldwide. We do this by allocating
company profits and employee contributions
of time and money. We support
organizations that:
• Promote efficient, sustainable resource
use
• Advance diversity, equity, and
inclusion within the public sector
• Invest in access to clean water and
sanitation
• Help vulnerable communities by
addressing affordability issues

RAFTELIS 1
TAB A: FIRM’S QUALIFICATIONS
Who We Are
RAFTELIS: HELPING LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND UTILITIES THRIVE.

Since our founding in 1993, local government and utility leaders have partnered with Raftelis to transform their organizations by enhancing performance, planning for the future, identifying top talent, improving their financial condition, and telling their story.

We’ve helped more than 700 organizations in the last year alone. We provide trusted advice, and our experts include former municipal and utility leaders with decades of hands-on experience running successful organizations. People who lead local governments and utilities are innovators—constantly seeking ways to provide better service to the communities that rely on them. Raftelis provides management consulting expertise and insights that help bring about the change that our clients seek.

We believe that Raftelis is the right fit for this project. We provide several key factors that will benefit the City and help to make this project a success.

RESOURCES AND EXPERTISE: This project will require the resources necessary to effectively staff the project and the skillsets to complete all required components. With more than 190 consultants, Raftelis has one of the largest local government management and financial consulting practices in the nation. Our depth of resources will allow us to provide the City with the technical expertise necessary to meet your objectives. In addition to having many of the industry’s leading management and financial consultants, we also have experts in key related areas, like stakeholder engagement and data analytics, to provide additional insights as needed.

DECADES OF COLLECTIVE EXPERIENCE: Our associates and subject matter experts have decades of experience strengthening local municipalities and nonprofit organizations. They’ve served in a wide range of positions, from city manager to public works director to fire chief.

PERSONAL SERVICE FROM SENIOR-LEVEL CONSULTANTS: You appreciate it when deadlines are met, phone calls are returned, and your challenges are given in-depth, out-of-the-box thinking. While other firms may assign your business to junior-level people, our approach provides exceptional service from senior-level consultants.

NICHE EXPERTISE: Our expertise lies in strengthening public-sector organizations. We’re consulting specialists rather than generalists, focusing our strengths to do a highly effective job for a specific group of clients.

Subconsultants
Because we possess the in-house knowledge and experience necessary for this work, no subconsultants will be used.

All team members are Raftelis employees.

RAFTELIS 2

FIRM CAPABILITIES
FINANCE: Promote financial integrity and the
equitable recovery of costs to achieve your objectives
• Rate, charge, and fee studies
• Financial and capital planning
• Cost of service and cost allocation
• Customer assistance programs
• Affordability analysis
• Utility valuation
• Budget development
• Financial condition assessments
• Debt issuance support
• Economic feasibility and analysis
• Regulated utility support
COMMUNICATION: Inform and engage with your
stakeholders to build understanding and support
• Strategic communication planning
• Public involvement and community outreach
• Public meeting facilitation
• Graphic design and marketing materials
• Media and spokesperson training
• Risk and crisis communication
• Social media strategy
• Visual facilitation
• Virtual engagement
• Technical writing and content development
STRATEGIC PLANNING/FACILITATION:

Plan for the future to guide your organization to success • Organization, department, and community-based
strategic planning
• Climate action planning
• Effective Board / Commission / Council governance
• Retreat planning and facilitation
STORMWATER UTILITY SERVICES: Implement
sustainable financial practices to equitably fund your
stormwater program
• Stormwater utility development and implementation
support
ORGANIZATIONAL ASSESSMENT: Identify needs,
plan for the future, and implement positive changes
• Organizational and operational assessments
• Performance measurement
• Staffing analysis
• Sustainability
• Organizational climate and culture
• Asset management and operations
• Regional collaboration and service sharing
TECHNOLOGY: Gain insights from your data and
develop tools to increase effectiveness and
engagement
• Cybersecurity services
• Strategic technology planning services
• Financial management technology services
• Customer management technology services
• Maintenance and asset management technology services
• Data management, analytics, and visualization
• Custom software solutions
EXECUTIVE SERVICES: Identify and develop top
talent to lead local governments and utilities
• Executive recruitment
• Executive coaching
• Executive performance evaluations
SOLID WASTE SERVICES: Deliver effective solid
waste services while ensuring financial sustainability
and customer engagement
• Solid waste plans & sustainable materials management
planning & implementation
• Grant application assistance
• Billing technology planning and implementation
• Collection/routing and disposal/processing planning,
procurement, and implementation
• Rates and financial modeling
• Benchmarking and best practices
• Regulation and compliance
• Communications and public engagement

RAFTELIS 3
Firm Organization Chart
Over the last five years, our firm has grown from 97 to 224 employees. Raftelis' staff consists of some of the most knowledgeable and skilled consulting professionals in the municipal consulting industry. The organizational chart below shows the full organization and reporting structure of our firm.

LEADERSHIP
President and CEO
Board of Directors
Chief Financial Officer
Executive Vice Presidents
Senior Vice Presidents
Vice Presidents

FINANCIAL AND RATE ORGANIZATIONAL ASSESSMENT /

STRATEGIC PLANNING
Management – 7
Support Staff – 24

CORPORATE FUNCTIONS
Management – 19
Support Staff – 55
Management – 8
Support Staff – 23

STORMWATER AND DATA STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS
Management – 4
Support Staff – 13
Management – 3
Support Staff – 3

SOLID WASTE SERVICES TECHNOLOGY
Management – 3
Support Staff – 2
Management – 9
Support Staff – 10

EXECUTIVE SERVICES
Management – 5
Support Staff – 7

RAFTELIS 4
TAB B: EXPERIENCE AND REFERENCES
Experience and References

RAFTELIS HAS THE MOST EXPERIENCED UTILITY FINANCIAL AND MANAGEMENT CONSULTING PRACTICE IN THE NATION.

Our staff has assisted more than 1,700 public agencies and utilities across the U.S., including some of the largest and most complex agencies in the nation. In the past year alone, Raftelis worked on more than 1,300 financial, organizational, and/or technology consulting projects for over 700 agencies in 47 states, the District of Columbia, and Canada. In addition, we have assisted over 350 utilities and local governments in California. In this section, we have provided descriptions of projects that we have worked on that are similar in scope to the City’s project. We have included references for each of these clients and urge you to contact them to better understand our capabilities and the quality of service that we provide.

RAFTELIS HAS PROVIDED FINANCIAL/

ORGANIZATIONAL/TECHNOLOGY ASSISTANCE

TO UTILITIES SERVING MORE THAN
25% OF THE U.S. POPULATION.

RAFTELIS 5
City of Long Beach CA
Reference: Tom Modica, City Manager
P: 562.570.5091 / E: [email protected]
Omar Ramos, Manager of Administration
P: 562.570.6060 / E: [email protected]
411 W. Ocean Boulevard, Long Beach, CA 90802
Dates: April 2024 - Present
The City of Long Beach (City) placed a ballot measure before voters in November 2024 to amend the City Charter to establish one consolidated human resources function, modify the duties of the Civil Service Commission, and rename the Commission to the Civil Service Employee Rights and Appeals Commission. All administrative responsibilities provided by the Civil Service Department would be transferred to the Human Resources (HR) Department. The City engaged Raftelis to partner with HR and City leadership to help prepare for potential integration should the ballot measure pass. Key deliverables included an integration roadmap, a facilitated workshop with leadership to discuss and assign key priorities for integration, and initial process improvements to achieve performance goals as outlined in the Charter amendment.

Subsequently, Raftelis was again engaged to assist the City in preparing the HR Department to assume responsibility for the functions served by the separate Civil Service Department. The City Council had placed a Charter Amendment on the ballot, and in anticipation of its passage, the City began the process of identifying changes needed to integrate two separate departments. Our work involved information gathering at the outset, including an employee survey, a wide variety of interviews (stakeholders, executives, HR staff), and an initial roadmap of integration elements.

Pinellas County FL
Reference: Joe Lauro CPPB/CPPO, Director, Department of Administrative Services P: 727.464.4710 / E: [email protected]
400 Ft. Harrison Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756
Dates: February 2020 - August 2020
In February 2020, Pinellas County (County) engaged the firm to complete an organizational assessment of the County's Fleet Management operations. The Fleet Management function provides maintenance and repairs to County vehicles and equipment and manages a fuel program with 17 fuel sites across the County to support operations. The goal of this assessment was to evaluate fleet management and fuel operations, including organizational structures, facilities, tools, and processes, and to assess the use of industry best practices. This review was informed by interviews with 22 Fleet Management staff as well as interviews with representatives from customer departments such as Public Works and Parks and Conservation Resources. Site visits and tours of the Central Fleet Garage, four sub shop locations, and the 17 fuel sites provided context for the scope of the fleet operations and quality of facilities. In addition, Fleet Management provided several documents and data regarding the division’s operations, performance, and workload. This information was analyzed along with publicly available documents such as County budgets and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) information.

As an element of the review process, the County requested an analysis identifying the optimal arrangement of fuel sites throughout the County and a summary of recommendations to inform capital budgeting discussions. The goal of this analysis was to determine the number of fuel sites and fueling options necessary to maintain existing service levels to County operating departments, maintain fuel reserve resiliency in case of natural disasters, and minimize

RAFTELIS 6
the operating and capital costs necessary to support fueling operations. The fuel site assessment was informed by extensive analysis of fuel data, the geographic distribution of fuel sites relative to County operating needs, and the anticipated capital and operating costs necessary to maintain fueling infrastructure.

Napa Sanitation District CA
Reference: Andrew Damron, General Manager
P: 707.258.6007 / E: [email protected]
1515 Soscol Ferry Road, Napa, CA 94558
Dates: July 2023 – April 2024
In July 2023, the Napa Sanitation District (District) engaged the firm to review organizational structure and staffing in its Administration Division (including Clerk, Finance, and Human Resources), Engineering Services Division, and Collection Services workgroups. The firm conducted on-site interviews with key staff members, reviewed data and documents, toured facilities, and presented preliminary recommendations for improving effectiveness and providing career paths for staff. The firm continues to work with the District on a phased plan to address issues, presenting critically needed positions to the Board prior to the presentation of a comprehensive plan.

City of Hillsboro OR
Reference: Rahim Harji, Assistant City Manager
P: 503.681.6447 / E: [email protected]
150 E. Main Street, Hillsboro, OR 97123
Dates: 2023
The City of Hillsboro (City) engaged our team in 2023 to develop an Asset Management Strategic Implementation Plan that would serve as the foundation for long-term capital planning and execution. Building on prior efforts initiated in 2021, the project sought to move beyond isolated asset management practices toward a unified, organization-wide framework that would guide strategic decision-making, capital investment, and service delivery.

In Phase 1, we collaborated with staff and process owners to assess the current state of asset management across the City and to define a shared vision and values for the program. A workshop with City stakeholders helped articulate desired future outcomes and identify priority areas for improvement—establishing a roadmap for governance, data integration, and program development. In Phase 2, our team synthesized feedback and findings into 41 recommendations forming an asset management framework aligned with the City’s long-term strategic goals.

Central to this effort was developing a governance structure and decision-making process that ensured asset management practices directly informed capital prioritization and project execution.

The City also engaged Raftelis in 2023 to perform an operational assessment of its Facilities Management function.

The purpose of this study was to analyze facilities operations to determine the optimal organizational structure and staffing needed and to enhance the work planning and execution processes. To accomplish this, the project team conducted virtual interviews with 22 City staff, including all Facilities Management staff and staff from the City Manager's Office, Information Services Department, and Finance Department. The resulting report included recommendations to improve management and administrative support, work planning and staff capacity, and capital project management.

RAFTELIS 7
Dublin San Ramon Services District CA
Reference: Jan Lee, General Manager
P: 925.875.2204 / E: [email protected]
7051 Dublin Boulevard, Dublin, CA 94568
Dates: June 2022 – February 2025 (Phase I and II)
With a goal to ensure appropriate staffing and organization structure, Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) engaged Raftelis in 2022 to provide a workforce study of its Operations Department, including water, wastewater, and recycled water operations. The work included interviews with managers and staff workgroups, onsite tours, benchmarking against other peer agencies, and an online survey of staff. Raftelis presented a recommendation to the Board to add nine positions over the next five years to enhance its preventive maintenance, laboratory and regulatory reporting functions, and administrative support.

We returned in 2024 to perform an organizational assessment of all remaining departments, including the General Manager’s Office, finance, human resources, engineering, customer service, and field services. The resulting recommendations helped address staffing and vacancy concerns in specific areas and improve operations.

City of Laguna Beach CA
Reference: David Kiff, City Manager
P: 949.497.0704 / E: [email protected]
505 Forest Avenue, Laguna Beach, CA 92651
Dates: August 2024 – January 2025
In 2024, the City of Laguna Beach (City) engaged Raftelis to provide a comprehensive assessment of its Finance Department (Department), including process integrations with the City Treasurer. The Department had experienced significant staff turnover, the implementation of a new financial system, and performance concerns in recent years.

Project work included interviews with staff and other City departments, a review of audit findings and City documents, and a comparison of Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) and Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) best practices. The resulting project report addressed structure, staffing levels, performance measures, and improvements to internal controls and processes to serve as a roadmap for the Department moving forward.

City of Arroyo Grande CA
Reference: Matt Downing, City Manager
P: 805.473.5400 / E: [email protected]
300 E. Branch Street, Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
Dates: December 2024 – May 2025
The City of Arroyo Grande (City) engaged Raftelis to perform a high-level organizational assessment of its City Manager’s Office, Legislative and Information Services, Administrative Services, Community Development, Recreation Services, and Public Works Departments. The City sought to align organizational structure and staffing levels with City goals and service levels. The recommendations considered economic development resources and programming to support revenue growth, optimal staffing to meet administrative workload demand, and opportunities for operational efficiency across all departments evaluated.

RAFTELIS 8
City of Hayward CA
Reference: Dustin Claussen, Former Assistant City Manager, now Deputy City Manager – City of San Leandro P: 510.577.3354 / E: [email protected]
777 B Street, 4th Floor, Hayward, CA 94541
Dates: February 2024 – September 2024
In 2024, the City of Hayward (City) engaged the firm to assist with a review and assessment of operations and organization structures in its Public Works & Utilities and Maintenance Services Departments. The goal of this engagement was to identify opportunities for improved efficiency and effectiveness of operations, staffing, organizational structure, technology, processes, and policies. The resulting analysis recommended that the City focus first upon recruiting and retention of staff in order to fill several vacant positions. In addition, recommendations included moving the Maintenance Services Department from focusing on reactive responses to nuisance calls, such as graffiti and homeless encampments, to proactive maintenance of City infrastructure, which was falling behind. Improving sharing and communication with staff located separately at the Corporate Yard facility was also among the report recommendations.

City of Richmond CA
Reference: Nickie Mastay, Deputy City Manager
P: 510.620.6609 / E: [email protected]
450 Civic Center Plaza, Richmond, CA 94804
Dates: August 2023 – June 2024
In 2023, the City of Richmond (City) engaged the firm to perform a Citywide staffing analysis. Richmond, located in the Bay Area northeast of San Francisco, is a City of 120,000 with over 700 authorized staff positions. Our team conducted interviews across all departments, including Executive and Internal Services, Finance, Public Works, Community Development, Community Services, Economic Development, Police, and Fire. We presented our observations and recommendations to the City Council, which included specific staffing and operating efficiency recommendations across all operating departments.

City of Coachella CA
Reference: Bill Pattison, Finance Director
P: 760.398.3502 / E: [email protected]
53990 Enterprise Way, Coachella, CA 92236
Dates: November 2022 – September 2023
In 2023, the City of Coachella (City) engaged Raftelis to perform a staffing and manpower study of its utility operations, including the Coachella Water Authority and Sanitary District. Located in the Coachella Valley in the Colorado Desert of California, the Utilities Department provides for the treatment and distribution of potable water to over 9,000 residential, commercial, and industrial water service connections, as well as the collection, treatment, and disposal of wastewater from more than 8,000 wastewater service connections. The goal of the study was to identify current and future service demands and staff and structure the utilities appropriately.

Work included an evaluation of the operational units’ scope of work, operating procedures, finances against industry standards, and a benchmarking comparison with peer utilities. Deliverables included a report representing findings from the analysis and recommended strategies to address gaps in performance and add staff as appropriate.

RAFTELIS 9
Town of Nantucket MA
Reference: Libby Gibson, Town Manager
P: 508.228.7200 ext. 7305 / E: [email protected] 16 Broad Street, Nantucket, MA 02554
Dates: July 2018 – February 2019 (Planning and Land Use Study) The Town of Nantucket (Town) initially engaged The Novak Consulting Group, now Raftelis, to complete a comprehensive Town-wide Staffing Study, which included a detailed assessment of staffing, structure, and process efficiencies for all Town departments. This foundational project provided a data-driven understanding of organizational capacity, identified operational improvements, and established a baseline for future planning efforts.

Following the success of the staffing assessment, the Town contracted with our team for a structural review of the Town’s Planning and Land Use Services function, resulting in recommendations to streamline development review processes, improve interdepartmental coordination, and enhance service delivery to the public. Building on this momentum, we partnered with Nantucket to develop a strategic plan, aligning organizational priorities with community values and providing a framework to guide decision-making and resource allocation. Since the completion of these initial projects, the Town of Nantucket has continued to work with Raftelis on a series of engagements, including long-term strategic planning, implementation support for organizational assessment recommendations, governing body retreats and facilitation, organizational communications planning, and deeper organizational assessments in human services, planning, development, and transportation.

This project history highlights not only our expertise across multiple areas of municipal service delivery, but also our commitment to strong, ongoing client relationships. Our long-standing partnership with the Town of Nantucket exemplifies the quality of work, depth of understanding, and trust that we bring to our engagements—qualities that are equally critical for a shared services assessment.

City of Charleston SC
Reference: Susan Poteat, Director of Process and Service Improvement P: 843.577.1381 / E: [email protected]
80 Broad Street, Charleston, SC 29401
Dates: 2018 - 2023
The City of Charleston (City) engaged our firm under a multi-year contract to conduct a series of organizational and structural assessments. As part of the City’s broader commitment to building internal capacity for continuous improvement, representatives from multiple departments attended the Denver Peak Academy, gaining tools and training in process improvement methodologies.

Working alongside the City’s efficiency experts and the Process and Service Improvement Department, our consultants have provided value-added analysis of many of Charleston’s core lines of business. Monthly meetings with the Mayor and project leadership have ensured accountability, momentum, and measurable progress in implementing recommended initiatives. To date, our work with the City has included detailed reviews of:
• The development review and permitting processes
• Public Works, Fleet, and Solid Waste operations
• Facilities Capital Project Delivery
• Parks, Recreation, and Community Services operations
• The structural placement of the City’s Tourism and Special Events function

RAFTELIS 10
In addition, we have:
• Conducted a recurring, City-wide organizational culture assessment and workplace survey • Performed city-wide employee engagement assessments
• Provided facilitation, support and leadership engagement to advance the City’s strategic priorities This long-term partnership illustrates our ability to work collaboratively with municipal leadership on high-impact, cross-departmental process improvements and to provide sustained implementation support—ensuring recommendations not only identify opportunities but also result in tangible, lasting improvements. The firm recently completed a change management project with Planning, Permitting, & Engineering (PPE) for the City.

City of Fort Collins CO
Reference: Kelly DiMartino, City Manager
P: 970.416.2028 / E: [email protected]
300 LaPorte Avenue, Fort Collins, CO 80521
Dates: January 2021 – March 2021
The City of Fort Collins (City) engaged The Novak Consulting Group, now Raftelis, to conduct a structural review of the budget and finance functions for Utility Services and the General City Financial function. The team analyzed the functions and identified opportunities to reassign resources to increase the capacity of the General City Finance Department to provide services to Utility Services. In addition , members of our project team conducted an organizational structure analysis of the City while working with a previous firm. They conducted best practice research and identified specific structural changes designed to enhance service delivery for the customers of Transportation Service, Community Planning and Environmental Services, and Utility Services. The primary purpose of this study was to create an improved organizational structure. Cost savings were also achieved by eliminating a high-level (Service Area Director) position and associated support staff.

City of Bloomington IN
Reference: Adam Wason, Director of Public Works
P: 812.349.3410 / E: [email protected]
401 North Morton Street, Bloomington, IN 47404
Dates: 2018 - 2022
The City of Bloomington (City) began a systematic process of assessing each department under the leadership of former Mayor John Hamilton. The City engaged our project team to lead these efforts. Detailed assessments were completed for the following departments: Finance/Controller; Public Works; Utilities; Transportation and Planning; Legal; Human Resources; Information Technology; and the Police and Fire Departments. Assessments were also completed for the Housing and Neighborhood Development Department; Economic and Sustainable Development Department; and the Office of the Mayor. In addition, a review of the City’s various Boards and Commissions was also conducted.

RAFTELIS 11
City of Milton WA
Reference: Shanna Styron Sherrell, Mayor
P: 253.922.8733 x2705 / E: [email protected] 1000 Laurel Street, Milton, WA 98354
Dates: August 2023 – November 2023
In 2023, the firm was engaged by the City of Milton (City) to perform an organizational assessment of its Finance Department with a goal to review structure, staffing levels, and processes. Work included interviews with all Finance staff, a review of data and documents, and comparisons against best industry practices. Report recommendations included adding an administrative staff member for the City Hall front desk functions, improving performance management, enhancing department team building, physical space improvements, and other elements.

RAFTELIS 12
TAB C: QUALIFICATIONS OF TEAM
Project Team

WE HAVE DEVELOPED A TEAM OF CONSULTANTS WHO SPECIALIZE

IN THE SPECIFIC ELEMENTS THAT WILL BE CRITICAL TO THE
SUCCESS OF THE CITY’S PROJECT.

Our project team is made up of senior-level consultants with direct local government experience. No subconsultants are proposed for this work; all team members are employees of Raftelis.

An organizational chart of our project team is as follows. Short introductory bios are provided on the following pages. Full resumes for each team member, including office location and project role, are provided in the Appendix.

Raftelis has the following 15 offices, which are located strategically across the U.S.: Los Angeles, CA; Santa Barbara, CA; Albany Metro, NY; Austin, TX; Bellingham, WA; Boston Metro, MA; Charlotte, NC; Cincinnati, OH; Denver, CO; Durham, NC; Greensboro, NC; Irving, TX; Kansas City, MO; Littleton, CO; and Orlando Metro, FL. The office locations of our proposed team members are provided in their resumes.

SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS
Jennifer Teal
Human Resources
J. Scott Parker
Public Works and Utilities
Joan Schoening
Information Technology
Nick Zoller, APR
Communications
City of Roseville

PROJECT DIRECTOR
Nancy Hetrick

STAFF CONSULTANTS
James Flick
Claire Pritchard
Jordan Jerkovich
Polly Englot

PROJECT MANAGER
Jonathan Ingram

PROJECT MANAGEMENT SUPPORT

AND SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT -

FINANCE
Rebekka G. Hosken

RAFTELIS 13
Nancy Hetrick

PROJECT DIRECTOR
Vice President
Nancy has nearly 30 years of experience as a local government management consultant and practitioner. She has extensive experience as a facilitator and trainer and has worked with both elected and appointed officials from jurisdictions throughout the western United States to conduct goal setting, develop strategic plans, and prioritize service delivery. She has led engaging strategic planning processes that sharpen focus while strengthening teamwork. In addition, Nancy has worked with leadership teams in all local government service areas to improve team effectiveness.

In addition to her work in organizational development and strategic planning, Nancy has led hundreds of local government consulting engagements spanning all areas of general management consulting support, including executive recruitment, organization assessment, workforce and succession planning, performance management system design, and financial sustainability planning.

Jonathan Ingram

PROJECT MANAGER
Vice President
Jonathan has over 20 years of leadership experience advancing performance, efficiency, and resilience in local government operations, with specialized expertise in public works, municipal services, and asset management. As the leader of Raftelis’ Local Government Organizational Assessment Practice, he directs complex, enterprise-level engagements that support cities, counties, and public utilities in addressing strategic and operational challenges through data-driven, fiscally grounded solutions.

With a unique blend of hands-on public sector experience and high-impact management consulting, Jonathan has successfully led transformative initiatives for over 1,000 local governments and utilities nationwide. Jonathan brings deep technical knowledge and strategic insight into infrastructure planning, asset management, and service delivery optimization. He has developed and implemented comprehensive operational reviews, capital and lifecycle planning strategies, and workforce deployment models that enhance reliability, regulatory compliance, and cost efficiency.

His public works consulting emphasizes aligning field operations with strategic goals, sustainability imperatives, and realistic budgetary conditions.

Rebekka G. Hosken

SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT - PROJECT MANAGEMENT / FINANCE
Senior Manager
Rebekka joined Raftelis in 2020 with 16 years of direct service to local governments and 10 years of management consulting experience. As an experienced consultant, Rebekka has led organizational assessments for a broad range of operating departments and offices in cities, counties, universities, and special districts, including community development, public works, police, administration, and city attorney departments. With direct operational experience in finance, municipal administration, and public works, Rebekka’s breadth of knowledge makes her skillful in quickly identifying organizational strengths and opportunities, analyzing operations through the creation of process maps and workflows, preparing actionable recommendations for improvement, and communicating

RAFTELIS 14
findings to a wide variety of audiences. She has consulted for over 150 clients throughout the United States and internationally.

Prior to Raftelis, Rebekka served as finance director for the City of La Cañada Flintridge, California, a contract city north of Los Angeles, where she was responsible for accounts payable, receivable, budget, audit, and payroll.

Previously, she was the budget officer for the City of Simi Valley, California, a full-service community in the Los Angeles region. Rebekka is also a member of GFOA and CSMFO.

Jennifer Teal

SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT - HUMAN RESOURCES
Senior Manager
Jennifer began consulting in 2017 after nearly 20 years of public sector experience, including 10 years of leadership experience in local government. Most recently, Jennifer served the City of Gahanna, Ohio, where she worked as the deputy finance director, chief financial officer, and finally, city administrator.

Jennifer has worked on more than 100 projects across 27 states. She is a skilled facilitator, trainer, problem solver, and a Certified Lean Six Sigma Black Belt. Jennifer’s commitment to empowering others in the public sector has led to the development of the Raftelis Performance Academy (RPA), the only leadership development, performance improvement, and innovation training in the country designed to meet the unique needs of local governments and utilities. Jennifer is active in the local government and utility industries and has presented at several conferences on topics related to strategic planning and workforce development. She has recently co-authored articles that have appeared in the Journal of Public Integrity and Water and Environment Technologies. She is also a lecturer at the Ohio State University John Glenn College of Public Affairs, where she teaches graduate and undergraduate seminars in Local Government Administration.

J. Scott Parker

SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT - PUBLIC WORKS AND UTILITIES
Vice President
Scott has over 20 years of experience in local government, utility management, and private consulting. Immediately before joining Raftelis, he served as the asset manager for KC Water (KCW), the drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater utility in Kansas City, Missouri. Beyond his work at KCW, he has designed, developed, and implemented asset management programs in three (3) local governments and utilities. Scott is a former Assistant Director of Public Works for two communities and has served in utilities management. He has consulted for numerous utilities and public works operations, with expertise in utility operations and facilities management.

In Kansas City, Scott developed the organization’s first data management strategic plan and its Business Case Evaluation (BCE) framework for information system purchases. He has designed and managed capital programs for organizations throughout the U.S., including KC Water (KCW); the Unified Government of Wyandotte County (Kansas City, Kansas); Fort Smith, AR; Jackson, MS; Lenexa, KS; and Olathe, KS. All but the last two were under consent orders with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), resulting in programs worth billions of dollars.

RAFTELIS 15
Joan Schoening

SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Senior Advisor
Joan has over 28 years of experience in Information Technology (IT) in local government. During her tenure, she has managed diverse and complex technology projects and participated in cross-department non-technical initiatives to develop a broad skillset to apply to information technology-related projects. After retiring in 2013, Joan worked as an independent project manager assisting local agencies and served as a senior advisor with another management consulting firm. As a Senior Advisor, she managed requests for proposal RFP projectsand process improvement workshops, as well as conducted information technology assessments, technology strategic plans, and other project management services.

As an IT Manager for the City of Foster City, Joan was responsible for planning, budgeting, implementing, maintaining, and securing the city's IT. Joan worked closely with city management and departments to align business goals with technology solutions to drive process improvements; developed policies and procedures to implement best practices for citywide technology projects; and was a staff liaison for a citizens' technology advisory committee.

Nick Zoller, APR

SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT - COMMUNICATIONS
Senior Consultant
Nick is a seasoned communications executive and strategist with 15+ years of experience leading the high-profile public sector and consulting engagements. As the Strategic Communications Practice Leader at Raftelis, he helps local governments and utilities strengthen public trust, drive effective engagement, and improve outcomes through strategic, data-informed communications. He advises executive leaders, elected officials, and communicators on high-impact issues, guiding them through crises, campaigns, and organizational change. Previously, as Senior Director of Communications for the City of Savannah, Nick led executive messaging, crisis response, and citywide education initiatives. He excels at developing integrated storytelling strategies that build credibility, shape public opinion, and deliver measurable impact. Nick is also passionate about mentoring teams and advancing best practices across the profession.

As the leader of Raftelis’ Strategic Communications practice, Nick manages a team of communications professionals. He provides counsel to government and utility clients on high-stakes issues, engagement strategy, and campaign design. Nick also develops best practices for effective communications and public trust-building initiatives.

RAFTELIS 16
James Flick

STAFF CONSULTANT
Senior Consultant
James has over 14 years of organizational leadership experience, including six years in local government. Most recently, James served as the Director of Economic Development and Public Information Officer for Deerfield Township in Warren County, Ohio. Previously, he was a Development Officer and oversaw the Policy and Communication Division for the Department of Community and Economic Development at the City of Cincinnati.

James' areas of expertise include economic development, project management, and performance measurement. He is also a skilled communicator, analyst, and creative problem solver. James has presented at several state and regional conferences on smart cities, data and demographics, and economic development's relationship to parks.

James is an Adjunct Instructor for the Northern Kentucky University Master of Public Administration program as well, where he teaches Community Development, Public Policy, and Budgeting.

Claire Pritchard

STAFF CONSULTANT
Senior Consultant
Claire has more than 10 years of experience in management consulting and local government management. She began her consulting career following five years of service with Dakota County, Minnesota, where, most recently, she held the position of assistant to the county manager. As a consultant, Claire has worked on organizational and staffing analyses for communities around the country, such as the Town of Nantucket, Massachusetts, the City of Allentown, Pennsylvania, and the City of Bloomington, Indiana, as well as several utilities, including Fairfax Water, Virginia, Pinellas County Utilities, Florida, the San Diego Public Utilities Department, California, and Tampa Bay Water, Florida.

Claire has assisted in developing financial models to analyze revenue and expenditure trends, as well as conducting detailed staffing and workload analysis to determine optimal organizational structures. She has developed and analyzed an array of employee and community-based surveys. Claire has conducted several best practice and benchmarking research projects and has assisted in the creation of strategic planning and implementation deliverables.

Jordan Jerkovich

STAFF CONSULTANT
Consultant
Jordan’s local government experience spans multiple service areas, jurisdictions, and countries, including sustainability, administration, procurement, and community development at local governments in Sweden, Scotland, and the United States. He most recently served as the Community Development Director for the City of Lindsborg, Kansas, where he helped to facilitate and develop the department’s functional areas, including current and long-range planning, development services, and special projects. Through his work and education, he has developed a broad knowledge of local government administration and development issues, including leadership and management practices, housing policy and development, climate change and sustainability, systems and process

RAFTELIS 17
mapping, community engagement, volunteer program development, among others. As a Consultant with Raftelis, Jordan is responsible for delivering client services across a range of activities, including strategic planning, organizational assessment, studies, and facilitation services.

Polly Englot

STAFF CONSULTANT
Associate Consultant
Polly has robust analytical experience throughout the public sector, having worked in local government, nonprofit, and international development settings. She is proficient in the areas of budget planning and analysis, process improvement, and project management. Polly is a detail-oriented problem solver who leverages data and organizational analysis to identify trends and actionable solutions.

Prior to joining Raftelis, Polly worked in Broward County’s Office of Management and Budget in southern Florida.

There, she supported monitoring and development of over $100millionannual operating budgets for judicial offices and the county’s extensive environmental agency. As a consultant, Polly has served on teams performing operational and organizational assessments of a wide variety of departments.

RAFTELIS 18
TAB D: PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
Project Understanding
The City of Roseville is seeking an experienced consulting partner to conduct a comprehensive assessment of selected shared services functions to determine the most effective and efficient approach for their delivery. The goal is to evaluate how each targeted service is currently provided—whether centralized, decentralized, or through a hybrid model— and to identify the advantages, disadvantages, and operational implications of each approach.

Our team brings extensive experience working with local government clients across the country, helping communities evaluate and optimize how services are delivered—whether through centralized, decentralized, or hybrid models. Not only do we have broad experience in California and across the country, but we also have an extensive history supporting Roseville in strategic planning, organizational assessment, and financial modeling projects over the years. This experience equips us with a deep understanding of the community, its organizational values, and the operational context in which City services are delivered. It also enables us to quickly focus on the key questions at the heart of this engagement—how each targeted service is currently delivered, what model best supports operational excellence for that service, and how changes can be implemented in a way that strengthens consistency, coordination, and collaboration while preserving the City’s strong commitment to serving its residents.

We understand that in Roseville, this project is not about applying a predetermined structure, but about taking a clear-eyed look at how services are currently provided, identifying the advantages and disadvantages of different approaches for each function, and recommending the path that best supports quality, consistency, coordination, and collaboration.

Our approach is grounded in practicality. Even the most innovative ideas have little value if they cannot be implemented or sustained within the City’s available resources, operational culture, and community expectations. We pride ourselves on our ability to listen deeply, analyze objectively, and work collaboratively to develop solutions that are not just “best practices from a manual,” but are grounded in the realities of Roseville’s environment and designed for actual implementation.

A core strength of our team is our ability to build on existing capabilities and resources, helping organizations see challenges and opportunities from new perspectives. We work alongside City staff to understand their experiences, constraints, and aspirations—recognizing that the people currently serving Roseville are key partners in shaping and implementing any future changes.

We are excited about the opportunity to support the City in proactively planning for the future of its shared services.

We assume good intent, respect the knowledge and commitment of staff, and believe that successful, lasting improvements come from collaborative development and shared ownership of recommendations. This intentional, partnership-driven approach—combined with Raftelis’ expertise in organizational assessment, shared services evaluation, and financial modeling—makes us uniquely qualified to help Roseville achieve meaningful and sustainable improvements within the timeframe requested.

RAFTELIS 19
TAB E: PROJECT PLAN
Project Plan
Activity 1 - Begin Engagement
The first activity will establish the foundation for the Shared Services Assessment by aligning project expectations, clarifying evaluation criteria, and creating a collaborative framework for decision-making. This step will ensure that the City and the consulting team share a common understanding of the services to be reviewed, the measures of success, and the methodology to be applied in assessing centralized, decentralized, and hybrid service delivery models.

Kickoff Meeting
We will begin the engagement with a kickoff meeting involving the City’s Project Manager, key members of the leadership team, and representatives from the service areas included in the assessment. This discussion will serve to validate the project’s objectives, refine the list of functions under review, and establish the communication and reporting protocols that will guide the project. Key discussion topics will include:
• Confirming the purpose, scope, and desired outcomes of the study • Reviewing initial expectations, questions, and priority issues for evaluation • Identifying known strengths, challenges, and potential improvement areas in current service delivery models • Clarifying roles and responsibilities for both City staff and the consulting team • Establishing a preferred schedule for status updates, milestone reviews, and ongoing communication • Reviewing the initial data and document request to ensure timely and complete information sharing Project Chartering Workshop
Following the kickoff, we will conduct an in-depth project chartering workshop with the City’s project team, central service leaders, and departmental representatives. The goal of this session will be to develop a shared framework for evaluating each service area and to agree on the criteria that will guide recommendations. This facilitated session will:
• Define the factors to be considered when assessing centralized, decentralized, and hybrid models, including cost, service quality, efficiency, responsiveness, and internal coordination • Clarify measures of service quality for both internal customers (other departments) and external customers (the public)
• Identify operational, cultural, and organizational considerations that may influence the preferred service delivery model
• Establish a benchmarking strategy and peer community selection approach to ensure comparisons are meaningful and relevant
• Document consensus on the project’s priorities, analytical approach, and measures of success Ongoing Project Management
Throughout the engagement, we will maintain a structured approach to project coordination and communication.

This will include:
• Maintaining a detailed project schedule with defined milestones and deliverables. • Providing regular progress updates, including monthly status reports, in addition to milestone meetings. • Ensuring transparent, two-way communication between the consulting team and the City’s project team to address questions, emerging issues, or refinements to the scope as needed.

RAFTELIS 20
Meetings:
• Kickoff meeting with Project Manager, leadership
team, and service area representatives
• In-person chartering session with project team,
central service leaders, and departmental
representatives
• Monthly project status meetings (virtual) in
addition to milestone review sessions
Deliverables:
• Kickoff meeting agenda and facilitation materials
• Initial data and document request
• Draft and final project schedule
• Chartering session facilitation materials
Activity 2 - Assess Current Service Delivery Models
This activity will develop a detailed, nuanced understanding of how the City currently provides its targeted shared services—whether through centralized, decentralized, or hybrid structures—and the real-world implications of each approach. Our analysis will go beyond simply cataloging service-specific tasks; it will also account for the other roles and responsibilities carried out by staff members whose work intersects with these services. For example, an individual may manage departmental budget tracking while also performing significant duties directly related to program or service delivery within their department. These dual roles can affect the practicality of shifting functions to a central model and must be fully understood before recommendations are made. Our approach will capture these nuances to ensure that potential changes are grounded in operational realities.

We will:
• Examine both service-specific and broader departmental duties for each staff member • Identify where current structures enhance service delivery or create inefficiencies
• Assess the feasibility and potential impact of shifting to different delivery models
The study will focus on the following service areas, while remaining open to including additional functions identified through Activity 1 discussions:
• Finance and budget support
• Human resources and payroll administration
• Procurement and contracting
• Information technology services and support
• Facilities maintenance and management
• Fleet management
• Records management and administrative support services Engagement Interviews and Focus Groups
We will conduct targeted interviews and focus groups with both central service providers and departmental personnel who regularly engage in these functions. These discussions will document how responsibilities are assigned, the nature of interdepartmental coordination, and how staff balance competing priorities. This will allow us to see not only how services are structured on paper but also how they function in practice. We will:
• Document job duties, including secondary and informal responsibilities • Map workflow paths, from request to completion, for core services • Understand how technology and tools are applied in daily operations • Identify recurring challenges, inefficiencies, or coordination gaps • Gather examples of practices that work well and could be scaled Citywide

RAFTELIS 21
Time and Workload Documentation
Following the interviews, we will design and administer a tailored time and workload documentation survey for individuals in each targeted function. The survey will quantify how time is divided between service-specific activities and other departmental responsibilities, as well as capturing the volume, complexity, and timing of work. This will allow us to evaluate which functions are most appropriate for centralization, decentralization, or hybrid models— and which may require maintaining a closer departmental alignment. Our team will:
• Capture the proportion of time spent on targeted vs. unrelated tasks • Identify resource bottlenecks, duplicated efforts, and missed efficiencies • Document seasonal or cyclical workload fluctuations
• Understand reliance on manual processes versus automated systems • Highlight positions where financial or administrative tasks are a small fraction of the role Current State Overview
Once interviews and survey data are complete, we will compile our findings into a narrative and visual Current State Overview. This document will combine workflow diagrams, organizational maps, and key findings to present a clear picture of existing structures and their advantages and disadvantages. We will review this Current State Overview first with the City’s project team, then in a virtual workshop with the broader stakeholder group to validate findings and refine our understanding before moving toward recommendations. We will:
• Synthesize data into a clear, accessible narrative with visual mapping • Identify opportunities to strengthen coordination, consistency, and collaboration • Validate findings through collaborative discussion with both project leadership and service-area stakeholders Meetings:
• Engagement interviews and focus groups with
central and departmental staff
• Follow-up meetings to clarify workload data
• Review meeting with City project team on Current
State Overview
• Virtual stakeholder workshop to validate findings
Deliverables:
• Key themes summary from interviews/focus
groups
• Time and workload survey instruments (draft/final)
• Validated workload data for each function
• Current State Overview presentation
Activity 3 - Assess and Identify Shared Service Opportunities Building on the validated current state from Activity 2, we will assess each targeted service area to determine whether a centralized, decentralized, or hybrid delivery model offers the greatest benefit to Roseville. This assessment will account for the full scope of responsibilities of staff involved in these functions—including duties outside the shared service focus area—to ensure that recommendations are realistic and operationally sustainable.

Our goal is to identify an approach for each service that enhances internal or public service levels, strengthens consistency, and improves coordination and collaboration across departments.

Document Current State and Challenges
We will compile a detailed service-area profile integrating engagement findings, time and workload documentation, and workflow mapping. This will establish a fact-based understanding of how each function is delivered today, as well as associated strengths and challenges. Our team will review:
• Current delivery model (central, decentral, hybrid) for each targeted function • Functional responsibilities, workflows, and interdepartmental dependencies • Strengths and benefits of the existing model

RAFTELIS 22
• Challenges, bottlenecks, and inconsistencies in service delivery • Extent of non-core responsibilities that could affect consolidation feasibility Conduct Targeted Benchmarking
We will conduct benchmarking to provide context for
Roseville’s options, drawing on examples from peer
agencies of similar size, complexity, and governance
structure. This will frame the range of viable models for each function. We will:
• Identify comparable peer agencies for each targeted
service area
• Document peer delivery models and rationale for
model selection
• Note performance outcomes and operational impacts
under each model
• Highlight lessons learned from peers’ implementation
experiences
Conduct Targeted Best Practice Research
We will perform best practice research to identify effective solutions—whether or not they come from strict peer agencies—that address challenges similar to Roseville’s. This research will leverage Raftelis’ experience with over 1,700 agencies and information from recognized industry organizations. We will:
• Access Raftelis’ repository of best practice resources and case studies • Review guidance from ICMA (general governance), GFOA (finance), APWA (public works), NRPA (parks), AWWA (utilities), NAFA Fleet Management Association (fleet), and other relevant associations • Identify policies, structures, and practices proven to enhance consistency, coordination, and service quality • Select adaptable solutions aligned with Roseville’s operational needs and culture Develop Shared Services Scenarios
We will identify and model viable shared services scenarios for each targeted function, including centralization, decentralization, and hybrid options. This process will evaluate potential operational structures, staffing implications, and the expected impact on service levels. Each scenario will undergo a cost-benefit analysis to assess both hard and soft cost savings. Raftelis’ standing as one of the most highly regarded management, organizational assessment, and financial modeling consultancies in the United States provides a unique advantage—combining deep operational insight with robust analytical capabilities to produce scenarios that are practical, financially sound, and service-oriented. Our team will:
• Identify opportunities for centralization, decentralization, or hybrid approaches for each service area • Assess staffing requirements, organizational structure implications, and operational changes for each option • Conduct cost-benefit analysis for each scenario, including quantification of potential hard and soft cost savings
• Evaluate service quality, responsiveness, and coordination impacts alongside financial metrics • Leverage Raftelis’ management and financial modeling expertise to ensure scenarios are both analytically sound and operationally feasible
Synthesize Findings and Develop Recommendations
We will integrate the current state assessment, benchmarking results, best practice research, and scenario analysis

RAFTELIS 23
into a comprehensive set of recommendations and alternatives for each service area. The synthesis will assess and summarize the advantages and disadvantages of centralization, decentralization, and hybrid delivery models, presenting multiple options for consideration. Raftelis will:
• Compare advantages, disadvantages, and service-level impacts of each model for every targeted function • Summarize options for consideration, including the recommended model and at least one viable alternative • Document operational, staffing, and cost implications of each option • Outline strategies for improving consistency, coordination, and collaboration regardless of the model selected
• Conduct an additional meeting review with the project team to validate the assessment and recommendations
• Facilitate an initial recommended observations, recommendations, and alternatives review with the broader project team, including representatives from each affected department and customer area, to ensure alignment before moving to the reporting phase
Meetings:
• Review meeting with the project team to confirm
current state findings and key service challenges
• Virtual validation meeting with the project team on
the synthesized findings and draft
recommendations
• Virtual stakeholder session to review draft options
and alternatives, and gather feedback
Deliverables:
• Current state and issues summary for each
service area
• Synthesis of findings and preliminary
recommendations for each service area
• Presentation materials for review sessions with
the project team and the broader stakeholder
group
Activity 4 - Prepare and Present Project Report and Change Management Plan
We will prepare a comprehensive Draft Report summarizing the assessment process, findings, and recommended approaches for each service area. The report will clearly outline the advantages and disadvantages of centralization, decentralization, and hybrid models, with tailored recommendations for each function. It will incorporate current state documentation, benchmarking results, best practice insights, scenario analysis, and cost-benefit evaluations, along with staffing and structural implications. Our team will:
• Summarize methodology, engagement process, and scope of review • Document current state profiles and key service-specific issues • Present benchmarking and best practice research findings • Provide shared services scenarios and associated cost-benefit analysis • Offer preliminary recommendations and viable alternatives for each service area Review and Feedback
The Draft Report will be delivered to the City for review, with comments requested within two weeks of delivery.

Following receipt of the City’s feedback, we will conduct a virtual review meeting to discuss comments and clarify requested revisions. We will then incorporate feedback and make any necessary amendments to produce the Final Report. We will:
• Deliver Draft Report and request City comments within two weeks • Conduct a virtual review meeting with the project team to discuss comments • Amend the report as necessary to address City input

RAFTELIS 24
Change Management and Implementation Planning Workshop
Before the Final Report is officially finalized, we will conduct a one-day Change Management and Implementation Workshop with key stakeholders responsible for implementation. Raftelis will develop an initial implementation framework and timeline to serve as a starting point for discussion. During the workshop, we will facilitate the development of a critical path plan for implementing recommendations, including change management strategies and a communications plan for employees. This plan will be designed to integrate with other organizational initiatives while capitalizing on the momentum generated by the study process. Our team will:
• Develop initial implementation framework and timeline • Facilitate workshop to refine framework into a practical critical path plan • Define change management strategies to support the adoption of recommendations • Create an internal communications plan to keep staff informed and engaged Finalize Report and Implementation Plan
Following the workshop, we will finalize the Implementation Plan in alignment with the Final Report. We will work with staff to prepare a final presentation for City Council that integrates study findings, recommendations, and the collaboratively developed Implementation Plan—providing a clear, actionable path forward for the organization. Raftelis will:
• Finalize Implementation Plan incorporating workshop outcomes • Complete Final Report
• Prepare and deliver the final presentation to the City Council, including both recommendations and the agreed-upon implementation approach
Meetings:
• Virtual meeting to review City comments on Draft
Report
• One-day Change Management and
Implementation Workshop
• Final in-person presentation to City Council
Deliverables:
• Draft Report
• Final Report
• Change management and communication
planning workshop
• Draft and final Implementation framework and
timeline
• Final presentation materials for City Council

RAFTELIS 25
Proposed Work Schedule
A proposed project schedule is provided below. We expect to review and refine this with the City during Activity 1.

Activity 1 - Begin
Engagement
Activity 2 - Assess Current
Service Delivery Models
Activity 3 - Assess and
Identify Shared Service
Opportunities
Activity 4 - Prepare and
Present Project Report and
Change Management Plan
In-Person Meetings
Web Meetings
Deliverables

SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY

RAFTELIS 26
TAB F: COST PROPOSAL
Cost Proposal
The total fixed fee to complete the scope of work outlined in this proposal is $174,250, which includes all professional fees and expenses, including travel for Raftelis. No reimbursable expenses are required.

A breakdown of costs by project activity is provided in the table below.

Activity Description Cost
1 Begin Engagement $17,000
2 Assess Current Service Delivery Models $53,000
3 Assess and Identify Shared Service Opportunities $57,000 4 Prepare and Present Project Report and Change Management Plan $47,250 TOTAL $174,250
Hourly rates and estimated project hours by team member are provided below. Raftelis reserves the right to reallocate hours amongst team members within the project budget.

Team Member Classification Hourly Rate Estimated Hours
Hetrick Vice President $375 21
Ingram Vice President $375 66
Hosken Senior Manager $340 53
Teal Senior Manager $340 30
Parker Vice President $375 46
Schoening Principal Consultant $310 10
Zoller Senior Manager $340 13
Flick Senior Consultant $260 16
Pritchard Senior Consultant $260 14
Jerkovich Consultant $230 118
Englot Associate $195 166
It is our practice to invoice clients for monthly progress payments based upon work completed.

RAFTELIS 27
TAB G: REQUIRED STATEMENTS/DOCUMENTS
Required Statements/Documents
The designated project team will be used for this project. Departure, reassignment of, or substitution for any member of the designated project team shall not be made without the prior written approval of the City.

Raftelis has no conflicts of interest that would affect this contract.

We are able to and agree to fulfill the indemnification and insurance requirements contained in the Sample Contract.

Nothing contained in this proposal is proprietary.

Raftelis is registered to conduct business in the State of California (Registration #2670972). On the following page, we have included our Statement of Information from the California Secretary of State.

RAFTELIS 28

RAFTELIS 29

RAFTELIS 30

RAFTELIS 31

RAFTELIS 32
TAB H: EXCEPTIONS
Exceptions
We do not have any proposed modifications or exceptions to the RFP requirements or to the Sample Contract.

TAB I: COMPETENCY OF PROPOSERS
Competency of Proposers
Pending Litigation
Raftelis has been joined as a third-party defendant in a lawsuit filed by local developers against the Town of Fuquay-Varina, North Carolina. The subject of this currently pending litigation is development impact fees assessed by the town and developed by Raftelis. This is the only legal case in which Raftelis has been joined as a party in the history of our firm. Raftelis intends to vigorously defend the allegations and claim.

Termination of Contracts
No client of Raftelis has ever terminated a contract.

RAFTELIS 33
APPENDIX: RESUMES
Appendix: Resumes

RAFTELIS 34
Nancy Hetrick

PROJECT DIRECTOR
Vice President
ROLE
Nancy will be responsible for overall project accountability and will be available to provide quality assurance and control, industry perspective, and insights into the project.

PROFILE
Nancy has nearly 30 years of experience as a local government management consultant and practitioner. Her lifelong commitment to the value and importance of public service underscores her work with local government clients. She invests time to understand both the human dynamic and the systems and culture within an organization to ensure project outcomes that will best service the unique needs of the organization.

Nancy has extensive experience as a facilitator and trainer. She has worked with both elected and appointed officials from jurisdictions throughout the western United States to conduct goal setting, develop strategic plans, and prioritize service delivery. She has led engaging strategic planning processes that sharpen focus while strengthening teamwork. The strategic plans that are developed offer a meaningful and implementable road map for the organizations she serves. In addition, Nancy has worked with leadership teams in all local government service areas to improve team effectiveness.

In addition to her work in organizational development and strategic planning, Nancy has led hundreds of local government consulting engagements spanning all areas of general management consulting support, including executive recruitment, organization assessment, workforce and succession planning, performance management system design, and financial sustainability planning.

Nancy is active in professional associations that support the advancement of local government professionals. She served as the President of the Municipal Management Association of Northern California (MMANC), founded the Women’s Leadership Summit, and sits on the board of Cal-ICMA, where she chairs the Cal-ICMA Talent Initiative.

Nancy studied political science with a concentration in public administration as an undergraduate and continued her studies in a Master of Public Administration program. She has participated in an executive leadership program and received certifications in leadership and style assessment tools such as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), DiSC, and the CPI 260 Psychological Inventory.

Office: San Jose, CA (remote)
Years with Firm: 2
Specialties
• Strategic planning and facilitation
• Organizational culture and team
building
• Organizational design
• Governance strategy and support
• Performance management
• Workforce planning and
development
Professional History
• Raftelis: Vice President (2023-
present)
• Baker Tilly LLC: Managing Director
(through acquisition) 2022-2023
• Management Partners: Vice
President, Partner, Senior Manager,
Senior Management Advisor (2006-
2022)
• County of San Mateo, County
Manager’s Office: Principal
Management Analyst, Management
Analyst III (2001-2006)
• Management Partners:

Management Advisor (1996-2001)
• Norman Roberts and Associates
(Executive Recruiters): Research
Associate (1995-1996)
Education
• Coursework complete toward
Master of Public Administration,
California State University, San
Francisco (1996-1997)
• Bachelor of Arts, Political Science
with concentration in Public
Administration, California State
University, Chico (1994)
Certifications
• Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
• DiSC
• CPI 260 California Psychological
Inventory
Professional Memberships
• ICMA, member; past trainer for the
Center for Performance
Measurement
• Cal-ICMA, board member, Talent
Initiative Chair
• Women Leading Government,
member
• Municipal Management Association
of Northern California, Past
President, founder, Women’s
Leadership Summit

RAFTELIS 35
Jonathan Ingram

PROJECT MANAGER
Vice President
ROLE
Jonathan will manage the day-to-day aspects of the project, ensuring it is within budget, on schedule, and effectively meets the City’s objectives. He will also lead the consulting staff in conducting analyses and preparing deliverables for the project. Jonathan will serve as the City’s main point of contact for the project.

PROFILE
Jonathan is a nationally recognized executive consultant with over 20 years of leadership experience advancing performance, efficiency, and resilience in local government operations, with specialized expertise in public works, municipal services, and asset management. As the leader of Raftelis’ Local Government Organizational Assessment Practice, he directs complex, enterprise-level engagements that support cities, counties, and public utilities in addressing strategic and operational challenges through data-driven, fiscally grounded solutions.

With a unique blend of hands-on public sector experience and high-impact management consulting, Jonathan has successfully led transformative initiatives for over 1,000 local governments and utilities nationwide. His work spans the full spectrum of municipal services—including streets and transportation, water and sewer utilities, facilities management, fleet services, stormwater, solid waste, and environmental services—as well as internal service functions and community-facing departments.

Jonathan brings deep technical knowledge and strategic insight into infrastructure planning, asset management, and service delivery optimization. He has developed and implemented comprehensive operational reviews, capital and lifecycle planning strategies, and workforce deployment models that enhance reliability, regulatory compliance, and cost efficiency. His public works consulting emphasizes aligning field operations with strategic goals, sustainability imperatives, and realistic budgetary conditions.

His signature methodologies—developed and refined at Raftelis—prioritize employee engagement, workload analysis, and best practice benchmarking, producing realistic and implementable plans that modernize service delivery and elevate organizational performance.

SELECTED AREAS OF EXPERTISE
• Public Works and Utility Operations Reviews, including streets, stormwater, water/wastewater, fleet, and facilities
• Asset Management and Capital Planning, integrating lifecycle cost analysis and service-level expectations • Workforce and Resource Planning, tailored to field operations and 24/7 service demands Office: Cincinnati, OH
Years with Firm: 13
Specialties
• Staffing and operations assessment
• Strategic leadership
• Financial management and planning
• Process improvement
• Change management and
implementation
Professional History
• Raftelis: Vice President (2024-
present); Senior Manager (2021-
2023); Manager (2020-2021); Senior
Associate, The Novak Consulting
Group (2012-2020)
• City of Cincinnati, Ohio: Operating
Budget Director (2010-2012)
• Management Partners: Senior
Management Advisor (2005-2010)
Education
• Master of Public Administration -
Northern Illinois University (2005)
• Bachelor of Arts in Political Science
- Aurora University (2003)
Professional Memberships
• International City/County
Management Association (ICMA)
• Ohio City/County Management
Association (OCMA)

RAFTELIS 36
• Process Optimization, emphasizing service reliability, regulatory compliance, and interdepartmental coordination
• Strategic Financial Planning, translating infrastructure and operational needs into long-term financial strategies
• Performance Management Systems, built for accountability, transparency, and continuous improvement • Shared Services and Intergovernmental Collaboration, enabling scalable and coordinated service delivery Jonathan’s approach is grounded in the belief that public organizations must balance operational effectiveness with fiscal responsibility and public accountability. He frequently supports fiscally distressed or resource-constrained communities, crafting multi-year roadmaps that integrate capital investment, staffing, service delivery, and technology modernization within a sustainable financial framework.

He holds a Master of Public Administration from Northern Illinois University and a Bachelor of Political Science from Aurora University. He is a member of the International City/County Management Association (ICMA) and the Ohio City/County Management Association (OCMA).

RAFTELIS 37
Rebekka G. Hosken

PROJECT MANAGEMENT SUPPORT /
SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT – FINANCE
Senior Manager
ROLE
Rebekka will support Jonathan in managing the project team and will provide input and guidance as a Subject Matter Expert for the municipal finance components of this project.

PROFILE
Rebekka joined Raftelis in 2020 with 16 years of direct service to local governments and 10 years of management consulting experience. As an experienced consultant, Rebekka has led organizational assessments for a broad range of operating departments and offices in cities, counties, universities, and special districts, including community development, public works, police, administration, and city attorney departments. With direct operational experience in municipal administration, public works, and finance departments, Rebekka’s breadth of knowledge makes her skillful in quickly identifying organizational strengths and opportunities, analyzing operations through the creation of process maps and workflows, preparing actionable recommendations for improvement, and communicating findings to a wide variety of audiences. She has consulted for over 125 clients throughout the United States and Canada.

Rebekka served as finance director for the City of La Cañada Flintridge, California, a contract city north of Los Angeles, responsible for accounts payable, receivable, budget, audit, and payroll. During her tenure, she identified and successfully obtained a State loan for the financing of the City’s new city hall and played a key leadership role in successfully moving all operations and staff, as well as communicating all financial impacts of the project to management and the City Council.

Previously, Rebekka was the budget officer for the City of Simi Valley, California, a full-service community in the Los Angeles region. She prepared the City’s $196 million annual budget and $160 million capital improvement program, as well as its cost allocation plan. She also managed the budget and capital projects module training and setup for a comprehensive citywide enterprise resource planning (ERP) system implementation across nine operating departments.

Rebekka has a Master of Business Administration with a Certificate in Local Government and Non-Profit Management from Boston University, and a Bachelor of Arts from the University of Michigan– Ann Arbor. She has published articles in Public Management magazine and served as a trainer in sessions at International City/County Management Association (ICMA) conferences.

Office: Los Angeles, CA
Years with Firm: 5
Specialties
• Organizational assessment
• Budgeting and financial analysis
• Business process improvement
• Strategic planning
• Staffing analysis
Professional History
• Raftelis: Senior Manager (2023-
present); Manager (2020-2022)
• City of La Cañada Flintridge,
California: Finance Director (2017-
2020)
• City of Simi Valley, California:

Budget Officer (2012-2017)
• City of Burbank, California; Senior
Management Analyst (2010-2012)
• Management Partners; Senior
Consultant (1999-2010)
• Village of La Grange Park, Illinois:

Assistant Village Manager (1996-
1999)
• City of Appleton, Wisconsin:

Assistant to the Mayor (1994-1996)
• Town of Lexington, Massachusetts:

Management Intern (1992-1993)
Education
• Master of Business Administration –
Boston University (1993)
• Certificate in Local Government and
Non-Profit Management – Boston
University (1993)
• Bachelor of Arts in Russian Studies
– University of Michigan (1989)
Professional Memberships
• Government Finance Officers
Association
• California Society of Municipal
Finance Officers

RAFTELIS 38
Jennifer Teal
SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT – HUMAN RESOURCES
Senior Manager
ROLE
Jennifer will provide input and guidance as a Subject Matter Expert for the human resources components of this project.

PROFILE
Jennifer began consulting in 2017 after nearly 20 years of public sector experience, including 10 years of leadership experience in local government.

Most recently, Jennifer served the City of Gahanna, Ohio, where she worked as the deputy finance director, chief financial officer, and finally, city administrator. In her finance roles, Jennifer was instrumental in guiding the City out of the recession while strengthening its financial position and management strategies. Jennifer led the City through a bond rating increase, multiple debt issuances, the development of key financial policies, and multiple rounds of union negotiations. Working with the elected leadership, Jennifer transformed the City’s budget and financial reporting processes to align with best practices and Government Finance Officer Association award standards, developed the community’s first Citywide strategic plan, and led an in-house process improvement and innovation team.

As a consultant, Jennifer has worked on more than 100 projects across 27 states. She is a skilled facilitator, trainer, and problem solver, and a Certified Lean Six Sigma Black Belt. Jennifer’s commitment to empowering others in the public sector has led to the development of the Raftelis Performance Academy (RPA), the only leadership development, performance improvement, and innovation training in the country designed to meet the unique needs of local governments and utilities. Through the RPA, Jennifer has designed curricula and programs serving hundreds of utility and local government employees and supported the development of in-house innovation and leadership development organizations in several organizations. In addition to this work, Jenifer works with local governments and utilities across the country to develop impactful strategic plans, and conduct assessments of organizational culture and operations.

Jennifer is active in the local government and utility industries and has presented at several conferences on topics related to strategic planning and workforce development. She has recently co-authored articles that have appeared in the Journal of Public Integrity and Water and Environment Technologies. She is also a lecturer at the Ohio State University John Glenn College of Public Affairs, where she teaches graduate and undergraduate seminars in Local Government Administration.

Office: Cincinnati, OH
Years with Firm: 6
Specialties
• Strategic planning
• Facilitation
• Organizational assessment
• Training and curriculum
development
• Performance management
• Business process improvement
• Lean process development and
implementation
Professional History
• Raftelis: Senior Manager (2025-
present); Manager (2022-2024)
Senior Consultant (2020-2022);
Associate, The Novak Consulting
Group (2019-2020)
• The Ohio State University: Lecturer
(2019-present)
• J Teal Consulting: Principal
Consultant (2017-2019)
• City of Gahanna, Ohio: City
Administrator (2016-2017), Chief
Financial Officer (2011-2015),
Deputy Finance Director (2009-
2011)
• City of Colorado Springs, Colorado -
Stormwater Enterprise: Business
Administrator (2007-2009)
• Missile Defense Agency: Financial
Manager (2006-2007)
• Department of Homeland Security:

Budget Analyst (2003-2006)
• George Mason University: Budget
Assistant (2001-2003)
• Village of Lincoln Heights, Ohio:

Economic Development Intern
(1999)
Education
• Master of Public Administration -
George Mason University (2003)
• Bachelor of Arts in Urban Planning
and Public Administration - Miami
University (2000)
Certifications
• Lean Six Sigma Black Belt
Certification
• Everything DiSC® Certification
Professional Memberships
• International City/County Managers
Association (ICMA)
• Ohio City/County Management
Association (OCMA)
• Engaging Local Government
Leaders (ELGL)

RAFTELIS 39
J. Scott Parker
SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT –

PUBLIC WORKS AND UTLITIES
Vice President
ROLE
Scott will provide input and guidance as a Subject Matter Expert for the utility management and public works components of this project.

PROFILE
Scott has over 20 years of experience in local government, utility management, and private consulting. Immediately before joining Raftelis, he served as the asset manager for KC Water (KCW), the drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater utility in Kansas City, Missouri. Beyond his work at KCW, he has designed, developed, and implemented asset management programs in three (3) local governments and utilities. His particular area of expertise is designing programs that retain the best theoretical concepts of asset management while accounting for the operational and cultural circumstances unique to the organizations he serves.

Scott has demonstrable experience evaluating and implementing multiple data technology systems in the asset management and utility space. His expertise includes ESRI Geospatial products; Innovyze InfoAsset Planner and hydraulic modeling software; multiple Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS) platforms (including Infor IPS – Hansen, Lucity, Cityworks, and Cartegraph); Autodesk GeoBIM; and various Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV) technologies used for sanitary and stormwater assessments following NASSCO Pipeline Assessment Certification Program (PACP) standards.

In Kansas City, Scott developed the organization’s first data management strategic plan and its Business Case Evaluation (BCE) framework for information system purchases. He has designed and managed capital programs for organizations throughout the U.S. Scott has been a frequent presenter at national and regional conferences on topics including general asset management, data management, and the application of asset management principles in specific operational and administrative environments. He has written or been featured in several articles focused on business process modeling, asset management, and water management, and he serves as a co-lead on the Water Environment Federation’s Water Intrapreneurship for Strategic Enterprises (WISE) Data, Technology, and Innovation team. He also co-authored the WISE white paper on the criteria and approach to Business Case Evaluations in capital planning.

Office: Kansas City, MO
Years with Firm: 3
Specialties
• Asset management for utilities and local
governments
• Capital planning, budgeting, and
implementation
• Data strategic planning, management,
and governance
• Business Risk Exposure (BRE) and
Decision Support System (DSS)
methodologies for infrastructure
• Data analytics and business intelligence
standards
• Business process modeling
• Performance management
(measurement, dashboarding, etc.)
• Organizational design and capacity
building
• Utility governance
Professional History
• Raftelis: Vice President (2025-present);
Senior Manager (2022-2024)
• KC Water: Utility Officer – Asset
Manager (2018-2022)
• Burns and McDonnell: Engineering
Manager (2015-2018)
• City of Olathe, KS: Assistant Director of
Public Works (2011-2015)
• City of Lenexa, KS: Assistant Director of
Public Works/Assistant to the City
Manager (2006-2011)
• City of Kansas City, MO: Budget and
Finance Analyst (2003-2006); L.P.

Cookingham Management Fellow
(2002)
Education
• Master of Public Administration –
University of Missouri (2004)
• Master of Arts, History – University of
Arkansas-Fayetteville (2000)
• Bachelor of Arts in History – Graceland
University (1997)
Professional Memberships
• Institute of Asset Management (IAM)
• Water Environment Federation (WEF)
• American Water Works Association
(AWWA)
• Water Research Foundation (WRF)

RAFTELIS 40
Joan Schoening
SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT –

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Senior Advisor
ROLE
Joan will provide input and guidance as a Subject Matter Expert for the information technology components of this project.

PROFILE
Joan has over 28 years of experience in information technology in local government. During her tenure, she has managed diverse and complex technology projects and participated in cross-department non-technical initiatives to develop a broad skillset to apply to information technologyrelated projects. After retiring in 2013, Joan worked as an independent project manager assisting local agencies and served as a senior advisor with another management consulting firm. As a Senior Advisor, she managed requests for proposal (RFP) projects, process improvement workshops, conducted information technology assessments, technology strategic plans, and other project management services.

As an IT Manager for the City of Foster City, Joan was responsible for planning, budgeting, implementing, maintaining, and securing the city's information technology. Joan worked closely with city management and departments to align business goals with technology solutions to drive process improvements; developed policies and procedures to implement best practices for citywide technology projects; and was a staff liaison for a citizens' technology advisory committee. Under her supervision, the City’s IT Division developed a public sector job board for use by local agencies. The application grew to include the ability to post the agency recruitment, accept the application online, and allow an agency to manage the recruitment process within one system.

During her tenure at the City of San Mateo, she developed skills related to business systems analysis, software development and methodology, daily operations, network infrastructure, e-mail systems, help desk, desktop operating and software systems, and backup and recovery.

Joan served on the local chapter and state board for the Municipal Information Systems Association of California (MISAC), an organization for public agency information technology professionals. Joan earned her Bachelor of Arts in Management from Saint Mary’s College of California.

Office: Foster City, CA (remote)
Years with Firm: 1
Specialties
• Technology Strategic Planning
• Organizational Assessments
• Project Management
• Business Process Review
• Request for Proposal Development
Professional History
• Raftelis: Senior Advisor (2024-
present)
• Baker Tilly LLC through Acquisition:

Special Advisor (2024)
• Management Partners: Special
Advisor (2015-2024)
• Independent Project Management
Consultant (2014-2015)
• City of Foster City, CA: IT Manager
(2000-2013)
• City of San Mateo, CA: Senior
Systems Analyst (1986-2000)
Education
• Bachelor of Arts in Management -
Saint Mary’s College of California

RAFTELIS 41
Nick Zoller, APR
SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT – COMMUNICATIONS
Senior Manager
ROLE
Nick will provide input and guidance as a Subject Matter Expert for the strategic communications components of this project.

PROFILE
Nick is a seasoned communications executive and strategist with 15+ years of experience leading the high-profile public sector and consulting engagements.

As the Strategic Communications Practice Leader at Raftelis, he helps local governments and utilities strengthen public trust, drive effective engagement, and improve outcomes through strategic, data-informed communications. He advises executive leaders, elected officials, and communicators on highimpact issues, guiding them through crises, campaigns, and organizational change. Previously, as Senior Director of Communications for the City of Savannah, Nick led executive messaging, crisis response, and citywide education initiatives. He excels at developing integrated storytelling strategies that build credibility, shape public opinion, and deliver measurable impact.

Nick is also passionate about mentoring teams and advancing best practices across the profession.

As the leader of Raftelis’ Strategic Communications practice, Nick manages a team of communications professionals. He provides counsel to government and utility clients on high-stakes issues, engagement strategy, and campaign design. He also develops best practices for effective communications and public trust-building initiatives.

KEY PROJECT EXPERIENCE
• Placer County (CA): Strategic Communications Framework • City of Savannah (GA): Public Engagement and Strategic Communication (note: some of these are expanded individually below for use as needed)
• Emergency Response Communication (FL & GA): Crisis
Communication Strategy
• Marion County (FL): Strategic Public Engagement and Campaign Leadership
• City of Savannah (GA): Stormwater Utility Outreach and Engagement • City of Savannah (GA): Casey Canal Phase 2 Drainage Infrastructure Public Engagement
Office: Savannah, GA (remote)
Years with Firm: <1
Specialties
• Strategic communications planning
• Stakeholder engagement & public
participation
• Crisis & issues management
• Brand & reputation management
• Media relations & spokesperson
training
• Digital & social media strategy
• Community outreach & event
management
• Performance measurement &
analytics
• Executive communications coaching
• Team building & development
Professional History
• Raftelis: Senior Manager/Strategic
Communications Practice Leader
(2025-present)
• City of Savannah, GA: Senior
Director of Communications/Chief
Communications Officer (2019-
2025)
• Marion County, FL: Director of
Public Relations (2016-2019)
• Pinellas County, Florida: Public
Information Officer – Public Works &
Utilities Communications
Coordinator (2014-2016)
• Independent Consultant:

Communications & Media Relations
(2009-2014)
Education
• M.S., Mass Communication - Florida
International University (2016)
• B.S., Public Policy & Administration
- St. Petersburg College (2015)
Certifications
• APR – Accreditation in Public
Relations, Public Relations Society
of America (2018)
Professional Memberships
• Public Relations Society of America
(PRSA)
• National Association of Government
Communicators (NAGC)

RAFTELIS 42
James Flick

STAFF CONSULTANT
Senior Consultant
ROLE
James will work at the direction of Jonathan in conducting interviews, directing research and analysis, preparing recommendations, and drafting deliverables.

PROFILE
James has over 14 years of organizational leadership experience, including six years in local government. Most recently, James served as the Director of Economic Development and Public Information Officer for Deerfield Township in Warren County, Ohio. Previously, he was a Development Officer and oversaw the Policy and Communication Division for the Department of Community and Economic Development at the City of Cincinnati.

James' areas of expertise include economic development, project management, and performance measurement. In addition, he is a skilled communicator, analyst, and creative problem solver.

During his tenure at Deerfield Township, James worked closely with entrepreneurs looking to start a business, assisted existing companies with relocations and expansions, and managed development projects of varying scales. He also served on the Executive Board of the Warren County Small Business Development Alliance.

At the City of Cincinnati, James supported business attraction initiatives and evaluated commercial development opportunities in the Central Business District. He was also instrumental in developing policies, programs, and strategic plans to address smart city initiatives, small business growth, retail revitalization in the urban core, and foreign direct investment.

James has presented at several state and regional conferences on smart cities, data and demographics, and economic development's relationship to parks. He is also an Adjunct Instructor for the Northern Kentucky University Master of Public Administration program, where he teaches Community Development, Public Policy, and Budgeting.

James earned a bachelor's degree in political science from Eastern Michigan University and a master's degree in public administration from Northern Kentucky University.

Office: Cincinnati, OH
Years with Firm: 4
Specialties
• Organizational assessment
• Strategic Planning
Professional History
• Raftelis: Senior Consultant (2021-
present)
• Northern Kentucky University: Adjunct
Instructor (2017-2021)
• Deerfield Township, Ohio: Economic
Development Director/Public
Information Officer (2018-2021)
• City of Cincinnati: Development
Officer /Interim Division Manager,
Policy and Communication (2016-
2018)
• Cushman and Wakefield: Vice
President of Research and Marketing
(2010-2016)
Education
• Master of Public Administration –
Northern Kentucky University (2010)
• Bachelor of Arts in Political Science –
Eastern Michigan University (2006)
Certifications
• Economic Development Finance
Professional Certification (Grow
American formerly NDC)
Professional Memberships
• International City/County
Management Association (ICMA)
• American Society for Public
Administration (ASPA)

RAFTELIS 43
Claire Pritchard

STAFF CONSULTANT
Senior Consultant
ROLE
Claire will work at the direction of Jonathan in conducting interviews, directing research and analysis, preparing recommendations, and drafting deliverables.

PROFILE
Claire has more than 10 years of experience in management consulting and local government management. She began her consulting career following five years of service with Dakota County, Minnesota, where, most recently, she held the position of assistant to the county manager. While with Dakota County, Claire coordinated the County’s legislative agenda, assisted in the development of the annual budget, and conducted financial impact analyses and process improvement efforts for a variety of County functions. Claire also coordinated the County’s transition to a new form of government in 2013.

As a consultant, Claire has worked on organizational and staffing analyses for communities around the country, such as the Town of Nantucket, Massachusetts, the City of Allentown, Pennsylvania, and the City of Bloomington, Indiana, as well as several utilities, including Fairfax Water, Virginia, Pinellas County Utilities, Florida, the San Diego Public Utilities Department, California, and Tampa Bay Water, Florida.

Claire has assisted in developing financial models to analyze revenue and expenditure trends, as well as conducted detailed staffing and workload analysis to determine optimal organizational structures. She has developed and analyzed an array of employee and community-based surveys. Claire has conducted several best practice and benchmarking research projects and has assisted in the creation of strategic planning and implementation deliverables.

Claire earned a bachelor’s degree in political science from the University of Chicago and a master’s degree in public policy from the University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy. She is a member of the International City/County Management Association and is a former ICMA Local Government Management Fellow.

Office: Cincinnati, OH
Years with Firm: 7
Specialties
• Organizational assessment
• Staffing analysis
• Survey and data analysis
• Best practice and benchmarking
research
Professional History
• Raftelis: Senior Consultant (2023-
present); Consultant (2021-2022);
Associate Consultant (2020-2021);
Associate Consultant, The Novak
Consulting Group (2018-2020)
• Dakota County, Minnesota:

Assistant to the County Manager
(2013-2017)
• National Association of Regional
Councils: Policy Intern (2012)
• Congressional Research Service
(2010-2011)
Education
• Master of Public Policy - University
of Chicago (2013)
• Bachelor of Arts in Political Science
- University of Chicago (2009)
Professional Memberships
• International City/County
Management Association (ICMA)
• Engaging Local Government
Leaders (ELGL)
• International Facility Management
Association (IMFA)

RAFTELIS 44
Jordan Jerkovich

STAFF CONSULTANT
Consultant
ROLE
Jordan will work at the direction of Jonathan in conducting interviews, directing research and analysis, preparing recommendations, and drafting deliverables.

PROFILE
Jordan’s local government experience spans multiple service areas, jurisdictions, and countries, including sustainability, administration, procurement, and community development at local governments in Sweden, Scotland, and the United States. He most recently served as the Community Development Director for the City of Lindsborg, Kansas, where he helped to facilitate and develop the department’s functional areas, including current and long-range planning, development services, and special projects. Through his work and education, he has developed a broad knowledge of local government administration and development issues, including leadership and management practices, housing policy and development, climate change and sustainability, systems and process mapping, community engagement, volunteer program development, among others. As a Consultant with Raftelis, Jordan is responsible for delivering client services across a range of activities, including strategic planning, organizational assessment, studies, and facilitation services.

Jordan earned a Master of Public Administration in Local Government Management from the University of Kansas, graduating with honors and admission to Phi Alpha Alpha, the National Honors Society for Public Affairs and Administration. He earned a second Master of Science in Strategic Leadership towards Sustainability from Blekinge Institute of Technology in Sweden, where he co-authored his thesis “Pursuing Sustainability and Prosperity in Swedish Municipalities: Using Indicators to Inform Strategic Governance.” Jordan also earned a Bachelor of Arts in Environmental Studies and a Bachelor of Science in Business Management and Leadership from the University of Kansas with certificates in sustainability and research experience. Jordan recently served as the Vice Chair of the McPherson Housing Coalition, a registered Community Housing Development Organization working to provide housing solutions for moderate and lowincome families.

Office: Kansas City, MO
Years with Firm: 2
Specialties
• Strategic plans
• Organizational assessments
• Process improvement
• Facilitation
• Data analysis and visualization
• Community development
• Climate and sustainability
• Leadership and management
Professional History
• Raftelis: Consultant (2023-present)
• City of Lindsborg, Kansas:

Community Development Director
(2021-2023)
• Stirling Council, Scotland:

Administrative Support Officer
(2020-2021)
• City of Grandview, Missouri:

Management Intern (2019)
• Blekinge Institute of Technology,
Sweden: Sustainability Consultant
(2018-2019)
Education
• Master of Public Administration in
Local Government Management -
University of Kansas (2022)
• Master of Science in Strategic
Leadership towards Sustainability -
Blekinge Institute of Technology
(2019)
• Bachelor of Science in Business
Management and Leadership -
University of Kansas (2016)
• Bachelor of Arts in Environmental
Studies - University of Kansas
(2015)
Professional Memberships
• International City/County
Management Association (ICMA)
• American Planning Association
(APA)

RAFTELIS 45
Polly Englot

STAFF CONSULTANT
Associate Consultant
ROLE
Polly will work at the direction of Jonathan in conducting interviews, directing research and analysis, preparing recommendations, and drafting deliverables.

PROFILE
Polly has robust analytical experience throughout the public sector, having worked in local government, nonprofit, and international development settings. She is proficient in the areas of budget planning and analysis, process improvement, and project management. Polly is a detail-oriented problem solver who leverages data and organizational analysis to identify trends and actionable solutions.

Prior to joining Raftelis, Polly worked in Broward County’s Office of Management and Budget in southern Florida. She supported the monitoring and development of over $100 million annual operating budgets for judicial offices and the county’s extensive environmental agency. This work included forecasting for a dozen special revenue funds, monitoring state and federal grants, assessing payroll and benefit costs for over 500 employees, and evaluating new staffing and capital project requests.

Throughout her academic studies, Polly developed highly functional skills in GIS analysis, data visualization and communication, evaluation design, and public budgeting. She strengthened these skills in the classroom by learning from her prior tenure at Food Bank for New York City, where she supported planning and content development for over 90 marketing campaigns and events annually. In addition, she collaborated with stakeholders and donors at all levels to raise awareness, fundraise, and support the Food Bank’s clients.

Polly began her career in program operations supporting international public health programs based in West Africa, funded by major public and private grantors. Programs ranged from women’s health information campaigns to sanitation service delivery research, and she completed technical assistance trips to Ghana and Liberia.

Polly earned a master’s degree in public policy from Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy and a bachelor’s degree in geography, with minors in Arabic and French, from Bucknell University in Pennsylvania.

Office: San Francisco, CA
(remote)
Years with Firm: 1
Specialties
• Municipal budget development
• Project management
• Organizational assessment
• Process improvement
• Event planning and facilitation
• Forecasting
• Data analysis
Professional History
• Raftelis: Associate Consultant
(2024-present)
• Broward County: Budget and
Management Analyst (2022-2023)
• Food Bank for New York City:

Marketing and Events Coordinator
(2018-2020)
• Population Services International:

Program Coordinator (2016-2018)
Education
• Master of Public Policy - Duke
University, Sanford School of Public
Policy (2022)
• Bachelor of Arts in Geography,
minors in Arabic and French -
Bucknell University (2016)

City Council
Communication
Meeting Date: 10/15/2025
Item #: VI.4
File #: 0900-04-02 & 0201-
01 Item ID: 2025-680
Title: Vernon Street/Atlantic Street Multimodal Safety Improvement Project - Award of Contract and Budget Adjustment
Contact: Karen Vences 916-774-5412 [email protected]

SUMMARY
Staff recommends approval of a construction agreement with Martin Brothers Construction in the amount of $1,948,279 for the construction of the Vernon Street/Atlantic Street Multimodal Safety Improvement Project, and approval of a budget adjustment to fully fund the construction in the amount of $1,650,000 from the Highway Users Tax Fund. The project will include intersection improvements at Vernon Street/Atlantic Street and Folsom Road to improve traffic circulation and improve accessibility for bicyclists and pedestrians. Project features include construction of enhanced pedestrian crosswalks, landscaped median, pavement rehabilitation, and lane reductions. Work is expected to begin in late fall 2025 and be completed by summer 2026. This project is also supported by funding previously appropriated from the Local Transportation Fund, a Highway Safety Improvement Program Grant, and the General Fund.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Award the base bid and add alternative for the Vernon Street/Atlantic Street Multimodal Safety Improvement Project to the low bidder, Martin Brothers Construction, for $1,948,279 and adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement and authorize change order authority of 10% of the contract amount ($194,827); and

2. Adopt an ordinance to approve a budget adjustment in the amount of $1,650,000 from the Highway Users Tax Fund to fully fund project construction.

BACKGROUND
Vernon Street through Downtown Roseville is a two-lane collector road with on-street parking and posted speed limits ranging between 15 to 25 mph. The Council-adopted Downtown Specific Plan identifies the need for intersection improvements at Vernon Street/Atlantic Street and Folsom Road to improve traffic circulation, improve accessibility for bicyclists and pedestrians, and provide better connectivity between Historic Old Town and Downtown.

The project will include improvements to Vernon Street beginning at Lincoln Street, and will extend through the S-curve up to Yosemite Street. The project scope includes the construction of enhanced pedestrian crosswalks, rectangular rapid flashing beacons, green bike lanes to improve visibility, pavement rehabilitation, lane reductions to slow vehicle speeds, and turning restrictions at low volume intersections to reduce conflict zones. All of these improvements are designed to benefit driver, bicyclists, and pedestrian safety through the corridor. This project will also improve corridor aesthetics by including a raised landscaped median upon entering Vernon Street into the Downtown area.

At the April 16, 2025, meeting, Council approved the plans and specifications for the project and authorized staff to call for bids. The bid opening was held on August 26, 2025, and a total of five bids were received. The following is a summary of the engineer's estimate and the 3 lowest bids received:

Bidder Base Bid Alternate Total
Engineer's Estimate $1,745,350 $175,850 $1,921,200
Martin Brothers Construction $1,620,951 $327,328 $1,948,279 FBD Vanguard Construction,
Inc.
$1,700,008 $248,852 $1,948,860
Central Valley Engineering &
Asphalt, Inc.
$1,726,070 $232,199 $1,958,269
Given the bids received, it is recommended to award the base bid plus the add alternate bid item.

Construction of the project is anticipated to begin late fall 2025 and be completed by summer 2026.

PUBLIC OUTREACH
Public Works staff will be working closely with the Public Affairs & Communications Department to continue to keep the community informed of the project's benefits, progress, and construction impacts.

Communications include, but are not limited to: direct mail, signage, social media, project webpage (roseville.ca.us/atlantic), and email newsletters.

FISCAL IMPACT
The project was previously funded by $1,309,360 in the General Fund, Highway Users Tax (HUT) Fund, Local Transportation Fund (LTF), and Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Grant funds. The requested budget adjustment of $1,650,000 appropriates funds from the Highway Users Tax Fund to provide sufficient funding for project construction, change order authority, and construction management.

The new total project budget will be $2,959,360.

IMPACT OF MAINTENANCE COSTS FOR LANDSCAPING
This project includes landscaping improvements along the corridor that will require maintenance by the City's Parks, Recreation and Libraries Department (PRL) that are expected to be approximately $2,000 per year. The PRL operating budget for landscape maintenance in the General Fund will increase by an estimated $2,000 within the citywide budget process beginning the fiscal year after project completion as a result of this project.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Development of the Vernon Street/Atlantic Street Multimodal Safety Improvement Project was previously evaluated in the Downtown Specific Plan EIR (certified April 3, 2009, SCH No. 2007102090), and identified in the associated Downtown Specific Plan. Construction of the Vernon Street/Atlantic Street Multimodal Safety Improvement Project is found to be within the scope of the project covered by the Downtown

Specific Plan EIR. As discussed in the Specific Plan EIR, the EIR provides environmental analyses of community infrastructure and facilities, including Gateway Elements, landscaping, and multimodal safety improvements, to the extent applicable. Because the project is consistent with Downtown Specific Plan EIR and Specific Plan, no new effects would be expected to occur and all applicable mitigation measures from the Downtown Specific Plan EIR will be implemented during the design and construction of the Vernon Street/Atlantic Street Multimodal Safety Improvement Project. Because the proposed project meets the requirements identified in Section 15183 of the State CEQA Guidelines, no additional CEQA review is required.

CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLAN/OVERARCHING GOALS

1. Ensure a safe and healthy community

4. Invest in well-planned infrastructure and growth
Respectfully Submitted,
Karen Vences, Assistant Engineer
Jason Shykowski, Public Works Director
ATTACHMENTS:

1. Location Map

2. Resolution 25-321

3. Vernon Atlantic-Contractor Agreement

4. Ordinance 6999
REVIEWERS:

Karen Vences, Public Works Department - Engineering - City Project's Created/Initiated - 9/18/2025 Jerome Pastor, City Clerk Department Approved - 9/19/2025 Jesse Khatkar, Public Works Department - Engineering - City Project's Approved - 9/24/2025 Noah Siviglia, Public Works Department - Engineering - Traffic Engineering Approved - 9/25/2025 Stefanie Kemen, Public Works Department - Engineering - Traffic Engineering Approved - 9/25/2025 Gretchen Hakala, City Attorney Department Approved - 9/26/2025 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Approved - 9/26/2025 Ryan DeVore, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 9/30/2025 Dennis Kauffman, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 10/3/2025 Michelle Sheidenberger, City Attorney Department Approved - 10/3/2025 Dominick Casey, City Clerk Department Approved - 10/6/2025 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Final Approval - 10/6/2025

U.P.R.R.

ATLANTIC ST.

WASHINGTON BLVD.

VERNON ST.

YOSEMITE ST.

U.P.R.R.

FOLSOM RD. LINCOLN ST.

HARDING BLVD.

DOUGLAS BLVD.

VERNON STREETATLANTIC STREET

MULTIMODAL SAFETY IMPROVEMENT

PROJECT

LOCATION MAP

PROJECT LOCATION

RESOLUTION NO. 25-321

APPROVING AN AGREEMENT, BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE AND

MARTIN BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE IT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE

WHEREAS, an Agreement, for the Vernon Street/Atlantic Street Multimodal Safety Improvement project, by and between the City of Roseville and Martin Brothers Construction, has been reviewed by the City Council; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roseville that said Agreement is hereby approved and that the City Manager is authorized to execute it on behalf of the City of Roseville.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Roseville that the City Manager or his designee is authorized to approve change orders for the Project, consistent with the contract terms, provided that the net cost of all change orders shall not exceed ten percent (10%) of the contract amount.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Roseville this ___ day of ______________, 2025, by the following vote on roll call:

AYES COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS:
______________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
________________________
City Clerk

ORDINANCE NO. 6999

ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE
AUTHORIZING CERTAIN AMENDMENTS TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2025-26

BUDGET AND DECLARING THIS ORDINANCE TO BE IMMEDIATELY

EFFECTIVE AS AN APPROPRIATION MEASURE
THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE ORDAINS:

SECTION 1. The City of Roseville Annual Budget, Fiscal Year 2025-26, is hereby amended as listed on the attached budget adjustment for the Vernon Street/Atlantic Street Multimodal Safety Improvement project.

SECTION 2. This ordinance is hereby declared to be an appropriation measure, immediately effective pursuant to the provisions of Section 5.03 of the Charter.

SECTION 3. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to post a true copy of the foregoing ordinance in each of three (3) conspicuous locations in the City and she shall immediately after such posting enter in the ordinance book, under the record of the ordinance, a certificate under her hand stating the time and place of such publication by posting.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Roseville, this day of , 2025, by the following vote on roll call:

AYES COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR
ATTEST:

City Clerk

REQUEST FOR BUDGET ADJUSTMENT
Updated 07/03/2025
Please complete the cells highlighted in yellow.

REQUESTER NAME & TITLE: FISCALYEAR:

PREPARER NAME & TITLE: ORDINANCE:

DEPARTMENT/DIVISION:

EXPENDITURES/EXPENSES/TRANSFERS OUT
ACCOUNT STRING BUDGET ($)
Fund Account Center Project Adjustment DESCRIPTION
2305 6587 84001 500324 1,650,000 Increase Capital Outlay CIP Projects budget for the Vernon Atlantic Multimodal Safety Improvement project
EXPENDITURES/EXPENSES/TRANSFERSOUTTOTAL 1,650,000

REVENUES/TRANSFERS IN
ACCOUNT STRING BUDGET ($)
Fund Account Center Project Adjustment DESCRIPTION

REVENUES/TRANSFERS INTOTAL -
NET ADJUSTMENT 1,650,000

FUND BALANCE
ACCOUNT STRING BUDGET ($)
Fund Account Center Project Adjustment DESCRIPTION
2305 3601 00000 000000 (1,650,000) Reduce Highway Users Tax Fund Balance 3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
FUND BALANCE TOTAL (1,650,000)
Justification for Budget Adjustment:

The Public Works department is requesting a budget adjustment of $1,650,000 to increase the Vernon Atlantic Multimodal Safety Improvement project (500324) budget from available resources in the Highway Users Tax (2305) fund.

Additional funding is needed for construction, construction management, and design support during construction.

The current project budget is $1,309,360. With this adjustment, the revised project budget will total $2,959,360.

Karen Vences, Assistant Engineer 2025-26
Karen Vences, Assistant Engineer
Public Works/Engineering

City Council
Communication
Meeting Date: 10/15/2025
Item #: VI.5
File #: 0900-01-01 & 0201-
01 Item ID: 2025-724
Title: Council Chambers Renovation Project - Budget Adjustment Contact: Lori Crittenden 916-774-5707 [email protected]

SUMMARY
Staff recommends approval of a budget adjustment of $873,457 to consolidate the remaining funds from the Council Chambers Conference Room Design and Construction Project into the Council Chambers Renovation Project, for a revised project total budget of $2,873,457. Funding for the project is from the Public Facilities Fund and the Cable TV Public, Educational, and Governmental (PEG) Fund. No General Fund resources are being used for the project.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt an ordinance to approve a budget adjustment of $873,457 of the Public Facilities Fund to consolidate the funds from the FY2023-24 Council Chambers Conference Room Design and Construction Project into the budget for the Council Chambers Renovation Project.

BACKGROUND
In 2023, the City conducted an evaluation of the Council Chambers to identify necessary improvements and support long-term planning for continued use. The study recommended several enhancements, including a larger Council Chamber, an upgraded lobby to improve security, and an adjacent conference room for use by City Council and staff.

Based on these recommendations, an initial project was established to construct the new conference room. However, following further analysis and consideration of the study’s broader findings, the City determined that a more comprehensive approach was warranted. A second project was subsequently initiated to address interior renovations and the development of a new lobby designed to serve as overflow seating for Council meetings, an economical solution to accommodate increased public attendance.

The expanded lobby also supports televised Council proceedings and enhances public accessibility. City Council approved moving forward with selective upgrades to the Council Chambers, including improvements to aesthetics, media lighting, and mechanical systems, as well as the construction of a new lobby, conference room, accessible path of travel, and updated restroom facilities.

Because the Council Chambers Renovation Project now includes the scope of the original Council Chambers Conference Room Design and Construction Project, staff recommends consolidating the remaining project budgets in the Public Facilities Fund.

FISCAL IMPACT
The recommended budget adjustment will consolidate the remaining funds from the Council Chambers Conference Room Design and Construction Project into the Council Chambers Renovation Project, for a

revised project total budget of $2,873,457. Funding for the project is from the Public Facilities Fund and the Cable TV Public, Educational, and Governmental (PEG) Fund. No General Fund resources are being used for the project.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply to activities that will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, or is otherwise not considered a project as defined by CEQA Statute §21065 and CEQA State Guidelines §15060(c)(3) and §15378. The proposed action is a budget adjustment that consolidates funds from two separate components/funds (design and construction) of the same overall project: renovation of the City Council Chambers. Notices of Exemption were prepared for both components of the project subject to CEQA in November 2023 and August 2025. Design has been completed, and construction has commenced: the proposed action is strictly a fiscal activity, which meets the above criteria and is therefore not subject to additional CEQA review. No additional environmental review is required.

CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLAN/OVERARCHING GOALS

4. Invest in well-planned infrastructure and growth

6. Deliver exceptional City services
Respectfully Submitted,
Lori Crittenden, Project Coordinator
Jason Shykowski, Public Works Director
ATTACHMENTS:

1. Ordinance 7002

2. 2025_NOE - Council Chambers Renovation Project - Contractor REVIEWERS:

Lori Crittenden, Public Works Department - Facilities Created/Initiated - 9/24/2025 James Kremko, Public Works Department - Facilities Approved - 9/25/2025 Stefanie Kemen, Public Works Department - Engineering - Traffic Engineering Approved - 9/26/2025 Gretchen Hakala, City Attorney Department Approved - 9/30/2025 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Approved - 9/30/2025 Ryan DeVore, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 9/30/2025 Dennis Kauffman, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 10/1/2025 Michelle Sheidenberger, City Attorney Department Approved - 10/2/2025 Dominick Casey, City Clerk Department Approved - 10/6/2025 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Final Approval - 10/6/2025