Agenda packet, regular meeting — Roseville City Council, February 4, 2026 (part 3 of 7)

Percentage of
Certificates Certificates of Total Certificates Certificates of Total Total Placer County Debt Fiscal of Capital Participation Lease Subscription Governmental of Revenue Participation Subscription Business-Type Primary Total Personal Per Year Participation (d) Lease Sub-Lease Liability Liability Loans Activities Participation Bonds Sub-Leases Liability Loans Activities Government (e) Income (a) Capita (a) 2016 -$ 34,928$ 24,347,067$ -$ -$ 4,030,681$ 28,412,676$ 152,649,025$ 368,091,795$ 3,538,160$ -$ -$ 524,278,980$ 552,691,656$ 2.34% 4,122$ 2017 - - 23,272,775 - - 4,013,624 27,286,399 138,472,975 363,175,852 3,123,170 - - 504,771,997 532,058,396 2.15% 3,916 2018 - - 24,823,067 - - 3,981,145 28,804,212 133,923,531 363,838,283 - - - 497,761,814 526,566,026 1.92% 3,838 2019 14,455,822 - 8,795,122 - - 3,964,079 27,215,023 129,546,859 347,567,126 - - - 477,113,985 504,329,008 1.61% 3,612 2020 14,163,014 - 7,482,335 - - 3,469,049 25,114,398 88,959,644 (f) 327,768,646 - - - 416,728,290 441,842,688 1.08% 3,044 2021 13,860,206 - 6,143,935 - - 3,469,049 23,473,190 85,802,679 206,045,926 - - 4,344,362 (h) 296,192,967 319,666,157 1.02% 2,176 2022 13,542,398 - 4,777,987 169,456 - - 18,489,841 82,515,715 183,892,263 - - 31,851,283 (h) 298,259,261 316,749,102 0.85% 2,097 2023 13,209,589 - 3,382,764 2,286,058 3,388,352 - 22,266,763 25,078,750 (g) 165,613,599 - 1,993,084 77,060,646 (h) 269,746,079 292,012,842 0.80% 1,909 2024 12,861,780 - 1,959,090 1,840,295 2,663,884 - 19,325,049 21,491,786 147,231,263 - 1,500,806 98,497,485 (h) 268,721,340 288,046,389 (b) 1,866 2025 12,498,973 - 992,175 1,736,931 3,182,732 - 18,410,811 17,739,826 128,068,926 - 950,527 95,675,320 242,434,599 260,845,410 (b) 1,646 (a) These ratios are calculated using personal income and population as shown on the Demographics and Economic Statistics schedule. (b) Total personal income information is not available. (c) The Redevelopment Agency was dissolved effective January 31, 2012 and its liabilities were assumed by the Successor Agency. (d) In 2013 the Certificates of Participation were refunded by the 2013 Public Facilities Refunding lease. (e) Long term debt was restated in fiscal year 2014; statistics prior to 2014 have not been restated. (f) Decrease mostly caused by electric fund debt paydown of $36 million and wastewater debt refunding of $38.3 million with revenue bonds. (g) Decrease mostly caused by electric fund debt paydown of $54 million. (h) Increase from draws on State Revolving Fund loans for construction of PGWWTP Expansion and Energy Recovery projects.

Sources: The City's Annual Comprehensive Financial Reports State of California, Department of Finance (population) U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis - Local Data (personal income)

CITY OF ROSEVILLE

RATIO OF OUTSTANDING DEBT BY TYPE
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Governmental Activities Business-Type Activities
204

Page 248 of 1141 ends

Fiscal Tax Increment Total
Year Revenue (a) Principal Interest Debt Service Coverage 2016 2,692,154$ (b) 435,000$ 390,688$ 825,688$ 3.26 2017 5,263,766 435,000 378,363 813,363 6.47
2018 3,534,361 445,000 365,063 810,063 4.36
2019 3,723,819 465,000 343,463 808,463 4.61
2020 3,959,041 485,000 319,379 804,379 4.92
2021 3,280,510 505,000 302,713 807,713 4.06
2022 2,595,354 525,000 277,552 802,552 3.23
2023 1,679,567 555,000 260,109 815,109 2.06
2024 1,570,864 570,000 243,085 813,085 1.93
2025 5,570,937 (c) 580,000 216,101 796,101 7.00
(a) Amounts reported include tax revenue and debt service of the Successor Agency. (b) Restated.
(c) Increase reflects additional tax increment amounts requested and approved to meet bond debt service and loan repayment obligations.

CITY OF ROSEVILLE
2014 REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT TAX ALLOCATION BONDS
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Debt Service Requirements
$0
$1,000
$2,000
$3,000
$4,000
$5,000
$6,000
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

IN THOUSANDS
Tax Increment Revenue (a) Total Debt Service
Source: City of Roseville's Annual Financial Statments 205

Page 249 of 1141 ends

Fiscal Tax Increment Total
Year Revenue (b) Principal Interest Debt Service Coverage 2017 5,263,766$ -$ 703,884$ 703,884$ 7.48 2018 3,534,361 340,000 738,037 1,078,037 3.28 2019 3,723,819 395,000 733,439 1,128,439 3.30 2020 3,959,041 410,000 727,603 1,137,603 3.48 2021 3,280,510 415,000 721,408 1,136,408 2.89 2022 2,595,354 415,000 711,749 1,126,749 2.30 2023 1,679,567 420,000 705,422 1,125,422 1.49 2024 1,570,864 430,000 695,681 1,125,681 1.40 2025 5,570,937 (c) 445,000 684,855 1,129,855 4.93 (a) Ten years of data are not available due to the bonds being issued on July 19, 2016. (b) Amounts reported include tax revenue and debt service of the Successor Agency. (c) Increase reflects additional tax increment amounts requested and approved to meet bond debt service and loan repayment obligations.

CITY OF ROSEVILLE
2016 REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT TAX ALLOCATION BONDS
Last Nine Fiscal Years (a)
Debt Service Requirements
$0
$1,000
$2,000
$3,000
$4,000
$5,000
$6,000
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

IN THOUSANDS
Tax Increment Revenue (b) Total Debt Service
Source: City of Roseville's Annual Financial Statements 206

Page 250 of 1141 ends

2024-2025 Assessed Valuation: $33,579,367,047
City's Share
Total Debt of Debt
6/30/2025 % Applicable (a) 6/30/2025
OVERLAPPING TAX AND ASSESSMENT DEBT:

Sierra Joint Community College District SFID No. 4 190,940,000$ 34.919% 66,674,339$ Roseville Joint Union High School District 92,796,164 75.846% 70,382,179 Roseville Joint Union High School District SFID No. 1 62,895,913 98.137% 61,724,162 Center Joint Unified School District 94,053,419 28.328% 26,643,453 Rocklin Unified School District 16,869,181 0.360% 60,729 Dry Creek Joint School District 19,028,677 53.010% 10,087,102 Roseville City School District 6,264,259 97.121% 6,083,911 City of Roseville Community Facilities Districts 479,939,000 100.000% 479,939,000 City of Roseville Placer Valley Sports Complex & Tourism Assessment District 27,570,000 100.000% 27,570,000 California Municipal Finance Authority Community Facilities Districts 10,717,000 100.000% 10,717,000 California Statewide Communities Development Authority Assessment Districts 18,303,458 100.000% 18,303,458 TOTAL OVERLAPPING TAX AND ASSESSMENT DEBT $778,185,333
DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING GENERAL FUND DEBT:

Placer County General Fund Obligations 73,660,000$ 30.212% 22,254,159$ Roseville Joint Union High School District Certificates of Participation 57,580,000 75.846% 43,672,127 Rocklin Unified School District General Fund Obligations 17,123,000 0.360% 61,643 Eureka Union School District Certificates of Participation 1,260,000 32.849% 413,897 Roseville City School District General Fund Obligations 5,405,179 97.121% 5,249,564 Placer Mosquito and Vector Control District General Fund Obligations 1,273,000 30.212% 384,599 City of Roseville General Fund Obligation 12,907,175 100.000% 12,907,175 City of Roseville Debt Premium 611,780 100.000% 611,780 TOTAL DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING GENERAL FUND DEBT $85,554,944 OVERLAPPING TAX INCREMENT DEBT (Successor Agency): 23,990,000$ 100.000% 23,990,000$ TOTAL DIRECT DEBT 13,518,955$
TOTAL OVERLAPPING DEBT 874,211,322$
COMBINED TOTAL DEBT 887,730,277$ (b)
(a) The percentage of overlapping debt applicable to the city is estimated using taxable assessed property value.

Applicable percentages were estimated by determining the portion of the overlapping district's assessed value that is within the boundaries of the city divided by the district's total taxable assessed value. (b) Excludes tax and revenue anticipation notes, enterprise revenue, mortgage revenue and non-bonded capital lease obligations.

Ratios to 2024-2025 Assessed Valuation:

Total Overlapping Tax and Assessment Debt 2.32%
Total Direct Debt ($19,325,049) 0.04%
Combined Total Debt 2.64%
Ratios to Redevelopment Successor Agency Incremental Valuation ($1,263,130,138):

Total Overlapping Tax Increment Debt 1.90%

CITY OF ROSEVILLE

COMPUTATION OF DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING DEBT
Source: California Municipal Statistics, Inc.
207

Page 251 of 1141 ends

ASSESSED VALUATION:

Secured property assessed value, net of
exempt real property 32,624,477,037$
BONDED DEBT LIMIT (3.75% OF ASSESSED VALUE) (a) 1,223,417,889$ AMOUNT OF DEBT SUBJECT TO LIMIT:

Total Bonded Debt 165,170,090$
Less bonded debt not subject to limit (165,170,090)$
Amount of debt subject to limit -
LEGAL BONDED DEBT MARGIN 1,223,417,889$
Total net debt
Total Net Debt Legal applicable to the limit
Fiscal Debt Applicable to Debt as a percentage
Year Limit Limit Margin of debt limit
2011 567,178,798$ -$ 567,178,798$ 0.00% 2012 560,837,192 - 560,837,192 0.00% 2013 536,758,408 - 536,758,408 0.00% 2014 578,172,662 - 578,172,662 0.00% 2015 624,626,766 - 624,626,766 0.00% 2016 672,531,992 - 672,531,992 0.00% 2017 717,170,366 - 717,170,366 0.00% 2018 760,269,304 - 760,269,304 0.00% 2019 815,306,847 - 815,306,847 0.00% 2020 873,200,181 - 873,200,181 0.00% 2021 924,988,530 - 924,988,530 0.00% 2022 984,602,595 - 984,602,595 0.00% 2023 1,074,196,141 - 1,074,196,141 0.00% 2024 1,151,182,551 - 1,151,182,551 0.00% 2025 1,223,417,889 - 1,223,417,889 0.00% (a) California Government Code, Section 43605 sets the debt limit at 15%.

The Code section was enacted prior to the change in basing assessed value to full market value when it was previously 25% of market value. Thus, the limit shown as 3.75% is one-fourth the limit to account for the adjustment of showing assessed valuation at full cash value.

CITY OF ROSEVILLE

COMPUTATION OF LEGAL BONDED DEBT MARGIN
June 30, 2025
Source: City of Roseville Finance Department
208

Page 252 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE

DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC STATISTICS
Last Ten Fiscal Years
County
Total County City of
City of Personal Per Capita Roseville Placer City
Fiscal Roseville Income Personal Unemployment County Population Year Population (in thousands) Income Rate (%) Population % of County 2016 134,073 22,741,453$ 59,000$ 4.5% 373,796 35.87% 2017 135,868 24,527,289 63,000 3.8% 382,837 35.49% 2018 137,213 26,223,081 67,000 3.0% 389,532 35.23% 2019 139,643 27,459,330 69,000 3.5% 396,691 35.20% 2020 145,163 29,124,683 72,000 3.0% 403,711 35.96% 2021 146,875 31,684,782 77,000 5.5% 404,994 36.27% 2022 151,034 34,170,169 82,000 2.8% 409,025 36.93% 2023 152,928 36,114,725 87,000 3.0% 410,305 37.27% 2024 154,329 (a) (a) 3.8% 412,844 37.38%
2025 158,494 (a) (a) 4.1% 421,446 37.61%
(a) Information not available
0 50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

POPULATION
City of Roseville Placer County
Source: Values obtained from the California Department of Finance and Placer County ACFR 209

Page 253 of 1141 ends

Employer
Number of
Employees Rank
Percentage of
Total City
Employees
Number of
Employees Rank
Kaiser Permanente 6,130 1 6.52% 4,988 1 Sutter Health Roseville Medical Group 5,070 2 5.39% 2,100 3 Adventist Health 1,560 3 1.66% 801 9 City of Roseville 1,415 4 1.51% 1,136 5 Roseville City School District 1,145 5 1.22% 1,034 7 Penumbra 1,050 6 1.12% - -
Roseville Joint Union High School 980 7 1.04% 1,090 6 Hewlett-Packard 940 8 1.00% 2,300 2 PRIDE Industries 855 9 0.91% 838 8
Union Pacific Railroad Company 640 10 0.68% 1,150 4 Consolidated Commuications - - - 440 10 Subtotal 19,785 21.05% 15,877
Total Employment 94,000 (a) 76,925
(a) Total employment as used above represents the estimated total employment of all employees located within the City limits.
2025 2016

CITY OF ROSEVILLE

PRINCIPAL EMPLOYERS
Current Year and Nine Years Ago
Source: Roseville Chamber of Commerce as self-reported by employers 210

Page 254 of 1141 ends

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 (a) 2023 2024 2025
Function
General Government 183.11 187.98 150.23 158.73 168.23 169.73 150.23 159.23 164.60 169.60 Public Safety 316.00 317.00 315.50 317.00 321.00 327.00 331.00 343.00 355.00 359.00 Public Works 71.50 71.50 110.75 108.75 110.25 112.25 117.50 123.25 128.25 134.25 Development and Operations 72.00 74.00 75.00 82.00 83.00 83.75 89.00 91.00 93.00 94.00 Parks, Recreation & Libraries 122.50 124.50 122.50 114.50 114.50 116.50 125.50 137.25 146.25 153.50 Environmental Utilities 222.25 223.75 227.75 226.75 244.75 255.00 270.00 277.00 284.00 285.00 Electric 149.00 150.00 149.00 153.00 154.00 156.00 193.75 197.25 196.75 196.75 Total 1,136.36 1,148.73 1,150.73 1,160.73 1,195.73 1,220.23 1,276.98 1,327.98 1,367.85 1,392.10 (a) Decrease in General Government and increase in Electric due to transfer of utility billing staff to Electric Department

CITY OF ROSEVILLE

FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT CITY POSITIONS BY FUNCTION
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Adopted for Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2025
0 50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 (a) 2023 2024 2025

NUMBER OF POSITIONS
General Government Public Safety Public Works Development and Operations Parks, Recreation & Libraries Environmental Utilities Electric Source: City of Roseville Annual Budget
211

Page 255 of 1141 ends

Function/Program 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Public Safety:

Fire:

Number of Haz-Mat Alarms Responded 204 224 239 278 232 218 200 299 233 227 Number of Medical Emergencies Responded 10,694 10,545 10,993 11,078 10,835 11,124 12,285 12,051 12,272 12,802 Total Calls for Service 12,828 16,756 16,553 17,109 17,010 17,311 19,127 19,395 19,952 20,715 Police:

Law Violations: (b)
Physical Arrests (adult and juvenile) 4,057 3,734 4,554 4,061 4,417 4,297 3,132 3,311 3,465 3,476 Traffic Citations 2,702 3,036 4,187 3,180 4,024 3,386 2,343 4,149 4,627 6,644 Public Works: (d)
Total Building Permits Issued 5,854 6,226 6,387 6,621 5,744 7,277 7,449 6,450 6,429 6,374 Total Square Feet of Street Maintenance Performed 3,468,666 12,190,840 1,564,362 2,866,227 2,713,778 880,033 3,035,171 6,947,598 3,459,889 3,677,116 Parks and Recreation: (c)
Community Services:

Total Attendance in Youth/Adult/Senior Programs 246,331 209,619 213,916 210,091 133,900 70,215 206,512 246,996 282,944 263,861 Total Attendance at Aquatic Facilities (e) 316,994 428,744 451,127 467,324 276,413 163,447 298,852 289,048 338,538 365,025 Library: (a)
Number of Materials Checked Out 1,306,844 1,339,684 1,221,101 1,149,134 975,554 948,772 1,183,830 1,295,497 1,364,885 1,488,065 Water:

Average Daily Consumption (in million gallons) 20.70 23.25 25.77 25.40 26.96 29.28 26.46 25.27 26.71 27.71 Number of Backflow Devices Tested 5,093 5,183 5,200 5,054 4,999 5,053 5,440 5,453 5,595 5,143 Number of Meters Sold 848 1,044 1,100 914 1,432 1,222 1,714 1,570 1,352 1,244 Wastewater:

Number of Miles of Sewer Mains Flushed 266 294 283 273 264 296 289 301 296 297 % of Preventative Work Order Hours 38.4% 46.4% 45.7% 48.1% 47.9% 43.5% 51.1% 55.1% 85.0% 83.4% Solid Waste:

Tons of Solid Waste Collected 101,794 117,594 115,548 139,501 139,061 139,683 145,499 142,195 135,832 136,714 (a) The Library totals include Downtown Library, Maidu Library and Riley Library. The libraries were closed on Fridays between fiscal year 2018 and 2019. (c) Fiscal year 2021 indicators were impacted by COVID-19 pandemic restrictions which resulted in staff shortages in Parks and Recreation, aquatic facilities and community services. (d) New home production resulted in an increase in Building permits. The total square feet of street maintenance performed decreased in fiscal year 2021 due to a large decrease in contract work performed.
(e) Roseville Aquatic Complex was closed to the public for most of fiscal year 2023 and Mike Shellito Indoor Pool (MSIP) was closed to the public for the latter half of fiscal year 2023.

Johnson Pool was closedue tue to construction in June 2024. (b) The City restated Police law violations in fiscal year 2016 and 2017.

CITY OF ROSEVILLE

OPERATING INDICATORS BY FUNCTION/PROGRAM
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year
Source: City of Roseville Department Staff
212

Page 256 of 1141 ends

Function/Program 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Public Safety:

Fire Stations 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9
Police Stations 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Number of Police Patrol Vehicles 77 91 88 93 97 99 99 95 94 104 Public Works:

Miles of Streets 465 470 478 480 485 498 514 519 525 530 Number of Traffic Signals 175 180 183 187 188 189 191 192 193 197 Parks and Recreation: (a)
Community Services:

Golf Courses (18 holes) 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Parks 66 68 71 72 76 79 81 84 87 89
Open Spaces/Preserves 3,801 3,895 3,910 3,910 3,910 3,910 3,913 3,992 4,232 4,331 Recreation Facilities (Community Centers and Pools) 7 7 7 7 7 7 9 7 7 7 Libraries 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Adventure Clubs 17 18 18 18 19 19 20 21 21 22
Water:

Miles of Water Mains 592 608 621 635 650 681 690 704 712 722 Fire Hydrants 4,735 4,763 5,007 5,087 5,212 5,443 5,526 5,641 5,710 5,848 Wastewater:

Miles of Sanitary Sewers 505 517 529 542 552 577 586 598 607 614 Miles of Storm Drain 366 372 381 390 401 421 428 434 441 451 Solid Waste:

Number of New Residential
Refuse Customers 787 822 1,068 926 859 1,054 1,612 1,579 1,349 1,153 Electric:

Number of Residential Customers 50,784 51,638 52,789 53,868 54,687 56,549 58,359 59,760 61,107 63,063 Number of Commercial Customers 6,700 6,759 6,812 6,884 6,975 7,059 7,133 7,194 7,305 7,421 (a) In FY 2021 Roseville's Parks, Recreation and Libraries Department changed the listed capital assets to be more relevant. Parks were separated from Recreation Facilities. (Community Centers and Pools) and Open Spaces/Preserves replaced Miles of Creek, which are a part of the open spaces and preserves. Adventure Club buildings were added as they are a city-owned asset.

Fiscal Year

CITY OF ROSEVILLE

CAPITAL ASSET STATISTICS BY FUNCTION/PROGRAM
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Source: City of Roseville Department Staff
213

Page 257 of 1141 ends

7+,63$*(,17(17,21$//</()7%/$1.
214

Page 258 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
(AN ENTERPRISE FUND OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA) FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2025 ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT

Page 259 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
(AN ENTERPRISE FUND OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA)

Annual Financial Report

For the Year Ended June 30, 2025

Page 260 of 1141 ends

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Page 261 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
(AN ENTERPRISE FUND OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA)

Annual Financial Report

For the Year Ended June 30, 2025

Table of Contents

Page

Independent Auditors’ Report ........................................................................................................................................ 1

Basic Financial Statements

Statement of Net Position ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Position ......................................................................... 5 Statement of Cash Flows ........................................................................................................................................ 6 Notes to Financial Statements ................................................................................................................................ 7

Required Supplementary Information

Schedule of the Program’s Proportionate Share of the City’s Net Pension Liability (Miscellaneous Plan) .................................................................................................... 20 Schedule of the Program’s Pension Contributions ............................................................................................... 22 Schedule of the Program’s Proportionate Share of the City’s Net OPEB Liability ............................................... 24 Schedule of the Program’s OPEB Contributions .................................................................................................. 26

Supplementary Information

Schedule of Expenditures of Federal and State Awards ...................................................................................... 30 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Position .................................................... 31 Schedule of Expenditures by State Categories .................................................................................................... 32 Schedule of Reimbursable Equipment Expenditures ........................................................................................... 33 Schedule of Reimbursable Equipment Expenditures for Renovation and Repairs ............................................. 34 Schedule of Reimbursable Administrative Costs ................................................................................................. 35 Audited Attendance and Fiscal Reports/Audited Fiscal Reports:

CCTR-4209 – School Age Child Care Program ............................................................................................... 36 Audited Reserve Account Activity Report ...................................................................................................... 58 Notes to Supplementary Information ............................................................................................................. 59

Compliance Reports

Independent Auditors’ Report on Compliance with Applicable Requirements and on Internal Control Over Compliance ..................................................................................................................................... 61 Summary of Findings and Questioned Costs ....................................................................................................... 63 Summary of Prior Year Findings and Questioned Costs ..................................................................................... 64

Page 262 of 1141 ends

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Page 263 of 1141 ends

LSLCPAS.COM
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT

To the Honorable Members of the City Council
City of Roseville, California

Report on the Audit of the Financial Statements

Opinion

We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the City of Roseville School-Age Child Care Program (Program), an enterprise fund of the City of Roseville, California, (City) as of and for the year ended June 30, 2025, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collec tively comprise the Program’s basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Program, as of June 30, 2025, and the changes in financial position and cash flows thereof for the year then ended in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Basis for Opinion

We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Our responsibilities under those standards are further described in the Auditors’ Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial State ments section of our report. We are required to be independent of the City and to meet our other ethical responsib ilities, in accordance with the relevant ethical requirements relating to our audit. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinions.

Emphasis of Matter

As discussed in Note 1, the financial statements of the Program are intended to present the financial position, the changes in financial position, and cash flows of only that port ion of the business-type activities of the City that is attributable to the transactions of the Program. They do not purport to, and do not, present fairly the financial position of the City, as of June 30, 2025, the changes in its financial position, or, where applicable, its cash flows for the year then ended in accordance with accounting principles generally a ccepted in the United States of America. Our opinion is not modified with respect to this matter.

Responsibilities of Management for the Financial Statements

Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, and for the design, implementation, and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.

Page 264 of 1141 ends

To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Co
uncil
City of Roseville, California
Auditors’ Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Statements Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to is sue an auditors’ report that includes our opinions.

Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance but is not absolute assurance and therefore is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with generally accepted a uditing standards and Government Auditing Standards will always detect a material m isstatement when it exists. The risk of not detecting a material misstatement resulting from fraud is higher than for one resulting from error, as fraud may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal control. Misstatements are considered material if there is a substantial likelihood that, individually or in the aggregate, they would influence the judgment made by a reasonable user based on the financial statements.

In performing an audit in accordance with generally accepted au diting standards and Government Auditing Standards, we:
• Exercise professional judgment and maintain professional skepticism throughout the audit. • Identify and assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error, and design and perform audit procedures responsive to th ose risks. Such procedures include examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. • Obtain an understanding of internal control relevant to the audit in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control. Accordingly, no such opinion is expressed. • Evaluate the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluate the overall presentation of the financial statements.

We are required to communicate with those charged with governance regarding, among other matters, the planned scope and timing of the audit, significant audit findings, and certain internal control-related matters that we identified during the audit.

Required Supplementary Information
Accounting principles ge
nerally accepted in the United States o f America require that pension and other post-employment benefits schedul es, as listed on the table of c ontents be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such information is the responsibility of management and, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by the Governmental Accountin g Standards Board who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic fin ancial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context. We have applied certain limite d procedures to the required supplementary information in accordance with auditing standards generally acc epted in the United States of America, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance.
2

Page 265 of 1141 ends

To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
City of Roseville, California

Management has omitted the management’s discussion and analysis that accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require to be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such missing information, although not a part of the basic financial stateme nts, is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board who considers it to be an essential part of fin ancial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historic al context. Our opinion on the basic financial statements is not affected by this missing information.

Supplementary Information

Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively comprise the Program’s basic financial statements. The accompanying schedule of expenditures of state and federal awards, combining statement of revenues, expenses and changes in net po sition, schedule of expenditures by state categories, schedules of reimbursable equipment and admin costs, and audit attendance and fiscal report/audited fiscal reports are presented for purposes of additional analysi s and are not a required part of the basic financial statements. Such information is the responsibility of management and was derived from and relates directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements. The information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of th e basic financial statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing and reconciling such information directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements or to the basic financial statements themselves, and other additional procedures in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the supplementary information is fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements as a whole.

Other Reporting Required by Government Auditing Standards

In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated November 12, 2025, on our consideration of the Program’s internal control over financ ial reporting and on our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant a greements and other matters. The purpose of that report is solely to describe the scope of our testing of intern al control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of the Program’s internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integra l part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering Program’s internal control over financial reporting and compliance.

Sacramento, California
November 12, 2025

Page 266 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Statement of Net Position
June 30, 2025
Assets:

Current:

Cash and investments in City Treasury 635,651 $
Accounts receivable 251,860
Accrued interest 6,779
Restricted:

Cash and investments 79,189
Total Current Assets 973,479
Noncurrent:

Nondepreciable capital assets 736,618
Depreciable capital assets 4,309,964
Less: Accumulated depreciation (1,601,872)
Total Noncurrent Assets 3,444,710
Total Assets 4,418,189
Deferred Outflows of Resources:

Deferred outflows related to pensions 2,038,054
Deferred outflows related to OPEB 285,000
Total Deferred Outflows of Resources 2,323,054
Liabilities:

Current:

Accounts payable 74,810
Accrued liabilities 221,205
Unearned revenues 134,090
Advance from the City 55,000
Compensated absences 151,621
Child development reserves 79,189
Total Current Liabilities 715,915
Noncurrent:

Compensated absences 94,283
Advances from the City 1,945,000
Net OPEB liability 2,635,000
Net pension liability 8,748,781
Total Noncurrent Liabilities 13,423,064
Total Liabilities 14,138,979
Deferred Inflows of Resources:

Deferred inflows related to OPEB 792,000
Total Deferred Inflows of Resources 792,000
Net Position (Deficit):

Invested in capital assets 3,444,710
Unrestricted (11,634,446)
Total Net Position (8,189,736)$
See Notes to Financial Statement.
4

Page 267 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Statement of Revenues, Expenses
And Changes in Net Position
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025
Operating Revenues:

ASES program revenue 303,826$
California Department of Social Sevices grant 222,582
Federal grants 217,447
Parent fees - noncertified children 158,025
Parent fees - certified children 1,676
Recreation program revenue 5,909,205
Revenue from other agencies 279,989
Total Operating Revenues 7,092,750
Operating Expenses:

Salaries 4,314,020
Employee benefits 1,915,021
Books and supplies 334,255
Services and other operating expenses 1,880,151
Pension and other post employement benefits expense 117,371 Depreciation 131,444
Total Operating Expenses 8,692,262
Operating Income (loss) (1,599,512)
Nonoperating Revenues (Expenses):

Use of money and property 12,281
Interest and fiscal charges (50,551)
Total Nonoperating
Revenues (Expenses) (38,270)
Income (loss) Before Transfers (1,637,782)
Transfers from the City 1,421,363
Changes in Net Position (216,419)
Net Position (Deficit):

Beginning of Year, as originally reported (8,000,055)
Restatements - change in accounting principle 26,738
Beginning of Fiscal Year, as restated (7,973,317)
End of Fiscal Year (8,189,736)$
See Notes to Financial Statement.
5

Page 268 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Statement of Cash Flows
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025
Cash Flows from Operating Activities:

Receipts from customers 6,518,192$
Department of Social Services grants and Federal grants 440,029 Cash paid to employees (4,227,548)
Cash paid to suppliers (4,226,882)
Net Cash Provided (Used) by Operating Activities (1,496,209) Cash Flows from Non-Capital
Financing Activities:

Transfers from the City 1,421,363
Net Cash Provided (Used) by
Non-Capital Financing Activities 1,421,363
Cash Flows from Capital
and Related Financing Activities:

Acquisition and construction of capital assets (204,420) Principal paid on long-term borrowings from City (55,000) Interest paid on long-term borrowings from City (50,551) Net Cash Provided (Used) by
Capital and Related Financing Activities (309,971)
Cash Flows from Investing Activities:

Interest received 39,019
Net Cash Provided (Used) by
Investing Activities 39,019
Net Increase (decrease) in Cash
and Cash Equivalents (345,798)
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Year 1,060,638 Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Year 714,840$
Reconciliation of Operating Income to Net Cash
Provided (Used) by Operating Activities:

Operating lncome (loss) (1,599,512)$
Adjustments to Reconcile Operating Income (loss)
Net Cash Provided (Used) by Operating Activities:

Depreciation 131,444
Increase (decrease) in net pension related amounts 305,371 Increase (decrease) in OPEB related amounts (188,000)
(Increase) decrease in accounts receivable (31,906)
Increase (decrease) in accounts payable (48,841)
Increase (decrease) in accrued liabilities 13,873
Increase (decrease) in unearned revenue (23,434)
Increase (decrease) in compensated absences (55,204)
Total Adjustments 103,303
Net Cash Provided (Used) by
Operating Activities (1,496,209)$
See Notes to Financial Statement.
6

Page 269 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Notes to the Financial Statements
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025
NOTE 1: ORGANIZATION
The City of Roseville (City) operates the School-Age Child Care Program (Program) encompassing 21 childcare centers within the City. Three of these centers provide day car e services to subsidized families under the Child Development Program funded by the California Department o f Social Services. The City is financially accountable for the activities of the Program. The program reimburses the City for costs incurred while operating the Program, including costs for salaries and benefits.

These basic financial statements present only the activities of the Program and are not intended to present the financial position of the City, or the results of its operations. The financial statements of the Program are included as an enterprise fund in the City's financial statements.

NOTE 2: SUMMARY OF SIGNIF ICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
A. Basis of Accounting
The School-Age Chil
d Care Program Enterprise Fund is reported using the economic resources measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are recorded when earned and expenses are recorded at the time liabilities are incurred, regardless of when the related cash flows take place.

The principal operating revenues of the Program are federal, st ate and local grants, and parent fees. Operating expenses include cost of services, administrative expenses, and depreciation on capital assets. All revenues and expenses not meeting this definition are reported as nonoperating revenues and expenses.

B. Net Position
Net Position is the
excess of all the Program's assets and defe rred outflows of resources over its liabilities and deferred inflows of resources. As of June 30, 2025, the Program’s Net Position is divided into the three classifications described below:

Invested in capital assets describes the portion of net position which is represented by t he net book value of the Program's capital assets. The pr ogram does not currently have a n outstanding balance of debt issued to finance these assets.

Restrict for program reserves describes apportionment monies received and earned through eligible service units but not yet expended and are restricted for use for the program.

Unrestricted describes the portion of net position which is not restricted to use.

C. Fair Value Measurement
The Program categorizes the
fair value measurements of its inve stments based on the hierarchy established by generally accepted accounting principles. The fair value hierarchy, which has three levels, is based on the valuation inputs used to measure an asset’s fair value: Level 1 inputs are quoted prices in active markets for identical assets; Level 2 inputs are significant other observable inputs; Level 3 inputs are significant unobservable inputs. The Program held no investments outside of the City Pool as of June 30, 2025.

D. Pensions
For purposes of measuring t
he net pension liability and deferred outflows/inflows of resources related to pensions, and pension expense, information about the Program’s fiduciary net position in the City’s California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) miscellaneous plan (Plan) and additions to/deductions from the Plan’s fiduciary net position have been determined on the same basis as they are rep orted by CalPERS. For this purpose, benefit payments (including refunds of employee contributions) are recognized when due and payable in accordance with the benefit terms. Investments are reported at fair value. 7

Page 270 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Notes to the Financial Statements
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025
NOTE 2: SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED) E. Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB)
For purposes of measuring the net OPEB liability, defer red outflows/deferred inflows of resources related to OPEB, and OPEB expense, information about the fiduciary net position of the City’s OPEB Plan (Plan) and additions to/deductions from the Plan’s fiduciary net position have been determined on the same basis as they are reported by the Plan. For this purpose, the Plan recognizes benefit payments when due and payable in accordance with the benefit terms. Investments are reported at fair value, except f or money market investments and participating interest-earning investment contracts that have a maturity at the time of purchase of one year or less, which are reported at cost.

F. Deferred Inflows of Resources and Deferred Outflows of Resou rces In addition to assets, the st
atement of net assets will report a separate section for deferred outflows of resources.

This separate financial statement element, deferred outflows of resources, represents a consumption of net position that applies to a future period and so will not be recognized as an outflow of resources (expense) until then.

In addition to liabilities, the statement of net assets will report a separate section for deferred inflows of resources.

This separate financial statement element, deferred inflows of resources, represents an acquisition of net position that applies to a future period and so will not be recognized as an inflow of resources (revenue) until that time.

The Program has two items that are reported in each of these categories relating to the net pension liability and net OPEB liability. These are described in Notes 8 and 9, respectively.

G. Cash and Investments
The Progra
m’s cash and investments are included in the City’s i nvestment pool (City Pool), which is described in the City’s Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR). The Ci ty, as a charter city, has adopted its own investment guidelines, which are consistent with the requiremen ts of the California Government Code. The City Council and the City’s Assistant City Manager/Chief Financ ial Officer provide oversight of the City Pool and reaffirm its investment policy on an annual basis. The City Pool is not rated and is not registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

The Program’s position in the City Pool at June 30, 2025 is sta ted at fair value. The value of the pool shares that may be withdrawn at any time is determined on an amortized cost basis, which is different than the fair value of the Program’s position in the pool. The City Pool values participant shares at fair value year-round. For further information regarding the City Pool, refer to the City’s ACFR on the internet at www.roseville.ca.us.

For the purposes of the statement of cash flows, the Program co nsiders cash and cash equivalents to include all pooled cash and investments, including restricted assets, as these pooled balances have the general characteristics of a demand deposit.

H. Capital Assets
Capital assets are defined as assets with an in
itial, individual cost of more than $5,000, and an estimated useful life greater than one year. Capital assets are recorded at historical cost. Contributions are recorded at acquisition cost.

Depreciation of capital assets is provided on the straight-line method over estimated useful lives between 5 and 40 years.

I. Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements
in conformity with gene rally accepted accounting principles in the United States requires management t o make estimates and assumpt ions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from those estimates. 8

Page 271 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Notes to the Financial Statements
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025
NOTE 2: SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUN

TING POLICIES (CONTINUED)
J. Program Funding Terms & Conditions
In accordance with the applicable requirements
from the Funding Terms & Conditions of the General Child Care and Development Program (Grant Program):

Interest expense is only allowable as a reimbursable cost in certain circumstances when it has been preapproved by the administering state department or relates to the lease, pur chase, acquisition, or repair or renovation of early learning and cash facilities owned or leased by the contractor. No interest expense was claimed to a child development contract for the year ended June 30, 2025.

All expenses claimed for reimbursement under a related rent transaction must be supported by a fair market rental estimate from an independent appraiser, licensed by the California Office of Real Estate Appraisers. There were no related party rent expenses claimed for the year ended June 30, 2025.

Bad debt expense is unallowable unless it relates to uncollecti ble family fees where documentation of adequate collection attempts exists. No bad debt expense was claimed to a child development contract for the year ended June 30, 2025.

NOTE 3: CASH AND INVESTMENTS
The Program's cash and investments are included in a City Pool, the details of which is presented in the City's ACFR.

The Program pools cash from all sources with the City so that i t can be invested at the maximum yield, consistent with safety and liquidity, while individual funds can make expenditures at any time. The City's investment policy and the California Government Code permit investments in the securi ties of the federal government or its agencies, certificates of deposit, negotiable certificates of deposit, banker's acceptances, commercial paper, the State of California Local Authority Investment Fund (LAIF Pool), California Asset Management Program (CAMP), repurchase agreements, passbook savings account demand deposits, and interest rate swaps.

The Program’s participation in the City Pool at June 30, 2025 was $635,651, which was measured based on uncategorized inputs not defined as a Level 1, Level 2, or Level 3 input.

NOTE 4: ADVANCE FROM THE CITY AND DUE TO THE CITY
The Program borrowed $300,000 and $205,000 from the City in fis cal years 2012 and 2014, respectively.

The program borrowed an additional $300,000 in fiscal year 2018 for the purpose of funding an additional site. The program borrowed an additional $340,000 in fiscal year 2019 for the purpose of funding an additional site. The program borrowed an additional $1,275,000 in fiscal year 2023 t o finance buildings for two new sites. The total balance due to the City as of June 30, 2025 is $2,000,000. Interest on outstanding amounts accrued is based upon the City’s prior year average annual pooled interest rate of return. 9

Page 272 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Notes to the Financial Statements
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025
NOTE 4: ADVANCE

FROM THE CITY AND DUE TO THE CITY (CONTINUED)
The Program recorded a due to the City of $55,000 that represen ts the amount that will be paid in the next fiscal year. The total balance of $2,000,000 will be repaid in accordance with the below payment schedule:

NOTE 5: CAPITAL ASSETS
Capital assets activity is summarized below for the year ended June 30, 2025:

Year Ending June 30, Principal Interest Total
2026 55,000$ 48,700$ 103,700$
2027 55,000 47,361 102,361
2028 55,000 46,022 101,022
2029 55,000 44,682 99,682
2030 55,000 43,343 98,343
2031-2035 314,000 195,677 509,677
2036-2040 518,500 150,885 669,385
2041-2045 637,500 77,616 715,116
2046-2047 255,000 9,314 264,314
Total 2,000,000$ 663,598$ 2,663,598$
Balance at
June 30, 2024 Additions Deletions
Balance at
June 30, 2025
Capital assets, not being depreciated
Construction in progress 532,198$ 204,420$ -$ 736,618$ Capital assets, not being depreciated 532,198 204,420 - 736,618 Capital assets, being depreciated
Building and improvements 4,129,011 - - 4, 129,011 Machinery and equipment 11,644 - - 11,644 Computer equipment 169,309 - - 169,309 Subtotal 4,309,964 - - 4, 309,964
Accumulated depreciation
Building and improvements (1,317,694) (103,225) - (1, 420,919) Machinery and equipment (11,644) - - (11,644) Computer equipment (141,090) (28,219) - ( 169,309) Total accumulated depreciation (1,470,428) (131,444) - (1, 601,872) Net capital assets being depreciated 2,839,536 (131,444) - 2, 708,092 Capital assets, net 3,371,734$ 72,976$ -$ 3, 444,710$ 10

Page 273 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Notes to the Financial Statements
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025

NOTE 6: COMPENSATED ABSENCES

Compensated absences comprise unused vacation leave, sick pay, and certain compensated time off, which are accrued as earned. Unused vacation time and personal holiday may be accumulated up to a specified maximum and are paid at the time of termination from Commission employment. Non-probationary employees in the classified service and unclassified service, whose separation is not caused by dismissal, shall be entitled to payment for sick leave accrued up to their date of separation. The changes in compensated absence balances were as follows:

NOTE 7: CONTINGENCIES

The Program participates in State grant programs which are subj ect to the provisions of applicable State requirements. Management is not aware of any cost differences; however, these programs are still subject to further examination by the grantors and the amount, if any, of expenses which may be disallowed by the granting agencies cannot be determined at this time. The Program expects such amounts, if any, to be immaterial.

NOTE 8: DEFINED BE NEFIT PENSION PLAN

Plan Description – Substantially all full-time Program employees are eligible to participate in the City’s Miscellaneous Plan, an agent multiple-employer defined benefit pension plan, administered by CalPERS, which acts as a common investment and administrative agent for its participating member employers. Benefit provisions under the Plan are established by State statute and may be amended by City resolution. CalPERS issues publicly available reports that include a full description of the pension plans regarding benefit provisions, assumptions and membership information that can be found on the CalPERS website. For financial reporting purposes, the Program reports a proportionate share of the City’s net pension liab ility. Accordingly, the disclosures and required supplementary information (RSI) has been reported for the Program as a cost-sharing participant.

Benefits Provided – CalPERS provides retirement and disability benefits, annual c ost of living adjustments and death benefits to plan members, who must be public employees and beneficiaries. Benefits are based on years of credited service, equal to one year of full time employment. Members with five years of total service are eligible to retire at age 50 with statutorily reduced benefits. All members are eligible for non-duty disability benefits after 10 years of service. The death benefit is one of the following: the Basic Death benefit, the 1957 Survivor Benefit, or the Optional Settlement 2W Death Benefit. The cost of living adjustments for each plan are applied as specified by the Public Employees’ Retirement Law.

The Plan’s provisions and benefits in effect at June 30, 2025, are summarized as follows:

Balance as restated at Balance as of Due within
June 30, 2024 Net Change June 30, 2025 one year
281,020$ (35,116)$ 245,904$ 151,621$ Classic PEPRA
Hire date Prior to January 1, 2013 On or after January 1, 2013 Benefit v esting schedule 5 years serv ice 5 years serv ice Benefit payments monthly for life monthly for life
Retirement age 50-55 52-67
Monthly benefits, as a % of annual salary 2.0-2.7% 1.0-2.5% Required employee contribution rates 7.890% 7.000%
Required employer contribution rates 11.800% 7.750%
11

Page 274 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Notes to the Financial Statements
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025

NOTE 8: DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN (CONTINUED)

Contributions – Section 20814(c) of the California Public Employees’ Retirement Law requires that the employer contribution rates for all public employers are determined on an annual basis by the actuary and shall be effective on the July 1 following notice of a change in rate. Funding contributions for the Plan are determined annually on an actuarial basis as of June 30 by CalPERS. The actuarially determined rate is the estimated amount necessary to finance the costs of benefits earned by employees during the ye ar, with an additional amount to finance any unfunded accrued liability. The Program is required to contribute the difference between the actuarially determined rate and the contribution rates of employees.

Employer contribution rates as of the measurement date were 11. 80 percent for the Classic Plan Members and

7.75 percent for the PEPRA Plan members. The Program’s proporti onate share of the City’s contributions to the Miscellaneous Plan was $1,090,340 for the year ended June 30, 2025.

Pension Liability, Pension Expense and Deferred Outflows/Inflows of Resources Related to Pensions

As of June 30, 2025, the Program reported a net pension liabili ty of $8,748,781 for its proportionate share of the City’s Miscellaneous Plan’s net pension liability.

The net pension liability of the P lan was measured as of June 3 0, 2024, and the total pension liab ility used to calculate the net pension liability was determined by an actuar ial valuation as of June 30, 2023 rolled forward to June 30, 2025. The Program’s proportion of the City’s Miscellaneous Plan’s net pension liability was based on the Program’s fiscal year 2024 contributions to the City’s Miscellaneous Plan relative to the total contributions of the City as a whole. The Program’s proportionate share of the City’s Miscellaneous Plan net pension liability, measured as of June 30, 2024, was 2.71 percent, which was a decrease of 0.0 1 percent from its proportion measured as of June 30, 2024.

For the year ended June 30, 2025, the Program recognized pension expense of $1,421,434. At June 30, 2025, the Program reported deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to pension from the following sources:

Deferred Outflows Deferred Inflows
of Resources of Resources
Contributions paid by the
program subsequent to measurement date 1,090,340 $ - $ Changes of assumptions 199,732 -
Difference between expected and actual experience 526,136 - Net differences between projected and actual earnings on pension plan investments 221,846 -
Total 2,038,054 $ - $
12

Page 275 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Notes to the Financial Statements
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025

NOTE 8: DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN (CONTINUED)

The amount of $1,090,340 reported in the fund as deferred outflows of resources related to pensions, resulting from the Program’s contributions to the City’s plan subsequent to the measurement date, will be recognized as a reduction of the net pension liability in the year ended June 30, 2026. Other amounts reported as deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to pensions w ill be rec ognized as a reduction to pension expense as follows:

Actuarial Assumptions – The Program’s proportion of the City’s total pension liability in the June 30, 2025, actuarial valuation was determined using the following actuarial assumptions:

The mortality table used was developed based on CalPERS-specifi c data. For more details on this table, please refer to the December 2017 experience study report (based on CalPERS demographic data from 1997 to 2015) that can be found on the CalPERS website.

The long-term expected rate of return on pension plan investments was determined using a building block method in which best-estimate ranges of expected future real rates of return (expected returns, net of pension plan investment expense an inflation) are developed for each major asset class.

In determining the long-term expected rate of return on pension plan investments, CalPERS took into account both short and long-term market return expectations as well as the expected pension fund cash flows. Such cash flows were developed assuming that both members and employers will make their required contributions on time and as scheduled in all future years. Using historical returns of all the funds’ asset classes, expected compound (geometric) returns were calculated over the short-term (first 10 years) an d the long-term (11-60 years) using a building-block approach. Using the expected nominal returns for both short-term and long-term, the present value of benefits was calculated for each fund. The expected rate of return was set by calculating the single equivalent expected return that arrived at the same present value of benefits for cash flo ws as the one calculated using both short-term and long-term returns. The expected rate of return was then set equivalent to the single equivalent rate calculated above and rounded down to the nearest one quarter of one percent.

Deferred
Outflows/(Inflows)
Year Ending June 30, of Resources
2026 411,679$
2027 594,864
2028 30,754
2029 (89,583)
Total 947,714$
Miscellaneous
Valuation Date June 30, 2023
Measurement Date June 30, 2024
Actuarial Cost Method Entry-Age Normal Cost Method
Actuarial Assumptions:

Discount Rate 6.90%
Inflation 2.30%
Payroll Growth 2.80%
Projected Salary Increase 3.3-14.2% (1)
Inv estment Rate of Return 6.80%
Mortality Deriv ed using CalPERS membershiop data
(1) Depending on age, service, and type of employment.
13

Page 276 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Notes to the Financial Statements
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025

NOTE 8: DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN (CONTINUED)

The table below reflects long-term expected real rate of return by asset class. The rate of return was calculated using the capital market assumptions applied to determine the discount rate and asset allocation. The target allocation shown was adopted by the Pension Board.

Discount Rate – The discount rate used to measure the total pension liability was 6.90 percent. The projection of cash flows used to determine the discount rate assumed that employee contributions will be made at the current contribution rate and that the Program’s contributions will be made at rates equal to the difference between actuarially determined contributions rates and the employee rate. Based on those assumptions, each pension plan’s fiduciary net position was projected to be available to make all projected future benefit payments of current active and inactive employees. Therefore, the long-term expected rate of return on pension plan investments was applied to all periods of projected benefit payments to determine the total pension liability.

Sensitivity of the Program’s Proportionate Share of the City’s Miscellaneous Plan’s Net Pension Liability to Changes in the Discount Rate – The following presents the Program’s proportionate share of t he net pension liability of the City’s Miscellaneous Plan’s net pension liability, calculated using the discount rate for the Plan, as well as what the Program’s proportionate share of the net pension liability would be if it were calculated using a discount rate that is 1-percentage point lower or 1-percentage point higher than the current rate:

Assumed
asset
allocation Real return 1, 2
Global Equity - Cap weighted 30.00% 4.54%
Global Equity - Non-Cap weighted 12.00% 3.84%
Private Equity 13.00% 7.28%
Treasury 5.00% 0.27%
Mortgage-backed Securities 5.00% 0.50%
Inv estment Grade Corporates 10.00% 1.56%
High Yield 5.00% 2.27%
Emerging Market Debt 5.00% 2.48%
Private Debt 5.00% 3.57%
Real Assets 15.00% 3.21%
Leverage -5.00% -0.59%
(1) An expected inflation of 2.30% used for this period. (2) Figures are based on the 2022 Asset Liability Management st udy.

Miscellaneous
1% Decrease 5.90%
Net Pension Liability 12,276,316
Current Discount Rate 6.90%
Net Pension Liability 8,748,781
1% Increase 7.90%
Net Pension Liability 5,856,537
14

Page 277 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Notes to the Financial Statements
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025

NOTE 8: DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN (CONTINUED)

Pension Plan Fiduciary Net Position – Detailed information about the City’s collective net pension liability is available in the City’s separately issued ACFR. The City’s ACFR may be obtained on the internet at www.roseville.ca.us.

NOTE 9: OTHER POST-EMPLO YMENT BENEFITS (OPEB)

Plan Description – The City provides medical benefits to substantially all retirees under the City of Roseville Other Post Employment Benefit Plan (Plan), a single-employer defined benefit healthcare plan. The City is responsible for establishing and amending the funding policy of the Plan. Benef it provisions under the Plan are established by agreements between the City and its labor units. The plan financial statements can be obtained by contacting the City of Roseville Finance Department at 311 Vernon Street, Roseville, California 95678. For financial reporting purposes, the Program reports a proportionate share of the City ’s net OPEB liability. Accord ingly, the disclosures and required supplementary information (RSI) have been reported for the Program as a cost-sharing participant.

Benefits Provided – The Plan provides medical, dental, and vision insurance benefits to eligible retirees and their dependents. Benefits are provided through a third-party insurer, and the full cost of the benefits are covered by the Plan.

Contributions – Contribution requirements of the Program are established and may be amended by the City Council. The Council establishes rates based on an actuarially determined rate. For the year ended June 30, 2025, the Program contributed $384,000.

OPEB Liability, OPEB Expense and Deferred Outflows/Inflows of Resources Related to OPEB

As of June 30, 2025, the Program reported a net OPEB liability of $2,635,000 for its proportionate share of the City’s net OPEB liability.

The net OPEB liability of the Plan was measured as of June 30, 2025, and the total OPEB liability used to calculate the net OPEB liability was determined by an actuarial valuation as of June 30, 2024 rolled forward to June 30, 2025.

The Program’s proportion of the Plan’s net OPEB liability was based on the Program’s fiscal year 2024 contributions to the Plan relative to the total contributions of the City as a whole. The Program’s proportionate share of the Plan’s net OPEB liability, measured as of June 30, 2025, was 4.3 percent, which was a increase of 0.54 percent from its proportion measured as of June 30, 2024.

For the year ended June 30, 2025, the Program recognized an OPE B expense of $81,000. At June 30, 2025, the Program reported deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to OPEB from the following sources:

Deferred Outflows Deferred Inflows
of Resources of Resources
Changes of assumptions 62,346 $ (310,454) $
Difference between expected and actual experience 222,654 (313,984) Net differences between projected and actual earnings on OPEB plan investments - (167,562) Total 285,000 $ (792,000) $
15

Page 278 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Notes to the Financial Statements
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025

NOTE 9: OTHER POST-EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS (OPEB) (CONTINUED)

Amounts reported as deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to OPEB w ill be recognized as a reduction to pension expense/credit as follows:

Actuarial Assumptions – The Program’s proportion of the City’s total OPEB liability in the June 30, 2025 actuarial valuation was determined using the following actuarial assumptions.

The underlying mortality assumptions and all other actuarial assumptions used in the June 30, 2023, valuation were based on the results of an actuarial -experience study for the period of 1997 to 2015. Further details of the Experience Study can be found on the CalPERS website.

The long-term expected rate of return on OPEB plan investments was determined using a building block method in which best-estimate ranges of expected future real rates of return (expected returns, net of pension plan investment expense an inflation) are developed for each major asset class. These ranges are combined to produce the long-term expected rate of return by weighting the expected future real rates of return by the target asset allocation percentage and by adding expected inflation.

Deferred
Outflows/(Inflows)
Year Ending June 30, of Resources
2026 (111,922) $
2027 (172,781)
2028 (160,145)
2029 (96,701)
2030 20,323
Thereafter 14,226
Total (507,000)$
Valuation Date June 30, 2023
Measurement Date June 30, 2025
Actuarial Cost Method Entry-Age Normal Cost Method
Actuarial Assumptions
Discount Rate 6.25%
Inflation 2.50%
Payroll Growth 2.75%
Projected Salary Increase 2.75%
Investment Rate of Return 6.25%
Healthcare cost trend rate
Mortality CalPERS 2000-2019 Experience Study
Non-Medicare - 7.90%, decreasing to an ultimate rate of

3.45% in 2076
Medicare - 6.90%, decreasing to an ultimate rate of 3.45% in 2076
16

Page 279 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Notes to the Financial Statements
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025

NOTE 9: OTHER POST-EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS (OPEB) (CONTINUED)

The table below reflects long-term expected real rate of return by asset class. The rate of return was calculated using the capital market assumptions applied to determine the discoun t rate and asset allocation. The target allocation shown was adopted by the City effective on July 1, 2019.

Discount Rate – The discount rate used to measure the net OPEB liability was 6.25 percent. The projection of cash flows used to determine the discount rate assumed that contributions will be made at the current contribution rate.

Based on those assumptions, the Plan’s fiduciary net position was projected to be available to make all projected future benefit payments of current active and inactive employees. Therefore, the long-term expected rate of return on pension plan investments was applied to all periods of projected benefit payments to determine the total pension liability.

Sensitivity of the Program’s Proportionate Share of the Plan’s N e t O P E B L i a b i l i t y t o C h a n g e s i n t h e Discount Rate – The following presents the Program’s proportionate share of the net OPEB liability, calculated using the discount rate for the Plan , as well as what the Program’s proportionate share of the net OPEB liability would be if it were calculated using a discount rate that is 1-percentag e point lower or 1-percentage point higher than the current rate:

Sensitivity of the Program’s Proportionate Share of the Plan’s N e t O P E B L i a b i l i t y t o C h a n g e s i n t h e Healthcare Cost Trend Rates – The following presents the Program’s proportionate share of the net OPEB liability, as well as what the Program’s proportionate share of the net OP EB liability would be if it were calculated using healthcare cost trend rates that are 1-percentage-point lower or 1-percentage-point higher than the current healthcare cost trend rates:

OPEB Plan Fiduciary Net Position – Detailed information about the City’s collective net OPEB liability is available in the City’s separately issued ACFR. The City’s ACFR may be obtained on the internet at www.roseville.ca.us.

Target
Allocation
Expected
Real Return
Global Equity 52% 4.56%
Private Equity 5% 7.09%
Fixed Income 33% 0.78%
Private Debt 5% 4.38%
Real Assets 5% 4.03%
Total 100%
Assumed Long-Term Rate of Inflation is 2.50%
Expected Long-Term Net Rate of Return Rounded is 6.25%
Asset Class
1% Decrease Current Rate 1% Increase
(5.25%) (6.25%) (7.25%)
Program's net OPEB Liability 3,965,293$ 2,635,000 $ 1,535,782$ Discount Rate
Current Trend
1% Decrease Rate 1% Increase
Program's net OPEB Liability 1,635,551$ 2,635,000 $ 3,630,241$ Healthcare Cost
17

Page 280 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Notes to the Financial Statements
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025

NOTE 10: NEW AND FUTURE A CCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS

Future Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Pronouncements

GASB Statement No. 103 – In April 2024, the GASB issued Statement No. 103, Financial Reporting Model Improvements. The objective of this Statement is to improve key components of the financial reporting model to enhance its effectiveness in providing information that is essential for decision making and assessing a government’s accountability. This Statement also addresses certain application issues. The Statement is effective for reporting periods beginning after June 15, 2025. The City has not determined the effect on the Program’s financial statements.

GASB Statement No. 104 – In September 2024, the GASB issued Statement No. 104, Disclosure of Certain Capital Assets. The objective of this Statement is to provide users of government financial statements with essential information about certain types of capital assets. The Statemen t is effective for reporting periods beginning after June 15, 2025. The City has not determined the effect on the Program’s financial statements.

NOTE 11: RESTATEMENTS OF BEGINNING BALANCES

During the current year, the City implemented GASB Statement No . 101, Compensated Absences. In addition to the value of unused vacation time owed to employees upon separation of employment, the Program now recognizes an estimated amount of sick leave earned as of year-end that will be used by employees as time off in future years as part of the liability for compensated absences. The effects of the change in accounting principle are summarized below in the “Restatement - GASB 101 implementation” column in the table below.

June 30, 2024 Restatement -
As Previously GASB 101 June 30, 2024
Reported implementation As Restated
(8,000,055)$ 26,738 $ (7,973,317)$
18

Page 281 of 1141 ends

REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
19

Page 282 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Schedule of Program's Proportionate Share of the City's Net Pension Liability (Miscellaneous Plan) Last Ten Years
2016 2017 2018 2019
Measurement date June 30, 2015 June 30, 2016 June 30, 2017 June 30, 2018 Program's proportion of the City's
Net Pension Liability (Miscellaneous Plan) 2.45% 2.88% 3.91% 3.18% Program's proportionate share of the City's
Net Pension Liability (Miscellaneous Plan) 4,166,408$ 5,879,509$ 8,934,765$ 7,556,336$ Covered Payroll 2,053,457$ 2,157,033$ 2,385,506$ 2,457,071$ Program's proportionate share of net pension liability
as a percentage of covered payroll 202.90% 272.57% 374.54% 307.53% Plan fiduciary net position as a percentage
of the Total Pension Liability 66.97% 63.89% 63.85% 65.21% 20

Page 283 of 1141 ends

2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
June 30, 2019 June 30, 2020 June 30, 2021 June 30, 2022 June 30, 2023 June 30, 2024

3.29% 3.38% 2.68% 2.79% 2.72% 2.71%
8,227,212$ 8,933,574$ 5,179,899$ 8,614,640$ 8,873,460$ 8,748,781$ 2,400,674$ 2,603,909$ 2,497,228$ 2,328,451$ 2,601,648$ 2,680,936$ 342.70% 343.08% 207.43% 369.97% 341.07% 326.33%

65.09% 64.55% 75.39% 63.82% 63.92% 66.26%
21

Page 284 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Schedule of the Program's Pension Contributions
Last Ten Years
2016 2017 2018 2019
Miscellaneous Rate Plan
Actuarially Determined Contribution 506,156$ 588,625$ 723,026$ 677,313$ Contribution in Relation to the Actuarially Determined Contribution (506,156) (588,625) (723,026) (677,313) Contribution Deficiency (Excess) -$ -$ -$ -$ Covered Payroll 2,157,033$ 2,385,506$ 2,457,071$ 2,400,674$ Contributions as a Percentage of Covered Payroll 23.47% 24.68% 29.43% 28.21% Notes to Schedule:

Methods and assumptions used to determine contribution rates:

Actuarial cost method
Amortization method
Asset valuation method
Inflation
Salary increases
Payroll growth
Investment rate of return
Retirement age
Mortality
All other actuarial assumptions used in the June 30, 2023 valuation were based on the results of an actuarial experience study for the period from 1997 to 2015, including updates to salary increase, mortality and retirement rates. The Experience Study report may be accessed on the CalPERS website at www.calpers.ca.gov under Forms and Publications.

The mortality table used was developed based on CalPERS’ specific data. The table includes 15 years of mortality improvements using 90 percent of Society of Actuaries' Scale 2016. For more details on this table, please refer to the 2017 experience study report.

Market Value

2.50%
Varies by Entry Age and Service

2.75%

7.00%, net of pension plan investment expenses, including inflation.

Entry age normal cost method
Level percentage of pay, a summary of the current policy is provided in the table below:
22

Page 285 of 1141 ends

2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
765,391$ 918,967$ 813,652$ 933,304$ 980,781$ 1,090,340$ (765,391) (918,967) (813,652) (933,304) (980,781) (1,090,340) -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 2,603,909$ 2,497,228$ 2,328,451$ 2,601,648$ 2,680,936$ 2,942,158$

29.39% 36.80% 34.94% 35.87% 36.58% 37.06%
Market Value

2.50%
Varies by Entry Age and Service

2.75%

7.00%, net of pension plan investment expenses, including inflation.

Entry age normal cost method
Level percentage of pay, a summary of the current policy is provided in the table below:
23

Page 286 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Schedule of the Program's Proportionate Share of the City's Net OPEB Liability Last Ten Fiscal Years**
2018 2019 2020
Measurement date June 30, 2018 June 30, 2019 June 30, 2020 Program's proportion of the City's net OPEB liability 3.22000% 2.21000% 2.35000% Program's proportionate share of the City's net OPEB liability 4,589,000$ 3,257,000$ 4,349,000$ Program's covered-employee payroll 2,053,457$ 1,523,361$ 2,400,674$ Program's proportionate share of net OPEB liability
as a percentage of covered-employee payroll 223.48% 213.80% 181.16% Plan fiduciary net position as a percentage
of the Total OPEB Liability 31.28% 37.07% 48.58%
(1) Fiscal Year 2018 was the first year of implementation, therefore only eight years are shown. 24

Page 287 of 1141 ends

2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
June 30, 2021 June 30, 2022 June 30, 2023 June 30, 2024 June 30, 2025

4.28093% 4.25695% 4.47826% 3.76033% 4.29935%
4,265,000$ 3,564,000$ 3,523,000$ 2,763,000$ 2,635,000$ 2,603,909$ 2,497,228$ 2,328,451$ 2,604,648$ 2,680,936$ 163.79% 142.72% 151.30% 106.08% 98.29%

58.95% 60.73% 64.17% 68.43% 74.38%
25

Page 288 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Schedule of the Program's OPEB Contributions
Last Ten Years**
2018 2019 2020
Actuarially Determined Contribution 287,000$ 336,000$ 387,000$ Contribution in Relation to the Actuarially Determined Contribution (287,000) (336,000) (387,000) Contribution Deficiency (Excess) -$ -$ -$ Covered-Employee Payroll 1,523,361$ 2,400,674$ 2,603,909$

18.84% 14.00% 14.86%
(1) Fiscal Year 2018 was the first year of implementation, therefore only eight years are shown.

Contributions as a Percentage of Covered-Employee Payroll 26

Page 289 of 1141 ends

2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
600,494$ 454,940$ 474,292$ 395,361$ 460,503$ (600,494) (454,940) (535,661) (470,442) (577,491) -$ -$ (61,369)$ (75,081)$ (116,988)$ 2,497,228$ 2,328,451$ 2,604,648$ 2,680,936$ 2,942,158$

24.05% 19.54% 20.57% 17.55% 19.63%
27

Page 290 of 1141 ends

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
28

Page 291 of 1141 ends

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
29

Page 292 of 1141 ends

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025
Assistance
Listing
Number
Pass-Through's
Unique ID
Award
Amount Revenue Expenses
State Awards
State of California, Department of Social Services
Child Development Division
General Child Care and Development Program N/A LDJ1MM9L56K7 314,056$ 222,582$ 222,582$ Federal Awards
Department of Health and Human Services
Passed through State of California, Department of Social Services Child Development Division
Child Care and Development Block Grant 93.575 LDJ1MM9L56K7 191,019 168,136 168,136

93.596 LDJ1MM9L56K7 20,242 17,817 17,817

93.575 LDJ1MM9L56K7 25,232 25,232 25,232 Total Department of Health and Human Services 236,493 211,185 211,185 Department of Homeland Security
Passed through the California Governor's Office of Emergency Services Disaster grants - Public Assistance
(Presidential Declared Disasters) 97.036 UTM3S7LKYQZ4 6,262 6,262 6,262 Total Department of Homeland Security 6,262 6,262 6,262 556,811$ 440,029$ 440,029$
Footnote 1. Basis of Presentation
Total Federal and State Awards

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES Schedule of Expenditures of Federal and State Awards
Grantor/Program Title
The Schedule of Expenditures of State and Federal Awards includes the expenditures of federal awards of the City. Expenditures are presented on the accrual basis of accounting. The federal information in this schedule is presented in accordance with the requirements of Uniform Guidance, 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart F. Thus, some amounts presented in this schedule may differ from amounts presented and/or used in the preparation of the financial statements.

Child Care Mandatory and Matching Funds of the Child
Care and Development Fund
ARPA Stabilization Fund
30

Page 293 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Position For the Year Ended June 30, 2025
Total CDSS Non-CDSS
CCTR-4209 Contracts Programs Total
Operating Revenues:

ASES program revenue -$ -$ 303,826$ 303,826$ California Department of Social Services grant 222,582 222,582 - 222,582 Federal grants
CCTR contract amount 185,953 185,953 185,953 ARPA 22,648 22,648 2,584 25,232 COVID-19 6,262 6,262
Parent fees - certified children 1,676 1,676 - 1,676 Parent fees - noncertified children 158,025 158,025 - 158,025 Recreation program revenue - - 5,909,205 5,909,205 Revenue from other agencies 125,876 125,876 154,113 279,989 Total Operating Revenues 716,760 716,760 6,375,990 7,092,750 Operating Expenses:

Salaries 404,815 404,815 3,909,205 4,314,020 Employee benefits 237,917 237,917 1,677,104 1,915,021 Books and supplies 10,848 10,848 323,407 334,255 Services and other operating expenses 116,402 116,402 1,763,749 1,880,151 Pension and other post employement benefits expense - - 117,371 117,371 Depreciation - - 131,444 131,444 Total Operating Expenses 769,982 769,982 7,922,280 8,692,262 Operating Income (53,222) (53,222) (1,546,290) (1,599,512) Nonoperating Revenues (Expenses):

Use of money and property - - 12,281 12,281 Interest and fiscal charges - - (50,551) (50,551) Total Nonoperating
Revenues (Expenses) - - (38,270) (38,270) Income Before Transfers (53,222) (53,222) (1,584,560) (1,637,782) Transfers from the City - - 1,421,363 1,421,363 Changes in Net Position (53,222)$ (53,222)$ (163,197)$ (216,419) Net Position:

Beginning of Year (8,000,055)
Restatements 26,738
Beginning of Fiscal Year, as restated (7,973,317)
End of Fiscal Year (8,189,736)$
31

Page 294 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Statement of Expenditures by State Categories
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025
CDSS Contract
CCTR-2174
Expenditure Codes
2000 Classified Salaries 404,815$
3000 Employee Benefits 237,917
4000 Books and Supplies 10,848
5000 Services and Other Operating Expenses 116,402
Total Expenditures 769,982$
32

Page 295 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Schedule of Reimbursable Equipment Expenditures
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025
Cost Item Cost Item Cost Item
-$ None -$ None -$ None $5,000 Unit Cost With CCD Approval Without CCD Approval Expenditures Over Expenditures Over
Expenditures Under $5,000 Unit Cost $5,000 Unit Cost
33

Page 296 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Schedule of Reimbursable Equipment Expenditures for Renovation and Repairs For the Year Ended June 30, 2025
Cost Item Cost Item Cost Item
-$ None -$ None -$ None $10,000 Unit Cost With CCD Approval Without CCD Approval Expenditures Over Expenditures Over
Expenditures Under $10,000 Unit Cost $10,000 Unit Cost
34

Page 297 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Schedule of Reimbursable Administrative Costs
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025
CDSS Contract
CCTR-2147
Administrative Salaries and Benefits 291,174$
Toal Administrative Costs 291,174$
35

Page 298 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services AUD 9500 (5/25) Page 1 of 5

AUDITED ENROLLMENT, ATTENDANCE AND FISCAL REPORT

FOR CHILD CARE AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS
Audit Report Page
Full Name of Contractor*
Section 1 - Number of Counties Where Services are Provided • 1XPEHURIFRXQWLHVZKHUHWKHDJHQF\SURYLGHGVHUYLFHVWRFHUWL¿HGFKLOGUHQ )RUP$8'

• 1XPEHURIFRXQWLHVZKHUHWKHDJHQF\SURYLGHGPHQWDOKHDOWKFRQVXOWDWLRQVHUYLFHVWRFHUWL¿HGFKLOGUHQ )RUP$8'

• 1XPEHURIFRXQWLHVZKHUHWKHDJHQF\SURYLGHGVHUYLFHVWRQRQFHUWL¿HGFKLOGUHQ )RUP$8'

• 1XPEHURIFRXQWLHVZKHUHWKHDJHQF\SURYLGHGPHQWDOKHDOWKFRQVXOWDWLRQVHUYLFHVWRQRQFHUWL¿HGFKLOGUHQ )RUP$8'

• 7 RWDOHQUROOPHQWDQGDWWHQGDQFHIRUPVWRDWWDFK

1RWH
)RUHDFKRIWKHDERYHFDWHJRULHVVXEPLWRQHIRUPIRUHDFKVHUYLFHFRXQW\IRUWKHILVFDO\HDU Section 2 - Days of Enrollment, Attendance and Operation Column A
&XPXODWLYH)<
&')6

Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
Column D
Adjusted Days
per Audit
Total Certified Days of Enrollment
Total Certified Days of Enrollment with Mental Health Consultation Services Days of Attendance (including MHCS)
N/A
Total Non-Certified Days of Enrollment
Total Non-Certified Days of Enrollment with Mental Health Consultation Services Days of Operation
N/A
Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2025
Contract Number*
Vendor Code*

,QGLFDWHVILHOGLVUHTXLUHG
CCTR-4209
2191
City of Roseville
1 1
2 14,056 10 14,066
14,066 14,066
3,723 3,723
247 247
36 36

Page 299 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services AUD 9500 (5/25) Page 2 of 5
Audit Report Page
Full Name of Contractor Contract Number
Column A
&XPXODWLYH)<
&')6

Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
5HVWULFWHG,QFRPH&KLOG1XWULWLRQ3URJUDPV
5HVWULFWHG,QFRPH&RXQW\0DLQWHQDQFHRI(IIRUW
:,&6HFWLRQ

5HVWULFWHG,QFRPH$PHULFDQ5HVFXH3ODQ$FW
$53$

5HVWULFWHG,QFRPH2WKHU

Restricted Income - Subtotal
7UDQVIHU)URP5HVHUYH
:DLYHG)DPLO\)HHVIRU&HUWLILHG&KLOGUHQ
)DPLO\)HHV&ROOHFWHGIRU&HUWLILHG&KLOGUHQ
,QWHUHVW(DUQHGRQ&KLOG'HYHORSPHQW$SSRUWLRQPHQW3D\PHQWV 8QUHVWULFWHG,QFRPH)HHVIRU1RQ&HUWLILHG&KLOGUHQ
8QUHVWULFWHG,QFRPH+HDG6WDUW
8QUHVWULFWHG,QFRPH2WKHU

Total Revenue (*Waived Family Fees Not Included)
Section 3 - Revenue
CommeQWV

City of Roseville CCTR-4209
22,648 22,648
Cost of Care Plus Payments 125,876 125,876
22,648 125,876 148,524
0 1,676 1,676
158,025 158,025
182,349 125,876 308,225
37 37

Page 300 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services AUD 9500 (5/25) 3DJHRI
Audit Report Page
Full Name of Contractor Contract Number
$SSURYHG,QGLUHFW&RVW5DWH

126833/(0(17$/5(9(18((;3(16(6&KHFNWKLVER[DQGRPLWSDJH Column A
&XPXODWLYH)<
&')6

Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
'LUHFW3D\PHQWVWR3URYLGHUV
)&&+RQO\

1000 Certificated Salaries
2000 Classified Salaries
(PSOR\HH%HQHILWV
%RRNVDQG6XSSOLHV
5000 Services and Other Operating Expenses
6100/6200 Other Approved Capital Outlay
1HZ(TXLSPHQW
SURJUDPUHODWHG

(TXLSPHQW5HSODFHPHQW
SURJUDPUHODWHG

Depreciation or Use Allowance
Start-up Expenses (service level exemption)
%XGJHW,PSDVVH&UHGLW
,QGLUHFW&RVWV
LQFOXGHLQ7 RWDO$GPLQLVWUDWLYH&RVW

Total Reimbursable Expenses
7 RWDO$GPLQLVWUDWLYH&RVW
LQFOXGHGLQ6HFWLRQDERYH

7 RWDO6WDII7UDLQLQJ&RVW
LQFOXGHGLQ6HFWLRQDERYH

Section 4 - Reimbursable Expenses
City of Roseville CCTR-4209
0 404,815 404,815
237,917 237,917
10,848 10,848
116,402 116,402
769,982 769,982
291,174 291,174
38 38

Page 301 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services AUD 9500 (5/25) 3DJHRI
Audit Report Page
Full Name of Contractor Contract Number
Column A
&XPXODWLYH)<
&')6

Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
(QKDQFHPHQW)XQGLQJ
2WKHU

2WKHU

Total Supplemental Revenue
Column A
&XPXODWLYH)<
&')6

Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
1000 Certificated Salaries
2000 Classified Salaries
(PSOR\HH%HQHILWV
%RRNVDQG6XSSOLHV
5000 Services and Other Operating Expenses
(TXLSPHQW&DSLWDO2XWOD\
Depreciation or Use Allowance
,QGLUHFW&RVWV
Non-Reimbursable Supplemental Expenses
Total Supplemental Expenses
Section 5 - Supplemental Revenue
Section 6 - Supplemental Expenses
City of Roseville CCTR-4209
39 39

Page 302 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services AUD 9500 (5/25) Page 5 of 5
Audit Report Page
Full Name of Contractor Contract Number
Column A
&XPXODWLYH)<
&')6

Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
Total Certified Days of Enrollment (including MHCS)
Days of Operation
Days of Attendance (including MHCS)
5HVWULFWHG3URJUDP,QFRPH
Transfer from Reserve
)DPLO\)HHV&ROOHFWHGIRU&HUWLILHG&KLOGUHQ
,QWHUHVW(DUQHGRQ&KLOG'HYHORSPHQW$SSRUWLRQPHQW3D\PHQWV Direct Payments to Providers
Start-up Expenses (service level exemption)
Total Reimbursable Expenses
Total Administrative Cost
Total Staff Training Cost
Non-Reimbursable (State use only) N/A N/A
Section 7 - Summary
Total Certified Adjusted Days of Enrollment (including MHCS) Total Non-Certified Adjusted Days of Enrollment (including MHCS) ,QGHSHQGHQWDXGLWRU¶VDVVXUDQFHVRQDJHQF\¶VFRPSOLDQFHZLWKFRQWUDFWIXQGLQJWHUPVDQGFRQGLWLRQVDQGSURJUDPUHTXLUHPHQWVIRUSURJUDPVWKDW WUDQVIHUUHGWRWKH&DOLIRUQLD'HSDUWPHQWRI6RFLDO6HUYLFHVRQ-XO\SXUVXDQWWR:,&6HFWLRQ E

(OLJLELOLW\HQUROOPHQWDQGDWWHQGDQFHUHFRUGVDUHEHLQJPDLQWDLQHGDVUHTXLUHG VHOHFW<(6RU12IURPWKHGURSGRZQER[

5HLPEXUVDEOHH[SHQVHVFODLPHGRQSDJHDUHHOLJLEOHIRUUHLPEXUVHPHQWUHDVRQDEOHQHFHVVDU\DQGDGHTXDWHO\ VXSSRUWHG
VHOHFW<(6RU12IURPWKHGURSGRZQER[

,QFOXGHDQ\FRPPHQWVLQWKHFRPPHQWVER[RQSDJH,IQHFHVVDU\DWWDFKDGGLWLRQDOVKHHWVWRH[SODLQDGMXVWPHQWV

City of Roseville CCTR-4209
14,056 10 14,066
247 247
14,066 14,066
22,648 22,648
1,676 1,676
769,982 769,982
291,174 291,174
Yes
Yes
40 40

Page 303 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services AUD 9500.1 (6/25) Page 1 of 2

CHILD CARE AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS

CERTIFIED CHILDREN DAYS OF ENROLLMENT AND

ATTENDANCE
Full Name of Contractor*
Service County*:

Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2025
Contract Number*
Vendor Code*
Column A
Cumulative FY
CDFS 9500
Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
Column D
Adjustment
Factor
Column E
Adjusted Days
per Audit
Infants (up to 18 months) Full-time-plus
Infants (up to 18 months) Full-time
Infants (up to 18 months) One-half-time
Toddlers (18 up to 36 months) Full-time-plus
Toddlers (18 up to 36 months) Full-time
Toddlers (18 up to 36 months) One-half-time
Three Years and Older Full-time-plus
Three Years and Older Full-time
Three Years and Older One-half-time
Exceptional Needs Full-time-plus
Exceptional Needs Full-time
Exceptional Needs One-half-time
Audit Report Page
*Indicates field is required.

CCTR-4209
2191
City of Roseville
Placer

2.8792

2.4400

1.3420

2.1240

1.8000

0.9900
2,218 2,218 1.1800 2,617.2400
4,396 4,396 1.0000 4,396.0000
7,442 10 7,452 0.5500 4,098.6000

1.8172

1.5400

0.8470
41 41

Page 304 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services

Page 2 of 2 ends

Audit Report Page
Full Name of Contractor Contract Number
Column A
Cumulative FY
CDFS 9500
Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
Column D
Adjustment
Factor
Column E
Adjusted Days
per Audit
Dual Language Learner Full-time-plus
Dual Language Learner Full-time
Dual Language Learner One-half-time
At Risk of Abuse or Neglect Full-time-plus
At Risk of Abuse or Neglect Full-time
At Risk of Abuse or Neglect One-half-time
Severely Disabled Full-time-plus
Severely Disabled Full-time
Severely Disabled One-half-time
Total Certified Days of Enrollment
Days of Attendance
Enter the sum of Total Certified Days of Enrollment from all Form AUD 9500.1(s) into the AUD 9500 form, Section 2, Total Certified Days of Enrollment line.

Enter the sum of Days of Attendance from all From AUD 9500.1(s) and Form AUD 9500.2(s) into the AUD 9500 form, Section 2, Days of Attendance line.

City of Roseville CCTR-4209

1.2980

1.1000

0.5500

1.2980

1.1000

0.5500

2.2774

1.9300

1.0615
14,056 10 14,066 N/A 11,111.8400
14,056 10 14,066 N/A N/A
42 42

Page 305 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services AUD 9500.3 (6/25) Page 1 of 2

CHILD CARE AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS

NON-CERTIFIED CHILDREN DAYS OF ENROLLMENT
Full Name of Contractor*
Audit Report Page
Column A
Cumulative FY
CDFS 9500
Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
Column D
Adjustment
Factor
Column E
Adjusted Days
per Audit
Infants (up to 18 months) Full-time-plus
Infants (up to 18 months) Full-time
Infants (up to 18 months) One-half-time
Toddlers (18 up to 36 months) Full-time-plus
Toddlers (18 up to 36 months) Full-time
Toddlers (18 up to 36 months) One-half-time
Three Years and Older Full-time-plus
Three Years and Older Full-time
Three Years and Older One-half-time
Exceptional Needs Full-time-plus
Exceptional Needs Full-time
Exceptional Needs One-half-time
Service County*:

Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2025
Contract Number*
Vendor Code*
*Indicates field is required.

CCTR-4209
2191
City of Roseville
Placer
02 .8792
02 .4400
0 1.3420
02 .1240
01 .8000
0 0.9900
994 994 1.1800 1,172.9200
2,729 2,729 1.0000 2,729.0000
3,723 -3,723 0.5500

1.8172

1.5400

0.8470
43 43

Page 306 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services

Page 2 of 2 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social ServicesCalifornia Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services Audit Report Page
Full Name of Contractor Contract Number
Column A
Cumulative FY
CDFS 9500
Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
Column D
Adjustment
Factor
Column E
Adjusted Days
per Audit
Dual Language Learner Full-time-plus
Dual Language Learner Full-time
Dual Language Learner One-half-time
At Risk of Abuse or Neglect Full-time-plus
At Risk of Abuse or Neglect Full-time
At Risk of Abuse or Neglect One-half-time
Severely Disabled Full-time-plus
Severely Disabled Full-time
Severely Disabled One-half-time
Total Non-Certified Days of Enrollment
Enter the sum of Total Non-Certified Days of Enrollment from all Form AUD 9500.3(s) into the AUD 9500 form, Section 2, Total Non-Certified Days of Enrollment line.

City of Roseville CCTR-4209

1.2980

1.1000

0.5500

1.2980

1.1000

0.5500

2.2774

1.9300

1.0615
7,446 -3,723 3,723 N/A 3,901.9200
44 44

Page 307 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services AUD 9500-SSC (4/25) Page 1 of 13

AUDITED ENROLLMENT, ATTENDANCE AND FISCAL REPORT

FOR CHILD CARE AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS
(FOR SINGLE SERVICE COUNTY)
Audit Report Page
Full Name of Contractor*
Section 1 - Contractor Provided Services in Only One County

6HUYLFHVZHUHSURYLGHGWRFHUWL¿HGFKLOGUHQFKHFNWKLVER[DQGinclude pages 6-7.*

0HQWDOKHDOWKFRQVXOWDWLRQVHUYLFHVZHUHSURYLGHGWRFHUWL¿HGFKLOGUHQFKHFNWKLVER[DQGinclude pages 8-9.*

6HUYLFHVZHUHSURYLGHGWRQRQFHUWL¿HGFKLOGUHQFKHFNWKLVER[DQGinclude pages 10-11.*

0HQWDOKHDOWKFRQVXOWDWLRQVHUYLFHVZHUHSURYLGHGWRQRQFHUWL¿HGFKLOGUHQFKHFNWKLVER[DQGinclude pages 12-13.* Section 2 - Days of Enrollment, Attendance and Operation Column A
Cumulative FY
CDFS 9500
Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
Column D
Adjusted Days
per Audit
Total Certified Days of Enrollment
Total Certified Days of Enrollment with Mental Health Consultation Services Days of Attendance (including MHCS)
N/A
Total Non-Certified Days of Enrollment
Total Non-Certified Days of Enrollment with Mental Health Consultation Services Days of Operation*
N/A
Fiscal Year Ending* June 30, 2025
Contract Number*
Vendor Code*
*Indicates field is required.

CCTR-4209
2191
City of Roseville
14,056 10 14,066 11,494.8728
14,056 10 14,066
3,723 3,723 3,901.9200
247 247
45 45

Page 308 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services AUD 9500-SSC (4/25) Page 2 of 13
Audit Report Page
Full Name of Contractor Contract Number Column A
Cumulative FY
CDFS 9500
Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
Restricted Income - Child Nutrition Programs
Restricted Income - County Maintenance of Effort (WIC Section 10308.5) Restricted Income - American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA)
Restricted Income - Other:

Restricted Income - Subtotal
Transfer From Reserve
Waived Family Fees for Certified Children*
Family Fees Collected for Certified Children
Interest Earned on Child Development Apportionment Payments Unrestricted Income - Fees for Non-Certified Children
Unrestricted Income - Head Start
Unrestricted Income - Other:

Total Revenue (*Waived Family Fees Not Included)
Section 3 - Revenue
Comments:

City of Roseville CCTR-4209
46 22,648 22,648
Cost of Care Plus Payments 125,876 125,876
22,648 125,876 148,524
0 158,205 158,205
182,529 125,876 308,405
1,676 1,676
46

Page 309 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services AUD 9500-SSC (4/25) Page 3 of 13
Audit Report Page
Full Name of Contractor Contract Number Approved Indirect Cost Rate:

126833/(0(17$/5(9(18((;3(16(6&KHFNWKLVER[DQGRPLWSDJH Column A
Cumulative FY
CDFS 9500
Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
Direct Payments to Providers (FCCH only)
1000 Certificated Salaries
2000 Classified Salaries
3000 Employee Benefits
%RRNVDQG6XSSOLHV
6HUYLFHVDQG2WKHU2SHUDWLQJ([SHQVHV
6100/6200 Other Approved Capital Outlay
6400 New Equipment (program-related)
6500 Equipment Replacement (program-related)
Depreciation or Use Allowance
6WDUWXS([SHQVHV
VHUYLFHOHYHOH[HPSWLRQ

Budget Impasse Credit
Indirect Costs (include in Total Administrative Cost)
Total Reimbursable Expenses
7 RWDO$GPLQLVWUDWLYH&RVW
LQFOXGHGLQ6HFWLRQDERYH

7 RWDO6WDII7UDLQLQJ&RVW
LQFOXGHGLQ6HFWLRQDERYH

Section 4 - Reimbursable Expenses
City of Roseville CCTR-4209
404,815 404,815
237,917 237,917
10,848 10,848
116,402 116,402
769,982 769,982
291,174 291,174
47 47

Page 310 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services AUD 9500-SSC (4/25) Page 4 of 13
Audit Report Page
Full Name of Contractor Contract Number Column A
Cumulative FY
CDFS 9500
Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
Enhancement Funding
Other:

Other:

Total Supplemental Revenue
Column A
Cumulative FY
CDFS 9500
Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
1000 Certificated Salaries
2000 Classified Salaries
3000 Employee Benefits
%RRNVDQG6XSSOLHV
6HUYLFHVDQG2WKHU2SHUDWLQJ([SHQVHV
6000 Equipment / Capital Outlay
Depreciation or Use Allowance
Indirect Costs
1RQ5HLPEXUVDEOH6XSSOHPHQWDO([SHQVHV
Total Supplemental Expenses
Section 5 - Supplemental Revenue
Section 6 - Supplemental Expenses
City of Roseville CCTR-4209
48 48

Page 311 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services AUD 9500-SSC (4/25) Page 5 of 13
Audit Report Page
Full Name of Contractor Contract Number Column A
Cumulative FY
CDFS 9500
Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
Total Certified Days of Enrollment (including MHCS)
Days of Operation
Days of Attendance (including MHCS)
Restricted Program Income
Transfer from Reserve
Family Fees Collected for Certified Children
Interest Earned on Child Development Apportionment Payments Direct Payments to Providers
6WDUWXS([SHQVHV
VHUYLFHOHYHOH[HPSWLRQ

7 RWDO5HLPEXUVDEOH([SHQVHV
Total Administrative Cost
Total Staff Training Cost
1RQ5HLPEXUVDEOH
6WDWHXVHRQO\

N/A N/A
Section 7 - Summary
Total Certified Adjusted Days of Enrollment (including MHCS) Total Non-Certified Adjusted Days of Enrollment (including MHCS) Independent auditor’s assurances on agency’s compliance with contract funding terms and conditions and program requirements fo r programs that WUDQVIHUUHGWRWKH&DOLIRUQLD'HSDUWPHQWRI6RFLDO6HUYLFHVRQ-XO\SXUVXDQWWR:,&6HFWLRQ E

(OLJLELOLW\HQUROOPHQWDQGDWWHQGDQFHUHFRUGVDUHEHLQJPDLQWDLQHGDVUHTXLUHG VHOHFW<(6RU12IURPWKHGURSGRZQER[

5HLPEXUVDEOHH[SHQVHVFODLPHGRQSDJHDUHHOLJLEOHIRUUHLPEX UVHPHQWUHDVRQDEOHQHFHVVDU\DQGDGHTXDWHO\ VXSSRUWHG
VHOHFW<(6RU12IURPWKHGURSGRZQER[

,QFOXGHDQ\FRPPHQWVLQWKHFRPPHQWVER[RQSDJH,IQHFHVVDU\DWWDFKDGGLWLRQDOVKHHWVWRH[SODLQDGMXVWPHQWV City of Roseville CCTR-4209
14,056 10 14,066
247 247
14,056 10 14,066
22,648 125,876 148,524
1,676 1,676
769,982 769,982
291,174 291,174
11,494.8728
3,901.9200
Yes
Yes
49 49

Page 312 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services AUD 9500-SSC (4/25) Page 6 of 13
Full Name of Contractor Contract Number Service County:*
Column A
Cumulative FY
CDFS 9500
Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
Column D
Adjustment
Factor
Column E
Adjusted Days
per Audit
Infants (up to 18 months) Full-time-plus
Infants (up to 18 months) Full-time
Infants (up to 18 months) One-half-time
Toddlers (18 up to 36 months) Full-time-plus
Toddlers (18 up to 36 months) Full-time
Toddlers (18 up to 36 months) One-half-time
Three Years and Older Full-time-plus
Three Years and Older Full-time
Three Years and Older One-half-time
([FHSWLRQDO1HHGV)XOOWLPHSOXV
([FHSWLRQDO1HHGV)XOOWLPH
([FHSWLRQDO1HHGV2QHKDOIWLPH
Audit Report Page

CHILD CARE AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS

CERTIFIED CHILDREN DAYS OF ENROLLMENT AND ATTENDANCE
*Indicates field is required.

City of Roseville CCTR-4209

2.8792

2.4400

1.4674

2.1240

1.8000

1.0825
2,218 2,218 1.1800 2,617.2400
4,396 4,396 1.0000 4,396.0000
7,442 10 7,452 0.6014 4,481.6328

1.8172

1.5400

0.9262
50 50

Page 313 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services AUD 9500-SSC (4/25) Page 7 of 13
Full Name of Contractor Contract Number Audit Report Page
Column A
Cumulative FY
CDFS 9500
Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
Column D
Adjustment
Factor
Column E
Adjusted Days
per Audit
Dual Language Learner Full-time-plus
Dual Language Learner Full-time
Dual Language Learner One-half-time
$W5LVNRI$EXVHRU1HJOHFW)XOOWLPHSOXV
$W5LVNRI$EXVHRU1HJOHFW)XOOWLPH
$W5LVNRI$EXVHRU1HJOHFW2QHKDOIWLPH
6HYHUHO\'LVDEOHG)XOOWLPHSOXV
6HYHUHO\'LVDEOHG)XOOWLPH
6HYHUHO\'LVDEOHG2QHKDOIWLPH
Total Certified Days of Enrollment
Days of Attendance*
,IQRVHUYLFHVZHUHSURYLGHGWRFHUWLILHGFKLOGUHQRPLWSDJHV *Indicates field is required for Days of Attendance.

City of Roseville CCTR-4209

1.2980

1.1000

0.6014

1.2980

1.1000

0.6014

2.2774

1.9300

1.1607
14,056 10 14,066 N/A 11,494.8728
14,056 10 14,066 N/A N/A
51 51

Page 314 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services AUD 9500-SSC (4/25) Page 8 of 13
Full Name of Contractor Contract Number Audit Report Page
Column A
Cumulative FY
CDFS
9500MHCS
Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
Column D
Adjustment
Factor
Column E
Adjusted Days
per Audit
Infants (up to 18 months) Full-time-plus
Infants (up to 18 months) Full-time
Infants (up to 18 months) One-half-time
Toddlers (18 up to 36 months) Full-time-plus
Toddlers (18 up to 36 months) Full-time
Toddlers (18 up to 36 months) One-half-time
Three Years and Older Full-time-plus
Three Years and Older Full-time
Three Years and Older One-half-time
([FHSWLRQDO1HHGV)XOOWLPHSOXV
([FHSWLRQDO1HHGV)XOOWLPH
([FHSWLRQDO1HHGV2QHKDOIWLPH
Service County:*

CHILD CARE AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS CERTIFIED CHILDREN RECEIVING MENTAL

HEALTH CONSULTATION SERVICES DAYS OF ENROLLMENT AND ATTENDANCE *Indicates field is required.

City of Roseville CCTR-4209

2.9792

2.5400

1.5674

2.2240

1.9000

1.1825

1.2800

1.1000

0.7014

1.9172

1.6400

1.0262
52 52

Page 315 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services AUD 9500-SSC (4/25) Page 9 of 13
Full Name of Contractor Contract Number Column A
Cumulative FY
CDFS
9500MHCS
Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
Column D
Adjustment
Factor
Column E
Adjusted Days
per Audit
Dual Language Learner Full-time-plus
Dual Language Learner Full-time
Dual Language Learner One-half-time
$W5LVNRI$EXVHRU1HJOHFW)XOOWLPHSOXV
$W5LVNRI$EXVHRU1HJOHFW)XOOWLPH
$W5LVNRI$EXVHRU1HJOHFW2QHKDOIWLPH
6HYHUHO\'LVDEOHG)XOOWLPHSOXV
6HYHUHO\'LVDEOHG)XOOWLPH
6HYHUHO\'LVDEOHG2QHKDOIWLPH

TOTAL CERTIFIED DAYS OF ENROLLMENT WITH

MENTAL HEALTH CONSULTATION SERVICES
DAYS OF ATTENDANCE*
Audit Report Page
,IQRPHQWDOKHDOWKFRQVXOWDWLRQVHUYLFHVZHUHSURYLGHGWRFHUWLILHGFKLOGUHQRPLWSDJHV
*Indicates field is required for Days of Attendance.

City of Roseville CCTR-4209

1.3980

1.2000

0.7014

1.3980

1.2000

0.7014

2.3774

2.0300

1.2607
N/A

N/A N/A
53 53

Page 316 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services AUD 9500-SSC (4/25) Page 10 of 13
Full Name of Contractor Contract Number Column A
Cumulative FY
CDFS 9500
Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
Column D
Adjustment
Factor
Column E
Adjusted Days
per Audit
Infants (up to 18 months) Full-time-plus
Infants (up to 18 months) Full-time
Infants (up to 18 months) One-half-time
Toddlers (18 up to 36 months) Full-time-plus
Toddlers (18 up to 36 months) Full-time
Toddlers (18 up to 36 months) One-half-time
Three Years and Older Full-time-plus
Three Years and Older Full-time
Three Years and Older One-half-time
([FHSWLRQDO1HHGV)XOOWLPHSOXV
([FHSWLRQDO1HHGV)XOOWLPH
([FHSWLRQDO1HHGV2QHKDOIWLPH
Service County:*

CHILD CARE AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS

NON-CERTIFIED CHILDREN DAYS OF ENROLLMENT
Audit Report Page
*Indicates field is required.

City of Roseville CCTR-4209

2.8792

2.4400

1.4674

2.1240

1.8000

1.0825
994 994 1.1800 1,172.9200
994 1,735 2,729 1.0000 2,729.0000
2,729 -2,729 0.6014

1.8172

1.5400

0.9262
54 54

Page 317 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services AUD 9500-SSC (4/25) Page 11 of 13
Full Name of Contractor Contract Number Column A
Cumulative FY
CDFS 9500
Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
Column D
Adjustment
Factor
Column E
Adjusted Days
per Audit
Dual Language Learner Full-time-plus
Dual Language Learner Full-time
Dual Language Learner One-half-time
$W5LVNRI$EXVHRU1HJOHFW)XOOWLPHSOXV
$W5LVNRI$EXVHRU1HJOHFW)XOOWLPH
$W5LVNRI$EXVHRU1HJOHFW2QHKDOIWLPH
6HYHUHO\'LVDEOHG)XOOWLPHSOXV
6HYHUHO\'LVDEOHG)XOOWLPH
6HYHUHO\'LVDEOHG2QHKDOIWLPH
Total Non-Certified Days of Enrollment
Audit Report Page
,IQRVHUYLFHVZHUHSURYLGHGWRQRQFHUWLILHGFKLOGUHQRPLWSDJHV City of Roseville CCTR-4209

1.2980

1.1000

0.6014

1.2980

1.1000

0.6014

2.2774

1.9300

1.1607
3,723 3,723 N/A 3,901.9200
55 55

Page 318 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services AUD 9500-SSC (4/25) Page 12 of 13
Full Name of Contractor Contract Number Column A
Cumulative FY
CDFS
9500MHCS
Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
Column D
Adjustment
Factor
Column E
Adjusted Days
per Audit
Infants (up to 18 months) Full-time-plus
Infants (up to 18 months) Full-time
Infants (up to 18 months) One-half-time
Toddlers (18 up to 36 months) Full-time-plus
Toddlers (18 up to 36 months) Full-time
Toddlers (18 up to 36 months) One-half-time
Three Years and Older Full-time-plus
Three Years and Older Full-time
Three Years and Older One-half-time
([FHSWLRQDO1HHGV)XOOWLPHSOXV
([FHSWLRQDO1HHGV)XOOWLPH
([FHSWLRQDO1HHGV2QHKDOIWLPH
Service County:*

CHILD CARE AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS NON-CERTIFIED CHILDREN RECEIVING

MENTAL HEALTH CONSULTATION SERVICES DAYS OF ENROLLMENT
Audit Report Page
*Indicates field is required.

City of Roseville CCTR-4209

2.9792

2.5400

1.5674

2.2240

1.9000

1.1825

1.2800

1.1000

0.7014

1.9172

1.6400

1.0262
56 56

Page 319 of 1141 ends

California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services AUD 9500-SSC (4/25) Page 13 of 13
,IQRPHQWDOKHDOWKFRQVXOWDWLRQVHUYLFHVZHUHSURYLGHGWRQRQFHUWLILHGFKLOGUHQRPLWSDJHV Full Name of Contractor Contract Number Column A
Cumulative FY
CDFS
9500MHCS
Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
Cumulative
per Audit
Column D
Adjustment
Factor
Column E
Adjusted Days
per Audit
Dual Language Learner Full-time-plus
Dual Language Learner Full-time
Dual Language Learner One-half-time
$W5LVNRI$EXVHRU1HJOHFW)XOOWLPHSOXV
$W5LVNRI$EXVHRU1HJOHFW)XOOWLPH
$W5LVNRI$EXVHRU1HJOHFW2QHKDOIWLPH
6HYHUHO\'LVDEOHG)XOOWLPHSOXV
6HYHUHO\'LVDEOHG)XOOWLPH
6HYHUHO\'LVDEOHG2QHKDOIWLPH

TOTAL NON-CERTIFIED DAYS OF ENROLLMENT WITH

MENTAL HEALTH CONSULTATION SERVICES
Audit Report Page
City of Roseville CCTR-4209

1.3980

1.2000

0.7014

1.3980

1.2000

0.7014

2.3774

2.0300

1.2607
N/A
57 57

Page 320 of 1141 ends

AUD 9530A (6/25)
California Health & Human Services Agency California Department of Social Services

AUDITED RESERVE ACCOUNT

ACTIVITY REPORT
Fiscal Year End
Reserve Account Type
Vendor Code
Full Name of Contractor
Section 1 - Prior Year Reserve Account Activity

1. Beginning Balance (2023–24 AUD 9530A Ending Balance)

2. Plus Transfers to Reserve Account: Per 2023–24 Post-Audit CDFS 9530 Contract No.

Contract No.

Total Transferred from 2023–24 Contracts to Reserve

3. Less Excess Reserve to be Billed

4. Ending Balance per 2023-24 Post-Audit CDFS 9530
Section 2 - Current Year (2024–25) Reserve Account Activity Column A
CDFS
9530A
Column B
Audit
Adjustments
Column C
per Audit

5. Plus Interest Earned This Year on Reserve:

6. Less Transfers to Contracts from Reserve:

Contract No.

Total Transferred to Contracts from Reserve Account

7. Ending Balance on June 30, 2025
COMMENTS - If necessary, attach additional sheets to explain adjustments. *Indicates field is required.

Audit Report Page

Page 1 of 1 ends

June 30, 2025
Center-Based
2191
City of Roseville
76,025
CCTR3199 1,261
1,261
77,286
1,903 1,903
0 0
0 0
0 0
00 0
79,189 0 79,189
58 58

Page 321 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Notes to the Supplemental Information
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025

In accordance with the applicable requirements from the Funding Terms & Conditions:

Interest expense is only allowable as a reimbursable cost in certain circumstances when it has been preapproved by the administering state department or relates to the lease purchase, acquisition, or repair or renovation of early learning and care facilities owned or leased by the contractor. Allowable interest expense of $50,551 relating to the advance between the fund and the City (Note 4).

Bad debt expense is unallowable unless it relates to uncollected family fees where documentation of adequate collection attempts exists. No bad debt expense was claimed to a child care and development contract for the year ended June 30, 2025.
59

Page 322 of 1141 ends

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
60

Page 323 of 1141 ends

LSLCPAS.COM

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE

REQUIREMENTS AND ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER COMPLIANCE

To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
City of Roseville, California

Opinion

We have audited the City of Roseville’s (the City) School-Age Child Care Program’s (the Program) compliance with the requirements described in the CDSS Audit Guide (the Guide) issued by the California Department of Social Services, August 2025, for the year ended June 30, 2025.

In our opinion, the City complied, in all material respects, with the compliance requirements referred to above that are applicable to the Program for the year ended June 30, 2025.

Basis for Opinion

We conducted our audit of compliance in accordance with auditin g standards generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAS); and the standards applicable t o financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards , issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; and the Guide. Our responsibilities under those standards are further described in the Auditors’ Responsibilities for the Audit of Compliance section of our report. We are required to be independent of the City and the Program and to meet our other ethical responsibilities, in accordance with relevant ethical requirements relating to our audit. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinion. Our audit does not provide a legal determination of the City's compliance with the compliance requirements referred to above.

Responsibilities of Management for Compliance

Management is responsible for compliance with the requirements referred to above and for the design, implementation, and maintenance of effective internal control over compliance with the requirements of laws, statutes, regulations, rules, and provisions of contracts or grant agreements applicable to the City’s government programs.

Auditors’ Responsibilities for the Audit of Compliance

Our responsibility is to express opinions on compliance with the requirements described in the Guide based on our audit. We conducted our audit of compliance in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America; the standards applicable to financial audits contained in the Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; and the Guide. Those standards and the Guide require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether noncompliance with the types of compliance requirements referred to above that could have a material effect on the City’s Program. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence about the City’s compliance with those requirements and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Misstatements are considered material if there is a substantial likelihood that, individually or in the aggregate, they would influence the judgment made by a reasonable user based on the financial statements.

Page 324 of 1141 ends

To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
School-Age Child Care Program
City of Roseville, California

In performing an audit in accordance with GAAS, Government Auditing Standards, and the Guide, we:

• Exercise professional judgment and maintain professional skepticism throughout the audit.

• Identify and assess the risks of material noncompliance, wheth er due to fraud or error, and design and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks. Such proced ures include examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the City's compliance with the compliance requirements referred to above and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.

• Obtain an understanding of the City's internal control over co mpliance relevant to the audit in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances and to test and report on internal control over compliance in accordance with the Guide, but not for the purpos e of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City's internal control over compliance. Accordingly, no such opinion is expressed.

We are required to communicate with those charged with governance regarding, among other matters, the planned scope and timing of the audit, and any significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in internal control over compliance that we identified during the audit.

Report on Internal Control Over Compliance

In planning and performing our audit of the financial statement s, we considered the City’s internal control over the Program’s financial reporting (internal control) as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control.

A deficiency in internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a control over compliance does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, noncompliance on a timely basis. A material weakness in internal control over compliance is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies in internal control over complia nce, such that there is a reasonable possibility that material noncompliance with a compliance requirement will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis. A significant deficiency in internal control over compliance is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over compliance that is less severe than a material weakness in internal control over compliance, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance.

Our consideration of internal control was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal contr ol that might be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies and therefore, material weaknesses or significant deficiencies may exist that were not identified. Given these limitations, during our audit we did not identify any deficiencies in internal control that we consider to be material weaknesses. We identified a certain deficiency in internal control, described in the accompanying schedule of findings and responses as item 2025-001 that we consider to be a significant deficiency.

Report on Compliance and Other Matters

As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the Program’s financial statements are free from material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the financial statements. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed ins tances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards and which are described in the accompanying schedule of findings and questioned costs.

Our audit was not designed for the purpose of expressing an opi nion on the effectiveness of internal control over compliance. Accordingly, no such opinion is expressed.
61

Page 325 of 1141 ends

To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
School-Age Child Care Program
City of Roseville, California

City of Roseville, California’s Response to Findings

Government Auditing Standards requires the auditor to perform limited procedures on the City ’s response to the findings identified in our audit and described in the accompany ing schedule of findings and responses. The City’s response was not subjected to the other auditing procedures app lied in the audit of the financial statements and, accordingly, we express no opinion on the response.

The purpose of this report on internal control over compliance is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over compliance and the results of that testing based on the requirements of the CDSS Audit Guide issued by the California Department of Social Services, August 2025. Accordingly, this communication is not suitable for any other purpose.

Sacramento, California
November 12, 2025
62

Page 326 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Summary of Findings and Questioned Costs
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025

Reference Number: 2025-001

Improper Attendance Records
Significant Deficiency/Noncompliance

Condition
LSL observed three instances of selected children, where physical attendance records examined did not agree to the days reported in the monthly attendance summary report.

Criteria
Per the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) General Child Care and Development (CCTR) Program Requirements, FY 2024-25, contractors must comply with the following attendance recordkeeping standards:

Daily Attendance Records (Section IX.A, Plan for Provider Reimbursement; FTC, Section IV, Paragraph C, Enrollment and Attendance Accounting)
- Contractors are required to maintain daily records of each ch ild’s attendance, including sign-in and sign-out times for every day that services are provided.

Parent/Guardian Verification (Section IX.A, Plan for Provider Reimbursement) - Attendance records must be ve rified by the parent or guardian ’s signature, attesting under penalty of perjury to the accuracy of the information.

Timely Submission and Retention (Section V, Family Data File and Documentation; Section IX.B, Records on File Concerning Licensed Service Providers)
- Contractors must submit attendance records as required by CDS S and retain them in the family data file for audit and review purposes.

Compliance with Payment and Reimbursement (Section IX.A, Plan for Provider Reimbursement) - For Family Child Care Home Education Network providers, reimb ursement is contingent upon the submission of complete and accurate daily sign-in and sign-out sheets. Payments must not be withheld for records that are complete, and procedures must be in place to resolve discrepancies.

Documentation Standards (Section V, Family Data File and Documentation) - All attendance documentation must be sufficient to support eligibility, need, and payment for services rendered, and must be maintained in accordance with CDSS regulations.

Failure to maintain accurate and complete attendance records constitutes noncompliance with CDSS requirements and may result in questioned costs, delayed reimbursements, and other administrative actions.

Cause
Staff members responsible for maintaining attendance records en tered incorrect attendance information. These errors were not identified or corrected as part of the review process.

Effect or Potential Effect
The City’s failure to record attendance accurately for the time period of attendance by children resulted in noncompliance with federal regulations, potentially leading to questioned costs, delays in provision, and an inability to timely identify inaccuracies for attendance.

Recommendation
We recommend that the City implement review procedures over recording attendance records to streamline the process for accurate attendance recording to ensure that future errors do not occur.

Management’s Response
The City agrees with the finding. The City has implemented addi tional review procedures, including monthly spot checks of attendance records with supervisors and dual review of quarterly reports prior to submission. These actions will strengthen oversight and ensure compliance with reporting requirements.

Page 327 of 1141 ends

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

SCHOOL-AGE CHILD CARE PROGRAM
Summary of Prior Year Findings and Questioned Costs
For the Year Ended June 30, 2024
No findings were reported in the prior year.
64

Page 328 of 1141 ends

LSLCPAS.COM
INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS’ REPORT ON AGREED-UPON

PROCEDURES APPLIED TO APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT WORKSHEETS
To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
City of Roseville, California
We have performed the procedures enumerated below on the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet No. 6 (or other alternative computation) of the City of Roseville, California, for the year ended June 30, 2026.

These procedures are the responsibility of the City, which were agreed to by the City of Roseville and the League of California Cities (as presented in the publication entitled Agreed-Upon Proc edures Applied to the Appropriations Limitation Prescribed by Article XIII-B of the California Cons titution), were performed solely to assist the City of Roseville in meeting the requi rements of Section 1.5 of Article XIII-B of the California Constitution. The City of Roseville's manag ement is responsible for the Appropriations Limit Worksheet No. 6 (or other alternative computation).

The City has agreed to and acknowledged that the proced ures performed are appropriate to meet the intended purpose of recomputing the Appropriations Limit Worksheet No. 6 (or other alternative computation). This report may not be suitable for any other purpose. The procedures performed may not address all the items of interest to a user of this report and may not meet the needs of all us ers of this report and, as such, users are responsible for determining whether the procedures performed are appropriate for their purposes.

The procedures performed and our findings were as follows:

1. We obtained the completed Worksheets No. 1 thr ough No. 7 (or other alternative computations) and compared the limit and annual adjustment factors incl uded in those worksheets to the limit and annual adjustment factors that were adopted by resolution of t he City Council. We also compared the population and inflation options included in the aforementioned worksheets to those that were selected by a recorded vote of the City Council.

Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.

2. For the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet No. 6, we multiplied line A, last year's limit, by line D, ratio of change, and compared the resulting amount to line E, this year's limit.

Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.

3. We compared the current year information presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet No. 6 to the other worksheets described in No. 1 above.

Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.

4. We compared the prior year appropriations limit presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet No. 6 to the prior year appropriations limit adopted by the City Council for the prior year.

Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures.

Page 329 of 1141 ends

To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
City of Roseville, California

We were engaged by the City to perform this agreed-upon procedures engagement and conducted our engagement in accordance with attestation standards es tablished by the AICPA. We were not engaged to and did not conduct an examination or review engagement, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion or conclusion, respectively, on the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet No. 6 (or other alternative computation). Accordingly, we do not expr ess such an opinion or conclusion. Had we performed additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you.

We are required to be independent of the City and to meet our other ethical responsibilities, in accordance with the relevant ethical requirements related to our agreed-upon procedures engagement.

This report is intended solely for the information of the City Council and management of the City of Roseville and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than these specified parties.

Irvine, California
June 12, 2025

Page 330 of 1141 ends

To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
City of Roseville, California

CITY OF ROSEVILLE
2025-2026

APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT CALCULATION

A. 2024-2025 APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT: $243,892,865

B. 2025-2026 CHANGE IN PER CAPITA
PERSONAL INCOME: 6.44%

C. 2025-2026 CHANGE IN POPULATION: 1.0076%

D. RATIO OF CHANGE (1.0644 X 1.0076): 1.0725

E. 2025-2026 APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT: $261,575,098
($243,892,865 X 1.0725)

Page 331 of 1141 ends

LSLCPAS.COM
December 16, 2025

To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
City of Roseville, California

We have audited the financial statements of the governmental ac tivities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of Roseville, California (hereafter, the City) for the year ended June 30, 2025. Professional standards require that w e provide you with information about our responsibilities under generally accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards as well as certain information related to the planned scope and timing of our audi t. We have communicated such information in our letter to you dated April 30, 2025. Professional standards also require that we communicate to you the following information related to our audit.

Significant Audit Matters

Qualitative Aspects of Accounting Practices

Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. The significant accounting policies used by the City are described in Note 1 to the financial statements. As described in Note 1 to the financial statements, the City changed accounting policies related to com pensated absences by adopting Statement of Governmental Accounting Standards (GASB Statement) No. 101, Compensated Absences, in fiscal year 2025.

Accordingly, the cumulative effect of the accounting change as of the beginning of the year is reported in the Statement of Activities. We noted no transactions entered into by the City during the year for which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. All significant transactions have been recognized in the financial statements in the proper period.

Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial stat ements prepared by management and are based on management’s knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future events.

Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from those expected. The most sensitive estimates affecting the City’s financial statements were:

Management’s estimates of the net pension liability, net other post-employment benefits liability, and claims and judgments liability are based on actuarial valuations. We evalu ated the methods, assumptions, and data used to develop the net pension liability, net other post-employment benefits liability, and claims and judgments liability in determining that they are reasonable in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole.

The financial statement disclosures are neutral, consistent, and clear.

Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit

We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing and completing our audit.

Page 332 of 1141 ends

To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
City of Roseville, California

Corrected and Uncorrected Misstatements

Professional standards require u s to accumulate all known and l ikely misstatements identified during the audit, other than those that are clearly trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management.

Management has corrected all such misstatements. In addition, none of the misstatements detected as a result of audit procedures and corrected by management were material, eit her individually or in the aggregate, to each opinion unit’s financial statements taken as a whole.

Disagreements with Management

For purposes of this letter, a disagreement with management is a financial accounting, reporting, or auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our s atisfaction, that could be sign ificant to the financial statements or the auditors’ report. We are pleased to report that no such disagreements arose during the course of our audit.

Management Representations

We have requested certain representations from management that are included in the management representation letter dated December 16, 2025.

Management Consultations with Other Independent Accountants

In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting matters, similar to obtaining a “second opinion” on certain situations. If a consultation involves application of an accounting principle to the City’s financial statements or a determination of the type of auditor’s opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professi onal standards require the con sulting accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant has all the relevant facts. To our knowledg e, there were no such consultations with other accountants.

Other Audit Findings or Issues

We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing standards, with management each year prior to retention as the City’s audi tors. However, these discussions occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our retention.

Other Matters

We applied certain limited procedures to management’s discussio n and analysis, the budgetary comparison schedules for the General Fund and major special revenue funds, the required pension and other post-employment benefits schedules, and the modifi ed approach to reporting stre et pavement costs, which are required supplementary information (RSI ) that supplements the basic fina ncial statements. Our procedures consisted of inquiries of management regarding the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We did not audit the RSI and do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the RSI.

We were engaged to report on the combining and individual fund statements and schedules which accompany the financial statements but are not RSI. With respect to this supp lementary information, we made certain inquiries of management and evaluated the form, content, and methods of prep aring the information to determine that the information complies with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, the method of preparing it has not changed from the prior period, and the inf ormation is appropriate and complete in relation to our audit of the financial statements. We compared and reconciled the supplementary information to the underlying accounting records used to prepare the financial statements or to the financial statements themselves.

Page 333 of 1141 ends

To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
City of Roseville, California

We were not engaged to report on the introductory and statistical sections of the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report, which accompany the financial statements but are not RSI. Such information has not been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements, and accordingly, we do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on it.

Future GASB Pronouncements

The following Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) pronouncements will be effective for the following fiscal years’ audits and should be reviewed for proper implementation by management:

Fiscal Year 2025-2026

GASB Statement No. 103, Financial Reporting Model Improvements.

GASB Statement No. 104, Disclosure of Certain Capital Assets.

Future Projects

Comprehensive Project, Revenue and Expense Recognition.

Major Project, Going Concern Uncertainties and Severe Financial Stress.

Major Project, Infrastructure Assets.

Practice Issue, Subsequent Events.

Restriction on Use

This information is intended solely for the information and use of City Council and management of the City and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than these specified parties.

Very truly yours,

Sacramento, California

Page 334 of 1141 ends

LSLCPAS.COM

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING AND ON

COMPLIANCE AND OTHER MATTERS BASED ON AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED IN

ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS

To the Honorable Members of the City Council
City of Roseville, California

We have audited, in accordance with the auditing standards gene rally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund i nformation of the City of Roseville, California (hereafter, the City), as of and for the year ended June 30, 2025, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the City’s basic financial statemen ts, and have issued our report thereon dated December 16, 2025.

Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

In planning and performing our audit of the financial statement s, we considered the City’s internal control over financial reporting (internal control) as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control.

A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allo w management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, misstatements, on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the entity’s financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely b asis. A significant deficiency is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control that is less s evere than a material weakness, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance.

Our consideration of internal control was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal contr ol that might be material weaknesses or, significant deficiencies. Given these limitations, during our audit we did not identify any deficiencies in internal control that we consider to be material weaknesses. However, material weaknesses or significant deficiencies may exist that were not identified.

Report on Compliance and Other Matters

As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City’s financial statements are free from material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and ma terial effect on the financial statements.

However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisio ns was not an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards.

Page 335 of 1141 ends

To the Honorable Members of the City Council
City of Roseville, California

Purpose of This Report

The purpose of this report is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the e ffectiveness of the City’s internal control or on compliance. This report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering the City’s internal control and compliance. Acco rdingly, this communication is not suitable for any other purpose.

Sacramento, California
December 16, 2025

Page 336 of 1141 ends

City Council
Communication
Meeting Date: 2/4/2026
Item #: VII.5
File #: 0103-29-01 & 0206-
03-01 & 0201-01
Item ID: 2025-964

Title: Roseville Finance Authority - Budget Adjustment
Contact: Jeannine Thrash 916-774-5473 [email protected]

SUMMARY
Staff recommends approval of a Roseville Finance Authority budget adjustment. This budget adjustment appropriates $53,401 for the Crocker Ranch and Stoneridge bonded community facilities districts and transfers $434,555 to the Citywide Park Fund to support the loan repayment of the Harry Crabb Park Phase 2 project. There is sufficient fund balance in the fund to accommodate the budget adjustment.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that City Council adopt a resolution to approve the attached Roseville Finance Authority budget adjustment.

BACKGROUND
Each year, interest savings from a prior Roseville Finance Authority (RFA) bond refunding are allocated to the Crocker Ranch and Stoneridge bonded community facilities districts (CFDs), with the remaining savings directed to parks improvements. This budget adjustment appropriates $53,401 for the Crocker Ranch and Stoneridge bonded CFDs and transfers $434,555 to the Citywide Park Fund to support the internal loan repayment for the Harry Crabb Park Phase 2 project.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is sufficient fund balance in the fund to accommodate the budget adjustment.

CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLAN/OVERARCHING GOALS

2. Remain fiscally responsible in a changing world

Respectfully Submitted,
Jeannine Thrash, Management Analyst

Scott Pettingell, Finance Director

Page 337 of 1141 ends

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution 26-2

REVIEWERS:

Jeannine Thrash, Finance Department Created/Initiated - 12/15/2025 Scott Pettingell, Finance Department - Budget Approved - 1/16/2026 Kelly Aye, City Attorney Department Approved - 1/22/2026 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Approved - 1/22/2026 Ryan DeVore, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 1/22/2026 Dennis Kauffman, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 1/22/2026 Michelle Sheidenberger, City Attorney Department Approved - 1/23/2026 Dominick Casey, City Clerk Department Approved - 1/27/2026 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Final Approval - 1/27/2026

Page 338 of 1141 ends

FINANCE AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE
RESOLUTION NO. 26-2
AUTHORIZING AMENDMENTS TO THE FY2025-26 BUDGET

WHEREAS, the Finance Authority of the City of Roseville desires to allocate interest savings from a prior Roseville Finance Authority rending to the Crocker Ranch and Stoneridge bonded Community Facilities Districts (CFD), with the remaining savings directed to the Citywide Park Fund to support the loan repayment of the Harry Crabb Park Phase 2 project as listed on the attached budget adjustment.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Finance Authority of the City of Roseville does hereby resolve that the Roseville Finance Authority Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget is hereby amended as listed on the attached budget adjustment.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Finance Authority of the City of Roseville this day of , 20 , by the following vote on roll call:

AYES AGENCY MEMBERS:

NOES AGENCY MEMBERS:

ABSENT AGENCY MEMBERS:

CHAIR

ATTEST:

Secretary

Page 339 of 1141 ends

REQUEST FOR BUDGET ADJUSTMENT
Updated 11/19/2025

Please complete the cells highlighted in yellow.

REQUESTER NAME & TITLE: FISCAL YEAR:

PREPARER NAME & TITLE: ORDINANCE:

DEPARTMENT/DIVISION:

EXPENDITURES/EXPENSES/TRANSFERS OUT
ACCOUNT STRING BUDGET ($)
Fund Account Center Project Adjustment DESCRIPTION
3541 5569 10001
53,401 Increase budget for RFA17A levy credits to Funds 7416,7420,7421 and 7422.
3541 6810 10001 434,555 Transfer out RFA17A surplus into Citywide Park Fund 3303 for loan payment (A42)

EXPENDITURES/EXPENSES/TRANSFERS OUT TOTAL 487,956

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

REVENUES/TRANSFERS IN TOTAL -

NET ADJUSTMENT 487,956

FUND BALANCE
ACCOUNT STRING BUDGET ($)
Fund Account Center Project Adjustment DESCRIPTION

3541

3601

00000

000000

(487,956) Decrease Roseville Finance Authority Capital Projects Fund Balance
3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
FUND BALANCE TOTAL (487,956)

Justification for Budget Adjustment:

The Finance department is requesting a budget adjustment to true up the RFA 17A surplus funds budgets. This budget adjustment also aligns budget to actuals for improved reporting and analysis.
2025-26
Jeannine Thrash, Management Analyst
Jeannine Thrash, Management Analyst
Finance Admin

Page 340 of 1141 ends

City Council
Communication
Meeting Date: 2/4/2026
Item #: VII.6
File #: 0200 & 0201-01
Item ID: 2025-965

Title: Fiscal Year 2025-26 - Budget Adjustments - Citywide Park & Recycled Water Construction Funds
Contact: Jeannine Thrash 916-774-5473 [email protected]

SUMMARY
Staff recommends approval of budget adjustments for the Citywide Park Fund and the Recycled Water Construction Fund. The proposed adjustments transfer funds into the Citywide Park Fund, reflecting savings from a prior Roseville Finance Authority refunding and increase revenues in the Recycled Water Construction Fund to recognize Community Facilities District funding received pursuant to developer agreement obligations. The recommended budget adjustments increase available fund balances through a transfer to the Citywide Park Fund of $434,555 and additional revenues into the Recycled Water Construction Fund totaling $154,380.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that City Council adopt an ordinance to approve the attached budget adjustments for the City Wide Park Fund and Recycled Water Construction Fund.

BACKGROUND
Staff recommends approval of budget adjustments for the Citywide Park Fund and the Recycled Water Construction Fund. The transfer into the Citywide Park Fund is tied to a prior Roseville Finance Authority bond refunding that generated savings now being used to help repay the loan for Harry Crabb Park Phase

2. The revenue adjustment in the Recycled Water Construction Fund reflects funding received through Community Facilities District developer agreement obligations.

FISCAL IMPACT
The recommended budget adjustments increase available fund balances through a transfer to the Citywide Park Fund of $434,555 and additional revenues into the Recycled Water Construction Fund totaling $154,380.

CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLAN/OVERARCHING GOALS

2. Remain fiscally responsible in a changing world

Page 341 of 1141 ends

Respectfully Submitted,
Jeannine Thrash, Management Analyst

Scott Pettingell, Finance Director

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Ordinance 7039

REVIEWERS:

Jeannine Thrash, Finance Department Created/Initiated - 12/15/2025 Scott Pettingell, Finance Department - Budget Approved - 1/16/2026 Kelly Aye, City Attorney Department Approved - 1/22/2026 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Approved - 1/22/2026 Ryan DeVore, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 1/22/2026 Dennis Kauffman, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 1/22/2026 Michelle Sheidenberger, City Attorney Department Approved - 1/22/2026 Dominick Casey, City Manager Department - City Manager Approved - 1/23/2026 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Final Approval - 1/23/2026

Page 342 of 1141 ends

ORDINANCE NO. 7039

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 adjustments.

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 , 2026, by the following vote on roll call:

AYES COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR
ATTEST:

City Clerk

Page 343 of 1141 ends

REQUEST FOR BUDGET ADJUSTMENT
Updated 11/19/2025

Please complete the cells highlighted in yellow.

REQUESTER NAME & TITLE: FISCAL YEAR:

PREPARER NAME & TITLE: ORDINANCE:

DEPARTMENT/DIVISION:

EXPENDITURES/EXPENSES/TRANSFERS OUT
ACCOUNT STRING BUDGET ($)
Fund Account Center Project Adjustment DESCRIPTION

EXPENDITURES/EXPENSES/TRANSFERS OUT TOTAL -

REVENUES/TRANSFERS IN
ACCOUNT STRING BUDGET ($)
Fund Account Center Project Adjustment DESCRIPTION
3303 4810 10001
434,555 Transfer from fund 3541 into Citywide Park Fund 3303 for loan payment (A42)

6240

4790

10001

154,380 Increase revenue into Fund 6240.Coming from funds 7431,7435,7436,7438,7439 and 7440 for DA obligation

REVENUES/TRANSFERS IN TOTAL 588,935

NET ADJUSTMENT (588,935)

FUND BALANCE
ACCOUNT STRING BUDGET ($)
Fund Account Center Project Adjustment DESCRIPTION
3303 3601 00000 000000 434,555 Increase City Wide Park Fund Balance 6240 3601 00000 000000 154,380 Increase Recycled Water Construction Fund Balance 3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
FUND BALANCE TOTAL 588,935

Justification for Budget Adjustment:

The Finance department is requesting a budget adjustment to true up the transfer amount into City wide Parks fund (3303) and the budget for the Recycled Water Construction fund (6240) which is receiving funds from CFDs for a DA obligation. This budget adjustment also aligns budget to actuals for improved reporting and analysis.
2025-26
Jeannine Thrash, Management Analyst
Jeannine Thrash, Management Analyst
Finance Admin

Page 344 of 1141 ends

City Council
Communication
Meeting Date: 2/4/2026
Item #: VII.7
File #: 0709-04 & 0214 &
0201-01
Item ID: 2025-982

Title: HOUSING AUTHORITY/CITY COUNCIL – Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention Program - Grant Agreement and Budget Adjustment Contact: Trisha Isom 916-746-1239 [email protected]

SUMMARY
Staff recommends approval of the Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention grant agreement with the Homeless Resource Council of the Sierras to utilize $110,000 in grant funds to stabilize housing for Emergency Housing Voucher (EHV) assisted households during the program wind-down period. Staff also recommends approval of a budget adjustment in the amount of $110,000 to extend EHV funding. This action will have no impact on the City’s General Fund.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a resolution to approve the Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention Program Grant Agreement between the Homeless Resource Council of the Sierras and the Roseville Housing Authority, and authorize the Roseville Housing Authority Executive Director to execute it; and

2. Adopt a resolution to approve the necessary budget adjustment in the amount of $110,000 to extend Emergency Housing Voucher (EHV) funding.

BACKGROUND
The California Interagency Council on Homelessness (CAL ICH) announced the availability of Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention Program, Round 5 (HHAP-5) grant funding in September of 2023.

HHAP-5 is a $1 billion block grant program authorized by section 17 of AB 129 (Health & Safety Code § 50230, et seq.), which was signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom on July 10, 2023. This grant was established for the purpose of organizing and deploying the full array of homelessness programs and resources comprehensively and effectively, and to sustain existing federal, state, and local investments towards long-term sustainability of housing and supportive services.

The Homeless Resource Council of the Sierras (HRCS) applied for and received HHAP-5 funds and subsequently released a Notice of Funding Availability in April 2025 to promote engagement between regional jurisdictions and non-profits to assist people experiencing homelessness in Placer and Nevada Counties. Applications for HHAP-5 were required to use a best-practices framework focused on moving homeless individuals and families into permanent housing and support the efforts of those individuals and families to maintain their permanent housing.

On June 20, 2025, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) issued Public and Indian Housing (PIH) Notice 2025-19 formally announcing the conclusion of Emergency Housing Voucher

Page 345 of 1141 ends

(EHV) funding and directing Public Housing Authorities (PHA) to begin transitioning EHV households into the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program. The EHV program was launched in 2021 under the American Rescue Plan Act to rapidly house individuals and families experiencing or at risk of homelessness, including those fleeing domestic violence, sexual assault, or human trafficking. At its peak, the program assisted nearly 70,000 households nationwide and contributed to an estimated 12 percent reduction in homelessness. Due to sustained high rental costs, EHV funding (originally anticipated to be available through 2030) is projected to be fully expended by the third quarter of 2026, placing assisted households at increased risk of housing instability.

With this notice in consideration, the Roseville Housing Authority (RHA) applied for $547,200 to stabilize housing for EHV assisted households during the program wind-down period. A fully funded award would have extended funding for EHV assisted households approximately one more year.

RHA was awarded a $110,000 HHAP-5 grant from HRCS.

RHA currently expends approximately $1,200 per month in Housing Assistance Payments for each Emergency Housing Voucher household. For the remaining 35 EHV participants, the $110,000 allocation will provide critical bridge funding to maintain housing stability during the program wind-down period. As regular Housing Choice Voucher and Mainstream funding and turnover vouchers become available in 2026, RHA will transition eligible EHV households to these ongoing programs, allowing assistance to extend beyond the initial bridge period and supporting continued housing stability for vulnerable residents.

The grant agreement requires one hundred percent of HHAP funds be expended by June 30, 2028.

FISCAL IMPACT
The recommended actions in this report do not require any General Fund resources. Funding the Emergency Housing Voucher program with this grant will provide housing stability and reduce instances and durations of homelessness in Roseville, thereby reducing indirect costs to the community as well.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) only applies to projects which have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. (CEQA Guidelines §15061(b)(3)).

CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLAN/OVERARCHING GOALS

1. Ensure a safe and healthy community

Respectfully Submitted,
Trisha Isom, Housing Manager

Melissa Anguiano, Economic Development Director

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution 26-1

2. HHAP-5 Contract

3. Resolution 26-2

Page 346 of 1141 ends

REVIEWERS:

Trisha Isom, Economic Development Department - Housing Created/Initiated - 1/2/2026 Trisha Isom, Economic Development Department - Housing Approved - 1/2/2026 Melissa Anguiano, Economic Development Department Approved - 1/5/2026 Kelly Aye, City Attorney Department Approved - 1/20/2026 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Approved - 1/21/2026 Ryan DeVore, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 1/22/2026 Dennis Kauffman, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 1/22/2026 Michelle Sheidenberger, City Attorney Department Approved - 1/26/2026 Dominick Casey, City Clerk Department Approved - 1/27/2026 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Final Approval - 1/27/2026

Page 347 of 1141 ends

1 HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE

RESOLUTION NO. 26-1

APPROVING A GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN HOMELESS RESOURCE

COUNCIL OF THE SIERRAS AND ROSEVILLE HOUSING AUTHORITY

WHEREAS, the Housing Authority of the City of Roseville has reviewed the proposed Grant Agreement between Homeless Resource Council of the Sierras and Roseville Housing Authority, for homeless prevention through the Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention Program Round Five.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Housing Authority of the City of Roseville does hereby approve said Grant Agreement and authorizes the Roseville Housing Authority Executive Director to execute it on behalf of the City of Roseville.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Housing Authority of the City of Roseville this ______ day of __________________, 2026, by the following vote on roll call:

AYES AUTHORITY MEMBERS:

NOES AUTHORITY MEMBERS:

ABSENT AUTHORITY MEMBERS:

______________________________

CHAIRMAN

_______________________
Secretary

Page 348 of 1141 ends

GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN HOMELESS RESOURCE COUNCIL OF THE SIERRAS AND ROSEVILLE HOUSING AUTHORITY FOR HOMELESS PREVENTION THROUGH THE HOMELESS HOUSING, ASSISTANCE, AND PREVENTION PROGRAM ROUND FIVE Contract#:CA515-HHAP5-0003

Page 349 of 1141 ends

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ARTICLE 1—PROJECT 3 SECTION 1: DEFINITIONS 3 SECTION 2: SCOPE OF WORK 4 A. Activities 4 B. Payment for Services 5 C. Performance Monitoring 6 SECTION 3: TERM OF AGREEMENT 6 SECTION 4: PROGRAM REPORTING 6 SECTION 5: CONTINUUM OF CARE REQUIREMENTS 7 SECTION 6: NOTICES 8 ARTICLE 2—FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 8 SECTION 1: PAYMENTS AND BUDGET 8 A. General Statement 8 B. Budget & Disbursement 8 C. Breach and Remedies 9 SECTION 2: DOCUMENTATION OF COSTS, FINANCIAL REPORTING, AND GENERAL CONDITIONS 9 SECTION 3: PROGRAM INCOME 11 SECTION 4: INELIGIBLE COSTS 11 SECTION 5: GRANTEE RESPONSIBILITY 11 SECTION 5: SEVERABILITY 11 SECTION 6: DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE CERTIFICATION 11 SECTION 7: ENTIRE AGREEMENT 12 SECTION 8: NO THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARIES 12 SECTION 9: ATTORNEYS FEES 12 SECTION 10: GOVERNING LAW AND JURISDICTION 12 EXHIBIT A: PROJECT BUDGET 14 EXHIBIT B: PROJECT TIMELINE 15

ROSEVILLE HOUSING AUTHORITY Page 2 of 15 Contract# CA515-HHAP5-0003

Page 350 of 1141 ends

GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN HOMELESS RESOURCE COUNCIL OF THE SIERRAS AND ROSEVILLE HOUSING AUTHORITY FOR HOMELESS PREVENTION THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this 17th day of December, 2025, by and between the Homeless Resource Council

the

Sierras

(“HRCS”)

and

the

Roseville

Housing

Authority

(herein

called

the

“Grantee”).

WHEREAS, the HRCS has applied for and received funds from the State of California (State), through the Homeless

Housing,

Assistance

and

Prevention

Program

Round

FIVE

(HHAP-5),

administered

the

California

Department

Housing

and

Community

Development

(HCD);

and
WHEREAS, HRCS wishes to engage the Grantee to assist HRCS in utilizing such funds to assist people experiencing

homelessness

Placer

County; NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed between the parties hereto that: ARTICLE 1—PROJECT SECTION 1: DEFINITIONS The following HHAP-5 program terms are defined in accordance with Health and Safety Code section 50216,

subdivisions (a)

–

(q):

(a) “Coordinated Entry System” means a centralized or coordinated process developed pursuant to Section

578.7

Title

24 of

the

Code

Federal

Regulations,

that

section

read

January

10,

2019,

designed

coordinate

homelessness

program

participant

intake,

assessment,

and

provision

referrals.

order

satisfy

this

subdivision,

centralized

coordinated

assessment

system

shall

cover

the

geographic

area,

easily

accessed

individuals

and

families

seeking

housing

services,

well-advertised,

and

include

comprehensive

and

standardized

assessment

tool.
(b) “Homeless Prevention” has the same meaning as defined in subdivision (e) of Section 50801. (c) “Homeless” has the same meaning as defined in Section 578.3 of Title 24 of the Code of Federal Regulations,

that

section

read

January

10,

2019.
(d) “Homeless Management Information System” means the information system designated by a Continuum

Care

comply

with

federal

reporting

requirements

defined

Section

578.3

Title

24 of

the

Code

Federal

Regulations.

The

term

“Homeless

Management

Information

System”

also

includes

the

use

comparable

database

victim

services

provider

legal

services

provider

that

permitted

the

federal

government

under

Part

576

Title

24 of

the

Code

Federal

Regulations.
(e) “Homeless youth” means an unaccompanied youth between 12 and 24 years of age, inclusive, who

experiencing

homelessness,

defined

subsection

(2)

Section

725

the

federal

ROSEVILLE HOUSING AUTHORITY Page 3 of 15 Contract# CA515-HHAP5-0003

Page 351 of 1141 ends

McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 11434a(2)). “Homeless youth” includes unaccompanied

youth

who

are

pregnant

parenting.
(f) “Housing First” has the same meaning as in Section 8255 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, including

all

the

core

components

listed

therein.
(g) “Navigation center” means a Housing First, low-barrier, service-enriched shelter focused on moving

homeless

individuals

and

families

into

permanent

housing

that

provides

temporary

living

facilities

while

case

managers

connect

individuals

experiencing

homelessness

income,

public

benefits,

health

services,

shelter,

and

housing.

SECTION 2: SCOPE OF WORK A. Activities 1. Eligible Activities: The Scope of Work (“Work”) for this Agreement shall include uses that are consistent with Health

and

Safety

Code

section 50220.5,

subdivision

(d)–(f), and

any other applicable laws.

The

grantee

shall

expend

funds

evidence-based

solutions

that

address

and

prevent

homelessness

among

eligible

populations

for

the

approved

activity

activities

below:
● Homeless Prevention HRCS will consider a scope of work change if a request is submitted to HRCS or the Chairperson

the

Continuum

Care

for
Roseville/Rocklin/Placer County (CA-515) and must be for evidence-based solutions within the scope of eligible uses that address and prevent

homelessness

among

eligible

populations

uses

including

any

the

following:
a) Street outreach to assist persons experiencing homelessness in accessing permanent housing

and

services.
b) Systems support for activities necessary to create regional partnerships and maintain a homeless

services

and

housing

delivery

system,

particularly

for

vulnerable

populations

including

families

and

homeless

youth.
c) Delivery of permanent housing and innovative housing solutions, such as hotel and motel

conversions.
d) Prevention and shelter diversion to permanent housing, including rental subsidies. e) New navigation centers and emergency shelters based on demonstrated need. Demonstrated need for purposes of this paragraph shall be based on the following: (i) The number of available shelter beds in the city, county, or region served by a Continuum

Care.

ROSEVILLE HOUSING AUTHORITY Page 4 of 15 Contract# CA515-HHAP5-0003

Page 352 of 1141 ends

(ii) The number of people experiencing unsheltered homelessness in the homeless point-in-time

count.
(iii) Shelter vacancy rate in the summer and winter months. (iv) Percentage of exits from emergency shelters to permanent housing solutions. (v) A plan to connect residents to permanent housing. 2. General Statement: Grantee will utilize HHAP funds for the following eligible activities in Placer County:
● Provide Housing Prevention Services 3. Program Delivery: Activity #1 Provide Housing Stability Services Provide housing-focused prevention services to households at imminent risk of

homelessness,

including

housing

stability

assessments,

problem-solving,

landlord

mediation,

referrals

financial

and

legal

resources,

and

coordination

short-term

supports

maintain

existing

housing

and

prevent

displacement.

B. Payment for Services It is mutually agreed that HRCS shall pay Grantee no more than the following: ● $110,000.00 for Homeless Prevention through HHAP-5 See

attached

Exhibit

for

project

budget

and

eligible

expenses.

Any

amendment

the

project

budget

must

approved

the

HRCS

Board

Directors.

Grantee

contractually

obligated

expend

fifty

percent

(50%)

HHAP

funds

June

30,

2026,

and

one

hundred

percent

(100%)

HHAP

funds

June

30,

2028.

Grantee

solely

responsible

for

adherence

the

Agreement.

HRCS reserves the right to discontinue, modify or withhold payments to be made under this Agreement

require

total

partial

return

any

funds,

including

any

unexpended

funds

under

the

following

conditions:

HRCS,

its

sole

discretion,

determines

that

Grantee

has

not

performed

accordance

with

this

contract

has

failed

comply

with

any

term

condition

this

Agreement;

Grantee

fails

comply

with

the

specified

grantee

activities

deliverables

outlined

this

Agreement.

C. Performance Monitoring HRCS will monitor the performance of the Grantee regarding goals and performance standards as

stated

above.

Substandard

performance

determined

HRCS

will

constitute

noncompliance

with

this

Agreement.

action

correct

such

substandard

performance

not

ROSEVILLE HOUSING AUTHORITY Page 5 of 15 Contract# CA515-HHAP5-0003

Page 353 of 1141 ends

taken by the Grantee within a reasonable period of time after being notified by HRCS, suspension

termination

procedures

will

initiated.

SECTION 3: TERM OF AGREEMENT The term of this Agreement is December 1, 2025, through June 30, 2028. SECTION 4: PROGRAM REPORTING 1) Annual Reports By December 31, 2026, and annually on that date thereafter until all funds have been expended, the

Grantee

shall

submit

annual

report

HRCS

format

provided

HRCS.

Annual

Reports

will

include

request

for

data

expenditures

and

people

served

with

HHAP-5

funding

addition

details

specific

projects

selected

for

the

use

HHAP-5

funding.

the

Grantee

fails

provide

such

documentation,

HRCS

may

recapture

any

portion

the

amount

authorized

this

Agreement

with

14-day

written

notification.

later

than

April

2029,

the

Grantee

shall

submit

final

report,

format

provided

HRCS,

well

detailed

explanation

all

uses

the

Program

funds.
2) Expenditure Reports In addition to the annual reports, HRCS requires the Grantee to submit quarterly expenditure reports

due

later

than

20 days

following

the

end

each

fiscal

quarter.

Grantee shall

submit

report

HRCS

form

and

method

provided

HRCS

that

includes

the ongoing

tracking

the

specific

uses

and

expenditures

any

program

funds

broken

out

eligible

uses

listed,

including

the

current

status

those

funds,

well

any

additional

information

HRCS

deems

appropriate

necessary. If

the

Grantee

fails

provide

such

documentation,

HRCS

may recapture any

portion

the

amount

authorized

this

Agreement

with

14-day

written

notification.

3) Reporting Requirements 1) Annual Report: The annual report shall contain detailed information in accordance with Health

and

Safety

Code

section

50222,

subdivision

(a).

This information

includes

the

following,

well

any

additional

information

deemed

appropriate

necessary

Cal

ICH:
(1) Data collection shall include, but not be limited to, information regarding individuals and families

served,

including

demographic

information,

information

regarding

partnerships

among

entities

lack

thereof,

and

participant

and

regional

outcomes.
(2) The performance monitoring and accountability framework shall include clear metrics, which

may

include,

but

are

not

limited

to,

the

following:
(1) The number of individual exits to permanent housing, as defined by the United States

Department

Housing

and

Urban

Development,

from

unsheltered

environments

and

interim

housing

resulting

from

this

funding.

ROSEVILLE HOUSING AUTHORITY Page 6 of 15 Contract# CA515-HHAP5-0003

Page 354 of 1141 ends

(2) Racial equity, as defined by the council in consultation with representatives of state and

local

agencies,

service

providers,

the

Legislature,

and

other

stakeholders.
(3) Any other metrics deemed appropriate by the council and developed in coordination with

representatives

state

and

local

agencies,

advocates,

service

providers,

and

the

Legislature.
(3) Data collection and reporting requirements shall support the efficient and effective administration

the

program

and

enable

the

monitoring

jurisdiction

performance

and

program

outcomes.
2) Expenditure Report: The expenditure report(s) shall contain data on expenditures of HHAP-5 funding

including

but

not

limited

obligated

funds,

expended

funds,

interest

accrued,

and

other

funds

derived

from

HHAP-5

funding.
3) Final Expenditure Plan: During the final fiscal year of reporting, grantees may be required to include

plan

fully

expend

HHAP-5

grant

funding.

This

plan

must

submitted

with

the

quarterly

expenditure

report

format

provided

HRCS.

HRCS

reserves

the

right

request

that

Grantee

return

funds

HRCS

the

period

after

the

Final

Expenditure

Plan

submitted.
4) HRCS may require additional supplemental reporting with written notice to the Grantee. Grantee may, at their discretion, fully expend their HHAP-5 allocation prior to the end date of the grant term

and

will

not

required

submit

quarterly

fiscal

reports

after

the

quarter

which

their

allocation

was

fully

expended.

SECTION 5: CONTINUUM OF CARE REQUIREMENTS The Grantee is required to actively participate in the following: ● Continuum of Care meetings: Grantee will attend monthly Continuum of Care meetings and provide

public

reports

the

request

HRCS

the

Continuum

Care.

Grantee

allowed

than

two

annual

absences

from

monthly

Continuum

Care

Meetings.

● The Grantee shall maintain no fewer than one (1) active Homeless Management Information System

(HMIS)

user

license

within

the

agency

all

times

and

shall

comply

fully

with

all

applicable

HMIS

policies,

procedures,

standards,

training

and

data-management

requirements

i
● Coordinated Entry System (CES): The Grantee shall ensure that all programs funded under this

Grant

are

registered

with

and

recognized

the

Coordinated

Entry

System

(CES).

The

Grantee

shall

develop

and

maintain

written

standards

for

referrals

and

shall

submit

such

standards

HRCS

and

the

CES

Program

Administrator

later

than

thirty

(30)

days

following

execution

this

Agreement

and

annually

thereafter.
● HRCS Outcomes and Measurements Committee: Grantee will nominate a single representative

attend

all

Data

and

Evaluation

Committee

meetings.

Grantee

allowed

than

two

annual

absences.

SECTION 6: NOTICES

ROSEVILLE HOUSING AUTHORITY Page 7 of 15 Contract# CA515-HHAP5-0003

Page 355 of 1141 ends

All notices required under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be delivered by United States mail

(postage

prepaid),

commercial

courier,

personal

delivery,

facsimile

transmission,

other

authorized

electronic

means.

Any

such

notice

shall

deemed

effective

the

date

delivered

transmitted.

All

notices

and

other

written

communications

under

this

Agreement

shall

addressed

the

individuals

and

the

addresses

designated

below,

unless

and

until

such

designations

are

modified

subsequent

written

notice

provided

accordance

with

this

Section.

HRCS Grantee Homeless Resource Council of the Sierras Roseville Housing Authority PO Box 130 316 Vernon Street #150 Auburn, CA 95604 Roseville, CA 95678 (650) 255-7989 Blanca Castro, Executive Director [email protected] (916) 746-1239 Trisha Isom, Executive Director [email protected] ARTICLE 2—FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT AND GENERAL REQUIREMENTS SECTION 1: PAYMENTS AND BUDGET A. General Statement HRCS shall provide funding to the Grantee for allowable costs incurred in the performance of the services

identified

this

Agreement,

not

exceed

the

total

funds

allocated

the

budget

set

forth

Exhibit

Allowable costs shall mean those necessary and proper costs identified in the Grantee’s application

and

budget

and

approved

HRCS.

Such

disbursement

shall

constitute

full

and

complete

payment

the

HRCS

under

this

Agreement.

B. Budget & Disbursement Any amendments to the budget must be approved in writing by HRCS. HRCS may require a more detailed

budget

breakdown

than

the

one

contained

herein,

and

the

Grantee

shall

provide

such

supplementary

budget

information

timely

fashion

the

form

and

content

prescribed

HRCS.

HHAP

funds

may

expended

solely

allowable

costs

defined

under

this

Agreement.

HRCS

determines

that

any

funds

have

been

expended

the

Grantee

for

unauthorized,

ineligible,

otherwise

disallowed

purposes,

HRCS

may

require

repayment

such

amounts.

The

Grantee

shall

remit

all

disallowed

amounts

HRCS

within

thirty

(30)

days

receiving

written

notice

the

disallowance.

Grantee is contractually obligated to expend one hundred percent (100%) of HHAP-5 funds by June

30,

2028.

The

Grantee

agrees

that

upon

expiration

this

Agreement,

the

Grantee

shall

ROSEVILLE HOUSING AUTHORITY Page 8 of 15 Contract# CA515-HHAP5-0003

Page 356 of 1141 ends

transfer to HRCS any HHAP-5 funds on hand at the time of the expiration and any accounts receivable

attributable

the

use

HHAP-5

funds.

C. Breach and Remedies Breach of Agreement Breach of this Agreement includes, but is not limited to, the following events: ● Grantee’s failure to comply with the terms or conditions of this Agreement. ● Use of, or permitting the use of, HHAP-5 funds provided under this Agreement for any ineligible

activities.

●

Any failure to comply with the deadlines set forth in this Agreement.

Remedies for Breach of Agreement In addition to any other remedies that may be available to Agency in law or equity for breach of this

Agreement,

Agency

may:

●

Bar the Grantee from applying for future HHAP funds;

●

Revoke any other existing HHAP-5 award(s) to the Grantee;

●

Require the return of any unexpended HHAP-5 funds disbursed under this Agreement;

●

Require repayment of HHAP-5 funds disbursed and expended under this Agreement; ● Require the immediate return to the Agency of all funds derived from the use of HHAP-5 funds;

Seek,

court

competent

jurisdiction,

order

for

specific

performance

the

defaulted

obligation

participation

the

technical

assistance

accordance

with

HHAP-5

requirements.

All remedies available to HRCS are cumulative and not exclusive.

HRCS may give written notice to the Grantee to cure the breach or violation within a period of not

less

than

15 days.

This Agreement may be terminated by HRCS immediately and without notice for cause or by HRCS

without

cause

upon

thirty

(30)

days’

written

notice

termination

Grantee.

Upon

termination,

Grantee

shall

entitled

compensation

for

Services

performed

the

effective

date

termination,

unless

this

Agreement

terminated

for

cause,

which

case,

HRCS

may

withhold

compensation

due

Grantee

order

reimburse

HRCS

for

any

losses,

damages

expenses

caused

Grantee’s

default

under

this

Agreement.

SECTION 2: DOCUMENTATION OF COSTS, FINANCIAL REPORTING, AND GENERAL CONDITIONS The Grantee shall maintain books, records, documents, and other evidence directly related to the performance

the

work

under

this

Agreement

for

period

less

than

five

(5)

years,

and

such

records

shall

kept

accordance

with

Generally

Acceptable

Accounting

Principles

(GAAP).

Costs

shall

supported

properly

executed

payrolls,

time

records,

invoices,

vouchers

other

official

documentation,

evidence

the

nature

and

propriety

the

charges.

All accounting documents pertaining in whole or in part to this Agreement shall be clearly identified and

readily

accessible,

and

upon

reasonable

notice,

HRCS

shall

have

the

right

audit

the

records

the

Grantee

they

relate

the

Agreement

and

the

activities

and

services

described

herein.

ROSEVILLE HOUSING AUTHORITY Page 9 of 15 Contract# CA515-HHAP5-0003

Page 357 of 1141 ends

The Grantee shall also: ▪ Comply with all applicable State and Federal laws, regulations, and requirements and all provisions

this

Agreement.
▪ Comply with and obtain at its own expense, if necessary, all applicable Federal, State, City or Municipal

standards

for

licensing,

certifications

and

operation

facilities

and

programs,

and

accreditation

and

licensing

individuals,

and

any

other

standards

criteria

described

this

Agreement

assure

quality

services.
▪ Comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act

1968

amended,

Section

104(b)

and

Section

109

Title

the

Housing

and

Community

Development

Act

1974

amended,

Section

504

the

Rehabilitation

Act

1973,

the

Americans

with

Disabilities

Act

1990,

the

Age

Discrimination

Act

1975,

Executive

Order

11063,

and

Executive

Order

11246

amended

Executive

Orders

11375,

11478,

12107

and

12086.

▪ Comply with the nondiscrimination in employment and contracting opportunities laws, regulations,

and

executive

orders

referenced

24 CFR

570.607,

revised

Executive

Order

13279.

The

nondiscrimination

provisions

Section

109

the

Housing

and

Community

Development

Act

1974

are

still

applicable,

which

stipulates

that

person

the

United

States

shall

the

grounds

race,

color,

national

origin

sex

excluded

from

participation

in,

denied

the

benefits

of,

subjected

discrimination

under

any

program

activity

funded

whole

part

pursuant

this

Agreement.
▪ Maintain an effective system of internal fiscal control and accountability for all HHAP-5 funds and

property

acquired

improved

with

HHAP-5

funds,

and

ensure

the

same

are

used

solely

for

authorized

purposes.
▪ Keep a continuing record of all disbursements by date, check number, amount, vendor, description

items

purchased

and

line

item

from

which

the

money

was

expended,

reflected

the

Grantee’s

accounting

records.
▪ Maintain payroll, financial, and expense reimbursement records for a period of five (5) years after

receipt

final

payment

under

this

Agreement.
▪ Permit inspection and audit of its records with respect to all matters authorized by this Agreement

representatives

HRCS

any

time

during

normal

business

hours

and

often

necessary.
▪ Inform HRCS concerning any funds allocated to the Grantee, that the Grantee anticipates will not

expended

during

the

term

this

Agreement,

and

permit

the

reassignment

the

same

HRCS

other

Grantees.
▪ Provide budget and disbursement amendments as outlined in Article 2, Section 1B above. ▪ Repay HRCS any funds in its possession at the time of the termination of this Agreement that may

due

HRCS.
▪ Have processes in place (satisfaction surveys, Board representation, grievance procedures, etc.)

which

receive,

document

and

utilize

the

input

from

low-income

persons

potentially

benefiting

affected

the

program

project

covered

under

this

Agreement.

SECTION 3: PROGRAM INCOME If applicable, Grantee shall report monthly on all program income generated by activities carried out with

HHAP-5

funds

made

available

under

this

Agreement.

The

Grantee

may

use

such

income

only

during

the

term

this

Agreement

and

only

for

activities

permitted

under

this

Agreement

and

shall

ROSEVILLE HOUSING AUTHORITY Page 10 of 15 Contract# CA515-HHAP5-0003

Page 358 of 1141 ends

reduce requests for additional funds by the amount of any such program income balances on hand.

All

unexpended

program

income

shall

returned

HRCS

the

completion

the

Agreement.

SECTION 4: INELIGIBLE COSTS HHAP-5 funds shall not be used for costs associated with activities in violation of any law or for any activities

not

consistent

with

the

intent

the

Program

and

the

eligible

uses

identified

Health

and

Safety

Code section

50220.5.

HRCS reserves the right to request additional clarifying information to determine the reasonableness and

eligibility

of all uses

the funds

made

available

this

Agreement.

the

Grantee

use

HHAP-5

funds

pay

for

ineligible

activities,

the

Grantee shall

required

reimburse

these

funds

HRCS.

An expenditure which is not authorized by this Agreement, or by written approval of HRCS or HCD, or

which

cannot be adequately documented,

shall

disallowed

and

must

reimbursed

HRCS

the

Grantee.

HCD, at its sole and absolute discretion, shall make the final determination regarding the allowability of

HHAP-5

fund expenditures.

Program funds shall not be used to supplant existing local funds for homeless housing, assistance, or prevention. Administrative

costs

are

not

allowable

expense

for

this

grant

program.

SECTION 5: GRANTEE RESPONSIBILITY Grantee is responsible for the completion of the Project or full operation of the Program if only partial

funding

provided

through

HHAP-5.

SECTION 5: SEVERABILITY It is understood and agreed by the parties that if any part, term, or provision of this Agreement is held

the

courts

invalid,

illegal

conflict

with

any

law,

the

remainder

the

Agreement

shall

not

affected

thereby

and

all

other

parts

this

Agreement

shall

nevertheless

full

force

and

effect.

SECTION 6: DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE CERTIFICATION Certification of Compliance: By signing this Agreement, Grantee, and its subcontractors, hereby certify,

under

penalty

perjury

under

the

laws

the

State

California,

compliance

with

the

requirements

the

Drug-Free

Workplace

Act

1990

(Government

Code

8350

seq.)

and

have

will

provide

drug-free

workplace

taking

the

following

actions:

1. Publish a statement notifying employees and subcontractors that unlawful manufacture, distribution,

dispensation,

possession,

use

controlled

substance

prohibited

and

specifying

actions

taken

against

employees,

contractors,

subcontractors

for

violations,

required

Government

Code

section

f(8355(a)(1).

ROSEVILLE HOUSING AUTHORITY Page 11 of 15 Contract# CA515-HHAP5-0003

Page 359 of 1141 ends

2. Establish a Drug-Free Awareness Program, as required by Government Code section 8355(a)(2)

inform

employees,

contractors,

subcontractors

the

following:
a. The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace; b. Subcontractor’s policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace; c. Any available counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs; and d. Penalties that may be imposed upon employees, contractors, and subcontractors

for

drug

abuse

violations.

3. Provide, as required by Government Code 8355 (a)(3), that every employee and/or subcontractor

who

works

under

this

Agreement:
a. Will receive a copy of Grantee’s drug-free policy statement, and b. Will agree to abide by terms of Grantee’s condition of employment or subcontract.

SECTION 7: ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between HRCS and the Grantee for the use of funds

received

under

this

Agreement

and

supersedes

all

prior

contemporaneous

communications

and

proposals,

whether

electronic,

oral,

written

between

HRCS

and

the

Grantee

with

respect

this

Agreement.

SECTION 8: NO THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARIES Except as expressly provided otherwise, this Agreement is intended to be solely for the benefit of the parties

and

shall

not

otherwise

deemed

confer

upon

give

any

other

person

third

party

any

remedy,

claim,

cause

action

other

right.

SECTION 9: ATTORNEYS FEES If an action at law or in equity is necessary to enforce or interpret the terms of this Agreement, the prevailing

party

shall

entitled

reasonable

attorneys’

fees,

costs

and

necessary

disbursements

addition

any

other

reasonable

relief

which

may

entitled.

With

respect

any

suit,

action

proceeding

arising

out

this

Agreement,

the

documentation

hereto,

the

parties

hereby

submit

the

jurisdiction

and

venue

the

Superior

Municipal

Court,

whichever

applicable,

the

County

Placer,

State

California

for

any

proceeding

arising

hereunder.

SECTION 10: GOVERNING LAW AND JURISDICTION This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. In the event

any

dispute

over

the

Agreement’s

terms

and

conditions,

the

exclusive

venue

and

jurisdiction

for

any

litigation

arising

thereunder

shall

the

Superior

Court

Placer

County

Nevada

County,

California,

and,

necessary

for

exclusive

federal

questions,

the

United

States

District

Court

for

the

Eastern

District

California.

ROSEVILLE HOUSING AUTHORITY Page 12 of 15 Contract# CA515-HHAP5-0003

Page 360 of 1141 ends

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement as of the date of the most recent signatory.

ROSEVILLE HOUSING AUTHORITY Page 13 of 15 Contract# CA515-HHAP5-0003 Grantor: Homeless Resource Council of the Sierras Grantee: Roseville Housing Authority
Blanca Castro, Executive Director Trisha Isom, Executive Director Date:

Date:

Page 361 of 1141 ends

EXHIBIT A: PROJECT BUDGET Eligible Activity Budget Amount Activity #1 Provide Housing Stability Services Provide housing-focused prevention services to households at imminent risk of homelessness, including housing stability assessments, problem-solving, landlord mediation, referrals to financial and legal resources, and coordination of short-term supports to maintain existing housing and prevent displacement. $110,000.00
Total Budget $110,000.00

ROSEVILLE HOUSING AUTHORITY Page 14 of 15 Contract# CA515-HHAP5-0003

Page 362 of 1141 ends

EXHIBIT B: PROJECT TIMELINE
Activity Timeline Responsible Party Activity #1: Provide Housing Stability Services Provide housing-focused prevention services to households at imminent risk of homelessness, including housing stability assessments, problem-solving, landlord mediation, referrals to financial and legal resources, and coordination of short-term supports to maintain existing housing and prevent displacement.

December 1, 2025 - June 30, 2028 Grantee

ROSEVILLE HOUSING AUTHORITY Page 15 of 15 Contract# CA515-HHAP5-0003

Page 363 of 1141 ends

HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE
RESOLUTION NO. 26-2

APPROVING A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26

WHEREAS, the Housing Authority of the City of Roseville has reviewed the proposed Housing Authority Budget Adjustment for the Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention Program.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Housing Authority of the City of Roseville does hereby approve the attached budget adjustment.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Housing Authority of the City of Roseville this day of , 2026, by the following vote on roll call:

AYES AUTHORITY MEMBERS:

NOES AUTHORITY MEMBERS:

ABSENT AUTHORITY MEMBERS:

CHAIRMAN

Secretary

Page 364 of 1141 ends

REQUEST FOR BUDGET ADJUSTMENT
Updated 11/19/2025

Please complete the cells highlighted in yellow.

REQUESTER NAME & TITLE: FISCAL YEAR:

PREPARER NAME & TITLE: ORDINANCE:

DEPARTMENT/DIVISION:

EXPENDITURES/EXPENSES/TRANSFERS OUT
ACCOUNT STRING BUDGET ($)
Fund Account Center Project Adjustment DESCRIPTION
2811 5571 84001 700086 110,000 Increase Grants Public Service for the EHV Transition Assistance project.

EXPENDITURES/EXPENSES/TRANSFERS OUT TOTAL 110,000

REVENUES/TRANSFERS IN
ACCOUNT STRING BUDGET ($)
Fund Account Center Project Adjustment DESCRIPTION
2811 4435 84001 700086 110,000 Increase revenue for the Housing Authority Grants Fund

REVENUES/TRANSFERS IN TOTAL 110,000

NET ADJUSTMENT -

FUND BALANCE
ACCOUNT STRING BUDGET ($)
Fund Account Center Project Adjustment DESCRIPTION
3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000

FUND BALANCE TOTAL -

Justification for Budget Adjustment:

The Economic Development Department recommends that Council authorize the establishment of a new Non-Capital Multi-Year Project – EHV Transition Assistance (The "Project"), and adopt an ordinance to approve a budget adjustment appropriating $110,000 in the Housing Authority Grants Fund (2811) to the project.

The Homeless Resource Council of the Sierras (HRCS) granted Roseville Housing Authority $110,000 to stabilize housing for Emergency Housing Voucher (EHV) assisted households during the program wind-down period. HRCS will provide half of the grant award in advance, with the remaining balance reimbursed on a billable basis.
2025-26
Emily Sawin, Management Analyst
Emily Sawin, Management Analyst
Economic Development - Housing

Page 365 of 1141 ends

City Council
Communication
Meeting Date: 2/4/2026
Item #: VII.8
File #: 0203-13
Item ID: 2025-985

Title: Corporation Yard Skylight Replacement - Contract Purchase Agreement Contact: Andre Baranov 916-774-5342 [email protected]

SUMMARY
Staff recommends approval of a contract purchasing agreement with MCM Roofing Company Inc. in the amount of $372,172.50 to provide 146 skylight replacements at five buildings located at the City's Corporation Yard, under the direction of the Public Works Department's Facilities Division. The existing skylights are at the end of life. Funding is included in several project budgets funded by Fleet, Facilities Rehabilitation, Roseville Electric, Environmental Utilities, and Alternative Transportation. Staff requests an additional 10% change order authority in the amount of $37,217.25.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution to approve a Contract Purchasing Agreement (3005132) with MCM Roofing Company Inc. and authorize the City Manager to execute it on behalf of the City of Roseville.

Staff further requests that the City Council authorize the City Manager or his designee to approve change orders for the project, consisting with the contract terms, provided that the net cost of all change orders shall not exceed ten percent (10%) of the contract price.

BACKGROUND
The Facilities Division of the Public Works Department is responsible for design, construction, and maintenance of the public facilities used by the staff, residents, and visitors of the City. Facilities staff oversees the implementation of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) that pertains to the buildings. Of the nearly 100 buildings that the City owns and maintains, 10% of these are located at the Corporation Yard Hilltop Circle Campus and house Environmental Utilities Administration Services, Central Stores, Fleet, Shops, and Facilities. The Corporation Yard consists of 11 stand-alone structures and associated modular/temporary buildings. Many of the structures were built with smoke-hatch skylights to provide energy-efficient natural light nearly 30 years ago, and now the skylights are at the end of life and several leaks are outpacing repair efforts.

In the Fiscal Year 2025-26 budget, staff created projects to replace 146 skylights in five of the Corporation Yard buildings. A Request for Proposals (RFP) was issued to solicit proposals from interested contractors.

Of the 15 contractors that attended the job walk, three (3) submitted proposals, and two (2) met the required qualifications for the work. Staff evaluated the proposals and recommend the Council approve a Contract Purchase Agreement with MCM Roofing Company Inc., a qualified contractor, to complete the project to maintain building integrity and occupant safety.

FISCAL IMPACT
Funding is included in several project budgets funded by Fleet, Facilities Rehabilitation, Roseville Electric,

Page 366 of 1141 ends

Environmental Utilities, and Alternative Transportation. Staff requests an additional 10% contingency in the amount of $37,217.25. There is no ongoing fiscal impact anticipated after the project is completed.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed project involves the repair and maintenance of an existing facility. This activity is categorically exempt from CEQA as a Class 1 Exemption (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301). The Exemption has been prepared and no further CEQA action is required.

CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLAN/OVERARCHING GOALS

4. Invest in well-planned infrastructure and growth

Respectfully Submitted,
Andre Baranov, Project Supervisor

Jason Shykowski, Public Works Director
Stefanie Kemen, Engineering Manager

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution 26-024

2. Contract Purchase Agreement - MCM Roofing

3. CEQA Class 1 Exemption

4. Notice of Intent to Award

REVIEWERS:

Andre Baranov, Public Works Department - Facilities Created/Initiated - 12/17/2025
James Kremko, Public Works Department - Facilities Approved - 12/17/2025 Stefanie Kemen, Public Works Department - Engineering - Traffic Engineering
Approved - 1/21/2026
Kelly Aye, City Attorney Department Approved - 1/21/2026 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Approved - 1/21/2026 Ryan DeVore, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 1/22/2026 Dennis Kauffman, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 1/22/2026 Michelle Sheidenberger, City Attorney Department Approved - 1/23/2026 Dominick Casey, City Clerk Department Approved - 1/27/2026 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Final Approval - 1/27/2026

Page 367 of 1141 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 26-024

APPROVING A CONTRACT PURCHASE AGREEMENT, BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE AND MCM ROOFING COMPANY INC., AND AUTHORIZING THE

CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE IT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE

WHEREAS, a Contract Purchase Agreement (3005132) for the Corporation Yard Skylight Replacement project, by and between the City of Roseville and MCM Roofing Company Inc., 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 the City Manager is authorized to execute it on behalf of the City of Roseville.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED 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 price.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Roseville this ___ day of ______________, 2026, by the following vote on roll call:

AYES COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS:

______________________________
MAYOR

ATTEST:

________________________
City Clerk

Page 368 of 1141 ends

Page 369 of 1141 ends

Page 370 of 1141 ends

Page 371 of 1141 ends

Page 372 of 1141 ends

Page 373 of 1141 ends

Page 374 of 1141 ends

Page 375 of 1141 ends

Page 376 of 1141 ends

Page 377 of 1141 ends

Page 378 of 1141 ends

Page 379 of 1141 ends

Page 380 of 1141 ends

Notice of Exemption

To: Placer County Clerk From: City of Roseville
Recorder’s Office Development Services Dept.
2954 Richardson Drive 311 Vernon Street
Auburn, CA 95603 Roseville, CA 95678

Project Title: Corporation Yard Skylight Replacement

Project Location(s): 2005, 2025, 2075, 2080, and 2090 Hilltop Circle, Roseville, California 95678 (APNs 473-110-007, 008, 009, 010, -011, -012, -013, -014, -015, -021 -022).

Project Description: This project would allow for the replacement of 146 skylights on five existing buildings located within the City’s Corporation Yard facility. The e xisting skylights have reached end of life and need to be replaced to ensure proper maintenance of the City ’s buildings and ensure safety of employees and visitors to the Corporation Yard. There would be no expansion of use.

Public Agency Approving Project: Roseville City Council

Agency/Individual Carrying Out Project: City of Roseville Public Works Department

Reason why this Project is Exempt: This project qualifies for a Class 1 E xemption as described in Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines which states:

“Class 1 consists of the …repair [and] maintenance of existing public…structures [and] facilities […involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use…. Examples include but are not limited to: ( d) Restoration or rehabilitation of deteriorated or damaged structures , facilities, or mechanical equipment to meet current standards of health and safety…”

The project is located entirely within the Corporation Yard and provides needed maintenance to five of the existing buildings. The project would not result in expansion of use, and no environmentally sensitive resources are located within or near the propert y; therefore the Class 1 exemption is applicable to the proposed project.

Lead Agency Contact Person: Andre Baranov, Public Works Department Facilities Division, (916) 774- 5342.

Signature: Date: 1/22/2026
Jessica Lynch, Environmental Coordinator,
City of Roseville

Page 381 of 1141 ends

311 Vernon Street
Roseville, CA 95678

NOTICE OF INTENT TO AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT

To Whom it May Concern;

Regarding: RFP 01-088 Corporation Yard Skylight Replacement

From: Public Works Facility Services; Andre Baranov, Project Supervisor.

Subject: Notice of Intent to Award Design Contract

For RFP 01-088, pending City Council approval, the City intends to award the contract to replace skylights at 5 Corporation Yard buildings to: MCM Roofing Co. Inc.

To inquire about the recommended award, please write to Public Works Facility Services, Andre Baranov, Project Supervisor at: Public Works Facility Services [email protected].

Page 382 of 1141 ends

City Council
Communication
Meeting Date: 2/4/2026
Item #: VII.9
File #: 0316-02
Item ID: 2025-994

Title: 2025 Speed Limit Update - Roseville Municipal Code Amendment Contact: Jerome Pastor 916-746-1352 [email protected]

SUMMARY
Staff recommends City Council introduce for first reading an ordinance amending section 11.28.010 of Chapter 11.28 of Title 11 of the Roseville Municipal Code regarding speed limits. Staff is required to justify a posted speed limit other than 65 miles per hour that is radar enforceable. Local jurisdictions are required to conduct and approve an engineering and traffic survey every seven to fourteen years, or when there is a major change to a roadway. The cost of changing the speed limit signs is included in existing operating budgets.

RECOMMENDATION
This is a request to set the speed limits on certain roads in the City of Roseville. Two options are available for Council's consideration:

1. Introduce for first reading an ordinance amending section 11.28.010 of Chapter 11.28 of Title 11 of the Roseville Municipal Code regarding speed limits that would be radar enforceable; or

2. Adopt an amended speed limit ordinance with speed limits modified as desired. However, roadway segments with lower speed limits than those recommended may not be radar enforceable.

Staff recommends option 1, approval of the attached speed limit ordinance.

BACKGROUND
State law establishes the process for setting speed limits for roadways in California. The California Vehicle Code (CVC) and the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CaMUTCD) contain the guidelines and processes that must be followed in order to make speed limits radar enforceable. Certain roadways are assigned speed limits by default (called "prima facie" speed limits), such as 25 mph for residential streets and business districts, 15 mph in alleys, and 65 mph on all other roadways. Those do not require any kind of study as they are established by law. To justify a posted speed limit other than 65 mph that is radar enforceable, local jurisdictions are required to conduct and approve an Engineering and Traffic Survey (ETS). An ETS is based on two factors: the measured 85th percentile speed (the speed at or below which 85% of the traffic is traveling) and whether or not "conditions not readily apparent to motorists" are present.

The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has an established set of standards and procedures for conducting an ETS. These standards require that for a speed limit to be radar enforceable, the posted speed limit should be set at the 5 mph increment nearest the 85th percentile speed. The recommended speed limit can be lowered an additional 5 mph if "conditions not readily apparent to motorists" are present. Conditions not readily apparent can be a variety of things such as accident history, numerous driveways along the roadway, adjacent land uses, bike lanes, etc. The CVC requires that speed

Page 383 of 1141 ends

surveys must be conducted every seven to fourteen years, or when there is a major change to a roadway.

Staff recently completed 9 ETS's (See Table 1, attached). There is one new roadway surveyed, and eight surveys with no change recommended. In addition, there is one change being proposed to the ordinance to correct an error related to the speed limit on Bob Doyle Drive.

A summary of the speed surveys is shown in Table 1 and a copy of the completed set of speed surveys is available in Public Works/Engineering or upon request for Council and/or the public's review. The CVC requires that posted speed limits be consistent with the results of the ETS to be radar enforceable. Public Works, Police, and the City Attorney are all in agreement that in order for the City to be in compliance with state law, posted speed limits need to be set using the state guidelines.

FISCAL IMPACT
The cost of completing speed limit surveys and changing the recommended speed limit signs is included in existing operating budgets.

CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLAN/OVERARCHING GOALS

1. Ensure a safe and healthy community

6. Deliver exceptional City services

Respectfully Submitted,
Jerome Pastor, Senior Engineer

Jason Shykowski, Public Works Director

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Ordinance for First Reading

2. Table 1 - 2025 Speed Limit Changes

REVIEWERS:

Carlee Parks, Public Works Department - Engineering - Traffic Engineering Created/Initiated - 1/14/2026 Jerome Pastor, Public Works Department - Engineering - Traffic Engineering Approved - 1/14/2026 Noah Siviglia, Public Works Department - Engineering - Traffic Engineering Approved - 1/14/2026 Stefanie Kemen, Public Works Department - Engineering - Traffic Engineering Approved - 1/20/2026 Kelly Aye, City Attorney Department Approved - 1/20/2026 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Approved - 1/21/2026 Ryan DeVore, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 1/22/2026 Dennis Kauffman, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 1/22/2026 Michelle Sheidenberger, City Attorney Department Approved - 1/22/2026

Page 384 of 1141 ends

Dominick Casey, City Manager Department - City Manager Approved - 1/23/2026 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Final Approval - 1/23/2026

Page 385 of 1141 ends

ORDINANCE NO.

ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE AMENDING SECTION

11.28.010 OF CHAPTER 11.28 OF TITLE 11 OF THE ROSEVILLE MUNICIPAL CODE

REGARDING CHANGE IN SPEED LIMITS SET BY STATE LAW

THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE ORDAINS:

SECTION 1. Section 11.28.010 of Chapter 11.28 of Title 11 of the Roseville Municipal

Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

11.28.10. Change in speed limits set by state law.

Pursuant to authority contained in Sections 22357 and 22358 of the Vehicle Code, the city council determines upon the basis of an engineering and traffic survey that the prima facie speed limits set forth in this section would facilitate the orderly movement of vehicular traffic and would be reasonable and safe, except when passing school grounds, and it is determined that a speed limit greater than those hereinafter set forth would be more than is reasonable or safe. It is declared that the prima facie speed limits hereinafter set forth are established according to law:

1. Alexandra Drive:

a. Between East Roseville Parkway and Secret Ravine Parkway, 35 mph;

2. All-America City Boulevard:

a. Between Los Vegas Avenue and Washington Boulevard, 25 mph;

Page 386 of 1141 ends

2 3. Angus Road:

a. Between Fiddyment Road and Casa Sedona Drive, 35 mph;

4. Antelope Creek Drive:

a. Between Galleria Boulevard and Creekside Ridge Drive, 30 mph,

b. Between Creekside Ridge Drive and end, 30 mph;

5. Atkinson Street:

a. Between Denio Loop and Church Street, 40 mph,

b. Between Denio Loop and PFE, 45 mph;

6. Atlantic Street:

a. Between Yosemite Street and Interstate 80, 40 mph;

7. Auburn Boulevard:

a. Between Riverside and city limits, 35 mph;

8. Automall Drive: 30 mph;

9. Baseline Road:

a. Between Foothills Boulevard and Fiddyment Road, 45 mph,

b. Between Fiddyment Road and Westbrook Boulevard, 50 mph,

c. Between Westbrook Boulevard and western city limits, 50 mph;

Page 387 of 1141 ends

3 10. Berry Street:

a. Between 156 Berry Street and Galleria Boulevard, 35 mph;

11. Blue Oaks Boulevard:

a. Between Fiddyment Road and eastern city limits, 45 mph,

b. Between Fiddyment Road and Hayden Parkway, 45 mph,

c. Between Hayden Parkway and western city limits, 45 mph;

12. Bob Doyle Between Drive:

a. .

Betw
een K

ennerleigh ParkwayW

estpark Drive and Hayden Parkway, 3 0 3 5

mph,;

a .b . Between Kennerleigh Parkway and Westpark Drive, 30 mph;

13. Brady Lane:

a. Between Vineyard Road and Baseline Road, 40 mph;

14. Brookstone Drive:

a. Between Westbrook Boulevard (N) and Westbrook Boulevard (S), 30 mph;

15. Casa Sedona Drive:

a. Between Angus Road and Crocker Ranch Road, 30 mph;

16. Central Park Drive:

Page 388 of 1141 ends

4 a. Between Fairway Drive and Highland Park Drive, 25 mph;

Page 389 of 1141 ends

5 17. Chase Drive:

a. Between Roseville Parkway and Heritage Drive, 30 mph;

18. Church Street:

a. Between Atkinson Street and Washington Boulevard, 35 mph;

19. Cirby Hills Drive:

a. Between Cirby Way and end, 25 mph;

20. Cirby Way:

a. Between Foothills Boulevard and Old Auburn Boulevard, 40 mph;

21. Commerce Drive:

a. Vernon Street and Roseville Road, 30 mph;

22. Conference Center Drive:

a. Between Gibson Drive and end, 30 mph;

23. Country Club Drive:

a. Between Baseline Road and Pleasant Grove Boulevard, 35 mph;

24. Crawford Parkway:

a. Between Schellhous Drive and Fiddyment Road, 35 mph,

b. Between North Hayden Boulevard to Schellhous Drive, 25 mph;

Page 390 of 1141 ends

6 25. Creekside Ridge Drive:

a. Between Roseville Parkway and end, 25 mph;

26. Crimson Ridge Way:

a. Between Woodcreek Oaks Boulevard and Roseville Parkway, 30 mph;

27. Crocker Ranch Road:

a. Between Blue Oaks Boulevard and Opal Drive, 35 mph;

28. Del Webb Boulevard:

a. Between Fiddyment Road and Blue Oaks Boulevard, 35 mph;

29. Diamond Creek Boulevard:

a. Between Blue Oaks Boulevard and Parkside Way, 35 mph;

30. Douglas Boulevard:

a. Between Vernon Street and 1-80, 30 mph,

b. Between I-80 and Rocky Ridge, 35 mph,

c. Between Rocky Ridge Drive and Sierra College Boulevard, 45 mph;

31. Earl Rush Drive:

a. Between Market Street and Westbrook Boulevard, 30 mph,

b. Between Westbrook Boulevard and eastern city limits, 30 mph;

Page 391 of 1141 ends

7 32. Eastridge Drive:

a. Between Old Auburn Road and Weston Way, 30 mph;

33. East Roseville Parkway:

a. Between Taylor Road and Sierra College Boulevard, 45 mph,

b. Between Sierra College Boulevard and eastern city limits, 40 mph;

34. Estates Drive:

a. Between Folsom Road and Harding Boulevard, 25 mph;

35. Eureka Road:

a. Between Interstate 80 and Sierra College Boulevard, 40 mph;

36. Fairway Drive:

a. Between northern city limits and Stanford Ranch Road, 40 mph;

37. Fiddyment Road:

a. Between Pleasant Grove Boulevard and northern city limits, 45 mph,

b. Between Pleasant Grove Boulevard and Baseline Road, 50 mph;

38. Fidelity Way:

a. Between Blue Oaks Boulevard and Freedom Way, 30 mph;

39. Folsom Road:

Page 392 of 1141 ends

8 a. Between Vernon Street and Douglas Boulevard, 25 mph;

40. Foothills Boulevard:

a. Between Cirby Way and Blue Oaks Boulevard, 45 mph,

b. Between Blue Oaks Boulevard and northern city limits, 40 mph;

41. Freedom Way:

a. Between Industrial Avenue and Washington Boulevard, 35 mph;

42. Galilee Road:

a. Between Pleasant Grove Boulevard and Industrial Avenue, 35 mph;

43. Galleria Boulevard:

a. Between Harding Boulevard and Roseville Parkway, 45 mph,

b. Between Roseville Parkway and SR-65, 40 mph;

44. Gibson Drive:

a. Between Roseville Parkway (E) and Roseville Parkway (W), 40 mph;

45. Hallissy Drive:

a. Between Washington Boulevard and Pleasant Grove Boulevard, 30 mph;

46. Harding Boulevard:

a. Between Douglas Boulevard and Estates Drive, 30 mph,

Page 393 of 1141 ends

9 b. Between Estates Drive and Lead Hill Boulevard, 35 mph,

c. Between Lead Hill Boulevard and Wills Road, 40 mph;

47. Harvey Way.

a. Between Fiddyment Road and Orchard View Road, 25 mph;

48. Hayden Parkway:

a. Between Fiddyment Road and Blue Oaks Boulevard, 35 mph;

49. Highland Park Drive:

a. Between Fairway Drive and Pleasant Grove Boulevard, 30 mph,

b. Between Pleasant Grove Boulevard and Stanford Ranch, 35 mph;

50. Hillsborough Drive:

a. Between East Roseville Parkway and Eureka Road, 35 mph;

51. Holt Parkway:

a. Between Fiddyment Road and North Hayden Parkway, 30mph;

52. Industrial Avenue:

a. Between northern city limits and Washington Boulevard, 45 mph;

53. Junction Boulevard:

a. Between Baseline Road and Foothills Boulevard, 45 mph,

Page 394 of 1141 ends

10 b. Between Foothills Boulevard and Washington Boulevard, 40 mph;

54. Kennerleigh Parkway:

a. Between Pleasant Grove Boulevard and Bob Doyle Drive, 35 mph;

55. Kemoy Lane:

a. Between Riverside Avenue and end, 25 mph;

56. Lead Hill Boulevard:

a. Between Harding Boulevard and North Sumise Avenue, 35 mph,

b. Between North Sunrise Avenue and East Roseville Parkway, 40 mph;

57. Main Street:

a. Between Foothills Boulevard and Porter Drive, 35 mph;

58. Market Street:

a. Between Pleasant Grove Boulevard and southerly end, 35 mph,

b. Between Earl Rush Drive and Vista Grande Boulevard, 35 mph,

c. Between Vista Grande Boulevard and Baseline Road, 35 mph;

59. McAnally Drive:

a. Between Foothills Boulevard and Woodcreek Oaks Boulevard, 35 mph;

60. Melody Lane:

Page 395 of 1141 ends

11 a. Between Cirby Way and West Whyte Avenue, 35 mph;

61. Miners Ravine Drive:

a. Between Sierra College Boulevard and Copperleaf Street, 25 mph;

62. Monument Drive:

a. Between Pleasant Grove Boulevard and Bob Doyle Drive, 30 mph;

63. New Meadow Drive:

a. Between Blue Oaks Boulevard and Parkside Way, 35 mph;

64. Niblick Drive:

a. Between Blue Oak Boulevard and end, 35 mph;

65. North Cirby Way:

a. Between Thistle Down Drive and East Roseville Parkway, 30 mph;

66. North Hayden Parkway:

a. Between Fiddyment Road and Hollis Way, 35 mph,

b. Between Hollis Way and Blue Oaks Boulevard, 35 mph;

67. Northpark Drive:

a. Between Woodcreek Oaks Boulevard and Parkside Drive, 30 mph;

68. North Sunrise Avenue:

Page 396 of 1141 ends

12 a. Between Douglas Boulevard and Lead Hill Boulevard, 35 mph,

b. Between Lead Hill Boulevard and East Roseville Parkway, 40 mph;

69. Oak Crest Drive:

a. Between Alexandra Drive and Frensham Drive, 25 mph;

70. Oak Meadow Drive:

a. Between Blue Oaks Boulevard and Harvey Way, 25 mph;

71. Old Auburn Road:

a. Between South Cirby and the easterly city limit line, 40 mph,

b. Between Sierra College Boulevard and East Roseville Parkway, 35 mph,

c. Between South Cirby and the southern city limit line, 35 mph;

72. Old Washington Blvd:

a. Between Atlantic Street and Republican Alley, 15 mph;

73. Olympus Drive:

a. Between Professional Drive and East Roseville Parkway, 30 mph,

b. Between East Roseville Parkway and Sierra College Boulevard, 40 mph;

74. Opal Drive:

a. Between Crocker Ranch Road and Parkside Way, 35 mph;

Page 397 of 1141 ends

13 75. Opportunity Drive:

a. Vineyard Road and end, 30 mph;

76. Orchard View Road:

a. Between Blue Oaks Boulevard and Harcourt Way, 25 mph;

77. Orlando Avenue:

a. Between Cirby Way and Riverside Avenue/Auburn Boulevard, 40 mph;

78. Painted Desert Drive:

a. Between Prairie Woods and Woodcreek Oaks, 30 mph,

b. Between Woodcreek Oaks Boulevard and Roseville Parkway, 35 mph;

79. Parkhill Drive:

a. Between McLaren Drive and East Roseville Parkway, 35 mph;

80. Parkside Drive:

a. Between Opal Drive and Diamond Creek Boulevard, 35 mph,

b. Between Diamond Creek and McCloud Way, 25 mph,

c. Between McCloud Way and New Meadow Drive; 35 mph;

81. Park Regency Drive:

a. Between Hiawatha Drive and Junction Boulevard, 30 mph,

Page 398 of 1141 ends

14 b. Between Junction Boulevard and Casterbridge Drive, 35 mph;

82. P.F.E. Road:

a. Between Atkinson Street and the western city limits, 45 mph;

83. Phillip Road:

a. Between Westpark Drive and end, 40 mph;

84. Pioneer Road:

a. Between Pleasant Grove Boulevard and Trehowell Drive, 30 mph;

85. Pleasant Grove Boulevard:

a. Between western city limits and Rocklin city limits, 45 mph;

86. Prairie Woods Way:

a. Between Blue Oaks and Painted Desert, 30 mph;

87. Professional Drive:

a. Between Rocky Ridge Drive and Olympus Drive, 30 mph;

88. Reserve Drive:

a. Between Diamond Oaks Road and Roseville Parkway, 25 mph,

b. Between Diamond Oaks Road and Berry Street, 35 mph;

89. Riverside Avenue:

Page 399 of 1141 ends

15 a. Between I-80 and Darling Way, 35 mph,

b. Between Darling Way and Douglas Boulevard, 25 mph;

90. Rocky Ridge Drive:

a. Between Cirby Way to Douglas Boulevard, 40 mph,

b. Between Douglas Boulevard and Eureka Road, 35 mph,

c. Between Eureka Road and East Roseville Parkway, 40 mph;

91. Roseville Parkway:

a. Between Washington Boulevard and Taylor Road, 45 mph,

b. . Between Foothills Boulevard and Washington Boulevard, 45 mph,

b .c . Between Blue Oaks Boulevard and Foothills Boulevard, 35 mph;

92. Roseville Road:

a. Between Cirby Way and the southern city limits, 45 mph;

93. Santa Clara Drive:

a. Between Douglas Boulevard and Sierra Gardens Drive, 30 mph;

94. Scarborough Drive:

a. Between Secret Ravine Parkway and northern city limits, 35 mph;

95. Secret Ravine Parkway:

Page 400 of 1141 ends

16 a. Between East Roseville Parkway and Sierra College Boulevard, 45 mph;

96. Schellhous Drive:

a. Between Holt Parkway and Cumberland Loop, 25 mph;

97. Sierra Boulevard:

a. Between Roseville Street and Alta Vista, 30 mph;

98. Sierra College Boulevard:

a. Between Olympus Drive and Old Auburn Road, 45 mph,

b. Between Olympus and city limits, 50 mph;

99. Sierra Gardens Drive:

a. Between Douglas Boulevard and North Sunrise Avenue, 30 mph;

100. Sierra Village Drive:

a. Between Santucci Boulevard and Westbrook Boulevard, 40 mph,

b. Between Westbrook Boulevard and Market Street, 30 mph;

101. Solaire Drive:

a. Between Santucci Boulevard and Solar Point Drive, 25 mph;

102. South Cirby Way:

a. Between Rocky Ridge Drive and Old Auburn Road, 40 mph;

Page 401 of 1141 ends

17 103. Stanford Ranch Road:

a. Between Highway 65 and northern city limits, 40 mph;

104. Stone Point Drive:

a. Between North Sunrise and Rocky Ridge Drive, 35 mph;

105. Sun City Boulevard:

a. Between Pleasant Grove Boulevard and Del Webb Boulevard, 35 mph;

106. Sunrise Avenue:

a. Between Douglas Boulevard and Cirby Way, 35 mph,

b. Between Cirby Way and city limits, 40 mph;

107. Taylor Road:

a. Between Eureka Road to East Roseville Parkway, 40 mph,

b. East Roseville Parkway to city limit, 45 mph;

108. Trehowell Drive:

a. Between Chase Drive and Pioneer Road, 30 mph;

109. Trestle Road:

a. Between Roseville Parkway and Hallissy Drive, 25 mph;

110. Vernon Street:

Page 402 of 1141 ends

18 a. Between Lincoln Street and South Grant Street, 15 mph,

b. Between South Grant Street and Riverside Avenue, 25 mph,

c. Between Riverside Avenue and 6th Street, 35 mph,

d. Between 6th Street and Cirby Way, 40 mph,

e. Between Cirby Way and West Whyte Avenue, 25 mph;

111. Village Green Drive:

a. Between Fiddyment Road and Bob Doyle Drive, 35 mph;

112. Vineyard Road:

a. Between Atkinson Street and Brady Lane, 40 mph;

113. Vista Grande Boulevard:

a. Between Fiddyment Road and Market Street, 40 mph;

114. Washington Boulevard:

a. Between Oak Street and Elefa Street, 35 mph,

b. Between Elefa Street and Blue Oaks Boulevard, 45 mph;

115. Westbrook Boulevard:

a. Between Pleasant Grove Boulevard and Blue Oaks Boulevard, 40 mph,

b. Between Baseline Road and Pleasant Grove Boulevard, 45 mph;

Page 403 of 1141 ends

19 116. Westhills Drive:

a. Between Fiddyment Road and Morningstar Drive, 35 mph;

117. Westpark Drive:

a. Between Blue Oaks Boulevard and 2420 feet south of Phillip Road, 40 mph,

b. Between 2420 feet south of Phillip Road and Bickleigh Loop, 35 mph,

c. Between Bickleigh Loop and Bob Doyle Drive, 35 mph;

118. Woodcreek Oaks Boulevard:

a. Between Baseline Road and Horncastle Avenue, 40 mph,

b. Between Horncastle Avenue and Blue Oaks Boulevard, 45 mph,

c. Between Blue Oaks Boulevard and northern city limits, 40 mph;

119. Yosemite Street:

a. Between Atlantic Street and Shasta Street, 25 mph.

SECTION 2. This ordinance shall be effective at the expiration of thirty (30) days from

the date of adoption.

SECTION 3. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause this ordinance to be published

in full at least once within fourteen (14) days after it is adopted in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, or shall within fourteen (14) days after its adoption cause this ordinance

Page 404 of 1141 ends

20 to be posted in full in at least three (3) public places in the City and enter in the Ordinance Book a certificate stating the time and place of said publication by posting.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Roseville this day of

, 20 , by the following vote on roll call:

AYES COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

City Clerk

Page 405 of 1141 ends

Street From To Existing
Speed LimitCurrent 85thPrevious
85th
Proposed
Speed Limit
Roseville Parkway Washington Boulevard Foothills Boulevard N/A 52.4 N/A 45 Fiddyment Road Blue Oaks Boulevard City Limit 45 49.6 51.1 45 Hayden Parkway Fiddyment Road Blue Oaks Boulevard 35 38.2 40.3 35 Junction Boulevard Baseline Road Woodcreek Oaks Boulevard 45 51.0 51.4 45 Opal Drive Crocker Ranch Road Parkside Way 35 37.6 35.6 35 Parkside Way McCloud Way New Meadow Drive 35 41.0 40.0 35 Sun City Boulevard Pleasant Grove Boulevard Del Webb Boulevard 35 40.0 40.6 35 Vernon Street Douglas Boulevard Sixth Street 35 42.2 42.4 35 Woodcreek Oaks Boulevard Pleasant Grove Boulevard Horncastle Avenue 40 46.4 46.5 40 Table 1 - 2025 Speed Limit Changes
New Survey
No Change

Page 406 of 1141 ends

City Council
Communication
Meeting Date: 2/4/2026
Item #: VII.10
File #: 0801 & 0900-02-02-1
& 0201-01
Item ID: 2026-5

Title: Recycled Water Storage Improvements – New Capital Improvement Project Approval, Project Cancellation and Budget Adjustment
Contact: Tracie Mueller 916-774-5688 [email protected]

SUMMARY
Staff recommends approval of a new capital improvement project called the Dry Creek Recycled Water Storage Improvements Project, cancellation of the West Roseville Recycled Water Storage Improvements Project, and a budget adjustment associated with these two projects. The new project will be funded by both the Recycled Water Construction Fund and the Wastewater Rehabilitation Fund.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Authorize the establishment of a new capital improvement project, the Dry Creek Recycled Water Storage Improvements Project,

2. Authorize the cancellation of an existing capital improvement project, the West Roseville Recycled Water Storage Improvements, and

3. Adopt an ordinance to approve a budget adjustment returning $1,200,000 to the Recycled Water Construction Fund from the existing project, and adding $566,706 from the Recycled Water Construction Fund and $1,320,594 from the Wastewater Rehabilitation Fund into the new project budget.

BACKGROUND
Based on the recent completion of the Recycled Water Systems Evaluation, the more immediate need for recycled water storage is at the Dry Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (DCWWTP) rather than at the West Zone Tank and Pump Station located near the Pleasant Grove Wastewater Treatment Plant. The existing project was set up for additional recycled water storage at the West Zone Tank and Pump Station and therefore needs to be canceled. The new project will improve recycled water storage capacity in response to current and projected recycled water demand growth while maintaining the minimum discharge requirement to Dry Creek. The new project will add storage at the DCWWTP by repurposing an existing concrete structure that was used as the chlorine contact basin prior to converting the DCWWTP disinfection system into an ultraviolet (UV) system. The project objective is to cost effectively design and construct the retrofit to create a storage facility to meet future needs, enhance operational efficiency, and improve the reliability of the recycled water system.

FISCAL IMPACT
The budget adjustment returns $1,200,000 to fund balance in the Recycled Water Construction Fund from the existing project, and adds $566,706 from the Recycled Water Construction Fund and $1,320,594 from

Page 407 of 1141 ends

the Wastewater Rehabilitation Fund into the new project budget. In total, $633,294 is being returned to the Recycled Water Construction 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. The proposed actions include the establishment of a new capital improvement project, cancellation of the existing West Roseville Recycled Water Store Improvements project, and adoption of an ordinance to approve a budget adoption for the new capital project. These actions meet the criteria above and are not subject to CEQA at this time.

The newly established capital project will allow for staff to study, develop, and design a solution to address recycled water storage needs at the Dry Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant. Once the project scope has been developed and the solution has been designed, a separate contract will be executed for construction of the solution, and CEQA analysis will be completed at the time. No CEQA evaluation is necessary at this time.

CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLAN/OVERARCHING GOALS

6. Deliver exceptional City services

4. Invest in well-planned infrastructure and growth

Respectfully Submitted,
Tracie Mueller, Wastewater Utility Manager

Sean Bigley, Environmental Utilities Director

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Ordinance 7037

REVIEWERS:

Tracie Mueller, Environmental Utilities Department - Wastewater Created/Initiated - 1/6/2026 Tracie Mueller, Environmental Utilities Department - Wastewater Approved - 1/6/2026 Devin Whittington, Environmental Utilities Department Approved - 1/12/2026 Sean Bigley, Environmental Utilities Department Approved - 1/15/2026 Kelly Aye, City Attorney Department Approved - 1/20/2026 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Approved - 1/21/2026 Ryan DeVore, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 1/22/2026 Dennis Kauffman, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 1/22/2026 Michelle Sheidenberger, City Attorney Department Approved - 1/23/2026 Dominick Casey, City Clerk Department Approved - 1/27/2026 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Final Approval - 1/27/2026

Page 408 of 1141 ends

ORDINANCE NO. 7037

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 Dry Creek Recycled Water Storage Improvements 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.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Roseville, this day of , 2026, by the following vote on roll call:

AYES COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR
ATTEST:

City Clerk

Page 409 of 1141 ends

REQUEST FOR BUDGET ADJUSTMENT
Updated 11/19/2025

Please complete the cells highlighted in yellow.

REQUESTER NAME & TITLE: FISCAL YEAR:

PREPARER NAME & TITLE: ORDINANCE:

DEPARTMENT/DIVISION:

EXPENDITURES/EXPENSES/TRANSFERS OUT
ACCOUNT STRING BUDGET ($)
Fund Account Center Project Adjustment DESCRIPTION

6240

6587

84001

500644

566,706 Establish Capital Outlay-CIP Projects budget for Project 500644 Dry Creek RW Storage Improvements

6230

6587

84001

500644

1,320,594 Establish Capital Outlay-CIP Projects budget for Project 500644 Dry Creek RW Storage Improvements

6240

6587

84001

500621

(1,200,000)
Decrease Capital Outlay-CIP Projects budget for Project 500621 West Roseville RW Storage Improvements to
close project

EXPENDITURES/EXPENSES/TRANSFERS OUT TOTAL 687,300

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

REVENUES/TRANSFERS IN TOTAL -

NET ADJUSTMENT 687,300

FUND BALANCE
ACCOUNT STRING BUDGET ($)
Fund Account Center Project Adjustment DESCRIPTION
6240 3601 00000 000000 633,294 Increase Recycled Water Construction Fund Balance 6230 3601 00000 000000 (1,320,594) Decrease Wastewater Rehabilitation Fund Balance 3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
FUND BALANCE TOTAL (687,300)

Justification for Budget Adjustment:

Staff recommends that Council authorize the return of $1,200,000 to the Recycled Water Construction Fund (6240) from the cancellation of existing project, West Roseville Recycled Water Storage Improvements Project (500621), and establish a new Capital Improvement project budget for Dry Creek Recycled Water Storage Improvements Project (500644) in the amount of $1,887,300 by adding $566,706 from the Recycled Water Construction Fund (6240) and $1,320,594 from the Wastewater Rehabilitation Fund (6230). Based on the recent completion of the Recycled Water Systems Evaluation, the more immediate need for recycled water storage is at the Dry Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (DCWWTP) rather than at the West Zone Tank and Pump Station located near the Pleasant Grove Wastewater Treatment Plant. In total, $633,294 is being returned to the Recycled Water Construction Fund. 2025-26
Tracie Mueller, Wastewater Utility Manager
Deanne Garcia, EU Business Analyst
EU/Wastewater

Page 410 of 1141 ends

City Council
Communication
Meeting Date: 2/4/2026
Item #: VII.11
File #: 0800-04 & 0201-01
Item ID: 2025-969

Title: Dry Creek Greenway East Phase 1 Trail Project - Professional Design Services Agreement Amendment and Budget Adjustment
Contact: Cathy Gosalvez 916-774-5396 [email protected]

SUMMARY
Staff recommends approval of an amendment to professional design services agreement with PSOMAS, for engineering and environmental permitting services in the amount of $92,310 for the Dry Creek Greenway East Phase 1 Project and approval of a budget adjustment. The budget adjustment totaling $1,000,000 from the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) will provide funds for the PSOMAS contract amendment and ongoing construction management services performed by HDR Construction Control Corporation through an existing on-call professional services contract. No General Fund resources are being used for the project.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends City Council:

1. Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute the Third Amendment to Professional Design Services Agreement with PSOMAS for the Dry Creek Greenway East Phase 1 project; and

2. Adopt an ordinance to approve a budget adjustment in the amount of $1,000,000 of Local Transportation Funds.

BACKGROUND
The Dry Creek Greenway East trail project is a paved multi-use trail along Dry, Cirby, and Linda Creeks from Darling Way/Riverside Avenue to the City limits at S. Cirby Way/Old Auburn Road. Phase 1 of the trail is currently under construction and extends from Darling Way to Rocky Ridge Drive along Dry, Cirby and Linda Creek.

An agreement with PSOMAS for Engineering and Environmental Permitting Services for the Dry Creek Greenway East Phase 1 project was executed March 18, 2020 for $2,371,738. In May of 2022, Council approved the first amendment to the contract and increased the contract total to $2,578,479. In March of 2023, Council approved the second amendment to the contract and increased the contract total to $2,744,914.

Additional work is needed for items related to construction support activities and design and permitting services for new erosion repairs along Linda Creek and modifications to the Sunrise Avenue bridge connection. These items of work are due to the creek meandering and causing erosion of the creek bank near the trail west of Rocky Ridge Drive and due to unknown underground utilities found in the Sunrise Avenue area during construction. The contract amendment (Third Amendment to Agreement) for this additional work is $92,310, bringing the total contract amount to $2,837,224. These costs are included within the recommended budget adjustment.

Page 411 of 1141 ends

In addition, the budget adjustment will provide funding for concurrent ongoing construction management support for the project. Construction management is being provided through an existing on-call professional services agreement with HDR Construction Control Corporation. This on-call contract was previously approved by Council on January 24, 2025 for an annual not-to-exceed amount of $1.5 million and the requested services are within the approved contract authority. Therefore, a contract amendment is not required for HDR Construction Control Corporation to execute these services.

The requested funding for construction management is due to the items previously mentioned as well as various unforeseen field conditions encountered throughout construction. The most significant challenges encountered to date include the implementation of the erosion repairs and responding to environmental and cultural resource sensitivity concerns. These issues take additional resources to address and also have extended the project timeline due to time restrictions on "in-water" work and required buffers around nesting birds detailed by the project's environmental permits. HDR has worked collaboratively with the contractor to resolve these issues while maintaining positive relationships with affected community members and business owners. The budget adjustment will support continued construction management, implementation of design modifications, and staffing through project completion and closeout.

FISCAL IMPACT
The budget adjustment totaling $1,000,000 from the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) will provide funds for the contract amendment and construction management services for the project. The Dry Creek Greenway East Trail Project is fully funded by federal, state and local sources: Solutions for Congested Corridors (SCCP), Active Transportation Program (ATP), Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ), and Local Transportation (LTF) Funds. No General Fund resources will be used for the project.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed activity is an amendment to a professional services agreement and budget adjustment for an existing project that is currently under construction. The project was previously evaluated in the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Dry Creek Greenway East Trail Project (certified April 20, 2022, SCH No. 2013112042. The amendment to the agreement and budget adjustment are consistent with the project evaluated in the EIR, and no new impacts or mitigation requirements would occur. 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

6. Deliver exceptional City services

Respectfully Submitted,
Cathy Gosalvez, Associate Engineer

Jason Shykowski, Public Works Director

ATTACHMENTS:

Page 412 of 1141 ends

1. Resolution 26-019

2. PSOMAS Amendment

3. Ordinance 7034

REVIEWERS:

Cathy Gosalvez, Public Works Department - Engineering - City Project's Created/Initiated - 12/16/2025
Jesse Khatkar, Public Works Department - Engineering - City Project's Approved - 1/14/2026 Noah Siviglia, Public Works Department - Engineering - Traffic Engineering Approved - 1/14/2026 Stefanie Kemen, Public Works Department - Engineering - Traffic Engineering
Approved - 1/20/2026
Kelly Aye, City Attorney Department Approved - 1/20/2026 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Approved - 1/21/2026 Ryan DeVore, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 1/22/2026 Dennis Kauffman, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 1/22/2026 Michelle Sheidenberger, City Attorney Department Approved - 1/23/2026 Dominick Casey, City Clerk Department Approved - 1/27/2026 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Final Approval - 1/27/2026

Page 413 of 1141 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 26-019

APPROVING A THIRD AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL DESIGN SERVICES

AGREEMENT, BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE AND PSOMAS,

AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE IT

ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE

WHEREAS, a Third Amendment to Professional Design Services Agreement for the Dry Creek Greenway East Phase 1 Project, by and between the City of Roseville and PSOMAS, has been reviewed by the City Council; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roseville that said third amendment 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 ______________, 2026, by the following vote on roll call:

AYES COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS:

______________________________
MAYOR

ATTEST:

________________________
City Clerk

Page 414 of 1141 ends

Page 415 of 1141 ends

Page 416 of 1141 ends

Page 417 of 1141 ends

Page 418 of 1141 ends

Page 419 of 1141 ends

Page 420 of 1141 ends

Page 421 of 1141 ends

Page 422 of 1141 ends

Page 423 of 1141 ends

Page 424 of 1141 ends

Page 425 of 1141 ends

ORDINANCE NO. 7034

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 Dry Creek Greenway East Phase 1 Trail 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.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Roseville, this day of , 2026, by the following vote on roll call:

AYES COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR
ATTEST:

City Clerk

Page 426 of 1141 ends

REQUEST FOR BUDGET ADJUSTMENT
Updated 11/19/2025

Please complete the cells highlighted in yellow.

REQUESTER NAME & TITLE: FISCAL YEAR:

PREPARER NAME & TITLE: ORDINANCE:

DEPARTMENT/DIVISION:

EXPENDITURES/EXPENSES/TRANSFERS OUT
ACCOUNT STRING BUDGET ($)
Fund Account Center Project Adjustment DESCRIPTION
6520 6587 84001 400022 1,000,000 Increase project budget for engineering design and construction management services.

EXPENDITURES/EXPENSES/TRANSFERS OUT TOTAL 1,000,000

REVENUES/TRANSFERS IN
ACCOUNT STRING BUDGET ($)
Fund Account Center Project Adjustment DESCRIPTION
6520 4425 84001 400022 1,000,000 Increase revenue budget for Local Transportation Funds (LTF)

REVENUES/TRANSFERS IN TOTAL 1,000,000

NET ADJUSTMENT -

FUND BALANCE
ACCOUNT STRING BUDGET ($)
Fund Account Center Project Adjustment DESCRIPTION
3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000
3601 00000 000000

FUND BALANCE TOTAL -

Justification for Budget Adjustment:

The Public Works Department is requesting a budget adjustment of $1,000,000 to increase the budget for the Dry Creek Greenway East Trail Phase 1 project (400022) in the Transportation Fund (6520).

This requested Budget Adjustment will allow for continued engineering design and construction management services for this project. Phase 1 of the trail is under construction and extends from Darling Way to Rocky Ridge Drive, along Dry, Cirby, and Linda Creek. Additional work is needed for items related to on- going construction support activities and additional design and permitting services needed for an erosion repair along Linda Creek and modifications to the Sunrise Avenue bridge connection.

The current project budget is $35,063,481. With this adjustment, the revised project budget will total $36,063,481 2025-26
Cathy Gosalvez, Associate Engineer
Cathy Gosalvez, Associate Engineer
Public Works/Engineering

Page 427 of 1141 ends

City Council
Communication
Meeting Date: 2/4/2026
Item #: VII.12
File #: 0800-02
Item ID: 2026-21

Title: Solid Waste Compliance – Professional Services Agreement Amendment Contact: Michelle White 916-774-5774 [email protected]

SUMMARY
Staff recommends approval of an amendment to the existing professional services agreement with HF&H Consultants, LLC to increase the contract amount to address additional SB 1383 compliance needs. The amendment adds peer review support for the City’s preliminary analysis related to a potential conversion to a three-stream collection system and the development of a material recovery facility and transfer station, expanded technical assistance, compliance evaluation support, and Implementation Record development in response to CalRecycle Jurisdiction and Agency Compliance and Enforcement audit process. The amendment increases the contract by $55,000, resulting in a revised not-to-exceed amount of $124,000 and is included in FY2025-26 Waste Services Operations Fund budget. With the exception of one sub-task A3, the amendment will be funded by the CalRecycle SB 1383 Local Assistance Grant.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution to approve the First Amendment to Professional Services Agreement with HF&H Consultants, LLC for SB 1383 Technical Assistance Services, and authorize the City Manager to execute it on behalf of the City of Roseville.

BACKGROUND
Senate Bill (SB) 1383 established statewide requirements to reduce organic waste disposal and imposed extensive recordkeeping, monitoring, and enforcement obligations on local jurisdictions. These requirements span collection systems, edible food recovery, procurement, capacity planning, waivers, outreach and education, inspections, and enforcement activities. To support compliance with these requirements, the City entered into a Professional Services Agreement with HF&H Consultants, LLC on October 28, 2025 utlizing a piggyback contract, in an amount not to exceed $69,000, to provide SB 1383 technical assistance and compliance support.

Since execution of the original agreement, regulatory demands have increased significantly. On November 20, 2025, the City received a Notice of Compliance Evaluation from CalRecycle’s Jurisdiction and Agency Compliance and Enforcement (JACE) Division, followed by a formal request for the City’s SB 1383 Implementation Record on December 8, 2025. In response, City staff and HF&H worked collaboratively to compile and submit a comprehensive Implementation Record by December 18, 2025, in advance of the CalRecycle deadline.

The timing and urgency of the JACE request, combined with the City’s concurrent onboarding of a new SB 1383 compliance software system, required additional effort beyond the scope and budget originally anticipated. As a result, staff is requesting an amendment to the existing Professional Services Agreement to provide additional contract authority and scope flexibility to address expanded regulatory documentation, compliance evaluation support, and transition of records into the City’s new SB 1383

Page 428 of 1141 ends

database system. The proposed amendment includes the following changes:
• Task A.3 – Technical Analysis of Three-Stream Collection Service and City Material Recovery/Transfer Facility Study (New Subtask):

This new subtask adds peer review support for the City’s preliminary analysis related to a potential conversion to a three-stream collection system and the development of a material recovery facility (MRF) and transfer station. HF&H will review capital, operational, and rate impact assumptions and provide recommendations to inform future City decision-making.
• Task C – SB 1383 JACE Compliance Evaluation Support (Expanded Budget):

Additional funding is requested to address increased effort related to the JACE compliance evaluation process, including documentation review, regulatory coordination, and responsiveness to CalRecycle findings and follow-up requests.
• Task D – Implementation Record Review and Analysis (Expanded Budget):

Additional funding is requested to support expanded Implementation Record development, documentation gap resolution, and transition of the City’s Implementation Record into its new SB 1383 digital compliance system.
• Task E – Expenses (Expanded Budget):

A minor increase in expense authority is requested to account for additional project-related costs.

The amendment increases the total contract authority by $55,000, resulting in a revised not-to-exceed amount of $124,000. With the exception of Task A.3, which will be funded with non-grant funds, the remaining amendment costs will be funded through the CalRecycle SB 1383 Local Assistance Grant (Cycle OWR4).

FISCAL IMPACT
The total contract cost of $124,000 is included in the FY2025-26 Waste Services Operations Fund budget.

The project is primarily funded through the CalRecycle Local Assistance Grant (Cycle OWR4), except for the Task A3 amount of $34,940.

CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC PLAN/OVERARCHING GOALS

4. Invest in well-planned infrastructure and growth

6. Deliver exceptional City services

Page 429 of 1141 ends

Respectfully Submitted,
Michelle White, Environmental Utilities Compliance Administrator

Sean Bigley, Environmental Utilities Director

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution 26-018

2. Professional Services Agreement

REVIEWERS:

Michelle White, Environmental Utilities Department - Strategic Affairs Division Created/Initiated - 1/13/2026 Lanie Paquin, Environmental Utilities Department - Strategic Affairs Division Approved - 1/14/2026 Brian Craighead, Environmental Utilities Department Approved - 1/14/2026 Sean Bigley, Environmental Utilities Department Approved - 1/14/2026 Kelly Aye, City Attorney Department Approved - 1/20/2026 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Approved - 1/21/2026 Ryan DeVore, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 1/22/2026 Dennis Kauffman, City Manager Department - Assistant City Manager Approved - 1/22/2026 Michelle Sheidenberger, City Attorney Department Approved - 1/23/2026 Dominick Casey, City Clerk Department Approved - 1/27/2026 Katrina Six, City Clerk Department Final Approval - 1/27/2026

Page 430 of 1141 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 26-018

APPROVING A FIRST AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE AND HF&H CONSULTANTS, LLC., AND

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE IT ON BEHALF OF

THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE

WHEREAS, a First Amendment to Professional Services Agreement for SB 1383 Technical Assistance Services, by and between the City of Roseville and HF&H Consultants, LLC, has been reviewed by the City Council; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roseville that said first amendment 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 ______________, 2026, by the following vote on roll call:

AYES COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS:

______________________________
MAYOR

ATTEST:

________________________
City Clerk

Page 431 of 1141 ends

1 B:\City Attorney\corres\Melissa\Contracts 2026\HF&H Consultants PSA amendment.docx

FIRST AMENDMENT TO

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
SB 1383 Technical Assistance Services

THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT is made and entered into this ___ day of __________, 20__, by and between the City of Roseville, a municipal corporation (“CITY”), and HF&H Consultants, LLC, a California limited liability company (“CONSULTANT”); and

W I T N E S S E T H:

WHEREAS, CITY and CONSULTANT previously entered into a Professional Services Agreement dated October 28, 2025 (“Agreement”) regarding SB 1383 Technical Assistance Services (“Project”); and
WHEREAS, CITY desires to amend the Agreement to include additional services as described in CONSULTANT’s letter/proposal dated December 30, 2025, which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, CONSULTANT is willing and able to provide such additional services.

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:

1. CONSULTANT shall provide additional services as described in Exhibit “A” of this First Amendment to Agreement.

2. Section 2 of the Agreement is amended by adding an additional paragraph to read as follows:

Docusign Envelope ID: 4066902D-767E-4F31-B035-965DCD76B667

Page 432 of 1141 ends

2 B:\City Attorney\corres\Melissa\Contracts 2026\HF&H Consultants PSA amendment.docx “CITY shall pay fifty-five thousand dollars ($55,000), in consideration of the additional services as set forth in Exhibit “A” to the First Amendment to Agreement.

This brings the total not to exceed contract amount to one hundred twenty-four thousand dollars ($124,000).”

3. All other provisions of the Agreement shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Roseville, a municipal corporation, has authorized the execution of this First Amendment to Agreement in duplicate by its City Manager and attested to by its City Clerk under the authority of Resolution No. _________, adopted by the Council of the City of Roseville on the ___ day of ___________, 20__, and CONSULTANT has caused this First Amendment to Agreement to be executed.

CITY OF ROSEVILLE, a HF&H CONSULTANTS, LLC, a
municipal corporation California liability limited company

BY: _______________________________ BY: _______________________________ DOMINICK CASEY its: _______________________________ City Manager
and
ATTEST:

BY: _______________________________
its: _______________________________

BY: _______________________________

CARMEN AVALOS
City Clerk

[SIGNATURES CONTINUED ON FOLLOWING PAGE]

Docusign Envelope ID: 4066902D-767E-4F31-B035-965DCD76B667 President

Page 433 of 1141 ends

3 B:\City Attorney\corres\Melissa\Contracts 2026\HF&H Consultants PSA amendment.docx APPROVED AS TO FORM:

BY: _______________________________

MICHELLE SHEIDENBERGER
City Attorney

APPROVED AS TO SUBSTANCE:

BY: _______________________________

SEAN BIGLEY
Environmental Utilities Director

Docusign Envelope ID: 4066902D-767E-4F31-B035-965DCD76B667

Page 434 of 1141 ends

4 B:\City Attorney\corres\Melissa\Contracts 2026\HF&H Consultants PSA amendment.docx

“EXHIBIT “A”

Docusign Envelope ID: 4066902D-767E-4F31-B035-965DCD76B667

Page 435 of 1141 ends

HF&H Consultants
590 Ygnacio Valley Rd. Suite 105
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Phone: (925) 977-6950
Web: hfh-consultants.com

December 30, 2025
Michelle J. White
Compliance Administrator
Environmental Utilities
2005 Hilltop Circle
Roseville, CA 95747
Sent via email: [email protected]
Subject: Proposal for Additional As Needed Solid Waste, Recycling, Organics, and SB 1383 Technical Assistance Services
Dear Michelle White,
HF&H Consultants (HF&H) is pleased to submit this scope of work to the City of Roseville (City) to provide additional as needed solid waste, recycling, organics, and SB 1383 technical assistance services.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide you with this proposal. We look forward to an opportunity to continue our partnership with the City. If you have any questions, please contact Rob Hilton at (925) 977 -6959 or [email protected] or Colleen Foster at (949) 251-4817 or [email protected].

Sincerely,
HF&H Consultants, LLC

Rob Hilton
President
Docusign Envelope ID: 4066902D-767E-4F31-B035-965DCD76B667

Page 436 of 1141 ends

Proposal for As-Needed Technical Assistance
Section 1: Scope of Work

City of Roseville | Page 1 of 4 | December 30, 2025 Section 1: Scope of Work
Please note the following scope of work only includes descriptions for new Tasks or Tasks being modified under the current agreement in response to City’s request for additional project budget.

TASK A: AS NEEDED TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
RFP Task A Description. Provide ongoing as-needed technical assistance and expertise on solid waste, recycling, organics, and SB 1383 implementation along with other solid waste regulated mandatory programs, services, ordinances, reports, and enforcement requirements, as outlined in the SB 1383 Regulations.

Understanding and Approach for Task A Scope and revision/additions to subtasks:

HF&H’s broad range of solid waste and recycling experience provides the City of Roseville with an on-call source to address any as-needed organics, recycling, solid waste, and SB 1383 technical assistance needs that become necessary. As part of this updated scope of work, HF&H is proposing to revise subtasks under Task A with the inclusion of an additional task for HF&H’s analysis of the City’s Material Recovery/Transfer Facility Study:

Task A1: As Needed SB 1383 Program Analysis (No change) Task A2: Review and Provide Ordinance Recommendations for SB 1383 compliance and Right Sizing (Task numbering update only)
Task A3: Technical Analysis of City Material Recovery/Transfer Facility Study (New Task)
New Task:

As part of the “as needed SB 1383 program analysis”, the City has requested that HF&H review potential changes to the City’s SB 1383 collection and processing programs .

Specifically, the City is considering converting to a three-stream system and developing a MRF and transfer station to create the infrastructure for that change . The City has prepared preliminary analysis of the costs and rate impacts associated with this program change and has requested that HF&H conduct a peer review of that analysis. HF&H has included within this revised scope and Section 2 Fee Proposal, the addition of Task A3 and a corresponding budget of not to exceed amount of $34,940, for a combined Task A total of $42,240.

Through Task A3, HF&H will provide the City with a high-level peer review of the City’s Material Recovery/Transfer Facility capital and operating cost assumptions as well as operational and cost assumptions related to adding collection for a source separated recycling stream. As part of our analysis, HF&H will provide follow-up questions for the City’s review and consideration, along with recommendations for consideration in the City’s finalization of the Study. HF&H ’s support will include one in -person working session with the City (up to 3 hours), follow-up communications, and up to 2 virtual alignment (one hour each) meetings with the City. Based on the final version of the analysis agreed upon by the City and HF&H , HF&H will prepare a Docusign Envelope ID: 4066902D-767E-4F31-B035-965DCD76B667

Page 437 of 1141 ends

Proposal for As-Needed Technical Assistance
Section 1: Scope of Work

City of Roseville | Page 2 of 4 | December 30, 2025 brief letter documenting HF&H review processes and final recommendations for the City’s consideration.

No other changes to the City’s current Task A are being proposed.

TASK C. SB 1383 JACE COMPLIANCE EVALUATION SUPPORT
RFP Task C Description. SB 1383 compliance evaluation support and assistance with Jurisdiction and Agency Compliance and Enforcement (JACE) inspection and compliance review.

Understanding and Approach for Task C Scope – Additional project time and budget requested.

On November 20th, the City received a Notice of Compliance Evaluation (CE) letter from the CalRecycle JACE Division. On December 9 th, the City received a formal request from the CalRecycle JACE division for the City’s Implementation Record. The City and HF&H worked closely to build the City’s Implementation Record in response to this request and provided a responsive Implementation Record to CalRecycle on December 18th, in advance of the CalRecycle deadline of December 19th. Due to the timing and urgency of the JACE request and its misalignment with the onboarding of the City’s new SB 1383 database system, HF&H and the City will have to expend additional time and effort than originally planned in transitioning the City’s current Implementation Record into the City’s new database system in early 2026.

It is our understanding that the City would like to increase the project budget for this Task C, by an additional amount of $10,070 to meet additional documentation and timing needs for the JACE process. Additional project budget will enable HF&H to continue to provide tailored services and technical assistance throughout the JACE process and will help alleviate potential issues that may arise from the uncertainty in the process and from CalRecycle’s findings. The Section 2 Fee Proposal of this scope has been updated to include a maximum budget amount of $34,370 for this Task C.

Please note expenses were increased by a total of $185 to account for additional expense needs related to project tasks. No other task changes are anticipated at this point in time.

TASK D: IMPLEMENTATION RECORD REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
RFP Task D Description. Maintain and update the City’s SB 1383 required Implementation Records on a regular basis and monitor all required data points and provide analysis for ongoing compliance, budgeting, and enforcement needs.

Understanding and Approach for Task D Scope – Additional project time and budget requested.

Immediately upon project commencement of the current engagement in late October, the City and HF&H met multiple times in early November to plan and strategize the City’s approach to building an Implementation Record in alignment with the City’s onboarding of a new SB 1383 digital software system in December. Additionally, the City, HF&H, and the City’s software vendor Go2Zero met on November 3rd to kick off the development of the City’s SB 1383 Implementation Record within the vendor’s SMART 1383 program . In tandem to these Docusign Envelope ID: 4066902D-767E-4F31-B035-965DCD76B667

Page 438 of 1141 ends

Proposal for As-Needed Technical Assistance
Section 2: Fee Proposal

City of Roseville | Page 3 of 4 | December 30, 2025 collaboration efforts with the City and their vendor, HF&H immediately began developing a request for information for SB 1383 compliance documentation. As documents were received from the City in response to the RFI , HF&H conducted a detailed analysis of all SB 1383 documentation against regulatory requirements and documented its findings through an Implementation Record Report Card tool that was shared with the Cit y through multiple program alignment meetings. O n November 20th, the City received a Notice o f Compliance Evaluation (CE) letter from the CalRecycle JACE Division. On December 9th, the City received a formal request from the CalRecycle JACE division for the City’s Implementation Record. In response to CalRecycle’s request, t he City and HF&H worked closely to build the City’s Implementation Record from the ground up , and provided a responsive Implementation Record to CalRecycle on December 18 th, in advance of the CalRecycle deadline of December 19th. Due to the timing and urgency of the JACE request and its misalignment with the onboarding of the City’s new SB 1383 database system, HF&H and the City were forced to develop a separate Implementation Record from the City’s intended SMART 1383 digital database system, in order to meet CalRecycle’s JACE request deadline . Due to the timing of the JACE request, along with the need for multiple Implementation Record documentation enhancements based on program/documentation gaps, and the need to transition all documentation and provide program SOP’s that will align with the new database system, HF&H is proposing to add additional budget to this Task D in response to the City’s request for additional support in 2026.

It is our understanding that the City would like to increase the project budget for this Task D, by an additional amount not to exceed $ 9,805 to meet additional Implementation Record documentation needs and to help facilitate the transition of the City’s Implementation Record to SMART 1383. Additional project budget will enable HF&H to continue to provide tailored services and technical assistance that aligns with SB 1383 documentation and Implementation Record requirements. The Section 2 Fee Proposal has b een updated to include a maximum budget amount of $34,155 for this Task D.

No other task changes are anticipated at this point in time.

Section 2: Fee Proposal
We will perform the scope of work based on time and materials, up to the limit of the available budget. The estimated total budget for our existing agreement with the City was approved for $69,000 for the term of the engagement. With the addition of Task A.3, and the increase in project budget and expenses for Task C and Task D in response to the City’s request, HF&H is proposing a revised total budget for $124,000 for the entire term of the engagement. We will bill the City once per month based on the number of hours worked and expenses incurred.

Payment is due within 30 days of invoicing. Hourly rates are shown below.

Docusign Envelope ID: 4066902D-767E-4F31-B035-965DCD76B667

Page 439 of 1141 ends

Roseville City CouncilFebruary 4, 2026

Roseville City Council
February 4, 2026